The past 50 yr of advances in weed recognition technologies have poised site-specific weed control (SSWC) on the cusp of requisite performance for large-scale production systems. The technology offers improved management of diverse weed morphology over highly variable background environments. SSWC enables the use of nonselective weed control options, such as lasers and electrical weeding, as feasible in-crop selective alternatives to herbicides by targeting individual weeds. This review looks at the progress made over this half-century of research and its implications for future weed recognition and control efforts; summarizing advances in computer vision techniques and the most recent deep convolutional neural network (CNN) approaches to weed recognition. The first use of CNNs for plant identification in 2015 began an era of rapid improvement in algorithm performance on larger and more diverse datasets. These performance gains and subsequent research have shown that the variability of large-scale cropping systems is best managed by deep learning for in-crop weed recognition. The benefits of deep learning and improved accessibility to open-source software and hardware tools has been evident in the adoption of these tools by weed researchers and the increased popularity of CNN-based weed recognition research. The field of machine learning holds substantial promise for weed control, especially the implementation of truly integrated weed management strategies. Whereas previous approaches sought to reduce environmental variability or manage it with advanced algorithms, research in deep learning architectures suggests that large-scale, multi-modal approaches are the future for weed recognition.

Water is the primary carrier for herbicide applications. Spray water qualities such as pH, hardness, temperature, or turbidity can influence herbicide performance and may need to be amended for optimum weed control. Water quality factors can affect herbicide activity by reducing solubility, enhancing degradation in the spray tank, or forming herbicide-salt complexes with mineral cations, thereby reducing the absorption, translocation, and subsequent weed control. The available literature suggests that the effect of water quality varies with herbicide chemistry and weed species. The efficacy of weak-acid herbicides such as glyphosate, glufosinate, clethodim, sethoxydim, bentazon, and 2,4-D is improved with acidic water pH; however, the efficacy of sulfonylurea herbicides is negatively impacted. Hard-water antagonism is more prevalent with weak-acid herbicides, and trivalent cations are the most problematic. Spray solution temperature between 18 C and 44 C is optimum for some weak-acid herbicides; however, their efficacy can be reduced at relatively low (5 C) or high (56 C) water temperature. The effect of water turbidity is severe on cationic herbicides such as paraquat and diquat, and herbicides with low soil mobility such as glyphosate. Although adjuvants are recommended to overcome the negative effect of spray water hardness or pH, the response has been inconsistent with the herbicide chemistry and weed species. Moreover, information on the effect of spray water quality on various herbicide chemistries, weed species, and adjuvants is limited; therefore, it is difficult to develop guidelines for improving weed control efficacy. Further research is needed to determine the effect of spray water factors and develop specific recommendations for improving herbicide efficacy on problematic weed species.

The topic of sustainability is popular in mainstream media and a common discussion theme, particularly for the agriculture discipline that serves the entire world. Individuals and corporations often have a desire to be sustainable in their practices, but the commentary on “being sustainable” can be confusing in terms of realistic practices. To define whether weed science is sustainable one must first identify the resource or object to be sustained. From a historical perspective, weed control in the United States over the past 40 yr has revolved around no-tillage row crop acres. The implementation of no-till or reduced till has undeniable benefits in sustaining natural resources, especially two of our most valuable resources: soil and water. While the overall trend toward chemical weed control has been shown to decrease agriculture’s impact on the environment, depending solely on herbicides is not sustainable long term with the rise in herbicide-resistant weed species. We also consider the benefits and challenges associated with agronomic trends within the context of sustainability and expand consideration to include emerging technology aligned to human health and environmental stewardship. The key to improving farming is producing more and safer food, feed, and fiber on less land while reducing adverse environmental effects, and this must be accomplished with the backdrop of human population growth and the desire for an improved standard of living globally. Emerging technologies provide new starting points for sustainable weed management solutions, and the weed science community can initiate the conversation on sustainable practices and share advancements with our colleagues and community members. In addition to broadening the sustainability concept, targeted and relevant communication tools will support the weed science community to have successful and impactful discussions.

Palmer amaranth has a long history of evolving resistance to herbicides to the point at which it has become a significant obstacle to row crop production. A survey of Palmer amaranth escapes in dicamba-resistant cotton and soybean fields in Tennessee was conducted in fall 2021 with the objective of determining whether poor control was due to environmental phenomena or the development of dicamba resistance. A greenhouse dicamba dose-response screen was conducted on 15 Tennessee accessions. Three accessions were identified with a relative resistance factor between 1.85 and 2.49, and one accession from Lauderdale County was found with a relative resistance factor of 14.25. The Lauderdale County 1 accession developed a higher dicamba resistance level than all others evaluated and can no longer be effectively controlled using dicamba. The history of Palmer amaranth escaping dicamba in the Lauderdale County 1 location from 2019 to 2021 in the field and in preliminary greenhouse screens would suggest that the dicamba resistance has passed between generations. This research documents the first findings of Palmer amaranth control failures in cotton and soybean fields due to the evolution of dicamba resistance.

Alternative strategies are needed for management of glyphosate-resistant (GR) horseweed in soybean. Integrating a cereal rye cover crop with soybean planted in narrow rows may improve control and reduce herbicide selection pressure for herbicide-resistant horseweed biotypes. Four site-years of experiments were conducted in Michigan to determine whether fall-planted cereal rye terminated with glyphosate 1 wk prior to (early termination) or 1 wk after (planting green) planting in combination with narrow-row soybean improved GR horseweed management. At postemergence (POST) herbicide application, horseweed biomass was reduced by 71% to 90% when soybean was planted into cereal rye, regardless of termination time, compared with no cover across all row widths. Planting green or narrow-row soybean suppressed horseweed through soybean harvest. When glyphosate was applied POST (noneffective), horseweed biomass was 36% to 46% lower when planting green compared with early terminated cereal rye and no cover. Similarly, planting soybean in 19- and 38-cm rows reduced horseweed biomass by 48% and 28%, respectively, compared with 76-cm rows. Cereal rye did not affect soybean yield pooled over 3 of 4 site-years; however, narrow row soybean yielded 11% to 18% higher than 76-cm rows. Soybean yield was 11% higher when an effective POST herbicide was applied. In conclusion, fall-seeded cereal rye or narrow-row soybean suppressed horseweed compared with no cover and 76-cm rows; however, the effects of early termination did not last throughout the growing season in most cases. Delaying cover crop termination by planting green reduced horseweed biomass and density through soybean harvest, but reduced yield in 1 site-year due to an increased incidence of white mold. These cultural practices have a positive influence on suppressing horseweed that should be part of an overall horseweed management strategy; however, the use of an effective POST herbicide is still needed for complete season-long horseweed management.

Quizalofop-resistant rice allows for over-the-top applications of quizalofop, a herbicide that inhibits acetyl-coenzyme A carboxylase. However, previous reports have indicated that quizalofop applied postemergence may cause significant injury to quizalofop-resistant rice. Therefore, field experiments were conducted to evaluate the response of quizalofop-resistant rice cultivars to quizalofop applications across different planting dates. Under controlled conditions, the effects of soil moisture content, air temperature, and light intensity on quizalofop-resistant rice sensitivity to quizalofop were investigated. In the planting date experiment, injury of more than 11 percentage points was observed on early-planted rice compared with late-planted rice at the 5-leaf stage, with higher injury observed under saturated soil conditions. However, quizalofop applications at the labeled rate caused ≤16% reduction in yield regardless of planting environment. Quizalofop-resistant cultivars exhibited more injury by at least 25 percentage points when soil was maintained at 90% or 100% of field capacity because rice cultivars ‘PVL01’, ‘PVL02’, and ‘RTv7231 MA’ exhibited ≥42%, 30%, and ≥54% injury, respectively, compared with ≤10%, ≤5%, and ≤22% injury, respectively, at 40% or 50% of field capacity, pooled over rating timing. Greater injury ranging from 18% to 31% was observed on quizalofop-resistant rice grown under low light intensity (600 µmol m−2s−1) compared with 5% to 14% injury under high light intensity (1,150 µmol m−2s−1). The injury persisted from 7 to 28 d after 5-leaf stage application (DAFT), averaged over quizalofop-resistant cultivars and air temperatures (20/15 C and 30/25 C day/night, respectively). At 7 DAFT, greater injury (by 5 to 21 percentage points) was observed on quizalofop-resistant cultivars; PVL01, PVL02, and RTv7231 MA exhibited 33%, 9%, and 58% injury, respectively, under 20/15 C temperature conditions compared with 13%, 4%, and 37% injury, respectively, under 30/25 C day/night conditions averaged over light intensities. Overall, quizalofop is likely to cause a greater risk for injury to quizalofop-resistant rice if it is applied under cool, cloudy, and moist soil conditions.

Injury to quizalofop-resistant rice was reported in some fields following postemergence applications of quizalofop. Glyphosate-resistant (GR) corn, cotton, and soybean, and imidazolinone-resistant rice are grown near quizalofop-resistant rice. Herbicide drift from glyphosate and imazethapyr and the resulting crop injury and potential yield loss is a cause of concern for producers. Field experiments conducted near Colt, and Keiser, AR, in 2021 evaluated whether low rates of glyphosate or imazethapyr interact with sequential quizalofop applications to exacerbate injury to quizalofop-resistant rice compared to quizalofop applications alone. Herbicide treatments consisted of a low rate of glyphosate (90 g ae ha−1) or imazethapyr (10.7 g ai ha−1) applied 10, 7, 4, and 0 d before the 2-leaf growth stage of rice, and glyphosate or imazethapyr, at the same rate and timings, followed by quizalofop at 120 g ai ha−1 applied to 2-leaf rice. All plots treated with quizalofop received a subsequent application of the same herbicide and rate at the 5-leaf rice stage. At 28 d after final treatment (DAFT), glyphosate followed by quizalofop the same day to 2-leaf rice caused 77% injury compared with 58% when glyphosate was applied alone, regardless of location. Glyphosate followed by quizalofop the same day reduced rough rice grain yield by 67% compared with 33% when glyphosate was applied alone to 2-leaf rice at the Colt location. Application of imazethapyr followed by quizalofop the same day to 2-leaf rice caused more injury (63% and 19% injury at the Colt and Keiser locations, respectively) than imazethapyr alone (42% and 7% injury at the Colt and Keiser locations, respectively) at 35 DAFT. Overall, glyphosate and imazethapyr followed by quizalofop applications worsened injury compared to glyphosate, imazethapyr, and quizalofop applications alone. As the interval between exposure to a low rate of glyphosate or imazethapyr and quizalofop decreases, the detrimental effect of herbicide on rice likewise increases.

Small-seeded vegetable crop production is challenged by poor emergence, stand establishment and canopy development, as well as a lack of effective weed control options. The potential use of plant growth regulators such as gibberellic acid (GA) could enhance early emergence and growth rates while potentially synchronizing weed germination with control tactics. In response, a controlled environment study was conducted to investigate the effects of GA on garden beet, cabbage, carrot, and onion. At 7 d after seeding (DAS) carrot emergence was greater when carrot seeds were treated with 2, 4, 8, 16, or 64 ppm GA compared with nontreated seeds. Total carrot emergence over the study period was 14% greater when seeds were treated with 4 ppm GA compared with nontreated seeds. Treatment of cabbage with as low as 2 to 4 ppm GA increased cabbage emergence rate and total plant emergence over the study period relative to nontreated seeds. Onion response to GA treatment was variable and unremarkable and was hypothesized to be influenced by seed dormancy because emergence was also low with the nontreated seeds. The GA rates that stimulated vegetable crop seed germination and emergence were then explored with three common weed species to determine whether a similar response was observed. If so, GA could be used to stimulate weed emergence in synchrony with management tactics. Palmer amaranth emergence was strongly affected by GA treatment, whereby the total number of emerged plants was 48% greater when 4 ppm GA was applied than in the nontreated check. Velvetleaf emergence at 3 DAS with the 4 and 8 ppm GA was 2.9 and 3.0 plants pot−1, respectively, compared to no emergence in the nontreated pots. Redroot pigweed emergence was not affected by GA treatment at any rate.

Following the introduction of dicamba-resistant (DR) soybean in 2017, concerns have increased with regard to dicamba off-target movement (OTM) onto sensitive crops, including vegetables. Field trials were conducted in New Jersey, New York, and Delaware to evaluate cucumber (‘Python’), eggplant (‘Santana’), and snap bean (‘Caprice’ and ‘Huntington’) injury and yield response to simulated dicamba drift rates. Crops were exposed to dicamba applied at 0, 0.056, 0.11, 0.56, 1.12, 2.24 g ae ha–1, representing 0, 1/10,000, 1/5,000, 1/1,000, 1/500, and 1/250 of the maximum soybean recommended label rate (560 g ae ha–1), respectively. Dicamba was applied either at the early vegetative (V2) or early reproductive (R1) stages. Minimal to no injury, vine growth reduction, or yield loss was noted for cucumber. Dicamba was more injurious to eggplant with up to 22% to 35% injury 2 wk after treatment (WAT) at rate ≥1.12 g ae ha–1; however, only the highest dicamba rate caused 27% reduction of the commercial yield compared to the nontreated control. Eggplant also showed greater sensitivity when dicamba exposure occurred at the R1 than at theV2 stage. Snap bean was the most sensitive crop investigated in this study. Injury 2 WAT was greater for ‘Caprice’ with dicamba ≥0.56 g ae ha–1 applied at V2 compared to R1 stage, whereas a similar difference occurred as low as 0.056 g ae ha–1 for ‘Huntington’. Compared to the nontreated control, reduction in plant height and biomass accumulation occurred for both cultivars at dicamba rate ≥0.56 g ae ha–1. Dicamba applied at 1.12 g ae ha–1 or greater resulted in 30% yield loss for ‘Caprice’, whereas ‘Huntington’ yield dropped 52% to 93% with dicamba ≥0.56 g ae ha–1. ‘Caprice’ bean yield was not influenced by dicamba timing of application. Conversely, ‘Huntington’ bean yield decreased by 8% following application at R1 compared to V2 stage.

Dose-response trials to determine the tolerance of summer squash and watermelon to fomesafen applied (over the top of black polyethylene mulch and respective row middles) pre-transplanting were performed between 2020 and 2021 at three Indiana locations: the Meigs Horticulture Research Farm (MEIGS), the Pinney Purdue Agricultural Center (PPAC), and the Southwest Purdue Agricultural Center (SWPAC). Summer squash trials were performed at the MEIGS and PPAC locations, and watermelon trials were performed at the MEIGS and SWPAC locations. The experiments for both summer squash and watermelon had a split-plot arrangement in which the main plot was herbicide rate, and the subplot was cultivar. Summer squash injury included necrotic leaf margin, chlorosis, brown and white spots, and stunting. Fomesafen rates from 262 to 1,048 g ai ha−1 in 2020 at both locations, and from 280 to 1,120 g ai ha−1 in 2021 at MEIGS did not affect summer squash yield. However, in 2021 at PPAC, fomesafen applied at rates from 280 to 1,120 g ha−1 delayed summer squash harvest and decreased marketable yield from 95% to 61% compared with the nontreated control. Watermelon injury included bronzing and stunting. Fomesafen rates from 210 to 840 g ai ha−1 did not affect marketable watermelon yield or fruit number. Crop safety was attributed to rain, which washed off most of the herbicide from the polyethylene mulch before plants were transplanted or little to no rain after transplant. Injury was observed only when there was no rain before transplant followed by excessive rain shortly after transplant. Overall, the 1× rate used for each trial was safe for use 1 d before transplanting summer squash and 6 to 7 d before transplanting watermelon.

This study compared the field performance of red clover germplasm UK2014, selected for 2,4-D tolerance, to Kenland, a standard variety grown in the transition zone of the United States. UK2014 and Kenland were seeded in the spring of 2017 and 2018. Single applications of 0, 1.12, or 2.24 kg ae ha−1 2,4-D-amine were made in June, August, or October. One week after the treatments, yields were determined. Visible herbicide injury ratings were made prior to harvest and regrowth was visibly assessed 1 wk after harvest. Red clover stands were visibly assessed the following spring. Kenland, across all application timings, was injured by 2,4-D more than UK2014, with mean injury ratings of 39% and 63% compared with 26% and 37% at 1.12 and 2.24 kg 2,4-D ae ha−1, respectively. At equivalent rates, Kenland regrowth was less than UK2014 at all application timings. UK2014 regrowth after 2,4-D treatment ranged from 65% to 91%, whereas Kenland regrowth ranged from 12% to 72%. Applications of 2,4-D in October were the most damaging to stands of both UK2014 and Kenland the following spring, but Kenland stands were reduced much more than those of UK2014. Kenland and UK2014 had similar season total yields when not treated with 2,4-D (means of 7,550 and 7,880 dry matter kg ha−1, respectively in 2017 and 5,280 dry matter kg ha−1 for both in 2018). Kenland season total yield in 2017 was reduced by both 2,4-D rates applied in June or August and at all timings in 2018. UK2014 season total yield in 2017 was reduced only when 2.24 kg 2,4-D ae ha−1 was applied in August. In 2018, 2.24 kg ae ha−1 2,4-D resulted in reduced UK2014 season total yield across application timings. UK2014 has greater 2,4-D tolerance than Kenland, but additional selection might be beneficial.

In the Mid-Atlantic United States, there is increasing interest in delaying cereal rye termination until after soybean planting (i.e., planting green). Improved understanding of cereal rye seeding rate effects is needed to balance weed and agronomic management goals. We investigated the effects of cereal rye seeding rates on weed control and crop performance when planting green in complementary experiments in two Mid-Atlantic regions. The Pennsylvania experiment was replicated at three site-years and the Delaware experiment at two site-years. In both experiments, population-level weed responses were evaluated across four cereal rye seeding rates: 0, 51, 101, and 135 kg ha−1. The Delaware experiment also implemented a nitrogen treatment factor (0 and 34 kg N ha−1; spring applied). Both experiments showed that integrating cereal rye in the fall significantly improved winter- and summer-annual weed suppression compared with the fallow control, but no differences in total cereal rye biomass production or weed suppression were found among alternative cereal rye seeding rates (51 to 135 kg ha−1). Soybean yield did not differ among treatments in any of the studies. These results show there is no reason to increase cereal rye seeding rates for weed suppression services or to decrease seeding rates for agronomic reasons (i.e., soybean population and yield) when employing planting-green tactics in no-till soybean production within the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States.

Many problematic weeds have evolved resistance to herbicides in mid-southern U.S. rice fields. With the lack of new effective herbicides, rice producers seek alternatives that are currently not labeled for rice production. Inhibitors of very-long chain fatty acid elongase (VLCFA) are currently not labeled for use with U.S. rice crops but are labeled for use in other U.S. row cropping systems and rice production in Asia. Previous research has demonstrated the utility of VLCFA inhibitors for weed control in rice; however, these herbicides induce variable amounts of injury to the crop when applied early in the growing season. Experiments were initiated in 2020 and 2021 at the Rice Research and Extension Center near Stuttgart, AR, to evaluate rice tolerance and weed control with acetochlor and seed treatment with a herbicide safener, fenclorim. Three rates of a microencapsulated formulation of acetochlor (630, 1,260, and 1,890 g ai ha−1), four application timings (preemergence, PRE; delayed-preemergence, DPRE; spiking; and 1-leaf), and without or with the fenclorim seed treatment (2.5 g kg−1 of seed) were used to evaluate rice tolerance, weedy rice control, and barnyardgrass control. Acetochlor applied DPRE at 1,260 g ai ha−1 provided better weedy rice and barnyardgrass control than applications at the 1-leaf stage at the same rate. Acetochlor rates of 1,260 and 1,890 g ai ha−1 reduced barnyardgrass and weedy rice densities by more greater than the 630 g ai ha−1 rate. The fenclorim seed treatment did not influence weedy rice or barnyardgrass control but did reduce injury for DPRE acetochlor applications. Based on these results, acetochlor can be safely applied to rice DPRE (≤19% injury) at 1,260 g ai ha−1 when the seed is treated with fenclorim, leading to ≥88% barnyardgrass and ≥45% weedy rice control 28 d after treatment.

Rice producers in the United States need effective herbicides to control problematic weeds. Previous research has demonstrated that acetochlor can provide in-season weed control in rice; however, undesirable injury is common. Thus, trials were initiated in 2020 and 2021 to evaluate 1) rice cultivar tolerance to microencapsulated (ME) acetochlor with the use of a fenclorim seed treatment at 2.5 g ai kg−1 of seed; 2) a dose-response of a fenclorim seed treatment with ME acetochlor; and 3) rice tolerance to fenclorim and ME acetochlor under cool, wet conditions. For all trials, acetochlor was applied delayed-preemergence (4 to 7 d after planting). In the dose-response trials and in the presence of acetochlor, the fenclorim seed treatment rate of 2.5 g ai kg−1 reduced rice injury and increased rice plant heights and shoot numbers relative to acetochlor without fenclorim, and plant heights and shoot numbers were comparable to those of the nontreated control in all evaluations. In the cultivar screening, 14 of 16 cultivars exhibited <20% injury with acetochlor at 1,260 g ai ha−1 and fenclorim at 2.5 g ai kg−1 2 wk after emergence (WAE) at the Pine Tree Research Station (PTRS). At the Rice Research and Extension Center (RREC) 2 and 4 WAE and at PTRS 4 WAE, all cultivars exhibited <20% injury with acetochlor and fenclorim. The fenclorim seed treatment in the presence of acetochlor provided comparable rice plant height, shoot numbers, groundcover, and rough rice yield to that of the nontreated control. Under cool, wet conditions, rice injury without fenclorim ranged from 15% to 60% with acetochlor at 1,050 g ai ha−1, whereas injury from acetochlor with the fenclorim seed treatment ranged from 0% to 20%. Based on the results of these experiments, the fenclorim seed treatment appears to safen an assortment of rice cultivars from injury caused by ME acetochlor.

The threat of herbicide-resistant weed species, such as Palmer amaranth, has driven the development of robust weed management programs that rely on more than chemicals for weed control. Previous research has shown that zero-tolerance weed thresholds, cover crops, deep tillage, and diverse herbicide programs are effective strategies for controlling Palmer amaranth. Unfortunately, research investigating the integration of all four of these weed management strategies in a system is lacking. To better leverage these integrated weed management strategies in cotton production systems, a long-term study was initiated in fall 2018 near Marianna, AR, with zero tolerance, deep tillage, a cereal rye cover crop, and either a dicamba or non-dicamba in-crop herbicide program as factors. Results found that total Palmer amaranth emergence was reduced 76% as the result of deep tillage in 2019 and, in the absence of a zero-tolerance strategy, 73% in 2020. In the absence of a zero-tolerance strategy, the combination of a non–cover crop strategy and dicamba herbicide program decreased total Palmer amaranth emergence by 73%, while the combination of a cover crop strategy and dicamba herbicide program decreased total Palmer amaranth emergence by 78% compared to the combination of a cover crop and non-dicamba herbicide program. Under a zero-tolerance strategy in 2019, tillage reduced cotton yield by 12% and partial returns by US$370 ha−1. In 2020, tillage reduced cotton yield by 14% and partial returns of US$371 ha−1 under a non-zero-tolerance strategy, while a 12% yield reduction and a US$260 ha−1 decrease in partial returns were observed under a zero-tolerance strategy. In 2019, the non-dicamba program resulted in greater partial returns than the dicamba in-crop program because of greater yield and lower program costs. However, in 2020, partial returns were greater for the dicamba in-crop herbicide program owing to greater yields achieved by this program.

Tall fleabane is emerging as a problematic weed species in the eastern cropping region of Australia. Recently, growers indicated poor control of tall fleabane to the field rate of glyphosate in fallow fields. Pot studies were conducted in an open field at the Gatton farm of the University of Queensland, Queensland, Australia, to confirm the level of glyphosate resistance in a putative glyphosate-resistant (GR) tall fleabane population and to evaluate the performance of alternative postemergence herbicides to control GR tall fleabane. Compared with a glyphosate-susceptible (GS) population, the level of resistance in the GR population was 4-fold and 3.5-fold greater based on plant survival and biomass, respectively. The target-site resistance mechanism was not present because both the GR and GS populations had the same gene sequence. There were several effective alternative herbicides for the control of small (4-leaf stage) plants of tall fleabane, but to control large (12- to 14-leaf stage) plants, the sole application of saflufenacil + trifludimoxazin or its mixtures with glyphosate, glufosinate, or paraquat were the best herbicide treatments. This is the first published report on the occurrence of GR tall fleabane in Australia. Growers need to use integrated management strategies to mitigate the further spread of GR tall fleabane in fallow fields as well as glyphosate-resistant crops.

Weeds represent one of the most important biotic threats to agricultural plant health, and the potential global impact of weeds on crop yields is similar to that of all other pests (animal pests and pathogens) combined. Canola is the most-grown crop in Canada based on seeded area and generates on average Can$29.9 billion in economic activity each year. The objective of this report, sponsored by the Weed Science Society of America Weed Loss Committee, was to provide an updated estimate of potential yield and monetary losses due to weed interference in spring canola grown in Canada and the United States. Quantitative yield data from field experiments were provided by researchers and weed science professionals in the northern Great Plains region; the major canola-producing area of North America. Overall, 89 yield loss estimates were compiled, covering the 18-yr period from 2003 to 2020. Average canola yield losses due to weed interference in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and North Dakota were 35%, 30%, 18%, and 28%, respectively. Potential yield losses weighted by canola harvested area averaged 30%, 28%, and 30% for Canada, the United States, and both countries combined, respectively. Therefore, unfettered weed interference in spring canola represents a potential monetary loss of Can$2.21 billion, $0.16 billion, and $2.37 billion for farmers in Canada, the United States, and both countries combined. The realization of such losses could manifest through continued selection for herbicide-resistant weeds, indicating the critical need for canola farmers to diversify resistance selection pressures by implementing proactive integrated weed management programs.