Giorgio Sperandio

Bio: Giorgio Sperandio is an academic researcher from University of Brescia. The author has contributed to research in topics: Honey bee & Popillia. The author has an hindex of 5, co-authored 12 publications receiving 126 citations. Previous affiliations of Giorgio Sperandio include University of Modena and Reggio Emilia.

Critical Success Factors for the Adoption of Decision Tools in IPM

Abstract: The rational control of harmful organisms for plants (pests) forms the basis of the integrated pest management (IPM), and is fundamental for ensuring agricultural productivity while maintaining economic and environmental sustainability. The high level of complexity of the decision processes linked to IPM requires careful evaluations, both economic and environmental, considering benefits and costs associated with a management action. Plant protection models and other decision tools (DTs) have assumed a key role in supporting decision-making process in pest management. The advantages of using DTs in IPM are linked to their capacity to process and analyze complex information and to provide outputs supporting the decision-making process. Nowadays, several DTs have been developed, tackling different issues, and have been applied in different climatic conditions and agricultural contexts. However, their use in crop management is restricted to only certain areas and/or to a limited group of users. In this paper, we review the current state-of-the-art related to DTs for IPM, investigate the main modelling approaches used, and the different fields of application. We also identify key drivers influencing their adoption and provide a set of critical success factors to guide the development and facilitate the adoption of DTs in crop protection.

Eight principles of Integrated Pest Management.

Abstract: The use of pesticides made it possible to increase yields, simplify cropping systems, and forego more complicated crop protection strategies. Over-reliance on chemical control, however, is associated with contamination of ecosystems and undesirable health effects. The future of crop production is now also threatened by emergence of pest resistance and declining availability of active substances. There is therefore a need to design cropping systems less dependent on synthetic pesticides. Consequently, the European Union requires the application of eight principles (P) of Integrated Pest Management that fit within sustainable farm management. Here, we propose to farmers, advisors, and researchers a dynamic and flexible approach that accounts for the diversity of farming situations and the complexities of agroecosystems and that can improve the resilience of cropping systems and our capacity to adapt crop protection to local realities. For each principle (P), we suggest that (P1) the design of inherently robust cropping systems using a combination of agronomic levers is key to prevention. (P2) Local availability of monitoring, warning, and forecasting systems is a reality to contend with. (P3) The decision-making process can integrate cropping system factors to develop longer-term strategies. (P4) The combination of non-chemical methods that may be individually less efficient than pesticides can generate valuable synergies. (P5) Development of new biological agents and products and the use of existing databases offer options for the selection of products minimizing impact on health, the environment, and biological regulation of pests. (P6) Reduced pesticide use can be effectively combined with other tactics. (P7) Addressing the root causes of pesticide resistance is the best way to find sustainable crop protection solutions. And (P8) integration of multi-season effects and trade-offs in evaluation criteria will help develop sustainable solutions.

Drivers of colony losses.

Abstract: Over the past decade, in some regions of the world, honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies have experienced rates of colony loss that are difficult for beekeepers to sustain. The reasons for losses are complex and interacting, with major drivers including Varroaand related viruses, pesticides, nutrition and beekeeper practices. In these endeavors it has also become apparent that defining a dead colony, and singling out the effects of specific drivers of loss, is not so straightforward. Using the class of neonicotinoid pesticides as an example we explain why quantifying risk factor impact at the colony level is at times elusive and in some cases unpractical. In this review, we discuss the caveats of defining and quantifying dead colonies. We also summarize the current leading drivers of colony losses, their interactions and the most recent research on their effects on colony mortality.

Cannibalism and early capping: strategy of honeybee colonies in times of experimental pollen shortages A Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology

Abstract: We observed the impact of bad pollen supply (non-foraging due to artificial rain and pollen removal under poor-foraging conditions) on the survival of honey bee larvae, and on the total development time from egg-laying to the capping of a larval cell. Five days of non-foraging led to cannibalism of larvae younger than 3 days old and to a shortening of the time until larvae were sealed, but 4- and 5-day-old larvae survived even worse pollen supply situations. Manual pollen removal and reduction of income (pollen trap) induced cannibalism of younger larvae. The larvae's mean capping age significantly correlated with the mean pollen income: the less pollen was stored by the hive during the larvae's development, the earlier the larvae were capped. Both behavioral patterns lead to a quick reduction in the amount of unsealed older brood in response to a shortage of available protein. Older larvae have the highest pollen demand, so this strategy compensates for a shortage of supply by reducing demand. Additionally worker jelly gets enriched by protein gained from cannibalism, and the early capping of older larvae saves the oldest part of the brood, which represents the highest broodcare investment.

Lethal and sublethal synergistic effects of a new systemic pesticide, flupyradifurone (Sivanto®), on honeybees.

Abstract: The honeybee ( Apis mellifera L.) is an important pollinator and a model for pesticide effects on insect pollinators. The effects of agricultural pesticides on honeybee health have therefore raised concern. Bees can be exposed to multiple pesticides that may interact synergistically, amplifying their side effects. Attention has focused on neonicotinoid pesticides, but flupyradifurone (FPF) is a novel butenolide insecticide that is also systemic and a nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) agonist. We therefore tested the lethal and sublethal toxic effects of FPF over different seasons and worker types, and the interaction of FPF with a common SBI fungicide, propiconazole. We provide the first demonstration of adverse synergistic effects on bee survival and behaviour (poor coordination, hyperactivity, apathy) even at FPF field-realistic doses (worst-case scenarios). Pesticide effects were significantly influenced by worker type and season. Foragers were consistently more susceptible to the pesticides (4-fold greater effect) than in-hive bees, and both worker types were more strongly affected by FPF in summer as compared with spring. Because risk assessment (RA) requires relatively limited tests that only marginally address bee behaviour and do not consider the influence of bee age and season, our results raise concerns about the safety of approved pesticides, including FPF. We suggest that pesticide RA also test for common chemical mixture synergies on behaviour and survival.