Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-lrf7s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-25T06:08:36.911Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Morphological and Herbicide Susceptibility Differences among Strains of Hoary Cress

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

J. J. Sexsmith
J. J. Sexsmith*
Affiliation:
Soils Section, Canada Agriculture Research Station, Lethbridge, Alberta
Get access

Abstract

Strains of hoary cress, particularly within the lens-podded species (Cardaria chalepensis (L.) Hand.-Maz.), varied greatly in leaf size and shape, spreading ability, stand density, and reaction to treatment with several herbicides. Without competition, heart-podded hoary cress (C. draba (L.) Desv.) spread farther and produced a denser stand than either lens-podded or globe-podded cress (C. pubescens (K. A. Meyer) Jarm.), and, in general, was more susceptible to 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and trichlorobenzoic acid (2,3,6-TBA) than lens-podded cress. Within 12 strains of lens-podded hoary cress no relationship was found between susceptibility to 2,4-D or 2,3,6-TBA and any other characteristic.

Type
Research Article
Information
Weeds , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , January 1964 , pp. 19 - 22
Copyright
Copyright © 1964 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. Bellue, M. K. 1933. New weeds confused with hoary cress. California Dept. Agr. Monthly Bull. 22:288–293.Google Scholar
2. Brown, E. O. 1946. Notes on some variations in field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis L.). Iowa State Coll. J. Sci. 20:269–276.Google Scholar
3. Buchholz, K. P. 1958. Variations in the sensitivity of clones of quackgrass to dalapon. Proc. NCWCC 15:18–19.Google Scholar
4. Budd, A. C., and Best, K. F. 1956. A suggested system of leaf shape classification. Weeds 4:398–399.Google Scholar
5. Corns, W. G., and Frankton, C. 1952. Hoary cresses in Canada with particular reference to their distribution and control in Alberta. Sci. Agr. 32:484–495.Google Scholar
6. Fernald, M. L. 1950. Gray's manual of botany. 8th ed. American Book Co., New York. 1632 pp.Google Scholar
7. Hodgson, J. M. 1961. Response of ecotypes of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense Scop.) to herbicides and cultivation. Abstracts, WSA, 36–37.Google Scholar
8. Hubbard, F. T. 1915. A taxonomic study of Setaria italica and its immediate allies. Am. J. Bot. 2:169–198.Google Scholar
9. Mulligan, G. A., and Frankton, C. 1962. Taxonomy of the genus Cardaria with particular reference to the species introduced into North America. Can. J. Bot. 40:1411–1425.Google Scholar
10. Pryor, M. R. 1959. Hoary cress: New control findings. California Dept. Agr. Bull. 48:11–14.Google Scholar
11. Raynor, R. N. 1945. Experiments on controlling hoary cress by cultivation, searing, and spraying. California Dept. Agr. Bull. 34:17–26.Google Scholar
12. Santelmann, P. W., and Meade, J. A. 1961. Variations in morphological characteristics and dalapon susceptibility within the species Setaria lutescens and S. Faberii . Weeds 9:406–410.Google Scholar
13. Warren, R., and Freed, V. 1954. Canada thistle. Oregon Agr. Expt. Sta. Ext. Bull. 519.Google Scholar
14. Whitehead, C. W., and Switzer, D. M. 1958. The differential susceptibility of wild carrot plants to various herbicides. Proc. NCWCC 15:128.Google Scholar
15. Willard, C. J. 1934. Eradicating Canada thistle. Ohio Agr. Expt. Sta. Ext. Bull. 146.Google Scholar