Author
Listed:
- Felix U. Sansaet Jr.
(Davao Oriental State University)
- Daisy M. Jarical
(Davao Oriental State University)
- Daniel J. Baldoz Jr
(Davao Oriental State University)
- Erwin C. Copas
(Davao Oriental State University)
- Erwin C. Copas
(Davao Oriental State University)
- Renee Rose Y. Saylan
(Davao Oriental State University)
Abstract
This study evaluated the herbicidal efficacy of aqueous extracts from different parts of Chromolaena odorata (L.) enhanced with coconut vinegar for the control of common weeds under field conditions. Specifically, the study aimed to determine which plant part (leaves, roots, or stems) exhibited the greatest weed control efficacy compared with a positive control (sterile distilled water) and a negative control (glyphosate). The experiment was conducted using a Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with five treatments and three replications. The treatments consisted of T1 – Sterile Distilled Water (positive control), T2 – C. odorata leaves + coconut vinegar + sterile distilled water, T3 – C. odorata roots + coconut vinegar + sterile distilled water, T4 – C. odorata stems + coconut vinegar + sterile distilled water, and T5 – Glyphosate (negative control). Results showed that the C. odorata-based formulations significantly suppressed weed growth compared with the untreated control. Seven days after application, Treatment 2 recorded the highest weed control rating among the botanical treatments (7.33 ± 0.58), followed by Treatment 4 (7.00 ± 1.00) and Treatment 3 (6.67 ± 1.15), while glyphosate achieved a mean rating of 8.00 ± 0.00. Fourteen days after application, weed control ratings declined for the botanical treatments, with Treatment 2 recording 5.33 ± 0.58, Treatment 4 recording 5.00 ± 1.00, and Treatment 3 recording 4.67 ± 0.58, whereas glyphosate achieved complete weed control (10.00 ± 0.00). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed highly significant differences among treatments at both evaluation periods (p < 0.001). Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test indicated that all C. odorata-based treatments significantly outperformed the untreated control, while no significant differences were observed among the leaf, root, and stem extracts. However, glyphosate provided significantly greater weed control than the botanical formulations after 14 days. Among the weed species evaluated, Cleome rutidosperma was the most susceptible to the C. odorata extracts, whereas Physalis angulata was the least affected. The findings demonstrate that aqueous extracts of C. odorata enhanced with coconut vinegar possess promising herbicidal activity and can effectively suppress common weeds, particularly during the early stages of weed growth. Although their efficacy was lower than that of glyphosate over time, the comparable performance of the leaf, root, and stem extracts suggests that allelopathic compounds are distributed throughout the plant. These results highlight the potential of C. odorata as a sustainable botanical herbicide and provide a basis for further optimization of formulation, concentration, and application strategies for integrated weed management.
Suggested Citation
Felix U. Sansaet Jr. & Daisy M. Jarical & Daniel J. Baldoz Jr & Erwin C. Copas & Erwin C. Copas & Renee Rose Y. Saylan, 2026.
"Efficacy Trial of Chromolaena odorata and Coconut Vinegar as an Alternative Herbicide,"
International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science, RSIS International, vol. 15(6), pages 2120-2129, July.
Handle:
RePEc:bjf:ijltem:v:15:y:2026:i:6:a:2973
DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2026.150600152
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bjf:ijltem:v:15:y:2026:i:6:a:2973. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dr. Pawan Verma (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.ijltemas.in/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.