• Home
  • A. Nicholas E Birch
A. Nicholas E Birch

A. Nicholas E Birch
James Hutton Institute, Dundee. · Ecological Sciences

43.3
 · 
Applied Biology BSc (Hons) 1st, PhD Entomology
About
263
Research items
27,108
Reads
3,361
Citations
Introduction
I coordinate and manage several international and U.K. projects on Intergrated Pest Managment, aiming to translate underpinning strategic research into on-farm successes for sustainable crop protection.
Research Experience
Apr 2010 - Jul 2015
James Hutton Institute
Position
  • Senior Research Entomologist / IPM specialist
Jul 2007 - Jul 2010
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
Position
  • External PhD examiner
Description
  • PhD examiner and graduate course presenter (chemical ecology of brassicas).
Mar 2005 - Apr 2005
Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (EMBRAPA)
Position
  • Visiting consultant
Description
  • Environmental Risk assessment of GM crops.
Network
Cited By
Followers
Following
Research
Research items (263)
Article
Full-text available
The use of pesticides made it possible to increase yields, simplify cropping systems, and forego more complicated crop protection strategies. Over-reliance on chemical control, however, is associated with contamination of ecosystems and undesirable health effects. The future of crop production is now also threatened by emergence of pest resistance...
Article
Full-text available
The environmental impacts of genetically modified crops is still a controversial issue in Europe. The overall risk assessment framework has recently been reinforced by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and its implementation requires harmonized and efficient methodologies. The EU-funded research project AMIGA − Assessing and monitoring Impa...
Article
Full-text available
Drivers behind food security and crop protection issues are discussed in relation to food losses caused by pests. Pests globally consume food estimated to feed an additional one billion people. Key drivers include rapid human population increase, climate change, loss of beneficial on-farm biodiversity, reduction in per capita cropped land, water sh...
Chapter
Weeds, pests and diseases in Rubus plantations can have significant economic impact through their negative effects on yield and the costs of implementing control measures. Yield losses can be particularly high for certain pests and diseases, in some cases leading to total plantation losses. While the costs of weed control are rarely quantified, wee...
Project - BT-assement
Update
We are working closely with EU partners via papers arising from EU AMIGA project, which links to previous projects including EU ECOGEN and Swiss Gov. funded ERA research in developing countries (with Dr. R. Wheatley), including above and below ground interactions of GM crops with their receiving environments.
Article
Full-text available
In this opinion, the EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO Panel) assessed the three-event stack maize MON 87427 × MON 89034 × NK603 and its three subcombinations, independently of their origin. The GMO Panel has previously assessed the three single events combined to produce this three-event stack maize and did not identify safety conc...
Article
Full-text available
In this opinion, the GMO Panel assessed the five-event stack maize MON 87427 × MON 89034 ×1507 × MON 88017 × 59122 and its 25 subcombinations, independently of their origin. The GMO Panel has previously assessed the five single events combined to produce this five-event stack maize and 11 subcombinations of these events and did not identify safety...
Article
Full-text available
This document provides supplementary guidance on specific topics for the allergenicity risk assessment of genetically modified plants. In particular, it supplements general recommendations outlined in previous EFSA GMO Panel guidelines and Implementing Regulation (EU) No 503/2013. The topics addressed are non-IgE-mediated adverse immune reactions t...
Article
Full-text available
Following the submission of application EFSA-GMO-RX-003 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Pioneer Overseas Corporation and Dow AgroSciences LLC, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority (GMO Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the context of the renewal of...
Question
Hello, do you know of portable sensors that can quickly detect insect (aphid) fedding induced volatiles from strawberries? We want to detect hotspots of pests before they spread and become problematic.
Article
Full-text available
We respond to the paper of Kruse-Plass et al. (Environ Sci Eur 29:12, 2017), published in this journal, regarding the risk to non-target lepidopteran larvae exposed to pollen from one or more of three Bt maize events (MON810, Bt11 and 1507). We emphasise that what is important for environmental risk assessment is not the number of pollen grains per...
Article
Full-text available
Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority (GMO Panel) assessed the annual post-market environmental monitoring (PMEM) report for the 2015 growing season of the Cry1Ab-expressing maize event MON 810 provided by Monsanto Europe S.A. The GMO Panel concludes that...
Article
Full-text available
In this opinion, the EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) assesses the two-event stack soybean FG72 × A5547-127 for food and feed uses, import and processing. The EFSA GMO Panel previously assessed the two single events combined to produce the two-event stack soybean FG72 × A5547-127 and did not identify safety concerns. No new data o...
Article
Full-text available
In this opinion, the GMO Panel assessed the three-event stack oilseed rape (OSR) MON 88302 × MS8 × RF3 and its three subcombinations, independently of their origin. The GMO Panel has previously assessed the single events combined to produce this three-event stack OSR and did not identify safety concerns; no new information that would modify the ori...
Article
Full-text available
Soybean DAS-68416-4 was developed by Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation to express the aryloxyalkanoate dioxygenase-12 (AAD-12) protein, conferring tolerance to 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and other related phenoxy herbicides, and the phosphinothricin acetyltransferase (PAT) protein, conferring tolerance to glufosinate amm...
Article
Full-text available
Soybean DAS-44406-6 expresses 5-enolpyruvyl-shikimate-3-phosphate synthase (2mEPSPS), conferring tolerance to glyphosate-based herbicides, aryloxyalkanoate dioxygenase (AAD-12), conferring tolerance to 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and other related phenoxy herbicides, and phosphinothricin acetyl transferase (PAT), conferring tolerance to...
Article
Full-text available
The EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) has previously assessed the single events Bt11, MIR162, MIR604 and GA21 as well as different stacked events corresponding to combinations of these events. These maize events were found to be as safe as their conventional counterparts and other appropriate comparators with respect to potential e...
Article
Full-text available
Cotton MON 88701 was developed through Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation to express the dicamba mono-oxygenase (DMO) protein, conferring tolerance to dicamba, and the phosphinothricin N-acetyltransferase PAT protein, conferring tolerance to glufosinate ammonium-based herbicides. The molecular characterisation data and bioinformatics...
Project - Integrated Pest Management as a key part of sustainable agriculture in Scotland
Update
We have started rolling out our IPM tools for protected soft fruit with 'pioneer' farmers who are seeking to reduce their reliance on conventional pesticides. This work is in collaboration with Prof. Steve Wratten's group at the BioProtection Centre in Lincoln University, New Zealand. This year we will introduce mass reared aphid parasitoids (with Koppert UK) and enhance available floral resources and habitats for pollinators and predators, especially hoverflies.
Article
Full-text available
In legal frameworks worldwide, genetically modified plants (GMPs) are subjected to pre-market environmental risk assessment (ERA) with the aim of identifying potential effects on the environment. In the European Union, the EFSA Guidance Document introduces the rationale that GMPs, as well as their newly produced metabolites, represent the potential...
Article
Full-text available
Following the submission of application EFSA-GMO-RX-001 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Pioneer Overseas Corporation and Dow Agrosciences LLC, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority (GMO Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the frame of a renewal of auth...
Answer
EFSA (EU) evaluate GM food, feed and cultivation data generated by the industry applicants, t ask science-based questions for clarification, then decide on  risk or not) versus conventional comparators (risk is relative, in this scenario).
Answer
In Europe (EFSA)  GM crops are evaluated by multi-disciplinary experts (molecular, food, feed, environment) and in an IPM context (risk management). But not economic aspects per se, like cost:benefit analysis. I hope this helps Dennis.
Article
Maize DAS-40278-9 was developed by direct Whiskers-mediated transformation to express the aryloxyalkanoate dioxygenase-1 (AAD-1) protein, conferring tolerance to 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and aryloxyphenoxypropionate (AOPP) herbicides. The molecular characterisation of maize DAS-40278-9 did not raise safety issues. The agronomic, pheno...
Article
Full-text available
The EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO Panel) has previously assessed genetically modified (GM) maize DAS-59122-7 as a single event as well as part of several stacked events. These maize events were found to be as safe as their conventional counterparts and other appropriate comparators with respect to potential effects on human and...
Article
Full-text available
Soybean DAS-81419-2 was developed by Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation. It expresses the Cry1F and Cry1Ac proteins to confer resistance to certain lepidopteran species and the PAT protein that confers tolerance to glufosinate ammonium-based herbicides and that was used as a selectable marker gene. The molecular characterisation of s...
Answer
I would endorse Jay ram's view, especially the need for socio-economic assessment of IPM. We have plenty of research on IPM (potential IPM tools)  but not enough farmer uptake, often due to farmer's reactions on practicality, cost, effectiveness, lack of  advisor/farmer training, etc
Article
There is an urgent need to develop new interventions to manage pests because evolution of pesticide resistance and changes in legislation are limiting conventional control options for farmers. We investigated b-aminobutyric acid (BABA), jasmonic acid (JA) and fructose as possible plant defence activators against grey mould disease, Botrytis cinerea...
Project - Integrated Pest Management as a key part of sustainable agriculture in Scotland
Update
We are currently working on development of IPM toolboxes for a range of Scottish crops including soft fruit, potato, cereals and oilseeds rape (with SRUC). This 5 year work is funded by the Scottish Government (RESAS) and aims to utilise range of IPM tools including pest resistant varieties, biopesticides, semiochemicals, pest monitoring tools, traps + lures, biocontrol agents and predictive models. It builds on expertise gained in large EU and UK collaborative projects including PURE and SCEPTRE. The long term aim is to improve sustainability, use and protect ecosystem services (pollinators and natural enemies) and to reduce reliance on synthetic pesticides.
Article
Introduction: Research on plant root chemical ecology has benefited greatly from recent developments in analytical chemistry. Numerous reports document techniques for sampling root volatiles, although only a limited number describe in situ collection. Objectives: To demonstrate a new method for non-invasive in situ passive sampling using solid p...
Article
Introduction: Collection of volatiles from plant roots poses technical challenges due to difficulties accessing the soil environment without damaging the roots. Objectives: To validate a new non-invasive method for passive sampling of root volatiles in situ, from plants grown under field conditions, using solid phase micro-extraction (SPME). Me...
Answer
For biopesticides that have activity via volatility (eg attractants, repellents) then temperature and humidity can have an effect. We see this regularly when we test biopesticides on raspberries in polytunnels and in open fields. 
We also see that plant stress (eg drought) can affect the level of resistance or susceptibility to pests and diseases. Plants seem able to switch resources depending on current stressors (type and severity) so there are strong genotype x environment interactions. we saw this in our EU PURE project, testing tomato genotypes with several primers and elicitors to induce resistance to Botrytis and root know nematodes (paper currently under review for a special edition of  Crop Protection).
Answer
I'm also interested in the topic, so will look for those papers. we are testing several parasitoid spp to suppress 2 pest aphids in protected raspberry (polytunnels), in combination with biopesticides and added aphid-resistant varieties.
Project - Integrated Pest Management as a key part of sustainable agriculture in Scotland
Update
A recent DEFRA/Hortlink project called 'SCEPTRE' has shown that selected biopesticides can suppress 2 species of aphids on protected raspberry crops and are compatible with the use of released parasitoid wasps as biocontrol agents. Used together in IPM, they can be as effective as industry standard insecticide sprays.
Technical Report
Full-text available
Following a request from the European Commission, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) assessed the relevance of the Hofmann et al. (2016) publication for the environmental risk assessment and risk management of the Bt-maize events MON810, Bt11 and 1507 for cultivation. Hofmann et al. (2016) reported data on pollen deposition on maize and weed...
Article
Integrated pest management (IPM) is facing both external and internal challenges. External challenges include increasing needs to manage pests (pathogens, animal pests and weeds) due to climate change, evolution of pesticide resistance as well as virulence matching host resistance. The complexity of designing effective pest management strategies, w...
Article
In this opinion, the EFSA GMO Panel assesses the five-event stack maize and 20 of its subcombinations independently of their origin. The EFSA GMO Panel has previously assessed the five single events that are combined to produce this five-event stack maize Bt11 × 59122 × MIR604 × 1507 × GA21 and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the s...
Article
The Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority (GMO Panel) previously assessed the two single events combined to produce soybean 305423 × 40-3-2 and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single events affecting the original conclusions were identified. Based on the molecular, agronomic, phenotypic a...
Article
The Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority (GMO Panel) has evaluated the overall safety of genetically modified (GM) carnation FLO-40685-2 cut flowers to be imported into the EU for ornamental use. The genetic modification results in the flowers having purple petals. The stability of the newly intro...
Article
The Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority (GMO Panel) previously assessed the three single events combined to produce a three-event stack cotton 281-24-236 9 3006-210-23 9 MON 88913 and did not identify safety concerns. In this opinion, the GMO Panel assesses only the three-event stack cotton. No new data on...
Answer
 We found (not yet published) very clear crop genotype x elicitor interactions (in tomato), so choice of optimal crop varieties could be a key feature of future IPM using induced defence systems. What does NGS stand for (sorry for my ignorance)?
Answer
Most induced resistance I've seem gives an additional 10-30% protection, under certain environmental conditions. Plants are responding to multiple stressors in a dynamic way, so continuously changing their resources to try to optimise fitness. So I think induced plant defence can 'top up' plant protection in IPM and reduce selection pressure on constitutive R genes but not as a first lines of defence in most situations where pest/disease pressure is high.
Article
Cotton GHB119 was developed by Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation. It expresses the Cry2Ae and phosphinothricin acetyltransferase (PAT) proteins which, respectively, confer resistance to certain lepidopteran species and tolerance to glufosinate ammonium-based herbicides. The molecular characterisation of cotton GHB119 did not give ri...
Article
The EFSA GMO Panel previously assessed the four single events combined to produce a four-event stack maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × GA21 and did not identify safety concerns. In this opinion, the EFSA GMO Panel assesses the four-event stack maize and all its subcombinations independently of their origin. No new data on the single events, leading to...
Article
In 2007, 2010 and 2011, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO Panel) concluded the assessment of genetically modified (GM) maize GA21, MIR604 x GA21 and MIR604 x GA21 x Bt11. These were xfound to be as safe as their conventional counterparts and other appropriate comparators with respect to potential...
Article
The EFSA GMO Panel previously assessed the two single events that are combined to produce soybean MON 87769 × MON 89788 and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on these single events, leading to a modification of the original conclusions on safety, were identified. The molecular, agronomic, phenotypic and compositional data on soybean MON...
Technical Report
Full-text available
A close up view of Integrated Pest Management in Europe today is provided by the European Centre for Integrated Pest Management.
Technical Report
Full-text available
Article
The EFSA GMO Panel previously assessed the two single events combined to produce soybean MON 87705 ? MON 89788 and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single events affecting the previous conclusions were identified. No differences in composition requiring further assessment were observed between soybean MON 87705 ? MON 89788 and i...
Article
Using mathematical modelling, the EFSA GMO Panel has previously quantified the risk to non-target (NT) Lepidoptera of conservation concern, potentially occurring within protected habitats, associated with the ingestion of Bt-maize pollen deposited on their host plants. To reduce the estimated larval mortality to a negligible level, an isolation dis...
Article
Maize MON 87427 was developed by Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation to express the CP4 5-enolpyruvyl-shikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS) protein, in all tissues except for the male reproductive tissues, conferring tissue-selective tolerance to glyphosate. The molecular characterisation of maize MON 87427 did not give rise to safet...
Article
Single events MON 87708 and MON 89788 were combined to produce the stack two-event soybean MON 87708 ? MON 89788. The EFSA GMO Panel previously assessed the two single events and did not identify safety concerns in the context of their scope. No new data on single soybean events leading to a modification of the original conclusions on their safety...
Answer
We typically use a range of non-GM comparators, including the parental line that has been transformed and often several other regionally grown varieties (to estimate variability within crop lines). Sometimes we also include resistant lines that have been bred conventionally (if available). We  do theses  trials in multiple locations (regions or countries)n  over 3-4 years. So it is a lot of work, but important so we can look at the statistical robustness, power of the analysis, effect sizes etc.
Answer
Case by case even goes down to regional differences, seasonal differences, variations in pest complexes and pest pressure. For GM crops we think not only about biosafety but also management. The management of cropping systems is a critical issue that has been overlooked (eg herbicide resistant weeds, Bt resistant pests). This needs to be thought about over local, regional and even national scales, across multiple seasons.
Answer
Case by case is  right in the EU. So, general statements about all GM crops, all pesticides or all large scale farming become problematic. It's like saying all pharmaceutical drugs are bad because a few have caused problems. We weigh up the pros and cons of each one, case by case. Do they address the problem of concern? Do they work well? Do they have any side effects? What is the risk:benefit ratio? It's quite complex and hard to communicate via the media, but we have a legal obligation to do it to protect consumers and the environment.
Answer
I agree secondary pests and insect resistance management for the target pest(s) are key issues. We are writing a review on this topic at the moment, within the context of IPM.
Regarding use of resistant plants (bred conventionally or GE) in IPM; pest and disease resistant plants have ben widely and successfully used in IPM programmes for several decades. In fact, they are often considered the foundation for good IPM.   IPM helps to promote durability of R genes because selection pressure on pest populations is reduced by using multiple tactics (including resistant  varieties).
In EU AMIGA we address these issues and will be having a final conference, which should be open to researchers from all regions. it will be notified on the EU AMIGA website in a few months time.
Answer
I agree partially - the early launches of insect-resistant GM crops were marketed as 'silver bullet' solutions to single groups of pests (eg corn borers). But after 20 years we are more in tune with using GM crops within an IPM framework, because some insecticide use is reduced but there are secondary pests to deal with. Also, IRM using high dose/refugia strategies  is a part of IPM, just like with pesticides. 
Answer
Hello Jay Ram. The only commercial example in the EU so far is Bt maize (event Mon810), mainly grown in Spain and on a lesser scale in other EU countries. The management of this crop requires 20% non-Bt maize to be planted in the region, as a refugia to delay build up of resistance in target pest populations. This is part of Insect Resistance Management  (a part of IPM). In addition, Bt toxin in Bt maize only suppresses certain (target) lepidopteran pests; there are numerous secondary pests that may require control using  strategies other  than the GM route. Since EU crop protection policy is now centred on IPM, this means that IPM is required for Bt maize too. All this is part of the push for more sustainable crop protection in the EU, linked to reduced reliance on conventional pesticides. So GM crops can be (and already are) part of IPM in the EU, but certainly more could be done to develop practical  IPM for arable crops like maize in Europe.
Article
Full-text available
To inform current and future pesticide availability to glasshouse vegetable growers, the current project trialled more than twenty products, including existing industry standards, against four key pests of glasshouse tomatoes and bell peppers. These included experimental conventional chemical pesticides as well as alternative biopesticide and biora...
Article
According to Articles 11(6) and 23(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on genetically modified food and feed, the European Food Safety Authority should publish detailed guidance to assist applicants in the preparation and presentation of their applications for the renewal of authorisations of that genetically modified food and feed. This guidance do...
Article
This document provides guidance for the agronomic and phenotypic characterisation of genetically modified (GM) plants and clarifies the EFSA GMO Panel?s view on how agronomic and phenotypic data support the risk assessment of GM plants. Specific recommendations are given on (1) the selection of sites and test materials; (2) the quality and design o...
Article
Maize 5307 was developed by Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation to express two proteins: eCry3.1Ab, conferring resistance to certain coleopteran pests, and phosphomannose isomerase (PMI), used as selection marker. The molecular characterisation showed relevant similarities between the amino acid sequence of PMI and a known allergen, a...
Article
We consider modelling the movements of larvae using individual bioassays in which data are collected at a high-frequency rate of five observations per second. The aim is to characterize the behaviour of the larvae when exposed to attractant and repellent compounds. Mixtures of diffusion processes, as well as Hidden Markov models, are proposed as mo...
Article
Full-text available
Genetically modified (GM) carnation IFD-26407-2 was developed to express anthocyanins in the petals conferring a mauve colour to the flowers. The GM carnation is intended to be imported in the European Union as cut flower for ornamental use only. Based on the molecular characterisation data, the Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of...
Article
Full-text available
Following a request of the European Commission, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) evaluated the concerns raised by Bulgaria and the accompanying documentation submitted under Article 34 of Regulation (EC) 1829/2003 in support of its request to prohibit the cultivation of the genetically modified maize MON 810 in the European Union. EFSA con...
Article
Full-text available
Following a request from the European Commission, a set of assessment criteria was developed to support the selection of existing environmental surveillance networks for post-market environmental monitoring (PMEM) of genetically modified plants (GMPs). In compliance with these criteria, some networks and associated programmes were identified as bei...
Article
Full-text available
The European Commission asked the Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA GMO Panel) to address the objections of Cyprus to the placing on the market of the genetically modified (GM) carnation SHD-27531-4. The GM carnation cut flowers, with a modified petal colour, are intended to be imported a...
Answer
Birch, A.N.E.; Begg, G.S.; Squire, G.R., (2011) How agro-ecological research helps to address food security issues under new IPM and pesticide reduction policies for global crop production systems., Journal of Experimental Botany, 62, 3251-3261.
Mitchell, C.; Johnson, S.N.; Gordon, S.C.; Birch, A.N.E.; Hubbard, S.F., (2010) Combining plant resistance and a natural enemy to control Amphorophora idaei., BioControl, 55, 321-327.
Birch, A.N.E.; Gordon, S.C.; Fenton, B.; Malloch, G.; Mitchell, C.; Jones, A.T.; Griffiths, D.W.; Brennan, R.M.; Graham, J.; Woodford, J.A.T., (2004) Developing a sustainable IPM system for high value Rubus crops (raspberry, blackberry) for Europe., Acta Horticulturae, 649, 289-292.
Crook, D.J.; Cross, J.; Birch, A.N.E.; Brennan, R.M.; Mordue, A., (2001) Oviposition and larval survival of Dasineura tetensi on four blackcurrant Ribes cultivars., Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 101, 183-190
Answer
Try Atle Bones  in Norway (Trondheim University). They have good analysis systems for glucosinolates.
Answer
Our glucosinolate specialist has retired but I can contact him if you are still stuck. Best, Nick
Answer
For protected crops (glasshouse and polytunnel grown) fruit and vegetables IPM is implementated using multiple tools for 100% of the area. For open field (arable) crops I would estimate the area under full IPM (multiple tools) is much less in area (c. 10%) and sophistication (eg use of field margins to promote natural enemies), but is slowly increasing. 
Answer
Regarding your long list of Qs, I would guess that nearly 100% of protected crops in the UK practice full IPM (monitoring, action thresholds, biocontrol R varieties, biopesticides, pheromones, etc). For open field arable  crops the uptake is much less in area (maybe 10%) and the degree of uptake is lower too (eg use of field margins to promote conservation biocontrol, use of R varieties against single pests/diseases, some monitoring for key pests in broadacre crops). There is much IPM research on arable crops like wheat and maize feeding through from big EU projects like PURE http://www.pure-ipm.eu/project but it will take another 5+ years to implement these results (on farm trials) into farmers' practice, imo.
Answer
I would agree with Kate - in the UK and EU  the main drivers for IPM are pesticide resistance, breakdown of host plant resistance genes (conventional or GM), banning/withdrawal  of widely used pesticides (led by EU and national policies), detection of pesticide residues on fresh fruit and vegetables and pressure from supermarkets (indirectly from consumers). IPM tends to be taken up most for high value fresh  fruit and veg crops that are amenable to biocontrol and other IPM tools (eg protected environments). Arable / broadacre crops have some IPM inputs now, but mainly restricted to basicIPM  tools like resistant cvs, use of field margins to promote conservation biocontrol, softer pesticides, mnoitoring and action thresholds etc.
Answer
I would welcome more interaction between organic and IPM research...in fact, more organic research. To me, organic production seems best suited for small scale production and for high value crops like fresh  fruit and vineyards. If you yield less  due to crop damage the residual value is generally high enough to sustain production. Pesticide residues are closely monitored and generally very low (ppm or less) in conventional agriculture. Maybe long term exposure of such miniscule pesticide doses (below agreed MRLs)  might have adverse effects on humans - but is  there convincing evidence? Organic food can contain natural toxins produced by plants or  by invading pathogens (eg Fusarium in maize), so organic food needs to be carefully checked too. It's not a black and white case for me.
Answer
I would say in the EU all countries are implementing IPM but at very different levels. For some it mainly means better use of existing pesticides and reducing spray drift, human exposure, etc. For others it means much more - especially for high value fruit and veg crops where residues are an issue and consumers are making active choices based on MRLs (eg Netherlands). The term IPM covers so many tools and strategies it's possible for all farmers to say they are using IPMK in Europe (at least to a degree). I see it as a catch up exercise, where the leading countries will push the IPM bar higher for the others over the next 5-10 years.
Answer
I would guess that some consumers will still perceive the 'added value' of organic food, even if it is not easy to demonstrate scientifically (health, environment, climate, biodiversity etc). Choosing food in Europe seems to be partly emotional (what some  people call 'lifestyle' choices), at least for those that can afford the more expensive  choices. Organic as a 'brand' has been around a long time, whereas IPM as a brand hasn't. So much more marketing effort will be needed to communicate what IPM means and what are the benefits to farmers,  consumers, wildlife, future generations, etc.
Answer
Yes, crop, region and system dependent. But not black and white in terms of organic being better (or worse). But often more expensive. In Norway, organic raspbery growers throw away 50% of the crop due to beetle damage, but still make a good profit. In the UK only 1-2% is lost in conventional systems using approved insecticides. A big difference in terms of marketable yield, but not profit margins.
Answer
Thanks for the interesting responses, in particular from Constantine. I am not against organic farming but do have some concerns about pesticides used by some organic organisations, especially copper in Bordeaux mixture (which has poisoned soils in organic vineyards making them unusable).. Pesticides can impact on the environment as well as on humans and biodiversity. Natural doesn't mean safe, since many natural compounds are highly toxic (e.g.  many plant secondary metabolites and several heavy metals). Organic food  production may also be less economic because of lower yields and/or more wastage (due to pests, disease, short shelf life,  etc). So although I can see the merits of a holistic approach based on ecology (for IPM)  I'm wary of stating that organic farming solves all our IPM and crop protection problems. But it can be a partial solution, especially  on a local scale and offers more choices to consumers (good, imo).