Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-kp629 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T17:41:22.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Weed Management in a Glyphosate Resistant Soybean System: Weed Species Shifts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Kari L. Hilgenfeld ,
Alex R. Martin ,
David A. Mortensen  and
Stephen C. Mason
Kari L. Hilgenfeld
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0915
Alex R. Martin*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0915
David A. Mortensen
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Science, Penn State University, University Park, PA 16802
Stephen C. Mason
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0915
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: amartin2@unl.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

With increased reliance on glyphosate for weed control, weed species composition shifts are likely. Changes in relative abundance could arise from differential tolerance or resistance to, or avoidance of, glyphosate. This study characterized the potential changes in seedbank composition of a mixed population of summer annual weeds due to glyphosate application timing. Seven weeds common in soybean fields in the Midwest were introduced at known densities and treated with glyphosate at several treatment timings. Common lambsquarters, common sunflower, common waterhemp, eastern black nightshade, ivyleaf morningglory, shattercane, and woolly cupgrass were selected to represent a range of emergence patterns and tolerances to glyphosate. Seedling emergence and seed production were monitored. Differences in herbicide tolerance and avoidance, through markedly different weed emergence patterns, were strong contributors to projected changes in weed species composition. Lessened sensitivity to glyphosate allowed some emerged species, such as ivyleaf morningglory, to better survive the herbicide. Late emergence allowed others, such as shattercane and ivyleaf morningglory, to avoid glyphosate applications. Such mechanisms may allow specific species to increase in a continuous glyphosate system.

Keywords

Glyphosatecommon lambsquarters, Chenopodium album L.# CHEALcommon sunflower, Helianthus annuus L. # HELANcommon waterhemp, Amaranthus rudis Sauer # AMATAeastern black nightshade, Solanum ptycanthum Dun. ex DC. # SOLPTivyleaf morningglory, Ipomoea hederacea [L.] Jacq. # IPOHEshattercane, Sorghum bicolor [L.] Moench # SORVUwoolly cupgrass, Eriochloa villosa [Thunb.] Kunth # ERBVIsoybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr. ‘Asgrow 3003RR’Differential sensitivityfecundityherbicide tolerancepopulation dynamicsrelative abundanceDAP, days after plantingPOST, postemergenceSBt, seedbank at time = 0SBt+1, seedbank at time = 1 yr

Information

Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , June 2004 , pp. 284 - 291
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Literature Cited

Aldrich, R. J. 1984. Weed-Crop Ecology Principles in Weed Management. Scituate, MA: Brenton. Pp. 1–13, 373–398.Google Scholar
Ball, D. A. 1992. Weed seedbank response to tillage, herbicides, and crop rotation sequence. Weed Sci. 40:654–659.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D., Hartzler, R. G., and Forcella, F. 1997a. Implications of weed seedbank dynamics to weed management. Weed Sci. 45:329–336.Google Scholar
Buhler, D. D., Hartzler, R. G., Forcella, F., and Gunsolus, J. L. 1997b. Sustainable agriculture: relative emergence sequence for weeds of corn and soybeans. Iowa State University Extension Publication SA-11/April 1997. Pp. 1–4.Google Scholar
Clayton, G. W., Harker, K. N., O'Donovan, J. T., Baig, M. N., and Kidnie, M. J. 2002. Glyphosate timing and tillage system effects on glyphosate-resistant canola (Brassica napus). Weed Technol. 16:124–130.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., York, A. C., Batts, R. B., and Jennings, K. M. 2000. Weed management in glufosinate- and glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 14:77–88.Google Scholar
Fenner, M. 1985. Seed Ecology. New York: Chapman Hall. Chapter 4; Pp. 87–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartzler, R. G. 1996. Management of Woolly Cupgrass. Web page: http://www.weeds.iastate.edu. Accessed: March 4, 2004.Google Scholar
Hartzler, R. G. 1997. Managing Waterhemp in Today's Cropping Systems. Web page: http://www.weeds.iastate.edu. Accessed: March 4, 2004.Google Scholar
Hartzler, R. G., Buhler, D. D., and Stoltenberg, D. E. 1999. Emergence characteristics of four annual weed species. Weed Sci. 47:578–584.Google Scholar
Hilgenfeld, K. L. 2001. Weed Species Shifts in Glyphosate Resistant Soybean (Glycine max). M.S. dissertation. University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.Google Scholar
Hilgenfeld, K. L., Martin, A. R., Mortensen, D. A., and Mason, S. C. 2004. Weed management in glyphosate resistant soybean (Glycine max): weed emergence patterns in relation to glyphosate treatment timing. Weed Technol. 18:172–178.Google Scholar
Horak, M. J. 1998. An overview of weed shifts. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 53:15.Google Scholar
Hoss, N. E., Al-Khatib, K., Peterson, D. E., and Loughin, T. M. 2003. Efficacy of glyphosate, glufosinate, and imazethapyr on selected weed species. Weed Sci. 51:110–117.Google Scholar
Iowa State University Extension. 2000. Weed emergence sequences. Iowa State University Extension Publication. University Extension IPM 64a. P. 1.Google Scholar
Jordan, D. L., York, A. C., Griffin, J. L., Clay, P. A., Vidrine, P. R., and Reynolds, D. B. 1997. Influence of application variables on efficacy of glyphosate. Weed Technol. 11:354–362.Google Scholar
Krausz, R. F., Kapusta, G., Matthews, J. L., Baldwin, J. L., and Maschoff, J. 1999. Evaluation of glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays) and glufosinate: efficacy on annual weeds. Weed Technol. 13:691–696.Google Scholar
Lycan, D. W. and Hart, S. E. 1998. Absorption and translocation of glufosinate, glyphosate, and nicosulfuron in woolly cupgrass and shattercane. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 53:93.Google Scholar
Marshall, M. W., Al-Khatib, K., and Maddux, L. 1998. Glyphosate efficacy on ivyleaf morningglory in glyphosate tolerant corn and soybean. Proc. N. Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 53:5.Google Scholar
Marshall, M. W., Al-Khatib, K., and Maddox, L. 2000. Weed community shifts associated with continuous glyphosate applications in corn and soybean rotation. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 53:22.Google Scholar
Martin, A. R., Roeth, F. W., Wilson, R. G., Wicks, G. A., Klein, R. N., Lyon, D. J., and Knezevic, S. Z. 2001. 2001 Guide for weed management in Nebraska. Nebraska Cooperative Extension. University of Nebraska Cooperative Extension. EC 01-130-D. Pp. 38–42.Google Scholar
National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2001. Crop Acreage. Web page: http://www.usda.gov/nass/pubs/acrobat.htm. Accessed: March 4, 2004.Google Scholar
Norsworthy, J. K., Burgos, N. R., and Oliver, L. R. 2001. Differences in weed tolerance to glyphosate involve different mechanisms. Weed Technol. 15:725–731.Google Scholar
Ogg, A. G. Jr. and Dawson, J. H. 1984. Time of emergence of eight weed species. Weed Sci. 32:327–335.Google Scholar
Roberts, H. A. and Potter, M. E. 1980. Emergence patterns of weed seedlings in relation to cultivation and rainfall. Weed Res. 20:377–386.Google Scholar
Roeth, F. W., Martin, A. R., and Klein, R. N. 1994. Shattercane and its control. NebGuide. University of Nebraska Cooperative Extension. G94-1205-A. 4p.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. W. and Wax, L. M. 1973. Periodicity of germination and emergence of some annual weeds. Weed Sci. 21: 6:574–580.Google Scholar
Taylor, S. E. 1996. Effect of Rate and Application Timing of Glyphosate to Control Sicklepod and Other Problem Weeds of the Mississippi Delta. M.S. dissertation. University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR. 116 p.Google Scholar
VanGessel, M. J. 2001. Glyphosate-resistant horseweed from Delaware. Weed Sci. 49:703–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weakley, C. V. 1987. Weed species shifts related to weed control practices. Proc. Annu. Calif. Weed Conf. 39:203–206.Google Scholar
Webster, E. P., Bryant, K. J., and Earnest, L. D. 1999. Weed control and economics in nontransgenic and glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 13:586–593.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. G., Jarvi, K. J., Seymour, R. C., Witkowski, J. F., Danielson, S. D., and Wright, R. F. 1992. Annual Weed Growth Across Nebraska. University of Nebraska Agricultural Research Division. Research Bulletin 314-F. 53 p.Google Scholar
Zelaya, I. A. and Owen, M. D. K. 2000. Differential response of common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis Sauer) to glyphosate in Iowa. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 40:62–63.Google Scholar