APPLICATION FORM CONTAINMENT

Application for containment approval for new organisms under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996

Send by post to: Environmental Protection Authority, PO Box 131, Wellington 6140 OR email to: [email protected]

Application number

APP201244

Applicant

AgResearch Limited

Key contact

Sean Marshall Postal Mail: Private Bag 4749, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand Courier: cnr Springs Road and Gerald Street, Lincoln

www.epa.govt.nz 2

Application for containment approval for new organisms

Important

This application form should be used if you intend to import, develop or field test any new organism (including genetically modified organisms (GMOs)) in containment. These terms are defined in the HSNO Act. The HSNO Act can be downloaded from: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1996/0030/latest/DLM381222.html. If your application is for a project approval of low-risk genetic modification, use application form EPA0062. The HSNO (Low Risk Genetic Modification) Regulations can be downloaded from: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2003/0152/latest/DLM195215.html. Applications to field test GMOs will be publicly notified. The other application types may or may not be publicly notified. This application form will be made publicly available so any confidential information must be collated in a separate labelled appendix. The fee for this application can be found on our website at www.epa.govt.nz. If you need help to complete this form, please look at our website (www.epa.govt.nz) or email us at [email protected]. This form was approved on 21 September 2011.

September 2011 EPA0061 3

Application for containment approval for new organisms

1. What type(s) of containment activities are you applying for?

Tick where appropriate: Application type Type of new organism

GM Import into containment Non-GM

Develop in containment i.e. regeneration, fermentation or GM genetic modification Non-GM

GM Field test in containment Non-GM

2. Brief application description

Provide a short description (approximately 30 words) of what you are applying to do.

To import tropical of the into containment to conduct research on potential biological control of these pests in their country of origin.

3. Summary of application

Provide a plain English, non-technical description of what you are applying to do and why you want to do it.

This application is to import tropical beetles of the family Scarabaeidae into containment for use as the target hosts of various pathogens (fungi, bacteria and virus) that have the potential to be biological control agents. The proposed are restricted to the tropics, and are therefore adapted for survival in high ambient temperatures. The importations will include rhinoceros beetles, taro beetles and other similar species. The insect pathogens are already held in the AgResearch Insect Pathogen Culture Collection in the Microorganism Containment Facility (MPI/MAF #480), though approval to import additional putative pathogens may be sought in the future if determined appropriate for the project. Importation of different species from various tropical countries (such as those from SE Asia or Pacific Island nations) will provide for comparative studies between pest species and strains of pathogens, and selection of the best biocontrol agents for release in these countries. Research into the biology of insect pests and their pathogens for biocontrol purposes will help to maintain existing New Zealand scientific capability, as well as expand capability in this area by identifying possible methods to improve the biocontrol capabilities of these organisms. It will also assist our fundamental understanding of insect disease caused by microbial agents, which contributes to the development of biologically-based insect control methods and agents for exotic insect pests that pose potential biosecurity risks. These beetles are pests of agriculture in tropical climates and our research will contributed towards the ability to better manage them. The beetles will be held under containment and will not be released into the New Zealand environment.

September 2011 EPA0061 4

Application for containment approval for new organisms

4. Describe the background and aims of your application

This section is intended to put the new organism(s) in perspective of the wider activities(s) that they will be used in. You may use more technical language but please make sure that any technical words used are included in a glossary. New Zealand has had a long relationship with Pacific and Asian countries in the development of pest management systems and, more recently, development of biosecurity procedures. AgResearch is a leader in biocontrol technologies for insect pest species and has been assisting Pacific and Asian countries in the development of biocontrol systems. During this work, the need for a central laboratory where comparative research can be carried out has become evident. AgResearch has built up an extensive collection of biological control agents (via isolation from the NZ environment or under containment through MPI/MAF Import Permits) while working on international programmes. Some of these agents are regularly supplied to overseas collaborators, but there is an important need to carry out testing in New Zealand to allow for quality control of produced microbes and comparative studies to determine the susceptibility of target species of pest and select the best strains for use as biocontrol agents. This will involve challenging the imported tropical beetles with a variety of putative biocontrol agents held in our Microorganism Containment Facility (MP/MAF#480) (such as those held under ERMA Approval GMD001413) and assessing the effects of these agents. The beetles will be held under containment in an insect quarantine facility and are never intended for release into the New Zealand environment. The project focuses on pest beetles of the Family Scarabaeidae found within tropical climates. under study include (but are not limited to) the rhinoceros beetles and cane grub/white grub scarabs of plantation and food crops found through the tropical regions (approximate latitudes between 0° to 35°) of the Pacific, Australia, America, Asia, Africa, and Middle East areas. These have been identified by our Asia and Pacific collaborators as being either currently or potentially problematic (e.g. the rhinoceros beetle, rhinoceros) (Watt 1986; Jackson & Masamdu 1998). Some of these insects are endemic to Asia (and the other regions mentioned above) but have spread into the Pacific Islands where they cause severe crop losses and are a threat to regional food security, or a potential risk to trading partners. For example, the coconut rhinoceros beetle, Oryctes rhinoceros, is a pest of coconut palms through South-East and South Asia (Bedford 1980). In recent years it has become an important pest of oil palm plantations in SE Asia due both to prohibitions on environmentally persistent and burning of oil palm debris during replants. It has also invaded the Pacific region where it has caused major losses in coconut palms and is a significant biosecurity threat requiring quarantine controls and limiting trade. Other examples of beetles affecting coconut palm and oil palm include Oryctes monoceros found in Indian Ocean states, and Scapanes australis from Papua New Guinea. The taro beetles, Papuana spp., are endemic to Asia and the Western Pacific, but have spread into the central Pacific islands where they cause considerable damage to tropical root crops. In the case of Oryctes rhinoceros, a biocontrol virus (Oryctes virus, initially isolated from Malaysia) is employed for control of the rhinoceros beetle (first introduced into Apia, Western Samoa in the late 1960‟s). It subsequently spread (both deliberately and through auto-dissemination) to many other Pacific and Asia regions infested with O. rhinoceros. However, in new areas of invasion (e.g. Guam) the beetle appears to be virus free and control may have broken down in other areas (e.g. Samoa, Maldives). New Zealand researchers have been providing assistance in assessment of the status of virus in the pest populations and provision of pure virus for release to authorities in the Asia/Pacific region for 30+ years. The Oryctes virus biocontrol agent has been held in New Zealand prior to the HSNO legislation by both DSIR/HortResearch (now know as Plant and Food Research) and MAFTech/AgResearch, and is currently held in our Microorganism Containment Facility (MPI/MAF#480). Through our collaborative programmes we have conducted training of technicians and researchers both in New Zealand and in their home countries, and carried out collaborative research in the Pacific and Asia region. We have reached the point where it is necessary to establish measures of toxicity of biological materials (e.g. Oryctes virus preparations as a biocontrol agent) and to determine efficacy standards against particular pest species to determine appropriate application protocols for their potential utilization as a management option (both for biocontrol and biosecurity uses). Additionally, the need to further develop this research area is becoming more

September 2011 EPA0061 5

Application for containment approval for new organisms important as new project initiatives are being developed, and overseas enquiries indicating a strong demand for our expertise in the biocontrol and biosecurity areas. Our expertise lies with our research capability to examine the interaction between biocontrol agents and their hosts and providing advice for implementing strategies to manage insect pest populations. This capability will assist our overseas collaborators in developing and evaluating improved strategies for control beetle pests in their respective regions.

5. Information about the new organism(s)

For non-GMOs: provide a taxonomic description of the new organism(s). For GMOs: provide a taxonomic description of the host organism(s) and describe the genetic modification (i.e. the experimental procedures and biological material to be used in the genetic modification and where the expression of foreign nucleic acid may occur). Describe the biology and main features of the organism including if it has inseparable organisms. Describe if the organism has affinities (e.g. close taxonomic relationships) with other organisms in New Zealand. Could the organism form an undesirable self-sustaining population? If not, why not? How easily could the new organism be recovered or eradicated if it established an undesirable self-sustaining population? for non-GMO

Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Arthropoda Class: Insecta Order: Coleoptera Family: Scarabaeidae (scarabs and chafers)

Biology

All Scarabaeidae have holometabolistic development with four distinct life stages. These are egg/embryo, (a.k.a. grub) having 3 interstages (L1 to 3) with a typical scarabidoe (or „C‟) shape appearance, , and adult. Members of Scarabaeidae are generally univoltine (1 generation per year): eggs are laid in the soil; larvae emerge and feed off of roots and other organic matter found in the soil; after pupation, young adults emerge from the soil to mate. Though adult scarabs can feed on the above ground plant foliage, not all feed extensively (some only have a small nibble, e.g. C. zealandica only has 1-2 small meals at most shortly after emerging from the soil). An excellent overview of the general biology of scarabs is found in several review articles (Ritcher & Station 1958; Bedford 1980; Watt 1986), while Appendices 1 and 2 provides a list and further details on species of current interest for importation.

Scarabaeidae generally cannot be reared from egg through to egg under laboratory conditions (there is often high mortality of adults or an inability to rear reproductively mature females), and so must be field collected at the desired stage or reared through to the desired stage (from field collected samples). Field collected insects have the potential to have an associated pathogen or parasitoid, therefore collected insects would be transported to the transitional facility in appropriately sealed containers. To prevent contamination of the entire shipment should there be an associated pathogen or parasitoid, individuals placed in separate containers will be used; where egg stages are collected, batches of eggs would be collected into several individual containers. Any accompanying pathogen or parasitoid found in the shipments would be preserved for identification with EPA notified and MPI/MAF consulted.

September 2011 EPA0061 6

Application for containment approval for new organisms

Taxonomic relationships

Imported Scarabaeidae may have close taxonomic relationships with Scarabaeidae species already present in New Zealand. This will be different with for each species brought into containment; some may be in the same as a species already present in New Zealand, while others may be only as close as being a member of the same taxonomic family. However, the scarabs we are currently most interested in for importation, are limited to those species originating from tropical climate regions; from regions lying within latitudes 0 to 35 (see Appendix under “Organisms identified as of immediate interest”) and do not have representatives present in New Zealand at the genus level. The closest relationship that any of these species (see Appendix 1 under “Organisms identified as of immediate interest”) have with a New Zealand beetle is at the sub-family level (e.g. and Melolonthinae) (Watt 1984), making interbreeding impossible.

Ability to form a self-sustaining population

The insects being considered for research will be imported into a MPI/MAF approved PC2 invertebrate containment facility. The likelihood of any mated female scarab escaping from the containment facility is therefore very low. In the highly unlikely event that escape did occur, the ability of the insect to establish a self-sustaining population is negligible. Establishment depends on variables such as: the availability of suitable host plants; the number, sex and mating status of individuals likely to form a self sustaining population; and the biology of the insect (e.g. thermo tolerance). In particular, the likelihood of species from tropical regions (latitudes between 0° to 35°) establishing in Canterbury, New Zealand (latitude 43°S) is extremely low, though for those species from high altitude tropical regions or more subtropical climatic regions with multiple host plants, the likelihood of establishment could be marginally greater.

A sustainable population of any Scarabaeidae species could only establish if: 1) a gravid female (mated with a fertile male) was to escape and encounter a suitable oviposition site and larval host; or, 2) both male and female insects escaped, then mated, and the female was able to find a suitable host site. Because female and male scarabs will be separated at all times while in the containment facility except for mating for trials where mated females are required, it is highly unlikely that any adverse effects will result from an escape. Additionally, we will account for every individual insect from arrival through to destruction. Should an insect escape we would know immediately.

How easily could the new organism be recovered or eradicated if it established an undesirable self- sustaining population?

In the highly unlikely event that a fertile gravid female or multiple individuals escaped from containment, mate and form a self-sustaining population, there are numerous ways in which organisms could be located, identified and eradicated.

There are a number of tools available including the use of attractant chemicals (semiochemicals) for detection and mass trapping, chemical insecticides and biological control agents/biopesticides for the successful eradication of several species in the unlikely change they escape containment (Suckling et al. 2007; Hajek 2009).

The adult stage of scarabs can be located by visual searches of hosts. The adult form can be attracted to traps using pheromones or other semiochemicals. Eradication may then be achieved through the use of some or all of the following: host destruction, broad-spectrum and selective (e.g. Oryctes virus, Metarhizium) insecticides, and mass trapping, many of which are used for control in other countries (e.g. Malaysia uses Oryctes virus and Metarhizium to control O. rhinoceros). The choice of options will be species dependant.

September 2011 EPA0061 7

Application for containment approval for new organisms

However the most effective eradication method would likely be the New Zealand climate itself, particularly for the Canterbury region. The scarab species we are proposing to import would not be able to survive for prolonged periods in the Canterbury climate (average soil temperature being 10.7 C; see Section 7 below) as they need the high temperatures (18+ C, if not higher) of the tropics for activity (flight and feeding) and development. Even within the tropics they are slow developing species (univoltine, generally 1-2 year life cycle) and would not be able to complete their life cycles at Canterbury temperatures. Frosts would kill the scarab species being considered for evaluation.

In the unlikely event that an insect or multiple insects escaped and formed a self-sustaining population, the probability of successful eradication would be high because the population is likely to be small, in a confined area, and the climate would be outside their range. As a matter of standard operating procedure within the quarantine facility, we will account for every individual insect from arrival through to destruction. Should an insect escape we will know immediately.

6. For field tests: The nature and method of the field test

Describe the nature and method of the field test and the experimental procedures to be used.

N/A

7. Proposed containment of the new organism(s) (physical and operational)

Describe how you propose to contain the new organism(s) after taking into account its ability to escape from containment (i.e. the possible pathways for escape).

It is proposed to hold all imported specimens from the Scarabaeidae in the Level PC2 Insect Containment Facility at Lincoln, (MPI/MAF registration number 3122) operated to MPI/MAF approved Standard 154.02.08 “Transitional and Containment Facilities for Invertebrates”. Details of the containment facility are presented in a containment manual lodged and registered with the MPI/MAF. All insects will be held in vented containers (e.g. clear plastic cages with mesh covering air hole), in a controlled environment chamber within the quarantine room. For handling, containers will be removed from the chamber and manipulations, testing carried out on the quarantine bench. If an escape is detected within this quarantine room and the escapees cannot be counted and returned, then all insect containers in the room will be sealed using sticky tape. These containers will then be returned to the controlled environment chamber and the sealed quarantine room will be fumigated. Sticky insect barriers have been installed on the ground around the door of the containment facility and associated annex room to catch any beetles that may escape the plastic containers. Only trained and authorised personnel will have access to the quarantine containment facility. Upon completion of the research, the insect and all inseparable invertebrates (parasites), or diseases will be destroyed by autoclaving all material (insects, food material and substrates). The scarab species from tropical regions would not be able to survive for prolonged periods in the Canterbury climate as they need the high temperatures (18+ C) of the tropics for activity (flight and feeding) and development (Bedford 1980). Even within the climate of the tropics, these beetles are slow developing species (univoltine, generally 1-2 year life cycle) and would not be able to complete their life cycles at Canterbury soil temperatures. Table 1: Soil temperature from NIWA weather data (2007-2009) (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd http://cliflo.niwa.co.nz/).

September 2011 EPA0061 8

Application for containment approval for new organisms

Location Mean ( C) SD Min ( C) Max ( C)

CHCH 10.7 5.3 0.9 23.9

The containment provisions of the containment facility at the AgResearch Lincoln campus require measures to be taken to prevent escape via any of the following pathways: escape during transport to containment facilities; accidental or deliberate escape from enclosure; escape due to accidental/unintentional or deliberate removal by people; and escape from containment following natural disaster (e.g. flood, earthquake etc.) or fire. The scarab species covered by this application are limited to tropical climate regions and the risk of any of the proposed species establishing a population in New Zealand, if they were to escape, is therefore extremely low. All tropical species will be unable to complete their life cycle under the ambient temperatures of New Zealand; however, some areas of Northern New Zealand (Kaitaia, Whangarei, Auckland, Tauranga) could potentially be at the southern most climatic range for some species. The closest relationship that any of these species have with a New Zealand beetle is at sub-family level (e.g. Dynastinae and Melolonthinae) (Watt 1984), making interbreeding impossible. In the event that an accidental escape occurs, the tropical beetles are unable to survive in the Canterbury climate and would therefore not be able to manifest an impact on the environment nor cause a nuisance effect. However should an escape occur, the unusually large size of these tropical species compared to that of New Zealand species would make them highly noticeable to members of the public, which would aid eradication efforts.

8. Detail of Māori engagement (if any)

Discuss any engagement or consultation with Māori undertaken and summarise the outcomes.

We have had advice from the EPA that no further consultation is required.

9. Identification and assessment of beneficial (positive) and adverse effects of the new organism(s)

Adverse effects include risks and costs. Beneficial or positive effects are benefits. Identification involves describing the potential effects that you are aware of (what might happen and how it might happen). Assessment involves considering the magnitude of the effect and the likelihood or probability of the effect being realised. Consider the adverse or positive effects in the context of this application on the environment (e.g. could the organism cause any significant displacement of any native species within its natural habitat, cause any significant deterioration of natural habitats or cause significant adverse effect to New Zealand‟s inherent genetic diversity, or is the organism likely to cause disease, be parasitic, or become a vector for or plant disease?), human health and safety, the relationship of Māori to the environment, the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, society and the community, the market economy and New Zealand‟s international obligations.

We do not intend to release any organisms into the environment thus do not envisage any interaction between insects brought into containment and the current flora and fauna present in New Zealand. The purpose of the importation is to enable research to be carried out for the selection, assessment and development of more effective biological control agents against significant pests which challenge food security and

September 2011 EPA0061 9

Application for containment approval for new organisms impede economic development in the Asia/Pacific region. The proposal will strengthen recognition of AgResearch as a leader in the field of biocontrol of insect pests and in development of experimental procedures for the testing and development of potential control agents against pest insects. This will also expand AgResearch‟s role in international agricultural development through further contract research. New Zealand overall benefits from the development of new knowledge and tools from a broad range of sources for the early detection of potential pests and for the eradication of those pests by a potential reduction in the use of . For any adverse effect on the environment, the insects would first need to escape and form a self-sustaining population, which is highly improbable given the containment measures proposed. Additionally, the tropical beetles are highly unlikely to survive for prolonged periods of time in the Canterbury climate and would therefore not be able to manifest a negative impact on the environment nor cause a nuisance effect. The greatest risk is inadvertent escape of a gravid female or multiple scarabs from the containment facility. The other risk is that mated females may lay eggs that are accidently carried out on the personal articles of the worker and subsequently hatch into larvae. These risks have been minimised by the controls and protocols set out for the containment facility. Our facility has a good track record with positive feedback from the annual MPI/MAF audits and no breaches of containment. AgResearch has successfully managed the importation of Microctonus hyperodae and Microctonus aethiopoides (Irish) (both Hymenoptera: Braconidae) and their hosts (Listronotus bonariensis and Sitona lepidus, respectively) into containment without any incidents (Goldson et al. 1992; Goldson et al. 2005).

10. For developments of GMOs that take place outdoors and field tests of GMOs: Alternative methods and potential effects from the transfer of genetic elements

Discuss if there are alternative methods of achieving the research objective. Discuss whether there could be effects resulting from the transfer of genetic elements to other organisms in or around the site of the development or field test.

N/A

11. For imports of GMOs: Could your organism(s) undergo rapid assessment (s42B of the HSNO Act)?

Discuss whether the GMO(s) to be imported fulfil the following criteria: The host organism(s) are Category 1 or 2 host organisms as per the HSNO (Low Risk Genetic Modification) Regulations. The genetic modifications are Category A or B modifications as per the HSNO (Low Risk Genetic Modification) Regulations and the modifications are not listed in the Schedule of these Regulations. The minimum containment of the GMO(s) will be as per the HSNO (Low Risk Genetic Modification) Regulations (PC1 or PC2 as per AS/NZS2243.3:2002).

N/A

12. Other information

Add here any further information you wish to include in this application including if there are any ethical considerations that you are aware of in relation to your application.

N/A

September 2011 EPA0061 10

Application for containment approval for new organisms

13. Appendices(s) and referenced material (if any) and glossary (if applicable)

Appendix 1: Organisms identified as of immediate interest (though not limited to)

Dermolepida spp. (Melolonthinae), Oryctes spp. (Dynastinae), Papuana spp. (Dynastinae), Scapanes spp. (Dynastinae), spp. (Dynastinae)

Dermolepida spp. (Melolonthinae)

Dermolepida albohirtum Waterhouse 1875 – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae. Common name is Greyback cane grub. Distribution – Australian (Queensland, Papua New Guinea)

Dermolepida annulitarse (Heller, 1914) – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae. Common name is cane grub. Distribution - Australian (New Guinea)

Dermolepida meeki Britton, 1957 – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae. Common name is cane grub. Australian (Papua New Guinea, Goodenough Island)

Dermolepida noxium Britton, 1957 – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae. Common name is cane grub. Distribution - Australian (New Guinea)

Dermolepida papuanum (Brenske, 1895) – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae. Common name is cane grub. Distribution - Australian (New Guinea, Kaiser Wilhelmsland, Bongu)

Dermolepida pica (Arrow, 1916) – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae. Common name is cane grub. Distribution - Oriental (Indonesia (Larat))

Dermolepida undatum (Brenske, 1895) – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae. Common name is cane grub. Distribution - Australian (New Guinea, Kaiser Wilhelmsland, Bongu)

Dermolepida uniforme (Fairmaire, 1879) – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Melolonthinae. Common name is cane grub. Distribution - Australian (Duke of York Island)

Oryctes spp. (Dynastinae)

Oryctes agamemnon Burmeister, 1847 – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. No common name. Distribution - Afrotropical (Somalia, Sudan)

Oryctes elegans Prell, 1914 – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is date palm fruit stalk borer. Distribution – Palaearctic (Iran, Irak, Arabia, Yemen)

Oryctes monoceros (Olivier, 1789) – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is African rhinoceros beetle. Distribution - Afrotropical (Senegal, Ivory Coast, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Chad, Nigeria, Congo, Burundi, Angola, Natal, Zululand, Mozambique, Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Yemen), Madagascan(Madagascar, Seychellen)

September 2011 EPA0061 11

Application for containment approval for new organisms

Oryctes rhinoceros (Linnaeus 1758) – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is Coconut palm rhinoceros beetle. Distribution - Oriental (India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Lombok, Sumatra, Java, Bali, Borneo, Halmahera), Palaearctic (Vietnam, Annam, Tonkin, China, Taiwan, Korea), Australian (Papua New Guinea), Pacific (Fiji, Hawai, Palau)

Papuana spp. (Dynastinae)

Papuana biroi Endrödi, 1969 – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is Taro beetle. Distribution - Australian (Papua New Guinea, Admirality Islands)

Papuana cheesemanae Arrow, 1941 – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is Taro beetle. Distibution - Australian (New Hebriden)

Papuana huebneri (Fairmaire, 1879) – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is Taro beetle. Distribution - Australian (Papua New Guinea, Bismarck Archipel, Salomon Islands, Halmahera)

Papuana inermis Prell, 1912 – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is Taro beetle. Distibution - Australian (Salomon Islands)

Papuana japenensis Arrow, 1941 – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is Taro beetle. Distibution - Australian (Papua New Guinea, Bismarck Archipel, Japen Island)

Papuana szentivanyii Endrödi, 1971 – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is Taro beetle. Distibution - Australian (Papua New Guinea)

Papuana trinodosa Prell, 1912 – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is Taro beetle. Distibution - Australian (Papua New Guinea)

Papuana uninodis Prell, – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is Taro beetle. Distribution - Australian (Papua New Guinea, Bismarck Archipel, Salomon Islands, New Hebriden)

Papuana woodlarikana (Montrouzier, 1855) – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is Taro beetle. Distribution - Australian (Queensland, Papua New Guinea), Oriental (Lombok, Buru, Java, Sumatra)

Eucopidocaulus tridentipes Arrow, 1911 (previously Papuana tridentipes Arrow, 1911) – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is Taro beetle. Distribution - Australian (Papua New Guinea, Salomon Islands)

Scapanes spp. (Dynastinae)

Scapanes affinis Dechambre, 1995 – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is Melanesian rhinoceros beetle. Distribution - Australian (New Guinea)

Scapanes australis (Boisduval, 1835) – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae. Common name is Melanesian rhinoceros beetle. Distribution - Australian (New Guinea)

Strategus spp. (Dynastinae)

September 2011 EPA0061 12

Application for containment approval for new organisms

Strategus aloeus (Linnaeus, 1758) – Insecta: Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae Common name is ox beetle – Americas (southern USA (Arizona and Texas), Mexico and central America, Nnorthern nations of South America (central Brazil and Bolivia)).

Appendix 2: Description of the biology for selected species

General information on Scarabaeidae biology of agricultural significance in the tropics - (Bedford 1980), (Watt 1986)

Dermolepida albohirtum - (Sallam 2011)

Oryctes rhinoceros - (Bedford 1976), (Zelazny & Alfiler 1991), (Prior et al. 2000)

Oryctes agamemnon - (Soltani et al. 2008)

Papuana spp. - (Aloalii et al. 1993)

Scapanes australis - (Bedford 1976), (Prior et al. 2000)

Strategus aloeus - (Ratcliffe 1976)

References

Aloalii I, Masamdu R, Theunis W, Thistleton B 1993. Prospects for biological control of taro beetles, Papuana spp. (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae), in the South Pacific. In: Ferentinos L ed. Proceedings of the Sustainable Taro Culture for the Pacific Conference. Sustainable Taro Culture for the Pacific Conference; 1992 Sept 24-25; Honolulu, Hawaii. Honolulu (HI). University of Hawaii, Pp. 66-70. Bedford GO 1976. Observations on the biology and ecology of Oryctes rhinoceros and Scapanes australis (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae): Pests of coconut palms in Melanesia. Australian Journal of 15: 241-251. Bedford GO 1980. Biology, ecology, and control of palm rhinoceros beetles. Annual Review of Entomology 25: 309-339. Goldson SL, McNeill MR, Phillips CB, Proffitt JR 1992. Host specificity testing and suitability of the parasitoid Microctonus hyperodae (Hym.: Braconidae, Euphorinae) as a biological control agent of Listronotus bonariensis (Col.: Curculionidae) in New Zealand. Entomophaga 37: 483-498. Goldson SL, McNeill MR, Proffitt JR, Barratt BIP 2005. Host specificity testing and suitability of a European biotype of the braconid parasitoid Microctonus aethiopoides as a biological control agent against Sitona lepidus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in New Zealand. Biocontrol Science and Technology 15: 791-813.

September 2011 EPA0061 13

Application for containment approval for new organisms

Hajek AE 2009. Invasive and approaches for their microbial control. In: Hajek AE, Glare T, O‟Callaghan M eds. Use of Microbes for Control and Eradication of Invasive Arthropods. Springer, Pp. 3-18. Jackson TA, Masamdu R 1998. Soil dwelling and other concealed pests in the Pacific - suitable targets for microbial control? In: O‟Callaghan M, Jackson TA eds. Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Microbial Control of Soil Dwelling Pests. Pp. 1-7. National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd http://cliflo.niwa.co.nz/. New Zealand's National Climate Database. Prior R, Morin JP, Rochat D, Beaudoin-Ollivier L, Stathers T, Kakul T, Embupa S, Nanguai R 2000. New aspects of the biology of the Melanesian rhinoceros beetle Scapanes australis (Col., Dynastidae) and evidence for field attraction to males. Journal of Applied Entomology 124: 41-50. Ratcliffe BC 1976. A Revision of the Genus Strategus (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Bulletin Of The University Of Nebraska State Museum 10: 93-204. Ritcher PO, Station OSCAE 1958. Biology of Scarabaeidae. Annual Review of Entomology 50: 311-334. Sallam N 2011. Review of current knowledge on the population dynamics of Dermolepida albohirtum (Waterhouse) (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Australian Journal of Entomology 50: 300-308. Soltani R, Chaieb I, Hamouda MHB 2008. The life cycle of the root borer, Oryctes agamemnon, under laboratory conditions. Journal of Insect Science 8: Suckling DM, Barrington AM, Chhagan A, Stephens AEA, Burnip GM, Charles JG, Wee SL 2007. Eradication of the Australian painted apple moth Teia anartoides in New Zealand: trapping, inherited sterility, and male competitiveness. In: Vreysen MJB, Robinson AS, Hendrichs J eds. Area-wide control of insect pests : from research to field implementation. Springer SBM, Dordrecht, Netherlands. Pp. 603-615. Watt JC 1984. A review of some New Zealand Scarabaeidae (Coleoptera). New Zealand Entomologist 8: 4-24. Watt JC 1986. Pacific Scarabaeidae and Elateridae (Coleoptera) of agricultural significance. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 15: 175-187. Zelazny B, Alfiler AR 1991. Ecology of baculovirus-infected and healthy adults of Oryctes rhinoceros (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) on coconut palms in the Philippines. Ecological Entomology 16: 253-259.

14. Signature of applicant or person authorised to sign on behalf of applicant

I request the Authority to waive any legislative information requirements (i.e. concerning the information that shall be supplied in my application) that my application does not meet (tick if applicable). I have completed this application to the best of my ability and, as far as I am aware, the information I have provided in this application form is correct.

Signature Date

September 2011 EPA0061