Author details

and 11 [111, 116]. This indicates that allelopathy activity in cereal is controlled by quantitative loci. The relatively low phenotypic variation for the individual QTL is explained by the

Herbicide resistance is a major impediment in sustaining high crop productivity. The lack of new chemical modes of action becoming available emphasises the need for novel approaches to control weeds. Crop competitiveness and allelopathy are potential tools to reduce the dependence on synthetic chemical inputs and in so doing may extend the lives of key herbicides. A challenge for researchers is to be able to separate competitiveness from allelopathy in the field. For crop producers it does not really matter whether it is one or the other or both as long it works. A further challenge for researchers is attracting funds to undertake this work to

What are the prospects of herbicide resistance evolution occurring to allelochemicals? Of course the risks exist but they are likely to be much lower for at least two reasons: firstly allelopathy relies on a mix of chemicals at any one time from a single crop; and different crops have different mixes of chemicals so that in a rotation of crops, weeds will be exposed to

Phenotyping traits associated with allelopathic activity, such as reduction of weed growth in the laboratory and field, with high-throughput genotyping technology such as sequencing and mapping populations, allow researchers to detect QTL and genes associated with allelopathy and weed competition. It is an open question whether weed competition and allelopathy are distinct traits, but if this is the case, both traits could be pyramided in a single variety. In addition to genetic and phenotypic information, functional 'omic' data, such as identification of secondary metabolites, can be integrated in the QTL analysis leading to the detection of genes and pathways responsible for allelopathy activity. This would enable the development

Authors thank NSW Department of Primary Industries, Charles Sturt University and E.H.

Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation for supporting crop interference research.

chemicals of different modes of action only once or twice in a rotation cycle.

of novel alleles to expand breeding activity for weed interference in canola.

difficulty in measuring the allelopathic traits at the individual genotype level.

4. Conclusions

38 Biological Approaches for Controlling Weeds

commercial outcomes.

Acknowledgements

Conflict of interest

Authors do not have conflict of interest to declare.

Harsh Raman1,2\*, Nawar Shamaya1,2 and James Pratley<sup>2</sup>

\*Address all correspondence to: harsh.raman@dpi.nsw.gov.au

1 NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, Wagga Wagga, NSW, Australia

2 Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, NSW, Australia
