Orobanche ramosa (branched broomrape)
Index
- Pictures
- Identity
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Description
- Plant Type
- Distribution
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Risk of Introduction
- Habitat
- Habitat List
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Symptoms
- List of Symptoms/Signs
- Biology and Ecology
- Climate
- Latitude/Altitude Ranges
- Air Temperature
- Rainfall
- Rainfall Regime
- Soil Tolerances
- Natural enemies
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Pathway Causes
- Pathway Vectors
- Plant Trade
- Impact Summary
- Impact
- Economic Impact
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Diagnosis
- Detection and Inspection
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- References
- Organizations
- Contributors
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.
Generate reportPictures
Top of pageIdentity
Top of pagePreferred Scientific Name
- Orobanche ramosa L. (1753)
Preferred Common Name
- branched broomrape
Other Scientific Names
- Kopsia interrupta (Pers.) Dumort. (1822)
- Kopsia ramosa Dumortiet (1822)
- Orobanche cannabis Vaucher (1828)
- Orobanche interrupta Pers. (1807)
- Orobanche micrantha Wallroth (1822)
- Phelipanche ramosa (L.) Pomel (1874)
- Philipaea ramosa C.A. Meyer (1831)
International Common Names
- English: hemp broomrape
- Spanish: hierba tora; yerba sosa
- French: Orobanche rameuse; phelipee rameuse
- Arabic: halook; halouk
- Portuguese: erva-toira-ramosa
Local Common Names
- Brazil: erva-toura
- Ethiopia: delantuba; yebeg eras; yemeder kitenge
- Germany: Aestige Sommerwurz; Hanfwuerger
- Iran: gole jeez
- Italy: Orobanche della canapa; succiamele della canapa
- Lebanon: haluj-rihi
- Netherlands: hennepvreter
- South Africa: blouduivel; geelpop; vertakte besmraap
- Turkey: mavi cicekli canavarotu
EPPO code
- ORARA (Orobanche ramosa)
Summary of Invasiveness
Top of pageO. ramosa does not spread rapidly or aggressively but its introduction in contaminated seed or soil can go undetected, and once introduced it can cause severe damage to important agricultural crops and prove very difficult to eradicate.
Taxonomic Tree
Top of page- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Plantae
- Phylum: Spermatophyta
- Subphylum: Angiospermae
- Class: Dicotyledonae
- Order: Scrophulariales
- Family: Orobanchaceae
- Genus: Orobanche
- Species: Orobanche ramosa
Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Top of pageSection Tryonichon also includes the closely related O. aegyptiaca Pers. and O. mutelii F.W. Schultz, with which some confusion is possible. The larger-flowered O. mutelii is sometimes treated as O. ramosa ssp. mutelii (e.g. Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, 2008). Similarly, a very small-flowered, unbranched form may be treated as O. nana (Reuter) Noe ex G. Beck, or as O. ramosa ssp. nana. Keys and descriptions are given by Beck-Mennagetta (1930), Chater and Webb (1972) and Parker and Riches (1993).
Description
Top of pageO. ramosa produces leafless flowering stems, 15-20(-30) cm high, usually very branched, bearing alternate scales, less than 1 cm long. The plant is pale, completely lacking any chlorophyll. The base of the stem, below ground, is normally swollen and tuberous. The inflorescence, occupying approximately half the length of the stems carries many acropetally developing flowers, arranged in spikes or racemes, each subtended by a bract 6-10 mm long with two additional bracteoles, attached to the base of the calyx and of similar length. The calyx has 4(-5) lobes, more-or-less deeply divided into two segments, 6-8 mm long. The corolla, 10-20 mm long, is tubular, inflated at the base, with two approximately equal lips, the lower is 3-lobed. The corolla is whitish below and cream, blue or violet distally (occasionally all white). Filaments are inserted in the corolla tube, 3-6 mm above the base. A capsule develops up to 6-10 mm long and may contain several hundred seeds, each about 0.2 x 0.4 mm. A single plant carries ten to several hundred flowers and hence may produce up to a quarter million seeds. This description is from sources including Chater and Webb (1972), and O. ramosa is dealt with in some detail in Holm et al. (1997).
Distribution
Top of pageO. ramosa occurs naturally in Mediterranean countries in southern Europe, Africa and the Middle East, extending eastwards to India, Pakistan and China, central Asia and southern Russia but has also been introduced to the USA, Cuba, Central America, Australia, West Africa, East Africa, South Africa and Chile.
Distribution Table
Top of pageThe distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.
Last updated: 10 Feb 2022Continent/Country/Region | Distribution | Last Reported | Origin | First Reported | Invasive | Reference | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Africa |
|||||||
Algeria | Present | Native | |||||
Egypt | Present, Widespread | Native | |||||
Eritrea | Present | Native | |||||
Ethiopia | Present | Native | |||||
Kenya | Present | ||||||
Libya | Present | Native | |||||
Mali | Present | Introduced | Original citation: Parker and Riches (1993) | ||||
Morocco | Present | Native | |||||
Namibia | Present | Introduced | Original citation: Wells et al. (1986) | ||||
South Africa | Present | Introduced | |||||
Sudan | Present | Native | |||||
Tanzania | Present | ||||||
Tunisia | Present | ||||||
Zimbabwe | Present | Introduced | |||||
Asia |
|||||||
Afghanistan | Present | Native | |||||
Armenia | Present | Native | |||||
Azerbaijan | Present | Native | |||||
China | Present | ||||||
-Xinjiang | Present | Introduced | |||||
Georgia | Present | Native | |||||
India | Present | ||||||
-Haryana | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Rajasthan | Present | Introduced | |||||
Iran | Present | Native | |||||
Iraq | Present | Native | |||||
Israel | Present | Native | |||||
Jordan | Present, Widespread | Native | |||||
Lebanon | Present, Widespread | Native | |||||
Nepal | Present, Widespread | Introduced | |||||
Oman | Present, Localized | ||||||
Pakistan | Present | ||||||
Qatar | Present, Localized | ||||||
Saudi Arabia | Present | ||||||
Syria | Present | Native | |||||
Turkey | Present | Native | |||||
Yemen | Present | ||||||
Europe |
|||||||
Albania | Present | Native | |||||
Austria | Present | Native | |||||
Belarus | Present | Native | |||||
Belgium | Present, Localized | Introduced | |||||
Bulgaria | Present | Native | |||||
Cyprus | Present | Native | |||||
Czechoslovakia | Present, Localized | Introduced | |||||
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia | Present | Native | |||||
Estonia | Present | Introduced | 1925 | ||||
France | Present | Native | |||||
-Corsica | Present | Native | |||||
Germany | Present, Localized | Introduced | |||||
Greece | Present | Native | |||||
Hungary | Present | Native | |||||
Ireland | Present | Introduced | 1874 | ||||
Italy | Present | Native | Sardinia, Sicily | ||||
Lithuania | Present | Introduced | 1950 | ||||
Malta | Present | Native | |||||
Moldova | Present | Native | |||||
Netherlands | Present, Localized | Introduced | |||||
Poland | Present, Localized | Introduced | |||||
Portugal | Present | Native | |||||
Romania | Present | Native | |||||
Russia | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
-Central Russia | Present | Native | |||||
-Eastern Siberia | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Southern Russia | Present | Native | |||||
-Western Siberia | Present | Introduced | |||||
Slovakia | Present | ||||||
Spain | Present | Native | |||||
-Balearic Islands | Present | Native | |||||
Switzerland | Present | Native | |||||
Ukraine | Present | Native | |||||
United Kingdom | Present, Localized | Introduced | |||||
North America |
|||||||
Canada | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
-Ontario | Present | Introduced | |||||
Cuba | Present | Introduced | |||||
Mexico | Present | Introduced | |||||
United States | Present | Introduced | |||||
-California | Absent, Eradicated | ||||||
-Illinois | Present, Localized | Introduced | |||||
-Kentucky | Present, Localized | Introduced | |||||
-New Jersey | Present | Introduced | |||||
-New York | Present | Introduced | |||||
-North Carolina | Present, Localized | Introduced | |||||
-Texas | Present, Localized | Introduced | |||||
-Virginia | Present, Localized | Introduced | |||||
Oceania |
|||||||
Australia | Present | Introduced | |||||
-South Australia | Present | Introduced | |||||
-Victoria | Present | Introduced | |||||
South America |
|||||||
Chile | Present | Introduced | 1986 |
History of Introduction and Spread
Top of pageO. ramosa has been introduced into many countries outside its native range, but there is no readily available information on the exact dates or means by which those introductions occurred.
Risk of Introduction
Top of page
The risk of introduction from infested areas is high as a result of contamination of crop seed, soil or packaging materials. The minute seeds are extremely difficult to detect and have considerable longevity. Furthermore, this species can establish and propagate on a wide range of non-crop species, allowing it to build up undetected in natural vegetation before attacking host crops.
Orobanche species are listed as prohibited, and/or subject to quarantine, in virtually all countries with developed plant quarantine systems. See, e.g. USDA-ARS (2008) and USDA-NRCS (2008) for regulatory status in the USA.
Habitat
Top of pageMost of the weedy Orobanche species are native to the Middle East and are adapted to soils of generally high pH. They occur to some extent in wild vegetation but the weedy species are mostly associated with the crops that they attack. O. ramosa requires relatively high temperatures for optimum germination and growth, and occurs mainly in irrigated crops grown under summer conditions in tropical and sub-tropical climates.
Habitat List
Top of pageCategory | Sub-Category | Habitat | Presence | Status |
---|---|---|---|---|
Terrestrial | Managed | Cultivated / agricultural land | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Managed | Protected agriculture (e.g. glasshouse production) | Principal habitat | Harmful (pest or invasive) |
Terrestrial | Managed | Rail / roadsides | Secondary/tolerated habitat | Natural |
Terrestrial | Managed | Urban / peri-urban areas | Secondary/tolerated habitat | Natural |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Natural grasslands | Secondary/tolerated habitat | Natural |
Terrestrial | Natural / Semi-natural | Scrub / shrublands | Secondary/tolerated habitat | Natural |
Hosts/Species Affected
Top of pageO. ramosa has an especially wide host range, occurring on wild plants in the families Amaranthaceae, Chenopodiaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Capparidaceae, Labiatae [Lamiaceae], Linaceae, Malvaceae, Oxalidaceae, Plantaginaceae, Polygonaceae and Rubiaceae, as well as crops in Alliaceae [Liliaceae], Compositae [Asteraceae], Cannabinaceae, Cruciferae [Brassicaceae], Cucurbitaceae, Leguminosae [Fabaceae], Solanaceae, Rosaceae and Umbelliferae [Apiaceae] (Parker and Riches, 1993). See also Qasem and Foy (2007) for a recent study of host range in O. ramosa.
Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
Top of pageSymptoms
Top of pageO. ramosa causes no very distinctive symptoms but may cause some wilting, yellowing and necrosis of the foliage and a general weakening of the plant, with reduced fruit production.
List of Symptoms/Signs
Top of pageSign | Life Stages | Type |
---|---|---|
Leaves / wilting | ||
Leaves / yellowed or dead | ||
Roots / reduced root system | ||
Whole plant / early senescence |
Biology and Ecology
Top of pageThe chromosome number of O. ramosa is 2n = 24. In addition to the genetic variability evident in the range of varieties and/or sub-species noted above, there is also evidence for variation between morphologically similar populations associated with particular hosts. Brault et al.(2007) have demonstrated significant variation in the virulence of parasites collected from rape-seed, tobacco and hemp in France, suggesting the development of host-related pathotypes, confirmed by differences in RAPD analysis. Musselman and Parker (1982) had earlier shown similar variation in the host-preference of forms attacking Solanaceae and lettuce.
Reproductive Biology
When the flowers of O. ramosa open, the mature anthers are already in contact with the stigma and self pollination is apparently the norm (Musselman et al.,1981). Seeds are then produced in very large numbers, many hundreds per capsule, and may remain viable in soil for many years, possibly 10 or more, and certainly for 5 years in many situations.
Phenology and Physiology
O. ramosa is an obligate parasite, needing to establish a connection to a host root within a few days of germination. The seed is minute (approximately 0.2 x 0.4 mm), from which only the radicle emerges, and this can grow only a few millimetres long. A chemical stimulus is needed to trigger Orobanche germination, normally coming from host roots, therefore, Orobanche normally germinates only when a host root is nearby. However, a moist environment is required for several days, together with suitable temperatures, before the mature seed is responsive to germination stimulants. This preparatory period is known as conditioning or preconditioning. Conditioned seeds remain responsive to germination stimulants for a limited period after which secondary dormancy may be induced. Their ability to respond to germination stimuli also fades gradually when the seeds dry, and they then remain dormant until re-conditioned (Timko et al., 1989; Joel et al., 1995a). Detailed studies of the effects of different temperature and moisture regimes on the germination and viability of O. aegyptiaca have been reported by Kebreab and Murdoch (1999a). These results are likely to be applicable also to O. ramosa. Optimum temperatures for conditioning and germination of O. ramosa are in the region of 18-23°C.
On contact with the host root, a swelling, the haustorium, is formed, and intrusive cells penetrate through the cortex to the vascular bundle to establish connection with the host xylem. The parasite develops into a tubercle on the surface of the root, developing to a diameter of 5-20 mm. Secondary roots may develop on the tubercle and make separate contacts with the host root system. After several weeks, the tubercle develops a flowering shoot which emerges above the soil.
Orobanche spp. depend totally on their hosts for all nutrition, and also draw most of their water from the host root. Effects on the host are generally proportional to the biomass of the parasite, such that the mass of the parasite is reflected in a very similar loss in mass of the host crop (e.g. Barker et al., 1996, working with O. aegyptiaca).
For a recent review on the biology of O. ramosa see Joel et al. (2007).
Climate
Top of pageClimate | Status | Description | Remark |
---|---|---|---|
As - Tropical savanna climate with dry summer | Tolerated | < 60mm precipitation driest month (in summer) and < (100 - [total annual precipitation{mm}/25]) | |
Aw - Tropical wet and dry savanna climate | Tolerated | < 60mm precipitation driest month (in winter) and < (100 - [total annual precipitation{mm}/25]) | |
BW - Desert climate | Tolerated | < 430mm annual precipitation | |
Cf - Warm temperate climate, wet all year | Preferred | Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, wet all year | |
Cs - Warm temperate climate with dry summer | Preferred | Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry summers | |
Cw - Warm temperate climate with dry winter | Preferred | Warm temperate climate with dry winter (Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry winters) |
Latitude/Altitude Ranges
Top of pageLatitude North (°N) | Latitude South (°S) | Altitude Lower (m) | Altitude Upper (m) |
---|---|---|---|
50 | 35 |
Air Temperature
Top of pageParameter | Lower limit | Upper limit |
---|---|---|
Mean annual temperature (ºC) | 10 | 28 |
Mean maximum temperature of hottest month (ºC) | 35 | |
Mean minimum temperature of coldest month (ºC) | 0 |
Rainfall
Top of pageParameter | Lower limit | Upper limit | Description |
---|---|---|---|
Dry season duration | 0 | 6 | number of consecutive months with <40 mm rainfall |
Mean annual rainfall | 300 | 1500 | mm; lower/upper limits |
Soil Tolerances
Top of pageSoil drainage
- free
Soil reaction
- acid
- alkaline
- neutral
Soil texture
- heavy
- light
- medium
Natural enemies
Top of pageNatural enemy | Type | Life stages | Specificity | References | Biological control in | Biological control on |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fusarium oxysporum | Pathogen | Plants|Seeds; Plants|Stems | ||||
Phytomyza orobanchia | Herbivore | Fruits|pods; Plants|Stems |
Notes on Natural Enemies
Top of pageO. ramosa is attacked by the agromyzid fly Phytomyza orobanchia throughout much of its range and a high proportion of plants may be damaged as a result of larvae reducing seed production and/or mining in the stem, leading to infection by fungi and total collapse. The fly has been used for biological control and was effective in the former Soviet Union for decades. However, this biological control agent gradually became less effective due to the spread of hyperparasites that attack the Phytomyza pupae. See Kroschel and Klein (1999) for a detailed review of this topic. Opius occulisus is the most common hyperparasite in Hungary (Horvath, 1987). Recent attempts to exploit Phytomyza for biocontrol of O. ramosa in Chile have been reported by Norambuena et al. (2001).
Several plant pathogens have been reported specifically to attack O. ramosa (Bedi, 1994; Bozoukov and Kouzmanova, 1994), but none have yet been developed fully for biological control.
Means of Movement and Dispersal
Top of pageThe very small seeds may very easily be moved from one field to another by water and wind.
Vector Transmission (Biotic)
Animals could disseminate seeds if browsing infested crops, as seeds remain viable after passing through the alimentary system of animals.
Accidental Introduction
Agricultural tools and machinery can transfer Orobanche seeds or contaminated soil to non-infested fields, thus should always be cleaned after being used in an infested field.
Hay or livestock manure may also be contaminated with viable Orobanche seeds if from or fed from infested areas.
Agricultural products of various crops may carry Orobanche seeds if harvested in an infested field.
Pathway Causes
Top of pageCause | Notes | Long Distance | Local | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Botanical gardens and zoos | Yes | Yes | ||
Crop production | Yes | Yes | Jacobsohn (1984) | |
Flooding and other natural disasters | Yes | |||
Forage | Yes | Yes | Jacobsohn (1984) | |
Seed trade | Yes | Yes |
Pathway Vectors
Top of pageVector | Notes | Long Distance | Local | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
Containers and packaging - wood | Yes | Yes | ||
Land vehicles | Yes | Jacobsohn (1984) | ||
Livestock | Grazing animals | Yes | Jacobsohn (1984) | |
Machinery and equipment | Yes | Jacobsohn (1984) | ||
Plants or parts of plants | Yes | Yes | ||
Soil, sand and gravel | Yes | Jacobsohn (1984) | ||
Wind | Yes |
Plant Trade
Top of pagePlant parts liable to carry the pest in trade/transport | Pest stages | Borne internally | Borne externally | Visibility of pest or symptoms |
---|---|---|---|---|
Bulbs/Tubers/Corms/Rhizomes | weeds/seeds | Yes | Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope | |
Flowers/Inflorescences/Cones/Calyx | weeds/seeds | Yes | Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope | |
Fruits (inc. pods) | weeds/seeds | Yes | Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope | |
Growing medium accompanying plants | weeds/seeds | Yes | Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope | |
Roots | weeds/seeds | Yes | Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope | |
True seeds (inc. grain) | weeds/seeds | Yes | Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope |
Impact
Top of pageInfestation of tomatoes and aubergine by O. ramosa can be especially serious as it may prove uneconomic to continue growing these crops (and many others) for a very long period. Attempts to resume growing a susceptible crop on infested land within 5-7 years are liable to result in immediate re-infestation (Parker and Riches, 1993).
Economic Impact
Top of pageInfestation of tomatoes and aubergine by O. ramosa can be especially serious as it may prove uneconomic to continue growing these crops (and many others) for a very long period. Attempts to resume growing a susceptible crop on infested land within 5-7 years are liable to result in immediate re-infestation (Parker and Riches, 1993).
Apart from the direct damage to crops, there can be further serious economic loss resulting from restrictions on the export of crop produce suspected of being infested or contaminated, as in Australia (Panetta and Lawes, 2007).
Risk and Impact Factors
Top of page- Invasive in its native range
- Proved invasive outside its native range
- Has a broad native range
- Abundant in its native range
- Tolerates, or benefits from, cultivation, browsing pressure, mutilation, fire etc
- Tolerant of shade
- Fast growing
- Has high reproductive potential
- Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
- Has high genetic variability
- Conflict
- Host damage
- Negatively impacts agriculture
- Negatively impacts livelihoods
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Parasitism (incl. parasitoid)
- Highly likely to be transported internationally accidentally
- Difficult to identify/detect as a commodity contaminant
- Difficult/costly to control
Diagnosis
Top of pageTo check for the contamination of crop seed stocks, place a crop seed sample (100-400 g) into 1 litre of water containing 0.1% surfactant (e.g. Triton X-100). The water surface can be lightly sprayed with anti-foam. Allow to stand for 10 min, then stir well for 1-2 min. Decant the water (keep the seeds for the next step) onto the top sieve, with openings of 500 µm, which is placed on top of a second sieve with openings of 100 µm. Wash the seeds as above two additional times, decanting the water onto the sieve. On the last wash, dump the entire contents onto the sieve together with the washing water. Using a shower nozzle, thoroughly wash the seeds on the sieve with an additional 5-8 litres of tap water. The presence of Orobanche seeds can be determined on the surface of the lower sieve, with the help of a dissection microscope (Jacobsohn and Marcus, 1988).
Detection and Inspection
Top of pageAfter crop establishment, the roots may be carefully retrieved and washed, and inspected for the presence of the typical tubercles, 1-20 mm. Note that the tubercles are easily disconnected from the roots if the root system is pulled out of the soil.
Later in the life of the crop, emerged shoots of O. ramosa will be found, but much damage will by then already have occurred.
Bio-assay of Field Infestation
Flax can sometimes serve as an indicator of field infestation. Flax plants parasitized by Orobanche rapidly develop chlorosis and are considerably stunted. It is therefore used as a reliable tool to pinpoint infected spots in the field (Joel et al., 1990). It can also serve as a tool for infestation diagnosis in pots using soil samples taken from the field, and in experiments where the influence of different treatments on the Orobanche seed bank or on infestation needs to be examined (Joel et al., 1995a).
Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
Top of pageO. ramosa is distinguished from most other important Orobanche species by the branching habit and the presence of bracteoles. However, there is often confusion with O. aegyptiaca. The latter is typically distinguished by larger flowers, 22-30 mm long and densely hairy connective tissue between anthers, and often the filaments also, while O. ramosa typically has flowers only 15-17 mm long and stamens glabrous or only sparsely hairy. Katzir et al. (1996) have used RAPD techniques to show clear distinction between typical populations of O. aegyptiaca and O. ramosa but intermediates with flowers about 20 mm long and moderately hairy anthers can be difficult to assign and leave some doubts about the full distinctness of these two species.
Prevention and Control
Top of pageDue to the variable regulations around (de)registration of pesticides, your national list of registered pesticides or relevant authority should be consulted to determine which products are legally allowed for use in your country when considering chemical control. Pesticides should always be used in a lawful manner, consistent with the product's label.
Prevention
Phytosanitary Measures
Most countries prohibit entry of major parasitic weed species, including Orobanche spp.
Phytosanitation is aimed at preventing the spread of viable seeds by minimizing the movement of infested soil by farm machinery and vehicles, preventing grazing on infested plant material, treating manure (e.g. composting) and avoiding the use of hay made of Orobanche-infested plants (Jacobsohn, 1984). One should also avoid the use of Orobanche-infested crop seeds. Panetta and Lawes (2007) discuss the intensive monitoring that is needed in the course of an eradication programme such as that being implemented in Australia.
Control
Cultural control
Hand-weeding of emerged stems is too late to prevent crop damage but may be worthwhile where infestations are still light, to prevent or reduce future infestations. The stems should immediately be removed from the field to preclude seed shed after pulling. Unfortunately it is often difficult to see O. ramosa shoots under the canopy of a dense tomato crop.
Trap crops may be used to promote germination of Orobanche seeds in soil, without themselves supporting parasitism, in order to deplete the seed reserve. Examples of trap crops for O. ramosa include flax, Phaseolus bean, sorghum, maize and cucumber (Parker and Riches, 1993). There are few examples of the fully successful use of this principle, but it should be considered in any integrated control approach.
Soil solarization, based on mulching moist soil with polyethylene sheets for several weeks under solar irradiation, can provide excellent levels of control of Orobanche seeds in the upper soil layers where temperatures are high enough (Jacobsohn et al., 1980), and this has been confirmed in a number of studies involving O. ramosa (see Parker and Riches, 1993; Mauromicale et al.,2005).
Kebreab and Murdoch (1999b) showed that seeds maintained at high moisture and high temperature, lose viability relatively rapidly. This could explain the success that has been occasionally reported from prolonged flooding or water-logging (e.g. Mohamed Ahmed and Drennan, 1994), but a period of at least 6 weeks may be needed.
High levels of nitrogen have been reported to reduce O. ramosa in tomato and tobacco (Parker and Riches, 1993; Demirkan and Nemli, 1994). In some cases good crop yield increases have been recorded (Abu-Irmaileh, 1985) but in others the crop has been damaged and care is needed to maintain the correct balance between nitrogen and phosphorus. Nitrogen as ammonium is much more effective than as nitrate (e.g. Westwood and Foy, 1999). Haidar and Sidahmed (2006) report the successful use of chicken manure for control of O. ramosa in aubergine and potato in Lebanon.
Host-Plant Resistance
While host-plant resistance has been very important in the control of Orobanche cernua in sunflower, there has been little success in finding resistance to O. ramosa. Screening of tobacco and tomato varieties against O. ramosa or O. aegyptiaca have demonstrated some variations in susceptibility (see Parker and Riches, 1993; Qasem and Kaswari, 1995; Mariam and Suwanketnikom, 2004), but there are no reports of the successful application of these results.
Biological control
The fly Phytomyza orobanchia has been used for biological control of Orobanche spp., including O. ramosa, and was effective in the former Soviet Union for decades, using special rearing and inundative release techniques. However, this became less effective due to the spread of hyperparasites. See Kroschel and Klein (1999) for a detailed review. New attempts to exploit P. orobanchia for biocontrol of O. ramosa in Chile are reported by Norambuena et al. (2001).
Several Fusarium spp. and other plant pathogens have been reported specifically to attack O. ramosa (Bedi, 1994; Bozoukov and Kouzmanova, 1994), but none have yet been developed fully for biological control.
Chemical control
Alternatives to now banned soil fumigation methods including metam-sodium and dazomet may provide good control but methods of use are critical and best results are normally achieved with soil coverage by plastic (see Parker and Riches, 1993). Recommended doses of these compounds are usually very high and costly but much lower doses have been reported by Chalakov (1998) to be effective in Bulgaria, perhaps resulting from a germination-stimulatory effect and death by suicidal germination.
Among the few herbicides to have shown adequate selective control of O. ramosa, imazethapyr has been reported effective in potato, but three applications are needed at 2-week intervals (Kleifeld et al., 1998). This was not safe when used on tomato. The sulfonylurea herbicides chlorsulfuron, rimsulfuron and triasulfuron have shown some selectivity against both O. aegyptiaca and O. ramosa in tomato, but application methods are critical, preferably through drip irrigation (e.g. Kleifeld et al., 1996; Vouzounis and Americanos, 1998; Goldwasser et al., 2001). Simple recommendations are not often possible but Goldwasser et al. (2001)indicate that rimsulfurondoes now have approval for used on commercial crops of potato. Glyphosate at low doses post-emergence has likewise shown some selectivity in both tomato and tobacco but the margin of safety is too small for reliability. In potato, a low dose of rimsulfuron followed by 3 low-dose applications of glyphosate gave best results (Hauidar et al., 2005).
A range of volatile vegetable oils was also effective against O. ramosa in a greenhouse experiment (Solymosi, 1998).
The use of transgenic crops engineered with target-site herbicide resistance is one of the most promising solutions for Orobanche infestation in many crops. Using glyphosate on transgenic oilseed rape, and chlorsulfuron and asulam on tobacco, complete control of O. aegyptiaca has been achieved without affecting the crop or its yield (Joel et al., 1995b; Nandula et al., 1999). Comparable results can be expected against O. ramosa.
For the latest review of control methods for Orobanche spp, including O. ramosa, see Joel et al. (2007).
References
Top of pageBeck-Mennagetta G, 1930. Orobanchaceae. In: Engler HGA, ed. Das Pflanzenreich, 96(IV-261):1-275.
Chalakov H, 1998. Present situation and prospects for solving the tobacco broomrape problem in Bulgaria. In: Wegmann K, Musselman LJ, Joel DM, eds. Current Problems of Orobanche Research. Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Orobanche, Albena, 1998, 401-403.
Chater AO, Webb DA, 1972. 2. Orobanche. In: Tutin TG, Heywood VH, Burgess NA, Morre DM, Valentine, DH, Walters SM, Webb DM, eds. Flora Europaea 3. Diapensiaceae to Myoporaceae. Cambridge, UK: University Press, 286-293.
Goldwasser Y, Eisenberg H, Herschenhorn J, Plakhine D, Blumenfeld T, Buxbaum H, Golan S, Kleifeld K, 2001. Control of Orobanche aegyptiaca and O. ramosa in potato. Crop Protection, 20:403-410.
Graham RA, 1957. Orobanchaceae. In: Turrill WB, Milne-Redhead E, eds. Flora of Tropical East Africa. London, UK: Crown Agents, 1-7.
Holm LG, Doll J, Holm E, Pancho JV, Herberger JP, 1997. World Weeds: Natural Histories and Distribution. New York, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Jacobsohn R, 1984. Broomrape avoidance and control: agronomic problems and available methods. In: Borg SJ ter, ed. Proceedings of a Workshop on Biology and Control of Orobanche. Wageningen, Netherlands: LH/VPO, 18-24.
Joel DM, Peled T, Kleifeld Y, Golan S, Graph S, Levanon U, 1990. The use of flax as a catch crop for Orobanche spp. Phytoparasitica, 18:244.
Joel DM, Steffens JC, Matthews DE, 1995. Germination of Weedy Root Parasites. In: Kigel J, Galili G, eds. Seed Development and Germination. New York, USA: Marcel Dekker, Inc., 567-598.
Kleifeld Y, Goldwasser Y, Herzlinger G, Plakhine D, Golan S, Chilf T, 1996. Selective control of Orobanch aegyptiaca in tomato with sulfonylurea herbicides. In: Moreno MT, Cubero JI, Berner D, Joel DM, Musselman LJ, Parker C, eds. Advances in Parasitic Plant Research. Cordoba, Spain: Junta de Andalucia, 707-715.
Kleifeld Y, Goldwasser Y, Plakhine D, Lakhine G, Herzlinger G, Golan S, Herschenhorn J, 1998. Selective control of Orobanche spp. with imazethapyr. In: Wegmann K, Musselman LJ, Joel DM, eds. Current Problems of Orobanche Research. Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Orobanche, Albena, 1998, 359-365.
Kroschel J, Klein O, 1999. Biological control of Orobanche spp. with Phytomyza orobanchia Kalt., a review. In: Kroschel J, Abderabihi M, Betz H. eds. Advances in Parasitic Weed Control at On-farm Level, Volume II. Wekersheim, Germany: Margraf Verlag, 135-159.
Norambuena H, Diaz J, Kroschel J, Klein O, Esacobar S, 2001. Rearing and field release of Phytomyza orobanchia on Orobanche ramosa in Chile. In: Fer A, Thalouarn P, Joel DM, Musselman LJ, Parker C, Kerkleij, eds. Proceedings of the Seventh International Parasitic Weed Symposium, Nantes, 2001, 258-261.
Parker C, 1988. Parasitic plants in Ethiopia. Walia, 11: 21-27.
Solymosi P, 1998. Biology of broomrape (Orobanche ramosa L.). Novenyvedelem, 34: 469-475 (in Hungarian).
Timko MP, Flore CS, Riopel JL, 1989. Control of the germination and early development in parasitic angiosperms. In: Teylorson RB, ed. Recent Advances in the Development and Germination of Seeds. New York, USA: Plenum Press, 225-240.
Wang ZR, 1990. Farmland Weeds in China. Beijing, China: Agricultural Publishing House.
Wells MJ, Balsinhas AA, Joffe H, Engelbrecht VM, Harding G, Stirton CH, 1986. A catalogue of problem plants in South Africa. Memoirs of the botanical survey of South Africa No 53. Pretoria, South Africa: Botanical Research Institute.
Wells MJ, Balsinhas AA, Joffe H, Engelbrecht VM, Harding G, Stirton CH, 1986. A catalogue of problem plants in southern Africa incorporating the national weed list of South Africa. Memoirs, Botanical Survey of South Africa, No. 53, v + 658pp.; 185 ref.
Distribution References
Beck-Mennagetta G, 1930. Das Pflanzenreich. 96 (IV-261) [ed. by Engler H G A]. 275 pp.
CABI, Undated. Compendium record. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated a. CABI Compendium: Status inferred from regional distribution. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated b. CABI Compendium: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI
Chater AO, Webb DA, 1972. Orobanche. In: Flora Europaea 3. Diapensiaceae to Myoporaceae, [ed. by Tutin TG, Heywood VH, Burgess NA, Morre DM, Valentine DH, Walters SM, Webb DM]. Cambridge, UK: University Press. 286-293.
Graham RA, 1957. Orobanchaceae. In: Flora of Tropical East Africa, [ed. by Turrill WB, Milne-Redhead E]. London, UK: Crown Agents. 1-7.
Wang Z R, 1990. Farmland Weeds in China. Beijing, China: Agricultural Publishing House.
Organizations
Top of pageUSA: International Parasitic Plant Society, James H. Westwood, Ph.D. Associate Professor Virginia Tech Department of Plant Pathology, Physiolo, 401 Latham Hall Blacksburg, VA 24061-0390, http://www.parasiticplants.org/default.asp
Distribution Maps
Top of pageSelect a dataset
Map Legends
-
CABI Summary Records
Map Filters
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/