The sulfonylurea herbicides were discovered in 1975 and immediately set a new standard for chemical weed control. The subsequent worldwide development effort has led to the commercialization of 18 different active ingredients in over a dozen major crops, and additional development candidates have been announced. Some of the reasons for the rapid commercial acceptance of sulfonylurea herbicides include their exceptionally low application rates (often a factor of 10-100 times lower than conventional herbicides), favorable environmental and toxicological properties, and compatibility with the trend towards postemergence weed control.This chapter reviews recent developments in the biology and biochemistry of the sulfonylurea herbicides. The agricultural utilities of 12 new sulfonylureas commercialized or introduced since 1990 and significant new uses of existing commercial sulfonylureas are reviewed. These include tribenuron methyl, amidosulfuron, and NC330 in wheat and barley; metsulfuron methyl, cinosulfuron, pyrazosulfuron ethyl, and imazosulfuron in rice; rimsulfuron, NC319/MON12000, and CGA 152,005 in maize; and ethametsulfuron methyl, triflusulfuron, flazasulfuron, and rimsulfuron in oilseed rape, sugar beets, turf, and potatoes, respectively. Additionally, the biochemical crop selectivity mechanisms of five sulfonylureas in maize, wheat, and oilseed rape are reviewed. Metabolic reactions involved include aryl and aliphatic hydroxylation and oxidative 0-and N-dealkylation leading to inactivation of herbicidal compounds or selective activation of pro herbicidal sulfonylurea analogs. Finally, current information relating to weed resistance to sulfonylureas is reviewed including occurrence, mechanisms, fitness, gene flow, and management strategies. New developments include, among others, the occurrence of ALS-inhibitor resistant biotypes of aquatic species in U.S. rice production and the appearance of ALSinhibitor resistant biotypes of X anthium strumarium in soybeans. In addition, recent studies of competitiveness, seed production and other fitness comparisons suggest little or no difference in fitness between susceptible and resistant biotypes. Finally, management strategies are described which are designed to preserve the widespread utility of this important class of crop protection tools.