Greenhouse IPM Strategies Coming Into Focus
March 10, 2026 
Symptoms of disease or insect damage, such as this leaf discoloration on vinca, may not show up until it’s too late, hence the need for advanced scouting. Photo: Jen Browning, BASF
Editor’s Note: These insights were compiled from a recent conversation between Brian Sparks, Editor of Greenhouse Grower, and Jen Browning, PCA and Senior Technical Specialist with BASF’s Turf + Ornamentals division.
Brian Sparks: What are some of the biggest pain points you hear from growers when it comes to IPM and biological control?
Jen Browning: Sourcing the products they need to target their pest spectrum on their budget – and that assumes what they need and want exists. Sometimes it doesn’t yet! This is especially true if they have a difficult or invasive pest, need an insect growth regulator or new biological that’s not widely available, or they are growing greenhouse vegetables and a bio-compatible conventional isn’t labeled for use on the site.
Sparks: Do you have any examples of a grower developing an IPM-based strategy for a specific pest?
Browning: Growers are very resourceful, and I’m seeing more get done with less in very creative ways. This includes using new application equipment and monitoring – sometimes built on site – to trial products that are already in the field. This not only helps them, it also drives trial work and development for manufacturers. Growers tell us what they see working and also what they want and need, such as getting better efficacy from beneficial nematodes applied with a sugar lure. In trials, it turned out the data agreed, which then gives me the ability to share that information with others. Field results show where adjuvants are most helpful with which operations.
Sparks: Why should growers look at IPM as a production system, not a product program?
Browning: The integration concept is that IPM is designed to be a dynamic umbrella and blend into the system of crop inputs, evolving with the calendar and record keeping. It should fold in and assist, but not be overly burdensome once in place.
Sparks: Any tips on how growers can track IPM performance?
Browning: The most important piece is record keeping, which is time intensive on the front end but less so in gathering it since we’re scouting anyway. Time investment is required when considering season results, but it does help make planning and buying decisions for coming seasons.
Sparks: Are there any other trends you’re seeing in IPM?
Browning: The calls I get are less reactive than they used to be and also come with more sophisticated questions. There’s a lot of good technical information available to growers, but it’s also important to check our sources of information for answers. A summary through ChatGPT is not the same as real source data.
We’re also seeing growers looking to get more out of the products they purchase, whether that means mixing in generic materials or looking for solutions that have broad label applications and are compatible with the biologicals they use.
Sparks: What excites you the most about the future of this industry?
Browning: We’re seeing a younger cohort of people coming into the industry with really good, novel ideas. They’re also working with a more experienced group of people, and when you get everyone together, collectively we come up with great ideas. Everyone is having to work faster with fewer resources and fewer people, and they have a huge diversity of genetics to consider. The amount of plants that are available now is incredible, and while that’s kind of exciting, I feel like it’s also a massive challenge. The good news is, many of us love a challenge.
Subscribe to eNewsletter
