Zadoks J C
Department of Phytopathology, Wageningen Agricultural University, The Netherlands.
Ciba Found Symp. 1993;177:48-55; discussion 55-60. doi: 10.1002/9780470514474.ch4.
The answer to the question 'why' has proximate and ultimate roots. The proximate answer, 'pests take our harvest', compels one to act. Crops and their pests are products of domestication, the ancestors of the pests still exist in nature. Eradication is impossible and undesirable. What action should be taken? The ultimate answer, how organisms became pests, may tell us how to act. Old cropping systems had man-made ecological sustainability but do not have economic sustainability in modern times. To achieve both we must prevent rather than control pest outbreaks, using old and new ecological tricks, with application of pesticides in emergency cases only. The action will require a move from chemistry to ecology. Optimism on regaining some ecological sustainability is mixed with doubts on economic sustainability. Can farmers be asked to invest in the future at the expense of today's family income? Crop protection faces new technical and moral problems.
“为什么”这个问题的答案有直接原因和根本原因。直接答案是“害虫夺走了我们的收成”，这促使人们采取行动。作物及其害虫是驯化的产物，害虫的祖先仍存在于自然界。根除是不可能且不可取的。应该采取什么行动呢？根本答案，即生物如何变成害虫，可能会告诉我们如何行动。旧的种植系统具有人为的生态可持续性，但在现代却没有经济可持续性。为了实现两者，我们必须预防而非控制害虫爆发，运用新旧生态技巧，仅在紧急情况下使用农药。这一行动将需要从化学转向生态学。对恢复一些生态可持续性的乐观情绪与对经济可持续性的疑虑交织在一起。能要求农民以牺牲当前家庭收入为代价来投资未来吗？作物保护面临着新的技术和道德问题。
