Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-13T23:46:20.667Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Allelopathic Activity of Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense) in Colorado

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

W. J. Stachon and
R. L. Zimdahl
W. J. Stachon
Affiliation:
Weed Res. Lab., Dep. Bot. and Plant Pathol., Colorado State Univ., Ft. Collins, CO 80523
R. L. Zimdahl
Affiliation:
Weed Res. Lab., Dep. Bot. and Plant Pathol., Colorado State Univ., Ft. Collins, CO 80523
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Low species diversity accompanied high populations of Canada thistle [Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop.]. Two perennial grasses and two rushes grew with Canada thistle; annual plants did not. Canada thistle litter, ground roots, and ground foliage added to soil in greenhouse bio-assay tests reduced growth of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.) and green foxtail [Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv.] more than cucumber (Cucumis sativis L.) or barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). The addition of nutrients did not mask the toxic effect. Ethanolic extracts of Canada thistle roots and foliage were similar in their ability to reduce radicle growth of barley, cucumber, green foxtail, and redroot pigweed in petri dish studies. There was no significant difference between water controls and controls adjusted to the average pH and osmotic potential of the extracts. Germination of barley and cucumber seed was not affected. Comparisons between ethanolic extractions and soil incorporation of plant residues with presumably non-allelopathic plants revealed that cucumber and barley extracts reduced redroot pigweed radicle growth whereas barley and green foxtail extracts increased green foxtail radicle growth. These effects were not observed when these plant residues were mixed in soil.

Keywords

Plant residuetoxic extractsweed ecology

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , January 1980, pp. 83 - 86
Copyright
Copyright © 1980 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

1. Amor, R. L. and Harris, R. V. 1975. Seedling establishment and vegetative spread of Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. in Victoria, Australia. Weed Res. 15:407–411.Google Scholar
2. Bendall, G. M. 1975. The allelopathic activity of California thistle (Cirsium arvense) in Tasmania. Weed Res. 15:77–81.Google Scholar
3. Bonner, J. 1950. The role of toxic substances in the interaction of higher plants. Bot. Rev. 16:51–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Chou, C. H. and Young, C. C. 1974. Effects of osmotic concentration and pH on plant growth. Taiwania 19:157–165.Google Scholar
5. del Moral, R. and Muller, C. H. 1970. The allelopathic effects of Eucalyptus camalduiensis . Am. Midl. Nat. 83:254–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. del Moral, R. and Gates, R. G. 1971. Allelopathic potential of dominant vegetation of Western Washington. Ecology 52:1030–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Einhellig, F. A., Rice, E. L., Risser, P. G., and Wender, S. H. 1970. Effects of scopoletin on growth, CO2 exchange rates, and concentration of scopoletin, scopolin, and chlorogenic acids in tobacco, sunflower, and pigweed. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club. 97:22–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Evanari, M. 1949. Germination inhibitors. Bot. Rev. 15:153–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Helgeson, E. A. and Konzak, R. 1950. Phytotoxic effects of aqueous extracts of field bindweed and of Canada thistle. A preliminary report. North Dakota Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 12:71–76.Google Scholar
10. Hoagland, D. R. and Arnon, D. I. 1950. The water-culture method for growing plants without soil. California Agric. Exp. Stn. Cir. 347. 39 pp.Google Scholar
11. Hodgson, J. M. 1963. Canada thistle, you can't afford to keep them. Montana Agric. Exp. Stn. Cir. 241:1–2.Google Scholar
12. Hodgson, J. M. 1968. The nature, ecology, and control of Canada thistle. Tech. Bull. No. 1386, Agric. Res. Serv. USDA.Google Scholar
13. Kommedahl, T., Kotheimer, J. B., and Bernardine, J. V. 1959. The effects of quackgrass on germination and seedling development of certain crop plants. Weeds 7:1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Muller, C. H. and del Moral, R. 1966. Soil toxicity induced by terpenes from Salvia leucophylla . Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 93:130–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Overland, L. 1966. The role of allelopathic substances in the “Smother Crop” barley. Am. Bot. 53:423–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Putnam, A. R. and Duke, W. B. 1974. Biological suppression of weeds: Evidence of allelopathy in accessions of cucumber. Science 185:370–372.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17. Rice, E. L. 1964/1967. Chemical warefare between plants. Biol. Sci. 38:67–74.Google Scholar
18. Rice, E. L. 1965. Inhibition of nitrogen-fixing and nitrifying bacteria by seed plants. II. Characterization and identification of inhibitors. Physiol. Plant. 18:255–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Tinnin, R. O. and Muller, C. H. 1972. The allelopathic influences of Avena fatua: The allelopathic mechanism. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 99:287–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Whittaker, R. H. 1971. The chemistry of communities. Pages 10–18 in Biochemical Interactions Among Plants. Environmental Physiology. Subcomm., U.S. Nat. Comm., IBP, Nat. Acad. Sci., Washington, DC.Google Scholar