Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T12:39:21.924Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors Affecting Seed Germination and Emergence of Venice Mallow (Hibiscus trionum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Demosthenis Chachalis ,
Nikolaos Korres  and
Embrahim M. Khah
Demosthenis Chachalis*
Affiliation:
Benaki Phytopathological Institute, Weed Science Department, 8 S. Delta and 7 Ekalis Street, Athens 145 61, Greece
Nikolaos Korres
Affiliation:
Lotus SA, 26 Grigoroviou Street, Athens 111 41, Greece
Embrahim M. Khah
Affiliation:
University of Thessaly, School of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Agriculture Crop Production and Agricultural Environment, Fytoko Street, Volos 38446, Greece
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Venice mallow is an emerging weed problem in many regions of the world in various crops. Studies on its hard seed coat were conducted by scanning electron, light, and fluorescence microscopy. The effects of environmental factors on germination and seedling emergence were examined in laboratory experiments. Seeds possessed physical dormancy (90%) that required immersion for 0.5 h in concentrated sulfuric acid to break without damaging the seed. After scarification, 29% of seeds exhibited primary embryo dormancy. Exposure of seeds to even short periods of 15 d of prechilling induced secondary dormancy (10% germination). The surface of hard seeds had a velvety appearance from numerous papillate structures and deposits (hydrophilic material). The location of the water barrier was very superficial in the outer seed coat. Although, in hard seeds, the hilar area appeared to have vertical ruptures and the hilum fissure appeared to be open, there was no water entry. It was observed that microruptures could be the region of structural weakness of hard seeds in relation to water permeability during prolonged burial (8 mo).

The highest (60%) germination was recorded at a day/night temperature of 30/20 C with a 12-h photoperiod. No germination was measured at either 10 or 45 C constant temperature. Germination was recorded with a broad range of pH (3-11) and seeds were rather tolerant to low water potential (20% germination at –1.2 MPa). Seedling emergence was higher for seeds buried at 2 cm than for those placed on the surface (54 vs. 38%, respectively). These results showed that Venice mallow is a rather unique species that possesses a complex mechanism of dormancy (physical, primary, and secondary). Information gained in this study will be used in developing management strategies for this species.

Keywords

Venice mallow, Hibiscus trionum L. HIBTRGerminationosmotic potential salt stresstemperaturelight
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 56 , Issue 4 , August 2008 , pp. 509 - 515
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

Anonymous 1997. Venice mallow. Integr. Pest Crop Manag. Newsl. 17:5.Google Scholar
Baskin, C. C. 2003. Breaking physical dormancy in seeds—focusing on the lens. New Phytol. 158:227–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baskin, C. C. and Baskin, J. M. 1998. Seeds: Ecology, Biogeography and Evolution of Dormancy and Germination. New York Academic. 700.Google Scholar
Baskin, C. C., Baskin, J. M., and Li, X. 2000. Taxonomy, anatomy and evolution of physical dormancy in seeds. Plant Species Biol. 15:139–152.Google Scholar
Bewley, J. D. and Black, M. 1982. The release from dormancy. Pages 127–198. in Bewley, J. D. and Black, M. Physiology and Biochemistry of Seeds. Berlin Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Chachalis, D. and Reddy, K. N. 2000. Factors affecting Campsis radicans seed germination and seedling emergence. Weed Sci. 48:212–216.Google Scholar
Chachalis, D. and Smith, M. L. 2000. Imbibition behavior of soybean (Glycine max) accessions with different testa characteristics. Seed Sci. Technol. 28:201–211.Google Scholar
Chachalis, D. and Smith, M. L. 2001. Seed coat regulation of water uptake during imbibition in soybeans (Glycine max). Seed Sci. Technol. 29:401–412.Google Scholar
Chauhan, B. S., Gill, G., and Preston, C. 2006. African mustard (Brassica tournefortii) germination in southern Australia. Weed Sci. 54:891–897.Google Scholar
Egley, G. H. and Duke, S. O. 1985. Physiology of weed seed dormancy and germination. Pages 27–64. in Duke, S. O. Weed Physiology. Volume I. Reproduction and Ecophysiology. Boca Raton, FL CRC.Google Scholar
Egley, G. H. and Paul, R. N. Jr. 1993. Detecting and overcoming water-impermeable barriers in prickly-sida (Sida spinosa L.) seeds. Seed Sci. Res. 3:119–127.Google Scholar
Evetts, L. L. and Burnside, O. C. 1972. Germination and seedling development of common milkweed and other species. Weed Sci. 20:371–378.Google Scholar
Gogue, G. J. and Emino, E. R. 1979. Seed coat scarification of Albizia julibrissin Durazz. by natural mechanisms. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 104:421–423.Google Scholar
Gopinthan, M. C. and Baru, C. R. 1985. Structural Diversity and its Adaptive Significance in Seeds of Vigna minima (Roxb.). Ann Bot. 56:723–732.Google Scholar
Gutterman, Y. and Heydecker, W. 1973. Studies of the surface of desert plant seeds. I. Effect of day length upon maturation of the seed coat of Onomis sicula Guss. Ann. Bot. 37:1049–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[ISTA] International Seed Testing Association 1985. International rules for seed testing. Seed Sci. Technol. 13:307–513.Google Scholar
Jain, R. and Singh, M. 1989. Factors affecting goatweed (Scoparia dulcis) seed germination. Weed Sci. 37:766–770.Google Scholar
Johnson, S. B., Sindel, B. M., and Charles, G. W. 2003. What bladder ketmia have you got. Aust. Cottongrow. 24:50–54.Google Scholar
Kelly, K. M. and van Staden, J. 1986. The lens as the site of permeability in papilionoid seed, Aspalathus linearis . J. Plant Physiol. 128:395–404.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z. and Cassman, K. G. 2003. Use of herbicide-tolerant crops as a component of an integrated weed management program. Crop Manag. 10:1094.Google Scholar
Koger, C. H., Reddy, K. N., and Poston, D. H. 2004. Factors affecting seed germination, seedling emergence, and survival of texasweed (Caperonia palustris). Weed Sci. 52:989–995.Google Scholar
Korres, N. E. 2005. Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Weed Science: Theory and Digest. Paris Lavoisier. 724.Google Scholar
Kremer, R. J. 1993. Management of weed seed banks with microorganisms. Ecol. Appl. 1:42–52.Google Scholar
Leggese, N. and Powell, A. A. 1992. Comparisons of water uptake and imbibition damage in eleven cowpea cultivars. Seed Sci. Technol. 20:173–180.Google Scholar
Mennan, H. and Ngouajio, M. 2006. Seasonal cycles in germination and seedling emergence of summer and winter populations of catchweed bedstraw (Galium aparine) and wild mustard (Brassica kaber). Weed Sci. 54:114–120.Google Scholar
Prostko, E. P., Rosales-Robles, E., James, M., and Chandler, J. M. 1998. Wild okra control with bromoxynil and pyrithiobac. J. Cotton Sci. 2:100–103.Google Scholar
Reddy, K. N. and Singh, M. 1992. Germination and emergence of beggarticks (Bidens pilosa). Weed Sci. 40:195–199.Google Scholar
Serrato-Valenti, G., Cornara, L., Ghisellini, P., and Ferrando, M. 1994. Testa structure and histochemistry related to water uptake in Leucaena leucocephala Lam (De Wit.). Ann. Bot. 73:531–537.Google Scholar
Shaw, D. R., Macks, R. E., and Smith, C. A. 1991. Redvine (Brunnichia ovata) germination and emergence. Weed Sci. 39:33–36.Google Scholar
Singh, M. and Achhireddy, N. R. 1984. Germination and ecology of milk-weed (Morrenia odorata). Weed Sci. 32:781–785.Google Scholar
Soteres, J. K. and Murray, D. S. 1981. Germination and development of honeyvine milkweed (Ampelamus albidus) seeds. Weed Sci. 29:625–628.Google Scholar
Steuter, A. A., Mozafar, A., and Goodin, J. R. 1981. Water potential of aqueous polyethylene glycol. Plant Physiol. 67:64–67.Google Scholar
Uremis, I. and Uygur, F. N. 2005. Seed viability of some weed species after 7 years of burial in the Cukurova. Asia J. Plant Sci. 4:1–5.Google Scholar
van Klinken, R. D. and Flack, L. 2005. Wet heat as a mechanism for dormancy release and germination of seeds with physical dormancy. Weed Sci. 53:663–669.Google Scholar
Westra, P., Pearson, C., and Ristau, R. J. 1990. Control of Venice mallow (Hibiscus trionum) in corn (Zea mays) and onions (Allium cepa). Weed Technol. 4:500–504.Google Scholar
Westra, P., Pearson, C. H., Ristau, R., and Schweissing, F. 1996. Venice mallow (Hibiscus trionum) seed production and persistence in soil in Colorado. Weed Technol. 10:22–28.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. G. 1979. Germination and seedling development of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Weed Sci. 27:146–151.Google Scholar
Wolf, W. J., Baker, F. L., and Bernard, R. L. 1981. Soybean seed-coat structural features: pits, deposits and cracks. Scanning Electron Microsc. 3:531–544.Google Scholar