Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-r6c6k Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T16:10:23.211Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Resistance to 2,4-D in Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) from Kansas is mediated by enhanced metabolism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2022

Chandrima Shyam
Affiliation:
Graduate Research Assistant, Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA
Dallas E. Peterson
Affiliation:
(Retired) Extension Weed Science Specialist and Professor, Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA
Mithila Jugulam*
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Mithila Jugulam, Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66502. (Email: mithila@ksu.edu)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri S. Watson) population (KCTR: KS Conservation Tillage Resistant) collected from a conservation tillage field was confirmed with resistance to herbicides targeting at least six sites of action, including 2,4-D. The objectives of this research were using KCTR A. palmeri to investigate (1) the level of 2,4-D resistance, (2) 2,4-D absorption and translocation profiles, (3) the rate of 2,4-D metabolism compared with 2,4-D–tolerant wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), and (4) the possible role of cytochrome P450s (P450s) in mediating resistance. Dose–response experiments were conducted to assess the level of 2,4-D resistance in KCTR compared with susceptible plants, KSS (KS 2,4-D susceptible) and MSS (MS 2,4-D susceptible). KSS, MSS, and KCTR plants were treated with [14C]2,4-D to determine absorption, translocation, and metabolic patterns. Additionally, whole-plant dose–response assays were conducted by treating KCTR and KSS plants with P450 inhibitors (malathion, piperonyl butoxide [PBO]) before 2,4-D application. Dose–response experiments indicated a 6- to 11-fold 2,4-D resistance in KCTR compared with susceptible plants. No difference was found in percent [14C]2,4-D absorption among the populations. However, 10% less and 3 times slower translocation of [14C]2,4-D was found in KCTR compared with susceptible plants. Importantly, [14C]2,4-D was metabolized faster in KCTR than susceptible plants. At 24, 48, and 72 h after treatment (HAT), KCTR metabolized ∼20% to 30% more [14C]2,4-D than susceptible plants. KCTR plants and wheat generated metabolites with similar polarity. Nonetheless, at 24 HAT, ∼70% of [14C]2,4-D was metabolized in wheat, compared with only 30% in KCTR A. palmeri. Application of malathion before 2,4-D increased the sensitivity to 2,4-D in KCTR, suggesting involvement of P450s in mediating 2,4-D metabolism. However, no such impact of PBO was documented. Overall, this study confirms that enhanced metabolism is the primary mechanism of 2,4-D resistance in KCTR.

Information

Type
Research Article
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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© Kansas State University, 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Weed Science Society of America
Figure 0

Figure 1. Dose–response curves describing the response of KSS (susceptible), MSS (susceptible), and KCTR (resistant) Amaranthus palmeri to 2,4-D. Relative dry weight (% of nontreated) of KSS, MSS, and KCTR A. palmeri was analyzed using the three-parameter log-logistic regression model (Equation 1) at 4 wk after treatment (WAT). Dashed line at the center of the plot represents 50% of the relative dry weight.

Figure 1

Table 1. Regression parameters (Equation 1) describing the response of KSS (susceptible), MSS (susceptible), and KCTR (resistant) Amaranthus palmeri to 2,4-D under growth-chamber conditions.a

Figure 2

Figure 2. [14C]2,4-D (A) absorption and (B) translocation in KSS (susceptible), MSS (susceptible), and KCTR (resistant) plants grown under growth-chamber conditions, as determined using Equations 9 and 10.

Figure 3

Table 2. Parameters describing percent absorption of [14C]2,4-D in KSS, MSS, and KCTR Amaranthus palmeri plants calculated from Equations 9 and 10.a

Figure 4

Table 3. Comparison of parameters estimating [14C]2,4-D absorption and translocation in KSS (susceptible), MSS (susceptible), and KCTR (resistant) Amaranthus palmeri plants (using Equations 9 and 10) when grown under growth-chamber conditions.

Figure 5

Figure 3. HPLC chromatograms depicting resolved [14C]2,4-D parent compound and its metabolites at 24 h after treatment (HAT) in (A) KSS (susceptible), (B) MSS (susceptible), (C) KCTR (resistant) Amaranthus palmeri and (D) wheat (naturally tolerant) seedlings, grown under growth-chamber conditions. M1, M2, and M3 represent metabolites 1, 2, and 3.

Figure 6

Figure 4. Percent of [14C]2,4-D in KSS (susceptible), MSS (susceptible), and KCTR (resistant) Amaranthus palmeri seedlings at (A) 6, (B) 24, (C) 48, and (D) 72 h after treatment (HAT) grown under growth-chamber conditions. Error bars represent standard error of mean and letters represent significant differences identified by separation of means using Tukey’s test (5%).

Figure 7

Figure 5. Dose–response curves describing the response of KSS (susceptible) and KCTR (resistant) Amaranthus palmeri to 2,4-D with or without pretreatment with malathion (cytochrome P450 inhibitor). Relative dry weight (% of nontreated) of KSS and KCTR A. palmeri was analyzed using the three-parameter log-logistic regression model (Equation 1) at 4 wk after treatment (WAT). Dashed line at the center of the plot represents 50% of the relative dry weight.

Figure 8

Table 4. Regression parameters (Equation 1) describing the response of KSS (susceptible) and KCTR (resistant) Amaranthus palmeri under growth-chamber conditions to 2,4-D application with or without pretreatment with malathion (cytochrome P450 inhibitor).a

Figure 9

Figure 6. Dose–response curves describing the response of KSS (susceptible) and KCTR (resistant) Amaranthus palmeri to 2,4-D with or without pretreatment with piperonyl butoxide (PBO; cytochrome P450 inhibitor). Relative dry weight (% of nontreated) of KSS and KCTR A. palmeri was analyzed using the three-parameter log-logistic regression model (Equation 1) at 4 wk after treatment (WAT). Dashed line at the center of the plot represents 50% of the relative dry weight.

Figure 10

Table 5. Regression parameters (Equation 7) describing the response of KSS (susceptible) and KCTR (resistant) Amaranthus palmeri to 2,4-D with or without pretreatment with piperonyl butoxide (PBO; cytochrome P450 inhibitor) under growth-chamber conditions.a