Impact of interspecific competition on seed development and quality of five soybean cultivars
Katherine Millar A , David J. Gibson B , Bryan G. Young C and Andrew J. Wood A DA Department of Plant Biology, and Centre of Excellence for Soybean Research, Teaching, and Outreach, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901-6509, USA.
B Department of Plant Biology, and Centre for Ecology, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901-6509, USA.
C Department of Plant, Soil & Agricultural Systems, and Centre of Excellence for Soybean Research, Teaching, and Outreach, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901-4415, USA.
D Corresponding author. Email: wood@plant.siu.edu
Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 47(12) 1455-1459 https://doi.org/10.1071/EA07034
Submitted: 31 January 2007 Accepted: 21 June 2007 Published: 16 November 2007
Abstract
Enhancing total yield and improving seed quality is a dynamic area of research. Both breeding and biotechnology have been successful in creating soybean cultivars with increased oil or protein content with much research directed at total yield. We conducted a 2-year field experiment to investigate the potential impact of interspecific competition on seed quality and seed development of five soybean cultivars (Forrest, Essex, Asgrow 4603, Asgrow 4403 and Asgrow 3903). Three levels of weed competition were established using different application rates of pre-emergence herbicides s-metolachlor and cloransulam. Several seed related parameters were measured and many showed similar trends of significance for cultivar and weed competition treatments across both years. Higher levels of weed competition resulted in soybean seeds containing higher protein content (increase between 0.7 and 1%). For protein in 2005, there was a significant interaction term for competition level and cultivar (F8,44 = 2.38, P < 0.05). Seed oil tended to decrease with higher levels of competition, but by less than 1% each year. Seed yield showed a significant decrease in response to competition in 2005 (F2,44 = 56.82, P < 0.0001), but not in 2004. Seed per plant decreased in response to competition both years (2004: F2,44 = 8.23, P < 0.05; 2005: F2,44 = 8.71, P < 0.05). Seed per plant was impacted both years by competition. The number of aborted pods per plant was greater for plants under low and medium competition; however, significance was seen only in 2004 (F2,44 = 3.33, P < 0.05) but the trend was evident in 2005. Seed quality changes are responsive to the presence of neighbouring plants even if their interference does not reduce total yield. Future studies should be designed to investigate how competition and interference alter soybean metabolism such that seed quality is maximised.
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge and thank the following individuals for their assistance: James Millar, Matthew Millar, Jack Millar, and staff at the Agronomy Research Centre. Funding was provided by the US Department of Agriculture CSRESS program.
Ballare CL
(1999) Keeping up with the neighbours: phytochrome sensing and other signaling mechanisms. Trends in Plant Science 4, 97–102.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
Behboudian MH,
Ma Q,
Turner NC, Palta JA
(2001) Reactions of chickpea to water stress: yield and seed composition. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 81, 1288–1291.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bensch CN,
Horak MJ, Peterson D
(2003) Interference of redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus), Palmer amaranth (A. palmeri), and common waterhemp (A. rudis) in soybean. Weed Science 51, 37–43.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bhyan BS,
Batra VK,
Singh J, Thakral KK
(2004) Effect of weed competition on quality of pea seed. Haryana Journal Horticultural Science 33, 130–131.
Bradley CA,
Hartman GL, Wax LM
(2002) Quality of harvested seed associated with soybean cultivars and herbicides under weed-free conditions. Plant Disease 86, 1036–1042.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cober ER,
Morrison MJ,
Ma B, Butler G
(2005) Genetic improvement rates of short-season soybean increase with plant population. Crop Science 45, 1029–1034.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Conley SP,
Stoltenberg DE,
Boerboom CM, Binning LK
(2003) Predicting soybean yield loss in giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) and common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) communities. Weed Science 51, 402–407.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cowbrough MJ,
Brown RB, Tardif FJ
(2003) Impact of common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) aggregation on economic thresholds in soybean. Weed Science 51, 947–954.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dardanelli JL,
Balzarini M,
Marinez MJ,
Cuiberti M,
Resnik S,
Ramunda SF,
Herrero R, Baigorri H
(2006) Soybean maturity group, environments, and their interaction define mega-environments for seed composition in Argentina. Crop Science 46, 1939–1947.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Egli DB
(2005) Flowering, pod set and reproductive success in soya bean. Journal Agronomy & Crop Science 191, 283–291.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Felton WL
(1976) The influence of row spacing and plant population on the effect of weed competition in soybeans. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 16, 926–931.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Goslee SC,
Peters DPC, Beck KG
(2001) Modeling invasive weeds in grasslands, the role of allelopathy in Acroptilon repens invasion. Ecological Modelling 139, 31–45.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hartwig EE, Epps JM
(1973) Registration of ‘Forrest’ soybeans. Crop Science 13, 287.
Kitajima K
(2002) Do shade-tolerant tropical tree seedlings depend longer on seed reserves? Functional growth analysis of three Bignoniaceae species. Functional Ecology 16, 433–444.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Krishnan HB
(2005) Engineering soybean for enhanced sulfur amino acid content. Crop Science 45, 454–461.
Lang X,
Dalai AK,
Bakhshi NN,
Reaney MJ, Hertz PB
(2001) Preparation and characterization of bio-diesels from various bio-oils Bioresource Technology 80, 53–63.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
Lapuerta M,
Armas O, Garcia-Contreras R
(2007) Stability of diesel-bioethanol blends for use in diesel engines. Fuel 86, 1351–1357.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Liu K,
Orthoefer F, Brown EA
(1995) Association of seed size with genotypic variation in the chemical constituents of soybeans. Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society 72, 189–192.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Liu F,
Andersen MN, Jensen CR
(2004) Root signal controls pod growth in drought-stressed soybean during the critical, abortion-sensitive phase of pod development. Field Crops Research 85, 159–166.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lutman PJ,
Bowerman P,
Palmer GM, Whytock GP
(2000) Prediction of competition between oilseed rape and Stellaria media. Weed Research 40, 255–269.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Marchetti JM,
Miguel VU, Errazu AF
(2007) Possible methods for biodiesel production. Renewable Sustainable Energy Reviews 11, 1300–1311.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
McDonald GK,
Hollaway KL, McMurray L
(2007) Increasing plant density improves weed competition in lentil (Lens culinaris). Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 47, 48–56.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Munier-Jolain NG,
Munier-Jolain NM,
Roche R,
Ney B, Duthion C
(1998) Seed growth rate in grain legumes. I. Effect of photoassimilate availability on seed growth rate. Journal of Experimental Botany 49, 1963–1969.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Nakasathien S,
Israel DW,
Wilson RF, Kwanyuen P
(2000) Regulation of seed protein concentration in soybean by supra-optimal nitrogen supply. Crop Science 40, 1277–1284.
Norsworthy JK, Oliver LR
(2002) Effect of irrigation, soybean (Glycine max) density, and glyphosate on hemp sesbania (Sesbania exaltata) and pitted morningglory (Ipomoea lacunose) interference in soybean. Weed Technology 16, 7–17.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pfeiffer TL,
Cho Y,
Gibson DJ,
Young BG, Wood AJ
(2001) Utility of trigonelline as a biochemical marker for interspecific competition between soybean and the weed common waterhemp. Biologia Plantarum 44, 619–622.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Piper EL, Boote KJ
(1999) Temperature and cultivar effects on soybean seed oil and protein concentrations. Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society 76, 1233–1241.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rose IA
(1987) Evaluation of soybean breeding lines by examining their responses to sowing date and row spacing. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 27, 721–726.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Schwab AW,
Bagby MO, Freedman B
(1987) Preparation and properties of diesel fuels from vegetable oils. Fuel 66, 1372–1378.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Sjahril JS, Mak C
(1987) Genotype-environment interactions and relative stability of seed protein content in soybeans (Glycine max). Sabrao Journal 19, 35–44.
Smith TJ, Camper HM
(1973) Registration of ‘Essex’ soybeans. Crop Science 13, 495.
Stocklin J
(1997) Competition and the compensatory regulation of fruit and seed set in perennial herb Epilobium dodonaei. American Journal of Botany 84, 763–768.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Triboi E, Triboi-Blondel A
(2002) Productivity and grain or seed composition, a new approach to an old problem – invited paper. European Journal of Agronomy 16, 163–186.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Umarani R, Selvaraj JA
(1996) Effect of weed and crop densities on seed quality of soybean. World Weeds 3, 107–111.
Wall DA,
Friesen GH, Dryden D
(1988) Effect of herbicides and annual weed on the yield and seed quality of lathyrus (Lathyrus sativus L.). Crop Protection (Guildford, Surrey) 7, 372–377.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wilcox JR, Shibles RM
(2001) Interrelationhips among seed quality attributes in soybean. Crop Science 41, 11–14.
Vollmann J,
Fritz CN,
Wagentristl H, Ruckenbauer P
(2000) Environmental and genetic variation of soybean seed protein content under Central European growing conditions. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 80, 1300–1306.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
