Integrated Pest Management (IPM) offers a suite of ways by which to reduce the need for pesticide use, thus minimising environmental damage and pathogen resistance build-up in crop production. Farmers and agronomists active in the Scottish spring barley sector were surveyed to determine the extent to which they currently use or are open to implementing three IPM measures-varietal disease resistance, crop rotation, and forecasting disease pressure-in order to control three important fungal diseases. Overall, the survey results demonstrate that farmers and agronomists are open to using the three IPM techniques. However, gaps between actual and perceived recent practice were large: despite over 60% of farmers stating that they sowed varieties highly resistant to Rhynchosporium or Ramularia, less than one third of reportedly sown varieties were highly resistant to these diseases. Similarly, over 80% of farmers indicated that they used crop rotations, yet 66% of farmers also reported sowing consecutive barley often/always. Further research is needed in order to understand why these gaps exist, and how they can be reduced in future in order to increase IPM uptake and optimise pesticide use.
Restrictions on social interaction and travel due to the COVID-19 pandemic have affected how researchers approach fieldwork and data collection. Whilst online focus groups have received attention since the 2000s as a method for qualitative data collection, relatively little of the relevant literature appears to have made use of now ubiquitous video calling software and synchronous, interactive discussion tools. Our own experiences in organising fieldwork aimed at understanding the impact of different ‘future-proofing’ strategies for the European agri-food system during this period resulted in several methodological changes being made at short notice. We present an approach to converting in-person focus group to a virtual methodology and provide a checklist for researchers planning their own online focus groups. Our findings suggest data are comparable to in-person focus groups and factors influencing data quality during online focus groups can be safeguarded. There are several key steps, both before and during the focus groups, which can be taken to ensure the smooth running of such events. We share our reflections on this approach and provide a resource for other researchers moving to online-only data collection.
The contribution of seafood to global food security is being increasingly highlighted in policy. However, the extent to which such claims are supported in the current food security literature is unclear. This review assesses the extent to which seafood is represented in the recent food security literature, both individually and from a food systems perspective, in combination with terrestrially-based production systems. The results demonstrate that seafood remains under-researched compared to the role of terrestrial animal and plant production in food security. Furthermore, seafood and terrestrial production remain siloed, with very few papers addressing the combined contribution or relations between terrestrial and aquatic systems. We conclude that far more attention is needed to the specific and relative role of seafood in global food security and call for the integration of seafood in a wider interdisciplinary approach to global food system research.
This paper assesses potential for Integrated Pest Management (IPM) techniques to reduce the need for fungicide use without negatively impacting yields. The impacts of three disease management practices of relevance to broad acre crops-disease resistance, forecasting disease pressure, and fungicide use-were analysed to determine impact on yield using a long-term field trials database of Scottish spring barley, with information from experiments across the country regarding yield, disease levels, and fungicide treatment. Due to changes in data collection practices, data from 1996-2010 were only available at trial level, while data from 2011-2014 were available at plot level. For this reason, data from 1996-2014 were analysed using regression models, while a subset of farmer relevant varieties was taken from the 2011-2014 data, and analysed using ANOVA, to provide additional information of particular relevance to current farm practice. While fungicide use reduced disease severity in 51.4%of a farmer-relevant subset of trials run 2011-2014, and yields were decreased by 0.62t/ha on average, this was not statistically significant in 65% of trials. Fungicide use had only a minor impact on profit in these trials, with an average increase of 4.4% for malting and 4.7% for feed varieties, based on fungicide cost and yield difference; potential savings such as reduced machinery costs were not considered, as these may vary widely. Likewise, the1996-2014 database showed an average yield increase of 0.74t/ha due to fungicide use, across a wide range of years, sites, varieties, and climatic conditions. A regression model was developed to assess key IPM and site factors which influenced the difference between treated and untreated yields across this 18-year period. Disease resistance, season rainfall, and combined disease severity of the three fungal diseases were found to be significant factors in the model. Sowing only highly resistant varieties and, as technology improves, forecasting disease pressure based on anticipated weather would help to reduce and optimise fungicide use. I.
Restrictions on social interaction and travel due to the COVID-19 pandemic have affected how researchers approach fieldwork and data collection. Whilst online focus groups have received attention since the 2000s as a method for qualitative data collection, relatively little of the relevant literature appears to have made use of now ubiquitous video calling software and synchronous, interactive discussion tools. Our own experiences in organising fieldwork aimed at understanding the impact of different ‘future-proofing’ strategies for the European agri-food system during this period resulted in several methodological changes being made at short notice. We present an approach to converting in-person focus group to a virtual methodology and provide a checklist for researchers planning their own online focus groups. Our findings suggest data are comparable to in-person focus groups and factors influencing data quality during online focus groups can be safeguarded. There are several key steps, both before and during the focus groups, which can be taken to ensure the smooth running of such events. We share our reflections on this approach and provide a resource for other researchers moving to online-only data collection.
Crop breeding is one of the main tools which can assist in future‐proofing food systems for more sustainable outcomes. In order to ensure priorities are aligned with the needs and wants of food system actors, it is essential to engage with key stakeholders to understand preferences on plant breeding solutions. This study presents results from a series of online focus groups conducted with agricultural production related stakeholders (i.e. farmers and farmer representatives, policymakers and NGOs) regarding the potential for crop improvement to future‐proof European food systems. Stakeholders shared concern around climate change and environmental impacts (particularly drought and heat stress), and general agreement about the need to develop resilient crops which combine multiple positive attributes, while reducing trade‐offs and negative externalities. Stakeholders also prioritized plant breeding solutions for areas where they felt they had little agency, and existing alternative solutions, such as improving input use efficiency, or altering diets to be considered where these are available. This highlights the need for the crop breeding community to focus its attentions on the ‘most hard to fix’ issues, where in‐field measures are currently not offering viable solutions, to maximize acceptance and adoption by agricultural production stakeholders. It also highlights that consideration of trade‐offs, within plant and within a broader agri‐food context, must be integrated into crop breeding research and development, with trade‐off analysis an explicit component of breeding research. Understanding broader agri‐food system knock‐on effects of plant innovation is a non‐trivial challenge requiring interdisciplinary research and close partnerships with food system stakeholders.
The global demand for providing nutritious, sustainable, and safe diets for a 10 billion population by 2050 while preserving affordability, reducing environmental impacts, and adapting to climate change will require accelerating the transition to sustainable agri‐food systems. A plausible way to help tackle these challenges is by developing new plant varieties that have improved crop yield, plant nutritional quality, and sustainability (or resilience) traits. However, stakeholders, consumers, and citizens' concerns and appreciation of future‐proofing crops and the acceptability of new plant breeding strategies are not well‐established. These groups are actors in the agri‐food systems, and their views, values, needs, and expectations are crucial in helping to co‐design fair, ethical, acceptable, sustainable, and socially desirable policies on new plant breeding techniques (NPBTs) and the transition to sustainable agri‐food systems. In this study, we engaged with consumer experts and societal stakeholders to consider their perceptions, expectations, and acceptability of improving crops and NPBTs for future‐proofing the agri‐food systems. Our analysis points to a need for governments to take a proactive role in regulating NPBTs, ensure openness and transparency in breeding new crop varieties, and inform consumers about the effects of these breeding programmes and the risks and benefits of the new crop varieties developed. Consumer experts and societal stakeholders considered these strategies necessary to instil confidence in society about NPBTs and accelerate the transition to sustainable agri‐food systems.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.