You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
Shrinkage and Growth Compensation in Common Sunflowers: Refining Estimates of Damage
James A. Sedgwick, John L. Oldemeyer and Elizabeth L. Swenson
The Journal of Wildlife Management
Vol. 50, No. 3 (Jul., 1986), pp. 513-520
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3801115
Page Count: 8
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Sunflowers, Net yield, Wildlife damage management, Damage assessment, Plants, Underestimates, Simulations, Plant growth, Test ranges, Estimate reliability
Were these topics helpful?See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Preview not available
Shrinkage and growth compensation of artificially damaged common sunflowers (Helianthus annuus) were studied in central North Dakota during 1981-82 in an effort to increase accuracy of estimates of blackbird damage to sunflowers. In both years, as plants matured damaged areas on seedheads shrank at a greater rate than the sunflower heads themselves. This differential shrinkage resulted in an underestimation of the area damaged. Sunflower head and damaged-area shrinkage varied widely by time and degree of damage and by size of the seedhead damaged. Because variation in shrinkage by time of damage was so large, predicting when blackbird damage occurs may be the most important factor in estimating seed loss. Yield/occupied seed area was greater (P < 0.05) for damaged than undamaged heads and tended to increase as degree of damage inflicted increased, indicating growth compensation was occurring in response to lost seeds. Yields of undamaged seeds in seedheads damaged during early seed development were higher than those of heads damaged later. This suggested that there was a period of maximal response to damage when plants were best able to redirect growth to seeds remaining in the head. Sunflowers appear to be able to compensate for damage of ≤15% of the total head area. Estimates of damage can be improved by applying empirical results of differential shrinkage and growth compensation.
The Journal of Wildlife Management © 1986 Wiley