1. Introduction

The Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (AHDB) is a non-departmental government body, funded by levy income from farmers, growers and others in the supply chain, and managed as an independent organisation (independent of both commercial industry and the UK Government). AHDB's role is to help improve the efficiency and competitiveness of various agriculture sectors within the UK. Our purpose is to help our farmers, growers and industry to succeed in a rapidly changing world.

As AHDB is funded in this manner, value for money is paramount. We welcome suppliers who can offer innovative and cost-efficient solutions to meet our needs, while also offering superlative service that will enable us to create a world-class food and farming industry. Solutions should look to help us not only reduce costs but increase business flexibility, lift productivity, bring people together to collaborate, innovate and drive change throughout.

For further information about us see the AHDB home page  

To ensure crop protection strategies of the future are resilient, it is essential to maximise the use of all available options for disease management. This includes selection of optimal varieties, assessing fungicide resistance risks and evaluating the efficacy of current fungicides. Building on the success of the AHDB Fungicide Performance and resistance projects, which offer valuable independent evidence to inform effective crop protection strategies, we aim to extend this support to the effective use of biofungicides.

2. Background

Biofungicides are plant protection products based on microbes (e.g. a bacterium or fungus), pheromones, semiochemicals, plant extracts or other novel alternatives. They must be registered for use by CRD (Chemicals Regulation Division) as for synthetic pesticides. Biofungicides are widely used in horticulture and while only a small number of products are currently available for use in cereals and oilseeds, the market’s expansion potential into the arable sector is evident.  The potential for biofungicides to mitigate resistance to synthetic fungicides, alongside broader benefits such as enhanced soil health and reduced impact on beneficial organisms, underscores the need to explore options for integrating biofungicides into disease management strategies for arable crops.

Encouraging results have already emerged from preliminary work on the potential for a limited range of biofungicides to control wheat diseases in the Crop Health North project (2017—2020).  When compared with synthetic fungicides, biofungicides produced lower (though still effective) disease control, comparable or lower yields, and comparable or higher grain quality.  Conclusions recommended that future work should focus on improving grower confidence in the use biofungicides. 

Our goal is to deliver robust data to levy payers on the efficacy of correctly applied biofungicides in arable crops, similar to our ongoing Fungicide Performance project.  As this is a new area of work, the project should generate robust efficacy data for biofungicides in winter wheat and form a pilot study to ensure robust protocols are developed to provide a fair test of biofungicide products on a range of priority arable crop diseases.

This document is an invitation to propose research suited to evaluating the performance of biofungicides over two cropping years as outlined in sections 3 and 4 below.  Proposals to deliver this work should be based on the information contained within this document and in the format outlined in section 6.  Deadlines and submission instructions are contained in sections 8 and 9.

3. Tender objectives

The research will need to:

• Generate reliable, independent and robust data on the efficacy of biofungicides in controlling wheat diseases, through field trials for harvests 2026 and 2027.
• Determine the practicalities of using biofungicides in arable crops in-situ rather than controlled environments through field trials for harvests 2026 and 2027.
• Provide practical information to levy payers on how to effectively incorporate biofungicides into their spray programmes.

4. Scope and approach

This funding opportunity will support the development and delivery of field trials which will robustly test the efficacy of a range of biofungicides for their disease control in winter wheat over two seasons (2025/26 and 2026/27).  The work will deliver reliable and independent data to give levy payers confidence in integrating biofungicides into their disease control strategies.

The trials should be established on six trial sites each year, with each site hosting a fully randomised, replicated trial. Trials can be drilled or established on standing crops, ensuring a variety of appropriate disease resistance.

Three sites will focus on one disease and the other three sites on another, where sites are selected based on natural risk factors to ensure satisfactory disease levels (depending on disease and location). Target diseases will be confirmed pending product inclusion but will comprise the most important wheat diseases, e.g. septoria.  Applicants should propose methods of maximising sufficient disease pressure for two candidate diseases (e.g. trial location, infector rows). 

Please note that, depending on availability of products, work may shift to focus on a single disease.  Disease pressure from nearby plots and other crops must be managed effectively. 

Each trial will test biofungicides alongside a conventional fungicide programme and an untreated control.  Applicants should cost work based on trials testing a maximum of seven biofungicide products and should be operated similarly to standard efficacy trials.  As this is a developing market for arable crops, contingencies for insufficient numbers of new products may need to be made by, for example, considering varietal, location or application variables in trial planning, e.g. looking at fewer products but on two wheat varieties.

We envisage that to ensure a fair comparison between biofungicides and the conventional fungicide programme, the biofungicides will need to be applied as part of an equivalent conventional fungicide programme, e.g. swapping out for a conventional fungicide, although the applicant is welcome to suggest an alternative approach. 

While it may be simpler for growers for biopesticide application timings to occur at the standard timings for current fungicide programmes (e.g. T1), actual application programmes, methods and timings of the biofungicides in these trials will need to be developed by the applicants with manufacturers.  This is critical to maximise the performance of biofungicides and demonstrate their potential.  For example, this may mean that different application timings are needed for each biopesticide. 

As a minimum, assessments should include disease levels, yield, grain quality and presence of any relevant contaminants, with consideration of any relevant EPPO guidelines specifically PP 1/296(1) Principles of efficacy evaluation for low-risk plant protection products which will have an update pertaining to biopesticides available from September. Additional sampling may be proposed to capture additional benefits of biofungicides.  Noting the importance of cost effectiveness for crop protection strategies, the work will also need to include an assessment of the cost-benefit of using the biofungicides tested.  For this reason, applicants will need to identify a realistic spray programme for each biopesticide in liaison with the manufacturer.  Consideration must also be given for product interactions so that any conventional synthetic chemistry applied through the trial period will not impede the activity of biological products. 

Applicants should propose criteria for inclusion of products in the trials.  This can include consideration of prospects for registration on UK cereal crops, data demonstrating efficacy against target diseases, registration status and feasibility of securing trial permits. 

AHDB’s initial discussions with manufacturers have already identified some products that may be suitable for inclusion in these trials. These details will be provided to the successful applicant at the start of the project, however further liaison with manufacturers will be needed to identify further products for inclusion.  Strong relationships with biopesticide manufacturers will be essential for underpinning this work, in order to both identify suitable products and for building on existing knowledge of effective biopesticide use in crops, especially in the arable environment.

As this is a test-pilot with a view to expanding the work in future, we encourage applicants to consider how trials will need to be adapted to provide a fair test of biofungicides according to the properties of each product, whilst balancing the pragmatic need to apply products cost effectively in commercial practice.  Flexibility will be important as the work progresses to maximise the delivery outcomes for levy payers.  Applicants will be required to form an AHDB-led steering group comprising relevant stakeholders to agree on various project management aspects, such as product inclusion, protocols, site selection, interpretation of results and messaging.  This group will be expected to meet monthly.   

Project outputs will include conclusions and recommendations for use of the products tested.  The successful applicants will also be expected to contribute to an associated communications programme, which helps with building levy payer understanding and confidence with the use of biopesticide products on farm.  Communications should be agreed in liaison with AHDB, ensuring that the outcomes of the research clearly recognise the support of levy funding.  Knowledge exchange activities may include presentations at AHDB events (e.g. Monitor Farm meetings and the Agronomy Conference), short videos and blogs. Co-location of trials could be considered for an opportunity to conduct trial visits should results warrant demonstration, but this is not essential.

Annual and final project reports will be required. Further information and templates for these reports can be found at AHDB Cereals & Oilseeds research report templates.

5. Budget

The maximum budget for delivery of this research is £180,000 (inclusive of VAT).  

Proposals that include co-funding from other partners will be welcomed.

 6. Structure/format of submission

Applicants should use the AHDB large proposal form available from our research funding webpage but note scoring criteria are those listed in section 6 of this research call rather than the criteria embedded in the application form.

Joint applications from two or more organisations are acceptable and encouraged where there is added value.

AHDB reserves the right to not proceed with any application or, if appropriate, to request applicants to form a consortium to work together to deliver a programme of activities.

An evaluation panel will assess submissions in line with the scoring criteria and weightings in section 7 to decide the best outcome for this research project. The selection will be an open and fair competition according to AHDB’s procurement policy.

7. Evaluation and award of contract

Evaluation of tenders will be on the following basis:

8. Tender submissions

Submissions to be made electronically:

Submissions will remain unopened until after the closing date and time has passed

9. Timetable

These timescales are approximate and may change.

A project initiation meeting will be held between the successful bidder and the project funders at the start of the contract.  Additional meetings will be held as required for progress updates.

10. Terms/conditions of participation

AHDB's terms for Research Funding Agreements shall apply to any contract awarded as a result of this invitation to tender.

As a test pilot, there may be a specific break clause included in the agreement with regards to a minimum number of products tested/experimental treatments being available for viable trials.

If you have any questions relating to this tender please contact:

11. Clarification Questions and Answers

Question: How are you defining biofungicides?  Compounds with antifungal activity of biological origin e.g. bacteria based products and/or products on natural origin which induce a response in the wheat plant to fungal attack e.g. elicitors such as Iodus

Answer: For our scope of inclusion we have been following the HSE definition of a Biopesticide.   From this, bacteria or plant extracts (including oils) that elicit a plant response are acceptable for inclusion.

Question: Are you including oils from biological origin in the biofungicides group

Answer: All products for inclusion will be discussed and agreed prior to trial commencement as part the AHDB-led steering committee overseeing various project management aspects. We have stipulated in the call that applicants should propose criteria for inclusion so if they have any information on plant extract oils which may have fungicidal activity, we would certainly like to hear about this and include in discussions. We have made preliminary enquiries into product inclusion and require suppliers to build on this knowledge to further develop the number of products to be included in the trials

Question: What about other chemical elicitor products, such as phosphonates?

Answer: All products suggested should have evidence of antifungal activity either in wheat or against a relevant disease in another crop. Preference with microbial products is for products that already have registration or a permit in the UK, even if this is in another crop, as this will make obtaining a trial permit easier and more timely. Novel microbials that do not currently occur naturally in the UK are likely to be prohibitive to inclusion in year 1, as there may be a lengthy process to obtain a trial permit.

Question: Could you provide some clarification on whether this bid is focused on exploring the interactions between biofungicides and conventional products within an integrated program, or if the objective is more about comparing a full biofungicide program to a conventional application program?

Answer: This research project is looking to assess biofungicides as part of an integrated program.  We envisage that each biofungicide will be used in place of a conventional fungicide as part of an integrated spray program. The application timing to substitute would be according to manufacturer recommendations, though initial discussions with manufacturers indicate these are likely to be at the T0 or T1 timing. This is design is deemed to provide a fair assessment of the potential of a biofungicide in an integrated program when compared to an equivalent conventional fungicide-only program.  However, applicants are welcome to propose an alternative approach, as long as this provides a suitable assessment of the performance of biofungicides.  If applicants have knowledge of biofungicide only programs that may be suitable for inclusion, these are welcomed to be described in the proposal and would be considered by the steering group.