Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T09:30:27.574Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Soybean (Glycine max) – Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) Interspecific Competition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Philip H. Munger ,
James M. Chandler ,
J. Tom Cothren  and
Frank M. Hons
Philip H. Munger
Affiliation:
Soil & Crop Sci. Dep., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843-2474
James M. Chandler
Affiliation:
Soil & Crop Sci. Dep., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843-2474
J. Tom Cothren
Affiliation:
Soil & Crop Sci. Dep., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843-2474
Frank M. Hons
Affiliation:
Soil & Crop Sci. Dep., Texas A&M Univ., College Station, TX 77843-2474
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In a 2-yr field study conducted on a Weswood silt loam soil (Fluventic Ustochrepts), interspecific competition between soybeans [Glycine max (L.) Merr. ‘Hutton′] and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medik. # ABUTH) resulted in greater than 40 and 50% reductions in soybean and velvetleaf seed yield, respectively. Leaf area index, number of mainstem nodes, total number of leaves, and plant dry weight of monocultured and intercropped velvetleaf differed significantly as early as 4 weeks after emergence. Interspecific competition had litttle or no effect on soybean morphology before 8 weeks after emergence. Soil water extraction occurred to 1-m depths in a monoculture of velvetleaf (five plants/m2) in 1984 and 1985. Monocultured soybeans (32.5 plants/m2) extracted water from a 1.5-m or greater depth of the soil profile during the same years. Soil water extraction in the intercropped plots resembled that of the monocultured velvetleaf treatment until soybeans attained R6, when soil water was extracted to a 1.5-m depth. The potential for interspecific competition for water existed early in the season before late-season soybean root development. Relative water content and leaf water potential (Ψw1) did not differ (0.05) between monocultured and intercropped soybeans in 1984 or 1985. In 1985, Ψw1 differed between monocultured and intercropped velvetleaf during anthesis. Leaf water potential values in the youngest, fully expanded leaves were approximately 0.3 and 0.4 MPa lower during midmorning and midday hours, respectively, in intercropped and monocultured velvetleaf. Transpiration and stomatal conductance did not differ between monocultured and intercropped soybeans or velvetleaf at any time during 1984. Photosynthetic and transpiration rates, stomatal conductance, and Ψw1 were lower in intercropped than in monocultured velvetleaf during anthesis in 1985, suggesting interspecific competition for soil water. Soybean water relations were not affected in either year. The data suggest that soybean yield reductions in soybean-velvetleaf interspecific competition are attributable to resource limitations other than water in south-central Texas.

Keywords

Photosynthesisstomatal conductanceleaf area indexleaf water potentialmorphologyyieldsoilABUTH
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 35 , Issue 5 , September 1987 , pp. 647 - 653
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 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. Boyer, J. S. 1970. Differing sensitivity of photosynthesis to low leaf water potentials in corn and soybeans. Plant Physiol. 46:236–239.Google Scholar
2. Chandler, J. M. 1977. Competition of spurred anoda (Anoda cristata), velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti), prickly sida (Sida spinosa), and Venice mallow (Hibiscus trionum) in cotton. Weed Sci. 25:151–158.Google Scholar
3. Eaton, B. J., Russ, O. G., and Feltner, K. C. 1976. Competition of velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti), prickly sida (Sida spinosa), and Venice mallow (Hibiscus trionum) in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 24:224–228.Google Scholar
4. Gates, D. M. 1980. Biophysical Ecology. Springer-Verlag. Page 611.Google Scholar
5. Geddes, R. D., Scott, H. D., and Oliver, L. R. 1979. Growth and water use by common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) and soybeans (Glycine max) under field conditions. Weed Sci. 21:206–212.Google Scholar
6. Hagood, E. S., Bauman, T. T., Williams, J. L., and Schreiber, M. M. 1980. Growth analysis of soybeans (Glycine max) in competition with velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 28:729–734.Google Scholar
7. Hall, A. E., and Kaufmann, M. R. 1975. Stomatal response to environment with Sesamum indicum L. Plant Physiol. 55:455–459.Google Scholar
8. Hall, A. E., Schulze, E. D., and Lange, O. L. 1976. Current perspectives of steady-state stomatal responses to environment. In Water and Plant Life, Lange, O. L., Kappen, L., Schulze, E. D., eds. Ecol. Stud. 12:169–188. Berlin/Heidelberg/New York: Springer.Google Scholar
9. Hanway, J.J. and Thompson, H. E. 1967. How a soybean plant develops. Iowa Agric. Exp. Stn. Spec. Rep. 53.Google Scholar
10. Kreig, D. R. 1983. Whole-plant response to water deficits: carbon assimilation and utilization. Pages 319–330 in Limitations to Efficient Water Use in Crop Production, Taylor, H. M., Jordan, W. R., and Sinclair, T. R., eds. Am. Soc. Agron., Crop Sci. Soc. Am., and Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Madison, WI.Google Scholar
11. Losch, R. 1977. Responses of stomata to environmental factors – Experiments with isolated epidermal strips of Polypodium vulgare. I. Temperature and humidity. Oecologia 29:85–97.Google Scholar
12. Losch, R. 1979. Responses of stomata to environmental factors – Experiments with isolated epidermal strips of Polypodium vulgare. II. Leaf bulk water potential, air humidity, and temperature. Oecologia 39:229–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Oliver, L. R. 1979. Influence of soybean (Glycine max) planting date on velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) competition. Weed Sci. 27:183–188.Google Scholar
14. Ray, A. A. 1982. SAS User's Guide: Statistics. SAS Inst., Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
15. Scott, H. D. and Oliver, L. R. 1976. Field competition between tall morningglory and soybean. II. Development and distribution of root systems. Weed Sci. 24:454–460. 16.Google Scholar
16. Stoller, E. W. and Woolley, J. T. 1985. Competition for light by broadleaf weeds in soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 33:199–202.Google Scholar
17. Turner, N. C. 1981. Techniques and experimental approaches for the measurement of plant water status. Pages 339–366. Plant Soil. 58:339–366.Google Scholar
18. USDA Handb. No. 60. 1954. Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils.Google Scholar