Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:23:02.670Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth and Development of Florida Beggarweed (Desmodium tortuosum) Selections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

John Cardina  and
Barry J. Brecke
John Cardina
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS, Coastal Plain Exp. Stn., Tifton, GA 31793-0748
Barry J. Brecke
Affiliation:
Univ. Florida, Agric. Res. Educ. Ctr., Jay, FL 32565-9524
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Florida beggarweed seeds were collected in Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina from plants differing in morphological characteristics. Seedlings were transplanted into peanut rows in field studies at Tifton, GA, and Jay, FL, in 1986 and 1987, and frequent observations of vegetative and reproductive characteristics were made. The competitiveness of the Florida beggarweed selections was evaluated by comparing pod weights from peanut plants grown in rows adjacent to the individual weed selections with pod weights of weed-free peanuts. There were significant differences among selections of Florida beggarweed in days to maximum height, maximum node formation, maximum branching, and initial flowering and fruiting at both locations. Selection GA-1 generally reached these growth stages earliest, was shorter, narrower, had fewer nodes, and produced less dry matter and fewer seeds than GA-2, which was generally the latest maturing selection. GA-4 produced fewer branches and smaller seeds than the other selections. Peanut pod weights adjacent to Florida beggarweed plants were reduced 12 to 18% in 1986 and 10 to 24% in 1987 compared to weed-free checks. Florida beggarweed selection GA-2 was the most competitive and GA-4 was among the least competitive both years. The variation of measured parameters among Florida beggarweed selections in this study may contribute to the survival and adaptability of this weed with changing environmental conditions, cultural practices, and control measures.

Keywords

Florida beggarweed, Desmodium tortuosum (Sw.) DC.♯3 DEDTOpeanut, Arachis hypogaea L.Biotypesphenologyarea of influence
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , March 1989 , pp. 207 - 210
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 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. Buchanan, G. A., Murray, D. S., and Hauser, E. W. 1983. Weeds and their control in peanuts. Pages 206–249 in Pattee, H. E., Young, C. T., eds. Peanut Science and Technology. Am. Peanut Res. and Educ. Soc., Yoakum, TX.Google Scholar
2. Degennaro, F. P. and Weller, S. C. 1984. Growth and reproductive characteristics of field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) biotypes. Weed Sci. 32:525–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Duncan, W. H. and Foote, L. E. 1975. Wildflowers of the Southeastern United States. Univ. GA Press, Athens. Page 78.Google Scholar
4. Hauser, E. W., Buchanan, G. A., Nichols, R. L., and Patterson, R. M. 1982. Effects of Florida beggarweed (Desmodium tortuosum) and sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) on peanut (Arachis hypogaea) yield. Weed Sci. 30:602–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Oliver, L. R. and Buchanan, G. A. 1986. Weed competition and economic thresholds. Pages 71–97 in Camper, N. D., ed. Research Methods in Weed Science. South. Weed Sci. Soc., Champaign, IL.Google Scholar
6. Radford, A. E., Ahles, H. E., and Bell, C. R. 1968. Manual of the vascular flora of the Carolinas. Univ. NC Press, Chapel Hill. Page 608.Google Scholar
7. Retzinger, E. J. Jr. 1984. Growth and development of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) selections. Weed Sci. 32:608–611.Google Scholar
8. Schoner, C. A., Norris, R. F., and Chilcote, N. 1978. Yellow foxtail (Setaria lutescens) biotype studies: Growth and morphological characteristics. Weed Sci. 26:632–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Smith, J. G. 1900. Fodder and forage plants: Exclusive of grasses. Bull. No. 2. U.S. Dep. Agric. Div. Agrostology. Page 17.Google Scholar
10. Valentine, D. H. 1975. The taxonomic treatment of polymorphic variation. Watsonia 10:385–390.Google Scholar
11. Waller, R. A. and Duncan, D. B. 1969. A Bayes rule for the symmetric multiple comparison problem. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 64:1484–1499.Google Scholar
12. Wulff, R. D. 1985. Effect of seed size on heteroblastic development in seedlings of Desmodium paniculatum . Am. J. Bot. 72:1684–1686.Google Scholar