Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T23:42:59.117Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth and Seed Production of Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) Populations after Exposure to Postemergence 2,4-D

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Greg R. Kruger ,
Vince M. Davis ,
Stephen C. Weller  and
William G. Johnson
Greg R. Kruger
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, 915 W. State Street, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Vince M. Davis
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, 915 W. State Street, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Stephen C. Weller
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, 625 Agriculture Mall Drive, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-1105
William G. Johnson*
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, 915 W. State Street, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: wgj@purdue.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Horseweed can be a problematic weed in no-till soybean fields and populations can vary in their response to 2,4-D. The objective of this study was to evaluate the growth and seed production of four horseweed populations after exposure to 2,4-D. 2,4-D amine was applied at 0, 140, 280, and 560 g ae ha−1 to 5- to 10-cm-tall horseweed plants. An additional treatment of 280 g ha−1 of 2,4-D + 840 g ae ha−1 of glyphosate was included in the study. At 2 wk after treatment (WAT), injury ranged from 47 to 98%, but by 6 WAT the injury ranged from 89 to 100% for all four populations. Between 6 and 12 WAT some individual horseweed plants started to recover. No differences in dry weights were observed between the four populations in the untreated checks at 0, 2, 6, and 12 WAT. At 280 g ha−1 of 2,4-D amine, seed production was reduced by greater than 95%. However, three of the four horseweed populations had plants that survived and produced seed after exposure to 840 g ha−1 of glyphosate + 280 g ha−1 of 2,4-D. One plant produced seed after exposure to 560 g ha−1 of 2,4-D. These results suggest that horseweed can evolve resistance to 2,4-D and no fitness penalities were observed in populations that had higher levels of tolerance to 2,4-D.

Keywords

2,4-D aminehorseweed, Conyza canadensis L. (Cronq.), ERICAsoybean, Glycine max (L.) MerrMarestailfitnessfecunditybiotypedose response
Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Information
Weed Science , Volume 58 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 413 - 419
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.)

References

Literature Cited

Bhowmik, P. C. and Bekech, M. M. 1993. Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) seed production, emergence and distribution in no-tillage and conventional-tillage corn (Zea mays). Trends Agric. Sci. 1:67–71.Google Scholar
Bruce, J. A. and Kells, J. J. 1990. Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) control in no-tillage soybeans (Glycine max) with preplant and preemergence herbicides. Weed Technol. 4:642–647.Google Scholar
Burke, I. C., Yenish, J., Pittmann, D., and Gallagher, R. 2008. 2,4-D resistant prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola L.) in Washington. Page. 21. in. 48th Weed Science Society of America. Chicago, IL Weed Science Society of America.Google Scholar
Childs, D., Jordan, T. N., and Blackwell, R. L. 1997. Survey of problem weeds in Indiana: 1996 Purdue University Cooperative Extension Services.Google Scholar
[CTIC] Conservation Technology Information Center 2004. National Crop Residue Management Survey Conservation Tillage Data. www.ctic.purdue.edu/CTIC/CRM.htm. Accessed: January 28, 2008.Google Scholar
Dauer, J. T., Mortensen, D. A., and VanGessel, M. J. 2007. Temporal and spatial dynamics of long-distance Conyza canadensis seed dispersal. J. Appl. Ecol. 44:105–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, V. M., Gibson, K. D., Bauman, T. T., Weller, S. C., and Johnson, W. G. 2007. Influence of weed management practices and crop rotation on glyphosate-resistant horseweed population dynamics and crop yield. Weed Sci. 55:508–516.Google Scholar
Davis, V. M., Gibson, K. D., Bauman, T. T., Weller, S. C., and Johnson, W. G. 2009a. Influence of weed management practices and crop rotation on glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) population dynamics and crop yield-years III and IV. Weed Sci. 57:417–426.Google Scholar
Davis, V. M., Gibson, K. D., and Johnson, W. G. 2008. A field survey to determine distribution and frequency of glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) in Indiana. Weed Technol. 22:331–338.Google Scholar
Davis, V. M. and Johnson, W. G. 2008. Glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) emergence, survival, and fecundity in no-till soybean. Weed Sci. 56:231–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, V. M., Kruger, G. R., Stachler, J. M., Loux, M. M., and Johnson, W. G. 2009b. Growth and seed production of horseweed (Conyza canadensis) populations resistant to glyphosate, ALS-inhibiting, and multiple (glyphosate + ALS-inhibiting) herbicides. Weed Sci. 57:494–504.Google Scholar
Gibson, K. D., Johnson, W. G., and Hillger, D. E. 2005. Farmer perceptions of problematic corn and soybean weeds in Indiana. Weed Technol. 19:1065–1070.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gleason, H. A. and Cronquist, A. 1991. Manual of Vascular Plants of Northeastern United States and Adjacent Canada. New York New York Botanical Garden. 592 p.Google Scholar
Green, J. M. 2007. Review of glyphosate and ALS-inhibiting herbicide crop resistance and resistant weed management. Weed Technol. 21:547–558.Google Scholar
Gressel, J. 1995. Creeping resistances: the outcome of using marginally effective or reduced rates of herbicides. Pages. 587–589. in. Proceedings of the Brighton Crop Protection Conference—Weeds.Google Scholar
Heap, I. 2009. International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. www.weedscience.com. Accessed: February 5, 2009.Google Scholar
Johnson, B., Barnes, J., Gibson, K., and Weller, S. 2004. Late-season weed escapes in Indiana soybean fields Crop Manage. DOI: 10.1094/cm-2004-0923-01-BR.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W. G., Davis, V. M., Kruger, G. R., and Weller, S. C. 2009. Influence of glyphosate-resistant cropping systems on weed species shifts and glyphosate-resistant weed populations. Eur. J. Agron. 31:162–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knezevic, S. Z., Streibig, J. C., and Ritz, C. 2007. Utilizing R software package for dose–response studies: the concept and data analysis. Weed Technol. 21:840–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koger, C. H., Poston, D. H., Hayes, R. M., and Montgomery, R. F. 2004. Glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) in Mississippi. Weed Technol. 18:820–825.Google Scholar
Kruger, G. R., Davis, V. M., Johnson, W. G., and Weller, S. C. 2008a. Response of selceted Indiana horseweed (Conzya canadensis) populations to glyphosate and cloransulam. Page. 124. in. Proceedings of the Proc. N. Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. Google Scholar
Kruger, G. R., Davis, V. M., Weller, S. C., and Johnson, W. G. 2008b. Response and survival of rosette-stage horseweed (Conyza canadensis) after exposure to 2,4-D. Weed Sci. 56:748–752.Google Scholar
Kruger, G. R., Davis, V. M., Weller, S. C., Stachler, J. M., Loux, M. M., and Johnson, W. G. 2009a. Frequency, distribution, and characterization of horseweed biotypes with resistance to glyphosate and ALS-inhibiting herbicides. Weed Sci. 57:652–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kruger, G. R., Johnson, W. G., Weller, S. C., Owen, M. D. K., Shaw, D. R., Wilcut, J. W., Jordan, D. L., Wilson, R. G., and Young, B. G. 2009b. U.S. grower views on problematic weeds and changes in weed pressure in glyphosate-resistant corn, cotton, and soybean cropping systems. Weed Technol. 22:162–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littell, R. C., Milliken, G. A., Stroup, W. W., Wolfinger, R. D., and Schabenberger, O. 2006. SAS for Mixed Models. 2nd ed. Cary, NC SAS Institute. 795 p.Google Scholar
Main, C. L., Mueller, T. C., Hayes, R. M., and Wilerson, J. B. 2004. Response of selected horseweed (Conyza canadensis (L) Cronq) populations to glyphosate J. Agric. Food Chem. 52:879–883.Google Scholar
Nandula, V. K., Eubank, T. W., Poston, D. H., Koger, C. H., and Reddy, K. N. 2006. Factors affecting germination of horseweed (Conyza canadensis). Weed Sci. 54:898–902.Google Scholar
Nice, G. and Johnson, B. 2005. Indiana's top ten most problematic weeds. www.btny.purdue.edu/WeedScience/2005/topten05.pdf. Accessed: January 27, 2008.Google Scholar
Owen, M. D. K. 2008. Weed species shifts in glyphosate-resistant crops. Pest Manage. Sci. 64:377–387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Regehr, D. L. and Bazzaz, F. A. 1979. The population dynamics of Erigeron canadensis, a successional winter annual. J. Ecol. 67:923–933.Google Scholar
Sammons, R. D., Heering, D. C., Dinicola, N., Glick, H., and Elmore, G. A. 2007. Sustainability and stewardship of glyphosate and glyphosate-resistant crops. Weed Technol. 21:347–354.Google Scholar
Sankula, S. 2006. Quantification of the impacts on U.S. agriculture of biotechnology-derived crops planted in 2005. www.ncfap.org/whatwedo/pdf/2005biotecimpacts-finalversion.pdf. Accessed: June 27, 2007.Google Scholar
Saxton, A. M. 1998. A macro for converting mean separation output to letter groupings in Proc Mixed. Pages. 1243–1246. in. Proceedings of the 23rd SAS Users Group International. Cary, NC SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Shields, E. J., Dauer, J. T., VanGessel, M. J., and Neumann, G. 2006. Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) seed collected in the planetary boundary layer. Weed Sci. 54:1063–1067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stachler, J. M., Kells, J. J., and Penner, D. 2000. Resistance of wild carrot (Daucus carota) to 2,4-D in Michigan. Weed Technol. 14:734–739.Google Scholar
VanGessel, M. J., Ayeni, A. O., and Majek, B. A. 2001. Glyphosate in full-season no-till glyphosate-resistant soybean: role of preplant applications and residual herbicides. Weed Technol. 15:714–724.Google Scholar
Weaver, S. E. 2001. The biology of Canadian weeds. 115. Can. J. Plant Sci. 81:867–875.Google Scholar
Whitworth, J. W. and Muzik, T. J. 1966. Differential response of selected clones of bindweed to 2,4-D. Weeds. 15:275–280.Google Scholar
Wright, T. R., Lira, J. M., Merlo, D. J., and Hopkins, N. 2005. Novel herbicide resistance genes. World patent Appl. No. 107,437.Google Scholar