BIOVEXO at the IPM Conference 2024 in Brussels

The BIOVEXO team, featuring members from the coordinators RTDS Association and the AIT Austrian Institute of Technology, recently represented the project at the IPM Conference 2024, titled “Holistic IPM: Reducing Pesticide Use.” This conference, held on 14^th May in Brussels was organized by the IPM Decisions and IPMWorks, and marked the conclusion of the both Horizon 2020 sister projects.

This day-long conference at the popular Herman Teirlinck building, in the heart of Brussels, attracted over 130 attendees from around 15 European countries, including representatives from various agricultural, plant health, and pest management organizations, research institutes, and industry actors.

Image©Shutterstock

The BIOVEXO project generated a lot of interest at this event, with participants from the IPM community keen to know more about its foreseen biological solutions for combating the deadly pathogen Xylella fastidiosa in Europe with advanced integrated pest management (IPM) strategies for important food trees like Olives and Almonds. A BIOVEXO promotional poster along with project flyers was showcased and distributed at this event.

Click here to check out Dr. Günter Brader’s (representative from the Scientific Coordination, AIT Austrian Institute of Technology) message at the conference.

Mr. Diego Canga Fano, during his opening speech and Dr. Günter Brader from AIT with the BIOVEXO poster at the IPM Conference (Image©RTDS)

Innovation in plant protection

The conference was opened by Diego Canga Fano, Director of Quality Policy, Research & Innovation, and Outreach of the European Commission’s Directorate for Agriculture (DG AGRI). In his speech, Canga highlighted, innovating plant protection in Europe. He emphasized the significance of Horizon Europe initiatives working towards reducing reliance on harmful chemical pesticides and fostering the development of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies that are both economically viable and environmentally sustainable.

IPM in action

Nick Paveley and Mark Ramsden from ADAS, a member of the project coordination of IPM Decisions, summarized the main outcomes of the IPM Decisions project. This was followed by an engaging presentation on scientific evidence of pest regulation through landscape diversity by Dr Sandrine Petit, from INRAE, France. She spoke about how ecological intensification of agriculture (EIA) aims to assure food security by harnessing ecosystem services. Available modeling tools and approaches to forecasting natural pest control were diverse and promising, but the integration of accurate descriptions of farming practices at the landscape scale remains a challenge. According to Petit, few studies integrated socio-economic aspects and provided approaches to guide and co-design the transition to future agroecological landscapes.

Nick Paveley from ADAS & Sandrine Petit, INRAE (Image©RTDS)

Further into the event, speaking on quantifying the potential of reducing pesticides, Prof. Titto Catiff (Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore), spoke on the framework for the implementation of IPM, based on the decision-making process, which involves four kinds of decisions.

Strategic
tactical on whether and when
on which control measures to be adopted
operational decisions.

Each type of decision plays a critical role in ensuring the effectiveness and sustainability of the IPM program. Strategic decisions are long-term and focus on the overall goals and direction of the pest management program. These decisions set the framework within which all other decisions are made. They often involve goal setting, policy development, resource allocation, research and development including risk management.

Tactical decisions are medium-term and focus on planning and scheduling activities to achieve strategic goals. These decisions involve determining whether and when to implement specific control measures. They include pest monitoring, intervention intervals, selection of control measures, etc.

The decisions on “which control measures to adopt” involve selecting specific pest control methods that will be used to manage pest populations. The choice of control measures is critical and is based on the following considerations. Effectiveness, environmental impact, economic viability, compatibility of control measures with other IPM strategies and agricultural practices, and long-term sustainability of such control measures.

Operational decisions are short-term and involve the day-to-day implementation of pest control measures. These decisions ensure that the chosen control strategies are executed effectively and efficiently. They include the application of control measures, continuously evaluating the effectiveness of control measures, and adjusting as required to improve results.

In an effective IPM program, these four types of decisions are interconnected and inform one another. This integrated approach ensures that pest management is sustainable, environmentally responsible, and economically viable.

Tito Catiff , Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Italy and Stefan Carlesi Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna (Image©RTDS)

Importance of decision support systems

Emphasizing the role of decision support systems (DSS), Dr. Stefane Carlesi (Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna) presented the effectiveness of rock powder for olive-fly control. The olive fruit fly (Bactrocera oleae) is the most serious pest for olives. The larvae (maggots) of the olive fruit fly feed inside the fruit, destroying the pulp and allowing the entry of secondary bacteria and fungi that lead to the rotting of the fruit. Feeding damage can cause premature fruit drops and reduce fruit quality for both table olive and olive oil production.

Carlesi mentioned that pest control might not be only non-chemical but highly DSS (decision support system). According to him, a healthy crop has reduced pesticide use and impact, a safer environment, enhanced biodiversity, avoidance of resistance, and better pest control. Moreover, he spoke about the 5 pillars of holistic IPM.

Agricultural landscapes with diverse semi-natural habitats
Cropping system designed to decrease.
Preferential use of non-chemical control options
Optimized decision-making to avoid unnecessary treatments.
Increased efficiency of treatments

This presentation was particularly relevant to the BIOVEXO project as it focused on pests affecting olive orchards in Italy. While the BIOVEXO project targets the bacterium Xylella fastidiosa, the olive fly, a parasite of olives, although dreadful, poses a significantly lower threat than Xylella.

After the coffee break, the session continued with the topic of holistic weed management strategy in arable farming by Johan Devriendt. Devriendt is a farmer from Jura in the Flemish part of Belgium and maintains a farmland along with his family. He shared his personal experiences on weed management and how his farm is adapting to welcoming diverse crops. He also emphasized that good IPM strategies are required for crop health as well as for the health of his farm and family.

Johan Devriendt, Farmer from Jura and Mette Sønderskov on cost-effective IPM (Image©RTDS)

Evidence of IPM cost efficiency: results from our network

Dr. Mette Sønderskov, from Aarhus University, presented the most discussed and debated topic on the cost-effectiveness of IPM. Sønderskov discussed the methods of biocontrol measures like using bait with hormones, chemotropic/biological attraction, mating disruption or mating confusion, and enhancement of natural regulation. Biopesticides, derived from natural materials such as animals, plants, bacteria, and certain minerals, offer a cost-effective alternative to conventional chemical pesticides. Their cost-effectiveness arises from several factors: reduced development and registration costs, minimal environmental impact, and the potential for sustainable pest management. As biopesticides are typically less harmful to beneficial insects and ecosystems, they can decrease the long-term costs associated with environmental cleanup and health care. Additionally, their use can mitigate the development of pest resistance, ensuring long-term efficacy and reducing the economic burden on agricultural systems. Thus, the integration of biopesticides into pest management programs can enhance both economic and environmental sustainability.

IPM Demo Hubs

In the Peer-to-Peer learning session, Laure Triste and her team from IPM Works presented stories of creating Demo Hubs for farmer groups within the project. Her presentation emphasized how important it is to first get to know the farmers, create a safe space for them to interact and foster dialogue, and for frequent communications and joint agenda development. Speaking on the key role of a Hub Coach, Triste emphasized providing individual advice, organizing demo events for the wider public, facilitating the hub as a group, also connecting the hub internationally.

Speaking of the importance of Demo Hubs, Triste Laure informed that it is very important to show that IPM strategies work on the ground, for which the following points need to be checked.

Relate to potential motivations for farmers to adopt IPM practices (technical, Economic, Market, Regulation)
Adapt the topic and location for the audience.
Take into account the farming calendar (seasons).
Show success stories and challenges.
Facilitate interaction and reflection. Click here to watch Laure’s video clip of the presentation at the IPM Conference 2024

IPM Workshop

After the lunch break, there was a series of workshops for the participants to choose from. SAGROPIA attended the “Biological Control in Integrated Pest Management” workshop.

The workshop was conducted by Karel Bolkmans, from the BioFirst group, and also featured experiences on IPM in private farms from the Belgian farmer and vine grower Christian Balduyck of the Glabais vineyard in the Walloon Brabant province in Belgium.

Discussing biocontrol-based IPM, Bolkmans said that prevention, monitoring, and suppression are the three important points. Biological control, or biocontrol, is a vital component of integrated pest management (IPM) strategies that aim to manage pest populations using natural enemies. The growing concern over pesticide resistance, pesticide residue, and the environmental impact of chemical controls has led to increased interest in biocontrol methods. In the workshop, the different types of biocontrol and their benefits were explored briefly:

Classical Biological control: Introduction of ecologically adapted natural enemies from the area of origin.
Conservative Biological Control and Conservation of natural enemies in the agroecosystem by using cultural practices or habitat management to enhance their activities and by eliminating non-selective pesticide sprays.
Augmentative biological control involves the release of mass-reared natural enemies to manage pest populations. There are two primary methods:

Seasonal Inoculative Biological Control: Natural enemies are released periodically to establish a population that controls pests over a season.
Inundative Biological Control: Large numbers of natural enemies are released to quickly reduce pest populations.

The main benefits of biological control are:

Reduction in Pesticide Use: By utilizing biological control, the reliance on chemical pesticides is significantly reduced.
Pesticide Resistance: Biological control helps mitigate issues related to pests developing resistance to chemical pesticides.
Pesticide Reregistration and Residue Requirements: Using biological control can simplify compliance with pesticide reregistration and reduce concerns about chemical residues on crops.

Proven Effectiveness and Affordability of Biocontrol-Based IPM

The workshop participants agreed that the effectiveness of biocontrol methods has been well-documented. Advanced large-scale production technologies have made biocontrol affordable for use in row crops, making it a viable option for many agricultural practices. However, workshop participants stated that the availability of modern biopesticides is limited for European farmers compared to other parts of the world, due to the very slow registration process.

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) that incorporates biocontrol strategies offers proven effectiveness and affordability, particularly for row crops due to advanced production technologies. The benefits of biocontrol outlined were:

Proven Effectiveness: Numerous studies have demonstrated the successful implementation of biocontrol in managing pest populations.
Affordability: Large-scale production technologies make biocontrol solutions cost-effective for farmers.
Regulatory Challenges: However, the availability of modern biopesticides remains limited for European farmers compared to other regions, primarily due to the slow registration process.

Biocontrol methods as a suitable alternative to traditional chemical pesticides

The workshop concluded that biocontrol methods, including classical, conservative, and augmentative biological control, offer sustainable, effective, and environmentally friendly alternatives to traditional chemical pesticides. These strategies not only help reduce pesticide use and mitigate resistance but also support biodiversity and ecosystem health. As regulatory processes evolve and more biocontrol products become available, the adoption of biocontrol-based IPM will continue to grow, benefiting farmers and the environment alike.

Takeaways from the IPM conference

In his closing remarks, Urban Hrovatič, Advisor at SE Europe Advisory Service Network, emphasized the importance of a holistic Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategy. He highlighted that the innovation chain in IPM must remain unbroken and that IPM is a comprehensive approach to pest control, combining various strategies and practices to grow healthy crops while minimizing pesticide use. The IPM Decisions and IPM Works projects have set a valuable precedent for advancing IPM strategies and future initiatives.

The conference provided BIOVEXO with valuable insights on IPM strategies. In response to the rising Xylella outbreaks in Europe, the BIOVEXO Project is developing innovative biopesticides targeting the Xylella bacterium. The carrier vector of Xylella is the meadow spittlebug (Philaenus spumarius L.) is a prolific pest in Europe. Conducting field trials in severely affected orchards of olives and almonds in Apulia Alicante and Mallorca, the project has yielded significant results with strategies for biological solutions. With one year remaining, BIOVEXO is gaining recognition and attracting interest due to the threat posed by the pathogen and the critical nature of its contribution to combating Xylella.

If you’d like to follow the work of the BIOVEXO project and stay up to date on the fight against Xylella, please sign up for our Newsletter and follow us on Twitter, Instagram, Linkedin, or Facebook.