Current Status and Recent Developments in Biopesticide Use

Biopesticides have attracted attention in pest management in recent decades, and have long been promoted as prospective alternatives to synthetic pesticides. Biopesticides have also attracted great interest in the international research community, with a significant increase in the number of publications devoted to the subject. Recently, new substances, like strains of the fungus Talaromyces flavus SAY-Y-94-01, extracts of the plant Clitoria ternatea (butterfly pea), products of the fungus Trichoderma harzianum, products of the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis var. tenebrionis strain Xd3 (Btt-Xd3), the alkaloid compound oxymatrine, fermentation products of the bacterium Lactobacillus casei strain LPT-111, stilbenes accumulated in grape canes, and olive mill wastes, have been reported in the literature as promising compounds for use as biopesticides, but more field research is required to assess the effects on specific pest problems under diverse cropping systems. Nevertheless, biopesticides have not yet reached the desired level of use, whereby they could displace the dominance of chemical pesticides, given that the commercialization of new products in the market is lagging behind. Currently, biopesticides comprise a small share of the total crop protection market globally, with a value of about $3 billion worldwide, accounting for just 5% of the total crop protection market. Fewer biopesticide-active substances are registered in the European Union (EU) than in the United States, India, Brazil, or China, due to long and complex registration processes in the EU, which follow the model for the registration of conventional pesticides. Nanoformulations and microencapsulation technologies can improve the stability and residual action of biopesticide products, and this could increase their field use. Regulations that promote registration of low-risk compounds with the provision of incentives could also facilitate commercialization and availability of biopesticides in the market

Farmers’ Training on Pesticide Use Is Associated with Elevated Safety Behavior

Occupational exposure to pesticides in agricultural applications may cause acute and long-term health effects to farmers, and thus research on factors that reduce exposure is useful. However, studies on the relevance and effectiveness of training are limited. The association of previous training in the form of intensive seminars relating to pesticide use (e.g., use of spraying equipment, application parameters, use of personal protective equipment, risks to human health and the environment) with farmers’ knowledge and behavior in pesticide use was studied via the self-reporting method in a purposive sample of 82 trained and non-trained farmers. Most trained farmers showed higher levels of knowledge of pesticide use, higher levels of beliefs in pesticide hazard control, and higher levels of safety behavior than non-trained farmers. Knowledge of pesticide use and beliefs regarding pesticide hazard control were significantly correlated with safety behavior in both groups of farmers. Concerning farmers’ beliefs regarding pesticide hazard control, trained farmers were more likely to think that safety precautions work very well and less likely to feel they had little control over avoiding pesticide hazards. Overall, previous training was associated with increased levels of farmers’ knowledge of pesticides and beliefs about pesticide hazard control, was accompanied by elevated safety behavior in farmers, and thus was connected with lower occupational exposure to pesticides. Interventions that facilitate knowledge and compliance with safety behaviors should become a priority for decreasing exposure to pesticides among farmers

Weed Competition Effects on Growth and Yield of Spring-Sown White Lupine

White lupine (Lupinus albus L.) is an annual legume that is grown for both seeds and green biomass, but several agronomic aspects of this crop, including response to weed competition, have not been studied extensively. Field experiments over two growing seasons (2012 and 2016) were carried out in Orestiada, Greece, to study the growth and development of spring-sown white lupine under season-long weed competition from natural weed flora compared with its growth without weed competition. Treatments were arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replications and included (i) a non-treated (weedy) control, where weeds (Chenopodium album and Sorghum halepense) remained in the plots throughout the experiments and (ii) a weed-free control, where weeds were removed upon crop emergence and the plots were kept free of weeds throughout the experiments by hand removal. The presence of Chenopodium album and Sorghum halepense reduced the aboveground dry matter accumulation of white lupine ‘Multitalia’ at 7 weeks after crop emergence by 18.0% in the first growing season and 29.5% in the second growing season, while the corresponding decrease in the aboveground dry matter accumulation at 9 weeks after crop emergence was 25.3 and 33.4%. However, the reduction in dry matter accumulation was limited to lower levels after flowering (9.9% in the first and 12.8% in the second growing season). In both growing seasons, values of the ability to withstand competition (AWC) index were lower at 7 and 9 weeks from crop emergence than at maturity. Seed yields were 1.58 Mg per ha under weedy conditions and 2.20 Mg per ha under weed free conditions in the first growing season, and 1.59 and 2.32 Mg per ha, respectively, in the second growing season. The values of the relative yield loss (RYL) index for seed yield were 28.2% in the first growing season and 31.5% in the second growing season. Overall, white lupine growth and seed yield was significantly affected by the occurrence of weeds mostly at the early vegetative stages, resulting in the potential yield not being achieved due to weed competition. Future research on weed competition across several sites and years would be useful to define more clearly the critical period of weed control in white lupine

Farmers’ willingness to use lower risk pesticides for pest control: Barriers and facilitators in northern Greece

Understanding farmers’ preferences and behaviors in pesticide handling is essential for promoting sustainable chemical pest management practices that protect both the health of farmers and the ecosystem. The aim of this work was to fill the knowledge gap in farmers’ behaviors when using pesticides by addressing whether farmers would prefer to use lower risk pesticides for the management of the most common pests in their crops. Data were gathered with face-to-face interviews from a farmers’ survey in northern Greece. Almost three quarters (76%) of the farmers noted that they would prefer to use all available pesticides for the management of the most common pests of their crops, while only 24% stated they would prefer to use lower risk pesticides. Elderly and large-scale farmers were not willing to use lower risk pesticides. By contrast, educated farmers and those who applied pesticides more frequently (high number of applications) were found more willing to use lower risk pesticides. Finally, the probability of using lower risk pesticides increased significantly in trained farmers, in farmers with high perception of risk, and in farmers who cared to be informed about pesticides. Logistic regression indicated that previous training on pesticide handling, high perception of pesticide hazard, and upper secondary education positively influenced (P < 0.05) farmers’ willingness to use lower risk pesticides on their farms. On the contrary, age, primary education, and number of pesticide applications in a season (less than 3) showed a negative relationship (P < 0.05) with farmers’ willingness to use lower risk pesticides on their farms. Training in the correct use of pesticides is a basic pillar of safety in pesticide use and can improve farmers’ willingness to use lower risk pesticides

Drivers of Personal Safety in Agriculture: A Case Study with Pesticide Operators

Agriculture is a hazardous occupational industry for farmers and farm workers; therefore, decisions to improve safety in the working place require understanding behavior of farmers and farm workers and factors affecting it. This study examined factors influencing perceived importance of personal safety and safe behavior of farmers in terms of personal protective equipment (PPE) use in pesticide spraying. Data were collected from a previous survey of farmers in rural areas of northern Greece. Over half of the farmers (55.4%) perceived low importance of personal safety in pesticide spraying. Perceived importance of personal safety increased in young farmers, with high education level, and large land area as well as with high perception of risk, knowledge of pesticide toxicity, seminar in pesticide use, access to internet, and perceived usefulness of PPE. Most farmers showed unsafe behavior in PPE use in terms of using long-sleeved shirt, long pants, chemical resistant gloves, socks, and shoes (58.9%). Farmers perceived low risk of pesticides (65.2%), despite the fact that two out of three farmers (66.1%) perceived high usefulness of PPE. Safe behavior in pesticide use increased in young farmers, with high education level, and small land area as well as with high perception of risk, knowledge of pesticide toxicity, seminar in pesticide use, access to internet, and perceived usefulness of PPE. Binary logistic regression analysis showed that knowledge of pesticide toxicity, education, age, and farm size were significant predictors of perceived importance of personal safety. In addition, self-confidence in spraying, following colleagues&#8217; behaviors, risk perception, knowledge of pesticide toxicity, and farm size were significant predictors of safe behavior in terms of PPE use during pesticide spraying. Findings highlight differences in how farmers perceive personal safety and how they finally respond in daily action with respect to personal safety measures. Perception of risk, knowledge of pesticide toxicity, and farm size were common significant predictors for both variables. Lifelong education targeting promotion of knowledge about pesticide risks among farmers should be always a priority