HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Tardif, F. J. Articles by Leroux, G. D. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Tardif, F. J. Articles by Leroux, G. D. Agricola Articles by Tardif, F. J. Articles by Leroux, G. D.

Response of Three Quackgrass Biotypes to Nitrogen Fertilization

Dep. of Crop Protection, Univ. of Adelaide, Waite Agricultural Research Institute, P.M.B. 1, Glen Osmond 5064, South Australia
Département de phytologie, Université Laval, Ste-Foy, Québec, Canada, G1K 7P4

^* Corresponding author.

Variability in the response of quackgrass [Elytrigia repens (L.) Nevski] biotypes to N is worth considering if quackgrass is to be used as a forage crop. This study was conducted to determine whether the growth response of quackgrass to different N rates varies among biotypes. The effect of 0, 150, 250 kg N ha–¹ on the number of tillers and rhizome buds, total biomass, shoot and rhizome biomass, and shoot to rhizome biomass ratio of three biotypes grown on a St-Nicolas gravelly loam (loamy, mixed mesic, Typic Dystrochrept) was measured at Ste-Foy, Québec, Canada, in 1985 and 1986. The response of biotypes to N differed for all variables. At Harvest 1 of 1985 and at Harvests 1 and 2 of 1986, dry matter production of Biotype 3 was at least two times more important at 250 kg N ha–¹ than at 0 kg N ha^–1. Biotype 1 response to N was comparable to that of Biotype 3 in 1986, but not in 1985. Biotype 2 response to N was inferior to that of the other biotypes and was significant only at the first harvest of 1986. Variations found between years are attributed to differences in rainfall regime. The response of a quackgrass biotype to N is to be considered if it is to be used as a forage crop or in a breeding program.

Received for publication February 25, 1991.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. L. Brenly-Bultemeier, D. J. Barker, R. M. Sulc, S. K. Harrison, and E. E. Regnier Species Interactions with Quackgrass and Their Effects on Forage Production Crop Sci., January 1, 2005; 45(1): 290 - 296. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]