Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T15:15:53.527Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Biological Control in the Tropics: Present Opportunities and Future Prospects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

D. J. Greathead
D. J. Greathead
Affiliation:
International Institute of Biological Control, Silwood Park, Buckhurst Road, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 7TA, UK
Get access

Abstract

Progress in the adoption of biological control in the 100 years since the introduction of the vedalia beetle into California is reviewed briefly as a background to examining current trends, especially in tropical countries. Recent successful classical biological control programmes have increased interest in applying biological control to other major pest problems as has increasing public appreciation of the dangers of over-reliance on chemical pesticides. Consequently, there is an unprecedented opportunity for greater use of biological control. However, the opportunities for classical biological control are limited and greater attention to other biological control techniques is necessary, especially the development of pathogens as biopesticides and techniques to increase the impact of native natural enemies. Biological control is not a panacea and can seldom be effective on its own. It must, therefore, be integrated with other pest control techniques in integrated management programmes. International collaboration is required to increase awareness of these opportunities, facilitate the procurement of biotic agents and generally to promote the adoption of biologically sound sustainable pest and vector management procedures. Support for biological control should include training of personnel who will be involved in decision-making and in implementing control. Practitioners must be prepared to promote the use of biological control by farmers, and also address legitimate public concerns about the safety of biological control so as to ensure continuing public support and appropriate regulatory procedures.

Résumé

Une revue brève est fournie sur le progrès en l'adoption de la lutte biologique pendant les 100 années depuis l'introduction de la coccinelle vedalie dans la Californie, comme base pour l'examination des directions courantes, particulièrement dans les pays tropicaux. Les programmes de lutte biologique classique qui ont eu de succès, ont augmenté d'interêt en l'application de lutte biologique aux autres problèmes des insectes nuisibles majeurs, aussi que la croissance dans le publique des dangers des pesticides chimiques. Par conséquence, il y a une opportunité sans précèdent pour le plus grand utilisation de lutte biologique. Cependant, les opportunités pour l'usage de la lutte biologique classique sont limitées, et plus d'attention doit être donner aux autres techniques dans la lutte biologique, particulièrement aux développement des pathogènes comme biopesticides et des techniques pour augmenter l'effet des ennemies naturelles indigènes. La lutte biologique n'est pas une panacée et seule, peut rarement être éfficace. Cependant, elle doit être intégrée avec des autres techniques de lutte en programmes de lutte intégrées contre les insectes nuisibles. La coopération internationale est nécéssaire pour augmenter la connaissance de ces opportunités pour faciliter l'entremise des agents biotiques, et pour avancer l'adoption des procédures soutenables, qui sont biologiquement bien fondés, de lutte contre des insectes nuisibles et des vecteurs. L'appui pour la lutte biologique doit comprendre l'education des personnes qui seront entraoinés à prendre des décisions et dans l'exécution de la lutte. Les practiciens doivent se préparer d'avancer l'utilisation de la lutte biologique par des cultivateurs et aussi de s'addresser aux intérêts publiques justes au sujet de la sûreté de la lutte biologique pour assurer l'appui publique continuant et les règlements intérieurs convenables.

Keywords

Biological controlnatural enemiesaugmentationbiopesticidesintegrated pest managementinternational collaborationtraining
Type
Articles
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 12 , Issue 1-2-3: Current Topics in Tropical Entomology , June 1991 , pp. 3 - 8
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Agricola, U., Agounké, D., Fischer, M. U. and Moore, D. (1989) The control of Rastrococcus invadens Williams (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) in Togo by the introduction of Gyranusoidea tebygi Noyes (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae). Bull. entomol. Res. 79, 671–678.Google Scholar
Caltagirone, L. E. and Doutt, R. L. (1989) The history of the vedalia beetle importation to California and its impact on the development of biological control. A. Rev. Entomol. 34, 1–16.Google Scholar
Carl, K. P. (1982) Biological control of native pests by introduced natural enemies. Biocontrol News Inf. 3, 191–200.Google Scholar
Cock, M. J. W. (1985) A review of biological control of pests in the Commonwealth Carribean and Bermuda up to 1982. Tech. Commun. Commonw. Inst. Biol. Control. No. 9.Google Scholar
Cock, M. J. W. and Perera, P. A. C. R. (1987) Biological control of Opisina arenosella Walker (Lepidoptera Oecophoridae). Biocontrol News Inf. 8, 283–310.Google Scholar
Cullen, J. M. and Delfosse, E. S. (1985) Echium plantagineum: catalyst for conflict and change in Australia. Proc. VI Int. Symp. Biol. Control Weeds, Vancouver, 1984, pp. 249–292.Google Scholar
Greathead, D. J. (1971) A review of biological control in the Ethiopian Region. Tech. Commun. Commonw. Inst. Biol. Control No. 5.Google Scholar
Greathead, D. J. (1988) Crop protection without chemicals: pest control in the third world. Aspects of Biology 17, 19–28.Google Scholar
Harley, K. L. S. (1989) The Management of Water Hyacinth with Emphasis on Biological Control. Commonwealth Science Council, London.Google Scholar
Julien, M. H. (1987) Biological control of weeds. A World Catalogue of Agents and Their Target Weeds. Second edition. CAB International, Wallingford.Google Scholar
Kenmore, P. E. (1988) Conservation of natural enemies precept, pay off and policy in IPM for tropical rice. Proc. XVIII Int. Congr. Entomol., Vancouver, 3–9 July 1988. Abstracts and author index.Google Scholar
Mohyuddin, A. I. (1990) Utilization of natural enemies for the control of insect pests of sugarcane. Insect Sci. Applic. 11, 863–870.Google Scholar
Moore, D. and Prior, C. (1988) Present status of biological control of the coffee berry borer Hypothenemus hampei. Brighton Crop Prot. Conf. Pests and Diseases, 1988, pp. 1119–1124.Google Scholar
Napompeth, B. and MacDicken, K. G. (Eds) 1990 Leucaena psyllid: problems and management. Proc. Int. Workshop, Bogor, Indonesia, January 16–21, 1989. Bangkok, Thailand.Google Scholar
Neuenschwander, P. and Herren, H. (1988) Biological control of the cassava mealybug, Phenacoccus manihoti, by the exotic parasitoid, Epidinocarsis lopezi in Africa. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London B318, 319–333.Google Scholar
Prior, C. and Greathead, D. J. (1989) Biological control of locusts: the potential for the exploitation of pathogens. FAO Plant Prot. Bull. 37, 37–18.Google Scholar
Waage, J. K. (1989) Population ecology of pest-pesticide-natural enemy interactions. In Pesticides and Non-target Invertebrates (Edited by Jepson, P. C.), pp. 81–93. Intercept, Wimbourne, UK.Google Scholar