IPM in wheat. The EU requires IPM by 2014 - what does this mean??? 1.Blind Chemical control –Schematic and routine treatments 2.Chemical control based.

IPM in wheat

The EU requires IPM by 2014 -what does this mean???

1. Blind Chemical control– Schematic and routine treatments

2. Chemical control based on advice– Recommendation given by region often using broad spectrum

pesticides

3. Specific control– Use economic threshold levels. differentiate between pesticides

(including impact on beneficials)

4. Integrated plant protection– Use mainly cultural methods and only limited input of pesticides

5. Integrated agricultural production– Use and exploit all positive factors in the agro-ecosystem

Definition given by IOBC

• Two case studies:– fungicides in cereals

– herbicides in cereals

• National monitoring of diseases

• Data on variety susceptibility

• Data on fungicide efficacy. Need for lots of field trials which support the use of reduced rates

• Implematation of threshold models

Elements in wheat IPM

Need for treatment

No need (45 loc.)

Monitoring network

Susceptible variety Resistant variety

Major thresholds in wheatDisease Examples of threshold in CPO

Eyespot >35% plants attacked at GS 30-32

Mildew >10% plants attacked from GS 29 (S)

>25% plants attacked from GS 29 (R)

No treatments after GS 40

Septoria 4 days with precipitation from GS 32 (S)

5 days with precipitation from GS 37 (R)

Or attack on third leaf from GS 45-60

Brown rust >25% plants attacked (S)

Yellow rust GS 29-60 > 1% plants attacked (S)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

TFI –dose /ha

Dt/

ha

gra

in p

er h

a

Gross yield

Net yield

Control of Septoria in wheat -different input 6 trials from DK

Appropriate and reduced dosages of fungicides

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0

Total fungicide input (TFI)N

et

yie

ld g

ain

(d

t h

a-1

)

BCD 20 €CD 20 €C 20 €CD 10 €C 10 €BCD 10 €

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0

Total fungicide input (TFI)

Ne

t yie

ld g

ain

(d

t h

a-1

)

D 20 €CD 20 €D 10 €CD 10 €

Resistant cultivar Susceptible cultivar

A: GS 25-31. B: GS 32-36. C: GS 37-50. D: GS 51-64

Optimal dose depends on cultivar and grain price

TF

I/Rel

ativ

e d

ose

0

0,4

0,8

1,2

1,6

2

85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04

TFI

Dose

Source: Farmstat/Kleffmann/Pesticide statistics

Development of fungicide use in winter wheat

0.125 0.25 0.375 0.5 0.75

0

5

10

15

Dose. l/ha

Net

loss

com

pare

d w

ith o

ptim

um.

dt/h

a

15.0

2.1

9.8

1.1

5.9

0.7

5.3

1.0

8.4

1.5

Source: Danish Agricultural Advisory Service

Summary of 73 Danish field trials on ear treatment in winter wheat

TFI Fungicides

Winter wheat

Spring barley

Official statistics (2005-2007)

0.71 0.34

Target 0.65 0.35

CPO (trial results)

0.7 0.4

Fungicide use stays close to the optimum

• Herbicide performance is affected by many biotic and physicochemical factors such as:– weed flora– growth stage of weeds– crop competitiveness– climatic conditions– application technique– adjuvants– the presence of other pesticides in the spray

solution

Herbicides in cereals

Efficacy profile for 60 weed species

DSS for weed control

DSS for weed control

Treatment Frequency Index

Net

yie

ld lo

ss c

om

par

edw

ith

op

tim

um

do

se. d

t/h

a

Source: Danish Agricultural Advisory Service

Summary of 130 Danish field trials on weed control in spring barley

TFI Fungicides TFI Herbicides

Winter wheat

Spring barley

Winter wheat

Spring barley

Official statistics (2003-2005)

0.71 0.34 1.32 0.99

Target 0.65 0.35 0.95 0.70

CPO potential 0.7 0.4 0.7 0.5

• Why is the current herbicide use in cereals onsiderably higher than the targets?– Because an integrated approach was

not adopted

• Decision-making for weed control is a three step procedure– Consider preventive measures such as

crop rotation or cultivation techniques to reduce the potential losses due to weeds

– Assess the need to apply herbicides (threshold)

– Herbicide choice and dose rate

Monitoring for weeds is difficult and time consuming

Autonomous sprayer with weed sensor. The future?

• Conclusions:– Only integrated pest control approaches

will be sustainable

– Integrated disease and insect control can often be practised without major changes in the cropping practice (1-year perspective) .

– Integrated weed management often requires major changes in cropping practices (multi-year perspective)

Barriers for using thresholds and DSS

”As little as possible. as much as neccessary”

Factors influencing the optimal theoretical pestice need

Spray capacity.No. of hours to spray.

timing

Family. spare time.holidays.

Risk of crop failure Scaling up trials to fields

Problematic areas. limited harvest capacity.

Employees.education.

working hours

Climate changes. unknown factors.

Poor control experiences

Other activities on the farm. animal. job?

Management and available

information

Optimal pesticideuse in DK 1.7-2.3 TFI

Price relations

What do growers want?

• Reliable and robust solutions

• Economically sound solutions

• Simple and easy messages

• A dialogue with advisors

If they should do something else; they need incentives!

Jokers!• Increasing problems with fungicide

resistance• Limitations in available fungicides (DK has

no chlorothalonil, prochloraz)• Registration of ”heavy-loaded fungicides”

triazole mixtures!• Climate changes have been estimated to

increase disease risk and TFI