| Literature DB >> 35924187 |
J S Mishra1, Rakesh Kumar1, Surajit Mondal1, S P Poonia2, K K Rao1, Rachana Dubey1, Rohan Kumar Raman1, S K Dwivedi1, Rahul Kumar3, Kirti Saurabh1, Md Monobrullah1, Santosh Kumar1, B P Bhatt1, R K Malik2, Virender Kumar4, Andrew McDonald5, S Bhaskar6.
Abstract
Weeds are one of the key threats in sustaining the productivity of the rice-wheat cropping system in the Indo-Gangetic Plains. The development of sound integrated weed management technologies requires knowledge of mechanisms that influence weed flora composition and weed seedbank dynamics. A long-term study was initiated in 2015 at Patna, Bihar, India to evaluate the effect of seven tillage and crop establishment methods on weed density, weed seedbank composition, and crop productivity in rice-wheat-mungbean rotation. All the treatments included zero-till mungbean after wheat. Tillage and crop establishment methods had differential effects on weed and weed seedbank composition. In rice, zero-till direct-seeded rice recorded 62% lower emergence of Cyperus iria, 82-90% of Echinochloa colona, and 81-83% of total weeds compared to tilled systems, but the system of rice and wheat intensification favoured E. colona. In wheat, the system of wheat intensification favoured the Phalaris minor and Solanum nigrum. Zero-till rice and wheat reduced the seedbank of Trianthema portulacastrum by 95%, and total weed seedbank by 62% compared to the system of rice and wheat intensification. Nearly, 72% of C. iria seeds, 62% of grasses, and 64% of broad-leaved weeds were in 0-15 cm soil layer. Zero-till direct-seeded rice produced a 13% lower rice grain yield than conventional puddled transplanted rice. Compared to the system of wheat intensification, zero-till wheat under triple zero-till systems produced an 11.5% higher grain yield. Managing weed seedbank is a long-term endeavour. The present study revealed that tillage and crop establishment methods influence weed density and diversity. Under zero-till rice-wheat system, rice yield decreases marginally, but the system productivity maintains due to improvement in succeeding wheat yield. This system is also helpful in reducing the weed flora density and soil weed seedbank. Regular monitoring and management of emerging pests such as armyworm (Mythimna separata) are, however, required. The study suggests that the adoption of triple zero-tillage can be a viable option for reducing the weed density and weed seedbank concurrently increasing the system productivity of the rice-wheat-mungbean cropping system in eastern Indo-Gangetic Plains.Entities:
Keywords: Crop residue management; Direct-seeded rice; Grain yield; Triple cropping; Weed biomass; Weed density
Year: 2022 PMID: 35924187 PMCID: PMC9214547 DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2022.108577
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Field Crops Res ISSN: 0378-4290 Impact factor: 6.145
Fig. 1Mean monthly maximum (Tmax) and minimum (Tmin) temperatures (°C) and total precipitation (mm) during 5 cropping seasons.
Description of tillage and crop establishment (TCE), and residue management practices under rice-wheat mungbean system during five years of experimentation. [RPTR: Puddled random transplanted rice; BCW: Broadcast wheat; LPTR: Puddled line transplanted rice; CTW: Conventional-till wheat; CTMTR: CT machine transplanted rice; ZTW: Zero-till wheat; ZTMTR: Zero-till MTR; SRI: System of rice intensification; SWI: System of wheat intensification; DSR: Direct-seeded rice].
| Treatment notations | Tillage | Crop establishment | Residue management | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rice | Wheat | Mungbean | Rice | Wheat | Mungbean | Rice | Wheat | Mungbean | |
| T1: RPTR-BCW | Cultivator: 2 passes (dry tillage: DT) | Cultivator: 2 passes | Zero-till | 25-days old seedlings, manually transplanted with random geometry | Broadcasting | Drill seeding with Happy Seeder | ~30% incorporated in the soil | ~30% retained on the soil surface | 100% incorporated |
| T2: LPTR-CTW | 25-days old seedlings, manually transplanted in lines at 25 × 15 cm apart. | Drill seeding with Happy Seeder | |||||||
| T3: CTMTR-ZTW | Zero-till | 18-days old seedlings, machine transplanting at 23 × 14 cm apart. | ~30% retained on the soil surface | ||||||
| T4: ZTMTR-ZTW | Zero-till (flooding before transplanting) | 18-days old seedlings, machine transplanting at 23 × 14 cm apart. | 100% removed | ||||||
| T5: SRI-SWI | Cultivator: 2 passes (DT) | Cultivator: 2 passes | 12-days old seedlings, manual transplanting at 25 × 25 cm apart. | Manual seeding | ~30% incorporated in the soil | 100% incorporated | |||
| T6: CTDSR-ZTW | Cultivator: 2 passes | Zero-till | Drill seeding at 22.5 cm row spacing | Drill seeding with Happy Seeder | ~30% retained on the soil surface | ||||
| T7: ZTDSR-ZTW | Zero-till | Drill seeding at 22.5 cm row spacing | 100% retained on the soil surface | ||||||
Fig. 3Box and whisker plot of mean total weed dry weight in rice at 75 days after sowing; ‘X′ represents mean. [RPTR: Puddled random transplanted rice; BCW: Broadcast wheat; LPTR: Puddled line transplanted rice; CTW: Conventional-till wheat; CTMTR: CT machine transplanted rice; ZTW: Zero-till wheat; ZTMTR: Zero-till MTR; SRI: System of rice intensification; SWI: System of wheat intensification; DSR: Direct-seeded rice].
Weed density in rice under different tillage and crop establishment methods in rice-wheat-mungbean system; mean values followed by different lower case letters within a column and different upper case letters within a row or column are significantly different at P < 0.05. [RPTR: Puddled random transplanted rice; BCW: Broadcast wheat; LPTR: Puddled line transplanted rice; CTW: Conventional-till wheat; CTMTR: CT machine transplanted rice; ZTW: Zero-till wheat; ZTMTR: Zero-till MTR; SRI: System of rice intensification; SWI: System of wheat intensification; DSR: Direct-seeded rice].
| Treatments | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | Mean | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | Mean | |
| RPTR-BCW | 129b | 3.33b | 3.00b | 29.67b | 41.3BC | 36a | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.5b | 9.4B |
| LPTR- CTW | 95bc | 3.33b | 3.17b | 56.67ab | 39.5 C | 21b | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0c | 5.3 C |
| CTMTR-ZTW | 192a | 2.67b | 2.00b | 101.67a | 74.6 A | 4c | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.17a | 1.5E |
| ZTMTR-ZTW | 64 cd | 6.33a | 4.67a | 103a | 44.5B | 2c | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.67c | 0.7E |
| SRI-SWI | 118b | 2.67b | 2.33b | 4.25b | 31.8D | 2c | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.25c | 0.6E |
| CTDSR-ZTW | 98bc | 0.33c | 0.5c | 20.33b | 29.8D | 0c | 120a | 0.0 | 0.42c | 30.1 A |
| ZTDSR-ZTW | 33d | 0.0c | 0.0c | 16.17b | 12.3E | 3c | 11b | 0.0 | 0.75c | 3.7D |
| Mean | 104.0 A | 2.7 C | 2.2 C | 47.4B | 9.7B | 18.7 A | 0.0D | 0.82 C | ||
| P-value (Year*Treatment) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||||||
| RPTR-BCW | 2.0b | 2.33b | 1.83d | 22.67ab | 7.2B | 1.3d | 0.33c | 0.5bc | 30.75ab | 8.2B |
| LPTR- CTW | 2.0b | 2.67b | 2.00d | 7.83abc | 3.6D | 0.8d | 1.0c | 0.67bc | 19abc | 5.4 C |
| CTMTR-ZTW | 1.0b | 5.67ab | 5.17b | 10.25abc | 5.5 C | 5.2b | 3.0b | 2.5b | 32.92a | 10.9 A |
| ZTMTR-ZTW | 0.0b | 4.33b | 4.33bc | 19.67abc | 7.1B | 7.2a | 3.0b | 2.33bc | 11.42abc | 6.0 C |
| SRI-SWI | 12.0a | 8.33a | 8.00a | 27.00a | 13.8 A | 1.7d | 6.67a | 6.67a | 8.83abc | 6.0 C |
| CTDSR-ZTW | 3.0b | 3.67b | 3.00 cd | 4.17bc | 3.5D | 5.1b | 1.67bc | 0.0c | 3.92bc | 2.7D |
| ZTDSR-ZTW | 5.0b | 3.0b | 2.67d | 1.25c | 3.0D | 3.55c | 0.0c | 1.83bc | 1.58c | 1.7E |
| Mean | 3.6 C | 4.3B | 3.9 C | 13.3 A | 3.6B | 2.2 C | 2.1 C | 15.5 A | ||
| P-value (Year*Treatment) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||||||
| Total weed density (no. m−2) | ||||||||||
| RPTR-BCW | 2.0b | 3.0a | 1.83b | 0.0 | 1.7B | 182b | 9.32c | 7.17dfe | 98.58ab | 74.3B |
| LPTR- CTW | 6.0a | 2.0b | 2.67a | 0.0 | 2.7 A | 132c | 10.0bc | 9.00 cd | 93.17ab | 61.0 C |
| CTMTR-ZTW | 1.0b | 1.33c | 0.83 cd | 0.0 | 0.8 C | 250a | 15.67b | 11.33bc | 169.17a | 111.5 A |
| ZTMTR-ZTW | 0.0b | 2.0b | 1.17c | 0.0 | 0.8 C | 138c | 18.99b | 13.5b | 150.08a | 80.1B |
| SRI-SWI | 0.0b | 1.33c | 1.00 cd | 0.0 | 0.6D | 149c | 25.67b | 18.00a | 51.08b | 60.9 C |
| CTDSR-ZTW | 0.0b | 0.67d | 0.50de | 0.0 | 0.3E | 152c | 128.01a | 4.00e | 38.17b | 80.6B |
| ZTDSR-ZTW | 1.0b | 0.0e | 0.0e | 0.0 | 0.3E | 48d | 16.33b | 6.17de | 29.0b | 24.9D |
| Mean | 1.4 A | 1.5 A | 1.1B | 0 C | 150.0 A | 32.0 C | 9.9D | 89.9B | ||
| P-value (Year*Treatment) | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | ||||||||
Fig. 4Box and whisker plot of mean total weed dry weight in wheat at 75 days after sowing; ‘X′ represents mean. [RPTR: Puddled random transplanted rice; BCW: Broadcast wheat; LPTR: Puddled line transplanted rice; CTW: Conventional-till wheat; CTMTR: CT machine transplanted rice; ZTW: Zero-till wheat; ZTMTR: Zero-till MTR; SRI: System of rice intensification; SWI: System of wheat intensification; DSR: Direct-seeded rice].
Weed density in wheat under different tillage and crop establishment methods in rice-wheat-mungbean system; mean values followed by different lower case letters within a column and different upper case letters within a row or column are significantly different at P < 0.05. [RPTR: Puddled random transplanted rice; BCW: Broadcast wheat; LPTR: Puddled line transplanted rice; CTW: Conventional-till wheat; CTMTR: CT machine transplanted rice; ZTW: Zero-till wheat; ZTMTR: Zero-till MTR; SRI: System of rice intensification; SWI: System of wheat intensification; DSR: Direct-seeded rice].
| Treatments | Year | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015–16 | 2016–17 | 2017–18 | 2018–19 | 2019–20 | Mean | 2015–16 | 2016–17 | 2017–18 | 2018–19 | 2019–20 | Mean | |
| RPTR-BCW | 42.0b | 54.3a | 4.7c | 15.7c | 0.0 | 23.3D | 12.7b | 11.3d | 32.3b | 1.3a | 0.0 | 11.5 C |
| LPTR- CTW | 32.3bc | 43.3b | 13.0c | 39.7c | 3. 7a | 26.4D | 3.3b | 50.7a | 56.3a | 7.3a | 0.0 | 23.5B |
| CTMTR-ZTW | 23.0c | 28.0c | 7.3c | 63.7b | 2. 7a | 24.9D | 4.3b | 42.7ab | 10.7c | 0.3a | 0.0 | 11.6 C |
| ZTMTR-ZTW | 16.0c | 23.7d | 27.7b | 162.7a | 8. 7a | 47.8 A | 10.7b | 28.0c | 6.3c | 0.7a | 0.0 | 9.1D |
| SRI-SWI | 71.7a | 52.3a | 14.7c | 68.3b | 11.3a | 43.7AB | 41.7a | 37.3bc | 53.0a | 10.3a | 0.0 | 28.5 A |
| CTDSR-ZTW | 16.3c | 24.7d | 58.0a | 88.0b | 10. 7a | 39.5BC | 7.7b | 13.7d | 5.7c | 2.0a | 0.0 | 5.8E |
| ZTDSR-ZTW | 15.7c | 32.7c | 54.7a | 83.0b | 5.0a | 38.2 C | 10.3b | 12.7d | 10.3c | 0.0 | 0.0 | 6.7E |
| Mean | 31.0 C | 37.0B | 25.7D | 74.4 A | 6.0E | 13.0 C | 28.1 A | 24.9B | 3.1D | 0.0E | ||
| P-value (Y*T) | < 0.01 | < 0.01 | ||||||||||
| RPTR-BCW | 1.3c | 21.7b | 36.7b | 10.67b | 11.0b | 16.3C | 4.7b | 7.3a | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.4B |
| LPTR- CTW | 2.0b | 19.0b | 114.0a | 19.0b | 11. 7b | 33.1B | 1.3b | 7.7a | 6.3a | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.1 A |
| CTMTR-ZTW | 0.7c | 15.3b | 14.3c | 14.67b | 5.0b | 10.0D | 0.0 | 6.0a | 1.0c | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.4 C |
| ZTMTR-ZTW | 0.7c | 1.7c | 15.3c | 4.33b | 4. 7b | 5.4E | 1.7b | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.3E |
| SRI-SWI | 5.3a | 46.3a | 142.0a | 67.67a | 26.0a | 57.5 A | 8.3a | 6.7a | 1.0c | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.2 A |
| CTDSR-ZTW | 0.3c | 0.0 | 6.7c | 4.67b | 10.0b | 4.3E | 3.3b | 0.0 | 1.0c | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.9D |
| ZTDSR-ZTW | 0.3c | 0.0 | 9.3c | 6.0b | 4.7b | 4.1E | 1.3b | 6.3a | 3.3b | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.2B |
| Mean | 1.5E | 14.9 C | 48.3A | 18.1B | 10.4D | 2.9B | 4.9 A | 1.8 C | 0.0D | 0.0D | ||
| P-value (Y*T) | < 0.01 | < 0.01 | ||||||||||
| Total weed density (no. m−2) | ||||||||||||
| RPTR-BCW | 2.3b | 5.7ab | 2.7c | 3.67c | 0.0 | 2.9D | 68.0b | 102.3bc | 83.4b | 31.7c | 13.0c | 59.7D |
| LPTR- CTW | 2.0b | 3.7c | 6.0ab | 9.33b | 1.3 | 4.5B | 46.7bc | 124.4b | 202.6a | 80.7b | 19.0c | 94.7B |
| CTMTR-ZTW | 1.7b | 5.0b | 5.0b | 2.33c | 0.0 | 2.8D | 37.0c | 97.0c | 40.3c | 85.3b | 13. 7c | 54.7D |
| ZTMTR-ZTW | 0.7b | 7.0a | 8.0a | 1.67c | 0.0 | 3.5 C | 39.7c | 61.4d | 65.3bc | 171.0a | 22.0b | 71.9 C |
| SRI-SWI | 7.7a | 5.7ab | 5.7ab | 18.67a | 2.3 | 8.0 A | 139.3a | 156.3a | 219.4a | 169.3a | 43. 7a | 145.6 A |
| CTDSR-ZTW | 1.7b | 3.0c | 1.3c | 3.67c | 0.3 | 2.0E | 31.7c | 41.4d | 76.7b | 100.0b | 26.0b | 55.2D |
| ZTDSR-ZTW | 1.0b | 4.3c | 1.0c | 4.33c | 2.3 | 2.6D | 36.3c | 63.0d | 83.6b | 94.3b | 15.3c | 58.5D |
| Mean | 2.4D | 4.9B | 4.2 C | 6.2 A | 0.9E | 57.0D | 92.3 C | 110.2 A | 104.6B | 21.8E | ||
| P-value (Y*T) | < 0.01 | < 0.01 | ||||||||||
Effect of tillage and crop establishment methods on soil weed seedbank (no. kg−1 soil); mean values followed by different lower case letters within a column or row are significantly different at P < 0.05. [RPTR: Puddled random transplanted rice; BCW: Broadcast wheat; LPTR: Puddled line transplanted rice; CTW: Conventional-till wheat; CTMTR: CT machine transplanted rice; ZTW: Zero-till wheat; ZTMTR: Zero-till MTR; SRI: System of rice intensification; SWI: System of wheat intensification; DSR: Direct-seeded rice].
| Treatments | Soil layer (cm) | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0–15 | 15–30 | Mean | 0–15 | 15–30 | Mean | 0–15 | 15–30 | Mean | 0–15 | 15–30 | Mean | 0–15 | 15–30 | Mean | |
| Total grassy weeds | Total broad-leaved weeds | Total weeds | |||||||||||||
| RPTR-BCW | 17.69 | 5.00 | 11.33a | 6.00 | 10.67 | 8.33a | 10.33 | 5.00 | 7.67b | 24.0 | 14.0 | 19.0b | 48.0 | 29.67 | 38.67b |
| LPTR- CTW | 12.67 | 5.67 | 9.17a | 9.00 | 6.00 | 7.50a | 6.00 | 6.33 | 6.17b | 18.33 | 15.0 | 16.67b | 40.0 | 26.67 | 33.33b |
| CTMTR-ZTW | 21.67 | 11.00 | 16.33a | 20.00 | 4.33 | 12.17a | 2.67 | 1.67 | 2.17b | 17.33 | 12.67 | 15.0b | 59.0 | 28.00 | 43.5b |
| ZTMTR-ZTW | 17.33 | 4.67 | 11.00a | 14.00 | 7.67 | 10.83a | 3.33 | 5.00 | 4.17b | 14.0 | 12.33 | 13.17b | 45.33 | 24.67 | 35.0b |
| SRI-SWI | 19.67 | 10.33 | 15.00a | 11.17 | 7.67 | 9.67a | 36.67 | 11.00 | 23.86a | 72.33 | 22.67 | 47.5a | 104.0 | 40.67 | 72.17a |
| CTDSR-ZTW | 13.00 | 9.00 | 11.00a | 8.33 | 5.67 | 7.00a | 4.67 | 1.00 | 2.83b | 12.33 | 10.0 | 11.17b | 33.67 | 24.67 | 29.17b |
| ZTDSR-ZTW | 24.00 | 3.33 | 13.67a | 9.33 | 5.67 | 7.50a | 0.67 | 1.67 | 1.17b | 6.00 | 6.33 | 6.17b | 39.33 | 15.33 | 27.33b |
| Mean | 18.00a | 7.00b | – | 11.19a | 6.81b | – | 9.19a | 4.52b | – | 23.48a | 13.29b | – | 52.67a | 27.1b | – |
Fig. 2Relative abundance of key weed species in different depths (0–15 and 15–30 cm) under various tillage and crop establishment methods. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean; bars followed by different lower-case letters are significantly different at P < 0.05. [RPTR: Puddled random transplanted rice; BCW: Broadcast wheat; LPTR: Puddled line transplanted rice; CTW: Conventional-till wheat; CTMTR: CT machine transplanted rice; ZTW: Zero-till wheat; ZTMTR: Zero-till MTR; SRI: System of rice intensification; SWI: System of wheat intensification; DSR: Direct-seeded rice].
Effect of tillage and crop establishment methods on crop yields in the 5th cropping season; mean values followed by different lower case letters within a column are significantly different at P < 0.05. [RPTR: Puddled random transplanted rice; BCW: Broadcast wheat; LPTR: Puddled line transplanted rice; CTW: Conventional-till wheat; CTMTR: CT machine transplanted rice; ZTW: Zero-till wheat; ZTMTR: Zero-till MTR; SRI: System of rice intensification; SWI: System of wheat intensification; DSR: Direct-seeded rice].
| Treatment | Crop yields (Mg ha−1) | System productivity (REY, Mg ha−1) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rice | Wheat | Mungbean | ||
| RPTR-BCW | 6.26a | 4.44ab | 0.45c | 12.73ab |
| LPTR- CTW | 6.27a | 4.66ab | 0.52abc | 13.25a |
| CTMTR-ZTW | 5.28bc | 4.72a | 0.47c | 12.12b |
| ZTMTR-ZTW | 4.86c | 4.43ab | 0.64a | 12.09b |
| SRI-SWI | 6.04ab | 4.33b | 0.57abc | 12.88ab |
| CTDSR-ZTW | 5.29bc | 4.71a | 0.62ab | 12.38ab |
| ZTDSR-ZTW | 5.46abc | 4.83a | 0.47bc | 12.46ab |