Australian Herbicide Resistance Initiative (phase 4)

A national focus on strategic and applied research to minimise herbicide resistance in Australian cropping.

Risk assessment and preventive strategies for herbicide resistance in NR (phase III)

The threat and management of glyphosate# resistant weeds are major issues facing northern region growers. At present five weeds are confirmed glyphosate-resistant: barnyard grass, liverseed grass, windmill grass, annual ryegrass and flaxleaf fleabane. This project used 25 experiments to investigate the ecology of the grass weeds, plus new or improved chemical and non-chemical control tactics for them. The refined glyphosate resistance model developed in this project used the experiments' findings to predict the long-term impacts on evolution of resistance and on seed bank numbers of resistant weeds. These data led to revised management and resistance avoidance strategies, which were published in the Reporter newsletter, and via an on-line risk assessment tool. - See more at: http://finalreports.grdc.com.au/UQ00054#sthash.oTkCN4Sk.dpuf

Herbicide resistance modelling: Past, present and future

Computer simulation modelling is an essential aid in building an integrated understanding of how different factors interact to affect the evolutionary and population dynamics of herbicide resistance, and thus in helping to predict and manage how agricultural systems will be affected. In this review, we first discuss why computer simulation modelling is such an important tool and framework for dealing with herbicide resistance. We then explain what questions related to herbicide resistance have been addressed to date using simulation modelling, and discuss the modelling approaches that have been used, focusing first on the earlier, more general approaches, and then on some newer, more innovative approaches. We then consider how these approaches could be further developed in the future, by drawing on modelling techniques that are already employed in other areas, such as individual-based and spatially explicit modelling approaches, as well as the possibility of better representing genetics, competition and economics, and finally the questions and issues of importance to herbicide resistance research and management that could be addressed using these new approaches are discussed. We conclude that it is necessary to proceed with caution when increasing the complexity of models by adding new details, but, with appropriate care, more detailed models will make it possible to integrate more current knowledge in order better to understand, predict and ultimately manage the evolution of herbicide resistance. © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry.

Simulating the evolution of glyphosate resistance in grains farming in northern Australia.

Background and Aims: The evolution of resistance to herbicides is a substantial problem in contemporary agriculture. Solutions to this problem generally consist of the use of practices to control the resistant population once it evolves, and/or to institute preventative measures before populations become resistant. Herbicide resistance evolves in populations over years or decades, so predicting the effectiveness of preventative strategies in particular relies on computational modelling approaches. While models of herbicide resistance already exist, none deals with the complex regional variability in the northern Australian sub-tropical grains farming region. For this reason, a new computer model was developed. Methods: The model consists of an age- and stage-structured population model of weeds, with an existing crop model used to simulate plant growth and competition, and extensions to the crop model added to simulate seed bank ecology and population genetics factors. Using awnless barnyard grass (Echinochloa colona) as a test case, the model was used to investigate the likely rate of evolution under conditions expected to produce high selection pressure. Key Results: Simulating continuous summer fallows with glyphosate used as the only means of weed control resulted in predicted resistant weed populations after approx. 15 years. Validation of the model against the paddock history for the first real-world glyphosate-resistant awnless barnyard grass population shows that the model predicted resistance evolution to within a few years of the real situation. Conclusions: This validation work shows that empirical validation of herbicide resistance models is problematic. However, the model simulates the complexities of sub-tropical grains farming in Australia well, and can be used to investigate, generate and improve glyphosate resistance prevention strategies.

Is Australia ready for triple gene herbicide stack technology?

Integration of multiple herbicide-resistant genes (trait stacking) into crop plants would allow over the top application of herbicides that are otherwise fatal to crops. The US has just approved Bollgard II® XtendFlex™ cotton which has dicamba, glyphosate and glufosinate resistance traits stacked. The pace of glyphosate resistance evolution is expected to be slowed by this technology. In addition, over the top application of two more herbicides may help to manage hard to kill weeds in cotton such as flax leaf fleabane and milk thistle. However, there are some issues that need to be considered prior to the adoption of this technology. Wherever herbicide tolerant technology is adopted, volunteer crops can emerge as a weed problem, as can herbicide resistant weeds. For cotton, seed movement is the most likely way for resistant traits to move around. Management of multiple stack volunteers may add additional complexity to volunteer management in cotton fields and along roadsides. This paper attempts to evaluate the pros and cons of trait stacking technology by analysing the available literature in other crop growing regions across the world. The efficacy of dicamba and glufosinate on common weeds of the Australian cotton system, herbicide resistance evolution, synergy and antagonisms due to herbicide mixtures, drift hazards and the evolution of herbicide resistance to glyphosate, glufosinate and dicamba were analysed based on the available literature.

Survey of weed flora and management relative to cropping practices in the north-eastern grain region of Australia

The main weeds and weed management practices undertaken in broad acre dryland cropping areas of north-eastern Australia have been identified. The information was collected in a comprehensive postal survey of both growers and agronomists from Dubbo in New South Wales (NSW) through to Clermont in central Queensland, where 237 surveys were returned. A very diverse weed flora of 105 weeds from 91 genera was identified for the three cropping zones within the region (central Queensland, southern Queensland and northern NSW). Twenty-three weeds were common to all cropping zones. The major common weeds were Sonchus oleraceus, Rapistrum rugosum, Echinochloa spp. and Urochloa panicoides. The main weeds were identified for both summer and winter fallows, and sorghum, wheat and chickpea crops for each of the zones, with some commonality as well as floral uniqueness recorded. More genera were recorded in the fallows than in crops, and those in summer fallows exceeded the number in winter. Across the region, weed management relied heavily on herbicides. In fallows, glyphosate and mixes with glyphosate were very common, although the importance of the glyphosate mix partner differed among the cropping zones. Use and importance of pre-emergence herbicides in-crop varied considerably among the zones. In wheat, more graminicides were used in northern NSW than in southern Queensland, and virtually none were used in central Queensland, reflecting the differences in winter grass weed flora across the region. Atrazine was the major herbicide used in sorghum, although metolachlor was also used predominantly in northern NSW. Fallow and inter-row cultivation were used more often in the southern areas of the region. Grazing of fallows was more prominent in northern NSW. High crop seeding rates were not commonly recorded indicating that growers are not using crop competition as a tool for weed management. Although many management practices were recorded overall, few growers were using integrated weed management, and herbicide resistance has been and continues to be an issue for the region.

Weed management in wide-row cropping systems: a review of current practices and risks for Australian farming systems.

Growing agricultural crops in wide row spacings has been widely adopted to conserve water, to control pests and diseases, and to minimise problems associated with sowing into stubble. The development of herbicide resistance combined with the advent of precision agriculture has resulted in a further reason for wide row spacings to be adopted: weed control. Increased row spacing enables two different methods of weed control to be implemented with non-selective chemical and physical control methods utilised in the wide inter-row zone, with or without selective chemicals used on the on-row only. However, continual application of herbicides and tillage on the inter-row zone brings risks of herbicide resistance, species shifts and/or changes in species dominance, crop damage, increased costs, yield losses, and more expensive weed management technology.

Competition of sorghum cultivars and densities with Japanese millet (Echinochloa esculenta).

Field studies were conducted at two locations in southern Queensland, Australia during the 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 growing seasons to determine the differential competitiveness of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) cultivars and crop densities against weeds and the sorghum yield loss due to weeds. Weed competition was investigated by growing sorghum in the presence or absence of a model grass weed, Japanese millet (Echinochloa esculenta). The correlation analyses showed that the early growth traits (height, shoot biomass, and daily growth rate of the shoot biomass) of sorghum adversely affected the height, biomass, and seed production of millet, as measured at maturity. "MR Goldrush" and "Bonus MR" were the most competitive cultivars, resulting in reduced weed biomass, weed density, and weed seed production. The density of sorghum also had a significant effect on the crop's ability to compete with millet. When compared to the density of 4.5 plants per m2, sorghum that was planted at 7.5 plants per m2 suppressed the density, biomass, and seed production of millet by 22%, 27% and 38%, respectively. Millet caused a significant yield loss in comparison with the weed-free plots. The combined weed-suppressive effects of the competitive cultivars, such as MR Goldrush, and high crop densities minimized the yield losses from the weeds. These results indicate that sorghum competition against grass weeds can be improved by choosing competitive cultivars and by using a high crop density of > 7.5 plants per m2. These non-chemical options should be included in an integrated weed management program for better weed management, particularly where the control options are limited by the evolution of herbicide resistance.

Allelopathy for weed control in agricultural systems

Weeds are a hidden foe for crop plants, interfering with their functions and suppressing their growth and development. Yield losses of ∼34 are caused by weeds among the major crops, which are grown worldwide. These yield losses are higher than the losses caused by other pests in the crops. Sustainable weed management is needed in the wake of a huge decline in crop outputs due to weed pressure. A diversity in weed management tools ensures sustainable weed control and reduces chances of herbicide resistance development in weeds. Allelopathy as a tool, can be importantly used to combat the challenges of environmental pollution and herbicide resistance development. This review article provides a recent update regarding the practical application of allelopathy for weed control in agricultural systems. Several studies elaborate on the significance of allelopathy for weed management. Rye, sorghum, rice, sunflower, rape seed, and wheat have been documented as important allelopathic crops. These crops express their allelopathic potential by releasing allelochemicals which not only suppress weeds, but also promote underground microbial activities. Crop cultivars with allelopathic potentials can be grown to suppress weeds under field conditions. Further, several types of allelopathic plants can be intercropped with other crops to smother weeds. The use of allelopathic cover crops and mulches can reduce weed pressure in field crops. Rotating a routine crop with an allelopathic crop for one season is another method of allelopathic weed control. Importantly, plant breeding can be explored to improve the allelopathic potential of crop cultivars. In conclusion, allelopathy can be utilized for suppressing weeds in field crops. Allelopathy has a pertinent significance for ecological, sustainable, and integrated weed management systems.

BYGUM – a new tool for BarnYard Grass Understanding and Management

Weed management has become increasingly challenging for cotton growers in Australia in the last decade. Glyphosate, the cornerstone of weed management in the industry, is waning in effectiveness as a result of the evolution of resistance in several species. One of these, awnless barnyard grass, is very common in Australian cotton fields, and is a prime example of the new difficulties facing growers in choosing effective and affordable management strategies. RIM (Ryegrass Integrated Management) is a computer-based decision support tool developed for the south-western Australian grains industry. It is commonly used there as a tool for grower engagement in weed management thinking and strategy development. We used RIM as the basis for a new tool that can fulfil the same types of functions for subtropical Australian cotton-grains farming systems. The new tool, BYGUM, provides growers with a robust means to evaluate five-year rotations including testing the economic value of fallows and fallow weed management, winter and summer cropping, cover crops, tillage, different herbicide options, herbicide resistance management, and more. The new model includes several northernregion- specific enhancements: winter and summer fallows, subtropical crop choices, barnyard grass seed bank, competition, and ecology parameters, and more freedom in weed control applications. We anticipate that BYGUM will become a key tool for teaching and driving the changes that will be needed to maintain sound weed management in cotton in the near future.

A review of weed management in wheat using crop competition

Wheat occupies a principal place in the diet of humans globally, contributing more to our daily calorie and protein intake than any other crop. For this reason, preventing weed induced yield losses in wheat has high significance for world food sustainability. Herbicides and tillage play an important role in weed control, but their use has often unacceptable consequences for humans and the wider environment. Additionally, the range of herbicides effective on key weeds is dwindling due to the evolution of herbicide resistance. Elevating crop competitiveness against weeds, through a combination of wheat breeding and innovative planting design (planting density, row spacing and orientation), has strong potential to reduce weed-induced yield losses in wheat. The last decade of research has provided a solid foundation for the breeding of weed suppressive wheat cultivars, and continued research in this area should be a focus for the future. In the interim, there is cause for optimism that weeds can be effectively suppressed using existing wheat varieties, through careful cultivar selection and choice of planting design. Further research is required to define the nature of relationships between cultivar traits and competitive planting strategies, across diverse weed flora in multiple countries, sites and seasons. Investment in such innovation promises to produce benefits, not only in terms of sustained wheat yields, but also in terms of human and ecosystem health, through ameliorating chemical and sediment contamination, soil degradation, and CO2 pollution.

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.

Understanding and management of resistance to Group M, L and I Herbicides

This project will develop better understanding of resistance to glyphosate, paraquat and Group I herbicides to better inform weed management. The project will develop a range of tools for farm advisors to improve their confidence in decision making with respect to reducing the risk of glyphosate, Group I and paraquat resistance. These will include risk assessments, case studies and scenario exploring tools. The project will discuss with commercial providers the potential for new herbicide registrations. The project will establish farm advisor learning groups to work on the application of the research in local areas where resistance is already a major problem and to improve adoption of research outcomes from this and other projects.

Weed management strategies for farming systems with herbicide tolerant cotton.

The introduction of glyphosate tolerant cotton has significantly improved the flexibility and management of a number of problem weeds in cotton systems. However, reliance on glyphosate poses risks to the industry in term of glyphosate resistance and species shift. The aims of this project were to identify these risks, and determine strategies to prevent and mitigate the potential for resistance evolution. Field surveys identified fleabane as the most common weed now in both irrigated and dryland system. Sowthistle has also increased in prevalence, and bladder ketmia and peachvine remained common. The continued reliance on glyphosate has favoured small seeded, and glyphosate tolerant species. Fleabane is both of these, with populations confirmed resistant in grains systems in Queensland and NSW. When species were assessed for their resistance risk, fleabane, liverseed grass, feathertop Rhodes grass, sowthistle and barnyard grass were determined to have high risk ratings. Management practices were also determined to rely heavily on glyphosate and therefore be high risk in summer fallows, and dryland glyphosate tolerant and conventional cotton. Situations were these high risk species are present in high risk cropping phases need particular attention. The confirmation of a glyphosate resistance barnyard grass population in a dryland glyphosate tolerant cotton system means resistance is now a reality for the cotton industry. However, experiments have shown that resistant populations can be managed with other herbicide options currently available. However, the options for fleabane management in cotton are still limited. Although some selective residual herbicides are showing promise, the majority of fleabane control tactics can only be used in other phases of the cotton rotation. An online glyphosate resistance tool has been developed. This tool allows growers to assess their individual glyphosate resistance risks, and how they can adjust their practices to reduce their risks. It also provides researchers with current information on weed species present and practices used across the industry. This tool will be extremely useful in tailoring future research and extension efforts. Simulations from the expanded glyphosate resistance model have shown that glyphosate resistance can be prevented and managed in glyphosate-tolerant cotton farming systems. However, for strategies to be successful, some effort is required. Simulations have shown the importance of controlling survivors of glyphosate applications, using effective glyphosate alternatives in fallows, and combining several effective glyphosate alternatives in crop, and these are the key to the prevention and management of glyphosate resistance.

Managing glyphosate resistance in Australian cotton farming: modelling shows how to delay evolution and maintain long-term population control

Glyphosate resistance is a rapidly developing threat to profitability in Australian cotton farming. Resistance causes an immediate reduction in the effectiveness of in-crop weed control in glyphosate-resistant transgenic cotton and summer fallows. Although strategies for delaying glyphosate resistance and those for managing resistant populations are qualitatively similar, the longer resistance can be delayed, the longer cotton growers will have choice over which tactics to apply and when to apply them. Effective strategies to avoid, delay, and manage resistance are thus of substantial value. We used a model of glyphosate resistance dynamics to perform simulations of resistance evolution in Sonchus oleraceus (common sowthistle) and Echinochloa colona (awnless barnyard grass) under a range of resistance prevention, delaying, and management strategies. From these simulations, we identified several elements that could contribute to effective glyphosate resistance prevention and management strategies. (i) Controlling glyphosate survivors is the most robust approach to delaying or preventing resistance. High-efficacy, high-frequency survivor control almost doubled the useful lifespan of glyphosate from 13 to 25 years even with glyphosate alone used in summer fallows. (ii) Two non-glyphosate tactics in-crop plus two in-summer fallows is the minimum intervention required for long-term delays in resistance evolution. (iii) Pre-emergence herbicides are important, but should be backed up with non-glyphosate knockdowns and strategic tillage; replacing a late-season, pre-emergence herbicide with inter-row tillage was predicted to delay glyphosate resistance by 4 years in awnless barnyard grass. (iv) Weed species' ecological characteristics, particularly seed bank dynamics, have an impact on the effectiveness of resistance strategies; S. oleraceus, because of its propensity to emerge year-round, was less exposed to selection with glyphosate than E. colona, resulting in an extra 5 years of glyphosate usefulness (18 v. 13 years) even in the most rapid cases of resistance evolution. Delaying tactics are thus available that can provide some or many years of continued glyphosate efficacy. If glyphosate-resistant cotton cropping is to remain profitable in Australian farming systems in the long-term, however, growers must adapt to the probability that they will have to deal with summer weeds that are no longer susceptible to glyphosate. Robust resistance management systems will need to include a diversity of weed control options, used appropriately.