Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T18:08:23.432Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Frequency, Distribution, and Characterization of Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) Biotypes with Resistance to Glyphosate and ALS-Inhibiting Herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Greg R. Kruger ,
Vince M. Davis ,
Stephen C. Weller ,
J. M. Stachler ,
M. M. Loux  and
William G. Johnson
Greg R. Kruger
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, 915 W. State Street, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Vince M. Davis
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, 915 W. State Street, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Stephen C. Weller
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, 625 Agriculture Mall Dr., Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-1105
J. M. Stachler
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, P.O. Box 6050, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58108
M. M. Loux
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture and Crop Science, The Ohio State University, 2021 Coffey Rd., Columbus, OH 43210
William G. Johnson*
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, 915 W. State Street, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: wgj@purdue.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Greenhouse studies were conducted to determine the prevalence of resistance to acetolactate synthase (ALS)-inhibiting herbicides in 266 Indiana horseweed populations, both glyphosate-susceptible and glyphosate-resistant, and to characterize the response of selected biotypes to combinations of glyphosate and cloransulam. Populations with individuals resistant to ALS inhibitors were more frequent in the northern half (38% of the populations in the NW and 50% of the populations in the NE) of Indiana than in the southern half (26% of the populations in the SW and 5% of the populations in the SE). Only 2% of the populations appeared to be resistant to both glyphosate and ALS inhibitors in an initial greenhouse study. Horseweed populations with resistance to ALS inhibitors exhibited herbicide doses required for 50% reduction in plant growth (GR50) values ranging from 14 to 255 g ai ha−1 of cloransulam. The resistant : susceptible (R : S) ratio for four horseweed populations with suspected resistance to glyphosate and ALS inhibitors ranged from 0.3 to 50 and from 2.5 to 8.1 for cloransulam and glyphosate, respectively. The tank mixtures exhibited an antagonistic response to 3 of the 16 combinations of cloransulam and glyphosate on the susceptible population. The tank mixtures exhibited primarily an additive response to those same combinations in the multiple-resistant populations, but the response was occasionally synergistic for two of the four populations. The additive response between glyphosate and cloransulam indicates that, where the level of resistance is fairly low, combinations of these herbicides should be more effective for control of multiple-resistant populations compared with application of a single herbicide.

Keywords

Chlorimuroncloransulamhorseweed, Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronq. ERICA.Controlcross-resistancedose–responseherbicidemultiple-resistancesurvey
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 57 , Issue 6 , December 2009 , pp. 652 - 659
Copyright
Copyright © 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, , 1981. Weeds of the North Central States. Champaign, IL University of Illinois North Central Region Research Station Publications 281 and 244.Google Scholar
Bruce, J. A. and Kells, J. J. 1990. Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) control in no-tillage soybeans (Glycine max) with preplant and preemergence herbicides. Weed Technol. 4:642–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buhler, D. D. and Owen, M. D. K. 1997. Emergence and survival of horseweed (Conyza canadensis). Weed Sci. 45:98–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colby, S. R. 1967. Calculating synergistic and antagonistic responses of herbicide combinations. Weeds. 15:20–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dauer, J. T., Mortensen, D. A., and VanGessel, M. J. 2007. Temporal and spatial dynamics of long-distance Conyza canadensis seed dispersal. J. Appl. Ecol. 44:105–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, V. M., Gibson, K. D., and Johnson, W. G. 2008. A field survey to determine distribution and frequency of glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) in Indiana. Weed Technol. 22:331–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, V. M. and Johnson, W. G. 2008. Glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) emergence, survival, and fecundity in no-till soybean. Weed Sci. 56:231–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J. M. 2007. Review of glyphosate and ALS-inhibiting herbicide crop resistance and resistant weed management. Weed Technol. 21:547–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heap, I. 2008. International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. www.weedscience.com. Accessed: November 5, 2008.Google Scholar
Hugie, J. A., Bollero, G. A., Tranel, P. J., and Riechers, D. E. 2008. Defining the rate requirements for synergism between mesotrione and atrazine in redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus). Weed Sci. 56:265–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z., Streibig, J. C., and Ritz, C. 2007. Utilizing R software package for dose–response studies: the concept and data analysis. Weed Technol. 21:840–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loux, M. M., Stachler, J. M., Johnson, W. G., Nice, G. R. W., and Bauman, T. T. 2007. Weed Control Guide for Ohio and Indiana. Columbus, OH Ohio State University Extension Bulletin 789.Google Scholar
Main, C. L., Steckel, L. E., Hayes, R. M., and Mueller, T. C. 2006. Biotic and abiotic factors influence horseweed emergence. Weed Sci. 54:1101–1105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, T. C., Massey, J. H., Hayes, R. M., Main, C. L., and Stewart, C. N. Jr. 2003. Shikimate accumulates in both glyphosate-sensitive and glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis L. Cronq.). J. Agric. Food Chem. 51:680–684.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nandula, V. K., Eubank, T. W., Poston, D. H., Koger, C. H., and Reddy, K. N. 2006. Factors affecting germination of horseweed (Conyza canadensis). Weed Sci. 54:898–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Regehr, D. L. and Bazzaz, F. A. 1979. The population dynamics of Erigeron canadensis, a successional winter annual. J. Ecol. 67:923–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sammons, R. D., Heering, D. C., Dinicola, N., Glick, H., and Elmore, G. A. 2007. Sustainability and stewardship of glyphosate and glyphosate-resistant crops. Weed Technol. 21:347–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trainer, G. D., Loux, M. M., Harrison, S. K., and Regnier, E. 2005. Response of horseweed biotypes to foliar applications of cloransulam-methyl and glyphosate. Weed Technol. 19:231–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tranel, P. J. and Wright, T. R. 2002. Resistance of weeds to ALS-inhibiting herbicides: what have we learned? Weed Sci. 50:700–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanGessel, M. J. 2001. Glyphosate-resistant horseweed from Delaware. Weed Sci. 49:703–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanGessel, M. J., Ayeni, A. O., and Majek, B. A. 2001. Glyphosate in full-season no-till glyphosate-resistant soybean: role of preplant applications and residual herbicides. Weed Technol. 15:714–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weaver, S. E. 2001. The biology of Canadian weeds. 115. Can. J. Plant Sci. 81:867–875.Google Scholar
Young, B. G. 2006. Changes in herbicide use patterns and production practices resulting from glyphosate-resistant crops. Weed Technol. 20:301–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zelaya, I. A., Owen, M. D. K., and VanGessel, M. J. 2004. Inheritance of evolved glyphosate resistance in Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronq. Theor. Appl. Genet. 110:58–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed