National Center for Food and Ag. Policy - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

National Center for Food and Ag. Policy

Description:

The Benefits of Agrochemical Research: Case Study of Imidacloprid Sujatha Sankula & Leonard Gianessi National Center for Food and Ag. Policy Washington, DC – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:58
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 59
Provided by: ncfapOrgd
Learn more at: https://www.ncfap.org
Category:
Tags: center | food | national | policy

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: National Center for Food and Ag. Policy


1
The Benefits of Agrochemical Research
Case Study of Imidacloprid
Sujatha Sankula Leonard Gianessi
National Center for Food and Ag.
Policy Washington, DC
2
Agrochemical categories
Herbicides (47) Insecticides (29) Fungicides
(18) Fumigants growth regulators (6)
3
Agrochemicals are necessary to
? Prevent yield losses ? Ensure quality ? Make
crop production easier cheaper
4
Crop yield response to agrochemicals
Without agrochemical use With agrochemical use
Theoretical attainable yield
5
Area farmed globally for food production in 2000
Billion ha
6
Global value of agrochemicals in 1998
31.25 billion (crop uses) 10.5 billion
(non-crop uses)
7
Worldwide crop protection markets in 2001
Sales in mil.
8
Goal of agrochemical research
  • To discover, develop, and understand new
    products for the safe and effective pest control
    and to maximize food production

9
Agrochemical discovery development programs
are driven by
  • Population growth
  • Food and health needs
  • Pest resistance issues
  • Safety considerations
  • Economic incentives
  • Replacements and phase-outs

10
Recent setbacks to agrochemical discovery
programs
  • Fewer players
  • Large investments
  • Great risks
  • High stakes
  • Economics
  • Higher standards of potency and safety

11
Insecticide categories
Organic (eg. DDT, chlorpyriphos) Botanicals (eg.
pyrethrum, nicotine) Inorganic (eg. boric acid,
sulfur)
12
Market dominance of commercial insecticide
categories
Category
Inorganics
8 Botanical 5 Synthetic organics
192
13
Major insecticide classes by importance as of 1995
Class Entry year Market
value

()
Chlorinated hydrocarbons 1947 5
Organophosphates 1965 34
Methylcarbamates 1969 20
Pyrethroids 1979 23 Benzoylureas 1983
5 Others 1982
8
14
Human toxicity and insect resistance to the first
generation neuro-active insecticides such as
carbamates and OPs led to the search for new
agrochemicalsSignificant discovery -
Imidacloprid
15
Imidacloprid
Classification Chloronicotinyl First registered
insecticide in its class Year
of registration in US 1995
16
World sales of top selling pesticides in 2001
Glyphosate 2.4 billion Imidacloprid 540
million
Source PANUPS 2002
17
Structural comparison of nicotine and imidacloprid
18
Characteristics of imidacloprid
Novel mode of action Broad spectrum of
activity Favorable environment fate
19
Mode of action of imidacloprid
Binds to nerve receptors called nicotinic
acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs), interferes
with the transmission of stimuli in the insect
nervous system leading to the accumulation of
acetylcholine resulting in paralysis.
20
  • Site of action is different than other
    insecticides
  • to which insects developed resistance.
  • Low toxicity to vertebrates due to low binding
  • to nACh receptors.

21
Imidacloprid provides a broad spectrum of
activity against
Sucking insects (leaf and plant hoppers, aphids,
thrips, whiteflies, scales, and plant
bugs) Some coleopteran insects (CPB, leaf
beetles) Select lepidopteran and dipteran
insects No activity on mites and nematodes
22
Imidacloprid has both contact and systemic
action. Imidacloprid can be applied as a
soil, seed, or foliar treatment. Readily
absorbed by plant roots and transmitted through
xylem. Effective at low rates than conventional
insecticides (0.33 lb versus 1-2 lb of OPs)
23
Trade names of imidacloprid
Gaucho (seed treatment) Admire (soil
applied) Provado (foliar)
24
Use range of imidacloprid
Potato Apple Tomato Grape Broccoli Citrus Le
ttuce Corn Sugarbeet Hops Cotton Rice Tobac
co
25
Impacts of imidacloprid on US crop production
26
Silverleaf whitefly
First discovered in 1986 in FL Widespread damage
in 1991 in CA and AZ Reduction in planted crop
acreage Yield and quality losses transmits
viruses (ToMoV and YLCLV)
27
Silverleaf whitefly is a billion dollar pest
28
Primary hosts of silverleaf whitefly
Broccoli Cauliflower Cabbage Lettuce Melons Cucumb
ers Tomatoes Cotton
29
Silverleaf whitefly management
Three classes of effective insecticides
(pyrethroids, OPs, chlorinated
hydrocarbons) Most common combination
bifenthrin endosulfan (2-3) fb. esfenvalerate
endosulfan (1-3) No residual control and
periodic treatments (4-6 sprays) Insect
resistance to three chemical classes
30
Section 18 permits for imidacloprid
(Admire) in California
First issue
Reissue
Broccoli/Cauliflower 1993 1994 Lettuce 1993
1994 Cucurbits 1995 1997 Tomatoes 1994
-
31
Vegetable production statistics for CA
2001 Acreage ( of US total)
Broccoli 92 Lettuce 71 (head) 88
(leaf) Cauliflower 89 Tomato 32 (fresh) 92
(processed) Cantaloupe 58
32
Use of imidacloprid (Admire) in California in 1995
treated acreage
33
Impacts of imidacloprid (Admire) on
CA crop production
34
Number of insecticide applications with Admire
and next best alternative
treatments
35
Cost of insecticide programs with Admire and next
best alternative
Cost of programs ()
36
Yield increase due to Admire compared to
traditional alternatives in CA
yield increase
37
Value of delayed planting
Warm weather heavy whitefly pressure Growers
shift the planting date to cooler periods to
avoid peak infestations Imidacloprid
facilitated marketing at the height of
infestation
38
Increase in grower benefits due to delayed
planting facilitated by Admire
increase
39
Impact of imidacloprid on insecticide use
in FL fresh tomato for whitefly and other
sucking pest control
1992
2000
------------- lb --------------
Buprofezin - 2000 Chlorpyrifos 22,0
00 - Endosulfan 89,000
34,900 Esfenvalerate 5,700
2,200 Imidacloprid -
8,400 Methamidophos 74,500
9,100 Methomyl 47,100
- Permethrin 10,900 8,000 Total 249,200
64,600
40
Colorado Potato Beetle
41
Green peach aphids
42
Insecticide use CPB/aphids
  • 1920s - 1940s Lead arsenate
  • 1950s - 1960s DDT, Parathion,
  • Endrin
  • 1970s - Present Aldicarb, Phorate,
  • Methamidophos,
  • Carbofuran,
  • Endosulfan
  • Permethrin

43
CPB management problems
CPB resistance to all synthetic insecticides
registered for use Cross-resistance of CPB
between insecticide classes Imidacloprid
unrelated chemistry and thus a new tool in
resistance management programs
44
Imidacloprid treated potato acreage () in 1999
Idaho 8 Maine 90 Michigan 93 Minnesota 70
North Dakota 68 Oregon 35 Pennsylvania 81 Was
hington 4 Wisconsin 74
45
Leading insecticides used for CPB control in 2001
(in order of importance)
Imidacloprid Carbofuran Permethrin Phorate Esfenva
lerate Endosulfan Methamidophos Azinophos-methyl A
ldicarb Methyl parathion Dimethoate
46
Reduction in insecticide use following
imidacloprid use in potato (1994 1999)
reduction
Source NASS
47
Pierces disease on grapes
48
Sharpshooters
Bluegreen
Glassy-winged
49
Pesticides registered for sharpshooter control
Average use rate (lb/A)
Dimethoate 1.32 Kaolin 23.75 Imidacloprid
0.05 (Admire)
50
Other grape insects controlled by Admire
Grape mealybug Vine mealybug Leafhopper Phylloxera

51
Insect management problems in citrus in CA and FL
Glassy-winged sharpshooter (overwintering
host) California red scale ( resistant to OP
carbamates) Citricola scale (increasing in
problem) Brown citrus aphid (vectors citrus
tristeza virus)
52
Use of imidacloprid on citrus(Section 18 in CA
and FL)
Glassy-winged sharpshooter CA red scale Citrus
brown aphid Citrus leaf miner
53
Cotton pest problems
Escalation of secondary pest problems Insecticide
resistance
54
Losses due to aphids in CA cotton in 1997
Crop loss Control costs Aphids 34 3
8 All insects and mites 66 167
--------------- Million -----------------
55
Imidacloprid treated cotton acreage in California
treated acres
Source NASS
56
Summary
Sucking pests have not been a significant problem
to growers in the recent years, largely because
of the advances in agrochemical research that
resulted in the development of imidacloprid. Amer
ican growers were able to increase crop
yields, reduce crop production costs, and
insecticide use following the introduction of
imidacloprid. No agrochemical is immune to
problems.
57
Conclusions
With the increasing safety and environmental
concerns, there will be loss of some
agrochemicals. Search for replacement products
that can live up to both regulatory and grower
standards necessitates continued agrochemical
research. Agrochemical research should
continue to meet the increasing demands of
growing population. Continued agrochemical
research will provide solutions to evolving pest
and their management problems.
58
www.ncfap.org
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com