Advancing integrated pest management: Strategies for minimizing pesticide use

Introduction Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a holistic approach to pest control that emphasizes ecological principles and sustainable practices. It is a comprehensive approach to pest control that aims to minimize pesticide use while effectively managing pest populations (Barzman et al., 2015) [4] . It involves a combination of strategies, including cultural, physical, biological, and chemical methods. Since the initiation of "integrated control," which is defined as "applied pest control which combines and integrates biological and chemical control" (Smith et al. 1959) [13] , IPM has advanced significantly. Entomologists first came up with the idea in response to widespread use of broad-spectrum insecticides, insect outbreaks brought on by the eradication of natural enemies, and the rise of pesticide resistance (Barzman et al., 2015) [4] . Today, IPM covers every facet of plant protection. The definition of IPM that is primarily based on the one provided by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, adding the concept of "ecological justification" to that of "economic justification" and replacing the term "pest control techniques" with "plant protection methods". However, IPM is a multifaceted method that involves multiple economic sectors and draws from a variety of disciplines. Producing specific recommendations that are applicable to the diversity of global agriculture is a challenging task (Barzman et al. 2014) [3] . In order to keep pest populations below economically damaging levels while reducing risks to the environment and public health, IPM is a comprehensive, ecological approach to managing pests in agricultural systems. It involves the strategic integration of multiple control methods, including cultural, biological, and chemical tactics (Angon et al., 2023) [1] . Rather than depending exclusively on reactive pesticide treatments, IPM stresses the use of preventive measures, monitoring, and decision-making based on defined criteria (Rossi et al., 2023; Deguine et al., 2021) [10,6] . IPM includes: preventing pest issues through cultural practices like crop production and sanitation; tracking pest populations and their natural enemies; utilizing economic thresholds to inform management choices; utilizing a combination of chemical, physical, and biological control methods; and assessing the efficacy of interventions (Scheff and Phillips, 2022; Han et al., 2024) [12,7] . IPM aims to maximize agricultural productivity while maintaining ecosystem services and reducing the negative effects of conventional pesticide dependence by combining multidisciplinary knowledge and a systems-based approach (Saroop and Tamchos, 2024; Baker et al., 2020) [11,2] . (Barzman et al., 2015) [4] . The general principles of IPM are shown in Fig. 1 and are as follows:

General principles of IPM

Monitoring Harmful organisms must be monitored

• observations in the field,

• scientifically sound warning,

• forecasting and early diagnosis systems, where feasible,

• Use of advice from professionally qualified advisors.

Decision-making

• Based on the results of the monitoring the professional user has to decide whether and when to apply plant protection measures. • Robust and scientifically sound threshold values

• For harmful organisms, threshold levels defined for the region, specific areas, crops and particular climatic conditions must be taken into account before treatment.

Non-chemical methods

• Sustainable biological, physical and other non-chemical methods must be chosen than chemical methods if they provide reasonable pest control.

Pesticide selection

• The pesticides applied shall be as specific as possible for the target • shall have the least side effects on human health, non-target organisms and the environment.

Reduced pesticide use

• reduced application frequency or partial applications,

• considering that the level of risk in vegetation is acceptable and • they do not increase the risk for development of resistance in populations of harmful organisms.

Anti-resistance strategies

• Use of multiple pesticides with different modes of action. [14,4] (Fig. 2):

Evaluation

Pesticide Use Reduction

When pesticides are necessary, IPM emphasizes the use of the least toxic and most selective options. This includes the use of reduced-risk pesticides, targeted applications, and the development of pest management decision support systems (Ahuja et al., 2015; Alam et al., 2016; Ragunathan and Divakar, 2020) [16,19,15] . Examples:

• Using selective pesticides: Targeting specific pests while minimizing harm to beneficial organisms. • Applying pesticides accurately and efficiently: Reducing the amount of pesticide used and preventing drift.

• Adhering to integrated pest management thresholds:

Only applying pesticides when the pest population exceeds

Comparing different Strategies of IPM

IPM encompasses a variety of strategies to minimize pesticide use. Habitat manipulation focuses on modifying the environment to favor beneficial organisms and deter pests, offering long-term benefits like biodiversity enhancement but requiring upfront investment (Ragunathan and Divakar, 2020) [15] . Cultural controls involve adjusting agricultural practices, such as planting resistant varieties or improving sanitation, for relatively easy and often cost-effective pest prevention (Ahuja et al., 2015) [16] . Biological control leverages natural enemies, like predators and parasites, for highly specific and environmentally friendly control, though it may require specialized knowledge and can be costly (Alam et al., 2016) [19] . Monitoring and early detection enable timely interventions, minimizing the need for broadspectrum pesticides, but require consistent effort and potentially specialized training (Paez Chavez et al., 2018) [18] . Finally, pesticide use optimization emphasizes judicious use of pesticides when necessary, prioritizing selective options and adhering to thresholds to minimize environmental impact and reduce resistance risks (Leskey et al., 2020) [17] . Choosing the right IPM strategy depends on a variety of factors, including the specific pest, the crop being grown, the environmental conditions, and the available resources. Often, the most effective approach is to combine multiple strategies to create a comprehensive IPM strategy.

Benefits of Advancing IPM

• Reduced Environmental Impact: Minimizing pesticide use protects beneficial organisms, reduces water pollution, and conserves natural resources. • Improved Human Health: Reducing exposure to pesticides can improve human health and safety (Boudh and Singh, 2019 and Rejesus and Jones, 2020) [5,9] . • Sustainable Agriculture: IPM practices promote long-term sustainability of agricultural systems. • Cost-Effectiveness: IPM can be more cost-effective in the long run compared to relying solely on pesticides. • Enhanced agricultural sustainability: Promotes long-term productivity and profitability by reducing pest-related losses and improving soil health (Narayanan et al., 2022 and Rejesus and Jones, 2020) [8,9] . • Improved food quality: Reduces pesticide residues on crops, ensuring safer and healthier food for consumers (Boudh and Singh, 2019; Narayanan et al., 2022 and Rejesus and Jones, 2020) [5,8,9] . • Increased biodiversity: Supports the conservation of beneficial organisms and promotes a healthier agroecosystem (Boudh and Singh, 2019 and Rejesus and Jones, 2020) [5,9] . the public about the benefits of IPM and encouraging its adoption.

Challenges and Future Directions

Conclusion

Advancing IPM through the implementation of these strategies is essential for achieving sustainable agriculture and mitigating the negative impacts of pesticide use. Continued research, development, and implementation of innovative IPM approaches are crucial for addressing the challenges of pest management in a changing world. By advancing IPM strategies, we can create a more sustainable and resilient agricultural system that minimizes pesticide use and protects both human and environmental health.

References

1. Angon PB, Mondal S, Jahan I, Datto M, Antu UB, Ayshi FJ, et al. Integrated pest management (IPM) in agriculture and its role in maintaining ecological balance and biodiversity. Adv Agric. 2023;2023(1):5546373.
2. Baker BP, Green TA, Loker AJ. Biological control and integrated pest management in organic and conventional systems. Biol Control. 2020;140:104095.
3. Barzman MS, Bertschinger L, Dachbrodt-Saaydeh S, Graf B, Jensen JE, Joergensen LN, et al. Integrated Pest Management policy, research and implementation: European initiatives. In: Integrated Pest Management: Experiences with Implementation, Global Overview, Vol. 4. 2014. p. 415-428.
4. Barzman M, Bàrberi P, Birch ANE, Boonekamp P, Dachbrodt-Saaydeh S, Graf B, et al. Eight principles of integrated pest management. Agron Sustain Dev. 2015;35(4):1199-1215.
5. Boudh S, Singh JS. Pesticide contamination: environmental problems and remediation strategies. In: Emerging and ecofriendly approaches for waste management. 2019. p. 245269.
6. Deguine JP, Aubertot JN, Flor RJ, Lescourret F, Wyckhuys KA, Ratnadass A. Integrated pest management: good intentions, hard realities. A review. Agron Sustain Dev. 2021;41(3):38.
7. Han P, Rodriguez-Saona C, Zalucki MP, Liu SS, Desneux N. A theoretical framework to improve the adoption of green Integrated Pest Management tactics. Commun Biol. 2024;7(1):337.
8. Narayanan M, Kandasamy S, He Z, Kumarasamy S. Ecological impacts of pesticides on soil and water ecosystems and its natural degradation process. In: Pesticides in the natural environment. Elsevier; 2022. p. 2349.
9. Rejesus RM, Jones MS. Perspective: enhancing economic evaluations and impacts of integrated pest management farmer field schools (IPM-FFS) in low-income countries. Pest Manag Sci. 2020;76(11):3527-3536.
10. Rossi V, Caffi T, Salotti I, Fedele G. Sharing decisionmaking tools for pest management may foster implementation of Integrated Pest Management. Food Sec. 2023;15(6):1459-1474.
11. Saroop S, Tamchos S. Impact of pesticide application: Positive and negative side. In: Pesticides in a Changing Environment. 2024. p. 155-178.
12. Smith R, Van Den Bosch R, Hagen K, Stern V. The integration of chemical and biological control of the spotted alfalfa aphid: the integrated control concept. Hilgardia. 1959;29(2):81-101.
13. Zhou W, Arcot Y, Medina RF, Bernal J, Cisneros-Zevallos L, Akbulut ME. Integrated pest management: an update on the sustainability approach to crop protection. ACS Omega. 2024;9(40):41130-41147.
14. Ragunathan V, Divakar BJ. Integrated pest management strategies. In: Molecular Biology of the Biological Control of Pests and Diseases of Plants. CRC Press; 2020. p. 173196.
15. Ahuja DB, Ahuja UR, Singh SK, Singh N. Comparison of integrated pest management approaches and conventional (non-IPM) practices in late-winter-season cauliflower in Northern India. Crop Prot. 2015;78:232-238.
16. Leskey TC, Short BD, Ludwick D. Comparison and refinement integrated pest management tactics for Halyomorpha halys (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) management in apple orchards. J Econ Entomol. 2020;113(4):1725-1734.
17. Paez Chavez J, Jungmann D, Siegmund S. A comparative study of integrated pest management strategies based on impulsive control. J Biol Dyn. 2018;12(1):318-341.
18. Alam MZ, Haque MM, Islam MS, Hossain E, Hasan SB, Hasan SB, Hossain MS. Comparative study of integrated pest management and farmers practices on sustainable environment in the rice ecosystem. Int J Zool. 2016;2016(1):7286040.