Identification and documentation of herbicide resistance - Érudit
←
→
Transcription du contenu de la page
Si votre navigateur ne rend pas la page correctement, lisez s'il vous plaît le contenu de la page ci-dessous
Document généré le 12 juil. 2022 12:42
Phytoprotection
Comptes rendus / Proceedings
Identification and documentation of herbicide resistance
I.M. Heap
Volume 75, numéro 4, 1994 Résumé de l'article
Herbicide Resistance Workshop – Edmonton, Alberta - 9 and Les programmes proactifs de gestion de la résistance aux herbicides sont basés
10 december 1993 sur la détection rapide des populations résistantes et sur la connaissance des
Atelier sur la résistance aux herbicides – Edmonton (Alberta) – 9 et combinaisons de mauvaises herbes et d'herbicides prédisposées au
10 décembre 1993 développement de cette résistance. Les mauvaises herbes annuelles,
prolifiques productrices de graines, génétiquement variées et exposées de
façon répétée à des herbicides du même mode d'action, sont sujettes au
URI : https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/706075ar
développement rapide de la résistance. Quand la résistance est soupçonnée,
DOI : https://doi.org/10.7202/706075ar
des échantillons de graines sont recueillis et évalués par un bioessai du plant
entier. Ces bioessais sont conduits en champ, en chambre de croissance ou en
Aller au sommaire du numéro plats de Pétri. Des courbes complètes de réponse aux doses sont tracées en
utilisant une population sensible aux herbicides et une population soupçonnée
de résistance. Le bioessai conduit en chambre de croissance est la méthode la
Éditeur(s) plus fiable d'identification de nouveaux cas de résistance aux herbicides. Les
bioessais basés sur la détection biochimique d'un seul mécanisme de résistance
Société de protection des plantes du Québec (SPPQ)l ne sont pas fiables pour la détection de nouveaux cas de résistance.
ISSN
0031-9511 (imprimé)
1710-1603 (numérique)
Découvrir la revue
Citer cet article
Heap, I. (1994). Identification and documentation of herbicide resistance.
Phytoprotection, 75(4), 85–90. https://doi.org/10.7202/706075ar
La société de protection des plantes du Québec, 1994 Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d’auteur. L’utilisation des
services d’Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique
d’utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne.
https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/
Cet article est diffusé et préservé par Érudit.
Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de
l’Université de Montréal, l’Université Laval et l’Université du Québec à
Montréal. Il a pour mission la promotion et la valorisation de la recherche.
https://www.erudit.org/fr/Herbicide Résistance Workshop - Edmonton 1993
Atelier sur la résistance aux herbicides - Edmonton 1993
Identification and documentation of
herbicide résistance
lan M. Heap1
Received 1993-11-08; acceptée! 1994-07-11
Proactive herbicide résistance management programs rely upon early
détection of résistant populations and knowledge of which combinations
of weed and herbicide are prone to the development of résistance. Annual
weeds that are prolific seed producers, genetically diverse, and repeatedly
exposed to a single herbicide mode of action, are prone to rapid develop-
ment of résistance. When résistance is suspected, seed samples are col-
lected and evaluated using a whole plant bioassay. Whole plant bioassays
are conducted underfield, growth room, or Pétri dish conditions. Complète
dose response curves for the suspected résistant and a référence suscep-
tible population are used to verify résistance. Bioassay, conducted in growth
rooms, is the most reliable method for identification of new cases of
herbicide résistance. Bioassays, based on the biochemical détection of a
single mechanism of résistance, are not reliable for screening for new
occurrences of résistance.
Heap, I.M. 1994. Identification et documentation de la résistance aux
herbicides. PHYTOPROTECTION 75 (Suppl.): 85-90.
Les programmes proactifs de gestion de la résistance aux herbicides
sont basés sur la détection rapide des populations résistantes et sur la
connaissance des combinaisons de mauvaises herbes et d'herbicides pré-
disposées au développement de cette résistance. Les mauvaises herbes
annuelles, prolifiques productrices de graines, génétiquement variées et
exposées de façon répétée à des herbicides du même mode d'action, sont
sujettes au développement rapide de la résistance. Quand la résistance est
soupçonnée, des échantillons de graines sont recueillis et évalués par un
bioessai du plant entier. Ces bioessais sont conduits en champ, en chambre
de croissance ou en plats de Pétri. Des courbes complètes de réponse aux
doses sont tracées en utilisant une population sensible aux herbicides et
une population soupçonnée de résistance. Le bioessai conduit en chambre
de croissance est la méthode la plus fiable d'identification de nouveaux cas
de résistance aux herbicides. Les bioessais basés sur la détection biochi-
mique d'un seul mécanisme de résistance ne sont pas fiables pour la
détection de nouveaux cas de résistance.
Nomenclature of chemical names cited in the text:
Diclofop-methyl: methyl(±)-2-[4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)phenoxy]propanoic acid.
1. Department of Crop and Soil Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, U.S.A.
97331
85INTRODUCTION and Devine 1989; Heap and Morrison
1992, 1993; Heap et al. 1993; Morrison
The number of documented cases of étal. 1989; Primiani étal. 1990;Saari et
herbicide résistance hâve increased al. 1992). Weeds in the Amaranth fam-
from a few in the early 1970s to over ily, such as redroot pigweed {Amaran-
100 in 1990 (Holt and LeBaron 1990). thus retroflexus L.) and prostrate pig-
Undoubtedly new cases of herbicide- weed (Amaranthus blitoides S. Wats.)
résistant weeds, and the area they in- are widespread, genetically diverse, and
fest, will continue to increase. Studies prolific seed producers, making them
on the mechanisms, fitness, and mode likely candidates to follow with résis-
of inheritance of résistant populations tance to sulfonylurea herbicides.
will advance our gênerai scientific Herbicides that rapidly sélect for
knowledge about the résistance phe- résistance are highly effective on the
nomena. Studies on sélection pressures, weed species (when applied at the
cross-resistance patterns, alternative recommended rate), and hâve a single
control measures, and weed popula- target site mode of action (Gressel and
tion dynamics are immediately useful Segel 1990). Examples are herbicides
in developing proactive résistance that inhibit the enzyme acetyl coenzyme-
management programs. In order to A carboxylase (ACCase) (aryloxyphe-
manage résistance proactively it is noxypropionates and cyclohexanedi-
necessary to predict résistance prob- ones), or those that inhibit the enzyme
lems, and document herbicide résis- acetolactate synthase (sulfonylureas
tance in a scientific and consistent and imidazolinones) (Lichtenthaler 1990;
manner when it occurs. This paper Ray 1984).
describes the characteristics of weed
and herbicide combinations that are Repeated usage of herbicides with
favorable for the development of résis- the same mode of action, without
tance, and outlines procédures for iden- alternative measures of weed control,
tification and documentation of résis- results in rapid development of résis-
tance. tance (Gressel and Segel 1990). Lack of
effective or économie cultural controls,
or herbicides with différent modes of
CANDIDATES FOR action, combined with product loyalty,
RESISTANCE marketing stratégies, and low aware-
ness of the conséquences of résistance,
The rapidity of appearance of herbicide hâve led many farmers into a rapid
résistance is influenced by the charac- sélection of résistant populations.
teristics of the weed species, the her-
bicide, and the usage pattern of the
herbicide (Gressel and Segel 1990). INVESTIGATION OF
Weeds that produce large numbers of
^ genetically différent propagules, and
RESISTANCE
? that are repeatedly exposed to a single
3 mode of action of herbicide, are the Before conducting expensive trials to
a most likely to develop résistance. Thèse détermine if a weed has developed
J5 are the annual weed species, that are résistance, the investigator should
I^ genetically diverse, prolific seed pro- détermine if the herbicide normally
J ducers, widespread, and problematic to controls the species, if the herbicide
o growers if left uncontrolled, such as was applied correctly (check rates,
£ green foxtail [Setaria viridis{L.) Beauv.], equipment, application misses, environ-
£ wild oats {Avena fatua L), wild mustard ment, timing etc.), and if the herbicide
o [Sinapis arvensis (L.)] , kochia [Kochia controlled other susceptible species
o. scoparia (L) Schrad.], Russian thistle présent at the time of application., If the
£ {Salsola pestifer Nels.), and chickweed answer is yes to ail thèse questions,
^ [Stellaria média (L.) Vill.]. Each of thèse seed samples should be collected and
°- species has developed résistance to one screened for résistance. The herbicide
or more herbicide mode of action (Hall history of the field will assist in deter-
86HEAP: IDENTIFICATION OF HERBICIDE RESISTANCE
mining the likelihood that résistance has SCREENING WEEDS FOR
developed, but the possibility that HERBICIDE RESISTANCE
résistant seed has been imported should
not be ignored.
Screening weed populations for herbi-
cide résistance, based on the response
SEED SAMPLING of whole plants, has been conducted
via field, growth room, and Pétri dish
Collection bioassays. Biochemical methods, based
Seed should be collected from mature, on extracted enzyme activity in the
surviving, treated plants, and not from présence of a herbicide, hâve also been
untreated areas. Survivors may be used to identify spécifie résistance
widely dispersed individuals or dense mechanisms. Gerwick et al. (1993) hâve
clusters, covering a few square meters reported such a technique for identifi-
to 100 ha, thus it is not practical to cation of sulfonylurea-resistant broad-
outline a standard sampling path or leaf weeds.
frequency. It is important that the seed
collected is représentative of the popu- Bioassays
lation in the area to be tested, whether A susceptible control of the same
that area be a few square meters or a species must be included for référence,
whole field. Collection of seed from a regardless of the type of bioassay.
single plant will not allow an accurate Ideally, this susceptible control should
évaluation of résistance. For most hâve a similar genetic background to
species, the seed sample should be that of the suspected résistant popula-
collected from at least 40 mature plants tion (usually in the vicinity of the
and constitute more than 1000 viable suspected résistant plants where herbi-
seeds. Collection of seed from larger cides hâve not been applied). Where
numbers of plants will increase the numerous samples (> 100) are to be
accuracy of évaluation of the propor- collected and tested for résistance, it is
tion of résistant individuals in the impractical to collect and test a match-
population. A susceptible population ing susceptible for each. In such cases
with a similar genetic background to it is sufficient to test several susceptible
the suspected résistant plants will be populations (never exposed to herbi-
needed for comparison, and can nor- cides) from separate locations to déter-
mally be obtained from nearby, in an mine the natural variation in levels of
area where herbicides hâve not been tolérance. If this natural variation is
applied. relatively small, then one average
susceptible population may be used in
subséquent bioassays as a référence
Identification of sample
population. If the variation is large then
Correct identification of the sample is
a susceptible population collected in
essential. Identification should include
the same vicinity of each suspected
the growers name, address, téléphone
résistant population will hâve to be used
number, the species collected, the field
for comparison.
name, location (map) of the collection
site, date of sampling, an outline of A complète dose-response curve for
the problem, and a detailed crop and both the référence susceptible and the
herbicide history in the field for the suspected résistant populations should
past 10 yr. be established to détermine the level of
résistance. An example of such a dose-
Handling of sample response curve is given in Figure 1
The sample should be dry and kept (Heap, unpublished data; Brain and
in paper bags during storage and Cousens 1989). Levels of herbicide
shipping. Seed samples stored in résistance are expressed as the ratio of
plastic bags (or any airtight container) the G R ^ f o r the résistant (R) to the
are prone to an increase in the inci- susceptible (S) population (GR50 R: GR50
dence of overheating and mold, result- S). GR50 values are the dosages of
ing in a decrease in seed viability. herbicide, normally in g a.i. ha 1, that
87100 < 1-r — — • • • • —1
—
A*\ • • UM8
A A UM7
80
H
£ ^
60 Y^95.47/l(l + e , - ()6( - 5 - 7,) X 1 - 06 )HEAP: IDENTIFICATION OF HERBICIDE RESISTANCE
effective at very low dosages under détection of new occurrences of résis-
controlled environment conditions, and tance.
the recommended field rate may kill
both susceptible and résistant popula-
tions. The résistance ratio, based on REFERENCES
GRcn, is more informative than the
ou
Brain, P., and R. Cousens. 1989. An équation
actual rate required to kill the résistant to describe dose responses where there
population. is stimulation of growth at low doses.
Weed Res. 29: 93-96.
Pétri dish bioassays Devine, M.D., S.A. Maclsaac, M.L. Romano,
Pétri dish bioassays are reliable if they and J.C. Hall. 1992. Investigation of the
hâve been correlated with controlled mechanism of diclofop résistance in two
environment or field data. In thèse biotypes of Avena fatua. Pestic. Biochem.
assays, the seed or seedling is exposed Physiol. 42: 88-96.
to intermittent or continuous herbicide Devine, M.D., J.C. Hall, M.L. Romano, M.A.S.
solutions, and évaluation is made on Maries, L.W. Thomson, and R.H. Shima-
seedling mortality and shoot elonga- bukuro. 1993. Diclofop and fenoxaprop
tion. Pétri dish bioassays are most résistance in wild oat is associated with
an altered effect on the plasma mem-
useful for cost effective screening of brane electrogenic potential. Pestic. Bio-
large numbers of suspected résistant chem. Physiol. 45: 167-77.
samples, after initial growth room trials Gerwick, B.C., L.C. Mireles, and R.J. Eilers.
hâve established that résistance to the 1993. Rapid diagnosis of ALS/AHAS-
herbicide occurs. resistant weeds. Weed Technol. 7: 519-
524.
Biochemical methods Gressel, J., and LA. Segel. 1990. Modelling
the effectiveness of herbicide rotations
Biochemical bioassays that screen for and mixtures as stratégies to delay or
spécifie mechanisms of résistance are preclude résistance. Weed Technol. 4:
not reliable for screening populations 186-198.
suspected of being résistant. Popula- Hall, L.M., and M.D. Devine. 1989. Cross
tions of annual ryegrass (Lolium résistance of a chlorsulfuron résistant
rigidum Gaud.), wild oats and green biotype of Stellarîa média to triazolopy-
foxtail vary dramatically in their levels rimidine herbicide. Plant Physiol. 93: 962-
of résistance and patterns of cross- 966.
resistance to ACCase-inhibitor herbi- Heap, I.M., and R.A. Knight. 1990. Variations
in herbicide cross-resistance among
cides (Heap and Knight 1990; Heap and populations of annual ryegrass (Lolium
Morrison 1993; Heap et al. 1993). It is rigidum) résistant to diclofop-methyl.
likely that there are many différent Aust. J. Agric. Res. 41: 121-128.
mutations and mechanisms of résis- Heap, I.M., and I.N. Morrison. 1992. Résis-
tance in thèse species. For instance, in tance to auxin-type herbicides in wild
two ACCase-inhibitor résistant popula- mustard (SinapisarvensisL.) populations
tions of wild oats, one was found to in western Canada. Proc. Weed Sci. Soc.
resist diclofop via increased metabo- Am. 32: 164 (Abstract).
lism, whilst the other resisted via an Heap, I.M., and I.N. Morrison. 1993. Résis-
tance to aryloxyphenoxypropionate and
altered plasma membrane response
cyclohexanedione herbicides in green
(Devine et al. 1992, 1993). In one pop- foxtail (Setaria viridis). Proc. Weed Sci.
ulation of green foxtail, the mechanism Soc. Am. 33: 185 (Abstract).
of résistance was due to an altération of Heap, I.M., B.G. Murray, H.A. Loeppky, and
the ACCase enzyme (Maries et al. 1993). I.N. Morrison. 1993. Résistance to aryl-
It is also likely that someof thèse mech- oxyphenoxypropionate and cyclohexan-
anisms will be novel, and not just var- edione herbicides in wild oats (Avena
iations of an altered ACCase enzyme, or fatua). Weed Sci. 41: 232-238.
an increase in metabolism. Any assay Holt, J.S., and H.M. LeBaron. 1990. Signifi-
that targets détection of a spécifie cance and distribution of herbicide
résistance. Weed Technol. 4: 141-149.
mechanism of résistance will miss ail Lichtenthaler, H.K. 1990. Mode of action of
other possible mechanisms, known and herbicides affecting acetyl-CoA carboxyl-
unknown. Whole plant détection tech- ase and fatty acid biosynthesis. Z.
niques are the only reliable method for Naturforsch. 45: 521-528.
89Maries, M.A.S., M.D. Devine, and J.C. Hall. Ray, T.B. 1984. Site of action of chlorsul-
1993. Herbicide résistance in Setaria furon. Inhibition of valine and isolleucine
viridis conferred by a less sensitive form biosynthesis in plants. Plant Physiol. 75:
of acetyl coenzyme-A carboxylase. 827-831.
Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 46: 7-14. Saari, L.L., J.C. Cotterman, W.F. Smith, and
Morrison, I.N., B.G. Todd, and K.M. M.M. Primiani. 1992. Sulfonylurea herbi-
Nawolsky. 1989. Confirmation of tri- cide résistance in common chickweed,
fluralin-resistant green foxtail (Setaria perennial ryegrass, and Russian thistle.
viridis) in Manitoba. Weed Technol. 3: Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 42: 110-118.
544-551.
Primiani, M.M., J.C. Cotterman, and L.L.
Saari. 1990. Résistance of kochia {Kochia
scoparia) to sulfonylurea and imida-
zolinone herbicides. Weed Technol. 4:
169-172.
a
a
3
(0
90Vous pouvez aussi lire
