International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research

IJSTR@Facebook IJSTR@Twitter IJSTR@Linkedin
Home About Us Scope Editorial Board Blog/Latest News Contact Us

IJSTR >> Volume 5 - Issue 3, March 2016 Edition

International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research  
International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research

Website: http://www.ijstr.org

ISSN 2277-8616

Performance Of Groundnut [Arachis Hypogaea (L.)] Varieties As Influenced By Weed Control Treatments In Kano State Of Nigeria

[Full Text]



M.S. Garko, I.B Mohammed, A.I. Yakubu, Z. Y. Muhammad



Groundnut, pre- and post-emergence herbicides, Weeds, growth and development.



A field experiment was carried out during 2012 rainy season at the Research Farm of Bayero University, Kano (110 58 N, 80 26E and 475m above sea level) and National Horticultural Research Institute Bagauda sub-station Bebeji local Government area of Kano State (110 33N 80 23E and 481m above sea level) to find out the performance of varieties and weed control treatments on growth and development of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). The experiment consisted of two groundnut varieties (SAMNUT-22 and SAMNUT-23) and 12 weed control treatments (Metolachlor at 2 levels of 1.0 and 2.0kg a.i. /ha, Fluazifop-p butyl at 2 levels of 1.0 and 1.5 kg a.i. /ha at pre or post-emergence, or combined with hoe weeding at 15 days after sowing or supplementary hoe weeding at 30 days after sowing while weed free check at 15 and 30 days after sowing and weedy check were included as control. The treatments were laid out using split plot design with variety assigned to the main and weed control to the sub plot. The result showed that SAMNUT-22 out yielded SAMNUT-23 and exhibited superior growth and yield components such as stand count, canopy height, number of branches, leaf area index, plant dry weight. The application of Metolaclor at 1.0 kg a.i. /ha followed by Fluazifop-p butyl at 1.0 kg a.i. /ha as well as Metolaclor at 1.0 or 2.0 kg a.i. /ha followed by supplementary hoe weeding produced significantly higher number of pods per plant, and pod yield per hactare. Leaf area index and number of pod per plant were significantly and positively correlated with pod weight. Thus, SAMNUT-22 can be recommended for the two study areas. Similarly application of Metolaclor at 1.0 kg a.i. /ha followed by Fluazifop-p butyl at 1.0 kg a.i. /ha and Metolaclor at 1.0 or 2.0 kg a.i. /ha followed by supplementary hoe weeding could be recommended for weed control in groundnut in the study area.



[1] Arslan, M. (2005). Effects of haulm cutting time on pod yield of peanut. J. Agron., 4: 39-43.

[2] Bailey, W. A., J. W. Wilcut, J. F. Spears, T. G. Isleib, and V. B. Langston. (2000). Diclosulam does not influence yields in eight Virginia market-type peanut (Arachis hypogaea) cultivars. Weed Technol. 14:402405.

[3] Dadari, S.A. and Mani. H (2005). The effect of post-emergence weed control on irrigated wheat in the Sudan savannah off Nigeria. Crop Protection. 24: 842-847.

[4] Duncan, D. B. (1955). Multiple Range and Multiple F test Biometrics 11, 1- 42.

[5] FAO (2006).FAO Production Yearbook, Vol.60, Rome, Italy.

[6] Grichar WJ. (1997). Control of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) with post- emergence herbicides; 11 739-743.

[7] Hassan, A.A. and Metwally, G.M. (2001). Growth and yield components of groundnut plants as affected by some herbicides treatments. Bull NRC, Egypt 26, (4:) 483 491.

[8] James, W., Grichar, P. A., Dotray, T. A. Baughman. (2008) Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus Esculentus) Control and Peanut Tolerance to S-Metolachlor and Diclosulam Combinations. Weed Technology 22:3, 442-447.

[9] Nigam, S.N., S.L. Dwivedi and R.W. Gibbons, (1991). Groundnut breeding, constraints, achievements and future possibilities; 61: 1127- 1136.

[10] Snedecor. G.W and Cochran, W.G. (1967) Statistical method 6th edition, Iowa state university press U.S.A 61 1 p.

[11] Ishaya, D.B., P. Tunku, M.S. Yahaya. (2008).Effect of pre- emergence herbicide mixtures on cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) at Samaru, in northern Nigeria. CropProtection. Volume 27, Issue 7, July 2008, Pages 1105-1109.

[12] Taru, V.B., Kyagya, I.Z., Mshelia, S.I. and Adebayo, E.F. (2008). Economic Efficiency of Resource Use in Groundnut Production in Adamawa State of Nigeria. World Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 4: p896-900.

[13] Lagoke S. T. O, A. H. Choudhary Y. M. Tanko (1981) Weed control in rainfed groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) in the Guinea savanna zone of Nigeria. Weed Research, 21: 119 125.doi: 10.1111/j.1365- 3180.1981.tb00105.

[14] Richburg, J.S. III, Wilcut J.W., and Grichar, W.J. (2006). Response of runner, Spanish, and Virginia peanut cultivars to imazethapyr. Peanut Sc.; 33, 47-52.