Cultivars to face climate change effects on crops and weeds: a review
Climate change is caused by the release of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Climate change will impact many activities, but its effects on agricultural production could be acute. Estimates of annual damages in agriculture due to temperature increase or extended periods of drought will be more costly than damages in other activities. Yield losses are caused both by direct effects of climate change on crops and by indirect effects such as increased inputs in crop production for weed control. One possible solution to counteract the effects of climate change is to seek crop cultivars that are adapted to highly variable, extreme climatic conditions and pest changes. Here we review the effects of climate change on crop cultivars and weeds. Biomass increase will augment marketable yield by 8–70 % for C3 cereals, by 20–144 % for cash and vegetable crops, and by 6–35 % for flowers. Such positive effects could however be reduced by decreasing water and nutrient availability. Rising temperature will decrease yields of temperature-sensitive crops such as maize, soybean, wheat, and cotton or specialty crops such as almonds, grapes, berries, citrus, or stone fruits. Rice, which is expected to yield better under increased CO2, will suffer serious yield losses under high temperatures. Drought stress should decrease the production of tomato, soybean, maize, and cotton. Nevertheless, reviews on C4 photosynthesis response to water stress in interaction with CO2 concentration reveal that elevated CO2 concentration lessens the deleterious effect of drought on plant productivity. C3 weeds respond more strongly than C4 types to CO2 increases through biomass and leaf area increases. The positive response of C3 crops to elevated CO2 may make C4 weeds less competitive for C3 crops, whereas C3 weeds in C4 or C3 crops could become a problem, particularly in tropical regions. Temperature increases will mainly affect the distribution of weeds, particularly C4 type, by expanding their geographical range. This will enhance further yield losses and will affect weed management systems negatively. In addition, the expansion of invasive weed species such as itchgrass, cogongrass, and witchweed facilitated by temperature increases will increase the cost for their control. Under water or nutrient shortage scenarios, an r-strategist with characteristics in the order S-C-R, such as Palmer amaranth, large crabgrass, johnsongrass, and spurges, will most probably prevail. Selection of cultivars that secure high yields under climate change but also by competing weeds is of major importance. Traits related with (a) increased root/shoot ratio, (b) vernalization periods, (c) maturity, (d) regulation of node formation and/or internode distance, (e) harvest index variations, and (f) allelopathy merit further investigation. The cumulative effects of selecting a suitable stress tolerator-competitor cultivar will be reflected in reductions of environmental pollution, lower production costs, and sustainable food production.
KeywordsAllelopathy Stress tolerance Climate change Carbon dioxide Drought Temperature Weed competition Competitive ability Cultivar selection Integrated weed management
5.6 A synthesis
Climate change refers to long-term changes in the state of the climate (IPCC 2014). These changes are identifiable, i.e., the mean or the variability of climate change components such as the increase of temperature or elevated atmospheric CO2 levels can be assessed by the application of appropriate analytical and statistical methods (IPCC 2014). The release of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide) due to various anthropogenic activities is very likely to be one of the major causes of recent climatic change (Glover et al. 2008). Plausible climate change scenarios include higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations, higher temperatures, and changes in precipitation (Adams et al. 1998; Trenberth et al. 2007).
To counteract the effects of climate change, various adaptation strategies have been suggested. These, according to IPCC (2014), are the processes of adjustment to actual or expected climatic changes and its effects. In agricultural production systems, adaptations seek to lessen or avoid damages caused by climate changes or exploit beneficial opportunities (IPCC 2001; Adger et al. 2002). Farmers, throughout history, responded to changes in the environment by adopting new crop cultivars and by adjusting their cultural practices (Gala Bijl and Fisher 2011). At the farm level, these adaptations include alterations in planting and harvest dates, changes in cropping sequence, better management of water for irrigation, optimized use of fertilizers, and adoption of various tillage practices (Adams et al. 1998). In addition, studies in Australia showed that crop responses to climate change are strongly cultivar-dependent (Wang et al. 1992). Asfaw and Lipper (2011) predicted that the farmers’ primary response to climate change would be to seek and crop cultivars that are most adapted to highly variable, extreme climatic conditions and pest changes brought forth by global warming.
Weed interference, in addition to climate change, enhances the risk for further crop yield losses. Despite the advanced technological achievements for weed control, crop yields are suffering great losses due to weed competition (Fig. 1b). Overall, weeds caused the greatest potential loss (34 %), with animal pests and diseases being, usually, less important (losses of 18 and 16 % respectively) (Oerke 2006). Competitiveness, adaptation, and stress tolerance are the characteristics by which weed species secure their survival in a variety of environmental conditions. Competitiveness, within the context of this paper, pertains to the ability of an organism (weed species in this case) to perform better in acquiring resources in relation to another organism (crop plants) within the same habitat. Adaptation is a change or a process of change by which an organism becomes better suited to a “new” environment, whereas tolerance is the ability of an organism to survive and reproduce under adverse environmental conditions. Weediness, which comprises traits that secure the survival and dispersal of weeds, even under severe environmental conditions, can be described through various morphological, phenological, or physiological characteristics. One of the main components of integrated weed management strategies for farmers is to grow crops able to offset the competitive ability of weeds. The utility of crops with weed-suppressive ability particularly in low input agricultural systems, or in situations when chemical weed control is not possible, can be proven valuable (Gibson et al. 2003; Benaragama et al. 2014). However, selection for weed-suppressive cultivars is difficult because this trait is a manifestation of the joint activity of many genes, controlling many traits. As reports have shown, a combination of characteristics, instead of a single trait, interacts for enhanced weed-suppressive ability (Andrews et al. 2015). These traits are related to (a) crop morphological performance at early stages (i.e., rapid emergence, rapid root and shoot growth, early groundcover, early biomass accumulation, rapid leaf area development), (b) crop growth characteristics (i.e., height, growth habit, tillering ability, leaf width, maturity date), (c) crop physiological performance (i.e., ability for efficient water and nutrient uptake), and (d) potential allelopathic properties (Korres and Froud-Williams 2002; Korres 2005; Mason and Spaner 2006).
Climate change, in combination with an increasing world population, is predicted to escalate the global need for farmland, a resource that is already in high demand (Barrow et al. 2008) and dwindling rapidly. The adoption of stress-tolerant cultivars that can withstand adverse climatic changes and produce high yields is an effective strategy against the unprecedented risks of climate change on crop productivity (Ciais et al. 2005) and the increasing demand for higher food production (Larson 2013) particularly in low-input farming systems that are common in marginal areas (Darwin and Kennedy 2000). Furthermore, stress-tolerant cultivars that exhibit attributes of increased suppressive ability against weeds would secure yield production even more either directly by dominating over weeds or indirectly by reducing crop management inputs (Korres and Froud-Williams 2002). To our knowledge, information that enables the evaluation of the relative strengths and weaknesses of both crops and weeds under various climate change scenarios is negligible. This paper aims to cover this gap and to discuss the benefits of selecting stress-tolerant cultivar as a tool for integrated weed control under various climate change scenarios.
2 Effects of climate change on crops
2.1 Effects of elevated CO2
2.1.1 Effects of elevated CO2 on crop physiological characteristics
Response of C3 and C4 weeds and crops to doubled atmospheric CO2 levels in relation to biomass and leaf area production for both crop plants and weed species with C3 and C4 photosynthetic pathway
Range of response (× growth at ambient CO2 concentrations)
Range of response (% increase)
2.1.2 Effects of elevated CO2 on crop yields
Effects of doubling CO2 concentration on marketable yield of major cereal, row, cash, vegetable crops, and flowers
Marketable yield (% increase)
2.2 Effects of temperature increases
2.2.1 Effects of temperature increases on crop physiological characteristics
2.2.2 Effects of temperature increases on crop yield
Crop yields particularly those of temperature-sensitive crops such as maize, soybean, wheat, and cotton (Schlenker and Roberts 2009) or specialty crops such as almonds, grapes, berries, citrus, or stone fruits (Lobell and Field 2011; Lobell et al. 2006) will be decreased with temperature increases at the regional and local scales (Lobell et al. 2006). Night temperature increases resulted in rice and wheat grain yield losses (Lobell et al. 2005; Peng et al. 2004; Mohammed and Tarpley 2009). Thus, even a C3 crop like rice which is expected to yield better under increased CO2 will suffer serious yield losses under high temperature. Since the majority of global rice is grown in tropical and semitropical regions, it is likely that higher temperatures would negatively affect its production in these areas due to an increase in floret sterility that would subsequently decrease yields (Prasad et al. 2006a, b). The detrimental effect of high temperature on rice yield will be exacerbated by increased CO2 in the atmosphere.
2.3 Effects of water deficit
2.3.1 Effects of water deficit on crop physiological characteristics
Physiological responses of plants to drought stress are complex and vary with plant species and the degree or time of the exposure to drought (Bodner et al. 2015; Evans et al. 1991). Under drought conditions, photosynthesis inhibition occurs because of stomata closure and reductions in the CO2/O2 ratio in leaves (Griffin et al. 2004).
2.3.2 Effects of water deficit on crop yield
Plant height, stem and leaf dry weight, leaf area, and node number in drought-stressed and well-watered control cotton plants at the end of the drought (49 days after planting)
Stem dry weight (g)
Leaf dry weight (g)
Leaf area (cm2)
2.4 Interactive effects of climate change components on the physiology of crop plants and yield
Seasonal water use efficiency (g DM/kg water) under various water regimes and ambient and double CO2 concentrations in various crop species
Wheat (well watered)
Wheat (water shortage)
Wheat (well watered)
Wheat (water shortage)
3 Effects of climate change on weeds
Compared with crops, weeds have more variable characteristics as they have not been subjected to the same degree of selection for specific favorable traits (e.g., lack of seed dormancy, uniform growth, high yields). Hence, weeds tend to exhibit greater potential capability to adapt to stress than crop plants. The high genetic diversity among weedy plants allows them to achieve a greater competitive fitness against crops as a consequence of climate change (Dukes and Mooney 1999). The major categories under which climate change will affect weed populations include species abundance and richness, geographic range, and phenology (Anonymous 2013; Curtis and Wang 1998).
3.1 Effects of elevated CO2
3.1.1 Direct effects of elevated CO2 on weeds
3.1.2 Indirect effects of elevated CO2 on weeds
Weed reproductive capacity will most probably be enhanced by increased CO2 (Patterson et al. 1999; Ziska and Runion 2006). In case of the green amaranth, a 274 % increase in flower production under elevated CO2 (550 ± 30 ppm) in controlled environmental conditions was reported by Naidu and Paroha (2008). Reproductive capacity is linked to resource capture (DeFelice et al. 1988; Benvenuti and Steffani 1994; Bello et al. 1995) which is related to increased biomass and leaf area (Korres 2005). Therefore, increases in biomass with elevated CO2 levels will enhance weed reproductive output as these two traits are positively correlated (Korres and Froud-Williams 2002; Korres and Norsworthy 2015). Hence, increases in reproductive output will result in increases of weed abundance. Disruptions of soil and native plant populations for urban or rural development, emissions that increase atmospheric CO2 concentrations, and nitrogen deposition to the ground surface which enhance weed growth (Johnson and Council 2013), and roadside activities which lead to the spread of weeds (Korres et al. 2015) will further enhance weed abundance. In addition, Ziska et al. (2004) observed that elevated CO2 concentrations increased root biomass of Canada thistle (C3 plant type), suggesting that perennial weeds might be more difficult to control at these higher CO2 levels.
3.1.3 Effects of elevated CO2 on crop-weed interference
Response of crop and weed species grown under competition as a function of high CO2 concentration
C4 weed vs. C3 crops
High CO2 favors
Sorghum halepense vs. Festuca pratensis
Sorghum halepense vs. Glycine max
Amaranthus retroflexus vs. Glycine max
Echinochloa glabrescens vs. Oryza sativa
Paspalum dilatatum vs. various grasses
Various grasses vs. Medicago sativa
C3 weed vs. C3 crops
Chenopodium album vs. Beta vulgaris
Taraxacum officinale vs. Medicago sativa
Plantago lanceolata vs. pasture
Taraxacum and Plantago vs. pasture
Cirsium arvensis vs. Glycine max
Chenopodium album vs. Glycine max
C4 weed vs. C4 crop
Amaranthus retroflexus vs. Sorghum bicolor
C3 weeds vs. C4 crops
Xanthium strumarium vs. Sorghum bicolor
Abutilon theophrasti vs. Sorghum bicolor
3.2 Effects of temperature
3.2.1 Effects of temperature on weed physiological characteristics
Soil temperature is the primary determinant of seed germination and survival particularly when soil freezes (Zimdahl 2007). Various responses to temperature fluctuations have been reported for seed germination of weed species. Common chickweed (Stellaria media L.) survives well in cold climates (King 1966), whereas some of the most troublesome weeds in soybean, maize, and cotton respond to temperature gradients to varying degrees (Ehleringer 1983). Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa spp.) is a weed of warm regions that requires high temperatures for dry matter production and growth (Maun and Bennett 1986). Similarly, prickly sida (Sida spinosa L.) needs high temperatures for its development (Anonymous 2001). The spatial distribution of johnsongrass [Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers.] in colder climates is restricted by its rhizome intolerance to temperatures below −3 °C (Warwick and Black 1983). Similarly, morning glories are frost intolerant (Halvorson and Guertin 2003; Zia-Ul-Haq et al. 2012), but their germination occurs over a wide range of temperatures (15–35 °C) (Cole and Coats 1973—cited in Halvorson and Guertin 2003) with optimum germination temperature at 24 °C (Crowley and Buchanan 1980—cited in Halvorson and Guertin 2003). In addition, Ziska and Bunce (2007) reported 88 % increase in biomass and 68 % increase in leaf area of itchgrass [Rottboelliia cochinchinensis (Lour.) W.D. Clayton] in response to a 3 °C increase in temperature.
3.2.2 Effects of temperature on weed distribution
The geographical range of many weed species is largely determined by temperature and it has long been recognized that temperature determines successful colonization of new environments by weedy species (Woodward and Williams 1987). Warming will affect the growth, reproduction, and distribution of weeds. Increased temperatures could, for example, alter the latitudinal distinction between Midwest and Midsouth regions within the USA, altering the weed geographical limitations. The greater soybean and maize losses experienced in the Midsouth are associated with a number of very aggressive weed species of tropical or subtropical environments such as prickly sida and johnsongrass (Osunsami 2009; Riar et al. 2013). Obviously, increased temperatures will facilitate the spread of these species into other areas of the Midwest with subsequent effects on soybean and maize production (Walthall et al. 2012). Temperature increases are likely to be particularly important in affecting the relative plant growth of C3 and C4 plants, potentially favoring C4 weeds (Dukes and Mooney 1999), such as smutgrass (Sporobolus indicus L. R. Br.). This again could provide suitable conditions for more robust growth of some species, which are currently limited by low temperatures, whereas the distribution of some tropical and subtropical C4 species could shift northwards (Ziska and Runion 2006; Chandrasena 2009), thus exposing temperate-zone agriculture to previously unknown aggressive colonizers.
In addition, Ziska and Bunce (2007) stated that an expansion of invasive weed species such as itchgrass, cogongrass [Imperata cylindrical (L.) P. Beauv.], and witchweed [Striga asiatica (L.) Kuntze] will be facilitated by temperature increases. They also reported an increase in biomass and leaf area of itchgrass by 88 and 68 %, respectively, in response to a 3 °C increase. On the contrary, additional warming could restrict the southern range of other cooler climate invasive weeds such as wild proso millet (Panicum miliaceum L.) or Canada thistle (Ziska and Runion 2007).
3.3 Effects of water deficit
3.3.1 Effects of drought on weed physiological responses
Under more frequent and severe drought stress events due to climate change, the competitive balance would shift in favor of deep-rooted plants (Stratonovitch et al. 2012). Early emerging species, such as the shallow-rooted Sandberg’s bluegrass (Poa sandbergii Vasey), which uses the resources that are available in the upper soil profile early in the growing season and during periods of light precipitation, will be suppressed (Daudenmire 1970 cited in Sheley et al. 1996).
Potential effects of drought on Australian agricultural weeds
Blackberry (Rubus fruticosus L.)
Expected to retreat to higher altitudes due to its sensitivity to higher temperatures and drought
Chilean needle grass [Nassella neesiana (Trin. & Rupr.) Barkworth)]
Expected to increase its range because its increased invasiveness ability (long-lived, seed dispersed by wind and water) and drought tolerance
Gorse (Ulex europaeus L.)
Establishment into high-rainfall zones due to its sensitivity to drought
Lantana (Lantana camara L.)
Establishment into high-rainfall zones
3.3.2 Weed adaptation strategies under water deficit and other unfavorable conditions
As reported by Wiese and Vandiver (1970), species with the greatest growth under high soil moisture conditions will be the most adversely affected by the combination of competition and water shortage. On the contrary, the more competitive species under semidrought conditions are likely to be those that produce little growth in moist soils. Based on the competitive exclusion principle, the species that uses a resource more efficiently will eventually, either wholly or partially, displace the other species. This opportunistic behavior characterizes the r-strategists, those with short life cycle and high energy investments into reproduction and dispersability, as opposed to K-strategists (Sheley et al. 1996; Hardin 1960). Grime (1979) extended the r- and K-classification strategies into stress tolerators (S), competitors (C), ruderals (R), or combinations of the above strategies. Under high stress intensity that can limit plant growth, as in the case of water or nutrient shortage, stress tolerators (S) can perform adequately. Based on the ability of adjacent organisms to exploit the same resource, competitors (C) will perform best, whereas ruderals (R) can withstand physical damages. Most weeds of annual agricultural systems exhibit ruderal-competitive characteristics, whereas most weeds of rangeland and forest ecosystems exhibit stress tolerance-competitive characteristics. Typically, succession is evolved from ruderal to competitive and finally to stress tolerator species (Korres 2005). Hence, under water or nutrient shortage scenarios, an r-strategist with characteristics in the order S-C-R will most probably prevail. In a recent weed survey (Korres et al. 2015), the preference of Palmer amaranth, large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis L. Scop.), johnsongrass, and spurges (Euphorbia spp.) for disturbed habitats was reported. In the same survey, giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida L.), yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus L.), barnyardgrass, and hemp sesbania [Sesbania herbacea (Mill.) McVaFugh] exhibited a strong preference for moist habitats. Obviously, the former group of weeds is assured of a greater probability for survival under water or nutrient stress conditions in comparison to the latter.
3.4 Interactive effects of climate change components on weed performance and consequences on weed-crop competition
Effects of increased CO2 concentration on glyphosate efficacy for various weed species with different photosynthetic pathways
Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop
Paspalum dilatatum Poir.
Chenopodium album L.
Eragrostis curvula (Schrad.) Nees
Elytrigia repens (L.) Gould
Amaranthus retroflexus L.
Chloris gayana Kunth
Sporobolus indicus (L.) R. Br.
Additionally, little attention has been focused on the interactions between nutrient availability or drought with rising CO2, on weed-crop competition. According to Newton et al. (1996), the proportion of weed biomass increased with elevated CO2 equally in wet and dry treatments in pasture mixture. In another study, reduced weed competition was observed when tomato (C3 crop) and redroot pigweed (C4 weed) were grown under well-watered conditions, but when drought and high CO2 occurred synchronously, redroot pigweed performed better (Valerio et al. 2011). Under extreme nutrient limitations, stimulation of biomass with additional CO2 may be minimal. However, under moderate nutrient limitations, more indicative of agroecosystems, the increase in biomass may be reduced but still occurs (Seneweera et al. 1994). Under a competitive environment between rice (C3 crop type) and barnyardgrass (C4 weed type), the proportion of rice biomass increased relative to barnyardgrass with a 200-ppm increase in atmospheric CO2, but only when soil nitrogen was adequate. If nitrogen was limited in an enriched CO2 environment, the competitive ability of rice relative to barnyardgrass was reduced, possibly due to reductions in tiller formation (Zhu et al. 2008). Elevated CO2 can mitigate some of the adverse effects of increased temperature and drought and also regulate the adaptive mechanism of black knapweed (Centaurea nigra L.) (Qaderi et al. 2013). The effects of drought are likely to vary widely among crops and weeds. In maize, drought has been found to both decrease interference from naturally occurring weed flora dominated by foxtail species (Setaria spp.) (McGiffen et al. 1997), and increase the competitive ability of johnsongrass (Leguizamon et al. 2011). Drought and high temperatures favor the competitive ability of C4 weeds over C3 crops (Fuhrer 2003), an advantage which will most probably diminish or possibly be reversed under increased CO2 concentrations (Bazzaz and Carlson 1984; Carter and Peterson 1983).
Spatial-based effects of temperature increases and prolonged drought periods on weeds have also been anticipated. More particularly, long drought periods interspersed with occasional very wet years will enhance weed invasion because established vegetation, both native and crops, will be weakened, leaving some areas open to invasion (Chandrasena 2009). In general, wetter and milder winters are likely to increase the survival of some winter annual weeds, whereas warmer summers and longer growing seasons may permit thermophile summer annuals to grow in regions further north (Peters et al. 2014). Alterations in temperature and nutrients supply can reduce photosynthetic rate of Palmer amaranth. The combination of temperature between 36 and 46 °C with resource supply constraints may restrict the potential distribution range of Palmer amaranth (Ehleringer 1983; Ward et al. 2013).
4 Cultivar selection against weeds and traits that confer competitiveness
Crop ability to suppress weeds can be considered in two ways, namely (a) the ability to tolerate weed competition which can be measured by the ability of the crop to maintain high yields under weedy conditions and (b) the ability of the crop to suppress the growth of weeds, usually determined by comparing different biological characteristics in mixtures with that in pure stands, known as weed suppression ability or competitive ability (Callaway 1992; Korres and Froud-Williams 2004; Andrews et al. 2015). However, there is a confusion between cultivar tolerance to weed competition and cultivar weed-suppressive ability (Olesen et al. 2004). Furthermore, crop tolerance to weed competition varies widely over seasons and locations (Cousens and Mokhtari 1998; Olesen et al. 2004). Thus, weed suppression criterion has been emphasized here for the selection of suitable cultivars against weeds under various climate change scenarios.
4.1 Cultivar phenotypic characteristics and weed suppression
Unlike breeding for diseases and pest resistance, little research has been done on breeding crop cultivars which are more competitive to weeds. Certain crop cultivars are known to be better competitors with weeds than others (Callaway 1992). For example, white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars differ in their ability to compete with weeds (Malik et al. 1993). Certain tomato cultivars (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) have considerable tolerance to dodder (Cuscuta spp.), a severe parasitic weed in many parts of the world (Goldwasser et al. 2001). Cultivars of small grain cereals with certain characteristics such as short stature, earlier maturity, better winter hardiness, or early season growth have shown differential competitive abilities when grown in mixtures compared to monocultures (Juskiw et al. 2000). As stated by various authors, breeding crop cultivars with an enhanced ability to suppress weeds would be a sustainable contribution to improved weed management in many crops (Didon and Bostrom 2003; Lemerle et al. 2001; Paolini et al. 1998; Vollmann et al. 2010). Therefore, cultivar selection with traits that enhance its ability to suppress weeds such as these mentioned above could be explored under various climate change scenarios. Additionally, the belowground traits such as root length density, root elongation rate, total root length, and root spatial distribution are important factors for attributing competition effect (Gealy et al. 2013a; Fargione and Tilman 2006; Stevanato et al. 2011). The greater ability to extract water from dry soil may affect or even determine the competitive ability of a cultivar (Song et al. 2010). Reports have shown that under weed competition, the root/shoot ratio of the crop and weeds was reduced (Kasperbauer and Karlen 1994; Thomas and Allison 1975; Stone et al. 1998), particularly of the less competitive species, although soil water content was not a limiting factor (Thomas and Allison 1975; Rajcan and Swanton 2001). However, as stated by Rajcan and Swanton (2001), competition for water should be viewed as an outcome of the interaction between both soil-plant-atmosphere and the crop-weed systems, rather than simply as a shortage of available water.
4.2 Implications for allelopathic properties
Weed suppression can vary with management factors such as planting method, seeding density, flood depth, and nitrogen fertilization, whereas in some cases, activated charcoal has reduced the inhibition of weeds in soils, implicating allelopathic activity as a possible contributing factor (Kong et al. 2008, 2011). Rondo, for example, a rice cultivar grown in a commercial organic rice production operation in Texas, USA, that combines a high yield potential and a weed suppression ability, is considered as a potential cultivar with allelopathic properties (Gealy and Yan 2012). Bertholdsson (2010) bred spring wheat for improved allelopathic potential by conventional breeding. The material used originated from a cross between a Swedish cultivar with low allelopathic activity and a Tunisian cultivar with high allelopathic activity.
5 Traits for developing an ideotype S-C cultivar
The use of tolerant cultivars to a wide range of climatic fluctuations as adaptive tool is widely spread (Matthews et al. 1994). In Australia, for example, the use of late-maturing cultivars secures high yield outcomes that could be otherwise affected by inconsistent climatic conditions (Connor and Wang 1993). A similar strategy, at the crop level, is used in Canada and China, where the diversification of crops counteracts the climatic fluctuations (Hulme et al. 1992; Cohen et al. 1992).
5.1 Cultivars with deep root system
Adapting a cultivar with a deep root system, particularly in areas which experience prolonged dry periods, can be a useful tool (Bodner et al. 2015). Newly introduced wheat cultivars can better exploit water and nutrients (Korres et al. 2008) mainly due to their greater ability to maintain water uptake and consequently to survive longer in dry soils (Song et al. 2009). Sorghum, for example, seems an attractive option for dry lands where crops frequently encounter drought stress compared to maize. Sorghum has deep root system, high root density, cuticle and epicuticular deposition in leaves, and efficient stomata function under water stress (Assefa et al. 2010; Starggenborg et al. 2008; Schittenhelm and Schroetterm 2014). Traits related to competitiveness for water and nutrients that could affect the weed-suppressive ability of the crop include root density, root length, water uptake rate, and root surface area (Aarssen 1989; Callaway 1992; Mohler 2001). In the long term, breeding drought-tolerant cultivars might be advantageous for weed suppression as well as a means to cope with climatic changes in areas with prolonged summer dry periods (Bodner et al. 2015). Acquiring and utilizing water and nutrients more adequately compared to weeds due to their extensive root system, for example, will enable crop cultivars to maintain growth even under drought conditions. Cultivars with high early vigor and earlier maturity can be used as an effective adaptation strategy for areas with semiarid continental climates in temperate zones where more frequent generative droughts are forecasted (Gouache et al. 2012; Bodner et al. 2015). Genetic manipulation using molecular breeding has resulted in commercialization of drought-resistant crops such as the maize-DroughtGradeTM (Monsanto, St. Louis, USA) that is already used extensively in the USA (Waltz 2014). Differences in resistance to drought are known to exist within genotypes of plant species (Grzesiak et al. 2012), e.g., in wheat (Winter et al. 1988; Paknejad et al. 2007), rapeseed (Richards and Thurling 1978), oat (Larsson and Gorny 1988), and triticale (Royo et al. 2000; Grzesiak et al. 2012). Nevertheless, drought tolerance does not necessarily provide competitive advantages to the crop. As reported by Cerqueira et al. (2013), two drought-tolerant upland rice cultivars were affected by the competition of shrubby false buttonweed (Spermacoce verticillata L.) regardless of water conditions (presence and absence). In addition, as reported by Chauhan and Abugho (2013), rain-fed rice plants under weed competition with spiny amaranth (Amaranthus spinosus L.) and Chinese sprangletop [Leptochloa chinensis (L.) Nees] (C4 types) did not survive under limited water conditions. On the contrary, both weed species survived and produced a significant number of tillers and leaves.
5.2 Harvest index and dry mater components
To promote adaptation to high temperatures, plant breeders have suggested phenotypic traits related to heat tolerance during flowering, high harvest index, small leaves, and reduced leaf area per unit of ground area (Walthall et al. 2012). Differences between winter wheat cultivars in harvest index at high temperatures imply that heat-tolerant cultivars maintain higher grain development, compared to more temperature-sensitive cultivars (Wardlaw and Moncur 1995). Lower harvest indices are an indication of injudicious investment of assimilates, a result of favoring biomass production over commercial yield (Hay and Walker 1992). Therefore, genotypes with high harvest indices are expected to be weak competitors because of the relative fewer resources allocated for stem and leaf expansion (Kawano and Jennings 1983), traits that confer competitiveness. Mann (1980) stated that it might be possible to obtain improvements in harvest index and therefore yield, suggesting further reductions in straw length and maintenance of aboveground biomass. Korres (2000) investigating winter wheat cultivar characteristics for increased competitive ability found a negative relationship between the number of leaf area per square meter and infertile tillers per square meter. Questions that merit further thought are related to the manipulation of leaf area and infertile tiller production. If the production of infertile tillers could be manipulated, would this result in leaf area investments? Would increases in leaf area, hence interception of photosynthetic active radiation, in response to increased day length as the crop enters reproductive development cause higher yield production and enhance competitive ability? Would leaf area duration be affected and what would be the consequences for grain yield?
However, specific leaf area, a characteristic which is positively correlated with relative growth rate, is usually reduced by elevated CO2 thereby counteracting the positive response of photosynthesis (Bruhn et al. 2001).
5.3 Late-maturing cultivars
Late-maturing soybean cultivars (group IV) depressed weed seed production and seed weight of both pitted morning glory (Ipomoea lacunosa L.) and hemp sesbania [Sesbania exaltata (Raf.) Rydb. ex A.W. Hill] presumably through increased crop competitiveness (Bennet and Shaw 2000) due to their ability to maintain vegetative growth longer (Nordby et al. 2002). Nevertheless, Rosenzweig and Tubiello (2007) suggested that under warmer climates, crops would tend to mature faster, resulting in less time available for carbohydrate accumulation and grain production. Responses to specific adaptation strategies for given cropping systems can still vary considerably, as a function of location and climate change scenario. Adapting longer maturing cultivars in a winter cereal production system requires enough precipitation over an extended growing season to sustain grain filling. If both warmer and drier conditions prevail, such an adaptation strategy is not applicable. On the contrary, the adaptation of fast growing species (i.e., those with high sink strength, hence positive response of photosynthesis) has the advantage of better competition for resources, thus faster adaptation to a changed climate.
5.4 Nutrient uptake and utilization
Nutrient utilization, mainly nitrogen, is an important factor for cultivar selection as an adaptive strategy but also as a crop competitiveness tool under various climate change scenarios. There is a general agreement that crop cultivars, particularly of cereals, can differ in their responsiveness to nitrogen (Gent and Kiyomoto 1998; Duan et al. 2007; Benin et al. 2012) possibly due to greater sink capacity, hence better nitrogen utilization or more extensive root systems (Lupton et al. 1974; Foulkes et al. 1994). Crop biomass is a component of two processes namely the amount of accumulated intercepted radiation and radiation use efficiency (Monteith 1977; Gallagher and Biscoe 1978). Foulkes et al. (1994) stated that maximum growth depends on the acquisition of sufficient nitrogen to form a canopy of sufficient size to intercept the majority of the incident radiation when adequate moisture to balance evaporation from the canopy is provided. One of the main traits conferring resistance to drought in winter wheat is the flowering date (Foulkes et al. 1997). More particularly, cultivars with early flowering are less prone to drought effects due to shorter life cycle they exhibit. Susceptible cultivars to dry conditions, especially toward the end to the growing season, uptake and utilize lower nitrogen. Hence, cultivars with efficient N uptake and utilization that exhibit drought resistance characteristics can be used for weed suppression and also as adaptive tools in less fertile or dry soils.
5.5 Heat tolerance—improvements and expectations
Improvements of heat-stress-tolerant germplasm lines have resulted in the development of the Hoveyzeh rice cultivar from Khuzestan delta in south Iran which attains spikelet fertility at average day temperatures of 45 °C (Jennings et al. 1979). Despite the impressive achievements by plant breeding programs, efforts to generate heat-tolerant crops have not been very successful. This is mainly because abiotic stress tolerance in plants is quantitatively inherited, and it is found to be controlled by multiple genes/quantitative trait loci (Blum et al. 1988). Advances in agricultural biotechnology have been successful in developing heat tolerance transgenically under controlled conditions (Grover et al. 2013).
5.6 A synthesis
Breeding objectives should be reorientated toward a selection of traditional × modern crop characteristics that will result in increased weed-suppressive ability (Dingkuhn et al. 2010), an ability to thrive in harsh environments and high yielding potential (Jones et al. 1997; Johnson et al. 1998). Hybrids of Oryza glaberrima × Oryza sativa share common parental characteristics such as weed competitiveness, ability to grow under stressful conditions without jeopardizing their yield (Jones et al. 1997; Johnson et al. 1998).
Response of crop plants and weeds under elevated CO2, increased temperature, and prolonged drought periods
Climate change component
Interception of PAR
Rate of photosynthesis
Rate of photosynthesis
Seed formation period
As mentioned earlier, increased temperatures will reduce vernalization (i.e., the promotion of flowering in response to a prolonged exposure to low temperatures) requirements for both crops and weeds, particularly grasses. This in turn will shorten the vegetative period due to early reproductive induction (Chauvel et al. 2002), at the vegetative points, of the apex (Chouard 1960; Chauvel et al. 2002) which will result in biomass reductions and, in case of the crop, consequent yield reductions. As it was stated previously, increases in biomass production or its components, e.g., leaf area, tillers, stem weight, etc., are positively related to increased competitiveness for both crop plants and weeds as in the case of cereals, particularly winter wheat, and blackgrass [Alopecurus myosuroides Huds.] (Chauvel et al. 2002). Therefore, crop plants that maintain their vernalization periods, under abiotic stresses, unaffected will preserve appropriate vegetative periods for acceptable biomass production and yield but will also retain their suppressive ability against weeds.
The development of tolerant cultivars to drought with increased root/shoot ratio will result in enhanced water and nutrient uptake, unaffected growth rates and biomass production, hence improved weed-suppressing ability.
Traits related with the maturity of cultivars is another option that merits further consideration for developing cultivars tolerant to drought and enhanced suppressive ability against weeds.
Traits associated with the regulation of node formation and/or internode distance, particularly under drought stress conditions, can be used for developing high yielding and competitive cultivars against weeds.
Traits or plant attributes related with harvest index variations such as those of infertile tillers and leaf area as mentioned above merit further investigation since they can influence both yield production through increased utilization of resources (i.e., PAR) and weed-suppressive ability (e.g., shading).
Cultivars that exhibit allelopathic attributes should be prioritized in breeding programs.
Cultivars that retain appropriate vernalization periods under increased temperatures, hence preserving the normal duration of vegetative growth stages, can reserve high yield production but also to exhibit suppressive ability against weeds.
Climate change is predicted to affect agricultural production in many ways. Climate change is likely to affect the growth of both crops and weeds, sometimes benefiting the crop sometimes the weeds. Crop yield in many areas will decrease due to increased temperatures or extended drought periods, whereas weed competition, despite the technological advances, will increase further crop yield reductions. A dual adaptive approach is needed not only to counteract the negative effects of climate change but also to enhance crop competitiveness against weeds. As it has been shown in this paper, cultivar selection serves this adaptive approach adequately. Cultivars with C3 photosynthetic pathway are more suitable for adaptation to elevated CO2 but also to compete with weeds, particularly those with C4 photosynthetic pathway. In addition, cultivars with mechanisms to resist drought through increases in root/shoot ratio will gain a significant advantage under dry conditions in marginal areas. The potential of these cultivars for weed suppression will more likely enhance, due to their ability to acquire water and nutrients effectively. However, increased temperatures, accompanied by extended drought periods, favor the selection of cultivars with longer maturity period which have also proven to be highly competitive by maintaining longer vegetative growth. Cultivars with allelopathic abilities should be used in integrated weed management systems since they have shown great potential for high yield production but also increased weed-suppressing ability. This paper investigates the complex interactions between crops and weeds under various climate change scenarios aiming to facilitate decision-making processes toward sustainable crop production systems. Developing cultivars to tolerate climate changes such as drought, temperature increases, or nutrient shortage can reduce fertilizer and irrigation inputs considerably. The incorporation of cultivars with enhanced weed suppression ability into the system can reduce herbicide inputs substantially (Callaway 1992; Gealy et al. 2003, 2014; Korres et al. 2008; Travlos 2012). This is even more demanding considering the increase of weed herbicide resistance evolution (Heap 2015). The cumulative effects from selecting a suitable S-C cultivar will be reflected in the reductions of environmental pollution, lower production costs, and sustainable food production. It is therefore imperative to expand research efforts to investigate how crop-weed interference under various abiotic stresses and cropping systems influences cultivar performance and subsequent yield outcome. This information could be incorporated into breeding programs for improving performance of cultivars under abiotic (climate change) and biotic (weed competition) stresses without compromising final yield.
- Ainsworth EA, Long SP (2005) What have we learned from 15 years of free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE)? A meta-analytic review of the responses of photosynthesis, canopy properties and plant production to rising CO2. New Phytol 165(2):351–372. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01224.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Albert KR, Ro-Poulsen H, Mikkelsen TN, Michelsen A, van der Linden L, Beier C (2011) Interactive effects of elevated CO2, warming, and drought on photosynthesis of Deschampsia flexuosa in a temperate heath ecosystem. J Exp Bot 62:4253–4266. doi:10.1093/jxb/err133 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Alberto A, Ziska L, Cervancia C, Manalo P (1996) The influence of increasing carbon dioxide and temperature on competitive interactions between a C3 crop, rice (Oryza sativa) and a C4 weed (Echinochloa glabrescens). Funct Plant Biol 23(6):795–802. doi:10.107/PP9960795Google Scholar
- Anonymous (2001) Sida spinosa. European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. 02/9188, Point 7.8Google Scholar
- Anonymous (2008) Climate change impacts on pest animals and weeds. Communicating climate change. Module 13. Australian Government, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Bureau of MeteorologyGoogle Scholar
- Anonymous (2013) Climate change consortium for specialty crops: impacts and strategies for resilience. California Dept. of Food and Agriculture, 64 pGoogle Scholar
- Asfaw S, Lipper L (2011) Economics of PGRFA management for adaptation to climate change: a review of selected literature. Background study paper No 60. Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. Agricultural Economic Development Division (ESA), FAO, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
- Bello IA, Owen MDK, Hatterman-Valenti HM (1995) Effect of shade on velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) growth, seed production, and dormancy. Weed Technol 9:452–455Google Scholar
- Bennett AC, Shaw DR (2000) Effect of Glycine max cultivars and weed control weed seed characteristic. Weed Sci 48:431–435Google Scholar
- Bertholdsson NO (2007) Varietal variation in allelopathic activity in wheat and barley and possibilities for use in plant breeding. Allelopathy J 19:1. ISSN: 0971-4693Google Scholar
- Bertholdsson NO, Andersson SC, Merker A (2012) Allelopathic potential of Triticum spp., Secale spp. and Triticosecale spp. and use of chromosome substitutions and translocations to improve weed suppression ability in winter wheat. Plant Breed 131:75–80. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0523.2011.01895.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Blum A, Mayer J, Golan G (1988) The effect of grain number (sink size) on source activity and its water-relations in wheat. J Exp Bot 39: 106–114Google Scholar
- Bruhn D, Mikkelsen TN, Pilegaard K, Gavito ME, Saxe H (2001) Climate change in a plant ecophysiological perspective. In: Jorgensen AMK, Fenger J, Halsnaes K (eds) Climate change research. Danish contributions. Danish Meteorological Institute/Gads Forlag, Copenhagen, pp 167–190Google Scholar
- Chandrasena N (2009) How will weed management change under climate change? Some perspectives. J Crop Weed 5(2):95–105Google Scholar
- Chauhan BS, Abugho SB (2013) Effect of water stress on the growth and development of Amaranthus spinosus, Leptochloa chinensis, and rice. Am J of Plant Sci 4:989–998. doi:10.4236/ajps.2013.45122
- Chen XH, Hu F, Kong CH (2008) Varietal improvement in rice allelopathy. Allelopathy J 22:379–384Google Scholar
- Chijioke OB, Haile M, Waschkeit C (2011) Implication of climate change on crop yield and food accessibility in Sub Saharan Africa. Interdisciplinary term paper, University of Bonn, Germany. Global Climate Adaptation Partnership (GCAP) (2012). Projects and Clients. http://www.climateadaptation.cc/projects-clients. Accessed 18 Sept 2015
- Ciais P, Reichstein M, Viovy N, Granier A, Ogee J, Allard V, Aubinet M, Buchmann N, Bernhofer C, Carrara A, Chevallier F, De Noblet N, Friend AD, Friedlingstein P, Grunwald T, Heinesch B, Keronen P, Knohl A, Krinner G, Loustau D, Manca G, Matteucci G, Miglietta F, Ourcival JM, Papale D, Pilegaard K, Rambal S, Seufert G, Soussana JF, Sanz MJ, Schulze ED, Vesala T, Valentini R (2005) Europe-wide reduction in primary productivity caused by the heat and drought in 2003. Nature 437:529–533. doi:10.1038/nature03972 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cline WR (1992) The economics of global warming. Washington, DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics. ISBN: 978-0-88132-132-6Google Scholar
- Cohen S, Wheaton E, Masterton J (1992) Impacts of climatic change scenarios in the Prairie Provinces: a case study from Canada. SRC Publication No. E-2900-4-D-92, Saskatchewan Research Council, Saskatoon, Canada, 157 pGoogle Scholar
- Connor DJ, Wang YP (1993) Climatic change and the Australian wheat crop. In Proceedings of the Third Symposium on the Impact of Climatic Change on Agricultural Production in the Pacific Rim, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC, pp. 29–47Google Scholar
- Daudenmire R (1970) Steppe vegetation of Washington. Washington Agric. Exp. Stm. Bull. No. 62Google Scholar
- DeCeault MT, Polito VS (2008) High temperatures during bloom can inhibit pollen germination and tube growth, and adversely affect fruit set in the Prunus Domestica cultivars “improved French” and “Muir Beauty”. In Proceedings of IX International Symposium on Plum and Prune Genetics, Breeding and Pomology, March 16–19, 2008, Dipartimento Colture Arboree, University of Palermo, Italy, 874 pGoogle Scholar
- DeFelice MS, Witt WW, Barrett M (1988) Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) growth and development in conventional and no-till corn (Zea mays). Weed Sci 36:609–615Google Scholar
- Dingkuhn M, Singh BB, Clerget B, Chantereau J, Sultan B (2010) Past, present and future criteria to breed crops for water-limited environments in West Africa. In Proceedings of the 4th International Crop Science Congress “New directions for a diverse planet”, 26 September–1 October 2004, Brisbane, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
- Dukes JS, Pontius J, Orwig D, Garnas JR, Rodgers VL, Brazee N, Cooke B, Theoharides KA, Stange EE, Harrington R, Ehrenfeld J, Gurevitch J, Lerdau M, Stinson K, Wick R, Ayres M (2009) Responses of insect pests, pathogens, and invasive plant species to climate change in the forests of northeastern North America: what can we predict? Can J For Res 39:231–248. doi:10.1139/X08-171 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Edwards GE, Huber S (1981) The C4 pathway. In: Hatch MD, Boardman ΝΚ (eds) The biochemistry of plants. Academic, New York, pp 238–281. ISBN 012675408XGoogle Scholar
- Erbs M, Manderscheid R, Jansen G, Seddig S, Pacholski A, Weigel HJ (2010) Effects of free-air CO2 enrichment and nitrogen supply on grain quality parameters and elemental composition of wheat and barley grown in crop rotation. Agric Ecosyst Environ 136:59–68. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2009.11.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Evans RO, Skagss RW, Sneed RE (1991) Stress day index models to predict corn and soybean relative yield under high water table conditions. Trans ASAE 5, 1997–2005. doi:0001-2351/91/3405-1997Google Scholar
- Foulkes MJ, Scott RK, Sylvester-Bradley R, Clare RW, Evans EJ, Frost DL, Kettlewell PS, Ramsbottom JE, White E (1994) Suitabilities of UK winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties to soil and husbandry conditions. Plant Varieties Seeds 7:161–181Google Scholar
- Foulkes MJ, Scott PK, Sylvester-Bradley R (1997) Optimising winter wheat varietal selection on drought-prone soil types. In optimising cereal inputs: its scientific basis. Asp Appl Biol 50:61–77Google Scholar
- Gala Bijl C, Fisher M (2011) Crop adaptation to climate change. CSA News Magazine July 2011, 5–9Google Scholar
- Gallagher JN, Biscoe PV (1978) Radiation absorption, growth and yield of cereals. J Agric Sci. 91:47–60. doi:10.1017/S0021859600056616
- Gealy DR, Moldenhauer KA, Duke S (2013a) Root distribution and potential interactions between allelopathic rice, sprangletop (Leptochloa spp.), and barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) based on 13C isotope discrimination analysis. J Chem Ecol 39:186–203. doi:10.1007/s10886-013-0246-7 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gent MPN, Kiyomoto RK (1998) Physiological and agronomic consequences of Rht genes in wheat. In: Basra AS (ed) Crop science: recent advances, pp 27–46Google Scholar
- Glover J, Johnson H, Lizzio J, Wesley V, Hattersley P, Knight C (2008) Australia’s crops and pastures in a changing climate—can biotechnology help? Australian Government Bureau of Rural Sciences, CanberraGoogle Scholar
- Griffin JG, Thomas GR, Mason-Pharr D (2004) Heat and drought influence photosynthesis, water relations, and soluble carbohydrates of two ecotypes of redbud (Cercis Canadensis). J Am Soc Hort Sci 129(4):497–502Google Scholar
- Halvorson WL, Guertin P (2003) Factsheet for Ipomoea purpurea (L.) Roth. USGS weeds in the west project: status of introduced plants in Southern Arizona parks. U.S. Geological Survey, Southwest Biological Science Center and University of ArizonaGoogle Scholar
- Hay JL, Walker AJ (1992) An introduction to the physiology of crop yield. Longman Scientific and Technical and John Wiley and Sons Publications, pp. 163–168. ISBN: 978-0582408081Google Scholar
- Heap I (2015) The international survey of herbicide resistant weeds. Online Internet. www.weedscience.org. Accessed 12 Nov 2015
- Hulme M, Wigley T, Jiang T, Zhao Z, Wang F, Ding Y, Leemans R, Markham A (1992) Climate change due to the greenhouse effect and its implications for China. CRU/WWF/SMA, World Wide Fund for Nature, Gland, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
- IPCC (2001) Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution of the Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 978-0521015004Google Scholar
- IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge, UK/New York, NY: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
- IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: global and sectoral aspects. In: Field CB, Barros VR, Dokken DJ, Mach KJ, Mastrandrea MD, Bilir TE, Chatterjee M, Ebi KL, Estrada YO, Genova RC, Girma B, Kissel ES, Levy AN, MacCracken S, Mastrandrea PR, White LL (eds) Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1132 pGoogle Scholar
- Jennings PR, Coffman WR, Kauffman HE (1979) Rice improvement. IRRI, Los Banos, 186 pGoogle Scholar
- Johnson D, California Invasive Plant Council (2013) Invasive plants, climate change and agriculture, presented at the California Department of Food and Agriculture Climate Change Adaptation Consortium, March 20, American Canyon, CAGoogle Scholar
- Karl TR, Melillo JM, Peterson TC (eds) (2009) Global climate change impacts in the United States. A state of knowledge report from the U.S. Global Change Research Program. Cambridge University Press, New York, USA, 196 p. ISBN: 978-0-521-14407-0Google Scholar
- Kawano K, Jennings PR (1983) Tropical crop breeding—achievements and challenges. In IRRI, Potential productivity of field crops under different environments, Los Banos, Laguna, PhilippinesGoogle Scholar
- King LJ (1966) Weeds of the world—biology and control. Interscience, New York, 270 p. ISBN: 112596779XGoogle Scholar
- Korres NE (2000) The effects of seed rate and varietal selection for weed suppression and herbicide sensitivity in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). PhD thesis, Reading University, Reading University, UKGoogle Scholar
- Korres NE (2005) Encyclopaedic dictionary of weed science. Theory and digest, Intercept and Lavoisier (pubs). Andover, Paris, 695 p. ISBN: 1-898298-99-8Google Scholar
- Korres NE, Norsworthy JK (2015) Influence of Palmer amaranth interrow distance and emergence date on seed production in wide-row and drill-seeded soybean. In: Proceedings of the Weed Science Society of America, Annual Meeting, Lexington, Kentucky, USA, February 9–12, 2015Google Scholar
- Korres NE, Froud-Williams RJ, Chachalis D, Pavli O, Skaracis GN (2008) Yielding ability and competitiveness of wheat cultivars against weeds, 4th EPSO Conference: Plants for Life, Toulon (Cote d’ Azur), France, 22–26 June 2008, pp. 52Google Scholar
- Malik VS, Swanton CJ, Michaels TE (1993) Interaction of white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars, row spacing, and seeding density with annual weeds. Weed Sci 41:62–68Google Scholar
- Mann GC (1980) Variety development. Proceedings of the 16 th NIAB Crop Conference, 7–15Google Scholar
- Matthews RB, Kropff MJ, Bachelet D, van Laar HH (1994) The impact of global climate change on rice production in Asia: a simulation study. Report No. ERL-COR-821, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, ORGoogle Scholar
- McGiffen ME Jr, Forcella F, Lindstrom MJ, Reicosky DC (1997) Covariance of cropping systems and foxtail density as predictors of weed interference. Weed Sci 45, 388–396. ISSN: 00431745Google Scholar
- Mohammed AR, Tarpley L (2009) High nighttime temperatures affect rice productivity through altered pollen germination and spikelet fertility. Agric For Meteorol 149:999–1008. doi:10.1016/j.agrformet.2008.12.003
- Mohler CL (2001) Enhancing the competitive ability of crops. In: Liebman M, Mohler CL, Staver CP (eds) Ecological management of agricultural weeds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 231–269. ISBN: 1139427245, 9781139427241Google Scholar
- Morison JIL (1989) Plant growth in increased atmospheric CO2. In: Fantechi R, Ghazi A (eds) Carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases: climatic and associated impacts. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp 228–244. ISBN 0-7923-0191-9Google Scholar
- Morison JIL (1993) Response of plants to CO2 under water limited conditions. Vegetatio 104/105:193–209. doi:10.1007/BF00048153
- Naidu VSGR, Paroha S (2008) Growth and biomass partitioning in two weed species Parthenium hysterophorus (C3) and Amaranthus viridis (C4) under elevated CO2. Eco Env Cons 14(4):9–12Google Scholar
- Obirih-Opareh N, Adwoa Onumah J (2014) Climate change impact pathways on agricultural productivity in africa: a review. J Environ Earth Sci 4:4, 115–121. ISSN: 2224-3216Google Scholar
- Osunsami S (2009) Killer pigweeds threaten crops in the South. http://abcnews.go.com/WN/pig-weed-threatensagriculture-industry-overtaking-fields-crops/story?id8766404. Accessed 5 May 2015
- Pace PF, Crale HT, El-Halawany SHM, Cothren JT, Senseman SA (1999) Drought induced changes in shoot and root growth of young cotton plants. J Cotton Sci 3:183–187. doi:http://www.journal.cotton.org/journal/1999-03/4/upload/jcs03-183.pdf
- Paknejad F, Nasri M, Moghadam HRT, Zahedi H, Alahmadi MF (2007) Effects of drought stress on chlorophyll fluorescence parameters, chlorophyll content and grain yield of wheat cultivars. J Biol Sci 7, 841–847. doi:http://en.journals.sid.ir/ViewPaper.aspx?ID=103989
- Parry ML (1990) Climate change and world agriculture. Earthscan Publications, London. doi:10.1080/00139157.1991.9931405Google Scholar
- Patterson DT (1985) Comparative eco-physiology of weeds and crops. In: Duke SO (ed) Weed Physiology ,vol. 1. CRC, Boca Raton, pp 101–129Google Scholar
- Patterson DT (1995) Weeds in a changing climate. Weed Sci 43, 685–701. ISSN: 00431745Google Scholar
- Patterson DT, Flint EP, Beyers JL (1984) Effects of CO2 enrichment on competition between a C4 weed and a C3 crop. Weed Sci 32:1, 101–105. ISSN: 00431745Google Scholar
- Perez de Vida FB, Laca EA, Mackill DJ, Fernandez GM, Fischer AJ (2006) Relating rice traits to weed competitiveness and yield: a path analysis. Weed Sci 54:1122–1131. doi:10.1614/WS-06-042R.1
- Pope KS (2012) Climate change adaptation: temperate perennial crops, presented at the California Department of Food and Agriculture Climate Change Adaptation Consortium, November 28, Modesto, CAGoogle Scholar
- Prasad PVV, Boote KJ, Allen LH Jr (2006a) Adverse high temperature effects on pollen viability, seed-set, seed yield and harvest index of grain-sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) are more severe at elevated carbon dioxide due to higher tissue temperatures. Agric For Meteorol 139(3–4):237–251. doi:10.1016/j.agrformet.2006.07.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ragab AR, Abdel-Raheem AT, Kasem ZA, Omar FD, Samera AM (2007) Evaluation of R1 tomato somaclone plants selected under poly ethylene glycol (PEG) treatments. Afr Crop Sci Soc 8: 2017–2025. doi:http://www.acss.ws/upload/xml/research/468.pdf
- Sakthivelu G, Devi MKA, Giridhar P, Rajasekaran T, Ravishankar GA, Nedev T, Kosturkova G (2008) Drought induced alterations in growth, osmotic potential and in vitro regeneration of soybean cultivars. Genet Appl Plant Physiol 34:103–112. doi:http://www.bio21.bas.bg/ipp/gapbfiles/v-34_pisa-08/08_pisa_1-2_103-112.pdf
- Schlenker W, Roberts MJ (2009) Nonlinear temperature effects indicate severe damages to U.S. crop yields under climate change. PNAS 106:15594–15598. doi:10.1073/pnas.0906865106
- Scott JK, Murphy H, Kriticos DJ, Webber BL, Ota N, Loechel B (2014) Weeds and climate change: supporting weed management adaptation. CSIRO, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
- Sheley RL, Svejcar TJ, Maxwell BD (1996) A theoretical framework for developing successional weed management strategies on rangeland. Weed Technol 10:766–773. ISSN: 0890037XGoogle Scholar
- Southworth J, Pfeifer RA, Habeck M, Randolph JC, Doering OC, Johnston JJ, Rao DG (2002) Changes in soybean yields in the midwestern United States as a result of future changes in climate, climate variability, and CO2 fertilization. Clim Chang 53(4):447–475. doi:10.1023/A:1015266425630 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Stevanato P, Trebbi D, Bertaggia M, Colombo M, Broccanello C, Concheri G, Saccomani M (2011) Root traits and competitiveness against weeds in sugar beet. Int Sugar J 113:497–501. doi:http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Piergiorgio_Stevanato/publication/236848489_Root_traits_and_competitiveness_against_weeds_in_sugar_beet/links/0deec519e734789524000000.pdf. Accessed 12 Oct 2015
- Stone MJ, Cralle HT, Chandler JM, Bovey RW, Carson KH (1998) Above- and below-ground interference of wheat (Triticum aestivum) by Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum). Weed Sci 46:438–441. ISSN: 00431745Google Scholar
- Storrie A, Cook T (2007) What impact does drought have on weeds? Primefact 430, State of New South Wales through NSW Department of Primary Industries. Job number 7322, pp. 1–3Google Scholar
- Streck NA (2005) Climate change and agroecosystems: the effect of elevated atmospheric CO2 and temperature on crop growth, development, and yield. Ciencia Rural, Santa Maria 35(3):730–740. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-84782005000300041
- Taiz L, Zeiger E (1991) Plant physiology. Benjamin/Cummings series. Benjamin-Cummings, Lewiston, p 559Google Scholar
- Tokatlidis IS (2013) Adapting maize crop to climate change. Agron Sustain Dev 33:63–79. doi:10.1007/s13593-012-0108-7
- Travlos IS (2012) Reduced herbicide rates for an effective weed control in competitive wheat cultivars. Int J Plant Prod 6:1–13. ISSN: 1735–6814Google Scholar
- Trenberth KE, Jones PD, Ambenje P, Bojariu R, Easterling D, Klein Tank A, Parker D, Rahimzadeh F, Renwick JA, Rusticucci M, Soden B, Zhai P (2007) Observations: surface and atmospheric climate change. In: Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, Tignor M, Miller HL (eds) Climate change: the physical science basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
- Tuong TP, Bouman BAM (2003) Rice production in water-scarce environments. In: Kijne JW, Barker R, Molden D (eds) Water productivity in agriculture: limits and opportunities for improvements. CABI Publishing: 53–67. ISBN: 0851996698, 9780851996691Google Scholar
- Walthall CL, Hatfield J, Backlund P, Lengnick L, Marshall E, Walsh M, Adkins S, Aillery M, Ainsworth EA, Ammann C, Anderson CJ, Bartomeus I, Baumgard LH, Booker F, Bradley B, Blumenthal DM, Bunce J, Burkey K, Dabney SM, Delgado JA, Dukes J, Funk A, Garrett K, Glenn M, Grantz DA, Goodrich D, Hu S, Izaurralde RC, Jones RAC, Kim SH, Leaky ADB, Lewers K, Mader TL, McClung A, Morgan J, Muth DJ, Nearing M, Oosterhuis DM, Ort D, Parmesan C, Pettigrew WT, Polley W, Rader R, Rice C, Rivington M, Rosskopf E, Salas WA, Sollenberger LE, Srygley R, Stockle C, Takle ES, Timlin D, White JW, Winfree R, Wright-Morton L, Ziska LH (2012) Climate change and agriculture in the United States: effects and adaptation. USDA Technical Bulletin 1935. Washington, DC. 186Google Scholar
- Wiese AF, Vandiver CW (1970) Soil moisture effects on competitive ability of weeds. Weed Sci 18:518–519. ISSN: 0043–1745Google Scholar
- Winter SR, Musik JT, Porter KB (1988) Evaluation of screening techniques for breeding drought resistant winter wheat. Crop Sci 28:512–516Google Scholar
- Zimdahl RL (2007) Fundamentals of weed science. Academic, Burlington, p 655Google Scholar
- Ziska LH (2004) Rising carbon dioxide and weed ecology. In: Inderjit (ed) Weed biology and management. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 159–176. ISBN: 978-90-481-6493-6Google Scholar
- Ziska LH (2014) Climate, CO2 and invasive weed management. In: Ziska LH, Dukes JS (eds) Invasive species and global climate change. CABI Invasives Series, Boston, Wallingford: 293–305. ISBN: 9781780641645Google Scholar
- Ziska LH, George K (2004) Rising carbon dioxide and invasive, noxious plants: potential threats and consequences. Water Resour Rev 16:427–446Google Scholar
- Ziska LH, Runion GB (2006) Future weed, pest and disease problems for plants. In: Newton P, Carman A, Edwards G, Niklaus P (eds) Agroecosystems in a changing climate. CRC, New York. Chapter 11: 262–287. ISBNGoogle Scholar
- Ziska LH, Runion GB (2007) Future weed, pest and disease problems for plants. In: Newton PCD, Carran A, Edwards GR, Niklaus PA (eds) Agroecosystems in a changing climate. CRC, Boston, pp 262–279Google Scholar
- Ziska LH, Teasdale JR, Bunce JA (1999) Future atmospheric carbon dioxide may increase tolerance to glyphosate. Weed Sci 47:608–615. ISSN: 00431745Google Scholar