Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Pest control

Pest control involves the regulated of designated as pests— such as , , weeds, or pathogens that cause economic losses, transmit diseases, or damage and —through methods aimed at preventing, suppressing, or eradicating their populations to tolerable levels. These efforts are essential for safeguarding , , and infrastructure, as uncontrolled pest proliferation can lead to failures, epidemics like those from mosquitoes carrying or spreading , and structural decay in buildings. Historically, pest control relied on rudimentary physical and chemical means, such as compounds used by ancient Sumerians around 2500 BC to combat , evolving into more systematic approaches with the advent of synthetic s in the that dramatically boosted but also sparked concerns over environmental persistence and non-target effects. Modern practices emphasize (IPM), a process that integrates monitoring, cultural practices like , biological agents such as predatory , and targeted chemical applications to minimize risks while maximizing efficacy. Controversies arise from pesticide overuse, which has induced in pest populations and collateral damage to beneficial species, prompting shifts toward sustainable alternatives despite ongoing debates over balancing human needs against ecological impacts.

Definition and Principles

Core Definition and Objectives

Pest control encompasses the systematic of populations of organisms designated as pests—typically , , weeds, pathogens, or other that interfere with human activities by damaging crops, spreading , inflicting structural harm, or reducing economic productivity. These organisms are contextually defined by their adverse effects rather than inherent traits, with thresholds often determined by economic injury levels where pest density causes losses exceeding control costs. Effective pest control prioritizes accurate and to distinguish pests from beneficial , avoiding unnecessary interventions that could disrupt ecosystems. The core objectives of pest control are to suppress pest numbers to levels where harm is tolerable, thereby safeguarding human health, agricultural yields, property integrity, and environmental stability without undue reliance on any single method. This involves preventive strategies to limit pest establishment, such as habitat modification, alongside corrective actions triggered by surveillance data indicating imminent damage. Economically, the goal is to optimize returns by balancing control expenses against potential losses, as evidenced by principles where interventions are withheld until pest populations approach action thresholds derived from field-specific data. Broader aims include minimizing non-target impacts on pollinators, predators, and , which empirical studies link to resilient agroecosystems, and fostering sustainable practices that reduce resistance development in pest populations—a phenomenon observed in over 500 insect resistant to at least one class as of 2020. These objectives underscore a shift from reactive eradication to proactive management, informed by causal factors like biology, host interactions, and environmental variables, ensuring interventions align with verifiable rather than unsubstantiated assumptions.

First-Principles of Pest Management

Pest management operates on the ecological reality that pests—organisms causing economic, , or aesthetic harm—flourish when environmental conditions favor their reproduction and survival over those of hosts or beneficial . Effective strategies prioritize disrupting pest cycles at vulnerable stages while preserving services like predation and , as indiscriminate interventions often amplify problems through development or imbalances. This approach emerged from observations in the mid-20th century, where heavy use led to pest resurgences; for instance, post-World War II applications of initially suppressed insects but subsequently triggered outbreaks as natural enemies were eradicated, demonstrating the causal link between non-selective controls and ecological disruption. Core to these principles is prevention, achieved through system design that excludes pests or renders environments unsuitable, such as site selection to avoid high-risk areas, sanitation to remove breeding sites, or mechanical barriers like screens. Accurate pest identification follows, as misidentification wastes resources; for example, distinguishing between crop-damaging aphids and harmless look-alikes requires morphological or molecular confirmation to target interventions precisely. Monitoring via regular sampling—scouting fields weekly or using traps—quantifies populations against action thresholds, typically economic injury levels (EILs) calculated as the pest density where control costs equal or less than anticipated damage, preventing premature or excessive action. Control tactics are then selected hierarchically for specificity and sustainability: cultural methods (e.g., disrupting host continuity), biological agents (e.g., releasing parasitoids that attack specific ), physical removals (e.g., burying pupae), and chemical applications as a last resort, rotated to delay resistance—evidenced by cases where continuous use reduced efficacy by over 90% in bollworms within a decade. Post-intervention evaluation assesses outcomes, refining future thresholds based on data like yield losses or residue levels, ensuring grounded in empirical feedback rather than routine spraying. This integrated framework reduces input costs by 20-50% in field trials while curbing secondary pest flares, underscoring the causal efficacy of balanced, evidence-based regulation over suppression.

Historical Development

Pre-Modern and Mechanical Eras

Pre-modern pest control encompassed physical, mechanical, and biological techniques developed across ancient civilizations, relying on direct intervention rather than synthesized compounds. In around 2500 BCE, Sumerians implemented early measures including manual removal and sulfur dusting to target and mites damaging crops, marking initial organized responses to pest pressures in settled . These methods stemmed from necessity, as unchecked pests could devastate stored grains and fields, with evidence from records indicating targeted applications to mitigate losses estimated at up to 30% of yields in vulnerable systems. Ancient Egyptian practices, dating to approximately 2000 BCE, integrated biological agents such as domesticated to prey on invading granaries, a strategy evidenced by and faunal remains showing reduced rates in protected stores. Farmers supplemented this with mechanical hand-picking of from crops and application of natural barriers like oils and plant ashes to deter and locusts, achieving partial control through labor-intensive efforts that aligned crop protection with daily agrarian routines. In parallel, agriculturists by 1200 BCE employed botanical extracts from plants like for repulsion, while cultural practices such as timed planting disrupted pest life cycles. By the classical period, and farmers advanced mechanical , using plows to bury overwintering pests or expose them to and predation, a technique documented in agronomic texts like Cato's (160 BCE) that recommended deep cultivation to break soil habitats. , formalized in four-field systems by the 1st century CE, prevented pest buildup by alternating host plants, reducing populations of soil-dwelling nematodes and insects by diversifying microbial and faunal dynamics in fields. Biological augmentation emerged in around 300 CE, with intentional placement of predatory ants on citrus trees to consume citrus psylla, sustaining yields without broad disruption to ecosystems. In medieval , mechanical traps constructed from wood and clay targeted rats and mice in mills and homes, often baited with food lures to capture individuals and limit breeding, as described in 13th-century agricultural manuals. Physical barriers, including elevated storage and netting over orchards, became standard by the to exclude and , with records from monastic estates showing these measures preserving up to 20% more harvest against avian depredation. The transition to early modern mechanical innovations in the 18th and 19th centuries introduced steam-powered plows and harrows, which enhanced soil disruption to unearth and destroy pest pupae, exemplified by the Norfolk four-course rotation system's adoption in around 1700, which integrated mechanical cultivation to suppress weeds and associated . These eras' approaches emphasized empirical observation of pest behaviors, favoring sustainable, low-impact interventions that minimized unintended ecological shifts compared to later chemical dependencies.

Chemical Revolution (20th Century)

The chemical revolution in pest control during the marked a shift from reliance on inorganic compounds like arsenic-based pesticides and natural extracts to synthetic chemicals, enabling more effective, broad-spectrum control. This era began with the synthesis of chlorinated hydrocarbons and organophosphates, which targeted pests' nervous systems through contact or ingestion, drastically reducing crop losses and vector-borne diseases. A pivotal development occurred in 1939 when Swiss chemist discovered the insecticidal properties of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (), a persistent compound effective against a wide range of at low concentrations. During , was deployed to combat typhus-carrying lice and mosquitoes, saving millions of lives among troops and civilians by interrupting disease transmission. Post-war, its adoption in agriculture accelerated; by the late 1940s, applications increased yields by controlling pests like the and , with U.S. farmers reporting reductions in insect-related crop damage from over 30% to under 10% in treated fields. Müller's work earned him the 1948 in Physiology or Medicine for 's role in safeguarding health and food production. Parallel advancements included insecticides, first synthesized in the 1930s by German chemist while researching potential chemical weapons; compounds like and emerged in the 1940s as alternatives to , offering rapid knockdown effects via inhibition. These chemicals facilitated large-scale aerial and ground applications, integral to the post-WWII , where pesticide use alongside hybrid seeds and fertilizers boosted global production by over 200% between 1950 and 1984, averting famines in developing regions. In the U.S., expenditures correlated with output gains, with each dollar invested yielding $3 to $6.50 in additional agricultural value through minimized pest-induced losses. By the mid-20th century, the proliferation of these synthetics transformed pest management from labor-intensive mechanical methods to efficient chemical interventions, supporting amid and intensified farming. Herbicides like 2,4-D, introduced in 1945, further revolutionized , reducing manual labor and enabling expansion. However, the broad efficacy stemmed from these compounds' stability and non-selectivity, which initially overshadowed emerging concerns about and off-target effects.

Emergence of Integrated Approaches

The heavy dependence on broad-spectrum synthetic insecticides following their introduction in the and engendered practical failures, including the rapid of in over 100 insect species by the late 1950s and the resurgence of target s due to the collateral destruction of predatory and parasitic natural enemies. These outcomes stemmed from causal mechanisms such as selective pressure favoring resistant genotypes and disrupted ecological balances that previously suppressed pest populations below damaging levels, prompting entomologists to seek methods that preserved beneficial organisms. In 1959, researchers V.M. Stern, R.F. Smith, R. van den Bosch, and K.S. Hagen formalized the "integrated control" concept in a foundational paper on managing the spotted alfalfa aphid in California, defining it as the coordinated application of biological controls—such as conserving native predators—with chemical treatments used selectively and only when pest densities exceeded established economic thresholds. This framework prioritized monitoring pest and beneficial populations to inform decisions, avoiding routine calendar-based spraying that exacerbated resistance and secondary outbreaks, and marked a shift from pesticide-centric tactics to ecologically informed systems. The terminology evolved to "" (IPM) by the mid-1960s, expanding the scope to include cultural, physical, and host-plant resistance methods alongside biological and judicious chemical options for multiple types, not just insects. Practical implementation accelerated in the 1970s, with early successes in cotton fields where IPM strategies reduced broad-spectrum applications by integrating traps, natural enemy , and targeted sprays, achieving yield stability while curbing resistance development and environmental residues. In 1972, U.S. President elevated IPM to national policy by directing federal agencies to develop and promote these programs, institutionalizing the approach amid growing evidence of chemical-only methods' unsustainability.

Agricultural Applications

Biological and Natural Enemy Methods

Biological control in agriculture employs living organisms, known as natural enemies, to suppress pest populations below economically damaging levels. These methods leverage predators, parasitoids, and pathogens that target specific pests while minimizing harm to crops, beneficial species, and the environment. Unlike chemical pesticides, biological agents often provide sustained suppression through reproduction and establishment, though their efficacy depends on factors such as climate, habitat suitability, and integration with other pest management practices. Classical biological control introduces exotic natural enemies to control invasive pests, augmentative releases involve mass-rearing and periodic inundation or inoculation, and conservation enhances existing enemy populations via habitat manipulation. Predators, such as lady beetles (Coccinellidae) and lacewings (Chrysopidae), consume multiple prey items during their development, providing rapid suppression of soft-bodied pests like aphids and mites in crops including alfalfa and citrus. For instance, the vedalia beetle (Rodolia cardinalis), introduced from Australia to California in November 1888, established populations that controlled the invasive cottony cushion scale (Icerya purchasi) by 1890, averting the collapse of the state's citrus industry valued at millions of dollars annually at the time. Parasitoids, primarily wasps or flies whose larvae develop inside a single host pest, killing it upon emergence, offer targeted control; examples include Trichogramma species released inundatively against moth eggs in corn and vegetables, with rates of 100,000–300,000 per acre yielding up to 90% parasitism in field trials. Pathogens, including bacteria, fungi, viruses, and nematodes, induce disease in pests under favorable conditions. Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), a bacterium producing crystal toxins lethal to lepidopteran larvae, has been commercially applied since the 1920s and used on nearly 8 million hectares of insect-infested forests in Canada since 1985, achieving control rates exceeding 90% against spruce budworm without broad nontarget effects. Fungal pathogens like Beauveria bassiana target whiteflies and thrips in greenhouse tomatoes, while nematodes (Steinernema spp.) suppress soil-dwelling larvae in turf and potatoes. Conservation strategies, such as planting insectary strips with flowering plants to attract and sustain predators, have increased parasitoid densities by 20–50% in vegetable fields, reducing aphid outbreaks. Despite successes, biological methods face challenges including slow response times, vulnerability to pesticides and weather extremes, and occasional failures in establishment; for example, only about 10–20% of classical introductions achieve full control of target . Augmentative releases succeed best in enclosed systems like greenhouses, where Phytoseiulus persimilis mites control spider mites on cucumbers with minimal inputs. Overall, these approaches reduce reliance on synthetic chemicals, with meta-analyses showing average pest reductions of 30–50% in integrated systems, though outcomes vary by crop and region.

Cultural, Physical, and Crop-Specific Techniques

Cultural techniques in pest control involve modifying agricultural practices to make the environment less favorable for pests, thereby suppressing their populations without direct intervention. , a foundational method, alternates host crops over seasons to disrupt pest life cycles and prevent buildup of soil-dwelling or crop-specific pests. This approach reduces pest pressure through spatiotemporal separation of suitable hosts, leading to observed yield increases of 10-25% and lower incidence of persistent damage in diversified systems. and trap cropping further enhance these effects by diversifying plantings, which interrupts pest host-finding and concentrates infestations on sacrificial plants for targeted removal. Timely planting and field sanitation, such as removing crop residues, minimize overwintering sites and initial inoculum, contributing to preventive suppression. Physical methods employ mechanical or barrier-based interventions to directly exclude, trap, or destroy pests. operations, including moldboard plowing and vertical tillage, expose soil and weed seeds to , predators, and unfavorable conditions, achieving reductions in winter annual weeds by up to 50% and slug damage by 24% in certain systems. However, efficacy varies with intensity; reduced may preserve beneficial predators while still controlling some pests, though it risks higher abundances in undisturbed soils for others. Barriers like floating row covers, insect netting, and trunk wraps physically prevent pest access to crops, effectively excluding flying or crawling in and field settings without chemical residues. Hand weeding and mulching suppress weed competition, which indirectly limits pest habitats, though labor-intensive for large scales. Crop-specific techniques tailor these methods to the of pests and for optimized control. In cucurbit production, perimeter trap cropping with earlier-planted varieties lures squash bugs and vine borers away from main fields, reducing damage when combined with localized treatments. For root vegetables like carrots, fine-mesh barriers or collars block oviposition, preventing larval infestation in soil. In crops, with trap plants such as nasturtiums diverts , while adjusted planting dates avoid peak pest flights. These adaptations leverage pest preferences and crop vulnerabilities, enhancing overall efficacy in integrated systems by minimizing broad-spectrum disruptions.

Chemical Pesticide Deployment

Chemical pesticides in agriculture are deployed through various methods tailored to target pests, crop types, and field conditions, primarily including foliar sprays, soil applications, and seed treatments. Foliar application involves spraying liquid formulations directly onto plant surfaces using ground-based boom sprayers or handheld equipment to control above-ground insects, weeds, and diseases, achieving uniform coverage when calibrated for droplet size and pressure. Soil applications, such as drenches or granular broadcasts, deliver pesticides into the root zone for systemic uptake or soil-dwelling pests, with granules incorporated via tillage to enhance efficacy against nematodes and soil insects. Seed treatments coat seeds with pesticides before planting, providing early-season protection against seedcorn maggots and fungal pathogens, minimizing the need for broadcast applications. Aerial deployment, using or helicopters, enables rapid coverage of large areas, treating up to 127 million acres annually in the United States, particularly for row crops like and where timely intervention prevents yield losses from defoliating . This reduces ground compaction and labor costs but requires adherence to (FAA) regulations and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines on drift minimization through nozzle selection and flight altitude adjustments. Band applications along field borders or rows target perimeter pests with non-selective herbicides, conserving resources compared to full-field broadcasts. Deployment strategies emphasize integrated timing and rates to maximize effectiveness while curbing resistance, a phenomenon documented since the with organic insecticides like , where initial successes in yield protection—contributing to post-World War II increases of 20-50% in major crops—gave way to widespread arthropod resistance by the 1980s, affecting over 500 . Empirical studies show that over 90% of applications result in gains, with modern formulations improving by reducing application volumes and targeting specificity, though overuse accelerates resistance evolution via on pest populations. Regulatory frameworks, including EPA labeling for drift reduction and buffer zones, mitigate off-target effects, ensuring pesticides' role in sustaining global food production amid .

Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology

Genetic engineering has introduced pest-resistant traits into crops by incorporating genes that produce toxins lethal to specific insects, reducing reliance on chemical insecticides. Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) crops, commercialized in the mid-1990s, express Cry proteins from the soil bacterium B. thuringiensis, which disrupt the gut of targeted lepidopteran and coleopteran larvae upon ingestion, while sparing non-target organisms due to host specificity. Examples include Bt corn effective against European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis), achieving up to 89.7% reduction in Diabrotica spp. infestation, and Bt cotton controlling bollworms, with cumulative savings of $6.8 billion in corn borer damages over 14 years in U.S. Midwest regions. Adoption of insect-resistant (IR) GM crops has empirically lowered insecticide applications by 37% on average across crops and regions, boosted yields by 22%, and cut environmental impacts from pesticides by 17.3% globally between 1996 and 2020, as IR varieties like and corn supplanted broad-spectrum sprays. Bt technology integrates with biological controls, minimally affecting predators and parasitoids, and has stabilized yields by mitigating outbreak risks from mobile pests. However, pest to Bt toxins has emerged in field populations, necessitating strategies like refuge planting—non-Bt areas to sustain susceptible insects—and gene pyramiding with multiple Bt toxins to delay . Beyond , () biotechnology deploys double-stranded (dsRNA) to silence essential pest genes post-ingestion, offering species-specific control without permanent genetic modification to crops. Transgenic or topical sprays delivering dsRNA target genes for reproduction or development in pests like and , with field trials showing reduced damage in and corn; combining with enhances durability against . The (SIT), augmented by , uses or to induce sterility in mass-reared males, released to suppress wild populations via mating incompatibility, as demonstrated in area-wide programs against fruit flies and moths in orchards. CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing refines pest resistance by precisely altering plant genomes, such as knocking out susceptibility factors (e.g., eIF4E genes conferring vulnerability to piercing-sucking insects) or stacking resistance alleles without foreign DNA, evading some regulatory hurdles for GMOs. Recent applications include CRISPR-edited rice and wheat with enhanced tolerance to rice brown planthopper and Hessian fly, respectively, via R-gene activation, with 2024 trials reporting 50-80% mortality in targeted pests. These tools promote sustainable pest management by minimizing off-target effects and enabling rapid trait deployment, though long-term field efficacy requires monitoring for pleiotropic impacts and regulatory approval varies by jurisdiction.

Urban and Domestic Applications

Physical Barriers and Sanitation

Physical barriers in urban and domestic pest control involve structural modifications to exclude pests such as and from entering buildings, primarily by sealing entry points and using screens or meshes. Common methods include caulking cracks and gaps around windows, doors, pipes, and foundations; installing door sweeps and ; and fitting fine-mesh screens on vents, windows, and drains to block small arthropods like , , and flies, which require openings as narrow as 1/16 inch for entry. These exclusions form the foundation of (IPM) by addressing pest access at the source, reducing reliance on chemical interventions. For , metal flashing, , or cloth barriers around foundations and under doors prove more durable than softer materials, with studies showing that treated barriers can reduce penetration by house mice and ground squirrels by 50-80% compared to untreated surfaces. In multi-unit housing, comprehensive sealing of shared walls and utility penetrations has demonstrated up to 70% reductions in sightings when combined with , as gaps serve as primary harborage and routes. Effectiveness varies by pest size and behavior; while highly reliable for larger invaders like rats (needing 1/2-inch gaps), smaller may exploit imperfect seals, necessitating regular inspections and maintenance. Sanitation complements barriers by eliminating attractants that sustain populations indoors, targeting , , and through practices like prompt spill cleanup, storing perishables in airtight containers, and ensuring garbage disposals are frequent and sealed. In urban settings, where and thrive on organic debris, maintaining dry conditions—such as fixing leaks and ventilating damp areas—disrupts breeding cycles, with IPM programs reporting 40-60% drops in densities after sustained in apartments. Proper , including lidded bins and prompt removal, prevents fly and foraging, as unsealed refuse can harbor thousands of eggs per site. Together, barriers and yield synergistic effects in IPM, as exclusion alone fails if interior resources persist, while sanitation without seals allows reinvasion from neighboring units or outdoors. Empirical data from studies indicate these non-toxic approaches can suppress pest thresholds below action levels for months, minimizing health risks from allergens and vectors without environmental residues. Implementation requires resident and professional audits, as incomplete application—such as overlooking vents—undermines outcomes.

Baiting, Fumigation, and Targeted Chemicals

Baiting employs attractants combined with toxicants to lure and eliminate pests such as , , and in urban and domestic environments, often using tamper-resistant stations to contain rodenticides and reduce non-target exposure. rodenticides, particularly second-generation compounds like and , dominate rodent control by disrupting blood clotting after consumption, achieving high mortality rates in commensal species like rats and roof rats when bait uptake is sufficient. In urban settings, bait stations placed along rodent runways facilitate targeted delivery, with studies indicating reduced bait consumption post-initial intake due to symptom onset, signaling effective dosing. However, widespread secondary exposure occurs in non-target , such as rats showing anticoagulant residues in over 80% of sampled urban populations, raising concerns for predators like and coyotes. For insect pests, gel and granular baits prove highly effective; cockroach baits incorporating or yield infestation reductions exceeding 90% in apartment studies by exploiting behavior. baits using slow-acting toxins like target colonies systemically, minimizing broadcast applications. Despite , bait shyness—where surviving pests avoid treated food—can emerge, necessitating rotation of bait types and integration with sanitation to sustain control. introduces gaseous pesticides into sealed structures to eradicate hidden infestations, particularly drywood and bed bugs in homes, penetrating voids inaccessible to surface treatments. , the predominant fumigant for residential use since its registration in 1957, acts as a metabolic , achieving near-total pest mortality within 24-72 hours of exposure at concentrations of 1-3 grams per cubic meter. The process involves tenting of the building, gas injection, dwell period, and aeration until levels drop below 5 for safe re-entry, with professional monitoring required to prevent exposure. Efficacy data confirm elimination rates over 99% for , though incomplete sealing or insufficient dosage can compromise results. Safety protocols mitigate risks, as the gas's odorless nature and high —lethal to humans above 25 —have led to reported poisonings from premature re-entry or equipment failures. Targeted chemical applications deliver insecticides via precise methods like crack-and-crevice spraying, dusts, or gels to harborage sites, curbing pests including , , and while limiting human and environmental contact compared to broad-spectrum fogging. Pyrethroids such as and neonicotinoids like , applied as residual sprays, provide contact and residual kill lasting weeks to months, with field trials showing 85-95% reductions in populations in urban dwellings. dusts exploit grooming behavior for slow-acting in roaches, achieving suppression without buildup common in faster agents. Fipronil-based treatments target trails and mounds effectively, though regulatory scrutiny emphasizes minimal application volumes—often under 1 per site—to avert runoff into waterways. These methods integrate into IPM frameworks, prioritizing to apply only upon exceedance, thereby enhancing over prophylactic overuse.

Biological Controls in Human Habitats

Biological control in human habitats employs living organisms—such as predators, parasitoids, pathogens, and microbes—to suppress pest populations in landscapes, residential gardens, and indoor structures, often as part of to minimize chemical use. These methods leverage natural enemy-pest dynamics, including predation, , and , targeting common pests like mosquitoes, , and while aiming to preserve non-target species. Effectiveness depends on factors like agent specificity, environmental conditions, and release timing, with urban fragmentation sometimes reducing natural enemy compared to rural settings. Microbial agents, particularly bacteria and fungi, are widely applied indoors and in urban water sources. (Bti), a bacterium producing toxins lethal to larvae, is routinely deployed in urban waterways and standing water around homes to control species like , vectors for dengue and Zika; it spares beneficial insects, fish, and humans due to its narrow host range. In field applications, Bti has achieved over 90% larval mortality in treated sites without significant non-target impacts in most studies. Entomopathogenic fungi such as and Metarhizium anisopliae infect via penetration in buildings, causing 70-100% mortality in lab exposures after 7-14 days, offering a viable alternative to insecticides amid growing resistance. These fungi are formulated as sprays or dusts for structural use, though humidity and sanitation influence spore viability. Parasitoid insects, notably wasps, provide targeted control in homes and urban greenspaces. Species like Evania appendigaster parasitize oothecae (egg cases) of American and Oriental cockroaches in structures, reducing populations by 20-50% in augmented releases when combined with monitoring. In residential landscapes, Trichogramma wasps attack caterpillar eggs on ornamentals, while Aphidius spp. parasitize aphids, suppressing outbreaks without broad toxicity. Releases of 1,000-5,000 wasps per acre in urban gardens can yield 60-80% parasitism rates under favorable conditions. Advanced techniques like the Wolbachia method deploy mosquitoes infected with the endosymbiotic bacterium pipientis, which induces cytoplasmic incompatibility—rendering offspring from matings with uninfected females inviable—thus suppressing vector populations in cities. Field trials in dengue-endemic urban areas, such as , (2017-2020), reduced by over 77% and dengue incidence by 77%, with sustained effects over three years. Similar releases in Brazilian cities like achieved 69% mosquito density reductions, demonstrating scalability in dense human habitats without genetic modification. Predatory nematodes, such as Steinernema feltiae, target soil-dwelling pests like in indoor potting areas or lawn grubs around homes, achieving 80-95% control in moist conditions. Conservation approaches enhance these by planting nectar-rich urban flora to sustain native predators like lady beetles, boosting control in parks and yards. Despite successes, urban heat islands and can lower agent persistence, necessitating monitoring for optimal integration.

Specialized and Industrial Contexts

Forestry Pest Management

Forestry pest management encompasses strategies to mitigate damage from insects, pathogens, and other organisms threatening health, timber production, and services, primarily through (IPM) frameworks that combine monitoring, prevention, and targeted interventions. IPM in forests emphasizes long-term prevention by assessing pest populations via aerial surveys, traps, and ground assessments to determine economic injury levels before deploying controls. Common forest insect pests include defoliators like the spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana), which causes cyclic outbreaks every 30-40 years affecting tens of millions of hectares in , and bark beetles such as the mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae), which target stressed and have led to widespread mortality in lodgepole pine stands. Silvicultural practices form the foundation of preventive , including overcrowded stands to enhance vigor and reduce susceptibility, harvesting to remove infested or high-risk trees, and promoting to disrupt life cycles. For bark beetles, tactics like the "fall and destroy" — and or chipping infested trees before brood —limits , while anti-aggregation pheromones such as verbenone deter attacks on residual pines. Biological controls leverage natural enemies, including predators, parasitoids, and entomopathogens; for instance, the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis var. kurstaki () has been aerially applied against spruce budworm larvae since the 1950s to protect foliage without broad nontarget effects. Early intervention strategies, informed by monitoring, aim to suppress rising outbreaks before they escalate, as demonstrated in Canada's response to spruce budworm where pheromone-based detection enables timely action. Chemical interventions are reserved for high-value or outbreak scenarios due to logistical challenges in vast forests and potential ecological risks, often involving helicopter or fixed-wing aerial spraying of insecticides over targeted areas. In , a 2018 federal investment of $74.75 million over five years supported spruce budworm suppression, including research into resilient and improved spraying efficacy. Economic analyses underscore the stakes: uncontrolled spruce budworm outbreaks in could cost approximately $15 billion in timber losses, while invasive forest insects inflict over $4 billion annually in damages across the , predominantly borne by local governments and property owners through removal and replacement efforts. These impacts highlight the causal link between unmanaged pest dynamics—driven by factors like climate warming expanding beetle ranges—and tangible losses in wood fiber supply and nonmarket forest values.

Infrastructure and Transportation Challenges

Termites inflict substantial structural damage on wooden components of buildings and bridges, with annual costs for repairs and control in the United States reaching $5 billion. Globally, termite-related expenditures exceed $40 billion yearly, encompassing prevention and remediation efforts. In regions with aging infrastructure, such as older urban buildings in New York City, cracks, leaks, and deteriorated materials create ideal entry points and harborage for rodents and cockroaches, complicating eradication. Construction sites face additional vulnerabilities, where exposed materials and temporary structures attract pests that damage equipment and compromise safety. Transportation systems encounter distinct pest-related hazards, including bird strikes on , which cause engine failures, structural damage, and operational delays. The reports cumulative costs of $1.48 billion for bird strike damages to U.S. civil from 1990 to 2023, averaging hundreds of millions annually when adjusted for inflation. A single severe incident can necessitate engine overhauls costing $1-5 million or more. Maritime and cargo transport exacerbates invasive species dispersal, as shipping containers inadvertently carry pests like the and from overseas origins. These vectors enable rapid establishment in new ecosystems, leading to widespread ecological and economic harm without natural predators to curb proliferation. Control measures, such as container inspections and treatments, prove challenging due to the volume of global trade—approximately 25 million containers arriving annually in the U.S. from and alone—and the pests' ability to hide in cargoes or packaging. Rail and subway networks grapple with rodent infestations, particularly in tunnels where inaccessible voids and discarded food sustain populations. City's subway system harbors an estimated 28 million rats, prompting reliance on traps, baits, and , yet persistent access through cracks undermines efficacy. Similar issues in systems like Washington Metrorail highlight the limitations of low-tech interventions in vast underground infrastructures, where exploit structural weaknesses for ingress. Sealing penetrations and barriers represent critical, yet labor-intensive, preventive strategies.

Empirical Impacts and Effectiveness

Economic Contributions to Yield and Productivity

Pest control interventions, including chemical pesticides, biological agents, and (IPM), have prevented substantial losses, thereby enhancing agricultural yields and productivity worldwide. The (FAO) estimates that pests, weeds, and diseases cause 20-40% of global production losses annually in the absence of effective controls. Similarly, the (USDA) reports that 20-40% of global output is lost to pests each year, with plant diseases alone imposing economic costs of approximately $220 billion globally. These interventions thus contribute an equivalent increase in realizable yields, supporting and economic output from . In specific commodities, the impact is pronounced; for corn, unchecked pests can diminish by up to 70%, while targeted pest management preserves and reduces the need for compensatory planting or replanting. Empirical studies confirm primary yield losses from pests and diseases averaging 26%, with secondary losses (from reduced quality or marketability) reaching 38%, underscoring the gains from mitigation strategies. Threshold-based IPM approaches have demonstrated potential to boost yields while cutting applications by 44%, optimizing economic returns through lower input costs and sustained output. Overall, pest control has enabled yield doublings in major crops since the mid-20th century, with economic analyses showing benefits-to-cost ratios for pesticides ranging from 4:1 to 20:1 across regions and crops, reflecting net productivity enhancements despite variable environmental trade-offs. These gains underpin agricultural GDP contributions, with protected harvests translating to higher farmer incomes and reduced food price volatility.

Public Health Outcomes from Vector Control

Vector control measures, particularly indoor residual spraying (IRS) and insecticide-treated nets (ITNs), have substantially lowered incidence and mortality in endemic regions. In , where accounts for the majority of global cases, IRS targets resting mosquitoes post-blood meal, reducing vector lifespan and transmission potential. Studies indicate that ITNs reduce infection risk by 37% and clinical incidence by 38% in children compared to non-users. Combining IRS with ITNs yields additive protection, with modeled reductions in infection prevalence exceeding those from either method alone, as evidenced in trials across multiple countries. Historical data underscore these outcomes: intensive DDT-based IRS in the mid-20th century correlated with the lowest incidence rates in regions like and parts of , enabling elimination in 37 countries by 2023. Globally, deaths fell from peaks exceeding 1 million annually pre-2000 to 597,000 in 2023, with averting an estimated 7.6 billion clinical cases between 2000 and 2020 through scaled ITN distribution and IRS campaigns. The attributes much of this progress to vector interventions preventing infection at the population level, though insecticide resistance has tempered gains in recent years. For arboviral diseases transmitted by Aedes mosquitoes, such as dengue, Zika, and chikungunya, vector control via larval habitat elimination and adulticide spraying has curbed outbreaks, though resurgence occurs without sustained efforts. In the Americas, targeted Aedes aegypti control reduced dengue transmission in urban foci, with community-based source reduction preventing epidemics in areas achieving over 80% larval index suppression. Yellow fever control, integrating vector management with vaccination, eliminated urban transmission in the Americas since 1948. Overall, vector control has shrunk the geographic burden of vector-borne diseases, responsible for over 700,000 annual deaths, by fostering behavioral changes and reducing human-vector contact.

Controversies and Debates

Efficacy of Chemical vs. Organic Methods

Chemical pesticides generally outperform methods in terms of rapid and broad-spectrum suppression, enabling quicker population reductions and higher short-term control rates, often exceeding 90% mortality for target species in field applications. This stems from their systemic and contact modes of action, which disrupt physiology effectively across diverse taxa, as demonstrated in trials where synthetic insecticides achieved superior knockdown compared to biopesticides requiring multiple applications for similar results. In contrast, approaches—relying on microbial agents, extracts like neem, or natural predators—typically exhibit delayed effects, narrower host ranges, and lower consistency under high pressure, with often below 70% in standalone use due to and variable . Agricultural yield data further quantifies this disparity, with meta-analyses of global trials showing conventional systems, bolstered by chemical interventions, yielding 18-25% more than counterparts, attributable in large part to superior and management that minimizes losses estimated at 10-20% in untreated plots. For instance, in crops, chemical treatments reduce and infestations more reliably than rotations or biopesticides, preserving photosynthetic capacity and grain fill. systems may foster natural enemy populations for secondary suppression, potentially lowering baseline densities by 10-18% in low-input scenarios, but this rarely compensates for outbreaks where synthetic options provide decisive . Long-term, chemical reliance accelerates resistance—evident in over 500 globally—necessitating rotations, whereas methods delay such adaptations but at the expense of immediate productivity. In for , chemical insecticides like pyrethroids maintain high against mosquitoes, achieving 80-95% knockdown in residual sprays, far surpassing alternatives such as essential oils, which offer transient protection insufficient for thresholds. Empirical reviews note that while some academic studies emphasize viability in niche, low-pressure contexts—potentially influenced by institutional preferences for narratives—rigorous field comparisons consistently affirm chemical methods' edge in scalable, outcome-driven eradication. blending both can mitigate drawbacks, but standalone remains constrained by causal limitations in potency and persistence.

Environmental Claims and Causal Realities

Environmental advocacy often asserts that chemical pesticides in pest control inflict irreversible harm on ecosystems, citing correlations between pesticide application and declines in non-target species such as , , and pollinators. These claims emphasize to beneficial organisms and long-term , positioning pest control as a primary driver of . However, reveals that such effects are frequently overstated or confounded by other factors, including and climate variability, with (IPM) demonstrating viable mitigation strategies that preserve ecological balance while curbing pest-induced crop losses estimated at 30-40% without intervention. In , pesticides have empirically driven yield enhancements critical to global ; U.S. data indicate that alongside fertilizers and improved seeds, they accounted for yield doublings or more in crops like and from 1960 to 2008, averting famine-scale shortages. Without these inputs, pre-pesticide losses to s could reduce outputs by up to 78% for some staples, underscoring a causal where reduced chemical use correlates with diminished rather than inherent environmental salvation. IPM approaches, emphasizing biological controls and targeted applications, further align pest suppression with gains, as evidenced by positive trophic-level impacts from techniques like and field margins that enhance natural enemy populations. Pollinator declines, particularly colony collapse disorder (), exemplify contested causality; while exposure contributes sublethally, primary drivers include mites, viral pathogens, nutritional deficits from , and , with pesticides acting more as exacerbators than root causes in multifactorial models. Regulatory bans on compounds like , motivated by environmental concerns, have yielded unintended human costs, such as resurgence in and , where case numbers surged from under 10,000 to over 40,000 annually post-1996 restrictions until DDT's reintroduction halved infections by 2000. Broader empirical syntheses challenge blanket indictments of pest control, revealing that while misuse elevates risks, judicious application—supported by declining intensities per yield unit since 1990—facilitates sustainable intensification without proportional ecological collapse. Sources amplifying alarmist narratives, often from institutions with documented ideological skews toward restriction, tend to underweight these productivity imperatives and overstate linear causation from pesticides to decline, ignoring adaptive practices that decouple pest control from .

Regulatory Policies and Unintended Consequences

In the United States, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), originally enacted in 1947 and significantly amended in 1972, requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to register pesticides only if they perform their intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human health or the environment. This framework mandates risk assessments, labeling restrictions, and periodic reviews, often leading to phased reductions or cancellations of registrations for persistent or high-toxicity compounds, such as the 1972 cancellation of for most agricultural uses due to and wildlife impacts. Similar regulatory approaches in the , under Directive 2009/128/EC and the 2018 neonicotinoid restrictions, prioritize hazard-based criteria, banning outdoor uses of substances like , , and on pollinator-attractive crops to mitigate sublethal effects on bees. These policies have produced unintended consequences, including accelerated resistance when fewer chemical modes of action are available for rotation, as restricted options limit strategies that rely on diverse tools to delay evolutionary adaptations. For instance, post-registration cancellations under FIFRA have correlated with shifts toward narrower-spectrum alternatives, fostering secondary pest outbreaks where suppressed natural enemies allow minor pests to proliferate unchecked, as observed in systems after restrictions. Empirical models indicate that abrupt, landscape-scale reductions in broad-spectrum applications can amplify non-target effects, such as increased populations or weed shifts, outweighing targeted benefits in some agroecosystems. In , the neonicotinoid bans have led to higher frequencies of foliar sprays—up to 2-3 additional applications per season in oilseed rape fields—to control and other pests previously managed prophylactically via seed treatments, potentially elevating overall loads and exposure risks to applicators and ecosystems. Yield data from affected crops like canola show profitability declines of 10-20% in regions without derogations, as substitute controls prove less effective against early-season infestations, prompting compensatory increases in or use that indirectly burden pollinators and . Such outcomes underscore causal mismatches in regulatory assumptions, where hazard-focused bans overlook pest and effects, sometimes resulting in net environmental trade-offs, as evidenced by persistent exports of banned actives to non-regulating markets, sustaining global resistance pressures.

Recent Advancements

Technological Innovations (Post-2020)

Since 2020, technological innovations in pest control have emphasized precision targeting, data-driven decision-making, and genetic interventions to minimize environmental impact and chemical reliance. Advances in (AI), unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs or drones), and tools like CRISPR-Cas9 have enabled real-time monitoring, automated detection, and species-specific management, particularly in where pest-induced losses exceed $220 billion annually globally. These developments integrate with frameworks, using sensors and devices to optimize interventions and reduce applications by up to 30-50% in targeted scenarios. Empirical validations from field trials demonstrate improved efficacy, such as AI models achieving over 95% accuracy in pest identification via convolutional neural networks (CNNs) analyzing imagery. AI and machine learning algorithms have transformed pest detection by processing vast datasets from cameras, sensors, and satellites to identify infestations early. models, including CNNs and explainable (XAI), classify pests with high precision, enabling for outbreaks; for instance, devices deployed in 2023-2025 trials forecasted pest surges days in advance, integrating with for automated alerts. approaches combining visual, spectral, and environmental data further enhance accuracy, as seen in 2024 systems that distinguish species from beneficial , reducing misapplications. These tools, often cloud-connected, support (IPM) by quantifying population thresholds, with studies reporting 20-40% yield protections in crops like and . Limitations persist in variable field conditions, but iterative training on diverse datasets has mitigated false positives. Drone technology has advanced pest surveillance and application since 2021, with multirotor UAVs equipped with hyperspectral cameras and for mapping infestations at centimeter-scale . In 2025 agricultural deployments, drones facilitated spot-spraying of biopesticides, cutting chemical use by 70-90% compared to broadcast methods while covering large areas efficiently. Integration with GPS and real-time data analytics allows autonomous navigation and variable-rate delivery, as evidenced by trials in control where drones detected pests like bark beetles with 92% accuracy. Regulatory progress, including FAA approvals for beyond-visual-line-of-sight operations, has accelerated adoption, though challenges like battery life and weather dependency remain. CRISPR-Cas9 has emerged as a targeted biotech tool for pest suppression post-2020, enabling modifications to insect fertility, resistance genes, or vector behaviors without broad ecological disruption. Applications include gene drives in mosquitoes to curb disease vectors, with 2022-2024 lab trials achieving sterile-male releases that reduced populations by 80-95% in confined settings. In crops, editing susceptibility genes has conferred resistance to pests like , as demonstrated in 2024 varieties edited for enhanced defenses, potentially decreasing needs by 50%. For direct pest control, disrupts resistance mechanisms, with studies editing target-site genes in to restore susceptibility. Field releases remain limited by ethical and containment concerns, but simulations predict scalable impacts on vectors of diseases like . Precision sensors and networks complement these innovations by enabling continuous monitoring, with 2023-2025 systems using detectors to signal presence at low densities. These feed into digital platforms for threshold-based actions, integrating with for holistic IPM, as validated in where pesticide reductions reached 40% without loss. Overall, these post-2020 technologies prioritize causal efficacy over indiscriminate methods, supported by peer-reviewed trials showing sustained reductions in pressure and secondary environmental effects.

Evidence-Based Policy Shifts

In response to accumulating on pesticide resistance, environmental persistence, and human health risks, regulatory bodies have increasingly incorporated (IPM) principles into policy frameworks, prioritizing threshold-based interventions over routine calendar spraying. A 2025 meta-analysis of 90 studies found that threshold-based IPM programs reduced insecticide applications by 44% and costs by 39-40%, while maintaining yields equivalent to conventional methods (p=0.748) and outperforming untreated controls (p<0.0001). This evidence has informed updates to IPM strategies, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture's ongoing emphasis on science-based through tools like the Pesticide Risk Tool and annual Chemical Use Surveys, which track adoption and efficacy without mandating uniform risk metrics across states. In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has enacted targeted restrictions on high-risk pesticides based on toxicological data. For instance, in 2021, the EPA revoked tolerances for on food crops following court-ordered reviews of evidence linking chronic low-level exposure to neurodevelopmental deficits in children, including reduced IQ and attention disorders, as corroborated by longitudinal cohort studies. Complementing this, 2024 revisions to the Agricultural Worker Protection Standard rescinded select 2020 exemptions in application exclusion zones, reinstating buffer requirements to minimize bystander exposure, grounded in field data on drift and acute poisoning incidents. These shifts reflect causal assessments prioritizing verifiable health endpoints over economic , though broader IPM adoption remains voluntary, with extension programs at land-grant universities driving localized implementation. European policies have pursued ambitious reductions under the Farm to Fork Strategy, targeting a 50% cut in pesticide use and risk by 2030 through IPM promotion and substance approvals tied to hazard profiles. Pre-2020 data showed a 33% volume reduction from 2015-2017 baselines, attributed partly to voluntary shifts and bans on persistent organophosphates, but causal attribution to policy alone is limited by confounding factors like market-driven alternatives. In 2024, amid farmer resistance and yield concern critiques, the proposed Sustainable Use Regulation was withdrawn for stakeholder dialogue, signaling evidence-informed flexibility where modeled scenarios indicated potential trade-offs in food security without compensatory innovations like precision application tech. Overall, IPM-centric policies, validated by reviews showing consistent pesticide reductions and sustained pest control across crops, underscore a paradigm favoring multifaceted strategies—biological, cultural, and chemical—over monocultural reliance, though low farmer adoption (e.g., 37% in some vegetable systems) highlights gaps in incentives and extension.

References

  1. [1]
    Introduction to Integrated Pest Management | US EPA
    Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is an environmentally friendly, common sense approach to controlling pests. Learn about IPM principles and benefits.
  2. [2]
    Pest Management - USDA NIFA
    Methods to manage these problems include the use of pesticides or biological pest control. Integrated pest management (IPM) couples both methods and includes ...
  3. [3]
    Integrated Pest Management | USDA
    Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a science-based process combining tools to manage pests, minimizing economic, health, and environmental risks.
  4. [4]
    Biological Control Program | Animal and Plant Health Inspection ...
    Biological control (biocontrol) involves the reduction of pest populations through the use of natural enemies such as parasitoids, predators, pathogens, ...
  5. [5]
    Pest Management | Natural Resources Conservation Service
    Integrated pest management (IPM) combines decision-making with conservation, using scouting to assess pests, and spot treatment to save money.
  6. [6]
    What Is Integrated Pest Management (IPM)? / UC Statewide IPM ...
    IPM is a process to solve pest problems while minimizing risks, using long-term prevention and combining techniques like biological control.
  7. [7]
    Combining Methods to Better Managing Pests - USDA NIFA
    Apr 11, 2022 · From rodents and insects to weeds and microorganisms that bring disease, pests can evolve to withstand the methods we've developed to control ...
  8. [8]
    With or Without You?—A Critical Review on Pesticides in Food - PMC
    Mar 25, 2025 · Finally, the controversies surrounding pesticide use, including public perception, consumer concerns, and policy debates, are addressed. Through ...
  9. [9]
    Pest Management Overview | New Mexico State University
    Pest management is a system of integrated preventive and corrective measures to reduce or prevent pests from causing significant harm to humans or the ...
  10. [10]
    Unit 1: Principles of Pest Control - CTAHR
    The intent is to reduce the number of pests to a level where the harm they are causing is acceptable. Once a pest's presence is detected and the decision is ...
  11. [11]
    Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Principles | US EPA
    Sep 2, 2025 · As a first line of pest control, IPM programs work to manage the crop, lawn, or indoor space to prevent pests from becoming a threat. In an ...
  12. [12]
    Biological Safety Manual - Chapter 15: Integrated Pest Management ...
    IPM is a process for achieving long-term, environmentally sound pest suppression and prevention. The primary goal of an IPM program is to prevent pest problems ...
  13. [13]
    Principles of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) | Extension
    IPM principles include identifying pests, monitoring, setting action thresholds, and implementing effective, economical control tactics.
  14. [14]
    Eight principles of integrated pest management
    Jul 24, 2015 · Principle 1 (Prevention and suppression) comes first because it encompasses the initial design and actions undertaken at the cropping system ...
  15. [15]
    Using Integrated Pest Management in the Landscape
    In other words, you need clear understanding of two basic principles, pest or host plant biology and your tolerance of the pest infestations. Monitoring and ...
  16. [16]
    IPM General Principles - OSU Extension
    IPM programs emphasize PREVENTION, INSPECTION and the use of a wide variety of NON-CHEMICAL tools BEFORE pesticide applications are ever considered.Missing: fundamental | Show results with:fundamental
  17. [17]
    Brief History of Integrated Pest Management
    The History of Integrated Pest Management ; 2,500 B.C., First records of insecticides (the Sumerians use sulphur compounds to control insects and mites) ; 1,500 ...
  18. [18]
    Pest Control History: Ancient to Modern - JP Pest Services
    Dec 21, 2015 · Early pest control used sulfur (2500 BCE), cultural methods (1000 BCE), botanicals (1200 BCE), biological controls (300-400 AD), and organized ...
  19. [19]
    History of Pests and Their Management - Growing Produce
    Jul 19, 2018 · Up until the 1940s, chemicals derived from plants and inorganic compounds were the source of pest control. During World War II, the synthetic ...
  20. [20]
    Pest Control History Through the Ages
    Nov 25, 2024 · Ancient Egypt: Egyptians were early pioneers in pest control, using herbs like peppermint, thyme, and garlic to protect grain stores from ...
  21. [21]
    A Brief History of Pest Control and Why It Still Matters
    Feb 5, 2025 · One of the earliest known forms of pest control can be traced back to Ancient Egypt around 2000 BC. Egyptians used natural substances like ...
  22. [22]
    A Journey into the History of Agricultural Pest Management
    Apr 14, 2022 · As the agricultural revolution was well under way, in 1888, farmers successfully implemented the first large-scale biological predatory pest ...
  23. [23]
    Ancient Societies Used Clay Rat Traps and Oils for Pest Control
    Feb 14, 2025 · Although much of the ancient approach to pest control involved nets, swatters, traps, and other tools, there is also evidence the ancients tried ...
  24. [24]
    A Brief History Of Pest Control
    Mar 28, 2019 · The earliest record of using a “pesticide” or chemical compound to deal with insects was in 2500 BC when the Ancient Sumerians used sulfur ...
  25. [25]
    The Evolution of Chemical Pesticides - Fisher Scientific
    The earliest documented chemical pesticide compounds were elements such as sulfur, heavy metals and salt. The use of elemental compounds for pest control ...
  26. [26]
    20th Century Insect Control - USDA ARS
    Mar 15, 2024 · “They came up with a class of insecticides called organophosphate compounds—malathion was one, and methyl parathion, and several others—that, ...
  27. [27]
    How DDT went from triumph to tragedy | Feature - Chemistry World
    May 20, 2024 · Meanwhile, DDT suppressed many troublesome agricultural pests, and gave home-owners relief from invasive insects. Hailed as a scientific miracle ...
  28. [28]
    [PDF] Dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane and newer insecticides
    DDT insecticides have now been introduced into all possible fields of insect control, for instance in hygiene, textile protection, storage and plant protec-.
  29. [29]
    Chemical Age: How War Tools Became Pesticides | joegardener®
    Oct 6, 2022 · 'The Chemical Age' details how some of the most important and ecologically damaging chemicals used in agriculture have origins in warfare.
  30. [30]
    [PDF] Pesticide Use in U.S. Agriculture: 21 Selected Crops, 1960-2008
    Pesticides—including herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides—have contributed to substantial increases in crop yields over the past five decades. Properly ...
  31. [31]
    Pesticides in the early part of the 20th century. - CABI Digital Library
    Sep 14, 2018 · From the 1940s onwards, chemists started to develop organochlorine and organophosphate insecticides as well as new herbicides and fungicides.
  32. [32]
    Chapter: 2 Benefits, Costs, and Contemporary Use Patterns
    (1991) estimated that every $1 increase in pesticide expenditure raises gross agricultural output by $3.00–6.50. ... Pesticide use in US agriculture increased ...
  33. [33]
    History of IPM
    History of IPM ... In the 1950's entomologists discovered that insects were developing resistance to pesticides because of their overuse and abuse.
  34. [34]
    [PDF] INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT: Historical Perspectives and ...
    Mar 1, 2022 · IPM is a robust construct in agriculture, with roots in the late 1800s, and is now a household term, though often misused.
  35. [35]
    [PDF] Cal 47-Stern 29-2 1959 - James Litsinger
    Integrated control combines and integrates biological and chem- ical controls. Chemical control is used as necessary and in a manner which is least disruptive ...
  36. [36]
    The integration of chemical and biological control of the spotted ...
    The integration of chemical and biological control of the spotted alfalfa aphid: The integrated control concept ; Publication date Created: October 1959.
  37. [37]
    [PDF] IPM: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE - Beyond Pesticides
    IPM practices reduce dependency upon toxic pesticides, subsequently mitigating exposure to these hazardous chemicals.<|control11|><|separator|>
  38. [38]
    [PDF] A HISTORY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ... - UC IPM
    IPM pilot projects for cotton, apple, citrus, alfalfa, and soybean. In California, pilot projects for cotton and later for pears demonstrated to growers the ...
  39. [39]
    [PDF] integrated pest management
    1950s: Emergence of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) as a response to pesticide-related environmental and health concerns. • 1960s-1970s: Development and ...
  40. [40]
    Approaches to the Biological Control of Insect Pests - CT.gov
    The need for pesticides can be reduced by use of resistant varieties, cultural methods that reduce pest abundance or damage, methods of manipulating pest mating ...
  41. [41]
    Natural Enemy Releases for Biological Control of Crop Pests - UC IPM
    Learn about the specific situations where purchasing and releasing parasites and predators can increase the effectiveness of biological control.
  42. [42]
    Rodolia cardinalis - Cornell University
    A lady beetle called vedalia beetle was introduced into California from Australia to combat cottony cushion scale, Icerya purchasi - also an introduced species.
  43. [43]
    Biocontrol Success Stories
    Koebele discovered the vedalia ladybird beetle feeding on the scale and arranged a total of 5 shipments of beetles to California from November 1888 to March ...
  44. [44]
    Biological control using Bacillus thuringiensis (B.t.)
    Sep 10, 2025 · Since 1985, B.t. has been used on nearly 8 million hectares of insect-infested forests. Today it is not only the most effective tool for control ...
  45. [45]
    Bacillus thuringiensis as microbial biopesticide: uses and ...
    Jun 19, 2021 · The present review briefly provides an overview of the Bt uses and application as a biocontrol agent against insect pest for sustainable agriculture.
  46. [46]
    Biological Control Strategies in Integrated Pest Management (IPM ...
    May 16, 2021 · Conservation biological control practitioners often start with manipulating the farmscape or landscape, such as growing insectary plants (i.e., ...
  47. [47]
    Biologically Based Methods for Pest Management in Agriculture ...
    Here, we discuss biological control, its challenges under climate change scenarios and how increased global temperatures will require adaptive management ...
  48. [48]
    Integrated Pest Management: An Update on the Sustainability ... - NIH
    The Review discusses the key components of IPM, including cultural practices, biological control, genetic pest control, and targeted pesticide application ...
  49. [49]
    Crop Rotation Reduces Pest Pressure: Basic Game Guide
    Sep 14, 2025 · Crop rotation generally increases yield (by 10–25%), decreases the need for chemical inputs, and lowers incidence of persistent pest damage.Missing: efficacy | Show results with:efficacy<|separator|>
  50. [50]
    a review on cultural practice as an effective pest management ...
    The review collects and studies some of the basic and commonly adopted cultural practices like clean and healthy crop growth, trap crop plantation, crop ...
  51. [51]
    The New Integrated Pest Management Paradigm for the Modern Age
    Apr 29, 2019 · Adopting good agronomic practices that avoid or reduce pest infestations and damage refers to cultural control. Choosing clean seed or plant ...
  52. [52]
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376620271_VERTICAL_tillage_effects_on_crop_production_and_pest_management_in_pennsylvania
  53. [53]
    Is tillage beneficial or detrimental for insect and slug management ...
    Jun 1, 2020 · We found that insect and slug pests were not more abundant in reduced-tillage systems than in high-disturbance tillage systems.
  54. [54]
    General Approaches to Insect Control - Wisconsin Horticulture
    Examples include removal of weeds in greenhouses that may harbor mites, aphids, or whiteflies; destruction of crop residues such as corn stubble, squash vines, ...
  55. [55]
    [PDF] Mechanical Pest Controls - Oklahoma State University
    Examples of exclusion devices include row covers, nets to keep birds away from ripening fruit, paper collars placed around stems of plants to prevent cutworm ...
  56. [56]
    Trap cropping: A simple, effective, and affordable Integrated Pest ...
    Mar 16, 2017 · To control squash bugs and squash vine borer, insecticide applications to the trap crop plants are recommended. As a result of research and ...
  57. [57]
    Physical Barriers for the Control of Insect Pests - ResearchGate
    Physical barriers can also work against insect pests, such as carrot fly (Boiteau and Vernon, 2001) . In lettuce, aphids can be prevented by covering the crop ...
  58. [58]
    Trap Crops to Control Pests - Gardenia.net
    It acts as a decoy, drawing the pest away from the plants and saving your crop from decimation without pesticides. For example, Nasturtiums trap aphids, and ...What Is Trap Cropping? · Implementing trap crops in the...
  59. [59]
    Cultural Pest Control - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    Cultural pest control refers to the manipulation of the crop production system or cultural practices to reduce or eliminate pest populations.
  60. [60]
    [PDF] Pesticide Application Equipment and Methods - University of Kentucky
    Here are some common pesticide application methods: Band —applied along fence rows or borders, often with a non-selective herbicide to kill all vegetation. ...
  61. [61]
    [PDF] Pesticide application methods - Citrus Research and Education Center
    To minimize pesticide contact with non-target plants and animals, a directed-spray application may be used. This is a type of spot treatment with pesticides ...
  62. [62]
    Best Practices for Effective and Efficient Pesticide Application
    Oct 30, 2020 · Best Practices for Effective and Efficient Pesticide Application · Uniform mixing of pesticides (especially dry products) in the sprayer tank.
  63. [63]
    Five Facts You Need to Know About Aerial Application and UAVs
    Sep 10, 2019 · 1. Aerial application by manned aircraft is by far the fastest application method. Every year aerial application pilots treat approximately 127 million acres ...
  64. [64]
    [PDF] National Aerial Applicator's Manual - EPA
    LAWS AND REGULATIONS FOR. THE AERIAL APPLICATOR PILOT. As an aerial pesticide applicator ... information on proper application of herbicide. MIXING INSTRUCTIONS.
  65. [65]
    [PDF] The Facts - History & overview of resistance - IRAC
    Between 1914 and 1946, another 11 cases of resistance to inorganic pesticides were recorded. Then came development of organic insecticides, such as DDT, and the ...
  66. [66]
    Impact of pesticides use in agriculture: their benefits and hazards
    Improving productivity​​ Tremendous benefits have been derived from the use of pesticides in forestry, public health and the domestic sphere – and, of course, in ...
  67. [67]
    Yield to the data: some perspective on crop productivity and pesticides
    Jan 7, 2022 · More than 90% of pesticide treatments reported in the studies resulted in an increase in crop yield. The magnitude of the increase in crop yield ...Missing: effectiveness historical<|separator|>
  68. [68]
    https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2014/june/pesticide-use-peaked-in-1981-then-trended-downward-driven-by-technological-innovations-and-other-factors
  69. [69]
    [PDF] US EPA - Best Practices for Aerial Application - Webinar Materials
    – Water quality and other properties;. – Plant structure and makeup;. – Spray system limitations;. – Environmental conditions in field. • Adjust pH to maintain ...
  70. [70]
    Genetically engineered (modified) crops (Bacillus thuringiensis ...
    Jun 19, 2018 · Bt crops are plants genetically engineered (modified) to contain the endospore (or crystal) Bt toxin to be resistant to certain insect pests. “ ...
  71. [71]
    [PDF] Are Bt crops safe - US EPA
    Beginning in the mid-1990s, crop plants expressing Bt genes were commercialized in the United States. Cry1Ab and Cry1F Bt corn are effective in controlling ...
  72. [72]
    Impact of genetically engineered maize on agronomic ... - Nature
    Feb 15, 2018 · Our results clearly indicated that GE maize was highly effective against Diabrotica spp. infestation with 89.7% of pest decrease compared to the ...
  73. [73]
    The 'Public Good' of Controlling Mobile Pests with Genetically ...
    Nov 11, 2020 · Bt corn has been estimated to save corn growers in that region $6.8 billion cumulatively over a 14-year period in reduced corn borer damages.
  74. [74]
    A Meta-Analysis of the Impacts of Genetically Modified Crops
    On average, GM technology adoption has reduced chemical pesticide use by 37%, increased crop yields by 22%, and increased farmer profits by 68%.
  75. [75]
    Genetically Modified (GM) Crop Use 1996–2020 - NIH
    Oct 13, 2022 · GM crops reduced pesticide use by 7.2% and decreased environmental impact by 17.3% between 1996 and 2020. Insect resistant cotton had the ...Gm Ht Soybean · Gm Ht Maize · Gm Ir Crops
  76. [76]
    Bt-Corn: What It Is and How It Works | Entomology
    For this reason, GMOs that have the Bt gene are compatible with biological control programs because they harm insect predators and parasitoids much less than ...
  77. [77]
    New Study Shows Benefits of Bt Corn to Farmers - USDA ARS
    Oct 7, 2010 · Planting genetically engineered Bt corn also has provided significant collateral benefits to farmers who grow non-transgenic corn.
  78. [78]
    Monitoring Bt crops: pest management does not end when GM ...
    Transgenic Bt crops have been a very successful tool for managing various insect pests in field crops. However, like all pest management strategies, ...
  79. [79]
    100 Years of Bacillus thuringiensis: A Critical Scientific Assessment
    Replacement of toxic chemical pesticides with Bt has reduced hazards to the environment and farm workers. Bt-engineered crops are equally amenable to use in ...<|separator|>
  80. [80]
    Biotechnological Approaches for Host Plant Resistance to Insect Pests
    The RNAi strategy for pest control is based on ingestion of double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) into the target pest system. After ingestion, dsRNA expresses either ...Missing: sterile | Show results with:sterile
  81. [81]
    Emerging technological developments to address pest resistance in ...
    Sep 3, 2024 · RNAi can be combine with Bt toxins to produce more effective and durable resistance against insect pests (Tabashnik & Carrière. 2017) (Fig. 4).Bt Cotton Adoption And The... · Gene Pyramiding · Other Biopesticides For The...
  82. [82]
    Implementing the sterile insect technique with RNA interference
    We review RNA interference (RNAi) of insect pests and its potential for implementing sterile insect technique (SIT)‐related control.
  83. [83]
    Biotechnology: A sustainable approach to insect pest management
    In this review, we have discussed some important strategies like GMO crops, RNA interference (RNAi), Sterile Insect Technique (SIT), CRISPR Cas9, and Host Plant ...
  84. [84]
    Recent Developments in CRISPR/Cas9 Genome-Editing ...
    Using CRISPR-Cas9 technology, researchers have successfully disrupted eIF4E genes to generate resistance against potyviruses and ipomoviruses in Arabidopsis and ...
  85. [85]
    Recent advances of CRISPR-based genome editing for enhancing ...
    Sep 22, 2024 · CRISPR/Cas technology is also being utilized to enhance pest resistance in crops by knocking out susceptibility genes and enhancing plant ...
  86. [86]
    Genome editing in future crop protection: utilizing CRISPR/Cas9 to ...
    Nov 19, 2024 · This review explores various approaches with which CRISPR/Cas9 is applied for crop protection: knocking out of susceptibility genes, introduction of resistance ...
  87. [87]
    Revolutionizing Agriculture With CRISPR Technology: Applications ...
    Sep 11, 2025 · CRISPR technologies are revolutionizing agriculture by enabling precise genetic improvements in crops, livestock, and microbes.
  88. [88]
    CRISPR in Agriculture: 2024 in Review - Innovative Genomics Institute
    Dec 10, 2024 · The use of CRISPR in agriculture is becoming more common around the world. A review of the progress in 2022 and what is coming next.
  89. [89]
    Genome editing towards pests and disease management in ...
    The development of genome editing tools offers new ways to design unique genotypes that are resistant to pests and diseases in crops.<|separator|>
  90. [90]
    Pest Control: Resources for Housing Managers | US EPA
    May 2, 2025 · Studies have proven that IPM is the most effective way to control pests in the home. ... Install barriers to pest entry and movement.
  91. [91]
    [PDF] PEST-PROOFING yOUR HOME - The University of Arizona
    Aug 1, 2015 · For example caulking (sealing) cracks, fitting door sweeps and screens, etc. Consider that these small flies only require tiny entry points.
  92. [92]
    "Efficacy of repellent-treated structural barriers for Richardson's gro ...
    Relative to untreated barriers, AQ treatments reduced defeat of the barrier by 50–55% for RGS and 55–80% for house mice. RGS showed a marked decrease in ...
  93. [93]
    How to Pest-Proof Your Home - Entomology - University of Kentucky
    While sealing is the more permanent way to exclude pests originating from outdoors, comprehensive pest-proofing is labor-intensive and sometimes impractical.
  94. [94]
    SP486A/IN1073: Urban Pests and Pest Management
    Integrated Pest Management Methods In Households And Structures · Sanitation and Habitat Modification · Exclusion · Inspection · Trapping · Biological Control.
  95. [95]
    [PDF] INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT (IPM)
    Some important aspects of IPM are educating residents about pest biology, training maintenance staff not to spray, using sticky traps to monitor pests, and ...
  96. [96]
    [PDF] Common Urban Pests Identification, Prevention, and Control
    Control measures: Cover floor drains with screen and make sure there is water in all water traps; store food in sealed containers; keep things clean and dry; ...
  97. [97]
    Management of Household Pesticides - Vermont Agency of Agriculture
    Nov 14, 2023 · Use preventative practices to dissuade pests from establishing in and around the home. Removing food sources, installing physical barriers, and ...
  98. [98]
    Use of rodenticide bait stations by commensal rodents at the urban ...
    Feb 26, 2021 · Pest management professionals use anticoagulant rodenticides, usually placed in tamper-resistant bait stations, to control commensal rodents ...
  99. [99]
    A strategy to improve rodent control while reducing rodenticide ... - NIH
    Mortality was 100 %, and bait consumption analysis revealed a fast evolution of symptoms as bait consumption decreased 60 % on the last test day. First- ...
  100. [100]
    Widespread exposure to anticoagulant rodenticides among common ...
    Nov 20, 2024 · Anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs) are currently the most common method to control rats in cities, but these compounds also cause morbidity ...
  101. [101]
    Patterns of exposure of coyotes to anticoagulant rodenticides in ...
    Nov 18, 2024 · Secondary exposure to anticoagulant rodenticides (ARs) causes the death of mammalian predators and scavengers directly and indirectly ...
  102. [102]
    Bait Evaluation Methods for Urban Pest Management - IntechOpen
    Jan 30, 2013 · Overall, baits are a very effective and successful insecticide formulation for urban pest control. As a result, the industry has been expanding ...2. Cockroach Bait... · 3. Ant Bait Evaluations · 4. Termite Bait Evaluations
  103. [103]
    Rodent baiting for pest controllers and environmental impact
    Nov 1, 2022 · Saturation baiting requires rodents to eat repetitively to achieve a lethal dose; bait replenishment needs to be undertaken more frequently to ...
  104. [104]
    Sulfuryl Fluoride Technical Fact Sheet
    Sulfuryl fluoride is a gas used to fumigate closed structures and their contents for drywood and Formosan termites, wood infesting beetles, bedbugs, carpet ...Will I be exposed to sulfuryl... · What is the toxicity of sulfuryl...
  105. [105]
    Sulfuryl Fluoride | US EPA
    Jul 29, 2025 · Sulfuryl fluoride is a structural and commodity fumigant used to control a wide variety of pests, including termites, powder post beetles, ...
  106. [106]
    What to Know About Termite Fumigation - WebMD
    Jan 21, 2025 · Research shows that fumigating a building with sulfuryl fluoride is an effective way to completely eliminate pests from your building — ...
  107. [107]
    EPA Announces Next Steps to Protect People from Sulfuryl Fluoride ...
    Jul 30, 2024 · Sulfuryl fluoride is the only fumigant registered for use in residential structures, and it is used to control pests such as termites, powder ...
  108. [108]
    Deciding to Fumigate - University of Kentucky
    Nov 30, 2018 · Fumigation quickly eradicates pests and penetrates cracks, but is toxic, requires special equipment, is time-consuming, and expensive.
  109. [109]
    Sulfuryl Fluoride Poisonings in Structural Fumigation, a Highly ...
    Jun 6, 2019 · Structural fumigations are conducted using sulfuryl fluoride, a colorless, odorless, lethal gas, which is heavier than air [3,4]. Sulfuryl ...<|separator|>
  110. [110]
    What Do Pest Control Companies Use: Essential Tools and Chemicals
    Sep 22, 2024 · Targeted application: Using a sprayer, duster, or foamer, chemicals can be applied to specific areas or pests, such as trails and nests, to ...Biological Pest Control... · Chemical Pest Control... · Insecticides
  111. [111]
    What Chemical Do Pest Control Companies Use? Top 10 Revealed
    Jul 24, 2024 · Pest control companies commonly use pyrethrins, pyrethroids, fipronil, malathion, and boric acid, among other chemicals.Pyrethrins And Pyrethroids · How Pest Control Chemicals... · Integrated Pest Management...
  112. [112]
    Smart Pest Control to Protect Your Health | US EPA
    Feb 13, 2025 · In addition to preventive measures, you can use traps, bait stations, and other pesticide products (including repellents) to control some pests.
  113. [113]
    Effective Pest Control Methods: Best Practices & Strategies
    Aug 29, 2025 · Examples include glue boards, bait stations, and slug traps using beer dishes. These devices work best when placed along the paths that pests ...Physical Pest Control · Biological Pest Control · Chemical Pest Control
  114. [114]
    Local and Landscape Effects to Biological Controls in Urban ...
    Jul 22, 2019 · An alternative form of pest control is conservation biological control (CBC)—a form of ecological pest management—that can reduce the severity ...1. Introduction · 2. Literature Review... · 4. Discussion
  115. [115]
    Bti and Mosquito Control: Safety, Effectiveness, and Use
    Aug 21, 2025 · Bti specifically targets mosquito larvae while remaining harmless to humans, pets, and beneficial insects (2,3). How Bti Kills Mosquito Larvae.
  116. [116]
    Biological larviciding against malaria vector mosquitoes ... - PubMed
    For integrated vector management, targeting the vector larvae with biological larvicides such as Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis (Bti) can be an effective ...
  117. [117]
    Effects of mosquito control using the microbial agent Bacillus ...
    Nov 22, 2023 · There is now a significant body of studies documenting effects of mosquito control using Bti on NTOs or other ecosystem properties.
  118. [118]
    Comparative Efficacy of a Fungal Entomopathogen with a Broad ...
    In the present study, we use different techniques to expose bed bugs and German cockroaches to Beauveria bassiana, a fungal pathogen that only infects insects, ...
  119. [119]
    Efficacy of entomopathogenic hypocrealean fungi against ...
    Metarhizium and Beauveria are two main active insect pathogenic fungi that are widely used as fungal biocontrol agents against cockroaches (Lopes and Alves, ...
  120. [120]
    Cockroach Biocontrol: Parasitoids and Parasites - Alabama Extension
    Jan 14, 2022 · Cockroach biocontrol uses parasitoid wasps, predatory nematodes, and entomopathogenic fungi as natural enemies to control cockroaches.
  121. [121]
    Biological Pest Controls for the Home Landscape - OSU Extension
    Examples are tachinid flies, trichogramma wasps, braconid wasps, ichneumonid wasps, scale parasites and whitefly parasites. Extension Fact Sheet HLA-6713, “ ...
  122. [122]
    Parasitoid Wasps | University of Maryland Extension
    Jul 31, 2024 · Two species of wasps are very important aphid parasitoids: Aphelinidae and Aphidius (Braconid wasps). · Trichogramma are endoparasitoids of the ...
  123. [123]
    What is a beneficial parasite? - Insects in the City
    Aug 2, 2013 · The first known parasitoid wasps, called “ichneumons”, were discovered laying eggs on caterpillars and described by anatomists and microscopists ...
  124. [124]
    Efficacy of Wolbachia-Infected Mosquito Deployments for the Control ...
    Jun 9, 2021 · Thus, the introgression of “virus-blocking” strains of wolbachia into field populations of A. aegypti is an emerging dengue-control method.
  125. [125]
    Our Wolbachia method - World Mosquito Program
    Our ground-breaking Wolbachia method reduces the ability of mosquitoes to transmit disease. Learn how it works. Find out more.
  126. [126]
    Efficacy of Wolbachia-mediated sterility to reduce the incidence of ...
    Feb 8, 2024 · Our results demonstrated the potential of Wolbachia-mediated incompatible insect technique for strengthening dengue control in tropical cities.
  127. [127]
    Urbanization hampers biological control of insect pests: A global ...
    Aug 15, 2022 · Weakened biological control can increase the maintenance costs and inputs for urban greenspace management (Dale and Frank, 2018; Vogt et al., ...2. Material And Methods · 3. Results · 4. Discussion
  128. [128]
    Integrated Pest Management | US Forest Service
    The Biological Control program focuses its resources on a few insects and weed species that have the greatest potential for biological control. Identify natural ...
  129. [129]
    [PDF] Forest Pest Management
    The following are some examples of management strategies. Weather plays an important part in the development of most insect and disease pests. Keeping track of ...
  130. [130]
    Spruce budworm - Natural Resources Canada
    Sep 10, 2025 · Outbreak cycles of spruce budworm occur every 30 to 40 years. · During an outbreak, tens of millions of hectares of trees can be severely ...
  131. [131]
    Mountain Pine Beetle | Colorado State Forest Service
    Remove infested trees and slash from thinning or pruning. · Solar treatments can be used to reduce mountain pine beetle populations in small infested stands.
  132. [132]
    Management of the mountain pine beetle - Gov.bc.ca
    Jan 30, 2025 · Tactics · Push-pull tactic · Fall and destroy tactic · Pest reduction harvesting · Thinning to reduce susceptibility · Planting for resiliency ...
  133. [133]
    Spruce budworm
    Jan 8, 2025 · Aerial spray programs have been conducted against spruce budworm to protect foliage during every major outbreak since the 1950s.Prevention And Management · Photos · Selected References
  134. [134]
    [PDF] Can outbreaks be stopped? - Healthy Forest Partnership
    The cost of an uncontrolled spruce budworm outbreak in Atlantic Canada has been estimated to be about $15 billion. The ecological costs of a spruce budworm ...
  135. [135]
    Tackling the Spruce Budworm Pest - Natural Resources Canada
    Jan 16, 2025 · The Government of Canada announced in Budget 2018 an investment of $74.75 million over five years to combat the spruce budworm in Atlantic Canada.
  136. [136]
    Invasive species are costly in economic and ecological damage ...
    Jul 27, 2015 · Recent estimates show economic costs of invasive forest insects in the U.S. exceed $4 billion annually. Moreover, most of these costs are borne ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  137. [137]
    Economic impacts of invasive species in forest past, present, and ...
    A review of the literature leads one to anticipate that the greatest economic impacts of invasive species in forests are due to the loss of nonmarket values.
  138. [138]
    Termite Damage Statistics & Costs - Orkin
    Termites damage about 600,000 homes yearly, costing $5 billion annually for control and repairs, with an average repair cost of $3,000.
  139. [139]
    How to Kill Termites and Protect Against Their Damage - Amdro
    The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that these destructive, wood-eating pests are behind nearly $40 billion in damage worldwide every year. In the U.S. ...
  140. [140]
    The Impact of NYC's Old Infrastructure on Pest Control Challenges
    Oct 1, 2025 · Older buildings throughout NYC are especially vulnerable to infestations from rodents, cockroaches, and other pests that thrive in cracks, leaks ...
  141. [141]
    Pest Control for Infrastructure Construction - Contego Response
    Pests can have various impacts on construction projects, such as damage to structures, equipment, and materials. They can also pose health and safety risks to ...
  142. [142]
    Frequently Asked Questions and Answers
    Jan 3, 2025 · A: The reported costs for civil aircraft in USA totaled $1.48 billion for the 34-year period, 1990 to 2023. When costs are adjusted for reported ...
  143. [143]
    https://www.facebook.com/AVIO.KNOWLEDGE/posts/single-bird-can-cost-an-airline-millions-heres-howwe-all-know-the-miracle-on-the/1374994381333714/
  144. [144]
    Shipping containers: Importing insect pests, too - American Forests
    Sep 22, 2014 · These include the Asian longhorned beetle (ALB), emerald ash borer, and redbay ambrosia beetle. All entered the country since trade opened ...
  145. [145]
    Cargo, With a Side of Hornets, Flies and Crabs - The Revelator
    Jan 10, 2022 · Global shipping is moving invasive species around the world. Can world governments agree on necessary preventative measures?
  146. [146]
    wood packaging – Center for Invasive Species Prevention
    So probably ~25 million shipping containers arrived via ship from Asia, Europe, and other overseas trading partners. Note that the CBP reports containers ...<|separator|>
  147. [147]
    Tunnel flooding may drive subway rats onto NYC streets - NBC News
    Oct 31, 2012 · Some 28 million rats have been reported to lurk in the dark, wet subway tunnels of New York City, though official numbers are hard to come by.
  148. [148]
    For Metrorail, it's one man vs. mouse (and rat) - The Washington Post
    Mar 15, 2014 · To keep mice, rats and bugs at bay, Washington's Metro system uses low-tech sticky cardboard and packets of poison. But the transit agency's best weapon may be ...
  149. [149]
    Preventing rodents from causing costly downtime in rail infrastructure
    Feb 8, 2022 · The first line of defense in preventing pests is building in physical barriers in walls, floors, cabinets and enclosures. Only proven systems ...
  150. [150]
    Understanding the context | Pest and Pesticide Management
    FAO estimates that plant pests and diseases account for the reduction of between 20 and 40 percent of global crop yields per year. Crop losses contribute to ...
  151. [151]
    Researchers Helping Protect Crops From Pests - USDA NIFA
    Feb 6, 2023 · Between 20% to 40% of global crop production is lost to pests annually. Each year, plant diseases cost the global economy around $220 billion, ...
  152. [152]
    The Economic Benefits of Pesticides to Farmers & Society
    May 21, 2025 · One of the central tenets to producing crops is the control of pests that, when left unchecked, can reduce corn yields by up to 70%.
  153. [153]
    Primary and Secondary Yield Losses Caused by Pests and Diseases
    Jan 3, 2017 · Results showed that pests and diseases led to high primary yield losses (26%) and even higher secondary yield losses (38%).
  154. [154]
    Threshold-based management reduces insecticide use by 44 ...
    Aug 27, 2025 · Threshold-based insecticide programs offer many promises; increased yield, reduced input costs, and reduced non-target effects. The magnitude of ...
  155. [155]
    [PDF] Benefits and costs of pesticide use
    Pesticides increase yields and protect investments, but new ones are costly. Benefits exceed costs by 20:1, but environmental issues and exposure exist.
  156. [156]
    Threats to the effectiveness of insecticide-treated bednets for ...
    Children who slept under ITNs had a 37% reduced risk of infection with Plasmodium falciparum and 38% lower incidence of clinical malaria than did non-users ...
  157. [157]
    [PDF] Combining Indoor Residual Spraying and Insecticide-Treated Net ...
    Jul 17, 2020 · Combining IRS and LLIN reduces malaria infection risk more than using either alone, with studies showing a protective effect.
  158. [158]
    Indoor residual spraying for preventing malaria in communities ...
    Jan 17, 2022 · Adding IRS to ITNs may improve malaria control simply because two interventions can be better than one.
  159. [159]
    A century of medical records reveal earlier onset of the malaria ...
    Oct 22, 2024 · Our historical data shows that the lowest malaria incidence occurred during periods of intensive DDT use and indoor residual spraying.
  160. [160]
    Malaria - World Health Organization (WHO)
    Globally, in 2023, the number of deaths was estimated at 597 000, with a mortality rate of 13.7 per 100 000. The WHO African Region continues to carry the ...
  161. [161]
    Malaria - World Health Organization (WHO)
    Dec 11, 2024 · Vector control is a vital component of malaria control and elimination strategies as it is highly effective in preventing infection and ...
  162. [162]
    Vector-borne diseases - World Health Organization (WHO)
    Sep 26, 2024 · Vector-borne diseases account for more than 17% of all infectious diseases, causing more than 700 000 deaths annually.
  163. [163]
    The importance of vector control for the control and elimination of ...
    Jan 16, 2020 · Vector control, to a greater extent than drugs or vaccines, has been responsible for shrinking the map of many VBDs.
  164. [164]
    As dengue cases increase globally, vector control, community ...
    Aug 3, 2023 · As dengue cases increase globally, vector control, community engagement key to prevent spread of the disease - PAHO/WHO | Pan American Health ...
  165. [165]
    Pesticides vs. Biopesticides: From Pest Management to Toxicity and ...
    Dec 4, 2023 · Most biopesticides are safer for use around people and pets than man-made pesticides because, for example, they can be easily washed away from fruits and ...
  166. [166]
    Efficacy of three biopesticides against cotton pests under field ...
    Therefore, the goal of this study was to quantify the efficacy of biopesticides versus synthetic insecticides for the control of primary and secondary pests of ...
  167. [167]
    Biopesticides and Conventional Pesticides: Comparative Review of ...
    Apr 26, 2022 · ... synthetic pesticides have better efficacy within a shorter time when compared with natural pesticides. These synthetic pesticides however ...Missing: trials | Show results with:trials
  168. [168]
    Biopesticides as a promising alternative to synthetic pesticides - NIH
    Feb 16, 2023 · Biopesticides are often ranked as having low efficacy and a slower rate in the control of pests and diseases (Damalas and Koutroubas, 2016; ...Missing: trials | Show results with:trials
  169. [169]
    Microbial pesticides – challenges and future perspectives for testing ...
    May 29, 2024 · Biopesticides should be considered a sustainable solution. They may be less toxic than chemical pesticides, be very specific to the target pest, decompose ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  170. [170]
    Yield gap between organic and conventional farming systems ...
    Yield of organic farming is 18.4% lower than that of conventional farming. •. Yield of organic farming is lower in specific warm temperate sub-types, ...Missing: efficacy | Show results with:efficacy
  171. [171]
    Organic farming supports lower pest infestation, but fewer natural ...
    Jun 10, 2021 · Biological control can reduce the need for pesticide application, and thus saves money for the farmers, and in addition, contributes to ...Organic Farming Supports... · 1 Introduction · 4 Discussion
  172. [172]
    Study Shows Effectiveness of Organic Pest Management Methods
    Jul 2, 2010 · In fact, the study found that the increased evenness of species in the organic plots compared to the conventional plots led to 18% lower pest ...
  173. [173]
    Conventional vs. Organic Agriculture–Which One Promotes Better ...
    Jun 9, 2022 · This paper provides a general overview of the major current debates on conventional and organic farming performance regarding yields.
  174. [174]
    Comparative Efficacy of Common Active Ingredients in Organic ...
    In this study, we conducted 153 field trials on different host crops to evaluate the control efficacy of common active ingredients in organic insecticides ...
  175. [175]
    A comprehensive review on environmental and human health ...
    2. Usage of chemical pesticide. The utilization of chemical pesticides has been pivotal in advancing crop quality and yield, significantly bolstering food ...
  176. [176]
    Ecological approaches and the development of “truly integrated ...
    One possible approach to meeting this demand, at least in part, is the control of pests and diseases, which currently cause a 30–40% loss in available crop ...
  177. [177]
    [PDF] Pesticide Use in U.S. Agriculture: 21 Selected Crops, 1960-2008
    Pesticides, together with fertilizers and improved seed varieties, have contributed to substantial increases in crop yields over the last 80 years. Average ...
  178. [178]
    Pesticides in our food system - FoodPrint
    Oct 4, 2018 · For farmers, pesticides save labor and generally provide a higher yield: they can mean the difference between saving a crop and losing it to ...
  179. [179]
    NECR575 Edition 1 Integrated Pest Management (IPM) for ...
    Aug 27, 2024 · Most techniques had a positive impact on biodiversity with crop rotation, field margins, cover crops and companion crops having the most ...
  180. [180]
    Integrated Pest Management and Its Role in Biodiversity Conservation
    Different IPM approaches, from suppression to eradication of invasive pests, have been shown to impact biodiversity positively across various trophic levels.
  181. [181]
    Factors Associated with Honey Bee Colony Losses: A Mini-Review
    CCD has been linked to changes in bee habitats and malnutrition, both of which are indirectly caused by climate change.
  182. [182]
    Honey bee colony loss linked to parasites, pesticides and extreme ...
    Dec 1, 2022 · We found that extreme temperature and precipitation events, even when controlling for other factors, significantly impact colony loss.
  183. [183]
    Pesticides and Their Involvement in Colony Collapse Disorder
    Aug 20, 2019 · If pesticides are applied anytime during bloom, bees will be killed; even the shortest duration pesticides like pyrethroids are not disappearing overnight.
  184. [184]
    Attempts to ban DDT have increased deaths - PMC - NIH
    Pressures on poor countries to ban the insecticide DDT because of fears that its use would harm the environment have led to a resurgence of malaria in the ...
  185. [185]
    When Politics Kills: Malaria and the DDT Story
    Feb 23, 2001 · However, concerns about the environmental harm of DDT led to a decline in spraying, and likewise, a resurgence of malaria. Today there are ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  186. [186]
    Pesticides use and trade. 1990–2022
    Jul 16, 2024 · Between 1990 and 2022, pesticides intensities increased at different rates: use per cropland area increased by 94 percent, use per value of ...
  187. [187]
    The social costs of pesticides: a meta-analysis of the experimental ...
    Dec 30, 2024 · Pesticide use poses major public health risks and raises environmental concerns globally. We synthesize three decades of stated preferences ...
  188. [188]
    Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA ... - EPA
    Jan 31, 2025 · Under FIFRA §26, a State shall have primary enforcement responsibilities for pesticide use violations if EPA determines that such State has ...Missing: unintended consequences
  189. [189]
    DDT - A Brief History and Status | US EPA
    Sep 11, 2025 · In 1972, EPA issued a cancellation order for DDT based on its adverse environmental effects, such as those to wildlife, as well as its potential ...
  190. [190]
    Three years of banning neonicotinoid insecticides based on sub ...
    The 2013 EU ban of three neonicotinoids used in seed coating of pollinator attractive crops was put in place because of concern about declining wild ...<|separator|>
  191. [191]
    Slowing and Combating Pest Resistance to Pesticides | US EPA
    Jan 30, 2025 · Regulatory oversight includes human health and environmental fate risk assessments as well as resistance-management risk evaluations.What EPA is doing · Conventional pesticides and... · Biopesticides and resistance...
  192. [192]
    [PDF] Pesticide Benefits Assessment - Purdue Agriculture
    It allows EPA to register a product when “it will perform its intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.” Under FIFRA Section 2( ...
  193. [193]
    How low can you go? Estimating impacts of reduced pesticide use
    Nov 8, 2018 · Research suggests that large, landscape-level changes in pesticide applications can have unintended consequences.56-58, 61-66 So ...
  194. [194]
    The impact of restrictions on neonicotinoid and fipronil insecticides ...
    The general view is that restrictions on neonicotinoid use for seed treatments would result in an increased number of insecticide applications and/or other ...
  195. [195]
    An overview of agricultural neonicotinoid regulation in the EU ...
    Aug 12, 2025 · For example, while studies indicate that neonicotinoid bans have significantly affected canola yield and profitability in the EU, Sweden defies ...
  196. [196]
    A new critical social science research agenda on pesticides
    Aug 10, 2023 · We call for systematic attention to the socio-ecological afterlives of pesticide bans, or the outcomes and unintended consequences of pesticide ...
  197. [197]
    Deep learning based agricultural pest monitoring and classification
    Mar 13, 2025 · The proposed work presents an innovative automatic approach based on the incorporation of deep learning in smart farming for pest monitoring and classification.
  198. [198]
    [PDF] Advances in Precision Agriculture: A Review of
    Aug 22, 2025 · Precision technologies enable targeted pest and disease control, reducing pesticide use and environmental impact (Singh et al., 2022). High-.
  199. [199]
    Application of artificial intelligence in insect pest identification
    AI uses machine learning, deep learning, and computer vision, especially CNNs, to identify insects by analyzing visual features and image-based classification.
  200. [200]
    AI and IoT-powered edge device optimized for crop pest ... - Nature
    Jul 2, 2025 · ML's prediction capabilities enable it to predict pest and disease outbreaks before they worsen. The work of N. Ullah et al. presented ...
  201. [201]
    New trends in detection of harmful insects and pests in modern ...
    This paper provides an overview of new trends in modern agriculture for harmful insect and pest detection using neural networks.
  202. [202]
    Leveraging deep learning for plant disease and pest detection
    Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) enhances plant disease and pest detection by addressing the “black-box” nature of deep learning models, making their ...
  203. [203]
    Unravelling the use of artificial intelligence in management of insect ...
    AI based, machine learning coupled with deep learning strategy helps in effective pest detection and management. •. Sensor devices with AI tools viz., ...
  204. [204]
    The expanding role of multirotor UAVs in precision agriculture with ...
    Sep 16, 2025 · Multirotor UAVs, or drones, play an increasingly vital role in precision pest management by enhancing the accuracy, efficiency, and ...
  205. [205]
    A systematic review of UAV and AI integration for targeted disease ...
    This study comprehensively analyzes the latest developments in UAV technology for crop disease detection, weed management, and pest control.
  206. [206]
    Global Agricultural Drone Industry Sees Record Growth - DRONELIFE
    May 1, 2025 · DJI's 2025 report reveals explosive growth in ag drone use, highlighting environmental gains, regulatory progress.
  207. [207]
    Harnessing CRISPR-Cas Genome Editing for Effective Insect Pest ...
    The CRISPR-Cas gene editing technique has the capability to modify the DNA of insects, either to trigger a gene drive or to overcome their resistance to ...
  208. [208]
    CRISPR/Cas Technology in Insect Insecticide Resistance - PMC
    Mar 26, 2025 · The emergence of CRISPR/Cas gene-editing technology has deepened our understanding of the mechanisms by which insects adapt to and resist insecticides.
  209. [209]
    Transferable approaches to CRISPR-Cas9 induced genome editing ...
    Jul 7, 2025 · Use of CRISPR-Cas9 for the generation of gene drives and other methods of insect pest and vector control. Not only has CRISPR-Cas9 been ...
  210. [210]
    precision pest management using digital tools and sensors
    Aug 22, 2025 · Precision pest management leverages digital tools and sensors to enhance pest detection, monitoring, and targeted treatment application.
  211. [211]
    Across the Atlantic: How IPM Strategies Compare in the EU and U.S.
    Aug 7, 2025 · A new article in the Journal of Integrated Pest Management ... Recent policy shifts in both regions make this comparison especially timely.Missing: evidence- | Show results with:evidence-
  212. [212]
    New evidence of chlorpyrifos harm to kids' brains amid regulatory ...
    Aug 18, 2025 · The EPA then banned chlorpyrifos in 2021 after a federal court ordered the agency to take action amid litigation and a wealth of evidence of the ...
  213. [213]
    Federal Register :: Pesticides; Agricultural Worker Protection Standard
    Oct 4, 2024 · Specifically, EPA is rescinding three of the amendments outlined in the 2020 AEZ Rule and reinstating the related AEZ requirements as published ...
  214. [214]
    Pesticide reduction amidst food and feed security concerns in Europe
    Sep 21, 2023 · By 2021, a reduction of 33% and 21% in the two targets from the reference period (2015–2017) was achieved at EU level, mostly due to substance ...Missing: basis | Show results with:basis
  215. [215]
    [PDF] Review of Evidence on Integrated Pest Management - SRUC Pure
    The evidence was mostly consistent in showing a decrease in chemical pesticide use where an IPM approach had been taken. This was consistent across different ...
  216. [216]
    Adoption status of integrated pest management (IPM) practices ...
    The findings revealed that only 37 % of the total respondents adopted IPM practices for vegetable cultivation. The easy availability of chemical pesticides and ...