Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Relationships Between Growth and Competitiveness of Four Annual Weeds

M. L. Roush and S. R. Radosevich
Journal of Applied Ecology
Vol. 22, No. 3 (Dec., 1985), pp. 895-905
DOI: 10.2307/2403238
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2403238
Page Count: 11
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($18.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Relationships Between Growth and Competitiveness of Four Annual Weeds
Preview not available

Abstract

(1) Competitive relationships among Amaranthus retroflexus L., Chenopodium album L., Echinochloa crus-galli L., and Solanum nodiflorum Jacq. were investigated under field conditions by replacement series experiments. Six complete series, matching each species with all other species, yielded a consistent hierarchy of aggressiveness among the four species. The primary interaction among the species was competition for similar resources. (2) Growth analysis for the four species was performed simultaneously with the competition experiments. Relative growth rate (RGR) did not vary significantly among the four species. However, plant weight and height, Canopy area index (CAI), Root/shoot ratio (R/S), Unit Leaf Rate (ULR), and Leaf Area Ratio (LAR) exhibited significant variation among the species. The parameters other than RGR suggest a general hierarchy that was consistent with the hierarchy obtained in the competition experiment. (3) RGR was poorly correlated with aggressivity (A) of the four species, with all other parameters exhibiting better correlations. The best-fitting linear regression relating competitiveness to growth ability described A as a function of plant weight, ULR, and LAR.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
895
    895
  • Thumbnail: Page 
896
    896
  • Thumbnail: Page 
897
    897
  • Thumbnail: Page 
898
    898
  • Thumbnail: Page 
899
    899
  • Thumbnail: Page 
900
    900
  • Thumbnail: Page 
901
    901
  • Thumbnail: Page 
902
    902
  • Thumbnail: Page 
903
    903
  • Thumbnail: Page 
904
    904
  • Thumbnail: Page 
905
    905