Assistant Extension Professor Ana Legrand is coordinator of UConn’s IPM program. She holds a PhD in entomology and conducts research on biological control and tritrophic interactions. One area of her work focuses on the influence of plant morphological variation on the control of pea aphid by its complex of predators and parasites.

Sustainable pest management

By Ana Legrand
Assistant Extension Professor

Aphids, mice, powdery mildew, cockroaches, ragweed, slugs … the list goes on. We all have at some point encountered a pest problem that needed a solution. In dealing with a pest, we need to consider the sustainability of the steps taken to solve the problem. From the perspective of pest management, sustainability is considered in terms of environmental and human health protection, economic benefits, and effectiveness. Actions that are sustainable seek to protect our environment and natural resources for the benefit of future generations. Integrated pest management, or IPM, is a sustainable approach that emphasizes ecosystem-based strategies that result in economical and long-term solutions to pest problems. The objective for IPM practitioners is to minimize risks to human health and the environment from the pest management actions implemented.

IPM is a holistic approach that seeks to manage pests by using methods that are effective, economically sound, and ecologically compatible. IPM practitioners base decisions on information that is collected systematically as they integrate economic, environmental, and social goals. IPM promotes the use and integration of multiple tactics such as biological control, use of resistant varieties, behavioral modification, and mechanical and cultural controls for pest management. A special emphasis is placed on prevention of the pest problem and on control by natural enemies of the pest organism. Preventive steps, for example, would include using mesh screening in greenhouses or in homes to prevent insect pest entry. Control by natural enemies encompasses examples such as aphids being killed by ladybird beetles or Japanese beetle grubs being killed by Tiphia parasitic wasps. The principles of IPM can be applied in a variety of settings, such as agricultural crops, residences and buildings, urban landscapes, forests, recreational areas, and other managed ecosystems.

While the IPM concept was formally developed in the 1950s and 1960s, the ideas behind this approach go further back. Before the advent of a diversity of chemical pesticides, many of the approaches used in pest management relied on understanding the biology and ecology of the pest and the integration of all available pest management tactics. For example, a farmer’s bulletin on root-knot nematode management published in 1911 by E.A. Bessey outlines what would now be considered an integrated management plan. Beginning in the 1970s, IPM was promoted through federal funding after scientists and the public raised many concerns on the over-reliance on powerful chemical pesticides. Environmental and human health concerns were also heightened by the fact that at the time there were many cases of pests becoming resistant to the pesticides used against them. In fact, resistance to over-used pesticides is still a concern; a recent count noted that the number of arthropod species that have lost susceptibility to certain pesticides has gone from seven, as documented in 1938, to over 700 species by 2001.

Early proponents of the IPM approach noted that reliance on natural enemies of the pests was necessary and that chemical pesticides would play a role only when this and other preventive steps failed. Taking steps to manage pests using an IPM approach promotes a sustainable form of pest management. In this case, the tools to manage the pest are selected so that they pose the least risk to the environment and to human health. Thus, in IPM the application of pesticides is done only when necessary to avoid damage to the managed resource or to protect human health. Pesticides are used only after documenting that they are needed according to established guidelines. Moreover, steps are taken to promote the action of pests’ natural enemies and to protect them. Noted entomologist Carl Huffaker emphasized that “when we kill off the natural enemies of a pest we inherit their work”.

The College of Agriculture and Natural Resources is home to UConn’s Integrated Pest Management program. The IPM program educates growers and the general public on environmentally sound pest management tactics. The goal of the program is to provide information on how to control pests without relying solely on pesticides. IPM educational programs provide information on pest management alternatives through field training, conferences, workshops, and publications. Regular pest alerts are also provided through email and the IPM Web site. IPM training programs are currently offered to producers of vegetables, tree and small fruit, wine grapes, greenhouse crops, and nursery crops. In addition, the IPM program also provides educational outreach on non-native invasive plant problems and turfgrass pest problems. Connecticut IPM personnel train growers, groundskeepers, homeowners, and students each year in IPM methods. The IPM staff help growers with pest problems as well as provide training on how to carry out IPM for a particular crop. In this regard, the key educational component of the IPM program is intensive, hands-on, onsite training to clients through an entire growing season. This training is designed to provide growers with the knowledge, skills, and confidence needed to achieve effective implementation of IPM. Since 1984, IPM educators have delivered more than 770 onsite season-long IPM training programs. As a result, growers have withheld from application nearly 92 tons of pesticide active ingredient. The implementation of IPM also improves farm profitability by cutting out unnecessary costs and reducing losses due to pest damage. Growers participating in the program have also been able to reduce pesticide applications by trying innovative IPM tactics that include trap cropping and releases of beneficial insects. To find out more about IPM and IPM offerings in Connecticut, visit our Web site at www.ipm.uconn.edu.

IPM tactics include:

• Cultural controls: Sanitation, crop rotation, planting time selection
• Physical and mechanical controls: Sticky traps, fences, row covers
• Host plant resistance: Use of resistant varieties.
• Behavioral modification: Use of insect pheromones, use of scare tactics
• Biological control: Use of beneficial organisms like insect predators, insect pathogens,
and antagonists of plant pathogens.
• Pesticides: Use of conventional chemical pesticides and biorational pesticides
• Regulatory or legislative prevention: Quarantine programs