Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:15:03.620Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Common Bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) Interference in Newly Planted Peach (Prunus persica) Trees

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Stephen C. Weller ,
Walter A. Skroch  and
Thomas J. Monaco
Stephen C. Weller
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic. Sci., North Carolina State Univ.
Walter A. Skroch
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic., Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN 47907
Thomas J. Monaco
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic. Sci., North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, NC 27650
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments conducted over a 2-yr period demonstrated that common bermudagrass [Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. # CYNDA] inhibited growth of newly planted peach (Prunus persica L. ‘Norman’) trees. Common bermudagrass densities of 100, 75, 50, and 25% ground cover reduced tree fresh weight by 86, 64, 43, and 19%, respectively, the first year (1978) and 87, 62, 44, and 28%, respectively, the second year (1979) after planting. Tree trunk diameter relative growth rate (RGR) was reduced by 75 and 100% common bermudagrass ground cover densities at all measurement dates only in 1978. Tree leaf N and K were reduced in both years by common bermudagrass; however, only at the 100% common bermudagrass density in 1978 was N at a deficient level. Leaf chlorophyll was reduced in trees grown in all densities of common bermudagrass only in 1978. Reduced tree growth cannot be explained entirely by competition for essential nutrients; thus an allelopathic effect of the bermudagrass on young peach roots is suspected.

Keywords

AllelopathycompetitionCYNDA
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , January 1985 , pp. 50 - 56
Copyright
Copyright © 1985 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. Aharoni, M., Hiller, W., and Patt, J. 1969. Effect of drainage water from the root medium of bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) and of annual weeds on the development of citrus seedlings. Isr. J. Agric. Res. 19:47–48.Google Scholar
2. Bandeen, J. D. and Buchholtz, K. P. 1967. Competitive effects of quackgrass upon corn as modified by fertilization. Weeds 15:220–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Beevers, L. 1966. Effect of gibberellic acid on the senescence of leaf disks of nasturtium (Tropaeolum majus). Plant Physiol. 41:1074–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Bould, C. and Jarrett, R. M. 1962. The effect of cover crops and NPK fertilizers on growth, crop yield and leaf nutrient status of young dessert apple trees. J. Hortic. Sci. 37:58–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Boynton, D. and Compton, O. C. 1944. Normal seasonal changes of oxygen and carbon dioxide percentages in gas from the larger pores of three orchard subsoils. Soil Sci. 57:107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Childers, N. F. 1966. Nutrient deficiency symptoms in world peach orchards. Pages 146–163 in Childers, N. F., ed. The Peach. Hortic. Pub., New Brunswick, NJ.Google Scholar
7. Coker, E. G. 1959. Root development of apple trees in grass and clean cultivation. J. Hortic. Sci. 34:111–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Evans, G. C. 1972. Relative growth rate. Pages 246–254 in Evans, G. E., ed. The Qualitative Analysis of Plant Growth. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
9. Friedman, T. and Horowitz, M. 1970. Phytotoxicity of subterranean residues of three perennial weeds. Weed Res. 10:382–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Horowitz, M. 1972. Development of Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. Weed Res. 12:207–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Horowitz, M. 1972. Spatial growth of Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. Weed Res. 12:373–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Horowitz, M. 1973. Competitive effects of Cynodon dactylon, Sorghum halepense and Cyperus rotundus on cotton and mustard. Exp. Agric. 9:263–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Horowitz, M. and Friedman, T. 1971. Biological activity of subterranean residues of Cynodon dactylon L., Sorghum halepense L. and Cyperus rotundus L. Weed Res. 11:88–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Howard, A. 1925. The effect of grass on trees. Proc. Roy. Soc. Ser. B. 97:285–317.Google Scholar
15. Kramer, P. J. 1969. Plant and Soil Water Relationships. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York. Pages 482.Google Scholar
16. Laganauskas, C. K., Stolzy, L. H., Klotz, L. J., and DeWolfe, T. A. 1971. Soil carbon dioxide and mineral accumulation in citrus seedlings (Citrus sinensis var. Bessie). Plant and Soil 35:337–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. McClung, A. C. and Lott, W. L. 1956. A survey of the nutrient composition of leaf samples from North Carolina peach orchards. Soil Sci. 20:10–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Morevia, I. and Rosa, M. L. 1976. Allelopathic effects of Cynodon dactylon and Panicum repens rhizomes. In Proceedings II. Symposio Nacional de Herbolgia Oevias 1976. Vol. 11:23–30.Google Scholar
19. Parenti, R. L. and Rice, E. L. 1969. Inhibitional effects of Digitaria sanguinalis and possible role in old-field succession. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 96:70–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Spankevich, P. V., Maksimova, N. A., and Khomendo, B. P. 1965. The influence of water extracts from the rhizomes of bermudagrass on the germination of some agriculture plants and on the growth of their rootlets. Agrobiologiya 6:915–916.Google Scholar