Herbicide Resistance Action Committee Research Articles

Dimesulfazet, a novel rice paddy herbicide, is an inhibitor of very long-chain fatty acid biosynthesis.

Dimesulfazet can control annual and perennial sedges in rice paddies. Here we assessed its mode of action. We performed a phenotype assay of Arabidopsis, conducted a metabolomic analysis of Echinochloa crus-galli, and analyzed the endogenous concentration of very long-chain fatty acids (VLCFAs) in Schoenoplectiella juncoides. Dimesulfazet treatment caused curling and greening symptoms in the leaves and fiddlehead-like symptoms in the inflorescences of Arabidopsis. These symptoms were visually indistinguishable from those caused by flufenacet and benfuresate, which belong to Herbicide Resistance Action Committee (HRAC) Group 15. We performed GC-MS/MS analysis of primary metabolites and LC-MS analysis of lipids in the herbicide-treated E. crus-galli, followed by Orthogonal Partial Least Squares Discriminant Analysis clustering. The results showed that dimesulfazet belongs to the HRAC Group 15 cluster. The endogenous concentrations of C24:0, C26:0, and C28:0 decreased in dimesulfazet-treated plants as compared to those in the control. Overall, the mode of action of dimesulfazet involves the inhibition of VLCFA biosynthesis.

Bioisosteric Tactics in the Discovery of Tetflupyrolimet: A New Mode-of-Action Herbicide.

The last new herbicidal modes-of-action with commercial significance were introduced to the marketplace multiple decades ago. Serious weed resistance to most herbicidal classes have since emerged with widespread use. Aryl pyrrolidinone anilides represent an entirely new mode-of-action class of herbicides that interfere with de novo pyrimidine biosynthesis in plants via inhibition of dihydroorotate dehydrogenase. The chemical lead for this new herbicide class discovery was identified from high-volume sourced greenhouse screening that required structural reassignment of the hit molecule followed by an extensive synthetic optimization effort. With excellent grass weed control and pronounced safety on rice, the selected commercial development candidate has a proposed common name of tetflupyrolimet and represents the first member of the new HRAC (Herbicide Resistance Action Committee) Group 28. This paper describes the discovery path to tetflupyrolimet with an added focus on the bioisosteric modifications pursued in optimization, including replacements of the lactam core itself.

Hierarchical cluster analysis of herbicide modes of action reveals distinct classes of multiple resistance in weeds.

BACKGROUNDThe number of weed species resistant to multiple herbicide modes of action (MoAs) has increased over the last 30 years and may in the future render existing herbicide MoAs obsolete for many cropping systems. Yet few predictive tools exist to manage this risk. Using a worldwide dataset of weed species resistant to multiple herbicide MoAs, hierarchical clustering was used to classify MoAs into similar groups in relation to the suite of resistant weed species they have in common. Network analyses then were used to explore the relative importance of species prevalence and similarity in cluster patterns.RESULTSHierarchical clustering identified three similarly sized clusters of herbicide MoAs that were linked by the co‐occurrence of resistant weeds: Herbicide Resistance Action Committee (HRAC) groups 2, 4, 5 and 9; HRAC groups 12, 14 and 15; and HRAC groups 1, 3 and 22. Cluster membership was consistent with similarities in the physiological or biochemical target of the herbicide MoAs. Network analyses revealed that the number of weed species resistant to two different MoAs was related to the number of weeds known to be resistant to each individual herbicide MoA.CONCLUSIONSHierarchical cluster analysis provided new insights into the risk of weeds becoming resistant to more than one herbicide MoA. By clustering herbicide MoAs into three distinct groups, the potential exists for farmers to manage resistance by rotating herbicides between rather than within clusters, as far as crop, weed and environmental conditions allow.

Aclonifen targets solanesyl diphosphate synthase, representing a novel mode of action for herbicides.

Aclonifen is a unique diphenyl ether herbicide. Despite its structural similarities to known inhibitors of the protoporphyrinogen oxidase (e.g. acifluorfen, bifenox or oxadiazon), which result in leaf necrosis, aclonifen causes a different phenotype that is described as bleaching. This also is reflected by the Herbicide Resistance Action Committee (HRAC) classification that categorizes aclonifen as an inhibitor of pigment biosynthesis with an unknown target. A comprehensive Arabidopsis thaliana RNAseq dataset comprising 49 different inhibitor treatments and covering 40 known target pathways was used to predict the aclonifen mode of action (MoA) by a random forest classifier. The classifier predicts for aclonifen a MoA within the carotenoid biosynthesis pathway similar to the reference compound norflurazon that inhibits the phytoene desaturase. Upon aclonifen treatment, the phytoene desaturation reaction is disturbed, resulting in a characteristic phytoene accumulation in vivo. However, direct enzyme inhibition by the herbicide was excluded for known herbicidal targets such as phytoene desaturase, 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase and homogentisate solanesyltransferase. Eventually, the solanesyl diphosphate synthase (SPS), providing one of the two homogentisate solanesyltransferase substrate molecules, could be identified as the molecular target of aclonifen. Inhibition was confirmed using biochemical activity assays for the A. thaliana SPSs 1 and 2. Furthermore, a Chlamydomonas reinhardtii homolog was used for co-crystallization of the enzyme-inhibitor complex, showing that one inhibitor molecule binds at the interface between two protein monomers. Solanesyl diphosphate synthase was identified as the target of aclonifen, representing a novel mode of action for herbicides. © 2020 Society of Chemical Industry.

First Report of Herbicide-Resistant Echinochloa crus-galli in Uruguayan Rice Fields

Echinochloa crus-galli is the main weed in direct dry-seeded rice systems worldwide and is the target of most herbicide applications. Numerous cases of E. crus-galli biotypes with resistance to herbicides have been reported in different regions of the world; however, to date, no cases have been reported in Uruguay. The purpose of this research is to assess the presence of herbicide-resistant E. crus-galli in the rice fields of Uruguay. More than 40 E. crus-galli biotypes were sampled from eastern to northern regions in different years and assessed following the Herbicide Resistance Action Committee (HRAC) protocols of confirmation, using the herbicides propanil, quinclorac, clomazone, bispyribac–sodium, penoxsulam, imazapyr + imazapic, profoxidim and cyhalofop. Herbicides rates included 0, 0.125, 0.25, 0.50, 1, 2, 4 and 8 times the label rate. Most E. crus-galli biotypes (35) resulted as resistant to quinclorac. Furthermore, resistance was confirmed to propanil in at least seven biotypes, 12 to imazapyr + imazapic, and three to penoxsulam. Five biotypes showed multiple resistance to propanil and quinclorac, and one biotype was resistant to quinclorac, penoxsulam and imazapyr + imazapic. No biotype showed confirmed resistance to clomazone, bispyribac-sodium, cyhalofop or profoxidim—herbicides that ensure satisfactory control. The presence of E. crus-galli herbicide resistant-biotypes reduces herbicide options, threatening rice production in Uruguay. In this context, a redesign of the productive systems would represent an opportunity to complement the chemical control, integrating larger-scale cultural and management practices.

Alternative Options to Glyphosate for Control of Large Echinochloa colona and Chloris virgata Plants in Cropping Fallows.

The over-reliance on the herbicide glyphosate for knockdown weed control in fallows under minimum and zero-till cropping systems has led to an increase in populations of glyphosate-resistant weeds. Echinochloa colona and Chloris virgata are two major grass weeds in the cropping regions of northern New South Wales and southern Queensland, Australia, that have become harder to kill due to a steady rise in the occurrence of glyphosate-resistant weed populations. Therefore, to help growers contain these hard to kill fallow weeds, an alternate approach to glyphosate application is needed. With this purpose in mind, a pot study was carried out during the summer seasons of 2015 and 2016 at the Tamworth Agricultural Institute, Tamworth, NSW, Australia, to evaluate the efficacy of tank mixtures and sequential applications of Group H (4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) inhibitor), Group C (inhibitors of photosynthesis at photosystem II), Group A (ACCase inhibitors) and Group L (photosystem I inhibitor) herbicides on late tillering E. colona and C. virgata plants. These herbicide groups are a global classification by the Herbicide Resistance Action Committee. Highly effective results were achieved in this study using combinations of Groups H, C, A and L herbicides applied as tank mixtures for controlling large E. colona plants. Additionally, sequential applications of Group H, C and A herbicides followed by (fb) paraquat were shown to be very effective on large E. colona plants. Late tillering C. virgata plants were generally well controlled by tank mixtures, and sequential applications proved to be highly effective on this grass weed as well. Haloxyfop in combination with paraquat as a tank mixture, via sequential application or as a stand-alone treatment, was highly effective for C. virgata control; however, using combinations of herbicide groups is the preferred choice when combating herbicide resistant weed populations. There was a clear synergy shown using Group H, Group C and Group A herbicides in combination with the Group L herbicide paraquat in this study for controlling advanced E. colona and C. virgata plants. These combinations were shown to be successful on plants grown under glasshouse conditions; however; these treatments would need to be tested on plants grown in a field situation to show whether they will be a useful solution for farmers who are trying to control these weeds in fallow.

Modifications on Labels and Leaflets of Herbicides for Preventing and Managing Resistance

ABSTRACT: The challenge of managing herbicide-resistant weeds is an agricultural reality in Brazil that shall not be neglected. In this sense, Ministério da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento (MAPA) published Act No. 45 on July 14, 2017, provides the inclusion of a code system on labels and leaflets of insecticides, fungicides and herbicides, in order to demonstrate the mode of action of the active ingredient present in the product. In case of mix formulations, both molecules must be discriminated, adopting the same “Herbicide Resistance Action Committee - HRAC” international reference code. The Act No. 45 facilitates the process to choose and adopt products by all those involved in the chain production. It also collaborates with the possible to standardize the mixture of the products, since the need to mix products from different chemical groups to correct handling the resistance cases and avoiding potential new cases. In summary, the process of recognizing the mode of action and classification of herbicides was facilitated, as well as its practical adoption by technicians, growers and the chain production.

Suppressing Alopecurus myosuroides Huds. in Rotations of Winter-Annual and Spring Crops

Alopecurus myosuroides Huds. has become one of the most abundant grass weeds in Europe. High percentages of winter-annual crops in the rotation, earlier sowing of winter wheat and non-inversion tillage favor A.myosuroides. Additionally, many populations in Europe have developed resistance to acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACCase), acetolactate synthase (ALS) and photosynthetic (PSII) inhibitors. Hence, yield losses due to A.myosuroides have increased. On-farm studies have been carried out in Southern Germany over five years to investigate abundance, control efficacies and crop yield losses due to A.myosuroides. Three crop rotations were established with varying proportions of winter- and summer-annual crops. The crop rotations had a share of 0, 25 and 50% of summer-annual crops. Within each crop rotation, three herbicide strategies were tested. In contrast to classical herbicidal mixtures and sequences, the aim of one of the herbicide strategies was to keep selection pressure as low as possible by using each mode of action (MOA) only once during the five years. A.myosuroides population was susceptible to all herbicide at the beginning of the experiment. Initial average density was 14 plants m−2. In the rotation with only winter-annual crops, density increased to 5347 ears m−2 in the untreated control plots. Densities were lower in the rotations with 25% and even lower with 50% summer-annual crops. Control efficacies against A. myosuroides in the herbicide strategy using only MOAs of the HRAC-groups B and A, according to the Herbicide Resistance Action Committee (HRAC) classification on MOA, dropped after five years compared to the strategy of changing MOA in every year. Nevertheless, the results demonstrate the need for combining preventive and direct weed-management strategies to suppress A.myosuroides and maintain high weed-control efficacies of the herbicides.

A cheminformatics review of auxins as herbicides.

Herbicides are an important asset in ensuring food security, especially when faced with an ever-increasing demand on food production to feed the global population. The current selection of herbicides is increasingly encountering resistance in agricultural weeds they once targeted effectively. It is imperative that new compounds or more effective modes of action are discovered in order to overcome this resistance. This cheminformatics review looks at current herbicides and evaluates their physiochemical properties on a class-by-class basis. We focus in particular on the synthetic auxin herbicides, Herbicide Resistance Action Committee class O, analyzing these against herbicides more generally and for class-specific features such as mobility in plant vasculature. We summarise the physiochemical properties of all 24 compounds used commercially as auxins and relate these results to ongoing approaches to novel auxin discovery. We introduce an interactive, open source cheminformatics tool known as DataWarrior for herbicide discovery, complete with records for over 300 herbicidal compounds. We hope this tool helps researchers as part of a rational approach to not only auxin discovery but agrochemical discovery in general.

Industry Views of Monitoring and Mitigation of Herbicide Resistance

Managing the risk of herbicide resistance (HR) is strategically important to leading herbicide technology providers and is the focus of the Global Herbicide Resistance Action Committee (HRAC), an organization with representation from 8 major companies, working as a part of CropLife International (Brussels, Belgium). Early detection of HR, understanding the extent of HR in a defined area, and mitigation of resistance through efforts to limit its spread are important aspects of managing HR. Monitoring for HR populations has been employed by weed scientists for both early detection and to define the extent of resistance (Baumgartner et al. 1999; Beckie et al. 2013; Davis et al. 2008; Falk et al. 2005; Owen et al. 2007). Methods used to monitor for resistance have included random or nonrandom seed sample collection from fields, followed by resistance bioassay (field surveys); market research surveys of farmers and weed management experts; and tracking farmer performance inquiries, followed by appropriate field evaluation and testing. Each method has advantages and disadvantages in costs, accuracy, and effectiveness to address HR management goals. Before embarking on a resistance-monitoring program, the objectives, probability of achieving those objectives, and the associated resource needs should be carefully considered. Based on a review of existing monitoring studies and company experiences, HRAC offers the following considerations for herbicide resistance monitoring:

Lessons Learned From the History of Herbicide Resistance

The selection of herbicide-resistant weed populations began with the introduction of synthetic herbicides in the late 1940s. For the first 20 years after introduction, there were limited reported cases of herbicide-resistant weeds. This changed in 1968 with the discovery of triazine-resistant common groundsel. Over the next 15 yr, the cases of herbicide-resistant weeds increased, primarily to triazine herbicides. Although triazine resistance was widespread, the resistant biotypes were highly unfit and were easily controlled with specific alternative herbicides. Weed scientists presumed that this would be the case for future herbicide-resistant cases and thus there was not much concern, although the companies affected by triazine resistance were somewhat active in trying to detect and manage resistance. It was not until the late 1980s with the discovery of resistance to Acetyl Co-A carboxylase (ACCase) and acetolactate synthase (ALS) inhibitors that herbicide resistance attracted much more attention, particularly from industry. The rapid evolution of resistance to these classes of herbicides affected many companies, who responded by first establishing working groups to address resistance to specific classes of herbicides, and then by formation of the Herbicide Resistance Action Committee (HRAC). The goal of these groups, in cooperation with academia and governmental agencies, was to act as a forum for the exchange of information on herbicide-resistance selection and to develop guidelines for managing resistance. Despite these efforts, herbicide resistance continued to increase. The introduction of glyphosate-resistant crops in the 1995 provided a brief respite from herbicide resistance, and farmers rapidly adopted this relatively simple and reliable weed management system based on glyphosate. There were many warnings from academia and some companies that the glyphosate-resistant crop system was not sustainable, but this advice was not heeded. The selection of glyphosate resistant weeds dramatically changed weed management and renewed emphasis on herbicide resistance management. To date, the lesson learned from our experience with herbicide resistance is that no herbicide is invulnerable to selecting for resistant biotypes, and that over-reliance on a weed management system based solely on herbicides is not sustainable. Hopefully we have learned that a diverse weed management program that combines multiple methods is the only system that will work for the long term.

History of chemical weeding from 1944 to 2011 in France: Changes and evolution of herbicide molecules

Herbicide development in France has been analysed from a historical and agronomical perspective. A database was built up from data collected from the archives of the Ministry of Agriculture Food and Fisheries and from French phytosanitary compendia edited since 1961 by the Association de Coordination Technique Agricole. Only herbicides used in cultivated areas were retained. The first organic synthetic herbicides were registered on cereals after the Second World War. Since 1944, a total of 225 herbicidal active ingredients have been registered in France. The number of active ingredients regularly increased with a maximum of 138 in 2002; 104 were still authorized in 2011. Different combinations (maximum of 156 in 2002) were available that combined 2–5 active ingredients. On average, a given active ingredient has been used for more than twenty years. Nevertheless, some of them have been used for 67 years. A decrease in the number of active ingredients was observed after 2003 due to European and French strengthened regulations. The lack of tools to control some weed groups, the decrease in diversity of active ingredients in terms of HRAC groups and herbicide withdrawals in minor crops will inevitably lead to agronomical dead ends if no alternative solutions are proposed. This evolution induces a risk; the repeated use of fewer active ingredients belonging to a few HRAC (Herbicide Resistance Action Committee) groups may favour the selection of herbicide resistant weeds.

Action mechanism of a novel herbicide, fenoxasulfone

The action mechanism of fenoxasulfone was studied by examining the inhibitory effects of this herbicide on the biosynthesis of very-long-chain fatty acids (VLCFAs). Fenoxasulfone treatment decreased VLCFAs, such as C20:0, C20:1, C22:0, C24:0, C24:1 and C26:0 fatty acids, in barnyard millet cultured cells, and increased long-chain-fatty acids and medium-chain-fatty acids, such as C18:0 and C15:0, which are precursors of VLCFAs. Fenoxasulfone potently inhibited activities of VLCFA elongase (VLCFAE) in the microsomal fraction of etiolated barnyard millet seedlings, which catalyzed the elongation steps from C22:0 to C24:0 and C24:0 to C26:0, respectively. These results strongly suggested that fenoxasulfone is a potent inhibitor of plant VLCFAEs and should be categorized within the K3 group of the Herbicide Resistance Action Committee. VLCFAE activity of recombinant Fatty Acid Elongation 1 (FAE1) of Arabidopsis that catalyzes the elongation step from C18:1 to C20:1, was inhibited by fenoxasulfone in a time-dependent manner, which has been shown in the inhibition of VLCFAEs by other well-known VLCFAE-inhibiting herbicides. On the other hand, VLCFAE activity of the microsomal fraction of etiolated barnyard millet seedlings, which catalyzes the elongation step from C24:0 to C26:0, was inhibited by fenoxasulfone in a time-independent manner. This time-independent inhibition raised a new inhibition mechanism of VLCFAE by fenoxasulfone likely with pyroxasulfone, which is classified in the same chemical class as fenoxasulfone.

The action of herbicides on fatty acid biosynthesis and elongation in barley and cucumber

Herbicides that affect lipid metabolism have been used commercially for many years. Here, napropamide, diphenamid, dimethachlor and cafenstrole are compared; these have all been classified by the Herbicide Resistance Action Committee (HRAC) as K(3) herbicides and inhibitors of cell division and/or synthesis of very-long-chain fatty acids (VLCFAs). In addition, spiro-decanedione A and pinoxaden dione are compared as inhibitors of lipid synthesis through inhibition of acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACCase). Whereas the chloracetamide dimethachlor and the carboxyamide cafenstrole potently inhibited VLCFA synthesis in both barley and cucumber, the acetamides napropamide and diphenamid which are also classified as K(3) herbicides and likewise the unclassified herbicide cinmethylin did not. The graminicide pinoxaden dione inhibited de novo fatty acid synthesis in barley, but not in cucumber, and correspondingly inhibited the plastid form of maize ACCase much more than the cytosolic form (IC(50) values of 0.1 and 17 microM). By contrast, spiro-decanedione A exhibited herbicidal effects not only on grasses but also on broad leaves, strongly inhibited maize cytosolic ACCase and inhibited synthesis of VLCFAs in cucumber. The acetamides napropamide and diphenamid, which do not inhibit VLCFA synthesis, should be classified separately from K(3) herbicides that do. Pinoxaden dione and spiro-decanedione A represent new classes of chemicals acting on plant lipid synthesis.

Physiological and biochemical modes of action of the diphenylether aclonifen

Aclonifen belongs to the diphenylether (DPE) chemical family among which potent herbicides with a photodependent mode of action can be found. For years aclonifen has been used in several types of cultures. However its biochemical mode of action remains unclear although it was listed as a carotenoid synthesis inhibitor by the Herbicide Resistance Action Committee (HRAC). As a matter of fact, corn seedling leaves treated with 10 −4 M aclonifen and maintained in the dark no longer contained carotenoids but showed an accumulation of a compound having all the characteristics of phytoene. That demonstrated aclonifen ability to inhibit the desaturases catalyzing the transformation of phytoene into carotenoids. Moreover, aclonifen (5 × 10 −5 M) was responsible for a photodependent cell destruction (necrosis) of cucumber cotyledons typically due to protoporphyrin IX accumulation. The same phenomenon was demonstrated in aclonifen-treated etiolated corn seedlings (10 −4 M) that showed an accumulation of protoporphyrin IX, reaching 62 ng/g of leaf fresh mass and reactive oxygen species production under light. On these two cases (cucumber cotyledons and etiolated corn seedlings), aclonifen was acting as a typical DPE, as demonstrated by the accumulation of protoporphyrin IX. As a whole, aclonifen was shown here, to act on two different biochemical pathways including carotenoid synthesis on the one hand, as well as protoporphyrinogen oxidase, in the chlorophyll synthesis pathway, on the other for the same range of concentrations.

Revised Classification of Herbicides by Site of Action for Weed Resistance Management Strategies1

The classification of herbicides by site of action, published in 1997, has been revised. The classification system uses a numbering system for a herbicide's site of action, chemical family, and common name. Regulatory agencies in the United States and Canada have published labeling guidelines based on the classification to aid in herbicide resistance management. Abbreviations: EPA, Environmental Protection Agency; HRAC, Herbicide Resistance Action Committee; PMRA, Pest Management Regulatory Agency.

Improving Herbicide Application Accuracy in South Asia1

In 1998, Indian regulatory agencies approved the registration of CGA 184927, MON 37500, and fenoxaprop for postemergence control of isoproturon-resistant littleseed canarygrass. Herbicides used in rice and wheat before 1998 were generally mixed with sand or urea and were applied by hand. Foliar pesticide spray applications consisted primarily of insecticides and fungicides that were applied to high-value crops. These pesticides were often sprayed to runoff with backpack sprayers that were equipped with single hollow-cone or flood nozzles. Applicators walked through the fields, swinging the wands in sweeping motions resulting in uneven pesticide distribution and overapplication. The newly registered postemergence herbicides were applied with the same equipment and in the same fashion. After these applications, control of littleseed canarygrass was strikingly inconsistent, and the growers blamed the lack of control on the manufacturers. It was later clear that basic understanding of the application techniques was lacking. In response to this, an application training workshop was organized and conducted in India and Nepal in 2000. The workshops focused on teaching the participants how to use and fabricate multiple-nozzle booms, the importance of flat-fan nozzles, calibration, drift avoidance, and applicator safety. To date, approximately 3,000 farmers, extension agents, scientists, and industry representatives have attended more than 30 workshops. The participants were unanimously enthusiastic about the value of the workshops. Although simplistic, the adoption of this technology will significantly decrease the amounts of herbicides applied and will increase efficacy and efficiency.Nomenclature: CGA 184927 (proposed common name, clodinafop), 2-propynyl R-2-[4-[(5-chloro-3-fluoro-2-pyrdinyl)oxy]phenoxyl]-propanoate propynyl ester; fenoxaprop; isoproturon; MON 37500 (proposed common name, sulfosulfuron), 1-(4,6-dimethoxypyrimidin-2-yl)-3-[(2-ethanesulfonyl-imidazo[1,2-a]pyridine)sulfonyl]urea; littleseed canarygrass, Phalaris minor Retz. #3 PHAMI; rice, Oryza sativa L.; wheat, Triticum aestivum L.Additional index words: Backpack sprayers, pesticide application method, technology transfer.Abbreviation: I-HRAC, The Herbicide Resistance Action Committee of India.

Weed Science in the 1990s: Will It be Forward or in Reverse?

Dr. Homer M. LeBaron is Senior Research Fellow in the New Technology and Basic Research Department of CIBA-GEIGY Corporation, where He has the responsibility for coordinating and directing outside basic research on all of CIBA-GEIGY agricultural products. He has been employed in various R&D positions with Geigy and CIBA-GEIGY for 27 years. From 1960 to 1964, Dr. LeBaron was employed as a plant physiologist at the Virginia Tech Experiment Station in Norfolk, Virginia, mainly researching weed problems in vegetables and fruit crops.LeBaron was born May 13, 1926 in Southern Alberta, Canada, the third in a family of 10 children, and grew up on a diversified irrigation farm. He obtained his B.S. and M.S. degrees from Utah State University in 1955 and 1957. He received his Ph.D. degree from Cornell in 1960.LeBaron, in addition to WSSA, is a member of the American Society of Agronomy, American Chemical Society, Entomological Society of America, American Phytopathological Society, CAST, Sigma Xi, Aquatic Plant Management Society, European Weed Research Society, and all of the regional weed science societies.He has held numerous positions in several of these and other scientific societies. Homer served as president of NEWSS in 1969–70 and as president of the SWSS in 1986–87. He served on several WSSA committees, including the Executive Board of Directors. In 1978, Dr. LeBaron was elected a Fellow in the WSSA, and received the Distinguished Service Award in the SWSS in 1984.He is author of over 70 scientific publications, and has been editor and author of five books on herbicide and pesticide resistance and biotechnology. He is currently serving on the parent Herbicide Resistance Action Committee (HRAC) under GIFAP, as well as on the ALS/AHAS Inhibitors Resistance Working Group and as Chairman of the Triazine Resistance Working Group. He is on the Planning Committee and Co-Chair of the Weed Resistance Management Working Group within the International Organization for Pest Resistance Management (IOPRM). In addition to his busy professional schedule, Dr. LeBaron has always been involved in church and community affairs. He has 7 children and 20 grandchildren.