Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bioherbicides: Strategies, Challenges and Prospects

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Developments in Fungal Biology and Applied Mycology

Abstract

Availability of enough food for ever-growing population is a serious task faced by human race due to pests. Weeds are major kind of pests; their competitive effects on the production and yield of various crops are well documented in India and the world. An increased and indiscriminate use of chemical pesticides, in order to control pests, has resulted in resistance, immunity and resurgence in them. The negative effects of chemical herbicides on nature and natural resources have forced scientists to shift focus on the reliable, sustainable and environment-friendly agents of weed control, the bioherbicides. Microbial-based pesticides, called bioherbicides , are the formulations of host-specific plant pathogens that are applied at high inoculum rates in a similar way as chemical herbicides for the management of weeds. In the majority of the bioherbicides, the fungal organisms are the active ingredients; therefore, the term mycoherbicide has often been used interchangeably with bioherbicide. There has been a great number of naturally occurring fungal plant pathogens worked out for possible use as potential biocontrol agents, but a small proportion has been developed to commercial products. Among the bacterial plant pathogens, Xanthomonas campestris and Pseudomonas fluorescens have shown the potential to be developed as bioherbicides. Some viruses also have been investigated for the potential to control invasive or undesirable weeds (e.g. tobacco mild green mosaic tobamovirus (TMGMV) for control of tropical soda apple in Florida). Twenty-four bioherbicides, based on fungi, bacteria and viruses have been registered around the globe, with several other microbial candidates in various stages of evaluation as bioherbicides. Most of the fungal biocontrol agents used as mycoherbicides have been found to be hemibiotrophs. To make mycoherbicides economical and popular among farmers, there is a strong need to develop mycoherbicides composed of consortia of compatible plant pathogens, each specific to a different weed species that could simultaneously control several weeds at a time. Scientist should lay emphasis on enhancing the pathogenesis of the biocontrol agents for overcoming the dependence on dew, one of the major constraints to make them potential bioherbicide. The pace of development of available bioherbicides including their success and failure, constraints, commercialization as well as current status has been discussed in this paper.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abu-Dieyeh MH, Watson AK (2007) Grass Over seeding and a fungus combine to control Taraxacum officinale. J Appl Ecol 44:115–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Aneja KR (2000) Biopesticides (micriobial pesticides). In: Aneja KR, Charaya MU, Aggarwal AK, Hans DK, Khan SA (eds) Glimpses in plant sciences. PragatiPrakashan, Meerut (UP), India, pp 20–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Aneja KR (2009) Biotechnology: an alternative novel strategy in agriculture to control weeds resistant to conventional herbicides. In: Lawrence R, Gulati AK, Abraham G (eds) Antimicrobial resistance from emerging threats to reality. Narosa Publishing House, New Delhi, pp 160–173

    Google Scholar 

  • Aneja KR (2014) Exploitation of phytpathogenic fungal diversity for the development of bioherbicides. Kavaka 42:7–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Aneja KR, Kaushal S (1998) Occurrence of Gibbago trianthemae on horse purslane in India. J Biol Control 12(2):157–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Aneja KR, Mehrotra RS (2011) Text book of fungal diversity and biotechnology. New Age International Publishers, pp 621–622

    Google Scholar 

  • Aneja KR, Mehrotra RS (1996) Strategies in biological control of weeds with plant pathogens. In: Agnihotri VP, Prakash OM, Kishan R, Misra AK (eds) Disease scenario in crop plants. International Books and Periodicals Supply Service, Delhi, pp 243–252

    Google Scholar 

  • Aneja KR, Kumar V, Jiloha P, Sharma MK, Surian D, Dhiman R, Aneja A (2013). Potential bio herbicides: Indian perspectives. In: Salar RK, Gahlawat SK, Siwach P, Duhan JS (eds) Biotechnology: prospects and applications. Springer, India, pp 197–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Aneja KR, Khan SA, Kaushal S (2000) Management of horse purslane (Trianthema portulacastrum L.) with Gibbago trianthemae Simmons in India. In: Spencer NR (ed) Proceedings of the Xth international symposium on biological control of weeds. Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana, USA, 27–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Aneja KR, Srinivas B, Singh K (1990) Three new pathogenic fungi of water hyacinth from India. Trop Pest Manag 36(1):76

    Google Scholar 

  • Auld BA, Hetherington SD, Smith HE (2003) Advances in bioherbicide formulation. Weed Biol Manag 3:61–67

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Auld BA (1993) Vegetableoil suspension emulsions reduce dew dependence of a mycoherbicide. Crop Prot 12:477–479

    Google Scholar 

  • Avis TJ, Hamelin RC, Belanger RR (2001) Approaches to molecular characterization of fungal biocontrol agents: some case studies. Can J Plant Pathol 23:8–12

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Babu RM, Sajeena A, Seetharaman K (2003) Bioassay of the potentialité of Alternaria alternata (Fr.) Keissler as a bioherbicide to control water hyacinth and other quatic weeds. CropProt. 22:1005–1013

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey KL (2014) The bioherbicide approach to weed control using plant pathogens. In: Abrol DP (ed) Integrated pest management: current concepts and ecological perspective. Elsevier, San Diego, CA, pp 245–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey KL, Boyetchko SM, Langle T (2010) Social and economic drivers shaping the future of biological control: a Canadian perspective on the factors affecting the development and use of microbial biopesticides. Biol Control 52:221–229

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey KL, Falk S, Derby JA, Melzer M, Boland GJ (2013) The effect of fertilizers on the efficacy of the bioherbicide, Phoma macrostoma, to control dandelions in turf grass. Biol Control 65:147–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey KL, Pitt WM, Falk S, Derby J (2011) The effects of Phoma macrostoma on non-target plant and target weed species. Biol Control 58:379–386

    Google Scholar 

  • Barton J (2005) Bioherbicides: all in a day’s for a superhero. What’s new in biological control of weeds?. Landcare Research-Manaaki Whenua, New Zealand, pp 4–6

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowers RC (1986) Commercialization of Collego™—an industrialist’s view. Weed Sci (Suppl) 34:24–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyetchko SM, Peng G (2004) Challenges and strategies for development of mycoherbicides. In: Arora DK (ed) Fungal biotechnology in agricultural, food and environmental application. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, pp 111–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyette CD, Templeton GE, Smith RJ Jr (1979) Control of winged water primrose (Jussiaea decurrens) and Northernjointvetch (Aeschynomene virginica) with fungal pathogens. WeedSci 27:497–501

    Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell CJ, Hynes RK, Boyetchko SM, Korber DR (2012) Colonization and bioherbicidal activity on green foxtail by Pseudomonas fluorescens BRG100 in a pesta formulation. Can J Microbiol 58:1–9

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Charudattan R, Walker HL, Boyette CD, Ridings WH, TeBeest DO, Van Dyke CG, Worsham AD (1986) Evaluation of Alternaria cassiae as a mycoherbicide for sicklepod (Cassia obtusifolia) in regional field tests. Southern Cooperative Service Bulletin Alabama: Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University, pp 1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Charudattan R (1986) Cercospora rodmannii: abiological control agent for water hyacinth. Aquatics 8:21–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Chattopadhyay N, Samui RP, Rathore LS (2011) Strategies for minimizing crop loss due to pest and disease incidences by adoption of weather-base plant protection techniques. In: Attri SD, Rathore LS, Sivakumar MVK, Dash SK (eds) Challenges and opportunities in agrometeorology, pp 235–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchill BW (1982) Mass production of microorganisms for biological control. In: Charudattan R, Walker HL (eds) Biological control of weeds with plant pathogens. Wiley, New York, pp 209–222

    Google Scholar 

  • Chutia M, Mahanta JJ, Bhattacharya N, Bhuyan M, Boruah P, Sharma TC (2007) microbial herbicides in weed management: prospects, progress and constraints. Plant Pathol J 6:200–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Connick WJ Jr, Boyette CD, McAlpine JR (1991) Formulation ofmycoherbicides using a pasta-like process. Biol Control 1:281–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Dagno K, Lahlali R, Diourte M, Jijakli MH (2012) Present status of the development ofmycoherbicides against water hyacinth: successes and challenges-a review. Biotechnol Agron Soc Environ 16(3):360–368

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel JT, Templeton GE, Smith RJ, Fox WT (1973) Biological control of northern jointvetch in rice with an endemic fungal disease. Weed Sci 21:303–307

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Morsy EM (2004) Evaluation of microfungi for the biological control of water hyacinth in Egypt. Fungal Divers 16:35–51

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Sayed W (2005) Biological control of weedswithpathogens: currentstatus and future trends. Z Pflanzenkrankh Pflanzenschutz 112:209–221

    Google Scholar 

  • EPA (2015) Biopesticides registration action document: tobacco mild green mosaic Tobamovirus strain U2. PC Code: 056705. United States Environmental Protection Agency

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament (2014) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 of 25 May 2011 Implementing Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the list of approved active substances

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans HC (1995) Fungi as biocontrol agents of weeds: a tropical prospective. Can J Bot 73:S58–S64

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans HC, Seier MK, Derby JA, Falk S, Bailey KL (2013) Tracing the origins of White Tip disease of Cirsium arvense and its causal agent, Phoma macrostoma. Weed Res 53:42–52

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gadermaier G, Hauser M, Ferreira F (2014) Allergens of weed pollen: an overview on recombinant and natural molecules. Methods 66:55–66

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin PH (2001) A molecular weed—mycoherbicide interaction: Colletotrichum gloeosporioides f. sp. malvae and round leaved mallow, Malva pusilla. Can J Plant Pathol 23:28–35

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Greaves MP, Dutton L, Lawrie J (2000) Formulation of microbial herbicides. Asp Appl Biol 57:171–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Green S (2003) A review of the potential for the use of bioherbicides to control forest weeds in the UK. For Int J For Res 76:285–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding PD, Raizada NM (2015) Controlling weeds with fungi, bacteria and viruses: a review. Plant Sci 6:659

    Google Scholar 

  • Imaizumi S, Nishino T, Miyabe K, Fujimori T, Yamada M (1997) Biological control of annual bluegrass (Poa annua L.) with a Japanese isolate of Xanthomonas campestris pv. poae (JTP-482). Biol Control 8:7–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazinczi G, Lukacs D, Takacs A, Horvath J, Gaborjanyi R, Nadasy M (2006) Biological decline of Solanum nigrum due to virus infections. J. Plant Dis Protect 32:5–330

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiely T, Donaldson D, Grube A (2004) Pesticides industry sales and usage, 2000 and 2001 market estimates. US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathur S (2014) Assocham study suggests annual crop losses worth Rs. 50,000 crore due to pest in India TNN Feb 14

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell JK (1988) Gibbago trianthemae a recently described Hyphomycete with bioherbicide potential for control of horse purslane (Trianthema portulacastrum). Plant Dis 72:354–355

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris MJ, Wood AR, den Breeÿen A (1999) Plant pathogens and biological control of weeds in South Africa: a review of projects and progress during the last decade. Afr Entomol Mem 1:129–137

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortensen K (1988) The potential of an endemic fungus, Colletotrichum gloeosporioides for biological control of round leaved mallow (Malva pusilla) and velvate leaf (Abutilon theophrasti). Weed Sci 36:473–478

    Google Scholar 

  • Oerke EC (2006) Crop losses to pests. J Agric Sci 144:31–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Oerke EC, Dehne HW, Schonbeck F, Weber A (1994) Crop production and crop protection: Estimated losses in major food and cash crop. Elsevier, pp 808

    Google Scholar 

  • Panetta FD (1992) The role of prediction in determining the quarantine significance of weeds. In: Proceedings of the first international weed control congress. Weed Science Society of Victoria Inc. Melbourne, pp 381–383

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng G, Wolf TM, Byer KN, Caldwell B (2001) Spray retention on green foxtail (Steria viridis) using airbrush and broadcast sprayers and its impact on the efficacy of a mycoherbicide agent. In: Ni HW, You ZG (eds) Proceedings of 18th Asian Pacific weed science conference, May 28–June 2, Beijing, China, pp 699–706

    Google Scholar 

  • Phatak SC, Summer DR, Wells HD, Bell DK, Glaze NC (1983) Biological control of yellow nutsedge with the indigenous rust fungus Puccinia canaliculata. Science 219:1446–1447

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pitt WM, Bailey KL, Fu YB, Peterson GW (2012) Biological and genetic characterization of Phoma macrostoma isolates with bioherbicidal activity. Biocontrol Sci Technol 22:813–835

    Google Scholar 

  • Prasad R (1992) Some factors affecting herbicidal activity of glyphosate in relation to adjuvants and droplet size. In: Pesticide formulations and application systems. Standard Technical Publication, Philadelphia, PA

    Google Scholar 

  • Quail JW, Ismail N, Pedras MSC, Boyetchko SM (2002) Pseudophomins A and B, a class of cyclic lipodepsipeptides isolated from a Pseudomonas species. Acta Crystallogr C Crystal Struct Commun 58:268–271

    Google Scholar 

  • Quimby PC (1982) Impact of diseases on plant populations. In: Biological control of weed with plant pathogens. Wiley, NewYork, pp 47–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosskopf EN, Charudattan R, Kadir JB (1999) Use of plant pathogens in weed control. In: Bellows TS, Fisher TW (eds) Handbook of biological control. Academic Press, New York, pp 891–918

    Google Scholar 

  • Sands D, Miller R (1993) Evolving strategies for biological control of weeds with plant pathogens. Pesticides Sci 37:399–403

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder D, Muller-Scharer H (1995) Biological control of weeds and its prospectives in Europe. Med Fac Landbouw Univ Gent 60(2a):117–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroers HJ, Geldenhuis MM, Wingfield MJ, Schoeman MH, Yen YF, Shen WC, Wingfield BD (2005) Classification of the guava wilt fungus Myxosporium psidii, the palm pathogen Gliocladium vermoesenii and the persimmon wilt fungus Acremonium diospyri in Nalanthamala. Mycologia 97(2):375–395

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shabana YM (1997) Formulation of Alternaria eichhorniae, a mycoherbicide for water hyacinth, in invert emulsion save its dew dependence. J Plant Dis Prot 104:231–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart-Wade SM, Neumann S, Collins LL, Boland GJ (2002) The biology of Canadian weeds. 117. Taraxacum officinale G. H. Weber ex Wiggers. Can J Plant Sci. 82:825–853

    Google Scholar 

  • Stowell IJ (1991) Submerged fermentation of biological herbicides (In: Microbial control of Taraxacum officinale). J Appl Ecol 44:115–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Tateno A (2000) Herbicidal composition for the control of annual bluegrass. U.S. Patent No 6162763 A. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • TeBeest DO, Templeton GE (1985) Mycoherbicides: progress in the biological control of weeds. Plant Dis 69(1):6–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Templeton GE (1992) Use of Colletotrichum strains as mycoherbicides. In: Bailey JA, Jeger MJ (eds) Colletotrichum: biology, pathology and control. CAB International, Wallingford UK, pp 358–380

    Google Scholar 

  • Templeton GE, TeBeest DO, Smith RJ (1979) Biological weed control with mycoherbicides. Phytopath 17:301–310

    Google Scholar 

  • Templeton GE (1982) Biological herbicides: discovery, development, deployment. Weed Sci 30:430–433

    Google Scholar 

  • Wan FH, Wang R (2001) Biological weed control in China: an update report on Alien invasive species. In: Workshop on alien invasive species, IUCN regional biodiversity programme, Asia. Colombo Sri Lanka, pp 8–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson AK (1989) Current advances in bioherbicide research. Brighton Crop Protect Conf Weeds 3:987–996

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson AK (1991) Prospects for bioherbicide development in South-eastAsia. In: Swarbrick RK (ed) Proceedings 13th Asian Pacific weed science conference. Asian Pacific Weed Science Society and Weed Science Society of Indonesia, Jakarta, pp 65–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson AK, Hong LW, Sastroutomo SS (1999) Can viable weed control be attainable with microorganism. In: Proceedings of symposium on biological control in tropics, MARDI Training Centre, Serdang, Malaysia, 18–19 Mar

    Google Scholar 

  • Womack JG, Burge MN (1993) Mycoherbicide formulation and the potential for bracken control. Pestic Sci 37:337–341

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang XB, TeBeest DO (1992) The stability of host-pathogen interactions of plant diseases in relation to biological weed control. Biol Control 2:266–271

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang XB, TeBeest DO (1993) Epidemological mechanism of mycoherbicide effectiveness. Phyopathol. 83:891–893

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Formerly at Department of Microbiology, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, Haryana, India

    K. R. Aneja

  2. Department of Biotechnology and Microbiology, Bhagwati College of Management and Technology, Siwaya, Meerut, India

    S. A. Khan

  3. University Health Center, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, Haryana, India

    A. Aneja

Authors
  1. K. R. Aneja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. A. Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Aneja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. R. Aneja .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Biological Sciences and Engineering, Netaji Subhas Institute of Technology (University of Delhi), New Delhi, India

    Tulasi Satyanarayana

  2. TERI-Deakin Nano-Biotechnology Centre, The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), New Delhi, India

    Sunil K. Deshmukh

  3. Department of Biotechnology, Barkatullah University, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India

    B.N. Johri

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Aneja, K.R., Khan, S.A., Aneja, A. (2017). Bioherbicides: Strategies, Challenges and Prospects. In: Satyanarayana, T., Deshmukh, S., Johri, B. (eds) Developments in Fungal Biology and Applied Mycology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4768-8_23

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation