DOCSLIB.ORG

The Biology, Behaviour and Survival of Pupating False Codling Moth

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Biology, Behaviour and Survival of Pupating False Codling Moth The biology, behaviour and survival of pupating false codling moth, Thaumatotibia leucotreta (Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), a citrus pest in South Africa A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE of RHODES UNIVERSITY by Claire Natalie Love February 2015 i ABSTRACT Control of the citrus pest, false codling moth (FCM), Thaumatotibia leucotreta Meyrick (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) is crucial for the South African citrus industry. The economic losses and phytosanitary status of this pest, coupled with increased consumer awareness and demands, has created a need for effective, IPM-compatible control measures for use against the soil-dwelling life stages of FCM. Promising developments in the field of microbial control through the use of entomopathogenic fungi (EPF) and entomopathogenic nematodes (EPNs) have highlighted the need for research regarding pupation biology, behaviour and survival of FCM, as a good understanding of biology of the target organism is an important component of any biological control programme. The aim of this study was to improve the current understanding of FCM pupation habits through the manipulation of soil texture class, ground cover, shading, soil compaction, air temperature, and soil moisture in the laboratory. These findings would then be used to aid the biological control programmes using EPF and EPNs against FCM in the soil. Three soil texture classes (sandy loam, silt loam and silty clay loam) were obtained from orchards for use in the study. FCM larvae were allowed to drop into the soil of their own accord and the pupation behaviour that followed was then captured on film with pupae formed in the soil being kept in order to measure adult eclosion. In general, very few abiotic factors had a clear influence on FCM pupation. Larval wandering time and distance was short, but also variable between individuals. Distance did increase when soils were moist. Pupation depth was shallow, with pupal cocoons generally being formed on the soil surface. Depth of pupation was less than one centimetre for all abiotic conditions, with little burrowing into soil. Eclosion success was higher for sandier soils when these were dry and uncompacted, but the addition of both moisture and soil compaction increased FCM eclosion success. FCM was sensitive to desiccation when the soils were dry and temperature limits of 15 °C and 32 °C had a strongly negative impact on eclosion success. Preferences for particular abiotic conditions were limited to only certain moisture conditions when interacting with soil texture class and a preference for pupating in soil when it is available. Limited preference was found for particular soil textures despite this having a strong influence on eclosion success, but individuals did appear to pupate in close proximity to one another. Viable direct habitat manipulation for FCM control could not be identified. These results and all of the abiotic variables measured have important implications for EPF and EPN application, survival and persistence in the soil in order to improve the ability of these biological control agents to control FCM. These are discussed in each chapter. ii Acknowledgements This research would not have been possible without the support of a number of people and institutions. To everyone who has assisted with this work, both directly and indirectly, thank you so very much. I could not have asked for more supportive and helpful supervisors than Martin Hill and Sean Moore. Your time, advice, insights and knowledge have been such a benefit to me and this body of work and I am extremely grateful to you both. My heartfelt thanks to both Martin Hill and Sean Moore for your assistance with regards to securing funding and for giving me exposure to the citrus industry, having your support with both of these has truly made all the difference. Thank you to the citrus growers in the Sundays River Valley and Kat River Valley who were so willing to assist and allow for soil collection from their orchards. Your assistance with this made this work possible. Field assistance was very kindly provided by the CRI staff, including Wayne Kirkman and Zongezile Zondi, as well as Kennedy Zimba, Candice Coombes, Veronique Chartier-Fitzgerald, Tamryn Marsberg, Mathew Goddard and Danielle Wiblin from Rhodes University. FCM was kindly supplied by Craig Chambers and the staff of River Bioscience, as well as Mellissa Peyper from Rhodes University. Laboratory equipment was always available for use thanks to the efforts of Tanya Pretorius, Mellissa Peyper and Candice Marshall. I am especially grateful to Terry Butterworth for advising and assisting in this capacity. The support staff at Rhodes University Zoology and Entomology Department is gratefully acknowledged, without whom we would not be able to do our research. I am very grateful to the Rhodes University Geography Department, Gillian McGregor for soils advice and loaning me relevant materials, as well as Glynn Armstrong and Abe Ngoepe for assistance and equipment use. A big thank you must be extended towards Tim Vink and Ryan Wasserman for their time and efforts with the VirtualDubMod and the ImageJ/Fiji software. Your willingness to help made this a much simpler task. iii Statistical assistance was very kindly provided by Julie Coetzee, Philip Weyl and Candice Coombes during various phases of this work. I am so very grateful to the other students who joined me on this postgraduate journey: Diane Smith, Megan Murison, Shana Mian, Dan Danckwerts, Megan Riddin, Jaryd Ridgeway, Izak Pretorious, Dan van der Vyver, Samantha Page, as well as Candice Coombes, Tamryn Marsberg, Tara O’Neill, the Rhodes postgraduate students and the other half of the Claire duo, Claire Faddel. The friendship, support, encouragement, academic discussions and comic relief when needed provided by you all has seen me through both good and challenging times. A special word of thanks to Candice Coombes for being so willing to help with all aspects of this work, from providing expertise to proofreading, your help has been so greatly appreciated. Funding is a vital component of any postgraduate research and this work would not have been possible without the financial support of the National Research Foundation (NRF), the Ernst & Ethel Erikson Trust, Citrus Research International (CRI) and Rhodes University. The support provided by the postgraduate and undergraduate funding office staff members has allowed me to be in a position to pursue my postgraduate studies and for that I am very grateful. I would also like to acknowledge Jeanne van der Merwe for handling the financial matters over the duration of this work. As I move onto the next phase this journey, I must thank all the staff of CRI and River Bioscience, as well as the students at CRI, Sean Thackeray and Sonnica Albertyn for being so welcoming and for giving me new insights into this work. In conclusion, thank you to my parents, sisters, aunts, other family and friends for your support and interest from the early stages of my academic career to those who still continue to encourage me in these latter years. A tribute must be given to my grandfather, Reginald Sweet, a scholar and a true gentleman for having been such a wonderful influence on me in my younger years, both academically and personally. In particular thanks must be given to my mother, Bridget Love for your love and endless support. You have encouraged me since day one and none of this would have been possible without you. iv Table of Contents Abstract………………………………………….…………………………………………….ii Acknowledgments………………………………………….…………………………………iii Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………………...v List of Tables………………………………………………………………………………....ix List of Figures………………………………………………………………………………....x List of Abbreviations………………………………………………………………………xxiii 1. CHAPTER 1 – General Introduction 1.1 SOUTH AFRICAN CITRUS ....................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 The Taxonomy of the Citrus Genus ........................................................................ 1 1.1.2 The South African Citrus Industry .......................................................................... 2 1.1.3 Citrus Export: Sanitary and Phytosanitary regulations (SPS) ................................. 6 1.1.4 Citrus Pests of South Africa ................................................................................... 7 1.2 FALSE CODLING MOTH ........................................................................................ 10 1.2.1 Taxonomic Classification ...................................................................................... 10 1.2.2 Distribution and Host Range ................................................................................. 11 1.2.3 Description of Life Stages ..................................................................................... 12 1.2.4 General Life History of FCM ................................................................................ 13 1.2.5 The Pre-pupal and Pupal Life Stages of Lepidoptera ............................................ 14 1.2.6 Pupation in False Codling Moth ............................................................................ 15 1.2.7 The Economic Importance of False Codling Moth ............................................... 16 1.2.8 Control of False Codling Moth .............................................................................. 16 1.2.8.1 Pre-harvest Control ...........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Sustainable Agricultural Future Relies on the Transition to Organic Agroecological Pest Management
    sustainability Review A Sustainable Agricultural Future Relies on the Transition to Organic Agroecological Pest Management Lauren Brzozowski 1 and Michael Mazourek 1,2,* ID 1 Section of Plant Breeding and Genetics, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA; [email protected] 2 David R. Atkinson Center for Sustainable Future, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 21 April 2018; Accepted: 11 June 2018; Published: 15 June 2018 Abstract: The need to improve agricultural sustainability to secure yields, minimize environmental impacts and buffer environmental change is widely recognized. Investment in conventional agriculture has supported its present yield advantage. However, organic agriculture with agroecological management has nascent capacity for sustainable production and for increasing yields in the future. Conventional systems have leveraged reductionist approaches to address pests, primarily through pesticides that seek to eliminate biological factors that reduce yield, but come at a cost to human and ecosystem health, and leave production systems vulnerable to the development of pest resistance to these chemicals or traits. Alternatives are needed, and are found in organic production approaches. Although both organic and agroecology approaches encompass more than pest management, this aspect is a pivotal element of our agricultural future. Through increased investment and application of emerging analytical approaches to improve plant breeding for and management of these systems, yields and resilience will surpass approaches that address components alone. Keywords: organic agriculture; agroecology; pest management; plant breeding; biodiversity; sustainability; host plant resistance; pesticides 1. Achieving Needs for Agricultural Productivity and Pest Management Sustainably There is broad recognition among agricultural scientists that a growing world population will consume greater amounts of food and fiber with fewer resources available for production [1].
    [Show full text]
  • False Codling Moth Thaumatotibia Leucotreta
    Stone Fruit Commodity-Based Pest Survey False Codling Moth Thaumatotibia leucotreta Introduction False codling moth (Figure 1) is a significant pest because of its potential economic impact on many crops, including stone fruit, avocado, citrus, corn, cotton, and macadamia. It is not currently known to be present in the United States. Biology Depending on conditions, the false codling moth’s life cycle ranges from 30 to 174 days. It can produce from 2 to 10 generations each year, depending on multiple factors including temperature, food availability and quality, and humidity. To attract males, adult females release pheromones at FIGURE 1. Adult false codling moth (Thaumatotibia leucotreta). Photo courtesy of night. After the adults mate, the female deposits eggs on Pest and Diseases Image Library, Bugwood.org. host plants, either in batches or as single eggs. Later, the hatching larvae burrow into the rind of the host plant. Mature larvae spin cocoons and pupate before they emerge as adults. Symptoms False codling moth can attack stone fruit at any stage. Larvae can even develop in hard green fruit prior to application of control measures. Larvae burrow at the stem end into the fruit and cause damage by feeding around the stone. Damaged fruit can become vulnerable to secondary pests such as fungal organisms and scavengers. Peaches can be damaged by larvae beginning up to 6 weeks before harvest. False codling moth can also attack plants unsuitable for larvae development, such as avocado, causing lesions on fruit tissue and diminishing the marketability of fruit. Because false codling moth is an internal feeder, few symptoms are actually displayed by the larvae.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Responses and Control of California Red Scale Aonidiella Aurantii (Maskell) (Hemiptera: Diaspididae)
    Biological responses and control of California red scale Aonidiella aurantii (Maskell) (Hemiptera: Diaspididae) by Khalid Omairy Mohammed Submitted to Murdoch University in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy College of Science, Health, Engineering and Education Murdoch University Perth, Western Australia March 2020 Declaration The work described in this thesis was undertaken while I was an enrolled student for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Murdoch University, Western Australia. I declare that this thesis is my own account of my research and contains as its main content work which has not previously been submitted for a degree at any tertiary education institution. To the best of my knowledge, all work performed by others, published or unpublished, has been duly acknowledged. Khalid O. Mohammed Date: March 10, 2020 I Acknowledgements بِ ْس ِمِِاللَّ ِـه َِّالر ْح َم ٰـ ِن َِّالر ِح ِيمِ ُ َويَ ْسأَلُ َونَك َِع ِن ُِّالروحِِِۖقُ ِل ُِّالر ُوح ِِم ْنِأَ ْم ِر َِر ِب َيِو َماِأ ِوتيتُ ْم ِِم َن ِْال ِع ْل ِمِإِ ََّّل َِق ِل ايًلِ﴿٨٥﴾ The research for this thesis was undertaken in the School of Veterinary and Life Science, Murdoch University. I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my supervisors Professor Yonglin Ren and Dr Manjree Agarwal “Postharvest Biosecurity and Food Safety Laboratory Murdoch” for their support with enthusiasm, constructive editing, and patience throughout the years of this wonderful project. I deeply appreciate their encouragement, assistance and for being so willing to take me on as a student. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all those who helped me in completing this thesis.
    [Show full text]
  • False Codling Moth on Chillies Thaumatotibia Leucotreta Prevention Monitoring Direct Control
    PEST MANAGEMENT DECISION GUIDE: GREEN LIST False codling moth on chillies Thaumatotibia leucotreta Prevention Monitoring Direct Control l Use mesh or net barriers to keep the l Start monitoring when the chilli fruits start developing as the larvae only attack l Control is difficult because the moth pest out of the crop when possible the fruits has many alternative hosts so l Insect: reinfestation is likely to occur l Eggs are less than 1 mm long, oval, flattened and difficult to see. They are l Hand pick the mature larvae from the laid singly or in group on the developing fruits crop Larva T. leucotreta (Tertia l Larvae are yellowish-white when young with dark spots. The full grown larva l If available, spray a mating disruption Grové, Institute for Tropical and is about 15 mm long, bright red or pink, with a yellow-brown head. The young pheromone into the crop to stop the Subtropical Crops, larvae mine fruit just beneath the surface, or bore into the skin causing males and females from mating Bugwood.org) premature ripening of the fruit l Destroy fruits that are infested and l The pupa (5-7 mm long) is contained within a tough silken cocoon and can be have fallen to the ground to reduce seen in the soil or amongst plant debris the build-up cycle and avoid carrying over the pest to the next season. Put l Adult moths are 15-16 mm (males) and 19-20 mm (female) in length. the fruits in plastic bags and expose Forewings have grey, brown, black and orange-brown markings.
    [Show full text]
  • Efficacy of Electrolyzed Water in Degrading and Removing
    EFFICACY OF ELECTROLYZED WATER IN DEGRADING AND REMOVING PESTICIDE RESIDUES ON FRESH PRODUCE By HANG QI (Under the Direction of Yen-Con Hung) ABSTRACT Pure solution of diazinon, cyprodinil, and phosmet were treated with electrolyzed oxidizing (EO) water and electrolyzed reduced (ER) water. Lower pH, higher available chlorine content (ACC), and longer treatment time of EO water resulted in higher reductions of the three pesticides. ER water was effective in degrading phosmet, slightly effective in reducing diazinon, and ineffective in degrading cyprodinil. Soaking grapes in 12 mg/L mixed pesticide solution for 10 min was found to be the appropriate method for pesticide inoculation. EO water at 500 mL combined with 100 rpm shaking was determined to be the most effective way to wash 200 g contaminated grapes. Then, fresh grapes, spinach, and snap peas contaminated with the three pesticides were washed with EO water at different ACC and treatment time. The results showed both ACC and treatment time were significant (P ≤ 0.05) factors for EO water in removing the three pesticide residues on produce samples. EO water was more effective than ER water, diluted bleach, Vegwash and DI water. Finally, the effect of EO water treatment on produce quality was evaluated. No significant (P > 0.05) color and texture degradation was found for EO water treated produce samples. INDEX WORDS: Electrolyzed water, fresh produce, diazinon, cyprodinil, phosmet EFFICACY OF ELECTROLYZED WATER IN DEGRADING AND REMOVING PESTICIDE RESIDUES ON FRESH PRODUCE by HANG
    [Show full text]
  • Thaumatotibia Leucotreta
    Thaumatotibia leucotreta Scientific Name Thaumatotibia leucotreta (Meyrick) Synonyms: Cryptophlebia leucotreta (Meyrick), Cryptophlebia roerigii Zacher Olethreutes leucotreta Meyrick Thaumatotibia roerigii Zacher Common Name(s) False codling moth, citrus codling moth, orange moth, and orange codling moth Type of Pest Moth Figure 1. Larva of Thaumatotibia leucotreta (T. Grove Taxonomic Position and W. Styn, bugwood.org). Class: Insecta, Order: Lepidoptera, Family: Tortricidae Reason for Inclusion CAPS Target: AHP Prioritized Pest List - 2003 through 2014 Pest Description Eggs: Eggs are flat, oval (0.77 mm long by 0.60 mm wide) shaped discs with a granulated surface. The eggs are white to cream colored when initially laid. They change to a reddish color before the black head capsule of the larvae becomes visible under the chorion prior to hatching (Daiber, 1979a). 1 Larvae: First instar (neonate) larvae approximately 1 to 1.2 mm (< /16 in) in length with dark pinacula giving a spotted appearance, fifth instar larvae are orangey-pink, 1 becoming more pale on sides and yellow in ventral region, 12 to 18 mm (approx. /2 to 11 /16 in) long, with a brown head capsule and prothoracic shield (Fig. 1). [Note this coloration is only present in live specimens.] The last abdominal segment bears an anal comb with two to ten “teeth.” The mean head capsule width for the first through fifth instar larvae has been recorded as: 0.22, 0.37, 0.61, 0.94 and 1.37 mm, respectively (Daiber, 1979b). Diagnostic characters would include the anal comb with two to ten teeth in addition to: L pinaculum on T1 enlarged and extending beneath and beyond (posterad of) the spiracle; spiracle on A8 displaced posterad of SD pinaculum; crochets unevenly triordinal, 36-42; L-group on A9 usually trisetose (all setae usually on same pinaulum) (Brown, 2011).
    [Show full text]
  • False Codling Moth
    Fact sheet False codling moth What is the False codling moth? The False codling moth (Cryptophlebia leucotreta) is an internal fruit feeding moth that can be found throughout the year in warm climates and has been recorded as feeding on over 50 different plant species. This moth causes economic loss in a range of crops in sub-Saharan Africa. Losses during infestations can be between 20-30%. What does it look like? Adult moths are 15-16 mm (males) and 19-20 mm Citrus Research International, Bugwood.org J.H. Hofmeyr, (female) in length. Forewings have grey, brown, Eggs are oval shaped and almost 1 mm long black and orange-brown markings. A triangular marking on the outer part of the wing with a crescent shaped marking above it distinguishes the False codling moth from other species. Young larvae are yellowish-white with dark spots but bright red or pink when fully grown (15 mm), with a yellow-brown head. Pupae are contained within a tough silken cocoon amongst debris or in the soil. Female moths lay 100-400 eggs (oval, flattened and almost 1 mm in length) singly on the fruits at night. J.H. Hofmeyr, Citrus Research International, Bugwood.org J.H. Hofmeyr, What can it be confused with? False codling moth pupae False codling moth can look similar to other moths but can be distinguished by the triangular marking near the edges of the wings. What should I look for? The young larvae mine fruit just beneath the surface, or bore into the skin causing premature ripening of the fruit.
    [Show full text]
  • Crucifer Insect Pest Problems: Trends, Issues and Management Strategies
    Crucifer insect pest problems: trends, issues and management strategies G.S. Lim1, A. Sivapragasam2 and W.H. Loke2 1IIBC Station Malaysia, P.O. Box 210, 43409 UPM Serdang 2Strategic, Environment and Natural Resources Center, MARDI, P.O. Box 12301, 50774, Kuala Lumpur Abstract Crucifer vegetables are important cultivated crops and are widely grown in many parts of the world, including the highlands in most tropical countries. They are frequently attacked by a number of important insect pests. Some have been a problem for a long time while others have become important only recently. For many, trends are apparent pertaining to their changing status, including other aspects and strategies associated with efforts to counter them. In some cases, they are also closely associated with other agricultural developments and agronomic practices which are driven by commercial interests in vegetable production. Among the major trends recognised are: (1) A number of pests persisting to be important (e.g., Plutella xylostella or diamondback moth (DBM), Pieris rapae, Hellula undalis), (2) Negative impacts of pesticides continuing to be of major concern where DBM remains a serious problem, (3) Some pests becoming more important, either independently of DBM suppression (e.g., leafminer and Spodoptera exigua) or as a consequence of effective DBM control (e.g., aphid and Crocidolomia binotalis), (4) DBM becoming increasingly resistant to Bacillus thuringiensis, and (5) New cultivation practices emerging, such as rain shelter and hydroponic systems. All these have generated new concerns, additional issues and challenges, and have demanded a review of crucifer cultivation and the associated pest problems, including their management practices and approach.
    [Show full text]
  • New Pest Response Guidelines False Codling Moth Thaumatotibia Leucotreta
    United States Department of New Pest Response Agriculture Marketing and Regulatory Guidelines Programs Animal and False Codling Moth Plant Health Inspection Service Thaumatotibia leucotreta Cooperating State Departments of Agriculture August 13, 2007 New Pest Response Guidelines False Codling Moth Thaumatotibia leucotreta August 13, 2007 New Pest Response Guidelines: False Codling Moth Thaumatotibia leucotreta was prepared by Jeffrey Stibick, USDA–APHIS–PPQ–Emergency and Domestic Programs and edited by Patricia S. Michalak, USDA–APHIS–PPQ–Manuals Unit. Cite this report as follows: Stibick, J. 2006. New Pest Response Guidelines: False Codling Moth Thaumatotibia leucotreta. USDA–APHIS–PPQ–Emergency and Domestic Programs, Riverdale, Maryland [http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ import_export/plants/ppq_manuals.shtml]. R. L. Dunkle May 3, 2007 Richard Dunkle, Deputy Administrator Date USDA–APHIS–PPQ Emergency and Domestic Programs Emergency Planning Joel Floyd, Team Leader 4700 River Road Unit 137 Riverdale, Maryland 20737 Telephone: 310/734-4396 [email protected] 1 Credits False Codling Moth Contributors Stephanie Bloem, U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)–Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)–Center for Plant Health Science and Technology (CPHST), Raleigh, North Carolina Jim E. Carpenter, USDA–Agricultural Research Service (ARS)–Crop Protection and Management Research, Tifton, Georgia Susan Ellis, USDA–APHIS–Plant Protection and Quarantine–Office of the Deputy Administrator, Riverdale, Maryland Todd Gilligan, Ohio State University, Museum of Biodiversity, Columbus, Ohio Jeffrey N. L. Stibick, USDA–APHIS–PPQ–Emergency and Domestic Programs, Riverdale, Maryland Shaharra J. Usnick, USDA–APHIS–PPQ–Plant Health Programs, Riverdale, Maryland Robert C. Venette, USDA–Forest Service, St. Paul, Minnesota Industry, State Regulatory Officers, Universities, and Governmental Agencies as credited in: September 1983.
    [Show full text]
  • False Codling Moth, Thaumatotibia (=Cryptophlebia) Leucotreta (Meyrick) [Lepidoptera: Tortricidae]
    Mini Risk Assessment False codling moth, Thaumatotibia (=Cryptophlebia) leucotreta (Meyrick) [Lepidoptera: Tortricidae] Robert C. Venette, Erica E. Davis, Michelle DaCosta, Holly Heisler, & Margaret Larson Department of Entomology, University of Minnesota St. Paul, MN 55108 September 21, 2003 Introduction Thaumatotibia leucotreta is a significant pest of fruit trees and field crops in portions of Africa (CIE 1976, Zhang 1994). Until recently, this pest had been most commonly known as Cryptophlebia leucotreta (Komai 1999). A detailed description of the rationale for the name change is included in this document. For the sake of scientific accuracy, we refer to the false codling moth as T. leucotreta throughout this report. We hope the change does not cause confusion. To our knowledge the risks posed by this pest for US agriculture and native ecosystems have not been evaluated previously in a formal pest risk assessment. Figure 1. Larva and adult of T. leucotreta. Images not to scale. [Larval image from http://www.arc.agric.za/institutes/ itsc/main/avocado/moth.htm; Adult image from Georg Goergen/IITA Insect Museum, Cotonou, Benin as published in (CAB 2000)] 1. Ecological Suitability. Rating: Medium. Thaumatotibia leucotreta is native to the Ethiopian zoogeographic province and presently occurs in much of Sub- Saharan Africa (CIE 1976, CAB 2000). Climates in the area occupied by this pest can be characterized as tropical, dry or temperate (CAB 2000). The currently reported global distribution of T. leucotreta suggests that the pest may be most closely associated with biomes that are generally classified as desert and xeric shrubland, tropical and subtropical grasslands, savannas, and shrubland; and tropical and subtropical moist broadleaf forest.
    [Show full text]
  • EPPO PRA on Thaumatotibia
    EUROPEAN AND MEDITERRANEAN PLANT PROTECTION ORGANIZATION ORGANISATION EUROPEENNE ET MEDITERRANEENNE POUR LA PROTECTION DES PLANTES 13-19032 Pest Risk Analysis for Thaumatotibia leucotreta September 2013 EPPO 21 Boulevard Richard Lenoir 75011 Paris www.eppo.int [email protected] This risk assessment follows the EPPO Standard PM 5/3(5) Decision-support scheme for quarantine pests (available at http://archives.eppo.int/EPPOStandards/pra.htm) and uses the terminology defined in ISPM 5 Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms (available at https://www.ippc.int/index.php). This document was first elaborated by an Expert Working Group and then reviewed by core members and by the Panel on Phytosanitary Measures and if relevant other EPPO bodies. It was finally approved by the Council in September 2013. Cite this document as: EPPO (2013) Pest risk analysis for Thaumatotibia leucotreta. EPPO, Paris. Available at http://www.eppo.int/QUARANTINE/Pest_Risk_Analysis/PRA_intro.htm 1 Guideline on Pest Risk Analysis Decision-support scheme for quarantine pests Version N°5 13-19032 (13-18307, 12-18121) Pest Risk Analysis for Thaumatotibia leucotreta Fig. 1 Adult of T. leucotreta Fig. 2 Larvae of T. leucotreta (courtesy Ms van der Straten) (courtesy Ms van der Straten) Stage 2: Pest Risk Assessment Section A: Pest categorization Stage 2: Pest Risk Assessment Section B: Probability of entry of a pest Stage 2: Pest Risk Assessment Section B: Probability of establishment Stage 2: Pest Risk Assessment Section B: Conclusion of introduction Stage 2: Pest Risk Assessment Section B: Probability of spread Stage 2: Pest Risk Assessment Section B: Eradication, containment of the pest and transient populations Stage 2: Pest Risk Assessment Section B: Assessment of potential economic consequences Stage 2: Pest Risk Assessment Section B: Degree of uncertainty and Conclusion of the pest risk assessment Stage 3: Pest Risk Management Expert Working group for PRA for T.
    [Show full text]
  • Europhyt Interceptions 2018
    DG Health and Food Safety Europhyt Interceptions Annual Report 2018 Health and Food Safety Further information on the Health and Food Safety Directorate-General is available on the internet at: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_food-safety/index_en.htm Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use that might be made of the following information. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2018 © European Union, 2018 Reuse is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. The reuse policy of European Commission documents is regulated by Decision 2011/833/EU (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). For any use or reproduction of photos or other material that is not under the EU copyright, permission must be sought directly from the copyright holders. © Photos : http://www.istockphoto.com/, Health and Food Safety Directorate-General Print ISBN 978-92-79-61478-1 doi:10.2875/594988 EW-BC-16-067-EN-C PDF ISBN 978-92-79-61477-4 doi:10.2875/830026 EW-BC-16-067-EN-N Ref. Ares(2019)5031679 - 01/08/2019 EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY Health and food audits and analysis DG(SANTE) 2019-6845 EUROPHYT-INTERCEPTIONS EUROPEAN UNION NOTIFICATION SYSTEM FOR PLANT HEALTH INTERCEPTIONS ANNUAL REPORT 2018 Executive summary EUROPHYT- Interceptions is the plant health interception, notification and rapid alert system for EU Member States (MSs) and Switzerland, managed by the European Commission. This report presents key statistics on non-EU country interceptions from 2018 and provides analysis of trends in interceptions based on annual figures for the period 2014- 2018.
    [Show full text]