Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-jswmv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T19:56:25.657Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phenology of common lambsquarters growth parameters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jed Colquhoun,
David E. Stoltenberg,
Larry K. Binning and
Chris M. Boerboom
David E. Stoltenberg
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706
Larry K. Binning
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706
Chris M. Boerboom
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Research was conducted to characterize the phenology of common lambsquarters growth parameters as influenced by climatic variation among years. Treatments included soybean or corn grown alone, common lambsquarters with soybean or corn, and common lambsquarters grown alone. Common lambsquarters leaf area and plant height phenology differed among years and was variable within treatments. Conversely, crop leaf area and plant height phenology did not differ among years and was less variable within a treatment than common lambsquarters. Weed relative leaf area and relative volume differed among years because of differences in crop and common lambsquarters leaf area and plant height phenology. Differences in common lambsquarters relative leaf area and relative volume among years may explain differences in previously reported crop yield responses to weed infestations between sites and years. Although common lambsquarters relative leaf area and relative volume differed among years, variability as indicated by regression coefficients of determination was also high within year and treatment. Crop leaf area and plant height phenology were well described by regression equations, with r 2 values greater than 0.68. Therefore, low coefficients of determination for relative leaf area and relative volume models were attributed to variability in common lambsquarters within a treatment.

Keywords

Common lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. CHEALfield corn, ‘Dekalb DK493SR’, Zea mays L.soybean, ‘Asgrow XP19505RR’ and ‘AG2101RR’, Glycine max L. MerrWeed biologyweed ecologyCHEAL

Information

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , April 2001, pp. 177 - 183
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Alm, D. M., McGiffen, M. E. Jr., and Hesketh, J. D. 1991. Weed phenology. Pages 191–218 In Hodges, T., ed. Predicting Crop Phenology. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Alm, D. M., Pike, D. R., Hesketh, J. D., and Stoller, E. W. 1988. Leaf area development in some crop and weed species. Biotronics 17:9–39.Google Scholar
Bhowmik, P. C. 1997. Weed biology: importance to weed management. Weed Sci. 45:349–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bussler, B. H., Maxwell, B. D., and Puettmann, K. 1995. Using plant volume to quantify interference in corn (Zea mays) neighborhoods. Weed Sci. 43:586–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caton, B. P., Foin, T. C., and Hill, J. E. 1997. Phenotypic plasticity of Ammannia spp. in competition with rice. Weed Res. 37:33–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cousens, R. 1985a. A simple model relating yield loss to weed density. Ann. Appl. Biol. 107:239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cousens, R. 1985b. An empirical model relating crop yield to weed and crop density and a statistical comparison with other models. J. Agric. Sci. 105:513–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cousens, R., Brain, P., O’Donovan, J. T., and O’Sullivan, P. A. 1987. The use of biologically realistic equations to describe the effects of weed density and relative time of emergence on crop yield. Weed Sci. 35:720–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cousens, R., Weaver, S. E., Porter, J. R., Rooney, J. M., Butler, D. R., and Johnson, M. P. 1992. Growth and development of Avena fatua (Wildoat) in the field. Ann. Appl. Biol. 120:339–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deen, W., Hunt, T., and Swanton, C. J. 1998a. Influence of temperature, photoperiod, and irradiance on the phenological development of common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia). Weed Sci. 46:555–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deen, W., Hunt, T., and Swanton, C. J. 1998b. Photothermal time describes common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) phenological development and growth. Weed Sci. 46:561–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dekker, J. 1997. Weed diversity and weed management. Weed Sci. 45:357–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devore, J. and Peck, R. 1993. Statistics: The Exploration and Analysis of Data. 2nd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. pp. 691–706.Google Scholar
Forcella, F., Wilson, R. G., Renner, K. A., Dekker, J., Harvey, R. G., Alm, D. A., Buhler, D. D., and Cardina, J. 1992. Weed seed banks of the U.S. corn belt: magnitude, variation, emergence, and application. Weed Sci. 40:636–644.Google Scholar
Ghersa, C. M. and Holt, J. S. 1995. Using phenology prediction in weed management: a review. Weed Res. 35:461–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. Chenopodium album L. Chenopodiaceae, goosefoot family. Pages 84–91 In The World's Worst Weeds: Distribution and Ecology. Honolulu, HI: University Press of Hawaii.Google Scholar
Kilkenny, Z. A. 1995. Emergence and Growth of Common Annual Weeds Under Varied Levels of Shade. M.S. thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. 92 pp.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1994. Interference of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) in corn (Zea mays). Weed Res. 35:207–214.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S. A., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1995. Comparison of empirical models depicting density of Amaranthus retroflexus L. and relative leaf area as predictors of yield loss in maize (Zea mays L.). Weed Res. 35:207–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kropff, M. J. and Spitters, C.J.T. 1991. A simple model of crop loss by weed competition from early observations on relative leaf area of weeds. Weed Res. 31:97–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindquist, J. L., Mortensen, D. A., Westra, P., et al. 1999. Stability of corn (Zea mays)-foxtail (Setaria spp.) interference relationships. Weed Sci. 47:195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lotz, L.A.P., Christensen, S., Cloutier, D., et al. 1996. Prediction of the competitive effects of weeds on crop yields based on relative leaf area of weeds. Weed Res. 36:93–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, D. C. and Smith, H. 1981. Control of development in Chenopodium album L. by shadelight: the effect of light quantity (total fluence rate) and light quality (red : far-red ratio). New Phytol. 88:239–248.Google Scholar
Mulugeta, D. and Stoltenberg, D. E. 1998. Influence of cohorts on Chenopodium album demography. Weed Sci. 46:65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ngouajio, M., Lemieux, C., and Leroux, G. D. 1999. Prediction of corn (Zea mays) yield loss from early observations of the relative leaf area and the relative leaf cover of weeds. Weed Sci. 47:297–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parks, R. J., Curran, W. S., Roth, G. W., Hartwig, N. L., and Calvin, D. D. 1995. Common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) control in corn (Zea mays) with postemergence herbicides and cultivation. Weed Technol. 9:728–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, D. T. 1992. Temperature and canopy development of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 6:68–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlichting, C. D. 1989. Phenotypic plasticity in Phlox . II. Plasticity of character correlations. Oecologia 78:496–501.Google ScholarPubMed
Sibuga, K. P. and Bandeen, J. D. 1980. Effects of green foxtail and lamb'squarters interference in field corn. Can. J. Plant Sci. 60:1419–1425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siebert, A. C. and Pearce, R. B. 1993. Growth analysis of weed and crop species with reference to seed weight. Weed Sci. 41:52–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wall, D. A. and Morrison, I. N. 1990. Phenological development and biomass allocation in Silene vulgaris (Moench) Garcke. Weed Res. 30:279–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar