Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:12:18.068Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Germination, Host Preference, and Phenolic Content of Witchweed (Striga hermonthica) Seed Populations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Faiz F. Bebawi
Affiliation:
Univ. Khartoum, Shambat, Sudan
Adil E. Awad
Affiliation:
Univ. Khartoum, Shambat, Sudan
Sami A. Khalid
Affiliation:
Univ. Khartoum, P.O. Box 1966, Khartoum, Sudan

Abstract

Phenolic content, germination percentage, and host preference were compared among 11 seed populations of witchweed (Striga hermonthica (Del.) Benth. # STRHE). Significant differences in germination percentage occurred among the seed populations after preconditioning by their exposure to different durations of warm-moist conditions. Greatest percentage of seed germinated after 8 days of preconditioning. Preconditioning for more than 16 days reduced percentage germination. The host specificity range of witchweed seed populations that parasitized pearl millet [Pennisetum americanum (L.) K. Schum] was broader than were those seed populations that attacked sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench.]. Results of thin-layer chromatography indicated large variations in phenolic content among the witchweed seed populations.

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Copyright
Copyright © 1986 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. Bebawi, F. F. 1981. Intraspecific physiological variants of Striga hermonthica . Exp. Agric. 17:419423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Brown, R. and Edwards, M. 1946. The germination of the seeds of Striga lutea. II. The effect of time of treatment and concentration of the host stimulant. Ann. Bot. 10:134142.Google Scholar
3. Eplee, R. E. 1975. Ethylene: A witchweed seed germination stimulant. Weed Sci. 23:433436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Hepper, F. N. 1963. Scrophulariaceae in Hutchinson, J. and Dalziel, J. M., eds. Flora of West Tropical Africa (2nd ed.), Vol. 2. Crown Agents for Overseas Governments, London.Google Scholar
5. Hsiao, A. I., Worsham, A. D., and Moreland, D. E. 1981. Regulation of witchweed (Striga asiatica) conditioning and germination by dl-Strigol. Weed Sci. 29:101104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Johnson, A. W., Rosebery, G., and Parker, C. 1976. A novel approach to Striga and Orobanche control using synthetic germination stimulants. Weed Res. 16:223227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. King, S. B. and Zummo, N. 1977. Physiological specialization in Striga hermonthica in West Africa. Plant Dis. Rep. 61:770773.Google Scholar
8. Kust, C. A. 1963. Dormancy and viability of witchweed seeds as affected by temperature and relative humidity during storage. Weeds 11:247250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Musselman, L. J. 1980. The biology of Striga, Orobanche, and other root-parasitic weeds. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 18:463489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Musselman, L. J. and Parker, C. 1981. Surface features of Striga seeds (Scrophulariaceae). Adansonia 20:431437.Google Scholar
11. Vallance, K. B. 1950. Studies on the germination of seeds of Striga hermonthica. 1. The influence of moisture-treatment, stimulant dilution and after-ripening on germination. Ann. Bot. 14:347363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Visser, J. H. and Botha, P. J. 1974. Chromatographic investigation of the Striga seed germination stimulant. 2. Pflanzenphysiologie 72:353358.Google Scholar
13. Wilson-Jones, K. 1955. Further experiments on witchweed control. II. The existence of physiological strains of Striga hermonthica . Exp. Agric. 23:206213.Google Scholar