Future strategies for Effective Parthenium Management,
V. M. Bhan, Sushilkumar and M. S. Raghuwanshi, National Research Centre for Weed Science, Adhartal, Jabalpur - 482 004, Madhya Pradesh, India

Introduction

Parthenium hysterophorus L., commonly called as carrot weed, white top or congress grass in India is a herbacious erect and annual plant belonging to family Asteracae (Compositae). The origin of parthenium is considered to be Mexico, America, Trinidad and Argentina. Within last 100 years, it has found its way to Africa, Australia and Asia. In Australia and India parthenium has achieved the status of "worst weed". Its surmised that parthenium possibly got entry from USA through the imported food grains (Vertak, 1968)

or through the cereals got for experimental purpose (Lonkaref al., 1974). In most of the publications, first occurrence of parthenium in India has believed to be in 1956 when it was first noticed by a retired horticulturist Prof. Paranjape and described by Rao (1956). However, some reports trace its history of occurrence about one and half century older than as reported by Rao (Roxburgh, 1914, Bennet et al., 1978 and Maiti, 1983). Its presence in India before 1956 gets further confirmation from a herbarium record collected by Dr. Brandis in 1880 in Forest Research Institute, Dehradun.

Tom these records, it is clear that parthenium has entered India before 1910 and lived unknown till 1956. It is clear that since 1956, parthenium has spread like wild fire throughout India and has achieved the status of "worst weed". According to Mahadevappa (1996), parthenium status, in terms of its seriousness in different states of India is Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, West

Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Orissa and Bihar, in that order of magnitude, contrary to earlier observations when it was catagorised as serious weed of Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Delhi (Krishnamurthy et al., 1976). The parthenium intensity has been estimated less in high elevation. It is estimated that about 5 million ha area has been invaded by parthenium in India.

Parthenium is a poisonous, pernicious, problematic, allergic and aggressive weed posing a serious threat to human beings and livestock. This weed has been considered as one of the greatest source of dermatitis, asthama, nasal-dermal and naso-bronchial types of diseases. Besides these ill effects, it also causes several other problems like blockage of common pathways and orchards and reduces the aesthetic values of parks, gardens and residential colonies. Mostly parthenium is a weed of fallow and waste land but its impact on agricultural crops has not been well documented. Its infestation has been noticed more in rainfed than in irrigated agriculture. /

Present scenario of parthenium management

Ever since the weed became a menace in India and other countries, efforts are being made to manage the weed by different methods. But so far, no single method has been proved satisfactory, as each method suffers from one or more limitations such as high cost, impracticability, environmental safety, temporary relief etc. A brief of various management practices being employed against parthenium is given below to take an insight of merits and demerits of the method before switching over to future strategy for effective parthenium management.


Manual and mechanical methods

Manual methods are very expensive and can not be employed everywhere. It is feasible only in high value crop. The relief from this method is temporary and needs to be repeated. Mechanical removal with the help of tractor, plough, etc., is possible upto certain extent and only in open fields.


Legal .methods

The management of parthenium was also tried in India through the legal act, first in Karnataka state. Government of Karnataka, issued a notification on 23rd Oct., 1975, declaring parthenium a noxious weed in terms of section 3 read with sub section seven of the section two of the Karnataka Agricultural Pests and Disease Act, 1968. Under this act, to remove parthenium, notices were issued in Bangalore once or twice during the eighties by Municipal Corporation but were not followed up. Thus, inspite of this comprehensive act, it was a total failure to get the weed removed from. Bangalore or elsewhere.


Biological methods

During last few years much emphasis has been laid to control parthenium through various biological agents like insects, pathogens and plants.


*By Plants

In recent past, this approach gained momentum after reports that Cassia sericea (C. uniflora) can be used to control parthenium (Singh, 1983 and Mahadevappa and Ramaiah, 1988). Cassia sericea, a non nitrogen fixing leguminous plant was suggested to be used by adopting two approaches namely maintaining of naturally occurring biodiversity and planting of specis in target area (Mahadevappa, 1996). In this approach, two apprehensions were observed by Balyan et al., (1997) (a) In planting of C. sericea in areas of parthenium dominance, in the beginning, parthenium has to be removed physically and mechanically and there are limitations of uprooting parthenium in undulating areas (b) to remove one weed (carrot weed), another weed (Cassia) has to grow, which may also pose danger to field crops and orchards in coming years. .In Jabalpur (M.P., India), suppression of parthenium by marigold showed encouraging results and this practice was also advocated for parthenium suppression (Kauraw and Bhan ,1995b).


*By indigenous insects

In India, many insects have been reported on parthenium but none of the indigenous insect was found to be host specific. The occurrence and role of indigenous insects have been reviewed and discussed by Sushilkumar and Bhan (1995). A cerembycid borer Oberea sp. has been found infesting parthenium upto 29.9 per cent in Jabalpur and Vindhya nagar (M.P.) (Sushilkumar and Bhan, 1997).


*By exotic insects

Owing to lack of effective indigenous insects, three insect species have been imported in India so far. Among these only the chrysomelid beetle Zygogramma bicolorata imoorted from Mexico could be established and successfully controlled the parthenium Bangalore, when released after host specificity test (Jayanth, 1987). But this beetle was involved in a controversy after reports that it feeds on sunflower and xanthium. This aspect has been reviewed and discussed in detail by Sushilkumar and Bhan (1995). Balyan et. al., (1997) suspected the usefulness of biocontrol agents due to variable climatic conditions in India and difficulty in multiplying and producing huge quantity of bio-agents under laboratory conditions besides restriction of their host specificity.


*By pathogens

Some pathogens have been reported to attack parthenium (Luke, 1976 and Kalidas, 1981). During survey from 1992-94 in an around Jabalpur, many fungal species were isolated infesting leaves, seeds and stem/roots of parthenium. Among these use of Fusarium pallidoroseum and Sclerotium rolfsii against parthenium is also very common in India (Padmanabhan, 1982 and Kauraw and Bhan, 1995a).


Chemical methods

Researches on chemical control of parthenium in India gained momentum since eighties. Bromacil, diuron, terbacil @ 1.5 kg per ha were found effective as herbicides (Kanchan and Jayachandra, 1977). Diquat 0.5 kg per ha in 500 I spray effectively controlled parthenium at all growth stages (Dhanraj and Mitra, 1976). Spraying of 2 kg 2,4-D sodium salt or 2 I MCPA in 400 I of water controlled the growth of parthenium seedlings. Likewise, MSMA @ 4 I in 4001 of water was able to control fully grown parthenium (Mahadevappa,1996). On the basis of two years research Balyan et al., (1997), gave concrete recommendations for control of parthenium (Table 1). They also advocated the supremacy of chemical control over other control measures on the ground of quick relief, time saving and cost effectiveness.


Future strategies for effective parthenium management


Present methods of parthenium control discussed above indicate that there are some merits and demerits in each methods. It is also clear that any single approach is not enough to manage parthenium, hence there is an urgent need to adopt an integrated parthenium management approach by amalgamating more than one options. On the basis of demerits of the above methods, an attempt has been made to give some suggestions to improve the existing methods for evolving effective strategies against parthenium. Physical and mechanical management It has been seen that cuttings of parthenium enhance their regeneration. So if mechanical or manual methods are to be adopted, weed should be uprooted and such operations should be started before blooming as uprooting after flowering will be sheer wastage of time and money. As manual removal is not cost effective it can be advocated only in limited situations. If it becomes imperative to use labour, persons engaged for the job should be ascertained for their parthenium sensitiveness.


Cultural management

Some researchers have advocated growing competitive crops to suppress parthenium but as parthenium is mainly a waste land weed, the scope of this practice is limited to only certain situations.


Legal management

In India, Laws and Acts to suppress weeds exist but their proper implementation have never occurred and Acts remained in files only. If such an act is passed, administration of the state in collaboration with the scientist should give a wide publicity through TV, video, radio, posters, seminars, etc., to bring awareness and educate the people for the implementation of the Act. On the lines of Karnataka Government, other states where this weed has assumed alarming situation should also enact Acts against parthenium with more administrative control.


Biological management

Past efforts through biological control.agents indicate that parthenium management through biocontrol agents can not be as simple as in some other successful cases because of high regeneration capacity, large seed production ability, germination ability throughout the year and extreme adaptability of parthenium in wide range of ecosystem. Some future strategy in biological management may be as follows :

*Even if Mexican beetle Zygogramma bicolorata gets clearance from the blame of its feeding on sunflower, it is not sufficient to manage parthenium because this beetle is able to make sufficient population build up only during July to September. On the contrary, partfaenium is able to germinate throughout the year. Therefore, such insects which are active during most part of the year will be more helpful to manage parthenium. Search of these types of insects in the native home of the parthenium and their introduction in our country will remain an essential component of future strategy,

* Fresh efforts are needed to look into the case of failure of past efforts in establishing of seed feeding weevil Smicronyx lutulentus. The establishment of this insect along with Z. bicolorata may be helpful to manage parthenium more effectively.

*More concerted efforts are needed to investigate the role of indigenous insect fauna.

* So far, only countable efforts have been made to search for pathogens against parthenium (Kauraw and Bhan ,1995a). More concerted research in this direction is imperative in the development of mycoherbicides for effective parthenium management. It has been reported that integration of bioherbicide with reduced rate of chemical herbicides can successfully improve the activity of mycoherbicides towards weed. It has also been suggested that bioherbicide comprised of native pathogens may be more effective than introduced pathogens because of more adaptability and no necessity of quarantine measures (Quimby and Walker,1982). This approach can be explored to manage parthenium, as earlier studies have already revealed a few effective pathogens.

*The role of marigold should get encouragement in residential colonies, office premises and farm houses with the help of peoples' participation. Using marigold, parthenium suppression can be achieved and aesthetic value will be maintained. The role of marigold in waste land and along the roadside is not justifiable as marigold require little more attention to avoid to be plucked on flowering from the greedy people who may think to fetch little money by selling the flowers in the market and this attention can be made only by colony and office premise people.

*The role of Cassia sericea and other competitive and haimless plants have to be reinvestigated under a long term trial programme to see the actual damage, if any by replacing weed as has been apprehended by some researcher. But it is a fact that in comparison to parthenium, C. sericea or C. tora are very less harmful and can be managed easily in case they reach at the alarming stage. To get high germination rates of Cassia sp. while applying against parthenium, seeds can be soaked in concentrated sulfuric acid for 12-21 min (Jayakumar et al., 1989).


Chemical management

The management of parthenium by herbicides has been considered only a viable option by Balyan et al., (1977) but in our view this approach alone is not justifiable as the effect of herbicide will always be of a temporary nature and repeated operations are required which will not remain cost effective as parthenium is a weed of waste land so and common man will never invest his money in this venture. Moreover, plants suppressed by

chemicals have been observed to regenerate after remaining dormant for a few days. Chemical treatment can only kill existing population at the given sites but cannot prevent the entry of the seeds from neighbouring places. Because of continuous seed production ability of parthenium throughout the year, reinvasion of the once controlled area can hardly be checked unless the seed source itself is controlled. The recommendation of common salt and soap water is also not justifiable as the application can spoil the existing soil conditions and can deteriorate the environment. Nevertheless, only in very limited situations, chemical use is justifiable for quick relief. Following research strategies are needed for chemical parthenium management:

*Detailed study of herbicide action on the biology and ecology of parthenium should be done before recommending any herbicide because of the fact that parthenium is very hardy weed and may soon develop resistance against herbicides.

*As parthenium germinates throughout the year, application of pre and postemergent herbicide in sequence may give effective conrol of parthenium. This approach needs in-depth investigation.

*Development of newer group of herbicides with the attributes of economically cheap, persistant but having less residual effects are imperative.

*Most sensitive stage of growth of parthenium should be identified for effective management.


Management by utilization

The large scale utilization of parthenium will also be one of the effective methods to manage the weed. Parthenium has been well documented for its insecticidal, nematicidal and herbicidal properties (Gajendran and Gopalan 1982, Bala et al., 1986 and Pandey et al., 1993) besides oxalic acid (Mane et al.., 1986) and biogas production (Gunaseelan 1987). The search on more effective utilization of parthenium will render it for effective management.


Integrated parthenium management

From the past researches, it is clear that parthenium can only be managed effectively by adopting integrated approach involving many options in combination. The role of exotic insect Z, bicolorata can be suspended in integrated approach till its clearance from the blame of a potential feeder of sunflower. An integrated package of practices for effective parthenium management can be adopted as follows:

* On the lines of Karnataka state, other states of India should enact Acts for parthenium management, keeping in view the seriousness of the parthenium. Such acts must be given high publicity through various media and follow up action by the administration. Local leaders of urban and rural areas, volunteers, NGOs and village level officers and assistants should be taken into confidance. Efforts should be made to give them 1-2 days training about parthenium hazards and the benefits and about its control. If this sort of strong group is made, it will further take care of the programme implementation.

* During summer and winter, the population of parthenium remains low in comparison to rainy season and therefore spraying of glyphosate will be of much use to reduce the intensity of parthenium in forthcoming season. Before monsoon pre-emergent herbicide like atrazine, metribuzin or bromacil @ 2, 2.3 and 1.5 kg per ha can be applied in the sites already marked for dominant patches. Tills application will certainly reduce the intensity of the seed bank. With the onset of monsoon, emerged seedlings of sufficient height can be controlled by spraying of glyphosate @ I per cent solution. This application should be made at any cost before blooming.

*During rainy season, soil remains wet and hence manual or mechanical removal can be done before the onset of flowering, with the help of peoples participation.

*On the onset of monsoon, seeds of C. sericia or C. tora can be sown in highly dominated areas by parthenium after seed treatments as suggested by Jayakumar et al., (1989) to ensure good germination. Likewise, marigold seeds can be sown in the vacant

soils of residential colonies, farm house and office premises with the onset of monsoon. After sufficient wetting of soil, seedlings can also be transplanted for quick establisliment. The deliberate sowing of these plant species will be required only for initial 1-2 years, later on, they will establish themselves. In nutshell, for effective parthenium management in a given geographical area, serious efforts are imperative. Deep consideration should be given about the site, nature of infestation (like arable, non arable, waste land, scanty or adundant) and stage of the growth of weed. Efforts to manage parthenium should not be

stopped only after one season but should be prolonged till the complete seed bank is exhausted. Otherwise, all the efforts will go in vain due to high seed production capacity of the weed. Further, adequate quarantine measures should be adopted to check the emigration and emmigration of the weed. Therefore, combined efforts by researchers, social workers and department of horticulture, agriculture and forestry are required.

References

  • Bala, S.K., P. Bhattacharya, K.S. Mukerjee and N.C. Sukul. 1986. Nematicidal properties of the plants Xanthium strumarium and P. hysterophoi'us. Environ. & Ecol. 4(l):139-141.

  • Balyan, R.S., A. Yadav and R.K. Malik. 1997. Easy and efficient control of carrot weed (Parthenium hysterophorus L.) CCSHAU, Hisar. Extn. Bull. pp. 8.

  • Bennet, S.S.R., H.P. Nathani and M.B. Raizada. 1978. parthenium L. in India - a review and history. Indian J. Forest. 1 (2): 128-131

  • Dhanraj, R. E. and M. K. Mitra. 1976. Control of P. hysterophorus L. with diquat. PANS. 22(2):269-272.

  • Gajendran, G. and M. Gopalan. 1982. Notes on the antifeedant activity of Parthenium hysterophorus Linn. on Spodoptera litura Fabricious (Lipidoptera : Nocuidae). Indian J. Agric. Sci. 52(3):203-205.

  • Gunaseelan, V.N. 1987. Parthenium as an additive with cattle manure in biogas production. Biol. wastes. 21(3): 195- 202.

  • Jayakumar, R., M. Mahadevappa, S. Joshi and T. G. Prasad. 1989. Dormancy studies in Cassia sericea seeds. Seed Res. 17(2):118-121.

  • Jayanth, K. P. 1987. Introduction and establishment of Zygogramma bicolorata on P. hysterophorus at Bangalore, India. Curr. Sci. 56(7) : 310-311.

  • Kalidas, D. 1981. Phytopathogens as weed control agents. Proc. Eigth Asian-Pacific Weed Sci. Soc. Conf. 157-159.

  • Kanchan, S.D. and Jayachandra 1977. Post-emergent chemical control of congress grass. Pesticides. II (9):55-56.

  • Kauraw, L.P. and V.M. Bhan 1995a.Pathogen associated with Parthenium hysterophorus and Eichhorina crassipes. Weed News. 2(l&2) : 1-2

  • Kauraw, L.P. and V.M. Bhan. 1995b. Efficacy of Cassytha powder to water hyacinth and of marigold to parthenium population. Weed News. 2(l&2) : 3-6

  • Krishnamurthy, K., T.V.R. Prasad and T.V. Muniyappa 1976. Ecology and control of Parthenium. In : Parthenium - Positive danger, Proc. of the seminar held on Sept. 4,1976, UAS Tech. Series, No. 16 : 1-5.

  • Lonkar, A., J.C. Mitchell and C.D. Calnan, 1974. Contact dermatitis from Parthenium hysterophorus, Trans. St. John's Hospital Dermatological Soc., 60 : 43-43.

  • Luke, P. 1976-Fungi in the root region of Parthenium hysterophorus Linn. Current Sci. 45 (17) : 631-632.

  • Mahadevappa, M. 1996. Parthenium. Prasaranga, University of Mysore, Mysore, p. 66.

  • Mahadevappa, M. andH.Ramaiah. 1988: Pattern of replacement of Parthenium hysterophorus plants by Cassia serecia in waste lands.indian J. Weed Sci. 20 (4):83-85.

  • Maiti, G. S. 1983. An untold study on the occurrence of the Parthenium hysterophorus Linn. in India. Indian Forest. 6(4) : 328-32

  • Padmanabhan, C. 1982. A phyllody disease of Parthenium hysterophorus. Curr. Res. 11:11-12

  • Pandey, D. K., L. P. Kauraw and V. M. Bhan, 1993. Inhibitory effect of parthenium (Parthenium hysterophorus) residue on growth of water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes Mart. Solma.) 1. Effect of leaf residue. J. Chem. Ecol. 19(11) : 2651-2662.

  • Quimby, P.C. Jr. and H.L. Walker. 1982. Pathogens as mechanism for weed management. Weed Sci. 30 (suppl.l): 30-34.

  • Rao, R.S. 1956. Parthenium, a new record for India. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 54:218-220.

  • Roxburgh, W. 1914. Hortus Bengalensis, Misson Press, Calcutta. Singh, N.P. 1983. Potential biological control of Parthenium hysterophorus L. Curr. Sci. 52 :644.

  • Sushilkumar and V.M. Bhan. 1995. Parthenium control by insects in India : retrospecs and prospects. J. Appl. Zool. Res. 6(2) : 109-112.

  • Sushilkumar and V.M. Bhan. 1997. Parthenium infestation by shoot and root bore Oberea sp. (Coleoptera :Laminae: Ceremycidae) in Madhya Pradesh .7th Biennial Conference of Indian Society of Weed Science held at PAU, Ludhiana on Feb. 19-21, 1997 (Abstr. no. 181) : 114-115.

  • Vertak, V.D. 1968. Weed that threatens crop and grasslands in Maharashtra . Indian Fmg. 18:23-24.

  • (Source : Bhon et. al. (1997) In : Proc. First International Conference on Parthenium Management (Vol. I) : 90-95.

Return to Main Page