Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:38:55.619Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variability in Photosynthetic Rates and Accumulated Biomass Among Greenhouse-Grown Common Cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) Accessions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

James J. Wassom ,
Andrew W. Knepp ,
Patrick J. Tranel  and
Loyd M. Wax
James J. Wassom
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Andrew W. Knepp
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Patrick J. Tranel*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Loyd M. Wax
Affiliation:
USDA/ARS, Invasive Weed Management Research Unit, Urbana, IL 61801
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: tranel@uiuc.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Common cocklebur is an adaptable and competitive weed with variable morphology. To learn how the rate of net photosynthesis (Pn) by common cocklebur relates to traits that may influence competitiveness, we compared Pn, accumulation of biomass (shoot mass, root mass, and total plant mass), and total leaf area among six accessions of common cocklebur grown in a greenhouse. There were highly significant (P ≤ 0.01) differences among accessions for all measured traits. Correlations of each measure of biomass with total leaf area were positive and highly significant, but correlations of Pn with each biomass measure and with total leaf area were negative. The negative correlations were largely a result of relatively low biomass accumulation by the two accessions with the highest Pn. This contrasted with results from a previous experiment on field-grown common cocklebur plants, in which the correlation of Pn with shoot mass was positive (r = 0.64). Despite the negative Pn-to-biomass correlations in the greenhouse study, the rank among accessions for Pn in the greenhouse was nearly the same as with the field-grown plants (Spearman rank correlation r = 0.89). We conclude that the relative Pn rates among common cocklebur accessions grown in the greenhouse may be used to predict their relative Pn rates in the field, but relationships of Pn with biomass or leaf area observed in the greenhouse may not be a reliable indicator of relationships in the field.

Keywords

Common cocklebur, Xanthium strumarium L. #3 XANTHBiotypecompetitivenessleaf areaphotosynthesisstomatal densityCDT, Central Daylight TimePn, net photosynthetic ratePPFD, photosynthetic photon flux densityTOD, time of day
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , March 2003 , pp. 84 - 88
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

Austin, R. B., Morgan, C. L., and Ford, M. A. 1982. Flag leaf photosynthesis of Triticum aestivum and related diploid and tetraploid species. Ann. Bot. 49: 177–189.Google Scholar
Barrentine, W. L., Soignier, S. S., and Kilen, T. C. 1995. Characterization of a common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.) biotype resistant to the imidazolinone herbicides. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 35: 135.Google Scholar
Blais, P. A. and Lechowicz, M. J. 1989. Variation among populations of Xanthium strumarium (Compositae) from natural and ruderal habitats. Am. J. Bot. 76: 901–908.Google Scholar
Byrd, J. D. Jr. and Coble, H. D. 1991. Interference of common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) and cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 5: 270–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hesketh, J. D., Ogren, W. L., Hageman, M. E., and Peters, D. B. 1981. Correlations among leaf CO2 exchange rates, areas and enzyme activities among soybean cultivars. Photosynth. Res. 2: 21–30.Google Scholar
Lawlor, D. W. 1995. Photosynthesis, productivity and environment. J. Exp. Bot. 46: 1449–1461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lechowicz, M. J. 1984. The effects of individual variation in physiological and morphological traits on the reproductive capacity of the common cocklebur, Xanthium strumarium L. Evolution 38: 833–844.Google Scholar
Löve, D. and Dansereau, P. 1959. Biosystematic studies on Xanthium: taxonomic appraisal and ecological status. Can. J. Bot. 37: 173–205.Google Scholar
Lynch, J., González, A., Tohme, J. M., and Garcia, J. A. 1992. Variation in characters related to leaf photosynthesis in wild bean populations. Crop Sci. 32: 633–640.Google Scholar
Moran, G. F. and Marshall, D. R. 1978. Allozyme uniformity within and variation between races of the colonizing species Xanthium strumarium L. (noogoora burr). Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 31: 283–291.Google Scholar
Royal, S. S., Brecke, B. J., and Colvin, D. L. 1997. Common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) interference with peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Weed Sci. 45: 38–43.Google Scholar
Rushing, G. S. and Oliver, L. R. 1998. Influence of planting date on common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) interference in early-maturing soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 46: 99–104.Google Scholar
Steel, R. G. D. and Torrie, J. H. 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. pp. 550–551.Google Scholar
Tranel, P. J. and Wassom, J. J. 2001. Genetic relationships of common cocklebur accessions from the United States. Weed Sci. 49: 318–325.Google Scholar
Wassom, J. J., Tranel, P. J., and Wax, L. M. 2002. Variation among U.S. accessions of common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium). Weed Technol. 16: 171–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weaver, S. E. and Lechowicz, M. J. 1983. The biology of Canadian weeds: 56. Xanthium strumarium L. Can. J. Plant Sci. 63: 211–225.Google Scholar
Weed Science Society of America. 1989. Composite List of Weeds. Champaign, IL: Weed Science Society of America. 112 p.Google Scholar
Weed Society of America. 1971. Report of the Subcommittee on Standardization of Common and Botanical Names of Weeds. Weed Sci. 19: 453–476.Google Scholar