Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Microbial biopesticides for integrated crop management : an assessment of environmental and regulatory sustainability

By Dave Chandler, G. (Gill) Davidson, Wyn Grant, Justin Greaves and Mark (G. Mark) Tatchell

Abstract

Herbivorous insects and mites, plant diseases and weeds are major impediments to the production of food crops and are increasingly difficult to control with conventional chemicals. This paper focuses on microbial control agents with an emphasis on augmentation. There are marked differences in the availability of products in different countries which can be explained in terms of differences in their regulatory systems. Regulatory failure arises from the application of an inappropriate synthetic pesticides model. An understanding of regulatory innovation is necessary to overcome these problems. Two attempts at remedying regulatory failure in the UK and the Netherlands are assessed. Scientific advances can feed directly into the regulatory process and foster regulatory innovation

Topics: S1, GE
Publisher: Elsevier
Year: 2008
OAI identifier: oai:wrap.warwick.ac.uk:1388

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2005). A Beauveria phylogeny inferred from nuclear ITS and EF1-a sequences: evidence for cryptic diversification and links to Cordyceps teleomorphs. doi
  2. (2000). A greenhouse without pesticides: fact or fantasy? doi
  3. (1996). Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). doi
  4. (2007). Are exotic natural enemies an effective way of controlling invasive plants? doi
  5. (1998). Biocontrol – risky but necessary? doi
  6. (1997). Biopesticides at the crossroads: IPM products or chemical clones?
  7. (2000). Biopesticides; a review of their action, applications and efficacy. doi
  8. (2007). Committee on Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, Draft Report on Thematic Strategy on the Sustainable Use of Pesticides,
  9. (1993). Competitive interaction between strains of Verticillium lecanii on two insect hosts. doi
  10. (1969). Determinants of innovation in organizations. doi
  11. (2005). Directory of microbial pesticides for agricultural crops in OECD countries. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. http://www.agr.gc.ca/env/pdf/cat_e_pdf (last accessed 28/06/2007)
  12. (1993). Environmental issues involved in biological control of rangeland grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acrididae) with exotic agents. doi
  13. (2003). Environmental safety of inundative application of a naturally occurring biocontrol agent, Serratia entomophila. In doi
  14. (1996). Fate of biological control introductions: Monitoring an Australian fungal pathogen of grasshoppers in North America. doi
  15. (2004). Final report of the sub-group of the Advisory Committee on Pesticides on: Alternatives to conventional pest control techniques in the UK: A scoping study of the potential for their wider use.
  16. (2007). How to evaluate the environmental safety of microbial plant protection products: a proposal. doi
  17. (2001). Indirect ecological effects in biological control: the challenge and the opportunity. In doi
  18. (2003). Indirect effects of host-specific biological control agents. doi
  19. (2005). Indirect nontarget effects of host-specific biological control agents: Implications for biological control. doi
  20. (2003). Innovation in the public sector. doi
  21. (1993). Insect pathology. doi
  22. (2000). Interactions between entomopathogenic fungi and other natural enemies; Implications for biological control. doi
  23. (2003). Introduced species and their missing parasites. doi
  24. (2001). Microbial interactions and biocontrol in the rhizosphere. doi
  25. (2004). Natural enemies; an introduction to biological control. Cambridge UK: doi
  26. (2003). Parasite local adaptation: Red Queen vs. Suicide King. Trends doi
  27. (2005). Phylogeography of Metarhizium, an insect pathogenic fungus. doi
  28. (1998). Policy Networks Under Pressure (Aldershot: Ashgate)
  29. (2003). Population genetic structure of the lettuce root aphid, Pemphigus bursarius (L.), in relation to geographic distance, gene flow and host plant usage. doi
  30. (2000). Pressure Groups and British Politics. doi
  31. (2003). Regulatory requirements for ecotoxicological assessments of microbial insecticides – how relevant are they? In doi
  32. (2005). Risk analysis and management decisions for weed biological control agents: Ecological theory and modelling results. doi
  33. (2001). Safety of fungal biocontrol agents. In doi
  34. (2003). Safety of hyphomycete fungi as microbial control agents. In doi
  35. (2003). The British regulatory state: High modernism and hyper-innovation. Oxford UK: doi
  36. (2005). The challenges of interdisciplinary environmental research: the case of biopesticides.
  37. (2007). The fungal dimension of biological invasions. doi
  38. (2001). The government of risk: Understanding risk regulatory regimes. Oxford UK: doi
  39. (2004). The Manual of Biocontrol Agents. British Crop Protection Council,
  40. (2000). The Regulatory Craft: Controlling Risks, Solving Problems and Managing Compliance. Washington DC USA: doi
  41. (2005). Translating host-specificity test results into the real world: The need to harmonize the yin and yang of current testing procedures. doi
  42. (2005). Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States. doi
  43. (2005). What is regulatory innovation? In doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.