Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T18:20:27.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Germination Techniques for Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) and Pennsylvania Smartweed (Polygonum pensylvanicum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Shawn M. Hock
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583
Stevan Z. Knezevic*
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska, Concord, NE 68728
Chris L. Petersen
Affiliation:
1025 North 33rd Street, Lincoln, NE 68503
John Eastin
Affiliation:
1025 North 33rd Street, Lincoln, NE 68503
Alex R. Martin
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

A laboratory bioassay was conducted to describe the effects of cold stratification and solid matrix priming (SMP®) on the germination response of common lambsquarters and Pennsylvania smartweed seeds. Treating seeds of common lambsquarters with a combination of cold stratification and SMP resulted in 78% germination compared with 13% in control seeds. Analogous treatments of Pennsylvania smartweed seeds resulted in 22% germination compared with 1% for control. Improved germination of common lambsquarters and Pennsylvania smartweed seeds suggested that the combination of cold stratification and SMP treatments have potential for improving seed germination in other weed species that exhibit high levels of seed dormancy.

Type
Teaching/Education
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

Baskin, J. M. and Baskin, C. C. 1987. Temperature requirements for after-ripening in buried seeds of four summer annual weeds. Weed Res. 27:385389.Google Scholar
Belcher, E. W. Jr. 1972. Evaluating the duration of dormancy in Polygonum pensylvanicum L. Proc. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. 62:98100.Google Scholar
Bensch, C. N., Horak, M. J., and Peterson, D. 2003. Interference of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus), Palmer amaranth (A. palmeri), and common waterhemp (A. rudis) in soybean. Weed Sci. 51:3743.Google Scholar
Brocklehurst, P. A. and Dearman, J. 1983. Interactions between seed priming treatments and nine seed lots of carrot, celery and onion. I. Laboratory germination. Ann. Appl. Bot. 102:577584.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D., Hoffman, M. L., and Andersen, R. N. 1999. Andersen's Guide to Practical Methods of Propagating Weeds and Other Plants. 2nd ed. Lawrence, KS: Weed Science Society of America. Pp. 8896.Google Scholar
Chikoye, D., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1995. Influence of common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisifolia) time of emergence and density on white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris). Weed Sci. 43:375380.Google Scholar
Dell'Aquila, A. and Taranto, G. 1986. Cell division and DNA-synthesis during osmopriming treatment and following germination in aged wheat embryos. Seed Sci. Technol. 14:333341.Google Scholar
Dieleman, A., Hamill, A. S., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1995. Empirical models of pigweed (Amaranthus spp.) interference in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 43:612618.Google Scholar
Eastin, J. A. inventor. April 3, 1990. Solid matrix priming of seeds. U.S. patent 4,912,874.Google Scholar
Eastin, J. A. inventor. May 13, 1997. Solid matrix priming of seeds with microorganism and selected chemical Treatment. U.S. patent 5,628,144.Google Scholar
Everson, L. E. 1949. Preliminary studies to establish laboratory methods for germination of weed seeds. Assoc. Off. Seed Anal. Proc. 39:8489.Google Scholar
Gray, D., Steckel, J. R. A., and Hands, L. J. 1990. Responses of vegetable seeds to controlled hydration. Ann. Bot. 66:227235.Google Scholar
Jordan, J. L. 1981. Natural and induced scarification of Pennsylvania smartweed achenes. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 36:149150.Google Scholar
Jordan, J. L., Staniforth, D. W., and Jordan, C. M. 1982. Parental stress and prechilling effects on Pennsylvania smartweed (Polygonum pensylvanicum) achenes. Weed Sci. 30:243248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z., Weise, S. F., and Swanton, C. J. 1994. Interference of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) in corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci. 42:568573.Google Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z., Horak, M. J., and Vanderlip, R. L. 1997. Relative time of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.) emergence is critical in pigweed–sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] competition. Weed Sci. 45:502508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z., Vanderlip, R. L., and Horak, M. J. 2001. Relative time of redroot pigweed emergence affects dry matter partitioning. Weed Sci. 49:617621.Google Scholar
Kolk, H. 1962. Viability and dormancy of dry stored weed seeds. Uppsala, Sweden: Växtodling. 19.192 p.Google Scholar
Lauer, E. 1953. Uber die Keimtemperatur von Ackerunkräutern and deren Einfluss auf die Zusammensetzung von Unkrautgesellschaften. Flora Allg. Bot. Zeitschrift 140:551595.Google Scholar
Maguire, J. D. and Overland, A. 1959. Laboratory germination of seeds of weedy and native plants. Pullman, WA: Washington Agricultural Experiment Station Circular 349. 15 p.Google Scholar
Martinez-Ghersa, M. A., Satorre, E. H., and Ghersa, C. M. 1997. Effect of soil water content and temperature on dormancy breaking and germination of three weeds. Weed Sci. 45:791797.Google Scholar
Osborne, D. J. 1983. Biochemical control of systems operating in the early hours of germination. Can. J. Bot. 61:35683577.Google Scholar
Steinbauer, G. P. and Grigsby, B. 1959. Methods of obtaining field and laboratory germination of seeds of bindweeds, lady's thumb and velvet leaf. Weeds 7:4146.Google Scholar
Williams, J. T. 1962. Dormancy in Chenopodium album L. Ann. Appl. Biol. 50:352.Google Scholar
Woodstock, L. W. and Tao, K. L. J. 1981. Prevention of imbibition injury in low vigor soybean embryonic axes by osmotic control of water uptake. Physiol. Plant. 51:133139.Google Scholar