Urea/ZA + Herbicide

Journal of American Science 2010;6(11)
Effect of Adding Urea or Ammonium Sulphate on some Herbicides

Efficiency in Controlling Weeds in Onion Plants
1
El-Metwally, I. M.; *1Kowthar G. El-Rokiek; 1Salah A. Ahmed; 1Ebrahim R. El–Desoki and
2
Emad E. H. Abd-Elsamad
1
Botany Dept., National Research Centre, Dokki, Cairo,Egypt.
2
Vegetable Crops Research Dept., National Research Centre, Dokki, Cairo, Egypt.
*
ahmed_ezat2000@yahoo.com
Abstract: Two field experiments were conducted during two successive seasons of 2008/2009 and 2009/2010 at the
Agricultural Experiments Station of the National Research Centre at Nobariya, Behaira Governorate, Egypt, to study
the effect of adding urea or ammonium sulphate at 2% to herbicide solution on weed control efficiency in onion
fields. Weed control treatments were as follows: Metosulam at 20 ml/fed or Clodinafop-propargyl at 70g/fed with or
without addition of urea or ammonium sulphate (AMS) at 2% of herbicide solution in comparison to Metosulam at
40 ml/fed, Clodinafop- propargyl at 140g/ fed, Metosulam at 20 ml + Clodinafop- propargyl at 70 g / fed, two hand
hoeing and unweeded check. All weed control treatments significantly depressed weed growth when compared to
the unweeded one. Two hand hoeing showed the best control of broadleaved weeds in both seasons, followed by
that of Metosulam at 40 ml, Metosulam + urea and Metosulam + AMS treatments, respectively. Clodinafop –
propargyl at 140 g, Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g, Clodinafop – propargyl + urea, Clodinafop – propargyl + AMS
and Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl were very effective in controlling most grass weeds. Meanwhile, hand
hoeing, Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl, Metosulam at 40 ml and Clodinafop – propargyl at 140 g /fed were
the most effective in controlling onion weeds. All herbicidal treatments as well as hand hoeing markedly increased
onion yield in both seasons. Maximum values of bulb length, diameter, weight and bulb yield (t/fed) were recorded
from Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl, Metosulam at 20 ml and hand hoeing twice.
[El-Metwally, I. M.; Kowthar G. El-Rokiek; Salah A. Ahmed; Ebrahim R. El–Desoki and Emad E. H. Abd-
Elsamad. Effect of Adding Urea or Ammonium Sulphate on some Herbicides Efficiency in Controlling Weeds in
Onion Plants. Journal of American Science 2010; 6(11):536-543]. (ISSN: 1545-1003).
Keywords: Onion, Urea, Ammonium sulphate, Metosulam, Clodinafop-propargyl, weeds.
1. Introduction: Effective weed control and high yield of

Onion (Allium cepa L.) is one of the most onion were achieved by application of hand hoeing
important field and vegetable crops for both local or (Radwan and Hussein; 2001, El–Sayed et al., 2002
export market in Egypt. Weeds in transplanted onion and Ghalwash et al., 2008), Clodinafop – propargyl
fields not only compete with onion seedlings for (Khan et al., 2005 and Ghalwash et al., 2008) and
growth factors but also act as hosts of insects and Metosulam (El-Metwally, 2002; Sharara et al., 2006;
fungal diseases such as downy mildew that in turn Ghalwash et al., 2008 and El-Metwally and Saudy,
infest onion plants (Ghalwash et al., 2008). Unlike 2009). However, the recommended dose of herbicide
most crops, onion plants grow slowly and do not is relatively high and hence its cost is high and too
form a leaf canopy because of their upright growth expensive under the Egyptian conditions. Recently,
habit. This character of onion makes competition some evidences have been gathered that adding some
with weeds very poor. Thus, onion is the least additives, especially the nitrogenous fertilizers to
competitive crop against weeds (Karim et al., 1998). herbicide solution could increase its activity,
Weed growth reduce the yield of transplanted onion consequently the dose could be lowered and its cost
by 26 – 48 % (Babiker and Ahmed, 1986). price could be decreased. Moreover, lowering the
Weed control in onion fields must be carried dose of any herbicide is much appreciated from the
out, especially at the early developmental stages. Due point of view of minimizing pollution. In addition,
to the severe shortage of hand labour with highly paid Metwally and Hassan (2001) and El–Metwally
wages, hand weeding has become uneconomical (2002) recorded that using some herbicides with urea
processes. Consequently, chemical weed control or ammonium sulphate had higher efficiency in
would be a highly demanded alternative to decrease controlling annual weeds and increased yield and its
the cost and increase the economic return due to the components of wheat or maize as compared with
increase in onion yield. other treatments used.
http://www.americanscience.org 536 editor@americanscience.org

Therefore, the objective of this work was to 4- Metosulam at 20 ml +ammonium sulphate (AMS)
study the effect of adding urea or ammonium at 2%.
sulphate to herbicide solutions on weed control 5- Clodinafop – propargyl (Prop – 2 – ynyl – (R) – 2
efficiency in onion crop. – (4-(5–chloro– 3- fluoro pyridine – 2- yloxy)
phenoxy) = propionate , known commercially as
2. Materials and methods Topik 15 WP sprayed after 50 days from
Two field experiments were carried out transplanting at the rate of 140g/fed.
during the two successive seasons of 2008/2009 and 6 - Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed.
2009/2010 at the Experimental Station of the 7- Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g + urea at 2%.
National Research Centre at Nobariya, Behaira 8- Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g + AMS at 2%.
Governorate, Egypt, to study the influence of adding 9- Metosulam at 20 ml + Clodinafop – propargyl at
urea or ammonium sulphate at 2% (equall 4kg/fed) of 70 g / fed.
herbicide solutions on weed control efficiency in 10- Hand hoeing after 30 and 50 days from
onion crops. The soil of the experiments was sandy, transplanting (DFT).
the mechanical analysis (Piper, 1950) and chemical 11- Unweeded check (control) without hoeing or
analysis (Jackson, 1960) of the soil were carried out herbicide.
before sowing and presented in Table (1). The herbicides were applied with knapsack
sprayer equipped with one nozzle boom and water
Table (1): Mechanical and chemical analysis of volume was 200 L/ fed (fed=4200m2). The drip
Nobariya soil before executing experiment. irrigated was the irrigation system. Each treatment
Components Value plot consisted of 3 lateral lines, each was 10 m long,
70 cm distances between drip lateral lines. The
Sand % 75.6 treatments plot area was 21 m2. Onion plants were
Mechanical
Silt % 17.4 transplanted in two sides of drip lateral lines, 20 cm

apart between the plants. Seedlings of onion cultivar
analysis
Clay % 5.5 (Giza 6) were transplanted at the last week of

December in the two seasons. The previous summer
Texture class Sandy
crop in both seasons was peanut (Arachis hypogaea
PH 7.9 L.). All agronomic practices for growing onion were
done as recommended.
E.C. 0.11 mm hos/ cm
CO3 ‫ـــــــــــــ‬ Data recorded were:
A –Weeds:
HCO3 2.5 meq / 100 g soil Weeds were hand pulled randomly from one
-
square meter from each plot after 75 and 110 days
Cl 1.0 meq / 100 g soil after transplanting and then were identified and
Chemical analysis
Ca +2
2.5 meq / 100 g soil classified to broadleaved, grasses and total weeds.
Number and dry weight of each category was
Mg+2 1.0 meq / 100 g soil estimated.
Na 1.3 meq / 100 g soil
B- Bulb characters and onion yield:
K+ 0.05 At harvest time, ten bulbs were chosen at
random from each plot and the following data were
m. equivalent / 100 g soil recorded:
1- Bulb length 2 – Bulb diameter
A complete randomized blocks design with 3- Bulb weight 4- Bulb yield (t/fed)
three replications was used in the two seasons. Weed
control treatments were as follows: C- Some chemical constituents of onion bulbs:
1- Metosulam (N- 2,6 – dichloro – 3 –methyl phenyl) a- Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium contents
– 5.7 – dimethoxy – (1,2,4) Triazolo (1,5a)
pyrimidine – 2- sulphona mide), known (NPK)
commercially as Sinal 10 Sc sprayed after 30 days Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium contents were
from transplanting at the rate of 40 ml/ fed. determined in dried tissues of onion bulbs according
2- Metosulam at 20 ml/fed. to the official and modified methods of analysis
3- Metosulam at 20 ml + urea at 2%. (A.O.A.C., 1984).

weeds by 93.3, 91.1, 89.4, 89.2 and 86.6 % at 75 days

and by 94.4, 91.8, 90.6, 89.7 and 89.6 %, at 110 days
b- Total carbohydrate contents
from transplanting.
Total carbohydrates in onion bulbs were
extracted according to Herbert et al. (1971) and 3- Total weeds:
estimated colourimetrically by the phenol-sulphoric It is obvious from the results in Table (4) that
acid method as described by Montogomery (1961). weed control treatments revealed significant decrease
on number and dry weight of total weeds. Hand
Statistical analysis: hoeing twice, Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl,
All data were statistically analyzed Metosulam at 40ml and Clodinafop – propargyl at
according to the technique of analysis of variance 140 g /fed recorded the highest efficiency in
(ANOVA) of a randomized complete blocks design. decreasing total number of weeds at 75 and 110 days
Since the obtained results of the two seasons of from transplanting. These treatments reduced number
experiment were with the same trend, combined of total weeds than unweeded check by 84.3, 68.1,
analysis was followed for the two seasons (Little and 59.1 and 53.8 %, at 75 days and by 83.3, 69.7, 60.8
Hills, 1978). Least significant difference (LSD) and 55.6%, at 110 days from transplanting. Two hand
method was used to test the differences between hoeing, Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl,
treatment means at 5% level probability (Gomez and Clodinafop – propargyl at 140 and 70 g /fed
Gomez, 1984). treatments were very effective in controlling onion
weeds when compared with other weed control
3. Results and Discussion: treatments at 75 days from transplanting. These
Effect of different weed control treatments on: treatments reduced the total dry weight of weeds by
A- Onion weeds: 85.0, 67.5, 59.2 and 57.4 %, respectively, as
The common weeds in both growing seasons compared to unweeded check. With regard to dry
of onion crop were: weight of total weeds at 110 days from transplanting,
Chenopodium album L.; Ammi majus L.; results in Table (4) cleared that the highest efficiency
Coronopus squamatus, L. Melilotus indicus L. and in decreasing dry weight of total weeds was obtained
Centaurea calcitrapa as broadleaf weeds, while the from plots treated with hand hoeing, Metosulam +
grassy weeds were Avena fatua L.; Lolium Clodinafop – propargyl, Clodinafop – propargyl at
multiforum L. and L. The effect of different weed 140 g, Metosulam at 40 ml and Clodinafop –
control treatments on number and dry weight of propargyl at 70 g /fed + urea. These treatments
onion weeds after 75 and 110 days from transplanting decreased dry weight of total weeds than unweeded
are presented in Tables 2, 3 and 4. treatment by 84.2, 72.8, 62.00, 59.6 and 54.9 %,
respectively at 110 days from transplanting.
1- Broadleaved weeds: Generally, results in Tables 2, 3 and 4
The results in Table 2 showed significant revealed that all herbicidal treatments used alone or
effects on number and dry weight of broadleaved mixed with urea or ammonium sulphate and hand
weeds after 75 and 110 days from transplanting in hoeing decreased statistically the number and dry
both seasons. Hand hoeing exerted the highest weight of broad leaved, grasses and total weeds
reduction in number and dry weight of broadleaved grown with onion crop as compared with unweeded
weeds, followed by Metosulam at 40 ml, Metosulam treatment. These results may be due to the inhibitory
+ urea and Metosulam + ammonium sulphate effect of herbicidal treatments on weeds growth. Two
treatments, respectively. These treatments decreased hand hoeing, Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl,
dry weight of broadleaved weeds than unweeded Metosulam at 40 ml, Clodinafop – propargyl at 140 g
treatment by about 84.2, 60. 9, 59.6 and 59.1 % at 75 and Metosulam + urea were the most effective for
days and by 86.3, 66.7, 64.2 and 63.8 %, at 110 days controlling the weeds. Also, Clodinafop – propargyl
from transplanting, respectively. at 70 g, Clodinafop – propargyl + urea, Metosulam +
ammonium sulphate, Metosulam + urea and
2- Grass weeds: Clodinafop – propargyl + ammonium sulphate
Number and dry weight of grass weeds were treatments produced a promising effect against weed
significantly decreased by different weed control prevailing in onion fields compared with unweeded
treatments (Table 3). Clodinafop - propargyl at 140 treatment. Such results may be due to that urea or
and 70 g with or without urea, ammonium sulphate or ammonium sulphate had capacity to give synergistic
Metosulam were very effective in controlling most effects with herbicides used that reflected by the
grass weeds at 75 and 110 days from transplanting. higher reduction in weed growth. Similar results on
These treatments decreased dry weight of grass the synergestic effect of herbicide and ammonium

sulphate on broad leaved weeds were obtained with recorded by many investigators, who showed that
Abouziena et al. (2009-a). In this connection, it is effective control of weeds could be obtained with
worthy to mention that Suwnnamek and Parker Metosulam(Sharara et al.,2006; Ghalwash et al.,
(1975) found that the synergistic mechanism of urea 2008 and El-Metwally and Saudy, 2009 ), Clodinafop
or ammonium sulphate when mixed with Glyphosate – propargyl (Saini and Angiras, 2005; El-Metwally
could be attributed to some degree of activation and El- Rokiek,2007 and Ghalwash et al., 2008 ) as
inside the weed plants. Abouziena et al. (2009-b) well as hand hoeing twice (Ishwar et al., 2000; Ved–
reported that adding AMS to the glyphosate solution Prakash et al.,2000; Kolhe, 2001 and Ghalwash et al.,
increased absorption and translocation of glyphosate 2008).
to 90 and 67%, respectively.Similar results were
Table (2): Effect of herbicide treatments alone or mixed with urea or ammonium sulphate (AMS) on number
and dry weight of broadleaved weeds after 75 and 110 days from transplanting (Combined analysis
for 2008 / 2009 and 2009/2 010 seasons).
At 75days from transplanting At 110 days from transplanting
Treatments Dry Dry
% of % of % of % of
Number weight Number weight (g/
reduction 2 reduction reduction reduction
(g/ m ) m2)
Metosulam at 40 ml / fed 39.0 62.9 102.0 60.9 50.4 64.9 150.6 66.7
Metosulam at 20 ml / fed +
42.0 60.0 105.4 59.6 53.4 62.8 161.8 64.2
urea at 2%.
44.3 57.8 106.7 59.1 53.8 62.6 163.8 63.8
AMS at 2%.
Clodinafop – propargyl at 140
71.2 32.2 173.1 33.6 92.7 35.5 266.2 41.2
g / fed
Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g
73.8 29.7 176.8 32.2 102.2 28.9 311.2 31.2
/ fed
75.3 28.3 182.6 30.0 106.4 26.0 322.2 28.8
/ fed + urea at 2%
76.4 27.2 189.7 27.3 112.5 21.7 330.1 27.1
/ fed + AMS at 2%
Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g 45.4 56.8 122.0 53.2 56.8 60.5 171.8 62.0
/ fed
Two hand hoeing 18.3 82.6 41.2 84.2 22.9 84.1 62.0 86.3
Unweeded check 105.0 ‫ــــــ‬ 260.8 ‫ــــــ‬ 143.7 ‫ــــــ‬ 452.5 ‫ــــــ‬
LSD at 0.05 3.97 ‫ــــــ‬ 5.5 ‫ــــــ‬ 3.04 ‫ــــــ‬ 4.39 ‫ــــــ‬
Table (3): Effect of herbicide treatments alone or mixed with urea or ammonium sulphate (AMS) on number
and dry weight of grass after 75 and 110 days from transplanting. (Combined analysis for 2008 /
2009 and 2009 / 2010 seasons).
Treatments Dry Dry
% of % of % of % of
(g/ m ) m2)
38.6 32.5 148.4 23.9 49.5 37.9 185.6 36.1
urea at 2%
39.0 31.8 151.7 22.2 56.5 29.1 198.5 31.6
AMS at 2%
3.7 93.5 13.0 93.3 6.6 91.7 16.4 94.4
g / fed
4.9 91.4 17.4 91.1 7.4 90.7 23.7 91.8
/ fed
5.5 90.4 20.7 89.4 8.2 89.7 27.3 90.6
/ fed + urea at 2%
5.9 89.7 21.1 89.2 10.3 87.1 30.0 89.7
/ fed + AMS at 2%
/ fed
Two hand hoeing 7.1 87.6 27.3 86.0 14.4 81.9 55.4 80.96
Unweeded (Control) 57.2 ‫ــــــ‬ 195.0 ‫ــــــ‬ 79.7 ‫ــــــ‬ 290.3 ‫ــــــ‬

Table (4): Effect of herbicide treatments alone or mixed with urea or ammonium sulphate on number and dry weight of
total weeds after 75 and 110 days from transplanting. (Combined analysis for 2008 / 2009 and 2009 / 2010 seasons).
Treatments Dry Dry
% of % of % of % of
(g/ m ) m2)
80.6 50.3 253.8 44.3 102.9 53.9 347.4 53.2
urea at 2%
83.3 48.6 258.4 43.3 110.3 50.6 362.3 51.2
AMS at 2%
74.9 53.8 186.1 59.2 99.3 55.6 282.6 62.0
g / fed
78.7 51.5 194.2 57.4 109.6 50.9 334.9 54.9
/ fed
80.8 50.2 203.3 55.4 114.6 48.7 349.5 53.0
/ fed + urea at 2%
82.3 49.3 210.8 53.8 122.8 45.0 360.1 51.5
/ fed + AMS at 2%
/ fed
Two hand hoeing 25.4 84.3 68.5 85.0 37.3 83.3 117.4 84.2
B – Bulb criteria and onion: utilization of available resources to onion plants to

1 – Bulb length: produce plants having more bulb diameter, length and
Bulb length significantly influenced by the weight than weedy check plants. The same
different weed control treatments in both seasons conclusion was mentioned by Radwan and Hussein
(Table 5). The highest values of bulb length were (2001); El-Sayed et al. (2002); Ghosheh (2004) and
recorded with Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl, Ghalwash et al. (2008).
Metosulam at 20 ml, Metosulam + urea, hand hoeing
and Clodinafop – propargyl at 140 g, respectively. On 4 – Yield of bulbs/ fed:
the other side, unweeded plots resulted in the lowest The results in Table (5) indicate that
values of bulb length. Similar results were recorded Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl gave the
by Rizk et al. (1995). highest onion yield and recorded 6.43 ton / fed
increases over weedy check treatment, followed by
2 – Bulb diameter: Metosulam at 20 ml , hand hoeing twice, Metosulam
Results in Table (5) indicated that maximum + ammonium sulphate and Metosulam + urea. The
bulb diameter was obtained from the application of superiority of herbicidal treatments and hand hoeing
Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl followed by treatment might be attributed to that onion plants
Metosulam at 20 ml, hand hoeing twice, Metosulam exposed to low weed competition as a result of
+ ammonium sulphate and Metosulam + urea. These eliminating weed and its negative impacts on onion
treatments increased the bulb diameter by 43.3, 36.2, plants. Weeds compete with onion plants for water,
31.2, 26.1 and 24.1 %, over unweeded check. These light and nutrients and the feasibility of maintaining
results are coincided with those reported by Ghosheh high yield with good quality in absence of effective
(2004) and Ghalwash et al. (2008). weed control is strongly doubtful. The above results
3 – Bulb weight: are in agreement with those obtained by Sanjeev et
Controlling onion weeds with Metosulam + al. (2003); Ghosheh (2004); Sharara et al. (2006) and
Clodinafop – propargyl recorded the highest values Ghalwash, et al. (2008).
of bulb weight followed by Metosulam at 20 ml,
C- Some chemical constituents of onion bulbs:
hand hoeing twice, Metosulam + ammonium sulphate
Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium contents:
and Metosulam + urea, respectively (Table 5).
The results in Table (6) indicate that there were
Formentioned superior treatments increased bulb
significant increases in the contents of N, P and K in
weight than unweeded treatment by 125.6, 100.0,
onion bulbs due to different herbicide treatments
86.1, 77.0 and 70.3 %, respectively. Chemical and
alone or in combination with urea or ammonium
mechanical weed control treatments reduced weed
sulfate in comparison to the corresponding controls.
competition and thus afforded more efficient

Maximum level of N content in bulbs was recorded Sharara, et al., 2006), or hand hoeing (Radwan and
with Metosulam + Clodinafop – propargyl followed Hussein, 2001 and El-Sayed et al., 2002).
by combined treatment of Clodinafop – propargyl
with ammonium sulfate and its single treatment at Total carbohydrate contents
70g / fed. Phosphorus content in onion bulb was Using the herbicides alone as well as their
significantly less in all treatments relative to combinations with urea or ammonium sulfate caused
unweeded check, except in Metosulam + Clodinafop– significant increase in total carbohydrate contents in
propargyl treatments. Moreover, the content of K in onion bulbs (Table 6). Hand hoeing was the most
onion bulbs (Table 6) exhibited the highest value effective in increasing total carbohydrate as
with the combined treatment of Clodinafop – compared to control followed by Metosulam + urea
propargyl and ammonium sulfate followed by (Table 6). On the other hand, the least carbohydrate
Metosulam at 40 ml/fed. Significant increment of content was recorded in onion bulbs of that unweeded
nutrient contents in bulb onion (Table 6) may be plots. The results of increasing carbohydrate contents
attributed to the reduction of weed competition with in bulbs of onion due to hand hoeing or herbicide
onion plant due to the herbicide treatments alone, treatments alone or their combination with urea or
their combinations with urea or ammonium sulfate ammonium sulfate were previously mentioned by
(Metwally and Hassan, 2001, El-Metwally, 2002 and Rizk, et al. (1995); Metwally and Hassan, 2001 and
El- Sayed et al. (2002).
Table (5): Effect of herbicide treatments alone or mixed with urea or ammonium sulphate on bulb criteria and onion yield at harvest
(Combined analysis for 2008 / 2009 and 2009 /2010 seasons).
Treatments Bulb Bulb
% of % of Bulb weight % of Bulb yield % of
length diameter
increasing increasing (g) increasing (t / fed) increasing
(cm) (cm)
9.2 55.9 6.9 24.09 218.0 70.31 8.72 70.3
urea at 2%
8.6 45.8 7.0 26.09 226.5 76.95 9.06 76.95
AMS at 2%
8.9 50.9 6.7 22.10 214.8 67.77 8.59 67.77
g / fed
8.2 39.0 6.5 18.30 198.8 55.27 7.95 55.27
/ fed
7.9 33.9 6.5 17.93 195.0 52.34 7.80 52.34
/ fed + urea at 2%
7.3 23.7 6.0 8.51 168.0 31.25 6.72 31.25
/ fed + AMS at 2%
/ fed
Two hand hoeing 9.2 55.9 7.2 31.16 238.3 86.13 9.53 86.13
Table (6): Effect of herbicide treatments alone or mixed with urea or ammonium sulphate on chemical composition of onion bulbs.
(Combined analysis of 2008/2009 and 2009/2010 seasons).
Treatments Total carbohydrates (mg /
N % P % K %
100 g dry weight)
Metosulam at 40 ml / fed 2.15 0.82 2.80 80.29
Metosulam at 20 ml / fed 2.05 0.69 2.05 72.64
Metosulam at 20 ml / fed + urea at 2% 1.80 0.76 1.62 90.52
Metosulam at 20 ml / fed + AMS at 2% 2.50 1.37 2.43 75.83
Clodinafop – propargyl at 140 g / fed 1.85 0.71 2.07 70.89
Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed 2.90 0.83 2.44 55.95
Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed + urea at
1.75 1.11 78.71
2% 2.01
Clodinafop – propargyl at 70 g / fed + AMS at
3.95 0.96 62.26
2% 4.15
Metosulam at 20 ml / fed + Clodinafop –
4.05 1.38 53.15
propargyl at 70 g / fed 2.42
Two hand hoeing 2.05 0.69 2.71 91.47
Unweeded (Control) 1.90 1.21 2.00 52.56
LSD at 0.05 0.095 0.054 0.41 2.54

Corresponding author 12. Herbert, D; Phipps, P. J and Strange, R. E.

Kowthar G. El-Rokiek (1971). Determination of total carbohydrate.
Botany Dept., National Research Centre, Dokki, Methods in Microbiology 5B, p. 209-344.
Cairo,Egypt. 13. Ishwar, S.; H.S. Dungarwal and I. Singh (2000).
*
ahmed_ezat2000@yahoo.com Management of wild onion (Asphodelus
tenuipholius) in irrigated mustard. Indian, J. of
4. References: Agric. Sci. 70: (11), 799 – 800.
1. Abouziena, H. F., R. A. Elmergawi, S. D. 14. Jackson, M.L. (1960). Soil Chemical Analysis.
Sharma, A.A. Omar and M. Singh (2009-a). Printice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.; U.S.A.
Zinc antagonizes glyphosate efficacy on yellow 15. Karim, S.M.R.: T.M.T. Iqbal and N. Islam
nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus). Weed Sci. (1998). Relative yields of crops and crop losses
57:16–20. due to weed competition in Bangladesh /
2. Abouziena, H. F., S. D. Sharma and M. Singh Pakistan J. of Scientific and Industrial Res., 41
(2009-b). Impact of adjuvants on bentazon (6):318 – 324.
efficacy on selected broadleaf weeds. Crop Prot. 16. Khan, B. M.; B. Gul, M. Saeed and Z. Hussain
28:1081–1085. (2005). Efficacy of different herbicides for
3. Association of Official Analytical Chemists controlling weeds in onion in higher altitudes.
(A.O.A.C). (1984). - Official methods of Pak. J. Sci. Res. 11 (1 – 2): 61 – 68.
analysis of the Association of Official 17. Kolhe, S.S. (2001). Integrated weed
Analytical Chemists, Washington D. C., 21st ed. management in onion (Allium cepa L.). Indian,
4. Babiker, A.G.T. and M.K. Ahmed (1986). J. of Weed Sci., 33 (2): 26 – 29.
Chemical weed control in 18. Little, T.M. and F.J. Hills (1978). Agricultural
transplanted onion ( Allium cepa L. ) in Sudan Experimentation Design and Analysis. pp. 115 –
Gezira. Weed Res., UK 26 (2): 133 – 137. 124 & 132 – 137. John Wiley and Sons. New
5. El–Metwally, I.M. (2002). Efficacy of adding York, U.S.A.
urea on some herbicides efficiency in 19. Metwally, G.M. and A.A.A.Hassan (2001).
controlling weeds associated in maize crop. Efficacy of adding urea or ammonium sulphate
Zagazig J. Agric., 29 (4): 1093 – 1112. on herbicide efficiency in controlling weeds in
6. El–Metwally, I.M. and H.S. Saudy (2009). wheat crop. J. Agric. Sci. Mansoura Univ., 26
Herbicide tank – mixtures efficiency on weeds (6): 3435- 3446.
and wheat productivity. Annals of Agric. Sci., 20. Montogomery, R. (1961): Further studies of the
Moshtohor, 47 (2): 95 – 109. phenol-sulphuric acid reagent for carbohydrate.
7. El–Metwally, I.M. and K.G. El – Rokiek Biochem. Bioph. Acta, p. 48-59.
(2007). Response of wheat plants and 21. Piper, C. S. (1950). Soil and Plant Analysis.
accompanied weeds to some new herbicides Inter. Science Publishers, New York, 213 – 217.
alone or combined in sequence. Arab Univ. J. 22. Radwan, S.M.A. and H.F. Hussein (2001).
Agric. Sci., Ain Shams Univ., Cairo, 15 (2): Response of onion (Allium cepa, L) plants and
513-525. associated weeds to biofertilization under some
8. El–Sayed, S.F.; M.A.Khalil and M.A. El – plant mulches. Annals Agric. Sci., Ain Shams
Barrawy (2002). Effects of some herbicide Univ., Cairo, 46 (2):543 – 564.
treatments on of onion (Allium cepa, L). J. 23. Rizk, F.A., A.M. Shaheen and S.M. Adam
Agric. Sci. Mansoura Univ., 27 (11): 7373- (1995). Onion bulb productions as affected by
7384. some weed control treatments and plant density.
9. Ghalwash, A. M.: H.E. Soliman and A. E. Egypt. J. Appl. Sci., 10 (6): 367 – 386.
Khaffagy (2008). Effect of some weed control 24. Saini, J.P. and N.N. Angiras (2005).
treatments on transplanted onion (Allium cepa, Standardization of dose of sulfesulfuron (MON
L) yield and its associated weeds. J. Agric. Sci. 37503) in controlling weeds in rainfed wheat
Mansoura Univ., 33 (2): 941- 952. (Triticum aestivum) under mid–hill conditions
10. Ghosheh, H.Z. (2004). Single herbicide of Himachal Pradish. Ind. J. Agron., 50 (1): 41 –
treatments for control of broadleaved weeds in 43.
onion (Allium cepa L.). Crop Prot. 23 (6): 539 – 25. Sanjeev, A.; K.S. Sandhu and S. Ahuja (2003).
542. Efficiency of weed control in cabbage onion
11. Gomez, K. A. and A.A. Gomez (1984). relay cropping system. Annals of Biology.19
Statistical Procedures for Agric., Res. John (1): 31- 34.
Wiley and Sons, Inc. New York, U.S.A. 26. Sharara, F.A.A.; T. A. E. El-Shahawy and
A.A.A, Hassan (2006). Influence of some

selective herbicides on controlling weeds and

wheat (Triticum aestivum, L.) productivity. J.
Agric. Sci. Mansoura Univ., 31 (1): 73 – 90.
27. Suwnnamek, U. and C.Parker (1975). Control of
Cyperus rotundus with glyphosate: the influence
of ammonium sulphate and other additives.
Weed Res., 15: 13 – 19.
28. Ved–Prakash, A.K. Pandey, R.D. Singh, V.P.
Mani and V. Prakash (2000). Integrated weed
management in winter onion (Allium cepa, L)
under mid–hill conditions of north western
Himalayas. Indian, J. of Agron, 45 (4): 816–
821.
9/10/2010

Urea/ZA + Herbicide

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Urea/ZA + Herbicide

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Urea/ZA + Herbicide

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of American Science 2010;6(11)

Effect of Adding Urea or Ammonium Sulphate on some Herbicides

Keywords: Onion, Urea, Ammonium sulphate, Metosulam, Clodinafop-propargyl, weeds.

1. Introduction: Effective weed control and high yield of

http://www.americanscience.org 536 editor@americanscience.org

Silt % 17.4 transplanted in two sides of drip lateral lines, 20 cm

Clay % 5.5 (Giza 6) were transplanted at the last week of

http://www.americanscience.org 537 editor@americanscience.org

weeds by 93.3, 91.1, 89.4, 89.2 and 86.6 % at 75 days

http://www.americanscience.org 538 editor@americanscience.org

http://www.americanscience.org 539 editor@americanscience.org

B – Bulb criteria and onion: utilization of available resources to onion plants to

http://www.americanscience.org 540 editor@americanscience.org

http://www.americanscience.org 541 editor@americanscience.org

Corresponding author 12. Herbert, D; Phipps, P. J and Strange, R. E.

http://www.americanscience.org 542 editor@americanscience.org

selective herbicides on controlling weeds and

http://www.americanscience.org 543 editor@americanscience.org

You might also like