Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-21T16:48:02.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed Species Shifts with Increasing Field Age in Alaska

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Jeffery S. Conn  and
John A. Delapp
Jeffery S. Conn
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric, and Agric. Exp. Stn., Univ, of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK 99701
John A. Delapp
Affiliation:
Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric, and Agric. Exp. Stn., Univ, of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK 99701
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Vegetative cover of weeds was determined in 84 agricultural fields representing a number of crops in Alaska. Multivariate statistical techniques were used with weed, soil, and management data to determine if weed vegetation was related to particular environmental and management variables. Field age was the variable that best explained the variation in vegetation composition. In fields recently cleared, native species were most important, being replaced by introduced weed species with increasing field age. Field horsetail (Equisetum arvense L.) was an exceptional native species that persisted under cultivation. Total weed cover was low in the first few years of cultivation, but increased as introduced species such as common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.), common chickweed [Stellaria media (L.) Cyrillo], quackgrass [Agropyron repens (L.) Beauv.], and foxtail barley (Hordeum jubatum L.) became more prevalent. A number of introduced species such as hempnettle (Galeopsis tetrahit L.) and Pennsylvania smartweed (Polygonum pensylvanicum L.) were restricted to just a few fields, emphasizing the importance of using weed-free seed and other management practices to minimize the spread of introduced weeds.

Keywords

Ordination techniquesweed ecology
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 31 , Issue 4 , July 1983 , pp. 520 - 524
Copyright
Copyright © 1983 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. Branton, C. I., Watson, C. E., and Newman, J. E. 1971. Climatic characteristics of selected Alaskan locations. Tech. Bull. 2. Univ. of Alaska Inst. of Agric. Sci., Fairbanks. 56.Google Scholar
2. Curtis, J. T. and McIntosh, R. P. 1951. An upland forest continum in the prairie-forest border region of Wisconsin. Ecology 32:476–496.Google Scholar
3. Dahnke, W. C., ed. 1980. Recommended chemical soil test procedures for the North central region. Bull. 499. N.D. Agric. Exp. Stn., Fargo. 27.Google Scholar
4. Dearborn, C. H. 1959. Weeds in Alaska and some aspects of their control. Weeds 7:265–270.Google Scholar
5. Gauch, H. G. Jr. 1973. The Cornell ecology program series. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Am. 54:10–11.Google Scholar
6. Gauch, H. G. Jr., Whittaker, R. H., and Wentworth, T. R. 1977. A comparative study of reciprocal averaging and other ordination techniques. J. Ecol. 65:157–174.Google Scholar
7. Goodall, D. W. 1954. Vegetational classification and vegetational continua. Angew. Pfl Soziol. Wien, Festschr. Aichinger 1:168–182.Google Scholar
8. Hill, M. O. 1973. Reciprocal averaging: an eigenvector method of ordination. J. Ecol. 61:237–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Hill, M. O. 1974. Correspondence analysis: a neglected multivariate method. J. R. Stat. Soc., Series C 23:340–354.Google Scholar
10. Hill, M. O. 1979. DECORANA. A FORTRAN program for detrended correspondence analysis and reciprocal averaging. Section of Ecology and Systematics, Cornell Univ., Ithaca. 28.Google Scholar
11. Hulten, E. 1968. Flora of Alaska and Neighboring Territories. Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, CA: 1000.Google Scholar
12. Nie, N. H., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J. G., Steinbrenner, K., and Bent, D. H. 1975. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. McGraw Hill, Inc., New York. 675.Google Scholar
13. Rieger, S., Schoephorster, D. B., and Furbush, C. E. 1979. Exploratory soil survey of Alaska. U.S. Dep. Agric., Soil Cons. Serv. Washington, DC. 213.Google Scholar
14. Thomas, W. C. 1976. Agriculture in Alaska: 1976–2000 AD. Alaska Rev. Bus. Econ Cond. 8:1–27.Google Scholar
15. Thomas, W. C. and Lewis, C. E. 1981. Alaska's Delta agricultural project: a review and analysis. Agric. Admin. 8:357–374.Google Scholar
16. Viereck, L. A. 1979. Vegetation analysis. Pages 25–34, in Viereck, L. A. and Dyrness, C. T., eds. Ecological effects of the Wickersham Dome fire near Fairbanks, Alaska. U.S. For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-90. U.S. Dep. Agric., Washington, DC. 71.Google Scholar
17. Welsh, S. L. 1974. Anderson's Flora of Alaska and Adjacent Parts of Canada. Brigham Young Univ. Press, Provo, UT. 724.Google Scholar
18. Whittaker, R. H., ed. 1973. Ordination and classification of communities. Handbook of Vegetation Science. The Hague: W. Junk, 5:1–737.Google Scholar
19. Whittaker, R. H. and Niering, W. A. 1965. Vegetation of the Santa Catalina Mountains, Arizona. II. A gradient analysis of the south slope. Ecology 46:429–452.Google Scholar