Role of biocontrol agents in weed management – recent developments and trends

Tauseef Anwar

Department of Plant and Environmental Protection, PARC Institute of Advanced Studies in Agriculture, Islamabad

Huma Qureshi

Department of Botany, University of Chakwal, Chakwal


Within integrated pest management programs, biological control of unwanted plants has remarkable capacity to provide viable, effective, and economic control of weeds. When using bio-herbicides, crop production and quality improve with virtually no damage to the ecosystem. Bioherbicides are target-specific, destroy only selected weeds that have been sprayed for and do not cause harm to non-target plants. Bio-herbicides can be quickly incorporated into weed control programs, which can reduce chemical herbicide dependence. We are also raising the chance of environmental pollution by pesticides. There are only a few bio-herbicides available on commercial bases although work began earlier in the 1940s. Sources of commercialized bioherbicides include Phytophthora palmivora (Devine), Collectotrichum gleosporiodes (Collego), Colletotrichum gloeosporioides (Binomial) and Streptomyces viridochromogenes (Bialaphos and Glufosinate). Virulence for pathogens and their environmental requirement are major constraints for bioherbicide development. Specific bio-herbicides should be useful in finding position in irrigated fields, wildlife while thriving weeds with pests or resistant weed control.


synthetic chemicals in weed control, pesticide toxification, residues in plant systems and soil, eco-friendly weed control technologies, bioherbicides, mode of action

Amsellem, Z., Sharon, A., Gressel, J., Quimby, P.C. Jr. (1990). Complete abolition of high inoculum threshold of two mycoherbicides (Alternaria cassiae and A. crassa) when applied in invert emulsion. Phytopathology, 80(10), 925–929. DOI:

Aneja, K.R., Khan, S.A., Aneja, A. (2017). Bioherbicides: Strategies, challenges and prospects. In: Developments in fungal biology and applied mycology, Satyanarayana, T., Deshmukh, S., Johri, B. (eds.). Springer, Singapore, 449–470. DOI:

Ani, O., Onu, O., Okoro, G., Uguru, M. (2018). Overview of biological methods of weed control. In: Biological approaches for controlling weeds, Radhakrishnan, R. (ed.),. IntechOpen, London. DOI:

Auld, B.A., Hetherington, S.D., Smith, H.E. (2003). Advances in bioherbicide formulation. Weed Biol. Manag., 3(2), 61–67. DOI:

Bailey, K.L. (2014). The bioherbicide approach to weed control using plant pathogens. In: Integrated Pest Management: Current Concepts and Ecological Perspective, Abrol, D.P. (ed.). Academic Press – Elsevier, 245–266. DOI:

Beckie, H.J. (2011). Herbicide-resistant weed management: focus on glyphosate. Pest Manag. Sci., 67, 1037–1048. DOI:

Beckie, H.J., Hall, L.M., Meers,S., Laslo, J.J., Stevenson, F.C. (2004). Management practices influencing herbicide resistance in wild oat. Weed Technol., 18(3), 853–859. DOI:

Beckie, H., Brenzil, C., Holzgang, G. (2007a). Herbicide resistance testing (1996–2006): Results of samples submitted to the Crop Protection Lab, Saskatchewan Agriculture and Food Report to the Weed Sub-council, Saskatchewan Advisory Council on Soils & Agronomy Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Saskatoon, SK, pp. 22.

Beckie, H., Leeson, J.Y., Thomas, A.G., Hall, L.M., Brenzil, C.A., Andrews, T., Brown, K.R., Van Acker, R.C. (2007b). Prairie weed survey of herbicide-resistant wild oat from 2001 to 2003. Weed Survey Series, Publ. 06-2. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Saskatoon, SK, pp. 49.

Beckie, H., Julia, J., Leeson, Y., Thomas, A.G., Brenzil, C.A. (2008a). Weed resistance monitoring in the Canadian Prairies. Weed Technol., 22(3), 530–543. DOI:

Beckie, H.J., Julia, Y., Leeson, A., Thomas, G., Hall, L.M., Brenzil, C.A. (2008b). Risk assessment of weed resistance in the Canadian Prairies. Weed Technol., 22(4), 741–746. DOI:

Beckie, H.J., Ashworth, M.B., Flower, K.C. (2019). Herbicide resistance management: recent developments and trends. Plants, 8(6), 161. DOI:

Berestetskiy, A., Sokornova, S. (2018). Production and stabilization of mycoherbicides, biological approaches for controlling weeds. In: Biological Approaches for Controlling Weeds, Radhakrishnan, R. (ed.). IntechOpen, London. DOI:

Boyette, C.D., Hoagland, R.E., Weaver, M.A., Stetina, K. (2012). Biological Control Potential of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides for Coffee Senna (Cassia occidentalis). Am. J. Plant Sci., 3(4), 430–436. DOI:

Cai, X., Gu, M. (2016). Bioherbicides in organic horticulture. Horticulturae, 2(2). 3. DOI:

Carbonari, C.A., Latorre, D.O., Gomes, G.L., Velini, E.D., Owens, D.K., Pan, Z., Dayan, F.E. (2016). Resistance to glufosinate is proportional to phosphinothricin acetyltransferase expression and activity in LibertyLink(®) and WideStrike(®) cotton. Planta, 243(4), 925–933. DOI:

Charudattan, R. (2001). Biological control of weeds by means of plants pathogens: Significance for integrated weed management in modern agro-ecology. Biocontrol, 46, 229–260. DOI:

Charudattan, R., Prange, V.J., Devalerio, J.T. (1996). Exploration of the use of the “Bialaphos Genes” for improving bioherbicide efficacy. Weed Technol., 10(3), 625–636. DOI:

Cordeau, S., Triolet, M., Wayman, S., Steinberg, C., Guillemin, J. (2016). Bioherbicides: Dead in the water? A review of the existing products for integrated weed management. J. Crop Prot., 87, 44–49. DOI:

Dash, S., Sethi D. (2016). Benefits and constraints of using bioherbicide in weed management. Rashtriya Krishi, 1(2), 23–24

Dayan, F.E., Duke, S.O. (2014). Natural compounds as next generation herbicides. Plant Physiol., 166(3), 1090. DOI:

El-Sayed, W. (2005). Biological control of weeds with pathogens: Current status and future trends. J. Plant. Dis. Prot., 112(3), 209–221.

Fantke, P., Friedrick, R., Jolliet, O. (2012). Health impact and damage cost assessment of pesticides in Europe. Environ. Int., 49(15), 9–17. DOI:

Gelvin, S.B. (2003). Agrobacterium-mediated plant transformation: the biology behind the “gene-jockeying” tool. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev., 67(1), 16–37.–37.2003 DOI:

Gerwick, B.C., Sparks, T.C. (2014). Natural products for pest control: An analysis of their role, value and future. Pest Manag. Sci., 70(8), 1169–1185. DOI:

Green, S. (2003). A review of the potential for the use of bioherbicides to control forest weeds in the UK. Forestry, 76(3), 285–298. DOI:

Hajek, A., Eilenberg, J. (2018). Biological control of weeds. In: Natural Enemies: An Introduction to Biological Control, Hajek, A.. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 243–288. DOI:

Harding, D.P., Raizada, M.N. (2015). Controlling weeds with fungi, bacteria and viruses: a review. Front. Plant Sci., 6, 659. DOI:

Hoagland, R.E., Boyette, C.D., Weaver, M.A., Abbas, H.K. (2007). Bioherbicides: research and risks. Toxin Rev., 26(4), 313–342. DOI:

Keren, I.N., Menalled, F.D., Weaver, D.K., Robison-Cox, J.F. (2015). Interacting agricultural pests and their effect on crop yield: application of a Bayesian decision theory approach to the joint management of Bromus tectorum and Cephus cinctus. PloS One, 10(2), e0118111. DOI:

Kremer, R.J. (2019). Bioherbicides and nanotechnology: Current status and future trends. In: Nano-Biopesticides Today and Future Perspectives, Koul, O. (ed.). Academic Press, Insect Biopesticide Research Centre, Jalandhar, India, 353–366. DOI:

Leeson, J.Y., Thomas, A.G. (2008). Impacts of direct seeding – weed dynamics. Proc. (2008) Saskatchewan Soil Conservation Association Annual Conference, Fuelling the Farm Indian Head, SK, 21–27.

Légère, A., Beckie, H.J., Stevenson, F.C., Thomas, A.G. (2000). Survey of management practices affecting the occurrence of wild oat (Avena fatua) resistance to acetyl-CoA carboxylase inhibitors. Weed Technol., 14(2), 366–376. DOI:[0366:SOMPAT]2.0.CO;2

Leghari, S.J., Leghari, U.A., Laghari, G.M., Buriro, M., Soomro, F.A. (2016). An overview on various weed control practices affecting crop yield. J. Chem. Biol. Phys. Sci., 6(1), 59–69.

Masi, M., Freda, F., Sangermano, F., Calabrò, V., Cimmino, A., Cristofaro, M., Meyer, S., Evidente, A. (2019). Radicinin, a fungal phytotoxin as a target-specific bioherbicide for invasive buffelgrass (Cenchrus ciliaris) control. Molecules, 24(6), 1086. DOI:

Mohammadi, G.R. (2013). Alternative weed control methods: a review. In: Weed and pest control – conventional and new challenges, Soloneski, S., Larramendy, M. (eds.). IntechOpen. DOI:

Nazarko, O.M., Acker, R.C.V., Entz, M.H. (2005). Strategies and tactics for herbicide use reduction in field crops in Canada: a review. Can. J. Plant Sci., 85, 457–479. DOI:

Oerke, E.C. (2006). Centenary review: Crop losses to pests. J. Agric. Sci., 144, 31–43. DOI:

Ortiz-Ribbing, L., Williams, M.M. (2006). Potential of Phomopsis amaranthicola and Microsphaeropsis amaranthi as bioherbicides for several weedy Amaranthus species. J. Crop Protect., 25, 39–46. DOI:

Pacanoski, Z. (2015). Bioherbicides. In: Herbicides: Physiology of Action, and Safety, Price, A., Kelton, J., Sarunaite L. (eds.). IntechOpen. DOI:

Pakistan Agricultural Research Council Islamabad (2013). Wheat in Pakistan a status paper. Islamabad, Pakistan.

Pal, K.K., Gardener, B.M. (2006). Biological control of plant pathogens. Plant Health Instr. DOI:

Rao, V.S. (2000). Principles of weed science. Science Publishers, Enfield, New Hampshire, USA. DOI:

Rehman, A., Jingdong, L., Shahzad, B., Chandio, A.A., Hussain, I., Nabi, G., Iqbal, M.S. (2015). Economic perspectives of major field crops of Pakistan: An empirical study. Pac. Sci. Rev. B: Hum. Soc. Sci., 1, 145e158. DOI:

Rodenburg, J., Demont, M., Zwart, S.J., Bastiaans, L. (2016). Parasitic weed incidence and related economic losses in rice in Africa. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 235, 306–317. DOI:

Saritha, M., Tollamadugu, N.V.K.V.P. (2019). The status of research and application of biofertilizers and biopesticides: global scenario. In: Recent Developments in Applied Microbiology and Biochemistry, Buddolla, V. (ed.). Academic Press, 195–207. DOI:

Shabana, Y.M., Stiles, C.M., Charudattan, R., Tabl, A.H.A. (2010). Evaluation of bioherbicidal control of tropical signalgrass, crabgrass, smutgrass, and torpedograss. Weed Technol., 24(2), 165–172. DOI:

Sims, B., Corsi, S., Gbehounou, G., Kienzle, J., Taguchi, M., Friedrich, T. (2018). Sustainable weed manage-ment for conservation agriculture: Options for smallholder farmers. Agriculture, 8(8), 118. DOI:

Singh, H.P., Batish, D.R., Kohli, R.K. (2006). Weeds and their management: Rationale and approaches. In: Handbook of Sustainable Weed Management, Singh, H.P., Batish, D.R., Kohli, R.K. (eds.). Haworth Press, New York, 1–20. DOI:

Sporleder, M., Lacey, L. (2013). Biopesticides. In: Insect pests of potato. Global Perspectives on Biology and Management, Giordanengo, P., Vincent, C., Alyokhin, A. (eds.). Elsevier, Oxford,UK), 463–497. DOI:

Templeton, G.E., Heiny, D.I. (1989). Improvement of fungi to enhance mycoherbicide potential. In: Biotechnology of Fungi for Improving Plant Growth, Whipps, J.M., Lumsden, R.D. (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,17–152.

Thomas, A.G., Derksen, D.A., Blackshaw, R.E., Acker, R.C.V., Légère, A., Watson, P.R., Turnbull, G.C. (2004). A multi study approach to understanding weed population shifts in medium- to long-term tillage systems. Weed Sci., 52, 874–880. DOI:

Watson, A.K., Wymore, L.A. (1989). Biological control, a component of integrated weed management. Proc. VII International Symposium of Biological Control of Weeds, Rome, Italy, 101–106.

Womack, J.G., Eccleston, G.M., Burge, M.N. (1996). A vegetable oil-based invert emulsion for mycoherbicide delivery. Biol. Control, 6(1), 23–28. DOI:

Xu, Z., Shi, M., Tian, Y., Zhao, P., Niu, Y., Liao, M. (2019). Dirhamnolipid produced by the pathogenic fungus Colletotrichum gloeosporioides BWH-1 and its herbicidal activity. Molecules, 24(16), 2969. DOI:

Yamane, T., Tanaka, R. (2013). Mass production of spores of lactic acid-producing Rhizopus oryzae NBRC 5384 on agar plate. Biotechnol. Prog., 29(4), 876–81. DOI:



Tauseef Anwar 
Department of Plant and Environmental Protection, PARC Institute of Advanced Studies in Agriculture, Islamabad
Huma Qureshi 
Department of Botany, University of Chakwal, Chakwal


Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


Articles are made available under the conditions CC BY 4.0 (until 2020 under the conditions CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).
Submission of the paper implies that it has not been published previously, that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.

The author signs a statement of the originality of the work, the contribution of individuals, and source of funding.