Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T06:58:58.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Characterization of Imidazolinone-Resistant Smooth Pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Brian S. Manley ,
Henry P. Wilson  and
Thomas E. Hines
Brian S. Manley
Affiliation:
Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Painter, VA 23420
Henry P. Wilson
Affiliation:
Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Painter, VA 23420
Thomas E. Hines
Affiliation:
Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Painter, VA 23420
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Following six consecutive annual applications of imazaquin in combination with trifluralin or pendimethalin to several soybean fields on the Delmarva Peninsula, unacceptable smooth pigweed control was observed. Field and greenhouse studies were conducted to determine if this population of smooth pigweed was resistant to imazaquin and other herbicides. In field research, imazaquin and imazethapyr gave complete control of the susceptible (S) population while providing no control of the resistant (R) population; pyrithiobac controlled 99 and 90% of the R and S populations, respectively. Pendimethalin, metribuzin, MON-12000, and flumiclorac gave less than 75% control of both S and R populations. Chlorimuron, primisulfuron, CGA-152005, and lactofen gave above 75% control, and thifensulfuron and nicosulfuron gave above 90% control of both S and R populations. Seeds were collected from the R and S smooth pigweed populations for research in the greenhouse. Greenhouse studies confirmed high levels of resistance to imazaquin and imazethapyr and low levels of cross-resistance to rimsulfuron and chlorimuron in the R population. Susceptibility of the R population to nicosulfuron, thifensulfuron, pyrithiobac, and pendimethalin was comparable to that of the S population.

Keywords

pendimethalin, N-(1-ethylpropyl)-3,4-dimethyl-2,6-dinitrobenzenaminepyrithiobac, 2-chloro-6-[(4,6-dimethoxy-2-pyrimidinyl)thio]benzoic acidsmooth pigweed, Amaranthus hybridus L. # AMACHsoybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.ALS-inhibitor resistanceherbicide resistanceimidazolinone resistancesulfonylurea herbicidesCGA-152005chlorimuronflumicloracimazaquinimazethapyrlactofenmetribuzinMON-12000nicosulfuronpendimethalinprimisulfuronpyrithiobacrimsulfuronthifensulfurontrifluralinGlycine maxAMACHALS, acetolactate synthase (EC4.1.3.18)DAPT, days after postemergence treatmentsDAT, days after treatmentGR50, rate required to cause a 50% reduction in dry weightPOST, postemergencePPI, preplant incorporatedppmw, parts per million by weightPRE, preemergenceR, resistantS, susceptible
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 4 , December 1998 , pp. 575 - 584
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 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.)

References

Literature Cited

Anonymous. 1994. Virginia Agricultural Statistics, 1993. Richmond: Virginia Agricultural Statistics Service Bull. 65. 137 p.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1995. Crop Protection Reference. 11th ed. New York: C & P Press. 2165 p.Google Scholar
Christopher, J. T., Powles, S. B., and Holtum, J.A.M. 1992. Resistance to acetolactate synthase-inhibiting herbicides in annual ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) involves at least two mechanisms. Plant Physiol. 100:1909–1913.Google Scholar
Devine, M. D., Marles, M.A.S., and Hall, L. M. 1991. Inhibition of acetolactate synthase in susceptible and resistant biotypes of Stellaria media . Pestic. Sci. 31:273–280.Google Scholar
Gerwick, B. C., Subramanian, M. V., Loney-Gallant, V. I., and Chandler, D. P. 1990. Mechanism of action of the 1,2,4-triazolo [1,5-a] pyrimidines. Pestic. Sci. 29:357–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, L. M. and Devine, M. D. 1990. Cross-resistance of a chlorsulfuron resistant biotype of Stellaria media to a triazolopyrimidine herbicide. Plant Physiol. 93:962–966.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hawkes, T. R., Howard, J. L., and Pontin, S. E. 1989. Herbicides that inhibit the biosynthesis of branch chain amino acids. In Dodge, A. D., ed. Herbicides and Plant Metabolism. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 113–136.Google Scholar
Holt, J. S. 1992. History of identification of herbicide-resistant weeds. Weed Technol. 6:615–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horak, M. J. and Peterson, D. E. 1995. Biotypes of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) are resistant to imazethapyr and thifensulfuron. Weed Technol. 9:192–195.Google Scholar
Kendig, J. A. and DeFelice, M. S. 1994. ALS resistant cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.) in Missouri. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 34:12.Google Scholar
Mallory-Smith, C. A., Thill, D. C., and Dial, M. J. 1990. Identification of sulfonylurea herbicide-resistant prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola). Weed Technol. 4:163–168.Google Scholar
Manley, B. S., Wilson, H. P., and Hines, T. E. 1995. Imidazolinone resistant smooth pigweed. Proc. Northeast. Weed Sci. Soc. 49:31.Google Scholar
Manley, B. S., Wilson, H. P., and Hines, T. E. 1996. Smooth pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus) and livid amaranth (A. lividus) response to several imidazolinone and sulfonylurea herbicides. Weed Technol. 10:835–841.Google Scholar
Powles, S. B. and Howat, P. D. 1990. Herbicide resistant weeds in Australia. Weed Technol. 4:178–185.Google Scholar
Primiani, M. M., Cotterman, J. C., and Saari, L. L. 1990. Resistance of Kochia (Kochia scoparia) to sulfonylurea and imidazolinone herbicides. Weed Technol. 4:169–172.Google Scholar
Ray, T. B. 1984. Site of action of chlorsulfuron: inhibition of valine and isoleucine biosynthesis in plants. Plant Physiol. 75:827–831.Google Scholar
Rubin, B., Sibony, M., Benyamini, Y., and Danino, Y. 1992. Resistance to sulfonylurea herbicides in redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.). Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 32:66.Google Scholar
Saari, L. L., Cotterman, J. C., Smith, W. F., and Primiani, M. M. 1992. Sulfonylurea herbicide resistance in common chickweed, perennial ryegrass, and Russian thistle. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 42:110–118.Google Scholar
Saari, L. L., Cotterman, J. C., and Thill, D. C. 1994. Resistance to acetolactate synthase inhibiting herbicides. In Powles, S. B. and Holtum, J.A.M., eds. Herbicide Resistance in Plants: Biology and Biochemistry. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 83–139.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1985. SAS User's Guide. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 956 p.Google Scholar
Schloss, J. V. 1990. Acetolactate synthase, mechanism of action and its herbicide binding site. Pestic. Sci. 29:283–292.Google Scholar
Schloss, J. V., Ciskanik, L. M., and VanDyk, D. E. 1988. Origin of the herbicide binding site of acetolactate synthase. Nature 331:360–362.Google Scholar
Schmenk, R. E., Barrett, M., and Witt, W. W. 1996. Smooth pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus L.) resistance to acetolactate synthase inhibiting herbicides. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 36:9.Google Scholar
Shaner, D. L., Anderson, P. C., and Stidham, M. A. 1984. Imidazolines: potent inhibitors of acetohydroxyacid synthase. Plant Physiol. 76:545–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stidham, M. A. and Shaner, D. L. 1990. Imidazolinone inhibition of acetohydroxyacid synthase in vitro and in vivo. Pestic. Sci. 29:335–340.Google Scholar
Subramanian, M. V., Hung, H., Dias, J. M., Miner, V. W., Butler, J. H., and Jachetta, J. J. 1990. Properties of mutant acetolactate synthases resistant to triazolopyrimidine sulfonanilide. Plant Physiol. 94:239–244.Google Scholar
Thill, D. C., Mallory-Smith, C. A., Saari, L. L., Cotterman, J. C., Primiani, M. M., and Saladini, J. L. 1991. Sulfonylurea herbicide resistant weeds: discovery, distribution, biology, mechanism, and management. In Caseley, J. C., Cussans, G. W., and Atkins, R. K., eds. Herbicide Resistance in Weeds and Crops. London: Butterman and Heineman. p. 115.Google Scholar
[WSSA] Weed Science Society of America. 1994. Herbicide Handbook. 7th ed. Champaign, IL: WSSA. 352 p.Google Scholar
Wrubel, R. P. and Gressel, J. 1994. Are herbicide mixtures useful for delaying the rapid evolution of resistance? A case study. Weed Technol. 8:635–648.Google Scholar
Zar, J. H. 1984. Biostatistical Analysis. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 717 p.Google Scholar