Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5cfd469876-sdmrd Total loading time: 0.263 Render date: 2021-06-24T20:03:52.450Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Interference of Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) in Transplanted Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Prasanta C. Bhowmik
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Soil Sci., Univ. Mass., Amherst, MA 01003
Krishna N. Reddy
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Soil Sci., Univ. Mass., Amherst, MA 01003

Abstract

Field studies were conducted in 1982 to 1984 to determine the effects of common lambsquarters on growth, yield, and nutrient concentration of transplanted tomato. Common lambsquarters densities ranged from 16 to 64 plants/m tomato row and fresh weight ranged from 26 360 kg/ha at 16 plants/m to 46 000 kg/ha at 64 plants/m row. Common lambsquarters did not affect tomato shoot dry weight at the vegetative stage but decreased the weight at the early fruit stage. Season-long interference of common lambsquarters reduced marketable tomato fruit number and also, marketable fruit weight ranging from 17% at 16 plants/m to 36% to 64 plants/m row. Concentrations of N in tomato leaves were unaltered at vegetative and flowering stages but decreased regardless of common lambsquarters density at early fruit and harvest stages. Weed density did not alter concentrations of P, K, and Ca in tomato leaves.

Type
Research
Copyright
Copyright © 1988 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.

References

1. Bhowmik, P. C., and Reddy, K. N. [1988]. Effects of barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) on growth, yield and nutrient status of transplanted tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum). Weed Sci. (in press).Google Scholar
2. Conn, J. S., and Thomas, D. L. 1987. Common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) interference in spring barley. Weed Technol. 1:312313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Dawson, J. H. 1965. Competition between irrigated sugarbeets and annual weeds. Weeds 13:245249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Dawson, J. H., and Rincker, C. M. 1982. Weeds in new seedlings of alfalfa (Medicago sativa) for seed production: Competition and control. Weed Sci. 30:2025.Google Scholar
5. Greweling, T. 1976. Chemical analyses of plant tissue. Search (New York Agric. Exp. Stn.) 6:133.Google Scholar
6. Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. The World's Worst Weeds, Distribution and Biology. Univ. Press Hawaii, Honolulu. p. 8491.Google Scholar
7. Mohammad, E. S., and Sweet, R. D. 1978. Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.) and tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) competition studies. I. Influence of plant densities. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. p. 38.Google Scholar
8. Monaco, T. J., Grayson, A. S., and Sanders, D. C. 1981. Influence of four weed species on the growth, yield, and quality of direct-seeded tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum). Weed Sci. 29:394397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Sanders, D. C., Grayson, A. S., and Monaco, T. J. 1981, Mineral content of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) and four competing weed species. Weed Sci. 29:590593.Google Scholar
10. Schweizer, E. E. 1983. Common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) interference in sugarbeets (Beta vulgaris). Weed Sci. 31:57.Google Scholar
11. Stubblefield, F. M., and DeTurk, E. E. 1940. Effect of ferric sulfate in shortening Kjeldahl digestion. Ind. Eng. Chem. Anal. Ed. 12:396399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Welbank, P. J. 1963. A comparison of competitive effects of some common weed species. Ann. Appl. Biol. 51:107125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Interference of Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) in Transplanted Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum)
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Interference of Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) in Transplanted Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum)
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Interference of Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) in Transplanted Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum)
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *