Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T05:31:15.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of temperature and photoperiod on Setaria viridis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Clarence J. Swanton ,
Jian Zhong Huang ,
William Deen ,
Matthijs Tollenaar ,
Anil Shrestha  and
Hamid Rahimian
Jian Zhong Huang
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1
William Deen
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1
Matthijs Tollenaar
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1
Anil Shrestha
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1
Hamid Rahimian
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, College of Agriculture, Mashhad, Iran
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Understanding the environmental variables influencing the phenological development of weeds is essential for simulation model development. Temperature and photoperiod are important variables governing the phenological development of weeds. Growth cabinet studies were conducted to characterize the phenological development of Setaria viridis in response to variations in temperature and photoperiod and to determine the duration of the juvenile phase and the effect of temperature and photoperiod on reproductive development. Setaria viridis was adapted to a temperature range from 6.5 to 47 C. Phenological development of S. viridis was described accurately in terms of thermal days (cumulative day degrees above a base temperature) and biological days (Bd: chronological days at the optimum temperature and photoperiod). Four developmental phases of S. viridis were described: (1) a juvenile (photoperiod insensitive) phase of 2.6 Bd; (2) a photoperiod-sensitive inductive phase of 2.2 Bd; (3) a photoperiod-sensitive postinductive phase of 6.0 Bd; and (4) a photoperiod-insensitive inductive phase of 10.9 Bd. Photoperiod sensitivity of S. viridis did not differ with stage of development when expressed as a rate. Interpretation of constant sensitivity to photoperiod will simplify simulation of weed phenology in mechanistic models.

Keywords

Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. SETVI, green foxtailPhenologymechanistic weed modelsjuvenile phasethermal timebiological daysSETVI
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 47 , Issue 4 , August 1999 , pp. 446 - 453
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 by the 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

Deen, W., Hunt, L. A., and Swanton, C. J. 1998a. Photothermal time describes common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) phonological development and growth. Weed Sci. 46:561–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deen, W., Hunt, T., and Swanton, C. J. 1998b. Influence of temperature, photoperiod, and irradiance on the phenological development of common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia). Weed Sci. 46:555–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, B. J., Thomas, A. G., Morrison, I. N., and Maw, M. G. 1985. The biology of Canadian weeds. 70. Setaria viridis (L.) Beauv. Can. I. Plant Sci. 65:669–690.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. H., Collinson, S. T., Hudson, D., and Patefield, W. M. 1992. The analysis of reciprocal transfer experiments to estimate the durations of the photoperiod-sensitive and photoperiod-insensitive phases of plant development: an example in soybean. Ann. Bot. 70:87–92.Google Scholar
Ghersa, C. M. and Holt, J. S. 1995. Using phenology prediction in weed management: a review. Weed Res. 35:461–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammer, G. L., Vanderlip, R. L., Gibson, G., Wade, L. J., Henzell, R. G., Younger, D. R., Warren, J., and Dale, A. B. 1989. Genotype by environment interaction in grain sorghum. II. Effects of temperature and photoperiod on ontogeny. Crop Sci. 29:376–384.Google Scholar
Hodges, T. 1991. Temperature and water stress effects on phenology. Pages 7–13 in Hodges, T., ed. Predicting Crop Phenology. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Hunt, L. A. and Pararajasingham, S. 1995. CROPSIM-WHEAT: a model describing the growth and development of wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 75:619–632.Google Scholar
Kiniry, J. R., Ritchie, J. T., Musser, R. L., Flint, E. P., and Iwig, W. C. 1983. The photoperiod sensitive interval in maize. Agron. J. 75:687–690.Google Scholar
Kiniry, J. R., Rosenthal, W. D., Jackson, B. S., and Hoogenboom, G. 1991. Predicting leaf development of crop plants. Pages 29–42 in Hodges, T., ed. Predicting Crop Phenology. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Kirby, E.J.M. and Appleyard, M. 1984. Cereal plant development and its relation to crop management. Pages 161–173 in Gallagher, E. J., ed. Cereal Production: Proceedings of the Second International Summer School in Agriculture. London: Butterworths in association with the Royal Dublin Society.Google Scholar
Kropff, M. J., Weaver, S. E., and Smits, M. A. 1992. Use of ecophysiological models for crop-weed interference: relations among weed density, relative time of weed emergence, relative leaf area, and yield loss. Weed Sci. 40:296–301.Google Scholar
Major, D. R. and Kiniry, J. R. 1991. Predicting day length effects on phenological processes. Pages 15–28 in Hodges, T., ed. Predicting Crop Phenology. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Manthey, D. R. and Nalewaja, J. D. 1987. Germination of two foxtail (Setaria) species. Weed Technol. 1:302–304.Google Scholar
Patterson, D. T. 1993. Effects of temperature and photoperiod on growth and development of sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia). Weed Sci. 41:574–582.Google Scholar
Patterson, D. T. 1995. Effects of photoperiod on reproductive development in velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 43:627–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, D. E. and Nalewaja, J. D. 1992. Environment influences green foxtail (Setaria viridis) competition with wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 6:607–610.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1990. SAS Procedures Guide. Version 6. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Schreiber, M. M. 1965. Development of giant foxtail under several temperatures and photoperiods. Weeds 13:40–43.Google Scholar
Slafer, G. A. and Rawson, H. M. 1996. Responses to photoperiod change with phenophase and temperature during wheat development. Field Crops Res. 46:1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swanton, C. J. and Murphy, S. D. 1996. Weed science beyond the weeds: the role of integrated weed management (IWM) in agroecosystem health. Weed Sci. 44:437–445.Google Scholar
Thomas, B. and Vince-Prue, D. 1984. Juvenility, photoperiodism and vernalization. Pages 408–439 in Wilkins, M. B., ed. Advanced Plant Physiology. London: Pitman Publishing.Google Scholar
Tollenaar, M. and Hunter, R. B. 1983. A photoperiod and temperature sensitive period for leaf number in maize. Crop Sci. 23:457–460.Google Scholar
Trudgill, D. L. and Perry, J. N. 1994. Thermal time and ecological strategies—a unifying hypothesis. Ann. Appl. Biol. 125:521–532.Google Scholar
Wang, Z., Acock, M. C., and Acock, B. 1997. Photoperiod sensitivity during flower development of opium poppy (Papaver somniferum L.). Ann. Bot. 79:129–132.Google Scholar
Wilkerson, G. G., Jones, J. W., Boote, K. J., and Buol, G. S. 1989. Photoperiodically sensitive interval in time to flower of soybean. Crop Sci. 29:721–726.Google Scholar