Skip to main content
Log in

Seed production of cut-leaved teasel (Dipsacus laciniatus) in central Missouri

  • Section Botany
  • Published:
Biologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cut-leaved teasel is an invasive weed in Missouri that reduces the diversification of native species along roadsides and impairs traffic visibility. Teasel is a biennial and grows as a rosette in the first year and flowers the second year. Reproduction is only by seed. Field studies were conducted in 2004 and 2005 at two locations to assess the seed production of cut-leaved teasel. From a natural stand, fifteen plants were tagged at the onset of flowering. Selected plants included those considered growing in a group and those growing alone; a plant was considered alone when no other plant was adjacent for at least 60 cm. Whenever a seedhead completed flowering, it was covered with a cellophane bag and harvested one month later. Linear regression was used to correlate the weight of seeds from a single seedhead and number of seeds to estimate the total seed production per seedhead. The number of seedheads per plant varied from 3 to 56. On average, plants growing alone had 64% more seedheads per plant than plants occurring in a group. Seed numbers in the primary seedhead ranged from 511 to 1,487. Total seed production per plant ranged from 1,309 to 33,527. Seed production was 61% greater for plants growing alone versus those growing in a group and was more prolific in 2005 than in 2004. In addition, seed production per plant varied between locations for plants growing alone, but seed yield per plant was similar for plants growing in groups. Colonization of teasel in new areas is facilitated by higher seedhead numbers per plant and total seed production compared to reproduction of plants in areas of intraspecific competition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beaton L.L. & Dudley S.A. 2004. Tolerance to salinity and manganese in three common roadside species. Int. J. Plant Sci. 165: 37–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bentivegna D. J. & R.J. Smeda. 2011. Cutleaf teasel (Dipsacus laciniatus L.): Seed development and persistence. Invasive Plant Sci. & Manage. 4: 31–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bobrov E.G. 1957. Genus 1411. Dipsacus L., pp. 16–20. In: Shihkin B.K. & Bobrov E.G. (eds), Flora of the USSR, Vol XXIV, Izdatel’stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR, Moskva, Leningrad. (Transl. from Russian.) Israel Prog for SCI. Transl., Jerusalem.

  • Caswell H. & Werner P.A. 1978. Transient behavior and life history analysis of teasel (Dipsacus sylvestris Huds.). Ecology 59: 53–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheesman O.D. 1998. The impact of some field boundary management practices on the development of Dipsacus fullonum L. flowering stems, and implication for conservation. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 68: 41–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chujo H. & Hanyu Y. 1990. Growth characteristics of teasel (Dipsacus fullonum L.). Jap. J. Crop Sci. 59: 461–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glass W.D. 1991. Vegetation management guideline: cut-leaved teasel (Dipsacus laciniatus L.) and common teasel (Dipsacus sylvestris Huds.). Nat. Area J. 11: 213–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedberg I. & Hedberg O. 1977. The genus Dipsacus in tropical Africa. Botaniska notiser 129: 383–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman R. & Kearns K. 1997. Wisconsin Manual of Control. Recommendation for ecologically invasive plants. Wisconsin Department of natural Resources, Madison, WI. 102 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huenneke L.F. & Thomson J.K. 1994. Potential interference between a threatened endemic thistle and an invasive nonnative plant. Conserv. Biol. 9: 416–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jurica H.S. 1921. Development of head and flower of Dipsacus sylvestris. Bot. Gazette 71:138–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacey J.R., Marlow C.B. & Lane J.R. 1989. Influence of spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa) on surface runoff and sediment yield. Weed Technol. 3: 627–631.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullins D. 1951. Teasel growing, an ancient practice. World Crops 3: 146–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neubert M.G. & Caswell H. 2000. Demography and dispersal: calculation and sensitivity of invasion speed for structured population. Ecology 81: 1613–1628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rector B.G., Harizanova V., Sforza R., Widmer T. & Wiedenmann R.N. 2006. Prospects for biological control of teasels, Dipsacus spp., a new target in the United States. Biol. Control 36: 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts H.A. 1986. Seed persistence in soil and seasonal emergence in plant species from different habits. J. Appl. Ecol. 23: 639–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodale R. 1984. Teasel in Our Lawn. Organic Gardening 31(11): 22–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • SAS (Statistical Analysis Systems) 2003. SAS/STAT User’s Guide. Release 9.1 Software version 8e. Cary, NC: Statistical. Analysis Systems Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solecki M.K. 1993. Cut-leaved and common teasel (Dipsacus laciniatus L. and D. sylvestris Huds): profile of two invasive aliens, pp 85–92. In: McKnight B.N. (ed.), Biological Pollution: The control and impact of invasive exotic species, Indiana Academic of Science, Indianapolis.

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA 2006. The PLANT Database, Version 3.5 (http://plants.usda.gov). National Plant Data Center. Baton Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA. Access January 20, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner P.A. 1975a. A seed trap for determining patterns of seed deposition in terrestrial plant. Can. J. Bot. 53: 810–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werner P.A. 1975b. The biology of Canadian weeds 12. Dipsacus sylvestris Huds. Can. J. Plant Sci. 55: 783–794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werner P.A. 1977. Colonization success of a “Biennial” plant species: experimental field studies of species cohabitation and replacement. Ecology 58: 840–849.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diego J. Bentivegna.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bentivegna, D.J., Smeda, R.J. Seed production of cut-leaved teasel (Dipsacus laciniatus) in central Missouri. Biologia 66, 807–812 (2011). https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-011-0078-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-011-0078-2

Key words

Navigation