Beheersing van bodempathogenen via bodemgezondheidsmaatregelen : Een overzicht van de beschikbare kennis voor een selectie van akkerbouwgewassen met hun bijbehorende bodemziekten

Abstract

This report provides a comprehensive overview of soil health measures against soil pests for the eightmain arable crops in the Netherlands (potatoes, chicory, cereals, rapeseed, carrots, legumes, sugarbeet and onion). Soil pests have been controlled in the past by soil- or seed treatment within secticides. However, direct control possibilities decrease due to the shrinking of the insecticide package. However, the problem remains; soil pests are an essential part of the cultivation of arablecrops. A lot of attention is paid to measures that can improve soil quality and thereby potentiallyreduce pest pressure and damage. This report first provides an overview of the soil stages of soil pests,followed by a start to defining a potential resilient soil. Generically, soil health measures are discussed,followed by a brief look at the above-ground phase (Chapter 1). Chapter 2 identifies existing and potentially available soil health measures by species/group of soil infestation, followed by a summary by pest (Chapter 3), white spots (Chapter 4) and the conclusions with a summary table indicating soil health measures by species, including the status of the measure for the specific species (Chapter 5). In today’s agricultural systems where soil disturbance occurs to a greater or lesser extent, the natural suppression of soil pests by entomopathogenic fungi and nematodes is very limited. The disturbance also has an effect on the natural enemies active in and on the soil, but the impact on these organisms is assessed lower. The complex to natural enemies contributes to the control of soil pests, since eggs and larval stages of soil pests serve as food. If this contribution is large enough, it can be talked about a ‘pest-resistant soil’, which provides a basic level of protection against damage from soil pests. In the soil there are specific and generic natural enemies that parasitize or preach on soil pests, but of which little is known and which is therefore hardly paid attention to. Here lies a challenge to get a maximum control effect from these supporting organisms against soil pests with better soilmanagement (less disturbance). This is accompanied by a good knowledge of the biology of both thenatural enemy and the soil pest, looking at how and when the most optimal use of a soil health measure can be made. In addition to the use of natural enemies, the individual soil health measures are more or less relevant to the different soil pests. Crop rotation plays a particular role in the grassy soil pests and fly pests with a specific host plant, but a wider rotation often leads to less rapid pestdevelopment in any crop. Organic matter is increasingly in the spotlight, but we do not have sufficient knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages when it comes to the development and stimulation of natural and soil pests themselves. For some soil pests, stimulating natural enemies appears to be a perspective measure, while for other soil pests targeted intervention offersmore perspective. This often also has to do with where the different stages of the soil pests are located in the soil. It is clearthat literature offers many potentially attractive alternatives, but that it is necessary to take a closelook at how these measures are used in a practical and cost-effective way. With the white spots andthe table on the status of soil health measures on the individual soil pest species, this report provides a guide to explore more sustainable directions. The solution direction will vary per soil pest, with one soil pest being more manageable than the other. In addition, it is indicated that the approach to soil pathogens and soil pests can be better coordinated.