Harnessing nature’s tiny warriors: Plant viruses as innovative bioherbicides
Vol 6, Issue 2, 2023
VIEWS - 182 (Abstract) 91 (PDF)
Abstract
The use of plant viruses as bioherbicides represents a fascinating and promising frontier in modern agriculture and weed management. This review article delves into the multifaceted world of harnessing plant viruses for herbicidal purposes, shedding light on their potential as eco-friendly, sustainable alternatives to traditional chemical herbicides. We begin by exploring the diverse mechanisms through which plant viruses can target and control weeds, from altering gene expression to disrupting essential physiological processes. The article highlights the advantages of utilizing plant viruses, such as their specificity for weed species, minimal impact on non-target plants, and a reduced environmental footprint. Furthermore, we investigate the remarkable versatility of plant viruses, showcasing their adaptability to various weed species and agricultural environments. The review delves into the latest advancements in genetic modification techniques, which enable the engineering of plant viruses for enhanced herbicidal properties and safety. In addition to their efficacy, we discuss the economic and ecological advantages of using plant viruses as bioherbicides, emphasizing their potential to reduce chemical herbicide usage and decrease the development of herbicide-resistant weeds. We also address the regulatory and safety considerations associated with the application of plant viruses in agriculture. Ultimately, this review article underscores the immense potential of plant viruses as bioherbicides and calls for further research, development, and responsible deployment to harness these microscopic agents in the ongoing quest for sustainable and environmentally friendly weed management strategies.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. Oerke EC. Crop losses to pests. The Journal of Agricultural Science 2006; 144(1): 31–43. doi: 10.1017/S0021859605005708
2. Duke SO. The history and current status of glyphosate. Pest Management Science 2018; 74(5): 1027–1034. doi: 10.1002/ps.4652
3. Heap I. Global perspective of herbicide‐resistant weeds. Pest Management Science 2014; 70(9): 1306–1315. doi: 10.1002/ps.3696
4. Charudattan R. Use of plant viruses as bioherbicides: The first virus‐based bioherbicide and future opportunities. Pest Management Science. doi: 10.1002/ps.7760
5. Tatineni S, Hein GL. Plant viruses of agricultural importance: Current and future perspectives of virus disease management strategies. Phytopathology 2023; 113(2): 117–141. doi: 10.1094/PHYTO-05-22-0167-RVW
6. Charudattan R, Hiebert E. New bioherbicide composed of a plant virus. International Pest Control 2015; 57(2): 85–87.
7. Roossinck MJ. Mechanisms of plant virus evolution. Annual Review of Phytopathology 1997; 35(1): 191–209. doi: 10.1146/annurev.phyto.35.1.191
8. Kogovšek P, Pompe‐Novak M, Baebler Š, et al. Aggressive and mild Potato virus Y isolates trigger different specific responses in susceptible potato plants. Plant Pathology 2010; 59(6): 1121–1132. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3059.2010.02340.x
9. Atkinson NJ, Urwin PE. The interaction of plant biotic and abiotic stresses: From genes to the field. Journal of Experimental Botany 2012; 63(10): 3523–3543. doi: 10.1093/jxb/ers100
10. Rybicki EP. Plant-produced vaccines: Promise and reality. Drug Discovery Today 2009; 14(1-2): 16–24. doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2008.10.002
11. Zimdahl RL. Fundamentals of Weed Science. Academic Press; 2018. doi: 10.1016/C2015-0-04331-3
12. Scholthof KBG, Adkins S, Czosnek H, et al. Top 10 plant viruses in molecular plant pathology. Molecular Plant Pathology 2011; 12(9): 938–954. doi: 10.1111/j.1364-3703.2011.00752.x
13. Cañizares MC, Nicholson L, Lomonossoff GP. Use of viral vectors for vaccine production in plants. Immunology and Cell Biology 2005; 83(3): 263–270. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1711.2005.01339.x
14. Dunoyer P, Voinnet O. The complex interplay between plant viruses and host RNA-silencing pathways. Current Opinion in Plant Biology 2005; 8(4): 415–423. doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2005.05.012
15. Baulcombe DC. VIGS, HIGS and FIGS: Small RNA silencing in the interactions of viruses or filamentous organisms with their plant hosts. Current Opinion in Plant Biology 2015; 26: 141–146. doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2015.06.007
16. Gressel J. Low pesticide rates may hasten the evolution of resistance by increasing mutation frequencies. Pest Management Science 2011; 67(3): 253–257. doi: 10.1002/ps.2071
17. Vreysen MJB, Robinson AS, Hendrichs J, Kenmore P. Area-wide integrated pest management (AW-IPM): Principles, practice and prospects. In: Vreysen MJB, Robinson AS, Hendrichs J (editors). Area-wide Control of Insect Pests: From Research to Field Implementation. Springer Dordrecht; 2007. pp. 3–33. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-6059-5_1
18. Owen MDK, Zelaya IA. Herbicide‐resistant crops and weed resistance to herbicides. Pest Management Science 2005; 61(3): 301–311. doi: 10.1002/ps.1015
19. Wolt JD, Keese P, Raybould A, et al. Problem formulation in the environmental risk assessment for genetically modified plants. Transgenic Research 2010; 19(3): 425–436. doi: 10.1007/s11248-009-9321-9
20. Hokkanen HM, Pimentel D. New associations in biological control: Theory and practice. The Canadian Entomologist 1989; 121(10): 829–840. doi: 10.4039/Ent121829-10
21. Hoagland RE, Douglas Boyette C, Weaver MA, Abbas HK. Bioherbicides: Research and risks. Toxin Reviews 2007; 26(4): 313–342. doi: 10.1080/15569540701603991
22. Green S. A review of the potential for the use of bioherbicides to control forest weeds in the UK. Forestry 2003; 76(3): 285–298. doi: 10.1093/forestry/76.3.285
23. Bahadur S, Verma SK, Prasad SK, et al. Eco-friendly weed management for sustainable crop production—A review. Journal Crop and Weed 2015; 11(1): 181–189.
24. Rai M, Zimowska B, Shinde S, Tres MV. Bioherbicidal potential of different species of Phoma: Opportunities and challenges. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 2021; 105(8): 3009–3018. doi: 10.1007/s00253-021-11234-w
25. Singh H, Sharma A, Bhardwaj SK, et al. Recent advances in the applications of nano-agrochemicals for sustainable agricultural development. Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts 2021; 23(2): 213–239. doi: 10.1039/d0em00404a
26. Kremer RJ. Bioherbicide development and commercialization: Challenges and benefits. In: Koul O (editor). Development and Commercialization of Biopesticides: Costs and Benefits. Academic Press; 2023. pp. 119–148. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-323-95290-3.00016-9
27. Koch A. Development of RNAi-based biopesticides, regulatory constraints, and commercial prospects. In: Koul O (editor). Development and Commercialization of Biopesticides: Costs and Benefits. Academic Press; 2023. pp. 149–171. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-323-95290-3.00013-3
28. Iyiola AO, Kolawole AS, Oyewole EO. Sustainable alternatives to agrochemicals and their socio-economic and ecological values. In: In: Ogwu MC, Chibueze Izah S (editors). One Health Implications of Agrochemicals and their Sustainable Alternatives. Springer Singapore; 2023. pp. 699–734. doi: 10.1007/978-981-99-3439-3_25
29. Rehman A, Farooq M. Challenges, constraints, and opportunities in sustainable agriculture and environment. In: Farooq M, Gogoi N, Pisante M (editors). Sustainable Agriculture and the Environment. Academic Press; 2023. pp. 487–501. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-323-90500-8.00012-9
30. Marrone PG. Pesticidal natural products–status and future potential. Pest Management Science 2019; 75(9): 2325–2340. doi: 10.1002/ps.5433
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24294/th.v6i2.3146
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.