California Pest Rating for

Xyleborus pfeilii (Ratzeburg)

Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background:  Xyleborus pfeilii is a moderate-sized ambrosia beetle.  Females are 3-3.6 mm in length; males are smaller, but rare (Vandenberg et al., 2010).  Reported host trees include alder, beech, elm, maple, oak, pawpaw (Asimina triloba), poplar, and some conifers (Vandenberg et al., 2010; Wood & Bright, 1992).  A broad range of hosts is characteristic of ambrosia beetles, in contrast to more “typical” phloeophagous (phloem-feeding) scolytines.  As in other ambrosia beetles, the larvae feed on fungus in galleries excavated by adult beetles.  Females mate with males prior to dispersing (Kirkendall & Faccoli, 2010).  Little information is available on the biology of this species, but there is nothing in the literature suggesting that it has a significant economic or environmental impact, even though it is widespread in Europe, where it was apparently introduced almost 200 years ago (Kirkendall & Faccoli, 2010).

Worldwide Distribution:  Xyleborus pfeilii has a wide distribution, and is reported from Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, and New Zealand (Wood & Bright, 1992).  Historically, this species was considered to be native to Europe, Asia, and northern Africa.  Recent work suggests that it is native to Asia but was introduced to Europe at an early date (before 1837) (Kirkendall & Faccoli, 2010).  The species has also been introduced to Canada and the United States, where it is now known to occur in Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, and Oregon (Humble, 2001; Mudge et al., 2001; Vandenberg et al., 2000)).

Official Control:  Xyleborus pfeilii is apparently not under official control by any government.

California Distribution:  Although Xyleborus pfeilii was trapped multiple times in California, there is no information available to suggest that it is still present in the state.

California Interceptions:  Xyleborus pfeilii has been trapped in Sacramento in 2005 (PDR # 1294653) and Placer County in 2003 (1368629 and 1368628).

The risk Xyleborus pfeilii would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Xyleborus pfeilii occurs in areas with temperate and Mediterranean climates (Kirkendall & Faccoli, 2010). The beetle is probably capable of becoming established in much of California.  This species has been reported to feed on many tree genera; members of these genera are distributed across California.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: The reported hosts of Xyleborus pfeilii include multiple genera of broadleaf as well as coniferous trees. A broad host range is typical of ambrosia beetles.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: There is evidence suggesting that ambrosia beetles that have brother-sister mating, which is the case with pfeilii, have an enhanced ability to disperse and colonize new areas. A single female can found a new population, and she does not have to be fertilized.  She can produce sons from unfertilized eggs and mate with them.  Movement of infested firewood would achieve rapid, long-distance dispersal.  In addition, X. pfeilii flies (specimens have been caught with funnel traps) (Humble, 2001; Mudge et al., 2001).  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: Xyleborus pfeilii does not appear to have any recognized economic impact, even though it was introduced to much of Europe and has been present there for almost 200 years.  There is some doubt that economically-important trees in California would be significantly impacted, considering that most such trees are probably members of genera well-represented in Europe, and this beetle is apparently not a significant pest there.  There is the chance that it could vector a plant-pathogenic fungus to economically-important trees.  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: Xyleborus pfeilii is not known to have had an environmental impact in Europe. There is a chance, however, that this species could have a different impact in the environment of California, where there are tree species not found in Europe.  Ambrosia beetles are less constrained in their host plant choices, and this makes it more difficult to predict what trees might be attacked in a new environment.  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 Xyleborus pfeilii: 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: Although there are a few trapping records of this beetle from more than ten years ago, there is no further evidence of its occurrence in the state of 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:

There is uncertainty regarding two components of this pest rating proposal.  First, there is uncertainty regarding the possible presence of this species in the state.  This beetle was trapped multiple times in two counties.  There do not appear to have been any collections of this species in California since the last of these trappings in 2005, and it is presumed that it is not established in the state.  Second, there is uncertainty regarding the possible impact of this species in California.  Lack of impact in Europe does not mean this species could not have economic and/or environmental impacts in California.  Part of this uncertainty is the possibility of X. pfeilii interacting with plant-pathogenic fungal species that are already present in California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

There is no evidence that Xyleborus pfeilii causes economic or environmental damage anywhere it is known to have been introduced.  This includes the large area it has invaded in Europe over the past two centuries.  However, it seems that a cautious approach is best with possible forest pests.  The behavior of this beetle may be very different in the environments of California.  At least one introduced species in the genus Xyleborus, X. glabratus, has become a serious pest species in the southeastern United States; it is having a significant impact on the environment and it threatens the avocado industry (Hughes et al., 2016).  The fungus symbiosis in this genus raises special concerns; X. pfeilii could bring with it new (to California) pathogenic fungi, or it could interact in a new way with fungi already here.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.

References:

Kirkendall, L.R. & Faccoli, M.  2010.  Bark beetles and pinhole borers (Curculionidae, Scolytinae, Platypodinae) alien to Europe.  Zoo Keys.  56: 227-251.

Hughes, M.A., Smith, J.A., & Coyle, D.R.  2016.  Biology, ecology, and management of laurel wilt and the redbay ambrosia beetle.  Southern Regional Extension Forestry Forest Health.  November 2016: 1-6.

Humble, L.M.  2001.  Invasive bark and wood-boring beetles in British Columbia, Canada.  Pages 69-77 in R.I. Alfaro, K.R. Day, S.M. Salom, K.S.S Nair, H.F. Evans, A.M. Liebhold, F. Lieutier, M. Wagner, K. Futai, & K. Suzuki, editors. Protection of World Forests: Advances in Research, Proceedings: XXI IUFRO World Congress. August 7-12, 2001, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. IUFRO Secretariat, Vienna, IUFRO World Series Vol. 11. 253 p.

Mercado, J.E. 2010. Bark beetle genera of the United States. Colorado State University, USDA-APHIS-PPQ Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, and USDA-FS Rocky Mountain Research Station. http://idtools.org/id/wbb/bbgus

Mudge, A.D., LaBonte, J.R., Johnson, K.J.R., & LaGasa, E.H.  2001.  Exotic woodboring Coleoptera (Micromalthidae, Scolytidae) and Hymenoptera (Xiphyriidae) new to Oregon and Washington.  103(4): 1011-1019.

Vandenberg, N.J., Rabaglia, R.J., & Bright, D.E.  2000.  New records of two Xyleborus (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) in North America.  Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington.  102(1): 62-68.

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

Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/24/18 – 6/8/18

*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.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls 

California Pest Rating for

Black Twig Borer | Xylosandrus compactus (Eichhoff)

Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background: Xylosandrus compactus is a small (adult females are 1.4-1.7 mm long; males are flightless and smaller, 1-1.1 mm long) ambrosia beetle (Wood, 1982).  As in other ambrosia beetles, adults and larvae feed on fungus that grows in galleries excavated by the adult beetle.  Living twigs (less than 2 cm in diameter) of healthy trees and shrubs are attacked (Wood, 1982).  Affected branches wilt and die; the symbiotic fungus may be the cause of much of this damage. Apparently, this damage does not usually result in the death of an adult tree, but death has been reported in seedlings and young trees.  For example, seedlings of mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla) in Peru and soursop (Annona muricata) in Brazil were killed (Delgado and Couturier, 2010; Oliveira et al., 2008).  Non-lethal damage by this beetle still causes economic losses, for instance, in coffee (Bittenbender and Smith, 1999; Burbano et al., 2012).  Xylosandrus compactus is reported to attack hundreds of species (in 62 families) of shrubs and trees.  Hosts include crop and ornamental trees, for example, avocado, sycamore, magnolia, dogwood, coffee, and eucalyptus (Chong et al., 2009; Greco and Wright, 2015).  In Hawaii, a variety of native trees are attacked by this species, including seedlings of Acacia koa (Burbano et al., 2012).  Native trees in Italy were attacked over an area of 13 hectares, and some trees were killed.  Tree species affected include Quercus ilex and Viburnum tinus (Vannini et al., 2017).  Adult female X. compactus mate with males before leaving their developmental gallery, and they can also reproduce via arrhenotokous parthenogenesis (an unmated female lays unfertilized eggs that develop into males; the female mates with her male progeny and then deposits fertilized eggs, which develop into females).

Worldwide Distribution:  Xylosandrus compactus is reported from tropical Africa, Europe, southeast Asia, New Zealand, tropical Pacific islands (including Micronesia), the Caribbean, South America (including Brazil, Guyana, and Peru), and the United States (Hawaii and the southeastern United States) (Wood, 2007).  The species is native to Asia, and was presumably introduced to the other portions of its current distribution, including the United States (Burbano et al., 2012).

Official Control:  Xylosandrus compactus is listed as a quarantine pest by Brazil, Israel, and the European Union (EPPO, 2017).

California Distribution:  Xylosandrus compactus is not known to occur in California (Bright and Stark, 1973; Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network).

California Interceptions:  Xylosandrus compactus has been intercepted at least six times in California on shipments of plants from Hawaii (PDR # 008573, 1238977, 1239464, 1335578, 1225854, and 053234).

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

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Xylosandrus compactus has become established in many parts of the world, from Mediterranean Europe to tropical South America. This suggests that it has a wide climatic tolerance.  The beetle feeds on hundreds of species of plants in 62 families.  These facts suggest that compactus could become established over a wide portion of California.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Xylosandrus compactus is known to feed on hundreds of species of plants in 62 families. Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Female Xylosandrus compactus Sibling mating and parthenogenesis means that a single adult female emerging from its gallery can establish a new population.  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: Xylosandrus compactus is considered an economically-significant pest.  The species attacks hundreds of species of plants and poses a threat to economically-important trees, including avocado and coffee, both of which are currently grown in California.  Damage to these trees could lower crop yield and increase production costs.  The beetle can kill tree seedlings, so poses a problem for tree nurseries and the establishment of trees in forests.  In addition, like all ambrosia beetles, compactus carries fungi that may be pathogenic. If established in California, this beetle could develop an association with other species of pathogenic fungi already present in the state.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

Economic Impact:  A, B, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 3

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Xylosandrus compactus attacks a diversity of plants and would be expected to damage numerous species of plants in California if it became established here. The fact that it is known to attack such a wide variety of plants means it is likely that some endangered plants could also be at risk.  This risk is demonstrated by the fact that this beetle attacked native trees in Italy, including species of Quercus and Viburnum, genera which include native California species.  This beetle attacks ornamental trees, causing dieback of branches (Hayato, 2007).  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, 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 Xylosandrus compactus: 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 compactus is not known to occur in California.  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

7) The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (15)

Uncertainty:

There is little uncertainty regarding the potential for Xylosandrus compactus to become established in California.  There also seems to be little uncertainty regarding the potential of this species to become a pest in this state, because it has done so in other areas to which it was introduced and it attacks such a wide variety of plants.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Xylosandrus compactus is a highly polyphagous pest that has demonstrated an ability to become established in many areas worldwide and impact crop, ornamental, and native plants.  The species is not known to be present in California, and its potential introduction to this state poses a risk of economic and environmental damage.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.

References:

Bittenbender, H. C. and V. E. Smith. 1999. Growing coffee in Hawaii. College of tropical agriculture and human resources. University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI.  40 pp.

Bright Jr., D.E. and R.W. Stark.  1973.  The Bark and Ambrosia Beetles of California.  University of California Press.  169 pp.

Burbano, E.G., Wright, M.G., Gillette, N.E., Mori, S., Dudley, N., Jones, T., and M. Kaufmann.  2012.  Efficacy of traps, lures, and repellents for Xylosandrus compactus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) and other ambrosia beetles on Coffea arabica plantations and Acacia koa nurseries in Hawaii.  Environmental Entomology.  41(1): 133-140.

Chong, J.-H., Reid, L., and M. Williamson.  2009.  Distribution, host plants, and damage of the black twig borer, Xylosandrus compactus (Eichhoff), in South Carolina.  Journal of Agricultural and Urban Entomology.  26(4): 199-208.

Delgado, C. and G. Couturier.  2010.  Xylosandrus compactus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae” Scolytinae), a new pest of Swietenia macrophylla in the Peruvian Amazon.  Boletin de la Sociedad Entomolόgica Aragonesa.  47: 441-443.

EPPO.  2017.  EPPO Global Database.  Accessed October 12, 2017. https://gd.eppo.int

Greco, E.B. and M.G. Wright.  2015.  Ecology, biology, and management of Xylosandrus compactus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) with emphasis on coffee in Hawaii.  Journal of Integrated Pest Management.  6(1): 1-8.

Hayato, M.  2007.  Note on the dieback of Cornus florida caused by Xylosandrus compactus.  Bulletin of the Department of Forest Microbiology, Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute.  6(1): 59-63.

Oliveira, C.M., Flechtmann, C.A.H., and M.R. Frizzas.  2008.  First record of Xylosandrus compactus (Eichhoff) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) on soursop, Annona muricata L. (Annonaceae) in Brazil, with a list of host plants.  The Coleopterists Bulletin.  62(1): 45-48.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed February 15, 2018. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu

Vannini, A., Contarini, M., Faccoli, M., Della Valle, M., Rodriguez, C.M., Mazzetto, T., Guarneri, D., Vettraino, A.M., and S. Speranza.  2017.  First report of the ambrosia beetle Xylosandrus compactus and associated fungi in the Mediterranean maquis in Italy, and new host–pest

Associations.  EPPO Bulletin.  0(0): 1-4.

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/24/18 – 6/8/18

*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.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls 

California Pest Rating for

Black Timber Bark Beetle | Xylosandrus germanus (Blandford)

Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background: Xylosandrus germanus is a moderate-sized (2-2.3 mm in length), dark brown ambrosia beetle (Wood, 1982).  The beetle is reported to feed on over 200 species of broadleaved and coniferous trees, including species in the following genera: Acer, Carya, Cornus, Fagus, Fraxinus, Juglans, Malus, Myrica, Liriodendron, Pinus, Prunus, Pyrus, Quercus, and Ulmus. It feeds on live trees and cut wood (Wood, 1982).  This beetle has been reported to attack a variety of economically-important trees, including chestnut in Tennessee (Oliver and Mannion, 2001), flood-stressed flowering dogwood in Ohio (Ranger et al., 2015), walnut (Katovitch, 2014; Reed et al., 2015), and apple in New York (Agnello et al., 2016).  It has been suggested that this beetle may primarily attack trees that are stressed, even if this stress is not visually apparent (Ranger et al., 2015).  If this is the case, one possible explanation is that healthy trees resist the establishment of ambrosia fungus.  Besides the symbiotic ambrosia fungus, other fungi have been found in the galleries of X. germanus, including Fusarium species, which can be pathogenic (Ranger et al., 2016).  Thus, it is possible that X. germanus is involved with the spread of plant pathogenic fungi.   This beetle has also been reported to damage cut spruce and fir timber in Switzerland (Graf and Manser, 2000).  Adult females X. germanus mate with males before leaving their gallery, and they can also reproduce via arrhenotokous parthenogenesis: an unmated female lays unfertilized eggs that develop into males. The female mates with her male progeny and then deposits fertilized eggs, which develop into females (Wood, 1982).

Worldwide Distribution:  Xylosandrus germanus is native to Asia (Japan, Taiwan, Korea, China, and Vietnam).  It has been introduced to Europe, Canada (British Columbia), and the United States (Oregon, though possibly eradicated in that state, Hawaii, and the eastern United States) (LaBonte et al., 2005).

Official Control: Xylosandrus germanus does not appear to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  Xylosandrus germanus is not known to be present in the state of California (Bright and Stark, 1973; Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network).

California Interceptions: Xylosandrus germanus has apparently not been intercepted on incoming shipments in California, but was trapped in 2003 in Los Angeles County with a Lindgren funnel (PDR # 1368627).  This is the only available record for California, and the species is presumed to not be present in the state.

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

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Xylosandrus germanus has demonstrated an ability to become established over a large area worldwide, and a large portion of California has a climate suitable for the establishment of this species. The list of reported hosts for germanus is extensive (>200 species) and includes genera that are broadly distributed across the state, both as native forest trees as well as ornamental and crop trees.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Xylosandrus germanus is reported to feed on over 200 species of plants in many genera. Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Adult female Xylosandrus germanus Sibling mating and arrhenotokous parthenogenesis mean a single female is capable of founding a population.  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: This species has been reported to attack a range of ornamental and fruit (e.g., apple) trees.  Even if attacks do not result in the death of the tree, growth and aesthetics are impacted.  This species causes damage to cut timber as well.  All ambrosia beetles carry fungi; besides the symbiotic fungus, germanus could vector other, potentially pathogenic fungi.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Economic Impact:  A, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 2

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Although Xylosandrus germanus was introduced to large areas of Europe and the United States and has been present there for decades, environmental impact has been minimal. 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 Xylosandrus germanus: 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: Xylosandrus germanus is not known to be present in the state of California.  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

There appears to be a degree of uncertainty regarding the ability of Xylosandrus germanus to attack healthy trees or if only trees that are stressed or compromised are attacked.  If this species only attacks weakened trees, then its potential economic impact may be limited in time and space, although extreme weather associated with climate change could lead to a greater impact.  The lack of evidence of environmental impacts resulting from this species may be an artefact of a lack of study in this area.  Therefore, environmental impact may have been underestimated in this proposal.  The ability of this species (and perhaps ambrosia beetles in general) to carry fungi other than the symbiotic ambrosia fungus means that X. germanus could play a role in the transmission of other tree diseases, perhaps ones that are already present in California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Xylosandrus germanus is an ambrosia beetle that does not appear to be established in California, and it has a demonstrated ability to damage trees.  As already stated, there is uncertainty regarding the ability of X. germanus to attack completely healthy trees.  The author of this proposal is taking a cautious approach.  If significant numbers of trees, whether they be in an ornamental, fruit, or forest setting, are weakened by drought, for instance, and are ultimately killed as a result of ambrosia beetle attack, the economic or environmental impact would be no less important and the ambrosia beetles would have played a critical role in the damage.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.

References:

Agnello, A., Breth, D., Davis, A., and E. Tee.  2016.  Ambrosia beetles (Xylosandrus germanus) infestations and management trials in high-density apple orchards.  Proceedings from the Empire State Producers Expo, Syracuse, N.Y. http://www.hort.cornell.edu/expo/2016proceedings.php

Bright Jr., D.E. and R.W. Stark.  1973.  The Bark and Ambrosia Beetles of California.  University of California Press.  169 pp.

Graf, E. and P. Manser.  2000.  Beitrag zum eingeschleppten schwarzen nutzholzborkenkäfer

Xylosandrus germanus. Biologie und schadenpotential an im wald gelagertem rundholz im vergleich zu Xyloterus lineatus und Hylecoetus dermestoides.  Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Forstwesen.  151: 271-281.

Katovich, S.  2014.  Insects attacking black walnut in the Midwestern United States.  pp. 121-126.  In: (C.H. Michler, P.M. Pijut, J.W. Van Sambeek, M.V. Coggeshall, J. Seifert, K. Woeste, R. Overton, F. Ponser Jr., eds.) Black walnut in a new century, proceedings of the 6th Walnut Council research symposium; 2004 July 25-28; Lafayette, IN. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-243. St. Paul, MN: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station. 188 pp.

LaBonte, J.R., Mudge, A.D., and K.J.R. Johnson.  2005.  Nonindigenous woodboring Coleoptera (Cerambycidae, Curculionidae: Scolytinae) new to Oregon and Washington, 1999-2002: Consequences of the intracontinental movement of raw wood products and solid wood packing materials.  Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington.  107(3): 554-564.

Oliver, J.B. and C.M. Mannion.  2001.  Ambrosia beetle (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) species attacking chestnut and captured in ethanol-baited traps in middle Tennessee.  Environmental Entomology.  30(5): 909-918.

Ranger, C.M., Reding, M.E., Schultz, P.B., Oliver, J.B., Frank, S.D., Addesso, K.M., Chong, J.H., Sampson, B., Werle, C., Gill, S., and C. Krause.  2016.  Biology, ecology, and management of nonnative ambrosia beetles (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) in ornamental plant nurseries.  Journal of Integrated Pest Management.  7(1): 1-23.

Ranger, C.M., Schultz, P.B., Frank, S.D., Chong, J.H., and M.E. Reding.  2015.  Non-native ambrosia beetles as opportunistic exploiters of living but weakened trees.  PLOS One.  1-21.

Reed, S.E., Juzwik, J., English, J.T., and M.D. Ginzel.  2015.  Colonization of artificially stressed black walnut trees by ambrosia beetle, bark beetle, and other weevil species (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in Indiana and Missouri.  Environmental Entomology.  44(6): 1455-1464.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed February 14, 2018. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu

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

Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/24/18 – 6/8/18

*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.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls 

California Pest Rating for 

Trypodendron signatum (Fabricius)

Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction:

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

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

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

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

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

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

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

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

Economic Impact:  A, B, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 3

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

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

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

Environmental Impact: A, B

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: 3

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

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

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

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

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

References:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/20/18 – 6/4/18

*NOTE:

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

Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls 

California Pest Rating for

Beetle | Anomala ausonia Erichson

Coleoptera

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction:

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

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

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

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

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

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

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

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

Economic Impact:  A, B, C

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 3

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

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

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

Environmental Impact:  A, D, E

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

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

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

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

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

Score the pest for Environmental Impact.

Environmental Impact Score: 3

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

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

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

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

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

References:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/19/18 – 6/3/18

*NOTE:

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

Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls 

California Pest Rating for

Beetle | Dyscinetus dubius (Olivier)

Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction:

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

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

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

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

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

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

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

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

Economic Impact:  A, B, C

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 3

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

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

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

Environmental Impact:  D

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: 2

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

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

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

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

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

References:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/13/18 – 5/28/18

*NOTE:

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

Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls 

California Pest Rating  for

Dwarf Siberian Pine Beetle | Dryocoetes pini

Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background: This bark beetle measures approximately 2.5 mm in length.  Adults tunnel through the phloem (inner bark), where eggs are laid.  The larvae feed on the phloem.  This species has been reported to feed on pine (Pinus spp.), larch (Larix spp.), fir (Abies spp.), and spruce (Picea spp.) (European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization; Niijima, 1909).  The beetle is apparently not known as a significant pest in its native range (European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization).  Dryocoetes species are usually considered “secondary pests” and only attack dead, injured, or otherwise compromised host trees (Vega & Hofstetter, 2014).  At least one species, Dryocoetes confusus Swaine, is a serious pest of fir trees; it is apparently the most destructive member of the genus in North America (CABI,  2017; Hansen, 1996; Vega & Hofstetter, 2014).  The pathogenic fungus Grosmannia dryocoetis is associated with D. confuses (Vega & Hofstetter, 2014).  Similar fungi may also be associated with other Dryocoetes species, including D. pini.

Worldwide Distribution: Dryocoetes pini occurs in the Russian Far East, China, South Korea, and Japan (European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization; Park, 2016; Shiraki, 1952).  The species is not known to be present in North America.

Official Control: This species is not known to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution: This species does not appear to be present in California (Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network).

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

The risk Dryocoetes pini would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: This species appears to occur primarily in areas with a temperate climate. It is possible that it could thrive in a large portion of California if it was introduced.  The tree genera that this species is known to feed upon occur throughout California.  Therefore, Dryocoetes pini 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: As stated above, Dryocoetes pini has been reported from several coniferous genera. Therefore, pini 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: Dryocoetes pini is presumably capable of flight. Movement of wood (especially firewood) is a likely pathway for the human-aided dispersal of this species if it was to be introduced.  Reproductive potential is unknown for this species.  Therefore, pini 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: Dryocoetes pini has been reported to be associated with several genera of conifers, including Pinus.  There is a possibility that, if this species was to be introduced to California, it could have a different impact than what is observed in its native range, including killing trees, which could reduce yield of timber.  Significant infestations also have the potential to impact the recreational value of forests.  Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

Economic Impact:  A

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: Major outbreaks of bark beetles have the potential to kill large numbers of trees, which can have long-lasting impacts. Such impacts could include changes in forest composition, destabilization of soil, and even fire dynamics (Jenkins et al., 2008).  There are rare or threatened conifers in California that could be impacted by the introduction of pini.  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 Dryocoetes pini: Medium (11)

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: Dryocoetes pini is not known to occur in California.  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

7) The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: Medium (11)

Uncertainty:

There is little information available on this species, so it was necessary to draw upon information regarding other species in the genus as well as other bark beetle genera.  There are also no examples of introductions involving this species, so assessment of the impacts of this species requires speculation.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Bark beetles can have significant impacts on forests.  One native species in the genus Dryocoetes, D. confusus, is an important pest in western forests.  Even though there is little information on the biology of D. pini, it seems justifiable to use caution and assign it an “A” rating.

References:

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

European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization.  Forest pests on the territories of the former USSR.

https://www.eppo.int/QUARANTINE/special_topics/forestry_project/EPPOforestry_project.pdf

Hansen, E.M.  1996.  Western balsam bark beetle, Dryocoetes confusus Swaine, flight periodicity in northern Utah.  Great Basin Naturalist.  56(4): 348-359.

Jenkins, M.J., Hebertson, E., Page, W., & Jorgensen, C.A.  2008.  Bark beetles, fuels, fires and implications for forest management in the Intermountain West.  Forest Ecology and Management.  254: 16-34.

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.

Shiraki, T.  1952.  Catalogue of injurious insects in Japan.  Preliminary Study Number 71.  General Headquarters, Supreme Commander for the Allied Forces, Economic and Scientific Section, Natural Resources Division.  133 pp.

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

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

Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/9/18 – 5/24/18

*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.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls