James C Bennett1, Art Diggle, Fiona Evans, Michael Renton. 1. The Satellite Positioning for Atmosphere, Climate and Environment SPACE Research Centre, School of Mathematical and Geospatial Sciences, RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. james.cameron.bennett@rmit.edu.au
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The eradicability of rain-splashed crop diseases was examined by modelling the spread of lupin anthracnose over a spatially heterogeneous landscape. Two hypotheses were investigated: (i) in most cases, rain-splashed diseases are unlikely to be eradicable because spread will be too extensive by the time the disease is detected; (ii) there are recognisable characteristics of an incursion that can be used to identify cases when the disease will be eradicable. RESULTS: Results indicate that the eradication of a rain-splashed crop disease is heavily dependent on the surveillance effort, on how detectable the disease is and on whether there are susceptible hosts outside the cropping area. These simple indicators can be used to estimate the potential for success of an eradication scheme. Eradication targeting only the crop area is destined to fail, unless it is certain that no susceptible host lies adjacent to the cropping area. CONCLUSION: A failed eradication attempt can be costly, and a simple set of indicators for the likelihood of success is extremely useful. These indicators can aid decision-makers when faced with a new incursion, identifying when there is little hope of success.
BACKGROUND: The eradicability of rain-splashed crop diseases was examined by modelling the spread of lupin anthracnose over a spatially heterogeneous landscape. Two hypotheses were investigated: (i) in most cases, rain-splashed diseases are unlikely to be eradicable because spread will be too extensive by the time the disease is detected; (ii) there are recognisable characteristics of an incursion that can be used to identify cases when the disease will be eradicable. RESULTS: Results indicate that the eradication of a rain-splashed crop disease is heavily dependent on the surveillance effort, on how detectable the disease is and on whether there are susceptible hosts outside the cropping area. These simple indicators can be used to estimate the potential for success of an eradication scheme. Eradication targeting only the crop area is destined to fail, unless it is certain that no susceptible host lies adjacent to the cropping area. CONCLUSION: A failed eradication attempt can be costly, and a simple set of indicators for the likelihood of success is extremely useful. These indicators can aid decision-makers when faced with a new incursion, identifying when there is little hope of success.