Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T20:00:10.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Plant Movement and Seed Dispersal of Russian Thistle (Salsola iberica)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

George P. Stallings
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil, and Ent. Sci., Univ. Idaho, Moscow, ID 83843. Senior author's current title and address is: Prod. Dev. Rep., Monsanto Ag. Co., P.O. Box 379, Okemos, MI 48805
Donald C. Thill
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil, and Ent. Sci., Univ. Idaho, Moscow, ID 83843. Senior author's current title and address is: Prod. Dev. Rep., Monsanto Ag. Co., P.O. Box 379, Okemos, MI 48805
Carol A. Mallory-Smith
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil, and Ent. Sci., Univ. Idaho, Moscow, ID 83843. Senior author's current title and address is: Prod. Dev. Rep., Monsanto Ag. Co., P.O. Box 379, Okemos, MI 48805
Lawrence W. Lass
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil, and Ent. Sci., Univ. Idaho, Moscow, ID 83843. Senior author's current title and address is: Prod. Dev. Rep., Monsanto Ag. Co., P.O. Box 379, Okemos, MI 48805

Abstract

Russian thistle plant movement and seed dispersal were studied in 1991 and 1992 by placing Russian thistle plants in the center of wheat fields in eastern Washington. Three adjacent site treatments, with 24 plants on each site, were used each year; wheat stubble, summerfallow planted to winter wheat, and a “stationary” site. Plants in the “stationary” site were anchored to the ground to prevent tumbling. Plants in the stubble and summerfallow sites were allowed to tumble naturally. Individual plant movement was monitored and recorded weekly by satellite global positioning systems technology. Average estimated seed number per plant at the beginning of the experiment was 57,400 in 1991 and 66,000 in 1992. The direction plants moved correlated highly with wind direction. Some plants moved a maximum distance of 4069 m in 6 wks, while other plants moved only 60 m because of variable winds and being compressed by snow or frozen into wheat stubble. Average percentage seed loss in 1991 and 1992 for stationary plants was 15 and 26%, and for tumbling plants was 48 and 66%, respectively.

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 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

1. Aldrich, R.J. 1984. Competitiveness of weeds. Page 159187 in Weed-crop ecology: Principles in weed management. Breton Publishers, North Scituate, MA.Google Scholar
2. Crompton, C. W. and Bassett, I. J. 1985. The biology of Canadian weeds. 65. Salsola pestifer A. Nels. Can. J. Plant Sci. 65:379388.Google Scholar
3. Fay, P. K., Mulugeta, D. M., and Dyer, W. E. 1992. The role of seed dispersal in the spread of sulfonylurea resistant Kochia scoparia . Weed Sci. Soc. Amer. Abstr. 32:49.Google Scholar
4. Gressel, J. and Segel, L. A. 1990. Modelling the effectiveness of herbicide rotations and mixtures as strategies to delay or preclude resistance. Weed Technol. 4:186198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Lass, L. W. and Callihan, R. H. 1993. GPS and GIS for weed surveys and management. Weed Technol. 7:249254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Levin, D. A. and Kerster, H. W. 1974. Gene flow in seed plants. Evol. Biol. 7:139220.Google Scholar
7. Maxwell, B. D., Roush, M. L. and Radosevich, S. R. 1990. Predicting the evolution and dynamics of herbicide resistance in weed populations. Weed Technol. 4:213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Mulugeta, D., Fay, P. K., and Dyer, W. E. 1992. The role of pollen in the spread of sulfonylurea resistant Kochia scoparia . Weed Sci. Soc. Amer. Abstr. 32:48.Google Scholar
9. Radosevich, S. R. and Holt, J. S. 1984. Plant growth and interference. Page 93138 in Weed Ecology: Implications for Vegetation Management. John Wiley and Sons, NY.Google Scholar
10. Robbins, W. W., Crafts, A. S., and Raynor, R. N. 1942. Special weeds. Page 486 in Cole, L. J., ed. Weed Control, 1st ed. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York.Google Scholar
11. Saari, L. L., Cotterman, J. C., and Thill, D. C. 1994. Mechanisms of resistance for ALS-inhibitor herbicides. In Powles, S. B. and Holtum, J. A., eds. Herbicide Resistance in Plants: Ecology and Mechanisms. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. (in Press).Google Scholar
12. SAS Institute, Inc. 1990. SAS User's Guide: Statistics. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.Google Scholar
13. Stallings, G. P., Thill, D. C., and Mallory-Smith, C. A. 1994. Sulfonylurea-resistant Russian thistle survey (Salsola iberica) in Washington state. Weed Technol. 8:258264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Stallings, G. P., Thill, D. C., and Mallory-Smith, C. A. 1993. Pollen-mediated gene flow of sulfonylurea-resistant kochia (Kochia scoparia). Weed Sci. Soc. Amer. Abstr. 33:180.Google Scholar
15. Stevens, O. A. 1943. Russian thistle life history and growth. NDSU Bulletin 326. NDSU Agric. Exp. Stn., Fargo, ND.Google Scholar
16. Young, F. L. and Gealy, D. R. 1986. Control of Russian thistle (Salsola iberica) with chlorsulfuron in a wheat (Triticum aestivum) summer-fallow rotation. Weed Sci. 34:318324.Google Scholar
17. Young, J. A. and Evans, R. A. 1972. Germination and establishment of Salsola in relation to seedbed environment. I. Temperature, afterripening, moisture relations of Salsola seeds as determined by laboratory studies. Agron. J. 64:214218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar