Growth and Biomass Allocation of Muhlenbergia schreberi

Pedro Valério Dutra de Moraes, Patricia Rossi, Willian W. Witt, Luis Eduardo Panozzo

Federal Technologic University of Paraná, UTFPR, Dois Vizinhos, Brazil.
Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, Brazil.
University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA.

DOI: 10.4236/ajps.2014.514232                

Abstract

The main goal of this research was to evaluate the growth of nimblewill (Muhlenbergia schreberi), an emerging threat to forage grass. Our initial experiment was arranged in a completely randomized design, with 17 treatments (i.e., weeks) and 4 repetitions. Seventeen growth evaluations (i.e., treatments) were carried out every 7 days, totaling a 119-day cycle, followed by an analysis of the variables such as stolon number, length, number of leaves, dry matter, biological productivity, growth rate, and relative growth rate. A second experiment was conducted over a 5-week period to compare the growth variable between nimblewill plants and pastures. For all variables, the results showed that the weed grass developed slowly within the first 5 weeks after germination, indicating that this would be the best time to implement a chemical or cultural control measure. It was also observed that cultures with a rapid growth in the first 5 weeks after emergence could easily suppress weed growth. At the end of the experiment, stabilization of all variables was observed. However, additional observations are required to obtain more accurate results.

Keywords

Nimblewill, Fescues, Kentucky Bluegrass, Weed Biology, Management Strategy, Forage

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Radosevich, S.R. (1987) Methods to Study Interactions among Crops and Weeds. Weed Technology, 1, 190-198.
[2]	Baskin, J.M. and Baskin, C.C. (1985) Dormancy Breaking and Germination Requirements of Nimblewill (Muhlenbergia schreberi Gmel.) Seeds. Journal Range Manage, 38, 513-515. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3899742
[3]	Willis, J.B., Beam, J.B., Whitney, L.B., Shawn, D.A. and McErroy, J.S. (2007) Selective Nimblewill (Muhlenbergia schreberi) Control in Cool-Season Turfgrass. Weed Technology, 21, 886-889. http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/WT-07-016.1
[4]	Ravindra, G.M., Sridhara, S., Girijesh, G.K. and Nanjappa, H.V. (2008) Weed Biology and Growth Analysis of Celosia argentea L., a Weed Associated with Groundnut and Finger Millet Crops in Southern India. Communications in Biometry and Crop Science, 2, 80-87.
[5]	Radosevich, S., Holt, J.S. and Ghersa, C. (1997) Weed Ecology: Implications for Vegetation Management. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 278-301.
[6]	Horack, M.J. and Loughin, T.M. (2003) Growth Analysis of four Amaranthus Species. Weed Science, 48, 347-355. http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/0043-1745(2000)048[0347:GAOFAS]2.0.CO;2
[7]	Salehian, H. and Eshaghi, O. (2012) Growth Analysis Some Weed Species. International Journal of Agriculture and Crop Sciences, 4, 730-734.
[8]	Garnier, E. (1992) Growth Analysis of Congeneric Annual and Perennial Grass Species. Journal of Ecology, 80, 665-675. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2260858
[9]	Hunt, R. (1982) Plant Growth Curves: The Functional Approach to Plant Growth Analysis. Edward Arnold, London.
[10]	Tekalign, T. and Hammes, P.S. (2005) Growth and Productivity of Potato as Influenced by Cultivar and Reproductive Growth II. Growth Analysis, Tuber Yield and Quality. Scientia Horticulturae, 105, 29-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2005.01.021
[11]	Salisbury, F.B. and Ross, C.W. (1992) Plant Physiology, Hormones and Plant Regulators: Auxins and Gibberellins. 4th Edition, Wadsworth Publishing, Belmont, 357-381.
[12]	Willians, R.F. (1946) The Physiology of Plant Growth with Special Reference to the Concept of Net Assimilation Rate. Annals of Botany, 32, 41-72.
[13]	Lambers, H., Chapin III, F.S. and Pons, T.L. (2008) Plant Physiological Ecology. Springer, New York, 321-374. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-78341-3_10
[14]	Quero, J.L., Villar, R., Maran, T., Zamora, R. and Poorter, L. (2007) Seed-Mass Effects in four Mediterranean Quercus Species (Fagaceae) Growing in Contrasting Light Environments. American Journal of Botany, 94, 1795-1803. http://dx.doi.org/10.3732/ajb.94.11.1795
[15]	Poorter, H. and Remkes, C. (1990) Leaf Area Ratio and Net Assimilation Rate of 24 Wild Species Differing in Relative Growth Rate. Oecologia, 83, 553-559. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00317209