Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T06:27:03.185Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rhizome Differentiation in Yellow Nutsedge

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

D. K. Garg,
L. E. Bendixen and
S. R. Anderson
D. K. Garg
Affiliation:
College of Agriculture, Jobner, Rajasthan, India. (Formerly graduate student at the Ohio State University, Columbus.)
L. E. Bendixen
Affiliation:
Ohio State University and the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center
S. R. Anderson
Affiliation:
Ohio State University and the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center
Get access

Abstract

Rhizome differentiation in yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus L.), cultured under 12½, 14, and 15½-hr photoperiods, 21–16, 27–21, and 33–27 C temperatures (day and night, respectively), Hoagland solutions of 1/32, 1/8, and 1/2 strength nitrogen (N), and 0, 10, and 1000 ppm gibberellin (GA), was investigated in controlled-environment chambers.

High levels of N, long photoperiods, and high levels of GA at the shortest photoperiods inhibited tuberization whereas high temperatures at the lowest N level favored tuberization. Shoot formation was promoted by high levels of N, long photoperiods, and high temperatures under 12½ and 14-hr photoperiods while GA had a retarding effect. The higher levels of N, temperature, and GA decreased carbohydrate level whereas the longer photoperiods increased it.

It may be concluded that tuberization is not only the result of surplus carbohydrates in the plant but is controlled also by some GA-like substances regulated in the plant under specific conditions of photoperiod and temperature.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Weeds , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , April 1967, pp. 124 - 128
Copyright
Copyright © 1967 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. Arthur, J. M., Guthrie, J. D., and Newell, J. M. 1930. Some effects of artificial climates on the growth and chemical composition of plants. Amer. J. Botan. 17:416–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Bell, R. S., Lachman, W. H., Rahn, E. M., and Sweet, R. D. 1962. Life history studies as related to weed control in the Northeast. 1. Nutgrass. Rhode Island Agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 364. 33 p.Google Scholar
3. Claver, F. K. 1960. Efecto del acido gibberelico y de la hidrazide maleica sobre la tuberization de la papa. Phyton 15(1):29–35.Google Scholar
4. Driver, C. J. and Hawkes, J. G. 1943. Photoperiodism in the potato. Imp. Bur. Plant Breeding and Plant Genetic, School of Agriculture, Cambridge, England. 36 pp.Google Scholar
5. DuBois, M., Gilles, K., Hamilton, J., Rebers, P., and Smith, Fred. 1951. A colorimetric method for the determination of sugars. Nature 168:167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. DuBois, M., Gilles, K. A., Hamilton, J. K., Rebers, P. A., and Smith, Fred. 1956. Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Anal. Chem. 28:350–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Gregory, L. E. 1956. Some factors for tuberization in the potato plant. Amer. J. Botan. 43:281–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Okazawa, G. 1959. Studies on the occurrence of natural gibberellin and its effect on the tuber formation of potato plants. Proc. Crop Sci. Soc. Japan 28:129–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Okazawa, G. 1960. Studies on the relation between the tuber formation of potato and its natural gibberellin content. Proc. Crop. Sci. Soc. Japan 29:121–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Okazawa, Y. and Chapman, H. W. 1962. Regulation of tuber formation in the potato plant. Physiol. Plantarum 15:413–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Ranade, S. B. and Burns, W. 1925. The eradication of Cyperus rotundus L. (a study in pure and applied Botany) Memoirs of India, Dep. Agr. Botan. Ser. 13(4):99–192.Google Scholar