Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T11:08:11.455Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Biologically effective dose of metribuzin applied preemergence and postemergence for the control of waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) with different mechanisms of resistance to photosystem II–inhibiting herbicides

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 July 2021

David B. Westerveld
Affiliation:
Graduate Student, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
Nader Soltani*
Affiliation:
Adjunct Professor, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
David C. Hooker
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
Darren E. Robinson
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
Patrick J. Tranel
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA
Martin Laforest
Affiliation:
Research Scientist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu Research and Development Centre, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, QC, Canada
Peter H. Sikkema
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, ON, Canada
*
Author for correspondence: Nader Soltani, Department of Plant Agriculture, University of Guelph Ridgetown Campus, 120 Main Street East, Ridgetown, ONN0P 2C0, Canada. (Email: [email protected])

Abstract

Photosystem II (PS II)-inhibitor herbicide resistance in Ontario waterhemp [Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.) Sauer] populations is conferred via target-site resistance (TSR) and non–target site resistance (NTSR) mechanisms. Metribuzin-resistant (MR) A. tuberculatus is due to TSR. Conversely, in other populations of PS II–inhibitor resistant A. tuberculatus, plants are resistant to atrazine but metribuzin sensitive (MS). The objective of this study was to determine the biologically effective dose of metribuzin applied preemergence and postemergence for the control of MS and MR A. tuberculatus. Ten field experiments were conducted in 2019 and 2020 to determine the effective doses of metribuzin for 50%, 80%, and 95% control of MS and MR A. tuberculatus. Metribuzin applied preemergence at the calculated doses of 133, 350, and 1,070 g ai ha−1 controlled MS A. tuberculatus 50%, 80%, and 95%, respectively, whereas the calculated doses of 7,868 and 17,533 g ai ha−1 controlled MR A. tuberculatus 50% and 80%, respectively, at 12 wk after application (WAA). Metribuzin applied postemergence at the calculated doses of 245 and 1,480 g ai ha−1 controlled MS A. tuberculatus 50% and 80%, respectively; the calculated dose for 50% MR A. tuberculatus control was greater than the highest dose (17,920 g ai ha−1) included in this study. Metribuzin at 560 and 1,120 g ha−1 and pyroxasulfone/flumioxazin (240 g ai ha−1) applied preemergence controlled MS A. tuberculatus 88%, 95%, and 98%, respectively, at 12 WAA, whereas the same treatments only controlled MR A. tuberculatus 0%, 4%, and 93%, respectively, at 12 WAA. Metribuzin at 560 and 1,120 g ha−1 and fomesafen (240 g ai ha−1) applied postemergence controlled MS A. tuberculatus 65%, 70%, and 78%, and MR A. tuberculatus 0%, 1%, and 49%, respectively, at 12 WAA. Based on these results, PS II–inhibitor resistant A. tuberculatus with NTSR (enhanced metabolism) is controlled with metribuzin applied preemergence and postemergence; in contrast, PS II–inhibitor resistant A. tuberculatus with TSR (glycine-264-serine altered target site) is not controlled with metribuzin.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of 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.)

Footnotes

Associate Editor: Te-Ming Paul Tseng, Mississippi State University

References

Anderson, DD, Roeth, FW, Martin, AR (1996) Occurrence and control of triazine-resistant common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) in field corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol 3:570575 10.1017/S0890037X00040458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anonymous (2020) Sencor 480 F Herbicide. Bayer CropScience, Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 42 p Google Scholar
Benoit, L, Hedges, B, Schryver, MG, Soltani, N, Hooker, DC, Robinson, DE, Laforest, M, Soufiane, B, Tranel, PJ, Giacomini, D, Sikkema, PH (2019) The first record of protoporphyrinogen oxidase and four-way herbicide resistance in eastern Canada. Can J Plant Sci 100:327331 10.1139/cjps-2018-0326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costea, M, Weaver, SE, Tardif, FJ (2005) The biology of invasive alien plants in Canada. 3. Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.) Sauer var. rudis (Sauer) Costea & Tardif. Can J Plant Sci 85:507522 10.4141/P04-101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, AF Jr, O’Brien, SR, Ma, R, Hager, AG, Riggins, CW, Lambert, KN, Riechers, DE (2017) Biochemical characterization of metabolism-based atrazine resistance in Amaranthus tuberculatus and identification of an expressed GST associated with resistance. Plant Biotechnol J 15:12381249 10.1111/pbi.12711CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Evans, CM, Strom, SA, Riechers, DE, Davis, AS, Tranel, PJ, Hager, AG (2019) Characterization of a waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) population from Illinois resistant to herbicides from five site-of-action groups. Weed Technol 33:400410.10.1017/wet.2019.19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foes, MJ, Tranel, PJ, Wax, LM, Stoller, EW (1998) A biotype of common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) resistant to triazine and ALS herbicides. Weed Sci 46:514520 10.1017/S0043174500091013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hager, AG, Wax, LM, Bollero, GA, Stoller, EW (2003) Influence of diphenylether herbicide application rate and timing on common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) control in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 17:1420 10.1614/0890-037X(2003)017[0014:IODHAR]2.0.CO;2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartzler, RG, Battles, BA, Nordby, D (2004) Effect of common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) emergence date on growth and fecundity in soybean. Weed Sci 52:242245 10.1614/WS-03-004RCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, NE, Tranel, PJ, Riechers, DE, Hager, AG (2016) Responses of a waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) population resistant to HPPD-inhibiting herbicides to foliar-applied herbicides. Weed Technol 30:106115 10.1614/WT-D-15-00098.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, NE, Tranel, PJ, Riechers, DE, Maxwell, DJ, Gonzini, LC, Hager, AG (2013) Responses of an HPPD inhibitor-resistant waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) population to soil-residual herbicides. Weed Technol 27:704711 10.1614/WT-D-13-00032.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heap, I (2021) The International Herbicide-Resistant Weed Database. www.weedscience.org. Accessed: February 1, 2021Google Scholar
Hedges, BK, Soltani, N, Robinson, DE, Hooker, DC, Sikkema, PH (2018) Control of glyphosate-resistant Canada fleabane in Ontario with multiple effective modes-of-action in glyphosate/dicamba-resistant soybean. Can J Plant Sci 99:7883 10.1139/cjps-2018-0067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, J, Davis, AS, Tranel, PJ (2012) Pollen biology and dispersal dynamics in waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus). Weed Sci 60:416422 10.1614/WS-D-11-00201.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, H, Lu, H, Han, H, Yu, Q, Powles, S (2020) Metribuzin resistance via enhanced metabolism in a multiple herbicide resistant Lolium rigidum population. Pest Manag Sci 76:37853791 10.1002/ps.5929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, R, Kaundun, SS, Tranel, PJ, Riggins, CW, McGinness, DL, Hager, AG, Riechers, DE (2013) Distinct detoxification mechanisms confer resistance to mesotrione and atrazine in a population of waterhemp. Plant Physiol 163:363377 10.1104/pp.113.223156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, SR, Davis, AS, Riechers, DE (2018) Quantifying resistance to isoxaflutole and mesotrione and investigating their interactions with metribuzin POST in waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus). Weed Sci 66:586594 10.1017/wsc.2018.36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliveira, MC, Jhala, AJ, Gaines, T, Irmak, S, Amundsen, K, Scott, JE, Knezevic, SZ (2017) Confirmation and control of HPPD-inhibiting herbicide–resistant waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) in Nebraska. Weed Technol 31:6779 10.1017/wet.2016.4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[OMAFRA] Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (2018) Guide to Weed Control. Publication No. 75. Toronto, ON, Canada: OMAFRA. 258 pGoogle Scholar
Patzoldt, WL, Dixon, BS, Tranel, PJ (2003) Triazine resistance in Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq) Sauer that is not site-of-action mediated. Pest Manag Sci 59:11341142 10.1002/ps.743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patzoldt, WL, Tranel, PJ, Hager, AG (2002) Variable herbicide responses among Illinois waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis and A. tuberculatus) populations. Crop Prot 21:707712 10.1016/S0261-2194(02)00027-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, GF (1970) Resistance of common groundsel to simazine and atrazine. Weed Sci 18:614616 10.1017/S0043174500034330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schryver, MG, Soltani, N, Hooker, DC, Robinson, DE, Tranel, PJ, Sikkema, PH (2017a) Control of glyphosate-resistant common waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus var. rudis) in soybean in Ontario. Weed Technol. 31:811821 10.1017/wet.2017.50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schryver, MG, Soltani, N, Hooker, DC, Robinson, DE, Tranel, PJ, Sikkema, PH (2017b) Glyphosate-resistant waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus var. rudis) in Ontario, Canada. Can J Plant Sci 97:10571067 Google Scholar
Shergill, L, Barlow, B, Bish, M, Bradley, K (2018) Investigations of 2,4-D and multiple herbicide resistance in a Missouri waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) population. Weed Sci 66:386394 10.1017/wsc.2017.82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steckel, LE (2007) The dioecious Amaranthus spp.: here to stay. Weed Technol. 21:567570 10.1614/WT-06-045.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steckel, LE, Sprague, CL (2004) Common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) interference in corn. Weed Sci 52:359364 10.1614/WS-03-066R1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steckel, LE, Sprague, CL, Hager, AG, Simmons, FW, Bollero, GA (2003) Effects of shading on common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) growth and development. Weed Sci 51:898903 10.1614/P2002-139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strom, SA, Gonzini, LC, Mitsdarfer, C, Davis, AS, Riechers, DE, Hager, AG (2019) Characterization of multiple herbicide-resistant waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) populations from Illinois to VLCFA-inhibiting herbicides. Weed Sci 67:369379 10.1017/wsc.2019.13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweat, JK, Horak, MJ, Peterson, DE, Lloyd, RW, Boyer, JE (1998) Herbicide efficacy on four Amaranthus species in soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol 12:315321 10.1017/S0890037X00043876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vennapusa, AR, Faleco, F, Vieira, B, Samuelson, S, Kruger, GR, Werle, R, Jugulam, M (2018) Prevalence and mechanism of atrazine resistance in waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) from Nebraska. Weed Sci 66:595602 Google Scholar
Vyn, JD, Swanton, CJ, Weaver, SE, Sikkema, P (2007) Control of herbicide-resistant common waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus var. rudis) with pre- and post-emergence herbicides in soybean. Can J Plant Sci 87:175182 10.4141/P06-016CrossRefGoogle Scholar