Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T20:08:56.668Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of fluctuating temperatures on emergence of shattercane (Sorghum bicolor) and giant foxtail (Setaria faberi)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

George O. Kegode ,
R. Brent Pearce  and
Ted B. Bailey
R. Brent Pearce
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011
Ted B. Bailey
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Understanding patterns of shattercane and giant foxtail field emergence during the spring and summer in the Midwest is important to determine the best weed management programs for crop production systems. The primary objective of this study was to determine percentage emergence of shattercane and giant foxtail under field conditions as influenced by soil temperature fluctuations, in 1992 and 1993. A secondary objective was to determine the difference in emergence percentage based on shattercane and giant foxtail seed lots harvested in different years (1985, 1991, and 1992). Soil temperature fluctuations were manipulated by artificially shading the soil surface with plastic netting that provided 30, 60, and 90% of incident sunlight in addition to the full sunlight control (0% shade). Giant foxtail and shattercane seed was planted at depths of 1.25, 2.5, 5, and 10 cm under each shade, and emergence was monitored for 45 d. Soil temperature fluctuations were reduced by increasing depth and amount of shade. Increasing depth of seed significantly reduced percentage emergence by 63 and 54% for shattercane, and 71 and 73% for giant foxtail in 1992 and 1993, respectively. Decreasing light intensity significantly reduced percentage emergence of shattercane by 72 and 73% in 1992 and 1993, respectively, but did not decrease giant foxtail emergence. Seed lots of both species were different from one another both years. These results were consistent over years, even though 1993 precipitation was three times that for 1992. Therefore, shattercane seed uses diurnal fluctuations in temperature to sense proximity to the soil surface and covering vegetation to avoid germination when conditions are unfavorable for growth. In contrast, giant foxtail seed can germinate readily and grow when environmental conditions are within an acceptable range and when seed is not buried too deeply. Differences in percentage emergence between seed lots could play a major role in emergence patterns of shattercane and giant foxtail observed in the field and may be influenced by environmental conditions during seed development on parent plants.

Keywords

Shattercane, Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench. SORBIgiant foxtail, Setaria faberi Herrm. SETFAWeed biologyweed ecologypercentage emergenceburial depthshadeseed lotsSORBISETFA
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 46 , Issue 3 , June 1998 , pp. 330 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 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

Arnold, R.L.B., Fenner, M., and Edwards, P. J. 1991. Changes in germinability, ABA content and ABA embryonic sensitivity in developing seeds of Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench. induced by water stress during grain filling. New Phytol. 118: 339–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, R.L.B., Ghersa, C. M., Sanchez, R. A., and Garcia Fernandes, A. E. 1988. The role of fluctuating temperatures in the germination and establishment of Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. Regulation of germination under leaf canopies. Funct. Ecol. 2: 311–318.Google Scholar
Arnold, R.L.B., Ghersa, C. M., Sanchez, R. A., and Insausti, P. 1990. Temperature effects on dormancy release and germination rate in Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. seeds: a quantitative analysis. Weed Res. 30: 81–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baird, J. H. and Dickens, R. 1991. Germination and emergence of v irginia buttonwecd (Diodia virginiana). Weed Sci. 39: 37–41.Google Scholar
Barovetz, S. J. and Schiener, S. M. 1994. The effect of seed mass on the seed ecology of Coreopsis lanceolata . Am. Midl. Nat. 131: 65–74.Google Scholar
Baskin, J. M. and Baskin, C. C. 1977. Role of temperature in the germination ecology of three summer annual weeds. Oecologia (Berlin) 30: 377–382.Google Scholar
Baskin, J. M. and Baskin, C. C. 1984. Environmental conditions required for the germination of prickly sida (Sida spinosa). Weed Sci. 32: 786–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baskin, J. M. and Baskin, C. C. 1989. Physiology of dormancy and germination in relation to seed bank ecology. Pages 53–56 in Leek, M. A., Parker, V. T., and Simpson, R. L., eds. Ecology of Soil Seed Banks. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bazzaz, F. A. 1979. The physiological ecology of plant succession. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 10: 351–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bewley, J. D. and Black, M. 1994. Seeds: Physiology of Development and Germination. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 199–292.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D. 1991. Influence of tillage systems on weed population dynamics and control in the northern Corn Belt of the United States. Trends Agron. 1: 51–59.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D. and Oplinger, E. S. 1990. Influence of tillage systems on annual weed densities and control in solid-seeded soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 38: 158–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnside, O. C. 1965. Seed and Phenological Studies with Shattercane. Research Bull. 220. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Agricultural Experiment Station. 37 p.Google Scholar
Clark, L. E., Collier, J. W., and Langston, R. 1968. Dormancy in Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench. II. Effect of pericarp and testa. Crop Sci. 8: 155–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dekker, J., Dekker, B., Hilhorst, H., and Karssen, C. 1996. Weedy adaptation in Setaria spp. IV. Changes in the germinative capacity of S. faberii (Poaceae) embryos with development from anthesis to after abscission. Am. J. Bot. 83: 979–991.Google Scholar
Fellows, G. M. and Roeth, F. W. 1992. Factors influencing shattercane (Sorghum bicolor) seed survival. Weed Sci. 40: 434–440.Google Scholar
Fenner, M. 1985. Seed Ecology. New York: Chapman and Hall, pp. 87–116.Google Scholar
Fenner, M. 1991. The effects of the parent environment on seed germinability. Seed Sci. Res. 1: 75–84.Google Scholar
Ghersa, C. M., Arnold, R.L.B., and Martinez-Ghersa, M. A. 1992. The role of fluctuating temperatures in germination and establishment of Sorghum halepense . Regulation of germination at increasing depths. Funct. Ecol. 6: 460–468.Google Scholar
Griffith, D. R., Mannering, J. V., Galloway, H. M., Parson, S. D., and Richey, C. B. 1973. Effect of eight tillage-planting systems on soil temperature, percent stand, plant growth, and yield of corn on five Indiana soils. Agron. J. 65: 321–326.Google Scholar
Horak, M. J. and Moshier, L. J. 1994. Shattercane (Sorghum bicolor) biology and management. Rev. Weed Sci. 6: 133–149.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. D. and Lowery, B. 1985. Effect of three conservation tillage practices on soil temperatures and thermal properties. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 49: 1547–1552.Google Scholar
Kegode, G. O. and Pearce, R. B. 1998. Influence of environment during maternal plant growth on dormancy of shattercane (Sorghum bicolor) and giant foxtail (Setaria Faberii) seed. Weed Sci. 46: 322–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knake, E. L. 1990. Giant Foxtail Setaria faberii Herrm. Bull. 803. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 22 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, D. J. and Fletchall, O. H. 1963. Germination-Regulating Mechanisms of Giant Foxtail (Setaria faberii). Research Bull. 829. Columbia, MO: Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station. 25 p.Google Scholar
Reese, C. R. and Forcella, F. 1997. WeedCast 1.1. Forecasting weed emergence and growth in crop environments. Available from http://www.mrsars.usda.gov.Google Scholar
Roach, D. A. and Wulff, R. D. 1987. Maternal effects in plants. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18: 209–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1989. The GLM procedure. in SAS/STAT User's Guide. 6th ed. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. M. 1990. Seed Dormancy in Grasses. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 114–206.Google Scholar
Stanway, V. 1959. Germination of Sorghum vulgare Pers. at alternating temperature of 20–30 C and 20–35 C. Proc. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. 49: 84–87.Google Scholar
Swinton, S. M. and King, R. P. 1994. A bioeconomic model for weed management in corn and soybeans. Agric. Syst. 44: 313–335.Google Scholar
Taylor, G. B. 1981. Effect of constant temperature treatments followed by fluctuating temperatures on the softening of hard seeds of Trifolium subterraneum L. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 8: 547–558.Google Scholar
Taylorson, R. B. 1982. Anesthetic effects on secondary dormancy and phytochrome responses in Setaria faberi seeds. Plant Physiol. 70: 882–886.Google Scholar
Thompson, K. and Grime, J. P. 1983. A comparative study of germination responses to diurnally-fluctuating temperatures. J. Appl. Ecol. 20: 141–156.Google Scholar
Thompson, K., Grime, J. P., and Mason, G. 1977. Seed germination in response to diurnal fluctuations in temperature. Nature (London) 267: 147–148.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. D. 1972. Characterization of the dormancy of the seed of wild cane [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Missouri, Columbia, MO. 81 p.Google Scholar