VKM Report 2016: 55 Assessment of manure and digestive tract content from slaughterhouses as a pathway for weeds and plant pests Opinion of the Panel on Plant Health of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety Report from the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (VKM) 2016: 55 Assessment of manure and digestive tract content from slaughterhouses as a pathway for weeds and plant pests Opinion of the Panel on Plant Health of the Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety 15.11.2016 ISBN: 978-82-8259-245-1 Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (VKM) Po 4404 Nydalen N – 0403 Oslo Norway Phone: +47 21 62 28 00 Email: [email protected] www.vkm.no www.english.vkm.no Suggested citation: VKM. (2016) Risk assessment of manure and digestive tract content from slaughterhouses as a pathway for weeds and plant pests. Opinion of the Panel on Plant Health, ISBN: 978-82-8259-245-1, Oslo, Norway. VKM Report 2016: 55 Assessment of manure and digestive tract content from slaughterhouses as a pathway for weeds and plant pests Authors preparing the draft opinion Leif Sundheim, Åshild Ergon, Christer Magnusson, Jan Netland, Egil Prestløkken, Arild Sletten, May-Guri Sæthre, Elin Thingnæs Lid (VKM staff), Tron Gifstad (VKM staff), Micael Wendell (VKM staff). Assessed and approved The opinion has been assessed and approved by the Panel on Plant Health. Members of the panel are: Trond Rafoss (chair), Guro Brodal, Åshild Ergon, Christer Magnusson, Arild Sletten, Halvor Solheim, Leif Sundheim, May-Guri Sæthre, Anne Marte Tronsmo, Bjørn Økland. Acknowledgments The Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food Safety (Vitenskapskomiteen for mattrygghet, VKM) has appointed a working group consisting of both VKM members and external experts to answer the request from the Norwegian Food Safety Authority. Project leader from the VKM secretariat has been Elin Thingnæs Lid (until May 2016) and Tron Gifstad (from May 2016). The members of the working group, Leif Sundheim (chair), Åshild Ergon, Christer Magnusson, Arild Sletten, May-Guri Sæthre (Panel on Plant Health), Jan Netland (Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research), and Egil Prestløkken (Norwegian University of Life Sciences) are acknowledged for their valuable work on this opinion. John Ingar Øverland (the Norwegian Agricultural Extension Service) is acknowledged for information on production area and yields for legumes in Norway. Lucy Robertson (Norwegian University of Life Sciences) is acknowledged for copyediting the report. Trine Eggen (Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research) is acknowledged for reviewing the report. Competence of VKM experts Persons working for VKM, either as appointed members of the Committee or as external experts, do this by virtue of their scientific expertise, not as representatives for their employers or third party interests. The Civil Services Act instructions on legal competence apply for all work prepared by VKM. VKM Report 2016: 55 Table of Contents Summary ................................................................................................................ 7 Sammendrag på norsk ......................................................................................... 11 Abbreviations and/or glossary ............................................................................. 15 Background as provided by the Norwegian Food Safety Authority ...................... 18 Terms of reference as provided by the Norwegian Food Safety Authority ........... 19 Assessment .......................................................................................................... 20 1 Introduction ................................................................................................. 20 1.1 Purpose and scope ............................................................................................... 20 1.2 Methodology ....................................................................................................... 20 Ratings of probabilities and uncertainties ..................................................... 21 Literature search strategy .......................................................................... 21 Data collection .......................................................................................... 22 Previous risk assessments .......................................................................... 22 2 Pest identity and probability of association with the pathway at origin ...... 23 2.1 Identification of pest sources in animal feed and bedding ........................................ 23 Composition of the feed ............................................................................. 23 2.1.1.1 Plant species and ingredients in concentrates............................................ 25 2.1.1.2 Plant species and plant materials in forage ............................................... 27 2.1.1.3 Plant species and plant materials in other feed .......................................... 27 Composition of bedding ............................................................................. 27 2.2 Identity of pests associated with the pathway at origin ........................................... 28 Weeds ...................................................................................................... 28 Plant pathogenic fungi, oomycetes and protozoa .......................................... 30 Plant pathogenic bacteria ........................................................................... 32 Plant pathogenic viruses and their vectors ................................................... 33 Plant parasitic nematodes .......................................................................... 34 Phytophagous insects and mites ................................................................. 35 2.3 Probability of pest association with the pathway at origin ........................................ 37 3 Probabilities of pest survival ........................................................................ 42 3.1 Survival in feed and bedding material .................................................................... 42 Conditions during processing of feed and bedding material ........................... 42 3.1.1.1 Concentrates .......................................................................................... 42 VKM Report 2016: 55 3.1.1.2 Silage, haylage and hay............................................................................. 43 3.1.1.3 Other feed ............................................................................................. 44 3.1.1.4 Bedding material .................................................................................... 44 Probabilities of pest survival during processing and storage of feed and bedding material .............................................................................................................. 44 3.1.2.1 Weed .................................................................................................... 44 3.1.2.2 Plant pathogenic fungi, oomycetes and protozoa ....................................... 45 3.1.2.3 Plant pathogenic bacteria and viruses ....................................................... 46 3.1.2.4 Plant parasitic nematodes ....................................................................... 46 3.1.2.5 Phytophagous insects and mites .............................................................. 46 Conclusions on survival of pests in feed and bedding material ....................... 47 3.2 Survival of pests in the digestive tract of domestic animals ...................................... 48 Conditions in the digestive tracts of domestic animals .................................. 48 Probabilities of pest survival in the digestive tracts of the animals ................. 51 3.2.2.1 Weeds ................................................................................................... 51 3.2.2.2 Plant pathogenic fungi, oomycetes and protozoa ....................................... 52 3.2.2.3 Plant pathogenic bacteria and viruses ....................................................... 53 3.2.2.4 Plant parasitic nematodes ....................................................................... 54 3.2.2.5 Phytophagous insects and mites .............................................................. 55 Conclusions on pest survival in the digestive tract of animals ........................ 55 3.3 Survival of pests during manure storage ................................................................ 56 Conditions during storage of manure .......................................................... 56 Probabilities of pest survival during manure storage ..................................... 57 3.3.2.1 Weed .................................................................................................... 57 3.3.2.2 Plant pathogenic fungi and protozoa ........................................................ 59 3.3.2.3 Plant pathogenic bacteria and viruses ....................................................... 60 3.3.2.4 Plant parasitic nematodes ....................................................................... 60 3.3.2.5 Phytophagous insects and mites .............................................................. 61 Conclusions on pest survival during manure storage ..................................... 61 3.4 Summary of conclusions on survival of pests in each step of the pathway ................. 61 4 Probability of spread of plant pests ............................................................. 69