# China Farmer Reportedly Loses Nearly 25 Acres of Sesame After Following an AI-Generated Pesticide Plan > Source: > Published: 2026-08-12 21:00:04+00:00 # China Farmer Reportedly Loses Nearly 25 Acres of Sesame After Following an AI-Generated Pesticide Plan ## The perils of relying on AI for agricultural decisions without expert verification A 67-year-old farmer in Chuzhou, Anhui province, reportedly lost nearly 25 acres of sesame seedlings after following an [AI-generated pesticide plan](https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ai-app-misguides-farmer-ruins-sesame-crop-1813706), with the crop withering within 24 hours of the chemicals being sprayed. The grower, identified by Taiwanese publication CTWANT only by his surname Wu, saw his juvenile crop die irreversibly in a single day. The incident highlights the financial and physical risks of relying on an AI-generated pesticide plan without seeking independent human expert verification. ## The Reality of Relying on AI for Pesticide Plans Wu had spent nearly a year successfully relying on the artificial intelligence tool for agricultural guidance. He initially approached the new technology with measured scepticism. However, the farmer gradually let his guard down after a series of early successes with fertilising schedules and routine pest control tasks. The chatbot provided consistent and seemingly reliable advice over many months, which ultimately led him to trust its recommendation for a new chemical spray without consulting local agricultural authorities or agronomists. The recommendation consisted of a highly potent mixture of agro-chemicals. The chatbot instructed Wu to combine high-efficiency flupyridine and flufenazate for weed management, alongside thiamethoxam and emamectin benzoate for insect control. Relying entirely on the chatbot, he applied the complex mixture across his entire 25-acre field of sesame seedlings, expecting the same results he had seen previously. Agricultural technicians who later assessed the crop damage identified the core issue. The suggested herbicide strategy was unsuitable for broad application on sesame crops. The specified chemicals required highly targeted, context-specific use rather than a blanket spraying approach. The failure involved both the wrong chemical mixture and a flawed application method. ## Trusting Artificial Intelligence Without Expert Checks In a video interview later translated by the technology outlet Tom's Hardware, the farmer offered a warning to other growers regarding the specific chemical mixture. 'If you spray it, the next day the seedlings won't survive,' Wu said. 'Both the grass and the seedlings will die, and the seedlings will die even faster.' Reports from Chinese-language outlets said the technology company's support team acknowledged that their system did not possess an independent, verified agronomic database. It summarised publicly available information from the internet with misplaced confidence. This underlined that algorithms do not have real-world situational awareness. The company reportedly advised farmers to consult local agricultural experts before acting on similar recommendations in future, and said it would review how its tool generates crop-management advice. ## Wider Risks of Agricultural AI Advice Research published in the academic journal Frontiers in Plant Science has flagged this pattern in agricultural technology. The studies highlight decision-making failures, opaque algorithmic behaviour and mismatches between digital outputs and actual field conditions. The authors argue that human oversight and local expertise remain essential safeguards when deploying AI tools on farms. [Similar problems have been reported in the legal, medical and financial sectors](https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ai-incidents-highlight-growing-concerns-over-control-safety-1812912). The chatbot only identified the herbicide as the likely cause of the destruction when Wu consulted it again after the plants had already died. The earlier track record of accurate advice was not a guarantee of future success. © Copyright IBTimes 2025. All rights reserved.