+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Comparisons of Genetically Modified and Non-Genetically Modified Soybean Cultivars and Weed Management Systems



Comparisons of Genetically Modified and Non-Genetically Modified Soybean Cultivars and Weed Management Systems



Crop Science 50(6): 2597-2604



Adoption of glyphosate-resistant crops and the use of glyphosate has resulted in the evolution of glyphosate-resistant weeds. The objective of the studies reported was to investigate yield and weed management systems of genetically modified (GM) and non-GM soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] at three Iowa locations during 2007 and 2008. Yield of glyphosate-resistant, glufosinate-resistant, and non-GM cultivars was determined in six site-years. The non-GM cultivars yielded 315 and 265 kg ha(-1) less than the glyphosate-resistant and glufosinate-resistant cultivars, respectively, while no differences between GM cultivars were observed. Weed management systems differed for the cultivars but had equivalent weed control (>90%). Weed management systems in the non-GM cultivars caused more phytotoxicity (36% versus approximately 5% 7 d after application) and, coincidentally, the non-GM cultivars had the lowest yields. No differences in phytotoxicity were observed among the weed management systems for the GM cultivars. Similarly, no differences in yield were observed comparing the weed management systems for the GM cultivars. The experiment locations did not have high weed population densities although the untreated controls yielded 48% less than the other weed management systems included in the studies. Given concerns for glyphosate-resistant weeds, the studies demonstrated that acceptable and equivalent options to glyphosate-resistant soybean exist to manage glyphosate-resistant weeds in maturity groups 2 and 3 soybean which represent the majority of the U.S. soybean production.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 066237811

Download citation: RISBibTeXText


Related references

Detection of the genetically modified organisms in genetically modified soybean and maize by polymerase chain reaction method. Wei Sheng Yan Jiu 31(3): 184-187, 2002

US regulatory system for genetically modified [genetically modified organism (GMO), rDNA or transgenic] crop cultivars. Plant Biotechnology Journal 6(1): 2-12, 2007

Allelopathic effect of methanolic extracts of genetically modified and non-genetically modified canola on soybean. Toxicology and Industrial Health 32(3): 564-575, 2016

Occurrence of insects in the aerial part of soybean in function of the weed control systems and conventional and genetically modified herbicide-tolerant varieties. Ciencia Rural: 8, 2132-2137, 2008

Geobotanical studies to compare genetically modified and not modified oilseed rape Methods and results of a field study phase to build a longtime monitoring concept to control genetically modified plants. Floristische Rundbriefe Beiheft (7): 3-109, 2004

A comparative study of phytochemical composition of genetically and non-genetically modified soybean (Glycine max L.) and evaluation of antitumor activity. Natural Product Research 27(6): 574-578, 2013

Combination Approach of Border Rows and Isolation Distance for Securing Coexistence of Non-Genetically Modified and Genetically Modified Maize. Crop Science 55(4): 1818-1826, 2015

DNA degradation in genetically modified rice with Cry1Ab by food processing methods: implications for the quantification of genetically modified organisms. Food Chemistry 174: 132-138, 2015

First time detection of a genetically modified papaya in Europe - official complaint of a non authorized genetically modified organism within the EU. Deutsche Lebensmittel Rundschau 100(10): 377-380, 2004

The Farm Scale Evaluations of Spring-Sown Genetically Modified Crops || Invertebrate Responses to the Management of Genetically Modified Herbicide-Tolerant and Conventional Spring Crops. Ii. Within-Field Epigeal and Aerial Arthropods. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences 358(1439): 1863-1877, 2003

The Farm Scale Evaluations of Spring-Sown Genetically Modified Crops || Invertebrate Responses to the Management of Genetically Modified Herbicide-Tolerant and Conventional Spring Crops. I. Soil-Surface-Active Invertebrates. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences 358(1439): 1847-1862, 2003

Regulation of genetically modified organisms in the European Community. Part I. The proposal for a council directive on the contained use of genetically modified micro-organims. Proceedings of the European workshop on law and genetic engineering, Hamburg, Germany, 14-15 December 1989: 25-27, 1990

In vivo studies on possible health consequences of genetically modified food and feed--with particular regard to ingredients consisting of genetically modified plant materials. Nutrition and Health 17(1): 1-8, 2003

Comparative environmental impact assessment of herbicides used on genetically modified and non-genetically modified herbicide-tolerant canola crops using two risk indicators. Science of the Total Environment 557-558: 754-763, 2016

First application of a microsphere-based immunoassay to the detection of genetically modified organisms (GMOs): quantification of Cry1Ab protein in genetically modified maize. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 55(4): 1071-1076, 2007