Perceptions and Myths about Glyphosate Resistance

As we all know, in life there is oftentimes a gap between perception and reality, and the same holds true in the case of glyphosate resistance. For instance, respondents from a recent Purdue University study* of over 3,000 Indiana growers reported that many  were concerned about glyphosate resistance, but far less were those that said they practiced resistance management strategies.

There are several myths that surround glyphosate resistance.  Some people, for example, still believe there are only a few glyphosate resistant weeds in the United States, when in fact there are many resistant weed species across the country.  For a complete list of glyphosate-resistant weed populations in the U.S. and around the world, visit www.weedscience.org.  Another popular myth is that cutting application rates saves money and still kills the weeds.  However, cutting rates can allow susceptible weeds a greater chance to survive, shifting populations so that resistance is more likely to develop, which will cost far more to manage in the long-run. Experts have examined the cost of reactive vs. proactive management of glyphosate-resistant weeds.  Read more on additional common misconceptions at resistancefighter.com.

On a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most severe, how would you rank your concern of glyphosate resistance? Do you feel your management practices reflect your level of concern? How so? What additional steps can/should be made?