Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T06:05:42.232Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Common Waterplantain (Alisma triviale) Interference with Wild Rice (Zizania palustris)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. K. Ransom  and
E. A. Oelke
J. K. Ransom
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Plant Genetics, Univ. of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
E. A. Oelke
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. and Plant Genetics, Univ. of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Three cultivars of wild rice (Zizania palustris L.) were grown with various densities of common waterplantain (Alisma triviale Pursh) established from seeds and from rootstocks during 1979 and 1980. Wild rice cultivars did not differ in their response to common waterplantain interference. Common waterplantain grown from seeds at densities up to 82/m2 did not significantly reduce wild rice yield. Common waterplantain established from rootstocks significantly reduced wild rice yield at densities as low as 3/m2. A density of 43/m2 reduced wild rice yield by 91%. The yield component most susceptible to interference from common waterplantain was panicles per plant. The number of seeds per panicle was reduced by densities as low as 11/m2 and seed weight was reduced by densities of 22/m2 or greater. Only a density of 43/m2 reduced the stand of wild rice. Common waterplantain established from rootstocks at a density of 17 plants/m2 did not reduce wild rice yield if removed by 7 weeks after planting. Interference from common waterplantain for 9 weeks or longer reduced wild rice yield by approximately 50%.

Keywords

Competitionyield
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 30 , Issue 1 , January 1982 , pp. 10 - 14
Copyright
Copyright © 1982 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. Burnside, O. C. 1972. Tolerance of soybean cultivars to weed competition and herbicides. Weed Sci. 20:294–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Fisher, R. A. 1975. Yield potential in a dwarf spring wheat and the effect of shading. Crop Sci. 15:607–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Guneyli, E., Burnside, O. C., and Nordquist, P. T. 1969. Influence of seedling characteristics on weed competitive ability of sorghum hybrids and inbred lines. Crop Sci. 9:713–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Muenscher, W. C. 1936. Storage and germination of aquatic plants. Cornell Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. No. 652. 17 pp.Google Scholar
5. Oelke, Ervin. 1977. Harvesting wild rice grown as a field crop. Univ. of Minnesota Agric. Ext. Folder 344. 4 pp.Google Scholar
6. Smith, O. D., Kleese, R. A., and Stuthman, D. D. 1970. Competition among oat varieties grown in hill plots. Crop Sci. 10:381–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Smith, R. J. Jr. 1974. Competition of barnyardgrass with rice cultivars. Weed Sci. 22:423–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Smith, R. J., Flichum, W. T., and Seaman, D. E. 1977. Weed control in U.S. rice production. U.S. Dep. Agric, Agric. Handbook 497. 78 pp.Google Scholar
9. Steeves, T. A. 1952. Wild rice – Indian food and a modern delicacy. Econ. Bot. 6:107–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Vesecky, J. F., Feltner, K. C., and Vanderlip, R. L. 1973. Wild cane and forage sorghum competition in grain sorghum. Weed Sci. 21:28–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar