Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 388
Pesticide Resistance: Strategies and Tactics for Management.
1986. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
Actions and Proposed Policies for
Resistance Management by
Agncultural Chemical Manufacturers
CHARLES J. DELP
Agricultural chemical manufacturers (industryJ work indepen-
dently and cooperate with each other and with academic and gov-
ernment institutions to study resistance and to develop and implement
effective management strategies. lutra-industrial organizations fa-
cilitate cooperative resistance management activities. Industry does
not support congressional legislation to broaden U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA' regulatory responsibilities to include re-
sistance management, pesticide taxes to support regulations, or a
resistance research foundation created with industry assessments.
Industry does support research, monitoring, and educational activ-
ities in-house and in cooperation with other organizations for resis-
tance management.
INTRODUCTION
Agricultural chemical manufacturers (industry) are aware of the conse-
quences of resistance to pest-control chemicals and are prepared to initiate
actions to manage resistance to the chemicals they market. The efficacy of
their products is a critical concern, thus, industry commits substantial re-
sources for research, monitoring, and development of resistance management
practices. In recent years intercompany cooperative actions have helped in-
dustry respond to resistance management needs worldwide.
INDUSTRY ACTIONS
Companies with long-term commitments to crop protection are making
major contributions to the understanding of resistance management. They
388
OCR for page 389
ACTIONS AND PROPOSED PO~CIES
389
work independently and in cooperation with academic and government in-
stitutions. For example, Ciba-Geigy pioneered work in which Dittrich (1981)
provided a leadership role in practical resistance research on agriculturally
important arthropods, developing monitoring programs and management
strategies. With herbicides, Ciba-Geigy has supported research into triazine
resistance since the early 1970s (LeBaron, 19831. Its support helped deter-
mine the mode of resistance and has advanced the understanding of the
photosynthetic process. This research may even result in the development
of crop plants that are resistant to herbicides. Urech and Staub (1985) report
on Ciba-Geigy's recent contributions on fungicide resistance.
ICI has been working to unravel the population dynamics of cereal powdery
mildew strains, and Ruscoe (in press) initiated joint industry actions to deal
with potential pyrethroid problems.
Du Font has been researching benomyl resistance and monitoring meth-
omyl sensitivity since the early 1970s. In 1981 Leeper headed an insecticide
resistance management group in its research division. Monitoring is the
cornerstone of the program, which also includes research into areas such as
insect chemistry and toxicology, population genetics, and the potential use
of synergists.
Other companies, such as Bayer, BASE, and Sumitomo, have ongoing
in-house resistance research programs that at times amount to as much as 10
percent of the research program and provide grants of $10,000 to $30,000
to sponsor outside programs.
Industry has resources to facilitate practical solutions a worldwide com-
munications network; cooperative research and development contracts; and
a broad research base in biology, genetics, biochemistry, neurophysiology,
toxicology, and the like. Industry also has an excellent record of sponsoring
educational activities for which speakers, teachers, and funds for symposia
and training courses have been contributed. For example, 22 companies and
the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAG) are supporting
a series of resistance courses for the Third World. The latest, in Malaysia,
was such a success that another is planned for Central America. Industry
scientists are on the faculty of these courses. An increasing number of papers
by industry scientists are being published, and efforts are being made for
joint industry publications. There is an impressive amount of data available
that could help researchers put their results into a broader context.
INTRA-INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS
Companies contributing individually to resistance management recognize
the problems of insufficient or inaccurate information resulting from con-
flicting methods, conclusions, and management strategies. Cooperation is
needed not only with academia and government but with each other. The
OCR for page 390
390
MANAGEMENT OF RESISTANCE TO PESTICIDES
best resistance management efforts can be nullified by the actions of one
uninformed or irresponsible company or agency. Although the antitrust im-
plications and competitive traditions make intercompany collaboration dif-
ficult, significant results have been achieved during the past five years.
In November 1979 ICI approached nine companies that develop and market
photostable pyrethroid insecticides. These companies set up a technical li-
aison on pyrethroid resistance, the Pyrethroid Efficacy Group (PEG), which
has contributed significantly to resistance management. For example, PEG
helped the government of the United Kingdom deal with the problem of
pyrethroid-resistant houseflies by withdrawing pyrethroids from animal houses.
Industry also cooperated through PEG to prevent the use of pyrethroids on
noncotton crops in Egypt, thus interrupting exposure of Spodoptera through-
out the year. In Australia cooperative action by industry, government, and
growers successfully implemented restrictive strategies of pyrethroid use on
cotton to manage Heliothis resistance in 1984. Industry did not fully agree
on the above measures, however, and some companies are reluctant to con-
tinue to cooperate if results do not support long-term economic benefits or
if the scientific basis of a strategy becomes questionable (Davies, 19841.
The Fungicide Resistance Action Committee (FRAC) was developed be-
cause industry scientists knew cooperative industrial action was needed.
FRAC is a steering committee organized into working groups for each fun-
gicide type. Working groups are guided to (1) include senior scientists from
companies with a related "at risk" fungicide; (2) establish trust, pool in-
formation, define problems, and assess risks; (3) agree on monitoring meth-
ods and verify field resistance; (4) verify resistance reports and potential
remedies; and (5) encourage resistance research and communication. Some
of the actions of the FRAC working groups follow.
Acylalanines
Four companies agreed on the risks of resistance and on a management
strategy based on prepacked mixtures with fungicides having a different mode
of action. The companies solicit the support of extension and advisory agen-
cies to help restrict the use to two to four applications per season and no
curative use (Urech and Staub, 19851.
Benzimidazoles
Individual companies had done much of the management work on ben-
zimidazoles before FRAC was organized. After FRAC, research was focused
on resistance in the cereal eyespot pathogen in Europe (Delp, 1984; Wade
and Delp, 19851. Representatives of at least four companies sponsored meet-
ings, research programs, and monitoring surveys and agreed with advisory
OCR for page 391
ACTIONS AND PROPOSED PONCIES
391
officers that (1) a benzimidazole should not be used where resistant strains
had caused a disease-control failure; (2) a mixture of a benzimidazole plus
prochloraz would be recommended for fields with a high risk of eyespot
disease or where a benzimidazole had been used for several years; and (3)
a benzimidazole may provide cost-effective yield improvements in fields
with resistance or poor eyespot control.
Dicarboximides
The working group of 11 companies, cooperating with officials in France,
Germany, and Switzerland, conducted monitoring and research studies re-
sulting in joint agreements to limit the recommended use of dicarboximides
to control Botrytis on vines to two applications (bunch-closing and maturing
of berries) in intensive disease areas.
C14-Demethylation inhibitors (DMl)
The responsibility of this group (composed of senior scientists from five
companies, with a potential of eight more) is to anticipate field resistance
problems and to implement preventive strategies to avoid abuse. They co-
operate with, and have commissioned many special studies through, uni-
versities and governments. Improved monitoring methods and accumulated
research data are designed to lead to clear management recommendations.
The International Group of National Associations of Agrochemical Prod-
ucts (GIFAP), which sponsors FRAC, recently created an Insecticide Re-
sistance Action Committee (IRAC) of which PEG is a part. The working
groups of IRAC are for major crops such as cotton, fruit, rice, field crops,
vegetables, animal health, and vector control. This industry committee, with
objectives similar to FRAC, is conducting a worldwide industry survey of
resistance problems to classify economically relevant and verified cases of
field resistance according to their regional importance.
INDUSTRY POLICIES
Most companies support the following policies for managing resistance:
· Conduct research, monitoring, and education activities in support of
products
· Provide financial support to outside research, monitoring, and educa-
tional facilities for pesticide resistance management
· Strengthen commitments to organizations such as FRAC, IRAC,
GIFAP, and national associations
· Support special educational and management activities in the Third
World
OCR for page 392
392
MANAGEMENT OF RESISTANCE TO PESTICIDES
Industry does not support congressional legislation to broaden EPA reg-
ulatory responsibilities to include resistance management, pesticide taxes to
support government regulations, or a resistance research foundation created
with industry assessments.
CONCLUSION
As evidenced by its cooperative and voluntary programs, industry is not
only concerned but it is active in resistance management, and industry is
ready to work with all the groups involved (Urech, 19851. Industry can give
not only products and financial support but technical resources, organizational
skills, data bases, and motivation to prolong the effectiveness of pest-control
agents.
REFERENCES
Davies, R. A. H. 1984. Insecticide resistance: An industry viewpoint. Pp. 593-600 in Proc. 1984
Br. Crop Prot. Conf., Vol. 2. Lavenham, Suffolk: Lavenham.
Delp, C. J. 1984. Industry's response to fungicide resistance. Crop Prot. 3:3-8.
Dittrich, V. 1981. The role of industry in coping with insecticide resistance. Pp. 249-253 in Proc.
Symp. 9th Int. Congr. Plant Prot., T. Kommedahl, ed. Minneapolis, Minn.: Burgess.
LeBaron, H. M. 1983. Herbicide resistance in plants An overview. Weeds Today 14:4-6.
Ruscoe, C. N. E. In press. Pesticide resistance: Strategies and cooperation in the agrochemical
industry. In Rational Pesticide Use, K. J. Brent and R. K. Atkin, eds. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Urech, P. A. 1985. Management of fungicide resistance in practice. Proc. EPPO Symp. Fungic.
Resist. EPPO Bull. 15:571-576. Oxford: Blackwell.
Urech, P. A., and T. Staub. 1985. Resistance strategies for acylalanine fungicides. Proc. EPPO
Symp. Fungic. Resist. EPPO Bull. 15:539-543. Oxford: Blackwell.
Wade, M., and C. J. Delp. 1985. Aims and activities of industry's fungicide resistance action
committee (FRAC). Proc. EPPO Symp. Fungic. Resist. EPPO Bull. 15:577-583. Oxford: Black-
well.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
resistance research
