Table 7.
Technology “readiness” of pest management alternatives for western corn rootworm (Diabrotica virgifera virgifera) in maize, and locally perceived obstacles for their further farmer-uptake and diffusion (based on the expert consultation)
| Categories | Sub-categories | IPM alternatives identified | Evaluation criteriaa | Roadblocksb | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RESEARCH | READY | PRACTICED | ENVI | ECON | |||
| Biological control | Biopesticides | Turmeric extracts (Curcuma longa) are repellent (Brandl et al. 2016) | DE | ||||
| Nematodes | Heterorhabditis bacteriophora, H. megidis, Steinernema feltiae have all proven to be effective for WCR control (Pilz et al. 2009) | SI | DE | HU | DE,US | ||
| Nematodes | Root cap exudates of green pea and maize can enhance efficacy of Heterorhabditis megidis in the field (Jaffuel, Hiltpold, and Turlings 2015) | DE | HU | US | |||
| Ind. self. def. | Induced self-defense with jasmonic acid (Capra et al. 2015, Stenberg et al. 2015, Erb, Glauser, and Robert 2012) | HU | |||||
| Class. bio. cont. | C. compressa introduction into invaded areas (Toepfer et al. 2009) | HU,DE | |||||
| Cultural or mechanical control | Crop rotation | Crop rotation, 100% of rotation is not needed (Szalai et al. 2014) | DE | HU,HR,SI,DE,PL,US, IT | |||
| Winter cover crop | an autumn-planted and spring-killed grass cover crop enhanced abundance of predator populations and led to significantly less root damage in the subsequent maize crop (Lundgren and Fergen 2011) | ||||||
| DSS | Monitoring | Pheromone traps – sticky sheet and non-sticky container traps (added by the countries | HR | HU,SI,DE,PL,US | |||
| Model | % of fields with WCR above thresh. level in a region depends (i) on rotation rate (ii) on the pop. growth rate of WCR at low pop. density (Szalai et al. 2014) | HR,DE,US | HU, IT | ||||
| Model | Decision-support model, based upon degree-day, to estimate hatching time and adult emergence (add. By SI) | SI | |||||
| Host plant resistance | GMO | Bt maize | HU | US | |||
| GMO | RNA interference (RNAi), amylase inhibitors from common bean and soybean cysteine proteinase inhibitor N (soyacystatin N, scN). (Fishilevich et al. 2016) | HU,PL,US | HU | ||||
| Refuge establishment | In GMO-based systems, refuges along with WCR-resistant corn (add. US) | US | |||||
| Innov. pestic. and appl. reg. | Attract and kill | Powdered buffalo gourd, C. foetidissima, corn seedling volatiles, CO2, extracts of germ. corn (Schumann, A.Patel, and Vidal 2013, Cossé and Baker 1999, Schumann et al. 2014, Hibbard and Bjostad 1988, Hibbard and Bjostad 1990) | HU,DE | ||||
| Attract and kill | α-terpineol, β-caryophyllene, hydroxamic acids, long-chain free fatty acids are attractive (Hammack 1996, 2001, Hibbard, Bernklau, and Bjostad 1994, Xie et al. 1992, Hibbard and Bjostad 1990) | HU,DE | |||||
| Mating disrupt. | Pheromone-based mating confusion (add. by SI) | SI | |||||
| Attract and Kill | CO2-releasing capsules and a Metarhizium strain can be combined in an Attract & Kill scheme (add. by DE) | DE | |||||
aPRACTICED = is widely used in the country; RESEARCH = at 8research state only; READY=IPM alternative available for immediate implementation; bfrequently listed roadblocks, preventing technology diffusion: ENVI = it would not be effective under the environmental conditions of the country; ECON = deemed too expensive—so it is not widely adopted; ES (Spain), IT (Italy), SI (Slovenia),HU (Hungary), US (United States), DE (Germany), HR (Croatia), PL (Poland)