Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-30T21:09:33.111Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Benghal Dayflower (Commelina benghalensis) Seed Viability in Soil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Mandeep K. Riar
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Sciences, North Carolina State University, Box 7620, Raleigh, NC 27695
Theodore M. Webster*
Affiliation:
Crop Protection and Management Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Tifton, GA 31794
Barry J. Brecke
Affiliation:
West Florida Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Jay, FL 32565
David L. Jordan
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Sciences, North Carolina State University, Box 7620, Raleigh, NC 27695
Michael G. Burton
Affiliation:
William H. Darr School of Agriculture, Missouri State University, Springfield, MO 65804
Darcy P. Telenko
Affiliation:
West Florida Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Jay, FL 32565
Thomas W. Rufty
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Sciences, North Carolina State University, Box 7620, Raleigh, NC 27695
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: ted.webster@ars.usda.gov

Abstract

Benghal dayflower is an exotic weed species in the United States that is a challenge to manage in agricultural fields. Research was conducted in North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida to evaluate the longevity of buried Benghal dayflower seeds. Seeds were buried in the field for 2 to 60 mo at a depth of 20 cm in mesh bags containing soil native to each area. In North Carolina, decline of Benghal dayflower seed viability was described by a sigmoidal regression model, with seed size having no effect on viability. Seed viability at the initiation of the study was 81%. After burial, viability declined to 51% after 24 mo, 27% after 36 mo, and < 1% after 42 mo. In Georgia, initial seed viability averaged 86% and declined to 63 and 33% at 12 and 24 mo, respectively. Burial of 36 mo or longer reduced seed viability to < 2%. The relationship between Benghal dayflower seed viability and burial time was described by a sigmoidal regression model. In Florida, there was greater variability in Benghal dayflower seed viability than there was at the other locations. Seed viability at the first sampling date after 2 mo of burial was 63%. Although there were fluctuations during the first 24 mo, the regression model indicated approximately 60% of seed remained viable. After 34 mo of burial, seed viability was reduced to 46% and then rapidly fell to 7% at 39 mo, which was consistent with the decrease in seed viability at the other locations. Although there is a physical dormancy imposed by the seed coat of Benghal dayflower, which has been detected in previous studies, it appears that a decline in buried seed viability to minimal levels occurs within 39 to 48 mo in the southeastern United States, suggesting that management programs must prevent seed production for at least four growing seasons to severely reduce the Benghal dayflower soil seedbank.

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Budd, G. D., Thomas, P. E. L., and Allison, J. C. S. 1979. Vegetative regeneration, depth of germination and seed dormancy in Commelina benghalensis L. Rhod. J. Agric. Res. 17:151153.Google Scholar
Burns, J. H. 2004. A comparison of invasive and non-invasive dayflowers (Commelinaceae) across experimental nutrient and water gradients. Divers. Distrib. 10:387397.Google Scholar
Burnside, O. C., Moomaw, R. S., Roeth, F. W., Wicks, G. A., and Wilson, R. G. 1986. Weed seed demise in soil in weed-free corn (Zea mays) production across Nebraska. Weed Sci. 34:248251.Google Scholar
Burnside, O. C., Wilson, R. G., Weisberg, S., and Hubbard, K. G. 1996. Seed longevity of 41 weed species buried 17 years in eastern and western Nebraska. Weed Sci. 44:7486.Google Scholar
Conn, J. S., Beattie, K. L., and Blanchard, A. 2006. Seed viability and dormancy of 17 weed species after 19.7 years of burial in Alaska. Weed Sci. 54:464470.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. 2006. Glyphosate-induced weed shifts. Weed Technol. 20:277281.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., Flanders, J. T., York, A. C., and Webster, T. M. 2004. Tropical spiderwort (Commelina benghalensis) control in glyphosate-resistant cotton. Weed Technol. 18:432436.Google Scholar
Duncan, W. H. 1967. Commelina benghalensis a species new to United States. Brittonia. 19:282.Google Scholar
Egley, G. H. and Chandler, J. M. 1983. Longevity of weed seeds after 5.5 years in the Stoneville 50-year buried-seed study. Weed Sci. 31:264270.Google Scholar
Faden, R. B. 1993. The misconstrued and rare species of Commelina (Commelinaceae) in the eastern United States. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 80:208218.Google Scholar
Florida Automated Weather Network. 2011. Gainesville, FL: FAWN: Florida Automated Weather Network, University of Florida. http://fawn.ifas.ufl.edu/. Accessed: October 18, 2011.Google Scholar
Forcella, F., Webster, T. M., and Cardina, J. 2003. Protocols for weed seed bank determination in agro-ecosystems. Pages 318 in Labrada, R., ed. Weed Management for Developing Countries. Rome, Italy FAO Plant Production and Protection.Google Scholar
Gardarin, A., Durr, C., Mannino, M. R., Busset, H., and Colbach, N. 2010. Seed mortality in the soil is related to seed coat thickness. Seed Sci. Res. 20:243256.Google Scholar
Goddard, R. H., Webster, T. M., Carter, J. R., and Grey, T. L. 2009. Resistance of Benghal dayflower (Commelina benghalensis) seeds to harsh environments and the implications for dispersal by mourning doves (Zenaida macroura) in Georgia, USA. Weed Sci. 57:603612.Google Scholar
Harrison, S. K., Regnier, E. E., Schmoll, J. T., and Harrison, J. M. 2007. Seed size and burial effects on giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida) emergence and seed demise. Weed Sci. 55:1622.Google Scholar
Hoogenboom, G. 2011. Georgia automated environmental monitoring network. Griffin, GA University of Georgia. http://www.griffin.uga.edu/bae/. Accessed: August 4, 2011.Google Scholar
Kannangara, H. W. and Field, R. J. 1985. Environmental and physiological factors affecting the fate of seeds of yarrow (Achillea millefolium L) in arable land in New Zealand. Weed Res. 25:8792.Google Scholar
Kaul, V., Sharma, N., and Koul, A. K. 2002. Reproductive effort and sex allocation strategy in Commelina benghalensis L., a common monsoon weed. Bot. J. Lin. Soc. 140:403413.Google Scholar
Kim, S. Y., De Datta, S. K., and Mercado, B. L. 1990. The effect of chemical and heat treatments on germination of Commelina benghalensis L. aerial seeds. Weed Res. 30:109116.Google Scholar
Krings, A., Burton, M. G., and York, A. C. 2002. Commelina benghalensis (Commelinaceae) new to North Carolina and an updated key to Carolina congeners. Sida Contrib. Bot. 20:419422.Google Scholar
Lewis, J. 1973. Longevity of crop and weed seeds—survival after 20 years in the soil. Weed Res. 13:179191.Google Scholar
Lutman, P. J. W., Cussans, G. W., Wright, K. J., Wilson, B. J., Wright, G. M., and Lawson, H. M. 2002. The persistence of seeds of 16 weed species over six years in two arable fields. Weed Res. 42:231241.Google Scholar
Mennan, H. and Zandstra, B. H. 2006. The effects of depth and duration of seed burial on viability, dormancy, germination, and emergence of ivyleaf speedwell (Veronica hederifolia). Weed Technol. 20:438444.Google Scholar
[NC-CRONOS] North Carolina Climate Retrieval and Observations Network of the Southeast. 2011. CRONOS Database. Raleigh, NC State Climate Office of North Carolina, http://www.nc-climate.ncsu.edu/cronos. Accessed: October 18, 2011.Google Scholar
Omami, E. N., Haigh, A. M., Medd, R. W., and Nicol, H. I. 1999. Changes in germinability, dormancy and viability of Amaranthus retroflexus as affected by depth and duration of burial. Weed Res. 39:345354.Google Scholar
Price, A. J., Runion, G. B., Prior, S. A., Rogers, H. H., and Torbert, H. A. 2009. Tropical spiderwort (Commelina benghalensis L.) increases growth under elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide. J. Environ. Qual. 38:729733.Google Scholar
Roberts, H. A. and Feast, P. M. 1972. Fate of seeds of some annual weeds in different depths of cultivated and undisturbed soil. Weed Res. 12:316324.Google Scholar
Roberts, H. A. and Feast, P. M. 1973. Emergence and longevity of seeds of annual weeds in cultivated and undisturbed soil. J. Appl. Ecol. 10:133143.Google Scholar
Sabila, M. H., Grey, T. L., Webster, T. M., Vencill, W. K., and Shilling, D. G. 2012. Evaluation of factors that influence Benghal dayflower (Commelina benghalensis) seed germination and emergence. Weed Sci. 60:7580.Google Scholar
Santos, I. C., Ferreira, F. A., Miranda, G. V., and Santos, L. D. T. 2001. Germination of aerial and underground seeds of Commelina benghalensis . Planta Daninha. 19:163170.Google Scholar
Sermons, S. M., Burton, M. G., and Rufty, T. W. 2008. Temperature response of Benghal dayflower (Commelina benghalensis): Implications for geographic range. Weed Sci. 56:707713.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. W. and Wax, L. M. 1974. Dormancy changes and fate of some annual weed seeds in the soil. Weed Sci. 22:151155.Google Scholar
Taylorson, R. B. 1970. Changes in dormancy and viability of weed seeds in soils. Weed Sci. 18:265269.Google Scholar
Telewski, F. W. and Zeevaart, J. A. D. 2002. The 120-yr period for Dr. Beal's seed viability experiment. Am. J. Bot. 89:12851288.Google Scholar
Thompson, K. 1992. The functional ecology of seed banks. Pages 231258 in Fenner, M., ed. Seeds—The Ecology of Regeneration in Plant Communities. Wallingford, UK CAB International.Google Scholar
Thompson, K., Grime, J. P., and Mason, G. 1977. Seed germination in response to diurnal fluctuations in temperature. Nature. 267:147149.Google Scholar
Walker, S. R. and Evenson, J. P. 1985. Biology of Commelina benghalensis L. in south-eastern Queensland, 2: seed dormancy, germination and emergence. Weed Res. 25:245250.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M., Burton, M. G., Culpepper, A. S., Flanders, J. T., Grey, T. L., and York, A. C. 2006. Tropical spiderwort (Commelina benghalensis) control and emergence patterns in preemergence herbicide systems. J. Cotton Sci. 10:6875.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M., Burton, M. G., Culpepper, A. S., York, A. C., and Prostko, E. P. 2005. Tropical spiderwort (Commelina benghalensis): a tropical invader threatens agroecosystems of the southern United States. Weed Technol. 19:501508.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M., Faircloth, W. H., Flanders, J. T., Prostko, E. P., and Grey, T. L. 2007. The critical period of Benghal dayflower (Commelina benghalensis) control in peanut. Weed Sci. 55:359364.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M. and Grey, T. L. 2008. Growth and reproduction of Benghal dayflower (Commelina benghalensis) in response to drought stress. Weed Sci. 56:561566.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M., Grey, T. L., Flanders, J. T., and Culpepper, A. S. 2009. Cotton planting date affects the critical period of Benghal dayflower (Commelina benghalensis) control. Weed Sci. 57:8186.Google Scholar
Webster, T. M. and Sosnoskie, L. M. 2010. The loss of glyphosate efficacy: a changing weed spectrum in Georgia cotton. Weed Sci. 58:7379.Google Scholar