Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T22:58:09.991Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neutral density shading and far-red radiation influence black nightshade (Solanum nigrum) and eastern black nightshade (Solanum ptycanthum) growth

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Michael P. Crotser ,
W. W. Witt  and
Louis A. Spomer
W. W. Witt
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40646
Louis A. Spomer
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Greenhouse and growth-chamber experiments were conducted to determine the influence of the ratio of red to far-red (R:FR) radiation and of neutral filtration of plant-available radiation on the vegetative and reproductive growth of selected nightshade species. Exposure of eastern black nightshade and black nightshade to far-red radiation resulted in greater partitioning of resources to stem tissue, resulting in taller plants. Number of flowers, timing of flowering, branching, and biomass production of black nightshade and eastern black nightshade were not influenced by the ratio of red to far-red radiation. Eastern black nightshade shoot and berry dry weight decreased as neutral density shading increased from 0 to 71%. Shoot dry weight decrease was associated with lower stem weight and production of fewer berries per plant. Neutral shading did not reduce leaf weight or leaf area per plant but increased the specific leaf area of eastern black nightshade. Internode elongation of nightshade species into a soybean canopy should primarily be associated with exposure to low R:FR irradiance ratios, whereas the thinner leaves of eastern black nightshade growing under shade should be associated with lower irradiance levels. Both responses are common adaptations of shade-avoiding plants.

Keywords

Black nightshade, Solanum nigrum L. SOLNIeastern black nightshade, Solanum ptycanthum Dun. SOLPTsoybean, Glycine max (L.) MerrIrradiancespectral distributionphotosynthetically active radiationphotosynthetic photon fluxneutral density filtrationred to far-red ratiosphotomorphogenisisshading and plant response
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 51 , Issue 2 , April 2003 , pp. 208 - 213
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

Ballare, C. L., Scopel, A. L., and Sanchez, R. A. 1989. Photomodulation of axis extension in sparse canopies. Plant Physiol. 89:1324–1330.Google Scholar
Barreiro, R., Guiamet, J. J., Beltrano, J., and Montaldi, E. R. 1992. Regulation of the photosynthetic capacity of primary bean leaves by the red:far-red ratio and photosynthetic photon flux density of light. Physiol. Plant. 85:97–101.Google Scholar
Basset, I. J. and Munro, D. B. 1985. The biology of Canadian Weeds. 67. Solanum ptycanthum Dun., Solanum nigrum L., and S. sarrachoides Sendt. Can. J. Plant Sci. 65:401–414.Google Scholar
Briggs, W. R. and Huala, E. 1999. Blue-light photoreceptors in higher plants. Ann. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 15:33–62.Google Scholar
Brits, S. J. and Sager, J. C. 1990. Photomorphogenic and photoassimilation in soybean and sorghum under broad spectrum or blue-deficient light sources. Plant Physiol. 94:448–454.Google Scholar
Casal, J. J., Deregibus, V. A., and Sanches, R. A. 1985. Variations in tiller dynamics and morphology in Lolium multiflorum Lam. vegetative and reproductive plants as affected by differences in red/far-red irradiation. Ann. Bot. 56:553–559.Google Scholar
Casal, J. J., Sanchez, R. A., and Deregibus, V. A. 1987. Tillering responses of Lolium multiflorum plants to changes of red/far-red ratios typical of sparse canopies. J. Exp. Bot. 38:1432–1439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cober, E. R., Tanner, J. W., and Voldeng, H. D. 1996. Soybean photoperiod-sensitivity loci respond differentially to light quality. Crop Sci. 36:606–610.Google Scholar
Crotser, M. P. and Witt, W. W. 2000. Effect of Glycine max canopy characteristics, G. max interference and weed free period on Solanum ptycanthum growth. Weed Sci. 48:20–26.Google Scholar
Dijak, M., Smith, D. L., and Ormrod, D. P. 1987. Effect of growth light on quality on fluorescence characteristics of leaves of Glycine max . Environ. Exp. Bot. 27:185–192.Google Scholar
Egley, G. H. and Duke, S. O. 1985. Physiology of weed seed dormancy and germination. Pages 42–43 In Duke, S. O., ed. Weed Physiology. I. Reproduction and Ecophysiology. Boca Ranton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Fankhauser, C. and Chory, J. 1997. Light control and plant development. Ann. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 13:203–229.Google Scholar
Fisher, F.J.F., Ehret, D. L., Lister, G. R., and Hollingdale, J. 1989. Light quality and sun tracking in Malva neglecta . Can. J. Bot. 67:515–520.Google Scholar
Franklin, B. 1981. Germination in shade. Pages 187–204 In Smith, H., ed. Plants and Daylight Spectrum. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Holmes, M. G. 1981. Spectral distribution of radiation within plant canopies. Pages 147–158 In Smith, H., ed. Plants and the Daylight Spectrum. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Holt, J. S. 1995. Plant responses to light: a potential tool for weed management. Weed Sci. 43:474–482.Google Scholar
Kasperbauer, M. J. 1987. Far-red light reflection from green leaves and effects on phytochrome-mediated assimilate partitioning under field conditions. Plant Physiol. 85:350–354.Google Scholar
Kvet, J., Ondok, R., Necas, J., and Jarvis, P. G. 1971. Methods of growth analysis. Pages 347–356 In Catsky, J. and Jarvis, P. C., eds. Plant Photosynthetic Production. Manuals and Methods. The Hague, The Netherlands: W. Junk.Google Scholar
Mohr, H. 1986. Coaction between pigment systems. Pages 547–564 In Kendrick, R. E. and Kronenberg, G.H.M., eds. Photomorphogenisis in Plants. Dordrecht The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Morgan, D. C. 1981. Shadelight quality effects on plant growth. Pages 205–221 In Smith, H., ed. Plants and the Daylight Spectrum. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Murdock, E. C., Banks, P. A., and Toler, J. E. 1986. Shade development effect on pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunosa) interference with soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 34:711–717.Google Scholar
Novoplansky, A. 1991. Developmental responses of Portulaca seedlings to conflicting spectral signs. Oecologia 88:138–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Novoplansky, A., Cohen, D., and Sachs, T. 1990. How Portulaca seedlings avoid their neighbor. Oecologia 82:490–493.Google Scholar
Ogg, A. G. Jr. and Rogers, B. S. 1989. Taxonomy, distribution, biology, and control of black nightshade (Solanum nigrum) and related species in the United States and Canada. Rev. Weed Sci. 4:25–58.Google Scholar
Ogg, A. G. Jr., Rogers, B. S., and Shilling, E. E. 1981. Characterization of black nightshade (Solanum nigrum) and related species in the United States. Weed Sci. 29:27–32.Google Scholar
Pausch, R. C., Britz, S. J., and Mulchi, C. L. 1991. Growth and photosynthesis of soybean (Glycine max) in simulated vegetation shade: influence of the ratio of red to far-red radiation. Plant Cell Environ. 14:647–656.Google Scholar
Rajapaske, N. C., Pollock, R. K., McMahon, M. J., Kelly, J. W., and Young, R. E. 1992. Interpretation of light quality response in spectral filter research. Hort. Sci. 27:1208–1211.Google Scholar
Regnier, E. E. and Harrison, K. 1993. Compensatory response of common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) to partial shading. Weed Sci. 41:541–547.Google Scholar
Regnier, E. E., Salvucci, M. E., and Stoller, E. W. 1988. Photosynthesis and growth responses to irradiance in soybean (Glycine max) and three broadleaf weeds. Weed Sci. 36:487–496.Google Scholar
Regnier, E. E. and Stoller, E. W. 1989. The effects of soybean (Glycine max) interference on the canopy architecture of common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium), jimsonweed (Datura stramonium), and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 37:187–195.Google Scholar
Ross, M. S., Flanagan, L. B., and La Roi, G. H. 1986. Season and successional changes in light quality and quantity in the understory of boreal forest ecosystems. Can. J. Bot. 64:2792–2799.Google Scholar
Sattin, M., Zuin, M. C., and Sartorato, I. 1994. Light quality beneath field-grown maize, soybean, and wheat canopies—red:far red variations. Physiol. Plant. 91:322–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuerger, A. C., Brown, C. S., and Stryjewski, E. C. 1997. Anatomical features of pepper plants (Capsicum annum L.) grown under red light-emitting diodes supplemented with blue or far-red light. Ann. Bot. 79:273–282.Google Scholar
Sims, D. A. and Pearcy, R. W. 1992. Response of leaf anatomy and photosynthetic capacity in Alocasia macrorrhiza (Araceae) to a transfer from low to high light. Am. J. Bot. 79:449–455.Google Scholar
Smith, H. 1982. Light quality, photoperception, and plant strategy. Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 33:481–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoller, E. W. and Myers, R. A. 1989a. Effects of shading and soybean (Glycine max L.) interference in Solanum ptycanthum (Dun.) (eastern black nightshade) growth and development. Weed Res. 29:307–316.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. W. and Myers, R. A. 1989b. Response of soybeans (Glycine max) and four broadleaf weeds to reduced irradiance. Weed Sci. 37:570–574.Google Scholar