Presentation

Characterization of the technique

Description of the technique :

Jacques Girard	Chamber of Agriculture of Calvados	j.girard(at)calvados.chambagri.fr	Caen (14)
Julien Halska	INRA	julien.halska(at)grignon.inra.fr	Dijon (21)

Spam prevention: To use these addresses, replace (at) with @

Knowledge of the risk related to pathogens and bio-aggressors during the campaign can help evaluate the opportunities for treatments (as well as doses, product choices, programs). It is necessary to specify the type of risk considered (yield loss risk, economic risk). This risk is highly multifactorial and linked to local contexts (weather of the year, practices, field history, biology of the considered bio-aggressor, etc.). Risk evaluation can rely on field observations and/or epidemiological models. The reasoning of interventions can rely on various supports such as risk grids, thresholds, software, etc. Particular attention must be paid to the validity domain of the tool used (for example, thresholds are often disseminated without validity domain, which can make them inappropriate).

Example of implementation : Evaluation of take-all foot rot risk on winter wheat in Picardy (SRPV Picardy, cf. bibliography): the risk grid takes into account the infectious potential of the soil (frequency of wheat return and ploughing), soil type, sowing date, variety, as well as outputs from the epidemiological model TOP. It is possible not to treat when the risk is sufficiently low.

Implementation period On established crop

Spatial scale of implementation Field

Farm

Territory

Application of the technique to...

All crops : Sometimes difficult to generalize

All crops are potentially concerned, depending on tool availability.

Winter Oat, Einkorn (Small spelt), Spelt, Winter Rye, Winter Triticale: against autumn aphids, Virus of cereal yellow dwarf.

Beet: Thresholds recommended by ITB for cercospora leaf spot, ramularia, powdery mildew and rust. Tools against crane flies, soil and defoliating cutworms, leaf miners, rhizopus, flea beetles, mites.

Durum wheat: Against diseases (fusariosis, virus of YDV, etc.).

Winter Soft wheat: Numerous tools for diseases, leafhoppers and autumn aphids.

Winter Rapeseed, Spring rapeseed: For insecticide treatments (pollen beetles, flea beetles, the weevil of pods, the aphid of crucifers, etc.), sclerotinia, phoma.

Winter Faba bean, Spring faba bean: Against bean weevil, sitones, aphids, anthracnose, botrytis, rust.

Winter Flax fiber, Spring flax fiber, Winter flax seed, Spring flax seed: Against flea beetles, thrips.

Onion: Against downy mildew, botrytis, wireworms, thrips.

Winter Barley: Autumn aphids, Virus of cereal yellow dwarf, rhynchosporium, helminthosporium, dwarf rust.

Winter Pea, Spring pea: Against bean weevil, sitones, aphids, leafrollers, anthracnose, botrytis, rust, powdery mildew.

Potato: Against late blight, aphids, Colorado potato beetles, wireworms.

Tobacco: Against thrips.

All soil types : Easily generalizable

Attention to the validity domain of the tools.

All climatic contexts : Easily generalizable

Attention to the validity domain of the tools.

Effects on the sustainability of the cropping system

"Environmental" criteria

Effect on air quality : Variable

phytosanitary emissions : DECREASE

GHG emissions : VARIABLE

Effect on water quality : Increasing

pesticides : DECREASE

Effect on fossil resource consumption : Variable

fossil energy consumption : VARIABLE

Other : No effect (neutral)

Pollutant transfer to water (N, P, phyto ...): Decrease

Decrease if the risk is sufficiently low and if skips or dose reductions are possible. If practices generate a high risk, evaluation will lead to interventions. The effect on pollutant transfer also depends on the characteristics of the molecules (tendency to leach) and the field context (risk of drift or leaching).

Pollutant transfer to air (N, P, phyto ...): Decrease

Decrease if the risk is sufficiently low and if skips or dose reductions are possible. If practices generate a high risk, evaluation will lead to interventions. The effect on pollutant transfer also depends on the characteristics of the molecules (tendency to volatilize) and the field context (risk of drift).

Fossil energy consumption: variable

Possible reduction if passes are avoided.

GHG emissions: variable

Possible reduction if passes are avoided.

"Agronomic" criteria

Productivity : No effect (neutral)

Soil fertility : Variable

Possible improvement via reduced pressure on soil organisms (macrofauna, microorganisms).

Water stress : No effect (neutral)

Functional Biodiversity : Variable

Possible improvement via reduced pressure on living organisms in the field in case of treatment reduction.

"Economic" criteria

Operating costs : Decreasing

Possible decrease if pesticide costs are reduced.

Mechanization costs : Variable

Possible decrease if fewer passes. Some decision support tools are paid.

Margin : Increasing

Effect on margins varies depending on possible pesticide savings and the possible cost of the tool. Compared to systematic treatments, margins should be equal or higher.

"Social" criteria

Working time : Variable

Possible decrease if fewer passes.

Observation time : Variable

This strongly depends on the tool considered. Some require field observations, others are much simpler to implement.

Favored or disadvantaged organisms

Disadvantaged bioaggressors

Organism	Impact of the technique	Type	Details
Acari \| acarid		pest, predator or parasite
Rapeseed flea beetle \| rapeseed flea beetle		pest, predator or parasite
Flax flea beetle \| flax flea beetle		pest, predator or parasite
Pea anthracnose \| pea anthracnose		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Faba bean anthracnose \| faba bean anthracnose		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Botrytis cinerea \| botrytis cinerea		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Botrytis fabae \| botrytis fabae		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Bean weevil \| bean weevil		pest, predator or parasite
Faba bean weevil \| faba bean weevil		pest, predator or parasite
Cercospora leaf spot \| cercospora leaf spot		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Stem weevil \| stem weevil		pest, predator or parasite
Pod weevil \| pod weevil		pest, predator or parasite
Terminal bud weevil \| terminal bud weevil		pest, predator or parasite
Wheat leafhopper \| wheat leafhopper		pest, predator or parasite
Colorado potato beetle \| Colorado potato beetle		pest, predator or parasite
Fusariosis \| fusariosis		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Fusariosis trichothecenes A barley \| fusariosis trichothecenes A barley		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Fusariosis trichothecenes B zearalenone cereal straw \| fusariosis trichothecenes B zearalenone cereal straw		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Barley helminthosporiosis \| barley helminthosporiosis		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Slug \| slug		pest, predator or parasite
Microdochium on leaves \| microdochium on leaves		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Onion downy mildew \| onion downy mildew		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Potato late blight \| potato late blight		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Pollen beetle \| pollen beetle		pest, predator or parasite
Silver Y moth \| silver Y moth		pest, predator or parasite
Cutworm \| cutworm		pest, predator or parasite
Beet powdery mildew \| beet powdery mildew		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Cereal powdery mildew \| cereal powdery mildew		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Pea powdery mildew \| pea powdery mildew		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Flea beetle \| flea beetle		pest, predator or parasite
Crucifer phoma \| crucifer phoma		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Take-all \| take-all		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Common root rot \| common root rot		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Ear aphid \| ear aphid		pest, predator or parasite
Autumn aphid \| autumn aphid		pest, predator or parasite
Black bean aphid \| black bean aphid		pest, predator or parasite
Peach green aphid \| peach green aphid		pest, predator or parasite
Pea green aphid \| pea green aphid		pest, predator or parasite
Green and pink potato aphid \| green and pink potato aphid		pest, predator or parasite
Potato aphids \| potato aphids		pest, predator or parasite
Crucifer aphids \| crucifer aphids		pest, predator or parasite
Leaf miner \| leaf miner		pest, predator or parasite
Beet ramularia \| beet ramularia		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Rhizopus \| rhizopus		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Rhynchosporium \| rhynchosporium		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Brown rust \| brown rust		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Beet rust \| beet rust		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Faba bean rust \| faba bean rust		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Pea rust \| pea rust		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Yellow rust \| yellow rust		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Barley leaf rust \| barley leaf rust		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Sclerotinia \| sclerotinia		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Septoria leaf blotch \| septoria leaf blotch		pathogen (bioaggressor)
Pea sitona \| pea sitona		pest, predator or parasite
Wireworm \| wireworm		pest, predator or parasite
Flax thrips \| flax thrips		pest, predator or parasite
Tobacco and onion thrips \| tobacco and onion thrips		pest, predator or parasite
Crane fly \| crane fly		pest, predator or parasite
Pea leafroller \| pea leafroller		pest, predator or parasite
Virus of cereal yellow dwarf \| virus of cereal yellow dwarf		pathogen (bioaggressor)

For more information

Ecophyto R&D. Towards cropping systems sparing phytosanitary products. Volume II : Comparative analysis of different systems in arable crops
-Brunet N. (INRA); Debaeke P. (INRA); Delos M. (DRAAF-SRAl); Guérin O. (CA 17); Guichard L. (INRA); Guindé L. (INRA); Mischler P. (Agro-transfert RT); Munier-Jolain N. (INRA); Omon B. (CA Eure); Rolland B. (INRA); Viaux P. (Arvalis); Villard A. (CA 71)

INRA publisher (France) page 108, Book, 2009

Link to the report Level 1 break (intervention reasoning) allows reducing the IFT.

TOP model : estimation of Take-all-Foot rot risk
-Chamber of Agriculture of the Nord-Pas de Calais region

Technical brochure, 2015

link to the brochure

Keywords

Bioaggressor control method : Chemical control

Mode of action : Rescue

Type of strategy regarding pesticide use : Efficiency

Appendices

Défavorise les bioagresseurs suivants

Reasoning the Opportunity of Interventions

Contents