Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T08:23:07.280Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative Morphological Development of Cogongrass (Imperata cylindrica) in Iraq

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

B. A. Al-Juboory  and
G. S. Hassawy
B. A. Al-Juboory
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Coll. of Agric., Univ. of Baghdad, Abu-Ghraib and Foundation of Tech. Inst., Baghdad, Iraq
G. S. Hassawy
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Coll. of Agric., Univ. of Baghdad, Abu-Ghraib and Foundation of Tech. Inst., Baghdad, Iraq
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted over a 2-yr period to study the comparative morphological development of cogongrass [Imperata cylindrica (L.) Beauv.] ecotypes from 15 different locations throughout the three main regions of Iraq. Plant height and density of stands varied more than 2-fold. The number of flowering heads varied 11-fold for plants collected from the different locations. Mature leaf-blades varied in width from 4.7 to 6.9 mm. These distinct variations indicate the existence of different ecotypes of cogongrass in Iraq.

Keywords

Weedsecotypevegetative type
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 28 , Issue 3 , May 1980 , pp. 324 - 326
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

1. Buchholtz, K. P. 1958. Variations in the sensitivity of quackgrass to dalapon. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 15:18–19.Google Scholar
2. Dickens, R. and Buchanan, G. A. 1971. Old weed in a new home–that's cogongrass. Highlights of Agirc. Res. 18:67.Google Scholar
3. Dickens, R. 1974. Cogongrass in Alabama after sixty years. Weed Sci. 22:177–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Hadley, H. H. 1953. Cytological relationships between Sorghum vulgare and S. halepense . Agron. J. 45:139–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Hamilton, K. C. and Tucker, H. 1964. Response of selected and random plantings of johnsongrass to dalapon. Weeds 12:220–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Holm, L. 1969. Weed problems in developing countries. Weed Sci. 17:113–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Glausen, J. 1967. Stages in the evolution of plant species. 2nd ed., Hafner Publ. Co., Inc., New York. 206 pp.Google Scholar
8. Guest, E. R. 1968. Flora of Iraq. Ministry of Agric., Baghdad, Iraq. pp. 532–536.Google Scholar
9. McWhorter, C. G. 1971. Growth and development of johnsongrass ecotypes. Weed Sci. 19:141–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. McWhorter, C. G. 1971. Control of johnsongrass ecotypes. Weed Sci. 19:229–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. McWhorter, C. G. 1971. Control of johnsongrass. Weed Sci. 19:385–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Rochecouste, E. 1962. Studies on the biotypes of Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. II. Growth and response to trichloroacetic and 2,2-dichloropropionic acids. Weed Res. 2:136–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Snedecor, G. W. and Cochran, W. G. 1967. Statistical Methods. Sixth ed. The Iowa State Univ. Press. 593 pp.Google Scholar