One major complication to the use of herbicides for weed control is the ability of plants to evolve
herbicide resistance, rendering the herbicides ineffective against target plants. Out of 31 known herbicide modes of action, weeds have evolved resistance to 21. 268 plant species are known to have evolved herbicide resistance at least once. Herbicide resistance was first observed in 1957, and since has evolved repeatedly in weed species from 30 families across the globe. Weed resistance to herbicides has become a major concern in crop production worldwide. Resistance to herbicides is often attributed to overuse as well as the strong evolutionary pressure on the affected weeds. To minimize resistance, rotational programs of herbicide application, where herbicides with multiple modes of action are used, have been widely promoted. This caused incredibly strong selective pressure upon weeds, encouraging mutations conferring glyphosate resistance to persist and spread. However, in 2015, an expansive study showed an increase in herbicide resistance as a result of rotation, and instead recommended mixing multiple herbicides for simultaneous application. As of 2023, the effectiveness of combining herbicides is also questioned, particularly in light of the rise of non-target site resistance. Plants developed resistance to
atrazine and to
ALS-inhibitors relatively early, but more recently, glyphosate resistance has dramatically risen.
Marestail is one weed that has developed glyphosate resistance. Glyphosate-resistant weeds are present in the vast majority of soybean, cotton and corn farms in some U.S. states. Weeds that can resist multiple other herbicides are spreading. Few new herbicides are near commercialization, and none with a molecular mode of action for which there is no resistance. Because most herbicides could not kill all weeds, farmers rotate crops and herbicides to stop the development of resistant weeds. A 2008–2009 survey of 144 populations of
waterhemp in 41 Missouri counties revealed glyphosate resistance in 69%. Weeds from some 500 sites throughout Iowa in 2011 and 2012 revealed glyphosate resistance in approximately 64% of waterhemp samples. As of 2023, 58 weed species have developed glyphosate resistance. Weeds resistant to multiple herbicides with completely different biological action modes are on the rise. In Missouri, 43% of
waterhemp samples were resistant to two different herbicides; 6% resisted three; and 0.5% resisted four. In Iowa 89% of waterhemp samples resist two or more herbicides, 25% resist three, and 10% resist five.
Annual bluegrass collected from a golf course in the U.S. state of Tennessee was found in 2020 to be resistant to seven herbicides at once.
Rigid ryegrass and annual bluegrass share the distinction of the species with confirmed resistance to the largest number of herbicide modes of action, both with confirmed resistance to 12 different modes of action; however, this number references how many forms of herbicide resistance are known to have emerged in the species at some point, not how many have been found simultaneously in a single plant. In 2015,
Monsanto released crop seed varieties resistant to both dicamba and glyphosate, allowing for use of a greater variety of herbicides on fields without harming the crops. By 2020, five years after the release of dicamba-resistant seed, the first example of dicamba-resistant Palmer amaranth was found in one location.
Evolutionary insights When mutations occur in the genes responsible for the biological mechanisms that herbicides interfere with, these mutations may cause the herbicide mode of action to work less effectively. This is called target-site resistance. Specific mutations that have the most helpful effect for the plant have been shown to occur in separate instances and dominate throughout resistant weed populations. This is an example of
convergent evolution. • Target-site resistance: In target-site resistance, the genetic change that causes the resistance directly alters the chemical mechanism the herbicide targets. The mutation may relate to an enzyme with a crucial function in a metabolic pathway, or to a component of an
electron-transport system. For example, ALS-resistant weeds developed by genetic mutations leading to an altered enzyme. Such changes render the herbicide impotent. Target-site resistance may also be caused by an over-expression of the target enzyme (via
gene amplification or changes in a
gene promoter). A related mechanism is that an adaptable enzyme such as
cytochrome P450 is redesigned to neutralize the pesticide itself. • Non-target-site resistance: In non-target-site resistance, the genetic change giving resistance is not directly related to the target site, but causes the plant to be less susceptible by some other means. Some mechanisms include metabolic detoxification of the herbicide in the weed, reduced uptake and translocation, sequestration of the herbicide, or reduced penetration of the herbicide into the leaf surface. These mechanisms all cause less of the herbicide's active ingredient to reach the target site in the first place. The following terms are also used to describe cases where plants are resistant to multiple herbicides at once: • Cross-resistance: In this case, a single resistance mechanism causes resistance to several herbicides. The term target-site cross-resistance is used when the herbicides bind to the same target site, whereas non-target-site cross-resistance is due to a single non-target-site mechanism (e.g., enhanced metabolic detoxification) that entails resistance across herbicides with different sites of action. • Multiple resistance: In this situation, two or more resistance mechanisms are present within individual plants, or within a plant population.
Resistance management Due to
herbicide resistance – a major concern in
agriculture – a number of products combine herbicides with different means of action.
Integrated pest management may use herbicides alongside other pest control methods. Integrated weed management (IWM) approach utilizes several tactics to combat weeds and forestall resistance. This approach relies less on herbicides and so
selection pressure should be reduced. An example of a fully executed label compliant with the USEPA resistance management labeling guidance can be seen on the specimen label for the herbicide
cloransulam-methyl, updated in 2022.
Mixtures and sequences The use of two or more herbicides which have differing modes of action can reduce the selection for resistant genotypes. Ideally, each component in a mixture should: • Be active at different target sites • Have a high level of efficacy • Be detoxified by different biochemical pathways • Have similar persistence in the soil (if it is a residual herbicide) • Exert negative cross-resistance • Synergise the activity of the other component No mixture is likely to have all these attributes, but the first two listed are the most important. There is a risk that mixtures will select for resistance to both components in the longer term. One practical advantage of sequences of two herbicides compared with mixtures is that a better appraisal of the efficacy of each herbicide component is possible, provided that sufficient time elapses between each application. A disadvantage with sequences is that two separate applications have to be made and it is possible that the later application will be less effective on weeds surviving the first application. If these are resistant, then the second herbicide in the sequence may increase selection for resistant individuals by killing the susceptible plants which were damaged but not killed by the first application, but allowing the larger, less affected, resistant plants to survive. This has been cited as one reason why ALS-resistant
Stellaria media has evolved in Scotland recently (2000), despite the regular use of a sequence incorporating
mecoprop, a herbicide with a different mode of action. Some plants also produce their own herbicides, such as the genus
Juglans (
walnuts), or the
tree of heaven; such actions of natural herbicides, and other related chemical interactions, is called
allelopathy. The applicability of these agents is unclear.
Farming practices and resistance: a case study Herbicide resistance became a critical problem in
Australian agriculture after many Australian sheep farmers began to exclusively grow wheat in their pastures in the 1970s. Introduced varieties of
ryegrass, while good for grazing sheep, compete intensely with wheat. Ryegrasses produce so many seeds that, if left unchecked, they can completely choke a field. Herbicides provided excellent control, reducing soil disruption because of less need to plough. Within little more than a decade, ryegrass and other weeds began to develop resistance. In response Australian farmers changed methods. By 1983, patches of ryegrass had become immune to Hoegrass (
diclofop-methyl), a family of herbicides that inhibit an enzyme called
acetyl coenzyme A carboxylase. Ryegrass populations were large and had substantial genetic diversity because farmers had planted many varieties. Ryegrass is cross-pollinated by wind, so genes shuffle frequently. To control its distribution, farmers sprayed inexpensive Hoegrass, creating
selection pressure. In addition, farmers sometimes diluted the herbicide to save money, which allowed some plants to survive application. Farmers turned to a group of herbicides that block
acetolactate synthase when resistance appeared. Once again, ryegrass in Australia evolved a kind of "cross-resistance" that allowed it to break down various herbicides rapidly. Four classes of herbicides become ineffective within a few years. In 2013, only two herbicide classes called
Photosystem II and
long-chain fatty acid inhibitors, were effective against ryegrass. ==See also==