Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T18:46:52.765Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) seed shattering in wheat, corn, and soybean

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2020

Marie-Josée Simard Open the ORCID record for Marie-Josée Simard [Opens in a new window] ,
Robert E. Nurse ,
Eric R. Page  and
Gaétan Bourgeois
Marie-Josée Simard*
Affiliation:
Research Scientist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu Research and Development Centre, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, QC, Canada
Robert E. Nurse
Affiliation:
Research Scientist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Harrow Research and Development Centre, Harrow, ON, Canada
Eric R. Page
Affiliation:
Research Scientist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Harrow Research and Development Centre, Harrow, ON, Canada
Gaétan Bourgeois
Affiliation:
Research Scientist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu Research and Development Centre, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, QC, Canada
*
Author for correspondence: Marie-Josée Simard, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu Research and Development Centre, 430 Gouin Boulevard, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, QCJ3B 3E6, Canada. (Email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Before any late-season weed control operations are planned to manage herbicide-resistant weeds, it is essential to evaluate the plants’ maturity and shattering potential. Our goal was to assess the seed-shattering phenology of common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) using pollination bags as seed traps. A secondary goal was to evaluate the efficiency of these traps. Trials were conducted from 2014 to 2017 at two locations in eastern Canada (Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, QC, and Harrow, ON). At each location, three adjacent fields were seeded with spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.], or corn (Zea mays L.). Each field was divided into four replicate blocks that included two treatment plots with 5 weeds m−2 planted on the same date as the crop or when crop plants had two leaves (early or late emergence). To evaluate shattering in time, the experiment included up to 12 weekly collection dates (subplots). In each subplot, weeds were individually bagged at flowering (using mesh bags) until collection, when the number and viability of shattered and retained seeds per plant was recorded. Weather data as well as crop and weed stages were recorded. The effect of the pollen bags on seed retrieval and viability was evaluated by installing open and closed bags in corn and uncropped (bare) plots at a single location. Ambrosia artemisiifolia seed biomass was equivalent or higher in closed bags, and seed viability was equivalent or slightly reduced. No seeds were produced before harvest in spring wheat, as dispersal started in September. The percentage of seeds retained on the plant decreased linearly (1 site-year) or followed a logistic equation (4 site-years) with day of year or growing degree days. Dispersal in time was similar between early- and late-emerging weeds and similar in both corn and soybean. On average, more than 50% of A. artemisiifolia seeds were dispersed before harvest in corn and soybean.

Keywords

Phenologyseed productionseed retentionshattered seedsweed seed management
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 68 , Issue 5 , September 2020 , pp. 510 - 516
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2020

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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Mithila Jugulam, Kansas State University

References

Allard, HA (1945) Flowering behavior and natural distribution of the eastern ragweeds (Ambrosia) as affected by length of day. Ecology 26:387–39410.2307/1931660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[AOSA/SCST] Association of Official Seed Analysts and the Society of Commercial Seed Technologists (2010) Tetrazolium Testing Handbook. 2010 ed. Fort Collins, CO: AOSA/SCSTGoogle Scholar
Bae, J, Nurse, RE, Simard, MJ, Page, ER (2017) Managing glyphosate-resistant common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia): effect of glyphosate-phenoxy tank mixes on growth, fecundity, and seed viability. Weed Sci 65:31–4010.1614/WS-D-16-00094.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassett, IJ, Crompton, RW (1975) The biology of Canadian weeds. 11. Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. and A. psilostachya DC. Can J Plant Sci 55:463–47610.4141/cjps75-072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassett, IJ, Holmes, RM, Mac-Kay, KH (1961) Phenology of several plant species at Ottawa, Ontario, and an examination of the influence of air temperatures. Can J Plant Sci 41:643–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Datta, A, Ullah, H, Tursun, N, Pornprom, T, Knezevic, SZ, Chauhan, BS (2017) Managing weeds using crop competition in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.]. Crop Prot 95:60–6810.1016/j.cropro.2016.09.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, AS (2008) Weed seed pools concurrent with corn and soybean harvest in Illinois. Weed Sci 56:503–50810.1614/WS-07-195.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deen, W, Hunt, T, Swanton, CJ (1998a) Influence of temperature, photoperiod, and irradiance on the phenological development of common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia). Weed Sci 46:555–56010.1017/S0043174500091098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deen, W, Hunt, LA, Swanton, CJ (1998b) Photothermal time describes common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) phenological development and growth. Weed Sci 46:561–56810.1017/S0043174500091104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeSousa, N, Griffiths, JT, Swanton, CJ (2003) Predispersal seed predation of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus). Weed Sci 51:60–6810.1614/0043-1745(2003)051[0060:PSPORP]2.0.CO;2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forcella, F, Peterson, DH, Barbour, JC (1996) Timing and measurement of weed seed shed in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 10:535–54310.1017/S0890037X00040409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, J, Barrett, SCH (2008) High outcrossing in the annual colonizing species Ambrosia artemisiifolia (Asteraceae) Ann Bot 101:1303–130910.1093/aob/mcn039CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ganie, Z, Kaur, S, Jha, P, Kumar, V, Jhala, A (2018) Effect of late-season herbicide applications on inflorescence and seed production of glyphosate-resistant giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida). Weed Technol 32:159–16510.1017/wet.2017.101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Genton, BJ, Shykoff, JA, Giraud, T (2005) High genetic diversity in French invasive populations of common ragweed, Ambrosia artemisiifolia, as a result of multiple sources of introduction. Mol Ecol 14:4275–428510.1111/j.1365-294X.2005.02750.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, JM (2014) Current state of herbicides in herbicide-resistant crops. Pest Manag Sci 70:1351–1357CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heap, I (2020) The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. http://weedscience.com. Accessed: February 18, 2020Google Scholar
Keisling, TC (1982) Calculation of the length of day. Agron J 74:758–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, SZ, Evans, SP, Blankenship, EE, Van Acker, RC, Lindquist, JL (2002) Critical period for weed control: the concept and data analysis. Weed Sci 50:773–78610.1614/0043-1745(2002)050[0773:CPFWCT]2.0.CO;2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kollmann, J, Goetze, D (1998) Notes on seed traps in terrestrial plant communities. Flora 193:31–4010.1016/S0367-2530(17)30813-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kralemann, LEM, Scalone, R, Andersson, L, Hennig, L (2018) North European invasion by common ragweed is associated with early flowering and dominant changes in FT/TFL1 expression. J Exp Bot 69:2647–2658CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Longchamps, L, Panneton, B, Simard, M-J, Leroux, GD (2014) An imagery based weed cover threshold established using expert knowledge. Weed Sci 62:177–18510.1614/WS-D-13-00050.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, MD, Olsen, MT, Samaniego, JA, Zimmer, EA, Gilbert, MTP (2016) The population genomic basis of geographic differentiation in North American common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.). Ecol Evol 6:3760–377110.1002/ece3.2143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCanny, SJ, Cavers, PB (1988) Spread of proso millet (Panicum miliaceum L.) in Ontario Canada: II. Dispersal by combines. Weed Res 28:67–7210.1111/j.1365-3180.1988.tb00788.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mortensen, DA, Egan, JF, Maxwell, BD, Ryan, MR, Smith, RG (2012) Navigating a critical juncture for sustainable weed management. BioScience 62:75–8410.1525/bio.2012.62.1.12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nurse, RE, Booth, BD, Swanton, CJ (2003) Predispersal seed predation of Amaranthus retroflexus and Chenopodium album growing in soyabean fields. Weed Res 43:260–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickering, RA (1982) The effect of pollination bag type on seed quality and size in Hordeum inter- and intraspecific hybridization. Euphytica 31:439–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plouffe, D, Bourgeois, G, Beaudry, N, Chouinard, G, Choquette, D (2018) CIPRA–Centre Informatique de Prévision des Ravageurs en Agriculture: Guide des cultures. Ottawa: Agriculture et Agroalimentaire Canada Bulletin technique A42-119/2018F-PDF. 202 pGoogle Scholar
R Development Core Team (2019) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.orgGoogle Scholar
Rinella, MJ, Haferkamp, MR, Masters, RA, Muscha, JM, Bellows, SE, Vermeire, LT (2010) Growth regulator herbicides prevent invasive annual grass seed production. Invasive Plant Sci Manag 3:12–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, JA, Elliott, KA, Gonzalez-Carranza, ZH (2002) Abscission, dehiscence, and other cell separation processes Annu Rev Plant Biol 53:131–5810.1146/annurev.arplant.53.092701.180236CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scalone, R, Lemke, A, Štefanić, E, Kolseth, AK, Rašić, S, Andersson, L (2016) Phenological variation in Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. facilitates near future establishment at northern latitudes. PLoS ONE 11:e0166510CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schaffert, RE, Virk, DS, Senior, H (2016) Comparing pollination control bag types for sorghum seed harvest. J Plant Breed Crop Sci 8:126–137Google Scholar
Schwartz-Lazaro, LM, Norsworthy, JK, Walsh, MJ, Bagavathiannan, MV (2017) Efficacy of the Integrated Harrington Seed Destructor on weeds of soybean and rice production systems in the southern United States. Crop Sci 57:2812–2818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shirtliffe, SJ, Entz, MH (2005) Chaff collection reduces seed dispersal of wild oat (Avena fatua) by a combine harvester. Weed Sci 53:465–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simard, M-J, Panneton, B, Longchamps, L, Lemieux, C, Légère, A, Leroux, GD (2009) Validation of a management program based on a weed cover threshold model: effect on herbicide use and weed populations. Weed Sci 57:187–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simard, M-J, Benoit, DL (2012) Potential pollen and seed production of early- and late-emerging ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) plants in corn and soybean. Weed Technol 26:510–51610.1614/WT-D-11-00178.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statistics Canada (2019) Table 001-0017–Estimated Areas, Yield, Production and Average Farm Price of Principal Field Crops, in Metric Units, Annual. https://soycanada.ca/statistics/seeded-area-acres. Accessed: February 18, 2020Google Scholar
Stinson, KA, Albertine, JM, Hancock, LM, Seidler, TG, Rogers, CA (2016) Northern ragweed ecotypes flower earlier and longer in response to elevated CO2: what are you sneezing at? Oecologia 182:587–59410.1007/s00442-016-3670-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stinson, KA, Wheeler, JA, Record, S, Jennings, JL (2018) Regional variation in timing, duration, and production of flowers by allergenic ragweed. Plant Ecol 219:1081–1092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strom, SA, Gonzini, LC, Mitsdarfer, C, Davis, AS, Riechers, DE, Hager, AG (2019) Characterization of multiple herbicide–resistant waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) populations from Illinois to VLCFA-Inhibiting herbicides. Weed Sci 67:369–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TeKrony, TM, Egli, DB (1997) Accumulation of seed vigour during development and maturation. Pages 369–384 in Ellis RH, Black M, Murdoch AJ, Hong TD, eds. Basic and Applied Aspects of Seed Biology. Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Seeds, Reading, 1995. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer AcademicCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tidemann, BD, Hall, LM, Harker, KN, Beckie, HJ (2017) Factors affecting weed seed devitalization with the Harrington Seed Destructor. Weed Sci 65:650–65810.1017/wsc.2017.23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, MJ, Broster, JC, Schwartz-Lazaro, LM, Norsworthy, JK, Davis, AS, Tidemann, BD, Beckie, HJ, Lyon, DJ, Soni, N, Neve, P, Bagavathiannan, MV (2018) Opportunities and challenges for harvest weed seed control in global cropping systems. Pest Manag Sci 74:2235–224510.1002/ps.4802CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walsh, MJ, Harrington, RB, Powles, SB (2012) Harrington Seed Destructor: a new nonchemical weed control tool for global grain crops. Crop Sci 52:1343–134710.2135/cropsci2011.11.0608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walsh, MJ, Newman, P, Powles, SB (2013) Targeting weed seeds in-crop: a new weed control paradigm for global agriculture. Weed Technol 27:431–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weaver, SE (2001) Impact of lamb’s-quarters, common ragweed and green foxtail on yield of corn and soybean in Ontario. Can J Plant Sci 81:821–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar