Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:25:13.812Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Exploring the Potential for a Regulatory Change to Encourage Diversity in Herbicide Use

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Stephen B. Powles  and
Todd A. Gaines
Stephen B. Powles*
Affiliation:
Australian Herbicide Resistance Initiative, School of Plant Biology, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia
Todd A. Gaines
Affiliation:
Australian Herbicide Resistance Initiative, School of Plant Biology, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An overreliance on herbicides in several important grain- and cotton-producing regions of the world has led to the widespread evolution of herbicide-resistant weed populations. Of particular concern are weed populations that exhibit simultaneous resistance to multiple herbicides (MHR). Too often, herbicides are the only tool used for weed control. We use the term herbicide-only syndrome (HOS) for this quasi-addiction to herbicides. Growers and their advisers focus on herbicide technology, unaware of or ignoring basic evolutionary principles or the necessary diversity provided by other methods of weed control. Diversity in weed control practices disrupts resistance evolution. Significant challenges exist to implementing diversity, including how to address information so that producers choose to alter existing behaviors (HOS) and take calculated risks by attempting new and more complex strategies. Herbicide resistance management in the long term will require creativity in many sectors, including roles for growers, industry, researchers, consultants, retailers, and regulators. There can be creativity in herbicide registration and regulation, as exemplified by the recent U.S. Environmental Protection Agency program that encourages herbicide registrants to register products in minor crops. We propose one idea for a regulatory incentive to enable herbicide registrants in jurisdictions such as the United States to receive an extended data exclusivity period in exchange for not developing one new herbicide in multiple crops used together in rotation, or for implementing stewardship practices such as robust mixtures or limitations on application frequency. This incentive would provide a mechanism to register herbicides in ways that help to ensure herbicide longevity. Approaches based only on market or financial incentives have contributed to the current situation of widespread MHR. Our suggestion for regulatory creativity is one way to provide both financial and biological benefits to the registering company and to the overall stakeholder community by incentivizing good resistance management.

Keywords

Herbicide-only syndromemultiple herbicide resistanceregulation
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 64 , Issue S1: Special Issue: Human Dimensions of Herbicide Resistance , 2016 , pp. 649 - 654
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 by the Weed Science Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor for this paper: Sarah Ward, Colorado State University.

References

Literature Cited

Barrett, S (1983) Crop mimicry in weeds. Econ Bot 37: 233–282Google Scholar
Bell, MS, Hager, AG, Tranel, PJ (2013) Multiple resistance to herbicides from four site-of-action groups in waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus). Weed Sci 61: 460–468Google Scholar
Boutsalis, P, Gill, GS, Preston, C (2012) Incidence of herbicide resistance in rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) across southeastern Australia. Weed Technol 26: 391–398Google Scholar
Broster, JC, Pratley, JE (2006) A decade of monitoring herbicide resistance in Lolium rigidum in Australia. Aust J Exp Agric 46: 1151–1160Google Scholar
Davis, VM, Kruger, GR, Stachler, JM, Loux, MM, Johnson, WG (2009) Growth and seed production of horseweed (Conyza canadensis) populations resistant to glyphosate, ALS-inhibiting, and multiple (glyphosate+ ALS-inhibiting) herbicides. Weed Sci 57: 494–504Google Scholar
Délye, C, Michel, S, Bérard, A, Chauvel, B, Brunel, D, Guillemin, J-P, Dessaint, F, Le Corre, V (2010) Geographical variation in resistance to acetyl-coenzyme A carboxylase-inhibiting herbicides across the range of the arable weed Alopecurus myosuroides (black-grass). New Phytol 186: 1005–1017Google Scholar
Duke, SO (2012) Why have no new herbicide modes of action appeared in recent years? Pest Manag Sci 68: 505–512Google Scholar
[EPA] Environmental Protection Agency (2014) Questions and Answers—Exclusive Use Data Protection for Minor Use Registrations. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-04/documents/exclusive-use-questions.pdf. Accessed March 22, 2015Google Scholar
Heap, I (2015) The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. http://www.weedscience.com. Accessed March 25, 2015Google Scholar
Legleiter, TR, Bradley, KW (2008) Glyphosate and multiple herbicide resistance in waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) populations from Missouri. Weed Sci 56: 582–587Google Scholar
Moss, SR, Perryman, SAM, Tatnell, LV (2007) Managing herbicide-resistant blackgrass (Alopecurus myosuroides): theory and practice. Weed Technol 21: 300–309Google Scholar
Norsworthy, JK, Ward, SM, Shaw, DR, Llewellyn, RS, Nichols, RL, Webster, TM, Bradley, KW, Frisvold, G, Powles, SB, Burgos, NR (2012) Reducing the risks of herbicide resistance: best management practices and recommendations. Weed Sci 60: 31–62Google Scholar
Owen, M, Martinez, N, Powles, S (2014) Multiple herbicide-resistant Lolium rigidum (annual ryegrass) now dominates across the Western Australian grain belt. Weed Res 54: 314–324Google Scholar
Owen, M, Martinez, N, Powles, S (2015) Multiple herbicide resistant wild radish (Raphanus raphanistrum) populations dominate Western Australian cropping fields. Crop Pasture Sci 66: 1079–1085Google Scholar
Preston, C, Powles, SB (2002) Mechanisms of multiple herbicide resistance in Lolium rigidum. Pages 150–160in Clark, JM, Yamaguchi, I, eds. Agrochemical Resistance. Washington, DC: American Chemical SocietyGoogle Scholar
Schultz, JL, Chatham, LA, Riggins, CW, Tranel, PJ, Bradley, KW (2015) Distribution of herbicide resistances and molecular mechanisms conferring resistance in Missouri waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis Sauer) populations. Weed Sci 63: 336–345Google Scholar
Stratus Ag Research (2015) U.S. Resistance Tracking Study. http://stratusresearch.com/. Accessed April 22, 2015Google Scholar
Sun, LH (March 27, 2015) White House announces plan to fight antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/03/27/white-house-announces-plan-to-fight-antibiotic-resistant-bacteria/. Accessed April 10, 2015Google Scholar
Varanasi, VK, Godar, AS, Currie, RS, Dille, AJ, Thompson, CR, Stahlman, PW, Jugulam, M (2015) Field-evolved resistance to four modes of action of herbicides in a single kochia (Kochia scoparia L. Schrad.) population. Pest Manag Sci 71: 1207–1212Google Scholar
Vigueira, CC, Olsen, KM, Caicedo, AL (2013) The red queen in the corn: agricultural weeds as models of rapid adaptive evolution. Heredity 110: 303–311Google Scholar
Walsh, M, Owen, M, Powles, S (2007) Frequency and distribution of herbicide resistance in Raphanus raphanistrum populations randomly collected across the Western Australian wheatbelt. Weed Res 47: 542–550Google Scholar
Walsh, MJ, Harrington, RB, Powles, SB (2012) Harrington seed destructor: a new nonchemical weed control tool for global grain crops. Crop Sci 52: 1343–1347Google Scholar
Walsh, MJ, Newman, P, Powles, SB (2013) Targeting weed seeds in-crop: a new weed control paradigm for global agriculture. Weed Technol 27: 431–436Google Scholar