Differential Response of Arkansas Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) to Glyphosate and Mesotrione
We conducted a greenhouse study to evaluate the differential response of Palmer amaranth to glyphosate and mesotrione and to quantify the level of tolerance to mesotrione in recalcitrant (difficult-to-control) accessions and their offspring. Seeds were collected from 174 crop fields (corn, cotton, a...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Weed technology 2018-10, Vol.32 (5), p.579-585 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 585 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 579 |
container_title | Weed technology |
container_volume | 32 |
creator | Singh, Shilpa Roma-Burgos, Nilda Singh, Vijay Alcober, Ed Allan L Salas-Perez, Reiofeli Shivrain, Vinod |
description | We conducted a greenhouse study to evaluate the differential response of Palmer amaranth to glyphosate and mesotrione and to quantify the level of tolerance to mesotrione in recalcitrant (difficult-to-control) accessions and their offspring. Seeds were collected from 174 crop fields (corn, cotton, and soybean) across Arkansas between 2008 and 2016. Palmer amaranth seedlings (7 to 10cm tall) were treated with glyphosate at 840 g ae ha-1 or mesotrione at 105 g ha-1. Overall, 47% of the accessions (172) were resistant to glyphosate with 68% survivors. Almost 35% of accessions were highly resistant, with 90% survivors. The majority of survivors from glyphosate application incurred between 31% and 60% injury. Mesotrione killed 66% of the accessions (174); the remaining accessions had survivors with injury ranging from 61% to 90%. Accessions with the least response to mesotrione were selected to determine tolerance level. Dose–response assays were conducted with four recalcitrant populations and their F1 progeny. The average effective doses (ED50) for the parent accessions and F1 progeny of survivors were 21.5 g ha-1 and 27.5 g ha-1, respectively. The recalcitrant parent populations were three- to five-fold more tolerant to mesotrione than the known susceptible population, as were the F1 progeny. Nomenclature: glyphosate; mesotrione; Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.; corn, Zea mays L.; cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.; soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/wet.2018.34 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2131509124</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26567626</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26567626</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b317t-82c8f4337567697b07885f0f53c760e17be12106feb29ed36d0d44db042172f73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMFLwzAUxoMoOKcnz0LAi0M6X5I2aY9j6hQmiih4C2mbsM6uqUmG7L-3terR03vw_fje-z6ETglMCRBx9anDlAJJpyzeQyOSJBBREcM-GkGaQQRMvB2iI-_XAIRTCiNUXFfGaKebUKkaP2vf2sZrbA2euXfVeOXxk6o32uHZRjnVhBW--N22HrffWjXBweJFvWtX1qugsWpK_KC9Da6yjT5GB0bVXp_8zDF6vb15md9Fy8fF_Xy2jHJGRIhSWqQmZkwkXPBM5CDSNDFgElYIDpqIXBNKgBud00yXjJdQxnGZQ0yJoEawMToffFtnP7baB7m2W9d0JyUljCSQERp31OVAFc5677SRrau6RDtJQPYtyq5F2bcoWU-fDfTaB-v-UMr7Jynv9Mmg55Xtov7r9QU-hHvb</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2131509124</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Differential Response of Arkansas Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) to Glyphosate and Mesotrione</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Cambridge Journals - Connect here FIRST to enable access</source><creator>Singh, Shilpa ; Roma-Burgos, Nilda ; Singh, Vijay ; Alcober, Ed Allan L ; Salas-Perez, Reiofeli ; Shivrain, Vinod</creator><creatorcontrib>Singh, Shilpa ; Roma-Burgos, Nilda ; Singh, Vijay ; Alcober, Ed Allan L ; Salas-Perez, Reiofeli ; Shivrain, Vinod</creatorcontrib><description>We conducted a greenhouse study to evaluate the differential response of Palmer amaranth to glyphosate and mesotrione and to quantify the level of tolerance to mesotrione in recalcitrant (difficult-to-control) accessions and their offspring. Seeds were collected from 174 crop fields (corn, cotton, and soybean) across Arkansas between 2008 and 2016. Palmer amaranth seedlings (7 to 10cm tall) were treated with glyphosate at 840 g ae ha-1 or mesotrione at 105 g ha-1. Overall, 47% of the accessions (172) were resistant to glyphosate with 68% survivors. Almost 35% of accessions were highly resistant, with 90% survivors. The majority of survivors from glyphosate application incurred between 31% and 60% injury. Mesotrione killed 66% of the accessions (174); the remaining accessions had survivors with injury ranging from 61% to 90%. Accessions with the least response to mesotrione were selected to determine tolerance level. Dose–response assays were conducted with four recalcitrant populations and their F1 progeny. The average effective doses (ED50) for the parent accessions and F1 progeny of survivors were 21.5 g ha-1 and 27.5 g ha-1, respectively. The recalcitrant parent populations were three- to five-fold more tolerant to mesotrione than the known susceptible population, as were the F1 progeny. Nomenclature: glyphosate; mesotrione; Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.; corn, Zea mays L.; cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.; soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0890-037X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1550-2740</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/wet.2018.34</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, USA: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Agricultural production ; Amaranth ; Amaranthus palmeri ; Cereal crops ; Corn ; Cotton ; Crop fields ; Crops ; differential tolerance ; Evolution ; Glyphosate ; Glyphosate resistance ; Grain ; Herbicides ; Offspring ; Population ; Populations ; Progeny ; recalcitrant populations ; resistance evolution ; Seedlings ; Seeds ; Sorghum ; Soybeans ; tolerant population ; Weeds</subject><ispartof>Weed technology, 2018-10, Vol.32 (5), p.579-585</ispartof><rights>Weed Science Society of America, 2018.</rights><rights>Weed Science Society of America, 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b317t-82c8f4337567697b07885f0f53c760e17be12106feb29ed36d0d44db042172f73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b317t-82c8f4337567697b07885f0f53c760e17be12106feb29ed36d0d44db042172f73</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26567626$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26567626$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Singh, Shilpa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roma-Burgos, Nilda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Vijay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alcober, Ed Allan L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salas-Perez, Reiofeli</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shivrain, Vinod</creatorcontrib><title>Differential Response of Arkansas Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) to Glyphosate and Mesotrione</title><title>Weed technology</title><addtitle>Weed Technol</addtitle><description>We conducted a greenhouse study to evaluate the differential response of Palmer amaranth to glyphosate and mesotrione and to quantify the level of tolerance to mesotrione in recalcitrant (difficult-to-control) accessions and their offspring. Seeds were collected from 174 crop fields (corn, cotton, and soybean) across Arkansas between 2008 and 2016. Palmer amaranth seedlings (7 to 10cm tall) were treated with glyphosate at 840 g ae ha-1 or mesotrione at 105 g ha-1. Overall, 47% of the accessions (172) were resistant to glyphosate with 68% survivors. Almost 35% of accessions were highly resistant, with 90% survivors. The majority of survivors from glyphosate application incurred between 31% and 60% injury. Mesotrione killed 66% of the accessions (174); the remaining accessions had survivors with injury ranging from 61% to 90%. Accessions with the least response to mesotrione were selected to determine tolerance level. Dose–response assays were conducted with four recalcitrant populations and their F1 progeny. The average effective doses (ED50) for the parent accessions and F1 progeny of survivors were 21.5 g ha-1 and 27.5 g ha-1, respectively. The recalcitrant parent populations were three- to five-fold more tolerant to mesotrione than the known susceptible population, as were the F1 progeny. Nomenclature: glyphosate; mesotrione; Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.; corn, Zea mays L.; cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.; soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.</description><subject>Agricultural production</subject><subject>Amaranth</subject><subject>Amaranthus palmeri</subject><subject>Cereal crops</subject><subject>Corn</subject><subject>Cotton</subject><subject>Crop fields</subject><subject>Crops</subject><subject>differential tolerance</subject><subject>Evolution</subject><subject>Glyphosate</subject><subject>Glyphosate resistance</subject><subject>Grain</subject><subject>Herbicides</subject><subject>Offspring</subject><subject>Population</subject><subject>Populations</subject><subject>Progeny</subject><subject>recalcitrant populations</subject><subject>resistance evolution</subject><subject>Seedlings</subject><subject>Seeds</subject><subject>Sorghum</subject><subject>Soybeans</subject><subject>tolerant population</subject><subject>Weeds</subject><issn>0890-037X</issn><issn>1550-2740</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMFLwzAUxoMoOKcnz0LAi0M6X5I2aY9j6hQmiih4C2mbsM6uqUmG7L-3terR03vw_fje-z6ETglMCRBx9anDlAJJpyzeQyOSJBBREcM-GkGaQQRMvB2iI-_XAIRTCiNUXFfGaKebUKkaP2vf2sZrbA2euXfVeOXxk6o32uHZRjnVhBW--N22HrffWjXBweJFvWtX1qugsWpK_KC9Da6yjT5GB0bVXp_8zDF6vb15md9Fy8fF_Xy2jHJGRIhSWqQmZkwkXPBM5CDSNDFgElYIDpqIXBNKgBud00yXjJdQxnGZQ0yJoEawMToffFtnP7baB7m2W9d0JyUljCSQERp31OVAFc5677SRrau6RDtJQPYtyq5F2bcoWU-fDfTaB-v-UMr7Jynv9Mmg55Xtov7r9QU-hHvb</recordid><startdate>20181001</startdate><enddate>20181001</enddate><creator>Singh, Shilpa</creator><creator>Roma-Burgos, Nilda</creator><creator>Singh, Vijay</creator><creator>Alcober, Ed Allan L</creator><creator>Salas-Perez, Reiofeli</creator><creator>Shivrain, Vinod</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>Weed Science Society of America</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20181001</creationdate><title>Differential Response of Arkansas Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) to Glyphosate and Mesotrione</title><author>Singh, Shilpa ; Roma-Burgos, Nilda ; Singh, Vijay ; Alcober, Ed Allan L ; Salas-Perez, Reiofeli ; Shivrain, Vinod</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b317t-82c8f4337567697b07885f0f53c760e17be12106feb29ed36d0d44db042172f73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Agricultural production</topic><topic>Amaranth</topic><topic>Amaranthus palmeri</topic><topic>Cereal crops</topic><topic>Corn</topic><topic>Cotton</topic><topic>Crop fields</topic><topic>Crops</topic><topic>differential tolerance</topic><topic>Evolution</topic><topic>Glyphosate</topic><topic>Glyphosate resistance</topic><topic>Grain</topic><topic>Herbicides</topic><topic>Offspring</topic><topic>Population</topic><topic>Populations</topic><topic>Progeny</topic><topic>recalcitrant populations</topic><topic>resistance evolution</topic><topic>Seedlings</topic><topic>Seeds</topic><topic>Sorghum</topic><topic>Soybeans</topic><topic>tolerant population</topic><topic>Weeds</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Singh, Shilpa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roma-Burgos, Nilda</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Vijay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Alcober, Ed Allan L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salas-Perez, Reiofeli</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shivrain, Vinod</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Research Library</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Weed technology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Singh, Shilpa</au><au>Roma-Burgos, Nilda</au><au>Singh, Vijay</au><au>Alcober, Ed Allan L</au><au>Salas-Perez, Reiofeli</au><au>Shivrain, Vinod</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Differential Response of Arkansas Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) to Glyphosate and Mesotrione</atitle><jtitle>Weed technology</jtitle><stitle>Weed Technol</stitle><date>2018-10-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>579</spage><epage>585</epage><pages>579-585</pages><issn>0890-037X</issn><eissn>1550-2740</eissn><abstract>We conducted a greenhouse study to evaluate the differential response of Palmer amaranth to glyphosate and mesotrione and to quantify the level of tolerance to mesotrione in recalcitrant (difficult-to-control) accessions and their offspring. Seeds were collected from 174 crop fields (corn, cotton, and soybean) across Arkansas between 2008 and 2016. Palmer amaranth seedlings (7 to 10cm tall) were treated with glyphosate at 840 g ae ha-1 or mesotrione at 105 g ha-1. Overall, 47% of the accessions (172) were resistant to glyphosate with 68% survivors. Almost 35% of accessions were highly resistant, with 90% survivors. The majority of survivors from glyphosate application incurred between 31% and 60% injury. Mesotrione killed 66% of the accessions (174); the remaining accessions had survivors with injury ranging from 61% to 90%. Accessions with the least response to mesotrione were selected to determine tolerance level. Dose–response assays were conducted with four recalcitrant populations and their F1 progeny. The average effective doses (ED50) for the parent accessions and F1 progeny of survivors were 21.5 g ha-1 and 27.5 g ha-1, respectively. The recalcitrant parent populations were three- to five-fold more tolerant to mesotrione than the known susceptible population, as were the F1 progeny. Nomenclature: glyphosate; mesotrione; Palmer amaranth, Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.; corn, Zea mays L.; cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.; soybean, Glycine max (L.) Merr.</abstract><cop>New York, USA</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/wet.2018.34</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0890-037X |
ispartof | Weed technology, 2018-10, Vol.32 (5), p.579-585 |
issn | 0890-037X 1550-2740 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2131509124 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; Cambridge Journals - Connect here FIRST to enable access |
subjects | Agricultural production Amaranth Amaranthus palmeri Cereal crops Corn Cotton Crop fields Crops differential tolerance Evolution Glyphosate Glyphosate resistance Grain Herbicides Offspring Population Populations Progeny recalcitrant populations resistance evolution Seedlings Seeds Sorghum Soybeans tolerant population Weeds |
title | Differential Response of Arkansas Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) to Glyphosate and Mesotrione |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T07%3A59%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Differential%20Response%20of%20Arkansas%20Palmer%20Amaranth%20(Amaranthus%20palmeri)%20to%20Glyphosate%20and%20Mesotrione&rft.jtitle=Weed%20technology&rft.au=Singh,%20Shilpa&rft.date=2018-10-01&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=579&rft.epage=585&rft.pages=579-585&rft.issn=0890-037X&rft.eissn=1550-2740&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/wet.2018.34&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E26567626%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2131509124&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26567626&rfr_iscdi=true |