Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T15:24:26.619Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Characterization of multiple herbicide–resistant waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) populations from Illinois to VLCFA-inhibiting herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2019

Seth A. Strom Open the ORCID record for Seth A. Strom [Opens in a new window] ,
Lisa C. Gonzini ,
Charlie Mitsdarfer ,
Adam S. Davis ,
Dean E. Riechers Open the ORCID record for Dean E. Riechers [Opens in a new window]  and
Aaron G. Hager
Seth A. Strom
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA
Lisa C. Gonzini
Affiliation:
Senior Research Specialist, Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA
Charlie Mitsdarfer
Affiliation:
Principal Research Specialist, Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA
Adam S. Davis
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA
Dean E. Riechers
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA
Aaron G. Hager*
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Aaron G. Hager, Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in 2016 and 2017 in Champaign County, IL, to study a waterhemp [Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.) J. D. Sauer] population (CHR) resistant to 2,4-D and 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD)-, photosystem II–, acetolactate synthase (ALS)-, and protoporphyrinogen oxidase–inhibiting herbicides. Two field experiments were designed to investigate the efficacy of very-long-chain fatty-acid (VLCFA)-inhibiting herbicides, including a comparison of active ingredients at labeled use rates and a rate titration experiment. Amaranthus tuberculatus density and control were evaluated at 28 and 42 d after treatment (DAT). Nonencapsulated acetochlor, alachlor, and pyroxasulfone provided the greatest PRE control of CHR (56% to 75%) at 28 DAT, while metolachlor, S-metolachlor, dimethenamid-P, and encapsulated acetochlor provided less than 27% control. In the rate titration study, nonencapsulated acetochlor controlled CHR more than equivalent field use rates of S-metolachlor. Subsequent dose–response experiments with acetochlor, S-metolachlor, dimethenamid-P, and pyroxasulfone in the greenhouse included three multiple herbicide–resistant (MHR) A. tuberculatus populations: CHR-M6 (progeny generated from CHR), MCR-NH40 (progeny generated from Mclean County, IL), and ACR (Adams County, IL), in comparison with a sensitive population (WUS). Both CHR-M6 and MCR-NH40 are MHR to atrazine and HPPD, and ALS inhibitors and demonstrated higher survival rates (LD50) to S-metolachlor, acetochlor, dimethenamid-P, or pyroxasulfone than ACR (atrazine resistant but HPPD-inhibitor sensitive) and WUS. Based on biomass reduction (GR50), resistant to sensitive (R:S) ratios between CHR-M6 and WUS were 7.5, 6.1, 5.5, and 2.9 for S-metolachlor, acetochlor, dimethenamid-P, and pyroxasulfone, respectively. Values were greater for MCR-NH40 than CHR-M6, and ACR was the most sensitive to all VLCFA inhibitors tested. Complete control of all populations was achieved at or below a field use rate of acetochlor. In summary, field studies demonstrated CHR is not controlled by several VLCFA-inhibiting herbicides. Greenhouse dose–response experiments corroborated field results and generated R:S ratios (LD50) ranging from 4.5 to 64 for CHR-M6 and MCR-NH40 among the four VLCFA-inhibiting herbicides evaluated.

Keywords

Amaranthus tuberculatus managementchloroacetamidedose–response studysoil-applied residual
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 67 , Issue 4 , July 2019 , pp. 369 - 379
Copyright
© Weed Science Society of America, 2019 

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: Muthukumar Bagavathiannnan, Texas A&M University

References

Bach, L, Faure, JD (2010) Role of very-long-chain fatty acids in plant development, when chain length does matter. Comptes Rendus Biologies 333:361–370CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bell, MS, Hager, AG, Tranel, PJ (2013) Multiple resistance to herbicides from four site-of-action groups in waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus). Weed Sci 61:460–46810.1614/WS-D-12-00166.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, MS, Tranel, PJ (2010) Time requirement from pollination to seed maturity in waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus). Weed Sci 58:167–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belz, RG, Duke, SO (2014) Herbicides and plant hormesis. Pest Manag Sci 70:698–70710.1002/ps.3726CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Böger, P (2003) Mode of action for chloroacetamides and functionally related compounds. J Pestic Sci 28:324–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breaux, EJ (1987) Initial metabolism of acetochlor in tolerant and susceptible seedlings. Weed Sci 35:463–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunton, DJ, Boutsalis, P, Gurjeet, G, Preston, C (2018) Resistance to multiple PRE herbicides inn a field-evolved rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) population. Weed Sci 66:581–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buhler, DD, Hartzler, RG (2001) Emergence and persistence of seed of velvetleaf, common waterhemp, woolly cupgrass, and giant foxtail. Weed Sci 49:230–23510.1614/0043-1745(2001)049[0230:EAPOSO]2.0.CO;2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnet, WM, Barr, AR, Powles, SB (1994) Chloroacetamide resistance in rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum). Weed Sci 42:153–157Google Scholar
Busi, R, Gaines, TA, Powles, SB (2017) Phorate can reverse P450 metabolism-based herbicide resistance in Lolium rigidum. Pest Manag Sci 73:410–417CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Busi, R, Powles, SB (2016) Cross-resistance to prosulfocarb + S-metolachlor and pyroxasulfone selected by either herbicide in Lolium rigidum. Pest Manag Sci 72:1664–1672CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deal, LM, Hess, FD (1980) An analysis of the growth inhibitory characteristics of alachlor and metolachlor. Weed Sci 28:168–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dhillon, NS, Anderson, JL (1972) Morphological, anatomical, and biochemical effects of propachlor on seedling growth. Weed Res 12:182–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, R, Owen, WJ (1989) The comparative metabolism of S-triazine herbicides atrazine and terbutryne in suspension cultures of potato and wheat. Pestic Biochem Physiol 34:246–25410.1016/0048-3575(89)90164-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, CM (2016) Characterization of a Novel Five-Way-Resistant Population of Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus). Master’s thesis. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois. 106 pGoogle Scholar
Evans, JA, Tranel, PJ, Hager, AG, Schutte, B, Wu, C, Chatham, LA, and Davis, AS (2016) Managing the evolution of herbicide resistance. Pest Manag Sci 72:74–80CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fuerst, EP (1987) Understanding the mode of action of chloroacetamides and thiocarbamate herbicides. Weed Technol 1:270–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hager, AG, Wax, LM, Bollero, GA, Simmons, FW (2002a) Common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis Sauer) management with soil-applied herbicides in soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.). Crop Prot 21:277–283.10.1016/S0261-2194(01)00098-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hager, AG, Wax, LM, Simmons, FW, Stoller, EW (1997) Waterhemp management in agronomic crops. University of Illinois Bulletin 855:12Google Scholar
Hager, AG, Wax, LM, Stoller, EW, Bollero, GA (2002b) Common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) interference in soybean. Weed Sci 50:607–61010.1614/0043-1745(2002)050[0607:CWARII]2.0.CO;2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamm, PC (1974) Discovery, development, and current status of the chloroacetamide herbicides. Weed Sci 22:541–54510.1017/S004317450003825XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartzler, RG, Buhler, DD, Stoltenberg, DE (1999) Emergence characteristics of four annual weed species. Weed Sci 47:578–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatton, PJ, Dixon, D, Cole, DJ, Edwards, R (1996) Glutathione transferase activities and herbicide selectivity in maize an associated weed species. Pestic Sci 46:267–2753.0.CO;2-N>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, NE, Singh, S, Tranel, PJ, Riechers, DE, Kaundun, SS, Polge, ND, Thomas, DA, Hager, AG (2011) Resistance to HPPD-inhibiting herbicides in a population of waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) from Illinois, United States. Pest Manag Sci 67:258–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, NE, Tranel, PJ, Riechers, DE, Hager, AG (2016) Response of a waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) population resistant to HPPD-inhibiting herbicides to foliar-applied herbicides. Weed Technol 30:106–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, NE, Tranel, PJ, Riechers, DE, Maxwell, DJ, Gonzini, LC, Hager, AG (2013) Responses of an HPPD inhibitor-resistant waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) population to soil-residual herbicides. Weed Technol 27:704–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heap, I (2018) The international survey of herbicide resistant weeds. www.weedscience.org. Accessed: December 1, 2018Google Scholar
Jhala, A (2017) Effect of excessive rainfall on efficacy of residual herbicides applied in corn and Soybean. https://cropwatch.unl.edu. Accessed: October 11, 2018Google Scholar
Johnson, WG, Chahal, GS, Regehr, DL (2012) Efficacy of various corn herbicides applied preplant incorporated and preemergence. Weed Technol 26:220–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, SZ, Streibig, JC, Ritz, C (2007) Utilizing R software package for dose-response studies: the concept and data analysis. Weed Technol 21:840–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loux, MM, Doohan, D, Dobbels, AF, Reeb, B, Johnson, WG, Young, BG, Ikley, J, Hager, A (2018) Weed Control Guide for Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. Columbus: Ohio State University Extension Pub# WS16/Bulletin 789/IL15. 220 pGoogle Scholar
Ma, R, Kaundun, SS, Tranel, PJ, Riggins, CW, McGinness, DL, Hager, AG, Hawkes, TH, McIndoe, E, Riechers, DE (2013) Distinct detoxification mechanisms confer resistance to atrazine in a population of waterhemp. Plant Physiol 163:363–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, MJ (1940) The genetics of sex determination in the family Amaranthaceae. Genetics 25:409–431Google ScholarPubMed
Nakatani, M, Yoshihiro, Y, Honda, H, Uchida, Y (2016) Development of the novel pre-emergence herbicide pyroxasulfone. J Pestic Sci 41:107–112CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oliveira, MC, Jhala, AJ, Gaines, T, Irmak, S, Amundsen, K, Scott, JE, Knezevic, SZ (2017) Confirmation and control of HPPD-inhibiting herbicide-resistant waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) in Nebraska. Weed Technol 31:67–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patzoldt, WL, Tranel, PJ, Hager, AG (2005) A waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) biotype with multiple resistance across three herbicide sites of action. Weed Sci 53:30–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pillai, P, Davis, DE, Truelove, B (1979) Effects of metolachlor on germination, growth, leucine uptake, and protein synthesis. Weed Sci 27:634–63710.1017/S0043174500046038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riechers, DE, Kreuz, K, Zhang, Q (2010) Detoxification without intoxication: herbicide safeners activate plant defense gene expression. Plant Physiol 153:3–13CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sauer, J (1955) Revision of the dioecious amaranths. Madrono 13:5–46Google Scholar
Saxton, AM (1998) A macro for converting mean separation output to letter groupings in Proc Mixed. Pages 1243–1246 in Proceedings of the 23rd SAS Users Group International. Cary, NC: SAS InstituteGoogle Scholar
Shaner, DL, ed (2014) Herbicide Handbook. 10th ed. Lawrence, KS:Weed Science Society of America. 512 pGoogle Scholar
Shergill, LS, Barlow, BR, Bish, MD, Bradley, KW (2018) Investigations of 2, 4-D and multiple herbicide resistance in a Missouri waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) population. Weed Sci 66: 386–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somerville, GJ, Powles, SB, Walsh, MJ, Renton, M (2017) Why was resistance to shorter-acting pre-emergence herbicides slower to evolve? Pest Manag Sci 73:844–851CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steckel, LE (2007) The dioecious Amaranthus spp.: here to stay. Weed Technol 21:567–570CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steckel, LE, Sprague, CL (2004) Common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) interference in corn. Weed Sci 52:359–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steckel, LE, Sprague, CL, Hager, AG (2002) Common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) control in corn (Zea mays) with single preemergence and sequential applications of residual herbicides. Weed Technol 16:755–761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steckel, LE, Sprague, CL, Hager, AG, Simmons, FW, Bollero, GA (2003) Effects of shading on common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) growth and development. Weed Sci 51:898–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanetani, Y, Fujioka, T, Kaku, K, Shimizu, T (2011) Studies on the inhibition of plant very-long-chain fatty acid elongase by a novel herbicide pyroxasulfone. J Pestic Sci 36:221–22810.1584/jpestics.G10-81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanetani, Y, Kaku, K, Kawai, K, Fujioka, T, Shimizu, T (2009) Action of mechanism of a novel herbicide, pyroxasulfone. Pestic Biochem Physiol 95:47–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tranel, PJ, Riggins, CW, Bell, MS, Hager, AG (2011) Herbicide resistance in Amaranthus tuberculatus: a call for new options. J Agric Food Chem 59:5808–5812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trenkamp, S, Martin, W, Tietjen, K (2004) Specific and differential inhibition of very-long-chain fatty acid elongases from Arabidopsis thaliana by different herbicides. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:11903–1190810.1073/pnas.0404600101CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Werck-Reichhart, D, Hehn, A, Didierjean, L (2000) Cytochromes P450 for engineering herbicide tolerance. Trends Plant Sci 5:116–123CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed