In this article we will discuss about the implementation of IPM for crop cultivation in developing countries.
Implementation of IPM for Rice Cultivation:
Major efforts in implementing IPM in irrigated rice have been carried out in Asia by the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) through the Inter Country Programme for the Development and Application of Integrated Pest Control in Rice in South and South-east Asia. This programme remains one of the best examples of IPM implementation in the tropical region.
It involves purposeful, direct efforts to change farmer practices in contrast to some more indirect routes of IPM technology diffusion in many industrialized, temperate environments. The programme itself has evolved into its present transnational form from a relatively small project supported by Australia in the late 1970s, following the large-scale pest outbreaks in several South-east Asian countries.
The first phase of the FAO programme (1980-86) focused on developing and testing the technical aspects of the IPM concept in its seven participating countries, viz. Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Thailand. More recently, the project has been directed towards enhancing farmers’ adoption of IPM.
The programme is supported by Australia, the Netherlands and the Arab Gulf Fund. One significant accomplishment of the programme has been to cause policy changes within several governments, in the form of official support of IPM as the means for national plant protection in the Philippines, Indonesia, India, Sri Lanka and Malaysia.
Indonesia:
A case study of the National IPM Programme in Indonesia as a part of the regional programme during 1989-1991 provides an interesting scenario. Indonesia subsidised up to 85 per cent of the cost of pesticides during the early 1980s. Following research findings showing the relation between brown planthopper outbreaks and high pesticide use, the Indonesian government banned the use of 57 of the 66 broad-spectrum pesticides used on rice.
By 1989, pesticide subsidies were no longer offered and IPM was declared as the national pest control strategy. These measures, created a favourable climate for the large scale implementation of IPM. Consequently, there was dramatic increase in Indonesian rice production; production rose from 38 to 45 million tonnes, while Indonesia went from a net importer of pesticides (US$ 47 million) to a net exporter (US$ 15 million).
The savings as a result of elimination of subsidies exceeded US$ 1 billion. It has been estimated that FAO training of 200,000 farmers in IPM techniques has resulted into a saving of $160 million in pesticide subsidies. By 2002, rice production reached 51 million tonnes, providing a good example of what progressive policies combined with massive farmer training can accomplish.
China:
China, which had been experimenting with IPM for the control of rice pests since early 1980s, was also invited to join the FAO project in 1989. During 1989-90 alone, nearly 1,60,000 farmers from over 2000 villages received IPM training. Compared with untrained farmers, IPM-trained farmers saved roughly a third of the pesticides in rice cultivation and still obtained 7 per cent higher yield.
It was estimated that the investment in IPM training generated a return of more than 400 per cent. Encouraged by these results, the Ministry of Agriculture has set up a National Steering Committee for the comprehensive prevention and control of diseases and insect pests to protect the nation’s rice crop and increase profits. The Committee conducts IPM tests, gives demonstrations and makes appraisals.
Philippines:
In Philippines, National IPM Programme was launched in 1993 and a total of 40,024 farmers have been trained during 1993-95, among whom 36,024 are rice farmers. Among 1,632 FFSs, 1470 were devoted to rice farmers. The increase in rice yield obtained by IPM farmers varied from 4.7 to 62 per cent. The expenditure on pesticide use (15% of total cost) was almost eliminated in case of IPM farmers.
India:
In India, the first IPM programme in rice was started at Cuttack in 1975 covering an area of about 1000 ha in 10 villages. As a result of implementation of a number of cultural practices and ETL based applications of insecticides, the number of applications was reduced from 3-4 to usually single one. Subsequently, an Operational Research Project (ORP) was instituted on integrated control of rice pests at six locations in five provinces.
This resulted in a reduction in the number of sprays and increased yield of the crop. On the basis of 5 years of ORP at Kuttanad in Kerala, it has been observed that, on an average, one-third of expenditure on plant protection operations can be saved by practising pest management methods. Prophylactic sprays and spray schedules have been abandoned by the cultivators and plant protection measures were taken only when the pest population exceeded economic threshold.
The validation of IPM in Basmati rice (Pusa Basmati 1) was demonstrated in village Shikohpur in Distt Baghpat (UP) during 1999. This village had the history of indiscriminate use of pesticides on this crop and some farmers had applied 10-12 rounds of highly toxic chemicals. The success of IPM approach during 1999 led entire village to follow and adopt this technology in an area of 120 ha in 2000 and 160 ha during kharif 2001 and 2002.
By following the IPM tactics, the pesticide use was drastically cut, other input costs like fertilizers, number of irrigations, etc. reduced and farmers could secure residue free higher produce. The cost: benefit ratios were 1:3.18 (IPM) and 1:2.28 (non-IPM) in 2000, 1:3.16 (IPM) and 1:2.12 (non-IPM) in 2001, and 1:2.21 (IPM) and 1:1.64 (non-IPM) in 2002.
Implementation of IPM for Cotton Cultivation:
The cotton production systems of the world illustrate well the ecological and environmental problems associated with intensive insecticide use.
Peru:
Cotton growing in the Canete Valley, Peru is a well-documented case that has become a classical example of integrated control. Even prior to the advent of synthetic organic insecticides, the increasing use of inorganic insecticides resulted in serious outbreaks of Heliothis virescens (Fabricius) and Aphis gossypii (Glover).
The advent of synthetic organic insecticides resulted in extensive use of these chemicals. Both H. virescens and A. gossypii soon became resistant to these insecticides. A number of other pests like leafrollers, mealybugs, leaf perforator, etc. also became serious. The frequency of treatments decreased from 8-15 days to every 3 days.
The average number of insecticide applications was increased to 16 but still lint yields touched the lowest levels of 332 kg/ha. A set of integrated control measures involving the use of natural enemies (Trichogramma spp., lady beetles and carabid beetles), cultural practices (early maturing varieties, crop rotation, fixed sowing dates and clean up campaigns) and selective use of inorganic insecticides were implemented from 1956 onwards and by 1959 productivity reached a level of 800 kg/ha.
The number of insecticide applications declined to 2-3 per season and increase in cotton yields was sustained for the following two decades. However, during the last decade, the area planted to cotton has been reduced to half, following the break-up of large estates and pesticide use has begun to increase again. IPM is still practised on a small area of organic cotton, but a large proportion of the cotton crop is now treated intensively with pesticides.
Colombia:
The adoption of IPM system in Colombia led to considerable decrease in insecticide use and increase in cotton yield. In 1977, 22-28 insecticide treatments were carried out in cotton, most of them to combat Heliothis virescens (Fabricius). This pest had developed resistance to methyl parathion and all other available insecticides.
With the introduction of pyrethroids it again became possible to control the pests effectively, with a much smaller quantity of active ingredient per hectare than had been needed before. At the same time, an IPM programme was set up-the pest populations were carefully monitored and measures to control them only implemented if relevant threshold values were exceeded.
Massive numbers of beneficial arthropods were then released. Rigid calendar based treatments were replaced with crop monitoring, which allowed pest attacks to be detected at an early stage. This in turn, allowed insecticides to be employed in a targeted manner. Insecticide use was optimized in this IPM system, and developed as a complement to biological control measures.
India:
The Indian Council of Agricultural Research sponsored a village level IPM project to test and demonstrate the efficacy, practicability and economics of IPM in cotton. The IPM programme called the Operational Research Project (ORP), was initiated in Punjab and Tamil Nadu in 1975 and 1980, respectively. In Punjab, 15 villages during different years were covered up in ORP to test and demonstrate the efficacy, practicability and economics of IPM strategy.
The adoption of IPM technology resulted in 73.7 and 12.4 per cent reduction in the number of insecticide sprays for control of sucking pests and bollworms, respectively. The reduction of bollworm incidence in ORP villages was 38.55 per cent higher than non-ORP villages leading to 23.1 per cent higher yield and 31.1 per cent higher net income per unit area.
The yield of seed cotton obtained in demonstration fields was 20.45 q/ ha as against 10.17 q/ha on other fields. ORP project on IPM has also been successful at Coimbatore in Tamil Nadu in reducing the use of insecticides without affecting the yield of seed cotton, at the same time encouraging the natural enemies and reducing the environmental pollution.
The mean quantity of insecticides used in the project villages was 3.82 kg a.i./ha in 6 applications at spray interval of 15-18 days, which was 58.6 per cent less than the amount (9.23 kg a.i./ha) used in non- project villages with 11 sprays at an interval of 7-8 days. The IPM system increased the abundance of native natural enemies by three fold, reduced the cost of insecticide and environmental pollution by 50.3 and 53.4 per cent, respectively.
The Insecticide Resistance Management programme was launched in 2002 in 26 cotton-growing districts in 10 states, which consume 80 per cent of India’s insecticide use on cotton. The basic objectives of the IRM strategy are to disseminate available technology related to IPM, to monitor the level of resistance to commonly used insecticides, to assess the impact of IRM strategy on economic status of the farmers and to validate the IRM technology.
In Punjab, three districts (Bathinda, Ferozepur and Mansa) have been covered, which account for more than 70 per cent of the total area under cotton cultivation. Three more districts, viz. Muktsar, Faridkot and Barnala were adopted in 2006. The district Bathinda is considered to be the hot-spot for pesticide consumption, where 50 per cent of the cost of cultivation is on pesticides. From about 2-3 insecticide applications in cotton in 1970s, farmers have been reported to resort to more than 30 insecticide applications towards the beginning of the twenty-first century.
The impact of IRM based IPM strategy, has been summarised in Table 33.2. In general, there was less damage by the bollworm complex, lower incidence of sucking pests, higher number of natural enemies, less number of insecticidal sprays, lowest cost of production and increase in net income.
With the adoption of IRM strategies, farmers were able to get an additional profit of Rs. 10097 per ha. The decrease in pesticide load led to increase in the population of natural enemies during early season which helped in reducing the pest population and ultimately the damage caused to the crop.
A landmark in cotton IPM has been the validation of the cropping system based holistic community approach of IPM at village Ashta (1998-2001) in Nanded district (Maharashtra). The baseline information indicated less than a quintal average seed cotton yield per ha in the Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) epidemic year of 1997 when the farmers had sprayed more than 12-13 chemical pesticide spray rounds.
All the farmers of the village were involved and the IPM approach covered 180 ha cotton area. The off-season practices included management of H. armigera on pigeonpea and chickpea through use of neem seed kernel extract (NSKE) and HaNPV, field sanitation and deep ploughing.
In the pre-sowing practices, multiplicity of cultivars was avoided by selecting only two sucking pest moderately resistant cultivars and treating the seed with imidacloprid. The sowing of the entire village was completed within a week to avoid vulnerability of crop over a long period.
The IPM interventions included use of Trichogramma chilonis Ishii, HaNPV and NSKE. Lastly, chemical pesticides were used when needed and these included spray of endosulfan/bavistin for the management of bollworms or grey mildew in certain pockets. The cost of plant protection was reduced by 31.3 per cent, chemical pesticide consumption reduced by 94.3 per cent and seed cotton yield increased by 56.9 per cent.
The system has become self-sustainable as the farmers of Ashta have themselves become decision-makers and have started adopting many 1PM practices on their own. The average cost: benefit ratio over the four year period was 1:1.473 (IPM) and 1:1.018 (non- IPM).
Pakistan:
The research efforts had been focused to develop IPM programme in Pakistan since 1971. In 1997, Asian Development Bank supported the CABI Bioscience to run a pilot FFS project on cotton that formed the basis of IPM success. Based on success of the project, the National IPM programme was established in 2000, which led to scale up of farmers-led IPM through integration of international and national efforts.
This National IPM programme with the help of international support took further initiatives to execute three projects to have sustainable IPM programme. These included FAO-EU Regional Project “Cotton IPM Programme for Asia” (2000-2004); ADB-FAO Pakistan Project, “Cotton IPM Programmes” (2002-04); and AGFUND-FAO Pakistan Project, “Pesticide Risk Reduction for Women in Pakistan” (2002-03).
By the end of 2004, under different projects, a total of 425 IPM facilitators (8 women) were trained in 12 ToF courses, a total of 525 crop season long FFS were conducted in which 12,999 farmers were benefited. The impact assessment carried out in 2003 showed better cotton yield (30%), reduced cost of pesticides (55%), reduced use of chemical pesticides (43%), reduced use of highly toxic pesticides (54%), increase in number of farmers joining community organization (33%), and reduced poverty of the target farmers group (16%).
Implementation of IPM for Vegetable Crops:
The practical application of IPM in vegetable cultivation is generally still limited, although simple packages do exist for some key pests. China is the only country in the region where IPM in major vegetable crops has been carried out through an exclusive technical body since late 1970s. In 1987, more than 1,07,000 ha of non-polluted vegetables were cultivated in 200 cities of 22 provinces, producing more than 6.4 million tonnes of vegetables.
The Chinese have used the cultural control method as the foundation, while giving priority to biocontrol agents followed by judicious use of safer insecticides. During the past decade, efforts have been made to develop IPM technology in situations where chemical insecticides have failed to provide effective control in other countries of Asia.
The diamondback moth (DBM) has emerged as the most serious pest on cabbage, cauliflower and Chinese cabbage throughout South and South-East Asia. The research conducted at the Asian Vegetable Research and Development Centre (AVRDC) on the control of DBM without pesticides has resulted in the development of an IPM programme.
A collaborative Vegetable Research Network for Southeast Asia (AVNET) was jointly established by Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand in 1989. Another network, the South Asian Research Network (SAVERNET) has linked Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka since 1992. Both networks are supported by the Asian Development Bank with AVRDC as the executive agency and both have IPM of DBM as one of their sub-networks.
On the basis of decisions arrived at joint meetings of two networks, a master plan is developed for implementation in all the participating countries. It involves releases of a parasitoid, Diadegma semiclausum Hellen; a bacterial insecticide Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner or neem kernel extract sprays, pheromone traps and growing mustard as a trap crop. To date, parasitoid rearing facilities have been established in all South-east Asian countries.
Introduction and release of D. semiclausum has reduced the use of chemical insecticides by up to 86 per cent in the highlands of Malaysia. In Philippines, when cabbages were contaminated by over use of pesticides, IPM training resulted in farmers reducing from over 20 applications per season to three, including one treatment with an insect pathogen. It is estimated that in the Philippines highland area of Cordillera, extension and adoption of the IPM technology by all farmers in the 7000 ha cabbage area would result in a cost reduction of US$ 10.5 million over three cropping seasons.
In Thailand, adoption of IPM technology resulted in a more than 145 per cent increase in net profits in IPM fields over non-IPM fields in crucifers. In Vietnam, the number of pesticide applications in cabbage have been reduced from 6 of chemical pesticides to 1 of Bt in IPM areas, in tomato from 14 (3 insecticides, 10 fungicides, 1 of 2, 4-D as growth stimulator) to no application in IPM.
Researchers at the Indian Institute of Horticultural Research (IIHR), Bangalore have developed an IPM combination to control DBM and it is becoming increasingly popular among the farmers. It involves growing of paired rows of bold-seeded Indian mustard as a trap crop at the beginning and after every 25 cabbage rows.
Among the paired rows, the first is sown 15 days prior to cabbage planting while the second is sown 25 days after planting. This attracts upto 80-93 per cent of DBM for colonization. Depending upon the severity of infestation some attack of DBM and other pests is recorded on cabbage.
To control these, 4 per cent neem seed kernel extract (NSKE) or neem soap (1%) or pongamia soap (1%) is applied at primordial or head initiation stage; 2-3 post-heading sprays may be applied at 10-15 days interval depending on population pressure. NSKE is safe to Apanteles plutellae Kurdyumov which is the dominant parasitoid of DBM found in the cabbage ecosystem.
The insects colonizing Indian mustard may defoliate the entire plant and move on to cabbage. To control these, 0.1 per cent dichlorvos is applied at 9-15 days interval after first mustard sowing. This technology has been validated at three locations near Bangalore (50ha), Varanasi (15.6ha) and Ranchi (6.3ha) during 2001-2004. The overall cost: benefit ratios were 1:3.13 (IPM) and 1:2.11 (non-IPM).
Tomato is another vegetable crop in which successful IPM technology has been developed for the management of fruit borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) at the IIHR. It involves growing of African tall marigold cv. Golden Age as a trap crop. Marigold nursery is raised 15 days earlier to tomato and 40-day old marigold and 25-day old tomato seedlings are simultaneously planted in the field.
One row of marigold is alternated after every 16 tomato rows. Fruit borer moths lay eggs predominantly on the buds and flowers of marigold. It has also been observed that marigold has an added attraction potential for the serpentine leafminer, Liriomyza trifolii (Burgess), which infests tomato.
The tomato fruits may suffer about 10 per cent infestation in the trap crop fields. This infestation may be controlled by sprays of NPV at 250 larval equivalents (LE)/ha or by use of conventional insecticides on tomato crop. The marigold crop is not sprayed to maintain its attraction of fruit borer moths for oviposition and colonization. It also helps in conserving the natural enemies.
The grown up H. armigera may be hand collected from the marigold flowers and put in a pail of water containing any insecticide solution. The above technology has been validated at three locations near Bangalore (40 ha), Varanasi (25.4 ha) and Ranchi (8.9 ha) during 2001-2004. The overall cost: benefit ratios were 1:1.4.06 (IPM) and 1:1.32 (non-IPM).
Implementation of IPM for Plantation Crops:
IPM considerations are especially important in tropical plantation crops, where, unlike annual crops, biological interactions have a chance to reach equilibrium or near equilibrium conditions. Adoption of IPM is feasible for the effective management of rhinoceros beetle, Oryctes rhinoceros (Linnaeus), one of the major pests of coconut palm.
The beetle suffers from natural epizootics produced by a fungus, Metarhizium anisopliae (Metchnikoff) Sorokin and a baculovirus of Oryctes (OBU). Release of baculovrius infested beetles has been successfully used for the biosuppression of the beetle in several countries including South Pacific Islands, Fiji, Mauritius, Seychelles, Papua New Guinea and Mauritius.
In India, the damage by O. rhinoceros was substantially checked when the OBV infected beetles were released in Minicoy and Androth islands of Lakshadweep, Chhittilappilly in Trichur and Sipighat of Andaman islands. The release of O. rhinoceros beetles infected with Kerala isolate of the virus resulted in over 99 per cent reduction in palm damage within three years of augmentation in Andaman Islands.
There have been reports of resurgence of the beetle in some other regions including Kerala and Western Samoa. There’ is also the possibility of development of resistance to baculovirus in Indonesia, East Java and South Sulawese. To overcome these problems, an IPM has been proposed for the management of the beetle which includes planting legumes as cover crops to conceal the potential breeding sites of the beetle; extracting the adult beetles by means of a metal rod (about 0.5 m long) with a hook at one end during peak period of pest abundance (June-September) from the infested sites; treatment of breeding places of the beetle with the entomopathogen, M. anisopliae; promoting the spread of the virus by leaving some dead standing palms; increasing the prevalence of the virus by releasing virus-infected beetles (10-15 per ha) preferably during dusk; and treating the breeding sites with carbaryl (0.01%) where biological control is not possible.