Jul 2026· Journal of plant diseases and protection· Vol 133· 0 citations· 31 references
Abstract
Plant biostimulants are increasingly applied in agriculture to enhance crop performance and contribute to more sustainable production systems. Their adoption by farmers depends largely on product availability, regulatory accessibility, and demonstrated efficacy under field conditions. Under EU Regulation (EU) 2019/1009, plant biostimulants are defined as products that improve nutrient use efficiency, tolerance to abiotic stress, or crop quality traits, explicitly excluding direct plant protection claims. This paper reviews the current definition of plant biostimulants, outlines the development of the EU legal framework, and summarizes the requirements for market placement within the European Union. Particular attention is given to the coexistence of two regulatory pathways: the harmonized EU framework applicable since June 2022 and pre-existing national regulatory systems. Their respective advantages and limitations are critically assessed in relation to different market strategies. The biostimulants are known to influence plant physiology through multiple mechanisms and their effect may not always be clear when it comes to the distinction between biostimulation and plant protection. The harmonized EU procedure offers obvious advantages for manufacturers targeting multi-country markets and developing innovative products, whereas national pathways may remain more suitable for companies operating in localized markets with established distribution networks. Overall, this analysis highlights a conceptual and regulatory gap between the legally defined functions of biostimulants and their scientifically recognized multifunctionality, with implications for future policy development and product innovation.
Plant biostimulants have shown significant potential as environmentally benign agricultural inputs that can improve soil health, crop yield, nutrient us efficiency and resistance to abiotic stress conditions under changing climatic conditions. With a focus on mechanisms of action, abiotic stress tolerance and economic potential, this study provides a thorough literature review and bibliometric analysis of studies on plant biostimulants in sustainable agricultural production. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) framework was used to ensure a transparent and systematic selection process. The Scopus database was the only source of scientific papers that were retrieved between 2015 and 2026. To identify relevant research related to plant biostimulants, sustainable agriculture, climate resilience, stress management and commercialization factors, a thorough keyword-based search method was used. About 1341 peer-reviewed journal and review papers that satisfied the inclusion criteria were chosen for in-depth analysis out of the 2593 publications that were found in the initial search. According to the bibliometric study, the most common research topics in the subject include soil health, microbial interactions, biofertilisers, abiotic stress tolerance and sustainable agriculture. Strong worldwide scientific cooperation was shown by co-authorship and bibliometric coupling analyses, especially amongst nations like China, Italy, Spain and India. The results also show that increasing plant physiological and biochemical responses under environmental stress circumstances is greatly aided by microbial inoculants, seaweed extracts, humic compounds and protein hydrolysates. Broader adoption is still delayed by issues with product standardization, field-level uniformity, regulatory frameworks and commercialisation despite significant research progress. Overall, plant biostimulants hold significant promise for promoting environmentally conscious agricultural production methods, climate resilience and sustainable agriculture.
P. Srinivasan, N. Deepa, S. Selvanayaki et al.· Plant Science Today· 0 citations
This review aims to synthesise existing knowledge on the efficacy, underlying mechanisms, and practical relevance of biostimulants within low-input agroecosystems, with particular emphasis on South Africa as a representative semi-arid, resource-constrained agricultural system, while highlighting broader implications for similar low-input agroecosystems in sub-Saharan Africa. This review paper reviews peer-reviewed and selected grey literature sources published between 1997 and 2026, retrieved through structured searches of Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar using predefined keywords related to biostimulants, sustainable agriculture and South Africa. Across the literature, there is general agreement that biostimulants may indirectly support biodiversity through improved soil biological activity and reduced dependence on synthetic inputs, although direct field evidence remains limited. Methodologically, most studies are conducted under controlled or semi-controlled conditions, including greenhouses, growth chambers, and pot experiments. While these approaches allow for mechanistic understanding and precise variable control, they often fail to capture the complexity of field environments typical of low-input farming systems. This review synthesises peer-reviewed literature identified through structured searches of major databases utilising terms related to biostimulants, with an emphasis on studies conducted in both controlled environments and field settings. Evidence suggests that biostimulants can enhance plant physiological performance, improve stress tolerance, and contribute to more efficient resource use when integrated into appropriate management practices. However, their effectiveness is highly context-dependent, and they should not be considered substitutes for soil fertility management or sound agronomic practices. Future research, particularly in South Africa as a representative semi-arid and resource-constrained system, should prioritise field-based assessments and incorporate ecological indicators such as species abundance, pollinator visitation, and ecosystem resilience under biostimulant regimes to generate more robust and context-relevant evidence.
The European Green Deal, the main aim of which is to substantially change the agricultural production systems through the Farm to Fork (F2F) Strategy, has caused the most significant reconsideration of pest management in the European Union (EU) in a generation. Since 2020, several regulatory and policy measures have affected pest management decisions, including revised risk assessment procedures for plant protection products, restrictions on certain emergency derogations, updated rules facilitating microbial biological control agents, and the integration of IPM (Integrated Pest Management)-related measures into the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) eco-schemes. At the same time, implementation has been challenging. The proposed Sustainable Use Regulation (SUR), which aimed to introduce binding pesticide reduction targets and additional restrictions in sensitive areas, was withdrawn in 2024 following political disagreement within the EU Commission and concerns regarding implementation feasibility. As a result, pesticide governance remains primarily based on the Sustainable Use Directive (SUD), national action plans, and CAP-supported measures. This mini review synthesizes the post Green Deal policy timeline, identifies regulatory factors that directly affect farmers’ pest management choices, examines emerging quantitative trends, and discusses practical implications for industry, advisory systems, and growers. Particular attention is given to the opportunities and limitations of Harmonized Risk Indicators (HRIs) – notably their sales-based nature and limited capacity to reflect actual ecological exposure, alongside uneven IPM implementation among Member States and emerging climate-driven pest pressures.
A. Balog, Hugh D. Loxdale, A. B. Csorba et al.· Frontiers in Insect Science· 0 citations
Essential oils are increasingly investigated for their potential use in plant protection because of their insecticidal, fumigant, repellent, behavioural, and antifungal activities. This narrative review with a structured literature search synthesizes evidence relevant to European plant protection, focusing primarily on stored-product pests, with additional consideration of pests and plant pathogens outside storage systems, stage-specific susceptibility, formulation, practical limitations, and the EU regulatory framework. EO efficacy was strongly influenced by chemical composition, concentration, formulation, exposure time, developmental stage, target species, and environmental conditions. The strongest evidence was identified for stored-product pests (Coleoptera), although stage-specific susceptibility varied among species. Under field conditions, the practical application of essential oils remains challenging due to their high volatility, short persistence, sensitivity to environmental conditions, potential phytotoxicity, formulation requirements, and limited field validation. Methodological differences among assay types also limit direct comparison across studies. In the EU, regulatory acceptance remains substance-specific, with whole essential oils assessed separately from their individual volatile constituents. Most available evidence is derived from laboratory studies, while greenhouse and field validation remains limited. No formal methodological quality or risk-of-bias assessment of individual studies was performed. Overall, essential oils should be regarded as complementary, application-specific tools whose contribution to more sustainable plant protection depends on improved standardization, formulation, field validation, safety, economic viability, and regulatory acceptance.
Mojca Gorišek, S. Trdan· Sustainability· 0 citations
Postharvest fruit losses and the global demand for safer, chemical-free foods have increased the urgency of developing sustainable alternatives to synthetic fungicides. Biopesticides play a key role in agroecological transitions, offering environmentally sound and residue-free solutions for postharvest disease management. Despite significant research advances, the global innovation landscape for postharvest biopesticides remains poorly understood (i.e., the geographic distribution, technological maturity, and institutional drivers of this innovation have not been systematically mapped), limiting large-scale adoption and policy integration. Understanding patent activity provides valuable insight into technological trends, innovation drivers, and regulatory barriers shaping the development of these green technologies. Here, we review the global patent landscape for postharvest biopesticides, based on 251 patent families retrieved from Espacenet and INPI databases without time restriction. The main points are as follows: (1) the innovation field is rapidly evolving and strongly driven by research institutions, with universities responsible for 59% of all filings; (2) China leads patenting activity (45%), followed by the United States, reflecting regional asymmetries in technological capacity; (3) microbial biopesticides dominate the landscape, particularly Bacillus spp., which account for 26% of all identified biocontrol agents; (4) the main target pathogens (Botrytis cinerea, Penicillium expansum, and P. digitatum) are responsible for major postharvest losses in apples, tomatoes, and pears; and (5) integrated formulations combining microbial, biochemical, and chemical components represent 26% of filings, highlighting efforts to enhance product efficacy and stability through synergistic strategies. However, large-scale adoption remains limited by regulatory complexity, short shelf life, inconsistent field performance, and weak technology transfer from academia to industry. This review provides strategic insights to strengthen innovation ecosystems, align regulatory frameworks, and accelerate the transition toward safer and more sustainable postharvest biocontrol practices.
Anna Cristina P. Lima, João Rogério B. A. Rodrigues, M. F. S. Mota et al.· ACS Agricultural Science &am...· 0 citations