1 Introduction

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a holistic and sustainable approach to pest control that combines multiple strategies to minimize the use of chemical pesticides and reduce their negative impacts on the environment and human health (Alam et al., 2016). IPM integrates biological, cultural, physical, and chemical tools to manage pest populations at acceptable levels while promoting ecological balance and economic viability (Dhakal and Poudel, 2020). This approach is particularly crucial in rice production, where pests pose significant threats to yield and quality (Hajjar et al., 2023).

Understanding insect behavior is fundamental to the success of IPM strategies. Insects exhibit various behaviors that influence their interactions with crops, natural enemies, and the environment (Matteson, 2000). These behaviors include feeding, mating, oviposition, and movement patterns, which can be exploited to develop targeted and effective pest management tactics (Green et al., 2020).

For instance, knowledge of insect behavior can inform the timing and placement of interventions such as pheromone traps, biological control agents, and habitat manipulation to enhance the effectiveness of IPM programs (Lundin et al., 2021). Additionally, understanding the evolutionary dynamics of pest populations can help in designing strategies that delay resistance development and maintain the efficacy of control measures (Fahad et al., 2021).

This study explores the implications of insect behavior on IPM strategies for rice, synthesizes current knowledge on the behavioral ecology of rice pests and their natural enemies, and identifies how this knowledge can be applied to improve IPM practices. The scope includes an examination of various IPM components such as biological control, cultural practices, and chemical interventions, with a focus on how insect behavior can be leveraged to enhance their effectiveness.

2 Behavioral Ecology of Rice Pests

2.1 Key rice pest species and their behavioral patterns

Rice production is significantly impacted by various insect pests, including rice planthoppers, stem borers, and leaf folders (Li et al., 2020). These pests exhibit distinct behavioral patterns that influence their management. For instance, rice planthoppers are known for their rapid population growth and ability to develop resistance to chemical insecticides, making them particularly challenging to control. Stem borers, on the other hand, cause damage by boring into the stems of rice plants, which can lead to significant yield losses. Understanding these behavioral patterns is crucial for developing effective integrated pest management (IPM) strategies (Du et al., 2020).

2.2 Feeding behavior and host selection

The feeding behavior and host selection of rice pests are critical factors in their management. Many rice pests, such as planthoppers and stem borers, have specific feeding habits that make them particularly damaging. Planthoppers feed on the phloem sap of rice plants, which can lead to the transmission of plant viruses and subsequent plant diseases. Stem borers, by boring into the plant stems, disrupt the vascular system of the rice plants, leading to reduced nutrient and water transport. These feeding behaviors necessitate targeted IPM strategies that can effectively mitigate their impact.

2.3 Reproductive behavior and population dynamics

The reproductive behavior and population dynamics of rice pests are key considerations in IPM. For example, the high reproductive rate of planthoppers allows them to quickly establish large populations, which can overwhelm rice fields if not properly managed. Similarly, the population dynamics of stem borers are influenced by their life cycle, which includes multiple generations per year, leading to continuous pressure on rice crops. Effective IPM strategies must account for these reproductive behaviors to prevent pest outbreaks and maintain sustainable rice production (Lou et al., 2013).

2.4 Dispersal and migration patterns

Dispersal and migration patterns of rice pests play a significant role in their management. Many rice pests, such as planthoppers, exhibit migratory behavior, which allows them to spread rapidly across large areas. This migration can lead to the introduction of pests into new regions, complicating management efforts. Additionally, the movement of pests within and between rice fields can influence the effectiveness of control measures. For instance, the movement of pests to untreated areas can lead to re-infestation and reduced efficacy of IPM strategies. Understanding these dispersal and migration patterns is essential for developing comprehensive IPM programs that can effectively manage rice pest populations. By integrating knowledge of the behavioral ecology of rice pests, including their key species, feeding behavior, reproductive behavior, and dispersal patterns, IPM strategies can be more effectively tailored to mitigate the impact of these pests on rice production. This holistic approach is essential for achieving sustainable and environmentally friendly pest management in rice agro-ecosystems (Settle et al., 1996).

3 Role of Insect Behavior in Pest Population Regulation

3.1 Behavioral responses to environmental cues

Insect pests exhibit a range of behavioral responses to environmental cues, which play a crucial role in pest population regulation. For instance, herbivorous insects use chemical cues, such as volatiles and contact cues, to locate and select their host plants. These responses are highly plastic and can vary based on the insect's physiological state, previous experiences, and environmental conditions (Anton and Cortesero, 2022). Understanding these behavioral responses is essential for developing environmentally acceptable pest control methods that manipulate insect behavior to protect crops effectively.

Anton and Cortesero (2022) found that chemosensory plasticity involves a multi-level integration process influencing behavioral outputs. Signal detection by chemosensory proteins such as odorant receptors (ORs) and gustatory receptors (GRs) leads to receptor neuron activation. This signal is further processed by central neurons, where intra- and inter-modal signal integration occurs. Importantly, the final behavioral output is modulated by various factors including chemosensory experience, physiological state, sex, and morphology. These factors influence each stage of the process, from initial signal detection to central neuron responses, demonstrating the complexity of sensory processing and its adaptive capabilities. This integrative framework highlights how external stimuli and internal states interact to drive context-dependent behaviors in organisms.

3.2 Insect-plant interactions: behavioral adaptations to host defenses

Insect-plant interactions are characterized by complex behavioral adaptations that pests develop to overcome host plant defenses. For example, the brown planthopper and the rice striped stem borer exhibit cooperative herbivory, where their joint infestation of rice plants suppresses the plant's defensive mechanisms, such as the production of proteinase inhibitors. This cooperation not only improves plant quality for the pests but also reduces the risk of egg parasitism, highlighting the sophisticated behavioral adaptations that pests evolve to exploit their host plants. Additionally, small RNAs (sRNAs) play a significant role in mediating these interactions by regulating gene expression in both the plant and the insect, further influencing pest behavior and host plant defenses (Liu et al., 2021).

3.3 Social behavior and communication among rice pests

Social behavior and communication among rice pests are critical factors in their population dynamics and pest management. For instance, the use of push-pull strategies in integrated pest management (IPM) leverages the social behavior of pests by manipulating their movement and aggregation patterns. These strategies involve using stimuli to repel pests from the protected resource (push) while attracting them to a trap or less critical area (pull), thereby reducing pest populations in the target area. Such behavioral manipulation techniques are essential for reducing pesticide use and promoting sustainable pest management practices (Cook et al., 2007).

3.4 Predator avoidance and anti-predator strategies

Predator avoidance and anti-predator strategies are vital for the survival and population regulation of insect pests. In tropical Asian irrigated rice systems, the presence of abundant natural enemies often prevents significant pest problems. However, unnecessary insecticide use can disrupt this natural balance, emphasizing the need for IPM education and training to empower farmers to manage their ecosystems sustainably. Additionally, the cooperative behavior between the brown planthopper and the rice striped stem borer, which reduces parasitoid attraction, exemplifies how pests can evolve strategies to evade natural enemies and enhance their survival. Understanding these anti-predator strategies is crucial for developing effective biological control methods that exploit the vulnerabilities of pest populations. By integrating knowledge of insect behavior into IPM strategies, it is possible to develop more effective and sustainable approaches to pest management in rice production systems (Jing et al., 2023).

4 Incorporating Behavioral Insights into IPM Strategies

4.1 Manipulating insect behavior for pest control

Manipulating insect behavior is a cornerstone of modern Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies. By understanding and leveraging the natural behaviors of pests, it is possible to develop more effective and environmentally friendly pest control methods. For instance, semiochemicals, which are chemicals that convey information between organisms, can be used to manipulate pest behavior. These chemicals can be deployed to disrupt mating patterns, thereby reducing pest populations over time. Additionally, mathematical models have been developed to study the impact of mating disruption using artificial pheromones, which confuse male insects and reduce their mating opportunities, leading to a decline in population size (Morrison et al., 2021).

4.2 Behavioral disruptions through pheromone traps and repellents

Pheromone traps and repellents are effective tools for disrupting the behavior of insect pests. These methods involve the use of synthetic pheromones to lure pests into traps or to repel them from certain areas. For example, pheromone traps can be used to capture male insects, thereby preventing them from mating and reducing the overall pest population. This approach has been particularly successful in managing stored product insects, where semiochemicals are used to protect commodities by manipulating pest behavior. The effectiveness of these traps and repellents can be enhanced by ensuring that the pheromones used are competitive with natural food cues and potent at low concentrations.

4.3 Use of behavioral modifications in biocontrol approaches

Behavioral modifications can also be integrated into biological control approaches to enhance their effectiveness. For instance, the presence of natural enemies in rice paddies can be leveraged to maintain pest populations at manageable levels. Educating farmers on the importance of preserving these natural enemies and discouraging unnecessary insecticide use is crucial for maintaining ecological balance. Additionally, community-based IPM activities that emphasize farmer training and participatory research can lead to more sustainable pest management practices. By incorporating behavioral insights into biocontrol strategies, it is possible to develop more holistic and effective IPM programs.

4.4 Enhancing IPM with behavioral data integration

Integrating behavioral data into IPM strategies can significantly enhance their effectiveness. Continuous research and training on IPM technologies are essential for creating sustainable rice agroecosystems. By understanding the behavior of pests and their interactions with the environment, it is possible to develop more targeted and efficient pest management strategies. For example, the use of semiochemicals in post-harvest IPM programs can be optimized by incorporating data on pest behavior and environmental factors. This approach not only improves the effectiveness of IPM strategies but also minimizes the environmental impact of pest control measures. In conclusion, incorporating behavioral insights into IPM strategies offers a promising avenue for developing more effective and sustainable pest management practices. By leveraging the natural behaviors of pests and integrating behavioral data into IPM programs, it is possible to achieve better control of pest populations while minimizing environmental risks (Anguelov et al., 2016).

5 Case Study

5.1 Location and context of the case study

The case study focuses on the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS), which includes southwestern China, Laos, and Myanmar. This region is characterized by its reliance on rice as a staple crop, making it crucial for both national stability and economic progress. The Integrated Pest Management (IPM) initiative in this area was funded by the European Union (EU) and involved collaboration between local and international partners to develop sustainable and environmentally friendly pest management strategies.

5.2 Key pest species in the region

The primary pest species targeted in this case study were rice stem borers, which are significant pests in rice production systems. The project specifically focused on the biological control of these pests using Trichogramma spp., including Trichogramma chilonis and T. japonicus, which were selected based on their effectiveness in field surveys and laboratory studies (Radchenko et al., 2022).

5.3 Application of behavioral-based IPM strategies

The IPM strategy implemented in the GMS included the establishment of 12 Trichogramma rearing facilities (TRFs), with four facilities in each participating country. These facilities were crucial for the mass production and release of Trichogramma spp. to control rice stem borers. The project also incorporated cultural and biological control practices, emphasizing the importance of reducing insecticide applications and promoting natural enemy abundance (Kapoor et al., 2020).

5.4 Results and outcomes from the case study

The implementation of the IPM strategy in the GMS led to several positive outcomes. Rice yields increased by 2-10%, and there was a notable rise in the abundance of natural enemies, such as spiders, which doubled in number. Additionally, the number of insecticide applications was reduced by 1.5 on average. The project also included a capacity-building program that trained approximately 50 IPM trainers and 6,400 rice farmers, promoting the adoption of IPM practices (Babendreier et al., 2020).

Babendreier et al. (2020) found that the establishment of Trichogramma rearing facilities (TRFs) plays a key role in advancing Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies, particularly in rice farming. The rearing of Trichogramma, a parasitic wasp, offers an eco-friendly biological control mechanism by targeting pest eggs, reducing the reliance on chemical pesticides. Collaboration among project teams and local stakeholders was crucial for developing a sustainable IPM framework. Regular meetings facilitated knowledge exchange and the development of local capacities for Trichogramma production. The project also demonstrated the importance of locally constructed rearing equipment to ensure the scalability and adaptability of the IPM practices. This approach underscores how grassroots efforts and technical innovations can synergize to foster agricultural sustainability and pest management innovation.

5.5 Lessons learned and future recommendations

The case study in the GMS highlights the potential success of advanced biological control-based IPM systems. Key lessons learned include the importance of local and international collaboration, the effectiveness of biological control agents like Trichogramma spp., and the benefits of reducing chemical pesticide use. Future recommendations include the need for continuous research and training on IPM technologies, as well as the adaptation of these strategies to other regions and crops to enhance agricultural sustainability (Fahad et al., 2021).

6 Challenges and Limitations in Applying Behavioral Strategies in IPM

6.1 Unpredictability of behavioral responses

One of the primary challenges in applying behavioral strategies in Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is the unpredictability of insect behavioral responses. Insects may not always respond consistently to behavioral cues such as semiochemicals, which are used to manipulate pest behavior. For instance, the effectiveness of semiochemicals can be compromised by the presence of competing food cues, which can attract pests away from the intended traps or deterrents. Additionally, the diverse insect assemblages in agricultural settings can lead to varied responses, making it difficult to predict and manage pest behavior effectively (Veres et al., 2020).

6.2 Challenges in field implementation

Implementing behavioral strategies in the field presents several practical challenges. One significant issue is the need for extensive farmer education and training to ensure proper application of IPM techniques (Mishra et al., 2022). Traditional extension systems, such as the Training and Visit (TandV) system, have often failed to achieve widespread adoption of IPM practices due to their top-down approach. Instead, more participatory methods, such as farmer field schools and community IPM activities, have shown greater success but require substantial investment in time and resources. Additionally, the physical deployment of behavioral tools, such as pheromone traps, can be labor-intensive and may not be feasible for all farmers, particularly in resource-limited settings (Douris et al., 2020).

6.3 Integration with other IPM components

Integrating behavioral strategies with other components of IPM, such as biological control and chemical treatments, poses another set of challenges (Haliru et al., 2020). For example, the use of semiochemicals for mating disruption must be carefully coordinated with the timing of biological control releases to avoid interference. Moreover, the economic threshold levels (ETL) for insecticide application must be accurately determined to ensure that chemical treatments are only used when absolutely necessary, thereby preserving the effectiveness of behavioral and biological controls.

The complexity of managing multiple IPM components simultaneously can be daunting for farmers, necessitating ongoing research and support to develop more streamlined and user-friendly IPM systems. In summary, while behavioral strategies offer promising avenues for sustainable pest management in rice, their application is fraught with challenges related to the unpredictability of insect behavior, practical difficulties in field implementation, and the need for seamless integration with other IPM components. Addressing these challenges will require a concerted effort from researchers, extension workers, and farmers alike (Alam et al., 2016).

7 Future Perspectives

7.1 Advancing research on insect behavioral mechanisms

Understanding the intricate behaviors of insect pests is crucial for developing effective Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies. Future research should focus on the behavioral mechanisms of pests, such as their mating habits, feeding patterns, and interactions with natural enemies. For instance, the use of semiochemicals to manipulate pest behavior has shown promise in stored product insects, but its application in rice agro-ecosystems remains underexplored. Additionally, the role of natural enemies in pest control, as observed in tropical Asian irrigated rice, highlights the need for in-depth studies on predator-prey dynamics to enhance biological control methods. By advancing our knowledge of these behavioral mechanisms, we can develop more targeted and sustainable IPM strategies (Rezaei et al., 2020).

7.2 Potential technological innovations for behavior-based IPM

Technological innovations hold significant potential for enhancing behavior-based IPM strategies (Ramayya et al., 2021). The development of semiochemical-mediated tactics, such as mating disruption and attract-and-kill methods, can be further refined to improve their efficacy in rice pest management. Moreover, the establishment of Trichogramma spp. rearing facilities has demonstrated success in biological control, suggesting that similar technological advancements could be adapted for other pest species and regions. The integration of digital tools, such as remote sensing and precision agriculture technologies, can also provide real-time data on pest populations and environmental conditions, enabling more precise and timely interventions. These innovations can lead to more effective and environmentally friendly pest management solutions (Dash et al., 2020).

7.3 Policy implications and farmer adoption

The successful implementation of IPM strategies depends not only on technological advancements but also on policy support and farmer adoption (Horgan and Peñalver-Cruz, 2022). Policies that promote IPM education and training, such as the "farmer first" approach and community IPM activities, have proven effective in empowering farmers and reducing unnecessary insecticide use. Additionally, increasing farmers' knowledge about pest management and ecological conservation can significantly enhance their willingness to adopt IPM practices. Policymakers should focus on creating supportive environments that facilitate the dissemination of IPM knowledge and technologies. This includes providing financial incentives, establishing demonstration plots, and fostering collaborations between researchers, extension services, and farming communities. By addressing these policy and adoption challenges, we can ensure the widespread and sustainable use of IPM in rice production systems (Sun et al., 2022).

8 Concluding Remarks

The systematic review of the literature on the implications of insect behavior on Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategies for rice reveals several critical insights. Firstly, IPM has been identified as a crucial approach for sustainable rice production, effectively reducing pest populations while minimizing environmental impacts. Studies have demonstrated that IPM strategies, such as biological control using natural enemies like Trichogramma spp., can significantly enhance rice yields and reduce the need for chemical insecticides. Additionally, IPM practices, including egg mass collection, sweeping, and perching, have been shown to lower pest damage and improve yield components in rice agro-ecosystems. The importance of farmer education and participatory approaches in the successful implementation of IPM has also been highlighted, emphasizing the need for continuous training and community involvement.

The findings underscore the necessity for future IPM programs to focus on several key areas. Firstly, there is a need for the development and dissemination of bio-based IPM strategies that leverage natural control agents to replace or supplement synthetic pesticides. This approach not only ensures environmental safety but also promotes economic viability for farmers. Secondly, the integration of advanced biological control methods, such as the use of Trichogramma spp., should be expanded and adapted to different regions and crops to maximize their effectiveness. Furthermore, the success of IPM programs heavily relies on farmer education and participatory research. Therefore, future programs should prioritize the establishment of farmer field schools and community IPM activities to empower farmers with the knowledge and skills required for effective pest management. Lastly, continuous research and innovation in IPM technologies are essential to address emerging pest challenges and adapt to changing climatic conditions.

In conclusion, the adoption of IPM strategies in rice production is imperative for achieving sustainable agricultural practices that ensure food security and environmental conservation. The reviewed literature provides robust evidence that IPM not only enhances rice yields but also reduces the reliance on chemical insecticides, thereby mitigating their adverse environmental impacts. Future IPM programs should build on these findings by promoting bio-based control methods, enhancing farmer education, and fostering community participation. By doing so, we can create resilient rice agro-ecosystems capable of sustaining high productivity while preserving ecological balance. Continued research and innovation will be vital in refining IPM strategies and addressing the dynamic challenges posed by insect pests in rice production.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions that greatly improved the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

The author affirms that this research was conducted without any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

Alam M., Crump A., Haque M., Islam M., Hossain E., Hasan S., Hasan S., and Hossain M., 2016, Effects of integrated pest management on pest damage and yield components in a rice agro-ecosystem in the barisal region of bangladesh, Frontiers in Environmental Science, 4: 22.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2016.00022

Anguelov R., Dufourd C., and Dumont Y., 2016, Mathematical model for pest-insect control using mating disruption and trapping, Applied Mathematical Modelling, 52: 437-457.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2017.07.060

Anton S., and Cortesero A., 2022, Plasticity in chemical host plant recognition in herbivorous insects and its implication for pest control, Biology, 11(12): 1842.

https://doi.org/10.3390/biology11121842

Babendreier D., Hou M., Tang R., Zhang F., Vongsabouth T., Win K., Kang M., Peng H., Song K., Annamalai S., and Horgan F., 2020, Biological control of lepidopteran pests in rice: a multi-nation case study from Asia, Journal of Integrated Pest Management, 18: 11.

https://doi.org/10.1093/jipm/pmaa002

Cook S., Khan Z., and Pickett J., 2007, The use of push-pull strategies in integrated pest management, Annual Review of Entomology, 52: 375-400.

https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV.ENTO.52.110405.091407

Dash L., 2020, Breeding for resistance against leaf folder in rice Indian, Journal of Plant Protection, 8: 248-253.

https://doi.org/10.18782/2582-2845.8456

Dhakal A., and Poudel S., 2020, Integrated pest management (ipm) and its application in rice-a review, Institute of Agriculture and Animal Science, 11(2): 39-43.

https://doi.org/10.26480/rfna.02.2020.54.58

Douris V., Denecke S., Leeuwen T., Bass C., Nauen R., and Vontas J., 2020, Using CRISPR/Cas9 genome modification to understand the genetic basis of insecticide resistance: Drosophila and beyond, Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology, 167: 104595.

Du B., Chen R., Guo J., and He G., 2020, Current understanding of the genomic genetic and molecular control of insect resistance in rice, Molecular Breeding, 40: 10.

Fahad S., Saud S., Akhter A., Bajwa A., Hassan S., Battaglia M., Adnan M., Wahid F., Datta R., Babur E., Danish S., Zarei T., and Irshad I., 2021, Bio-based integrated pest management in rice: An agro-ecosystems friendly approach for agricultural sustainability, Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences, 20: 94-102.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2020.12.004

Green K., Stenberg J., and Lankinen Å., 2020, Making sense of integrated pest management (IPM) in the light of evolution, Evolutionary Applications, 13: 1791-1805.

https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.13067

Hajjar M., Ahmed N., Alhudaib K., and Ullah H., 2023, Integrated insect pest management techniques for rice, Sustainability, 15(5): 4499.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054499

Haliru B., Rafii M., Mazlan N., Ramlee S., Muhammad I., Akos I., Halidu J., Swaray S., and Bashir Y., 2020, Recent strategies for detection and improvement of brown planthopper resistance genes in rice: a study, Plants, 23: 9.

https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9091202

Horgan F., and Peñalver-Cruz A., 2022, Compatibility of Insecticides with rice resistance to planthoppers as influenced by the timing and frequency of applications, Insects, 13(2): 106.

https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13020106

Jing S., Xu J., Tang H., Li P., Yu B., and Liu Q., 2023, The roles of small RNAs in rice-brown planthopper interactions, Frontiers in Plant Science, 14: 1326726.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1326726

Kapoor D., Pujari M., and Singh M., 2020, Genomics and genetic engineering of rice for resistance to different insect pests Asian, Journal of Biological Sciences, 6: 107-127.

Li C., Zhang J., Ren Z., Xie R., Yin C., Ma W., Zhou F., Chen H., and Lin Y., 2020, Development of "multi-resistance rice" by assembly of herbicide insect and disease resistance genes with a transgene stacking system, Pest Management Science, 21(1): 306.

Liu Q., Hu X., Su S., Ning Y., Peng Y., Yè G., Lou Y., Turlings T., and Li Y., 2021, Cooperative herbivory between two important pests of rice, Nature Communications, 12(1): 6772.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-27021-0

Lou Y., Zhang G., Zhang W., Hu Y., and Zhang J., 2013, Biological control of rice insect pests in China, Biological Control, 67: 8-20.

https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOCONTROL.2013.06.011

Lundin O., Rundlöf M., Jonsson M., Bommarco R., and Williams N., 2021, Integrated pest and pollinator management-expanding the concept, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 19(5): 283-291.

https://doi.org/10.1002/FEE.2325

Matteson P., 2000, Insect pest management in tropical Asian irrigated rice, Annual Review of Entomology, 45: 549-574.

https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV.ENTO.45.1.549

Mishra A., Barik S., Pandit E., Yadav S., Das S., and Pradhan S., 2022, Genetics mechanisms and deployment of brown planthopper resistance genes in rice, Critical studys in Plant Sciences, 41(2): 91-127.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07352689.2022.2062906

Morrison W., Scully E., and Campbell J., 2021, Towards developing areawide semiochemical-mediated behaviorally-based integrated pest management programs for stored product insects, Pest Management Science, 77(6): 2667-2682.

 https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.6289

Radchenko E., Abdullaev R., and Anisimova I., 2022, Genetic resources of cereal crops for aphid resistance, Plants, 11: 19.

Ramayya P., Vinukonda V., Singh U., Alam S., Venkateshwarlu C., Vipparla A., Dixit S., Yadav S., Abbai R., Badri J., Padmakumari A., Singh V., and Kumar A., 2021, Marker-assisted forward and backcross breeding for improvement of elite Indian rice variety naveen for multiple biotic and abiotic stress tolerance, PLoS One, 16(9): e0256721.

Rezaei R., Safa L., and Ganjkhanloo M., 2020, Understanding farmers’ ecological conservation behavior regarding the use of integrated pest management- an application of the technology acceptance model, Global Ecology and Conservation, 22: e00941.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e00941

Settle W., Ariawan H., Astuti E., Cahyana W., Hakim A., Hindayana D., and Lestari A., 1996, Managing tropical rice pests through conservation of generalist natural enemies and alternative prey, Ecology, 77: 1975-1988.

https://doi.org/10.2307/2265694

Sun X., Lyu J., and Ge C., 2022, Knowledge and farmers’ adoption of green production technologies: an empirical study on ipm adoption intention in major indica-rice-producing areas in the anhui province of China, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(21): 14292.

https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114292

Veres A., Wyckhuys K., Kiss J., Tóth F., Burgio G., Pons X., Avilla C., Vidal S., Razinger J., Bažok R., Matyjaszczyk E., Milosavljević I., Le X., Zhou W., Zhu Z., Tarno H., Hadi B., Lundgren J., Bonmatin J., Lexmond M., Aebi A., Rauf A., and Furlan L., 2020, An update of the Worldwide Integrated Assessment (WIA) on systemic pesticides, part 4: alternatives in major cropping systems, Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 27: 29867-29899.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09279-x