Hygeia AnalyticsLogo

Menu

Skip to content
  • Home
  • About Hygeia
    Analytics
    • Dynamic Presentations
    • Keywords and Site Map
    • Hygeia Analytics – Who We Are
    • Why Hygeia?
    • Funding and “Sound Science”
    • Acronyms and Glossary
    • Sign-Up for Updates
  • Nutrition
    • Introduction and Nutrition 101
      • Good Fat Bad Fat
      • Fatty Acids
        • Primer on the Fatty Acids in Milk
      • Impact of Livestock Feeding
    • Antioxidants
      • Organic Farming Elevates Antioxidants
      • Maximizing Antioxidant Intake
    • Organic vs. Conventional Foods
      • Milk and Dairy Products
        • 2018 Grassmilk Paper
        • PLOS ONE Study
        • Dairy Meta-Analysis
      • Multi Food Meta-Analyses
        • Meat Products
        • Plant-Based Foods
        • Smith-Spangler et al.
        • Dangour et al.
        • The Organic Center Report
      • Food Specific Comparisons
        • General
        • Fruits and Vegetables
        • Wine and Wine Grapes
    • Considering Nutritional Quality
      • Impact of Genetics and Production Systems
      • New Tool for Food Security
      • Transforming Jane Doe’s Diet
      • Nutritional Quality Index
    • Nutrient Decline
    • Other Choices and Challenges
      • Human Health
      • Dietary Choices
  • Pesticides
    • Usage
      • Pesticide Use Data Sources
        • Pesticide Use Indicators
      • PUDS – The Pesticide Use Data System
    • Dietary Risks
      • The Dietary Risk Index (DRI)
    • Risk Assessment and Regulation
      • Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA)
      • Glyphosate/Roundup Case Study
      • The Lowdown on Roundup
      • Does Glyphosate/Roundup Cause Cancer?
      • 2019 Glyphosate Genotoxicity Paper
    • Impacts of GE on Pesticide Use
    • Environmental, Human Health, and Other Impacts of Pesticides
  • Ag Biotech
    • Key Historical Documents – Donald Duvick
    • Key Historical Documents – Arpad Pusztai
    • Herbicide Resistant Crops
    • Weed Resistance
    • Bt Transgenic Crops
    • Resistant Insects
    • Health Risks and Safety Assessments
    • Regulation of GE Crop Technology
    • Marketing, Economics, and Public Relations
    • Patenting and Intellectual Property Issues
    • Labeling
  • Other Issues
    • Animal Products
    • The Future of Food
    • Global Food Security
    • Natural Resources and Climate Change
    • Alternatives to Industrial Ag
    • Policy and Politics
    • Scientific Integrity
    • Soil Health
    • Yields
  • Recent Posts
    • Hot Science
    • In The News
    • Hygeia’s Blog
  • Special
    Coverage
    • Organic Apples in Washington State
    • Dicamba Drift Crisis
    • Organic Food Consumption Lowers Cancer Risk
    • Organic Integrity

Palmer Amaranth Resistant to an Unprecedented Six Herbicides Identified

Posted on October 12, 2018 in Hot Science, Pesticides | 723 Views

In an experiment conducted in Missouri, researchers have identified Palmer amaranth that is resistant to six herbicides.

Amaranthus palmerii is a one tough weed. When full grown, at its base, stalks can match the circumference of a man’s wrist. One plant can set over 400,000 seeds. It has a long history of herbicide resistance, and for many farmers, Palmer Amaranth is near the top of the list of most-feared and costly weeds.

Previous research has identified populations resistant to multiple herbicides, such as this Argentinian population resistant to glyphosate, dicamba and 2,4-D.  This is the first time, however, that resistance has been reported to six different herbicide modes of action.

A research team from the University of Missouri published a paper in Weed Science with this bad news. The team also report some interesting discoveries about how resistance develops.

Resistance Spreads Quickly

The percentage of “visual control” observed in weed populations year by year has changed significantly.  For example, for 2,4-D application rates ranging from 0.56-4.48 kilograms per hectare (kg/ha), visual control of Palmer amaranth ranged from 26-77% in 2015.   But, visual control decreased to 15-55% in the following year.

Resistant Weeds Can Still Be Killed (Sometimes)

Monster weeds resistant to multiple herbicides leave farmers with few tools in their chemical-weed control toolbox.

But it takes a lot more herbicide and multiple modes of action, if herbicides work at all. The researchers compared the resistant plants to control populations that were still sensitive to these herbicides, and measured how much herbicide was needed to kill weeds in each population.

In one such example, to achieve 50% control of waterhemp, application rates of 2,4-D increased from 0.47 kg/ha in the control population to 1.44 kg/ha for the resistant population.  That’s over triple the amount of herbicide.

These rates skyrocketed for other herbicides tested.  Resistant waterhemp needed 7 times as much atrazine, 14 times as much mesotrione, and 22-times more glyphosate.

Multiple Resistance is Depressingly Common

For Palmer amaranth in Missouri, resistance to just one herbicide is a rarity.  In fact, only 1% of the populations studied was resistant to just one herbicide (glyphosate).  Plus, about 1 in 6 (16%) of the weed plants were resistant to six of the herbicides studied: 2,4-D, atrazine, chlorimuron, fomesafen, glyphosate, and mesotrione.

Few Tools Left in the Toolbox

For the 16% of the populations of amaranth resistant to six herbicides, only dicamba and glufosinate proved effective in controlling the weeds, as this article from Soybean South describes. But, earlier reports of dicamba-resistant weed populations in some states raise concerns that dicamba-resistance might spread quickly.

Given that dicamba use in the U.S. is rising fast, the rapid-spread scenario seems likely.  Despite promises by Monsanto (now Bayer) that these new formulations would not be volatile, herbicide drift and movement has remained a big problem.  As a result, weeds far and wide are being exposed to low-levels  of dicamba, even those growing in fields that are not planted to dicamba-resistant crops.  And such low-level, not-lethal exposures are prone to triggering resistance, and hence over time, will further accelerate the herbicide treadmill.

2,4-D resistant corn, soybeans, and cotton are the next-gen resistant crops about to hit the market.  But this study documents that 2,4-D resistance is already a problem in multiple weeds.  It remains puzzling why so many conventional farmers remain supportive of such a deeply flawed weed management strategy, since they are the ones paying more and more year-to-year for herbicide-based management systems that work less and less well.

“The results are sobering – especially for anyone waiting on the approval of 2,4-D–resistant corn and soybeans as a way to manage glyphosate resistance. If we’re already seeing 2,4-D resistance now, what will happen when use of the herbicide becomes even more commonplace?”

—Soybean South

 

The solution?

According to Soybean South, the researchers feel that “six-way resistant waterhemp demands a diversified approach.”  This is the “many little hammers” strategy that relies on a variety of mechanical, biological, and chemical control methods, rather than the near-sole reliance on herbicides that is the norm today.

There is plenty of good science showing that diversified weed management can work, the problem is figuring out how to support farmers willing to switch gears after many years of incrementally more heavy-handed herbicide use.  The switch is challenging and will take time and money, because so many farmers have invested for years almost exclusively in the large-scale equipment, seed genetics, and know how needed to spray lots of herbicides across very large farms, quickly, with very few people. The other compartments in the weed management “toolbox” are empty, or rusty and outmoded.

Excessive reliance on herbicides has led to a “wicked problem.” The way forward is clear and proven, and entails less use of herbicides, coupled with integration of multiple, non-chemical weed management practices and tactics.

Economics will eventually dictate that “many little hammers” replace the one big one causing such costly problems on many of the nation’s largest and most “progressive” farms.

Sources:

Shergill, L., Barlow, B., Bish, M., & Bradley, K., “Investigations of 2,4-D and Multiple Herbicide Resistance in a Missouri Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) Population,” Weed Science, 66(3), 86-394, 2018, doi:10.1017/wsc.2017.82

Soybean South, “Missouri Scientists Find Waterhemp Resistant to 6 Herbicide Modes of Action,” October 11, 2018.

Posted in Hot Science, Pesticides | Tagged 24D, atrazine, Dicamba, GE Impacts, Glyphosate, Herbicide Resistance, Weeds

Related Posts

Implications of EPA’s Decision to Renew Dicamba Registration for Over-the-Top Use→

Dr. Benbrook Testifies Before the Philadelphia City Council as they Consider Glyphosate Ban→

Roundup is Safe Enough to Drink, Right?→

This Monster Dose of Innovation is Reason for Hope→

New Iowa Centric Verse of the Dicamba Blues→

Saving Roundup — Another Shoe Falls→

Implications of the Big Dicamba Decision→

Appeals Court Rules EPA “Substantially Understated” Risks from Dicamba Use, Revokes Registration and Bans Sales of Some Dicamba Herbicides→

©2016 Hygeia-Analytics.com. All Rights Reserved.

Menu