Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T23:45:58.538Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competition between maize and Rottboellia exaltata

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

P. E. L. Thomas  and
J. C. S. Allison
P. E. L. Thomas
Affiliation:
Henderson Research Station, Private Bag 222 A, Salisbury, Rhodesia
J. C. S. Allison
Affiliation:
Department of Agriculture, University of Rhodesia, Salisbury, Rhodesia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

One pot and five field experiments were made to study different aspects of the competition between R. exaltata and maize.

The growth of young maize plants was not inhibited by being grown together in pots with young R. exaltata plants. In the field the soil tended to be somewhat wetter when the two species were grown together than when maize was grown alone, and was wettest with R. exaltata grown alone. Maize grain and total yield decreased and shoot yield of R. exaltata increased with R. exaltata plant density on both irrigated and unirrigated blocks of land, but yields were not much affected on either block by increase in plant density of maize or in nitrogen supply; maize yield was increased by irrigation but that of R. exaltata was not. Maize plant arrangement did not greatly affect maize grain and total yield or R. exaltata shoot yield, nor did arrangement of R. exaltata plants have much influence on their depression of maize yield, but R. exaltata caused a greater decrease in the grain yield of a short than of a tall maize cultivar.

R. exaltata plants germinating at the same time as the crop plants did not have much effect on maize grain yield if they were removed by 8 weeks after the seedlings emerged, but decreased it considerably if allowed to remain for 12 weeks or more; weeds sown 2 or more weeks after the maize emerged hardly grew and had little effect on maize yield. When maize and R. exaltata were grown together leaf area of the maize was little affected up to the time of flowering, but was decreased after flowering, while leaf area of the weed was greatly depressed. Up to 7–8 weeks after seedling emergence more of the ground area was covered by foliage when maize was grown with R. exaltata than when it was grown alone, but later the ground was completely covered by foliage in both cases. Dry weight of grain and shoot of maize increased and that of shoot of R. exaltata decreased when the weed plants were shortened with growth regulators.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 84 , Issue 2 , April 1975 , pp. 305 - 312
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1975

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

REFERENCES

Allison, J. C. S. (1969). Effect of plant population on the production and distribution of dry matter in maize. Annals of Applied Biology 63, 135–44.Google Scholar
Allison, J. C. S. & Watson, D. J. (1966). The production and distribution of dry matter in maize after flowering. Annals of Botany 30, 365–81.Google Scholar
Bor, N. L. (1960). Grasses of Burma, Geylon, India and Pakistan (excluding Bambuseae). London: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Cackett, K. E. (1964). A simple device for measuring canopy cover. Rhodesian Journal of Agricultural Research 2, 56.Google Scholar
Cackett, K. E. & Metelerkamp, H. R. R. (1964). Evapotranspiration of maize in relation to open-pan evaporation and crop development. Rhodesian Journal of Agricultural Research 2, 35–44.Google Scholar
Donald, C. M. (1963). Competition among crop and pasture plants. Advances in Agronomy 15, 1–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downey, L. A. (1971). Water use by maize at three plant densities. Experimental Agriculture 7, 161–69.Google Scholar
Holm, L. R. & Herberger, J. (1970). Weeds of tropical crops. Proceedings of the Tenth British Weed Control Conference, pp. 1132–49.Google Scholar
Lemon, E. (1969). Gaseous exchange in crop stands. In Physiological Aspects of Crop Yield (ed. Eastin, J. D., Haskins, F. A., Sullivan, C. Y. and Bavel, C. H. M. van). Madison: American Society of Agronomy.Google Scholar
Milthorpe, F. L. (1961). The nature and analysis of competition between plants of different species. In Mechanisms in Biological Competition. Symposia of the Society for Experimental Biology, no. 15. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Moss, D. N. & Stinson, H. T. (1961). Differential response of corn hybrids to shade. Crop Science 1, 416–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, P. E. L. (1970). A survey of the weeds of arable lands in Rhodesia. Rhodesia Agricultural Journal 67, 3–4.Google Scholar
Wild, H. (1955). Common Rhodesian Weeds. Salisbury: Government Printer.Google Scholar
Wilson, J. H. (1968). Effects of severe soil moisture stress imposed at different stages of growth on grain yields of maize. Rhodesian Journal of Agricultural Research 6, 103–5.Google Scholar