Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-8gtf8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-01T02:40:21.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Glyphosate-Induced Weed Shifts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

A. Stanley Culpepper
A. Stanley Culpepper*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, University of Georgia, P.O. Box 1209, Tifton, GA 31794
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: stanley@uga.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Composition and abundance of weed populations often change in response to new or extensively used weed management practices. Glyphosate-resistant (GR) technology is one such weed management practice now used extensively. A recent survey of weed scientists was conducted to address weed shifts in GR corn, cotton, and soybean. Twelve scientists in 11 states responded to the survey. Averaged over estimates from scientists, GR corn, cotton, and soybean were planted on 15, 90, and 88% of the hectarage in 2003, respectively. Acreage of GR corn is expected to rise, whereas only minor changes in acreage of GR cotton or soybean are expected. Weed shifts have not been observed in GR corn but have occurred in GR cotton and soybean. In GR cotton, Amaranthus, Commelina, Ipomoea, and Cyperus species as well as annual grasses were noted as becoming more problematic. Similar to cotton, Ipomoea and Commelina species are becoming more troublesome in GR soybean. In addition, in GR soybean, various winter annuals, lambsquarters species, and waterhemp species were noted as becoming more problematic. All scientists felt that weeds shifts were occurring, and two-thirds of these scientists noted that weed shifts are currently of economic concern. The scientists recommend the following to help manage weed shifts: additional herbicides in mixture with glyphosate, rotation to herbicides other than glyphosate, rotation to non–GR crops, and greater use of soil-applied herbicides.

Keywords

Glyphosatewaterhemp species, Amaranthus tuberculatus and Amaranthus rudiscorn, Zea mays L.cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.soybean, Glycine max (L.) MerrInvasive weedsnoxious weedsGRglyphosate-resistant
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , June 2006 , pp. 277 - 281
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

Aldrich, R. J. and Kremer, R. J. 1997. Principles in Weed Management. 2nd ed. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press. Pp. 35–63.Google Scholar
Askew, S. D. and Wilcut, J. W. 1999. Cost and weed management with herbicide programs in glyphosate-resistant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 13:308–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bariuan, J. V., Reddy, K. N., and Wills, G. D. 1999. Glyphosate injury, rainfastness, absorption, and translocation in purple nutsedge. Weed Technol. 13:111–119.Google Scholar
Bradley, A. L., York, A. C., Yelverton, F. H., Culpepper, A. S., and Batts, R. B. 2001. Fluometuron carryover to tobacco. J. Cotton Sci. 5:184–196.Google Scholar
Bradley, J. F. 2000. Economic comparison of weed control systems in conservation tillage systems. in Dugger, C. P. and Richter, D. A., eds. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference, January 4–8, 2000, San Antonio, TX. Memphis, TN: National Cotton Council of America. Pp. 1474–1476.Google Scholar
Byrd, J. D. Jr. 1995. Herbicide-resistant crops: perspectives from an extension specialist. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 48:37.Google Scholar
[CTIC] Conservation Technology Information Center. 2004. National Crop Residue Management Survey. Conservation Tillage Data: Web page: http://www.ctic.purdue.edu/CTIC/CRM.html. Accessed: February 27, 2004 (password required).Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., Flanders, J. T., York, A. C., and Webster, T. M. 2004. Tropical spiderwort (Commelina benghalensis) control in glyphosate-resistant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 18:432–436.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. and York, A. C. 1998. Weed management in glyphosate-tolerant cotton. J. Cotton Sci. 2:174–185.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. and York, A. C. 1999. Weed management and net returns with transgenic, herbicide-resistant, and non-transgenic cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L). Weed Technol. 13:411–420.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., York, A. C., and Carlson, S. 2002. Cutleaf eveningprimrose (Oenothera laciniata) and wild radish (Raphanus raphanistrum) control with burndown herbicides for conservation tillage cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 55:16.Google Scholar
Curran, W. S., Handwerk, K., and Lingenfelter, D. D. 2002. Temporal weed dynamics as influenced by corn and soybean herbicides. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 42:6.Google Scholar
Ellis, J. M. and Griffin, J. L. 2003. Glyphosate and broadleaf mixtures for soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 17:21–27.Google Scholar
Fawcett, R. and Towery, D. 2003. Conservation Tillage and Plant Biotechnology: How New Technologies can Improve the Environment by Reducing the Need to Plow. West Lafayette, IN: Conservation Technology Information Center: Web page: http://www.ctic.purdue.edu/CTIC/BiotechPaper.pdf. Accessed: September 27, 2004.Google Scholar
Fernandez-Cornejo, J. and McBride, W. D. 2002. Adoption of Bioengineered Crops. Economic Research Service/USDA: Web page www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer810/. Pp. 1–61. Accessed: February 27, 2004.Google Scholar
Fischer, D. W. and Harvey, R. G. 2002. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) and annual weed control in glyphosate-resistant field corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 16:482–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harker, K. N., Clayton, G. W., Blackshaw, R. E., Donovan, J. T., Johnson, E., Gan, Y., Irvine, B., and Derksen, D. 2004. RR wheat and canola cropping systems impacts on weed populations. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 44:36.Google Scholar
Hayes, R. M. 2000. Managing weed shifts in Roundup Ready (Glyphosate-tolerant) cotton. in Dugger, C. P. and Richter, D. A., eds. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference, January 9–13, 2001, Anaheim, CA. Memphis, TN: National Cotton Council of America. Pp. 1463–1464.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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, M. W., Al-Khatib, K., and Maddux, L. 2000. Weed community shifts associated with continuous glyphosate applications. Proc. West. Weed Sci. Soc. 53:22–25.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. A. and Renner, K. A. 2002. Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) control and tuber production with glyphosate and ALS-inhibiting herbicides. Weed Technol. 16:512–519.Google Scholar
Patzoldt, W. L., Tranel, P. J., and Hager, A. G. 2002. Variable herbicide response among Illinois waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis and A. tuberculatus) populations. Crop Prot. 21:707–712.Google Scholar
Prostko, E. P., Culpepper, A. S., Webster, T. M., and Flanders, J. T. 2004. Tropical Spiderwort Identification and Control in Cotton and Peanut. Tifton, GA: University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service Bull. In press.Google Scholar
Rogers, C. B., Talbert, R., and Frans, R. 1986. Effect of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) herbicide carryover on subsequent crops. Weed Sci. 34:756–760.Google Scholar
Shaner, D. L. 2000. The impact of glyphosate-tolerant crops on the use of other herbicides on resistant management. Pest Manag. Sci. 56:320–326.3.0.CO;2-B>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, D. R. 1995. Herbicide-resistant crops and implications for herbicide resistant weeds. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 48:38.Google Scholar
Taylor-Lovell, S., Wax, L. M., and Bollero, G. 2002. Preemergence flumioxazin and pendimethalin and postemergence herbicide systems for soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 16:502–511.Google Scholar
Tharp, B. E. and Kells, J. J. 2002. Residual herbicides used in combination with glyphosate and glufosinate in corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 16:274–281.Google Scholar
Tuesca, D., Puricelli, E., and Papa, J. C. 2001. A long-term study of weed flora shifts in different tillage systems. Weed Res. 41:369–382.Google Scholar
Westra, P. and Nissen, S. 2004. Weed population dynamics in conventional and Roundup Ready irrigated crops. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 44:36.Google Scholar
Westra, P., Wilson, R., Stahlman, P., Miller, S., Wicks, G., Nissen, S., Chapman, P., and Withrow, J. 2004. Results of six years of weed shift studies in central great plains Roundup Ready irrigated and dryland crops. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 42:92.Google Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Coble, H. D., York, A. C., and Monks, D. W. 1996. The niche for herbicide-resistant crops in U.S. agriculture. in Duke, S. O., ed. Herbicide-Resistant Crops: Agricultural, Environmental, Economic, Regulatory, and Technical Aspects. Boca Raton, FL: CRC. Pp. 213–230.Google Scholar
York, A. C. 1993. Peanut response to fluometuron applied to a preceding cotton crop. Peanut Sci. 20:111–114.Google Scholar
Young, B. G. 2004. Changes in herbicide use patterns and production practices resulting from glyphosate-resistant crops. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 44:36.Google Scholar