Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T17:36:53.402Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tanoak (Lithocarpus densiflorus) Leaf Surface Characteristics and Absorption of Triclopyr

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

M. G. King  and
S. R. Radosevich
M. G. King
Affiliation:
Dep. Bot., Univ. of California, Davis, CA 95616
S. R. Radosevich
Affiliation:
Dep. Bot., Univ. of California, Davis, CA 95616
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Absorption of triclopyr {[(3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinyl)oxy] acetic acid} by tanoak [Lithocarpus densiflorus (Hook. & Am.) Rehd.] leaves was investigated. Greater amounts of 14C-triclopyr were absorbed by immature leaves than mature leaves and by abaxial than adaxial surfaces. Both surfaces of immature and mature tanoak leaves were characterized. Stomata were present only on the abaxial surface and were more numerous on immature leaves than mature leaves. Immature leaves had less epicuticular wax and thinner, more permeable cuticular membranes than mature leaves. Stellate trichome densities were greater on abaxial surfaces than adaxial surfaces and on immature than mature leaves. Absorption of 14C-triclopyr was influenced by each of the leaf surface features studied.

Keywords

Epicuticular waxstomatatrichomediffusive resistance
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 27 , Issue 6 , November 1979 , pp. 599 - 604
Copyright
Copyright © 1979 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. Anderson, T. T. 1951. Technique for the preservation of 3-dimensional structure in preparing specimens for the SEM. Trans. New York Acad. Sci. 13:130–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Bayer, D. E. and Lumb, J. M. 1973. Penetration and translocation of herbicides. Pages 387–439 in Van Valkenburg, W., ed. Pesticide Formulations. Marcel Dekker, New York.Google Scholar
3. Crafts, A. S. and Foy, C. L. 1962. The chemical and physical nature of plant surfaces in relation to the use of pesticides and to their residues. Residue Rev. 1:112–239.Google Scholar
4. Crafts, A. S. and Yamaguchi, S. 1964. The autoradiography of plant materials. Univ. of California, Div. of Agric. Sci. Manual 35. 143 pp.Google Scholar
5. Currier, H. B. and Dybing, C. D. 1959. Foliar penetration of herbicides. Review and present status. Weeds 7:195–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Dybing, C. D. and Currier, H. B. 1961. Folair penetration by chemicals. Plant Physiol. 36:169–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Fowells, H. A. 1965. Silvics of Forest Trees of the United States. Agric. Handb. No. 271. For. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric. 762 pp.Google Scholar
8. Franke, W. 1961. Ectodesmata and foliar absorption. Am. J. Bot. 48:683–691.Google Scholar
9. Franke, W. 1964. Role of guard cells in foliar absorption. Nature 202:1236–1237.Google Scholar
10. Franke, W. 1971. The entry of residues into plants via ectodesmata (ectocythodes). Residue Rev. 38:81–115.Google Scholar
11. Gratkowski, H., Hopkins, D., and Lauterbach, P. 1973. The Pacific Coast and northern Rocky Mountain region. J. For. 71:138–143.Google Scholar
12. Gratkowski, H., Stewart, R. E., and Weatherly, H. G. 1978. Triclopyr and Krenite herbicides show promise for use in Pacific northwest forests. Down Earth 34:28–31.Google Scholar
13. Greene, D. W. and Bukovac, M. J. 1971. Factors influencing the penetration of naphthaleneacetamide into leaves of pear (Pyrus communis L.). J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 96:240–246.Google Scholar
14. Greene, D. W. and Bukovac, M. J. 1974. Stomatal penetration: effect of surfactants and role in foliar absorption. Am. J. Bot. 61:100–106.Google Scholar
15. Greene, D. W. and Bukovac, M. J. 1977. Foliar penetration of naphthaleneacetic acid: enhancement of light and role of stomata. Am. J. Bot. 64:96–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Hess, F. D., Bayer, D. E., and Falk, R. H. 1974. Herbicide dispersal patterns. I. As a function of leaf surface. Weed Sci. 22:394–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Hull, H. M. 1970. Leaf structure as related to absorption of pesticides and other compounds. Residue Rev. 31:1–155.Google ScholarPubMed
18. Hull, H. M., Morton, H. L., and Wharrie, J. R. 1975. Environmental influences on cuticle development and resultant foliar penetration. Bot. Rev. 41:421–452.Google Scholar
19. Kamimura, S. and Goodman, R. N. 1964. Influence of foliar characteristics on the absorption of a radioactive model compound by apple leaves. Physiol. Plant. 17:805–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Layne, R. E. C. 1967. Foliar trichomes and their importance as infection sites for Corynebacterium michiganese on tomato. Phytopathology 57:981–985.Google Scholar
21. Leece, D. R. 1976. Composition and ultrastructure of lead cuticles from fruit trees, relative to differential foliar absorption. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 3:833–847.Google Scholar
22. Martin, J. T. and Juniper, B. E. 1970. The Cuticles of Plants. St. Martin's Press, New York. 347 pp.Google Scholar
23. Norris, R. F. 1974. Penetration of 2,4-D in relation to cuticle thickness. Am. J. Bot. 61:74–79.Google Scholar
24. Norris, R. F. and Bukovac, M. J. 1968. Structure of the pear leaf cuticle with special reference to cuticular penetration. Am. J. Bot. 55:975–983.Google Scholar
25. Norris, R. F. and Bukovac, M. J. 1969. Some physical-kinetic considerations in penetration of naphthaleneacetic acid through isolated pear leaf cuticle. Physiol. Plant. 22:701–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26. Paliwal, G. S. and Kakkar, L. 1969. The use of hydrogen peroxide for clearing leaves. Acta Agron. Acad. Sci. Hung. 18:406–407.Google Scholar
27. Radosevich, S. R. and Bayer, D. E. 1979. Effect of temperature and photoperiod on triclopyr, picloram, and 2,4,5-T translocation. Weed Sci. 27:22–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Radosevich, S. R., Passof, P. C., and Leonard, O. A. 1976. Douglas fir release from tanoak and Pacific madrone competition. Weed Sci. 24:144–145.Google Scholar
29. Sands, R. and Bachelard, E. P. 1973a. Uptake of picloram by eucalypt leaf discs. I. Effect of surfactants and nature of leaf surfaces. New Phytol. 72:69–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30. Sands, R. and Bachelard, E. P. 1973b. Uptake of picloram by eucalypt leaf discs. II. Role of stomata. New Phytol. 72:87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31. Sargent, J. A. and Blackman, G. E. 1962. Studies on foliar penetration. I. Factors controlling the entry of 2,4-D. J. Exp. Bot. 13:348–368.Google Scholar
32. Sargent, J. A. and Blackman, G. E. 1972. Studies on foliar penetration. IX. Patterns of penetration of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid into the leaves of different species. J. Exp. Bot. 23:830–841.Google Scholar
33. Sass, J. E. 1958. Botanical Microtechnique. The Iowa State University Press. Ames, Iowa. 228 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34. Schönherr, J. and Bukovac, M. J. 1970. Preferential polar pathways in the cuticle and their relationship to ectodesmata. Planta (Berl.), 92:189–201.Google Scholar
35. Schönherr, J. and Bukovac, M. J. 1972. Penetration of stomata by liquids: Dependence on surface tension, wettability, and stomatal morphology. Plant Physiol. 49:813–819.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
36. Sharma, M. P. and Vanden Born, W. H. 1970. Foliar penetration of picloram and 2,4-D in aspen and balsam poplar. Weed Sci. 18:57–63.Google Scholar