Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:30:07.820Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of environmental conditions on the dormancy and germination of volunteer oilseed rape seed (Brassica napus)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Francisca López-Granados  and
Peter J. W. Lutman
Peter J. W. Lutman
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Disease Management, IACR-Rothamsted, Harpenden, Herts, AL5 2JQ, U.K.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The conditions causing the onset of secondary dormancy in seed of winter oilseed rape cultivars Falcon and Libravo were investigated in a series of laboratory experiments to provide practical guidance on how to minimize the persistence of volunteer oilseed rape seed. The germination of recently harvested oilseed rape seed in moist conditions at 12 C was close to 100% in both darkness and under white light. Imbibition in water stress with an osmotic potential (ψ) of −1,500 kPa at 12 C in far-red light (FR) or dark for more than 5 d induced secondary dormancy in both cultivars. Treatment with FR was more effective than darkness at inducing secondary dormancy. Libravo produced more dormant seed than Falcon. Imbibition in FR and absence of water stress (ψ = 0 kPa) decreased germinability especially at the low temperature (6 C). These conditions resulted in 19.4 and 27.2% dormant seed for Libravo and Falcon, respectively. The results suggest that phytochrome is involved in the induction of secondary dormancy in oilseed rape. In practice, much oilseed rape seed is buried by postharvest cultivation in late summer (low hydric conditions) and exposed to water stress and darkness for some time. To avoid soil seed persistence and subsequent volunteer oilseed rape, seed must be retained at the soil surface when there is adequate moisture available. Therefore, incorporation of seed by tillage should be avoided or delayed as long as possible.

Keywords

Brassica napus L. ‘Falcon’ and ‘Libravo.'Water potentialfar-red lightdarknesspersistencephytochrometillage
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 46 , Issue 4 , August 1998 , pp. 419 - 423
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 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

Baskin, J. and Baskin, C. 1985. The annual dormancy cycle in buried weed seeds: a continuum. Bioscience 35: 492–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bewley, J. D. and Black, M. 1994. Dormancy and the control of germination. Pages 199-270 in Physiology of Development and Germination. 2nd ed. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Hazebroek, J. P. and Metzger, D. 1990. Environmental control of seed germination in Thlaspi arvense (Cruciferae). Am. J. Bot. 77: 945–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilton, J. R. 1982. An unusual effect of the fat-red absorbing form of phytochrome: photoinhibition of seed getmination in Bromus sterilis L. Planta 155: 524–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[ISTA] International Seed Testing Association. 1993. International rules for seed testing. Rules 1993. Seed Sci. Technol. 21:(Suppl.).Google Scholar
Karssen, C. M. 1980/1981. Environmental conditions and endogenous mechanisms involved in secondary dormancy of seeds. Isr. J. Bot. 29: 45–64.Google Scholar
Kendrick, R. E. 1976. Photocontrol of seed germination. Sci. Programme 63: 347–367.Google Scholar
Kendrick, R. E. and Spruit, C.J.P. 1977. Phototransformations of phytochrome. Photochem. Photobiol. 26: 201–214.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lercari, B. 1982. The promoting effects of far-red light on bulb formation in the long day plant Allium cepa L. Plant Sci. Lett. 27: 243–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutman, P.J.W. 1993. The occurrence and persistence of volunteer oilseed rape (Brassica napus). Volunteer Crops Weeds, Aspects Appl. Biol. 35: 29–35.Google Scholar
Michel, B. E. and Kaufmann, M. R. 1973. The osmotic potential of polyethylene glycol 6000. Plant Physiol. 51: 914–916.Google Scholar
Niedzwiedz-Siegien, I. and Lewak, S. 1989. Photoinhibition of white clover seed germination at low water potential. Physiol. Plant. 76: 155–160.Google Scholar
Pekrun, C. 1994. Untetsuchungen zur sekundären Dormanz bei Raps (Brassica napus L.). Ph.D. thesis. University of Göttingen, Germany. 120 p.Google Scholar
Pekrun, C. and López-Granados, E. 1995. The effect of water stress and light conditions on the induction of secondary dormancy in seeds of Brassica napus L. Proc. 9th Int. Rapeseed Congr. (Cambridge) 3: 1052–1054.Google Scholar
Pekrun, C., Lutman, P.J.W., and Baeumer, K. 1997a. Induction of secondary dormancy in rape seeds (Brassica napus L.) by prolonged imbibition under conditions of water stress or oxygen deficiency in darkness. Eur. J. Agron. 6: 245–255.Google Scholar
Pekrun, C., Potter, T. C., and Lutman, P.J.W. 1997b. Genotypic variation in the development of secondary dormancy in oilseed rape and its impact on the persistence of volunteer rape. Proc. 1997 Brighton Crop Prot. Conf. Weeds. pp. 243-248.Google Scholar
Rao, S. C. and Dao, T. H. 1987. Soil water effects on low temperature seedling emergence of five Brassica cultivars. Agron. J. 79: 517–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, E. H. and Neilson, J. 1982. Seasonal changes in the temperature requirements for germination of buried seeds of Aphanes arvensis L. New Phytol. 92: 159–166.Google Scholar
Sauetmann, W. 1993. Einflusse auf den Glucosinolatgehalt—Ergebnisse 2–jahriger Untersuchungen aus den Landessortenversuchen. Raps 11: 82–86.Google Scholar
Schlink, S. 1994. Ökologie der Keimung und Dormanz von Körnerraps (Brassica napus L.) und ihre Bedeutung für eine Überdauerung der Samen im Boden. Ph.D. thesis. University of Göttingen, Germany. 197 p.Google Scholar
Schopfer, P. and Plachy, C. 1984. Control of seed germination by abscisic acid. II) Effect on embryo water uptake in Brassica napus L. Plant Physiol. 76: 155–160.Google Scholar