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     

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 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     

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.     

Managing the risk of glyphosate resistance in Australian glyphosate- resistant cotton production systems

BACKGROUND: Glyphosate-resistant cotton varieties are an important tool for weed control in Australian cotton production systems. To increase the sustainability of this technology and to minimise the likelihood of resistance evolving through its use, weed scientists, together with herbicide regulators, industry representatives and the technology owners, have developed a framework that guides the use of the technology. Central to this framework is a crop management plan (CMP) and grower accreditation course. A simulation model that takes into account the characteristics of the weed species, initial gene frequencies and any associated fitness penalties was developed to ensure that the CMP was sufficiently robust to minimise resistance risks. RESULTS: The simulations showed that, when a combination of weed control options was employed in addition to glyphosate, resistance did not evolve over the 30 year period of the simulation. CONCLUSION: These simulations underline the importance of maintaining an integrated system for weed management to prevent the evolution of glyphosate resistance, prolonging the use of glyphosate-resistant cotton. Copyright (c) 2007 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.     

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     

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-resistant horseweed made sensitive to glyphosate: low-temperature suppression of glyphosate vacuolar sequestration revealed by 31P NMR

BACKGROUND: Horseweed has been the most invasive glyphosate‐resistant (GR) weed, spreading to 16 states in the United States and found on five continents. The authors have previously reported that GR horseweed employs rapid vacuolar sequestration of glyphosate, presumably via a tonoplast transporter, substantively to reduce cytosolic glyphosate concentrations. 1 It was hypothesized that glyphosate sequestration was the herbicide resistance mechanism. If resistance is indeed endowed by glyphosate sequestration, suppression of sequestration offers the potential for controlling GR horseweed at normal herbicide field‐use rates. RESULTS: Low‐temperature ³¹P NMR experiments performed in vivo with GR cold‐acclimated horseweed showed markedly suppressed vacuolar accumulation of glyphosate even 3 days after glyphosate treatment. [In stark contrast, 85% of the visible glyphosate was sequestered 24 h after spraying warm‐acclimated GR horseweed.] Cold‐acclimated GR horseweed treated at normal use rates and maintained at low temperature succumbed to the lethal effects of glyphosate over a 40 day period. Treatment of GR horseweed in the field when temperatures were cooler showed the predicted positive herbicidal response. CONCLUSIONS: Low temperature markedly diminishes vacuolar sequestration of glyphosate in the GR horseweed biotype, yielding a herbicide response equivalent to that of the sensitive biotype. This supports the recent hypothesis 1 that glyphosate sequestration is the resistance mechanism employed by GR horseweed. Copyright © 2011 Society of Chemical Industry     

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     

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。     

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     

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     

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.     

New multiple-herbicide crop resistance and formulation technology to augment the utility of glyphosate

Glyphosate has performed long and well, but now some weed communities are shifting to populations that survive glyphosate, and growers need new weed management technologies to augment glyphosate performance in glyphosate-resistant crops. Unfortunately, most companies are not developing any new selective herbicides with new modes of action to fill this need. Fortunately, companies are developing new herbicide-resistant crop technologies to combine with glyphosate resistance and expand the utility of existing herbicides. One of the first multiple-herbicide-resistant crops will have a molecular stack of a new metabolically based glyphosate resistance mechanism with an active-site-based resistance to a broad spectrum of ALS-inhibiting herbicides. Additionally, new formulation technology called homogeneous blends will be used in conjunction with glyphosate and ALS-resistant crops. This formulation technology satisfies governmental regulations, so that new herbicide mixture offerings with diverse modes of action can be commercialized more rapidly and less expensively. Together, homogeneous blends and multiple-herbicide-resistant crops can offer growers a wider choice of herbicide mixtures at rates and ratios to augment glyphosate and satisfy changing weed management needs.     

Weed control in glyphosate‐tolerant maize in Europe

Maize growing in the EU27 increased to over 13 million ha in 2007, most of which (>80%) was grown in just eight countries (France, Romania, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Spain and Bulgaria). The number of herbicides used to control the wide spectrum of weeds occurring in all these countries is likely to decline in the future as each current active ingredient is reassessed for toxicological and environmental safety under Directive 91/414/EEC. Glyphosate has already been approved under this directive. Glyphosate, applied alone or in combination with currently available residual herbicides to genetically modified varieties tolerant to glyphosate, can provide a viable, flexible and profitable alternative to conventional weed control programmes. Glyphosate usage with glyphosate‐tolerant varieties also provides an environmentally sustainable weed control option as long as sufficient diversity of weed management options (crop rotation, chemical diversity, multiple cultural and mechanical practices, buffer strips) is maintained within the farm management system. Appropriate product stewardship measures will be required to maximise the long‐term overall benefits of the glyphosate‐based system. Specifically, care will need to be taken to manage potential weed shifts to more difficult‐to‐control species and to reduce the risk of selection for glyphosate‐resistant weeds. Copyright © 2009 Society of Chemical Industry     

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.     

Response of wild Brassica juncea populations to glyphosate

BACKGROUND: Wild Brassica juncea (L.) is a troublesome arable land weed and ruderal. It is critical to understand the responses of this weed to herbicides, because the assessment of its susceptibility profile has important ecological and evolutionary consequences for future cultivation of herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape. The response of 31 wild populations from different geographic origins in China to glyphosate was evaluated with two bioassay methods, and variable responses were found in initial studies. Dose-response assays were conducted to characterize the extreme populations further, and shikimate accumulation in vivo was determined using a spectrophotometric method. RESULTS: On the basis of ID(50) values, the resistance ratios (R/S) were 5.85 and 4.19 for two glyphosate-resistant B. juncea populations in germination tests, whereas they were 4 times more resistant to glyphosate in spray tests. There were differences in shikimate accumulation patterns between the two biotypes. Shikimate concentrations in resistant populations began to decline from 6 days after treatment (DAT), while they increased continually in susceptible populations. CONCLUSION: The results obtained suggest that the populations responded differentially to glyphosate, and this variability may provide the genetic basis for evolution of individuals with increased resistance to glyphosate, with important implications for herbicide resistance management, especially in the context of risk assessment of glyphosate-tolerant crops.     

Rapid vacuolar sequestration: the horseweed glyphosate resistance mechanism

BACKGROUND: Glyphosate‐resistant (GR) weed species are now found with increasing frequency and threaten the critically important GR weed management system. RESULTS: The reported ³¹P NMR experiments on glyphosate‐sensitive (S) and glyphosate‐resistant (R) horseweed, Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronq., show significantly more accumulation of glyphosate within the R biotype vacuole. CONCLUSIONS: Selective sequestration of glyphosate into the vacuole confers the observed horseweed resistance to glyphosate. This observation represents the first clear evidence for the glyphosate resistance mechanism in C. canadensis. Copyright © 2010 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.