A Strong Partner for Sustainable Development

Module
in
CROP PROT 104

APPROACHES AND PRACTICES IN

PEST MANAGEMENT

College of CAFES
BSA
 2

Module No. _3_

ECONOMIC CONCEPTS
Topic

2ND Semester AY 2020-2021

VIMBEE A. ERESUELA
Instructor 1

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Cover page 1
Title Page 2
Table of Contents 3
Instruction to the Users 4
Introduction 5
Chapter

Title of the Chapter 6

Overview 6
Learning outcomes 6
Pre-test 6
Lesson 2 A. Learning outcomes 7
B. Time Allotment 7
C. Discussion 8
a. Pre-IPM era 9
b. EMERGENCE OF THE EARLY CONCEPT 16
OF IPM
c. THE “ETL -BASED IPM 17
d. Emerging IPM/PM Concept 22
D. Activities/Exercises 23
E. Evaluation/Post-test 23
References 24
Greetings and Students information 25
Back Cover (WPU-Vision 2020, Mission and Core Values) 26

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 4

INSTRUCTION TO THE USER

This module would provide you an educational experience while

independently accomplishing the task at your own pace or time. It aims as
well to ensure that learning is unhampered by health and other challenges. It
covers the topic about the Economic Concept.

Reminders in using this module:

1. Keep this material neat and intact.

2. Answer the pretest first to measure what you know and what to be
learned about the topic discussed in this module.
3. Accomplish the activities and exercises as aids and reinforcement for
better understanding of the lessons.
4. Answer the post-test to evaluate your learning.
5. Do not take pictures in any parts of this module nor post it to social
media platforms.
6. Value this module for your own learning by heartily and honestly
answering and doing the exercises and activities. Time and effort were
spent in the preparation in order that learning will still continue amidst
this Covid-19 pandemic.
7. Observe health protocols: wear mask, sanitize and maintain physical
distancing.

Hi! I’m Blue Bee, your WPU Mascot.

Welcome to Western Philippines University!

Shape your dreams with quality learning experience.

STAY SAFE AND HEALTHY!

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 5

INTRODUCTION

This module will serve as an alternative learning material to usual way of

classroom teaching and learning delivery. The instructor will facilitate and explain the

module to the students to achieve its expected learning outcomes, activities and to

ensure that they will learn amidst of pandemic.

This module will help you to understand The Economic Concept of Integrated Pest

Management.

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 6

CHAPTER 3

Economic Concept

Overview

Module 3 covers the topic about Economic Concept of Integrated Pest Management:

At the end of this lesson, you can:

a. Explain the crop loss and reference yield

b. Describe and differentiate direct and indirect loss
c. Discuss control actions and yield
d. Classify the uncertainty and risk
e. Differentiate the approaches to optimization
Pre-test
Directions: To start off, you have to answer the pre-test for you to measure how much you
know about the topic. You can start now. Each question is worth 1 point. Read each question
fully and carefully take your time. GOD BLESS!
Test 1. Multiple Choice. Choose the letter of the correct answer.
1. It occurs when the pest attacks plant parts other than the marketable product but
reduces the yield and/or quality of the product.
a. Direct loss b. indirect loss c. actual yield d. economic yield
2. The difference between the total revenue when the pest is controlled and that when the
pest is uncontrolled is called
a. partial budget b. Partial revenue c. total cost d. partial cost
3. The difference between the attainable yield and the theoretical yield is a/an
a. unpreventable loss c. reference yield
b. crop loss d. preventive loss
4. The difference between the actual yield and the attainable yield is a/an
a. unpreventable loss c. reference yield
b. crop loss d. preventive loss
5. The quantitative nature of the yield response to pest population density.
a. unpreventable loss c. reference yield
b. crop loss d. preventive loss
6. The crop loss or yield functions also vary with _____ that have different levels of pest
resistance.
a. plants b. cultivars c. species d. all of the above
7. It is a systematic procedure for finding the "best" solutions to a complex problem.
a. repeated simulation c. optimization
b. linear programming d. calculation
8. It is used to solve problems of allocation
a. repeated simulation c. optimization
b. linear programming d. calculation
9. which of the following is not belong to the effects of indirect pest on the plant?
a. Reduction of photosynthetic area
b. Diversion of photosynthate
c. Reduction in photosynthetic rate
d. All of the above
10. It is the difference between total cost and total revenue
a. Balance b. profit c. economic d. yield

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 7

B. Time Allotment: 3 hours

Discussion

Introduction

The engine that drives private enterprise is profit. Whether it be to eke out a
subsistence or to earn a cash income, a farmer is motivated by return on investment.
Therefore, whatever tactics we use in integrated pest management, the benefits must outweigh
the costs.
One of the goals of integrated pest management programs is to translate ecological
considerations into economic ones for individual farmers. To get farmers to accept the concept
of IPM we have to convince them that it pays, We, have to develop pest control technologies
that are cost-effective, We, have to influence public policy to create an economic environment
in which the benefits of IPM outweigh the costs.

Crop loss and reference yield

A grower takes a particular pest control action to prevent an anticipated crop loss.
Generally, one cannot recoup losses that have already occurred, and pest control measures are
not usually taken for vengeance! Prevention implies a certain predictive capability, and most
often the prediction is based solely on the experience of the farmers–they know that if they see
a particular pest and do not do something about it, they will soon suffer a loss. Unfortunately,
growers’ predictive capabilities are often limited–they may overreact, or they may fail to react
in time or with sufficient force.
To predict a crop loss, a reference yield is necessary. (Yield is used in the broad sense
here to include both amount harvested and quality–perhaps yield in dollars.) What can one
reasonably expect the yield to be in the absence of constraints?

Yield Reference Yield Description

High • Calculated by plant physiologists
Theoretical
• Approached in plant breeding programs
Yield

• Yield with all stresses on crop (constraints) removed

• Limited by the genes of a crop in a particular
Attainable environment
Yield
• Approached in small, experimental plots

• Yield obtained on farmers’ fields using local

Actual Yield
practices and inputs
• Depends on market value of crop and cost of
production
Economic • May be above or below actual yield
Yield
• Occurs where the profit is maximized

Low Primitive Yield • Little or no inputs

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 8

• e.g., subsistence agriculture

(Adapted from Zadocs and Schein, 1979)

The difference between the attainable yield and the theoretical yield is an
unpreventable loss, whereas the difference between the actual yield and the attainable yield is
a preventable loss. One can usually determine attainable yield experimentally. We must grow
the crop free of constraints (e.g., pests). We attempt to push the actual yield up to the
attainable yield (preventable loss). Making the actual yield the same as the attainable yield is
not always economically rational. Ideally the actual yield should be the same as the economic
yield.

Direct and indirect loss

It is useful to conceptualize crop loss as either direct or indirect. Direct loss occurs
when the saleable commodity itself is affected by the pest. The loss can be one of quality,
quantity, or both. Apple scab is an example of a direct pest that reduces the quality of the
marketed product, and the bean weevil is an example of a direct pest that reduces both
quantity and quality of dry beans and peas in storage. Direct loss is generally proportional to
the pest population density at low densities and approaches an upper limit (often 100%) as
the pest population increases.

Figure 1. Direct Loss. The proportion of the loss increases linearly with pest density
at first. Then it asymptotically approaches one.

Indirect loss occurs when the pest attacks plant parts other than the marketable
product but reduces the yield and/or quality of the product. An indirect pest may have one or
more of the following effects on the plant:

• Reduction of photosynthetic area

• Diversion of photosynthate
• Reduction in photosynthetic rate
• Reduction in net assimilation
• Increase in respiration rate
• Upset of water balance

Crop loss–that is, the quantitative nature of the yield response to pest population
density–can vary widely from one crop species to another and from pest to pest within the
same crop. At very low pest population densities, there is often no measurable yield loss, but
when the pest density gets high enough, the yield begins to decline steeply. At very high pest
densities, the yield may drop to zero, or it may level out at a low level.

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 9

Sometimes low levels of pest damage can slightly enhance yield. This can occur, for
example, in crops where the lower leaves are heavily shaded by the top of the canopy, and a
slight pruning of the upper leaves by a foliage feeder allows greater light penetration into the
lower canopy.

Figure 2. Indirect Loss. The response to pest density can follow one of several
different patterns, depending on the crop and the pest.

Multiple pests can interact synergistically to reduce yields, or they can interfere with
one another so that the yields with both pests present can actually be higher than would be
obtained with either pest alone at the same density.

The crop loss or yield functions can change at different stages of crop development,
and the final yield (quality and quantity) at harvest can be affected both by brief episodes of
pest damage and by the cumulative effects over the season. The crop loss and yield functions
can also be affected by factors in the physical environment (temperature, rainfall, cultural
practices, etc.).

Pest-resistant cultivars

The crop loss or yield functions also vary with cultivars that have different levels of
pest resistance. It is not uncommon to find primitive cultivars or landraces that may not be
as high yielding as so-called "improved" cultivars if pest populations are kept low, but which
can outproduce an improved cultivar when the pest pressure is high.

Figure 3. The effect of pest resistance. The yield response to pest population density may be
different for different cultivars.

Control actions and yield

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 10

Crop loss and yield functions can be used to evaluate the effects of pest control
measures that abruptly change pest populations (pesticides, sanitation measures, etc.) One
first must have a model that predicts the pest population dynamics with and without the
control measure.

Figure 4. Pest population dynamics. The increase in pest population density may be abruptly
reduced by a control action, such as the application of a pesticide. Loss should be evaluated
at the point shown because________________________________.

Using this prediction of the controlled and uncontrolled pest population densities
combined with the yield response functions, we can then estimate the yield loss that would be
prevented by the control action.

Figure 5. Evaluating the impact of a control action. The predicted yield in the
presence of a high pest population (uncontrolled) is subtracted from the predicted yield
when the pest is controlled. Doing so gives an estimate of the loss prevented by the control
action.

Modeling yield with computers

Taken together, all the possible interactions of pest population dynamics, crop
development, environmental variables, and management options to predict crop loss or yield
is complex. However, this problem can be broken into its components, which are relatively
straightforward quantitative relationships. The set of equations generated by this approach
can then be solved numerically in an appropriately designed computer simulation. With a

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 11

model that simulates pest and crop development with reasonable fidelity, "field experiments"
can be run on the computer and used as an analytical tool to develop management models.

For this discussion we will assume that the goal of the farmer is to maximize profit, but
in fact growers have many other–often conflicting–goals. (We will deal with these later.)

Microeconomics at the farm level

Profit is the difference between total cost and total revenue:

Profit = TR - TC (1)

A pest control measure makes economic sense only if the profit when the pest is
controlled (Profit C is greater than the profit when the pest is not controlled ("uncontrolled,"
shown as Profit U): that is, when

ProfitC > ProfitU (2)

or when

TRC - TCC > TRU - TCU (3)

or, rearranging terms, when

TRC - TRU > TCC - TCU (4)

NOTE: The above inequality applies only to the case when there are two alternatives,
controlling the pest or not controlling the pest. The general case with in management
alternatives is

MAX (Profit0, Profit1, Profit2, ..., Profitn) (5)

Partial budget analysis

While profits are based on total costs and total revenues, it is not necessary to do a
complete budget analysis in order to evaluate a particular management decision. Many of the
costs remain fixed regardless of the management option selected, so we do what is called a
partial budget analysis.

In the inequality 4, above, the difference between all the costs when the pest is
controlled and all the costs when the pest is uncontrolled is called the partial cost–the cost of
the pest control, CC.

CC = TCC - TCU (6)

CC is more than simply the direct cost of the pest control measure (e.g., the cost of a
pesticide plus its application costs). CC must include, for example, the additional costs of
harvesting and handling the crop if the yields are higher when the pest is controlled than when
it is not.

The difference between the total revenue when the pest is controlled and that when the
pest is uncontrolled is called the partial revenue. In other words, it is the change in revenue
attributable to the pest control, RC.

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 12

RC = TRC - TRU (7)

The total revenue is the product of the price and the yield.

TR = P · Y (8)

If crop quality is unaffected by the pest control, the partial revenue is simply the crop
price times the difference in yield.

RC = P (YC - YU) (9)

But if the pest control affects crop quality as well as yield, the price with pest control
will likely be different from that without it, and the partial revenue will be the product of price
and yield when the pest is controlled minus the product of price and yield when it is not.

RC = PC · YC - PU · YU (10)

If the harvested product is graded into different quality classes and there are different
prices for the different quality classes, it may be necessary to consider the yield distribution at
various quality levels. If n is the total number of quality classes, and i designates the quality
class, then

P · Y = Pi · Yi (11)

For example:

Crop Damage Price Yield PiYi

none 10.00 500 5000
light 6.00 250 1500
medium 3.00 125 375
severe 1.50 63 95

P·Y = 6970

The Decision-Making Criterion

The pest control measure makes economic sense if the partial revenue is greater than
the partial cost:

RC > CC (12)

Note: both of the terms in this inequality can be negative (e.g., consider the case where
the new control measure is a pest resistant cultivar with a slightly lower yield, but which
requires less pesticide)

The general case (more than 2 alternatives) is:

MAX (R1- C1, R2- C2, ..., Rn- Cn) (12)

The Production Function

Imagine the new pest control measure is not a discrete event (such as plowing under a
crop residue) but is instead a treatment that can be applied at varying intensities (such as the

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 13

dose of a pesticide). We then have to decide the following: a) whether to apply the treatment
to make a greater profit than if we applied no treatment; and b) at what level to apply the
treatment to maximize profit. Consider the cost of the pest control measure (the partial cost)
and the revenue attributable to control of the pest (the partial revenue) as functions of the level
of input (e.g., a pesticide dose).

Figure 1. Production function. The partial cost (CC) generally increases linearly with
intensity of pest control effort. The partial revenue (RC) increases, but at a diminishing
rate, and may ultimately begin to decline.

Most often cost and revenue are measured in monetary units (such as dollars) but they
can be measured in any other commensurable units, such as yield equivalents or hours of
labor. The cost of control CC, is usually directly proportional to the level of pest control input,
making the cost function linear. The shape of the revenue function, RC, may vary from one
case to another, but in general as pest control input increases, the revenue also increases,
because of the greater yields resulting from pest control.

At some level of input, the increment in revenue for each increment in input begins to
decline (diminishing returns). The revenue can reach a peak and then begin to decline (e.g., if
input is a pesticide that is phytotoxic). If this is the case, the cost of control can again exceed
the increased revenue resulting from control. The level of input that maximizes profit occurs
at the point where the RC curve is at its maximum distance above the CC curve.
(Mathematically this also happens to be the point where the tangent to the revenue curve is
parallel to the cost line.)

Computation of the decision criterion

To calculate the partial cost and the partial revenue of pest control, we first need
detailed crop loss and yield functions in response to pest population. This kind of information
usually comes from considerable field research. Lack of this kind of data continues to limit the
development of IPM programs that are based on economic decision-making criteria.

Once we have the crop loss functions, the rest is straightforward accounting, which
the farmer or an agricultural consultant can do with pencil and paper (but with many
variables and options, the calculations can be tedious).

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 14

RISK AND UNCERTAINTY

The crop loss and yield models discussed until now have been deterministic; that is,
there has been one, and only one, value for the dependent variable (e.g., revenue)
corresponding to a given independent variable (e.g., pest density). In reality, there is
considerable variability in the response to a given set of inputs. We cannot account for some
of this variability, and we simply attribute it to randomness. These responses, however, are
not totally random; they vary within predictable ranges according to a quantifiable probability
distribution.

Much of this variation results from day-to-day and season-to-season changes in the
weather, which affects pest and crop development. Long-term weather records for a particular
locality can be useful in quantifying the apparent randomness attributable to weather. In one
approach, we can run crop and pest simulation models repeatedly with historical weather data
and observe the frequency distribution of responses. Alternatively, we can assign probability
distributions to particular weather events based on long-term weather records and create a
stochastic weather simulator. Simulated weather data can then be used to drive the crop-pest
models.

Another important "random" variable is the price that will be paid for the crop at
harvest. It is a variable whose value is usually not known at the time a pest control decision is
made. Historical marketing data and current market analysis can be used to assign a
probability distribution to future prices, and then a probability distribution of revenue can be
created from the distributions for price and yield. Price and yield do not vary completely
independently. For example, if a wide geographical area is affected by weather that has a
marked effect on yields, such as a widespread frost, the yields of large numbers of producers
might be reduced and the prices might be driven up.

Probability distributions of revenue

Consider the hypothetical example in the accompanying table:

Probability Distributions of Revenues

Resulting from Different Levels
of Pest Control (Hypothetical)
Pesticide Dose (kg/ha)

0 1 2 3 4
Total Revenue ($/ha) Probabilities
> 300 0.0 0.01 0.11 0.37 0.65
251-300 0.0 0.08 0.40 0.45 0.29
201-250 0.01 0.32 0.38 0.13 0.05
151-200 0.06 0.44 0.09 0.04 0.01
101-150 0.27 0.12 0.02 0.01 0.0
51-100 0.48 0.03 0.0 0.0 0.0
1-50 0.16 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
<1 0.02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 15

Expected total
86.50 191.50 249.50 281.50 304.00
revenue
Pest control cost 0.0 40.00 80.00 120.00 160.00
Total cost* 100.00 140.00 180.00 220.00 260.00
Expected profit -13.50 51.50 69.50 61.50 44.00
* Assumes total fixed costs of $100/ha

In this table we have a distribution of probabilities of a given level of revenue for each
of several levels of input. You may notice that this is simply a version of the production
function, in which the revenue scale, which is actually continuous, has been made discrete by
breaking it into intervals. Instead of a single value for revenue at each level of input, we have
a probability distribution, and if you trace the median value in each of these distributions, you
can see the revenue curve. Note that the probabilities within each column sum to one (1.0).

The expected total revenue for each pesticide dose is the average one would obtain
from a large number of replications with varying weather and prices. It is computed by
multiplying the mid-point of each revenue interval by its corresponding probability and then
summing the products for each column. The pest control cost for this example is simply the
cost/kg of pesticide times the dose. To maximize profits, the farmer would simply look at the
expected profit (the bottom line) and decide to apply the 2 kg rate with an expected profit of
$69.50.

But let's play a different kind of game with these figures. Let's look at the odds of the
outcomes with different levels of input. Applying no spray, one would have a 34% chance of at
least breaking even (you get this by adding all of the percentages above $100, the "break even"
mark, in the "0" column: 0.0 + 0.0 + 0.01 + 0.06 + 0.27). You’d have about a 5% chance of a
profit greater than the expected profit ($69.50). (Confused? Click here to see these concepts
demonstrated in the table.)

Applying the 1 kg dose, one would have an 85% chance of breaking even (0.01 + 0.08
+ 0.32 + 0.44) and about a 30% chance of a profit over $69.50. Applying 3 kg instead of 2 kg
("for insurance") does not significantly improve the odds of breaking even (about 90% in both
cases).

This kind of analysis provides growers with "betting odds" on a particular outcome of
a decision and gives them more information on which to base a decision than they would have
with conventional extension information. Farmers are the world's largest group of high stakes
gamblers. Unlike most other gamblers, farmers generally cannot compute their odds.
Probability distribution of revenues are particularly important for subsistence farmers, whose
farming strategy is basically to minimize the risk of catastrophic losses.

Economic threshold

➢ Intuitively we can get a feel for some kind of threshold pest population
o If the pest population (and the resulting damage) is low enough, it does
not pay to take control measures
o As the pest population continues to rise, it reaches a point where the
resulting damage would justify taking control measures

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 16

➢ Unfortunately, our intuitive notion of an "economic threshold" has been

corrupted by many rather loose and completely different definitions of the term
in the early IPM literature:
o "The maximum pest population that can be tolerated at a particular
time and place without a resultant economic crop loss"
o "The density of a pest population below which the cost of applying
control measures exceeds the losses caused by the pest". (Glass, 1975)
o That point at which the incremental cost of pest control is equal to the
incremental return resulting from pest control" (Thompson and White,
1979) (also "economic injury level" - Stern, 1959)
o "The pest population at which pest control measures must be taken to
prevent the pest population from rising to the economic injury level"
(Stern, 1959) (also "action threshold")
➢ Recognizing that some authors used very different definitions for the terms
"economic threshold" and "economic injury level," we have to be careful in
reading the IPM literature.
➢ In recent years Larry Pedigo has straightened out some of the confusion. In his
1989 textbook "Entomology and Integrated Pest Management," he revived
Stern's original definition of the economic injury level, and to make it a
practical management tool, he expressed it in terms of variables that can be
estimated empirically.
o Pedigo's definition of the economic injury level (EIL) is derived from
the decision criterion in partial budget analysis:
o Considering that the partial revenue is the yield loss prevented by
controlling the insect population, and simplifying the partial cost to
only the cost of the insect control (which is probably valid in most
cases), the above inequality can be written

where "loss" is the proportion of the yield lost per

insect. Rearranging terms, we get

Note that this assumes that the loss is directly

proportional to the insect population, or in other words, loss is
a linear function of insect population. Pedigo expressed his
definition of economic injury level as

EIL = C/(VIDK)

where:
EIL = economic injury level
C = cost of insect control
V = value of a unit of the crop
I = injury units per insect
D = damage (proportion of yield lost) per injury unit
K = proportionate reduction in injury

This equation expands the simple proportion of yield lost per

insect into a term for "Injury", which represents the physiological
effects of insect feeding, "damage", which is a measurable loss in yield

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 17

or quality per unit of injury, and a dimensionless constant, K, which

represents the proportionate reduction in injury as the result of the
insect control.

o Empirically determined economic injury levels have proven

very useful in reducing the numbers of insecticide sprays that
are necessary for controlling many insect pest species. It is a
reactive rather than a proactive approach and therefore may
not be applicable to pests whose populations develop too
rapidly to be managed by any reactive means (e.g., many plant
pathogens).

OPTIMIZATION

Until now we have discussed management decisions only a single management

variable at a single moment in time. Real management situations are rarely that simple; We
usually have to consider several management variables, all of which simultaneously affect crop
yield–or we might have to make these decisions at several times throughout the season.

Optimization is a systematic procedure for finding the "best" solution (or solutions!)
to a complex problem. It is necessary to state the objective explicitly, that is, to maximize
something or to minimize something (e.g., to maximize yields, to maximize profits, to
minimize effort, or to minimize costs). Generally, we optimize only one objective at a time. For
example, one can maximize profits or minimize costs, but not do both simultaneously. The
solution is the combination of decision variables that optimizes the objective.

There are many different approaches to optimization, and we will touch on only three
here: repeated simulation, linear programming, and dynamic programming.

Repeated Simulation

By repeated execution of a computer simulation model with different values for the
input variables, we can explore the effects of different values of those variables on the final
objective.

For example, suppose we have three partially resistant cultivars that require different
levels of fungicide application to control a fungal disease. In this example, the more resistant
varieties have either a lower quality or lower yield than the most susceptible one. Execute the
simulation with a range of sprays (1—6) per season for each of the cultivars. Using the marginal
analysis procedure, determine the profit for each set of input values.

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 18

Figure 1. Repeated simulation as a means of optimization. Each data point in this example
represents the output from one execution of the simulator.

In this example, Cultivar C is the most susceptible and Cultivar A the least susceptible.
Therefore, in the absence of fungicides, Cultivar A would yield the maximum profit. There are
two optimum solutions if our objective is maximum profit: 3 sprays on Cultivar B and 4 sprays
on Cultivar C.

The simulation approach is usually faster and cheaper than doing the optimization
empirically in the field, but it's limited by how many runs of the simulation are feasible. In this
example, the simulation had to be executed 20 times–not an unreasonable number for most
simulators. But suppose that we had 5 cultivars, 4 different fungicides, 3 spray schedules, and
7 levels of fungicide, and that we wanted to look at the mean and variance of the profit using
the past 10 seasons of weather data. The number of runs required would be

5 x 4 x 3 x 7 x 10 = 4200 runs

If each run cost $.50 on the supercomputer, the cost would be $2100. If each run took
1 minute on a microcomputer, it would take about 3 days of continuous computing.

Linear programming

Programming here refers to planning, not computer programming. Linear

programming is used to solve problems of allocation (e.g., allocation of land area in a crop
rotation plan, allocation of effort in a pest monitoring scheme, etc.).

The procedures are illustrated in the following simple example:

1. Define the objective function

➢ Allocate weed control costs between herbicide application and hand weeding to
maximize profit
➢ In this example (for simplicity) we will make the yield and price constant and set the
total revenue at $250/acre
➢ Therefore, maximizing profit in this example means minimizing cost

2. Identify the constraints

➢ Cost constraint: if x is the cost of hand weeding and y is the cost of herbicide
application, then
X + Y <= 250

➢ Weed control effectiveness constraint:

o To achieve the yield that gives us the above total revenue ($250), we must
invest at least $300/acre in hand weeding
o The amount of hand weeding required can be reduced by $2 for every $1 spent
on the herbicide
o Therefore, if x is the cost of hand weeding and y is the cost of herbicide
application, the constraint is given by
X + 2Y >= 300

o Herbicide label constraint:

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 19

o the amount of herbicide is limited because of possible phytotoxicity; the cost of

the maximum allowable rate is $100/acre
o Therefore, the label constraint is given by:
Y <= 100

11. Determine the optimum solution

The optimal region of feasible solutions occurs where the constraint regions overlap.

Figure 2. Optimization by linear programming: A 2-dimensional allocation of herbicide

application and hand weeding. Click on the image to add each constraint. The gray area
represents the optimal region, given the constraints applied.

The optimum solution (given that the objective is to minimize cost) occurs where a line
parallel to the cost constraint line (equal costs) is as far away from the cost constraint line as
possible, while remaining within the optimal region. In this example it would be $100 invested
in the herbicide and $100 invested in hand weeding.

Computer software exists for a wide range of linear programming applications. Linear
programming can handle a large number of allocation variables (it is not limited to 2
dimensions as we are on a 2-dimensional graph), and it can handle huge numbers of constraint
functions. The models must be linear, or they at least must be able to be approximated by
linear functions. These models are not dynamic (that is, they cannot allocate variables through
time), but they can approximate a dynamic solution by repeating the analysis at intervals
through time. Linear programming cannot handle stochastic models, but probability
distributions can be created by repeating the analysis with different constraints that vary
according to known probability distributions.

Dynamic programming

Very commonly a pest manager has to make a series of decisions at different points in
time throughout the season. One optimization technique that is particularly useful for solving
sequential decision problems is called "dynamic programming."

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 20

As is illustrated in the following example, the optimum sequence of decisions is not simply
a matter of making the optimum decision at every decision point. Very often the optimum
sequence is counter-intuitive. To simplify the example, we will make just two decisions, with
an interval of time between them, and examine the results of those decisions at some interval
of time after they are made.

➢ Suppose at each decision period we have three possible alternatives:

1. Do nothing; no cost; no insect mortality

2. Low dose of insecticide; costs $20/acre; kills 1/3 of insects
3. High dose of insecticide; costs $100/acre; kills 3/4 of insects

➢ Further suppose that the total revenue accumulated during a time period is equal to
$200 minus $1 times the pest population at the beginning of the time period. (Each
insect does $1 worth of damage.)
➢ Also suppose that the insect populations increase 3-fold during each time period.

If we start with a pest population of 72, the accumulated profits during the first
period are as follows:

➢ No insecticide: $200 - 72 - 0 = $128

➢ Low dose: $200 - (2/3)72 - 20 = $132
➢ High dose: $200 - (1/4)72 - 100 = $82

The pest populations at the beginning of time period 2 are:

➢ No insecticide: 72 x 3 = 216
➢ Low dose: (2/3)72 x 3 = 144
➢ High dose: (1/4)72 x 3 = 54

Assume a decision about treatment (no insecticide; low dose; high dose) can be made at
the outset and after period 1. The profits accumulated during time period 2 and the final insect
populations are shown in the accompanying figure.

Figure 3. A simple sequential decision example with 2 decision points. Click on the image to see the
net benefits for two different pathways. Making the optimum choice at each decision point yields a
lower net benefit than taking the most costly option the first time and doing nothing the second.

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 21

Making the optimum decision at each decision point would dictate using the low dose
of insecticide at each decision point for a total profit of $132 + 84 = $216. However, the
optimum sequence would be to use the high dose for the first spray and nothing for the second:
$82 + 146 = $228.

This example simply illustrates the need for a systematic optimization procedure. The
number of possible decision combinations increases with the power of the number of decision
points. For our trivial example, N = 32 = 9. If we had 5 control alternatives and 7 decision
points, N = 57 = 78125.

The dynamic programming algorithm does not analyze all possible combinations but
selects possible sets of decisions according to certain rules. The dynamic programming
technique can handle nonlinear models, stochastic models, and a large, but limited, number
of decision variables. It can be used where the system can be adequately modeled with a
relatively modest number of variables.

D. Activities/Exercises

Directions: Please do this activity to a separate paper.

Let’s do this…

1. Try to make a hypothetical computation of cost of farm that engage

in synthetic and using integrated pest management. For example,
vegetable production that use pesticide in controlling pest (insect,
weeds) and vegetable production that use integrated pest
management tactics. Explain your output.
2. Search online a successful farmer used IPM that make a high profit.

E. Evaluation/Post-test

Directions: Read carefully and answer the following questions. Answer on separate
sheet of paper. This is a graded exam. This test will evaluate how much your effort to
learn this topic.

Test 1. Multiple Choice. Choose the letter of the correct answer.

1. It occurs when the pest attacks plant parts other than the marketable product but
reduces the yield and/or quality of the product.
a. Direct loss b. indirect loss c. actual yield d. economic yield
2. The difference between the total revenue when the pest is controlled and that when the
pest is uncontrolled is called
a. partial budget b. Partial revenue c. total cost d. partial cost
3. The difference between the attainable yield and the theoretical yield is a/an
a. unpreventable loss c. reference yield
b. crop loss d. preventive loss

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 22

4. The difference between the actual yield and the attainable yield is a/an
a. unpreventable loss c. reference yield
b. crop loss d. preventive loss
5. The quantitative nature of the yield response to pest population density.
a. unpreventable loss c. reference yield
b. crop loss d. preventive loss
6. The crop loss or yield functions also vary with _____ that have different levels of pest
resistance.
a. plants b. cultivars c. species d. all of the above
7. It is a systematic procedure for finding the "best" solutions to a complex problem.
a. repeated simulation c. optimization
b. linear programming d. calculation
8. It is used to solve problems of allocation
a. repeated simulation c. optimization
b. linear programming d. calculation
9. which of the following is not belong to the effects of indirect pest on the plant?
a. Reduction of photosynthetic area
b. Diversion of photosynthate
c. Reduction in photosynthetic rate
d. All of the above
10. It is the difference between total cost and total revenue
a. Balance b. profit c. economic d. yield

Test 2. Explain the following.

1. Enumerate the approaches to optimization and differentiate.
2. What is the importance of economic concept in integrated pest management.

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 23

References

Diane G. Alston (2011). The Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Concept. Utah State
University Extension and Utah Plant Pest Diagnostic Laboratory. Fact Sheet. P 1-2.

https://niphm.gov.in/Recruitments/ASO-Pathology.pdf

Ray F. Smith, J. Lawrence Apple, and Dale G. Bottrell. The Origins of Integrated Pest
Management Concepts for Agricultural Crops

John L. Capinera "Integrated Pest Management: Current Concepts and Ecological

Perspective," Florida Entomologist 97(3), 1272, (1 September 2014).
https://doi.org/10.1653/024.097.0342

G.B. Orlob (1973) Ancient and medieval plant pathology, Pflanzenschutz-Nachrichten 26:
65-294.,Cornell IPM CSS 4440/ ENTOM 4440 course materials.

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 24

Congratulations for completing this module!

Privacy Notice for Module

For this Module, we collect your name, program, year and section, contact number,
email address, Facebook and messenger account when you submit your printed
module for purposes of coordination and communication.

All personal information collected will be stored in a secure location and only
authorized staff will have access to them.

Student’s Information
Name:
Program:
Year and Section:
Contact No.:
E-mail address:
Facebook Account:
Messenger Account:

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

 25

Vision 2020
WPU: the leading knowledge center for sustainable
development of West Philippines and beyond.

Mission
WPU commits to develop quality human resource and green
technologies for a dynamic economy and sustainable
development through relevant instruction,
research and extension services.

Core Values (3CT)

Culture of Excellence
Commitment
Creativity
Teamwork

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)

WPU-QSF-ACAD-82A Rev. 00 (09.15.20)