Herbicides classified as synthetic auxins have been most commonly used to control broadleaf weeds in a variety of crops and in non‐cropland areas since the first synthetic auxin herbicide (SAH), 2,4‐D, was introduced to the market in the mid‐1940s. The incidence of weed species resistant to SAHs is relatively low considering their long‐term global application with 30 broadleaf, 5 grass, and 1 grass‐like weed species confirmed resistant to date. An understanding of the context and mechanisms of SAH resistance evolution can inform management practices to sustain the longevity and utility of this important class of herbicides. A symposium was convened during the 2nd Global Herbicide Resistance Challenge (May 2017; Denver, CO, USA) to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge of SAH resistance mechanisms including case studies of weed species resistant to SAHs and perspectives on mitigating resistance development in SAH‐tolerant crops. © 2017 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

Barnyardgrass biotypes from Arkansas (AR1 and AR2) and Mississippi (MS1) have evolved cross-resistance to imazamox, imazethapyr, and penoxsulam. Additionally, AR1 and MS1 have evolved cross-resistance to bispyribac-sodium. Studies were conducted to determine if resistance to acetolactate synthase (ALS)-inhibiting herbicides in these biotypes is target-site or non-target-site based. Sequencing and analysis of a 1701 base pair ALS coding sequence revealed Ala₁₂₂ to Val and Ala₁₂₂ to Thr substitutions in AR1 and AR2, respectively. The imazamox concentrations required for 50% inhibition of ALS enzyme activity in vitro of AR1 and AR2 were 2.0 and 5.8 times, respectively, greater than the susceptible biotype. Absorption of ¹⁴C-bispyribac-sodium, -imazamox, and -penoxsulam was similar in all biotypes. ¹⁴C-Penoxsulam translocation out of the treated leaf (≤2%) was similar among all biotypes. ¹⁴C-Bispyribac-treated AR1 and MS1 translocated 31- 43% less radioactivity to aboveground tissue below the treated leaf compared to the susceptible biotype. ¹⁴C-Imazamox-treated AR1 plants translocated 39% less radioactivity above the treated leaf and aboveground tissue below the treated leaf, and MS1 translocated 54 and 18% less radioactivity to aboveground tissue above and below the treated leaf, respectively, compared to the susceptible biotype. Phosphorimaging results further corroborated the above results. This study shows that altered target site is a mechanism of resistance to imazamox in AR2 and probably in AR1. Additionally, reduced translocation, which may be a result of metabolism, could contribute to imazamox and bispyribac-sodium resistance in AR1 and MS1.

Th is report explores the impact of the adoption of genetically engineered (GE) corn, soybean, and cotton on pesticide use in the United States, drawing principally on data from the United States Department of Agriculture. Th e most striking fi nding is that GE crops have been responsible for an increase of 383 million pounds of herbicide use in the U.S. over the fi rst 13 years of commercial use of GE crops (1996)(1997)(1998)(1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008).Th is dramatic increase in the volume of herbicides applied swamps the decrease in insecticide use attributable to GE corn and cotton, making the overall chemical footprint of today' s GE crops decidedly negative. Th e report identifi es, and discusses in detail, the primary cause of the increase --the emergence of herbicide-resistant weeds.Th e steep rise in the pounds of herbicides applied with respect to most GE crop acres is not news to farmers. Weed control is now widely acknowledged as a serious management problem within GE cropping systems. Farmers and weed scientists across the heartland and cotton belt are now struggling to devise aff ordable and eff ective strategies to deal with the resistant weeds emerging in the wake of herbicide-tolerant crops.But skyrocketing herbicide use is news to the public at large, which still harbors the illusion, fed by misleading industry claims and advertising, that biotechnology crops are reducing pesticide use. Such a claim was valid for the fi rst few years of commercial use of GE corn, soybeans, and cotton. But, as this report shows, it is no longer.An accurate assessment of the performance of GE crops on pesticide use is important for reasons other than correcting the excesses of industry advertising. It is also about the future direction of agriculture, research, and regulatory policy.Herbicides and insecticides are potent environmental toxins. Where GE crops cannot deliver meaningful reductions in reliance on pesticides, policy makers need to look elsewhere. In addition to toxic pollution, agriculture faces the twin challenges of climate change and burgeoning world populations. Th e biotechnology industry' s current advertising campaigns promise to solve those problems, just as the industry once promised to reduce the chemical footprint of agriculture. Before we embrace GE crops as solution to these new challenges, we need a sober, data-driven appraisal of its track record on earlier pledges.Th e government has the capability, and we would argue a responsibility, to conduct periodic surveys of suffi cient depth to track and accurately quantify the impacts of GE crops on major performance parameters, including pesticide use. While the USDA continued to collect farm-level data on pesticide applications during most of the 13 years covered in this report, the Department has been essentially silent on the impacts of GE crops on pesticide use for almost a decade. Th is is why the groups listed in the Acknowledgements commissioned this study by Dr. Benbrook, the third he has done on this t...

In fall 2011, cotton and soybean consultants from Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee were surveyed through direct mail and on-farm visits, and rice consultants from Arkansas and Mississippi were surveyed through direct mail to assess the importance and level of implementation of herbicide resistance best management practices (HR-BMPs) for herbicide-resistant weeds. Proper herbicide timing, clean start with no weeds at planting, application of multiple effective herbicide modes of action, use of full labeled herbicide rates, and prevention of crop weed seed production with importance rating of ≥ 4.6 out of 5.0 were perceived as the most important HR-BMPs in all crops. Purchase of certified rice seed was on 90% of scouted hectares. In contrast, least important HR-BMPs as perceived by consultants with importance ratings of ≤ 4.0 in cotton, ≤ 3.7 in rice, and ≤ 3.8 in soybean were cultural practices such as manual removal of weeds; tillage including disking, cultivation, or deep tillage; narrow (≤ 50 cm)-row crops, cover crops, and altered planting dates. Narrow crop rows and cover crops in cotton; altered planting dates in cotton and soybean; and cleaning of farm equipment and manual weeding in rice and soybean is currently employed on ≤ 20% of scouted hectares. Extra costs, time constraints, adverse weather conditions, lack of labor and equipment, profitability, herbicide-related concerns, and complacency were perceived as key obstacles for adoption of most HR-BMPs. With limited adoption of most cultural practices that reduce risks of herbicide-resistant weeds, there are opportunities to educate growers concerning the proactive need and long-term benefits of adopting HR-BMPs to ensure sustainable weed management and profitable crop production.

Experiments were conducted to determine the inheritance and physiological basis for resistance to the synthetic auxinic herbicide (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid (2,4-D) in a prickly lettuce biotype. Inheritance of 2,4-D resistance in prickly lettuce is governed by a single codominant gene. Absorption and translocation were conducted using (14)C-2,4-D applied to 2,4-D-resistant and -susceptible biotypes. At 96 h after treatment (HAT), the resistant biotype absorbed less applied 2,4-D and retained more 2,4-D in the treated portion of the leaf compared to the susceptible biotype. The resistant biotype translocated less applied 2,4-D to leaves above the treated leaf and crown at 96 HAT compared to the susceptible biotype. No difference in the rate of metabolism of 2,4-D was observed between the two biotypes. Resistance to 2,4-D appears to originate from a reduced growth deregulatory and overstimulation response compared to the susceptible biotype, resulting in lower translocation of 2,4-D in the resistant prickly lettuce biotype.