4.7 Article

Evaluation of a matrix to calculate fungicide resistance risk

Journal

PEST MANAGEMENT SCIENCE
Volume 70, Issue 6, Pages 1008-1016

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ps.3646

Keywords

fungicide resistance; insensitivity; risk assessment; pathogen evolution

Funding

  1. UK's Chemicals Regulation Directorate of the Health and Safety Executive
  2. Department for Food and Rural Affairs
  3. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council of the United Kingdom
  4. BBSRC [BBS/E/C/00005198] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUNDIn the European Union, assessments of resistance risk are required by the regulatory authorities for each fungicide product and are used to guide the extent of anti-resistance strategies. This paper reports an evaluation of a widely used risk matrix', to determine its predictive value. Sixty-seven unique cases of fungicide resistance in Europe were identified for testing the risk assessment scheme, where each case was the first occurrence of resistance in a pathogen species against a fungicide group. RESULTSIn most cases, high-, moderate- and low-risk categories for fungicide, pathogen and agronomic systems were each associated with significant differences in the number of years from fungicide introduction to the first detection of resistance (FDR time). The combined risk, calculated by multiplying the individual risk factors using the risk matrix, had useful predictive power (72.8% of FDR time variance accounted for; VAF) for all fungicides, but only limited predictive power (25.8% VAF) for single-site acting fungicides (the predominant type). CONCLUSIONThe resistance risk matrix has significant, but limited, predictive value. New fungicide modes of action, or pathogens that have become newly prevalent, cannot be assigned to risk categories until new methods of resistance risk assessment are developed. (c) 2013 Society of Chemical Industry

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available