Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T03:46:52.269Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Altered weed reproduction and maternal effects under low-nitrogen fertility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kimberly D. Tungate ,
Michael G. Burton ,
David J. Susko ,
Shannon M. Sermons  and
Thomas W. Rufty
Kimberly D. Tungate
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
David J. Susko
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, University of Michigan-Dearborn, Dearborn, MI 48128
Shannon M. Sermons
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
Thomas W. Rufty
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The low-nitrogen status of highly weathered soils may offer a potential alternative for weed suppression in agricultural systems with N2-fixing crops. In this study, we used sicklepod as a model to evaluate weed response that might occur with managed reductions in nitrogen-soil fertility. A field study was conducted with the parental generation supplied 0, 112, 224, or 448 kg N ha−1. Decreased nitrogen fertility led to reduced shoot biomass, seed number, and total seed mass. Individual seed mass was lower, but seed % nitrogen was not affected. Analysis of seed-mass distribution confirmed that low parental fertility was associated with more small seeds as a proportion of total seeds produced. Additional experiments in hydroponics culture revealed slower growth rates of seedlings produced from small seeds when grown under low-nitrogen conditions. Competitiveness of plants from small (low nitrogen) and large (high nitrogen) seed classes was determined in a replacement-series experiment conducted in sand culture in a controlled environment at two densities and two levels of nitrogen nutrition. Plants produced from smaller seeds were less competitive in low-nitrogen fertility conditions, but plants from small and large seeds competed similarly when grown under high-nitrogen fertility. The results support the hypothesis that comprehensive management strategies to reduce nitrogen availability for weed growth in low-fertility conditions could decrease weed interference by decreasing growth and seed production of parental plants and through maternal effects that lower competitiveness of offspring.

Keywords

Sicklepod, Senna obtusifolia (L.) H.S. Irwin & Barneby CASOBCompetitioninterferencenitrogen
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 54 , Issue 5 , October 2006 , pp. 847 - 853
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.)

References

Literature Cited

Aarssen, L. W. and Burton, S. M. 1990. Maternal effects at 4 levels in Senecio vulgaris (Asteraceae) grown on a soil nutrient gradient. Am. J. Bot. 77:1231–1240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ankumah, R. O., Khan, V., Mwamba, K., and Kpomblekou-A, K. 2003. The influence of source and timing of nitrogen fertilizers on yield and nitrogen use efficiency of four sweet potato cultivars. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 100:201–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J. N. 1956. The influence of seed size and depth of sowing on pre-emergence and early vegetative growth of subterranean clover (Trifolium subterraneum L). Austr. J. Agric. Res. 7:98–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J. N. 1957. Seed size as a factor in the growth of subterranean clover (Trifolium subterraneum L.) under spaced and sward conditions. Austr. J. Agric. Res. 8:335–351.Google Scholar
Black, J. N. 1958. Competition between plants of different initial seed sizes in swards of subterranean clover (Trifolium subterraneum L.) with particular reference to leaf area and light microclimate. Austr. J. Agric. Res. 9:299–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E., Brandt, R. N., Janzen, H. H., Entz, T., Grant, C. A., and Derksen, D. A. 2003. Differential response of weed species to added nitrogen. Weed Sci. 51:532–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E., Semach, G., Li, X., O'Donovan, J. T., and Harker, K. N. 2000. Tillage, fertiliser and glyphosate timing effects on foxtail barley (Hordeum jubatum) management in wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 80:655–660.Google Scholar
Cideciyan, M. A. and Malloch, A. J. C. 1982. Effects of seed size on the germination, growth and competitive ability of Rumex crispus and Rumex obtusifolius . J. Ecol. 70:227–232.Google Scholar
Cousens, R. and Mortimer, M. 1995. The dynamics of geographic range expansion. Pages 21–54 in Dynamics of Weed Populations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
deWit, C. T. 1986. On competition. Evol. Monogr. 7:1–82.Google Scholar
DiTomaso, J. M. 1995. Approaches for improving crop competitiveness through the manipulation of fertilization strategies. Weed Sci. 43:491–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, R. J. and Thomas, J. F. 1991. Phytotron procedural manual. Raleigh, NC: N.C. State Univ. Technical Bulletin 244 (revised).Google Scholar
Fenner, M. 1993. Environmental influences on seed size and composition. Hort. Rev. 13:183–213.Google Scholar
Hendrix, S. D., Nielson, E., Nielson, T., and Schutt, M. 1991. Are seedlings from small seeds always inferior to seedlings from large seeds? Effects of seed biomass on seedling growth in Pastinaca sativa L. New Phytol. 119:299–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Israel, D. W. and Burton, J. W. 1997. Nitrogen nutrition of soybean grown in coastal plain soils of North Carolina. Raleigh, N.C.: N.C. State Univ. Technical Bulletin 310.Google Scholar
Jolliffe, P. A., Minjas, A. N., and Runeckles, V. C. 1984. A reinterpretation of yield relationships in replacement series experiments. J. Appl. Ecol. 21:227–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkland, K. J. and Beckie, H. J. 1998. Contribution of nitrogen fertilizer placement to weed management in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 12:507–514.Google Scholar
Marshall, D. L. 1986. Effect of seed size on seedling success in 3 species of Sesbania (Fabaceae). Am. J. Bot. 73:457–464.Google Scholar
Mesbah, A. O. and Miller, S. D. 1999. Fertilizer placement affects jointed goatgrass (Aegilops cylindrica) competition in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 13:374–377.Google Scholar
Naegle, E. R., Burton, J. W., Carter, T. E., and Rufty, T. W. 2005. Influence of seed nitrogen content on seedling growth and recovery from nitrogen stress. Plant Soil. 271:329–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parrish, J. A. D. and Bazzaz, F. A. 1985. Nutrient content of Abutilon theophrasti seeds and the competitive ability of the resulting plants. Oecologia. 65:247–251.Google Scholar
Roush, M. L., Radosevich, S. R., Wagner, R. G., Maxwell, B. D., and Petersen, T. D. 1989. A comparison of methods for measuring effects of density and proportion in plant competition experiments. Weed Sci. 37:268–275.Google Scholar
Stanton, M. L. 1984. Seed variation in wild radish: effect of seed size on components of seedling and adult fitness. Ecology. 65:1105–1112.Google Scholar
Stratton, D. A. 1989. Competition prolongs expression of maternal effects in seedlings of Erigeron annuus (Asteraceae). Am. J. Bot. 76:1646–1653.Google Scholar
Tungate, K. D., Susko, D. J., and Rufty, T. W. 2002. Reproduction and offspring competitiveness of Senna obtusifolia are influenced by nutrient availability. New Phytol. 154:661–669.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walck, J. L., Baskin, J. M., and Baskin, C. C. 1999. Relative competitive abilities and growth characteristics of a narrowly endemic and a geographically widespread Solidago species (Asteraceae). Am. J. Bot. 86:820–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, T. M. 2001. Weed survey—southern states: broadleaf crops subsection. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 54:244–259.Google Scholar
Weiner, J., Martinez, S., Müller-Schärer, H., Stoll, P., and Schmid, B. 1997. How important are environmental maternal effects in plants? A study with Centaurea maculosa . J. Ecol. 85:133–142.Google Scholar
Weis, I. M. 1982. The effects of propagule size on germination and seedling growth in Mirabilis hirsuta . Can. J. Bot. 60:1868–1874.Google Scholar
Wulff, R. D. 1995. Environmental maternal effects on seed quality and germination. Pages 491–505 in Kigel, J. and Galili, G. eds. Seed Development and Germination. New York: Marcel-Dekker.Google Scholar
Wulff, R. D. and Bazzaz, F. A. 1992. Effect of the parental nutrient regime on growth of the progeny in Abutilon theophrasti (Malvaceae). Am. J. Bot. 79:1102–1107.Google Scholar
Wulff, R. D., Cáceres, A., and Schmitt, J. 1994. Seed and seedling responses to maternal and offspring environments in Plantago lanceolata . Funct. Ecol. 8:763–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimdahl, R. L. 1999. Fundamentals of Weed Science. 2nd ed. San Diego: Academic Press. 556 p.Google Scholar