RESPONSES
Respond to this 3 documents. They are 3 different document so 3 different responses. A paragraph each, max a paragraph and a half.
This paper from the Journal of Environmental Management titled Biological control of pests and a social model of animal welfare dives deep into the sociocultural implications of using biological pest control. The intersection of animal welfare and pest management is analyzed. The emphasis on managing species in this paper is for invasive species and their effects as they relate to climate change. In the context of our class however, we can look at these practices through the lens of conservation and as they relate to crop yield. Alongside the introduction of animal species to non-native locations whether on purpose or as a result of anthropocentric activities, humans are also responsible for non-native species damage on ecosystems through agriculture.
Through looking at what we determine to be the welfare of these animals, the paper addresses the path environmentalism has taken in the animal realm. The definition of the welfare of an animal has changed drastically since the 1980s, where now many consider that there should be “[….] equal consideration to ‘the basic health and functioning of animals, their affective state (pain, distress) and the ability of animals to lead reasonably natural lives'”. How do we define the animals that we are attempting to biologically control? What about those species that we are using to do the said biological control? It may not be brought up frequently, but ethical conversations are important to have in agriculture. There is so much manipulation and control of what is still considered an ecosystem, therefore I believe that these are important questions to at the very least ask and consider.
In agricultural practices, the use of biological control is often regarded positively, in that it reduces the use of chemical alternatives to pest management. By introducing parasites, pathogens, or predators this encourages the system to function to reduce identified pests with some level of control. This is no easy feat, however, as multiple pests can thrive or survive in a multitude of environmental conditions and the web of interactions is fairly complex. The paper questions whether physical observations of success of the biological control alternative to pest management is enough. Should the use of biological controls take priority over chemical methods? Do we know enough about the intersectional complexities that these organisms will have with each other to prevent further catastrophe or damage? It brings up questions about our role in these ecosystems, such as, should we hold this power and use it to benefit our agricultural efforts? And is this ethical to be using these animals for biological control?
There is an increasing concern over the use of pesticides in agriculture. These chemicals have the capability to create pollution and harm to the environment by runoff and non-point source pollution. Thus, people are looking to organic approaches to disease control, including the use of biological control agents (BCAs). These are naturally occurring, have a low environmental impact, less prone to resistance, cost-effective, and chemical-free.
On the other hand, BCAs may not be the best option for disease control in agriculture. The patterns may be inconsistent and easily swayed by environmental factors, they may be too specific or slow-acting, and have chances of mutation and a lack of long-term control. Also, depending on the needs, practicality, and compatibility with niche ecosystems and markets, this way of disease control may not be able to keep up to speed and the amount of expected harvest, and may even be more expensive.
There are a range of BCAs available for usage in agro-ecosystems. Fungal products and fungicides are on the increase, however many farmers may register them as a stimulant or soil conditioner rather than claiming fungicidal activity, which presents health and safety code concerns. There are also many soil and root microbiomes used, such as the mycoparasite Coniothyrium minitans and trichoderma harzianum. There are aerial microbimones such as ampelomyces quisqualis and phlebiopsis gigantea.
Opportunities for future development of these kinds of BCAs depend on market needs and legislatures. The acceptance and demand for sustainable agricultural systems have the potential to greatly increase the use of these alternatives to pesticides. One of the main limitations and concerns is the inconsistency that is possible with these biocontrol agents. They may be unpredictable, and thus farmers are being encouraged to practice screening and development projects to test out the best way to conduct these practices. Articles and sources such as these are very important in these developments, and it is crucial that we keep researching.
In the research article entitled
“Biological Pest Control of a Biscuit Beetle (Stegobium paniceum) Infestation in an Old Masters Paintings Storage Area”, a group of officials met to make a decision about the infestation of the Museum of Fine Arts in Vienna by Biscuit beetles (Querner et. al, 2019). Several paintings in the collection were infested with the Beetle bugs and elimination options were discussed by museum officials. Since chemical insecticides and other traditional insecticide methods would have severely damaged the precious paintings, the museum decided to use classical biological control by releasing the natural predator of the biscuit beetles. The museum released 3000 parasitic wasps into the contained infested area every month for almost 12 months until every biscuit beetle was eradicated (Querner et. al, 2019) . The museum’s use of biological pest control was a creative solution to a modern issue. The efficiency was 100% in terms of biscuit beetle mortality, and the museum was able to preserve the paintings and save money by not engaging in more expensive non-chemical alternatives. My question for this module is: what are the drawbacks to using biological pest control over classic insecticide treatments?