Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T06:28:39.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of Soil Moisture on Shoot and Root Growth of Green and Yellow Foxtail (Setaria viridis and S. lutescens)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Leonie B. Nadeau  and
Ian N. Morrison
Leonie B. Nadeau
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Sci., Univ. Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3T 2N2
Ian N. Morrison
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant Sci., Univ. Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3T 2N2
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Shoot and root growth of green foxtail [Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. # SETVI] and yellow foxtail [Setaria lutescens (L.) Beauv. # SETLU] were compared under three moisture regimes under simulated field conditions in 1982 and 1983. An increase in water supply from 0.3 to 2.5 cm/week resulted in proportionately greater increases in the number of tillers and leaf area of green foxtail compared to yellow foxtail. In 1982, green foxtail produced approximately three times as many seed as yellow foxtail under all three water regimes, whereas under warmer conditions in 1983, green foxtail produced nearly six times as many seed as yellow foxtail under the highest water regime and more than 11 times under the lowest regime. By using a specially constructed periscope to observe root growth through clear plastic tubes implanted in the soil it was determined that the amount of available moisture had much less effect on root growth than on shoot growth of the two species. In 1982, green foxtail tended to produce more roots than yellow foxtail early in the season but as the plants matured no significant differences occurred between species. In 1983, no significant differences in total root length occurred between species at any growth stage. The roots of both species penetrated to a depth of nearly 60 cm, with the highest concentration of roots occurring at depths of 20 to 30 cm.

Keywords

Moisture stresswater deficitroot distributionSETVISETLU
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 34 , Issue 2 , March 1986 , pp. 225 - 232
Copyright
Copyright © 1986 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. Akey, W. C. and Morrison, I. N. 1984. Effects of soil moisture on the vegetative growth of wild oat (Avena fatua). Weed Sci. 32:625–630.Google Scholar
2. Baker, H. G. 1974. The evolution of weeds. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 5:1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Bates, G. H. 1937. A device for the observation of root growth in the soil. Nature 139:966–967.Google Scholar
4. Bohm, W. 1979. Methods of Studying Root Systems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 188 pp.Google Scholar
5. Connor, D. J. 1975. Growth, water relations and yield of wheat. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 2:353–366.Google Scholar
6. Dexter, A. C., Nalewaja, J. D., Rasmusson, D. D., and Buchli, J. 1981. Survey of wild oats and other weeds in North Dakota in 1978 and 1979. North Dakota Res. Rpt. No. 79. 79 pp.Google Scholar
7. Douglas, B. J., Thomas, A. G., Morrison, I. N., and Maw, M. G. 1985. The biology of Canadian weeds. 70. Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. Can. J. Plant Sci. 65. (In press).Google Scholar
8. Dunlop, S. and Shaykewich, . 1982. Southern Manitoba's Climate and Agriculture. Manit. Agric. 26 pp.Google Scholar
9. Gregory, P. J. 1979. Periscope method for observing root growth and distribution in field soil. J. Exp. Bot. 30:205–214.Google Scholar
10. Harper, J. L. 1977. Population Biology of Plants. Academic Press, New York. 892 pp.Google Scholar
11. Hurd, E. A. 1964. Root studies of three wheat varieties and their resistance to drought and damage by soil cracking. Can. J. Plant Sci. 44:240–248.Google Scholar
12. Hurd, E. A. 1968. Growth of roots of seven varieties of spring wheat at high and low moisture level. Agron. J. 60:201–205.Google Scholar
13. Nadeau, L. B. and Morrison, I. N. 1983. Root development of two Setaria species under different soil moisture regimes. Pages 125–135 in Aspects Appl. Biol. 4. Influence of environmental factors on herbicide performance and crop and weed biology.Google Scholar
14. Richards, L. A. 1947. Pressure membrane apparatus-construction and use. Agric. Eng. 28:451–454.Google Scholar
15. Steel, M. G., Cavers, P. B., and Lee, S. M. 1983. The biology of Canadian weeds. 59. Setaria glauca (L.) Beauv. and S. verticillata (L.) Beauv. Can. J. Plant Sci. 63:711–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Tennant, D. 1975. A test of a modified line intercept method of estimating root length. J. Ecol. 63:995–1001.Google Scholar
17. Thomas, A. G. and Wise, R. 1983. Weed surveys of Saskatchewan cereal and oilseed crops from 1976 to 1979. Agric. Can. Res. Stn., Weed Survey Series Publ. 83–6, Regina, Sask. 260 pp.Google Scholar
18. Thomas, A. G. and Wise, R. 1984. Weed surveys of Manitoba cereal and oilseed crops in 1978, 1978 and 1981. Agric. Can. Res. Stn., Weed Survey Series Publ. 84–1, Regina, Sask. 230 pp.Google Scholar
19. Waddington, J. 1971. Observation of plant roots in situ. Can. J. Bot. 49:1850–1852.Google Scholar