Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-npwhs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T06:14:47.062Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors Affecting Seed Germination of Perennial Wall Rocket (Diplotaxis tenuifolia) in Southern Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Samuel G. L. Kleemann ,
Bhagirath S. Chauhan  and
Gurjeet S. Gill
Samuel G. L. Kleemann*
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Food and Wine, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy Campus, South Australia, Australia 5371
Bhagirath S. Chauhan
Affiliation:
International Rice Research Institute, Los Banos, Laguna, Philippines
Gurjeet S. Gill
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Food and Wine, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy Campus, South Australia, Australia 5371
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: samuel.kleemann@adelaide.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Germination response of perennial wall rocket to temperature, light, osmotic potential, and depth of burial emergence was evaluated under controlled environmental conditions. The effect of seed burial depth on seedling recruitment in the field was also investigated at Roseworthy, South Australia. Under optimal conditions (30 C, light/dark) germination of perennial wall rocket was rapid, with 90% of seeds germinating within 48 h of imbibition. Germination was reduced (20%) at lower, suboptimal temperatures (10 to 20 C) when seeds of perennial wall rocket were exposed to light. Germination declined with increasing osmotic potential and was completely inhibited at osmotic potentials of −1.5 MPa. Perennial wall rocket emergence was greatest from seeds placed on the soil surface, but some seedlings (< 10%) emerged from a depth of 0.5 to 2 cm. Under both field and growth-cabinet conditions, the greatest seedling emergence of perennial wall rocket occurred from seed present on the soil surface; however, the level of absolute recruitment from the seed bank was much lower (< 5%). Information gained from this study will further improve our understanding of the germination behavior of perennial wall rocket and contribute to developing sustainable strategies for its control.

Keywords

Perennial wall rocket, Diplotaxis tenuifolia (L.) DC. DIPTELighttemperatureosmotic potentialburial depthseedling recruitmentweed biology

Information

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 55 , Issue 5 , October 2007 , pp. 481 - 485
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Caso, O. H. 1976. Physiology of the regeneration process of Diplotaxis tenuifolia . Malezas. 5 (1):8–19.Google Scholar
Chauhan, B. S., Gill, G., and Preston, C. 2006a. African mustard (Brassica tournefortii) germination in southern Australia. Weed Sci. 54:891–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chauhan, B. S., Gill, G., and Preston, C. 2006b. Influence of environmental factors on seed germination and seedling emergence of Oriental mustard (Sisymbrium orientale). Weed Sci. 54:1025–1031.Google Scholar
Clements, D. R., Benoit, D. L., Murphy, S. D., and Swanton, C. J. 1996. Tillage effects on weed seed return and seedbank composition. Weed Sci. 44:314–322.Google Scholar
Cousens, R. D., Baweja, R., Vaths, J., and Schofield, M. 1993. Comparative biology of cruciferous weeds: a preliminary study. in. Proceedings of the 10th Australian and 14th Asian-Pacific Weed Conference. 376–380. Brisbane, Australia: Weed Society of Queensland.Google Scholar
Froud-Williams, R. J., Chancellor, R. J., and Drennan, D. S. H. 1984. The effects of seed burial and soil disturbance on emergence and survival of arable weeds in relation to minimal cultivation. App. Ecol. 21:629–641.Google Scholar
Genstat 5 Committee 1993. Genstat 5, Release 3, Reference Manual. Oxford, UK Clarendon.Google Scholar
Ghosheh, H. and Al-Hajaj, N. 2005. Weed seed bank response to tillage and crop rotation in a semi-arid environment. Soil Tillage Res. 84:184–191.Google Scholar
Jessop, J. P. and Toelken, H. R. 1986. Flora of South Australia. Part 1. Adelaide Government Printer. 391–392.Google Scholar
Michel, B. E. 1983. Evaluation of the water potentials of solutions of poly-ethylene glycol 8000 both in the absence and presence of other solutes. Plant Physiol. 72:66–70.Google Scholar
Moerkerk, M. 2006. Weed Identification and Management. http://weedman.horsham.net.au.Google Scholar
Parsons, W. T. and Cuthbertson, E. G. 1992. Noxious weeds of Australia. Melbourne Inkata Press. 342–344.Google Scholar
Perez-Garcia, F., Iriondo, J. M., and Martinez-Laborde, J. B. 1995. Germination behaviour in seeds of Diplotaxis erucoides and D. virgata . Weed Res. 35:495–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preston, C. 2006. Resistance to acetolactate synthase-inhibiting herbicides in Diplotaxis tenuifolia (L.) DC. in. Proceedings of the 15th Australian Weeds Conference. 526–529. Adelaide Weed Management Society of South Australia.Google Scholar
Ray, J., Creamer, R., Schroeder, J., and Murray, L. 2005. Moisture and temperature requirements for London rocket (Sisymbrium irio) emergence. Weed Sci. 53:187–192.Google Scholar
Yenish, J. P., Doll, J. D., and Buhler, D. D. 1992. Effects of vertical distribution and viability of weed seed in soil. Weed Sci. 40:429–433.Google Scholar