Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T02:43:36.497Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Yield, seasonal changes in root competitive ability and competition for nutrients among grass species

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

S. U. Remison  and
R. W. Snaydon
S. U. Remison
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Botany, University of Reading, Reading
R. W. Snaydon
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Botany, University of Reading, Reading
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Root interactions between populations of Lolium perenne, Dactylis glomerata, Holcus lanatus and Anthoxanthum odoratum collected from fertilized and unfertilized plots of the Park Grass Experiment were investigated at two levels of NPK over a period of 3 years.

The root competitive abilities of species were dependent on fertilizer applications and changed with time. For example, L. perenne was more competitive at high nutrient application and during the early stages of the experiment. On the other hand, the root competitive ability of H. lanatus was greatest on unfertilized soil and increased with time. The large effect of root interaction on plant yield and the effects of fertilizer application on this, may be regarded as evidence of competition for one or more of the elements, N, P and K. H. lanatus, the most aggressive species, was more competitive on the unfertilized soil (NIL) than on the fertilized soil (NPK). However, this could not be confirmed by chemical analysis of plant material; there was no conclusive evidence that aggressive species contained higher concentrations of these nutrients when grown in mixtures with less aggressive species. The possibility of allelopathy, the production of toxins by one plant which inhibit the growth of another, cannot be precluded.

The root competitive ability of species and populations was not positively correlated with the yield of species and populations in pure stand. Indeed, negative correlation was found especially on unfertilized soil. In this case varieties or species with a low yield in pure stand were highly successful root competitors in mixtures, while those with high yield in pure culture were poor root competitors.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 90 , Issue 1 , February 1978 , pp. 115 - 124
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

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

REFERENCES

Armstrong, M. A. (1960). British grasses and their employment in agriculture. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bergh, J. P. van den (1968a). An analysis of yields of grasses in mixed and pure stands. Verslagen van Landbouwkundige onderzoehingen no. 714, 1–71.Google Scholar
Bergh, J. P. van den (1968b). Distribution of pasture plants in relation to chemical properties of the soil. In Ecological Aspects of mineral Nutrition of plants (ed. Rorison, I. H.), Symposium of British Ecological Society, pp. 11–23. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
Bergh, J. P. van denElberse, W. Th. (1962). Competition between Lolium perenne L. and Anthoxanihum odoratum L. at two levels of phosphate and potash. Journal of Ecology 50, 87–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackman, G. E.Templeman, W. G. (1938). The nature of competition between weed crops and annual weeds. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 28, 247–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bray, R. H. (1954). A nutrient mobility concept of soilplant relationships. Soil Science 78, 9–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenchley, W. E.Warington, K. (1958). The Park Grass plot at Rothamsted, 1956–1949. Rothamsted Experimental Station, Rothamsted.Google Scholar
Chakraborty, T. (1973). Nature of competition between weeds and rice for N under dry land conditions. Experimental Agriculture 9, 219–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chesnutt, D. B. M. (1971). Effects of white clover on the botanical composition of swards of ryegrass, timothy and meadow fescue and mixtures of these three. Journal of British Orassland Society 26, 35–40.Google Scholar
Cocks, P. S. (1974). The influence of density and N on the outcome of competition between two annual pasture grasses. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 25, 24758.Google Scholar
Cowling, D. W.Lockyer, D. R. (1968). A comparison of the yield of three grass species at various levels of N fertilizer sown alone or in a mixture. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 71, 127–36.Google Scholar
Davies, M. S.Snaydon, R. W. (1974). Physiological differences among populations of A. odoratum L. collected from the Park Grass Experiment, Rothamsted III Response to phosphate. Journal of Applied Ecology 11, 699–707.Google Scholar
Davies, W. (1954). The grass crop. Its development, use and maintenance. Spon Limited.Google Scholar
Donald, C. M. (1951). Competition among pasture plants. 1. Intraspeciflc competition among pasture plants. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 2, 355–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, C. M. (1956). Competition among pasture plants. Proceedings oj 1th International Grassland Congress, Palmerston North, New Zealand, pp. 80–91.Google Scholar
Donald, C. M. (1958). The interaction of competition for light and for nutrients. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 9, 421–35.Google Scholar
Finney, D. J. (1972). An Introduction to Statistical Science in Agriculture,4th edition. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
Gardner, A. L.Hunt, V. I. (1963). Inter-varietal competition in perennial ryegrass swards. Journal of British Grassland Society 18, 285–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, R. L. (1974). Analysis of the nature of interference between plants of different species. II. Nutrient relations in a Nandi Setaria and Greenleaf Desmondium association with particular reference to potassium. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 25, 749–56.Google Scholar
Harris, W. (1971). The effects of fertilizer and lime on the competitive interactions of Rumex acetosella L. with Trifolium repens L. and Lolium species. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 14, 185–207.Google Scholar
Harris, W. (1973). Competition among pasture plants. IV. Cutting frequency, N and P interactions and competition between two ryegrass cultivars. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 16, 399–413.Google Scholar
Hunt, I. V. (1974). Studies of response of fertilizer N. Journal of British Grassland Society 29, 69–73.Google Scholar
Kruijne, A. A.Vries, D. M. de (1963). Data concerning Important herbage plants. Mededelingen I.B.S. Wageningen 225, 1–45.Google Scholar
Lambert, D. A. (1967). Competition between plants of cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerata) grown for seed. Journal of British Grassland Society 23, 274–9.Google Scholar
Litav, M.Isti, D. (1974). Root competition between two strains of Spinacia oleraceae. II. Effects of nutrient nmsupply and of non-simultaneous emergence. Journal of Applied Ecology 11, 1017–25.Google Scholar
Litav, M.Seligman, N. (1969). Competition between Oryzopsis holdformis (M.B.) Hack and annual plants. II. Performance of O. holciformis and two annuals when grown in mixtures of differing ratios. Israel Journal of Botany 19, 517–28.Google Scholar
Litav, M.Wolovitoh, S. (1971). Partial separation of roots as a means of reducing the effect of competition between two grass species. Annals of Botany 35, 1163–78.Google Scholar
McGilchrist, C. A. (1965). Analysis of competition experiments. Biometrics 21, 975–85.Google Scholar
McGilchrist, C. A.Trenbath, B. R. (1971). A revised analysis of plant competition experiments. Biometrics 27, 659–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montgomery, E. G. (1912). Competition in cereals. Bulletin of the Nebraska Agricultural Experiment Station XXVI, V, 1–22.Google Scholar
Norrington-Davies, J. (1967). Application of diallol analysis to experiment in plant competition. Euphytica 16, 391–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, I. (1968 a). The growth and development of some grass species under competitive stress. 2. Regrowth, floral development and seasonal production. Journal of British Grassland Society 23, 247–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, I. (1968 b). The growth and development of some grass species under competitive stress. 3. The nature of competitive ability during seedling growth. Journal of British Grassland Society 23, 330–5.Google Scholar
Snaydon, R. W. (1971). An analysis of competition between plants of Trifolium repens L. Populations collected from contrasting soils. Journal of Applied Ecology 8, 687–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Troughton, A. (1957). The underground organs of herbage grasses. Commonwealth Bureau of Pastures and Field Crops, Bulletin 44.Google Scholar
Vries, D. M. deKruijne, A. A. (1960). The influence of N fertilization on the botanical composition of permanent grass-land. Overdruk Uit: Stikstof, No. 4 Medeling 103.Google Scholar
Warren, R. C.Johnston, A. E. (1964). The Park Grass Experiment. Report ofRothamsted Experimental Station 1963, 240–62.Google Scholar
Whittington, W. J.O'brien, T. A. (1968). A comparison of yields from plots sown with a single species or a mixture of grass species. Journal of Applied Ecology 5, 209–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, R. D. (1960). Nutrient uptake by grass roots. Proceedings of 8th International Grassland Congress 1960, 283–6.Google Scholar
Wit, C. T. de (1960). On competition. Verslagen van Landbouwkundige onderzoekingen 66, 1–82.Google Scholar
Wit, C. T. deBergh, J. P. van den (1965). Competition between herbage plants. Netherland Journal of Agricultural Science 13, 212–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar