Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Article contents

Early Vigor and Ozone Response in Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) Biotypes Differing in Glyphosate Resistance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

David A. Grantz
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Sciences and Air Pollution Research Center, University of California at Riverside, Kearney Agricultural Center, Parlier, CA 93648
Anil Shrestha
Affiliation:
Statewide Integrated Pest Management Program, University of California, Kearney Agricultural Center, Parlier, CA 93648
Hai-Bang Vu
Affiliation:
Department of Botany and Plant Sciences and Air Pollution Research Center, University of California at Riverside, Kearney Agricultural Center, Parlier, CA 93648
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

Horseweed has become increasingly difficult to control in the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) of California. Resistance to glyphosate may not fully explain the quasi-invasive behavior of this native species. We contrast glyphosate-resistant (GR) and glyphosate-susceptible (GS) horseweed biotypes for vigor during the vegetative stage and for resistance to ozone (O3). The SJV is impacted by O3 air pollution, which could be a factor in competitiveness of GR vs. GS. Both biotypes were exposed during the seedling and vegetative stages of rosette development to a range of O3 concentrations in greenhouse exposure chambers. Leaf injury was evaluated visually and biomass production and allocation destructively. In O3-free air, the GR biotype exhibited fewer foliar lesions, more vigorous growth, and 40% greater biomass than the GS biotype. The slope of the response to O3 was greater in the GR than in the GS biotype, implying greater relative sensitivity to O3. This was due to greater vigor at low O3, as the biotypes performed similarly at high O3. The competitive advantage of the GR biotype may be reduced in polluted environments. There appeared to be no linkage between the evolution of resistances to O3 and to glyphosate.

Type
Weed Biology and Ecology
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Andersen, C. P. 2003. Source-sink balance and carbon allocation below ground in plants exposed to ozone. New Phytol. 157:213228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armhein, N., Deus, B., Gehrke, P., and Steinrucken, H. C. 1980. The site of the inhibition of the shikimate acid pathway by glyphosate. Plant Physiol. 65:830834.Google Scholar
Bazzaz, F. A. 1979. The physiological ecology of plant succession. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 10:351371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baucom, R. S. and Mauricio, R. 2004. Fitness costs and benefits of novel herbicide tolerance in a noxious weed. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 101:1338613390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bently, R. 1990. The shikimate pathway—a metabolic tree with many branches. Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 25:307384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, S. M. and Whitwell, T. 1988. Influence of tillage on horseweed (Conyza canadensis). Weed Technol. 2:269270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[CEPA] California Environmental Protection Agency 2007. Air Resources Board. http://www.arb.ca.gov/.Google Scholar
Cooley, D. R. and Manning, W. J. 1987. The impact of ozone on assimilate partitioning in plants. Ann. Rev. Environ. Pollut. 47:95113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
D'Antonio, C. M. 1993. Mechanisms controlling invasion of coastal plant communities by the alien succulent Carpobrotus edulis . Ecology. 74:8395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, P. A. and Ashmore, M. R. 1992. The effects of ambient air on a semi-natural grassland community. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 38:9197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feng, P. C. C., Tran, M., Chiu, T., Sammons, R. D., Heck, G. R., and CaJacob, C. A. 2004. Investigations into glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis): retention, uptake, translocation, and metabolism. Weed Sci. 52:498505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flagler, R. B. 1998. Recognition of Air Pollution Injury to Vegetation: A Pictorial Atlas. Pittsburgh, PA Air and Waste Management Association.Google Scholar
Fuhrer, J. and Booker, F. 2003. Ecological issues of ozone: agricultural issues. Environ. Int. 29:141154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glater, R. A., Solberg, R. A., and Scott, F. M. 1962. A developmental study of the leaves of Nicotiana glutinosa as related to their smog sensitivity. Am. J. Bot. 49:954970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorissen, A. and van Veen, J. A. 1988. Temporary disturbance of translocation of assimilates in Douglas-firs by low levels of ozone and sulphur dioxide. Plant Physiol. 88:559563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grantz, D. A. 2003. Ozone impacts on cotton: towards an integrated mechanism. Environ. Pollut. 126:331344.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grantz, D. A. and Farrar, J. F. 1999. Acute exposure to ozone inhibits rapid carbon translocation from source leaves of Pima cotton. J. Exp. Bot. 50:12531262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grantz, D. A. and Farrar, J. F. 2000. Ozone inhibits phloem loading from a transport pool: compartmental efflux analysis in Pima cotton. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 27:859868.Google Scholar
Grantz, D. A., Gunn, S., and Vu, H. 2006. Ozone impacts on plant development: a meta-analysis of root/shoot allocation and growth. Plant Cell Environ. 29:11931209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grantz, D. A. and Shrestha, A. 2006. Tropospheric ozone and interspecific competition between yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus L.) and Pima cotton (Gossypium barbadense L.). Crop Sci. 46:18791889.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grantz, D. A., Silva, V., Toyota, M., and Ott, N. 2003. Ozone increases root respiration but decreases leaf CO2 assimilation in cotton and melon. J. Exp. Bot. 43:23752384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grantz, D. A. and Yang, S. 1996. Effects of O3 on hydraulic architecture in Pima cotton—biomass allocation and water transport capacity of roots and shoots. Plant Physiol. 112:16491657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, B. D., Shrestha, A., Pelham, K. C., and Shaner, D. L. 2007. An enzyme assay and GIS as tools to characterize and determine the spatial distribution of glyphosate-resistant horseweed in the San Joaquin Valley of California. Abstract #268. in. Weed Science Society of America, Annual Meeting, Feb. 5–9, 2007. San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
Heap, I. M. 1997. The occurrence of herbicide-resistant weeds worldwide. Pestic. Sci. 51:235243.3.0.CO;2-N>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heck, W. W., Philbeck, R. B., and Denning, J. A. 1978. A continuous stirred tank reactor (CSTR) system for exposing plants to gaseous air pollutants. Washington, DC U.S. Department of Agriculture, Publication No. ARS-5-181.Google Scholar
Holm, L. J., Doll, E., Holm, P. J., and Herberger, J. 1997. in. World Weeds: Natural Histories and Distribution. New York John Wiley & Sons. 226235.Google Scholar
Johnson, B. G., Hale, B. A., and Ormrod, D. P. 1996. Carbon dioxide and ozone effects on growth of a legume-grass mixture. J. Environ. Qual. 25:908916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuokol, J. and Dugger, W. M. 1967. Anthocyanin formation as a response to ozone and smog treatment in Rumex crispus L. Plant Physiol. 42:10231024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krupa, S. V. and Kickert, R. N. 1989. The greenhouse effect: impacts of ultraviolet radiation, carbon dioxide, and ozone on vegetation. Environ. Pollut. 61:263393.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lodge, D. M. 1993. Biological invasions: lessons for ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 8:133137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lorraine-Colwill, D. F., Powles, S. B., Hawkes, T. R., Hollinshead, P. H., Warner, S. A. J., and Preston, C. 2003. Investigations into the mechanism of glyphosate resistance in Lolium rigidum . Pest. Biochem. Physiol. 74:6272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAinsh, M. R., Evans, N. H., Montgomery, L. H., and North, K. A. 2002. Calcium signaling in stomatal responses to pollutants. New Phytol. 153:441447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Main, C. L., Mueller, T. C., Hayes, R. M., and Wilkerson, J. B. 2004. Response of selected horseweed (Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronq.) populations to glyphosate. J. Agric. Food Chem. 52:879883.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mebrahtu, T., Mersie, W., and Rangappa, M. 1990. Inheritance of ambient ozone insensitivity in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Environ. Pollut. 67:7989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mortensen, L. and Engvild, K. C. 1995. Effects of ozone on 14C translocation velocity and growth of spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) exposed in open-top chambers. Environ. Pollut. 87:135140.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mueller, T. C., Massey, J. H., Hayes, R. M., Main, C. L., and Stewart, C. N. Jr. 2002. Shikimate accumulates in both glyphosate-sensitive and glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis L. Cronq.). J. Agric. Food Chem. 51:680684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muller, M., Kohle, B., Tausz, M., Grill, D., and Lutz, C. 1996. The assessment of ozone stress by recording chromosomal aberrations in root tips of spruce trees (Picea abies (L.) Karst). J. Plant Physiol. 148:160165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nussbaum, S., Geissmann, M., and Fuhrer, J. 1995. Ozone exposure–response relationships for mixtures of perennial ryegrass and white clover depend on ozone exposure patterns. Atmos. Environ. 29:989995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, D. T. 1995. Weeds in a changing climate. Weed Sci. 43:685701.Google Scholar
Reiling, K. and Davison, A. W. 1992. Spatial variation in ozone resistance of British populations of Plantago major L. New Phytol. 122:699708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rennenberg, H., Herschbach, C., and Polle, A. 1996. Consequences of air pollution on shoot–root interactions. J. Plant Physiol. 148:296301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, D. M. and Bond, W. J. 1991. Determinants of plant distribution: evidence from pine invasions. Am. Nat. 137:639668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrestha, A. and Grantz, D. A. 2005. Ozone impacts on competition between tomato and yellow nutsedge: above- and below-ground effects. Crop Sci. 45:15871595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrestha, A., Hembree, K. J., and Va, N. 2007. Growth stage influences level of resistance in glyphosate-resistant horseweed. Calif. Agric. 61:6770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simarmata, M., Bughrara, S., and Penner, D. 2005. Inheritance of glyphosate resistance in rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) from California. Weed Sci. 53:615619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sisó, S., Camarero, J., and Gil-Pelegrín, E. 2004. Relationship between hydraulic resistance and leaf morphology in broadleaf Quercus species: a new interpretation of leaf lobation. Trees Struct. Func. 15:341345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tamaoki, M., Nakajima, N., Kubo, A., Aono, M., Matsuyama, T., and Saji, H. 2003. Transcriptome analysis of O3-exposed Arabidopsis reveals that multiple signal pathways act mutually antagonistically to induce gene expression. Plant Mol. Biol. 53:443456.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thebaud, C., Finzi, A. C., Affre, L., Debussche, M., and Escarre, J. 1996. Assessing why two introduced Conyza differ in their ability to invade Mediterranean old fields. Ecol. 77:791804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ting, I. P. and Dugger, W. M. 1971. Ozone resistance in tobacco plants: a possible relationship to water balance. Atm. Environ. 5:147150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tingey, D. T., Reinert, R. A., Dunning, J. A., and Heck, W. W. 1971. Vegetation injury from the interaction of nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide. Phytopathol. 61:15061511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Gessel, M. J. 2001. Glyphosate-Resistant horseweed from Delaware. Weed Sci. 49:703705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weaver, S. E. 2001. The biology of Canadian weeds. 115. Conyza canadensis . Can. J. Plant Sci. 81:867875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilbourne, S., Davison, A. W., and Ollerenshaw, J. H. 1995. The use of an unenclosed field fumigation system to determine the effects of O3 on a grass–clover mixture. New Phytol. 129:2332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wonisch, A., Muller, M., Tausz, M., Soja, G., and Grill, D. 1999. Simultaneous analyses of chromosomes in root meristems and of the biochemical status of needle tissues of three different clones of Norway spruce trees challenged with moderate ozone levels. Eur. J. For. Pathol. 29:281294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziska, L. H. 2002. Sensitivity of ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) growth to urban ozone concentrations. Func. Plant Biol. 29:13651369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 7 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 20th January 2017 - 21st January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-76cb886bbf-7fh6l Total loading time: 0.588 Render date: 2021-01-21T06:45:58.440Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Early Vigor and Ozone Response in Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) Biotypes Differing in Glyphosate Resistance
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Early Vigor and Ozone Response in Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) Biotypes Differing in Glyphosate Resistance
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Early Vigor and Ozone Response in Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) Biotypes Differing in Glyphosate Resistance
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *