Review: confirmation of resistance to herbicides and evaluation of resistance levels

Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

Standard

Review : confirmation of resistance to herbicides and evaluation of resistance levels. / Burgos, Nilda R.; Tranel, Patrick J.; Streibig, Jens Carl; Davis, Vince M.; Shaner, Dale; Norsworthy, Jason K.; Ritz, Christian.

In: Weed Science, Vol. 61, No. 1, 2013, p. 4-20.

Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Burgos, NR, Tranel, PJ, Streibig, JC, Davis, VM, Shaner, D, Norsworthy, JK & Ritz, C 2013, 'Review: confirmation of resistance to herbicides and evaluation of resistance levels', Weed Science, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 4-20. https://doi.org/10.1614/WS-D-12-00032.1

APA

Burgos, N. R., Tranel, P. J., Streibig, J. C., Davis, V. M., Shaner, D., Norsworthy, J. K., & Ritz, C. (2013). Review: confirmation of resistance to herbicides and evaluation of resistance levels. Weed Science, 61(1), 4-20. https://doi.org/10.1614/WS-D-12-00032.1

Vancouver

Burgos NR, Tranel PJ, Streibig JC, Davis VM, Shaner D, Norsworthy JK et al. Review: confirmation of resistance to herbicides and evaluation of resistance levels. Weed Science. 2013;61(1):4-20. https://doi.org/10.1614/WS-D-12-00032.1

Author

Burgos, Nilda R. ; Tranel, Patrick J. ; Streibig, Jens Carl ; Davis, Vince M. ; Shaner, Dale ; Norsworthy, Jason K. ; Ritz, Christian. / Review : confirmation of resistance to herbicides and evaluation of resistance levels. In: Weed Science. 2013 ; Vol. 61, No. 1. pp. 4-20.

Bibtex

@article{ecbd466ae7fa410391d5a0474b4e9bd4,
title = "Review: confirmation of resistance to herbicides and evaluation of resistance levels",
abstract = "As cases of resistance to herbicides escalate worldwide, there is increasing demand from growers to test for weed resistance and learn how to manage it. Scientists have developed resistance-testing protocols for numerous herbicides and weed species. Growers need immediate answers and scientists are faced with the daunting task of testing an increasingly large number of samples across a variety of species and herbicides. Quick tests have been, and continue to be, developed to address this need, although classical tests are still the norm. Newer methods involve molecular techniques. Whereas the classical whole-plant assay tests for resistance regardless of the mechanism, many quick tests are limited by specificity to an herbicide, mode of action, or mechanism of resistance. Advancing knowledge in weed biology and genomics allows for refinements in sampling and testing protocols. Thus, approaches in resistance testing continue to diversify, which can confound the less experienced. We aim to help weed science practitioners resolve questions pertaining to the testing of herbicide resistance, starting with field surveys and sampling methods, herbicide screening methods, data analysis, and, finally, interpretation. More specifically, this article discusses approaches for sampling plants for resistance confirmation assays, provides brief overviews on the biological and statistical basis for designing and analyzing dose–response tests, and discusses alternative procedures for rapid resistance confirmation, including molecular-based assays. Resistance confirmation procedures often need to be slightly modified to suit a specific situation; thus, the general requirements as well as pros and cons of quick assays and DNA-based assays are contrasted. Ultimately, weed resistance testing research, as well as resistance management decisions arising from research, needs to be practical, feasible, and grounded in science-based methods.",
author = "Burgos, {Nilda R.} and Tranel, {Patrick J.} and Streibig, {Jens Carl} and Davis, {Vince M.} and Dale Shaner and Norsworthy, {Jason K.} and Christian Ritz",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1614/WS-D-12-00032.1",
language = "English",
volume = "61",
pages = "4--20",
journal = "Weed Science",
issn = "0043-1745",
publisher = "Weed Science Society of America",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Review

T2 - confirmation of resistance to herbicides and evaluation of resistance levels

AU - Burgos, Nilda R.

AU - Tranel, Patrick J.

AU - Streibig, Jens Carl

AU - Davis, Vince M.

AU - Shaner, Dale

AU - Norsworthy, Jason K.

AU - Ritz, Christian

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - As cases of resistance to herbicides escalate worldwide, there is increasing demand from growers to test for weed resistance and learn how to manage it. Scientists have developed resistance-testing protocols for numerous herbicides and weed species. Growers need immediate answers and scientists are faced with the daunting task of testing an increasingly large number of samples across a variety of species and herbicides. Quick tests have been, and continue to be, developed to address this need, although classical tests are still the norm. Newer methods involve molecular techniques. Whereas the classical whole-plant assay tests for resistance regardless of the mechanism, many quick tests are limited by specificity to an herbicide, mode of action, or mechanism of resistance. Advancing knowledge in weed biology and genomics allows for refinements in sampling and testing protocols. Thus, approaches in resistance testing continue to diversify, which can confound the less experienced. We aim to help weed science practitioners resolve questions pertaining to the testing of herbicide resistance, starting with field surveys and sampling methods, herbicide screening methods, data analysis, and, finally, interpretation. More specifically, this article discusses approaches for sampling plants for resistance confirmation assays, provides brief overviews on the biological and statistical basis for designing and analyzing dose–response tests, and discusses alternative procedures for rapid resistance confirmation, including molecular-based assays. Resistance confirmation procedures often need to be slightly modified to suit a specific situation; thus, the general requirements as well as pros and cons of quick assays and DNA-based assays are contrasted. Ultimately, weed resistance testing research, as well as resistance management decisions arising from research, needs to be practical, feasible, and grounded in science-based methods.

AB - As cases of resistance to herbicides escalate worldwide, there is increasing demand from growers to test for weed resistance and learn how to manage it. Scientists have developed resistance-testing protocols for numerous herbicides and weed species. Growers need immediate answers and scientists are faced with the daunting task of testing an increasingly large number of samples across a variety of species and herbicides. Quick tests have been, and continue to be, developed to address this need, although classical tests are still the norm. Newer methods involve molecular techniques. Whereas the classical whole-plant assay tests for resistance regardless of the mechanism, many quick tests are limited by specificity to an herbicide, mode of action, or mechanism of resistance. Advancing knowledge in weed biology and genomics allows for refinements in sampling and testing protocols. Thus, approaches in resistance testing continue to diversify, which can confound the less experienced. We aim to help weed science practitioners resolve questions pertaining to the testing of herbicide resistance, starting with field surveys and sampling methods, herbicide screening methods, data analysis, and, finally, interpretation. More specifically, this article discusses approaches for sampling plants for resistance confirmation assays, provides brief overviews on the biological and statistical basis for designing and analyzing dose–response tests, and discusses alternative procedures for rapid resistance confirmation, including molecular-based assays. Resistance confirmation procedures often need to be slightly modified to suit a specific situation; thus, the general requirements as well as pros and cons of quick assays and DNA-based assays are contrasted. Ultimately, weed resistance testing research, as well as resistance management decisions arising from research, needs to be practical, feasible, and grounded in science-based methods.

U2 - 10.1614/WS-D-12-00032.1

DO - 10.1614/WS-D-12-00032.1

M3 - Review

VL - 61

SP - 4

EP - 20

JO - Weed Science

JF - Weed Science

SN - 0043-1745

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 45489479