Chlorophyll Fluorescence: A Novel Method to Screen for Herbicide Resistance

Document Type : Research paper

Authors

1 Institut National Polytechnique, École Nationale Supérieure Agronomique de Toulouse, Avenue de l'Agrobiopole - Auzeville-Tolosane, BP 107 - F 31326 Castanet-Tolosan Cedex, France

2 Horticulture Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 430 Gouin Blvd., St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, QC, Canada, J3B 3E6

3 Horticulture Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 430 Gouin Blvd., St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, QC, Canada, J3B 3E6; Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, K.W. Neatby Building, 960 Carling Ave., Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0C6 Canada

Abstract

The susceptibility to Terbacil of six randomly selected strawberry cultivars (‘Aromas’, ‘Chambly’, ‘Harmonie’, ‘Kent’, ‘La Clé des Champs’ and ‘Seascape’) was analysed using chlorophyll florescence (CF) in comparison with visual observation, in an attempt to develop a method for use in a breeding programme to select herbicide-resistant strawberry lines. Terbacil was applied at one of five rates (0, 0.55, 1.10, 2.20 and 3.30kg/ha), and CF was measured 1, 3, 7 and 14d after application. Visible damage was assessed using a scale of 0 to 10 (where 0 is no damage and 10 is the death of the leaf). All cultivars showed a decrease in CF after herbicide application, but this decrease was not the same for all cultivars. ‘Chambly’ and ‘Harmonie’ had the lowest CF changes, and both appeared to be tolerant or resistant to Terbacil, in keeping with previously reported results. In contrast, ‘Kent’ and ‘Aromas’ showed a significant decrease in CF on the third day after treatment with Terbacil at 2.20 and 3.30 kg/ha, an indication that their chlorophyll system had been damaged by herbicide application without any visible signs of leaf damage. It is concluded that CF can be used as an alternative and more accurate method to evaluate seedlings in a strawberry breeding programme aimed at selecting herbicide-resistant lines. This method could be very useful, especially for those lines that do not show any visible leaf damage from herbicide application, even though their chlorophyll system is damaged enough to cease plant growth and development.

Keywords

References

1. Barrentine, J.L., and G.F. Warren. 1970. Isoparaffinic Oil as a Carrier for Chlorpropham and Terbacil. Weed Sci. 18:365-372.

2. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. 2005. Crop Profile for Strawberry in Canada. Pesticide Risk Reduction Program, Pest Management Centre, AAFC, Government of Canada. Online: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2009/agr/A118-10-17-2005E.pdf.

3. Christensen, M.G., H.B. Teicher, and J.C. Streibig. 2003. Linking Fluorescence Induction Curve and Biomass in Herbicide Screening. Pest Manag. Sci. 59:1303-1310.

4. Centre de référence en agriculture et agroalimentaire du Québec. 2007. Fraisier : Guide de protection 2007. Online: http://www.agrireseau.qc.ca/petitsfruits/documents/EVE017.pdf).
5. DeEll, J.R., and P.M.A. Toivonen (eds.). 2003. Practical Applications of Chlorophyll Fluorescence in Plant Biology, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, USA.

6. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2007. FAOSTAT. Online: http://faostat.fao.org/site/291/default.aspx or http://faostat3.fao.org/faostat-gateway/go/to/home/E.

7. Genez, A.L., and T.J. Monaco. 1983. Metabolism of Terbacil in Strawberry (Fragaria ×ananassa) and Goldenrod (Solidago fistulosa). Weed Sci. 31:221-225.

8. Khanizadeh, S., and J.R. DeEll. 2003. The Potential of Chlorophyll Fluorescence in Fruit Breeding, pp. 243-256. In: J.R. DeEll and P.M.A. Toivonen (eds.), Practical Application of Chlorophyll Fluorescence in Plant Biology, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA, USA.

9. Khanizadeh, S., and J. DeEll. 2005. Our Strawberries/Les Fraisiers de Chez Nous: A Description of Over 170 Strawberry Cultivars along with Regional Evaluation and Details Information Used for Plant Breeder’s Right Office. PWGSC, Publishing and Depository Services, Ottawa, Ontario. 551 p.

10. Khanizadeh, S., D. Buszard, M. Lareau, and D. Bagnara. 1990. ‘Chambly’ Strawberry. HortScience 25:984-985.

11. Maxwell, K., and G.N. Johnson. 2000. Chlorophyll Fluorescence- A Practical Guide. J. Exp. Bot. 51:659-668.

12. McCully, K., and K. Jensen. 2004. Strawberry IPM Weed Management Guide. Department of Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fisheries, Government of New Brunswick. Online: http://www.gnb.ca/0171/20/strawberryipm.pdf.

13. Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. 2012. Guide to Weed Control 2012-2013, Publication 75. Government of Ontario. Online: http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/pub75/pub75toc.htm.

14. Opti-Sciences. 2004. OS30p Chlorophyll Fluorometer—Operation Manual. Opti-Sciences, Inc., Hudson, NH, USA.

15. Polter S.B., D. Doohan, and J.C. Scheerens. 2004. Tolerance of Greenhouse-Grown Strawberries to Terbacil as Influenced by Cultivar, Plant Growth Stage, Application Rate, Application Site and Simulated Postapplication Irrigation. HortTechnology 14:223-229.

16. Polter, S.B., D. Doohan, and J.C. Scheerens. 2005. The Effect of Irrigation on Terbacil Tolerance in Field-Grown Strawberry. HortTechnology 15:560-564.

17. SAS Institute, 1989. SAS User’s Guide: Statistics. Version 6. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.
 
International Journal of Horticultural Science and Technology
Volume 1, Issue 2 - Serial Number 2
Autumn & Winter
December 2014
Pages 93-99

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 20 January 2014
  • Revise Date: 02 July 2014
  • Accept Date: 12 July 2014

Share

How to cite

Statistics