Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
PESTICIDE USAGE SURVEY REPORT 187
ARABLE CROPS
IN GREAT BRITAIN
2002
D. G. Garthwaite, M. R. Thomas, A. Dawson & H. Stoddart
Pesticide Usage Survey Team
Central Science Laboratory
Sand Hutton
York UK
YO41 1LZ
Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs
& Scottish Executive Environment & Rural Affairs Department
ii
iii
CONTENTS Page Definitions iii
Quality control of data iii
Summary 1
Introduction 2
Methods 3
Results and discussion 5
Crops 5
Overall usage of pesticides 6
Extent and quantities of pesticide formulations used 11
Extent and quantities of active substances used 24
Pesticide usage on cereals
Wheat 27
Winter barley 36
Spring barley 44
Oats 49
Rye 55
Triticale 59
Pesticide usage on oilseeds
Oilseed rape 63
Linseed & flax 69
Pesticide usage on potatoes
Ware potatoes 73
Seed potatoes 79
Pesticide usage on pulses
Dry harvest peas 84
Field beans 89
Pesticide usage on sugar beet 94
Pesticide usage on set-aside 99
Comparison with previous surveys 105
Acknowledgements 107
References 107
Appendix 108
iv
DEFINITIONS a) 'Pesticide' is used throughout this report to include commercial formulations containing active substances used as acaricides, biological control agents, defoliants, desiccants, fungicides, growth regulators, herbicides, insecticides, molluscicides or nematicides. b) Other than for potatoes, where the desiccant sulphuric acid is a commodity chemical and therefore reported separately, all other desiccants such as diquat are included in the category herbicides. c) 'Treated area' is the gross area treated with a pesticide, including all repeat applications, some of which may have been applied to the land in preparation for drilling, or applied to a crop which since failed and was re-drilled with the current crop, and thus may appear as an inappropriate use on that crop. d) Where quoted in the text, reasons for application are the farmer's stated reasons for use of that particular pesticide on that crop and may not always seem entirely appropriate. e) Where individual active substances are mentioned in the text, they are listed in descending order of use by hectares treated. f) Throughout all tables, “Other” refers to chemicals grouped together because they were applied to less than 0.1% of the total area treated with pesticides.
g) The term “formulation(s)” used within the text is used here to describe either single active substances or mixtures of active substances contained within an individual product. It does not refer to any of the solvents, pH modifiers or adjuvants also contained within a product that contribute to its efficacy. h) For the purposes of this survey arable crops include the following: wheat; winter barley; spring barley; oats; rye; triticale; oilseed rape; linseed; flax; ware potatoes; seed potatoes; peas for harvesting dry; field beans, sugar beet and other combinable crops including borage, crambe, hemp, lupins, soya and sunflowers. Areas of set-aside land, which range from those sown or planted with industrial crops to those with natural regeneration, are included in this survey.
ROUNDING Due to rounding of figures, the sum of constituent items in the tables may not agree exactly with the totals shown. QUALITY CONTROL OF DATA All data are collected by personal interview using fully qualified staff working to standard operating procedures. Paper records are held at the Central Science Laboratory, York (or Scottish Agricultural Science Agency, Edinburgh for Scottish holdings) but individual holdings cannot be identified. Data are entered onto a computer database which has extensive error checking routines associated with the input program. Each item of data is then checked after entry and subsequently, all forms are re-checked by someone other than the original operator. Prior to compilation of the tables, the data are further subjected to a range of computer checks to detect, amongst other things, any values which, on agronomic grounds, appear suspect. Any thus revealed are further scrutinised, and, if necessary, referred back to the original source. All the tables are prepared by computer once the data set is considered correct, thus eliminating transcription and typographical errors.
1
SUMMARY
Data are presented on all aspects of pesticide usage on arable farm crops in Great Britain for the growing season from autumn 2001 through to harvest in 2002, including cereals, oilseeds, potatoes, peas, beans, sugar beet and set-aside. Experienced pesticide usage surveyors collected data during visits to 1,123 holdings throughout Great Britain, representing 5% of the total area of arable crops grown. The area of crops surveyed in each region was proportional to the area of arable crops grown in that region and the data on the area of pesticide treatments and the amount of active substances applied have been raised to give estimates of national usage. Comparisons are made with pesticide usage on individual arable crops since 1992.
Wheat comprised 48% of the area of all arable crops, excluding set-aside, grown in 2002, winter barley 13%, spring barley 13%, winter oilseed rape 9%, sugar beet 4%, field beans 4% and ware potatoes 3%. In terms of area treated, wheat accounted for 56% of the total, winter barley 12%, spring barley 8%, oilseed rape 7%, ware potatoes 6% and field beans 2%. When the desiccant sulphuric acid is excluded, applications to wheat constituted 53% of the total weight of active substances applied, winter barley 13%, ware potatoes 13%, oilseed rape 5%, spring barley 5%, sugar beet 4% and field beans 3%.
Herbicides and desiccants accounted for 34% of the total pesticide-treated area of arable farm crops grown in Great Britain in 2002, fungicides 34%, seed treatments 10%, insecticides & nematicides 10%, growth regulators 10%, molluscicides 3% and sulphur for less than one percent. In contrast, herbicides and desiccants (including sulphuric acid) accounted for 71% by weight of the pesticide active substances applied, fungicides 12%, growth regulators 11%, insecticides & nematicides 2%, molluscicides 1%, seed treatments 1% and sulphur less than one percent. Sulphuric acid alone accounted for 39% of the total weight of active substances used but only 0.2% of the pesticide-treated area, having been used entirely for desiccation on approximately 73,000 ha of potatoes.
The most extensively-used fungicide formulations applied as sprays were epoxiconazole (used primarily on wheat, winter and spring barley), azoxystrobin (used mainly on wheat, winter barley, spring barley and peas), tebuconazole (used mainly on cereals, particularly wheat but also on oilseed rape and beans), epoxiconazole/fenpropimorph/kresoxim-methyl (used almost exclusively on cereals) and trifloxystrobin (used exclusively on wheat, winter and spring barley).
The most extensively-used herbicide formulations, all used principally on cereals, were glyphosate (used widely pre- or post sowing of most crops, pre-harvest in cereals and for control of weeds on naturally regenerating set-aside), isoproturon (for grass/broad-leaved weed control on cereals), fluroxypyr (for control of cleavers in cereals), mecoprop-P (for broad-leaved weed control in cereals) and diflufenican/isoproturon (for grass/broad-leaved weed control in cereals).
The pyrethroids were the most extensively-used insecticides, accounting for 87% of the insecticide-treated area, followed by the carbamates 7% and the organophosphates 4%. Four insecticides accounted for 78% of the total insecticide-treated area of all arable farm crops: cypermethrin 49%, lambda-cyhalothrin 16%, esfenvalerate 7% and pirimicarb 6%. Other extensively-used insecticides included the pyrethroids alpha-cypermethrin and zeta-cypermethrin.
The area of all arable crops, excluding set-aside, grown in 2002 had decreased by 9% compared with 1992. Despite this, there was an increase of 25% in the pesticide-treated area but a decrease in the weight of pesticides applied of 2%. The discrepancy between the decrease in the area grown and the increase in the area treated reflects the increase in the average number of sprays applied to each crop, from four in 1992 to over five in 2002. In addition, the number of products used has also increased from and average of seven products per crop in 1992 to ten products in 2002.
Despite the increase in the number of sprays and products used, the weight of active substances applied has fallen over the last ten years reflecting both the move to products containing active substances active at lower concentrations and the use of reduced rates by farmers and growers.
2
INTRODUCTION
The independent Advisory Committee on Pesticides advises government on all aspects of pesticide use. In order to discharge this function the Committee must regularly monitor the usage of all pesticides. It needs accurate data on the usage of individual pesticides.
As part of the ongoing process for obtaining data, the Pesticide Usage Survey Teams of the Central Science Laboratory, an executive agency of the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs, and the Scottish Agricultural Science Agency, an agency of the Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department conducted a survey of pesticide usage on arable farm crops in the growing season from autumn 2001 through to harvest in 2002, by visiting holdings throughout Great Britain during the winter of 2002/2003.
This was the sixth fully co-ordinated survey of pesticide usage on arable farm crops throughout Great Britain, the first being in 1992 (Davis, Thomas, Garthwaite & Bowen, 1993), followed by 1994 (Garthwaite, Thomas & Hart, 1995), 1996 (Thomas, Garthwaite & Banham, 1997), 1998 (Garthwaite & Thomas 1999) and 2000 (Garthwaite & Thomas 2003). There have previously been five surveys of pesticide usage on arable farm crops conducted in England & Wales in 1974 (Chapman, Sly & Cutler, 1977), 1977 (Steed, Sly, Tucker & Cutler, 1979), 1982 (Sly, 1986), 1988 (Davis, Garthwaite & Thomas, 1990) and 1990 (Davis, Garthwaite & Thomas, 1991). The first two surveys also included information on pesticide usage in Scotland. Three further surveys of this topic in Scotland have been reported for 1982 (Bowen & Wood, 1989), 1988 (Snowden, Bowen & Dickson, 1991) and 1990 (Snowden & Bowen, 1991).
All surveys of pesticide usage in agriculture and horticulture are now fully co-ordinated by the two survey teams and present reports of pesticide usage throughout Great Britain. Information on all aspects of pesticide usage in Great Britain plus the regions of England & Wales can be obtained from the Pesticide Usage Survey Team at the Central Science Laboratory, Sand Hutton. Further data related specifically to Scotland can be obtained from the Pesticide Usage Survey Team at the Scottish Agricultural Science Agency, Edinburgh.
A list of the most recently published reports is included in the Appendix.
REPORT FORMAT
In order to improve the presentation of data within this report summary charts and tables for each crop have been incorporated. These take three forms:
1. A summary of the number of all pesticide spray applications, products and active substances currently used and how these have changed over the last 10 years.
2. Data are presented which outline the percentage of monthly applications made for each of the main pesticide groups, in particular insecticides, fungicides, herbicides and growth regulators. Within a pesticide group each individual monthly figure is expressed as a proportion of the total annual application of that pesticide group. Figures are expressed proportionately in order to remove any bias caused by one pesticide group dominating all usage on an individual crop.
3. For each major pesticide group, detailed data are presented on the five principal active substances used on an individual crop. These data include the area treated with each formulation in 2002, the weight applied in 2002, the proportion of the total area treated within each pesticide group, the proportion of the census area grown treated with each formulation, the number of applications of each formulation made to an individual crop where treated with that formulation and the proportion of its full label rate used on that crop.
3
METHODS The samples of holdings to be surveyed were selected using data from the Agricultural Census Returns, June 2001 for England & Wales (Anon., 2002a) and for Scotland (Anon., 2002b). The samples were drawn from the census returns so as to represent the area of all arable crops grown throughout England, Scotland and Wales. For England & Wales the sample was selected within each of the six former MAFF regions (Fig. 1) and for Scotland the country was divided into 11 land-use regions (Wood, 1931). The samples were stratified according to the total area of all arable crops grown in each region and by farm size group based on the total area of arable crops on each farm. The area of arable crops sampled in each size group and each region was proportional to the total area of arable crops grown on holdings of each size group in each region. For the purposes of this survey the total area of arable farm crops was taken as the sum of the areas of the following crops: wheat; winter barley; spring barley; oats; rye; triticale; oilseed rape; linseed; flax; ware potatoes; seed potatoes; peas for harvesting dry; field beans and sugar beet. A number of minor crops were encountered in the survey, including borage, crambe, hemp, lupins, soya and sunflowers. These minor crops accounted for 0.5% of the total arable area grown in Great Britain. An introductory letter was sent to the occupiers of the selected holdings explaining the purpose of the survey. A total of 1,123 holdings were visited during the winter of 2002/2003 and data collected during a personal interview with the farmer. Where a holding listed in the original sample was not able to provide data, it was replaced with another from the same size group and region, held on a reserve list. Raising factors The pesticide usage data collected from each holding were raised by two factors to give an estimate of regional usage; the first factor being dependent on farm size group and region and the second dependent on crop area and region. The data were further adjusted by a third factor to give estimates of total pesticide usage related to the national cropping areas in Great Britain (Thomas, 2001). The raising factors were based on the areas of arable crops grown and harvested in 2002 as recorded in the June Agricultural Census Returns both for England & Wales (Anon., 2003a) and Scotland (Anon., 2003b). The Questionnaire The questionnaire for the main part of the survey consisted of two forms, which were completed by an experienced pesticide usage surveyor during an interview with the farmer. Form 1 summarised the areas of arable crops grown on the designated holding during the growing season from autumn 2001 through to harvest in 2002. Form 2 dealt with all aspects of pesticide usage on the individual crops grown on the holding and harvested in 2002, a separate form being used for each field. This included pesticides applied prior to drilling and those used to maintain barren strips around field boundaries. As these are subsequently associated with the land on which that crop was grown they may appear as inappropriate uses. Certain agronomic details that may have influenced pesticide usage (including the source of seed and type of treatment, method of drilling, use of adjuvants and the volume of spray applied) were also recorded on form 2. A further form was completed where potatoes were stored on the holding, detailing information on storage methods and pesticide treatments made during storage. The results of this survey are reported separately. Similarly data were collected from each holding concerning the usage of rodenticides, which are also published elsewhere.
4
Fig. 1 Counties in Defra regions of England & Wales and regions covered by SEERAD Scotland
ScotlandBordersCentral
Dumfries & GallowayFife
GrampianHighlands & Islands
LothianStrathclyde
Tayside
Durham
Tyne & Wear
NorthumberlandNorth Yorkshire
Cleveland
NorthernCumbria
Humberside
South Yorkshire
West Yorkshire
EasternBedfordshire
CambridgeshireEssex
HertfordshireGreater London (E)
LincolnshireNorfolk
NorthamptonshireSuffolk
South EasternBerkshire
BuckinghamshireEast Sussex
Greater London (SE)Hampshire
KentOxfordshire
SurreyWest Sussex
South WesternAvon
CornwallDevonDorset
GloucestershireSomersetWiltshire
Gwent
WalesClwydDyfed
GwyneddMid Glamorgan
PowysSouth GlamorganWest Glamorgan
Nottinghamshire
Midlands & WesternCheshire
DerbyshireGreater Manchester
Hereford & WorcesterLancashire
LeicestershireMerseyside
ShropshireStaffordshireWarwickshire
West Midlands
5
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
CROPS
Information and data on pesticide usage concerning thirteen types of arable crops and set-aside were collected from 16,337 examples grown on 1,123 holdings throughout Great Britain. The sample accounted for 5% of the total area of arable farm crops in Great Britain drilled in autumn 2001 or spring 2002 through to harvest in 2002.
The areas of each of the arable farm crops grown in the six regions of England & Wales plus Scotland are shown in Table 1. Four combinable crops accounted for almost three-quarters of the total area of arable farm crops grown: wheat (42%), winter barley (11%), spring barley (11%) and oilseed rape (8%). Set-aside, both permanent and rotational, as an "arable crop" accounted for 13% of the arable area and included grassland, woodland, cropped and regenerated fields. Approximately 35% of the total area of arable crops in Great Britain was grown in Eastern Region, 15% in Northern Region, 15% in Midlands and Western Region, 13% in Scotland, 12% in South Eastern Region, 10% in South Western Region and one percent in Wales.
The distribution of most of the crops was similar with a few notable exceptions. Almost three quarters of the sugar beet was grown in Eastern Region (72%), whilst none was grown in Scotland, and less than a thousand hectares was grown in each of South Western Region, South Eastern Region and Wales. Approximately 50% of the spring barley was grown in Scotland, accounting for 44% of the total area of all arable farm crops grown in this region. Fifty-five percent of the total area of rye was grown in Eastern Region, with a further 17% being grown in South Eastern Region. Almost a third, 32%, of all triticale was grown in South Western Region with almost all, 85%, of seed potatoes being grown in Scotland.
Table 1 Area of arable crops grown in Great Britain 2002 (hectares)
Northern Midlands Eastern South South Wales Scotland Great & Western Eastern Western Britain
Wheat1 321,284 302,411 800,998 257,597 193,927 15,288 97,912 1,989,417
Winter barley 120,771 90,437 150,638 44,964 63,205 10,520 61,234 541,769Spring barley 59,010 38,465 67,251 36,995 50,258 14,884 263,914 530,777Oats1
11,644 27,008 13,116 23,973 21,945 3,612 21,907 123,205Rye
228 580 2,752 863 409 134 0 4,966Triticale 1,447 1,869 2,855 1,610 4,448 356 1,265 13,850Oilseed rape1
59,392 53,323 128,694 55,709 27,394 1,367 30,901 356,780Linseed1
1,205 1,551 3,449 3,221 4,232 307 861 14,826Potatoes ware 21,704 30,958 53,687 4,974 7,970 2,295 16,416 138,004Potatoes seed 1,304 286 474 20 247 172 13,787 16,290Peas
9,463 11,478 33,807 18,186 9,882 498 1,451 84,765Beans1
17,199 31,415 70,233 24,193 17,630 1,398 2,116 164,184Sugar beet 22,682 23,560 121,987 124 690 105 0 169,148Set-aside2
88,580 85,300 190,026 87,402 66,953 4,259 85,580 608,100
All arable crops 735,913 698,641 1,639,967 559,831 469,190 55,195 597,344 4,756,081
1 includes winter and spring sown crops
2 areas of the different types of cropping on set-aside land are given in Table 35 on page 100
6
OVERALL USAGE OF PESTICIDES
Pesticide usage on crops
The extent of pesticide usage, in terms of area treated, varied with each crop group (Table 2). For example, wheat accounted for 42% of the total area of arable farm crops grown in Great Britain, but for 55% of the total pesticide-treated area. However, this varied between chemical groups. Wheat accounted for approximately 77% of the total area treated with growth regulators, 56% of the total fungicide-treated area, 55% of the insecticide & nematicide-treated area but for only 26% of the total sulphur treated area.
Similarly, whilst ware potatoes occupied 3% of the total area of arable crops grown, they comprised 5% of the total pesticide-treated area. They accounted for 63% of all sulphuric acid usage (the remainder being used on seed potatoes), 10% of the total fungicide-treated area, 14% of the total molluscicide-treated area, 4% of the total insecticide & nematicide-treated area, but for 0.7% of the total growth regulator treated area.
There was no usage of growth regulators recorded on linseed, peas, beans, seed potatoes or sugar beet. Usage of the desiccant sulphuric acid was confined to potatoes. Three crops accounted for approximately 89% of the total molluscicide-treated area: wheat (57%), oilseed rape (18%) and ware potatoes (14%).
Proportion of crops treated
The percentage areas of each crop treated with the different pesticide groups are shown in Table 3, whilst the mean number of spray rounds, mean number of products and mean number of active substances applied are shown in Tables 4a-c.
Fungicides and herbicides were often applied with pesticides of complementary activity, either as formulated products containing more than one active substance or as mixtures of products in the spray tank. In contrast, it was unusual to apply a mixture of insecticides, though one may have been applied concurrently with a fungicide or herbicide.
Herbicides were applied to at least 72% of the area of all arable crops, with the exception of set-aside, with a mean of three applications using four products and five active substances. Almost all of the sugar beet area was treated with, on average, five herbicide applications, using a total of nine (not necessarily different) products and eleven active substances, illustrating the use of repeat low dose applications for weed control in this crop. Similarly, peas were treated with an average of three herbicide applications comprising four products and six active substances. In contrast, most triticale crops received on average a single herbicide application of two products and two active substances. Almost a third, 63%, of the set-aside land, both cropped and regenerated, received two herbicide applications, comprising two products and two active substances.
Fungicides, including sulphur, were applied to 82% of the total area of arable crops, with an average of two applications using four products and five active substances. However, as with herbicides, there was considerable variation between crops. All seed potatoes and rye were treated with fungicides as were almost all ware potatoes, wheat and winter barley. On average, seed potatoes throughout Great Britain were treated six times with a total of seven products and twelve active substances. Ware potatoes were treated on average nine times, with a total of ten products and sixteen active substances. Wheat received three fungicide applications, comprising a total of four products and six active substances. In contrast, less than 20% of the linseed and set-aside areas were treated with fungicides.
7
Insecticide & nematicide usage was most intensive on peas, with approximately 85% of the area treated on average twice. Approximately 73% of the seed potato area was treated on average three times illustrating the practice used by growers to minimise infection with aphid-borne viruses. In addition 80% of oilseed rape was treated with an average of two sprays, while 84% of rye crops, 81% of wheat and 78% of winter barley were treated with at least one insecticide. Usage of insecticides on set-aside, linseed and spring barley was least extensive, with between 14% and 15% of the area of each being treated.
Usage of growth regulators was mostly restricted to cereals, with 22% of the area of ware potatoes treated with maleic hydrazide prior to harvest for sprout suppression. Sulphuric acid was used solely on potatoes for desiccation. A number of herbicides were used to desiccate oilseed crops and peas.
Molluscicides were applied to 17% of the area of all crops and were proportionately most extensively used on oilseed rape, ware potatoes and wheat.
Most arable crops (89%) were sown or planted with treated seed. All sugar beet and seed potatoes received a seed treatment prior to drilling or planting, with the majority of cereals, oilseeds, ware potatoes and peas also being treated. However almost half of the triticale area was sown with untreated seed, as was 90% of the field bean area grown.
All rye, oilseed rape and potatoes, both seed and ware, encountered in the survey received a foliar pesticide application, as did almost all cereals, peas and beans. By contrast 23% of triticale, 28% of linseed and 35% of set-aside remained untreated. Overall 6% of arable crops remained untreated.
Tabl
e 2
Tre
ated
are
as o
f ara
ble
crop
s in
Gre
at B
rita
in 2
002
by c
rop
grou
p (s
pray
hec
tare
s)
Che
mic
al g
roup
W
heat
W
inte
r Sp
ring
O
ats
Rye
Tri
tical
eO
ilsee
d L
inse
edPo
tato
esPo
tato
es
Peas
B
eans
B
eet
Set
All
barl
ey
barl
ey
ra
pe
war
ese
ed
A
side
1 cr
ops
Inse
ctic
ides
& n
emat
icid
es
2,27
9,21
7 42
9,62
7 51
,708
60
,087
5,
195
3,67
650
5,80
7 3,
473
170,
743
53,5
12
175,
698
236,
400
56,9
28
123,
700
4,15
5,77
0Fu
ngic
ides
8,
184,
667
1,72
1,28
5 1,
339,
347
218,
699
12,3
3311
,027
754,
569
4,00
61,
417,
648
119,
198
153,
734
373,
911
91,7
90
206,
211
14,6
08,4
23H
erbi
cide
s 7,
500,
816
1,53
9,05
8 1,
214,
189
238,
552
12,4
9021
,186
1,04
7,13
7 30
,073
375,
387
29,5
09
309,
503
357,
412
1,39
9,12
9 60
1,97
2 14
,676
,412
Des
icca
nts
. .
. .
..
. .
46,0
4126
,607
.
. .
. 72
,648
Gro
wth
regu
lato
rs
3,17
2,55
0 69
1,41
7 86
,798
13
4,88
3 9,
074
7,80
81,
155
.27
,443
. .
. .
133
4,13
1,26
1M
ollu
scic
ides
& re
pelle
nts
628,
078
44,6
41
303
7,67
5 63
.19
8,20
6 .
150,
398
4,65
4 87
0 4,
262
1,11
6 59
,807
1,
100,
071
Sulp
hur
22,3
88
9,69
1 19
,232
2,
906
..
11,2
23
.4,
161
. 1,
081
2,86
9 7,
711
4,22
9 85
,490
All
seed
trea
tmen
ts
1,97
0,55
7 53
8,77
3 47
2,21
7 10
5,59
6 4,
473
7,05
946
4,53
5 13
,011
133,
804
15,1
68
79,9
38
15,7
04
467,
681
140,
189
4,42
8,70
5
A
ll pe
stic
ides
23
,758
,272
4,
974,
491
3,18
3,79
4 76
8,39
6 43
,627
50,7
552,
982,
632
50,5
622,
325,
625
248,
648
720,
824
990,
557
2,02
4,35
4 1,
136,
241
43,2
58,7
81
1 incl
udes
pes
ticid
e us
e on
indu
stria
l cro
ps g
row
n on
set-a
side
land
8
Tabl
e 3
Usa
ge o
f pes
ticid
es o
n ar
able
cro
ps in
Gre
at B
rita
in 2
002
- per
cent
age
area
of c
rops
trea
ted
with
pes
ticid
es
Cro
p gr
oup
Inse
ctic
ides
Fu
ngic
ides
Her
bici
des
Des
icca
nts
Gro
wth
M
ollu
scic
ides
Se
ed
Not
regu
lato
rs
& r
epel
lent
s tr
eatm
ents
tr
eate
d
Whe
at
80.8
98
.198
.7.
89.3
22
.4
95.6
0.
3W
inte
r bar
ley
77.9
96
.998
.6.
73.3
7.
7 96
.5
0.7
Sprin
g ba
rley
14.9
88
.694
.4.
14.3
0.
1 83
.1
4.2
Oat
s 52
.3
90.2
93.4
.77
.7
6.8
84.7
0.
5R
ye
84.3
10
010
0.
92.6
1.
4 89
.1
.Tr
itica
le
29.7
62
.077
.0.
49.7
.
51.8
23
.0O
ilsee
d ra
pe
79.8
87
.898
.3.
0.4
43.7
86
.2
.Li
nsee
d 14
.5
16.4
72.2
..
. 90
.7
27.8
War
e po
tato
es
55.3
99
.694
.513
.321
.5
33.1
86
.1
.Se
ed p
otat
oes
73.4
10
010
067
.2.
. 10
0 .
Peas
84
.5
83.4
99.3
..
1.2
94.3
0.
4B
eans
71
.2
88.0
95.0
..
2.4
10.0
1.
2Su
gar b
eet
25.6
56
.499
.9.
. 0.
8 10
0 <
0.1
Set-a
side
/cro
ps o
n se
t-asi
de
14.1
15
.862
.7.
< 0.
1 8.
7 72
.7
35.1
A
ll cr
ops
62.5
82
.393
0.4
51.4
16
.5
88.5
5.
5 Ta
ble
4a U
sage
of p
estic
ides
on
arab
le c
rops
in G
reat
Bri
tain
200
2 - n
umbe
r of s
pray
roun
ds a
pplie
d to
cro
ps (e
xclu
ding
seed
trea
tmen
ts)
Cro
p gr
oup
Inse
ctic
ides
Fu
ngic
ides
H
erbi
cide
sD
esic
cant
sG
row
thM
ollu
scic
ides
A
ll
regu
lato
rs&
rep
elle
nts
Pest
icid
es
W
heat
1.
3 2.
8 2.
8.
1.4
0.4
5.8
Win
ter b
arle
y 0.
9 2.
0 2.
1.
1.2
0.1
4.2
Sprin
g ba
rley
0.2
1.8
1.8
.0.
2<0
.1
2.9
Oat
s 0.
7 1.
5 2.
1.
1.1
0.1
3.7
Rye
0.
8 1.
8 1.
8.
1.8
0.1
3.9
Triti
cale
0.
7 0.
9 1.
4.
0.7
. 2.
8O
ilsee
d ra
pe
1.5
1.8
2.7
.<0
.10.
7 5.
0Li
nsee
d 0.
3 0.
4 2.
4.
..
3.0
War
e po
tato
es
1.0
9.1
2.4
0.1
0.2
1.1
12.8
Seed
pot
atoe
s 2.
8 6.
0 1.
80.
8.
. 8.
8Pe
as
1.9
1.2
3.2
..
<0.1
5.
2B
eans
1.
4 1.
5 2.
0.
.<0
.1
4.1
Suga
r bee
t 0.
4 0.
7 4.
8.
.<0
.1
5.8
Set-a
side
/cro
ps o
n se
t-asi
de
0.4
0.6
1.6
.<0
.10.
2 2.
3
A
ll cr
ops
1.1
2.4
2.7
<0.1
0.8
0.3
5.3
9
Tabl
e 4b
Usa
ge o
f pes
ticid
es o
n ar
able
cro
ps in
Gre
at B
rita
in 2
002
- num
ber o
f pro
duct
s (ot
her t
han
seed
trea
tmen
ts) a
pplie
d to
cro
ps
Cro
p gr
oup
Inse
ctic
ides
Fu
ngic
ides
H
erbi
cide
sD
esic
cant
sG
row
thM
ollu
scic
ides
A
ll
regu
lato
rs&
rep
elle
nts
pest
icid
es
W
heat
1.
3 4.
3 4.
3.
1.7
0.4
12.0
Win
ter b
arle
y 0.
9 3.
5 3.
2.
1.4
0.1
9.2
Sprin
g ba
rley
0.2
3.2
2.7
.0.
2<0
.1
6.2
Oat
s 0.
7 2.
1 2.
3.
1.4
0.1
6.5
Rye
0.
9 3.
0 2.
6.
1.9
0.1
8.5
Triti
cale
0.
7 1.
0 1.
8.
0.7
. 4.
1O
ilsee
d ra
pe
1.6
2.3
3.3
.<0
.10.
7 7.
8Li
nsee
d 0.
3 0.
6 3.
1.
..
3.9
War
e po
tato
es
1.2
10.1
3.
20.
10.
21.
3 16
.1Se
ed p
otat
oes
2.8
6.5
2.8
0.8
..
12.8
Peas
2.
4 2.
0 4.
3.
.<0
.1
8.7
Bea
ns
1.5
2.4
2.5
..
<0.1
6.
5Su
gar b
eet
0.4
0.7
9.4
..
<0.1
10
.5Se
t-asi
de/c
rops
on
set-a
side
0.
4 0.
7 1.
8.
<0.1
0.2
3.2
All
crop
s 1.
1 3.
5 3.
9<0
.11
0.4
9.9
Tabl
e 4c
Usa
ge o
f pes
ticid
es o
n ar
able
cro
ps in
Gre
at B
rita
in 2
002
- num
ber o
f act
ive
subs
tanc
es (o
ther
than
seed
trea
tmen
ts) a
pplie
d to
cro
ps
Cro
p gr
oup
Inse
ctic
ides
Fu
ngic
ides
H
erbi
cide
sD
esic
cant
sG
row
thM
ollu
scic
ides
A
ll
regu
lato
rs&
rep
elle
nts
Pest
icid
es
W
heat
1.
3 5.
9 5.
3.
2.3
0.4
15.1
Win
ter b
arle
y 0.
9 4.
3 4.
3.
1.8
0.1
11.5
Sprin
g ba
rley
0.2
4.2
3.7
.0.
3<0
.1
8.3
Oat
s 0.
7 2.
8 3.
0.
1.6
0.1
8.1
Rye
0.
9 3.
5 3.
2.
2.6
0.1
10.3
Triti
cale
0.
7 1.
2 2.
3.
0.9
. 5.
1O
ilsee
d ra
pe
1.6
2.9
3.6
.<0
.10.
7 8.
7Li
nsee
d 0.
3 0.
6 3.
4.
..
4.2
War
e po
tato
es
1.2
16.1
4.
20.
10.
21.
3 23
.1Se
ed p
otat
oes
2.8
12.3
4.
30.
8.
. 20
.0Pe
as
2.7
2.1
5.7
..
<0.1
10
.5B
eans
1.
5 2.
9 2.
7.
.<0
.1
7.1
Suga
r bee
t 0.
4 1.
2 11
.4.
<0.1
<0.1
13
.0Se
t-asi
de/c
rops
on
set-a
side
0.
4 0.
9 1.
9.
.0.
2 3.
5
A
ll cr
ops
1.1
4.8
4.9
<0.1
1.3
0.4
12.4
10
11
EXTENT AND QUANTITIES OF PESTICIDE FORMULATIONS USED
The estimated total areas of each crop treated in Great Britain with each pesticide formulation are given in Table 5, whilst the estimated quantities of pesticide active substances used are given in Table 6.
Herbicides and desiccants accounted for 34% of the total pesticide-treated area of arable farm crops grown in Great Britain in 2002, fungicides 34%, seed treatments 10%, insecticides & nematicides 10%, growth regulators 10%, molluscicides 3% and sulphur for less than one percent. In contrast, by weight herbicides and desiccants accounted for 71% of the pesticide active substances applied, fungicides 12%, growth regulators 11%, insecticides & nematicides 2%, molluscicides 1%, seed treatments 1% and sulphur less than one percent. Sulphuric acid alone accounted for 39% of the total weight of active substances used but only 0.2% of the pesticide-treated area, having been used entirely for the desiccation of approximately 73,000 ha of potatoes.
The most extensively-used fungicide formulations applied as sprays were epoxiconazole (used primarily on wheat, winter and spring barley), azoxystrobin (used mainly on wheat, winter barley, spring barley and peas), tebuconazole (used mainly on cereals, particularly wheat, but also on oilseed rape and beans), epoxiconazole/fenpropimorph/kresoxim-methyl (used almost exclusively on cereals) and trifloxystrobin (used exclusively on wheat, winter and spring barley).
The most extensively-used herbicide formulations, all used principally on cereals, were glyphosate (used widely pre- or post sowing of most crops, pre-harvest in cereals and for control of weeds on naturally regenerating set-aside), isoproturon (for grass/broad-leaved weed control on cereals), fluroxypyr (for control of cleavers in cereals), mecoprop-P (for broad-leaved weed control in cereals) and diflufenican/isoproturon (for grass/broad-leaved weed control in cereals).
The pyrethroids were the most extensively-used insecticides accounting for 87% of the insecticide-treated area, followed by the carbamates 7% and the organophosphates 4%. Four insecticides accounted for 78% of the total insecticide-treated area of all arable farm crops: cypermethrin 49%, lambda-cyhalothrin 16%, esfenvalerate 7% and pirimicarb 6%. Other extensively-used insecticides included the pyrethroids alpha-cypermethrin and zeta-cypermethrin.
Five active substance combinations, all fungicides, were used on almost three quarters of the seed treatment area with most being used almost exclusively on cereals: bitertanol/fuberidazole 19%, tebuconazole/triazoxide 13%, thiram 9%, (used mainly on sugar beet and oilseed rape), fludioxonil 8%, and carboxin/thiram 6%.
Chlormequat applied alone accounted for 49% of the area of arable crops treated with growth regulators (applied predominantly to cereals and oilseed rape) and for 75% of the treated area including all formulations.
Metaldehyde (79%) and methiocarb (14%) were the two most commonly used molluscicides recorded, with thiodicarb accounting for a further 5% of the total molluscicide-treated area.
Tabl
e 5
Usa
ge o
f pes
ticid
es o
n ar
able
cro
ps g
row
n in
Gre
at B
rita
in, 2
002
(spr
ay h
ecta
res)
W
heat
W
inte
r Sp
ring
Oat
sR
ye
Tri
tical
eO
ilsee
d L
inse
edA
ll Pe
as
Bea
nsSu
gar
Set
All
barl
ey
barl
ey
rape
po
tato
es
be
et
asid
e cr
ops
Fun
gici
des
A
zoxy
stro
bin
1,10
3,36
1 19
3,68
6 11
9,51
421
,145
4,25
5 3,
092
1,04
1 .
. 52
,358
2,
514
. 31
0 1,
501,
276
Azo
xyst
robi
n/fe
npro
pim
orph
28
,865
62
,127
55
,858
1,40
149
3 .
. .
. .
..
. 14
8,74
3 B
rom
ucon
azol
e 21
,811
17
,965
5,
498
..
..
..
. .
. .
45,2
74
Car
bend
azim
53
,133
14
,570
10
,632
..
.13
8,39
2 62
9.
. 5,
229
. 30
,826
25
3,41
2 C
arbe
ndaz
im/fl
usila
zole
5,
602
33,8
93
31,7
70.
. .
121,
440
..
. 15
768
,981
37
,699
29
9,54
2 C
hlor
otha
loni
l 31
7,96
6 7,
049
5,16
4.
. .
2,46
6 79
93,
646
75,0
14
173,
348
88
1,22
7 58
6,76
6 C
hlor
otha
loni
l/cyp
roco
nazo
le
47,7
27
210
1,81
291
3.
..
..
8,39
3 25
,243
141
. 84
,439
C
yazo
fam
id
. .
..
. .
. .
80,4
12
. .
. .
80,4
12
Cym
oxan
il .
. .
..
..
.52
,420
.
..
. 52
,420
C
ymox
anil/
man
coze
b .
. .
..
..
.38
3,21
1 .
..
. 38
3,21
1 C
ymox
anil/
man
coze
b/ox
adix
yl
. .
..
. .
. .
63,7
83
. .
. .
63,7
83
Cyp
roco
nazo
le
56,2
75
1,81
4 .
22,3
34.
..
..
. 23
,962
18,2
41
. 12
2,62
5 C
ypro
cona
zole
/cyp
rodi
nil
26,8
08
61,5
78
37,5
2194
3.
..
..
. .
. .
126,
850
Cyp
roco
nazo
le/p
ropi
cona
zole
52
,022
7,
004
3,12
5.
626
..
..
. .
. .
62,7
77
Cyp
roco
nazo
le/tr
iflox
ystro
bin
127,
628
2,66
0 12
,985
..
2,14
953
9 .
. .
..
. 14
5,96
2 C
ypro
dini
l 11
5,50
9 18
1,85
7 11
5,95
7.
. .
. .
. .
..
674
413,
996
Dife
noco
nazo
le
5,71
7 .
..
. .
66,7
71
..
. .
. 12
,329
84
,817
D
imet
hom
orph
/man
coze
b .
. .
..
..
.12
4,94
9 .
..
. 12
4,94
9 E
poxi
cona
zole
1,
486,
911
191,
641
75,5
528,
702
342
3,44
7.
..
. .
. 67
4 1,
767,
270
Epo
xico
nazo
le/fe
npro
pim
orph
61
,698
72
,698
50
,581
3,76
0.
..
..
. .
. .
188,
737
Epo
xico
nazo
le/fe
npro
pim
orph
/kre
soxi
m-m
ethy
l 58
0,55
7 54
,174
56
,036
23,8
37.
.39
1 .
. .
..
. 71
4,99
5 E
poxi
cona
zole
/kre
soxi
m-m
ethy
l 41
9,00
9 9,
133
37,6
6018
,972
230
..
..
. .
. .
485,
004
Epo
xico
nazo
le/k
reso
xim
-met
hyl/p
yrac
lost
robi
n 17
5,39
3 1,
030
.51
6.
..
..
. .
. .
176,
939
Epo
xico
nazo
le/p
yrac
lost
robi
n 31
0,77
0 13
,988
2,
080
..
..
..
. .
. .
326,
838
Fam
oxad
one/
flusi
lazo
le
118,
071
43,9
35
34,2
62.
. .
. .
. .
..
. 19
6,26
8 F
enpr
opid
in
53,9
94
2,80
0 3,
945
1,95
0.
..
..
. .
. .
62,6
90
Fen
prop
idin
/tebu
cona
zole
51
,073
6,
019
913
.59
9 .
. .
. .
..
. 58
,604
F
enpr
opim
orph
10
7,05
7 65
,793
14
4,29
041
,702
1,96
7 2,
149
539
..
. 3,
925
. .
367,
422
Fen
prop
imor
ph/fl
usila
zole
1,
767
64,0
51
88,9
7525
3.
..
..
. .
. .
155,
046
Fen
prop
imor
ph/k
reso
xim
-met
hyl
106,
189
18,1
56
52,8
353,
379
. .
. .
. .
..
. 18
0,55
9 F
entin
hyd
roxi
de
. .
..
. .
. .
138,
315
. .
. .
138,
315
Flu
azin
am
. .
..
. .
354
.30
3,65
1 .
..
. 30
4,00
4 F
luqu
inco
nazo
le
124,
780
3,11
4 .
141
599
..
..
. .
. .
128,
634
Flu
quin
cona
zole
/pro
chlo
raz
89,5
49
8,66
0 49
0.
334
..
..
. .
. .
99,0
32
Flu
sila
zole
12
,906
50
,759
40
,693
1,15
3.
.76
,288
.
. .
..
14,9
42
196,
742
Ipro
dion
e .
. .
..
.2,
404
..
. .
. 71
2 3,
116
Ipro
dion
e/th
ioph
anat
e-m
ethy
l .
. .
..
.45
,849
.
. .
2,53
6.
8,71
6 57
,101
M
anco
zeb
1,02
7 18
6 1,
247
..
.1,
147
.13
5,81
7 .
700
. 21
6 14
0,34
1 M
anco
zeb/
zoxa
mid
e .
. .
..
..
.46
,249
.
..
. 46
,249
12
Tabl
e 5
(con
t) U
sage
of p
estic
ides
on
arab
le c
rops
gro
wn
in G
reat
Bri
tain
, 200
2 (s
pray
hec
tare
s)
Whe
at
Win
ter
Spri
ngO
ats
Rye
T
ritic
ale
Oils
eed
Lin
seed
All
Peas
B
eans
Suga
r Se
t A
ll
ba
rley
ba
rley
ra
pe
pota
toes
beet
as
ide
crop
s F
ungi
cide
s (co
nt)
M
etco
nazo
le
247,
175
30,7
20
18,6
74.
. .
86,5
78
..
. .
. 20
,243
40
3,38
9 P
icox
ystro
bin
84,9
55
305,
362
107,
413
5,23
5.
..
..
. .
. .
502,
965
Pro
chlo
raz
62,7
21
3,89
9 97
7.
. .
9,30
1 .
. .
..
4,42
2 81
,319
P
roch
lora
z/pr
opic
onaz
ole
20,2
26
36,8
30
8,90
0.
. .
385
..
. .
. .
66,3
41
Pro
chlo
raz/
tebu
cona
zole
81
,541
21
0 .
..
.3,
579
..
. .
. 51
2 85
,841
P
yrac
lost
robi
n 20
4,86
5 11
,064
24
,327
68.
..
..
. .
. .
240,
324
Qui
noxy
fen
340,
050
13,0
08
49,2
3442
,143
. .
2,07
4 .
. 1,
270
236
4,33
9 16
7 45
2,52
2 S
piro
xam
ine
58,2
85
37,0
25
44,4
1349
023
0 .
. .
894
713
848
. 1,
532
144,
429
Teb
ucon
azol
e 60
6,96
5 5,
308
12,7
488,
226
1,82
9 .
126,
138
2,57
8.
. 81
,467
. 54
,499
89
9,75
9 T
ebuc
onaz
ole/
triad
imen
ol
58,5
39
505
140
870
. .
. .
. .
734
. .
60,7
88
Tet
raco
nazo
le
62,7
13
6,34
5 1,
483
5,71
3.
..
..
. .
. .
76,2
53
Trif
loxy
stro
bin
534,
457
33,3
59
47,2
85.
. .
. .
. .
..
. 61
5,10
1 V
incl
ozol
in
1,36
5 .
..
. .
21,5
03
..
15,4
83
8,84
9.
3,61
0 50
,809
O
ther
1 fung
icid
es2
157,
634
47,1
01
34,3
574,
852
827
191
47,3
90
.20
3,49
8 50
3 44
,164
. 12
,902
55
3,42
0 A
ll fu
ngic
ides
8,
184,
667
1,72
1,28
5 1,
339,
347
218,
699
12,3
33
11,0
2775
4,56
9 4,
006
1,53
6,84
5 15
3,73
4 37
3,91
191
,790
20
6,21
1 14
,608
,423
S
ulph
ur
22,3
88
9,69
1 19
,232
2,90
6.
.11
,223
.
4,16
1 1,
081
2,86
97,
711
4,22
9 85
,490
1 Th
roug
hout
all
tabl
es, "
Oth
er"
refe
rs to
che
mic
als g
roup
ed to
geth
er b
ecau
se th
ey w
ere
appl
ied
to le
ss th
an 0
.1%
of t
he to
tal a
rea
treat
ed w
ith p
estic
ides
. 2 O
ther
fun
gici
des
incl
udes
azo
xyst
robi
n/flu
triaf
ol,
bena
laxy
l/man
coze
b, b
enom
yl,
Bor
deau
x m
ixtu
re,
carb
enda
zim
/chl
orot
halo
nil,
carb
enda
zim
/flut
riafo
l, ca
rben
dazi
m/ip
rodi
one,
car
bend
azim
/man
coze
b, c
arbe
ndaz
im/m
aneb
, ca
rben
dazi
m/m
aneb
/sul
phur
, ca
rben
dazi
m/p
roch
lora
z,
carb
enda
zim
/pro
pico
nazo
le,
carb
enda
zim
/tebu
cona
zole
, ca
rben
dazi
m/v
incl
ozol
in,
chlo
roth
alon
il/cy
mox
anil,
ch
loro
thal
onil/
fluqu
inco
nazo
le,
chlo
roth
alon
il/flu
triaf
ol,
chlo
roth
alon
il/m
anco
zeb,
chl
orot
halo
nil/m
etal
axyl
, ch
loro
thal
onil/
met
alax
yl-m
, ch
loro
thal
onil/
prop
amoc
arb
hydr
ochl
orid
e, c
hlor
otha
loni
l/tet
raco
nazo
le,
copp
er o
xych
lorid
e, c
ymox
anil/
fam
oxad
one,
cyp
roco
nazo
le/p
roch
lora
z,
cypr
ocon
azol
e/qu
inox
yfen
, di
fenz
oqua
t (f
), di
thia
non,
ep
oxic
onaz
ole/
tride
mor
ph,
fenb
ucon
azol
e,
fenb
ucon
azol
e/fe
npro
pim
orph
, fe
nbuc
onaz
ole/
prop
icon
azol
e,
fenp
ropi
din/
fenp
ropi
mor
ph,
fenp
ropi
din/
proc
hlor
az,
fenp
ropi
mor
ph/p
roch
lora
z,
fenp
ropi
mor
ph/p
ropi
cona
zole
, fe
npro
pim
orph
/qui
noxy
fen,
fe
ntin
ac
etat
e/m
aneb
, flu
sila
zole
/trid
emor
ph,
flutri
afol
, m
anco
zeb/
met
alax
yl,
man
coze
b/m
etal
axyl
-M,
man
coze
b/of
urac
e,
man
coze
b/pr
opam
ocar
b hy
droc
hlor
ide,
man
eb,
prop
icon
azol
e, p
ropi
cona
zole
/tebu
cona
zole
, sp
iroxa
min
e/te
buco
nazo
le,
triad
imen
ol,
triad
imen
ol/tr
idem
orph
, tri
dem
orph
, un
spec
ified
fun
gici
des
and
zine
b-et
hyle
ne t
hiur
am
disu
lphi
de a
dduc
t.
13 13
Tabl
e 5
(con
t) U
sage
of p
estic
ides
on
arab
le c
rops
gro
wn
in G
reat
Bri
tain
, 200
2 (s
pray
) hec
tare
s
Whe
at
Win
ter
Spri
ng
Oat
s R
ye
Tri
tical
e O
ilsee
d L
inse
edA
ll Pe
asB
eans
Su
gar
Set
All
barl
eyba
rley
rape
po
tato
es
be
etas
ide
crop
s D
esic
cant
s
Sul
phur
ic a
cid
. .
. .
. .
. .
72,6
48
..
..
72,6
48
Her
bici
des
A
mid
osul
furo
n 13
6,03
7 22
,839
2,59
9 6,
426
. .
. 3,
452
. .
. .
.17
1,35
4 B
enta
zone
/MC
PB
. .
. .
. .
. .
. 52
,106
. 19
.52
,125
B
rom
oxyn
il/io
xyni
l 64
,689
21
,027
105,
708
9,90
3 17
6 .
. .
. .
. .
443
201,
946
Chl
orid
azon
.
..
. .
. .
.65
.
. 99
,881
.99
,946
C
hlor
otol
uron
83
,551
35
,252
. .
. 19
1 .
..
..
..
118,
994
Clo
dina
fop-
prop
argy
l 42
7,49
6 .
. .
714
2,49
1 .
..
.51
5 .
.43
1,21
6 C
lodi
nafo
p-pr
opar
gyl/t
riflu
ralin
33
4,34
0 28
4.
. .
. .
..
190
. .
.33
4,81
4 C
lopy
ralid
88
1 15
. .
. .
44,6
03
..
..
89,2
4524
,027
158,
770
Cya
nazi
ne
209
492
. .
. .
25,8
84
..
59,4
5960
7 19
11,0
9097
,759
C
yana
zine
/pen
dim
etha
lin
2,52
3 1,
898
18
. .
. .
.5,
163
30,2
7825
,911
.
.65
,791
C
yclo
xydi
m
. 28
018
.
. .
66,8
91
3,06
721
4 15
,873
17,5
81
13,0
3413
,194
130,
152
Des
med
ipha
m/e
thof
umes
ate/
phen
med
ipha
m
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. 96
,528
.96
,528
D
icam
ba/m
ecop
rop-
P 17
7,12
7 15
,739
52,5
25
4,88
0 .
. .
..
..
.1,
468
251,
739
Dic
lofo
p-m
ethy
l/fen
oxap
rop-
P-et
hyl
9,92
9 39
,101
9,99
4 .
. .
. .
. .
. .
.59
,024
D
ifluf
enic
an/fl
urta
mon
e 61
,118
23
,590
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
.84
,708
D
ifluf
enic
an/fl
urta
mon
e/is
opro
turo
n 36
,919
27
,798
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
.64
,718
D
ifluf
enic
an/is
opro
turo
n 45
7,27
4 14
6,23
6.
. 37
7 60
0 .
..
482
. .
.60
4,97
0 D
ifluf
enic
an/tr
iflur
alin
58
,964
43
,332
. .
950
. .
..
..
..
103,
246
Diq
uat
387
..
62
. .
4,07
2 1,
524
52,1
75
16,2
781,
450
.3,
287
79,2
33
Diq
uat/p
araq
uat
2,30
4 15
3.
. .
. .
.84
,274
.
. 99
6.
87,7
27
Eth
ofum
esat
e .
..
. .
. .
..
..
124,
409
.12
4,40
9 E
thof
umes
ate/
phen
med
ipha
m
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
. 61
,551
.61
,551
F
enox
apro
p-P-
ethy
l 19
4,94
0 2,
693
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
.19
7,63
3 F
lora
sula
m
66,8
27
8,15
9.
453
. .
939
..
..
..
76,3
78
Flu
azifo
p-P-
buty
l .
..
. .
. 37
,886
.
. 6,
213
3,81
1 9,
850
10,5
6768
,327
F
lufe
nace
t/pen
dim
etha
lin
132,
408
37,6
69.
. .
. 26
0 .
. .
. .
333
170,
670
Flu
pyrs
ulfu
ron-
met
hyl
536,
374
..
3,04
4 .
. .
..
..
..
539,
418
Flu
pyrs
ulfu
ron-
met
hyl/t
hife
nsul
furo
n-m
ethy
l 77
,814
.
. 12
,604
.
. .
..
..
..
90,4
18
Flu
roxy
pyr
660,
745
71,1
0753
,484
20
,214
33
4 .
35
..
..
611
937
807,
468
Gly
phos
ate
628,
291
131,
505
133,
244
41,3
86
106
1,23
4 19
1,69
3 7,
453
26,1
38
60,7
6382
,121
72
,261
319,
213
1,69
5,40
6 Is
opro
turo
n 93
3,45
4 31
3,94
315
,089
14
1 94
2 2,
491
. .
. .
256
.6
1,26
6,32
2 Is
opro
turo
n/pe
ndim
etha
lin
101,
881
53,4
4714
6 .
106
. .
..
..
..
155,
580
Isop
rotu
ron/
sim
azin
e 72
,105
14
,000
. .
. .
. .
. .
. .
.86
,105
L
enac
il .
..
. .
. .
..
..
107,
433
.10
7,43
3 L
inur
on
. .
. .
. .
. 57
577
,647
.
. .
.78
,222
14
Tabl
e 5
(con
t) U
sage
of p
estic
ides
on
arab
le c
rops
gro
wn
in G
reat
Bri
tain
, 200
2 (s
pray
) hec
tare
s
W
heat
W
inte
r Sp
ring
O
ats
Rye
T
ritic
ale
Oils
eed
Lin
seed
A
ll Pe
as
Bea
nsSu
gar
Set
All
barl
ey
barl
ey
ra
pe
pota
toes
beet
as
ide
crop
s H
erbi
cide
s (co
nt)
M
CPA
32
,258
4,
869
22,0
40
1,50
2.
..
1,73
6 79
6 51
9 1,
281
. 5,
301
70,3
01
Mec
opro
p-P
449,
953
79,3
73
205,
155
29,5
10.
4,61
72,
038
. .
383
..
1,62
077
2,65
0 M
etam
itron
.
. .
..
.29
5.
. .
.23
8,44
8 .
238,
742
Met
azac
hlor
.
. .
..
.11
3,39
3.
. .
..
31,5
9914
4,99
2 M
etaz
achl
or/q
uinm
erac
15
2 .
. .
. .
90,3
5066
.
. .
. 32
,329
122,
897
Met
sulfu
ron-
met
hyl
330,
010
40,9
30
100,
423
35,7
541,
798
3,08
7.
4,01
6 .
. .
. 1,
194
517,
213
Met
sulfu
ron-
met
hyl/t
hife
nsul
furo
n-m
ethy
l 11
3,16
5 18
,495
20
1,74
7 3,
281
. .
..
. .
..
.33
6,68
8 M
etsu
lfuro
n-m
ethy
l/trib
enur
on-m
ethy
l 35
,331
19
,642
29
,910
2,
309
. .
..
. .
..
.87
,191
P
endi
met
halin
43
1,08
2 99
,242
3,
243
.2,
431
824
.57
5 2,
065
3,22
7 8,
461
. 27
755
1,42
7 P
endi
met
halin
/pic
olin
afen
55
,545
37
,787
.
..
..
. .
. .
. .
93,3
32
Phe
nmed
ipha
m
. .
. .
. .
..
. .
.25
4,51
3 .
254,
513
Pro
paqu
izaf
op
. .
. .
. .
137,
401
1,68
3 81
1 4,
986
7,69
410
,167
44
,265
207,
006
Pro
pyza
mid
e 10
9 1,
221
444
..
.89
,735
. .
. 11
,767
. 18
,669
121,
946
Sim
azin
e .
. .
..
..
. .
. 12
1,68
9.
.12
1,68
9 T
epra
loxy
dim
15
0 .
. .
. .
59,8
6748
8 .
16,5
86
26,8
5114
,139
15
,792
133,
872
Ter
buth
ylaz
ine/
terb
utry
n 16
.
. .
. .
..
29,1
34
21,7
98
9,99
1.
.60
,938
T
erbu
tryn
48,7
75
4,64
7 .
21,2
62.
..
. .
. .
. .
74,6
84
Thi
fens
ulfu
ron-
met
hyl/t
riben
uron
-met
hyl
12,7
15
3,40
1 38
,059
16
7.
22.
. .
. .
. .
54,3
63
Tra
lkox
ydim
39
,560
62
,849
90
,039
.
599
..
. .
. .
. .
193,
048
Tri-
alla
te
138,
171
34,2
03
1,25
9 .
342
..
. .
. 29
966
2 .
174,
936
Trib
enur
on-m
ethy
l 64
,868
24
,695
39
,201
4,
817
1,91
1 2,
149
..
. .
..
.13
7,64
1 T
riflu
ralin
19
6,88
4 32
,577
.
654
1,10
4 .
94,2
7966
.
182
6,16
6.
36,2
4036
8,15
3 T
riflu
sulfu
ron-
met
hyl
. .
. .
. .
..
. .
.10
9,25
8 .
109,
258
Oth
er h
erbi
cide
s1 29
3,48
4 64
,571
10
9,84
4 40
,181
599
3,48
087
,517
5,37
2 12
6,41
3 20
,183
30
,964
96,1
04
30,1
2290
8,83
4 A
ll he
rbic
ides
7,
500,
816
1,53
9,05
8 1,
214,
189
238,
552
12,4
90
21,1
861,
047,
137
30,0
73
404,
896
309,
503
357,
412
1,39
9,12
9 60
1,97
214
,676
,412
1 O
ther
her
bici
des
incl
ude
2,4-
D, 2
,4-D
/MC
PA, 2
,4-D
B/li
nuro
n/M
CPA
, am
idos
ulfu
ron/
iodo
sulfu
ron-
met
hyl-s
odiu
m, a
trazi
ne, b
enaz
olin
, ben
azol
in/2
,4-D
B/M
CPA
, ben
azol
in/b
rom
oxyn
il/io
xyni
l, be
nazo
lin/c
lopy
ralid
, ben
tazo
ne,
bent
azon
e/M
CPA
/MC
PB,
bent
azon
e/pe
ndim
etha
lin,
bife
nox/
chlo
roto
luro
n,
bife
nox/
isop
rotu
ron,
br
omox
ynil,
br
omox
ynil/
clop
yral
id,
brom
oxyn
il/di
chlo
rpro
p/io
xyni
l/MC
PA,
brom
oxyn
il/di
flufe
nica
n/io
xyni
l, br
omox
ynil/
fluro
xypy
r, br
omox
ynil/
fluro
xypy
r/iox
ynil,
br
omox
ynil/
ioxy
nil/m
ecop
rop-
P,
brom
oxyn
il/io
xyni
l/tria
sulfu
ron,
ca
rbet
amid
e,
carf
entra
zone
-eth
yl,
carf
entra
zone
-eth
yl/fl
upyr
sulfu
ron-
met
hyl,
carf
entra
zone
-et
hyl/m
ecop
rop-
P,
carf
entra
zone
-eth
yl/m
etsu
lfuro
n-m
ethy
l, ca
rfen
trazo
ne-e
thyl
/thife
nsul
furo
n-m
ethy
l, ch
lorid
azon
/chl
orpr
opha
m/m
etam
itron
, ch
lorid
azon
/eth
ofum
esat
e,
chlo
ridaz
on/le
naci
l, ch
lorid
azon
/met
amitr
on,
chlo
ridaz
on/q
uinm
erac
, ch
loro
tolu
ron/
isop
rotu
ron,
chl
orpr
opha
m/fe
nuro
n/pr
opha
m,
chlo
rpro
pham
/met
amitr
on,
cini
don-
ethy
l, cl
odin
afop
-pro
parg
yl/d
ifluf
enic
an,
clom
azon
e, c
lopy
ralid
/flur
oxyp
yr/tr
iclo
pyr,
clop
yral
id/tr
iclo
pyr,
cyan
azin
e/te
rbut
hyla
zine
, de
smed
ipha
m/p
henm
edip
ham
, di
cam
ba/M
CPA
/mec
opro
p-P,
di
chlo
rpro
p-P,
di
chlo
rpro
p-P/
MC
PA/m
ecop
rop-
P,
dich
lorp
rop/
MC
PA,
dicl
ofop
-met
hyl,
dife
nzoq
uat,
diflu
feni
can/
terb
uthy
lazi
ne,
etho
fum
esat
e/m
etam
itron
, fe
noxa
prop
-P-e
thyl
/isop
rotu
ron,
fla
mpr
op-M
-isop
ropy
l, flo
rasu
lam
/flur
oxyp
yr,
flufe
nace
t/met
ribuz
in,
fluor
ogly
cofe
n-et
hyl/i
sopr
otur
on,
flupy
rsul
furo
n-m
ethy
l/met
sulfu
ron-
met
hyl,
fluro
xypy
r/met
osul
am,
fluro
xypy
r/thi
fens
ulfu
ron-
met
hyl/t
riben
uron
-met
hyl,
fom
esaf
en/te
rbut
ryn,
gl
ufos
inat
e-am
mon
ium
, im
azam
etha
benz
-met
hyl,
isop
rotu
ron/
triflu
ralin
, le
naci
l/phe
nmed
ipha
m,
MC
PA/M
CPB
, M
CPB
, m
ecop
rop-
P/m
etsu
lfuro
n-m
ethy
l, m
ecop
rop-
P/tri
asul
furo
n, m
etha
benz
thia
zuro
n, m
etrib
uzin
, m
onol
inur
on,
mon
olin
uron
/par
aqua
t, pa
raqu
at, p
endi
met
halin
/sim
azin
e, p
ropo
xyca
rbaz
one-
sodi
um,
quiz
alof
op-P
-eth
yl,
quiz
alof
op-
ethy
l, rim
sulfu
ron,
seth
oxyd
im, s
odiu
m m
onoc
hlor
oace
tate
, sul
fosu
lfuro
n, te
rbut
ryn/
triet
azin
e, th
ifens
ulfu
ron-
met
hyl a
nd u
nspe
cifie
d he
rbic
ides
.
15
Tabl
e 5
(con
t) U
sage
of p
estic
ides
on
arab
le c
rops
gro
wn
in G
reat
Brit
ain,
200
2 (s
pray
hec
tare
s)
W
heat
W
inte
r Sp
ring
Oat
sR
ye
Tri
tical
eO
ilsee
d L
inse
edA
ll Pe
as
Bea
nsSu
gar
Set
All
barl
ey
barl
ey
rape
po
tato
es
be
et
asid
ecr
ops
Inse
ctic
ides
& n
emat
icid
es
Car
bam
ate
Piri
mic
arb
52,4
52
741
5,02
956
8.
.86
7 .
72,4
63
47,4
03
50,2
7417
,751
2,
627
250,
176
Org
anop
hosp
hate
D
imet
hoat
e 10
8,62
7 1,
089
1,18
31,
188
377
.28
2 .
1,39
9 9,
388
936
450
012
4,92
0 Py
reth
roid
A
lpha
-cyp
erm
ethr
in
44,7
14
10,0
19
.1,
016
. .
97,7
94
..
11,7
98
17,7
05.
21,6
7020
4,71
5 C
yper
met
hrin
1,
244,
786
254,
933
18,2
6133
,062
3,59
6 1,
825
282,
793
3,43
737
,043
20
,134
80
,094
3,33
5 58
,355
2,04
1,65
4 D
elta
met
hrin
71
,985
23
,330
5,
791
1,23
9.
.11
,074
.
. 5,
113
23,3
032,
410
6,07
115
0,31
8 E
sfen
vale
rate
20
7,99
5 64
,752
14
64,
188
493
1,85
179
2 .
. 23
5 .
. 32
728
0,77
8 L
ambd
a-cy
halo
thrin
34
0,59
2 40
,676
10
,442
14,8
3872
9 .
74,9
83
3625
,790
54
,969
55
,254
6,15
9 27
,378
651,
846
Tau
-flu
valin
ate
67,2
97
1,34
1 1,
312
..
.40
9 .
. .
..
.70
,358
Z
eta-
cype
rmet
hrin
10
2,07
1 19
,462
2,
434
3,47
1.
.32
,197
.
1,33
4 7,
671
8,31
4.
7,27
118
4,22
6 O
ther
inse
ctic
ides
& n
emat
icid
es1
38,6
98
13,2
85
7,10
951
8.
.4,
616
.86
,226
18
,986
52
026
,822
.
196,
779
All
inse
ctic
ides
& n
emat
icid
es
2,27
9,21
7 42
9,62
7 51
,708
60,0
875,
195
3,67
650
5,80
7 3,
473
224,
255
175,
698
236,
400
56,9
28
123,
700
4,15
5,77
0
Mol
lusc
icid
es &
repe
llent
s
M
etal
dehy
de
505,
016
34,8
60
303
6,15
7.
.16
7,31
4 .
104,
621
274
4,26
287
5 42
,819
866,
502
Met
hioc
arb
82,0
19
3,99
0 .
935
63
.22
,187
.
41,1
59
596
.24
1 3,
367
154,
557
Thi
odic
arb
20,9
62
5,65
9 .
583
. .
3,15
6 .
8,77
4 .
..
12,3
2251
,457
O
ther
mol
lusc
icid
es &
repe
llent
s2 20
,081
13
1 .
..
.5,
548
.49
7 .
..
1,29
827
,555
A
ll m
ollu
scic
ides
& re
pelle
nts
628,
078
44,6
41
303
7,67
563
.
198,
206
.15
5,05
2 87
0 4,
262
1,11
6 59
,807
1,10
0,07
1
Gro
wth
regu
lato
rs
2-c
hlor
oeth
ylph
osph
onic
aci
d/m
epiq
uat
121,
620
69,8
79
19,4
651,
896
2,81
3 45
5.
..
. .
. .
216,
129
Chl
orm
equa
t 1,
589,
609
342,
274
34,5
1042
,908
4,29
4 5,
311
1,15
5 .
. .
..
133
2,02
0,19
4 C
hlor
meq
uat c
hlor
ide/
2-ch
loro
ethy
lpho
spho
nic
acid
/mep
iqua
t chl
orid
e ac
id/m
epiq
uat c
hlor
ide
32,5
43
18,8
35
5,81
0.
. .
. .
. .
..
.57
,188
Chl
orm
equa
t/2-c
hlor
oeth
ylph
osph
onic
aci
d 56
,267
16
,397
5,
102
259
. .
. .
. .
..
.78
,025
C
hlor
meq
uat/c
holin
e ch
lorid
e 38
8,35
6 63
,671
14
637
,524
559
2,04
2.
..
. .
. .
492,
298
Chl
orm
equa
t/im
azaq
uin
419,
699
1,14
9 29
3.
. .
. .
. .
..
.42
1,14
0 T
rinex
apac
-eth
yl
505,
528
164,
420
13,3
0152
,297
1,40
8 .
. .
. .
..
.73
6,95
3 O
ther
gro
wth
regu
lato
rs3
58,9
28
14,7
91
8,17
2.
. .
. .
27,4
43
. .
. .
109,
335
All
grow
th re
gula
tors
3,
172,
550
691,
417
86,7
9813
4,88
39,
074
7,80
81,
155
.27
,443
.
..
133
4,13
1,26
1 1 O
ther
inse
ctic
ides
and
nem
atic
ides
incl
udes
1,3
-dic
hlor
opro
pene
, ald
icar
b, b
ifent
hrin
, car
bosu
lfan,
chl
orpy
rifos
, del
tam
ethr
in/p
irim
icar
b, e
thop
roph
os, f
osth
iaza
te, g
amm
a-H
CH
, lam
bda-
cyha
loth
rin/p
irim
icar
b, n
icot
ine,
oxa
myl
, py
met
rozi
ne a
nd tr
iaza
mat
e.
2 Oth
er m
ollu
scic
ides
& re
pelle
nts i
nclu
des u
nspe
cifie
d m
ollu
scic
ides
. 3 O
ther
gro
wth
regu
lato
rs in
clud
e 2-
chlo
roet
hylp
hosp
honi
c ac
id, 2
-chl
oroe
thyl
phos
phon
ic a
cid/
mep
iqua
t chl
orid
e, c
hlor
meq
uat c
hlor
ide/
mep
iqua
t chl
orid
e, c
hlor
meq
uat/2
-chl
oroe
thyl
phos
phon
ic a
cid/
imaz
aqui
n an
d m
alei
c hy
draz
ide.
16
Tabl
e 5
(con
t) U
sage
of p
estic
ides
on
arab
le c
rops
gro
wn
in G
reat
Bri
tain
, 200
2 (s
pray
hec
tare
s)
W
heat
W
inte
r Sp
ring
Oat
sR
ye
Tri
tical
eO
ilsee
d L
inse
edA
ll Pe
as
Bea
nsSu
gar
Set
All
barl
ey
barl
ey
rape
po
tato
es
be
et
asid
ecr
ops
Fun
gici
de se
ed tr
eatm
ents
B
iterta
nol/f
uber
idaz
ole
752,
151
21,3
21
4,45
843
,187
230
1,19
2.
..
. .
. .
822,
539
Car
boxi
n/th
iram
15
2,75
6 57
,764
43
,853
7,75
233
4 2,
149
. .
. .
..
.26
4,60
9 F
ludi
oxon
il 32
3,06
7 9,
832
20,6
7212
,979
. .
127
..
. .
. .
366,
678
Flu
quin
cona
zole
/pro
chlo
raz
70,9
39
. .
..
..
..
. .
. .
70,9
39
Fub
erid
azol
e/tri
adim
enol
78
,365
16
,623
9,
463
1,54
13,
567
..
..
. .
. .
109,
558
Gua
zatin
e 10
2,35
6 13
,602
51
,431
12,0
43.
595
315
..
. .
. .
180,
342
Gua
zatin
e/tri
ticon
azol
e 44
,609
.
110
3,52
8.
.0
..
. .
. .
48,2
47
Hym
exaz
ol
. .
..
. .
0 .
. .
.16
9,14
8 .
169,
148
Imaz
alil
. 29
5 26
0.
. .
0 .
64,3
85
. .
. .
64,9
40
Ipro
dion
e .
. .
..
.12
9,19
7 .
1,09
0 89
6 42
7.
38,7
5417
0,36
3 P
ency
curo
n .
. .
..
..
.47
,578
.
..
.47
,578
P
roch
lora
z .
. .
..
..
2,23
5.
. .
. .
2,23
5 S
ilthi
ofam
46
,798
2,
795
..
. .
. .
. .
..
.49
,594
T
ebuc
onaz
ole
1,32
2 7,
615
..
. .
. .
. .
..
.8,
936
Teb
ucon
azol
e/tri
azox
ide
3,38
1 29
2,71
9 28
1,05
81,
413
. .
. .
. .
..
674
579,
245
Thi
ram
.
. .
..
.14
5,70
0 .
661
44,8
40
3,83
416
9,14
8 40
,213
404,
395
F
ungi
cide
/inse
ctic
ide
seed
trea
tmen
ts
Bite
rtano
l/fub
erid
azol
e/im
idac
lopr
id
164,
084
9,97
3 .
1,31
5.
.74
4 .
. .
..
.17
6,11
7 F
uber
idaz
ole/
imid
aclo
prid
/tria
dim
enol
45
,248
1,
268
..
. .
. .
. .
..
.46
,516
Inse
ctic
ide
seed
trea
tmen
ts
Bet
a-cy
fluth
rin/im
idac
lopr
id
. .
..
. .
128,
566
395
. 33
4 .
. 42
,548
171,
843
Imid
aclo
prid
.
. .
..
..
..
. .
125,
144
.12
5,14
4
Mol
lusc
icid
e se
ed tr
eatm
ents
M
ethi
ocar
b .
. .
..
.6,
498
..
. .
. 2,
138
8,63
5 O
ther
seed
trea
tmen
ts1
185,
482
104,
966
60,9
1121
,838
342
3,12
353
,389
10
,381
35,2
60
33,8
68
11,4
434,
241
15,8
6354
1,10
5 A
ll se
ed tr
eatm
ents
1,
970,
557
538,
773
472,
217
105,
596
4,47
3 7,
059
464,
535
13,0
1114
8,97
3 79
,938
15
,704
467,
681
140,
189
4,42
8,70
5
1 O
ther
seed
trea
tmen
ts in
clud
e, c
arbe
ndaz
im/c
ymox
anil/
oxad
ixyl
/thira
m, c
arbo
xin/
thia
bend
azol
e, c
ymox
anil/
fludi
oxon
il/m
etal
axyl
-m, e
thiri
mol
/flut
riafo
l/thi
aben
dazo
le, f
enpr
opim
orph
/gam
ma-
HC
H/th
iram
, fon
ofos
, fos
etyl
-al
umin
ium
, gam
ma-
HC
H, g
amm
a-H
CH
/thira
m, g
uaza
tine/
imaz
alil,
imid
aclo
prid
/tebu
cona
zole
/tria
zoxi
de, i
maz
alil/
penc
ycur
on, i
maz
alil/
thia
bend
azol
e, im
azal
il/tri
ticon
azol
e, m
etal
axyl
/thia
bend
azol
e,
met
alax
yl/th
iabe
ndaz
ole/
thira
m, t
eflu
thrin
. thi
aben
dazo
le, t
hiab
enda
zole
/thira
m, t
olcl
ofos
-met
hyl,
unsp
ecifi
ed se
ed tr
eatm
ents
and
uns
peci
fied
SPD
seed
trea
tmen
ts.
17
27
Tabl
e 6
Usa
ge o
f pes
ticid
es o
n ar
able
cro
ps g
row
n in
Gre
at B
rita
in, 2
002
(tonn
es o
f act
ive
subs
tanc
es a
pplie
d)
W
heat
W
inte
r Sp
ring
Oat
sR
ye
Tri
tical
eO
ilsee
d L
inse
edA
ll Pe
as
Bea
nsSu
gar
Set
All
barl
ey
barl
ey
rape
po
tato
es
be
et
asid
ecr
ops
Fun
gici
des
Azo
xyst
robi
n 10
2.59
20
.52
11.5
82.
340.
61
0.26
0.07
.
. 6.
30
0.31
. 0.
0414
4.61
A
zoxy
stro
bin/
fenp
ropi
mor
ph
8.96
20
.43
18.2
80.
270.
28
..
..
. .
. .
48.2
1 B
rom
ucon
azol
e 3.
36
1.61
0.
88.
. .
. .
. .
..
.5.
85
Car
bend
azim
9.
39
3.61
1.
75.
. .
35.6
6 0.
24.
. 2.
46.
8.22
61.3
2 C
arbe
ndaz
im/fl
usila
zole
1.
07
5.36
3.
89.
. .
18.7
9 .
. .
0.02
14.1
6 5.
4548
.74
Chl
orot
halo
nil
141.
95
5.06
2.
38.
. .
2.02
0.
801.
85
47.2
7 12
1.90
0.03
0.
6132
3.87
C
hlor
otha
loni
l/cyp
roco
nazo
le
18.3
2 0.
02
0.75
0.51
. .
. .
. 5.
30
14.4
00.
01
.39
.32
Cya
zofa
mid
.
. .
..
..
.10
.72
. .
. .
10.7
2 C
ymox
anil
. .
..
. .
. .
5.06
.
..
.5.
06
Cym
oxan
il/m
anco
zeb
. .
..
. .
. .
544.
18
. .
. .
544.
18
Cym
oxan
il/m
anco
zeb/
oxad
ixyl
.
. .
..
..
.10
5.14
.
..
.10
5.14
C
ypro
cona
zole
2.
30
0.04
.
1.46
. .
. .
. .
1.09
0.78
.
5.67
C
ypro
cona
zole
/cyp
rodi
nil
7.78
15
.65
7.87
0.30
. .
. .
. .
..
.31
.60
Cyp
roco
nazo
le/p
ropi
cona
zole
3.
77
0.88
0.
25.
0.04
.
. .
. .
..
.4.
94
Cyp
roco
nazo
le/tr
iflox
ystro
bin
20.4
8 0.
29
1.64
..
0.46
0.07
.
. .
..
.22
.94
Cyp
rodi
nil
38.5
4 51
.65
28.2
7.
. .
. .
. .
..
0.15
118.
62
Dife
noco
nazo
le
0.17
.
..
. .
4.58
.
. .
..
0.90
5.65
D
imet
hom
orph
/man
coze
b .
. .
..
..
.18
2.78
.
..
.18
2.78
E
poxi
cona
zole
64
.78
8.51
3.
290.
430.
02
0.20
. .
. .
..
0.02
77.2
5 E
poxi
cona
zole
/fenp
ropi
mor
ph
12.2
9 14
.37
9.70
0.84
. .
. .
. .
..
.37
.19
Epo
xico
nazo
le/fe
npro
pim
orph
/kre
soxi
m-m
ethy
l 11
7.67
9.
80
10.0
04.
16.
.0.
05
..
. .
. .
141.
68
Epo
xico
nazo
le/k
reso
xim
-met
hyl
54.1
4 1.
26
3.97
2.18
0.03
.
. .
. .
..
.61
.58
Epo
xico
nazo
le/k
reso
xim
-met
hyl/p
yrac
lost
robi
n 26
.83
0.18
.
0.03
. .
. .
. .
..
.27
.04
Epo
xico
nazo
le/p
yrac
lost
robi
n 38
.66
1.15
0.
22.
. .
. .
. .
..
.40
.03
Fam
oxad
one/
flusi
lazo
le
16.1
9 6.
08
4.13
..
..
..
. .
. .
26.4
0 F
enpr
opid
in
11.0
9 0.
62
0.86
0.51
. .
. .
. .
..
.13
.09
Fen
prop
idin
/tebu
cona
zole
10
.86
1.15
0.
15.
0.12
.
. .
. .
..
.12
.27
Fen
prop
imor
ph
25.5
6 15
.09
37.6
712
.53
0.71
1.
210.
15
..
. 1.
02.
.93
.94
Fen
prop
imor
ph/fl
usila
zole
0.
25
16.5
3 21
.79
0.06
. .
. .
. .
..
.38
.63
Fen
prop
imor
ph/k
reso
xim
-met
hyl
18.9
7 3.
12
8.53
0.56
. .
. .
. .
..
.31
.17
Fen
tin h
ydro
xide
.
. .
..
..
.32
.38
. .
. .
32.3
8 F
luaz
inam
.
. .
..
.0.
05
.40
.42
. .
. .
40.4
7 F
luqu
inco
nazo
le
7.17
0.
11
.0.
010.
04
..
..
. .
. .
7.33
F
luqu
inco
nazo
le/p
roch
lora
z 18
.28
1.07
0.
11.
0.08
.
. .
. .
..
.19
.54
Flu
sila
zole
1.
07
5.75
4.
300.
12.
.9.
21
..
. .
. 1.
8922
.34
Ipro
dion
e .
. .
..
.0.
80
..
. .
. 0.
120.
92
Ipro
dion
e/th
ioph
anat
e-m
ethy
l .
. .
..
.26
.36
..
. 1.
73.
5.08
33.1
7 M
anco
zeb
0.83
0.
30
0.62
..
.0.
75
.19
0.25
.
1.12
. 0.
1819
4.04
M
anco
zeb/
zoxa
mid
e .
. .
..
..
.60
.65
. .
. .
60.6
5
18
28
Met
cona
zole
7.
40
0.95
0.
70.
. .
3.35
.
. .
..
0.84
13.2
4
Tabl
e 6
(con
t) U
sage
of p
estic
ides
on
arab
le c
rops
gro
wn
in G
reat
Bri
tain
, 200
2 (to
nnes
of a
ctiv
e su
bsta
nces
app
lied)
W
heat
W
inte
r Sp
ring
Oat
sR
ye
Tri
tical
eO
ilsee
d L
inse
edA
ll Pe
as
Bea
nsSu
gar
Set
All
barl
ey
barl
ey
rape
po
tato
es
be
et
asid
ecr
ops
Fun
gici
des (
cont
)
P
icox
ystro
bin
11.1
3 37
.21
11.1
40.
61.
..
..
. .
. .
60.0
9 P
roch
lora
z 12
.90
1.55
0.
06.
. .
2.31
.
. .
..
0.93
17.7
5 P
roch
lora
z/pr
opic
onaz
ole
5.69
12
.99
1.98
..
.0.
06
..
. .
. .
20.7
1 P
roch
lora
z/te
buco
nazo
le
19.1
4 0.
02
..
. .
1.35
.
. .
..
0.17
20.6
8 P
yrac
lost
robi
n 22
.47
0.85
1.
520.
01.
..
..
. .
. .
24.8
4 Q
uino
xyfe
n 15
.44
0.75
2.
562.
11.
.0.
49
..
0.16
0.
010.
21
0.06
21.7
8 S
piro
xam
ine
9.75
7.
15
9.12
0.07
0.02
.
0.00
.
0.04
0.
05
0.02
. 0.
2326
.46
Teb
ucon
azol
e 55
.36
0.65
1.
700.
960.
24
.18
.11
0.32
. .
11.0
5.
7.41
95.8
0 T
ebuc
onaz
ole/
triad
imen
ol
8.65
0.
09
0.01
0.16
. .
0.00
.
. .
0.10
. .
9.00
T
etra
cona
zole
3.
83
0.40
0.
060.
50.
.0.
00
..
. 0.
00.
.4.
78
Trif
loxy
stro
bin
52.0
9 3.
29
3.99
..
..
..
. .
. .
59.3
7 V
incl
ozol
in
0.27
.
..
. .
6.16
.
. 3.
85
2.22
. 0.
9913
.49
Oth
er fu
ngic
ides
1 41
.77
8.80
7.
710.
720.
32
0.02
19.1
5 .
228.
16
0.23
33
.45
. 5.
9134
6.25
A
ll fu
ngic
ides
1,
049.
21
284.
91
223.
4331
.42
2.51
2.
1514
9.52
1.
361,
401.
61
63.1
6 19
0.91
15.1
9 39
.19
3,45
4.58
S
ulph
ur
82.8
1 32
.39
48.9
911
.71
. .
39.5
3 .
15.9
8 1.
35
11.0
043
.02
17.3
030
4.07
1 O
ther
fun
gici
des
incl
udes
azo
xyst
robi
n/flu
triaf
ol,
bena
laxy
l/man
coze
b, b
enom
yl,
Bor
deau
x m
ixtu
re,
carb
enda
zim
/chl
orot
halo
nil,
carb
enda
zim
/flut
riafo
l, ca
rben
dazi
m/ip
rodi
one,
car
bend
azim
/man
coze
b, c
arbe
ndaz
im/m
aneb
, ca
rben
dazi
m/m
aneb
/sul
phur
, ca
rben
dazi
m/p
roch
lora
z,
carb
enda
zim
/pro
pico
nazo
le,
carb
enda
zim
/tebu
cona
zole
, ca
rben
dazi
m/v
incl
ozol
in,
chlo
roth
alon
il/cy
mox
anil,
ch
loro
thal
onil/
fluqu
inco
nazo
le,
chlo
roth
alon
il/flu
triaf
ol,
chlo
roth
alon
il/m
anco
zeb,
chl
orot
halo
nil/m
etal
axyl
, ch
loro
thal
onil/
met
alax
yl-m
, ch
loro
thal
onil/
prop
amoc
arb
hydr
ochl
orid
e, c
hlor
otha
loni
l/tet
raco
nazo
le,
copp
er o
xych
lorid
e, c
ymox
anil/
fam
oxad
one,
cyp
roco
nazo
le/p
roch
lora
z,
cypr
ocon
azol
e/qu
inox
yfen
, di
fenz
oqua
t (f
), di
thia
non,
ep
oxic
onaz
ole/
tride
mor
ph,
fenb
ucon
azol
e,
fenb
ucon
azol
e/fe
npro
pim
orph
, fe
nbuc
onaz
ole/
prop
icon
azol
e,
fenp
ropi
din/
fenp
ropi
mor
ph,
fenp
ropi
din/
proc
hlor
az,
fenp
ropi
mor
ph/p
roch
lora
z,
fenp
ropi
mor
ph/p
ropi
cona
zole
, fe
npro
pim
orph
/qui
noxy
fen,
fe
ntin
ac
etat
e/m
aneb
, flu
sila
zole
/trid
emor
ph,
flutri
afol
, m
anco
zeb/
met
alax
yl,
man
coze
b/m
etal
axyl
-M,
man
coze
b/of
urac
e,
man
coze
b/pr
opam
ocar
b hy
droc
hlor
ide,
man
eb,
prop
icon
azol
e, p
ropi
cona
zole
/tebu
cona
zole
, sp
iroxa
min
e/te
buco
nazo
le,
triad
imen
ol,
triad
imen
ol/tr
idem
orph
, tri
dem
orph
, un
spec
ified
fun
gici
des
and
zine
b-et
hyle
ne t
hiur
am
disu
lphi
de a
dduc
t.
19
Tabl
e 6
(con
t) U
sage
of p
estic
ides
on
arab
le c
rops
gro
wn
in G
reat
Bri
tain
, 200
2 (to
nnes
of a
ctiv
e su
bsta
nces
app
lied)
Whe
at
Win
ter
Spri
ngO
ats
Rye
T
ritic
ale
Oils
eed
Lin
seed
A
ll Pe
as
Bea
nsSu
gar
Set
All
barl
ey
barl
ey
ra
pe
po
tato
es
be
et
asid
ecr
ops
Des
icca
nts
Sul
phur
ic a
cid
. .
..
. .
. .
10,7
71.6
0 .
..
.10
,771
.60
H
erbi
cide
s
A
mid
osul
furo
n 2.
36
0.48
0.
080.
13.
. .
0.10
.
. .
. .
3.15
B
enta
zone
/MC
PB
. .
..
. .
. .
. 69
.18
.0.
02
.69
.20
Bro
mox
ynil/
ioxy
nil
19.4
3 9.
53
30.3
44.
080.
05
. .
. .
. .
. 0.
1263
.54
Chl
orid
azon
.
. .
..
. .
. 0.
19
. .
93.3
5 .
93.5
4 C
hlor
otol
uron
21
7.52
88
.63
..
. 0.
24
. .
. .
..
.30
6.39
C
lodi
nafo
p-pr
opar
gyl
11.6
4 .
..
0.01
0.
06
. .
. .
0.01
. .
11.7
1 C
lodi
nafo
p-pr
opar
gyl/t
riflu
ralin
30
5.55
0.
08
..
. .
. .
. 0.
30
..
.30
5.93
C
lopy
ralid
0.
05
. .
..
. 2.
78
. .
. .
6.51
1.
5810
.92
Cya
nazi
ne
0.05
0.
25
..
. .
11.3
9 .
. 14
.65
0.51
. 4.
7831
.63
Cya
nazi
ne/p
endi
met
halin
1.
27
0.74
0.
01.
. .
. .
10.0
5 52
.81
45.5
2.
.11
0.40
C
yclo
xydi
m
. 0.
02
..
. .
10.7
6 0.
54
0.05
2.
02
2.68
2.38
2.
2020
.64
Des
med
ipha
m/e
thof
umes
ate/
phen
med
ipha
m
. .
..
. .
. .
. .
.23
.87
.23
.87
Dic
amba
/mec
opro
p-P
34.8
9 3.
34
19.4
54.
01.
. .
. .
. .
. 0.
2461
.93
Dic
lofo
p-m
ethy
l/fen
oxap
rop-
P-et
hyl
4.22
20
.00
4.84
..
. .
. .
. .
. .
29.0
6 D
ifluf
enic
an/fl
urta
mon
e 10
.36
4.12
.
..
. .
. .
. .
. .
14.4
8 D
ifluf
enic
an/fl
urta
mon
e/is
opro
turo
n 32
.48
21.0
3 .
..
. .
. .
. .
. .
53.5
2 D
ifluf
enic
an/is
opro
turo
n 28
3.72
83
.51
..
0.49
0.
62
. .
. 0.
75
..
.36
9.09
D
ifluf
enic
an/tr
iflur
alin
26
.95
18.4
4 .
.0.
45
. .
. .
. .
. .
45.8
3 D
iqua
t 0.
23
. .
0.04
. .
2.22
0.
78
24.4
0 8.
26
0.80
. 1.
6938
.42
Diq
uat/p
araq
uat
0.95
0.
06
..
. .
. .
38.6
5 .
.0.
52
.40
.19
Eth
ofum
esat
e .
. .
..
. .
. .
. .
22.1
0 .
22.1
0 E
thof
umes
ate/
phen
med
ipha
m
. .
..
. .
. .
. .
.20
.29
.20
.29
Fen
oxap
rop-
P-et
hyl
10.3
6 0.
18
..
. .
. .
. .
..
.10
.54
Flo
rasu
lam
0.
32
0.05
.
..
. .
. .
. .
. .
0.37
F
luaz
ifop-
P-bu
tyl
. .
..
. .
3.29
.
. 0.
64
0.31
1.44
0.
826.
49
Flu
fena
cet/p
endi
met
halin
17
3.07
42
.71
..
. .
0.37
.
. .
..
0.48
216.
63
Flu
pyrs
ulfu
ron-
met
hyl
5.22
.
.0.
03.
. .
. .
. .
. .
5.26
F
lupy
rsul
furo
n-m
ethy
l/thi
fens
ulfu
ron-
met
hyl
3.59
.
.0.
38.
. .
. .
. .
. .
3.98
F
luro
xypy
r 76
.49
7.97
5.
292.
090.
03
. .
. .
. .
0.06
0.
0692
.00
Gly
phos
ate
457.
70
100.
93
115.
5628
.40
0.11
1.
21
190.
38
7.31
28
.78
54.5
9 72
.18
72.9
8 35
5.54
1,48
5.66
Is
opro
turo
n 12
23.7
2 37
2.93
19
.25
0.11
1.39
2.
49
. .
. .
0.17
. 0.
011,
620.
06
Isop
rotu
ron/
pend
imet
halin
15
2.83
73
.14
0.28
.0.
16
. .
. .
. .
. .
226.
42
Isop
rotu
ron/
sim
azin
e 81
.60
16.5
2 .
..
. .
. .
. .
. .
98.1
2 L
enac
il .
. .
..
. .
. .
. .
19.0
0 .
19.0
0 L
inur
on
. .
..
. .
. 0.
45
94.8
0 .
..
.95
.25
20
Tabl
e 6
(con
t) U
sage
of p
estic
ides
on
arab
le c
rops
gro
wn
in G
reat
Bri
tain
, 200
2 (to
nnes
of a
ctiv
e su
bsta
nces
app
lied)
Whe
at
Win
ter
Spri
ngO
ats
Rye
T
ritic
ale
Oils
eed
Lin
seed
A
ll Pe
as
Bea
nsSu
gar
Set
All
barl
ey
barl
ey
ra
pe
po
tato
es
be
et
asid
ecr
ops
Her
bici
des (
cont
)
M
CPA
19
.76
2.43
17
.38
0.91
. .
. 0.
28
0.47
0.
29
0.67
. 3.
4945
.68
Mec
opro
p-P
256.
27
41.8
9 13
1.68
20.9
5.
2.54
0.
73
. .
0.08
.
. 1.
3345
5.47
M
etam
itron
.
. .
..
. 0.
28
. .
. .
164.
71
.16
4.99
M
etaz
achl
or
. .
..
. .
69.6
1 .
. .
..
20.1
489
.75
Met
azac
hlor
/qui
nmer
ac
0.14
.
..
. .
73.9
0 0.
03
. .
..
21.2
795
.34
Met
sulfu
ron-
met
hyl
1.29
0.
18
0.37
0.14
0.01
0.
01
. 0.
02
. .
..
0.01
2.02
M
etsu
lfuro
n-m
ethy
l/thi
fens
ulfu
ron-
met
hyl
3.12
0.
55
5.95
0.10
. .
. .
. .
..
.9.
72
Met
sulfu
ron-
met
hyl/t
riben
uron
-met
hyl
0.32
0.
21
0.31
0.03
. .
. .
. .
..
.0.
86
Pen
dim
etha
lin
463.
47
98.6
7 3.
260.
002.
17
0.94
.
0.83
2.
61
2.48
8.
47.
0.28
583.
17
Pen
dim
etha
lin/p
icol
inaf
en
38.7
5 26
.15
..
. .
. .
. .
..
.64
.91
Phe
nmed
ipha
m
. .
..
. .
. .
. .
.57
.38
.57
.38
Pro
paqu
izaf
op
. .
..
. .
5.50
0.
12
0.06
0.
28
0.53
0.69
1.
818.
99
Pro
pyza
mid
e 0.
15
0.96
0.
44.
. .
57.4
1 .
. .
7.68
. 12
.73
79.3
7 S
imaz
ine
. .
..
. .
. .
. .
114.
71.
.11
4.71
T
epra
loxy
dim
0.
01
. .
..
. 2.
85
0.02
0.
00
0.90
1.
330.
73
0.77
6.61
T
erbu
thyl
azin
e/te
rbut
ryn
0.02
.
..
. .
. .
36.0
5 19
.62
11.2
9.
.66
.99
Ter
butry
n 71
.14
8.59
.
31.6
3.
. .
. .
. .
. .
111.
36
Thi
fens
ulfu
ron-
met
hyl/t
riben
uron
-met
hyl
0.32
0.
07
0.94
..
. .
. .
. .
. .
1.32
T
ralk
oxyd
im
10.5
9 16
.99
18.4
3.
0.15
.
. .
. .
..
.46
.16
Tri-
alla
te
295.
99
71.3
3 2.
83.
0.88
.
. .
. .
0.67
0.02
.
371.
74
Trib
enur
on-m
ethy
l 0.
48
0.15
0.
290.
040.
01
0.03
.
. .
. .
. .
1.00
T
riflu
ralin
17
2.27
27
.04
.0.
720.
58
. 91
.66
0.06
.
0.17
5.
82.
37.0
833
5.41
T
riflu
sulfu
ron-
met
hyl
. .
..
. .
. .
. .
.1.
35
.1.
35
Oth
er h
erbi
cide
s1 13
1.71
54
.33
84.1
78.
300.
26
2.07
41
.26
1.62
53
.56
17.6
0 24
.56
40.2
9 15
.37
475.
09
All
herb
icid
es
4,60
2.39
1,
214.
21
461.
1610
2.08
6.77
10
.22
564.
40
12.1
6 28
9.67
24
4.63
29
7.93
527.
67
481.
768,
815.
04
1 Oth
er h
erbi
cide
s in
clud
e 2,
4-D
, 2,4
-D/M
CPA
, 2,4
-DB/
linur
on/M
CPA
, am
idos
ulfu
ron/
iodo
sulfu
ron-
met
hyl-s
odiu
m, a
trazi
ne, b
enaz
olin
, ben
azol
in/2
,4-D
B/M
CPA
, ben
azol
in/b
rom
oxyn
il/io
xyni
l, be
nazo
lin/c
lopy
ralid
, ben
tazo
ne,
bent
azon
e/M
CPA
/MC
PB,
bent
azon
e/pe
ndim
etha
lin,
bife
nox/
chlo
roto
luro
n,
bife
nox/
isop
rotu
ron,
br
omox
ynil,
br
omox
ynil/
clop
yral
id,
brom
oxyn
il/di
chlo
rpro
p/io
xyni
l/MC
PA,
brom
oxyn
il/di
flufe
nica
n/io
xyni
l, br
omox
ynil/
fluro
xypy
r, br
omox
ynil/
fluro
xypy
r/iox
ynil,
br
omox
ynil/
ioxy
nil/m
ecop
rop-
P,
brom
oxyn
il/io
xyni
l/tria
sulfu
ron,
ca
rbet
amid
e,
carf
entra
zone
-eth
yl,
carf
entra
zone
-eth
yl/fl
upyr
sulfu
ron-
met
hyl,
carf
entra
zone
-et
hyl/m
ecop
rop-
P,
carf
entra
zone
-eth
yl/m
etsu
lfuro
n-m
ethy
l, ca
rfen
trazo
ne-e
thyl
/thife
nsul
furo
n-m
ethy
l, ch
lorid
azon
/chl
orpr
opha
m/m
etam
itron
, ch
lorid
azon
/eth
ofum
esat
e,
chlo
ridaz
on/le
naci
l, ch
lorid
azon
/met
amitr
on,
chlo
ridaz
on/q
uinm
erac
, ch
loro
tolu
ron/
isop
rotu
ron,
chl
orpr
opha
m/fe
nuro
n/pr
opha
m,
chlo
rpro
pham
/met
amitr
on,
cini
don-
ethy
l, cl
odin
afop
-pro
parg
yl/d
ifluf
enic
an,
clom
azon
e, c
lopy
ralid
/flur
oxyp
yr/tr
iclo
pyr,
clop
yral
id/tr
iclo
pyr,
cyan
azin
e/te
rbut
hyla
zine
, de
smed
ipha
m/p
henm
edip
ham
, di
cam
ba/M
CPA
/mec
opro
p-P,
di
chlo
rpro
p-P,
di
chlo
rpro
p-P/
MC
PA/m
ecop
rop-
P,
dich
lorp
rop/
MCP
A,
dicl
ofop
-met
hyl,
dife
nzoq
uat,
diflu
feni
can/
terb
uthy
lazi
ne,
etho
fum
esat
e/m
etam
itron
, fe
noxa
prop
-P-e
thyl
/isop
rotu
ron,
fla
mpr
op-M
-isop
ropy
l, flo
rasu
lam
/flur
oxyp
yr,
flufe
nace
t/met
ribuz
in,
fluor
ogly
cofe
n-et
hyl/i
sopr
otur
on,
flupy
rsul
furo
n-m
ethy
l/met
sulfu
ron-
met
hyl,
fluro
xypy
r/met
osul
am,
fluro
xypy
r/thi
fens
ulfu
ron-
met
hyl/t
riben
uron
-met
hyl,
fom
esaf
en/te
rbut
ryn,
gl
ufos
inat
e-am
mon
ium
, im
azam
etha
benz
-met
hyl,
isop
rotu
ron/
triflu
ralin
, le
naci
l/phe
nmed
ipha
m,
MC
PA/M
CPB
, M
CPB
, m
ecop
rop-
P/m
etsu
lfuro
n-m
ethy
l, m
ecop
rop-
P/tri
asul
furo
n, m
etha
benz
thia
zuro
n, m
etrib
uzin
, m
onol
inur
on,
mon
olin
uron
/par
aqua
t, pa
raqu
at,
pend
imet
halin
/sim
azin
e, p
ropo
xyca
rbaz
one-
sodi
um,
quiz
alof
op-P
-eth
yl,
quiz
alof
op-
ethy
l, rim
sulfu
ron,
seth
oxyd
im, s
odiu
m m
onoc
hlor
oace
tate
, sul
fosu
lfuro
n, te
rbut
ryn/
triet
azin
e an
d th
ifens
ulfu
ron-
met
hyl.
21
Tabl
e 6
(con
t) U
sage
of p
estic
ides
on
arab
le c
rops
gro
wn
in G
reat
Bri
tain
, 200
2 (to
nnes
of a
ctiv
e su
bsta
nces
app
lied)
W
heat
W
inte
rSp
ring
Oat
sR
yeT
ritic
ale
Oils
eed
Lin
seed
A
llPe
as
Bea
nsSu
gar
Set
All
barl
eyba
rley
ra
pe
pota
toes
be
et
asid
ecr
ops
Inse
ctic
ides
& n
emat
icid
es
Car
bam
ate
Piri
mic
arb
3.64
0.
020.
330.
07.
. 0.
08.
7.77
4.38
4.
761.
91
0.35
23.3
1 O
rgan
opho
spha
te
Dim
etho
ate
36.8
9 0.
560.
590.
290.
12.
0.07
. 0.
172.
54
0.16
0.03
.
41.4
2 Py
reth
roid
A
lpha
-cyp
erm
ethr
in
0.56
0.
13.
0.01
..
1.19
. .
0.16
0.
21.
0.29
2.55
C
yper
met
hrin
30
.15
6.05
0.47
0.82
0.08
0.07
6.
950.
08
0.94
0.48
2.
040.
09
1.44
49.6
6 D
elta
met
hrin
0.
28
0.11
0.04
..
. 0.
07.
.0.
03
0.15
0.01
0.
040.
73
Esf
enva
lera
te
0.66
0.
21.
0.01
.0.
01
..
..
..
.0.
90
Lam
bda-
cyha
loth
rin
1.37
0.
140.
040.
06.
. 0.
41.
0.17
0.27
0.
310.
03
0.11
2.91
T
au-f
luva
linat
e 1.
82
0.04
0.03
..
. 0.
01.
..
..
.1.
90
Zet
a-cy
perm
ethr
in
1.07
0.
220.
030.
03.
. 0.
33.
0.02
0.11
0.
09.
0.08
1.99
O
ther
inse
ctic
ides
& n
emat
icid
es1
16.5
1 0.
324.
670.
27.
. 0.
06.
311.
051.
94
0.04
13.0
4 .
347.
89
All
inse
ctic
ides
& n
emat
icid
es
92.9
6 7.
806.
201.
560.
210.
07
9.17
0.08
32
0.12
9.91
7.
7615
.11
2.32
473.
26
Mol
lusc
icid
es &
repe
llent
s M
etal
dehy
de
195.
01
11.2
10.
133.
44
. .
70.2
4 .
34.1
30.
14
1.14
0.27
18
.59
334.
32
Met
hioc
arb
10.9
4 0.
30.
0.08
0.
04
.3.
90
. 4.
660.
08
.0.
03
0.71
20.7
6 T
hiod
icar
b 3.
17
1.21
.0.
12
. .
0.37
.
1.19
. .
. 1.
777.
83
All
mol
lusc
icid
es &
repe
llent
s 20
9.12
12
.73
0.13
3.65
0.
04
.74
.52
. 39
.98
0.23
1.
140.
30
21.0
836
2.91
G
row
th re
gula
tors
2
-chl
oroe
thyl
phos
phon
ic a
cid/
mep
iqua
t 53
.78
26.6
26.
70
0.69
1.
41
0.31
.
. .
. .
. .
89.5
1 C
hlor
meq
uat
1,70
5.44
35
4.13
23.6
6 49
.77
6.59
5.
91
0.89
.
..
..
0.05
2,14
6.44
C
hlor
meq
uat c
hlor
ide/
2-ch
loro
ethy
lpho
spho
nic
acid
/mep
iqua
t chl
orid
e 13
.24
7.14
1.93
.
. .
. .
..
..
.22
.30
Chl
orm
equa
t/2-c
hlor
oeth
ylph
osph
onic
aci
d 27
.49
6.28
2.29
0.
28
. .
. .
..
..
.36
.34
Chl
orm
equa
t/cho
line
chlo
ride
399.
44
70.5
50.
09
50.3
3 0.
88
3.14
.
. .
. .
. .
524.
43
Chl
orm
equa
t/im
azaq
uin
219.
47
0.76
0.14
.
. .
. .
..
..
.22
0.37
T
rinex
apac
-eth
yl
21.0
9 6.
230.
67
2.85
0.
07
. .
. .
. .
. .
30.9
1 O
ther
gro
wth
regu
lato
rs2
30.9
3 3.
641.
35
. .
. .
. 81
.17
. .
. .
117.
09
All
grow
th re
gula
tors
2,
470.
88
475.
3436
.82
103.
93
8.95
9.
37
0.89
.
81.1
7.
..
0.05
3,18
7.39
1 O
ther
inse
ctic
ides
and
nem
atic
ides
incl
udes
1,3
-dic
hlor
opro
pene
, ald
icar
b, b
ifent
hrin
, car
bosu
lfan,
chl
orpy
rifos
, del
tam
ethr
in/p
irim
icar
b, e
thop
roph
os, f
osth
iaza
te, g
amm
a-H
CH
, lam
bda-
cyha
loth
rin/p
irim
icar
b, n
icot
ine,
oxa
myl
, py
met
rozi
ne a
nd tr
iaza
mat
e.
2 O
ther
gro
wth
regu
lato
rs in
clud
e 2-
chlo
roet
hylp
hosp
honi
c ac
id, 2
-chl
oroe
thyl
phos
phon
ic a
cid/
mep
iqua
t chl
orid
e, c
hlor
meq
uat c
hlor
ide/
mep
iqua
t chl
orid
e, c
hlor
meq
uat/2
-chl
oroe
thyl
phos
phon
ic a
cid/
imaz
aqui
n an
d m
alei
c hy
draz
ide
22
Tabl
e 6
(con
t) U
sage
of p
estic
ides
on
arab
le c
rops
gro
wn
in G
reat
Bri
tain
, 200
2 (to
nnes
of a
ctiv
e su
bsta
nces
app
lied)
Whe
at
Win
ter
Spri
ngO
ats
Rye
T
ritic
ale
Oils
eed
Lins
eed
All
Peas
B
eans
Suga
r Se
t A
ll
ba
rley
barl
ey
ra
pe
po
tato
es
beet
as
ide
crop
s F
ungi
cide
seed
trea
tmen
ts
B
iterta
nol/f
uber
idaz
ole
81.4
7 2.
180.
544.
630.
01
0.11
.
. .
. .
. .
88.9
5 C
arbo
xin/
thira
m
32.7
3 11
.98
10.1
81.
620.
04
0.41
.
. .
. .
. .
56.9
6 F
ludi
oxon
il 2.
88
0.08
0.21
0.11
. .
. .
..
..
. 3.
29
Flu
quin
cona
zole
/pro
chlo
raz
11.4
9 .
..
. .
. .
..
..
. 11
.49
Fub
erid
azol
e/tri
adim
enol
5.
90
1.19
0.70
0.15
0.15
.
. .
..
..
. 8.
08
Gua
zatin
e 11
.21
1.58
6.19
1.92
. 0.
08
. .
..
..
. 20
.97
Gua
zatin
e/tri
ticon
azol
e 5.
21
.0.
010.
39.
. .
. .
. .
. .
5.61
H
ymex
azol
.
..
..
. .
. .
. .
11.7
2 .
11.7
2 Im
azal
il .
..
..
. .
. 1.
74.
..
. 1.
75
Ipro
dion
e .
..
..
. 1.
75
. 0.
300.
58
0.20
. 0.
54
3.37
P
ency
curo
n .
..
..
. .
. 27
.57
. .
. .
27.5
7 P
roch
lora
z .
..
..
. .
0.04
.
. .
. .
0.04
S
ilthi
ofam
2.
08
0.12
..
. .
. .
..
..
. 2.
20
Teb
ucon
azol
e 0.
01
0.04
..
. .
. .
..
..
. 0.
05
Teb
ucon
azol
e/tri
azox
ide
0.04
3.
293.
890.
01.
. .
. .
. .
. 0.
01
7.24
T
hira
m
. .
..
. .
2.40
.
5.19
6.91
0.
764.
19
0.67
20
.11
Fun
gici
de/in
sect
icid
e se
ed tr
eatm
ents
Bite
rtano
l/fub
erid
azol
e/im
idac
lopr
id
27.5
4 1.
61.
0.21
. .
. .
..
..
. 29
.36
Fub
erid
azol
e/im
idac
lopr
id/tr
iadi
men
ol
6.19
0.
17.
..
. .
. .
. .
. .
6.36
In
sect
icid
e se
ed tr
eatm
ents
Bet
a-cy
fluth
rin/im
idac
lopr
id
. .
..
. .
2.83
0.
08
.0.
34
..
0.94
4.
19
Imid
aclo
prid
.
..
..
. .
. .
. .
11.9
5 .
11.9
5
M
ollu
scic
ide
seed
trea
tmen
ts
M
ethi
ocar
b .
..
..
. 0.
17
. .
. .
. 0.
02
0.20
O
ther
seed
trea
tmen
ts1
1.31
9.
932.
450.
05.
. 0.
56
0.73
13
.79
4.89
0.
210.
28
0.05
34
.27
All
seed
trea
tmen
ts
188.
07
32.1
724
.16
9.09
0.21
0.
60
7.71
0.
86
48.5
912
.72
1.17
28.1
3 2.
23
355.
72
1 Oth
er s
eed
treat
men
ts i
nclu
de c
arbe
ndaz
im/c
ymox
anil/
oxad
ixyl
/thira
m,
carb
oxin
/thia
bend
azol
e, c
ymox
anil/
fludi
oxon
il/m
etal
axyl
-m,
ethi
rimol
/flut
riafo
l/thi
aben
dazo
le,
fenp
ropi
mor
ph/g
amm
a-H
CH
/thira
m,
fono
fos,
fose
tyl-
alum
iniu
m,
gam
ma-
HC
H,
gam
ma-
HC
H/th
iram
, gu
azat
ine/
imaz
alil,
im
idac
lopr
id/te
buco
nazo
le/tr
iazo
xide
, im
azal
il/pe
ncyc
uron
, im
azal
il/th
iabe
ndaz
ole,
im
azal
il/tri
ticon
azol
e,
met
alax
yl/th
iabe
ndaz
ole,
m
etal
axyl
/thia
bend
azol
e/th
iram
, tef
luth
rin. t
hiab
enda
zole
, thi
aben
dazo
le/th
iram
and
tolc
lofo
s-m
ethy
l.
23
24
EXTENT AND QUANTITIES OF ACTIVE SUBSTANCES USED
The 50 most extensively-used pesticide active substances on all arable farm crops in Great Britain in 2002 are listed in descending order of area treated in Table 7. A similar list showing the 50 most-used active substances in descending order of amount applied is presented in Table 8. The ranking of active substances varies in each list depending upon their extent of usage, rate of application, and relative proportions in products containing that active substance.
The ten most extensively-used active substances in 2002 included five fungicides, three herbicides, one growth regulator and one insecticide. The most widely-used active substance was the fungicide epoxiconazole, usage of which increased by 7% since 2000, and was also the most frequently-used fungicide in 2000. Use of the most widely-used herbicide, isoproturon, declined by 16% since 2000, whilst glyphosate usage increased by 15% in terms of area treated over the same period. Use of the growth regulator chlormequat had increased in 2002 by 5% since 2000. The use of pendimethalin, mainly as a pre-emergence herbicide, primarily on cereals, increased by 37% since 2000.
The most extensively-used foliar applied fungicide active substances by area treated were: epoxiconazole (used mainly on cereals and in particular on wheat); fenpropimorph (used mainly in formulation with other fungicides and encountered mainly on cereals); azoxystrobin (recorded on all cereals, peas, beans and oilseed rape); kresoxim-methyl (encountered mainly on cereals); tebuconazole (used on all crops except triticale, potatoes, peas and sugar beet). Fuberidazole was the most extensively-used fungicide seed treatment recorded, accounting for almost 1.2 million treated hectares, with bitertanol (always formulated with fuberidazole) accounting for a further 1 million treated hectares. Fungicides newly encountered since the last survey included the strobilurins pyraclostrobin, used mainly on wheat, and picoxystrobin used primarily on winter and spring barley. In terms of amount applied mancozeb appeared in the top five but was only fourteenth in terms of area treated, reflecting its relatively high rate of application. Similarly chlorothalonil was ninth in terms of weight applied but twentieth by area treated.
Isoproturon was again clearly the most extensively-used herbicide active substance, principally applied to cereals in England & Wales. Other extensively-used active substances were: glyphosate (used on almost all crops as a pre-planting clean-up spray or as a pre-harvest treatment to cereals); mecoprop-P (used almost exclusively on cereals); pendimethalin; metsulfuron-methyl (used on cereals and linseed) and diflufenican (used mainly on winter sown cereals). In contrast to the extent of usage of metsulfuron-methyl by area treated, it is not in the first 50 by weight of active substance used, reflecting its extremely low rate of application per hectare. Newly encountered herbicides since the last survey included flufenacet, used in mixtures on just over 170,000 hectares and picolinafen again used in formulated mixtures. Usage of dicamba, which appeared at number 43 by area treated, had more than doubled since 2000, being used mainly for the control of broad-leaved weeds in cereals.
Cypermethrin was again the most extensively-used insecticide active substance by area treated, though it showed a 3% decline since the last survey. Other extensively-used active substances were lambda-cyhalothrin, showing an increase of 5% in the area treated since 2000, pirimicarb, increasing by 2% and esfenvalerate, increasing by 78%.
Chlormequat was again the most extensively-used growth regulator active substance. Usage had increased slightly since the last survey, both in terms of area treated (5%) and amount used (3%).
Use of the molluscicide metaldehyde decreased by 4% in terms of both area treated and weight applied between the two surveys, reflecting, perhaps, seasonal differences between survey years.
Sulphuric acid was again the active substance used most by weight applied, though its usage had decreased by 10% (1,204 tonnes) compared with 2000. This represented 39% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied to arable farm crops (including set-aside) in 2002.
25
Table 7 Estimated area (ha) of application of the fifty most extensively-used active substances on all arable crops surveyed in 2002 in Great Britain (excluding seed treatments)
Active substance Area treated 2002 (ha) Area treated 2000 (ha) % change on 2000 Movement
1 Epoxiconazole 3,665,844 3,434,739 7 ↑ 2 Chlormequat 3,017,068 2,862,628 5 ↑ 3 Isoproturon 2,239,215 2,661,800 -16 ↓ 4 Cypermethrin 2,047,883 2,105,188 -3 ↓ 5 Fenpropimorph 1,823,617 1,794,341 2 ↑ 6 Glyphosate 1,699,251 1,473,693 15 ↑ 7 Azoxystrobin 1,654,411 2,084,307 -21 ↓ 8 Kresoxim-methyl 1,557,497 2,124,178 -27 ↓ 9 Tebuconazole 1,134,382 1,258,039 -10 ↓ 10 Mecoprop-P 1,079,646 811,650 33 ↑ 11 Pendimethalin 1,078,753 785,897 37 ↑ 12 Metsulfuron-methyl 960,286 1,000,883 -4 ↓ 13 Diflufenican 936,747 1,112,566 -16 ↓ 14 Mancozeb 889,253 921,306 -3 ↓ 15 Metaldehyde 866,502 903,663 -4 ↓ 16 Fluroxypyr 853,498 994,345 -14 ↓ 17 Flusilazole 848,570 596,474 42 ↑ 18 Trifluralin 822,491 857,268 -4 ↓ 19 Clodinafop-propargyl 806,980 789,170 2 ↑ 20 Chlorothalonil 774,434 772,023 0 ↑ 21 Trifloxystrobin 761,063 587,497 30 ↑ 22 Pyraclostrobin 744,101 . ↑ 23 Trinexapac-ethyl 736,953 636,228 16 ↑ 24 Lambda-cyhalothrin 674,182 641,148 5 ↑ 25 Flupyrsulfuron-methyl 673,294 503,838 34 ↑ 26 Carbendazim 641,900 778,757 -18 ↓ 27 Cyproconazole 586,899 755,418 -22 ↓ 28 Cymoxanil 555,395 442,741 25 ↑ 29 Cyprodinil 540,847 552,040 -2 ↓ 30 Quinoxyfen 518,081 514,897 1 ↑ 31 Picoxystrobin 502,965 . ↑ 32 Thifensulfuron-methyl 497,709 561,206 -11 ↓ 33 Choline chloride 492,298 297,693 65 ↑ 34 Phenmedipham 455,298 438,180 4 ↑ 35 Imazaquin 426,552 332,419 28 ↑ 36 Metconazole 403,389 365,411 10 ↑ 37 2-chloroethylphosphonic acid 401,064 429,572 -7 ↓ 38 Prochloraz 371,436 337,166 10 ↑ 39 Ethofumesate 307,586 279,767 10 ↑ 40 Fluazinam 304,004 325,100 -6 ↓ 41 Pirimicarb 303,235 297,432 2 ↑ 42 Tribenuron-methyl 292,108 187,588 56 ↑ 43 Dicamba 281,768 120,237 134 ↑ 44 Esfenvalerate 280,778 158,116 78 ↑ 45 Bromoxynil 276,256 256,485 8 ↑ 46 Metazachlor 267,889 197,487 36 ↑ 47 Ioxynil 266,004 230,918 15 ↑ 48 Fenoxaprop-P-ethyl 258,814 280,348 -8 ↓ 49 Metamitron 258,486 225,492 15 ↑ 50 Simazine 240,153 182,358 32 ↑
26
Table 8 Estimated amount (tonnes) of the 50 active substances, used most by weight, on all arable crops surveyed in 2002 in Great Britain (excluding
seed treatments)
Active substance Amount used 2002 (t) Amount used 2000 (t) % change on 2000 Movement
1 Sulphuric acid 10,772 11,976 -10 ↓ 2 Chlormequat 2,885 2,792 3 ↑ 3 Isoproturon 2,254 2,730 -17 ↓ 4 Glyphosate 1,488 1,285 16 ↑ 5 Mancozeb 1,146 1,158 -1 ↓ 6 Pendimethalin 1,057 717 47 ↑ 7 Trifluralin 682 714 -5 ↓ 8 Mecoprop-P 527 437 20 ↑ 9 Chlorothalonil 424 387 10 ↑ 10 Tri-allate 372 462 -19 ↓ 11 Chlorotoluron 341 133 157 ↑ 12 Metaldehyde 334 350 -4 ↓ 13 Sulphur 315 393 -20 ↓ 14 Fenpropimorph 267 262 2 ↑ 15 1,3-dichloropropene 192 180 6 ↑ 16 Epoxiconazole 178 206 -14 ↓ 17 Metamitron 174 175 -1 ↓ 18 Terbutryn 163 71 129 ↑ 19 Metazachlor 161 122 32 ↑ 20 Azoxystrobin 158 225 -30 ↓ 21 Cyprodinil 146 156 -6 ↓ 22 Simazine 135 96 41 ↑ 23 Tebuconazole 116 127 -8 ↓ 24 Chloridazon 108 101 7 ↑ 25 Fluroxypyr 97 113 -15 ↓ 26 Linuron 97 79 22 ↑ 27 Kresoxim-methyl 93 142 -35 ↓ 28 Carbendazim 89 134 -33 ↓ 29 Phenmedipham 82 79 4 ↑ 30 Maleic hydrazide 81 69 17 ↑ 31 Flusilazole 80 59 37 ↑ 32 Propyzamide 79 60 31 ↑ 33 MCPA 79 123 -36 ↓ 34 Trifloxystrobin 75 63 19 ↑ 35 Prochloraz 73 59 24 ↑ 36 Cyanazine 72 55 32 ↑ 37 Pyraclostrobin 68 . ↑ 38 Picoxystrobin 60 . ↑ 39 2-chloroethylphosphonic acid 59 85 -30 ↓ 40 Aldicarb 59 24 143 ↑ 41 Mepiquat 59 57 4 ↑ 42 Diquat 58 68 -14 ↓ 43 Bentazone 56 62 -9 ↓ 44 Cymoxanil 51 39 33 ↑ 45 Ethofumesate 51 46 10 ↑ 46 Cypermethrin 50 51 -3 ↓ 47 MCPB 47 45 3 ↑ 48 Tralkoxydim 46 55 -16 ↓ 49 Bromoxynil 44 42 7 ↑ 50 Dimethoate 41 70 -41 ↓
27
PESTICIDE USAGE ON CEREALS
WHEAT
Wheat crops received on average three fungicides, three herbicides, one growth regulator and one insecticide (Table 4a). Fungicides accounted for 34% of the total pesticide-treated area of wheat, herbicides 32%, growth regulators 13%, insecticides 10%, seed treatments 8%, molluscicides 3% and sulphur less than one percent. Herbicides accounted for 53% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied, growth regulators 28%, fungicides 12%, molluscicides 2% and seed treatments, insecticides and sulphur one percent each. The varieties Claire, Consort and Malacca accounted for 64% of the total wheat area grown in England & Wales (data on varieties grown were not available for Scotland). Approximately 31% of all seed sown in England & Wales was farm saved from the previous harvest.
Timing of pesticide applications on wheat: September 2001 - August 2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Perc
enta
ge o
f app
licat
ions
FungicideHerbicideInsecticideGrowth regulator
Wheat – Sprayer water volumes
Usage of sprayer water volumes varied little between individual pesticide groups, with most applications being made in the 150 – 200 litres per hectare category.
Sprayer water volumes used for pesticide applications to wheat 2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Fungicide Growth Regulator Herbicide Insecticide
Perc
enta
ge o
f are
a sp
raye
d
<100 L/Ha100-150 L/Ha151-200 L/Ha>200 L/Ha
28
Wheat - Fungicides
Most fungicides were applied between March and June, being used to control a broad spectrum of diseases, with general disease control being cited for 67% of the total area treated. Where individual reasons were specified, Septoria accounted for a further 14% of the treated area, mildew 4%, a combination of mildew/Septoria for 3%, eyespot 2%, rust/Septoria 1%, mildew/rust 1% and Fusarium 1%. It can be seen from the table below that epoxiconazole and azoxystrobin were used on almost half of the total wheat area grown, with most farmers using one or two applications during the season. Most of the principal fungicides used were applied at approximately one third to a half of the full label rate but were most commonly used in combination with other fungicide active substances.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of fungicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Epoxiconazole 1,486,911 64,783 0.18 0.48 1.55 0.35 Azoxystrobin 1,103,361 102,586 0.13 0.45 1.18 0.37 Tebuconazole 606,965 55,361 0.07 0.28 1.11 0.44 Epoxiconazole/fenpropimorph/kresoxim-methyl 580,557 117,673 0.07 0.23 1.21 0.51 Trifloxystrobin 534,457 52,088 0.07 0.21 1.22 0.39 Wheat – use of the QoI group of fungicides1
The 2002 harvest year saw the first reported incidence of QoI (strobilurin and oxazolidinedione) resistance in Septoria tritici. Since then, label amendments have been introduced to help prevent the spread of resistance, but during the 2002 season, recommendations from the Fungicide Resistance Action Committee included a maximum of two sprays, maintenance of recommended doses and use of a partner fungicide with a different mode of action. In 2002, the average rate of use of QoIs on wheat was only 44% of full label rate, while 22.3% of crops received three or more applications. Almost 9% of all QoI sprays applied to wheat were without a partner fungicide. Wheat – Seed treatments
The most frequently encountered wheat seed treatments were bitertanol/fuberidazole and fludioxonil, accounting for 38% and 16% of the area grown respectively. Wheat – Herbicides
Isoproturon was again, as it had been in previous arable surveys, the most commonly used herbicide active substance in wheat and almost half of the area grown was treated. The main reason given for the use of herbicides, 35% of the area treated, was general weed control, with specific weeds including blackgrass accounting for 16% of the treated area, cleavers 11%, other broad-leaved weeds 10%, wild oats 8%, blackgrass/wild oats 3%, crop volunteers 3%, pre-harvest desiccation 2% and grass weeds 2%.
It can be seen that although most of the principal herbicides were used at or at less than half the full label rate most flupyrsulfuron-methyl was used at or near full rate, possibly to enable better control of some herbicide-resistant blackgrass. 1 QoI active substances currently registered in the UK are azoxystrobin, famoxadone, fenamidone, kresoxim-methyl, picoxystrobin,pyraclostrobin and trifloxystrobin. They were previously known as STAR (Strobilurins And Related compounds) fungicides.
29
Wheat – Herbicides (continued)
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of herbicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Isoproturon 933,454 1,223,717 0.12 0.45 1.05 0.55 Fluroxypyr 660,745 76,492 0.09 0.31 1.02 0.30 Glyphosate 628,291 457,702 0.08 0.27 1.13 0.54 Flupyrsulfuron-methyl 536,374 5,225 0.07 0.26 1.00 0.97 Diflufenican/isoproturon 457,274 283,720 0.06 0.23 1.00 0.43 Wheat - Growth regulators
Growth regulator usage was highest between March and May, with the majority of applications being made in April. The use of chlormequat alone accounted for half the area treated with growth regulators, with most farmers applying between one and two sprays.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of growth regulator
treated area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Chlormequat 1,589,609 1,705,441 0.50 0.63 1.30 0.67 Trinexapac-ethyl 505,528 21,090 0.16 0.23 1.20 0.42 Chlormequat/imazaquin 419,699 219,468 0.13 0.17 1.11 0.57 Chlormequat/choline chloride 388,356 399,442 0.12 0.16 1.30 0.61 2-chloroethylphosphonic acid/mepiquat 121,620 53,780 0.04 0.06 1.01 0.48
Wheat – Insecticides
The majority of insecticides were applied in the autumn for aphid control, which accounted for 90% of the insecticide-treated area, with a smaller peak of insecticide applications being made in the summer. Cypermethrin accounted for the majority of autumn applications to prevent infection with barley yellow dwarf virus. Other important active substances included dimethoate and chlorpyrifos, both of which were used for the control of wheat bulb fly, primarily in March and orange wheat blossom midge in June. Most cypermethrin was applied at or near the full label rate.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of insecticide-treated area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Cypermethrin 1,244,786 30,150 0.55 0.53 1.19 0.97 Lambda-cyhalothrin 340,592 1,368 0.15 0.16 1.20 0.80 Esfenvalerate 207,995 657 0.09 0.09 1.09 0.63 Dimethoate 108,627 36,893 0.05 0.05 1.16 0.50 Zeta-cypermethrin 102,071 1,074 0.04 0.05 1.05 0.70
Wheat – Molluscicides Metaldehyde accounted for 80% of the molluscicide-treated area, methiocarb 13% and thiodicarb 3%.
30
Wheat – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 9 & 10)
The area of wheat grown between 1992 and 2002 changed very little, increasing by only 3% over the last ten years. However the area treated increased by 31% over the same period whilst the weight of active substances applied decreased by 7%. The discrepancy between these two figures is due mainly to the introduction of new products active at much lower rates of application and to growers applying fungicides and herbicides at reduced doses per hectare. In particular, although the number of fungicide applications had increased between 1992 and 2002, the average rate of application of individual fungicide products has decreased from 0.35 kg a.s./ha in 1992 to 0.13 kg a.s./ha in 2002 (Table 10).
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to wheat 1992 - 2002
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
Number of fungicide sprays, products and active substances applied to wheat 1992 - 2002
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
bers
of A
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
Despite the fact that the number of fungicide applications had increased over this period, the change in spraying practices (seed treatments have been excluded) across all pesticides is more clearly illustrated in the following two figures, showing the average dose rate of individual active substances used at each application, and the total dose (assumed proportions of full label doses) applied to the crop. The average active substance dose rate (as the average for all active substances expressed as the rate applied as a proportion of full label rate for that product) fell for fungicides, growth regulators and molluscicides. For herbicides, however, after a decline from 1992 to 1998, the trend appears to be reversing, perhaps reflecting increased incidence of resistance in weed species such as black-grass, wild-oats, Italian ryegrass and more recently chickweed and common poppy. Insecticide use has remained much higher, usually above 0.8 of full label dose, and has shown no consistent trends over time.
31
Average active substance dose rate applied to wheat 1992 - 2002
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Fungicides Sulphur Herbicides Growth regulators Insecticides Molluscicides
Prop
ortio
n of
full
labe
l dos
e ra
te a
pplie
d
199219941996199820002002
The number of active substance full label dose rates applied to the crop is, perhaps, the best indicator of change in pesticide inputs to wheat over time. It is derived from the average of the sum of each individual active substance dose rate applied to wheat, compared with the full label dose rate, such that, two applications of single formulated products (e.g. azoxystrobin), each at half rate, would be equivalent to one full dose. Three applications of triple formulated products (e.g. epoxiconazole/fenpropimorph/kresoxim-methyl), each at half rate, would be equivalent to 4.5 full doses. The indicator is independent of changes in the area grown. It is also unaffected by changes in active substance spectrum and therefore rates of application over time, being normalised only to the maximum label rate within each product, but does account for changes in the percentage of the crop treated, the number of applications made, tank-mixing complexity and complexity of formulated products.
Across all pesticides, the average total number of active substance full label doses applied to wheat has increased steadily from 6.4 in 1992 to 7.7 in 2002. However, within that, the total dose of fungicide applied has decreased from almost 3 doses to just under 2.5, perhaps reflecting the improved level of control afforded by some of the newer conazole fungicides and the introduction of the strobilurin fungicides in the late 1990s. Increasing levels of inputs are seen. However, for herbicides (from 2 units in 1992 to 2.8 in 2002), growth regulators (< 1 unit in 1992 to 1.25 units in 2002) and insecticides (0.7 units in 1992 to almost 1 unit in 2002).
Number of active substance full label doses applied to wheat 1992 - 2002
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Dos
e un
its a
pplie
d MolluscicidesInsecticidesGrowth regulatorsHerbicidesFungicides
32
Wheat – Comparison with previous surveys (cont.) Wheat – Fungicides The principal change over the period 1992 to 2002 has been the continued increase in use of epoxiconazole and its dominance in importance as a fungicide on wheat since 1998. Usage of azoxystrobin and tebuconazole formulations declined since the last survey, while trifloxystrobin use increased. None of the five most important formulations used in 2002 were available in 1992.
Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five fungicides in 2002 used on wheat over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
. 1,027,223 (1) 1,148,618 (2) 1,486,911 Epoxiconazole
. 727,011 (3) 1,376,114 (1) 1,103,361 Azoxystrobin
. 692,375 (4) 794,329 (4) 606,965 Tebuconazole
. 299,218 (9) 597,836 (5) 580,557 Epoxiconazole/fenpropimorph/kresoxim-methyl
. . 357,541 (6) 534,457 Trifloxystrobin Wheat – Herbicides Although isoproturon has been the principal herbicide used since 1992 its usage has declined since 1998 whilst the area treated with glyphosate continues to rise. Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five herbicides in 2002 used on wheat over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
669,008 (1) 1,312,274 (1) 1,027,199 (1) 933,454 Isoproturon
668,184 (2) 738,432 (3) 800,780 (2) 660,745 Fluroxypyr
152,083 (8) 262,412 (8) 546,208 (4) 628,291 Glyphosate
. . 228,510 (12) 536,374 Flupyrsulfuron-methyl
531,130 (3) 862,111 (2) 630,721 (3) 457,274 Diflufenican/isoproturon Wheat – Growth regulators Chlormequat continues to dominate growth regulator usage in wheat but the use of trinexapac-ethyl has continued to rise since 1998. Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five growth regulators in 2002 used on wheat over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
1,555,946 (1) 1,504,944 (1) 1,713,934 (1) 1,589,609 Chlormequat
. 249,567 (4) 447,350 (2) 505,528 Trinexapac-ethyl
. . 306,889 (3) 419,699 Chlormequat/imazaquin
38,571 (3) 291,976 (3) 218,578 (4) 388,356 Chlormequat/choline chloride
131,643 (2) 160,221 (5) 125,804 (5) 121,620 2-chloroethylphosphonic acid/mepiquat
33
Wheat – Comparison with previous surveys (cont.) Wheat – Insecticides The principal insecticide active substances used on wheat over the last ten years have remained relatively unchanged. However, over this period, when treated area is expressed as a percentage of the area grown (Table 10), the use of organophosphates has decreased from 19% of the area grown in 1992 to 7% of the area grown in 2002. Usage of pyrethroids has increased over the same period from 58% of the area grown in 1992 to 105% in 2002. Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five insecticides in 2002 used on wheat over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
832,751 (1) 1,130,038 (1) 1,182,576 (1) 1,244,786 Cypermethrin
55,643 (7) 321,481 (3) 288,879 (2) 340,592 Lambda-cyhalothrin
. 117,753 (4) 109,882 (4) 207,995 Esfenvalerate
258,843 (2) 322,883 (2) 189,360 (3) 108,627 Dimethoate
. 24,176 (9) 53,904 (6) 102,071 Zeta-cypermethrin Wheat – Sprayer water volumes The chart below illustrates the change in sprayer water volumes used for fungicide applications between 1992 and 2002. This pattern is repeated for insecticide, herbicide and growth regulator applications. The use of higher volume sprays, those over 200 litres per hectare, has declined from usage on over 30% of the treated area in 1992 to less than 5% of the treated area in the current survey. Although the change from 1992 to 2002 is marked there have also been significant changes between 1998 and 2000 with the use of sprays less than 100 and less than 150 litres per hectare now accounting for around 55% of the treated area.
Sprayer water volumes used for fungicide applications to wheat 1992-2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1992 1998 2000 2002
Perc
enta
ge o
f are
a sp
raye
d
<100 L/Ha100-150 L/Ha151-200 L/Ha>200 L/Ha
34
Table 9 Comparison of pesticide usage on wheat 1992 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t)
Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weightapplied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weightapplied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Carbamates 78,828 7.97 87,835 7.16 48,526 3.18 52,452 3.64 Organochlorines 5,694 5.57 8,225 7.98 558 0.61 4,015 4.47 Organophosphates 400,315 131.30 374,325 143.08 207,005 71.79 131,343 48.86 Pyrethroids 1,199,743 23.54 1,704,559 30.62 1,718,425 32.38 2,091,302 35.98 Other insecticides . . 12,939 0.61 . . 106 < 0.01 Total - all insecticides 1,684,581 168.38 2,187,882 189.44 1,974,513 107.96 2,279,217 92.96 Fungicides 7,403,223 2,576.68 8,464,295 1,694.53 8,501,757 1,206.92 8,184,667 1,049.21 Sulphur 50,931 168.77 53,808 161.74 23,405 64.37 22,388 82.81 Growth regulators 1,791,623 1,873.49 2,705,226 2,266.02 3,032,830 2,426.13 3,172,550 2,470.88 Herbicides 4,897,107 4468.10 6,842,830 4760.19 7,368,005 4646.17 7,500,816 4,602.39 Molluscicides 147,027 49.44 259,389 86.75 807,813 253.06 628,078 209.12 Repellents 153 0.73 . . . . . . Seed treatments 2,101,862 64.44 2,065,378 190.05 2,061,525 177.81 1,968,616 188.07 Total - all registered pesticides 18,076,507 9,370.04 22,578,808 9,348.71 23,769,848 8,882.41 23,756,331 8,695.43 Area grown 2,057,534 2,035,686 2,078,908 1,989,417
35
Table 10 Comparison of pesticide usage in wheat 1992 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average application rate (kg a.s./ha)
Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002 Area treated
as % of area grown
Average appln. rate(kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate(kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Carbamates 4 0.10 4 0.08 2 0.07 3 0.07 Organochlorines < 1 0.98 <1 0.97 < 1 1.09 < 1 1.11 Organophosphates 19 0.33 18 0.38 10 0.35 7 0.37 Pyrethroids 58 0.02 84 0.02 83 0.02 105 0.02 Other insecticides . . 1 0.05 . . < 1 0.03 Total - all insecticides 82 0.10 107 0.09 95 0.05 115 0.04 Fungicides 360 0.35 416 0.20 409 0.14 411 0.13 Sulphur 2 3.31 3 3.01 1 2.75 1 3.70 Growth regulators 87 1.05 133 0.84 146 0.80 159 0.78 Herbicides 238 0.91 336 0.70 354 0.63 377 0.61 Molluscicides 7 0.34 13 0.33 39 0.31 32 0.33 Repellents < 1 4.79 . . . . . . All seed treatments 102 0.03 101 0.09 99 0.09 99 0.10 All pesticides 879 0.52 1,109 0.41 1,143 0.37 1,194 0.37
36
WINTER BARLEY
Winter barley crops received on average two herbicides, two fungicides, one growth regulator and one insecticide (Table 4a). Fungicides accounted for 35% of the total pesticide-treated area of winter barley, herbicides 31%, growth regulators 14%, seed treatments 11%, insecticides 9%, molluscicides one percent and sulphur less than one percent. Herbicides accounted for 59% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied, growth regulators 23%, fungicides 14%, sulphur 2%, seed treatments 2%, molluscicides one percent and insecticides less than one percent. The varieties Pearl and Regina accounted for 62% of the total winter barley area grown in England & Wales (data on varieties grown were not available for Scotland). Approximately 22% of all seed sown in England & Wales was farm saved from the previous harvest.
Timing of pesticide applications on winter barley: September 2001 - August 2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Perc
enta
ge o
f app
licat
ions
FungicideHerbicideInsecticideGrowth regulator
Winter barley – Sprayer water volumes
Sprayer water volumes used for pesticide applications to winter barley 2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Fungicide Growth Regulator Herbicide Insecticide
Perc
enta
ge o
f are
a sp
raye
d
<100 L/Ha100-150 L/Ha151-200 L/Ha>200 L/Ha
37
Winter barley - Fungicides Most fungicides were applied between March and May, being used to control a broad spectrum of diseases, with general disease control being cited for 71% of the total area treated. Where individual reasons were specified, Rhynchosporium accounted for a further 10% of the treated area, rusts 5%, mildew 2%, a combination of net blotch/Rhynchosporium for 2%, net blotch 2%, mildew/Rhynchosporium 2% and brown rust 1%. Picoxystrobin was approved in 2002, but despite its recent introduction it was used on 44% of the area grown. In common with wheat, all of the principal fungicides used were applied at approximately one third to a half of the full label rate and were most commonly used in combination with other fungicide active substances.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of fungicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Picoxystrobin 305,362 37,214 0.18 0.44 1.28 0.49 Azoxystrobin 193,686 20,523 0.11 0.29 1.21 0.42 Epoxiconazole 191,641 8,506 0.11 0.27 1.33 0.36 Cyprodinil 181,857 51,651 0.11 0.28 1.19 0.57 Epoxiconazole/fenpropimorph 72,698 14,366 0.04 0.11 1.21 0.39 Winter barley – Seed treatments The most frequently encountered winter barley seed treatments were tebuconazole/triazoxide and carboxin/thiram, accounting for 54% and 11% of the area grown respectively. Winter barley – Herbicides Isoproturon was again, as it had been in previous arable surveys since 1998, the most commonly used herbicide active substance in winter barley and just over half of the area grown was treated with isoproturon at least once. The main reason given for the use of herbicides, 49% of the area treated, was general weed control, with unspecified broad-leaved weeds comprising a further 8%, crop desiccation 7%, cleavers 6%, wild oats 6%, blackgrass 4%, annual meadow grass 3%, blackgrass/wild oats 2%, docks 2%, unspecified grass weeds 2%, chickweed 2% and couch one percent. It can be seen that most of the principal herbicides were used at or at less than half the full label rate.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of herbicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Isoproturon 313,943 372,930 0.20 0.56 1.03 0.50 Diflufenican/isoproturon 146,236 83,505 0.10 0.26 1.04 0.40 Glyphosate 131,505 100,935 0.09 0.21 1.07 0.56 Pendimethalin 99,242 98,667 0.06 0.18 1.00 0.50 Mecoprop-P 79,373 41,889 0.05 0.14 1.02 0.39
38
Winter barley - Growth regulators Growth regulator usage was highest between March and May, with the majority of applications being made in April. The use of chlormequat alone accounted for half of the area treated with growth regulators with most farmers applying between one and two sprays. Almost two thirds of the winter barley area grown was treated with chlormequat.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of growth regulator
treated area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Chlormequat 342,274 354,127 0.50 0.58 1.12 0.67 Trinexapac-ethyl 164,420 6,233 0.24 0.29 1.02 0.25 2-chloroethylphosphonic acid/mepiquat 69,879 26,622 0.10 0.12 1.02 0.41 Chlormequat/choline chloride 63,671 70,548 0.09 0.11 1.06 0.64 Chlormequat chloride/2-chloroethylphosphonic acid/mepiquat chloride 18,835 7,135 0.03 0.03 1.00 0.41
Winter barley – Insecticides The majority of insecticides were applied in the autumn for aphid control, which accounted for 94% of the insecticide-treated area. Cypermethrin, used on 44% of the area grown, accounted for the majority of autumn applications. Other important reasons for use included the control of gout fly. Most cypermethrin was applied at or near the full label rate.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of insecticide-treated area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Cypermethrin 254,933 6,053 0.59 0.44 1.12 0.95 Esfenvalerate 64,752 213 0.15 0.11 1.07 0.66 Lambda-cyhalothrin 40,676 140 0.09 0.07 1.07 0.69 Deltamethrin 23,330 107 0.05 0.04 1.00 0.74 Zeta-cypermethrin 19,462 221 0.05 0.03 1.00 0.76 Winter barley – Molluscicides Metaldehyde accounted for 78% of the molluscicide-treated area, thiodicarb 13% and methiocarb 9%.
39
Winter barley – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 11 & 12)
The area of winter barley grown between 1992 and 2002 had decreased by 30%. However, the area treated decreased by 6% over the same period whilst the weight applied decreased by 26%. The significantly smaller reduction in area treated compared to area grown indicates a continued increase in the level of treatment of this crop over that period, while the larger percentage decrease in weight applied is due mainly to the introduction of new products active at much lower rates of application and to growers applying fungicides and herbicides at reduced rates per hectare. Although the number of fungicide sprays remained similar between 1992 and 2002 the average number of products and active substances used increased. Despite this increase the average rate of application fell from 0.29 kg/ha in 1992 to 0.17 kg/ha in 2002.
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to winter barley 1992 - 2002
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
Number of fungicide sprays, products and active substances applied to winter barley 1992 - 2002
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
bers
of A
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
40
Winter barley – Comparison with previous surveys (cont.) Winter barley – Fungicides The principal change over the period 1992 to 2002 has been the very rapid uptake of picoxystrobin and its replacement of azoxystrobin as the most important formulation applied to winter barley. Usage of epoxiconazole and epoxiconazole/fenpropimorph formulations continued to increase while cyprodinil use has declined since the last survey. None of the five most important formulations used in 2002 were available in 1992.
Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five fungicides in 2002 used on winter barley over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
. . . 305,362 Picoxystrobin
. 80,319 (7) 438,651 (1) 193,686 Azoxystrobin
. 175,307 (3) 188,554 (3) 191,641 Epoxiconazole
. 148,973 (6) 217,670 (2) 181,857 Cyprodinil
. 34,940 (259) 46,203 (9) 72,698 Epoxiconazole/fenpropimorph Winter barley – Herbicides Although isoproturon and diflufenican/isoproturon have been the principal herbicides applied since 1992, the usage of both has continued to decline, whilst the area treated with glyphosate has increased over the same period. Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five herbicides in 2002 used on winter barley over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
200,678 (2) 403,809 (1) 340,431 (1) 313,943 Isoproturon
253,434 (1) 357,503 (2) 211,110 (2) 146,236 Diflufenican/isoproturon
38,549 (10) 96,497 (7) 126,111 (4) 131,505 Glyphosate
74,181 (7) 52,267 (10) 127,039 (3) 99,242 Pendimethalin
79,912 (6) 101,006 (6) 65,905 (7) 79,373 Mecoprop-P Winter barley – Growth regulators Although chlormequat has remained the principal growth regulator active substance used on winter barley since 1992 the rate of application of all growth regulators have shown a steady decline from 0.93 kg/ha in 1992 to 0.69 kg/ha in 2002 (Table 12). Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five growth regulators in 2002 used on winter barley over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
412,645 (1) 346,789 (1) 336,555 (1) 342,274 Chlormequat
. 167,851 (2) 146,020 (2) 164,420 Trinexapac-ethyl
168,682 (2) 114,032 (3) 65,834 (3) 69,879 2-chloroethylphosphonic acid/mepiquat
12,987 (4) 89,329 (4) 40,710 (4) 63,671 Chlormequat/choline chloride
. . 23,380 (7) 18,835Chlormequat chloride/2-chloroethylphosphonic acid/mepiquat chloride
41
Winter barley – Comparison with previous surveys (cont.) Winter barley – Insecticides The principal insecticide active substances used on winter barley over the last ten years have remained relatively unchanged. Usage of organophosphates in winter barley has always been less than in wheat. However, the level of usage has now fallen from one percent in 1992 to less than one percent in 2002. When treated area is expressed as a percentage of the area grown (Table 12), the usage of pyrethroids has increased by 11% since 1992 but decreased by 5% since 1998. Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five insecticides in 2002 used on winter barley over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
374,344 (1) 440,068 (1) 332,914 (1) 254,933 Cypermethrin
. 64,997 (3) 38,460 (3) 64,752 Esfenvalerate
19,057 (4) 108,266 (2) 60,298 (2) 40,676 Lambda-cyhalothrin
54,375 (3) 15,557 (4) 21,019 (4) 23,330 Deltamethrin
. 9,472 (5) 5,930 (5) 19,462 Zeta-cypermethrin Winter barley – Sprayer water volumes The chart below illustrates the change in sprayer water volumes used for fungicide applications between 1992 and 2002. The use of higher volume sprays, those over 200 litres per hectare, has declined from usage on over 40% of the treated area in 1992 to less than 5% of the treated area in 2002. Although the water volumes used for fungicide applications made to winter barley are slightly higher than those used on wheat, the pattern of decreases in the higher water volumes, with corresponding increases in the use of lower water volumes, is the same.
Sprayer water volumes used for fungicide applications to winter barley 1992-2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1992 1998 2000 2002
Perc
enta
ge o
f are
a sp
raye
d
<100 L/Ha100-150 L/Ha151-200 L/Ha>200 L/Ha
42
Table 11 Comparison of pesticide usage on winter barley 1992 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Carbamates 2,828 0.28 608 0.05 . . 741 0.02 Organochlorines 1,544 1.74 3,557 3.18 . . . . Organophosphates 11,568 3.15 10,375 4.19 4,030 1.43 1,823 0.80 Pyrethroids 532,165 10.60 638,595 11.20 459,565 8.33 427,063 6.97 Other insecticides 214 0.03 1,062 0.15 . . . . Total - all insecticides 548,319 15.80 654,198 18.77 463,595 9.76 429,627 7.80 Fungicides 1,834,483 534.88 2,187,828 452.05 1,808,085 332.42 1,721,285 284.91 Sulphur 7,854 32.48 10,120 29.27 2,401 6.49 9,691 32.39 Growth regulators 636,578 590.24 830,480 588.36 684,824 476.01 691,417 475.34 Herbicides 1,426,079 1,523.67 1,948,026 1,544.18 1,575,914 1,264.30 1,539,058 1,214.21 Molluscicides 19,094 6.81 22,481 6.65 59,016 16.83 44,641 12.73 Repellents 749 4.56 . . . . . . Seed treatments 813,846 63.70 758,088 40.79 531,128 27.72 536,707 32.17 Total - all registered pesticides 5,287,004 2,772.14 6,411,220 2,680.05 5,124,964 2,133.52 4,972,425 2,059.55 Area grown 777,247 760,497 583,105 541,769
43
Table 12 Comparison of pesticide usage in winter barley 1992 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average application rate (kg a.s./ha) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate(kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate(kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Carbamates < 1 0.10 < 1 0.08 . . < 1 0.03 Organochlorines < 1 1.12 < 1 0.90 . . . . Organophosphates 1 0.27 1 0.40 1 0.36 < 1 0.44 Pyrethroids 68 0.02 84 0.02 79 0.02 79 0.02 Other insecticides < 1 0.13 < 1 0.14 . . . . Total - all insecticides 71 0.03 86 0.03 80 0.02 79 0.02 Fungicides 236 0.29 288 0.21 310 0.18 318 0.17 Sulphur 1 4.14 1 2.89 < 1 2.70 2 3.34 Growth regulators 82 0.93 109 0.71 117 0.70 128 0.69 Herbicides 183 1.07 256 0.79 270 0.80 284 0.79 Molluscicides 2 0.36 3 0.30 10 0.29 8 0.29 Repellents < 1 6.09 . . . . . . All seed treatments 105 0.08 100 0.05 91 0.05 99 0.06 All pesticides 680 0.52 843 0.42 879 0.42 918 0.41
44
SPRING BARLEY
Spring barley crops received on average two fungicide and two herbicide sprays (Table 4a). Fungicides accounted for 42% of the total pesticide-treated area of spring barley, herbicides 38%, seed treatments 15%, growth regulators 3%, insecticides 2%, sulphur one percent and molluscicides less than one percent. Herbicides accounted for 58% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied, fungicides 28%, sulphur 6%, growth regulators 5%, seed treatments 3%, insecticides one percent and molluscicides less than one percent. The variety Optic accounted for 65% of the total spring barley area grown in England & Wales (data on varieties grown were not available for Scotland). Approximately 25% of all seed sown in England & Wales was farm saved from the previous harvest.
Timing of pesticide applications on spring barley: September 2001 - August 2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Perc
enta
ge o
f app
licat
ions
FungicideHerbicideInsecticideGrowth regulator
Spring barley - Fungicides Most fungicides were applied between May and June, being used to control a broad spectrum of diseases, with general disease control being cited for 68% of the total area treated. Where individual reasons were specified, mildew accounted for a further 15% of the treated area, Rhynchosporium 11% and mildew/ Rhynchosporium 3%. Picoxystrobin was approved in 2002, but despite its recent introduction it was used on 18% of the area grown. Fenpropimorph was the most commonly used active substance, being applied on 21% of the area grown with an average between one or two applications. In common with wheat and winter barley, all of the principal fungicides used were applied at approximately one third to a half of the full label rate and were most commonly used in combination with other fungicide active substances.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of fungicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Fenpropimorph 144,290 37,674 0.11 0.21 1.33 0.35 Azoxystrobin 119,514 11,578 0.09 0.20 1.10 0.39 Cyprodinil 115,957 28,273 0.09 0.20 1.07 0.49 Picoxystrobin 107,413 11,140 0.08 0.18 1.16 0.41 Fenpropimorph/flusilazole 88,975 21,795 0.07 0.15 1.13 0.46 Spring barley – Seed treatments The most frequently encountered spring barley seed treatments were tebuconazole/triazoxide and guazatine, accounting for 53% and 10% of the area grown respectively.
45
Spring barley – Herbicides The two principal herbicides, mecoprop-P and metsulfuron-methyl/thifensulfuron-methyl, were both used in a single application on over a third of the spring barley area grown. The main reason given for the use of herbicides, 51% of the area treated, was general weed control, with unspecified broad leaved weeds comprising a further 19%, wild oats 12%, crop desiccation 4%, cleavers 4%, couch 2%, chickweed 1%, blackgrass 1% and volunteers 1%.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of herbicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Mecoprop-P 205,155 131,683 0.17 0.37 1.02 0.48 Metsulfuron-methyl/thifensulfuron-methyl 201,747 5,952 0.17 0.37 1.01 0.74 Glyphosate 133,244 115,557 0.11 0.23 1.00 0.61 Bromoxynil/ioxynil 105,708 30,343 0.09 0.19 1.00 0.43 Metsulfuron-methyl 100,423 367 0.08 0.18 1.00 0.61
Spring barley - Growth regulators Growth regulator usage was minimal on spring barley although chlormequat was again the single most important active substance, being used on 6% of the area grown.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of growth regulator
treated area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Chlormequat 34,510 23,657 0.40 0.06 1.06 0.73 2-chloroethylphosphonic acid/mepiquat 19,465 6,699 0.22 0.04 1.00 0.50 Trinexapac-ethyl 13,301 667 0.15 0.03 1.00 0.40 2-chloroethylphosphonic acid 8,172 1,351 0.09 0.02 1.00 0.69 Chlormequat chloride/2-chloroethylphosphonic acid/mepiquat chloride 5,810 1,926 0.07 0.01 1.00 0.48
Spring barley – Insecticides Usage of insecticides was minimal with the principal insecticide, cypermethrin, being used on 3% of the area grown. Most insecticide usage was for the control of aphids, 70% of the area treated, or leatherjackets, 29% of the area treated.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of insecticide-treated area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Cypermethrin 18,261 471 0.35 0.03 1.00 1.03 Lambda-cyhalothrin 10,442 41 0.20 0.01 1.06 0.79 Chlorpyrifos 7,109 4,672 0.14 0.01 1.00 0.91 Deltamethrin 5,791 36 0.11 0.01 1.00 0.99 Pirimicarb 5,029 326 0.10 0.01 1.08 0.46
Spring barley – Molluscicides
Metaldehyde was the only molluscicide recorded on spring barley.
46
Spring barley – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 13 & 14)
The area of spring barley grown between 1992 and 2002 had increased by 10%. However the area treated increased by 58% over the same period whilst the weight applied decreased by 1%. Again the introduction of new products, active at much lower rates of application and farmers applying fungicides and herbicides at reduced rates is responsible for the discrepancy in the changes in area treated and weight applied. The number of all sprays, but in particular fungicide sprays, increased between 1992 and 2002, from two applications in 1992 to three applications in 2002. The greatest change, however, was in the number of products applied, and therefore reflects the increased use of tank mixing, which has resulted in an increased use from three to four products in 1992 to six in 2002.
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to spring barley 1992 - 2002
0123456789
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
Spring barley – Fungicides Despite the increased use of fungicides in terms of area treated, the rate of active substance application has fallen from 0.32 kg/ha in 1992 to 0.17 kg/ha in the current survey (Table 13).
Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five fungicides in 2002 used on spring barley over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
193,841 (1) 107,844 (2) 84,555 (5) 144,290 Fenpropimorph
. 6,840 (265) 156,058 (1) 119,514 Azoxystrobin
. 23,533 (10) 86,240 (4) 115,957 Cyprodinil
. . . 107,413 Picoxystrobin
. 18,641 (13) 69,088 (7) 88,975 Fenpropimorph/flusilazole
Spring barley – Herbicides In line with the increased usage of sulphonyl-urea herbicides, the average rate of herbicide application has fallen from 0.61 kg of active substance/hectare in 1992 to 0.38 kg/ha in 2002 (Table 13). Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five herbicides in 2002 used on spring barley over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
115,309 (2) 134,200 (2) 186,391 (1) 205,155 Mecoprop-P
51,482 (4) 104,087 (3) 149,704 (2) 201,747 Metsulfuron-methyl/thifensulfuron-methyl
21,284 (9) 52,370 (5) 111,188 (4) 133,244 Glyphosate
40,168 (6) 71,628 (4) 78,365 (5) 105,708 Bromoxynil/ioxynil
219,126 (1) 166,807 (1) 146,829 (3) 100,423 Metsulfuron-methyl
47
Table 13 Comparison of pesticide usage on spring barley 1992 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Carbamates 3,733 0.42 2,028 0.27 3,570 0.36 5,029 0.33 Organochlorines . . 2,636 2.69 1,324 0.78 . . Organophosphates 19,046 7.36 15,118 9.45 16,473 10.30 8,292 5.26 Pyrethroids 15,373 0.37 32,159 0.65 42,968 0.74 38,386 0.61 Total - all insecticides 38,152 8.15 51,940 13.06 64,335 12.18 51,708 6.20 Fungicides 639,665 207.45 881,132 170.56 1,159,258 185.31 1,339,347 223.43 Sulphur 10,372 38.81 19,216 57.51 6,178 12.61 19,232 48.99 Growth regulators 53,272 36.87 42,068 17.96 45,473 20.81 86,798 36.82 Herbicides 762,661 466.32 948,386 377.44 1,130,070 460.93 1,214,189 461.16 Molluscicides 1,691 0.02 667 0.16 5,403 1.27 303 0.13 Seed treatments 498,139 33.03 467,733 23.72 472,264 21.79 458,512 24.16 Total - all registered pesticides 2,003,952 790.65 2,411,142 660.41 2,882,980 714.89 3,170,090 800.88 Area grown 481,394 455,594 510,550 530,777
48
Table 14 Comparison of pesticide usage in spring barley 1992 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average application rate (kg a.s./ha) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Carbamates 1 0.11 < 1 0.13 1 0.10 1 0.06 Organochlorines < 1 < 0.01 1 1.02 < 1 0.59 . . Organophosphates 4 0.39 3 0.62 3 0.63 2 0.63 Pyrethroids 3 0.02 7 0.02 8 0.02 7 0.02 Total - all insecticides 8 0.21 11 0.25 13 0.19 10 0.12 Fungicides 133 0.32 193 0.19 227 0.16 252 0.17 Sulphur 2 3.74 4 2.99 1 2.04 4 2.55 Growth regulators 11 0.69 9 0.43 9 0.46 16 0.42 Herbicides 158 0.61 208 0.40 221 0.41 229 0.38 Molluscicides < 1 0.01 < 1 0.24 1 0.23 < 1 0.43 All seed treatments 103 0.07 103 0.05 93 0.05 86 0.05 All pesticides 416 0.39 529 0.27 565 0.25 597 0.25
49
OATS
Oats received on average two herbicide, two fungicide, one growth regulator and one desiccant spray (Table 4a). Herbicides accounted for 31% of the total pesticide-treated area of oats, fungicides 28%, growth regulators 18%, seed treatments 14%, insecticides 8%, molluscicides one percent and sulphur less than one percent. Growth regulators accounted for 39% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied, herbicides 39%, fungicides 12%, sulphur 4%, seed treatments 3%, with insecticides and molluscicides one percent each. The variety Gerald accounted for 44% and Jalna 43% of the total area of oats grown in England & Wales (data on varieties grown were not available for Scotland). Approximately 24% of all seed sown in England & Wales was farm saved from the previous harvest.
Timing of pesticide applications on oats: September 2001 - August 2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Perc
enta
ge o
f app
licat
ions
FungicideHerbicideInsecticideGrowth regulator
Oats - Fungicides Most fungicides were applied between May and June, being used to control a broad spectrum of diseases, with general disease control being cited for 55% of the total area treated. Where individual reasons were specified, mildew accounted for a further 29% of the treated area, crown rust 5% and crown rust/mildew 4%. Quinoxyfen and fenpropimorph were the principal two fungicides used in 2002 as they had been since 1998.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of fungicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Quinoxyfen 42,143 2,108 0.19 0.23 1.27 0.33 Fenpropimorph 41,702 12,526 0.19 0.26 1.23 0.40 Epoxiconazole/fenpropimorph/kresoxim-methyl 23,837 4,157 0.11 0.18 1.17 0.44 Cyproconazole 22,334 1,463 0.10 0.14 1.22 0.83 Azoxystrobin 21,145 2,336 0.10 0.15 1.43 0.44 Oats – Seed treatments The most frequently encountered oat seed treatments were bitertanol/fuberidazole, fludioxonil and guazatine accounting for 35%, 11% and 10% of the area grown respectively.
50
Oats – Herbicides Glyphosate, used both as a pre-drilling herbicide for general weed control or as a crop desiccation aid, was the principal herbicide active substance applied to oats. The main reason given for the use of herbicides, 46% of the area treated, was general weed control, with unspecified broad leaved weeds comprising a further 27%, crop desiccation 12%, grass weeds 4%, chickweed 4%, fat hen/Polygonum 2%, docks/fat hen 2% and cleavers 2%.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of herbicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Glyphosate 41,386 28,397 0.17 0.28 1.27 0.50 Metsulfuron-methyl 35,754 140 0.15 0.28 1.01 0.65 Carfentrazone-ethyl/flupyrsulfuron-methyl 33,285 878 0.14 0.27 1.00 0.88 Mecoprop-P 29,510 20,948 0.12 0.24 1.02 0.54 Terbutryn 21,262 31,632 0.09 0.17 1.02 1.02
Oats - Growth regulators In contrast to wheat and barley crops, trinexapac-ethyl was the principal growth regulator used in 2002, being applied to 36% of the census area grown, with chlormequat being used on a further 31%.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of growth regulator
treated area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Trinexapac-ethyl 52,297 2,855 0.39 0.36 1.25 0.55 Chlormequat 42,908 49,769 0.32 0.31 1.12 0.71 Chlormequat/choline chloride 37,524 50,333 0.28 0.25 1.09 0.79 2-chloroethylphosphonic acid/mepiquat 1,896 690 0.01 0.02 1.00 0.53 Chlormequat/2-chloroethylphosphonic acid 259 280 < 0.01 < 0.01 1.00 1.00
Oats – Insecticides Cypermethrin, the principal insecticide used, was applied to 26% of the area grown. Most insecticide usage was for the control of aphids, 92% of the area treated, with general pests accounting for 5% and leatherjackets 2% of the area treated.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of insecticide-treated area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Cypermethrin 33,062 815 0.55 0.26 1.02 0.99 Lambda-cyhalothrin 14,838 58 0.25 0.12 1.00 0.78 Esfenvalerate 4,188 15 0.07 0.03 1.00 0.86 Zeta-cypermethrin 3,471 31 0.06 0.03 1.00 0.60 Deltamethrin 1,239 5 0.02 0.01 1.00 0.64
Oats – Molluscicides Metaldehyde accounted for 80% of the molluscicide-treated area, methiocarb 12% and thiodicarb 8%.
51
Oats – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 15 & 16)
The area of oats grown between 1992 and 2002 had increased by 26%. However the area treated increased by 84% over the same period whilst the weight applied increased by 5%, indicating a significant increase in the degree of pest control applied to oats. Again the introduction of new products, active at much lower rates of application and growers applying fungicides and herbicides at reduced rates, are responsible for the discrepancy between the increases in area treated and weight applied. The number of sprays applied increased from two applications in 1992 to almost four in 2002. The greatest change, however, is in the number of products applied, and therefore reflects the increased use of tank mixing, which has resulted in an increased use from three to four products in 1992 to six to seven in 2002.
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to oats 1992 - 2002
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
Oats – Fungicides Despite the increased use of fungicides in terms of area treated, the rate of active substance application has fallen from 0.39 kg/ha in 1992 to 0.14 kg/ha in the current survey (Table 15). The increasing importance of quinoxyfen for mildew control, together with fenpropimorph, both as a single formulation alone or tank-mixed with other fungicides, or in formulated mixtures, and strobilurin products, was also noticeable.
Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five fungicides in 2002 used on oats over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
. 13,328 (4) 41,692 (1) 42,143 Quinoxyfen
19,702 (2) 38,259 (1) 19,669 (3) 41,702 Fenpropimorph
. . 2,422 (10) 23,837 Epoxiconazole/fenpropimorph/kresoxim-methyl
. 15,187 (3) 39,316 (2) 22,334 Cyproconazole
. 389 (262) 2,812 (8) 21,145 Azoxystrobin
52
Oats – Comparison with previous surveys (cont.) Oats – Herbicides In line with the increased usage of sulphonyl-urea herbicides, the average rate of herbicide application has fallen from 0.79 kg of active substance/hectare in 1992 to 0.43 kg/ha in 2002 (Table 16). Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five herbicides in 2002 used on oats over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
3,710 (9) 8,332 (6) 27,247 (3) 41,386 Glyphosate
32,058 (1) 34,213 (1) 31,030 (2) 35,754 Metsulfuron-methyl
. 22,907 (2) 20,106 (5) 33,285 Carfentrazone-ethyl/flupyrsulfuron-methyl
25,404 (2) 17,009 (5) 24,032 (4) 21,748 Mecoprop-P
4,933 (8) 21,107 (3) 16,063 (6) 21,262 Terbutryn Oats – Growth regulators Trinexapac-ethyl was the principal growth regulator used in 2002, replacing chlormequat, which had been the principal active substance used between 1992 and 2000. Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five growth regulators in 2002 used on oats over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
. 1,369 (4) 31,774 (2) 52,297 Trinexapac-ethyl
58,330 (1) 46,078 (1) 56,767 (1) 42,908 Chlormequat
4,055 (2) 28,382 (2) 18,577 (3) 37,524 Chlormequat/choline chloride
2,550 (3) 5,138 (3) 4,703 (4) 1,896 2-chloroethylphosphonic acid/mepiquat
704 (5) 128 (8) . 259 Chlormequat/2-chloroethylphosphonic acid
53
Table 15 Comparison of pesticide usage on oats 1992 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Carbamates . . . . 2,083 0.10 568 0.07 Organochlorines . . . . . . . . Organophosphates 1,523 0.39 120 0.05 670 0.43 1,587 0.55 Pyrethroids 24,597 0.50 45,561 0.72 40,282 0.75 57,932 0.94 Total - all insecticides 26,121 0.89 45,680 0.77 43,035 1.28 60,087 1.56 Fungicides 69,646 27.11 135,393 33.76 142,434 16.30 218,699 31.42 Sulphur 3,108 13.10 6,223 21.45 2,276 4.34 2,906 11.71 Growth regulators 67,093 81.51 81,790 103.71 112,470 93.52 134,883 103.93 Herbicides 159,357 126.01 168,498 75.33 189,841 82.21 238,552 102.08 Molluscicides 3,565 0.18 2,419 1.37 5,558 1.24 7,675 3.65 Seed treatments 86,928 2.32 79,742 8.95 81,781 12.00 104,051 9.09 Total - all registered pesticides 415,817 251.13 519,746 245.34 577,394 210.89 766,852 263.42 Area grown 97,892 94,714 105,663 123,205
54
Table 16 Comparison of pesticide usage in oats 1992 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average application rate (kg a.s./ha) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Carbamates . . . . 2 0.05 < 1 0.12 Organochlorines . . . . . . . . Organophosphates 2 0.26 < 1 0.39 1 0.64 1 0.35 Pyrethroids 25 0.02 48 0.02 38 0.02 47 0.02 Total - all insecticides 27 0.03 48 0.02 41 0.03 49 0.03 Fungicides 71 0.39 143 0.25 135 0.11 178 0.14 Sulphur 3 4.21 7 3.45 2 1.91 2 4.03 Growth regulators 69 1.21 86 1.27 106 0.83 109 0.77 Herbicides 163 0.79 178 0.45 180 0.43 194 0.43 Molluscicides 4 0.05 3 0.57 5 0.22 6 0.47 All seed treatments 89 0.03 84 0.11 77 0.15 84 0.09 All pesticides 425 0.60 549 0.47 546 0.37 622 0.34
55
RYE
Rye crops received on average two herbicides, two fungicides, two growth regulators and an insecticide spray (Table 4a). Herbicides accounted for 29% of the total pesticide-treated area of rye, fungicides 28%, growth regulators 21%, insecticides 12%, seed treatments 10% and molluscicides less than one percent. Growth regulators accounted for 48% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied, herbicides 36%, fungicides 13%, seed treatments one percent, insecticides one percent and molluscicides less than one percent. The variety Espirit accounted for 49% of the total rye area grown in England & Wales, with Ursus comprising a further 42% (no crops of rye were encountered in Scotland). Approximately 8% of all seed sown in England & Wales was farm saved from the previous harvest.
Timing of pesticide applications on rye: September 2001 - August 2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Perc
enta
ge o
f app
licat
ions
FungicideHerbicideInsecticideGrowth regulator
Rye - Fungicides Most fungicides were applied between March and May, being used to control a broad spectrum of diseases, with general disease control being cited for 90% of the total area treated. Where individual reasons were specified, brown rust/mildew accounted for a further 10% of the treated area. In common with wheat and winter barley, all of the principal fungicides used were applied at approximately one third to a half of the full label rate and were most commonly used in combination with other fungicide active substances.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of fungicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Azoxystrobin 4,255 612 0.35 0.69 1.29 0.57 Fenpropimorph 1,967 710 0.16 0.38 1.00 0.48 Tebuconazole 1,829 236 0.15 0.21 1.63 0.51 Cyproconazole/propiconazole 626 40 0.05 0.10 1.18 0.31 Fenpropidin/tebuconazole 599 120 0.05 0.12 1.00 0.32
56
Rye – Herbicides The three principal herbicides, pendimethalin, tribenuron-methyl and metsulfuron-methyl, were all used in a single application on over a third of the rye area grown. The main reason given for the use of herbicides, 61% of the area treated, was general weed control, with wild oats comprising a further 13%, mayweed 11%, annual meadow grass 9% and chickweed 6%.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of herbicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Pendimethalin 2,431 2,175 0.19 0.49 1.00 0.45 Tribenuron-methyl 1,911 9 0.15 0.38 1.00 0.30 Metsulfuron-methyl 1,798 7 0.14 0.36 1.00 0.67 Trifluralin 1,104 580 0.09 0.17 1.40 0.47 Diflufenican/trifluralin 950 450 0.08 0.19 1.00 0.43
Rye – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 17 & 18)
The area of rye grown between 1992 and 2002 had decreased by 39%. However the area treated increased by 41% over the same period, whilst the weight applied decreased by 24%. Again the introduction of new products, active at much lower rates of application and farmers applying fungicides and herbicides at reduced rates, are responsible for the discrepancy in the changes between area treated and weight applied. The number of all pesticide sprays applied increased from three applications in 1992 to almost four applications in 2002. The greatest change however is in the number of products applied, and therefore reflects the increased use of tank mixing, which has resulted in an increased use from three to four products in 1992 to more than eight in 2002, especially fungicides.
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to rye 1992 - 2002
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
57
Table 17 Comparison of pesticide usage on rye 1992 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Organochlorines . . 319 0.25 . . . . Organophosphates . . . . . . 377 0.12 Pyrethroids 1,678 0.04 6,865 0.13 6,408 0.13 4,817 0.09 Total - all insecticides 1,678 0.04 7,183 0.39 6,408 0.13 5,195 0.21 Fungicides 1,262 0.60 30,223 6.96 18,732 3.21 12,333 2.51 Growth regulators 8,588 11.82 14,094 11.63 12,091 11.13 9,074 8.95 Herbicides 14,871 11.63 25,177 16.36 11,631 7.40 12,490 6.77 Molluscicides 1,260 0.31 228 0.15 734 0.30 63 0.04 Seed treatments 3,225 0.19 9,612 0.62 3,757 0.16 4,473 0.21 Total - all registered pesticides 30,883 24.59 86,517 36.10 53,353 22.34 43,627 18.68 Area grown 8,121 9,709 7,176 4,966
58
Table 18 Comparison of pesticide usage in rye 1992 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average rate applied (kg a.s./ha) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Organochlorines . . 3 0.80 . . . . Organophosphates . . . . . . 8 0.32 Pyrethroids 21 0.02 71 0.02 89 0.02 97 0.02 Total - all insecticides 21 0.02 74 0.05 89 0.02 105 0.04 Fungicides 16 0.48 311 0.23 261 0.17 248 0.20 Growth regulators 106 1.38 145 0.82 168 0.92 183 0.99 Herbicides 183 0.78 259 0.65 162 0.64 252 0.54 Molluscicides 16 0.25 2 0.67 10 0.42 1 0.64 All seed treatments 40 0.06 99 0.06 52 0.04 90 0.05 All pesticides 380 0.80 891 0.42 743 0.42 879 0.43
59
TRITICALE
Triticale crops received on average one herbicide, one fungicide, one insecticide and one growth regulator spray (Table 4a). Herbicides accounted for 42% of the total pesticide-treated area of triticale, fungicides 22%, growth regulators 15%, seed treatments 14% and insecticides 7%. Herbicides accounted for 46% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied, growth regulators 42%, fungicides 10%, seed treatments 3% and insecticides less than one percent. The variety Purdy accounted for 51%, Trinidad 21% and Fidelio 17% of the total triticale area grown in England & Wales (data on varieties grown were not available for Scotland). Approximately 9% of all seed sown in England & Wales was farm saved from the previous harvest.
Timing of pesticide applications on triticale: September 2001 - August 2002
0102030405060708090
100
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Perc
enta
ge o
f app
licat
ions
FungicideHerbicideInsecticideGrowth regulator
Triticale - Fungicides Most fungicides were applied in May, being used to control a broad spectrum of diseases, with general disease control being cited as the main reason for fungicide applications.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of fungicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Epoxiconazole 3,447 196 0.31 0.25 1.00 0.45 Azoxystrobin 3,092 262 0.28 0.22 1.00 0.34 Cyproconazole/trifloxystrobin 2,149 460 0.19 0.16 1.00 0.80 Fenpropimorph 2,149 1,209 0.19 0.16 1.00 0.75 Propiconazole/tebuconazole 191 24 0.02 0.01 1.00 0.50 Triticale – Herbicides The principal herbicide, mecoprop-P, was generally used in a single application on a third of the triticale area grown.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of herbicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Mecoprop-P 4,617 2,542 0.22 0.33 1.00 0.43 Metsulfuron-methyl 3,087 14 0.15 0.22 1.00 0.73 Clodinafop-propargyl 2,491 60 0.12 0.18 1.00 0.40 Isoproturon 2,491 2,491 0.12 0.18 1.00 0.40 Tribenuron-methyl 2,149 32 0.10 0.16 1.00 1.00
60
Triticale – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 19 & 20)
The area of triticale grown between 1992 and 2002 had increased by 30%. However the area treated increased by only 15% over the same period, whilst the weight applied decreased by 49%, thus indicating that, unlike most other cereals, pesticide inputs to this crop have generally decreased over the last decade. This is highlighted by the fact that approximately 23% of the triticale area grown remained untreated. The number of all sprays applied has decreased between 1992 and 2002, from four applications in 1992 to less than three applications in 2002, again emphasising the low inputs used on this cereal crop.
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to triticale 1992 - 2002
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
61
Table 19 Comparison of pesticide usage on triticale 1992 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Carbamates 1,396 0.20 . . . . . . Organochlorines . . . . . . . . Organophosphates 785 0.44 111 0.04 747 0.14 . . Pyrethroids 3,720 0.08 4,319 0.10 5,556 0.11 3,676 0.07 Other insecticides . . . . 838 0.07 . . Total - all insecticides 5,901 0.72 4,431 0.15 7,141 0.32 3,676 0.07 Fungicides 11,317 2.37 9,802 2.15 9,217 2.66 11,027 2.15 Sulphur 1,516 3.22 . . . . . . Growth regulators 15,927 15.83 13,716 13.68 9,287 10.19 7,808 9.37 Herbicides 16,248 21.98 12,955 7.44 15,750 14.87 21,186 10.22 Seed treatments 9,039 0.20 9,856 0.48 6,934 0.36 7,015 0.60 Total - all registered pesticides 59,948 44.33 50,761 23.90 48,328 28.40 50,712 22.41 Area grown 10,677 10,561 15,619 13,850
62
Table 20 Comparison of pesticide usage in triticale 1992 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average application rate (kg a.s./ha) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Carbamates 13 0.14 . . . . . . Organochlorines . . . . . . . . Organophosphates 7 0.57 1 0.40 5 0.19 . . Pyrethroids 35 0.02 41 0.02 36 0.02 27 0.02 Other insecticides . . . . 5 0.08 . . Total - all insecticides 55 0.12 42 0.03 46 0.04 27 0.02 Fungicides 106 0.21 93 0.22 59 0.29 80 0.19 Sulphur 14 2.12 . . . . . . Growth regulators 149 0.99 130 1.00 59 1.10 56 1.20 Herbicides 152 1.35 123 0.57 101 0.94 153 0.48 All seed treatments 85 0.02 93 0.05 44 0.05 51 0.09 All pesticides 561 0.74 481 0.47 309 0.59 366 0.44
63
PESTICIDE USAGE ON OILSEEDS
OILSEED RAPE
Oilseed rape crops received on average three herbicides, two fungicides, two insecticides and one molluscicide (Table 4a). Herbicides accounted for 35% of the total pesticide-treated area of oilseed rape, fungicides 25%, insecticides 17%, seed treatments 16%, molluscicides 7%, with sulphur and growth regulators less than one percent. Herbicides accounted for 67% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied, fungicides 18%, molluscicides 9%, sulphur 5%, insecticides and seed treatments one percent and growth regulators less than one percent. The varieties Fortress, Escort and Apex accounted for 45% of the total winter oilseed rape area grown in England & Wales, whilst Liaison, Senator and Heros comprised 73% of the spring varieties. Approximately 21% of all seed sown in England & Wales was farm saved from the previous harvest.
Timing of pesticide applications on winter oilseed rape: August 2001 - July 2002
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
AugSep Oct
Nov Dec Jan
Feb Mar Apr
May Ju
n Jul
Perc
enta
ge o
f app
licat
ions
FungicideHerbicideInsecticide
Sprayer water volumes used for pesticide applocations to oilseed rape 2002
05
1015202530354045
Fungicide Herbicide Insecticide
Perc
enta
ge o
f are
a sp
raye
d
<100 L/Ha100-150 L/Ha151-200 L/Ha>200 L/Ha
64
Oilseed rape - Fungicides The majority of fungicides were applied to winter oilseed rape either between October and November or March and May. Most were applied to spring oilseed rape in June and July. Although general disease control was cited for 52% of the total area of winter oilseed rape treated, where individual reasons were specified, Phoma accounted for a further 20% of the treated area, light leaf spot 13% and Sclerotinia 5%.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of fungicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Carbendazim 138,392 35,658 0.18 0.33 1.22 0.51 Tebuconazole 126,138 18,114 0.17 0.32 1.07 0.57 Carbendazim/flusilazole 121,440 18,789 0.16 0.28 1.20 0.52 Metconazole 86,578 3,347 0.11 0.20 1.21 0.54 Flusilazole 76,288 9,212 0.10 0.20 1.03 0.60 Oilseed rape – Seed treatments The most frequently encountered oilseed rape seed treatments were thiram, iprodione and beta-cyfluthrin/imidacloprid accounting for 41%, 36% and 36% of the area grown respectively. Oilseed rape – Herbicides Glyphosate was the most commonly used herbicide, being used both as a pre-drilling clean-up and a pre-harvest desiccant. The main reason given for the use of herbicides, 24% of the area treated, was general weed control, with other reasons including pre-harvest desiccation, accounting for 16% of the treated area, grass weeds 13%, cereal volunteers 13%, blackgrass 12%, unspecified broad leaved weeds 4%, mayweed 4%, cleavers 3%, thistles 3% and charlock 2%. It can be seen that although metazachlor and propaquizafop were used at or at less than half the full label rate, others were used at or near three quarters of the full label rate.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of herbicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Glyphosate 191,693 190,378 0.18 0.45 1.14 0.74 Propaquizafop 137,401 5,501 0.13 0.36 1.06 0.27 Metazachlor 113,393 69,614 0.11 0.30 1.00 0.49 Trifluralin 94,279 91,657 0.09 0.26 1.01 0.88 Metazachlor/quinmerac 90,350 73,902 0.09 0.25 1.00 0.82
Oilseed rape – Insecticides The majority of insecticides were applied in the autumn with further applications being made between March and June. Cypermethrin accounted for the majority of autumn applications. Control of cabbage stem flea beetle was the reason specified for 37% of the treated area, pollen beetle accounted for a further 25% and aphids for 24%.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of insecticide-treated area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Cypermethrin 282,793 6,953 0.56 0.52 1.49 0.64 Alpha-cypermethrin 97,794 1,187 0.19 0.20 1.37 0.61 Lambda-cyhalothrin 74,983 411 0.15 0.17 1.15 0.73 Zeta-cypermethrin 32,197 327 0.06 0.07 1.23 1.02 Deltamethrin 11,074 69 0.02 0.03 1.07 0.74
65
Oilseed rape – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 21 & 22) The area of oilseed rape grown between 1992 and 2002 decreased by 15%. However the area treated increased by 32% over the same period whilst the weight applied decreased by 5%. The discrepancy between these two figures is due to an increase in the number of sprays applied to the crop, coupled with the introduction of new products active at much lower rates of application and to growers applying fungicides and herbicides at reduced rates per hectare. In particular, although the number of fungicide applications had increased between 1992 and 2002, the average rate of application of each fungicide product has decreased from 0.51 kg/ha in 1992 to 0.2 kg/ha in 2002.
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to oilseed rape 1992 - 2002
0123456789
10
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
Number of fungicide sprays, products and active substances applied to oilseed rape 1992 - 2002
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
Oilseed rape – Fungicides Despite the introduction of new molecules, carbendazim has continued to be the principal fungicide active substance used since 1992.
Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five fungicides in 2002 used on oilseed rape over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
143,274 (1) 253,893 (1) 170,879 (1) 138,392 Carbendazim
. 179,403 (3) 107,050 (2) 126,138 Tebuconazole
1,850 (13) 179,833 (2) 63,094 (4) 121,440 Carbendazim/flusilazole
. . 45,559 (8) 86,578 Metconazole
1,893 (12) 65,015 (6) 72,584 (3) 76,288 Flusilazole
66
Oilseed rape – Comparison with previous surveys (cont.) Oilseed rape – Herbicides The area treated with glyphosate has continued to rise, as it has in many other crops, since 1992. In contrast to the use of fungicides, the rate of herbicide application has increased slightly from 0.46 kg of active substance/ha to 0.54 kg/ha (Table 21). Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five herbicides in 2002 used on oilseed rape over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
59,079 (7) 137,743 (2) 139,061 (1) 191,693 Glyphosate
. 135,000 (3) 92,007 (3) 137,401 Propaquizafop
103,957 (2) 235,332 (1) 103,217 (2) 113,393 Metazachlor
21,933 (10) 87,034 (6) 51,728 (7) 94,279 Trifluralin
. 550 (262) 53,913 (6) 90,350 Metazachlor/quinmerac Oilseed rape – Insecticides The principal insecticide active substances used on oilseed rape over the last ten years have remained relatively unchanged. However, over this period the use of organophosphates has decreased from 45% of the area grown in 1992 when treated area is expressed as a percentage of the area grown (Table 22) to less than one percent of the area grown in 2002. Usage of pyrethroids has increased over the same period from 105% of the area grown in 1992 to 141% in 2002. Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five insecticides in 2002 used on oilseed rape over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
185,763 (1) 377,531 (1) 286,099 (1) 282,793 Cypermethrin
171,152 (2) 110,211 (3) 35,814 (3) 97,794 Alpha-cypermethrin
27,807 (4) 122,742 (2) 82,849 (2) 74,983 Lambda-cyhalothrin
. 19,228 (5) 24,007 (5) 32,197 Zeta-cypermethrin
42,071 (3) 40,890 (4) 33,202 (4) 11,074 Deltamethrin Oilseed rape – Sprayer water volumes Sprayer water volumes used for herbicide applications decreased, in line with similar changes in cereals, between 1992 and 2002. In particular, applications at over 200 litres per hectare were rarely encountered in 2002.
Sprayer water volumes used for fungicide applications to oilseed rape 1992-2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1992 1998 2000 2002
Perc
enta
ge o
f are
a sp
raye
d
<100 L/Ha100-150 L/Ha151-200 L/Ha>200 L/Ha
67
Table 21 Comparison of pesticide usage on oilseed rape 1992 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t)
Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Areatreated (ha)
Weightapplied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Carbamates 1,358 0.22 18,600 1.94 3,795 0.22 867 0.08 Organochlorines 7,081 2.41 5,266 1.35 . . . . Organophosphates 11,032 5.01 4,155 1.73 694 0.23 282 0.07 Pyrethroids 440,013 9.01 676,598 11.89 465,423 8.90 504,324 8.98 Other insecticides 3,452 0.09 5,089 0.54 . . 334 0.03 Total - all insecticides 462,936 16.74 709,707 17.46 469,912 9.34 505,807 9.17 Fungicides 463,668 235.18 1,073,293 279.65 696,358 159.21 754,569 149.52 Sulphur 41,947 207.18 56,175 225.71 23,052 67.62 11,223 39.53 Growth regulators 6,171 8.37 39,010 38.13 24,930 26.05 1,155 0.89 Herbicides 808,496 368.00 1,170,018 550.48 805,809 417.94 1,047,137 564.40 Molluscicides 43,466 16.18 134,161 45.76 187,283 63.70 198,206 74.52 Repellents 158 0.70 . . . . . . Seed treatments 435,826 36.77 528,747 44.32 333,755 12.51 458,437 7.71 Total - all registered pesticides 2,262,667 889.11 3,711,110 1201.51 2,541,100 756.37 2,976,534 845.75 Area grown 419,757 505,423 332,104 356,780
68
Table 22 Comparison of pesticide usage in oilseed rape 1992 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average application rate (kg a.s./ha)
Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002 Area treated
as % of area grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Carbamates < 1 0.16 4 0.10 1 0.06 < 1 0.10 Organochlorines 2 0.34 1 0.26 . . . . Organophosphates 3 0.45 1 0.42 < 1 0.33 < 1 0.25 Pyrethroids 105 0.02 134 0.02 140 0.02 141 0.02 Other insecticides 1 0.03 1 0.11 . . < 1 0.09 Total - all insecticides 110 0.04 140 0.02 141 0.02 142 0.02 Fungicides 110 0.51 212 0.26 210 0.23 211 0.20 Sulphur 10 4.94 11 4.02 7 2.93 3 3.52 Growth regulators 1 1.36 8 0.98 8 1.05 < 1 0.77 Herbicides 193 0.46 231 0.47 243 0.52 293 0.54 Molluscicides 10 0.37 27 0.34 56 0.34 56 0.38 Repellents < 1 4.41 . . . . . . All seed treatments 104 0.08 105 0.08 100 0.04 128 0.02 All pesticides 539 0.39 734 0.32 765 0.30 834 0.28
69
LINSEED
Linseed crops received on average three sprays (Table 4a), comprising 2.4 herbicide sprays, but less than one fungicide and insecticide spray. Herbicides accounted for 59% of the total pesticide-treated area of linseed, seed treatments 26%, fungicides 8% and insecticides 7%. Herbicides accounted for 84% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied, fungicides 9%, seed treatments 6% and insecticides one percent. The variety Symphonia accounted for 30%, Barbara 17% and Flanders 16% of the total linseed area grown in England & Wales (data on varieties grown were not available for Scotland). Liviola, Escalina and Electra were the only flax varieties encountered. A lot of spring linseed was grown opportunistically in 2002, perhaps explaining why only 2% of all seed sown in England & Wales was farm saved from the previous harvest.
Timing of pesticide applications on linseed: October 2001 - September 2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Perc
enta
ge o
f app
licat
ions
FungicideHerbicideInsecticide
Linseed – Fungicides Tebuconazole accounted for 64% of the fungicide-treated area and was used on 14% of the total area of linseed grown. The control of Botrytis accounted for 88% of all fungicide applications. Linseed - Herbicides Most herbicides were applied in May and June, being used to control a broad spectrum of weed species, with general weed control being cited as the main reason for herbicide applications (38%). A further 29% of usage was for crop desiccation, 16% for wild oats and 13% for cleavers.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of herbicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Glyphosate 7,453 7,305 0.25 0.39 1.36 0.67 Metsulfuron-methyl 4,016 18 0.13 0.27 1.00 0.77 Amidosulfuron 3,452 103 0.11 0.23 1.00 0.99 Cycloxydim 3,067 542 0.10 0.21 1.00 0.39 Bromoxynil 2,466 156 0.08 0.17 1.00 0.14 Linseed – Insecticides
The use of cypermethrin accounted for almost all insecticide usage on linseed (99%), being used primarily to control flea beetle.
70
Linseed – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 23 & 24)
The area of linseed grown between 1992 and 2002 had decreased by 92%, with corresponding decreases in the area treated of 91% and the weight applied by 92%.
Although the number of all sprays applied increased slightly between 1992 and 2002, it had decreased since 1998 and 2000.
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to linseed 1992 - 2002
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
71
Table 23 Comparison of pesticide usage on linseed 1992 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Carbamates 195 0.03 . . . . . . Organochlorines 4,673 1.85 573 0.46 1,047 1.05 . . Organophosphates 2,487 1.06 1,635 0.68 1,260 0.25 . . Pyrethroids 26,849 0.68 22,104 0.39 55,150 1.13 3,473 0.08 Other insecticides . . . . . . . . Total - all insecticides 34,203 3.63 24,313 1.53 57,458 2.43 3,473 0.08 Fungicides 13,092 4.66 61,198 16.22 10,658 2.46 4,006 1.36 Sulphur . . 744 5.95 . . . . Growth regulators 6,240 6.59 6,639 9.18 516 0.90 . . Herbicides 380,293 154.21 349,818 125.24 176,376 82.22 30,073 12.16 Molluscicides 685 0.09 1,570 0.64 3,243 1.20 . . Seed treatments 111,841 4.39 112,494 34.96 55,115 10.80 13,011 0.86 Total - all registered pesticides 546,353 173.56 556,775 193.73 303,367 100.02 50,562 14.46 Area grown 144,465 114,191 83,886 12,012
72
Table 24 Comparison of pesticide usage in linseed 1992 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average application rate (kg a.s./ha) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Carbamates < 1 0.18 . . . . . . Organochlorines 3 0.40 1 0.81 1 1.00 . . Organophosphates 2 0.43 1 0.41 2 0.20 . . Pyrethroids 19 0.03 19 0.02 66 0.02 29 0.02 Other insecticides . . . . . . . . Total - all insecticides 24 0.11 21 0.06 68 0.04 29 0.02 Fungicides 9 0.36 54 0.27 13 0.23 33 0.34 Sulphur . . 1 8.00 . . . . Growth regulators 4 1.06 6 1.38 1 1.75 . . Herbicides 263 0.41 306 0.36 210 0.47 250 0.40 Molluscicides < 1 0.14 1 0.41 4 0.37 . . All seed treatments 77 0.04 99 0.31 66 0.20 108 0.07 All pesticides 378 0.32 488 0.35 362 0.33 421 0.29
73
PESTICIDE USAGE ON POTATOES
WARE POTATOES
Ware potato crops received on average nine fungicides, two herbicides, one molluscicide and one insecticide (Table 4a). Fungicides accounted for 61% of the total pesticide-treated area of ware potatoes, herbicides 16%, insecticides 7%, molluscicides 6%, seed treatments 6%, desiccants 2%, growth regulators one percent, and nematicides and sulphur less than one percent. By contrast the only desiccant used, sulphuric acid, comprised 78% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied, fungicides 14%, herbicides 3%, nematicides 2%, insecticides and growth regulators one percent and molluscicides and sulphur less than one percent. The varieties Maris Piper and Estima accounted for 33% of the total ware potato area grown in England & Wales (data on varieties grown were not available for Scotland).
Maleic hydrazide was the only growth regulator encountered.
Timing of pesticide applications on ware potatoes: November 2001 - October 2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
Perc
enta
ge o
f app
licat
ions
FungicideHerbicideInsecticideGrowth regulator
Ware potatoes – Sprayer water volumes
Most fungicide and herbicide sprays used on potatoes were applied in relatively high water volumes, particularly when compared to cereals. In particular, sprayer water volumes for the growth regulator maleic hydrazide, applied as a pre-harvest sprout suppressant, were normally over 200 litres per hectare, in line with the label recommendations for this active substance.
Sprayer water volumes used for pesticide applications to ware potatoes 2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Fungicide Growth Regulator Herbicide Insecticide
Perc
enta
ge o
f are
a sp
raye
d
<100 L/Ha100-150 L/Ha151-200 L/Ha>200 L/Ha
74
Ware potatoes - Fungicides The majority of fungicides were applied to ware potatoes between June and August. Blight, Phytophthora infestans, was the only reason specified for fungicide usage. Most fungicides were applied at or around the full label rate in order to ensure the crop was protected from blight infestation. Two formulations, cymoxanil/maneb and fluazinam, accounted for almost half of all fungicides applied, being used on 73% and 66% of the area grown respectively.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of fungicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Cymoxanil/mancozeb 348,867 498,984 0.25 0.73 3.27 0.99 Fluazinam 284,889 37,678 0.20 0.66 2.80 0.88 Mancozeb 127,966 181,310 0.09 0.29 2.98 1.02 Dimethomorph/mancozeb 122,038 178,456 0.09 0.36 2.09 0.99 Fentin hydroxide 121,312 29,387 0.09 0.53 1.64 0.96 Ware potatoes – Seed treatments The most frequently encountered ware potato seed treatments were imazalil and pencycuron, accounting for 43% and 32% of the area grown respectively. Ware potatoes – Herbicides The main reason given for the use of herbicides, 65% of the area treated, was general weed control, with pre-harvest desiccation accounting for a further 26% of the treated area.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of herbicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Diquat/paraquat 80,195 36,398 0.21 0.57 1.00 0.41 Linuron 68,889 86,702 0.18 0.49 1.00 0.57 Diquat 49,265 22,998 0.13 0.26 1.26 0.58 Metribuzin 33,338 21,867 0.09 0.20 1.24 0.60 Terbuthylazine/terbutryn 28,405 35,255 0.08 0.20 1.01 0.79
Ware potatoes – Insecticides and nematicides Most insecticides were applied at or around the full label rate, with 57% of applications being used to control aphids with a further 26% being for cutworm control. The use of the nematicide 1,3–dichloropropene, to control the increasing problem of potato cyst nematode, accounted for 60% of the weight of all insecticides and nematicides applied. The area treated with 1,3–dichloropropene had increased by 7% since 2000 and by 6% in terms of weight applied to 192 tonnes applied to 760 ha, less than 1% of the area grown. Fosthiazate was applied to just over 7,200 ha while ethoprophos was applied to almost 1,800 ha.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of insecticide-treated area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Pirimicarb 61,729 6,439 0.38 0.25 1.80 0.75 Cypermethrin 28,372 717 0.18 0.11 1.22 1.01 Lambda-cyhalothrin 21,254 136 0.13 0.09 1.92 0.86 Aldicarb 20,973 50,958 0.13 0.15 1.00 0.76 Deltamethrin/pirimicarb 11,041 1,297 0.07 0.05 1.35 0.98 Ware potatoes – Molluscicides Metaldehyde accounted for 67% of the molluscicide-treated area, methiocarb 27% and thiodicarb 6%.
75
Ware potatoes – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 25 & 26)
The area of ware potatoes grown between 1992 and 2002 decreased by 10%. However, the area treated increased by 27% over the same period whilst the weight applied increased by 3%, indicating a continued increase in the level of pesticide applications applied to this crop despite growers applying herbicides, and to a lesser extent insecticides, at reduced rates per hectare.
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to ware potatoes 1992 - 2002
0
5
10
15
20
25
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
Number of fungicide sprays, products and active substances applied to ware potatoes 1992 - 2002
02468
1012141618
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
Ware potatoes – Fungicides Cymoxanil/mancozeb and fluazinam have consistently been the principal two formulations used over the last ten years.
Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five fungicides in 2002 used on ware potatoes over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
286,685 (1) 262,373 (2) 316,354 (1) 348,867 Cymoxanil/mancozeb
353,087 (1) 300,915 (2) 284,889 Fluazinam
177,341 (2) 117,107 (5) 181,283 (4) 127,966 Mancozeb
100,347 (6) 154,357 (5) 122,038 Dimethomorph/mancozeb
111,597 (4) 254,935 (3) 193,186 (3) 121,312 Fentin hydroxide
76
Ware potatoes – Comparison with previous surveys (cont.) Ware potatoes – Herbicides The rate of herbicide usage has declined from 0.89 kg of active substance/ha in 1992 to 0.72 kg/ha in 2002 (Table 25) while the importance of diquat/paraquat as a pre-emergence herbicide, and linuron, have continued to increase. Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five herbicides in 2002 used on ware potatoes over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
26,850 (5) 64,338 (2) 62,898 (1) 80,195 Diquat/paraquat
35,763 (4) 37,921 (4) 55,336 (2) 68,889 Linuron
56,560 (2) 40,557 (3) 47,547 (3) 49,265 Diquat
49,108 (3) 65,788 (1) 40,852 (5) 33,338 Metribuzin
14,072 (8) 14,904 (9) 5,182 (10) 28,405 Terbuthylazine/terbutryn Ware potatoes – Insecticides Pirimicarb has consistently been the principal insecticide used over the last ten years. However, over this period the use of organophosphates, when usage is expressed as a percentage of the area grown, has decreased from 43% in 1992 to less than one percent in 2002 (Table 26). Usage of pyrethroids has increased over the same period from 17% of the area grown in 1992 to 37% in 2002. Overall the use of insecticides has declined from 157% of the area grown in 1992 to 97% of the area grown in 2002. Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five insecticides in 2002 used on ware potatoes over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
123,678 (1) 48,724 (1) 68,865 (1) 61,729 Pirimicarb
15,844 (4) 18,341 (3) 25,278 (3) 28,372 Cypermethrin
740 (10) 19,719 (2) 25,685 (2) 21,254 Lambda-cyhalothrin
. 8,745 (4) 5,472 (5) 11,041 Deltamethrin/pirimicarb
. . 2,254 (9) 8,982 Pymetrozine Ware potatoes – Sprayer water volumes Although the sprayer water volumes used for fungicide applications on potatoes are higher than those used on cereals, the chart below shows a decrease in the volumes of water used on potatoes since 1992, in line with the pattern already seen on cereals and oilseed rape.
Sprayer water volumes used for fungicide applications to ware potatoes 1992-2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1992 1998 2000 2002
Perc
enta
ge o
f are
a sp
raye
d
<100 L/Ha100-150 L/Ha151-200 L/Ha>200 L/Ha
77
Table 25 Comparison of pesticide usage on ware potatoes 1992 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t)
Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Areatreated (ha)
Weightapplied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Carbamates 123,678 16.10 48,724 5.70 68,865 8.53 61,729 6.44 Organophosphates 65,788 47.00 11,959 15.87 6,578 4.43 601 0.18 Pyrethroids 25,537 0.43 38,516 0.60 54,411 0.74 50,520 0.86 Other insecticides 25,573 3.14 19,703 2.26 16,333 1.77 20,568 1.95 Total - all insecticides 240,577 66.67 118,903 24.43 146,187 15.47 133,418 9.44 Desiccants 54,021 7,145.00 63,896 9,099.58 54,888 9,211.96 46,041 7,150.69 Fungicides 1,039,728 1,221.89 1,430,090 1,241.39 1,388,402 1,289.41 1,417,648 1,290.66 Sulphur . . 855 3.42 7,957 15.49 4,161 15.98 Growth regulators 4,171 16.59 9,352 30.93 22,362 69.15 27,443 81.17 Herbicides 323,140 286.24 367,912 240.88 364,733 245.20 375,387 270.65 Molluscicides 70,050 26.85 101,775 24.19 173,719 41.79 150,398 39.02 Nematicides 26,906 147.39 36,188 119.09 20,075 243.17 37,325 305.42 Seed treatments 76,812 35.44 113,579 35.22 115,074 29.27 133,804 39.06 Total - all registered pesticides 1,835,406 8,946.05 2,242,551 10,819.12 2,293,396 11,160.92 2,325,625 9,202.09 Area grown 153,622 142,119 144,702 138,004
78
Table 26 Comparison of pesticide usage in ware potatoes 1992 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average application rate (kg a.s./ha)
Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002 Area treated
as % of area grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Carbamates 81 0.13 34 0.12 48 0.12 45 0.10 Organophosphates 43 0.71 8 1.33 5 0.67 < 1 0.31 Pyrethroids 17 0.02 27 0.02 38 0.01 37 0.02 Other insecticides 17 0.12 14 0.11 11 0.11 15 0.09 Total - all insecticides 157 0.28 84 0.21 101 0.11 97 0.07 Desiccants 35 132.26 45 142.41 38 167.83 33 155.31 Fungicides 677 1.18 1,006 0.87 959 0.93 1,027 0.91 Sulphur . . 1 4.00 5 1.95 3 3.84 Growth regulators 3 3.98 7 3.31 15 3.09 20 2.96 Herbicides 210 0.89 259 0.65 252 0.67 272 0.72 Molluscicides 46 0.38 72 0.24 120 0.24 109 0.26 Nematicides 18 5.48 25 3.29 14 12.11 27 8.18 All seed treatments 50 0.46 80 0.31 80 0.25 97 0.29 All pesticides 1,195 4.87 1,578 4.82 1,585 4.87 1,685 3.96
79
SEED POTATOES
Seed potatoes received on average six fungicide sprays, three insecticides, two herbicides and a desiccant (Table 4a). Fungicides accounted for 48% of the total pesticide-treated area of seed potatoes, insecticides 22%, herbicides 12%, desiccants 11%, seed treatments 6% and molluscicides 2%. The desiccant sulphuric acid accounted for 96% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied, fungicides 3%, herbicides 1% and insecticides and molluscicides less than one percent.
Timing of pesticide applications on seed potatoes: November 2001 - October 2002
0
20
40
60
80
100
Nov Dec Jan
Feb Mar Apr
May Ju
n Jul
AugSep Oct
Perc
enta
ge o
f app
licat
ions
FungicideHerbicideInsecticide
Seed potatoes - Fungicides The majority of fungicides were applied in June, July and August for the control of potato blight. Most fungicides were applied at or near full recommended rate, with cymoxanil/mancozeb being used on two thirds of the area grown.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of fungicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Cymoxanil/mancozeb 34,344 45,198 0.29 0.67 2.78 0.93 Fluazinam 18,761 2,739 0.16 0.47 2.41 0.97 Fentin hydroxide 17,003 2,989 0.14 0.47 2.00 0.69 Cymoxanil/mancozeb/oxadixyl 10,886 18,195 0.09 0.36 2.06 0.99 Mancozeb 7,851 8,939 0.07 0.32 1.48 0.77 Seed potatoes – Herbicides Paraquat and linuron were the most commonly used herbicide formulations in terms of area applied, being used both pre-drilling or pre-emergence of the crop. The main reason given for the use of herbicides, 65% of the area treated, was general weed control, with pre-harvest desiccation accounting for a further 24% of the area treated.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of herbicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Paraquat 10,370 4,916 0.35 0.62 1.00 0.43 Linuron 8,758 8,098 0.30 0.52 1.00 0.42 Diquat/paraquat 4,079 2,254 0.14 0.25 1.00 0.50 Diquat 2,910 1,403 0.10 0.12 1.33 0.60 Metribuzin 1,960 1,276 0.07 0.12 1.00 0.87
80
Seed potatoes – Insecticides The majority of insecticides were applied for the control of aphids in order to prevent the transmission of viruses to the potential seed crop. With the exception of pymetrozine, most of the insecticides were applied at or near the full label rate.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of insecticide-treated area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Deltamethrin/pirimicarb 15,638 1,325 0.29 0.37 2.00 0.77 Pirimicarb 10,734 1,330 0.20 0.34 2.08 0.89 Cypermethrin 8,671 226 0.16 0.16 3.00 1.04 Pymetrozine 7,100 587 0.13 0.31 1.36 0.55 Lambda-cyhalothrin/pirimicarb 5,330 624 0.10 0.24 1.57 0.74
81
Seed potatoes – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 27 & 28)
The area of seed potatoes grown between 1992 and 2002 increased by 6%. However the area treated increased by 12% over the same period whilst the weight applied increased by 26%. The increase in weight applied is due almost entirely to sulphuric acid, which is used at relatively high rates for crop desiccation, usage of which increased by 27% in terms of area treated and weight applied since 1992.
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to seed potatoes 1992 - 2002
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
bers
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
Seed potatoes – Fungicides The average rate of fungicides applied has decreased from 1.16 kg of active substance/hectare in 1992 to 0.93 kg/ha in 2002 (Table 27). Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five fungicides in 2002 used on seed potatoes over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
21,021 (1) 18,635 (3) 22,115 (2) 34,344 Cymoxanil/mancozeb
. 37,966 (1) 24,185 (1) 18,761 Fluazinam
5,056 (7) 20,128 (2) 7,722 (6) 17,003 Fentin hydroxide
6,614 (5) 5,440 (6) 7,838 (5) 10,886 Cymoxanil/mancozeb/oxadixyl
14,357 (2) 15,597 (4) 8,181 (4) 7,851 Mancozeb Seed potatoes – Insecticides Expressing area treated as a percentage of area grown (Table 28), the use of organophosphates has decreased from 78% in 1992 to 5% in 2002. Overall the use of insecticides has declined from 469% of the area grown in 1992 to 327% in 2002, however the number of insecticide applications does vary according to the season depending on the level of aphids present. Changes in the area treated (ha) for the top five insecticides in 2002 used on seed potatoes over the period 1992 – 2002 (figures in parentheses refer to position in previous years)
1992 1998 2000 2002 Formulation
. 13,982 (3) 14,413 (3) 15,638 Deltamethrin/pirimicarb
10,086 (2) 27,951 (1) 24,453 (1) 10,734 Pirimicarb
7,378 (3) 8,018 (4) 4,881 (5) 8,671 Cypermethrin
. . 1,487 (6) 7,100 Pymetrozine
. 6,688 (5) 15,107 (2) 5,330 Lambda-cyhalothrin/pirimicarb
82
Table 27 Comparison of pesticide usage on seed potatoes 1992 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t)
Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Areatreated (ha)
Weightapplied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Carbamates 10,086 1.13 27,951 2.79 24,453 2.61 10,734 1.33 Organophosphates 12,029 2.90 2,577 0.55 1,329 0.47 886 0.07 Pyrethroids 11,112 0.25 26,136 0.30 16,733 0.12 13,647 0.26 Other insecticides 39,090 4.90 25,406 2.54 31,785 3.10 28,068 2.54 Total - all insecticides 72,316 9.18 82,070 6.17 74,300 6.30 53,336 4.20 Desiccants 20,975 2,849.05 26,451 3,627.54 19,897 2,743.95 26,607 3,620.91 Fungicides 83,506 97.11 124,161 91.70 102,941 103.82 119,198 110.95 Sulphur . . 206 2.06 1,300 5.20 . . Herbicides 32,295 29.85 32,757 23.41 28,934 18.01 29,509 19.02 Molluscicides 3,511 0.88 5,319 2.25 5,455 0.75 4,654 0.96 Nematicides 34 0.06 360 1.58 1,320 2.13 176 1.06 Seed treatments 9,117 6.94 14,575 6.95 14,040 7.63 15,168 9.53 Total - all registered pesticides 221,753 2,993.07 285,898 3,761.66 248,187 2,887.78 248,648 3,766.62 Area grown 15,409 16,263 14,276 16,290
83
Table 28 Comparison of pesticide usage in seed potatoes 1992 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average application rate (kg a.s./ha)
Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002 Area treated
as % of area grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Carbamates 65 0.11 172 0.10 171 0.11 66 0.12 Organophosphates 78 0.24 16 0.21 9 0.35 5 0.08 Pyrethroids 72 0.02 161 0.01 117 0.01 84 0.02 Other insecticides 254 0.13 156 0.10 223 0.10 172 0.09 Total - all insecticides 469 0.13 505 0.08 520 0.08 327 0.08 Desiccants 136 135.83 163 137.14 139 137.91 163 136.09 Fungicides 542 1.16 763 0.74 721 1.01 732 0.93 Sulphur . . 1 10.00 9 4.00 . . Herbicides 210 0.92 201 0.71 203 0.62 181 0.64 Molluscicides 23 0.25 33 0.42 38 0.14 29 0.21 Nematicides < 1 1.68 2 4.39 9 1.61 1 6.00 All seed treatments 59 0.76 90 0.48 98 0.54 93 0.63 All pesticides 1,439 13.50 1,758 13.16 1,738 11.64 1,526 15.15
84
PESTICIDE USAGE ON PULSES
DRY HARVEST PEAS
Pea crops received on average three herbicide sprays, two insecticides and a fungicide (Table 4a). Herbicides accounted for 43% of the total pesticide-treated area of peas, insecticides 24%, fungicides 21%, seed treatments 11% and molluscicides and sulphur less than one percent. Herbicides accounted for 74% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied, fungicides 19%, seed treatments 4%, insecticides 3% and sulphur and molluscicides each less than one percent.
The variety Nitouche accounted for 45% of the total dry harvest pea area grown in England & Wales (data on varieties grown were not available for Scotland). Approximately 18% of all dry harvest pea seed sown in England & Wales was farm saved from the previous harvest.
Timing of pesticide applications on dry harvest peas: September 2001 - August 2002
0
20
40
60
80
100
Sep OctNov Dec Ja
nFeb M
ar AprM
ay Jun Ju
lAug
Perc
enta
ge o
f app
licat
ions
FungicideHerbicideInsecticide
Peas – Fungicides
Together, chlorothalonil and azoxystrobin accounted for 83% of the fungicide-treated area. Most usage, 62%, was for general disease control, with a further 26% being used for Botrytis and 9% for mildew control.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of fungicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Chlorothalonil 75,014 47,274 0.49 0.69 1.26 0.42 Azoxystrobin 52,358 6,297 0.34 0.54 1.19 0.48 Vinclozolin 15,483 3,851 0.10 0.14 1.42 0.50 Chlorothalonil/cyproconazole 8,393 5,304 0.05 0.08 1.14 0.76 Quinoxyfen 1,270 156 0.01 0.01 1.00 0.82
85
Peas - Herbicides Most herbicides were applied in March, April and May, frequently as pre-emergence herbicides and being used to control a broad spectrum of weed species. Broad-leaved weed control was cited as the main reason for herbicide applications, 34% of the treated area, with general weed control comprising 31%. Crop desiccation accounted for a further 13% of usage, wild oats for 6%, unspecified grass weeds 5%, blackgrass/wild oats 2%, poppies 2% and charlock 2%.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of herbicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Glyphosate 60,763 54,586 0.20 0.53 1.49 0.79 Cyanazine 59,459 14,646 0.19 0.65 1.07 0.25 Bentazone/MCPB 52,106 69,184 0.17 0.60 1.04 0.83 Cyanazine/pendimethalin 30,278 52,814 0.10 0.36 1.00 0.84 Terbuthylazine/terbutryn 21,798 19,623 0.07 0.26 1.00 0.55 Peas – Insecticides The majority of insecticides were applied in June, primarily for the control of aphids, which accounted for 35% of the insecticide-treated area, pea and bean weevil for 27%, pea moth 16%, thrips 9% and a combination of aphids/pea moth for 7%. Most insecticides were applied at two thirds of the full label rate, or greater, with pirimicarb being used on 52% of the area grown and lambda-cyhalothrin on 44%.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of insecticide-treated area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Lambda-cyhalothrin 54,969 267 0.31 0.44 1.47 0.65 Pirimicarb 47,403 4,375 0.27 0.52 1.15 0.66 Cypermethrin 20,134 478 0.11 0.20 1.23 0.95 Lambda-cyhalothrin/pirimicarb 13,564 1,415 0.08 0.15 1.09 0.66 Alpha-cypermethrin 11,798 157 0.07 0.08 1.36 0.89
86
Peas – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 29 & 30)
The area of peas grown between 1992 and 2002 had increased by 8%, with increases in the area treated of 41% and weight applied of 26%. The main reason for the discrepancy between the rise in the area grown and the area treated is that the number of all pesticide sprays used on peas has increased from just under four sprays in 1992 to over five sprays in 2002.
The rates of application of all pesticide groups have fallen over the last decade. In particular the rate of insecticide applications has decreased from 0.14 kg of active substance/hectare in 1992 to 0.06 kg/ha in 2002. This reflects a move away from organophosphate insecticides, which are applied at relatively high rates, and an increase in the use of pyrethroids and carbamates, both of which are applied at lower rates.
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to dry harvest peas 1992 - 2002
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
87
Table 29 Comparison of pesticide usage on peas 1992 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Carbamates 27,705 3.16 51,743 5.06 60,387 5.65 47,403 4.38 Organochlorines . . 194 0.19 . . . . Organophosphates 37,928 13.21 30,993 10.14 9,883 2.95 9,388 2.54 Pyrethroids 65,277 1.37 82,536 1.62 101,641 1.11 99,921 1.04 Other insecticides 4,947 0.63 15,627 1.88 8,862 1.07 18,986 1.94 Total - all insecticides 135,857 18.37 181,092 18.89 180,773 10.78 175,698 9.91 Desiccants . . . . 154 20.11 . . Fungicides 124,429 62.04 178,188 118.47 172,737 85.02 153,734 63.16 Sulphur 1,410 5.68 1,178 1.84 1,510 2.32 1,081 1.35 Growth regulators . . 485 0.45 . . . . Herbicides 176,480 164.40 314,159 225.69 294,699 216.20 309,503 244.63 Molluscicides . . 555 0.33 . . 870 0.23 Seed treatments 71,656 13.04 90,679 15.47 70,429 15.72 79,938 12.72 Total - all registered pesticides 509,832 263.53 766,337 381.15 720,301 350.16 720,824 332.01 Area grown 78,466 101,729 83,595 84,765
88
Table 30 Comparison of pesticide usage in peas 1992 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average application rate (kg a.s./ha) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Carbamates 35 0.11 51 0.10 72 0.09 56 0.09 Organochlorines . . < 1 0.98 . . . . Organophosphates 48 0.35 30 0.33 12 0.30 11 0.27 Pyrethroids 83 0.02 81 0.02 122 0.01 118 0.01 Other insecticides 6 0.13 15 0.12 11 0.12 22 0.10 Total - all insecticides 173 0.14 178 0.10 216 0.06 207 0.06 Desiccants . . . . < 1 130.90 . . Fungicides 159 0.50 175 0.66 207 0.49 181 0.41 Sulphur 2 4.03 1 1.56 2 1.54 1 1.25 Growth regulators . . < 1 0.92 . . . . Herbicides 225 0.93 309 0.72 353 0.73 365 0.79 Molluscicides . . 1 0.60 . . 1 0.26 All seed treatments 91 0.18 89 0.17 84 0.22 94 0.16 All pesticides 650 0.52 753 0.50 862 0.49 850 0.46
89
FIELD BEANS
Field bean crops received on average two herbicide sprays, two fungicides and an insecticide (Table 4a). Fungicides accounted for 38% of the total pesticide-treated area of beans, herbicides 36%, insecticides 24%, seed treatments 2% and molluscicides and sulphur less than one percent. Herbicides accounted for 58% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied, fungicides 37%, sulphur 2%, insecticides 2%, seed treatments and molluscicides each less than one percent.
The variety Clipper (winter sown) accounted for 30% of the total field bean area grown in England & Wales, Victor (spring sown) a further 20%, Target (winter sown) 20% and Quattro (spring sown) 11% (data on varieties grown were not available for Scotland). Approximately 36% of all seed sown in England & Wales was farm saved from the previous harvest.
Timing of pesticide applications on field beans: September 2001 - August 2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Perc
enta
ge o
f all
appl
icat
ions
FungicideHerbicideInsecticide
Beans – Fungicides
Together, chlorothalonil and tebuconazole accounted for 68% of the fungicide-treated area. Most usage, 48%, was for chocolate spot control, with a further 15% being used for general disease control, downy mildew 9%, chocolate spot/rusts 9% and chocolate spot/mildew 7%.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of fungicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Chlorothalonil 173,348 121,903 0.46 0.72 1.54 0.52 Tebuconazole 81,467 11,047 0.22 0.38 1.24 0.54 Chlorothalonil/metalaxyl 31,448 21,091 0.08 0.16 1.13 0.58 Chlorothalonil/cyproconazole 25,243 14,403 0.07 0.14 1.23 0.69 Cyproconazole 23,962 1,089 0.06 0.11 1.13 0.57
90
Beans - Herbicides Most herbicides were applied either in October/November or in March, frequently as pre-emergence herbicides and being used to control a broad spectrum of weed species. General weed control was cited as the main reason for herbicide applications, 56% of the treated area, with blackgrass comprising 12%, broad-leaved weeds 8%, crop desiccation 7%, unspecified grass weeds 4%, cereal volunteers 3%, cleavers 2%, couch 2% and blackgrass/wild oats 2%.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of herbicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Simazine 121,689 114,714 0.34 0.73 1.01 0.94 Glyphosate 82,121 72,180 0.23 0.43 1.12 0.67 Tepraloxydim 26,851 1,332 0.08 0.16 1.00 0.66 Cyanazine/pendimethalin 25,911 45,521 0.07 0.16 1.00 0.85 Cycloxydim 17,581 2,679 0.05 0.11 1.00 0.34 Beans – Insecticides The majority of insecticides were applied from April to June, primarily for the control of pea and bean weevil, which accounted for 53% of the insecticide-treated area, aphids for 26% and bruchid beetle 8%. Most insecticides were applied at three quarters of the full label rate, or greater, with cypermethrin being used on 38% of the area grown, pirimicarb 29% and lambda-cyhalothrin on 23%.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of insecticide-treated area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Cypermethrin 80,094 2,041 0.34 0.38 1.31 1.02 Lambda-cyhalothrin 55,254 313 0.23 0.23 1.33 0.75 Pirimicarb 50,274 4,758 0.21 0.29 1.03 0.68 Deltamethrin 23,303 150 0.10 0.11 1.42 0.86 Alpha-cypermethrin 17,705 208 0.07 0.08 1.33 0.78
91
Beans – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 31 & 32)
The area of field beans grown between 1992 and 2002 had increased by 27%, with increases in the area treated of 65% and weight applied of 39%. The rise in the area grown and the area treated is accounted for by the number of all pesticide sprays used on beans increasing from just under three sprays in 1992 to over four sprays in 2002. In particular, the use of insecticides has increased from 76% of the area grown being treated in 1992 to 144% of the area grown in 2002 (Table 32). Similarly, the use of herbicides on the area grown has increased from 144% to 218% over the same period, and contributed most to the total increased weight of pesticides applied. Nonetheless, the rates of application of all pesticide groups have fallen over the last decade (Table 32).
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to field beans 1992 - 2002
012345678
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
bers
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
92
Table 31 Comparison of pesticide usage on beans 1992 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Carbamates 23,516 2.94 12,802 1.30 25,914 2.30 50,274 4.76 Organophosphates 9,561 2.83 5,339 1.34 1,837 0.56 936 0.16 Pyrethroids 65,004 1.41 71,563 1.11 104,309 1.54 184,669 2.80 Other insecticides . . 111 0.01 . . 520 0.04 Total - all insecticides 98,081 7.19 89,815 3.77 132,060 4.40 236,400 7.76 Fungicides 283,984 179.07 313,830 159.01 281,404 135.58 373,911 190.91 Sulphur 3,835 15.74 . . 2,608 7.47 2,869 11.00 Growth regulators 210 0.24 . . . . . . Herbicides 185,145 159.99 193,465 157.35 233,139 177.53 357,412 297.93 Molluscicides . . 2,400 0.45 3,017 0.89 4,262 1.14 Seed treatments 28,794 5.20 13,920 2.67 9,960 0.77 15,704 1.17 Total - all registered pesticides 600,050 367.43 613,430 323.25 662,188 326.64 990,557 509.91 Area grown 128,754 110,590 124,129 164,184
93
Table 32 Comparison of pesticide usage in beans 1992 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average application rate (kg a.s./ha) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Carbamates 18 0.13 12 0.10 21 0.09 31 0.09 Organophosphates 7 0.30 5 0.25 1 0.30 1 0.17 Pyrethroids 50 0.02 65 0.02 84 0.01 112 0.02 Other insecticides . . < 1 0.11 . . < 1 0.07 Total - all insecticides 76 0.07 81 0.04 106 0.03 144 0.03 Fungicides 221 0.63 284 0.51 227 0.48 228 0.51 Sulphur 3 4.10 . . 2 2.86 2 3.83 Growth regulators < 1 1.16 . . . . . . Herbicides 144 0.86 175 0.81 188 0.76 218 0.83 Molluscicides . . 2 0.19 2 0.29 3 0.27 All seed treatments 22 0.18 13 0.19 8 0.08 10 0.07 All pesticides 466 0.61 555 0.53 533 0.49 603 0.51
94
PESTICIDE USAGE ON SUGAR BEET
Sugar beet crops received on average five herbicide sprays and less than one fungicide and insecticide spray (Table 4a). Herbicides accounted for 69% of the total pesticide-treated area of sugar beet, seed treatments 23%, fungicides 5%, insecticides 3%, sulphur and molluscicides less than one percent. Herbicides accounted for 85% of the total weight of pesticide active substances applied, sulphur 7%, fungicides 2%, insecticides 2%, seed treatments and molluscicides each less than one percent.
The variety Roberta accounted for 24% of the total sugar beet area grown, with Wildcat comprising a further 13%, Latoyah 12%, Chorus 12% and Humber 10%. All seed was bought in.
Timing of pesticide applications on sugar beet: October 2001 - September 2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
OctNov Dec Ja
nFeb M
ar AprM
ay Jun Ju
lAug
Sep
Perc
enta
ge o
f app
licat
ions
FungicideHerbicideInsecticide
Sprayer water volumes used for fungicides and insecticides applied to sugar beet were similar to those used for cereals, being applied at between 150 and 200 litres of water per hectare. However, over 60% of herbicides, normally as part of a repeat low dose programme, were applied in sprayer water volumes less than 100 litres of water per hectare.
Sprayer water volumes used for pesticide applications to sugar beet 2002
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Fungicide Herbicide Insecticide
Perc
enta
ge o
f are
a sp
raye
d
<100 L/Ha100-150 L/Ha151-200 L/Ha>200 L/Ha
95
Sugar beet – Fungicides
Carbendazim/flusilazole was the most important fungicide active substance, being used on 41% of the area of sugar beet grown and accounting for 75% of the fungicide-treated area. Powdery mildew and a combination of mildew/rust accounted for 28% and 24% of the fungicide-treated area respectively. Most sulphur applications, 96% of the total area treated with sulphur, were for the control of powdery mildew.
Sugar beet - Herbicides
Most herbicides were applied in April and May, with a smaller peak appearing in June. The first herbicide application was normally made pre-emergence in high water volumes with subsequent applications of repeated low doses being made in lower water volumes. Broad-leaved weed control was cited as the main reason for herbicide usage, comprising 40% of the treated area, with general weed control comprising a further 28%. Polygonum accounted for a further 6% of usage, cereal volunteers for 3%, wild radish 3%, cleavers 3%, bindweed 3% and thistles 3%.
Formulation area treated (ha)
Weight of a.s. applied (kg)
Proportion of herbicide-treated
area
Proportion of census area
treated
Average number of applications (where applied)
Average proportion of full label rate
Phenmedipham 254,513 57,379 0.18 0.68 2.27 0.54 Metamitron 238,448 164,707 0.17 0.71 2.06 0.41 Ethofumesate 124,409 22,095 0.09 0.42 1.85 0.20 Triflusulfuron-methyl 109,258 1,346 0.08 0.39 1.61 0.82 Lenacil 107,433 18,996 0.08 0.38 1.52 0.90 Sugar beet – Insecticides Most foliar applications of insecticides were made in May and June, with a further peak of soil-applied insecticides, particularly aldicarb and oxamyl, occurring in March at drilling. Most applications were made primarily for the control of aphids (pirimicarb, triazamate, lambda-cyhalothrin/pirimicarb and dimethoate), which accounted for 65% of the insecticide-treated area, or mangold fly (lambda-cyhalothrin) 16%, flea beetle (deltamethrin) 8% and millipedes (aldicarb) 7%. Pirimicarb accounted for 31% of the insecticide-treated area but was applied to only 9% of the total area of sugar beet grown, with the soil-applied aldicarb comprising a further 24% of the insecticide-treated area but applied to only 8% of the area of sugar beet grown.
96
Sugar beet – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 33 & 34)
The area of sugar beet grown between 1992 and 2002 had decreased by 14% with increases in the area treated of 9%, but a decrease in the weight applied of 26%. The main reason for the discrepancy between the decrease in the area grown and the area treated is that the number of all pesticide sprays used on sugar beet has increased from just over four sprays in 1992 to almost six sprays in 2002, while the larger decrease in weight applied is a result of newer molecules more active at lower doses and farmers’ increasing use of reduced rate applications. Of particular not is the major move away from sulphur, applied at over 5 kg/ha to large areas in previous years, to conazole fungicides, applied at less than 0.2 kg/ha in 2002.
The most dramatic change in pesticide usage in sugar beet, when treated area is expressed as a percentage of the area grown, has been the decrease in the use of foliar applied insecticides from 98% of the area grown in 1992 to 23% of the area grown in 2002 (Table 34). This is due to the increased use of imidacloprid and tefluthrin seed treatments, which have reduced the need for soil-incorporated insecticides and late season foliar applications. The herbicide rate of application has fallen from 0.58 kilogrammes/hectare in 1992 to 0.38 kg/ha in 2002 (Table 34), reflecting the increased use of sulfonylurea active substances which are applied at very low rates.
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to sugar beet 1992 -2002
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
97
Table 33 Comparison of pesticide usage on sugar beet 1992 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Carbamates 96,085 28.08 30,529 5.13 13,941 2.41 19,884 3.09 Organochlorines 5,867 6.52 723 0.55 554 0.62 . . Organophosphates 63,776 11.15 1,363 0.98 1,495 0.53 1,263 0.57 Pyrethroids 11,093 0.22 24,381 0.52 17,929 0.25 11,905 0.13 Other insecticides 15,518 3.69 24,196 2.45 6,097 0.61 6,289 0.43 Total - all insecticides 192,340 49.67 81,191 9.63 40,016 4.42 39,341 4.22 Fungicides 6,578 0.68 82,174 7.73 54,697 7.75 91,790 15.19 Sulphur 31,528 177.69 80,994 450.69 30,943 168.41 7,711 43.02 Herbicides 1,028,450 595.65 1,369,463 555.39 1,318,575 490.02 1,399,129 527.67 Molluscicides 2,265 0.35 3,173 1.27 16,489 6.27 1,116 0.30 Nematicides 16,553 10.74 28,190 24.86 13,123 9.13 17,587 10.89 Seed treatments 580,887 20.63 506,471 30.46 479,204 28.52 467,681 28.13 Total - all registered pesticides 1,858,602 855.41 2,151,657 1080.01 1,953,046 714.51 2,024,354 629.43 Area grown 196,397 188,355 172,566 169,148
98
Table 34 Comparison of pesticide usage on sugar beet 1992 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average application rate (kg a.s./ha) Pesticide group 1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Carbamates 49 0.29 16 0.17 8 0.17 12 0.16 Organochlorines 3 1.11 0 0.76 0 1.12 0 Organophosphates 32 0.17 1 0.72 1 0.36 1 0.45 Pyrethroids 6 0.02 13 0.02 10 0.01 7 0.01 Other insecticides 8 0.24 13 0.10 4 0.10 4 0.07 Total - all insecticides 98 0.26 43 0.12 23 0.11 23 0.11 Fungicides 3 0.10 44 0.09 32 0.14 54 0.17 Sulphur 16 5.64 43 5.56 18 5.44 5 5.58 Herbicides 524 0.58 727 0.41 764 0.37 827 0.38 Molluscicides 1 0.15 2 0.40 10 0.38 1 0.27 Nematicides 8 0.65 15 0.88 8 0.70 10 0.62 All seed treatments 296 0.04 269 0.06 278 0.06 276 0.06 All pesticides 946 0.46 1,142 0.50 1,132 0.37 1,197 0.31
99
PESTICIDE USAGE ON SET-ASIDE
Set-aside land can be split into four main areas; industrial oilseed crops (occupying 17% of the total area), grassland (14%), other short-term crops (3%) and natural regeneration, occupying the remaining 66% of set-aside land. Herbicides accounted for 53% of the total pesticide-treated area, fungicides for 18%, seed treatments 12%, insecticides for 11%, molluscicides 5% and sulphur and growth regulators both less than one percent each. Herbicides comprised 85% of the total weight of all pesticides applied to set-aside land, fungicides 7%, molluscicides 4%, sulphur 3% and growth regulators, seed treatments and insecticides less than one percent each.
The most extensively-used herbicide formulation was glyphosate, being applied to 53% of the total herbicide-treated area and to 47% of the area grown, being used mainly for total vegetation control in naturally regenerated set-aside. Other formulations included propaquizafop, used on 7% of the area, trifluralin on 6%, metazachlor/quinmerac on 5% and metazachlor on 5% of the treated area, all predominantly used on industrial oilseed crops.
Usage of fungicides was confined mainly to industrial oilseed rape, which accounted for 98% of the total fungicide-treated area. Tebuconazole was the most common of the foliar applied fungicides, accounting for 26% of the total treated area and being used on 7% of the area grown. Usage of carbendazim/flusilazole was also high, accounting for a further 18% of the fungicide-treated area. Carbendazim was used on a further 15%, metconazole on 10%, and flusilazole on 7%. Thiram and iprodione were the most commonly encountered fungicide seed treatments, being used entirely on industrial oilseed rape seed.
Insecticide usage was again confined mainly to industrial oilseed rape, which accounted for 99% of all insecticide usage. Cypermethrin, used on 7% of the total set-aside area grown, accounted for 47% of the total foliar applied insecticide-treated area, lambda-cyhalothrin for 22% and alpha-cypermethrin for 18%. Beta-cyfluthrin/imidacloprid was the most commonly used insecticide seed treatment, its use being confined entirely to oilseed rape.
Usage of sulphur for disease control was confined to industrial oilseed rape.
By area treated, metaldehyde accounted for 72% of the molluscicides used, thiodicarb for 21% and methiocarb 6%.
There was minimal use of growth regulators and chlormequat was the only one recorded.
Tabl
e 35
Set
-asi
de: p
estic
ides
(fol
iar a
pplic
atio
ns) a
nd th
eir u
sage
on
indi
vidu
al c
rops
(tre
ated
hec
tare
s) a
nd to
tal a
mou
nt a
pplie
d (to
nnes
)
Indu
stri
al
Indu
stri
al
Mus
tard
G
ame
Oth
erG
rass
N
atur
al
Tota
l are
aT
otal
oils
eed
rape
lin
seed
cove
rC
rops
1
rege
nera
tion
trea
ted
tonn
es
Fun
gici
des
Azo
xyst
robi
n .
. .
.31
0.
. 31
00.
04
Car
bend
azim
29
,925
90
2 .
..
. .
30,8
268.
22
Car
bend
azim
/flus
ilazo
le
37,6
99
. .
..
. .
37,6
995.
45
Chl
orot
halo
nil
917
. .
.31
0.
. 1,
227
0.61
C
ypro
dini
l .
. .
.67
4.
. 67
40.
15
Dife
noco
nazo
le
12,3
29
. .
..
. .
12,3
290.
91
Epo
xico
nazo
le
. .
. .
674
. .
674
0.02
F
lusi
lazo
le
14,9
42
. .
..
. .
14,9
421.
89
Ipro
dion
e 71
2 .
. .
..
. 71
20.
12
Ipro
dion
e/th
ioph
anat
e-m
ethy
l 8,
716
. .
..
. .
8,71
65.
08
Man
coze
b 21
6 .
. .
..
. 21
60.
18
Met
cona
zole
20
,243
.
. .
..
. 20
,243
0.84
P
roch
lora
z 4,
422
. .
..
. .
4,42
20.
93
Pro
chlo
raz/
tebu
cona
zole
51
2 .
. .
..
. 51
20.
17
Qui
noxy
fen
167
. .
..
. .
167
0.06
S
piro
xam
ine
1,53
2 .
. .
..
. 1,
532
0.23
T
ebuc
onaz
ole
54,1
91
. 30
7 .
..
. 54
,499
7.41
V
incl
ozol
in
3,61
0 .
. .
..
. 3,
610
0.99
O
ther
fung
icid
es2
25,3
93
. .
379
1,30
81,
614
1,42
7 30
,122
15.3
7 A
ll fu
ngic
ides
20
3,03
4 90
2 30
7 .
1,96
8.
. 20
6,21
139
.21
S
ulph
ur
4,22
9 .
. .
..
. 4,
229
17.3
0
Are
a gr
own3
101,
962
451
2,60
8 9,
084
5,12
985
,156
40
3,71
1
1 Oth
er c
rops
incl
ude
barle
y, c
love
r, cr
ambe
, hem
p, m
isca
nthu
s, po
ppy,
shor
t rot
atio
n co
ppic
e, tr
itica
le a
nd w
oodl
and
2 Oth
er fu
ngic
ides
incl
ude
carb
enda
zim
/ipro
dion
e, c
arbe
ndaz
im/m
anco
zeb,
car
bend
azim
/man
eb, c
arbe
ndaz
im/p
roch
lora
z, c
arbe
ndaz
im/te
buco
nazo
le a
nd c
arbe
ndaz
im/v
incl
ozol
in
3 Rai
sed
from
tota
l cen
sus a
rea
of se
t-asi
de, n
ot a
reas
of i
ndiv
idua
l cro
ps g
row
n as
set-a
side
100
Tabl
e 35
(con
t) S
et-a
side
: pes
ticid
es (f
olia
r app
licat
ions
) and
thei
r usa
ge o
n in
divi
dual
cro
ps (t
reat
ed h
ecta
res)
and
tota
l am
ount
app
lied
(tonn
es)
Indu
stri
al
Indu
stri
al
Mus
tard
G
ame
Oth
erG
rass
N
atur
al
Tota
l are
aT
otal
oils
eed
rape
lin
seed
cove
rC
rops
1
rege
nera
tion
trea
ted
tonn
es
H
erbi
cide
s
B
rom
oxyn
il/io
xyni
l .
. .
.20
523
8 .
443
0.12
C
lopy
ralid
24
,017
.
. 9
..
. 24
,027
1.58
C
yana
zine
10
,621
.
. .
469
. .
11,0
904.
78
Cyc
loxy
dim
12
,396
.
798
..
. .
13,1
942.
20
Dic
amba
/mec
opro
p-P
. .
. .
1,34
7.
121
1,46
80.
24
Diq
uat
1,90
1 45
1 .
2990
6.
. 3,
287
1.69
F
luaz
ifop-
P-bu
tyl
10,2
59
. 30
7 .
..
. 10
,567
0.82
F
lufe
nace
t/pen
dim
etha
lin
333
. .
..
. .
333
0.48
F
luro
xypy
r .
. .
.67
426
4 .
937
0.06
G
lyph
osat
e 53
,408
.
2,16
5 42
02,
264
4,04
8 25
6,90
9 31
9,21
335
5.54
Is
opro
turo
n .
. .
6.
. .
60.
01
MC
PA
. .
. .
272,
021
3,25
3 5,
301
3.49
M
ecop
rop-
P .
. .
.20
51,
366
49
1,62
01.
33
Met
azac
hlor
31
,599
.
. .
..
. 31
,599
20.1
4 M
etaz
achl
or/q
uinm
erac
32
,329
.
. .
..
. 32
,329
21.2
7 M
etsu
lfuro
n-m
ethy
l .
451
. .
..
743
1,19
40.
01
Pen
dim
etha
lin
. .
. 27
7.
. .
277
0.28
P
ropa
quiz
afop
44
,265
.
. .
..
. 44
,265
1.81
P
ropy
zam
ide
18,3
62
. 30
7 .
..
. 18
,669
12.7
3 T
epra
loxy
dim
15
,792
.
. .
..
. 15
,792
0.77
T
riflu
ralin
35
,288
.
952
..
. .
36,2
4037
.08
Oth
er h
erbi
cide
s2 25
,393
.
. 37
91,
308
1,61
4 1,
427
30,1
2215
.37
All
herb
icid
es
315,
964
902
4,53
0 1,
121
7,40
49,
550
262,
502
601,
972
481.
76
G
row
th re
gula
tors
C
hlor
meq
uat
133
. .
..
. .
133
0.05
1 O
ther
cro
ps in
clud
e ba
rley,
clo
ver,
cram
be, h
emp,
mis
cant
hus,
popp
y, sh
ort r
otat
ion
copp
ice,
triti
cale
and
woo
dlan
d 2 O
ther
her
bici
des
incl
ude
2,4-
D, 2
,4-D
/MC
PA, 2
,4-D
B/li
nuro
n/M
CPA
, atra
zine
, ben
azol
in, b
enaz
olin
/2,4
-DB/
MC
PA, b
enaz
olin
/clo
pyra
lid, b
enta
zone
/MC
PA/M
CPB
, bro
mox
ynil/
fluro
xypy
r/iox
ynil,
car
beta
mid
e, c
lom
azon
e,
clop
yral
id/fl
urox
ypyr
/tric
lopy
r, cl
opyr
alid
/tric
lopy
r, M
CPA
/MC
PB, p
araq
uat,
quiz
alof
op-P
-eth
yl, q
uiza
lofo
p-et
hyl,
seth
oxyd
im, s
odiu
m m
onoc
hlor
oace
tate
, thi
fens
ulfu
ron-
met
hyl a
nd u
nspe
cifie
d he
rbic
ides
.
101
Tabl
e 35
(con
t) S
et-a
side
: pes
ticid
es (f
olia
r app
licat
ions
& se
ed tr
eatm
ents
) and
thei
r usa
ge o
n in
divi
dual
cro
ps (t
reat
ed h
ecta
res)
and
tota
l am
ount
app
lied
(tonn
es)
In
dust
rial
In
dust
rial
M
usta
rd
Gam
eO
ther
Gra
ss
Nat
ural
To
tal a
rea
Tot
al
oi
lsee
d ra
pe
linse
ed
co
ver
Cro
ps1
re
gene
ratio
n tr
eate
dto
nnes
In
sect
icid
es
Alp
ha-c
yper
met
hrin
21
,670
.
. .
..
. 21
,670
0.29
C
yper
met
hrin
58
,349
.
. 6
..
. 58
,355
1.44
D
elta
met
hrin
6,
071
. .
..
. .
6,07
10.
04
Esf
enva
lera
te
327
. .
..
. .
327
< 0.
01
Lam
bda-
cyha
loth
rin
26,5
48
. 46
1 58
310
. .
27,3
780.
11
Piri
mic
arb
2,62
7 .
. .
..
. 2,
627
0.35
Z
eta-
cype
rmet
hrin
6,
780
. 49
1 .
..
. 7,
271
0.08
A
ll in
sect
icid
es
122,
374
. 95
2 64
310
. .
123,
700
2.32
Mol
lusc
icid
es
Met
alde
hyde
41
,318
.
. .
864
608
30
42,8
1918
.59
Met
hioc
arb
3,24
1 .
. .
..
126
3,36
70.
71
Thi
odic
arb
12,3
22
. .
..
. .
12,3
221.
77
Oth
er m
ollu
scic
ides
2 1,
298
. .
..
. .
1,29
8.
All
mol
lusc
icid
es
58,1
79
. .
.86
460
8 15
6 59
,807
21.0
8
Seed
trea
tmen
ts
Fun
gici
de se
ed tr
eatm
ents
I
prod
ione
38
,448
.
. 21
285
. .
38,7
540.
54
Teb
ucon
azol
e/tri
azox
ide
. .
. .
674
. .
674
0.01
T
hira
m
39,8
85
. .
4328
5.
. 40
,213
0.67
In
sect
icid
e se
ed tr
eatm
ents
B
eta-
cyflu
thrin
/imid
aclo
prid
42
,548
.
. .
..
. 42
,548
0.94
M
ollu
scic
ide
seed
trea
tmen
ts
Met
hioc
arb
2,11
7 .
. 21
..
. 2,
138
0.02
O
ther
seed
trea
tmen
ts
Fun
gici
de/in
sect
icid
e se
ed tr
eatm
ents
3 79
0 .
. .
..
. 79
00.
05
Uns
peci
fied
seed
trea
tmen
ts
10,7
85
451
649
787
650
51
. 13
,372
. A
ll se
ed tr
eam
ents
13
4,57
3 45
1 64
9 87
21,
894
51
. 13
8,48
92.
00
1 O
ther
cro
ps in
clud
e ba
rley,
clo
ver,
cram
be, h
emp,
mis
cant
hus,
popp
y, sh
ort r
otat
ion
copp
ice,
triti
cale
and
woo
dlan
d
2 Oth
er m
ollu
scic
ides
incl
ude
unsp
ecifi
ed m
ollu
scic
ides
3 Oth
er fu
ngic
ide/
inse
ctic
ide
seed
trea
tmen
ts in
clud
e fe
npro
pim
orph
/gam
ma-
HC
H a
nd g
amm
a-H
CH
/thira
m.
98 102
103
Set-aside – Comparison with previous surveys (Tables 36 & 37)
The area of set-aside had almost doubled between the 1998 and 2002 surveys, with a three-fold increase in the area treated and a doubling of the weight applied. The area of set-aside grown in intervening years has varied according to the requirements of the Arable Area Payment Scheme. Much of the increase in the treated area has come, not only from an increase in the area of industrial crops grown, 13% in 1998 to 17% in 2002, but also an increase in the number of applications made to set-aside. The area treated as a percentage of the area grown had increased from 131% to 187% between 1998 and 2002. In particular, the area treated with herbicides had increased from 76% of the area grown in 1998 to 99% in 2002 with only a slight reduction in the average rate of application.
Table 36 Comparison of pesticide usage on set-aside 1998 - 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t) Pesticide group 1998 2000 2002 Area Weight Area Weight Area Weight treated (ha) applied (t) treated (ha) applied (t) treated (ha) applied (t) Insecticides Carbamates 5,413 0.59 612 0.04 2,627 0.35 Organochlorines 444 0.18 164 0.05 . . Organophosphates 365 0.18 1,504 0.78 . . Pyrethroids 46,509 0.90 112,220 2.28 121,073 1.97 Total - all insecticides 52,731 1.84 114,500 3.15 123,700 2.32 Fungicides 62,201 15.60 156,594 36.06 206,211 39.19 Sulphur 3,690 19.19 3,311 9.12 4,229 17.30 Growth regulators 5,032 3.99 4,064 6.81 133 0.05 Herbicides 235,829 195.14 492,985 400.51 601,972 481.76 Molluscicides 2,995 1.29 36,734 13.39 59,807 21.08 Seed treatments 44,595 4.10 92,044 3.36 138,926 2.23 Total - all registered pesticides 407,073 241.16 900,233 472.39 1,134,978 563.93 Area grown 310,604 563,349 608,100
104
Table 37 Comparison of pesticide usage on set-aside 1998 - 2002, treated area as a percentage of area grown and average application rate (kg a.s./ha) Pesticide group 1998 2000 2002
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate(kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate(kg a.s./ha)
Area treated as % of area
grown
Average appln. rate (kg a.s./ha)
Insecticides Carbamates 2 0.11 < 1 0.07 < 1 0.13 Organochlorines < 1 0.40 < 1 0.33 . . Organophosphates < 1 0.48 < 1 0.52 . . Pyrethroids 15 0.02 20 0.02 20 0.02 Total - all insecticides 17 0.03 20 0.03 20 0.02 Fungicides 20 0.25 28 0.23 34 0.19 Sulphur 1 5.20 1 2.75 1 4.09 Growth regulators 2 0.79 1 1.67 < 1 0.35 Herbicides 76 0.83 88 0.81 99 0.80 Molluscicides 1 0.43 7 0.36 10 0.36 Seed treatments 14 0.09 16 0.04 23 0.02 Total - all registered pesticides 131 0.59 160 0.52 187 0.50
105
ARABLE CROPS – COMPARISON WITH PREVIOUS SURVEYS (Table 38)
The area of all arable crops, excluding set-aside, grown between 1992 and 2002 had decreased by 9%. However, in contrast there was an increase in the area treated of 25%, but a decrease in the weight applied of 2%. The discrepancy between the decrease in the area grown and the increase in the area treated reflects the increase in the average number of sprays applied from four in 1992 to over five in 2002. In addition the number of products used, and therefore the degree of tank mixing, has also increased from an average of seven products per crop in 1992 to ten products in 2002.
Despite the increase in the number of sprays and products used, the weight of active substances applied has fallen over the last ten years. This reflects both the move to products containing newer molecules intrinsically more active at lower doses and the use of reduced rates by farmers and growers. In particular, the use of both organochlorine and organophosphate insecticides, both used at relatively high rates, have decreased by 83% and 75% respectively (Table 38). In contrast the use of pyrethroids, which are used at lower rates of application, increased by 44%.
Number of pesticide sprays, products and active substances applied to all crops 1992 - 2002
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Num
ber
of a
pplic
atio
ns
SpraysProductsActive substances
Usage of the desiccant sulphuric acid had changed little over the last ten years with approximately 70 -75,000 hectares being treated annually, however there was an increased use in 1998 when over 90,000 hectares were treated. The weight of sulphuric acid applied accounted for 36% of the total weight of pesticides in 1992 and 40% in 2002.
Whilst the use of fungicides increased by 20%, the weight applied fell by 34% reflecting the use of more frequent lower dose applications in 2002 compared to 1992.
Similarly, although the weight of herbicide active substances applied over the last ten years remained fairly constant, the area treated increased by 38%. Much of this discrepancy is due to the use of sulfonylurea herbicides, applied at very low rates, replacing older molecules, for example mecoprop, previously used at higher rates.
The area treated with growth regulators had increased by 60% since 1992, with an increase in the weight applied of 21%.
Molluscicide usage had increased steadily and the area treated in 2002 was almost four times that used ten years ago, with a corresponding increase in the weight applied.
Nematicide usage, particularly for the control of potato cyst nematodes, had increased by 27% since 1992.
106
Table 38 Comparison of pesticide usage on all arable crops, (excluding set-aside) 1992 – 2002, area treated (ha) and amount used (t)
1992 1998 2000 2002
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Area treated (ha)
Weight applied (t)
Insecticides Carbamates 369,410 60.54 280,820 29.41 251,534 25.37 249,682 24.14 Organochlorines 24,859 18.08 21,493 16.66 3,482 3.05 4,015 4.47 Organophosphates 635,836 225.81 458,069 188.10 252,000 93.51 156,779 59.19 Pyrethroids 2,422,161 48.52 3,373,890 59.84 3,088,801 56.22 3,491,635 58.83 Other insecticides 88,794 12.47 104,133 10.43 63,914 6.61 74,871 6.94 Total - all insecticides 3,541,061 365.43 4,238,405 304.44 3,659,731 184.76 3,976,982 153.57 Desiccants 74,996 9,994.04 90,348 12,727.13 74,938 11,976.01 72,648 10,771.60 Fungicides 11,974,581 5,149.71 14,971,607 4,274.17 14,346,680 3,530.08 14,402,212 3,415.39 Sulphur 152,501 662.67 229,520 959.65 101,630 354.32 81,262 286.78 Growth regulators 2,589,873 2,641.54 3,742,859 3,080.04 3,944,784 3,133.89 4,131,128 3,187.35 Herbicides 10,210,620 8,376.07 13,743,463 8,659.37 13,513,475 8,123.00 14,074,440 8,333.28 Molluscicides 292,615 101.11 534,139 169.97 1,267,729 387.29 1,040,264 341.83 Repellents 1,060 5.99 . . . . . . Nematicides 43,493 158.18 64,738 145.53 34,517 254.43 55,088 317.37 Seed treatments 4,827,973 286.28 4,770,874 434.65 4,234,967 345.07 4,288,516 353.49 Total - all registered pesticides 33,708,773 27,741.03 42,385,953 30,754.94 41,178,451 28,288.86 42,122,540 27,160.64 Area grown 4,569,735 4,545,431 4,256,279 4,147,981
107
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks are due to all of the growers who willingly participated in this survey, providing invaluable information upon which this report is based. Many thanks are also due to Chris Bierley, Aimee Dawson, Harriet Dennison, Helen Longbottom, Jeremy Snowden, Harley Stoddart and Louis Thomas for their role in collecting the data, Gillian Parish and Lynda Smith for preparatory work, data entry and checking data integrity and Emma Maidment for her role in maintaining the pesticides database. Thanks also go to the members of the ACP Working Party on Pesticide Usage Surveys for their invaluable comments. REFERENCES Anon. (2002a) Agricultural Statistics in England and Wales 2001. London: HMSO Anon. (2002b) Agricultural Statistics, Scotland 2001. Edinburgh: HMSO Anon. (2003a) Agricultural Statistics in England and Wales 2002. London: HMSO Anon. (2003b) Agricultural Statistics, Scotland 2002. Edinburgh: HMSO Bowen, H.M. & Wood, J. (1989) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 45 - Arable Crops 1982. Edinburgh: DAFS Chapman, P.J., Sly, J.M.A. & Cutler, J.M.A. (1977) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 11 - Arable Crops 1974. London: MAFF Davis, R.P., Garthwaite, D.G. & Thomas, M.R. (1990) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 78 - Arable Farm Crops 1988. London: MAFF Davis, R.P., Garthwaite, D.G. & Thomas, M.R. (1991) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 85 - Arable Crops 1990. London: MAFF Davis, R.P., Thomas, M.R., Garthwaite, D.G. & Bowen, H.M. (1993) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 108 - Arable Crops 1992. London: MAFF Garthwaite, D.G., Thomas, M.R. & Hart, M. (1995) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 127 - Arable Farm Crops 1994. London: MAFF Garthwaite, D.G. & Thomas, M.R. (1999) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 159 - Arable Farm Crops 1998. London: MAFF Garthwaite, D.G. & Thomas, M.R. (2003) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 171 - Arable Farm Crops 2000. London: Defra Sly, J.M.A. (1986) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 35 - Arable Farm Crops 1982. London: MAFF Snowden, J.P., Bowen, H.M. & Dickson, J.M. (1990) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 74 - Potatoes 1987. Edinburgh: DAFS Snowden, J.P., Bowen, H.M. & Dickson, J.M. (1991a) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 77 - Arable Crops 1988. Edinburgh: DAFS Snowden, J.P., Bowen, H.M. & Dickson, J.M. (1991b) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 87 - Arable Crops 1990. Edinburgh: DAFS Steed, J.M., Sly, J.M.A., Tucker, G.G. & Cutler, J.R. (1979) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 18 - Arable Farm Crops 1977. London: MAFF Thomas, M.R., Garthwaite, D.G. & Banham, A.R. (1997) Pesticide Usage Survey Report 141 - Arable Farm Crops in Great Britain 1996. London: MAFF Thomas, M.R. (2001) Pesticide usage monitoring in the United Kingdom. Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 45 (supplement 1): S87-S93. Wood, H.J. (1931) An Agricultural Atlas of Scotland. London: George Gill & Sons
108
PESTICIDE USAGE SURVEY REPORTS APPENDIX Surveys which include data relating to Scotland are marked with * Surveys which include data relating to Northern Ireland are marked with # PUBLISHED REPORTS 1
150 Review of usage of pesticides in agriculture & horticulture throughout Great Britain 1986-1996* PB 4188 £2.00 151 Grassland & fodder crops in Great Britain 1997* PB 4189 £3.00 152 Hardy Nursery Stock in Great Britain 1997* PB 4280 £3.00 153 Outdoor bulbs & flowers in Great Britain 1997* PB 4244 £2.00 154 Rodenticide usage on farms in Great Britain growing grassland and fodder crops 1997* PB 4739 £2.00 155 Rodenticide usage by Local Authorities in Great Britain 1997* PB 5411 £3.00 156 Grassland and fodder crops, Northern Ireland 1997# ISBN 1 85527 506 6 157 Sheep treatments, Northern Ireland 1997# ISBN 1 85527 425 6 158 Aerial applications, Great Britain 1998* PB 4552 £3.00 159 Arable farm crops in Great Britain 1998* PB 4808 £4.50 160 Soft fruit in Great Britain 1998* PB 5412 £3.50 161 Potato stores in Great Britain 1998* PB 5413 £2.50 162 Rodenticide usage on farms in Great Britain growing arable crops 1998* PB 5946 £2.50 163 Outdoor vegetable crops in Great Britain 1999* PB 5947 £3.50 164 Protected crops (edible and ornamental) in Great Britain 1999* PB 6166 £3.50 165 Mushroom crops in Great Britain 1999* PB 6167 £1.00 166 Aerial applications, Great Britain 1999* PB 8151 £1.50 167 Soft fruit crops, Northern Ireland 1998# ISBN 1 85527 540 6 168 Arable crops, Northern Ireland 1998# ISBN 1 85527 536 8 169 Vegetable crops, Northern Ireland 1999# ISBN 1 85527 561 9 170 Mushroom crops, Northern Ireland 1999# ISBN 1 85527 549 X 171 Arable farm crops in Great Britain 2000* PB 8014 £2.00 172 Orchards and fruit stores in Great Britain 2000* PB 6168 £1.50 173 Hops in Great Britain 2000 PB 6169 £1.00 174 Potato stores in Great Britain 2000* PB 8015 £1.50 175 Rodenticide usage on farms in Great Britain growing arable crops 2000* PB 8016 £1.50 176 Aerial applications, Great Britain 2000* PB 8152 £1.50 179 Farm grain stores in Great Britain 1998/99* PB 6170 £1.00 180 Commercial grain stores in Great Britain 1998/99* PB 6171 £1.00 181 Soft fruit crops in Great Britain 2001* PB 8017 £1.50 182 Hardy nursery stock in Great Britain 2001* PB 8177 £1.50 183 Outdoor bulbs and flowers in Great Britain 2001* PB 8153 £2.00 184 Aerial applications, Great Britain 2001* PB 8154 £1.50 186 Aerial applications, Great Britain 2002* PB 8176 £1.50
Copies of reports categorised PB may be purchased from: Defra Publications, Admail 6000, London SW1A 2XX Tel: 08459 556000 Copies of reports categorised ISBN may be obtained through Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
1For information on reports prior to number 150 and for pdf versions of recently published reports consult our website at: http://www.csl.gov.uk/science/organ/pvm/puskm/pusg.cfm
