Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T10:46:23.540Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Soil Environment and Temperature Affect Germination and Seedling Growth of Mayweed Chamomile (Anthemis cotula)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

David R. Gealy
Affiliation:
U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric. Res. Serv., 165 Johnson Hall, Washington State Univ., Pullman, WA 99164
Sheila A. Squier
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron. Soils, Washington State Univ., Pullman, WA 99164
Alex G. Ogg Jr.
Affiliation:
U.S. Dep. Agric., Agric Res. Serv., 165 Johnson Hall, Washington State Univ., Pullman, WA 99164

Abstract

Mayweed chamomile is an increasing weed problem in cropping systems of the Pacific Northwest. Modern farming practices that utilize conservation tillage systems and heavy application of nitrogen fertilizers have been associated with increased soil surface water potential and decreased soil pH. Therefore, soil water potential, soil pH, and temperature effects on germination and growth of mayweed chamomile were determined in controlled laboratory tests. Germination of mayweed chamomile in soil was greatest at 30 C and a soil water potential of –25 kPa. Germination and seedling growth were similar in soils with pH 4.7, 5.1, and 6.2. Total plant weight was greatest at 20 C and reduced at 10 and 30 C. Shoot dry weight, as a percent of total dry weight, ranged from a low of 54% at 10 C to 78% at 30 C. A soil moisture potential of –10 000 kPa reduced germination and total plant weight by as much as 95% and 80%, respectively.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 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. Cilley, H. L. and Dunn, S. 1964. Light effects on weed seed germination. Northeast. Weed Control Conf. Proc. 18th Annu. Meet. p. 387392.Google Scholar
2. Etherington, J R. and Evans, C. E. 1986. Technique for ecological studies of seed germination in relation to soil water potential. Plant Soil 95:285288.Google Scholar
3. Gealy, D. R. 1988. Growth, gas exchange, and germination of several jointed goatgrass (Aegilops cylindrica) accessions. Weed Sci. 36:176185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Gealy, D. R., Squier, S. A., and Ogg, A. G. Jr. 1991. Photosynthetic productivity of mayweed chamomile (Anthemis cotula). Weed Sci. 39:1826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Gealy, D. R., Young, F. L., and Morrow, L. A. 1985. Germination of mayweed (Anthemis cotula) achenes and seed. Weed Sci. 33:6973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Heit, C. E. 1973. Laboratory germination of two Anthemis species. Newsl. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. 47:5354.Google Scholar
7. Hsiao, T. C. 1973. Plant responses to water stress. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 24:519570.Google Scholar
8. Ivens, G. W. 1979. Stinking mayweed. N. Z. J. Agric. 138:2123.Google Scholar
9. Jones, H. G. 1983. Plants and Microclimate, A Quantitative Approach to Environmental Plant Physiology. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge. p. 6084, 212-237.Google Scholar
10. Kay, Q. O. N. 1958. Biological flora of the British Isles. Anthemis cotula L. J. Ecol. 59:623636.Google Scholar
11. Kells, J. J. 1989. Chemical control of mayweed chamomile (Anthemis cotula) in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 3:686689.Google Scholar
12. Klute, A. 1986. Laboratory measurement of hydraulic conductivity of saturated soil. p. 648650 in Klute, A., ed. Methods of Soil Analysis, Part I. 2nd ed. Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, WI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Mahler, R. L. and Harder, R. W. 1984. The influence of tillage methods, cropping sequence, and N rates on the acidification of a northern Idaho soil. Soil Sci. 137:5260.Google Scholar
14. Mitchell, R. L. 1970. Crop growth and culture. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA. p. 173194.Google Scholar
15. Ogg, A. G. Jr., Stephens, R. H., and Gealy, D. R. 1993. Growth analysis of mayweed chamomile (Anthemis cotula) interference in peas (Pisum sativum). Weed Sci. 41:394402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Papendick, R. I. and Miller, D. E. 1977. Conservation tillage in the Pacific Northwest. J. Soil Water Conserv. 32:4956.Google Scholar
17. Pierre, W. H. 1928. Nitrogenous fertilizers and soil acidity: 1. Effect of various nitrogenous fertilizers on soil reaction. Agron. J. 20:254269.Google Scholar
18. Roberts, H. A. and Neilson, J. E. 1981. Seed survival and periodicity of seedling emergence in twelve weedy species of Compositae. Ann. Appl. Biol. 97:325334.Google Scholar
19. Salisbury, F. B. and Ross, C. W. 1985. Plant Physiology, 3rd ed. Wadsworth Publishing Co., Inc., Belmont, Ca. p. 216228, 409-425.Google Scholar
20. Sharratt, B. S. 1991. Shoot growth, root length density, and water use of barley grown in different soil temperatures. Agron. J. 83:237239.Google Scholar
21. Smith, A. E. 1987. Increasing importance and control of mayweed chamomile in forage crops. Agron. J. 79:657660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Squier, S. A. 1986. Photosynthetic productivity and germination response of mayweed chamomile (Anthemis cotula L.). M.S. Thesis. Dep. Agron. and Soils, Washington State Univ. p. 5779.Google Scholar
23. Thompson, A. and Mitchel, W. J. P. 1973. The control of stinking mayweed in pastures. Proc. N. Z. Weed Pest Control. Conf. 26:4044.Google Scholar
24. Wagenvoort, W. A. and Van Opstal, N. A. 1979. The effect of constant and alternating temperatures, rinsing, stratification and fertilizer on germination of some weed species. Sci. Hortic. 10:1520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. Weaver, S. E. and Hamill, A. S. 1985. Effects of soil pH on competitive ability and leaf nutrient content of corn (Zea mays L.) and three weed species. Weed Sci. 33:447451.Google Scholar