Bioscience Methods 2024, Vol.15, No.4, 196-206 http://bioscipublisher.com/index.php/bm 2 02 control decisions, with insecticides used only as a last resort. The introduction of Bt cotton, selective insecticides, and an industry-wide extension campaign facilitated the adoption of IPM. Surveys indicate that IPM is now embedded within the industry, leading to a significant reduction in the amount of insecticide active ingredient applied per hectare. This transition from reactive to proactive pest management has been instrumental in embedding IPM within the farming system, confirming the effectiveness of an industry-led, science-backed approach (Wilson et al., 2018). 6.2 Impact of biotechnological advances on pest management Biotechnological advances have significantly impacted pest management in cotton crops. The introduction of genetically modified Bt cotton has been a game-changer, providing inherent resistance to key pests and reducing the reliance on chemical insecticides. This has not only lowered the environmental impact but also helped in managing insecticide resistance. Additionally, the development of selective insecticides that target specific pests while sparing beneficial organisms has further enhanced the effectiveness of IPM strategies. These biotechnological innovations have been crucial in advancing sustainable pest management practices, as they allow for more precise and environmentally friendly control measures (Wilson et al., 2018; Veres et al., 2020). 6.3 Lessons learned and recommendations The successful implementation of IPM in the Australian cotton industry offers several valuable lessons. First, the importance of industry involvement and a science-backed approach cannot be overstated. Engaging stakeholders at all levels ensures that IPM strategies are practical and widely adopted. Second, flexibility in pest management approaches allows for the incorporation of new scientific findings and technologies, making the system more resilient and adaptive. Third, continuous education and training for farmers and advisers are essential for the successful adoption of IPM practices. Finally, the integration of biotechnological advances, such as Bt cotton and selective insecticides, has proven to be highly effective in reducing pest populations and minimizing environmental impact. Future recommendations include further research into biotechnological innovations, enhanced farmer education programs, and the development of more precise and targeted pest management tools to continue improving the sustainability and effectiveness of IPM strategies (Figure 3) (Horrocks et al., 2018; Wilson et al., 2018; Deguine et al., 2021). 7 Challenges and Future Directions 7.1 Environmental and ecological considerations The environmental and ecological impacts of pest management techniques in cotton crops are multifaceted. The introduction of genetically modified (GM) cotton, such as Bt cotton, has significantly reduced the need for chemical insecticides, thereby decreasing the environmental footprint of cotton farming (Rocha-Munive et al., 2018; Wilson et al., 2018). However, the long-term ecological effects, including potential gene flow to wild relatives and the impact on non-target organisms, remain areas of concern (Rocha-Munive et al., 2018). Additionally, the evolution of herbicide-resistant weeds poses a significant challenge, necessitating the rotation of different herbicides and the adoption of integrated pest management (IPM) strategies to mitigate resistance (Rocha-Munive et al., 2018). The use of cover crops has shown promise in enhancing natural enemy recruitment and reducing pest populations, thereby contributing to more sustainable pest management practices (Bowers et al., 2020). 7.2 Economic and social impacts The economic benefits of advanced pest management techniques, such as Bt cotton, are evident in the increased profitability for farmers due to reduced pest damage and lower insecticide costs (Rocha-Munive et al., 2018; Wilson et al., 2018; Li et al., 2020). However, these benefits are variable and depend on factors such as international cotton prices and the costs associated with GM crop inputs (Rocha-Munive et al., 2018). Socially, the adoption of these technologies has been met with mixed reactions. In some regions, there is public misperception and regulatory inaction that hinder wider adoption (Li et al., 2020). Moreover, the economic validation of IPM approaches has been crucial in embedding these practices within farming systems, as seen in the Australian cotton industry (Wilson et al., 2018). The economic analysis of cover crop utilization also suggests that it can be
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjQ4ODY0NQ==