105,000 individuals have been produced mainly against South American tomato
leafminer and whiteflies at the same time. This predatory species proved to be
effective to suppress Tuta absoluta population within the greenhouse solitary or in
combination with Trichogramma wasps and needs to be considered more.
Predatory mites have been considered as one of the most prominent predatory
groups which have high potential to reduce the pest population in the greenhouse
mainly. The most important families used practically are Phytoseiidae and
Laelapidae. Different phytoseiids used as BCAs worldwide but in Iran, only three
species, Amblyseius swirskii, Neoseiulus californicus and Phytoseiulus persimilis
produced commercially which among those species, the A. swirskii has the highest
production (ca. 21 million individuals) and two others produced as 100,000 and
200,000 individuals per year, respectively. These species largely used in augmentative release within greenhouses and against greenhouse whiteflies and two-spotted
spider mite. Regarding their simple mass rearing procedure and high rate of producing cost to benefit makes this group of the predator as ideal candidates for rearing and
releasing at least in greenhouses.
The result of the above discussion about commercial production of predator clear
that the suppressive potential of this group has been ignored largely by many
growers and farmers who at least in some cases aware of parasitoids and MCA
potential. Compare to parasitoids, few insectaries produced predators and their
production rate is not comparable at all. This problem somewhat arouses from
polyphagous habits of most predators. Thereupon, they do not respond to pest
population outbreaks quickly and in some cases, they seem inefficient. Moreover,
the mass rearing of many predator species needs sophisticated methods and requirements which could not affordable by private insectaries and the end product would
be expensive. In addition to the above deficiencies, in recent years, the governmental
subsidies contribution decreased from 100% to 55% which has not paid timely (The
third Author, Personal communications with private producers). This, in turn, might
be causing that some minor private producers discarded their predator production.
Fortunately, direct contract between predators producer and farmers have recorded
recently which promise the BC plan using these agents in the future.
Besides the above species, it sounds that green lacewings have a high potential to
be produced commercially. Still, research on optimization of predator mass rearing,
cold storage, packaging and releasing should be a high priority of research institutes
and Universities especially regarding effective native predators which are acclimatized with the weather of Iran. Defective knowledge in each of these steps prevents
the widespread use of predators as BCAs.
17.2.3 Microbial Control Agents (MCA)
Currently, the diversity of available MCA in the country is restricted and hence has
reduced the range of farmers’ choice. The reasons for this should be sought in the
processes and rules for the registration and regulation of MCAs. There may be a
612
J. Karimi et al.
leafminer and whiteflies at the same time. This predatory species proved to be
effective to suppress Tuta absoluta population within the greenhouse solitary or in
combination with Trichogramma wasps and needs to be considered more.
Predatory mites have been considered as one of the most prominent predatory
groups which have high potential to reduce the pest population in the greenhouse
mainly. The most important families used practically are Phytoseiidae and
Laelapidae. Different phytoseiids used as BCAs worldwide but in Iran, only three
species, Amblyseius swirskii, Neoseiulus californicus and Phytoseiulus persimilis
produced commercially which among those species, the A. swirskii has the highest
production (ca. 21 million individuals) and two others produced as 100,000 and
200,000 individuals per year, respectively. These species largely used in augmentative release within greenhouses and against greenhouse whiteflies and two-spotted
spider mite. Regarding their simple mass rearing procedure and high rate of producing cost to benefit makes this group of the predator as ideal candidates for rearing and
releasing at least in greenhouses.
The result of the above discussion about commercial production of predator clear
that the suppressive potential of this group has been ignored largely by many
growers and farmers who at least in some cases aware of parasitoids and MCA
potential. Compare to parasitoids, few insectaries produced predators and their
production rate is not comparable at all. This problem somewhat arouses from
polyphagous habits of most predators. Thereupon, they do not respond to pest
population outbreaks quickly and in some cases, they seem inefficient. Moreover,
the mass rearing of many predator species needs sophisticated methods and requirements which could not affordable by private insectaries and the end product would
be expensive. In addition to the above deficiencies, in recent years, the governmental
subsidies contribution decreased from 100% to 55% which has not paid timely (The
third Author, Personal communications with private producers). This, in turn, might
be causing that some minor private producers discarded their predator production.
Fortunately, direct contract between predators producer and farmers have recorded
recently which promise the BC plan using these agents in the future.
Besides the above species, it sounds that green lacewings have a high potential to
be produced commercially. Still, research on optimization of predator mass rearing,
cold storage, packaging and releasing should be a high priority of research institutes
and Universities especially regarding effective native predators which are acclimatized with the weather of Iran. Defective knowledge in each of these steps prevents
the widespread use of predators as BCAs.
17.2.3 Microbial Control Agents (MCA)
Currently, the diversity of available MCA in the country is restricted and hence has
reduced the range of farmers’ choice. The reasons for this should be sought in the
processes and rules for the registration and regulation of MCAs. There may be a
612
J. Karimi et al.