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.     

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.     

Herbicide‐resistant weed management: focus on glyphosate

This review focuses on proactive and reactive management of glyphosate‐resistant (GR) weeds. Glyphosate resistance in weeds has evolved under recurrent glyphosate usage, with little or no diversity in weed management practices. The main herbicide strategy for proactively or reactively managing GR weeds is to supplement glyphosate with herbicides of alternative modes of action and with soil‐residual activity. These herbicides can be applied in sequences or mixtures. Proactive or reactive GR weed management can be aided by crop cultivars with alternative single or stacked herbicide‐resistance traits, which will become increasingly available to growers in the future. Many growers with GR weeds continue to use glyphosate because of its economical broad‐spectrum weed control. Government farm policies, pesticide regulatory policies and industry actions should encourage growers to adopt a more proactive approach to GR weed management by providing the best information and training on management practices, information on the benefits of proactive management and voluntary incentives, as appropriate. Results from recent surveys in the United States indicate that such a change in grower attitudes may be occurring because of enhanced awareness of the benefits of proactive management and the relative cost of the reactive management of GR weeds. Copyright © 2011 Society of Chemical Industry     

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 – a two‐edged sword*

Summary Weeds cause yield losses and reductions in crop quality. Prior to the introduction of selective herbicides, the drudgery of manual weeding forced farmers to adhere to a suit of weed management tactics by carefully combining crop rotation, appropriate tillage and fallow systems. The introduction of selective herbicides in the late 1940s and the constant flow of new herbicides in the succeeding decades provided farmers with a new tool, ‘the chemical hoe’, putting them in a position to consider weed control more independently of the crop production system than hitherto. The reliance on herbicides for weed control, however, resulted in shifts in the weed flora and the selection of herbicide‐resistant biotypes. In the 1980s, the public concern about side‐effects of herbicides on the environment and human health resulted in increasingly strict registration requirements and, in some countries, political initiatives to reduce the use of pesticides were launched. Today, the number of new herbicides being introduced has decreased significantly and integrated weed management has become the guiding concept. Farmers also have the option of growing herbicide‐resistant crops where the biology of the crop has been adapted to tolerate herbicides considered safe to humans and environmentally benign. This paper discusses some of the recent developments in herbicide discovery, technology and fate, and sketches important future developments.     

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 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     

Contamination of internationally traded wheat by herbicide‐resistant Lolium rigidum

As herbicide‐resistant weeds have spread in the agricultural fields of grain‐exporting countries, their seeds could be introduced into other countries as contaminants in imported grain. The spread of resistance genes through seed and pollen can cause significant economic loss. In order to assess the extent of the problem, we investigated the contamination by herbicide‐resistant annual ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) of wheat imported from Western Australia into Japan. Annual ryegrass seeds were recovered from wheat shipments and seed bioassays were conducted to identify resistance to the herbicides that are commonly used in Australia: diclofop‐methyl, sethoxydim, chlorsulfuron, and glyphosate. Nearly 4500 ryegrass seeds were detected in 20 kg of wheat that was imported in both 2006 and 2007. About 35% and 15% of the seeds were resistant to diclofop‐methyl, 5% and 6% were resistant to sethoxydim, and 56% and 60% were resistant to chlorsulfuron in 2006 and 2007, respectively. None was resistant to glyphosate in either year. As the contamination of crops by herbicide‐resistant weeds is probably a common phenomenon, the monitoring of incoming grain shipments is necessary to stem the further spread of herbicide‐resistant weeds into importing countries.     

Prevalence of herbicide‐resistant weed species in Malaysian rice fields: A review

The management of weeds in Malaysian rice fields is very much herbicide‐based. The heavy reliance on herbicide for weed control by many rice‐growers arguably eventually has led to the development and evolution of herbicide‐resistant biotypes in Malaysian rice fields over the years. The continuous use of synthetic auxin (phenoxy group) herbicides and acetohydroxyacid synthase‐inhibiting herbicides to control rice weeds was consequential in leading to the emergence and prevalence of resistant weed biotypes. This review discusses the history and confirmed cases and incidence of herbicide‐resistant weeds in Malaysian rice fields. It also reviews the Clearfield Production System and its impact on the evolution of herbicide resistance among rice weed species and biotypes. This review also emphasizes the strategies and management options for herbicide‐resistant rice field weeds within the framework of herbicide‐based integrated weed management. These include the use of optimum tillage practices, certified clean seeds, increased crop competition through high seeding rates, crop rotation, the application of multiple modes of action of herbicides in annual rotations, tank mixtures and sequential applications to enable a broad spectrum of weed control, increase the selective control of noxious weed species in a field and help to delay the resistance evolution by reducing the selection pressure that is forced on those weed populations by a specific herbicidal mode of action.     

Tillage and herbicide treatments with inter‐row cultivation influence weed densities and yield of three industrial crops

Field experiments were conducted in northern Greece in 2003 and 2004 to evaluate effects of tillage regimes (moldboard plowing, chisel plowing, and rotary tilling), cropping sequences (continuous cotton, cotton‐sugar beet rotation, and continuous tobacco) and herbicide treatments with inter‐row hand hoeing on weed population densities. Total weed densities were not affected by tillage treatment except that of barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus‐galli), which increased only in moldboard plowing treated plots during 2003. Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) and black nightshade (Solanum nigrum) densities were reduced in continuous cotton, while purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus), E. crus‐galli, S. nigrum, and johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense) densities were reduced in tobacco. A. retroflexus and S. nigrum were effectively controlled by all herbicide treatments with inter‐row hand hoeing, whereas E. crus‐galli was effectively reduced by herbicides applied to cotton and tobacco. S. halepense density reduction was a result of herbicide applied to tobacco with inter‐row hand hoeing. Yield of all crops was higher under moldboard plowing and herbicide treatments. Pre‐sowing and pre‐emergence herbicide treatments in cotton and pre‐transplant in tobacco integrated with inter‐row cultivation resulted in efficient control of annual weed species and good crop yields. These observations are of practical relevance to crop selection by farmers in order to maintain weed populations at economically acceptable densities through the integration of various planting dates, sustainable herbicide use and inter‐row cultivation; tools of great importance in integrated weed management systems.     

Simulating evolution of glyphosate resistance in Lolium rigidum I: population biology of a rare resistance trait

Despite frequent use for the past 25 years, resistance to glyphosate has evolved in few weed biotypes. The propensity for evolution of resistance is not the same for all herbicides, and glyphosate has a relatively low resistance risk. The reasons for these differences are not entirely understood. A previously published two‐herbicide resistance model has been modified to explore biological and management factors that account for observed rates of evolution of glyphosate resistance. Resistance to a post‐emergence herbicide was predicted to evolve more rapidly than it did to glyphosate, even when both were applied every year and had the same control efficacy. Glyphosate is applied earlier in the growing season when fewer weeds have emerged and hence exerts less selection pressure on populations. The evolution of glyphosate resistance was predicted to arise more rapidly when glyphosate applications were later in the growing season. In simulations that assumed resistance to the post‐emergence herbicide did not evolve, the evolution of glyphosate resistance was less rapid, because post‐emergence herbicides were effectively controlling rare glyphosate‐resistant individuals. On their own, these management‐related factors could not entirely account for rates of evolution of resistance to glyphosate observed in the field. In subsequent analyses, population genetic parameter values (initial allele frequency, dominance and fitness) were selected on the basis of empirical data from a glyphosate‐resistant Lolium rigidum population. Predicted rates of evolution of resistance were similar to those observed in the field. Together, the timing of glyphosate applications, the rarity of glyphosate‐resistant mutants, the incomplete dominance of glyphosate‐resistant alleles and pleiotropic fitness costs associated with glyphosate resistance, all contribute to its relatively slow evolution in the field.     

Simulating evolution of glyphosate resistance in Lolium rigidum II: past, present and future glyphosate use in Australian cropping

Glyphosate is a key component of weed control strategies in Australia and worldwide. Despite widespread and frequent use, evolved resistance to glyphosate is rare. A herbicide resistance model, parameterized for Lolium rigidum has been used to perform a number of simulations to compare predicted rates of evolution of glyphosate resistance under past, present and projected future use strategies. In a 30‐year wheat, lupin, wheat, oilseed rape crop rotation with minimum tillage (100% shallow depth soil disturbance at sowing) and annual use of glyphosate pre‐sowing, L. rigidum control was sustainable with no predicted glyphosate resistance. When the crop establishment system was changed to annual no‐tillage (15% soil disturbance at sowing), glyphosate resistance was predicted in 90% of populations, with resistance becoming apparent after between 10 and 18 years when sowing was delayed. Resistance was predicted in 20% of populations after 25–30 years with early sowing. Risks of glyphosate resistance could be reduced by rotating between no‐tillage and minimum‐tillage establishment systems, or by rotating between glyphosate and paraquat for pre‐sowing weed control. The double knockdown strategy (sequential full rate applications of glyphosate and paraquat) reduced risks of glyphosate and paraquat resistance to <2%. Introduction of glyphosate‐resistant oilseed rape significantly increased predicted risks of glyphosate resistance in no‐tillage systems even when the double knockdown was practised. These increased risks could be offset by high crop sowing rates and weed seed collection at harvest. When no selective herbicides were available in wheat crops, the introduction of glyphosate‐resistant oilseed rape necessitated a return to a minimum‐tillage crop establishment system.     

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.     

耐草甘膦杂草的研究现状

草甘膦是目前世界上用量最大、应用范围最广的农药,因为在转基因抗草甘膦作物田中过度依赖其除草,耐草甘膦杂草将演替成优势种群。耐受性杂草不但增加了杂草防除难度和成本,而且还会导致在农田生态系统中因过量使用草甘膦而出现一系列生态风险问题。本文通过对草甘膦特性、耐草甘膦杂草现状和耐受机制等进行较系统的总结和分析,以期为我国未来抗除草剂作物商业化种植后制定杂草治理策略奠定基础,也为草甘膦在转基因作物田高效安全地使用提供理论依据。     

Integrated pest management and weed management in the United States and Canada

There is interest in more diverse weed management tactics because of evolved herbicide resistance in important weeds in many US and Canadian crop systems. While herbicide resistance in weeds is not new, the issue has become critical because of the adoption of simple, convenient and inexpensive crop systems based on genetically engineered glyphosate‐tolerant crop cultivars. Importantly, genetic engineering has not been a factor in rice and wheat, two globally important food crops. There are many tactics that help to mitigate herbicide resistance in weeds and should be widely adopted. Evolved herbicide resistance in key weeds has influenced a limited number of growers to include a more diverse suite of tactics to supplement existing herbicidal tactics. Most growers still emphasize herbicides, often to the exclusion of alternative tactics. Application of integrated pest management for weeds is better characterized as integrated weed management, and more typically integrated herbicide management. However, adoption of diverse weed management tactics is limited. Modifying herbicide use will not solve herbicide resistance in weeds, and the relief provided by different herbicide use practices is generally short‐lived at best. More diversity of tactics for weed management must be incorporated in crop systems. © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry     

Glyphosate resistance in common ragweed ( A mbrosia artemisiifolia L.) from Mississippi,USA

Glyphosate is one of the most commonly used broad‐spectrum herbicides over the last 40 years. Due to the widespread adoption of glyphosate‐resistant (GR) crop technology, especially corn, cotton and soybean, several weed species have evolved resistance to this herbicide. Research was conducted to confirm and characterize the magnitude and mechanism of glyphosate resistance in two GR common ragweed ( A mbrosia artemisiifolia L.) biotypes from Mississippi, USA. A glyphosate‐susceptible (GS) biotype was included for comparison. The effective glyphosate dose to reduce the growth of the treated plants by 50% for the GR1, GR2 and GS biotypes was 0.58, 0.46 and 0.11 kg ae ha^?1, respectively, indicating that the level of resistance was five and fourfold that of the GS biotype for GR1 and GR2, respectively. Studies using ¹⁴ C‐glyphosate have not indicated any difference in its absorption between the biotypes, but the GR1 and GR2 biotypes translocated more ¹⁴ C‐glyphosate, compared to the GS biotype. This difference in translocation within resistant biotypes is unique. There was no amino acid substitution at codon 106 that was detected by the 5‐enolpyruvylshikimate‐3‐phosphate synthase gene sequence analysis of the resistant and susceptible biotypes. Therefore, the mechanism of resistance to glyphosate in common ragweed biotypes from Mississippi is not related to a target site mutation or reduced absorption and/or translocation of glyphosate.     

Are herbicides a once in a century method of weed control?

The efficacy of any pesticide is an exhaustible resource that can be depleted over time. For decades, the dominant paradigm – that weed mobility is low relative to insect pests and pathogens, that there is an ample stream of new weed control technologies in the commercial pipeline, and that technology suppliers have sufficient economic incentives and market power to delay resistance – supported a laissez faire approach to herbicide resistance management. Earlier market data bolstered the belief that private incentives and voluntary actions were sufficient to manage resistance. Yet, there has been a steady growth in resistant weeds, while no new commercial herbicide modes of action (MOAs) have been discovered in 30 years. Industry has introduced new herbicide tolerant crops to increase the applicability of older MOAs. Yet, many weed species are already resistant to these compounds. Recent trends suggest a paradigm shift whereby herbicide resistance may impose greater costs to farmers, the environment, and taxpayers than earlier believed. In developed countries, herbicides have been the dominant method of weed control for half a century. Over the next half‐century, will widespread resistance to multiple MOAs render herbicides obsolete for many major cropping systems? We suggest it would be prudent to consider the implications of such a low‐probability, but high‐cost development. © 2017 Society of Chemical Industry     

Control by glyphosate and its alternatives of glyphosate‐susceptible and glyphosate‐resistant Echinochloa colona in the fallow phase of crop rotations in subtropical Australia

Echinochloa colona is the most common grass weed of summer fallows in the grain‐cropping systems of the subtropical region of Australia. Glyphosate is the most commonly used herbicide for summer grass control in fallows in this region. The world's first population of glyphosate‐resistant E. colona was confirmed in Australia in 2007 and, since then, >70 populations have been confirmed to be resistant in the subtropical region. The efficacy of alternative herbicides on glyphosate‐susceptible populations was evaluated in three field experiments and on both glyphosate‐susceptible and glyphosate‐resistant populations in two pot experiments. The treatments were knockdown and pre‐emergence herbicides that were applied as a single application (alone or in a mixture) or as part of a sequential application to weeds at different growth stages. Glyphosate at 720 g ai ha^?1 provided good control of small glyphosate‐susceptible plants (pre‐ to early tillering), but was not always effective on larger susceptible plants. Paraquat was effective and the most reliable when applied at 500 g ai ha^?1 on small plants, irrespective of the glyphosate resistance status. The sequential application of glyphosate followed by paraquat provided 96–100% control across all experiments, irrespective of the growth stage, and the addition of metolachlor and metolachlor + atrazine to glyphosate or paraquat significantly reduced subsequent emergence. Herbicide treatments have been identified that provide excellent control of small E. colona plants, irrespective of their glyphosate resistance status. These tactics of knockdown herbicides, sequential applications and pre‐emergence herbicides should be incorporated into an integrated weed management strategy in order to greatly improve E. colona control, reduce seed production by the sprayed survivors and to minimize the risk of the further development of glyphosate resistance.     

Are herbicide‐resistant crops the answer to controlling Cuscuta?

BACKGROUND: Herbicide‐resistant crop technology could provide new management strategies for the control of parasitic plants. Three herbicide‐resistant oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) genotypes were used to examine the response of attached Cuscuta campestris Yuncker to glyphosate, imazamox and glufosinate. Cuscata campestris was allowed to establish on all oilseed rape genotypes before herbicides were applied. RESULTS: Unattached seedlings of C. campestris, C. subinclusa Durand & Hilg. and C. gronovii Willd. were resistant to imazamox and glyphosate and sensitive to glufosinate, indicating that resistance initially discovered in C. campestris is universal to all Cuscuta species. Glufosinate applied to C. campestris attached to glufosinate‐resistant oilseed rape had little impact on the parasite, while imazamox completely inhibited C. campestris growth on the imidazolinone‐resistant host. The growth of C. campestris on glyphosate‐resistant host was initially inhibited by glyphosate, but the parasite recovered and resumed growth within 3–4 weeks. CONCLUSION: The ability of C. campestris to recover was related to the quality of interaction between the host and parasite and to the resistance mechanism of the host. The parasite was less likely to recover when it had low compatibility with the host, indicating that parasite‐resistant crops coupled with herbicide resistance could be highly effective in controlling Cuscuta. Published 2009 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The benefits of herbicide-resistant crops

Since 1996, genetically modified herbicide-resistant crops, primarily glyphosate-resistant soybean, corn, cotton and canola, have helped to revolutionize weed management and have become an important tool in crop production practices. Glyphosate-resistant crops have enabled the implementation of weed management practices that have improved yield and profitability while better protecting the environment. Growers have recognized their benefits and have made glyphosate-resistant crops the most rapidly adopted technology in the history of agriculture. Weed management systems with glyphosate-resistant crops have often relied on glyphosate alone, have been easy to use and have been effective, economical and more environmentally friendly than the systems they have replaced. Glyphosate has worked extremely well in controlling weeds in glyphosate-resistant crops for more than a decade, but some key weeds have evolved resistance, and using glyphosate alone has proved unsustainable. Now, growers need to renew their weed management practices and use glyphosate with other cultural, mechanical and herbicide options in integrated systems. New multiple-herbicide-resistant crops with resistance to glyphosate and other herbicides will expand the utility of existing herbicide technologies and will be an important component of future weed management systems that help to sustain the current benefits of high-efficiency and high-production agriculture. Copyright © 2012 Society of Chemical Industry