See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/362667605

Biopesticides: Current status and future prospects

Article · August 2022

CITATIONS READS

9 1,659

3 authors:

Rajni Yadav Siril Singh

Panjab University Panjab University
18 PUBLICATIONS 52 CITATIONS 26 PUBLICATIONS 77 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Anand Narain Singh

Panjab University
130 PUBLICATIONS 1,548 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Anand Narain Singh on 13 August 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233

Article

Biopesticides: Current status and future prospects

Rajni Yadav1, Siril Singh1,2, Anand Narian Singh1

1
Soil Ecosystem and Restoration Ecology Lab, Department of Botany, Panjab University, Chandigarh-160014, India
2
Department of Environment Studies, Panjab University, Chandigarh-160014, India
E-mail:: dranand1212@gmail.com

Received 20 June 2022; Accepted 25 July 2022; Published online 13 August 2022; Published 1 September 2022

Abstract
In developing countries, the agricultural sector is playing a significant role to enhance the economy. Pests
cause significant damage to crop production. Globally, the human population is rapidly increasing. To fulfill
the food security for the rapidly growing human population, there is a strict need for eco-friendly insect pest
management in Indian agriculture to sustain the agricultural produce for future needs. The present paper
highlights biopesticides’ current status and importance in India's farm sector and worldwide. Chemical
pesticides are commonly used to control pests, which cause harmful impacts on the environment and non-
target living systems, including human beings. Biopesticides are natural and a better substitute for chemical
pesticides and provide an alternative for crop protection worldwide. Exploring and building their natural
biopesticide resources in crop protection can help sustain agriculture. The trend of biopesticides consumption
in India has shown a drastic increase in use over time which stood at 8847 and 8645 metric tonnes in 2019-20
& 2020-2021, respectively. However, a few numbers of biopesticides are easily accessible in the market. In
India, as compared to chemical pesticides, biopesticides production, utilisation, and consumption is much
lower due to a lack of research advancements, innovation and policies. Thus, the present paper provides a
baseline overview of biopesticides and their classifications, current status and prospects.

Keywords biopesticides; chemical pesticides; economy; eco-friendly; pest management.

Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences

ISSN 2220­8860
URL: http://www.iaees.org/publications/journals/piaees/online­version.asp
RSS: http://www.iaees.org/publications/journals/piaees/rss.xml
E­mail: piaees@iaees.org
1 Editor­in­Chief:
IntroductionWenJun Zhang
Publisher: International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences

1 Introduction
Agriculture is an anthropogenic activity but adversely affected by various pests such as bacteria, fungi, insects,
and weeds, leading to reduced crop yield and production quality (Kumar, 2012). Over the past 50 years, the
most common method for pest control has been the extensive use of chemical pesticides (Peshin et al., 2009;
Zhang et al., 2011; Peshin and Zhang, 2014; Zhang, 2018). These pesticides were adopted in the 1940s with
the help of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) followed by other organochlorines, organophosphate, and
carbamate pesticides, respectively (Nicholson, 2007). After that, the Green Revolution technology of crop

IAEES www.iaees.org
212 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233

production increased food production in developing countries through intensive inputs like chemical fertilisers
and pesticides. In the late 1960s, the first wave of the green revolution was started in India, and due to the
green revolution, India became self-sufficient in wheat production in the late 1970s. The green revolution
impact was confined to northern India. Almost all crops, including rice covered in the second wave of the
green revolution. It enhanced rural income and rural property. The tolerance of the wheat to abiotic and biotic
stresses has made it possible to double the food production worldwide (Bahadur et al., 2014; Maurya et al.,
2014; Kumar et al., 2016; Kumar, 2018).
By using agrochemicals, agriculture productivity increased rapidly. In India, 381 g/ha of chemical and
synthetic pesticides are consumed annually and the rate of consumption rising from 2 to 5% yearly. However,
the pesticides consumption is relatively lower in India than the worldwide consumption of 500 g/ha (Vendan,
2016). Chemical and synthetic pesticides are used in excessive amounts to control pests in crop fields and it
also deteriorates the soil fertility and ecosystem (Zhang et al., 2011; Zhang, 2018). But it is the most effective
tool for integrated pest management (IPM) (Kumari et al., 2014). However, they also have adverse impacts on
water quality, soil health, product quality, and developed problems such as insect resistance, genetic variation
in plants, toxic residues, food, and feed. The used pesticides may damage the indigenous microorganisms,
disturb the soil ecosystem, also reduce the soil enzymatic activities that act as a "biological index" of soil
fertility, and may also affect human health via the food chain (Monkiedje and Spiteller, 2002; Antonious, 2003;
Ingram et al., 2005; Wang et al., 2006; Littlefield-Wyer et al., 2008). Soil biota when interacting with
pesticides, then metabolic activities of soil biota may be affected substantially. Therefore, alteration in the
physiological behaviour and biochemical reactions like mineralisation of organic matter, nitrogen fixation,
nitrification, denitrification, and ammonification via activating or deactivating soil enzymes or soil
microorganisms may happen.
Microorganisms are the key indicators of soil health and biological processes in the soil environment. But,
heavy pesticide use significantly damages nitrogen fixation and phosphorus solubilising processes that
maintain natural soil fertility and soil functioning (Singh and Walker, 2001; Kinney et al., 2005; Menon et al.,
2005; Hussain et al., 2009). Chemical and synthetic pesticides are used expansively worldwide, but they are
environmentally objectionable. Thus, reliance on chemical or synthetic pesticides and their extensive use has
caused negative impacts on the environment and human health (Zhang et al., 2011). However, adverse effects
of pesticides in the soil ecosystem have been observed from several parts of the country where pesticide use is
widespread. Recognising the negative impact of the agrochemicals like pesticide resistance and residues in the
produce, pest resurgence and outbreak of secondary pests, causes serious impacts on air, water, and soil (Al-
Zaidi et al., 2011; Zhang and Liu, 2022). It has become necessary to develop substitutes for these synthetic
agro-inputs due to the evolution of pesticide resistance in some pest species and concerns about the safety of
chemical residues. The need of the day is to produce maximum from the diminishing natural resources and
protect the produce from post-harvest losses without adversely affecting the environment.
One solution is using biopesticides (pest control agents based on living organisms) as a substitute in food
production, but the rate of commercialisation is low (Fig. 1). Biopesticides are usually microbial biological
pest control agents that are used in crop fields like chemical pesticides (Sanjaya et al., 2013; Zhang, 2018). The
most beneficial advantages of biopesticides are that they are eco-friendly and have biodegradable by-products.
They can be more affordable than chemical pesticides when locally produced. They can be more effective than
chemical pesticides in the longterm. The utilization of biofertilisers and biopesticides can play a significant
role in dealing with these challenges in a sustainable manner.

IAEES www.iaees.org
 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233 213

Different classes of pesticides used in India

3% 3%
16%

19%
60%

Insecticides Fungicides Herbicides Biopesticides Others

Fig. 1 The ratio of different classes of pesticides used in India (%).

Biopesticides and biofertilisers, the eco-friendly naturally occurring formulations made from the
substances that control pests by non-toxic mechanisms and have been used in different forms since human
civilisation. Biopesticides have more potential benefits to agriculture as well as public health programs.
Biopesticides are naturally occurring products made from living organisms and have a minor threat to the
environment and human health. It constitutes mainly naturally occurring substances termed biochemical
pesticides. Secondly, it is also supported by microorganisms that control pests termed as microbial pesticides
and, lastly, pesticide substances produced by genetic material termed as plant-incorporated protectants (Sarwar
et al., 2013, Sarwar, 2015). Biopesticides consist of various microbial pesticides, biochemicals generated from
microbes, and other natural sources. These are usually made by growing and concentrating naturally existing
organisms and their metabolites, such as bacteria and other microorganisms, fungus, nematodes, etc. These are
frequently considered vital components of IPM programs and have gained a lot of practical attention as
alternatives to chemical and synthetic pesticides (Glare et al., 2012).
About 200 plants are known for insecticidal activities (Singh et al., 2001). But their accessibility is
decreasing as a result of new regulations and pest populations evolution. Biopesticides are mass-produced
agents manufactured from a living microorganism or a natural product and sold to control plant pests
(Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2009). Biopesticides could be derived
from animals (e.g., nematodes), plants such as Chrysanthemum, Azadirachta (Neem), and microorganisms
(e.g., Bacillus thuringiensis, Trichoderma, Pseudomonas), and include living organisms (natural enemies),
their product (phytochemicals, microbial products) which can be used for the management of pest injurious
(Mazid et al., 2011).
Thus, biopesticides can be utilised for the management of pests. Bacillus thuringiensis, also known as Bt,
is one of the most frequently used microbial biopesticides. The potential benefits of the utilisation of
biopesticides in agriculture and public health programs are considerable. The present paper provides a baseline
overview of biopesticides and their classifications, current status, and future prospects.

IAEES www.iaees.org
214 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233

2 Materials and Methods

To gather more and more information about the biopesticides have extensively searched on available databases
viz Web of Science, Google Scholar, Science Direct etc. using keywords biopesticides, biopesticides available
in India, current scenario of biopesticides usage etc. We gathered all these articles from year 1985 to 2021 by
using all above mentioned databases. From all above mentioned databases we got approx. 320 articles and
approx. 80 from other additional sources including books, grey matter (unpublished thesis), reports, etc. After
removing duplicate, insignificant and inappropriate studies finally, approx. 116 more relevant studies were
included for preparation of the paper as shown in Fig. 2. The study conducted using secondary data. The major
objective of the study is about awareness of biopesticides usage instead of chemical and synthetic pesticides in
the current developmental era for the welfare of humankind. Biopesticides are an eco-friendly method to
control pest and also a better substitute to the chemical pesticides.

Fig. 2 Collection of relevant literature for the preparation of the present paper.

3 What Are Biopesticides?

Biopesticides are pesticides derived from microorganisms or natural products orbio-based formulations that
control pests through different mechanisms of action (Tijjani et al., 2016). Plants, insects, and microorganisms
are the primary source of biopesticides which are cheaper, readily available, demonstrate various modes of
action, and are degradable. They are products or by-products derived from microorganisms (Bacillus
thuringiensis, Verticillium lecanii, Neodiprion sertifer), insects (Trichogramma spp.), animals (nematode,
Heterorhabditis spp.), and plant parts or extracts (Chrysanthemum cinerariafolium, Azadirachta indica)

IAEES www.iaees.org
 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233 215

(Pavela, 2014; Rodgers, 1993). They are categorised into (a) microbial biopesticides containing
microorganisms controlling diseases and insects, (b) botanical biopesticides (plant-derived), and (c) plant-
incorporated protectants (Fig. 3). In past few decades, biopesticides are the best substitute against chemical and
synthetic pesticides in managing pests. They are currently used in the post and pre-harvest control of diseases
and crop pests (EPA, 2011; Yadav, 2017; Kour et al., 2020). Biopesticides are target-specific and are nontoxic
to the environment and humans. The mode of action of biopesticides is specific and operates by targeting pests.
Nowadays, biopesticides have been played a vital role in the agro-market and are widely utilised in organic
farming (Seiber et al., 2014; Nawaz et al., 2016; Lengai and Muthomi, 2018).

Fig. 3 The three different categories of biopesticides and some selected examples of each category.

More than 6000 species of plants have been showing insecticidal properties. Several products are derived
from the plant in pest management, such as neem, tobacco, pyrethrum, and custard apple (Koul, 2012). Due to
their volatile nature, these plant-derived pesticides are eco-friendly with minimal environmental risk compared
to chemical pesticides. Azadirachtin derived from neem plant is sold under numerous trade names; we use it
against several food crops to control the population of thrips, scale, and whitefly (Sarwar et al., 2013). Some
important botanical biopesticides are given in Table 1. Many problems encountered during the
commercialisation of plant derived pesticides include product standardisation and quality control. The
improper and excessive application of plant-derived pesticides also leads to resistance in insect pests, as
showed by synthetic pesticides. Phytotoxicity is also noticed in plant-derived pesticides, e.g., neem oil is
phytotoxic to brinjal, tomato, and ornamental plants (Stevenson et al., 2012). Some plant products registered as
biopesticides and their products with target organisms are listed in Table 2.
IAEES www.iaees.org
 216 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233

Table 1 List of important plant-derived pesticides with their target organisms.

Source Target Species References

Azadirachta indica Aspergillus species, Aphis craccivora, Amrasca devastans, Baidoo et al. (2012), Vinodhini and
Alternaria alternate, Bacillus subtilis, Aphis gossypii, Malaikozhundan (2011), Aziz et al.
Bemisia tabaci, Sitobionavenae, Helminthosporium species, (2013), Biswas (2013), Stanley et al.
Lipaphis erysimi, Meloidogyne javanica, Meloidogyne (2014), Raut et al. (2014), Castillo-
incognita, Myzus persicae, Sciothrips cardamom, Monilinia Sa´nchez et al. (2015)
fructicola, Rhizopus species, Vibrio cholera, Pythium
aphanidermatum, and Trichothecium roseum

Allium sativum Alternaria raphanin, Aspergillus niger, Bacillus subtilis, Yang et al. (2012), Perello et al. (2013),
Brevicoryne brassicae, Bipolaris sorokiniana, Candida Suleiman and Abdallah (2014), Tiroesele
albicans, Curvularia lunata, Colletotrichum species, et al. (2015), Ghotaslou et al. (2016),
Callosobruchus maculatus, Fusarium graminearum, Strika et al. (2017), Baidoo and Mochiah
Fusarium flocciferum, Drechslera tritici-repetis, Plutella (2016), Plata-Rueda et al. (2017)
xylostella, Salmonella senflenberg, Rhizoctonia solani,
Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis,
Sitotroga cerealella, Spodoptera littorals, Trichophyton
rubrum, and Tenebrio molitor

Curcuma longa Alternaria solani, Bactrocera zonata, Bacillus subtilis, Ali et al. (2014), Siddiqi et al. (2011),
Listeria monocytogenes, Escherichia coli, Tribolium Mohammed and Habil (2015), Murthy et
castaneum, Trichoplusia ni, Streptococcus pyogene, al. (2015), Rawat and Rawat (2015), de
Streptococcus mutants, and Ralstonia solanacearum Souza Tavares et al. (2016), Altunatmaz
et al. (2016), Muthomi et al. (2017)

Cinnamomum zeylanicum Bursaphelenchus xylophilus, Aspergillus oryzae, Botrytis Shirurkar and Wahegaonkar (2012),
cinereal, Bacillus subtilis, Escherichia coli, Fusarium solani, Bastas (2015), Nikkhah et al. (2017),
Staphylococcus aureus, Penicillium expansum, and Zhang et al. (2016)
Meloidogyne species

Euphorbia spp. Aspergillus flavus, Enterobacter aerogenes, Escherichia coli, Gayathri and Ramesh (2013),
Salmonella typhi, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa Mohammadi et al. (2016), Voukeng et al.
(2017)

Jatropha spp. Aspergillusn flavus, Alternaria alternate, Meloidogyne Srivastava et al. (2012), Asif et al. (2014),
incognita, Aphis fabae, Bactrocera cucurbitae, Penicillium Rampadarath et al. (2016), Neeraj et al.
glabrum, Oryzaephilus surimanensis, Rhyzorpertha (2017)
dominica, Tribolium castaneum, and Sitophilus zeamais

Tagetes spp. Brevicorynebrassicae, Fusarium oxysporum, Jankowska et al. (2009), Bissa and Bohra
Mamestrabrassicae, Klebsiella pneumoniae, (2011), Granja et al. (2014)
Plutellaxylostella, and Meloidogyne incognita

Thymus vulgaris Aspergillus niger, Meloidogyne incognita, Diaphorina citri, Abtew et al. (2015), Witkowska et al.
Megalurothrips sjostedti, Escherichia coli, Pratylenchus (2016), Karaca et al. (2017), Semeniuc et
brachyurus, Helicotylenchus dihystera, Saccharomyces al. (2017)
species, Penicillium species, Tilletia tritici, Salmonella
typhimurium, and Xanthomonas vesicatoria

Zingiber officinale Aspergillus parasiticus, Aspergillus flavus, Drosicha Al-Rahmah et al. (2013), Abid and Butt
mangiferae, Dermestes maculatus, Fusarium oxysporum, (2015), Rizvi et al. (2016), Ayeloja and
Escherichia coli, Rhizoctonia solani, Pythium George (2016)
aphanidermatum, Necrobial rufipe, Trichoplusia binotalis,
Salmonella typhi, and Tribolium castaneum

Source- Modified from Thakur et al. (2020).

IAEES www.iaees.org
 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233 217

Table 2 Some of the plant's products are registered as biopesticides and their products with target organisms.
Botanical Pesticides Target Organism

Neem Sucking and chewing insect (Aphids, Thrips, lepidopteran and coleopteran larvae
such as apple codling moth, cotton bollworm, green leafhopper, etc.), nematodes and
fungi (Rhizoctonia solani, Fusarium oxysporum, Botrytis cinerea, etc.)

Linalool and Limonene Aphids, fleas, fire ants, mites, flies, house crickets, and paper wasps

Nicotine Used as a fumigant against the soft-bodied insect pests

Pyrethrum Mosquitoes, caterpillars, sawfly larvae, aphids, leafhoppers, house flies, Culicoides
variipennis, ants, flour beetle, fleas, flies, cockroaches, and ticks

Rotenone Aphids, beetles (bean leaf beetle, Colorado potato beetle, asparagus beetle, flea
beetle, cucumber beetle, fleas, strawberry leaf beetles), and lice

Ryania Caterpillars (European corn borer, corn earworm, and thrips)

Sabadilla Harlequin bugs, squash bugs, leafhoppers, thrips, stink bugs, and caterpillars

Source- Modified from Mazid et al. (2011), and Sachdeva and Singh (2016).

Table 3 Bioinsecticides available in India.

Biocontrol Agents Product Name Against Pests

Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. Tacibio/Technar Leipdopterous pests

Israelensis

B. thuringiensis subsp. Kurstaki Bio-Bart/ Biolep/Halt/Taciobio-Btk Lepidopterous pests

Baeuveria bassiana Myco-Jaal/Biosoft/ATEC/Baeuveria/Larvo- Coffee-berry borer, diamondback

Guard/Biorin/Biolarvex/Phalada moth, thrips, grasshoppers,
101B/Biogrubex/Biowonder/Veera/Bioguard/B whiteflies, aphids, coding moth
io-power

Helicoverpa armigera NPV Helicide/Helocide/Biovirus-H/Heligard/Virin- Cotton bollworm

H

Metarhizium anisopliae ABTEC/Verticillium/Meta-Guard/Biomet/ Coleoptera and lepidoptera,

Biomagic/Meta/Biomet/Sun Agro Meta/Bio- termites, mosquitoes, leafhoppers,
Magic beetles, grubs

Pseudomonas fumosoroseus Nemato-Guard Whitefly

Pseudomonas lilacinus Yorker/ABTEC/Paceilomyces/Paecil/Pacihit/R Whitefly

OM biomite/Bio-Nematon

Verticillium lecanii Verisoft/Verticillium/Vert- Whitefly, green coffee bug,

Guard/Bioline/Biosappex/Versitile/Ecocil/Phal homopteran pests
ada 107 V/Biovert Rich/ROM Verlac/ROM
Gurbkill/Sun AgroVerti/Bio-Catch

Spodoptera litura NPV Spodocide/Spodoterin/Spodi-cide/Biovirus-S Spodoptera litura

Source- Modified from Mishra et al. (2015).

IAEES www.iaees.org
 218 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233

Biopesticides play a vital role in crop protection. They are compatible with other chemical pesticides and
are also utilized in integrated crop management (ICM) practices throughout the world. Due to advancements in
research and development, biopesticides have raised sustainability and reduced the pollution caused by
chemical pesticides. Production of biopesticides is challenging due to the dissimilarity of the active and
integrated ingredients. Moreover, when utilised as a component of IPM programs, biopesticides achieve an
equivalent level of crop yield by reducing the load of chemical pesticides (Aneja et al., 2016; Satapathy, 2018;
Zhang and Liu, 2022). Commonly used biopesticides are living organisms, which have pathogenic potential
against pests. These consist of bioinsecticides (Bacillus thuringiensis) (Table 3), biofungicides (Trichoderma)
(Table 4), and bioherbicides (Phytopthora) (Table 5). Approximately 24 bioherbicides have been registered in
the world so far. Out of these, ten are registered in the USA, eight in Canada, three in South Africa, and one
each in Japan, Netherlands, India, and China (Dagno et al., 2012; Aneja et al., 2014; Harding and Raizada,
2015). Auld et al. (2003) reveal in research findings that bioherbicide products have low cost, long shelf-life,
ease of application, and efficacy.
Biopesticides are easily available in nature, easily biodegradable, show different modes of actions, are less
expensive and possess less toxicity to live organisms. Therefore, it was realised that biological control is the
only means of a safe, cost-effective, and eco-friendly method to control the widespread resistance of chemical
insecticides towards pests. Later, biopesticides became a part of IPM that was previously wholly based on
chemical pesticides (Mishra et al., 2020). Globally, research on the application and stability of diverse
biopesticides can help to assist sustainable agriculture (Kumar et al., 2019; Yadav and Yadav, 2019).

Table 4 Some biofungicides developed and commercialised around the world.

Biocontrol Agents Product Name Target Pathogens Crops

Agrobacterium radiobacter GALLTROL Agrobacterium tumefaciens Ornamental nursery stock, soil

K84 treatment

Bacillus subtillis QST 713 CEASE Rhizoctonia solani, Pythium, Most greenhouse ornamentals
Phythophora, Fusarium and vegetable transplants

Bacillus subtillis GB03 COMPANION Leaf spots, Powdery mildew, Most greenhouse ornamentals
(LIQUID) Botrytis, bacterial diseases, and vegetable transplants
Rhizoctonia solani, Pythium,
Phytophthora

Bacillus subtilis EPIC (Dry powder). Fusarium spp., Rhizoctonia solani, Cotton and legumes
Alternaria spp., Aspergillus spp.

Bacillus subtilis KODIAK, KODIAK Rhizoctonia solani, Alternaria spp., Cotton and legumes
HB, KODIAK A.T Aspergillus spp., Fusarium spp.
(Dry powder)

Coniothryium minitans CONTANS WG Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, S. minor Most greenhouse ornamentals,

vegetable transplants, herbs,
Soil treatment

Gliocladium virens GL-21 SOIL GARD Rhizoctonia solani, Phytium Most greenhouse ornamentals,
vegetable transplants

Gliocladium catenulatum PRESTOP WP Botrytis, Rhizoctonia solani, Pythium Most greenhouse ornamentals,
JII-446 spp., Phytophthora, Fusarium, vegetable transplants
Verticillium spp.

IAEES www.iaees.org
 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233 219

Fusarium oxysporum FUSACLEAN Fusarium oxysporum Asparagus, basil, carnation,

(nonpathogenic) (spores) tomato

Myrothecium verrucaria DITERA (Wettable Root knot, citrus cyst, stubby root, Fruit vegetables and ornamental
powder) lesions and burrowing nematodes crops, turf

Pseudomonas cepacian INTERCEPT Fusarium spp., Rhizoactonia solani, Maise, vegetables, cotton
Pythium

Psudomonas fluorescens PHAGUS (Bacterial Pseudomonas tolassii Agaricus spp., Pleurotus spp.
Suspension)

Reynoutria sachalinensis REGALIA Botrytis, Leaf Spots, Powdery Herbs and spices, soil
mildew, bacterial diseases, Fusarium, treatment, plant health promoter
Rhizoctonia, Pythium, Phytophthora,
Verticillium

Streptomyces griseovirdis MYCOSTOP (Dry Botrytis, Rhizoctonia, Pythium, Most greenhouse ornamentals,
powder) Phythophora, Alternaria vegetable transplants

Streptomyces lydicus ACTINOVATE Powdery mildew, Downy mildew, Most greenhouse ornamentals,
Botrytis, Rhizoctonia, Pythium, vegetable transplants
Phytophthora

Tricoderma harzianum PLANT SHIELD, Cylindrocladium, Fusarium, Most greenhouse ornamentals,

Rhizoctonia, Pythium, Thielaviopis vegetable transplants
ROOT SHIELD,

T-22 PLANTER
BOX

Source- Modified from Burges (1998), and Aneja et al. (2016).

Table 5 Some commercial bioherbicides are available and used globally.

Biocontrol Agents Product Name Formulation Type Target Weed Year of
Registration and
Country

Acremonium diospyri ACREMONIUM Conidial suspension Persimmon (Diospyros 1960 Canada

DIOSPYRI virginiana) trees in rangelands

Colletotrichum LUBAO Conidial suspension Dodder (Cuscata chinesis and C. 1963 China
gloeosporioides f. sp. australis) in soyabeans
Cuscutae

Phytophthora DEVINER Liquid spore's Milkweed vine 1981 USA

palmivora (P. suspension
citrophthora) (Morrenia odorata)

Colletotrichum COLLEGOTM Wettable powder Northern joint-vetch 1982 USA

gloeosporioides f. sp. (Aeschynomene virginica)
Aeschynomene (LOCKDOWNTM)

Alternaria cassia CASSTTM Solid Sickle-pod and coffee senna 1983 USA
(Cassia spp.)

Cercospora rodmanii ABG-5003 Wettable powder Water hyacinth (Eichhornia 1984 USA

IAEES www.iaees.org
220 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233

crassipes)

Puccinia canaliculate DR. BIOSEDGE Emulsified Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus 1987 USA
suspension esculentus)

Colletotrichum VELGOR Wettable powder Velvet leaf (Abutilon 1987 Canada

coccodes theophrastus)

Colletotrichum BIOMALR Wettable powder in Round-leaved mallow (Malva 1992 Canada

gloeosporioides f. sp. silica gel pussila)
Malvae

Cylindrobasidium STUMPOUTTM Liquid (oil) Turf grass (Poa annua) in golf 1997 South Africa
suspension courses, Acacia spp.

Chondrostereum BIOCHONTM Mycelial suspension Woody plannts Blackberry weed 1997 Netherlands
purpureum in water (Prunus serotina)

Xanthomonas CAMPERICOTM Turf grass (Poa annua) 1997 Japan

campestris pv poae

Colletotrichum HAKATAK Conidial suspension Hakea gummosis & H. sericea in 1999 South Africa
acutatum Granular Dry native vegetation
Conidia

Puccinia thlaspeos WOAD WARROIR Powder Isastis tinctoria (dyer's wood or 2002 USA
glastrum) in farms and rangeland

Chondrostereum MYCOTECHTM Paste Deciduous tree species 2002/2005 Canada

purpureum PASTE

Chondrostereum CHONTROLTM Spray emulsion & Alder, aspen and other hardwood 2004/2005 Canada
purpureum PASTE paste

Alternaria destruens SMOLDERR Conidial suspension Dodder species 2005 USA

Sclerotinia minor SARRITOR Granular Dandelions in lawns/turf 2007 Canada

Fusarium oxysporum STRIGA Solid, Dried Striga hermonthica & S. asiatica 2008 Africa
f. sp. Stigae Chlamydospores+
Arabic gum

Tobacco mild green SOLVINIXTM Wettable powder/ Soda apple (Solanum viarum) 2009 Florida
mosaic virus Foliar spray
suspension

Lactobacillus spp. ORGANO-SOL Liquid Broadleaved weeds 2010 Canada

Lactococcus spp.

Phoma macrostoma Formulation Product Granules composed Broadleaved weeds 2011 Canada/USA
name not Specified of mycelial
fragments and flour

Streptomyces spp. MBI-005 EP Broadleaved weeds 2012 USA

Gibbagotrianthemae GIBBATRIANTH Liquid Conidial Trianthema portulacastrum 2014 India

Suspension+ (Horse purslane)
Surfactant

Source: Modified from Aneja, 2014.

IAEES www.iaees.org
 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233 221

4 Current Global Status of Biopesticides

The biopesticides’ total production is 3000 tonnes per year, and their use is enhancing steadily by 10% every
year (Gupta and Dixit, 2010; Kumar and Singh, 2015). Marrone (2007) states that about 1400 biopesticide
products are prepared and sold worldwide. Over 200 biopesticides are sold in the US market as compared to
only 60 similar products available in the European Union (EU) (EPA, 2012). About 45% of biopesticides were
used and sold in the USA, Canada, and Mexico (NAFTA Countries). In comparison, Asia lacks biopesticides
and uses only 5% of biopesticides sold globally (Bailey et al., 2010; Hubbard et al., 2014).
The biopesticides market holds apretty small share in the crop protection market of the world. The
worldwide biopesticides market was approximately 3.5% ($1.6 billion) of the total pesticide market of the
world in 2009 (BCC Research, 2010), which grown to 5% ($3 billion) (Olson et al., 2013). However, its rate of
growth shows an increasing trend in the past two decades. Approximately up to 2023, the annual growth rate
of biopesticides will rise to 8.64% and account for more than 7% ($4.5 billion) of the worldwide crop
protection market (Olson, 2015). Most countries have improved their policies to reduce the utilization of
chemical pesticides and promote biopesticides; however, biopesticides are still primarily regulated by the
system initially designed for chemical pesticides (Kumar and Singh, 2014). Due to very long and complicated
processes of registration in the European Union (Poinar Jr and Leutenegger, 1968), a minimal number of
biopesticides have been registered as compared to Brazil, United States, China, and India (Damalas and
Koutroubas, 2018). In Nigeria, the utilization of biopesticides is low due to substandard foundations, high
costs, and governmental policies (Ivase et al., 2017). In China, 327 biopesticides were registered. Two hundred
seventy bacterial biopesticides were produced from 11 species of microbes, among which 181 biopesticides
were produced from B. thuringiensis (ICAMA, 2008). In 2002, total biopesticides, mainly B. thuringiensis,
weresoldat1.5 million dollars in Kenya alone (Wabule et al., 2004; Abtew et al., 2015).
4.1 Current Indian status of biopesticides
The biocontrol concept of plant diseases has been started in India for an extended time (Schmutterer, 1985).
The neem tree (Azadirachta indica A. Juss) and its derivatives, such as leaf extract, oil, and seed cake, have
been used as fertilizers to minimise the risk of post-harvest loss in stored storage cereals (Isman, 1997;
Brahmachari, 2004). During the 1960s, with a target of judicious use of pesticides in agriculture, the concept
of IPM had also arisen (Smith and van den Bosch, 1967). However, in India, a major technological
breakthrough in biocontrol ocuured when conventional insecticides failed to control Helicoverpa armigera,
Spodoptera litura, and other cotton pests (Kranthi et al., 2002).
Also, the awareness about the utilisation of biopesticides among the farmers is enhancing and hence it
becomes a very popular alternative to the chemical and synthetic pesticides (Pelaez and Mizukawa, 2017).
Biopesticides are registered and regulated under the Insecticides Act, 1968 (Satapathy, 2018). In India, 2.5% is
the estimated annual rate of growth of biopesticides. Due to some issues at the policy and industrial level, the
production of biopesticides is relatively lower in India. In India, the consumption of biopesticides produced
from plant-derived is less than 1% and is only 12% globally. For sustainable farming, National Farmer Policy
2007 has promoted the utilization of biopesticides (Dar et al., 2004). In India, only twelve types of
biopesticides have been registered under the Insecticide Act, 1968 India (Table. 6), which shows different
biopesticides formulated in various industries (Fig. 4).The trend of biopesticides consumption in India has
shown a drastic increase in uses over time which stood at 8847 and 8645 metric tonnes in 2019-20 & 2020-
2021, respectively (Fig. 5).

IAEES www.iaees.org
222 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233

Fig. 4 Industry-wise distribution of microbial biopesticides (Source: Data obtained from DPPQS, Ministry of Agriculture &
Farmers Welfare, Government of India).

Fig. 5 Consumption of biopesticides in India during the last seven years (Source: Data obtained from DPPQS, Ministry of
Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Government of India).

IAEES www.iaees.org
 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233 223

Table 6 List of biopesticides registered in India under Insecticides Act, 1968.

Sr. No. Name of Biopesticides

1 Bacillus thuringiensis var. israelensis

2 Bacillus thuringiensis var. kurstaki

3 Bacillus thuringiensis var. galleriae

4 Bacillus sphaericus

5 Trichoderma viride

6 Trichoderma harzianum

7 Pseudomonas fluorescens

8 NPV of Helicoverpa armigera

9 Beauveria bassiana

10 NPV of Spodoptera litura

11 Neem based pesticides

12 Cymbopogon

Fig. 6 Consumption of biopesticides formulation in various states of India during 2014-15 to 2020-21 (Source: Data obtained
from DPPQS, Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Government of India).

IAEES www.iaees.org
224 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233

Fig. 7 Area under cultivation and use of chemicals & biopesticides during 2014-15 to 2020-21 (Source: Data obtained from
DPPQS, Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Government of India).

In recent years, there has been a tremendous increase in the use of biopesticides, and the area of cultivation
of biopesticides has been rapidly increasing. In India, West Bengal, Rajasthan, and Maharashtra used the
maximum amount of biopesticides in 2020-21. Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 represents the consumption of biopesticides
formulation in various states of India during 2014-15 to 2020-21 and the area under cultivation and underuse
of chemical & biopesticides during 2014-15 to 2020-21 respectively. The rapid growth in the biopesticide
market is based on the advantages such as inherently less harmful, reduced environmental load, affecting only
one specific pest or a few pests in some cases, degradable therefore decrease exposure to the biota, thus
avoiding the pollution problems, also effective in small quantities, and nontoxic to humans.

5 Future Prospects
Improve product quality and sales through technical inputs and training to producers. There is a need for more
communication between users, researchers, and industry in the early stages of their development to gear up
biopesticide research.
 The government should continue imposing strict regulatory measures on conventional chemical
pesticides. It will create a big opportunity for biopesticides marketing to help fill the gap and the
availability of biopesticides at affordable cost.
 To promote these eco-safe approaches, encourage and empower developing countries to develop their
biopesticide manufacture and use capacities.
 Incorporation of biopesticides in the mainstream of agriculture requires a better understanding of
action mechanisms to enhance their activity spectra against pests, improving their field performance,
advancement in the delivery system of biopesticides, longer shelf life, low cost of production, ease of
availability, awareness among farmers and simple registration and regulation policy (Fig. 8).

IAEES www.iaees.org
 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233 225

Fig. 8 Factors that promotes the biopesticides market.

 The most significant advances in biopesticides will come by exploiting knowledge of pests' genomes
and their natural enemies. Researchers are using molecular-based technologies to reconstruct the
evolution of natural microbial enemies and separate the molecular basis for their pathogenicity. An
ecological study on the dynamics of disease in the insect population is necessary.
 Farmers should be adequately trained to use biopesticides for harvesting maximum benefits. The
primary constraints include: creating awareness among farmers on biopesticides storage and use;
farmers should be adequately trained to use these eco-friendly alternatives to pest control in their
agricultural fields efficiently.
Moreover, efforts should be made to minimise the loss of infectivity of pathogens due to photoinactivation.
Make aware of the uses and benefits of biopesticides among the farming community is the priority.

6 Challenges for Biopesticides

Biopesticides are considered safe because they are target-oriented, reduce environmental pollution risk, and
eliminate resistance. Biopesticides are gaining popularity due to the desire for safe and residue-free food.
Despite all these beneficial attributes, in India biopesticides market is small. Farmers are unwilling to use
biopesticides in place of chemical pesticides due to their high cost, inconsistent performance on fields, short
shelf life, and delayed results. The biopesticides market is also affected due to the lack of large-scale
production facilities. In India, the registration process is time-consuming and expensive and it also slows the
development of biopesticides. Due to the high cost of raw materials and extraction process, commercial
production of botanical pesticides is more expensive than chemical pesticides. However, the lack of awareness
about biopesticide's benefits, knowledge about biopesticides products, confidence in farmers, and unreliable
supply and inconsistent performance are major challenges in the development of biopesticides. Ecological
studies are necessary on the dynamics of diseases in insect populations because environmental factors play a
vital role in the outbreaks of the disease to control the pests.

IAEES www.iaees.org
226 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233

7 Policy Recommendations
The following policy measures need to be taken urgently to reduce the excessive utilisation of chemical
pesticides and promote the biopesticide industry and R & D in the same field.
 Focus on sustainable agriculture by promoting: a) disease and pest resistant, and mainly traditional,
varieties; b) judicious inter-cropping, and c) reduced crop intensity.
 Improvement in the intensity of training for IPM. The focus should be on both the quality of training
and the number of farmers trained. The training should be followed by regular contact with the trained
farmers for providing continuous support.
 The state agricultural universities, which have a decisive influence over what governmental agencies
promote pest control methods, should pay greater attention to biopesticides.
 Continued investment in expertise for the discovery, development, and implementation of
biopesticides growth in industry research and development (R & D) is necessary to support the
development and registration of more biopesticides. The underpinning fundamental through to early
development research is often conducted in university and government research institutes. Together,
public and private organisations are needed to educate growers, retailers, and the public on the use and
merits of biopesticides.
 More research and trials on area-specific and crop-specific formulations are needed to maximize the
use of biopesticides.
 Funding agencies should come forward for research and development of novel and innovative
biopesticide formulation specific to pests.
The efforts of various government agencies to popularise integrated pest management (IPM) and the use of
biopesticides have had little impact. In the absence of active promotion bythe agriculture department, the
demand for these products has not developed and increased. For this reason, the majority of the private shops
and dealers do not stock and sell biopesticides.

8 Conclusion
Pesticide resistance problems are faced by farmers most of the time. Due to these problems, microbial
biopesticides are at the forefront of IPMs systems. Resistance in insect body against microbes is not developed
quickly. Biopesticides are best for controlling the pests of agriculture than chemical pesticides. Productions
and utilisation of biopesticides are increasing fast due to their eco-friendly with host-specific nature globally.
Organic farming and agricultural produce free from pesticide residue would positively permit greater
acceptance of biopesticides among the farmers. The National Farmer Policy of 2007 actively encouraged the
development of biopesticides to manage pests in an environmentally acceptable manner. Biopesticide research
is young and evolving and requires more attention and reliability. To develop biopesticides, deep analysis is
needed, including screening potential control agents, formulation, delivery, and commercialisation.
Biopesticides are attracting global attention as a safer, eco-friendly approach to managing pest populations
such as weeds, plant pathogens, and insects while posing less risk to animals, humans, and the environment.
As environmental safety is our primary concern, we need to develop awareness among the manufacturers,
farmers, policymakers, government agencies, and ordinary men to promote biopesticides in pest management.
Therefore, biopesticides need to be explored more and people should be encouraged to use them instead of
chemical pesticides. As it played a vital role in pest management strategies, their role will likely be more
significant in agriculture and forestry in the future. Biopesticides have the potential to bring sustainability to
global agriculture for food and feed security.

IAEES www.iaees.org
 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233 227

Acknowledgement
The authors are highly grateful to the Department of Botany, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India for
providing all facilities for work. Department of Science and Technology supports co-Author Siril Singh,
Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India, under Women Scientist Scheme-B, WISE-KIRAN
DIVISION, Project Grant No. DST/WOS-B/2018/1589.

References
Abid R, Butt S. 2015. Repellent activity of cardamom, ginger and nutmeg against certain insect
pests. International Journal of Zoology Research, 5(6): 1-6
Abtew A, Subramanian S, Cheseto X, Kreiter S, Garzia GT, Martin T. 2015. Repellency of plant extracts
against the legume flower thrips Megalurothrips sjostedti (Thysanoptera: Thripidae). Insects, 6(3): 608-
625
Ali S, Sagheer M, Hassan M, Abbas M, Hafeez F, Farooq M, Ghaffar A. 2014. Insecticidal activity of turmeric
(Curcuma longa) and garlic (Allium sativum) extracts against red flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum: A safe
alternative to insecticides in stored commodities. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies, 2(3): 201-
205
Al-Rahmah AN, Mostafa AA, Abdel-Megeed A, Yakout SM, Hussein SA. 2013. Fungicidal activities of
certain methanolic plant extracts against tomato phytopathogenic fungi. African Journal of Microbiology
Research, 7(6): 517-524
Altunatmaz SS, Aksu FY, Issa G, Kahraman BB, Altiner DD, Buyukunal SK. 2016. Antimicrobial effects of
curcumin against L. monocytogenes, S. aureus, S. Typhimurium and E. coli O157: H7 pathogens in minced
meat. Veterinarni Medicina, 61(5): 256-262
Al-Zaidi AA, Elhag EA, Al-Otaibi SH, Baig MB. 2011. Negative effects of pesticides on the environment and
the farmers awareness in Saudi Arabia: A case study. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 21(3): 605-
611
Aneja KR. 2014. Exploitation of phytpathogenic fungal diversity for the development of
bioherbicides. Kavaka, 42: 7-15
Aneja KR, Khan SA, Aneja A. 2016. Biopesticides an eco-friendly pest management approach in agriculture:
status and prospects. Kavaka, 47: 145-154
Aneja KR, Kumar V, Jiloha P, Sharma MK, Surian C, Dhiman P,Aneja A. 2014. Potential herbicides: India
Perspectives. In: Biotechnology: Prospects and Applications (Salar RK, Gahlawat SK, Siwach P, Duhan JS,
eds). 197-215, Springer
Antonious GF. 2003. Impact of soil management and two botanical insecticides on urease and invertase
activity. Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part B, 38(4): 479-488
Asif M, Parihar K, Rehman B, Ashraf Ganai M, Usman A, Siddiqui MA. 2014. Bio-efficacy of some leaf
extracts on the inhibition of egg hatching and mortality of Meloidogyne incognita. Archives of
Phytopathology and Plant Protection, 47(8): 1015-1021
Auld BA, Hetherington SD, Smith HE. 2003. Advances in bioherbicide formulation. Weed Biology and
Management, 3(2): 61-67
Ayeloja AA, George FOA. 2016. Insecticidal effects of natural preservatives on insect pests of smoked African
mud catfish, Clarias gariepinus (Burchell, 1822). Journal of Food Processing and Technology, 12: 1-5

IAEES www.iaees.org
228 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233

Aziz MA, Ahmad M, Nasir MF, Naeem M. 2013. Efficacy of different neem (Azadirachta indica) products in
comparison with imidacloprid against English grain aphid (Sitobion avenae) on wheat. International
Journal of Agriculture and Biology, 15(2): 279-284
Bahadur I, Meena VS, Kumar S. 2014. Importance and application of potassic biofertiliser in Indian
agriculture. International Research Journal of Biological Sciences, 3: 80-85
Baidoo P, Baidoo-Ansah D, Agbonu I. 2012. Effects of neem (Azadirachta indica A. Juss) products on Aphis
craccivora and its predator Harmonia axyridis on cowpea. American Journal of Experimental Agriculture,
2 (2): 198-206
Baidoo PK, Mochiah MB. 2016. Comparing the effectiveness of garlic (Allium sativum L.) and hot pepper
(Capsicum frutescens L.) in the management of the major pests of cabbage Brassica oleracea
(L.). Sustainable Agriculture Research, 5(2): 83-91
Bailey KL, Boyetchko SM, Längle T. 2010. Social and economic drivers shaping the future of biological
control: a Canadian perspective on the factors affecting the development and use of microbial
biopesticides. Biological Control, 52(3): 221-229
Bastas KK. 2015 Determination of antibacterial efficacies of plant extracts on tomato bacterial speck
disease. The Journal of Turkish Phytopathology, 44(1-2-3): 1-10
BCC Research. 2010. Biopesticides: the Global Market CHM029C.
Bissa S, Bohra A. 2011. Antibacterial potential of pot marigold. Journal of Microbiology and
Antimicrobials, 3(3): 51-54
Biswas GC. 2013. Comparative effectiveness of neem extracts and synthetic organic insecticide against
mustard aphid. Bangladesh Journal of Agricultural Research, 38(2): 181-187
Brahmachari G. 2004. Neem-An omnipotent. Chembiochem, 5: 408-421
Burges HD. 1998. Formulation of Microbial Biopesticides, Beneficial Microorganisms, Nematodes and Seed
Treatments. Springer
Castillo-Sánchez LE, Jiménez-Osornio JJ, Delgado-Herrera MA, Candelaria-Martínez B, Sandoval-Gío JJ.
2015. Effects of the hexanic extract of neem Azadirachta indica against adult whitefly
Bemisiatabaci. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies, 3: 95-99
Dagno K, Lahlali R, Diourté M, Jijakli H. 2012. Present status of the development of mycoherbicides against
water hyacinth: successes and challenges. A review. Biotechnologie, Agronomie, Société et
Environnement, 16(3): 360-368
Damalas CA, Koutroubas SD. 2018. Current status and recent developments in biopesticide use. Agriculture, 8:
1-6
Dar AS, Khan ZH, Khan AA, Ahmad SB. 2019. Biopesticides-its prospects and limitations: An
overview. Perspective in Animal Ecology and Reproduction. 296-314, Astral International, New Delhi,
India
de Souza Tavares W, Akhtar Y, Gonçalves GLP, Zanuncio JC, Isman MB. 2016. Turmeric powder and its
derivatives from Curcuma longa rhizomes: insecticidal effects on cabbage looper and the role of
synergists. Scientific Reports, 6(1): 1-11
DPPQS. 2021. Directorate of Plant Protection Quarantine and Storage, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers
Welfare, Government of India. http://ppqs.gov.in/divisions/integrated-pest-management/bio-control-labs
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) USA. 2011. Biopesticide Registration. http://www.epa.gov/pesticide-
registration/ biopesticide-registration
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) USA. 2012. Regulating Biopesticides.

IAEES www.iaees.org
 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233 229

Gayathri A, Ramesh KV. 2013. Antifungal activity of Euphorbia hirta L. inflorescence extract against
Aspergillus flavus–A mode of action study. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied
Sciences, 2(4): 31-37
Ghotaslou R, Saghati H, Dehnad A, Salahi Eshlaghi B. 2016. Antibacterial effects of Azerbaijan honey on
Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm. Iranian Journal of Medical Microbiology, 9(4): 40-46
Glare T, Caradus J, Gelernter W, Jackson T, Keyhani N, Köhl J, Marrone P, Morin L, Stewart A. 2012. Have
biopesticides come of age? Trends in Biotechnology, 30(5): 250-258
Granja EM, Reyes Benitez S, Sanjuanello D. 2014. Effect of antagonists and plant extracts in the control of
Protea wilt (F. oxysporum). American Journal of Plant Science, 5: 3203
Gupta S, Dikshit AK. 2010. Biopesticides: An ecofriendly approach for pest control. Journal of
Biopesticides, 3(Special Issue): 186-188
Harding PD Raizada NM. 2015. Controlling weeds 2014. The biochemistry behind biopesticide efficacy.
Sustainable Chemical Processes, 2: 18
Hubbard M, Hynes RK, Erlandson M,Bailey KL. 2014. The biochemistry behind biopesticide
efficacy. Sustainable Chemical Processes, 2(1): 1-8
Hussain S, Siddique T, Saleem M, Arshad M, Khalid A. 2009. Impact of pesticides on soil microbial diversity,
enzymes, and biochemical reactions. Advances in Agronomy, 102: 159-200
ICAMA. 2008. Pesticide Manual. www.agrolex.com.cn.
Ingram CW, Coyne MS, Williams DW. 2005. Effects of commercial diazinon and imidacloprid on microbial
urease activity in soil and sod. Journal of Environmental Quality, 34(5): 1573-1580
IsmanMB. 1997. Neem and other botanical insecticides: barriers to commercialisation. Phytoparasitica, 25(4):
339-344
Ivase TJP, Nyakuma BB, Ogenyi BU, Balogun AD, Hassan MN. 2017. Current status, challenges and
prospects of biopesticide utilization in Nigeria. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Agriculture and
Enviroment, 9: 95-106
Jankowska B, Poniedziałek M, Jędrszczyk E. 2009. Effect of intercropping white cabbage with French
marigold (Tagetes patula nana L.) and pot marigold (Calendula officinalis L.) on the colonisation of plants
by pest insects. Folia Horticulturae, 21(1): 95-103
Karaca G, Bilginturan M, Olgunsoy P. 2017. Effects of some plant essential oils against fungi on wheat
seeds. Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, 3: 385-388
Kinney CA, Mandernack KW, Mosier AR. 2005. Laboratory investigations into the effects of the pesticides
mancozeb, chlorothalonil, and prosulfuron on nitrous oxide and nitric oxide production in fertilised
soil. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 37(5): 837-850
Koul O. 2012. Plant biodiversity as a resource for natural products for insect pest management. In:
Biodiversity and Insect Pests: Key Issues for Sustainable Management (Geoff M, Gurr GM, Wratten SD, et
al., eds). 85-105, John Wiley and Sons, USA
Kour D, Rana KL, Yadav AN, Yadav N, Kumar M, Kumar V, Saxena AK. 2020. Microbial biofertilisers:
Bioresources and eco-friendly technologies for agricultural and environmental sustainability. Biocatalysis
and Agricultural Biotechnology 23: 101487
Kranthi KR, Russell D, Wanjari R, Kherde M, Munje S, Lavhe, N, Armes, N. 2002. In-season changes in
resistance to insecticides in Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in India. Journal of Economic
Entomology, 95(1): 134-142

IAEES www.iaees.org
230 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233

Kumar A, Chaturvedi AK, Yadav K, Arunkumar KP, Malyan SK, Raja P, Yadav AN. 2019. Fungal
phytoremediation of heavy metal-contaminated resources: current scenario and future prospects. In: Recent
Advancement. In: White Biotechnology Through Fungi. 437-461, Springer
Kumar A, Patel JS, Bahadur I, Meena VS. 2016. The molecular mechanisms of KSMs for enhancement of
crop production under organic farming. In: Potassium Solubilising Microorganisms For Sustainable
Agriculture. 61-75, Springer, New Delhi, India
Kumar S. 2012. Biopesticides: a need for food and environmental safety. Journal of Biofertilizers and
Biopesticides, 3(4): 1-3.
Kumar S, Singh A. 2014. Biopesticides for integrated crop management: environmental and regulatory
aspects. Journal of Biofertilizers and Biopesticides, 5: 121-123
Kumar S, Singh A. 2015. Biopesticides: present status and the future prospects. Journal of Fertilizers and
Pesticides, 6(2): 100-129
Kumar VV. 2018. Biofertilisers and biopesticides in sustainable agriculture. In: Role of rhizospheric microbes
in soil. Springer
Kumari S, Kumar SC, Jha MN, Kant R, Singh U, Kumar P. 2014. Microbial pesticide: A boom for sustainable
agriculture. International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research, 5(6): 1394-1397
Lengai GM, Muthomi JW. 2018. Biopesticides and their role in sustainable agricultural production. Journal of
Biosciences and Medicines, 6(6): 7-41
Littlefield-Wyer JG, Brooks P, Katouli M. 2008. Application of biochemical fingerprinting and fatty acid
methyl ester profiling to assess the effect of the pesticide Atradex on aquatic microbial
communities. Environmental Pollution, 153(2): 393-400
Marrone PG. 2007. Barriers to adoption of biological control agents and biological pesticides. CAB Reviews:
Perspectives. In: Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources 2(15). CABI Publishing,
UK
Maurya BR, Meena VS,Meena OP. 2014. Influence of Inceptisol and Alfisol's potassium solubilising bacteria
(KSB) isolates on release of K from waste mica. Vegetos, 27(1): 181-187
Mazid S, Kalida JC, Rajkhowa RC. 2011. A review on the use of biopesticides in insect pest management.
International Journal of Science and Advanced Technology, 1(7): 169-178
Menon P, Gopal M, Parsad R. 2005. Effects of chlorpyrifos and quinalphos on dehydrogenase activities and
reduction of Fe3+ in the soils of two semi-arid fields of tropical India. Agriculture, Ecosystems
&Environment, 108(1): 73-83
Mishra J, Dutta V, Arora NK. 2020 Biopesticides in India: technology and sustainability
linkages. Biotech, 10(5): 1-12
Mishra J, Tewari S, Singh S, Arora NK. 2015. Biopesticides: where we stand? In: Plant Microbe's Symbiosis:
Applied Facts. 37-75, Springer, New Delhi, India
Mohammadi S, Shandiz SAS, Bigdeli R, Mahboubi A, Hedayati M, Asgary V. 2016. Evaluation of anti-
bacterial properties of Euphorbia condylocarpa methanol extract. Archives of Microbiology and
Immunology, 1: 12-20
Mohammed NA, Habil NY. 2015. Evaluation of antimicrobial activity of curcumin against two oral
bacteria. Automation, Control and Intelligent Systems, 3(2): 18-21
Monkiedje A, Spiteller M. 2002. Effects of the phenylamide fungicides, mefenoxam and metalaxyl on the
microbiological properties of a sandy loam and a sandy clay soil. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 35(6): 393-
398

IAEES www.iaees.org
 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233 231

Murthy K, Soumya K, Srinivas C. 2015. Antibacterial activity of Curcuma longa (turmeric) plant extracts
against bacterial wilt of tomato caused by Ralstonia solanacearum. International Journal of Science and
Research, 4(1): 2136-2141
Muthomi JW, Lengai GM, Wagacha MJ, Narla RD. 2017. In vitro activity of plant extracts against some
important plant pathogenic fungi of tomato. Australian Journal of Crop Science, 11(6): 683-689
Nawaz M, Mabubu JI, Hua H. 2016. Current status and advancement of biopesticides: microbial and botanical
pesticides. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies, 4(2): 241-246
Neeraj GS, Kumar A, Ram S, Kumar V. 2017. Evaluation of nematicidal activity of ethanolic extracts of
medicinal plants to Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid and White) chitwood under lab
conditions. International Journal of Pure and Applied Bioscience, 5: 827-831
Nicholson GM. 2007. Fighting the global pest problem: preface to the special Toxicon issue on insecticidal
toxins and their potential for insect pest control. Toxicon, 49(4): 413-422
Nikkhah M, Hashemi M, Najafi MBH, Farhoosh R. 2017. Synergistic effects of some essential oils against
fungal spoilage on pear fruit. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 257: 285-294
Olson S. 2015. An analysis of the biopesticide market now and where it is going. Outlooks on pest
Management, 26(5): 203-206
Olson S, Ranade A, Kurkjy N, Pang K, Hazekamp C. 2013. Green Dreams or Growth Opportunities:
Assessing The Market Potential For "Greener" Agricultural Technologies. Lux Research, Boston, MA,
USA. Disponible enlínea: https://portal.luxresearchinc. com/research/tidbit/15753
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2009. Series on pesticides No. 448. Report of
Workshop on the Regulation of Biopesticides: Registration and Communication Issues.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/3/Collego55/43056580.pdf
Pavela R. 2014. Limitation of plant biopesticides. In: Advances in Plant Biopesticides. 347-359, Springer,
New Delhi, India
Pelaez V, Mizukawa G. 2016. Diversification strategies in the pesticide industry: from seeds to
biopesticides. Ciência Rural, 47
Perelló AE, Noll U, Slusarenko AJ. 2013. In vitro efficacy of garlic extracts to control fungal pathogens of
wheat. Journal of Medicinal Plants Research, 5: 1809-1817
Peshin R, Bandral RS, Zhang WJ, et al. 2009. Integrated Pest Management: A Global Overview of History,
Programs and Adoption. In: Integrated Pest Management: Innovation-Development Process (Vol. 1)
(Peshin R, Dhawan AK, eds). 1-50, Springer, Netherlands
Peshin R, Zhang WJ. 2014. Integrated Pest Management and Pesticide Use. In: Integrated Pest Management:
Pesticide Problems (Vol. 3) (Pimentel D, Peshin R, eds). 1-46, Springer, Netherlands
Plata-Rueda A, Martínez LC, Dos Santos MH, Fernandes FL, Wilcken CF, Soares MA, Zanuncio JC. 2017.
Insecticidal activity of garlic essential oil and their constituents against the mealworm beetle, Tenebrio
molitor Linnaeus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Scientific Reports, 7(1): 1-11
Poinar Jr GO, Leutenegger R. 1968. Anatomy of the infective and normal third-stage juveniles of
Neoaplectana carpocapsae Weiser (Steinernematidae: Nematoda). The Journal of Parasitology, 340-350
Rampadarath S, Puchooa D, Jeewon R. 2016. Jatropha curcas L: Phytochemical, antimicrobial and larvicidal
properties. Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Biomedicine, 6(10): 858-865
Raut RR, Sawant AR, Jamge BB. 2014. Antimicrobial activity of Azadirachta indica (Neem) against
pathogenic microorganisms. Journal of Academia and Industrial Research, 3(7): 327-329.
Rawat S, Rawat A. 2015. Antimicrobial activity of Indian spices against pathogenic bacteria. Advances in
Applied Science Research 6(3): 185-190

IAEES www.iaees.org
232 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233

Rizvi SAH, Hussain S, Rehman SU, Jaffar S, Rehman MFU. 2016. Efficacy of eco-friendly botanical extracts
of Ginger (Zingiber officinale), Garlic (Allium sativum) and Tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L) for the control
of cabbage looper (Trichoplusia binotalis) under agro ecological conditions of Peshawar. Pakistan Journal
of Entomology and Zoology Studies, 4(1): 88-90
Rodgers PB. 1993. Potential of biopesticides in agriculture. Pesticide Science, 39(2): 117-129
Sachdev S, Singh RP. 2016. Current challenges, constraints and future strategies for development of successful
market for biopesticides. Climate Change and Environmental Sustainability, 4(2): 129-136
Sanjaya Y, Ocampo VR, Caoili BL. 2013. Selection of entomopathogenic fungi against the red spider mite
Tetranychus kanzawai (Kishida) (Tetranychidae: Acarina). Arthropods, 2(4): 208-215
Sarwar M. 2015. Biopesticides: an effective and environmentally friendly insect-pests inhibitor line of
action. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Research Technology, 1(2): 10-15
Sarwar M, Ashfaq M, Ahmad A, Randhawa MAM. 2013. Assessing the potential of assorted plant powders on
survival of Caloglyphus grain mite (Acari: Acaridae) in wheat grain. International Journal of Agricultural
Science and Bioresource Engineering Research, 2(1): 1-6
Satapathy S. 2018. Regulatory norms and quality control of bio-pesticides in India. International Journal of
Current Microbiology and Applied Science, 7(11): 3118-3122
Schmutterer H. 1985. The Neem Tree Azadirachtia indica A. Juss and Other Meliaceous Plants: Sources of
Unique Natural Products For Integrated Pest Management, Medicine, Industry And Other Purposes. VCH
Weinheim, Germany
Seiber JN, Coats J, Duke SO, Gross AD. 2014. Biopesticides: state of the art and future opportunities. Journal
of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 62(48): 11613-11619
Semeniuc CA, Pop CR, Rotar AM. 2017. Antibacterial activity and interactions of plant essential oil
combinations against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Journal of Food and Drug
Analysis, 25(2): 403-408.
Shirurkar DD, Wahegaonkar NK. 2012. Antifungal activity of selected plant derived oils and some fungicides
against seed borne fungi of maise. European Journal of Experimental Biology, 2(5): 1693-1696
Siddiqi AR, Rafi A, Naz F, Masih R, Ahmad I, Jilani G. 2011. Effects of Curcuma longa extracts on mortality
and fecundity of Bactrocera zonata (Diptera: Tephritidae). Ciência e Agrotecnologia, 35: 1110-1114
Singh R, Singh B, Verma RA. 2001. Efficiency of different indigenous plant products as grain protectant
against Callosobruchus chinensis Linn. on pea. Indian Journal of Entomology, 63: 179-181
Singh BK, Walker A. 2006. Microbial degradation of organophosphorus compounds. FEMS Microbiology
Reviews, 30(3): 428-471
Smith RF, van den Bosch R. 1967. Integrated control. In: Pest control: Biological, Physical and Selected
Chemical Methods (Kilgore WW, Doutt RL, eds). 295-340, Academic Press, New York, USA
Srivastava S, Kumar R, Sinha A. 2012. Antifungal activity of Jatropha curcas oil against some seed-borne
fungi. Plant Pathology Journal, 11: 120-123
Stanley J, Preetha G, Chandrasekaran S, Gunasekaran K, Kuttalam S. 2014. Efficacy of neem oil on cardamom
thrips, Sciothrips cardamomi Ramk., and organoleptic studies. Psyche, 2014: 1-7
Stevenson PC, Nyirenda SP, Mvumi BM, Sola P, Kamanula JF, Sileshi G, Belmain SR. 2012. Pesticidal plants:
A viable alternative insect pest management approach for resource-poor farming in Africa. In:
Biopesticides in Environment and Food Security. 212-238, Scientific Publishers, Jodhpur, India
Strika I, Basic AB, Halilović N. 2017. Antimicrobial effects of garlic (Allium sativum L.). Bulletin of the
Chemists and Technologists of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 47(7): 17-22

IAEES www.iaees.org
 Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2022, 12(3): 211-233 233

Suleiman EA, Abdallah WB. 2014. In vitro activity of garlic (Allium sativum) on some pathogenic
fungi. European Journal of Medicinal Plants, 4(10): 1240-1250
Thakur N, Kaur S, Tomar P, Thakur, S, Yadav AN. 2020. Microbial biopesticides: current status and
advancement for sustainable agriculture and environment. In: New and Future Developments in Microbial
Biotechnology and Bioengineering. 243-282, Elsevier
Tijjani A, Bashir KA, Mohammed I, Muhammad A, Gambo A, Musa H. 2016. Biopesticides for pest's control:
A review. Journal of Biopesticides and Agriculture, 3(1): 6-13
Tiroesele B, Thomas K, Seketeme S. 2015. Control of cowpea weevil, Callosobruchus maculatus (F.)
(Coleoptera: Bruchidae), using natural plant products. Insects, 6(1): 77-84
Vendan SE. 2016. Current scenario of biopesticides and eco-friendly insect pest management in India. South
Indian Journal of Biological Sciences, 2(2): 268-271
Vinodhini J, Malaikozhundan B. 2011. Efficacy of Neem and pungam based botanical pesticides on sucking
pests of cotton. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, 45(4): 341-345
Voukeng IK, Beng VP,Kuete V. 2017. Multidrug resistant bacteria are sensitive to Euphorbia prostrata and
six others Cameroonian medicinal plants extracts. BMC Research Notes, 10(1): 1-8
Wabule MN, Ngaruiya PN, Kimmins FK, Silverside PJ. 2003. Registration for biocontrol agents in Kenya.
Proceedings of the PCPB/KARI/DFID CPP Workshop, Nakuru, Kenya, 14-16 May 2003. Kenya
Agricultural Research Institute (KARI), Kenya
Wang MC, Gong M, Zang HB, Hua XM, Yao J, Pang YJ, Yang YH. 2006. Effect of methamidophos and urea
application on microbial communities in soils as determined by microbial biomass and community level
physiological profiles. Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part B, 41(4): 399-413
Witkowska D, Sowińska J, Żebrowska JP, Mituniewicz E. 2016. The antifungal properties of peppermint and
thyme essential oils misted in broiler houses. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science, 18: 629-638
Yadav AN. 2017. Agriculturally important microbiomes: biodiversity and multifarious PGP attributes for the
amelioration of diverse abiotic stresses in crops for sustainable agriculture. Biomedical Journal of
Scientific and Technical Research, 1(4): 861-864
Yadav N,Yadav AN. 2019. Biodegradation of biphenyl compounds by soil microbiomes. Biodiversity
International Journal, 3: 37-40
Yang FL, Zhu F, Lei CL. 2012. Insecticidal activities of garlic substances against adults of grain moth,
Sitotroga cerealella (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). Insect science, 19(2): 205-212
Zhang WJ. 2018. Global pesticide use: Profile, trend, cost / benefit and more. Proceedings of the International
Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 8(1): 1-27
Zhang WJ, Jiang FB, Ou JF. 2011. Global pesticide consumption and pollution: with China as a focus.
Proceedings of the International Academy of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 1(2): 125-144
Zhang WJ, Liu GH. 2022. A Mathematical Model to Simulate the Development of Insecticide Resistance:
Assessment of IPM Technologies for Reducing Insecticide Resistance. In: Advances in Integrated Pest
Management Technology: Innovative and Applied Aspects (Tanda AS, ed). Springer, Netherlands
Zhang Y, Liu X, Wang Y, Jiang P, Quek S. 2016. Antibacterial activity and mechanism of cinnamon essential
oil against Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus. Food Control, 59: 282-289

IAEES www.iaees.org

View publication stats