A European perspective of IPM in glasshouses, with emphasis on

floriculture

Irene VänninenAgrifood Research Finland

5th National IPM Symposium, St. Louis, USA, April 4-6, 2006Presentation at minisymposium: ” ”Are alternative IPM approaches for

greenhouse and nursery pests feasible”

Rikalan puutarhasäätiö

Borisoffin Puutarhasäätiö

1. Glasshouse technology in Europe

Map image courtesy: http://www.europa.eu.int Image courtesy: http://clairepentecost.org

The Netherlands, NW-Europe

shade cloth + plastic houses

Venlo-blocks;wide-span houses

single-span houses

Spain (Almeria)

North Scandinavia (Finland)Glasshouse structures:

Artificial Lighting: NO, FI (DK, NL, UK)

tomato and cucumber 180-250 W/m2, in cucumber even 300 W/m2

(=about 16000-22000-28000 lux), rose, gerbera 180-220 W/m2

Photo by Tom Murmann Photo by Tom Murmann

Supplementary lightsbetween plant rows toilluminate lower leaves

Yield of AYR cucs/FI:120-140 kg/m per year

Finland: 30 % of cucsarea and 25 % of tomatoarea with ArtLight

Whiteflies, thrips, powdery mildew.

Behaviour of beneficialsCosts of IPM

The NL: Elsewhere:

Size of glasshouses

Average size: > 1haAverage size e.g. 0.25 ha Finland,

0.3 ha Germany

Photo by Pauliina Laitinen

The NL:

Size-related problems…

Scouting in dense crops or in mobile beds (roses, chrysanthemum).

Economics of scale in terms of IPMper unit area

The NL with high exports of flowers:

Degree of specialisation

Plant species and cultivar selection at Her-burg rosenkwekerij (NL): 3 ha of Passion.

Plant species selection at Dion tenHave’s company: 3 ha Campanula.

IPM less complicated in one-crop companies

Degree of specialisation

Photo by Pauliina Laitinen Photo by Pauliina Laitinen

Photo by Pauliina LaitinenPhoto by Pauliina Laitinen

Photo by Pauliina Laitinen

Countries producing mostly for domestic markets: Heikkilä, Turku, Finland

…and more…

Domestic, relatively small market� many sorts of plants � less possibilitiesfor mechanisation � production is labor intensive � higher labor costs

IPM more complicated in multiple-crop companies

Degree of mechanisation

The NL: high specialisation ����

high mechanisation

Elsewhere (but not everywhere):

Mobile growing tables, mobile beds (gerbera, rose,tulip, chrysanth.), transport systems, sorting andbunching machines, camera-based spacing of pots

Less but increasing, particularlyin big new units

Photos by Pauliina LaitinenHand-packing allows last lookon pests in plants ���� discard

infested ones

Degree of mechanisation

The NL: Elsewhere:

Spray robots

Manually operated hydraulicsprayers, cold-foggers

Photo by Pauliina Laitinen

In the NL, labor costs of spraying not as importanta cost factor as before �

in relative terms, labor for applic. of beneficialsan important cost factor nowadays!

The NL: North-west/North Europe:

Computer-controlled climate regulation

Photo by Pauliina Laitinen

Photo by Pauliina Laitinen

Pest monitoring results are put in the computer on the spot.

Documentation and submission of datarequired by certified

label organizations is computerized

Focus on biotechnol. & breeding (pest resistance);biosensors for tracking quality-changes in prod-ucts; computerized production control & roboticsin large units; closed climate-controlled g-houses

Degeneration of horticulturaleducation! (loss of knowledgeamong academics, decreasein the number of students withacademic education)

Production expandsalong the Mediterraneancoast

Scandinavia: high quality regional niche production (products vulnerable to trans-port; emphasis on selling, not producing;”Recreational horticulture” (Garden Cen-ters etc.)

A new horticult. cluster will form innorthern Poland – developmentwith Dutch & Danish moneyDutch & Danish money,exports to elsewhere in Europe

European glasshouse horticulture in the 21st century – anticipated developments

Source and image courtesy Rolf Larsen

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/hri2/newsandevents/oldernews/bewleylecture/rolf.pdf

Hungary exporting to thecountries of Balkan?

2. Use of IPM in European floriculture

�Crops & production acreages

� Status of IPM in the NL, UK, and Scandinavia (with brief lookon other countries) and reasons for differences

� Costs of IPM

� Future prospects of IPM in European floriculture

Top-10 producers of glasshouseornamentals areawise (ha) in Europe

5700

4309

3014

2683

2215

1022

850

655

322

300

NL

Italy

Spain

Germany

France

UK

Poland

Belgium

Denmark

Ireland

=95 % of total area ofabout 23 000 ha

Trends in flower production in the mostadvanced production countries:

•production area is slowly declining•number of growers is decreasing•average company size is increasing•total production is stable

NL: emphasis oncut flowers

Other countries:emphasis on potted floweringplants & beddingplants

I Plant protection problems:factors that necessitate IPM

II Grower: adoption and suc-success of IPM

III Support: implementationand success of IPM

IV Market: continuity ofIPM

V Legislative: obligations, incentives

Pesticide availability & efficacy, environ-mental & health issues

Geography, pest complexes, growingsystems, types of glasshouse; growerpsychology, skills & educational level

Extension system & resources, researchin local conditions (resources), availabil-ity & efficacy of BCAs & selective pestic-ides

Costs of other PP strategies, imago bran-ding, trademarking (added value of prod.),certified labels in response to consumer/retailer demands

Binding legislation, agreements betweenstakeholders, cross compliance within EU

Interfaces influencing the adoption and success of IPM

The road to IPM in ornamentals in The NLThe road to IPM in ornamentals in The NL

5700 ha6400 companies

Cut flowers 60%60% of flower area: Rose,chrysanthemum, Alstroemeria, Freesia,Lily, Gerbera,orchids, Anthurium, carnation, many others

Pot plants 24%; of which 40% foliage: Ficus, Dracaena, Hedera, Schefflera, palms;60% flowering: kalanchoe, orchids, chrys.,gerbera, roses, begonia, Campanula,saint-paulia, Primula, Hortensia, cyclamen…

Other flowers 16%

Reasons to implement IPM:

Environmental issues

Pesticide resistance

Retailers’ criteria on pro-duction system’s quality

MPS (Milieu

Project Sierteelt)

1993����

SIGNatuur

1997-2000

Telen met toekomst

2003-07

Strateeg

2004-07

The road to IPM in ornamentals in The NL: The road to IPM in ornamentals in The NL:

agreements between stakeholdersagreements between stakeholders

Meerjarenplan Gewasbescherming(1991-2000): initial step to reduceuse of pesticides & emissions

Convenant Glastuinbouw en Milieu (GLAMI) (1997-2010). Agreement on glasshouse crop production and Environment (all relevant stakeholders): set goals to reduce the use of energy, pesticides and fertilizers. Milieu Planobligatory in companies.

1.1.2005 Resolution on the principles of IPM

Convenant Gewasbescherming(2003): stimulation of IPMLegislative + PP problems

interfaces very important

MPS (Milieu

Project Sierteelt)

1993����

SIGNatuur

1997-2000

Telen met toekomst2003-07

Strateeg2004-07

� guidelines for environmentally friendly production certification: MPS certificationsystem

� use of biocontrol encouraged to reducepesticide use

� Demonstration project on the possibilitiesof IPM in greenhouse ornamentals

The road to IPM in ornamentals in The NL:The road to IPM in ornamentals in The NL:

role of support interfacerole of support interface

Gov. withdrew from knowledge transfer � break-up of the traditional knowledge transfer triptychResearch-Extension-Education

Socio-technical network: Testingand delivery of ”Best Practices”

Grower network for participat-ive and stepwise learning

M o b i l i s a t i o n!

10% area with IPM

20% area with IPM

now 38% area with IPM(goal: 80 % by 2010)

<1% area with IPM

The road to IPM in ornamentals in The NL:The road to IPM in ornamentals in The NL:

market interface (quality assurance schemes)market interface (quality assurance schemes)

MPS-A,B,C

MPS-GAP

MPS-SQMPS-QUALITY

MPS-Florimark

MPS-SQ. Socially qualified production conditions.

MPS-Quality of products and services.

ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION based on the usage ofenergy, PPPs and fertilizers and trmt of waste. A, B & C categories based on what kinds of pesticides are used; MPS-MIND is the indication system for the hazard levelof pesticides.

Corresponds to EurepGap quality assurance scheme(retailers’ demands on production systems)

Top growers with MPS-A, MPS-GAP, MPS-SQ, MPS-

QUALITY Image courtesy: www.my-mps.com

More info: p.vant.hoff@my-mps.com

MPS also in: DK, BE

http://www.agribusinessonline.com/regulations/eurepprotocol.pdf

Quality assurance demands bylarge retailers (supermarket chains)

Mostly in use: UK, NL, BE, AU, IT, ES

Other quality assurance schemes:

(also ornamentals)

Elements of IPM in European floriculture

• Quarantine

• Monitoring

• Hygiene

• Screening of vents

• Biocontrol

• Insect pathogenic fungi in propagation areas

• Mechanized applicationmethods of beneficials

• Regular inundative releases

• Banker plants

• Host plant resistance

• Oils, soaps, otherbiorationals

• Selective pesticides

• Spatial integration: chemicals on leaves, biocontrol in soil or viceversa

• Temporal integration: biocontrol in mother stocks, chemical in sales plants

• Educated personnel

• Emphasis on ”easy” crops

IPM in use in the NL: Rosenkwekerij Joop van de Nauweland

Crop manager ArendBook: 15 years expe-rience on IPM.

3 ha of roses (Sphinx, Explosion). Company has MPS-certification.

Biol. control: spider mites, citrus spider mites, thrips.Chemical control: whiteflies, scales, aphids, powderymildew (spot treatments). Sulphur fumigation for 4hours only after powdery mildew trmts.

Monitoring: 3-5 hours weekly. Two persons+the whole staff monitors when maintaining the crop.Written record sheet at the end of all beds.

The mostimportant thing is

scouting!

Amblyseius cucumeris against thrips.Action threshold level for correctivechemical trmts 10 thrips per stickytrap (1 trap/1000 m2). swirskii is in trials.

Old flowers are removed regularly insummertime to hinder developmentof thrips population.

An advisor visitsonce in two weeks,1,5 hours at a time A. californicus is applied against citrus

spider mites (in photo: damage by this mite).

IPM in chrysanthemum in the NL: combined roleof market, support and PP problems interfaces

Rapid changeover taking place – in two years almost 50% of chrys. areaunder IPM

IPM program developed by Syngenta a keyto succes of IPM in this crop. IPM enables continuous efficacy of Vertimec with alleviated resistance prob-lems (Vertimec=abamectin-based acaricide/insecticide).

Best practices of plant protection of chrysanthemums developed:www.telenmettoekomst.nl

IPM program outline for cut chrysanthemums: http://www.syngentacropprotection.nl/gew/chrysant/

big areas attract biocontrol producers (R&D, advice), in the NL several domestic producers of biocontrol agents offer theirproducts for chrysanthemum

IPM in ornamentals in the UKIPM in ornamentals in the UK

Cut flowers (160 ha=16% of total area of 1022ha):chrysanthemum, Alstroemeria, carnations, pinks,others

Pot plants: chrysanthemum, begonia, poinset-tia, foliage plants

Bedding plants: Fuchsia, Geranium, Pansy

Map image courtesy: http://www.world66.com/myworld66/visitedEurope

Important factors for advancement of IPM:

� early start in the end of 1980s (Les Wardlaw pioneering) (=support interface)� enthusiastic IPM specialists transferring knowledge (now reduced in numbers

due to privatization) (Jude Bennison, ADAS and her coworkers) (=support interface)� resistance problems (=PP problems interface)� retail pressure to reduce pesticide use (but no financial premium for IPM) (=marketinterface) � ”Best practices” for most important crops

�large domestic biocontrol producers � advising+biocontrol products

see also http://www.bopp.org.uk/home/British Orn.Producers certification scheme

IPM in the UK ornamentals

Beneficials used most often:

Encarsia formosaPhytoseiulus persimilisAphidius colemaniAmblyseius sp.Aphidoletes aphidimyzaHypoaspis miles

Use of IPM in glasshouse horticulture, UK

Crop % of area under IPM*

Tomato 79,4

Cucumber 91,2

Peppers 89

Strawberries 50,5

Other fruit 66,3

Pot chrysanthemum 58,5

Other pot plants** 70

Alstroemeria 55

Hardy nursery stock 17,4

Other flowers & foliage 16

* IPM=at least one species of biocontrol agent

was used in the crop (Jude Bennison, ADAS, pers.

communic.)

* begonia, cyclamen, ferns, fuchsia, gerbera,

hydrangea, ivy, kalanchoe, poinsettia

Source: Pesticide Usage Survey Report 196. Protected crops

(edible and ornamental) in Great Britain. D.G. Garthwaite & M. R. Thomas.

National Statistics. Central Science Laboratory.

in 1999 only 30 %

IPM in glasshouse floriculture: Scandinavia

relatively small acreages of glasshouse floriculture:

�Denmark 322 (pot plants)�Finland 175 ha (bedding plants, pot plants, cut rose)�Norway 106 ha (pot plants, cut rose)�Sweden 16 ha (pot plants, bedding plants)

small number of registeredpesticides � resistance prob-lems push towards IPM

Pesticide reduction plans: DK, SE, FI (but emphasis in arablecrops)

certified labels not very explicit conc.pesticide use or IPM (except in Den-mark, where MPS label is owned byseveral growers)

expensive beneficials (shipment costs)in Norway, Sweden, Finland (but nowone Finnish producer)In Denmark, domestic producers of bc-agents.

Environmental pressures notexcessive to reduce pesticideuse in glasshouse crops

IPM in Norwegian glasshouse floriculture

Rose growers in Norway learning fromeach other.

Photo: Annichen Smith-Eriksen

Cut roses – a special case in IPM of ornamentals in Norway: 50 % IPM(Annichen Smith-Eriksen, pers. communic.)

small area (15 ha)

concentrated in Rogaland

veryvery narrownarrow selectionselection of of

pesticidespesticides�� IPM is the IPM is the onlyonly

possibilitypossibility

two successive knowledge-transfer projects that includedroses

in other types of ornamentals<10% IPM

IPM in Finnish glasshouse floriculture

Extent of biocontrol and IPM in Finnish glasshouse crops

(% of area)

(Grönroos & Nikander 2002, questionnaire survey )

0 % 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 %

Cucumber

Tomato

Potted vegetables

Other vegetables

Pot plants

Cut flowers

Biological IPM Only chemical Not reported

+ phone survey in 2004: 28 % used IPM (cut flowers + pot plants + bedding plants) (Korkala 2005)

Banker plants for rearing aphidparasitoids above potted roses

IPM starting in cut roses (10companies (50% of total area)participate in the knowledgetransfer project INTO

no legislavite incentives for IPMtight economical situation of growersbig resistance problems in cut roses

AYR production: winter con-ditions not favourable to allbeneficials despite artificiallighting

Photo: Marika Linnamäki

Denmark: 30-35 % IPM (pot plants,which comprise 75% of the total areaof glasshouse ornamentals 322 ha)(Eilenberg et al. 2000)

Finland:

http://www.dansk-ip.dk/

3. Costs of IPM in European floriculture

German source: Horstmann, Richter, Klose & Sell 2006. Long-term costs in biological pest control withbeneficial organisms in cut flower roses. Nachrichtenblatt des deutschen Pflanzenschutzdienstens.(in

press). Finnish source: bookkeeping of the greenhouse companies

IPM costs in cut roses in two German and two Finnish

cut rose crops

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Year

eu

ros/m

2

Finland A Germany A Germany B

Conventional PP, A Conventional PP, B Finland B

Note: Germany IPM: labor costsincluded, Finland IPM: not included

average cost of chemical control in Finland: 2.35 e/m2 (labor incl.)

Proportional costs for different pests, Finnish cut

rose crop

0,00

1,00

2,00

3,00

4,00

5,00

6,00

2004 2005

Year

eu

ros/m

2 Powdery mildew

Spider mites

Thrips

Aphids

• Reduce costs by deepening the knowledge basis �

• move from the safe side of application rates to lower rates of beneficials

• rely on economics of scale (reduced costs per m2 with increase in area

under IPM)

(IPM)

Average chemicalcontrol per m2, incl.labor (2002-06)

Achievable goal: IPM with developed know-ledge basis, excl.labor (Lepaa Hort. Coll.)

after having ”tasted” the totality of benefits of IPM, growers want to stick to itand try to:

Economics of scale of using beneficialsin cut roses

Costs

€/m

2

Glasshouse area, m2

Source: http://www.bba.de/projekte/nuetzlinge/nuetzl_start1.htm(Ellen Richter, BBA, Germany)

Ellen Richter, BBA,coord. of NützlingeI & II

Costs of plant protection in poinsettia in Germany (commercial greenhouses)

Source: Krodel, K. 1996. Gartenbauwissenschaft 1/96, 37-46

Company PP methods

Cost per

1000 plants,

€

Pests

1

Only beneficials: 15 x Encfor (1

per 3-6 plants), 1 x Steinernema

(5000/pot)1,64 whiteflies, fungus gnats

2Like 1, but for 4 weeks 1

Encfor/plant1,84

whiteflies (heavy infestation),

fungus gnats

3 Like 1 + 1 x Confidor 1,94whiteflies (heaviest infestation),

fungus gnats

4Like 1 + 3 fungicide trmts: 2 x

Rovral, 1 X Previcur3,64

whiteflies, fungus gnats,

Rhizoctonia, Botrytis, Pythium

5Like 2 + 3 fungicide trmts: 2 x

Rovral, 1 X Previcur3,84

heavy whitefly infestation, fungus

gnats, Rhizoctonia, Botrytis,

Pythium

6Like 3 + 3 fungicide trmts: 2 X

Rovral, 1 x Previcur3,94

heaviest whitefly infestation,

fungus gnats, Rhizoctonia,

Botrytis, Pythium

7

Chemical: 2 x Confidor, 1 X

Nomolt, 2 x Rovral, 1 x Previcur, 1

x Steinernema (5000/pot)4,10

whiteflies, Rhizoctonia, Botrytis,

Pythium, fungus gnats

8

Control from 1987: 46 pesticide

trmts(!) (Ambush, Thiodan,

Malathion, Benomyl, Previcur)15,5

whiteflies, Rhizoctonia, Botrytis,

Pythium

4. Future prospects of floriculture IPMin Europe

Denmark 30-35%

UK up to 70% under IPM depend-ing on cropspecies

NL 38%

FI 30% pot plants,<10% cut roses)

NO: 50 % cut roses,<5% pot plantsWhat about others?

Extent of IPM in some other countries

5700

4309

3014

2683

2215

1022

850

655

322

300

NL

Italy

Spain

Germany

France

UK

Poland

Belgium

Denmark

Ireland

France < 5 %

Spain < 5%?

Italy <5?

Germany 5 %

Poland <5%?

The big producers of ornamentals are thechallenge re. the changeover to IPM in Europe

SE <25% pot plants

Switzerland < 5 % (230 ha)

? =no exact data available

”Integrated PestManagement in

Ornamentals” (INTO) www.agropolis.fi/into

(coord. Irene Vänninen)

Nützlinge I+IIwww.bba.de/projekte/nuetzlinge/nuetzl.start1.htm

(coord. Ellen Richter)Strateeg www.groeiservice.nl (coord.

Annelies Hooijmans)

Telen met toekomstwww.telenmettoekomst.nl

(coord. Ellen Beerling)

Pest Controlhttp://www.pcsierteelt.be/hosting/pcs_site.

Nsf?Open(coord. Marc Vissers,Liesbet Blindeman

Biological pest control in cut rosesand cucumber grown with new

lighting methodswww.bioforsk.no

(coord. Nina Johansen)

On-going knowledge transfer projects in floriculture

+ less organized, but by no meansnot less efficient knowledgetransfer in UK, DK, AU, SE…

Threat: government support to advisory/extension systemsdecreasing everywhere

EU-level incentives encouranging IPM?:

Thematic Strategy on the Sustainable Use of Pesticides

-Finalizing in May 2006?

-Seems to end up only recommending national schemes to bedeveloped

-Hardly a strong incentive for glasshouse floriculture IPM – nationatio--

nalnal schemesschemes moremore importantimportant

-NL, UK, DE, DK, SE, FI, BE: National Pesticide Reduction Plans (butemphasis clearly on edible crops)

EU-project REBECA www.rebeca-net.de: aims at developing a balanced systemof regulation of biocontrol agents to promote the implementation of biological control in European countries

Market demands pushing floriculture towards IPM?

Image courtesy: http://orgprints.org/3824/01/3824-02OE265-ble-igz-2003-stecklinge.pdf

Organic flowers?

Estimation of achievablemarket share (DE, NL, CH,

AU): 33--5 %5 % ((Billmann & Schmid

1999 http://www.fibl.net

/forschung/anbautechnik-einjaehrig

/bioblumen/billmann1999.php

Production guidelines in severalcountries

Fair flowers and plants?

Image courtesy: http://www.fairflowers.de/

- 49 companies in South-Africa, Kenya, Ecuador, Portugal (1000 ha)

- IPM not explicitly mentioned in standards, but…

-…companies in these countries aremoving towards IPM ���� pressure for European floriculture to follow??

Acknowledgements:

Staff of INTO-project, FI:Pauliina Laitinen, Agropolis Ltd.Marika Linnamäki, Agropolis Ltd.

IPM specialists in different countries:Annelies Hooijmans, Groeiservice, NLEllen Beerling, WUR, NLFilip van Noort, WUR, NLRuud van Leeuwen, Strateeg-project, NL Jude Bennison, ADAS, UKMonica Tomiczek, ADAS, UKAnnichen Smith-Eriksen, NOEllen Richter, BBA, DEMartin Hommes, BBA, DEAnnie Enkegaard, Danmarks JordbrugsForskning, DKLeszek Orlikowski,Inst. Pomology and Floriculture, PLRoselyne Souriau, Gie La Croix, FRMireille Piron, Koppert B.V., FRCeline Gilli, Swiss Agric. Res., CHSirpa Kurppa, Agrifood Research Finland MTT, FI

Growers of ornamental plants:Leo Holstein, Holstein Flowers, NLArend Book, Rosenkwekerij Joop van de Nauweland, NLMarco Herburg, Herburg Rosenkwekerij, NLIke Vlielander, FIDES, NLDion ten Have, NLSirpa Anttila, Viherlandia, FIMartin Tarhat Oy, FIYlitalo Oy, FIHeikkilän kauppapuutarha, FILepolan puutarha, FIHuiskula Oy, FIRuusutarhat Oy, FI

Organizers of the symposium ”Delivering a promise” (5th National IPMSymposium, USA, St. Louis)