Author
Listed:
- Paul Anguria
- Essegbemon Akpo
- Chris O. Ojiewo
- Michael A. Ugen
Abstract
Poor and costly weed management constrains Groundnut (Arachis hypogea L.) production in Uganda. A field study was therefore conducted at the National Semi-Arid Resources Research Institute (NaSARRI), Serere, Uganda during the long rains of 2020 and 2021 and short rains of 2020 to evaluate the efficacy of hand weeding and different herbicides on weed management, yield, and the economics of their use in groundnut. The experiment for this study comprised 7 treatments constituted by six herbicides; four pre-emergent (Glyphosate, Clethodim, S-Metolachlar, and 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid), and two post-emergent (Bentazone and Quizalofop-p-ethyl) and hand weeding. Post-emergence herbicide application and hand weeding were done at 30, 45, and 60 DAS. The treatments were laid out in a randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. Calculated weed indices show the effect of weed control measures on groundnut weeds. Pre-emergence application of glyphosate followed by post-emergence application of Quizalofop-p-ethyl produced superior pod yield (1724.3 kg/ha), the lowest weed density of grass (0.62), and Sedges (0.61), the lowest weed biomass at harvest (122.5g), the highest percentage of weed control efficiency (69.65%), and highest net returns (7,937,746UGX/ha). However, post-emergence sole application of quizalofop-p-ethyl produced the highest B- C ratio (36.49). Therefore, this study has indicated that the pre-emergence application of glyphosate followed by the post-emergence application of quizalofop-p-ethyl is the most profitable weed control measure in groundnut; while the post-emergence sole application of quizalofop-p-ethyl is the most economical. Hand weeding though may be used where labour is cheap and not scarce as opposed to the herbicides.
Suggested Citation
Paul Anguria & Essegbemon Akpo & Chris O. Ojiewo & Michael A. Ugen, 2025.
"Assessing Herbicide Use and Hand Weeding Efficacy in Groundnut Production Intensification,"
Journal of Agricultural Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 17(4), pages 1-69, March.
Handle:
RePEc:ibn:jasjnl:v:17:y:2025:i:4:p:69
Download full text from publisher
More about this item
JEL classification:
- R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
- Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General
Statistics
Access and download statistics
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:jasjnl:v:17:y:2025:i:4:p:69. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.