Glyphosate- and Acetolactate Synthase Inhibitor–Resistant Kochia (<i>Kochia scoparia</i>) in Western Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In summer, 2011, we investigated suspected glyphosate-resistant (GR) kochia in three chem-fallow fields (designated F1, F2, F3, each farmed by a different grower) in southern Alberta. This study characterizes glyphosate resistance in those populations, based on data from dose–response experiments. In a greenhouse experiment, the three populations exhibited a resistance factor ranging from 4 to 6 based on shoot biomass response (GR50ratios), or 5 to 7 based on survival response (LD50ratios). Similar results were found in a field dose–response experiment at Lethbridge, AB, in spring 2012 using the F2 kochia population. In fall 2011, we surveyed 46 fields within a 20-km radius of the three chem-fallow fields for GR kochia. In the greenhouse, populations were screened with glyphosate at 900 g ae ha−1. Seven populations were confirmed as GR, the farthest site located about 13 km from the three originally confirmed populations. An additional GR population more than 100 km away was later confirmed. Populations were screened for acetolactate synthase (ALS)–inhibitor (thifensulfuron : tribenuron) and dicamba resistance in the greenhouse, with molecular characterization of ALS-inhibitor resistance in the F1, F2, and F3 populations. All GR populations were resistant to the ALS-inhibiting herbicide, but susceptible to dicamba. ALS-inhibitor resistance in kochia was conferred by Pro197, Asp376, or Trp574amino acid substitutions. Based upon a simple empirical model with a parameter for selection pressure, calculated from weed relative abundance and glyphosate efficacy, and a parameter for seedbank longevity, kochia, wild oat, and green foxtail were the top three weeds, respectively, predicted at risk of selection for glyphosate resistance in the semiarid Grassland region of the Canadian prairies; wild oat, green foxtail, and cleavers species were predicted at greatest risk in the subhumid Parkland region. This study confirms the first occurrence of a GR weed in western Canada. Future research on GR kochia will include monitoring, biology and ecology, fitness, mechanism of resistance, and best management practices.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".