Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-fmk2r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-27T06:21:57.249Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Density and Species Proportion on Competition between Spurred Anoda (Anoda cristata) and Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

David T. Patterson
David T. Patterson*
Affiliation:
Plant Physiol., U.S. Dep. Agric., Dep. Bot., Duke Univ., Durham, NC 7706
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Spurred anoda and velvetleaf were grown for 40 days in controlled-environment chambers in monocultures at densities of 2, 4, 8, and 12 plants per 20-cm-diam pot and in mixed culture with all combinations of 2, 4, 8, and 12 plants of each species per pot. The day/night temperature was 29/23 C, and the photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD) was 1000 μE m–2 s–1. Shoot dry weights and leaf areas of the two species were similar when they were grown in monoculture. However, in mixed culture spurred anoda exceeded velvetleaf in leaf area/plant and shoot weight/plant in 15 out of 16 treatments. Multiple linear regression equations relating shoot biomass/plant to the density of both species in mixed culture were calculated. Comparison of competition coefficients from these equations indicated that the competitive impact of a single spurred anoda plant was equivalent to the impact of 2.5 velvetleaf plants. In mixed culture, spurred anoda always contributed a greater proportion of the total shoot weight and total leaf area per pot than would be predicted from its proportion of the total plant population. These results indicate spurred anoda is competitively superior to velvetleaf.

Keywords

Spurred anoda, Anoda cristata (L.) Schlecht. # ANVCRvelvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti Medik. # ABUTHCompetition-methodology
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 38 , Issue 4-5 , September 1990 , pp. 351 - 357
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 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. Black, J. N. 1956. The influence of seed size and depth of sowing on pre-emergence and early vegetative growth of subterranean clover (Trifolium subterraneum L.). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 7:98–109.Google Scholar
2. Black, J. N. 1958. Competition between plants of different initial seed sizes in swards of subterranean clover (Trifolium subterraneum L.) with particular reference to leaf area and the light microclimate. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 9:299–318.Google Scholar
3. Chandler, J. M. 1977. Competition of spurred anoda, velvetleaf, prickly sida, and Venice mallow in cotton. Weed Sci. 25:151–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Downs, R. J. and Hellmers, H. 1975. Environment and the Experimental Control of Plant Growth. Academic Press, New York. Page 112.Google Scholar
5. Firbank, L. G. and Watkinson, A. R. 1985. On the analysis of competition within two species mixtures of plants. J. Appl. Ecol. 22:503–517.Google Scholar
6. Flint, E. P., Patterson, D. T., and Beyers, J. L. 1983. Interference and temperature effects on growth of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum), spurred anoda (Anoda cristata), and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 31:892–898.Google Scholar
7. Radosevich, S. R. 1987. Methods to study interactions among crops and weeds. Weed Technol. 1:190–198.Google Scholar
8. Radosevich, S. R. and Holt, J. S. 1984. Weed Ecology. Implications for Vegetation Management. John Wiley and Sons, New York. Pages 93–115.Google Scholar
9. Rejmanek, M., Robinson, G. R., and Rejmankova, E. 1989. Weed-crop competition: Experimental designs and models for data analysis. Weed Sci. 37:276–284.Google Scholar
10. Roush, M. L., Radosevich, S. R., Wagner, R. G., Maxwell, B. D., and Petersen, T. D. 1989. A comparison of methods for measuring effects of density and proportion in plant competition experiments. Weed Sci. 37:268–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. SAS Institute, Inc. 1987. SAS/STAT Guide for Personal Computers. Version 6 ed. SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, NC. 1028 pp.Google Scholar
12. Spencer, N. R. 1984. Velvetleaf, Abutilon theophrasti (Malvaceae), history and economic impact in the United States. Econ. Bot. 38:407–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Spitters, C.J.T. 1983. An alternative approach to the analysis of mixed cropping experiments. 1. Estimation of competition effects. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 31:1–11.Google Scholar
14. Suehiro, K. and Ogawa, H. 1980. Competition between two annual herbs, Atriplex gmelini C. A. Mey and Chenopodium album L., in mixed cultures irrigated with seawater of various concentrations. Oecologia (Berl.) 45:167–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Wright, A. J. 1981. The analysis of yield-density relationships in binary mixtures using inverse polynomials. J. Agric. Sci. 96:561–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Zimdahl, R. L. 1980. Weed-Crop Competition. A Review. Int. Plant Prot. Ctr., Corvallis, OR. Pages 15–27.Google Scholar