2008
DOI: 10.1007/s11056-008-9121-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Weeds in Eucalyptus globulus subsp. maidenii (F. Muell) establishment: effects of competition on sapling growth and survivorship

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

5
26
0
7

Year Published

2011
2011
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
5
26
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…The weed interference observed in the present study, which had negative effects on some eucalyptus variables, such as: plant height, stem diameter, dry biomass, chlorophyll concentration and net assimilation rate (Tables 1 to 6), is in accordance with several previous studies that reported a higher sensitivity of eucalyptus plants to interference during the first year following their establishment (Adams et al, 2003;Florentine and Fox, 2003;Garau et al, 2009;Tarouco et al, 2009). …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The weed interference observed in the present study, which had negative effects on some eucalyptus variables, such as: plant height, stem diameter, dry biomass, chlorophyll concentration and net assimilation rate (Tables 1 to 6), is in accordance with several previous studies that reported a higher sensitivity of eucalyptus plants to interference during the first year following their establishment (Adams et al, 2003;Florentine and Fox, 2003;Garau et al, 2009;Tarouco et al, 2009). …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…In addition, competition with these weeds may have detrimental effects on several physiological characteristics in eucalyptus, such as photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, transpiration rate and water use efficiency (Santos et al, 2015). The first year is the critical period of interference imposed by the weeds (Pitelli and Marchi, 1991;Nambiar and Sands, 1993;Florentine and Fox, 2003;Garau et al, 2009), which lead a reduced growth of up to 40% and 52% in stem diameter and height, respectively (Adams et al, 2003).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regarding biotic factors, the presence of weeds has been a problematic aspect in the forestry sector around the world (Sands and Nambiar et al, 1984;Ellis et al, 1985;Caldwell et al, 1995;Adams et al, 2003;Dinardo et al, 2003;Florentine and Fox, 2003;Schaller et al, 2003;Coll et al, 2004;Garau et al, 2008;Cruz et al, 2010) as competing with crops for water, light, nutrients and releasing allelochemicals that interfere in cultural practices (Pitelli and Marchi, 1991;Toledo et al, 2001;Watt et al, 2003). Thus, it is important to note that eucalyptus seedlings are sensitive to competition imposed by these weeds especially during the establishment and early development (up to about a year old) (Pitelli and Marchi, 1991;Nambiar and Sands, 1993;Schumann et al, 1994;Florentine and Fox, 2003;Garau et al, 2009) and may reach 52% loss in height and 40% for diameter compared to plants grown in the absence of weed (Adams et al, 2003). Garau et al (2009) found that there was a slight recovery of eucalyptus globulus in the third year of coexistence with weeds, but still there were significant losses in the measured variables, reaching reductions of 28% for the stem diameter, 13% for height and 53% for volume than the weed-free treatment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studying other Eucalyptus spp., the presence of weeds were a serious threat to the seedlings development of Eucalyptus globules (Garau et al, 2009), Eucalyptus urophylla (Toledo et al, 2000), and Eucalyptus grandis (Souza et al, 2010). On the other hand, Brendolan et al (2000) evaluated eucalyptus inter and intraspecific competition and found no effects on height, number of leaves and branches, analyzing a period of 60 days of coexistence with weeds.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Abiotic and biotic factors can affect the degree of weed interference in addition to the weed species coexistence with the interesting crop (Souza et al, 2003;Garau et al, 2009;Pereira et al, 2013). Weed spatial distribution in the field is one of the main factors affecting the degree of weed interference (Norris et al, 2001a,b).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%