Skip to main content
Log in

Alternatives to methyl bromide: chemical fumigants or integrated pest management systems?

  • ASDS Keynote Address Session 9
  • Published:
Australasian Plant Pathology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Changes in government and international policy, coupled with consideration of sustainable management strategies, will lead to the demise of methyl bromide as a soil disinfestation treatment for high value cropping industries within the next decade. Methyl bromide has provided excellent disease, pest and weed seed control and finding alternative chemical and non-chemical options which replace all the benefits of methyl bromide is providing a challenge to researchers. The advantages and disadvantages of alternative chemical and non-chemical control strategies are considered in this paper. Alternative chemicals treatments showing promise include lower application doses of methyl bromide, such as methyl bromide/chloropicrin (30∶70) and the use of other fumigant mixtures such as, 1,3-Dichloropropene/chloropicron and metham sodium combined with chloropicron. Investigations in Victoria have led to the development of an integrated pest management (IPM) strategy which partially offsets the need for methyl bromide in the flower bulb industry. IPM systems, however, will require more input from farmers, and support services, in such areas as the monitoring of pest and disease populations and the use of disease resistant stock and disease-free nursery material, before IPM systems fully offset the benefits of methyl bromide. Consideration of grower profits, reliability and insurance afforded by soil disinfestation with methyl bromide must be taken into account when assessing the suitability of alternatives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Banks, J. (1995) — Agricultural Production Without Methyl Bromide — Four Case Studies. CSIRO, Canberra Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bello, A, Gonzalez, J., Arias, M. And Rodriguez-Kabana (Eds) (1998) — Alternatives to methyl bromide for the southern European countries. Proceedings of an International Workshop, 9–12 April, 1997, Arona, Tenerife (Canary Islands, Spain).

  • Desmacheliar, J. (1998) — Determination of effective fumigant concentrations in different soil types for methyl bromide and other soil fumigants. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation Report, Australia.

  • Katan, J. (1981) — Solar heating (solarisation) of soil for control of soilborne pests. Annual Review of Phytopathology 19: 211–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, I.J., Feruglio, S.E. and Gross, R.W. (1995) — Development of chemical and cultural strategies for control of sclerotium rot of bulb crops. Horticultural Research and Development Corporation Final Report, Project No. FLll0.

  • Porter, I., Brett, R. and Wiseman, B. (1998) — Alternatives to soil fumigation with methyl bromide in the strawberry and ornamentals industries. Horticultural Research and Development Corporation Final Report, Project No. HG95015.

  • Wiseman, B. and Shanks, A. (1998) -Evaluation of plant-back periods for methyl bromide and alternative fumigants used for soil disinfestation in the strawberry industry. Horticultural Research and Development Corporation Final Report, Project No. FR96050.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Porter, I.J., Brett, R.W. & Wiseman, B.M. Alternatives to methyl bromide: chemical fumigants or integrated pest management systems?. Australasian Plant Pathology 28, 65–71 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1071/AP99009

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1071/AP99009

Keywords

Navigation