Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Spatial arrangement, density, and competition between barnyardgrass and tomato: II. Barnyardgrass growth and seed production

  • Robert F. Norris, Clyde L. Elmore (a1), Marcel Rejmánek (a2) and William C. Akey (a3)

Abstract

Barnyardgrass was grown at densities of 0, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 5, and more than 50 plants m−1 of tomato crop row in either a regular, random, or clumped pattern. Tomato was established at 0, 5, 10, or 20 plants m−1 of crop row in a regular pattern. Crop density and weed density or spatial arrangement had little effect on phenological development of barnyardgrass. In the absence of tomato, barnyardgrass was estimated to produce over 400,000 seeds plant−1 when not subjected to intraspecific competition (0.25 plants m−1 density), decreasing to about 10,000 seeds plant−1 when weed density exceeded 50 plants m−1 of row. Differences in seed production between plants in the regular and random spatial arrangements were minor, but the clumped distribution resulted in 30 to 50% reduction in seed production at weed densities between 1 and 5 plants m−1 of row. Tomato reduced barnyardgrass seed production. The magnitude of the reduction depended on both tomato density and barnyardgrass density. In the absence of tomato, barnyardgrass produced over 200,000 seeds m−2 in 1993 and over 500,000 seeds m−2 in 1994 at 5 plants m−1 of row. Production was almost 700,000 seeds m−2 when the weed density exceeded 50 plants m−1 of row. Barnyardgrass seed production at the single-season economic threshold density in tomato was sufficient to maintain the seedbank at a level that would mandate high levels of weed control in subsequent crops. Because of the high fecundity of barnyardgrass, our experiments suggest that stopping seed production is the best long-term management strategy for the weed. Spatial arrangement of the weed, at the scale used in these studies, would not be a factor in establishing long-term management guidelines based on weed population biology.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Corresponding author. Weed Science Program, Department of Vegetable Crops, University of California, Davis, CA 95616; rfnorris@ucdavis.edu

References

Hide All
Auld, B. A., Kemp, D. R., and Medd, R. W. 1983. The influence of spatial arrangement on grain yield in wheat. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 34:99108.
Bruinsma, J. 1966. Analysis of growth, development and yield in a spacing experiment with winter rye (Secale cereale L.). Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 14:198213.
Cardina, J., Johnson, G. A., and Sparrow, D. H. 1997. The nature and consequence of weed spatial distribution. Weed Sci. 45:364373.
Cardina, J. and Norquay, H. M. 1997. Seed production and seedbank dynamics in subthreshold velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) populations. Weed Sci. 45:8590.
Cardina, J., Sparrow, D. H., and McCoy, E. L. 1995. Analysis of spatial distribution of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) in notill soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 43:258268.
Chancellor, R. J. 1970. Seed production by Avena fatua populations in various crops. Proc. 10th British Weed Control Conference, Brighton, pp. 711.
Dessaint, F., Chadoeuf, R., and Barralis, G. 1996. Spatial pattern analysis of weed seeds in the cultivated soil seed bank. J. Appl. Ecol. 28:721730.
Firbank, L. G. and Watkinson, A. R. 1986. Modelling the population dynamics of an arable weed and its effects upon crop yield. J. Appl. Ecol. 23:147159.
Fischer, R. A. and Miles, R. E. 1973. The role of spatial pattern in the competition between crop plants and weeds. A theoretical analysis. Math. Biosci. 18:335350.
Heywood, J. S. and Levin, D. A. 1986. Interactions between seed source, planting arrangement, and soil treatment in determining plant size and root allocation in Phlox drummondii . Oecologia 68:285290.
Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. The Worlds Worst Weeds: Distribution and Biology. Honolulu, HA: University of Hawaii Press, pp. 3240.
Légère, A. and Deschenes, J.-M. 1990. Effects of duration of hemp-nettle (Galeopsis tetrahit) interference in oats (Avena sativa) and alfalfa (Medicago sativa). Can. J. Plant Sci. 70:809816.
Lindquist, J. L., Dielman, J. A., Mortensen, D. A., Johnson, G. A., and Wyse-Pester, D. Y. 1998. Economic importance of managing spatially heterogeneous weed populations. Weed Technol. 12:713.
Maun, M. A. and Barrett, S.C.H. 1986. The biology of Canadian weeds. 77. Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. Can. J. Plant Sci. 66:739759.
Medd, R. W., Auld, B. A., Kemp, D. R., and Murison, R. D. 1985. The infuence of wheat density and spatial arrangement on annual ryegrass, Lolium rigidum Gaudin, competition. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 36:361371.
Mithen, R., Harper, J. L., and Weiner, J. 1984. Growth and mortality of individual plants as a function of “available area.” Oecologia 62:5760.
Norris, R. F. 1992a. Case history for weed competition/population ecology: barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris). Weed Technol. 6:220227.
Norris, R. F. 1992b. Predicting seed rain in barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crusgalli). IX Colloquium on Weed Biology and Ecology, Dijon, France: European Weed Res. Soc., pp. 377386.
Norris, R. F. 1996. Weed population dynamics: seed production. 2nd Int. Weed Control Cong., Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 1520.
Norris, R. F. 1999. Ecological implications of using thresholds for weed management. Pages 3158 In Buhler, D. D., ed. Expanding the context of weed management. New York, NY: Food Products Press, The Haworth Press Inc.
Norris, R. F., Elmore, C. L., Rejmánek, M., and Akey, W. C. 2001. Spatial arrangement, density, and competition between barnyardgrass and tomato: crop growth and yield. Weed Sci. 49:6168.
Ottman, M. J. and Welch, L. F. 1989. Planting patterns and radiation interception, plant nutrient concentration, and yield in corn. Agron. J. 81:167174.
Park, S. J., Reinbergs, E., and Song, L.S.P. 1977. Grain yield and its components in spring barley under row and hill plot conditions. Euphytica 26:521526.
Quakenbush, L. S. and Anderson, R. L. 1984. Effect of soybean (Glycine max) interference on eastern black nightshade (Solanum ptycanthum). Weed Sci. 32:638645.
Silander, J. A. Jr. and Pacala, S. W. 1985. Neighborhood predictors of plant performance. Oecologia (Berlin) 66:256263.
Silvertown, J., Holtier, S., Johnson, J., and Dale, P. 1992. Cellular automata models of interspecific competition for space: the effect of pattern on process. J. Ecol. 80:527534.
Thompson, B. K., Weiner, J., and Warwick, S. I. 1991. Size-dependent reproductive output in agricultural weeds. Can J. Bot. 69:442446.
Thornton, P. K., Fawcett, R. H., Dent, J. B., and Perkins, T. J. 1990. Spatial weed distribution and economic thresholds for weed control. Crop Prot. 9:337342.
Van Groenendael, J. M. 1988. Patchy distribution of weeds and some implications for modeling population dynamics: a short literature review. Weed Res. 28:437441.
Weiner, J. 1982. A neighborhood model for annual-plant interference. Ecology 63:12371241.
Weiner, J. 1988. The influence of competition on plant reproduction. Pages 228245 In Lovett Doust, J. and Lovett Doust, L., eds. Plant Reproductive Ecology; Patterns and Strategies. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, Inc.
Wiles, L. J., Oliver, G. W., York, A. C., Gold, H. J., and Wilkerson, G. G. 1992. Spatial distribution of broadleaf weeds in North Carolina soybean (Glycine max) fields. Weed Sci. 40:554557.
Zanin, G., Berti, A., and Riello, L. 1998. Incorporation of weed spatial variability into the weed control decision-making process. Weed Res. 38:107118.
Zanin, G. and Sattin, M. 1988. Threshold level and seed production of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medicus) in maize. Weed Res. 28:347352.

Keywords

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