Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T19:19:10.626Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed diversity and weed management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Jack Dekker
Jack Dekker*
Affiliation:
Weed Biology Laboratory, Agronomy Department, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The story of agriculture is the story of weed interference. After millennia of weed control we still have weeds. This situation has led many growers to observe that “the weeds always win.” One of the most important reasons weeds are so successful is their biodiversity. Biodiversity is an inevitable consequence of the struggle an individual weed species undergoes in the presence of neighbors, and by occupying a physical space in an agroecosystem. Weeds have evolved in response to cropping system practices by adapting and occupying niches left available in agroecosystems. Forces created by our cropping practices over evolutionary time have led to the weed diversity we observe today. Diversity underlies weed management in several important ways. A plant experiences diversity among its neighbors in at least five different ways. Weeds have adapted to selection in agroecosystems in several ways: (1) genetic variants within a species; (2) somatic polymorphism of plant parts; (3) success in diverse habitat microsites; (4) temporal adaptations within the community; and (5) floristic diversity of a community at higher levels than the species. Herein, weed diversity is discussed in this broader context, in terms of population behaviors that emerge as a consequence of the activities of individual components at lower levels of organization. Diversity is also discussed in terms of its implications for weed management. The potential exists to develop management strategies based on differences in weed and crop diversity. These strategies might be developed by characterization of weedy genetic and phenotypic diversity; enhancement of crop, cropping system, and agroecosystem diversity; and characterization of the spatial distribution of weed populations.

Keywords

Weed population dynamicsspatial distributionbiodiversity
Type
Symposium
Information
Weed Science , Volume 45 , Issue 3 , June 1997 , pp. 357 - 363
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 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

Akey, W. C., Jurik, T. W., and Dekker, J. 1990. Competition for light between velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and soybean (Glycine max). Weed Res. 30: 403–411.Google Scholar
Akey, W. C., Jurik, T. W., and Dekker, J. 1991. A replacement series evaluation of competition between velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and soybean (Glycine max). Weed Res. 31: 63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, R. N. and Koukkari, W. L. 1978. Response of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) to bentazon as affected by leaf orientation. Weed Sci. 26: 393–395.Google Scholar
Andersen, R. N. and Koukkari, W. L. 1979. Rhythmic movements of some common weeds. Weed Sci. 27: 393–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anonymous. 1981. Weeds of the North Central States. N.C. Reg. Res. Publ. 281, Urbana, IL. 303 p.Google Scholar
Campiranon, S. and Koukkari, W. L. 1976. Circadian periodic response of Phaseolus vulgaris L. to 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid. Chronobiologia 3: 137–148.Google Scholar
Darmency, H. and Pernes, J. 1989. Agronomic performance of a triazine esistant foxtail millet (Setaria italica (L.) Beauv.). Weed Res. 29: 147–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C. The Origin of Species. 1958. Harvard Facsimile 1st ed. New York: New American Library of World Literature, Inc. 479 p.Google Scholar
Dekker, J. 1991. An overview of new techniques and advances in weed physiology and molecular biology. Weed Sci. 39: 480–481.Google Scholar
Dekker, J. 1993. Pleiotropy in triazine resistant Brassica napus: leaf and environmental influences on photosynthetic regulation. Zeitschrift Naturforschung 48c: 283–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dekker, J. H. and Burmester, R. G. 1992. Pleiotropy in triazine resistant Brassica napus: ontogenetic and diurnal influences on photosynthesis. Plant Physiol. 100: 2052–2058.Google Scholar
Dekker, J., Dekker, B. I., Hilhorst, H., and Karssen, C. 1995. Weedy adaptation in Setaria spp.: IV. Changes in the germinative capacity of S. faberii embryos with development from anthesis to after abscission. Am. J. Bot. 83: 979–991.Google Scholar
Dekker, J. H. and Meggitt, W. F. 1983a. Interference between velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti (L.) Medic.) and soybeans (Glycine max (L.) Merr.). I. Growth. Weed Res. 23: 91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dekker, J. H. and Meggitt, W. F. 1983b. Interference between velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti (L.) Medic.) and soybeans (Glycine max (L.) Merr.). II. Population dynamics. Weed Res. 23: 103–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dekker, J. H. and Meggitt, W. F. 1986. Field emergence of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) in relation to time and burial depth. Iowa J. Res. 61: 65–80.Google Scholar
Dekker, J. and Sharkey, T. D. 1992. Regulation of photosynthesis in triazine resistant and susceptible Brassica napus . Plant Physiol. 98: 1069–1073.Google Scholar
Doran, D. L. and Andersen, R. N. 1976. Effectiveness of bentazon applied at various times of the day. Weed Sci. 24: 567–570.Google Scholar
Gosselink, J. G. and Standifer, L. C. 1967. Diurnal rhythm of sensitivity of cotton seedlings to herbicides. Science 158: 120–121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haar, M. and Dekker, J. 1994. Somatic polymorphism in Setaria faberii: germination-dormancy states at abscission. The 1st International Plant Dormancy Symposium. Corvallis, OR. 214 p.Google Scholar
Haar, M. and Dekker, J. 1997. Weedy adaptation in Setaria spp.: somatic polymorphism in S. faberii germinability-dormancy states at abscission. Manuscript in preparation: Am. J Bot. Google Scholar
Harper, J. L. 1977. Population Biology of Plants. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 892 p.Google Scholar
Johnson, G. A., Mortensen, D. A., Young, L. J., and Martin, A. R. 1995. The stability of weed seedling population models and parameters in eastern Nebraska corn (Zea mays) and soybean (Glycine max) fields. Weed Sci. 43: 604–611.Google Scholar
Koukkari, W. L. and Johnson, M. A. 1979. Oscillations of leaves of Abutilon theophrasti (velvetleaf) and their sensitivity to bentazon in relation to low and high humidity. Physiol. Plant 47: 158–162.Google Scholar
LeBaron, H. M. and Gressel, J., eds. 1982. Herbicide Resistance in Plants. New York: J Wiley. 401 p.Google Scholar
Mapplebeck, L. R., Souza-Machado, V., and Grodzinski, B. 1982. Seed germination and seedling growth characteristics of atrazine-susceptible and resistant biotypes of Brassica campestris . Can. J. Plant Sci. 62: 733–739.Google Scholar
Nissen, S. J., Masters, R. A., Lee, D. J., and Rowe, M. L. 1992. Comparison of restriction fragment length polymorphisms in the chloroplast DNA of five leafy spurge (Euphorbia spp.) accessions. Weed Res. 40: 63–67.Google Scholar
Pillai, P. and St. John, J. B. 1981. Lipid composition of chloroplast membranes from weed biotypes differentially sensitive to triazine herbicides. Plant Physiol. 68: 585–587.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rominger, J. M. 1962. Taxonomy of Setaria (Gramineae) in North America. Illinois Biological Monographs No. 29. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. 132 p.Google Scholar
Roush, M. L., Radosevich, S. R., and Maxwell, B. D. 1990. Future outlook for herbicide-resistance research. Weed Technol. 4: 208–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slife, F. W. 1954. A new Setaria species in Illinois. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 11: 6–7.Google Scholar
Solbrig, O. T. and Solbrig, D. J. 1981. Introduction to Population Biology and Evolution. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing. 468 p.Google Scholar
Thurston, J. M. 1957. Morphological and physiological variation in wild oats (Avena fatua L. and A. ludoviciana Dur.) and hybrids between wild and cultivated oats. J. Agric. Sci. Camb. 49: 260–274.Google Scholar
Vaughn, K. C. and Duke, S. O. 1980. Ultrastructural alterations to chloroplasts in triazine-resistant biotypes. Physiol. Plant 62: 510–520.Google Scholar
Wang, R. L. and Dekker, J. 1995. Weedy adaptation in Setaria spp.: III. Variation in herbicide resistance in Setaria spp. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 51: 99–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, R. L., Wendell, J., and Dekker, J. 1995a. Weedy adaptation in Setaria spp.: I. Isozyme analysis of the genetic diversity and population genetic structure in S. viridis . Am. J. Bot. 82: 308–317.Google Scholar
Wang, R. L., Wendell, J., and Dekker, J. 1995b. Weedy adaptation in Setaria spp.: II. Genetic diversity and population genetic structure in S. glauca, S. geniculata and S. faberii . Am. J. Bot. 82: 1031–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warwick, S. I. 1990. Allozyme and life history variation in five northwardly olonizing North American weed species. Plant Syst. Evol. 169: 41–54.Google Scholar
Warwick, S. I., Thompson, B. K., and Black, L. D. 1987. Life history and allozyme variation in populations of the weed species Setaria faberi . Can. J. Bot. 65: 1396–1402.Google Scholar
Williams, J. T. and Harper, J. L. 1965. Seed polymorphism and germination. 1. The influence of nitrates and low temperatures on the germination of Chenopodium album . Weed Res. 5: 141–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar