The National Plant Health the National Plant Health Status Report Status Report

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The National Plant Health the National Plant Health Status Report Status Report The National Plant Health Plant National The The National Plant Health Status Report Status Report Status 07/08 Plant Health Australia Health Plant 07/08 Z00 30193 © Plant Health Australia 2009 Disclaimer: This publication is published by Plant Health Australia (PHA) for information purposes only. Information in the document is drawn from a variety of sources outside This work is copyright. Apart from any use as Plant Health Australia. Although reasonable care was taken in its preparation, Plant Health permitted under the Copyright Act 1986, no part Australia does not warrant the accuracy, reliability, completeness or currency of the may be reproduced by any process without prior information, or its usefulness in achieving any purpose. permission from Plant Health Australia. Given that there are continuous changes in trade patterns, pest distributions, control Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction measures and agricultural practices, this report can only provide a snapshot in time. and rights should be addressed to: Therefore, all information contained in this report has been collected for the 2007/08 financial year, and should be validated and confirmed by the relevant organisations/ Communications Manager authorities before being used. A list of contact details (including websites) is provided Plant Health Australia in Appendix 2. 5/4 Phipps Close DEAKIN ACT 2600 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Plant Health Australia will not be liable for any loss, damage, cost or expense incurred in or arising by reason of any person relying on the ISSN 1836-7461 information in this publication. Readers should make and rely on their own assessment An electronic version of this report is available for and enquiries to verify the accuracy of the information provided. download from the Plant Health Australia website. Print copies can be ordered by contacting Plant Health Australia. In referencing this document, the preferred citation is: National Plant Health Status Report (07/08). Plant Health Australia, Canberra, ACT. Contents Chapter 1 – IntroduCTION 7 1.1 The importance of plant health 10 1.2 The report 11 Chapter 2 – ORGANISATION OF PLANT HEALTH SYSTEMS IN AUSTRALIA 13 2.1 National committees 16 Primary industries committees 16 Plant Health Committee 16 2.2 AusBIOSEC – the bigger picture 18 2.3 Australian Government plant health services 20 The Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service 20 Biosecurity Australia 20 Product Integrity, Animal and Plant Health Division 21 Trade and Market Access Division 21 Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 21 2.4 State and territory plant health services 22 2.5 Private plant health services 23 Industry representative bodies 23 Growers and landholders 23 Private agricultural consultants 23 2.6 Plant Health Australia 24 Chapter 3 – AUSTRALIA’s plant healTH STATUS 27 3.1 Australia’s high priority plant pests 32 3.2 Australia’s regionalised pests 39 3.3 Emergency response – eradication and containment of emergency plant pests 44 3.4 Weeds of national significance 46 Chapter 4 – MAINTAINING AUSTRALIA’s plant healTH STATUS 49 4.1 Pre-border activities 56 International trade 56 Imports 57 Exports 60 4.2 Border activities 61 Post-entry quarantine 61 Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy 62 4.3 Post-border activities 64 Industry biosecurity planning 65 Pre-emptive breeding 67 Surveillance 67 Diagnostics 79 Regional, community and on-farm biosecurity 90 Communication and awareness 92 Plant health information and support systems 93 Chapter 5 – EMERGENCY RESPONSE, MANAGING PLANT HEALTH EMERGENCIES 95 5.1 The Emergency Plant Pest Response Deed 99 National Management Group 99 Consultative Committee on Emergency Plant Pests 99 Emergency Plant Pest Categorisation Group 99 5.2 PLANTPLAN 100 Contingency planning 100 Training 103 BioSIRT 103 Chapter 6 – InnovATION, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 105 6.1 Research and development in association with the Australian Government 108 Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation 110 Australian Research Council 112 Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research 113 Australian Agency for International Development 115 Cooperative research centres 115 Research and development corporations 119 6.2 State and territory governments research and development 131 6.3 Universities and private research institutions 140 LEFT: Image coutesy of AQIS. APPENDIx 1 – AUSTRALIA’s plant INDUSTRIES 145 Broadacre crops 147 Grains and pulses 147 Rice 148 Sugarcane 149 Cotton 150 Forestry 151 Horticulture 152 Citrus 152 Apples and pears 153 Stone fruit (excluding cherries and canned fruit) 154 Cherries 155 Strawberries 156 Grapes – table 157 Grapes – wine 158 Dried fruit 159 Mangoes 160 Bananas 161 Pineapples 162 Avocados 163 Olives 164 Vegetables (excluding processing tomatoes) 165 Onions 166 Tomatoes – processing 167 Passionfruit 167 Canned fruits 167 Nuts 168 Almonds 168 Macadamias 169 Nursery and garden 170 Honey bees 171 APPENDIx 2 – PLANT HEALTH CONTACT DETAILS 173 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 176 INDEX 177 RIGHT: Image courtesy of GRDC. Key Tables and Figures CHAPTER 2 13 Figure 1. National governmental consultative committees 17 Figure 2. AusBIOSEC – Building on current sectoral strategies and programs 19 Table 1. State and territory agricultural departments 22 Table 2. Plant Health Australia’s members 25 CHAPTER 3 27 Figure 3. Australia’s plant health system 31 Table 3. High Priority Pests for the Viticulture Industry 33 Table 4. Australia’s High Priority Pests of Plant Industries (2007/08) 34 Table 5. Australia’s regionalised pests (2007/08) 40 Table 6. Emergency Plant Pests eradicated or undergoing eradication (2007/08) 44 Table 7. Australia’s weeds of national significance (2007/08) 47 CHAPTER 4 49 Table 8. Responsibilities and activities across the quarantine and biosecurity continuum 52 Figure 4. Fruit Fly Exclusion Zone 54 Figure 5. Biosecurity Australia import risk analysis flowchart 58 Table 9. Biosecurity Australia’s finalised policy advice and draft regulated import risk assessment reports 59 Table 10. Post entry plant quarantine facilities (2007/08) 61 Figure 6. NAQS area of operation 62 Figure 7. NAQS area of operation in Torres Strait 63 Table 11. Australia’s plant health surveillance programs (2007/08) 68 Table 12. Australia’s diagnostic services and laboratories (2007/08) 80 Figure 8. Approval process of national diagnostic procedures/protocols flow chart 87 Table 13. Diagnostic protocols (2007/08) 88 CHAPTER 5 95 Table 14. Contingency plans (2007/08) 101 CHAPTER 6 105 Figure 9. Organisations involved in plant health research and development 109 Tables 15–47. Plant health related research projects active in 2007/2008 110 APPENDIX 1 145 Figures 10–55. Industry production data 147 LEFT: Image courtesy of NAQS. Foreword For the first time, a single document has been produced that provides a concise overview of Australia’s plant biosecurity system. This document, the National Plant Health Status Report, provides readers with a wealth of information covering the plant pests of greatest concern to Australian industries; the organisations and processes involved in keeping Australia’s agricultural and forestry industries free from pests; and innovative plant health research projects currently being undertaken by Australian research organisations and universities. There are a number of reasons why we would want to consolidate all of this information into one publication. Firstly, it provides farmers, domestic producers and retailers with confidence in the security and viability of Australia’s food industries. It provides policy and decision makers across governments and industries with an overview of the sophisticated biosecurity system responsible for protecting Australia’s food supply and product markets. Similarly, for educators and those involved in providing support and commercial services to the plant industries it represents a useful reference manual on national biosecurity arrangements. For traders and international audiences, the Status Report demonstrates the robustness of Australia’s plant health system and gives them the confidence that Australian product is delivered to them pest free. Finally, all readers are offered an insight into the overseas and domestic initiatives in place that help maintain and protect Australia’s ongoing pest-free status. The National Plant Health Status Report has been compiled by Plant Health Australia (PHA) with input from all of Australia’s key plant biosecurity stakeholders. PHA plans to publish this report annually. It is an appropriate commitment, given PHA’s position as the lead national coordinating body for plant biosecurity, bringing together governments and industries on important biosecurity issues. Both as Chair of PHA and as a grower in my own right, I am proud of PHA’s efforts in facilitating this report and I am confident of the value that this will bring to Australian producers and markets in the long term. I hope you find it as enlightening a read as we intend it to be. Dr Tony Gregson Chairman Plant Health Australia 6 Chapter 1 Introduction 8 This first edition of theN ational Plant Health Status Report provides a snapshot of the structure and status of Australia’s plant health system in 2007/08. Australia’s geographic isolation has fortuitously allowed the island continent to remain relatively free from many of the pests that have significantly affected plant industries in other parts of the world. Consequently, Australia has placed a high priority on maintaining plant biosecurity:
Recommended publications
  • Addenda and Amendments to a Checklist of the Lepidoptera of the British Isles on Account of Subsequently Published Data
    Ent Rec 128(2)_Layout 1 22/03/2016 12:53 Page 98 94 Entomologist’s Rec. J. Var. 128 (2016) ADDENDA AND AMENDMENTS TO A CHECKLIST OF THE LEPIDOPTERA OF THE BRITISH ISLES ON ACCOUNT OF SUBSEQUENTLY PUBLISHED DATA 1 DAVID J. L. A GASSIZ , 2 S. D. B EAVAN & 1 R. J. H ECKFORD 1 Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD 2 The Hayes, Zeal Monachorum, Devon EX17 6DF This update incorpotes information published before 25 March 2016 into A Checklist of the Lepidoptera of the British Isles, 2013. CENSUS The number of species now recorded from the British Isles stands at 2535 of which 57 are thought to be extinct and in addition there are 177 adventive species. CHANGE OF STATUS (no longer extinct) p. 17 16.013 remove X, Hall (2013) p. 25 35.006 remove X, Beavan & Heckford (2014) p. 40 45.024 remove X, Wilton (2014) p. 54 49.340 remove X, Manning (2015) ADDITIONAL SPECIES in main list 12.0047 Infurcitinea teriolella (Amsel, 1954) E S W I C 15.0321 Parornix atripalpella Wahlström, 1979 E S W I C 15.0861 Phyllonorycter apparella (Herrich-Schäffer, 1855) E S W I C 15.0862 Phyllonorycter pastorella (Zeller, 1846) E S W I C 27.0021 Oegoconia novimundi (Busck, 1915) E S W I C 35.0299 Helcystogramma triannulella (Herrich-Sch äffer, 1854) E S W I C 41.0041 Blastobasis maroccanella Amsel, 1952 E S W I C 48.0071 Choreutis nemorana (Hübner, 1799) E S W I C 49.0371 Clepsis dumicolana (Zeller, 1847) E S W I C 49.2001 TETRAMOERA Diakonoff, [1968] langmaidi Plant, 2014 E S W I C 62.0151 Delplanqueia inscriptella (Duponchel, 1836) E S W I C 72.0061 Hypena lividalis (Hübner, 1790) Chevron Snout E S W I C 70.2841 PUNGELARIA Rougemont, 1903 capreolaria ([Denis & Schiffermüller], 1775) Banded Pine Carpet E S W I C 72.0211 HYPHANTRIA Harris, 1841 cunea (Drury, 1773) Autumn Webworm E S W I C 73.0041 Thysanoplusia daubei (Boisduval, 1840) Boathouse Gem E S W I C 73.0301 Aedia funesta (Esper, 1786) Druid E S W I C Ent Rec 128(2)_Layout 1 22/03/2016 12:53 Page 99 Entomologist’s Rec.
    [Show full text]
  • <I>Tilletia Indica</I>
    ISPM 27 27 ANNEX 4 ENG DP 4: Tilletia indica Mitra INTERNATIONAL STANDARD FOR PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES PHYTOSANITARY FOR STANDARD INTERNATIONAL DIAGNOSTIC PROTOCOLS Produced by the Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) This page is intentionally left blank This diagnostic protocol was adopted by the Standards Committee on behalf of the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures in January 2014. The annex is a prescriptive part of ISPM 27. ISPM 27 Diagnostic protocols for regulated pests DP 4: Tilletia indica Mitra Adopted 2014; published 2016 CONTENTS 1. Pest Information ............................................................................................................................... 2 2. Taxonomic Information .................................................................................................................... 2 3. Detection ........................................................................................................................................... 2 3.1 Examination of seeds/grain ............................................................................................... 3 3.2 Extraction of teliospores from seeds/grain, size-selective sieve wash test ....................... 3 4. Identification ..................................................................................................................................... 4 4.1 Morphology of teliospores ................................................................................................ 4 4.1.1 Morphological
    [Show full text]
  • The Microlepidopterous Fauna of Sri Lanka, Formerly Ceylon, Is Famous
    ON A COLLECTION OF SOME FAMILIES OF MICRO- LEPIDOPTERA FROM SRI LANKA (CEYLON) by A. DIAKONOFF Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden With 65 text-figures and 18 plates CONTENTS Preface 3 Cochylidae 5 Tortricidae, Olethreutinae, Grapholitini 8 „ „ Eucosmini 23 „ „ Olethreutini 66 „ Chlidanotinae, Chlidanotini 78 „ „ Polyorthini 79 „ „ Hilarographini 81 „ „ Phricanthini 81 „ Tortricinae, Tortricini 83 „ „ Archipini 95 Brachodidae 98 Choreutidae 102 Carposinidae 103 Glyphipterigidae 108 A list of identified species no A list of collecting localities 114 Index of insect names 117 Index of latin plant names 122 PREFACE The microlepidopterous fauna of Sri Lanka, formerly Ceylon, is famous for its richness and variety, due, without doubt, to the diversified biotopes and landscapes of this beautiful island. In spite of this, there does not exist a survey of its fauna — except a single contribution, by Lord Walsingham, in Moore's "Lepidoptera of Ceylon", already almost a hundred years old, and a number of small papers and stray descriptions of new species, in various journals. The authors of these papers were Walker, Zeller, Lord Walsingham and a few other classics — until, starting with 1905, a flood of new descriptions 4 ZOOLOGISCHE VERHANDELINGEN I93 (1982) and records from India and Ceylon appeared, all by the hand of Edward Meyrick. He was almost the single specialist of these faunas, until his death in 1938. To this great Lepidopterist we chiefly owe our knowledge of all groups of Microlepidoptera of Sri Lanka. After his death this information stopped abruptly. In the later years great changes have taken place in the tropical countries. We are now facing, alas, the disastrously quick destruction of natural bio- topes, especially by the reckless liquidation of the tropical forests.
    [Show full text]
  • CARBÓN PARCIAL DEL TRIGO Tilletia Indica Mitra Ficha Técnica
    CARBÓN PARCIAL DEL TRIGO Tilletia indica Mitra Ficha Técnica No. 24 Durán, 2008., Durán 2016., Castlebury & Shivas 2006. ISBN: Pendiente Mayo, 2019 Dirección: DGSV/CNRF/PVEF Código EPPO : NEOVIN. Fecha de actualización: Mayo, 2019. Comentarios y sugerencias enviar correo a: [email protected] CONTENIDO IDENTIDAD .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Nombre científico ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Sinonimia .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Clasificación taxonómica ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Nombre común .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Código EPPO .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Estatus Fitosanitario .........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Tilletia Indica.Pdf
    Podsumowanie Analizy Zagrożenia Agrofagiem (Ekspres PRA) dla Tilletia indica Obszar PRA: Rzeczpospolita Polska Opis obszaru zagrożenia: Obszar całego kraju Główne wnioski Prawdopodobieństwo wniknięcia T. indica na teren PRA jest ściśle związane z importem zakażonego ziarna. Istnieje ryzyko zadomowienia się patogenu na obszarze PRA i wywoływania szkód w produkcji rolnej. W przypadku sprowadzania z miejsc, gdzie występuje choroba konieczne jest prowadzenie działań fitosanitarnych jak kontrola materiału nasiennego lub ziarna przeznaczonego na inne cele. Wskazane jest także zaniechanie importu w przypadku epidemii na nowym terenie lub z rejonów o silnym natężeniu infekcji. Sprowadzanie ziarna produkowanego poza obszarem występowania T. indica nie wymaga podejmowania specjalnych zabiegów fitosanitarnych. Wszelkie sygnały o obecności agrofaga powinny zostać poddane wnikliwej analizie, a zakażone rośliny lub materiał zniszczone. Ze względu na duże zdolności teliospor do przetrwania w niekorzystnych warunkach zwalczanie chemiczne lub płodozmian mogą okazać się nieskuteczne. Ryzyko fitosanitarne dla zagrożonego obszaru (indywidualna ranga prawdopodobieństwa wejścia, Wysokie Średnie X Niskie zadomowienia, rozprzestrzenienia oraz wpływu w tekście dokumentu) Poziom niepewności oceny: (uzasadnienie rangi w punkcie 18. Indywidualne rangi niepewności dla prawdopodobieństwa wejścia, Wysoka Średnia Niska X zadomowienia, rozprzestrzenienia oraz wpływu w tekście) Inne rekomendacje: 1 Ekspresowa Analiza Zagrożenia Agrofagiem: Tilletia indica Przygotowana przez: dr Katarzyna Pieczul, prof. dr hab. Marek Korbas, mgr Jakub Danielewicz, dr Katarzyna Sadowska, mgr Michał Czyż, mgr Magdalena Gawlak, lic. Agata Olejniczak dr Tomasz Kałuski; Instytut Ochrony Roślin – Państwowy Instytut Badawczy, ul. Węgorka 20, 60-318 Poznań. Data: 10.08.2017 Etap 1 Wstęp Powód wykonania PRA: Tilletia indica jest patogenem porażającym pszenicę i pszenżyto oraz potencjalnie niektóre z gatunków traw dziko rosnących. Patogen stwarza realne zagrożenie dla upraw zbóż na obszarze PRA.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloaded from BOLD Or Requested from Other Authors
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Towards a global DNA barcode reference library for quarantine identifcations of lepidopteran Received: 28 November 2018 Accepted: 5 April 2019 stemborers, with an emphasis on Published: xx xx xxxx sugarcane pests Timothy R. C. Lee 1, Stacey J. Anderson2, Lucy T. T. Tran-Nguyen3, Nader Sallam4, Bruno P. Le Ru5,6, Desmond Conlong7,8, Kevin Powell 9, Andrew Ward10 & Andrew Mitchell1 Lepidopteran stemborers are among the most damaging agricultural pests worldwide, able to reduce crop yields by up to 40%. Sugarcane is the world’s most prolifc crop, and several stemborer species from the families Noctuidae, Tortricidae, Crambidae and Pyralidae attack sugarcane. Australia is currently free of the most damaging stemborers, but biosecurity eforts are hampered by the difculty in morphologically distinguishing stemborer species. Here we assess the utility of DNA barcoding in identifying stemborer pest species. We review the current state of the COI barcode sequence library for sugarcane stemborers, assembling a dataset of 1297 sequences from 64 species. Sequences were from specimens collected and identifed in this study, downloaded from BOLD or requested from other authors. We performed species delimitation analyses to assess species diversity and the efectiveness of barcoding in this group. Seven species exhibited <0.03 K2P interspecifc diversity, indicating that diagnostic barcoding will work well in most of the studied taxa. We identifed 24 instances of identifcation errors in the online database, which has hampered unambiguous stemborer identifcation using barcodes. Instances of very high within-species diversity indicate that nuclear markers (e.g. 18S, 28S) and additional morphological data (genitalia dissection of all lineages) are needed to confrm species boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Tilletia Indica) of Wheat Prem Lal Kashyap 1, Satvinder Kaur 1, Gulzar S
    1873 Prem Lal Kashyap et al./ Elixir Agriculture 31 (2011) 1873-1876 Available online at www.elixirpublishers.com (Elixir International Journal) Agriculture Elixir Agriculture 31 (2011) 1873-1876 Novel methods for quarantine detection of karnal bunt (tilletia indica) of wheat Prem Lal Kashyap 1, Satvinder Kaur 1, Gulzar S. Sanghera 2, Santhokh S. Kang 1 and PPS Pannu 1 1 Molecular Diagnostic Laboratory, Department of Plant Pathology, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana- 141004 2 SKUAST (K) - Rice Research and Regional Station, Khudwani, Anantnag, 192102, Jammu and Kashmir, India ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article history: Prior knowledge about the presence of a plant pathogen in an infected plant material and Received: 8 December 2010; natural reservoir is the first requirement for a successful disease management strategy. This Received in revised form: becomes more crucial in case of quarantine pathogen like T. indica in order to alleviate 29 December 2010; unnecessary restrictions that prevent the movement of wheat across the globe and tells how Accepted: 1 February 2011; this pathogen hinders the wheat trade of India. More over the potential risk of its dissemination in international wheat trade and germplasm exchange, there is a need for quick, sensitive, Keywords reliable and alarming method to identify T. indica to facilitate implementation of specific Tilletia indica, disease control strategies and for accurately selecting areas for quarantine. The detection of Detection, Karnal bunt (KB) is based primarily on the presence of teliospores on wheat seeds. However, Karnal bunt, accurate and reliable identification of T. indica teliospores by spore morphology alone is not Wheat always possible. Research based on genomic advances and innovative detection methods as well as better knowledge of the T.
    [Show full text]
  • The National Plant Biosecurity Status Report
    The National Plant Biosecurity Status Report 2014 © Plant Health Australia 2015 Disclaimer: This publication is published by Plant Health Australia for information purposes only. Information in the document is drawn from a variety of sources outside This work is copyright. Apart from any use as Plant Health Australia. Although reasonable care was taken in its preparation, Plant Health permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part Australia does not warrant the accuracy, reliability, completeness or currency of the may be reproduced by any process without prior information, or its usefulness in achieving any purpose. permission from Plant Health Australia. Given that there are continuous changes in trade patterns, pest distributions, control Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction measures and agricultural practices, this report can only provide a snapshot in time. and rights should be addressed to: Therefore, all information contained in this report has been collected for the 12 month period from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2014, and should be validated and Communications Manager confirmed with the relevant organisations/authorities before being used. A list of Plant Health Australia contact details (including websites) is provided in the Appendices. 1/1 Phipps Close DEAKIN ACT 2600 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Plant Health Australia will not be liable for any loss, damage, cost or expense incurred in or arising by reason of any person relying on the ISSN 1838-8116 information in this publication. Readers should make and rely on their own assessment An electronic version of this report is available for and enquiries to verify the accuracy of the information provided.
    [Show full text]
  • NDP 41 Hessian
    NDP 41 V1- National Diagnostic Protocol for Mayetiola destructor National Diagnostic Protocol Mayetiola destructor Hessian Fly NDP 41 V1 NDP 41 V1 - National Diagnostic Protocol for Mayetiola destructor © Commonwealth of Australia Ownership of intellectual property rights Unless otherwise noted, copyright (and any other intellectual property rights, if any) in this publication is owned by the Commonwealth of Australia (referred to as the Commonwealth). Creative Commons licence All material in this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence, save for content supplied by third parties, logos and the Commonwealth Coat of Arms. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence is a standard form licence agreement that allows you to copy, distribute, transmit and adapt this publication provided you attribute the work. A summary of the licence terms is available from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en. The full licence terms are available from https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/legalcode. This publication (and any material sourced from it) should be attributed as: Subcommittee on Plant Health Diagnostics (2018). National Diagnostic Protocol for Mayetiola destructor – NDP41 V1. (Eds. Subcommittee on Plant Health Diagnostics) Authors Severtson, D, Szito, A.; Reviewers Nicholas, A, Kehoe, M. ISBN 978-0-6481143-3-8 CC BY 3.0. Cataloguing data Subcommittee on Plant Health Diagnostics (2018). National Diagnostic Protocol for Mayetiola destructor – NDP41 V1. (Eds. Subcommittee
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Biology and Life Cycle of the Barley Stem Gall Midge and Hessian Fly (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) in Morocco
    Revue Marocaine de Protection des Plantes, 2016, N° 9: 17-37 Comparative Biology and Life Cycle of The Barley Stem Gall Midge and Hessian fly (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) in Morocco Comparaison de la Biologie et du cycle de vie de la cécidomyie à galle de l’orge et de la mouche de Hesse (Diptères: Cecidomyiidae) au Maroc 1, 2 2 1, 3 LHALOUI S. , EL BOUHSSINI M. , OTMANE R. , 1,3 1, 2, OURINICHE S. & ALAMI A. 1Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, Centre Régional de Settat 2: International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas, Rabat, Morocco 3: Faculté des Sciences et Techniques, Université Hassan I, Settat, Maroc ABSTRACT The barley stem gall midge, Mayetiola hordei (Keiffer) is the most serious pest of barley in Morocco. The biology and life cycle of this insect were studied in a laboratory and under natural weather conditions. The results showed that similarly to Hessian fly, barley stem gall midge has two feeding instars and a third non-feeding instar. The generation time was longer for barley stem gall midge than for Hessian fly (45 vs 32 days at 18 ± 1°C, and a 12:12 (L: D) h photoperiod). The eggs of barley stem gall midge hatched in 7 days compared to 4 days for Hessian fly. The largest discrepancy in developmental time was for second instar and pupa. Second instars and pupae of barley stem gall midge required twice as long as those of Hessian fly to develop and molt into next stage (12 vs. 6 days). The first and third instars of barley stem gall midge also required a little bit longer to complete development (9 and 10 days vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Nonsystemic Bunt Fungi—Tilletia Indica and T. Horrida: a Review of History, Systematics, and Biology∗
    ANRV283-PY44-05 ARI 7 February 2006 20:39 V I E E W R S I E N C N A D V A Nonsystemic Bunt Fungi—Tilletia indica and T. horrida: A Review of History, Systematics, and Biology∗ Lori M. Carris,1 Lisa A. Castlebury,2 and Blair J. Goates3 1Department of Plant Pathology, Washington State University, Pullman, Washington 99164-6430; email: [email protected] 2USDA ARS Systematic Botany and Mycology Laboratory, Beltsville, Maryland 20705-2350; email: [email protected] 3USDA ARS National Small Grains Germplasm Research Facility, Aberdeen, Idaho 82310; email: [email protected] Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. Key Words 2006. 44:5.1–5.21 Karnal bunt, Neovossia, rice kernel smut, Tilletia walkeri, Tilletiales The Annual Review of Phytopathology is online at phyto.annualreviews.org Abstract doi: 10.1146/ The genus Tilletia is a group of smut fungi that infects grasses either annurev.phyto.44.070505.143402 systemically or locally. Basic differences exist between the systemi- Copyright c 2006 by cally infecting species, such as the common and dwarf bunt fungi, and Annual Reviews. All rights locally infecting species. Tilletia indica, which causes Karnal bunt of reserved wheat, and Tilletia horrida, which causes rice kernel smut, are two ex- 0066-4286/06/0908- amples of locally infecting species on economically important crops. 0001-$20.00 However, even species on noncultivated hosts can become important ∗ The U.S. Government when occurring as contaminants in export grain and seed shipments. has the right to retain a nonexclusive, royalty-free In this review, we focus on T. indica and the morphologically similar license in and to any but distantly related T.
    [Show full text]
  • Division of Plant Exploration and Germplasm Collection 1
    okf"kZd izfrosnu Annual Report 2015-16 HkkÑvuqi&jk"Vªh; ikni vkuqOakf'kd Laklk/u C;wjks (Hkkjrh; Ñf"k vuqLak/ku ifj"kn) iwlk ifjlj] ubZ fnYyh&110 012 ICAR-NATIONAL BUREAU OF PLANT GENETIC RESOURCES (Indian Council of Agricultural Research) Pusa Campus, New Delhi - 110 012 Supervision and Guidance : Dr KC Bansal, Director Dr SC Dubey, Director (Acting) and Chairman, Publication Committee Compiled and Edited by : Dr Kavita Gupta, Principal Scientist Dr Anjali Kak, Principal Scientist Dr Vandana Tyagi, Principal Scientist Dr MK Rana, Principal Scientist Dr TV Prasad, Senior Scientist Dr K Pradheep, Senior Scientist Citation : Anonymous (2016). Annual Report of the ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources 2015-16, NBPGR, Pusa Campus, New Delhi, India, 195 + x p. This report includes unprocessed or semi-processed data, which would form the basis of scientific papers in due course. The material contained in the report therefore may not be made use of without the written permission of the Director, ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, New Delhi except for quoting it for scientific reference. Published by the Director, ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, Pusa Campus, New Delhi-110 012, and Printed at Alpha Printographics (India), New Delhi-110 028. Tel.: 9999039940, 9811199620 CONTENTS Preface v Acronyms and Abbreviations vii-x dk;Zdkjh lkjka'k 1-6 Executive Summary 7-13 Introduction 14-18 1 Division of Plant Exploration and Germplasm Collection 19-27 2 Germplasm Exchange Unit 28-33 3 Division of Plant Quarantine
    [Show full text]