Category Archives: Ratings

Trypodendron signatum (Fabricius)

California Pest Rating Proposal for 
Trypodendron signatum (Fabricius)
Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

 


Comment Period: 4/20/18 – 6/4/18


Initiating Event:

Trypodendron signatum is currently Q-rated.  A permanent pest rating proposal is required to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Trypodendron signatum is an ambrosia beetle that ranges in length from 3.2 to 3.5 mm and has distinctive yellow and black longitudinal stripes on the elytra (Oranen, 2013).  Like other ambrosia beetles, the adults excavate tunnels in wood, and the larvae feed on fungus that grows in these tunnels.  This species has been reported to live in deciduous trees, including Alnus spp., Fagus sylvatica, and Quercus spp. (Cebeci and Ayberk, 2010; Henin et al., 2003).  This beetle primarily utilizes dead trees, but this can still have an economic impact, as cut timber is damaged through the tunneling of this beetle and the staining by the associated ambrosia fungus (Oranen, 2013).  There are also reports of T. signatum attacking living trees.  For example, ambrosia beetles, including T. signatum, were reported to be responsible for large-scale death of beech (Fagus sylvatica) trees in Belgium in the early 2000s (Henin et al., 2003).  Research suggests that these trees were probably injured prior to beetle attack, and that this prior injury may have been the result of freezing damage.  However, later attacks appear to have taken place on healthy trees for unknown reasons (Henin et al., 2003).

Worldwide Distribution: Trypodendron signatum is broadly distributed across the Palearctic Region, from western Europe to south-eastern China (Balachowsky, 1949; Cebeci and Ayberk, 2010; Galko et al., 2014; Henin et al., 2003; Knizek, 2011;  Oranen, 2013; Ostrauskas and Tamutis, 2012).

Official Control: Trypodendron signatum is not known to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  Trypodendron signatum is not known to be present in California (Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network).

California Interceptions: Trypodendron signatum has been intercepted on wood from Europe (PDR # 927924).

The risk Trypodendron signatum would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Trypodendron signatum is widely distributed across Europe, from cold, northern areas to the Mediterranean. This beetle is known to feed on Alnus and Quercus species, which are widely distributed across California.  Based on this information, this beetle is likely capable of becoming established over a broad area in California.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Trypodendron signatum is known to feed on trees in three genera. Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Trypodendron signatum can fly (Gaubicher et al., 2002). Another species, lineatum (Olivier) was found to be capable of moving (presumably by flying) two and a half miles, and T. signatum may have similar dispersal ability (Dyer, 1961).  In addition, it has been intercepted multiple times on wood entering the United States from Europe, which demonstrates that it is capable of human-aided dispersal (Haack and Rabaglia, 2013).  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

3) Economic Impact: Trypodendron signatum appears to primarily feed and develop in dead or dying trees (including cut wood).  Other Trypodendron species that have been introduced to western Canada and the western United States have caused damage to logs and lumber, and it is possible that signatum could have the same impacts in California (Livingston, 2004; McLean, 1985).  There have been reports of T. signatum attacking and killing living (potentially injured) trees.  Injury to trees that could lead to attack by beetles can result from climate extremes, for instance, drought, or warm weather followed by extreme cold (Henin et al., 2003).  The resulting beetle damage could result in lower yield and high production costs for forest products.  Trypodendron signatum is an ambrosia beetle, so by definition it carries fungus that becomes established in the beetle galleries and is used as a larval food source.  There is evidence that the beetle-fungus relationship in a new area (after introduction) can be unpredictable and could include the beetle and its fungal associate being introduced simultaneously, possibly with the fungus developing into a more aggressive form in its new range, as well as the introduced fungus being carried by a native beetle or an introduced beetle becoming associated with (and vectoring) a fungus already present in the new area.  Therefore, Trypodendron signatum receives a High (3) in this category.

Economic Impact:  A, B, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: As already stated, Trypodendron signatum has the potential to kill trees, especially if the trees are stressed or injured. Oaks (Quercus) are an important component of many California ecosystems and this genus is known to be fed upon by this beetle.  Some of these oak species are rare.  Therefore, T. signatum receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

Environmental Impact: A, B

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Environmental Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Trypodendron signatum: Medium (12)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Trypodendron signatum is not known to occur in California.  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

7) The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: Medium (12)

Uncertainty:

There is some uncertainty regarding the possible economic and environmental impact of this species on California.  There are many examples that illustrate the unpredictability of bark and ambrosia beetles, and it is apparent that various factors including climate, tree species, and fungus species interact, and that significant economic and/or environmental damage could result.  Climate change could result in a higher frequency of extreme weather events, which could lead to tree stress and increased ambrosia beetle damage.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

This beetle is one of many ambrosia beetles that are thought to feed mostly in dead or dying trees.  However, it seems that a cautious approach is best with possible forest pests, especially when there is evidence (as there is in this case) that living trees can be affected.  The behavior of this beetle may be very different in California than it is in Europe; it could be significantly worse.  The fungus symbiosis raises special concerns, because the beetle could bring with it possibly pathogenic fungi new to California, or it could interact in a new way with fungi already here.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

Balachowsky, A.  1949.  Faune de France: Tome 50.  Coléoptères Scolytides.  P. Lechevalier, Paris.

Cebeci, H.H. and H. Ayberk.  2010.  Ambrosia beetles, hosts and distribution in Turkey with a study on the species of Istanbul province.  African Journal of Agricultural Research.  5(10): 1055-1059.

Dyer, E.D.A.  1961.  Flight capability of ambrosia beetle (Trypodendron).  Canadian Department of Agriculture and Forestry Biological Division Bi-Monthly Progress Report.  17(1): 4.

Galko, J., Nikolov, C., Kimoto, T., Kunca, A., Gubka, A., Vakula, J., Zúbrik, M., and M. Ostrihoň.  2014.  Attraction of ambrosia beetles to ethanol baited traps in a Slovakian oak forest.  69(10): 1376-1383.

Gaubicher, B., De Proft, M., and J.C. Gregoire.  2002.  Trypodendron domesticum and Trypodendron signatum: Two scolytid species involved in beech decline in Belgium.  In (McManus, M.L. and A.M. Liebhold, eds): Proceedings; Ecology, survey and management of forest insects.  (pp. 134-135).  United States Department of Agriculture.

Haack, R.A. and R.J. Rabaglia.  2013.  Exotic bark and ambrosia beetles in the USA: Potential and current invaders.  In (J. Peña, ed.): Potential pests of agricultural crops (pp. 48-74).  CAB International.

Henin, J-M., Huart, O., and J. Rondeux.  2003.  Biogeographical observations on four scolytids (Coleoptera, Scolytidae) and one lymexylonid (Coleoptera, Lymexylonidae) in Wallonia (Southern Belgium).  Belgian Journal of Zoology.  133(2): 175-180.

Knizek, M. 2011. Subfamily Scolytinae Latreille, 1804. In (I. Loebl and A. Smetana, eds.): Catalogue of Palaearctic Coleoptera. Volume 7. Cucrulinoidea I. (pp. 204-251). Apollo Books.

Livingston, L.  2004.  Management guide for ambrosia beetle.  United States Department of Agriculture, United States Forest Service, Forest Health Protection and State Forestry Organizations. https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5186823.pdf

McLean, J.A.  1985.  Ambrosia beetles: A multimillion dollar degrade problem of sawlogs in coastal British Columbia.  Forestry Chronicle.  61: 295-298.

Oranen, H.  2013.  The striped ambrosia beetle, Trypodendron lineatum (Olivier), and its fungal associates.  Thesis.  University of Helsinki. https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/40117/Oranen_Heidi.pdf?sequence=1

Ostrauskas, H. and V. Tamutis.  2012.  Bark and longhorn beetles (Coleoptera: Curculionidae, Scolytinae et Cerambycidae) caught by multiple funnel traps at the temporary storages of timbers and wood in Lithuania.  18(2): 263-269.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed February 6, 2018. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu


Author:

Kyle Beucke, 1220 N Street, Room 221, Sacramento, CA, 95814, 916-403-6741, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 2800 Gateway Oaks, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov


Comment Period:*

4/20/18 – 6/4/18


*NOTE:

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.  If you have registered and have not received the registration confirmation, please contact us at plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.


Posted by ls 

Gray Scale | Pseudoparlatoria ostreata

California Pest Rating Proposal for
Gray Scale | Pseudoparlatoria ostreata Cockerell
Hemiptera: Diaspididae
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

 


Comment Period: 4/19/18 – 6/3/18


 Initiating Event:

Pseudoparlatoria ostreata was reported to be established on the island of Oahu, Hawaii (J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.).  It is currently Q-rated, and a permanent pest rating proposal is required to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  The scale cover is thin and circular in adult female P. ostreata.  These scales can form dense aggregations on host plants.  Pseudoparlatoria ostreata is reported to feed on (apparently causing damage to plants, in some cases) plants in 39 families, including Agavaceae (Agave sp.), Arecaceae (various palms), Cactaceae, Caricaceae (Carica papaya), Euphorbiaceae (including Acalypha spp.), Fabaceae, Orchidaceae (various orchids), and Vitaceae (Vitis sp.).  (Malumphy & Redstone, 2012; Sweezey, 1945; Wolff, 2008).  In agricultural situations, this scale is reported to be a pest of papaya (J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.; Miskimen & Bond, 1970; Wolcott, 1948) avocado (McKenzie, 1935), and Acalypha species (Dekle, 1965; Wolcott, 1948).  It appears to be primarily tropical and subtropical, but it has managed to become a pest in greenhouses in temperate areas (in the United Kingdom, for example) (Malumphy & Redstone, 2012).

Worldwide Distribution:  Pseudoparlatoria ostreata is native to the Caribbean and has been introduced to North America (Mexico, Florida, and Texas), Central America (Guatemala), South America (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, and Venezuela), Hawaii, Africa, and Europe (indoor plantings only) (Claps et al., 2001; Claps et al., 2006; García et al., 2016; Malumphy & Redstone, 2012; J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.; Sweezey, 1945).

Official Control: Pseudoparlatoria ostreata is considered a prohibited, declared pest in Australia (Government of Western Australia).

California Distribution:  Pseudoparlatoria ostreata is not known to be present in California.

California Interceptions:  Pseudoparlatoria ostreata was intercepted in 2012 at a California border station on palms from Mexico (BL0P06030809).

The risk Pseudoparlatoria ostreata would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Most of the areas where Pseudoparlatoria ostreata is known to occur have a subtropical or tropical climate. For example, in the United States, it is restricted to Florida, Texas, and Hawaii.  However, some locations (for example, in Argentina) have a more temperate climate (Claps et al., 2001).  This scale is highly polyphagous, and suitable host plants are probably present over much of California.  It appears possible that Pseudoparlatoria ostreata could become established in a significant portion of California.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Pseudoparlatoria ostreata is highly polyphagous, and has been reported to feed on plants in 39 families. Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: It is apparent that Pseudoparlatoria ostreata is easily transported on infested plant material, as it has been introduced to many locations.  In addition, another species in this genus, parlatorioides (Comstock), has a high reproductive capacity (females lay up to 130 eggs) and is suspected to be parthenogenic, and this may apply P. ostreata as well (Miller & Davidson, 2005).   Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: If Pseudoparlatoria ostreata became established in California, it could become a pest of many different crops because it is so polyphagous.  Avocados and grapes are known hosts, but there could be many more.  Infestations of this scale could increase production costs and affect normal cultural practices.  As scales are easily transported with infested plant material, the presence of this scale in California could also result in the loss of markets because of the phytosanitary risk to an area importing California plants or plant products.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

Economic Impact:  B, C, D

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Pseudoparlatoria ostreata is a polyphagous scale insect that has been documented to cause damage to plants through its feeding. It is possible that this scale could directly affect rare plants.  There are rare California plants in some of the plant families that are hosts of this scale, for example, Shaw’s agave (Agave shawii), which occurs in southern, coastal California (Calflora).  If this scale becomes established in California, it is also likely to impact ornamental plantings and it could trigger treatments as well.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

Environmental Impact:  B, D, E

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

Environmental Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Pseudoparlatoria ostreata: High (14)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Pseudoparlatoria ostreata is not known to be present in California.  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (14)

Uncertainty:

The distribution of Pseudoparlatoria ostreata appears to be mostly limited to areas with a subtropical or tropical climate, although there are a few locations that suggest this scale could survive in a more temperate climate.  Therefore, there is some uncertainty regarding its ability to become established in a significant portion of California.  There is little uncertainty regarding the presence of suitable host plants in California, because this scale is highly polyphagous.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Pseudoparlatoria ostreata is a polyphagous scale that has a demonstrated ability to attack a wide variety of plants and cause damage.  It is not known to be present in California, and if it became established in this state, there is a significant possibility that it could have economic and environmental impacts.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

Calflora: Information on California plants for education, research and conservation, with data contributed by public and private institutions and individuals, including the  Consortium of California Herbaria.  [web application].  2017. Berkeley, California: The Calflora Database [a non-profit organization].  Accessed 28 December 2017. http://www.calflora.org

Claps, L.E., Wolff, V.R.S, & González, R.H.  2001.  Catálogo de la Diaspididae (Hemiptera: Coccoidea) exόticas de la Argentina, Brazil, Brasil y Chile.  Revista de la Sociedad Entomológica Argentina.  60 (1-4): 9-34.

Claps, L.E., Zamudio, P., & Briz, L.D.  2006.  Las Dactylopiidae y Diaspididae (Hemiptera, Coccoidea) de la Colecciόn Kenneth Hayward, Tucumán, Argentina.  Revista Brasileira de Entomologia.  50 (1): 33-38.

Dekle, G.W.  1965.  Florida armored scale insects.  Arthropods of Florida and Neighboring Land Areas.  3:  1-265.

García, M.M., Denno, B.D., Miller, D.R., Miller, G.L., Ben-Dov, Y., & Hardy, N.B.  2016.  ScaleNet: A literature-based model of scale insect biology and systematics.  Database. doi: 10.1093/database/bav118.  Accessed 28 December 2017. http://scalenet.info.

Government of Western Australia.  Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development.  Pseudoparlatoria ostreata Cockerell, 1892.  Accessed: 27 December 2017. https://www.agric.wa.gov.au/organisms/128755

Malumphy, C. & Redstone, S.  2012.  Grey scale Pseudoparlatoria ostreata Cockerell (Hemiptera: Diaspididae), a pest of indoor plantings new to Britain.  Entomologist’s Gazette.  63: 107-114.

Miller, D.R. & Davidson, J.A.  2005.  Armored scale insect pests of trees and shrubs.  Comstock Publishing Associates.  Ithaca, NY.  442 pp.

McKenzie, H.L.  1935.  Biology and control of avocado insects and mites.  University of California Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin.  592: 1-48.

Miskimen, G.W. & Bond, R.M.  1970.  Scientific Survey of Porto Rico and the Virgin Islands.  Volume XIII – Part I.  The New York Academy of Sciences.  New York, NY.  114 pp.

Sweezey, O.H.  1945.  Insects associated with orchids.  Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society.  12(2): 343-403.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed 20 November 2017. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu

Wolcott, G.N.  1948.  The insects of Puerto Rico.  The Journal of Agriculture of the University of Puerto Rico.  20(1): 1-224.

Wolff, V.R.S.  2008.  Revisão de Pseudoparlatoria (Hemiptera, Diaspididae).  Iheringia Série Zoologia.  98(3): 291-307.


Author:

Kyle Beucke, 1220 N Street, Room 221, Sacramento, CA, 95814, 916-403-6741; plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 2800 Gateway Oaks, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov


Comment Period:*

4/19/18 – 6/3/18


*NOTE:

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.  If you have registered and have not received the registration confirmation, please contact us at plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.


Posted by ls 

Beetle | Anomala ausonia

California Pest Rating Proposal for
Beetle | Anomala ausonia Erichson
Coleoptera
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

Comment Period: 4/19/18 – 6/3/18


Initiating Event:

Anomala ausonia Erichson is currently Q-rated.  A permanent pest rating proposal is required to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Adult Anomala ausonia are metallic green beetles approximately one half of an inch in length.  They feed on the leaves and fruit.  The larvae are whitish, C-shaped grubs that live in the soil and feed on roots and possibly organic matter as well (Ritcher, 1958).  Adult feeding causes serious damage to grapevines in Spain.  Olive trees are also reported to be attacked by larvae, but this damage is apparently not as significant (Alvarado et al., 1996). This beetle is reported to be present in coastal and riparian areas in France and Italy, sometimes in abundance (Contarini, 1990; Paulian, 1941).

Worldwide Distribution:  Anomala ausonia is present in Mediterranean Europe (France, Italy, and Spain) (Alvarado et al., 1996; Contarini, 1990; Schaeffer, 1959).  This beetle is not known to have been introduced elsewhere.  A specimen was caught outside in New Jersey in 1964, but apparently this species did not become established in the United States (New Jersey Department of Agriculture, 1965).

Official Control: Anomala ausonia is not known to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  Anomala ausonia is not known to be present in California.

California Interceptions:  One dead specimen was found in a trailer from Canada at a border station (PDR # 1214299).

The risk Anomala ausonia would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Anomala ausonia is native to Mediterranean Europe. The species has been reported to feed on grapevines and olive, and it likely feeds on other plants as well.  The climate of California would be ideal for A. ausonia, and grapes, a major host plant of the species, are cultivated in a large portion of the state.  Anomala ausonia is likely capable of establishing a widespread distribution in California.  Therefore, this species receives a High (3) in this category.

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Anomala ausonia has been reported to feed on olive trees and grapevines, representing two families of plants. The beetle likely feeds on other plants as well in natural (non-agricultural) areas in its native range.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Anomala ausonia presumably flies, and could possibly be artificially dispersed through transport of infested, potted plants, which has been suggested as a possible mode of introduction for other Anomala species (CABI, 2017).  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Anomala ausonia has been reported to cause significant damage to grapes as a result of adults feeding on leaves.  Grapes are a major crop in California, and an infestation could be expected to lower crop yield and increase production costs.  It could also lead to a loss of markets.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

Economic Impact:  A, B, C

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: If A. ausonia became established in California, it could become a pest in vineyards and possibly other situations, including olive groves and ornamental plantings, which could trigger treatment programs. This beetle could also impact vegetation (and disrupt natural communities) in California ecosystems, including riparian areas, where this species is known to occur in Europe.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

Environmental Impact:  A, D, E

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact.

Environmental Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Anomala ausonia: Medium (13)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Anomala ausonia is not known to be present in California. It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: Medium (12)

Uncertainty:

While there is little doubt that A. ausonia could become established in California, no information was found suggesting that this species has been introduced anywhere, which makes it difficult to predict its pest potential.  There are plants and ecosystems in California that A. ausonia has not been exposed to in its native range, and the organisms that limit its population size in its native range are likely not present in California.  Thus, if this beetle was introduced to California, it could have significant impacts in certain areas.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Anomala ausonia is a plant-feeding scarab beetle that belongs to a genus with demonstrated pest potential.  California appears to be an ideal place for the establishment of this Mediterranean species.  If this beetle became established in California, it could impact agriculture (including grapes and olives), ornamental plantings, and the environment.   For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

Alvarado, M., Serrano, A., & Durán y de La Rosa, J.M.  1996.  Problemática de los gusanos blancos (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae) en el olivar de la provincia de Sevilla.  Boletín de Sanidad Vegetal Plagas.  22: 319-328.

CABI.  2017.  Invasive Species Compendium. Wallingford, UK: CAB International.  Accessed 2 January 2018. www.cabi.org/isc

Contarini, E.  1992.  Eco-profili D’Ambiente della Coleotterofauna di Romagna: 4-Arenile, duna e retroduna della costa Adriatica.  Bollettino del Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Venezia.  41: 131-182.

New Jersey Department of Agriculture.  1965.  50th Annual Report of the New Jersey Department of Agriculture.  230 pp.

Paulian, R.  1941.  Faune de France.  38.  Coléoptères Scarabéides.  Paul Lechevalier et Fils.  Paris, France.  239 pp.

Ritcher, P.O.  1958.  Biology of Scarabaeidae.  Annual Review of Entomology.  3: 311-334.

Schaefer, L.  1959.  Contribution à la connaissance des coléoptères des Pyrénées-orientales.  Bulletin mensuel de la Société linnéenne de Lyon.  28(7): 222-235.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed 3 January 2018. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu


Author:

Kyle Beucke, 1220 N Street, Room 221, Sacramento, CA, 95814, 916-403-6741; plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 2800 Gateway Oaks, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov


Comment Period:*

4/19/18 – 6/3/18


*NOTE:

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.  If you have registered and have not received the registration confirmation, please contact us at plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.


Posted by ls 

Beetle | Dyscinetus dubius

California Pest Rating Proposal for
Beetle | Dyscinetus dubius (Olivier)
Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae
Current  Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

Comment Period: 4/13/18 – 5/28/18


Initiating Event:

Dyscinetus dubius (Olivier) is currently Q-rated.  A permanent pest rating proposal is required to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Dyscinetus dubius is a reddish-brown beetle approximately 1.5 to 2 cm in length.  The larvae are whitish C-shaped grubs that live underground and feed on roots.  This beetle is reported to be a pest (through larval feeding) of potato, rice, and soybeans in Brazil (Ferreira & Barrigossi, 2006; Ferreira & Martins, 1984), but it has also been associated with, and may feed on corn and elephant ear (Xanthosoma sagittifolium) (Araceae) (Joly & Escalona G., 2010).

Worldwide Distribution:  Dyscinetus dubius is widely distributed throughout Mexico, the Caribbean (including Cuba and Trinidad), Central America (including Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama), and South America (including Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, French Guiana, Paraguay, Suriname, and Venezuela) (Ferreira & Martins, 1984; Joly & Escalona G., 2010; Neita-Moreno & Yepes,  2011).

Official Control: Dyscinetus dubius is a prescribed pest in Guyana (Caribbean Invasive Alien Species Network).

California Distribution:  Dyscinetus dubius is not known to be present in California.

California Interceptions:  Dyscinetus dubius has been intercepted at a border station on bananas from Ecuador (1183969).

The risk Dyscinetus dubius would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Dyscinetus dubius appears to be restricted to areas with a subtropical to tropical climate, and this may be expected to limit the potential distribution of this species in California. This beetle is reported to feed on at least four plant families, including Poaceae and Solanaceae, and would likely find suitable food plants over much of the state.    This beetle could possibly become established over a limited portion of California.  Therefore, Dyscinetus dubius receives a Medium (2) in this category.

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Dyscinetus dubius is a generalist and has been reported to feed on plants in the families Araceae, Fabaceae, Poaceae, and Solanaceae. Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Dyscinetus dubius is collected at light, so it can fly.  It can be dispersed artificially through movement of infested plant material.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Dyscinetus dubius is a recognized pest of several crops, among them rice.  California rice production in 2016 was valued at $649 million (USDA, 2018).  Potatoes and corn, which are also grown in California, could also be impacted.  If Dyscinetus dubius was established in California, it could lower crop yield and increase production costs of these crops.  It could also lead to a loss of markets.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

Economic Impact:  A, B, C

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: If Dyscinetus dubius became established in California, it could trigger treatment programs if it became a crop pest. Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

Environmental Impact:  D

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Environmental Impact Score: 2

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Dyscinetus dubius: Medium (12)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Dyscinetus dubius is not known to be present in California.  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

7) The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: Medium (12)

Uncertainty:

Dyscinetus dubius appears to be currently limited to areas with a subtropical or tropical climate.   This beetle may not be capable of becoming established in California, and if it is, it could be limited to a very small area.  Rice in California is typically grown in flooded conditions, and this may reduce or eliminate the potential of D. dubius to impact this crop, although other crops, including corn and potatoes, could still be affected (California Rice Commission, 2018).  Other plants, including native California species that this beetle has not been previously exposed to, could also be attacked in California, which could result in additional impacts on the environment.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Dyscinetus dubius is a recognized pest in Latin America.  This beetle is not known to be present in California.  However, it affects crops that are grown in the state, including rice and potatoes.  If it became established in the state, it could have economic and environmental impacts.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

California Rice Commission.  2018.  How rice grows.  Accessed 4 January 2018.  http://calrice.org/industry/how-rice-grows

Caribbean Invasive Alien Species Network.  Guyana.  Accessed 3 January 2018. http://www.ciasnet.org/countryprofiles/guyana

Ferreira, E. & Barrigossi, J.A.F.  2006.  Insetos Orizívoros da Parte Subterrânea.  San Antônio de Goiás, Goiás, Brazil.  52 pp.

Ferreira, E. & da S. Martins, J.F.  1984.  Insetos prejudiciais ao arroz no Brasil e seu controle.  EMBRAPA-CNPAF. Goiânia, Goiás, Brazil.  67 pp.

Joly, L.J. & Escalona G., H.E.  2010.  El género Dyscinetus Harold (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae: Cyclocephalini) en Venezuela y la descripciόn de una nueva especie.  Papéis Avulsos de Zoologia.  50(14): 203-231.

Neita-Moreno, J.C. & Yepes, F.  2011.  Descripciόn de la larva y pupa de Dyscinetus dubius (Coleoptera: Melolonthidae: Dynastinae: Cyclocephalini).  Revista Colombiana de Entomología.  37(1): 152-156.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed 20 November 2017. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu

United States Department of Agriculture.  2016 State Agriculture Overview.  California.  Accessed 4 January 2018. https://www.nass.usda.gov/Quick_Stats/Ag_Overview/stateOverview.php?state=CALIFORNIA


Author:

Kyle Beucke, 1220 N Street, Room 221, Sacramento, CA, 95814, 916-403-6741; plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 2800 Gateway Oaks, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov


Comment Period:*

4/13/18 – 5/28/18


*NOTE:

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.  If you have registered and have not received the registration confirmation, please contact us at plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.


Posted by ls 

An Ant | Pheidole dentigula

California Pest Rating Proposal for
An Ant | Pheidole dentigula
 Hymenoptera: Formicidae
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

 


Comment Period:  4/13/18 – 5/28/18


Initiating Event:

Pheidole dentigula was frequently intercepted in 2016 and 2017 by CDFA and requires a pest rating proposal to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Pheidole dentigula is a common ant found in leaf litter and rotting stumps in mesic forests of the southeastern United States. They can be recognized in the field by the tendency of the major workers to have orange-colored gasters1.

Pheidole dentigula is associated with moisture-retentive microhabitats and nests in soil and rotten stumps3

Worldwide Distribution: Pheidole dentigula is known from the United States and Central and South America. In the United States, it is reported from Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas3.   

Official Control: Pheidole dentigula is not known to be under official control in any states or nations, but the genus Pheidole is listed as a harmful organism in Japan and Republic of Korea5.

California Distribution: Pheidole dentigula has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: Pheidole dentigula was intercepted 18 times in 2015, 2016, and 2017 by CDFA’s border station and nursery regulatory inspections. Interceptions were typically on plants or plant material imported from the southeastern infested States4.

The risk Pheidole dentigula would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Pheidole dentigula is found in moisture-retentive microhabitats, including rotten stumps and accumulations of leaf litter in forests. Riparian areas in California would be suitable for this ant and it could establish in a limited area in California. It receives a Low (1) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California:

Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Pheidole dentigula feeds on dead insects, dead leaves, and decaying fruit. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest.

Low (1) has a very limited host range.

Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: There is little information available on the biology of Pheidole dentigula. Other members of the genus are known to have multiple queens and are capable of producing large numbers of eggs. Because this may be true for this species, P. dentigula receives at High (3) in this category

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest.

Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Pheidole dentigula is not expected to lower crop yields or increase crop production costs. It is not expected to disrupt any markets for Californian agricultural commodities. It is not expected to change cultural practices or vector other pestiferous organisms. These ants could injure livestock if established in California. It receives a Low (1) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below.

Economic Impact:  F

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 1

Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Pheidole dentigula is not likely to disrupt natural communities, lower biodiversity, or change ecosystem processes in California. This species does not directly impact any threatened species. However, it is likely to trigger new treatments by residents if it invades homes in search of food and water. It receives a Medium (2) in this category

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

Environmental Impact: D

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Environmental Impact: Score 2

Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Pheidole dentigulaMedium (10)

Low = 5-8 points

Medium = 9-12 points

 –High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Pheidole dentigula has never been found in the natural environment in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included:

Score: 0

Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

-Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

-Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

-High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: Medium (10)

Uncertainty:

There have not been any formal surveys for Pheidole dentigula in California. This species has been intercepted through regulatory pathways multiple times and can be transported on commodities. It is possible that it might be present in certain areas of California, but if so, it has escaped detection.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Pheidole dentigula has never been found in the environment of California.  If it were to establish in the state, this ant may have an environmental impact in riparian and wetland areas of California. Other species of this genus have multiple queens and have proved invasive in areas where they are introduced. Given these considerations, an “A”-rating is justified, especially as there is a chance of excluding it.


References:
  1. Ants (Formicidae) of the Southeastern United states by Joe McGowan. Accessed November 4, 2017.      http://mississippientomologicalmuseum.org.msstate.edu/Researchtaxapages/Formicidaepages/genericpages/Pheidole.dentigula.html#.Wfn2_ltSzA4
  2. Ant web. Accessed November 4, 2017. https://www.antweb.org/description.do?name=dentigula&genus=pheidole&rank=species&project=allantwebants
  3. School of Ants. Accessed November 4, 2017.  http://www.schoolofants.org/species/2155
  4. Pest and Damage Record Database, California Department of Food and Agriculture, Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services. http://phpps.cdfa.ca.gov/user/frmLogon2.asp
  5. USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). Accessed December 23, 2016  https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Author:

Javaid Iqbal,  California Department of Food and Agriculture; 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA 95814; Tel. (916) 403-6695; plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 2800 Gateway Oaks, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov


Comment Period:*

4/13/18 – 5/28/18


*NOTE:

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.  If you have registered and have not received the registration confirmation, please contact us at plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.


Posted by ls 

European Mistletoe | Viscum album L

Figure 1: 
Viscum album (2001 CDFA)
California Pest Rating Proposal for
Viscum album L: European mistletoe
Santalales: Viscaceae
Current Rating: B
Proposed  Pest Rating: A | Proposed Seed Rating: R

 


Comment Period:  4/13/18 – 5/28/18


Initiating Event:

This plant has been rated as “B” on the CDFA Plant Pest Rating list for some years.

History & Status:

BackgroundEuropean mistletoe (Viscum album) is a hemiparasite of broad-leaved trees and shrubs that can be found on its hosts stems. It depends on the host for water, mineral nutrients, and some carbohydrates. Depending on the health of the host plant and severity of infestation it weakens its host, leaving it susceptible to damage from insects, increasing host mortality rates. European mistletoe is spread by seed dispersal from birds eating its berries and expelling the viscin covered seeds.

Found natively in Eurasia and North Africa this plant was introduced to California in the early 1900s by noted plant breeder Luther Burbank at his experimental farm outside Sebastopol, where it still occurs.

European mistletoe (Fig. 1) is sometimes confused with the native California mistletoe (Phoradendron serotinum) (Fig. 2) that is common in the area where European mistletoe is adventive. Differences in leaf form are the easiest way to distinguish them; European mistletoe has narrow propeller-shaped leaves, while California mistletoe has widely ovate leaves. European mistletoe has dichotomously branched stems that diverge at >40%, while California mistletoe has branches that generally diverge at <45%. European mistletoe has only a few fruits per cluster (generally <5), while California mistletoe has many fruits per cluster (generally >5).

 

Figure 2: 
Phoradendron serotinum ©2011 Jorg & Mimi Fleige

Worldwide Distribution: European mistletoe has a native range from North Africa to southern England, southern Scandinavia, and western Russia. It can infect numerous species of broad-leaved trees and conifers in temperate to tropical regions.

Official Control: Viscum album is a prohibited plant in New Zealand.

California Distribution:  European mistletoe was introduced to the Sebastopol area of Sonoma County as an ornamental from Eurasia around 1900, but it was not until 1966 that the taxon was recorded as present in California (Howell 1966). Surveys performed in 1971 covered 16 square miles in Sebastopol and Graton, and found 310 infected trees in 21 species (Scharpf and McCartney 1975). Surveys performed in 1984 covered 63 square miles in Sebastopol, Graton, Forestville, Santa Rosa, and Cotati, and found 554 infected trees in 22 species (Hawksworth and Scharpf 1986). Surveys performed in 1984 covered 71 square miles across Occidental, Forestville, Fulton, Santa Rosa, and Cotati, and found 664 infected trees in 23 species (Hawksworth et al 1991).  Current specimen records show that it is present in Sebastopol and Santa Rosa. There is one recorded occurrence in Sacramento, but this record is most likely spurious.

California Interceptions: None

The risk European mistletoe would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: California has a climate suitable to European The area it has established in is surrounded by scattered oaks and conifers forests. while it has yet to be recorded expanding to these trees, there is potential as it has established itself on oaks and conifers forests in its native range. Therefore, it scores as Medium (2) in this category.

-Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

-Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

-High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Risk is Medium (2) as European mistletoe can infect numerous species of broad-leaved trees and conifers in temperate to tropical regions, which are found throughout California. In California, it has been detected on native bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red alder (Alnus rubra) California buckeye (Aesculus californica), Fremont Cottonwood (Populus fremontii), and Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra). It has also been found on introduced species of birch (Betula), persimmon (Diospyros spp.), locust (Robinia spp.), hickory (Carya spp.), ash (Fraxinus spp.), hawthorn (Crataegus spp.) apple (Malus spp.), plum (Prunus spp.), pyracantha (Pyracantha spp.), mountain-ash (Sorbus spp.), Maple (Acer spp.), elm (Ulmus spp.), and poplar (Populus spp.) Therefore, it scores as Medium (2) in this category.

             -Low (1) has a very limited host range.

             -Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

             -High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Viscum album is spread primarily by birds, which eat and carry the fruit to other trees. Since introduction to Sonoma County, spread has increased from point of origin to more than 71 square miles at last survey in 1991. The current distribution and pattern of infestation is not known. Therefore, it scores as Low (1) in this category.

-Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

-Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

-High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Within its native range European mistletoe infects apple and other commercial fruit trees; however, it’s damage is limited as these hosts are pruned regularly, preventing further damage and slowing its spread. Therefore, it scores as High (3) in this category.

A, B, C, D

A. The pest could lower crop

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

-Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

-Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

-High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: European mistletoe has potential to find hosts in a variety of California trees and shrubs. Many of these hosts are found within riparian corridors, such as willows, and impacts to this environment could affect multiple special status species that depend on a riparian habitat. In Sonoma County riparian trees provide nesting habitat for a variety of birds, including Swanson hawk, and roots provide shelter for California freshwater shrimp. European mistletoe also impacts urban street trees and fruit orchards in Europe, leading to increased pruning to prevent damage to the trees. Therefore, it scores High (3) in this category.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score:

Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for European mistletoe:

Total score: 11

Low = 5-8 points

 Medium = 9-12 points

High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included. -1

-Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

 -Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area: Sebastopol area of Sonoma County.

-Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: 10

Uncertainty:

Medium. This plant has had the opportunity to spread further in California, but it has not succeeded so far. This plant has hosts and dispersal techniques that are adaptable to California, but it has a history in the state with little impacts. It is known from younger street trees less than 15 years in place, so the reasons for its restriction are not known; it is possible that it is still in its lag phase and may increase its rate of spread once it becomes more prevalent.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

European mistletoe currently is known from only Sonoma County in CA; it has the potential to move beyond its established area in California. As the current list of infected hosts shows, it could use riparian corridors to move throughout the state. If this plant does spread it might have significant impacts to native trees and commercial orchards. Despite its current slow rate of spread, an A rating is justified.


References

Calflora: Information on California plants for education, research and conservation. Berkeley, California: The Calflora Database: http://www.calflora.org/ (Accessed: March 20, 2018).

California Department of Food and Agriculture, Encycloweedia: Data Sheets:  https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/plant/IPC/encycloweedia/weedinfo/viscum.htm (Accessed: March 20, 2018).

Consortium of California Herbaria: ucjeps.berkeley.edu/consortium/ (Accessed: March 20, 2018).

Hawksworth, F.G., Scharpf, R.F., & Marosy, M. 1991. European mistletoe continues to spread in Sonoma County. California Agriculture. 45: 39-40.

Howell, J. T. 1966. Viscum album in California. Leaflets of Western Botany 10(13):244.

Scharpf, R., and F. Hawksworth. 1976. Luther Burbank introduced European mistletoe into California. Plant Disease Reporter 60(9):740-742.

Photo Sources:

Viscum album: ©2001 CDFA Used with Permission. Retrieved April 6, 2018 at

https://calphotos.berkeley.edu/cgi/img_query?enlarge=0175+3301+2364+0094

Phoradendron serotinum: ©2011 Jorg & Mimi Fleige, Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0. Retrieved April 6, 2018, at https://calphotos.berkeley.edu/cgi/img_query?enlarge=0000+0000+0211+1177


Author:

Rachel Avila, Environmental Scientist; California Department of Food and Agriculture; 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA 95814; Tel. (916) 403-6813; plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov

Responsible Party:

Dean G. Kelch, Primary Botanist; California Department of Food and Agriculture; 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA 95814; Tel. (916) 403-6650;  plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Period:*

4/12/18 – 5/27/18


*NOTE:

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.  If you have registered and have not received the registration confirmation, please contact us at plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.


Posted by ls 

 

Cotton Bud Thrips | Frankliniella schultzei

California Pest Rating Proposal for
Cotton Bud Thrips | Frankliniella schultzei Trybom
Thysanoptera: Thripidae
Current Pest Rating:  Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

 


Comment Period: 4/12/18 – 5/27/18


Initiating Event:

Frankliniella schultzei, cotton bud thrips, is intercepted regularly through CDFA regulatory activities. It was intercepted 6 times in 2017 and most recently on January 23, 2018 at the Winterhaven Border Station in a shipment of cut flowers, originating from Miami, Florida and destined for San Diego. Currently, it has a temporary rating of “Q”.  A pest rating proposal is required to assign a permanent rating for this species.

History & Status:

BackgroundFrankliniella schultzei is a highly polyphagous pest that has been recorded from 83 species of plants among 35 families (Palmer 1990). It feeds on ornamental, fruits and vegetable hosts in different parts of the world. It can cause direct damage to host plants by feeding injury and by laying eggs in the leaves. Indirect damage includes pale spots and stripes on flowers caused by transmission of tospoviruses (Plantwise Knowledge Bank, 2017).

Frankliniella schultzei occurs in pale and dark forms. The pale form is yellow with brownish blotches. The dark form is uniformly dark brown. These two forms are morphologically similar to each other. In the United States, the dark form is distributed in Florida and Colorado whereas the light form is found in Hawaii (Kakkar et al. 2017). There are two larval and two inactive and non-feeding stages (prepupa and pupa). The complete life cycle takes approximately 12.6 days.

Major hosts of Frankliniella schultzei are cotton, groundnut, beans and pigeon pea. However, it also attacks chilies, coffee, onion, potato, sorghum, sunflower, sweet potato and tomato among others (Hill 1975).

Worldwide Distribution: Frankliniella schultzei is thought to originate from South America, although there is a possibility that it came from Africa (Hoddle et.al 2012). It has a wide distribution and is mainly found in tropical and subtropical areas of the world including Africa, Asia, Australia, the South Pacific, Central America, the Caribbean, Europe and North America (Kakkar et al. 2012).

In the United States, Frankliniella schultzei has been reported to be present in central and southern Florida, Colorado and Hawaii (CABI 2017).

Official Control: Frankliniella schultzei is listed as a harmful organism in Armenia, Belarus, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Panama and the Russian Federation (USDA APHIS- PCIT).

California DistributionFrankliniella schultzei was found once in the environment of California, in Los Angeles County.

California Interceptions: Frankliniella schultzei has been intercepted 33 times by CDFA through various regulatory pathways mainly through border station inspections and, nursery regulatory and high-risk pest exclusion activities.

The risk Frankliniella schultzei (cotton bud thrips) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Areas of California with tropical and subtropical climates are likely to be favorable for many host plants of Frankliniella schultzei. Hosts like tomatoes, cucurbits, cotton, rice, strawberry, peach, avocado, onions and carnation are grown throughout the state. It receives a High (3) in this category

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California.  Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Frankliniella schultzei is a highly polyphagous pest that has been reported to attack 83 host plant species in 35 families. Major host include onion (Allium cepa),  pineapple (Ananas comosus), groundnut (Arachis hypogaea), cacti (Cactaceae), pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan), bell pepper (Capsicum annuum), thistle (Cirsium), watermelon (Citrullus lanatus), melon (Cucumis melo), pumpkin (Cucurbita sp.), carnation (Dianthus), Lisianthus (Eustoma grandiflorum), strawberry (Fragaria ananassa), soyabean (Glycine max), cotton (Gossypium sp.), Bourbon cotton (Gossypium hirsutum), hyacinth (Hyacinthus), bully tree (Hyeronima alchorneoides), irises (Iris), lettuce (Lactuca sativa), lentil (Lens culinaris subsp. culinaris), mango (Mangifera indica), tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum), orchids (Orchidaceae), rice (Oryza sativa), avocado (Persea americana), common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris), peach (Prunus persica), roses (Rosa), African violet (Saintpaulia ionantha), tomato (Solanum lycopersicum), aubergine (Solanum melongena), spinach (Spinacia oleracea), African marigold (Tagetes erecta), black gram (Vigna mungo) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) (Plant Wise Knowledge Bank, 2017). It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3)   Pest Dispersal Potential: Frankliniella schultzei females inserts their eggs in flower tissue. One generation is completed in 12.6 days at 24°C (Kakkar et al.2017).  When females feed on larval diet of Malvavicus arboreus and sucrose, they can produce about 60 eggs at 77°F (Milne et. al. 1996). It can disperse rapidly with air currents to colonize new areas. It receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Frankliniella schultzei adults and nymphs feed on pollen and floral tissue resulting in abortion of flowers. Direct damage causes discoloration and stunted growth of the plant (Palmer 1985). Indirect damage is caused by transmission of tomato spotted wilt virus (Tospovirus) and tomato chlorotic spot virus (TCSV). The dark form of schultzei is mainly responsible for vectoring tospovirus and TCSV, whereas the pale form is a weak vector. (Kakkar et al., 2017). It receives a High (3) in this category

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score: A, B, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Frankliniella schultzei is not likely to lower biodiversity and disrupt natural communities. It is also not expected to affect threatened or endangered species. However, since many of the host plants are grown in California gardens, infestation by schultzei could trigger additional chemical treatment by homeowners. If this species gets established in California, cultural practices could be significantly impacted. For example, the following practices may be required: flood irrigation to destroy large pupal populations, use of horticultural oils to repel adults and reduce oviposition, and growing trap crops and manipulation of vegetation adjacent to host crops to repel this species. (Plant-wise Knowledge Bank, 2017). It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impacts of the pest on California using the following criterion: D, E

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Frankliniella schultzei (cotton bud thrips): High (14)

Add up the total score and include it here.

-Low = 5-8 points

-Medium = 9-12 points

-High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Frankliniella schultzei was detected in the natural environment of California once. It receives Low (-1) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records of specimens identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included.

Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

-Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (13)

Uncertainty:

Frankliniella schultzei has been found in the environment in California once on roses in a residence garden in Los Angeles County. The status of that infestation is unknown, as well as if the species became established and is present in a wider area or not. The species is intercepted by CDFA mostly on shipments of cut flowers, potted plants and perishable vegetables coming to California. There are many nurseries and florists in California that sell cut flowers and potted plants. California’s favorable climate and presence of several major hosts of F. schultzei, including cotton, make this thrips species a threat to the agriculture industry of the state. Presence of native thrips species like F. occidentalis and others in California could delay early detections of F. schultzei. Therefore, additional surveys could aid in early detections and rapid eradication from the state. Vigilant inspections of shipments from Florida and Hawaii as well as border station inspections are essential to prevent the introduction of F. schultzei to California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Frankliniella schultzei is expected to have significant economic and environmental impacts because of the presence of several host plants species and their importance to the state’s agriculture resources. Based on all of the above evidence provided, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

Amin P.W. and Palmer JM. 1985. Identification of groundnut Thysanoptera. Tropical Pest Management 31: 268-291

CABI, 2017. Frankliniella schultzei.  Invasive species compendium. Wallingford, UK: CAB international, Accessed 2/15/2018 https://www.cabi.org/isc/datasheet/24431

CABI Plant Wise Knowledge Bank. Technical factsheet. Frankliniella schultzei. Accessed 2/15/2018  https://www.plantwise.org/KnowledgeBank/Datasheet.aspx?dsID=24431

Hill DS. 1975. Agricultural Insect Pests of the Tropics and Their Control, Cambridge University Press, London.

Hoddle M.S., Mound L.A., Paris DL. 2012. Thrips of California. CBIT Publishing, Queensland. Accessed 2/15/2018  http://keys.lucidcentral.org/keys/v3/thrips_of_california/authors/authors.html

Kakkar, G., Seal. R. D. & V. Kumar, 2017. Featured Creatures. Frankliniella schultzei. Publication Number EENY-477 Entomology and Nematology Department, University of Florida. Accessed 2/15/2018 http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/IN/IN86000.pdf

Kakkar, G., Seal D.R. & V. Kumar. 2012. Assessing abundance and distribution of an invasive thrips Frankliniella schultzei (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) in South Florida. Bulletin of Entomological Research.102: 249-259.

Milne, M. & G.H. Walter. 1997. The significance of prey in the diet of the phytophagous thrips, Frankliniella schultzei. Ecological Entomology. 22: 74-81.

Palmer J.M. 1990. Identification of the common thrips of tropical Africa (Thysanoptera: Insecta). Tropical Pest Management 36: 27-49.

USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). Assessed 2/14/2018 https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/faces/signIn.jsf


Author:

Raj Randhawa, 1220 ‘N’ Street, Room 221, Sacramento CA 95814, (916) 403-6617, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 2800 Gateway Oaks, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov


Comment Period:*

4/12/18 – 5/27/18


*NOTE:

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.  If you have registered and have not received the registration confirmation, please contact us at plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.


Posted by ls 

 

Tawny Crazy Ant | Nylanderia fulva

California Pest Rating Proposal for
Tawny Crazy Ant | Nylanderia fulva
Hymenoptera:  Formicidae
Current Pest Rating:  Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A  

 


Comment Period: 4/12/18 – 5/27/18


Initiating Event:

Several Nylanderia species have been intercepted 31 times in 2017 by CDFA through various regulatory pathways. Nylanderia fulva, the tawny crazy ant is an invasive species that has invaded the southern states of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida and Georgia (Wang et. al, 2016). Nylanderia species have been rated as Q.  A pest rating proposal is needed to assign a permanent rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Ants in the genus Nylanderia are relatively small, pale yellow to black. Nylanderia fulva in the U.S. were originally identified as Paratrechina sp. cf. pubens and later revised to N. fulva. The true N. pubens is also an invasive pest, but is apparently restricted to southern Florida. Worker ants of these two species cannot be distinguished morphologically, so clear identification requires examination of male specimens.

 Nylanderia fulva is also known as the crazy ant due to its quick and erratic movement. It is a small, reddish brown ant that forms huge colonies, and is a serious nuisance pest. (MacGown and Layton, 2010). Nylanderia fulva infests buildings and greenhouses. This ant can attack domestic animals, honeybee hives, and several crop plants; it can also displace native ant species (Hill et.al, 2013). It can aggregate in large numbers in electrical equipment and cause short circuits or clog switching mechanisms, resulting in equipment failure.

The Tawny crazy ant is a social insect usually found in large numbers that lives in large colonies and seem to be indistinguishable from each other. Males and workers are similar in size while queens are larger. Colonies contain many queens, workers and brood (larvae and pupae). Pupae are naked (without cocoons). Colonies periodically produce winged male and female forms called sexuals, alates or reproductives. Foraging activity begins in spring and worker populations increase dramatically in density by mid- summer. (Nestor, 2002)

Worldwide Distribution:

Nylanderia fulva is native to South America, specifically southern Brazil and northern Argentina along the border of Uruguay and Paraguay (Kumar et. al., 2015). It has established in Anguilla, Bermuda, Colombia, Cuba, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Panama, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. (Hill et. al., 2013)

In the United States, it was first recognized as N. fulva near Houston, Texas in 2002, but this record is preceded by previous misidentifications as N. pubens in Florida. Currently, Nylanderia fulva has become established in the states of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, and Georgia.

Official Control: Nylanderia fulva has not been listed as a harmful organism in any U.S. states or other nations (PCIT, 2018).

California DistributionNylanderia fulva has never been found in the natural environment of California.

California InterceptionsNylanderia species were intercepted 107 times between July 2013 and January 2018 by CDFA through detection surveys, border stations, dog team inspections, and high-risk pest exclusion activities.

The risk Nylanderia fulva (tawny crazy ant) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Nylanderia fulva is omnivorous and its foraging trails widens  as the temperature rises to 20°C. Foraging activity begins in spring and worker density can increase to millions during July – August and the number of ants remain high throughout fall. Nests can occur in leaf litter, soil, rotten logs, under potted plants, under rocks and along underground electrical circuits (Sharma et al., 2014). California’s climate and habitat would be suitable for occurrence of nests and rapid increase in          populations. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California:

Score: 3

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Nylanderia fulva worker ants tend plant-feeding hemipterous insects such as aphids, scale insects, whiteflies, mealy bugs and others that excrete honeydew. Workers are also attracted to sweet parts of plants including nectaries, and damaged and over-ripe fruit. They also consume other insects and small vertebrates for protein (Nestor, 2002). These hosts can be found throughout California. It receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest:

Score: 2

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Nylanderia fulva queens lay single, white, ovoid-shaped eggs that incubate for approximately 16 days. The larvae that emerge pass through three (workers) or four (males) instars and the larval stage lasts about 11 days. Workers carry pupae to the nest where they are piled into mounds. Adults emerge from pupae after 12 days. Nuptial flight activity has not been recorded until recently. New findings have confirmed that alate males fly throughout the year but females are produced only once a year (Wang, et al., 2016). Colonies spread by budding with breeding occurring at the periphery. The annual rate of spread by ground migration is about 20-30 m per month in industrial areas and about 207 m per year in rural landscapes (Nestor, 2002). Nylanderia fulva can be transported long distances by the movement of infested material including garbage, yard debris, compost, potted plants and bales of hay transported by truck, railroad and airplane. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest:

Score: 3

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Nylanderia fulva, in large numbers, can become a nuisance and make human activities uncomfortable and difficult. Infestations can extend to sidewalks, buildings and gardens. These ants are capable of biting small livestock, causing them to die of asphyxia and can attack large animals around their eyes, nasal fossae and hooves. Their foraging and nesting behavior can cause short circuits in electrical equipment. Since this species feeds on the exudate of hemipteran insects, it can result in the disruption of biocontrol and cause losses from increased crop damage. This species has been reported to destroy honey bee hives in Texas by consuming brood, and then colonizing the hive (Harmon, 2009). It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below:

Economic Impact: A, B, D, F

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Nylanderia fulva is likely to reduce biodiversity of other animals, both invertebrates and vertebrates. Larger ant populations have forced ground and tree nesting birds and other small animals to move out of the area (LeBrun et. al, 2013). Masses of these ants covering the ground and trees can cause wildlife to move out of the area. Ecological impacts by fulva include reduction in arthropod diversity, particularly native ant species. This ant can undoubtedly impact ecosystems in its adventive range and has the potential to cause cascading ecological impacts (Wang et al., 2016). Large infestations may be difficult to control and would need professional pest control services to treat affected areas. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below:

Environmental Impact: A, B

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact:

Environmental Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Nylanderia fulva (tawny crazy ant): High (14)

Add up the total score and include it here:

-Low = 5-8 points

-Medium = 9-12 points

High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Nylanderia fulva (tawny crazy ant) has never been found in the environment in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included:

Score: 0

Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

-Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

-Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

-High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (14)

Uncertainty:

Five species of Nylanderia are native to the southwestern United States including California. Nylanderia fulva has a potential to overlap with these native species. Since this species is currently established in the southeastern states mentioned above, any host material coming from those areas could potentially contain N. fulva. The presence of only a few workers in incoming samples can also make it difficult to identify Nylanderia to species level because males are needed to positively identify N. fulva.  Detection surveys in California would likely aid in the early detection of this invasive ant.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Nylanderia fulva has not been recorded in the environment of California and would likely have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to enter the state.  An “A”-rating is justified.


References:

Harmon, K. 2009. Honeybees Face New Threat in Texas: “Crazy” ants. Accessed 1/25/18.  (http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=honeybees-face-new-threat-in-texas-2009-08-07).

Hill, S.K., Baldwin, R.W., Pereira, R.M. &  Koehler, P.G., 2013. Tawny Crazy Ant. Publication # SP486D, University of Florida, Accessed 1/26/18 http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/IN/IN107600.pdf.

Kumar, S., LeBrun, E.G., Stohlgren, T.J., Stabach, J.A.,McDonald, D.L., Oi, D.H. &  J.S. LaPolla. 2015. Evidence of niche shift and global invasion potential of the tawny crazy ant, Nylanderia fulva. Ecol. 5, 4628–4641

LeBrun, E. G., Abbott. & L. E. Gilbert. 2013. Imported crazy ant displaces imported fire ant, reduces and homogenizes grassland ant and arthropod assemblages. Biological Invasions 15: 2429-2442.

MacGown, J. A. & B. Layton. 2010. The invasive Rasberry crazy ant, Nylanderia sp. near pubens (Hymenoptera:  Formicidae), Midsouth Entomologist Vol 3: 1:  441- 47. Accessed1/26/18. http://midsouthentomologist.org.msstate.edu/Volume3/Vol3_1_html_files/vol3_1_008.htm

Nestor, P.R. 2002. Tawny (Rasberry) Crazy Ant. Center for Urban and Structural Entomology. Texas A & M Agrilife Extension. Accessed 1/25/18.  http://bugwoodcloud.org/resource/files/6305.pdf

Pest and Damage Record Database. Pest Prevention and Plant Health Services. CA Department of Food and Agriculture. Accessed 1/24/18. http://phpps.cdfa.ca.gov/user/frmLogon2.asp

Sharma, S, Warner, J and R.H. Scheffrahn, 2014. Featured Creatures. Tawny Crazy Ant. Nylanderia fulva. Entomology and Nematology Department, University of Florida. Accessed 1/25/18.  http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/creatures/urban/ants/tawny_crazy_ant.htm

USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). Accessed 1/24/18. https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/PExD/faces/PExDReport.jsp

Wang, Z., Moshman, L., Kraus, E.C., Wilson, B.E. Acharya N., and Diaz, R., 2016. A Review of the Tawny Crazy Ant, Nylanderia fulva, an Emergent Ant Invader in the Southern United States: Is Biological Control a Feasible Management Option? Department of Entomology, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA; Accessed 1/24/18. www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/7/4/77/pdf


Author:

Raj Randhawa, 1220 ‘N’ Street, Room 221, Sacramento CA 95814, (916) 403-6617, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 2800 Gateway Oaks, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov


Comment Period:*

4/12/18 – 5/27/18


*NOTE:

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.  If you have registered and have not received the registration confirmation, please contact us at plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.


Posted by ls 

Compact Carpenter Ant | Camponotus planatus

California Pest Rating Proposal for
Compact Carpenter Ant | Camponotus planatus
Hymenoptera:  Formicidae
Current Pest Rating:  Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

 


Comment Period: 4/11/18 – 5/26/18


 

Initiating Event:

Camponotus planatus has been intercepted 34 times in 2018 during January and February at various CDFA border stations during inspection of vehicles entering CA. Recently, multiple live ants of this species have been intercepted at on a trailer entering Blyth inspection station (PDR # BL0P06743971). The trailer was carrying a load of bee colonies, originating from Florida. Camponotus planatus has temporary rating of “Q”.  A pest rating proposal is required to determine a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

BackgroundCamponotus planatus is a small polymorphic ant. It is primarily an arboreal species, but it is increasingly becoming a structural pest in Florida. These ants feed on drops of honey dew from exterior walls of structures, trees, shrubs, along sidewalks and through lawns. This ant species is a day-active ant; therefore, they are observed more than nocturnal carpenter ants. (University of Florida)

Camponotus planatus have colonies with a single queen. Queens start new colonies and care for the first larvae until they develop into workers. Workers in turn begin to forage for food and to care for the queen, new eggs and the larvae. Colonies continue to grow for 2-5 years. Newly winged reproductives, known as Alates, are observed from spring to fall. (University of Florida)

The most common habitats of Camponotus planatus include hollow twigs, empty spaces in trunks of trees, dead wood, old termite galleries and leaf axils of palm (Deyrup 1991)

Worldwide DistributionCamponotus planatus is widely distributed in Cuba, and from Mexico to Columbia. In United State, it is well established in parts of Florida including Sarasota in Tempa, East Miami (Deyrup, 1991), Texas and Hawaii. These ants have also been reported in Fort Myers in Lee county, Coconut Groves areas in Dade county, Hillsborough ,Manatee, Monroe, Orange  and Sarasota counties areas in Miami, Florida (Warner and Scheffrahn, 2017).

Official Control: Camponotus has been named as a harmful organism in Namibia, the Republic of Korea, South Africa, and Taiwan (PCIT)

California DistributionCamponotus planatus has never been found in the natural environment of California.

California InterceptionsCamponotus planatus was intercepted 28 times between January 2014 and October 22, 2017 by CDFA at various border station during inspection of vehicles entering California.

The risk Camponotus planatus (compact carpenter ant) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Camponotus planatus has been found in tropical moist forests, wet lowland forests and tropical rain forests of the world. This species commonly feeds on honey dew from structural walls with surface temperatures of up to 37-degree Celsius. (University of Florida). Many Camponotus species are found in foothill and mountain communities of California. (Pest of Homes, Structures, People and Pets, UCANR Publication). It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California:

Score: 3

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Camponotus planatus live in hollow tree twigs, old termite galleries, dead wood, voids in tree trunks and leaf axil bases in palms. These habitats can be found throughout California. It receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest:

Score: 2

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Camponotus planatus develops by complete metamorphosis by going through egg, larva, pupa in silk cocoon and adult stages. Single queen starts new colony of male, female and worker ants. This colony can continue to grow for 2-5 years. Once the colony is mature, it produces winged adults that go for mating flights between spring and fall. Colony size can be up to 10000 worker ants. Long distance spread of this species can be caused by movement of fire wood. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest:

Score: 3

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Camponotus planatus has been found in a nursery in   Mississippi that specializes in palms (Arecaceae) and makes nests towards uppermost part of palms. There are nurseries in the south coast of California that produce and sell palm trees. The crop quality and value can be impacted if this species were to get establish in the state. Camponotus planatus may also be a significant predator of native ants and other arthropods. Camponotus planatus is not only likely to become a nuisance pest of exterior buildings but it can also enter the buildings through structural cracks and crevices. It has been reported to protect honeydew producing insects (MacGown 2014). It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below:

Economic Impact: A, D, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Camponotus planatus is reported to exert ecological pressure on native ants. In natural ecosystem, carpenter ants play an important role by decomposing wood back into soil (Harris & Berry, 1994). Since this species is mainly a pest of structures and wood, it could significantly impact cultural practices like trimming of tree branches close to structures, sealing of potential entry points, increasing ventilation to damp areas and storing firewood away from structures and off the ground. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below:

Environmental Impact: A, E

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact:

Environmental Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Camponotus planatus (compact carpenter ant): High (14)

Add up the total score and include it here:

-Low = 5-8 points

-Medium = 9-12 points

High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Camponotus planatus (compact carpenter ant) has never been found in the environment and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included:

Score: 0

Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

-Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

-Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

-High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (14)

Uncertainty:

Camponotus planatus is being intercepted regularly at various border station of California. Even though it has not been found in the natural environment, it can likely be introduced from south eastern states especially Florida, Texas and Hawaii. Since various Camponotus species are found in California, it is possible that C. planatus may be present in some areas especially in palm growing nurseries in southern California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Camponotus planatus has never been found in the environment of California and would likely to have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to enter the state.  An “A”-rating is justified.


References:

Ant Wiki, Assessed 10/23/2017  http://www.antwiki.org/wiki/Camponotus_planatus

Ant Key ID Guide. Introduced ants. Camponotus planatus. Assessed 10/23/2017  http://antkey.org/en/taxa/camponotus-planatus

Ant Web: Assessed 10/24/2017  https://www.antweb.org/description.do?genus=camponotus&species=planatus&rank=species&countryName=Mexico

Deyrup MA. 1991. Exotic Ants of the Florida Keys (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Proceedings of the 4th Symposium on the Natural History of the Bahamas. 21 pp.

Deyrup, M.  2003. An updated list of Florida ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Florida Entomologist 86: 43-48.

Harris, Richard & Berry Jo. 1994. Invasive Ant Threat. Information Sheet Number 2: Camponotus Mayr. Biosecurity New Zealand. Assessed 10/25/2017  https://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/51009/2.pdf

H. Klotz, Dept. of Entomology, UC Riverside; M. K. Rust, Dept. of Entomology, UC Riverside; and L. D. Hansen, Dept. of Life Sciences, Spokane Falls Community College.

Pest Notes: Carpenter Ants. UCANR Publication 7416, UC Statewide IPM Program, UC Davis. Assessed 10/25/2017  http://ipm.ucanr.edu/PMG/PESTNOTES/pn7416.html

MacGown Joe, Camponotus planatus (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), an Exotic Carpenter Ant Found in Mississippi, Mississippi Entomological Museum, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS, 39762, Assessed 10/25/2017  http://mississippientomologicalmuseum.org.msstate.edu/Researchtaxapages/Formicidaepages/ant.publications/Camponotus_planatus_MacGown2010.pdf

MacGwon, Joe. A. 2014. Ants (Formicidae) of the southeastern united states. Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, Entomology and Plant Pathology, Mississippi State University. Assessed 10/25/2017.

http://mississippientomologicalmuseum.org.msstate.edu/Researchtaxapages/Formicidaepages/genericpages/Camponotus_planatus.htm#.WfJLnE2WzL8

USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). Assesses 10/24/2017 https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Warner, John and Scheffrahn, Rudolph. 2017. Featured Creatures: Camponotus planatus. University of Florida, Entomology and Nematology. Assessed 10/24/2017 http://entomology.ifas.ufl.edu/creatures/urban/ants/c_planatus.htm


Author:

Raj Randhawa, 1220 ‘N’ Street, Room 221, Sacramento CA 95814, (916) 403-6617, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 2800 Gateway Oaks, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov


Comment Period:*

4/11/18 – 5/26/18


*NOTE:

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.  If you have registered and have not received the registration confirmation, please contact us at plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.


Posted by ls 

Peacock Mite | Tuckerella sp

California Pest Rating Proposal for
Peacock Mite | Tuckerella sp.
Acari: Tuckerellidae
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

 


Comment Period: 4/11/18 – 5/26/18


 

Initiating Event:

Tuckerella sp. (Peacock mite) was intercepted in June 2017 by San Joaquin county dog team on a shipment of Mango fruits (Magnifera indica) originating in Miami, Florida ( PDR# 570P6611570)  and again in July 2017 by Sacramento county dog team from a shipment of mamey sapote (Pouteria sapota) fruits originating in Puerto Rico (PDR# 570P06611782) . This species has temporary rating of “Q”.  A pest rating proposal is required to determine a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Tuckerella spp. are significant herbivorous pests in the tropics on citrus fruit. They are called peacock mites because of the peacock tail of plumose posterior setae that trails out behind them. Their dorsal shields are covered with large, leaf like setae. These setae are swept over the body to deter predators (Walter 2009).

Tuckerellids are slow moving, typically bright red and occur in soil and in stems, leaves and fruit of plants. Described species of Tuckerella fall into two species groups that segregate ecologically. One group is found in association with grasses (perhaps feeding on roots) and the other on stems and fruits of woody plants. Some species of the latter group are pests of citrus (Walter 2009)

Worldwide DistributionTuckerella spp. have limited distribution worldwide. Half of the spp. are reported from eastern Asia. T. ornata (Tucker), T. pavoniformus (Ewing) and T. knorri Baker and Tuttle are originally described from South Africa, Hawaii and Thailand respectively and are each reported from several continents (Manual of Acarology 2009).

Official Control: Two Tuckerella sp. are considered harmful organisms. Tuckerella. flabellifera and T. japonica are reported as harmful organisms in the Republic of Korea and Japan respectively (PCIT 2016).

California Distribution: Tuckerella spp. have never been found in the natural environment of California.

California Interceptions: Tuckerella spp. have been intercepted five times between July, 2011 and July, 2017 by CDFA at various border stations during inspection of vehicles entering California.

The risk Tuckerella sp. (Peacock mite) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Tuckerella are mainly found in the tropics and have been reported occurring in soils and in association with underground plant parts. However, T. hypoterra has been collected from pasture soil in South Dakota and T. colegynis from foliage and debris in Nevada (Krantz 2009). Depending on the species, Tuckerella spp. might establish a widespread distribution in California and receives a High (3) in this category

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California:

Score: 3

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Tuckerelilids are considered pests of ornamentals and fruit crops in the United States. Peacock mite cause damage to citrus, avocado, tea and other ornamental and fruit crops (Ochoa, 2010). These crops are widely cultivated in California. It receives a High (3) in this category

Evaluate the host range of the pest:

Score: 3

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Tuckerlilid mites have a high reproduction rate, several reproduction modes and short life cycles. Peacock mites have 5-7 pairs of caudal setae that help with their wind borne dispersal (The full wiki, 2010). Mites are very small and small populations are not easily detectable during visual inspection. This allows them to be rapidly transported long distance when infested plants or fresh plant material is moved. Peacock mite receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest:

Score: 3

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Peacock mite was recorded in Central America as a pest of citrus plants and fruits but it has never been associated with serious damage to citrus. Tuckerella knorri has been reported as a serious pest of citrus in Costa Rica and is likely to reduce yields. It is reported to occur in association with the fungus Sphaceloma fawceti which is considered a causative agent of the cracking of citrus fruits (Vacante 2010). It receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below:

Economic Impact: A, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 2

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Tuckerella are not likely to lower the biodiversity and disrupt natural communities. Since mites can be contaminants of stored grains and phytoparasites of several crops, its infestations could cause private treatment by homeowners. It receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below:

Environmental Impact: A, E

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered sp..

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered sp. by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact:

Environmental Impact Score: 2

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Tuckerella sp. (peacock mite): High (13)

Add up the total score and include it here:

-Low = 5-8 points

-Medium = 9-12 points

High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Tuckerella has never been found in the environment and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included:

Score: 0

Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

-Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

-Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

-High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (13)

Uncertainty:

Peacock mites have been intercepted a few times by CDFA for many years. Some Tuckerella spp. like T. pavoniformis do not cause economic damage to citrus but other sp. like T. knorri can damage citrus plants and fruits. Even though Tuckerella spp. have not been found in natural environment of California, they can resemble California native mites like citrus bud mite and Texas citrus mite. If Tuckerella spp. are introduced to California, they might have the potential to cause significant economic damage to citrus growing areas of the state. There have not been any formal surveys done to confirm the presence of Tuckerella spp. in California on crops like Citrus and avocado. Early surveys can confirm the presence of Tuckerella spp. in California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Tuckerella sp. has never been found in the environment of California and might have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to enter the state. An “A”-rating is justified.


References:

 Krantz G.W. 2009. A manual of Acarology, 3rd edition, pp 302

Ochoa R., Aguilar H., and Vargas C. 1994. Phytophagous mites in Central America: an illustrated guide

Ochoa, Ronald-Ron. 2010. Mite Systematics and Arthropod Diagnostics with Emphasis on Invasive sp.. USDA ARS Systematic Entomology Laboratory, Beltsville, MD  https://www.ars.usda.gov/research/project/?accnNo=420497 

Ochoa, Ronald. The genus Tuckerella in Costa Rica (Acari: Tuckerllidae). International Journal of Acarology. 14 (2): 205-207

The Full Wiki. 2010. Tuckerella Encyclopedia http://www.thefullwiki.org/Tuckerella

Vacante, Vincenzo. 2010. Review of the phytophagous mites collected on Citrus in the world. Acarologia 50 (2): 221-241.

Walter, David Evans; Proctor, Heather (2013). Mites: Ecology, Evolution & Behavior. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 292. ISBN 978-94-007-7164-2.


Author:

Raj Randhawa, 1220 ‘N’ Street, Room 221, Sacramento CA 95814, (916) 403-6617, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 2800 Gateway Oaks, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov


Comment Period:*

4/11/18 – 5/26/18


*NOTE:

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.  If you have registered and have not received the registration confirmation, please contact us at plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.


Posted by ls 

Plant Bug | Rubrocuneocoris calvertae

California Pest Rating Proposal for
Plant Bug | Rubrocuneocoris calvertae Henry
Hemiptera: Miridae
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

Comment Period: 4/10/18 – 5/25/18


Initiating Event:

Rubrocuneocoris calvertae was reported to be established on Hawaii and Oahu islands, Hawaii (Henry, 2017; J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.).  It is currently Q-rated, and a permanent pest rating proposal is required to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Rubrocuneocoris calvertae is a small plant bug (approximately 2.5 millimeters in length) that is dull brown in color except for distinctive red markings on the posterior portion of the forewings (a character shared with other members of the genus).  This species is only known from Hawaii, but it is presumed to have been introduced from somewhere in Asia or the Pacific, because the other species in the genus are native to these areas.  In Hawaii, R. calvertae is reported to feed on Macaranga tanarius (Euphorbiaceae) and Pipturus sp. (Urticaceae) (Henry, 2017; J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.), but no information is available on the extent of damage inflicted on these plants by this bug.  Very little information was found on the biology of this genus.  Most collections of Rubrocuneocoris appear to have been made with light or malaise traps, which provides little biological information.

Worldwide Distribution:  Rubrocuneocoris calvertae is only known from Hawaii (Hawaii and Oahu islands), and it was presumably introduced there from an unknown location in east Asia or the Pacific (Henry, 2017; J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.).

Official Control: Rubrocuneocoris calvertae is not known to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  Rubrocuneocoris calvertae is not known to be present in California (Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network).

California Interceptions:  Rubrocuneocoris calvertae has not been intercepted in California.

The risk Rubrocuneocoris calvertae would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Rubrocuneocoris calvertae has been reported to feed on plants in the families Euphorbiaceae and Urticaceae. There are plants in these families present throughout California.  This insect is only known to be present in Hawaii, although it is presumed to be native to somewhere in east Asia or the Pacific.  At least one species in the genus Rubrocuneocoris occurs in the Primorye region of the Russian Federation, which suggests it may be tolerant of a more temperate climate (Vinokurov et al., 1988).  Therefore, even though it is likely that calvertae originated in a tropical or subtropical area and is limited to such climates, it is also possible that this species is native to an area with a temperate climate, and thus could survive in much of California.  Therefore, R. calvertae receives a High (3) in this category.

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: This species has been reported to feed on two families of plants, the Euphorbiaceae and Urticaceae. Its native distribution is unknown, but this species may feed on other plants there.  The unknown feeding habits in the (also unknown) native range are considered here.  Therefore, calvertae receives a Medium (2) in this category.

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Rubrocuneocoris calvertae presumably flies, because other species in the genus are caught at light traps (Schuh, 1984).  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: This species feeds on plants.  It is not known to be present in California, and it is possible that it has a very limited distribution and may not have been exposed to some economically-significant plants that are present in California.  Therefore, even though there is no evidence that calvertae is a pest elsewhere, there is still the possibility that it could become a pest in California if it became established here.  If it became a pest in California, it could lower crop yield and increase crop production costs, for example, through increased pesticide use.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Economic Impact: A, B

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 2

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: As explained above, under Economic Impacts, there is the possibility that calvertae could become a pest if it was established in California. This could trigger treatment programs, for example, in agriculture or ornamental plantings.  There is a rare Euphorbia species in California, E. hooveri, which could be attacked by R. calvertae if it became established in California.  Therefore, R. calvertae receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

Environmental Impact: B, D

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Environmental Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Rubrocuneocoris calvertae: Medium (12)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Rubrocuneocoris calvertae is not known to be present in California.  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

7) The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: Medium (12)

Uncertainty:

The full extent (including native range) of the distribution of R. calvertae are presumably not known.  This means that the climatic tolerances and feeding habits of this insect are also unknown, which makes it challenging to determine its potential for impact in California.  No information was found suggesting that any species in the genus Rubrocuneocoris is a pest.  This suggests that the genus may have a low potential for economic or environmental impact.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Rubrocuneocoris calvertae is only known from Hawaii, but it is presumed to be native somewhere in Asia or the Pacific.  It is possible that it could have economic and environmental impacts if it became established in California.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

Henry, T.  2017.  A new species of the plant bug genus Rubrocuneocoris Schuh (Heteroptera: Miridae: Phylinae) from Hawaii.  Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington.  119(1): 63-69.

Lin, C-S.  2006.  Genus Rubrocuneocoris Schuh (Hemiptera: Miridae) of Taiwan.  Formosan Entomologist.  26: 295-302.

Schuh, R.T.  1984.  Revision of the Phylinae (Hemiptera, Miridae) of the Indo-Pacific.  Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History.  177: 1-476.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed November 20, 2017. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu

Vinokurov, N.N., Golub, V.B., Kanyukova, E.V., Kerzhner, I.M., and G.P. Tshernova.  1988.  Volume II: Homoptera and Heteroptera.  In (P.A. Lehr, ed.) Keys to the Insects of the Far East of Russia.  Nauka Publishing House, Leningrad.  972 pp.


Author:

Kyle Beucke, 1220 N Street, Room 221, Sacramento, CA, 95814, 916-403-6741, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov


Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 2800 Gateway Oaks, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov


Comment Period:*

4/10/18 – 5/25/18


*NOTE:

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.  If you have registered and have not received the registration confirmation, please contact us at plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.


Posted by ls 

Stink Bug | Kalkadoona pallida

California Pest Rating Proposal for
Stink Bug | Kalkadoona pallida (Van Duzee)
Hemiptera: Pentatomidae
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

Comment Period: 4/10/18 – 5/25/18


Initiating Event:

Six adult specimens of K. pallida were collected in a natural area reserve on Oahu Island, Hawaii, on May 26, 2016 (J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.).  This apparently represents the first detection of the species in the United States.

History & Status:

Background: Kalkadoona pallida is a pale brownish-yellow stink bug that measures 7-8 mm in length (Van Duzee, 1905).  This bug lives in desert sand dunes in Australia, where it has been recorded feeding on plants in the genera Dodonaea (Sapindaceae) and Enchylaena (Amaranthaceae) (Atlas of Living Australia; Cassis & Gross, 2002).  The specimens recently (2016) collected in Hawaii were found feeding on Atriplex suberecta (sprawling saltbush) (Amaranthaceae) (J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.).

Worldwide Distribution: Kalkadoona pallida is native to southern Australia.  It was recently reported in a natural area on Oahu Island, Hawaii, United States, where it was presumably introduced.

Official Control: Kalkadoona pallida is not known to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  Kalkadoona pallida is not known to occur in California (Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network).

California Interceptions: This species is not known to have been intercepted in California.

The risk Kalkadoona pallida would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: The area of Australia in which Kalkadoona pallida occurs has a semi-arid to arid climate. There are large areas in California that have a similar climate.  In addition, pallida is established on Oahu Island, Hawaii, which suggests that this species has a relatively broad climatic tolerance.  Therefore, Kalkadoona pallida receives a High (3) in this category.

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Kalkadoona pallida is known to feed on three species of plant, in three genera. Therefore, pallida receives a Medium (2) in this category.

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Kalkadoona pallida is capable of flight, as at least some of the collecting records from Australia indicate specimens were captured in flight or were attracted to light. Reproductive potential is unknown for this species.  Therefore, pallida receives a Medium (2) in this category.

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Within the plant families that Kalkadoona pallida has been recorded feeding upon, there are some crops (spinach and beets, in the Amaranthaceae) and ornamental plants (in the Scrophulariaceae). However, this insect prefers arid or semi-arid conditions, and there do not appear to be any reports of it being a pest in Australia, which has a similar climate to California.  In Hawaii, it feeds on an introduced weed growing near the shore and is not known to be a pest there.  For these reasons, it seems unlikely that Kalkadoona pallida could significantly impact agriculture in California.  Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

Economic Impact:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 1

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: The reported host plants of this species in Australia belong to the families Amaranthaceae and Scrophulariaceae. Also within these families are some rare California plants, including the Federally-endangered Suaeda californica Watson (California seablite), which is limited to the California coast, the rare Amaranthus watsonii Standley (Watson’s amaranth), which occurs in creosote bush scrub in southern California, a number of Atriplex species (saltbushes, etc.), and the rare Scrophularia villosa Pennell (Santa Catalina figwort).  It is possible that, if K. pallida was introduced to California, it could feed on and threaten these species.  The Atriplex species are perhaps most at risk because K. pallida is known to feed on A. suberecta in Hawaii.  Pentatomids are known to transmit plant diseases.  If K. pallida can transmit such diseases, this would pose an additional risk to California native plants.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

Environmental Impact: B

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

Environmental Impact Score: 2

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Kalkadoona pallida: Medium (10)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Kalkadoona pallida is not known to occur in California.  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

7) The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: Medium (10)

Uncertainty:

This species is not known to be a pest in Hawaii, which is the only locality to which this species is known to have been introduced.  However, there are native species of Atriplex present in California, and these native species could be more heavily impacted.  It is also possible that this species could feed on a much broader range of hosts if it became established in California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Kalkadoona pallida is a phytophagous insect that is likely capable of becoming established in California.  If it did so, it is unlikely to have an economic impact, but it could attack multiple species of rare plants.  The potential for environmental damage, and the fact that this species is not yet present in the state, justify an “A” rating.


References:

Atlas of Living Australia.  Accessed March 2, 2018.  https://www.ala.org.au/

Calflora.  Accessed March 2, 2018. http://www.calflora.org

Cassis, G. & Gross, G.F.  2002.  Entomological Catalogue of Australia.  CSIRO Publishing.  737 pp.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed March 2, 2018. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu

Van Duzee, E.P.  1905.  Notes on Australian Pentatomidae, with descriptions of a few new species.  Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History.  21: 187-214.


Author:

Kyle Beucke, 1220 N Street, Room 221, Sacramento, CA, 95814, 916-403-6741, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov


Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 2800 Gateway Oaks, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov


Comment Period:*

4/10/18 – 5/25/18


*NOTE:

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.  If you have registered and have not received the registration confirmation, please contact us at plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.


Posted by ls