Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T13:14:53.327Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Suppression of Powell Amaranth (Amaranthus powellii) by Buckwheat Residues: Role of Allelopathy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Virender Kumar ,
Daniel C. Brainard  and
Robin R. Bellinder
Virender Kumar*
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Daniel C. Brainard
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 41325
Robin R. Bellinder
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: Virender.kumar@cgiar.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous studies have demonstrated that emergence and growth of Powell amaranth is inhibited in soils where buckwheat has been grown and incorporated. The primary objectives of this research were to (1) evaluate the possible role of allelopathy in explaining that suppression; (2) distinguish between suppression caused by incorporation of fresh buckwheat residues from suppression caused by changes in soil during buckwheat growth; and (3) quantify the relative importance of buckwheat root vs. shoot tissues in suppression. When all buckwheat plant parts were removed from soil in which buckwheat was grown, Powell amaranth emergence was not suppressed, but growth was reduced 70% compared to bare soil. Addition of buckwheat shoots, but not roots to these soils reduced emergence by 80%, and contributed to additional reduction in growth. Addition of chemically activated carbon did not increase emergence or growth in buckwheat-amended soil. However, thermally activated carbon resulted in greater adsorption of phenolics than chemically activated carbon and alleviated suppression of Powell amaranth in buckwheat-amended, high organic-matter soils. However, suppression was not overcome on mineral soils. In addition to adsorbing phenolics, activated carbon changed the nitrogen (N) content and electrical conductivity of soil extracts. Aqueous shoot extracts of buckwheat stimulated Powell amaranth germination slightly, but inhibited radicle growth. Aqueous soil extracts from buckwheat-amended soil inhibited germination of Powell amaranth compared with extracts from unamended soil. Results suggest that emergence suppression of Powell amaranth by buckwheat residues might be due to allelopathic compounds concentrated in the shoot tissues. However, these inhibitory effects appear to depend on interactions of buckwheat residues with soils. In contrast, suppression of growth of Powell amaranth appears to be associated primarily with lower N availability in buckwheat-grown soils.

Keywords

Powell amaranth (= green pigweed), Amaranthus powellii S. Wats. AMAPObuckwheat, Fagopyrum esculentum MoenchEmergencegrowthcover cropresidue effectsgreen manureactivated carbon
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 57 , Issue 1 , February 2009 , pp. 66 - 73
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Al-Khatib, K., Libbey, C., and Boydston, R. 1997. Weed suppression with brassica green manure crops in green pea. Weed Sci. 45:439–445.Google Scholar
Barnes, J. P. and Putnam, A. R. 1986. Evidence for allelopathy by residues and aqueous extracts of rye (Secale cereale). Weed Sci. 34:384–390.Google Scholar
Baskin, C. C. and Baskin, J. M. 1998. Seeds: Ecology, Biogeography, and Evolution of Dormancy and Germination. San Diego, CA Academic. 666.Google Scholar
Bonanomi, G., Sicurezza, M. G., Caporaso, S., Esposito, A., and Mazzoleni, S. 2006. Phytotoxicity dynamics of decaying plant materials. New Phytol. 169:571–578.Google Scholar
Boodley, J. W. and Shedrake, R. Jr. 1977. Cornell Peat-Lite Mixes for Commercial Plant Growing. Informational Bulletin 43. Ithaca, NY New York State College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Cornell University. 8 p.Google Scholar
Brainard, D. C., DiTommaso, A., and Mohler, C. L. 2006. Intraspecific variation in germination response to ammonium nitrate of Powell amaranth (Amaranthus powellii) seeds originating from organic vs. conventional vegetable farms. Weed Sci. 54:435–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brecke, B. J. and Shilling, D. G. 1996. Effect of crop species, tillage, and rye (Secale cereale) mulch on sicklepod (Senna obtusifolia). Weed Sci. 44:133–136.Google Scholar
Butcko, V. M. and Jensen, R. J. 2002. Evidence of tissue-specific allelopathic activity in Euthamia graminifolia and Solidago canadensis (Asteraceae). Am. Midl. Nat. 148:253–262.Google Scholar
Callaway, R. M. and Aschehoug, E. T. 2000. Invasive plant versus their new and old neighbors: a mechanism for exotic invasion. Science. 290:521–523.Google Scholar
Carmona, D. M. and Landis, D. A. 1999. Influence of refuge habitats and cover crops on seasonal-density of ground beetles (Coleoptera:Carabidae) in field crops. Environ. Entomol. 28:1145–1153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chase, W. R., Nair, M. G., and Putnam, A. R. 1991. 2,2′-oxo-1,1′-azobenzene: selective toxicity of rye (Secale cereale L.) allelochemicals to weed and crop species: II. J. Chem. Ecol. 17:9–19.Google Scholar
Cheremisinoff, P. N. and Ellerbusch, F. 1978. Carbon Adsorption Handbook. Ann Arbor, MI Ann Arbor Science. 1063 p.Google Scholar
Chou, C. H. 1999. Roles of allelopathy in plant biodiversity and sustainable agriculture. Critical Rev. Plant Sci. 18:609–636.Google Scholar
Conklin, A. E., Erich, M. S., Liebman, M., Lambert, D., Gallandt, E. R., and Halteman, W. A. 2002. Effects of red clover (Trifolium pratense) green manure and compost soil amendments on wild mustard (Brassica kaber) growth and incidence of disease. Plant Soil. 238:245–256.Google Scholar
Davis, A. S. and Liebman, M. 2003. Cropping system effects on Setaria faberi seedbank dynamics. Aspects Appl. Biol. 69:83–91.Google Scholar
Diab, N. and Sullivan, J. 2003. Targeted Mowing as a Weed Management Method Increasing Allelopathy in Rye (Secale cereale L.). Santa Cruz, CA Organic Farming Research Foundation Project. Report 01-s-18. 18 p.Google Scholar
Dyck, E. and Liebman, M. 1994. Soil fertility management as a factor in weed control: the effect of crimson clover residue, synthetic nitrogen fertilizer, and their interaction on emergence and early growth of lambsquarters and sweet corn. Plant Soil. 167:227–237.Google Scholar
Eom, S. H., Kim, M. J., Choi, Y. H., Rim, Y. S., Yu, C. Y., and Kim, E. H. 1999. Allelochemicals from buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum Moench.) as herbicides. Korean J. Weed Sci. 19:83–89.Google Scholar
Gagliardo, R. W. and Chilton, W. S. 1992. Soil transformation of 2(3H)-benzoxazolone of rye into phytotoxic 2-amino-3H-phenoxazin-3-one. J. Chem. Ecol. 18:1683–1691.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallandt, E. R., Molloy, T., Lynch, R. P., and Drummond, F. A. 2005. Effect of cover-cropping systems on invertebrate seed predation. Weed Sci. 53:69–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golisz, A., Lata, B., Gawronski, S. W., and Fujii, Y. 2007. Specific and total activities of the allelochemicals identified in buckwheat. Weed Biol. Manag. 7:164–171.Google Scholar
Harper, J. L. 1977. Population Biology of Plants. San Diego, CA Academic. 892.Google Scholar
Hill, E. C., Ngouajio, M., and Nair, M. G. 2006. Differential response of weeds and vegetable crops to aqueous extracts of hairy vetch and cowpea. Hortscience. 41:695–700.Google Scholar
Hoffman, M. L., Weston, L. A., Snyder, J. C., and Regnier, E. E. 1996. Separating the effects of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) and rye (Secale cereale) root and shoot residues on weed development. Weed Sci. 44:402–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inderjit 2001. Soils: environmental effects on allelochemical activity. Agron. J. 93:79–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inderjit, , and Dakshini, K. M. M. 1996. Allelopathic potential of Pluchea lanceolata: comparative studies of cultivated fields. Weed Sci. 44:393–396.Google Scholar
Inderjit and L. A. Weston 2000. Are laboratory bioassays suitable for prediction of field responses. J. Chem. Ecol. 26:2111–2118.Google Scholar
Iqbal, Z., Hiradate, S., Noda, A., Isojima, S., and Fuji, Y. 2002. Allelopathy of buckwheat: assessment of allelopathic potential of extract of aerial parts of buckwheat and identification of fagomine and other related alkaloids as allelochemicals. Weed Biol. Manag. 2:110–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iqbal, Z., Hiradate, S., Noda, A., Isojima, S., and Fuji, Y. 2003. Allelopathic activity of buckwheat: isolation and characterization of phenolics. Weed Sci. 51:657–662.Google Scholar
Kalinová, J., Tríska, J., and Vrchotová, N. 2005. Biological activity of phenolic compounds present in buckwheat plant. Allelopathy J. 16:123–130.Google Scholar
Karssen, C. D. and Hilhorst, H. 1992. Effect of chemical environment on seed germination. Pages 327–347. in Fenner, M. Seeds: the Ecology of Regeneration in Plant Communities. Wallingford, UK CAB International.Google Scholar
Kremer, R. J. 1993. Management of weed seed banks with microorganisms. Ecol. Appl. 3:42–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kumar, V., Brainard, D. C., and Bellinder, R. R. 2008. Suppression of Powell amaranth (Amaranthus powellii), shepherd's-purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris), and corn chamomile (Anthemis arvensis) by buckwheat residues: role of nitrogen and fungal pathogens. Weed Sci. 56:271–280.Google Scholar
Machado, S. 2007. Allelopathic potential of various plant species on downy brome: implications for weed control in wheat production. Agron. J. 99:127–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohler, C. L. 1996. Ecological bases for the cultural control of annual weeds. J. Prod. Agric. 9:468–474.Google Scholar
Mohler, C. L. and Callaway, M. B. 1991. Effects of tillage and mulch on emergence and survival of weeds in sweet corn. J. Appl. Ecol. 29:21–34.Google Scholar
Mohler, C. L. and Teasdale, J. R. 1993. Response of weed emergence to rate of Vicia villosa Roth and Secale cereale L. residue. Weed Res. 33:487–499.Google Scholar
Özgür, A. and Ferhan, C. 2006. Effect of type of carbon activation on adsorption and its reversibility. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 81:94–101.Google Scholar
Prati, D. and Bossdorf, O. 2004. Allelopathic inhibition of germination by Alliaria petiolata (Brassicaceae). Am. J. Bot. 91:285–288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Putnam, A. R. 1994. Phytotoxicity of plant residues. Pages 285–314. in Unger, P. W. Managing Agricultural Residues. Boca Raton, FL Lewis.Google Scholar
Ridenour, W. M. and Callaway, R. M. 2001. The relative importance of allelopathy in interference: the effects of an invasive weed on a native bunchgrass. Oecologia. 126:444–450.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Samson, R. A. 1991. The weed suppressing effects of cover crops. Pages 11–22. in. Fifth Annual REAP Conference, Macdonald College, Ste.-Anne-de-Bellevue, Quebec.Google Scholar
SAS Institute 2001. SAS/STAT User's Guide Version 8.1. Cary, NC SAS Institute. 1030.Google Scholar
Schmidt, S. K. 1990. Ecological implications of the destruction of juglone (5-hydroxy-1,4-naphthoquinone) by soil bacteria. J. Chem. Ecol. 16:3547–3549.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teasdale, J. R. and Mohler, C. L. 2000. The quantitative relationship between weed emergence and the physical properties of mulches. Weed Sci. 48:385–392.Google Scholar
Thomas, W. E., Burke, I. C., Spears, J. F., and Wilcut, J. W. 2006. Influence of environmental factors on slender amaranth (Amaranthus viridis) germination. Weed Sci. 54:316–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsuzuki, E. and Dong, Y. 2003. Buckwheat allelopathy: use in weed management. Allelopathy J. 12:1–12.Google Scholar
Waterhouse, A. 2008. Folin-Ciocalteau Micro Method for Total Phenol in Wine. University of California, Davis. http://waterhouse.ucdavis.edu/phenol/folinmicro.htm. Accessed: August 20, 2008.Google Scholar
Weston, L. A. 1996. Utilization of allelopathy for weed management in agroecosystems. Agron. J. 88:860–866.Google Scholar
Xuan, T. D. and Tsuzuki, E. 2004. Allelopathic plants: buckwheat. Allelopathy J. 13:137–148.Google Scholar