Search

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of four different herbicides, namely Glyphosate, Paraquat, Dicamba, and S-metolachlor, in controlling post-emergence weeds in cotton fields. The experiment was conducted in Layyah, and the selected weed species included Pigweed, Canada thistle, barnyardgrass, Field bindweed, Purslane, Bermuda grass, Green amaranth, and Puncture vine. A randomized complete block design was employed, with four treatments and four replications within each treatment. One-meter quadrates were randomly placed within each replication to collect data on weed abundance. The recommended herbicide doses were applied, including 3 liters per hectare of Glyphosate, 1 liter per hectare of Paraquat, 1 liter per hectare of Dicamba, and 1.5 liters per hectare of S-metolachlor. The effectiveness of the herbicides was observed at regular intervals, noting the time taken for visible weed control and weed mortality. Data were collected for three time points to assess the herbicides' long-term efficacy. Data analysis revealed variations in the effectiveness of the herbicides on different weed species. Treatment T3 (Dicamba) consistently exhibited the highest control, while T4 (S-metolachlor) showed the lowest effectiveness. Mean weed densities across the treatments indicated significant reductions in pigweed, Canada thistle, barnyardgrass, and field bindweed. However, no statistically significant differences were observed among the treatments for purslane, Bermuda grass, green amaranth, and puncture vine. These findings provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of different herbicides in controlling post-emergence weeds in cotton fields. The results can inform farmers and agricultural professionals in selecting appropriate herbicides for effective weed management. Further research is warranted to evaluate the long-term effects and environmental considerations associated with the herbicides. The study highlights the importance of multiple data collection time points to assess the sustained effectiveness of herbicide treatments.

In the present day, the acquisition of mixed animals has become common. In the light of the principles of cross breeding, GMO or cloning, a new species of new qualities is obtained by interlinking forbidden and Halāl animals. It is a problem to decide status of mixed race. The Jurisprudence of Aḥnāf believes that if the mother of such an animal is Halāl and the child is similar to the mother, such an animal is lawful. The religion of jurists except Aḥnāf is more, that is, if one of the two is lawful, this animal will still be lawful in every condition. The Fuqhā of Shāfa'ī and Ḥanāblāh do not consider it to be subservient to anyone, but the Shāfa'ī do not consider it to be subject to the mother in Zakāt. Although all these jurist scholars justify the combination of one species of animal with another. There is more complexity in the religion of jurisprudence and jurisprudence. On the one hand, they give these animals a new identity, while on the other hand they consider mules to be lawful. According to Ẓāhriah, such animals have an element of sanctity, so since the texts are silent about all such new species, these animals will not be lawful. The main argument for such animals to be lawful is the change of the meaning and reality. When the element changes, the order will also change.