Quality Control Methods for the Production of Natural Enemies

Concepts and Methods of Quality Assurance for Mass-Reared Parasitoids and Predators

“…At least minimal product quality control guidelines have been developed for many commercially produced natural enemies (Bigler, 1992; van Lenteren et al, 1993a,b;Leppla and Larson, 2004) (Table 9.2); however, they must be …”

Survey of Phytoseiids (Acari: Phytoseiidae) on the Central Coast of California

“…Regulatory agencies sought to require proof of identity, purity and efficacy of each reared species. The Association of Natural Bio-Control Producers Working Group (AMRQC) to develop quality control guidelines for more than 40 natural enemies (Leppla, et al, 2004).…”

“…The quality of these arthropods affects their ability to exhibit the preferred behaviors upon release in the field after exposure to a laboratory environment. Discussions spurred the development of standards by which to evaluate each species on their rate of development and survival, identity, size and overall behavior (Leppla et al, 2004). Regulatory agencies sought to require proof of identity, purity and efficacy of each reared species.…”

“…Quality control guidelines allow users to predict the predator's behavior and efficacy in the field (Leppla et al, 2004). However, not all predator release programs have been scientifically evaluated.…”

“…Rather, it's the released individuals that provide the needed control (van Lenteren, 2003;Van Driesche et al, 2008). Factors that determine usefulness of augmentation programs include availability, quality, and effectiveness of mass-produced natural enemies (Daane et al, 1998;Leppla et al, 2004;Obrycki et al, 1997;Van Driesche et al, 2008;Grenier & De Clercq, 2003).…”