Efficacy of Herbicides in Controlling Wild Onion (Asphodelus Tenuifolius L.) in Cumin Grown Under Arid Climatic Conditions

Home , Asphodelus tenuifolius, Brassica juncea, Cumin

agronomy

Article Efﬁcacy of Herbicides in Controlling Wild Onion (Asphodelus tenuifolius L.) in Cumin Grown under Arid Climatic Conditions

Moti Lal Mehriya 1,*, Neelam Geat 1, Sita Ram Kumhar 1, Abdullah A. Alrajhi 2 , Mohammed A. Alkuriji 3,* , Ahmed Z. Dewidar 4 and Mohamed A. Mattar 5,6

1 Agricultural Research Station, Mandor, Agriculture University, Jodhpur 342304, India; [email protected] (N.G.); [email protected] (S.R.K.) 2 King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology (KACST), King Abdullah Road, Riyadh 11442, Saudi Arabia; [email protected] 3 National Center of Agricultural Technology, Life Science & Environmental Research Institute, King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology (KACST), King Abdullah Road, Riyadh 11442, Saudi Arabia 4 Prince Sultan Bin Abdulaziz International Prize for Water Chair, Prince Sultan Institute for Environmental, Water and Desert Research, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia; [email protected] 5 Department of Agricultural Engineering, College of Food and Agriculture Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia; [email protected] 6 Agricultural Engineering Research Institute (AEnRI), Agricultural Research Centre, Giza 12618, Egypt * Correspondence: [email protected] (M.L.M.); [email protected] (M.A.A.)

Abstract: A ﬁeld experiment was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of different herbicides

Citation: Mehriya, M.L.; Geat, N.; for controlling wild onion (Asphodelus tenuifolius) in cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) during the rabi Kumhar, S.R.; Alrajhi, A.A.; Alkuriji, seasons (2018–2019 and 2019–2020) at Agricultural Research Station, Agriculture University, Jodhpur, M.A.; Dewidar, A.Z.; Mattar, M.A. Rajasthan. The experiment comprised eight herbicidal weed management treatments for wild Efficacy of Herbicides in Controlling onion applied to cumin in a three-replication randomized block design. Among the herbicidal Wild Onion (Asphodelus tenuifolius L.) weed management treatments, early post-emergence (8 DAS) application of oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha in Cumin Grown under Arid Climatic resulted in the lowest weed density and dry matter of Asphodilus tenuifolius, with maximum weed Conditions. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1597. (Asphodilus tenuifolius) control efficiency at 40 days after sowing (DAS) during both experimental https://doi.org/10.3390/ years. Likewise, the highest total efficiency of weed control was recorded with the application of agronomy11081597 oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha at 8 DAS. Oxyflourfen 200 g/ha used early post emergence (8 DAS) reduced the weed index more effectively than the other herbicides. It also recorded the highest number Academic Editors: James V. Anderson of branches/plant, plant height, umbels/plant, umbellates/umbel, seeds/umbellates, and seed and David P. Horvath yield. However, application of oxyflourfen @ 200 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE and pendimethalin 38.7 CS

Received: 5 July 2021 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen @ 150 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE were statistically similar in terms of plant Accepted: 10 August 2021 growth, yield, and yield attributes. The net returns (366.49 USD/ha in 2018–2019 and 175.72 USD/ha Published: 11 August 2021 in 2019–2020) and B:C ratio (1.70 and 1.33 in 2018–2019 and 2019–2020, respectively) were also superior, with oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha applied early post emergence. Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in Keywords: B:C ratio; oxyflourfen; weed density; seed yield; weed control efficiency; weed index published maps and institutional affil- iations.

1. Introduction Cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) is mostly grown in India, Morocco, Iran, Turkey, Greece, Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Syria, Egypt, Algeria, and China [1]. Cumin is an important spice crop in India. This Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. crop is widely adopted as an essential commercial crop in arid and semi-arid regions of This article is an open access article India. Gujarat and Rajasthan are the top producers of cumin. It is cultivated in an area of distributed under the terms and 9.25 lakh hectares with the production of 5.4 lakh tons and productivity of 640 kg/ha in conditions of the Creative Commons India during 2019–2020 [2]. Cumin is valued for its distinctive aroma, which comes from Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// its essential oil ranging between 2.7 and 4.3% in indigenous collections and up to 5.5% in creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ exotic collections [3]. Cumin seeds are used for various purposes, including condiments, 4.0/).

Agronomy 2021, 11, 1597. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11081597 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/agronomy Agronomy 2021, 11, 1597 2 of 11

medicine, flavoring, and seasoning agents. Following the extraction of the volatile oil, the residues contain high levels of protein (17%) and fat (20.42%), making them suitable for use as cattle feed [4]. Cuminaldehyde or cuminal is a major component of cumin essential oil contributing to the specific value-added aroma and has carminative, stomachic, and astringent properties [1,3]. Cumin is a short-statured crop with slow germination and initial growth and less canopy cover, making it unable to compete with weeds. Most farmers sow by broadcasting method, which takes time for germination (10–14 days) and requires one or two extra irrigations for better germination [5]. These factors provide an ideal atmosphere for the luxurious growth of weeds during the initial crop growth stage, which compete for essential resources (water, nutrients, light, and space), resulting in low seed yield. Cumin seed yields might be reduced by 80–90% owing to weed infestations, depending on the severity and kind of plant flora present in the field [6]. As a result, successful weed control is needed to achieve the optimal level of yield and improve resource usage efficiency, as arid and semi-arid soils are still deficient in these resources. The major weed species that appear in the cumin crop in Rajasthan (India) are Chenopodium murale L., Rumex dentatus L., Chenopodium album L., and Cynodon dactylon L. [7]. Asphodelus tenuifolius has emerged as a major noxious weed of cumin. Additionally, wild onion (A. tenuifolius) is a serious weed of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.), mustard (Brassica juncea L.), linseed (Linum usitatissimum L.), and lentil (Lens culinaris Medic.) in India [8,9]. It germinates quickly, regenerates, and competes with crops in the early phases of growth [10]. Earlier reports suggest that wild onion leaves have an allelopathic effect on the germination and growth of different crop plants [11]. Tewari et al. [8] reported that chickpea and mustard yield was decreased by 80% and 56%, respectively, due to infestation of Asphodelus tenuifolius. Controlling Asphodelus tenuifolius in cumin crops under field conditions is a big chal- lenge for the farmers of arid regions. Hand pulling (manual weeding) of Asphodelus tenuifolius is common, but due to the unusual configuration of the sturdy roots, this method frequently results only in top removal. Bulbs or bulblets will likely be left in the ground, and new leaves will later re-emerge. This is also an expensive, labor-intensive, and time-consuming method of weed control. Chemical weed control may be the most suitable option to over- come these problems [12]. Herbicides play an essential role in weed control where manual or mechanical weeding is difficult [13]. Weed control has crucial importance in increasing the yield of the crop. Controlling wild onion (Asphodelus tenuifolius) and other allied weeds, which have a significant impact on cumin crop yields, requires effective weed management techniques. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the influence of various herbicidal weed management practices on noxious weed density and consequential effects on various growth parameters of cumin, including seed yield and yield attributes.

2. Material and Methods 2.1. Field Experiment During two successive rabi seasons (2018–2019 and 2019–2020), a ﬁeld experiment was conducted at Agricultural Research Station, Mandor, Agriculture University, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India. Geographically, it is located between 26◦150 N and 26◦450 N latitude and 73◦000 E and 73◦290 E longitude at an altitude of 231 m above mean sea level. This research station falls under agro-climatic zone Ia (Arid Western Plains Zone) of Rajasthan. The experimental ﬁeld’s soil was composed of a sandy loam with a low organic carbon content (0.13%), slightly alkaline in reaction (pH 8.2), and available nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium was 173, 23.2, and 325 kg/ha, respectively. The climate of Jodhpur is typically arid with hot dry summers. The average annual rainfall is about 367 mm, and the bulk of it (85 to 90%) is received from June to September (Kharif season) by the southwest monsoon. The weekly agro-meteorological parameters were recorded and are presented in chart format during 2018–2019 and 2019–2020 (Figure1). Meteorological data were collected Agronomy 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 11

Agronomy 2021, 11, 1597 3 of 11 bulk of it (85 to 90%) is received from June to September (Kharif season) by the southwest monsoon. The weekly agro-meteorological parameters were recorded and are presented in chart format during 2018–2019 and 2019–2020 (Figure 1). Meteorological data were col- lectedfrom the from meteorological the meteorological station ofstation ICAR-Central of ICAR- AridCentral Zone Arid Research Zone Research Institute, In Jodhpur,stitute, Jodhpur,Rajasthan Rajasthan (India). (India).

Figure 1. WeeklyWeekly meteorological parameters during rabi season of the year 2018–20192018–2019 (A)) andand 2019–20202019–2020 ((BB).).

Under the present investigation, different herbicides were used to study their effect on wild onion and crops crops.. The experiment comprising of eight treatments viz.viz. T1——weedyweedy check,check, T T22——weed-free,weed-free, T3 T—3—pendimethalinpendimethalin 38.7 38.7 CS CS@ 750 @ 750g/ha g/ha–pre-emergence–pre-emergence (PE), (PE),T4— oTxyfluorfen4—oxyfluorfen @ 200 @ g/ha 200– g/ha–PE,PE, T5—pendimethalin T5—pendimethalin 38.7 CS 38.7 @ 500 CS g/ha @ 500 + o g/haxyfluorfen + oxyfluor- @ 150 g/hafen @–PE 150, T g/ha–PE,6—oxyflourfen T6—oxyflourfen @ 200 g/ha 8 @ DAS 200– g/haearly 8post DAS–early emergence post (P emergenceOE), T7—endime- (POE), thalinT7—endimethalin 38.7 CS @ 50038.7 g/ha CS + @oxyfluorfen 500 g/ha +@ oxyfluorfen150 g/ha 8 DAS @ 150–early g/ha PO 8E DAS–early, and T8—o POE,xydiargyl and @T8 50—oxydiargyl g/ha 20 DAS @– 50PO g/haE, was 20 DAS–POE,set up in a wasthree set-replication up in a three-replication randomized block randomized design. block Plot sizedesign. was Plot 5.0 sizem × was3.0 m 5.0 (1 m5 ×m23.0). Cumin m (15 mseeds2). Cumin of the seeds GC 4 of variety the GC were 4 variety treated were with treated car- bendazimwith carbendazim @ 2.0 g/kg @ seed 2.0 g/kg to protect seed tothe protect crop from the crop fungal from diseases fungal which diseases were which sowed were 30 cmsowed apart 30 in cm a apartline at in a a seed line atrate a seedof 12 rate kg/ha. of 12 The kg/ha. required The requiredquantity quantityof commercial of commercial formu- lationformulation of each of herbicidal each herbicidal treatmen treatmentt was sprayed was sprayed using a usingknapsack a knapsack sprayer sprayerwith a flat with fan a nozzleflat fan and nozzle 500 andL/ha500 of water L/ha as of a water carrier as. One a carrier. day after One sowing, day after pre sowing,-emergence pre-emergence herbicides wereherbicides sprayed. were In sprayed.comparison, In comparison, post-emergence post-emergence herbicides were herbicides used at were8 and used 20 DAS at 8 after and sowing.20 DAS afterIn the sowing. weedy che In theck, weedyno weeding check, practice no weeding was performed practice was. All performed. the recommended All the improvedrecommended practices improved were followed practices in were this followed experiment, in this including experiment, fertilizers including and plant fertilizers-pro- tectionand plant-protection measures. measures.

Agronomy 2021, 11, 1597 4 of 11

2.2. Analysis of Weed Density and Weed Dry Weight Weed counting was carried out using a quadrate of 0.5 × 0.5 m2 at two locations, and the dry weight of each plot’s weeds was recorded. For the determination of weed dry weight, weed samples were collected in triplicate from each plot. The samples were placed inside a paper envelope in an oven at 105 ◦C for two hours, and then at 80 ◦C until a constant dry weight was obtained.

2.3. Analysis of Weed Control Efﬁciency and Weed Index As suggested by Mani et al. [14], the following formula was used to compute weed control efﬁciency, WCE (%):

DMC − DMT Weed control efﬁciency, WCE (%) = × 100 (1) DMC where DMC = Dry matter production of weeds/m2 in weedy check. DMT = Dry matter production of weeds/m2 in the treatment to be compared. Weed index is a percent reduction in seed yield due to weed compared to the total yield of weed-free treatment. The index of weed was determined using the following formula:

X − Y Weed Index(%) = × 100 (2) X where X = Seed yield from weed free plot. Y = Seed yield from the treatment for which the weed index is to be determined.

2.4. Analysis of Plant Growth, Yield, and Yield Attributes At maturity, ﬁve plants from each plot were uprooted for determination of plant height (cm), number of umbels/plant, number of branches/plant, number of seeds/umbellate, and number of umbellates/umbel. After threshing, the seed yield of cumin from each treatment’s plot was weighed, and the weight is given in kg/ha.

2.5. Statistical Analyses The experiment’s entire data sets were analyzed to determine the mean values of three replicates of each treatment. Using Minitab 17 software, the data were then statistically examined with a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Fisher LSD method at a 95% conﬁdence (p ≤ 0.05) was used to group information between mean values of acquired data from each experiment. Additionally, the Sigma Plot version 12 program was utilized to create the ﬁgures.

3. Results and Discussion 3.1. Major Weed Flora The weed ﬂora noticed from the weedy check plots of the experimental ﬁeld con- sisted of Asphodelus tenuifolius L. (70.8%) and others (29.2%), i.e., Chenopodium album L., Chenopodium murale L., Rumex dentatus L., Launea asplenifolia L., Cynodon dactylon L., and Cyperus rotundus. However, predominant weeds were Asphodelus tenuifolius L., Chenopodium murale L., and Chenopodium album L. Similarly, Patel et al. [5] and Birla et al. [15] found Asphodelus tenuifolius as a major weed in cumin.

3.2. Effect of Different Herbicides on Density and Dry Matter of Weeds The density and dry matter of Asphodilus tenuifolius recorded at 40 DAS were significantly reduced by all the herbicidal treatments as compared to weedy check during both the years (Figure2). Among different herbicides, application of oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha early post emergence (8 DAS) was the most efficient in lowering the density and dry Agronomy 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 11

Agronomy 2021, 11, 1597 the years (Figure 2). Among different herbicides, application of oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha5 early of 11 post emergence (8 DAS) was the most efficient in lowering the density and dry matter of Asphodilus tenuifolius weed, followed by application of pendimethalin 500 g/ha + ox- matteryfluorfen of Asphodilus 150 g/ha applied tenuifolius earlyweed, post followed emergence by application during both of pendimethalinthe years (Figure 500 2). g/ha The + oxyfluorfenapplication of 150 oxyfluorfen g/ha applied 200 early g/ha postearly emergence post emergence during (8 bothDAS) the red yearsuced (Figurethe wild2). onion The applicationdensity by of90.40% oxyfluorfen and 78.42% 200 g/ha over early the weedy post emergence check during (8 DAS) 201 reduced8–2019 and the wild2019 onion–2020, densityrespectively by 90.40%. Likewise, and 78.42% wild onion over dry the matterweedy wascheck reduced during by2018–2019 85% and and 75%2019–2020 over the, respectively.weedy check Likewise, during 201 wild8–20 onion19 and dry 201 matter9–2020 was, respectively. reduced by However, 85% and application 75% over the of weedypendimethalin check during 500 g/ha 2018–2019 + oxyfluorfen and 2019–2020150 g/ha applied, respectively. at 8 DAS However, significantly application reduced the of pendimethalindensity and dry 500 matter g/ha of + wild oxyfluorfen onion as 150 well g/ha as total applied weeds at 8 as DAS compared significantly to the reduced application the densityof pendimethalin and dry matter 750 g/ha of wild and onion oxyflu asorfen well 200 as total g/ha weeds applied as pre compared-emergence, to the but application their ap- ofplication pendimethalin pre-emergence 750 g/ha was and found oxyfluorfen to be on par 200 with g/ha each applied other pre-emergence, (Figure 2 and Table but their S1). applicationOur results pre-emergenceare corroborated was by found Patel toet beal. on[16], par who with found each otherthat both (Figure the2 oxadiargyl and Table S1).and Ourpendimethalin results are corroboratedpre-emergence by significantly Patel et al. [ 16reduced], who foundthe dry that weight both of the weeds oxadiargyl compared and pendimethalinto the post-emergence pre-emergence application significantly of oxadiargyl. reduced Earlier the research dry weight revealed of weeds that comparedherbicides toviz. the pendimethalin post-emergence [17] application and oxadiargyl of oxadiargyl. [5], were Earlier found research to be efficient revealed against that herbicides weeds in viz.cumin. pendimethalin Mathukia et [al.17 ][18] and reported oxadiargyl that [the5], wereapplication found of to pendimethalin be efficient against (900 g/ha) weeds pre in- cumin.emergence Mathukia followed et by al. hand [18] reportedweeding at that 45 theDAS application and oxadiargyl of pendimethalin (75 g/ha) early (900post g/ha)emer- pre-emergencegence at 7 DAS followedfollowed byby handhand weeding at 45 DAS significantly and oxadiargyl reduced (75 g/ha) the dry early weight post emergenceof weeds in at cumi 7 DASn. Our followed results by also hand have weeding close conformity at 45 DAS with significantly the results reduced of Mehdi the et dry al. weight[19]. They of weedsreported in cumin.that application Our results of pre also-planting have close herbicides conformity (trifluralin with theand results ethalflu- of Mehdiralin), pre et al.-emergence [19]. They herbicides reported (oxadiazon, that application simazine, of pre-planting and prometryn), herbicides and (trifluralinpost-emer- andgence ethalfluralin), herbicide (Linuron) pre-emergence significantly herbicides reduced (oxadiazon, the dry simazine, weight and and prometryn), weed density and of post-emergenceweeds in cumin herbicide as compared (Linuron) to the significantly weedy check. reduced the dry weight and weed density of weeds in cumin as compared to the weedy check.

Figure 2. Efﬁcacy of different herbicides on density (A) and dry matter (B) of Asphodelus tenuifolius.

Where,Figure 2. T 1Efficacy= weedy of different check; Therbicides3 = pendimethalin on density 38.7(A) and CS @dry 750 matter g/ha–PE; (B) of Asphodelus T4 = oxyfluorfen tenuifolius. @ Where, T1 = weedy check; T3 = pendimethalin 38.7 CS @ 750 g/ha–PE; T4 = oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha– 200 g/ha–PE;T5 = pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha @–PE; T6 = oxyflourfen PE ; T5 = pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha @–PE ; T6 = oxyflourfen @ 200 g/ha @ 200 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE; T7 = pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen @ 150 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE; T7 = pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen @ 150 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE; 8 DAS–early POE; T8 = oxydiargyl @ 50 g/ha 20 DAS–POE. Error bars show SD; Fisher LSD method T8 = oxydiargyl @ 50 g/ha 20 DAS–POE. Error bars show SD; Fisher LSD method at 95% confidence at 95% confidence (p ≤ 0.05) was used to group information between the mean values of acquired data. Different letters point out significant differences among the treatments in a particular year.

Agronomy 2021, 11, 1597 6 of 11

Pre-emergence or post-emergence (20–25 DAS) herbicides are usually used for controlling weeds in cumin. However, their efficiency is lower. Generally, cumin seeds germinate within 10–14 days and require one or two additional irrigations. This provides an ideal environment for weeds to flourish. Moreover, herbicides can also be leached out of the soil. Additionally, the thin waxy leaves of wild onion may decrease the weed control efficiency of post-emergence herbicides. Waxy leaves are largely responsible for poor herbicide absorption since they obstruct the herbicide’s ability to stick on leaves and reduce the penetration process. [20]. As a result, early post-emergence herbicides could be more effective for controlling weeds in cumin. Since early post-emergence herbicides have a higher effective value, application of oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha early post emergence (8 DAS) or pendimethalin 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha applied at 8 DAS might be more efficient in lowering the Asphodilus tenuifolius density as well as other weeds in cumin than pre-emergence or post-emergence herbicides. Oxyfluorfen has both foliar and soil activity. This herbicide is the inhibitor of protoporphyrinogen oxidase. It destroys the cell membrane of weeds by forming reactive oxygen species (superoxide and peroxide radicals) and free electrons responsible for lipid peroxi- dation [21]. Pendimethalin inhibits cell division and root formation in weed seedlings [21], whereas oxadiargyl is the inhibitor of protoporphyrinogen oxidase and destroys the weeds by necrotic action [22].

3.3. Weed Control Efficiency (WCE) and Weed Index (WI) Efficacy of herbicide can only be judged by calculating the weed control efficiency of a particular treatment and comparing it with weedy check to control weeds. Signifi- cant differences in weed control efficiency and weed index were observed as a result of several weed management treatments (Figure3 and Supplementary Table S2). Among the herbicidal weed management treatments, oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha early post emergence (8 DAS) and pendimethalin 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha applied early post emergence (8 DAS) were equally significant over the other herbicidal weed management treatments in relation to wild onion (Asphodelus tenuifolius) control efficiency and weed index during both experimental years (Figure3A,B). However, oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha early post emergence (8 DAS) recorded the highest wild onion control efficiency (84.79% and 75.28% in 2018–2019 and 2019–2020, respectively). Likewise, the lowest weed index (2.9% in 2018–2019 and 2.7% Agronomy 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 11 in 2019–2020) was also recorded with oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha applied early post emergence (8 DAS) (Figure3B). This could be due to herbicides being used to eliminate weeds.

FigureFigure 3. Wild 3. Wild onion onion ( Asphodelus(Asphodelus tenuifoliustenuifolius)) control efficiency efficiency (A) ( andA) andweed weed index index(B) of different (B) of differentherbicidal herbicidalweed man- weed managementagementtreatments treatments in cu cumin.min. Where, Where, T1 T =1 w=eedy weedy check; check; T3 = Tp3endimethalin= pendimethalin 38.7 CS 38.7 @ 750 CS g/ha @ 750–PE; g/ha–PE; T4 = oxyfluorfen T4 = oxyfluorfen @ 200 @ g/ha–PE; T5 = pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha @–PE; T6 = oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE; 200 g/ha–PE; T5 = pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha @–PE; T6 = oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha 8 DAS–early T7 = pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen @ 150 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE; T8 = oxydiargyl @ 50 g/ha 20 DAS–POE. POE; T = pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen @ 150 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE; T = oxydiargyl @ 50 g/ha Error7 bars show SD; Fisher LSD method at 95% confidence (p ≤ 0.05) was used to group information8 between the mean 20 DAS–POE.values of Erroracquired bars data. show Different SD; Fisher letters LSD point method out significant at 95% confidencedifferences among (p ≤ 0.05) the treatments was used toin groupa particular information year. between the mean values of acquired data. Different letters point out significant differences among the treatments in a particular year. 3.4. Effect of Herbicidal Weed Management on Cumin Plant Growth, Yield, and Yield Attributes The number of branches/plant and plant height were significantly raised by all the herbicidal weed management treatments over the weedy check during both consecutive years (Table 1). In both years, the highest number of branches/plant and plant height were recorded with the weed-free treatment, which was equally significant with the application of oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha applied at 8 DAS, pendimethalin 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha applied at 8 DAS, and pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha @–PE. Mehdi et al. [19] also found significant differences among various herbicide treatments in cumin density, number of umbels/plant, number of seeds/umbel, 1000-seed weight, and seed yield. This could be due to the crop having more resources available in the absence of weeds. The low number of branches/plant and plant height observed under weedy check may be a result of significant resource competition between weeds and agricultural plants (water, nutrients, light, and space).

Table 1. Effect of herbicidal weed management on plant growth and umbels of cumin.

Branches/Plant Plant Height (cm) Umbels/Plant Treatment 2018–2019 2019–2020 2018–2019 2019–2020 2018–2019 2019–2020 Weedy check 4.0 ± 0.20 b 3.90 ± 0.17 e 21.0 ± 3.0 c 20.1 ± 2.0 e 15.4 ± 3.8 d 15.7 ± 2.02 d Weed free 5.8 ± 0.52 a 5.45 ± 0.30 a 29.5 ± 1.7 a 30.5 ± 0.80 a 29.0 ± 2.0 a 28.0 ± 1.32 a Pendimethalin 38.7 CS @ 750 g/ha–PE 4.4 ± 0.4 b 4.30 ± 0.23 de 25.0 ± 1.7 b 24.7 ± 2.21 d 20.9 ± 1.9 c 20.0 ± 1.80 c Oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha–PE 4.5 ± 0.5 b 4.53 ± 0.58 cd 25 ± 2.65 b 24.9 ± 1.53 cd 21.3 ± 0.55 c 21.7 ± 1.76 bc Pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen 150 5.2 ± 0.20 a 4.67 ± 0.11 cd 27 ± 1.40 ab 27.3 ± 1.47 bcd 22.0 ± 1.58 c 23.7 ± 0.77 b g/ha @–PE Oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE 5.7 ± 0.27 a 5.20 ± 0.20 ab 29.13 ± 0.80 a 30.0 ± 1.47 ab 28.0 ± 1.0 a 27.2 ± 1.15 a Pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen @ 5.6 ± 0.27 a 4.93 ± 0.11 bc 28.60 ± 0.91 a 27.8 ± 1.75 abc 26.0 ± 1.38 ab 26.8 ± 2.52 a 150 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE Oxydiargyl @ 50 g/ha 20 DAS–POE 4.5 ± 0.48 b 4.60 ± 0.41 cd 25.20 ± 2.31 b 26.3 ± 2.13 cd 22.7 ± 2.57 bc 22.7 ± 1.60 bc Data are the average of three replicates ± SD; Grouping information between mean values of obtained data was carried out by Fisher LSD method and 95% confidence (p ≤ 0.05). Different letter point out significant differences in a column.

Agronomy 2021, 11, 1597 7 of 11

The improved weed indices could be attributed to the integrated effect of these treatments on the dry matter of weeds and seed yield. This is akin to the report of Bhandari et al. [23]. Similarly, Patel et al. [5] also found maximum weed index (77%) with the weedy check, and that herbicide treatments significantly decreased the weed index and enhanced the weed control efficiency considerably. Our present study found a novelty that oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha early post emergence (8 DAS) significantly decreased the dry matter and weed density of wild onion and other weeds without any hand-weeding intercultural operation in cumin.

3.4. Effect of Herbicidal Weed Management on Cumin Plant Growth, Yield, and Yield Attributes The number of branches/plant and plant height were significantly raised by all the herbicidal weed management treatments over the weedy check during both consecutive years (Table1). In both years, the highest number of branches/plant and plant height were recorded with the weed-free treatment, which was equally significant with the application of oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha applied at 8 DAS, pendimethalin 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha applied at 8 DAS, and pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha @–PE. Mehdi et al. [19] also found significant differences among various herbicide treatments in cumin density, number of umbels/plant, number of seeds/umbel, 1000-seed weight, and seed yield. This could be due to the crop having more resources available in the absence of weeds. The low number of branches/plant and plant height observed under weedy check may be a result of significant resource competition between weeds and agricultural plants (water, nutrients, light, and space).

Table 1. Effect of herbicidal weed management on plant growth and umbels of cumin.

Branches/Plant Plant Height (cm) Umbels/Plant Treatment 2018–2019 2019–2020 2018–2019 2019–2020 2018–2019 2019–2020 Weedy check 4.0 ± 0.20 b 3.90 ± 0.17 e 21.0 ± 3.0 c 20.1 ± 2.0 e 15.4 ± 3.8 d 15.7 ± 2.02 d Weed free 5.8 ± 0.52 a 5.45 ± 0.30 a 29.5 ± 1.7 a 30.5 ± 0.80 a 29.0 ± 2.0 a 28.0 ± 1.32 a Pendimethalin 38.7 CS @ 4.4 ± 0.4 b 4.30 ± 0.23 de 25.0 ± 1.7 b 24.7 ± 2.21 d 20.9 ± 1.9 c 20.0 ± 1.80 c 750 g/ha–PE Oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha–PE 4.5 ± 0.5 b 4.53 ± 0.58 cd 25 ± 2.65 b 24.9 ± 1.53 cd 21.3 ± 0.55 c 21.7 ± 1.76 bc Pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + 5.2 ± 0.20 a 4.67 ± 0.11 cd 27 ± 1.40 ab 27.3 ± 1.47 bcd 22.0 ± 1.58 c 23.7 ± 0.77 b oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha @–PE Oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha 5.7 ± 0.27 a 5.20 ± 0.20 ab 29.13 ± 0.80 a 30.0 ± 1.47 ab 28.0 ± 1.0 a 27.2 ± 1.15 a 8 DAS–early POE Pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen @ 150 g/ha 8 DAS–early 5.6 ± 0.27 a 4.93 ± 0.11 bc 28.60 ± 0.91 a 27.8 ± 1.75 abc 26.0 ± 1.38 ab 26.8 ± 2.52 a POE Oxydiargyl @ 50 g/ha 20 DAS–POE 4.5 ± 0.48 b 4.60 ± 0.41 cd 25.20 ± 2.31 b 26.3 ± 2.13 cd 22.7 ± 2.57 bc 22.7 ± 1.60 bc Data are the average of three replicates ± SD; Grouping information between mean values of obtained data was carried out by Fisher LSD method and 95% confidence (p ≤ 0.05). Different letter point out significant differences in a column.

The number of umbellates/umbel, umbels/plant, and seeds/umbellate, as well as seed yield, were significantly increased under various herbicidal weed management treatments over the weedy check (Tables1 and2). In both experimental years, weed-free treatment was equally significant with oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE and pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen @ 150 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE treatments in relation to umbels/plant and seed yield of cumin. In the case of seeds/umbellate, pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha @–PE, oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE, and pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen @ 150 g/ha 8 DAS– early POE were equally as significant as weed-free treatment in 2018–2019. However, in 2019–2020, there were no statistically significant differences between the various herbicidal weed management treatments and weed-free treatments in relation to umbellates/plant. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1597 8 of 11

Table 2. Effect of herbicidal weed management on yield and yield attributes of cumin.

Umbellates/Umbel Seeds/Umbellate Seed Yield (kg/ha) Treatment 2018–2019 2019–2020 2018–2019 2019–2020 2018–2019 2019–2020 Weedy check 4.2 ± 0.52 d 3.7 ± 0.57 d 4.03 ± 0.35 d 3.6 ± 0.23 b 103 ± 21 c 91 ± 5 c Weed free 5.0 ± 2.0 a 4.9 ± 0.11 a 5.23 ± 0.40 a 4.8 ± 0.20 a 446 ± 19 a 375 ± 16 a Pendimethalin 38.7 CS @ 4.4 ± 2.0 cd 4.2 ± 0.20 c 4.60 ± 0.20 c 4.4 ± 0.20 a 309 ± 13 b 283 ± 28 b 750 g/ha–PE Oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha–PE 4.3 ± 0.10 cd 4.4 ± 0.40 bc 4.70 ± 0.26 bc 4.5 ± 0.30 a 325 ± 22 b 287 ± 11 b Pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + 4.7 ± 0.37 abc 4.7 ± 0.26 abc 4.90 ± 0.20 abc 4.6 ± 0.20 a 344 ± 6 b 314 ± 21 b oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha @–PE Oxyflourfen @ 200 g/ha 4.9 ± 0.36 ab 4.8 ± 0.15 ab 5.16 ± 0.15 ab 4.8 ± 0.40 a 433 ± 35 a 365 ± 12 a 8 DAS–early POE Pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + Oxyfluorfen @ 150 g/ha 4.8 ± 0.20 abc 4.8 ± 0.13 ab 5.0 ± 0.20 abc 4.7 ± 0.30 a 402 ± 50 a 353 ± 22 a 8 DAS–early POE Oxydiargyl @ 50 g/ha 20 DAS–POE 4.5 ± 0.20 bcd 4.3 ± 0.30 bc 4.63 ± 0.28 c 4.5 ± 0.23 a 338 ± 29 b 301 ± 30 b Data are the average of three replicates ± SD; Grouping information between mean values of obtained data was carried out by Fisher LSD method and 95% confidence (p ≤ 0.05). Different letter point out significant differences in a column.

In relation to yield and yield attributes (umbels/plant, umbellates/plant, and seeds/ umbellates), the highest effect was recorded with weed-free treatment, closely followed by early post-emergence application of oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha, and pre-emergence as well as early post-emergence application of pendimethalin 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha. In 2018–2019, application of oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha early post emergence (8 DAS) enhanced the cumin seed yield by 321% and 33.23%, respectively, over the weedy check and oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha–PE. A similar trend was also found during 2019–2020 in relation to the seed yield of cumin (Table2). This could be due to decreasing the competition with the main crop for moisture, space, light, and nutrients. As a result of reduced crop–weed competition, crop growth improved, as evidenced by increased plant height and dry matter accumulation. Our results have close conformity with Patel et al. [5], who found that cumin seed yields were significantly affected by varied weed management practices. In addition, our findings are in close agreement with those of Meena et al. [24] and Yadav et al. [17]. Patel et al. [16] reported that the cumin seed yield was significantly higher with the application of pendimethalin 1.0 kg/ha than fluchloralin or trifluralin 1.0 kg/ha, because the application of pendimethalin was more effective in controlling weeds in cumin than other herbicides. Haji Rezaei et al. [25] reported that application of pre-plant incorporated (trifluralin and pendimethalin @ 3 L/ha) and pre-emergence herbicides (pendimethalin @ 3 L/ha, prometryn @ 2 kg/ha, and metribuzin @ 1 kg/ha) significantly reduced the dry weight, weed density, and leaf area of weeds in cumin. However, pendimethalin as a pre-emergence herbicide showed the highest weed control efficiency and increased the cumin yield by 204% over the weedy check.

3.5. Economics Our results reveal that all herbicidal weed management treatments significantly increased the net return and benefit:cost ratio (B:C ratio) over the control (weedy check) (Table3). Oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE and pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen @ 150 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE were equally significant over the other herbicidal weed management treatments in relation to net return and B:C ratio. However, application of oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha applied early post emergence recorded the highest net returns (366.49 USD/ha in 2018–2019 and 175.72 USD/ha in 2019–2020) and benefit:cost ratio (1.70 and 1.33 in 2018–2019 and 2019–2020, respectively). This could be due to the cost of cumin crop cultivation increasing in weed-free treatment as a result of the increased demand for human labor and higher wages. This cost was lowered in the treatment of oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha applied early post emergence by using herbicide to effectively control weeds, minimizing labor requirements. Pendimethalin 38.7 CS @ 750 g/ha applied pre emergence was the least significant in relation to net return and B:C ratio. A similar trend was also noticed by Meena et al. [24], Yadav et al. [17], and Birla et al. [15]. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1597 9 of 11

Table 3. Evaluation of economics of different herbicides used for controlling of weeds in cumin.

Cost of Cultivation Gross Returns (USD/ha) Net Returns (USD/ha) B:C Ratio Treatments (USD/ha) 2018–2019 2019–2020 2018–2019 2019–2020 2018–2019 2019–2020 Weedy check 494.64 211.83 ± 43.5 c 174.09 ± 10.0 c −282.81 ± 43.5 c −320.56 ± 10.0 d 0.43 ± 0.08 d 0.35 ± 0.02 e Weed free 585.67 919.44 ± 39.5 a 721.78 ± 30.0 a 333.77 ± 39.5 a 136.11 ± 30.0 ab 1.57 ± 0.07 a 1.23 ± 0.05 abc Pendimethalin 38.7 CS @ 750 g/ha–PE 523.58 636.16 ± 26.6 b 545.03 ± 53.0 b 112.59 ± 26.6 b 21.45 ± 53.0 c 1.22 ± 0.05 c 1.04 ± 0.10 d Oxyfluorfen @ 200 g/ha–PE 526.61 670.28 ± 45.7 b 552.72 ± 21.7 b 143.68 ± 45.7 b 26.11 ± 21.7 c 1.27 ± 0.087 c 1.05 ± 0.04 d Pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + 533.57 709.67 ± 12.42 b 604.55 ± 40.1 b 176.11 ± 12.42 b 70.98 ± 40.1 bc 1.33 ± 0.02 c 1.13 ± 0.08 bcd oxyfluorfen 150 g/ha @–PE Oxyflourfen @ 200 g/ha 526.61 893.10 ± 72.4 a 702.34 ± 22.2 a 366.49 ± 72.4 a 175.72 ± 22.2 a 1.70 ± 0.13 a 1.33 ± 0.04 a 8 DAS–early POE Pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen @ 150 g/ha 544.49 827.84 ± 102.6 a 678.81 ± 42.0 a 283.35 ± 102.6 a 134.32 ± 42.0 ab 1.52 ± 0.18 ab 1.25 ± 0.07 ab 8 DAS–early POE Oxydiargyl @ 50 g/ha 20 DAS–POE 518.84 697.31 ± 59.6 b 578.36 ± 57.8 b 178.47 ± 59.6 b 59.52 ± 57.8 c 1.34 ± 0.11 bc 1.11 ± 0.11 bcd Data are the average of three replicates ± SD; Grouping information between mean values of obtained data was carried out by Fisher LSD method and 95% confidence (p ≤ 0.05). Different letter point out significant differences in a column. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1597 10 of 11

4. Conclusions All herbicidal weed management treatments considerably decreased the density and dry matter of wild onions (A. tenuifolius) over the control (weedy check). The lowest wild onion (A. tenuifolius) dry matter and weed density were found with the application of oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha at 8 DAS followed by pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen @ 150 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE. The application of oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha at 8 DAS was more effective in controlling Asphodelus tenuifolius than other herbicidal weed management treatments. The number of branches/plant, plant height, umbels/plant, umbellates/plant, and seeds/umbellate, as well as seed yield, of cumin were more prominent with oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha at 8 DAS followed by pendimethalin 38.7 CS 500 g/ha + oxyfluorfen @ 150 g/ha 8 DAS–early POE. The application of oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha at 8 DAS was also economically feasible compared to other herbicidal weed management treatments. Therefore, farmers of arid zones can be advised to apply oxyfluorfen 200 g/ha at 8 DAS to manage wild onion in cumin to increase seed yield.

Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10 .3390/agronomy11081597/s1: Table S1: Efficacy of different herbicides on density and dry matter of total weeds over the control (weed free) at 40 DAS in cumin. Table S2: Weed control efficiency (WCE) of different herbicides over the control (Weedy check) in relation to control of total weeds (including wild onion) in cumin. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, supervision, methodology, formal analysis, writing— original draft preparation, writing—review and editing, M.L.M. and N.G.; data curation, project administration, investigation, M.L.M. and S.R.K.; writing—review and editing, funding acquisition, A.A.A., M.A.A., A.Z.D. and M.A.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research was financially supported by the Vice Deanship of Research Chairs at King Saud University. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. Acknowledgments: This work was financially supported by the Vice Deanship of Research Chairs at King Saud University. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References 1. Dubey, P.N.; Saxena, S.N.; Mishra, B.K.; Solanki, R.K.; Vishal, M.K.; Singh, B.; Sharma, L.K.; John, S.; Agarwal, D.; Yogi, A. Preponderance of cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) essential oil constituents across cumin growing agro-ecological sub regions, India. Ind. Crop. Prod. 2017, 95, 50–59. [CrossRef] 2. Anonymous. Ministry of Agriculture-Jahad Statistics. 2020. Available online: https://www.maj.ir/Index.aspx?page_=form& lang=1&sub=65&tempname=amar&PageID=11583 (accessed on 18 February 2020). 3. Moghaddam, M.; Miran, S.N.K.; Pirbalouti, A.G.; Mehdizadeh, L.; Ghaderi, Y. Variation in essential oil composition and antioxidant activity of cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) fruits during stages of maturity. Ind. Crop. Prod. 2015, 70, 163–169. [CrossRef] 4. Merah, O.; Sayed-Ahmad, B.; Talou, T.; Saad, Z.; Cerny, M.; Grivot, S.; Evon, P.; Hijazi, A. Biochemical composition of cumin seeds, and bioreﬁning study. Biomolecules 2020, 10, 1054. [CrossRef] 5. Patel, S.M.; Amin, A.U.; Patel, J.A. Effect of weed management practices on weed indices, yield and economics of cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.). Int. J. Seed Spices 2016, 6, 78–83. 6. Yadav, R.S.; Dahama, A.K. Effect of planting date, irrigation and weed-control method on yield and water-use efﬁciency of cumin (Cuminum cyminum). Indian J. Agric. Sci. 2003, 73, 494–496. 7. Singh, R.; Saxena, A. Weed dynamics and critical period of crop weed competition in cumin (Cuminum cyminum) under arid region of Rajasthan. J. Spices Aromat. Crop. 2013, 22, 165–169. 8. Tewari, A.N.; Tiwari, S.N.; Rathi, J.P.S.; Verma, R.N.; Tripathi, A.K. Crop-weed competition studies in chickpea having Asphodelus tenuifolius dominated weed community under rainfed condition. Indian J. Weed Sci. 2001, 33, 198–199. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1597 11 of 11

9. Mishra, J.S.; Singh, V.P.; Yaduraju, N.T. Wild onion (Asphodelus tenuifolius Cav.) interference in lentil and chickpea crops and its management through competitive cropping. Weed Biol. Manag. 2006, 6, 151–156. [CrossRef] 10. Yadav, R.P. Comparative efficacy of herbicides in controlling Asphodelus tenuifolius and other weeds in Indian mustard (Bras- sica juncea). Indian J. Agron. 1999, 44, 151–155. 11. Mishra, J.S.; Swain, D.; Singh, V.P. Allelopathic effect of Asphodelus tenuifolius on wheat, mustard, lentil and chickpea. Pestology 2001, 25, 48–50. 12. Hanif, Z.; Khan, M.I. Grassy weeds in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Pak. J. Weed Sci. Res. 2004, 10, 139–144. 13. Yaduraju, N.T.; Mishra, J.S. Zero-Tillage in rice–wheat cropping system on vertisols in Madhya Pradesh: Prospects and problems. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Herbicide Resistance Management and Zero-Tillage in Rice-Wheat Cropping System, CCSHAU, Hisar, India, 4–6 March 2002; pp. 117–119. 14. Mani, V.S.; Malla, M.L.; Gautam, K.C. Weed-killing chemicals in potato cultivation. Indian Farming 1973, 23, 17–18. 15. Birla, L.; Naruka, I.S.; Shaktawat, R.P.S.; Ajnave, S.R. Integrated weed management in cumin. Indian J. Weed Sci. 2016, 48, 102–104. [CrossRef] 16. Patel, R.B.D.; Meisuriya, M.I. Chemical weed control in cumin-pearl millet cropping system. Indian J. Weed Sci. 2008, 40, 44–45. 17. Yadav, A.; Patel, J.C.; Mehta, R.S.; Meena, T. Growth, yield and economics of cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) production as affected by weed management practices. Int. J. Seed Spices 2012, 2, 27–29. 18. Mathukia, R.K.; Sagarka, B.K.; Panara, D.M.; Vekariya, S.J. Management of diverse weed flora of cumin by sole and combined herbicide application. J. Crop. Weed 2018, 14, 143–148. 19. Mehdi, D.; Ebrahim, G.A.; Abbas, B.; Zeynab, O.; Meisam, H. Study the several herbicides effect on weeds control and yield of cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.). Iran. J. Weed Sci. 2018, 14, 83–95. 20. Hassan, G.; Khan, I. Post emergence herbicidal control of Asphodelus tenuifolius in Desi chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) at Lakki Marwat, Pakistan. Pak. J. Weed Sci. Res. 2007, 13, 33–38. 21. Ross, M.A.; Childs, D.J. Herbicide Mode-of-Action Summary; Weed science: West Lafayette, IN, USA, 1995. 22. Maxwell, K.; Johnson, G.N. Chlorophyll fluorescence—A practical guide. J. Exp. Bot. 2000, 51, 659–668. [CrossRef] 23. Bhandari, V.; Singh, J.; Randhawa, J.S.; Randhawa, R.S. Studies on weed control in summer blackgram (Phaseolus mungo). Indian J. Weed Sci. 2004, 36, 129–130. 24. Meena, S.S.; Kakani, R.K.; Mehta, R.S. Economic feasibility of weed management practices in cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.). J. Spices Aromat. Crops 2009, 18, 9–12. 25. Rezaei, T.H.; Eslami, S.; Mahmoodi, S.; Moeini, M.M. Feasibility of chemical control of weeds in cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.). J. Plant Prot. 2020, 34, 457–472.