Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:26:50.809Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effect of mowing on perennial sedges

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Harold D. Coble
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Box 7620, Raleigh, NC 27695
Fred H. Yelverton
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Box 7620, Raleigh, NC 27695

Abstract

Field studies were conducted in 1996 and 1997 to determine the response of Cyperus rotundus and Cyperus esculentus, Kyllinga brevifolia, and Kyllinga gracillima to mowing regimens common to recreational turfgrass. Treatments were selected to simulate Cynodon dactylon golf course management and included mowing at 1.3 and 3.8 cm with mowing frequencies of three times per week and once a week, respectively. A nonmowed check was included for comparison. Reductions in C. rotundus shoot number were observed beginning 6 wk after initial treatment (WAIT) in 1996 and 9 WAIT in 1997 for the 1.3-cm mowing regime. The 3.8-cm mowing regime did not reduce C. rotundus shoot number until the final evaluation of each year. Reductions in C. rotundus rhizome length, tuber number, and tuber size were observed for both mowing regimes in both years. Cyperus esculentus shoot number was reduced by the 1.3-cm treatment at each evaluation date in 1996 and 1997. Cyperus esculentus shoot number reductions in the 3.8-cm regime were first observed 4 and 6 WAIT in the 2 yr and continued until termination. The 1.3-cm regime reduced C. esculentus spread beginning 6 WAIT in 1996 and 3 WAIT in 1997. Cyperus esculentus spread was also reduced by the 3.8-cm treatment, but reduction began at later evaluations (8 and 9 WAIT). Tuber production by C. esculentus was completely inhibited by the two mowing regimes in both years. The only treatment effect observed in K. brevifolia and K. gracillima in 1996 was a reduction in internode length of K. gracillima by the 1.3-cm mowing regime. In 1997, the 1.3-cm regime reduced K. brevifolia shoot number at 15 and 18 WAIT and plant spread beginning 6 WAIT and continuing until termination. The 3.8-cm treatment did not affect K. brevifolia shoot number and reductions in spread were only observed at the final evaluation. Kyllinga gracillima shoot number and plant spread were reduced by the 1.3-cm mowing regime at each 1997 evaluation. Reductions in K. gracillima shoot number occurred at the final evaluation, and reductions in spread began 12 WAIT when subjected to the 3.8-cm treatment. Both mowing regimes reduced K. brevifolia and K. gracillima internode length. Kyllinga brevifolia total rhizome length and total node number were reduced by the 1.3-cm regime only. Kyllinga gracillima rhizome length, internode length, and node number were reduced by both regimes in 1997.

Type
Research Article
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.)

Footnotes

Current address: Department of Plant and Soil Science, The University of Tennessee, 369 Ellington Plant Science, Knoxville, TN 37996; [email protected]

References

Literature Cited

Baker, R. S. 1964. Reproductive capacity of nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) tubers. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 4:6364.Google Scholar
Bendixen, L. E. and Nandihalli, U. B. 1987. Worldwide distribution of purple and yellow nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus and C. esculentus). Weed Technol. 1:6165.Google Scholar
Blum, R. R. and Yelverton, F. H. 1997. Sedge control in bermudagrass turf. . North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. 109 pp.Google Scholar
Bryson, C. T. and Carter, R. 1994. Notes on the Carex, Cyperus, and Kyllinga (Cyperaceae) in Mississippi with records of eight species previously unreported to the state. Sida 16:171182.Google Scholar
Bryson, C. T., Carter, R., McCarty, L. B., and Yelverton, F. H. 1997. Kyllinga, a genus of neglected weeds in the continental United States. Weed Technol. 11:838842.Google Scholar
Coats, G. E., Munoz, R. F., Anderson, D. H., Heering, D. C., and Scruggs, J. W. 1987. Purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) control with imazaquin in warm-season turfgrasses. Weed Sci. 35:691694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delahoussaye, A. J. and Thieret, J. W. 1967. Cyperus subgenus Kyllinga (Cyperaceae) in the continental United States. Sida 3:128136.Google Scholar
Garg, D. K., Bendixen, L. E., and Anderson, S. R. 1967. Rhizome differentiation in yellow nutsedge. Weeds 15:124128.Google Scholar
Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. The world's worst weeds. Distribution and Biology. Honolulu, HI: University Press of Hawaii, pp. 824, 125–133.Google Scholar
Horowitz, M. 1972a. Effects of frequent clipping on three perennial weeds, Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers., Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers., and Cyperus rotundus L. Exp. Agric. 8:225234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, M. 1972b. Growth, tuber formation and spread of Cyperus rotundus L. from single tubers. Weed Res. 12:348363.Google Scholar
Kawabata, O., Nishimoto, R. K., and Tang, C. 1994. Interference of two kyllinga species (Kyllinga nemoralis and Kyllinga brevifolia) on bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) growth. Weed Technol. 8:8386.Google Scholar
Kral, R. 1981. Further additions to some notes on the flora of the southern states, particularly Alabama and middle Tennessee. Rhodora 83:301315.Google Scholar
Molin, W. T., Khan, R. A., Barinbaum, R. B., and Kopec, D. M. 1997. Green kyllinga (Kyllinga brevifolia): germination and herbicidal control. Weed Sci. 45:546550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naczi, R.F.C. 1984. Rare sedges discovered and rediscovered in Delaware. Bartonia 50:3135.Google Scholar
Naczi, R.F.C., Driskill, R. J., Pennell, E. L., Seyfried, N. E., Tucker, A. O., and Dill, N. H. 1986. New records of some rare DelMarVa sedges. Bartonia 52:4957.Google Scholar
Rao, J. S. 1968. Studies on the development of tubers in nutgrass and their starch content at different depths of soil. Madras Agric. 55:1923.Google Scholar
Reed, C. F. 1970. Selected weeds of the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 366. pp. 9699.Google Scholar
Santos, B. M., Morales-Payan, J. P., Stall, W. M., and Bewick, T. A. 1997. Influence of tuber size and shoot removal on purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) regrowth. Weed Sci. 45:681683.Google Scholar
Snyder, D. B. 1983. Rare New Jersey grasses and sedges. Bartonia 49:7172.Google Scholar
Snyder, D. B. 1984. Botanical discoveries of Vincent Abraitys. Bartonia 50:5456.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. W. and Sweet, R. D. 1987. Biology and life cycle of purple and yellow nutsedges (Cyperus rotundus and C. esculentus). Weed Technol. 1:6673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundell, E. and Thomas, R. D. 1988. Four new records of Cyperus (Cyperaceae) in Arkansas. Sida 13:259261.Google Scholar
Thullen, R. J. and Keeley, P. E. 1975. Yellow nutsedge sprouting and resprouting potential. Weed Sci. 23:333337.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. C. 1984. A revision of the genus Kyllinga Rottb. (Cyperaceae) in Mexico and Central America. Rhodora 86:507538.Google Scholar
Tumbleson, M. E. and Kommedahl, T. 1961. Reproductive potential of Cyperus esculentus by tubers. Weeds 9:646653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, D. H., Dennis, W. M., and Patrick, T. S. 1981. Distribution and naturalization of Cyperus brevifoliodes (Cyperaceae) in eastern United States. Sida 9:188190.Google Scholar
Wills, G. D. 1987. Biology of purple and yellow nutsedge. Pages 352354 In Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Production Research Conferences. Memphis, TN: Natl. Cotton Council of America.Google Scholar
Yelverton, F. H. 1996. Know your sedges. Golf Course Manage. 64:5660.Google Scholar
Zomlefer, W. B. 1994. Guide to flowering plant families. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, pp. 347350.Google Scholar