Benchmark study on glyphosate-resistant cropping systems in the United States. Part 3: Grower awareness, information sources, experiences and management practices regarding glyphosate-resistant weeds

BACKGROUND: A survey was conducted with nearly 1200 growers in US states (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska and North Carolina) in 2005 with the objective in part of determining the awareness of the potential for development of glyphosate resistance, the experience with glyphosate‐resistant (GR) weeds and the sources of information that growers had utilized for information on glyphosate resistance. Growers were asked a series of questions to determine the level of glyphosate resistance awareness and to list the sources of information used to learn about glyphosate resistance issues. RESULTS: The majority of the growers (88%) were aware of a weed's potential to evolve resistance to herbicide, while 44% were aware of state‐specific documented cases of GR weeds, and 15% reported having had personal experience with GR weeds. Among sources of information concerning glyphosate resistance issues, farm publications, dealers/retailers and university/extension were the most frequent responses (41, 17 and 14% respectively). Based on a 1‐10 effectiveness scale, growers ranked tillage the least effective practice (5.5) and using the correct label rates of herbicides at the proper timing for the size and type of weeds present the most effective practice (8.6) with respect to how effectively the practices mitigated the evolution of GR weeds. CONCLUSION: Results from this survey can be used by researchers, extension specialists and crop advisors further to bridge the information gap between growers and themselves and better to disseminate information concerning glyphosate resistance and glyphosate resistance management practices through more targeted information and information delivery methods. 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.     

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     

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.     

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     

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     

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     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Sustainable use of glyphosate in North American cropping systems

Roundup Ready (glyphosate-resistant) cropping systems enable the use of glyphosate, a non-selective herbicide that offers growers several benefits, including superior weed control, flexibility in weed control timing and economic advantages. The rapid adoption of such crops in North America has resulted in greater glyphosate use and concern over the potential for weed resistance to erode the sustainability of its efficacy. Computer modeling is one method that can be used to explore the sustainability of glyphosate when used in glyphosate-resistant cropping systems. Field tests should help strengthen the assumptions on which the models are based, and have been initiated for this purpose. Empirical evaluations of published data show that glyphosate-resistant weeds have an appearance rate of 0.007, defined as the number of newly resistant species per million acres treated, which ranks low among herbicides used in North America. Modeling calculations and ongoing field tests support a practical recommendation for growers occasionally to include other herbicides in glyphosate-resistant cropping systems, to lower further the potential for new resistance to occur. The presented data suggest that the sustainability of glyphosate in North America would be enhanced by prudent use of additional herbicides in glyphosate-resistant cropping systems.     

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     

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.     

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 weeds of South American cropping systems: an overview

Herbicide resistance is an evolutionary event resulting from intense herbicide selection over genetically diverse weed populations. In South America, orchard, cereal and legume cropping systems show a strong dependence on glyphosate to control weeds. The goal of this report is to review the current knowledge on cases of evolved glyphosate-resistant weeds in South American agriculture. The first reports of glyphosate resistance include populations of highly diverse taxa (Lolium multiflorum Lam., Conyza bonariensis L., C. canadensis L.). In all instances, resistance evolution followed intense glyphosate use in fruit fields of Chile and Brazil. In fruit orchards from Colombia, Parthenium hysterophorus L. has shown the ability to withstand high glyphosate rates. The recent appearance of glyphosate-resistant Sorghum halepense L. and Euphorbia heterophylla L. in glyphosate-resistant soybean fields of Argentina and Brazil, respectively, is of major concern. The evolution of glyphosate resistance has clearly taken place in those agroecosystems where glyphosate exerts a strong and continuous selection pressure on weeds. The massive adoption of no-till practices together with the utilization of glyphosate-resistant soybean crops are factors encouraging increase in glyphosate use. This phenomenon has been more evident in Argentina and Brazil. The exclusive reliance on glyphosate as the main tool for weed management results in agroecosystems biologically more prone to glyphosate resistance evolution.     

草甘膦作用机制和抗性研究进展

草甘膦是迄今为止最为重要、应用最广泛和最优秀的除草剂之一。然而,由于抗草甘膦转基因作物的广泛商业化导致草甘膦使用量迅速增长,杂草抗药性发生,这不仅对草甘膦的药效发挥和未来可持续应用造成了严重影响,而且对现代农业生产安全构成了威胁。本文通过对草甘膦的作用机理、草甘膦抗性杂草发展现状和抗性机制进行系统的总结和分析,以期为我国草甘膦的抗性研究和科学使用提供参考。     

南繁基地牛筋草对草甘膦的抗药性研究

牛筋草是一年生禾本科恶性杂草, 在我国黄淮海流域及长江以南地区的农田危害严重。草甘膦是一种优良的非选择性除草剂, 随着生物育种产业化的推进, 草甘膦会逐步在玉米、大豆等作物田登记应用。育种基地抗草甘膦杂草的产生是其快速传播的潜在因素。为明确三亚一育种基地牛筋草种群对草甘膦的敏感性, 本研究利用生物测定、分子生物学等方法检测了待测种群的抗性水平, 并分析了可能的分子机制。结果发现, 草甘膦对牛筋草种群的生长抑制中量为2 053.0 g/hm2(有效成分用量), 抗性指数(RI)为5.0; 靶标基因EPSPS的保守区域无突变, 但相对表达量是敏感种群的47.4倍; 抗性植株中EPSPS蛋白的浓度是敏感植株的17.1倍。以上结果表明, 该牛筋草种群对草甘膦产生了中等水平抗性, 靶标基因过量表达是其抗性机制之一。     

Evolved glyphosate-resistant weeds around the world: lessons to be learnt

Glyphosate is the world's most important herbicide, with many uses that deliver effective and sustained control of a wide spectrum of unwanted (weedy) plant species. Until recently there were relatively few reports of weedy plant species evolving resistance to glyphosate. Since 1996, the advent and subsequent high adoption of transgenic glyphosate-resistant crops in the Americas has meant unprecedented and often exclusive use of glyphosate for weed control over very large areas. Consequently, in regions of the USA where transgenic glyphosate-resistant crops dominate, there are now evolved glyphosate-resistant populations of the economically damaging weed species Ambrosia artemissifolia L., Ambrosia trifida L., Amaranthus palmeri S Watson, Amaranthus rudis JD Sauer, Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq) JD Sauer and various Conyza and Lolium spp. Likewise, in areas of transgenic glyphosate-resistant crops in Argentina and Brazil, there are now evolved glyphosate-resistant populations of Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers and Euphorbia heterophylla L. respectively. As transgenic glyphosate-resistant crops will remain very popular with producers, it is anticipated that glyphosate-resistant biotypes of other prominent weed species will evolve over the next few years. Therefore, evolved glyphosate-resistant weeds are a major risk for the continued success of glyphosate and transgenic glyphosate-resistant crops. However, glyphosate-resistant weeds are not yet a problem in many parts of the world, and lessons can be learnt and actions taken to achieve glyphosate sustainability. A major lesson is that maintenance of diversity in weed management systems is crucial for glyphosate to be sustainable. Glyphosate is essential for present and future world food production, and action to secure its sustainability for future generations is a global imperative.     

抗草甘膦杂草及其抗性机制研究进展

介绍了迄今为止全球发现的13种抗草甘膦杂草的发生、发展,并从草甘膦的吸收、输导和分布,5-烯醇丙酮莽草酸-3-磷酸合成酶(EPSPS)的活性以及抗药性遗传等方面对其抗性机制进行了讨论,指出了中国在未来出现抗草甘膦杂草的潜在风险性,并提出了延缓杂草对草甘膦抗性发生的策略。