3] with a greater investment in leaf area and biomass per unit shoot biomass (Table 1) compared with the LO3 treatment.
This unexpected insensitivity of young leaf gas exchange reflects, in part, the enhanced leaf abscission and resulting compensatory leaf production that led to enrichment in very young leaves in the sample pool in MO3 and particularly in HO3, relative to LO3.
In contrast to tomato, the chlorophyll concentration of nutsedge leaves was reduced relative to LO3 by about 15 and 25%, at MO3 and HO3, respectively (Fig.
pooled over all population ratios) reduced leaf area of tomato (Table 2), particularly in the LO3 and HO3 treatments (Fig.
3] (Table 2), declining substantially (31%) between LO3 and MO3, with little further reduction in HO3 (Fig.
It is noteworthy that a few immature fruit were observed but only in LO3.
However, the nutsedge shoots exhibited a more erect growth habit in the LO3 and MO3 treatments than in the HO3 treatment.
Root biomass was approximately 25% lower at MO3 and 44% lower at HO3, relative to LO3.
059; Table 2), particularly at HO3 relative to LO3 (Fig.
3] treatment, in contrast to LO3 and MO3, imposed a damaging stress that triggered redirection of allocation toward reproduction at the expense of vegetative shoot and root biomass.
In the present study, the number of tubers were reduced by about 70, 55, and 55%, in LO3, MO3, and HO3, respectively, when one nutsedge plant was grown with or without one tomato plant.
3] further established this aerial dominance, as nutsedge shoots were more erect in the LO3 and MO3 treatments than at HO3.