抗草甘膦杂草的抗性机理研究进展

草甘膦因其独特而优异的理化特性,自上市起便受到广泛的关注,现在已经成为全世界应用最广的除草剂之一.但是随着草甘膦抗性杂草的不断出现,草甘膦的应用前景受到严峻的挑战.文章综述了草甘膦生产及应用现状、草甘膦作用机理和草甘膦抗性杂草的发展,重点阐述了草甘膦抗性杂草的抗性机理.最后对如何通过延缓草甘膦抗性杂草的出现,保护草甘膦提出建议.     

杂草对草甘膦的抗性及抗性治理

本文从草甘膦现状、杂草抗性、抗性机制及抗性治理等几方面进行综述．并提出几点看法。力求提高草甘膦管理水平延长其使用年限,促进农业的发展。     

草甘膦在抗除草剂油菜田的应用研究初报

油菜是杂草危害较为严重的作物之一,我国冬油菜区草害面积达45%～48%,中度以上危害的面积达22%～23%,春油菜区危害面积高达80%以上,草害已成为制约我国油菜生产水平提高的重要因素.目前,防治油菜田单子叶类杂草如禾本科杂草,使用稳杀得、盖草能、禾草克等除草剂就能收到较好的防治效果,但对双子叶类的阔叶杂草还没有理想的除草剂.     

草甘膦抗性杂草的田间监测

北京的大兴区北藏村镇巴园子村的苦菜、节节草对草甘膦不敏感,防效仅为40%~60%;顺义区木林镇魏家店村的马唐对草甘膦不敏感,防效仅70%;通州区潞城镇小营村的藜对草甘膦不敏感,防效仅50%;延庆县井庄镇二司村的黄花蒿、刺儿菜、狗尾草、苦荬菜对草甘膦不敏感,防效仅40%~60%;延庆县农场的黄花蒿、刺儿菜、紫花地丁、苦荬菜对草甘膦不敏感,防效仅30%~50%;山东省淄博的铁苋菜对草甘膦不敏感,防效为70%;滕州的小飞蓬、苘麻、葎草对草甘膦不敏感,防效为40%~60%;广西的杂草对草甘膦都比较敏感,防效都在88%以上;其他杂草对草甘膦较敏感。     

除草剂面临的挑战及草甘膦复配的意义

除草剂是保证农业高产、稳产的重要工具,在农业现代化进程中发挥着举足轻重的作用。本文对我国除草剂面临的挑战及草甘膦复配等方面的内容进行了综述,并提出相关可行性解决方案。     

二酰胺类杀虫剂作用机制和抗性机理研究综述

针对二酰胺类杀虫剂的作用机制和抗性现状,以及昆虫对二酰胺类杀虫剂的抗性机理研究进行探讨,并简介抗性风险评估机制与方法.     

除草剂安全剂作用机制研究进展

除草剂安全剂在不影响除草剂对靶标杂草活性的前提下可选择性地保护作物免受除草剂的伤害。本文通过讨论安全剂对植物体内除草剂各种生理生化过程的影响,阐述了安全剂作用机制的研究。     

一种有效的果园除草剂草甘膦

一种有效的果园除草剂草甘膦赵荒（沈阳市辽中化工总厂化工研究所１１０２００）随着果园面积的不断扩大，果园中丛生的杂草不仅与果树争夺肥水，而且是很多病虫的中间寄生。特别是恶性杂草，很难根除，造成果园除草用工多，费用大。一般果园全年除草用工数占果园用工总数...     

What have the mechanisms of resistance to glyphosate taught us?

The intensive use of glyphosate alone to manage weeds has selected populations that are glyphosate resistant. The three mechanisms of glyphosate resistance that have been elucidated are (1) target-site mutations, (2) gene amplification and (3) altered translocation due to sequestration. What have we learned from the selection of these mechanisms, and how can we apply those lessons to future herbicide-resistant crops and new mechanisms of action? First, the diversity of glyphosate resistance mechanisms has helped further our understanding of the mechanism of action of glyphosate and advanced our knowledge of plant physiology. Second, the relatively rapid evolution of glyphosate-resistant weed populations provides further evidence that no herbicide is invulnerable to resistance. Third, as new herbicide-resistant crops are developed and new mechanisms of action are discovered, the weed science community needs to ensure that we apply the lessons we have learned on resistance management from the experience with glyphosate. Every new weed management system must be evaluated during development for its potential to select for resistance, and stewardship programs should be in place when the new program is introduced. Copyright © 2011 Society of Chemical Industry     

Why have no new herbicide modes of action appeared in recent years?

Herbicides with new modes of action are badly needed to manage the evolution of resistance of weeds to existing herbicides. Yet no major new mode of action has been introduced to the market place for about 20 years. There are probably several reasons for this. New potential products may have remained dormant owing to concerns that glyphosate-resistant (GR) crops have reduced the market for a new herbicide. The capture of a large fraction of the herbicide market by glyphosate with GR crops led to significantly diminished herbicide discovery efforts. Some of the reduced herbicide discovery research was also due to company consolidations and the availability of more generic herbicides. Another problem might be that the best herbicide molecular target sites may have already been discovered. However, target sites that are not utilized, for which there are inhibitors that are highly effective at killing plants, suggests that this is not true. Results of modern methods of target site discovery (e.g. gene knockout methods) are mostly not public, but there is no evidence of good herbicides with new target sites coming from these approaches. In summary, there are several reasons for a long dry period for new herbicide target sites; however, the relative magnitude of each is unclear. The economic stimulus to the herbicide industry caused by the evolution of herbicide-resistant weeds, especially GR weeds, may result in one or more new modes of action becoming available in the not too distant future.     

草甘膦防治菟丝子的机理研究

作者以菟丝子幼苗为材料研究了草甘膦防治菟丝子的机理。结果表明:草甘膦处理后,幼苗内色氨酸和花色素的含量均减少了,且其蛋白质合成也受到抑制。外源苯丙氨酸(Phe)、酪氨酸(Tyr)和色氨酸(Trp)的供给既可保证幼苗内蛋白质合成不受草甘膦的影响,又可保证其在这一除草剂存在的介质中能够正常生长。所有结果表明3种芳香族氨基酸的生物合成是草甘膦防治菟丝子的唯一作用点。     

Biological evidence for a 1:1 Ca2+:glyphosate association in deposit residuals on the leaf surface of barley

It has long been known that calcium ion antagonizes glyphosate, but it was not clear whether the stoichiometry of their interaction is 1:1 or 1:2. Two independent methods were used to determine which stoichiometry was the most probable. First, dose–response curves of barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.) plants treated with glyphosate were determined in the presence of 0, 1.25, 2.5, 5 and 10 mM CaCl₂. The doses of 'free' glyphosate (=not inactivated by calcium ion) were computed using the assumptions of 1:1 and 1:2 stoechiometries. The response curves were redrawn as a function of 'free' glyphosate. Analysis showed that the 1:2 hypothesis could be rejected, whereas the 1:1 hypothesis was highly probable. Second, kinetics of glyphosate penetration into barley leaves were determined in the presence of 0, 2.5 and 10 mM CaCl₂. The concentrations of 'free' glyphosate were computed as above. The kinetics of glyphosate penetration at these concentrations were established and were compared to the kinetics of glyphosate penetration in the presence of CaCl₂. Again, the 1:2 hypothesis was rejected, whereas the 1:1 hypothesis was more probable. These results strongly suggest that the stoichiometry of the Ca²⁺:glyphosate association is 1:1 in deposit residuals on the leaf surface.