Category Archives: Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Entomology: Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Hylesinus cingulatus Blandford

California Pest Rating Proposal
Hylesinus cingulatus Blandford
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

 


 Comment Period: 1/17/18 – 3/3/18


Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background:  Like most bark beetles, Hylesinus species develop in the phloem (inner bark).   Hylesinus cingulatus has been reported to feed on Fraxinus mandshurica and F. longicuspis.  According to one source, it breeds in windthrown trees and does not cause significant damage in forests (Kurenzov, 1941).  In at least some (possibly most) species of Hylesinus, adults feed on healthy trees prior to reproduction; this is referred to as maturation feeding.  Other species of Hylesinus are known to attack live, but stressed (through drought, for instance) trees.

Worldwide Distribution: Found in China, Korea, Japan, and the Primorye region of the Russian Far East.

Official Control: This species does not appear to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  This species is not known to be present in California.

California Interceptions: Hylesinus cingulatus has apparently never been intercepted in California.

The risk Hylesinus cingulatus would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: The climate represented by the native distribution of Hylesinus cingulatus suggests that it could become established in some parts of California.  Ash trees (Fraxinus) are widely distributed in 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: This species apparently is only known to feed on two species of Fraxinus. Assuming it is likely restricted to this genus of host tree, it receives a Low (1) 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: Hylesinus cingulatus is capable of sustained flight. The species could be moved in firewood or wood products, although the apparently limited host range might reduce the chances of such movement.  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: Hylesinus cingulatus has a fairly limited host range, at least in its native range.  The species apparently feeds on trees that are already damaged or in decline, although limited information on the biology of this species was obtained.  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: Hylesinus cingulatus does not appear to have much potential for environmental impact. The species apparently feeds on dead or stressed trees, although limited information on the biology of this species was obtained.  One California species of Fraxinus is rare ( parryi), but it occurs in a desert area that is unlikely to be invaded by H. cingulatus.  Therefore, H. cingulatus receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact: 

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: 1

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 Hylesinus cingulatus: Low (7)

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: Hylesinus cingulatus 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: Low (7)

Uncertainty:

There may be information on the biology of this species that was not accessible to this author because it is not in English, although an attempt was made to translate the available literature.  If this species was established in California, it could have a broader host range here than it does in Asia.  If Hylesinus cingulatus species behaved differently in California, for instance, by feeding on trees that were not already killed or damaged, there would be potential for environmental impact.  In addition, newly-emerged adults of some species in the genus are known to feed (“maturation feeding”) on healthy trees.  If this is the case with H. cingulatus, there is greater potential for economic and environmental impacts, especially when it is considered that fungi are associated with bark beetles and maturation feeding could possibly vector pathogenic fungi to healthy trees.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Although H. cingulatus does not behave as a serious pest in its native range, and it is perhaps likely that it would have no more serious an impact in California if it were introduced here, there are reasons to be cautious.  Maturation feeding by adults could damage trees and could result in the transmission of pathogenic fungi.  In addition, it is possible that this beetle could feed on new host trees in California.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

 Blackman, M.W.  1922.  Mississippi bark beetles.  Mississippi Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin.  11: 1-130.

Kurenzov, A.I.  1941.  Bark-beetles of the Far East, USSR.  Academy of Sciences of the USSR.  Moscow. http://libarch.nmu.org.ua/bitstream/handle/GenofondUA/24318/d58a7531c60e960ba7eb551b93c67d51.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Niijima, Y.  1909.  Die Scolytiden Hokkaidos unter Berücksichtigung ihrer Bedeutung für Forstschäden.  The Journal of the College of Agriculture, Tohoku Imperial University.  3: 109-179.

Park, S.  2016.  Taxonomic review of Scolytinae and Platypodinae (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in Korea.  Ph.D. thesis.  Seoul National University.

Pfister, A.  2012.  Aktuelle Schäden durch Eschenbastkäfer in der Steieremark.  Forstschutz Aktuell.  54: 22-25.

Wood, S.L.  2007.  Bark and ambrosia beetles of South America.  Brigham Young University.  900 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 Drive, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211;  plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Period:*

1/17/2018 – 3/3/2018


*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

A mealybug | Nipaecoccus floridensis Beardsley

California Pest Rating Proposal
A Mealybug | Nipaecoccus floridensis Beardsley
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

 Comment Period: 1/17/18 – 3/3/18


Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background:  Nipaecoccus floridensis is a small (approximately 1.4 mm long) mealybug that occurs on palms.  It was described recently and is very similar to N. nipae (Beardsley, 1999).  It is possible that some identifications of N. nipae were actually misidentified N. floridensisNipaecoccus nipae is present in California (reported from Alameda, Kern, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, San Francisco, and Ventura counties).  Nipaecoccus floridensis has been reported on the palms Acoelorrhaphe wrightii and Washingtonia robusta and Psidium guajava (guava) (Beardsley, 1999; Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 2005; Novoa et al. 2010).  In the nursery environment, it has been found on a variety of palms.

Worldwide Distribution:  Nipaecoccus floridensis is reported from Cuba and Florida (where it infests palms) (Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 2005; Novoa et al. 2015).  It is possibly native to Florida (Peña, 2013).

Official Control: Nipaecoccus floridensis is apparently not under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  Nipaecoccus floridensis has been found in numerous instances at California nurseries, but there do not appear to be any reports of this species being present in California outside of nurseries.  For this reason, it is assumed that it is not present in the environment of California.

California Interceptions:  Nipaecoccus floridensis has been intercepted on Annona squamosa fruit (probably from Florida) in 2015 (PDR # 570P06363493) and on a plant from Florida in 2017 (PDR # 010P06660306).  It has been found at nurseries (usually on palms) numerous times: Ventura County in 2000 (PDR # 1190499); Orange County in 1997, 1998, and 2001 (PDR # 1145197, 1212115, 1204342, and 085566); Los Angeles County in 1995, 1998, 2002, 2005, 2006, 2013, 2015, 2016, and 2017 (PDR # 1122913, 1212067, 1294290, 1352589, 1352580, 1352496, 1352477, 190P06058690, 190P06058654, 190P06058656, 190P06058655, 190P06059656, 190P06059651, 190P06059638, 190P06620202, 190P06620188, 190P06620166, 190P06620165, 190P06620164, 190P06620167, 190P06620155, 190P06620155, 190P06620147, 190P06620146, 190P06620146, 190P06620134, 190P06620133, 190P06620125, 190P06620114, 190P06620113, 190P06620059 , 190P06619989, 190P06619878, 190P06060247, 190P06060186, 1252840, and 190P06060156); San Bernardino County in 2013, 2016, and 2017 (PDR # 360P06147027, 360P06381148, 360P06381138, 360P06578933, 360P06380913, 360P06380914, and 360P06202635); San Diego County in 2012 (PDR # 1508906); and Ventura County in 2012, 2015, and 2017 (PDR # 1508906, 56VP06083122, 56VP06083121, 56VP06084073, and 56VP06084022).

The risk Nipaecoccus floridensis would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Nipaecoccus floridensis is only known to occur in Florida and Cuba, although see Uncertainty, below. It is apparently restricted to tropical and subtropical areas.  It is possible that it could become established in a limited portion of California, perhaps the coastal, southern portion of the state.  Therefore, Nipaecoccus floridensis receives a Low (1) 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: Nipaecoccus floridensis has been reported from a few species of palms and from guava. It was intercepted on Annona squamosa fruit.  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: Mealybugs can be dispersed passively in the first instar (“crawler”) stage by wind (CABI, 2017).  Based on the numerous detections on palms at nurseries, Nipaecoccus floridensis is evidently capable of being dispersed artificially via transport of infested plants.  In addition, some Nipaecoccus are capable of producing over 1000 offspring per female (Bartlett, 1978).  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: Nipaecoccus floridensis feeds on palms.  Ornamental palms are a $70 million industry in California (Hoddle).  If N. floridensis was introduced to California, it could become a pest in nurseries and increase the cost of palm production.  Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

Economic Impact: B

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: If Nipaecoccus floridensis became established in California, it could trigger treatments if ornamental palms became infested. As palms are widely planted in the state, infestations and treatments in response could be widespread as well.  The only native California palm species, Washingtonia filifera, occurs in desert, and N. floridensis is unlikely to thrive in such an environment.  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.

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 Nipaecoccus floridensis: Medium (9)

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: Although Nipaecoccus floridensis has been found at California nurseries numerous times, the species is presumed to not be established in the state, as no records outside of nurseries have been found. 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 (9)

Uncertainty:

As stated above, Nipaecoccus floridensis is similar to, and could have perhaps been misidentified as Nipaecoccus nipae in the past.  Therefore, N. floridensis may have a more widespread distribution than is reflected in literature and collecting records, which means that the climatic tolerance and feeding habits may be broader than what is suggested by those records.  It is apparent that N. floridensis has had numerous opportunities to become established in California, based on the fact that it has been found in nurseries multiple times, and it is possible that N. floridensis is already established in a limited part of the state but has gone undetected.  If the species is not established in California, it may be possible that it is not capable of becoming established here outside of the nursery environment.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Nipaecoccus floridensis is a palm-feeding mealybug that is not known to be established in California but could become a pest of ornamental palms.  Ornamental palms are an important industry in California, and they are an iconic symbol of the state.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

Bartlett, B.R. 1978. Pseudococcidae, p. 137–170. In: C.P. Clausen (ed.). Introduced parasites and predators of arthropod pests and weeds: A world review. Agriculture Handbook. 480. USDA, Washington, DC.  545 pp.

Beardsley, J.W.  1999.  Nipaecoccus nipae (Maskell) and two apparently undescribed sibling species (Hemiptera: Coccoidea: Pseudococcidae).  Entomologica, Bari.  33: 49-57.

CABI.  2017.  Maconellicoccus hirsutus.  Invasive Species Compendium. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. www.cabi.org/isc

Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.  Florida cooperative agriculture pest survey program quarterly report no. 2-2005.  10 pp.

García Morales, M., Denno, B.D., Miller, D.R., Miller, G.L., Ben-Dov, Y., N.B. Hardy. 2016. ScaleNet: A literature-based model of scale insect biology and systematics.  Accessed 3 November 2017. http://scalenet.info.

Hoddle, M.  Has the South American palm weevil, Rhynchophorus palmarum, established in southern California?  University of California, Riverside, Center for Invasive Species Research. Accessed: November 17, 2017 http://cisr.ucr.edu/palmarum.html

Novoa, N.M., Hodges, G.S., Hamon, A., Kondo, T., Oliver, P.H., Herrera, M.D.M., and A.H. Marrero.  2015.  Insectos escama (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea) del Parque Natural Topes de Collantes, Sancti-Spíritus, Cuba y la relación con sus plantas hospedantes.  Insecta Mundi.  426: 1-27.

Novoa, N.M., Hodges, G.S., Rubio, M.V., Bonnin, P.C., and P.H. Oliver.  2010.  Nuevos registros de insectos escamas (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea) para Cuba.  Fitosanidad.  14(3): 181-183.

Peña, J.  2013.  Potential Invasive Pests of Agricultural Crops.  CABI.  464 pp.

Stocks, I.  2013.  19: Recent adventive scale insects (Hemiptera: Coccoidea) and whiteflies (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in Florida and the Caribbean basin, pp. 342-362.  In J. Peña (ed.), Potential Invasive Pests of Agricultural Crops.  CABI.


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 Drive, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211;  plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Period:*

1/17/2018 – 3/3/2018


*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

Black Pine Bark Beetle | Hylastes ater (Paykull)

California Pest Rating Proposal
Black Pine Bark Beetle | Hylastes ater (Paykull)
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

Comment Period: 1/17/18 – 3/3/18


Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background: Hylastes ater is fairly large (3.5-4.4 mm long) sized for a bark beetle.  The beetle is dark in color, almost black.  Hylastes ater larval feeding appears to be limited to the roots and stumps of already-cut conifers (mostly pine, Pinus spp.).  Adults burrow into the phloem (inner bark), forming tunnels in which the larvae feed.  Feeding by newly-emerged adult bark beetles takes place in seedlings.  As is commonly the case with bark beetles, multiple species of fungi are associated with H. ater.  Sapstain fungi may be transferred to recently-cut logs by adult H. ater through their feeding.  This fungus can decrease the value of wood.

Worldwide Distribution: Hylastes ater is native to a large portion of the Palearctic, including much of Europe.  The species has been introduced to Australia, Chile, New Zealand, and South Africa.

Official Control: This species is considered a quarantine pest by Canada.

California Distribution:  This species is not known to be present in California.

California Interceptions: Hylastes ater has been intercepted in California on Pinus radiata wood from New Zealand (PDR # 1166010 and 1059432).

The risk Hylastes ater would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Hylastes ater is widely distributed in the Palearctic, and has demonstrated its ability to be introduced successfully to various localities, including Australia, Chile, and New Zealand. This species feeds on pines, which occur throughout California.  Therefore, Hylastes ater 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: Hylastes ater has been reported to feed on many species of pines as well as other coniferous trees. 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: Hylastes ater flies, and has successfully been introduced to several countries. Adults are strongly attracted to freshly-cut logs, which means these beetles are likely to be present on logs/firewood that are not removed immediately after cutting.  This would enable the beetles to be moved with the logs/firewood.  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: Hylastes ater has been reported to cause heavy mortality of pine seedlings in New Zealand, primarily as a result of the feeding of newly emerged adults described above.  There is some evidence that healthy seedlings are generally not damaged or killed as a result of this feeding, and that it is only otherwise-compromised seedlings that are affected.  Assuming that healthy seedlings are damaged or killed, the introduction of ater to California could impact the timber industry through increasing production costs, both through loss of seedlings as well as infection of logs by sapstain fungi.  Timing of cutting or harvesting of timber could require modification, to avoid the beetles.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

Economic Impact:  B, 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: There does not appear to be any evidence that Hylastes ater has a significant environmental impact in any of the areas to which it has been introduced. Any significant damage to pine seedlings in timber operations may be related to the artificially higher density of food sources (wood waste) and resulting high densities of adult beetles.  However, it is possible that this species could have a different impact in California if it was introduced here.  There is also a possibility that the species could carry a fungal pathogen to which California trees are susceptible.  Forest ecosystems and rare California conifers could be affected.  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,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: 

– 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 Hylastes ater: 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: Hylastes ater 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 (13)

Uncertainty:

Besides any damage to already-cut timber by the transmitted fungi, the only evidence so far of damage resulting from this beetle is the feeding by newly emerged adults on tree seedlings.  There appears to be some uncertainty regarding the ability of the adults to injure or kill healthy pine seedlings; some research suggests that injured/killed seedlings were originally in poor health prior to being fed upon.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Hylastes ater is a bark beetle that is not known to occur in the United States and has the potential to impact the timber industry through direct feeding damage of seedlings or transmission of pathogenic fungi.  There could be environmental impacts as well.  In addition, there are pine species in California (some of them rare) that this bark beetle has not encountered before, and the behavior (including damage) of the beetle could be different from what has been observed to date in other parts of the world.  An “A” rating is justified.


References:

Bain, J., Berndt, L., and B. Gresham.  2009.  Forest and timber insects in New Zealand.  Number 29: Black pine bark beetle. http://www.nzffa.org.nz/farm-forestry-model/the-essentials/forest-health-pests-and-diseases/Pests/Hylastes-ater/Hylastes-aterEnt29

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

EPPO.  2017.  EPPO Global Database (available online).  Accessed 21 September 2017. https://gd.eppo.int

Kliejunas, J.T, Burdsall Jr., H.H., DeNitto, G.A., Eglitis, A., Haugen, D.A., Haverty, M.I., and J.A. Micales.  2006.  Pest risk assessment of the importation into the United States of unprocessed Pinus logs and chips from Australia.  United States Department of Agriculture.  159 pp.

Reay, S.D., Glare, T.R., and M. Brownbridge.  2012.  Hylastes ater (Curculionidae: Scolytinae) affecting Pinus radiata seedling establishment in New Zealand.  Psyche.  2012: 1-9.

Wood, S.L.  1982.  The bark and ambrosia beetles of North and Central America (Coleoptera: Scolytidae), a taxonomic monograph.  Brigham Young University.  1359 pp.

Wood, S.L.  2007.  Bark and ambrosia beetles of South America.  Brigham Young University.  900 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 Drive, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211;  plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Period:*

1/17/2018 – 3/3/2018


*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

Bark Beetle | Coccotrypes rutschuruensis Eggers

California Pest Rating Proposal
Bark Beetle | Coccotrypes rutschuruensis Eggers
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

Comment Period: 1/16/18 – 3/2/18


Initiating Event:

In 1987, beetles were found mining the bases of seedlings of the palm, Howea forsteriana, in Orange County (PDR # 821414).  The beetles were identified as Coccotrypes rutschuruensis (misspelled in the PDR as rutshuruensis).  This apparently represents the only detection of the species in the United States.

History & Status:

Background: This species has been found associated with the following plants: Annona sp. (Annonaceae), Astrocaryum murumura, Howea forsteriana, Phoenix reclinata (Arecaceae), and Triplochiton scleroxylon (Malvaceae).  Wood (2007) considered it possible that what he treated as C. rutschuruensis could have been two or more species.  Therefore, the biological data of multiple species may have been combined and the specific identification of members of this genus may be problematic.  Regardless, little biological information is available for the beetles that have been referred to by this name except for reports of feeding on the bases of seedlings of Howea forsteriana and in Astrocaryum palm nuts.  For both of these reasons (doubtful species identity and poorly-known biology), a cautious approach must be taken and the biology of the entire genus Coccotrypes will be drawn upon in this proposal.

Worldwide Distribution: Coccotrypes rutschuruensis was described from material collected in Rutshuru, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and it is presumably native to that continent.  The 1987 Orange County find is apparently the only record of this species in the United States, and it is presumed that this species is not established in this country (Haack and Rabaglia 2013).  There are reports that this species has been introduced to Brazil and Suriname (Wood, 2007).  Unfortunately, these records may represent one or more different species due to the confused taxonomy.

Official Control: Coccotrypes rutschuruensis is not known to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution: This species is not known to occur in the United States.

California Interceptions: The above-mentioned detection in Orange County is apparently the only record of this species in California (and the United States).

The risk Coccotrypes rutschuruensis would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: The available distribution records suggest that the species is primarily tropical but may also be capable of establishment in temperate climates, although this depends on the specimens identified as rutschuruensis in South America actually being that species. Because of the lack of biological information available on this species and the doubt regarding the species identities, the broad, collective climatic tolerance of the entire genus Coccotrypes is considered.  Regarding host plants, this beetles appears to be mostly restricted to palms.  There is only one native palm in California, but many species are planted as ornamentals in the southern half of the state.  Therefore, C. rutschuruensis 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: The available feeding records for Coccotrypes rutschuruensis all involve palms, although there is little biological information available. The feeding habits of the entire genus Coccotrypes are considered.  Therefore, Coccotrypes rutschuruensis 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: Coccotrypes species are inbreeding and can reproduce via arrhenotokous parthenogenesis. This means that a single, unfertilized female is capable of founding a population by producing males from unfertilized eggs and mating with them.  In addition, Coccotrypes species are known to fly.  Therefore, Coccotrypes rutschuruensis 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: The beetles identified as rutschuruensis were reported feeding on palm seeds and seedlings. It is possible that if it were to become established in California, this beetle could impact the date and ornamental palm industries, including lowering yield and disrupting markets and increasing production costs.  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: Coccotrypes rutschuruensis is reported to feed on palm seeds and seedlings. Another species of Coccotrypes, carpophagus, has been reported to feed on Washingtonia filifera and W. robusta.  If introduced into California, C. rutschuruensis could impact the regeneration of the native Washingtonia filifera palm in southern California.  This beetle could also impact ornamental palm plantings and trigger treatment programs if planted palms were attacked.  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. 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 Coccotrypes rutschuruensis: 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: Coccotrypes rutschuruensis been found only once in California (the Orange County find cited above).  Because there is no further evidence of this species in the state, 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: High (14)

Uncertainty:

Coccotrypes is diverse (129 described species) and the body size is minute.  This makes identification challenging even in a best-case scenario (i.e., if the systematics of the group have been well-studied, or a modern revision existed).  In many cases, specimens of Coccotrypes are only identified to the level of genus.  This means that, even if C. rutschuruensis was established in the United States, it may not have been identified as that species.  In addition, the sparseness of biological data available for this species, along with the doubt regarding its identity, leads the author to consider the biology of the entire genus Coccotrypes in developing a rating.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

The beetles historically identified as C. rutschuruensis have been reported feeding on palm seeds and seedlings.  This raises the possibility of economic and environmental damage if this species became established.  There is apparently a possibility that other Coccotrypes species may be referred to as C. rutschuruensis, which means that a specimen intercepted in California and identified as C. rutschuruensis may be a different species with a different biology (including feeding habits and climatic tolerances).  For this reason, a cautious approach has been taken.  Coccotrypes rutschuruensis deserves an “A” rating.


References:

Atkinson, T.H.  2017.  Bark and ambrosia beetles of North and Central America. http://www.barkbeetles.info

Haack, R.A.  2001.  Intercepted Scolytidae (Coleoptera) at U.S. ports of entry: 1985-2000.  Integrated Pest Management.  6: 253-282.

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.

Vega, F.E. and R.W. Hofstetter.  2014.  Bark beetles: Biology and ecology of native and invasive species.  Academic Press.  640 pp.

Wood, S.L.  2007.  Bark and ambrosia beetles of South America.  Brigham Young University.  900 pp.

Wood, S.L. and D.E. Bright.  1992.  A catalog of Scolytidae and Platypodidae (Coleoptera), Part 2: Taxonomic index.  Great Basin Naturalist Memoirs.  13: 1-1553.


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 Drive, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211;  plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Period:*

1/16/2018 – 3/2/2018


*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

A Bark Beetle | Pycnarthrum hispidum (Ferrari)

California Pest Rating Proposal
A Bark Beetle | Pycnarthrum hispidum (Ferrari)
Coleoptera
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: C

 


Comment Period: 1/16/18 – 3/2/18


Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background:  Pycnarthrum hispidum is a neotropical bark beetle that occurs at low elevations below 1300 meters above sea level.  The feeding behavior is apparently restricted to the phloem of cut, injured, or fallen limbs and trunks of fig trees (Ficus spp.).  No reports were found suggesting that it attacks living, healthy trees.  The species has been associated with the following Ficus species: F. lyrata, F. elastica, and F. retusa.

Worldwide Distribution:  Pycnarthrum hispidum occurs in the United States (south Texas and south Florida), Mexico, the Caribbean, Central America, Venezuela, and Guyana.

Official Control: Pycnarthrum hispidum does not appear to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  Pycnarthrum hispidum is not known to occur in California.

California Interceptions: Pycnarthrum hispidum was intercepted on Artemisia sp., Ficus sp., and Ceratonia silique from Florida (PDR # 010P06660363, 010P06660369, 010P06660366, and 010P06660375).

The risk Pycnarthrum hispidum would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Pycnarthrum hispidum occurs in tropical/subtropical areas. There is a possibility that it could become established in a limited portion of California.  Ficus species are grown as ornamental trees in California and could serve as host plants.  Therefore, Pycnarthrum hispidum 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: Pycnarthrum hispidum is apparently restricted to the genus Ficus. Therefore, it receives a Low (1) 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: Pycnarthrum hispidum is capable of sustained flight, and is attracted to light.  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: The available information suggests that Pycnarthrum hispidum does not impact living trees.  The two most obvious concerns regarding the possible establishment of a species that feeds on Ficus are ornamental trees and commercial fig fruit, but these concerns are not supported by evidence.  In 2016, figs were grown in 32 Mexican states and the harvest was worth approximately 514 million pesos.  Yet, there do not appear to be any reports of P. hispidum as a pest of figs there, or anywhere else.  Ficus species are also widely planted as ornamental trees, and again, no reports were found of P. hispidum as a pest.  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: Pycnarthrum hispidum is only known to feed on Ficus species, and there are no species in this genus (or even the family Moraceae) native to California. Additionally, as explained above in Economic Impact, there does not appear to be significant potential for hispidum to become an economic pest.  Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact:

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: 1

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 Pycnarthrum hispidum: Low (7)

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: Pycnarthrum hispidum 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: Low (7)

Uncertainty:

There appears to be little uncertainty regarding the possible impact of Pycnarthrum hispidum in California.  The species is widely distributed and common and not a single report was found of it attacking live trees.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Pycnarthrum hispidum is a common, Neotropical insect that apparently feeds on cut branches and trunks of Ficus spp.  No reports were found suggesting it is a pest in any situation.  It does not appear to pose a threat to California’s agriculture or environment.  For these reasons, a “C” rating is justified.


References:

Atkinson, T.H. and A.E. Martínez.  1985.  Notes on biology and distribution of Mexican and Central American Scolytidae (Coleoptera).  I.  Hylesininae, Scolytinae except Cryphalini and Corthylini.  The Coleopterists Bulletin.  39(3): 227-238.

Atkinson, T.H., Martínez-Fernández, E., Saucedo-Céspedes, E., and A. Burgos-Solorio.  1986.  Scolytidae y Platypodidae (Coleoptera) asociados a selva baja y comunidades derivadas en el estado de Morelos.  Folia Entomolόgica Mexicana.  69: 41-82.

Martínez, A.E. and T.H. Atkinson.  1986.  Annotated checklist of bark and ambrosia beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytidae and Platypodidae) associated with a tropical deciduous forest at Chamela, Jalisco, Mexico.  Florida Entomologist.  69(4): 619-635.

Servicio de Informaciόn Agroalimentaria y Pesquera.  Anuario Estadístico de la Producciόn Agrícola.  http://nube.siap.gob.mx/cierre_agricola/

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network (SCAN).  http://symbiota4.acis.ufl.edu

Valencia, A.E. and T.H. Atkinson.  1988.  Scolytidae y Platypodidae (Coleoptera) de escárcega, Campeche, México.  Biogeografia, biología, importancia econόmica y una lista comentada de especies.  Anales del Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autόnoma de México.  58: 199-220.

Wood, S.L.  1982.  The bark and ambrosia beetles of North and Central America (Coleoptera: Scolytidae), a taxonomic monograph.  Brigham Young University.  1359 pp.

Wood, S.L.  2007.  Bark and ambrosia beetles of South America.  Brigham Young University.  900 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 Drive, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211;  plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Period:*

1/16/2018 – 3/2/2018


*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

Banded Elm Bark Beetle | Scolytus schevyrewi Semenov

California Pest Rating Proposal
Banded Elm Bark Beetle | Scolytus schevyrewi Semenov
Coleoptera
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: C

 


Comment Period: 1/16/18 – 3/2/18


Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background: Scolytus schevyrewi can be recognized by its relatively large size (2.7-4.3 mm in length), the dark band running across the median portions of the elytra, and the position and shape of the abdominal spine.  In the United States, this species attacks elms (Ulmus americana, U. pumila, U. thomasii, and U. procera).  In its native range, it has been reported feeding on trees in the genera Malus and Prunus.  These genera include important fruit trees in California.  As of 2005, however, there were no records of this beetle attacking trees other than elms in the United States.  The species appears to preferentially attack, or cause greater damage to weakened or stressed trees.  Drought stress may be associated with greater damage.  Maturation feeding (feeding by adults before mating) occurs on twigs.  This beetle is apparently capable of transmitting the Dutch elm disease fungus to otherwise healthy trees, and maturation feeding is one way this could occur.

Worldwide Distribution: Scolytus schevyrewi is native to northern China, Central Asia, and Russia.  The beetle was introduced to the United States in 1994 or earlier, as this when the first specimen was collected, but recognition of the species and the fact it was present in the United States took a decade, probably because of the similarity of this species to Scolytus multistriatus.  Scolytus schevyrewi is widely distributed in the United States and has been reported from at least 28 states.  The species has also been introduced to Canada and Mexico.

Official Control: Scolytus schevyrewi is not known to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  Scolytus schevyrewi has been found in at least 13 counties in California, ranging from Lassen County in the north to San Diego County in the south.

California Interceptions: Scolytus schevyrewi has been trapped in 9 counties from 2004-2010 (Kern, Inyo, Lassen, Los Angeles, Mono, Nevada, Sacramento, San Diego, and San Bernardino) (PDR # 5035940, 1355030, 1355032, 1355027, 1355031, 1311668, 1322007, 1322005, 1368633, 1322006).

The risk Scolytus schevyrewi would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Scolytus schevyrewi is already present in at least 13 counties in California, from Lassen County in the north to San Diego County in the south. The beetle is also widely distributed over much of the rest of the continental United States.  This suggests it has the potential to become established over much or most of the state of California.  Elms are widely planted in California.  Therefore, Scolytus schevyrewi 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: Even though Scolytus schevyrewi has not been reported to attack trees other than a few species of Ulmus in the United States, it is also reported to attack trees in the Rosaceae 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: Scolytus schevyrewi is capable of sustained flight and it infests wood and wood products that could be moved (e.g. firewood). 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: There does not appear to be any significant economic damage associated with schevyrewi in California, even though it is present over a large portion of the state.  Elms are not a major timber tree, and the genus Prunus, which includes important fruit trees, does not appear to be affected in the United States.  Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

Economic Impact:  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: 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: Scolytus schevyrewi does not appear to have had a significant environmental impact in California, even though it is widely distributed in the State. Elms (Ulmus) are not native to California, and these are the only trees reported as being impacted by this beetle in the United States.  Even though there do not appear to be many reports of this beetle damaging planted elms in the state, it is possible that this could occur during periods of drought.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact: 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.

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 Scolytus schevyrewi: 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: Scolytus schevyrewi has already spread to at least 13 counties in California.  The full extent of its distribution in the state is not known, and it is likely that its distribution will continue to expand.  The current range represents a large enough area to consider the species fully established for the purposes of this pest rating proposal.  It receives a High (-3) 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: Low (7)

Uncertainty:

The host range of S. schevyrewi in the United States was considered, for the purposes of this pest rating proposal, to be significantly narrower than what has been reported for this species’ native distribution.  This was based on the available information.  Because S. schevyrewi is already so widespread in the United States, it seemed that, if it had a broader host range in this country, it would have been reflected in the literature, especially considering how much attention this species has received.  It is possible that S. schevyrewi does attack other genera and/or species of trees in the United States, but this has escaped attention.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

When it was initially determined, in the mid-2000s, that Scolytus schevyrewi was present in the United States, there was much concern regarding the possible impact of this species on elms (and possibly on fruit trees as well).  However, over a decade has elapsed and there is very little evidence of major economic or environmental impacts resulting from the species.  It is apparently already widely distributed in California, and there is little evidence of significant impacts in the state.  A “C” rating is justified.


References:

Campos-Bolaños, R., Atkinson, T.H., Cibrian-Tovar, D., and T. Méndez-Montiel.  2015.  Primer registro de Scolytus schevyrewi Semenov 1902 (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) en Mexico.  Acta Zoologica Mexicana.  31(1): 146-148.

LaBonte, J.R.  2010.  The banded elm bark beetle, Scolytus schevyrewi Semenov (Coleoptera, Curculionidae, Scolytinae) in North America; a taxonomic review and modifications to the Wood (1982) key to the species of Scolytus Geoffroy in North and Central America.  ZooKeys.  56: 207-218.

Lee, J.C., Negrόn, J.F., McElwey, S.J., Witcosky, J.J., and S.J. Seybold.  2006.  Pest Alert: Banded elm beetle – Scolytus schevyrewi.  United States Department of Agriculture.  https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fsbdev2_026555.pdf

Negrόn, J.F., Witcosky, J.J., Cain, R.J., LaBonte, J.R., and Duerr II, D.A., McElwey, S.J., Lee, J.C., and S.J. Seybold.  2005.  The banded elm bark beetle: A new threat to elms in North America.  American Entomologist.  51(2): 84-94.

Seybold, S.J., Penrose, R.L., and A.D. Graves.  2016.  Chapter 21: Invasive bark and ambrosia beetles in California Mediterranean forest ecosystems.  In Paine, T.D. and F. Lieutier (Eds.), Insects and Diseases of Mediterranean Forest Systems (pp. 583-662).  Springer.


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 Drive, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211;  plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Period:*

1/16/2018 – 3/2/2018


*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

Small Spruce Bark Beetle | Polygraphus poligraphus (L.)

California Pest Rating Proposal
Small Spruce Bark Beetle |  Polygraphus poligraphus (L.)
Coleoptera
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

Comment Period: 1/16/18 – 3/2/18


Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background: Polygraphus poligraphus has been reported to feed on Norway spruce (Picea abies) and Scotch pine (Pinus sylvestris).  Apparently, it prefers weakened trees but can attack healthy ones as well.  Healthier trees may be attacked when population levels of the beetle are high, probably because tree defenses can be overwhelmed through mass attack.  Polygraphus poligraphus, like many or most bark beetles, is associated with multiple species of fungi, and some of these may be pathogenic to trees.

Worldwide Distribution: Polygraphus poligraphus is native to Europe and has a wide distribution there, being found from Scandinavia to the Mediterranean and Eastern Europe.

Official Control: Although this species is considered a pest, it does not appear to be under official control in any country.

California Distribution:  This species is not known to be present in California.

California Interceptions: Polygraphus poligraphus has apparently been intercepted one time in California, on wood from Belgium or Germany (PDR # 798650).

The risk Polygraphus poligraphus would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Although Polygraphus poligraphus has a wide distribution in Europe, extending from northern Europe to the Mediterranean, it appears that climates represented by much of its distribution may be colder than what is present in most of California. However, spruce and pine trees occur throughout California and are potential host trees of this beetle.  Therefore, Polygraphus poligraphus 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: Polygraphus poligraphus is known to attack at least two genera of coniferous trees. 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: Polygraphus poligraphus is capable of sustained flight. The species can also be artificially dispersed via movement of wood (including wood packing), as shown in one study where poligraphus emerged in a Canadian quarantine facility from wood packing from Norway.  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: There are challenges to predict the possible economic impact of Polygraphus poligraphus.  The literature suggests that living trees are attacked by this species, and multiple species of fungi (some of them apparently pathogenic) can be vectored by it.  If established, poligraphus could reduce the quality and/or yield of timber, which could result in the loss of markets for California timber.  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: As stated above, there is evidence that Polygraphus poligraphus attacks living trees and could vector harmful fungi. This could have a significant impact on California forest ecosystems.  There are several rare pines in California that could be impacted by the establishment of this beetle.  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, 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 Polygraphus poligraphus: 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: Polygraphus poligraphus 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:

Polygraphus poligraphus is a bark beetle that primarily feeds on trees that are damaged or weakened, but some sources suggest that it can attack healthy trees.  Hence, the impact of this species on natural and managed forests in California is difficult to predict.  There is a possibility that the ability of P. poligraphus to overcome the defenses of healthy trees and the impact of its vectored fungi (as well as any interactions between this beetle and fungi already present in California) in California could be different from what is seen in Europe.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

As mentioned above, there are uncertainties regarding the possible impact of this species.  However, the fact that it does not yet occur in California, the evidence that it can (at least in some situations) attack living trees, and the fact that it can vector fungi suggest that an “A” rating is justified.


References:

Allen, E.A. and L.M. Humble.  2002.  Nonindigenous species introductions: A threat to Canada’s forests and forest economy.  Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology.  24: 103-110.

Alonso-Zarazaga, M.A., Kníñek, M., and S. Vit.  2017.  Polygraphus poligraphus (Linnaeus).  Fauna Europaea version 2017.06 https://fauna-eu.org

Kärvemo, S., Björkman, C., Johansson, T., Weslien, J., and J. Hjälten.  2017.  Forest restoration as a double-edged sword: the conflict between biodiversity conservation and pest control.  Journal of Applied Ecology.  1-11.

Krokene, P. and H. Solheim.  1996.  Fungal associates of five bark beetle species colonizing Norway spruce.  Canadian Journal of Forest Research.  26: 2115-2122.

Vojtěch, O., Křenová, Z., and J. Rastislav.  2013.  Species of bark beetles (Scolytinae) collected in the Bohemian Forest at Smrčina/Hochficht two years after the Kyrill hurricane.  Silva Gabreta.  19(3): 149-164.


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 Drive, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211;  plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Period:*

1/16/2018 – 3/2/2018


*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

Strangulate Weevil | Trochorhopalus strangulatus (Gyllenhal)

California Pest Rating Proposal
Strangulate Weevil | Trochorhopalus strangulatus (Gyllenhal)
Coleoptera
Current Pest Rating: Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A

Comment Period:  1/11/18 – 2/25/18


 Initiating Event:

Trochorhopalus strangulatus was recently reported to be established on the island of Hawaii (J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.).  The species is currently Q-rated, and a permanent pest rating proposal is required to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Trochorhopalus strangulatus is a weevil that is widely distributed in tropical sugarcane-growing areas.  Adults are reported to be 6-10 mm in length and are black with a coating of short, brown/gold setae (Corbett, 1932; Hustache, 1920; J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.).  This species is considered a pest of sugarcane.  The larvae bore into and feed in the stalks of the plant (Magarey et al., 2002).  However, some reports suggest it is of minor significance.  For example, it is reported to primarily attack sugar cane that is damaged or weak in Fiji (Imperial Bureau of Entomology, 1920).  The beetle has been reported to attack coconut palm; details on the damage inflicted are sparse, but one report suggests this beetle may provide conditions allowing other, more serious pests to attack trees (Corbett 1932).  This species was also reported to be associated with, and possibly damage bananas, although no further details were found (Harmer, 1912; Mararuai, 2010).  Lastly, this species is apparently often found associated with dead palm trees (J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.).

Worldwide Distribution:  Trochorhopalus strangulatus is known from islands in the Indian Ocean (Republic of Seychelles and the Mascarene Islands), Southeast Asia (Indonesia and Philippines), Papua New Guinea, Fiji, and Hawaii (Hustache, 1920; Magarey et al., 2002; J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.; Pemberton, 1963; Senterre et al., 2011; Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network).  The native distribution is unknown, although one report states it is indigenous to the Seychelles (Senterre et al., 2011).  The distribution has presumably been expanded as a result of cultivation and transport of sugarcane in Southeast Asia and Pacific islands, which began thousands of years ago, and it is assumed that at least some localities represent introductions (Artschwager and Brandes, 1958).

Official Control: Trochorhopalus strangulatus is not known to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  Trochorhopalus strangulatus is not known to occur in California.

California Interceptions:  Trochorhopalus strangulatus has not been intercepted in California.

The risk Trochorhopalus strangulatus would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Trochorhopalus strangulatus has been reported to feed on sugarcane, banana, and palms. Of these, ornamental palms are the most obvious possible host plant in California, and they are present throughout much of the state.  Based on the current distribution of T. strangulatus (tropical areas), it appears unlikely that this species could become established in more than a very limited portion of California.  Therefore, this species receives a Low (1) 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: Trochorhopalus strangulatus is a pest of sugar cane, but has also been reported to attack coconut palm and bananas, which suggests at least three families of plants are fed upon. Unfortunately, details regarding feeding on these alternate host plants are lacking. Therefore, T. strangulatus 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: Trochorhopalus strangulatus presumably flies.  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 weevil is a pest of sugarcane and it has also been reported to attack banana and palms.  California industries that could be affected by the establishment of this weevil include ornamental palms and sugarcane.  Ornamental palms are a $70 million industry in California, and damage (including lowering of yield) to palms in nurseries could result if T. strangulatus became established in California (Hoddle).  Sugarcane is either currently being grown in, or is planned to be grown in the Imperial Valley, where a sugarcane-based sugar and biofuels initiative is underway.  If this weevil became established in the Imperial Valley, which may not be likely given its apparent restriction to tropical areas, it could lower yield of sugarcane there.  An extensive sugarcane industry exists in the southeastern United States, and the climate in that region would likely be more favorable for the establishment of this pest.  The possibility of the spread of this pest to the southeastern United States (and impact on sugarcane and palms there), as well as other countries, could lead to a loss of markets for ornamental palms from California.  Therefore, T. strangulatus receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Economic Impact: A, 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: 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: If this weevil was introduced to California, it could potentially spread to groves of the only species of native California palm, Washingtonia filifera, although this is somewhat unlikely, considering that this weevil is apparently restricted to tropical areas and these palms occur in the desert. Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact: A

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 Trochorhopalus strangulatus: Medium (9)

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: Trochorhopalus strangulatus 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 (9)

Uncertainty:

There is a great deal of uncertainty regarding the feeding by this species on palms and banana.  A possibility that must be considered is that some of the feeding attributed to T. strangulatus could have been the result of another species misidentified as this one.  If this is the case, it means that the feeding habits of this species may be narrower than assumed in this rating proposal.  There is also uncertainty regarding the ability of this species to become established in California, apart from the issue of host plant.  This species is apparently restricted to areas with a tropical climate, and it appears unlikely to be able to become established in California, although parts of southern California could provide adequate conditions for it.  This beetle could become an established pest in parts of California.  A cautious approach has been taken here because of the ability of this species to attack living plants, as shown by its status as a sugar cane pest.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Trochorhopalus strangulatus is a tropical weevil that is not known to occur in California.  The beetle is a pest of sugarcane, and reports suggest it also attacks bananas and palms.  This species poses an economic and environmental risk to California.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

Artschwager, E. and E.W. Brandes.  1958.  Agriculture Handbook 122: Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.); origin, classification, characteristics, and descriptions of representative clones.  United States Department of Agriculture.  United States Government Printing Office.  307 pp.

Corbett, G.H.  1932.  Insects of coconuts in Malaya.  Bulletin General Series (Straits Settlements & Federated Malay States Department of Agriculture).  10: 1-106.

Harmer, S.F.  1912.  Department of Zoology.  VI.  Economic zoology.  Return, British Museum.  1912: 163-167.

Hoddle, M.  Has the South American palm weevil, Rhynchophorus palmarum, established in southern California?  University of California, Riverside, Center for Invasive Species Research.

Accessed: November 17, 2017 http://cisr.ucr.edu/palmarum.html

Hustache, A.  1920.  Curculionides des iles Mascareignes.  Annales de la Société entomologique de France.  89: 113-203.

Imperial Bureau of Entomology.  1920.  Series A: Agricultural.  Review of Applied Entomology.  8: 1-40.

Magarey, R.C., Suma, S., Irawan, Kuniata, L.S., and P.G. Allsopp.  2002.  Sik na binatang bilong suka – Diseases and pests encountered during a survey of Saccharum germplasm ‘in the wild’ in Papua New Guinea.  Proceedings of the Australian Society of Sugar Cane Technology.  24: 219-227.

Mararuai, A.  2010.  Market access of Papua New Guinea bananas (Musa sp.) with particular respect to banana fly (Bactrocera musae (Tryon)) (Diptera: Tephritidae).  Ph.D. thesis.  School of Natural Resource Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.  192 pp.

Pemberton, C.E.  1963.  Important Pacific insect pests of sugar cane.  Pacific Science.  17(2): 251-252.

Senterre, B., Henriette, E., Chong-Seng, L., Beaver, K., Mougal, J., Vel, T., and J. Gerlach.  2011.  Seychelles key biodiversity areas.  Output 1: List of species of special concern.  Report of Consultancy, UNDP-GEF project, Ministry of Environment of Seychelles, Victoria, Seychelles.  67 pp.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed 20 November 2017. 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 Drive, Sacramento CA 95833, (916) 654-1211;  plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Period:*

1/11/2018 – 2/25/2018


*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

Camphor Shot Borer | Cnestus mutilatus (Blandford)

California Pest Rating Proposal
Camphor shot borer | Cnestus mutilatus (Blandford)
Curculionidae: Coleoptera
Current Pest Rating:  Not Rated
Proposed Pest Rating: A

Comment Period:  1/11/18 – 2/25/18


Initiating Event:

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has proposed changing the status of Cnestus mutilatus from actionable to non-actionable.  A pest rating proposal is required to determine a permanent pest rating for this beetle.

History & Status:

Background Cnestus mutilatus is a wood-boring beetle that prefers to attack stems that are 2-5 cm in diameter, including more than 20 botanical families1.  Female beetles bore into trees and inoculate them with fungi1.  Adult beetles and larvae feed on these fungi, and reside within the stems.  A wide variety of trees are attacked.

Known hosts include Aceraceae: Japanese maple (Acer palmatum)1, red maple (Acer rubrum) 1, sugar maple (Acer saccharum) 1, maples (Acer spp.) 1, Acer sieboldianum1; Betulaceae: American hophornbeam (Ostrya virginiana) 1, Japanese hornbeam (Carpinus laxiflora) 1; Cornaceae: flowering dogwood (Cornus florida) 1, dogwood (Cornus spp.) 1; Fabaceae: Albizia spp. 1, Ormosia hosiei1; Fagaceae: beech (Fagus grandifolia) 1, chestnut (Castanea spp.) 1, Japanese beech (Fagus crenata) 1, Quercus shumardii1; Hamamelidaceae: sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) 1; Juglandaceae: hickory (Carya spp.) 1, Platycarya spp. 1; Lauraceae: camphor laurel (Cinnamomum camphora) 1, spicebush (Benzoin [Lindera] spp.) 1, Lindera erythrocarpa1, Lindera triloba1, Parabenzoin [Lindera] praecox1, Machilus [Persea] thunbergii1; Magnoliaceae: yellow poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) 1; Meliaceae: Melia azedarach1; big leaved mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla) 1; Oleaceae: Osmanthus fragrans1; Taxodiaceae: Japanese cedar (Cryptomeria japonica) 1; Pinaceae: loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) 1; Rosaceae: black cherry (Prunus serotina) 1, wild plum (Prunus americana) 1; Theaceae: Camellia spp. 1; Ulmaceae: elm (Ulmus alata) 1; Vitaceae: muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia) 1. It has also been reported on Anacardiaceae, Cupressaceae, Melastomataceae, Papilionaceae, and Styracaceae1.  The beetles can be transported long distances when infested nursery stock or firewood is moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Cnestus mutilatus is native to Asia, and has invaded the eastern United States and established a widespread distribution there1.

Official Control: Cnestus mutilatus is not known to be under official control in any other states or nations.

California Distribution Cnestus mutilatus has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions Cnestus mutilatus has never been intercepted by CDFA or County Agricultural agents.

The risk Cnestus mutilatus (Camphor shot borer) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:   

1) Climate/Host Interaction: The native distribution of Cnestus mutilatus corresponds with Plant Hardiness Zones 5 through 131, which matches most of the state of California. One model predicts that this beetle will not find the western United States as favorable as the east due to precipitation and temperature requirements1,2.  However, this same model also predicted that the beetles would not find suitable habitats in other eastern states where the beetle has since been found.  Other invasive wood boring beetles with similar native Asian distributions are thriving in California.  The accuracy of predictive models for wood-boring beetle distributions could likely be improved by including data on the environment inside trees, where the beetles spend the majority of their lives.  Host trees of the beetle are widely grown as ornamentals in California.  Cnestus mutilatus can be expected to 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:

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: Cnestus mutilatus is highly polyphagous and 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: Cnestus mutilatus both disperses and overwinters as mated females so a single individual can found a new population.  Female beetles can fly 2-3km and can rapidly be transported long distances when infested nursery stock or firewood is moved1Cnestus mutilatus receives a High (3) 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: Cnestus mutilatus attacks nursery stock and a variety of insecticide treatments have been developed for this pest.  If this beetle were to establish in California, it is likely to affect yields of nurseries and increase production costs.  The beetles also vector symbiotic fungi from tree to tree.  Known hosts of the beetle include cherry, plum, and grapes (Prunus serotina, Prunus americana, and Vitis rotundifolia).  If the beetles are able to feed on grapevines and other stone fruit trees, it could have significant impacts on California’s $5.58 billion grape industry and $21 billion fruit and nut crop industries.  Cnestus mutilatus receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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: Cnestus mutilatus is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes.  The species is not expected to directly affect threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats.  The beetle is likely to trigger new chemical treatments by the nursery industry and by residents who find infested plants unsightly.  Many host trees of the beetle are planted as ornamentals in California and are likely to be significantly affected by this pest.  Cnestus mutilatus receives a High (3) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact: 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.

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 Cnestus mutilatus (Camphor shot borer):  High (15)

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: Cnestus mutilatus has never been found 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.

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 (15)

Uncertainty:

In some cases, Cnestus mutilatus is attracted to gasoline mixed with ethanol3.  Female beetles can bore into plastic fuel storage containers, causing fuel to leak out3.  This could potentially increase the risk of fire in California3.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Cnestus mutilatus has not been found in California and is expected to have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to establish in the state.  An “A” rating is justified.


References:

1 PPQ. 2017. DEEP report for Cnestus mutilatus (Blandford) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae)—Camphor shot borer. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ), Raleigh, NC. 5 pp.  To request a copy of this report please contact USDA.

2 Olatinwo, R., D. Streett, and C. Carlton. 2014. Habitat suitability under changing climatic conditions for the exotic ambrosia beetle, Cnestus mutilatus (Curculionidae: Scolytinae: Xyleborini) in the southeastern United States. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 107(4):782-788.  https://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/pubs/ja/2014/ja_2014_olatinwo_004.pdf

3 Carlton, Chris and Victoria Bayless.  2011. A case of Cnestus mutilatus (Blandford) (Curculionidae: Scolytinae: Xyleborini) Females Damaging Plastic Fuel Storage Containers in Louisiana, U.S.A. The Coleopterists Bulletin 65(3): 290-291. http://www.lsuinsects.org/resources/docs/publications/Carlton&Bayless2011Cnestus.pdf


Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:*

1/11/2018 – 2/25/2018


*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

Ambrosia Beetle | Xylosandrus amputatus (Blandford)

California Pest Rating Proposal
Ambrosia Beetle |  Xylosandrus amputatus (Blandford)
Coleoptera: Curculionidae
Current Pest Rating:  Not Rated
Proposed Pest Rating: A

 


Comment Period:  1/11/18 – 2/25/18


Initiating Event:

The United States Department of Agriculture’s Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Lab has proposed changing the status of the ambrosia beetle Xylosandrus amputatus from actionable to nonactionable1.  A pest rating proposal is required to determine the impacts that this proposed change might have on California and to assign a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Xylosandrus amputatus is a small fungus-feeding ambrosia beetle1.  Female beetles carry a symbiotic fungus and inoculate host trees1.  Adults and larvae then feed on the fungus1.  In its native range this beetle has been collected from trees in the families Anacardiaceae, Ebenaceae, Geraniaceae, Lauraceae, Moraceae, Rhamnaceae, Sapindaceae, Styracaceae, and Theaceae2.  Reported hosts include maple (Acer sp.)1, sumac (Rhus trichocarpa)1, Diospyros morrisiana1, zonal geranium (Pelargonium x hortorum)1, Actinodaphne lanciflora1 (possibly lancifolia), camphor tree (Cinnamomum camphora)1, Cinnamomum mairei1, Cinnamomum osmophloeum1, Machilus sp.1, Persea (Machilus) thubergii1, fig (Ficus carica)1, jujube (Ziziphus jujube)1, snowbell (Styrax suberifolium)1, and Stewartia monoderpha1 (possibly monodelpha).  The beetles can be rapidly transported long distances when infested wood products such as firewood are moved.

Worldwide Distribution:  Xylosandrus amputatus is native to Asia (China, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan)1,2.  The beetle is only known to have invaded Florida and Georgia1.

Official Control Xylosandrus amputatus is not known to be under official control in any other states or nations.

California Distribution:  Xylosandrus amputatus has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions:  Xylosandrus amputatus has never been intercepted by CDFA or the County Agricultural Commissioners.

The risk Xylosandrus amputatus would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:   

1) Climate/Host Interaction:  Xylosandrus amputatus is likely able to establish throughout USDA Plant Hardiness zones 7 through 101. This is a climatic match for most of California.  Suitable host plants are grown throughout this region as well.  The beetle 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:  Xylosandrus amputatus is known to feed on at least 314 species of plants in 9 plant families.  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: In Florida, Xylosandrus amputatus has spread 200 miles in 7 years, demonstrating a high dispersal potential1.  The beetle could be spread through the movement of infested wood, including firewood.  Ambrosia beetles also have high reproductive potential.  Xylosandrus amputatus receives a High (3) 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: In Florida and Georgia, where Xylosandrus amputatus has become established, it has not been found attacking healthy, stressed, or dying trees1.  It has only been found in traps.  Until more information about its biology in Florida or Georgia is known, it is appropriate to consider impacts that the beetles could have on all known hosts.  Fig and jujube are both known hosts that are grown commercially in California.  If Xylosandrus amputatus were to become established in the state the beetle could lower crop yields and increase crop production costs.  Female beetles also vector a fungal symbiont, Ambrosiella beaveri1.  However, it is not known if this fungus is pestiferous1Xylosandrus amputatus receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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: If Xylosandrus amputatus were to establish in California it is not likely to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes.  The beetle is not expected to feed on any threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats.  The species might trigger new treatment programs in fig and jujube orchards, however it is not likely to significantly impact cultural practices or home/urban gardens.  However, known host trees are common ornamental plants in California and may be susceptible to attack, especially if trees that are stressed due to drought.  Xylosandrus amputatus receives a High (3) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact: 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:

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 Xylosandrus amputatus:  High (15)

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: Xylosandrus amputatus has never been found in the environment of 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.

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 (15)

Uncertainty:

Although Xylosandrus amputatus is well established throughout most of Florida and part of Georgia, however the beetles are only known from traps.  There is no information as to what host plants the beetles are feeding on in these states or if host trees are healthy or stressed.  There is a possibility that they are feeding on additional host tree species.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Xylosandrus amputatus has never been found in California.  If it were to enter the state, it is likely to have significant impacts on ornamental trees and fig and jujube production.  An “A”-rating is justified.


References:

Note:  If links do not work please copy and paste URLs into your browser.

1PPQ. 2017. DEEP report for Xylosandrus amputatus (Blandford) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ), Raleigh, North Carolina. 4 pp.  To request a copy of this report please contact USDA.

2 Cognato, Anthony I., Rachel O. Olson, and Robert J. Rabaglia. 2011. An Asian Ambrosia Beetle, Xylosandrus amputatus (Blandford) (Curculionidae: Scolytinae: Xyleborini), Discovered in Florida, U.S.A. The Coleopterists Bulletin 65(1): 43-45.  https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Anthony_Cognato/publication/232681964_An_Asian_Ambrosia_Beetle_Xylosandrus_amputatus_Blandford_Curculionidae_Scolytinae_Xyleborini_Discovered_in_Florida_USA/links/55b7632508ae9289a08be3a5.pdf


Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:*

1/11/2018 – 2/25/2018


*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

 

Three-lined Cockroach | Luridiblatta trivittata

California Pest Rating Proposal
Three-lined cockroach |  Luridiblatta trivittata
Blattodea: Blatellidae
Current Pest Rating: Z
Proposed Pest Rating: C  
Comment Period: 1/5/18 – 2/19/18
Initiating Event:

Luridiblatta trivittata has a current rating of Z. It was recently reported in Vallejo, California and it is known to occur throughout the San Francisco Bay area. A pest rating proposal is required to assign a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Luridiblatta trivittata, the three-lined cockroach, is a tiny cockroach in the family Ectobiidae. It looks similar to larvae of the German cockroach (Blatella germanica), but that species has two dark pronotal lines instead of the three in L. trivittata1. It is primarily an outdoor species, but it will enter homes, especially in the late summer. This species is synanthropic (occurring only where humans do), occurring in leaf litter, plant debris, mulch, and compost piles. It is native to Mediterranean Europe and was introduced to the west coast of the United States, first being reported there in 2004. This species has spread throughout the San Francisco Bay area and other parts of northern California2, 3.

Luridiblatta trivittata was formerly known in the literature as Phyllodromica trivittata1.

Worldwide Distribution: Luridiblatta trivittata is native to dry habitats in the Mediterranean. It has been recorded from Morocco, Algeria, Spain, Italy, Libya, and Israel1.

Official Control: Luridiblatta trivittata is not listed as a harmful organism by any states or nations and it is not known to be under official control anywhere6.

California Distribution: Luridiblatta trivittata was known to be present in the San Francisco Bay area as early as 2004 and it is very common in northern California.

California Interceptions: There was only one specimen (PDR1374767) reported in the Pest and Damage Record Database by CDFA5. This was found in mulch in Pinole, Contra Costa County.

The risk Luridiblatta trivittata (three-lined Cockroach) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Luridiblatta trivittata can feed on a variety of leftover food and plant debris in the home. They just need hiding places and access to water. It may establish in larger, but limited, warm metropolitan areas of California. It receives a Medium (2) 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: Luridiblatta trivittata is an omnivorous scavenger. It prefers sugary, starchy, or protein-rich foods, but can also consume decaying organic matter4. 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: The adult female produces an egg capsule (ootheca) at the tip of the abdomen that carries eggs during the incubation period. Each egg capsule usually contains between 30 and 40 young. Two generations are produced in one year (spring and fall) 3. It receives a Medium (2) 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: Luridiblatta trivittata is not expected to lower crop yields or crop value because it is not an agricultural pest. It receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

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: Luridiblatta trivittata is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It might trigger new chemical treatments by residents who find infestations inside the home or in gardens. It is not expected to significantly impact cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings. 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 Luridiblatta trivittata  (Three-lined Cockroach):  Medium (10)

Low = 5-8 points

Medium = 9-12 points

High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Luridiblatta trivittata has a localized distribution in California (San Francisco Bay area) and receive Low Score (-1) 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.

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 (9)

Uncertainty:

Luridiblatta trivittata has been present in California since at least 2004.  So far its spread has been limited to the San Francisco Bay area.  Much of California is probably suitable for this species and there is a strong possibility that it will continue to spread.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Luridiblatta trivittata has established a widespread distribution in the San Francisco Bay area. It does not appear to be having a significant economic or environmental impact. Therefore, a “C” rating is justified.


References:
  1. California Plant Pest & Disease Report Vol. 25. 2009. Accessed September 26, 2017.  https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/plant/ppd/PDF/CPPDR_2011_25.pdf
  2. Cockroaches Management Guidelines UC-IMP. Accessed September 26, 2017.  http://ipm.ucanr.edu/PMG/PESTNOTES/pn7467.html
  3. Insect of San Francisco Bay Area. Accessed September 26, 2017. http://isfba.bugpeople.org/sites/CAEB150000/isfbaguide/isfbaSiteGuide.pdf
  4. Orkin pest control. Accessed September 26, 2017. https://www.orkin.com/cockroaches/cockroach-food/
  5. Pest and Damage Record Database, California Department of Food and Agriculture, Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services.
  6. http://phpps.cdfa.ca.gov/user/frmLogon2.aspUSDA phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). Accessed September 7, 2017. 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, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Period: *

1/5/18 – 2/19/18


*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.

Gray Sugarcane Mealybug | Trionymus boninsis (Kuwana)

California Pest Rating Proposal
Image of a Gray Sugarcane Mealybug. Click on image for photo citation.
Click on image for photo citation.
Gray Sugarcane Mealybug | Trionymus boninsis (Kuwana)
Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae
Current Pest Rating:  Q
Proposed Pest Rating: A
Comment Period: 1/5/18 – 2/19/18
Initiating Event:

Trionymus boninsis has been intercepted on January 18, 2017 at a nursery in Los Angles during a regulatory inspection. This species has a temporary Q rating. A pest rating proposal is required to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Trionymus boninsis, known as the gray sugarcane mealybug, is a mealybug species common on sugarcane growing areas of the world. It is generally found on the stem under the leaf blade and tended by various ant species. Trionymus boninsis is currently known to feed on plants of 11 families and 31 genera, and is found often on grasses other than sugarcane, including Sorghum and corn, but also on coconut, Ipomeas and Citrus among others (Williams & Granara de Willink 1992; Garcia Morales et al. 2016).

Worldwide Distribution: Trionymus boninsis is recorded to be present in ASIA, Bonin Islands, Formosa, Japan, AFRICA, Egypt, Mauritius, AUSTRALASIA and PACIFIC ISLANDS, Australia, CarolineIs. Hawaiian islands, Marianas. New Caledonia, New Guinea, NORTH AMERICA, Mexico, United States, CENTRAL AMERICA and WEST INDIES, Panama, West Indies, SOUTH AMERICA, Brazil, Surinam, Venezuela. (CABI 2016).

U.S. Distribution: Trionymus boninsis has been reported only in Florida, Georgia, Louisiana and Mississippi (Garcia Morales et al. 2016).

U.S. Quarantine Interceptions: Trionymus boninsis has been intercepted 13 times at United States ports of entry between 1995 and 2012. This species is commonly collected on sugarcane from every warm part of the world where sugarcane is grown. It is also reported from 10 families of host plants, predominantly species of grasses (Miller et al. 2014).

Official Control: Trionymus boninsis has been listed as a harmful organism by the republic of Korea (USDA APHIS- PCIT 2017).

California Distribution:  Trionymus boninsis has not been found in the natural environment in California.

California Interceptions:  Trionymus boninsis has been found multiple times by CDFA through border station inspections, dog team inspections, and high risk pest exclusion activities and nursery regulatory inspections. Between January 1990 and October 2017, it has been intercepted 10 times.

The risk Trionymus boninsis (gray sugarcane mealybug) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Sugarcane is not commonly grown in California. Grasses are common throughout the state. However Trionymus boninsis attacks grasses in temperate and warm areas. If this species were to get established in state it can attack grasses in deserts areas. It receives a Medium (2) 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: Trionymus boninsis is a common pest of Sugarcane but is also found on other plants in 11 families including many grasses, maize, sorghum and rice. It is also reported to occur on weeds especially Lactuca in the water canals around sugarcane farms (M. Moghaddam 2006).  There is a record of this species on Citrus sp. (Marotta 1987), and there is the chance that it could become established throughout Citrus growing areas in California. It receives a High (3) in this category as some of its potential hosts in California are staple crops.

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: Mealybugs have high reproductive rate and can spread long distances by movement of infested plant parts. Sugarcane mealy bugs can survive for up to four months in the leaf sheaths attached to canes. Several species of ants can help spread the mealybugs from infested to healthy canes. Among other factors affecting the number of mealybugs include rainfall pattern tightness of leaf sheath and incidence of predators and parasites (Inkerman et al. 1986). It receives a High (3) 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: Trionymus boninsis is a widespread pest in sugar cane growing areas of the world. This species also attacks grasses in warm and warm temperate areas. This species could significantly impact cultural practices in citrus, maize and rice growing areas of California. Currently, sugarcane is being planted on a small scale in the Imperial Valley for research (Western farm press, 2001). If boninsis were to establish, it could lower the quality and value of these crops. This species is capable of transmitting Sugarcane bacillifrom badnavirus (SCBV) through infected sugarcane setts. It receives a High (3) in this category

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

Economic Impact: B, 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: Since mealybugs are spread by ants, chemical treatments for ant control may have detrimental environmental impacts because of their slow degradation (Kessing & Mau 2007). If this species were to establish in California, it may trigger new chemical treatments in areas where host grasses are present.

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

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 of Annona/Gray Pineapple Mealybug into California:  High (14)

-Low = 5-8 points

-Medium = 9-12 points

         -High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Trionymus boninsis has not been found in the natural or agricultural environment of California. Therefore, it 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.

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: (14)

Uncertainty:

Trionymus boninsis has been intercepted many times by CDFA through regulatory pathways.  There have not been any recent surveys for Trionymus boninsis. If it goes undetected, there is a good possibility that it can spread in the state based on its rapid dispersal potential. Its main host is sugarcane and although it attacks citrus, maize and rice, it is not known how serious a pest it could be on these crops.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Trionymus boninsis has not been found in the natural or agricultural environment in California. If this species were to become established in California, there could be significant economic and environmental impacts. Based on all the above evidence, an “A” rating is proposed at this time.


References:

CAB International 2016: Dysmicoccus boninsis. [Distribution map]  https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/20056600116

García Morales M, Denno BD, Miller DR, Miller GL, Ben-Dov Y, Hardy NB. 2016.ScaleNet: A literature-based model of scale insect biology and systematics. Database. doi: 10.1093/database/bav118. http://scalenet.info. http://scalenet.info/catalogue/Trionymus%20boninsis/ Accessed 10/23/2017

Inkerman, P.A., N. J. Ashbolt, Mary Carver and D. J. Williams. 1986. Observation on the pink sugarcane mealy bug, Saccharicoccus sacchari (Cockerell) in Australia (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae)  http://www.issct.org/pdf/proceedings/1986/1986%20Inkerman%20Observations%20on%20the%20Pink%20Sugarcane%20Mealybug%20in%20Australia.pdf

Kessing JLM, Mau RFL, 2007. Dysmicoccus neobrevipes (Beardsley). Crop Knowledge Master.  http://www.extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/type/d_neobre.htm

Marotta, S. 1987 An annotated list of the Italian mealybugs. Bollettino del Laboratorio di Entomologia Agraria ‘Filippo Silvestri’. Portici 43: (1986, Supplement): 107-116. 

Miller, D., A. Rung, G. Parikh, G. Venable, A.J. Redford, G.A. Evans, and R.J. Gill. 2014. Scale Insects, Edition 2. USDA APHIS Identification Technology Program (ITP). Fort Collins, CO. Accesed 10/23/2017 http://idtools.org/id/scales/

Moghaddam, M. 2006. The mealybugs of southern Iran (Hem.: Coccoidea: Pseudococcidae). Journal of Entomological Society of Iran, 26(1), 1-11.

Pest and Damage Report Database: Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services, California Department of Food and Agriculture: Accessed 10/19/2017

Western farm press.  2001. Sugarcane: California’s triple threat? http://www.westernfarmpress.com/sugarcane-californias-triple-threat

USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT): Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD), Accessed 10/19/2017  https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/PExD/faces/ReportFormat.jsp


Author:

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

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.


Comment Period: *

1/5/2018 – 2/19/2018


*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.