Discover how start-ups revolutionize crop protection, offering greener solutions

In many jurisdictions, some active ingredients in chemical products have been restricted due to environmental and human health risks, making it all the more difficult to control insects, disease and weeds. More restriction is being fought in various EU countries and other locales, but it may come. In addition, resistance to many herbicides, insecticides and fungicides continues to grow.

Therefore, hearing that new biological technology platforms such as systemic metabolites and RNAi are enabling unprecedented innovation is no doubt very welcome among those in crop production around the world. And whilst the number of bio-products from these technologies is not yet large, a huge number are expected to launch in the next few years.

It’s exciting times. Crop farmers will be able to use these targeted products without the concerns for human and environmental health associated with chemical-based products. They will also be freed from residue concerns and have another weapon in hand in the fight to control resistant pests, disease and weeds.

But which of these products will make the biggest impact first?

Susceptible to resistance development

According to Dr. Pamela Marrone of the California-based Invasive Species Corporation, products with RNAi or peptides (see Part 1 of this story for more) will make the biggest impact first.

Marrone cautions however that both of these platforms are susceptible to resistance development, especially peptides. “They are both single-gene control methods and will have to be used in programs that prevent resistance management,” she explains.

“There are also challenges with manufacturing and delivery. Not all of the bio-products in development are standalone, and in any case, everything should be used in an integrated pest or disease control program.”

_{Text continues below picture}

Getting to market

Marrone explains that for any crop protection product to achieve commercial launch, efficacy and stability are obviously required. The cost must also be reasonable, she notes, but she adds that “the costs are coming down with RNAi and we’re also seeing this with peptides. That bodes well for these platforms in the near future.”

Marrone also provides another caveat. Even with efficacy, stability and reasonable cost, she stresses that winning bio-product start-ups need to offer something that provides a substantial leap forward in protection against pests, diseases or weeds, not just an incremental improvement over what’s already on the market.

“Once you’ve got efficacy established for your product in the field, and your product is different and you’re not just offering something that’s a little better than the current suite of products but a lot better – you will be a success,” she says.

Good planning

And success over the long term? In Marrone’s view, that requires good planning. “Resistance can develop and new diseases emerge,” she says. “There is always a new need in crop protection.”

This means that a start-up that markets a successful peptide or RNAi product should also endeavor to understand potential resistance mechanisms that may develop, and if possible have one or more products waiting in the wings that can take over if resistance to the first product develops.

Two marketing strategies

Some bio-products start-ups are partnering with big firms for R&D and marketing. Biotalys, for example, has partnered with Novozymes.

Others like Meristem and Pivot are achieving success alone. As Marrone explains, “they have developed their products independently and for marketing, they are going direct to farmers and getting early adopters to do demonstrations. They are doing the marketing themselves, focusing on demand creation at the farmer level.”

She adds that “farmers are very honest with each other about what works and what doesn’t and they are very active on social media, so word of mouth is important, too.”

_{Text continues below picture}

Detailed instructions

Marrone cautions bio-product start-ups, those working alone or partnering with bigger firms, to conduct their marketing efforts carefully in they want adoption to take off quickly.

“One of the things I hear all the time from growers is how bio-product companies are not specific enough about how to use the product,” she says. “In general, labels are very broad and growers need very specific information. Market research studies are showing that about half of growers are still generally unfamiliar with how to use biologicals and how these products work, so they need support.”

She stresses, “you need to tell growers the mode of action, how to apply, what to avoid, what you can tank mix the product with, and so on. You need a strong focus on providing that grower-level education. People have to feel comfortable using something new, but surveys do show that once growers are knowledgeable about a bio-product, they like them and use them, because they do work!”

EPA pathway

But before market launch comes regulatory approval for all these products – and has been the case for many other products inside and outside agriculture over decades and decades, all those in the bio-products industry around the world are watching the US carefully. US regulation, in general, leads that of most countries.

On that score, Marrone is very excited to share that the US regulatory approval process for bio-products appears to have diverted from that of traditional chemical products.

“The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seems to be treating them as a new category,” she reports. “The regulatory approval process for Micropep and Greenlight’s peptide and RNAi products seems to be setting this precedent, and it seems a new track for these products is being established. That’s very encouraging for start-ups and it’s very good for crop growers as well, as products should be able to come to market faster.”

Marrone further reports that the EPA’s Biopesticide Pollution Prevention Division (BPPD) currently has 71 new active ingredients they are reviewing, compared to 10 new active ingredients of synthetic chemicals at the Registration Division.

In a sign of good things to come, Marrone adds that “clearly, BPPD will need more resources to handle the exploding number of innovative new products they are reviewing.”