Non-dicamba-resistant soybean yield loss resulting from dicamba off-target injury has become an increasing concern for soybean growers in recent years. After off-target dicamba movement occurs onto sensitive soybean, little information is available on tactics that could be used to mitigate the cosmetic or yield losses that may occur. Therefore, a field experiment was conducted in 2017, 2018, and 2019 to determine whether certain recovery treatments of fungicide, plant growth hormone, macro- and micronutrient fertilizer combinations, or weekly irrigation could reduce dicamba injury and/or result in similar yield to soybean that was not injured with dicamba. Simulated drift events of dicamba (5.6 g ae ha−1) were applied to non-dicamba-resistant soybean once they reached the V3 or R2 stages of growth. Recovery treatments were applied approximately 14 d after the simulated drift event. Weekly irrigation was the only recovery treatment that provided appreciable levels of injury reduction or increases in soybean height or yield compared to the dicamba-injured plants. Weekly irrigation following the R2 dicamba injury event resulted in an 1% to 14% increase in soybean yield compared with the dicamba-injured control. All other recovery treatments resulted in soybean yields that were similar to the dicamba-injured control, and similar to or lower than the nontreated control. Results from this study indicate that if soybean have become injured with dicamba, weekly irrigation will help soybean recover some of the yield loss and reduce injury symptoms that resulted from off-target dicamba movement, especially in a year with below average precipitation. However, yield loss will likely not be restored to that of noninjured soybean.

Italian ryegrass is a major weed in winter cereals in the south-central United States. Harvest weed seed control (HWSC) tactics that aim to remove weed seed from crop fields are a potential avenue to reduce Italian ryegrass seedbank inputs. To this effect, a 4-yr, large-plot field study was conducted in College Station, Texas, and Newport, Arkansas, from 2016 to 2019. The treatments were arranged in a split-plot design. The main-plot treatments were (1) no narrow-windrow burning (a HWSC strategy) + disk tillage immediately after harvest, (2) HWSC + disk tillage immediately after harvest, and (3) HWSC + disk tillage 1 mo after harvest. The subplot treatments were (1) pendimethalin (1,065 g ai ha−1; Prowl H2O®) as a delayed preemergence application (herbicide program #1), and (2) a premix of flufenacet (305 g ai ha−1) + metribuzin (76 g ai ha−1; Axiom®) mixed with pyroxasulfone (89 g ai ha−1; Zidua® WG) as an early postemergence application followed by pinoxaden (59 g ai ha−1; Axial® XL) in spring (herbicide program #2). After 4 yr, HWSC alone was significantly better than no HWSC. Herbicide program #2 was superior to herbicide program #1. Herbicide program #2 combined with HWSC was the most effective treatment. The combination of herbicide program #1 and standard harvest practice (no HWSC; check) led to an increase in fall Italian ryegrass densities from 4 plants m−2 in 2017 to 58 plants m−2 in 2019 at College Station. At wheat harvest, Italian ryegrass densities were 58 and 59 shoots m−2 in check plots at College Station and Newport, respectively, whereas the densities were near zero in plots with herbicide program #2 and HWSC at both locations. These results will be useful for developing an improved Italian ryegrass management strategy in this region.

A comprehensive, Wisconsin state-wide assessment of waterhemp response to a diverse group of herbicide sites of action has not been conducted. Our objective was to characterize the response of a state-wide collection of waterhemp accessions to postemergence (POST) and preemergence (PRE) herbicides commonly used in corn and soybean in Wisconsin. Greenhouse experiments were conducted with more than 80 accessions from 27 counties. POST treatments included 2,4-D, atrazine, dicamba, fomesafen, glufosinate, glyphosate, imazethapyr, and mesotrione at 1× and 3× label rates. PRE treatments included atrazine, fomesafen, mesotrione, metribuzin, and S-metolachlor at 0.5×, 1×, and 3× label rates. Ninety-eight percent and 88% of the accessions exhibited ≥50% plant survival after exposure to imazethapyr and glyphosate POST 3× rate, respectively. Seventeen percent, 16%, and 3% of the accessions exhibited ≥50% plant survival after exposure to 2,4-D, atrazine, and dicamba, respectively, applied POST at the 1× rate. Survival of all accessions was ≤25% after exposure to 2,4-D or dicamba applied POST at the 3× rate, or glufosinate, fomesafen, and mesotrione applied POST at either rate evaluated. No plant of any accession survived exposure to glufosinate at either rate. Forty-five percent and 3% of the accessions exhibited <90% plant density reduction after exposure to atrazine applied PRE at the 3× rate and fomesafen PRE at the 1× rate, respectively. Plant density reduction of all accessions was ≥96% after exposure to fomesafen applied PRE at the 3× rate, or metribuzin, S-metolachlor, and mesotrione applied PRE at the 1× rate. Our results suggest that waterhemp resistance to imazethapyr and glyphosate applied POST is widespread in Wisconsin, whereas resistance to 2,4-D, atrazine, and dicamba applied POST is present to a lower extent. One accession (A75, Fond du Lac County) exhibited multiple resistance to imazethapyr, atrazine, glyphosate, and 2,4-D when applied POST. Overall, atrazine applied PRE was ineffective for waterhemp control in Wisconsin. Proactive resistance management and the use of effective PRE and POST herbicides are fundamental for waterhemp management in Wisconsin.

Smooth scouringrush has invaded no-till production fields across the US Pacific Northwest. The ability of Equisetum species to take up and accumulate silica on the epidermis and in cell walls may affect herbicide uptake. The objectives of this study were to measure the silica concentration in smooth scouringrush stems over time, and to determine how time of application affects the efficacy of glyphosate for smooth scouringrush control, with and without the addition of an organosilicone surfactant (OSS). Field studies were conducted at three sites in eastern Washington from 2019 to 2021. Three herbicide treatments (no herbicide, glyphosate, and glyphosate + OSS) were applied at four application times (May, June, July, and August) in 2019 fallow. The silica content of smooth scouringrush stems increased over the course of the 2019 growing season at all three sites. In 2020, smooth scouringrush stem densities were reduced when the 2019 herbicide treatments were applied in late June (12% of no herbicide density) compared to late July (24%) or August (30%). Smooth scouringrush stem densities at all three sites, in both 2020 and 2021, were reduced in the glyphosate + OSS treatment compared to glyphosate alone. In 2021, 2 yr after herbicide application, there was no effect of application timing for the glyphosate treatment without OSS, but stem densities were reduced when glyphosate + OSS was applied in late June (1%) compared with applications in late July (26%) or late August (21%). It is not clear if the cause of reduced glyphosate efficacy with late July and late August applications is the result of increased silica content in smooth scouringrush stems over time. Maximum glyphosate efficacy on smooth scouringrush was achieved with an application in late June and with the addition of an OSS. Control of smooth scouringrush with glyphosate + OSS can be sustained for at least 2 yr after application.

The past 50 yr of advances in weed recognition technologies have poised site-specific weed control (SSWC) on the cusp of requisite performance for large-scale production systems. The technology offers improved management of diverse weed morphology over highly variable background environments. SSWC enables the use of nonselective weed control options, such as lasers and electrical weeding, as feasible in-crop selective alternatives to herbicides by targeting individual weeds. This review looks at the progress made over this half-century of research and its implications for future weed recognition and control efforts; summarizing advances in computer vision techniques and the most recent deep convolutional neural network (CNN) approaches to weed recognition. The first use of CNNs for plant identification in 2015 began an era of rapid improvement in algorithm performance on larger and more diverse datasets. These performance gains and subsequent research have shown that the variability of large-scale cropping systems is best managed by deep learning for in-crop weed recognition. The benefits of deep learning and improved accessibility to open-source software and hardware tools has been evident in the adoption of these tools by weed researchers and the increased popularity of CNN-based weed recognition research. The field of machine learning holds substantial promise for weed control, especially the implementation of truly integrated weed management strategies. Whereas previous approaches sought to reduce environmental variability or manage it with advanced algorithms, research in deep learning architectures suggests that large-scale, multi-modal approaches are the future for weed recognition.

Biotypes of Palmer amaranth that are resistant to acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibitor are becoming widespread in western Nebraska. There are limited effective postemergence (POST) herbicides labeled for ALS-inhibitor-resistant Palmer amaranth control in dry edible bean. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of dimethenamid-P in a sequential preemergence (PRE) fb followed by (fb) POST program at two POST application timings, the first and third trifoliate stages (V1 and V3, respectively), for controlling ALS-inhibitor-resistant Palmer amaranth in dry edible bean. A field study was conducted in 2019, 2020, and 2021 in Scottsbluff, NE. PRE-alone applications of pendimethalin + dimethenamid-P provided inconsistent Palmer amaranth control. Dimethenamid-P applied POST following a PRE application of pendimethalin + dimethenamid-P provided effective (>90%) Palmer amaranth control at 4 wk after V3 only at the V1 application timing in 2019. In 2020 and 2021 dimethenamid-P applied POST at V1 and V3 following a PRE application of pendimethalin + dimethenamid-P provided 99% and 98% Palmer amaranth control at 4 wk after V3, and 98% and 94% Palmer amaranth control at harvest, respectively. Palmer amaranth biomass was reduced by 95% to 99% and by 96% to 98% compared with the -nontreated control when dimethenamid-P was applied POST at V1 and V3, respectively, following a PRE application of pendimethalin + dimethenamid-P in 2020 and 2021. Application of a mixture of dimethenamid-P with imazamox + bentazon POST provided similar results to those of the fomesafen-containing treatments and dimethenamid-P alone POST. Dimethenamid-P applied POST following a PRE application of pendimethalin + dimethenamid-P resulted in similar yield as the fomesafen-containing treatments. If fomesafen is not an option due to the crop rotation interval restriction, using dimethenamid-P in a sequential PRE fb POST program is the only effective alternative to control ALS-inhibitor–resistant Palmer amaranth in Nebraska. The use of dimethenamid-P in a sequential PRE fb POST program, alone or mixed with foliar-active herbicides should be considered by dry edible bean growers who are dealing with ALS-inhibitor-resistant Palmer amaranth.

Field bindweed is a perennial vining weed with vigorous growth, and is commonly found in highbush blueberry fields of Oregon. It requires and integrated strategy using multiple applications of postemergence herbicides and hand weeding for adequate control. Quinclorac is a herbicide that has been shown to control field bindweed, but no information is available indicating the tolerance of blueberry to quinclorac. The objective of this study was to evaluate the response of blueberry to quinclorac and to evaluate field bindweed control with quinclorac in different mixtures. Three groups of field studies were designed to assess 1) single application control of field bindweed, 2) use of sequential treatments to control field bindweed, and 3) long-term impact of quinclorac on field bindweed. In the single application control studies, a single application of quinclorac at 210 or 420 g ai ha−1 alone or in a mixture with rimsulfuron (35 g ai ha−1) or carfentrazone (35 g ai ha−1), controlled field bindweed by 69% to 76% while reducing its biomass between 22% and 44% compared to the nontreated control (61 g m−2). In a sequential treatment study, a single application of quinclorac (420 g ai ha−1) provided 83% to 100% control of field bindweed, outperforming three sequential applications of carfentrazone. In the long-term study, a single application of quinclorac reduced field bindweed biomass by 50% to 82% in 2019 and 62% to 87% in 2020. These results indicate that quinclorac can be safely applied to highbush blueberry plants. Early spring applications of quinclorac to field bindweed will reduce or eliminate the need for subsequent applications later in the season.

Enlist E3TM soybean cultivars permit over-the-top application of labeled glyphosate, glufosinate, and 2,4-D choline products. Increased Enlist E3TM trait adoption and use of 2,4-D choline postemergence across U.S. soybean production systems raise concerns regarding potential for 2,4-D off-target movement (OTM). A large-scale drift experiment was established near Sun Prairie, WI, and Arlington, WI, in 2019 and 2020, respectively. A 2,4-D-resistant soybean cultivar was planted in the center of the field (∼3 ha), while the surrounding area was planted with a 2,4-D-susceptible cultivar. An application of 785 ae ha−1 2,4-D choline plus 834 g ae ha−1 glyphosate was completed within the center block at R2 and V6 growth stages on August 1, 2019, and July 3, 2020, respectively. Filter papers were placed in-swath and outside of the treated area in one upwind transect and three downwind transects to estimate particle deposition. Low-volume air samplers ran for the 0.5-h to 48-h period following application to estimate 2,4-D air concentration. Injury to 2,4-D-susceptible soybean was assessed 21 d after treatment (0% to 100% injury). The 2,4-D deposition in-swath was 9,966 and 5,727 ng cm−2 in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Three-parameter log-logistic models estimated the distance to 90% reduction in 2,4-D deposition (D90) to be 0.63 m and 0.90 m in 2019 and 2020, respectively. In 2020, the 2,4-D air concentration detected was lower for the upwind (0.395 ng m−3) than the downwind direction (1.34 ng m−3), although both were lower than the amount detected in-swath (4.01 ng m−3). No soybean injury was observed in the downwind or upwind directions. Our results suggest that 2,4-D choline applications following label recommendations pose little risk to 2,4-D-susceptible soybean cultivars; however, further work is needed to understand 2,4-D choline OTM under different environmental conditions and the presence of other susceptible crops.

The CoAXium® Production System includes a new herbicide-resistant wheat (AXigen®) that allows for fall and/or spring postemergence (POST) applications of quizalofop-P-ethyl (QPE) for control of winter annual grass weeds. As area planted with AXigen® wheat increases, so will the use of QPE herbicide, and with this comes an increased chance for physical drift, tank contamination, or misapplication to nearby sensitive plants. A total of eight field studies were conducted at four locations during the 2018–2019 and 2019–2020 growing seasons to understand the response of nonresistant wheat when exposed to various rates of QPE herbicide. Five rates of QPE were evaluated: 1× (92 g ai ha−1), 1/10×, 1/50×, 1/100×, and 1/200×. Treatments of QPE were applied in the fall (2- to 3-leaf wheat) or in the spring (3- to 4-tiller wheat). Results indicated an interaction between application timing and QPE rate on grain yield for half of the site-years. The 1× rate resulted in complete or near complete grain yield loss regardless of application timing. However, QPE at the 1/10× rate resulted in yield loss ranging from 0% to 41% when fall-applied, whereas spring application resulted in 80% to 100% yield loss. For site-years when only the main effect of QPE rate was significant, 86% to 100% yield loss was observed following exposure to QPE at the 1/10× and 1× rates. For all site-years, it was infrequent that significant yield reductions were observed following the three lowest rates of QPE. If the two highest QPE rates were considered to represent tank contamination or misapplication and the three lowest rates physical drift, we can assume that physical drift of QPE to non-AXigen® wheat is not of major concern if proper application guidelines are followed. Conversely, tank contamination and misapplication should be carefully considered by growers who have planted both AXigen® and non-AXigen® wheat varieties.

Water is the primary carrier for herbicide applications. Spray water qualities such as pH, hardness, temperature, or turbidity can influence herbicide performance and may need to be amended for optimum weed control. Water quality factors can affect herbicide activity by reducing solubility, enhancing degradation in the spray tank, or forming herbicide-salt complexes with mineral cations, thereby reducing the absorption, translocation, and subsequent weed control. The available literature suggests that the effect of water quality varies with herbicide chemistry and weed species. The efficacy of weak-acid herbicides such as glyphosate, glufosinate, clethodim, sethoxydim, bentazon, and 2,4-D is improved with acidic water pH; however, the efficacy of sulfonylurea herbicides is negatively impacted. Hard-water antagonism is more prevalent with weak-acid herbicides, and trivalent cations are the most problematic. Spray solution temperature between 18 C and 44 C is optimum for some weak-acid herbicides; however, their efficacy can be reduced at relatively low (5 C) or high (56 C) water temperature. The effect of water turbidity is severe on cationic herbicides such as paraquat and diquat, and herbicides with low soil mobility such as glyphosate. Although adjuvants are recommended to overcome the negative effect of spray water hardness or pH, the response has been inconsistent with the herbicide chemistry and weed species. Moreover, information on the effect of spray water quality on various herbicide chemistries, weed species, and adjuvants is limited; therefore, it is difficult to develop guidelines for improving weed control efficacy. Further research is needed to determine the effect of spray water factors and develop specific recommendations for improving herbicide efficacy on problematic weed species.

Auxinic herbicides have been commonly used in production systems for broadleaf weed control for many years. One potential negative aspect to their use is their propensity to volatilize and move away from the treated area after application. This research examined three herbicide formulations and their relative amounts of vaporization following application under field conditions in Knoxville, TN, in 2017, 2018, and 2019. Herbicide treatments evaluated included 2,4-D choline, 2,4-D amine, and the diglycolamine (DGA) salt of dicamba. Ten field studies were conducted with major parameters including air sampler height (0.3 and 1.3 m) and applied surface condition (dry wheat stubble or green-plant vegetation). The relative volatility indicated by the study was that dicamba > 2,4-D choline = 2,4-D amine. Detected herbicide concentrations were numerically higher at the 0.3-m sampling height and in the green-plant surface condition. These results confirm that dicamba is more volatile than 2,4-D and that there was no difference in vapor emissions between the amine and choline salts of 2,4-D under field conditions.

Field and pot experiments were conducted in Greece to study the occurrence of resistance in silky windgrass to acetolactate synthase (ALS)- and acetyl-CoA synthase (ACCase)-inhibiting herbicides. Twenty-four populations of silky windgrass were examined in whole-plant response experiments. High levels of field-evolved resistance to chlorsulfuron (0% to 28% control in terms of fresh weight reduction) with the recommended field rates were confirmed in most silky windgrass populations. However, other ALS inhibitors, such as pyroxsulam and a premix of mesosulfuron-methyl and iodosulfuron, provided adequate control (76% to 100% in terms of fresh weight reduction) of most populations, except eight silky windgrass populations that were found to be cross-resistant to all ALS-inhibiting herbicides tested (i.e., chlorsulfuron, commercial mixture of mesosulfuron-methyl plus iodosulfuron, and pyroxsulam). Conversely, most silky windgrass populations were controlled effectively (90% to 100% in terms of fresh weight reduction) with the recommended field rates of ACCase inhibitors cycloxydim, clethodim, and pinoxaden, but five populations were also found to be resistant to clodinafop-propargyl (10% to 68% control in terms of fresh weight reduction). The ALS gene sequencing of the eight silky windgrass populations, with cross-resistance to ALS inhibitors, revealed a point mutation at the Pro-197 position, causing amino acid substitution by Ser or Thr in the ALS enzyme. Overall, chlorsulfuron and clodinafop-propargyl were selecting agents of field-evolved multiple resistance to ALS- and ACCase-inhibiting herbicides in five silky windgrass populations. As the available postemergence-applied chemistries/modes of action registered for grass weed control in cereals are rather limited, adopting integrated management practices and implementing proactive and reactive measures to delay the evolution of resistant populations is essential.

Field trials were conducted to determine the effects of glyphosate and/or dicamba simulated drift rates on chipping potatoes (Solanum tuberosum L.) ‘Atlantic’ and ‘Dakota Pearl.’ Sublethal herbicide rates were applied at the tuber initiation stage and consisted of dicamba at 99 g ae ha−1 or glyphosate at 197 g ae ha−1 applied alone or the combinations of dicamba at 20 or 99 g ae ha−1 and glyphosate at 40 or 197 g ae ha−1, respectively. At 7 days after treatment (DAT), the high spray combination of glyphosate plus dicamba resulted in the greatest plant damage (28%). Plant injury from plants treated with the low combination of glyphosate plus dicamba did not differ from the nontreated control. At 21 DAT, visible injury increased to 40% for plants treated with the high combination of glyphosate plus dicamba. Total yield suggested that dicamba and glyphosate caused similar yield reductions as plants that received glyphosate at 197 g ha−1 or dicamba at 99 g ha−1 had lower total yields compared to the nontreated and plants that received the combination of glyphosate (197 g ha−1) and dicamba (99 g ha−1) had lower total yields compared to plants that received either herbicide alone. However, ‘Dakota Pearl’ plants were more sensitive to glyphosate at 197 g ha−1 than were ‘Atlantic’ plants, causing the interaction for most tuber grades. Tuber specific gravity was lower for plants that received glyphosate at 197 g ha−1, dicamba at 99 g ha−1, or this combination, but this reduction would not prevent chip processing. Results reinforce the need for diligence when applying these herbicides in proximity to a susceptible crop, such as chipping potatoes, and the need to thoroughly clean sprayers before application to a sensitive crop.

Field studies were conducted in North Carolina in 2018 and 2019 to determine sweetpotato tolerance to indaziflam and its effectiveness in controlling Palmer amaranth in sweetpotato. Treatments included indaziflam pre-transplant; 7 d after transplanting (DATr) or 14 DATr at 29, 44, 58, or 73 g ai ha−1; and checks (weedy and weed-free). Indaziflam applied postemergence caused transient foliar injury to sweetpotato. Indaziflam pretransplant caused less injury to sweetpotato than other application timings regardless of rate. Palmer amaranth control was greatest when indaziflam was applied pretransplant or 7 DATr. In a weed-free environment, sweetpotato marketable yield decreased as indaziflam application was delayed. No differences in storage root length to width ratio were observed.

A field experiment was conducted in 2019 and 2020 that included six site-years and four locations in Arkansas to determine the optimal sequence and timing of dicamba and glufosinate applications when applied alone, sequentially, or in combination to control Palmer amaranth by size: labeled (<10 cm height) and non-labeled (13 to 25 cm height). Single applications of dicamba, glufosinate, and dicamba plus glufosinate (not labeled) resulted in less than 80% Palmer amaranth control, regardless of weed size. The mixture of dicamba plus glufosinate was antagonistic for Palmer amaranth control and percent mortality. Sequential applications, averaged over all time intervals and herbicides, improved the percentage of Palmer amaranth control 11 to 17 percentage points over a single application, regardless of weed size at application 28 d after final application (DAFA). Palmer amaranth control with glufosinate followed by (fb) glufosinate and dicamba fb dicamba, pending weed size, were optimized at intervals of 7 d, and 14 to 21 d, respectively. Because single site of action (SOA) postemergence herbicide systems increase the likelihood of the development of resistant biotypes and are not a best management practice (BMP) in that regard; sequential applications involving both dicamba and glufosinate were more effective. Furthermore, the sequence of application mattered with a preference for applying dicamba first. Dicamba fb glufosinate at a 14-d interval was profit-maximizing and the only herbicide treatment that resulted in 100% weed control when size was <10 cm. For larger weed sizes, economic analysis revealed that dicamba fb dicamba performed better than dicamba fb glufosinate when no penalty was assigned for using a single SOA. This resulted in greater yield loss risk and soil weed seed bank in comparison to timelier weed control with the smaller weed size. Hence, timely weed control and two SOAs to control Palmer amaranth are recommended as BMPs that reduce producer risk.

The topic of sustainability is popular in mainstream media and a common discussion theme, particularly for the agriculture discipline that serves the entire world. Individuals and corporations often have a desire to be sustainable in their practices, but the commentary on “being sustainable” can be confusing in terms of realistic practices. To define whether weed science is sustainable one must first identify the resource or object to be sustained. From a historical perspective, weed control in the United States over the past 40 yr has revolved around no-tillage row crop acres. The implementation of no-till or reduced till has undeniable benefits in sustaining natural resources, especially two of our most valuable resources: soil and water. While the overall trend toward chemical weed control has been shown to decrease agriculture’s impact on the environment, depending solely on herbicides is not sustainable long term with the rise in herbicide-resistant weed species. We also consider the benefits and challenges associated with agronomic trends within the context of sustainability and expand consideration to include emerging technology aligned to human health and environmental stewardship. The key to improving farming is producing more and safer food, feed, and fiber on less land while reducing adverse environmental effects, and this must be accomplished with the backdrop of human population growth and the desire for an improved standard of living globally. Emerging technologies provide new starting points for sustainable weed management solutions, and the weed science community can initiate the conversation on sustainable practices and share advancements with our colleagues and community members. In addition to broadening the sustainability concept, targeted and relevant communication tools will support the weed science community to have successful and impactful discussions.

The continued dispersal of Palmer amaranth can impose detrimental impacts on cropping systems in Wisconsin. Our objective was to characterize the response of a recently introduced Palmer amaranth accession in southern Wisconsin to postemergence (POST) and preemergence (PRE) herbicides commonly used in corn and soybean. Greenhouse experiments were conducted with the Wisconsin putative herbicide-resistant accession (BRO) and two additional control accessions from Nebraska, a glyphosate-resistant (KEI2) and a glyphosate-susceptible (KEI3) accession. POST treatments were 2,4-D, atrazine, dicamba, glufosinate, glyphosate, imazethapyr, lactofen, and mesotrione at 1X and 3X label rates. PRE treatments were atrazine, mesotrione, metribuzin, S-metolachlor, and sulfentrazone at 0.5X, 1X, and 3X label rates. Plant survival of each accession was ≥63% after exposure to imazethapyr POST 3X rate. Survival of BRO and KEI2 was 44% (±13) and 50% (±13), respectively, after exposure to atrazine POST 3X rate. Survival of BRO was 69% (±12) after exposure to glyphosate POST 1X rate, whereas survival of KEI2 was 44% (±13) after exposure to glyphosate POST 3X rate. After exposure to 2,4-D POST 1X rate, KEI2 and KEI3 survival was 38% (±13) and 50% (±13), respectively. Survival of all accessions was ≤31% after exposure to 2,4-D POST 3X rate or dicamba, glufosinate, lactofen, and mesotrione POST at either rate. Plant density reduction of KEI2 was 77% (±13) after exposure to atrazine PRE 1X rate, whereas density reduction of BRO was 56% (±13) after exposure to atrazine PRE 3X rate. Plant density reduction of all accessions was ≥94% after exposure to mesotrione PRE 1X and 3X rates or metribuzin, S-metolachlor, and sulfentrazone PRE at either rate. Our results suggest that each accession is resistant (≥50% survival) to imazethapyr POST, that BRO and KEI2 are resistant to atrazine and glyphosate POST, and that KEI2 and KEI3 are resistant to 2,4-D POST. The recently introduced BRO accession exhibited multiple resistance to imazethapyr, atrazine, and glyphosate POST. In addition, atrazine PRE was ineffective for BRO control, suggesting that diversified resistance management strategies will be critical for its effective management.

Pesticide regulations and application technologies are changing rapidly due to rising concerns around off-target movement of pesticides and increased focus on improving the efficiency of pesticide applications. In order to conduct relevant applied research and develop educational programs related to pesticide application, it is necessary to understand the common application practices and technologies that growers use. A survey was conducted to assess common pesticide application practices and technologies used by Georgia growers. Both online and printed survey copies were distributed by county agricultural extension agents to growers in all 159 counties. A total of 186 responses representing agronomic crops in 65 counties were received and analyzed for results. Main results of this survey indicated that 1) 72% of respondents produced ≥200 ha of crops; 2) 29% of respondents received their information from university Extension personnel; 3) 42% of respondents used a separate sprayer for applications of dicamba, 2,4-D, or 2,4-DB; 4) 46% of respondents used sprayers with boom lengths ≥18.3 m; 5) 65% of respondents used ≥121 L/ha to apply pesticides; 6) 53% of respondents used three or more different nozzles on their spray booms throughout the season; 7) 68% of respondents used TeeJet® nozzles; 8) 65% of respondents used global positioning systems and rate controllers on their application equipment; 9) 66% of respondents recorded their pesticide application data on a notepad or diary; and 10) 39% of respondents reported that application accuracy is the biggest advantage of new spray technologies. Respondents also reported that weather, timing, and pesticide drift/regulations were their biggest application challenges and that more research is needed on topics such as rates, carrier volumes, pest control, chemicals and adjuvants. Information from this survey provides useful insights into the current application practices, technologies, and research needs of Georgia growers and will be used for developing appropriate research and educational efforts.

Field experiments were conducted in 2020 and 2021 to determine the effectiveness of electrocution on several weeds commonly encountered in Missouri soybean production using an implement known as The Weed Zapper™. In the first study, the effectiveness of electrocution on waterhemp, cocklebur, giant and common ragweed, horseweed, giant and yellow foxtail, and barnyardgrass was determined. Electrocution was applied when plants reached average heights and/or growth stages of 30 cm, 60 cm, flowering, pollination, and seed set. Electrocution was applied once or twice, at two different tractor speeds. Electrocution was more effective at the later plant growth stages. Pearson correlation coefficients indicated that control of weed species was most related to plant height and amount of plant moisture at the time of electrocution. When plants contained seed at the time of electrocution, viability was reduced from 54% to 80% among the species evaluated. A second study determined the effect of electrocution on late-season waterhemp plants, and also soybean injury and yield. Electrocution timings took place throughout reproductive soybean growth stages. The control of waterhemp escapes within the soybean trial ranged from 51% to 97%. Yield of soybean electrocuted at the R4 and R6 growth stages was similar to that of the nontreated control, but soybean yield was reduced by 11% to 26% following electrocution at all other timings. However, the visual injury and yield loss observed in these experiments likely represents a worst-case scenario because growers who maintain a clear height differential between waterhemp and the soybean canopy would not need to maintain contact with the soybean canopy. Overall, results from these experiments indicate that electrocution as part of an integrated weed-management program could eliminate late-season herbicide-resistant weed escapes in soybean, and reduce the number and viability of weed seed that return to the soil seedbank.

Renewed interest in studying auxin herbicides (WSSA Group 4) is increasing as a result of the release of genetically engineered crop varieties that are tolerant to preemergence and postemergence applications of specific formulations of dicamba. Auxin-resistant crops were developed in response to the development of weed species resistant to glyphosate and other herbicides. Research was conducted at multiple field locations in Georgia in 2018 and 2019 to examine weed control when postemergence herbicides were applied to dicamba- and glyphosate-resistant cotton at eight different points in time over a 24-h period. Applications were made at 1 h prior to sunrise all the way up to midnight during the same day to examine the effect of herbicide application timing on broadleaf weed control. Glyphosate, dicamba, and glyphosate plus dicamba were applied at each timing. Visual ratings of weed control were scored at 7, 14, 21, and 28 d after treatment (DAT). Weed control was affected by herbicide application timing. Midnight applications resulted in the lowest levels of control. Sicklepod, pitted morningglory, and prickly sida control was 49%, 38%, and 41%, respectively. Greatest control of all three species (up to 99%) occurred from the noon to 1 h prior to sunset application timings. Orthogonal contrasts of timing of application indicated that weed control was improved with day > night and pre-dawn > midnight.