Table 7 Effect of nitrogen, residue and weed management practices on energy indices of wheat (Average of 2018–2019 & 2019–2020).

From: Effect of residue and weed management practices on weed flora, yield, energetics, carbon footprint, economics and soil quality of zero tillage wheat

Treatment

Energy input (MJ ha−1)

Energy output (MJ ha−1)

Net energy (MJ ha−1)

Energy use efficiency

Energy productivity (kg MJ−1)

Energy profitability (kg MJ−1)

Nitrogen and residue management

RDN + R

42,084.29

123,835.66

81,751.37

2.94

0.09

1.94

125% RDN + R

43,614.97

136,926.13

93,311.16

3.14

0.10

2.14

125% RDN + R + WD

43,688.45

137,860.04

94,171.59

3.16

0.10

2.16

RDN

15,277.00

117,079.26

101,802.26

7.66

0.23

6.66

SEm ± 

–

2480.83

2480.83

0.10

0.00

0.10

LSD (p = 0.05)

–

8584.79

8584.79

0.33

0.01

0.33

Weed management

Sulfosulfuron + carfentrazone (25 + 20 g/ha) at 30–35 DAS

36,164.18

140,942.73

104,778.56

4.70

0.14

3.70

Clodinafop-propargyl + metsulfuron (60 + 4 g/ha) at 30–35 DAS

36,176.20

138,156.09

101,979.89

4.54

0.14

3.54

Clodinafop-propargyl + metribuzin (54 + 120 g/ha) at 30–35 DAS

36,183.38

135,670.64

99,487.26

4.37

0.13

3.37

Control

36,140.95

100,931.62

64,790.68

3.29

0.10

2.29

SEm ± 

–

1934.67

1934.67

0.04

0.00

0.04

LSD (p = 0.05)

–

6694.83

6694.83

0.15

0.01

0.15

Interaction

–

NS

NS

NS

NS

NS

  1. Treatment means were compared at P ≤ 0.05 level using least significant difference (LSD).