Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:10:39.214Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Characterization of Wild Oat (Avena fatua L.) Populations and an Inbred Line with Multiple Herbicide Resistance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Anthony J. Kern
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil, and Environ. Sci., Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717-0312
Corey T. Colliver
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil, and Environ. Sci., Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717-0312
Bruce D. Maxwell
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil, and Environ. Sci., Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717-0312
Peter K. Fay
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil, and Environ. Sci., Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717-0312
William E. Dyer
Affiliation:
Dep. Plant, Soil, and Environ. Sci., Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717-0312

Abstract

Repeated use of the preemergence herbicide triallate has selected for wild oat populations that are resistant (R) to field use rates. Field collections and an inbred R line were shown in greenhouse and petri dish dose response experiments to be 6- to 20-fold more tolerant to triallate than susceptible (S) lines. R populations and the inbred line were also resistant (8-fold) to the related thiocarbamate herbicide diallate, as well as to the chemically unrelated postemergence herbicide difenzoquat (60-fold). 14C-triallate uptake and translocation patterns were similar between R and S lines for the first 24 h after application. However, translocation of radioactivity was more rapid in S lines than R lines from 24 through 60 h after application. 14C-difenzoquat uptake was the same in R and S lines 12 h after application, but was 10 to 20% higher in R lines than S lines by 24 through 96 h after application. Similarly, translocation of radioactivity after 14C-difenzoquat application was 7 to 14% greater in R than S lines after 12 h, although translocated radioactivity amounts were not significantly different between R and S lines. The relatively minor differences in triallate and difenzoquat uptake and translocation patterns between R and S lines are most likely not of sufficient magnitude to explain the observed resistance levels.

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 by the 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

Blackshaw, R. F., O'Donovan, J. T., Sharma, M. P., Harker, K. N., and Maurice, D. 1996. Response of triallale-resistant wild oat (Avena fatua) to alternative herbicides. Weed Technol. 10: 258262.Google Scholar
Brian, R. C. 1967. The uptake and adsorption of diquat and paraquat by tomato, sugar beet and cocksfoot. Ann. Appl. Biol. 59: 9199.Google Scholar
Casida, J. E., Gray, R. A., and Tilles, H. 1974. Thiocarbamate sulfoxides: potent, selective and biodegradable herbicides. Science 184: 573574.Google Scholar
Colliver, C. T., Kern, A. J., Dyer, W. E., and Maxwell, B. D. 1994. Mechanism of triallate resistance in wild oats (Avena fatua L.). Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 47: 103.Google Scholar
Fuerst, E. P. and Vaughn, K. C. 1990. Mechanisms of paraquat resistance. Weed Technol. 4: 150156.Google Scholar
Hart, J.J. and DiTomaso, J.M. 1994. Sequestration and oxygen radical detoxification as mechanisms of paraquat resistance. Weed Sci. 42: 277284.Google Scholar
Jana, S. and Naylor, J. M. 1976. Genetic adaptation for seed dormancy in Avena fatua . Can. J. Bot. 54: 306312.Google Scholar
Jana, S. and Naylor, J. M. 1982. Adaptation for herbicide tolerance in populations of Avena fatua . Can. J. Bot. 60: 16111617.Google Scholar
Kern, A. J., Colliver, C. T., Cranston, H. J., and Dyer, W. E. 1994. Triallate resistant wild oats are cross-resistant to difenzoquat. Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 47: 105.Google Scholar
Kern, A. J. and Dyer, W. E. 1995. Triallate and difenzoquat metabolism studies in resistant wild oats (Avena fatua L.). Abs. Weed Sci. Soc. Amer. 35: 66.Google Scholar
Malchow, W. E. 1995. Wild oat resistance to triallate in Montana. . Montana State University, Bozeman, MT. 84 pp.Google Scholar
McMullan, P. N. and Nalewaja, J. D. 1991. Triallate absorption and metabolism in relationship to tolerance in wheat (Triticum aestivum and Triticum durum). Can. J. Plant Sci. 71: 10811088.Google Scholar
O'Donovan, J. T., Sharma, M. P., Harker, K. N., Maurice, D., Baig, M. N., and Blackshaw, R. E. 1994. Wild oat (Avena fatua) populations resistant to triallate are also resistant to difenzoquat. Weed Sci. 42: 195199.Google Scholar
Seefeldt, S. S., Jensen, J. E., and Fuerst, E. P. 1995. Log-logistic analysis of herbicide dose-response relationships. Weed Technol. 9: 218227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaner, D. L. 1983. Mode of action of Avenge (difenzoquat). Can. Plant. Proc. 12: 4958.Google Scholar
Sharma, M. P., Vanden Born, W. H., Friesen, H. A., and McBeath, D. K. 1976. Penetration, translocation, and metabolism of 14C-difenzoquat in wild oat and barley. Weed Sci. 24: 379384.Google Scholar
Streibig, J. C. and Kudsk, P., eds. 1993. Herbicide Bioassays. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL 270 p.Google Scholar
Thai, K. M., Jana, S., and Naylor, J. M. 1985. Variability for response to herbicides in wild oat (Avena fatua) populations. Weed Sci. 33: 829835.Google Scholar