Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Yield of glyphosate-resistant sugar beets and efficiency of weed management systems with glyphosate and conventional herbicides under German and Polish crop production

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Transgenic Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In sugar beet production, weed control is one of the most important and most expensive practices to ensure yield. Since glyphosate-resistant sugar beets are not yet approved for cultivation in the EU, little commercial experience exists with these sugar beets in Europe. Experimental field trials were conducted at five environments (Germany, Poland, 2010, 2011) to compare the effects of glyphosate with the effects of conventional weed control programs on the development of weeds, weed control efficiency and yield. The results show that the glyphosate weed control programs compared to the conventional methods decreased not only the number of herbicide applications but equally in magnitude decreased the dosage of active ingredients. The results also showed effective weed control with glyphosate when the weed covering was greater and sugar beets had a later growth stage of four true leaves. Glyphosate-resistant sugar beets applied with the glyphosate herbicide two or three times had an increase in white sugar yield from 4 to 18 % in comparison to the high dosage conventional herbicide systems. In summary, under glyphosate management sugar beets can positively contribute to the increasingly demanding requirements regarding efficient sugar beet cultivation and to the demands by society and politics to reduce the use of chemical plant protection products in the environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beißner L, Buettner G (2000) Herbizidstress bei Zuckerrüben: Physiologie, Symptomatik und Schadrelevanz. In: Proceedings of the 63rd IIRB congress, February 2000, Interlaken

  • Bennett R, Phipps R, Strange A, Grey P (2004) Environmental and human health impacts of growing genetically modified herbicide-tolerant sugar beet: a life-cycle assessment. Plant Biotechnol J 2:273–278

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bräutigam H (1998) Untersuchungen zur Konkurrenz zwischen Unkraut und Zuckerrüben - Auftreten, Ursachen und Konsequenzen für die Unkrautregulierung. Dissertation, Cuvillier Verlag Göttingen

  • Brooks DR, Bohan DA, Champion GT, Haughton AJ, Hawes C, Heard MS, Clark SJ, Dewar AM, Firbank LG, Perry JN, Rothery P, Scott RJ, Woiwod IP, Birchall C, Skellern MP, Walker JH, Baker P, Bell D, Browne EL, Dewar AJG, Fairfax CM, Garner BH, Haylock LA, Horne SL, Hulmes SE, Mason NS, Norton LR, Nuttall P, Randle Z, Rossall MJ, Sands RJN, Singer EJ, Walker MJ (2003) Invertebrate responses to the management of weeds in genetically modified herbicide-tolerant and conventional spring crops. I. Soil-surface-active invertebrates. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 358:1847–1862

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Buchholz K, Märländer B, Puke H, Glattkowski H, Thielecke K (1995) Neubewertung des technischen Wertes von Zuckerrüben. Sugar Ind 120(2):113–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhre C, Fecke P, Nelles F, Schlinker G, Ladewig E (2011) Entwicklungen im Pflanzenschutz aus der Produktionstechnik im Vergleich zur Erhebung NEPTUN. Sonderheft 10. Göttinger Zuckerrübentagung. Sugar Ind 136:13–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter JE (2011) Impact of GM crops on biodiversity. GM Crops 2(1):7–23. doi:10.4161/gmcr.2.1.15086

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Champion GT, May MJ, Bennett S, Brooks DR, Clark SJ, Daniels RE, Firbank LG, Haughton AJ, Hawes C, Heard MS, Perry JN, Randle Z, Rossall MJ, Rothery P, Skellern MP, Scott RJ, Squire GR, Thomas MR (2003) Crop management and agronomic context of the farm scale evaluations of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 358:1801–1818

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Coyette B, Tencalla F, Brants I, Fichet Y, Rouchouze D (2002) Effect of introducing glyphosate-tolerant sugar beet on pesticide usage in Europe. Pestic Outlook 10:219–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Mendiburu F (2010) Agricolae: statistical procedures for agricultural research. R package version 1.0-9. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=agricolae

  • Dewar AM, Haylock LA, Bean KM, May MJ (2000) Delayed control of weeds in glyphosate-tolerant sugar beet and the consequences on aphid infestation and yield. Pest Manag Sci 56:345–350

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dewar AM, May MJ, Woiwod IP, Haylock LA, Champion GT, Garner BH, Sands RJN, Qi A, Pidgeon JD (2003) A novel approach to the use of genetically modified herbicide tolerant crops for environmental benefit. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:335–340. doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.2248

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dewar AM, Haylock LA, Garner BH, Sands RJN, Baker P (2005) The environmental impact of GM herbicide-tolerant sugarbeet. Aspects of Appl Biol 74:119–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Harzler B, Boerboom C, Nice G, Sikkema P (2006) Understanding glyphosate to increase performance. The glyphosate, weeds, and crops series. GWC 2:5

    Google Scholar 

  • Haughton AJ, Champion GT, Hawes C, Heard MS, Brooks DR, Bohan DA, Clark SJ, Dewar AM, Firbank LG, Osborne JL, Perry JN, Rothery P, Roy DB, Scott RJ, Woiwod IP, Birchall C, Skellern MP, Walker JH, Baker P, Browne EL, Dewar AJG, Garner BH, Haylock LA, Horne SL, Mason NS, Sands RJN, Walker MJ (2003) Invertebrate responses to the management of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant and conventional spring crops. II. Within-field epigeal and aerial arthropods. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 358:1863–1877

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hawes C, Haughton AJ, Osborne JL, Roy DB, Clark SJ, Perry JN, Rothery P, Bohan DA, Brooks DR, Champion GT, Dewar AM, Heard MS, Woiwod IP, Daniels RE, Young MW, Parish AM, Scott RJ, Firbank LG, Squire GR (2003) Responses of plants and invertebrate trophic groups to contrasting herbicide regimes in the farm scale evaluations of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 358:1899–1913

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heard MS, Hawes C, Champion GT, Clark SJ, Firbank LG, Haughton AJ, Parish AM, Perry JN, Rothery P, Scott RJ, Skellern MP, Squire GR, Hill MI (2003) Weeds in fields with contrasting conventional and genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. I. Effects on abundance and diversity. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 358:1819–1832

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann C (2006) Zuckerrüben als Rohstoff. Die technische Qualität als Voraussetzung für eine effiziente Verarbeitung. Habilitationsschrift. Göttingen

  • James C (2009) Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2009. ISAAA Brief No. 41, ISAAA, Ithaca, NY

  • James C (2010) Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2010. ISAAA Brief No. 42, ISAAA, Ithaca, NY

  • James C (2011) Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2011. ISAAA Brief No. 43, Executive Summary. ISAAA, Ithaca, NY

  • Keuls M (1952) The use of the “studentized range” in connection with an analysis of variance. Euphytica 1:112–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan MFR (2010) Introduction of glyphosate-tolerant sugar beet in the United States. Outlooks Pest Manag 21(1):38–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleter GA, Harris C, Stephenson G, Unsworth J (2008) Review: comparison of herbicide regimes and the associated potential environmental effects of glyphosate-resistant crops versus what they replace in Europe. Pest Manag Sci 64:479–488

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kniss AR (2010) Comparison of conventional and glyphosate-resistant sugarbeet the year of commercial introduction in Wyoming. J Sugar Beet Res 47:127–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kniss AR, Wilson RG, Martin AR, Burgener PA, Feuz DM (2004) Economic evaluation of glyphosate-resistant and conventional sugar beet. Weed Technol 18(2):388–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konietschke F (2011) nparcomp: nparcomp-package. R package version 1.0-1. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=nparcomp

  • Kraus J, Sauerbrey E, Nehls R, Loock A, Jansen R (2003) Glyphosate tolerant sugar beet. U.S. Patent Application, US020040172669A1

  • Lutmann PJW, Berry K, May MJ, Champion GT, Clarke JH, Cook SK (2005) Final report: agronomic and environmental implications of the establishment of GM herbicide tolerant problem weeds. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs. http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Default.aspx?Menu=Menu&Module=More&Location=None&Completed=0&ProjectID=13335#RelatedDocuments

  • Madden LV, Hughes G, Van den Bosch F (2007) The study of plant disease epidemics. APS Press, St. Paul

    Google Scholar 

  • Maier K, Baron O, Bruhns J (2012) Zuckerwirtschaft Europa. 58. Auflage. Bartens, Berlin

  • Märländer B (2005) Weed control in sugar beet using genetically modified herbicide-tolerant varieties—a review of the economics for cultivation in Europe. J Agron Crop Sci 191:64–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Märländer B, Bückmann H (1999) Genetically modified varieties in Germany-status and prospects with special respect of a sustainable sugar beet cultivation. Sugar Ind 124(12):943–946

    Google Scholar 

  • Märländer B, von Tiedemann A (2006) Herbizidtolerante Kulturpflanzen—Anwendungspotenziale und Perspektiven. Schriftenreihe der Deutschen Phytomedizinischen Gesellschaft e.V. 8, 32–45, ISSN 0939-8929. Eugen Ulmer KG, Stuttgart

  • Märländer B, Hoffmann C, Koch HJ, Ladewig E, Merkes R, Petersen J, Stockfisch N (2003) Environmental situation and yield performance of sugar beet crop in Germany: heading for sustainable development. J Agron Crop Sci 189:201–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May MJ (2000) Efficiency and selectivity of RR and LL weed control techniques compared to classical weed control systems. In: Proceedings of the 63rd IIRB congress, February 2000, Interlaken

  • May MJ (2001) Crop protection in sugar beet. Pestic Outlook 10:188–191. doi:10.1039/b108605g

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May MJ (2003) Economic consequences for UK farmers of growing GM herbicide tolerant sugar beet. Ann Appl Biol 142:41–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May MJ, Champion GT, Dewar AM, Qi A, Pidgeon JD (2005) Management of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant sugar beet for spring and autumn environmental benefit. Poc R Soc B 272:111–119. doi:101098/rspb.2004.2948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2003) BioTrack Product Database. http://www2.oecd.org/biotech

  • Park J, McFarlane I, Phipps R, Ceddia G (2011) The impact of the EU regulatory constraint of transgenic crops on farm income. New Biotechnol 2011. doi:10.1016/j.nbt.2011.01.005

  • Petersen J, Röver A (2005) Comparison of sugar beet cropping systems with dead and living mulch using a glyphosate-resistant hybrid. J Agron Crop Sci 191:55–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2011) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org/

  • Schweizer EE, Dexter AG (1987) Weed control in sugarbeets (beta vulgaris) in North America. Rev Weed Sci 3:1133

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellmann A (1999) Konkurrenzbeziehungen und Schadensprognose in Zuckerrüben bei variiertem zeitlichen Auftreten von Chenopodium album L. und Chamomilla recutita (L.) Rauschert. Dissertation, Cuvillier Verlag Göttingen

  • Wevers JDA (2000) Herbicide tolerance and the effects on the environmental contamination. In: Proceedings of the 63rd IIRB congress, February 2000, Interlaken

  • Wilson RG, Sbatella GM (2011) Late-season weed control in glyphosate-resistant sugarbeet. Weed Technol 25:350–355

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. KWS SAAT AG, Grimsehlstraße 31, 37555, Einbeck, Germany

    Henrike Nichterlein, Anja Matzk, Josef Kraus & Carsten Stibbe

  2. Department of Agroecosystems Management, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, pl. Grunwaldzki 24a, 50-363, Wroclaw, Poland

    Leszek Kordas

Authors
  1. Henrike Nichterlein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anja Matzk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Leszek Kordas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Josef Kraus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Carsten Stibbe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Henrike Nichterlein.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nichterlein, H., Matzk, A., Kordas, L. et al. Yield of glyphosate-resistant sugar beets and efficiency of weed management systems with glyphosate and conventional herbicides under German and Polish crop production. Transgenic Res 22, 725–736 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-012-9678-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-012-9678-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation