Abstract
Integrated Pest and Pollinator Management (IPPM) advocates a pollinator-friendly approach to Integrated Pest Management (IPM), with emphasis on the need to protect pollinators from the harmful effects of chemical pesticides. However, in order to link the goals of IPM and pollinator management both more formally and comprehensively, we introduce here a unified decision metric, termed the joint Economic Impact Level (jEIL). The joint EIL integrates the use of economic injury levels, as well-established in IPM, with a proposed pollinator equivalent; the Pollinator Economic Impact Level (PEIL). This joint metric can hence be used to weigh the cost and benefit of pest and pollinator management in a holistic sense – including where these practices interact, and remedial actions (such as the avoidance of pesticide use during flowering) are taken. However, especially when priorities are unclear (when biocontrol and pollination services trade off; flower strips exacerbate pest injury; pests and pollinators show non-linear effects on yield); the joint EIL can be of particular value to identify the most beneficial action. To render this decision metric actionable, we further introduce the concept of pest and pollinator Action Thresholds (AT pe and AT po). We follow theoretical description of these metrics with a practical example for strawberry, to demonstrate calculation of a joint EIL in support of IPPM decision making. As a whole, the joint EIL provides a flexible framework for integrated decision making, in support of timely management action. This decision metric (supported by a forthcoming jEIL tool) could hence be of broad practical value for farmers, agricultural advisors, researchers, and commercial and governmental agencies.
Highlights
Injury from pests and insect-provided pollination services are of large relevance to yield in the majority of the world’s food crops (Klein et al 2007; Oerke 2006)
Recent years have witnessed growing awareness of the widespread acute and chronic effects of pesticides on pollinators such as wild and managed bees (Godfray et al 2014; Siviter et al 2018). These effects can translate into impacts on crop pollination service (Brittain and Potts 2011; Stanley et al 2015)
Et al 2016; Bartomeus and Dicks 2018). This explicit incorporation into Integrated Pest Management (IPM) of the goal of protecting pollinators from the harmful effects of pesticides has been termed by Biddinger and Rajotte (2015) as Integrated Pest and Pollinator Management (IPPM), and was developed into an expanded framework by Egan et al (2020)
Summary
Injury from pests (including pest insects, weeds, and pathogens) and insect-provided pollination services are of large relevance to yield in the majority of the world’s food crops (Klein et al 2007; Oerke 2006). The effects of practices employed to manage pests and pollinators are not necessarily independent, . Recent years have witnessed growing awareness of the widespread acute and chronic effects of pesticides on pollinators such as wild and managed bees (Godfray et al 2014; Siviter et al 2018). These effects can translate into impacts on crop pollination service (Brittain and Potts 2011; Stanley et al 2015). Owing to the potentially large and negative effects of pesticides on pollinators, up-take of more balanced pest control strategies – such as those inherent in an IPM approach – are increasingly demanded
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have