DOCSLIB.ORG

Microbial Risk Assessment Guideline

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Microbial Risk Assessment Guideline EPA/100/J-12/001 USDA/FSIS/2012-001 MICROBIAL RISK ASSESSMENT GUIDELINE PATHOGENIC MICROORGANISMS WITH FOCUS ON FOOD AND WATER Prepared by the Interagency Microbiological Risk Assessment Guideline Workgroup July 2012 Microbial Risk Assessment Guideline Page ii DISCLAIMER This guideline document represents the current thinking of the workgroup on the topics addressed. It is not a regulation and does not confer any rights for or on any person and does not operate to bind USDA, EPA, any other federal agency, or the public. Further, this guideline is not intended to replace existing guidelines that are in use by agencies. The decision to apply methods and approaches in this guideline, either totally or in part, is left to the discretion of the individual department or agency. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2012). Microbial Risk Assessment Guideline: Pathogenic Microorganisms with Focus on Food and Water. EPA/100/J-12/001 Microbial Risk Assessment Guideline Page iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Disclaimer .......................................................................................................................... ii Interagency Workgroup Members ................................................................................ vii Preface ............................................................................................................................. viii Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... ix Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………….xii 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Who is this Guideline Written For? ................................................................. 1 1.2 What are the Benefits of this Guideline? ......................................................... 2 1.3 What are Some Fundamental Differences between Microbes and Chemicals? .......................................................................................................... 3 1.4 What are the Components of a MRA that I Should Consider? ..................... 6 1.5 How is this MRA Guidance Related to Other MRA Frameworks/Guidelines that are Currently Available? ................................. 8 1.6 What MRA Principles MRA Should I be Aware Of? .................................... 9 1.7 How can the MRA be Used? ........................................................................... 11 1.8 What Are Examples of Types of MRA? ........................................................ 12 1.9 What Types of Decisions within Risk Assessment are Science Policy?....... 13 1.10 Why are Uncertainty and Variability in MRA Important? ......................... 15 1.11 Summary ........................................................................................................... 16 2. Planning and Scoping ................................................................................................ 17 2.1 What is Planning and Scoping? ...................................................................... 17 2.1.1 What is Problem Formulation? ............................................................ 18 2.2 What do I Consider When Deciding to Initiate a MRA? ............................. 19 2.3 What “Depth” Can I go into in the Risk Assessment? ................................. 21 2.4 What Elements are Discussed During Planning and Scoping? ................... 23 2.4.1 What are Risk Management Questions and What is the Charge? ... 27 2.4.2 What is a Risk Profile? ......................................................................... 27 2.4.3 What is a Conceptual Model? .............................................................. 28 2.4.4 How are Data Gaps Identified and Addressed in the Context of Planning and Scoping? .......................................................................... 29 2.4.5 What is an Analysis Plan? .................................................................... 32 2.4.6 How do I Consider Information Quality Including Data Quality? .. 32 2.4.7 What is Value-of-Information Analysis? ............................................ 35 2.4.8 What is a Communications Plan? ........................................................ 35 2.5 Who Can be Involved with Planning and Scoping? ..................................... 36 2.6 Summary ........................................................................................................... 37 3. Hazard Identification and Hazard Characterization ............................................. 38 Microbial Risk Assessment Guideline Page iv 3.1 What are Hazard Identification and Hazard Characterization? ................ 38 3.2 How do I Define the Hazard? ......................................................................... 39 3.3 What Hazard Characteristics Can I Consider? ............................................ 40 3.4 How do Microbial Hazards Cause Adverse Outcomes? .............................. 41 3.4.1 What does Virulence and/or Pathogenicity Mean in the Context of Causing an Adverse Outcome? ............................................................ 42 3.5 What are the Mechanisms that May Lead to the Development of New Pathogens or Pathogens with New Traits? .................................................... 43 3.6 What are the Major Categories of Microorganisms? ................................... 44 3.7 What Methodological Approaches are Used to Identify and Quantify Microorganisms?.............................................................................................. 46 3.8 Are there Concerns Regarding Microbial Detection Methods? .................. 47 3.9 What Host Factors Can I Take into Consideration? .................................... 51 3.10 How does Life Stage Affect Sensitivity to Infection and Disease Manifestation? .................................................................................................. 53 3.11 What Environmental Factors Can I Take into Consideration? .................. 54 3.12 Summary ........................................................................................................... 55 4. Dose-Response Assessment ....................................................................................... 56 4.1 What is Dose-Response Modeling and What are Some General Considerations for Dose-Response Modeling? .............................................. 56 4.1.1 How do I Choose Between Modeling a Discrete Dose Versus an Average Dose? ........................................................................................ 57 4.1.2 What is the Difference Between a Threshold and a Non-Threshold Model? .................................................................................................... 58 4.1.3 What is the One-Hit Model and When is it the Preferred Model? ... 58 4.1.4 What Important Factors Can I Consider in Dose-Response Assessment? ........................................................................................... 60 4.1.5 How Can I Model the Spread of Disease in the Population?............. 67 4.1.6 What Can I Address for Each Model to Improve Transparency? ... 69 4.2 What is Current Practice in Quantitative Dose-Response Modeling for Microbial Illness? ............................................................................................. 70 4.2.1 What Models Can I Use for Microbial Dose-Response Assessment? 70 4.2.2 What is the Output of a Dose-Response Assessment?........................ 76 4.2.3 How do I Fit Models to Existing Dose-Response Data? ..................... 77 4.2.4 How Can I Evaluate Uncertainty in Dose-Response? ........................ 79 4.2.5 What is Variability in Dose-Response? ............................................... 80 4.2.6 How Can I Account for Life Stages and Different Populations in Dose-Response Models? ........................................................................ 81 4.2.7 Can I Use Uncertainty, Modifying, or Adjustment Factors in a Microbial Dose-Response Assessment? ............................................... 81 4.2.8 Are Other Modeling Methods Being Developed? ............................... 82 4.3 Summary ........................................................................................................... 83 5. Exposure Assessment ................................................................................................. 84 5.1 What are General Concepts in Exposure Assessment? ................................ 84 Microbial Risk Assessment Guideline Page v 5.1.1 What is an Exposure Assessment? ....................................................... 84 5.1.2 What are Sources, Pathways, and Routes of Exposure? ................... 85 5.1.3 How are Fate and Transport Considered in Exposure Assessment? 88 5.1.4 What Environmental Factors Can I Take into Consideration?........ 89 5.1.5 What is an Exposure Scenario? ........................................................... 90 5.1.6 What are Qualitative and Quantitative Exposure Assessments? ..... 90 5.1.7 What is Variability in Exposure Assessment? .................................... 91 5.1.8 What is Uncertainty in Exposure Assessment? .................................. 91 5.1.9 What is a Deterministic Exposure Assessment? ................................. 92 5.1.10 What is a Stochastic Exposure Assessment? ....................................... 92
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 10: Classification of Microorganisms
    Chapter 10: Classification of Microorganisms 1. The Taxonomic Hierarchy 2. Methods of Identification 1. The Taxonomic Hierarchy Phylogenetic Tree of the 3 Domains Taxonomic Hierarchy • 8 successive taxa are used to classify each species: Domain Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus **species can also contain different strains** Species Scientific Nomenclature To avoid confusion, every type of organism must be referred to in a consistent way. The current system of nomenclature (naming) has been in use since the 18th century: • every type of organism is referred by its genus name followed by its specific epithet (i.e., species name) Homo sapiens (H. sapiens) Escherichia coli (E. coli) • name should be in italics and only the genus is capitalized which can also be abbreviated • names are Latin (or “Latinized” Greek) with the genus being a noun and the specific epithet an adjective **strain info can be listed after the specific epithet (e.g., E. coli DH5α)** 2. Methods of Identification Biochemical Testing In addition to morphological (i.e., appearance under the microscope) and differential staining characteristics, microorganisms can also be identified by their biochemical “signatures”: • the nutrient requirements and metabolic “by-products” of of a particular microorganism • different growth media can be used to test the physiological characteristics of a microorganism • e.g., medium with lactose only as energy source • e.g., medium that reveals H2S production **appearance on test medium reveals + or – result!** Commercial devices for rapid Identification Perform multiple tests simultaneously Enterotube II Such devices involve the simultaneous inoculation of various test media: • ~24 hrs later the panel of results reveals ID of organism! Use of Dichotomous Keys Series of “yes/no” biochemical tests to ID organism.
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Glossary for AQA GCSE Biology Student Book
    Biology Glossary amino acids small molecules from which proteins are A built abiotic factor physical or non-living conditions amylase a digestive enzyme (carbohydrase) that that affect the distribution of a population in an breaks down starch ecosystem, such as light, temperature, soil pH anaerobic respiration respiration without using absorption the process by which soluble products oxygen of digestion move into the blood from the small intestine antibacterial chemicals chemicals produced by plants as a defence mechanism; the amount abstinence method of contraception whereby the produced will increase if the plant is under attack couple refrains from intercourse, particularly when an egg might be in the oviduct antibiotic e.g. penicillin; medicines that work inside the body to kill bacterial pathogens accommodation ability of the eyes to change focus antibody protein normally present in the body acid rain rain water which is made more acidic by or produced in response to an antigen, which it pollutant gases neutralises, thus producing an immune response active site the place on an enzyme where the antimicrobial resistance (AMR) an increasing substrate molecule binds problem in the twenty-first century whereby active transport in active transport, cells use energy bacteria have evolved to develop resistance against to transport substances through cell membranes antibiotics due to their overuse against a concentration gradient antiretroviral drugs drugs used to treat HIV adaptation features that organisms have to help infections; they
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Microorganisms: Evolution and Solution to Pollution Fu L Li1, Wang B1,2
    COMMENTARY Marine microorganisms: Evolution and solution to pollution Fu L Li1, Wang B1,2 Li FL, Wang B. Marine microorganisms: Evolution and solution to pollution. J Mar Microbiol. 2018;2(1):4-5. nce ocean nurtured life, now she needs our care. Marine microorganism will be an opportunity to further understand ourselves and to seek for new Ois the host of ocean in all ages. We should learn from them humbly. methods of fighting old infections. Marine microorganism is tightly bond with human during the history of evolution and nowadays’ environment pollution. Along with industrial revolution, our marine ecosystem suffered serious pollutions. Microplastics are tiny plastic particles (<5 mm) (Figure 1B), Although the topic is still in debate, life is probably originated from which poison marine lives. Because these microplastics are very hard to be submarine in hydrothermal vent systems (1). In the journey of evolution, our degraded, it is predicted that there will be more microplastics than fish in biosphere was completely dominated by microbes for a very long time (Figure ocean by the year 2050 (7). Since marine sediments are considered as the sink 1A). Human being evolves with those microorganisms. Consequently, of microplastics and marine microbes are key dwellers of marine sediments, the influences of microorganisms can be found in all aspects of human more attention should be paid on the interactions between microplastics biology. More than 65% of our genes originated with bacteria, archaea, and and marine microbes. Actually, a call for this has been published in 2011 unicellular eukaryotes, including those genes responsible for host-microbe (8).
    [Show full text]
  • The Pathogenomics and Evolution of Anthrax-Like Bacillus Cereus Isolates and Plasmids
    The Pathogenomics and Evolution of Anthrax-like Bacillus cereus Isolates and Plasmids A white paper proposal submitted by: Geraldine A. Van der Auwera, Ph.D. Harvard Medical School Michael Feldgarden, Ph.D. Genomic Sequencing Center for Infectious Diseases The Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard 1 Executive summary A key member of the Bacillus cereus group, Bacillus anthracis is defined by phenotypic and molecular characteristics that are conferred by two large plasmids, pXO1 and pXO2. However the very concept of B. anthracis as a distinct species has been called into question by recent discoveries of “intermediate” isolates identified as B. cereus and B. thuringiensis but possessing features similar to those of B. anthracis, including large plasmids that share a common backbone with pXO1 and/or pXO2. Many of these “intermediate” isolates possess potential or demonstrated lethal pathogenic properties and are sometimes called “anthrax-like”, even though they do not meet the strict definition of anthrax-causing B. anthracis. We recently showed that pXO1- and pXO2- like plasmids are widely prevalent in environmental isolates of the B. cereus group. Because B. anthracis-like isolates do not possess all the molecular hallmarks of typical B. anthracis, there is a significant risk that they would escape being flagged as dangerous. Consequently, accidental infection by naturally occurring pathotypes which are not immediately recognized as life-threatening could present a serious health concern. Such cases have already been reported, some with a fatal outcome. The second risk posed by these B. anthracis-like isolates could be the intentional use as “stealth anthrax” bioweapon, either in natural form or with genetic modifications that would require only minimal skills and facilities to produce.
    [Show full text]
  • Levitis Et Al 2009
    Animal Behaviour 78 (2009) 103–110 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Animal Behaviour journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/yanbe Behavioural biologists do not agree on what constitutes behaviour Daniel A. Levitis*, William Z. Lidicker, Jr, Glenn Freund Museum of Vertebrate Zoology and Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley article info Behavioural biology is a major discipline within biology, centred on the key concept of ‘behaviour’. But Article history: how is ‘behaviour’ defined, and how should it be defined? We outline what characteristics we believe Received 10 February 2009 a scientific definition should have, and why we think it is important that a definition have these traits. Initial acceptance 12 March 2009 We then examine the range of available published definitions for behaviour. Finding no consensus, we Final acceptance 23 March 2009 present survey responses from 174 members of three behaviour-focused scientific societies as to their Published online 3 June 2009 understanding of the term. Here again, we find surprisingly widespread disagreement as to what MS. number: AE-09-00083 qualifies as behaviour. Respondents contradict themselves, each other and published definitions, indi- cating that they are using individually variable intuitive, rather than codified, meanings of ‘behaviour’. Keywords: We offer a new definition, based largely on survey responses: behaviour is the internally coordinated behaviour responses (actions or inactions) of whole living organisms (individuals or groups) to internal and/or definition external stimuli, excluding responses more easily understood as developmental changes. Finally, we level of organization philosophy of science discuss the usage, meanings and limitations of this definition. Ó 2009 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.
    [Show full text]
  • Reinforcing the Immunocompromised Host Defense Against Fungi: Progress Beyond the Current State of the Art
    Journal of Fungi Review Reinforcing the Immunocompromised Host Defense against Fungi: Progress beyond the Current State of the Art Georgios Karavalakis 1, Evangelia Yannaki 1,2 and Anastasia Papadopoulou 1,* 1 Hematology Department-Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Unit, Gene and Cell Therapy Center, “George Papanikolaou” Hospital, 57010 Thessaloniki, Greece; [email protected] (G.K.); [email protected] (E.Y.) 2 Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +30-2313-307-693; Fax: +30-2313-307-521 Abstract: Despite the availability of a variety of antifungal drugs, opportunistic fungal infections still remain life-threatening for immunocompromised patients, such as those undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation or solid organ transplantation. Suboptimal efficacy, toxicity, development of resistant variants and recurrent episodes are limitations associated with current antifungal drug therapy. Adjunctive immunotherapies reinforcing the host defense against fungi and aiding in clearance of opportunistic pathogens are continuously gaining ground in this battle. Here, we review alternative approaches for the management of fungal infections going beyond the state of the art and placing an emphasis on fungus-specific T cell immunotherapy. Harnessing the power of T cells in the form of adoptive immunotherapy represents the strenuous protagonist of the current immunotherapeutic approaches towards combating invasive fungal infections. The progress that has been made over the last years in this field and remaining challenges as well, will be discussed. Citation: Karavalakis, G.; Yannaki, E.; Papadopoulou, A. Reinforcing the Keywords: fungal infections; fungus-specific T cells; T cell immunotherapy Immunocompromised Host Defense against Fungi: Progress beyond the Current State of the Art.
    [Show full text]
  • The Neurophysiology of Backward Visual Masking: Information Analysis
    The Neurophysiology of Backward Visual Masking: Information Analysis Edmund T. Rolls, Martin J. Tovée, and Stefano Panzeri University of Oxford Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/11/3/300/1758552/089892999563409.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021 Abstract ■ Backward masking can potentially provide evidence of the to the stimulus. The decrease is more marked than the decrease time needed for visual processing, a fundamental constraint in ªring rate because it is the selective part of the ªring that that must be incorporated into computational models of vision. is especially attenuated by the mask, not the spontaneous Although backward masking has been extensively used psycho- ªring, and also because the neuronal response is more variable physically, there is little direct evidence for the effects of visual at short SOAs. However, even at the shortest SOA of 20 msec, masking on neuronal responses. To investigate the effects of a the information available is on average 0.1 bits. This compares backward masking paradigm on the responses of neurons in to 0.3 bits with only the 16-msec target stimulus shown and a the temporal visual cortex, we have shown that the response typical value for such neurons of 0.4 to 0.5 bits with a 500- of the neurons is interrupted by the mask. Under conditions msec stimulus. The results thus show that considerable infor- when humans can just identify the stimulus, with stimulus mation is available from neuronal responses even under onset asynchronies (SOA) of 20 msec, neurons in macaques backward masking conditions that allow the neurons to have respond to their best stimulus for approximately 30 msec.
    [Show full text]
  • Hand on a Hot Stove
    Hand on a Hot Stove Introduction: When You Put Your Hand on a Hot Stove Think about what happens if you accidentally place your hand on a hot stove. Use numbers 1-5 to place these statements in the order in which they happen. ____ You wave or shake your hand voluntarily to cool it. ____ Your arm moves to automatically move your hand away from the stove. ____ You feel pain in your hand. ____ You remember that you should not touch a hot stove. ____ You touch a hot stove. Life Sciences Learning Center 1 Copyright © 2013 by University of Rochester. All rights reserved. May be copied for classroom use Part 1: What is a reflex? Reflexes If you touch something that is very hot, your hand moves away quickly before you even feel the pain. You don’t have to think about it because the response is a reflex that does not involve the brain. A reflex is a rapid, unlearned, involuntary (automatic) response to a stimulus (change in the environment). Reflexes are responses that protect the body from potentially harmful events that require immediate action. They involve relatively few neurons (nerve cells) so that they can occur rapidly. There are a wide variety of reflexes that we experience every day such as sneezing, coughing, and blinking. We also automatically duck when an object is thrown at us, and our pupils automatically change size in response to light. These reflexes have evolved because they protect the body from potentially harmful events. Most reflexes protect people from injury or deal with things that require immediate action.
    [Show full text]
  • 14S802 - Strain Specific Pathogenicity of Staphylococcus Aureus Final Report
    14S802 - Strain Specific Pathogenicity of Staphylococcus aureus Final Report This project was funded under the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine Competitive Funding Programme. SUMMARY Mastitis is a costly endemic disease for the dairy industry. It is primarily caused by bacterial infection and is the most common reason for antibiotic use in dairy cows in Ireland. Staphylococcus aureus is the most common mastitis pathogen in Ireland and the S. aureus strains that cause mastitis belong to specific bovine-adapted lineages. Current selection for mastitis-resistance is based on the host immune response, as determined by somatic cell count (SCC). However, the ability of S. aureus to evade and subvert the host immune response is well known, including the ability to internalise and survive within host cells. This project tested the hypothesis that bovine intramammary infection with different S. aureus strains results in differential activation of the host immune response. Supporting this hypothesis, significant differences between S. aureus lineages in their ability to internalise within bovine mammary epithelial cells were found with some strains internalising at higher levels than others. It was also found that some strains induced higher expression of cytokines and chemokines responsible for attracting immune cells and these strains induced mammary epithelial cells to produce factors that attracted somatic cells, while other strains did not. Differences in disease presentation in vivo in cows infected with different strains were also observed, indicating strain-specific virulence. Significantly higher somatic cell count and anti- Staphylococcus IgG and significantly lower milk yield were observed in response to infection with a more virulent strain.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Disease and Disease Transmission
    DISEASE AND DISEASE TRANSMISSION Chapter 2 Disease and disease transmission An enormous variety of organisms exist, including some which can survive and even develop in the body of people or animals. If the organism can cause infection, it is an infectious agent. In this manual infectious agents which cause infection and illness are called pathogens. Diseases caused by pathogens, or the toxins they produce, are communicable or infectious diseases (45). In this manual these will be called disease and infection. This chapter presents the transmission cycle of disease with its different elements, and categorises the different infections related to WES. 2.1 Introduction to the transmission cycle of disease To be able to persist or live on, pathogens must be able to leave an infected host, survive transmission in the environment, enter a susceptible person or animal, and develop and/or multiply in the newly infected host. The transmission of pathogens from current to future host follows a repeating cycle. This cycle can be simple, with a direct transmission from current to future host, or complex, where transmission occurs through (multiple) intermediate hosts or vectors. This cycle is called the transmission cycle of disease, or transmission cycle. The transmission cycle has different elements: The pathogen: the organism causing the infection The host: the infected person or animal ‘carrying’ the pathogen The exit: the method the pathogen uses to leave the body of the host Transmission: how the pathogen is transferred from host to susceptible person or animal, which can include developmental stages in the environment, in intermediate hosts, or in vectors 7 CONTROLLING AND PREVENTING DISEASE The environment: the environment in which transmission of the pathogen takes place.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Management of Opportunistic Infections and Anti Retroviral Treatment in Adolescents and Adults in Ethiopia
    GUIDELINES FOR MANAGEMENT OF OPPORTUNISTIC INFECTIONS AND ANTI RETROVIRAL TREATMENT IN ADOLESCENTS AND ADULTS IN ETHIOPIA Federal HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control Office Federal Ministry of Health July 2007 PART I GUIDELINES FOR MANAGEMENT OF OPPORTUNISTIC INFECTIONS IN ADULTS AND ADOLESCENTS ii Table of Contents Foreword iv Acknowledgement v Acronyms and Abbreviations vi 1. Introduction 1 2. Objectives and Targets 2 2.1. Objectives 2 2.2. Targets 2 3. Management of Common Opportunistic Infections 2 4. Unit 1: Management of OI of the Respiratory System 3 1.1 Bacterial pneumonia 6 1.2 Pneumonia due to Pneumocystis jiroveci. 6 1.3 Pulmonary tuberculosis 7 1.4 Correlation of pulmonary diseases and CD4 count in HIV-infected patients 9 Unit 2: Management of GI Opportunistic Diseases 11 2.1. Dysphagia and odynophagia 11 2.2. Diarrhoea 12 2.3 Peri-anal problems 14 2.4. Peri-anal and/or genital herpes 15 Unit 3: Management of Opportunistic Diseases of the Nervous system 16 3.1. Peripheral neuropathies 17 3.2. Persistent headache with (+/-) neurological manifestations (+/-) seizure 18 3.3. Management of common CNS infections presenting with headache and/or seizure 19 3.3.1. Toxoplasmosis 19 3.3.2 Management of seizure associated with toxoplasmosis and other CNS OIs 21 3.3.3 Cryptococcosis 23 3.3.4 CNS Tuberculosis 25 Unit 4: Management of Skin Disorders 26 4.1 Aetiological Classification of Skin Disorders in HIV disease. 27 4.2 Selected skin conditions in patients with HIV infection 28 4.2.1 Seborrheic dermatitis 28 4.2.2 Pruritic Papular Eruption 29 4.2.3 Kaposi’s Sarcoma 29 Unit 5: Management of Fever 30 5.1 Selected causes of fever in AIDS patients 33 5.1.1 Malaria 33 5.1.2 Visceral Leishmaniasis 33 5.1.3 Sepsis 34 Unit 6: Some Special Conditions in OI Management 35 6.1 Initiating ART in context of an acute OI 35 6.2 When to initiate ART in context of an acute OI 36 iii Tables 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Ralstonia Solanacearum Race 3 Biovar 2 OriginalWebpage(SeeLink AtTheEndOfTheDocument)
    USDA-NRI Project: R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2: detection, exclusion and analysis of a Select Agent Educational modules Ralstonia solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 Original webpage (see link at the end of the document) Author : Patrice G. Champoiseau of University of Florida Reviewers : Caitilyn Allen of University of Wisconsin; Jeffrey B. Jones , Carrie Harmon and Timur M. Momol of University of Florida Publication date : September 1 2, 2008 Supported by : The United States Department of Agriculture - National Research Initiative Program (2007 -2010) - See definitions of red-colored words in the glossary at the end of this document - Ralstonia solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 is the plant pathogen bacterium that causes brown rot (or bacterial wilt) of potato, Southern wilt of geranium, and bacterial wilt of tomato. R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 occurs in highlands in the tropics and in subtropical and some warm-temperate areas throughout the world. It has also occurred in cold-temperate regions in Europe, where several outbreaks of brown rot of potato have been reported in the last 30 years. It has been reported in more than 30 countries and almost all continents. In the United States, several introductions of R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 have already occurred as a result of importation of infested geranium cuttings from off-shore production sites, but the pathogen was apparently eradicated. However, because of the risk of its possible re-introduction through importation of infected plant material, and its potential to affect potato production in cold-temperate areas in the northern United States, R. solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 is considered a serious threat to the United States potato industry.
    [Show full text]