Glyphosate-resistant Waterhemp Research Articles

Economic impact of glyphosate-resistant weeds on major field crops grown in Ontario

AbstractLimited information exists on the global economic impact of glyphosate-resistant (GR) weeds. The objective of this manuscript was to estimate the potential yield and economic loss from uncontrolled GR weeds in the major field crops grown in Ontario, Canada. The impact of GR weed interference on field crop yield was determined using an extensive database of field trials completed on commercial farms in southwestern Ontario between 2010 and 2021. Crop yield loss was estimated by expert opinion (weed scientists and Ontario government crop specialists) when research data were unavailable. This manuscript assumes that crop producers adjust their weed management programs to control GR weeds, which increases weed management costs but reduces crop yield loss from GR weed interference by 95%. GR volunteer corn, horseweed, waterhemp, giant ragweed, and common ragweed would cause an annual monetary loss of (in millions of Can$) $172, $104, $11, $3, and $0.3, respectively, for a total annual loss of $290 million if Ontario farmers did not adjust their weed management programs to control GR biotypes. The increased herbicide cost to control GR volunteer corn, horseweed, waterhemp, giant ragweed, and common ragweed in the major field crops in Ontario is estimated to be (in millions of Can$) $17, $9, $2, $0.1, and $0.02, respectively, for a total increase in herbicide expenditures of $28 million annually. Reduced GR weed interference with the adjusted weed management programs would reduce farm-gate monetary crop loss by 95% from $290 million to $15 million. This study estimates that GR weeds would reduce the farm-gate value of the major field crops produced in Ontario by Can$290 million annually if Ontario farmers did not adjust their weed management programs, but with increased herbicide costs of Can$28 million and reduced crop yield loss of 95% the actual annual monetary loss in Ontario is estimated to be Can$43 million annually.

Inter-row cultivation timing effects on waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) control and sugarbeet yield and quality

AbstractThe invasion of waterhemp into northern sugarbeet growing regions has prompted producers to re-integrate inter-row cultivation into weed management programs, as no currently registered herbicides can control glyphosate-resistant waterhemp POST in crop. Inter-row cultivation was a common weed control practice in sugarbeet until the release of glyphosate-resistant sugarbeet cultivars in 2008 made the use of inter-row cultivation unnecessary. In the late 2010s, producers began again to use inter-row cultivation to remove weeds that glyphosate did not control, but producers need information on the effectiveness and safety of inter-row cultivation when used with soil-residual herbicide programs. Efficacy and tolerance field experiments were conducted in Minnesota and North Dakota from 2017 to 2019. Results from the efficacy experiment demonstrated that cultivation improved waterhemp control 11% and 12%, 14 and 28 d after treatment, respectively. Waterhemp response to cultivation was dependent on crop canopy and precipitation after cultivation. Cultivation had minimal effect on waterhemp density in three environments, but at one environment, near Galchutt, ND in 2019, waterhemp density increased 600% and 196%, 14 and 28 d after treatment, respectively. Climate data indicated that in 2019 Galchutt, ND received 105 mm of precipitation in the 14 d following cultivation and had an open crop canopy that probably contributed to further weed emergence. Results from the tolerance experiment demonstrated that root yield and recoverable sucrose were not affected by cultivation timing or number of cultivations. In one environment, cultivating reduced sucrose content by 0.8% regardless of date or cultivation number, but no differences were found in four environments. Damage/destruction of leaf tissue from in-season cultivation is probably responsible for the reduction in sucrose content. Results indicate that cultivation can be a valuable tool to control weeds that herbicide cannot, but excessive rainfall and open crop canopy following cultivation can create an environment conducive to further weed emergence.

Environment influences sugarbeet tolerance to S-metolachlor

AbstractHerbicides used in sugarbeet are commonly adapted from other row crops and may cause injury and yield loss often associated with environmental and edaphic factors. Glyphosate-resistant waterhemp in sugarbeet requires a PRE herbicide, such as S-metolachlor, for its control. The objectives of this research were to evaluate sugarbeet tolerance to PRE S-metolachlor, including air temperature and soil water content interactions with soil series in field and growth chamber experiments. Results from field experiments conducted in 12 environments in 2015, 2016, and 2017 indicated 2.16 or 4.32 kg ai ha−1S-metolachlor applied PRE reduced sugarbeet density and stature but did not reduce root yield, sucrose content, or recoverable sucrose compared with the untreated control in environments with soils with less than 3.5% organic matter (OM) and receiving greater than 40-mm cumulative rainfall within 14 d after planting. In the growth chamber, sugarbeet density and shoot fresh weight following S-metolachlor application was influenced by soil moisture content, air temperature, and soil series but not by S-metolachlor rate. Sugarbeet density and shoot fresh weight were reduced 15% and 106%, respectively, when S-metolachlor was applied to a Glyndon sandy loam (2.6% OM, 9.5% clay) at 100% field capacity (FC) and 14 C compared with S-metolachlor application to a Fargo silty clay (7.7% OM and 54% clay) at 100% FC and 21 C. It is concluded that field selection, rather than herbicide rate, is an important criterion for managing sugarbeet tolerance with S-metolachlor.

Influence of Adjuvants on the Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Canada Fleabane and Waterhemp in Corn with Tolpyralate

Tolpyralate is a new benzoylpyrazole herbicide for weed management in corn. It is recommended to be co-applied with atrazine along with the adjuvants methylated seed oil concentrate (MSO) plus an ammonium nitrogen fertilizer, such as urea ammonium nitrate (UAN). Two studies were conducted on glyphosate-resistant (GR) Canada fleabane and GR waterhemp to determine if an additional adjuvant is still required when tolpyralate plus atrazine are tankmixed with a commercial glyphosate formulation (Roundup WeatherMAX®) in corn. Trials were conducted over a two-year period (2018-19) on farms in south western Ontario with confirmed GR populations. When co-applied with Roundup WeatherMAX®, the addition of MSO to tolpyralate + atrazine increased control of GR waterhemp 9%; however, there was no increase in GR Canada fleabane control from the addition of additional adjuvants. At 8 WAA, all treatments provided > 91% and > 84% control of GR waterhemp and GR Canada fleabane, respectively. This study concludes that the addition of Roundup WeatherMAX® to tolpyralate plus atrazine improves the control of GR waterhemp and GR Canada fleabane in corn.

Control of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp with preemergence herbicides in glyphosate- and dicamba-resistant soybean

Glyphosate-resistant (GR) waterhemp was first discovered in Ontario, Canada, in 2014. In Ontario, GR waterhemp interference in previous studies reduced soybean yield up to 73%. Tank-mixes of herbicides with multiple modes-of-action are important for delaying the evolution of herbicide resistance. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of pyroxasulfone (150 g a.i. ha−1), S-metolachlor/metribuzin (1943 g a.i. ha−1), pyroxasulfone/sulfentrazone (300 g a.i. ha−1), and pyroxasulfone/flumioxazin (240 g a.i. ha−1) applied preemergence (PRE) with and without the addition of glyphosate/dicamba (1800 g a.e. ha−1) for the control of GR waterhemp in soybean. At 8 wk after treatment application (WAA), glyphosate/dicamba applied PRE controlled GR waterhemp 45%. Pyroxasulfone, S-metolachlor/metribuzin, pyroxasulfone/sulfentrazone, and pyroxasulfone/flumioxazin applied PRE controlled GR waterhemp 79%, 87%, 91%, and 95%, respectively. At 2, 4, 8, and 12 WAA, the addition of glyphosate/dicamba to the aforementioned PRE herbicides did not improve GR waterhemp control. There was no increase in GR waterhemp control with the addition glyphosate/dicamba; however, multiple herbicide modes-of-action should be utilized to reduce the selection intensity for herbicide-resistant weeds.

Influence of glyphosate/dicamba application rate and timing on the control of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp in glyphosate/dicamba-resistant soybean

The objective of this study was to determine the effect of premixed glyphosate/dicamba application timing and rate on glyphosate-resistant (GR) waterhemp control. Glyphosate/dicamba applied to 5-, 15-, and 25-cm-tall plants, controlled GR waterhemp 81%, 73%, and 61% at 2 wk after application (WAA) and 61%, 68%, and 72% at 8 WAA, respectively.

Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Waterhemp with Two-Pass Weed Control Strategies in Glyphosate/Dicamba-Resistant Soybean

Waterhemp is a small-seeded, dioecious, broadleaf weed that emerges throughout the growing season. If left uncontrolled, waterhemp interference can reduce soybean yield up to 73%. Glyphosate-resistant (GR) waterhemp was first discovered in one county in Ontario in 2014; as of 2017, it has been found in two other counties. Glyphosate/dicamba-resistant soybean can be sprayed with glyphosate and/or dicamba preplant (PP), preemergence (PRE) and/or postemergence (POST). The objective of this study was to determine the control of GR waterhemp in glyphosate/dicamba-resistant soybean with PRE residual herbicides, glyphosate/dicamba applied POST or a two-pass program of a PRE residual herbicide followed by glyphosate/dicamba applied POST. At 8 weeks after application (WAA), pyroxasulfone (150 g ai ha-1), S-metolachlor/metribuzin (1943 g ai ha-1), pyroxasulfone/sulfentrazone (300 g ai ha-1) and flumioxazin/pyroxasulfone (240 g ai ha-1), applied PRE, resulted in 71%, 85%, 82% and 90% GR waterhemp control, respectively. The same PRE herbicides, followed by glyphosate/dicamba (1800 g ae ha-1) POST, improved control to greater than 96%. This study concludes that a two-pass program of an effective soil applied residual herbicide followed by glyphosate/dicamba POST controlled GR waterhemp in glyphosate/dicamba-resistant soybean.

Control of glyphosate-resistant common waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus var rudis) with dicamba and dimethenamid-P in Ontario

Glyphosate-resistant (GR) waterhemp is the fifth confirmed GR weed in Canada and was first confirmed in 2014 in the province of Ontario. In 2015 and 2016, two field experiments were conducted across four site–years each to determine the effectiveness of dicamba at two rates (300 and 600 g a.i. ha−1) in addition to dimethenamid-P (693 g a.i. ha−1) in a single and sequential management program. Due to traited soybean seed availability, all treatments were applied in corn. Waterhemp density, biomass, visual control estimates, and corn yield were collected. Waterhemp density and dryweight were found to be lower in treatments including a sequential application of dicamaba and those that included dimethenamid-P. The sequential management strategy provided >95% control of GR waterhemp at 12 weeks after application. Dicamba applied after emergence at 300 and 600 g a.i. ha−1 controlled GR waterhemp 80% and 91%, respectively; in contrast, dicamba applied before emergence at 300 and 600 g a.i. ha−1 provided only 9% ...

Glyphosate- and multiple-resistant waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus var. rudis) in Ontario, Canada

Waterhemp is one of the most troublesome weeds in the US and is spreading into Ontario. In 2014, a waterhemp population was not controlled with glyphosate in a field in Lambton County, ON. This population was the first confirmed glyphosate-resistant (GR) waterhemp in Canada. In 2015, waterhemp seeds were collected from 48 fields in Lambton (32), Chatham-Kent (2), and Essex (14) counties to determine the occurrence and distribution of GR waterhemp in Ontario. Waterhemp plants were grown in a greenhouse and sprayed when 10 cm in height. In addition to glyphosate (a group 9 herbicide), collected populations were screened for resistance to imazethapyr and atrazine, representing herbicide groups 2 and 5, respectively. Visual control estimates for biomass reduction were completed at 1, 3, and 5 wk after application. Glyphosate-resistant waterhemp was confirmed in 40 fields, representing 82% of all sampled fields from the three Ontario counties. Of the 49 populations collected, all were resistant to imazethapyr ...

Influence of Nitrogen Status on the Sensitivity of Glyphosate-Resistant and -Susceptible Tall Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) and Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri)

Anecdotal observations of improved glyphosate efficacy on glyphosate-resistant (GR) tall waterhemp populations in corn production compared with soybean suggested the presence of nitrogen (N) fertilizer may influence the expression of glyphosate resistance. Greenhouse and field experiments were conducted to determine the influence of soil-applied nitrogen fertilizer on the growth rate and sensitivity of glyphosate-susceptible (GS) and GR tall waterhemp and Palmer amaranth. The addition of supplemental fertilizer increased the relative growth rate (plant height and shoot volume), number of nodes, and percentage of shoot nodes with axillary branches on GS and GR biotypes of both weed species. The axillary bud activity was increased 52 and 8% with increasing N for the GR and GS biotypes of tall waterhemp and Palmer amaranth, respectively. The GS populations of tall waterhemp and Palmer amaranth were more sensitive to glyphosate in the greenhouse under increased fertilizer levels compared with no fertilizer. Additionally, GR tall waterhemp was more sensitive to glyphosate under the higher fertilizer treatments, which resulted in a reduction in the calculated resistance factor (RF) from 27.8 under no fertilizer to 4.7 for the high fertilizer treatment. The RF for GR Palmer amaranth was not influenced by the fertilizer treatments in the greenhouse. Field experiments demonstrated that glyphosate efficacy may be greater on GR populations of tall waterhemp and Palmer amaranth under high N conditions, but these results were not consistent and most likely were influenced by soil moisture in 2012, which was more limiting than N supply. This research implies that soil fertility can influence the sensitivity of some GR weed species to glyphosate and the RF. Therefore, the evolution and management of GR weed species in commercial crop production may be influenced by the nutrient status of the soil and the use of supplemental fertilizers.

Early-Season Palmer Amaranth and Waterhemp Control from Preemergence Programs Utilizing 4-Hydroxyphenylpyruvate Dioxygenase–Inhibiting and Auxinic Herbicides in Soybean

Palmer amaranth and waterhemp have become increasingly troublesome weeds throughout the United States. Both species are highly adaptable and emerge continuously throughout the summer months, presenting the need for a residual PRE application in soybean. To improve season-long control ofAmaranthusspp., 19 PRE treatments were evaluated on glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth in 2013 and 2014 at locations in Arkansas, Indiana, Nebraska, Illinois, and Tennessee; and on glyphosate-resistant waterhemp at locations in Illinois, Missouri, and Nebraska. The twoAmaranthusspecies were analyzed separately; data for each species were pooled across site-years, and site-year was included as a random variable in the analyses. The dissipation of weed control throughout the course of the experiments was compared among treatments with the use of regression analysis where percent weed control was described as a function of time (the number of weeks after treatment [WAT]). At the mean (i.e., average) WAT (4.3 and 3.2 WAT for Palmer amaranth and waterhemp, respectively) isoxaflutole +S-metolachlor + metribuzin had the highest predicted control of Palmer amaranth (98%) and waterhemp (99%). Isoxaflutole +S-metolachlor + metribuzin,S-metolachlor + mesotrione, and flumioxazin + pyroxasulfone had a predicted control ≥ 97% and similar model parameter estimates, indicating control declined at similar rates for these treatments. Dicamba and 2,4-D provided some, short-lived residual control ofAmaranthusspp. When dicamba was added to metribuzin orS-metolachlor, control increased compared to dicamba alone. Flumioxazin + pyroxasulfone, a currently labeled PRE, performed similarly to treatments containing isoxaflutole or mesotrione. Additional sites of action will provide soybean growers more opportunities to control these weeds and reduce the potential for herbicide resistance.

Evaluation of Weed Management Programs and Response of FG72 Soybean to HPPD-Inhibiting Herbicides

Field experiments were conducted at two locations in Missouri in 2012 and 2013 to evaluate herbicide programs in 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD)-inhibitor-resistant soybean, referred to as FG72 soybean, and their tolerance to four HPPD-inhibiting herbicides. At the Columbia location, PRE followed by (fb) POST and two-pass POST treatments provided 97% or greater control of all weeds except ivyleaf morningglory. At Moberly in 2012, PRE fb POST treatments provided 95% or greater control and 100% biomass reduction (BR) of glyphosate-resistant (GR) waterhemp, with the exception of isoxaflutole at 0.04 kg ha−1plusS-metolachlor at 0.6 kg ha−1plus metribuzin at 0.2 kg ha−1. In 2013, PRE fb POST treatments provided greater than 89% control and 93% BR. Two-pass POST treatments of isoxaflutole plus glyphosate always provided greater control and BR of GR waterhemp compared with glyphosate fb glyphosate. However, at Columbia, where glyphosate-susceptible weeds were present, there were no differences in control or BR between two-pass POST treatments. In the soybean tolerance experiment, isoxaflutole provided the lowest levels of injury. Applications of tembotrione at the 1× rate resulted in the greatest injury in both years. Topramezone at the 1× rate always provided less injury than tembotrione, but was always similar in BR. The 2× rates increased soybean injury over the 1× rate for the third trifoliate (V3) application, but not for the PRE and first-flower (R1) applications. V3 and R1 applications of isoxaflutole and mesotrione resulted in similar injury, height reduction, and BR to soybean 28 d after application in 2012 and 2013. Overall these results indicate that FG72 soybean could allow the use of HPPD-inhibiting herbicides such as mesotrione PRE along with isoxaflutole PRE and POST to provide an additional herbicide mechanism of action that was not previously available in soybean.

Herbicide Program Approaches for Managing Glyphosate-Resistant Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatusandAmaranthus rudis) in Future Soybean-Trait Technologies

Herbicide-resistantAmaranthusspp. continue to cause management difficulties in soybean. New soybean technologies under development, including resistance to various combinations of glyphosate, glufosinate, dicamba, 2,4-D, isoxaflutole, and mesotrione, will make possible the use of additional herbicide sites of action in soybean than is currently available. When this research was conducted, these soybean traits were still regulated and testing herbicide programs with the appropriate soybean genetics in a single experiment was not feasible. Therefore, the effectiveness of various herbicide programs (PRE herbicides followed by POST herbicides) was evaluated in bare-ground experiments on glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth and glyphosate-resistant waterhemp (both tall and common) at locations in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Nebraska, and Tennessee. Twenty-five herbicide programs were evaluated; 5 of which were PRE herbicides only, 10 were PRE herbicides followed by POST herbicides 3 to 4 wks after (WA) the PRE application (EPOST), and 10 were PRE herbicides followed by POST herbicides 6 to 7 WA the PRE application (LPOST). Programs with EPOST herbicides provided 94% or greater control of Palmer amaranth and waterhemp at 3 to 4 WA the EPOST. Overall, programs with LPOST herbicides resulted in a period of weed emergence in which weeds would typically compete with a crop. Weeds were not completely controlled with the LPOST herbicides because weed sizes were larger (≥ 15 cm) compared with their sizes at the EPOST application (≤ 7 cm). Most programs with LPOST herbicides provided 80 to 95% control at 3 to 4 WA applied LPOST. Based on an orthogonal contrast, using a synthetic-auxin herbicide LPOST improves control of Palmer amaranth and waterhemp over programs not containing a synthetic-auxin LPOST. These results show herbicides that can be used in soybean and that contain auxinic- or HPPD-resistant traits will provide growers with an opportunity for better control of glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth and waterhemp over a wide range of geographies and environments.

A Multistate Study of the Association Between Glyphosate Resistance and EPSPS Gene Amplification in Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus)

Waterhemp is an increasingly problematic weed in the U.S. Midwest, having now evolved resistances to herbicides from six different site-of-action groups. Glyphosate-resistant waterhemp in the Midwest is especially concerning given the economic importance of glyphosate in corn and soybean production. Amplification of the target-site gene, 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS) was found to be the mechanism of glyphosate resistance in Palmer amaranth, a species closely related to waterhemp. Here, the relationship between glyphosate resistance and EPSPS gene amplification in waterhemp was investigated. Glyphosate dose response studies were performed at field sites with glyphosate-resistant waterhemp in Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, and Nebraska, and relative EPSPS copy number of survivors was determined via quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). Waterhemp control increased with increasing glyphosate rate at all locations, but no population was completely controlled even at the highest rate (3,360 g ae ha−1). EPSPS gene amplification was present in plants from four of five locations (Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska) and the proportion of plants with elevated copy number was generally higher in survivors from glyphosate-treated plots than in plants from the untreated control plots. Copy number magnitude varied by site, but an overall trend of increasing copy number with increasing rate was observed in populations with gene amplification, suggesting that waterhemp plants with more EPSPS copies are more resistant. Survivors from the Kentucky population did not have elevated EPSPS copy number. Instead, resistance in this population was attributed to the EPSPS Pro106Ser mutation. Results herein show a quantitative relationship between glyphosate resistance and EPSPS gene amplification in some waterhemp populations, while highlighting that other mechanisms also confer glyphosate resistance in waterhemp.

EPSPS Gene Amplification is Present in the Majority of Glyphosate-Resistant Illinois Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) Populations

With the frequency of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp increasing throughout the Midwest, the identification of resistant populations has become important for managing this species. However, high-throughput screening for glyphosate resistance in the greenhouse is tedious and inefficient. Research was conducted to document the occurrence of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp throughout the state of Illinois, and to determine whether a molecular assay for 5-enolypyruvyl-shikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS) gene amplification can be used as an alternative means to detect resistant populations. Populations throughout the state of Illinois were collected in 2010 and screened for glyphosate resistance using a whole-plant assay in a greenhouse, and survivors were examined for EPSPS gene amplification. Of 80 populations investigated, 22 were glyphosate resistant based on the greenhouse screen, and gene amplification was identified in 20 (91%) of the resistant populations. Although there are multiple mechanisms for glyphosate resistance in waterhemp, a molecular test for EPSPS gene amplification provides a rapid alternative for identification of glyphosate resistance in most populations.

Glyphosate-Resistant Giant Ragweed (Ambrosia trifida) and Waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) Management in Dicamba-Resistant Soybean (Glycine max)

Field experiments were conducted across two locations during 2011 and 2012 to evaluate herbicide options for the control of glyphosate-resistant (GR) giant ragweed and GR waterhemp in dicamba-resistant (DR) soybean. All herbicide treatments provided 91 to 100% control of GR giant ragweed 3 wk after treatment (WAT). Flumioxazin plus dicamba plus glyphosate applied preplant provided greater control and density reduction of GR giant ragweed than flumioxazin plus 2,4-D plus glyphosate. When flumioxazin plus dicamba plus glyphosate were applied preplant, the addition of dicamba to glyphosate at either the early-postemergence (EPOST) or mid-postemergence (MPOST) timing provided greater control and density reduction of GR giant ragweed than glyphosate alone. Regardless of the preplant treatment, delay of EPOST dicamba to the MPOST timing did not influence GR giant ragweed control or density reduction. In the GR waterhemp experiment, dicamba plus glyphosate applied sequentially provided 88 to 89% control and 90% density reduction at the EPOST and MPOST timings compared to only 24% control and 42% density reduction in response to glyphosate applied sequentially. Control and GR waterhemp density reduction did not improve with the addition of acetochlor to either the EPOST or late-postemergence (LPOST) timings. Flumioxazin plus chlorimuron applied PRE followed by dicamba plus glyphosate or dicamba plus glyphosate plus acetochlor provided greater control of GR waterhemp than glyphosate plus fomesafen or glyphosate alone applied EPOST. Results from this research indicate that dicamba applied once or sequentially and when timed appropriately to match the biology of the weed species can be utilized as a component of an integrated program for the management of GR weeds like giant ragweed and waterhemp in DR soybean.

Influence of Dicamba and Dicamba plus Glyphosate Combinations on the Control of Glyphosate-Resistant Waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis)

A total of four field experiments were conducted over a 2-yr period (2011 and 2012) near Mokane and Moberly, Missouri, to determine the control of glyphosate-resistant (GR) waterhemp with dicamba and glyphosate applied alone or as a tank-mix combination. In one experiment, dicamba was applied at 0.14, 0.28, 0.42, and 0.56 kg ae ha−1with or without 0.86 kg ae ha−1glyphosate to GR waterhemp plants 7.5, 15, and 30 cm in height. In a second experiment, sequential treatments of dicamba or dicamba plus glyphosate were applied 4, 7, and 14 d after the initial herbicide treatment to plants measuring either 7.5 or 23 cm in height. Control of GR waterhemp ranged from 7 to 62%, 11 to 40%, and 8 to 30% when applied to 7.5-, 15-, and 30-cm plants, respectively. Control of 7.5-cm GR waterhemp increased by 16 to 36%, and biomass reduction increased by 29 to 52% in response to 0.14, 0.28, 0.42, and 0.56 kg ha−1dicamba plus glyphosate compared to these same rates of dicamba alone. When sequential dicamba-containing treatments were averaged across all treatments and application timings, GR waterhemp control ranged from 46 to 47%, and biomass reduction ranged from 55 to 66%. No differences in control were observed based on the timing of the sequential herbicide treatment. However, in terms of GR waterhemp biomass reduction, sequential treatments applied 4 d after the initial treatment reduced GR waterhemp biomass more than sequential treatments applied 14 d after the initial treatment. Results from these experiments indicate that, in the absence of crop competition, a single treatment of dicamba up to 0.56 kg ha−1provides less than 62% control of GR waterhemp, and sequential dicamba plus glyphosate treatments targeting 7.5 cm plants are required to achieve at least 72% control.

A Survey of Glyphosate-Resistant Waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) in Missouri Soybean Fields and Prediction of Glyphosate Resistance in Future Waterhemp Populations Based on In-Field Observations and Management Practices

A survey of soybean fields containing waterhemp infestations was conducted just prior to harvest in 2008 and 2009 to determine the frequency and distribution of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp in Missouri, and to determine if there are any in-field parameters that may serve as indicators of glyphosate resistance in this species in future crop production systems. Glyphosate resistance was confirmed in 99 out of 144, or 69%, of the total waterhemp populations sampled, which occurred in 41 counties of Missouri. Populations of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp were more likely to occur in fields with no other weed species present at the end of the season, continuous cropping of soybean, exclusive use of glyphosate for several consecutive seasons, and waterhemp plants showing obvious signs of surviving herbicide treatment compared to fields characterized with glyphosate-susceptible waterhemp. Therefore, it is suggested that these four site parameters, and certain combinations of these parameters, serve as predictors of glyphosate resistance in future waterhemp populations.

Evaluation of herbicide programs for the management of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp ( Amaranthus rudis) in Maize

Field experiments were conducted in corn to evaluate the influence of herbicide treatments on glyphosate resistant waterhemp control in Platte County, Missouri during 2006 and 2007. Pre-emergence (PRE), pre-emergence followed by post-emergence (PRE fb POST), and post-emergence-only (POST-only) herbicide programs were evaluated for use in conventional, glyphosate-resistant, or glufosinate-resistant corn hybrids. All programs containing a PRE herbicide, conventional POST herbicide, or glufosinate resulted in greater than 98% control of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp and reduced seed production by at least 99%. Waterhemp densities were also reduced by programs that contained a PRE herbicide, conventional POST herbicide, or glufosinate. The highest waterhemp density and poorest control occurred with a sequential glyphosate program. Corn yields did not differ between herbicide treatments in 2006 however certain conventional PRE and PRE fb POST programs increased yields compared to the sequential glyphosate program in 2007. Results from this research indicate that several herbicide options are available for the control of glyphosate-resistant common waterhemp in corn. However, the lack of crop rotation at this field site for a period of at least 15 consecutive years and lack of residual herbicide applications typically utilized in corn likely contributed to the increased sensitivity of this waterhemp population to PRE-only corn herbicide programs.

Glyphosate-Resistant Waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) Control and Economic Returns with Herbicide Programs in Soybean

Field experiments were conducted in Platte County, Missouri, during 2006 and 2007 to evaluate PRE, POST, and PRE followed by (fb) POST herbicide programs for the control of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp in soybean. All PRE fb POST treatments resulted in at least 66 and 70% control of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp in 2006 and 2007, respectively. Control of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp was less than 23% with lactofen and acifluorfen in 2006, but at least 64% in 2007. Variability in control likely resulted from differences in trial locations and a population of protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO)–resistant waterhemp at the Platte County site in 2006 compared with 2007. In both years, glyphosate resulted in less than 23% control of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp and provided the least control of all herbicide programs. Programs containing PRE herbicides resulted in waterhemp densities of less than 5 plants/m2, whereas the POST glyphosate treatment resulted in 38 to 70 plants/m2. Waterhemp seed production was reduced at least 78% in all PRE fb POST programs, from 55 to 71% in POST programs containing lactofen and acifluorfen and by only 21% in the POST glyphosate treatment. Soybean yields corresponded to the level of waterhemp control achieved in both years, with the lowest yields resulting from programs that provided poorest waterhemp control. PRE applications ofS-metolachlor plus metribuzin provided one of the highest net incomes in both years and resulted in $271 to $340/ha greater net income than the glyphosate-only treatment. Collectively, the results from these experiments illustrate the effectiveness of PRE herbicides for the control of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp in glyphosate-resistant soybean and the inconsistency of PPO-inhibiting herbicides or PPO-inhibiting herbicide combinations for the control of waterhemp populations with multiple resistance to glyphosate and PPO-inhibiting herbicides.