Growth and Development of Organic Arsenical-Susceptible and -Resistant Common Cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) Biotypes Under Noncompetitive Conditions

The growth, development, and reproductive potential of several populations of organic arsenical-susceptible (S) and -resistant (R) common cocklebur biotypes were compared under noncompetitive field conditions. Plant height, leaf area, aboveground dry weights, and relative growth rate (RGR) were measured periodically during the growing season. Days to flowering, bur dry weight, and number of burs per plant were also recorded. Arsenical S- and R-biotypes were similar in all measured parameters of growth, development, and reproductive potential. Populations within each biotype varied occasionally in plant height, leaf area, aboveground dry weights, and reproductive potential.

[1]  Bahman Shafii,et al.  Differential Competitiveness of Sulfonylurea Resistant and Susceptible Prickly Lettuce (Lactuca serriola) , 1992, Weed Technology.

[2]  M. L. Roush,et al.  Predicting the Evolution and Dynamics of Herbicide Resistance in Weed Populations , 1990, Weed Technology.

[3]  M. L. Roush,et al.  Future Outlook for Herbicide-Resistance Research , 1990, Weed Technology.

[4]  Lee A. Segel,et al.  Modelling the Effectiveness of Herbicide Rotations and Mixtures as Strategies to Delay or Preclude Resistance , 1990, Weed Technology.

[5]  Maurice B. Green,et al.  Managing resistance to agrochemicals : from fundamental research to practical strategies , 1990 .

[6]  J. S. Holt Fitness and ecological adaptability of herbicide-resistant biotypes , 1990 .

[7]  D. Patterson,et al.  Growth performance of triazine-resistant and -susceptible biotypes of Solanum nigrum over a range of temperatures , 1988 .

[8]  James R. Harris,et al.  Resistance of Common Cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) to the Organic Arsenical Herbicides , 1988, Weed Science.

[9]  J. Toler,et al.  Growth and Development of Dinitroaniline-Susceptible and -Resistant Goosegrass (Eleusine indica) Biotypes Under Noncompetitive Conditions , 1986, Weed Science.

[10]  W. E. Haigler Resistance of Common Cocklebur to Organic Arsenical Herbicides , 1986 .

[11]  E. Stoller,et al.  Competition, Growth Rate, and CO2 Fixation in Triazine-Susceptible and -Resistant Smooth Pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus) , 1983, Weed Science.

[12]  J. S. Holt,et al.  Differential Growth of Two Common Groundsel (Senecio vulgaris) Biotypes , 1983, Weed Science.

[13]  G. Buchanan,et al.  Competition of Common Cocklebur (Xanthium pensylvanicum) with Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) , 1982, Weed Science.

[14]  S. Warwick,et al.  The relative competitiveness of atrazine susceptible and resistant populations of Chenopodium album and C. strictum , 1981 .

[15]  S. Warwick Differential growth between and within triazine‐resistant and triazine‐susceptible biotypes of Senecio vulgaris L. , 1980 .

[16]  S. Warwick,et al.  Differential growth and response to atrazine between and within susceptible and resistant biotypes of Chenopodium album L. , 1980 .

[17]  S. Conard,et al.  Phototactic behavior of Daphnia carinata as an indicator of chromium biotoxicity , 1979 .

[18]  S. Conard,et al.  ECOLOGICAL FITNESS OF SENECIO VULGARIS AND AMARANTHUS RETROFLEXUS BIOTYPES SUSCEPTIBLE OR RESISTANT TO ATRAZINE , 1979 .

[19]  L. Segel,et al.  The paucity of plants evolving genetic resistance to herbicides: possible reasons and implications. , 1978, Journal of theoretical biology.

[20]  E. R. Burns,et al.  Weed Competition in Cotton. II. Cocklebur and Redroot Pigweed , 1971, Weed science.

[21]  P. J. Radford,et al.  Growth Analysis Formulae - Their Use and Abuse 1 , 1967 .