The role of basic substances in organic farming: Scientific and market perspectives

1. INTRODUCTION

In recent years, there has been a notable shift in the European Union's attitude towards the use of pesticides. Increased environmental awareness and growing concerns about the residues of active substances in food have led to a search for alternatives to synthetic pesticides, particularly in light of the documented negative impact of some of these substances on the agro-phytocenosis, particularly pollinating insects, soil microorganisms, and aquatic organisms. At the same time, the agricultural sector is under pressure to ensure high productivity and phytosanitary safety while reducing chemical inputs.

These objectives are outlined in the Farm to Fork Strategy, which is a key component of the European Green Deal. The strategy aims to reduce the risk and use of chemical pesticides by 50% by 2030, while promoting the development of biological and mechanical control methods. Against this backdrop, the significance of biopreparations and tools that align with the principles of integrated and organic plant protection is growing rapidly.

One such tool is basic substances, i.e. natural, widely available raw materials that are used in the food sector, and that have additional protective effects on plants. Due to their high safety profile and simplified approval process, basic substances are an important element of low-chemical-intensity production systems, including organic farming. A particular advantage of basic substances is that they can be used in the form of simple formulations that can be prepared independently, which reduces protection costs further, and allows methods to be adapted to farm conditions (Kowalska et al., 2021).

The primary objective of the study is to analyse the market for basic substances and their potential applications in organic farming system.

2. THE VOLUME AND STRUCTURE OF THE PLANT PROTECTION PRODUCTS MARKET IN POLAND

The plant protection products (PPP) market in Poland is one of the largest in the European Union both in terms of value and the quantity of active substances consumed. According to industry data, the value of the PPP market in the 2023/2024 season (calculated from harvest to harvest) amounted to slightly over PLN 4 billion, which represents an increase of approximately 13% as compared to the previous season (Kowalczyk, 2025). This increase in market value is largely due to rising preparation prices, with slightly more varied trends in terms of sales volume.

Long-term analyses indicate a significant increase in the sale of active pesticide substances in Poland since the beginning of the 21st century – rising from under 10,000 tonnes in 2000 to approximately 26,900 tonnes in 2021 (Urban, 2024). However, data from 2023–2024 indicate a shift in the trend: sales of pesticides in terms of active substance in Poland and across the EU have reached their lowest level in over a decade. This is linked to increasing regulatory pressure, the adoption of integrated plant protection methods and greater awareness among farmers and consumers (Kupczak, 2025b).

In terms of PPP application intensity, Poland ranks below the EU average. According to the latest data, pesticide consumption per hectare of agricultural land in Poland was approximately 35% lower than the EU average in 2023, which was the lowest level since 2010 (Ceny-Rolnicze, 2025). Consumption patterns vary considerably depending on the crop: relatively small doses are used for cereals, whereas much higher doses are applied to fruit and vegetable crops, where intensive chemical protection is standard practice (Kowalska, 2024).

The market is dominated by synthetic preparations produced by large international corporations. Despite the growing role of domestic producers, foreign suppliers still dominate in terms of market share and product range sold in Poland (Chemia i Biznes, 2017).

3. TRENDS IN DEVELOPMENT – FROM CHEMISTRY TO BIOLOGICAL SOLUTIONS

The nature of the PPP market is strongly influenced by regulatory and social factors. The Farm to Fork (F2F) strategy and the European Green Deal's objectives aim to reduce the use and risk of synthetic pesticides. This results in the gradual withdrawal of certain active substances, as well as stricter requirements for marketing authorisation process, good agricultural practices and product compliance with applicable residue standards (Tostado, 2024). From the perspective of producers and distributors, this represents a dual challenge – stemming from the reduced availability of active substances and higher compliance costs, and an opportunity to develop alternative technologies.

Consequently, the biological preparations market is expanding rapidly at both the global and national levels. Estimates indicate that biological plant protection products currently account for around 4% of the global plant protection product market, whereas in Poland they represent only about 2% of all registered preparations (Polskie Stowarzyszenie Zrównoważonego Rolnictwa i Żywności; n.d.). According to the latest data, there are approximately 52–55 microbiological plant protection products registered in Poland, while the total number of registered preparations is approximately 1,800–2,000 (Molenda, 2025).

Despite its relatively small market share in terms of volume, the market for biopreparations has been expanding rapidly. However, several barriers to its development have been identified, including the lack of a clear legal definition of “biological plant protection products”, lengthy and costly registration procedures comparable to that applied to chemical preparations, and limited practical knowledge among farmers (Polskie Stowarzyszenie Ochrony Roślin; n.d.). On the other hand, the planned simplification of authorisation procedures for biological products within the European Union may accelerate the development of this segment in the coming years (Kupczak, 2025a).

4. STATUS OF BASIC SUBSTANCES ON THE POLISH MARKET

Basic substances constitute a specific, very small but qualitatively significant part of the market for alternative plant protection solutions. According to Article 23 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and the interpretation of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (Ministerstwo Rolnictwa i Rozwoju Wsi, 2018), these are substances:

• not considered potentially dangerous,

• do not have an inherent endocrine, neurotoxic or immunotoxic effect,

• are not primarily used in plant protection but may be beneficial in this area (e.g. vinegar, salt, milk, plant extracts).

An important aspect is that basic substances are not marketed as plant protection products. Instead, they may take the form of food, feed, or technical raw materials that perform a protective function only when used for plant protection purposes (Ministerstwo Rolnictwa i Rozwoju Wsi, 2018). Consequently, they are not included in conventional plant protection product (PPP) sales statistics – neither in terms of market value nor the volume of active substances. This is despite their actual role in plant protection systems, particularly in organic farming and amateur gardening.

Basic substances therefore occupy a niche position on the market:

• economically – they are mainly sold on the raw materials market (vinegar, milk, baking soda, dried herbs) rather than as registered PPPs, making it difficult to distinguish them in terms of turnover value;

• functionally – they complement classic plant protection products, especially on organic farms, where they can be applied in accordance with Regulation 2021/1165 as part of disease and pest control, but not as herbicides (Malusà, Tartanus, 2022);

• image-related – they are part of the growing trend towards “natural” and “residue-free” plant protection, responding to the expectations of consumers and producers looking for solutions that are less harmful to the environment.

Together with the markets for synthetic preparations and registered biopreparations, basic substances constitute a segment of considerable strategic importance, although their quantitative significance remains limited. Their role is particularly evident in niche areas such as organic farming system, specialised high-value crops (including fruits, vegetables, and berries), as well as small-scale production and non-professional gardening. The further development of this segment largely depends on investments in marketing activities, the dissemination of practical knowledge, and the provision of advisory services that enable farmers and gardeners to use this category of substances safely and effectively.

5. AN OVERVIEW OF BASIC SUBSTANCES

Currently, 28 basic substances are officially approved in the EU. A complete list of basic substances with their names, types, intended uses and dates of approval is shown in Table 1.

The basic substances approved by the EU fall into three main groups: foodstuffs and raw materials of animal origin, plant raw materials, and mineral substances.

6. AREAS WITH THE MOST EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF BASIC SUBSTANCES

The implementation of basic substances in plant protection requires consideration of legal, organisational and technological aspects, including the realities of agricultural production. The following analysis reveals where, how and under what circumstances basic substances can prove effective in practice.

7. EXAMPLES OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ON BASIC SUBSTANCES

Drury et al. (2003) assessed the effectiveness of milk and whey as preventive treatments against powdery mildew in greenhouse experiments on winter wheat. Disease progression in plants treated with milk or whey was, on average, approximately two-thirds lower than in the untreated control group, with preventive applications (prior to inoculation) proving more effective than post-infection interventions. In a subsequent experiment, milk and whey achieved results comparable to those obtained with sulphur, which is the standard treatment in organic farming (Drury et al., 2003).

However, in a field experiment evaluating the control of tomato powdery mildew, the application of 10% raw cow's milk significantly reduced the severity of the disease compared to the control (Drury et al., 2003). According to the results published by Sepúlveda-Chavera et al. (2013), the treatments used in the studies, including 10% raw milk, significantly decreased the severity of powdery mildew symptoms on leaves compared to water (used on the control object). Twenty-one days after application, the severity of disease symptoms was assessed at 91.8% in the control and 41.5% in the milk-treated plot. The reduction in disease incidence was noticeable, although significantly lower than that achieved with the most effective chemical agents evaluated in the study.

In research conducted by Konecki (2025), the impact of selected basic substances was assessed over two growing seasons: wine vinegar, chitosan hydrochloride, mustard seed powder and ozone treatment of seed material – in terms of reducing mycotoxins in spring wheat grain.

The most effective treatment was a combination referred to as “comprehensive protection” (vinegar + chitosan hydrochloride + mustard), which was identified as the most efficacious in both pot and plot experiments and subsequently applied in large-scale production. The study also reported total mycotoxin levels under different experimental conditions: 352.6 μg/kg in pots, 101.8 μg/kg in plots, and 90.1 μg/kg in the field, with the highest concentrations observed for deoxynivalenol (DON) and HT-2, among others. In the field experiment, applications of basic substances reduced mycotoxin levels below the established safety thresholds (HT-2 and T-2 – 50 μg/kg), thereby meeting the regulatory requirements for unprocessed cereal grains.

The study by Žabka and Pavela (2021) evaluated the effectiveness of chitosan hydrochloride in limiting the growth of Phytophthora infestans. For comparison, two other naturally occurring substances were tested: sodium bicarbonate and lecithin, known for their ability to inhibit pathogen growth. The results indicate that chitosan applied in concentrations ranging from 0.1% to 1% effectively reduces infection growth, with the observed effect depending on the dose applied. Sodium bicarbonate, by contrast, demonstrated moderate efficacy, resulting in a 41.36% reduction in disease progression compared with the untreated control.

In experiments conducted by the same authors on whole plants, under conditions conducive to intensive pathogen development, the addition of chitosan at a concentration of 0.4% resulted in a significant reduction in disease, reaching 84.72% (Žabka, Pavela, 2021). A distinct reduction in leaf damage was observed, amounting to 23.3%, while in the control object, as much as 95% of the leaf surface was affected. Under the same conditions, sodium bicarbonate at a concentration of 1% exhibited low efficacy, achieving only 15.63% inhibition.

The number of treatments performed proved to be a key factor influencing the effectiveness of protection under conditions similar to those in field practice. A single application of chitosan led to a 37.25% reduction in disease, with an infestation level of 48.0%, compared to 76.5% in the control. Increasing the number of treatments to three and four significantly enhanced the protective effect, raising the inhibition level to 90.46% and 99.35%, respectively, resulting in a very low leaf infestation rate of 7.3% and 0.5%.

The results clearly indicate that the effectiveness of protection against potato blight depends on both the concentration of the preparation and the number of protective applications. Similar effects of chitosan have been reported by Francesconi et al. (2020) in studies on durum wheat, demonstrating that chitosan hydrochloride inhibits the germination and growth of Fusarium graminearum spores. The authors further showed that chitosan can limit the development of fusarium head blight and reduce both the pressure and virulence of the pathogen.

Available literature also indicates that chitosan hydrochloride has the potential to disrupt pathogen cell membranes, thereby inhibiting their metabolic activity. This mechanism has been described, among others, for Phytophthora infestans in potato cultivation (Poldmets et al., 2025) and for fungi of the genus Fusarium spp. in tomato cultivation (Safari et al., 2021).

In studies by Sarhan et al. (2020) and Meng et al. (2022), mustard seeds, which are rich in glucosinolates, were used; when ground, these compounds are metabolised into isothiocyanates, which effectively inhibit the growth of selected pathogens. The resulting mustard seed powder was applied in biofumigation to protect eggplant seeds from Verticillium dahliae and chickpea seeds from infection by Fusarium spp. fungi.

Wine vinegar is another basic substance used in plant protection. It acidifies the environment, damages cell membranes and inhibits the cellular respiration of pathogens. Due to these properties, it effectively reduces the growth of microorganisms (Stratford et al., 2009). The effectiveness of wine vinegar was also confirmed by Kowalska et al. (2021), who applied wine vinegar solutions with concentrations ranging from 0.5% to 2.0% to protect barley against Pyrenophora graminea, as well as pumpkin, tomato and pepper crops against fungi of the genus Alternaria spp.

Another basic substance, sodium bicarbonate, has been tested in apple orchards. Studies by Ilhan et al. (2006) and Kelderer et al. (2008) demonstrated that applications of sodium bicarbonate, both alone and in combination with tebuconazole, effectively reduced infection of apple fruit by Venturia inaequalis. Its efficacy has also been reported in reducing infection by Sphaerotheca macularis in strawberry cultivation (Pertot et al., 2008).

Furthermore, lecithin solution is also frequently used in field studies as a fungicide to protect vineyards, orchards, vegetable crops and ornamental plants. Trdan et al. (2008) reported that foliar applications of soy lecithin significantly reduced infection of chicory by the pathogenic fungus Alternaria cichorii.

There are gaps in research on the application of basic substances in scientific studies, including a lack of long-term field experiments, a lack of standardisation of the doses applied, a lack of data on the impact of basic substances on the soil microbiome, a lack of data on economic efficiency, and an insufficient number of comparative studies with synthetic plant protection products. All issues mentioned above create opportunities for future research on basic substances.

8. CONCLUSIONS

Basic substances represent an exceptionally promising way for plant protection management in organic farming systems, as they combine attributes desired from both an environmental and economic perspective. Their natural origin, high safety profile and compatibility with European Union regulations provide a solid basis for their widespread use on farms seeking to minimise the use of chemicals in production. These substances align well with the principles of organic farming, including closed material cycles, the use of locally sourced raw materials, and the activation of natural plant resistance mechanisms.

Compared to conventional plant protection products, basic substances offer low-cost, easily accessible and self-preparable solutions, particularly beneficial to small and mediumsized farms. Simultaneously, they respond to public expectations regarding the reduction of pesticide residues and the implementation of more environmentally friendly production methods.

The EU regulations ensure a consistent legal framework and clearly defined criteria for the use of basic substances, increasing certainty for farmers and facilitating the organic certification process. Consequently, basic substances not only complement existing plant protection methods, but are also becoming an important element in the transition towards sustainable and low-chemical agriculture. Their importance is expected to grow as regulations on synthetic plant protection products continue to tighten and consumer awareness of environmental issues increases.

Scientific research confirm that basic substances have real and measurable effectiveness in reducing plant diseases. Although they are often less effective than synthetic plant protection products, they are a valuable component of integrated and organic protection strategies, especially when used preventively, at appropriate concentrations and with the right frequency of treatment. Their importance in agricultural practice is further enhanced by their high safety profile and compliance with applicable EU regulations.

The wide adoption of basic substances has the potential to strengthen farms' resilience to market and climate-related stresses. Farms' vulnerability to external market shocks and supply chain disruptions was especially visible during the polycrisis period of 2020–2023 (COVID-19 outbreak, Russian-Ukrainian war). The year 2026, due to the blockage of the Strait of Hormuz, might be another difficult year for farmers worldwide, especially those reliant on synthetic chemical inputs. This vulnerability highlights the urgent need to redesign current value chains into more autonomous production models that prioritize internal farm resources over global supply chains. The use of basic substances can lower the dependency of farms on global markets while enhancing circularity through the utilization of local resources. By safeguarding biodiversity and supporting the health of the surrounding ecosystem, basic substances contribute to a self-sustaining “biological buffer” that allows the farm to adapt more effectively to climate variability and evolving pest pressures.