The combination of organic and inorganic fertilizers influence the weed growth, productivity and soil fertility of monsoon rice.

Synthetic fertilizer and herbicides encompass the largest share in nutrient and weed management on food grain crops that create serious environmental issues. Integrated nutrient and non-chemical weed management approaches may help to reduce the chemical load in the environment, maintaining higher weed control efficiency and yield. A field experiment was conducted for two consecutive monsoon seasons during 2015 and 2016 in farm fields to develop a profitable and sustainable rice production system through integrated nutrient and weed management practices. A varied combination of nutrients either alone or integrated with chemical and non-chemical weed management were tested on transplanted rice in a factorial randomized block design with three replications. The results showed that the integration of concentrated organic manures with chemical fertilizer effectively inhibited weed growth and nutrient removal. Integration of nutrient and weed management practices significantly enhanced 9% biomass growth, 10% yield of the rice crop along with 3-7% higher nutrient uptake. Brassicaceous seed meal (BSM) and neem cake also had some influence on weed suppression and economic return. Thus, the integrated nutrient and weed management practices in rice cultivation might be an effective way to achieve economic sustainability and efficient rice cultivation in eastern India. Shortages of farmyard manure and vermicompost could be supplemented by BSM and neem cake in the integrated module.

1 Introduction

Rice, wheat and maize are the mainstays of food security in the world. Rice is consumed as a staple food by more than 60% of the current world population [1] and more than 50% of the Indian population [2]. Globally rice is cultivated on167.13 Mha of arable land with production and productivity of 782 Mt and 4.67 t·ha-1, respectively [3]. Rice is the most widely cultivated cereal crop, predominantly raised in south Asian countries like India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, China, and Thailand, either as an irrigated or rain-fed crop. In India, rice occupiesabout44.5 Mha of cultivated land that produces 172.58 Mt with an average productivity of 3.87 t·ha-1 [3]. India is the home of 1.32 billion people, so to ensure food security, India has to increase rice production at the rate of 3.75 Mt per year until 2050 [4]. Climatic suitability allows Indian farmers to grow rice in both the rainy and winter seasons of the year. Indian farmers mainly rely on nitrogenous fertilizers to increase food grain production, making India the second-largest nitrogen (N) consumer in the world [5]. Over the past 10 to 20 years, the data have shown a declining trend in rice productivity in many parts of India, despite higher nitrogenous fertilizer application [6] because of lower efficiency through greater runoff, leaching [7] and greenhouse gas emission [8] which leads to decreased partial factor productivity [9] and ultimately results in environmental pollution [10].

The main challenge for Indian farmers now is how to increase agricultural productivity while maintaining soil fertility for greater crop yields to meet the burgeoning population’s need for food in the coming decades in an economically viable and ecologically acceptable way. Soil organic matter plays a central role in fertility and directly influences soil functions such as water retention [11]. Depletion of soil organic matter is the major cause for deteriorating soil health and loss of sustainability of the intensive rice-based cropping systems in India [12, 13]. The continuous addition of organic matter is necessary to maintain soil health because soil functions like a nutrient recycling system that can degrade toxic chemicals. The sole application of animal manure is not sufficient to meet the nutrient demands of rice because it contains relatively small amounts of nutrients and manure is not available in the huge amounts that would be necessary. The combined use of manure and inorganic fertilizer, however, may be a better choice for synchronization of nutrient release with crop demand. This would minimize nutrient losses in various pathways, and ensure sustainable productivity [14-16]. Integrated use of manure and inorganic fertilizer proved to be beneficial for maintaining soil nutrient balance, aggregation, moisture retention capacity and fertility [17-19]. This combination also favors soil carbon accumulation [20-22], correction of secondary and micronutrient deficiency and long-term enhancement of soil quality [23-25]. Increased crop yield and nutrient uptake of rice under conjoint use of organic manure with inorganic fertilizer have been reported by many researchers [9, 26, 27].

Weeds are one of the major harmful pests that severely affect growth and drastically limit crop yield [28, 29]. The yield loss due to weeds is mainly attributable to competition for water, nutrients, space and sunlight at the critical early growth stages of the crop [30-32]. Weed species present in the crop fields differ in their competitive ability for various inputs and crop yield loss is the manifestation of crop-weed competition offered by mixed weed flora present in the crop field [33]. Mahajan et al. [34] reported a 57% reduction in the yield of transplanted rice and 82% reduction in the yield of direct-seeded rice because of weed infestation. Agronomic practices such as poor fertilizer management strongly influence weed composition, diversity and density through altering crop and weed growth [35-37]. The weed community structure is strongly influenced by the source and dose of added nutrients like nitrogen [38] and partial substitution of organic manure for inorganic nitrogenous fertilizer increased weed management efficiency [39]. In earlier times, monsoon rain was sufficient for puddle-transplanted rice cultivation. Thus, farmers in India did not practice any weed control measures since puddling followed by standing water in the field allowed rice to grow in weed-free conditions. But now the erratic distribution of rainfall in the monsoon season and frequent dry spells during the rice-growing period allows weeds to proliferate along with transplanted rice, resulting in greater crop-weed competition in the initial 30–45 days after transplantation (DAT). This necessitates efficient and cost-effective weed management strategies for puddle-transplanted rice. Currently, chemical weed management methods have become very popular for different crops including rice [29, 40–42]. However, the injudicious use of herbicides may cause serious environmental pollution, induce herbicide resistance in weeds, leave herbicide residues in the food chain, and have deleterious effects on soil microbial populations [43-46]. Integration of non-chemical weed management approaches helps to reduce herbicide load in the environment with greater weed control efficiency [47, 48].

The present study was undertaken to formulate a profitable and sustainable rice production strategy through integrated nutrient and weed management practices in subtropical eastern India. The objectives of this study were (i) to evaluate the effect of partial substitution of organic fertilizers and compost for inorganic fertilizers and sustainable weed management practices on growth, nutrient uptake, productivity and profitability of rice; (ii) to evaluate the effects of nutrient and weed management practices on weed growth under different treatment combinations; and (iii) to assess the changes in soil properties during the experimental period.

2. Materials and methods

2.1 Experimental site

The field experiment was conducted during two consecutive rainy seasons in 2015 and 2016 in farmers’ fields in Uttar Chandamari village, Muratipur, Nadia, West Bengal, India (88°27’ E longitude and 22°59’ N latitude, with an elevation of 7.9 m above mean sea level). The region has a humid and subtropical climate, with a hot, dry spell from April to May and a hot, wet monsoon period from June to September, followed by cold, dry winter weather from November to March. During the experimental period, the mean maximum and minimum temperature; rainfall; maximum and minimum relative humidity; and sunshine hours were32.9 and 27.5°C; 603 mm; 96.0 and 76.9% and 4.4 h in 2015 and 32.4 and 26.1; 893mm; 95.4 and 76.1% and 5.1 h in 2016, respectively. The soil of the experimental site is a clay loam with pH 7.39, electrical conductivity 0.29 dS·m-1 and organic carbon content of 4.3 g·kg-1. The initially available nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium content were175, 38.9 and 156 kg·ha-1 respectively.

2.2 Experimental treatments

The experiment was laid out in a factorial randomized block design having two factors, nitrogen and weed management, with three replicates. The nutrient management practices included sole chemical fertilizer (100% nitrogen N, phosphorus P, and potassium K), integration of chemical fertilizer (75% N) with bulk organic farmyard manure (FYM) or the vermicompost and concentrated organic manures such as Brassicaceous seed meal (BSM) or neem cake for 25% of recommended N in rice. The P and K were applied through fertilizer. The weed management practices were: (1) no weeding, (2) herbicides (bispyribac-sodium 25 g·ha-1 at 15 days after transplanting, DAT, followed by metsulfuron-methyl and chlorimuron ethyl [2+2] g·ha-1 at 30 DAT), and (3) integrated (bensulfuron methyl + pretilachlor [60+600] g·ha-1followed by mechanical weeding at 30 DAT). The recommended dose of fertilizer for the rice crop was 60-30-30 kg N- P2O5- K2O·ha-1. The nutrients were applied through urea (46% N), single superphosphate (16% P2O5), and muriate of potash (60% K2O). All P and K fertilizers along with organic manures (25% N) were applied as basal dose before transplanting. The N fertilizer was applied in three splits i.e. ½ N before transplanting, ¼ N at the tillering stage and remaining ¼ N at the panicle initiation stage. A knapsack sprayer (16 litre capacity) with a flat fan nozzle was used for herbicide application and the spray volume was 500 L·ha-1.

2.3 Crop management

Field preparation was done by one ploughing, followed by flooding with water, and puddling was done by four passes with the power tiller. Twenty-two-day-old rice (cv. IET 4786) seedlings were transplanted on the 20th and 17thof July in both 2015 and 2016 seasons. Two seedlings per hill were transplanted at row-to-row and plant-to-plant distances of 20 and 15 cm, respectively. The individual plot size was 7.2 m × 3.0 m and a 1.0 m no-crop area was maintained between two adjacent plots. For controlling rice stem borer, 5% fipronil SC was applied to the rice crop at the tillering stage. The second and third rows on either side of each plot were used for plant biometric observations and destructive sampling, while for yield determination, the middle thirty crop rows were harvested manually on the 19th and 18th days of October 2015 and 2016, respectively.

2.4 Plant biometric measurements

In each plot, four permanent quadrats (60 cm × 60 cm) were earmarked for observation on weed density and dry biomass accumulation at 30 and 60 DAT. Weeds were cut at ground level from two quadrats, counted and cleaned with tap water followed by drying in the sun and a hot-air oven at 65°C for 72h and weighed. For plant height, five plants were selected from each plot and height was taken to the tip of the plant from ground level. Five hills were selected from the 2nd and 3rd rows of either side and cut at ground level then dried in the sun and in a hot-air oven at 65°C for 72h and weighed for determination of accumulated plant dry biomass. The crop growth rate was defined as an increase in the biomass of plants per unit area per unit change of time [49]. where, W1 = plant dry biomass per unit area at timet1, and W2 = plant dry biomass per unit area at timet2.

Punching a core of known area was used for leaf area index (LAI) calculations. The dry weight of the known area was recorded and the area-weight relationship was calculated. The leaf area of each treatment was worked out using this relationship. The LAI was calculated from the formula given by Watson [50]:

At the physiological maturity of the crop, the number of panicles was measured from ten hills of the net plot area and converted to a per m2 basis. Twenty panicles from the 2nd and 3rd rows of either side were collected, dried to 14% moisture content then weighed to get panicle weight in grams. For the determination of rice grain yield, the crop was harvested manually at ground level from the net plot area. Grains were threshed, dried to 14% and weighed. The weight of grains was converted to t·ha-1.

2.5 Soil and plant analyses

Replicate soil samples at0-15 cm depth were collected after the harvest of the second rice crop from all treatments. The soil samples were dried in air, passed through a 2 mm sieve, and stored in a polybag for chemical analysis. Soil pH and electrical conductivity (EC) at a soil:water ratio of 1:2.5 was determined by standard methods [51]. The organic carbon content of the soils was determined using the wet oxidation method [52]. The available N and P in soil was determined by the alkaline permanganate method [53] and the ascorbic acid reduced blue color method [54]. Available K was measured by flame photometry using neutral 1N ammonium acetate extractant as described by Jackson [51].

The plant samples from each treatment were collected, oven-dried, and ground for analyzing total N, P and K. For plant N estimation, 1 g of ground plant sample was placed into a Kjeldahl tube and 5 mL of concentrated H2SO4,1 g of digestion mixture (potassium sulfate: copper sulfate: selenium powder, 100:10:1) was added and digestion was carried out for 3 h until a white or colorless solution was obtained. N was estimated by the micro-Kjeldahl method. For the determination of P and K content, plant material was digested in tri-acid (HNO3: H2SO4: HClO4 = 10:1:4) [51] and estimated by spectrophotometer and flame photometer, respectively. The total N, P and K content of organic manures was also determined foreach year before application (sS1 Table).

2.6 Data analysis

Due to high variance, the actual weed density (X) data were transformed [] before statistical analysis, whereas original weed density is presented in the manuscript. Data were subjected to analysis of variance using GenStat software. Treatment means were compared by Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference at the 5% level of significance. The effect of years was estimated to be homogeneous and consequently, variance over years was pooled with the experimental error variance. Excel software was used for drawing graphs and figures.

3. Results

3.1 Weed growth and nutrient uptake by weeds

The weed flora observed at the experimental site were Scirpus juncoides Roxb, Scirpus maritimus L. Eleocharis congesta D. Don, Cyperus difformis L., Cyperus rotundus L., Leersia hexandra Swartz, Ludwigia octovalvis (Jacq.) Raven and Ammannia baccifera L. The weed density, dry matter accumulation and nutrient uptake by weeds at different crop growth stages were influenced by year, nutrient and weed management practices as described in Table 1. The density of weeds at the early crop growth stage (tillering) varied significantly (p<0.001) with year, nutrient level and weed management practices, but the effects of the year on weed density at the later crop growth stage (panicle initiation) was not significant (p≥0.05). N supplementation through organic manures had no significant effect on dry matter accumulation by weeds at tillering, but significantly (p<0.001) influenced weed biomass at later growth stages. The addition of concentrated organic green manures (BSM and neem cake) were superior to bulky organic manures (vermicompost and FYM) and to sole chemical fertilizer in reducing weed density at the crop growth stages and weed biomass at the panicle initiation stage. The weed management approaches viz., chemical (bispyribac-Na followed by metsulfuron-methyl + chlorimuron ethyl) and integrated (bensulfuron methyl + pretilachlor followed by hoeing) significantly reduced the weed density and biomass compared to non-weeded. The performances of weed management practices were statistically similar except for weed density at the panicle initiation stage.

Table 1

Effect of different nutrient sources and weed management practices on weed growth and nutrient uptake.

Treatment	Weed density (no·m-2)		Weed dry weight (g·m-2)		Nutrient uptake (kg·ha-1) by weeds at 60 DAT
	30 DAT	60 DAT	30 DAT	60 DAT	N	P	K
Year
Year 1	125a	95a	8.52a	42.3a	9.04a	0.65a	1.00a
Year 2	88b	88a	6.83b	38.9b	8.34b	0.60b	0.93b
Nutrient management
Fert100	111ab	103a	7.74a	44.4a	9.50a	0.68a	1.06a
Fert75-VC25	124a	96a	7.45a	47.1a	10.21a	0.73a	1.12a
Fert75-FYM25	116a	106a	8.24a	45.4a	9.75a	0.70a	1.08a
Fert75-BSM25	87c	77b	7.45a	33.0b	7.05b	0.51b	0.78b
Fert75-NC25	93bc	78b	7.50a	32.9b	6.93b	0.50b	0.78b
Weed management
Weedy	293a	287a	15.73a	102.8a	22.11a	1.59a	2.47a
Herbicide	51b	39b	3.99b	10.6b	2.20b	0.16b	0.24b
Integrated	43b	31c	3.30b	8.3b	1.75b	0.12b	0.19b
Source of variation
Year	***	ns	***	**	**	**	*
NM	***	***	ns	***	***	***	***
WM	***	***	*** ***	***	***	***	***
Year × NM	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns
Year × WM	ns	ns	ns	ns	*	ns	ns
NM× WM	ns	***	ns	***	***	***	***
Year × NM × WM	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns

NM, nutrient management; WM, weed Management; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; K, potassium; VC, vermicompost; FYM, farmyard manure; BSM, brassicaceous seed meal; NC, neem cake; Fert100, full dose of N,P and K through fertilizer; Fert75-VC25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through VC; Fert75-FYM25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through FYM; Fert75-BSM25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through BSM; Fert75-NC25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through NC; Weedy, no weeding; herbicide, bispyribac-sodium 25 g/ha at 15 DAT fbmetsulfuron methyl + chlorimuron ethyl (2+2) g/ha at 30 DAT; Integrated, bensulfuron methyl + pretilachlor (60+600) g/ha at 5 DAT fb MW at 30 DAT; DAT, days after transplanting; Within year, nutrient and weed management, numbers followed by different letter indicate significant differences at p≤0.05 (otherwise statistically at par); ns, non-significant (p> 0.05)

*, ** and *** indicate significance at p < 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001, respectively.

The uptake of plant macronutrients (N, P, K) by weeds at the panicle initiation stage of rice was significantly (p<0.05) influenced by year, nutrient, weed management and their interaction (nutrient × weed) (Table 3). The yearly effect of weed management was also statistically (p<0.05) influenced by the N uptake of weed flora. Similar to weed density and biomass accumulation by weeds, the N, P and K uptake by weed flora was also restricted with the addition of BSM and neem cake as 25% of recommended N source of transplanted rice. The lowest values of N uptake by weeds (6.93 kg/ha) was observed with neem cake application. Weed management methods significantly restricted (p<0.001) the nutrient uptake by weeds. The chemical and integrated weed management methods curtailed the NPK uptake by 90 and 92%, respectively, and their performance was statistically similar (p≥0.05).

Table 3

Effect of different nutrient sources and weed management practices on nutrient uptake by rice plants at harvest.

Treatment	Nutrient uptake (kg·ha-1) by grain			Nutrient uptake (kg·ha-1) by straw
	N	P	K	N	P	K
Year
Year 1	83.6a	10.8b	19.7a	64.0a	13.3b	100.2a
Year 2	84.8a	11.4a	19.7a	96.5a	14.2a	107.3b
Nutrient management
Fert100	81.0b	11.2a	15.8c	96.8a	14.1ab	111.8a
Fert75-VC25	83.3ab	11.6a	18.3b	98.0a	14.5a	98.1b
Fert75-FYM25	90.1a	11.6a	21.9a	97.5a	13.4ab	10.2a
Fert75-BSM25	89.3a	11.3a	21.7a	91.4a	13.8ab	104.0ab
Fert75-NC25	77.2b	9.7b	20.9a	92.6a	12.9b	96.7b
Weed management
Weedy	73.9c	9.8c	16.9c	90.4b	13.3b	91.9b
Herbicide	86.0b	11.2b	18.2b	95.0ab	13.4b	107.8a
Integrated	92.7a	12.3a	24.0a	100.4a	14.4a	111.5a
Source of variation
Year	ns	*	ns	ns	***	**
NM	***	***	***	ns	**	***
WM	***	***	***	***	**	***
Year × NM	ns	ns	ns	ns	**	ns
Year × WM	ns	*	ns	ns	ns	ns
NM × WM	***	***	***	***	**	***
Year × NM × WM	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns

NM, nutrient management; WM, weed management; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; K, potassium; VC, vermicompost; FYM, farmyard manure; BSM, brassicaceous seed meal; NC, neem cake; Fert100, full dose of N,P and K through fertilizer; Fert75-VC25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through VC; Fert75-FYM25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through FYM; Fert75-BSM25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through BSM; Fert75-NC25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through NC; Weedy, no weeding; Herbicide, bispyribac-sodium 25 g/ha at 15 DAT fbmetsulfuron methyl + chlorimuron ethyl (2+2) g/ha at 30 DAT; Integrated, bensulfuron methyl + pretilachlor (60+600) g/ha at 5 DAT fb MW at 30 DAT; DAT, days after transplanting; Within year, nutrient and weed management, numbers followed by different letter indicate significant differences at p ≤0.05 (otherwise statistically at par); ns, non-significant (p> 0.05)

*, ** and *** indicate significant at p< 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001, respectively.

3.2 Crop growth, yield attributes and grain yield

The crop growth parameters (height, biomass accumulation, LAI and CGR), panicle number, panicle weight and grain yield of rice by year, nutrient application and weed management practice are depicted in Table 2. Except for plant height, the variation in other growth parameters was not statistically significant(p≥0.05) with year. Nutrient management practices influenced (p<0.01) biomass accumulation by rice plants, but its effect on plant height, LAI and CGR at 90 DAT was not significant (p≥0.05). The addition of N (25%) through BSM was statistically superior to N addition through vermicompost or sole chemical fertilizer for biomass accumulation by rice plants. The supplementation of N through BSM enhanced the rice biomass accumulation by 9% over sole chemical fertilization. The performance of weed management practices on crop growth parameters was highly significant (p<0.001). Height, biomass accumulation and growth rate of rice plants were statistically superior with the inclusion of hoeing at 30 DAT following pre-emergence herbicide (bensulfuron methyl + pretilachlor) over bispyribac-Na followed by metsulfuron-methyl + chlorimuron ethyl. Both weed management approaches were similar for LAI at 90 DAT.

Table 2

Effect of different nutrient sources and weed management practices on plant growth, yield attributes, and yield.

Treatment	Plant height (cm) at 90 DAT	Biomass (g·m-2) at 90 DAT	LAI at 90 DAT	CGR (g·m-2day-1) at 60–90 DAT	Panicles m-2	Panicle weight (g)	Grain yield (t·ha-1)
Year
Year 1	106b	891a	2.37a	15.3a	379a	2.44a	5.14a
Year 2	108a	913a	2.43a	15.4a	392a	2.55a	5.19a
Nutrient management
Fert100	107a	871b	2.41a	14.8a	365b	2.18b	4.84b
Fert75-VC25	106a	886b	2.4a	15.3a	371ab	2.49a	5.16ab
Fert75-FYM25	107a	899ab	2.42a	15.6a	380ab	2.63a	5.21ab
Fert75-BSM25	109a	953a	2.36a	16.4a	410a	2.59a	5.55a
Fert75-NC25	107a	899ab	2.42a	14.6a	401ab	2.58a	5.13ab
Weed management
Weedy	104c	806c	2.22b	13.7c	342b	2.22c	4.51c
Herbicide	108b	916b	2.49a	15.2b	399a	2.53b	5.23b
Integrated	110a	989a	2.5a	17.2a	415a	2.74a	5.77a
Source of variation
Year	**	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns
NM	ns	**	ns	ns	*	***	*
WM	***	***	***	***	***	***	***
Year × NM	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns
Year × WM	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns
NM × WM	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns
Year × NM × WM	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns	ns

NM, nutrient management; WM, weed management; N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; K, potassium; VC, vermicompost; FYM, farmyard manure; BSM, brassicaceous seed meal; NC, neem cake; Fert100, full dose of N,P and K through fertilizer; Fert75-VC25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through VC; Fert75-FYM25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through FYM; Fert75-BSM25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through BSM; Fert75-NC25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through NC; Weedy, no weeding; Herbicide, bispyribac-sodium 25 g/ha at 15 DAT fbmetsulfuron methyl + chlorimuron ethyl (2+2) g/ha at 30 DAT; Integrated, bensulfuron methyl + pretilachlor (60+600) g/ha at 5 DAT fb MW at 30 DAT; DAT, Days after transplanting; Within year, nutrient and weed management, numbers followed by different letter indicate significant differences at p≤0.05 (otherwise statistically at par); ns, non-significant (p> 0.05)

*, ** and *** indicate significant at p< 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001, respectively.

The number of panicles, panicle weight and grain yield of rice were not influenced by year (p≥0.05); however, the effect of nutrient and weed management practices was significant (p<0.01) (Table 2). The nutrients supplied by organic manures gave higher values for the number of panicles, panicle weight and grain yield of rice. The addition of BSM increased the number of panicles/m2 by 12%. The N supplementation through organic manures enhanced the rice yield over sole chemical fertilizer. The addition of N through BSM was statistically superior (p<0.05) to sole chemical fertilizer, however, the performance of vermicompost, FYM and neem cake was at par (p≥0.05) with sole chemical fertilization. Among the weed management practices, the performance chemical and integrated approach were similar for the number of panicles but significantly different in respect to panicle weight and rice grain yield. The addition of hoeing following pre-emergence herbicide (integrated) enhanced the panicle weight and rice grain yield by 8 and 10%, respectively over the chemical approach.

3.3 Nutrient uptake by rice grain and straw

The N, P and K have been taken up by rice grains and straw depended upon the nutrient content and yield of rice. The N, P and K uptake by grain and straw as influenced by year, nutrient and weed management practices are depicted in Table 3. The effect of year on N uptake by rice grains and straw and K uptake by rice grains was not significant (p≥0.05). The effect of nutrient and weed management practices and their interaction was significant on nutrient uptake by rice grain and straw (nutrient × weed). Grain N uptake ranged from 77.2 to 90.1 kgN·ha-1 and maximum grain N uptake was recorded for plots with added FYM, closely followed by N addition through BSM. The straw N uptake was statistically at par for all nutrient management treatments and ranged from 91.4 to 98.0 kg N·ha-1, though a higher but non-significant straw N uptake was observed with the addition of bulky organic manures at25%N supplementation. The grain and straw P uptake followed a similar trend with grain P uptake ranging from 9.7 to 11.6 kg·ha-1. The lowest grain P uptake was recorded from plots received neem cake for N supplementation. The straw P uptake ranged from 12.9 to 14.5 kg·ha-1 and the maximum straw P uptake was observed on plots with vermicompost added. N supplementation through FYM, BSM and neem cake was statistically superior to chemical fertilizer and N addition through vermicompost in respect to uptake by rice grain. The lowest K uptake (96.7 kg·ha-1) by rice straw was observed with N supplementation through neem cake.

Both chemical and integrated weed management practices significantly reduced nutrient uptake by weeds and improved nutrient uptake by rice grain and straw. The grain and straw N, P and K uptake were significantly higher with the inclusion of hoeing at 30 DAT following bensulfuron methyl + pretilachlor over bispyribac-Na followed by metsulfuron-methyl + chlorimuron ethyl. The straw N and K uptake under the chemical and integrated weed management approach were statistically at par (p≥0.05). The integrated weed management approach enhanced grain N, P and K uptake by 8, 10 and 32%, respectively, over the sole chemical approach. The degree of N, P and K uptake enhancement by rice straw with integrated weed management approach was 6, 7 and 3%, respectively, over sole chemical fertilization.

3.4 Changes in soil properties

The integrated nutrient and weed management practices and their interaction had no statistically (p≥0.05) a significant impact on post-harvest soil properties like pH, EC, organic carbon and available macronutrient contents (Figs 1 and 2). Soil pH varied from 6.12 to 6.36, and EC varied from 0.17 to 0.21 dS·m-1which means that the soil was slightly acidic and non-saline. Soil organic carbon ranged from 5.4 to 6.4 g·kg-1, indicating that short-term organic manure addition was unable to produce a significant change in soil organic carbon content among the different treatments. In post-harvest soil, the available N, P and K ranged from 203–246, 33.2–45.5 and 171–189 kg·ha-1, respectively. Organic manure addition at 25% N supplementation resulted in a non-significant (p≥0.05) increase in available nitrogen content over chemically fertilized plots. The N availability in post-harvest soil was increased by 16, 13, 7 and 8% with nutrient supplementation through vermicompost, FYM, BSM and neem cake, respectively over chemical fertilizer. Among weed control measures, a slightly higher available N was observed in the no-weed plot in all nutrient management options. Compared to the chemical fertilized plot, the available P in post-harvest soils from plots fertilized with FYM or BSM were 16.6 and 17.3% higher, respectively. As with available N, slightly higher available K was also recorded with organic manure treatments (p≥0.05). Supplementation with Vermicompost or FYM for nutrients increased the available K by 7 and 6% respectively over sole chemical fertilizer. Results indicated that integrated nutrient management with bulky organic manures (vermicompost and FYM) favored higher build-up of residual available macronutrients in post-harvest soil than concentrated organic manures like BSM and neem cake.

Fig 1

Effect of fertilizer and weed treatment combinations on post-harvest soil pH, electrical conductivity (EC) and organic carbon content.

Fig 2

Effect of fertilizer and weed treatment combinations on post-harvest soil macro-nutrient content.

N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; K, potassium; VC, vermicompost; FYM, farmyard manure; BSM, brassicaceous seed meal; NC, neem cake; Fert100, full dose of N,P and K through fertilizer; Fert75-VC25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through VC; Fert75-FYM25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through FYM; Fert75-BSM25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through BSM; Fert75-NC25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through NC; Weedy, no weeding; herbicide, bispyribac-sodium 25 g/ha at 15 DAT fbmetsulfuron-methyl + chlorimuron ethyl (2+2) g/ha at 30 DAT; integrated, bensulfuron methyl + pretilachlor (60+600) g/ha at 5 DAT fb MW at 30 DAT; DAT, days after transplanting.

3.5 Economics

It was observed that the inclusion of organic manures was associated with the higher cost of cultivation in all integrated nutrient management treatments over the sole chemical approach. The maximum cost of cultivation was associated with N supplementation through neem cake, closely followed by BSM (Table 4). The net return was higher in integrated based treatments over the sole chemical approach except for the addition of neem cake. The maximum net return and economic efficiency were computed with N supplementation through BSM having an integrated weed management approach. However, the highest benefit to cost ratio was recorded for25%N supplied by FYM, closely followed by BSM. Concerning the weed management approach, the inclusion of hoeing with pre-emergent herbicide resulted in a higher net return and benefit to cost ratio with maximum economic return than solely chemical-based weed management practice.

Table 4

Economics for rice production per hectare (two years’ pooled data).

Treatment combinations	Additional cost due to treatment (USD·ha-1)	Gross return (USD·ha-1)	Net return (USD·ha-1)	B:C ratio	Economic efficiency (USD·day-1ha-1)
Fert100×Weedy	63	1047	485	1.86	5.27
×Herbicide	117	1186	570	1.93	6.20
×Integrated	178	1282	605	1.89	6.57
Fert75-VC25×Weedy	83	1054	472	1.81	5.13
×Herbicide	137	1218	581	1.91	6.31
×Integrated	198	1327	629	1.90	6.84
Fert75-FYM25×Weedy	83	1043	460	1.79	5.00
×Herbicide	137	1256	620	1.97	6.74
×Integrated	198	1432	734	2.05	7.99
Fert75-BSM25×Weedy	129	1162	534	1.85	5.80
×Herbicide	183	1298	616	1.90	6.69
×Integrated	244	1482	739	1.99	8.03
Fert75-NC25×Weedy	166	1032	366	1.55	3.99
×Herbicide	220	1226	507	1.70	5.51
×Integrated	281	1386	605	1.78	6.59

N, nitrogen; P, phosphorus; K, potassium; VC, vermicompost; FYM, farmyard manure; BSM, brassicaceous seed meal; NC, neem cake; Fert100, full dose of N,P and K through fertilizer; Fert75-VC25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through VC; Fert75-FYM25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through FYM; Fert75-BSM25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through BSM; Fert75-NC25, 75% of N and 100% of P and K through fertilizer with 25% N through NC; Weedy, no weeding; Herbicide, bispyribac-sodium 25 g/ha at 15 DAT fbmetsulfuron methyl + chlorimuron ethyl (2+2) g/ha at 30 DAT; Integrated, bensulfuron methyl + pretilachlor (60+600) g/ha at 5 DAT fb MW at 30 DAT; DAT, days after transplanting; Within year, nutrient and weed management, numbers followed by different letter indicate significant differences at p ≤0.05 (otherwise statistically at par). ns, non-significant (p> 0.05); *, ** and *** indicate significant at p< 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001;Respectivelycost of urea: 0.107 USD·kg-1; Single super phosphate (SSP): 0.114 USD·kg-1; muriate of potash (MOP): 0.257 USD·kg-1; Vermicompost(VC): 0.021 USD·kg-1; Farmyard manure (FYM): 0.009 USD·kg-1; Brassicaceous seed meal (BSM): 0.214 USD·kg-1; Neem cake (NC): 0.357 USD·kg-1; Labor wages @ 2.57 USD·man-1 unit-1; Cost of Atrazine: 12.53 USD·kg-1; 1 USD (US dollar) D 70 Indian rupees.

4. Discussion

In our study, the substitution of BSM and neem cake for 25% of the N requirement reduced mean weed density and dry weight at tillering and panicle initiation stage of rice. Application of concentrated organic manures before transplanting suppressed weed seed germination as reflected in lower weed density and dry weight. The suppression of weeds by the addition of organic manures might be explained by phototoxic allelochemicals released after the addition of concentrated organic manure which effectively inhibited germination of weed seeds or caused weed seed mortality [55-57]. Brassica residues contain glucosinolates and phenolic compounds which were converted into several isothiocyanates compounds through myrosinase activity that express allelopathic activity. These allelochemicals were potentially responsible for the reduction of weed growth in the paddy [58]. That the addition of organic N suppressed weed growth compared to inorganic treatments was earlier reported by Davis and Liebman [59]. Application of organic manures not only suppressed weed growth by releasing allelochemicals, but also by modifying N availability to weeds at the initial stages of their growth. The lower weed density and weed dry weight obtained in our study with added BSM and neem cake are in agreement with the above-mentioned studies. The source of supply of different nutrients, organic manure vs inorganic fertilizer, results from indifferent responses from weeds based on nutrient availability at initial crop growth stages. Some weed seeds may not be fully digested in the stomachs of cattle and the seeds can be excreted in the manure reflecting their viability and vigor in the crop fields after dispersal through organic manures [60]. That application of FYM enhances weed growth was also observed by Efthimiadou et al. [61]. The observation that gradual release of N from compost and manure with time favors weed growth rather than crop productivity was also reported [62]. These studies explain the abundant weed growth seen with FYM and vermicompost treatments compared to chemical fertilizers.

Decreased weed growth with BSM and neem cake fertilization was caused by the lower nutrient uptake by weeds under these conditions which ultimately resulted in higher crop yield. The repeated addition of organic manure over years enhanced its efficacy in reducing weed growth and nutrient removal by weeds. Addition of organic matter to soil improved rice growth in terms of yield and yield attributes. Different integration of bulky and concentrated organic manures with chemical fertilizer increased the growth and yield of rice over sole chemical fertilization. The bacterial nitrification activities were inhibited under the waterlogged condition that prevents the ammonium volatilization and denitrification losses and creates a conducible environment for soil organic N mineralization, of which the end product is ammonium nitrogen [63, 64]. Thus, gradual mineralization of organic manures and split application of nutrients increases the availability of plant nutrients during critical rice growth stages for rapid tillering and panicle initiation, which contributes to higher grain yield. Higher rice grain yields under integrated practices were earlier reported by Mishra et al. [65]; Borah et al. [66]; Singh et al. [67]. In our study, maximum growth and yield of rice were achieved with the addition of BSM followed by FYM. The higher grain yields with N supplementation through organic manures are in agreement with results obtained by Sarkar et al. [68] who found that integrated use of FYM along with NPK fertilizers enhanced rice grain and straw yield. Recently, Mondal et al. [69] observed that 50% substitution of inorganic fertilizers with organic manure significantly enhanced hybrid rice yield and productivity in subtropical eastern India. Moe et al. [9] demonstrated that the substitution of 50% of the recommended dose of N with poultry manure and FYM can achieve a sustainable economic yield of hybrid rice in Myanmar.

Weeds are the major biotic constraints on a crop’s production and cause a significant loss of yield. In general, weeds occur in repeated flushes in a field throughout the growth period of a crop. So, adopting a single method of weed control may not be sufficient to manage diverse weed species in a crop field. In the present study, the chemical weed management approach using bispyribac-Na followed by metsulfuron-methyl + chlorimuron-ethyl may not able to control some weeds which appear in the later stages of crop growth. The use of hoeing following pre-emergence application of bensulfuron-methyl + pretilachlore effectively managed weed flora which were not controlled by herbicide application or which germinate after herbicide application. Ghosh et al. [48] found that integration of non-chemical weed management approaches along with herbicide enhanced the weed control efficiency as well as the yield of rice. Like integrated nutrient management, the combination of hoeing with herbicide increased mean grain yield by 1.26 t ha-1, while herbicide use alone for weed management only increased mean grain yield by 0.72 t ha-1compared to the non-weeded condition. Sarkar et al. [70] found that integration of hand weeding with pre-emergence herbicide use produced maximum yields compared to treatments with herbicide alone in transplanted winter rice in Bangladesh. This might be because the application of herbicide reduced weed growth at the initial crop growth stage, and later hoping removed remaining weeds at the rapid tillering phase. Weed competition with the rice crop was eliminated at the critical growth stages, resulting in lower weed density, reduced nutrient loss from uptake by weeds, with higher nutrient uptake by crops and larger grain yield.

A higher level of nutrient uptake by rice grain and straw was observed on plots fertilized with FYM and BSM compared to others. Organic manures such as FYM and BSM decompose gradually and release nutrients slowly over time. The addition of organic manures creates a better soil environment, more extensive root proliferation due to improvement in soil structure and enhances nutrient cycling by soil microbes [71]. Organic acids released during the decomposition process are good chelating agents for P and increase its availability from applied P fertilizers [72]. Nutrient supplementation from both organic and inorganic sources enriches nutrient content in both grain and straw [73-75]. However, in contrast to this general rule, neem cake treatment resulted in the lowest grain and straw N and P uptake observed. This may be due to the smaller amount of nutrients released from neem cake, especially N and P, from the panicle emergence period to the grain filling period and a slower mineralization rate compared to other organic manures. Apart from the C:N ratio, the chemical composition of the added organic matter is a crucial factor that governs the mineralization rate [76, 77]. The composition and molecular complexity of neem cake may delay the mineralization process and also affect nutrient release behavior. Mondal et al. [78] reported that neem cake addition results in a slower mineralization rate and lower availability of NH4+ and NO3-during a 60 to 90 day period compared to Brassica cake in an incubation study. Furthermore, the lower amount of plant-available P during the 90 to 120 days observed in their study suggested that less P may have been available to our rice crop during the grain-filling period. The K uptake and content was higher in straw and lower ingrain asmeasuredafter100% NPK treatment. Higher inputs of N and P from fertilizer result in a soil solution that triggers indirect absorption of K by plants to compensate for imbalances due to higher N and P supplies [79-81]. That may cause over-consumption of K during the vegetative period with subsequent lower availability during the grain filling stage.

Two years of integrated nutrient management with vermicompost, FYM, BSM and neem cake have shown a positive but non-significant (p≥0.05) impact on the build-up of soil organic carbon, available N, P and K content in post-harvest soil over sole chemical fertilizer. The main reason behind the non-significant variation of these soil parameters was most likely the relatively short duration of the experiment [82]. To draw sound conclusions on the effects of organic fertilizers on soil properties we would have to run longer experiments with organic manures added at lower concentrations. Organic manures added at high amounts can produce marked variations in soil properties within a short time. Organic manure applications in smaller quantities are beneficial in terms of enhancing soil microbe function, which is directly linked to nutrient cycling and transformations. Enrichment of soil with organic matter leads to increased cation exchange capacity, which enhances the soil’s nutrient holding and buffering capacity [11, 83, 84]. The enrichment of soil fertility parameters was more prominent with bulky organic manures such as FYM and vermicompost. To supply the same amount of N (25% N), larger amounts of FYM and vermicompost are required compared to BSM and neem cake. Improvement in soil quality under long term application of compost was found with a maize-wheat cropping system in sub-mountainous inceptisol soils of western India [85]. After a two-year experiment on rice growing, Mondal et al. [69] reported that the application of 50% or more of the nutrient requirement from mustard oil cake and the remainder through NPK fertilizer brought about a significant increase in soil organic carbon and available N-P-K content over initial values in post-harvest soil. An increase in yield and better soil fertility with integrated nutrient management was also reported by Satyanarayana et al. [16]; Sarkar et al. [68] and Jha et al. [86].

5. Conclusions

We have tested the hypothesis that the integration of organic manure into nutrient and weed management approaches helps to cut down herbicide contamination in the environment with greater weed control efficiency and higher crop yield. The two-year trial revealed that the integration of concentrated organic manures with chemical fertilizer effectively reduced weed growth and nutrient uptake and increased crop yield. In addition, organic fertilizer use had a positive impact on the buildup of soil organic carbon and the availability of soil nutrients compared to a purely chemical management approach. So, integration of nutrient and weed management practices in rice might be an effective strategy for sustainable and economic rice cultivation in eastern India. The potential benefits of organic fertilizers like brassicaceous seed meal and neem cake could be exploited for both nutrient and weed management and they could be an effective alternative for farmyard manure and vermicompost.

Nutrient content (%) in different organic manures.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

14 Jul 2021

PONE-D-21-17504

The Combination of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers Influence the Soil Fertility, Weed Growth and Productivity of Monsoon Rice

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Hossain,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 28 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see:  http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at  https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Mohan Lal Dotaniya, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. In your Methods section, please provide additional information regarding the permits you obtained for the work. Please ensure you have included the full name of the authority that approved the field site access and, if no permits were required, a brief statement explaining why.

3. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match.

When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section.

4. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information.

Additional Editor Comments:

The MS falls under the aim and scope of the Journal. It is well written, but needs few clearification as : Please add most significant achievements in abstrct part; Add few latest references on INM effect on Soil microbial functions. Please mention the SOC build up and its effect on soil fertility etc. Once again check statistical analysis.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Review for the MS (PONE-D-21-17504)

Authors have attempted a good job in laying out the experiment and presenting it in this current manuscript in terms of design, methodology, data collection, analysis and interpretation. However, the following parts needs to be considered before this paper can be further processed for publication.

Abstract

The abstract seems very weak and needs modification in writing in terms of aim and purpose, methodology, key results and a concrete conclusion from this current study. Besides following observation are placed for necessary corrections.

L 27: Replace ‘commercial’ with ‘food grain’

L30: Rephrase ‘two consecutive two-monsoon seasons’

L 39-40: Rewrite ‘Thus, the integration of nutrient and weed management practices in rice farming might be an effective way to achieve economic sustainability and efficient rice cultivation in eastern India.’ for ease in understanding.

Introduction

-This section is to be modified in line with the title of the manuscript. It should start with the role of integrated nutrient management on soil fertility initially, and then weed growth and productivity of monsoon rice.

-Please do mention the novelty of this work and scope of the study how it is improving the current state of knowledge on the role of INM on monsoon rice.

-Please incorporate the following reference in L73 and L74 which defines carbon accumulation and soil quality respectively in terms of INM:

Padbhushan, R., Rakshit, R., Das, A. and Sharma, R.P. (2015). Assessment of long-term organic matter amendments effect on some sensitive indicators of carbon under subtropical climatic condition. The Bioscan, Vol.10: 1237-1240

Rakshit, R., Das, A., Padbhushan, R., Sharma, R.P., Sushant. and Kumar, S. (2018). Assessment of soil quality and identification of parameters influencing system yield under long term fertilizer trial. Journal of the Indian society of Soil Science, Vol. 66(2): 166-171.

Material and methods

-The percentage of nutrients in BSM needs to be placed for better understanding.

Result

-Why CGR is measured only on 60-90 DAT, not in other growth stages?

-What does the error bars indicate in Figure 1 & 2?

-L202-203: Please clarify the statement ‘N-concentrated organic green manures (BSM and neem cake)’

-Cite the appropriate table no. in the result section.

Discussion

L309-311- How it relates with Line 193-195 and hence discussion should be in accordance with the weeds in your study.

L314- Again, brief the role of brassica residue on the weeds observed in your study.

L321-323- Rephrase the sentence “Straw containing……..organic manures” for better understanding and clarity for the readers.

L333-336- How gradual mineralization of organic manures in expected in anaerobic condition? Please explain here with suitable reference.

L374-376- C:N ratio really matters when we are talking of mineralization, it is the primary factor that governs mineralization. So, check the statement and rephrase it accordingly.

Discussion section is loaded with number of known facts which are well established. Even, its all about the role of organics in soil system, so explain the facts as per the data available in the manuscript, not with any parameters which are not taken into consideration.

References

Double check the references and add the necessary ones in suitable place.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

20 Aug 2021

Authors’ Responses for editor and all reviewers’ comments are available below:

Additional Editor Comments:

The MS falls under the aim and scope of the Journal. It is well written, but needs few clarification as : Please add most significant achievements in abstract part; Add few latest references on INM effect on Soil microbial functions. Please mention the SOC build up and its effect on soil fertility etc. Once again check statistical analysis.

Authors’ Response: We are happy to inform you that we have been able to address all of the comments provided by reviewers. Please check all edits in track changes mode in the manuscript.

Authors’ Response to Reviewers’ Comments

Reviewer comment: Authors have attempted a good job in laying out the experiment and presenting it in this current manuscript in terms of design, methodology, data collection, analysis and interpretation. However, the following parts needs to be considered before this paper can be further processed for publication.

Authors’ Response: Authors are grateful to the anonymous reviewer for his critical suggestions to improve the quality of the manuscript.

Abstract

Reviewer comment: The abstract seems very weak and needs modification in writing in terms of aim and purpose, methodology, key results and a concrete conclusion from this current study. Besides following observation are placed for necessary corrections.

Authors’ Response: Suggested points have been incorporated in the abstract

Reviewer comment: L 27: Replace ‘commercial’ with ‘food grain’

Authors’ Response: Corrected as suggested

Reviewer comment: L30: Rephrase ‘two consecutive two-monsoon seasons’

Authors’ Response: The sentence has been rephrased as suggested

Reviewer comment: L 39-40: Rewrite ‘Thus, the integration of nutrient and weed management practices in rice farming might be an effective way to achieve economic sustainability and efficient rice cultivation in eastern India.’ for ease in understanding.

Authors’ Response: The sentence has been rewritten and simplified for ease in understanding.

Introduction

Reviewer comment: This section is to be modified in line with the title of the manuscript. It should start with the role of integrated nutrient management on soil fertility initially, and then weed growth and productivity of monsoon rice.

Authors’ Response: Authors feel that the introduction may be kept unchanged, and a very little modification in the title has been made.

Reviewer comment: Please do mention the novelty of this work and scope of the study how it is improving the current state of knowledge on the role of INM on monsoon rice.

Authors’ Response: Incorporated in the introduction part.

Reviewer comment: Please incorporate the following reference in L73 and L74 which defines carbon accumulation and soil quality respectively in terms of INM:

Padbhushan, R., Rakshit, R., Das, A. and Sharma, R.P. (2015).Assessment of long-term organic matter amendments effect on some sensitive indicators of carbon under subtropical climatic condition. The Bioscan, Vol.10: 1237-1240

Rakshit, R., Das, A., Padbhushan, R., Sharma, R.P., Sushant. and Kumar, S. (2018). Assessment of soil quality and identification of parameters influencing system yield under long term fertilizer trial. Journal of the Indian society of Soil Science, Vol. 66(2): 166-171.

Authors’ Response: These pertinent references have been incorporated in the appropriate places.

Material and methods

Reviewer comment: The percentage of nutrients in BSM needs to be placed for better understanding.

Authors’ Response: It was mentioned in supplementary Table S1.

Result

Reviewer comment:-Why CGR is measured only on 60-90 DAT, not in other growth stages?

Authors’ Response: CGR has also been measured in other stages i.e. 0-30 DAT and 30-60 DAT, but the influence of the treatment was non-significant. Thus, the data was not presented here.

Reviewer comment: What does the error bars indicate in Figure 1 & 2?

Authors’ Response: The error bars indicate the standard error (SE) values of the respective parameters.

Reviewer comment: L202-203: Please clarify the statement ‘N-concentrated organic green manures (BSM and neem cake)’

Authors’ Response: The statement was modified

Reviewer comment: Cite the appropriate table no. in the result section.

Authors’ Response: Table no. cited in the appropriate place

Discussion

Reviewer comment: L309-311- How it relates with Line 193-195 and hence discussion should be in accordance with the weeds in your study.

Authors’ Response: L309-311 was deleted to avoid discrepancies

Reviewer comment: L314- Again, brief the role of brassica residue on the weeds observed in your study.

Authors’ Response: The sentence was modified with suitable reasons.

Reviewer comment: L321-323- Rephrase the sentence “Straw containing……..organic manures” for better understanding and clarity for the readers.

Authors’ Response: Modified as suggested

Reviewer comment: L333-336- How gradual mineralization of organic manures in expected in anaerobic condition? Please explain here with suitable reference.

Authors’ Response: Explained with suitable reference

Reviewer comment: L374-376- C:N ratio really matters when we are talking of mineralization, it is the primary factor that governs mineralization. So, check the statement and rephrase it accordingly.

Authors’ Response: The statement has been rephrased for better clarity.

Reviewer comment: Discussion section is loaded with number of known facts which are well established. Even, its all about the role of organics in soil system, so explain the facts as per the data available in the manuscript, not with any parameters which are not taken into consideration.

Authors’ Response: Discussion section has been modified with the facts as per the data available in the manuscript

References

Reviewer comment: Double check the references and add the necessary ones in suitable place.

Authors’ Response: The references have been checked, incorporated and corrected.

Submitted filename: 1. Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

30 Dec 2021

The Combination of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers Influence the Weed Growth, Productivity and Soil Fertility of Monsoon Rice

PONE-D-21-17504R1

Dear Dr. Hossain,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Mohan Lal Dotaniya, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

6 Jan 2022

PONE-D-21-17504R1

The Combination of Organic and Inorganic Fertilizers Influence the Weed Growth, Productivity and Soil Fertility of Monsoon Rice

Dear Dr. Hossain:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Mohan Lal Dotaniya

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE