Kochia [Bassia scoparia(L.) A. J. Scott] is a problematic annual broadleaf weed species in the North American Great Plains.Bassia scopariainherits unique biological characteristics that contribute to its propensity to evolve herbicide resistance. Evolution of glyphosate resistance inB. scopariahas become a serious threat to the major cropping systems and soil conservation practices in the region.Bassia scopariapopulations with resistance to four different herbicide sites of action are a concern for growers. The widespread occurrence of multiple herbicide–resistant (HR)B. scopariaacross the North American Great Plains has renewed research efforts to devise integrated weed management strategies beyond herbicide use. In this review, we aim to compile and document the growing body of literature on HRB. scopariawith emphasis on herbicide-resistance evolutionary dynamics, distribution, mechanisms of evolved resistance, agronomic impacts, and current/future weed management technologies. We focused on ecologically based, non-herbicidal strategies such as diverse crop rotations comprising winter cereals and perennial forages, enhanced crop competition, cover crops, harvest weed seed control (HWSC), and tillage to manage HRB. scopariaseedbanks. Remote sensing using hyperspectral imaging and other sensor-based technologies would be valuable for early detection and rapid response and site-specific herbicide resistance management. We propose research priorities based on an improved understanding of the biology, genetic diversity, and plasticity of this weed that will aid in preserving existing herbicide resources and designing sustainable, integrated HRB. scopariamitigation plans.

The 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD)-inhibiting herbicides are primarily used for weed control in corn, barley, oat, rice, sorghum, sugarcane, and wheat production fields in the United States. The objectives of this review were to summarize (1) the history of HPPD-inhibitor and their use in the United States, (2) HPPD-inhibitor resistant weeds, their mechanism of resistance, and management, (3) interaction of HPPD-inhibitor with other herbicides, and (4) the future of HPPD-inhibitor-resistant crops. As of 2022, three broadleaf weeds (Palmer amaranth, waterhemp, and wild radish) have evolved resistance to the HPPD-inhibitor. The predominance of metabolic resistance to HPPD-inhibitor was found in aforementioned three weed species. Management of HPPD-inhibitor-resistant weeds can be accomplished using alternate herbicides such as glyphosate, glufosinate, 2,4-D, or dicamba; however, metabolic resistance poses a serious challenge, as the weeds may be cross-resistant to other herbicide sites of action, leading to limited herbicide options. The HPPD-inhibitor is commonly applied with photosystem II (PS II)-inhibitor to increase efficacy and weed control spectrum. The synergism with HPPD-inhibitor arises from depletion of plastoquinones, which allows increased binding of PS II-inhibitor to the D1 protein. New HPPD-inhibitor from azole carboxamides class is in development and expected to be available in the near future. The HPPD-inhibitor-resistant crops have been developed through overexpression of a resistant bacterial HPPD enzyme in plants and the overexpression of transgenes for HPPD and a microbial gene that enhances the production of HPPD substrate. Isoxaflutole-resistant soybean is commercially available, and it is expected that soybean resistant to other HPPD-inhibitor such as mesotrione, stacked with resistance to other herbicides, will be available in the near future.

Field experiments were conducted over two years (2019 to 2020) at two locations in Iowa to evaluate multi-tactic strategies for managing multiple herbicide-resistant (MHR) waterhemp [Amaranthus tuberculatus (Moq.) Sauer] in a corn (Zea mays L.)-soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] rotation. The effect of three herbicide programs on A. tuberculatus control was tested in corn (2019). The effects of prior year’s corn weed control, a cereal rye (Secale cereale L.) cover crop, and soybean row spacing (38-cm vs. 76-cm wide) on A. tuberculatus density, biomass, and seed production were tested in soybean (2020). A herbicide program used in corn with two sites of action provided only 35% control of MHR A. tuberculatus, compared with ≥97% control by a herbicide program with three sites of action. In soybean, adequate control of A. tuberculatus (≥90%) in the prior year’s corn crop and use of a cover crop or narrow rows reduced A. tuberculatus density by more than 60% at 3 and 9 WAP compared with inadequate control (30%) in the prior year’s corn and no cover crop. Cover crop and narrow row soybean reduced A. tuberculatus density by 44% at 3 WAP compared with no cover crop and wide row soybean. Inclusion of a single control tactic, either adequate control (≥90%) with multiple herbicides in the prior year’s corn, use of a cover crop or narrow row soybean reduced A. tuberculatus biomass and seed production at soybean harvest by at least 24%, compared with inadequate control (30%) in the prior year’s corn, no cover crop, and wide row soybean. The combination of all three control tactics reduced A. tuberculatus biomass and seed production at soybean harvest by at least 80%. In conclusion, diverse control tactics targeting A. tuberculatus at multiple life-cycle stages can make substantial contributions to the management of MHR populations.

Evolution of kochia resistance to glyphosate and dicamba is a concern for growers in the US Great Plains. An increasing use of glyphosate and dicamba with the widespread adoption of glyphosate/dicamba-resistant (GDR) soybean in recent years may warrant greater attention. Long-term stewardship of this new stacked-trait technology will require the implementation of diverse weed control strategies, such as the use of soil-residual herbicides (PRE) aimed at effective control of GDR kochia. Field experiments were conducted in Huntley, MT, in 2017 and 2018, and Hays, KS, in 2018 to determine the effectiveness of various PRE herbicides applied alone or followed by (fb) a POST treatment of glyphosate plus dicamba for controlling GDR kochia in GDR soybean. Among PRE herbicides tested, sulfentrazone provided complete (100%), season-long control of GDR kochia at both sites. In addition, PRE fb POST programs tested in this study brought 71% to 100% control of GDR kochia throughout the season at both sites. Pyroxasulfone applied PRE resulted in 57% to 70% control across sites at 9 to 10 wk after PRE (WAPRE). However, mixing dicamba with pyroxasulfone improved control up to 25% at both sites. Kochia plants surviving pyroxasulfone applied PRE alone produced 2,530 seeds m−2 compared with pyroxasulfone + dicamba (230 seeds m−2) at the Montana site. No differences in soybean grain yields were observed with PRE alone or PRE fb POST treatments at the Montana site; however, dicamba, pyroxasulfone, and pendimethalin + dimethenamid-P applied PRE brought lower grain yield (1,150 kg ha−1) compared to all other tested programs at the Kansas site. In conclusion, effective PRE or PRE fb POST (two-pass) programs tested in this research should be proactively utilized by the growers to manage GDR kochia in GDR soybean.

Weed management in safflower (Carthamus tinctorious L.) is a major challenge for growers due to very limited herbicide options available, particularly for broadleaf weed control. Field experiments were conducted at the Montana State University Southern Agricultural Research Center (MSU-SARC) near Huntley, MT in 2015 and 2016 to evaluate preemergence (PRE) soil-residual herbicides for crop safety and season-long broadleaf weed control in safflower. Among all herbicide programs tested, only sulfentrazone (105 g•ai•ha −1) alone or with pendimethalin (1064 g•ai•ha −1) caused 4% to 12% early-season visible injury to safflower, although the injury was not evident beyond 30 DAT. Sulfentrazone alone or with pendimethalin and pyroxasulfone (59 g•ai•ha −1) with pendimethalin had a season-long residual activity on kochia [Kochia scoparia (L.) Schrad] and Russian-thistle (Salsola tragus L), with 89% to 99% control at 60 DAT, and up to 98% reduction in weed density compared with dimethenamid-P (213 g•ai•ha −1) and S-metolachlor (433 g•ai•ha −1) at 65 DAT. Pyroxasulfone (59 or 118 g•ai•ha −1) alone or dimethenamid-P with pendimethalin provided a moderate to good control (65% to 79% at 60 DAT) of kochia and Russian-thistle. However, the end-season control of kochia or Russian-thistle was inadequate (<50% control) with pendimethalin, dimethenamid-P, or S-metolachlor alone program. Safflower grain yield with sulfentrazone alone or with pendimethalin, pyroxasulfone alone or with pendimethalin, and dimethenamid-P with pendimethalin averaged 3559 kg•ha −1 , which was 195% higher compared with the nontreated check. In conclusion, sulfentrazone and pyroxasulfone or dimethenamid-P in combination with pendimethalin will be effective PRE herbicide programs for kochia and Russian-thistle control in safflower.