Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T13:41:23.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Absence of Differential Fitness Between Giant Foxtail (Setaria faberi) Accessions Resistant and Susceptible to Acetyl-Coenzyme A Carboxylase Inhibitors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Ronald J. Wiederholt
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706
David E. Stoltenberg
Affiliation:
Dep. Agron., Univ. Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706

Abstract

Experiments were conducted to determine the productivity, inter-, and intraspecific competitive ability of giant foxtail accessions resistant (PCW1) and susceptible (AC1) to acetyl-coenzyme A carboxylase (ACCase) inhibitors. Under noncompetitive conditions in the field, shoot dry biomass, plant height, and leaf area over time were similar between the PCW1 and AC1 accessions. The instantaneous relative growth rate and instantaneous net assimilation rate did not differ between the accessions; however, the instantaneous leaf area ratio was slightly greater for the AC1 accession than the PCW1 accession. The seed yield was similar between the PCW1 and AC1 accessions. Addition series experiments were conducted in the field to determine the intraspecific competitive ability of the PCW1 and AC1 accessions. Regression surface analysis of reciprocal mean shoot dry biomass and seed yield indicated that the relative competitive ability of the PCW1 and AC1 accessions was similar. Replacement series experiments were conducted in the greenhouse with or without corn to determine the interspecific competitive ability of the accessions. The relative growth rate, shoot dry biomass, and seed yield of the PCW1 and AC1 accessions were greater without than with corn competition. The relative competitive ability of the PCW1 and AC1 accessions was similar with or without corn competition based on shoot dry biomass or seed yield. These results indicated that the intra- and interspecific competitive ability of the PCW1 and AC1 giant foxtail accessions are similar and suggest that resistance to ACCase inhibitors has not reduced the relative fitness of the PCW1 accession.

Type
Physiology, Chemistry, and Biochemistry
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Ahrens, W. H. and Stoller, E. W. 1983. Competition, growth rate, and CO2 fixation in triazine-susceptible and -resistant smooth pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus). Weed Sci. 31: 438444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Alcocer-Ruthling, M., Thill, D. C., and Shafii, B. 1992. Differential competitiveness of sulfonylurea resistant and susceptible prickly lettuce (Latuca serriola). Weed Technol. 6: 303309.Google Scholar
3. Bussler, B. H. 1993. Corn (Zea mays) interactions with common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Pages 6590. . Dep. Agron. University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN. Google Scholar
4. Bussler, B. H. and Maxwell, B. D. 1995. Using plant volume to quantify interference in corn (Zea mays) neighborhoods. Weed Sci. 43: 586594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Cousens, R. 1991. Aspects of the design and interpretation of competition (interference) experiments. Weed Technol. 5: 664673.Google Scholar
6. Devine, M. D. and Shimabukuro, R. H. 1994. Resistance to acetyl coenzyme A carboxylase inhibiting herbicides. Pages 141169 in Powles, S. B. and Holtum, J.A.M., eds. Herbicide Resistance in Plants: Biology and Biochemistry. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
7. de Wit, C. T. and Van Den Bergh, J. P. 1965. Competition between herbage plants. Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 13: 212221.Google Scholar
8. Ghersa, C. M., Martinez-Ghersa, M. A., Brewer, T. G., and Roush, M. L. 1994. Selection pressures for diclofop-methyl resistance and germination time of Italian ryegrass. Agron J. 86: 823828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Ghersa, C. M., Martinez-Ghersa, M. A., Brewer, T. G., and Roush, M. L. 1994. Use of gene flow to control diclofop-methyl resistance in Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum). Weed Technol. 8: 139147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Gray, J. A., Stoltenberg, D. E., and Balke, N. E. 1995. Productivity and intraspecific competitive ability of a velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) biotype resistant to atrazine. Weed Sci. 43: 619626.Google Scholar
11. Gronwald, J. W. 1991. Lipid biosynthesis inhibitors. Weed Sci. 39: 435449.Google Scholar
12. Haigler, W. E., Gossett, B. J., Harris, J. R., and Toler, J. E. 1994. Growth and development of organic arsenical-susceptible and -resistant common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) biotypes under noncompetitive conditions. Weed Technol. 8: 154158.Google Scholar
13. Heap, J. and Knight, R. J. 1982. A population of ryegrass tolerant to the herbicide diclofop-methyl. J. Aust. Inst. Agric. Sci. 48: 156157.Google Scholar
14. Holt, J. S. and Thill, D. C. 1994. Growth and productivity of resistant plants. Pages 299316 in Powles, S. B. and Holtum, J.A.M., eds. Herbicide Resistance in Plants: Biology and Biochemistry. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
15. Hunt, R. 1978. Growth analysis of individual plants. Pages 825 in Plant Growth Analysis. Studies in Biology No. 96. Edward Arnold Publishers, London, England.Google Scholar
16. Jasieniuk, M. and Maxwell, B. D. 1994. Population genetics and the evolution of herbicide resistance in weeds. Phytoprotection. 75(Suppl.): 2535.Google Scholar
17. Matthews, J.M. 1994. Management of herbicide resistant weed populations. Pages 317335 in Powles, S. B. and Holtum, J.A.M., eds. Herbicide Resistance in Plants: Biology and Biochemistry. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
18. Reboud, X. and Till-Bottraud, I. 1991. The cost of herbicide resistance measured by a competition experiment. Theor. Appl. Genet. 82: 690696.Google Scholar
19. Rejmanek, M., Robinson, G. R., and Rejmankova, E. 1989. Weed-crop competition: experimental designs and models for data analysis. Weed Sci. 37: 276284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Roush, M. L., Radosevich, S. R., Wagner, R. G., Maxwell, B. D., and Petersen, T. D. 1989. A comparison of methods for measuring effects of density and proportion in plant competition experiments. Weed Sci. 37: 268275.Google Scholar
21. Schonfeld, M., Yaacoby, T., Michael, O., and Rubin, B. 1987. Triazine resistance without reduced vigor in Phalaris paradoxa . Plant Physiol. 83: 329333.Google Scholar
22. Stoltenberg, D. E. and Wiederholt, R. J. 1995. Giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) resistance to aryloxyphenoxypropionate and cyclohexanedione herbicides. Weed Sci. 43: 527535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Thill, D. C., O'Donovan, J. T., and Mallory-Smith, C. A. 1994. Integrated weed management strategies for delaying herbicide resistance in wild oats. Phytoprotection. 75(Suppl.): 6170.Google Scholar
24. Thompson, C. R., Thill, D. C., and Shafii, B. 1994. Growth and competitiveness of sulfonylurea-resistant and -susceptible kochia (Kochia scoparia). Weed Sci. 42: 172179.Google Scholar
25. Warwick, S. I. and Black, L. D. 1994. Relative fitness of herbicide-resistant and susceptible biotypes of weeds. Phytoprotection. 75(Suppl.): 3749.Google Scholar
26. White, J. and Harper, J. L. 1970. Correlated changes in plant size and number in plant populations. J. Ecol. 58: 467485.Google Scholar
27. Wiederholt, R. J., and Stoltenberg, D. E. 1995. Cross-resistance of a large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis) accession to aryloxyphenoxypropionate and cyclohexanedione herbicides. Weed Technol. 9: 518524.Google Scholar
28. Wiederholt, R. J. and Stoltenberg, D. E. 1996. Similar fitness between large crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalis) accessions resistant or susceptible to acetyl-coenzyme A carboxylase inhibitors. Weed Technol. (In press).Google Scholar
29. Zar, J. H. 1984. Multiple regression and correlation. Pages 328360 in Biostatistical Analysis. 2nd ed. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, CA.Google Scholar