Activated carbon may have undesired side effects for testing allelopathy in invasive plants

Weißhuhn, Karoline; Prati, Daniel

doi:10.1016/j.baae.2008.10.009

Cited by 66 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Later studies called for caution in the interpretation of the results of these studies because of potential side effects of activated carbon on soil properties, microbes and plant growth (e.g. Abhilasha et al 2008;Lau et al 2008;Weißhuhn and Prati 2009;Kabouw et al 2010;Wurst and Van Beersum 2009;Wurst et al 2010;Kulmatiski 2011;Del Fabbro and Prati 2015;Nolan et al 2015). For example, Kabouw et al (2010) showed that despite the fact that activated carbon adsorbed glucosinolates very well-indicating the suitability of activated carbon for removing potentially allelopathic compounds it also changed the soil pH and had varying effects on germination of different plant species.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the treatment combinations with activated carbon, we mixed 40 ml activated carbon (CASNO: 7440-44-0, EMD Millipore Corporation, Billerica MA, USA) into the substrate of each pot; and for the treatment combinations without activated carbon, we did not. The concentration of activated carbon that we used (20 ml/l) was also used in previous studies on allelopathy (Lau et al 2008;Weißhuhn and Prati 2009). Activated carbon adsorbs and thereby neutralizes allelopathic substances (Mahall and Callaway 1992;Inderjit and Callaway 2003;Weißhuhn and Prati 2009).…”

Section: Experimental Set-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The concentration of activated carbon that we used (20 ml/l) was also used in previous studies on allelopathy (Lau et al 2008;Weißhuhn and Prati 2009). Activated carbon adsorbs and thereby neutralizes allelopathic substances (Mahall and Callaway 1992;Inderjit and Callaway 2003;Weißhuhn and Prati 2009). However, activated carbon can also have side effects on plant growth (Lau et al 2008;Weißhuhn and Prati 2009;Kabouw et al 2010;Wurst et al 2010).…”

Section: Experimental Set-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Activated carbon adsorbs and thereby neutralizes allelopathic substances (Mahall and Callaway 1992;Inderjit and Callaway 2003;Weißhuhn and Prati 2009). However, activated carbon can also have side effects on plant growth (Lau et al 2008;Weißhuhn and Prati 2009;Kabouw et al 2010;Wurst et al 2010). Therefore, to reduce the likelihood that activatedcarbon addition would have side effects by adsorbing allelopathic compounds from organic materials that were already in the substrate and/or by increasing nutrient levels due to a boost in mineralization of organic materials (Lau et al 2008), we used a nonorganic substrate (i.e.…”

Section: Experimental Set-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Allelopathy of a native grassland community as a potential mechanism of resistance against invasion by introduced plants

Lei

Kleunen

2016

Biol Invasions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Successful plant invasions depend, at least partly, on interactions between introduced plants and native plant communities. While allelopathic effects of introduced invaders on native resident species have received much attention, the reverse, i.e. allelopathic effects of native residents on introduced plants, have been largely neglected. Therefore, we tested whether allelopathy of native plant communities decreases their invasibility to introduced plant species. In addition, we tested among the introduced species whether the invasive ones are more tolerant to allelopathy of native plant communities than the non-invasive ones. To test these hypotheses, we grew nine pairs of related (congeneric or confamilial) invasive and non-invasive introduced plant species (i.e. 18 species) in the presence or absence of a native grassland community, which consisted of three common forbs and three common grasses, with or without activated carbon in the soil. Activated carbon reduced the survival percentage and growth of introduced plants in the absence of the native plant community. However, its net effect on the introduced plants was neutral or even slightly positive in the presence of the native community. This might suggest that the native plant community imposed allelopathic effects on the introduced plants, and that these effects were neutralized or reduced by activated carbon. The invasive and non-invasive introduced plants, however, did not differ in their tolerance to such allelopathic effects of the native plant community. Thus, although allelopathy of native plant communities might increase their resistance against introduced plants, there was no evidence that tolerance to allelopathy of native plant communities contributes to the degree of invasiveness of introduced plants.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Experimental Set-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Experimental Set-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Experimental Set-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Allelopathy of a native grassland community as a potential mechanism of resistance against invasion by introduced plants

Lei

Kleunen

2016

Biol Invasions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Allelochemicals are often implicated in nitrification inhibition [49]; yet, the activated carbon treatment (3rd growth cycle), which can ameliorate allelopathic activity [50], caused very little increase in the growth of B. tectorum in competition. The veracity of our inferences that activated carbon ameliorates allelopathy must be questioned based on recent research [51,52]. A more persuasive argument that nitrification inhibition may not have a major role in suppression is that application of large quantities of NO 3 − -N (4th growth cycle) did significantly increase B. tectorum above-ground biomass grown in competition relative to above-ground biomass of B. tectorum grown without competition.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Suppression ofBromus tectorumL. by Established Perennial Grasses: Potential Mechanisms—Part One

Blank¹,

Morgan²

2012

Applied and Environmental Soil Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

properly cited. Bromus tectorum L. (cheatgrass)is an Eurasian annual grass that has invaded ecosystems throughout the Intermountain west of the United States. Our purpose was to examine mechanisms by which established perennial grasses suppress the growth of B. tectorum. Using rhizotrons, the experiment was conducted over 5 growth cycles: (1) B. tectorum planted between perennial grasses; (2) perennials clipped and B. tectorum planted; (3) perennials clipped and B. tectorum planted into soil mixed with activated carbon; (4) perennials clipped, B. tectorum planted, and top-dressed with fertilizer, and; (5) perennial grasses killed and B. tectorum planted. Water was not limiting in this study. Response variables measured at the end of each growth cycle included above-ground mass and tissue nutrient concentrations. Relative to controls (B. tectorum without competition), established perennial grasses significantly hindered the growth of B. tectorum. Overall, biomass of B. tectorum, grown between established perennials, increased considerably after fertilizer addition and dramatically upon death of the perennials. Potential mechanisms involved in the suppression of B. tectorum include reduced nitrogen (possibly phosphorus) availability and coopting of biological soil space by perennial roots. Our data cannot confirm or reject allelopathic suppression. Understanding the mechanisms involved with suppression may lead to novel control strategies against B. tectorum.

show abstract

Release from belowground enemies and shifts in root traits as interrelated drivers of alien plant invasion success: a hypothesis

Dawson

2015

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our understanding of the interrelated mechanisms driving plant invasions, such as the interplay between enemy release and resource‐acquisition traits, is biased by an aboveground perspective. To address this bias, I hypothesize that plant release from belowground enemies (especially fungal pathogens) will give invasive plant species a fitness advantage in the alien range, via shifts in root traits (e.g., increased specific root length and branching intensity) that increase resource uptake and competitive ability compared to native species in the alien range, and compared to plants of the invader in its native range. Such root‐trait changes could be ecological or evolutionary in nature. I explain how shifts in root traits could occur as a consequence of enemy release and contribute to invasion success of alien plants, and how they could be interrelated with other potential belowground drivers of invasion success (allelopathy, mutualist enhancement). Finally, I outline the approaches that could be taken to test whether belowground enemy release results in increased competitive ability and nutrient uptake by invasive alien plants, via changes in root traits in the alien range.

show abstract

Activated carbon may have undesired side effects for testing allelopathy in invasive plants

Cited by 66 publications

References 26 publications

Allelopathy of a native grassland community as a potential mechanism of resistance against invasion by introduced plants

Allelopathy of a native grassland community as a potential mechanism of resistance against invasion by introduced plants

Suppression ofBromus tectorumL. by Established Perennial Grasses: Potential Mechanisms—Part One

Release from belowground enemies and shifts in root traits as interrelated drivers of alien plant invasion success: a hypothesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About