Next Article in Journal
Morphological Characterization of Metamorphosis in Stamens of Anemone barbulata Turcz. (Ranunculaceae)
Previous Article in Journal
Soil Carbon, Nitrogen and Phosphorus Fractions and Response to Microorganisms and Mineral Elements in Zanthoxylum planispinum ‘Dintanensis’ Plantations at Different Altitudes
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 13
Issue 2
10.3390/agronomy13020559
agronomy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Impact of Futuristic Climate Variables on Weed Biology and Herbicidal Efficacy: A Review

by
Vipin Kumar
1,
Annu Kumari
2,
Andrew J. Price
3,*,
Ram Swaroop Bana
4,
Vijay Singh
5 and
Shanti Devi Bamboriya
6
1
Department of Plant Pathology, Physiology, and Weed Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA
2
Crop, Soil & Environmental Sciences Department, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849, USA
3
National Soil Dynamics Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Auburn, AL 36832, USA
4
Senior Scientist Division of Agronomy, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110012, India
5
Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Centre, Virginia Tech, Painter, VA 23420, USA
6
ICAR-Indian Institute of Maize Research, Ludhiana 141004, India
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2023, 13(2), 559; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13020559
Submission received: 16 January 2023 / Revised: 10 February 2023 / Accepted: 13 February 2023 / Published: 15 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Topic The Effect of Climate Change on Crops and Natural Ecosystems)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Our changing climate will likely have serious implications on agriculture production through its effects on food and feed crop yield and quality, forage and livestock production, and pest dynamics, including troublesome weed control. With regards to weeds, climatic variables control many plant physiology functions that impact flowering, fruiting, and seed dormancy; therefore, an altered climate can result in a weed species composition shift within agro-ecosystems. Weed species will likely adapt to a changing climate due to their high phenotypic plasticity and vast genetic diversity. Higher temperatures and CO2 concentrations, and altered moisture conditions, not only affect the growth of weeds, but also impact the effectiveness of herbicides in controlling weeds. Therefore, weed biology, growth characteristics, and their management are predicted to be affected greatly by changing climatic conditions. This manuscript attempted to compile the available information on general principles of weed response to changing climatic conditions, including elevated CO2 and temperature under diverse rainfall patterns and drought. Likewise, we have also attempted to highlight the effect of soil moisture dynamics on the efficacy of various herbicides under diverse agro-ecosystems.

1. Introduction

Climate change is the variation in global or regional climatic patterns that are measurable and persist for a prolonged time period. Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, the global climate has witnessed such deviations in climatic systems, mainly due to carbon dioxide emissions through the use of fossil fuels (https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/ accessed on 20 October 2021. The emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) is increasing rapidly, and it is predicted that atmospheric CO2 concentrations will reach 1000 PPM in the late 21st century with a simultaneous rise of about 2–4 °C in the Earth’s average surface temperature [1]. The increase in global temperature, erratic distribution of rainfall, changed wind patterns, and extreme weather phenomena, such as severe storms, floods, and droughts, will likely occur due to past and continued emissions of greenhouse gases [2,3,4,5].
The changing climate is known to have serious implications on agriculture through its effects on food and feed crop quality and quantity; altered cropping systems and livestock production; and crop management practices for sustaining crop production under predicted climate change scenarios [6]. In addition to these impacts, a changing climate also aggravates weed control [7]. Among the different biotic factors that reduce crop yield, weeds are the biggest threat and can result in yield losses of 34–37%, as compared to insects (18–29%), diseases (16–22%) and others (12%) [8,9,10]. In addition, non-controlled weeds also cause various direct and indirect losses to crops. Owing to their inherent phenotypic plasticity and vast genetic diversity, weeds can adapt to changing climatic conditions [11]. Climatic variables control plant flowering, fruiting, and seed dormancy; therefore, an altered climate can bring a shift in floral species composition of various ecosystems [12]. Weed species will adapt to the changing climate through migration, altered phenology and physiology, and growth behaviour. Higher temperatures and altered soil moisture conditions not only affect weed growth but also affects the effectiveness of herbicides in controlling weeds. Decreasing herbicide efficacy is problematic, as farmers across the globe rely heavily upon herbicides for the weed management of their crops, rangelands, and fallow lands [13]. Along with plant factors and herbicide chemical properties, herbicide efficacy is also dependent on climatic factors [14]. The absorption of herbicides in weeds is dependent on its interaction with plants leaves, soil, atmosphere, or the interface of plant leaf-soil-atmosphere [14]. Therefore, alterations in climatic conditions due to increasing CO2 levels and their effect on the Earth’s average surface temperature and shifting rainfall patterns can significantly affect the growth of weed plants and the efficacy of herbicides.
The use of herbicides is widely adopted and is an efficient weed management practice; therefore, herbicide use in the future requires an understanding of the consequences of the changing climate on the growth of weed plants and the efficacy of herbicides. The main objective of this manuscript was to analyze the probable effects of altered climate on the growth and biology of weed species and the efficacy of herbicides.

2. Impact of Climate Change on Weed Biology

2.1. Photosynthetic Cycles

The differential reactions of C3 and C4 plants to changed climatic conditions necessitate a deeper understanding of C3 and C4 photosynthetic cycles in weeds (Table 1).

2.1.1. C3 Plants

In C3 plants, the enzyme which acts as an acceptor of CO2 is Ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase oxygenase (Rubisco). Rubisco can perform both carboxylation and oxidation functions. The extent of carboxylation or oxidation depends upon the ratio of atmospheric concentration of CO2 to O2 (Table 1). If CO2 level increases, then carboxylation is favored, but if CO2 concentration decreases then oxidation is favored. For plants, oxidation is an energy-wasteful process, whereas carboxylation leads to the production of photosynthates. Increased atmospheric CO2 concentration results in a corresponding increase in net photosynthesis, hence it is beneficial to C3 plants. However, a temperature increase is detrimental to C3 plants because the photorespiration rate increases when the temperature exceeds 25 °C [15]. In addition, drought and water stress conditions disfavor C3 weeds because C3 plants have low water use efficiency compared to C4 plants. Therefore, C4 plants have an advantage over the plants with C3 photosynthetic pathways [12].

2.1.2. C4 Plants

In C4 plants, Phospho-enol-pyruvate carboxylase (PEP) is the CO2 acceptor enzyme. It can catalyse only one reaction, carboxylation. In C4 plants, the CO2 supply mechanism to PEP is controlled internally, hence C4 plants do not depend much on atmospheric CO2 for photosynthesis. Also, C4 plants become saturated in terms of CO2 fixation at a concentration of around 360 ppm, thus becoming less sensitive to increased CO2 [16]. However, an increased temperature enhances the rate of photosynthesis in C4 plants, with a negligible loss of energy through photorespiration [17]. In addition, the water-use efficiency of C4 plants is higher compared to C3 plants, thus weeds with a C4 mechanism are likely to be more competitive compared to C3 plants under water-stressed ecologies and increased temperature conditions [12]. A list of different C3 and C4 plants is presented in Table 2. Some of these C4 weeds are more competitive than others, as higher phenotypic plasticity and huge genetic diversity influence sensitivity towards the changing climatic conditions on the weeds [18].

2.2. Basic Principles of Weeds’ Response to an Increased CO2 and Temperature Climate

The continuous survival and existence of a weed species requires adaptability to change in climatic conditions [19]. Weeds can adopt three different adaptability mechanisms for survival [20,21].
Migration: This mechanism is also called range shift, and it includes the movement/shift of weed species from one place to another, more favourable place. Several anthropogenic activities, such as using crop seeds and organic manures having weed-seed contamination, movement of farm equipment, transport of crop produce having weed seed mixed with it, also contribute to the dispersal of weed seeds [8,22,23].
Acclimation: This mechanism may be called a niche shift, and it refers to the reactions of plant species to the altering conditions through modifications in their phenotype, but these phenotypic modifications are not evolutionary and are non-heritable [24,25].
Adaptation: This mechanism is known as trait shift, and it includes various heritable changes which occur in a plant species in response to their altered environments. This is a type of natural selection, with the development of new characteristics and an optimizing the existing ones [26,27,28].

2.3. Weed Response to Elevated Atmospheric CO2 Concentration

Increasing CO2 concentrations significantly affect weed growth, development, and biology, as well as crop–weed interference. Various studies carried out to compare the effect of escalated CO2 concentrations on C3 and C4 weeds show that increased CO2 levels favor the growth and development of C3 species over the weeds which have C4 pathways [29,30]. The influence of increasing CO2 levels on the biomass of important C3 and C4 weeds is presented in Table 3.
The roots and shoots of different plant species also respond differently to elevated CO2 [31]. For example, both roots and shoots of Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. accumulated more biomass when grown under increased CO2 conditions, but the accumulation in root biomass was higher compared to shoot biomass [32]. Increasing CO2 levels also act as a selection factor for the evolution of plants. In an experiment, Ziska [33] grew two populations of wild oat i.e., old and new populations. Old population seeds were collected in 1966 and 1967 and the new population seeds were collected in 2014. These seeds were grown at 315 ppm and 420 ppm CO2 to represent the CO2 concentrations of the mid-20th century and current CO2 levels. In this study, the new population showed a significant increase in leaf, stem, and total plant weight under increased CO2, whereas there was no significant increase for the old population. Climate-induced selection favors weed populations more than crops. In the same study, cultivated oats were also grown along with the new wild oat population and it was found that under ambient CO2 conditions, cultivated oats had a higher leaf area and above-ground biomass, whereas, under increased CO2, both leaf area and above-ground biomass were higher for the new wild oat population. Relative growth rate, net photosynthesis rate, and biomass accumulation of two C3 weeds, Euphorbia heterophylla L. and Commelina diffusa Burm. f. increased by 80.5%, 16.7%, 143% and 60.5%, 9.5%, 108%, respectively, under increased CO2 conditions as compared to normal CO2 [34]. Under increased CO2 concentrations, similar increases in pod and seed yields, and biomass accumulation of the C3 weed Abutilon theophrasti Medik. were reported [35]. Elevated CO2 has resulted in increases in leaf area by 40%, 67%, and 24%, and biomass by 39%, 83%, and 59% in Chloris gayana Kunth, Eragrostis curvula (Schrad.) Nees, and Paspalum dilatatum Poir, respectively, while there was a decrease in leaf area by 34% and biomass by 5% in Sporobolus indicus (L.) R.Br. [36]. An increase in Chenopodium album L. biomass was observed even up to a 1500 ppm CO2 concentration. However, a further increase in CO2 concentration to 3000 ppm reduces biomass accumulation in C. album but still, the biomass accumulation remained higher than that at 350 ppm [37]. C4 weeds can show an increase in their growth under increased CO2 if they are subjected to water stress [38]. The iomass and height of water-stressed Amaranthus retroflexus L. increased by raising the CO2 concentration [38]. Therefore, the response of weed plants is not solely dependent upon CO2 concentrations, but also depends upon various other climatic factors.

2.4. Weed Response to Increased Temperature

Temperature is a crucial factor in determining the presence or absence of a particular weed species in a particular region [39]. Any alteration in temperature is likely to change the growth, development, and distribution pattern of weed plants. In general, increased temperature favors C4 weeds over C3 weeds, mainly due to high photorespiration in C3 plants under higher temperatures [14]. Higher temperatures accelerate canopy growth and root proliferation in C4 plants [40]. Infestations of various C4 weeds, such as Panicum dichotomiflorum Michx., Digitaria sp., Amaranthus retroflexus, Setaria sp., and Sorghum halepense (L.) Pers. are likely to increase further northward in the northern hemisphere and southward in the southern hemisphere [41,42]. The survival of winter annual weeds will likely increase under mild and wet winter conditions, while warm summers and long growing seasons will favor the growth of thermophilic summer annuals, allowing them to grow well in relatively colder regions [43,44]. Datura stramonium L., a weed that exhibits high growth under high temperatures [45], is expected to become a more aggressive competitor in the face of altered climatic conditions [46].
Lee [47] reported that emergence and flowering of Chenopodium album advanced by 26 and 50 days, respectively by an increase of 4 °C in temperature, while this advancement in the emergence and flowering time was 35 and 31.5 days, respectively for Setaria viridis (L.) P. Beauv. Bir et al. [48] reported an increase in plant height as well as the leaf area of different weed species in paddy fields under elevated temperatures (Figure 1).

2.5. Weed Response to Changed Rainfall Pattern and Drought Spells

Changes in soil moisture availability and rainfall patterns, along with elevated aridity and warmer climates, affects the growth, development, survival, and distribution of not only crop plants but also weeds. Drought conditions may harm C4 weeds to a lesser degree compared to C3 weeds [38], which can be attributed to the high water-use efficiency of C4 weeds. However, in excess moisture conditions, C3 weeds, such as Rhamphicarpa fistulosa (Hochst.) Benth. will be favored, while drought-like situations will favour C4 and parasitic weeds such as Striga hermonthica (Del.) Benth. [49].
Drought conditions enhance competition by Amaranthus. theophrasti and Anoda cristata (L.) Schtdl. with cotton [50], while Mortensen and Coble [51] found that yield loss in soybean because of Xanthium strumarium L. infestation was higher under optimum soil-moisture conditions (~29%) than moisture-stressed conditions (~12%). Similarly, Cirsium. arvense is more competitive to wheat under high rainfall conditions [52]. Some crop plants cannot survive water-stress conditions, but weeds can survive under such conditions. Rice plants were unable to survive under low soil-moisture conditions (25% and 12.5% of field capacity), whereas Amaranthus spinosus L. and Leptochloa chinensis (L.) Nees were not only able to survive, but also produced a sizeable number of branches/tillers at similar soil-moisture levels [53].

2.6. Weed Response to the Interaction of Climatic Variables

Climate is complex, and does not consist of only one or two variables, but rather consists of numerous variables functioning together. As stated earlier, increasing CO2 levels favour the growth and development of C3 species by increasing the net photosynthesis [12], but this CO2 fertilization can be altered by some other climatic variables. For instance, increased temperatures and drought-like conditions favor C4 plants in comparison to C3 plants [12]. It has been predicted that both CO2 concentrations and temperatures are expected to further increase in future years [54]. Despite this prediction, very few experiments have been conducted to study the impact of the simultaneous increase in CO2 and temperature on weed species. Most of the experiments have been conducted either under increased CO2 levels or increased temperatures, but the results of these studies may be different if both these parameters are taken into consideration. Valerio et al. [55] found that increasing CO2 from 400 to 800 ppm reduced the crop losses due to Chenopodium album and Amaranthus retroflexus in tomato from 33% to 32%, but when both CO2 concentration and temperature were increased from 400 to 800 ppm and 21/12 °C to 26/18 °C day/night respectively, then crop losses due to weed infestation increased from 55% to 61%. Lee [47] reported that biomass accumulation and seed production of Chenopodioum album (C3 weed) decreased when the atmospheric temperature was increased by 4 °C, but a simultaneous increase in temperature by 4 °C and CO2 by 1.8 times of the ambient levels increased biomass accumulation and seed production. However, similar treatments applied to Setaria viridis (C4 weed) did not show any individual effect of increased temperature on biomass accumulation and seed production, but a significant interaction effect of both temperature and CO2 elevation was observed (Figure 2). Another experiment conducted in the Philippines evaluated the effect of CO2 concentration and temperature on the competitiveness of Echinochloa glabrescens Munro ex Hook. f. with rice crop. This research indicated that an elevation in CO2 concentration to 594 ppm provided a competitive edge to rice but when temperature was increased from 27/21 °C (day/night) to 37/29 °C (day/night), Echinochloa glabrescens (C4 weed) was more competitive to rice [56].
Relatively few studies have been conducted on the interaction of moisture and CO2. Normally increased CO2 concentration favours C3 weeds but under water-stressed conditions elevated CO2 levels may also favor the growth of C4 weeds [38]. Improvements in the water-use efficiency of different C3 and C4 weeds by doubling the CO2 concentration from 300 to 600 ppm were reported by Carlson and Bazzaz [57]. By doubling CO2 concentration from 300 to 600 ppm, the water-use efficiency of crops such as sunflower, soybean, and maize increased by 55%, 48%, and 54%, respectively, while the water-use efficiency of weed species such as Ambrosia artemisiifolia L., A. theophrasti, D. stramonium and A. retroflexus increased by 128%, 87%, 84%, and 76%, respectively.
Furthermore, growth of Digitaria ciliaris (Retz.) Koeler, Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P.Beauv., and Eleusine indica (L.) Gaertn. (C4 weeds), as well as soybean (C3 crop) is favored by the rising CO2 concentrations because of improvements in their water-use efficiency under drought [58]. The IPCC [59] predicts changes in temperature and available moisture due to changing climates, which will affect the germination and temporal and spatial emergence of weed seeds and seedlings [60]. Weed-seed dormancy, one of the crucial factors governing the emergence of weed species, is believed to be broken faster due to the higher availability of moisture and high temperature conditions [61,62]. Likewise, nutrient supply also influences crop–weed interference. Zhu et al. [63] found that under optimum nitrogen level increasing the CO2 concentration by 200 ppm proportionately increased rice biomass as compared with E. crus-galli, while under elevated CO2 level and sub-optimum nitrogen supply, the competitive ability of rice decreased.

3. Changing Climate and Efficacy of Herbicides

Among various practices to manage weeds e.g., mechanical, cultural, chemical, and biological methods—chemical weed control is a widely adopted method owing to its economic advantages and ease of application [13]. However, in the past few decades, the concept of integrated weed management has become a popular method to reduce the dependency on herbicides due to the development of herbicide-resistant weeds [64] and various other challenges created by herbicide use. Given the role of herbicides in the management of weeds and reducing crop-yield losses, it is very important to evaluate how the efficacy of herbicides will be affected by changing climatic conditions, including CO2 concentration, temperature, wind, relative humidity, moisture availability, and light [14].

3.1. Increased CO2 Levels and Herbicide Efficacy

The efficacy of herbicides may change due to rising CO2 levels, mainly because of changes in physiological processes. Increased CO2 levels can decrease stomatal conductance by up to 50% in some plant species [65]. The activity of foliage-applied herbicides might be altered by decreased stomatal conductance [66]. Furthermore, increased leaf thickness and the reduced count of open stomata due to high levels of CO2 may reduce the efficacy of the post-emergence herbicides directly absorbed by the plants. For example, foliar uptake of glyphosate is reduced in high CO2 environments because of thickened leaves, reduced stomatal conductance, and the number of stomatal openings, thereby reducing its efficacy [67,68,69]. In addition, the decreased requirement of aromatic amino acids (tryptophan, phenylalanine, and tyrosine) owing to the low-protein content in plants under increased CO2 conditions [70,71] further reduces the effectiveness of glyphosate because glyphosate inhibits the activity of 5-EPSPS enzyme, which catalyzes the synthesis reaction of these aromatic amino acids [72].
Various studies have highlighted that the effects of altered CO2 on the amino acid inhibitor mode of action herbicides is weed species-specific. The application of glyphosate on weeds grown under elevated CO2 conditions resulted in a higher survival rate of C. gayana, E. curvula, and P. dilatatum as compared to the plants grown under normal CO2 conditions, while there was no effect of increased CO2 on the survival of Sporobolus indicus (L.) R. Br. [36]. Ziska et al. [72] reported that the application of glyphosate under increased CO2 concentrations did not affect the growth of C. album, whereas growth of A. retroflexus was reduced under both normal and elevated CO2 conditions. The efficacy of imazamethabenz in controlling Avena fatua L. increased by 15.7% by doubling the normal CO2 concentration, while metsulfuron-methyl efficacy on A. retroflexus declined by 4.6%, and there was no change in imazethapyr efficacy on Stellaria media (L.) Vill. [73]. Increased CO2 levels can provide higher carbon resources, resulting in more raw materials for fatty acid synthesis, which reduces the efficacy of fatty-acid-synthesis-inhibitor herbicides [74]. Higher CO2 levels stimulate the growth of weeds, reducing the time a weed plant spends in the seedling stage during which weeds are highly susceptible to herbicidal action, thereby reducing the time window for herbicide application [7]. Rising CO2 concentrations stimulate the growth of roots more than the shoots, and this has serious implications in the control of weed plants which propagate through underground vegetative parts, such as C. arvense, in which the increased growth of underground parts has resulted in the decreased efficiency of glyphosate [32]. Herbicide-resistant and susceptible weeds respond differently to herbicides under increased CO2 concentrations, as indicated by the study conducted by Refatti et al. [74], in which it was found that under normal CO2 conditions, both multiple resistant and susceptible genotypes of Echinochloa colona (L.) Link were killed equally after the application of cyhalofop-butyl, whereas under elevated CO2 conditions, cyhalofop-butyl was able to kill almost all plants of the susceptible genotype, while the control of the multiple-resistance genotype decreased from nearly 100% to less than 80%.

3.2. Temperature and Herbicide Efficacy

The efficacy of herbicides can be influenced directly and indirectly by temperature. Temperature controls numerous physiological processes in plants, such as respiration, photosynthesis, protoplasmic streaming, and phloem translocation [14]. Furthermore, temperature also regulates the growth and development of plants. Therefore, the translocation and penetration of herbicides inside the plants are indirectly affected by alterations in these processes. The diffusion of herbicides, physicochemical characteristics of spray solutions, and viscosity of cuticular waxes can be directly affected by temperature, consequently affecting herbicide efficacy [75]. Elevated temperatures can enhance the absorption and translocation of herbicides, which can increase the efficacy of herbicides. However, under higher temperatures, the metabolism of herbicides is also rapid, which can reduce the performance of herbicides on target weed species [76]. The increased absorption and translocation of herbicides under higher temperatures can cause phytotoxic effects on crop plants. For example, higher 14C-glyphosate translocation to meristematic tissues in glyphosate-resistant soybean at 35 °C as compared to 15 °C, causes glyphosate injury at elevated temperatures [77]. Godar et al. [78] reported a reduction in the effectiveness of mesotrione on Amaranthus palmeri S. Watson at higher temperature (40/30 °C day/night), compared to the optimum temperature of 32.5/22.5 °C day/night and lower temperatures of 25/15 °C day/night. Additionally, Godar et al. [78] found an increase in median effective dose (ED50) value (g a.i. ha−1) of mesotrione for plant height reduction, visual injury, chlorophyll reduction, photochemical efficiency of PSII (FV/FM) and mortality (Figure 3).
Increasing temperatures enhance the metabolism of herbicides, which decreases the efficacy of herbicides and increases the risk of the development of non-target site herbicide resistance in weed species [79]. The survival of four grass weeds (Avena sterilis L., Alopecurus myosuroides Huds., Lolium rigidum Gaudin and S. viridis) increased from 0% to 80% by an increase in temperature from 16/10 °C day/night to 34/28 °C day/night [79]. Under normal temperatures (23/35 °C, night/day), the effectiveness of cyhalofop-butyl on susceptible genotypes was numerically higher (injury nearly 90%) than multiple-resistant genotypes (injury nearly 80%) of E. colona, while under higher temperatures (26/38 °C, night/day), the injury percentage remained statistically similar to the susceptible genotype but the injury percentage in the multiple-resistant genotype decreased to nearly 50% [74]. This increase in resistance due to higher temperatures can be attributed to the upregulation of the genes involved in the abatement of abiotic stress and detoxification of herbicides [80,81]. In multiple-resistant genotypes, a hypersensitive response is also observed which results in rapid killing of the herbicide-exposed cells and quick recovery when combined with other integral coping mechanisms [80]. In contrast, a decrease in resistance against glyphosate due to its enhanced translocation was observed in A. artemisiifolia and Ambrosia trifida L. at higher temperatures [82]. Additionally, higher temperatures decreased ED50 (herbicide dose for 50% control) and GR50 (herbicide dose for 50% growth reduction) values for 2,4-D and glyphosate (Table 4) against A. artemisiifolia and A. trifida [82]. Studies have reported that in general, herbicide droplets dry rapidly under higher temperatures, which results in the decreased uptake of herbicides [83]. The volatility of various herbicides, such as synthetic auxins, is affected by temperature, which causes injury to different non-target broadleaf plants through vapor drift [84]. Behrens and Lueschen [85] found that visual injury in soybean due to the drift of dicamba increased from 0% to 40% when the temperature increased from 15 °C to 30 °C.
Soil temperature is one of the important climatic factors which affect the degradation of herbicides. As the soil temperature increases, the rate of herbicide degradation also increases due to enhanced microbial and chemical breakdown [86,87]. The half-life of S-metolachlor decreased from 64.8 to 38.9, 26.3, and 23.7 days when the soil temperature increased from 10 to 15, 25, and 35 °C, respectively, while keeping the soil moisture constant [87]. Likewise, the half-life of isoxaflutole decreased from 13.9 to 3.3, 1.3, and 0.8 days when the soil temperature increased from 5 to 15, 25, and 35 °C, respectively [88].
Along with temperature, soil type also affects volatilization loss of triallate herbicide, as indicated in a study by Atienza et al. [89], which demonstrated that increasing the temperature from 5 °C to 25 °C increased the losses of triallate herbicide by 14% to 60% in sandy soils and by 7% to 41% in loamy soils. The percentage of initial atrazine concentrations present after 60 days of application in clay soil was 73% and 80% at 30/16 °C and 16/8 °C (day/night), respectively, whereas in loamy sand the concentration was 45% and 70% at 30/16 °C and 16/8 °C (day/night), respectively [90].

3.3. Precipitation, Soil Moisture, and Herbicide Efficacy

The changing climate will affect the temporal and spatial distribution of rainfall, and the frequency of extreme events, such as drought and floods, is likely to increase [2]. Rainfall affects the uptake of herbicide by washing the herbicide droplets from the leaf surface or by reducing the concentration of herbicides due to dilution [91]. Rainfall controls the soil moisture, which in turn affects herbicide efficacy. The adsorption of herbicides is more pronounced in dry soil [92], while heavy rainfall increases the leaching of herbicides [93]. Herbicide efficacy is adversely affected by water-stressed conditions because of reduced translocation and lower transpiration rates [94,95]. Zhou et al. [96] found that the efficiency of glyphosate in controlling A. theophrasti reduced under stress.Even the addition of some adjuvants was unable to improve the efficacy of glyphosate under stress conditions (Table 5).
Similarly, Pereira [97] reported a decreased in efficacy of Acetyl CoA Carboxylase (ACCase) inhibitors in water-stressed Urochloa plantaginea (Link) R.D.Webster. The efficacy of preemergence-applied pethoxamid also decreased under low soil-moisture conditions [98]. Under water-stressed conditions, the uptake of soil-applied herbicides through roots was reduced, because of the reduced solubility and movement of herbicide in the soil [99,100]. For the efficient translocation of systemic herbicides, weed plants must be actively growing, therefore water-stressed weed plants are difficult to control with post-emergence herbicides [101]. Soil moisture also influences leaf orientation, where plants leaves are tilted downwards under reduced soil moisture conditions, thereby reducing the uptake of foliar-applied herbicides [96]. Moreover, soil moisture also affects the degradation of soil-applied herbicides by regulating chemical and biological activities [86,87].

3.4. Interaction of Climatic Variables and Herbicide Efficacy

Extensive research has been carried out to evaluate the individual effect of various climatic variables on the efficacy of different herbicides, but only a few studies have been conducted that focused on the combined influence of various climatic variables. Elevated temperatures and CO2 levels can modify leaf characteristics, such as increases in leaf thickness or alter the viscosity of cuticular waxes, which subsequently reduces the absorption of herbicides [102]. Increased temperatures and CO2 levels can intensify the development of non-target site weed resistance [74]. Moreover, high temperatures and CO2 concentrations affect photosynthesis activity, thereby impacting photosynthesis-interfering herbicides [14]. Under increased temperatures and CO2 levels, the translocation of glyphosate into shoot apical meristems and younger leaves was increased, which resulted in the quick death of affected leaves and decreased translocation to other plant tissues [103]. Additionally, Matzrafi et al. [103] found the percentage survival of C. album and Conyza canadensis (L.) Cronq. following glyphosate application was 8%, 34%, and 61%, and 19%, 41%, and 64% under increased CO2 levels and temperatures, respectively, as compared to normal temperatures and CO2 levels (3% and 12%, respectively). In contrast, elevated atmospheric temperatures combined with increased relative humidity is favorable for efficient weed control by amino acid-inhibitor herbicides [104].

4. Conclusions

Climate change can affect weed dynamics, weed biology, and their management by influencing various physiological and biochemical processes. Weed plants are responding under the changing climate, which has serious consequences in their management, specifically through herbicides. The altered moisture content with higher temperature and CO2 concentrations affects weed growth and impacts the effectiveness of herbicides in controlling weeds. Most studies reported a decrease in herbicide efficacy under changed climatic factors, while a few studies also reported an increase in herbicidal efficacy. In addition, most of the studies were done by altering a single climatic variable, but climate is a complex phenomenon; therefore, there is a need to study the impact of the complex interactions of various climatic factors and assess their long-term effects on agricultural systems. Additionally, it is essential to further investigate the effectiveness of various herbicides against different weed-species groups under variable climatic conditions. Moreover, future weed management research will need to consider the evolution of weed plants in addition to the complexities of environmental factors. Furthermore, weed species-specific management protocols for diverse soil, tillage, management, and farm typologies will need to be investigated in cropping system modes to develop pragmatic solutions for changing scenarios.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.K. and A.K.; methodology, V.K.; software, A.K.; validation, A.J.P., V.S. and R.S.B.; formal analysis, A.K.; investigation, A.J.P.; resources, S.D.B.; data curation, V.S.; writing—original draft preparation, V.K.; writing—review and editing, A.K.; visualization, R.S.B.; supervision, V.S.; project administration, A.J.P.; funding acquisition, A.J.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this paper are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. IPCC. Working Group I Contribution to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC Fifth) Assessment Report Climate Change. The Physical Science Basis, Summary for Policymakers. 2013. Available online: www.climatechange2013.org/images/uploads/WGIAR5SPM_Approved27Sep2013.pdf (accessed on 20 October 2021).
  2. Coumou, D.; Rahmstorf, S. A decade of weather extremes. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2012, 2, 491–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Gillett, N.P.; Arora, V.K.; Zickfeld, K. Ongoing climate change following a complete cessation of carbon dioxide emissions. Nat. Geosci. 2011, 4, 83–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Robinson, T.M.; Gross, K.L. The impact of altered precipitation variability on annual weed species. Am. J. Bot. 2010, 97, 1625–1629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Tubiello, F.N.; Soussana, J.F.; Howden, S.M. Crop and pasture response to climate change. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 19686–19690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Chauhan, B.S.; Prabhjyot-Kaur; Mahajan, G.; Randhawa, R.K.; Singh, H.; Kang, M.S. Global Warming and Its Possible Impact on Agriculture in India. Adv. Agron. 2014, 123, 65–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Ziska, L.H.; Blumenthal, D.M.; Franks, S.J. Understanding the nexus of rising CO2, climate change, and evolution in weed biology. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 2019, 12, 79–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Das, T.K. Weed Science: Basics and Applications; Jain Brothers: New Delhi, India, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  9. Oerke, E.C. Crop losses to pests. J. Agric. Sci. 2006, 144, 31–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Rana, K.S.; Choudhary, A.K.; Sepat, S. Advances in Field Crop Production; Post Graduate School, IARI: New Delhi, India, 2014; p. 475. [Google Scholar]
  11. Ziska, L.H. Evaluation of yield loss in field sorghum from a C3 and C4 weed with increasing CO2. Weed Sci. 2003, 51, 14–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Singh, R.P.; Singh, R.K.; Singh, M.K. Impact of climate and carbon dioxide change on weeds and their management—A Review. Indian J. Weed Sci. 2011, 43, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  13. Gianessi, L.P. The increasing importance of herbicides in worldwide crop production. Pest Manag. Sci. 2013, 69, 1099–1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Varanasi, A.; Prasad, P.V.V.; Jugulam, M. Impact of climate change factors on weeds and herbicide efficacy. Adv. Agron. 2016, 135, 107–146. [Google Scholar]
  15. Jordan, D.B.; Ogren, W.L. The CO2/O2 specificity of ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase. Planta 1984, 161, 308–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Leegood, R.C. C4 photosynthesis: Principles of CO2 concentration and prospects for its introduction into C3 plants. J. Exp. Bot. 2002, 53, 581–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Hatch, M.D. C4 photosynthesis: A unique elend of modified biochemistry, anatomy and ultrastructure. Biochim. Biophys. Acta (BBA) Rev. Bioenerg. 1987, 895, 81–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Fernando, N.; Manalil, S.; Florentine, S.K.; Chauhan, B.S.; Seneweera, S. Glyphosate Resistance of C3 and C4 Weeds under Rising Atmospheric CO2. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Woodward, F.I.; Cramer, W. Plant functional types and climatic change: Introduction. J. Veg. Sci. 1996, 7, 306–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Lavorel, S.; Garnier, E. Predicting changes in community composition and ecosystem functioning from plant traits: Revisiting the Holy Grail. Funct. Ecol. 2002, 16, 545–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Pautasso, M.; Dehnen-Schmutz, K.; Holdenrieder, O. Plant health and global change—Some implications for landscape management. Biol. Rev. 2010, 85, 729–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Kubisch, A.; Degen, T.; Hovestadt, T.; Poethke, H.J. Predicting range shifts under global change: The balance between local adaptation and dispersal. Ecography 2013, 36, 873–882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Kumar, V.; Bana, R.S.; Singh, T.; Kumar, H.; Louhar, G. Ecological weed management approaches for wheat under rice–wheat cropping system. Environ. Sustain. 2021, 4, 51–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Pearman, P.B.; Guisan, A.; Broennimann, O.; Randin, C.F. Niche dynamics in space and time. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2008, 23, 149–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Grime, J.P.; Hodgson, J.G. Botanical contributions to contemporary ecological theory. New Phytol. 1987, 106, 283–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Carroll, S.P.; Hendry, A.P.; Reznick, D.N.; Fox, C.W. Evolution on ecological time-scales. Funct. Ecol. 2007, 21, 387–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Harlan, J.R.; de Wet, J.M.J. Some thoughts about weeds. Econ. Bot. 1965, 19, 16–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Tungate, K.D.; Israel, D.W.; Watson, D.M.; Rufty, T.W. Potential changes in weed competitiveness in an agroecological system with elevated temperatures. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2007, 60, 42–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Patterson, D.T. Weeds in a Changing Climate. Weed Sci. 1995, 43, 685–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Navie, S.C.; Panetta, F.D.; McFadyen, R.E.; Adkins, S.W. The effect of CO2 enrichment on the growth of a C3 weed (Parthenium hysterophorus L.) and its competitive interaction with a C4 grass (Cenchrus ciliaris L.). Plant Protect. Q. 2005, 20, 61–66. [Google Scholar]
  31. Madhu, M.; Hatfield, J.L. Dynamics of Plant Root Growth under Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide; USDA-ARS/UNL Faculty: Lincoln, NE, USA, 2013; p. 1352. [Google Scholar]
  32. Ziska, L.H.; Faulkner, S.; Lydon, J. Changes in biomass and root: Shoot ratio of field grown Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), a noxious, invasive weed, with elevated CO2: Implications for control with glyphosate. Weed Sci. 2004, 52, 584–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ziska, L.H. Could recent increases in atmospheric CO2 have acted as a selection factor in Avena fatua populations? A case study of cultivated and wild oat competition. Weed Res. 2017, 57, 399–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Awasthi, J.P.; Paraste, K.S.; Rathore, M.; Varun, M.; Jaggi, D.; Kumar, B. Effect of elevated CO2 on Vigna radiata and two weed species: Yield, physiology and crop–weed interaction. Crop. Pasture Sci. 2018, 69, 617–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Ziska, L.H. Observed changes in soyabean growth and seed yield from Abutilon theophrasti competition as a function of carbon dioxide concentration. Weed Res. 2013, 53, 140–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Manea, A.; Leishman, M.R.; Downey, P.O. Exotic C4 Grasses Have Increased Tolerance to Glyphosate under Elevated Carbon Dioxide. Weed Sci. 2011, 59, 28–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Pilipavicius, V. Influence of Climate Change on Weed Vegetation. In Global Warming-Causes, Impacts and Remedies; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  38. Valerio, M.; Tomecek, M.; Lovelli, S.; Ziska, L.H. Quantifying the effect of drought on carbon dioxide-induced changes in competition between a C3 crop (tomato) and a C4 weed (Amaranthus retroflexus). Weed Res. 2011, 51, 591–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Patterson, D.T.; Westbrook, J.K.; Joyce, R.J.C.; Lingren, P.D.; Rogasik, J. Weeds, insects and diseases. Clim. Change 1999, 43, 711–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Morgan, J.A.; LeCain, D.R.; Mosier, A.R.; Milchunas, D.G. Elevated CO2 enhances water relations and productivity and affects gas exchange in C3 and C4 grasses of the Colorado shortgrass steppe. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2001, 7, 451–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Clements, D.R.; Ditommaso, A. Climate change and weed adaptation: Can evolution of invasive plants lead to greater range expansion than forecasted? Weed Res. 2011, 51, 227–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Weber, E.; Gut, D. A survey of weeds that are increasingly spreading in Europe. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2005, 25, 109–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Hanzlik, K.; Gerowitt, B. Occurrence and distribution of important weed species in German winter oilseed rape fields. J. Plant Dis. Protect. 2012, 119, 107–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Walck, J.L.; Hidayati, S.N.; Dixon, K.W.; Thompson, K.; Poschlod, P. Climate change and plant regeneration from seed. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2011, 17, 2145–2161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Cavero, J.; Zaragoza, C.; Suso, M.L.; Pardo, A. Competition between maize and Datura stramonium in an irrigated field under semi-arid conditions. Weed Res. 1999, 39, 225–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Chadha, A.; Florentine, S.; Javaid, M.; Welgama, A.; Turville, C. Influence of elements of climate change on the growth and fecundity of Datura stramonium. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 35859–35869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Lee, J.S. Combined effect of elevated CO2 and temperature on the growth and phenology of two annual C3 and C4 weedy species. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2011, 140, 484–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Bir, M.S.H.; Hien, L.T.; Won Ok, J.; Aung, B.B.; Ruziev, F.; Umurzokov, M.; Jia, W.; Khaitov, B.; Park, K.W. Growth response of weed species in a paddy field under elevated temperatures. Weed Turf Sci. 2018, 7, 321–329. [Google Scholar]
  49. Rodenburg, J.; Riches, C.R.; Kayeke, J.M. Addressing current and future problems of parasitic weeds in rice. Crop. Protect. 2010, 29, 210–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Patterson, D.T.; Highsmith, M.T.; Flint, E.P. Effects of temperature and CO2 concentration on the growth of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum), spurred anoda (Anoda cristata), and velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci. 1988, 36, 751–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Mortensen, D.A.; Coble, H.D. The Influence of Soil Water Content on Common Cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) Interference in Soybeans (Glycine max). Weed Sci. 1989, 37, 76–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Donald, W.W.; Khan, M. Yield Loss Assessment for Spring Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Infested with Canada Thistle (Cirsium arvense). Weed Sci. 1992, 40, 590–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Chauhan, B.S.; Abugho, S.B. Effect of Water Stress on the Growth and Development of Amaranthus spinosus, Leptochloa chinensis, and Rice. Am. J. Plant Sci. 2013, 4, 989–998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Stocker, T.F.; Qin, D.; Plattner, G.K.; Tignor, M.; Allen, S.K.; Boschung, J.; Nauels, A.; Xia, Y.; Bex, V.; Midgley, P.M. (Eds.) Climate Change: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; IPCC Summary for Policymakers; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  55. Valerio, M.; Tomecek, M.; Lovelli, S.; Ziska, L. Assessing the impact of increasing carbon dioxide and temperature on crop-weed interactions for tomato and a C3 and C4 weed species. Eur. J. Agron. 2013, 50, 60–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Alberto, A.M.; Ziska, L.H.; Cervancia, C.R.; Manalo, P.A. The influence of increasing carbon dioxide and temperature on competitive interactions between a C4 crop, rice (Oryza sativa), and a C3 weed (Echinochloa glabrescens). Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 1996, 23, 793–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Carlson, R.W.; Bazzaz, F.A. The effects of elevated CO2 concentrations on growth, photosynthesis, transpiration and water use efficiency of plants. In Environmental and Climatic Impact of Coal Utilization; Singh, J.J., Deepak, A., Eds.; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1980; pp. 610–622. [Google Scholar]
  58. Patterson, D.T. Responses of soybean (Glycine max) and three C4 grass weeds to CO2 enrichment during drought. Weed Sci. 1986, 34, 203–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. IPCC. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K.B., Tignor, M., Miller, H.L., Eds.; Summary for Policymakers; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  60. Travlos, I.; Gazoulis, I.; Kanatas, P.; Tsekoura, A.; Zannopoulos, S.; Papastylianou, P. Key Factors Affecting Weed Seeds’ Germination, Weed Emergence, and Their Possible Role for the Efficacy of False Seedbed Technique as Weed Management Practice. Front. Agron. 2020, 2, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Jaganathan, G.K.; Liu, B. Role of seed sowing time and microclimate on germination and seedling establishment of Dodonaea viscosa (Sapindaceae) in a seasonal dry tropical environment—An insight into restoration efforts. Botany 2015, 93, 23–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Ooi, M.K.J.; Denham, A.J.; Santana, V.M.; Auld, T.D. Temperature thresholds of physically dormant seeds and plant functional response to fire: Variation among species and relative impact of climate change. Ecol. Evol. 2014, 4, 656–671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Zhu, C.; Zeng, Q.; Ziska, L.H.; Zhu, J.; Xie, Z.; Liu, G. Effect of nitrogen supply on carbon dioxide induced changes in competition between rice and barnyard grass (Echinochloa crusgalli). Weed Sci. 2008, 56, 66–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Heap, I.M. The International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds. 2021. Available online: http://www.weedscience.org/ (accessed on 15 August 2021).
  65. Bunce, J.A. Growth, survival, competition, and canopy carbon dioxide and water vapor exchange of first year alfalfa at an elevated CO2 concentration. Photosynthetica 1993, 29, 557–565. [Google Scholar]
  66. Alizade, S.; Keshtkar, E.; Mokhtassi-Bidgoli, A.; Sasanfar, H.; Streibig, J.C. Effect of drought stress on herbicide perfor-mance and photosynthetic activity of Avena sterilis subsp. ludoviciana (winter wild oat) and Hordeum spontaneum (wild barley). Weed Res. 2021, 61, 288–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Ainsworth, E.A.; Long, S.P. What have we learned from 15 years of free-air CO2 enrichment (FACE)? A meta-analytic review of the responses of photosynthesis, canopy properties and plant production to rising CO2. New Phytol. 2005, 165, 351–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Nowak, R.S.; Ellsworth, D.S.; Smith, S.D. Functional responses of plants to elevated atmospheric CO2: Do photosynthetic and productivity data from FACE experiments support early predictions? New Phytol. 2004, 162, 253–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Ziska, L.H.; Teasdale, J.R. Sustained growth and increased tolerance to glyphosate observed in a C3 perennial weed, quackgrass (Elytrigia repens), grown at elevated carbon dioxide. Funct. Plant Biol. 2000, 27, 159–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Loladze, I. Hidden shift of the ionome of plants exposed to elevated CO2 depletes minerals at the base of human nutrition. eLife 2014, 3, e02245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Taub, D.R.; Miller, B.; Allen, H. Effects of elevated CO2 on the protein concentration of food crops: A meta-analysis. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2008, 14, 565–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Ziska, L.H.; Teasdale, J.R.; Bunce, J.A. Future atmospheric carbon dioxide may increase tolerance to glyphosate. Weed Sci. 1999, 47, 608–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Archambault, D.J.; Li, X.; Robinson, D.; Donovan, J.T.O.; Klein, K.K. The Effects of Elevated CO2 and Temperature on Herbicide Efficacy and Weed/Crop Competition. Available online: https://www.parc.ca/project/the-effects-of-elevated-co2-and-temperature-on-herbicide-efficacy-and-weed-crop-competition/ (accessed on 16 December 2022).
  74. Refatti, J.P.; de Avila, L.A.; Camargo, E.R.; Ziska, L.H.; Oliveira, C.; Salas-Perez, R.; Rouse, C.E.; Roma-Burgos, N. High CO2 and Temperature Increase Resistance to Cyhalofop-Butyl in Multiple-Resistant Echinochloa colona. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  75. Price, C.E. The effect of environment on foliage uptake and translocation of herbicides. In Aspects of Applied Biology 4: Influence of Environmental Factors on Herbicide Performance and Crop and Weed Biology; Biologists, A.O.A., Ed.; The Association of Applied Biologists: Warwick, UK, 1983; pp. 157–169. [Google Scholar]
  76. Johnson, B.C.; Young, B.G. Influence of temperature and relative humidity on the foliar activity of mesotrione. Weed Sci. 2002, 50, 157–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Pline, W.A.; Wu, J.; Hatzios, K.K. Effects of Temperature and Chemical Additives on the Response of Transgenic Herbicide-Resistant Soybeans to Glufosinate and Glyphosate Applications. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 1999, 65, 119–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Godar, A.S.; Varanasi, V.K.; Nakka, S.; Vara Prasad, P.V.; Thompson, C.R.; Mithila, J. Physiological and Molecular Mechanisms of Differential Sensitivity of Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) to Mesotrione at Varying Growth Temperatures. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0126731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Matzrafi, M.; Seiwert, B.; Reemtsma, T.; Rubin, B.; Peleg, Z. Climate change increases the risk of herbicide-resistant weeds due to enhanced detoxification. Planta 2016, 244, 1217–1227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Burgos, N.R.; Rouse, C.E.; Saski, C.A. Concerted enrichment of gene networks in multiple resistant Echinochloa colona. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting; Weed Science Society of America: Arlington, VA, USA, 2018; p. 387. [Google Scholar]
  81. Rouse, C.E.; Burgos, N.R.; Saski, C.A. Co-evolution of abiotic stress adaptation and quinclorac resistance in Echinochloa colona. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting; Weed Science Society of America: Arlington, VA, USA, 2018; p. 386. [Google Scholar]
  82. Ganie, Z.A.; Jugulam, M.; Jhala, A.J. Temperature influences efficacy, absorption, and translocation of 2,4-D or glyphosate in glyphosate-resistant and glyphosate-susceptible common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) and giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida). Weed Sci. 2017, 65, 588–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Devine, M.D.; Duke, S.O.; Fedtke, C. Foliar absorption of herbicides. In Physiology of Herbicide Action; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1993; pp. 29–52. [Google Scholar]
  84. Strachan, S.D.; Casini, M.S.; Heldreth, K.M.; Scocas, J.A.; Nissen, S.J.; Bukun, B.; Lindenmayer, R.B.; Shaner, D.L.; Westra, P.; Brunk, G. Vapor Movement of Synthetic Auxin Herbicides: Aminocyclopyrachlor, Aminocyclopyrachlor-Methyl Ester, Dicamba, and Aminopyralid. Weed Sci. 2010, 58, 103–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Behrens, R.; Lueschen, W.E. Dicamba volatility. Weed Sci. 1979, 27, 486–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Dong, X.; Sun, H. Effect of temperature and moisture on degradation of herbicide atrazine in agricultural soil. Int. J. Environ. Agric. Res. 2016, 2, 150–157. [Google Scholar]
  87. Long, Y.H.; Li, R.T.; Wu, X.M. Degradation of S-metolachlor in soil as affected by environmental factors. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2014, 14, 189–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Taylor-Lovell, S.; Sims, G.K.; Wax, L.M. Effects of Moisture, Temperature, and Biological Activity on the Degradation of Isoxaflutole in Soil. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50, 5626–5633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Atienza, J.; Tabernero, M.T.; Álvarez-Benedí, J.; Sanz, M. Volatilisation of triallate as affected by soil texture and air velocity. Chemosphere 2001, 42, 257–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Reinhardt, C.F.; Nel, P.C. The influence of soil type, soil water content and temperature on atrazine persistence. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil 1993, 10, 45–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Jugulam, M.; Varanasi, A.K.; Varanasi, V.K.; Vara Prasad, P.V. Climate change influence on herbicide efficacy and weed management. In Food Security and Climate Change; Yadav, S.S., Redden, R.J., Hatfield, J.L., Ebert, A.W., Hunter, D., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons Ltd.: Chichester, UK, 2019; Chapter 18; pp. 433–448. [Google Scholar]
  92. Blackshaw, R.E.; Moyer, J.R.; Kozub, G.C. Efficacy of downy brome herbicides as influenced by soil properties. Can. J. Plant Sci. 1994, 74, 177–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Zaller, J.G.; Weber, M.; Maderthaner, M.; Gruber, E.; Takács, E.; Mörtl, M.; Klátyik, S.; Győri, J.; Römbke, J.; Leisch, F.; et al. Effects of glyphosate-based herbicides and their active ingredients on earthworms, water infiltration and glyphosate leaching are influenced by soil properties. Environ. Sci. Eur. 2021, 33, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Keikotlhaile, B.M. Influence of the Processing Factors on Pesticide Residues in Fruits and Vegetables and Its Application in Consumer Risk Assessment. Ph.D. Thesis, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  95. Zanatta, J.F.; Procópio, S.O.; Manica, R.; Pauletto, E.A.; Cargnelutti Filho, A.; Vargas, L.; Sganzerla, D.C.; Rosenthal, M.D.A.; Pinto, J.J.O. Teores de água no solo e eficácia do herbicida fomesafen no controle de Amaranthus hybridus. Planta Daninha 2008, 26, 143–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  96. Zhou, J.; Tao, B.; Messersmith, C.G.; Nalewaja, J.D. Glyphosate Efficacy on Velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti) is Affected by Stress. Weed Sci. 2007, 55, 240–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Pereira, M.R.R. Efeito de herbicidas sobre plantas de Brachiaria plantaginea submetidas a estresse hídrico. Planta Daninha 2010, 28, 1047–1058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. Jursík, M.; Kočárek, M.; Hamouzová, K.; Soukup, J.; Venclova, V. Effect of precipitation on the dissipation, efficacy and selectivity of three chloroacetamide herbicides in sunflower. Plant Soil Environ. 2013, 59, 175–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  99. Dao, T.H.; Lavy, T.L. Extraction of Soil Solution Using a Simple Centrifugation Method for Pesticide Adsorption-Desorption Studies. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1978, 42, 375–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Moyer, J.R. Effects of soil moisture on the efficacy and selectivity of soil-applied herbicides. Weed Sci. 1987, 3, 19–34. [Google Scholar]
  101. Amare, T. Review on Impact of Climate Change on Weed and Their Management. Am. J. Biol. Environ. Stat. 2016, 2, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  102. Ziska, L.H.; Bunce, J.A. Plant responses to rising carbon dioxide. In Plant Growth and Climate Change; Morison, J.I.L., Morecroft, M.D., Eds.; Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, UK, 2006; pp. 17–47. [Google Scholar]
  103. Matzrafi, M.; Brunharo, C.; Tehranchian, P.; Hanson, B.D.; Jasieniuk, M. Increased temperatures and elevated CO2 levels reduce the sensitivity of Conyza canadensis and Chenopodium album to glyphosate. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 2228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  104. Stopps, G.J.; Nurse, R.E.; Sikkema, P.H. The effect of time of day on the activity of post-emergence soybean herbicides. Weed Technol. 2013, 27, 690–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agronomy 13 00559 g001 550
Figure 1. Plant height (cm) of different weeds in a paddy field under increased temperatures (Source: Modified from Bir et al. [48]). Different lower cases indicate significant differences among treatments.
Figure 1. Plant height (cm) of different weeds in a paddy field under increased temperatures (Source: Modified from Bir et al. [48]). Different lower cases indicate significant differences among treatments.
Agronomy 13 00559 g001
Agronomy 13 00559 g002 550
Figure 2. Effect of climatic factors on biomass (kg/m2) and seed yield (kg/m2) of Chenopodium album (C3) and Setaria virdis (C4) (Source: Modified from Lee [47]).
Figure 2. Effect of climatic factors on biomass (kg/m2) and seed yield (kg/m2) of Chenopodium album (C3) and Setaria virdis (C4) (Source: Modified from Lee [47]).
Agronomy 13 00559 g002
Agronomy 13 00559 g003 550
Figure 3. ED50 value (g a.i. ha−1) of mesotrione for different parameters under varying temperatures (Source: Modified from Godar et al. [78]).
Figure 3. ED50 value (g a.i. ha−1) of mesotrione for different parameters under varying temperatures (Source: Modified from Godar et al. [78]).
Agronomy 13 00559 g003
Table
Table 1. Major differences between C3 and C4 plants.
Table 1. Major differences between C3 and C4 plants.
CharacteristicsC3 PlantsC4 Plants
CO2 acceptorRibulose-1,5-bisphosaphatePhosphoenolpyruvate
EnzymeRubiscoPEP carboxylase
Extent of photorespirationHighNegligible
Saturation light intensity1000–4000 foot candleHardly reaches saturation even in full sunlight
CO2 compensation point50–150 ppm0–10 ppm
Operating CO2 fixation pathwayOnly C3 pathwayBoth C3 and C4 pathway
Optimum temperature for growth10–25 °C30–45 °C
Preferred climatic conditionDominant in temperate regionsDominant in tropical and sub-tropical areas
AbundanceFound in both angiosperms and gymnospermsFound only in angiosperms
Source: Das [8].
Table
Table 2. Major C3 and C4 weeds compete with crops.
Table 2. Major C3 and C4 weeds compete with crops.
C3 Weed SpeciesC4 Weed Species
Avena fatuaAmaranthus viridis
Abuliton theophrastiBoerhavia diffusa
Ageratum conyzoidesCynodon dactylon
Bidens pilosaCyperus rotundus
Chenopodium albumDactyloctenium aegypticum
Cirsium arvenseDigitaria sanguinalis
Commelina benghalensisEchinochloa crus-galli
Convolvulus arvensisElusine indica
Eichhornia crassipesFimbristylis miliacea
Phalaris minorIschaemun rugosum
Striga asiaticaPortulaca oleracea
Rumex dentatusSorghum halpense
Xanthium strumariumTrianthema portulacastrum
Source: Das [8].
Table
Table 3. Effect of elevated CO2 concentrations on various C3 and C4 weed species.
Table 3. Effect of elevated CO2 concentrations on various C3 and C4 weed species.
C3 SpeciesBiomass (% of Ambient)C4 SpeciesBiomass (% of Ambient)
Ambrosia artemisiifolia110–133Amaranthus retroflexus96–141
Datura stramonium174–272Cyperus rotundus102
Elymus repens164Digitaria ciliaris106–121
Rumex acetosella131Echinochloa crusgalli95–159
Cirsium arvense121Elusine indica102–121
Chenopodium album100–155Sorghum halepense56–110
Crotolaria spectabilis167Paspalum pilcatulum108
Parthenium hysterophorous953Cenchrus ciliaris104
Sesbania cannabina100Setaria faberi9
Setaria virdis19
Sorghum halapense8
Panicum dichotomiflorum24
Source: Modified from Patterson [29]; Navie et al. [30].
Table
Table 4. ED50 (g ae ha−1) and GR50 (g ae ha−1) dose of different herbicides for different weed species under increased temperatures.
Table 4. ED50 (g ae ha−1) and GR50 (g ae ha−1) dose of different herbicides for different weed species under increased temperatures.
Weed SpeciesHerbicide Low Temperature
(20/11 °C Day/Night)		High Temperature
(29/17 °C Day/Night)
ED50GR50ED50GR50
Ambrosia artemisiifolia2,4-D 187206117
GlyphosateSusceptible biotype4374513039
Resistant biotype28213231307306
A. trifida2,4-D 71151325
GlyphosateSusceptible biotype119596249
Resistant biotype14293491164218
Low Temperature
(17.5/7.5 °C Day/Night)		High Temperature
(32.5/22.5 °C Day/Night)
ED50GR50ED50GR50
Kochia scorpiaGlyphosatePratt county population3934173171
Riley county population3646186187
DicambaPratt county population522110673
Riley county population10546410225
Low Temperature (18 °C)High Temperature (32 °C)
GR50GR50
Amaranthus tuberculatusMesotrione 3.622.6
Digitaria sanguinalisMesotrione 11.182.1
Source: Modified from Johnson and Young [76]; Ganie et al. [82].
Table
Table 5. Fresh weight reduction (%) of Abutilon theophrasti due to glyphosate application with different adjuvants.
Table 5. Fresh weight reduction (%) of Abutilon theophrasti due to glyphosate application with different adjuvants.
AdjuvantSource of Stress
NoneDroughtFlooding
None844650
Ammonium sulphate905860
Ammonium nitrate855048
Non-ionic surfactant896062
Methylated seed oil844550
Petroleum oil concentrate835053
Source: Modified from Zhou et al. [96].
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kumar, V.; Kumari, A.; Price, A.J.; Bana, R.S.; Singh, V.; Bamboriya, S.D. Impact of Futuristic Climate Variables on Weed Biology and Herbicidal Efficacy: A Review. Agronomy 2023, 13, 559. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13020559

AMA Style

Kumar V, Kumari A, Price AJ, Bana RS, Singh V, Bamboriya SD. Impact of Futuristic Climate Variables on Weed Biology and Herbicidal Efficacy: A Review. Agronomy. 2023; 13(2):559. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13020559

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kumar, Vipin, Annu Kumari, Andrew J. Price, Ram Swaroop Bana, Vijay Singh, and Shanti Devi Bamboriya. 2023. "Impact of Futuristic Climate Variables on Weed Biology and Herbicidal Efficacy: A Review" Agronomy 13, no. 2: 559. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13020559

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop