Focus on Weed Control: The Impact of Herbicide-Resistant Rice Technology on Phenotypic Diversity and Population Structure of United States Weedy Rice

The use of herbicide-resistant (HR) Clearfield rice (Oryza sativa) to control weedy rice has increased in the past 12 years to constitute about 60% of rice acreage in Arkansas, where most U.S. rice is grown. To assess the impact of HR cultivated rice on the herbicide resistance and population structure of weedy rice, weedy samples were collected from commercial fields with a history of Clearfield rice. Panicles from each weedy type were harvested and tested for resistance to imazethapyr. The majority of plants sampled had at least 20% resistant offspring. These resistant weeds were 97 to 199 cm tall and initiated flowering from 78 to 128 d, generally later than recorded for accessions collected prior to the widespread use of Clearfield rice (i.e. historical accessions). Whereas the majority (70%) of historical accessions had straw-colored hulls, only 30% of contemporary HR weedy rice had straw-colored hulls. Analysis of genotyping-by-sequencing data showed that HR weeds were not genetically structured according to hull color, whereas historical weedy rice was separated into straw-hull and black-hull populations. A significant portion of the local rice crop genome was introgressed into HR weedy rice, which was rare in historical weedy accessions. Admixture analyses showed that HR weeds tend to possess crop haplotypes in the portion of chromosome 2 containing the ACETOLACTATE SYNTHASE gene, which confers herbicide resistance to Clearfield rice. Thus, U.S. HR weedy rice is a distinct population relative to historical weedy rice and shows modifications in morphology and phenology that are relevant to weed management.Weedy rice (Oryza sativa), a conspecific weed of cultivated rice, is a global threat to rice production (Delouche et al., 2007). Classified as the same species as cultivated rice, it is highly competitive (Diarra et al., 1985; Pantone and Baker, 1991; Burgos et al., 2006), difficult to control without damaging cultivated rice, and can cause almost total crop failure (Diarra et al., 1985). The competition of cultivated rice with weedy rice can lead to yield losses from less than 5% to 100% (Kwon et al., 1991; Watanabe et al., 2000; Chen et al., 2004; Ottis et al., 2005; Shivrain et al., 2009b). Besides being difficult to control, weedy rice persists in rice fields because of key weedy traits, including variable emergence (Shivrain et al., 2009b), high degree of seed shattering (Eleftherohorinos, et al., 2002; Thurber et al., 2010), high diversity in seed dormancy (Do Lago, 1982; Noldin, 1995; Vidotto and Ferrero, 2000; Burgos et al., 2011; Tseng et al., 2013), and its seed longevity in soil (Goss and Brown, 1939). Weedy rice is a problem mainly in regions with large farm sizes where direct-seeded rice culture is practiced (Delouche et al., 2007). It is not a major problem in transplanted rice culture, where roguing weeds is possible and hand labor is available. The severity of the problem has increased in recent decades because of the significant shift to direct seeding from transplanting (Pandey and Velasco, 2002; Rao et al., 2007; Chauhan et al., 2013), which is driven by water scarcity (Kummu et al., 2010; Turral et al., 2011), increasing labor costs, and migration of labor to urban areas (Grimm et al., 2008).The herbicide-resistant (HR) Clearfield rice technology (Croughan, 2003) provides an option to control weedy rice in rice using imidazolinone herbicides, in particular, imazethapyr. Imidazolinones belong to group 2 herbicides, also known as ACETOLACTATE SYNTHASE (ALS) inhibitors. Examples of herbicides in this group are imazamox, imazapic, imazaquin, and imazethapyr. Developed through mutagenesis of the ALS locus (Croughan, 1998), Clearfield rice was first commercialized in 2002 in the southern U.S. rice belt (Tan et al., 2005). Low levels of natural hybridization are known to occur between the crop and weedy rice. Gene flow generally ranges from 0.003% to 0.25% (Noldin et al., 2002; Song et al., 2003; Messeguer et al., 2004; Gealy, 2005; Shivrain et al., 2007, 2008). After the adoption of Clearfield technology, resistant weedy outcrosses were soon detected in commercial fields (Fig. 1), generally after two cropping seasons of Clearfield rice, where escaped weedy rice was able to produce seed (Zhang et al., 2006; Burgos et al., 2007, 2008). Similar observations have been reported outside the United States, in other regions adopting the technology (Gressel and Valverde, 2009; Busconi et al., 2012).Open in a separate windowFigure 1.Suspected herbicide-resistant weedy rice in a rice field previously planted with Clearfield rice along the Mississippi River Delta in Arkansas. More than 10 morphotypes of weedy rice were observed in this field, with different maturity periods. In the foreground is a typical weedy rice with pale green leaves; the rice cultivar has dark green leaves. The inset shows a weedy morphotype that matured earlier than cultivated rice.Despite this complication, the adoption of Clearfield rice technology is increasing, albeit at a slower pace than that of glyphosate-resistant crops. After a decade of commercialization, 57% of the rice area in Arkansas was planted with Clearfield rice cultivars in 2013 (J. Hardke, personal communication). Clearfield technology has been very successful at controlling weedy rice, and polls among rice growers suggest that farmers have kept the problem of HR weeds in check by following the recommended stewardship practices (Burgos et al., 2008). The most notable of these are (1) implementation of herbicide programs that incorporate all possible modes of action available for rice production; (2) ensuring maximum efficacy of the herbicides used; (3) preventing seed production from escaped weedy rice, remnant weedy rice after crop harvest, or volunteer rice and weedy rice in the next crop cycle; (4) rotating Clearfield rice with other crops to break the weedy rice cycle; and (5) practicing zero tillage to avoid burying HR weedy rice seed (Burgos et al., 2008).Clearfield rice has gained a foothold in Asia, where rice cultivation originated (Londo and Schaal, 2007; Zong et al., 2007). Clearfield rice received government support for commercialization in Malaysia in 2010 (Azmi et al., 2012) because of the severity of the weedy rice problem there. Dramatic increases in rice yields (from 3.5 to 7 metric tons ha⁻¹) were reported in Malaysia where Clearfield rice was planted (Sudianto et al., 2013). However, the risk of gene flow and evolution of resistant weedy rice populations is high in the tropics, where up to three rice crops are planted each year, and freezing temperatures, which would reduce the density of volunteer plants, do not occur.In the United States, where Clearfield technology originated and has been used for the longest time, the interaction between HR cultivated rice and weedy rice is not yet fully understood. Two main populations of weedy rice are known to occur in the southern United States and can be found in the same cultivated rice fields. These populations are genetically differentiated, are largely distinct at the phenotypic level, and have separate evolutionary origins (Reagon et al., 2010). One group tends to have straw-colored hulls and is referred to as the SH population; a second group tends to have black-colored hulls and awns and is referred to as the BHA population (Reagon et al., 2010). Genomic evidence suggests that both groups descended from cultivated ancestors but not from the tropical japonica subgroup varieties that are grown commercially in the United States. Instead, the SH group evolved from indica, a subgroup of rice commonly grown in the lowland tropics, and the BHA group descended from aus, a related cultivated subgroup typically grown in Bangladesh and the West Bengal region (Reagon et al., 2010). Weed-weed and weed-crop hybrids are also known to occur, but prior to Clearfield commercialization, these hybrids had occurred at low frequency (Reagon et al., 2010; Gealy et al., 2012). With the advent and increased adoption of Clearfield cultivars, the impact on U.S. weedy rice population structure and the prevalence of the SH and BHA groups are unknown.Efforts to predict the possible consequences of HR or genetically modified rice on weedy rice have been a subject of discussion for many years. Both weedy rice and cultivated rice are primarily self-fertilizing, but, as mentioned above, low levels of gene flow are known to occur. Additional environmental and intrinsic genetic factors can act as prezygotic and postzygotic mating barriers between cultivated and weedy rice and influence the possibility and levels of gene flow between these groups (Craig et al., 2014; Thurber et al., 2014). However, once gene flow occurs between cultivated and weedy rice, and if the resulting hybrids are favored by selection, the resulting morphological, genetic, and physiological changes in weedy rice populations can alter the way that weedy rice evolves and competes. For example, herbicide-resistant weed outcrosses in an experimental field have been observed to be morphologically diverse (Shivrain et al., 2006), with some individuals carrying major weedy traits and well adapted to rice agriculture. Such weedy plants could be more problematic than their normal weedy counterparts. Thus, introgression of crop genes into weedy populations has the potential to change the population dynamic, genetic structure, and morphological profile of weedy plants. This, in turn, must alter our crop management practices. To increase our understanding of the impact of HR rice on the evolution of weedy rice, in this article we aim to (1) assess the frequency of herbicide resistance in weedy rice in southern U.S. rice fields with a history of Clearfield use; (2) characterize the weedy attributes of resistant populations; and (3) determine the genetic origins of herbicide-resistant weeds in U.S. fields.