Herbicide resistance evolution, fitness cost, and the fear of the superweeds

Despite considerable differences in cropping systems around the globe, chemical weed control is a key tool in conventional agroecosystems, which has led to an increase in herbicide resistance. Although mutations causing resistance are thought to have an adaptation cost in resistant plants compared to the susceptible ones under herbicide-free conditions, such cost may not always express or will express under certain ecological conditions. To ensure that herbicides will keep going as viable instruments in agricultural production, strategies to minimize resistance are needed. Proactive or reactive strategies for weed control should utilize an overall integrated weed management approach by combining as many weed management practices as possible. The term ‘superweed’ was used initially to describe the phenomenon in which genetically engineered crops would become troublesome weeds and that the genes of interest would spread into related weeds, rendering them problematic, or into wild species, turning them into troublesome weeds. Contrary to the above definition, the use of this term in the literature has often been linked with herbicide resistance, mostly related to the cultivation of genetically engineered crops and the related increase in the use of glyphosate, which rapidly selected resistant weed populations. From a scientific point of view, weeds are better survivors than non-weedy species and cause crop problems because they have several unique traits, e.g., they are aggressive, adapt easily to different environments, produce many seeds, compete strongly with crops, disperse easily, are difficult to control, traits which occur whether weeds are herbicide-resistant or not. We propose that the term ‘superweed’ should be referred to weeds with resistant populations to several herbicides with diverse modes of action (MOAs).