Pest and disease management is critical to agricultural production, protecting crops from harmful pests and diseases. Threshold-based control programs, in which pesticides are applied only when pest and disease densities exceed a predetermined threshold, can reduce pesticide use. However, the impact of these programs is unclear and varies across settings. To assess the broader impact of threshold-based pesticide control programs on agricultural arthropod pests, we conducted a meta-analysis of 126 studies reporting 466 trials across 34 crops, comparing threshold-based programs with calendar-based pesticide control programs (i.e., weekly or non-species-specific) and/or untreated control plots. Compared to calendar-based programs, threshold-based programs reduced pesticide use by 44% and associated costs by 40% without affecting pest and disease control effectiveness or overall yield. Threshold-based programs also increased beneficial insect populations and achieved similar control of arthropod-borne diseases as calendar-based programs. Given the scale and sustainability of these benefits, increased political and financial support is needed to encourage the adoption of this control method in agriculture.
To evaluate the widespread adoption of threshold-based pesticide application protocols in agriculture, we systematically searched for relevant studies evaluating threshold application in cropping systems. Using multiple search engines, we ultimately analyzed 126 studies to determine the impact of threshold-based pesticide application protocols on arthropod pest control, agricultural productivity, and beneficial arthropod density. We hypothesize that threshold-based pesticide application protocols can reduce pesticide use without affecting crop yields. Furthermore, compared with calendar-based pesticide application protocols, threshold-based protocols are more effective in controlling arthropod-borne diseases while simultaneously supporting the survival of beneficial insects.
We conducted a literature review to determine the impact of threshold-based pesticide management programs in agriculture. Published literature was retrieved from Web of Science and Google Scholar (Figure 1). We also used a hybrid approach, employing complementary strategies to improve the representativeness and comprehensiveness of the database. We also included studies based on the researchers’ personal knowledge of previous research, relevant data repositories, and a snowball sampling strategy (i.e., selecting articles from relevant references). We reviewed the initial dataset in May 2023 to ensure its completeness for key agricultural factors, including crop type, arthropod species, and study country. Gaps in the database were addressed through subsequent keyword searches. The entire search for studies meeting the inclusion criteria lasted from February 2021 to June 2023.
Records were identified through database and other source searches, screened for relevance, assessed for eligibility, and ultimately narrowed to 126 studies that were included in the final quantitative meta-analysis.
For studies with known standard deviations, the following formulas 1 and 25 are used to estimate the log ratio and the corresponding standard deviation.
For studies with unknown standard deviations, the following formulas 3 and 4 are used to estimate the log ratio and the corresponding standard deviation 25.
Based on Geary’s (1930) normality test26, studies with values below 3 were excluded (according to formula 5 of Nakagawa et al. 2023).
For more details on the study methodology, please see the Nature Portfolio Report Summary linked in this article.
Pests pose a significant threat to many crops, accounting for more than 20 % of global yield losses. 28 Although threshold-based pest management programs are the cornerstone of integrated pest management (IPM), their overall impact on agriculture remains unclear. However, several independent studies have identified positive effects of these programs, including effective pest control, high yields, and beneficial indirect effects in some cases (e.g., increased pollination or biological control). We hypothesize that these positive effects are widespread across agriculture. The results of a meta-analysis largely support this hypothesis. Although pest densities were significantly higher in threshold-based programs than in calendar-based programs, pest damage indices showed similar control effectiveness for both pesticide application programs. Threshold-based and calendar-based pesticide application programs also showed similar suppression of arthropod-borne plant diseases. Threshold-based programs demonstrated higher numbers of beneficial arthropods compared to standard pesticide application programs. These results can be partially explained by the overall 44% reduction in pesticide use in threshold-based programs compared to calendar-based programs. However, although threshold and calendar-based control methods did not show significant differences in yield, we found that the threshold method slightly reduced yield quality. Furthermore, crop type (specialty crops versus conventional crops) can significantly influence the effectiveness of the threshold control method. Overall, our results support the long-held view that threshold-based pest management programs can provide significant benefits in managing pests and diseases in agricultural systems.
Economic thresholds are a central element of the integrated pest management (IPM) concept, and researchers have long reported the positive benefits of threshold-based pesticide application programs. Our study showed that arthropod pest control is essential in most systems, as 94% of studies indicate a reduction in crop yields without pesticide application. However, prudent pesticide use is critical to ensuring long-term sustainable agricultural development. We found that threshold use effectively controls arthropod damage without reducing yields compared to calendar-based pesticide application programs. Furthermore, threshold use can reduce pesticide application by more than 40%. Other large-scale assessments of pesticide use patterns in French farmland and plant disease control trials have also shown that pesticide application can be reduced by 40-50 % without affecting yields. These results highlight the need to continue developing new thresholds for pest management and providing resources to encourage their widespread use. As agricultural land use increases, pesticide use will continue to threaten natural systems, including particularly sensitive and valuable habitats . However, wider adoption and implementation of programs based on pesticide thresholds can mitigate these impacts, thereby improving the sustainability and environmental friendliness of agriculture.
The data are presented in the manuscript or a supplementary information file, and are also publicly available on the author’s GitHub account at https://github.com/aleach379/Thresholdsreduce.
Post time: Jan-12-2026