Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T20:34:58.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Responses of spreading orach (Atriplex patula) and common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) to soil compaction, drought, and waterlogging

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Manjula Maganti
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Harrow, ON N0R 1G0, Canada
Michael Downs
Affiliation:
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Harrow, ON N0R 1G0, Canada

Abstract

Root traits and growth of spreading orach and common lambsquarters were compared in response to soil compaction, drought, and waterlogging under controlled environment conditions. On the basis of the typical habitats occupied, the hypothesis was that spreading orach would be more tolerant of compaction and waterlogging and common lambsquarters more tolerant of drought. When grown in buckets with two soil bulk densities (1.2 and 1.6 g cm−3) for 8 wk, the two species responded similarly to compaction, with the fraction of fine roots reduced by 10%, total root length by 70%, root and shoot dry weight and leaf area by 50 to 60%, and plant height by 30% at the high compared with the low bulk density. When grown for 6 wk in soil columns 1 m long, which were watered daily or allowed to dry, common lambsquarters was deeper rooted than spreading orach at both moisture levels and better able to sustain growth in the drying columns. The watering regime did not alter the rooting depth of either species. Total root length in successive 10-cm increments declined exponentially from the top to the bottom of the watered columns, but root proliferation was reduced in the upper 20 cm of the drying columns. The average root diameter of both species decreased with drought and increased with soil compaction. When grown in waterlogged soil at 10 or 20 C for 4 wk, seedlings of spreading orach survived with little reduction in growth, whereas survival and growth of common lambsquarters were drastically reduced, particularly under cool soil conditions.

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
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

Andreasen, C., Streibig, H. C., and Haas, H. 1991. Soil properties affecting the distribution of 37 weed species in Danish fields. Weed Res 31:181187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, W. 1979. Aeration in higher plants. Pages 225332 in Woolhouse, H. W. ed. Advances in Botanical Research. Volume 7. London: Academic.Google Scholar
Atwell, B. J. 1990. The effect of compaction on wheat during early tillering: I. Growth and development and root structure. New Phytol 115:2935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassett, I. J. and Crompton, C. W. 1978. The biology of Canadian weeds. 32. Chenopodium album. L. Can. J. Plant Sci 58:10611072.Google Scholar
Bassett, I. J. and Munro, D. B. 1987. The biology of Canadian weeds. 79. Atriplex patula L., A. prostrata Boucher ex DC, and A. rosea L. Can. J. Plant Sci 67:10691082.Google Scholar
Bowes, G. G., Spurr, D. T., Thomas, A. G., Peschken, D. P., and Douglas, D. W. 1994. Habitats occupied by scentless chamomile (Matricaria perforate Mérat) in Saskatchewan. Can. J. Plant Sci 74:383386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buttery, B. R., Tan, C. S., Drury, C. F., Park, S. J., Armstrong, R. J., and Park, K. Y. 1998. The effects of soil compaction, soil moisture and soil type on growth and nodulation of soybean and common bean. Can. J. Plant Sci 78:571576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chassot, A., Stamp, P., and Richner, W. 2001. Root distribution and morphology of maize seedlings as affected by tillage and fertilizer placement. Plant Soil 231:123135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derksen, D. A., Lafond, G. P., Loeppky, H. A., and Swanton, C. J. 1993. Impact of agronomic practices on weed communities: tillage systems. Weed Sci 41:409417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dieleman, J. A., Mortensen, D. A., Buhler, D. D., Cambardella, C. A., and Moorman, T. B. 2000. Identifying associations among site properties and weed species abundance. I. Multivariate analysis. Weed Sci 48:567575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dwyer, L. M., Stewart, D. W., and Balchin, D. 1988. Rooting characteristics of corn, soybeans, and barley as a function of available water and soil physical characteristics. Can. J. Soil Sci 68:131132.Google Scholar
Dwyer, L. M., Stewart, D. W., Hayhoe, H. N., Balchin, D., Culley, J. L. B., and McGovern, M. 1995. Root mass distribution under conventional and conservation tillage. Can. J. Soil Sci 76:2328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engelaar, W. M. H. G., Jacobs, M. H. H. E., and Blom, C. W. P. M. 1993. Root growth of Rumex and Plantago species in compacted and waterlogged soils. Acta Bot. Neerl 42:2535.Google Scholar
Frick, B. and Thomas, A. G. 1992. Weed surveys in different tillage systems in southeastern Ontario field crops. Can. J. Plant Sci 72:13371347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallardo, M., Jackson, L. E., and Thompson, R. B. 1996. Shoot and root physiological responses to localized zones of soil moisture in cultivated and wild lettuce (Lactuca spp). Plant Cell Environ 19:11691178.Google Scholar
Hilfiker, R. E. and Lowery, B. 1988. Effect of conservation tillage systems on corn root growth. Soil Tillage Res 12:269283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Justin, S. H. F. W. and Armstrong, W. 1987. The anatomical characteristics of roots and plant response to soil flooding. New Phytol 106:465495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Materechera, S. A., Alston, A. M., Kirby, J. M., and Dexter, A. R. 1992. Influence of root diameter on the penetration of seminal roots into a compacted subsoil. Plant Soil 144:297303.Google Scholar
Materechera, S. A., Dexter, A. R., and Alston, A. M. 1991. Penetration of very strong soils by seedling roots of different plant species. Plant Soil 135:3141.Google Scholar
Pavlychenko, T. K. and Harrington, J. B. 1935. Root development of weeds and crops in competition under dry farming. Sci. Agric 16:151159.Google Scholar
Reader, R. J., Jalili, A., Grime, J. P., Spencer, R. E., and Matthew, N. 1992. A comparative study of plasticity in seedling rooting depth in drying soil. J. Ecol 81:543550.Google Scholar
Sharp, R. E. and Davies, W. J. 1985. Root growth and water uptake by maize plants in drying soil. J. Exp. Bot 36:14411456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unger, P. W. and Kaspar, T. C. 1994. Soil compaction and root growth: a review. Agron. J 86:759766.Google Scholar
Visser, J. W. E., Cornelis, W. P. M. B., and Laurentius, A. C. J. V. 1996. Flooding-induced adventitious rooting in Rumex: morphology and development in an ecological perspective. Acta Bot. Neerl 45:1728.Google Scholar
Wright, S. R., Jennette, M. W., Coble, H. D., and Rufty, T. W. Jr. 1999. Root morphology of young Glycine max, Senna obtusifolia, and Amaranthus palmeri . Weed Sci 47:706711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar