Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T01:58:51.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Itchgrass (Rottboellia cochinchinensis) Biotypes in World Populations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Rex W. Millhollon  and
David M. Burner
Rex W. Millhollon
Affiliation:
Sugarcane Res. Unit, Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., Houma, LA 70361
David M. Burner
Affiliation:
Sugarcane Res. Unit, Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., Houma, LA 70361
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Itchgrass biotypes from 34 countries or territories were evaluated under controlled and natural day length at Houma, LA. They could be placed in five broad groups based primarily on the effect of day length on flowering but also on general morphology and pattern of growth. The Group 1 biotypes (Argentina, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Cuba-1, Ecuador-1, Florida, Guadeloupe, Honduras-1, Louisiana-1, North Carolina, Papua New Guinea-1, Panama, Peru, Philippines-1, and Venezuela) were not affected by day lengths of 12 and 14 h (day length neutral) and flowered 35 to 57 d after germination. The Group 2 biotypes (Australia, Kenya-1, Reunion, South Africa, and Zimbabwe) also were not greatly affected by photoperiod and flowered 54 to 67 d after germination, and were taller with fewer and larger diameter culms than the Group 1 biotypes. The Group 3 biotypes (Brazil, Colombia, Jamaica, and Philippines-2) were moderately sensitive to photoperiod. They took longer to flower at 14 h than at 12 h and flowered in 63 to 95 d. The Group 4 biotypes (Cuba-2, Dominican Republic, Ecuador-2, Honduras-2, India, Louisiana-2, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea-2, Puerto Rico, Taiwan, and Thailand) were short-day plants that did not flower in the screenhouse until August or September (130 to 163 d), after the natural photoperiod had decreased to 13 h. The Group 5 biotypes (Indonesia, Kenya-2, Nigeria, Sudan, Tanzania, and Trinidad) were strict short-day plants that flowered only in September to November (167 to 226 d), after the day length had decreased to about 12 h. Most biotypes were diploids with 2n = 20 chromosomes, but some were polyploids (2n = 40 or 2n = 60). The shape of the glume tip on the pedicellate spikelet was found to be acuminate, acute, or obtuse for the biotypes with 2n = 20, 40, and 60 chromosomes, respectively, and was a reliable marker to distinguish diploids from polyploids.

Keywords

ItchgrassRottboellia cochinchinensis (Lour.) Clayton [=Rottboellia exaltata (Lour.) Clayton]. #3 ROOEXItchgrass photoperioditchgrass cytologyitchgrass ecologyROOEX
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , September 1993 , pp. 379 - 387
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 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. Allen, C. M. and Thomas, R. D. 1991. Brachaiaria plantaginea. Imperata cylindrica, and Panicum maximum: Three grasses (Poaceae) new to Louisiana and a range extension for Rottboellia cochinchinensis . Sida 14:613–615.Google Scholar
2. Bryson, C. T. and Wills, G. D. 1985. Susceptibility of bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) biotypes to several herbicides. Weed Sci. 33:848–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Celarier, R. P. 1956. Cytotaxonomy of the Andropogoneae I. Subtribes Dimeriinae and Saccharinae . Cytologia 21:272–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Chen, C. C. and Hsu, C. C. 1962. Cytological studies on Taiwan grasses (2). Chromosome numbers of some miscellaneous tribes. J. Jpn. Bot. 37:300–313.Google Scholar
5. Christopher, J. 1984. Cytomorphological studies of Rottboellia exaltata Linn. complex. Nucleus 27:160–164.Google Scholar
6. Evans, L. T. 1962. Day-length control of inflorescence initiation in the grass Rottboellia exaltata L.f. Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 15:291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Fisher, H. H., Menendez, R. A., Daley, L. S., Robb-Spencer, D., and Crabtree, G. D. 1987. Biochemical characterization of itchgrass (Rottboellia exaltata) biotypes. Weed Sci. 35:333–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Gomez Flores, M. A. 1985. Rottboellia exaltata L.f. Gramineae: Una Nueva Maleza en el Cultivo de la Cana de Azucar en la Region del Papaloapan. Instituto para el Mejoramiento de la Produccion de Azucar, Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Azucareras. Cordoba-Veracruz, Mexico. 11 pp.Google Scholar
9. Harlan, J. R. and deWet, J.M.J. 1975. On O. Winge and a prayer: The origins of polyploidy. Bot. Rev. 41:361–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Heslop-Harrison, J. 1959. Photoperiod and fertility in Rottboellia exaltata L.f. Ann. Bot.(NS) 23:345–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L. Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. The World's Worst Weeds. Distribution and Biology. Pages 139–144. Univ. Press of Hawaii, Honolulu.Google Scholar
12. Khodyarai, K., Smith, R. J. Jr., and Black, H. L. 1985. Itchgrass found in Arkansas. Arkansas Farm Res. March–April:5.Google Scholar
13. McWhorter, C. G. 1971. Growth and development of johnsongrass ecotypes. Weed Sci. 19:141–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Mercado, B. L. 1978. Biology, problems and control of Rottboellia exaltata L.F. A monograph. Biotrop. Bull. No. 14. Seameo Reg. Ctr. Trop, Biol., Bogor, Indonesia. 38 pp.Google Scholar
15. Millhollon, R. W. 1982. Reproduction variability in biotypes of johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers.) and itchgrass (Rottboellia exaltata Lf.). Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 22:74.Google Scholar
16. Millhollon, R. W. 1992. Effect of itchgrass (Rottboellia cochinchinensis) interference on growth and yield of sugarcane (Saccharum spp. hybrids). Weed Sci. 40:48–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Nannfeldt, J. A. 1938. Poa maroccana Nannf. n. sp. and P. rivulorum Maire & Trabut, two more tetraploids of sect. Ochlopoa A. & Gr., and some additional notes on Ochlopoa . Sven. Bot. Tidskr. 32:295–321.Google Scholar
18. Pamplona, P. P. and Mercado, B. L. 1981. Ecotypes of Rottboellia exaltata L.f. in the Philippines II. Response to day length and nitrogen application. Philipp. Agric. 64:371–378.Google Scholar
19. Patterson, D. T., Meyer, C. R., Flint, E. P., and Quimby, P. C. Jr. 1979. Potential responses and potential distribution of itchgrass (Rottboellia exaltata) in the United States. Weed Sci. 27:77–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Rochecouste, E. 1962. Studies on the biotypes of Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. I. Botanical investigations. Weed Res. 2:1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Smith, L. 1947. The acetocarmine smear technic. Stain Technol. 22:17–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22. Stebbins, G. L. 1956. Cytogenetics and the evolution of the grass family. Am. J. Bot. 43:890–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Thomas, P.E.L. and Allison, J.C.S. 1975. Competition between maize and Rottboellia exaltata . J. Agric. Sci. Cambridge 84:305–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. White, James C., Rhodes, Donald G., and Lynn Walker, H. 1979. Characteristics and distribution of itchgrass in Louisiana. Agric. Reviews and Manuals, ARM-S-7/November 1979. USDA, P.O. Box 53326, New Orleans, LA. 6 pp.Google Scholar