According to SRUC’s Professor Fiona Burnett, the direction of travel is shifting disease control from being input intensive with one-size-fits-all spray programmes, to knowledge intensive with clever tailoring to the context and field or sub-field.

“The drive and desire to be less reliant on pesticides and to manage disease in more integrated and regenerative ways are very real. New tools and techniques keep being added and we’re learning more and more each season,” she says.

New disease threats

For Fiona, the concern is disease burden as new threats, as well as new strains of existing pathogens, continue to mount. “Fungicide-resistant strains of pathogens such as potato blight and septoria will remain a challenge. Our move to more integrated crop practices brings many benefits, but we also have to be aware that with new approaches, we’ll see greater diversity. For example, with more grass in arable settings we’ll experience more issues like ergot.

“And as the climate changes, this brings additional threats – black stem rust in wheat is just one example of a pathogen we think is possible under warmer conditions.”

Digital technologies

In addition to IPM tools such as improved varieties and more elicitor and biological-type products, Fiona says without question, new digital technologies, imaging and artificial intelligence will be transformational.

“Things that seemed like science fiction just a couple of years ago are now out there being used – for instance, image recognition of groundkeepers which can cut spray inputs across a whole field down to a tiny fraction of what they were before.

“The ability to spot-treat diseases is next, but the way we use data to inform our management decisions and to evidence our practices will also be a game changer. We’re right to be cautious – as concerns around digital passports shows – but better use of data could lighten the load of assurance scheme inspections, better evidence our good practices and reassure buyers if we keep control and get this right.”

Meeting in the middle

Fiona believes it’s time to move away from the current binary approach to certain technologies. “The likes of gene editing remains contentious with strong opinions on both sides; pesticides are similar. If we could have more of a meeting in the middle, we could really change mindsets across the board.

“We absolutely can’t use these innovative solutions to prop up otherwise unsustainable production methods, but carefully integrated into lower input and regenerative systems, they could be key in getting the balance right between yield and environmental gains.”

Applied research

A broader issue for Fiona is that research science and applied practice are drifting apart. “Academics with fantastic innovations are rewarded for scientific papers but not so much for getting out and about in practice. This means there’s a real opportunity for people who are prepared to fill that connected middle ground,” she adds.

“Really build and use your networks to actively seek out and make contacts away from your ‘home crowd’. Be as supportive and collaborative as you can and those connections will support and collaborate in return.

“That massively increases your chances of doing relevant and impactful work and of it really making a difference.”

This article stems from CPM’s Arable Farming 2050 feature, which was written to celebrate the magazine’s 25th anniversary.