Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T17:37:35.795Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Emergence of garden spurge (Euphorbia hirta) and large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis) in response to different physical properties and depths of common mulch materials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 October 2019

Debalina Saha ,
S. Christopher Marble Open the ORCID record for S. Christopher Marble [Opens in a new window] ,
Brian Pearson ,
Héctor Pérez ,
Gregory MacDonald  and
Dennis Odero
Debalina Saha
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
S. Christopher Marble*
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, University of Florida, Mid-Florida Research and Education Center, Apopka, FL, USA
Brian Pearson
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, University of Florida, Mid-Florida Research and Education Center, Apopka, FL, USA
Héctor Pérez
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
Gregory MacDonald
Affiliation:
Professor, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
Dennis Odero
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, University of Florida, Everglades Research and Education Center, Belle Glade, FL, USA
*
Author for correspondence: S. Christopher Marble, University of Florida/IFAS Mid-Florida Research and Education Center, 2725 S Binion Road, Apopka, FL 32703. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Greenhouse and outdoor container experiments were conducted to determine garden spurge and large crabgrass emergence when seeds were placed either on top of or below three different mulch materials [pine bark (PB), hardwood (HW), or pine straw (PS)] applied at five depths (0, 1.3, 2.5, 5.1, and 10.2 cm). To elucidate mulch characteristics that contributed to weed control, photosynthetic active radiation (PAR) was recorded underneath each mulch layer, moisture retention was monitored for 24 h following irrigation, and particle size was determined using standard soil sieves. HW reduced PAR (97%) more than did PB (90%) or PS (92%) at 1.3 cm, but few or no differences were noted between mulches at greater mulch depths. HW also contained the highest percentage of small particles and consequently retained more water (29%), than PB (14%) or PS (22%) 24 h following a simulated irrigation event. Emergence of large crabgrass and garden spurge was consistently greater when seeds were placed on top of the mulch, compared to seeds placed below. Emergence of both species also tended to respond to increasing depth in a quadratic manner, indicating that once a critical level of mulch was applied (2.5 to 5 cm), further reductions in weed emergence would not be observed, at least over the short term (12 wk). PB and PS tended to provide a greater reduction in emergence of both species compared to HW. This research also indicates that larger particle materials such as PB or PS would be advantageous because of their ability to suppress weed emergence regardless of seed position.

Keywords

Prashant Jha, Iowa State UniversityGarden spurgeEuphorbia hirta L.large crabgrassDigitaria sanguinalis (L.) ScopPine barkpine strawhardwoodparticle sizelandscape
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 34 , Issue 2 , April 2020 , pp. 172 - 179
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2019

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

Altland, JE, Boldt, JK, Krause, CC (2016) Rice hull mulch affects germination of bittercress and creeping woodsorrel in container plant culture. American J Plant Sci 7:2359–2375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartley, III PC, Wehtje, GR, Murphy, AM, Foshee, III WG, Gilliam, CH (2017) Mulch type and depth influences control of three major weed species in nursery container production. HortTechnology 27:465–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berchielli-Robertson, DL, Gilliam, CH, Fare, DC (1990) Competitive effects of weeds on the growth of container grown plants. HortScience 25:77–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bilderback, TE, Stuart, LW, Owen, JS, Albano, JP (2005) Healthy substrates need physicals too! HortTechnology 15:747–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Billeaud, LA, Zajicek, JM (1989) Influence of mulches on weed control, soil pH, soil nitrogen content, and growth of Ligustrum japonicum. J Environ Hort 7:155–157Google Scholar
Broschat, TK (2007) Effects of mulch type and fertilizer placement on weed growth and soil pH and nutrient content. HortTechnology 17:174–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Case, LT, Mathers, HM, Sensesac, AF (2005) A review of weed control practices in container nurseries. HortTechnology 15:535–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chalker-Scott, L (2007) Impact of mulches on landscape plants and the environment––a review. J Environ Hort 25:239–249.Google Scholar
Chauhan, BS, Johnson, DE (2008) Germination ecology of southern crabgrass (Digitaria ciliaris) and Indian crabgrass (Digitaria longiflora): two important weeds of rice in the tropics. Weed Sci 56:722–728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Y, Strahan, RE, Bracy, RP (2013) Effects of mulching and preemergence herbicide placement on yellow nutsedge control and ornamental plant quality in landscape beds. HortTechnology 23:651–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cochran, DR, Gilliam, CH, Eakes, DJ, Wehtje, GR, Knight, PR, Olive, J (2009) Mulch depth affects weed seed germination. J Environ Hort 2:85–90Google Scholar
Duryea, ML, English, RJ, Hermansen, LA (1999) A comparison of landscape mulches. J Arboricult 25:88–97Google Scholar
Gilliam, CH, Fare, DC, Beasley, A (1992) Nontarget herbicide losses from application of granular ronstar to container nurseries. J Envion Hort 10:175–176Google Scholar
King, CA, Oliver, LR (1994) A model for predicting large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis) emergence as influenced by temperature and water potential. Weed Sci 42:561–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marble, SC (2015) Herbicide and mulch interactions: a review of the literature and implications for the landscape maintenance industry. Weed Technol 29:341–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marble, SC, Koeser, AK, Hasing, G (2015a) A review of weed control practices in landscape planting beds: Part I––non-chemical weed control methods. HortScience 50:851–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marble, SC, Koeser, AK, Hasing, G (2015b) A review of weed control practices in landscape planting beds: Part II––chemical methods. HortScience 50:857–862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathers, HM (2003) Novel methods of weed control in containers. HortTechnology 3:28–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ngouajio, M, Ernest, J (2004) Light transmission through colored polyethylene mulches affects weed populations. HortScience 39:1302–1304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penny, GM, Neal, JC (2003) Light, temperature, seed burial, and mulch effects on mulberry weed (Fatoua villosa) seed germination. Weed Technol 17:213–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereira, WE, Hostettler, FD (1993) Nonpoint source contamination of the Mississippi River and its tributaries by herbicides. Environ Sci Technol 27:1542–1552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Fernández, MA, Lamont, BB, Marwick, AL, Lamont, WG (2000) Germination of seven exotic weeds and seven native species in south-western Australia under steady and fluctuating water supply. Acta Oecologica 21:323–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, B, Gilliam, CH, Fain, GB, Wehtje, GR (2008) Container nursery weed control with pine bark mini-nuggets. J Environ Hort 26:144–148Google Scholar
Rooden, JV, Akkermans, LMA, van der Veen, R (1970) A study on photoblastism in seeds of some tropical weeds. Acta Bot Neerl 19:257–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samtani, JB, Kling, GJ, Mathers, HM, Case, L (2007) Rice hulls, leaf-waste pellets, and pine bark as herbicide carriers for container-grown woody ornamentals. HortTechnology 17:289–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sauerborn, J, Koch, W, Krage, J (1988) On the influence of light, temperature, depth of burial and water stress on the germination of selected weed species. J Plant Disease Protection 11:47–53Google Scholar
Teasdale, JR, Mohler, CL (2000) The quantitative relationship between weed emergence and the physical properties of mulches. Weed Sci 48:385–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, KL, Williams, DJ (1989) Annual grass interference in container-grown bush cinquefoil (Potentilla fruticosa).Weed Sci 37:73–75Google Scholar
Wilen, CH, Schuch, UK, Elmore, CL (1999) Mulches and subirrigation control weeds in container production. J Environ Hort 17:174–180Google Scholar