Pest and disease management is critical to agricultural production, protecting crops from harmful pests and diseases. Threshold-based control programs, which apply pesticides only when pest and disease population densities exceed a predetermined threshold, can reduce pesticide use. However, the effectiveness of these programs is unclear and varies widely. To assess the broader impact of threshold-based control programs on agricultural arthropod pests, we conducted a meta-analysis of 126 studies, including 466 trials on 34 crops, comparing threshold-based programs with calendar-based (i.e., weekly or non-species-specific) pesticide control programs and/or untreated controls. Compared with calendar-based programs, threshold-based programs reduced pesticide application by 44% and associated costs by 40%, without affecting pest and disease control efficacy or overall crop yield. Threshold-based programs also increased beneficial insect populations and achieved similar levels of control of arthropod-borne diseases as calendar-based programs. Given the breadth and consistency of these benefits, increased political and financial support is needed to encourage the adoption of this control approach in agriculture.
Agricultural chemicals dominate modern pest and disease management. Insecticides, in particular, are among the most commonly used pesticides in agriculture, accounting for nearly a quarter of global pesticide sales. 1 Due to their ease of use and significant effects, insecticides are often favored by farm managers. However, since the 1960s, the use of insecticides has come under heavy criticism (refs. 2, 3). Current estimates indicate that 65% of cropland worldwide is at risk of pesticide contamination. 4 Insecticide use is associated with numerous negative impacts, many of which extend beyond the site of application; for example, increased insecticide use has been associated with population declines in many animal species. 5, 6, 7 In particular, pollinating insects have experienced relatively large declines with increased pesticide use. 8,9 Other species, including insectivorous birds, have shown similar trends, with numbers declining by 3–4% annually with increasing use of neonicotinoid insecticides. 10 Continued intensive use of insecticides, particularly neonicotinoids, is predicted to lead to the extinction of over 200 threatened species. 11 Unsurprisingly, these impacts have resulted in a loss of functions in agroecosystems. The most documented negative impacts include reduced biological control12,13 and pollination14,15,16 . These impacts have prompted governments and retailers to implement measures to reduce overall pesticide use (e.g., the EU Sustainable Use of Crop Protection Products Regulation).
The negative impacts of pesticides can be mitigated by setting thresholds for pest population densities. Threshold-based pesticide application programs are crucial for integrated pest management (IPM). The IPM concept was first proposed by Stern et al. in 195917 and is known as the “integrated concept.” IPM assumes that pest management is based on economic efficiency: the costs of pest control should offset the losses caused by pests. Pesticide use should be balanced with the yield obtained by controlling pest populations.18 Therefore, if commercial yields are not affected, yield losses due to pests are acceptable. These economic concepts were supported by mathematical models in the 1980s.19,20 In practice, this concept is applied in the form of economic thresholds, i.e., Pesticide application is necessary only when a certain insect population density or damage level is reached.21 Researchers and pest management professionals consistently consider economic thresholds as a basis for IPM implementation. Threshold-based pesticide application programs offer numerous benefits: increased yields, reduced production costs, and reduced off-target impacts.22,23 However, the extent of these reductions varies depending on variables such as pest type, cropping system, and production area.24 Although threshold-based pesticide application forms the foundation of integrated pest management (IPM), its ability to sustainably improve the resilience of agroecosystems worldwide remains poorly understood. While previous studies have generally confirmed that threshold-based programs reduce pesticide use compared to calendar-based programs, this alone is insufficient to deeply understand their broader impact on resilience. In this study, we evaluated threshold-based pesticide application programs using a comprehensive analysis, systematically quantifying the reduction in pesticide use and, more importantly, its sustainability in maintaining crop yields and promoting the health of beneficial arthropods and agroecosystems across different farming systems. By directly linking thresholds to several sustainability indicators, our results advance the theory and practice of IPM beyond traditional understandings, presenting it as a robust strategy for achieving a balance between agricultural productivity and environmental management.
Records were identified through database and other source searches, screened for relevance, assessed for eligibility, and ultimately narrowed to 126 studies, which were included in the final quantitative meta-analysis.
For studies with known standard deviations, the following formulas 1 and 2 are used to estimate the log ratio and the corresponding standard deviation 25.
Economic thresholds play a central role in the concept of integrated pest management (IPM), and researchers have long reported the positive benefits of threshold-based pesticide application programs. Our research 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 promoting long-term sustainable agricultural development. We found that threshold-based application effectively controls arthropod damage without sacrificing crop yields compared to calendar-based pesticide application programs. Moreover, threshold-based application can reduce pesticide use by more than 40%. Other large-scale assessments of pesticide application patterns in French farmland and plant disease control trials have also shown that pesticide application can be reduced by 40-50 % without affecting yield. These results highlight the need for further development of new thresholds for pest management and the provision of resources to encourage their widespread use. As agricultural land use intensity increases, pesticide use will continue to threaten natural systems, including highly sensitive and valuable habitats . However, wider adoption and implementation of pesticide threshold programs can mitigate these impacts, thereby increasing the sustainability and environmental friendliness of agriculture.
Post time: Nov-25-2025