Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:13:23.883Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) Competition for Water in Cotton

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Sarah T. Berger ,
Jason A. Ferrell ,
Diane L. Rowland  and
Theodore M. Webster
Sarah T. Berger
Affiliation:
Agronomy Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611
Jason A. Ferrell*
Affiliation:
Agronomy Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611
Diane L. Rowland
Affiliation:
Agronomy Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611
Theodore M. Webster
Affiliation:
USDA-ARS, Tifton, GA 31793
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: jferrell@ufl.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Palmer amaranth is a troublesome weed in cotton production. Yield losses of 65% have been reported from season-long Palmer amaranth competition with cotton. To determine whether water is a factor in this system, experiments were conduced in 2011, 2012, and 2013 in Citra, FL, and in Tifton, GA. In 2011, infrequent rainfall lead to drought stress. The presence of Palmer amaranth resulted in decreased soil relative water content up to 1 m in depth. Cotton stomatal conductance (gs) was reduced up to 1.8 m from a Palmer amaranth plant. In 2012 and 2013 higher than average rainfall resulted in excess water throughout the growing season. In this situation, no differences were found in soil relative water content or cotton gs as a function of proximity to Palmer amaranth. A positive linear trend was found in cotton photosynthesis and yield; each parameter increased as distance from Palmer amaranth increased. Even in these well-watered conditions, daily water use of Palmer amaranth was considerably higher than that of cotton, at 1.2 and 0.49 g H20 cm−2 d−1, respectively. Although Palmer amaranth removed more water from the soil profile, rainfall was adequate to replenish the profile in 2 of the 3 yr of this study. However, yield loss due to Palmer amaranth was still observed despite no change in gs, indicating other factors, such as competition for light or response to neighboring plants during development, are driving yield loss.

Keywords

Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.Water competition
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 63 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 928 - 935
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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor for this article: Christopher Preston, University of Adelaide.

References

Literature Cited

Afifi, M, Swanton, C (2012) Early physiological mechanisms of weed competition. Weed Sci 60:542–551 Google Scholar
Buchanan, GA, Burns, ER (1971) Weed competition in cotton. I. Sicklepod and tall morningglory. Weed Sci 19:576–579 Google Scholar
Casper, BB, Jackson, RB (1997) Plant competition underground. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 28:545–570 Google Scholar
Chandler, JM (1977) Competition of spurred anoda, velvetleaf, prickly sida, and venice mallow in cotton. Weed Sci 25:151–158 Google Scholar
Culpepper, AS, Webster, TM, Sosnoskie, LM, York, AC (2010) Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth in the US. Pages 195–212 in Nandula, VK, ed. Glyphosate Resistance: Evolution, Mechanisms, and Management. Hoboken, NJ Wiley Google Scholar
Ehleringer, JR (1983) Ecophysiology of Amaranthus palmeri, a Sonoran Desert summer annual. Oceologia 57:107–112 Google Scholar
Forseth, IN, Ehleringer, JR, Werk, KS, Cook, CS (1984) Field water relations of Sonoran Desert annuals. Ecology 65:1436–1444 Google Scholar
Garner, TH, Bowen, HD, Luscombe, JA (1958) Effect of weed control on quality of mechanically-harvested cotton. Cotton Gin Oil Mill Press 59:30–32 Google Scholar
Horak, MJ, Loughin, TM (2000) Growth analysis of four Amaranthus species. Weed Sci 48:347–355 Google Scholar
Keeley, PE, Carter, CH, Thullen, RJ (1987) Influence of planting date on growth of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri). Weed Sci 35:199–204 Google Scholar
King, LJ (1966) Weeds of the World—Biology and Control. New York Interscience. 270 pGoogle Scholar
Klepper, B, Taylor, HM, Huck, MG, Fiscus, EL (1973) Water relations and growth of cotton in drying soil. Agron J 65:307–310 Google Scholar
MacRae, AW, Culpepper, AS, Webster, TM, Sosnoskie, LM, Kichler, JM (2008) Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth competition with Roundup Ready cotton. Page 1696 in Proceedings of the 2008 Beltwide Cotton Conference. Memphis, TN National Cotton Council of America Google Scholar
Massinga, RA, Currie, RS, Trooien, TP (2003) Water use and light interception under Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and corn competition. Weed Sci 51:523–531 Google Scholar
Morgan, GD, Baumann, PA, Chandler, JM (2001) Competitive impact of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) development and yield. Weed Technol 15:408–412 Google Scholar
Oerke, EC (2005) Crop losses to pests. J Agric Sci 144:31–43 Google Scholar
Peng, S, Krieg, DR (1991) Single leaf and canopy photosynthesis response to plant age in cotton. Agron J 83:704–708 Google Scholar
Peterson, KL, Fuchs, M, Moreshet, S, Cohen, Y, Sinoquet, H (1992) Computing transpiration of sunlit and shaded cotton foliage under variable water stress. Agron J 84:91–97 Google Scholar
Racjan, I, Swanton, CJ (2001) Understanding maize–weed competition: resource competition, light quality and the whole plant. Field Crop Res 71:139–150 Google Scholar
Ritchie, GL, Walker, JR, Bednarz, CW, Hook, JE (2009) Subsurface drip and overhead irrigation: a comparison of plant boll distribution in upland cotton. Agron J 101:1336–1344 Google Scholar
Rowland, MW, Murray, DS, Verhalen, LM (1999) Full-season Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) interference with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci 47:305–309 Google Scholar
Sauer, JD (1957) Recent migration and evolution of the dioecious amaranths. Evolution 11:11–31 Google Scholar
Smith, DM, Allen, SJ (1996) Measurement of sap flow in plant stems. J Exp Bot 47:1833–1844 Google Scholar
Smith, DT, Baker, RV, Steele, GL (2000) Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) impacts on yield, harvesting, and ginning in dryland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol 14:122–126 Google Scholar
Snipes, CE, Buchanan, GA, Street, JE, McGuire, JA (1982) Competition of common cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum) with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci 30:553–556 Google Scholar
Taylor, HM, Klepper, B (1974) Water relations of cotton. I. Root growth and water use as related to top growth and soil water content. Agron J 66:584–588 Google Scholar
Webster, TM (2013) Weed survey—southern states. Proc South Weed Sci Soc 66:275–287 Google Scholar
Webster, TM, Coble, HD (1997) Changes in the weed species of the southern United States: 1974 to 1995. Weed Technol 11:308–317 Google Scholar
Yunusa, IAM, Nuberg, IK, Fuentes, S, Lu, P, Eamus, D (2008) A simple field validation of daily transpiration derived from sapflow using a porometer and minimal meteorological data. Plant Soil 305:15–24 Google Scholar
Zimdahl, RL (2004) Weed–Crop Competition—A Review. 2nd ed. Ames, IA Blackwell. 220 pGoogle Scholar
Zimdahl, RL (2007) Fundamentals of Weed Science. 3rd edn. Amersterdam Elsevier. Pp 156–160 Google Scholar