Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T14:52:55.477Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Use of Infrared Thermometry in Determining Critical Stress Periods Induced by Quackgrass (Agropyron repens) in Soybeans (Glycine max)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Peter H. Sikkema
Affiliation:
Crop Sci. Dep., Univ. Guelph, Ontario, Canada, NIG 2W1
Jack Dekker
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Iowa State Univ., Ames, IA 50011

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted during 1981 and 1982 in Ontario, Canada, on the effects of quackgrass [Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv. # AGRRE] interference in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] and the usefulness of infrared thermometry in predicting critical periods of weed interference. Soybean seed yield, dry weight, number of leaves, height, and number of pods were substantially reduced due to quackgrass interference. High levels of P and K fertility did not overcome the quackgrass interference. Part of the competitive effects of quackgrass was alleviated by irrigation. Infrared thermometry successfully detected the first occurrence of quackgrass-induced stress during the early soybean flowering stage, when the quackgrass was in the four-leaf gtowth stage. This coincided with the onset of the first significant soybean yield loss. No additional soybean yield loss occurred after quackgrass reached the five-leaf growth stage. There was an inverse relation between accumulated stress degree days and soybean yield reductions due to quackgrass interference. The use of the stress degree day concept may be a valuable tool in predicting soybean yield losses due to quackgrass interference.

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 by the 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.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Anonymous. 1982. 1982 Field Crop Recommendations. Ontario Ministry of Agric. and Food Publ. 296:4.Google Scholar
2. Bandeen, J. D. and Buchholtz, K. P. 1966. Competitive effects of quackgrass upon corn as modified by fertilization. Weed Sci. 14:220224.Google Scholar
3. Byrne, G. F., Begg, J. E., Fleming, P. M., and Dunin, F. X. 1979. Remotely sensed land cover temperature and soil water status — a brief review. Remote Sending of Environment. 8:291305.Google Scholar
4. Dekker, J. H., Meggitt, W. F., and Putnam, A. R. 1983. Experimental methodologies to evaluate allelopathic plant interactions: The Abutilon theophrastic — Glycine max model. J. Chem. Ecol. 9:945981.Google Scholar
5. Gabor, W. E. and Veatch, C. 1981. Isolation of a phytotoxin from quackgrass (Agropyron repens) rhizomes. Weed Sci. 29: 155159.Google Scholar
6. Hagood, E. S., Bauman, T. T., Williams, J. L. Jr., and Schreiber, M. M. 1980. Growth analysis of soybeans (Glycine max) in competition with velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 28:729734.Google Scholar
7. Hagood, E. S., Bauman, T. T., Williams, J. L. Jr., and Schreiber, M. M. 1981. Growth analysis of soybeans (Glycine max) in competition with Jimsonweed (Datura stramonium). Weed Sci. 29:500504.Google Scholar
8. Harvey, R. G. and Linscott, J. J. 1978. Ethylene production in soil containing quackgrass rhizomes and other plant materials. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 42:721724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Idso, S. B., Jackson, R. D., and Reginato, R. J. 1977. Remote-sending of crop yields. Canopy temperatures and albedo measurements have been quantitatively correlated with final harvests of wheat. Science 196:1924.Google Scholar
10. Fevre, C. W. Le and Clagett, C. O. 1960. Concentration of a growth inhibitor from Agropyron repens (quackgrass). Proc. Northeast. Weed Control Conf. 14:353356.Google Scholar
11. Lynch, J. M., Hall, K. C., Anderson, H. A., and Hepburn, A. 1980. Organic acids from the anaerobic decomposition of Agropyron repens rhizomes. Phytochemistry 19:18461847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. McWhorter, C. G. and Hartwig, E. E. 1972. Competition of johnsongrass and cocklebur with six soybean varieties. Weed Sci. 20:5659.Google Scholar
13. Ohman, J. H. and Kommedahl, T. 1960. Relative toxicity of extracts from vegetative organs of quackgrass to alfalfa. Weeds 8:666670.Google Scholar
14. Ohman, J. H. and Kommedahl, T. 1964. Plant extracts, residues, and soil minerals in relation to competition of quackgrass with oats and alfalfa. Weeds 12:222231.Google Scholar
15. Osvald, H. 1948. Toxic exudates from the roots of quackgrass. J. Ecol. 36:192193.Google Scholar
16. Page, A. L., ed. 1982. Methods of soil analysis. Part 2: Chemical and Microbiological Properties. American Society of Agronomy No. 9. 2nd ed. Google Scholar
17. Palmiter, D. H. 1959. Evidence of quackgrass toxicity to apple seedlings. Phytopathology 49:228229.Google Scholar
18. Pinter, P. J., Stanghellini, M. E., Reganito, R. J., Idso, S. B., Jenkins, A. D., and Jackson, R. D. 1979. Remote detection of biological stresses in plants with infrared thermometry. Science 205:585586.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. Rathmann, D. P. and Miller, S. D. 1981. Wild oat (Avena fatua) competition in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 29:410414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Staniforth, D. W. 1958. Soybean-foxtail competition under varying soil moisture conditions. Agron. J. 50:1315.Google Scholar
21. Vengris, J., Colby, W. G., and Drake, M. 1955. Plant nutrient competition between weeds and corn. Agron. J. 47:213215.Google Scholar
22. Walker, G. K. and Hatfield, J. L. 1979. Test of the stress-degree-day concept using multiple planting dates of red kidney beans. Agron. J. 71:967971.Google Scholar
23. Weber, C. R. and Staniforth, D. W. 1957. Competitive relationships in variable weed and soybean stands. Agron. J. 49:440444.Google Scholar
24. Welbank, P. J. 1961. A study of the nitrogen and water factors in competition with Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv. Ann. Bot. 25:116137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar