Assessing Fitness Costs from a Herbicide-Resistance Management Perspective: A Review and Insight

Weed Science ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eshagh Keshtkar ◽  
Roohollah Abdolshahi ◽  
Hamidreza Sasanfar ◽  
Eskandar Zand ◽  
Roland Beffa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Herbicide Resistance ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Genetic Background ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Evolutionary Ecology ◽  
Resistance Management ◽  
Single Population ◽  
Herbicide Resistant ◽  
Scientific Disciplines ◽  
Cost Studies

AbstractIn recent years, herbicide resistance has attracted much attention as an increasingly urgent problem worldwide. Unfortunately, most of that effort was focused on confirmation of resistance and characterization of the mechanisms of resistance. For management purposes, knowledge about biology and ecology of the resistant weed phenotypes is critical. This includes fitness of the resistant biotypes compared with the corresponding wild biotypes. Accordingly, fitness has been the subject of many studies; however, lack of consensus on the concept of fitness resulted in poor experimental designs and misinterpretation of the ensuing data. In recent years, methodological protocols for conducting proper fitness studies have been proposed; however, we think these methods should be reconsidered from a herbicide-resistance management viewpoint. In addition, a discussion of the inherent challenges associated with fitness cost studies is pertinent. We believe that the methodological requirements for fitness studies of herbicide-resistant weed biotypes might differ from those applied in other scientific disciplines such as evolutionary ecology and genetics. Moreover, another important question is to what extent controlling genetic background is necessary when the aim of a fitness study is developing management practices for resistant biotypes. Among the methods available to control genetic background, we suggest two approaches (single population and pedigreed lines) as the most appropriate methods to detect differences between resistant (R) and susceptible (S) populations and to derive herbicide-resistant weed management programs. Based on these two methods, we suggest two new approaches that we named the “recurrent single population” and “recurrent pedigreed lines” methods. Importantly, whenever the aim of a fitness study is to develop optimal resistance management, we suggest selecting R and S plants within a single population and evaluating all fitness components from seed to seed instead of measuring changes in the frequency of R and S alleles through multigenerational fitness studies.

scholarly journals Economic Barriers to Herbicide-Resistance Management

Weed Science ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 64 (SP1) ◽  
pp. 585-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terrance M. Hurley ◽  
George Frisvold
Keyword(s):  
Herbicide Resistance ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Resistance Management ◽  
Common Goal ◽  
Multifaceted Approach ◽  
Herbicide Resistant ◽  
Biological Perspective ◽  
Economic Barriers ◽  
Near Term

Herbicide-resistant weeds are the result of evolutionary processes that make it easy to think about the problem from a purely biological perspective. Yet, the act of weed management, guided by human production of food and fiber, drives this biological process. Thus, the problem is socioeconomic as well as biological. The purpose of this article is to explain how well-known socioeconomic phenomena create barriers to herbicide-resistance management and highlight important considerations for knocking down these barriers. The key message is that the multidimensional problem requires a multifaceted approach that recognizes differences among farmers; engages the regulatory, academic, extension, seed and chemical suppliers, and farmer communities; and aligns the diverse interests of the members of these communities with a common goal that benefits all—more sustainable weed management. It also requires an adaptive approach that transitions from moreuniform and costly standards and incentives, which can be effective in the near-term but are unsustainable, to more-targeted and less-costly approaches that are sustainable in the long term.

Genetic Aspects of Herbicide-Resistant Weed Management

1999 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 647-652 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Christoffers
Keyword(s):  
Herbicide Resistance ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Selection Pressure ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Resistance Management ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Frequency Increase ◽  
Specific Nature ◽  
Herbicide Resistant ◽  
Case Basis

Weed populations develop herbicide resistance when they evolve due to selection pressure. Mutations and gene flow contribute to genetic variability and provide resistant alleles. The speed of resistance gene frequency increase is determined by the inheritance of resistance alleles relative to wild-type susceptibility and is influenced by the interaction between gene expression and selection. The goal of herbicide resistance management is to minimize selection pressure while maintaining adequate weed control. However, the specific nature of each herbicide, weed, and resistance combination determines the practices that optimize undesirable selection pressure. Therefore, generalized management strategies should be recommended with caution and must not be mandated without thorough evaluation on a case-by-case basis.

scholarly journals Reducing the Risks of Herbicide Resistance: Best Management Practices and Recommendations

Weed Science ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 60 (SP1) ◽  
pp. 31-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason K. Norsworthy ◽  
Sarah M. Ward ◽  
David R. Shaw ◽  
Rick S. Llewellyn ◽  
Robert L. Nichols ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Herbicide Resistance ◽  
Best Management Practices ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Crop Production ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Production Systems ◽  
Herbicide Resistant ◽  
Economic Thresholds ◽  
Soil Seedbank

Herbicides are the foundation of weed control in commercial crop-production systems. However, herbicide-resistant (HR) weed populations are evolving rapidly as a natural response to selection pressure imposed by modern agricultural management activities. Mitigating the evolution of herbicide resistance depends on reducing selection through diversification of weed control techniques, minimizing the spread of resistance genes and genotypes via pollen or propagule dispersal, and eliminating additions of weed seed to the soil seedbank. Effective deployment of such a multifaceted approach will require shifting from the current concept of basing weed management on single-year economic thresholds.

Herbicide-Resistant Weeds: Management Tactics and Practices

2006 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 793-814 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hugh J. Beckie
Keyword(s):  
Herbicide Resistance ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Cropping Systems ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Weed Species ◽  
Herbicide Resistant ◽  
Application Rates ◽  
Selection For ◽  
Reactive Management

In input-intensive cropping systems around the world, farmers rarely proactively manage weeds to prevent or delay the selection for herbicide resistance. Farmers usually increase the adoption of integrated weed management practices only after herbicide resistance has evolved, although herbicides continue to be the dominant method of weed control. Intergroup herbicide resistance in various weed species has been the main impetus for changes in management practices and adoption of cropping systems that reduce selection for resistance. The effectiveness and adoption of herbicide and nonherbicide tactics and practices for the proactive and reactive management of herbicide-resistant (HR) weeds are reviewed. Herbicide tactics include sequences and rotations, mixtures, application rates, site-specific application, and use of HR crops. Nonherbicide weed-management practices or nonselective herbicides applied preplant or in crop, integrated with less-frequent selective herbicide use in diversified cropping systems, have mitigated the evolution, spread, and economic impact of HR weeds.

scholarly journals Rethinking Outreach: Collaboration Is Key for Herbicide-Resistance Management

Weed Science ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 64 (SP1) ◽  
pp. 655-660 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Asmus ◽  
Jill Schroeder
Keyword(s):  
Herbicide Resistance ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Interdisciplinary Collaboration ◽  
Resistance Management ◽  
Information Delivery ◽  
Effective Resistance ◽  
Herbicide Resistant

Effective outreach is critical to achieving success in managing herbicide-resistant weeds. Interdisciplinary collaboration is needed to adapt information delivery and to engage communities to address the herbicide-resistance problem. Weed scientists must partner with the production community to adapt herbicide-resistance practices for local needs, to work collaboratively with state and regional stakeholders to create effective resistance-management practices, and to provide an overarching national message as to the causes of, and solutions to, resistance.

Survey of rice weed management and public and private consultant characteristics in Southern Brazil

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 351-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno de Lima Fruet ◽  
Aldo Merotto ◽  
André da Rosa Ulguim
Keyword(s):  
Herbicide Resistance ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Resistance Management ◽  
Weedy Rice ◽  
Herbicide Application ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Rice Farmers ◽  
Survey Results ◽  
Imidazolinone Herbicides

AbstractIdentification of common weeds is fundamental in determining adequate recommendations for management practices. The aim of this study was to identify the patterns of weed management adopted by rice farmers and the perspectives of consultants who work in flooded rice areas in Rio Grande do Sul (RS) State, Brazil. Fifty-three public and 50 private consultants who worked with rice in RS in 2017 and 2018 were interviewed. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics. Both weedy rice and Echinochloa sp. occurred and escaped more often from chemical control because they remained in the field until harvest in 59% of the area. According to consultants, the main reasons for reduced weed control were related to herbicide resistance and late herbicide application. Fifty-six percent of farmers used imidazolinone herbicides at rates that were greater than those indicated on the label for POST application. The consultants’ main challenges were weed escapes, resistance management, and guidelines on herbicide rates. Survey results show that the use of herbicide rates above label recommendations and consultants’ work on control of weed escapes are directly related to the high occurrence of herbicide resistance.

Managing herbicide resistance in China

Weed Science ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Xiangying Liu ◽  
Austin Merchant ◽  
Shihai Xiang ◽  
Tao Zong ◽  
Xuguo Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Herbicide Resistance ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Resistance Management ◽  
Acetolactate Synthase ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
The United States ◽  
Resistance Mechanisms ◽  
Future Research

Abstract Since its initial introduction in the late 1950s, chemical control has dominated weed management practices in China. Not surprisingly, the development of herbicide resistance has become the biggest threat to long-term, sustainable weed management in China. Given that China has followed the same laissez-faire approach toward resistance management that has been practiced in developed countries such as the United States, herbicide resistance has evolved rapidly and increased steadily over the years. Previously, we carried out a systematic review to quantitatively assess herbicide-resistance issues in China. In this review, our main objective is to focus on mechanistic studies and management practices to document the (1) history of herbicide application in China; (2) resistance mechanisms governing the eight most resistance-prone herbicide groups, including acetolactate synthase inhibitors, acetyl-CoA carboxylase inhibitors, synthetic auxin herbicides, 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase inhibitors, protoporphyrinogen oxidase inhibitors, photosystem I electron diverters, photosystem II inhibitors, and long-chain fatty-acid inhibitors; and (3) herbicide-resistance management strategies commonly used in China, including chemical, cultural, biological, physical, and integrated approaches. At the end, perspectives and future research are discussed to address the pressing need for the development of integrated herbicide-resistance management in China.

scholarly journals Fitness of Herbicide-Resistant Weeds: Current Knowledge and Implications for Management

Plants ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. 469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vila-Aiub
Keyword(s):  
Life History ◽  
Herbicide Resistance ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Current Knowledge ◽  
Resistance Management ◽  
Fitness Cost ◽  
Plant Fitness ◽  
Resistance Mutations ◽  
Fitness Costs ◽  
Wide Range

Herbicide resistance is the ultimate evidence of the extraordinary capacity of weeds to evolve under stressful conditions. Despite the extraordinary plant fitness advantage endowed by herbicide resistance mutations in agroecosystems under herbicide selection, resistance mutations are predicted to exhibit an adaptation cost (i.e., fitness cost), relative to the susceptible wild-type, in herbicide untreated conditions. Fitness costs associated with herbicide resistance mutations are not universal and their expression depends on the particular mutation, genetic background, dominance of the fitness cost, and environmental conditions. The detrimental effects of herbicide resistance mutations on plant fitness may arise as a direct impact on fitness-related traits and/or coevolution with changes in other life history traits that ultimately may lead to fitness costs under particular ecological conditions. This brings the idea that a “lower adaptive value” of herbicide resistance mutations represents an opportunity for the design of resistance management practices that could minimize the evolution of herbicide resistance. It is evident that the challenge for weed management practices aiming to control, minimize, or even reverse the frequency of resistance mutations in the agricultural landscape is to “create” those agroecological conditions that could expose, exploit, and exacerbate those life history and/or fitness traits affecting the evolution of herbicide resistance mutations. Ideally, resistance management should implement a wide range of cultural practices leading to environmentally mediated fitness costs associated with herbicide resistance mutations.

Herbicide Timing and Rate Effects on Weed Management in Three Herbicide-Resistant Canola Systems

2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 1006-1012 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Neil Harker ◽  
George W. Clayton ◽  
John T. O'Donovan ◽  
Robert E. Blackshaw ◽  
F. Craig Stevenson
Keyword(s):  
Weed Control ◽  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Integrated Weed Management ◽  
Weed Biomass ◽  
Herbicide Resistant ◽  
Leaf Stage ◽  
Rate Effects ◽  
Herbicide Timing ◽  
Weed Removal

Herbicide-resistant canola dominates the canola market in Canada. A multiyear field experiment was conducted at three locations to investigate the effect of time of weed removal (two-, four-, or six-leaf canola) and herbicide rate (50 or 100% recommended) in three herbicide-resistant canola systems. Weeds were controlled in glufosinate-resistant canola (GLU) with glufosinate, in glyphosate-resistant canola (GLY) with glyphosate, and in imidazolinone-resistant canola (IMI) with a 50:50 mixture of imazamox and imazethapyr. Canola yields were similar among the three canola cultivar–herbicide systems. Yields were not influenced by 50 vs. 100% herbicide rates. Timing of weed removal had the greatest effect on canola yield, with weed removal at the four-leaf stage giving the highest yields in most cases. Percent dockage was often greater for GLU and IMI than for GLY. In comparison with the other treatments, dockage levels doubled for GLU after application at 50% herbicide rates. The consistency of monocot weed control was usually greater for GLY than for GLU or IMI systems. However, weed biomass data revealed no differences in dicot weed control consistency between IMI and GLY systems. Greater dockage and weed biomass variability after weed removal at the six-leaf stage or after low herbicide rates suggests higher weed seed production, which could constrain the adoption of integrated weed management practices in subsequent years.

Competitiveness of Herbicide-Resistant Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) with Soybean

Weed Science ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 66 (6) ◽  
pp. 729-737 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas R. Butts ◽  
Bruno C. Vieira ◽  
Débora O. Latorre ◽  
Rodrigo Werle ◽  
Greg R. Kruger
Keyword(s):  
Weed Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Cropping Systems ◽  
Biomass Accumulation ◽  
Stem Diameter ◽  
The Other ◽  
Harvest Time ◽  
Herbicide Resistant ◽  
Amaranthus Tuberculatus ◽  
Soybean Plants

AbstractWaterhemp [Amaranthus tuberculatus(Moq.) J. D. Sauer] is a troublesome weed occurring in cropping systems throughout the U.S. Midwest with an ability to rapidly evolve herbicide resistance that could be associated with competitive disadvantages. Little research has investigated the competitiveness of differentA. tuberculatuspopulations under similar environmental conditions. The objectives of this study were to evaluate: (1) the interspecific competitiveness of three herbicide-resistantA. tuberculatuspopulations (2,4-D and atrazine resistant [2A-R], glyphosate and protoporphyrinogen oxidase [PPO]-inhibitor resistant [GP-R], and 2,4-D, atrazine, glyphosate, and PPO-inhibitor susceptible [2AGP-S]) with soybean [Glycine max(L.) Merr.]; and (2) the density-dependent response of eachA. tuberculatuspopulation within a constant soybean population in a greenhouse environment.Amaranthus tuberculatuscompetitiveness with soybean was evaluated across five target weed densities of 0, 2, 4, 8, and 16 plants pot−1(equivalent to 0, 20, 40, 80, and 160 plants m−2) with 3 soybean plants pot−1(equivalent to 300,000 plants ha−1). At the R1 soybean harvest time, no difference in soybean biomass was observed acrossA. tuberculatuspopulations. AtA. tuberculatusdensities <8 plants pot−1, the 2AGP-S population had the greatest biomass and stem diameter per plant. At the R7 harvest time, the 2AGP-S population caused the greatest loss in soybean biomass and number of pods compared with the other populations at densities of <16 plants pot−1. The 2AGP-S population had greater early-season biomass accumulation and stem diameter compared with the otherA. tuberculatuspopulations, which resulted in greater late-season reduction in soybean biomass and number of pods. This research indicates there may be evidence of interspecific competitive fitness cost associated with the evolution of 2,4-D, atrazine, glyphosate, and PPO-inhibitor resistance inA. tuberculatus. Focus should be placed on effectively using cultural weed management practices to enhance crop competitiveness, especially early in the season, to increase suppression of herbicide-resistantA. tuberculatus.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document