Content uploaded by Adamou Ibrahim Maman Laouali
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Adamou Ibrahim Maman Laouali on Mar 10, 2025
Content may be subject to copyright.
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2025) 14(01): 293-301
293
Original Research Article https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2025.1401.024
Comparative effect of Cassia mimosoides L. (Fabaceae), Leucas
aspera (Willd.) Link (Lamiaceae) and Sesbania pachycarpa DC.
(Fabaceae) on Millet Yield [Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.
(Poaceae)] in East-Southeast Niger
Mahamane Adamou *, Toudou Daouda Abdoul Karim,
Aboubacar Adamou Kolafane, Alio Moussa Abdourazak,
Adamou Ibrahim Maman Laouali, Inoussa Maman Maarouhi,
Douma Soumana, Amadou Harouna Issa, Bakasso Yacoubou and Mahamane Ali
Laboratoire GeVaBioS Département de Biologie, Faculté des Sciences et Techniques, Université Abdou
Moumouni de Niamey, Niamey, Niger
*Corresponding author
A B S T R A C T
Introduction
Millet provides the food base for some two million
inhabitants of tropical arid and semi-arid zones
(Goudiaby et al., 2018). Despite its importance,
cultivation techniques are still traditional and do not
guarantee good production. Production yields have
always been generally low and confined to the vocation
of subsistence crops (Soumaila, 2024). Thus, the food
self-sufficiency sought by political leaders is difficult to
achieve for many crops.
In Africa south of the Sahara, the constraints responsible
for the drop in production are climate variability and
change, and the risks of increasing soil degradation
(Sibiri, 1995; Bichat, 2006). In addition to these risks,
weeding and pest control practices have an influence on
crop yields (Mertz et al., 2007). Weeds have always been
International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences
ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 14 Number 1 (2025)
Journal homepage: http://www.ijcmas.com
Weed control is one of the most important constraints to crop production. This study was
undertaken in the south-east of Niger. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of
weed control on millet production in this area. Experiments focused on the growth (height
and tillering) and grain weight of millet plants subjected to competition from Cassia
mimosoides L. (Fabaceae), Leucas aspera (Willd.) Link (Lamiaceae) and Sesbania
pachycarpa DC. (Fabaceae). Results showed that Leucas aspera was the most aggressive
species. Its nuisance threshold density was 2 plants/m² and its interference period was
estimated at 14 days after sowing. Finally, the average percentage yield reduction was
98.34%.
K e yw o rd s
Nuisance, weeds,
yield, millet, Niger
Received:
28 November 2024
Accepted:
30 December 2024
Available Online:
10 January 2025
Article Info
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2025) 14(01): 293-301
294
a problem for farmers. The difficulty of controlling
weeds is one of the main reasons why farmers abandon
old plots to create new ones (Boraud, 2000).
Weed competition with crops for water, light, nutrients
and development space can have a direct negative effect
on yield. Heavy losses in yield and crop quality result
from weed competition (Buhler, 2002). These losses are
estimated at 9.7% of world agricultural production, and
range from 10 to 56% in Africa (Cramer, 1967).
In Niger, millet generally faces competition from three
groups of weeds: annual broadleaf dicotyledons, annual
grasses and Cyperaceae (Soumaila, 2024). These weeds
cause yield losses of around 30% in the Sahel (Lagoke et
al., 1988). In terms of weed management, understanding
the biology of the major weeds encountered in food crops
is a prerequisite for developing effective control
strategies (Gué, 2017). In addition, it is the major weeds
that guide the grower in the choice of weeding methods
to be applied to plots. And, their invasiveness is
conferred by their biological characteristics (Basu et al.,
2004). However, data on the harmfulness of weeds found
in agrosystems in Niger are scarce. It is in this context
that this study entitled “Comparative effect of Cassia
mimosodes L. (Fabaceae), Leucas aspera (Willd.) Link
(Lamiaceae) and Sesbania pachycarpa DC. (Fabaceae)
on millet yield in East-Southeast Niger” was undertaken
to assess the impact of weediness on millet production in
this zone.
Materials and Methods
Study Site
Located in West Africa between 11°37 and 23° north
latitude and 16° east longitude, Niger covers an area of
1,267,000 km² (Figure 1). Since 2011, Niger has been
divided into 7 regions (plus the Niamey urban
community). The regions are subdivided into 63
departments, of which Illéla is located in the South-East
of Niger between 5° 14' 38''East longitude and 14° 27'
43''North latitude (Ministère de l'Agriculture et de
l'Elevage, 2013). The department of Illéla (6933 km²)
belongs to the administrative region of Tahoua. It is
bordered to the north by Tahoua department, to the
northeast by Keita, to the east by Bouza, to the south by
Konni and to the west by Bagaroua. The population of
Illéla department is estimated at 334755 inhabitants
(165844 males and 168911 females) (Institut National de
la Statistique du Niger, 2012). This study was conducted
in Djinguiniss, a village in the Illéla department. It is
located 30 Km from Illéla, precisely on the Illéla -
Bagaroua axis (Ministère de l'Agriculture et de l'Elevage,
2013).
The predominantly Sudanian climate is characterized by
a long, cold dry season (November - February), a hot dry
season (March - May) and a rainy season (June -
October). Average annual rainfall varies between 300
and 450 mm, and in a normal year annual rainfall can
reach 500 mm (Ministère de l'Agriculture et de l'Elevage,
2013). It varies in time and space, and between rainy
years. There are a variety of soils (glacis, plateaux, valley
plateaux, dunes and lowlands). Agriculture is the main
activity in this zone. The main food crops are millet,
sorghum, maize, cash crops (groundnuts, beans,
cowpeas) and off-season crops (onions, tomatoes,
potatoes, etc.). Livestock breeding is the department's
second-largest activity.
In addition, trade and fishing are still underdeveloped in
the department. Vegetation is essentially dominated by
Combretaceae, Mimosaceae and herbaceous species.
Wildlife consists mainly of hares, squirrels, guinea fowl,
francolins, bustards, reptiles, etc. (Ministère de
l'Agriculture et de l'Elevage, 2013).
Constraints to improving agricultural production and
productivity include: unpredictable and insufficient
rainfall, flooding, degradation of cultivated land, pest
attacks, demographic pressure and weed proliferation.
Plant Material
The plant material used in this study includes :
- millet [Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br. (Poaceae)],
specifically the local variety “Guèreguera”,
- the weeds Cassia mimosoides L. (Fabaceae), Leucas
aspera (Willd.) Link (Lamiaceae) and Sesbania
pachycarpa DC. (Fabaceae). The biological material
covered by our work includes:
Technical Equipment
Setting up the plots and collecting data required the use
of the following equipment:
- a tractor to prepare the ground,
- a 50 m graduated tape measure to measure the plots, the
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2025) 14(01): 293-301
295
size of the millet plants and the Cassia mimosoides L.
(Fabaceae), Leucas aspera (Willd.) Link (Lamiaceae)
and Sesbania pachycarpa DC. (Fabaceae) plants,
- a string to mark plot boundaries,
- a machete to cut the wooden stakes installed in the four
corners of each plot,
- a daba for sowing,
- a hoe for ploughing and weeding,
- a knife for harvesting millet ears,
- a scale for weighing millet grains,
- a camera for taking photographs.
Computer Equipment
We used the following software:
- Microsoft Word version 2007 for word processing,
- Microsoft Excel version 2007 for data entry, processing
and analysis,
- R version 4.4.1. for analysis of variance and Duncan's
tests.
Determining Weed - Millet Competition
Several methods can be used to determine competition
between weeds and crops. These include the additive
method, the series of alternative options, the systematic
treatment method, etc. The additive method is the most
widely used in weed interference experiments. It involves
maintaining a constant crop density and varying the weed
density (Cousens, 1991; Radosevich, 1987; Olivier and
Buchanan, 1986). In this study, the treatment consisted in
varying the densities (0, 8... and 80 plants/m²) of Cassia
mimosoides, Leucas aspera and Sesbania pachycarpa per
plot. No fertilizer was applied to any of the plots, in line
with the growing conditions of millet farmers in the
study area (few farmers apply fertilizer here).
Choice of Plots and Experimental Design
The choice of experimental plots was guided by local
farmers who complained about the increasingly
significant presence and nuisance of Cassia mimosoides
L. (Fabaceae), Leucas aspera (Willd.) Link (Lamiaceae)
and Sesbania pachycarpa DC. (Fabaceae) in food plots.
The choice of the experimental site was also guided by
the accessibility of the plots due to the presence of a very
practicable road network. The experimental set-up is a
Fisher block (Figure 2). It is a complete randomized
block. This means that all the plots are laid out in the
same perimeter and are not arranged in any particular
order. The system comprises 4 replicates. Each block
comprises a control and 15 treatments (Figure 2a). The
15 treatments are T1, T2, T3, T7 and T10 for each of the
three weeds mentioned above. The elementary plot
covers an area of 4 m² (2 m x 2 m) and is composed of
two crop lines, one meter apart. Each cultivation line is
located 50 cm from the boundary of the elementary plot
and comprises four bunches 40 cm apart (Figure 2b).
Each plot contained 5 millet plants, which were retained
after weeding. The distance between plots in the same
block is 1 m, and 2 m between blocks. Each elementary
plot contains 40 millet plants. The number of plants of
each of the three weeds (C. mimosoides, L. aspera and S.
pachycarpa) per elementary plot varied from 8 to 80
(Table 1). The usable area is 658 m² (14 m x 47 m).
Trial Management
Plots were ploughed with a hoe three weeks after sowing.
During ploughing of the treatment plots, we eliminated
all weeds other than those corresponding to the plot
indicated. For example, in an elementary plot
corresponding to Cassia mimosoides densities, only the
Cassia mimosoides plants sown around the millet patches
were retained. Any weed other than Cassia mimosoides
is totally eliminated. The same applies to the other two
weeds (Leucas aspera and Sesbania pachycarpa). This
really enabled us to determine the harmfulness of the
plants of the three different weeds (C. mimosoides, L.
aspera and S. pachycarpa) on the millet plants. On the
other hand, for the control plots (kept clean from sowing
to harvesting of the millet) we retained only the millet
plants. Weeding was repeated every two weeks until
harvest.
Data Collection and Analysis
The variables considered (growth and weight) were used
to collect data on millet height, tillering and plot weight.
To fully appreciate the performance of millet plants
subjected to weed interference, dry ears were harvested
by hand from each elementary plot. The harvests were
weighed per elementary plot. This method was used to
determine, on the basis of different weed densities
(Cassia mimosoides, Leucas aspera and Sesbania
pachycarpa), the average dry mass per plot and per
hectare of millet. The averages of weekly heights,
number of plants and millet weight were subjected to a
one-factor repeated-measures analysis of variance to
assess their significance at the 5% level. They were then
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2025) 14(01): 293-301
296
compared using Duncan's test at the 5% significance
level. Treatment averages were compared with the
control, which was kept clean throughout the millet
growing cycle.
Results and Discussion
Effect of weed plant densities on millet plant
height growth
The results of the analysis of variance and Duncan's test
at the 5% threshold showed that there was no significant
difference between the average height of millet plants for
the three weeds with p = 0.01 (Table 2). The average
height at the first week after sowing for the three weeds
was 7.33 cm. However, by the fourth week after sowing,
there was a highly significant difference between the
mean heights of millet plants competing with the three
weeds (Table 2). The average height (44.19 cm) of millet
plants competing with Sesbania pachycarpa plants was
the highest. This was followed by the height (41.19 cm)
of millet plants competing with Cassia mimosoides.
Finally, the average height (30.94 cm) of millet plants in
competition with Leucas aspera is the lowest.
In addition, the distribution of the three weeds according
to the period of interference revealed that millet plants in
competition with Leucas aspera plants competed early
(14 days after sowing) with plants of this weed. This was
followed by competition from Cassia mimosoides plants
at 28 days after sowing. On the other hand, Sesbania
pachycarpa plants began to interfere with millet plants at
35 days after sowing (Table 3).
The main threshold densities were 2 plants/m² of Leucas
aspera, 4 plants/m² of Cassia mimosoides and 6
plants/m² of Sesbania pachycarpa. Table 4 shows the
threshold densities for the three different weeds. The
results reported in Table 4 showed that the threshold
density of Sesbania pachycarpa was the most tolerable
among the densities of the three weeds, at 6 plants/m².
Cassia mimosoides threshold density (4 plants/m²)
ranked second. Leucas aspera's threshold density (2
plants/m²) was the least tolerable (Table 4).
Table 5 below presents the results of the analysis of
variance and Duncan's test at the 5% threshold carried
out on the grain mass of the millet plants obtained. These
results showed a highly significant difference with
p=0.0001. The grain mass of millet plants in the
treatments showed a deficit compared with the grain
mass of millet plants in the control for all weeds.
However, millet plants competing with Sesbania
pachycarpa (1271.24 Kg/ha) outperformed those
competing with Cassia mimosoides (1003.75 Kg/ha) and
Leucas aspera (39.30 Kg/ha) (Table 5). The highest
percentage of yield loss (98.34%) was observed when
Leucas aspera plants competed with millet plants (Table
6).
The results of the analysis of variance and Duncan's test
on the number of tillers on millet plants in competition
with Cassia mimosoides, Leucas aspera and Sesbania
pachycarpa are shown in Table 7 below. This analysis
shows that the treatment effect is highly significant, with
p = 0.001. The distribution according to millet plant
multiplication showed that millet plants subjected to
interference from Sesbania pachycarpa plants (11.08
plants/m²) produced more tillers than those competing
with Cassia mimosoides (9.46 plants/m²) and Leucas
aspera (3.89 plants/m²). The differences observed are
therefore due to the effect of interspecific competition.
The impact of the density of the three weeds on the
height growth of the millet plants was only perceptible
after the third week. At this time, significant differences
appeared between the average height of millet plants
competing with Sesbania pachycarpa plants and those
competing with Cassia mimosoides and Leucas aspera
plants. These differences became increasingly important
right up to harvest. During the first three weeks of
cultivation, millet plants can tolerate competition from
these weeds. The fourth week corresponds to the start of
weed branch multiplication. The multiplication of these
branches had an increasingly depressive effect on the
millet plants. This was most noticeable above 2 plants/m²
for Leucas aspera, 4 plants/m² for Cassia mimosoides
and 6 plants/m² for Sesbania pachycarpa. The tolerable
critical threshold is therefore 2 weeks for a density of 2
plants/m² for L. aspera, 4 weeks for 4 plants/m² for C.
mimosoides and 5 weeks for 6 plants/m² for Sesbania
pachycarpa. The tolerable critical threshold is therefore 2
weeks for a density of 2 plants/m² for L. aspera, 4 weeks
for 4 plants/m² for C. mimosoides and 5 weeks for 6
plants/m² for Sesbania pachycarpa. In their studies,
Rojas et al., (1993) in Costa Rica, and Bridgemohan et
al., (1992) in Trinidad demonstrated that the critical
period of interference was respectively between 45 and
60 days for densities between 66 and 74 plants/m² and 0
to 63 days for 55 plants of Rottboellia cochinchinensis
after sowing. Bello et al., (2019) demonstrated that the
thresholds for early, critical and late competition from
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2025) 14(01): 293-301
297
onion weediness were 30, 45 and 60 days after
transplanting, respectively. The difference observed
between these different research studies could be due to
the maize variety, climatic and ecological conditions and
the conduct of the experiment. This observation is similar
to that made by Burnside and Wicks (1969) in the United
States of America and Olaya and Cardenas (1969) in
Colombia, on sorghum plantations.
In sugarcane plantations in northern Côte d'Ivoire,
Boraud and Kouassi (2005) defined threshold densities of
a single Amaranthus sp. plant per 2.5 m of row. These
results show a variability in the nuisance threshold
density. The difference observed could be due to the
nature of the crop, climatic and ecological conditions, the
conduct of the experiment and the weed present.
Sesbania pachycarpa and Cassia mimosoides were less
damaging than Leucas aspera. Sesbania pachycarpa and
Cassia mimosoides belong to the Fabaceae family,
formerly known as Leguminosae. Legumes are capable
of forming a symbiotic relationship with Gram-negative
soil bacteria (proteobacteria) known as Rhizobium
(Krimi et al., 2021). These bacteria are known for their
ability to fix nitrogen for leguminous hosts in exchange
for carbon. The result of this symbiosis is the formation
of nodules on the plant root, within which the Bacteria
can convert atmospheric nitrogen into ammonia, a
compound necessary for plant growth and development
(Krimi et al., 2021). This could explain the degree of
tolerance of Sesbania pachycarpa and Cassia
mimosoides compared with the aggressiveness of Leucas
aspera.
Observation of tillers reveals that their multiplication is
not identical within the different treatments according to
the three weeds. This is why millet plants resulting from
competition between Sesbania pachycarpa and Cassia
mimosoides grow rapidly and in large quantities. Cassia
mimosoides is also more damaging than Sesbania
pachycarpa. This could be explained by the quantity,
period of formation and lifespan of nodules of one
species compared with the other, despite being in the
same Fabaceae family. In addition, the reduction in yield
was more noticeable in millet plants subjected to
competition from Leucas aspera plants.
Yield reductions for Leucas aspera, Cassia mimosoides
and Sesbania pachycarpa were 98.34%, 57.73% and
46.47% respectively. Rojas et al., (1993) in Costa Rica
and Bridgemohan et al., (1992) in Trinidad obtained
yield reductions of 46-54% and 50% respectively.
Figure.1 Map of Study area (MAG/EL)
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2025) 14(01): 293-301
298
Table.1 Definition of treatment characteristics
Codes
Number of weed plants around a
pearl millet pocket
Density of weed (number/m²)
TM
0
0
T1
1
8
T2
2
16
T3
3
24
T7
7
56
T10
10
80
TM: Control parcel; Numbers 1 ; 2 ; 3 ; 7 and 10 assigned to weed and representing, respectively, the numbers of plants of we ed
around a pocket of pearl mill
Table.2 Comparison of average height of pearl millet plants in weeks 1, 4 and 14
Adventices
Average height of millet plants in treatments (cm)
7 DAS
28 DAS
98 DAS
Cassia mimosoides L. (Fabaceae)
7.28 a
41.19 ab
139.73b
Leucas aspera (Willd.) Link (Lamiaceae)
7.25 a
30.94 b
131bc
Sesbania pachycarpa DC. (Fabaceae)
7.48 a
44.19 a
179.98 a
a : average followed by the same letter in a given column, are not significantly different according to the Duncan test at 5 % ; DAS
: days after sowing.
Table.3 Comparison of the interference period between the three weeds
Adventices
Interference period (DAS)
Cassia mimosoides L. (Fabaceae)
28
Leucas aspera (Willd.) Link (Lamiaceae)
14
Sesbania pachycarpa DC. (Fabaceae)
35
DAS : days after sowing
Table.4 Comparison of nuisance threshold density between the three weeds
Adventices
Harm threshold density (plants/m²)
Cassia mimosoides L. (Fabaceae)
4
Leucas aspera (Willd.) Link (Lamiaceae)
2
Sesbania pachycarpa DC. (Fabaceae)
6
Table.5 Yield comparison according to weed competition
Adventices
Average weight obtained
(Kg/ha)
Average weight obtained
from control (Kg/ha)
Cassia mimosoides L. (Fabaceae)
1003.75
2375
Leucas aspera (Willd.) Link (Lamiaceae)
39.30
2375
Sesbania pachycarpa DC. (Fabaceae)
1271.24
2375
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2025) 14(01): 293-301
299
Table.6 Comparison of the proportions of yield loss depending on the weed
Adventices
Loss rate (%)
Average weight obtained
from control (Kg/ha)
Cassia mimosoides L. (Fabaceae)
57.73
2375
Leucas aspera (Willd.) Link (Lamiaceae)
98.34
2375
Sesbania pachycarpa DC. (Fabaceae)
46.47
2375
Table.7 Comparison of the number of plants produced depending on the adventitia
Adventices
Number of tillers (plants/m²)
Cassia mimosoides L. (Fabaceae)
9.46
Leucas aspera (Willd.) Link (Lamiaceae)
3.89
Sesbania pachycarpa DC. (Fabaceae)
11.08
Figure.2 Experimental setup
The present study results on the losses caused to millet
production by plants of three weeds were in line with
those of many authors including Boraud and Aman
(1998); Alex et al., (2000); Strahan et al., (2000);
Ahonon (2018); Bello et al., (2019), who also worked in
weedy agroecosystems.
The three weeds (Cassia mimosoides, Leucas aspera
and Sesbania pachycarpa) were studied for a better
appreciation and a proposal of solutions to the problems
they caused. The results of this study made it possible to
characterize their mode of competition in millet
cultivation in the study area. Thus, the interference
period and tolerable critical threshold were 2 weeks for a
density of 2 plants/m² of L. aspera, 4 weeks for 4
plants/m² of C. mimosoides and 5 weeks for 6 plants/m²
of Sesbania pachycarpa.
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2025) 14(01): 293-301
300
In terms of yield, millet plants resulting from competition
with Sesbania pachycarpa plants produced the highest
yield (1271.24 Kg/ha), compared with Cassia
mimosoides (1003.75 Kg/ha) and Leucas aspera (39.30
Kg/ha). Yield reductions for Leucas aspera, Cassia
mimosoides and Sesbania pachycarpa were 98.34%,
57.73% and 46.47% respectively.
Nodule production in Sesbania pachycarpa and Cassia
mimosoides made their competition less aggressive than
that of Leucas aspera.
Author Contributions
Mahamane Adamou: Investigation, formal analysis,
writing—original draft. Toudou Daouda Abdoul Karim:
Validation, methodology, writing—reviewing.
Aboubacar Adamou Kolafane:—Formal analysis,
writing—review and editing. Alio Moussa Abdourazak:
Investigation, writing—reviewing. Adamou Ibrahim
Maman Laowali: Resources, investigation writing—
reviewing. Inoussa Maman Maarouhi: Validation, formal
analysis, writing—reviewing. Douma Soumana:
Conceptualization, methodology, data curation,
supervision, writing—reviewing the final version of the
manuscript. Amadou Harouna Issa: Investigation, formal
analysis, writing—original draft. Bakasso Yacoubou:
Validation, methodology, writing—reviewing.
Mahamane Ali:—Formal analysis, writing—review and
editing.
Data Availability
The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the
current study are available from the corresponding author
on reasonable request.
Declarations
Ethical Approval Not applicable.
Consent to Participate Not applicable.
Consent to Publish Not applicable.
Conflict of Interest The authors declare no competing
interests.
References
Ahonon B, Traore H, Ipou JI. 2018. Mauvaises herbes
majeures de la culture de haricot (Phaseolus
vulgaris L.) dans la Région du Moronou au
Centre-Est de la Côte d’Ivoire. Int. J. Biol.
Chem. Sci., 12(1) : 310-321.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ijbcs.v12i1.25.
Alex M, Braima J, Kouessi A, Stephan W, Emmanuel A,
Brice G, 2000. Lutte contre les adventices dans
les champs de manioc: Guide de la pratique de
lutte intégrée à l’usage des vulgarisateurs.
Institut International d’Agriculture Tropicale
(IITA). Ibadan, Nigeria, 32 p.
Basu C, Halfhill D M, Mueller C T & Stewart Jr N C,
2004. Weed genomics: new tools to understand
weed biology. Plant Science, 9: 391-398.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2004.06.003
Bello S, Ahanchede A, et Amadji G L, 2019.
Détermination des périodes de compétition des
mauvaises herbes en culture d’oignon (Allium
cepa L.) au Nord-Est du Bénin. Int. J. Biol.
Chem. Sci. 13(6): 2497-2512,
H, 2006. L’or blanc des savanes africaines. Cahiers
Agricultures, 15 (1) : 7-8.
Boraud N K M and Aman K G, 1998. Les principales
adventices de la canne à sucre en Côte d’Ivoire:
Similitude et différence. XVIIème conférence du
COLUMA, journées internationales sur la lutte
contre les mauvaises herbes, 9-10-11 décembre
1998, Palais de Congrès, Dijon (France), pp.
1173-1179.
Boraud N K M and Kouassi C, 2005. La nuisibilité
spécifique de Cyperus rotundus L. (Cyperaceae)
dans la culture de la canne à sucre au nord de la
Côte d’Ivoire. Rev. Ivoir. Sci. Technol, 06
(2005), pp. 207-216.
Boraud N.K.M., 2000. Etude floristique et
phytoécologique des adventices des complexes
sucriers de Ferké 1 et 2, de Borotoukoro et de
Zuénoula en Côte d’Ivoire. Thèse de spécialité
UFR Biosciences Uni. Cocody Côte d’Ivoire ;
181p.
Bridgemohan P Mc, David C, Bekele I, Brathwaite R A
I, 1992. The effects of Rottboellia
cochinchinensis on the growth, development and
yield of maize. Tropical Pest Management, 38:
400-407.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09670879209371736
Buhler D D, 2002. Challenges and opportunities for
integrated weed management. Weed Sci. 50: 273
– 280. https://doi.org/10.1614/0043-
1745(2002)050[0273:AIAAOF]2.0.CO;2
Burnside O C and Wicks G A, 1969. Influence of weed
competition on sorghum growth. Weeds. pp. 17-
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2025) 14(01): 293-301
301
332-333.
Cousens R., 1991. Aspects of the design and
interpretation of competition (interference)
experiments. Weed Technology. 5: 664- 673.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890037X00027524
Cramer H H, 1967. Plant protection and world crop
production. Planzenschutz. Natchrichten, Bayer,
20: 1-524.
Goudiaby M F, Sarr I, Sembène M, 2018. Source of
resistance in pearl millet varieties against
stemborers and the ear head miner. Journal of
Entomology and Zoology studies, 6 (1): 1702 –
1708.
Gué A, 2017. Etude des caractéristiques biologiques de
quelques adventices majeures des cultures
vivrières du Centre-Ouest de la Côte d’Ivoire,
Thèse unique de Doctorat de l’Université Félix
Houphoet Boigny, Côte d’Ivoire, 165 p.
Institut National de Statistique du Niger. 2012.
Recensement général de la population [archive],
p. 23.
Krimi S, Felouat R et Bouhlaies A, 2021. Sybiose
Rhizobium – Légumineuses et diversité des
rhizobia nodulant les légumineuses de la tribu
des Viciae. 58 p. Mémoire de Master de
l’Université des Frères Mentouri Constantine.
Faculté des Sciences de la Nature et de la Vie.
Lagoke SIO, Parkinson V, Agunbiade RM, 1991.
Parasitic weeds and control methods in Africa.Int
Kim, S.K., éd. Cambating Striga in Africa: Proc.
Of the Int. Workshop organised by IITA,
ICRISAT and IDRC, 22-24 August 1988, IITA,
Ibadan, Nigeria. pp. 3-14.
Mertz O, Wadley R, Nielsen U, Bruun TB, Colfer CJP,
Neergaard A, Jepsen MR, Martinussen T, Zhao
Q, Noweg GT, Magid J, 2007. A fresh look at
shifting cultivation: Fallow length an uncertain
indicator of productivity. ScienceDirect.
Agricultural Systems 96 (2008): 75- 84.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2007.06.002
Ministère de l’Agriculture et de l’Elevage du Niger,
2013. Rapport national de synthèse: Evaluation
des récoltes de la campagne agricole d’hivernage
2012 et résultats définitifs 2012-2013, Niamey,
Niger, 39 p.
Olaya H, and Cardenas J, 1969. Epocas criticas de
competencia entre sorgo y malezas en la zona del
sur del Tolima. I Semin de la soc. Colombrana
de Control de Malezas y Fisiologia vegetal
(COMALFI). Bogota, Janv. pp. 21-22.
Oliver R. and Buchanan G., 1986. Weed compétition and
economic threshold. Research methods in weed
science. N.D. Camper (ed). Southern weed
sciencie society. Champaig. p. 71-97.
Radosevich S., 1987. Methods to study interactions
among crops and weed. Weed Technology. 1:
190-198.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890037X00029523
Rojas C E, LA Cruz R, Merayo A, 1993. Effecto
competitivo de la caminadora Rottboellia
cochinchinensis (Lour) Clayton en el cultivo del
maiz (Zea mays L.). Manejo Integrado de Plagas
27: 42-45.
Sibiri T J-B, 1995. Evolution de la fertilité des sols sur
un front pionnier en zone nordsoudanienne
(Burkina Faso). Thèse de doctorat, INP Loraine,
ENSA et IA. 133 p.
Soumaila S I, 2024. Amélioration de la tolerance au
stress hydrique du mil [Pennisetum glaucum (L.)
R. Br] au Niger: Effet de l’application foliaire du
bore. Mémoire de Thèse unique, 158 p.
Strahan R E, Griffin J L, Jordan D L, et M iller D K,
2000. Influence of adjuvants on itchgrass
(Rottboellia cochinchinensis) control in corn
(Zea mays) with nicosulfuron and primisulfuron.
Weed Tech. 14: 66-71.
https://doi.org/10.1614/0890-
037X(2000)014[0066:IOAOIR]2.0.CO;2
How to cite this article:
Mahamane Adamou, Toudou Daouda Abdoul Karim, Aboubacar Adamou Kolafane, Alio Moussa Abdourazak,
Adamou Ibrahim Maman Laouali, Inoussa Maman Maarouhi, Douma Soumana, Amadou Harouna Issa, Bakasso
Yacoubou and Mahamane Ali. 2025. Comparative effect of Cassia mimosoides L. (Fabaceae), Leucas aspera
(Willd.) Link (Lamiaceae) and Sesbania pachycarpa DC. (Fabaceae) on Millet Yield [Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R.
Br. (Poaceae)] in East-Southeast Niger. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci. 14(01): 293-301.
doi: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2025.1401.024
