Technical performance of some commercial glyphosate-resistant crops

Glyphosate-resistant (GR) crops have been sold commercially in the USA since 1996. The use of glyphosate alone or with conventional pre- and post-emergence herbicides with different modes of action gives growers many options for affordable, safe, easy, effective wide-spectrum weed control. Despite the overwhelming popularity of this technology, technical issues have surfaced from time to time as US growers adopt these crops for use on their farms. The types of concern raised by growers vary from year to year depending on the crop and the environment, but include perceptions of increased sensitivity to diseases, increased fruit abortion, reduced pollination efficiency, increased sensitivity to environmental stress, and differences in yield and agronomic characteristics between transgenic and sister conventional varieties. Although several glyphosate-resistant crops are commercially available, maize, soybean and cotton constitute the largest cultivated acreage and have likewise been associated with the highest number of technical concerns. Because glyphosate is rapidly translocated to and accumulates in metabolic sink tissues, reproductive tissues and roots are particularly vulnerable. Increased sensitivity to glyphosate in reproductive tissues has been documented in both glyphosate-resistant cotton and maize, and results in reduced pollen production and viability, or increased fruit abortion. Glyphosate treatments have the potential to affect relationships between the GR crop, plant pathogens, plant pests and symbiotic micro-organisms, although management practices can also have a large impact. Despite these potential technical concerns, this technology remains popular, and is a highly useful tool for weed control in modern crop production.     

Altered pesticide use on transgenic crops and the associated general impact from an environmental perspective

The large-scale commercial cultivation of transgenic crops has undergone a steady increase since their introduction 10 years ago. Most of these crops bear introduced traits that are of agronomic importance, such as herbicide or insect resistance. These traits are likely to impact upon the use of pesticides on these crops, as well as the pesticide market as a whole. Organizations like USDA-ERS and NCFAP monitor the changes in crop pest management associated with the adoption of transgenic crops. As part of an IUPAC project on this topic, recent data are reviewed regarding the alterations in pesticide use that have been observed in practice. Most results indicate a decrease in the amounts of active ingredients applied to transgenic crops compared with conventional crops. In addition, a generic environmental indicator -- the environmental impact quotient (EIQ) -- has been applied by these authors and others to estimate the environmental consequences of the altered pesticide use on transgenic crops. The results show that the predicted environmental impact decreases in transgenic crops. With the advent of new types of agronomic trait and crops that have been genetically modified, it is useful to take also their potential environmental impacts into account.     

Benchmark study on glyphosate-resistant cropping systems in the United States. Part 4: Weed management practices and effects on weed populations and soil seedbanks

BACKGROUND: Weed management in glyphosate‐resistant (GR) maize, cotton and soybean in the United States relies almost exclusively on glyphosate, which raises criticism for facilitating shifts in weed populations. In 2006, the benchmark study, a field‐scale investigation, was initiated in three different GR cropping systems to characterize academic recommendations for weed management and to determine the level to which these recommendations would reduce weed population shifts. RESULTS: A majority of growers used glyphosate as the only herbicide for weed management, as opposed to 98% of the academic recommendations implementing at least two herbicide active ingredients and modes of action. The additional herbicides were applied with glyphosate and as soil residual treatments. The greater herbicide diversity with academic recommendations reduced weed population densities before and after post‐emergence herbicide applications in 2006 and 2007, particularly in continuous GR crops. CONCLUSION: Diversifying herbicides reduces weed population densities and lowers the risk of weed population shifts and the associated potential for the evolution of glyphosate‐resistant weeds in continuous GR crops. Altered weed management practices (e.g. herbicides or tillage) enabled by rotating crops, whether GR or non‐GR, improves weed management and thus minimizes the effectiveness of only using chemical tactics to mitigate weed population shifts. Copyright © 2011 Society of Chemical Industry     

Glyphosate-resistant soybean as a weed management tool: Opportunities and challenges

Transgenic soybean, resistant to glyphosate, represents a revolutionary breakthrough in weed control technology. Transgenic soybean is the most dominant among all transgenic crops grown commercially in the world. In 2000, glyphosate-resistant (GR) soybean was planted to 25.8 million hectares globally, which amounts to 58% of the total global transgenic crop area. The United States soybean area planted with GR soybean has increased from 2% in 1996 to 68% in 2001. Glyphosate-resistant soybean as a weed management tool has provided farmers with the opportunity and flexibility to manage a broad spectrum of weeds. The use of glyphosate in GR soybean offers another alternative to manage weeds that are resistant to other herbicides. The rapid increase in GR soybean area is caused by the simplicity of using only one herbicide and a lower cost for weed control. Adoption of GR soybean has resulted in a dramatic decrease in the area treated with other herbicides. Glyphosphate-resistant soybean should not be relied on solely to the exclusion of other weed control methods, and should be used within integrated weed management systems. Over-reliance on GR soybean could lead to problems such as shifts in weed species and population, and the development of glyphosate-resistant weeds. The challenge is for soybean farmers to understand these problems, and for weed scientists to communicate with farmers that continuous use of glyphosate may diminish the opportunity of GR soybean as a weed management tool in the future.     

Herbicides, glyphosate resistance and acute mammalian toxicity: simulating an environmental effect of glyphosate-resistant weeds in the USA

BACKGROUND: With the emergence of glyphosate-resistant (GR) weeds, the environmental consequences of alternatives to GR technology are of increasing importance. A well-known acute mammalian toxicity measure, the LD(50) dose for rats, is used to assess one potential environmental impact of the loss of GR technology. A new dataset with this index is used to estimate and simulate the effects for corn, soybeans and cotton.RESULTS: With conventional tillage it is found that the use of GR seeds reduces the number of LD(50) doses applied per hectare by 17-98% depending on crop. With no-till, the use of GR seeds reduces LD(50) doses only in corn. If farmers switch to conventional seeds because of GR weeds but maintain the same tillage practice, the present simulations suggest that LD(50) doses could increase by as much as 100 LD(50) doses per hectare in soybeans, and 500 LD(50) doses per hectare in cotton, or 11.4 and 19.8% respectively.CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to use field-level data to assess GR technology with a mammalian toxicity environmental indicator. It has been found that GR crops have a positive environmental effect, and that alternatives to GR technology increase toxicity.     

Perspectives on transgenic,herbicide‐resistant crops in the United States almost 20 years after introduction

Herbicide‐resistant crops have had a profound impact on weed management. Most of the impact has been by glyphosate‐resistant maize, cotton, soybean and canola. Significant economic savings, yield increases and more efficacious and simplified weed management have resulted in widespread adoption of the technology. Initially, glyphosate‐resistant crops enabled significantly reduced tillage and reduced the environmental impact of weed management. Continuous use of glyphosate with glyphosate‐resistant crops over broad areas facilitated the evolution of glyphosate‐resistant weeds, which have resulted in increases in the use of tillage and other herbicides with glyphosate, reducing some of the initial environmental benefits of glyphosate‐resistant crops. Transgenic crops with resistance to auxinic herbicides, as well as to herbicides that inhibit acetolactate synthase, acetyl‐CoA carboxylase and hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase, stacked with glyphosate and/or glufosinate resistance, will become available in the next few years. These technologies will provide additional weed management options for farmers, but will not have all of the positive effects (reduced cost, simplified weed management, lowered environmental impact and reduced tillage) that glyphosate‐resistant crops had initially. In the more distant future, other herbicide‐resistant crops (including non‐transgenic ones), herbicides with new modes of action and technologies that are currently in their infancy (e.g. bioherbicides, sprayable herbicidal RNAi and/or robotic weeding) may affect the role of transgenic, herbicide‐resistant crops in weed management. Published 2014. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.     

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

BACKGROUND: Glyphosate‐resistant (GR) crops have changed the way growers manage weeds and implement control strategies. Since the introduction of GR crops, growers in many instances have relied on glyphosate almost exclusively to control a broad spectrum of weeds. This overreliance on glyphosate has resulted in the evolution of glyphosate resistance in some weed species. Growers and scientists are concerned about the sustainability of GR crops and glyphosate. When a grower is making decisions about weed control strategies, economic costs and benefits of the program are primary criteria for selection and implementation. Studies across six states were initiated in 2006 to compare the economics of using a weed resistance best management practice (BMP) system with a grower's standard production system. RESULTS: Resistance BMP systems recommended by university scientists were more costly but provided similar yields and economic returns. Rotation of GR crops resulted in a higher net return (maize and soybean) compared with continuous GR crop (cotton or soybean) or rotating a GR crop with a non‐GR crop (maize). CONCLUSION: Growers can implement weed resistance BMP systems with the confidence that their net returns will be equivalent in the short run, and, in the long term, resistance BMP systems will prevent or delay the evolution of GR weeds in their fields, resulting in substantial savings. Copyright © 2011 Society of Chemical Industry     

Benchmark study on glyphosate-resistant cropping systems in the United States. Part 1: Introduction to 2006-2008

Glyphosate-resistant (GR) crop technology has dramatically impacted agriculture. The adoption of GR systems in canola, maize, cotton, soybean and sugar beets has been widespread in the United States. However, weed scientists are concerned that growers' current herbicide programs and weed management tactics will affect their sustainability and effectiveness. Without proper management, the potential for weed populations to express a high degree of resistance to glyphosate will adversely impact the utility of glyphosate. In 2005, weed scientists from six universities initiated a long-term research study to assess the sustainability of GR technology. This paper introduces five other articles in this series. Over 150 fields of at least 10 ha were selected to participate in a long-term field-scale study, and each field was split in half. On one-half the grower continued using the current weed management program; on the other half the grower used academic-recommended herbicide resistance best management practices. Field data were collected in 2006-2008 to determine the impact of the two weed management programs on weed populations, diversity, seedbank, crop yields and economic returns. This long-term study will provide invaluable data for determining the sustainability and profitability of diversified weed management programs designed to lower the risk of evolving weed resistance to glyphosate.     

Benchmark study on glyphosate-resistant crop systems in the United States. Part 2: Perspectives

A six-state, 5 year field project was initiated in 2006 to study weed management methods that foster the sustainability of genetically engineered (GE) glyphosate-resistant (GR) crop systems. The benchmark study field-scale experiments were initiated following a survey, conducted in the winter of 2005-2006, of farmer opinions on weed management practices and their views on GR weeds and management tactics. The main survey findings supported the premise that growers were generally less aware of the significance of evolved herbicide resistance and did not have a high recognition of the strong selection pressure from herbicides on the evolution of herbicide-resistant (HR) weeds. The results of the benchmark study survey indicated that there are educational challenges to implement sustainable GR-based crop systems and helped guide the development of the field-scale benchmark study. Paramount is the need to develop consistent and clearly articulated science-based management recommendations that enable farmers to reduce the potential for HR weeds. This paper provides background perspectives about the use of GR crops, the impact of these crops and an overview of different opinions about the use of GR crops on agriculture and society, as well as defining how the benchmark study will address these issues.     

HERBICIDES AS FERTILIZER ADDITIVES

Summary. Granulated compound fertilizers were tested as solid carriers for a variety of herbicides known to be active when applied as liquids.
Pasture and cereal experiments with 2,4-D and MCPA as fertilizer additives indicated considerable loss of herbicidal activity in comparison with spray formulations.
Residual herbicides such as TCA, propham and diuron retained their activity when added to fertilizer for application to root crops. The most effective of the herbicides used as fertilizer additives were TCA and propham, both of which gave good control of Avena fatua in sugar beet, and a mixture of chlorpropham and diuron gave promising results as a general weed control treatment in carrots.
It is concluded that the addition of these or similar herbicides to fertilizer granules may have advantages over conventional spray formulations for those crops which require broadcast pre-sowing applications of herbicides and fertilizer. For such crops the use of a granular fertilizer as the carrier instead of inert material could also have advantages over conventional granular herbicides, particularly by reducing transport and application costs.     

Robotic weeders can improve weed control options for specialty crops

Specialty crop herbicides are not a priority for the agrochemical industry, and many of these crops do not have access to effective herbicides. High‐value fruit and vegetable crops represent small markets and high potential liability in the case of herbicide‐induced crop damage. Meanwhile, conventional and organic specialty crop producers are experiencing labor shortages and higher manual weeding costs. Robotic weeders are promising new weed control tools for specialty crops, because they are cheaper to develop and, with fewer environmental and human health risks, are less regulated than herbicides. Now is the time for greater investment in robotic weeders as new herbicides are expensive to develop and few in number, organic crops need better weed control technology and governments are demanding reduced use of pesticides. Public funding of fundamental research on robotic weeder technology can help improve weed and crop recognition, weed control actuators, and expansion of weed science curricula to train students in this technology. Robotic weeders can expand the array of tools available to specialty crop growers. However, the development of robotic weeders will require a broader recognition that these tools are a viable path to create new weed control tools for specialty crops. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry     

Benchmark study on glyphosate-resistant cropping systems in the United States. Part 6: Timeliness of economic decision-making in implementing weed resistance management strategies

BACKGROUND: The introduction of glyphosate‐resistant (GR) crops in the late 1990s made weed control in maize, cotton and soybean simple. With the rapid adoption of GR crops, many growers began to rely solely on glyphosate for weed control. This eventually led to the evolution of GR weeds. Growers are often reluctant to adopt a weed resistance best management practice (BMP) because of the added cost of additional herbicides to weed control programs which would reduce short‐term revenue. This study was designed to evaluate when a grower that is risk neutral (profit maximizing) or risk averse should adopt a weed resistance BMP. RESULTS: Whether a grower is risk neutral or risk averse, the optimal decision would be to adopt a weed resistance BMP when the expected loss in revenue is greater than 30% and the probability of resistance evolution is 0.1 or greater. However, if the probability of developing resistance increases to 0.3, then the best decision would be to adopt a weed resistance BMP when the expected loss is 10% or greater. CONCLUSION: Given the scenarios analyzed, risk‐neutral or risk‐averse growers should implement a weed resistance BMP with confidence that they have made the right decision economically and avoided the risk of lost revenue from resistance. If the grower wants to continue to see the same level of return, adoption of BMP is required. Copyright © 2011 Society of Chemical Industry     

Economic and herbicide use impacts of glyphosate-resistant crops

More than 95% of United States maize, cotton, soybean and sugarbeet acres are treated with herbicides for weed control. These products are used to improve the economic profitability of crop production for farmers. Since their introduction in 1996, over 75 million acres of genetically engineered glyphosate-resistant crops have been planted, making up 80% of soybean acres and 70% of cotton acres in the USA. These genetically engineered crops have been adopted by farmers because they are perceived to offer greater economic benefits than conventional crop and herbicide programs. The adoption of glyphosate-resistant crops has saved US farmers 1.2 billion dollars associated with the costs of conventional herbicide purchases, application, tillage and hand weeding. With the adoption of glyphosate-resistant sugarbeets on currently planted sugarbeet acres, US growers could potentially save an additional 93 million dollars. The adoption of glyphosate-resistant crops by US agriculture has reduced herbicide use by 37.5 million lbs, although the adoption of glyphosate-resistant sugarbeets would dampen this reduction by 1 million lbs.     

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.     

Glyphosate-resistant crops: adoption, use and future considerations

BACKGROUND: Glyphosate-resistant crops (GRCs) were first introduced in the United States in soybeans in 1996. Adoption has been very rapid in soybeans and cotton since introduction and has grown significantly in maize in recent years. GRCs have grown to over 74 million hectares in five crop species in 13 countries. The intent of this paper is to update the hectares planted and the use patterns of GRC globally, and to discuss briefly future applications and uses of the technology. RESULTS: The largest land areas of GRCs are occupied by soybean (54.2 million ha), maize (13.2 million ha), cotton (5.1 million ha), canola (2.3 million ha) and alfalfa (0.1 million ha). Currently, the USA, Argentina, Brazil and Canada have the largest plantings of GRCs. Herbicide use patterns would indicate that over 50% of glyphosate-resistant (GR) maize hectares and 70% of GR cotton hectares receive alternative mode-of-action treatments, while approximately 25% of GR soybeans receive such a treatment in the USA. Alternative herbicide use is likely driven by both agronomic need and herbicide resistance limitations in certain GR crops such as current GR cotton. Tillage practices in the USA indicate that > 65% of GR maize hectares, 70% of GR cotton hectares and 50% of GR soybean hectares received some tillage in the production system. Tillage was likely used for multiple purposes ranging from seed-bed preparation to weed management. CONCLUSION: GRCs represent one of the more rapidly adopted weed management technologies in recent history. Current use patterns would indicate that GRCs will likely continue to be a popular weed management choice that may also include the use of other herbicides to complement glyphosate. Stacking with other biotechnology traits will also give farmers the benefits and convenience of multiple pest control and quality trait technologies within a single seed.     

Herbicide-tolerant crops—real farmer opportunity or potential environmental problem?

Classical breeding, in-vitro selection and genetic engineering techniques have produced herbicide-tolerant crops. Commercial adoption of these cultivars in North America provides tolerance predominantly to non-selective herbicides for novel weed-control strategies. Of special value is the integration of these crops in minimum tillage situations, maintaining of a wide range of herbicides with different modes of action to provide a variety of opportunities for weed-control management. Associated with these special crops are a series of environmental issues which at present limit the rate of commercial development in Europe. Unlike the successful performance of herbicide tolerance in the crops, these strategic issues are much more difficult to resolve for technical, political, ethical and moral reasons. The primary concerns are the feasibility of controlling the volunteer crop and the opportunity for indiscriminate introgression of the herbicide-tolerance gene into agricultural and natural ecosystems. It is unlikely that these questions will be resolved without scaling-up field experiments to include the detection of herbicide-tolerance genes. The economic and management implications of herbicide-tolerant crops require special consideration in view of the necessity to integrate conventional and transgenic crops in new cropping systems. © 1998 SCI     

Assessing the risk of pesticide environmental impact in several Argentinian cropping systems with a fuzzy expert indicator

BACKGROUND: The introduction of transgenic soybean (Glycine max, L.) varieties resistant to glyphosate (GR soybeans) has rapidly expanded in Argentina, increasing pesticide use where only grasslands were previously cultivated. The authors compared an estimate of environmental risk for different crops and active ingredients using the IPEST index, which is based on a fuzzy‐logic expert system. For IPEST calculations, four modules are defined, one reflecting the rate of application, the other three reflecting the risk for groundwater, surface water and air. The input variables are pesticide properties, site‐specific conditions and characteristics of the pesticide application. The expert system calculates the value of modules according to the degree of membership of the input variables to the fuzzy subsets F (favourable) and U (unfavourable), and they can be aggregated following sets of decision rules. IPEST integrated values of ≥ 7 reflect low environmental risk, and values of < 7 reflect high risk. RESULTS: Alfalfa, soybean and wheat showed IPEST values over 7 (low risk), while maize had the lowest IPEST values (high risk). Comparing active ingredients applied in annual and perennial crops, atrazine and acetochlor gave the highest risks of environmental contamination, and they are mainly used in maize. Groundwater was the most affected compartment. CONCLUSIONS: Fuzzy logic provided an easy tool combining different environmental components with pesticide properties to give a simple and accessible risk assessment. These findings provide information about active ingredients that should be replaced in order to protect water and air from pesticide contamination. Copyright © 2010 Society of Chemical Industry     

Taking stock of herbicide-resistant crops ten years after introduction

Since transgenic, bromoxynil-resistant cotton and glufosinate-resistant canola were introduced in 1995, planting of transgenic herbicide-resistant crops has grown substantially, revolutionizing weed management where they have been available. Before 1995, several commercial herbicide-resistant crops were produced by biotechnology through selection for resistance in tissue culture. However, non-transgenic herbicide-resistant crops have had less commercial impact. Since the introduction of glyphosate-resistant soybean in 1996, and the subsequent introduction of other glyphosate-resistant crops, where available, they have taken a commanding share of the herbicide-resistant crop market, especially in soybean, cotton and canola. The high level of adoption of glyphosate-resistant crops by North American farmers has helped to significantly reduce the value of the remaining herbicide market. This has resulted in reduced investment in herbicide discovery, which may be problematic for addressing future weed-management problems. Introduction of herbicide-resistant crops that can be used with selective herbicides has apparently been hindered by the great success of glyphosate-resistant crops. Evolution of glyphosate-resistant weeds and movement of naturally resistant weed species into glyphosate-resistant crop fields will require increases in the use of other herbicides, but the speed with which these processes compromise the use of glyphosate alone is uncertain. The future of herbicide-resistant crops will be influenced by many factors, including alternative technologies, public opinion and weed resistance. Considering the relatively few recent approvals for field testing new herbicide-resistant crops and recent decisions not to grow glyphosate-resistant sugarbeet and wheat, the introduction and adoption of herbicide-resistant crops during the next 10 years is not likely to be as dramatic as in the past 10 years.     

Herbicide-resistant crops and weed resistance to herbicides

The adoption of genetically modified (GM) crops has increased dramatically during the last 3 years, and currently over 52 million hectares of GM crops are planted world-wide. Approximately 41 million hectares of GM crops planted are herbicide-resistant crops, which includes an estimated 33.3 million hectares of herbicide-resistant soybean. Herbicide-resistant maize, canola, cotton and soybean accounted for 77% of the GM crop hectares in 2001. However, sugarbeet, wheat, and as many as 14 other crops have transgenic herbicide-resistant cultivars that may be commercially available in the near future. There are many risks associated with the production of GM and herbicide-resistant crops, including problems with grain contamination, segregation and introgression of herbicide-resistant traits, marketplace acceptance and an increased reliance on herbicides for weed control. The latter issue is represented in the occurrence of weed population shifts, the evolution of herbicide-resistant weed populations and herbicide-resistant crops becoming volunteer weeds. Another issue is the ecological impact that simple weed management programs based on herbicide-resistant crops have on weed communities. Asiatic dayflower (Commelina cumminus L) common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L) and wild buckwheat (Polygonum convolvulus L) are reported to be increasing in prominence in some agroecosystems due to the simple and significant selection pressure brought to bear by herbicide-resistant crops and the concomitant use of the herbicide. Finally, evolution of herbicide-resistant weed populations attributable to the herbicide-resistant crop/herbicide program has been observed. Examples of herbicide-resistant weeds include populations of horseweed (Conyza canadensis (L) Cronq) resistant to N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine (glyphosate). An important question is whether or not these problems represent significant economic issues for future agriculture.     

Herbicide risk assessment during the Wheat Self-sufficiency Project in Iran

BACKGROUND: The present study describes the quantitative changes in herbicide use during the specific observation periods in the Wheat Self-sufficiency Project in Iran from 1994 to 2004 and the associated changes in herbicide risk, area and yield in this context. A risk index, the environmental impact quotient (EIQ), was used to estimate the environmental impacts (EIs) of herbicides applied to wheat agroecosystems. RESULTS: The results suggest that, during this period, the overall risk posed by the herbicides applied to wheat agroecosystems increased substantially, as evidenced by a 71% increase in herbicide usage (weight of pesticide applied) and a 62.2% increase in EI rating, in spite of an 8.2% decrease in overall EIQ rating and an 89.2% decrease in mean application rate. Furthermore, a 0.57% increase in the area and a 23.6% and 22.7% increase in irrigated and rainfed yields, respectively, were observed. The results also indicate that the EIQ(FUR) of two herbicides, dichlorprop-P/mecoprop-P/MCPA and difenzoquat, is much higher than that of other herbicides, and they could be qualified as high-risk herbicides. CONCLUSION: As a whole, an increase in herbicide usage (weight of pesticide applied) was an important factor on herbicide environmental impact boost. However, this increase has not led to a similar increase in wheat yield, which could be attributed in part to the negative impact of high herbicide consumption in wheat fields and subsequent threat to the long-term sustainability of these agroecosystems.