Technology to improve crop production: What is inhibiting biocontrols?

As researchers around the world continue to discover biocontrol technologies to improve sustainable food, feed, fiber and fuel production, more emphasis on their development within R&D is required for novel biologicals to become commercially viable products. ​

Products in the biocontrol landscape have the potential to be environmentally prudent, practical, productive and profitable for growers – thus generating more sustainable agriculture production and greater food security. Given the perceived win-win, what is inhibiting the wide adoption of biocontrols?

Discovery is the first step to transforming knowledge. The tenacity and passion of innovative scientists is often a preamble to venture capital funding for start-ups, but it is a well-established stage-gate development process that turns out successful products. The complexities of agricultural production systems are ever evolving, but certain aspects remain constant.

First, independent assessments of existing or pending biocontrol technology, products or companies, and the influencing factors for registration and adoption are vital. This technical due diligence for investors and researching companies validates assumptions about risks and opportunities, as well as adoption potential for biocontrols in targeted markets.

From the beginning, planning to answer the right questions in the right order generates a strategic approach to map pathways toward successful commercialization and adoption by growers in markets around the world.

Sounds simple, but it is not.

Biocontrol evolution​

The biocontrol evolution underway today is continuing the discovery and development of the almost endless list of microbes showing pesticidal potential. Experiments with some species of microbes showing pesticidal activity began 50 or more years ago. A pivotal decision for biocontrols is to focus on narrow spectrum advantages instead of the disadvantages.

For example, the early users of Bacillus thuringiensis​ (BT) on cotton accepted its selective control of a few species of lepidoptera. In that era, this was different from the organophosphates controlling the tobacco budworm with incidental control or partial suppression of plant bugs, thrips, boll weevil and other minor or secondary pests.

The early correct use of BT allowed the cotton consultant to practice integrated pest management (IPM). The further exploration and evolution of BT incorporated into the plant allowed insect population management in lieu of insecticide sprays every three days for pests like bollworm.

Factors inhibiting the development of biocontrols​

There are several factors that inhibit the development of biocontrols. For one, force-fitting a new technology into standard procedures and existing development templates. The nuances of how to use a new technology to get the best performance often differ from standard practices. Clearly defining best use practices and performance expectations are critical steps, especially when different from existing standard pest control products.

Another inhibitor is focus. One season of initial screening trials will reveal so many possibilities that the tendency of passionate researchers is to consider every option. Modifying or expanding the research trial protocol with every test delivers a little information about many opportunities, but not enough to prioritize any of them.

It is essential that new ideas be recorded and revisited when the resources are available, but focus and repetition is necessary to complete development of a concept into a commercially viable product. The first of many questions to answer is about performance: where and how does it work best?

Return on investment timeline​

Another obstacle to realizing the potential of biocontrols is the timeline for return-on-investment (ROI). The start-up or small research company trying to enter this market often operates on venture funding instead of an existing revenue stream. This funding may include expecting a three-to-five-year payback.

This contrasts with major multinationals that look at a new product based on a 10- to 20-year payback. Compression of the development cycle often motivates ill-advised risk-taking by skipping steps in the process that are essential to reach a high probability of success.

Time to generate performance data is often underestimated. Data requirements are not met quickly with the seasonality of crop production. Three years of data should be the minimum before moving to commercialization, even if the results are promising. Three years of continued development with a negative revenue stream is a realistic expectation.

Three trials per year for two years on a crop pest combination is a pretty good screen, but this does not generate a database competitive with the customary 20 or 30 trials, or more, per year for two or three years for each crop pest combination.

The importance of field trials ​

Continued testing is also a time barrier. How many biologicals have been registered and pushed to the market prematurely, with no post registration continuation of efficacy trials to provide continuous improvement of the performance supporting database?

Biocontrols have a failure rate that is heavily impacted by not adequately testing to determine the environmental, agronomic and many other factors that determine performance levels. This is not a market that is kind to those who skip steps. The failure rate of good, or even excellent, products is high if testing across environments cannot predict when they will work and in what conditions they will not work.

Overcoming field experiment challenges to improve biocontrol development​

The importance of well-executed field experiments is not limited to biocontrols. Critical differences from traditional crop inputs require careful planning from the earliest development stages. With the inherent variability of biocontrol performance, the development process must incorporate additional factors to help ensure successful product launch and high customer confidence.

From the earliest stages of development, building broad knowledge of how the biocontrol functions is critical to selecting the registration pathway, the initial crop(s) and market opportunity.

Careful design and investment in early-stage tests include targeting specific environments for further definition of formulation, application rates, timing, compatibility and impact on target pest. Maximizing data and information collection from the relatively low number of early trials helps to optimize resources. The goal is to minimize experimental error without restricting environmental range.

During all stages of development, consistent, accurate and objective quantification of pest control, crop response and product performance is essential. Comprehensive understanding of product placement in the commercial market increases odds of adoption by farmers worldwide. They require efficacy and safety along with practical use and profitability in a crop production system.

Technology transfer to farmers​

The final, most difficult step is technology transfer to farmers. The adoption process is complex, considering all the influences and variables in crop production. Firmly establishing Best Management Practices and realistic expectations requires disciplined development prior to ‘trialing’ on the farm. First-use failure on the farm can kill a new technology before it is truly launched. Bad news spreads quickly as farmers listen to other farmers.

A positive example of biocontrol use is in Brazil. In 2013, sightings of the cotton bollworm (Helicoverpa armigera​) were recorded in central Brazil, a pest with over 250 hosts.¹ ​At that time, no chemical product was registered to control it. Farmers then successfully applied biological control methods using a virus specific to the cotton bollworm larva and the parasitic wasp Trichogramma pretiosum​.

This was a transformative moment for biocontrol and agriculture in Brazil. Farmers saw it worked and spread the word. Since then, demand has increased and in 2014 key changes were made to the authorization process in Brazil to allow biocontrol and in particular microbials to be registered quickly for control of a given pest across any crop.

According to the International Biocontrol Manufacturers Association (IBMA), Brazil is a biocontrol powerhouse.²​ In the last two years, an estimated 100 biological products have been registered for use. Biocontrol is reportedly used on 46 million acres, about 60% of agricultural land in Brazil.² ​

Brazilian authorities responded to farmer demand for biocontrol by prioritizing it in the authorization process. Now, when a biocontrol product is registered for authorization, it is fast-tracked to the front of the queue, assessed, and approved (where appropriate) in two years.

Overcoming barriers​

Despite this prioritization in Brazil, regulatory barriers are still slowing progressing, especially in the European Union where farmers wait for nearly a decade for alternative biocontrol products. Overcoming the barriers inhibiting biocontrol development can lead to more alternative pest control methods.

A recent survey of 26 company members of the International Biocontrol Manufacturers' Association (IBMA) reported alternatives ready in the pipeline which included 79 new biocontrol active substances and 54 extensions of uses of existing substances expected before 2028.³​

This move from pesticide reduction to development of alternatives is the basis for the predicted growth in biocontrol industry. Some reports estimate the global biocontrol market value at US $6.6 billion, with expected growth to double by 2027.⁴​

For the growth expectation to become a reality requires more than just exploration and discovery. Moving novel products to producers and driving adoption requires rigorous product development – and that is as much about process as it is about science.

Very early in that process, the business plan must include a regulatory marketing strategy in parallel with field development that, in the end, should translate into a robust technology transfer and educational platform. The absence of these components wastes resources, adds financial risks, greatly slows commercial adoption and lowers potential rewards for the innovative companies and their investors.

Get in touch​ to find out more about biocontrol technologies.

References ​

1. ​SciELO. Biological Control in Brazil: state of art and perspectives.​
2.​ IBMA. What Europe can learn from Brazil, a biocontrol powerhouse.​
3.​ IBMA. Biological control in the pipelines.​
4. ​Markets and Markets. Biocontrols market.​