Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-495rp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-06T05:08:34.208Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Propagation of Euphorbia esula for Leafy Spurge Biocontrol Agents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Rodney G. Lym
Rodney G. Lym*
Affiliation:
Crop and Weed Sci. Dep., North Dakota State Univ., Fargo, ND 58106
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Efforts to screen and mass-rear insects and diseases for leafy spurge biocontrol agents have been hampered by low success in propagation and slow growth of leafy spurge in the greenhouse. The optimum greenhouse conditions for leafy spurge growth were determined. Leafy spurge was propagated from stem tip cuttings, with the basal end treated with 0.2% NAA, and the plants misted with water for 10 d. Optimum conditions for growth were 27 C air temperature, application of a complete fertilizer at 70 kg ha−1 weekly or 135 kg ha−1 biweekly 20 d after stem tip propagation, in a peat/perlite/vermiculite growth medium at pH 7 and a 16-h photoperiod. Regrowth from roots of parent plants was improved when cuttings were taken from plants at least 60 d old, and plants grew nearly twice as rapidly when the medium was maintained at 30 C compared to 22 C. Refrigeration of stem tip cuttings or roots before planting did not affect survival or growth vigor. Only gibberellic acid of nine plant growth regulators evaluated increased growth, but plants were etiolated. Biotypes from Nebraska and South Dakota were shorter than five others from the United States or Austria but had similar root and shoot dry weight. The time required to propagate vigorous leafy spurge was reduced to 2 mo compared to 6 mo required prior to the study.

Keywords

NAA, 1-naphthalene acetic acid, gibberellic acid, ent-3α,10,13-trihydroxy-20-norgibberell-1, 16-diene-7,19-dioc acid 19,10 lactoneleafy spurge (Euphorbia esula L.) #3 EPHESTemperaturewaterphotoperiodpHfertilizerchillingheatingbiotypesEPHES
Type
Special Topics
Information
Weed Science , Volume 40 , Issue 2 , June 1992 , pp. 326 - 332
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 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. Albrecht, M. L. and Ladd, D. L. 1984. Comparison of five poinsettia cultivars grown under different temperature regimes. Hortscience 19:438–439.Google Scholar
2. Bakke, A. L. 1936. Leafy spurge, Euphorbia esula L. Iowa Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Bull. 198.Google Scholar
3. Bartok, J. W. 1989. Mist propagation. Horticulture 67:52–54.Google Scholar
4. Bateman, D. F. 1961. The effect of soil moisture upon development of poinsettia root rots. Phytopathology 51:445–451.Google Scholar
5. Bateman, D. F. 1962. Relation of soil pH to development of poinsettia root rots. Phytopathology 52:559–566.Google Scholar
6. Carlson, R. B. and Mundal, D. 1990. Introduction of insects for the biological control of leafy spurge in North Dakota. N.D. Farm Res. 47(6):7–8.Google Scholar
7. Cox, D. A. 1988. Lime, molybdenum, and cultivar effects on molybdenum deficiency of poinsettia. J. Plant Nutr. 11:589–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Fonteno, W. C., Cassel, D. K., and Larson, R. A. 1981. Physical properties of three container media and their effect on poinsettia growth. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 106:736–741.Google Scholar
9. Gassman, A. and Shorthouse, J. D. 1990. Structural damage and gall induction by Pegomya curticornis and Pegomya euphorbiae (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) within the stems of leafy spurge [Euphorbia X pseudovirgata (Euphorbiaceae)]. Can. Entomol. 122:429–439.Google Scholar
10. Grueber, K. L. and Wilkins, H. F. 1986. Production of poinsettia stock plants. Minn. State Florists Bull. Agric. Ext. Serv. 35(3):1–6.Google Scholar
11. Hammer, P. A. and Bailey, D. A. 1987. Poinsettia tolerance to molybdenum. Hortscience 22:1284–1285.Google Scholar
12. Harvey, S. J. and Nowierski, R. M. 1988. Release of postsenescent dormancy in leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) by chilling. Weed Sci. 36:784–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Hein, D. G. 1988. Single and repetitive picloram treatments on leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula L.) and resulting changes in shoot density, canopy cover, forage production, and utilization by cattle. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Wyoming, Univ. Microfilms, Ann Arbor, MI (Diss. Abstr. AAD88-27917).Google Scholar
14. Helgeson, E. A. and Longwell, J. H. 1942. Control of leafy spurge by sheep. N.D. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bimonthly Bull. 4(5):10–12.Google Scholar
15. Janes, H. W. and McAvoy, R. 1982. Effect of root zone heating on growth of poinsettia. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 107:525–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Landgraf, B. K., Fay, P. K., and Havstad, K. M. 1984. Utilization of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) by sheep. Weed Sci. 32:348–352.Google Scholar
17. Link, C. B. and Shanks, J. B. 1956. The mineral nutrition of poinsettia stock plants in the greenhouse. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 69:502–512.Google Scholar
18. Lym, R. G. and Kirby, D. R. 1987. Cattle foraging behavior in leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula)-infested rangeland. Weed Technol. 1:314–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. McDaniel, G. L. 1986. Comparison of paclobutrazol, flurprimidol, and tetcyclacis for controlling poinsettia height. Hortscience 21:1161–1163.Google Scholar
20. Nissen, S. J. and Foley, M. E. 1987. Correlative inhibition and dormancy in root buds of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula). Weed Sci. 35:155–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Preece, J. E. 1990. Growth stimulation of Euphorbia lathyris L. by GA4+7 and BA. J. Plant Growth Regul. 9:85–88.Google Scholar
22. Semeniuk, P. and Griesbach, R. J. 1985. Bud applications of BA induces branching of a non-branching poinsettia. Hortscience 20:120–121.Google Scholar
23. Shanks, J. B. and Link, C. B. 1952. Poinsettia stock plant nutrition in relation to production, rooting, and growth of cuttings. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 59:487–495.Google Scholar
24. Staby, G. L. and Kofranek, A. M. 1979. Production conditions as they affect harvest and postharvest characteristics of poinsettia. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 104:88–92.Google Scholar
25. Stanley, C. D. and Harbaugh, B. K. 1989. Poinsettia irrigation based on evaporative demand and plant growth characteristics. Hortscience 24:937–939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26. Thompson, F., Leitch, J. A., and Leistritz, F. L. 1990. Economic impact of leafy spurge in North Dakota. N.D. Farm Res. 47(6):9–11.Google Scholar
27. Tjia, B., Ohpanayikool, S., and Buxton, J. 1976. Comparison of soil applied growth regulators on height control of poinsettia. Hortscience 11:373–374.Google Scholar