Testing Methods for Glyphosate Resistance

Shaner, Dale L.

doi:10.1002/9780470634394.ch5

Cited by 17 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 99 publications

(126 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The accumulation of shikimic acid in all E. colona lines following treatment with glyphosate suggests that glyphosate is successfully reaching the chloroplast and that at least some portion of the EPSPS enzyme present is sensitive to the herbicide . The varying levels of shikimic acid accumulation in these lines is consistent with an altered sensitivity of the EPSPS target site to glyphosate and/or differential exposure to glyphosate due to the amount reaching the target site .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple target site resistance to glyphosate in junglerice (Echinochloa colona) lines from California orchards

Morran

Moretti

Brunharo

et al. 2018

Pest Management Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple target site resistance to glyphosate in junglerice (Echinochloa colona) lines from California orchards

Morran

Moretti

Brunharo

et al. 2018

Pest Management Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This has spurred interest in factors that may contribute to resistant attribute(s) as well as methods that can be used to screen plants for herbicide toxicity (Shaner, 2010). Resistance mechanisms have been reported for horseweed (Conyza canadensis;Feng et al, 2004;Zelaya et al, 2004;Ge et al, 2010Ge et al, , 2011, Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri; Gaines et al, 2010), and ryegrass (Lolium rigidum and Lolium multiflorum; Powles et al, 1998;Perez et al, 2004;Ge et al, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

In Vivo 31P-Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Studies of Glyphosate Uptake, Vacuolar Sequestration, and Tonoplast Pump Activity in Glyphosate-Resistant Horseweed

Ge¹,

d’Avignon²,

Ackerman

et al. 2014

Plant Physiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Horseweed (Conyza canadensis) is considered a significant glyphosate-resistant (GR) weed in agriculture, spreading to 21 states in the United States and now found globally on five continents. This laboratory previously reported rapid vacuolar sequestration of glyphosate as the mechanism of resistance in GR horseweed. The observation of vacuole sequestration is consistent with the existence of a tonoplast-bound transporter. 31 P-Nuclear magnetic resonance experiments performed in vivo with GR horseweed leaf tissue show that glyphosate entry into the plant cell (cytosolic compartment) is (1) first order in extracellular glyphosate concentration, independent of pH and dependent upon ATP; (2) competitively inhibited by alternative substrates (aminomethyl phosphonate [AMPA] and N-methyl glyphosate [NMG]), which themselves enter the plant cell; and (3) blocked by vanadate, a known inhibitor/blocker of ATP-dependent transporters. Vacuole sequestration of glyphosate is (1) first order in cytosolic glyphosate concentration and dependent upon ATP; (2) competitively inhibited by alternative substrates (AMPA and NMG), which themselves enter the plant vacuole; and (3) saturable.31 P-Nuclear magnetic resonance findings with GR horseweed are consistent with the active transport of glyphosate and alternative substrates (AMPA and NMG) across the plasma membrane and tonoplast in a manner characteristic of ATP-binding cassette transporters, similar to those that have been identified in mammalian cells.

show abstract

“…Applicants will need to liaise with other providers of glyphosate-based herbicides and also with the producers of other glyphosate tolerant crops. Such observations may reveal the occurrence of localised resistance before it spreads, and may serve as a trigger for further investigations (Shaner, 2010).…”

Section: Monitoring Resistance Evolution To Glyphosate In Weeds Due Tmentioning

confidence: 94%

Scientific Opinion on an application (EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2005‐24) for the placing on the market of the herbicide tolerant genetically modified soybean 40‐3‐2 for cultivation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Monsanto

2012

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This Scientific Opinion reports on an evaluation of a risk assessment for the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified soybean 40‐3‐2, and updates the previous EFSA GMO Panel Scientific Opinion on the renewal applications for the continued marketing of soybean 40‐3‐2. The EFSA GMO Panel considered that soybean 40‐3‐2 is unlikely to raise additional environmental safety concerns compared with conventional soybean, but that the management of its cultivation could result in environmental harm under certain conditions. The Panel therefore recommended managing the use of glyphosate on soybean 40‐3‐2 in ways that result in similar or reduced environmental impacts compared with conventional soybean cultivation. There is no evidence of adverse effects on non‐target organisms (including pollinators) due to the expression of the CP4 EPSPS protein, and there are no indications of the occurrence of adverse effects on non‐target predators, herbivores and decomposers due to potential unintended changes in soybean 40‐3‐2. Owing to the lack of event‐specific data on plant‐pollinator interactions, scientific uncertainty on the occurrence of adverse effects on pollinators, due to potential unintended changes in soybean 40‐3‐2, remains, and strategies for resolving this uncertainty are discussed. The Panel recommended the deployment of case‐specific monitoring to address: (1) changes in weed community diversity; and (2) the evolution of resistance to glyphosate in weeds due to changes in herbicide and cutivation regimes. The Panel agreed with the general surveillance plan of the applicant, but requested that the Panel's proposals to strengthen general surveillance are implemented. The Panel concluded that the information available for soybean 40‐3‐2 addresses the scientific comments raised by Member States and that soybean 40‐3‐2, as described in this application, is as safe as its conventional counterpart and commercial non‐GM soybean varieties with respect to potential adverse effects on human and animal health. If subjected to appropriate management measures, the cultivation of soybean 40‐3‐2 is unlikely to have environmental effects any more adverse than those associated with conventional soybean cultivation.

show abstract

Testing Methods for Glyphosate Resistance

Cited by 17 publications

References 99 publications

Multiple target site resistance to glyphosate in junglerice (Echinochloa colona) lines from California orchards

Multiple target site resistance to glyphosate in junglerice (Echinochloa colona) lines from California orchards

In Vivo 31P-Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Studies of Glyphosate Uptake, Vacuolar Sequestration, and Tonoplast Pump Activity in Glyphosate-Resistant Horseweed

Scientific Opinion on an application (EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2005‐24) for the placing on the market of the herbicide tolerant genetically modified soybean 40‐3‐2 for cultivation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Monsanto

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About