Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T18:21:33.022Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Possible Role of Glandular Trichome Exudates in Interference by Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Tracy M. Sterling  and
Alan R. Putnam
Tracy M. Sterling
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic. and Pestic. Res. Ctr., Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI 48824
Alan R. Putnam
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic. and Pestic. Res. Ctr., Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI 48824
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The glandular trichomes on velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medic. # ABUTH) stems and petioles exude liquid globules which are phytotoxic in petri plate bioassays. Because the exudate is easily removed with water, it was hypothesized that it may be washed from velvetleaf stems and petioles into the surrounding soil environment where it may exert allelopathic influences. Field and greenhouse studies attempted to separate the influence of exudates from other mechanisms of interference by removing exudates from some velvetleaf plants and not from others. Velvetleaf trichome exudates did not increase interference by velvetleaf in either field or greenhouse studies. A velvetleaf accession from Rosemount, MN, produced 1.4 times more exudate/stem dry weight than another accession from Stoneville, MS. However, the MS exudate was about 1.4 times more toxic in petri plate assays when compared to the MN exudate. Although greenhouse-grown plants had approximately 3.3 times more exudate/stem dry weight than field-grown plants, the field exudate was 1.6 times more toxic. The activity of velvetleaf exudates was also assayed in autoclaved and nonautoclaved soil. Although active in autoclaved soil, extract activity was lost at all but the highest dosage when the soil was not autoclaved. Microorganisms appear to rapidly detoxify the velvetleaf toxin(s) and may reduce or eliminate its impact in the field.

Keywords

SecretionallelopathyphytotoxicityGlycine maxABUTH
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , May 1987 , pp. 308 - 314
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. Aldrich, R. J. 1986. Interference between crops and weeds. ACS Symp. Ser. (In press).Google Scholar
2. Andersen, R. N., Menges, R. M., and Conn, J. S. 1985. Variability in velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and reproduction beyond its current range in North America. Weed Sci. 33:507–512.Google Scholar
3. Bhowmik, P. C. and Doll, J. D. 1982. Corn and soybean response to allelopathic effects of weed and crop residues. Agron. J. 74:601–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Chandler, J. M. 1977. Competition of spurred anoda, velvetleaf, prickly sida, and venice mallow in cotton. Weed Sci. 25:151–158.Google Scholar
5. Colton, C. E. and Einhellig, F. A. 1980. Allelopathic mechanisms of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medic., Malvaceae) on soybean. Am. J. Bot. 67:1407–1413.Google Scholar
6. Daday, H. 1965. Gene frequencies in wild populations of Trifolium repens L. IV. Mechanisms of natural selection. Heredity 20:355–365.Google Scholar
7. DeFelice, M. S., Witt, W. W., and Slack, C. H. 1984. Velvetleaf competition with conventional and no-tillage corn. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 39:45–46.Google Scholar
8. Dekker, J. H. and Meggitt, W. F. 1983. Interference between velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medic.) and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.]. I. Growth. Weed Res. 23:91–101.Google Scholar
9. Eaton, B. J., Russ, O. G., and Feltner, K. C. 1976. Competition of velvetleaf, prickly sida, and venice mallow in soybeans. Weed Sci. 24:224–228.Google Scholar
10. Elmore, C. D. 1980. Inhibition of turnip (Brassica rapa) seed germination by velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) seed. Weed Sci. 28:658–660.Google Scholar
11. Fay, P. D. and Duke, W. B. 1977. An assessment of allelopathic potential in Avena germplasm. Weed Sci. 25:224–228.Google Scholar
12. Fuerst, E. P. and Putnam, A. R. 1983. Separating competitive and allelopathic components of interference: Theoretical principles. J. Chem. Ecol. 9:937–944.Google Scholar
13. Gressel, J. B. and Holm, L. G. 1964. Chemical inhibition of crop germination by weed seeds and the nature of inhibition by Abutilon theophrasti . Weed Res. 4:44–53.Google Scholar
14. Hagood, E. S. Jr., 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. 28:729–734.Google Scholar
15. Hanover, J. W. 1966. Environmental variation in the monoterpenes of Pinus monoticola Dougl. Phytochemistry 5:713–717.Google Scholar
16. Harper, J. L. 1977. Population Biology of Plants. Academic Press, New York. 892 pp.Google Scholar
17. Hoagland, D. R. and Arnon, D. I. 1950. The water-culture method for growing plants without soil. Univ. Calif. Agric. Exp. Stn. Circ. 347. 32 pp.Google Scholar
18. Houtz, R. L., Putnam, A. R., and Ries, S. K. 1984. Allelopathic exudates from velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medic.) trichomes. WSSA Abstr. 24:150.Google Scholar
19. Oliver, L. R. 1979. Influence of soybean (Glycine max) planting date on velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) competition. Weed Sci. 27:183–188.Google Scholar
20. Putnam, A. R. and Duke, W. B. 1974. Biological suppression of weeds: Evidence for allelopathy in accessions of cucumber. Science 185:370–372.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21. Retig, B., Holm, L. G., and Struckmeyer, B. E. 1972. Effects of weeds on the anatomy of roots of cabbage and tomato. Weed Sci. 20:33–36.Google Scholar
22. Rice, E. L. 1984. Allelopathy. 2nd ed. Academic Press, New York. 422 pp.Google Scholar
23. Schweizer, E. E. and Bridge, L. D. 1982. Sunflower (Helianthus annuus) and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) interference in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris). Weed Sci. 30:514–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Staniforth, D. W. 1965. Competitive effects of three foxtail species on soybeans. Weeds 13:191–193.Google Scholar
25. Staniforth, D. W. and Weber, C. R. 1956. Effects of annual weeds on the growth and yield of soybeans. Agron. J. 48:467–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26. Steinbauer, F. P. and Grigsby, B. 1959. Methods of obtaining field and laboratory germination of seeds of bindweeds, lady's thumb and velvetleaf. Weeds 7:41–46.Google Scholar
27. Sterling, T. M., Houtz, R. L., and Putnam, A. R. 1987. Phytotoxic exudates from velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medic.) glandular trichomes. Am. J. Bot. (In press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Stoller, E. W. and Woolley, J. T. 1985. Competition for light by broadleaf weeds in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 33:199–202.Google Scholar