Literature DB >> 35684422

Basic Substances, a Sustainable Tool to Complement and Eventually Replace Synthetic Pesticides in the Management of Pre and Postharvest Diseases: Reviewed Instructions for Users.

Gianfranco Romanazzi1, Yann Orçonneau2, Marwa Moumni1, Yann Davillerd2, Patrice André Marchand2.   

Abstract

Synthetic pesticides are widely used to protect crops from pathogens and pests, especially for fruits and vegetables, and this may lead to the presence of residues on fresh produce. Improving the sustainability of agriculture and, at the same time, reducing the adverse effects of synthetic pesticides on human health requires effective alternatives that improve the productivity while maintaining the food quality and safety. Moreover, retailers increasingly request fresh produce with the amounts of pesticides largely below the official maximum residue levels. Basic substances are relatively novel compounds that can be used in plant protection without neurotoxic or immune-toxic effects and are still poorly known by phytosanitary consultants (plant doctors), researchers, growers, consumers, and decision makers. The focus of this review is to provide updated information about 24 basic substances currently approved in the EU and to summarize in a single document their properties and instructions for users. Most of these substances have a fungicidal activity (calcium hydroxide, chitosan, chitosan hydrochloride, Equisetum arvense L., hydrogen peroxide, lecithins, cow milk, mustard seed powder, Salix spp., sunflower oil, sodium chloride, sodium hydrogen carbonate, Urtica spp., vinegar, and whey). Considering the increasing requests from consumers of fruits and vegetables for high quality with no or a reduced amount of pesticide residues, basic substances can complement and, at times, replace the application of synthetic pesticides with benefits for users and for consumers. Large-scale trials are important to design the best dosage and strategies for the application of basic substances against pathogens and pests in different growing environments and contexts.

Entities:  

Keywords:  European Union; fungicide residues; plant protection; regulation EU 1107/2009

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35684422      PMCID: PMC9182541          DOI: 10.3390/molecules27113484

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Molecules        ISSN: 1420-3049            Impact factor:   4.927


1. Introduction

The world population continues to grow and will reach 9.7 billion by 2050 [1]. For this, increasing food production is the primary objective of all countries. According to the latest estimates of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [2], up to 40% of food crops worldwide are lost every year due to pests and plant diseases. Crop losses caused by plant disease alone cost the global economy $220 billion annually [3]. Crop protection is essential to reduce yield losses, improve food quality, and increase grower profitability. The application of plant protection products (PPPs) is the main way to protect crops against pathogens, pests, and weeds [4]. However, human, animal, and environmental risks associated with the use of chemical PPPs are a growing concern. All these concerns have encouraged the onset of research to develop alternative approaches to control plant diseases [5]. Reducing the use of pesticides being a major challenge in developed countries, European Union Member States are required to implement National Action Plans that set quantitative objectives, timetables, and indicators related to reducing the impact of pesticide use (Directive 2009/128/CE) [6,7]. The use of basic substances is approved in the European Union under Article 23 of EC Regulation No 1107/2009 and which are listed in Part C of the Annex of the Regulation (EC) No 540/2011 [8]. In the EU, Integrated Pest Management (IPM) has been mandatory since January 2014, and among the rules of the IPM is the reduction of the application of synthetic pesticides whenever possible [9]. For sustainable and qualitative food production, respectful of the need to produce in sufficient quantities, biocontrol has grown tremendously through the last few years [10]. The PPP EU Regulation (EC) 1107/2009 was established to ensure a level of protection of humans, animals, and the environment and, at the same time, to unify for the entire EU the rules on the placing on the market of plant protection products [11,12]. Basic substances are sources of interest for research as alternative to synthetic pesticides, since they are used in human medicine or as a food ingredient, so they have no residue concerns and then no maximum residue limit (MRL) and, usually, no preharvest interval [13,14]. The lack of MRL contributes to a better prevention of contamination in plant protection, a better control of the residues and a reduction of analytical problems, of decommissioning, and of market withdrawal [14]. Another benefit of basic substances, and perhaps the most important, is their very low ecologic impact. Basic substances are products that are used as ‘foodstuffs’, as defined in Article 2 of Regulation (EC) 178/2002 [15] cosmetic, and does not have an inherent capacity to cause endocrine-disrupting, neurotoxic or immunotoxic effects, but they are also plant protection means and not placed on the market as a plant protection product. Article 28 of Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 set the absence of marketing authorizations and usages allowance for basic substances. Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 introduced the new category of ‘basic substances’, which are defined by recital 18 as ‘certain substances which are not predominantly used as plant protection products may be of value for plant protection, but the economic interest of applying for approval may be limited. Therefore, specific provisions should ensure that such substances, as far as their risks are acceptable, may also be approved for plant protection use’. The properties of basic substances are described in Article 23 of the EU Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 [11]. In 2021, the Euphresco project ‘BasicS’ contributed to demonstrate the effectiveness toward pests and pathogens of basic substances, with potential benefits for the farmers, the consumer, and the environment [16,17]. The basic substances have a positive impact on crop health when applied preventively. Certain basic substances, such as chitosan, stimulate the defense system of crops against several classes of pathogens, including fungi, viruses, bacteria, and phytoplasma [18]. According to the EU pesticides database, 24 basic substances were approved for use, 7 were withdrawn, 18 applications were not approved and 8 are still pending [19,20]. This review includes currently approved basic substances that have a protective potential and are a valuable addition to the range of measures and protection methods intended for use. Detailed information about basic substances and updates on new available compounds can be found at the page https://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/pesticides/eu-pesticides-database/active-substances (accessed on 23 May 2022). The standard-folder for approval of a basic substance, called ‘Basic Substance Application Template (BSAT)’, is based on the structure of the European Union evaluation report of an active substance that can be used for plant protection purposes. BSAT refers to all areas of risk assessment in the regulation of phytopharmaceutical product uses and shall be considered as a structured model to build a file collating all available information and enabling to demonstrate that the evaluated substance meets the eligibility criteria of a basic substance (SANCO 10,363 rev.10, 2021). Therefore, nowadays, a full deposit under International Uniform ChemicaL Information Database (IUCLID) software is mandatory since March 2021. Basic substances are submitted individually (Annex I inclusion dossier) at the first stage; then, later, an automatic inclusion was adopted for food/foodstuff basic substance from plant or animal origin [21,22]. Recently, an automatic consideration procedure (without any Annex I inclusion dossier) by Expert Group for Technical advice on Organic Production (EGTOP)/Directorate-General for the Agriculture and Rural Development (DGAgri) of positive ongoing basic substance approval (from Directorate-General Health and Food Safety—DGSanté to DGAgri) to generate an automatic EGTOP/DGAgri outcome for inclusion (or not). This provision bypasses the traditional route of substances in organic production in plant protection through dossiers submitted to Member States, but so far, no basic substance has been rejected by the Regulatory Committee of Organic Production (RCOP), and with the current procedure, are no longer studied than substances of mineral origin (or non-foods). This review aimed to highlight the properties of approved basic substances, summarize, and provide this information for phytosanitary consultants, scientists, growers, stakeholders, companies, and consumers.

2. Results

Out of the 86 basic substance application submitted to the European Commission until now, less than one-third have been approved (24) (Table 1 and Table 2), 19 have been refused, 6 have been withdrawn during their assessment (Table 3), 8 are currently being processed by the EC (Table 4 and Figure 1), and 2 already successfully submitted via IUCLID software (Ginger extract and Capsicum frutescens).
Table 1

Application of the basic substances approved.

Basic SubstanceApproval Regulation and ApplicantCrops and/or SituationFunction in Plant ProtectionPests orGroup ofPestsTargetApplicationApplication RatesNotes
MethodGrowth Stage & SeasonNo. Min/MaxIBA 1 (Days)Min–MaxWater L/ha Min–MaxTotal RatePHI 1
Equisetum arvense L. Reg. (EU) No 462/2014ITABFruit trees Apple fruit (Malus pumila, Malus domestica) Peach-tree (Prunus persica)FungicideFoliar fungi likescab disease(Venturia inaequalis),Powdery mildews(Podosphaeraleucotricha)Peach leaf curl(Taphrina deformans)Foliarapplication sprayingFrom green leaf tip (BBCH 53) to flowers fading (BBCH 67) Spring2–67200 g/hL500–10001000–2000 g/haNa 1Plant homogenate extracted with hot water and filtered to be used 24 h after preparation
Grapevine (Vitis vinifera)Downy mildew (Plasmopara viticola),Powdery mildew(Erysiphe necator)From 1st shoots (BBCH 10) to cluster tightening (BBCH 57) Spring to summer100–300200–600 g/haNa
Cucumber (Cucumis sativus) rootsPowdery mildew (Podosphaera fusca)Root fungilike common root rot, seedling blight (Pythium spp.)Root feeding application and foliar application sprayingFrom (9th leaf unfolded on main stem—BBCH 19) to 9 or more primary side shoots visible (BBCH 49)23–4300600 g/ha15
Tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum)Early blight(Alternaria solani),Septoria blight(Septoria lycopsersici)Foliar application sprayingFirst inflorescence visible (BBCH 51) to BBCH 59 summer14
Strawberry (Fragaria × Ananassa) Raspberry (Rubus idaeus)Gray mold(Botrytis cinerea),Powdery mildew(Podosphaera aphanis), red core(Phytophthora fragariae), other fungi likeColletotrichum acutatumFoliar application spraying 2Growth restart till end of fructification. Early spring till end of summer Stage BBCH 1 to BBCH 894–85–14225 g/hL300675 g/haNa
Potato (Solanum tuberosum)Late blight(Phytophthora infestans), early blight(Alternaria solani),powdery mildew(Erysiphe cichoracearum)Stage BBCH 1 until BBCH 9
Ornamentaltrees useof whichPrunus spp.RosesRosa spp.Ornamentalfungaldiseases,rose blackspot(Marsonia spp.),Rose rust(Phragmidiummucronatum),leaf curl diseases, monilioses, oidium and mildewIncluded in mulchNot relevant1NaNaNa9000 g/haDry plant aerialparts usage neverapplied on whole hectare
Chitosan hydrochloride Reg. (EU) 2021/1446ChiProFruits berries and small fruitElicitor, having a fungicide and bactericide effect via the stimulation of natural defence mechanismsPlant elicitor, plant resistance against pathogenic fungiand bacteriaLow–Medium volume sprayingFrom 1 leaf development (main shoot) to 7 development of fruit4–81450–200 g/hL200–400100–800 g/ha0
Vegetables50–100 g/hL100–400 g/ha
Cereals
Spices
Crops foranimal feed
CerealsSeedtreatmentLow volumesprayingBefore sowing1NaNaNa
PotatoesSeedtreatmentLow volumespraying/dippingNaNa
Sugar beetSeedtreatment50–200 g/hLNaNa
OrnamentalbulbousplantsBulb treatment–Dipping/drenchingGermination(BBCH 00–01) 50–100 g/hL200–800100–800 g/ha
Low–Mediumvolume sprayingLeaf development–senescence(BBCH 10–92)1–85–750–200 g/hL200–400
Low–Mediumvolume sprayingLeaf development –senescence(BBCH 10–92)
Beet crops
Sucrose Reg. (EU) No 916/2014ITABIRBIApple trees/orchards(Malus pumila,Malusdomestica)Elicitor, having an insecticidal and fungicidal effect via thestimulation of natural defence mechanismsFruits borer likeCodling moth(Cydia pomonella) 3Foliarapplicationsprayingearly inthe morningbefore 9 AM(Solar time)From spring BBCH stage 6 to summerBBCH stage 897–101510 g/hL600–100060–100 g/haNaCold water solutionprepared just before application
Sweet Maize(Sweet corn)(Zea mays L.convar. saccharataKoern)Corn borer(Ostrinia nubilalisHbn.) 3From the BBCHstage 12 to 893–420020 g/ha
Maize(corn grain)(Zea mayssubsp. mays (L.))and corn seedCorn borer(Ostrinia nubilalisHbn.) 3From the BBCHstage 12 to 513–4
Grapevine(Vitis vinifera)Vine leafhopper(Scaphoideustitanus) 3From the BBCHstage 17 to 573715015 g/ha
Grapevine(Vitis vinifera)Downy mildew(Plasmopara viticola) 3From 1st shoots tocluster tighteningspring (BBCH 10–57)up to 2100–20010–20 g/ha
Calcium hydroxide Reg. (EU) 2015/762IFOAMPome fruitFungicide Neonectria galligena Sprinkler applicationLeaf drops end of October till end of December2–75–14104–208 L/ha 4 1460 L/ha 55000–10,000 L/ha25–50 kg/ha350 kg/ha 3Na
Pome fruit and stone fruitNeonectriagalligenaand otherdiseasesSpray applicationWith products at 24% 63–104 L/ha 4 728 L/ha 5 with products at 33.12% 45–76 L/ha 4 532 L/h5500–1000 L/ha15–25 kg/ha 4175 kg/ha 5
Brush application directly on pruning wounds and old cancers on stems 6Winter to March1–221With products at 24% 450 L/ha 3 900 L/ha 4 with products at 33.12%450 L/ha 4 900 L/ha 5No extra water 6149.04 kg 4 299.08 kg 5
Vinegar Reg. (EU) No 540/2011 Reg. (EU) 2015/1108 Reg. (EU) 2019/149ITABWheat seeds(Triticum vulgare),common wheat(Triticum aestivum),durum wheat(Triticum durum),spelt(Triticum spelta)Fungicide, bactericide and herbicideCommon bunt(Tilletia caries,Tilletia foetida)Seedtreatmentjust beforeseedingAutumn1Na25–50 7 per 100 kg of seedNotapplicable24–100 7,8Na
Barley seeds(Hordeum vulgare)Barley leaf stripe(Pyrenophoragraminea)
Market vegetablesGardening like carrot(Daucus carota),tomato(Solanum lycopersicum),bell pepper(Capsicum spp.)Alternaria spp.Autumn tospringSeeds aretem-porarysoaked inthe dilutionthen removedSeeds aretemporarysoaked inthe preparationthenremoved
Marketvegetablesgardeninglike tomato(SolanumLycopersicum),bell pepper(Capsicum spp.),cabbage(Brassica oleracea)Clavibactermichiganensis,Clavibactermichiganensissubsp.michiganensis,Pseudomonassyringaepv. tomato,Xanthomonas campestris pv.vesicatoria,Botrytis aclada1Na
White and red chestnut(Aesculus L.),Sycamore spp. (option), Acer spp.Bacteria:Pseudomonassyringae pv.aesculiTools application before sawing or cutting 9Na1 per day to eachtime beforeuse1400 g/hLNaNa Waiting period 30 s after washing
Hawthorns (Rosaceae):Crataegus spp., Amelanchir,Aronia, Chaenomeles,Cotoneaster, Cydonia,Malus, Photinia, Potentilla,Prunus, Pyracantha,Pyrus, Rosa, Sorbus andSpiraeaFire blight(Erwiniaamylovora)NaNaNaNa
Many ornamental plantsincludingAcer, Cotoneaster,Euonymus, Forsythia,Magnolia, Philadelphus,Populus, Prunus, Pyrus,Rosa, Rubus, Syringa andVacciniumBacterial blight/canker (Pseudomonas syringae pv.syringae)NaNaNaNa
Plane sp., Platanus, Prunussp., Chestnut sp., Aesculus L.,Sophora spp.,Linden sp., TiliaRot fungi,especiallyphellins:Phellinus,Tinder polyporeand ruffled(Fomesfomentarius)Na NaNaNa
Elm (elm other than Lutèce)(Ulmus spp.)Vascular fungi:Ophiostoma spp.NaNaNaNaNa
Maple sp., Acer sp.Wilt diseaseNaNaNaNaNa
Ailanthe sp., AilanthusaltissimaVerticillium spp.NaNaNaNaNaNaNa
Maple sp., Acer sp.;Sycamore, Acer spp.;Chestnut sp., Aesculus L.;Beech sp., Fagus spp.Sooty-Barkdisease(Cryptostromacorticale)NaNaNaNaNaNaNa
ITAB/ITEIPMAIMedicinalaromaticand perfumecropsWeedsSpray 10Pre cropemergence1Na10 kg/hL100 L vinegar (nodilution)10 kg/ha>120Phytotoxic to plant, may kill the young plants 11
Charbonneaux-Brabantpaths, borders,sidewalks andterracesWeedsDirect spray(spotapplication)VegetationPeriod of theweeds1–27–216 kg/hL100 L (dilutedvinegar)6–12 kg/haNaTemp > 20 °C phytotoxic to plant, may kill the young plants 12
Salix spp. cortex Reg. (EU) 2015/1107ITABFruit trees,Peach tree(Prunus persica)FungicideFoliar fungi likeTaphrina deformansFoliarapplicationsprayingFrom 1stshoots(BBCH 10)to clustertightening(BBCH 57)spring2–67222.2 g/hL500–1000 L/ha1111.1–2222.2 g/haNaPlant homogenate extracted with hot water (infusion), filtered and diluted by 3, to be used up to a maximum of 24 h after preparation. The product cannot be applied in case of hot temperature.It is used in case of rainy period
Apple fruit(Malus pumila,Malusdomestica)Foliar fungi likescab disease(Venturia inaequalis),powdery mildew(Podosphaera leucotricha)From greenleaf tip (BBCH 53)to flowersfading(BBCH 67)spring
Grapevine(Vitis vinifera)Downy mildew (Plasmopara viticola),Powdery mildew(Erysiphe necator)From 1stshoots(BBCH 10) toclustertightening(BBCH 57)spring tosummer100–300222.2–666.6 g/ha
Lecithins Reg. (EU) No 540/2011 Reg. (EU) 2015/1116ITABDAEFruit treesApple fruit(Malus pumila)Peach tree(Prunus persica)FungicidePowdery mildew(Podosphaera leucotricha)Peach leaf curl(Taphrina deformans)SprayapplicationBBCH 03toBBCH 793–12575 g/hL500–1000375–750 g/ha5
GooseberryRibes uva-crispaPowdery mildew(Microsphaera grossulariae)BBCH 10toBBCH 852–4200 g/hL1000–2000 g/ha
Market vegetablesgardening likecucumber(Cucumis sativus)Powdery mildew(Podosphaera fusca)BBCH 10toBBCH 892–6150 g/hL1000–15001500–2250 g/ha
Lettuce(Lactuca sativa) Erysiphe cichoracearum 27
Mash(Valerianella locusta) Erysiphe polyphaga 1Na
Tomato(Lycopersicumesculentum)Tomato late blight(Phytophthora infestans)2 to 67
Endive(Cichorium endivia L.) Alternaria cichorii
Ornamentals,especially rosesPowdery mildewand other fungaldiseases3–12575 g/hL100–30075–225 g/ha
Grapevine(Vitis vinifera)Downy mildew (Plasmopara viticola),Powdery mildew(Erysiphe necator)BBCH 11toBBCH 8530
Strawberry (Fragaria × Ananassa) Raspberry (Rubus idaeus)Powdery mildewand other fungal diseases, i.e.,Podosphaera aphanis,Red core (Phytophthora fragariae)Growth restart tillend of fructificationEarly spring till end ofSummerStage BBCH 10 to BBCH 89 (2nd crop,other strawberrieshave reached themspecific color)200 g/hL300–500600–1000 g/haNa
Potato (Solanum tuberosum)Late blight(Phytophthora infestans)Stage BBCH 10until BBCH 903–12100–400200–800 g/ha
Carrot(Daucus carota subsp.sativus)Powdery mildew(Leveillula taurica)BBCH 19 toBBCH 9041410002000 g/ha
Fructose Reg. (EU) 2015/1392ITABIRBIApple fruit (Malus pumila, Malus domestica)Elicitor, having an insecticidal and fungicidal effect via thestimulation of natural defence mechanismsFruits borerlikeCodlingMoth (Cydiapomonella) 13Foliar application spraying early in the morning before 9 AM (solar time)From spring BBCH stage 6 to summer BBCH stage 655–72110 g/hL600–100060–100 g/haNaCold water solution prepared just before application
Maize (Corngrain) (Zeamays subsp.mays L.)Sweet Maize(Sweet corn)(Zea mays L.convar.saccharataKoern)Symphylans(Scutigerellaimmaculata) 13Treatment inseedling linebefore 9 AM (solar time)-1Na4040 g/ha
Zea mayssubsp. maysL.FoliarapplicationSprayingearly in the morning before 9 AM (solar time)1 applicationat 2–3 leaves(BBCH 12–13) + 1application at 4 leaves(BBCH 14)21–2828.2 g/ha
Grapevine(Vitis vinifera)Vine leafhopper(Scaphoideustitanus) 4Foliar application spraying early in the morning before 9 AM (solar time)From the BBCH stage 17 to 573315015 g/ha
Grapevine(Vitis vinifera)Downy mildew (Plasmopara viticola) 4From 1st shoots to cluster tightening Spring (BBCH 10–57)up to 12>12100–20010–20 g/ha
Sodium hydrogen carbonate Reg. (EU) 2015/2069 Reg. (EU) 2015/2069Danish EnvironmentalProtection AgencyVegetablesSoft fruitOrnamentalsFungicide and herbicideMildews(Sphaerothecaspp., Oidiumspp.)Broad castusing fieldspray or greenhousesprayBBCH 12to 891–810333–1000 g/hL300–6002000–5000 g/ha or0.33–1.0%Max 1%Dose adjusteddepending onwater volume1Different crops have different sensitivity.Check concentrationsfor phytotoxic effects before widely used
Grapevine(Vitis vinifera)Powdery mildew(Erysiphe necator)Broadcastusing air blast orchard sprayerBBCH 12 to 891–8420–2000 g/hL200–6002500–5000 g/ha or0.42–2.0%Volumes and doses will vary according to crop canopysize. Conc. higher than 1–2% can be phytotoxic
AppleApple scab(Venturia inaequalis)Broadcastusing airblastorchardsprayerBBCH 10 to 851–8500–1000 g/hL500–10002500–5000 g/ha or0.5–1.0%
Fruit ofdifferenttypes(oranges, cherries,apples,papaya) Storagediseases likeBlue mold(Penicilliumitalicum)Green mold(Penicilliumdigitatum)Dipping orsurfacetreatmentHarvestedfruit1–21000–4000 gin 100 L water 1–4%Dose rates between 1–4% has been tested
Potted plants Liverwort/Bryophyte(thallose,Lunulariacruciata)Green thallusof liverwortplus, fruitingbodiesDirectapplicationof powderPostemergencelate summeror winter1NaNaNa122 kg/haNaThe product is used for post emergence application.Phytotoxicity of this use was not tested, check on small number of plants before it is widely used
Whey Reg. (EU) 2016/560ITABCucumber(Cucumissativus),zucchinisquash(Cucurbitapepo)Fungicide and virucide Podosphaera fusca, Podosphaera xanthii, Golovinomyces cichoracearum, Erysiphe orontii, Sphaerotheca fuliginea, Leveillula cucurbitacearum Foliarspray 12From threeweeks aftersowing(9th leafunfoldedonmain stem)to 9 ormoreprimaryside shootsvisible(BBCH 19–49) 143–570.6–3 L (0.036–0.24 kg/hL)1000–15006–30 L (0.36–2.4 kg/ha)NaWhey should be usedrapidly after collection,not stored in metalvessel
Grapevine(Vitis vinifera)Powdery mildew(Erysiphe necator)From 1stshoots toclustertighteningSpring 157–106–30 L(0.36–2.4 kg/hL)100–30,0 156–30 L(0.36–2.4 kg/ha)
VegetableGardening,Tomato(Lycopersicumesculentum)Tomato(Sinaloa) yellowleaf curl virusBegomovirusFirstinflorescencevisibleSummer(BBCH 10–51) 153–40.6–3 L (0.036–0.24 kg/hL)1000–1500
Glovefingertipsandmechanicalcutting toolsAll cropsViruses(Mechanicallytransferable) e.g.,Tobacco mosaicvirus(TMV),Tomatomosaic virus(ToMV),Peppermild mottle virus(PMMV),Cucumber green mottlemosaic virus(CGMMV),Tomato brownrugose fruitvirus(ToBRFV)DippingOn toolsand glovefingertipsBefore/after everyplantcontact 16NaNaNaNa Dipping for 5 s for gloves and 5 min for mechanical cutting tools. For reasons of efficacy use whey protein powder with at least 80% protein content.Replace the wheysolution regularly (e.g., after each crop row) to prevent cross contamination of the plant
Diammonium phosphate Reg. (EU) 2016/548ITABOrchards including cherry tree (Prunus spp.)AttractantMediterraneanfruit fly(Ceratitis capitata),Cherry fly(Rhagoletis cerasi)Placed in physical trapsNaMass trapping: 1 trap per tree up to 100 traps/ha42–56 17max 4 kg/hLMass trapping: max 100Mass trapping: max 4 kg/haNa
Olive trees (Olea europaea)Olive fly(Bactrocera oleae)
Citrus spp.Mediterraneanfruit fly(Ceratitis capitata)
Other cropswhere C. capitatacause damage
Sunflower oil Reg. (EU) 2016/1978ITABTomato(Lycopersicumesculentum)FungicideTomato powdery mildew(Pseudoidium neolycopersici)FoliarapplicationsprayingBBCH 32–37then BBCH 61–712 to 480.092 kg/hL (0.1 L)–0.46 kg/hL(0.5 L)500 to10000.46 kg/hL(0.5 L)–4.6 kg/hL(5 L)2Precautions must be taken to avoid overwatering and spilling of the dispersion.Treatment should be avoided during flowering time
Urtica spp. Reg. (EU) 2017/419ITABFruit treesApple tree(Malus domestica),Plum tree(Prunus domestica),Peach tree(Prunus persica),Red currant(Ribes rubrum),Walnut tree (Juglanssp.),Cherry tree(Prunus sp.)Insecticide, fungicide, acaricidePeach-potatoAphid (Myzus persicae, Macrosiphumrosae), wollyApple aphid(Eriosomalanigerum),Currant aphid (Cryptomyzus ribis),Walnut aphid (Callaphis juglandis),Black cherryaphid (Myzus cerasi)FoliarsprayingorShootsprayingDirectlyonaphidsSpring summeruntil BBCH 87(fruit ripe forpicking)1–57–151500 g/hL(dry matter) 18300–900 L/ha4500–13,500 g/ha 177Preventive treatmentis inefficient 24 h ofmaceration at 20 °C isenough
Bean, for exampleFrench bean(Phaseolus vulgaris)Black bean aphid(Aphis fabae)SpringSummeruntilBBCH 89(fully ripe)300–500 L/ha 184500–7500 g/ha 18
Potato(Solanum tuberosum)Peach-potato aphid(Myzus persicae)NaSpringSummeruntil BBCH 49(end of tuberformation)NaNaNa4500–10,000g/ha 17Na
LeafVegetables:Lettuce (Lactucasativa),Cabbage(Brassica olaeracea)Aphids, for example:cabbage aphid(Brevicoryne brassicae), Nazonoviaribis nigri)FoliarsprayingorshootsprayingdirectlyonaphidsSpringSummeruntil BBCH 19(9 or moretrue leavesunfolded)1–57–151500 g/hL(dry matter) 184500–7500 g/ha 187Preventive treatment is inefficient24 h of macerationat 20 °C is enough
Elder tree(Sambucus racemosa)Elder aphid (Aphis sambuci)SpringSummer400–8006000–12,000 g/ha 18
Rose(Rosa sp.)Rose aphid(Macrosyphum rosae)300–6004500–9000g/ha 18
Spiraea sp. Aphis spiraephaga
Brassicaceae(cabbage—Brassica oleracea, rapeseed—Brassica napus,radish—Raphanus sativus)Fleabeetle(Phyllotreta nemorum)FoliarsprayingSpringSummerUntil BBCH 19(9 or moretrue leavesunfolded1–6300–500 4500–10,000g/ha 18
Diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella)SpringSummer untilBBCH 49(Typical leafmass reached)
Apple tree(Malus domestica),Peer tree(Pyrus communis)Codling moth(Cydia pomonella)2 treatmentsin April, 1treatment inMay315300–9004500–13,500g/ha 18
Bean, for exampleFrench bean(Phaseolus vulgaris)Two-spotted spider mite (Tetranychus urticae)SpringSummerUntil BBCH 89(fully ripe)1–6(commonly3)7–21300–5004500–7500g/ha 18724 h ofmaceration at 20 °C is enough
Grapevine(Vitis vinifera)Two-spotted spider mite (Tetranychus urticae), red spider mite (Tetranychus telarius)SpringSummerUntil BBCH 89stage1–6(threebeforeflowering,threeafterflowering) 300–6004500–9000g/ha 18
Brassicaceae(Mustard family,Brassica sp.,Sinapis sp., radish—Raphanus sativus)Alternaria sp.FoliarsprayingSpringSummeruntilBBCH 49(typicalleaf massreached)1–67–151500g/hL(Based on drymatter) 18300–5004500–7500g/ha 187
Cucurbitaceae(Cucumber—Cucumis sativus)Powdery mildew (Erysiphe polygoni),Alternaria alternata f. sp. cucurbitaeUntil BBCH 89(typical fully ripecolour)
Fruit trees(Apple trees—Malus domestica,Plum trees—Prunus domestica,Peach trees–Prunus persica,Sweet cherry tree—Prunus avium)Leaf spot (Alternaria alternata),brown rot, blossom blight (Monilinia laxa), Botrytis cinerea, back breadmold (Rhizopus stolonifer)FoliarandFruitsprayingSpringSummerUntil BBCH 87(fruit ripe for picking)300–9004500–13,500g/ha 18
Grapevine(Vitis vinifera)Downy mildew (Plasmopara viticola)FoliarsprayingSpringSummerUntil BBCH 89stage1500 g/hL(Dry matter) 19300–6004500–9000 g/ha 18
Potato (Solanum tuberosum)Late blight(Phytophthora infestans)SpringSummerUntil BBCH 49(End oftuber formation)300–5004500–7500 g/ha 18
Cucumberroots(Cucumissativus)Powdery mildew(Podosphaera fusca),Root fungi likecommon root rot,seedling blight (Pythium spp.)IncludedinmulchNotrelevant1NaNaNa15 kg/ha 18NaDry plant aerial parts
Tomato(Lycopersicumesculentum)Early blight(Alternaria solani),Septoria blight(Septoria lycopsersici)
Ornamentaltrees useof whichPrunus spp.Roses(Rosa spp.)Ornamentalcryptogramic diseasesRose black spot (Marsonia spp.),Rose rust(Phragmidium mucronatum),leaf curl diseases, monilioses,Oidium and mildew
Clayed charcoal Reg. (EU) 2017/428Ets Christian CallegariGrapevine(Vitis vinifera)ProtectantEsca (black measles) caused by a complex of fungi that includesseveral species ofPhaeoacremoniumprimarily byPhaeoacremonium minimum (Pm)(currently known as P. ultimum), and byPhaeomoniellachlamydospora (Pch)Soil buryingNa1/3 years1095NaNa500Na
Hydrogen peroxide Reg. (EU) 2017/409ITABVegetables—Solanaceae like tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum), bell pepper (Capsicum spp.)Fungicide, bactericideSoil bacteria (Ralstonia solanacerum),Botrytis cinereaApply before cuttingNaTo be applied before every use of the toolNaNaNaNaNaWaiting period 30 s after washing
Lettuce (Lactuca sativa)Bacterial leaf spot pathogen(Xanthomonascampestris pv. vitians)Seed treatment before sowing 19Na1 Seeds are immersed in the prepared solution for 5 to 15 min (seed treatment)
Horticultureflowerslikecommonzinnia(Zinniaelegans)Fungi, especiallypathogenicAlternaria zinnia,Alternaria alternata,Fusarium spp.
Sodium chloride Reg. (EU) 2017/1529 Reg. (EU) 2021/556ITABAHDBGrapevine(Vitis vinifera)Fungicide, insecticide, herbicideFungal diseasesPowderymildews(Erysiphenecator)FoliarapplicationsprayingFrom 1st shoots(BBCH 10)to clustertightening(BBCH 57)Spring tosummer1–2Na600–2000 g/hL2001200–400030In case of 2 applications: one at 20 g/L + one at only 10 g/L. Maximum total rate of salt shall not exceed 6 kg/ha per year.Careful application should be controlled in terms of spray and target should be only the foliage. Low volumes are recommended in order to avoid spill. It is recommended not to spray everyyear, only in emergency cases.Maximum total rate of sodium chloride shall not exceed 6 kg/ha per year
MushroomslikeAgaricusbisporusFungal diseaseslikecobweb disease(Cladobotryumstrains—i.e.,Mycophilum),dry bubbledisease(Lecanicilliumfungicola),wet bubbledisease(Mycogoneperniciosa)Hand trowel cup scoopOn finding the pathogen.No earlier than 16 days intogrow cycle1Na0.03 g/kg–Dry80–100 g/haNaSalt is used as a spot treatment to cover incidents of disease. On a well-managed farm, disease willbe spotted early with specialist teams identifying and spottreating. This avoids harvesters accidently spreading diseasethorough contamination ofpersonal protective equipment(PPE) and transfer to other areas.This in turn will keep on site disease levels low and avoid the use of large volumes of salt.
Grapevine(Vitis vinifera)Europeangrapevinemoth (Lobesiabotrana)Foliarapplicationspraying1st late April to May(BBCH 55–57)2nd July(BBCH 75–77) 3rd September(BBCH 83–91)1–3Depen-ding on egg stage600 g/ha2001200–3600 g/ha30Careful application should be controlled in terms of spray and target should be only the foliage. Low volumes are recommended to avoid spill. It is recommended not to spray everyyear, only in emergency cases
Salt swampsand salt marshes Baccharis halimfolia Spotapplicationon drilledtree stumpor on soilin directvicinity oftree stumpNovember–February1NaNaNa10–100 gper treestump 20NaTreatment isallowed only in saltmarshes and salt swamps zones asdefined by national orlocal authorities.Treatment should be performed outside the rainy period
Beer Reg. (EU) 2017/2090ITABAll edible and nonedible cropsMolluscicidePest slugsand snailsSpecific traps for slugsAt the beginning of infestation1–5NaNot applicable (because ready to use liquid)NaNaNa
Mustard seed powder Reg. (EU) 2017/2066ITABWheatseeds (Triticumvulgare,Triticum aestivum),Durumwheat (Triticumdurum),Spelt (Triticumspelta)Fungicide for seed treatmentFungi likeCommonBunt (Tilletia caries,Tilletia foetida)SeedapplicationbeforesowingSummertoAutumn1NaNaNa1.5 kg/100 kg seedsNaMix 1.5 kg of mustard seeds powder with 4.5 L water. Treat 100 kg seeds with the slurry created
Talc E553B Reg. (EU) 2018/691COMPO Expert France SASFruit treesi.e., Apple fruit(MalusDomestica),Pear tree(Pyrus sp.),Olive tree(Oleaeuropea),etc.Insectifuge, fungifugePhysical barrier,Insectifuge:Insects andmites likeCacopsylla pyri,Cacopsyllafulguralis,Drosophilasuzukii,Panonychusulmi,Bactrocera oleaeFoliarapplicationsprayingFromBBCH412–521–281st application:2.13 to 3.54 kg/hLsucceedingapplications: 1.7 to 2.83 kg/hL600–10001stapplication:21.25 kg/hasucceedingapplications: 17 kg/haNaWater solutionprepared justbefore applicationand maintained stirred
Fruit treesi.e., Apple fruit(MalusDomestica),Pear tree(Pyrus sp.)Physical barrier,Fungifuge:Foliar fungi likemildews (Venturia inaequalis,Erysiphe necator)3–514–211.28–2.13 kg/hL12.75 kg/ha
Grapevine(Vitis vinifera) From BBCH 202–521–284.25–8.5 kg/hL150–300
Onion oil Reg. (EU) 2018/1295BionextCarrots, celery,parsnip,parsleyrootRepellent, scent maskingCarrot root fly (Psilla rosae)Masking the smell of theumbelliferouscrop byonion oilevaporatedfromdispensersShortly afterplanting orcropemergence(around mid–April) untilend of November(before harvest)1NaNaPot dispensers0.08–0.160L/haGranuleDispenser17.6–35.2 g/haNaNa4–8 dispensers per ha professional use only
L-cysteine Reg. (EU) 2020/642Soleo-EcoSolutionsAll crops and forestry in tropical areasInsecticideLeaf cutting antsHand held spreaderPost swarming (July)1–3303–36 kg granules/haNaMin 0.015 kg/ha Max 2.88 kg/ha 21NaUsed as an insecticide against ants. Application is made by hand on nest of ants. The application can be renewed, if necessary, with a maximum of 3 applications. Minimum/Maximum number of nests by hectare: 10–120
Cow milk Reg. (EU) 2020/1004Basic-Eco-LogiqueGrapevine(Vitis vinifera)Fungicide and virucidePowdery mildew (Erysiphe necator)Foliar application SprayingFrom 1st shoots (BBCH 07) to inflorescences fully developed; flowers separating (BBCH 57) 223–66–810–40 L/hL100–30010–120 L/haNa
Vegetable Gardening pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo)Pumpkinspowdery mildew(Podosphaera fusca)From leaf development (BBCH 01) until flowering (BBCH 06) 233–47–1250 L/hL400200 L/haNo application in presence offruits
FlowerGerbera(Gerberajamesonii)Powdery mildew (Erysiphecichoracearum)Before andduringflowering(BBCH 51–69)3–4716 L/hL500–100080–160 L/ha8
Cucumber (Cucumis sativus), Zucchini squash (Cucurbita pepo)PowderyMildew (Podosphaera fuliginea)From three weeks after sowing (9th leaf unfolded on main stem) to 9 or more primary side shoots visible (BBCH 19–49) 243–45–10 L/hL1000–150050–150 L/haNa
Soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr)Soybean Powdery mildew (Erysiphe diffusa)On leaves (BBCH 19–49)3–4718 L/hL1000–1500180–270 L/ha
Glovefingertipsandmechanicalcutting toolsAll cropsViruses (mechanically transferable) e.g., Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV), Tomatomosaic virus (ToMV), Pepper mild mottle virus (PMMV), Cucumber green mottle mosaic virus (CGMMV)DippingOn toolsBefore/afterevery plantcontactBefore/afterevery plantcontactBefore/afterevery plantcontactNaNa Dipping for 2 s.For reasons of efficacy use milkwith at least 3,5% proteincontent.Replace the milk regularly (e.g.,after each crop row) to preventcross-contamination of the plants
Allium cepa bulb extract Reg. (EU) 2021/81ITABPotatoes(Solanumtuberosum)FungicideEarly blight (Alternaria solani)SprayBBCH 21–853–571 kg/hL600–10006–10 L/ha (0.3–0.5 kg onion bulb/ha)Na
Vegetable Gardening Tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum)Tomato late blight (Phytophthorainfestans)75 days after planting BBCH 21–753–4150015 L/ha (0.75 kg onion bulb/ha)
Cucumber (Cucumis sativus)Cucumber gray mold (Botrytis cinerea)7
Chitosan Reg. (EU) 2022/456KitoZymeHorticultureFungicidePlant elicitor, plant resistance against pathogenic fungi and bacteriaSprayLow–Mediumvolume sprayingBBCH 09 to BBCH 894–82 weeks50–100 g/hL200–400100–400NaChitosan can be prepared for use following any of the two recipes provided in Appendix of Reg. (EU) 2022/456 (preparation for use).
olive treesFrom 1st new leaf development BBCH 10 to development of fruit BBCH 71800–3200
grapes200–600800–7800
grassBBCH 09 to BBCH 89200–400800–3200
postharvest fruit treatmentPathogenic fungi and bacteriaImmersionPostharvestBBCH 89+1-1--

1 IBA: Interval between applications; PHI: minimum preharvest interval; Na: Data not available; 2 The product cannot be applied in case of hot temperature. It is used in case of rainy period; 3 Indirect actions, no direct insecticide and fungicide properties; 4 maximum of rate per application; 5 maximum total rate per crop/season; 6 The aqueous solutions in this application are applied with few or without dilution. Here the case without dilution is calculated. Usually, not all trees are treated with brush application but only injured trees. In the calculation of maximum rate, it was assumed that 3000 trees per ha are treated with 0.15 L product per tree. This means that all trees of an orchard would be treated with several big wounds, which would be really the maximum rate and in reality, is very improbable; 7 Expressed as acetic acid. 1/1 dilution of vinegar/water L/L; 8 Considering 0.9 to 2 qt of seeds per ha; 9 Expressed as acetic acid. 50 mL/1 L dilution of vinegar/water for vinegar at 8% acetic acid; 10 Of main active substance acetic acid for vinegar at 10% acetic acid; 11 Expressed as acetic acid in a preparation with 60% vinegar (diluted in water), for vinegar at 10% acetic acid; 12 Treatments must be delayed 24–48 h or more after rain; 13 Spray when there is sun (preferably morning); 14 Do not apply when any plant is at a later growth stage than BBCH 49; 15 With a maximum of 10% concentration (30 L in 300 L); 16 Do not apply on treating fingertips right before or during harvest of edible commodities; 17 Depending upon environmental factors such as climate and topography; 18 The quantities of fresh nettle (or dry matter) written represents the quantities of nettle used in the recipe, but not the quantities that are effectively put in field—there is a filtration before; 19 Treatment, just before sowing; 20 Assuming plant density of between 0.1/m2 to 1/m2; 21 300 g of granules per nest multiplied by 120 nest/ha = 36 kg product/ha. Considering a maximum of 8% L-cysteine in the product, the maximum application rate per treatment of L-cysteine is 2.88 kg/ha; 22 Do not apply when any plant is at a later growth stage than BBCH 57; 23 Do not apply when any plant in the greenhouse is at a later growth stage than BBCH 06 and in presence of fruits; 24 Do not apply when any plant in the greenhouse is at a later growth stage than BBCH 49.

Table 2

Typical uses of the basic substances.

Substance NameUse(s)ApplicationRecipeFormulation Type
Equisetum arv-ense FungicideSpraying on crops2–2.25% water dilution200 to 225 g/100 L waterThe product cannot be applied in case of hot tem-perature. It is used in case of rainy periodDispersible concen-trate
Dry9 kg/100 kg mulchMulch
Chitosan hydrochlorideElicitorSpraying on crops or seeds0.05–0.2% water dilution50 to 200 g/100 L waterMust be applied within 24 hSoluble powder, paste
Sodium hydrogen carbonateFungicideAerial parts spraying0.33–2% water dilution333 to 2000 g/100 L waterSoluble powder
Postharvest dipping1–4% water dilution1 to 4 kg/100 L water
HerbicideDirect dusting10 g for a 50 cm Ø potDry powder
Sunflower oilFungicideFoliar spraying0.1–0.5% water dilution100 to 500 mL/100 L waterOil dispersion
Hydrogen peroxideSeed treatmentSeeds soakingReady-to-use solution (<5%)Ready-to-use solution
Urtica spp.Fungicide InsecticideSpraying3–4 days maceration in water at 20 °CFresh leaves (75 g/L) or dried leaves (15 g/L)Water dilution by 6 of filtered macerationDispersible concentrate
Mulch incorporationAddition of dried aerial parts. 83 g/kg of mulchMulch
Clayed charcoalProtectantSoil buryingBuried. 500 kg/hectare maximumPellet
Sodium chlorideFungicide InsecticideFoliar spraying0.6–2% water dilution600 to 2000 g/100 L waterSoluble powder
Substrate buryingMix salt in the substrate. 30 g/kg substrate (3%)Pellet
BeerMolluscicideTrapCovered slug traps. 1 trap per m2 maximumPure product
Di Ammonium PhosphateAttractantTrapPlace in traps/bottle, 30 g/L.Soluble powder
Onion oilOdor maskOil dispenserFill the dispenser with onion oil only (20 mL)Fill the dispenser with oil then add the pellets (4.4 g oil per 30 g granule)Oil or pellet
L-cysteineInsecticideHand-heldspreaderMixture with matrix (flour, food grade) at a concentration of maximum 8%Bait (ready for use)
Cow milkFungicideFoliar spraying5–50% water dilution = 0.5 to 5 L of cow milk filled up with water to 10 LSoluble concentrate
DippingDipping tools for 2 s in undiluted cow milk. For reasons of efficacy use milk with at least 3.5% protein content
Allium cepa L. bulb extractFungicideSpray applicationBoil 500 g of chopped onions in 10 L of water for ten minutes then let infuse for a quarter of an hour and filter the mixtureDispersible concentrate
ChitosanFungicideSpray application&ImmersionPreparation 1: added to a half-filled water tank, making sure the powder is evenly distributed over the water surface to avoid aggregation. The mixture should be stirred vigorously while adding the remaining water. The mixture should be used as soon as possible.Preparation 2: dissolved in water with pH < 5. The pH of water should be regulated by adding 7 mL vinegar (8% of acetic acid) per 1 L of water).Soluble powder
VinegarFungicideSeedtreatmentVinegar to be diluted in compliance with the rates of application reported in Appendix II.Undiluted for uses as herbicide on medicinal aromatic and perfume crops.For the herbicidal use in spot applications on paths, borders, sidewalks and terraces, vinegar needs to be diluted to a concentration of 60% vinegar in water (60/40 vinegar/water).Liquid for seed treatment
Toolsdisinfection
HerbicideSpray or spotapplication/Liquid
pH modifierIn combination with chitosanLiquid

Some applications were not validated by DGSanté and Member States during discussion and votes. Some were withdrawn (Table 3) by applicants during evaluation or discussions with no regulatory trace, while some were processed up to the vote and finally non-approved with corresponding Implementing Regulations (Table 4).

Table 3

Basic substance applications retired during the evaluation process.

Basic Substances Removed/Withdrawn during Evaluation
Substance NameIntended Use(s)EFSA OpinionReason(s)
Castanea and Schinopsis sp. tannins Bactericide, fungicide and nematicideEN 1363Limited number of studies about toxicity and residues led to a doubt concerning exposure assessment. Non-dietary exposure considered as hazardous
Honey from rhododendron RodenticideEN 1155Lack of studies concerning substance composition and efficacy on rodents. Rodents in traps might suffer ‘too long’
Extract from rhododendron RodenticideEN 1596Lack of studies concerning substance composition and efficacy on rodents. Rodents in traps might suffer ‘too long’
Quassia amara extract Insecticide and repellentEN 1382Data gaps were identified for genotoxicity, residues, environmental risk and exposure assessment. Concerns were raised regarding reproductive and endocrine toxicity
Valeriana officinalis Frost protectionNonePotential neurotoxicity, Valerian herbal tea makes it easier to fall asleep
Citrus pulp -None-
Potassium metabisulfite -None-
Didecyl-dimethylammonium chloride (DDAC) -RN-214Toxic to aquatic organisms
Table 4

Basic substance applications refused (non-approval).

Substances Not Approved by the European Commission
Substance NameIntended Use(s)Implementing RegulationEFSA OpinionReason(s)
Achillea millefolium L.Fungicide and insecticideEU no. 2017/2057EN 1093Risk assessment for toxicology and ecotoxicology not comprehensive enough left doubts and substance is not considered as foodstuff
Arctium lappa L. aerial partsFungicide and insecticideEU no. 2082/2015EN 699Risk assessment for toxicology and ecotoxicology not comprehensive enough left doubts and substance is not considered as foodstuff
Artemisia absinthium L.Fungicide, nematicide and insecticideEU no. 2015/2046EN 665Risk assessment for toxicology and ecotoxicology not comprehensive enough left doubts and Regulation (EC) 1334/2008 fixes limits for this substance
Artemisia vulgaris L.Insecticide/repellentEU no. 2015/1191EN 644Risk assessment for toxicology and ecotoxicology not comprehensive enough left doubts and Regulation (EC) 1334/2008 fixes limits for this substance
Capsicum annuum L. var. annuum, longum group, cayenne, extract (Oleoresin capsicum)RepellentEU no.2021/464EN 1838Risk assessment for toxicology show genotoxicity, causing serious eye damage, being harmful if swallowed and also as cause of skin irritation, although substance is considered as foodstuff
CaffeineMolluscicideEU no. 2022/xxEN 6423Proposal for non-approval under discussion
Carbon dioxideRodenticideEU no. 2021/80None-
Comfrey steepingFungicide and insecticideEU no. 2021/809EN 1753Risk assessment for toxicology and ecotoxicology not comprehensive enough left doubts and Regulation (EC) 1334/2008 fixes limits for this substance
DimethylSulfideAttractantEU no. 2021/1451EN 1911Risk assessment for toxicology and ecotoxicology not provided for long-term toxicity and carcinogenicity concern
Grape (Vitis vinifera) cane tanninsFungicideEU no. 2020/29EN 1414Risk assessment for toxicology and ecotoxicology not comprehensive enough left doubts and substance is not considered as foodstuff
Landes pine tarProtectant and repellentEU no. 2018/1294EN 1311It may contain substances of concern, so there is a lack of data, so risk assessment is not comprehensive enough and left doubts
Origanum vulgare L. essential oilFungicide, bactericide and insecticideEU no. 2017/241EN 1054Risk assessment for toxicology and ecotoxicology not comprehensive enough left doubts
Paprika extract E160cRepellentEU no. 2017/2067EN 1096Risk assessment for toxicology and ecotoxicology not comprehensive enough left doubts
Potassium sorbateFungicideEU no. 2017/2058EN 1232Lack of data concerning residues lead to an impossibility concerning exposition assessment
Propolis (water soluble extract)Fungicide and bactericideEU no. 2020/640EN-1494Defined as a skin sensitizer, risk assessment for genotoxicity and endocrine disruption toxicity left doubts. No safe limit for the use. Substance is not considered as foodstuff
Rheum officinale roots extractFungicideEU no. 2015/707EN 617Risk assessment for toxicology and ecotoxicology not comprehensive enough left doubts and substance is not considered as foodstuff
Saponariaofficinalis L. rootsAcaricide and elicitorEU no. 2020/643EN 1263Risk assessment for toxicology and ecotoxicology not comprehensive enough left doubts
Satureja montana L. essential oilFungicide and bactericideEU no. 2017/240EN 1051Risk assessment for toxicology and ecotoxicology not comprehensive enough left doubts
Tanacetum vulgare L.RepellentEU no. 2015/2083EN 666Risk assessment for toxicology and ecotoxicology not comprehensive enough left doubts and substance is not considered as foodstuff
Willow bark and stem extractPlant growth and defense elicitorEU no.2022/EN 1872Previously proposed for non-approval since not sold for other uses, proposal under discussion, may be accepted.
Figure 1

Total of the basic substance applications (BSA) and extensions presented by the results (%).

Currently, 24 basic substances are approved, of which 21 are also approved in organic production; for example, talc was validated in 2021 following EGTOP PPP VII and is being currently voted on at RCOP [23] and clayed charcoal was submitted. Recently, voted chitosan does not seem to be acceptable directly in organic production as the basic substance from its microorganism’s origin, although in the context of food quality. Basic substances are approved by EU Regulations, so the application month, where reported in Table 1, is related to the Northern Hemisphere. The scientific literature dealing with basic substances is relatively limited but increasing in recent years (Figure 2), and there is poor information about the effectiveness in field trials of basic substances toward pests and pathogens.
Figure 2

Number of documents available on Scopus through searches with keywords ‘basic substances’ in ‘Article title, Abstract, and Keywords’ (histograms) or in ‘All fields’ (linear) published over the last 10 years (Source: Scopus, https://www.scopus.com, accessed on 11 May 2022).

In the last decade, MRLs for pesticides with agricultural trade are becoming important. In the EU, there are increasing requirements from retailers to their suppliers to provide fruits and vegetables with an amount of pesticide residue below the MRLs (Table 5).
Table 5

Examples of requests from the retailer of the amount of the Maximum Residue Level (MRL) and Acute reference doses (ARfD).

RetailerMax. %MRL/ActiveSubstanceMax.Sum %MRL/SampleMax. %ARfD/ActiveSubstanceMax. Sum %ARfD/SampleMax.Number of ActiveSubstances/Samples
ALDI/HOFER 70%80%70%80%3–5
ALBERT HEIJN 50%-50%--
ASDA 80%----
BILLA 100%-100%--
DOHLA -70%-70%3–5
EDEKA 70%-100%-5
EDEKA OWN BRANDS50%-70%-5
GLOBUS 70%-70%100%5
LIDL 33.3%80%100%-5
KAUFLAND 33.3%80%50%50%5
NORMA -70%-70%5
METRO 50%80%70%100%5
MIGROS ----6
NETTO 70%-100%-5
REWE 50%100%70%100%5
REWE OWN BRANDS50%100%50%-5
TEGUT 70%-70%-Max. 4 (>0.01 mg/kg)
TENGEL MANN 70%150%70%100%-
The substances tested during Casdar programs ‘4P’, ‘Carie’, ‘Sweet’, ‘HE, Ecophyto ‘Usage’ and some from projects have already been described (Marchand, 2016) (Table 6). New projects are ongoing to develop extensions of use, describe better efficacy through better positioning during the season or to investigate compatibility/incompatibility with other biocontrol agents (i.e., reduce copper and macro-organisms). This is the ongoing work for Coperreplace, ABAPIC (ITAB), Vitinnova (UNIVPM), and Euphresco BasicS (Euphresco Network).
Table 6

Examples of the applications of the basic substances in research projects.

Substance NameUse(s)ProgramReference
Horsetail (Equisetum arvense L.) FungicideCasdar ‘4P’Coppereplace[24,25,26]
White willow bark (Salix cortex) FungicideCasdar ‘4P’[24,25]
Vinegar Seed treatmentCasdar ‘Carie’[27]; http://itab.asso.fr/programmes/carie-ble.php, accessed on 23 May 2022.
Mustard seed powder Seed treatment
Sucrose ElicitorEcophyto ‘Usage’ and Casdar ‘Sweet’, ABAPIC[28]; https://ecophytopic.fr/cuivre-viticulture/proteger/micro-doses-de-sucre, accessed on 23 May 2022.[29]; https://ecophytopic.fr/sites/default/files/USAGE.pdf, accessed on 23 May 2022.
Fructose Elicitor
Lecithin FungicideCasdar ‘HE’[30]; https://ecophytopic.fr/recherche-innovation/proteger/projet-he, accessed on 23 May 2022.
Talc Fungicideout of program[31]
Whey Fungicide[32]
Di-ammonium phosphate (DAP) Attractant[33]; https://ecophytopic.fr/pic/proteger/proteger-ses-oliviers-de-la-mouches-en-limitant-les-traitements, accessed on 23 May 2022.
Calcium hydroxide Fungicide[34]; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279636728_The_post-infection_activity_of_hydrated_lime_against_conidia_of_Venturia_inaequalis, accessed on 23 May 2022.
Chitosan hydrochloride FungicideVitinnova[35]; www.vitinnova.it/en, accessed on 23 May 2022.
Euphresco BasicS[16]; https://www.researchgate.net/project/EUPHRESCO-Basic-substances-as-an-environmentally-friendly-alternative-to-synthetic-pesticides-for-plant-protection-BasicS, accessed on 23 May 2022.
PRIMA StopMedWaste[36]; www.stopmedwaste.eu, accessed on 23 May 2022.
ZeroSprechi[37]; www.zerosprechi.info/en/zerosprechi, accessed on 23 May 2022.
CleanSeed[38]; https://www.cleanseed.it/en/cleanseed-2/, accessed on 23 May 2022.

Each use of plant extracts and natural products, such as decoctions, herbal teas, or aqueous solutions, have been defined and tested in the field or identified from the literature then controlled or cross-referenced with producer surveys. Whenever water is mentioned in these tests, it is either natural spring water or rainwater. Each basic substance preparation is described in Section 2.5 of Basic substances applications in EU 2012. The evaluation process of the basic substance application is getting longer, and legal delays fixed by EC are not consistently respected. The evaluation process lasts an average of 19 months (Supplementary Table S1 and Figure S1), while the legal maximum delay is fixed at 18 months until basic substance application admissibility. Even not considering admissibility evaluation delays that are considered outside of the evaluation process, this process becomes longer from year to year, resulting in a delay in availability of additional basic substances.

3. Discussion

The use of pesticides, if not appropriate, may lead to problems like contamination of the water, potential damage to sensitive species (e.g., bees), contamination of final food products and water, with up to 90% of applied pesticides not reaching the target species, and, also, because of the development of resistant pathogens and pests [39]. A high number of PPPs were not reauthorized (or companies did not provide the dossier for the reregistration of products out of patent, due to high costs and uncertain benefits) and leaves a gap for several uses. It is important that authorities provide a good number of options to growers to protect their crops, since farmers cannot stand without PPPs for certain crops and uses, and there is an increasing need, because a lot of substance prohibition dates are fixed without substitution mean. Just as an example, this occurred with the fungicide mancozeb in January 2022 and a risk to occur in 2025 with copper, that is fundamental for plant protection in organic agriculture and a good support to prevent the appearing of resistant isolates in IPM. In France, the use of neonicotinoids, known as dangerous insecticides, is extended when there is no other way to preserve crops and productivity. With Farm to Fork Strategy of the European Green Deal, the European Commission is committed to reduce the use of the most dangerous synthetic pesticides of 50% and achieve at least 25% of the EU agricultural land under organic farming by 2030, although the decrease of synthetic pesticides is already ongoing. These trends, together with the implementation of sustainable development goals—SDGs by the United Nations—are demanding for new alternatives, such as basic substances, to tackle some of these issues. To achieve these goals, more research is needed to advance the design of better farming systems and the development of alternatives to synthetic pesticides and to copper formulations. Three decades ago, the concept of MRLs was poorly known, while, in recent years, MRLs for pesticides arguably have become the first action growers should consider in their pest management decisions [40]. Trying to interpret consumer demands, retailers are increasingly required to reduce pesticide residues even more than the allowed thresholds (MRLs), which are defined considering a wide security factor (e.g., ×100) using the presence of pesticide residues as a factor of competition among companies. Requests from the retailers and consumer to reduce synthetic pesticide residues from fresh produce even more than the allowed threshold, such that the rules defined by the public administration have become more limiting for farmers in terms of the active ingredients allowed and MRLs [40,41]. The reduction of the presence of fungicide residues well beyond MRL may allow the pathogen to develop after harvest, resulting food loss and waste along the value chain. These developments have driven the search for alternative management strategies that are effective and not reliant just on conventional fungicide applications [5,42,43]. European regulation followed and carried this development with the introduction of new classes of phytosanitary products, in particular basic substances, but also new laws and simplification accompanied by the reduction of registration processes of low-risk substances, theoretically. Basic substances are approved for use in the EU and are products that are already sold for certain purposes, e.g., as a foodstuff or a cosmetic. Basic substances may be of major importance in biocontrol and several advantages can explain it. Basic substance regulatory application is simplified [44] and particularly reduced compared to other substances, therefore representing a lower cost to applicant (around 35-40 kEuro for approval of a basic substance and overall around 45 kEuro including approval for organic agriculture), thanks to the fact that these substances are already on the market for another purpose than plant protection, and safety is not an issue to be demonstrated. These substances are good alternatives available today and wide targets. Basic substances can be used in the crop protection as fungicide, bactericide, insecticide, etc., and most of them are allowed in organic production [18,45,46,47]. The basic substances are in order from 2014, when was the first approved application of Equisetum arvense L., chitosan hydrochloride, and sucrose until 2022, when a second chitosan formulation was approved. In some conditions basic substances were already at farm level, with a level of pest management not different than the standard. Just as example, chitosan hydrochloride was also applied in commercial conditions, in the field, and postharvest treatments, and several studies proved that it could have an effectiveness comparable to some commercial PPPs [42,48]. Basic substances, probably less efficient and practical to use than other active substances authorized as PPPs, are known and used by producers since decades as substitution means and have already demonstrated their effectiveness. Basic substances were the perfect tool to provide to producers as known, easy-to-use, less dangerous, and environmentally more respectful. Today, there is a consensus among a wide range of stakeholders that synthetic pesticide used need to be gradually reduced to a level that is effectively required to ensure crop production and that risks of pesticide application should be reduced as far as possible. Basic substances are good alternatives available today in our hands. The use of these substances needs to be integrated in vocational education, training, and technical advice to farmers. Further research around the world on the efficacy of basic substances may prove in the future that these substances can replace pesticides without reducing yields or increasing production costs. To develop the uses and the field trials we listed here the main usages of basic substances. However, rates included in the approval schedule may not produce a significant containment of diseases and pests in specific pathosystems. Just as example, the advised application rate of chitosan hydrochloride is between 100 and 800 g/ha, equal to a concentration ranging among 0.05 and 0.2% with 200–400 L/ha, while trials in commercial vineyards found a good effectiveness delivering the chitosan hydrochloride, with a concentration of at least 0.5% and with a volume of at least 500 L/ha [34,49]. For this reasons, large-scale trials are very important to demonstrate the effectiveness toward pathogens and pests in different environments and growing contexts, and a flexibility could be required in suggested dosages to avoid that applying basic substances at suggested rated can lead to a lack of or poor effectiveness and then the disaffection of users toward these innovative compounds, and this is in contrast with the requirements of finding solutions alternatives to the application of synthetic pesticides keeping the standard quality and quantity of the production, which is one of the drivers of the Farm-to=Fork Strategy of European Green Deal. Moreover, the diluent allowed for basic substance, up to now concretely restricted to water, may be another substance. In this case, vinegar has just been authorized for chitosan. Finally, increasing the demand from growers and competition among companies can lead to the reduction of costs of the treatments that, nowadays, are often higher than standard treatments.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Collection of Data

A systematic literature search from 2009 to 2021 was performed using the database of Scopus with the keywords ‘basic substance’ and ‘basic substances’. In the EU, several retailers request an amount of pesticide residue on fruit and vegetables below the legal limit (MRL), and data on some protocols were collected through companies and plant doctors.

4.2. Legislation

Basic substance criteria are defined by article 23 of Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009, cited in introduction. By way of derogation from Article 4 of this regulation, a basic substance is approved when all relevant evaluations conducted in accordance with other Community legislation, governing other uses of this substance, showing that it has neither an immediate or delayed harmful effect on human or animal health nor any unacceptable influence on the environment. Active substances that could be defined as ‘foodstuff’ are intrinsically considered as basic substances, following Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002. Basic substances shall be approved in accordance with paragraphs 2–6 of regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 and by way of derogation from Article 5, the approval shall be for an unlimited period. By way of derogation from Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009, an application for approval of a basic substance can be made by a Member State or any interested party. At the end of the evaluation process, basic substances shall be listed separately in the Regulation referred to in Article 13(4). The Commission may review the approval of an active substance at any time. It may take into account the request of a Member State to review the approval. Article 28 of Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009 set the absence of marketing authorizations and usages allowance for basic substances. However, no formal authorization is required as long as the product contains exclusively basic substances (see corresponding Review Report) [49,50].

4.3. Approval Process

The approval process of a basic substance starts with a request for approval (Figure 3). The applicant estimates if the substance concerned fulfil all criteria of basic substances category and then complete the BSAT, in English, to obtain a Basic Substance Application. Several guidance documents, such as the official SANCO guide or the teaching guide from the ITAB, have been published to help applicants to build basic substance application correctly [50]. For the transmission of the basic substance application, once completed, the file should be sent to the DGSanté, representing the European Commission (EC). The Basic Substance Application can firstly be sent to national competent authorities for a preassessment and possibly a support. For example, in France, the Basic Substance Application can be sent to the Ministry of Agriculture (DGAl in France), who can ask for the National Authority’ opinion and then transfer the file to the EC. Upon receipt of the Basic Substance Application, EC implements the approval procedure detailed in Article 23 of Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009. Admissibility may be pronounced at any time, directly or after questions from DGSanté. It constitutes the real start of the application (black line in Figure 3). The first stage is based on the Basic Substance Application evaluation by Member States and EFSA as scientific assistance leading to a request for corrections and questions. The request is sent to the applicant, and his answers shall be sent back within one month to the EFSA. For decision and approval, at the end of the basic substance application evaluation, EFSA will deliver its opinion, append a comment, and send the basic substance application to the DG Health within 3 months for the final vote of Member States in the PAFF committee (Figure 3). Approval, if accorded, is effective at the date of the publication of an implementing Regulation modifying Regulation (EU) No. 540/2011 [8].
Figure 3

Approval process and timeline of a Basic Substance Application (BSA).

The period of examination of the basic substance application is established in paragraph 1 of article 37 of Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009. It is said: ‘The Member State examining the application shall decide within 12 months of receiving it whether the requirements for authorization are met. Where the Member State needs additional information, it shall set a period for the applicant to supply it. In that case, the 12-month period shall be extended by the additional period granted by the Member State. That additional period shall be a maximum of 6 months and shall cease at the moment when the additional information is received by the Member State. Where at the end of that period the applicant has not submitted the missing elements, the Member State shall inform the applicant that the application is inadmissible.’ [10]. The maximum delay is therefore set at 18 months. However, although clearly defined, these steps are not so straightforward in many cases [51].

4.4. Extension of Uses Process

The request for an extension is somehow similar, except the need of support from corresponding agricultural sectors at the deposit step. Some extensions were voted after submission, some others were granted with admissibility and voted rapidly after; some later were following the full approval pathway, including admissibility, evaluation, outcome, full vote at PAFF Committee (appearance in Part A (lecture, discussion), C (proposal) and B (effective vote)). This latter process sometimes takes the same amount of time compared to a new approval, which is considered very excessive by the applicants, having an approved substance at the beginning of their request and only asking for one line sometimes in the Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) table.

4.5. Regulation Analysis

The EU Pesticides Database [52] was used to detect basic substances and their status (approved, nonapproved, pending, and modifications of Review Reports). Corresponding linked Implementing Regulations [20] attached to each active substance were found using the same method and cross-verified with Implementing Regulation (EU) 540/2011. The EU law database for Eur-Lex was also used to track each Implementing Regulation publication. Furthermore, EFSA documents were also compiled to extract decisions supportive analyses.

5. Conclusions

Searching for alternative products for crop protection is an important strategy for promoting more sustainable food systems. The use of basic substances is in line with the restriction on the application of chemical PPPs and the principles of the European Green Deal and SDGs, mostly renewables and with no MRL. There is relatively poor information about the effectiveness of basic substances as compared to synthetic pesticides and biological PPPs. A higher testing and validation of the use of basic substances as a phytosanitary measure can lead to further reduction of application of synthetic pesticides. In addition, searching for the most effective dosage of the basic substance is critical and an important question for phytosanitary consultants (the plant doctors that are opinion leaders in application of innovations in pest management), growers, stakeholder, and companies to avoid that their application at the recommended dose can lead to a lack of or poor effectiveness of these substances. For this reason, a flexibility might be required in the suggested dosage of basic substances approved to ensure good maintenance of the quality and quantity of production, which is one of the keys of the Farm to Fork Strategy of the European Green Deal. Moreover, a defined timeline for approval is basilar to have the chance to increase the number of basic substances available for growers, the scientific community, and the whole agricultural sector, with final benefits for the consumers.

6. Patents

All Implementing Regulations may be considered as patents but with free exploitation, since no Marketing Authorizations are needed for basic substances.
  13 in total

1.  Basic substances: an opportunity for approval of low-concern substances under EU pesticide regulation.

Authors:  Patrice A Marchand
Journal:  Pest Manag Sci       Date:  2015-03-21       Impact factor: 4.845

2.  The global burden of pathogens and pests on major food crops.

Authors:  Serge Savary; Laetitia Willocquet; Sarah Jane Pethybridge; Paul Esker; Neil McRoberts; Andy Nelson
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2019-02-04       Impact factor: 15.460

3.  Problems of implementing compulsory integrated pest management.

Authors:  Ewa Matyjaszczyk
Journal:  Pest Manag Sci       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 4.845

4.  Evolution of the biocontrol active substances in the framework of the European Pesticide Regulation (EC) No. 1107/2009.

Authors:  Diane C Robin; Patrice A Marchand
Journal:  Pest Manag Sci       Date:  2018-10-19       Impact factor: 4.845

5.  Plant protection means used in organic farming throughout the European Union.

Authors:  Ewa Matyjaszczyk
Journal:  Pest Manag Sci       Date:  2017-12-19       Impact factor: 4.845

6.  Use of Chitosan and Other Natural Compounds Alone or in Different Strategies with Copper Hydroxide for Control of Grapevine Downy Mildew.

Authors:  Gianfranco Romanazzi; Valeria Mancini; Renzo Foglia; Diego Marcolini; Mojtaba Kavari; Simone Piancatelli
Journal:  Plant Dis       Date:  2021-11-23       Impact factor: 4.438

Review 7.  Chitosan, a Biopolymer With Triple Action on Postharvest Decay of Fruit and Vegetables: Eliciting, Antimicrobial and Film-Forming Properties.

Authors:  Gianfranco Romanazzi; Erica Feliziani; Dharini Sivakumar
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2018-12-04       Impact factor: 5.640

8.  Pesticide Residues and Risk Assessment from Monitoring Programs in the Largest Production Area of Leafy Vegetables in South Korea: A 15-Year Study.

Authors:  Duck Woong Park; Yong Shik Yang; Yeong-Un Lee; Sue Ji Han; Hye Jin Kim; Sun-Hee Kim; Jong Pil Kim; Sun Ju Cho; Davin Lee; Nanju Song; Yujin Han; Hyo Hee Kim; Bae-Sik Cho; Jae Keun Chung; Ae Gyeong Kim
Journal:  Foods       Date:  2021-02-15

Review 9.  Considerations and Regulatory Approaches in the USA and in the EU for dsRNA-Based Externally Applied Pesticides for Plant Protection.

Authors:  Antje Dietz-Pfeilstetter; Mike Mendelsohn; Achim Gathmann; Dominik Klinkenbuß
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2021-06-11       Impact factor: 5.753

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.