Limits to the evolution of herbicide escape and tolerance in the agricultural weed <i>Amaranthus palmeri</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In response to novel anthropogenic stresses, defense strategies, including resistance, tolerance, and escape, can evolve. However, if the evolution of one or more of these strategies is limited by weak natural selection or a lack of genetic variation, then a mixed strategy (e.g., resistance and tolerance) is unlikely to evolve. To determine the mechanisms that limit the evolution of defense strategies, we studied escape from and tolerance to glyphosate herbicide in Amaranthus palmeri, an agricultural weed that has evolved glyphosate resistance. We grew A. palmeri in fields planted with corn, soybean, or no crop; manipulated their exposure to glyphosate; and measured escape and tolerance. We did not detect selection or genetic variation for glyphosate escape in any agricultural environment, suggesting that a mixed strategy of resistance and escape is unlikely to evolve in A. palmeri. We also did not detect selection for glyphosate tolerance, but there was genetic variation for tolerance in a corn crop environment, suggesting the potential for a mixed strategy of resistance and tolerance to evolve in A. palmeri in only a subset of environments. These results suggest that exposure to herbicides is unlikely to cause the widespread evolution of a mixed defense strategy in agricultural weeds.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".