Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:21:46.725Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae) Outperforms Squirreltail (Elymus elymoides) through Interference and Growth Rate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

K. Young  and
J. Mangold
K. Young
Affiliation:
Department of Rangeland Ecology and Management, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 97331
J. Mangold*
Affiliation:
USDA–Agricultural Research Service, 67826-A Highway 205, Burns, OR, 97720
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Understanding the ecological processes that foster invasion and dominance by medusahead is central to its management. The objectives of this study were (1) to quantify and compare interference between medusahead and squirreltail under different concentrations of soil nitrogen (N) and phosphorous (P) and (2) to compare growth rates of medusahead and squirreltail under field soil N and P availabilities. We grew medusahead and squirreltail in an addition series in a greenhouse and applied one of four nutrient treatments weekly: (1) low N low P (no N or P added), (2) low N high P (added 250 ml of 600 µM P solution in the form of calcium phosphate), (3) high N low P (added 250 ml of 8,400 µM N solution in the forms of calcium nitrate and potassium nitrate), and (4) high N high P (added solutions as listed above for high N and high P). After 70 d density and biomass by species were sampled. We also grew individual medusahead and squirreltail plants in control soil conditions. Biomass, leaf area, and root length were determined for each species at 14-d intervals over 72 d. Regression models for medusahead and squirreltail suggested N appeared to be playing a much larger role than P in interference between the species. The high N treatment did not increase medusahead's interference ability relative to squirreltail as we had hypothesized. Medusahead typically imposed a two-to-seven-times stronger influence on interference relationships than squirreltail. Medusahead accumulated biomass, leaf area, and root length twice as fast as squirreltail. Results from our study suggest that medusahead seedlings will likely dominate over squirreltail seedlings. To restore squirreltail to medusahead-infested rangeland, medusahead densities should be reduced with integrated weed management strategies. On medusahead-free rangeland, prevention and early detection and eradication programs are critical.

Keywords

Medusahead, Taeniatherum caput-medusae (L.) Nevski ELYCMsquirreltail, Elymus elymoides (Rafin.) Swezey SITHYCompetitioninterferenceinvasive plantsrevegetationweed management
Type
Research Articles
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , January 2008 , pp. 73 - 81
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

Arredondo, J. T., Jones, T. A., and Johnson, D. A. 1998. Seedling growth of intermountain perennial and weedy annual grasses. J. Range Manag. 51:584–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borman, M. M., Krueger, W. C., and Johnson, D. E. 1991. Effects of established perennial grasses on yields of associated annual weeds. J. Range Manag. 44:318–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bovey, R. W., LeTourneau, D., and Erickson, L. C. 1961. The chemical composition of medusahead and downy brome. Weeds 9:307–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Firbank, L. G. and Watkinson, A. R. 2003. On the effects of competition: from monocultures to mixtures. Pages 165–192. in Grace, J.B., Tilman, D., eds. Perspectives on Plant Competition. Caldwell, NJ Blackburn.Google Scholar
Fowler, N. 1986. The role of competition in plant communities in arid and semiarid regions. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 17:89–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garnier, E. 1992. Growth analysis of congeneric annual and perennial grass species. J. Ecol. 80:665–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grime, J. P. 2001. Plant Strategies, Vegetation Processes, and Ecosystem Properties. 2nd ed. Chichester, UK J. Wiley. 417.Google Scholar
Grime, J. P. and Hunt, R. 1975. Relative growth rate: its range and adaptive significant in a local flora. J. Ecol. 63:393–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardegree, S. P., Jones, T. A., and Van Vactor, S. S. 2002. Variability in thermal response of primed and non-primed seeds of squirreltail [Elymus elymoides (Raf.) Swezey and Elymus multisetus (J. G. Smith) M. E. Jones]. Ann. Bot. 89:311–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, G. A. 1965. Medusahead competition. Pages 66–69. in. Proceedings of the cheatgrass symposium, Vale, Oregon. Portland, OR Bureau of Land Management.Google Scholar
Herron, G. J., Sheley, R. L., Maxwell, B. D., and Jacobsen, J. S. 2001. Influence of nutrient availability on the interaction between spotted knapweed and bluebunch wheatgrass. Res. Ecol. 9:326–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hironaka, M. 1961. The relative rate of root development of cheatgrass and medusahead. J. Range Manag. 14:263–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hironaka, M. and Sindelar, B. W. 1973. Reproductive success of squirreltail in medusahead infested ranges. J. Range Manag. 26:219–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hironaka, M. and Sindelar, B. W. 1975. Growth characteristics of squirreltail seedlings in competition with medusahead. J. Range Manag. 28:283–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hironaka, M. and Tisdale, E. W. 1963. Secondary succession in annual vegetation in southern Idaho. Ecology 44:810–812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hironaka, M. and Tisdale, E. W. 1972. Growth and Development of Sitanion hystrix and Poa sandbergii, Desert Biome. U.S. International Biological Program RM 72-24.Google Scholar
Humphrey, L. D. and Schupp, E. W. 2004. Competition as a barrier to establishment of a native perennial grass (Elymus elymoides) in alien annual grass (Bromus tectorum) communities. J. Arid Environ. 58:405–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, R. 1982. Plant Growth Curves: The Functional Approach to Plant Growth Analysis. Baltimore, MD University Park. 555.Google Scholar
Jacobs, J. S., Sheley, R. L., and Maxwell, B. D. 1996. Effect of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum on the interference between bluebunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum) and spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa). Weed Technol. 10:13–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, K. B., Zhang, Y. F., and Dewey, D. R. 1990. Mode of pollination of perennial species of the Triticeae in relation to genomically defined genera. Can. J. Plant Sci. 70:215–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, T. A. 1998. Viewpoint: the present status and future prospects of squirreltail research. J. Range Manag. 51:326–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, T. A., Nielson, D. C., Arrendondo, J. T., and Redinbaugh, M. G. 2003. Characterization of diversity among 3 squirreltail taxa. J. Range Manag. 56:474–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keddy, P. A. 2003. Competitive hierarchies and centrifugal organization in plant communities. Pages 265–290. in Grace, J.B., Tilman, D., eds. Perspectives on Plant Competition. Caldwell, NJ Blackburn.Google Scholar
Larson, L. L. and McInnis, M. L. 1989. Impact of grass seedlings on establishment and density of diffuse knapweed and yellow starthistle. Northwest Sci. 63:162–166.Google Scholar
Lowe, P. N., Lauenroth, W. K., and Burke, I. C. 2002. Effects of nitrogen availability on the growth of native grasses exotic weeds. J. Range Manag. 55:94–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lusk, W. C., Jones, M. B., Torell, P. J., and McKell, C. M. 1961. Medusahead palatability. J. Range Manag. 14:248–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mangold, J. M. 2004. Investigating the Potential of Using R* Theory to Manage Nonindigenous Plant Invasions. PhD. dissertation. Bozeman, MT Montana State University. 136.Google Scholar
Mangold, J. M., Poulsen, C. L., and Carpinelli, M. F. 2007. Revegetating Russian knapweed (Acroptilon repens) infestations using morphologically diverse species and seedbed preparation. J. Range Manag. 60:378–385.Google Scholar
McKell, C. M., Wilson, A. M., and Kay, B. L. 1962. Effective burning of rangelands infested with medusahead. Weeds 10:125–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLendon, T. and Redente, E. F. 1991. Nitrogen and phosphorus effects on secondary succession dynamics on a semi-arid sagebrush site. Ecology 72:2016–2024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, H. C., Clausnitzer, D., and Borman, M. M. 1999. Medusahead. Pages 271–281. in Sheley, R.L., Petroff, J.K., eds. Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Corvallis, OR Oregon State University Press.Google Scholar
Monaco, T. A., Johnson, D. A., Norton, J. M., Jones, T. A., Connors, K. J., Norton, J. B., and Redinbaugh, M. B. 2003. Contrasting responses of Intermountain West grasses to soil nitrogen. J. Range Manag. 56:282–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radosevich, S., Holt, J., and Ghersa, C. 1997. Weed Ecology: Implications for Management. New York J. Wiley. 174–175, 219.Google Scholar
Rauzi, F. 1972. Residual effects of phosphorus and high rates of nitrogen on shortgrass rangeland. J. Range Manag. 32:470–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roush, M. L. 1988. Models of a Four-Species Annual Weed Community: Growth, Competition, and Community Dynamics. PhD. dissertation. Corvallis, OR Oregon State University. 218.Google Scholar
Sharp, L. A., Hironaka, M., and Tisdale, E. W. 1957. Viability of medusa-head (Elymus caput-medusae L.) seed collected in Idaho. J. Range Manag. 10:123–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheley, R. L. and Carpinelli, M. F. 2005. Creating weed-resistant plant communities using niche-differentiated nonnative species. Rangeland Ecol. Manag. 58:480–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheley, R. L., Jacobs, J. J., and Svejcar, T. J. 2005. Integrating disturbance and colonization during rehabilitation of invasive weed-dominated grasslands. Weed Sci. 53:307–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheley, R. L. and Larson, L. L. 1995. Interference between cheatgrass and yellow starthistle at 3 soil depths. J. Range Manag. 48:392–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheley, R. L., Manoukian, M., and Marks, G. 1999. Preventing noxious weed invasion. Pages 69–72. in Sheley, R.L., Petroff, J.K., eds. Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Corvallis, OR Oregon State University Press.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1980. Statistical Methods. Ames, IA Iowa State University Press. 507.Google Scholar
Spitters, C. J. 1983. An alternative approach to the analysis of mixed cropping experiments. I. Estimation of competition effects. Neth. J. Ag. Sci. 31:1–11.Google Scholar
Tilman, D. 1988. Plant Strategies and the Dynamics and Structure of Plant Communities. Princeton, NJ Princeton University Press. 376.Google Scholar
Turner, R. B. 1965. Medusahead control and management studies in Oregon. Pages 70–73. in. Proceedings of the Cheatgrass Symposium, Vale, Oregon. Portland, OR Bureau of Land Management.Google Scholar
Weiner, J. Size hierarchies in experimental populations of annual plants. Ecology 1985. 66:743–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiner, J. 1990. Asymmetric competition in plant populations. Trends Ecol. Evol. 5:360–364.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whisenant, S. G. 1990. Changing fire frequencies on Idaho's Snake River Plains: ecological and management implications. Pages 4–10. in McArthur, E.D., Romney, E.M., Smith, S.D., Tueller, P.T., eds. Proceedings from the Symposium on Cheatgrass Invasion, Shrub Die-Off, and Other Aspects of Shrub Biology and Management. Ogden, UT U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Report INT-276.Google Scholar
Young, J. A. 1992. Ecology and management of medusahead (Taeniatherum caput-medusae ssp. asperum [Simk.] Melderis). Great Basin Nat. 52:245–252.Google Scholar
Young, J. A., Clements, C. D., and Jones, T. 2003. Germination of seeds of big and bottlebrush squirreltail. J. Range Manag. 56:277–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, J. A. and Evans, R. A. 1977. Squirreltail seed germination. J. Range Manag. 30:33–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zamora, D. L. and Thill, D. C. 1999. Early detection and eradication of new weed infestations. Pages 73–84. in Sheley, R.L., Petroff, J.K., eds. Biology and Management of Noxious Rangeland Weeds. Corvallis, OR Oregon State University Press.Google Scholar