Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T17:13:21.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Temperature and Photoperiod on Growth and Development of Sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

David T. Patterson
David T. Patterson*
Affiliation:
U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv., Dep. Bot., Duke Univ., Durham, NC 27706
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sicklepod was grown in controlled-environment chambers in 16 day/night temperature regimes ranging from 19/11 to 34/26 C. Maximum dry weight, leaf area, plant height, node number, and leaf number after 46 d occurred at 29/26 and 34/26 C. Temperatures of 29/21 C or lower reduced dry weight by more than 50%. Leaf number, leaf weight, and leaf area were more sensitive to changes in day temperature, whereas plant height and root, stem, and total dry weight were more sensitive to night temperature. Dry matter production was more closely correlated with leaf area duration than with its other component, net assimilation rate. Leaf appearance rate and dry matter production were linearly related to average daily temperature. The low-temperature threshold for leaf production was 13 ± 1 C. Observations of plant development in photoperiods ranging from 10 to 16 h confirmed that sicklepod is a short-day plant with a critical day length of 13 to 14 h. No reproductive development occurred in photoperiods of 15 or 16 h. Seedlings that emerged in 10-h photoperiods required more than 1-wk exposure to short days to initiate and continue reproductive development. Plants from a North Carolina population flowered earlier than plants from a Florida population in photoperiods of 12, 13, or 14 h, but in an 11-h photoperiod the two populations flowered at the same time.

Keywords

Sicklepod, Cassia obtusifolia L. # CASOBGrowth analysisphenologyCASOB
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 41 , Issue 4 , December 1993 , pp. 574 - 582
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 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. Creel, J. M. Jr., Hoveland, C. S., and Buchanan, G. A. 1968. Germination, growth and ecology of sicklepod. Weed Sci. 16:396–400.Google Scholar
2. Downs, R. J. and Hellmers, H. 1975. Environment and the Experimental Control of Plant Growth. Academic Press, New York. Page 112.Google Scholar
3. Flint, E. P., Patterson, D. T., Mortesen, D. A., Reichers, G. H., and Beyers, J. L. 1984. Temperature effects on growth and leaf production in three weed species. Weed Sci. 32:655–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Holm, L., Pancho, J. V., Herberger, J. P., and Plucknett, D. L. 1979. Pages 70–71 in A Geographical Atlas of World Weeds. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
5. Irwin, H. S. and Barneby, R. C. 1982. The American Cassinae. A synoptical revision of Leguminosae tribe Cassieae subtribe Cassiinae in the New World. Mem. N. Y. Bot. Gard. Vol. 35, pt. 1. Pages 252–255.Google Scholar
6. Isely, D. 1990. Vascular Flora of the Southeastern United States. Vol. 3, pt. 2. Leguminosae (Fabaceae). Univ. of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. Page 37.Google Scholar
7. Kropff, M. J., Weaver, S. E., and Smits, M. A. 1992. Use of ecophysiological models for crop-weed interference: Relations among weed density, relative time of weed emergence, relative leaf area, and yield loss. Weed Sci. 40:296–301.Google Scholar
8. Kvet, J., Ondok, J. P., Necas, J., and Jarvis, P. G. 1971. Methods of growth analysis. Pages 343–391 in Sestak, Z., Catsky, J., and Jarvis, P. G., eds. Plant Photosynthetic Production. Manual of Methods. W. Junk, The Hague.Google Scholar
9. Patterson, D. T. 1990. Effects of day and night temperature on vegetative growth of Texas panicum (Panicum texanum). Weed Sci. 38:365–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Patterson, D. T. 1992. Effects of photoperiod on vegetative growth and reproductive development of northern and southern biotypes of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia). WSSA Abstr. 32:159.Google Scholar
11. Patterson, D. T. and Flint, E. P. 1990. Implications of increasing carbon dioxide and climate change for plant communities and competition in natural and managed ecosystems. Pages 83–110 in Kimball, B. A., Rosenberg, N. J., and Allen, L. H. Jr., eds. Impact of Carbon Dioxide, Trace Gases, and Climate Change on Global Agriculture. ASA Spec. Publ. No. 53. Am. Soc. Agron., Inc., Madison, WI.Google Scholar
12. Retzinger, E. J. Jr. 1984. Growth and development of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) selections. Weed Sci. 32:608–611.Google Scholar
13. Schreiber, M. M. 1982. Modeling the biology of weeds for integrated weed management. Weed Sci. 30(suppl.):13–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Teem, D. H., Hoveland, C. S., and Buchanan, G. A. 1980. Sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) and coffee senna (Cassia occidentalis) geographic distribution, germination, and emergence. Weed Sci. 28:68–71.Google Scholar
15. Vince-Prue, D. 1975. Photoperiodism in Plants. McGraw-Hill, London. 444 pages.Google Scholar
16. Weaver, S. B., Kropff, M. J., and Groeneveld, R.M.W. 1992. Use of ecophysiological models for crop-weed interference: The critical period of weed interference. Weed Sci. 40:302–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Wilkerson, G. G., Jones, J. W., Coble, H. D., and Gunsolus, J. L. 1990. SOYWEED: A simulation model of soybean and common cocklebur growth and competition. Agron. J. 82:1003–1010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar