Emerging Challenges for Weed Management in Herbicide-Resistant Crops
Karla L. Gage (),
Ronald F. Krausz () and
S. Alan Walters ()
Additional contact information
Karla L. Gage: Department of Plant Soils and Agricultural Systems, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901-6509, USA
Ronald F. Krausz: Department of Plant Soils and Agricultural Systems, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901-6509, USA
S. Alan Walters: Department of Plant Soils and Agricultural Systems, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901-6509, USA
Agriculture, 2019, vol. 9, issue 8, 1-11
Since weed management is such a critical component of agronomic crop production systems, herbicides are widely used to provide weed control to ensure that yields are maximized. In the last few years, herbicide-resistant (HR) crops, particularly those that are glyphosate-resistant, and more recently, those with dicamba (3,6-dichloro-2-methoxybenzoic acid) and 2,4-D (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid) resistance are changing the way many growers manage weeds. However, past reliance on glyphosate and mistakes made in stewardship of the glyphosate-resistant cropping system have directly led to the current weed resistance problems that now occur in many agronomic cropping systems, and new technologies must be well-stewarded. New herbicide-resistant trait technologies in soybean, such as dicamba-, 2,4-D-, and isoxaflutole- ((5-cyclopropyl-4-isoxazolyl)[2-(methylsulfonyl)-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenyl]methanone) resistance, are being combined with glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistance traits to manage herbicide-resistant weed populations. In cropping systems with glyphosate-resistant weed species, these new trait options may provide effective weed management tools, although there may be increased risk of off-target movement and susceptible plant damage with the use of some of these technologies. The use of diverse weed management practices to reduce the selection pressure for herbicide-resistant weed evolution is essential to preserve the utility of new traits. The use of herbicides with differing sites of action (SOAs), ideally in combination as mixtures, but also in rotation as part of a weed management program may slow the evolution of resistance in some cases. Increased selection pressure from the effects of some herbicide mixtures may lead to more cases of metabolic herbicide resistance. The most effective long-term approach for weed resistance management is the use of Integrated Weed Management (IWM) which may build the ecological complexity of the cropping system. Given the challenges in management of herbicide-resistant weeds, IWM will likely play a critical role in enhancing future food security for a growing global population.
Keywords: agronomic practices; dicamba; glyphosate; glufosinate; isoxaflutole; herbicide resistance; herbicide-resistant crops; mesotrione; non-target site resistance (NTSR); plant growth regulators (PGR); target site resistance (TSR); 2,4-D (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q1 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jagris:v:9:y:2019:i:8:p:180-:d:257611
Access Statistics for this article
Agriculture is currently edited by Prof. Dr. Les Copeland
More articles in Agriculture from MDPI, Open Access Journal
Bibliographic data for series maintained by XML Conversion Team ().