Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-xh45t Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-14T06:11:54.447Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Annual Grass Interference in Container-Grown Bush Cinquefoil (Potentilla fruticosa)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Kandy L. Walker  and
David J. Williams
Kandy L. Walker
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic., Univ. Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
David J. Williams
Affiliation:
Dep. Hortic., Univ. Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Experiments conducted for two consecutive years indicated that barnyardgrass, large crabgrass, and giant foxtail interfered with the growth and development of container-grown ‘Gold Drop’ bush cinquefoil. Grass weed densities ranging from one to six weeds per container reduced Gold Drop bush cinquefoil growth. Bush cinquefoil shoot dry weight, averaged over all grass weeds, was decreased as much as 75% after 83 days of interference. The reduction of cinquefoil growth was independent of the number of grass weeds in the container.

Keywords

Bush cinquefoil, Potentilla fruticosa L. ‘Gold Drop’barnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli L. # ECHCGlarge crabgrass, Digitaria sanguinalis L. # DIGSAgiant foxtail, Setaria faberi Herrm. #SETFAECHCGDIGSASETFA

Information

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , January 1989 , pp. 73 - 75
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 by the 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

1. Bhowmik, P. C. and Doll, J. D. 1979. Evaluation of allelopathic effects of selected weed species on corn and soybeans. Proc. North Cent. Weed Control Conf. 34:43–45.Google Scholar
2. Davison, J. D. 1971. Weed science in the service of the intensive producer-fruit and ornamental crops. Proc. 10th Br. Weed Control Conf. 3:909–916.Google Scholar
3. Fletcher, W. W. 1983. Recent advances in weed research. Commonw. Agric. Bur. Pages 200–201.Google Scholar
4. Fretz, T. A. 1972. Weed competition in container grown Japanese holly. HortScience 7(5):485–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Gwynne, D. C. 1985. Weed biology and control in agriculture and horticulture. London: Batsford Academic and Educational. Page 193.Google Scholar
6. Parenti, R. L. and Rice, E. L. 1969. Inhibitional effects of Digitaria sanquinalis and possible role in old-field succession. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 96:70–78.Google Scholar
7. Radosevich, S. R. 1984. Weed Ecology, Implications for Vegetation Management. John Wiley and Sons, New York. Page 98.Google Scholar
8. Walker, K. L. and Williams, D. J. 1987. Illinois Nursery Operator Weed Survey. Grower Trends. 307:3–6.Google Scholar