Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T14:19:21.141Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Phosphorus Fertility on Competition Between Lettuce (Lactuca sativa) and Spiny Amaranth (Amaranthus spinosus)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

James W. Shrefler ,
Joan A. Dusky ,
Donn G. Shilling ,
Barry J. Brecke  and
Charles A. Sanchez
James W. Shrefler
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611
Joan A. Dusky
Affiliation:
Everglades Res. Ed. Ctr., Univ. Florida, Belle Glade, FL 33430
Donn G. Shilling
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611
Barry J. Brecke
Affiliation:
Ag. Res. Ed. Ctr., Univ. Florida, Jay, FL 32565
Charles A. Sanchez
Affiliation:
Everglades Res. Ed. Ctr., Univ. Florida, Belle Glade, FL 33430
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted to determine the influence of phosphorus (P) fertility and method of application (banded versus broadcast) on the competitive interaction of lettuce and spiny amaranth. Weed density significantly affected lettuce head weight and spiny amaranth shoot biomass after 5 wk of interference. Weed density and duration of interference had little or no effect on P content of lettuce tissue. Duration of interference did affect P concentration of spiny amaranth; however, weed density did not Spiny amaranth competition reduced lettuce yield, but P was not the limiting factor. Duration of interference and method of P application interactively affected lettuce head weight; however, only duration of interference affected spiny amaranth biomass. Seven wk of interference caused a decrease in lettuce head weight of 20, 8, and 24% when P was broadcast, banded, or not applied, respectively. Banding of P reduced the negative impact of spiny amaranth on lettuce. Although method of P application influenced the interaction between lettuce and spiny amaranth, interspecific competition between the two species probably was not due to competition for P but some other factor.

Keywords

Lettuce, Lactuca sativa L., 'Southbay,’ spiny amaranth, Amaranthus spinosus L. # AMASPIntraspecific competitioninterspecific competitionweed/crop interferenceAMASP
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 42 , Issue 4 , December 1994 , pp. 556 - 560
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 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.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Aldrich, R. J. 1987. Predicting crop yield reductions from weeds. Weed Technol. 1:199–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Alvarez, J. and Sanchez, C. A. 1991. Phosphorous application constraints limit profitability of sweet corn and lettuce production. Hortic. Sci. 26:307–309.Google Scholar
3. Bremner, J. M. and Mulvaney, C. S. 1982. Nitrogen-total. Pages 596–624 in Page, A. L., ed. Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2. Am. Soc. Agron., Madison.Google Scholar
4. Buckeridge, D. J. and Norrington-Davies, J. 1986. Competition for phosphate between establishing plants of Lolium perenne and Trifolium repens under differing cultivation treatments in an upland pasture. J. Agric. Sci. 106:449–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Chapin, F. S. and Bielski, R. L. 1982. Mild phosphorus stress in barley and a related low-phosphorus-adapted barleygrass: Phosphorus fractions and phosphate absorption in relation to growth. Physiol. Plant. 54:309–317.Google Scholar
6. Costigan, P. A. 1984. The effects of placing small amounts of phosphate fertilizer close to the seed on growth and nutrient concentrations of lettuce. Plant and Soil. 79:191–201.Google Scholar
7. Dusky, J. A., Stall, W. M., and White, J. M. 1988. Evaluation of herbicides for weed control in Florida lettuce production. Proc. FL. State Hortic. Soc. 101:367–370.Google Scholar
8. Dusky, J. A. and Shrefler, J. W. 1992. Spiny amaranth (Amaranthus spinosus) competition with lettuce. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 45:313.Google Scholar
9. Firbank, L. G. and Watkinson, A. R. 1990. On the effects of competition: From monocultures to mixtures. Pages 165–192 in Grace, J. B. and Tilman, D., eds. Perspectives on Plant Competition. Academic, San Diego.Google Scholar
10. Gardner, W. K. and Boundy, K. A. 1983. The acquisition of phosphorus by Lupinus albus L. IV. The effect of interplanting wheat and white lupine on the growth and mineral composition of the two species. Plant and Soil. 70:391–402.Google Scholar
11. Giannopolitis, C. N., Vassiliou, G., and Vizantinopoulos, S. 1989. Effects of weed interference and herbicides on nitrate and carotene accumulation in lettuce. J. Agric. Food Chem. 37:312–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Lucas, R. E. 1982. Organic soils (Histosols) formation, distribution, physical and chemical properties and management for crop production. Res. Report 435. Mich. State Univ. Agric. Exp. Stn. East Lansing.Google Scholar
13. Roberts, H. A., Hewson, R. T., and Ricketts, M. A. 1977. Weed competition in drilled summer lettuce. Hortic. Res. 17:39–45.Google Scholar
14. Sanchez, C. A. and Burdine, H. W. 1988. Relationship between soil-test P and K levels and lettuce yield on Everglades histosols. Proc. Soil Crop Sci. Soc. FL. 47:52–56.Google Scholar
15. Sanchez, C. A. 1990. Soil-testing and fertilization recommendations for crop production on organic soils in Florida. Univ. Florida Tech. Bull. 876. Gainesville.Google Scholar
16. Sanchez, C. A., Swanson, S., and Porter, P. S. 1990. Banding P to improve fertilizer use efficiency of lettuce. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 115:581–584.Google Scholar
17. SAS Institute Inc. 1987. The ANOVA procedure. Pages 125–154 in SAS/STAT Guide for Personal Computers, Version 6 edition. SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
18. Shrefler, J. W., Dusky, J. A., Sanchez, C. A., and Colvin, D. L. 1991. Weed interference in crisphead lettuce. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 44:206.Google Scholar
19. Weiner, J. 1980. The effects of plant density, species proportion and potassium-phosphorus fertilization on interference between Trifolium incarnatum and Lolium multiflorum with limited nutrient supply. J. Ecol. 68:969–979.Google Scholar
20. Wolf, B. 1982. A comprehensive system of leaf analyses and its use for diagnosing crop nutrient status. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 13:1035–1059.Google Scholar