4.5 Article

Seed traits in arable weed seed banks and their relationship to land-use changes

期刊

BASIC AND APPLIED ECOLOGY
卷 10, 期 6, 页码 516-524

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.baae.2009.02.002

关键词

Seed; Longevity; Mass; Shape; Set-aside; Organic farming; Reduced tillage; Crop

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies have shown that relatively undisturbed plant communities, such as woodland and pasture, have generally low seed persistence, while seed longevity in frequently disturbed habitats, such as arable fields, is high. In addition, seed mass and shape were found to be closely linked to the living conditions of plants. The objective of the present study was to show how farming practice modifies these seed traits in the arable weed seed bank. On 67.4 ha of arable land at the Scheyern Research Station in Germany, conventional arable use was converted to organic farming, to a reduced-tillage system and to set-aside. During the six subsequent years, seed bank data were collected at 283 sampling points to analyse the effects of (1) the farming systems (long-term effects), (2) individual crops (short-term effects) and (3) vegetation cover. Set-aside arable land favoured a disk- or needle-like seed shape, greater mass and reduced seed longevity. Similarly, organic farming significantly increased seed mass and decreased longevity. Therefore, both types of land use reduced the selection for small and persistent seeds with a spherical shape. By contrast, an increasing persistence under reduced tillage suggested a higher selection pressure. The most consistent effect was that seed longevity increased with tillage frequency, independent from the farming system. Both high seed masses and a compact seed shape were frequently associated with a high crop cover. The results prove that beyond the properties of living plants the arable farming practice also significantly impacts the seed traits in the soil seed bank. (C) 2009 Gesellschaft fur Okologie. Published by Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据