Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T08:14:50.405Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Herbicide Response and Morphology of Interspecific Sowthistle Crosses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

A. R. Bell ,
John D. Nalewaja ,
S. Alam ,
A. B. Schooler  and
T. S. Hsieh
A. R. Bell
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., North Dakota State Univ., Fargo, ND. 58102
John D. Nalewaja
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., North Dakota State Univ., Fargo, ND. 58102
S. Alam
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., North Dakota State Univ., Fargo, ND. 58102
A. B. Schooler
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., North Dakota State Univ., Fargo, ND. 58102
T. S. Hsieh
Affiliation:
Dep. of Agron., North Dakota State Univ., Fargo, ND. 58102
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Interspecific crosses were made between perennial sowthistle (Sonchus arvensis L.) and annual sowthistle (Sonchus oleraceus L.). Flower head size, leaf type, and creeping root growth of the hybrid were intermediate to those same morphological characteristics of the parents. Backcrosses to the parents produced plants which resembled annual or perennial sowthistle more closely than did the F1 hybrids. Annual sowthistle and backcrosses to annual sowthistle were more tolerant to (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid (2,4-D) and 3,6-dichloro-o-anisic acid (dicamba) than were perennial sowthistle or backcrosses to perennial sowthistle. However, annual and perennial sowthistle were similar to each other in response to 4-amino-3,5,6-trichloropicolinic acid (picloram). Natural crosses between annual and perennial sowthistles may account for some of the variability in herbicide response found in perennial sowthistle.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , May 1973 , pp. 189 - 193
Copyright
Copyright © 1973 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. Bell, A. R., Nalewaja, J. D., Schooler, A. B., and Alam, S. 1968. Variations in shape of perennial sowthistle. N. Dak. Farm Res. 25(4):6–7.Google Scholar
2. Hodgson, J. M. 1970. The response of Canada thistle ecotypes to 2,4-D, amitrole, and intensive cultivation. Weed Sci. 18:253–255.Google Scholar
3. Hsieh, T. S., Schooler, A. B., Bell, A. R., and Nalewaja, J. D. 1972. Cytotaxonomy of three Sonchus species. Amer. J. Bot. 59:789–796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Jacobsohn, R. and Andersen, R. N. 1968. Differential response of wild oat lines to diallate, triallate, and barban. Weed Sci. 16:491–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Ryan, G. F. 1970. Resistance of common groundsel to simazine and atrazine. Weed Sci. 18:614–615.Google Scholar
6. Schooler, A. B. 1960. The effect of gibrel and gibberellic acid (K salt) in embryo culture media for Hordeum vulgare . Agron. J. 52:411.Google Scholar
7. Sexsmith, J. J. 1964. Morphological and herbicide susceptibility influences among strains of hoary cress. Weeds 12:19–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Snedecor, G. W. 1956. Statistical methods. Iowa State College Press, Ames, Iowa. 534 pp.Google Scholar
9. Stevens, O. A. 1926. The sowthistle. N. Dak. Agr. Exp. Sta. Circ. 32. 16 pp.Google Scholar
10. Whitworth, J. W. and Muzik, T. J. 1967. Differential response of selected lines of field bindweed to 2,4-D. Weeds 15:275–280.Google Scholar