Herbicide resistance: Development of wheat production systems and current status of resistant weeds in wheat cropping systems

Journal Pre-proof Herbicide resistance: Development of wheat production systems and current status of resistant weeds in wheat cropping systems

Sridevi Nakka, Mohammad

Mithila

Jugulam,

Dallas

Peterson,

Asif

PII:

S2214-5141(19)30125-4

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cj.2019.09.004

Reference:

CJ 411

To appear in:

The Crop Journal

Received date:

27 May 2019

Revised date:

23 August 2019

Accepted date:

23 September 2019

Please cite this article as: S. Nakka, M. Jugulam, D. Peterson, et al., Herbicide resistance: Development of wheat production systems and current status of resistant weeds in wheat cropping systems, The Crop Journal(2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cj.2019.09.004

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2019 Published by Elsevier.

Journal Pre-proof

Review Herbicide resistance: Development of wheat production systems and current status of resistant weeds in wheat cropping systems Sridevi Nakkaa*, Mithila Jugulamb, Dallas Petersonb, Asif Mohammada a

Heartland Plant Innovations, Manhattan, Kansas 66506, USA

b

Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, 2004 Throckmorton Plant Sciences Center, Manhattan, Kansas 66506, USA

Abstract: Herbicide resistance in crops has extended the scope of herbicide applications to control weeds. The introduction of herbicide resistant crops resulted in a major shift in the way that herbicides are used in many crops, but not necessarily increased the prevalence of herbicide use, especially in wheat. Wheat is one of the most

of

widely grown crops in the world and currently only two major herbicide-resistant wheat groups have been commercialized to manage weeds in a cost-effective manner. However, sustainable wheat production is threatened

ro

by the expanding occurrence of herbicide-resistant weed populations with limited efforts to discover new herbicide molecules. Selective control of certain problematic weeds in wheat was impossible until development

-p

and introduction of the technologies, Clearfield and CoAXium Production Systems. However, the current limitations of reliance on specific herbicides and evolution of resistant weeds mandate precautions and

re

considerations when using these systems to prevent the loss of existing herbicide resources and continue sustainable wheat production. The focus of this review is to provide an overview of natural pre-existing herbicide

lP

resistance and development of herbicide-resistant technologies in wheat. The mechanisms of resistance to herbicides in wheat as well as the weed populations in wheat cropping systems, and implications for weed

na

management are discussed.

Keywords: Clearfield; Coaxium; Cytochrome P450s; GSTs; Herbicide management; Herbicide resistance;

Jo

1. Introduction

ur

Herbicide tolerance; Stewardship; Wheat production systems

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) contributes significantly to the world’s agricultural economy by occupying about 218.5 Mha of arable land, more than any other cultivated food crop, with grain production of 771.7 Mt in 2017 [1]. Sustainable wheat production is critical to meet global food security as the arable land area for cropping is decreasing. Weed infestation and interference during various stages of wheat development is a major impediment and threat to wheat production across the globe. Use of herbicides for weed management in both no-till and noncropland areas has been highly effective in developed countries [2, 3]. A consequence of extensive and intensive use of herbicides has been the evolution and/or spread of herbicide-resistant weeds in many crop production systems, including wheat. According to The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds, wheat ranks first in reported number of herbicide resistant weed species, a total of 77 species with 140 unique herbicide resistance cases globally [4].

*

Corresponding author: Sridevi Nakka, E-mail address: [email protected]. Received: 2019-05-27; Revised: 2019-08-23; Accepted: 2019-09-23. 1

Journal Pre-proof The most common and economically troublesome monocot and dicot weeds in wheat cropping systems include Lolium spp. (annual ryegrass), Alopecurus spp. (black-grass), Phalaris spp. (canary grass), Avena spp. (wild oats), Bromus spp. (brome grass), Raphanus raphanistrum L. (wild radish), Chenopodium album L. (lambsquarters), and Kochia scoparia L. (kochia) [5–10]. When weeds are left uncontrolled yield losses in wheat range from 10% to 50% depending on the weed density and duration of interference [11–13]. Application of herbicides to control weeds has been very effective and efficient in terms of production costs and benefits. However, the adoption of no-till agricultural production [14] and repeated dependence on herbicides for weed management led to selection pressure and thus, the evolution of herbicide-resistant weeds. Herbicides have physical and chemical properties that allow them to be absorbed after initial contact with plant tissues; they are then translocated to target-sites, followed by injury and death in the case of a susceptible weed or crop plant species. Control of a weed species depends on the mode of action of the herbicide. The mode of action

of

is defined as the sequence of biochemical and physiological events occurring in the plant from the time the plant comes in contact with the herbicide until its complete death. However, when a plant is resistant to a herbicide, the

ro

herbicide is ineffective primarily due to two mechanisms: a) alterations in the herbicide target-site; or b) detoxification (metabolism) or sequestration of herbicide during absorption and translocation before reaching the

-p

target site [15–18]. Thus, herbicide resistance mechanisms are broadly classified into two types: target-site

re

resistance and non-target-site resistance.

2. Herbicide resistance in wheat

lP

Resistance to herbicides in crop plants, including wheat, is primarily achieved via non-target-site mechanisms through detoxification of the herbicides via activity of enzymes such as cytochrome P450 monoxygenases

na

(CYP450s) and glutathione S-transferases (GSTs) [19–24]. Examples of herbicides metabolized by these enzymes are listed in Table 1 and include: chlorotoluron in wheat, corn and cotton [25], fenoxaprop-p-ethyl in wheat and

ur

barley [26], bentazoan in soybean [27], atrazine in corn and sorghum [28], clomazone in cotton [29], pyrazosulfuron ethyl in rice [30], and clodinafop in wheat, barley, and corn [22]. However, wheat is more

Jo

sensitive to many herbicides than other crops such as corn, sorghum, rice and soybean. Only a few herbicides can be used for pre-plant, and pre- or post-emergence control of weeds in wheat. Also, the herbicides that are registered have different specific guidelines for use on winter wheat or spring wheat. Synthetic auxins, acetyl CoA carboxylase (ACCase)-, acetolactate synthase (ALS)- microtubule-, photosystem II (PS-II), and long-chain fatty acid synthesis-inhibitors (Table 1) play a critical role in weed management in wheat. Table 1 – Herbicides metabolized by cytochrome P450 monooxygenases and glutathione-S-transferases. Herbicide Mode of action (Group) Crop Enzyme Reference Chlorotoluron Acetolactate synthase (B/2) wheat, corn, cotton CytoP450s Mougin et al. [25] Fenoxaprop-ethyl Acetyl CoA Carboxylase (A/1) wheat, barley GSTs Romano et al. [26] Bentazoan Photosystem II (C3/6) soybean CytoP450s Sterling and Balke [27] Atrazine Photosystem II (C1/5) corn, sorghum GSTs Shimabukuro [28] Clomazone Microtubule (K1/3) cotton CytoP450s Ferhatoglu et al. [29] Pyrazosulfuron-ethyl Acetolactate Synthase (B/2) rice CytoP450s Yun et al. [30] Clodinafop Acetyl CoA Carboxylase (A/1) wheat, barley, corn GSTs Kreuz et al. [22]

Natural resistance in wheat to different herbicides varies depending on cultivar, time of application (preplanting, pre- or post-emergence), soil and environmental conditions, and use of protective compounds known as 2

Journal Pre-proof safeners. Therefore, wheat growers should closely follow labeling recommendations to avoid crop injury. Typical herbicide injury symptoms in wheat vary from yellowing of leaf tips to reduction in tiller numbers and more severe symptoms depending on the herbicide mode of action. Herbicide safeners are agrochemicals that enhance herbicide resistance in grass crops and protect them from injury caused by some herbicides [31–34]. Additions of safeners, such as mefenpyr diethyl and fenchlorazole ethyl to herbicides, enhance the expression of GSTs [34–36] and cytochrome P450s [37] and play an important role in the detoxification process in crops including wheat. 2.1. Herbicide detoxification via GST activity GSTs are multifunctional enzymes involved in plant growth and development, cellular metabolism and detoxification of xenobiotic compounds such as pesticides [38]. GSTs catalyze the transfer of a tripeptide, γglutamyl-cysteinyl-glycine known as glutathione (GSH) to an electrophilic reaction center of many substrates of endogenous and exogenous origin [39]. In plants, GSTs are encoded by a large diverse gene family classified into

of

three types (I, II, and III) based on the amino acid sequence and intron:exon distribution [40]. The significance of GSTs in herbicide detoxification was documented in 1970 when atrazine was conjugated with GSH by a maize

ro

GST activity, protecting the crop from herbicide injury [24]. Since then, many GSTs induced by herbicides were isolated and characterized for their role in herbicide tolerance, selectivity, and resistance in many crops and weed

-p

species [38, 41]. GSTs are known to metabolize and detoxify atrazine, alachlor, metolachlor, fluorodifen,

re

chloroacetanilide, and thiocarbamates. Corn contains high levels of GSTs that provide natural tolerance to triazines, alachlor, metolachlor, and s-ethyl dipropyl thiocarbamate (EPTC) [23, 24, 42, 43]. However, seed

lP

treatment with safener is required in sorghum if alachlor and metolachlor herbicides are used for pre-emergence weed control. Many susceptible crops like wheat, barley, peas, and several broadleaf weeds do not have increased GST activity [44]. Nevertheless, these crops can tolerate the herbicides when used with safeners. In wheat,

na

quinolinoxycarboxylic cloquintocet mexyl, mefenpyr diethyl and fenchlorazole ethyl are widely used as postemergence safeners. These compounds can help reduce injury in wheat from aryloxyphenoxypropionate

ur

(AOPP/FOP) herbicides that inhibit the essential enzyme acetyl CoA carboxylase (ACCase). This is because the tau class of GSTs (GSTU) are induced in wheat when fenchlorazole-ethyl is used with dimethenamid and

Jo

fenoxaprop, thereby increasing the cleavage of the herbicides by glutathionylation to confer resistance [36]. Cloquintocet mexyl is known to increase the hydroxylation rate, cleavage of ether, and glucosylation of the herbicide clodinafop propargyl, another ACCase-inhibitor [22]. In addition to safening fenoxaprop-ethyl herbicide in wheat, mefenpyr diethyl enhances the detoxification and selectivity of the unrelated sulfonylurea herbicides such as mesosulfuron-methyl and iodosulfuron methyl-sodium [45]. Various chemical classes of safeners have been developed for each major cereal to protect it from herbicide injury by means of increased GST activity. 2.2. Herbicide detoxification via cytochrome P450 monooxygenases Cytochrome P450s are heme-containing monooxygenases involved in both biosynthetic and detoxification pathways in many organisms including plants [46, 47]. Cytochrome P450s are mixed or multi-functional oxidoreductases that use NADPH and/or NADH to cleave oxygen molecules to form an organic substrate with a functional group and water. Some cytochrome P450s are tissue- or substrate-specific and regulated by specific genes. However, many different cytochrome P450s can act on a single substrate, and a single cytochrome P450 can have several substrates [48–51]. Chlorotoluron is metabolized by cytochrome P450s through oxidative Ndemethylation and hydroxylation of the ring-methyl group in wheat and barley [52]. Similar to their role in 3

Journal Pre-proof increasing GST activity, safeners also increase cytochrome P450 activity. Wheat seedlings treated with safeners naphthalic anhydride and phenobarbital increase the activity of several cytochrome P450s that catalyze hydroxylation of diclofop herbicides and lauric acid [53, 54]. To assess whether one or more cytochrome P450s are involved, irreversible inhibitors of lauric acid hydroxylase such as acetylenic compounds (10- and 11dodecynoic acids) showed that a single cytochrome P450 in wheat was responsible for catalyzing both diclofop and laurate hydroxylation [54]. However, herbicides such as bentazon and chlorotoluron are not affected by these inhibitors.

3. Wheat production systems In addition to non-target-site herbicide detoxification, target-site resistance in crops can be obtained by altering, amplifying or over expressing the target gene. However, only alteration of the target gene has been successfully

of

employed in the development and commercialization of herbicide resistant crops [55–57]. Herbicides that inhibit

ro

amino acid biosynthesis are ideal for developing target-site herbicide resistant crops [58]. The 3 major amino acid biosynthesis inhibitors include, ALS, 5-enol pyruvylshikimate 3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS) and glutamine

-p

synthetase (GS). Generally, herbicide resistant crops are commercialized under the trade names Clearfield, Roundup Ready, and LibertyLink, respectively [57]. These were developed by selection, mutagenesis or genetic

re

engineering and transformation [59]. In wheat, target-site resistance, particularly, ALS- and ACCase-inhibitor resistant cultivars, has been developed through mutagenesis and commercialized as Clearfieled and Coaxium

lP

wheat productions systems, respectively. 3.1. Clearfield production system

na

Herbicide resistant wheat cultivars were developed to meet farmer demand to control weeds in wheat without crop injury or loss of grain yield. BASF first developed the Clearfield technology in corn hybrids in the early 1990s. The technology was subsequently applied in canola, rice, sunflower, and finally in wheat in the late 1990s and

ur

early 2000s. Clearfield wheat cultivars resistant to imidazolinone (ALS-inhibitor) herbicides were commercially released for cultivation in the Great Plains and Pacific Northwest wheat growing regions of the USA in 2002 and

Jo

2003. ALS-inhibitors are herbicides that inhibit the enzyme acetolactate synthase and control grass and broadleaf weeds in many cropping systems. The ALS enzyme catalyzes the indispensable first step in biosynthesis of branched-chain amino acids leucine, isoleucine, and valine [60, 61]. Clearfield wheat genotypes were developed by ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) mutagenesis. The mutation occurred in the ALS gene on the long arm of chromosome 6D [62–64]. Mutants with single nucleotide polymorphisms in homologous ALS genes in the A and B genomes were also obtained by mutagenesis. Single gene or two-gene imidazolinone-resistant wheat cultivars were developed and released for commercial cultivation following backcrossing and advanced plant breeding procedures [65, 66]. Each imidazolinone-resistant wheat line carries a mutation that produces a serine to asparagine substitution at amino acid position 653 in the ALS protein relative to the Arabidopsis thaliana consensus sequence. The Clearfield wheat production system allows the use of imazamox herbicide (Beyond, BASF, EPA Reg. No. 241–244) to control many weeds including downy brome (Bromus tectorum L.), feral rye (cereal rye), jointed goatgrass, wild oat, mustards, and volunteer wheat and barley. “Clearfield Plus” wheat is similar to Clearfield wheat, but has two mutant genes conferring resistance to imidazolinone herbicides in wheat varieties. Two-gene cultivars have “Plus” or “+” in the name indicating ALS 4

Journal Pre-proof mutations on both the A and D, or B and D, genomes. More than 20 Clearfield winter and spring wheat cultivars have been developed by BASF in collaboration with private and public breeding programs. 3.2. CoAXium production system The Colorado Wheat Research Foundation and Colorado State University initiated and developed the CoAXium Wheat Production System in collaboration with Albaugh LLC and Limagrain Cereal Seeds. AXige is the patented trait that confers the herbicide tolerance and CoAXium is the system. CoAXium/AXigen wheat cultivars are resistant to the ACCase-inhibitor herbicide quizalofop-p-ethyl (Aggressor, Albaugh LLC, EPA Reg. No. 42750313). CoAXium wheat production system allows the use of quizalofop-p-ethyl (Aggressor) to control many grassy weeds such as feral rye, downy brome, jointed goatgrass, and ALS-resistant grasses. However, other herbicides should be used to control broad leaf weeds. ACCase-inhibitors interfere with lipid biosynthesis by inhibiting the ACCase enzyme that catalyzes the primary reaction of converting acetyl co-enzyme A to malonyl co-enzyme A,

of

in de novo synthesis of fatty acids [67, 68]. The AXigen trait in wheat was also developed by EMS mutagenesis, specifically by treating winter wheat (cv. Hatcher) with 60 mmol L−1 EMS and screening the M2 and M2:3

ro

populations with quizalofop to identify herbicide-tolerant plants [69]. Twenty mutants tolerant to quizalofop were identified, all with the amino acid substitution alanine to valine at position 2004 (A2004V) in the ACCase protein,

-p

where the position corresponds to the Alopecurus myosuroides reference sequence. The substitution was found in

re

each of the A, B, and D genomes and each one confers resistance to ACCase herbicides [69]. However, A2004V mutation in B genome confers lower level of resistance to quizalofop compared to the mutation in the A or D

lP

genomes and specifically, the A2004V change does not confer resistance to the cyclohexanedione class of ACCase-inhibitor herbicides. CoAXium is commercialized as a two-gene (A and D genome) trait obtained by crossing the individual mutant lines. Such lines confer high levels of resistance to quizalofop relative to single-

na

gene AXigen genotypes. ‘Incline AX’ and ‘LCS Fusion AX’ released in 2018 were the first hard red winter wheat (HRWW) with CoAXium technology. Future CoAXium varieties are being developed by both public and private

3.3. Roundup Ready wheat

ur

breeding programs to provide diverse germplasm options for growers.

Jo

Glyphosate resistant wheat was developed by Monsanto by insertion of a cassette containing the coding sequence of CP4 EPSPS from Agrobacterium strain CP4 into Bobwhite background. The Roundup Ready wheat lines MON 71800 was developed with the idea to benefit farmers and improve weed control in wheat and rotation cropping systems. The benefits include reductions in herbicide injury to wheat, simplified control of herbicide-resistant weed biotypes, elimination of other cereals and off-type wheat within a crop, and increased control or suppression of perennial weeds [70, 71]. However, the risks outweigh the advantages of roundup ready wheat and include difficulty and increased cost to control volunteer wheat, development of glyphosate resistant weeds in roundup ready dependent cropping systems, gene flow and out crossing into non-GMO wheat, increased seed costs, and loss of farmer saved seed options for wheat. In addition, there is risk of contamination of wheat segregated for sale as non-GMO and increased costs in the market system [70, 71]. Although farmers were ready to embrace the technology consumer rejection of the end product and fear of loss of potential markets around the world has led to the withdrawal of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) application by Monsanto and it should be noted that roundup ready wheat is not currently grown.

5

Journal Pre-proof 3.4. Stewardship of herbicide-tolerant wheat production systems The CoAXium wheat production system provides winter wheat farmers with an option to use a new herbicide mode of action in addition to BASF’s Clearfield cultivars, which have been in the market for nearly 20 years. Both technologies were generated by mutagenesis and are thus marketed as non-GMO wheat with wider global acceptance. However, to use these technologies more effectively and to reduce the risk of developing herbicide resistant weed populations, certain guidelines should be followed when producing CoAXium and/or Clearfield cultivars. The herbicide Aggressor controls only grassy weeds, and to control broadleaf weeds in CoAXium/AXigen cultivars, a broadleaf herbicide must also be used. Adjuvants recommended when spraying Aggressor include methylated seed oil (MSO), crop oil concentrate (COC) and non-ionic surfactants (NIS). The herbicide can be applied with nitrogen-based foliar fertilizers and also tank-mixed with a wide array of broadleaf herbicides for broadleaf weed control. However, it is critical not to tank-mix Aggressor with MCPA or 2,4-D

of

amine formulations due to antagonistic interactions (http://www.coaxiumwps.com/stewardship/). The herbicide Beyond controls both grass and broadleaf weeds in the Clearfield system. Application times of

ro

the herbicide and adjuvants used differ between one-gene and two-gene Clearfield cultivars. Beyond with MSO can be applied post-tiller initiation until the jointing stages of wheat in 2-gene Clearfield cultivars, but MSO

-p

cannot be used on 1-gene cultivars at any time due to crop injury. NIS can be applied to 2-gene cultivars from the 2-leaf to second-joint stages, but only after tiller initiation until jointing on 1-gene cultivars. In addition, a

re

nitrogen-based fertilizer such as ammonium sulphate (AMS) or 28 percent urea ammonium nitrate (UAN) should be added to the spray solution for both Clearfield cultivars.

lP

It is important to be aware that the AXigen trait is not compatible with the Clearfield system, i.e., Aggressor will kill Clearfield wheat and Beyond will kill CoAXium wheat. Both herbicides will kill wheat without the

na

herbicide-resistant traits. Farmers must sign a stewardship agreement in order to purchase and plant seed of either technology, indicating that they will only plant certified seed and cannot save the harvested seed for future planting. It is recommended that growers should rotate crops, herbicide modes of action, not use these production

ur

systems more than two years in a row, use a fallow period, and use glyphosate in fallows to limit weed seed production. The stewardship guidelines and recommendations are intended to help, preserve and maximize the

Jo

efficacy of the technologies and to prevent the selection and spread of herbicide-resistant weeds as a result of repeated use of specific herbicides.

Table 2 – Summary of wheat production systems in use. Item Clearfield Production System Developed by BASF Developed in 2001 Mutagenesis Ethyl methanesulfonate Target gene ALS Amino acid/substitution Serine653Asparagine Single gene On A or B genome Two genes On A and D or B and D genomes Herbicide Imazamox (Beyond) Chemical class Imidazolinone Adjuvants MSO, AMS, UAN Weeds controlled Grass and broadleaf Wheat varieties Clearfield, Clearfield Plus

CoAXium Production system CSU, Albaugh LLC, Limagrain Cereal Seeds 2015 Ethyl methanesulfonate ACCase Alanine2004Valine On A or B or D genome On A and D genomes Quizalofop-ethyl (Aggressor) Aryloxyphenoxypropionate MSO, COC, NIS Grass Incline AX’ and ‘LCS Fusion AX

6

Journal Pre-proof 4. Herbicide selection and evolution of resistance in weed species Widespread and recurrent application of herbicides to control weeds exerts a strong selection pressure and ultimately results in the evolution and spread of herbicide-resistant weeds. Weed populations naturally contain individual plants that are resistant to herbicides, regardless of the actual herbicide [72, 73], but the frequencies are likely to be extremely low and it is usually impossible to distinguish susceptible individuals in the population. Repeated applications of herbicides with the same mode of action select the herbicide-resistant individuals that survive and reproduce. Continued use of herbicides with the same mode of action results in rapid spread of resistant individuals that eventually become the dominant component of the population. Besides the selection pressure from herbicide use other factors such as the biological characteristics of individual weed species, genetic factors, characteristics of herbicides, and agronomic practices also play important roles in the evolution and spread of herbicide resistance in weed species [74]. Characteristics that facilitate rate of

of

increase in herbicide resistant populations include plant fecundity, germination rates, extended germination periods, seed dispersal mechanisms, seed dormancy, and initial frequency of resistant individuals. The genetic

ro

factors influencing rates of herbicide resistance include mutation frequency, and fitness costs of resistance genes in the presence and absence of herbicide use [72, 75]. When the initial frequency of resistant plants is high, there

-p

will be a rapid development of resistance. On the other hand, if resistance genes are rare in the weed population, the increase in frequency of resistant plants could take many years or not develop at all. Herbicide characteristics

re

such as structural properties, site/mode of action, residual activity, and agronomic practices such as applying lower than recommended rates can influence development of herbicide resistance. Time of application or weed

lP

size, climatic conditions, and crop rotation practices are important factors. Recent advances in agronomic practices involving no-till and reduced-till are dependent on herbicides, and hence increase the selection pressure

na

imposed upon weed populations.

5. Herbicide resistant weeds in wheat cropping systems

ur

Many weed species in wheat cropping systems have become resistant due to increased reliance on herbicide use and the selection pressure that is imposed. To date, about 330 individual reports of resistance have occurred across

Jo

wheat growing areas of the world [4]. Many weeds have evolved resistance to different chemical classes and mode-of-action herbicides. In addition, there are reports of cross resistance and multiple resistance to herbicides due to either target-site alterations or non-target-site-based mechanisms in several agronomically problematic weed species [4]. Target-site herbicide resistance in weeds can be conferred by point mutations resulting in amino acid substitutions, over expression, and/or amplification of target genes or through gene regulatory changes (in gene promoters) in target-sites. Alterations caused by point mutations in the target-site prevent or reduce the binding of herbicide to the target. Amplification or increased expression of the herbicide target gene can produce more target protein without affecting the normal functioning of the plant [76, 77]. Target-site based herbicide resistance mechanisms are more common to some mode-of-action herbicides than others, such as ACCase- [78], ALS- [79, 80] and PS II-inhibitors [81] due to the flexibility of the protein structures to function normally along with inhibition of herbicide binding. Non-target-site herbicide resistance involves one or a combination of several mechanisms that limit the quantity of herbicide reaching the target-site. These mechanisms include reduced absorption, decreased translocation, and 7

Journal Pre-proof enhanced metabolism of the herbicides. The cytochrome P450 and GST families that are involved in rapid detoxification of herbicides in crop plants such as wheat can also provide resistance to herbicides in weed species. The most commonly reported mechanism of resistance to ACCase- and ALS-inhibitors in weed species involves alteration (point mutation) leading to a single amino acid substitution in the target protein. In plants there are two isoforms of the ACCase gene, plastidic ACCase and cytosolic ACCase essential for biosynthesis of primary and long-chain fatty acids, respectively [82]. Cytosolic ACCase in all plant species is homomeric and function similarly but structural differences in plastidic ACCase make plants sensitive to ACCase-inhibitors. In dicots, ACCase in chloroplast is heteromeric and insentive to herbicides, whereas it is homomeric in all grass species and sensitive to ACCase herbicides [83]. Thus, ACCase inhibiting herbicides are popularly known as graminicides due to their selective control of grass weeds in many cropping systems. Many grass weeds are resistant to ACCase-inhibitors in different cropping systems. So far, 11 mutations affecting seven amino acid

of

residues in the ACCase gene and herbicide sensitivity have been identified [4, 74, 78, 84]. Similarly, ALS mutations involve 26 different substitutions at eight amino acid positions [83] with changes at

ro

the proline197 amino acid position being the most common, with eleven substitutions conferring resistance to the sulfonylurea class of herbicides [85]. Aspartate376glutamate and trptophan574leucine substitutions confer high-

-p

level, broad spectrum resistance to five chemical classes of ALS-inhibitors [86–88]. However, the examples of herbicide resistance and their mechanisms discussed here are weeds and herbicides widely used in wheat cropping

re

systems.

lP

5.1. Herbicide resistance in grass weeds in wheat

Downy brome, commonly called cheat-grass, is a winter annual grass weed with wide adaptability to different soil and climate conditions. It is a troublesome weed of winter wheat and infestation can cause wheat yield losses up

na

to 92% [89, 90]. The ALS-inhibitors, e.g., sulfosulfuron, propoxy-carbazone, and pyroxsulam, are commonly used to selectively control downy brome in winter wheat. Imazamox can also provide control of downy brome in

ur

Clearfield wheat. However, ALS-resistant downy brome identified in Clearfield wheat in Montana had crossresistance to other chemical classes of ALS-inhibitors. The ALS resistant downy brome had mutations in the

Jo

target-site, leading to Ser653Asn substitution [91]. Feral rye, also a damaging winter annual grass weed in wheat, reduces grain quality and yield by approximately 69% at 50–200 rye plants per square meter [92, 93]. Imazamox provides inconsistent control of feral rye but improved control can be achieved when it is tank-mixed with MCPA-ester to increase uptake of the herbicide [94]. Jointed goatgrass is an invasive grass species introduced from Europe and is highly problematic in western United States. Non-selective herbicides such as glyphosate, paraquat or glufosinate can be applied during fallow or prior to planting to control jointed goatgrass. Selective herbicides can also be used depending on the production system. Imazamox provides selective control of feral rye, downy brome, jointed goatgrass and other grass weeds in Clearfield wheat systems. However, there is differential response to imazamox between the three species due to differences in absorption, translocation and metabolism of the herbicide. Absorption of 14C imazamox in feral rye, downy brome and jointed goatgrass varies depending on the adjuvant used. Translocation and metabolism of the herbicide was higher in feral rye than in jointed goatgrass [95], which also has potential to become resistant to imazamox through gene flow between wheat and jointed goatgrass due to cross compatibility, and genetic similarities and similar growth habits [96]. Wheat (genomes AABBDD) and jointed goatgrass (CCDD) have the D genome in common, and hybridization and natural 8

Journal Pre-proof backcrossing in the field could lead to transfer of herbicide resistance genes from wheat to jointed goatgrass through normal chromosome recombination [97]. Rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum Gaudin), a native to Mediterranean countries, the Arabian Gulf and Indian subcontinent, is an invasive grass species introduced to North and South America, South Africa and Australia [98]. It was introduced to Australia during the 19th century as a forage grass, but subsequently became a major weed in wheat crops in Southern and Western Australia. ALS- and ACCase-inhibiting herbicides were commonly used for control [99], but many populations have developed high levels of resistance to chlorsulfuron, sulfometuron, diclofop-methyl, and clethodim [100, 101]. It has developed cross resistance and multiple resistance to other mode-of-action herbicides, including microtubule- and PS II-inhibitors, as well as ALS and ACCase-inhibitors [102–104]. Rigid ryegrass has evolved resistance to seven mode-of-action herbicides in Australian wheat cropping systems [4, 105]. Rigid ryegrass populations in Western Australia are resistant to ALS herbicides due to target-site

of

or non-target-site resistance mechanisms. Resistance to sulfometuron-methyl was associated with alterations at the proline197 position in the ALS protein. Four amino acid substitutions (P197S, P197T, P197Q, and P197R) were

ro

detected in one population, whereas another population had P197S and W574L mutations that conferred resistance to both imazapyr and sulfometuron-methyl [106]. Non-target site resistance to chlorsulfuron due to

-p

metabolism of the herbicide was found in the same study.

Low and sub-optimal doses of herbicides have been shown to trigger polygenic metabolic resistance in many

re

weeds, including rigid ryegrass [107, 108]. In a study to assess the potential for evolution of herbicide resistance and phenotypic variation in the level of resistance to suboptimal rates of diclofop-methlyl, a susceptible rigid

lP

ryegrass biotype (VLR1) was selectively sprayed with various lower than recommended rates (37.5 g ha1). The low rates of diclofop-methyl selected genetic variants and produced resistant phenotypes through genetic

na

recombination and selection over three generations [109]. The genes involved in metabolic herbicide resistance in rigid ryegrass were investigated by transcriptomic RNA-Seq analysis. Two cytochrome P450s (CytP450), glucosyltransferase (GT), and nitronate monooxygenase (NMO) showed constitutively increased expression in

ur

resistance compared to susceptible individuals in a segregating F2 population, along with expression differences in

Jo

metabolism and signal transduction-related genes [110]. Species closely related to rigid ryegrass, such as perennial ryegrass (L. perenne L.) and Italian ryegrass (L. multiflorum Lam.) have evolved resistance to glyphosate which is applied during fallow periods in wheat rotations in Australia and other countries. Wild oat (Avena fatua) is another economically troublesome weed in wheat production systems across the world. Wild oat resistant to ACCase-inhibitors has been reported in 17 countries, with most populations having multiple resistance [4]. In Western Australia, individuals from four wild oat populations resistant to ACCaseinhibitors were sequenced and identified with mutations in the ACCase gene causing one, two or three amino acid substitutions [111]. In some resistant individuals target-site mutations were not found; these plants had non-targetsite resistance mediated by enhanced metabolism of diclofop-methyl [112], thus showing that an individual plant can have two independent resistance mechanisms for the same herbicide. 5.2. Herbicide resistance in broadleaf weeds in wheat Many broadleaf weeds economically impact wheat production. Some of the most common summer weeds are field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis L.), wild buckwheat (Polygonum convolvulus L.), and kochia (Basia scoparia (L.) Scott) whereas winter broadleaf weeds include wild mustards (Brassica spp.), common chickweed (Stellaria media (L.) Vill), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola L.), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus L.), field 9

Journal Pre-proof pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.), and shepherd’s-purse (Capsella bursa-pastoris (L.) Medik). Along with control of summer annual broadleaf weeds, spring herbicide applications are also effective for winter weed control. However, weather conditions and timing (weed and crop growth stage) are critical to achieve good control. ALS and synthetic auxin herbicides are widely used to control these weeds. Sulfonylurea herbicides, metsulfuron, prosulfuron, and triasulfuron are effective on most winter annual broadleaf weeds but control of mustards is difficult with sulfonyl ureas alone as these plants bolt early. Tank mixing with 2,4-D improves the control of mustards. Dicamba and 2,4-D are often combined and applied to achieve broad-spectrum broadleaf weed control compared to when used alone. However, care should be taken to avoid injury to wheat when applying these herbicides because of a very narrow window of application time during which both herbicides can be safely applied. Kochia (Kochia scoparia L. Schrad) is a summer annual weed in crops including wheat with emergence in

of

early spring extending to late August to early September. The residual activity of ALS-herbicides applied early in spring controls late emerging kochia in wheat but is ineffective on ALS-resistant kochia. Dicamba, is more

ro

effective but must be applied before jointing. ALS-resistant kochia is widespread in the USA and Canada with a few populations also exhibiting cross resistance to PS II-, EPSPS-inhibitors and synthetic auxins [4]. Resistance in

-p

kochia to ALS-inhibitors is conferred by three different target-site mutations (Pro197, Asp376, or Trp574) as well as two-mutation combinations (Pro197 + Trp574 and Asp376 + Trp574) in highly resistant individuals [113]. The

re

mechanism of glyphosate resistance in kochia in wheat fallow fields is increased copy number of the EPSPS gene [114], and the mechanism of resistance to synthetic auxins is unknown.

lP

Russian thistle (Salsola tragus L.) is another weed that poses a severe management problem in summer fallow, spring wheat and other crops, such as pulses, canola and mustard, in the USA [115, 116]. Season-long competition

na

from Russian thistle can reduce wheat yields by as much as 50% [117]. ALS-inhibitor resistant Russian thistle was first reported in wheat fields in Washington and Montana in 1987 and currently more than 75% of the wheat fields are infested [118, 119]. Glyphosate is widely sprayed prior to planting wheat and post-harvest as a

ur

burndown application. Repeated applications led to increased numbers of glyphosate resistant Russian thistle populations and the mechanism of glyphosate resistance is yet to be investigated [120]. Other broadleaf weeds

Jo

have also evolved resistance to commonly used ALS-inhibitors used in wheat cropping systems, and appropriate weed management strategies must be implemented to minimize the spread of resistant weeds.

6. Management of herbicide resistant weeds With increased presence of herbicide-resistant weeds in cropping systems, we must discourage practices that impose high selection pressures and increase gene frequencies and try to prevent the increase and spread of mutant weed biotypes by implementing integrated control measures. Integrated weed management strategies include the use of cultural, mechanical and chemical tools to control weeds and to maximize the longevity of individual herbicides in cropping systems. The most common strategy is to reduce the intensity of selection of resistant individuals by sequential application of different herbicide mixtures or rotation of herbicides with different modes of action over multiple growing seasons. It is very important to follow label recommendations to prevent metabolic resistance due to low rates, which help to reduce the survival and reproduction of resistant individuals [75]. Management strategies that reduce and eliminate the spread of resistance by means of pollen movement, seed production, and propagule dispersal should be implemented. However, without integrated management 10

Journal Pre-proof practices it is not possible to produce weed free crops, and producers should take advantage of cultivars with greater competitiveness [121]. Understanding the physiological, genetic, biochemical, and molecular mechanisms by which weeds evolve herbicide resistance provides an insight on the survival of weeds to herbicide applications. Unraveling the multiple herbicide resistance mechanisms will have significant impact to delay the evolution of resistance and contribute to discovery of alternate new herbicides, wiser use of existing herbicide resources, and more sustainable strategies for weed control.

7. Conclusions Herbicide resistant wheat production systems offer exceptional and viable weed control strategies in wheat cropping systems. Beyond herbicide can be effectively used to control both grass and broadleaf weeds in Clearfield wheat production and Aggressor shows excellent control of grassy weeds in the CoAXium system.

of

Two-gene Clearfield Plus and CoAXium wheat varieties provide robust resistance to respective herbicides and better weed control options compared to their single gene counterparts. Clearfield wheat production systems have

ro

been widely adopted by farmers due to effective management of problematic weeds in wheat over the last 15 years. However, the evolution of resistant weeds has limited the use of Clearfield wheat. The introduction

-p

CoAXium wheat varieties provided farmers an option to control ALS resistant weeds. High yields are produced when Beyond and Aggressor are applied to small and actively growing weeds compared to tall and mature weeds.

re

In addition to these target herbicides, the CoAXium system mandates broadleaf herbicides such as 2,4 D, dicamba, metsufuron, thifensulfuron, and huskie, or in combination, to control many broad leaf weeds. Pre-

lP

emergence herbicides such as trifluralin, pyroxasulfone, and sulfosulfuron, or in combination, with other herbicides depending on the wheat variety grown are applied to control weeds in these wheat production systems.

na

The benefits of these systems can be preserved and protected by following label recommendations, crop rotations, seed rate that is competitive against weeds and integrated weed management strategies. Furthermore, the stewardship guidelines and recommendations are intended to help, preserve and maximize the efficacy of wheat

Acknowledgments

Jo

use of specific herbicides.

ur

production technologies and to prevent the selection and spread of herbicide-resistant weeds as a result of repeated

The research was supported by Heartland Plant Innovations, Inc, Manhattan, Kansas. References [1] FAOSTAT, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. http://faostat.fao.org. [2] L.P. Gianessi, The increasing importance of herbicides in worldwide crop production, Pest Manag. Sci. 69 (2013) 1099–1105. [3] Z.P. Zhang, Development of chemical weed control and integrated weed management in China, Weed Biol. Manag. 3 (2003) 197–203. [4] I. Heap, The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. http://www.weedscience.org (accessed on May 20, 2019). [5] A. Collavo, S. Panozzo, G. Lucchesi, L. Scarabel, M. Sattin, Characterisation and management of Phalaris paradoxa resistant to ACCase-inhibitors, Crop Prot. 30 (2011) 293–299. [6] Y. Menchari, C. Delye, V. le Corre, Genetic variation and population structure in black-grass (Alopecurus myosuroides Huds.), a successful, herbicide-resistant, annual grass weed of winter cereal fields, Mol. Ecol. 16 (2007) 3161–3172. [7] L.W. Mengistu, C.G. Messersmith, Genetic diversity of kochia, Weed Sci. 50 (2002) 498–503. [8] P. Kloot, The genus Lolium in Australia, Aust. J. Bot. 31 (1983) 421–435.

11

Journal Pre-proof [9] S. Kercher, J.K. Conner, Patterns of genetic variability within and among populations of wild radish, Raphanus raphanistrum (Brassicaceae), Am. J. Bot. 83 (1996) 1416–1421 [10] K.F. Kon, W.M. Blacklow, Identification, distribution and population variability of great brome (Bromus diandrus Roth.) and rigid brome (Bromus rigidus Roth.), Aust. J. Agric. Res. 39 (1989) 1039–1050. [11] E.C. Oerke, Crop losses to pests, J. Agric. Sci. 144 (2006) 31–43. [12] Y. Gharde, P.K. Singh, R.P. Dubey, P.K. Gupta, Assessment of yield and economic losses in agriculture due to weeds in India, Crop Prot. 107 (2018) 12–18. [13] F.C. Oad, M.H. Siddiqui, U.A. Buriro, Growth and yield losses in wheat due to different weed densities, Asian J. Plant Sci. 6 (2007) 173–176. [14] J. Kihara, A. Bationo, B. Waswa, J.M. Kimetu, B. Vanlauwe, J. Okeyo, J. Mukalama, C. Martius, Effect of reduced tillage and mineral fertilizer application on maize and soybean productivity, Exp. Agric. 48 (2012) 159–175. [15] S.B. Powles, J.A.M. Holtum, Herbicide Resistance in Plants: Biology and Biochemistry, Lewis Publishing, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1994.

of

[16] H.M. LeBaron, J. Gressel, Herbicide Resistance in Plants, Wiley, New York, USA, 1982. [17] R. DePrado, J. Jorrin, L. Garcia-Torres, Weed and Crop Resistance to Herbicides, Kluwer, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 1997.

ro

[18] J.C. Caseley, G.W. Cussans, R.K. Atkin, Herbicide Resistance in Weeds and Crops, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK, 1991.

-p

[19] D.J. Cole, Detoxification and activation of agrochemicals in plants, Pesticide Sci. 42 (1994) 209–222. [20] R. De Prado, J. Jorrín, L. Garcia-Torres, Weed and Crop Resistance to Herbicides, Springer, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 2012.

weed species, Pesticide Sci. 46 (1996) 267–275.

re

[21] P.J. Hatton, D. Dixon, D.J. Cole, R. Edwards, Glutathione transferase activities and herbicide selectivity in maize and associated

[22] K. Kreuz, J. Gaudin, J. Stingelin, E. Ebert, Metabolism of the aryloxyphenoxypropanoate herbicide, CGA 184927, in wheat,

lP

barley and maize: differential effects of the safener, CGA 185072, Z. Naturforsch. C 46 (1991) 901–905. [23] G.L. Lamoureux, L.E. Stafford, R.H. Shimabukuro, R.G. Zaylskie, Atrazine metabolism in sorghum. Catabolism of the glutathione conjugate of atrazine, J. Agric. Food Chem. 21 (1973) 1020–1030.

na

[24] R.H. Shimabukuro, D.S. Frear, H.R. Swanson, W.C. Walsh, Glutathione conjugation an enzymatic basis for atrazine resistance in corn, Plant Physiol. 47 (1971) 10–14.

[25] C. Mougin, N. Polge, R. Scalla, F. Cabanne, Interactions of various agrochemicals with cytochrome P-450-dependent

ur

monooxygenases of wheat cells, Pesticide Biochem. Physiol. 40 (1991) 1–11. [26] M.L. Romano, G.R Stephenson, A. Tal, J.C. Hall, The effect of monooxygenase and glutathione S-transferase inhibitors on the

Jo

metabolism of diclofop-methyl and fenoxaprop-ethyl in barley and wheat, Pesticide Biochem. Physiol. 46 (1993) 181–189. [27] T.M. Sterling, N.E. Balke, Bentazon uptake and metabolism by cultured plant cells in the presence of monooxygenase inhibitors and cinnamic acid, Pesticide Biochem. Physiol. 38 (1990) 66–75. [28] R.H. Shimabukuro, Atrazine metabolism and herbicidal selectivity, Plant Physiol. 42 (1967) 1269–1276. [29] Y. Ferhatoglu, S. Avdiushko, M. Barrett, The basis for the safening of clomazone by phorate insecticide in cotton and inhibitors of cytochrome P450s, Pesticide Biochem. Physiol. 81 (2005) 59–70. [30] M.S. Yun, Y. Yogo, R Miura, Y. Yamasue, A.J. Fischer, Cytochrome P-450 monooxygenase activity in herbicide-resistant andsusceptible late watergrass (Echinochloa phyllopogon), Pesticide Biochem. Physiol. 83 (2005) 107–114. [31] R. Edwards, M. Brazier-Hicks, D.P. Dixon, I. Cummins, Chemical manipulation of antioxidant defences in plants, Adv. Bot. Res. 42 (2005) 1–32 [32] K.K. Hatzios, Herbicide safeners: effective inducers of plant defense gene enzyme systems, Phytoparasitica 31 (2003) 3–7. [33] K.K. Hatzios, N. Burgos, Metabolism-based herbicide resistance: regulation by safeners, Weed Sci. 52 (2004) 454–467. [34] J. Davies, J.C. Caseley, Herbicide safeners: a review, Pesticide Sci. 55 (1999) 1043–1058. [35] B.P. DeRidder, P.B. Goldsbrough, Organ-specific expression of glutathione S-transferases and the efficacy of herbicide safeners in Arabidopsis, Plant Physiol. 140 (2006) 167–175. [36] I. Cummins, D.J. Cole, R. Edwards, Purification of multiple glutathione transferases involved in herbicide detoxification from wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) treated with the safener fenchlorazole-ethyl, Pesticide Biochem. Physiol. 59 (1997) 35–49. 12

Journal Pre-proof [37] M.W. Persans, J. Wang, M.A. Schuler, Characterization of maize cytochrome p450 monooxygenases induced in response to safeners and bacterial pathogens, Plant Physiol. 125 (2001) 1126–1138. [38] K.A. Marrs, The functions and regulation of glutathione S-transferases in plants, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 47 (1996) 127–158. [39] B. Mannervik, U. Helena Danielson, B. Ketterer, Glutathione transferases-structure and catalytic activity, Crit. Rev. Biochem. 23 (1988) 283–337. [40] F.N. Droog, P.J. Hooykaas, B.J. Vanderzaal, 2, 4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid and related chlorinated compounds inhibit two auxin-regulated type-III tobacco glutathione S-transferases, Plant Physiol. 107 (1995) 1139–1146. [41] D.J. Cole, I. Cummins, P.J. Hatton, D. Dixon, R. Edwards, Glutathione transferases in crops and major weeds, in: Regulation of Enzymatic Systems Detoxifying Xenobiotics in Plants. NATO ASI Series, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 1997, pp. 139–154. [42] K.M. O’Connell, E.J. Breaux, R.T. Fraley, Different rates of metabolism of two chloroacetanilide herbicides in Pioneer 3320 corn, Plant Physiol. 86 (1988) 359–363. [43] M.M. Lay, J.E. Casida, Dichloroacetamide antidotes enhance thiocarbamate sulfoxide detoxification by elevating corn root

of

glutathione content and glutathione S-transferase activity, Pesticide Biochem. Physiol. 6 (1976) 442–456. [44] R.H. Shimabukuro, G.L. Lamoureux, D.S. Frear, Glutathione conjugation: a mechanism for herbicide detoxication and

ro

selectivity in plants, in: Proceedings of National Meeting of the American Chemical Society, Academic Press, New Orleans, LA, USA, 1977.

iodosulfuron in cereals, J. Plant Dis. Prot. 7 (2000) 493–500.

-p

[45] E. Hacker, H. Bieringer, L. Willms, W. Rosch, H. Kocher, R. Wolf, Mefenpyrdiethyl: a safener for fenoxaprop-P-ethyl and

[46] C. Chapple, Molecular-genetic analysis of plant cytochrome P450-dependent monooxygenases, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 49

re

(1998) 311–343.

[47] M.A. Schuler, Plant cytochrome P450 monooxygenases, Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 15 (1996) 235–284.

lP

[48] S. Lupien, F. Karp, M. Wildung, R. Croteau, Regiospecific cytochrome P450 limonene hydroxylases from mint (Mentha) species: cDNA isolation, characterization, and functional expression of (−)-4S-limonene-3-hydroxylase and (−)-4S-limonene-6hydroxylase, Arch. Biochem. Biophy. 368 (1999) 181–192.

na

[49] C. Haudenschild, M. Schalk, F. Karp, R. Croteau, Functional expression of region-specific cytochrome P450 limonene hydroxylases from mint (Mentha spp.) in Escherichia coli and Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Arch. Biochem. Biophy. 379 (2000) 127–136.

ur

[50] N. Tijet, C. Helvig, F. Pinot, R. Le Bouquin, A. Lesot, F. Durst, I. Benveniste, Functional expression in yeast and characterization of a clofibrate-inducible plant cytochrome P-450 (CYP94A1) involved in cutin monomers synthesis, Biochem.

Jo

J. 332 (1998) 583–589.

[51] R. le Bouquin, M. Skrabs, R. Kahn, I. Benveniste, J.P. Salaün, L. Schreiber, F. Pinot, CYP94A5, a new cytochrome P450 from Nicotiana tabacum is able to catalyze the oxidation of fatty acids to the ω-alcohol and to the corresponding diacid, Eur. J Biochem. 268 (2001) 3083–3090.

[52] M. Gonneau, B. Pasquette, F. Cabanne, R. Scalla, Metabolism of chlortoluron in tolerant species: possible role of cytochrome P450 mono-oxygenases, Weed Res. 28 (1988) 19–25. [53] D.S. Frear, Wheat microsomal cytochrome P450 monooxygenases: characterization and importance in the metabolic detoxification and selectivity of wheat herbicides, Drug Metabol. Drug Interact. 12 (1995) 329–358. [54] N. Forthoffer, C. Helvig, N. Dillon, I. Benveniste, A. Zimmerlin, F. Tardif, J.P. Salaün, Induction and inactivation of a cytochrome P450 conferring herbicide resistance in wheat seedlings, Eur. J. Drug Metabol. Pharmacokin. 26 (2001) 9–16. [55] R.C. Kirkwood, Herbicide-tolerant crops, in: R.E.L. Naylor (Ed), Weed Management Handbook, Blackwell, Oxford, UK, 2002, pp. 253–279. [56] S.O. Duke, Taking stock of herbicide-resistant crops ten years after introduction, Pest Manage. Sci. 61 (2005) 211–218. [57] S.O. Duke, B.E. Scheffler, F.E. Dayan, W.E. Dyer, Genetic engineering crops for improved weed management traits, in: K. Rajasekaran, T.J. Jacks, J.W. Finley (Eds), Crop Biotechnology, ACS Symposium Series 829, American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, USA, 2002, pp. 52–66.

13

Journal Pre-proof [58] K.C. Vaughn, S.O. Duke, Biochemical basis of herbicide resistance, in: W. Ebing, H. Börner, D. Martin, V. Sjut, H.J. Stan, J. Stetter (Eds), Herbicide Resistance- Brassinosteroids, Gibberellins, Plant Growth Regulators. Chemistry of Plant Protection, Vol 7, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 1991, pp. 141–169. [59] S. Tan, R. Evans, B. Singh, Herbicidal inhibitors of amino acid biosynthesis and herbicide-tolerant crops, Amino Acids 30 (2006) 195–204. [60] F.E. Dailey, J.E. Cronan, Acetohydroxy acid synthase I, a required enzyme for isoleucine and valine biosynthesis in Escherichia coli K-12 during growth on acetate as the sole carbon source, J. Bacteriol. 165 (1986) 453–460. [61] D.L. Shaner, P.C. Anderson, M.A. Stidham, Imidazolinones: potent inhibitors of acetohydroxyacid synthase, Plant Physiol. 76 (1984) 545–546. [62] K.A. Newhouse, W.A. Smith, M.A. Starrett, T.J. Schaefer, B.K. Singh, Tolerance to imidazolinone herbicides in wheat, Plant Physiol. 100 (1992) 882–886. [63] J.A. Anderson, L. Matthiesen, J. Hegstad, Resistance to an imidazolinone herbicide is conferred by a gene on chromosome 6DL in the wheat line cv. 9804, Weed Sci. 52 (2004) 83–90.

of

[64] C.J. Pozniak, P.J. Hucl, Genetic analysis of imidazolinone resistance in mutation-derived lines of common wheat, Crop Sci. 44 (2004) 23–30.

ro

[65] C.J. Pozniak, I.T. Birk, L.S. O’Donoughue, C. Menard, P.J. Hucl, B.K. Singh, Physiological and molecular characterization of mutation-derived imidazolinone resistance in spring wheat, Crop Sci. 44 (2004) 1434–1443.

-p

[66] S. Tan, R.R. Evans, M.L. Dahmer, B.K. Singh, D.L. Shaner, Imidazolinone-tolerant crops: history, current status, and future, Pest Manage. Sci. 61 (2005) 246–257.

[67] J. Secor, C. Cséke, Inhibition of acetyl-CoA carboxylase activity by haloxyfop and tralkoxydim, Plant Physiol. 86 (1988) 10–12.

re

[68] Y. Sasaki, Y. Nagano, Plant acetyl-CoA carboxylase: structure, biosynthesis, regulation, and gene manipulation for plant breeding, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 68 (2004) 1175–1184.

lP

[69] M. Ostlie, S.D Haley, V. Anderson, D. Shaner, H. Manmathan, C. Beil, P. Westra, Development and characterization of mutant winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) accessions resistant to the herbicide quizalofop, Theor. Appl. Genet. 128 (2015) 343–351. [70] A.G. Ogg Jr., P.J. Isakson, Agronomic benefits and concerns for Roundup-Ready wheat, in: Proc. West. Soc. Weed Sci. 54

na

(2001) 80–90.

[71] R. van Acker, M. Entz, Agronomic benefits and risks of using Roundup Ready wheat in western Canada, in: Proceedings of Manitoba Agronomist Conference, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada, 2001, pp. 173–180.

ur

[72] M. Jasieniuk, A.L. Brûlé-Babel, I.N. Morrison, The evolution and genetics of herbicide resistance in weeds, Weed Sci. 44 (1996) 176–193.

Jo

[73] J. Gasquez, Genetics of herbicide resistance within weeds. Factors of evolution, inheritance and fitness, in: R. de Prado, J. Jorrín, L. García-Torres (Eds), Weed and Crop Resistance to Herbicides, Springer, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 1997, pp. 181– 189.

[74] S.B. Powles, Q. Yu, Evolution in action: plants resistant to herbicides, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 61 (2010) 317–347. [75] C. Délye, M. Jasieniuk, V. le Corre, Deciphering the evolution of herbicide resistance in weeds, Trends Genet. 29 (2013) 649– 658. [76] T.A. Gaines, W. Zhang, D. Wang, B. Bukun, S.T. Chisholm, D.L. Shaner, S.J. Nissen, W.L. Patzoldt, P.J. Tranel, A.S. Culpepper, T.L. Grey, Gene amplification confers glyphosate resistance in Amaranthus palmeri, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 107 (2010) 1029–1034. [77] S. Nakka, A.S. Godar, P.S. Wani, C.R. Thompson, D.E. Peterson, J. Roelofs, M. Jugulam, Physiological and molecular characterization of hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD)-inhibitor resistance in Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.), Front. Plant Sci. 8 (2017) 555. [78] C. Délye, Weed resistance to acetyl coenzyme A carboxylase inhibitors: an update, Weed Sci. 53 (2005) 728–746. [79] P.J. Tranel, T.R Wright, Resistance of weeds to ALS-inhibiting herbicides: what have we learned? Weed Sci. 50 (2002) 700– 712. [80] J.A. McCourt, S.S. Pang, J. King-Scott, L.W. Guddat, R.G. Duggleby, Herbicide-binding sites revealed in the structure of plant acetohydroxyacid synthase, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103 (2006) 569–573. 14

Journal Pre-proof [81] W. Oettmeier, Herbicide resistance and supersensitivity in photosystem II, Cell Mol. Life Sci. 55 (1999) 1255–1277. [82] B.S. Shorrosh, R.A. Dixon, J.B. Ohlrogge, Molecular cloning, characterization, and elicitation of acetyl-CoA carboxylase from alfalfa, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 91 (1994) 4323–4327. [83] T. Konishi, Y. Sasaki, Compartmentation of two forms of acetyl-CoA carboxylase in plants and the origin of their tolerance towards herbicides, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 91 (1994) 3598–3601. [84] S. Jang, J. Marjanovic, P. Gornicki, Resistance to herbicides caused by single amino acid mutations in acetyl-CoA carboxylase in resistant populations of grassy weeds, New Phytol. 197 (2013) 1110–1116. [85] P.J. Tranel, T.R. Wright, I.M. Heap, Mutations in herbicide-resistant weeds to ALS inhibitors, http/www.weedscience.org. [86] C.M. Whaley, H.P. Wilson, J.H. Westwood, A new mutation in plant ALS confers resistance to five classes of ALS-inhibiting herbicides, Weed Sci. 55 (2007) 83–90. [87] C.E. Pandolfo, A. Presotto, F. Moreno, I. Dossou, J.P Migasso, E. Sakima, M. Cantamutto, Broad resistance to acetohydroxyacid-synthase-inhibiting herbicides in feral radish (Raphanus sativus L.) populations from Argentina, Pest Manage. Sci. 72 (2016) 354–361.

of

[88] S. Panozzo, L. Scarabel, P.J. Tranel, M. Sattin, Target-site resistance to ALS inhibitors in the polyploid species Echinochloa crus-galli, Pesticide Biochem. Physiol. 105 (2013) 93–101.

ro

[89] D.J. Rydrich, T.J. Muzik, Downy brome competition and control in dryland wheat, Agron. J. 60 (1968) 279–280. [90] P.W. Stahlman, S.D. Miller, Downy brome (Bromus tectorum) interference and economic thresholds in winter wheat (Triticum

-p

aestivum), Weed Sci. 38 (1990) 224–228.

[91] V. Kumar, P. Jha, First report of a Ser653Asn mutation endowing high-level resistance to imazamox in downy brome (Bromus tectorum L.), Pest Manage. Sci. 73 (2017) 2585–2591.

re

[92] D.J. Rydrych, Cereal Rye Control in Winter Wheat, Special Report, Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station, Corvallis, OR, USA, 485 (1977) 27–29.

systems, Weed Technol. 20 (2006) 815–823.

lP

[93] A.D. White, D.J. Lyon, C. Mallory-Smith, C.R. Medlin, J.P. Yenish, Feral rye (Secale cereale) in agricultural production

[94] A.R. Kniss, D.J. Lyon, J.D. Vassios, S.J. Nissen, MCPA synergizes imazamox control of feral rye (Secale cereale), Weed

na

Technol. 25 (2011) 303–309.

[95] T.A. Pester, S.J. Nissen, P. Westra, Absorption, translocation, and metabolism of imazamox in jointed goatgrass and feral rye, Weed Sci. 49 (2001) 607–612

ur

[96] B.D. Hanson, C.A. Mallory-Smith, W.J. Price, B. Shafii, D.C. Thill, R.S. Zemetra, Interspecific hybridization: potential for movement of herbicide resistance from wheat to jointed goatgrass (Aegilops cylindrica), Weed Technol. 19 (2005) 674–682.

Jo

[97] A. Perez-Jones, C.A. Mallory-Smith, J.L. Hansen, R.S. Zemetra, Introgression of an imidazolinone-resistance gene from winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) into jointed goatgrass (Aegilops cylindrica Host), Theor. Appl. Genet. 114 (2006) 177–186. [98] Lolium rigidum (rigid rygrass), https://www.cabi.org/isc/datasheet/31167. [99] S.B. Powles, D.G. Bowran, Crop weed management systems, in: B.M. Sindel (Ed), Australian Weed Management Systems, Melbourne, Australia. (2000) pp. 287–306. [100] R.S. Llewellyn, S.B. Powles, High levels of herbicide resistance in rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) in the wheat belt of Western Australia, Weed Technol. 15 (2001) 242–248. [101] J.C. Broster, E.A. Koetz, H. Wu, Herbicide resistance levels in annual ryegrass (Lolium rigidum Gaud.) in southern New South Wales, Plant Prot. Q. 26 (2011) 22. [102] M.J. Owen, M.J. Walsh, R.S. Llewellyn, S.B. Powles, Widespread occurrence of multiple herbicide resistance in Western Australian annual ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) populations, Austr. J. Agric. Res. 58 (2007) 711–718. [103] P. Boutsalis, G.S Gill, C. Preston, Incidence of herbicide resistance in rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) across southeastern Australia, Weed Technol. 26 (2012) 391–398. [104] J.C. Broster, E.A Koetz, H. Wu, Herbicide resistance levels in annual ryegrass (Lolium rigidum Gaud.) and wild oat (Avena spp.) in southwestern New South Wales, Plant Prot. Q. 28 (2013) 126. [105] J. Heap, R. Knight, A population of ryegrass tolerant to the herbicide diclofop-methyl, J. Austr. Institute Agric. Sci. 48 (1982) 156–157. 15

Journal Pre-proof [106] S.S. Kaundun, R.P Dale, G.C Bailly, Molecular basis of resistance to herbicides inhibiting acetolactate synthase in two rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) populations from Australia, Weed Sci. 60 (2012) 172–178. [107] J. Gressel, Catch 22-mutually exclusive strategies for delaying/preventing quantitatively vs. monogenically inherited resistances, in: N.N. Ragsdale, P.C. Kearney, J.R. Plimmer (Eds), Options 2000, American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C., USA, 1995, pp. 330–345. [108] J. Gressel, Molecular Biology of Weed Control, Taylor & Francis, London, UK, 2002. [109] P. Neve, S.B. Powles, Recurrent selection with reduced herbicide rates results in the rapid evolution of herbicide resistance in Lolium rigidum, Theor. Appl. Genet. 110 (2005) 1154–1166. [110] T.A. Gaines, L. Lorentz, A. Figge, J. Herrmann, F. Maiwald, M.C. Ott, R. Beffa, RNA-Seq transcriptome analysis to identify genes involved in metabolism-based diclofop resistance in Lolium rigidum, Plant J. 78 (2014) 865–876. [111] M.S. Ahmad-Hamdani, M.J. Owen, Q. Yu, S.B. Powles, ACCase-inhibiting herbicide resistant wild oat (Avena fatua L.) populations from the Western Australian grain belt, Weed Tech. 26 (2011) 130–136. [112] M.S. Ahmad-Hamdani, Q. Yu, H. Han, G.R. Cawthray, S.F. Wang, S.B. Powles, Herbicide resistance endowed by enhanced

of

rates of herbicide metabolism in wild oat (Avena spp.), Weed Sci. 61 (2013) 55–62. [113] H.J. Beckie, R.E. Blackshaw, R. Low, L.M. Hall, C.A Sauder, S. Martin, S.W. Shirriff, Glyphosate and acetolactate synthase

ro

inhibitor-resistant kochia (Kochia scoparia) in western Canada, Weed Sci. 61 (2013) 310–318. [114] T.A. Gaines, A.L. Barker, E.L. Patterson, P. Westra, E.P. Westra, R.G. Wilson, P. Jha, V. Kumar, A.R. Kniss, EPSPS gene

-p

copy number and whole-plant glyphosate resistance level in Kochia scoparia, PLoS One 11 (2016) e0168295. [115] W.F. Schillinger, Ecology and control of Russian thistle (Salsola iberica) after spring wheat harvest, Weed Sci. 55 (2007) 381– 385.

re

[116] F.L. Young, Russian thistle (Salsola iberica) growth and development in wheat (Triticum aestivum), Weed Sci. 34 (1986) 901– 905.

lP

[117] F.L. Young, Effect of Russian thistle (Salsola iberica) interference on spring wheat (Triticum aestivum), Weed Sci. 36 (1988) 594–598.

[118] M.J. Guttieri, C.V. Eberlein, C.A. Mallory-Smith, D.C. Thill, D.L. Hoffman, DNA sequence variation in Domain A of the

na

acetolactate synthase genes of herbicide-resistant and -susceptible weed biotypes, Weed Sci. 40 (1992) 670–676. [119] P. Jha, V. Kumar, C.A. Lim, Herbicide resistance in cereal production systems of the US Great Plains, Indian J Weed Sci. 48 (2016) 112–116

ur

[120] V. Kumar, J.F. Spring, P. Jha, D.J. Lyon, I.C. Burke, Glyphosate-resistant Russian thistle (Salsola tragus) identified in Montana and Washington, Weed Technol. 31 (2017) 238–251.

Jo

[121] J.K. Norsworthy, S.M. Ward, D.R. Shaw, R.S. Llewellyn, R.L. Nichols, T.M. Webster, K.W. Bradley, G. Frisvold, S.B. Powles, N.R. Burgos, W.W. Witt, Reducing the risks of herbicide resistance: best management practices and recommendations, Weed Sci. 60 (2012) 31–62.

16