Size-dependent reproductive effort in Amaranthus retroflexus: The influence of planting density and sowing date

Canadian Journal of Botany

Volumn 84, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 485-492

  Wang, Tianhui ^a   Zhou, Daowei ^a   Wang, Ping ^a   Zhang, Hongxiang ^a  

^a NORTHEAST NORMAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Allometry; Amaranthus retroflexus; Architectural traits; Planting density; Size dependent reproductive allocation; Sowing date

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURE; BIOMASS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;

ALLOMETRY; AMARANTHUS RETROFLEXUS; ARCHITECTURAL TRAITS; PLANTING DENSITY; SIZE DEPENDENT REPRODUCTIVE ALLOCATION; SOWING DATE;

PLANTS (BOTANY);

ALLOMETRY; ANGIOSPERM; ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FITNESS; REPRODUCTIVE EFFORT; SIZE EFFECT; SOWING DATE;

BIOMASS; PLANTS; REPRODUCTION; SEEDING;

AMARANTHUS; AMARANTHUS RETROFLEXUS;

EID: 33748912508     PISSN: 00084026     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/B06-011     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Baker, H.G. 1974. The evolution of weeds. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 5: 1-24. doi:10.1146/annurev.es.05.110174.000245.
2. Bazzaz, F.A., Chiarello, N.R., Coley, P.D., and Pitelka, L.F. 1987. Allocating resources to reproduction and defense. Bioscience, 37: 58-67.
3. Bonser, S.P. 2003. Allometry and development in herbaceous plants: functional responses of meristem allocation to light and nutrient availability. Am. J. Bot. 90: 404-412.
4. Brown, J.S., and Eckert, C.G. 2005. Evolutionary increase in sexual and clonal reproductive capacity during biological invasion in an aquatic plant Butomus umbellatus (Butomaceae). Am. J. Bot. 92: 495-502.
5. Cheplick, G.P. 2001. Quantitative genetics of mass allocation and the allometry of reproduction in Amaranthus albus: relation to soil nutrients. Int. J. Plant Sci. 162: 807-816. doi:10.1086/320778.
6. Cheplick, G.P. 2002. Size and architectural traits as ontogenetic determinants of fitness in a phenotypically plastic annual weed (Amaranthus albus). Plant Species Biol. 17: 71-84. doi:10.1046/j.1442-1984.2002.00075.x.
7. Coleman, J.S., and McConnaughay, K.D.M. 1995. A non-functional interpretation of a classical optimal-partitioning example. Funct. Ecol. 9: 951-954.
8. Hartnett, D.C. 1990. Size dependent allocation to sexual and vegetative reproduction in four clonal composites. Oecologia, 84: 254-259.
9. Huang, J.Z. 2000. Effects of photoperiod on the phenological development of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.). Can. J. Plant Sci. 80: 929-938.
10. Jasienski, M., and Bazzaz, F.A. 1999. The fallacy of ratios and testability of models in biology. Oikos, 84: 321-326.
11. Lortie, C.J., and Aarssen, L.W. 2000. Fitness consequences of branching in Verbascum thapsus (Scrophulariaceae). Am. J. Bot. 87: 1793-1796.
12. Mandak, B., and Pysek, P. 1999. How does density and nutrient stress affect allometry and fruit production in the heterocarpic species Atriplex sagittata (Chenopodiaceae)? Can. J. Bot. 77: 1106-1119.
13. McConnaughay, K.D.M., and Coleman, J.S. 1999. Biomass allocation in plants: ontogeny or optimality? A test along three resource gradients. Ecology, 80: 2581-2593.
14. Mclachlan, S.M. 1995. Light limitation of reproduction and variation in allometric relationship between reproductive and vegetative biomass in Amaranthus retroflexus (redroot pigweed). J. Appl. Ecol. 32: 157-165.
15. Müller, I., Schmid, B., and Weiner, J. 2000. The effect of nutrient availability on biomass allocation patterns in 27 species of herbaceous plants. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 3: 115-127.
16. Niklas, K.J. 1994. Plant allometry. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill.
17. Ohara, M., and Shimamoto, Y. 1994. Some ecological and demographic characteristics of two growth forms of wild soybean (Glycine soja). Can. J. Bot. 72: 486-492.
18. Rajcan, I., AghaAlikhani, M., Swanton, C.J., and Tollenaar, M. 2002. Development of redroot pigweed is influenced by light spectral quality and quantity. Crop Sci. 42: 1930-1936.
19. Reekie, E.G. 1998. An explanation for size-dependent reproductive allocation in Plantago major. Can. J. Bot. 76: 43-50. doi:10.1139/cjb-76-1-43.
20. Reekie, E.G., and Bazzaz, F.A. 1987. Reproductive effort in plants. 1. Carbon allocation to reproduction. Am. Nat. 129: 876-896. doi:10.1086/284681.
21. Sadras, V.O. 1997. Reproductive allocation of cotton in response to plant and environmental factors. Ann. Bot. (Lond.), 80: 75-81.
22. Samson, D.A., and Werk, K.S. 1986. Size-dependent effects in the analysis of reproductive effort in plants. Am. Nat. 127: 667-680. doi:10.1086/284512.
23. Sans, F.X., and Masalles, R.M. 1994. Life-history variation in the annual arable weed Diplotaxis erucoides (Cruciferae). Can. J. Bot. 72: 10-19.
24. Sauer, J.D. 1967. The grain amaranths and their relatives: a revised taxonomic and geographic survey. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 53: 103-137.
25. Schmid, B., and Weiner, J. 1993. Plastic relationships between reproductive and vegetative mass in Solidago altissima. Evol. Int. J. Org. Evol. 47: 61-74.
26. Schmid, B., Puttick, G.M., Burgess, K.H., and Bazzaz, F.A. 1988. Correlations between genet architecture and some life history features in three species of Solidago. Oecologia, 75: 459-464. doi:10.1007/BF00376952.
27. Sugiyama, S., and Bazzaz, F.A. 1998. Size dependence of reproductive allocation: the influence of resource availability, competition and genetic identity. Funct. Ecol. 12: 280-288. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2435.1998.00187.x.
28. Sultan, S.E. 2000. Phenotypic plasticity for plant development, function and life history. Trends Plant Sci. 5: 537-542. doi:10.1016/S1360-1385(00)01797- 0.
29. Thompson, B.K., Weiner, J., and Warwick, S.I. 1991. Size-dependent reproductive output in agricultural weeds. Can. J. Bot. 69: 442-446.
30. Thompson, K., and Stewart, A.J.A. 1981. The measurement and meaning of reproductive effort in plants. Am. Nat. 117: 205-211. doi:10.1086/283700.
31. Vega, C. 2000. Reproductive allometry in soybean, maize and sunflower. Ann. Bot. (Lond.), 85: 461-468.
32. Weiner, J. 1988. The influence of competition on plant reproduction. In Plant reproductive ecology: patterns and strategies. Edited by D.J. Lovett. Oxford University Press, New York. pp. 228-245.
33. Weiner, J. 2004. Allocation, plasticity and allometry in plants. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 6: 207-215.
34. Welham, C.V.J., and Setter, R.A. 1998. Comparison of size-dependent reproductive effort in two dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) populations. Can. J. Bot. 76: 166-173. doi:10.1139/cjb-76-1-166.
35. Wright, S.D., and McConnaughay, K.D.M. 2002. Interpreting phenotypic plasticity: the importance of ontogeny. Plant Species Biol. 17: 119-131. doi:10.1046/j.1442-1984.2002.00082.x.
36. Zhou, D., Wang, T., and Valentine, I. 2005. Phenotypic plasticity of life-history characters in response to different germination timing in two annual weeds. Can. J. Bot. 83: 28-36. doi:10.1139/b04-148.