Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-9nbrm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-20T03:12:48.999Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Metabolic cross-resistance to florpyrauxifen-benzyl in barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli) evolved before the commercialization of Rinskor™

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2023

Hudson K. Takano*
Affiliation:
Herbicide Mode of Action Scientist, Corteva Agriscience, Indianapolis, IN, USA
Scott Greenwalt
Affiliation:
Analytical Chemist, Corteva Agriscience, Indianapolis, IN, USA
Dave Ouse
Affiliation:
Herbicide Biologist, Corteva Agriscience, Indianapolis, IN, USA
Moriah Zielinski
Affiliation:
Biochemist, Corteva Agriscience, Indianapolis, IN, USA
Paul Schmitzer
Affiliation:
Global Herbicide Resistance Leader, Corteva Agriscience, Indianapolis, IN, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Hudson K. Takano, Corteva Agriscience, 9330 Zionsville Road, Indianapolis, IN 46265. (Email: hudson.takano@corteva.com)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Herbicide options for selective control of monocot weeds in rice (Oryza sativa L.) have historically been limited to a few modes of action such as inhibitors of acetolactate synthase (e.g., penoxsulam, imazamox), photosystem II (e.g., propanil), and acetyl-CoA carboxylase (e.g., cyhalofop). Florpyrauxifen-benzyl (Rinskor™) is a synthetic auxin molecule introduced to the U.S. rice herbicide market in 2018, providing broad-spectrum weed control (monocots and dicots), including hard-to-control species such as barnyardgrass [Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P. Beauv.], along with postemergence rice selectivity at very low use rates. Within the year of commercialization, field agronomists and academics identified E. crus-galli escapes in some areas where florpyrauxifen-benzyl had been sprayed. Further evaluation under controlled environments confirmed that those plants were able to survive florpyrauxifen-benzyl application at the label rate. Here, we identify the mechanism of resistance to florpyrauxifen-benzyl and penoxsulam in two E. crus-galli populations from Arkansas (AR-27) and Missouri (MO-18). Using high-resolution mass spectrometry, we compared the two resistant biotypes with known susceptible plants regarding their ability to metabolize florpyrauxifen-benzyl, florpyrauxifen-acid, and penoxsulam in planta. We discovered that the resistant plants share a common resistance mechanism to florpyrauxifen-benzyl and penoxsulam, involving hydrolysis of a methoxy group (likely mediated by a cytochrome P450 monooxygenase) followed by glucose conjugation. Given that penoxsulam has been widely used in rice fields for the past decade, these data suggest that some populations of E. crus-galli may have evolved resistance before the commercialization of florpyrauxifen-benzyl.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Weed Science Society of America
Figure 0

Table 1. Treatments and their respective doses and herbicide modes of action.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Visual injury (%) to susceptible (S) and resistant (AR-27, MO-18) Echinochloa crus-galli biotypes in response to florpyrauxifen-benzyl, florpyrauxifen-acid, penoxsulam, imazamox, cyhalofop, and propanil application. FP, florpyrauxifen. *Statistically significant difference between susceptible and resistant (AR-27, MO-18) biotypes (P < 0.05). Bar graphs represent average across two experimental runs with three replications each.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Effect of malathion on visual injury (%) provided by florpyrauxifen-benzyl, florpyrauxifen-acid, penoxsulam, or imazamox application to AR-27 and MO-18 Echinochloa crus-galli biotypes. *Statistically significant difference between no malathion and with malathion within each herbicide treatment (P < 0.05); ns, not significant (P > 0.05). Bar graphs represent average across two experimental runs with three replications each.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Levels of florpyrauxifen-acid in leaves of susceptible (S) and resistant (AR-27, MO-18) Echinochloa crus-galli (ECHCG) biotypes over time following florpyrauxifen-benzyl application without malathion. Data points represent the average and the respective standard error across two experimental runs with three replications each.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Levels of florpyrauxifen-hydroxyacid and florpyrauxifen-hydroxy-glucose metabolites in leaves of susceptible (S) and resistant (AR-27, MO-18) Echinochloa crus-galli (ECHCG) biotypes following florpyrauxifen-benzyl application without malathion. These metabolites were not found in malathion-treated plants. Data points represent the average and the respective standard error across two experimental runs with three replications each.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Levels of pyroxsulam, pyroxsulam-hydroxyacid, and pyroxsulam-hydroxy-glucose metabolites in leaves of susceptible (S) and resistant (AR-27, MO-18) Echinochloa crus-galli (ECHCG) biotypes following florpyrauxifen-benzyl application without malathion. Data points represent the average and the respective standard error across two experimental runs with three replications each.

Figure 6

Figure 6. Acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibition by penoxsulam and imazamox in susceptible (S) and resistant (AR-27, MO-18) Echinochloa crus-galli (ECHCG) biotypes. Data points represent the average and the respective standard error across two experimental runs with three replications each.