Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T02:14:57.068Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Characterization of two biotypes of imidazolinone-resistant eastern black nightshade (Solanum ptycanthum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Leslie D. Milliman
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, 1102 South Goodwin Avenue, Urbana, IL 61801
Dean E. Riechers
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, 1102 South Goodwin Avenue, Urbana, IL 61801
Loyd M. Wax
Affiliation:
USDA/ARS, Invasive Weed Management Unit, 1102 South Goodwin Avenue, Urbana, IL 61801

Abstract

Biotypes of eastern black nightshade were found in Illinois and Indiana that were not controlled by postemergence applications of imazethapyr. Greenhouse studies were conducted to determine whole-plant responses to the imidazolinone herbicides imazethapyr and imazamox and to the sulfonylurea herbicide primisulfuron-methyl. The Illinois and Indiana resistant biotypes were highly resistant to imazamox and imazethapyr but were not cross-resistant to primisulfuron-methyl. DNA sequencing of acetolactate synthase (ALS) genes showed that the molecular basis for resistance in both resistant biotypes was a single base-pair mutation within Domain C that changed an alanine to a threonine in their encoded enzymes. In vitro enzyme assays showed that the Illinois resistant biotype's ALS enzyme was 789- and 881-fold less sensitive than that of the susceptible biotype to imazamox and imazethapyr, respectively. The Indiana resistant biotype's ALS enzyme was 110- and 158-fold less sensitive than that of the susceptible biotype to imazamox and imazethapyr, respectively. These results are consistent with the amino acid substitution found in the ALS enzyme of both resistant biotypes of eastern black nightshade.

Type
Research Article
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. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Bernasconi, P., Woodworth, A. R., Rosin, B. A., Subramanian, M. V., and Siehl, D. L. 1995. A naturally occurring point mutation confers broad range tolerance to herbicides that target acetolactate synthase. J. Biol. Chem. 270:17,38117,385.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bradford, M. M. 1976. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein dye-binding. Anal. Biochem. 72:248252.Google Scholar
Christopher, J. T., Preston, C., and Powles, S. B. 1994. Malathion antagonizes metabolism-based chlorsulfuron resistance in Lolium rigidum . Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 49:172182.Google Scholar
Devine, M. D. and Preston, C. 2000. The molecular basis of herbicide resistance. Pages 72104 In Cobb, A. H. and Kirkwood, R. C., eds. Herbicides and their Mechanisms of Action. Sheffield, U.K.: Sheffield Academic Press.Google Scholar
Heap, I. 2002. The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. Web page: http://www.weedscience.com.Google Scholar
Hershey, H. P., Schwartz, L. J., Gale, J. P., and Abell, L. M. 1999. Cloning and functional expression of the small subunit of acetolactate synthase from Nicotiana plumbaginifolia . Plant Mol. Biol. 40:795806.Google Scholar
Lee, K. Y., Townsend, J., Tepperman, J., Black, M., Chui, C. F., Mazur, B., Dunsmuir, P., and Bedbrook, J. 1988. The molecular basis of sulfonylurea herbicide resistance in tobacco. EMBO J. 7:12411248.Google Scholar
Majek, B. A. 1981. Nightshade Control in Field Crops. University of Minnesota Agricultural Extension Folder 603:2. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Mallory-Smith, C., Hendrickson, P., and Mueller-Warrant, G. 1999. Cross-resistance of primisulfuron-resistant Bromus tectorum L. (downy brome) to sulfosulfuron. Weed Sci. 47:256257.Google Scholar
Milliman, L. D., Riechers, D. E., Simmons, F. W., and Wax, L. M. 2000. Two biotypes of eastern black nightshade that are resistant to ALSinhibiting herbicides. Proc. North Cent. Weed Sci. Soc. 55:86.Google Scholar
Muhitch, M. J. 1988. Acetolactate synthase activity in developing maize (Zea mays L.) kernels. Plant Physiol. 86:2327.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ogg, A. G. Jr., and Rogers, B. S. 1989. Taxonomy, distribution, biology, and control of black nightshade (Solanum nigrum) and related species in the United States and Canada. Rev. Weed Sci. 4:2558.Google Scholar
Royuela, M., Gonzalez, A., Arrese-Igor, C., Aparicio-Tejo, P. M., and Gonzalez-Murua, C. 1998. Imazethapyr inhibition of acetolactate synthase in Rhizobium and its symbiosis with pea. Pestic. Sci. 52:372380.3.0.CO;2-P>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaner, D. L. and Singh, B. K. 1997. Acetohydroxyacid synthase inhibitors. Pages 69110 In Roe, R. M., Burton, J. D., and Kuhr, R. J., eds. Herbicide Activity: Toxicology, Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
Siehl, D. L., Bengtson, A. S., Brockman, J. P., Butler, J. H., Kraatz, G. W., Lamoreaux, R. J., and Subramanian, M. V. 1996. Patterns of cross-tolerance to herbicides inhibiting acetohydroxyacid synthase in commercial corn varieties designed for tolerance to imidazolinones. Crop Sci. 36:274278.Google Scholar
Stoller, E. W. and Myers, R. A. 1989. Response of soybeans (Glycine max) and four broadleaf weeds to reduced irradiance. Weed Sci. 37:570574.Google Scholar
Vaughn, K. C. and Gasquez, J. 1987. Structural and physiological comparisons of triazine-susceptible, -resistant, and “mixed” biotypes of Poa . Z. Naturforsch. 42c:798802.Google Scholar
Volenberg, D. S., Stoltenberg, D. E., and Boerboom, C. M. 2000. Solanum ptycanthum resistance to acetolactate synthase inhibitors. Weed Sci. 48:399401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, T. R., Bascomb, N. F., Sturner, S. F., and Penner, D. 1998. Biochemical mechanism and molecular basis for ALS-inhibiting herbicide resistance in sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris) somatic cell lines. Weed Sci. 46:1323.Google Scholar