Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T15:32:53.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Glyphosate and shade effects on glyphosate-resistant soybean defense response to Sclerotinia sclerotiorum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Chad D. Lee
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824
Ray Hammerschmidt
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824

Abstract

Application of glyphosate in combination with planting soybeans in narrow rows is an effective practice for management of weeds in glyphosate-resistant soybean. Farmers in Michigan reported higher levels of Sclerotinia stem rot (caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum) in fields of glyphosate-resistant soybean. Studies were conducted to determine if glyphosate or shading reduced the defense response of glyphosate-resistant soybean to S. sclerotiorum. Glyphosate caused shikimate accumulation in glyphosate-susceptible cultivar GL2415 but not in glyphosate-resistant cultivar GL2600RR. Ethylacetate extracts containing the plant defense compound glyceollin inhibited S. sclerotiorum hyphae in a rate-dependent manner. Glyphosate had no effect on either baseline or induced levels of glyceollin in glyphosate-resistant soybean, indicating that glyphosate did not impair plant defense responses to S. sclerotiorum. Shade levels of 60 and 90% in the greenhouse did not inhibit the induction of glyceollin synthesis. Glyphosate herbicide and shading did not affect the glyphosate-resistant soybean defense response to S. sclerotiorum.

Type
Research Article
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

Allen, E. H. and Kuć, J. 1968. α-Solanine and α-chaconine as fungitoxic compounds in extracts of Irish potato tubers. Phytopathology. 58:776781.Google Scholar
Amrhein, N., Deus, B., Gehrke, P., and Steinrücken, H. C. 1980. The site of glyphosate with chorismate formation in vivo and in vitro. Plant Physiol. 66:830834.Google Scholar
Boland, G. J. and Hall, R. 1988. Epidemiology of Sclerotinia stem rot of soybean in Ontario. Phytopathology. 78:12411245.Google Scholar
Chun, D., Kao, B., and Lockwood, J. L. 1987. Laboratory and field assessment of resistance in soybean to stem rot caused by Sclerotinia sclerotiorum . Plant Dis. 71:811815.Google Scholar
Dann, E. K., Diers, B. W., and Hammerschmidt, R. 1999. Suppression of Sclerotinia stem rot of soybean by lactofen herbicide treatment. Phytopathology. 89:598602.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fitter, A. H. and Hay, R.K.M. 1987. Environmental Physiology of Plants. New York: Academic Press. pp. 2565.Google Scholar
Grau, C. R. and Radke, V. L. 1984. Effects of cultivars and cultural practices on Sclerotinia stem rot of soybean. Plant Dis. 68:5658.Google Scholar
Herman, J. C. 1997. How a Soybean Plant Develops. Special Report No. 53. Ames, IA: Iowa State University. pp. 316.Google Scholar
Holliday, M. J. and Keen, N. T. 1982. The role of phytoalexins in the resistance of soybean leaves to bacteria: effect of glyphosate on glyceollin accumulation. Phytopathology. 72:14701474.Google Scholar
Ingham, J. L., Keen, N. T., Mulheirn, L. J., and Lyne, R. L. 1981. Inducibly-formed isoflavonoids from leaves of soybean. Phytochemistry. 20:795798.Google Scholar
Keen, N. T., Holliday, M. J., and Yoshikawa, M. 1982. Effects of glyphosate on glyceollin production and the expression of resistance to Phytophthora megasperma f. sp. glycinea in soybean. Phytopathology. 72:14671470.Google Scholar
Keen, N. T., Sims, J. J., Erwin, D. C., Rice, E., and Partridge, J. E. 1971. 6a-Hydroxyphaseollin: an antifungal chemical induced in soybean hypocotyls by Phytopathora megasperma var. sojae . Phytopathology. 61:10841089.Google Scholar
Lee, C. D., Penner, D., and Hammerschmidt, R. 2000. Influence of formulated glyphosate and activator adjuvants on Sclerotinia sclerotiorum in glyphosate-resistant and -susceptible Glycine max . Weed Sci. 48:710715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, B. D., Helms, T. C., and Olson, M. A. 1991. Comparsion of laboratory and field evaluations of resistance in soybean to Sclerotinia sclerotiorum. Plant Dis. 75:662665.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. A. 2000. Soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr] Growth and Development, White Mold [Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary] Incidence, and Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus L.) Control as Affected by Glyphosate and Other Herbicides. Ph.D. dissertation. Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI. pp. 73114.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. A. and Renner, K. A. 1999. Weed management in wide- and narrow-row glyphosate resistant soybean. J. Prod. Agric. 12:460465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padgette, S. R., Kolacz, K. H., Delannay, X., et al. 1995. Development, identification, and characterization of a glyphosate-tolerant soybean line. Crop Sci. 35:14511461.Google Scholar
Pennypacker, B. W. and Risius, M. L. 1999. Environmental sensitivity of soybean cultivar response to Sclerotinia sclerotiorum . Phytopathology. 89:618622.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 2000. SAS/STAT Software: Changes and Enhancements, Release 8.1. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Singh, B. K. and Shaner, D. L. 1998. Rapid determination of glyphosate injury to plants and identification of glyphosate-resistant plants. Weed Technol. 12:527530.Google Scholar
Sonago, S., Yang, X. B., and Lundeen, P. 2001. Field response of glyphosate-tolerant soybean to herbicides and sudden death syndrome. Plant Dis. 85:773779.Google Scholar
Steinrücken, H. C. and Amrhein, N. 1984. 5-Enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate of Klebsiella pneumoniae: 2. Inhibition by glyphosate [N-phosphonomethyl(glycine)]. Eur. J. Biochem. 143:351357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stössel, P. 1982. Glyceollin production in soybean. Phytopathol. Z. 105:109119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar