Benchmark study on glyphosate-resistant cropping systems in the United States. Part 5: Effects of glyphosate-based weed management programs on farm-level profitability

Although the problem of herbicide resistance is not new, the widespread evolution of glyphosate resistance in weed species such as Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeriS. Wats.), common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudisSauer), and kochia [Kochia scoparia(L.) Schrad.] raised awareness throughout the agricultural community of herbicide resistance as a problem. Glyphosate-resistant weeds resulted in the loss of a simple, single herbicide option to control a wide spectrum of weeds that gave efficacious and economical weed management in corn (Zea maysL.), soybean [Glycine max(L.) Merr.], and cotton (Gossypium hirsutumL.) crops engineered for tolerance to this herbicide and planted over widespread areas of the South and Midwest of the United States. Beyond these crops, glyphosate is used for vegetation management in other cropping systems and in noncrop areas across the United States, and resistance to this herbicide threatens its continued utility in all of these situations. This, combined with the development of multiple herbicide-resistant weeds and the lack of commercialization of herbicides with new mechanisms of action over the past years (Duke 2012), caused the weed science community to realize that stewardship of existing herbicide resources, extending their useful life as long as possible, is imperative. Further, while additional herbicide tolerance traits are being incorporated into crops, weed management in these crops will still be based upon using existing, old, herbicide chemistries.

Download Full-text

Benchmark Study: IV. Survey of Grower Practices for Managing Glyphosate-Resistant Weed Populations

Weed Technology ◽

10.1614/wt-d-11-00094.1 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 26 (3) ◽

pp. 543-548 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Joby M. Prince ◽

David R. Shaw ◽

Wade A. Givens ◽

Micheal D. K. Owen ◽

Stephen C. Weller ◽

...

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Weed Management ◽

Management Practices ◽

Relative Effectiveness ◽

The United States ◽

Effective Management ◽

Benchmark Study ◽

Effectiveness Rating ◽

Grower Survey

In 2010, a grower survey was administered to 1,299 growers in 22 states to determine changes in weed management in the United States from 2006 to 2009. The majority of growers had not changed weed management practices in the previous 3 yr; however, 75% reported using weed management practices targeted at glyphosate-resistant (GR) weeds. Growers were asked to rate their efforts at controlling GR weeds and rate the effectiveness of various practices for controlling/preventing GR weeds regardless of whether they were personally using them. Using the herbicide labeled rate, scouting fields, and rotating crops were among the practices considered by growers as most effective in managing GR weeds. Sixty-seven percent of growers reported effective management of GR weeds. Between the 2005 and 2010 Benchmark surveys, the frequency of growers using specific actions to manage GR weeds increased markedly. Although the relative effectiveness of practices, as perceived by growers, remained the same, the effectiveness rating of tillage and the use of residual and POST herbicides increased.

Download Full-text

Benchmark study on glyphosate-resistant cropping systems in the United States. Part 3: Grower awareness, information sources, experiences and management practices regarding glyphosate-resistant weeds

Pest Management Science ◽

10.1002/ps.2178 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 67 (7) ◽

pp. 758-770 ◽

Cited By ~ 22

Author(s):

Wade A Givens ◽

David R Shaw ◽

Michael E Newman ◽

Stephen C Weller ◽

Bryan G Young ◽

...

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Management Practices ◽

Information Sources ◽

Cropping Systems ◽

The United States ◽

Benchmark Study ◽

Awareness Information

Download Full-text

Managing Wicked Herbicide-Resistance: Lessons from the Field

Weed Technology ◽

10.1017/wet.2018.49 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 32 (4) ◽

pp. 475-488 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Jill Schroeder ◽

Michael Barrett ◽

David R. Shaw ◽

Amy B. Asmus ◽

Harold Coble ◽

...

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Herbicide Resistance ◽

Weed Management ◽

Crop Production ◽

Production Systems ◽

Cropping Systems ◽

Resistance Management ◽

Interdisciplinary Approach ◽

The United States ◽

The Many

AbstractHerbicide resistance is ‘wicked’ in nature; therefore, results of the many educational efforts to encourage diversification of weed control practices in the United States have been mixed. It is clear that we do not sufficiently understand the totality of the grassroots obstacles, concerns, challenges, and specific solutions needed for varied crop production systems. Weed management issues and solutions vary with such variables as management styles, regions, cropping systems, and available or affordable technologies. Therefore, to help the weed science community better understand the needs and ideas of those directly dealing with herbicide resistance, seven half-day regional listening sessions were held across the United States between December 2016 and April 2017 with groups of diverse stakeholders on the issues and potential solutions for herbicide resistance management. The major goals of the sessions were to gain an understanding of stakeholders and their goals and concerns related to herbicide resistance management, to become familiar with regional differences, and to identify decision maker needs to address herbicide resistance. The messages shared by listening-session participants could be summarized by six themes: we need new herbicides; there is no need for more regulation; there is a need for more education, especially for others who were not present; diversity is hard; the agricultural economy makes it difficult to make changes; and we are aware of herbicide resistance but are managing it. The authors concluded that more work is needed to bring a community-wide, interdisciplinary approach to understanding the complexity of managing weeds within the context of the whole farm operation and for communicating the need to address herbicide resistance.

Download Full-text

Weed Management in Soybeans in the United States

Pest Management in Soybean ◽

10.1007/978-94-011-2870-4_26 ◽

1992 ◽

pp. 262-271

Author(s):

C. G. Mcwhorter

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Weed Management ◽

The United States

Download Full-text

Descriptions of Chestnut Cultivars for Nut Production in the Eastern and Midwestern United States

HortScience ◽

10.21273/hortsci16090-21 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-10

Author(s):

Ronald S. Revord ◽

J. Michael Nave ◽

Ronald S. Revord ◽

J. Michael Nave ◽

Gregory Miller ◽

...

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

20Th Century ◽

The United States ◽

Castanea Dentata ◽

Eastern United States ◽

University Of Missouri ◽

Chinese Chestnut ◽

Nut Production ◽

The University ◽

On Farm

The Chinese chestnut (Castanea mollissima Blume) and other Castanea species (Castanea spp. Mill.) have been imported and circulated among growers and scientists in the United States for more than a century. Initially, importations of C. mollissima after 1914 were motivated by efforts to restore the American chestnut [Castanea dentata (Marsh.) Borkh.], with interests in timber-type characters and chestnut blight resistance. Chestnut for orchard nut production spun off from these early works. Starting in the early 20th century, open-pollinated seeds from seedlings of Chinese chestnut and other Castanea species were distributed widely to interested growers throughout much of the eastern United States to plant and evaluate. Germplasm curation and sharing increased quite robustly through grower networks over the 20th century and continues today. More than 100 cultivars have been named in the United States, although a smaller subset remains relevant for commercial production and breeding. The University of Missouri Center for Agroforestry curates and maintains a repository of more than 60 cultivars, and open-pollinated seed from this collection has been provided to growers since 2008. Currently, more than 1000 farms cultivate seedlings or grafted trees of the cultivars in this collection, and interest in participatory on-farm research is high. Here, we report descriptions of 57 of the collection’s cultivars as a comprehensive, readily accessible resource to support continued participatory research.

Download Full-text