<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<component xmlns="https://jwbm.com.my" version="1.0.2" type="journal" xml:lang="en">
<header>
<publicationMeta level="journal">
			<publisherInfo>
				<publisherName>Zibeline International Publishing</publisherName>
				<publisherLoc>Journal of Wastes and Biomass Management</publisherLoc>
			</publisherInfo>
			
			<doi origin="razipublishing" registered="yes">10.26480/jwbm.01.2026.01.05</doi>
			
			<issn type="online">2710-6012</issn>	
			<titleGroup>
				<title type="subject" xml:lang="en" sort="Journal of Wastes and Biomass Management">Journal of Wastes and Biomass Management</title>
				<title type="title">EFFECT OF DIFFERENT WEED CONTROL METHODS ON GROWTH AND YIELD OF SPRING MAIZE (ZEA MAYS L.) IN CHITWAN, NEPAL</title>
			</titleGroup>
			
			<copyright ownership="publisher">Copyright © 2017 Zibeline International Publishing</copyright>
			
			<eventGroup>
				<event type="publication_date" date="19-01-2025"/>
			</eventGroup>
			
			<creators>
				<creator xml:id="AT" creatorRole="editor">
					<personName>
						<editorNames>Avishek Thakur</editorNames>
					</personName>
				</creator>
				<creator xml:id="AG" creatorRole="editor">
					<personName>
						<editorNames>Achyut Gaire</editorNames>
					</personName>
				</creator>
				<creator xml:id="ARP" creatorRole="editor">
					<personName>
						<editorNames>Asim Raj Panjiyar</editorNames>
					</personName>
				</creator>
				<creator xml:id="GP" creatorRole="editor">
					<personName>
						<editorNames>Ganesh Paudel</editorNames>
					</personName>
				</creator>
				<creator xml:id="RB" creatorRole="editor">
					<personName>
						<editorNames>Rubee Bhattarai,</editorNames>
					</personName>
				</creator>
				<creator xml:id="AB" creatorRole="editor">
					<personName>
						<editorNames>Atul Baral,</editorNames>
					</personName>
				</creator>r
				<creator xml:id="GPS" creatortorRole="editor">
					<personName>
						<editorNames>Gokul Prasad Sharma</editorNames>
					</personName>
				</creator>
				<creator xml:id="RKK" reatorRole="editor">
					<personName>
						<editorNames>Rabiranjan Kumar Kushwaha</editorNames>
					</personName>
				</creator>
			</creators>
			
</publicationMeta>

		<citation_keywords>
		    <keyword>Maize, Weed Control Efficiency, Weed Density, Yield</keyword>
		</citation_keywords>
			
		<citation_pdfformat>
		     <pdf_url>https://jwbm.com.my/archives/1jwbm2026/1jwbm2026-01-05.pdf</pdf_url>
	    </citation_pdfformat>
	   
	   <citation_XMLformat>
	         <xml_url>https://jwbm.com.my/xml/1jwbm2026/1jwbm2026-01-05.xml</xml_url>
	   </citation_XMLformat>
	   
	   <citation_volume>
	       <volume>8</volume>
	   </citation_volume>
	   
	   <citation_issue>
	        <issue>1</issue>
	   </citation_issue>
	   
	   <citation_pages>
	      <pages>01-05</pages>
	   </citation_pages>  
	   
	   <citation_fulltext_html>
	       <fulltext_html>https://jwbm.com.my/jwbm-01-2026-01-05/</fulltext_html>
	    </citation_fulltext_html>
		
<abstractGroup>

			<abstract type="main" xml:lang="en">
			<title type="main">ABSTRACT</title>
			
					<p>In maize (Zea mays L.) cultivation, weed infestation is one of the crucial challenges for its production. To evaluate the impact of different weed control methods on growth, yield and yield attributes of maize and weed dynamics, a field experiment was carried out at research farm of Rampur campus, Chitwan, Nepal. The research was conducted in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with eight treatments viz: T₁ (Control), T₂ (Weed-free), T₃ (Plastic mulching), T₄ (Hand weeding), T5 (Pendimethalin @ 1 kg a.i./ha), T6(Pendimethalin @ 1 kg a.i./ha + Atrazine @1.5 kg a.i./ha tank mixture), T7 (Pendimethalin @ 1 kg a.i./ha + Atrazine @1.5 kg a.i./ha tank mixture fb 2,4-D @ 2.5 kg a.i./ha) and T8 (Pendimethalin @ 1 kg a.i./ha + Atrazine @1.5 kg a.i./ha tank mixture fb Laudis @ 200 ml/ha) replicated thrice during February,2024 to May,2024. Among different treatments, weed-free and plastic mulching were found to be the most effective in suppressing weed dry biomass, while the highest weed density was found consistently under control plot. Similarly, among different weed control treatments hand weeding showed the lowest weed index. The plant height, LAI, number of cobs per plant, test weight and grain yield was found higher under hand weeding and plastic mulching after weed free treatments. Manual and physical weed control methods are more effective in controlling weed and producing higher grain yield while chemical applications have moderate results under the field conditions of Khairahani, Chitwan.</p>
			</abstract>

</abstractGroup> 
			
			
			
</header>
	</component>
			