Failure of glyphosate to control Palmer amaranth was first reported in Arkansas in Mississippi County in June, 2005. The objectives of this research were to (a) confirm glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth in Arkansas, and (b) determine the effectiveness of 15 postemergence- (POST) applied herbicides comprising eight modes of action in controlling the glyphosate-resistant biotype compared to glyphosate-susceptible accessions. The LD50 values were similar among three susceptible Palmer amaranth accessions, ranging from 24.4 to 35.5 g ae/ha glyphosate. The resistant biotype had an LD50 of 2,820 g/ha glyphosate, which was 79- to 115-fold greater than that of the susceptible biotypes and 3.4 times a normal glyphosate-use rate of 840 g/ha. The glyphosate-resistant biotype was effectively controlled with most of the evaluated herbicides, but the use of acetolactate synthase-inhibiting herbicides such as pyrithiobac, trifloxysulfuron, and imazethapyr is not a viable option for control of this Palmer amaranth population.

This research was aimed at understanding how far and how fast glyphosate-resistant (GR) Palmer amaranth will spread in cotton and the consequences associated with allowing a single plant to escape control. Specifically, research was conducted to determine the collective impact of seed dispersal agents on the in-field expansion of GR Palmer amaranth, and any resulting yield reductions in an enhanced GR cotton system where glyphosate was solely used for weed control. Introduction of 20,000 GR Palmer amaranth seed into a 1-m2circle in February 2008 was used to represent survival through maturity of a single GR female Palmer amaranth escape from the 2007 growing season. The experiment was conducted in four different cotton fields (0.53 to 0.77 ha in size) with no history of Palmer amaranth infestation. In the subsequent year, Palmer amaranth was located as far as 114 m downslope, creating a separate patch. It is believed that rainwater dispersed the seeds from the original area of introduction. In less than 2 yr after introduction, GR Palmer amaranth expanded to the boundaries of all fields, infesting over 20% of the total field area. Spatial regression estimates indicated that no yield penalty was associated with Palmer amaranth density the first year after introduction, which is not surprising since only 0.56% of the field area was infested with GR Palmer amaranth in 2008. Lint yield reductions as high as 17 kg ha−1were observed 2 yr after the introduction (in 2009). Three years after the introduction (2010), Palmer amaranth infested 95 to 100% of the area in all fields, resulting in complete crop loss since it was impossible to harvest the crop. These results indicate that resistance management options such as a “zero-tolerance threshold” should be used in managing or mitigating the spread of GR Palmer amaranth. This research demonstrates the need for proactive resistance management.

Research was conducted for 2 yr at Marianna, AR, to determine whether the fall-planted cover crops rye, wheat, turnip, and a blend of brown and white mustard (Caliente) would aid weed management programs in conservation-tilled, enhanced, glyphosate-resistant cotton. Wheat and rye easily were established both years and turnip and mustard blend stands were better in the second year. The cover crops alone were more suppressive of Palmer amaranth, pitted morningglory, and goosegrass in 2007 than in 2008. Rye was generally superior to wheat in suppressing the three evaluated weeds. Once herbicides were applied, there were seldom differences among cover crops for a particular herbicide program as a result of the highly efficacious herbicide programs. Cotton yields were not affected by wheat, rye, or the mustard blend, but yields were lowest in plots that followed turnip both years, possibly because of allelopathy. Integration of cover crops, especially cereals, into conservation-tilled, glyphosate-resistant cotton aided early-season weed management and could reduce the selection of glyphosate for herbicide resistance.

No abstract

Research was conducted at experimental research stations near Keiser and Marianna (Marianna-A), AR, in 2007, and in a grower's field near Marianna (Marianna-B), AR, in 2008, to compare herbicide programs, including POST application(s) of glyphosate/glufosinate alone or in combination with residual herbicides applied as PRE, mid-POST (MPOST), or layby POST-directed (PD) in enhanced glyphosate- and glufosinate-resistant cotton. Weed species evaluated included Palmer amaranth, pitted morningglory, hemp sesbania, barnyardgrass, and a mixture of large crabgrass and goosegrass. At Marianna-B, AR, the Palmer amaranth population was a mixture of glyphosate-resistant and -susceptible plants. For both cotton cultivars and at all locations, inclusion ofS-metolachlor plus fluometuron PRE increased weed control and/or decreased the number of glufosinate or glyphosate applications needed in-season. At Marianna-B, AR, PRE residual herbicides and/or glufosinate were required to control glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth. Addition of pyrithiobac to glufosinate or glyphosate did not increase weed control. A layby PD application of flumioxazin plus MSMA was required to increase late-season control of all weed species in POST glufosinate-only programs, but not in POST glyphosate-only programs. None of the programs caused > 5% injury to either cotton cultivar. Seed-cotton yield was similar in all herbicide programs at Keiser, AR, and Marianna-A, AR, except for the POST glyphosate-only program, which yielded less than the PRE followed by POST programs in glyphosate-resistant cotton at Keiser, AR. In general, PRE herbicides did not increase cotton yield but did improve early and late-season control of glyphosate-susceptible and -resistant weeds in both cotton cultivars.