Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Weed Control Efficacy: Response of Chickpea to Pre- and Post-Emergence Herbicides

Wirksamkeit der Unkrautbekämpfung: Reaktion der Kichererbse auf Vor- und Nachauflaufherbizide

  • Original Article / Originalbeitrag
  • Published:
Gesunde Pflanzen Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Lack of control options for cool-season broadleaf weeds is a major deterrent to autumn-sown chickpea. Weed control and chickpea tolerance to PRE (pre-emergence) and POST (post-emergence) application of isoxaflutole and oxyflurofen, PRE metribuzin, POST pyridate, and flumetsulam were investigated at three locations, including Kermanshah, Kurdistan, and Hamedan provinces during 2017–2018. Untreated and weed-free checks were added for comparison. Pyridate and PRE oxyflurofen 125 g ai ha−1 caused the minor visual crop injury according to EWRS score (1–1.8), while the highest crop injury occurred with metribuzin (EWRS score 3.5–8.5) in whole locations. The most effective herbicides for weed reduction were pyridate (70–75%), PRE oxyfluorfen (69–76%), and POST oxyfluorfen (65–73%) at Kermanshah, PRE oxyfluorfen at 125 and 175 g ai ha−1 (70–78%), POST oxyfluorfen (70–76%) and pyridate (70–78%) at Kurdistan, PRE oxyfluorfen at 125 and 175 g ai ha−1 (88–96%), metribuzin (91–100%) and Pyridate (80–97%) at Hamedan. Pyridate and PRE oxyfluorfen at 125 g ai ha−1 resulted in the highest chickpea grain yield at the three locations. In general, PRE oxyfluorfen (125 g ai ha−1) was similar to pyridate in terms of efficacy in weed control and grain yield enhancement.

Zusammenfassung

Der Mangel an Bekämpfungsmöglichkeiten für breitblättrige Unkräuter der kalten Jahreszeit ist ein großes Hindernis für die Herbstaussaat von Kichererbsen. Die Unkrautbekämpfung und die Toleranz von Kichererbsen gegenüber der Anwendung von Isoxaflutol und Oxyflurofen als Vor- (PRE) und Nachauflaufherbizide (POST), Metribuzin als Vorauflaufherbizid und Pyridat und Flumetsulam als Nachauflaufherbizide wurden 2017–2018 an drei Standorten in den Provinzen Kermanshah, Kurdistan und Hamedan untersucht. Unbehandelte und unkrautfreie Kontrollen wurden zum Vergleich hinzugefügt. Pyridat und PRE-Oxyflurofen 125 g ai ha−1 verursachten die geringsten visuellen Pflanzenschäden gemäß EWRS-Score (1–1,8), während die höchsten Pflanzenschäden mit Metribuzin (EWRS-Score 3,5–8,5) an allen Standorten auftraten. Die wirksamsten Herbizide zur Unkrautreduzierung waren Pyridat (70–75 %), PRE-Oxyfluorfen (69–76 %) und POST-Oxyfluorfen (65–73 %) in Kermanshah, PRE-Oxyfluorfen bei 125 und 175 g ai ha−1 (70–78 %), POST-Oxyfluorfen (70–76 %) und Pyridat (70–78 %) in Kurdistan, PRE-Oxyfluorfen bei 125 und 175 g ai ha−1 (88–96 %), Metribuzin (91–100 %) und Pyridat (80–97 %) in Hamedan. Pyridat und PRE-Oxyfluorfen mit 125 g ai ha−1 führten an den drei Standorten zu den höchsten Kornerträgen. Im Allgemeinen war PRE-Oxyfluorfen (125 g ai ha−1) in Bezug auf die Wirksamkeit bei der Unkrautbekämpfung und die Steigerung des Kornertrags ähnlich wirksam wie Pyridat.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahmadi A (2017) Study of flora and mapping the distribution of weeds on field Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in Khorramabad. Plant Ecophysiol 9:177–190

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmadi GH, Rahimian H (1997) Critical period of weed control in rainfed chickpea in Kermanshah province. Dissertation. Ferdowsi university of Mashhad, Mashhad

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson A (2001) The effects of acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibiting herbicides on the growth, yield, nodulation and nitrogen fixation of selected legumes. Dissertation. Adelaide University, Adelaide

    Google Scholar 

  • Boydston RA, Nelson H, Chaves-Cordoba B (2018) Tolerance of chickpeas to post-emergence broadleaf herbicides. Weed Technol 32:190–194. https://doi.org/10.1017/wet.2017.99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chalechale Y, Minbashi Moeni M, Shiranirad AH (2014) Weed mapping in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) fields and prediction of their presence in agricultural lands of Kermanshah province using geographic information system. J Weed Ecol 2:95–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Datta A, Sindel BM, Kristiansen P, Jessop RS, Felton WL (2008) The effect of soil pH on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) genotype sensitivity to isoxaflutole. Plant Soil 303(1–2):49–54

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Datta A, Sindel BM, Kristiansen P, Jessop RS, Felton WL (2009) The effects of temperature and soil moisture on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotype sensitivity to Isoxaflutole. J Agron Crop Sci 195(3):178–185

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Deva S (2016) Effect of irrigation, nutrient and weed management practices on weed dynamics, crop establishment, soil microflora and productivity of late sown chickpea in rice based cropping system. Dissertation. Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Raipur

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorigo R (1999) The selectivity of flumetsulam to chickpeas, lentils, and vetch var. Popany. In: Proceedings of the 12th Australian Weeds Conference. Tasmanian Weed Society, Hobart, pp 306–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Endres EM (2017) Metribuzin Tolerance of Early-Maturing Soybean Genotypes. Dissertation. North Dakota State University, , p 68

    Google Scholar 

  • FAOSTAT (2020) online database. https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QCL. Accessed 15 Sept 2020

  • Farquharson RL (2010) The impact of acetohydroxyacid synthase inhibiting herbicides on symbiotic nitrogen fixation of grain and pasture legumes. Dissertation. School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide, Adelaide

    Google Scholar 

  • GMRDF (2011) Greek ministry of rural development and food. Catalogues of plant protection products. www.minagric.gr/syspest/syspestbycat_byactive.aspx. Accessed 20 Dec 2012

  • Green JM, Strek HJ (2001) British crop protection councilconference-weeds. In: proceedings of an international conference Brighton Crop Protection Conference, Brighton, pp 505–512

    Google Scholar 

  • Izadi Darbandi E, Molaei E, Nezami A, Pirsa H (2017) Evaluation of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) genotypes tolerance to some herbicides. Iran J Pulses Res. https://doi.org/10.22067/ijpr.v9i1.56867

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jafarzadeh N, Shimi P (2004) A field evaluation of isoxaflutole as a new herbicide in chickpea fields. Page 591 in proceeding of the 16th Iranian plant protection congress. Plant disease and weeds. University of Tabriz, Tabriz

    Google Scholar 

  • Jalilian J, Heydarzadeh S (2017) Assessment of changes in grain yield, its components and weed suppression capabilities of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in rain-fed and supplementary irrigation conditions. Iran J Dryland Agric 6:69–87 (http://idaj.areo.ir/article_113430_11594.html)

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson EN, Ulrich DJ, Blackshaw RE, Sapsford KL, Holms FA (2007) Effect of timing of isoxaflutole application on weed control in Desi chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). In: Proceeding of soils and crops, western college of veterinary medicine bldg University of Saskatchewan saskatoon

    Google Scholar 

  • Kachhadiya SP, Savaliya JJ, Bhalu VB, Pansuriya AG, Savaliya SG (2009) Evaluation of new herbicides for weed management in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Legum Res: Int J 32(4):293–297

    Google Scholar 

  • Karimi TB, Hassanian KH, Bihamta M, Moradi P, Mohammad APYH (2012) Evaluation of tolerance of chickpea genotypes to weed competition. Seed Plant Prod J 28(4):471–487

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaur T, Kumar R (2016) Weed-management strategies in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) for higher productivity and profitability in north-western part of India. Indian J Agron 61(4):484–488

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaushik SS, Rai AK, Sirothia P, Sharma AK, Shukla AK (2016) Growth, yield and economics of rain-fed chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) as influenced by integrated weed management. Indian J Nat Prod Resour 5(3):282–285

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey AJ, DeFrank J, Cheng Z (2019) Seashore paspalum and bermudagrass response to spray applications of post emergence herbicides. Hort Technol 1:1–7. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTTECH04267-19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyon DJ, Wilson RG (2005) Chemical weed control in dryland and irrigated chickpea. Weed Technol 19:959–965. https://doi.org/10.1614/WT-05-013R.1

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Merga B, Haji J (2019) Economic importance of chickpea: production, value, and world trade. Cogent Food Agric. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2019.1615718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi G, Javanshir A, Khooie FR, Mohammadi SA, Zehtab Salmasi S (2005) Critical period of weed interference in chickpea. Weed Res 45:57–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3180.2004.00431.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mousavi SK, Pezeshkpour P, Shahverdi M (2007) Weed population response to chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) variety and planting date. J Sci Technol Agric Nat Resour 40:167–177

    Google Scholar 

  • Mousavi SK, Sabeti P, Jafarzadeh N, Bazzazi D (2010) Evaluation of some herbicide efficacy for weed control in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Iran J Pulses Res 1:19–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Naghashzadeh M, Farrash Beyranvand A (2015) Broad-Leaved Weeds in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) as affected by plant density and lentagran herbicide application. Electron J Biol 11:90–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Patel BD, Patel VJ, Patel JB, Patel RB (2006) Effect of fertilizers and weed management practices on weed control in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) under middle Gujarat conditions. Indian J Crop Sci 1(1, 2):180–183

    Google Scholar 

  • Patel BD, Patel VJ, Chaudhari DD, Patel RB, Patel HK, Kalola AD (2016) Weed management with herbicides in chickpea. Indian J Weed Sci 48(3):333–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plancqaert PH, Braun PH, Werry J (1990) Agronomic studies on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) options Mediterraneanees-sevieseminaries. Crop Sci 9:87–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Poonia TC, Pithia MS (2013) Pre and post-emergence herbicides for weed management in chickpea. Indian J Weed Sci 45(3):223–225

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasal SJ, Ingole PG, Pagar PC, Chimote AN (2015) Weed management in Kabuli chickpea. Page 241 in proceedings of 25th Asian-Pacific Weed Science Society Conference on Weed Science for Sustainable Agriculture, Environment and Biodiversity Hyderabad, India. http://isws.org.in/Documents/Proceedings_of_conference/Proceedings_Volume_III_(Poster_Papers).pdf. Accessed 10 Nov 2015

  • Rupareliya VV, Chovatia PK, Vekariya SJ, Javiya PP (2017) Effects of different pre and post emergences herbicide on growth, yield attributes, yield and quality of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Int J Sci Environ Technol 6(4):2587–2593

    Google Scholar 

  • Sondhia S (2009) Persistence of oxyfluorfen in soil and detection of its residues in rice crop. Toxicol Environ Chem 91(3):425–433

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Varanasi A, Prasad PV, Jugulam M (2016) Impact of climate change factors on weeds and herbicide efficacy. Adv Agron 135:107–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veisi M, Kakae P, Darae E, Nemati A (2003) The efficiency of the herbicide Pyridate (Lentagran) in controlling broad-leaved weeds in rain-fed chickpea fields in Kermanshah Province. Technical report of Plant Protection Research Department, Kermanshah Agriculturaland Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Kermanshah (Agris.fao.org)

    Google Scholar 

  • Veisi M, Mansouri MS, Ghiasvand M (2018) Study on the effect of herbicides to control weeds in winter chickpea fields. Technical report of Plant Protection Research Department, Kermanshah Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Kermanshah, p 29 (Agris.fao.org)

    Google Scholar 

  • Veisi M, Mansouri MS, Ghiasvand M (2019) Chemical control of broad-leaved weeds in autumn-sown rainfed chickpea. J Plant Prot Res 59(4):552–560. https://doi.org/10.24425/jppr.2019.131262

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Veisi M, Zand E, Minbashi Moeini M, Bassiri K (2020) Review of research on weed management of chickpea in Iran: challenges, strategies and perspectives. J Plant Prot Res 60(2):113–125. https://doi.org/10.24425/jppr.2020.132212

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vrajalal RVK (2017) Efficacy of pre and post-emergence herbicides for weed management in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Dissertation. Junagadh Agricultural University, (http://krishikosh.egranth.ac.in/handle/1/5810033970)

    Google Scholar 

  • Whish J, Sindel B, Jessop R, Felton W (2002) The effect of row spacing and weed density on yield loss of chickpea. Aust J Agric Res 53:1335–1340. https://doi.org/10.1071/AR01168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yenish JP (2007) Weed management in chickpea. In: Yadav SS, Redden RJ, Chen W, Sharma B (eds) Chickpea Breeding and Management. CAB International, Wallingford, pp 233–245

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zand E, Baghestani MA, Soufizadeh S, Eskandari A, PourAzar R, Veysi M, Mousavi K, Barjasteh A (2007) Evaluation of some newly registered herbicides for weed control in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in Iran. Crop Prot 26(9):1349–1358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2006.10.011

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zand E, Baghestani M, Nezamabadi N, Shimi P (2010) Application guide of registered herbicides in Iran. Jihad-e-Daneshgahi, Mashhad, p 66

    Google Scholar 

  • Zheliazkov I, Mitkov A, Stoychev D (2017) A guidebook for exercises on herbology. Academic publisher of Agricultural University, Plovdiv

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the Plant Protection Research Department, Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Kermanshah, Kurdistan, and Hamedan, Iran, for their financial support of this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Plant Protection Research Department, Kermanshah Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Kermanshah, Iran

    Mozhgan Veisi & Peyman Sabeti

  2. Iranian Research Institute of Plant Protection, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Tehran, Iran

    Mehdi Minbashi Moeini

  3. Plant Protection Research Department, Hamedan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Hamedan, Iran

    Azhang Jahedi

  4. Plant Protection Research Department, Kurdistan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Sanandaj, Iran

    Mohammad Saleh Mansoori

Authors
  1. Mozhgan Veisi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mehdi Minbashi Moeini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Azhang Jahedi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohammad Saleh Mansoori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Peyman Sabeti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mozhgan Veisi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

M. Veisi, M.M. Moeini, A. Jahedi, M.S. Mansoori and P. Sabeti declare that they have no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Veisi, M., Moeini, M.M., Jahedi, A. et al. Weed Control Efficacy: Response of Chickpea to Pre- and Post-Emergence Herbicides. Gesunde Pflanzen 74, 447–456 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10343-022-00621-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10343-022-00621-6

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Search

Navigation