4.5 Article

Host shoot clipping depresses the growth of weedy hemiparasitic Pedicularis kansuensis

期刊

JOURNAL OF PLANT RESEARCH
卷 128, 期 4, 页码 563-572

出版社

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s10265-015-0727-6

关键词

Chlorophyll fluorescence; Host-parasite interaction; Parasitic weed; Root hemiparasitic plant; Weed control

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [31370512, 31400440, U1303201]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Yunnan Province [2009CD114]
  3. Youth Innovation Promotion Association of Chinese Academy of Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Root hemiparasitic plants show optimal growth when attached to a suitable host by abstracting water and nutrients. Despite the fact that damage to host plants in the wild occurs frequently in various forms (e.g. grazing), effects of host damage on growth and physiological performance of root hemiparasites remain unclear. In this study, host shoot clipping was conducted to determine the influence of host damage on photosynthetic and growth performance of a weedy root hemiparasite, Pedicularis kansuensis, and its interaction with a host, Elymus nutans. Photosynthetic capacity, tissue mineral nutrient content and plant biomass of P. kansuensis were significantly improved when attached to a host plant. Host clipping had no effect on quantum efficiency (I broken vertical bar(PSII)), but significantly reduced the growth rate and biomass of P. kansuensis. In contrast, clipping significantly improved photosynthetic capacity and accumulation of potassium in E. nutans. No significant decrease in biomass was observed in clipped host plants. By changing nutrient absorption and allocation, clipping affected the interaction between P. kansuensis and its host. Our results showed that host clipping significantly suppressed the growth of weedy P. kansuensis, but did not affect biomass accumulation in E. nutans. We propose that grazing (a dominant way of causing host damage in the field) may have a potential in the control against the weedy hemiparasite.

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