Claim · model-written summary
The resistant lines were proposed as tools for weed management through herbicide rotation.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Outcome
- weed management in wheat productione0
- Qualifier
- mainly via herbicide rotatione0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorSettingDirectionValue
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“These R lines are potential tools for weed management in wheat production, mainly via herbicide rotation”
Title
Stacked traits conferring multiple resistance to imazamox and glufosinate in soft wheat
Rafael Domínguez‐Mendez; Ricardo Alcántara‐de la Cruz; Antonia M Rojano‐Delgado; et al. Pest Management Science 2018. doi:10.1002/ps.5159
Other claims from this paper (9)
- Observation Rados and Helter were about 18-fold more resistant to glufosinate than the susceptible cultivar.
- Observation Rados and Helter were 15.1 to 19.8-fold more resistant to imazamox than the susceptible cultivar.
- Intervention effect Sequential herbicide application reduced glufosinate resistance by up to 12%.
- Intervention effect Sequential herbicide application reduced imazamox resistance by up to 50%.
- Observation Basal acetolactate and glutamine synthase activities were similar in resistant and susceptible plants.
- Mechanism Rados had 11.7-fold greater imazamox resistance than the susceptible cultivar, attributed to Ser653–Asn in imi‐ ALS.
- Mechanism Helter had 17.7-fold greater imazamox resistance than the susceptible cultivar, attributed to Ser653–Asn in imi‐ ALS.
- Mechanism Resistant lines accumulated less ammonia despite target-site susceptibility to glufosinate, indicating phosphinothricin acetyl transferase activity.
- Observation Absorption and translocation of labelled imazamox and glufosinate were similar in resistant and susceptible cultivars.