Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:18:23.119Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Herbicide Susceptibility and Biological Fitness of Triazine-Resistant and Susceptible Common Lambsquarters (Chenopodium album)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Robert J. Parks ,
William S. Curran ,
Gregory W. Roth ,
Nathan L. Hartwig  and
Dennis D. Calvin
Robert J. Parks
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Assoc. Prof. Entom., The Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, PA 16802
William S. Curran
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Assoc. Prof. Entom., The Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, PA 16802
Gregory W. Roth
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Assoc. Prof. Entom., The Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, PA 16802
Nathan L. Hartwig
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Assoc. Prof. Entom., The Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, PA 16802
Dennis D. Calvin
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Assoc. Prof. Entom., The Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, PA 16802
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Biological fitness and negative cross-resistance to other herbicides may be an important factor in managing triazine-resistant common lambsquarters. Greenhouse experiments examined the sensitivity of a resistant and a susceptible biotype to foliarly-applied bentazon, bromoxynil, dicamba, pyridate, and thifensulfuron. The noncompetitive vigor of triazine-resistant and susceptible common lambsquarters also was compared by growing plants in individual containers and harvesting them periodically throughout their vegetative period and at reproductive maturity. In the herbicide susceptibility study, 11 kg ai ha−1 atrazine had no effect on the growth of the resistant biotype, while it reduced susceptible common lambsquarters’ biomass by up to 68%. Estimated I50 values indicated the resistant biotype exhibited between 36 and 79% greater susceptibility to bentazon, bromoxynil, dicamba, and pyridate than did the susceptible one, while both responded similarly to thifensulfuron. In growth studies, the susceptible biotype achieved greater height, leaf area, and plant dry weight than the resistant population for the majority of harvest dates; however, values equalized between biotypes as the plants reached maturity. These experiments suggest that alternative management programs that exploit reduced fitness and increased herbicide susceptibility in triazine-resistant common lambsquarters could be developed. However, further studies are needed to determine whether these results have application for the management of triazine-resistant weeds in the field.

Keywords

Atrazine, [6-chloro-N-ethyl-N′-(1-methylethyl)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine]bentazon, [3-(1-methylethyl)-(1H)-2,1,3-benzothiadiazin-4(3H)-one 2,2-dioxide]bromoxynil, [3,5-dibromo-4-hydroxybenzonitrile]dicamba, [3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acid]pyridate, [O-(6-chloro-3-phenyl-4-pyridazinyl) S-octyl carbonothioate]thifensulfuron, [3-[[[[(4-methoxy-6-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sullonyl]-2-thiophenecarboxylic acid], common lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L. ♯ CHEALNegative cross resistance
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 44 , Issue 3 , September 1996 , pp. 517 - 522
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 by 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.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Ashton, F. M. and Crafts, A. S. 1981. Benzoics. Pages 139–163 in Mode of Action of Herbicides. 2nd ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
2. Bulcke, R., De Vleeschauwer, J., Vercruysse, J., and Stryckers, J. 1985. Comparison between triazine-resistant and susceptible biotypes of Chenopodium album L. and Solanum nigrum L. Med. Fac. Landbouww. 50: 211–220.Google Scholar
3. Conard, S. G. and Radosevich, S. R. 1979. Ecological Fitness of Senecio vulgaris and Amaranthus retroflexus biotypes susceptible or resistant to triazine. J. of App. Ecol. 16: 171–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. De Prado, R., Sanchez, M., Jorrin, J., and Dominguez, C. 1992. Negative cross-resistance to bentazone and pyridate in atrazine-resistant Amaranthus cruenlus and Amaranthus hybridus biotypes. Pestic. Sci. 35: 131–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Forcella, F. 1987. Herbicide-resistant crops; yield penalties and weed thresholds for oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). Weed Res. 27: 31–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Fuerst, P. E., Arntzen, C. J., Pfister, K., and Penner, D. 1986. Herbicide cross resistance in triazine-resistant biotypes of four species. Weed Sci. 34: 344–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Georghiou, G. P. 1986. The magnitude of the resistance problem. Pages 14–43 in Glass, E. H., ed. Pesticide Resistance: Strategies and Tactics for Management. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
8. Grant, I. and Beversdorf, W. D. 1985. Agronomic performance of triazine-resistant single cross hybrid oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). Can. J. Plant Sci. 65: 889–892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Gressel, J. and Segel, L. A. 1990. Herbicide rotations and mixtures: effective strategies to delay resistance. Pages 430–458 in Green, M. B., Moberg, W. K., and LeBaron, H. M., ed. Fundamental and Practical Approaches to Combating Resistance. Am. Chem. Soc. Symp. Ser., Am. Chem. Soc, Washington, DC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Gressel, J. and Segel, L. A. 1990. Modeling the effectiveness of herbicide rotations and mixtures as strategies to delay or preclude resistance. Weed Technol. 4: 186–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Gressel, J. and Segel, L. A. 1990. Negative cross resistance; a possible key to atrazine resistance management: a call for whole plant data. Z. Naturforsch. 45c, 470–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Holliday, R. J., Putwain, P. D., and Dafni, A. 1976. The evolution of herbicide resistance in weeds and its implications for the farmer. Proc. Br. Crop Prot. Conf.—Weeds. p. 937–946.Google Scholar
13. Holt, J. S. 1990. Fitness and ecological adaptability of herbicide-resistant biotypes. Pages 419–429 in Green, M. B., Moberg, W. K., and LeBaron, H. M., ed. Fundamental and Practical Approaches to Combating Resistance. Am. Chem. Soc. Symp. Ser., Am. Chem. Soc., Washington, DC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Jansen, M. A. K., Hobe, J. H., Wesselius, J. C., and van Rensen, J. J. S. 1986. Comparison of photosynthetic activity and growth performance in triazine-resistant and susceptible biotypes of Chenopodium album . Physiol. Veg. 4: 475–484.Google Scholar
15. LeBaron, H. M. and McFarland, J. 1990. Overview and prognosis of herbicide resistance in weeds and crops. Pages 000–000 in Green, M. B., Moberg, W. K. and LeBaron, H. M., eds. Proc. Am. Chem. Soc. Symp. on Fundamental and Practical Approaches to Combating Resistance. ACS Symp. Ser., ACS Books, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
16. Marriage, P. B. and Warwick, S. I. 1980. Differential growth and response to atrazine between and within susceptible and resistant biotypes of Chenopodium album L. Weed Res. 20: 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Steel, R. G. D. and Torrie, J. H. 1980. Analysis of variance II: multiway classifications. Pages 195–236 in Principles and Procedures of Statistics: Biometrical Approach. 2nd Ed. McGraw-Hill Book Comp., New York.Google Scholar
18. Sivakumaran, K., Mulugeta, D., Fay, P. K., and Dyer, W. E. Differential herbicide response among sulfonylurea-resistant Kochia scoparia L. accessions. Weed Sci. 41: 159–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19. Stidham, M. A. 1991. Herbicides that inhibit acetohydroxyacid synthase. Weed Sci. 39: 428–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Warwick, S. I. and Black, L. 1980. The relative competitiveness of atrazine susceptible and resistant populations of Chenopodium album and C. strictum. Can. J. Bot. 59: 689–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar