Advertisement

Allelopathic Mechanisms and Experimental Methodology

  • Jeffrey D. Weidenhamer

Abstract

Allelopathy is a complex ecological phenomenon, and it has proven notoriously difficult to develop experimental methods that can distinguish the role of both chemical interference and resource competition on plant growth. This paper discusses two promising new methodologies which can be used to study allelopathic interactions in the greenhouse and field. (a) Bioassays in which the density of the susceptible plant species is varied give results contrary to the expected results of resource competition when a toxin is present in the soil. Compared to a control soil, growth reductions will occur at low density but diminish or disappear at high density. Furthermore, individual plant size may actually increase as density increases. These density-dependent phytotoxic effects result from the fact that plants growing at low densities have a larger amount of the toxin available per plant, and therefore suffer greater growth reductions than those in high densities, where each plant receives a proportionately smaller dose of the toxin. (b) Sorbents based on the polymer polydimethyl-siloxane (PDMS) show promise for the measurement of allelochemical fluxes in the rhizosphere. Various forms of PDMS have been demonstrated to pick up increasing amounts of the lipophilic root exudate sorgoleone when buried beneath sorghum-sudangrass hybrid plants. Work is continuing to determine the stability of sorbed compounds, how broad a range of compounds can be effectively trapped by PDMS, and what forms of PDMS are most useful for field studies.

Keywords

Resource Competition Allelopathic Effect Allelopathic Potential Allelopathic Interaction Increase Plant Density 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andersen, R.N. (1981) Increasing herbicide tolerance of soybeans (Glycine max) by increasing seeding rates. Weed Sci. 29, 336–338.Google Scholar
  2. Baldwin, I.T. and Schultz, J.C. (1983) Rapid changes in tree leaf chemistry induced by damage, evidence for between-plant communication. Science. 221, 277–279.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baltussen, E., Cramers, C. and Sandra, P. (2002) Sorptive sample preparation – a review. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 373, 3–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baltussen, E., Sandra, P., David, F. and Cramers, C. (1999) Stir bar sorptive extraction (SBSE), a novel extraction technique for aqueous samples, theory and principles. J. Microcol. Separations. 11, 737–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barnes, J.P. and Putnam, A.R. (1983) Rye residues contribute weed suppression in no-tillage cropping systems. J. Chem. Ecol. 9, 889–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barnes, J.P. and Putnam, A.R. (1986) Evidence for allelopathy by residues and aqueous extracts of rye (Secale cereale). Weed Sci. 34, 384–390.Google Scholar
  7. Blum, U. (1995) The value of model plant-microbe-soil systems for understanding processes associated with allelopathic interaction, one example. In: Inderjit, K.M.M. Dakshini and F.A. Einhellig (Eds.), Allelopathy, Organisms, Processes, and Applications. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, pp. 127–131.Google Scholar
  8. Blum, U. (1999) Designing laboratory plant debris-soil bioassays, Some reflections. In: Inderjit, K.M.M. Dakshini and C.L. Foy (Eds.), Principles and Practices in Plant Ecology, Allelochemical Interactions. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 17–23.Google Scholar
  9. Blum, U., Shafer, S.R. and Lehman, M.E. (1999) Evidence for inhibitory allelopathic interactions involving phenolic acids in field soils, Concepts vs. an experimental model. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 18, 673–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown, R.T. and Mikola, P. (1974) The influence of fruticose soil lichens on the mycorrhizae and seedling growth of forest trees. Acta For. Fenn. 141, 1–23.Google Scholar
  11. Callaway, R.M., DeLuca, T.H. and Belliveau, W.M. (1999) Biological-control herbivores may increase competitive ability of the noxious weed Centaurea maculosa. Ecology. 80, 1196–1201.Google Scholar
  12. Campbell, G., Lambert, J.D.H., Arnason, J. and Towers, G.H.N. (1982) Allelopathic properties of α -terthienyl and phenylheptatriyne, naturally occurring compounds of Asteraceae. J. Chem. Ecol. 8, 961–972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dalton, B.R., Weed, S.B. and Blum, U. (1987) Plant phenolic acids in soils, a comparison of extraction procedures. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 51, 1515–1521.Google Scholar
  14. Duke, S.O., Vaughn, K.C., Croom, E.M. Jr., and Elsohly, H.N. (1987) Artemisinin, a constituent of annual wormwood (Artemisia annua), is a selective phytotoxin. Weed Sci. 35, 499–505.Google Scholar
  15. Einhellig, F.A. (1987) Interaction among allelochemicals and other stress factors of the plant environment. In: G.R. Waller (Ed.), Allelochemicals, Role in Agriculture and Forestry. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, pp. 343–357.Google Scholar
  16. Fischer N.H., Williamson, G.B., Weidenhamer, J.D. and Richardson, D.R. (1994) In search of allelopathy in the Florida scrub, The role of terpenoids. J. Chem. Ecol. 20, 1355–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fuerst, E.P, and Putnam, A.R. (1983) Separating the competitive and allelopathic components of interference, theoretical principles. J. Chem. Ecol. 18, 1683–1691.Google Scholar
  18. Gallet, C., and Pellissier, F. (1997) Phenolic compounds in natural solutions of a coniferous forest. J. Chem. Ecol. 23, 2401–2412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gentle, C.B., and Duggin, J.A. (1997) Allelopathy as a competitive strategy in persistent thickets of Lantana camara L. in three Australian forest communities. Plant Ecol. 132, 85–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gliessman, S.R. and Muller, C.H. (1972) The phytotoxic potential of bracken (Pteridum aquilinum (L), Kuhn.). Madrono. 21, 299–304.Google Scholar
  21. Gliessman, S.R. and Muller, C.H. (1978) The allelopathic mechanisms of dominance in bracken (Pteridum aquilinum) in southern California. J. Chem. Ecol. 4, 337–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gorham, E. (1979) Shoot height, weight and standing crop in relation to density of monospecific plant stands. Nature. 279, 148–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Harper, J.L. (1977) Population Biology of Plants. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  24. Harper J.L. (1982) After description. In: E.I. Newman (Ed.), The Plant Community as a Working Mechanism. Special Publication Number 1 of the British Ecological Society, Oxford, pp. 11–25.Google Scholar
  25. Hoffman, D.W. and Lavy, T.L. (1978) Plant competition for atrazine. Weed Sci. 26, 94–99.Google Scholar
  26. Humphry, R.W., Mortimer, M. and Marrs, R.H. (2001) The effect of plant density on the response of Agrostemma githago to herbicide. J. Appl. Ecol. 38, 1290–1302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Inderjit and del Moral, R. (1997) Is separating resource competition from allelopathy realistic? Bot. Rev. 63, 221–230.Google Scholar
  28. Inderjit and Mallik, A.U. (2002) Can Kalmia angustifolia interference to black spruce (Picea mariana) be explained by allelopathy? Forest Ecol. Manag. 160, 75–84.Google Scholar
  29. Inderjit and Weiner, J. (2001) Plant allelochemical interference or soil chemical ecology? Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 4, 3–12.Google Scholar
  30. Kaminsky, R. (1981) The microbial origin of the allelopathic potential of Adenostoma fasciculatum H & A. Ecol. Monogr. 51, 365–382.Google Scholar
  31. Kira, T., Ogawa, H. and Sakazaki, N. (1953) Intraspecific competition among higher plants. I. Competition-density yield interrelationship in regularly dispersed populations. J. Inst. Polytech. Osaka City Univ. D4, 1–16.Google Scholar
  32. Kreck, M., Scharrer, A., Bilke, S. and Mosandl, A. (2001) Stir bar sorptive extraction (SBSE)-enantio-MDGC-MS – a rapid method for the enantioselective analysis of chiral flavour compounds in strawberries. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 213, 389–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mallik, A.U. (2001) Black spruce growth and understory species diversity with and without sheep laurel. Agron. J. 93, 92–98.Google Scholar
  34. Mayer, P., Vaes, W., Wijnker, F., LeGierse, K., Kraaij, R., Tolls, J. and Hermens, J. (2000) Sensing dissolved sediment porewater concentrations of persistent and bioaccumulative pollutants using disposable solid-phase microextraction fibers. Environ. Sci. Technol. 34, 5177–5183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Molisch, H. (1937) Der Einfluss einer Pflanze auf die andere-Allelopathie. Fischer, Jena.Google Scholar
  36. Muller, C.H. (1966) The role of chemical inhibition (allelopathy) in vegetational composition. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club. 93, 332–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nilsson, M.C. (1994) Separation of allelopathy and resource competition by the boreal dwarf shrub Empetrum hermaphroditum Hagerup. Oecologia. 98, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Nilsson, M.C., Hogberg, P., Zackrisson, O. and Wang, F.Y. (1993) Allelopathic effects by Empetrum hermaphroditum on development and nitrogen uptake by roots and mycorrhizae of Pinus sylvestris. Can. J. Bot. 71, 620–628.Google Scholar
  39. Nimbal, C.I., Pedersen, J.F., Yerkes, C.N., Weston, L.A. and Weller, S.C. (1996) Phytotoxicity and distribution of sorgoleone in grain sorghum germplasm. J. Agric. Food Chem. 44, 1343–1347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Northup R.R., Dahlgren, R.A., Aide, T.M. and Zimmerman, J.K. (1999) Effect of plant polyphenols on nutrient cycling and implications for community structure. In: Inderjit, K.M.M. Dakshini and C.L. Foy (Eds.), Principles and Practices in Plant Ecology, Allelochemical Interactions. CRC Press, Boca Raton, p. 369.Google Scholar
  41. Pawliszyn, J. (1999) Applications of Solid Phase Microextraction. Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  42. Ponder, F. Jr., and Tadros, S.H. (1985) Juglone concentration in soil beneath black walnut interplanted with nitrogen-fixing species. J. Chem. Ecol. 11, 937–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Popp, P., Bauer, C., Hauser, B., Keil, P. and Wennrich, L. (2003) Extraction of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and organochlorine compounds from water, a comparison between solid-phase microextraction and stir bar sorptive extraction. J. Sep. Sci. 26, 961–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Putnam, A.R., Defrank, J. and Barnes, J.P. (1983) Exploitation of allelopathy for weed control in annual and perennial cropping systems. J. Chem. Ecol. 9, 1001–1010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Radosevich, S.R. and Holt, J.S. (1984) Weed Ecology, Implications for Vegetation Management. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  46. Rice, E.L. (1984) Allelopathy, 2nd ed. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  47. Ridenour, W.M. and Callaway, R.M. (2001) The relative importance of allelopathy in interference, the effects of an invasive weed on a native bunchgrass. Oecologia. 126, 444–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Romeo, J.T. (2000) Raising the beam, moving beyond phytotoxicity. J. Chem. Ecol. 26, 2011–2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Romeo, J.T. and Weidenhamer, J.D. (1998) Bioassays for allelopathy in terrestrial plants. In: K.F. Haynes and J.G. Millar (Eds.),Methods of Chemical Ecology, Volume 2, Bioassay Methods. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, Massachusetts, pp. 179–211.Google Scholar
  50. Schmidt, S.K. (1988) Degradation of juglone by soil bacteria. J. Chem. Ecol. 14, 1561–1571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Skipper, H.D. (1966) Microbial degradation of atrazine in soils. M.S. Thesis. Oregon State Univ., Corvallis.Google Scholar
  52. Tanrisever, N., Fischer, N.H. and Williamson, G.B. (1987) Ceratiolin and other flavonoids from Ceratiola ericoides. Phytochemistry. 26, 175–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Thelen, G.C., Vivanco, J.M., Newingham, B., Good, W., Bais, H.P., Landres, P., Caesar, A. and Callaway, R.M. (2005) Insect herbivory stimulates allelopathic exudation by an invasive plant and the suppression of natives. Ecol. Lett. 8, 209–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Thijs, H., Shann, J.R. and Weidenhamer, J.D. (1994) The effect of phytotoxins on competitive outcome in a model system. Ecology. 75, 1959–1964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tseng, M.H., Kuo, Y.H., Chen, Y.M. and Chou, C.H. (2003) Allelopathic potential of Macaranga tanarius (L.). Muell.-Arg. J. Chem. Ecol. 29, 1269–1286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Vercammen, J., Sandra, P., Baltussen, E., Sandra, T. and David, F. (2000) Considerations on static and dynamic sorptive sampling to monitor volatiles emitted by living plants. J. High Resol. Chromatogr. 23, 547–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wardle, D.A., Nilsson, M.C. and Gallet, C. (1998) An ecosystem-level perspective of allelopathy. Biol. Rev. 73, 305–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Weidenhamer, J.D. (1996) Distinguishing resource competition and chemical interference, overcoming the methodological impasse. Agron. J. 88, 866–875.Google Scholar
  59. Weidenhamer, J.D. (2005) Biomimetic measurement of allelochemical dynamics in the rhizosphere. J. Chem. Ecol. 31, 221–236.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Weidenhamer, J.D. (2006) Distinguishing allelopathy from resource competition, the role of density. In: M.J. Reigosa, N. Pedrol and L. González (Eds.), Allelopathy, a Physiological Process with Ecological Implications. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 85–103.Google Scholar
  61. Weidenhamer, J.D., Hartnett, D.C. and Romeo, J.T. (1989) Density-dependent phytotoxicity, Distinguishing resource competition and allelopathic interference in plants. J. Appl. Ecol. 26, 613–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Weidenhamer, J.D., Morton, T.C. and Romeo J.T. (1987) Solution volume and seed number, often overlooked factors in allelopathic bioassays. J. Chem. Ecol. 13, 1481–1491.Google Scholar
  63. Weidenhamer, J.D. and Romeo, J.T. (2004) Allelochemicals of Polygonella myriophylla, chemistry and soil degradation. J. Chem. Ecol. 30:1061–1078.Google Scholar
  64. White, C.S. (1994) Monoterpenes, their effects on ecosystem nutrient cycling. J. Chem. Ecol. 20, 1381–1406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. White, J. (1980) Demographic factors in plant populations. In: O.T. Solbrig (Ed.), Demography and Evolution of Plant Populations. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, pp. 21–48.Google Scholar
  66. White, J. and Harper, J.L. (1970) Correlated changes in plant size and number in plant populations. J. Ecol. 58, 467–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Williamson, G.B. (1990) Allelopathy, Koch’s postulates, and the neck riddle. In J.B. Grace and D. Tilman (Eds.), Perspectives on Plant Competition. Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 143–161.Google Scholar
  68. Williamson, G.B., Obee, E.M. and Weidenhamer J.D. (1992) Inhibition of Schizachyrium scoparium (Poaceae) by the allelochemical hydrocinnamic acid. J. Chem. Ecol. 18, 2095–2105.Google Scholar
  69. Williamson, G.B. and Weidenhamer, J.D. (1990) Bacterial degradation of juglone, evidence against allelopathy? J. Chem. Ecol. 16, 1739–1742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Willis, R.J. (1985) The historical bases of the concept of allelopathy. J. Hist. Biol. 18, 71–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Winkle, M.E., Leavitt, J.R.C. and Burnside O.C. (1981) Effects of weed density on herbicide absorption and bioactivity. Weed Sci. 29, 405–409.Google Scholar
  72. Zackrisson, O. and Nilsson, M.C. (1992) Allelopathic effects of Empetrum hermaphroditum on seed germination of two boreal tree species. Can. J. For. Res. 22, 1310–1319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffrey D. Weidenhamer
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryAshland UniversityAshlandUSA

Personalised recommendations