Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Release of Postsenescent Dormancy in Leafy Spurge (Euphorbia esula) by Chilling

  • Stephen J. Harvey (a1) and Robert M. Nowierski (a1)

Abstract

The growth and development of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula L. #3 EPHES) collected during postsenescent dormancy and grown in the greenhouse was increasingly stimulated by chilling treatments longer than 14 days duration at 0 to 6 C. Production of stems with flower buds, primary flowers, and secondary flowers was greater in plants chilled for 42 days or more. The effects of chilling on total number of stems, number of strictly vegetative stems, or number of stems with vegetative branching were not significant. The height of the tallest stem per pot was influenced by chilling longer than 42 days. Growth rate also increased as a function of chilling duration. Based on our findings, we believe that there is little possibility that any significant growth can occur in the postsenescent period because of the prevailing climatic conditions found in areas of leafy spurge distribution in North America.

Copyright

References

Hide All
1. Alley, H. P. and Messersmith, C. G. 1985. Chemical control of leafy spurge. Pages 6579 in Watson, A. K., ed., Leafy Spurge, Weed Sci. Soc. Am., Champaign, IL. 104 pp.
2. Coupland, R. T. 1955. The reproductive capacity of vegetative buds on the underground parts of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula L.). Can. J. Agric. Sci. 35:477484.
3. Espenshade, E. B. 1976. Goode's World Atlas. Rand McNally and Co., Chicago, IL. Page 81.
4. Harvey, S. J., Nowierski, R. M., Mahlberg, P. G., and Story, J. M. 1988. Taxonomic evaluation of leaf and latex variability of leafy spurge (Euphorbia spp.) for Montana and European accessions. Weed Sci. 36:726733.
5. McIntyre, G. I. 1972. Developmental studies on Euphorbia esula. The influence of the nitrogen supply on the correlative inhibition of root bud activity. Can. J. Bot. 50:949956.
6. McIntyre, G. I. 1972. Developmental studies on Euphorbia esula. Evidence for competition for water as a factor in the mechanism of root bud inhibition. Can. J. Bot. 50:949956.
7. Messersmith, C. G. 1979. Leafy spurge chemical control workshop. Page 78 in Proc. Leafy Spurge Symposium. North Dakota Coop. Ext. Serv., Fargo. 84 pp.
8. Nissen, S. J. and Foley, M. E. 1987. Correlative inhibition and dormancy in root buds of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula). Weed Sci. 35:155159.
9. Nissen, S. J. and Foley, M. E. 1987. Euphorbia esula L. root and root bud indole-3-acetic acid levels at three phenologic stages. Plant Physiology. 84:287290.
10. Raju, M.V.S. 1985. Morphology and anatomy of leafy spurge. Pages 2641 in Watson, A. K., ed. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., Champaign, IL. 104 pp.
11. Raju, M.V.S., Steeves, T. A., and Coupland, R. T. 1964. On the regeneration of root fragments of leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula L.). Weed Res. 4:211.
12. Selleck, G. W., Coupland, R. T., and Frankton, C. 1962. Leafy spurge in Saskatchewan. Ecol. Monogr. 32:129.
13. Watson, A. K. 1985. Introduction – The leafy spurge problem. Pages 15 in Watson, A. K., ed. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., Champaign, IL. 104 pp.

Keywords

Release of Postsenescent Dormancy in Leafy Spurge (Euphorbia esula) by Chilling

  • Stephen J. Harvey (a1) and Robert M. Nowierski (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed