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.

Changes in weed species since the introduction of glyphosate-resistant cotton

Weed management practices in cotton systems that were based on frequent cultivation, residual herbicides, and some post-emergent herbicides have changed. The ability to use glyphosate as a knockdown before planting, in shielded sprayers, and now over-the-top in glyphosate-tolerant cotton has seen a significant reduction in the use of residual herbicides and cultivation. Glyphosate is now the dominant herbicide in both crop and fallow. This reliance increases the risk of shifts to glyphosate-tolerant species and the evolution of glyphosate-resistant weeds. Four surveys were undertaken in the 2008-09 and 2010-11 seasons. Surveys were conducted at the start of the summer cropping season (November-December) and at the end of the same season (March-April). Fifty fields previously surveyed in irrigated and non-irrigated cotton systems were re-surveyed. A major species shift towards Conyza bonariensis was observed. There was also a minor increase in the prevalence of Sonchus oleraceus. Several species were still present at the end of the season, indicating either poor control and/or late-season germinations. These included C. bonariensis, S. oleraceus, Hibiscus verdcourtii and Hibiscus tridactylites, Echinochloa colona, Convolvulus sp., Ipomea lonchophylla, Chamaesyce drummondii, Cullen sp., Amaranthus macrocarpus, and Chloris virgata. These species, with the exception of E. colona, H. verdcourtii, and H. tridactylites, have tolerance to glyphosate and therefore are likely candidates to either remain or increase in dominance in a glyphosate-based system.

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.

Managing patches of glyphosate resistant Echinochloa colona: can they be eradicated?

Glyphosate-resistant Echinochloa colona L. (Link) is becoming common in non-irrigated cotton systems. Echinochloa colona is a small seeded species that is not wind-blown and has a relatively short seed bank life. These characteristics make it a potential candidate to attempt to eradicate resistant populations when they are detected. A long term systems experiment was developed to determine the feasibility of attempting to eradicate glyphosate resistant populations in the field. To this point the established Best Management Practice (BMP) strategy of two non-glyphosate actions in crop and fallow have been sufficient to significantly reduce the numbers of plants emerging, and remaining at the end of the season. Additional eradication treatments showed slight improvement on the BMP strategy, however were not significant overall. The effects of additional eradication tactics are expected to be more noticeable as the seed bank gets driven down in subsequent seasons.

Teores foliares de macro e micronutrientes em milho tolerante ao glyphosate submetido à herbicidas

A serial of factors related to development of glyphosate-tolerant corn should be approached and best studied. This work was developed to evaluate foliar levels of N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, B, Cu, Fe, Mn and Zn, besides the grain yield of glyphosate-tolerant corn (DKB390 RR hybrid). An experiment was carried out under field conditions, during the crop year of 2010/2011. A randomized complete block design with four repetitions was used to distribute the treatments in the field. Twelve herbicide treatments were studied: glyphosate (720, 1200 and sequential application of 960 plus 720 g ha(-1) of the acid glyphosate equivalent), atrazine (2500 g ha(-1)), nicosulfuron (60 g ha(-1)), mesotrione (192 g ha(-1)), tembotrione (100,8 g ha(-1)), atrazine plus glyphosate (1000 + 960 g ha(-1)), atrazine plus nicosulfuron (1000 + 20 g ha(-1)), atrazine plus mesotrione (1000 + 144 g ha(-1)) and atrazine plus tembotrione (1000 + 75,6 g ha(-1)) and one control treatment without herbicide. The glyphosate and mesotrione alone did not cause no visible injury to corn. The other herbicides caused intoxication symptoms classified as light (<5%). The treatments studied did not affect foliar levels of N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, B, Mn and Zn in the corn plants. But, the plants treated with atrazine plus nicosulfuron had more leaf Fe content, and the plants sprayed with glyphosate (in the three doses) and atrazine, more accumulation of Cu in the leaf. The Grain yield of corn was reduced with application single of glyphosate (1200 g ha(-1)), nicosulfuron, tembotrione and with the mixture atrazine plus nicosulfuron.

Chemical control of different digitaria insularis populations and management of a glyphosate-resistant population

This study aimed to control different populations of Digitaria insularis by glyphosate herbicide, isolated and mixed, besides the combination of methods (chemical and mechanical) to manage resistant adult plants. Three experiments were conducted, one in pots which were maintained under non-controlled conditions and two under field conditions. In the experiment in pots, twelve populations of D. insularis were sprayed with isolated glyphosate (1.44 and 2.16 kg a.e. ha(-1)) and mixed (1.44 and 2.16 kg a.e. ha(-1)) with quizalofop-p tefuryl (0.12 kg i.a. ha(-1)). The treatment of 1.44 kg a.e. ha(-1) of glyphosate plus 0.12 kg a.i. ha(-1) of quizalofop was sufficient for adequate control (>95%) of all populations. Population 11 (area of grain production in Itumbiara, GO) was considered sensitive to glyphosate. Others populations were moderately sensitive or tolerant to the herbicide. In the field, the plants of D. insularis of one of the experiments were mowed and, in the other, there were not. Eight treatments with herbicides [isolated glyphosate (1.44 and 2.16 kg a.e. ha(-1)) and mixed (1.44 and 2.16 kg a.e. ha(-1)) with quizalofop-p-tefuryl at 0.12 kg a.i. ha(-1)), clethodim at 0.108 kg a.i. ha(-1)) or nicosulfuron at 0.06 kg a.i. ha(-1))] were assessed, in combination with or without sequential application of the standard treatment, sprayed 15 days after the first application. The combination of the mechanic control with the application of glyphosate (2.16 and 1.44 kg a.e. ha(-1)) plus quizalofop-p-tefuryl (0.12 kg a.i. ha(-1)) or clethodim (0.108 kg a.i. ha(-1)), associated to the sequential application, was the most effective strategy for the management of adult plants of resistant D. insularis.

CONTROL OF GLYPHOSATE RESISTANT HAIRY FLEABANE (Conyza bonariensis) WITH DICAMBA AND 2,4-D

Auxyn type herbicides such as dicamba and 2,4-D are alternative herbicides that can be used to control glyphosate-resistant hairy fleabane. With the forthcoming possibility of releasing dicamba-resistant and 2,4-D-resistant crops, use of these growth regulator herbicides will likely be an alternative that can be applied to the control of glyphosate resistant hairy fleabane (Conyza bonariensis). The objective of this research was to model the efficacy, through dose-response curves, of glyphosate, 2,4-D, isolated dicamba and glyphosate-dicamba combinations to control a brazilian hairy fleabane population resistant to glyphosate. The greenhouse dose-response studies were conducted as a completely randomized experimental design, and the rates used for dose response curve construction were 0, 120, 240, 480, 720 and 960 ga.i. ha(-1) for 2,4-D, dicamba and the dicamba combination, with glyphosate at 540 g a. e. ha(-1). The rates for glyphosate alone were 0, 180, 360, 540, 720 and 960 g a. e. ha(-1). Herbicides were applied when the plants were in a vegetative stage with 10 to 12 leaves and height between 12 and 15 cm. Hairy fleabane had low sensitivity to glyphosate, with poor control even at the 960 g a. e. ha(-1) rate. Dicamba and 2,4-D were effective in controlling the studied hairy fleabane. Hairy fleabane responds differently to 2,4-D and dicamba. The combination of glyphosate and dicamba was not antagonistic to hairy fleabane control, and glyphosate may cause an additive effect on the control, despite the population resistance.

Control of glyphosate resistant hairy fleabane (Conyza bonariensis) with dicamba and 2,4-D

Auxyn type herbicides such as dicamba and 2,4-D are alternative herbicides that can be used to control glyphosate-resistant hairy fleabane. With the forthcoming possibility of releasing dicamba-resistant and 2,4-D-resistant crops, use of these growth regulator herbicides will likely be an alternative that can be applied to the control of glyphosate resistant hairy fleabane (Conyza bonariensis). The objective of this research was to model the efficacy, through dose-response curves, of glyphosate, 2,4-D, isolated dicamba and glyphosatedicamba combinations to control a brazilian hairy fleabane population resistant to glyphosate. The greenhouse dose-response studies were conducted as a completely randomized experimental design, and the rates used for dose response curve construction were 0, 120, 240, 480, 720 and 960 g a.i. ha-1 for 2,4-D, dicamba and the dicamba combination, with glyphosate at 540 g a.e. ha-1. The rates for glyphosate alone were 0, 180, 360, 540, 720 and 960 g a.e. ha-1. Herbicides were applied when the plants were in a vegetative stage with 10 to 12 leaves and height between 12 and 15 cm. Hairy fleabane had low sensitivity to glyphosate, with poor control even at the 960 g a.e. ha-1 rate. Dicamba and 2,4-D were effective in controlling the studied hairy fleabane. Hairy fleabane responds differently to 2,4-D and dicamba. The combination of glyphosate and dicamba was not antagonistic to hairy fleabane control, and glyphosate may cause an additive effect on the control, despite the population resistance.

Can patches of glyphosate-resistant Echinochloa colona be eradicated?

Glyphosate-resistant Echinochloa colona L. (Link) is becoming common in non-irrigated cotton systems. Echinochloa colona is a small seeded species that is not wind-blown and has a relatively short seed bank life. These characteristics make it a potential candidate to attempt to eradicate populations resistant to glyphosate when they are detected. A long term systems experiment was developed to determine the feasibility of attempting to eradicate glyphosate resistant populations in the field. After three seasons, the established Best Management Practice (BMP) strategy of two non-glyphosate actions in crop and fallow have been sufficient to significantly reduce the numbers of plants emerging, and remaining at the end of the season compared to the glyphosate only treatment. Additional eradication treatments showed slight improvement on the BMP strategy, however to date these improvements are not significant. The importance of additional eradication tactics are expected to become more noticeable as the seed bank gets driven down in subsequent seasons.

Effects of glyphosate-resistant crops on water quality.

2009

Glyphosate-resistant hairy fleabane competition in RR® soybean.

2014

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.

Detection of Sourgrass (Digitaria insularis) Biotypes Resistant to Glyphosate in Brazil

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

Manejo de azevém (Lolium multiflorum Lam.) resistente ao glyphosate com o uso de diferentes herbicidas

Pós-graduação em Agronomia (Proteção de Plantas) - FCA