Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-r6c6k Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T12:57:38.026Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

New Approaches to Herbicide and Bioherbicide Discovery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 October 2024

Stephen O. Duke
Affiliation:
National Center for Natural Products Research, University of Mississippi, University, MS, USA
Alyssa Twitty
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Claire Baker
Affiliation:
Toothpick Company Ltd., Kakamega, Kenya
David Sands
Affiliation:
Toothpick Company Ltd., Kakamega, Kenya
Louis Boddy
Affiliation:
ProFarm Group, Davis, CA, USA
María Lucía Travaini
Affiliation:
INBIOAR Global Ltd., Rosario, Argentina
Gustavo Sosa
Affiliation:
INBIOAR Global Ltd., Rosario, Argentina
Alexander L.A. Polidore
Affiliation:
Carl R. Woese Institute for Genomic Biology, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA MicroMGx, Evanston, IL, USA
Amit J. Jhala
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, USA
Jack M. Kloeber
Affiliation:
MicroMGx, Evanston, IL, USA
Xavier Jacq
Affiliation:
Moa Technology Ltd., Oxford, UK
Lucas Lieber
Affiliation:
BioHeuris Inc., St Louis, MO, USA
Maria Celeste Varela
Affiliation:
BioHeuris Inc., St Louis, MO, USA
Martina Lazzaro
Affiliation:
BioHeuris Inc., St Louis, MO, USA
Ana P. Alessio
Affiliation:
BioHeuris Inc., St Louis, MO, USA
Christopher C. Ladner
Affiliation:
Oerth Bio, LLC, Durham, NC, USA
Denis Fourches
Affiliation:
Oerth Bio, LLC, Durham, NC, USA
Itai Bloch
Affiliation:
Projini AgChem Ltd., Misgav, Israel
Maayan Gal
Affiliation:
Projini AgChem Ltd., Misgav, Israel Department of Oral Biology, Goldschleger School of Dental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
Jonathan Gressel
Affiliation:
Plant and Environmental Sciences, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
Karthik Putta
Affiliation:
Enko Chem Inc., Mystic, CT, USA
Yael Phillip
Affiliation:
Agrematch Ltd., Rehovot Science Park, Israel
Ifat Shub
Affiliation:
Agrematch Ltd., Rehovot Science Park, Israel
Eyal Ben-Chanoch
Affiliation:
Agrematch Ltd., Rehovot Science Park, Israel
Franck E. Dayan*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA
*
Corresponding author: Franck E. Dayan; Email: franck.dayan@colostate.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

During the past 30 yr an impasse has developed in the discovery and commercialization of synthetic herbicides with new molecular targets and novel chemistries. Similarly, there has been little success with bioherbicides, both microbial and chemical. These bioherbicides are needed to combat fast-growing herbicide resistance and to fulfill the need for more environmentally and toxicologically safe herbicides. In response to this substantial and growing opportunity, numerous start-up companies are utilizing novel approaches to provide new tools for weed management. These diverse new tools broaden the scope of discovery, encompassing advanced computational, bioinformatic, and imaging platforms; plant genome–editing and targeted protein degradation technologies; and machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI)-based strategies. This review contains summaries of the presentations of 10 such companies that took part in a symposium held at the WSSA annual meeting in 2024. Four of the companies are developing microbial bioherbicides or natural product–based herbicides, and the other six are using advanced technologies, such as AI, to accelerate the discovery of herbicides with novel molecular target sites or to develop non-GMO, herbicide-resistant crops.

Information

Type
Review
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Weed Science Society of America
Figure 0

Figure 1. (A) Untreated striga-infested field on Kisumu-Busia Road, Busia County, Kenya. (B) Striga-infested field treated with Kichawi Kill™ on Kisumu-Busia Road, Busia County, Kenya. Photos: Geoffrey Wanjala, Farm to Market Alliance, World Food Program.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Microbially produced herbicidal molecules.

Figure 2

Table 1. Nature of some of the challenges encountered in developing a bioherbicide

Figure 3

Figure 3. Ammi visnaga at the beginning of the colonization process in a natural area of Argentina.

Figure 4

Figure 4. A plant extract that kills weeds slowly and systemically when applied postemergence. Effects are 10 d after treatment.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Structure and bioactivity of naturally occurring phosphonates and their molecular mimics. Bioactive phosphonates with their respective enzyme targets are shown with a light blue background. The enzyme’s native substrates are shown in a light red background. Phosphorus-carbon bonds are shown as bold red lines on the molecule, and commercially available compounds are underlined. Fosfomycin, clinically sold as Monurol®, is used to treat difficult urinary tract infections, and phosphinothricin (also known as glufosinate) is the active ingredient for the broad-spectrum commercial herbicide sold under several trade names.

Figure 6

Figure 6. Discovery of novel herbicides from plant-associated enterobacteria (left). Novel phosphonate biosynthetic gene clusters (PepM BGCs) are identified from plant-associated enterobacteria through the metabologenomics platform (top, center). Native host expression of the PepM BGC is achieved by introduction of an inducible promoter, Ptac, through a simple promoter exchange method via homologous recombination (right). A bacterial recombinant with the exchanged promoter is then selected for using the antibiotic resistance gene (ARG). Spent media or purified compounds are then used for herbicide bioassays (bottom, center).

Figure 7

Figure 7. Growth impact assessment among common crop and weed species treated with formulated pantaphos. Data were compiled from five independent greenhouse trials with crop species in blue and weed species in red. The asterisks denote weed species with known glyphosate resistance. Horizontal axis is measured impact assessment based on overall growth yield compared with an untreated sample, and vertical axis distance is arbitrary. The growth phenotype of waterhemp [Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.) Sauer] after treatment with pantaphos is shown in the upper left inset. Rice (Oryza sativa L.) showed highly variable growth impact that was found to be dependent on the adjuvant used in the pantaphos formulation.

Figure 8

Figure 8. Graphical representation of moaNOVEL families identified by the GALAXY platform. Unique moaNOVEL families with more than 50 representative molecules are denoted with a bracket (>50). The number of each moaNOVEL molecule active in weeds is highlighted in green. moaNOVEL families with glasshouse activities are highlighted in yellow.

Figure 9

Figure 9. Weed spectrum evaluation of two examples of molecules being shortlisted for field trials in 2024: (A) molecule with broadleaf spectrum and largely postemergence properties and (B) molecule with largely preemergence properties and broad spectrum. DFF, diflufenican; ALOMY, blackgrass (Alopecurus myosuroides Huds.); AMARE, redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus L.); ANTAR, chamomile [Anthemis arvensis (Wallr.) DC.]; APESV, common windgrass [Apera spica-venti (L.) P. Beauv.]; CENCY, cornflower (Centaurea cyanus L.); CHEAL, lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.); ECHCG, barnyardgrass [Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv.] LOLMU, Italian ryegrass (Lolium perenne L. ssp. multiflorum (Lam.) Husnot; PHBPU, tall morningglory (Ipomoea purpurea (L.) Roth); POAAN, annual bluegrass (Poa annua L.); SETIT, foxtail millet [Setaria italica (L.) P. Beauv.]; STEME, common chickweed [Stellaria media (L.) Vill.]; VERPE, birdeye speedwell (Veronica persica Poir.). Blue indicates grass weeds; green indicates broadleaf weeds.

Figure 10

Figure 10. Heurik™ trait-discovery workflow developed to identify candidate mutations in plant genes that provide herbicide resistance.

Figure 11

Figure 11. Swap™ gene editing workflow allows the creation of mutations in plant genomes to efficiently obtain herbicide-resistant elite varieties. NHEJ, non-homologous end joining; HDR, homology-directed repair; DSB, double-strand break.

Figure 12

Figure 12. Herbicide resistance provided by different amino acid changes in two conserved positions of an orthologous target-site enzyme from soybean (red), sorghum (blue), and cotton (yellow). Changes are indicated with the three-letter code for each amino acid. Values correspond to the resistant/susceptible (R/S) ratio, calculated as GI50 of mutant variant by the GI50 of the wild-type variant.

Figure 13

Figure 13. (A) Illustration of a proteolysis-targeting chimera (PROTAC) with (1) its target ligand binding the target protein of interest, (2) its ligase-specific ligand to recruit a specific E3 ubiquitin ligase, and (3) its linker that covalently attaches those two ligands. (B) Illustration of the PROTAC mechanism of action (MOA): the PROTAC recruits a specific E3 ligase and a target protein to form a ternary complex, allowing several molecules of ubiquitin to be transferred onto the surface of the target protein. The ubiquitin-tagged protein is then transported to the proteasome for degradation. Figure reproduced with permission from Oerth Bio, LLC.

Figure 14

Figure 14. The two-enzyme protein–protein interacting complex catalyzing the conversion of serine to cysteine. The complex is composed of two dimers of O-acetylserine-sulfhydrylase (OASS) and a hexamer of serine-acetyl transferase (SAT). Only the binding of the one monomer of SAT whose C-terminal end binds into the binding pocket of one of the OASS monomers is shown. The structures of OASS and SAT were obtained using AlphaFold2. Images and text courtesy of Elad Cohen.

Figure 15

Figure 15. An example of two lead compounds that were phytotoxic to duckweed at 1 wk after sowing four frond-clusters per plate.

Figure 16

Figure 16. Examples of preemergence activity of Projini leads. The structure of each accession is described in Dotan et al. (2023). The various compounds were applied at rates varying between 1.8 and 2 kg per hectare−1.

Figure 17

Figure 17. Schematic representation of a DNA-encoded library (DEL) molecule bound to a target protein. A DNA barcode attached to the small molecule through a linker encodes information associated with the specific building blocks that were incorporated into the small molecule during library construction.

Figure 18

Figure 18. The “compound-based” approach provides early prediction of many critical characteristics and functions for compounds to become products.

Figure 19

Figure 19. An illustration of the Agrematch platform iterative process of in silico screening, laboratory validation, and feedback to the computational system to generate advanced functional compounds libraries.