Accounting for the economic risk, caused by variation in disease severity, in fungicide dose decisions: exemplified for Mycosphaerella graminicola on winter wheat

A method is presented to calculate economic optimum fungicide doses accounting for the risk-aversion of growers responding to variability in disease severity between crops. Simple dose-response and disease-yield loss functions are used to estimate net disease-related costs (fungicide cost, plus disease-induced yield loss) as a function of dose and untreated severity. With fairly general assumptions about the shapes of the probability distribution of disease severity and the other functions involved, we show that a choice of fungicide dose which minimises net costs on average across seasons results in occasional large net costs caused by inadequate control in high disease seasons. This may be unacceptable to a grower with limited capital. A risk-averse grower can choose to reduce the size and frequency of such losses by applying a higher dose as insurance. For example, a grower may decide to accept ‘high loss’ years one year in ten or one year in twenty (i.e. specifying a proportion of years in which disease severity and net costs will be above a specified level). Our analysis shows that taking into account disease severity variation and risk-aversion will usually increase the dose applied by an economically rational grower. The analysis is illustrated with data on septoria tritici leaf blotch of wheat caused by Mycosphaerella graminicola. Observations from untreated field plots at sites across England over three years were used to estimate the probability distribution of disease severities at mid-grain filling. In the absence of a fully reliable disease forecasting scheme, reducing the frequency of ‘high loss’ years requires substantially higher doses to be applied to all crops. Disease resistant cultivars reduce both the optimal dose at all levels of risk and the disease-related costs at all doses.

Evaluation of a predictive model for Mycosphaerella graminicola for economic and environmental benefits

A method was developed to evaluate crop disease predictive models for their economic and environmental benefits. Benefits were quantified as the value of a prediction measured by costs saved and fungicide dose saved. The value of prediction was defined as the net gain made by using predictions, measured as the difference between a scenario where predictions are available and used and a scenario without prediction. Comparable 'with' and 'without' scenarios were created with the use of risk levels. These risk levels were derived from a probability distribution fitted to observed disease severities. These distributions were used to calculate the probability that a certain disease induced economic loss was incurred. The method was exemplified by using it to evaluate a model developed for Mycosphaerella graminicola risk prediction. Based on the value of prediction, the tested model may have economic and environmental benefits to growers if used to guide treatment decisions on resistant cultivars. It is shown that the value of prediction measured by fungicide dose saved and costs saved is constant with the risk level. The model could also be used to evaluate similar crop disease predictive models.

Fungicide resistance: the dose rate debate

It makes economic sense to use as little fungicide as possible on a crop. In many settings, it is common to apply less than the manufacturer's recommended dose. If sources of disease are scarce, or conditions are unsuitable for it to increase, the reduced control from a low dose may be adequate. In other cases, a big reduction in dose may cause little reduction in control, again permitting savings - especially for growers prepared to run a little risk. But the label recommendations for most fungicides state that to avoid resistance, a full dose must always be used. Are individual cost-savings therefore endangering everyone's access to an exceptionally useful tool? The emergence of fungicide resistance is evolution in action. In all cases, it involves the genetic replacement of the original susceptible population of the pathogen by a new population with genetically distinct biochemistry, which confers resistance. The resistant biochemistry originates in rare genetic mutations, so rare that initially the population is hardly altered. Replacement of susceptible forms by resistant ones happens because, with fungicide present, the resistant form multiplies more rapidly than the susceptible form. The key point to notice is that only the relative rates of multiplication of the resistant and susceptible types are involved in the evolution of resistance. The absolute rates are irrelevant.