If the fungus can spread as quickly as recorded from 1989-1992, it is difficult to imagine that it required 79 years to spread from Boston to its 1989 distribution. The strain of E. maimaiga introduced in 1910-1911 was considered weak, and the introduction project was considered a failure and discontinued. The strain of E. maimaiga introduced in 1910-1911 may have barely survived in the environment for many years, and then a more highly pathogenic strain evolved and began spreading. Another hypothesis would be that E. maimaiga did not establish at all in 1910-1911, but was more recently accidentally introduced to North America. Therefore, laboratory production of E. maimaiga on artificial media would provide a method of producing quantities of E. maimaiga without the potential of introducing pest species in soil.
Fungi are also often short-lived in storage and relatively expensive to produce.
Host specificity of many entomophthoralean fungi make their production for control more expensive although making them more desirable due to decreased nontarget impact. Dried-mycelium preparations will present unique formulation problems of adhering the larger particles to leaf surfaces while protecting them from adverse environmental conditions. Additional research is critically needed in the areas of field ecology, biology, and population dynamics of E. maimaiga, before mycoinsecticide development and field application. There are many unanswered questions concerning E. maimaiga. The fungus could play a significant role in the natural control of gypsy moth, especially in years with a wet spring.