Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T10:44:36.183Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Herbicide Resistance in Rigid Ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) Has Not Led to Higher Weed Densities in Western Australian Cropping Fields

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Rick S. Llewellyn*
Affiliation:
CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, P.M.B. 2, Glen Osmond, South Australia 5064, Australia
Francis H. D'Emden
Affiliation:
School of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia
Mechelle J. Owen
Affiliation:
Western Australian Herbicide Resistance Initiative, School of Plant Biology, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia
Stephen B. Powles
Affiliation:
Western Australian Herbicide Resistance Initiative, School of Plant Biology, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: rick.llewellyn@csiro.au

Abstract

The aim of this study was to test whether herbicide resistance in rigid ryegrass has led to increased densities of this weed in Western Australian (WA) cropping fields. A total of 503 wheat fields with previously unknown management history and weed status were visited prior to harvest across 15 agronomic areas of the central WA cropping belt in 1998 and 2003. Rigid ryegrass density was visually assessed and, where possible, seed was collected from the population. Ryegrass was found in 91% of the wheat crops sampled. Ryegrass populations were tested in the following year for resistance to chlorsulfuron, sulfometuron, diclofop, and clethodim. With the use of nonparametric and regression statistical methods, resistance status, including multiple-resistance status, was not found to be associated with higher weed density. The results show that growers are generally maintaining low densities in fields with herbicide-resistant rigid ryegrass. The most common rigid ryegrass density at harvest time was less than 1 plant m−2 in both resistant and susceptible populations. Field and model-based studies of weed and herbicide resistance management that allow populations to continue at very high densities are unlikely to reflect common grower practice.

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

References

Literature Cited

[ABARE] Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics 2006. Australian Crop Report, September Quarter. Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics. http://www.abareonlineshop.com/product.aspprodid12669. Accessed: October 16, 2006.Google Scholar
Alemseged, Y., Jones, R. E., and Medd, R. W. 2001. A farmer survey of weed management and herbicide resistance problems of winter crops in Australia. Plant Prot. Q. 16:2125.Google Scholar
Auld, B. A., Menz, K. M., and Tisdell, C. A. 1987. Weed Control Economics. London Academic Press. 177.Google Scholar
Bauer, T. A. and Mortensen, D. A. 1992. A comparison of economic and economic optimum thresholds for two annual weeds in soybeans. Weed Technol. 6:228235.Google Scholar
Beckie, H. J., Thomas, A. G., and Stevenson, F. C. 2001. Survey of herbicide resistant wild oat (Avena fatua) in two townships in Saskatchewan. Can. J. Plant Sci. 82:463471.Google Scholar
Burnet, M. W. M., Hart, Q., Holtum, J. A. M., and Powles, S. B. 1994. Resistance to nine herbicide classes in a population of rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum). Weed Sci. 42:369377.Google Scholar
Cousens, R. 1987. Theory and reality of weed control thresholds. Plant Prot. Q. 2:1320.Google Scholar
Davis, V. M., Gibson, K. D., and Johnson, W. G. 2008. A field survey to determine distribution and frequency of glyphosate-resistant horseweed (Conyza canadensis) in Indiana. Weed Technol. 22:331338.Google Scholar
Heap, I. 2008. The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. http://www.weedscience.com. Accessed October 1, 2008.Google Scholar
Jones, R. E. and Medd, R. W. 2000. Economic thresholds and the case for longer term approaches to population management of weeds. Weed Technol. 14:337350.Google Scholar
Llewellyn, R. S., Lindner, R. K., Pannell, D. J., and Powles, S. B. 2002. Resistance and the herbicide resource: perceptions of Western Australian grain growers. Crop Prot. 21:10671075.Google Scholar
Llewellyn, R. S., Lindner, R. K., Pannell, D. J., and Powles, S. B. 2004. Grain grower perceptions and use of integrated weed management. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 44:9931001.Google Scholar
Llewellyn, R. S. and Powles, S. B. 2001. High levels of herbicide resistance (Lolium rigidum) in the Wheat Belt of Western Australia. Weed Technol. 15:242248.Google Scholar
Long, J. S. and Freese, J. 2001. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata. College Station, TX Stata.Google Scholar
Meddis, R. 1984. Statistics Using Ranks. Oxford, UK Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Monjardino, M., Pannell, D. J., and Powles, S. B. 2003. Multi-species resistance and integrated management: a bio-economic model for the management of Lolium rigidum and Raphanus raphanistrum in Australian cropping. Weed Sci. 51:798809.Google Scholar
Owen, M. J., Walsh, M. J., Llewellyn, R. S., and Powles, S. B. 2007. Widespread occurrence of multiple herbicide resistance in annual ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) populations within the Western Australian wheat belt. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 58:711718.Google Scholar
Pannell, D., Stewart, V., Bennett, A., Monjardino, M., Schmidt, C., and Powles, S. 2004. RIM: A bio-economic model for integrated weed management. Agric. Syst. 79:305325.Google Scholar
Walsh, M. J., Duane, D. R., and Powles, S. B. 2001. High frequency of chlorsulfuron resistant wild radish (Raphanus raphanistrum L.) populations across the Western Australian wheatbelt. Weed Technol. 15:199203.Google Scholar