Monitoring systems for resistance to plant protection products across the world: Between redundancy and complementarity

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Monitoring resistance to Plant Protection Products (PPPs) is crucial for understanding the evolution of resistances in bioagressors, thereby allowing scientists to design sound bioagressor management strategies. Globally, resistance monitoring is implemented by a wide range of actors that fall into three distinct categories: academic, governmental, and private. The purpose of this study was to investigate worldwide diversity in PPP resistance monitoring systems, and to shed light on their different facets. RESULTS: A large survey involving 162 experts from 48 countries made it possible to identify and analyze 250 resistance monitoring systems. Through an in-depth analysis, the features of the different monitoring systems were identified. The main factor differentiating monitoring systems was essentially the capabilities (funding, manpower, technology, etc.) of the actors involved in each system. In most countries, and especially in those with a high Human Development Index, academic, governmental, and private monitoring systems coexist. Overall, systems focus far more on monitoring established resistances than on the detection of emerging resistances. Governmental and private resistance monitoring systems generally have considerable capacities to generate data, whereas academic resistance monitoring systems are more specialized. Governmental actors federate and enrol a wider variety of stakeholders. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the efficacy of PPP resistance monitoring could be enhanced if the different actors involved in resistance monitoring could pool resources and increase collaborative efforts.

Prevalence, spatial structure and evolution of resistance to acetolactate‐synthase (ALS) inhibitors and 2,4‐D in the major weed Papaver rhoeas (L.) assessed using a massive, country‐wide sampling

“…Monitoring the prevalence and geographical extent of pesticide resistance in crop bio-aggressors (weeds, pests and pathogens) is essential to predict the efficacy of pesticide applications in the field and therefore to design and implement effective resistance management strategies. 1,2 In addition, when specific resistance mechanisms are identified, large-scale surveys are of great value in understanding their evolution and spread within and between bio-aggressor populations under the selective pressure of pesticide applications, which in turn aids resistance management. The value of such surveys has long been recognised in weed science, and largescale surveys with massive sampling have been carried out in America and especially in Australia (e.g., [3][4][5][6][7][8][9] ).…”