Abstract
Bt is classified as a biopesticide. Market surveys from several states in the United States of America suggest that the main reason for using biopesticides is it is considered safe for the environment. Public perception and organic farming have risen in importance as reasons for using biopesticides. However, the main reason for not using biopesticides continues to be perceptions of low efficacy, while higher costs and lack of awareness appeared to have less significance. Even though limited by its narrow activity, Bt usage has increased significantly over the years. The narrow activity spectrum of Bt is to its advantage for it is well suited for IPM programs that preserve large segments of indigenous invertebrate predator and parasitoid populations. On the other hand, usage of broad spectrum pesticides that also kill non-target beneficial insects, may lead to pest outbreak when the pesticide loses efficacy due to pest resistance. Less environmentally safe pesticides also have their roles to play in IRM and IPM programs. When combined with practices in IPM, they will have even less effect on the environment while reducing the probability of resistance. Substantial economic returns and environmental safety will drive the usage of safe pest control measures, which Bt may play a significant role.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ahmad M, Arif I, Ahmad M (2007) Occurence of insecticide resistance in field populations of Spodoptera litura (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Pakistan. Crop Prot 26:807–809
Armes NJ, Wightman JA, Jadhav DR, Ranga Rao GV (1997) Status of insecticide resistance in Spodoptera litura in Andhra Pradesh India. Pestic Sci 50:240–248
Baxter SW, Zhao JZ, Gahan LJ, Shelton AM, Tabashnik BE, Heckel DG (2005) Novel genetic basis of field-evolved resistance to Bt toxins in Plutella xylostella. Insect Mol Biol 14(3):327–334. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2583.2005.00563.x
Bommarco R, Miranda F, Bylund H, Bjorkman C (2011) Insecticides suppress natural enemies and increase pest damage in cabbage. J Econ Entomol 104(3):782–791
California’s pesticide use report (2009) California department of pesticide regulation. http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/pur/purmain.htm. Accessed 25 May 2011
Janmaat AF, Myers J (2003) Rapid evolution and the cost of resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis in greenhouse populations of cabbage loopers, Trichoplusia ni. Proc Biol Sci 270(1530):2263–2270. doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.2497
Kranthi KR, Jadhav DR, Wanjari RR, Ali SS, Russell D (2001) Carbamate and organophosphate resistance in cotton pests in India, 1995–1999. Bull Entomol Res 91(1):37–46
Marrone PG (1994) Present and future use of Bacillus thuringiensis in Integrated Pest Management systems: an industrial perspective. Biocontrol Sci Technol 4:517–526
Meissle M, Romeis J, Bigler F (2011) Bt maize and integrated pest management-a European perspective. Pest Manag Sci 67(9):1049–1058. doi:10.1002/ps.2221
Melnick R, Stoneman B, Marrone PG, Messerschmidt O, Donaldson M (2009) Biopesticide use and attitudes survey results. Biopesticide Industry Alliance. http://www.ipmcenters.org/ipmsymposium09/37-2_Stoneman.pdf. Accessed 25 July 2011
Navon A (2000) Bacillus thuringiensis insecticides in crop protection—reality and prospects. Crop Prot 19:669–676
Sanahuja G, Banakar R, Twyman RM, Capell T, Christou P (2011) Bacillus thuringiensis: a century of research, development and commercial applications. Plant Biotechnol J 9:283–300
Shapiro JP, Schroeder WJ, Stansly PA (1998) Bioassay and efficacy of Bacillus thuringiensis and organosilicone surfactant against the citrus leafminer (Lepidoptera: Phyllocnistidae). Fla Entomol 81(2):201–210
Tabashnik BE, Liu YB, Malvar T, Heckel DG, Masson L, Ballester V, Granero F, Mensua JL, Ferre J (1997) Global variation in the genetic and biochemical basis of diamondback moth resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 94(24):12780–12785
Tabashnik BE, Liu YB, Malvar T, Heckel DG, Masson L, Ferre J (1998) Insect resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis: uniform or diverse? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 353:1751–1756
Vacas S, Alfaro C, Primo J, Navarro-Llopis V (2011) Studies on the development of a mating disruption system to control the tomato leafminer, Tuta absoluta Povolny (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). Pest Manag Sci 67(11):1473–1480. doi:10.1002/ps.2202
van Frankenhuyzen K (2009) Insecticidal activity of Bacillus thuringiensis crystal proteins. J Invertebr Pathol 101(1):1–16. doi:10.1016/j.jip.2009.02.009
Wu KM, Guo YY (2005) The evolution of cotton pest management practices in China. Annu Rev Entomol 50:31–52. doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.50.071803.130349
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Abdullah, M. (2012). Use and Efficacy of Bt Compared to Less Environmentally Safe Alternatives. In: Sansinenea, E. (eds) Bacillus thuringiensis Biotechnology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3021-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3021-2_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-3020-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-3021-2
eBook Packages: Chemistry and Materials ScienceChemistry and Material Science (R0)