CHAPTER-1 Introduction, definition, losses, utilization and characteristics of weeds

1. Introduction
The insect pests (including mites, ticks and spiders), plant pathogens (fungi, bacteria, viruses,
nematodes, mycoplasma), weeds, vertebrate pests (birds, rats and rodents and a variety of
ruminants) and snails and slugs are considered as five important categories of agricultural
pests and have been existing in the natural environment in a dynamic, but fairly balanced
state since time immemorial.
Though plants are man‘s most valuable assets for his survival, their indiscriminate growth all
over the land and water-bodies, create troubles to carry out his activities. Out of 300,000
species of plants known in the world, hardly 3,000 are of economic value to us. When one
grows any of these economic species of the plants, invariably, a variety of volunteer
vegetation comes up simultaneously which is not only competitive and undesirable, but also
hazardous for man and animal‘s health and hamper normal activities of man otherwise.
There are four natural hazards, e.g. weather, weeds, insect pests and plant diseases,
which stand between humans and continuing food supply, These hazards sometimes work
independently and many times hand in hand. Weeds, one of the most prominent hazards,
have been recognized as a problem since the man started domesticating/cultivating plants and
animals around 10,000 B.C. and the battle against weeds is a never ending one and often the
costliest agronomic inputs for the success in crop production. Weeds are considered as a
hidden enemy of mankind as of the total annual loss of agricultural produce from various
pests in India, weeds roughly account for 45%, insects for 30%, diseases for 20% and other
pests for 5%, however, their direct and indirect hazardous impact gone unnoticed till the
harvest of the crop.
1.1 Weeds Defined
Weeds are defined in many ways, but most definitions emphasize behavior that affects
humans. The most basic concept of weed science is embodied in the word ‗weed‘ itself. Each
weed scientist has a clear understanding of the term, but there is no universal definition that is
accepted by all scientists.
 Weeds are the plants, which grow where they are not wanted (Jethro Tull, 1731).
 In 1967 the Weed Science Society of America defined a weed as ―a plant growing
where it is not desired‖ (Buchholtz, 1967).
 In 1989 the Society‘s definition was changed to define a weed as ―any plant that is
objectionable or interferes with the activities or welfare of man‖ (Humburg, 1989, p.
267; Vencill, 2002, p. 462).
 The European Weed Research Society defined a weed as ―any plant or vegetation,
excluding fungi, interfering with the objectives or requirements of people‖
(EWRS,1986).
 The Oxford English Dictionary (Little et al., 1973) defines a weed as a ―herbaceous
plant not valued for use or beauty, growing wild and rank, and regarded as cumbering
the ground or hindering the growth of superior vegetation.‖
 2

The human role is clear because it is we who determine use or beauty and which plants are to
be regarded as superior. It is important that weed scientists and vegetation managers
remember the importance of definitions as determinants of their views of plants and attitudes
toward them. Harlan and de Wet (1965) assembled several definitions to show the diversity
of definitions of the same or similar plants. The array of definitions emphasizes the care weed
scientists and vegetation managers must take in equating how something is defined with a
right or privilege to control.
1. Definitions from plant scientists
 ―A plant out of place or growing where it is not wanted‖ W.S. Blatchley 1912‘
 ―A plant that is growing where it is desired that something else shall grow‖ A.E.
Georgia 1916
 ―The obnoxious plants are known as weeds‖ W.W. Robbins et al. 1942
 ―Those plants with harmful or objectionable habits or characteristics which grow where
they are not wanted, usually in places where it is desired that something else should
grow‖ W.C. Muenscher 1946
 ―Higher plants which are a nuisance‖ J.L. Harper 1960
 ―A plant growing where we do not want it‖ E.J. Salisbury 1961
 ―A plant growing where it is not desired; or a plant out of place‖ G.C. Klingman 1961
2. Definitions by enthusiastic amateurs
 ―A plant whose virtues have not yet been discovered‖ R.W. Emerson 1912
 ―Weeds have always been condemned without a fair trial‖ F.C. King 1951
3. Ecological definitions
 ―Weeds are pioneers of secondary succession, of which the weedy arable field is a
special case‖ A.H. Bunting1960
 ―A plant which contests with man for the possession of the soil‖ W.S. Blatchley 1912
 ―Opportunistic species that follow human disturbance of the habitat‖ T. Pritchard 1960
 A weed is ―a plant that originated in a natural environment and, in response to
imposed or natural environments, evolved, and continues to do so, as an interfering
associate with our crops and activities.‖ Aldrich (1984) and Aldrich and Kremer
(1997, p. 8). They did not deny the validity of others but introduced a desirable
ecological base
2. Losses Caused By Weeds
(1) Weed Menace in Agriculture:
(A) Reduction in crop yields and production efficiency
The reduction in yields due to uncontrolled growth of weeds is 34.3% to 89.8%. As the
farmer adopts some kind of weeding on their field, it still leaves us with a conservative
estimate of at least 10% reduction in crop yields. It is estimated that in general weeds cause
5% loss in agricultural production in most of developed countries, 10% loss in less developed
countries and 25% loss in least developed countries.
 3

In weedy fields farm operations like application of fertilizer, insecticides and irrigation
become cumbersome. When spiny weeds invade the crop field it makes the harvesting
difficult. Some weeds like bindweed bind the crop plants together so well that their
harvesting becomes troublesome. Growing within and outside the fields weeds frequently
provide shelter to insect pests and disease organisms of crops and act as alternate host to
these, both during the crop season and off season.
In India, yield losses due to weeds are more than those from pest and diseases. Yield losses
due to weeds vary with the crops. Every crop is exposed to severe competition from weeds.
Most of these weeds are self-sown and they provide competition caused by their faster rate of
growth in the initial stages of crop growth. In some crops, the yields are reduced by more
than 50% due to weed infestation. Weeds compete with crops for water soil, nutrients, light,
and space, and thus reduce the crop yields. An estimate shows that weeds can deprive the
crops 47% N, 42% P, 50% K, 39% Ca and 24% Mg of their nutrient uptake.
Weeds are also act as alternate hosts that harbor insects, pests and diseases and other micro-
organisms.
Alternate hosts of some of the pest and diseases
Crop Pest Alternate host

Red gram Gram caterpillar Amaranthus, Datura

Castor Hairy caterpillar Crotalaria sp
Rice Stem Borer Echinocholoa, Panicum
Wheat Black Rust Agropyron repens
Pearl Millet Ergot Cenchrus ciliaris
Maize Downy Mildew Sacharum spontaneum
 Weeds not only reduce yield but also interfere with agricultural operations. Weeds
make mechanical sowing a difficult process and render harvesting difficult, leading to
increased expenditure on labour, equipment and chemicals for their removal.
 In aquatic environment, weeds block the flow of water in canals, water-transport
system and drainage system, rendering navigation difficult. The dense growth of
aquatic weeds pollutes water by deoxygenating it and killing the fishes.
 Weeds are also a nuisance and a fire hazard along railway lines, roads, right-of- ways,
airports, forest and industrial sites.
(B) Erosion of crop Quality
Weeds mar quality of farm produce in many ways. Contamination of food grain with weed
seeds fetches low price. The weedy grains produce flour with bad odour. In warehouses the
weed seeds and weed fragments continue respiration and thus cause the grain to heat and rot.
In tea the presence of Loranthus leaves impair its quality. In cotton the dry weed fragments
adhere to its lint and hinder its spinning process. In dry land agriculture weedy cause severe
moisture stress and force the food grain to shrivel. The vegetation and fruits are discolored
and deshaped in the presence of weeds. Contamination of weed seeds of Datura, Argemone,
 4

Brassica etc., is harmful to human health and weed seeds present in the produce cause odd
odour sometimes.
(2) Weed Menace in Animal Husbandry:
Growing with the forage crops, weeds often help to fill the carts and silos but it is the milk
and meat returns that their damage becomes apparent. Certain weeds cause sickness in farm
animals while others may prove fatal due to high levels of specific alkaloids, tannins,
oxalates, glucosides or nitrates. Johnson grass at its tillering stage and Xanthium pungens at
its cotyledon stage are poisonous to animal due to their high prussic acid contents. Tribulus
terrestris a weed of dry lands, induces in sheep extra sensitivity to light. Also, its thorny
fruits cause sores in the hooves of animals.
The leaves of lantana induce acute photosensitivity and jaundice in animals due to their toxic
‗Lantradene-A‘. Carrot grass cause contact dermatitis in livestock and it is reported to be
poisonous to sheep. Leafy spurge (Euphorbia esula) cause scours and weakness in cattle and
it is fatal to sheep. Crotolaria spp. is fatal to chick. Datura is another sickening weed for
animals.
Under drought conditions weeds like Chenopodium and Amaranths develop nitrate levels as
high as 1000 ppm or more which causes asphyxia in animals. Spines of Tribulus territories
can puncture animals‘ skin. When ingested these can also injure the stomach.
(3) Weed Menace to Human Health:
Health comfort and work efficiency of men are adversely affected by weeds. Numerous
people are plagued year after year with hay fever and asthma aggravated by pollens of
Ambrosia. The airborne pollens and other biotic particles of several other weeds belonging to
diverse families are known to cause rhinitis and conjunctivitis. Carrot grass is held
responsible for different kinds of dermal allergies in humans. Weeds provide food, protection
and habitat for the reproduction of vectors of fatal, human diseases. Aquatic weeds like water
lettuce (Pistia lanceolata), salvinia (Salvinia auriculata) and alligator weed (Alternanthera
spp.) shelter the alternate hosts and vectors of malaria, yellow fever, dengue fever and
filariasis.
Wheat flour contaminated with the seeds of corncockel (Agrostemma githago) gives bread a
bitter taste and irritates the gastric-tract of the consumer. Mexican poppy (Agremone
mexicana) seeds crushed with mustard seeds have brought death and blindness to thousands
of people in India. Milk from animals feeding upon this weed can cause glaucoma in humans.
(4) Weed Menace to Aquatic Ecosystems:
Not only on land, weeds are a nuisance also in and around water bodies. Aquatic weeds make
the appearance of water bodies repulsive and decline their recreational values. In other water
bodies they hinder navigation and fishing. Water-flow in irrigation canals and channels is
slowed. The potable and drinking water-bodies are fouled by the presence of decomposing
aquatic weeds.
 5

(5) Weed Menace To Industry And Public Utilities:

Weeds growing on industrial sites and air fields are potential source of fire hazards, besides
being unseemly. They hide industrial pipelines and valve and contribute to deterioration of
stores, equipment, and material. Weeds force the fence lines to corrode and obstruct road
signs and curves on highways. The working road widths are reduced by weeds. Some weeds
penetrate through even asphaltic surfaces which get weakened. Weeds growing around
electric poles prevent their ready access to the work crew. Weeds also weaken the rail tracks
and air-strips.
(6) Weed Menace To Forests And Pasture-Land:
In the forests and pasture-lands in India weeds are great impedance to regeneration of natural
vegetation. In outer Himalayas, lantana (Lantana camera) has made large areas of forests and
pastures useless. Now carrot grass (Parthenium hysterophorus) is entering these areas in a big
way. In Maharashtra, many forest nurseries, and in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh large
forest areas have also come under the grip of this weed. With the world‘s wood needs
increasing every year by 64 million cu m, there is need to manage the weeds in our forests to
allow natural regeneration of the desired forest species and increase the productivity of the
existing trees. Also, weed free buffer strips are essential in forests for preventing fire hazards.
(7) Weeds and Aesthetics:
In many advanced countries lowering of the aesthetic values is the primary objection to
weeds. Their presence around living and working places makes the surroundings dull and
insipid.
1.3 Beneficial Effects
In spite of all the difficulties caused by weeds, they can offer some beneficial
properties, particularly when occurring at low densities. These aspects should be utilized in
the farming system, although this may make organic management more complicated than
chemical based systems. Some of the potential benefits of weeds are listed below:
 Helping to conserve soil moisture and prevent erosion. A ground cover of weeds will
reduce the amount of bare soil exposed helping to conserve nutrients, particularly
nitrogen which could otherwise be leached away, especially on light soils.
 Food and shelter can be provided for natural enemies of pests and even alternative
food sources for crop pests. The actual presence of weed cover may be a factor in
increasing effectiveness of biological control of pests and reducing pest damage.
 Weeds can also be valuable indicators of growing conditions in a field, for example of
water levels, compaction and pH.
 Weeds can be an important source of food for wildlife, especially birds. Bird
populations have been declining on farmland over the last few decades and leaving
weeds as a resource has been shown to help revive bird populations.
 Several known weeds have been put to certain economic uses since ages. Of these,
their medicinal use is perhaps the most ancient one in India. Typha and Saccharum
spp. are used in cottage industry for making ropes and thatch boards.
 Cichorium intybus roots are used for adding flavour to coffee powder.
 6

 Weeds like Chenopodium album, Amaranthus viridis, and Portulaca spp., form good
leafy vegetables.
 Certain weeds have been used to donate specific genes to our crop plants, for instance,
Saccharum spontaneum has been widely exploited for developing the present noble
canes for North India.
 Fruit and rhizomes of certain weeds are used as vegetable and food material. Attempts
are underway to convert weedy vegetation into useful manure, animal feed, paper-
pulp, biogas, and edible proteins on commercial basis to make physical control of
weeds more attractive.
 More recently, certain weeds have exhibited nematicidal properties. Their
incorporation into the soil has been found to result in greatly reduced root-knot
nematode population. Some promising weeds in this respect are Crotolaria,
Parthenium, Calotropis and Eichhornia spp.
 Some entomologists have found that parasites and predators of certain crop pests also
survive on insect pests of certain weeds. Thus, such weeds help in maintaining the
continuity of life cycle of certain useful parasites.
However, these cannot dissuade a farmer from fighting weeds on and around his farm.
The cultivation of certain weedy plants as medicinal plants, greens, and forage is
a completely different issue; not to be confused with their occurrence on our
farm lands where they incur whooping yield and quality losses.
1.4 Characteristics of weeds
Weeds are also like other plants but have special characteristics that tend to put them in the
category of unwanted plants. Knowledge about these features will help in developing suitable
methods for their control by studying their most sensitive stage in their life cycle. Knowing
the characteristics of weeds will help in studying the means of their adaptation as well as
extent of loss which these weeds can render to human beings.
1. Weeds have rapid seedling growth and the ability to reproduce when young. Redroot
pigweed can flower and produce seed when less than 8 inches tall. Crops cannot do
either. Phyllanthus niruri has faster growth I groundnut.
2. Quick maturation or only a short time in the vegetative stage. Ephemerals have
lifecycle of 1 month. Canada thistle can produce mature seed two weeks after
flowering. Russian thistle seeds can germinate very quickly between 28° and 110°F in
late spring (Young, 1991). It would spread more, but the seed must germinate in loose
soil because the coiled root unwinds as it pushes into soil and is unable to do so in
hard soil.
3. Dual modes of reproduction. Most weeds are angiosperms and reproduce by seed.
Many also reproduce vegetatively (e.g., Canada thistle, field bindweed, leafy spurge,
quackgrass). Cyperus rotundus can propagate through tubers.
4. Environmental plasticity. Many weeds are capable of tolerating and growing under a
wide range of climatic and edaphic conditions. Weeds have the capacity to withstand
adverse conditions in the field, because they can modify their seed production and
growth according to the availability of moisture and temperature. They can germinate
under adverse soil-moisture conditions, have short period of plant growth, generally
 7

grow faster rate and produce seed earlier than most of the crops growing in
association. Rumex spinosus can germinate in acidic soil
5. Weeds are often self-compatible, but self-pollination is not obligatory.
6. If a weed is cross-pollinated, pollination is accomplished by nonspecialized flower
visitors or by wind.
7. Weeds resist detrimental environmental factors. Most crop seeds rot if they do not
germinate shortly after planting. Weed seeds resist decay for long periods in soil and
remain dormant.
8. Weed seeds exhibit several kinds of dormancy or dispersal in time to escape the rigors
of the environment and germinate when conditions are most favorable for survival.
Many weeds have no special environmental requirements for germination. Weed
seeds remain viable for longer period without losing their viability, e.g. annual
meadow grass (Poa annua) and scarlet pimpernel (Anagallis arvensis) remain viable
for about 8 years; creeping thistle (Cirsium arvense) for 20 years and field bind weed
(Convolvulus arvensis) for about 20-50 years. Cyperus rotundus have 78% viability.
9. Weeds often produce seed that is the same size and shape as crop seed, making
physical separation difficult and facilitating spread by man. Cichorium intybus in
berseem. Some weeds resemble morphologically with the crop and are difficult to
identify at weeding or hoeing.
10. Some annual weeds produce more than one seed crop per year, and seed is produced
as long as growing conditions permit.
11. Each generation is capable of producing large numbers of seed per plant, and some
seed is produced over a wide range of environmental conditions. Most of the weeds
especially annuals produce enormous quantity of seeds, e.g. wild oats (Avena fatua),
produces 250 seeds per plant, whereas wild amaranth (Amaranthus viridis) produces
nearly 11 million seeds. Striga juncea produces 50 lakh seeds/plant ; Amaranthus
viridis produces 1.78 lakh seeds/plant. It has been observed that among 61 perennial
weeds, the average seed production capacity was 26,500 per plant.
12. Many weeds have specially adapted long- and short-range seed dispersal mechanisms.
Weed seeds have a tremendous capacity to disperse from one place to another through
wind, water and animals including man. Many of times, weed seeds mimic with the
crop seeds due to their size and get transported from one place to another along with
them. There is formation of special structure for effective dissemination. Physallis
minima forms balloon structure.
13. Roots of some weeds are able to penetrate and emerge from deep in the soil. While
most roots are in the top foot of soil, Canada thistle roots routinely penetrate 3 to 6
feet and field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) roots have been recorded over 10-20
feet deep. Roots and rhizomes are capable of growing many feet per year.
14. Roots and other vegetative organs of perennials are vigorous with large food reserves,
enabling them to withstand environmental stress and intensive cultivation.
15. Perennials have brittleness in lower stem nodes or in rhizomes and roots, and, if
severed, vegetative organs will quickly regenerate a whole plant.
16. Many weeds have adaptations that repel grazing, such as spines (Solanum
xanthocarpus), taste, or odor.
 8

17. Weeds have great competitive ability for nutrients, light, and water and can compete
by special means (e.g. rosette formation, climbing, allelopathy). For example
Echinochloa colona is most competitive and aggressive in rice.
18. Weeds are ubiquitous. They exist everywhere we practice agriculture.
19. Weeds resist control/eradication, including resistance to herbicides.

x-x-x-x-x-x
 9

CHAPTER-2 Classification, reproduction/propagation and dissemination of weeds

2.1 CLASSIFICATION OF WEEDS:

1 Classification According (C. A.) to Ontogeny/life i. Annuals
cycle of weeds ii. Biennials
iii. Perennials
2 CA to seed type/morphology/Cotyledon character i. Monocot
ii. Dicot
3 C. A. to the nature of shoot/stem/plant architecture i. Woody and Semi woody
ii. Herbaceous Spp
4 C. A. to Association i. Season bound weeds
ii. Crop- Bound weeds
iii. Crop associated weeds
5 C. A. to habitat
6 C. A. to the origin of weeds i. Alien weed
ii. Indigenous weed
7 C. A. to soil reaction i. Acidophile
ii. Basophile
[Link]
8 Facultative and Obligate weeds i. Apophytes
ii. Anthropophytes
9 Noxious and objectionable weeds
10 C.A to response to photoperiod/day length i. Short day weeds
ii. Long day weeds
iii. Day neutral weeds
11 C.A to relative position/presence i. Absolute weeds
ii. Relative weeds
iii. Rogues
iv. Volunteer weeds
12 C.A to morphology i. Grasses
ii. Sedges
[Link] leaved
(1)Classification According (C. A.) to Ontogeny/life cycle of weeds:-
Depending upon their life cycle, weeds can be classified as:
(i) Annuals (ii) Biennials and (iii) Perennials
(i) Annuals weeds:
Annuals weeds grow and mature within a year of their germination, but more commonly they
complete their life cycle in one season. Ex. Summer annual:- Trianthema spp. and Digera
arvensis ; Winter annuals :- Chenopodium album.
A weed like Amaranthus viridis may grow round the year near irrigation channels and other
moist places, but primarily it is a summer annual plant.
 10

A weeds like Phyllanthus fratenus ‗Niruri‘ completes its seed to seed cycle within two or
four weeks. Such short – lived annuals are called Ephemerals.
General Characteristics:-
(i) Annual weeds reproduce by abundant seed production, however some like Allium
Spp. wild onion and wild garlic may grow also from bulbs and bulbils.
(ii) They fail to re-grow when they are cut close to the ground level. These are known as
Simple annuals.
(iii) Several annual weeds possess crown buds which sprout into new shoots soon
after the mother plant is de-topped.
(iv) Easy to control. Such weeds must be destroyed before they set seeds.
(v) Annuals weeds usually produce thousands of seeds on each plant. Buried in soil by
deep tillage. These weed seeds can remain dormant for several years. This makes
weed eradication almost infeasible. Therefore, a farmer must be particular about
not allowing the weeds to set seeds on his land.
(ii) Biennials Weeds:
They complete their life cycle in two years; in the first year they remain vegetative and in the
second year they produce flowers and set seeds. The usual feature of biennial weeds to flower
in the second year of growth limits their dispersal through seeds very much. It is so because
they get harvested along with the crop plants before they get a chance to set seeds. (
Launaea nudicaulis). The biennial weeds must be controlled in the first year of growth before
these have a chance to store food in their roots.
(iii) Perennial weeds:
They grow for 3 or more years.
(i) Usually, perennials weeds flower for the first time in the second year of their growth
and thereafter flower each year regularly.
(ii) Besides seeds, they reproduce vegetative from underground specialized organs.
(iii) In tropical areas these remain green throughout the year although in subtropical regions
they may undergo dormancy during the low temperature periods.
Perennials are also endowed with several adaptive measure/mechanisms:
 Longevity of tubers,corms, bulbs, rhizomes, stolons, roots, stems, bulbils
 Presence of deep roots
 Presecnce of buds that sprout from basal portion of stem or below the ground. e.g.
Andropogon spp., Pennisetum spp.
 Succelent stems with buds are able to grow when fragmented or cut. e.g. Talinum
triangulare.
 11

Perennial weeds may be classified as:

a. Simple perennials: They are perennials, but reproduce predominantly by seeds and have
no natural means of spreading vegetatively unless injured or cut. Sonchus arvensis
(Sowthistle), Rumex Sp. (dock), Lantana camera L. are examples of simple perennials.
b. Creeping perennials: They although have seed propagation, reproduce predominantly
by vegetative means such as stolons, rhizomes, tubers, bulbs, corms, roots, stems and
leaves and are most difficult to control. Imperata cylindrical, cynodon dectylon, cyperus
rotundus/esculentus are creeping perrenials.
c. Woody perennials: They grow continuously and consistently over the seasons or years
and have annual growth increament as per compound interest law giving rise to woody
biomass, stems and branches. Lantana camera L. and Prosopis juliflora/cineraria are
examples of woody perennials.
Depending upon the depth of their underground growth the perennial weeds may further be
classified as:
(a) Shallow rooted perennials: - eg. Cynodon dactylon ‗Bermudagrass‘ Agropyron repens
‗quackgrass‘.
Their roots and rhizomes lie normally in the furrow-slice within 15 cm (6 inches) depth of the
agricultural soil..
(b) Deep rooted perennials: - e.g. Cyperus rotundus ‗Purple nutsedge‘ and Sorghum
helepense ‗Johnsongrass‘ are deep rooted perennials.
Their roots go deeper even beyond 1-meter depth and the perennating structures lie very deep
in soil.
Difficult perennials weeds are also called paracious weeds.
The control of perennial weeds is much more difficult than that of annual weeds since neither
tillage nor the present day selective herbicides can reach their deep roots and underground
modified shoot systems. Therefore, attempts to suppress such weeds are usually made during
the fallow seasons by deep summer tillage along with the application of herbicides.
(2) CA to seed type/morphology/Cotyledon character:-
(i) Monocots :- Weeds have one cotyledon and can be splitted into two halves Also
known as narrow leaf or grass weeds. Gramineae is the most important family for
monocotyledon weeds. eg. Cynodon dactylon.
(ii) Dicot :- Weeds have two cotyledon and cannot be splitted into two halves Also known
as broadleaf weeds. Asteraceae is the most most important family for monocotyledon
weeds ,e.g. Digera arvensis
Two exceptions to this are sedges and cattails which although narrow leaved, are not grasses.
They belong to the family Cyperaceae and Typhaceae, respectively.
(3) C. A. to the nature of shoot/stem/plant architecture:-
(i) Woody and Semi woody (ii) Herbaceous Spp.
 12

(i) Woody and Semi Woody weeds : They include shrubs and under-shrub and are
collectively called brush weeds. Lantana camara, Acacia arabia, Prosopis
juliflora and Zizyphus rotundifolia are the examples of brush weeds.
(ii) Herbaceous weeds: In variance with woody and semi-woody, herbaceous weeds have
green, succulent stems and are of most common occurrence around us
Amaranthus viridis, and Chenopodium album are the examples of herbaceous weeds.
(4) C. A. to Association:-
(i) Season bound weeds: - It grows in specific season of the year with disregard to the
crop species cultivated. These weeds may be either summer annuals or winter
annuals. In the case of perennial weeds the period of their major vegetative growth is
taken as their growing season, e.g. Sorghum halepense is a summer perennial weed,
whereas, Cirsium arvense is a winter perennial weed.
(ii) Crop- Bound weeds:- These are usually parasitic weeds. They depend for their
survival upon their host plants partially or fully. Cuscuta spp. Orobanche spp. and
Striga spp. are the most common crop bound weeds.
A. Based on root-parasitism :
a) Total root/holo-root parasite : They take away food from the host-roots and do not have
any other source of gathering food. Therefore, they are also called ―obligate root-parasite.‖
For example, Orobanche sp (on tobacco, tomato, fababean, chickpea, mustard, etc).
b) Partial root/hemi-root parasite : Initially they depend upon host-roots for their food and
living (sub-terranean/under-ground stage in case of Striga), but later after emergence from
soil, they are green, chlorophyllous and can produce their own food. For example, Striga
hermonthica/asiatica(=lutea) on sorghum, maize and Striga gesneroides on cowpea.
B. Based on shoot/stem-parasitism:
a) Total stem/holo-stem parasite: They take away food from the host-shoot/stem and do not
have any other source of gathering food. Therefore, they are also called ―obligate
shoot/stem-parasite.‖ For example, Cuscuta campesstris/chinensis/epilinum (on alfalfa,
niger and linseed, respectively). Earlier Cuscuta was the only parasitic genus of the
autotrophic family Convolvulaceae. But now-a-days Cuscutaceae, a separate family has
come into being for this genus.
b) Partial stem/hemi-stem parasite: Initially they depend upon the host-shoot/stem for their
food, but later for becoming green and chlorophyllous, can produce their own food. For
example, Loranthus longiflorus is a green colour plant (on mango and other trees) and
Cassytha filiformis (on orange, eucalyptus and other trees). Cassytha filiformis has
circumnutation anticlock-wise like Cuscuta but is much greener than Cuscuta.
 13

C. Parasitic weed:- Species of weeds which usually parasitize the host plant. It includes
following.
Dodder / Loranthus / Broom rape / Witch weed/
Cuscuta Dandropthoe falcate Orobanche sp. Striga sp.
Total stem Partial stem parasite Total root parasite Partial/semi root
parasite parasite
Host crop- Host crops- Plantation Host crops- Host crops-
Lucerne crops Mustard, tobacco, sorghum, maize,
chilli, brinjal, potato sugarcane, sunflower
(iii) Crop associated weeds:- These are also crop specific but they may be associated
with certain crops for one of the following reasons:
a. Need for specific micro climate:- Weeds like Cichorium intybus requires a for their
best growth shady, cool and moist habitat which is amply available in crops like lucerne
and berseem.
b. Mimicry:- Wild rice in paddy field, Wild oat and Canary grass (Phalaris spp.) in small
grain crops survive because of their similarity in morphology with host crops. This
mechanism is called mimicry.
Examples of mimicry weeds:- Wild rice (O. sativa var. fatua) in paddy
Wild oat (A. fatua) and canary grass (Phalaris minor) in wheat
Mimicry weeds survive well because of their similarity in morphology with host crops.
Seed mimicry
Possible causes of weed association with crops Phenotypic mimicry
Chronological mimicry
Biochemical mimicry
Crop micro-climate
Weeds may mimic with crops in the following four ways.
i) Vegetative/phenotypic mimicry: Some weeds have similar morphology (leaf, stem)
as that of the associated crop plant and therefore, it is difficult to identify and separate
out them from crop plants until anthesis/inflorescence occurred. It is called
―vegetative/ phenotypic mimicry‖ particularly at the seedling and early vegetative
stage. As a result, they remain unweeded even by trained farmers/labourers and are
harvested along with crops. For example, Oryza sativa var fatua, Oryza
longistaminata (Wild rice), Echinochloa colona/crus-galli (jungle rice/barnyard
grass) in rice, Avena fatua/ludoviciana, Phalaris minor/paradoxa in wheat, Loranthus
sp in tea, Saccharum spontaneum (Wild cane) in sugarcane and Sorghum halepense
(Wild sorghum) in sorghum.
ii) Seed mimicry : These weeds have seeds similar in shape, size and even to some
extent by weight to that of some crop seeds called ―seed mimicry‖. For example,
seeds of Lolium temulentum, Agrostemma githago resemble wheat seed, Avena fatua
 14

seeds resemble cultivated oat seeds, Commelina sativa seeds resemble flax seeds,
Rottboellia cochinchinensis (Itch grass) seeds resemble rice seed (upland) and
Cichorium intybus seeds resemble berseem seeds. They are also called ―satellite
weeds.‖
iii) Chronological mimicry : These weeds have height and ripening time similar to that
of the crop plants associated called ―chronological mimicry‖. For example, Phalaris
minor/paradoxa has almost similar maturity time with wheat crops and as a result,
they are harvested along with crop and contaminate wheat grains. They are sown
again with wheat in the next year.
iv) Biochemical mimicry: A crop plant is normally tolerant to a herbicide selective to it.
A weed associated with the crop although controlled by it may develop resistance to
that herbicide through biochemical and physiological alterations/modifications on
continuous exposure to it in course of time and behaves like the tolerant crop. As a
result, that weed may remain associated with the crop as long as that herbicide or
herbicide with similar mode of action continues to be applied in that crop. This means
that the weed which was earlier susceptible now mimicking the crop plants through
biochemical means.
v) Ready contamination of crop seeds with weed seeds. Allium spp., Wild garlic and
P. minor mature their seeds at the same height and time as winter grains and thus they
easily contaminate crop seeds at harvest.
(5) C. A. to habitat:
1. Crop land weeds - Digera arvensis
2. Fallow land weeds – (Zizyphus rotundifolia) Jharber
3. Grassland, Pasture or Rangeland weeds - Cyperus rotundus
4. Non cropland weeds (Industrial weeds) - Xanthium strumarium, Acanthospernum
hospidum, Tribumsterrestris
5. Aquatic weeds - Eichhornia crassipes
6. Forest & woodland weeds - Lantana camera
7. Lawn and garden weeds - Cyperus rotandus, Euphorbia spp., Eragratis Major.
8. Orchard and Plantation weeds – Cynodon dactylon, Cyperus rotandus
9. Weeds of Road side - Xanthium strumarium, Parthenium hysterophorus
10. Weeds of canal & irrigation channel - Cyperus spp., Cynodon dactylon
Aquatic weeds:
Unwanted plants, which grow in water and complete at least a part of their life cycle in water
are called
as aquatic [Link] are further grouped into four categories as submersed, emersed,
marginal and floating weeds.
1. Submersed weeds: These weeds are mostly vascular plants that produce all or most of
their vegetative growth beneath the water surface, having true roots, stems and leaves.
Eg. Utricularia stellaris, Ceratophyllum demersum.
 15

2. Immersed weeds: These plants are rooted in the bottom mud, with aerial stems and leaves
at or above the water surface. The leaves are broad in many plants and sometimes like
grasses. These leaves do not rise and fall with water level as in the case of floating
weeds. Eg. Nelumbium speciosum, Jussieua repens.
3. Marginal weeds: Most of these plants are emersed weeds that can grow in moist shoreline
areas with a depth of 60 to 90 cm water. These weeds vary in size, shape and habitat.
The important genera that comes under this group are; Typha, Polygonum,
Cephalanthus, Scirpus, etc.
4. Floating weeds: These weeds have leaves that float on the water surface either singly or in
cluster. Some weeds are free floating and some rooted at the mud bottom and the leaves
rise and fall as the water level increases or decreases. Eg. Eichhornia crassipes, Pistia
stratiotes, Salvinia, Nymphaea pubescens.
(6) C. A. to the origin of weeds:
Many of our weeds in India originated in some other parts of the world. Such weeds are also
called “Anthrophytes / alien/ introduced weeds”. Weeds originating in a country, but got
introduced to another country through process of dispersal in course of time are
exotic/introduced weeds.
Exotic/introduced weeds may be further classified as:
a. Naturalised weeds: Weeds that have become adapted to the environment of the
new/introduced country and have established itself adequately and vigorously with viable
standing population almost all through the year are said to have become naturalized. For
example, Parthenium hysterphorus (in India, Ethiopia, Australia and many other
countries) and Eichhrnia crassipes (in India)
b. Indigenous weeds:- Weeds originated in a particular country and growing since long
time in a larger number with considerable diversity are indigenous to that country is
known as indigenous weeds. For example, Striga hermonthica is a native to Africa, Striga
asiatica is a native to Asia. The origins of some important weeds are as under:

Weeds species Probable Origin

Convolvulus arvensis Eurasia
Cyperus rotundus Eurasia
Eichhornia crassipes Tropical America Brazil
Lantana camera Central America/ Tropical America
Orobanche spp. Europe
Sorghum halepense Southern Europe and Asia
Tribulus terrestris Southern Europe

(7) C. A. to soil reaction:

Of the several variable of soil, pH is implicated most frequently with the distribution of weed
species over areas of similar agroclimate. On highly acid soils acidophile weeds such as
 16

Rumex acetosella tend to dominate the weed flora. on saline and alkali soils basophile weeds
like Polygonum spp. are found. However most of our common weeds are neutrophiles.
The texture of soil and consequently its water holding capacity also determines to a great
extent, the weed flora of a place. For example,Tribulus terrestris and Euphorbia spp.
dominant on course texture soil whereas Sorghum halepense grow abundantly on heavy
moisture retentive soils. Echinochloa colonum requires wet soils for their best growth.
Prominence of certain weeds on particular texture soils is largely due to their ability to
withstand moisture and air condition prevailing in the soil.
Some weeds tend to respond also to the nutrient status of the soil.
(a) High soil fertility eg. Nutsedge, Bhumasi
(b) Low soil fertility eg. Popati
(8) Facultative and Obligate weeds:
Facultative weeds are those weed species that grow primarily in wild communities but often
escape to cultivated field, associating themselves closely with man‘s affairs eg. Opuntia spp.
These are also known as apophytes.
Obligate weeds on the contrary occur only in cultivated or otherwise disturbed land. They
cannot stand competition from volunteer vegetation in a closed community. eg. Convoluvulus
arvensis. These are also known as anthropophytes.
(9) Noxious and objectionable weeds:
A noxious weed is a plant arbitrarily defined as being especially undesirable, troublesome
and difficult to control. These weeds have immense capacity of reproduction and dispersal
and they adopt tricky ways to defy man‘s efforts to get rid of them. These are sometimes also
referred special problem weeds. E.g. Cyperus rotundus, Orobanche spp. Striga spp.,
Parthenium spp. and Cynodon dactylon. An objectionable weed is a noxious weed whose
seed is difficult to separate once mixed with crop seeds. e. g. Jirado with Cumin.
(10) C.A to response to photoperiod/day length:
Short day weeds Long day weeds Day neutral weeds
The weeds, which start The weeds, which start The weeds, which are
flowering when the day flowering in response to day unaffected by the variation in
length is lower than some length longer than some photoperiodic conditions
critical lengths (8-12 hrs) critical lengths (> 10-12 hrs)
Ex:- Chenopodium album, Ex:- Chromolaena Ex:- Solanum nigrum
Xanthium strumarium
Also known as long night Also known as short night
weeds weeds
(11) C.A to relative position/presence:
a. Absolute weeds:- Weeds are wild plants or weedy plants in nature and have no value as
crops or any use to farmers under any circumstance, e.g. Polygonum sp. Rumex Spp.
 17

b. Relative weeds:- They are not weeds in nature, but because of their sudden occurrence, or
relative presence with certain crop of prime importance, are treated as weed, in strict
sense, relative to that situation only. Elsewhere, it may be growing as a crop or other
purpose. Undesirable crop plants in the main crop field. For example:- mustard is a
weed in wheat field, maize in sorghum field.
c. Rogues:- Few plants of a variety of a crop growing here and there in a sattered manner in
another variety of prime importance and preferably grown for a situation are treated
as rogues. Other varirty plant in the same crop. For example:- HD 2329 wheat
variety in HD 2285 wheat field and Alemaya Composite variety of maize in rare or
Bukuri variety of maize are rogues.
d. Volunteer weeds:- Such weeds are grown from the fallen seeds of previous or preceding
crop in the field.
(12) C.A to morphology:-
Based on the morphology of the plant, the weeds are also classified in to three categories.
This is the most widely used classification by the weed scientists.
(a) Grasses: All the weeds come under the family Poaceae are called as grasses which are
characteristically having long narrow spiny leaves. The examples are Echinocloa
colonum, Cynodon dactylon.
(b) Sedges: The weeds belonging to the family Cyperaceae come under this group. The
leaves are mostly from the base having modified stem with or without tubers. The
examples are Cyperus rotundus, Fimbrystylis miliaceae.
(c) Broad leaved weeds: This is the major group of weeds as all other family weeds come
under this except that is discussed earlier. All dicotyledon weeds are broad leaved
weeds. The examples are Flavaria australacica, Digera arvensis, Tridax procumbens.
2.2 PROPAGATION OF WEEDS
(i) Propagation through Seeds:
The majority of weeds reproduce by distinct seed formation which is prolific, particularly in
the annual and biennial species. Such weeds are capable of producing easily few thousands of
seeds per plant every season at the termination of their vegetative phase. In the perennial
species, on the other hand, the viable seed production facility is much limited, like in Cyperus
rotundus and Cynodon dactylon which produce only 40-170 seeds per plant. But there are
exceptions to this generalization since the perennial weeds like Sorghum halepense and
Saccharum spontaneum produce thousands of seeds per plant every year, in the same fashion
as the annual weeds. In an undisturbed field, like in the no-tillage farming system, most weed
seeds that fall on the ground tend to remain in the top about 1cm soil layer. But in the
conventional farming system, tillage of the field tends to distribute these evenly in the plough
layer of the soil. Some weed seeds may reach even deeper, up to 30 cm or more, by entering
through the soil crevices. A weed like Commelina benghalensis places its seeds directly
inside the soil since it produces both aerial and underground flowers and seeds. Within the
soil the weed seeds are capable of retaining viability for 2to25 years, depending upon the
 18

weed species. For instance, Rumex spp. Seeds showed 63-90 % germination up to 2-7 years
after these were burried 30 cm deep, while Echinochloa, Poa and Chenopodium spp.
germinated even after 25 years of their similar burial in the soil.
(ii) Propagation through Vegetative Propagules:
In vegetative propagation of weeds either their stem or root fragments may grow into new
plants, or the weed may produce some specific modified vegetative organs for this purpose,
both above and under the ground. These modifications may be in the form of rhizomes, root
stocks, runners, stolons, suckers, offsets, tubers bulbs or bulbils. Collectively these are termed
as Vegetative Propagules.
The vegetative propagation is primarily a feature of perennial weeds which employ one
or more of the above cited propagules to achieve the objective, depending upon the weed
species. A weed like bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon) uses rhizomes under the ground, and
runners and stolons over the ground surface to propagate itself into new colonies. Its
rhizomes form a dense network, largely in the plough layer of the soil. But in some other
weeds like tiger grass (Saccharum spontaneum) and johnson grass (Sorghum halepense), the
rhizomes travel much deeper into the soil. Purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) propagates by
its underground, prominent tubers which are, in fact, swollen ends of its wiry rhizomes. In
weeds like opuntia (Opuntia spp.) and dodder (Cuscuta spp.), the detached stems gives rise to
new plants. Field/bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) and Canadathistle (Cirsium arvense)
propagate typically by their extensive horizontal and vertical root system. Offsets are found
in an aquatic weed like water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes). Hydrilla spp. Produce aerial
buds called turions as additional means of its vegetative propagation.
Beside the perennial weeds, some annual weeds can also adopt specific vegetative
propagation mechanism. Such weeds vigourate their crown buds to produce new plants when
the parent plants are cut at the ground level. Carrot grass (Parthenium hysterophorus),
lantana (Lantana camara), and arrowwood (Pluchea lanceolata) are some weeds of this type.
Weeds equipped with vegetative propagation mechanisms are extremely difficult to manage
since their propagules are located in up to 100 cm soil depth where these are not easily
approachable even with deep tillage or any available herbicide. Moreover, weeds which are
able to regenerate from roots will almost always be able to recover from cultivation,
howsoever deep.
2.3 DISPERASAL OF WEEDS:-
The dispersal of seeds and vegetative propagules of weeds away from the parent
plants is nature‘s way of providing non-competitive sites to the new individuals. If all the
mature weed seeds were to fall near their mother plants, the young plants would face severe
competition amongst themselves, to their great disadvantage. But, fortunately, it is not so.
Weeds disperse to new sites freely, with complete disregard to the field and geographical
boundaries.
(1) Dispersal Of Weed Seeds:- Weed seeds may get dispersed with agents like
 19

(1) Wind:- Usually, the weed seeds (and fruits) that disseminate through wind possess special
organs to keep them afloat. Some such organs are:
(a) Pappus, which is a parachute like modification of persistant calyx into hairs, as found in
several Asteraceae weeds
(b) Comose, where weed seeds are covered with special hair, as occurring in Calotropis
spp.;
(c) Feathery, persistent styles, such as found in certain species Anemone
(d) Balloon, which is a modified papery calyx that encloses the fruit loosely along with the
entrapped air, as found in Physalis minima; and
(e) Wings, like those developed in Acer macrophyllum.
Besides the above adaptation, some weed seeds and fruits are so light may become
air-borne with a storm without any special floating arrangement. The density and test weight
of such weeds are very low. High velocity wind can sometimes disperse even heavy weight
weed seeds in yet another interesting manner. It may detach the whole plant of the weed from
the ground and roll it over long distances, dispersing its seeds all along the way. This mode of
dispersal of weed seeds is common with Carthamus oxyacantha wild safflower and Salsola
kali ‗Russian thistle‘. In Argemone mexicana ‗Mexican poppy‘, the wind swings the intact
plants and forces their mature pods to disperse their seeds some distance away from the
mother plants. The mechanism is called Censer-Mechanism.
(2) Water: - Aquatic weeds disperse primarily through water. They may drift either as whole
plants, plant fragments, or as seeds with the water currents. Terrestrial farm weeds also
frequently disperse with water in irrigation and drainage channels down the stream to new
fields.
(3) Animals: Many weedy fruits and seeds are eaten by birds and animals. Depending upon
the digestion mechanism of the animals and the nature of the weed species, 0.2 to9.6% of the
ingested weed seeds are passed in viable form with the animal excreta, which is dropped
wherever the animal moves. This mechanism of weed dispersal is called endozoochory.
Chicks digest the weed seeds most efficiently. Several birds pick up the weed fruits and seeds
on their wings, feet, and beaks and drop these during their flight. Dissemination of lantana
seeds, for example, is chiefly through two birds the Indian Myna and the Chinese turtledove.
Parasitic Loranthus seeds stick to the beaks of the birds which are transferred to new
branches of the trees when they rub their beaks against them.
Farm animals carry weed seeds and fruits on their skin, hair, and hooves. This is aided by
special appendages, such as hooks (ex. Xanthium stumarium), stiff hair (ex. Cenchrus
spp.),Sharp spines (ex. Tribulus terrestris), scarious bracts (ex. Achyranthus aspera), and
sticky grands (ex. Boerhavia repens). Ants carry a large number of certain weed seeds
possessing attractive secretions, from one place to another.
(4) Man: Careless acts of man are greatly responsible for the dispersal of weeds. For
example, when farm machinery is carried from one field to another without proper cleaning,
it carries numerous weed seeds with it. Weed seeds and fruits are carried on wheels of carts,
 20

automobiles, and aeroplanes. Too, man has carried weeds with him throughout the globe
during his travels. Numerous weed seeds and fruits are dispersed by man with raw
agricultural produce. This usually occurs in the case of weeds that mature at the same time
and height as the host crop, and have similar size and shape of their seeds (orfruits) as the
crop seeds. Such weeds are called satellite weeds, for instance, Avena fatua, Phalaris minor,
Oryza spp., Cichorium intybus, and Cuscuta spp. They form an integral part of specific crops.
(5) Manures and Silage: Farm-yard manure can be an important source of dissemination of
weeds since after numerous viable weed seeds are present in the dung of farm animals. Also,
there are often direct additions of mature weeds to the compost pits as farm wastes. Even
under optimum temperature and acidity conditions of the compost pits, the seeds of a weed
like Convolvulus arvensis (field bindweeds) have been reported to retain viability to the
extent of 4% in the first month of composting, and up to 1% two months later.
(2) Dispersal of Vegetative Propagules of Weeds:
Careless cultivation of land is perhaps the foremost factor in the dispersal of vegetative
propagules of weeds.
1. Cultivation detaches underground organs of weeds such as rhizomes, rootstocks, and
tubers and drags them to uninfested spots where they grow into new colonies. The aerial
bulbs of Allium spp. (Wild onion) disseminate with seeds of small grains.
2. Transplants of crops often carry weed seeds, rhizomes, and tubers hidden in their root soil.
A weed like Echinochloa spp. ‗Barnyard grass‘ mimics rice plants so well that in may
leave rice nurseries along with the crop seedlings and get transplanted in the main field in
large numbers.
3. Aquatic weeds (whole plant, plant fragments, or vegetative propagules) disseminate largely
with water current, boats, and ships.
2.4 PERSISTENCE OF WEEDS:-
High persistence of weeds results from their multifacet mechanisms. Important among these
are:-
(i) Prolific Seed Production:-
Seed Production Capacity of Certain Common Weeds
Weed species Average No. of seeds per Immediate germination %
plant
Amarathus spp. 196000 Not recorded
Brassica nigra 58000 Not recorded
Chenopodium album 72000 Not recorded
Cuscuta spp. 16000 Not recorded
Cynodon dactylon 170 6
Cyperus esculentus 820 38
C. rotundus 40 0
Datura stramonium 13900 5
Eleusine indica 41200 61
Portulaca spp. 193000 6
Trianthema spp. 52000 Not recorded
 21

(ii) Dormancy of Weed Seeds and Other Propagules in Soil:

Within the soil weed seeds can remain dormant for three reasons:-
(a) Enforced Dormancy: - Enforced dormancy in weed seeds is due to their placement
deeper than 5 cm, resulting usually from tillage of the field. Weed seeds under this kind of
dormancy germinate readily whenever these are restored to the top 3 to 5 cm layer of soil by
tillage, provided adequate soil moisture and congenial temperatures were available in this
zone of the soil. Enforced dormancy is a non-specific character of the seeds and it is caused
by the absence of red light ® under the ground, which otherwise induces germination in
seeds.
(b) Innate Dormancy:- Innate dormancy is a genetically controlled character and it is a
feature of specific weed seeds. Innate dormant seeds will fail to germinate even if they were
present in the top 3 to 5 cm soil and adequate soil moisture and temperature conditions were
provided to them. Innate dormancy usually results for reasons of either hard seed coat. In
certain weed seeds, particularly those of xerophytic origin, the presence of specific
germination inhibitors is responsible for their innate dormancy. In nature the innate dormancy
of weed seeds is overcome with either passage of time, or under the influence of some
climatic pressure.
(c) Induced Dormancy:- Induced dormancy results from some sudden physiological
change in otherwise non-dormant weed seeds under the impact of factors like a marked rise
in soil temperature, increased CO2 content of the soil, low O2 pressures, water logging, etc.
Certain weed seeds, like those of wild oat exhibit all the three kinds of dormancies.
(iii) Vegetative Propagation:- Many weeds are extremely persistent because of their
ability to propagate by vegetative means. When the above ground parts of such weeds are
destroyed, their deeply placed vegetative propagules put forth new shoots as soon as the
external stresses are removed and favorable conditions revive. Even if some kind of deep
tillage is employed in an attempt to destroy these, it will be a futile exercise since fragments
of the weed propagules get easily dispersed to new areas where they initiate fresh colonies.
(iv) Rapid Dispersal:- Dispersal is a very important means of persistence of weeds. It
exposes them to different ecosystems so that each weed species can choose its most
favorable environment and put up a hard struggle for existence in nature. Dispersal is the key
factor in developing a persistent weed population for every possible niche in the environment.
Dispersal aids persistence of weeds in proportion to the dispersal agents and adaptations
available to them.
(v) Inherent Hardiness:- To be widely successful a weed species must adapt itself to
diverse environmental conditions. Weeds seem to possess some kind of built-in
mechanism to survive against the vagaries of nature, like extreme cold, heat, drought, biotic
stress, and soil abnormalities. This is inherent hardiness of weeds.
(vi) Evasiveness:- Many a weed is capable of evading destruction by animals and man
because of their bitter taste, disagreeable odor, spiny nature, and mimicry.
 22

(vi) Self Regeneration:- Weeds are self-sown plants. They don‘t require any artificial,
friable seedbeds for their germination. Detached from the mother plants, weed seeds and
other propagules germinate profusely on un disturbed soils whenever the environment
is favorable for the purpose.
(vii) Selective Invasion:- Weed species differ widely in their soil and climatic
requirements. But in the first instance, the weed flora composition depends upon the
chance a particular weed had to reach a particular site. The nature then makes a critical
selection out of the lot and allows only those weed seeds to germinate at a time which were
most adapted to the environment prevailing then. The seeds of rest of the weed species wait
in soil till the environment outside changes. At this stage, suddenly another set of weed
species takes over the ground. The major environment factors which determine the weed
species composition on the ground comprise the available soil moisture, soil pH,
temperature, photoperiod, and solar energy.
(ix) Weed Succession:- In nature, the individuals of a weed species often have chance to
cross breed to variable levels. This leads to the development of a few plants of
different genetic make-up, forming new races within a species. Such races of weeds are
called agricultural ecotypes. When herbicides (or bio agents) are used continuously to
destroy the ―normal‖ races of a weed species, their newly developed ecotypes may
sometimes prove tolerant to the herbicides used; whence they get chance to gradually
expand in numbers, each season. Such agricultural ecotypes are then called chemo
types. The chemo types greatly aid a weed species to persist. Weed succession can also
occur amongst different weed species themselves in response to long term adoption of
an agricultural practice, including the use of herbicides. This leads to the destruction of
the susceptible group of weed species, leaving behind few plants of the resistant species
to gradually build up their population and finally emerge as the dominant weed flora of
the area.

x-x-x-x-x
 23

CHAPTER-3 Herbicide classification

Herbicide classification
(A) Based on Mode of action
Selective and Non Selective Herbicides
Selective: - A selective herbicide is one that will kill some plant species when applied to a
mixed plant population without causing serious injury to other species. e.g. 2, 4, D, Atrazine
etc.
It is used in crop areas, loans, gardens and grasslands. Certain selective herbicides when
applied at higher rates act as non-selective plant killers, for instance, simazine and duran.
Today the field of selective herbicidal control has reached such as advanced stage when a
weed of grass family can be controlled in a crop of the same family, for instance, Avena fatua
‗wild oat‘ in wheat. Besides such occasional inherent selectivity among herbicides, man has
been able purposefully induce selectivity in some herbicides to specific crops by modifying
their mode of application.
Non- Selective :- A non- selective herbicide is one that kills plant without regard to species
for example, paraquat, glyphosat, sodium chlorate etc. these herbicides are employed for
general vegetation control on industrial sites, fallow land and in aquatics.
(B) Based on spectrum of weed control
Narrow Spectrum and Broad Spectrum Herbicides
Narrow Spectrum: - The narrow spectrum herbicides prove active on one or a very limited
number of plant species. Most of other plants remain tolerant to such herbicides. These
herbicides are very useful against specific noxious weeds like Avena and Phalaris spp.
Metoxuron, difenzoquat and diclofop are very successful examples of narrow spectrum
herbicides. A limitation of narrow spectrum herbicides is the need to employ several
herbicides to control different weed species. This may contribute to environmental pollution.
Broad Spectrum Herbicides: - These herbicides control a wide spectrum of weed flora.
Most of our herbicides today belonging to this group of herbicides.
Sr Narrow Spectrum herbicide Broad Spectrum herbicide
No.
1. Controls particular group of weeds Controls a wider array of weeds
constituting grasses, broad leaved and
sedges
2. Ex- 2,4-D, metsulfuron-methyle Ex- Glyphosate, paraquat
3. Their range of activity is narrow Their range of activity over the
species of weed is broad
4. They could be useful against a specific They could be useful for grasses,
problem weed broad leaved and sedges
 24

(C) Based on Method of application/Surface or site of application

Soil Active and Foliage Active Herbicides
Soil Active: - It is applied primarily to the soil rather than to the vegetation. Inside soil it kills
weeds as they germinate or inhibits sprouting of their rhizomes, stolons and tubers.
Therefore, in crop fields a soil-active herbicide eliminates early weed-crop competition for
the period it remains active in soil. This period is usually 4 to 8 weeks, depending upon the
herbicide and its rate used. These herbicides are largely applied at the time of planting of
crops, but in some cases these may also be applied to the weed-free inter-rows of established
crops to obtain extended weed control e. g. Simazine, Alachlor, Trifluralin and EPTC. On
non-cropland, the soil-active herbicides used are largely sterilent and fumigant.
Foliage Active: - These herbicides are applied to weeds after their emergence from soil. They
are absorbed by plant foliage and in many cases these are translocated to other plant parts. At
normal rates the foliage active herbicides are most effective against young weeds in their
seedling stage but at high rates these may kill even the established weeds. e.g. Paraquat,
Amitrol. There may be some herbicides that are both soil and foliage active e. g. 2, 4, D,
Atrazine and Picloram.
Soil-Active Herbicides are more popular – Why?
i) It controls weeds even before they germinate, thus eliminating early period weed
competition.
ii) They maintain weed control for considerable period after application.
iii) It provides better selectivity to the treated crops.
(D) Based on mobility/mode of action
Contact and Translocated Herbicides: -
Contact -It kills pants primarily by contact with plant tissue rather than as a result of
translocation. Thus a contact herbicides applied to the foliage of a plant will not kill its roots,
though in simple annuals the roots of treated plants may die because they are deprived of
their shoots. The established weeds will regrow from their crown buds, roots or rhizomes,
shortly after treatment with contact herbicides. e.g. Paraquat, Diquat, Propanil and Petroleum
oils.
Translocated: - These herbicides move within the plant from the point of treatment to other
plant parts. It kills the entire plant even if only a portion of the plant was treated with the
herbicides. Therefore, trans located types of herbicides are of particular importance in
controlling the perennial weeds. Also, the trans located herbicides can be applied in low
volume sprays to control annual weeds because they need to wet only a portion of the plant
foliage against contact herbicides which must drench the weeds fully for their effective kill.
Some herbicides may exhibit both contact and translocation properties. e. g. Atrazine is
Tranlocated herbicides when absorbed from soil but contact herbicides when sprayed on plant
shoots.
 25

Sr No. Contact herbicide Translocated herbicide

1. Not absolutely contact, but have limited Highly mobile through plant sytem
mobility
2. Less efficient in controlling perennial More efficient in controlling perennial
weeds having underground vegetative weeds having underground vegetative
structure structure
3. Less risk in cropped situation if applied More risk in cropped situation if
by mistake applied by mistake
4. Ex- Paraquat,diquat Ex- Glyphosate
(E) Based on residual action in soil
Residual and Non- Residual Herbicides: -
Residual: -
Residual herbicides maintain their phytotoxic effects in soil for a considerable time after their
application. This period may be 3 to 4 weeks in some herbicides, such as 2, 4, D and EPTC
and much longer up to several months in others. In intensive crop rotations usually herbicides
with 3 to 6 weeks of residual activity in soils are used.
Non-Residual:
These herbicides are inactivated in soil immediately or within a few days after they reach the
soil. e.g. Paraquat, Glyphosate, Diquat, Amitrol and weed oil. These herbicides are good for a
quick knock down of the existing weeds, they do not provide any extended period of weed
control. In agriculture, their chief importance lies in destroying weed infestation occurring
either before planting or before germination of the crops.
They are called non-residual because they get usually adsorbed to soil colloids as soon
as they fall on the ground and become inactivated. The droplets falling on the soil are
simply a waste. Therefore, they should be targeted mainly to the canopy/foliage of
weeds.
(F) Based on duration of weed control (Mainly under Non-crop Situation) Soil
Sterilants and Fumigants
Soil Sterilant:
A soil sterilant type of herbicides will prevent the growth of plants when present in soil. Their
soil sterilizing effects may be either temporary or relatively permanent. Temporary soil
sterilants sterilize the soil for up to 16 weeks whereas the permanent ones remain active for a
much longer period, sometimes for two or more years. Temporary soil sterilants are usually
volatile compounds which leave the soil in vapour form after a few days to a few weeks of its
application. During this period these are supposed to have killing all live plant parts in the
soil. Such sterilants are also called soil fumigants. e. g. MB, Methan and Dazomet.
Permanent soil sterilants on the other hand find their chief use in causing bare ground in
industrial and other non-crop areas for one or more season. Sodium chlorate, substituted
ureas, several symmetrical triazines, arsenics and borates are major permanent soil sterilants
in use currently.
 26

Sr No. Temporary soil sterilant herbicide Permanent soil sterilant herbicide

1. They sterilize the soil for relatively short They remain active in soil for
period of time usually for 15-16 weeks relatively long period of time,
sometimes for two or more
seasons/years
2. Ex- Methyle bromide, carbon disulphide, Ex- Triazines, sodium chlorate
chlorfenac
3. They could be used in the nursery beds They are recommended mainly for
for rice, tobacco and TP vegetables industrial and non-cropped areas
4. Time- 15-16 weeks Time- two or more seasons/years
(G) Based on Time of application
Pre - plant application (PPI)
Application of herbicides before the crop is planted or sown. Soil application as well as foliar
application is done here. For example, fluchloralin can be applied to soil and incorporated
before sowing rainfed groundnut while glyphosate can be applied on the foliage of perennial
weeds like Cyperus rotundus before planting of any crop.

Pre – emergence
Application of herbicides before a crop or weed has emerged. In case of annual crops
application is done after the sowing of the crop but before the emergence of weeds and this is
referred as pre-emergence to the crop while in the case perennial crops it can be said as pre-
emergence to weeds. For example soil application by spraying of atrazine on 3rd DAT to
sugarcane can be termed as pre-emergence to cane crop while soil application by spraying the
same immediately after a rain to control a new flush of weeds in a inter-cultivated orchard
can be specified as pre-emergence to weed. Eg. Atrazine, Pendimethalin, Butachlor,
Thiobencarb, Pretilachlor

Post – emergence
Herbicide application after the emergence of crop or weed is referred as post-emergence
application. When the weeds grow before the crop plants have emerged through the soil and
 27

are killed with a herbicide then it is called as early post-emergence. For example spraying
2,4-D Na salt to control parasitic weed striga in sugarcane is called as post-emergence while
spraying of paraquat to control emerged weeds after 10-15 days after planting potato can be
called as early post-emergence. Eg. Glyphosate, Paraquat, 2,4-D Na Salt.

Early post emergence: Another application of herbicide in the slow growing crops like potato,
sugarcane, 2-3 week after sowing is classified as early post emergence.
(F) Based on Chemical Nature or Composition
Compounds having chemical affinities are grouped together. This is useful in liting and
characterising herbicides.
i) Inorganic Herbicides:
Contain no carbon actions in their molecules. These were the first chemicals used for weed
control before the introduction of the organic compounds, example are:
a) Acids:
Arsenic acid, arsenious acid, arsenic trioxide sulphuric acid.
b) Salts:
Borax, copper sulphate, ammonium sulphate, Na chlorate , Na arsenite , copper nitrate.
ii) Organic Herbicides:
Oils and non oils contain carbon and hydrogen in their molecules.
a) Oils: Diesel oil, standard solvent, xylene-type, aromatic oils, polycyclic , aromatic oils etc.
b) Aliphatics:
Dalapon, TCA, Acrolein, Glyphosphate methyl bromide.
c) Amides:
Propanil, butachlor, alachlor, CDAA, Diphenamide, Naptalam, Propachlor.
d) Benzoics:
2,3,6 TBA, Diacamba, tricamba, chloramben, Fenac.
e) Bipyridyliums:
Paraquat , diquat.
 28

f) Carbamates:
Propham, chloropham, barban.
g) Thocarbamates:
Butylate, dilate, triallate, EPTC, molinate, pebulate, vernolate, benthlocarb, aslum, cycolate.
h) Dithiocarbamates:
CDEC , Metham.
i) Nitralin ( Benzonitrates) :
Dichlobenil , bromoxynil, ioxynil.
j) Ditroanilines ( Toluidines) :
Benefin, nitralin, trifluralin, butralin, dinitramine, fluchlorine, oxyzalin, penoxalin.
k) Phenoxy:
2,4-D, 2,4 , 5-T, MCPB, 2,4-DB, 2,4- DP, 2,4 , 5-TP (silvex)
l) Triazines:
Atrazine, simazine, ametryne , terbuteryne, cyprazinc, Metribuzin, prometryn, propazine.
m) Ureas:
Monuron, diuron, fenuron, neburon, flumeturon, mothabenzathiazuron- buturon,
chlorbromuron, chloroxuron, norea siduson, metoxuron.
n)Uracils:
Bromacil, terbacil, lenacil.
o) Diphenyl Ethers:
Nitrogen, flurodifen.
p) Organic Arsenicals:
Cacodlic acid, MSMA, DSMA.
q) Others:
Bentazon, Piclaram, Pyrazon, Pyrichlor, endothall, bensulphioe, MH, DCPA.
(G) Based on window of application
a) Narrow-window herbicide: Narrow-window herbicides have length/range of time of
application highly reduced/limited to just before sowing or from sowing to before emergence
of crop or at a specific time after crop emergence as post-emergence. They are, therefore, pre-
planting, pre-emergence or post-emergence herbicides, e.g. trifluralin, fluchloralin,
pendimethalin, fenoxaprop-p-ethyl, clodinafop-propargyl, sulfosulfuron, tralkoxydim etc.
Once a crop is left untreated at the specified period, almost all these herbicides cannot be
used again in other growth stages of that crop.
 29

b) Wider-window herbicide: Wider-window herbicides as desired should have length/range

of time span of application wider, for example, from before sowing or after sowing to longer
period of crop growth may be up to 40 days after emergence of crop in certain cases. They,
therefore, are herbicides with extended period of activity along the crop growth cycle. In fact,
there is hardly any herbicide in the world today, which is wider-window in true sense.
Atrazine and butachlor because of their pre- and post-emergence activities may loosely be
held as wider-window herbicides. Chlorimuron-p-ethyl can be used as PPI, pre-emergence or
post-emergence in a few crops particularly soybean and may be assumed to be a wider-
window herbicide for soybean.

x-x-x-x-x
 30

CHAPTER-4 Concept of adjuvant and surfactant

ADJUVANTS
An adjuvant is an additive (usually in relatively low amounts compared to the carrier) that
improves or enhances application, performance, safety, storage, or handling of an active
ingredient. Adjuvants include materials such as:
1. Surfactants (spreaders, stickers, emulsifiers, wetting agents), which increase surface
contact, reduce runoff, and increase penetration through leaf cuticle
2. Anti-drift agents
3. Color and/or odor additives to discourage ingestion
4. Anti-freeze or other stabilizing chemicals to promote storage
An adjuvant is any material added to a herbicide spray solution that modifies or enhances the
action of that solution. Many herbicides already contain adjuvants as part of their
formulations. Some of these formulations can be used directly whereas others need to be
applied in conjunction with one or more adjuvants. There are over 3,000 adjuvants available
for use. These can be grouped into three general types of adjuvants, including activators,
spray modifiers and utility modifiers.
An adjuvant is a chemical added to a pesticide formulation or tank mix to improve mixing
and application or enhance performance. With judicious use of adjuvants, the effectiveness of
the pesticide compound may be increased as much as 5 or 10 fold. Most pesticide
formulations contain at least a small percentage of adjuvants. Wetting agents and spreaders
are the adjuvants most frequently added by pesticide users. A small number of products,
however, require avoiding adjuvants altogether. One should read the pesticide label before
adding any surfactant to the spray mixture.
Common adjuvants and their functions are as follows:
Wettings agents: It allows wettable powders to mix with water.
Emulsifiers: It allows petroleum-based pesticides (ECs) to mix with water.
Invert emulsifiers: It allows water-based pesticides to mix with petroleum carrier.
Spreaders: It allows pesticide to form a uniform coating layer over the treated surface.
Stickers: It allows pesticide to stay on the treated surface.
Penetrants: It allows pesticide to get through the outer surface to the inside of the treated
area.
Foaming agents: It reduces drift.
Thickeners: It reduces drift by increasing droplet size and reducing volume of spray
contained in drift-prone droplets.
Safeners: It reduces the toxicity of a pesticide formulation to the pesticide handler or to the
treated surface.
 31

Compatibility agents: It aids in combining pesticides effectively.

Buffers: It allows mixing of pesticides of different acidity or alkalinity.
Antifoaming agents: It reduces foaming of spray mixtures that require vigorous agitation.
Spray additives
Adjuvants are often added to spray mixtures to modify or enhance herbicidal activity or aid in
the spraying operation. Use of adjuvants, other than as formulation agents, is primarily
restricted to postemergence herbicide applications. Adjuvants can be divided into two general
categories: spray modifiers and activators. The most common type of adjuvants is
1. Activity enhancers, such as surfactants, oils, organosilicanes, and fertilizers,
2. Spray modifiers such as stickers and drift control agents, and
3. Utility modifiers such as compatibility and antifoam agents.
However, not all adjuvants are always beneficial; some may have no effect or even decrease
the desired effect. Therefore, adjuvants should not be placed in the spray mixture unless
suggested on the label or recommended by knowledgeable authorities.
Activity Enhancers
Surfactants derive their name from the term surface-active agents. Most surfactant molecules
are composed of a lipophilic long-chain hydrocarbon (alkyl) group and a hydrophilic polar
group. Surfactants are generally classified according to the nature of the polar segment of the
molecule. Among the types of surfactants are
1. Cationic (positive charge),
2. Anionic (negative charge)
3. zwitterionic (having both a positive and a negative charge, depending on the water pH),
and
4. Non-ionic (no charge).
Non-ionic surfactants dissociate little in water, whereas the others are charged when
dissolved in water. Because adjuvants contain both lipophilic (oil-like) and hydrophilic
(water like) properties, they can interact with the lipophilic plant surfaces, lipophilic
herbicides, hydrophilic herbicides, and water. The most common surfactants for use with
herbicides are non-ionic, and most emulsifiers are blends of anionic and nonionic types. In
general, a blend with a high proportion of the anionic types will improve performance in cold
water and soft water, whereas a blend with a predominance of nonionic types will usually
perform better in warm water and hard water.
At low to normal spray volumes, adjuvants usually increase the effectiveness of herbicidal
sprays by increasing the coverage of the plant surface; herbicide absorption is thereby also
increased. However, at high spray volumes adjuvants may decrease effectiveness by causing
excessive ―runoff‖ from the plant onto the ground. Herbicidal selectivity may be lost by the
addition of an adjuvant if the desired selectivity among species depends on differential
wetting and thus absorption.
 32

Spray Modifiers
Spray modifiers, such as stickers, increase the adhesion of spray solutions to treated plant
surfaces and are often used in conjunction with wetting agents (referred to as spreader-
stickers). Film-forming vegetable gels, emulsifiable resins, emulsifiable mineral oils, waxes,
and water-soluble polymers have been used as stickers.
Drift control agents are materials that thicken the spray solution and thereby increase droplet
size and reduce the number of very small satellite droplets. These materials include swellable
polymers and hydroxyethyl cellulose or polysaccharide gums and are used at concentrations
of 0.1 to 1.0% of the volume. Invert emulsions are also used to reduce spray drift.
Drift control agents are of great value when herbicide applications are made near sensitive
nontarget plants, even though they increase application costs. The appropriate spray
equipment and operating conditions must be used with these thickened solutions.
Utility Modifiers
Utility modifiers are adjuvants that are used to reduce or avoid application problems and/or
increase the usefulness of a formulation. Emulsifiers and other surfactants of herbicide
formulations can cause foaming with agitation of the spray mixture. Thus, antifoam agents
are used to prevent or reduce excessive foaming in the spray tank. Antifoam agents are
typically silicones and are used at 0.1% by volume. Kerosene or diesel fuel added to the spray
tank at the same rate can often inhibit foaming.
Compatibility agents are used to help with mixing and/or application problems that may
occur when a combination of pesticides is used. They can also be used when herbicides and
applied in combination with a suspension, slurry, or true solution of fertilizers. Compatibility
agents can counter separation problems that occur with hard or cold water.
Surfactant:- Surface Acting Agent/Reduces SurfaceTension
A surfactant is a material that exhibits activity at the surface or interfaces. Surfactant is key
component of formulation and their role differs from product to product. In WP, WDP and
WDG formulations, they act as wetting, dispersing and suspending agents; in EC and EW as
emulsifying agent; in SC as suspending agents.
Surface tension:
The molecules at the surface do not have other molecules on all sides of them and therefore
are pulled inwards. This creates some internal pressure and forces liquid surfaces to contract
to the minimal area.
Surfactants: are substances that absorb to surfaces or interfaces, causing a marked decrease
in the surface tension.
 33

Surfactant structure
All surfactants are characterized by
having two regions in their molecular
structure:
A) a hydrophobic group, such as a
hydrocarbon chain, that has no affinity for
aqueous solvents
B) a hydrophilic group that has an affinity
for water. A molecular or ion that
possesses this
type of structure is termed amphipathic
(amphiphilic).

Characteristics features of surfactants: -

 Amphipathic structure: It consists of two parts, hydrophilic and hydrophobic and on
account of this nature, it works as wetting agents, spreaders, penetrants, translocate
pesticides in different parts of plants or insect cuticle.
 Solubility: Soluble at least in one of the phase of the liquid system.
 Adsorption and orientation at interface: micelle formation helps adsorption and
orientation
 Increases emulsifying, spreading, dispersibility, wetting, sticking, cuticular
penetration and absorption by plants.
 Tank mix adjuvants modify atomization, retention, sorption and chemical stability.
 A surfactant has critical micelle concentration (CMC) and Kraft Point.
 34

 CMC is defined as the concentration of surfactants above which micelles are

spontaneously formed.
 Kraft Point is an important property of micelles and is defined as the temperature at
which the solubility of surfactant is equal to its CMC.
 Hydrophile-lipophile balance (HLB):- Hydrophile-lipophile balance：surfactants
contain both hydrophilic groups and lipophilic groups with one or the other being
more predominant, the hydrophile-lipophile balance (HLB) number is used as a
measure of the ratio of these groups. It is a value between 0-40 defining the affinity of
a surfactant for water or oil. HLB value of nonionic surfactants ranges from 0-20.
HLB numbers >10 have an affinity for water (hydrophilic) and number <10 have an
affinity of oil (lipophilic).
Usefulness and limitations of surfactants:
 Surfactants may be increase or decrease total spray retention
 Increase spray retention at key sites
 Increase penetration by increasing area of contact with the leaf surface by greater
droplet spread and eliminating air film between droplets and leaf surface.
 Reduce interfacial tension and surface tension
 Act as humicants and solubilizing agents
 Facilitate movement along cell walls after entry by lowering interfacial tension
 Helps in redistribution of chemicals upon rewetting
 Provide safety to operators
Different surfactants used for herbicides
Non-ionic Anionic Cationic
Non-ionic surfactants are Anionic surfactants are Cationic surfactants are
widely used in agriculture widely used in agriculture compatible with cationic
and work well in warm and work well in cold herbicides, [Link],
water and hard water water and soft water diquat, glufosinate-AM
It comprise of carboxylic It comprise of carboxylate, Quaternary ammonium
amide, ethoxylated alkyl sulphonate, sulphate and compound is an example.
phenol, anhydro sorbitol phosphate ester.
ester

x-x-x-x-x
 35

CHAPTER-5 Herbicide formulation and their use

Herbicide formulations
Herbicide formulations contain active ingredients (the component of the herbicide
formulation responsible for being phytotoxic to the weed) and inert ingredients. Inert
ingredients include anything other than the active ingredient and can usually be divided into
two categories including solvents and adjuvants. Common solvents include substances such
as water, petroleum distillates and clay.
WHAT ARE HERBICIDES?
 Herbicides, also commonly known as weed killers, are weedicides used to kill
unwanted plants in the cropped areas.
 Herbicides are the substances that are toxic to plants, used to destroy unwanted
vegetation.
 Herbicides used to clear waste ground, industrial sites, railways and railway
embankments are not selective and kill all plant material with which they come into
contact. Smaller quantities are used in forestry, pasture systems, and management of
areas set aside as wildlife habitat.
 Just as a pesticide is used to rid an area of unwanted pests, the herbicide is used to get
rid of unwanted plant life, like weeds, brush, unproductive bushes or trees, and other
growth that takes nutrients away from crops and other useful plants.
 Herbicides are available in two main types: non-selective and selective. The non-
selective variety is used to kill all growth and is generally reserved for agricultural use
or for clearing large or heavily overgrown areas. On the other hand, a selective
herbicide is used to target certain types of plant life. This form works to curb growth,
usually through some type of hormone disruption, and should not affect other
vegetation.
What is herbicide formulation?
 The active ingredient in a herbicide is the chemical that controls the target weed. The
herbicide product you purchase is rarely made up only of active ingredients. Often the
herbicide is diluted in water or a petroleum solvent, and other chemicals are added
before the product is offered for sale. These other chemicals may include wetting
agents, spreaders, stickers, extenders, or diluents. They usually make the product
easier to apply and more convenient to handle. This mixture of active and inert
ingredients (inactive) is called a formulation of herbicide.
 An herbicide formulation is the total marketed product and is typically available in
forms that can be sprayed on as liquids or applied as dry solids. It includes the active
ingredient(s), any additives that enhance herbicide effectiveness, stability or ease of
application such as surfactants and other adjuvants, and any other ingredients
 36

including solvents, carriers or dyes. The application method and species to be treated
will determine which formulation is best to use.
Formulation of herbicides
The different formulations of herbicides are:
 Dry formulations
 Liquid formulations
 Adjuvants
 Salts & Esters
Dry formulations
 Granules (G): Granules consist of the active ingredient absorbed onto coarse
particles of clay or other substance, and are most often used in soil applications. These
formulations can persist for some time and may need to be incorporated into the soil.
The amount of a.i. ranges from 1 to 15%. Examples: Top-Site, Sprakill 13, Arsenal
0.5 G.
 Pellets (P) or tablets (TB) : Pellets are similar to granules but tend to be more
uniform in size and shape. Pellets provide a high degree of applicator safety.
Example: Spike 20P
 Dust (D) : A dust is a finely ground pesticide combined with an inert or inactive dry
carrier. They can pose a drift or inhalation hazard.
 Wettable Powder (WP or W): Wettable powders are finely ground solids, typically
mineral clays, to which an active ingredient is absorbed. They provide an effective
way to apply an active ingredient in a water spray that is not readily soluble in water.
These dry preparations look like dust, contain a high percent active ingredient
(usually 50 percent or more) and are mixed with water for application. Wettable
powders form a suspension rather than the true solution when added to water. Good
agitation (mixing) is needed in the spray tank to maintain the suspension. Example:
Spike 80W.
 Soluble Powder (SP): This is a dry formulation that contains a high percent (usually
above 50 percent) active ingredient. Soluble powders look like wettable powders but
they form a true solution when added to water. Agitation in the spray tank will help
this formulation to dissolve. After dissolving, no more agitation is usually needed.
Few herbicides are available in this formulation because few active ingredients are
soluble in water. Soluble powders are nonabrasive to equipment. Inhalation hazard is
a characteristic of this formulation. Example: Solution
 Water-Dispersible Granule or Dry Flowable (WDG or DF): Dry flowable are
manufactured in the same way as wettable powders except that the powder is
aggregated into granular particles. They are mixed with water and applied in a spray
exactly like a wettable powder. This dry formulation usually contains 70 to 90 percent
active ingredient. The formulation pours easily without the windblown dust associated
 37

with wettable powders and readily disperses in water to form a suspension. Constant
agitation is required. Example: Diuron 80, Escort, Karmex IWC, Oust, Sahara, Velpar
DF.
Liquid formulations
Liquid formulations do not exhibit the variety of physical forms possible with dry
formulations. However, liquid formulations differ markedly in the nature of their
characteristics that influence selection, rate and method of application, and environmental
impact.
 Water-Soluble Concentrate (WSC): Water-soluble concentrates to form a true
solution when added to water and is applied with water as the carrier. These
herbicides usually have an amine (ammonium salt) or mineral salt in the molecule that
enables water solubility. These formulations are essentially nonvolatile. There are
usually 2 to 6 pounds of active ingredient per gallon of the formulation. Agitation is
not necessary to maintain the herbicide in solution. Example: Arsenal, Formula 40,
Garlon 3A, Krenite, Roundup Pro, Tordon K, Vanquish, Veteran 720.
 Emulsifiable Concentrate (E or EC): An emulsifiable concentrate formulation
usually contains the active ingredient, one or more petroleum solvents, and an
emulsifier that allows the formulation to be mixed with water. Emulsifiable
concentrates usually contain 2 to 8 pounds of active ingredient per gallon. These
concentrates are soluble in oil and form an emulsion in water. There usually is a
dermal (skin contact) hazard associated with this formulation. Example: Garlon 4
 Flowable or Aqueous Suspension (F, L or AS): In this formulation, very finely
ground solid material is suspended in a liquid. Liquid flowable usually contain a high
concentration (4 pounds or more) of active ingredient and are mixed with water for
application. The formulation has the same major characteristics as a wettable powder;
it forms a suspension when added to water, and it enables the application of water-
insoluble herbicides in water. They seldom clog spray nozzles and they need only
moderate agitation. Example: Diuron 4L
 Liquid suspensions (L for liquid or F for flowable) : That are dispersed in water
include: suspension concentrates (SC), aqueous suspensions (AS), emulsions of
water-dissolved herbicide in oil (EO), emulsions of an oil-dissolved herbicide in water
(EW), micro-encapsulated formulations (ME), and capsule suspensions (CS). All
these products consist of a particulate or liquid droplet active ingredient suspended in
a liquid. They are easy to handle and apply, and rarely clog nozzles. However, they
can require agitation to keep the active ingredients from separating out.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Types of Formulations
Each formulation has advantages and disadvantages in terms of safety, effectiveness, and
ease of use. A letter designation for formulation is usually on the label. The major herbicide
formulation categories include: Soluble concentrates (SC), soluble powders (SP),
emulsifiable concentrates (EC), wettable powders (WP), water dispersible powders (WDP),
water dispersible granules (WDG), and granules (G).
 38

Soluble concentrate (sc)/soluble powder (sp)

[ + ] Advantages
 Mix readily with water
 No agitation required for water soluble herbicides when mixed with water
 Non-volatile
 Not abrasive
 Do not plug screens or nozzles
 Equipment cleans easily
 Soluble powders are easy to store, transport and handle
[ - ] Disadvantages
 Inhalation hazard when pouring soluble powders
 Some products may react with unlined steel spray tanks
 Eye irritation with some salts
Emulsifiable concentrate (ec)
[ + ] Advantages
 Relatively easy to handle, transport, and store
 Not abrasive
 Do not plug screens or nozzles
 Little visible residue on treated surfaces
 Flexible application options which may include basal applications
[ - ] Disadvantages
 Some agitation required – can settle out if left in tank for a long period of time
 May be more phytotoxic to non-target plants
 More easily absorbed through skin of humans or animals
 Solvents may cause rubber or plastic hoses, gaskets, and pump parts and surfaces to
deteriorate
 May cause pitting or discoloration of painted finishes
 May be corrosive
 May be volatile
 Equipment cleaning more difficult
Wettable powders (wp)
[ + ] Advantages
 Ease of transport and storage
 Less skin and eye absorption than ECs and other liquid formulations
[ - ] Disadvantages
 Inhalation hazard to applicator while pouring and mixing the concentrated powder
 Require constant agitation (usually mechanical) in the spray tank and quickly settle
out if agitation is turned off
 Some may be abrasive to pumps and nozzles, causing them to wear out quickly
 Difficult to mix in very hard or very alkaline water
 May clog nozzles and screens
 Residues may be visible
 39

Water dispersible powders (wdp)/water dispersible granules (wdg)/ dry

flowables (df)
[ + ] advantages
 Easy to handle, transport and mix
 Seldom clog nozzles
 Reduced applicator exposure when mixing and loading
[ - ] Disadvantages
 Require moderate agitation
 May be abrasive to sprayers
 May leave a visible residue
Granules (g) and pellets (p)
[ + ] advantages
 Ready to use—no mixing
 Drift hazard is low, and particles settle quickly
 Little hazard to applicator—no spray, minimal dust
 Size can be large which carries the formulation through foliage to soil or water target
 Simple application equipment, such as seeders or fertilizer spreaders
 May break down more slowly than WPs or ECs through a slow-release coating
[ - ] Disadvantages
 Do not stick to foliage or other non-level surfaces
 May need to be incorporated into soil or planting medium
 May need moisture to start herbicide action
 May physically move off-target during rainfall or other moisture events, especially on
steep slopes
 May be difficult to spread uniformly around target plant or obstacles
Benefits of herbicides
 They kill unwanted plants.
 They can be safely used whereas in some cases manually removing weeds can destroy
the crop.
 Herbicides can be used on closely planted crops where other methods cannot be used.
 Most of the time one application of the herbicide is enough whereas other methods
have to be continually used.
 They are easy to use
 They work fast. They can be removed quickly in critical situations.
 Herbicides are relatively cheap, and most of the time cheaper than manual weeding.
 Non-selective herbicides can effectively clear fields, where houses and roads can then
be built.
 They can destroy plants bearing diseases.
 They help the crops grow by destroying the weed that is robbing the crops water,
nutrients and sunlight.
 They are relatively safe on lands which may erode.
Limitations of herbicides
 Some herbicides are non-biodegradable and are harmful for a long period of time.
 They are all slightly toxic.
 40

 They can cause illnesses. Glyphosate, a herbicide, can cause eye and skin problems
and upper respiratory effects in the user. Paraquat can cause irritations to the skin and
may also lead to death, accidental and even suicidal. Many other diseases and illness
can be caused such as cancer, nausea, headaches, chest pains, and fatigue.
 The can be carried into streams by runoff rainwater or leached into underground water
supplies polluting them.
 Herbivores may eat the plants treated with herbicides and then carnivores eat the
herbivores. The toxic herbicide would be passed up the food chain increasing in
concentration each time resulting in cancers and even deaths.

x-x-x-x-x
 41

CHAPTER-6 Introduction to mode of action of herbicides and selectivity

Mode of action
The term mode of action refers to the sequence of events from absorption into plants to
plant death. The mode of action of the herbicide influences how the herbicide is applied. For
example, contact herbicides that disrupt cell membranes, such as acifluorfen (Blazer) or
paraquat (Gramoxone Extra), need to be applied postemergence to leaf tissue in order to be
effective. Seedling growth inhibitors, such as trifluralin (Treflan) and alachlor (Lasso), need
to be applied to the soil to effectively control newly germinated seedlings.
To be effective, herbicides must
1) be adequately contact plants;
2) be absorbed by plants;
3) move within the plants to the site of action, without being deactivated; and
4) reach toxic levels at the site of action.
The application method used, whether pre-plant incorporated, pre-emergence, or post-
emergence, determines whether the herbicide will contact germinating seedlings, roots,
shoots, or leaves of plants.
Why Know Herbicide Modes of Action?
 Better understanding of how herbicides perform
 Improve herbicide performance
 Diagnose herbicide injury
 Prevent and manage herbicide resistance
The herbicide families listed below are grouped on the basis of how they affect plants
(their mode of action)
1. The Growth Regulator Herbicides (2,4-D, MCPP, dicamba, and triclopyr). These are
mostly foliar applied herbicides which are systemic and translocate in both the xylem and
phloem of the plant. They mimic natural plant auxins, causing abnormal growth and
disruption of the conductive tissues of the plant. The injury from this family of herbicides
consists of twisted, malformed leaves and stems.
2. The inhibitors of amino acid synthesis (glyphosate, halosulfuron, imazethapyr, and
sulfometuron). Both foliar and soil applied herbicides are in this family. Glyphosate
translocates in the phloem with photosynthate produced in the leaves. Others in this family
move readily after root or foliar absorption. These herbicides inhibit certain enzymes
critical to the production of amino acids. Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins.
Once protein production stops, growth stops. Symptoms are stunting and symptoms
associated with lack of critical proteins.
 42

3. Cell membrane disrupters - with soil activity (oxyfluorfen, lactofen, and acifluorfen).
Soil and foliar applied with limited movement in soil. These herbicides enter the plant
through leaves, stems, and roots, but are limited in their movement once they enter the
plant. Membrane damage is due to lipid peroxidation. Symptoms are necrosis of leaves
and stem.
4. Lipid biosynthesis inhibitors (diclofop, fluazifop, sethoxydim, and clethodim). Foliar
applied Diclofop has both soil and foliar activity. Herbicides in this family move in both
the xylem and phloem of the plant and inhibit enzymes critical in the production of lipids.
Lipids are necessary to form plant membranes which are essential to growth and metabolic
processes. Symptoms include stunting and death of tissue within the growing points of
plants.
5. Pigment inhibitors (norflurazon, fluridone, and amitrol). Soil applied and move in the
xylem except amitrol, which moves in both phloem and xylem. These herbicides inhibit
carotinoid biosyntehsis, leaving chlorophyll unprotected from photooxidation. This results
in foliage which lacks color. Symptoms include albino or bleached appearance of foliage.
6. Growth inhibitors of shoots (thiocarbamate herbicides including: EPTC, cycloate,
pebulate, and molinate). Soil applied and somewhat volatile, requiring incorporation.
Enter the plant through the roots and translocated through the xylem with the transpiration
stream to the growing points in the shoot. Mode of action is unclear, but affects
developing leaves in growing points of susceptible plants. Symptoms include stunting and
distortion of seedling leaves.
7. Herbicides which disrupt cell division (trifluralin, DCPA, dithiopyr, oryzalin,
pronamide, pendimethalin, and napropamide). All are soil applied, with limited movement
in the soil. Absorbed through roots or emerging shoot tips. Once absorption takes place,
movement is limited (site of action is near the site of absorption). These herbicides inhibit
cell division or mitosis, except pronamide and napropamide which stop cell division
before mitosis. Symptoms include stunting and swollen root tips.
8. Cell membrane disrupters - no soil activity (paraquat, diquat, glufosinate, acids, oils,
soaps). These herbicides are foliar applied with no soil activity. They enter the plant
through the leaves and stems and do not move significantly within the plant once
absorbed. These herbicides either act directly on cell membranes (acids, soaps. oils) or
react with a plant process to form destructive compounds which result in membrane
damage. Symptoms include rapid necrosis of the leaves and stem.
9. Inhibitors of photosynthesis (atrazine, simazine, metribuzin, cyanazine, prometryn,
diuron, linuron, tebuthiuron, and bromacil). These are soil applied herbicides, however, all
except simazine also have foliar activity. They move readily in the plant in the xylem with
the transpiration stream where they concentrate in the leaves at the site of photosynthesis.
Once there they block the electron transport system of photosynthesis, causing a buildup
of destructive high energy products which destroy chlorophyll and ultimately the leaf
tissues. Symptoms include chlorotic (yellowing) leaves which become necrotic.
 43

Herbicide Resistance
Herbicide resistance probably develops through the selection of naturally occurring biotypes
of weeds exposed to a particular family of herbicides over a period of years. A biotype is a
population of plants within the same species that has specific traits in common. Resistant
plants survive, go to seed, and create new generations of herbicide resistant weeds.
Mechanisms for resistance vary depending on herbicide family. Resistant biotypes may have
slight biochemical differences from their susceptible counterparts that eliminates sensitivity
to certain herbicides. Also, while photosynthesis is inhibited in triazine herbicide susceptible
biotypes, because of a slight change in a chloroplast protein, triazine resistant biotypes are
able to continue normal photosynthesis upon exposure to triazine herbicides. The potential
for developing herbicide resistant biotypes is greatest when an herbicide has a single site of
action.
Regardless of the mechanism for resistance, becoming familiar with the herbicide mode of
action can help design programs that prevent the introduction and spread of herbicide
resistant weeds. Management programs for herbicide resistance should emphasize an
integrated approach that stresses prevention. Dependence on a single strategy or herbicide
family for managing weeds will surely increase the likelihood of additional herbicide
resistance problems in the future. Some guidelines for an integrated approach to managing
herbicide resistant weeds are given below.
Strategies for preventing or managing herbicide resistance
• Practice crop rotation.
• Rotate herbicide families and use herbicides with different modes of action.
• Use herbicide mixtures with different modes of action.
• Control weedy escapes and practice good sanitation to prevent the spread of resistant
weeds.
• Integrate cultural, mechanical, and chemical weed control methods.
Effect of sub lethal dosage
When herbicides are applied on the soil, neighbouring fields may be affected by drift. The
high doses of herbicides applied to previous crop may be harmful to the succeeding crop.
However, these sub lethal doses may be occassionally helpful based on crop and the
herbicide used.
Herbicides show stimulatory effects on crops and toxic effects on sensitive crops even at sub
lethal doses. Which show stimulatory effects are phenoxys, triazines, ureas and uracils. In
fact, 2, 4-D was first used for its hormonal effect before its herbicidal properties were
discovered.
Phenoxy herbicides have growth promoting activities at lower doses similar to indole acetic
acid (IAA). They are active at the meristamatic tissues causing increased metabolic activities
and consequently higher grain protein content and yield. Protein content of wheat is increased
by dusting 5g/ha of 2,4-D mixed with micronutrients like iron and copper. Even higher dose,
 44

say 0.5 to 1.3 kg/ha applied to the soil as herbicide before sowing increases the protein
content of wheat. The other crops which show stimulatory effect due to herbicide application
are beans, potato, sugarcane, soybean etc.
Among triazines, simazine and atrazine produce favourable effects at sub lethal doses. They
increase nutrient absorption, chlorophyll and protein content. Simazine at 0.06 ppm increased
nutrient uptake and yield of maize, but at 0.3 ppm concentration the yield decreased. The sub
lethal effects caused by drifts are rarely toxic except to sensitive crops. Spray drift of 2,4 D
causes epinasty on cotton plants.
Amitrole at 10 to 100 ppm sprayed on tobacco or wheat causes chlorosis due to chloroplast
malformation and reduction in chlorophyll and carotenoids. Soil residues of herbicides
appilied to the previous crops may affect germination of sensitive crops
Selectivity of herbicides
Selective herbicides have been used extensively since the introduction of 2,4-D in the late
'40s. They have been one of the miracles of modem agriculture, releasing thousands of people
from the drudgery of hand weeding. A selective herbicide is one that kills or retards the
growth of an unwanted plant or "weed" while causing little or no injury to desirable species.
2,4-D used in turf will kill many of the broadleaf weeds that infest turf while not significantly
injuring the turfgrass. But selectivity is a fickle, dynamic process. Excessive rates of 2,4-D
applied to stressed turfgrass may injure the turf. Selectivity has always depended on proper
herbicide application. Normally herbicides work selectively within a given rate of
application. Too little herbicide and no weed control, too much and crop injury may occur.
But selectivity is more complex than this. It is a dynamic process that involves the interaction
of the plant, the herbicide, and the environment.
An examination of the available literature on the subject reveals that herbicidal selectivity can
be either 1. Innate or 2. Induced. The innate selectivity results from specific plant
morphological, physiological, and biological features in relation to the herbicide structure.
The induced selectivity, on the other hand, is bought about either by hindering from reaching
the site of its action in plants or by bringing about a genetic change in plants to develop
specific biochemical tolerance mechanisms.
Plant species often respond differently to different herbicides, one species responds
differently to different herbicides and the plants of one species but in different areas respond
differently to same herbicide. This phenomenon is called herbicidal selectivity.
The fundamental principles of herbicide selectivity is that more toxicant reaches the site of
action in active form inside target plants than in the non-target species. This may occur due
to:
1) Differential absorption
2) Differential translocation
3) Differential deactivation of the applied herbicide.
 45

Besides, some plants may exhibit innate protoplasmic resistance to specific herbicides.
(1) Differential Absorption of Herbicides:
It may occur due to
a) Differences in morphology of plants:-
Certain morphology features of crop plants will allow limited retention of aqueous sprays of
herbicides on their foliage. This offers an opportunity to obtain selective control of weed
species of variable morphology that may allow easy leaf wetting with the aqueous sprays.
Important limited spray retention characteristics found in certain plants are
(i) Narrow upright leaves
(ii) Corrugated or finely ridged leaf surfaces
(iii) Waxy leaf surfaces and
(iv) Pubescent leaves.
Aqueous sprays either bounce off as droplets from their foliage or wet them only in small
spots. Crops like wheat and sugarcane are further protected against herbicide sprays by their
covered growing points. The growing point in wheat plant is located at the base and initially
below the soil surface while in sugarcane, it is hidden by the upper leaf sheaths.
The limited spray retention provides plants protection only against contact selective
herbicides that are sprayed in carrier water without any wetting agent.
With translocated herbicides limited spray retention is of not much help in protecting the non-
target plants from herbicide injury. It is because the translocated type of herbicides, even
when they wet plant surfaces in small areas, can be absorbed and translocated to other plant
parts and thus injures the whole plant.
(b) Differences in growth Habits of plants:-
i) Shoot growth differences:-
When crop rows have a clear advantage in height over the inter row weeds directed spraying
of herbicides is a common method of achieving selective control of weeds.
In slow germinating crops, like potato and sugarcane weeds often established themselves
even before crop emergence. These weeds can be controlled selectively by spraying a contact
type of herbicide before more than 10 % of the crop plants are seen over the ground. Before
emergence of crops translocated type of herbicides can be used.
ii) Root growth difference:-
In general, weed seeds germinate from top 1.25 to 1.5 cm of soil whereas many crop seeds
are planted 5 to 7.5 cm deep. When a recommended pre-emergence herbicide is applied on
the soil surface and the soil moisture condition are suitable to leach it to about 2.5 to 3.0 cm
soil depth, it is readily available for absorption to the germinating weeds. Crop plants that
grow their roots beyond 5 cm depth obviously avoid herbicide absorption and escape
phytotoxicity. This is the basic principle of selectivity of most of the pre-emergence
 46

herbicides and it is a function of herbicide structure, formulation and rate besides the soil
texture organic and inorganic colloids and the rainfall. When any one of these factor is
unfavourble the herbicide may either injure crop plants or result in poor weed control.
Sometimes both the adverse effects may occur together when the phenomenon is called
„reverse selectivity‟.
(c) Use of Adsorbent and Antinodes
i) Adsorbents:-
If germinating crop seeds and seedling are surrounded by a layer of activated charcoal within
the soil; they can be made to escape absorption of many soil applied herbicides.
In dibbled vegetables activated carbon can be placed over seeds in seed holes. Pre-emergence
herbicides sprayed later are retained by carbon, thus avoiding their absorption by the
germinating crop seeds.
In recent years seed pelleting with activated carbon has been developed. In this method
carbon is coated over crop seeds using gum or PVA (polyving acetate).
(iii) Safeners (Antinodes):-
Safeners also known as antidote or crop protectant is a sort of physical barrier (extensively
active) or a chemical (internal active), which protects a crop from being injured on
application of a herbicide normally non-selective to it. The antodotes, which act as physical
barriers towards uptake of the herbicide by crop plants are basically adsorbent.
Safeners are chemicals discovered to antagonize phytotoxicity of specific herbicides to
specific plant species. Otto L. Hoffman is considered the father of safeners. As early as 1948
he observed antagonism of 2, 4-D on tomato plants. By 1969 he discovered and reported NA
(1, 8,-Naphthaline anhydride) as highly successful safener of EPTC as butylate in Maize.
Later a more maize specific safener of EPTC as butylate, namely R-25788 was discovered. It
could be applied to soil as a tank mix with EPTC without fear of protecting any EPTC
susceptible weeds. NA being not so specific must be used strictly as a seed-dress only. Its
effective dose is 0.5 g/kg seed. The dose of soil applied R-25788 is 0.6 kg/ha. CGA-43089 is
perhaps the latest safeners.
It is likely that NA and possibly other safeners enter the target plants and compete there with
herbicide molecules for a binding site on some native enzyme. Thus for safeners have proved
successful only against herbicides that affect cell division in one way or the other and not
against the photosynthetic inhibiting herbicides.
Usefulness of Antidotes:
 Non-selective herbicides could be used for selective weed control
 Higher doses of herbicide can be used since antidotes normally increase the safety
 A composite culture of a weeds similar or dissimilar to crops can be controlled
 Ready-mix/in-built combination of antidotes in the formulation or their tank-mixes
may save crops from damage of the non-selective herbicides applied accidentally
 47

 Antidotes offer grater insurance/reliance against crop damage particularly under

situations like susceptible crop varieties, soil conditions or adverse weather condition,
where crops are likely to receive phtotoxicity
Limitations of Antidotes:
 Using herbicide antidotes may increase the cost of weed control in particular and the
cost of crop cultivation in general since antidotes incur some cost
 Their antagonism with certain herbicide may protect some important weeds of a crop
 Their use with herbicides increases the toxicity load to the environment
 The effect of antidote is not constant/uniform, but varies across climates and soils
based on temperature, moisture, texture etc.
(d) Use of granular formulations:-
Development of granular formulations of herbicides is a step forwards achieving a general
selectivity between established crop plants and associated germinating weeds by giving
weeds the opportunity of selective absorption of the toxicant. The granules filter through the
crop foliage, leaving little herbicide for absorption by it. They then settle on the moist ground
where germinating weeds absorb the herbicide released slowing by the granule. An important
desirable character of herbicides embodies in the granules is their low leachability in soils,
else the toxicant may move down to the crop roots.
(2) Differential translocation of Herbicides
It is true that a plant can translocate through it only as much herbicide as it absorbs, and no
more. But there are instances when equal amounts of herbicides are absorbed by plants still
they are translocated at different rates.
Better mobility of herbicides in plants, however, does not always mean a quicker plant kill
actually, in certain instances it may aid the plant in escaping specific herbicide action for
instance, diphenamid is found selective to Convolvulus arvensis because this plant
translocates the herbicide rapidly from the roots to the shoots where it is metabolized. The
Avena sativa on the contrary, was found susceptible to diphenamid because it failed to
translocate diphenamid away from its roots which are always the site of phytotoxic action of
this herbicide.
(3) Differential rates of deactivation of herbicide by plants
Experimental evidence is growing that herbicide selectivity is primarily a function of
differential rates of deactivation of the toxicant by the target and the non-target plants before
they reach their respective site of action. This deactivation may be a process of
(i) metabolism
(ii) reverse metabolism or
(iii) Conjugation.
 48

A tolerant plant species deactivates the herbicide molecular rapidly, whereas a susceptible
species does so slowly. In some instances reverse metabolism may be an important venue of
herbicide dissipation.
i) Metabolism :-
Metabolism involves a change in the molecular structure of the applied herbicides inside
plants to yield non-phytotoxic products. Ribes nigrum which is susceptible to 2,4-D
metabolized the herbicide at a rate of 2% of the applied amount in 96 hours whereas the
tolerant R. sativum metabolized 50% of it during the same period.
ii) Reverse metabolism
When in metabolic reactions of herbicides the intermediate chemical structures prove more
phytotoxic than the parent compound, the process is called reverse metabolism. Herbicides
like 2,4-D and MCPB per se are non-phytotoxic. But the metabolism of these compounds in
plants yielded phytotoxic acetic acid intermediates namely 2,4-D and MCPA, respectively.
This reverse metabolism of 2, 4-D and MCPB is an enzymic B-oxidation process. It occurred
in many non leguminous plants. Certain legumes like pea lucern berseem and other clovers
on the other hand either lacked the necessary B-oxidation system or operated it sluggishly.
Consequently, these legumes proved comparatively tolerant to 2,4-D and MCPB.
iii) Conjugation
Conjugation is coupling of intact herbicide molecules with some plant cell constituent in
living plants. Conjugation takes the toxic herbicide concentration out of the main stream of
plant, and plants capable of rapidly doing so obviously prove tolerant to it.
In plant susceptible to chloramben the conjugation was found to be so slow that the herbicide
translocated from roots to the shoots where it proved phytotoxic. The tolerance of grasses and
certain ecotypes of Convolvovulus arvensis to the foliar application of 2,4-D has also been
explained at least in part on the basis of its conjugation with glucose and certain amino acids
in these plants.
Now it is known that simazine and atrazine are also deactivated in maize, apple, sugarcane
and certain millets by the process of conjugation rather than by earlier believed mechanism of
metabolism.
(4) Differential protoplasmic resistance
Plants show tolerance to dalapon withstands pantothenic acid deficiency and resist
precipitation of their cell proteins. Likewise, plasma lemma of epidermal cells of carrot
leaves resists the solubilizing action of crop oils much longer than many of the associated
weeds. Biophysical features of plant cells such as protoplasmic viscosity, streaming and
physical continuity also respond differently to variable herbicides structures.
(5) Multifactor herbicide selectivity in plants
Wheat is tolerant to post-emergent ioxynil and bromoxynil because of three concurrent
selectivity mechanics, namely
(i) limited spray retention
 49

(ii) slow translocation or

(iii) rapid herbicides metabolism.
Distribution of herbicides molecules within plants can also be an important factor in
selectivity. Perfluidone and Pichloram for instance accumulated at the site of action in the
susceptible plants but in tolerant species there are evenly distributed.
Besides the many inherent plant factor, method of planting of crops may also determine
herbicide selectivity. The ridge planted potato is found more tolerent to pre-emergent 2,4-D
than the flat planted crop.
(6) Other selectivity components
i) Rate of herbicide
Under rates of herbicides improve their selectivity to crops at the cost of satisfactory weed
control, while their over rates are most likely to reduce selectivity and cause variable crop
injury.
ii) Growth stages of Plants
2,4-D is selective to winter grains first at their 3 to 6 leaf stage and again at the drought stage.
At other growth stages 2,4-D may induce in these crops malformation like onion leafing and
missing spiklets ears.
x-x-x-x-x
 50

CHAPTER-7 Allelopathy and its application for weed management

Definition:
Allelopathy is derived from two Greek words, ―allelon or allelo‖ means ―mutual or each
other‖ and ―pathos or patho‖ means ―suffering or to suffer.‖ Molisch (1937) coined the term
allelopathy, which includes all stimulatory and inhibitory reciprocal biochemical interactions
among plants including microorganisms. Some authors, however, prefer to describe it purely
an inhibitory effect of one plant species upon another. Rice (1974) too opined the same.
However, an allelochemical that inhibits the growth of some plants or microorganisms at
certain concentration may stimulate the growth of same or different plants or microorganisms
at its lower concentration. Therefore, this biochemical interaction cannot be solely an
inhibitory phenomenon. That is why Rice later (Rice, 1984) inclined to the same definition of
allelopathy as propounded by Molisch (1937).
The term allelopathy was first introduced by Hans Molisch in 1937 and refers to chemical
interactions among plants, including those mediated by microorganisms. The concept of
allelopathy received new attention in 1974, after the publication of the first book in English
on the allelopathy by Elroy L Rice, where he defined allelopathy as the effect(s) of one plant
on another plants through the release of chemical compounds into the soil environment (Rice,
1984).
Allelopathy is the detrimental effects of chemicals or exudates produced by one (living)
plant species on the germination, growth or development of another plant species (or even
microorganisms) sharing the same habitat.
Allelopathy does not form any aspect of crop-weed competition, rather, it causes Crop-Weed
interference, it includes competition as well as possible allelopathy.
Allelo chemicals are produced by plants as end products, by-products and metabolites
liberalised from the plants; they belong to phenolic acids, flavanoides, and other aromatic
compounds viz., terpenoids, steroids, alkaloids and organic cyanides.
Table . Several definitions of allelopathy
SN Definitions of allelopathy References

1 Allelopathy refers to all biochemical interactions, stimulatory or Molisch (1937

inhibitory, among plants including microorganisms.
2 Allelopathy is the detrimental effects of chemicals) or exudates Evenari (1949) (cited
produced by one living plant species on the germination, growth or in
development of another plant species or microorganisms sharing the Akobundu, 198
same habitat
3 Allelopathy refers to the deleterious effects that one higher plant has Martin and
on another through the production of chemical retardants that escape Rademacher (1960,
into the environment. Muller (1966))
4 Allelopathy refers to any direct or indirect inhibitory effect by one Rice (1974)
plant including microorganisms on another through the production of
chemical compounds that escape into the environment.
5 Allelopathy includes inter-specific (antibiotics) as well as intra- --
specific(auto -toxic) chemical co- action
 51

Kinds of allelopathic interactions

Allelopathy may be alloallelopathy and autoallelopathy, true and functional allelopathy
(Aldrich, 1984) and concurrent/direct and residual allelopathy. Alloallelopathy is inter-
specific chemical co-action, whereas autoallelopathy intra-specific chemical co-action. The
cases of alloallelopathy are : maize is allelopathic to Chenopodium album, Amaranthus
retroflexus; sorghum to Abutilon theophrasti, Amaranthus hybridus, Setaria viridis, Bromus
pectinatus ; rye to Digitaria sanguinalis, Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Chenopodium album ;
cucumber to Echinochloa crusgalli, Amaranthus retroflexus ; and sweet potato to Cyperus
rotundus, Cyperus esculentus (Putnam, 1985). The cases of autoallelopathy are : wheat,
alfalfa, cowpea, rice, apple, clover and sweet potato are autotoxic. The soil where these crops
were previously grown, is inhibitive to their growth when replanted or their residues proved
autotoxic to them when incorporated. Similarly Trifolium repens (weed) has autotoxicity.
True allelopathy refers to the release into the environment of chemical compounds that are
toxic in the forms they are produced by the plants, but functional allelopathy is the release
into the environment of compounds that are toxic after chemical modification by
microorganisms. Concurrent/direct allelopathy refers to instantaneous direct effect of released
toxins from the living plants to another growing in vicinity, whereas residual allelopathy is
the effect obtained on the plants growing in succession from the decaying residues, leaf
litters, stems, roots of the previous plants. Concurrent allelopathy is differently called as ―live
plant effect,‖ e.g. sorghum suppresses many weeds growing in vicinity. Live barley plants
and their root exudates are more inhibitory than aqueous leachates of dead roots (Overland,
1966). This might support the concept of active metabolic secretion of allelochemicals by the
live/standing plants. Lentil residues are phytotoxic to wheat and sunflower and mustard
residues to several crops (Putnam, 1983, 1985). Similarly sorghum is allelopathic to wheat
and Phalaris minor and sweet potato to cowpea. These are example of residual allelopathy.
Allelopathic Chemicals
 Phenolic acid
 Coumarins
 Terpinoids
 Flavinoids
 Scopulatens
 52

Mode of Action of Allelochemicals

Ways of releasing Allelochemicals

Allelopathic chemicals are released

from
the plants as:
 Vapour – from root and leaf
(through
 stomata)
 Foliar
 Root
 Breakdown/ decomposition
product of dead plant parts
 Seed extract

How allelochemicals introduced into plant??

 53

Forms of Allelopathy

Weed on Crop

Weed on Weed

Crop on weed

Allelopathic Effect of Weeds on Crops

(1) Maize
• Leaves & inflorescence of Parthenium sp. affect the germination and seedling growth
• Tubers of Cyperus esculentus affect the dry matter production
(2) Sorghum
• Stem of Solanum affects germination and seedling growth
• Leaves and inflorescence of Parthenium affect germination and seedling growth
(3) Wheat
• Seeds of wild oat affect germination and early seedling growth
• Leaves of Parthenium affects general growth
• Tubers of C. rotundus affect dry matter production
 54

• Green and dried leaves of Argemone mexicana affect germination & seedling growth
(4) Sunflower
• Seeds of Datura affect germination & growth
Allelopathic Effect of crop plants on weeds
(i) Root exudation of maize inhibits the growth of Chenopodium album
(ii) The cold water extracts of wheat straw when applied to weeds reduce germination and
growth of Abutilon sp.
Allelopathic effect of weeds on weeds
• Extract of leaf leachate of decaying leaves of Polygonum contains flavonoides which are
toxic to germination, root and hypocotyls growth of weeds like Amaranthus spinosus
• Inhibitor secreted by decaying rhizomes of Sorghum halepense affect the growth of
Digitaria sanguinalis and Amaranthus sp.
Factors influencing allelopathy
a. Plant factors
i. Plant density: Higher the crop density the lesser will be the allelo chemicals it
encounters
ii. Life cycle: If weed emerges later there will be less problem of allelochemicals
iii. Plant age: The release of allelochemicals occurs only at critical stage. For eg. in case
of Parthenium, allelopathy occurs during its rosette & flowering stage.
iv. Plant habit: The allelopathic interference is higher in perennial weeds.
v. Plant habitat: Cultivated soil has higher values of allelopathy than uncultivated soil.
b. Climatic factors: The soil & air temperature as well as soil moisture influence the allelo
chemicals potential
c. Soil factors: Physico-chemical and biological properties influence the presence of
allelochemicals.
d. Stress factors: Abiotic and Biotic stresses may also influence the activity of
allelochemicals
Factors affecting the allelopathic effect :
Allelopathic effects might also depends on a number of other factors that might be important
in any given situation
Varieties: there can be a great deal of difference in the strength of allelopathic effects
between different crop varieties.
Specificity:
Mechanism of action of allele-chemicals
 55

 Interfere with cell elongation

 Interfere with photosynthesis
 Interfere with respiration
 Interfere with mineral ion uptake
Advantages of Allelopathy:-
 Limit competition for space, light, nutrients, water
 Autotoxity (Chemical produced inhibits germination of it's own seeds
 Allelopathic Weed Suppression Through the Use of Cover Crops
Interfere with protein and nucleic acid metabolism
Use of Allelopathy in biological control of weeds:
1. Use of cover crop for biological control
2. Use of alleopathic chemicals as bio-herbicides
Effect of weed competition on crop growth and yield
1. Crop growth and yield is affected
2. Crop suffers from nutritional deficiency
3. Leaf area development is reduced
4. Yield attributes will be lowered
5. Reduce the water use by the crop
6. Affect the dry matter production
7. Lowers the input response
8. Causes yield reduction
9. Pest and disease incidence will be more
Forms of Allelopathic Interactions
Crop against other crops
Crop against crop allelopathic interaction is likely operative in multiple crop culture like
inter-cropping. mixed-cropping, parallel multiple cropping, multi-storeyed cropping and
agro-forestry. Therefore, selection of suitable pairs of crops having no allelopathic effect with
each other is of paramount importance in crop diversification or crop mixture programme.
Enough in the field for a long period to determine crop compatibility and
This will serve as one basis/pre requisite for selection of crops for mixture apart from other
considerations like nature and kind of crop (cereals, pulses and legumes, oilseeds etc.),
rooting pattern, height, branching/tillering hahit etc. For example sunflower has been found
allelopathic to groundnut under intercropping situation. Tree crops like Eucalyptus also
shows some allelopathic interactions to vegetables and some field crops grown as
 56

intercrop with it. Crop residues of lentil are phytotoxic to wheat and of sunflower and
mustard to several crops (Putnam, 1983, 1985). Similarly sorghum is allelopathic to wheat
and phalaris minor and sweet potato to cowpea, but mung/green gram, urdbean/black gram
and cowpea are stimulatory to the growth of wheat.
Crop against weeds
Several crops show allelopathic effects on weeds 〔Table). For example, sorghum releases
hydrocyanic/prussic acid (IICN) and suppresses many weeds growing in vicinity. Barley is
more competitive to weeds than wheat. Live barley plants and their root exudates were more
inhibitory than aqueous leachates of dead roots (Overland, 1966). This might support the
concept of active metabolic secretion of allelochemicals by the live/standing plants. Barley
produces "gramine," an alkaloid, which inhibits weed growth. The allelopathic effects of
many leguminous plants and trees/shrubs, e.g. Azadirachta indica (neem), Prosopis
julifora/cineraria, Delonix regia, Eucalyptus globulus/citriodora on Parthenium
hysterophorus are also reported (Dhawan er. al, 1994; Dhawan and Dhawan, 1995).
Allelopathic effects of crops on weeds

SN Crops Weed species Source of inhibitors

1 Maize Chenopodiam athun, Amaranihus retroflexns Roots
2 Cassava Amaranihus dubius, Digitaria sarguinalis Leaves
3 Sorghum Abutilon theophrasti, Amaranthus hybridus, Shoots and foliages
Setaria viridis. Bromus pectinatus
4 Rye Digitaria sanguinalis, Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Shoots and foliages
Chenopodinm album
5 Cucumber Eehinochloa crusgalli. Amaranthirs retroflexus ----
6 Sweet potato Cyperus rotundus, Cyperus esculentus ----
Weeds against crops
Many weeds impose allelopathic influence (Putnam, 1983, 1985; Thompson, 1985; Rice,
1974, 1979, 1984) on certain crops (Table). They also may associate them with a number of
crops in the field and, therefore, further researches are to be carried out for knowing whether
they show similar allelopathy on those crops
Allelopathic effects of weeds on crops

SN Weeds Crops Source of inhibitors

1 Euphorbia sp Flax Root exudates
2 Commelina alyssum Flax Leaves
3 Setaria faberi Maize Whole plant
4 Cyperus rotundus Sorguhm, soybean Tubers
5 Polygomum persicaria Potato Roots
6 Salvinia occidentalis Coffee Roots
7 Imperata cylindrical Several crops Whole plant
8 Abutilon theophrasti Alfalfa Shoot and foliage
9 Cynodon dactylon Coffee ---
10 Chenopodium album Alfalfa, cucumber, oat, maize Shoot and foliage
 57

Weed against other weeds :

Parthenium hysterophorus is allelopathic to many weeds whose listing may be impossible
considering their vast diversity and large number. Wherever parthenium invades, it forms a
territory of its own replacing all existing flora, grasses and broad-leaved weeds mainly
because of its allelopathic effect (Kohli. 1992) and competition. Very little or no vegetation
could be seen in parthenium-dominated areas. similarly there are many weeds/wild species,
[Link] spinosus, Tagetes minuta, Mirabilis jalupa, etc. which pose strong
allelopathic effect on parthenium. Weed against weed allelopathy has enough importance and
could be exploited to result to oust parthenium in Karnataka State, India (Mahadevappa,
1997). Rumex sp shows allelopathic effects to Amaranthus spp.
Crop against same crop
The important step towards avoiding/removing the allelopathic effect of some crops
on the crop species is to stop the continuous mono-cropping of those crops over the years and
to encourage crop rotation with diverse crop species. Several crops like wheat, alfalfa,
cowpea, rice, apple and sweet potato are autotoxic. The soil where these crops were
previously grown,has been found inhibitive to their growth when replanted or their residues
proved autotoxic to them when incorporated. However, it is still to be established whether
there operates autotoxicity from the live existing stand of these crops in the field.
Weed against same weed
The allelopathic effect of weed against same weed is another important intraspecific chemical
co-action, which results in weaker stand of a particular weed. However, there is equal
possibility that chemical autotoxic to a certain weed, may be toxic to other plants specifically
crop plants, otherwise, it will accumulate in soil and develop soil sickness in the long run.
Trifolium repens (weed),for example has autotoxicity.
Allelopathic Problems in Agriculture, Horticulture and Forestry
Since the same crops are grown year after year on the same piece of land in certain
areas/regions,certain crop residues (e g. rice) get piled up, left on the field or incorporated.
farmers use different kinds of mulches, multiple cropping systems, crop mixtures or crop
diversifications programme adopted, afforestation launched. allelopathy has got a definite
role to play under such circumstances. Isolation of allelopathic interaction is e g. crop against
weeds, crop against other crops, crap against other weeds. weeds against other weeds and
weed against same weed) occurring in crop field is not possible considering the complexity of
crop-weed situation. However, their concurrent, cumulative effects altogether exert the
ultimate influence on the usual crop culture/cultivation of an area These interactions may
coexist, balance or compensate for each other. Of course, allelopathy cannot be a sole
contributing cause of these, but it definitely adds to other causes. Several problems occurring
in agriculture, horticulture and forestry.
i) Soil sickness
Soil becomes sick in two ways, first by direct or indirect use of synthetic chemicals (e.g.
pesticides, inorganic fertilizers and other chemicals) in excessive rates for crop production
 58

and protection and secondly by allelochernicals released from plants (roots, stem, foliage or
whole plant) and microorganisms. Tukey (1969) reported that soil sickness causes decline in
the quality and yield of a crop when grown on the same land year after year. In sick soil, root
growth is arrested/ warranted, microbial activity gets reduced and soil's inherent capacity to
supply and release plant nutrients through mineralization is weakened. Adsorption of
allelochemicals to soil colloids may lead to break-up of soil structure and alteration of other
physicochemical properties, namely pH. Eh of soil.
Monocropping practiced for a long period experiences soil sickness, which results in gradual
decline of yield of that crop in the successive years. The sickness is more pronounced under
monocropping because similar or same allclochemicals accumulate over the years and their
concertation gradually increases and reaches to a toxic level. On the contrary, under crop
mixture or crop rotation. the allelochemicals released by different crops are likely different
and their concentration may not build and reach to a toxic level rapidly. Soil sickness is.
therefore, plant species-specific, Continuous monocropping of wheat. barley, oat, rice,
cowpea and clover causes soil sicknes. Initially allelochemicals remain intact as plant
metabolites, but later change to humic substances like phenolic acids and other related
aromatic compounds.
Farmers in the temperate regions normally practise monocropping with or without rotation
and hardly take a second crop in the same year on account of chilling winter. Therefore,
residues get enough time all through the fall winter season for apparently complete
decomposition and removal from soil and sickness appears to be very less in such soil. On the
contrary, if irrigation facility exists in the tropic and sub-tropical areas, climate supports year-
round cropping and two or more crops could be g a year with a little time (15-20 days) gap
between the harvest of previous crop and the sowing of next crop. The decomposition of
previous crop residues coincides with the seed germination and seedling establishment of
next crop and therefore, the decomposition products likely influence the germination and
seedling growth of next crop. Hence, allelopathy has greater role to play in the crop-weed
ecosystem particularly under tropical and sub-tropical situations than in the temperate
conditions.
ii) Autotoxicity under same crop monocropping
Autoroxicity operates as a predominant mechanism for crop yield decline over the years in
many monoculture annual and pereenial [Link] extudates, decomposing crop residues
and sometimes the microorganisms attacking them are the sources of allelochemicals being
accumulated in soil over the years. Wheat soil extract is inbibitory to wheat and similarly
alfalfa soil extract is inhibitory to alfalfa growing in succession.
Coffee and sugarcane ratoon are good examples where autotoxicity operates. Caffeine
produced in coffee fruits decreases coffee seed germination and seedling growth.
Decomposition of roots and foliages of the previous sugarcane crop produces chemicals
phytotoxic to successive rattons and decreses plant stand by nearly 10%. Fusarium
oxysporum colonizes in higher population in the rhizosphere of poor ratoon sugarcane and
produces fusaric acid, which inhibits shoot and root growth of sugarcane. Fusarium
oxysporum and Trichoderma harzianum also proliferate on added sugarcane residues in soil.
 59

iii) Increased crop weed interference

Allelopathy being a component influences and intensifies crop-weed interference Occurring
in the field and partly responsible for the decline in crop yield caused by weeds Nearly 130
weed species are reported having allelopathic effects. Most of them are inhibitory to crops
barring a stimulate seed germination, growth and yield of crops. Seeds, decomposing
residues, root leaf leachates and volatilization of weeds usually release allelochemicals.
iv) Growing susceptibility of plants to diseases/pests
Allelochemical-rich soil may make plant roots gradually weak or injured on their continuous
exposure to if and forcefully induce vulnerability to diseases or pests in them. e.g. the
occurrence of root rot disease in tobacco, cotton, sugarcane and beans increase under such
conditions. Initial primary root injuries pave the way for secondary root infection and further
decay
The same may apply to pathogens, which fall susceptible or are controlled under
allelochemicals rich soil and hence allelopathy could reduce disease infestation too. For
example, Sulphur-containing volatiles from decomposing crucifer residues are inhibitory to
Aphanomyces euteiches and reduce root rot of peas.
v) Reduced nitrification and biological N fixation
Nitrification is the last step of nitrogen mineralization in soil where conversion of NH4+ into
NO3- takes place. This is an important step/process since NO3- is an available form of N
apart from NH4+ and taken up for metabolic activities by a majority of crops. Several
allelochemicals, namely ferulic an p-coumaric acids released from the decomposing plant
residues inhibit Nitrosomonas population and hence nitrification due to which a gradual
accumulation of NH4+ takes place in soil. Maize residues let on the soil surface for a long
period induces low nitrification. The concentration of NH4+ -N increases over NO3- -N in
maize-mulched soil compared to non-mulched soil.
Similarly nitrogen fixation of many legume crops, for example, soybean decreases due to
decomposing residues of the previous rice crop, which releases phenolic compounds. The
attributed to poor growth of N-fixing bacterium, Brady-rhizobium japonicum and reduction in
nodule number. There is, however, no effect if rice residues are burnt, rather soybean yield
increases compared to rice residue decomposition. The aqueous extracts of weeds, namely
Chenopodium album and Digitaria sp inhibited growth of nitrifying as well as N-fixing
bacteria (Rice, 1984)
vi) Reduced nutrient uptake
It is needless to mention that there is a large number of studies in India and abroad, which
adequately substantiate that crop's nutrient uptake is affected due to weed interference in the
field. Although allelopathy becomes a part of this, could hardly be quantified or
demonstrated. However, in isolated laboratory studies, phenolic acids have been found to
inhibit P and K uptake due to increased membrane permeability of certain inonganic ions.
Walker et al (1989) reported that decaying some get potato residues reduced Ca. Mg and S
uptake by other plants
 60

vii) Weed seed decomposition delayed/prevented

Chemicalization of soil affects the activity of microorganisms, which in turn affects the
decomposition of weed seeds in soil. Rice (1984) indicated that allelopathy contributed to
weed seed longevity through two mechanisms, a) chemical inhibitors in the seeds prevented
decay by microorganisms. and b) inhibitors kept the seed dormant, but viable for many years.
Several anti-microbial compounds as unsaturated lactones .phenolics and germination
inhibitors.e g. phenolics, flavonoids, glucosides tannins are present in weed seeds with
varying concentrations.
viii) Poor success on replanting of tree crops
New/fresh saplings of apple, peach, plum, cherry, apricot, citrus, grape when planted in soils
previously grown with these fruit crops. encounter loss of vigour and/or poor establishment
(Borner 95% Rice 1974: Putnam, 1985). In peach the toxicity is caused by cyanide (HCN)
formed by microbial break down of amygdalin in the barks of old roots. The new saplings
planted are also attacked by pathogens, e.g. fungi, nemalodes, which inhabit on old peach
roots and release phytotoxins apart from causing certain diseases.
ix) Failure of vegetative propagation (e.g. grafting, budding)
Grafting and budding are important horticutural techniques for fruit crops improvement.
Allelopathic interactions may cause several problems such as dwarfism, changing maturity
time, size. colour and uniformity of fruits. This kind of allelopathic interaction generally
stems from rootstocks and the use of non-allelopathic or less-allelopathic rootstocks can
bypass these problems to a great extent
x) Suppression effect from trees
It is frequently observed that flora or vegetation hardly grow or if at all grow, remain very
erratic and sparse surrounding the trunk of old trees. This effect could be attributed partly to
competition for sunlight, moisture and nutrients and partly to allelopathy. Most crops (potato,
tomato, alfalfa, turnip. corn, beans) failed to grow under black walnut (Juglans nigra) trees
because of juglone (5-hydroxy 1,4-naphthaquinone) present in the leaves and fruits of these
trees. Rain-washed juglone is oxidized to oxyjuglone, a toxic metabolite in soil. Potato and
tomato plants wilted (Cook, 1921) and alfalfa and tomato plants wilted and died when their
roots came in close contact with the roots of these trees (Massey, 1925)
Application of allelopathy in weed management
i) Development of novel biopesticides, namely herbicides, insecticides or fungicides from
allelochemicals or allelopathic agents assumes paramount importance.
a) Bialaphos, a microbial toxin/allelochemical is found in a bacterium Streptomyces
hygroscopicus. Its synthetic analogue glufosinate-AM is extensively used for weed
control in cropped and non-crop situations.
b) From Salvia sp (sage), 1,8-cineole is released, which has phytotoxic effect. Cinmethylin
is a synthetic herbicide and has structural similarity with it. Cinmethylin controls annual
grasses and some broad-leaved weeds and is recommended for weed control in rice.
 61

c) A natural herbicide AAL-toxin is a metabolite produced by Alternaria alternata f. sp.

Lycopersici, a pathogen (fungus) causing stem canker of tomato (Zimdahl, 1999).
ii) A number of crops have been reported with their alleged allelopathic effects and
attempts have also been made to find crop cultivars with a competitive allelopathic
basis (Putnam, 1985; Rice, 1979 & 1984; Thompson, 1985). Therefore, adoption of
crops or crop‘s cultivars more allelopathic to weeds may reduce the cost of weed
control in particular and the cost of cultivation as a whole. For example, sorghum
residues have been applied to control weeds in subsequent rotational crops (Putnam,
1885).
iii) Application of the residues of allelopathic crop plants as mulches or adoption of an
allelopathic crop in rotational sequence and allowing the residues to remain in the field
has enough importance to bring down weed population to lower level.
iv) Utilizing a companion crop/plant ((Putnam, 1885; Zimdahl, 1999) that is selectively
allelopathic to weeds and does not interfere appreciably with crop growth has enough
bearing towards weed control in the fields. In several intercropping situations such as
sorghum + cowpea, maize +cowpea/soybean and agro-forestry/agro-silvi-pastoral
systems, a clear advantage in weed control is obtained, but it requires to be
authenticated and quantified through enough research.

x-x-x-x-x
 62

CHAPTER-8 Bio-herbicides and their application in agriculture

BIOLOGICAL CONTROL OF WEEDS

Definition:
The biological control of weeds involves the use of living organisms. Such as insect,
herbivorous fish, other animals, disease organisms, and competitive plants to limit their
infestations.
An important aspect of biological weed control is that at a time, it is applicable to the control
of only one major weed species that has spread widely. With perennial weeds the main
objective of bio-control is the destruction of the existing vegetation, in the case of annual
weeds prevention of their seed production is generally more important.
Biological control is defined as the control of an organism (weeds, insect pests or pathogens
in agriculture) employing living organism or biological entity to a population/density lower
than what naturally occurs in the absence of the employed organism.
Advantages of biological control:-
 No chemicals are used so there's less pollution, disruption of the food chain and risk to
people eating the food that has been sprayed
 There's no need to keep repeating the treatment like you would with chemical pesticides
 It is economical in the long run, although initially monetary investment is high
 It preserves bio-diversity since weed control by biological means/agents is hardly
achieved to the level of 100%
Disadvantages of biological control:-
 High cost
 Damage on economic crops
 Limited use
 Very l;ow action
 Eradication not possible
 Warranting pesticide use
 Weed flora shift
 Small/narrow span of the activity
Comparison between Chemical control of weeds and Biological control of weeds
S.N. Chemical control of weeds Biological control of weeds
1. It may leave residue in dangerous On the contrary, does not leave any harmful
level in the crop produce residue in crops
2. It is a destructive method and may Does not pose pollution to environment.
pose a grave pollution to man,
animal and environment in the long
run
3. It may lead to development of No resistance development by weeds
resistance to herbicide by weeds
4. It is repetitive and not self- It is self-perpetuating if the bio-agent selection
perpetuating over the years. is proper and they could adapt well to that
climate.
 63

5. It may lead to shift in weed flora in No shift in weed flora as yet reported, but
certain situation there is chance.
6. Preponderance of perennial weeds No preponderance of perennial weeds
in crop field due to constant use of
herbicides.
7. Maintaining plant/weed biological It likely helps to maintain the biological
diversity on earth is quite difficult diversity on earth since it does not envisage
by chemical method since certain complete eradication of weeds.
herbicide may result in 100% kill or
eradication of weeds.
8. It may exert negligible and invisible It does not exert any phytotoxicity to crop
phytotoxicity to crops even though plants.
the herbicide is selective.
Approaches to biological control of weeds
[Link] Classical/Inoculative approach
Classical/inoculative approach involves the release of bio-agents (insects, pathogens) just for
once in the belief that it will readily adapt to the prevailing climate and multiply enough to keep
pace with the multiplication rate of weed in question. Therefore, repeated release of bio-agent
unless failed, is not advocated. No augmentation and large-scale mass production of the bio-agent
are practised. In this approach, a small amount of inoculum (pathogen) or a small number of
insects, say, one insect per 20-40 weeds or 1 insect per 3-5 m2 area based on the assessment of
weed problem and prevailing situation, is initially released in the standing population of weeds
and allow it to multiply and feed on the weeds.
[Link].1 Steps for introduction/release of bio-agents (mainly for exotic/introduced weeds)
The following steps are to be adopted while introducing insect bio-agents :
i) First assess area-wise gravity of the problem of the weed for which bio-agent is to be
introduced.
ii) Survey all native organisms (insects, diseases pathogens, vertebrate pests etc.) that attack the
weed in the area where the bio-agent is to be introduced.
iii) Find out the origin of that weed geographically and organisms those attack it there.
iv) Search for natural enemies in its place of origin or native land.
v) Test for host specificity of the bio-agent by means of multiple choice and starvation tests.
vi) Importation of the specific bio-agent based on performance of the bio-agent in above-
mentioned tests.
vii) Further testing and screening of the natural enemies for parasites in quarantine.
viii) Adaptability test and based on that, mass rearing of the bio-agents in the place where to be
introduced.
x) Release and assessment of the effect of bio-agent on that weed.
[Link] Augmentative/Inundative/Bio-Herbicide Approach
Inundative approach pursues in vitro augmentation of the pathogen inoculum and its culturing in
artificial medium in the laboratory on the belief that target weeds may fall susceptible to it when
applied in a large concentration (considering the number of active bio-agent molecules) over its
existing population. This inoculum is bio-herbicide. Bio-herbicides are native pathogens mostly
 64

fungi and hence called mycoherbicide. Several inoculums such as fungi, bacteria, parasitic
nematodes, viruses having tested control ability over a weed species may be applied/sprayed like
herbicides
Some of the Mycoherbicide products in use in the world
S.N. Product, Bio-herbicide description Target weeds and Crop where used
year & diseases caused and reference
country
1. DeVine, Phytophthora citrophthora Morrenia odorata Citrus, USA;
1981, USA p.v. palmivora. Soil-borne (Strangler vine), (Kenny, 1986)
pathogen and can remain for (Lethal root-rot)
3-4 years in soil by one
spray
2. Collego Colletotrichum Aeschynomene Rice and soybean,
1982, USA gleosporioides f. sp. virginica (Nothern USA; (Bowers,
Aeschynomene joint vetch), (Stem and 1982)
foliage blight)

3. Biomal, Colletotrichum Malva pusilla (Round- Cotton, Canada;

Canada gleosporioides f. sp. Malvae leaved mallow), (Makowski and
(Anthracnose) Mortenson, 1992)

4. Lubao II Colletotrichum Cuscuta sp (Dodder) ----

gleosporioides f. sp.
Cuscutae
5. VELGO Colletotrichum coccoides Abutilon theophrasti Cotton, Canada

6. CASST Alternaria cassiae Cassia obtusifolia, Cotton, soybean &

Cassia occidentalis & groundnut, Florida,
Cassia alata (Blight USA; various crops
disease) in Australia

7. Bipolaris Bipolaris sorghicola Sorghum halepense ----

(Johnson grass)

The comparison between classical and augmentative approaches.

S. N. Classical approaches Augmentative approaches
1. Initially small population of Initially a large concentrations of inoculum is
insects/bio agent is released and sprayed directly to the weed in the belief that
allowed it to adapt and multiply the weed will become susceptible to inoculum
keeping pace with weed since it is augmented in vitro and cultured
multiplication rate and growth artificially
2. Rearing of the bio agent in the Mass rearing/culturing of the inoculum takes
laboratory is in a limited scale place in the laboratory
3. No repeated application Repeated application
4. Mainly exotic or introduced insects Mostly native fungi, bacteria, viruses and even
and fungi are deployed in this nematodes are adopted through this approach
approach
5. No spraying like herbicide or other Inoculum is sprayed like a herbicide over the
chemicals standing population of weeds
 65

Criteria of Successful Bio agent:-

A successful bio agent is (i) host specific, (ii) adjustable to the new environment, (iii) rapid
destroyer of the target weed, (iv) easy to multiply, and (v) effective on several texa of the
weed in question.
(i) Host Specificity: - Bio control agents recommended for weed control should be host-
specific, i.e. they should not attack other plant species, particularly the economic ones. The
bio-agents released so far (chiefly insects) had successfully passed the ‗starvation tests‘
before they left the laboratories for field use. They were found to prefer to starve to death
rather than feed upon plant species other than the target weed. Starvation test is a good
safeguard against an introduced bio-agent becoming a pest on some economic crop plant.
(ii) Bio agent Hardiness: It is important that a classical bio agent withstands elements of
its new environment in which it is transplanted. This includes freedom from its own parasites
and predators. Further, the bio agent should be hardly enough to survive short and long
periods of food shortage when the target weed population is brought to a low level.
(iii) Feeding Habit: Great stress has been placed on the selection of insects as bio agents
that attack both the flowers and seeds of the weed or bore into their stems. Insect bio agents
with such feeding habits have been found more host specific and efficient in controlling
weeds than the leaf or root feeder. But lately certain leaf eating insects have been found
equally valuable in the control of weeds, particularly of the perennials. Likewise, insects that
attack roots are likely to be very effective on perennial weeds but insufficient attention has
been paid to them. In any case, the destructive capacity of a bio agent on the weed should be
very high so that its small population could destroy large weed infestations.
(iv) Ease of Multiplication: High rate and ease of natural reproduction of bio agent is
important in insects, pathogens, snails, and competitive plants. But it is very much unwanted
in the case of carp employed for aquatic weed control because their excessive population may
compete with cultivated fish.
(v) Effective on several taxa of the weeds: The bioagent should be effective on several
taxa of weeds
Kinds of Classical Bio agents: - Four kinds of bio agents have thus far been successfully
used for controlling weeds, both terrestrial and aquatic. These are (i) insects, (ii) carpfish, (iii)
fungi, and (iv) competitive plants.
(i) Insects: Insects have been more frequently used than other animals for the biological
control of weeds. The first successful example of weed control with deliberately introduced
insects was reported from Hawaii in 1902 when a project for the control of Lantana camara
L. was initiated with a moth, Crocidosema lantana Busck. Since then insects belonging to
widely different families and genera have been employed to control some other noxious weed
species.
Insects selected as bio control agents of weeds are largely host specific i.e. one insect species
is employed to destroy only one weed species.
(ii) Carp-fish: Certain fresh water carp-fish consume large quantities of aquatic weeds and
they are very suitable for relieving waterbodies of their massive growth of noxious, aquatic
 66

vegetation. Unlike insect bio agents, the herbivorous fish are not much food-specific. They
feed upon a wide range of plants and, therefore, they control a variety of aquatic weeds,
simultaneously. This food habit of grass carp may be undesirable in water bodies having
some plants of economic value, like water chestnut (Trapanatans) and lotus (Nelumbo spp.)
which, of course, are also classed as weeds in most situations.
(iii) Plant Pathogens: Many fungi are observed to attack specific weed species, but examples
of successful, practical weed control with fungi are few. Of late, it has been discovered that
Acacia glauca could be controlled successfully by injecting a suspension of spores of
Cephalosporium zonatum Sawada.
(iv) Competitive Plants: Certain plants may be highly competitive in nature; capable of
suppressing some specific weeds without causing any meaningful hindrance to our interests.
Outstanding Examples of Classical Bio-control of Weeds:-
(i) Lantana (Lantana camara L.): Lantana was the first weed controlled successfully with
certain insect bioagents in Hawaii. This bushy weed is a native of Central and North
America. In Hawaii it had invaded such large area of rangelands that it was causing great
concern. Of these, Crocidosema lantana Busck, a moth, was found prominent in destroying
flowers and seeds of lantana, which formed the chief organ for dispersal this weed. The insect
greatly curtailed the spread of lantana and thinned its existing infestations. Fifty years later,
the entomologists in Hawaii made further attempts to find and introduce new insect species to
destroy lantana; this time from areas other than the native land of the weed. They found seven
more insects feeding on lantana. Of these, Hypena jussalis Guenoe was an excellent feeder of
lantana leaves. It defoliated all sizes of lantana plants rapidly. Since then many other insects
have been screened for the destruction of lantana in Hawaii, and the weed has been brought
under control on her different islands.
(ii) Prickly pear (Opuntia spp.): In Australia, biocontrol of Opuntia inermis with a moth,
Cactoblastis cactorum (Berg) transformed 24 million ha land from wilderness to a scene of
prosperous endeavour. At the present, in Australia only occasional plants and few larger
patches of pricklypear can be found. The recovered land has returned to useful agriculture
there. In TamilNadu and Maharastra (India), 40,000 ha of land infested with Opuntia dillenii
was recovered from the weed by releasing Dactyloplius tomentosus Auct. (D. ceylonicus
Green) ‗cichineal scale insect‘ as its bioagent.
(iii) Alligator weed (Alternathera philoxeroides): Alligatorweed is a very prolific, aquatic
plant of the tropics and sub-tropics. In Florida, (U.S.A.) it has been very effectively
controlled with fleabeetle (Agasicles hygrophyla Selman Vogt) and several bayous have been
cleared of this weed there. The fleabeetle larvae feed on the leaves of alligator weed and
finally bore into its bare stems to pupate.
(iv) Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes): Water hyacinth, a world-wide aquatic weed,
infests transplanted paddy fields in many countries, including India. Several attempts have
been made on the biological control of this weed; both by pathogens and insects. Most
success in this respect has been met in Florida (USA) with a hyacinthmoth, Sameodes
albiguttalis B. Benner, which is a native of South America. The bioagent exhibits its rapid
 67

reproduction ability in field conditions. Its larvae feed upon young leaves and apical buds of
water hyacinth, rather severly.
(v) Salvinia (Salvinia molessta): In Kerala (India), fresh water courses and paddy fields have
been cleared of this noxious fern, using culionid beetle (Cytrobagous salviniae Sands) as a
very effective bioagent. The beetleis is native of South America. It is released in water ways
by collecting some beetle-infested Salvinia plants from either the beetle rearing ponds or
some old infestations, and scattering these on the target, salvinia infestations. It takes 4-6
months for the salvinia mats to turn yellow, and another six months to sink, completely. The
young larvae of the beetle damage the terminal buds, rhizomes, and petioles of salvinia. The
biological control of salvinia has made lives of over 5 million people in Kerala more
comfortable than before.
A bioherbicide is a biologically based control agent for weeds. Bioherbicides may be
compounds derived from microbes such as fungi, bacteria, viruses, or protozoa; or phytotoxic
plant residues, extracts or single compounds derived from other plant species. In the industry,
bio-herbicides and other bio-pesticides are often referred to as "naturals". When the active
ingredient used is a fungus, the product is called a mycoherbicide.
Almost every agricultural pest has at least one naturally occurring enemy that will reduce its
population. Bioherbicides utilize such naturally occurring enemies, rather than depending on
man-made chemicals. This can be important because agents of biological control ordinarily
have many fewer, and much milder, effects on the environment than do synthetic chemicals.
What is more, they tend not to lead to the public health problems that chemicals are
associated with. These two advantages of biological control agents, including bioherbicides,
do not however mean that they need not also be subjected to careful tests for environmental
and public health safety.
Plant pathogens can be used to control weeds in a similar way to chemical herbicides.
Bioherbicides can be applied in many ways, e.g. as aerial sprays, through ‗cut and paste‘
application or in a powder applied to the soil.
In contrast to the fungi typically used in classical biological control, the pathogens exploited
as mycoherbicides are often native to the area where they are utilized, and do not need to be
specially imported. Under natural conditions disease epidemics occur and damage plants
from time to time, but the potential of these fungi is frequently limited. For example, the
environment is not always conducive to good disease development and the pathogen may be
limited in its dispersal capabilities. The inundative approach, where these fungi are turned
into mycoherbicides, allows people to overcome some of these constraints and create disease
epidemics when and where they want. After application the fungi do not usually persist at
high levels for long and have often returned to background levels 1–2 years later. This means
that, like other herbicides used to kill plants, bioherbicides often need to be reapplied.
The pathogens used in inundative control often need not be as highly host specific as classical
biological control agents because their use can be restricted to certain areas.
History of bioherbicides
Mycoherbicide research to control agricultural and environmental weeds began in the 1940s.
The earliest experiments simply involved moving indigenous fungi between populations of
 68

target weeds (e.g. the fungus Fusarium oxysporum used against prickly pear cactus (Opuntia
ficus-indica) in Hawai‘i, before the release of the Cactoblastis cactorum moth).
In the 1950s the Russians mass-produced the spores of Alternaria cuscutacidae and applied
them to the parasitic weed dodder (Cuscata spp.). In 1963 the Chinese mass-produced a
different fungus (Colletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp. cuscutae) for the same weed. They
called their mycoherbicide ‗LuBao‘ and an improved formulation is still in use today. Since
then more than 100 bioherbicide projects have been undertaken worldwide, but only a small
percentage of these have resulted in commercially available, registered products. It should be
borne in mind that the chemical industry routinely screens thousands of inorganic compounds
to find a single commercially feasible new chemical herbicide.
Formulation is often the stumbling block when difficult to get living organisms to behave
predictably and reliably in the field given the variety of conditions they encounter. Mixtures
that look promising in laboratory trials often prove unsatisfactory in the field. It can take
many years of experimentation to develop a workable formulation. Each country has its own
rules regarding registration, and meeting the requirements can be an expensive and complex
process (e.g. it took 5 years to register BioMal®).
Commercialisation can also be difficult, especially if the target market is small and the
product extremely effective (if the product does not need to be reapplied, its market gets
smaller).
Benefits of bioherbicides over other herbicides
Because the plant pathogens used in bioherbicides usually occur naturally in the areas where
they are utilized, they tend to be less harmful to the environment than chemical herbicides.
The fungi are oft1en more selective in their mode of action so the risk of damage to other
plants is reduced. Bioherbicides are, as a rule, less toxic to people and animals than chemical
herbicides.
Principles of microbial weed control
Approach
Classical – agent selection, inoculation, selfperpetuating, long term protection.
 Inundative – mass production, application at high inoculum levels over a localized
area, short term, and repeated application.
 Augmentation – re-establishment of a classical agent.
 Mycoherbicide – fungal pathogen
 Bioherbicide – fungi and bacteria
Why bioherbicide ?
 Demand for decreased use of pesticides
 Large areas where herbicide application not possible or not cost effective
 Damage to the environment
 Contamination of our water supply
 High yield losses still occur $619 million in vegetable, $441 million in fruit and
 nut crops in the US
 69

Ideal characteristics of a bio herbicide:-

Produce abundant and durable inoculum in culture
Be target specific Be genetically stable
Be capable of killing a significant portion of the weed population under a variety of
environmental conditions (weed densities)
 Herbicide resistant weed population
 Detrimental effects on non target organisms
 Native plants
Agents used as bioherbicide:- Fungi, Bacteria and viruses
Major characteristics of a bio herbicide:-
Trait Bacteria Fungi Virus
Culture Easy Easy Host
Specificity Excellent Good Excellent
Field Variable Variable Unknown
performance
Formulation Variable Excellent Unknown
Effectiveness Variable Variable Excellent
Genetic High Medium Unknown
stability
Risks associated with bioherbicides.
In most instances the potential risks associated with the use of Bioherbicides may includes
certain concerns Such as:-
 worker exposure and safety
 Plant host range
 effects to nontarget organism (competition/displacement of beneficial microbes in the
community)
 production of chemicals that are persistent or toxic to mammalian systems
Steps in developing a bioherbicide
1. Check that a bioherbicide product is needed and that there is sufficient industry and
commercial backing to proceed.
2. Look for suitable pathogens (if not already known).
3. Identify highly pathogenic (disease- causing) isolates that produce no or few toxins, and
are unlikely to damage non-target species.
4. Develop an efficient way of mass-producing the pathogen and ensuring stability and
shelf life.
5. Determine the optimum conditions for infection and disease development.
6. Check that the pathogen can be used in a manner that will minimise any harmful
effects.
7. Develop an appropriate formulation and application technology.
8. Test in the field and improve formulation if necessary.
9. Obtain registration for the product, and market and distribute product.
Bioherbicide philosophy of weed control:-
Bioherbicides are pathogens cultured artificially and made available in sprayable
formulations; just like a chemical herbicide. The pathogen selected for the purpose is usually
 70

from the native place of the weed, but it could also be from other places. The bio-herbicides
are also sometimes called myco-herbicides. A myco-herbicides can be both, specific and non-
specific.
Some Commercial Myco-herbicides in use Abroad.
Product Content Weed controlled
De-Vine A liquid suspension of fungal spores of Stranglevine (Morrenia odorata) in
Phytophthora palmivora Butler. It causes citrus orchards.
root rot in the weed.
Collego Wettable powder containing fungal Jointvetch (Aeschynomone sp.) in rice
spores of Colletotrichum gloesporiodes fields. The bioherbicide causes stem
Penzig and Sacc. Sub sp. Aeschynomone and leaf blight in the weed.
Bipolaris A suspension of fungal spores of Johnsongrass (Sorghum halepense)
Bipolaris sorghicola.
Biolophos A microbial toxin produced as Non-specific, general vegetation
fermentation product of Streptomyces
hygroscopicus
BioMal®: Colletotrichum Round-leaved mallow(Malva
gloeosporioides f. sp. pusilla) in wheat, lentils & flax.
Malvae No longer commercially available
but made on request
x-x-x-x
 71

CHAPTER-9 Concept of herbicide mixture and utility in agriculture

CONCEPT
The concept of herbicide mixture probably dates back to 1960s when the phenoxyalkanoic
acids used to be formulated together. The researchers on herbicide mixture, however, have
gained momentum after there were reports of weed flora shift and herbicide resistance in
weeds in some countries of the world. Herbicide mixture is believed to be an important tool
towards management of herbicide-resistance in weeds. It, if not completely prevents the
development of resistance in weeds, certainly delays it. Formulating a herbicide mixture,
therefore requires a clear understanding of the compatibility and interaction of the component
herbicides to be used in mixture. For weed control in cereals, new herbicides such as
chlorsulfuron, metsulfuron-methyl, bensulfuron-methyl, chlorimuron-ethyl of the
sulfonylureas, almost from the beginning, have been developed in combinations with other
herbicides or viewed as additive by the trade and farmers (Martin, 1987). Mixed formulation
of chlortouron+bifenox, isoproturon+trifluralin, isoproturon+bromoxylin+ioxynil,
isoproturon+bromoxynil+ioxynil+mecoprop and isoproturon+bromoxynil+mecoprop are also
available for the combined control of grass and broad leaved weeds in cereals. However,
studies relating to bio-efficacy, selectivity and persistence of herbicide mixture require to be
taken up more in the forth-coming years and similarly the farmers may be advised to resort to
herbicide mixtures instead of using single herbicide repeatedly.
Herbicide mixture, in spite of having immense beneficial role, has some limitations. Two
selective herbicides may turn non-selective and hence become more toxic than either of the
component herbicides. As a result, the normally tolerant crops may fall susceptible to a
herbicide mixture. However, this demerit could be a merit under non-crop situations to
manage difficult-to-control weeds with reasonably lower total active ingredient. The
herbicide mixture may also show antagonistic response and there may exist physical
incompatibility between the component herbicides as well.
DEFINITION
On principle, mechanical or chemical mixing of two or more herbicides having different
mode of action and varying level of activity and selectivity, forms ―herbicide mixture.‖
KINDS/TYPES OF MIXTURE
Herbicides mixtures are of two kinds: factory-mix/pre-mix/ready-mix and field-mix/tank-
mix.
FACTORY-MIX/PRE-MIX/READY-MIX
It is the mixture of desired herbicides prepared in the factory itself with definite proportions,
e.g. isoguard plus (isoproturon+2,4-D), aniloguard plus (anilofos+2,4-D), primagram
(atrazine 250 g FW + metolachlor 250 g FW), primextra (atrazine 200g FW+metolachlor 300
g FW), Atlantis [Mesosulfuron-methyl (3%)+iodosulfuron-methyl sodium (0.6%)] etc. One
ready-mix Pursuit Plus® [pendimethalin (30%)+imazethapyr (2%)] for broad-spectrum weed
control in soybean is also available in India. Almix [metsulfuron-methyl (10%)+chlorimuron-
ethyl (10%)+0.2% surfactant] is another ready-mix recommended for rice.
 72

FIELD-MIX/TANK-MIX
It, on the contrary, is a mechanical mixing of two or more herbicides with their required
quantities in the spray tank right before applying to the field. For example, atrazine+alachlor,
atrazine+pendimethalin, isoproturon+tralkoxydim, sethoxydim+chlorsulfuron,
sethoxydim+thiometuron, fluometuron+chlorsulfuron, are compatible enough to be mixed
together for greater efficacy and broad-spectrum weed control in crops in which the
respective pair of herbicide is selective.
The number of ready-mix product is less in the market. They are not manufactured as such
unless there is sheer urgency towards weed control in certain crop. Ready-mix formulations
may fall short towards imparting selectivity to a large number of crops. For example,
pendimethalin is a versatile chemical and could be selective to nearly 60 different crops, but
its ready-mixes with certain herbicides reduce the mixture‘s selectivity for use in that many
number of crops. Thus herbicide mixture limits the choice of crops and becomes more crop-
specific than a single herbicide. Tank-mix formulation, on the other hand, is mixing of
chemicals in the tank before use in the field and, therefore, could be prepared as and when
required with exact amount calculated for two or more herbicides. The exact amount
calculated based on recommendation is, however, not easy to maintain in ready-mixes.
Ready-mixes are, however, more useful to illiterate farmers than tank-mixes. Once the
mixture response is known as synergism or at least additive in certain crop, it would be wiser
to resort to tank-mix application.
KINDS/TYPES OF MIXTURE INTERACTION
Relationship of one chemical against another in a combination/mixture is called interaction.
In a mixture, herbicides may interact in different ways, but the three major types of
interaction are:
1. PHYSICAL INTERACTION
The mixture components may interfere with each other for some physical
properties/processes in them, e.g. flowability, sticking, penetration/absorption through plant
surface.
2. CHEMICAL INTERACTION
The mixture components may react with each other chemically in the spray tank and/or inside
the plants and may result in new products with variable activities.
3. PHYSIOLOGICAL / BIOCHEMICAL INTERACTION
When two or more herbicides are introduced into cellular environment of a plant, conditions
for an interaction are created (Akobundu et. Al., 1975a). The physiological/biochemical
interaction of the mixture components thus takes place after entering into plants, which may
be manifested in the blockage/inhibition or stimulation of some plant processes mainly
translocation, activation and/or deactivation of one or all the component herbicides. All these
interactions may yield synergism, antagonism, additivity or enhancement effect depending on
target weed species and kind, rate, time and method of application of herbicides, but it is
always ideal and highly desirable that a herbicide combination should be synergistic to weeds
and antagonistic to crops.
 73

These interactions may affect (facilitate or de facilitate) the following phenomena, which
may be one way or the other responsible for the observed response in plants from herbicide
mixture.
 Mutual interaction of the herbicides in mixture may result in increased uptake of one
or all the component herbicides.
 Increased uptake may result in increased translocation of one or all the component
herbicides to the respective site of action inside the plants.
 Bio-activation as operative in certain herbicides after entering into plants, may be
influenced and accelerated.
 Detoxification of the mixture herbicides inside the plants may be prevented or
inhibited.
 Increased binding of one or all the component herbicides at their respective molecular
sites of lamellae (site of action) due to enhanced uptake and translocation.
 Additional site of action may be generated inside the plants due to new chemicals or
toxic metabolites formed on chemical interaction between the component herbicides.
BENEFICIAL ROLE OF HERBICIDE MIXTURE
1. Mixture controls a broad-spectrum of weeds
Herbicide appears to be an important tool for weed control in crops. There are over 400
herbicides available today. However, many of them have narrow-spectrum activity and
control a specific group of weeds whereas there exists a composite stand/culture of weeds in
the crop fields. Therefore, applying a single herbicide may not provide desired level of broad-
spectrum weed control. Moreover, the chances of a new broad-spectrum herbicide discovery
are decreasing in the world taking into consideration of crop selectivity, wide range of weed
control, specific weed problem, wider-window of application, persistence and residual
hazards. Added to this, fluctuation in weed flora makes it difficult to aim at specificity. The
broad-spectrum herbicides in true sense are a few in this world. Even a so-called broad
spectrum herbicide pendimethalin controls mainly broad-leaved weeds and a few grasses,
although it is known as a good broad-spectrum herbicide. Here lies the importance of a
herbicide mixture, which serves the purpose of a broad-spectrum herbicide. Several herbicide
mixtures offering broad-spectrum activity are:
a) Atrazine+alachlor as pre-emergence in maize
b) Atraqzine+pendimethalin as pre-emergence in maize and sorghum
c) Fenoxaprop-p-ethyl+2,4-D as post-emergence in wheat
d) Fenoxaprop-p-ethyl+isoproturon as post-emergence in wheat
e) Clodinafop-propergyl+2,4-D as post-emergence in wheat
f) Clodinafop-propergyl+isoproturon as post-emergence in wheat
g) Sulfosulfuron+2,4-D as post-emergence in wheat
h) Sulfosulfuron+isoproturon as post-emergence in wheat
i) Isoproturon+2,4-D as post-emergence in wheat
j) Isoproturon+tralkoxydim as post-emergence in wheat
 74

2. Mixture prevents/avoids weed flora shift

Continuous use of narrow-spectrum herbicide for years together may result in shift in weed
flora. For example, a crop field dominated by grass weed for many years may gradually turn
into broad-leaved weed domination if continuously a grass-killer herbicide is used for the
sake of control of grass weeds only. The reverse may be true if there was continuous use of
broad-leaved-killer herbicide. The world has already experienced it. In wheat, broad-leaved
weed domination in the late 1960s and early 1970s changed to grass weed (Avena
ludoviciana/fatua, Phalaris minor, Poa annua, Snowdenia polystachia) menace due to
continuous use of broad-leaved-killer herbicides like 2,4-D, MCPA (Phenoxyalkanoic acids)
in India and world. Repeated killing of the broad-leaved weeds by these herbicides gradually
eliminated competition from the natural enemy weeds, i.e., broad-leaved weeds for the
existing grass weeds and as a result, the grass weeds, in course of time, came up with
virulence and posed their dominance. The use of herbicide mixture may, however, prevent it.
3. Mixture avoids/delays the development of resistance in weeds
Herbicide mixtures, in true sense cannot completely prevent, but certainly delay the process
of development of resistance in weeds. The development of resistant biotypes within the wed
species seems to happen rather slowly and herbicide mixture of those having different site of
action helps to avoid the problem. The frequency of occurrence of resistance usually becomes
compounded and lowered in mixture compared to the frequency of occurrence of resistance
by a single herbicide (Gressel and Segel, 1990). For example, if the frequency of resistance
for one compound is 10-7 and for other is 10-8., the compounded frequency of occurrence of
resistance to either of the chemicals in mixture would be reduced to 10-15 (10-7×10-8). This is
mainly because of lower selection pressure owing to reduced rate of application in mixture.
Sulfonylureas and imidazolinones are widely used herbicides recently in number of crops and
they are more vulnerable for resistance development. Therefore, they should be judiciously
used preferably in mixture with less-resistance-prone herbicides.
To prevent herbicide resistance in weeds, a mixture should have component herbicdides
which are less resistant-prone. Wrubel and Gressel (1994) suggested that mixtures to be
efficient in preventing resistance, the less resistance-prone herbicide partner/component
should have following traits compared to the vulnerable one:
1) It must control same spectrum of weeds as the vulnerable partner.
2) It must have a mode of action different from that of vulnerable partner.
3) Both mixing partners (less resistance-prone and the vulnerable one) must have similar
effectiveness in weed control. It may not be that useful if, at the rate used, the mixing
partner effectiveness in weed control. It may not be that useful if, at the rate used, the
mixing partner kills 75% of the weeds and the vulnerable kills 95% unless the 20%
remaining are severely inhibited such that they have less reproductive capacity than
wild type. Otherwise, resistance could quickly evolve in remaining 20% of weeds.
4) It must have similar persistence as the vulnerable partner. Otherwise, the target weed
having periodicity in germination almost all through the cropping season may not be
exposed to the mixture, but to either of them which persists till that period.
5) It should not be degraded in the same manner/pathways as the vulnerable partner.
 75

6) It will put extra advantage if the less-resistance-prone mixing partner exerts negative
cross-resistance.
It is the realization of corn farmers in USA that atrazine+alachlor, atrazine+metalachlor
mixtures and other herbicide rotations kept away the development of resistance in weeds
after firat few reports of resistance (Chittapur et. al., 1997). This could be due to alachlor
and metalachlor reduced the doses of triazines, which reduced selection pressure. Also there
are reports (Martin, 1987) that some resistant weeds have become susceptible to herbicide
mixture when applied to the field.
4. Mixture increases weed control efficiency
Herbicide mixtures are likely to control a broad-spectrum of weeds quite effectively at
relatively low rates then their component‘s sole application rate. Therefore, there likely
occurs less phytotoxicity to crop and the overall performance of crop in terms of growth and
yield increases in absence of weed competition. This may render increases efficiency and
benefit per unit cost of investment in mixture compared to a single herbicide applicatuion.
Reddy et. al. (1995) reported that combination of fluchloralin+metolachlor (0.5 kg/ha+0.75
kg/ha, respectively) as pre-plant incorporation improved weed control efficiency in
sunflower. Nagaraju (1994) observed that anilofos+2,4-D mixture was more remunerative
than sloe application of recommended herbicides. Anilofos predominantly being a grass killer
and 2,4-D a broad-leaved killer. Their mixture brings about a broad-spectrum weed control
and results in greater efficacy. Similar increase in greater efficacy. Similar increase in weed
control efficacy may also be obtained in benthiocarb+2,4-D mixture in rice.
Weeds fall susceptible to herbicide mixtures (Martin, 1987)
Herbicides
Weed species Methabenzthiazuron Trifluralin+Linuron Terbutryne Isoxaben
Galium R MS R MS
aparine
Vernonia MR S MR S
hederifolia
Stellaria S S S S
media
Poa annua S S S R
R-Resistant; S-susceptible; MS-Moderately susceptible; MR-Moderately resistant
5. Mixture reduces cost of application of herbicides
To achieve a desired level of broad-spectrum weed control and greater efficacy, there is
required a good broad-spectrum herbicide, which is normally less available and even if some
are available, crop selectivity may warrant their application. The next possibility/option is
that herbicides having different spectrum of weed control have to be used independently as a
followed-by application consecutively giving no interval (if both are pre-emergence ones) or
with certain gaps, as applicable, of 15, 20, 25, or 30 days after first application (if one is pre-
emergence and the other is post-emergence). Their separate application in pursuit of greater
 76

efficiency will unnecessarily increase the cost application. On the contrary, by almost 50%
while the weed control efficacy may remain similar to higher.
6. Mixture reduces the requirement of active ingredient (toxicant)
A suitable mixture having good compatibility between the candidate herbicides may result in
synergism and potentiation action and reduce the doses of individual herbicide. Therefore, a
desired level of weed control may be achieved by mixing herbicides even at lower doses than
what required when they are applied independently. For example, almost 50% reduction in
active ingredient of atrazine+alachlor mixture in maize and atrazine+pendimethalin mixture
in maize and sorghum has been experienced for a desired level of weed control has achieved
by their individual separate application (Yaduraju et. al., 1998). Similar is the case with
fluazifop-p-butyl+clethodim applied as tank-mix in flax. Their reduced rates (50+18 g/ha,
respectively) were as effective as full rates of either of the herbicides applied alone and
resulted in 20% reduction in total amount of active ingredient required.
7. Mixture reduces residue hazard in crop and environment
Less residue build-up in the crop, soil and water accrues mainly from reduced rate of
application of the component herbicides in mixture. To achieve this, a lot of trial and error
has to be exercised on the compatibility of herbicides with reduced rate of application and
choosing herbicides of lower persistence in soil. In a mixture, if the summed-up dose of
component herbicides is equal to or even greater than their independent application dose,
residue build-up would definitely be reduced in mixture because of the reduced doses of
component herbicides. For example, in the mixtures of atrazine+pendimethalin,
atrazine+alachlor and atrazine+tridiphane, the residues are likely to reduce mainly because of
the lower dose of atrazine, which is a persistent herbicide and persists even for 6 months.
Simazine has also similar persistence as atrazine.
8. Mixture increases the chance of growing a sensitive crop in rotation
Maize-wheat rotation is a predominant system in USA. It is also practiced in some areas of
North and north-western India. A single higher dose, usually 1.5-2.0 kg/ha of atrazine to
maize for having a desired level of weed control may leave enough residue in soil for the
succeeding wheat crop since atrazine has higher persistence in soil. This may bring
phytotoxicity to wheat if grown in rotation. However, the reduced dose of atrazine (0.5-0.75
kg/ha) in mixture with pendimethalin or alachlor may permit wheat to be grown with no risk
of damage to it.
Herbicide mixtures for crops:-
a) Rice
In rice, particularly under direct-seeded condition, weeds comprising of grass, broad-leaved
and sedge are of often problem and cause serious yield reduction, whereas under lowland
transplanted situation, the weed problem is normally less except some extreme situations.
However, herbicides are used invariably in both these situations.
Fujiyama et al. (1987) reported that mixture of 120 g/ha MON-7200 (dithiopyr) + 25 g/ha
bensulfuron-methyl or 21 g/ha pyranosulfuron-ethyl gave wide spectrum of weed control at
low doses including Echinochloa crus-galli. This mixture did not cause severe injury to rice,
 77

although they could be injurious if basal stem was exposed to flood water. Temperature and
soil type did not affect the activity. Activity against Echinochloa crus-galli persisted until 70
days transplanting.
Several combinations are given below, although, their best use can be made through further
trial and error method. Of course, there may not be any objection regarding their
compatability, but interaction has to be modified towards more synergistic response through
manipulation of the doses of the component herbicides.
 Anilofos (0.4 ka/ha) + 2,4- DEE (0.50 ka/ha)
 Butachlor (1.0 ka/ha) + propanil (2.0 ka/ha)
 Butachlor (1.0 ka/ha) + 2,4- DEE (0.50 ka/ha)
 Benthiocarb (1.0 ka/ha) + 2,4- DEE (0.50 ka/ha)
 Anilofos (0.3 ka/ha) + chlorimuron (0.004 ka/ha)
 Anilofos (0.3 ka/ha) + metsulfuron-methyl (0.004 ka/ha)
 Bentazon + propanil (1604 + 3404 g/liter)
 Pretilachlor + 2,4- DEE at 4 days after sowing of upland rice.
b) Wheat and barley
Wheat and barley are grown in the winter as well as spring season through out the
temperate world. Both have got similarity in respect to the use of herbicides and the
weed flora present in the field.
So, both crops with respect to the use of herbicides mixture and combinations may be
used as tank-mix at 28-35 days after sowing of wheat (post-emergence application)
 Diclofop-methyl (750 g/ha) + fluroxypyr (100 g/ha)
 Diclofop-methyl (750 g/ha) + isoproturon (500 g/ha)
 Isoproturon (750 g/ha) + 2,4-D (250 g/ha)
 Isoproturon (750 g/ha) + 2,4-D (500 g/ha)
 Tralkoxydim (350g/ha) + 2,4-D (500 g/ha)
 Tralkoxydim (350g/ha) + isoproturon (500 g/ha)
 Clodinafop (60 g/ha) + 2,4-D (500 g/ha)
 Clodinafop (60 g/ha) + isoproturon (500 g/ha)
 Fenoxaprop-p-ethyl (120 g/ha) + 2,4-D (500 g/ha)
 Fenoxaprop-p-ethyl (120 g/ha) + isoproturon (500 g/ha)
 Sufosulfuron (30 g/ha) + 2,4-D (500 g/ha)
 Sufosulfuron (30 g/ha) + isoproturon (500 g/ha)
c) Maize, Sorghum and Pearl Millet
Atrazine (Triazines) has been used in maize since long ago. The weed control effect
of atrazine in maize is well appreciated and well acclaimed. Therefore, people used to
call it as ―Maize herbicides‖. However, there are many broad-leaved weeds developed
resistance to atrazine in the recent years. Therefore, researchers have to be diverted
towards greater weed control efficiency in maize by applying mixtures of herbicides.
The following combinations have been found highly useful for broad-spectrum weed
control in maize.
 78

 Atrazine (0.5 kg/ha) + alachlor (1.0-1.5 kg/ha) in maize. They may be formulated as
lasso-atrazine (ready-mix).
 Atrazine (0.75 kg/ha) + pendimethalin (0.75 kg/ha) in maize, sorghum and pearl
millet. (tank-mix).
 Atrazine + tridiphane in maize. (tank-mix).
 Atrazine + 2,4-D in maize, sorghum and pearl millet. (tank-mix).
d) Soybean
In soybean, many herbicides could be used as tank-mixes.
 Oxadiazon (0.5 kg/ha + metolachlor (0.5 ka/ha) as pre-emegance
 Fluazifop-p-butyl (0.75 kg/ha) + fomesafen (0.25 kg/ha) at 20 days after sowing
 Haloxyfop-methyl (0.20 kg/ha) + fomesafen (0.25 kg/ha) at 20 days after sowing
 Metribuzin + chlorimurom- ethyl as pre –emergence
 Imazephapyr + pendimethalin- as pre –emergence
e) Groundnut
Acifluorfen + bentazon +2,4-Dbat 2 weeks (post-emergence)
f) Sunflower
Fluchloralin (0.5 kg/ha) + metolachlor (0.75 kg/ha) as pre-plant incorporation
g) Mustard and rapeseed
Pendimethalin (1.0 kg/ha) + fluchloralin (1.0 kg/ha) as pre-plant incorporation (this is
not an ideal mixture)
h) Cotton
 Pendimethalin (1.5 kg/ha) + diuron (1.0kg/ha) as pre-emegence
 Diuron + paraquat as post-emergence directed spray
i) Sugarcane
 Diuron + 2,4-D
 2,4-D + atrazine/simazine as as pret-emergence or post-emergence
 Paraquat +2,4-D as post-emergence directed spray
 Glyphosate + 2,4-D as post-emergence directed spray
j) Potato
 Atrazine (0.125 kg/ha + paraquat (0.25 kg/ha) as pre emergence
 Atrazine (0.125 kg/ha + paraquat (0.25 kg/ha) as post-emergence directed spray
k) Tea and coffee
 Paraquat + 2,4-D mixture in tea and coffee usually offers additive response. They are
applied as tank-mix and post-emegence to weeds.
 Paraquat + diuron mixture, although results in antagonistic effect since paraquat
prevents the uptake and translocation of diuron by rapid destruction of foliage and
transport system., the residue of diuron in soil remains effective for a considerably
long period.
For achieving maximum weed control efficiency through herbicide mixture, attention should
be directed the search for good compatibility, ideal formulation. Low cost of manufacture and
application and the carry-over effect to the next crops. Herbicide mixture to control broad-
spectrum weeds, delay herbicide-resistant weeds and to check weed flora shift, has immense
potentiality which will not be tapped fully unless the above factors are studied.
x-x-x-x-x
 79

CHAPTER-10 Compatibility of herbicides with other agro chemicals

Under the current agricultural production practices, crops receive, in a single season, multiple
seed treatments, preemergence and post emergence herbicides, insecticides, fungicides,
nematicides, fertilizers and sometimes plant growth regulators. Most of these chemicals,
whether applied as mixtures, simultaneously or sequentially, may undergo a change in
physical and chemical characters which could lead to enhancement or reduction in the effect
of one or more compounds. A normally safe herbicide may become toxic to a crop or an
effective product may show reduced activity on a weed species. These interactions between
chemicals are of common occurrence in today‘s agriculture. Their significance is more
evident when the interaction effects are seen much later in the growing season or the
following season and year due to build up of persistent chemicals or their residues in the soil.
Application of a pre plant insecticide to soil may prove to be toxic when a post emergence
herbicide is applied several weeks later. Knowledge of the interaction of herbicides with
various chemicals will help in formulating and adopting a sound and effective weed
management programme. It can also help to exploit the synergistic and antagonistic
interactions between various herbicides to evolve an effective and economical eradication of
weeds.
INTERACTION RESPONSES
Interaction is the term used to express the relationship of one agent against the other in a
combination. When two or more chemicals accumulate in the plant, they may interact and
bring out response different from those obtained when they are used alone. These responses
are generally described as additive response, synergistic response (synergism) and
antagonistic response (antagonism).
Additive Response:
Additive response is the total effect of a combination which is equal to the sum of the effects
of the two components taken independently
Synergistic Response:
In synergistic response, the total effect of a combination is greater or more prolonged than the
sum of the effects of the two taken independently.
Antagonistic Response:
In antagonistic response, the total effect of a combination is smaller than the most active
component applied alone.
PHYSIOLOGICAL BASIS OF HERBICIDE INTERACTION
Enhancement or reduction of the activity of a given herbicide on a target plant brought about
by the prior or simultaneous application of another chemical is the result of changes in the
amount of herbicide reaching, or after reaching, the site of action in the active form. In a
mixture, one component influences the toxicity of another component by interfering with the
patterns of its penetration, translocation and biotransformation in plants. The physiological
 80

mechanisms explaining the synergistic, antagonistic and other interactions of herbicides with
other agrochemicals in higher plants are briefly discussed below.
Mechanisms of Synergistic Interaction
Several classes of agrochemicals including adjuvants, fertilizers, herbicides, insecticides,
growth regulators and other additives are known to synergize the activity of several
herbicides on certain plant species.
Mechanisms of Antagonistic Interaction
The mechanisms by which chemicals would reduce the activity of a given herbicide on a
target plant species can be generally classified into four groups. They are biochemical
antagonism, competitive antagonism, physiological antagonism and chemical antagonism.
HERBICIDE-HERBICIDE INTERACTIONS
Use of two or three-way mixtures is quite common in modern weed managements
programmes. The synergistic herbicide mixtures offer the following immediate and long-term
benefits.
1. Provide more effective weed control.
2. Increase the spectrum of weeds controlled. The most successful combinations are
those based on the pairing of a grass effective herbicide with a broadleaf weed
effective herbicide in order to complement the phytotoxicity of each other at the
physiological level.
3. Reduce the environmental impact of each herbicide in a mixture. The soil receives
lower amounts of herbicides, resulting in far less amounts of herbicides reaching
groundwater.
4. Improve crop safety (selectivity) as a result of application of reduced rates. Allow
crops to be planted sooner after herbicide application; because of lower initial rates,
herbicides will be more rapidly dissipated to non toxic levels.
5. Cause delay in the evolution of weed resistance to herbicides.
6. Allow zero or minimum tillage and chemical fallow practices achieve effective and
economical weed control.
7. Reduce danger of human toxicity directly and through crop residues because of
reduced rates of application.
There are two types of herbicide mixtures:
a) premixed formulations, made by manufacturers, and
b) tank mixes made by farmers before application with desired and recommended herbicides
and rates.
The success of a herbicide mixture can be undermined by physical, chemical and biological
incompatibility. This incompatibility leads to reduced performance of the mixture. Physical
incompatibility results in the formation of agglomerates, crystals, phase separation, or
thickening in the herbicide mixture. Thus, incompatibility is a frequent contributor to the
variability of herbicide performance, particularly in the case of tank mixtures. Compatibility
 81

charts serve as an excellent source of information to help avoid these mixing problems. When
making tank mixtures of herbicides, their compatibility needs to be tested. This may be done
by premixing the materials by making slurry of small quantities (equal proportion) before
adding to the tank. If required, a compatibility agent, which is non-ionic in nature, may be
used.
Herbicide-herbicide mixtures have been widely used for over 30 years. Scores of factory-
made premixes have been developed and farm level tank mixture recommended during this
period to control some of the most problematic weeds in agriculture.
HERBICIDE-SAFENER INTERACTIONS
Herbicide safeners (also referred to as antidotes, protectants, antagonists, or modifiers),
increase the tolerance level of crop plants to herbicides. As a result, the herbicide-safener
mixture allows for improved control of weeds. Certain herbicides, when applied alone, would
either not be sufficiently active on the weeds at lower rates, or would cause injury at the
higher rates required for satisfactory weed control. Safeners help in mitigating the problem by
allowing herbicide application at higher rates.
HERBICIDE-INSECTICIDE INTERACTIONS
Herbicides and insecticides are often applied simultaneously or serially to crops within a
short period. These chemicals are usually not harmful when used as per recommended
practices. The tolerance of plants to a herbicide may be altered in the presence of an
insecticide and vice versa.
HERBICIDE INTERACTIONS WITH FUNGICIDES AND PATHOGEN
Unlike herbicide-insecticide interactions, herbicide-fungicide interactions tend to be
antagonistic.
Herbicide-fungicide interactions are not as widespread as herbicide-insecticide interactions.
Herbicides interact with fungicides as well as the disease-causing organisms. Dinoseb was
shown to reduce the severity of stem rot (white mould) in groundnut.
HERBICIDE-FERTILIZER INTERACTIONS
There is growing evidence of herbicide-fertilizer/plant nutrient interactions occurring in
agriculture. The addition of ammonium nitrate greatly increases the absorption of solutions of
isooctyl ester of 2,4,5-T by tree leaves.
Fertilizers have a significant effect on herbicide absorption. For example, the complete
fertilizer involving N, P and K reduced atrazine absorption by plants, thus reducing
phytotoxicity. Atrazine was more toxic in the presence of P and K than in the presence of N
and P or N and K due to increased absorption of the herbicide by plants. Conversely,
herbicides also affect the absorption of plant nutrients.
HERBICIDE-ADJUVANT INTERACTIONS
An adjuvant refers to any substance included in the formulation of a herbicide or added to the
spray tank to enhance herbicide characteristics or application characteristics. Surfactants and
phytobland oils are the two types of chemicals commonly used as adjuvants in herbicide
 82

formulations. Once a herbicide is commercialized, it may not be necessary to use additional

adjuvants. However, addition of extra surfactants may be needed to improve the herbicide
efficacy at low rates of several water-soluble herbicides applied to the foliage. The applied
adjuvant enhances herbicide activity either favourably or unfavourably depending on the
interaction of herbicide-adjuvant-plant combination. Adjuvants enhance herbicide uptake by
the plant and its translocation to the site of action. As more herbicide is likely to be available
for its effect, herbicide-adjuvant interactions are generally synergistic. The effects of
adjuvants on herbicide activity are the opposite of safeners.
HERBICIDE-BIOHERBICIDE INTERACTIONS
The mixtures of bioherbicides (bioagents) and organic herbicides interact and bring out
synergistic responses. Synergism has been found for a diverse group of herbicides,
bioehrbicides and weed hosts. At the same time, mixing herbicides with certain bioherbicides
may have a detrimental effect on the living microbes. This problem can be mitigated if the
herbicide and bioagent are applied sequentially. The combinations of herbicides and living
organisms normally provide additive, synergistic and antagonistic effects on weed control.

x-x-x-x
 83

CHAPTER-11 Integration of herbicides with non-chemical methods of weed

management

WEED PREVENTION
Weed prevention comprises all measures which deny the entry and establishment of new
weeds in an area. It also includes farm hygiene that prevents the every year production of
seeds, tubers, and rhizomes of the weed species already present on the farm.
Some major aspects of weed prevention on farmland are as follows:-
(1) Use Weed free crop seeds:- one important way the weeds spread on the farmlands is
through crop seeds, contaminated with the weed seeds. Some weed seeds always go with
certain crop seeds, for example, Avena fatua and Brassica spp. with small grains.
The prevention of weeds that disperse with the crop seeds can be achieved in two ways, viz.
(I) by the production of weed free crop seeds at the Government farms or at the farmer‘s field
itself, and (II) by cleaning the crop seeds of weeds before storage as well as at the time of
sowing.
(2) Avoid contamination of manure pits:- It is a common practice of adding mature or
even blooming weeds and their vegetative propagules to manure pits in the hope of
recovering their manurial value. In most cases the weed seeds do not lose their viability in the
manure pits and the resulting farm-yard manure serves as a notorious source of adding weed
seeds to crop land.
(3) Prevent Movement of weeds with other farm resources:- Do not permit livestock
to move from the weed-infested areas directly into clean areas because they can always drop
weed seeds and fruits attached to them or those ingested by them earlier. The farm
machinery, for similar reason, should be cleaned properly before moving it from one field to
another. Same is true of the movement of nursery stock, gravel, sand, and soil from weed-
infested areas to the new ones.
(4) Keep non-crop areas clean:- The irrigation and drainage ditches, fence lines, farm
boundaries, bunds, and other like un-cropped areas are often neglected by farmers. These
places offer a perpetual weed nursery for the cropped plots. This should be prevented by
extending the weed control efforts to non-crop areas on the farm.
(5) Keep vigilance:- A farmer should inspect his farm areas periodically for some strange
looking weed seedlings. The search for them should be extended into standing crops even if
herbicides or cultivators were used to control weeds there. No sooner than any strange
looking weed seedling are noticed, they should be uprooted by digging as deep as their roots
may have penetrated the soil, and the soil in these spots should be treated with a suitable
sterilant.
(6) Legal measures:- Legal measures are necessary to check inter-state and inter-country
movement of noxious weeds if the cost of having to control additional alien weeds is to be
saved. Unfortunately, thus far, in most parts of the tropical and sub-tropical world, noxious
 84

weeds have not been subjected to strict quarantine laws. This has resulted in the introduction
and spread of some of the costliest weeds of the world.
Control and Eradication
Weed control is the process of limiting weed infestations so that crops could be grown
profitably and other activities of man conducted efficiently. The word ‗crop‘ is not restricted
here in its meaning to maize, sugarcane, or wheat, but it means any plant community that is
serving some useful purpose to man and his affairs at the place of its occurrence.
In weed control we seek to limit the growth of unwanted plants, both in space and time, with-
out any attempt to eliminate them from the scene. The extent to which any weed growth is
desired to be limited will depend upon the cost of weed control and the benefits anticipated
from the operation. The aim of weed control is to manage the vegetation on land and in water
bodies in such a way as will encourage the growth of plants beneficial to our interests at a
particular place and time and will suppress the remaining relatively unwanted plant species.
In variance with weed control, weed eradication is complete removal of all live plant parts
and seeds of a weed from an area, which may be a field/farm/village/geographical region,
depending upon the need. Although very attractive, it is a very expensive adventure sine it
will often cost more than the land was worth. Moreover, total destruction of weeds is
considered undesirable even from crop fields since many weeds harbor predators of crop
pests, or secrete in soil nematicides, while all of them hold soil nutrients against their
leaching losses during fallow periods. Heavy expense of weed eradication is justified against
noxious weeds such as Striga, Cuscuta, and Lantana spp., to prevent their dispersal to
additional millions of hectares of useful land and water bodies. Against the common weed,
we employ only control measures. But when required, a weed eradication programme should
begin when the weed growth is still limited. Once the weed has invaded large, continuous
areas, its eradication becomes uneconomical. The weed eradication is accomplished in more
than one year; it requires intensive initial efforts to destroy all plant parts followed by many
years of vigilance to prevent the new weed seedlings from establishing into adult plants. In
variance with it, weed control is an every year, constant rate programme. Of course, with
proper preventive measures, efforts required to control weeds can be reduced to a very low
level, in due course of time.
Methods of weed control
(A) Physical Control of Weeds
(B) Crop Husbandry Control of Weeds
(C) Herbicidal Control of Weeds
(D) Crop Breeding For Weed Control
(E) Non-living Mulches
(F) Burning and Flaming
 85

(A) CROP HUSBANDRY CONTROL OF WEEDS:-

Good crop husbandry is more than half the weed control envisages on farm land. While
directly it induces a healthy growth of crop, indirectly it maintains a crop environment that is
as detrimental to weeds as possible.
(1) Proper crop stand and early seedling vigor:-
Ready and uniform germination of crop seeds and their development into vigorous crop
seedling leaves less space for the weeds to grow amongst the crop plants. Uneven and low
crop populations and weak crop seedlings, on the contrary, permit thick growth of weeds. A
vigorously growing crop aids weed control by weakening the weeds by offering competition.
Important steps in obtaining good germination and optimum stand of crops are (1) selection
of most adapted crops and crop varieties, (2) the use of high viability seeds, (3) pre-plant seed
and soil treatment with pesticides, dormancy breaking chemicals, and germination boosters,
(4) adequate seed rates and (5) proper planting time and method. Despite these practices if
some gaps are still seen in the crop rows, these must be filled as soon as possible. Row
spacing of crops should be as narrow as agronomic recommendations will allow so that the
crops close in early. Unnecessarily deep plantings of crop seeds should be avoided as it
results in slow germination, and often, in weak seedling.
(2) Selective crop stimulation:- Selective crop stimulation can be achieved in many ways.
To start with, correction of soil condition to favor crop growth by the application of soil
amendments like gypsum or lime, as the case may be, is an important step towards favoring
crop growth. Addition of farm-yard manure or synthetic soil conditioners to very light or very
heavy soils may be useful in improving crop growth by ameliorating the soil structure and
thus, maintaining better air-water relationships.
Application of suitable fertilizers and manures in adequate quantities improves plant growth
very much. But when these are applied uniformly to soil, they may benefit the crops and
weeds. Therefore to make fertilizers available mainly to the crop, these should be banded or
side dressed. Weeds growing 20 cm or more away from the fertilized bands usually fail to
make use of even a mobile nutrient like N. Such weeds remain stunted in comparison to the
close growing weeds. Foliar application of fertilizer to wide row crops like maize sugarcane,
and cotton, also amounts to their selective stimulation.
(3) Proper planting method:- Any planting method that leaves the soil surface rough and
dry will discourage early weed growth. For example, in India when winter grains are planted
in seedbeds prepared after a pre-sowing irrigation, it leaves the top defers the germination of
the weeds. By this time the crop plants are sufficiently grown-up to fight weeds. In variance
with this sound practice of planting crops, when a farmer plants his crops in dry soil and
irrigates the field soon thereafter, the lands himself into serious weeds problems.
In the summer season, furrow planting of crops is a very useful method of reducing the weed
problems. It is so because in this method the irrigation water is restricted initially to the
furrows. This leaves the inter-row crop spaces dry where weeds fail to germinate. After the
crop seedlings are well established, the fields can be irrigated, uniformly.
 86

In transplanted crops the farmer gets opportunity to prepare a weed free field for the
placement of healthy crop seedlings. This gives a definite advantage to the crop over the later
germinating weeds.
(4) Proper planting time:- With the availability of photo-insensitive varieties of many
crops, manipulation of planting time of crops so as to avoid the first heavy flush of weeds
should be easy. For instance, when rainy season crops like maize and cotton are planted about
15 days before the break of monsoon with the help of a pre-sowing irrigation, the crops
germinate in weed free environment. And by the time the weeds germinate with the onset of
rains, the crop seedlings are well up.
(5) Crop rotation :- Crop rotation are effective in controlling crop-associated and crop-
bound weeds such as Avena fatua ‗wildoat‘ and Cuscuta spp. ‗dodder‘, respectively. Wildoat
can be driven away from small grain fields by using pea and gram as break crops for 2 to 3
years. Dodder on the other hand, can be eliminated from Lucerne by turning the land to grain
crops for some time.
(6) Stale seedbed:-A stale seedbed is one where 1 to 2 flushes of weeds are destroyed
before planting of any crop. As earlier stated, most weed seeds germinate from top 4 to5 cm
of surface soil. If a finally prepared seedbed is withheld from planting and it contains
adequate moisture in its top 4 to 5 cm of soil, a flush of young weed seedlings will appear on
it, in about a week‘s time. These weed seedlings can be destroyed either with a contact
herbicide like spike tooth harrow, trader-packer, spring tooth harrow, corrugated iron land-
roller, weeder-mulcher, and sweeps. Depending upon the time available, one or two flushes
of weeds can be destroyed in this manner before planting of crops in the stale seedbeds. The
main advantage of stale seedbeds is that crops germinate in weed free environment.
(7) Smother cropping: - The smother crops germinate quickly and develop large canopy,
capable efficient photosynthesis, in relatively short period. They possess both surface and
deep roots. Also called competitive crops, they suppress the weed seedling by excluding light
beneath and utilizing large quantities of nutrients from the soil, rapidly.
(8) Summer fallowing : -Farmers in India, as in many other tropical countries, have used
for decades hot months of April, May and June to expose their lands to sun in order to control
many soil-borne pests, including weeds. Roots, rhizomes, and tubers of shallow rooted
perennial weeds like Bermuda grass and nut sedge are desiccated when these are brought to
surface by tillage and exposed to air temperature of 40 to 450 C.
(9) Minimum tillage :- Deep and frequent tillage may be useful for some reasons, but it
serves to (i) bring more of dormant weed seeds and rhizomes to the soil surface, and (ii)
preserve, the new ones deep inside the soil for the future. Both these things are undesirable.
(10) Lowering area under bunds:-Soil bunds made in fields for the purpose of irrigation
are ideal places for the rapid growth of weeds. Soil dug or scraped for making these carries
numerous weed seeds that germinate readily on them soon after the fields are irrigated, and
establish into thick weed populations. These weeds form potential source of every year weed
seeds on the farm since the application of herbicides and cultivations are usually restricted to
the net cropped ground.
 87

(11) Flooding and Drainage: - Flood kills weeds by excluding air from their environment.
Some weed species are more susceptible to it than the others. Flooding is a world-wide crop
husbandry method of controlling weeds in rice fields. In some parts of Madhya Pradesh
(India), deep flooding of fallow fields with rain water is practiced continuously for 2-3
months. After that the water is let out and the winter grains are planted. The practice, locally
called ‗Haveli‘, is considered very effective in controlling weeds, besides conserving
moisture. The technique, however, can, be used as a weed suppression measure only in
limited situations.
In variance with flooding, drainage is used for controlling aquatic and semi-aquatic weeds in
rice fields, canals, and ponds. In rice fields, where both terrestrial and aquatic weeds may be
common, a judicious combination of the two can be practiced.
(B) THE PHYSICAL CONTROL OF WEEDS
(1) Pre-Plant Tillage Control of Weeds:-
Pre-plant tillage is usually conducted in two phases, viz., the primary tillage and the
secondary tillage. The primary tillage is conducted effectively with either a soil inverting
plough or a disc. The secondary tillage, on the contrary, is performed with lighter implements
like harrows, cultivators, weeder-mulchers, and corrugated rollers.
(2) Post-Plant Tillage:-
For a long time, besides the control of weeds, at least three more functions were
assigned to the post-plant tillage, more popularly called row cultivations. These function are
(i) conservation of soil moisture, (ii) enhanced soil aeration, and (iii) mixing of fertilizer and
manures with the soil. The development of chemicals to control weeds made it possible to
separate the weed control effects of row-tillage from its other effects.
(3) Mowing and Cutting:-
Mowing: Mowing is cutting of a uniform growth of weeds from entire area at the ground
level. Its chief purpose is to improve look and accessibility to the area, and in certain cases to
prevent multiplication of weed seeds. Also, repeated mowing can weaken the underground
parts of perennial weeds.
Mowing is usually practiced in non-crop areas, lawns, and gardens, but it can also prove
useful in removing weeds from rows of certain established crops. Common mowing tools and
implements are sickle, sword, scythe, machete, lawn mower, and reciprocating type rotary-
bar mower. Mowing is effective against only erect, herbaceous type of weeds. It is preferred
over tillage control of weeds on land susceptible to erosion since it does not produce any bare
land.
(ii) Cutting: In variance with mowing, cutting is topping of the weeds above the ground level.
It is most commonly practiced against brushes and trees with the help of axes and saws. In
aquatics, under-water weed cutters are used to cut weeds up to 1 m below the water surface.
Both cutting and mowing are short-lived in their effects; the topped weeds re-grow soon from
their crown region and underground buds. Therefore, these operations must be repeated often
to keep the weeds and grasses low.
 88

(4) Dredging and Chaining: These two physical control methods are used against aquatic
weeds growing in shallow ditches. Dredging constitutes mechanical pulling of weeds with
their shallow roots and rhizomes covered in mud. In chaining, on the other hand, a very
heavy chain is pulled over the bottom of the ditch with the help of two tractors, one moving
on either bank of the ditch. The chain fragments the rooted weeds by its rubbing action, and
the weed fragments float to the water surface. From here these can be collected down the
stream by nets and hooks.
(5) Soil Solarisation:-
Soil solarisation, also called solar soil heating, is another method of utilizing solar energy for
the desiccation of weeds in fallow fields during the hot summer months. It differs from hot
weather tillage control of weeds described earlier in two major aspects (i) It is effective
mainly against weeds from seeds. (ii) It usually does not involve any tillage of the field.
(C) Herbicidal control of weeds
Herbicides are chemicals capable of killing or inhibiting the growth of plants. In the last 40
years or so, man has greatly improved upon his weeding efficiency by supplementing the
conventional weeding methods with herbicides. It has saved farmers of undue, repeated inter-
cultivations and hoeing, and has helped him in obtaining satisfactory weed control where
physical methods often fail. Today, we have over 150 herbicides in common use for selective
and non-selective weed control in different areas. These chemicals vary greatly in their (a)
molecular structures, (b) mobility within plants, (c) selectivity, (d) fate in soils, and (e)
response to environment.
Benefits of Herbicides:
1. In monsoon season incessant rainfall may make physical weeding infeasible. Herbicides
can be used to ensure freedom of crops from weeds under such a condition. Also,
during the early crop growth period when many fields need weeding simultaneously,
even in labour-rich countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladeshi Nepal, Nigeria, and
Sudan, there is certainly a weeding bottleneck in crop production. The soil applied
herbicides can be of great help in these regions in boosting crop production.
2. Herbicides can be employed to control weeds as they emerge from the soil to eliminate
weed- crop interference even at a very early stage of crop growth. But by physical
methods weeds are removed after they have offered considerable competition to the
crops, and rarely at the critical time. Thus, herbicides provide benefits of timely weed
control.
3. Herbicides can kill many weeds that survive by mimicry, for example, wildoat (Avena
spp.) in wheat and barnyard grass (Echinochloa spp.) in rice. Weeds that resemble crop
plants usually escape physical weeding.
4. Herbicidal control does not dictate strict row spacing. In physical weed control, on the
other hand the crop rows have to be sufficiently wide to accommodate weeding
implements, else hand weeding and hand-pulling of weeds has to be resorted to.
 89

5. Herbicides bring about longer lasting control of perennial weeds and brushes than is
possible with any physical control method. Many modern herbicides can translocate
considerably deep in the underground system of weeds and damage them.
6. Herbicides are convenient to use on spiny weeds which cannot be reached manually.
7. Herbicides are safe on erodable lands where tillage may accelerate soil and water
erosion. Excessive tillage, in any case, spoils soil structure, reduces organic matter
content, and depletes moisture status of the soil.
8. Herbicides kill weeds in situ without permitting their dissemination. Tillage on the other
hand, may fragment the vegetative propagules of the weeds and drag them to new sites.
9. Herbicide sprays easily reach the weeds growing in obstructed situations, such as
utility-rights-of-way, under fruit trees, and on undulating lands.
Some other benefits of using herbicides include (a) fewer labour problems, (b) greater
possibility of farm mechanization, (c) easier crop harvesting and (d) lower cost of farm
produce. In dry land agriculture, effective herbicidal control ensures higher water use by
crops and less crop failures due to drought.
Limitations of Herbicides:
Like any other method of weed control, herbicides have their own limitations. But with
proper precautions these limitations can be overcome, markedly. Important limitations in the
use of herbicides are as follows.
1. In herbicidal control there is no automatic signal to stop a farmer who- may be
applying the chemical inaccurately till he sees the results in the crops sprayed or in
the rotation crops that follow.
2. Even when herbicides are applied accurately, these may interact with environment to
produce unintended results. Herbicide drifts, wash-off, and runoff can cause
considerable damage to the neighboring crops, leading to unwarranted quarrels.
3. Depending upon the diversity in faming, a variety of herbicides must be stocked on a
farm to control weeds in different fields. On the contrary, for physical control of
weeds a farmer has to possess only one or two kinds of weeding implements for his
entire farm.
4. Above all, herbicidal control requires considerable skill on the part of the user. He
must be able to identify his weeds and possess considerable knowledge about
herbicides and their proper usages. Sometimes, an error in the use of herbicides can
be very costly.
5. In herbicide treated soils, usually crop failures cannot be made up by planting a
different crop of choice. The selection of the replacement crop has to be based on its
tolerance to the herbicide already applied.
6. Military use of herbicides is the greatest misfortune of their discovery. In Vietnam,
2, 4, D and 2, 4, 5-T, for example, was used for defoliating forests and crops, leading
to miseries to the innocent civilians. In future, the chemical warfare with residual
herbicides may be even more devastating, which must be avoided at all costs.
(D) CROP BREEDING FOR WEED CONTROL
Plant breeders, thus far, have engaged themselves in evolving crop varieties tolerant to
specific pathogens, insects, nematodes, and even birds. But hardly any attempt has been made
to breed crop plants tolerant to competition from weeds. In recent years attention of a group
 90

of Asian and African plant breeders has been drawn towards breeding millet varieties tolerant
to Striga sp.
(E) NON-LIVING MULCHES
Mulching stunts or kills the weeds by cutting light to them. Straw, hay, dry sugarcane leaves,
farmyard manure, rice hull, saw dust, and bark dust are natural, partial mulch materials,
which can at best stunt the weed growth. Even when these are spread in thickness of 6 to 12
cm, the perennial weeds grow through them easily. Also, the natural mulches tend to harbour
insect pests and disease organisms and obstruct farm operations. Synthetic mulches, namely
black paper or Polythene film mulches provide stronger mechanical barriers to all kinds of
germinating weeds. Black, plastic-coated, craft paper mulches are now preferred on newly-
prepared fields to suppress weeds. These are made in rolls of different widths which can be
spread on the seedbeds and then crop seedlings can be transplanted through holes made into
them. Presently mulching with synthetic materials is costly, so its economic use is limited to
certain high value vegetables and ornamentals.
(F) BURNING AND FLAMING
Burning is the cheapest method of eliminating mature, unwanted vegetation from rangelands
and non-crop situations like roadsides and ditch banks in dry seasons. Weed seeds that have
al- ready shattered on the ground before flaming will not be killed by it. Burning is limited in
its value because it is a potential source of fire hazard. In variance with it, flaming is a
momentary exposure of green weeds to as high as 1000o C temperature from flame throwers.
Flaming kills plants by coagulating their cell protoplasm. In some western countries, flaming
is used for selective control of inter-row weeds in onion, soybean, grain sorghum, castor
bean, cotton, sesame, and certain fruit orchards. For selective weed control, flaming must be
done when weeds are in their seedling stage and the crop plants are well established. The
flame should be directed towards the weeds under hood covers.
Flaming has proved useful in destroying dodder-infested crops of Lucerne. In grasslands,
woody shrubs and patches of perennial weeds can be destroyed by spot flaming. Flaming is
also helpful in weeding farm ditches and many other difficult non-crop situations. It is
believed that repeated light applications of flame to plant shoots can destroy even roots of the
perennial weeds. The process is called searing.
Integrated weed management
Weed management differs from weed control or weed eradication wherein weeds are kept
under check at a level that they do not cause economic loss from the crop. Instead of
depending on one method of control, say herbicide or mechanical methods, integration of
different methods like sanitation, mechanical methods, biological means and use of
herbicides at a lower level keeps the weeds under check at an economic cost. This approach
is gaining importance as herbicides at higher levels cause hazards and the labour availability
becomes limiting and at times weather conditions do not permit soil manipulation.

x-x-x-x-x
 91

CHAPTER-12 Herbicides resistance and its management

There are three main plant responses to herbicide application. Susceptibility is demonstrated
when the treated plant dies as a result of a herbicide used at a normal rate. Tolerance is the
inherent ability of a plant to survive and reproduce after herbicide treatment. This implies that
there is no selection or genetic manipulation but that the plant is naturally tolerant- for
example, grass tolerance to 2,4-D or carrot tolerance to trifluralin. Resistance, as defined by
the Weed Science Society of America, is the inherited ability of a plant to survive and
reproduce following exposure to a dose of herbicide normally lethal to the wild type.
Resistance may occur naturally or be induced by selection pressure.
Within resistance there are three subcategories used to describe particular types of resistance.
Cross-resistance occurs when a plant selected for resistance to a specific herbicide is also
resistant to other herbicides within a similar chemical group (such as resistant to atrazine and
to other s-triazines as well). Multiple resistance occurs when a plant is resistant to herbicides
that are chemically unrelated and that have different modes of action (such as a well resistant
to both sulfonylurea and aryloxyphenoxy propanate herbicides). Negative cross resistance
occurs when a biotype resistant to a particular herbicide is more susceptible to other classes
of herbicides than the susceptible biotype- for instance, an atraxzine-resistant redroot
pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus) that is more susceptible to flometuron (cotoran/meturon)
that the triazine-susceptible biotype.
Herbicide resistance
Herbicide resistance is the ability of a weed biotype to survive and reproduce after treatment
with herbicides that would typically have been lethal. The development of herbicide
resistance poses three serious problems:
1. It is very expensive and time consuming to test for and to develop alternative management
plans
2. Develop management techniques to continue utilizing current herbicides and protect them
against resistance development. Few new active ingredients are being discovered and
developed into commercial products due to their high costs of development.
3. Development of herbicide resistance in a biotype limits weed management options and
creates economic consequences.
Factors that control development of resistant weeds;
1. Selection Pressure. - If highly effective and applied often, has long soil residual activity,
and is the only practice utilized to control a weed species, high selection pressure is placed
for resistant biotypes of a weed.
2. Weed biology
a. Genetic variability: Some plant species have high genetic variability meaning that many
different varieties or biotypes exist under the one species. Cross pollinating species like
kochia have greater genetic variability that self-pollinating species. Weeds with higher
 92

genetic variability generally develop resistance quicker, since chances are there are more
resistant biotypes within a population prior to spraying.
b. Seed longevity: Plant species that produce long-lived seed tend to develop resistance
more slowly. This is because susceptible seeds from the seedbank germinate over many
years adding variation to the population.
3. Genetics of resistance: This is regarding the site of action of the herbicide on the plant.
There are differences pertaining to the frequency mutations occur at different biological
target sites within plants. Sites that have high frequency of mutation, tend to develop
quickly, for example the site of action of ALS inhibitors can develop resistance with 3 or
4 years of continuous use since the target site is highly variable. In contrast, the target
site of glyphosate do not mutate as often. Glyphosate resistance does not exist, but it took
many years to develop.
Herbicide Resistant Crops
The use of biotechnology to develop crop plants with new resistance to herbicides, notably
broad-spectrum herbicides such as glyphosate, has had a significant impact on weed control
practices. This will continue as the ability to manipulate herbicide tolerance using these
methods expands: More genes for herbicide resistance are being developed and the number of
crops that can be genetically modified in this way is increasing. Indeed, it is possible that this
approach will change the manner in which herbicides are developed. Rather than identifying
a herbicide with selectivity, genes for resistance to specific herbicides (including new ones)
may be incorporated into specific crops.
There are three principal requirements for manipulating herbicide resistance in plants through
biotechnology:
1. Identification of a gene that can provide resistance to a herbicide
2. Modification of this gene so that it can be expressed in the target crop plant
3. Transfer of the modified gene into the crop plant.
Each of these components has been developed over the last 15 years as our understanding of
plant biochemistry, physiology, and molecular biology has increased. The application of
genetic engineering to herbicide resistance is the first major commercial success in
agricultural biotechnology. However, there is tremendous potential for genetic manipulation
of crop plants to impact crop production practices as well as the downstream uses of
agricultural products.
Identification of Genes for Herbicide Resistance
Plants use a number of mechanisms to tolerate herbicides, including reduced uptake of the
herbicide, increased metabolism, and a target site that is not affected by the herbicide.
Conceptually, genes could be identified that would alter any of these steps to provide
resistance to a specific herbicide. In practice, the two mechanisms that have been favored for
genetic engineering are modification of the target site and metabolism of the herbicide. The
revolutionary aspect of this new technology is that genes for such traits need not come from
 93

the traditional germ plasm resources used by plant breeders. Rather, genes for herbicide
resistance may be found in any organism, including microbes. Once identified, these genes
can be isolated, modified to function appropriately in a plant, and transferred to the crop.
The strategy used to identify genes for herbicide resistance depends on the nature of the
herbicide and its mode of action. An approach that has proven effective in many cases is to
identify microbes that either survive in the presence of the herbicide or use the herbicide as a
food source. There are a number of advantages to screening for herbicide resistance genes in
bacteria:
 Large numbers of bacteria can be tested through simple procedures, such as screening
for bacteria that grow on agar medium supplemented with the herbicide.
 Large collections of bacteria can be obtained simply from soil samples or other sources.
 Genes that are responsible for herbicide resistance can be isolated rapidly because
bacterial genomes are small and molecular genetic techniques facilitate this process.
Modification of Genes for Expression in Plants
Genes carry two essential pieces of information. First, they carry information to produce
proteins. The sequence of bases in the DNA is decoded by the cell to direct the synthesis of a
specific protein. The machinery of the cell first transcribes the sequence of bases in DNA into
a similar sequence of bases in RNA. This is then translated into a sequence of amino acids in
the protein. The DNA code for proteins is essentially the same in all organisms, from bacteria
to plants and animals. Consequently, a gene transferred from a bacterium to a plant will
encode the same protein if the gene is expressed.
In addition to carrying the code for a specific protein, each gene also carries instructions
about where, when, and to what level that gene should be expressed- that is, activated or
switched on. These regulatory features are critical for the function of all organisms. The
regulatory information is also carried in the sequence of bases in the DNA and is referred to
as the promoter. The promoter of a gene determines where and when that gene is expressed
and whether the protein will be made in abundance or at a low level. However, unlike the
codes for proteins, regulatory instructions are not the same from one organism to another.
Consequently, genes transferred between organisms will not be expressed unless the
promoters are tailored to work in the host into which this gene is being moved. For example,
a gene isolated from Salmonella typhimurium, a bacterium, will not be expressed in a plant
unless the promoter that controls its expression is altered to function in plants.
Genes that are used to provide tolerance to herbicides through biotechnology are therefore
comprised of two essential components:
1. A DNA sequence encoding a specific protein that will either metabolize the herbicide or
provide a target that is not inhibited by the herbicide
2. A promoter sequence that will direct the expression of this protein in particular tissues of
the plant.
 94

The process of gene transfer is commonly referred to as transformation. Cells that have
taken up a gene by this method, and plants that are regenerated from these cells, are described
as transformed or transgenic. The term genetically modified organism (GMO) is also used to
describe transgenic organisms, including transformed plants. Genes that are transferred into
plants are known as transgenes.
The various techniques used to transform plants include a number of common steps:
 A tissue is selected from which fertile plants can be regenerated through tissue culture.
 The desired gene(s) are transferred into as many cells as possible in this target tissue.
 Selection is used to identify transformed cells.
 Plants are regenerated from transformed cells.
 Transgenic plants are analyzed to confirm that the genes have been transferred, are
being expressed as expected, and are having the desired effect on the phenotype of the
plant.
Transformation of most plants has used either Agrobacterium tumefaciens or particle
bombardment to move genes into the plant. Agro bacterium tumefactions is a soil bacterium
that has the unique ability to transfer DNA from the bacterium into plant cells. In nature the
bacterium uses this ability to modify plant cells to produce compounds that the bacterium can
use for growth. For genetic manipulation of plants, Agrobacterium can be used to transfer
specific genes into plants without the deleterious effects normally associated with this
bacterium. Until recently, Agrobacterium could not be used for transformation of most crop
plants. Consequently, other methods were developed to transfer genes into these species, the
most widely used being particle bombardment. Metallic particles are coated with the genes
(pieces of DNA) to be transferred into the plant and these DNA-coated particles are literally
shot into the plant cells. Once inside a cell, the DNA is released from the particle, moves into
the nucleus, and incorporates into the genome. Particle bombardment can transfer DNA into
essentially any species, as it relies on physical methods to move DNA, unlike the biological
system used in Agro bacterium-mediated transformation.
The final step is to confirm that the transgenic is performing as expected. For herbicide
tolerance, this involves demonstrating that transgenic plants have tolerance to field
applications of the herbicide while maintaining suitable agronomic properties. The transgene
must also be stably expressed in all plants and from generation to generation.
The time required to progress from the initial transformation of plant cells to release of a new
variety is likely to be at least 5 years. However, once the new herbicide tolerance gene is
incorporated into elite breeding material, it can be handled simply as another trait that must
be followed during variety development.
Herbicide - Resistant Crops in The Market Or in Development
Herbicide-resistant crops that have been released or are being developed are listed below. As
shown, most major crops and several minor crops are being developed for resistance to many
widely used herbicides.
 95

The acreage of the major herbicide-resistant crops has shown a tremendous increase since
1996, and world acreage projection suggest that increased production of these crops will
continue in the future. Farmers have accepted this new technology with great excitement,
especially in the United States, because of its effectiveness, ease of use, and ability to reduce
input costs.
Major herbicides for which transgenic herbicide- resistant cultivars are being developed
Herbicide Herbicide-Resistant Plant Species
Bromoxynil Cotton, potato, tobacco.
Glyphosate Sugar beet, corn, cotton, potato, oilseed rape, soybean, tobacco, tomato,
winter and spring wheat, barley, rice.
Glufosinate Alfalfa, sugar beet, corn, barley, peanut, rice, sugarcane, soybean, tomato,
wheat, durum wheat, rye.
Sulfonylureas Corn, cotton, tobacco, tomato.
Imidazolinones Corn, wheat, rice, sugar beet, sunflower, sugarcane, soybean.
2,4-D Potato, cotton.
Sethoxydim Corn.
To prevent and manage existing herbicide resistant biotypes requires an integrative
approach.
1. Monitor Results - Scout for resistant biotypes following herbicide applications. If you
suspect herbicide resistance, have the field tissue sampled and tested.
2. Integrated Weed Control - Minimize reliance on herbicides. Combine control tools such
as mechanical, cultural, and biological with chemical. Monitor weeds and make
applications based on actual weed populations and when the infestations exceed
economic thresholds.
3. Rotate crop types – Crop rotations allow for a rotation of herbicide types. Don‘t plant
uncompetitive crops two years in a row on a field.
4. Tank Mix herbicides with different modes of action. The tank mix can delay the
development of resistant weeds it the components control the same weed with different
modes of actions. The chemicals used should have activity against potentially herbicide
resistant biotypes.
5. Use herbicides with short residual activity
6. Herbicide Rotation – Herbicides must be rotated. It is important not only to utilize
different herbicides, but herbicides with different modes of action. Do not make more
than two consecutive herbicide applications to a field using the same herbicide or a
herbicide with the same mode of action.
7. Utilize post-harvest weed control - It reduces weed seed production, controls perennials
and prevents worse infestations for the following year.
8. Equipment Sanitation - Clean equipment to prevent the spread of herbicide resistant
weed seed.
x-x-x-x