Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-kzqxb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-21T00:45:51.674Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of Shade on Giant Foxtail

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Ellery L. Knake
Ellery L. Knake*
Affiliation:
Univ. of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, 61801
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field studies were conducted with giant foxtail (Setaria faberii Herrm.) under shade intensities of 0, 30, 60, 70, 80, and 98%. Seed weight, dry weight of plant tops exclusive of seed, and total dry weight per plant decreased linearly with increasing shade intensities. These decreases were due primarily to decreases in number of leaves, number of stems per plant, and number of heads per plant. Height of main culm was less affected than other morphological characteristics. Shading affected the length of internodes but had little influence on number of internodes on the main culm. The amount of shade required to control giant foxtail completely, once it is established, appears to be above 95%. Expressed as 2-year means, plants grew to as much as 135 cm, had as many as 188 leaves, 41 stems, and 31 heads, and produced 73 g of dry matter per plant including 6 g of seed. Maximum number of seeds per head was 1405.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 20 , Issue 6 , November 1972 , pp. 588 - 592
Copyright
Copyright © 1972 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

1. Dunham, R. S. 1964. Losses from Weeds. Special Report No. 13, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
2. Knake, E. L. and Slife, F. W. 1962. Competition of Setaria faberii with corn and soybeans. Weeds 10:26–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Knake, E. L. and Slife, F. W. 1965. Giant foxtail seeded at various times in corn and soybeans. Weeds 13:331–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Knake, E. L. and Slife, F. W. 1969. Effect of giant foxtail removal from corn and soybeans. Weed Sci. 17:281–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Nieto, Jorge and Staniforth, D. W. 1961. Corn-foxtail competition under various production conditions. Agron. J. 53:1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Santelmann, P. W., Meade, J. A., and Peters, R. A. 1963. Growth and development of yellow foxtail and giant foxtail. Weeds 11:139–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Schreiber, M. M. 1965. Development of giant foxtail under several temperatures and photoperiods. Weeds 13: 40–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Staniforth, D. W. 1965. Competitive effects of three foxtail species on soybeans. Weeds 13:191–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Weber, C. R. and Staniforth, D. W. 1961. Competitive relationships in variable weed and soybean stands. Agron. J. 49:440–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar