Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T03:55:51.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Variation in Seed Viability and Dormancy of 17 Weed Species after 24.7 Years of Burial: The Concept of Buried Seed Safe Sites

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jeffery S. Conn*
Affiliation:
U.S. Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service, Subarctic Agricultural Research Unit, 319 O'Neill Building, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK 99775
Nancy R. Werdin-Pfisterer
Affiliation:
U.S. Department of Agriculture–Agricultural Research Service, Subarctic Agricultural Research Unit, 319 O'Neill Building, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK 99775
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

A 50-yr study at Fairbanks, AK, was started in 1984 to determine soil seed longevity of 17 weed species. Seeds were buried in mesh bags 2- and 15-cm deep and were recovered 0.7, 1.7, 2.7, 3.7, 4.7, 6.7, 9.7, 19.7, and 24.7 yr later. Viability was determined using germination and tetrazolium tests. By 24.7 yr after burial (YAB), no viable seeds were found for common hempnettle, flixweed, foxtail barley, quackgrass, and wild oat. Bluejoint reedgrass, which had no live seed 19.7 YAB, again had viability (1% at 15 cm) 24.7 YAB. Seeds of 11 other species were still viable: American dragonhead (52%), marsh yellowcress (11 and 3.0% at 2 and 15 cm respectively), common lambsquarters (2.8%), prostrate knotweed (2.8% at 15 cm), shepherd's-purse (2.8%), pineapple-weed (2.6%), rough cinquefoil (2.3%), Pennsylvania smartweed (1.1%), common chickweed (0.4%), wild buckwheat (0.3%), and corn spurry (0.1%). Seed dormancy 24.7 YAB was very low (< 10%) for all species except American dragonhead (99%), shepherd's-purse (40%), marsh yellowcress (23% at 2 cm), Pennsylvania smartweed (18%), and rough cinquefoil (14%). At the beginning of the study, declines in seed longevity were uniform between replicates, but variability between replicates increased over time for all species except American dragonhead, suggesting that some soil microsites are more favorable for seed survival and may be seedbank “safe sites.” Results of this study demonstrate that nonrandom seed mortality contributes to the spatial heterogeneity of seed populations in the soil seedbank.

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
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

Burnside, O. C., Wilson, R. G., Weisberg, S., and Hubbard, K. G. 1996. Seed longevity of 41 weed species buried 17 years in eastern and western Nebraska. Weed Sci. 44:7486.Google Scholar
Chee-Sanford, J. C., Williams, M. M. II, Davis, A. S., and Sims, G. K. 2006. Do microorganisms influence seed-bank dynamics? Weed Sci. 54:575587.Google Scholar
Conn, J. S. 1990. Seed viability and dormancy of 17 weed species after burial for 4.7 years in Alaska. Weed Sci. 38:134138.Google Scholar
Conn, J. S., Beattie, K. L., and Blanchard, A. 2006. Seed viability and dormancy of 17 weed species after 19.7 years of burial in Alaska. Weed Sci. 54:464470.Google Scholar
Conn, J. S., Cochrane, C. L., and DeLapp, J. A. 1984. Soil seedbank changes after forest clearing and agricultural use in Alaska. Weed Sci. 32:343347.Google Scholar
Conn, J. S. and Deck, R. E. 1995. Seed viability and dormancy of 17 weed species after 9.7 years of burial in Alaska. Weed Sci. 43:583585.Google Scholar
Conn, J. S. and Farris, M. L. 1987. Seed viability and dormancy of 17 weed species after 21 months in Alaska. Weed Sci. 35:524529.Google Scholar
Daehler, C. C., Denslow, J. S., Ansari, S., and Kuo, H-C. 2004. A risk-assessment system for screening out invasive pest plants from Hawaii and other Pacific Islands. Conserv. Biol. 18:360368.Google Scholar
Darlington, H. T. 1951. The seventy-year period for Dr. Beal's seed viability experiment. Am. J. Bot. 38:379381.Google Scholar
Davis, A. S., Schutte, B. J., Iannuzzi, J., and Renner, K. 2008. Chemical and physical defense of weed seeds in relation to soil seedbank persistence. Weed Sci. 56:676684.Google Scholar
Dekker, J. and Hargrove, M. 2002. Weedy adaptation in Setaria spp. V: effects of gaseous environment on giant foxtail (Setaria faberii) (Poacea) seed germination. Am. J. Bot. 89:410416.Google Scholar
Dessaint, F., Chadoeuf, R., and Barralis, G. 1991. Spatial pattern analysis of weed seeds in the cultivated seedbank. J. Appl. Ecol. 28:721730.Google Scholar
Elliott, J. M. 1977. Some Methods for the Statistical Analysis of Samples of Benthic Invertebrates. 2nd ed. Freshwater Biological Association Scientific Publication No. 25. Kendal, UK: Titus Wilson and Sons. 160.Google Scholar
Gardarin, A. and Colbach, N. 2009. Estimation of a key parameter for weed population dynamics: the in situ seed mortality. Pages 257267. in. XIIIème Colloque International Sur Biologie des Mauvaises Herbes. Dijon, France:.Google Scholar
Haddon, M. 2001. Modelling and Quantitative Methods in Fisheries. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press. 406.Google Scholar
Harper, J., Williams, J., and Sagar, G. 1965. The behaviour of seeds in soil: I: the heterogeneity of soil surfaces and its role in determining the establishment of plants from seed. J. Ecol. 53:273286.Google Scholar
Hiebert, R. D. 1997. Prioritizing invasive plants and planning for management. Pages 195212. in Luken, J. O. and Thieret, J. W. eds. Assessment and Management of Plant Invasions. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Lewis, J. 1973. Longevity of crop and weed seeds: survival after 20 years in the soil. Weed Res. 13:179191.Google Scholar
McGraw, J. B., Vavrek, M. C., and Bennington, C. C. 1991. Ecological genetic variation in seed banks: I. establishment of a time transect. J. Ecol. 79:617625.Google Scholar
Morisita, M. 1962. I δ index, a measure of dispersion of individuals. Res. Popul. Ecol. 4:17.Google Scholar
Panetta, F. D. and Timmins, S. M. 2004. Evaluating the feasibility of eradication for terrestrial weed incursions. Plant Prot. Q. 19:511.Google Scholar
Shafer, D. E. and Chilcote, D. O. 1970. Factors influencing persistence and depletion in buried seed populations: II. the effects of soil temperature and moisture. Crop Sci. 10:342345.Google Scholar
Telewski, F. W. and Zeevaart, J. A. D. 2002. The 120-yr period for Dr. Beal's seed viability experiment. Am. J. Bot. 89:12851288.Google Scholar
Thompson, K., Bakker, J., and Bekker, R. 1997. The soil seed banks of northwest Europe: methodology, density, and longevity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 276.Google Scholar
Toole, E. H. and Brown, E. 1946. Final results of the Duvel buried seed experiment. J. Agric. Res. 72:201210.Google Scholar
Van Mourik, T. A., Stomph, T. J., and Murdoch, A. J. 2005. Why high seed densities within buried mesh bags may overestimate depletion rates of soil seed banks. J. Appl. Ecol. 42:299305.Google Scholar
Van Veldhuizen, B. and Knight, C. 2006. Dragonhead mint (Dracocephalum parviflorum Nutt.) as a potential agronomic crop for Alaska. Fairbanks, AK: University of Alaska Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station Misc. Pub. 2006-01. 12.Google Scholar