Production control: Management of the
consistency, reliability and timeliness
of production output through monitor-
ing items such as materials, equip-
ment, environments, schedules and
personnel.
Process control:The means of assuring the
performance of production processes
through sampling of all life stages of
the arthropods in production, using
indicators to predict quality and mini-
mize variance from predetermined
standards.
Product control:Assurance of conformity
of the product to acceptable standards
of quality through monitoring proce-
dures applied at the end of production.
Such procedures substantially increase
the probability that the product will be
effective in performing its intended
function but cannot predict perfor-
mance because of the highly variable
conditions to which the product may
be exposed after the product is
shipped.
Product-control guidelines:Suggested stan-
dards and processes for product con-
trol procedures that might be adopted
by commercial insectaries, trade asso-
ciations and other groups to provide
consistency in product control.
Customer involvement:Selection of product,
application of the product, evaluation of
the results and feedback, with encourage-
ment of continual informational flow.
Product profile: A document supplied by a
producer, often with a product shipment,
to provide the customer with informa-
tion on the nature of the product being
shipped and methods of storing and
using the product properly. Details such
as identity, quantity, origin, life stages
shipped, sex ratio and expiration date
are usually included. Alternatively, simi-
lar information of a more generic nature
may be developed by an organization of
producers.
Product handling and evaluation: Environ-
mental conditions and actions designated
by the customer, including assessments of
quantity and quality of the product prior
to application.
Application:The release of the natural ene-
mies or otherwise putting them to use.
Performance evaluation: Assessments of the
effects of natural-enemy application upon
the target pest population.Quality testing performed at California
Polytechnic Institute, 1994–1995With the objective of creating a laboratory
that could independently test beneficial
organisms, a pilot project was established to
create a working link between the biological
control producers and the university, funded
by the National Biological Control Institute
(NBCI) and ANBP (G. Scriven, unpublished,
1994, ‘Quality assurance, production, deliv-
ery, and release of Phytoseiulus persimilis’).
Under the guidance of Dr J. Wheatley, the
following natural enemies were tested:
Trichogramma brassicae, Cryptolaemus mon-
trouzieri, Phytoseiulus persimilis, Aphytis meli-
nus and Chrysoperla rufilabris. Existing
International Organization for Biological
Control (IOBC) Guidelines (Chapter 19) were
used for Trichogramma andP. persimilisand
the IOBCChrysoperla carneaguideline was
used for C. rufilabris. There were no IOBC
guidelines for Cryptolaemusand Aphytis, so
here only numbers, shipping mortality and
sex ratio were tested. In addition, random
sampling and statistics were studied for
Trichogrammaand P. persimilis. Most of the
samples met the guidelines. However, the
idea of establishing a certification laboratory
with student labour was quietly abandoned,
because it was concluded that certification
testing needed to be done by experienced
and skilled laboratory personnel.
The project resulted in substantive ques-
tions and proposals:1.It needs to be clarified what we are trying
to measure. The IOBC protocols are an inter-
nal activity for the producer to use. Product
assessment and any certification procedure
would be activities done by agencies that
were independent of the producer and, as
such, should be receiving product as if they
were an end-user. Protocols need to be estab-
lished for product at the end-user.208 C.S. Glenister et al.