Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T19:21:01.372Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Corn-Induced Shading and Temperature on Rate of Leaf Appearance in Redroot Pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Stephane M. Mclachlan ,
Clarence J. Swanton ,
Stephan F. Weise  and
Matthijs Tollenaar
Stephane M. Mclachlan
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada
Clarence J. Swanton
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada
Stephan F. Weise
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada
Matthijs Tollenaar
Affiliation:
Dep. Crop Sci., Univ. Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Leaf development and expansion are important factors in determining the outcome of crop-weed interference. The comparative effects of temperature and corn canopy-induced shading on the rate of leaf appearance (RLA) of redroot pigweed were quantified in this study. Growth cabinet results indicated a linear increase in RLA with increased temperature. Weed RLA was predicted utilizing both this function and field temperature data. The ratio of observed to predicted RLA of redroot pigweed grown in field experiments decreased in 1990 and 1991 as shading increased with increased corn density and delayed weed planting date. Results indicated that RLA is substantially affected by canopy-induced shading in addition to temperature.

Keywords

Redroot pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus L. # AMAREcorn, Zea mays L., ‘Pioneer 3902’wheat, Triticum aestivum L.barley, Hordeum vulgare L.PhenologyirradiancelightsimulationAMARE
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 41 , Issue 4 , December 1993 , pp. 590 - 593
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. Alm, D. M., Pike, D. R., Hesketh, J. D., and Stoller, E. W. 1988. Leaf area development in some crop and weed species. Biontronics 17:29–39.Google Scholar
2. Anonymous. 1991. Field Crop Recommendations. Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food. Publ. 296. 92 pp.Google Scholar
3. Baker, C. K., Gallagher, J. N., and Monteith, J. L. 1980. Daylength change and leaf appearance in winter wheat. Plant Cell Environ. 3:285–287.Google Scholar
4. Brown, D. M. 1978. Heat units for corn in southern Ontario. Fact sheet. Agdex 111/31. 4 pp.Google Scholar
5. Cao, W. and Moss, D. N. 1989a. Temperature effect on leaf emergence and phyllochron in wheat and barley. Crop Sci. 29:1018–1021.Google Scholar
6. Cao, W. and Moss, D. N. 1989b. Daylength effect on leaf emergence and phyllochron in wheat and barley. Crop Sci. 29:1021–1025.Google Scholar
7. Cao, W. and Moss, D. N. 1991. Phyllochron change in winter wheat with planting date and environmental changes. Agron. J. 83:396–401.Google Scholar
8. Gallagher, J. N. 1979. Field studies of cereal leaf growth I. Initiation and expansion in relation to temperature and ontogeny. J. Exp. Bot. 30:625–636.Google Scholar
9. Gmelig-Myeling, H. D. 1973. Effect of light intensity, temperature and daylength on the rate of leaf appearance of maize. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 21:68–76.Google Scholar
10. Kirby, E.J.M., Appleyard, M., and Fellows, G. 1982. Effect of sowing date on the temperature response of leaf emergence and leaf size in barley. Plant Cell Environ. 5:477–484.Google Scholar
11. Kirby, E.J.M. and Perry, M. W. 1987. Leaf emergence rates of wheat in a Mediterranean environment. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 38:455–464.Google Scholar
12. Kropff, M. J. 1988. Modelling the effects of weeds on crop production. Weed Res. 28:465–171.Google Scholar
13. Kropff, M. J. and Spitters, C.J.T. 1992. An ecophysiological model for interspecific competition, applied to the influence of Chenopodium album L. on sugar beet. I. Model description and parameterization. Weed Res. 32:437–450.Google Scholar
14. SAS. 1986. Pages 773–875 in SAS User's Guide: Statistics. Version 5. SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
15. Smith, H. 1982. Light quality, photoreception and plant strategy. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 33:481–518.Google Scholar
16. Smith, H. and Morgan, D. C. 1983. The function of phytochrome in nature. Pages 491–517 in Shropshire, W. Jr. and Mohr, H., eds. Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology. New Series. 16B Photomorphogenesis. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
17. Terry, N. 1968. Development physiology of sugar beet. I. The influence of light and temperature on growth. J. Exp. Bot. 19:795–811.Google Scholar
18. Thiagarajah, M. R. and Hunt, L. A. 1982. Effects of temperature on leaf growth in corn (Zea mays L.). Can. J. Bot. 60:1647–1652.Google Scholar
19. Tollenaar, M. and Aguilera, A. 1992. Radiation use efficiency of an old and new maize hybrid. Agron. J. 84:536–541.Google Scholar
20. Tollenaar, M., Daynard, T. B., and Hunter, R. B. 1979. Effect of temperature on rate of leaf appearance and flowering date in maize. Crop Sci. 19:363–366.Google Scholar
21. Vincent, C. D. 1989. Recent advances in modelling crop response to temperature. Outlook Agric. 18:54–57.Google Scholar
22. Warrington, I. J. and Kanemasu, E. T. 1983. Corn growth response to temperature and photoperiod II. Leaf initiation and leaf appearance rates. Agron. J. 75:755–761.Google Scholar
23. 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.Google Scholar