IPM: Integrated Management of Insects, Diseases and Weeds in Wheat

Balanced Protection for Sustainable Harvests

IPM in wheat uses biological and cultural methods, including the release of beneficial organisms to control pests either gradually (inoculative) or immediately (inundative) during outbreaks. Techniques like altering planting times, rotating crops with rice and legumes, increasing crop density, and mass trapping with pheromones effectively manage aphids, whiteflies, thrips, and weeds while minimizing chemical inputs.

This technology is TAAT1 validated.

8•9

Scaling readiness: idea maturity 8/9; level of use 9/9

Project adoption2

Technology integrated in the CREW, and ENSURE projects.

See project details ›

17—33 %

Reduction in beetle damage

<10 %

Rust infestation reduction

35 USD per hectare

Profit generated by IPM

IP

Open source / open access

Problem

Reduced profitability: Crop damage and ineffective pest control can reduce marketable wheat output and revenue.
Rising input expenditure: Frequent pesticide applications increase spending on crop protection products, equipment, and labour.
Resistance-related costs: The declining effectiveness of pesticides can force farmers to seek alternative products or apply additional treatments.
Uncertain production outcomes: Poorly controlled pests, diseases, and weeds can create unpredictable yields and complicate farm business planning.
Limited efficiency of routine spraying: Applying pesticides without adequate monitoring can waste products and labour when pest populations do not justify treatment.
Market and compliance concerns: Excessive or poorly timed pesticide use can increase residue risks and create challenges in meeting buyer requirements.

Solution

Lower avoidable input costs: Pest monitoring and threshold-based decisions can help farmers avoid unnecessary pesticide applications and related expenses.
Protection of crop output: Integrated management practices help reduce losses caused by pests, diseases, and weeds, supporting more reliable wheat production.
Resistance management: Diversifying control methods reduces dependence on repeated chemical applications and supports more sustainable pest management.
Efficient field operations: Crop rotation, strategic planting, and appropriate crop density can help manage weeds and selected pests through planned agronomic practices.
More informed decisions: Field inspections and pest monitoring help farmers identify problems earlier and select appropriate control measures.
Potential profitability gains: The e-catalog reports a profit generated by IPM of USD 35 per hectare. Actual returns will depend on local conditions, implementation costs, and management practices.

Key points to design your business plan

Implementing Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in wheat production significantly contributes to sustainability by minimizing chemical pesticide usage and promoting biodiversity conservation, thereby enhancing ecosystem health and resilience. This approach not only boosts crop productivity and ensures food security but also mitigates health risks associated with pesticide exposure.

For the cost structure, consider the following:

Rearing colonies of parasitoid wasps requires an initial investment of approximately USD 5,000, with ongoing operational costs of about USD 6,000 per year, excluding working space, electricity, and water supply.
Coating planter seed with insecticides or fungicides costs between USD 0.50 and USD 1 per kilogram.
The use of pre-emergence herbicides for weed control requires an investment of approximately USD 25 to USD 35 per hectare, which also includes costs for hiring sprayers and labor to treat the crops.
A comprehensive IPM package that includes raised fertilizer rates, precision herbicide application, and seed treatment has an estimated cost of USD 515 per hectare.

Training is crucial for proper implementation, as it ensures effective use of strategies. Collaboration with local agricultural extension services, development institutions, and agro-input suppliers is essential for providing necessary support and resources.

Lastly, estimating the economic benefits of IPM adoption is vital for assessing its profitability and encouraging widespread implementation among wheat producers.

Adults 18 and over: Positive high

This technology can lead to higher income and food security, fostering economic stability.

Others: Positive medium

Stakeholders such as consumers and environmentalists benefit from IPM through increased food safety and environmental protection, leading to a healthier ecosystem.

The poor: Positive high

By increasing crop yields sustainably, it enhances their economic situation.

Under 18: Positive high

It reduces pesticide exposure, leading to better health outcomes for children who may be more vulnerable to chemical exposures.

Women: Positive high

This empowerment leads to improved economic opportunities and health for themselves and their families.

Climate adaptability: Highly adaptable

IPM practices are versatile and can be tailored to various climatic conditions, making them suitable for diverse agricultural settings.

Farmer climate change readiness: Significant improvement

IPM promotes resilience by using ecological principles that enhance farmers' ability to cope with climate variability and extreme weather events.

Biodiversity: Positive impact on biodiversity

IPM practices enhance biodiversity by promoting beneficial organisms and natural pest predators, leading to healthier ecosystems.

Carbon footprint: Much less carbon released

By reducing the reliance on chemical pesticides and promoting organic practices, IPM contributes to lower carbon emissions in agricultural production.

Environmental health: Greatly improves environmental health

IPM reduces chemical runoff and pesticide residues in ecosystems, leading to improved health for flora, fauna, and humans.

Soil quality: Does not affect soil health and fertility

IPM practices, which focus on biological and cultural methods, help maintain or improve soil health without depleting its nutrients.

Scaling Readiness describes how complete a technology's development is and its ability to be scaled. It produces a score that measures a technology's readiness along two axes: the level of maturity of the idea itself, and the level to which the technology has been used so far.

Each axis goes from 0 to 9 where 9 is the “ready-to-scale” status. For each technology profile in the e-catalogs we have documented the scaling readiness status from evidence given by the technology providers. The e-catalogs only showcase technologies for which the scaling readiness score is at least 8 for maturity of the idea and 7 for the level of use.

The graph below represents visually the scaling readiness status for this technology, you can see the label of each level by hovering your mouse cursor on the number.

Scaling readiness score of this technology

Maturity of the idea 8 out of 9

Uncontrolled environment: tested

Level of use 9 out of 9

Common use by intended users, in the real world

Maturity of the idea										Level of use
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9

Project	Countries	Beneficiaries	Budget (USD) & duration	Key figures
CREW Climate Resilient Wheat Value Chain Development Project	Ethiopia	Direct: 2,300,000	94.30 million African Development Bank (AfDB) 2023–2028	4 t/ha increase in wheat production 528 water pumps installed 50,000 farmer hubs equipped with laboratories 23,092 ha irrigation systems rehabilitated
ENSURE Enabling Environments for Sustainable Regional Agriculture Extension	Kenya Rwanda Burundi The Democratic Republic of the Congo South Sudan Uganda Tanzania, United Republic	Direct: 3,000,000	13.14 million African Development Bank (AfDB) 2024–2027	149,940 farmers trained 9,996 Training 2→3.5 tons/ha cereals production expected 350 agent trained

Project

Countries

Beneficiaries

Budget (USD) & duration

Key figures

CREW
Climate Resilient Wheat Value Chain Development Project

Ethiopia

Direct: 2,300,000

94.30 million

African Development Bank (AfDB)

2023–2028

4 t/ha increase in wheat production
528 water pumps installed
50,000 farmer hubs equipped with laboratories
23,092 ha irrigation systems rehabilitated

ENSURE
Enabling Environments for Sustainable Regional Agriculture Extension

Kenya
Rwanda
Burundi
The Democratic Republic of the Congo
South Sudan
Uganda
Tanzania, United Republic

Direct: 3,000,000

13.14 million

African Development Bank (AfDB)

2024–2027

149,940 farmers trained
9,996 Training
2→3.5 tons/ha cereals production expected
350 agent trained

Figures in italic are from project plans and may change during implementation.

Countries with a green colour: Tested & adopted
Countries with a bright green colour: Adopted
Countries with a yellow colour: Tested
Countries with a blue colour: Testing ongoing

Countries where the technology is being tested or has been tested and adopted
Country	Testing ongoing	Tested	Adopted
Benin	–No ongoing testing	–Not tested	Adopted
Burkina Faso	–No ongoing testing	–Not tested	Adopted
Ethiopia	–No ongoing testing	–Not tested	Adopted
Kenya	–No ongoing testing	–Not tested	Adopted
Niger	–No ongoing testing	–Not tested	Adopted
Nigeria	–No ongoing testing	–Not tested	Adopted
The Republic of the Sudan	–No ongoing testing	–Not tested	Adopted
Zimbabwe	–No ongoing testing	–Not tested	Adopted

This technology can be used in the colored agro-ecological zones. Any zones shown in white are not suitable for this technology.

Agro-ecological zones where this technology can be used
AEZ	Subtropic - warm	Subtropic - cool	Tropic - warm	Tropic - cool
Arid	–	–	–	–
Semiarid	–		–
Subhumid
Humid

Source: HarvestChoice/IFPRI 2009

The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals that are applicable to this technology.

Goal 2: zero hunger

Its ensures a more stable food supply and protects crops from pests, ultimately contributing to the goal of eradicating hunger.

Goal 15: life on land

IPM supports biodiversity conservation by enhancing the presence of beneficial organisms and promoting healthier ecosystems.

Goal 3: good health and well-being

By minimizing the use of harmful pesticides, IPM reduces health risks for farmers, consumers, and surrounding communities

Goal 12: responsible production and consumption

By integrating biological and cultural pest management techniques, IPM supports waste reduction and resource efficiency.

Initial Assessment:
- Identify harmful and beneficial organisms on the farm.
- Determine critical thresholds for economic injury based on community structure and growth stage.
Monitoring Pests:
- Use simple tools like traps, handheld magnifying glasses, or binocular microscopes for regular inspections.
- Employ advanced high-resolution cameras on drones for efficient surveillance of large areas.
Weed Inspection:
- Inspect weeds during emergence and tillering stages when annual broadleaf weeds are less than 1.5 inches (early season).
- Perform additional inspections during or after the harvest (post-season).
Insect and Disease Surveys:
- Conduct surveys at different growth stages, from tillering over stem extension up to flowering.
Data Analysis:
- Utilize software tools for data gathering and analysis to track pest and natural enemy development.
Threshold Evaluation:
- Once critical thresholds for harmful and beneficial organisms are reached, it's time to take action.
Selecting IPM Measures:
- Based on the assessment and monitoring, choose from a combination of biological, mechanical/physical, and cultural techniques.
Implementing Measures:
- Release natural predators and enemies to establish a balanced population.
- Utilize mechanical/physical interventions, such as equipment to deter birds or rodents, or manual pest removal.
- Employ cultural practices like precision sowing, shifting planting dates, waste removal, wildflower strips, and using pest-resistant varieties.
Special Considerations:
- Handle the introduction of new species or increasing beneficial communities with caution, as it can impact non-targeted organisms and ecosystems.
Additional Techniques:

- Employ the inoculative approach for long-term interventions, or the inundative approach for immediate pest suppression in severe outbreaks.
- Provide alternative hosts/prey or suitable nesting and feeding sites to support the reproduction and survival of natural predators and enemies.
- Reduce pest reproduction rates by releasing infecund males, disrupting breeding attempts by fertile males and females.
- Shift planting times to periods less favorable for rapid aphid multiplication.
- Rotate wheat with crops like rice, chickpea, pea, cotton, and others to suppress weed growth.
- Increase crop density and decrease row spacing to reduce weed seed output.
- Use pheromones for mass trapping, suitable for controlling pests like whiteflies and thrips.