## 4 FHB Management
### Resistance in Durum Wheat  
It has been long established that durum wheat (_T. turgidum_) is more susceptible to FHB than the common bread (_T. aestivum_) wheat. Even though the reason(s) for this is not clearly known and is yet to be elucidated, several plausible explanations have been put forth. Firstly, durum production for a long time was limited to the fertile crescent and semi-arid environments where FHB was not a problem. Secondly, in comparison to -bread wheat, durum wheat is cultivated on a smaller scale. [PERSON] et al. [124] reported that durum wheat accounts for about 4% of the total wheat production worldwide. Another possible explanation hints as the narrow genetic variation for FHB resistance in durum wheat elite germplasm as an important challenge [125]. It has been hypothesised that the D genome of hexaploid wheat plays a possible role in reducing FHB severity in wheat. [PERSON] et al. [126] reported that synthetic hexaploid wheat lines (SHW), generated by crossing tetraploid wheat (_T. turgidum_) with _Aegilops tauschii_, were more resistance than the _T. turgidum_ parents.  
Even though tetraploid wheat such as durum lacks a set of D chromosomes [121], researchers and breeding centers worldwide have been looking into exotic and native sources to find ways to improve FHB resistance. Thus far numerous studies have shown promising results for FHB resistance in durum [127; 128], however, these studies have also confirmed that it is more challenging to improve resistance in elite durum wheat than it is to improve resistance in elite bread wheat cultivars. One of the major tools used to enhance FHB resistance in wheat and durum over the last decades, QTL mapping, has resulted in the detection of numerous QTLs for FHB resistance. However, in durum and other tetraploid wheat only a few small effects QTLs have been identified [93; 125; 129]. For instance, the _Fhb1_ gene has been transferred to different bread wheat lines but for years introgression into elite durum lines has not been an easy feat [129]. Nevertheless, recent reports [126; 129; 130] have confirmed the successful introgression of _Fhb1_ gene from bread wheat to durum wheat. This result is promising for the future of FHB resistance in durum, and as new sources of resistance are being discovered it is conceivable that with the advance technology such as genomic selection, genome editing, transgenics and others, improved durum cultivars is within reach. It can also be expected that commercial wheat and durum cultivars, with substantially higher defence against FHB, will be released in the near future.  
In the last three decades the area of host resistance exploration has led to some great achievements especially in the development of highly resistant cultivars such as the previously mentioned Sumai-3 and Ning 4870 [131; 132; 133], predecessors to Canada's AAC Brandon. AAC Brandon is one of the most resistant spring wheat cultivars currently used in Canada and widely grown across Canadian Prairies [54]. However, [PERSON] et al. [55] have shown that even these current resistant varieties are still not immune to the catastrophic effect of FHB. Furthermore, ideal resistance in elite commercial wheat has not been achieved yet [\(\gamma\)], due to the extremely complex nature of FHB resistance traits. As a result of all these constraints with these current management strategies, FHB and _Fusarium_ mycotoxins remains a recalcitrant problem worldwide. Hence, there is an ever pressing need to combine all possible strategies old, novel, or improved that can stand alone or be integrated with other current management strategies to effectively stand a chance of minimising the effects of this disastrous disease.