TY - JOUR
T1 - Patterns of herbicide resistance in Raphanus raphanistrum revealed by comprehensive testing and statistical analysis
AU - Busi, Roberto
AU - Flower, Ken
AU - Goggin, Danica
AU - Onofri, Andrea
PY - 2024/12
Y1 - 2024/12
N2 - BACKGROUND: Raphanus raphanistrum causes $40 million total revenue losses annually in Western Australia partly due to its historically-documented ability to evolve herbicide resistance to multiple modes of action. In this study, 376 field-sampled populations of R. raphanistrum were tested for resistance to 21 herbicides applied at the recommended label rate. Eight treatments were herbicide mixtures with two, three or four modes of action. RESULTS: A total of 7199 individual resistance tests were conducted across 4 years by screening approximately 104 000 individual seeds and seedlings. The mean survival of individuals within a population for all standalone herbicides was 9%, whereas survival was significantly decreased to 3.5% with a herbicide mixture. Some herbicides such as triasulfuron (herbicide Group 2), 2,4-D (Group 4) or diflufenican (Group 12) were highly impacted by resistance, with frequencies of resistant populations being > 50%. Conversely, there was negligible resistance to glyphosate (Group 9) or protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO) inhibitors (tiafenacil, saflufenacil + trifludimoxazin, fomesafen: Group 14), and pre-emergence herbicides (i.e., atrazine or mesotrione: Groups 5 and 27, respectively) remained largely effective. Binary, ternary or quaternary mixtures of Groups 4, 6, 12 and 27 herbicides reduced the frequency of high-level resistant populations to 7.1%, 3.8% or 0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effective control of R. raphanistrum remains a challenge due to herbicide resistance. Raphanus raphanistrum management relies heavily on herbicide uses not yet compromised by resistance, such as pre-emergence herbicides (atrazine, fomesafen, mesotrione), glyphosate, and mixtures of two, three or four modes of action including bromoxynil, diflufenican, MCPA, picolinafen, pyrasulfotole and topramezone. Strategies that integrate effective herbicide use patterns, novel modes of action and efficiently-mechanized non-chemical weed control options (i.e., seed destructors) can completely constrain the selection of herbicide resistance in this highly adaptable species.
AB - BACKGROUND: Raphanus raphanistrum causes $40 million total revenue losses annually in Western Australia partly due to its historically-documented ability to evolve herbicide resistance to multiple modes of action. In this study, 376 field-sampled populations of R. raphanistrum were tested for resistance to 21 herbicides applied at the recommended label rate. Eight treatments were herbicide mixtures with two, three or four modes of action. RESULTS: A total of 7199 individual resistance tests were conducted across 4 years by screening approximately 104 000 individual seeds and seedlings. The mean survival of individuals within a population for all standalone herbicides was 9%, whereas survival was significantly decreased to 3.5% with a herbicide mixture. Some herbicides such as triasulfuron (herbicide Group 2), 2,4-D (Group 4) or diflufenican (Group 12) were highly impacted by resistance, with frequencies of resistant populations being > 50%. Conversely, there was negligible resistance to glyphosate (Group 9) or protoporphyrinogen oxidase (PPO) inhibitors (tiafenacil, saflufenacil + trifludimoxazin, fomesafen: Group 14), and pre-emergence herbicides (i.e., atrazine or mesotrione: Groups 5 and 27, respectively) remained largely effective. Binary, ternary or quaternary mixtures of Groups 4, 6, 12 and 27 herbicides reduced the frequency of high-level resistant populations to 7.1%, 3.8% or 0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effective control of R. raphanistrum remains a challenge due to herbicide resistance. Raphanus raphanistrum management relies heavily on herbicide uses not yet compromised by resistance, such as pre-emergence herbicides (atrazine, fomesafen, mesotrione), glyphosate, and mixtures of two, three or four modes of action including bromoxynil, diflufenican, MCPA, picolinafen, pyrasulfotole and topramezone. Strategies that integrate effective herbicide use patterns, novel modes of action and efficiently-mechanized non-chemical weed control options (i.e., seed destructors) can completely constrain the selection of herbicide resistance in this highly adaptable species.
KW - herbicide mixtures
KW - resistance test
KW - survey
KW - synergistic
KW - weed control
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85203045298&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/ps.8394
DO - 10.1002/ps.8394
M3 - Article
C2 - 39229851
AN - SCOPUS:85203045298
SN - 1526-498X
VL - 80
SP - 6555
EP - 6565
JO - Pest Management Science
JF - Pest Management Science
IS - 12
ER -