<b>HRAC Group 0</b> <font size='2'> (Legacy Z) </font> resistant Xanthium strumarium from United States, Louisiana

International Survey of Herbicide-Resistant Weeds

LOGIN | REGISTER
Thursday, October 31, 2024

HRAC GROUP 0 (LEGACY Z) RESISTANT COMMON COCKLEBUR
(Xanthium strumarium)

Nucleic acid inhibitorsHRAC Group 0 (Legacy Z)

United States, Louisiana

INTRODUCTION		COMMON COCKLEBUR
Common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) is a dicot weed in the Asteraceae family. In Louisiana this weed first evolved resistance to Group 0 (Legacy Z) herbicides in 1992 and infests Cotton. Group 0 (Legacy Z) herbicides are known as Nucleic acid inhibitors (Unknown). Research has shown that these particular biotypes are resistant to MSMA and they may be cross-resistant to other Group 0 (Legacy Z) herbicides. The 'Group' letters/numbers that you see throughout this web site refer to the classification of herbicides by their site of action. To see a full list of herbicides and HRAC herbicide classifications click here.

QUIK STATS (last updated Sep 15, 2000 )
Common Name	Common cocklebur
Species	Xanthium strumarium
Group	Nucleic acid inhibitors HRAC Group 0 (Legacy Z)
Herbicides	MSMA
Location	United States, Louisiana
Year	1992
Situation(s)	Cotton
Contributors - (Alphabetically)	Dearl Sanders
Edit this Case \| Add New Case of Resistance \| Add Note

NOTES ABOUT THIS BIOTYPE

CONTROL STRATEGIES

Dearl Sanders

Growers have switched to Staple. Not much of a problem.

Edit this Note | Add New Note

ACADEMIC ASPECTS

Confirmation Tests

Greenhouse trials comparing a known susceptible Common cocklebur biotype with this Common cocklebur biotype have been used to confirm resistance. For further information on the tests conducted please contact the local weed scientists that provided this information.

Genetics

Genetic studies on HRAC Group 0 resistant Common cocklebur have not been reported to the site. There may be a note below or an article discussing the genetics of this biotype in the Fact Sheets and Other Literature

Mechanism of Resistance

The mechanism of resistance for this biotype is either unknown or has not been entered in the database. If you know anything about the mechanism of resistance for this biotype then please update the database.

Relative Fitness

There is no record of differences in fitness or competitiveness of these resistant biotypes when compared to that of normal susceptible biotypes. If you have any information pertaining to the fitness of Group 0 (Legacy Z) resistant Common cocklebur from Louisiana please update the database.

Edit Case | Add Note | Add Article | Add New Case | Help

CONTRIBUTING WEED SCIENTISTS

DEARL SANDERS

Professor & Coordinator Louisiana State University Cooperative Extension 4419 Idlewild Rd Clinton, 70722, Louisiana United States Email Dearl Sanders Web : Web Site Link

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Herbicide Resistance Action Committee, The Weed Science Society of America, and weed scientists in Louisiana have been instrumental in providing you this information. Particular thanks is given to Dearl Sanders for providing detailed information.

Drag a column header and drop it here to group by that column

Herbicide Resistant Common cocklebur Globally
(Xanthium strumarium)

Country

FirstYear

Situation

Active Ingredients

Site of Action

Kazakhstan

2015

Soybean

imazethapyr

Inhibition of Acetolactate Synthase ( HRAC Group 2 (Legacy B)

United States (South Carolina)

1985

Cotton

DSMA, and MSMA

Nucleic acid inhibitors ( HRAC Group 0 (Legacy Z)

United States (Alabama)

1988

Cotton

DSMA, and MSMA

Nucleic acid inhibitors ( HRAC Group 0 (Legacy Z)

United States (Mississippi)

1989

Soybean

imazaquin, and imazethapyr

Inhibition of Acetolactate Synthase ( HRAC Group 2 (Legacy B)

United States (Arkansas)

1989

Cotton, and Cropland

MSMA

Nucleic acid inhibitors ( HRAC Group 0 (Legacy Z)

United States (Tennessee)

1991

Cotton

DSMA, and MSMA

Nucleic acid inhibitors ( HRAC Group 0 (Legacy Z)

United States (Louisiana)

1992

Cotton

MSMA

Nucleic acid inhibitors ( HRAC Group 0 (Legacy Z)

United States (Missouri)

1992

Soybean

chlorimuron-ethyl, and imazaquin

Inhibition of Acetolactate Synthase ( HRAC Group 2 (Legacy B)

United States (Tennessee)

1992

Soybean

imazaquin

Inhibition of Acetolactate Synthase ( HRAC Group 2 (Legacy B)

United States (Minnesota)

1994

Soybean

imazethapyr

Inhibition of Acetolactate Synthase ( HRAC Group 2 (Legacy B)

United States (Mississippi)

1994

Cotton

DSMA, and MSMA

Nucleic acid inhibitors ( HRAC Group 0 (Legacy Z)

United States (North Carolina)

1994

Cotton

DSMA, and MSMA

Nucleic acid inhibitors ( HRAC Group 0 (Legacy Z)

United States (Arkansas)

1995

Cropland, and Soybean

imazaquin

Inhibition of Acetolactate Synthase ( HRAC Group 2 (Legacy B)

United States (Iowa)

1995

Soybean

chlorimuron-ethyl, and imazethapyr

Inhibition of Acetolactate Synthase ( HRAC Group 2 (Legacy B)

United States (Oklahoma)

1996

Soybean

imazethapyr

Inhibition of Acetolactate Synthase ( HRAC Group 2 (Legacy B)

United States (Kansas)

1997

Soybean

chlorimuron-ethyl, and imazethapyr

Inhibition of Acetolactate Synthase ( HRAC Group 2 (Legacy B)

United States (Maryland)

1998

Unspecified

chlorimuron-ethyl, imazaquin, and imazethapyr

Inhibition of Acetolactate Synthase ( HRAC Group 2 (Legacy B)

United States (Illinois)

1998

Corn (maize), and Soybean

chlorimuron-ethyl, and imazethapyr

Inhibition of Acetolactate Synthase ( HRAC Group 2 (Legacy B)

United States (Ohio)

1999

Soybean

chlorimuron-ethyl, and cloransulam-methyl

Inhibition of Acetolactate Synthase ( HRAC Group 2 (Legacy B)

United States (North Carolina)

1999

Soybean

chlorimuron-ethyl, cloransulam-methyl, imazapyr, primisulfuron-methyl, and pyrithiobac-sodium

Inhibition of Acetolactate Synthase ( HRAC Group 2 (Legacy B)

Literature about Similar Cases

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...

Page size:

select

Page: of 10

Items 1 to 5 of 50

Zuver, K. A. ; Bernards, M. L. ; Kells, J. J. ; Sprague, C. L. ; Medlin, C. R. ; Loux, M. M.. 2006. Evaluation of postemergence weed control strategies in herbicide-resistant isolines of corn (Zea mays). Weed Technology 20 : 172 - 178.

Herbicide-resistant maize hybrids offer additional options for postemergence (POST) weed control in maize, and growers may benefit from information on the consistency of these weed control strategies. Studies were conducted in Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio, USA, in 2000 and 2001, to evaluate weed control among herbicide strategies for imidazolinone-resistant, glufosinate-resistant, glyphosate-resistant, and conventional maize. Isogenic hybrids were utilized to minimize variation in growth and yield potential among hybrids. The glyphosate-resistant maize postemergence (glyphosate-POST) treatment provided more consistent control of giant foxtail (Setaria faberi) than the PRE, conventional maize postemergence (conventional-POST), glufosinate-resistant maize postemergence (glufosinate-POST), and imidazolinone-resistant maize postemergence (imi-POST) treatments. All four POST treatments were more consistent and provided greater control than the PRE treatment of the large-seeded broadleaf weeds such as velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti), giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida), common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium), and morningglory species (Ipomoea spp.). Conventional-POST and imi-POST were more consistent than glufosinate-POST and glyphosate-POST treatments in controlling giant ragweed. There were no statistical differences in the variability of PRE or POST treatments for control of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album), common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), and redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus). Maize yield varied among locations and years. The glyphosate-POST treatment did not reduce yield relative to the weed-free treatment, the imi-POST and glufosinate-POST treatments each reduced yield in one of eight locations, and the conventional-POST treatment reduced yield in three of eight locations..

Bunting, J. A. ; Sprague, C. L. ; Riechers, D. E.. 2005. Incorporating foramsulfuron into annual weed control systems for corn. Weed Technology 19 : 160 - 167.

Field studies were conducted in 2000, 2001, and 2002 at Brownstown, DeKalb, Perry and Urbana, in Illinois, USA, to evaluate the weed control and maize (Zea mays) tolerance from postemergence (POST) applications of foramsulfuron in sequential and total-POST herbicide programmes. Foramsulfuron applied alone controlled giant foxtail (Setaria faberi), fall panicum (Panicum dichotomiflorum) and redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) by 88, 99 and 99%, respectively, 28 days after treatment (DAT), which was comparable with the standard treatment of nicosulfuron. However, the control of common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium), velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) and common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album) was significantly higher with foramsulfuron compared with nicosulfuron. Sequential herbicide programmes of atrazine, S-metolachlor or isoxaflutole applied preemergence (PRE) followed by a POST application of foramsulfuron provided greater than 85% control of giant foxtail, fall panicum, common cocklebur, velvetleaf, common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis [A. tuberculatus]), and redroot pigweed. Of the sequential herbicide treatments, atrazine applied PRE followed by a POST application of foramsulfuron provided the greatest Pennsylvania smartweed (Polygonum pennsylvanicum) control. A PRE application of either atrazine or isoxaflutole was needed before a POST application of foramsulfuron to control common lambsquarters. POST tank mixtures of foramsulfuron with atrazine, dicamba, and dicamba plus diflufenzopyr improved the control of Pennsylvania smartweed, common cocklebur, velvetleaf, common lambsquarters, and common waterhemp when compared with foramsulfuron applied alone. The tank mixture of foramsulfuron with mesotrione improved control of all species, except Pennsylvania smartweed, common lambsquarters, and common cocklebur. Foramsulfuron tank mixtures with carfentrazone did not improve control of any weed species to commercial acceptance. Adjuvant selection was important for POST tank mixtures. The control of giant foxtail and fall panicum was reduced when atrazine was tank mixed with foramsulfuron and crop oil concentrate (COC). However, when methylated seed oil (MSO) was added to the atrazine-foramsulfuron tank mixture instead of COC, giant foxtail and fall panicum control were similar to foramsulfuron applied alone..

Crooks, H. L. ; Burton, M. G. ; York, A. C. ; Brownie, C.. 2005. Vegetative growth and competitiveness of common cocklebur resistant and susceptible to acetolactate synthase-inhibiting herbicides. Journal of Cotton Science 9 : 229 - 237.

Herbicide-resistant biotypes of weeds are an increasing threat to crop production. An understanding of the basic biology of resistant biotypes, including their growth and development relative to susceptible biotypes, may yield information helpful in the management of resistant biotypes. Greenhouse and growth chamber experiments were conducted to compare growth characteristics of biotypes of common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium L.) that are resistant or susceptible to acetolactate synthase (ALS)-inhibiting herbicides. Averaged over two temperature regimes (24/18°C and 34/24°C day/night) under noncompetitive conditions, an ALS herbicide-susceptible (S) biotype produced more leaves, greater leaf area, and greater shoot dry biomass at 20 and 30 d after planting (DAP) than an ALS herbicide-resistant (R) biotype. By 40 DAP, leaf number, leaf area, leaf area ratio (LAR), leaf dry biomass, and shoot dry biomass were similar for R and S biotypes. Susceptible plants produced a greater root biomass, but R plants were taller at 40 DAP under noncompetitive conditions. Averaged across biotypes, relative growth rate (RGR) and photosynthetic net assimilation rate (NAR) were greater at the 24/18°C temperature regime. Averaged across temperature regimes, RGR and NAR were 11 and 17% greater for the R biotype than the S biotype under noncompetitive conditions. Under intertypic competitive conditions, the biotypes were similar in height, but the S biotype had a greater leaf number per plant. Evaluation of replacement series diagrams and relative crowding coefficient (RCC) estimates suggest that the two biotypes did not differ competitively in leaf production or plant height. The R biotype demonstrated a statistically significant, but probably trivial, competitive disadvantage in leaf dry biomass (t_lof=-4.55, P=0.01; RCC_R:S=0.73±0.07) and shoot dry biomass production (t_lof=-3.73, P=0.02; RCC_R:S=0.73±0.08)..

Stephenson, D. O., IV ; Patterson, M. G. ; Faircloth, W. H. ; Lunsford, J. N.. 2004. Weed management with fomesafen preemergence in glyphosate-resistant cotton. Weed Technology 18 : 680 - 686.

Field studies were conducted in Alabama, USA in 1998 and 1999 to evaluate fomesafen preemergence (PRE) in glyphosate-resistant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum cultivars Deltapine 655 BG/RR and Paymaster 1220 BG/RR). Fomesafen (0.3 and 0.4 kg ai/ha), fluometuron (1.4 kg ai/ha), and pyrithiobac (0.05 kg ai/ha) were applied alone or in tank mixtures. Glyphosate (0.4 kg ae/ha) was applied postemergence over-the-top (POT) and postemergence directed (PD). Regardless of PRE treatment, POT followed by PD applications of glyphosate were necessary for greater than 82% sicklepod (Senna obtusifolia [Cassia obtusifolia]) control at midseason. In the absence of glyphosate, fomesafen, and fomesafen-containing tank mixtures controlled common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) and Ipomoea species 77 and 72%, respectively, 14 days after PD application. However, two applications of glyphosate were needed for >94% season-long control of common cocklebur and Ipomoea species because of continued germination throughout the growing season. Postemergence applications of glyphosate added a 1,000 kg/ha seed cotton yield increase to all PRE treatments at both locations. Common cocklebur, Ipomoea species, and sicklepod control was not significantly increased by the addition of fomesafen PRE tank mixtures fb glyphosate postemergence as compared with glyphosate postemergence only..

Schmidt, L. A. ; Talbert, R. E. ; McClelland, M.. 2004. Management of acetolactate synthase (ALS)-resistant common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) in soybean. Weed Technology 18 : 665 - 674.

A fixed-plot management study for control of acetolactate synthase (ALS)-resistant common cocklebur in soyabean was initiated in 1994 at Fayetteville, Arkansas, USA. Three susceptible and three imazaquin-resistant common cocklebur plants were transplanted into the field, and seed (burs) were distributed throughout the plots in the autumn of 1994. The soyabean cultivars used were Hutcheson, Delta King 5580, Asgrow 5547LL and Delta King 5961RR. Herbicide treatments included imazaquin, chlorimuron, and chlorimuron plus metribuzin applied each year from 1995 through 1999 and herbicide rotations containing ALS inhibitors and herbicides with alternative modes of action. Effectiveness of management systems and the dynamics of the development of common cocklebur resistance, including development of resistance to imazaquin and chlorimuron, were evaluated. Imazaquin controlled susceptible common cocklebur populations in 1995 but not the resistant population, resulting in significant soyabean yield reduction. By the end of the 1996 season, the resistant biotype dominated imazaquin plots, and a high level of cross-resistance to chlorimuron was observed in the population. Resistant populations were reduced by non-ALS herbicide programmes of sulfentrazone plus clomazone applied preemergence (PRE), metribuzin plus clomazone applied PRE followed by bentazone applied postemergence (POST), and transgenic herbicide programmes of glyphosate and glufosinate applied POST. Rotating ALS inhibitors with non-ALS-inhibiting heribicides may slow the development of resistance, but resistant individuals may eventually dominate the population..

1 2 3 4 5 6 ...

Page size:

select

Page: of 10

Items 1 to 5 of 50

PERMISSION MUST BE OBTAINED FIRST if you intend to base a significant portion of a scientific paper on data derived from this site.
Cite this site as: Heap, I. The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. Online. Internet. Thursday, October 31, 2024 . Available www.weedscience.org
Copyright © 1993- 2024 WeedScience.org All rights reserved. Fair use of this material is encouraged. Proper citation is requested.