Nilda R. Burgos

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

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 Resistance: Toward an Understanding of Resistance Development and the Impact of Herbicide-Resistant Crops

This is the publisher’s final pdf. The published article is copyrighted by the Weed Science Society of America and can be found at: http://wssajournals.org/loi/wees. To the best of our knowledge, one or more authors of this paper were federal employees when contributing to this work.

EPSPS gene amplification in glyphosate-resistant Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne ssp. multiflorum) from Arkansas.

BACKGROUND Resistance to glyphosate in weed species is a major challenge for the sustainability of glyphosate use in crop and non-crop systems. A glyphosate-resistant Italian ryegrass population has been identified in Arkansas. This research was conducted to elucidate its resistance mechanism. RESULTS The investigation was conducted on resistant and susceptible plants from a population in Desha County, Arkansas (Des03). The amounts of glyphosate that caused 50% overall visual injury were 7 to 13 times greater than those for susceptible plants from the same population. The EPSPS gene did not contain any point mutation that has previously been associated with resistance to glyphosate, nor were there any other mutations on the EPSPS gene unique to the Des03 resistant plants. The resistant plants had 6-fold higher basal EPSPS enzyme activities than the susceptible plants, but their I(50) values in response to glyphosate were similar. The resistant plants contained up to 25 more copies of EPSPS gene than the susceptible plants. The level of resistance to glyphosate correlated with increases in EPSPS enzyme activity and EPSPS copy number. CONCLUSION Increased EPSPS gene amplification and EPSPS enzyme activity confer resistance to glyphosate in the Des03 population. This is the first report of EPSPS gene amplification in glyphosate-resistant Italian ryegrass. Other resistance mechanism(s) may also be involved.

Metabolism-based herbicide resistance: regulation by safeners

Abstract Safeners are chemical agents that reduce the phytotoxicity of herbicides to crop plants by a physiological or molecular mechanism, without compromising weed control efficacy. Commercialized safeners are used for the protection of large-seeded grass crops, such as corn, grain sorghum, and wet-sown rice, against preplant-incorporated or preemergence-applied herbicides of the thiocarbamate and chloroacetanilide families. Safeners also have been developed to protect winter cereal crops such as wheat against postemergence applications of aryloxyphenoxypropionate and sulfonylurea herbicides. The use of safeners for the protection of corn and rice against sulfonylurea, imidazolinone, cyclohexanedione, isoxazole, and triketone herbicides also is well established. A safener-induced enhancement of herbicide detoxification in safened plants is widely accepted as the major mechanism involved in safener action. Safeners induce cofactors such as glutathione and herbicide-detoxifying enzymes such as glutathione S-transferases, cytochrome P450 monooxygenases, and glucosyl transferases. In addition, safeners enhance the vacuolar transport of glutathione or glucose conjugates of selected herbicides. The safener-mediated induction of herbicide-detoxifying enzymes appears to be part of a general stress response. Nomenclature: Corn, Zea mays L.; grain sorghum, Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench; rice, Oryza sativa L.; wheat, Triticum aestivum L.

Differential activity of allelochemicals from Secale cereale in seedling bioassays

Abstract Differential activities of BOA, DIBOA, and crude water extract of Secale cereale ‘Elbon’ were studied in culture dish bioassays using several vegetable and weed species. On average, DIBOA was about seven times more inhibitory to root growth and four times more inhibitory to shoot growth than BOA. Allelochemicals from S. cereale inhibited shoot more than root elongation of cucurbits Cucumis melo, Cucumis sativus, and Cucurbita pepo. Small-seeded crops Lycopersicon esculentum and Lactuca sativa were sensitive to S. cereale. Large-seeded crops, including the cucurbits and Zea mays var. rogusa, were tolerant. Among the small-seeded weeds Amaranthus palmeri, Digitaria sanguinalis, Echinochloa crus-galli, and Eleusine indica, E. crus-galli was least susceptible. Inhibition of germination by BOA or DIBOA occurred only in small- to medium-seeded species, including A. palmeri, D. sanguinalis, E. indica, L. sativa, L. esculentum, and Sida spinosa. Large-seeded species C. melo, C. sativus, C. melopepo, Z. mays var. rogusa, Ipomoea hederacea var. integriuscula, Ipomoea lacunosa, and Senna obtusifolia were tolerant to allelochemicals from S. cereale. This bioassay indicated a promising potential for controlling small-seeded weeds in large-seeded crops. Nomenclature:BOA, (3H)-benzoxazolinone; DIBOA, 2,4-dihydroxy-1,4-(2H)benzoxazine-3-one; Echinochloa crus-galli L. Beauv. ECHCG, barnyardgrass; Ipomoea hederacea var. integriuscula L. IPOHE, entireleaf morningglory; Eleusine indica L. Gaertn. ELEIN, goosegrass; Digitaria sanguinalis L. Scop. DIGSA, large crabgrass; Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats. AMAPA, Palmer amaranth; Ipomoea lacunosa L. IPOLA, pitted morningglory; Sida spinosa L. SIDSP, prickly sida; Senna obtusifolia L. CASOB, sicklepod; Cucumis melo L., cantaloupe; Cucumis sativus L., cucumber; Lactuca sativa L., lettuce; Secale cereale L., rye; Cucurbita pepo var. melopepo L. cv. Alef., summer squash; Zea mays var. rogusa Bonaf, sweet corn; Lycopersicon esculentum Mill., tomato.

Review: Confirmation of Resistance to Herbicides and Evaluation of Resistance Levels

Abstract As cases of resistance to herbicides escalate worldwide, there is increasing demand from growers to test for weed resistance and learn how to manage it. Scientists have developed resistance-testing protocols for numerous herbicides and weed species. Growers need immediate answers and scientists are faced with the daunting task of testing an increasingly large number of samples across a variety of species and herbicides. Quick tests have been, and continue to be, developed to address this need, although classical tests are still the norm. Newer methods involve molecular techniques. Whereas the classical whole-plant assay tests for resistance regardless of the mechanism, many quick tests are limited by specificity to an herbicide, mode of action, or mechanism of resistance. Advancing knowledge in weed biology and genomics allows for refinements in sampling and testing protocols. Thus, approaches in resistance testing continue to diversify, which can confound the less experienced. We aim to help weed science practitioners resolve questions pertaining to the testing of herbicide resistance, starting with field surveys and sampling methods, herbicide screening methods, data analysis, and, finally, interpretation. More specifically, this article discusses approaches for sampling plants for resistance confirmation assays, provides brief overviews on the biological and statistical basis for designing and analyzing dose–response tests, and discusses alternative procedures for rapid resistance confirmation, including molecular-based assays. Resistance confirmation procedures often need to be slightly modified to suit a specific situation; thus, the general requirements as well as pros and cons of quick assays and DNA-based assays are contrasted. Ultimately, weed resistance testing research, as well as resistance management decisions arising from research, needs to be practical, feasible, and grounded in science-based methods.

Red Rice (Oryza sativa) Status after 5 Years of Imidazolinone-Resistant Rice Technology in Arkansas

Certified Crop Advisors of Arkansas and members of the Arkansas Crop Consultants Association were surveyed in fall 2006 through direct mail to assess the current situation of the red rice problem and early impact of imidazolinone-resistant (IMR) rice technology on red rice infestation. The information generated represented 40% (226,800 ha) of rice production areas in Arkansas. Barnyardgrass and red rice were the most problematic weeds, with 62% of fields infested with red rice. The estimated economic loss due to red rice averaged

Growth inhibition and root ultrastructure of cucumber seedlings exposed to allelochemicals from rye (Secale cereale)

274/ha. Red rice infestation was prevented mostly by crop rotation (96%) and use of certified seed (86%). Of the red rice–infested fields, 38% had light infestation and 26% had severe red rice problems before adopting IMR rice. Thirty-seven percent of infested fields had been planted with IMR rice once and 43% at least twice. Approximately 85% of the consultants reported > 90% red rice control when using IMR rice. The majority (92%) of IMR rice growers rotate to other crops, mostly soybean. Unsuitable field condition was the main reason for growing only rice. After 3 seasons, the consultants perceived that red rice infestation level declined by 77% on average. The herbicide-resistance gene had escaped to red rice in some fields, and 90% of growers are exerting effort to mitigate outcrossing. Nomenclature: Barnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. ECHCG, red rice, Oryza sativa L. ORYSA, rice, Oryza sativa L, soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr

Differences in Weed Tolerance to Glyphosate Involve Different Mechanisms1

Inhibition of “Calypso” cucumber seedling growth by rye allelochemicals, 2(3H)-benzoxazolinone BOA and 2,4-dihydroxy-1,4(2H)-benzo- xazin-3-one DIBOA, was studied by analyzing the growth of seedling tissues and organs. Light and electron microscopy of seedling root cells were also carried out to investigate the mechanism(s) of root growth inhibition and mode of action of these compounds. BOA inhibited root elongation and reduced the number of cucumber lateral roots by 77 and 100% at 0.1 and 0.43 mg BOA/mlDeionized (DI) water, respectively. DIBOA also inhibited root growth, but did not affect the number of lateral roots. BOA increased size of cucumber cortical root cells fivefold, but DIBOA had no effect. Both compounds reduced the regeneration of root cap cells and increased the width of cortical cells resulting in increased root diameter. BOA and DIBOA caused increased cytoplasmic vacuolation, reduced ribosomeDensity and dictyosomes, reduced number of mitochondria, and reduced lipid catabolism. Starch granules in amyloplasts of seedling roots treated with BOA and DIBOA were also greatly reduced compared to the control. Changes in cellular ultrastructure indicated that BOA and DIBOA reduced root growth by disrupting lipid metabolism, reducing protein synthesis, and reducing transport or secretory capabilities.

Consultant Perspectives on Weed Management Needs in Arkansas Rice

The cause of differential susceptibility of barnyardgrass, hemp sesbania, pitted morningglory, and prickly sida to glyphosate was examined by measuring the absorption of 14C-glyphosate, quantifying the amount of epicuticular wax, and observing the wettability of leaf surfaces. In greenhouse experiments, the biomass of barnyardgrass and prickly sida was reduced by 95% by Roundup Ultra®. Hemp sesbania and pitted morningglory showed more tolerance, with 66 and 51% average biomass reduction, respectively. Absorption of 14C-glyphosate in a controlled environment did not follow the trend in species susceptibility with barnyardgrass, 30%; prickly sida, 18%; hemp sesbania, 52%; and pitted morningglory, 6%; absorption. The high tolerance of pitted morningglory to glyphosate can be attributed mostly to limited absorption, but the tolerance of hemp sesbania is due to other mechanisms. The addition of nonionic surfactant (NIS) to a low rate of Roundup Ultra® reduced absorption of 14C-glyphosate by barnyardgrass and hemp sesbania, but had no effect on the herbicidal activity. Glyphosate absorption in the four weed species was not correlated with quantity of chloroform-extracted wax or leaf wettability. Pitted morningglory and prickly sida, which contained the least leaf wax, also had smaller contact angles or higher leaf wettability than the species with more waxy leaves. The adjuvant in Roundup Ultra® reduced contact angles of the four species compared to contact angles obtained using deionized water alone. The addition of 0.25% v/v NIS alone to water reduced contact angles more than did the adjuvant in Roundup Ultra® solution. Nomenclature: Barnyardgrass, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv. #3 ECHCG; hemp sesbania, Sesbania exaltata (Raf.) Rydb. ex A. W. Hill # SEBEX; pitted morningglory, Ipomoea lacunosa L. # IPOLA; prickly sida, Sida spinosa L. # SIDSP. Additional index words: Droplet contact angle, epicuticular wax, 14C-glyphosate, glyphosate absorption, glyphosate uptake. Abbreviations: CMC, critical micelle concentration; DAT, days after treatment; EPSPS, 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase; HAT, hours after treatment; NIS, nonionic surfactant.