This project aimed to develop an effective knowledge exchange strategy for the grains industry to improve its phosphine insect resistance management outcomes through identification of the methods in which information is delivered and exchanged through the grains supply chain.

Research outcomes

• Identification and evaluation of the networks that exist within the grains industry for the delivery and exchange of information relating to improved grain storage practices and limiting the development of phosphine resistance in insects of stored grain.
• Establishment of mechanisms to deliver this information through co-funding of Grains Biosecurity Officers.
• Identification of economic factors that influence phosphine resistance management practices.

Research implications 

Better methods for exchange of information will raise awareness of the issue of phosphine resistance and commence a gradual improvement in practice amongst all parts of the grains supply chain. 

Acknowledgements

PHA wishes to acknowledge the Cooperative Research Centre for National Plant Biosecurity (CRCNPB) for supporting this project.

PHA also acknowledges the contribution of the Bureau of Rural Sciences who were contracted by PHA to undertake the ‘Social networks for phosphine resistance management in the stored grains industry’ survey, the Grains Biosecurity Officers in each state who implemented the management practices and to all stakeholders involved in the consultation process and who contributed to this project.

This project was an extension of an earlier scoping project CRC30014 that developed software to collect surveillance data via small personal digital assistants (PDA) devices.
The software developed enhances the conformity and integrity of data collected during urban surveillance activities.

There were two central aims of the second phase project. The first was the delivery of the urban surveillance software to a greater number of surveillance personnel as well as mapping the best method for the integration of collected data into national initiatives such as The Australian Biosecurity Intelligence Network (ABIN) and Biosecurity Surveillance Incident Response and Tracing (BioSIRT).

The second aim of the project was to provide the post-harvest grains industry with a system to digitally collect and collate all grains pests surveillance information (presence/absence of emergency plant pests (EPPs), resistance to phosphine and fumigation/treatment records).

The project introduced a system that provides for seamless digital collection and collation of all surveillance related biosecurity information for the post-harvest grains industry. The system has built in checks to ensure data integrity and it is proposed that collected data may also directly interface with BioSIRT. This means it has the capacity to easily interface with other compliant (national and other) systems and also provides a development path into the future, which could include initiatives like ABIN.

This project allows the rapid and efficient use of all surveillance data to maintain and protect markets for the Australian grains and potentially other agricultural/horticultural industries.

Research outcomes:

PDA Phase Two project successfully developed and deployed six main applications:

• Biosecurity hazard site surveillance
• Multi-pest surveillance (MPS, BioSIRT compatible)
• Khapra beetle surveillance
• Forest plantation pest surveys (IPMG)
• MyPestGuide mobile pest datasheets
• Urban plant pest surveillance (USDB)
  • Dermestid surveillance
  • Stored grain ecology studies
  • European wasp surveillance
  • Exotic dung beetle surveys
  • Locust surveys
  • Tramp ant surveys

The Urban Surveillance Database was built with generic plant biosecurity surveillance in mind and has been adapted for a number of diverse projects. It services the popular need for recording property and contact details, one-is-to-many geo-located and barcoded activities (including digital image), one-is-to-many inspections of activities, one-is-to-many specimen details can be added with barcoded specimen labels and photograph.

Field-collected data are synchronised (two-way data transfer) from anywhere in the world via GPRS, WiFi to a wireless server hosted at DAFWA where it is available for further analysis and reporting.

Smartphone pest identification tools have become popular and can be used in conjunction with USDB to ensure rapid field recognition of potential Emergency Plant Pests. This project developed two database-driven smartphone apps (MyPestGuide & PestWeb Mobile). Individual pest records are added on the wireless server and pushed out to devices. These smartphone identification tools can be deployed as a shell for overseas users, or pre-populated with quarantine pests of significance.

Collaboration with CRC for Forestry resulted in development of the mobile software solution, called IPMG Plantation Health. This software allows foresters to quickly and accurately record pest and disease outbreaks in the field, including; the date of the observation, the extent and severity of any damage caused, GPS co-ordinates and photos. The software also includes brief weed and pest field guides to aid foresters with correct identification in the field. 

Research implications:

A high proportion of Australia’s agricultural produce is exported and demonstration of freedom from certain plant pests and diseases is critical to maintaining and securing new market access opportunities. Pest surveillance is an important tool for market access and accordingly importing countries now demand accurate, credible evidence to confirm pest freedom status.

In the past nearly all field-collected plant biosecurity surveillance information was recorded manually to paper reducing the rate of capture, integrity, conformity as well as security of the data. There is a growing need for plant pest surveillance data collection software and hardware that uses smartphones to provide auditing validation, ‘chain of evidence’ as well as increasing the volume of data collected and its integrity through relational databases and seamless data transfer to corporate systems. Smartphone data integrity is supported by GPS-located traps, digital voice navigation itineraries, time and date stamps, field printed barcode labels, site and pest imagery.

Pest identification tools delivered via smartphones are an important tool that allows immediate identification of potential biosecurity threats in the field.

Acknowledgements:

The following CRCNPB participants provided constructive criticism during development of the applications; Michelle Chami, David Cousins, Oonagh Byrne, Marc Widmer, Richard Johnston, Mike Grimm, Peter Gillespie, Deborah Kent, Cain Roberts, Paul Pheloung, Greg Hood, Steve Pratt and Deb Riddell.

Brian McCornack (KSU), Gordon Gordh (USDA) provided a useful US perspective.

Francisco Tovar (CRC Forestry/ Murdoch University) designed the IPMG application. Peter Davis demonstrated the potential for USDB in ant surveys on Barrow Island.

Flat grain beetle (FGB) is a major emergency plant pest (EPP) of stored grain in Australia. Populations of FGB have recently developed high level resistance to phosphine (the only viable fumigant available for non-quarantine use) resulting in control failures with current dosage regimes.

As there is no practical alternative to phosphine, failure to control FGB with phosphine places at risk market access for Australian grain worth up to $7 billion in annual trade. Therefore there is an urgent need to develop appropriate phosphine fumigation protocols to eradicate outbreaks of strongly resistant FGB.

Research outcomes:

• Characterisation of high resistance to phosphine in flat grain beetles (FGB) for the first time internationally.
• Establishment of fumigation protocols and an eradication strategy that will enable industry to eradicate infestations of phosphine-resistant flat grain beetle and prevent or delay further selection for resistance to phosphine.
• Development of a rapid test to detect highly resistant FGB.
• Facilitate continued market access of Australian grain.

Research implications:

The success of Australia’s $7 billion grain industry depends on the maintenance of high standard in its post-harvest produce through effective pest management. The absence of detectable levels of insect infestation is such an important issue to world grain markets that to maintain its competitiveness in premium markets, Australia guarantees supply of an insect-free product. This strategy is enforced by Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS) through the Exports (Grain) Regulation that specifies a ‘nil tolerance for live insects’ on all grain leaving the country. Nil tolerance for live insects is also the standard generally adopted by domestic buyers of grain.

The most cost-effective method to meet the Exports (Grain) Regulation is the application of chemicals to grain. Currently, the industry relies on a single fumigant, phosphine, because of an increasing sensitivity of grain markets to the presence of pesticide residues, the development of insecticide resistance to other chemical alternatives and the lack of practical alternatives. Phosphine has the enviable reputation for being relatively cheap, accepted as a residue-free treatment internationally and having flexibility in its application. Traditionally, the grain industry has managed resistance essentially by replacing redundant chemicals with new materials. Chemical treatments are favoured because available non-chemical methods, on the whole, are either significantly more expensive, less versatile, do not easily match grain-handling logistics, are less effective or require significant capital investment. Therefore, the chemical replacement strategy is no longer viable and at least for the medium term, the Australian grain industry will need to rely on phosphine for disinfestations of its stored commodities to meet the market demands.

The CRCNPB-supported FGB fumigation protocol development project has delivered two new fumigation protocols that can control highly resistant FGB populations. In addition, an eradication strategy has now been deployed that will eradicate infestations of phosphine-resistant FGB and prevent or delay further selection for resistance to phosphine and restrict their spread.

A direct implication of the research finding is that by extending the life of the effective use of phosphine, industry will avoid the use of contact pesticides for the time being. This will in turn avoid potential trade issues and save the industry from significant economic loss.

An independent cost-benefit analysis for this project by GRDC (Ross McLeod) has suggested that even if there are significant changes to key variables such as costs of fumigation, probability of success and volumes of grain treated with contact insecticide, prolonging the life of phosphine through development of new protocols will still result in substantial economic benefits.

Acknowledgements:

The research team expresses sincere thanks to farmers and the managers and field staff of GrainCorp, CBH and Viterra for their support and help for accessing storage sites for collection of insect samples and undertaking field trials. The team would also like to thank GRDC for their support throughout the research.

A range of naturalised harmful plant storage pests including beetles, psocids, moths and mites habitually threaten the food safety, market access, trade and the overall profitability and sustainability of the Australian grain industry. Some of these pests have already been detected with resistance to phosphine and the spread of resistance is on the rise annually. In addition, new resistances are also being developed, a recent example being the detection of strong resistance to phosphine in several populations of flat grain beetles. 

There is a need for a robust and systematic national resistance monitoring program to provide both strategic and tactical information on the presence/absence and trends in resistance to phosphine to underpin resistance management in the grain industry and to aid in the identification of factors that affect the risk of resistance in the system.

Research outcomes:

• establishment of a robust sampling protocol to monitor resistance to phosphine and grain protectants in stored grain pests
• standardised national assay methodology for detection of resistance to phosphine
• efficient, effective and comprehensive national data collection and analysis system established using the Australian Grain Insect resistance database.
• established that resistance to phosphine is mediated by the same genes across Australia in major pest species
• established that current impregnated paper assay for resistance to key grain protectants in major storage pests accurately reflects the resistance to respective field application rates
• provided early warning of emergence of strong resistance in rice weevils enabling industry to take timely remedial actions to restrict its development, and 
• diagnosed outbreaks of strong resistance in flat grain beetle providing industry with essential information on which to undertake timely remedial action.

Research implications:

This project has demonstrated that a national resistance monitoring program can contribute significantly to resistance management by providing industry with both strategic and tactical information on the frequency, distribution and strength of resistance.

The information provided by this project emphasises the critical need for industry to adopt the nationally agreed Phosphine resistance management strategy. Our results demonstrate that there is an enormous selection pressure on phosphine. It is imperative that alternatives to phosphine, including other fumigants, be developed to reduce this pressure. An alternative is particularly needed to combat resistance in the flat grain beetle.

Detection of strong resistance in the rice weevil requires that appropriate fumigation protocols be developed to effectively manage this pest and an action plan should be developed to restrict further development of resistance.

Despite the widespread occurrence of weak resistance in the rust-red flour beetle and the saw-toothed grain beetle, strong resistance remains rare in these species. In contrast, strong resistance in the lesser grain borer and flat grain beetle evolved relatively quickly. Future research should also be directed towards investigating the causes and factors that have restricted or promoted the evolution and spread of strong resistance in various species. 

Acknowledgements:

The research team expresses sincere thanks to farmers and the managers and field staff of GrainCorp, CBH and Viterra for their support and cooperation in accessing storage sites for collection of insect samples.