i

RESIDUAL EFFECTS OF EUCALYPTUS

CAMULDULENSIS LEAF LITTER ON ZEA MAYS AND

PENNISITUM TYPHODIUM

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of requirement for the degree

of

BS Botany

By

ABDUL HAKEEM JOKHIO 2K10/BOT/1

FAHEEM BUGHIO 2K10/BOT/94

NAVEED ALI JHATIAL 2K10/BOT/57

AZIZULLAH HAJANO 2K10/BOT/91

MUHAMMAD AHSAN KHAN 2K10/BOT/103

Supervisor

Saeed Akhter Abro

DECEMBER 2013

INSTITUTE OF PLANT SCIENCES, UNIVERSITY OF SINDH

ii

IN The NAME OF

The supremely merciful The most kind

Who’s help We solicit

iii

RESIDUAL EFFECTS OF EUCALYPTUS

CAMULDULENSIS LEAF LITTER ON ZEA MAYS

AND PENNISITUM TYPHODIUM

A thesis submitted for the fulfillment of requirements for the

degree of BS Botany

By

ABDUL HAKEEM JOKHIO 2K10/BOT/1

FAHEEM BUGHIO 2K10/BOT/94

NAVEED ALI JHATIAL 2K10/BOT/57

AZIZULLAH HAJANO 2K10/BOT/91

MUHAMMAD AHSAN KHAN 2K10/BOT/103

Supervisor Saeed Akhter Abro

INSTITUTE OF PLANT SCIENCES, UNIVERSITY OF SINDH, JAMSHORO

iv

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the research work presented in this thesis entitled” RESIDUAL

EFFECTS OF EUCALYPTUS CAMULDULENSIS LEAF LITTER ON ZEA

MAYS AND PENNISITUM TYPHODIUM” has been carried out by ABDUL

HAKEEM JOKHIO (2K10/BOT/1), FAHEEM BUGHIO (2K10/BOT/94),

NAVEED ALI JHATIAL (2K/10/BOT/57) AZIZULLAH HAJANO

(2K10/BOT/91), MUHAMMAD AHSAN PATHAN (2K10/BOT/103) under my

supervision is of original nature. In my opinion it is satisfactory in scope and quality as

thesis for the degree of BS in Botany.

Thesis Supervisor:

Saeed Akhter Abro ................................

Assistant Professor Institute of plant sciences

University of Sindh,

Jamshoro, Sindh,

Pakistan.

Thesis Review Committee

1. -------------------------------------- 2. ---------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------

Prof. Dr. Sher Mohammad Mangrio

Director

Institute of plant sciences

University of Sindh, Jamshoro,

v

Dedicated to my parents

For their endless love, support and encouragement

vi

Table of Contents

Contents Page #

Acknowledgment................................................................................................. VIII

Abstract............................................................................................................... X

Abbreviations and symbols.............................................................................. XII

Chapter# 01 INTRODUCTION & LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1. Introduction............................................................... 01

1.2 Allelopathy.............................................................. 02

1.3. Allelochemicals…………………………………… 04

1.4 Eucalyptus as Allelopathic plant………………….. 04

1.5 Effects of allelopathy……………............................ 05

1.6 Examples of Allelopathy………………………….. 06

1.7 Residual effects of Allelochemicals………………. 07

1.8 Objectives …………………………………………

08

Chapter#2. MATERIAL AND METHOD

2.1 Introduction……………………………………….. 09

2.2. The Materials…………………………………….... 09

2.2.1. The Bioassays Plants ……………………………...

09

2.2.2. Soil and leaf litter formulations…………………… 09

2.2.3. Eucalyptus leaf litter and its preparation…………..

09

2.3. The Methods………………………………………. 10

2.3.1. Experimental Design and treatment……..……..…..

10

2.3.2. Sowing of Seeds …………………..……………….

10

2.3.3.

Data Collection and Analysis

11

Parameters used 11

Plant parameters 11

a Germination ……………………………………….

11

b Relative germination ratio…………………………

11

c Percentage mortality rate………………………… 11

vii

d Fresh Weight ……………………………………..

12

e Dry Weight ……………………………………….. 12

f Shoot length ………………………………………. 12

g Relative biomass ……………………...................... 12

h Chlorophyll content ………………………………

12

Soil Parameters 13

a pH…………………………………………………

…

13

b Electric conductivity of soil ……………………… 13

c TDS………………………………………………... 13

d Salinity ……………………………………………. 14

e Na+ and K

+………………………………………… 14

f Organic matter…………………………………….. 14

g Soil water repellency ……………………………... 14

Chapter#3: Results and discussion

3.1. Zea mays………………………………………….. 16

3.1.1 Germination ……………………………………… 16

3.1.2. Mortality Rate………………………………..……. 16

3.1.3. Relative germination ratio………………………… 16

3.1.4. Relative elongation ratio of shoot…………………. 16

3.1.5. Shoot length.………………………………………. 17

3.1.6. Fresh weight ……………………………………… 17

3.1.7. Dry Weight ……………………………………….. 17

3.1.8. Relative biomass ratio…………………………….. 17

3.1.9. Chlorophyll content………………………………. 17

3.2. Soil properties……………………………………... 20

3.2.1. pH of soil …………………………………………. 20

3.2.2. Electric conductivity of soil ……………………… 20

3.2.3. TDS……………………………………………….. 22

3.2.4. Salinity …………………………………………… 22

viii

3.2.5. Soil organic matter………………………………... 22

3.2.6. Na+ and K

+………………………………………… 22

3.2.7. Water repellency…………………………………... 23

3.3. Pennisitum typhoidum 23

3.3.1. Germination ……………………………………… 23

3.3.2. Mortality Rate…………………………………….. 23

3.3.3. Relative germination ratio………………………… 23

3.3.4. Relative elongation ratio of shoot…………………. 24

3.3.5. Shoot length………………………………………. 24

3.3.6. Fresh weight ……………………………………... 24

3.3.7. Dry Weight ……………………………………….. 24

3.3.8. Relative biomass ratio…………………………….. 25

3.3.9. Chlorophyll content ………………………………. 25

3.4. Soil parameters 26

3.4.1. pH of soil …………………………………………. 26

3.4.2. Electro conductivity of soil ………………………. 26

3.4.3. TDS………………………………………………... 27

3.4.4. Salinity ……………………………………………. 27

3.4.5. Soil organic matter………………………………... 27

3.4.6. Na+ and K

+………………………………………… 28

3.4.7. Water repellency…………………………………... 28

3.5 Conclusion........................................................ 31

References 32

viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all we would like to thanks of Almighty Allah who gave us brain covered

by hard skull by which we contemplate about his nature. This project was also minute

work that was completed by our narrow mind. Hazrat Muhammad (PBUH) whose

imminent teachings enlighten our mind to complete this hard work.

We would like to express our sincere gratitude and deep respect to our

supervisor, Sir Saeed Akhter Abro, Institute Of Plant Sciences, University of Sindh,

Jamshoro, whose expertise, understanding, and endurance, added considerably to our

graduate experience. We are highly grateful for his sincere guidance, keen interest,

valuable suggestions and moral support during the study period, and also for critically

reading various chapters of this thesis.

After that we would especially pay thanks to our parents and family members, sympathy

and courage they given us during the difficulties we faced for the completion of this

thesis, as well as for the completion of higher studies.

We would like to thanks lecturer Sir. Farooq Ali Bughio Institute of Plant science,

University of Sindh, Jamshoro, for allowing us to undertake the BS Final work, and

provide us the moral support, chemicals on laboratory on timely and encouragement. We

are also thankful to Muhammad Luqman Panhwar and Deedar Hussain Kaloi who

practically participated for fulfillment of project work.

There are many helping hands; we wish to express our deepest regards to all who

have helped us in this study.

ix

Additionally we offer our regards and blessings to all of those who supported us in

any respect during the completion of this research work.

Last but not the least we want to tender our sincere gratitude, respect, reverence to

our beloved Parents, brothers and sisters without their constant encouragement, support

and pray we would not have been successful in our aim.

x

Abstract

The allelopathic effects of eucalyptus are widely reported and have effects on the

germination and growth of neighboring plants. To investigate the effects of leaf litter

residues, Zea mays and Pennisetum typhoideum were selected. The experiment was

conducted in green house, institute of plant sciences, university of Sindh, jamshoro. The

effect of two year old leaf litter mixed with soil in 10, 20, and 30% were observed. The

germination %, mortality rate, RGR, RERs, shoot length (cm), fresh and dry weight (g),

RBR, chlorophyll a, b, carotenoids (mg/g f.wt.) was calculated. In soil properties, pH, EC

(µs/cm), TDS, salinity (ppt), OM (%), Na (ppt), K (ppt), soil water repellency was

analyzed. The results suggest that leaf litter slightly decrease the germination %, RGR of

maize and has stimulatory effect on germination %, RGR of Pennisetum typhoideum.

The eucalyptus leaf litter has stimulatory effect on RERs, shoot length, fresh weight, dry

weight, relative biomass ratio and chlorophyll a, b and amount of carotenoids of both

plants. The soil pH, K was almost same values in treatments, but second soil have more

values than initial soil. The soil ECe (µs/cm), TDS, Salinity (ppt), OM (%), and Na (ppt)

was found in higher concentration in eucalyptus treatments and as concentration of leaf

litter increased, concentration of these values also increased in Zea mays soil. In

Pennisetum typhoideum soil pH was found 6.7 to 7.1 in initial soil and second soil pH

was almost same in treatments. The soil ECe (µs/cm), TDS, salinity (ppt), OM (%), Na

(ppt), K (ppt), was found in high concentration in eucalyptus treatments than control. The

soil EC (ppt), TDS, salinity and K (ppt), was found in high concentration in initial soil

and OM (%), Na (ppt), was found in high concentration in second soil. In both plant soils,

xi

treatment applied with eucalyptus leaf litter was found strongly to severely water

repellent as compared to control, which soil was non water repellent.

xii

Abbreviations and Symbols

Abbreviation Description

pH Potential or power of Hydrogen

ECe Electro conductivity of extract

TDC Total dissolved carbon

OM Organic Matter

OC Organic carbon

Na Natrium / Sodium

K Potassium

T Treatment

kg Kilogram

mg Milligram

ml Milliliter

Gn Number of seeds germinated after 14 days

GN The total number of seeds sown

GRt Germination ratio of plants under treatment

GRc Germination ratio of plants under control

oC Centigrade

RBR Relative biomass ratio.

MR Mortality rate

RGR Relative germination Ratio

RERs Relative elongation ratio of shoot

MBt Mean biomass of plant under treatment.

MBc Mean biomass of plant under control.

SL Shoot length

FW Fresh weight

xiii

DW Dry weight

WDPT Water drop penetration time

OOC Oxidizable organic carbon

TOC Total organic carbon

PPT Part per thousand

ppm Part per million

WR Water repellency

cm Centimeter

µs Micro second

USA

United state of America

< Greater than

> Less than

% Percentage

1

Chapter # 01

INTRODUCTION

1.1. INTRODUCTION

The Eucalyptus camaldulensis is a tree of the genus Eucalyptus,commonly known

as River Red Gum, It is one of around 800 in the genus. Eucalyptus is a long and

perennial tree belong to Myrtaceae family, it is a plantation species in many parts of the

world. Height ranges between 45 to 65 meters and has essential oil at least 1%

(volume/weight) (Javanshir 1972), Found in tropical region, River Red Gum is subject to

regular flooding in its natural habitat. River Red Gum prefers soils with clay content. The

trees not only rely on rainfall but also on regular flooding, since flooding recharges the

sub-soil with water. River Red Gum seeds germinate readily after floods and require

regular spring floods throughout their life to survive.

It is native of Australia. Eucalyptus spp. in natural habitats Grow under a wide

range climatic and edaphic condition (Dawar et al . 2007). In Pakistan, a small nursery

of Eucalyptus globules in 1903 was raised by the forest department of Punjab (Siddique

and Hussain, 1980).This species has a high possible of allelochemicals and also essential

oils (Iqbal et al 2003). Researcher of India and Pakistan pointed out inhibitory effects of

this species on the germination rate and growth of seedling on many crops (khan et al .,

2008) Eucalypts can depart the soil unfavorable to growth of other plants eg, by directly

inhibiting under storey species or crop plants being grown in vicinity of a eucalypt stand.

Crop will not do well, at least for number of years where a eucalypt stand is harvested

and replaced by an agricultural crop (Fikreyesus et al ., 2011).

2

1.2. Allelopathy:

Allelopathic studies were undertaken earlier (Schreinerand Reed, 1907, 1908) in the

history of allelopathy one of the defining experiments was carried out by (Massey

1925).Allelopathy is defined as “any process involving secondry metabolite produced by

plants, algae bacteria and fungi that influence the growth and development of agriculture

and biological system Anonymous;(1996). A term Allelopathy from two Greek words of

“Allello” and “pathy” meaning “mutual harm (Molisch (1937). A term “allelochemical”

derived from allelochemics was firstly used by chou and Waller and has become popular

in agriculture science, Chou and Waller (1983). Any direct or indirect effects (stimulation

or inhibitory) by one plant including microorganisms, on another through production of

chemicals compounds that escape into environment, Rice , (1984) Allelopathy is

fascinating and confusing subjects that concern with the interaction of plants as

influenced by the chemical substance that they release into environment (Bais et al .,

2003,Wills 2004 and Machado 2007) Allelopathy is the fabrication and release of

chemicals that damage or otherwise decrease the fitness of other plants (Hierro and

Callaway, 2003) , it is Capable of suppressing the germination and growth of various test

species. Allelopathic effects depended upon the parts assayed, test species and

physiological process involved .The rapid advances in chemistry, plant physiology,

biochemistry and ecology the role of allelopathy has increasingly become in investigated

Anon ( 2000), Malik (2002).

1.3. Allelochemicals

Essential oil neither stays long in soil nor penetrates underground water and never

causes environmental poisoning (Isman et al 2000) Allelochemicals are the small

3

molecular weight compounds excreted from plants during the process of secondary

metabolism, Rice ,(1984) Allelochemicals are found to be released to environment

inappreciable quantities via root exudates, leaf leachates, roots and other degrading

plantresidues in the soil ,Chemically allelochemical compounds have been opened chain

molecular structures .Allelochemicals can be classified into terpaenes, glucocides,

coumanines, aldehyds and phenolic compounds (Alam and Islam 2002). These are

secondary metabolites that have role in plant –plant, plant-soil, plant disease, plant-insect

and plant predator interaction that may be beneficial or detrimental to plant, Tang et al

.(1986),Yaduraju and Ahuja,(1996). 16 components in essential oil of E. camaldulensis

L., out of which five compounds ( 6.0% α-pinene,1.8% 3∆-carene ,7.94% β-

phellandrene, 53.22% 1-8 cineole and 21.59% p-cymene) were indentified, Iqbal et al

(2003) . E. camaldulensis yield 1.37% oil and have 0.90 specific gravity ; Zafar Iqbal

(2003) Essential oil can be used to control weeds in organic farming systems Tworkoski

(2002).Concentration of chlorogenic acid in some plants may be increased because of the

shortage of water Li et al ., (2001). Some terpenes , such as α-pinene, β-pinene, cineole,

camphor and can, increase their volatile under dry conditions Shao-Lin et al . 2004.The

relationships between phenolics and soil microorganisms in spruce forests and found that

phenolics compounds can stimulate fungi and cellulose hydrolyzers in the winter, but

inhabit cellulose hydrolyzers in summer Souto et al . 2000. Several laboratory

experiments indicate that mixture solutions of allelochemicals have greater effect than the

same concentrations of the compounds used separately Blum et al., 1999, Einhellig

1995, Chaves & Escudo 1997.

4

1.4. Eucalyptus as Allelopathic plant

Effect of Eucalyptus globulus‟ essential oil on Triticum aestivum, Zea mays,

Raphanus sativus, Cassia occidentalis, Amaranthus viridis and Echinochloa crus-galli

have been proved as their radicle length, plumule length, germination percentage and

germination rate decreased under the effect of essential oil concentration (M. Rassaeifar

et al 2013) Maize seeds in fields surrounded by Eucalyptus trees significantly decreased

germination Blaise, et al., (1997). Aqueous extract of air dried leaf litter of E. citirodora

had inhibitory effect on the seed germination, in wheat, mustard and gram reported by

Singh et al., (1992). Plant height and root length of American cotton increased

significantly as the diatance from eucalyptus trees increased, Eucalyptus trees adversely

affected the plant population of cotton Reddy et al (2006). Eucalyptus reduces the

growth of neighboring crops through the release of allelochemicals May and Ash, (1990).

aqueous extract from bark and leaf, and volatiles from leaves of Eucalytus citriodora

showed allelopathic effect on the growth of nine species, including the weeds Bidens

pilosa, Digitarie pertenuis, Eragrostics cilianesis, Setaria geniculata, and crops such as

corn, rice, cucumber, bean and Stylosanthes guianensi Cao and Luo (1996). In laboratory

bioassay germination, seedling length, chlorophyll content and respiratory ability of weed

plants was drastically affected, Batish et al, (2005). Eucalyptus produces prolific litter in

the form of dropping leaves and naturally flecked off bark. If allelochemicals are released

from Eucalyptus leaf litter its accumulation in the soil could result in poor development

of native flora Bughio et al , (2013). The concentration of chlorogenic acid in some

plants may be increased because of the shortage of water some terpencs , such as α-

5

pinene, β- pinene,,cincole, camphor and can increase their volatiles under dry conditions,

Dias and Dias (2000).

1.5. Effects of allelopathy

Allelochemicals significantly reduce the growth of other plants and the yields of

crop plants Rice (1984); Korner and Nicklish (2002), Leu et al., (2002) Inderjit and Duke

(2003), allelochemicals have significant effects on cell division, cell differentiation, ion

and water uptake, water status, phytohormone metabolism,respiration, photosynthesis,

enzyme function, signal transduction as well as geneexpression Singh and Thapar (2003);

Inderjit and Duke (2003); Belz and Hurle (2004),Science 2003). Any changes in Chl

content are expected to bring about change in photosynthesis. Allelopathy plays an

important role in biodiversity, it may regulate the density and production of plant

community under the canopy of a dominant species and limits the population of its

associated species (Chou., 1999), mostly seeds of plant species are not killed by

allelopathic compound; Chou (1999). Using advanced biotechnology techniques

,scientists in the foreseeing future my be able to isolate allelopathic genes from one plant

and transfer the gene to another plant .genes such as trypsin inhibitor gene and ethylene

regulatory gene have been successfully isolated from one plant to another plant, (Yeh et

al .1997;Yang1998).Allelochemicals activity varies with temperature, photoperiod,

water and soils during natural process, growing efforts are being made to examine the

role of allelopathy in controlling the spreads of weeds, pest insects and diseases. PENG

Shao-Lin et al . 2004. Allelochemicals are released and added to the soil over a time

period and also continually removed and/or immobilised from the soil solution by plant

uptake, adsorption to soil particles, and degradation by microorganisms Cheng (1995).

6

1.6. Examples of Allelopathy

Numerous crops have been investigated more or less thoroughly for allelopathic

activity towards weeds or other crops. A suppressive effect on weed, possibly mediated

by the release of allelochemicals has been reported for a wide range of temperate and

tropic crops. These include alfalfa (Medicago sativa), barley (Hordeum vulgare), clovers

(Trifolium spp., Melilotus spp.) oats (Avena sativa) pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum),

rice (Oryza sativa) rye (Secale cereale), sorghums (Sorghum spp.), sunflower

(Helianthus annuus), sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas) and wheat (Triticum aestivum), ,

Weston 1996, Narwal 1996, Narwal et al . 1998, Miller 1996, , Dilday et al . 1994.

Reduced chlorophyll content in allelochemical-treated plants has been frequently

reported. ZHOU, Y.H. and YU, Einhellig and Rasmussen (1979) and Patterson (1981) all

found that treatment Of soybean plants with phenolic acids such as ferulic, p-coumaric,

and vanillic acids greatly decreased the biomass associated with reduced chlorophyll

content in leaves.Similar results are also found in species such as Parthenium

hysterophorus,Kanchanand Jayachandra, (1980), Cucumis sativus Pramanik et al .

(2001); Yu et al .unpublished. In contrast, growth inhibition by allelopathic agents in

grain sorghum seedling was not followed by decreased chlorophyll content in some cases

Einhellig, (1986) Theophrastus (372-285) reported the inhibitory effect of pigweed on

alfalfa Jelenic, (1987). The negative impact of such species on native biodiversity has

been well documented D‟Antonio and Mahall 1991, Ridenour and Callaway 2001).

Species X. strumarium secretes allelochemical compounds that influence both the

germination of the seedes and the growth of vegetative mass in culture plants and weeds

7

(Bozsa and Oliver 1993; Sondhia and Saxena 2003; Sinha and Samart 2004; Dávid et al.,

2005; Tanveer and collaborators. 2008). Many crop plants, including chick pea (Cicer

arietinum) and barley (Hordeum vulgare), inhibit the growth of weeds and crop plants

other than barley (Rice 1984). The two alkaloids, gramine (N, N-dimethyl-3-amino-

methylindole) and hordenine (N, N dimethyltyramine) have been confirmed to play an

important role in the phytotoxic ability of barley (Lovett & Hoult 1995, Overland 1966).

1.7. Residual effects of Allelochemicals

Inhibitory effects on germination and establishments of crops caused by residues

of either crops or weeds have lead to investigation of the release of toxic compounds

from such residues. For example, the allelopathic interference of both living plant and of

plant residues of the highly aggressive weed Elytrigia repens, quackgrass, has been

strongly indicated (Weston & Putnam 1985). Residues from several crop species have

been examined for their potential to reduce weed germination (Creamer et al . 1996,

Moyer & Huang 1997). Most work concerning allelopathic effects of rye has been carried

out using residues. Rye residues have been employed as mulches or cover crops in no-

tillage cropping systems to suppress certain weed species (Barnes & Putnam 1986). In

contrast, results obtained by Creamer et al . (1996) by leaching rye of its water soluble

allelopathic compounds and using it as an inert material, indicated that the physical

suppression of rye was responsible for the reduced emergence of two weedy species,

eastern black night shade (Solanum ptycanthum) and yellow foxtail (Setaria glauca). The

release of allelochemicals from living wheat plants has also been documented (Pethó

1992a).

8

Literature survey suggest two directions one in which allelopathy are beneficial

as weed control on other hand it effects the germination ,division, growth and

photosynthesis rate of the other species but mostly adverse effects of allelopathy was

observed by surveying the literature. New leaf litter have allelopathy effects is observed

by conducting experiment by different scientists but to observe the effects after keeping

that leaf liter mixed soil for some year , Experiment was conducted to observe the

allelopathy effects of Eucalyptus camaldulensis leaf litter on Zea mays and Pennisetum

typhoids.

1.8. Objectives

The primary objective of this study was to assess the allelopathic effects of eucalyptus

leaf litter residue on the germination and growth of two cereals Zea mays and Pennisetum

typhodeum. Since the leaf litter of eucalyptus decomposes slowly in the soil environment

thus its residue remain in soil for longer periods. The study was designed to analyze the

effects of residue on plants and soil properties.

9

Chapter # 02

Material and methods

2.1. Introduction

In this present research leaf litter of Eucalyptus camaldulensis as allelopathy was

used to analyze the effects on the Zea mays and Pennisetum typhodeum (bioassay). This

present research provides vital information about plant parameters, e g germination rate,

mortality, shoot length, fresh weight, dry weight, water repellency and Soil properties, e

g. pH, EC, TDC, PPT, OM, Na and K. The experimental work was carried out in the

green house of Institute of Plant Sciences, University of Sindh, Jamshoro. The study

comprised of the following procedures and experimentation.

2.2. The Materials

2.2.1. The Bioassays Plants

In this experiment Zea mays and Pennisetum typhodeum were used as bioassay

plants. Seeds were purchased from the market, and were primed in water for eleven hours

then in the morning five seeds per pot was sown.

2.2.2. Soil and leaf litter formulations

Object of this research was to analyze that how long effects of Allelopathy of

Eucalyptus camaldulensis remain in the soil, for this purpose such soil was required in

which leaf litter must have mixed for some years, therefore formulation of soil and leaf

litter was used formed by previous worker, who Already worked three years ago on

Allelopathy, formulations is following.

2.2.3. Eucalyptus leaf litter and its preparation

10

The dropped dried leaves of Eucalyptus camaldulensis Dehnh., were collected

from Eucalyptus camaldulensis monoculture stands growing at Pai- Forest, District:

Shaheed Benazirabad, Sindh, Pakistan. dropped dried leaves of eucalyptus

cammaldulensis washed by distal water, dried one week of room temperature then

grounded and passed through 2.0 nm sieve, powder was used in soil as leaf litter w/w

(except control), eucalyptus leaf litter powder of leaves was mixed in these three

concentration i.e 10, 20 & 30% (w/w) in sandy silt soil Bughio et al., (2013). The soil

was analyzed for the physical and chemical parameters.

2.3. The Methods

2.3.1. Experimental Design and treatment

The complete block design was used with four treatments and four replications of each

treatment of both bioassays were made.

Table 1.Experiment design

Treatments Concentrations: Soil mixed dry leaf litter (w/w)

T0 Control Soil without leaf litter

T1 10%

T2 20%

T3 30%

2.3.2. Sowing of Seeds

The pots filled with soil (2kg) and leaf litter, was broken up earth and watered, one week

before sowing seeds for all the treatments for good germination. In each pot 5 holes of 1

inche was made and 1 seed were sown per hole in each pot of Zea mays and Pennisetum

typhodium. All the pots were provided homogenous conditions there was only one

variable in the experiment that was leaf litter of E. camaldulensis

11

2.3.3. Data Collection and Analysis

Parameters used

In experiment following parameters were recorded:

Plant parameters

In plant parameters following data parameters were recorded;

Germination %

Relative germination ratio

Percentage mortality rate

Fresh weight

Dry weight

Plant length

Relative biomass (RBR)

Chlorophyll content

(a) Germination % ( Scott et al ., 1984)

𝐺% =𝐺𝑛

𝐺𝑁𝑥100

Where Gn is the number of seeds germinated after 14 days and GN is the total number of

seeds sown.

(b) Relative germination ratio; (Rho & Kill, 1986)

𝑅𝐺𝑅 =𝐺𝑅𝑡

𝐺𝑅𝑐𝑥100

Using germination % data relative germination was calculated, GRt is germination ratio

of plants under treatment and GRc is the germination ratio of plants under control.

(c) Percentage mortality rate

It was counted that how many plants died after the germination.

12

𝑀𝑅 =𝑀𝑅𝑛

𝐺𝑁𝑥100

MR = % mortality rate.

MRn = no of seeds died after germination.

GN = total no of seeds germinated.

(d) Fresh Weight (g/plant)

From each treatment leaves of plants were cut randomly after 20 days and were brought

in lab for fresh weight (biomass) and were recorded by using electric balance in grams.

(e) Dry Weight (g/plant)

These pre weighted leaves were then oven-dried at 65oC for 30 minutes and then data for

dry Leaves (biomass) were recorded.

(f) Shoot length (cm)

Three times (duration of a week) length of the plants were measured by using foot scale

length of the every plant was measured after 30 days data was recorded.

(g) Relative biomass (RBR)

𝑅𝐵𝑅 =𝑀𝐵𝑡

𝑀𝐵𝑐 𝑥 100

Where;

RBR = relative biomass ratio.

MBt = mean biomass of plant under treatment .

MBc = mean biomass of plant under control.

(h) Chlorophyll content (mg g-1

)

The 1g of fresh leaves of Zea mays and Pennisetum typhodium were crushed in

mortar and pestle using 10 ml of 100% acetone. The chlorophyll extract was then filtered

by using what man filter paper .The extract was collected in a conical flask. The extract

was analyzed for absorbance using CIBA – Corning 254 colorimeter. The chlorophyll

content was measured by using following formulae:

13

Chlorophyll a= [12.7(OD) 470-2.69(OD) 540] x V/1000xW

Chlorophyll b= [22.9(OD) 540-4.68(OD) 470] x V/1000xW

Soil Parameters

In order to measure the soil changes produced by Eucalyptus treatments on soil

properties, the following soil parameters were recorded;

pH of soil

Electro conductivity of soil ( ECe )

TDS

Salinity (PPT)

Soil organic matter

Na+

K+

Water repellency

(a) pH

The pH of saturated soil paste was measured using digital pH meter (JENCO- Models

5000 Series 301120).

(b)Electric conductivity of soil (ECe )

Electro conductivity can almost be varied as the quality of available nutrients in

soil, it indicates the presence or absence of salt. To measure the EC 25g of the soil was

taken and added 40ml distil water then stirrer and allowed to stand four hours, then

filtered extract was used for EC meter (Thermo scientific, Orion 5 star (USA).

14

(c)TDS

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) is the amount of mineral and salt impurities in the

water. For measurement of TDS same extract was used (Thermo scientific, Orion 5 star

(USA).

(d) Salinity (PPT)

It is measurement of salinity, ppt stand for parts per thousand. The salt concentration

is usually expressed in parts per thousand (permillle, ‰) or parts per million (ppm). The

United States Geological Survey classifies saline water in three salinity categories. Salt

concentration in slightly saline water is around 1,000 to 3,000 ppm (0.1-0.3%), in

moderately saline water 3,000 to 10,000 ppm (0.3-1%) and in highly saline water 10,000

to 35,000 ppm (1-3.5%). Seawater has a salinity of roughly 35,000 ppm, (From

Wikipedia, 20 December 2013) (Thermo scientific, Orion 5 star (USA).

(e) Na+ and K

+

Sodium and Potassium are the important nutrients of the soil that affects the soil

properties; therefore Na+ and K

+ were also analyzed. To analysis of Na and K 10g soil

was taken, then 100ml distil water was added and stirred for half an hour

(f) Organic matter

Measurement of organic matter from the soil 1g of soil was taken to every

treatment. Soil organic matter was calculated by the procedure, which involves reduction

of potassium dichromate (K2Cr2O7) by Organic carbon (OC) and subsequent

determination of the unreduced dichromate by oxidation –reduction titration with ferrous

ammonium sulfate (Walkley, 1947).

Calculation:

15

Percentage organic matter in soil

1. 𝑀 =10

𝑉 𝐵𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑘

2. %𝑂𝑥𝑖𝑑𝑖𝑧𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑟𝑔𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑐 𝐶𝑎𝑟𝑏𝑜𝑛 (𝑂𝑂𝐶) =𝑉𝐵𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑘 −𝑉𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑥 0.3 𝑥 𝑀

𝑤𝑡

Where;

Wt = weight of soil

0.3 = 3 ×10-3

× 100 where 3 is equivalent weight of Carbon.

3. 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑂𝑟𝑔𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑐 𝐶𝑎𝑟𝑏𝑜𝑛 𝑇𝑂𝐶 = 1.334 𝑥 % 𝑂𝑂𝐶%

4. 𝑂𝑀 % = 1.724 𝑥 𝑇𝑂𝐶%

(h) Soil water repellency

Soil passed through 2mm sieve, after drying samples WDPT test was conducted

by placing a water dropper on the soil surface and recording the time taken for water to

penetrate the soil, five drops of distill water were applied with hypodermic syringe to the

surface of soil samples, the penetration time for each drop was recorded and average

penetration time taken as representative of the WDPT for each sample.

16

Chapter # 03

Results and Discussion

3.1. Results Zea mays

3.1.1. Germination %:

The results presented in Table-1 shows Zea mays have been influenced but in

such a way that Treatment T0 (control) and T1 (10%) have same value of the germination

ratio and value of the germination ratio of Treatment T2 (20%) have been decreased and

T3 (30%) germination ratio have been increased by different leaf litter of E.

camaldulansis treatments. Overall the germination % is affected but there is little

difference in values as compare to the ratio of the leaf litter concentrations, it shows that

germination % have not been effected by treatment of leaf litter of E. camaldulansis 10%,

20%, and 30%, as compare to control, able-1.

3.1.2 Mortality Rate:

It is percentage seedling death after germination. In Table-1 MR ratio of T0 and

T1 is same and T2 and T3 has zero % MR, it shows that mortality rate (%) of Zea mays

have not been effected by treatment of leaf litter.

3.1.3 Relative germination ratio:

There in table-1 same sort of the values between percentage of leaf litter and

Relative germination ratios have been found, T0 and T1 have same value 100% and

Treatment T2(91.8%) have been decreased and RGR ratio of T3 (97.29%) have been

increased by leaf litter.

3.1.4 Relative elongation ratio of shoot:

The relative elongation ratio of shoot is increasing gradually T0 =100 and T1 =

140.6 but RERs value of T2 shows it have been decreased T2 = 130.7 and value of the T3

increased (189.0) (Table-1)

17

3.1.5 Shoot length:

The shoot length of the Zea mays was measured from base of the stem to tip of

the last leaf and their mean was calculated. Shoot length have been increased gradually

T0 = 22.75 and T1 = 32 but in T2 it have been decreased (T2 = 29.6) and value of the T3

have been increased 43.5 it shows that treatment of leaf litter have not been effected

(Table-1)

3.1.6 Fresh weight:

The fresh weight of the plants of Zea mays was measured in grams.The results are

presented in Tables-1. Fresh weight of treatment T1 have been decreased as compare to

other three treatments T0,T2, T3, and the value of T0,T2,T3 have bee increased

gradually. It shows that fresh weight have not been effected by the treatment of leaf litter

of E. camaldulansis

3.1.7 Dry Weight:

The dry weight of Zea mays was also measured in grams. Fresh weight of

treatment T0, T2, T3 has been increased gradually. T1 have been decreased as compare

to other three treatments T0, T2, T3.The results are presented in Tables-1

3.1.8 Relative biomass ratio:

Relative biomass ratio was calculated from the values of dry weight. The RBR

ratio of treatment T0 =100 and the value of the T1, T2, T3 have been gradually increased.

3.1.9 Chlorophyll content

The analysis of chlorophyll content samples were taken after the 30 days. shows

significant difference among values of treatments. The maximum value of total

chlorophyll content was observed in T0 control (32.07) and followed by T2 (27.04) and

18

the values of T1 (14.05), T3 (15.68). The minimum value of chlorophyll content was

observed in T1 and T3, (Table 3).

Table.1. Residual Effects of eucalyptus leaf litter on germination of Zea mays.

Treatments Germination (%) RGR Mortality Rate

T0 92.5 100 5.0

T1 92.5 100 5.0

T2 85.0 91.8 0.0

T3 90.0 97.29 0.0

Mean 90.0 97.2 2.5

SE 2.635231

Table2. Residual Effects of eucalyptus leaf litter on growth of Zea mays.

Treatments Shoot length

(cm)

RERs

FW (g) DW (g) RBR

T0 22.75 100 3.10 0.53 100.0

T1 32.00 140.6 2.60 0.44 83.90

T2 29.60 130.7 4.00 0.52 99.00

T3 43.50 189.0 5.18 0.69 130.0

Mean 31.90 140.0 3.70 0.54 103.0

SE 0.901166

0.239064

0.047817

RERs= Relative elongation ratio of shoot

FW= Fresh weight

DW= Dry weight

RBR= Relative Biomass Ratio

19

Table.3. Residual effects of Eucalyptus leaf litter on leaf Chlorophyll content in

Zea mays.

Treatments Chlorophyll A

(mg/g f.wt)

Chlorophyll B

(mg/g f.wt)

Total

(mg/g f.wt)

Carotenoids

(mg/g f.wt)

T0 17.96 14.21 32.07 0.00000316

T1 7.99 6.06 14.05 0.00000041

T2 14.22 12.82 27.04 0.00000459

T3 7.79 7.89 15.68 0.00001931

Mean 12 10.2 22.2 0.00000068

20

3.2 Soil parameters

3.2.1 Soil pH

The pH of the soil was analyzed two times; firstly it was analyzed before the sowing of

seeds and after harvest. The analysis of initial soil pH per sample for individual

treatments T0, T1, T2, T3, shows no much differences among their values but with

difference of few points it have been increased and the value of the second soil sample

also shows no much differences among their values however there is difference between

the value of the initial soil and second soil by taking account their mean as I=6.3 and 7.4 .

(Table 2).

3.2.2 Electrical conductivity of soil ( ECe )

For electrical conductivity analysis soil sample was taken before the sowing seeds that

soil was named initial soil (I). The result was, treatment T0=229, T1=517, T2=576,

T3=620 for individual treatments values have been increased one by one. After duration

of one month soil was taken for second time analysis, there was not much difference in

Table 4. Residual Effects of eucalyptus leaf litter on Soil properties

Treatment pH EC (µs/cm) TDS Salinity WR

I S I S I S I S

T0 5.9 7.4 229 492 113 256 0.1 0.2 5

T1 6.2 7.4 517 523 252 250 0.2 0.3 3:17

T2 6.5 7.8 576 581 292 285 0.3 0.3 31:25

T3 6.9 7.3 620 532 315 261 0.3 0.3 26

Mean 6.3 7.4 485 532 243 263 0.2 0.2 15:11

21

Table. 5. Residual Effects of eucalyptus leaf litter on Soil properties

Treatment OM (%) OOC (%) TOC (%)

I S I S I S

T0 2.6 2.2 0.75 1.05 1.00 1.4

T1 2.9 4.8 0.9 2.1 1.20 2.8

T2 3.8 5.5 1.05 2.43 1.4 3.2

T3 3.0 5.8 1.8 2.55 2.4 3.4

Mean 3.0 4.0 1.12 2.03 1.5 2.7

Ta Table.6. Residual Effects of eucalyptus leaf litter on Soil properties

Treatment Na (ppm) K (ppm)

I S I S

T0 10 12 6 9

T1 10 11 5 7

T2 9 16 6 10

T3 17 13 6 8

Mean 11 13 5.7 3.5

I = Initial soil , S =Second soil

22

the values between treatments but EC of the second soil mean value have been increased

by leaf litter as compare to sample of initial soil. (Table 2).

3.2.3 TDS

The analysis of soil for total dissolved salts per soil sample for individual treatments

shows no significant differences among their values. As initial soil T0=113, T1= 252,

T2=292, T3=315.In second soil sample value of T2 have been increased, T1 value have

been decreased as compare to other treatments T0(256), T2 (285), T3(261) (Table 2).

3.2.4 Salinity (PPT)

The result of ppt also have been increased gradually from T0 to T3 treatment likewise, it

is give in table 2.

3.2.5. Soil organic matter

The analysis of soil for organic matter per soil sample for individual treatments of the

Zea mays shows gradually increased values from T0 (2.6) treatment to T3(3.0), T2 (3.8)

have high value as compare to other treatments. Values of second soil sample have been

increased one by one. However the mean value have been increased of second soil (4.0)

sample as compare to initial soil (3.0) value, (Table 2).

3.2.6 Na+ and K+

Soil was also analyzed for basic nutrients Na and K. The sample of the initial soil (I)

treatments for Na the values T0=10, T1=10, T2=9 have been increased but the value of

T3 is high (17) as compare to T0, T1, T2 treatments. In second sample values were

randomly as T0=12, T1=11, T2=16, T3=13. Mean value between initial soil and second

soil shows that mean value have been increased by leaf litter of second soil as compare to

initial soil.

23

The K analysis, the initial soil sample of the treatments T0, T2, T3, have equal values (6)

and value of the treatment T1was found low but the values of the second soil sample was

found randomly. By the mean, value of the initial soil (5.7) has been increased as

compare to second soil (3.5) sample.

3.2.7. Water repellency:

Low levels of water repellency have been observed in many soils (Hallett et al .,

2001). The biological origin of repellency suggests that it will have a high spatial and

temporal variability at very small scales, because of the submillimeter spatial ability of

organic matter, organisms and the microbial environment in soil (Nunan et al ., 2002).

WR ratio start from the lowest time 5 second of T0 control to 31 mints 25 seconds, WR

value has been increased gradually T0, T1, T2 and T3=26. Mean value was found 15:11

(Table 2)

3.3. Pennisitum typhodeum.

3.3.1. Germination %:

The results presented in Table-3 shows that germination rate have been increased from

treatment T0 to T3 of Pennisitum typhodeum .T0 and T1 have same rate of the

germination (95%) and T2 and T3 (100%). Rate of germination of T2 and T3 have been

increased as compare to T0 and T1.Mean value was found 97.5%

3.3.2. Mortality Rate:

Mortality rate of the Pennisitum typhodeum was not found. In all treatments there

was zero rate of the mortality, as shown in Table-4.

3.3.3. Relative germination ratio:

24

Relative germination ratio have been found, T0 and T1 have same value 100%

and Treatment T2 and T3 (105.2%) have been increased as compare to T0 and T1 102.6

was found their mean value (Table-4).

3.3.4. Relative elongation ratio of shoot:

The relative elongation ratio of shoot of the Pennisitum typhodeum have been

increased gradually T0 =100 and T1 = 128, T2=147, T3=163.Mean (134)(Table4)

3.3.5 Shoot length:

The shoot length of the Pennisitum typhodeum was also measured from base of

the stem to tip of the last leaf. Here the shoot length of the Pennisitum typhodeum have

been also increased gradually T0 = 28 and T1 = 36.4, T2=41.9, T3= 46.4 but the values

of the T1, T2, T3 have been increased as compare to control T0(Table 4)

3.3.6 Fresh weight:

The fresh weight of the Pennisitum typhodeum plants of was measured in

grams.The results are presented in Tables-3. Here the fresh weight of Pennisitum

typhodeum have been also increased gradually T0 = 0.20 and T1 = 0.6, T2=0.5, T3= 0.8

but the values of the T1, T2, T3 have been increased as compare to control T0 0.2 ,FW of

the control was found low (Table 4)

3.3.7 Dry Weight:

The dry weight of the Pennisitum typhodeum was measured in grams. dry

weight of Pennisitum typhodeum have been increased gradually T0 = 0.035 and T1 =

0.097, T2=0.092, T3= 0.011 but the value of the T3 was found high as compare to control

T0 0.035 ,DW of the control was found low 0.035 (Table 4)

25

3.3.8 Relative biomass ratio:

The RBR ratio of treatment was found T0 =100 and the value of the T1 = 278,

T2= 264, T3=321 have been gradually decreased. The high ratio 321 was found in T3 and

low ratio in control (Table 4)

3.3.9. Chlorophyll content (mg/g f. wt.)

The analysis of chlorophyll a, b and carotenoids shows that no significant

difference between the treatments was found (Table-5). It shows that eucalyptus leaf litter

stimulated the chlorophyll content of Pennisetum typhoideum.

Table 7. Residual Effects of eucalyptus leaf litter on germination of P. typhodium

Treatments Germination (%) RGR Mortality Rate

T0 95 100 0.0

T1 95 100 0.0

T2 100 105.0 0.0

T3 100 105.0 0.0

Mean 97.5 102.6 0.0

SE 1.86339

Table.8. Residual Effects of eucalyptus leaf litter on growth of P. typhodium .

Treatments Shoot length

(cm)

RERs

FW (g) DW

(g)

RBR

T0 28.4 100 0.20 0.035 100.0

T1 36.4 128 0.60 0.097 278

T2 41.9 147 0.55 0.092 264

T3 46.4 163 0.8 0.112 321

Mean 38.2 134 0.5 0.084 240

SE 1.348823

0.052434

0.0069

RERs= Relative elongation ratio of shoot

FW= Fresh weight

DW= Dry weight

RBR= Relative Biomass Ratio

26

Table.9. Residual effects of Eucalyptus leaf litter on leaf Chlorophyll content in pearl

millet.

Treatments Chlorophyll A

(mg/g f.wt)

Chlorophyll B

(mg/g f.wt)

Total

(mg/g f.wt) Carotenoids

T0 42.64 41.53 84.17 0.00002421

T1 44.45 52.04 96.49 0.00003164

T2 26.29 21.28 47.57 0.00000544

T3 42.88 43.83 86.71 0.00002986

Mean 39.0 39.5 78.5 0.00000224

3.4 Soil Parameters

3.4.1 pH of soil

The Ph of the soil was analyzed two time . The analysis of initial soil pH per sample for

individual treatments shows no much differences among their values but with difference

of few points it have been increased gradually T0=6.7, T1=6.8, T2=6.9, T3=7.1, T0

control 6.7 was found low value as compare to T3(7.1). In the second sample T0 was

found 7.7 and T3 7.8 high values, T1 (7.3), T2 (7.0).Mean value of the of the second soil

sample was found more (7.4) as compare to initial soil sample (6.8).

3.4.2 Electrical conductivity of soil ( ECe )

The analysis of electrical conductivity soil sample was taken initial and second The

T0=338, T1=448, T2=568, T3=750 values have been increased one by one. T0 have low

value and T3 high. Second time analysis, T0 was found 177.7 low as compare to T2

27

(428).Second soil, mean value have been decreased as compare to sample of initial soil.

(Table 5).

3.4.3 TDS

The values of total dissolved salts have been increased significantly. As initial soil

T0=166, T1= 220, T2=278, T3=367. Control was found low value of the TDS as

compare to other treatments .In second soil sample value of T0 was found low

(166)value as compare to T3(367) been increased, (Table 5).

3.4.4 Salinity (PPT)

The result of ppt also have been increased gradually in initial soil sample T0 and T1 was

equal (0.2).Value of the T3 was found high . Mean value of initial soil was more (0.2) as

compare to second soil sample (table 5).

3.4.5 Soil organic matter

The organic matter is the resulting decomposed product from green manure, plant

residues and animal wastes accumulated in the surface soil layers and microbial debris in

various stages of the decay (Ndabakishye 1985; Leclerc 1995). Analysis of soil for

organic matter of initial soil per soil sample for individual treatments of the Pennisitum

typhodeum shows gradually increased values from T0 (1.6) treatment followed by T3

(4.0). T0 have lowest value as compare to treatments T1, T2, T3, whereas T3 have

highest value. Values of second soil sample have been also increased gradually T0=3.1,

T1=3.7, T2=4.0, T3=5.5. Control T0 has lowest value and T3 have highest value.

However the mean value have been increased of second soil (4.0) sample as compare to

initial soil (2.8) value, (Table 5).

28

3.4.6. Na+ and K

+

Soil was analyzed for nutrients Na and K. The sample of the initial soil (I) treatments

values was found randomly for Na the values T0=4, T1=6, T2=4, T3 =6. In second

sample values have been increased gradually from control T0 to T3 (30% leaf litter), T0

have lowest value (7) and T3 highest value (12). Mean value between initial soil and

second soil value have been increased of second soil (11.7) as compare to initial soil (5).

Soil analysis for K, the initial soil sample of the treatment T1 have lowest value (9) and

T3 was found highest value (15), and the control T0 have (13) value. Second soil samples

T1and T3 have been increased (21) and the control was found lowest value. Mean, value

of the initial soil (12.2) and second soil (14.5).

3.4.7 Water repellency:

WR ratio have been increased gradually T0= 5 second, T1= 5 minutes and 50 second,

T2= 31 minutes and 25 and T3= 26 minutes and 13 seconds. Mean value was found

15:26 (Table 5)

29

Table.10. Residual Effects of eucalyptus leaf litter on Soil properties

Treatment PH EC (µs/cm) TDS Salinity WR

I S I S I S I S

T0 6.7 7.7 338 177 166 87 0.2 0.1 5

T1 6.8 7.3 448 324 220 159 0.2 0.2 3:50

T2 6.9 7.0 568 428 278 210 0.3 0.2 31:25

T3 7.1 7.8 750 427 367 209 0.4 0.2 26:13

Mean 6.8 7.4 526 339 257 166 0.2 0.17 15:26

Table11. Residual Effects of eucalyptus leaf litter on Soil properties

Treatment OM (%) OOC (%) TOC (%)

I S I S I S

T0 1.6 3.1 1.2 1.35 1.6 1.8

T1 3.3 3.7 1.27 1.65 1.7 2.2

T2 2.3 4.0 1.72 1.77 2.3 2.3

T3 4.0 5.5 1.35 2.4 1.8 3.2

Mean 2.8 4.0 1.38 1.79 1.85 2.37

I = Initial soil , S =Second soil

30

Table.12. Residual Effects of eucalyptus leaf litter on Soil properties

Treatment Na (ppm) K (ppm)

I I I S

T0 4 7 13 9

T1 6 11 9 21

T2 4 17 12 17

T3 6 12 15 21

Mean 5 11.7 12.2 14.5

31

Conclusion:

The results suggest that the eucalyptus leaf litter residues slightly decrease the

germination percentage of maize, the mortality rate was recorded in control and T1, in T2

and T3 no MR was found. Similarly RGR was decreased in eucalyptus treatments as

compared to the control. The eucalyptus leaf litter has stimulatory effect on RERs, shoot

length, fresh weight, dry weight, Relative biomass ratio and chlorophyll a, b and amount

of carotenoids of maize. The higher values of these parameters were found in eucalyptus

leaf litter than control. The soil pH, K was almost same values in treatments, but second

soil have more values than initial soil. Whereas EC, TDS, Salinity, OM, Na was found in

higher concentration in eucalyptus treatments as compared to the control, as

concentration of leaf litter increased, concentration of these values also increased. The

eucalyptus treatments soils were found strongly to severely water repellent as compared

to control soil, which was non repellent.

The eucalyptus leaf litter has stimulatory effect on germination percentage, RGR,

RERs, shoot length, fresh weight, dry weight, RBR, chlorophyll a, b and carotenoids of

Pennisetum typhoideum. These values were more in eucalyptus treatments than control

and were found increased as the leaf litter concentration increased. The soil pH was

found slightly in initial soil from 6.7 to 7.1 whereas in second soil pH was almost same in

treatments. The soil EC, TDS, salinity, OM, Na, K was found in high concentration in

eucalyptus leaf litter treatments than control. The soil EC, TDS, salinity and K was found

in high concentration in initial soil and OM, Na was found in high concentration in

second soil. The eucalyptus treatments soil was found strongly to severely water repellent

as compared to control, which soil was non water repellent.

32

References

Alam, S. M. and E. U. Islam. 2002. Effect of aqueous of extracts of leaf, stem and root of

nettle leaf goosefoot and nael on germination and seedling growth of rice. Pak J

Science Tech Z., (2): 47-52.

Anon, L. 2000. Allelopathy in the new millennium. Allelopathy J., 7: U2 – U2.

Anonymous.1996. International Allelopathy Society, 1996. First World Congress on

Allelopath, A Science for the future, Cadiz, Spain.

Ayyaz, M. K., I. Hussain and Ejaz Ahmed khan, 2008. “Allelopathy Effects of

Eucalyptus on Germination and seedling growth of wheat”. Pak. J .Weed Sci.

Res., 14 (1-2): 9-18.

B. Sahadeva Reddy, p .Munirathnam and S. Madhusudhan Reddy , 2006. Effect of

Eucalyptus trees on growth and yield of cotton, Indian J. Agric. Res., 40 (3) :

190 – 194.

Bais, H. P., R Vepachedu, S. Gilrey, R. M. callaway and J. M. vinco. 2003. Allelopathy

and exotic plant invarsion from molecules genes to species interactions. Science,

301: 1377-1380.

Barnes, J. P. & Putnam, A. R. 1986. Evidence for allelopathy by residues and aqueous

extracts of rye (Secale cereale). Weed Science 34, 384-390.

Batish, D. R., Kaur S., Singh H. P., Kohli R. K. 2005. Herbicidal activity of volatile oils

from Eucalyptus citriodora. Second European Allelopathy Symposium

"Allelopathy - from understanding to application". p. 29.

Belz, R.G., Hurle, K., 2004. A novel laboratory screening bioassay for crop seedling

alelopathy. J.Chem. Ecol.3, 175-198.

Blaise, D., P.C.Tyagi, O.P.S. Khola and S.P. Ahlawat. 1997. Effect ofEucalyptus on

wheat, maize and cowpeas. Allelo. J. 4:341-344.

Blum, U., Shafer, S. R. & Lehmen, M. E. 1999. Evidence for inhibitory interactions

involving phenolic acids in field soils: concepts vs. experimental model. Critical

Reviews in Plant Sciences 18, 673-693.

33

Bozsa, R.C., Oliver, L.R. 1993. Shoot and Root Interference of Common Cocklebur

(Xanthium strumarium) and Soybean (Glycine max), Weed Science Society of

America, 41:34-37.

Bughio, F.A., S.M. Mangrio, S.A. Abro, T.M. Jahangir and H. Bux, 2013. Physio-

Morphological responses of native Acacia nilotica to Eucalyptus Allelopathy.

Pak. J. Bot., 45(S1): 97-105.

Chaves, N., & Escudero, J. C. 1997. Allelopathic effect of Cistrus ladanifer on seed

germination. Functional Ecology 11, 432-440.

Cheng. 1995. Characterization of mechanisms of allelopathy: Modeling and experimental

approaches. In Allelopathy: Organisms, Processes and Applications (ed. Inderjit,

K. M. M. Dakshini and F. A. Einhellig), pp. 132-141. American Chemical

Society, Washington, DC.

Chou, C.H, 1999. Role of allelopathy in plant biodiversity and sustainable agriculture.

Critical Rev. in Plant Sciences 18:609-424.

Chou, C.H. and Waller, G.R.,Eds. 1983. Allechemical and Phermones. Institute of

Botany, Academia Sinica Monograph Series No.Taiwan.

Creamer, N. G., Bennett, M. A., Stinner, B. R., Cardina, J. & Regnier, E. E. 1996.

Mechanisms of weed suppression in cover crop-based production systems.

Hortscience 31, 410-413.

D‟Antonio, C.M. and Mahall, B.E. 1991. Root profiles and competition between the

invasive, exotic perennial, Carpobrotus edulis, and two native shrub species in

California coastal scrub. Am. J. Bot. 78, 885–894.

Dávid, I., Borbélyné-Varga, M., Radócz, L., 2005. Néhány allelokemikália szintjének

változása az olasz szerbtövisben (Xanthium italicum Mor.) a tenyészidőszak

folyamán, Nővényvédelem 41 (9).

Dekker, L.W., C. J. Ritsema, K. Oostindie, D. Moore and J. G. Wesseling. 2009.

Methods for determining soil water repellency on field-moist samples. Water

Resources Research. 5: 1-6.

34

Dias, A.S., and Dias L.S.2000. Effects of drought on allelopathic activity of Datura

stramonium L . Allelopathy J, 7: 273- 277.

Dilday, R. H., Lin, J. & Yan, W. 1994. Identification of Allelopathy in the Usda-Ars Rice

Germplasm Collection. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 34, 907-

910.

Einhellig, F. A. 1996. Physiology and mechanism of action in allelopathy. In First Wold

Congress on Allelopathy (ed. A. Torres, R. M. Oliva, D. Castellano and P. Cross),

pp. 139. SAI (University of Cadiz), Cádiz Spain.

Einhelling F. A., Rasmussen, J. A., 1979. Effects of three phenolic acids on chlorophyll

content and growth of soybean and grain sorghum seedlings. J. Chem. Ecol. 5,

815-824.

Hallett, P.D., T. Baumgartl, and I.M. Young. 2001. Subcritical water repellency of

aggregates under a range of soil management practhat tices. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.

65:184–190

Hierro, J.L., Callaway, R.M. 2003. Allelopathy and exotic plant invasion. Plant and Soil,

256: 29-39.

Inderjit, Duke and Stephen.O. 2003. Ecophysiological aspects of allelopathy, Planta 217,

529-539.

Iqbal, Z., I. Hussain, and M.Y. Ashraf. 2003. Genetic variability to essential oil contents

and composition in five species of Eucalyptus. Pak. J. Bot.35 (5):843-852.

Isman, M.B. 2000. Plant essential oils for pest and disease management. Crop Protection,

19:603– 608.

J.Q. Horticultural Department, Zhejiang University, Kaixuan Road 268,Hangzhou, P. R.

China 310029

Javanshir, K. 1972. Eucalyptus. Tehran University Publication, Tehran, Iran (In Persian),

pp 58,.

Jelenic, B. 1987 . Allelopathy and allelochemicals from Agrostema githago as

theoretical background of agrostemin production and use as a natural plant growth

regulator In: Agrostemin International Scientific Centre of Fertilizer . Ph. 13-26.

Welt and Szabolis, I., Eds., Belgarade Goettingen, Vienna.

35

Kanchan, S.D., Jayavchandra. 1980. Pollen allelopathy: a new phenomenon. New

Phytol, 84, 739-746.

Leclerc, B. 1995. Guide des matieres organiques : Fertilite des sols-Ressources-

Gestions-Fiches techniques. 1st edition, ITAB, Paris, 245 pp.

Li S-T Zhou J-M, Wang H-Y, Chen X- Q. 2001. Allelopathic mechanism of Plants. Rural

Eco-Environ , 17: 52 -55. (in Chinese with English abstract).

Lovett, J. V. & Hoult, A. H. C. 1995. Allelopathy and self-defence in barley. In

Allelopathy. Organisms, Processes, and Applications. (ed. Inderjit, K. M. M.

Dakshini and F. A. E. (eds.).), pp. 170-183. American Chemical Society,

Washington, DC.

Rassaeifar, M., N. Hosseini., N.H Hasani., P. Zandi., A.M Aghdam. 2013. “Allelopathic

effect of eucalyptus globulus‟ essential oil on seed germination and seedling

establishment of amaranthus blitoides and cyndon dactylon” Trakia Journal of

Sciences, No 1, pp 73-81.

M.A. Khan, Hussain, and E.A Khan. 2008. Allelopathic effects of eucalyptus (Eucalyptus

camaldulensis L.) on germination and seedling growth of wheat (Triticum

aestivum L.) Pak. J. Weed Sci. Res. 14(1-2): 9-18.

Machado, S. 2007. Allelopathic potential of various plant species on downy brome ;

Implication for weed control in wheat production. Agronomy journal , 99 ( jan –

feb ) ;127 -132.

Malik, A.U. 2000. Challenges and opportunities in allelopathy research; a brief overview

.J Chem Ecol, 26;.

Massey, A.B. 1925. Antagonism of the walnuts (Juglans nigra and J. cinerea) in certain

plant associations. Phytopathology, 15: 773-784.

May, F. E., and Ash, J. E. 1990. An assessment of the allelopathic potential of Eucalyptus

. Aust. J .Botany, 38(3): p. 245-254.

Miller, D. A. 1996. Allelopathy in forage crop systems. Agronomy Journal 88, 854-859.

Molisch, H. 1937. Der Einfluss einer Pflanze auf die andere Allelopathie. Fischer,Jena.

36

Moyer, J. R. & Huang, H. C. 1997. Effect of aqueous extracts of crop residues on

germination and seedling growth of ten weed species. Botanical Bulletin of

Academia Sinica 38, 131-139.

Narwal, S. S. 1996. Potentials and prospects of allelopathy mediated weed control for

sustainable agriculture. In Allelopathy in Pest Management for Sustainable

Agriculture. Procceding of the International Conference on Allelopathy, vol. ll

(ed. S. S. Narwal and P. Tauro), pp. 23-65. Scientific Publishers, Jodhpur.

Narwal, S. S., Sarmah, M. K. & Tamak, J. C. 1998. Allelopathic strategies for weed

management in the rice-wheat rotation in northwestern India. In Allelopathy in

Rice. Proceedings of the Workshop on Allelopathy in Rice, 25-27 Nov. 1996,

Manila (Philippines): International Rice Research Institute (ed. M. Olofsdotter).

IRRI Press, Manila.

Ndabalishye, I. 1985. Production du fumier et possibilite d‟amelioration. In Premier

seminaire sur la fertilization des sols au Rwanda, 258-259.

Nunan, N., K. Ritz, K. Wu, I.M. Young, and J.W. Crawford. 2002. Insitu spatial patterns

of soil bacterial populations, mapped at multi- ple scales, in an arable soil.

Microb. Ecol. 44:296–305.

Overland, L. 1966. The role of allelopathic substances in the "smother crop" barley.

Amer. J. Bot. 53 (5), 423-432.

Patterson, D.T. 1981. Effects of allelochemicals on growth and physiological responces

of soybean (Glycine max) Weed Sci. 29, 53-59.

Pethó, M. 1992. Occurrence and physiological role of benzoxazinones and their

derivates. lV. isolation of hydroxamic acids from wheat and rye root secretions.

Acta Agronomica Hungarica 41, 167-175.

Pramanik, M.H.R. Asao, T., Yamamoto, T., Mastsui, Y. 2001. Sensitive bioassay to

evaluate toxicity of aromatic acids to cucumber seedlings. Allelopathy J. 8,

161-169.

Rice, E. L. 1984. “Allelopathy”. 2nd

ed .Academic Press, New York.

37

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.

Oecologia126, 444–450.

Fikreyesus, S., Z. Kebebew, Amsalu, N., N. Zeleke and S. Bogale. 2011. “Allelopathic

Effects of Eucalyptus camaldulensis Dehnh.on Germination and Growth of

Tomato” American-Eurasian J. Agric. & Environ. Sci., 11 (5): 600-608.

Schreiner, O., Reed, H.S. 1907. The production of deleterious excretions by roots. Bull.

Torrey Bot. Club, 34:279-303.

Shao-Lin P, Jun, W., Qin-Feng, G. 2004. „Mechanism and active variety of

Allelochemicals” Acta Botanica Sinica. 46 (7):757 -766.

Singh, N.B., Tharpar, R. 2003. Allelopathicin influence of Cannabis sativa on growth and

metabolism of Parthenium hysterophorus J. 12, 61-70.

Sinha, N. K., Samar, J. S. 2004. Allelopathic effects of Xanthium strumarium on

Parthenium hysterophorus. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology , 9:313-315.

Sondhia, S., Saxena, N. K. 2003. Allelopathic effect of Xanthium strumarium L. on some

weeds, Geobios, Jodhpur, Inde, 30:173-176.

Souto, X.C., Chiapusio, G., Pellissier, F. 2000. Relationship between phenolics and soil

microorganisms in spruce forests: Significance for natural regeneration. J Chem

Ecol, 26: 2025 -2034.

Tang .1989. In photochemical Ecology: allelochemicals , mycotoxins and insect

pheromones and allomones.

Tanveer, A., Tahir, M., Nadeem, MA., Younis, M., Aziz, A., Yaseen, M. 2008.

Allelopathic effects of Xanthium strumarium L. on germination and seedling

growth of crops, Allelopathy Jurnal Departament of Agronomy University of

Agriculture Faisalabed.

Tworkoski, T., Herbicide effects of essential oils. Weed Science, 50: 425-431, 2002.

38

Weston, L. A. & Putnam, A. R. 1985. Inhibition of growth, nodulation, and nitrogen

fixation of legumes by quackgrass. Crop Science 25, 561-565.

Weston, L. A. 1996. Utilization of Allelopathy for Weed Management in

Agroecosystems. Agronomy Journal 88; 860-866.

Willis, R. J. 2004. Justus ludewing von uslar and the first book on allelopathy, S pringer,

3300 A A Dordrechet, The Netherland ,pp1.

Yaduraju, N.T., K.N. Ahuja.1996. Allelopathy. In The illustrated dictionary of science.

N.T.Yaduraju and K.N. Ahuja (eds).Venus Publishing House, 11/298 press

colony Mayapuri, New Dehli, India, pp.180.

Yang, S. F. 1998. The Plant senescence hormone ethyle: from biosynthesis to

biotechnology. In: Frontiers in Biology: The Challenges of Biodiversity, and

Sustainable Agriculture. Pp. 25-34. C.H and Shao, K.T., Academia Sinica, Taipei,

Taiwan.

Yeh, 1997. Sweat potato (Ipomoea batatas) trypsin inhibitors express in transgenic

tobacco plants confer resistance against Sposopteralitura. Plant Cell Reports

16:696-699.

Wikipedia, encyclopedia.