DOCSLIB.ORG

Cotton Industry Biosecurity Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cotton Industry Biosecurity Plan Biosecurity Plan for the Cotton Industry Version 3.0 August 2015 PLANT HEALTH AUSTRALIA | Biosecurity Plan for the Cotton Industry 2015 Location: Level 1 1 Phipps Close DEAKIN ACT 2600 Phone: +61 2 6215 7700 Fax: +61 2 6260 4321 E-mail: [email protected] Visit our web site: www.planthealthaustralia.com.au An electronic copy of this plan is available through the email address listed above. © Plant Health Australia Limited 2006 Copyright in this publication is owned by Plant Health Australia Limited, except when content has been provided by other contributors, in which case copyright may be owned by another person. With the exception of any material protected by a trade mark, this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivs 3.0 Australia licence. Any use of this publication, other than as authorised under this licence or copyright law, is prohibited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/ - This details the relevant licence conditions, including the full legal code. This licence allows for redistribution, commercial and non-commercial, as long as it is passed along unchanged and in whole, with credit to Plant Health Australia (as below). In referencing this document, the preferred citation is: Plant Health Australia Ltd (2006) Biosecurity Plan for the Cotton Industry (Version 3.0 – August 2015). Plant Health Australia, Canberra, ACT. Disclaimer: The material contained in this publication is produced for general information only. It is not intended as professional advice on any particular matter. No person should act or fail to act on the basis of any material contained in this publication without first obtaining specific and independent professional advice. Plant Health Australia and all persons acting for Plant Health Australia in preparing this publication, expressly disclaim all and any liability to any persons in respect of anything done by any such person in reliance, whether in whole or in part, on this publication. The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of Plant Health Australia. PLANT HEALTH AUSTRALIA | Biosecurity Plan for the Cotton Industry 2015 Acknowledgements The Biosecurity Plan for the Cotton Industry was coordinated by Plant Health Australia and developed through a partnership approach using government and industry resources and expertise. The following organisations and agencies were involved in the development and finalisation of the plan: Endorsement The Biosecurity Plan for the Cotton Industry (Version 3.0) was formally endorsed by the cotton industry (through Cotton Australia) in July 2015, and the Australian Government and all state and territory governments (through the Plant Health Committee) in August 2015. The Australian Government endorses the document without prejudice for the purposes of industries planning needs and meeting the Department’s obligations under Clause 13 of the EPPRD. In providing this endorsement the Department notes page 38 of the Plan which states: “This Document considers all potential pathways by which a pest might enter Australia, including natural and assisted spread (including smuggling). This is a broader view of potential risk than the IRA conducted by the Department of Agriculture which focus only on specific regulated import pathways.” PLANT HEALTH AUSTRALIA | Biosecurity Plan for the Cotton Industry 2015 Table of contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 10 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 11 Implementing biosecurity for the Australian cotton industry 2015-2020................................ 13 Australian cotton industry - biosecurity preparedness ....................................................... 16 Cotton industry biosecurity statement 2014-2015 .............................................................. 20 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 25 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 26 What is biosecurity and why is it important? ...................................................................... 26 The Plant Biosecurity System in Australia ............................................................................. 26 Plant Health Australia ......................................................................................................... 28 The Industry Biosecurity Plan ................................................................................................ 28 Biosecurity planning ........................................................................................................... 29 Industry Biosecurity Plan development .............................................................................. 30 Review processes .............................................................................................................. 31 Document overview ............................................................................................................... 32 Threat identification and pest risk assessments ................................................................ 32 Risk mitigation and preparedness ...................................................................................... 33 Response management ..................................................................................................... 33 Reference .............................................................................................................................. 33 THREAT IDENTIFICATION AND PEST RISK ASSESSMENTS ............................................ 34 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 35 Exotic Pests of the Cotton Industry ....................................................................................... 36 Threat identification ............................................................................................................ 36 Pest risk assessments ........................................................................................................ 36 Ranking pest threats .......................................................................................................... 38 Description of terms used in pest risk tables ...................................................................... 39 Cotton industry high priority plant pest threat list .................................................................. 41 Current resources for detection and identification of HPPs ............................................... 46 Established Pests of Biosecurity Significance ....................................................................... 48 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 48 Threat identification ............................................................................................................ 48 Prioritising pest threats ....................................................................................................... 48 Weeds of Biosecurity Significance ........................................................................................ 52 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 52 Threat identification ............................................................................................................ 52 Prioritising pest threats ....................................................................................................... 53 References ............................................................................................................................ 55 RISK MITIGATION AND PREPAREDNESS ........................................................................... 60 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 61 Barrier quarantine .................................................................................................................. 63 PLANT HEALTH AUSTRALIA | Biosecurity Plan for the Cotton Industry 2015 National level – importation restrictions ............................................................................. 63 State and regional level – movement restrictions .............................................................. 67 Farm level – exclusion activities ......................................................................................... 71 Surveillance ........................................................................................................................... 72 National surveillance programs .......................................................................................... 73 State surveillance programs ............................................................................................... 73 Farm surveillance activities ................................................................................................ 77 Training .................................................................................................................................. 78 Awareness
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Biosecurity Plan for the Vegetable Industry
    Biosecurity Plan for the Vegetable Industry A shared responsibility between government and industry Version 3.0 May 2018 Plant Health AUSTRALIA Location: Level 1 1 Phipps Close DEAKIN ACT 2600 Phone: +61 2 6215 7700 Fax: +61 2 6260 4321 E-mail: [email protected] Visit our web site: www.planthealthaustralia.com.au An electronic copy of this plan is available through the email address listed above. © Plant Health Australia Limited 2018 Copyright in this publication is owned by Plant Health Australia Limited, except when content has been provided by other contributors, in which case copyright may be owned by another person. With the exception of any material protected by a trade mark, this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivs 3.0 Australia licence. Any use of this publication, other than as authorised under this licence or copyright law, is prohibited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/ - This details the relevant licence conditions, including the full legal code. This licence allows for redistribution, commercial and non-commercial, as long as it is passed along unchanged and in whole, with credit to Plant Health Australia (as below). In referencing this document, the preferred citation is: Plant Health Australia Ltd (2018) Biosecurity Plan for the Vegetable Industry (Version 3.0 – 2018) Plant Health Australia, Canberra, ACT. This project has been funded by Hort Innovation, using the vegetable research and development levy and contributions from the Australian Government. Hort Innovation is the grower-owned, not for profit research and development corporation for Australian horticulture Disclaimer: The material contained in this publication is produced for general information only.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Pest Management: Current and Future Strategies
    Integrated Pest Management: Current and Future Strategies Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, Ames, Iowa, USA Printed in the United States of America Cover design by Lynn Ekblad, Different Angles, Ames, Iowa Graphics and layout by Richard Beachler, Instructional Technology Center, Iowa State University, Ames ISBN 1-887383-23-9 ISSN 0194-4088 06 05 04 03 4 3 2 1 Library of Congress Cataloging–in–Publication Data Integrated Pest Management: Current and Future Strategies. p. cm. -- (Task force report, ISSN 0194-4088 ; no. 140) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1-887383-23-9 (alk. paper) 1. Pests--Integrated control. I. Council for Agricultural Science and Technology. II. Series: Task force report (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology) ; no. 140. SB950.I4573 2003 632'.9--dc21 2003006389 Task Force Report No. 140 June 2003 Council for Agricultural Science and Technology Ames, Iowa, USA Task Force Members Kenneth R. Barker (Chair), Department of Plant Pathology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh Esther Day, American Farmland Trust, DeKalb, Illinois Timothy J. Gibb, Department of Entomology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana Maud A. Hinchee, ArborGen, Summerville, South Carolina Nancy C. Hinkle, Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, Athens Barry J. Jacobsen, Department of Plant Sciences and Plant Pathology, Montana State University, Bozeman James Knight, Department of Animal and Range Science, Montana State University, Bozeman Kenneth A. Langeland, Department of Agronomy, University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, Gainesville Evan Nebeker, Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State David A. Rosenberger, Plant Pathology Department, Cornell University–Hudson Valley Laboratory, High- land, New York Donald P.
    [Show full text]
  • Description and Identification of Four Species of Plant-Parasitic Nematodes Associated with Forage Legumes
    5 Egypt. J. Agronematol., Vol. 17, No.1, PP. 51-64 (2018) Description and Identification of Four Species of Plant-parasitic Nematodes Associated with Forage Legumes * * Mahfouz M. M. Abd-Elgawad ; Mohamed F.M. Eissa ; Abd-Elmoneim Y. ** *** **** El-Gindi ; Grover C. Smart ; and Ahmed El-bahrawy . * Plant Pathology Department, National Research Centre. ** Department of Agricultural Zoology and Nematology, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Cairo, Giza, Egypt. *** Department of Entomology and Nematology, IFAS, University of Florida, USA. **** Institute for Sustainable Plant Protection, National Council of Research, Bari, Italy. Abstract Four species of plant parasitic nematodes were present in soil samples planted with forage legumes at Alachua County, Florida, USA. The detected species Belonolaimus longicaudatus, Criconemella ornate, Hoplolaimus galeatus, and Paratrichodorus minor were described in the present study. They belong to orders Rhabditida (Belonolaimus longicaudatus, Criconemella ornate, and Hoplolaimus galeatus) and Triplonchida (Paratrichodorus minor) and to taxonomical families Dolichodoridae (Belonolaimus longicaudatus), Hoplolaimidae (Hoplolaimus galeatus) Criconematidae (Criconemella ornate), and Trichodoridae (Paratrichodorus minor). The identification of the present specimens was based on the classical taxonomy, following morphological and morphometrical characters in the species specific identification keys. Keywords: Belonolaimus longicaudatus, Criconemella ornate, Hoplolaimus galeatus, Paratrichodorus minor, morphology,
    [Show full text]
  • Saltmarsh Caterpillar, Estigmene Acrea (Drury) (Insecta: Lepidoptera: Arctiidae)1 John L
    EENY218 Saltmarsh Caterpillar, Estigmene acrea (Drury) (Insecta: Lepidoptera: Arctiidae)1 John L. Capinera2 Distribution The saltmarsh caterpillar, Estigmene acrea (Drury), is a native insect found throughout the United States. Its distribution extends to Central America, and in Canada it has damaged crops in Ontario and Quebec. As a pest, it is most common in the southern United States, particularly the southwest. Description and Life Cycle A generation can be completed in 35 to 40 days under ideal conditions, but most reports from the field suggest about six weeks between generations. The number of generations per year is estimated at one in the northern states to three Figure 1. Adult saltmarsh caterpillars, Estigmene acrea (Drury). to four in the south. Overwintering reportedly occurs in Credits: John L. Capinera, UF/IFAS the mature larval stage, with pupation early in the spring. Saltmarsh caterpillars usually are infrequent early in the season, but may attain high numbers by autumn. Eggs The eggs are nearly spherical in shape, and measure about 0.6 mm in diameter. Initially they are yellow, but soon become grayish in color. Females commonly produce 400 to 1000 eggs in one or more clusters. It is not unusual to find a single egg cluster containing 1200 eggs. Eggs hatch in four to five days. Figure 2. Eggs of the saltmarsh caterpillar, Estigmene acrea (Drury). Credits: John L. Capinera, UF/IFAS 1. This document is EENY218, one of a series of the Entomology and Nematology Department, UF/IFAS Extension. Original publication date July 2001. Revised March 2013. Reviewed July 2019. Visit the EDIS website at https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu for the currently supported version of this publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Preference for High Concentrations of Plant Pyrrolizidine Alkaloids in the Specialist Arctiid Moth Utetheisa Ornatrix Depends on Previous Experience
    Arthropod-Plant Interactions (2013) 7:169–175 DOI 10.1007/s11829-012-9232-1 ORIGINAL PAPER Preference for high concentrations of plant pyrrolizidine alkaloids in the specialist arctiid moth Utetheisa ornatrix depends on previous experience Adam Hoina • Carlos Henrique Zanini Martins • Jose´ Roberto Trigo • Rodrigo Cogni Received: 12 October 2012 / Accepted: 31 October 2012 / Published online: 15 November 2012 Ó Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012 Abstract Secondary metabolites are one the most per- diet with the high PA concentration, while larvae that were vasive defensive mechanisms in plants. Many specialist pretreated with a high PA diet showed no discrimination herbivores have evolved adaptations to overcome these between future feeding of different PA concentration diets. defensive compounds. Some herbivores can even take We discuss our results using mechanistic and evolutionary advantage of these compounds by sequestering them for approaches. Finally, we discuss how these results have protection and/or mate attraction. One of the most studied important implications on the evolution of plant herbivore specialist insects that sequesters secondary metabolites is interactions and how specialist herbivores may decrease the arctiid moth Utetheisa ornatrix. This species sequesters the levels of chemical defenses on plant populations. pyrrolizidine alkaloids (PAs) from its host plant, the legume Crotalaria spp. The sequestered PAs are used as a Keywords Coevolution Á Crotalaria Á Chemical defense Á predator repellent and as a mating pheromone. We used Diet choice Á Mating choice Á Taste receptors this species to test larval preference for different concen- trations of PAs. We purified PAs from plant material and added them at different concentrations to an artificial diet.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetically Modified Baculoviruses for Pest
    INSECT CONTROL BIOLOGICAL AND SYNTHETIC AGENTS This page intentionally left blank INSECT CONTROL BIOLOGICAL AND SYNTHETIC AGENTS EDITED BY LAWRENCE I. GILBERT SARJEET S. GILL Amsterdam • Boston • Heidelberg • London • New York • Oxford Paris • San Diego • San Francisco • Singapore • Sydney • Tokyo Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier Academic Press, 32 Jamestown Road, London, NW1 7BU, UK 30 Corporate Drive, Suite 400, Burlington, MA 01803, USA 525 B Street, Suite 1800, San Diego, CA 92101-4495, USA ª 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved The chapters first appeared in Comprehensive Molecular Insect Science, edited by Lawrence I. Gilbert, Kostas Iatrou, and Sarjeet S. Gill (Elsevier, B.V. 2005). All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier’s Rights Department in Oxford, UK: phone (þ44) 1865 843830, fax (þ44) 1865 853333, e-mail [email protected]. Requests may also be completed on-line via the homepage (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/permissions). Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Insect control : biological and synthetic agents / editors-in-chief: Lawrence I. Gilbert, Sarjeet S. Gill. – 1st ed. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-12-381449-4 (alk. paper) 1. Insect pests–Control. 2. Insecticides. I. Gilbert, Lawrence I. (Lawrence Irwin), 1929- II. Gill, Sarjeet S. SB931.I42 2010 632’.7–dc22 2010010547 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978-0-12-381449-4 Cover Images: (Top Left) Important pest insect targeted by neonicotinoid insecticides: Sweet-potato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci; (Top Right) Control (bottom) and tebufenozide intoxicated by ingestion (top) larvae of the white tussock moth, from Chapter 4; (Bottom) Mode of action of Cry1A toxins, from Addendum A7.
    [Show full text]
  • Paper Teplate
    Volume-03 ISSN: 2455-3085 (Online) Issue-12 RESEARCH REVIEW International Journal of Multidisciplinary December -2018 www.rrjournals.com [UGC Listed Journal] Biology of acridid grasshopper, Chrotogonus trachypterus Blanchard -A review Shashi Meena Assistant Professor, Department of Zoology, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur (India) _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Grasshoppers are abundant and most diverse group of was studied by various workers [1, 17]. Observations were also insects worldwide. They are ployphagous in nature and made on population density, seasonal history and number of become voracious foliage feeder when occupying maximum generations, food preferences, development on different food population density [29, 30]. Grasshoppers, belong to family plants, nature and extent of damage caused by C. trachypterus ‘Acrididae’, order Orthoptera, feed voraciously on green plants in Punjab [6]. Patterns of variation in external morphology, and vegetation, throughout India and other parts of the world biology and ecology of immature and adults of C. trachypterus and cause severe damage. They consume considerable was also illustrated [5, 11, 12]. amount of foliage during their nymphal stage and damage millets, vegetables, cereal, citrus and ornamental plants. The eggs of acridids in general are slightly curved in the Migratory grasshoppers can also attack on other shrubs and middle and blunt at the ends and are enclosed in a frothy plants and consume all parts of them [14]. secretion of accessory glands and laid eggs at a depth of 4.81± 0.09 cm [9, 13, 32, 33, 34]. C. trachypterus on an Surface grasshopper, Chrotogonus trachypterus average laid 71.10±24.54 eggs. The highest fertility of eggs Blanchard is a polyphagous pest and occurs through the year was observed at fluctuating temperature but in contrast C.
    [Show full text]
  • Biology of Cochlochila Bullita Stal As Potential Pest of Orthosiphon Aristatus (Blume) Miq
    UNIVERSITI PUTRA MALAYSIA BIOLOGY OF COCHLOCHILA BULLITA STAL AS POTENTIAL PEST OF ORTHOSIPHON ARISTATUS (BLUME) MIQ. IN MALAYSIA UPM TAN LI PENG COPYRIGHT © FH 2014 2 BIOLOGY OF Cochlochila bullita (STÅL) (HEMIPTERA: TINGIDAE), A POTENTIAL PEST OF Orthosiphon aristatus (BLUME) MIQ. (LAMIALES: LAMIACEAE) IN MALAYSIA UPM By TAN LI PENG Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, in Fulfilment to the Requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2014 COPYRIGHT © COPYRIGHT All material contained within the thesis, including without limitation text, logos, icons, photographs and all other artwork, is copyright material of Universiti Putra Malaysia unless otherwise stated. Use may be made of any material contained within the thesis for non-commercial purposes from the copyright holder. Commercial use of material may only be made with the express, prior, written permission of Universiti Putra Malaysia. Copyright © Universiti Putra Malaysia UPM COPYRIGHT © Abstract of thesis presented to the Senate of Universiti Putra Malaysia in fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy BIOLOGY OF Cochlochila bullita (STÅL) (HEMIPTERA: TINGIDAE), A POTENTIAL PEST OF Orthosiphon aristatus (BLUME) MIQ. (LAMIALES: LAMIACEAE) IN MALAYSIA By TAN LI PENG July 2014 Chairman: Prof. Ahmad Said Sajap, PhD UPM Faculty: Forestry Cochlochila bullita (Stål) is an importance pest in some Asia countries such as India, Kanpur and Thailand attacking plants form the genus Ocimum, herein its common name, ocimum tingid. Cochlochila bullita is first recorded in Malaysia in the year 2009, attacking one of the important medicinal herbs in this country, the Orthosiphon aristatus (Blume) Miq. Biology of this pest was studied to get a deeper understanding of this bug associated with O.
    [Show full text]
  • Biosecurity in Australia: a Working Partnership and Shared Responsibility
    Biosecurity in Australia: a working partnership and shared responsibility Dennis Bittisnich Biosecurity Services Group Outline • Australian agriculture in context • Biosecurity control in Australia: a brief background • PPPs in Australian biosecurity: a shared responsibility • Observations: key factors in Australian biosecurity PPPs Australian Agriculture in Context • Geographically isolated; unique flora and fauna; many climatic zones • Political federation of 8 state and territory governments under a commonwealth government • Only 10% land area is arable • 0.3% global population • 3% of global agricultural trade • Beef, wheat, wine, wool, lamb, feed, dairy Australian Agriculture in Context • Historically Australian economy “rode on the sheep’s back”; significant wool, lamb and cereal exporter • Ag nearly 30% of national GDP at peak (now 5% GDP; 60% is exported; 5:1 export:import) • Premium for “clean green” credentials; esp. from favourable animal/plant disease status • Biosecurity threats were thus high on industry, political, and trade agenda Australian Agriculture in Context • In last 10-15 years: exports levelled off; drought & international competition • Agri-food imports doubled; mostly from developing countries • International passengers and cargo doubled - globalization • Emerging/altered spread of disease • ALSO: Trading partner requirements/SPS disciplines more rigorously applied Biosecurity control in Australia • Historically public management of biosecurity (also food safety; ag R&D) seen as a government “public good” (beneficiaries
    [Show full text]
  • (Heteroptera: Miridae) Feeding on Cotton Bolls'
    Actual and Simulated Injury of Creonfiades s/gnaws (Heteroptera: Miridae) Feeding on Cotton Bolls' J. Scott Armstrong, 2 Randy J. Coleman and Brian L. Duggan3 USDA, ARS, Beneficial insect Research Unit, Weslaco, Texas 78596 USA J. Entomol. Sci. 45(2): 170-177 (April 2010) Abstract The actual feeding injury of Creontiades signatus Distant (Heteroptera: Miridae) was compared with a simulated technique during 2005, 2006 and 2008 by injecting varying dilutions of pectinase into cotton boils at different boll sizes (ages) and into 2 or 4 locules to determine if such a technique could be used to reduce the time and labor involved with conducting economic injury level studies in the field. The most accurate simulation occurred in 2008 by injecting I ItL of 10% pecti- nase into all 4 locules of a cotton boll. This improved the relationships of injury score to seed cotton, seed, and lint weights. The youngest boll age class of > 2 cm diam. (2 d of, age) was not significantly (8 more damaged than the medium age !! 2.5 cm d of age) boils, and both sustained significantly more injury than the large boll classification of ^! 3 cm (12 d of age) However, small boils were at least 3 times more likely to abscise than medium-sized boils, and large boils did not abscise regard- less of treatment. Some damage was observed for large boils from the ' injected and actual feeding compared with the controls, but the lint and seed weights were not significantly different for any of the treatments including the controls. Our study characterizes the feeding injury caused by C.
    [Show full text]
  • Fused Heterocyclic Compound Or Salt Thereof
    (19) TZZ Z¥_T (11) EP 2 975 039 B1 (12) EUROPEAN PATENT SPECIFICATION (45) Date of publication and mention (51) Int Cl.: of the grant of the patent: C07D 487/04 (2006.01) A01N 43/90 (2006.01) 15.08.2018 Bulletin 2018/33 A01P 7/04 (2006.01) A61K 31/5025 (2006.01) A61P 33/14 (2006.01) (21) Application number: 14762737.6 (86) International application number: (22) Date of filing: 14.03.2014 PCT/JP2014/056832 (87) International publication number: WO 2014/142292 (18.09.2014 Gazette 2014/38) (54) FUSED HETEROCYCLIC COMPOUND OR SALT THEREOF, AGRICULTURAL AND HORTICULTURAL INSECTICIDE CONTAINING FUSED HETEROCYCLIC COMPOUND, AND METHOD FOR USING AGRICULTURAL AND HORTICULTURAL INSECTICIDE KONDENSIERTE HETEROCYCLISCHE VERBINDUNG ODER SALZ DAVON, INSEKTIZID FÜR LANDWIRTSCHAFT UND GARTENBAU MIT EINER KONDENSIERTEN HETEROCYCLISCHEN VERBINDUNG UND VERFAHREN ZUR VERWENDUNG DES INSEKTIZIDS FÜR LANDWIRTSCHAFT UND GARTENBAU COMPOSÉ HÉTÉROCYCLIQUE CONDENSÉ OU SEL DE CELUI-CI, INSECTICIDE AGRICOLE ET HORTICOLE CONTENANT LE COMPOSÉ HÉTÉROCYCLIQUE CONDENSÉ ET PROCÉDÉ D’UTILISATION DE L’INSECTICIDE AGRICOLE ET HORTICOLE (84) Designated Contracting States: • FURUYA, Takashi AL AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB Kawachinagano-shi GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MC MK MT NL NO Osaka 586-0094 (JP) PL PT RO RS SE SI SK SM TR • SUWA, Akiyuki Kawachinagano-shi (30) Priority: 15.03.2013 JP 2013053201 Osaka 586-0094 (JP) 22.05.2013 JP 2013107592 25.07.2013 JP 2013155074 (74) Representative: Witte, Weller & Partner 07.11.2013 JP 2013231582 Patentanwälte mbB Postfach 10 54 62 (43) Date of publication of application: 70047 Stuttgart (DE) 20.01.2016 Bulletin 2016/03 (56) References cited: (73) Proprietor: Nihon Nohyaku Co., Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • Australian Biosecurity Funding Approaches Ahchow Et Al
    Australian Biosecurity Funding Approaches Ahchow et al. Australasian Agribusiness Perspectives 2017, Volume 20, Paper 8 ISSN: 1442-6951 Biosecurity in Australia: An Assessment of the Current Funding Approach Ruth Ahchowa, Garry Griffithb and Susan Hesterc * a Former postgraduate student, Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville; and Director, Economics, Regulation and Policy, EY, Melbourne. b Principal Fellow, Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville; and Professorial Research Fellow, UNE Business School, University of New England, Armidale. c Senior Research Fellow, UNE Business School, University of New England, Armidale; and Chief Investigator, Centre of Excellence for Biosecurity Risk Analysis, School of Biosciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Abstract Australian governments and industries have limited resources to tackle established pests and diseases and to prevent new incursions. As the biosecurity threats to Australia’s economy, environment and society change, it is important that the funding and governance of responses are appropriately aligned and resourced. Key decisions concern which biosecurity threats will receive funding, how much funding they will receive, and who will be responsible for providing the funding. In this paper we review the current national approach to biosecurity funding, and a high level assessment is made against economic and public policy principles for allocation of resources to biosecurity. The review finds that the primary assessment for determining funding of national biosecurity response is benefit-cost analysis. However, benefit-cost analysis is often restricted to providing a net benefit of responding to one plant or animal pest or disease. The conclusion is that an approach which considers a portfolio of pests and diseases may be more appropriate in a limited resource environment.
    [Show full text]