Cardio Heart Rate Formula

Two people are running on treadmills. Photo Credit shironosov/iStock/Getty Images

Calculating your maximum heart rate and determining your target cardiovascular work zone can be incredibly helpful in illustrating your workload. By identifying your target work zone, you can exercise more efficiently and personalize your workout routine. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends participating in 150 minutes of moderate-intensity or 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity cardiovascular exercise weekly in order to reduce health risks. Moderate-intensity exercises include swimming, light jogging and brisk walking. Vigorous-intensity exercises include cycling, running and aerobics.

Maximum Heart Rate and Moderate-Intensity Exercise

Step 1

Calculate your maximum heart rate using the formula 220 – age. For example, if you are 30 years old, your heart rate would be 220 – 30 = 190 beats per minute.

Step 2

Use the suggested percentages of heart rate maximum for moderate-intensity exercise.Use 50 percent to 70 percent to calculate your cardiovascular work zone. First, multiply your heart rate maximum by the low end range, 0.50. A 30-year-old person would calculate their heart rate zone like this: 190 times 0.50 = 95 beats per minute (bpm).

Step 3

Calculate the upper end of your cardiovascular work zone by multiplying your heart rate maximum by the high-end range, 0.70. A 30-year-old person would calculate the high-end range of their work zone like this: 190 times 0.70 = 133 bpm.

Heart Rate Maximum and Vigorous-Intensity Exercise

Step 1

Calculate your heart rate maximum using the formula 220 – age.

Step 2

Use the suggested percentages of heart rate maximum for vigorous-intensity exercise -- 70 percent to 85 percent -- to calculate your cardiovascular work zone. Multiply your heart rate maximum by the low range, 0.70.

Step 3

Multiply your maximum heart rate by the high range, 0.85, to complete your cardiovascular work zone for cardiovascular exercise.

Things You'll Need

• Calculator
• Pen
• Paper

www.livestrong.com

How Much Oatmeal Should I Eat for Breakfast to Boost Metabolism?

A bowl of oatmeal with sliced bananas. Photo Credit minadezhda/iStock/Getty Images

Eating a nutritious breakfast each morning can help regulate your blood sugar levels and get your metabolism going after a long night's fast. Whole-grain oatmeal is a healthy choice as it's naturally low in sugar and fat and high in fiber, which fills you up and keeps you feeling full so you're less likely to reach for an unhealthy midmorning snack. To get your metabolism going but avoid taking in too many calories, stick to a standard serving size and avoid added sugar and fat.

Rev Your Metabolism With Complex Carbs

Whole-grain oatmeal has only been minimally processed and still retains all three parts of the grain: the germ, bran and endosperm. This means it retains all of the nutrients, such as B vitamins and fiber, that are stripped away when grains are refined. Whole grains are considered complex carbohydrates. These types of carbs have a more complex chemical structure and take the body longer to break down. The body also has to work harder to break down whole grains, which gives a boost to your metabolism. Choosing a breakfast with complex carbs, such as whole-grain oats, can maximize your body's ability to burn fat, says nutritionist Christina Carlyle.

How Much Oatmeal to Eat

Eating oatmeal in the morning to get your metabolism going is an important part of maintaining or losing weight; however, if you eat too much oatmeal in the morning, you may end up taking in too many calories, which could lead to weight gain. A standard serving size for oatmeal is 1/2 cup of dry oats mixed with 1 cup of water or 1 cup of low-fat or skim milk. One-half cup of dry oats provides 150 calories, for a low-calorie breakfast meal. If you prepare your oatmeal with 1 cup of skim or low-fat milk, add another 83 or 102 calories, respectively. Steel-cut oats are more caloric, with 150 calories per 1/4-cup dry serving or 3/4 cup cooked. You also need to prepare it with 1 1/2 cups of liquid; if you use milk, add 126 to 153 calories.

Keeping it Healthy

If weight loss is your goal, you'll want to be wary when choosing oatmeal in the cereal aisle. Many varieties have added sugar, which drives up the calorie content. For example, a serving of instant oats flavored with maple and brown sugar has 158 calories. Also, because instant oats are more processed so that they cook more quickly, they have less tummy-filling fiber -- a serving has 2.9 grams of fiber, compared to 4 grams per serving of steel-cut or regular oats. Cook whole oats from scratch and avoid adding butter or sugar. Instead, stir in some fresh berries, which are naturally sweet and low in calories and provide extra fiber.

Other Tips for a Healthy Metabolism

In addition to eating a nutritious breakfast of whole grains, there are other diet and lifestyle changes you can make to rev your metabolism. The Medical University of South Carolina suggests not skipping meals and eating every three to four hours. Make sure you are eating enough because if you consume too few calories, your metabolism could slow. Also, eat a diet rich in fresh veggies and fruits to get the nutrients necessary to support healthy metabolism, and drink lots of water. Get plenty of exercise and work more activity into your day. Get up from your desk for a quick walk every hour -- even if it's just to the bathroom. Go for a brisk walk on your lunch break, and when you hit the grocery store after work, park in a spot far from the door so you get in a little extra exercise.

www.livestrong.com

What Causes a Dry Mouth so Dry That You Cannot Talk?

woman having her mouth examined by doctor Photo Credit George Doyle/Stockbyte/Getty Images

Having an exceptionally dry mouth can be more than an annoyance: It can be uncomfortable and severe enough that even talking becomes difficult. Also called xerostomia, dry mouth occurs when saliva decreases substantially. The causes of dry mouth syndrome may be temporary or related to some underlying cause or disease. Dry mouth can become a chronic condition, requiring treatment.

Function

Saliva is made up of 99 percent water plus infection-fighting lubricants, enzymes and proteins that assist in digestion. The average healthy adult produces approximately three pints of saliva every day. Saliva is essential to keeping soft tissues of the mouth healthy and helping wash away food debris. It also neutralizes the acids produced by plaque, which can cause tooth decay.
Without saliva's lubricating effects, you may experience difficulty in swallowing, chewing, tasting and your ability to talk can be diminished.

Causes

Other than the simple causes of dry mouth, such as snoring, dehydration and mouth breathing, there are basically three factors to consider: medications, medical conditions and their treatments, or excessive anxiety and stress. Older adults tend to experience this annoying syndrome more than young people. Sore throat, hoarseness and dry nasal passages may also accompany dry mouth.

Medications

Prescription medications and over-the-counter medicines may be the root cause of dry mouth. Drymouth.info reports that more than dry mouth is a side effect of more than 1800 medications, including medications for high blood pressure, anxiety, depression, allergies, weight loss pain and Parkinson's Disease. Decongestants, diuretics, water pills and muscle relaxants may also contribute to the discomfort of dry mouth.

Health

Certain medical conditions and their treatments contribute to dry mouth. People undergoing cancer treatments, such as chemotherapy and radiation near the salivary glands in their head and/or neck, often experience trauma and damage to these glands so severe, they can no longer produce enough saliva. In some cases, people may produce no saliva at all. An autoimmune disease, called Sjogren's syndrome affects the moisture-producing glands in the mouth and the eyes, which results in severe dryness. People with diabetes, Alzheimer's and stroke also may experience dry mouth.

Stress

"Fight or flight" is a term that describes a process your body goes through when you are frightened, excited, anxious or acutely stressed. The process involves increased heart rate, increased blood pressure, constricting of blood vessels and drying up of mucous membranes in the eyes and mouth. Your body signals you to either run or fight. Adrenaline and cortisol are released and your body responds in a cascade of physical reactions. Frequent bouts of stress cause decreased saliva and the soft tissues in your mouth become irritated, inflamed and susceptible to infection.

Significance

Since decreased saliva leads to the increase of bacteria in your mouth, ignoring the situation can lead to bad breath, bleeding gums, canker sores, gingivitis, loss of teeth, mouth sores, cavities and tooth abscesses. Serious conditions can result from poor mouth hygiene, including cardiovascular disease, bacterial pneumonia, osteoporosis and even cancer.

Prevention/Solution

Consumer Guide to Dentistry recommends that you speak with your dentist and perhaps a periodontist if you experience moderate or severe dry mouth that interferes with swallowing and talking. You also can suck on sugar-free candy, increase your fluids to include frequent sips of water, chew sugar-free gum to stimulate saliva, suck on ice chips, and use oral sprays or gels formulated to increase moisture. The Journal of the American Dental Association cautions you to avoid caffeine, alcohol, consumption of carbonated beverages, and tobacco products. The ADA also recommends brushing and flossing twice per day and using cleansing, anti-bacterial mouth rinses.

www.livestrong.com

Title

The effect of anaerobic fungal inoculation on the fermentation characteristics of rice straw silages

Author 

• 
  

• 
  

• 
  

• 
  

• 
  

• 
  

• First published: 13 January 2015Full publication history
• DOI: 10.1111/jam.12724
• Abstract 
• Aims
• To identify whether the supplement of anaerobic fungi isolates with cellulolytic activities accelerates the silage fermentation.
• Methods and Results
• Three fungal isolates with the highest cellulolytic activities among 45 strains of anaerobic fungal stock in our laboratory were selected and used as silage inoculants. The rice straw (RS) was ensiled for 10, 30, 60, 90 and 120 days with four treatments of anaerobic fungi derived from the control (no fungus), Piromyces M014 (isolated from the rumen of the Korean native goat), Orpinomyces R001 (isolated from the duodenum of Korean native cattle) and Neocallimastix M010 (isolated from the guts of termites), respectively. The silages inoculated with pure strains of fungi showed a higher fungal population (P < 0·05) when compared to the control silage. In situ ruminal DM disappearance of RS silage (RSS) was improved with fungal treatment. SEM observation showed live fungal cells inoculated in RS could survive during the ensiling process. Overall, this study indicated that the inoculation of anaerobic fungi decreased the cell wall content of the RSS and increased in situ dry matter disappearance.

Conclusions

The supplementation of anaerobic fungi isolates to RSS as a silage inoculant improves the RSS quality.

Significance and Impact of the Study

This is the first study showing the potential application of supplement of anaerobic fungi isolated from the guts may be applied industrially as an alternate feed additive that improves the silage quality.

For further details log on website :
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jam.12724/abstract

Phosphate Biofertilizer, Row Spacing and Plant Density Effects on Corn (Zea mays L.) Yield and Weed Growth

Title
Phosphate Biofertilizer, Row Spacing and Plant Density Effects on Corn (Zea mays L.) Yield and Weed Growth

Author

Gholam Reza Mohammadi, Mohammad Eghbal Ghobadi, Saeed Sheikheh-Poor

Affiliation(s)

Department of Crop Production and Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran.

Department of Crop Production and Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran.

Department of Crop Production and Breeding, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran.

Abstract

A field study was conducted at the Agricultural Research Farm of Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran to investigate the effects of phosphate biofertilizer, row spacing and plant density on corn yield and weed growth. The experiment was a factorial with three factors arranged in a randomized complete block design with three replications. The first factor was phosphate biofertilizer (inoculation and non-inoculation), the second was row spacing (conventional (75 cm) and reduced (50 cm)) and the third was plant density (66,666 plants·ha^–1(conventional plant density) 83,333 and 99,999 plants·ha^–1 (1.25 and 1.5 times the conventional plant density, respectively)). Results indicated that corn yield and weed growth were significantly influenced by row spacing and plant density. So that, corn yield improved and weed biomass diminished in response to increasing plant density and decreasing row spacing. However, phosphate biofertilizer had no significant effect on corn yield, whereas, weed biomass was notably increased when phosphate biofertilizer was applied. Overall, this study revealed that both yield and weed control in corn field can be improved by alteration of the planting arrangement.

KEYWORDS

Corn; Phosphate Biofertilizer; Planting Arrangement; Weed

Cite this paper

G. Mohammadi, M. Ghobadi and S. Sheikheh-Poor, "Phosphate Biofertilizer, Row Spacing and Plant Density Effects on Corn (Zea mays L.) Yield and Weed Growth," American Journal of Plant Sciences, Vol. 3 No. 4, 2012, pp. 425-429. doi: 10.4236/ajps.2012.34051.

References

[1]	D. N. Duvick and K. G. Cassman, “Post-Green-Revolution Trends in Yield Potential of Temperate Maize in the North-Central United States,” Crop Science, Vol. 39, No. 6, 1999, pp. 1622-1630. doi:10.2135/cropsci1999.3961622x
[2]	I. Turgut, A. Duman, U. Bilgili and E. Acikgoz, “Alternate Row Spacing and Plant Density Effects on Forage and Dry Matter Yield of Maize Hybrids (Zea mays L.). Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, Vol. 191, No. 2, 2005, pp. 146-151. doi:10.1111/j.1439-037X.2004.00146.x
[3]	D. E. Farnham, “Row Spacing, Plant Density and Hybrid Effects on Corn Grain Yield and Moisture,” Agronomy Journal, Vol. 93, No. 5, 2001, pp. 1049-1053. doi:10.2134/agronj2001.9351049x
[4]	G. A. Johnson, T. R. Hoverstad and R. E. Greenwald, “Integrated Weed Management Using Narrow Corn Row Spacing, Herbicides, and Cultivation,” Agronomy Journal, Vol. 90, No. 1, 1998, pp. 40-46. doi:10.2134/agronj1998.00021962009000010008x
[5]	P. M. Porter, D. R. Hicks, W. E. Lueschen, J. H. Ford, D. D. Warnes and T. R. Hoverstad, “Maize Response to Row Width and Plant Density in the Northern Maize Belt,” Journal of Production Agriculture, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1997, pp. 293-300.
[6]	W. J. Cox, D. R. Cherney and J. J. Hanchar, “Row Spacing, Hybrid, and Plant Density Effects on Corn Silage Yield and Quality,” Journal of Production Agriculture, Vol. 11, No. 1, 1998, pp. 128-134.
[7]	C. A. Shapiro and C. S. Wortmann, “Corn Response to Nitrogen Rate, Row Spacing and Plant Density in Eastern Nebraska,” Agronomy Journal, Vol. 98, No. 3, 2006, pp. 529-535. doi:10.2134/agronj2005.0137
[8]	W. D. Widdicombe and K. D. Thelen, “Row Width and Plant Density Effects on Corn Grain Production in the Northern Corn Belt,” Agronomy Journal, Vol. 94, No. 5, 2002, pp. 1020-1023. doi:10.2134/agronj2002.1020
[9]	F. C. Ogbo, “Conversion of Cassava Wastes for Biofertilizer Production Using Phosphate Solubilizing Fungi,” Bioresource Technology, Vol. 101, No. 11, 2010, pp. 4120-4124. doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2009.12.057
[10]	H. Besharati, F. Noorgholipour, M. J. Malakouti, K. Khavazi, M. Lotfollahi, M. S. Ardakani, “Direct Application of Phosphate Rock to Iran Calcareous Soils,” International Meeting on Direct Application of Phosphate Rock and Related Appropriate Technology, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 16-21 July 2001, pp. 277-279.
[11]	S. A. Omar, “The Role of Rock-Phosphate-Solubilizing Fungi and Vesicular-Arbuscular Mycorrhiza (VAM) in Growth of Wheat Plants Fertilized with Rock Phosphate,” World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, Vol. 14, No. 2, 1998, pp. 211-218. doi:10.1023/A:1008830129262
[12]	P. Gyaneshwar, K. G. Naresh, L. J. Parekh and P. S. Poole, “Role of Soil Microorganisms in Improving P Nutrition of Plants,” Plant and Soil, Vol. 245, No. 1, 2002, pp. 83-93. doi:10.1023/A:1020663916259
[13]	M. Cabello, G. Irrazabal, A. M. Bucsinszky, M. Saparrat and S. Schalamuk, “Effect of an Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungus, Glomus Mosseae, and a Rock-Phosphatesolubilizing Fungus, Penicillium Thomii, on Mentha Piperita Growth in a Soilless Medium,” Journal of Basic Microbiology, Vol. 45, No. 3, 2005, pp. 182-189. doi:10.1002/jobm.200410409
[14]	H. Chung, M. Park, M. Madhaiyan, S. Seshadri, J. Song, H. Cho and T. Sa, “Isolation and Characterization of Phosphate Solubilizing Bacteria from the Rhizosphere of Crop Plants of Korea,” Soil Biology and Biochemistry, Vol. 37, No. 10, 2005, pp. 1970-1974. doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2005.02.025
[15]	A. Peix, R. Rivas, I. Santa-Regina, P. F. Mateos, E. Martinez-Molina, C. Rodriguez-Barrueco and E. Velazquez, “Pseudomonas Lutea sp. nov., a Novel Phosphate-Solubilizing Bacterium Isolated from the Rhizosphere of Grasses,” International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, Vol. 54, No. 3, 2004, pp. 847-850. doi:10.1099/ijs.0.02966-0
[16]	S. R. Draper, “International Rules for Seed Testing,” Seed Science and Technology, Vol. 13, 1985, pp. 342-343.
[17]	SAS Institute, “SAS/STAT, User’s Guide,” Version 9.1, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, 2003.
[18]	W. E. Larson and J. J. Hanway, “Corn Production,” In: G. F. Sprague, Ed., Corn and Corn Improvement, American Society of Agronomy, Inc., Madison, 1977, pp. 625-669.
[19]	R. G. Hoeft, E. D. Nafziger, R. R. Johnson and S. R. Al-drich, “Modern Corn and Soybean Production,” MCSP Publ., Savoy, 2000, 353 Pages.
[20]	Z. M. El-Sirafy, H. J. Woodard and E. M. El-Norjar, “Contribution of Biofertilizers and Fertilizer Nitrogen to Nutrient Uptake and Yield of Egyptian Winter Wheat,” Journal of Plant Nutrition, Vol. 29, No. 4, 2006, pp. 587- 599. doi:10.1080/01904160600564287
[21]	M. S. Khan, A. Zaidi and P. A. Wani, “Role of Phosphate-Solubilizing Microorganisms in Sustainable Agriculture—A Review,” Agronomy for Sustainable Development, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2007, pp. 29-43. doi:10.1051/agro:2006011
[22]	P. A. Banks, P. W. Santelmann and B. B. Tucker, “Influence of Long-Term Soil Fertility Treatments on Weed Species in Winter Wheat,” Agronomy Journal, Vol. 68, No. 5, 1976, pp. 825-827. doi:10.2134/agronj1976.00021962006800050037x
[23]	C. Andreasen, J. C. Streibig and H. Hass, “Soil Properties Affecting the Distribution of 37 Weed Species in Danish Fields,” Weed Research, Vol. 31, 1991, pp. 181-187. doi:10.1111/j.1365-3180.1991.tb01757.x
[24]	R. Verma, H. R. Agarwal and V. Nepalia, “Effect of Weed Control and Phosphorus on Crop-Weed Competition in Fenugreek (Trigonella foenum-graecum),” Indian Journal of Weed Science, Vol. 31, No. 4, 1999, pp. 265- 266.
[25]	J. Belnap, S. K. Sherrod and M. E. Miller, “Effects of Soil Amendments on Germination and Emergence of Downy Brome (Bromus Tectorum) and Hilaria Jamesii,” Weed Science, Vol. 51, No. 3, 2003, pp. 371-378. doi:10.1614/0043-1745(2003)051[0371:EOSAOG]2.0.CO;2
[26]	R. E. Blackshaw, R. N. Brandt, H. H. Janzen and T. Entz, “Weed species response to phosphorus fertilization,” Weed Science, Vol. 52, No. 3, 2004, pp. 406-412. doi:10.1614/WS-03-122R
[27]	J. Di Tomaso, “Approaches for Improving Crop Competitiveness through the Manipulation of Fertilization Strategies,” Weed Science, Vol. 43, No. 3, 1995, pp. 491- 497.
[28]	C .J. Swanton and S. F. Weise, “Integrated Weed Management: The Rationale and Approach,” Weed Technology, Vol. 5, No. 3, 1991, pp. 657-663.
[29]	M. Tollenaar, D. E. McCoulough and L. M. Dwyer, “Phsiological basis of the genetic improvement of corn. In: G. A. Slafer, Ed., Genetic Improvement of Field Crops, Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, 1994, pp. 183-236.
[30]	S. D. Murphy, Y. Yakubu, S. F. Weise and C. J. Swanton, “Effect of Planting Patterns and Inter-Row Cultivation on Competition between Corn (Zea mays) and Late Emerging Weeds,” Weed Science, Vol. 44, 1996, pp. 856-870.
[31]	Z. S. Knezevic, M. J. Horak and R. L. Vanderlip, “Estimates of Physiological Determinants for Amaranthus retroflexus,” Weed Science, Vol. 47, 1999, pp. 291-296.

For further details log on website :
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=18686

Effect of Plant Spacing on Growth and Grain Yield of Soybean

Title
Effect of Plant Spacing on Growth and Grain Yield of Soybean

Author

Bhagirath S. Chauhan, Jhoana L. Opeña

Affiliation(s)

Weed Scientist and Assistant Scientist, Weed Science, Crop and Environmental Sciences Division, International Rice Research In- stitute, Los Ba?os, Philippines.

Weed Scientist and Assistant Scientist, Weed Science, Crop and Environmental Sciences Division, International Rice Research In- stitute, Los Ba?os, Philippines..

ABSTRACT

In the Philippines, rice monoculture systems are common. Compared to these systems, the rice-soybean cropping system may prove more water-efficient and there is a trend of increasing soybean area in the response to water scarcity and need for crop diversification in the Philippines. A field study was conducted to evaluate the effect of row and plant to plant spacing (20 × 10, 20 × 5, 40 × 10, and 40 × 5 cm) on growth and yield of soybean. Plant height was not influenced by the plant geometry. Spacing, however, influenced leaf area and shoot biomass of soybean. Plants grown at the widest spacing (i.e., 40 × 10 cm) produced lowest leaf area and shoot biomass at 6 and 12 weeks after planting. Leaf area and shoot biomass at other three spacing were similar. There was a negative and linear relationship between weed biomass and crop shoot biomass at 6 and 12 weeks after planting. Grain yield of soybean was not affected by plant geometry and it ranged from 1.3 to 1.9 t·ha^-1 at different spacing.

KEYWORDS

Row Spacing; Plant to Plant Spacing; Leaf Area; Weed Biomass

Cite this paper

B. Chauhan and J. Opeña, "Effect of Plant Spacing on Growth and Grain Yield of Soybean," American Journal of Plant Sciences, Vol. 4 No. 10, 2013, pp. 2011-2014. doi: 10.4236/ajps.2013.410251.

References

[1]	B. S. Chauhan, “Weed Ecology and Weed Management Strategies for Dry-Seeded Rice in Asia,” Weed Technology, Vol. 26, No. 1, 2012, pp. 1-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/WT-D-11-00105.1
[2]	G. Mahajan, B. S. Chauhan and M. S. Gill, “Dry-Seeded Rice Culture in Punjab State of India: Lessons Learned from Farmers,” Field Crops Research, Vol. 144, 2013, pp. 89-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2013.01.008
[3]	G. Mahajan, B. S. Chauhan, J. Timsina, P. P. Singh and K. Singh, “Crop Performance and Water- and Nitrogen-Use Efficiencies in Dry-Seeded Rice in Response to Irrigation and Fertilizer Amounts in Northwest India,” Field Crops Research, Vol. 134, 2012, pp. 59-70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2012.04.011
[4]	T. P. Tuong and B. A. M. Bouman, “Rice Production in Water-Scarce Environments, in Water Productivity in Agriculture: Limits and Opportunities for Improvements,” In: J. W. Kijne, R. Barker and D. Molden, Eds., CABI Publishing, Wallingford, 2003, pp. 53-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1079/9780851996691.0053
[5]	M. C. R. Alberto, R. J. Buresh, T. Hirano, A. Miyata, R. Wassmann, J. R. Quilty, T. Q. Correa Jr. and J. Sandro, “Carbon Uptake and Water Productivity for Dry-Seeded Rice and Hybrid Maize Grown with Overhead Sprinkler Irrigation,” Field Crops Research, Vol. 146, 2013, pp. 51-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2013.03.006
[6]	J. E. Board and B. J. Harville, “Explanations for Greater Light Interception in Narrowvs Wide-Row Soybean,” Crop Science, Vol. 32, No. 1, 1992, pp. 198-202. http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1992.0011183X003200010041x
[7]	S. Z. Knezevic, S. P. Evans and M. Mainz, “Row Spacing Influences the Critical Timing for Weed Removal in Soybean (Glycine max),” Weed Technology, Vol. 17, No. 4, 2003, pp. 666-673. http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/WT02-49
[8]	S. M. Hock, S. Z. Knezevic, A. R. Martin and J. L. Lindquist, “Soybean Row Spacing and Weed Emergence Time Influence Weed Competitiveness and Competitive Indices,” Weed Science, Vol. 54, No. 1, 2006, pp. 38-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/WS-05-011R.1
[9]	B. S. Chauhan and D. E. Johnson, “Implications of Narrow Crop Row Spacing and Delayed Echinochloa colona and Echinochloa crus-galli Emergence for Weed Growth and Crop Yield Loss in Aerobic Rice,” Field Crops Research, Vol. 117, 2010, pp. 177-182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2010.02.014
[10]	B. S. Chauhan and D. E. Johnson, “Row Spacing and Weed Control Timing Affect Yield of Aerobic Rice,” Field Crops Research, Vol. 121, 2011, pp. 226-231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2010.12.008
[11]	D. L. Karlen and C. R. Camp, “Row Spacing, Plant Population, and Water Management Effects on Corn in the Atlantic Coastal Plain,” Agron Journal, Vol. 77, No. 3, 1985, pp. 393-398. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj1985.00021962007700030010x
[12]	M. J. Ottman and L. F. Welch, “Planting Patterns and Radiation Interception, Plant Nutrient Concentration and Yield in Corn,” Agron Journal, Vol. 81, 1989, pp. 167-174. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj1989.00021962008100020006x
[13]	M. Tollenaar, A. A. Dibo, A. Aguilera, S. F. Weise and C. J. Swanton, “Effect of Crop Density on Weed Interference in Maize,” Agron Journal, Vol. 86, No. 4, 1994, pp. 591-595. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj1994.00021962008600040003x
[14]	GenStat 8.0, “GenStat Release 8 Reference Manual,” VSN International, Oxford, 2005, 343 p.
[15]	J. A. Torrion, T. D. Setiyono, K. G. Cassman, R. B. Ferguson, S. Irmak and J. E. Specht, “Soybean Root Development Relative to Vegetative and Reproductive Phenology,” Agron Journal, Vol. 104, No. 6, 2012, pp. 1702-1709. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj2012.0199
[16]	B. S. Chauhan, V. P. Singh, A. Kumar and D. E. Johnson, “Relations of Rice Seeding Rates to Crop and Weed Growth in Aerobic Rice,” Field Crops Research, Vol. 121, 2011, pp. 105-115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2010.11.019
[17]	D. Mulugeta and D. Stoltenberg, “Increased Weed Emergence and Seed Bank Depletion by Soil Disturbance in a No-Till System,” Weed Science, Vol. 45, 1997, pp. 234-241.

For further details log on website :
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=37680