Effect of pretilachlor rate on grain yield and weed biomass in two rice cultivars

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/08/2013
Views (207) Download (4)

Effect of pretilachlor rate on grain yield and weed biomass in two rice cultivars

Hashem Aminpanah, Peyman Sharifi, Ali mohaddesi, Abouzar Abbasian, Milad Javadi
Int. J. Biosci.3( 8), 150-158, August 2013.
Certificate: IJB 2013 [Generate Certificate]


This study was conducted at Rice Research Station of Tonekabon, Iran, in 2011. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the effect of different pretilachlor rates on grain yield of ‘Hashemi’ and ‘Deylamani’ rice cultivars, and to determine weed biomass and relative yield loss for both cultivars when pretilachlor was applied at below-label rates. The experimental design was a split plot where the whole plot portion was a randomized complete block with three replicates. Main plots were pretilachlor rates (0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 liter ha-1) and subplots were two traditional rice cultivars (‘Hashemi’ and ‘Deylamani’). Result indicated that no significant differences were found in grain yield, yield components, relative yield loss, harvest index, rice biomass, weed biomass, and herbicide efficacy between ‘Hashemi’ and ‘Deylamani’ as averaged across herbicide rates. At the same time, ‘Hashemi’ was significantly taller than ‘Deylamani’. In contrast, ‘Deylamani’ produced greater leaf area compared to ‘Hashemi’. Regardless of rice cultivar, the highest grain yield, tiller number per m-2, grain number per panicle, rice biomass, leaf area index, and herbicide efficacy were observed in plots received recommended rate (2 L ha-1) of Pretilachlor, while the highest weed biomass and relative yield loss were found in plots received no herbicide. The results suggest that rice grain yield significantly reduces when pretilachlor is used at lower than recommended rates.


Ashton FM, Monaco TJ. 1991. Weed Science, Principles and Practices, 3rd Ed., John Wiley and Sons.

Begum M, Juraimi AS, Rajan A, Syed Omar SR, Azmi M. 2008. Critical period competition between Fimbristylis miliacea (L.) Vahl and Rice (MR 220). Plant Protection Quarterly 23,153–157

Begum M. 2006. Biology and Management of Fimbristylis miliacea (L.) vahl. PhD Thesis. University Putra Malaysia.

Chauhan BS, Johnson DE. 2010. Relative importance of shoot and root competition in dry-seeded rice growing with jungle rice (Echinochloa colona) and ludwigia (Ludwigia hyssopifolia). Weed Science 58, 295–299. http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/WS-D-09-00068.1

Dhima K, Vasilakoglou I, Gatsis T, Eleftherohorinos I. 2010. Competitive interactions  of  fifty  barley  cultivars  with Avena sterilis and Asperugo Procumbens. Field Crops Research 117, 90–100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2010.02.004

FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2011. FAOSTAT statistical database. [Online]. Available at http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx

Fischer AJ, Ramirez H, Gibson KD, Pinheiro BDS. 2001. Competitiveness of semidwarf upland rice cultivars against palisadegrass (Brachiaria brizantha) and signalgrass (B. decumbens). Agronomy Journal, 93,967-973. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj2001.935967x

Garrity DP, Movillon M, Moody K. 1992. Differential weed suppression ability in upland rice cultivars. Agronomy Journal 84, 586-591. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj1992.0002196200 8400040009x

Gealy RD, Wailes EJ, Leopoldo E, Estorninos Jr, Chavez RSC. 2003. Rice cultivar differences in suppression of barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) and economics of reduced propanil rates. Weed Science 51, 601–609. http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/0043-1745(2003)051[0601:RCDISO]

Gomez KA. 1972. Techniques for field experiment with rice. International Rice Research Institute, Los Banos, 48P.

Haefele SM, Johnson DE, M’Bodj D, Wopereis MCS, Miezan KM. 2004. Field screening of diverse rice genotypes for weed competitiveness in irrigated lowland ecosystems. Field Crops Research 88, 39–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2003.11.010

Jannink JL, Orf JH, Jordan NR, Shaw RG. 2000. Index selection for weedsuppressive ability in soybean. Crop Science, 40, 1087-1094. http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2000.4041087x

Korai A, Morita H. 2003. Evaluation of the suppression ability of rice (Oryza sativa) on Monochoria vaginalis by measuring photosynthetic photon flux density below rice canopy. Weed Biology and Management 3, 172–178. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1445-6664.2003.00104.x

Lesnik M. 2003. The impact of maize stands density on herbicide efficiency. Plant, Soil and Environment 49(1), 29–35.

Ni H, Moody K, Robles RP, Paller EC, Lales JS. 2000. Oryza sativa (L.) plant traits conferring competitive ability against weeds. Weed Science 48, 200-204.

SAS, version 9.1.3. 2004. SAS Institute. Cary, NC, USA.

Singh I, Ram M, Nandal DP. 2007. Efficacy of new herbicides for weed control in transplanted rice under rice-wheat system. Indian Journal of Weed Science 38, 28-31.

Watson  PR,  Derksen  DA,  Van  Acker  RC. 2006. The ability of 29 barley cultivars to compete and withstand competition. Weed Science 54, 783– 792. http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/WS-05-020R3.1

Zhao DL, Atlin GN, Bastiaans L, Spiertz JHJ. 2006. Comparing rice germplasm for growth, grain yield, and weed-suppressive ability under aerobic soil conditions. Weed Research 46, 444-452. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3180.2006.00529.x

Zhao DL, Atlin GN, Bastiaans L, Spiertz JHJ. 2006b. Cultivar weed competitiveness in aerobic rice: Heritability, correlated traits, and the potential for indirect selection. Crop Science 46, 372-380. http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2005.0192