Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T19:16:26.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth and Reproductive Characteristics of Field Bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) Biotypes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Francis P. Degennaro  and
Stephen C. Weller
Francis P. Degennaro
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic., Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN 47907
Stephen C. Weller
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic., Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN 47907
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Five presumed biotypes were identified among field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis L. ♯3 CONAR) clones collected from a field population near Lafayette, IN. Consistent variations in leaf morphology, floral characteristics, and accumulation of shoot and root biomass were found between biotypes when grown in a controlled environment. The biotypes also differed in their flowering capacity. The earliest flowering biotype formed flowers 23 days before the latest and produced 19 times more flowers per plant, which indicated further differences in seed production potential between biotypes. Pollination studies helped to differentiate biotypes within the population and showed that the presumed biotypes were self-incompatible. Vegetative reproduction potential of the biotypes varied from 1.8 to 74.5% in the number of root buds that developed into shoots. The variability in growth and reproduction observed between these field bindweed biotypes may explain the survival and adaptability of a population of this weed as environmental conditions and control practices change.

Keywords

Cloneweed biologyCONAR
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , July 1984 , pp. 525 - 528
Copyright
Copyright © 1984 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. Brown, E. O. 1946. Notes on some variations in field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis L.). Iowa State J. Sci. 20:269–276.Google ScholarPubMed
2. Brown, E. O. and Porter, R. H. 1942. The viability and germination of seeds of Convolvulus arvensis L. and other perennial weeds. Iowa Res. Bull. 294:473–504.Google Scholar
3. Davison, J. G. 1970. The establishment of Convolvulus arvensis in a non-competitive situation. Proc. 10th Brit. Weed Contr. Conf. 1:352–357.Google Scholar
4. Hodgson, J. M. 1964. Variations in ecotypes of Canada thistle. Weeds 12:167–171.Google Scholar
5. Hodgson, J. M. 1970. The response of Canada thistle ecotypes to 2,4-D, amitrole, and intensive cultivation. Weed Sci. 18:253–255.Google Scholar
6. Kiss, A. 1973. Morphological variations and herbicide sensitivity of Convolvulus arvensis L. in the wine district of Mor. Acta Agron. Acad. Sci. Hung. 22:222–225.Google Scholar
7. Lewis, D. 1979. Sexual Incompatibility in Plants. Page 3 in The Institute of Biology's Studies in Biology, no. 110. E. Arnold, London.Google Scholar
8. Rochecouste, E. 1962. Studies of biotypes of Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. I. Botanical investigations. Weed Res. 2:1–23.Google Scholar
9. Rochecouste, E. 1962. Studies on the biotypes of Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. II. Growth response to trichloroacetic and 2,2-dichloropropionic acids. Weed Res. 2:136–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Schoner, C. A., Norris, R. F., and Chilcote, W. 1978. Yellow foxtail (Setaria lutescens) biotype studies: Growth and morphological characteristics. Weed Sci. 26:632–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Sexsmith, J. J. 1964. Morphological and herbicide susceptibility differences among strains of hoary cress. Weeds 12:19–22.Google Scholar
12. Swan, D. G. 1980. Field bindweed, Convolvulus arvensis L. Washington State Univ. Bull. 0888, p. 8.Google Scholar
13. Valentine, D. H. 1975. The taxonomic treatment of polymorphic variation. Watsonia 10:385–390.Google Scholar
14. Weaver, S. E. and Riley, W. R. 1982. The biology of Canadian weeds. 53. Convolvulus arvensis L. Can. J. Plant Sci. 62:461–472.Google Scholar
15. Whitworth, J. W. and Muzik, T. J. 1967. Differential response of selected clones of bindweed to 2,4-D. Weeds 15:275–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar