THE ROLE OF PEST CONTROL OPERATORS IN VERTEBRATE PEST CONTROL

The National Pest Control Association, which I represent, accepts for membership those persons or firms which are actively engaged in the performance of structural pest control services for hire to the public at large and which are in sympathy with the purposes of the Association. The pest control operator in this context might be called a commercial pest control operator to distinguish him from those doing similar work but who are employed by governmental agencies or within large commercial organizations. Pest control is a growing industry with a gross annual income of 300-350 million dollars. It is estimated to contain more than 5,000 firms employing about 25,000 productive workers. Many of these servicemen, possibly 15,000, are doing vertebrate pest control every day as they combat commensal rodents. A much smaller number, usually specialists or persons normally doing super¬visory work, are also engaged in the control of pest birds and a variety of miscellaneous vertebrates. With approximately 15,000 servicemen making at least 10 contacts a day with the public, it is readily apparent that whatever opportunity the general public has to judge the success or failure of vertebrate pest control practice is largely influenced by the work of the pest control industry.

Pest control : do it yourself or hire a professional?

Caption title.

THE ROLE OF INDUSTRY IN DEVELOPING NEW MATERIALS FOR VERTEBRATE PEST CONTROL

In the first paper presented to you today by Dr. Spencer, an expert in the Animal Biology field and an official authority at the same time, you heard about the requirements imposed on a chemical in order to pass the different official hurdles before it ever will be accepted as a proven tool in wildlife management. Many characteristics have to be known and highly sophisticated tests have to be run. In many instances the governmental agency maintains its own screening, testing or analytical programs according to standard procedures. It would be impossible, however, for economic and time reasons to work out all the data necessary for themselves. They, therefore, depend largely on the information furnished by the individual industry which naturally has to be established as conscientiously as possible. This, among other things, Dr. Spencer has made very clear; and this is also what makes quite a few headaches for the individual industry, but I am certainly not speaking only for myself in saying that Industry fully realizes this important role in developing materials for vertebrate control and the responsibilities lying in this. This type of work - better to say cooperative work with the official institutions - is, however, only one part and for the most of it, the smallest part of work which Industry pays to the development of compounds for pest control. It actually refers only to those very few compounds which are known to be effective. But how to get to know about their properties in the first place? How does Industry make the selection from the many thousands of compounds synthesized each year? This, by far, creates the biggest problems, at least from the scientific and technical standpoint. Let us rest here for a short while and think about the possible ways of screening and selecting effective compounds. Basically there are two different ways. One is the empirical way of screening as big a number of compounds as possible under the supposition that with the number of incidences the chances for a "hit" increase, too. You can also call this type of approach the statistical or the analytical one, the mass screening of new, mostly unknown candidate materials. This type of testing can only be performed by a producer of many new materials,that means by big industries. It requires a tremendous investment in personnel, time and equipment and is based on highly simplified but indicative test methods, the results of which would have to be reliable and representative for practical purposes. The other extreme is the intellectual way of theorizing effective chemical configurations. Defenders of this method claim to now or later be able to predict biological effectiveness on the basis of the chemical structure or certain groups in it. Certain pre-experience should be necessary, that means knowledge of the importance of certain molecular requirements, then the detection of new and effective complete molecules is a matter of coordination to be performed by smart people or computers. You can also call this method the synthetical or coordinative method.

Promise for plant pest control: root-associated pseudomonads with insecticidal activities.

Insects are an important and probably the most challenging pest to control in agriculture, in particular when they feed on belowground parts of plants. The application of synthetic pesticides is problematic owing to side effects on the environment, concerns for public health and the rapid development of resistance. Entomopathogenic bacteria, notably Bacillus thuringiensis and Photorhabdus/Xenorhabdus species, are promising alternatives to chemical insecticides, for they are able to efficiently kill insects and are considered to be environmentally sound and harmless to mammals. However, they have the handicap of showing limited environmental persistence or of depending on a nematode vector for insect infection. Intriguingly, certain strains of plant root-colonizing Pseudomonas bacteria display insect pathogenicity and thus could be formulated to extend the present range of bioinsecticides for protection of plants against root-feeding insects. These entomopathogenic pseudomonads belong to a group of plant-beneficial rhizobacteria that have the remarkable ability to suppress soil-borne plant pathogens, promote plant growth, and induce systemic plant defenses. Here we review for the first time the current knowledge about the occurrence and the molecular basis of insecticidal activity in pseudomonads with an emphasis on plant-beneficial and prominent pathogenic species. We discuss how this fascinating Pseudomonas trait may be exploited for novel root-based approaches to insect control in an integrated pest management framework.

Potential Impacts of Climate Change on Ecosystem Services in Europe: the Case of Pest Control by Vertebrates. BioScience.

Global environmental changes threaten ecosystems and cause significant alterations to the supply of ecosystem services that are vital for human well-being. We provide an assessment of the potential impacts of climate change on European diversity of vertebrates and their associated pest control services. We modeled the distributions of the species that provide this service using ensembles of forecasts from bioclimatic envelope models and then used their results to generate maps of potential species richness among vertebrate providers of pest control services. We assessed how potential richness of pest control providers would change according to different climate and greenhouse emissions scenarios. We found that potential richness of pest control providers was likely to face substantial reductions, especially in southern European countries that had economies highly dependent on agricultural yields. In much of central and northern Europe, where countries had their economies less dependent on agriculture, climate change was likely to benefit pest control providers

Perspectives of digestive pest control with proteinase inhibitors that mainly affect the trypsin-like activity of Anticarsia gemmatalis Hübner (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

The present study describes the main characteristics of the proteolytic activities of the velvetbean caterpillar, Anticarsia gemmatalis Hübner, and their sensitivity to proteinase inhibitors and activators. Midguts of last instar larvae reared on an artificial diet were homogenized in 0.15 M NaCl and centrifuged at 14,000 g for 10 min at 4ºC and the supernatants were used in enzymatic assays at 30ºC, pH 10.0. Basal total proteolytic activity (azocasein hydrolysis) was 1.14 ± 0.15 absorbance variation min-1 mg protein-1, at 420 nm; basal trypsin-like activity (N-benzoyl-L-arginine-p-nitroanilide, BApNA, hydrolysis) was 0.217 ± 0.02 mmol p-nitroaniline min-1 mg protein-1. The maximum proteolytic activities were observed at pH 10.5 using azocasein and at pH 10.0 using BApNA, this pH being identical to the midgut pH of 10.0. The maximum trypsin-like activity occurred at 50ºC, a temperature that reduces enzyme stability to 80 and 60% of the original, when pre-incubated for 5 and 30 min, respectively. Phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride inhibited the proteolytic activities with an IC50 of 0.39 mM for azocasein hydrolysis and of 1.35 mM for BApNA hydrolysis. Benzamidine inhibited the hydrolysis with an IC50 of 0.69 and 0.076 mM for azocasein and BApNA, respectively. The absence of cysteine-proteinases is indicated by the fact that 2-mercaptoethanol and L-cysteine did not increase the rate of azocasein hydrolysis. These results demonstrate the presence of serine-proteinases and the predominance of trypsin-like activity in the midgut of Lepidoptera insects, now also detected in A. gemmatalis, and suggest this enzyme as a major target for pest control based on disruption of protein metabolism using proteinase inhibitors.

Europe’s biocidal products directive: benefits and costs in urban pest management

The European Commission’s Biocidal Products Directive (Council Directive 98/8 EC), known as the BPD, is the largest regulatory exercise ever to affect the urban pest control industry. Although focussed in the European Union its impact is global because any company selling pest control products in the EU must follow its principles. All active substances, belonging to 23 different biocidal product types, come within the Directive’s scope of regulatory control. This will eventually involve re-registration of all existing products, as well as affecting any new product that comes to the market. Some active substances, such as the rodenticides and insecticides, are already highly regulated in Europe but others, such as embalming fluids, masonry preservatives, disinfectants and repellents/attractants will come under intensive regulatory scrutiny for the first time. One of the purposes of the Directive is to offer enhanced protection for human health and the environment. The potential benefit for suppliers of pest control products is mutual recognition of regulatory product dossiers across 25 Member States of the European Union. This process, requiring harmonisation of all regulatory decision-making processes, should reduce duplicated effort and, potentially, allow manufacturers speedier access to European markets. However, the cost to industry is enormous, both in terms of the regulatory resources required to assemble BPD dossiers and the development budgets required to conduct studies to meet its new standards. The cost to regulatory authorities is also tremendous, in terms of the need to upgrade staff capabilities to meet new challenges and the volume of the work expected by the Commission when they are appointed the Rapporteur Member State (RMS) for an active substance. Users of pest control products will pay a price too. The increased regulatory costs of maintaining products in the European market are likely to be passed on, at least in part, to users. Furthermore, where the costs of meeting new regulatory requirements cannot be recouped from product sales, many well-known products may leave the market. For example, it seems that in future few rodenticides that are not anticoagulants will be available within the EU. An understanding of the BPD is essential to those who intend to place urban pest control products on the European market and may be useful to those considering the harmonisation of regulatory processes elsewhere. This paper reviews the operation of the first stages of the BPD for rodenticides, examines the potential benefits and costs of the legislation to the urban pest control industry and looks forward to the next stages of implementation involving all insecticides used in urban pest management.

From farmers’ perspective : pesticide use and pest control

Many studies have shown that farmers in developing countries often overuse pesticides and do not adopt safety practices. Policies and interventions to promote a safer use of pesticides are often based on a limited understanding of the farmers’ own perspective of pesticide use. This often results in ineffective policies and the persistence of significant pesticide-related health and environmental problems, especially in developing countries. This chapter explores potentials and limitations of different approaches to study pesticide use in agriculture from the farmers’ perspective. In contrast to the reductionist and mono-disciplinary approaches often adopted, this chapter calls for integrative methodological approaches to provide a realistic and thorough understanding of the farmers’ perspective on pesticide use and illustrates the added value of such an approach with three case studies of pesticide use in Iran, India, and Colombia.

Farmers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the Cocoa Disease and Pest Control Programme (CODAPEC) in Ghana and its effects on poverty reduction

The study examined the contribution of the Cocoa Disease and Pest Control Programme (CODAPEC), which is a cocoa production-enhancing government policy, to reducing poverty and raising the living standards of cocoa farmers in Ghana. One hundred and fifty (150) cocoa farmers were randomly selected from five communities in the Bibiani-Anhwiaso-Bekwai district of the Western Region of Ghana and interviewed using structured questionnaires. Just over half of the farmers (53%) perceived the CODAPEC programme as being effective in controlling pests and diseases, whilst 56.6% felt that their yields and hence livelihoods had improved. In some cases pesticides or fungicides were applied later in the season than recommended and this had a detrimental effect on yields. To determine the level of poverty amongst farmers, annual household consumption expenditure was used as a proxy indicator. The study found that 4.7% of cocoa farmers were extremely poor having a total annual household consumption expenditure of less than GH¢ 623.10 ($310.00) while 8.0% were poor with less than GH¢ 801.62 ($398.81). An amount of money ranging from GH¢ 20.00 ($9.95) to GH¢ 89.04 ($44.29) per annum was needed to lift the 4.7% of cocoa farmers out of extreme poverty, which could be achieved through modest increases in productivity. The study highlighted how agricultural intervention programmes, such as CODAPEC, have the potential to contribute to improved farmer livelihoods.