Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T13:26:50.186Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Resistance to Aryloxyphenoxypropionate and Cyclohexanedione Herbicides in Wild Oat (Avena fatua)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Ian M. Heap ,
Bruce G. Murray ,
Heather A. Loeppky  and
Ian N. Morrison
Ian M. Heap
Affiliation:
Univ. Manitoba; Crop Agron., Agric. Can. Res. Stn., P.O. Box 1240 Melfort, SK, S0E 1A0
Bruce G. Murray
Affiliation:
Univ. Manitoba; Crop Agron., Agric. Can. Res. Stn., P.O. Box 1240 Melfort, SK, S0E 1A0
Heather A. Loeppky
Affiliation:
Univ. Manitoba; Crop Agron., Agric. Can. Res. Stn., P.O. Box 1240 Melfort, SK, S0E 1A0
Ian N. Morrison
Affiliation:
Univ. Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, R3T 2N2
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Resistance to aryloxyphenoxypropionate and cyclohexanedione herbicides was identified in four wild oat populations from western Canada. Populations UM1, UM2, and UM3 originated from northwestern Manitoba and UM33 from south-central Saskatchewan. Field histories indicated that these populations were exposed to repeated applications of diclofop-methyl and sethoxydim over the previous 10 yr. The populations differed in their levels and patterns of cross-resistance to these and five other acetyl-CoA carboxylase inhibitors (ACCase inhibitors). UM1, UM2, and UM3 were resistant to diclofop-methyl, fenoxaprop-p-ethyl, and sethoxydim. In contrast, UM33 was resistant to the aryloxyphenoxy propionate herbicides but not to sethoxydim. The dose of sethoxydim required to reduce growth of UM1 by 50% was 150 times greater than for a susceptible population (UM5) or UM33 based on shoot dry matter reductions 21 d after treatment. This population differed from UM2 and UM3 that had R/S ratios of less than 10. In the field UM1 also exhibited a very high level of resistance to sethoxydim. In contrast to susceptible plants that were killed at the recommended dosage, shoot dry matter of resistant plants treated at eight times the recommended dosage was reduced by only 27%. In growth chamber experiments none of the four populations was cross-resistant to herbicides from five different chemical families.

Keywords

Diclofop-methyl, (±)-2-[4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)phenoxy]propanoic acidfenoxaprop-p-ethyl, (R)-2-[4-[(6-chloro-2-benzoxazolyl)oxy]phenoxy]propanoic acid, ethyl estersethoxydim, 2-[1-(ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2-(ethylthio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2-cyclohexen-1-onetralkoxydim, 2-[1-(ethoxyimino)propyl]-3-hydroxy-5-(2,4,6-trimethylphenyl)cyclohex-2-enonewild oat, Avena fatua L. # AVEFAHerbicide resistancecross-resistanceAVEFA
Type
Weed Control and Herbicide Technology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 41 , Issue 2 , June 1993 , pp. 232 - 238
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 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

1. Devine, M. D., Hall, J. C., Romano, M. L., Maries, M.A.S., Thomson, L. W., and Shimabukuro, R. H. Diclofop and fenoxaprop resistance in wild oat is associated with an altered effect on the plasma membrane electrogenic potential. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. (in press).Google Scholar
2. Gressel, J. and Segel, L. A. 1990. Modelling the effectiveness of herbicide rotations and mixtures as strategies to delay or preclude resistance. Weed Technol. 4:186–198.Google Scholar
3. Heap, I. M. and Knight, R. A. 1986. The occurrence of herbicide cross-resistance in a population of annual ryegrass Lolium rigidum, resistant to diclofop-methyl. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 37:149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Heap, I. M. and Knight, R. A. 1990. Variations in herbicide cross-resistance among populations of annual ryegrass (Lolium ridigum) resistant to diclofop-methyl. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 41:121–128.Google Scholar
5. Hunter, J. H., Morrison, I. N., and Rourke, D.R.S. 1990. The Canadian prairie provinces. Pages 51–89 in Donald, W. W., ed. Systems of Weed Control in Wheat in North America. Weed Sci. Soc. Am., Champaign, IL.Google Scholar
6. Joseph, O., Hobbs, S., and Jana, S. 1990. Diclofop resistance in wild oat (Avena fatua). Weed Sci. 38:475–479.Google Scholar
7. Lichtenthaler, H. K. 1990. Mode of action of herbicides affecting acetyl-CoA carboxylase and fatty acid biosynthesis. Z. Naturforsch. 45:521–528.Google Scholar
8. Maxwell, B., Roush, M., and Radosevich, S. 1990. Predicting the evolution and dynamics of herbicide resistance in weed populations. Weed Technol. 4:2–13.Google Scholar
9. Mortimer, A. M., Ulf-Hansen, P. F., and Putwain, P. D. 1992. Modelling herbicide resistance—a study of ecological fitness. In: Achievements and developments in combating pesticide resistance. Ed. Denholm, I. et al. Elsevier (in press).Google Scholar
10. Moss, S. R. 1991. Herbicide cross-resistance in slender foxtail (Alopecurus myosuroides). Weed Sci. 38:492–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Parker, W. B., Marshall, L. C., Burton, J. D., Somers, D. A., Wyse, D. L., Gronwald, J. W., and Gengenbach, B. G. 1990. Dominant mutations causing alterations in acetyl-coenzyme A carboxylase confer tolerance to cyclohexanedione and aryloxyphenoxypropionate herbicides in maize. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. (Appl. Biol. Sci.). 87:7175–7179.Google Scholar
12. Stanger, C. E. and Appleby, A. P. 1989. Italian ryegrass (Lolium, multiflorum) accessions tolerant to diclofop. Weed Sci. 37:350–352.Google Scholar
13. Thomas, A. G. and Wise, R. F. 1988. Weed Survey of Manitoba Cereal and Oilseed Crops 1986. Weed Survey Ser. Publ. No. 88-1 Agric. Can., Regina, Sask. 201 pp.Google Scholar
14. Warkentin, T. D., Marshall, G., McKenzie, R.I.H., and Morrison, I. N. (1988). Diclofop-methyl tolerance in cultivated oats (Avena sativa L.). Weed Res. 28:27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar