Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-d5ftd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-04T11:57:34.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lipid Deposition on Leaves of Canada Thistle Ecotypes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. M. Hodgson
J. M. Hodgson*
Affiliation:
Plant Sci. Res. Div., Agr. Res. Serv., U. S. Dep. Agr., Bozeman, MT. 59715
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The amount of lipid present on leaves of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop.) varied due to ecotype, site where grown, and date of sampling. Thistles from a site with the greatest wind movement and greatest evaporation produced the most lipid per unit area of leaf. The relative lipid yield of ecotypes was similar at different locations. Deposition of lipid on the leaves of Canada thistle increased from the early bud stage to the first bloom and late bloom stages of growth. The amount of lipid on the leaves and previous data on the response of these ecotypes to (2,4-dichlorophenoxy) acetic acid (2,4-D) were highly correlated. Three ecotypes with the most lipid were most resistant and four ecotypes with the least lipid were most susceptible to 2,4-D spray. Two ecotypes were inconsistent in that comparison.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , May 1973 , pp. 169 - 172
Copyright
Copyright © 1973 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

1. Bakke, A. L. 1947. Discussion of Canada thistle control. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Contr. Conf. 4:7–8.Google Scholar
2. Barnes, D. K., Pearce, R. B., Carlson, B. E., Hart, R. H., and Hanson, C. H. 1969. Specific leaf weight differences in alfalfa associated with variety and plant age. Crop Sci. 9:421–423.Google Scholar
3. Bucholtz, K. P. 1958. Variations in sensitivity of clones of quackgrass to dalapon. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Contr. Conf. 15:18–19.Google Scholar
4. Cooper, C. S. 1967. Morphology and chlorophyll content of shade and sun leaves of two legumes. Crop Sci. 7:672–673.Google Scholar
5. Clausen, J., Keck, D. D., and Hiesey, W. M. 1940. Experimental studies on the nature of species. 1. Effect of varied environments on Western North American plants. Carnegie Inst. Wash., Publ. No. 520, Washington, D.C. 450 pp.Google Scholar
6. Dethier, B. E. and Vittum, M. T. 1963. Growing degree days. New York State Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 801. Geneva, N.Y. 84 pp.Google Scholar
7. Hamilton, K. C. 1967. Response of Johnsongrass strains to herbicides. Pages 11–12 in West. Weed Contr. Conf. Res. Prog. Rep. Google Scholar
8. Hilton, J. L. and Christiansen, M. N. 1972. Lipid contribution to selective action of trifluralin. Weed Sci. 20: 290–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Hodgson, J. M. 1958. Canada thistle control with cultivation, cropping, and chemical sprays. Weeds 6:1–11.Google Scholar
10. Hodgson, J. M. 1964. Variations in ecotypes of Canada thistle. Weeds 12:167–171.Google Scholar
11. Hodgson, J. M. 1968. The nature, ecology, and control of Canada thistle. U.S. Dep. Agr. Tech. Bull. 1386. 32 pp.Google Scholar
12. Hodgson, J. M. 1970. The response of Canada thistle ecotypes to 2,4,D, amitrole, and intensive cultivation. Weed Sci. 18:253–255.Google Scholar
13. Hodgson, J. M. 1972. Stomatal variations in Canada thistle and response to herbicides. Weed Sci. 20:68–70.Google Scholar
14. Hull, H. M. 1948. The effect of day and night temperature on growth, foliar wax content and cuticle development of velvet mesquite. Weeds 6:133–142.Google Scholar
15. Juniper, B. E. and Bradley, D. E. 1958. The carbon replica technique in the study of the ultra-structure of leaf surfaces. J. Ultrastruct. Res. 2:16–17.Google Scholar
16. Leonard, O. A. and Crafts, A. S. 1956. Translocation of herbicides III. Uptake and distribution of radioactive 2,4-D by brush species. Hilgardia 26:366–415.Google Scholar
17. Rasmussen, L. W. 1956. The effect of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T applications on the stand density of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense Scop. Weeds 4:343–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Schieferstien, R. H. and Loomis, W. E. 1959. Development of the cuticular layers in angiosperms. Amer. J. Bot. 46:625–635.Google Scholar
19. Sexsmith, J. J. 1964. Morphological and herbicidal susceptibility differences among strains of hoary cress. Weeds 12:19–21.Google Scholar
20. Skoss, J. D. 1955. Structure and composition of plant cuticle in relation to environmental factors and permeability. Bot. Gaz. 117:55–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Smith, L. W., Bayer, D. E., and Foy, C. L. 1968. Metabolism of amitrole in excised leaves of Canada thistle ecotypes and bean. Weed Sci. 16:523–526.Google Scholar
22. Still, G. G., Davis, D. G., and Zander, G. L. 1970. Plant epicuticular lipids. Plant Physiol. 46:307–314.Google Scholar
23. Whitworth, J. W. and Muzik, T. J. 1967. Differential response of selected clones of bindweed to 2,4-D. Weeds 15: 275–280.Google Scholar