## 3 Results
### Inhibitory Effects of Arachis pintoi against Echinola crus-galli in Paddy Field Condition
Rice yield was promoted at all applied doses. Rice yield was significantly increased by over 35% at 200 g/m\({}^{2}\) of application, followed by 26.49% (150 g/m\({}^{2}\)), and 19.19% (100 g/m\({}^{2}\)), and rice yield was slightly promoted by 2.99% at a dose of 50 g/m\({}^{2}\), respectively. Interestingly, at the highest doses applied (200 g/m\({}^{2}\)), rice yield was significantly increased by 35.13%, higher than hand-weeding (20.15%) and herbicide application (26.86%), respectively (Table 4). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline
**Dose** & **Germination** & **Shoot Length** & **Fresh Weight** & **Dry Weight** & **AI** \\ \hline
**(g/m\({}^{2}\))** & **(\%)** & **(cm)** & **(g)** & **(g)** & **(\%)** \\ \hline
200 & 7.7 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 1.203 (60.9) & 6.56 \({}^{\text{c}}\)\(\pm\) 0.475 (53.2) & 0.464 \({}^{\text{c}}\)\(\pm\) 0.04 (71.8) & 0.062 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.004 (67.5) & 63.4 \\
150 & 11.3 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 1.766 (42.6) & 7.24 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.796 (48.3) & 0.552 \({}^{\text{c}}\)\(\pm\) 0.063 (66.5) & 0.087 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.007 (54.5) & 53 \\
100 & 10.7 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 2.03 (45.7) & 10.96 \({}^{\text{ab}}\)\(\pm\) 0.332 (21.8) & 1.125 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.081 (31.7) & 0.115 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 0.011 (39.8) & 34.7 \\
50 & 10.3 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 1.455 (47.7) & 12.58 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 1.348 (10.2) & 1.509 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.081 (8.3) & 0.190 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.018 (0.5) & 16.7 \\ Control & 19.7 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.334 (0.0) & 14.01 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 1.166 (0.0) & 1.646 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.095 (0.0) & 0.191 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.015 (0.0) & \\ \hline LSD\({}_{(0.05)}\) & 4.65 & 2.86 & 0.21 & \\ CV\({}_{(\%)}\) & 21.4 & 15.3 & 11.1 & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Inhibitory effects of _Arachis pintoi_ on the germination and growth of _Echinochla crus-galli_ under greenhouse conditions. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline
**Dose** & **Shoot Length** & **Fresh Weight** & **Dry Weight** & **AI** \\ \hline
**(g/m\({}^{2}\))** & **(cm)** & **(g)** & **(g)** & **(\%)** \\ \hline
200 & 41.98 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 5.489 (40.6) & 70.43 \({}^{\text{c}}\)\(\pm\) 6.649 (44.7) & 12.07 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 1.547 (46.4) & 43.9 \\
150 & 56.11 \({}^{\text{ab}}\)\(\pm\) 6.643 (20.6) & 87.80 \({}^{\text{b}}\)\(\pm\) 11.654 (31.1) & 16.80 \({}^{\text{ab}}\)\(\pm\) 2.841 (25.4) & 25.7 \\
100 & 62.50 \({}^{\text{ab}}\)\(\pm\) 7.103 (11.6) & 114.57 \({}^{\text{ab}}\)\(\pm\) 1.214 (10.1) & 20.10 \({}^{\text{ab}}\)\(\pm\) 0.625 (10.8) & 10.8 \\
50 & 69.86 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 2.352 (1.2) & 114.20 \({}^{\text{ab}}\)\(\pm\) 7.242 (10.4) & 23.90 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 2.918 (\(-\)6.1) & 1.8 \\ Control & 70.70 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 2.166 (0.0) & 127.47 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 6.12 (0.0) & 22.53 \({}^{\text{a}}\)\(\pm\) 0.339 (0.0) & \\ \hline LSD\({}_{(0.05)}\) & 16.3 & 23.1 & 6.2 & \\ CV\({}_{(\%)}\) & 14.9 & 12.4 & 17.9 & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Inhibitory effect of _Arachis pintoi_ against the growth of _Echinochloa crus-galli_ under field trials.