Category Archives: Hemiptera

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Ceroplastes stellifer (Westwood): Stellate Scale

June 24, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Ceroplastes stellifer (Westwood): Stellate Scale

(synonym Vinsonia stellifera)

Hemiptera: Coccidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Ceroplastes stellifer is regularly intercepted by CDFA and is presently assigned a temporary rating of “Q”. A pest rating proposal is required to determine a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Ceroplastes stellifer is a polyphagous soft scale insect that feeds on a variety of plants including many crops and ornamentals. Some of the known hosts include: Anacardiaceae: mango (Mangifera indica¹), Mangifera sp.¹; Apocynaceae: blackboard tree (Alstonia scholaris¹), Ervatamia orientalis¹, frangipani (Plumeria acutifolia¹); Araliaceae: Schefflera sp.¹; Arecaceae: coconut (Cocos nucifera¹), Cocos sp.¹; Aspleniaceae: Asplenium sp.¹; Clusiaceae: Clusia sp.¹, purple mangosteen (Garcinia mangostana¹), bitter garcinia (Garcinia spicata¹), kokum (Garcinia indica¹), Garcinia sp.¹; Ebenaceae: velvet apple (Diospyros discolor¹); Euphorbiaceae: bishop wood (Bischofia javanica¹); Lauraceae: camphor tree (Cinnamomum camphora¹), avocado (Persea americana¹); Liliaceae: asparagus fern (Asparagus sprengeri¹); Moraceae: Artocarpus integra¹, banyan (Ficus benghalensis¹), Ficus antimesma¹; Musaceae: Musa sp.¹; Myrtaceae: Eucalyptus sp.¹, jambos (Eugenia jambos¹), jambul (Eugenia jambolana¹), water apple (Eugenia aquea¹), Eugenia sp.¹, java plum (Syzygium cuminii¹); Orchidaceae: blood red broughtonia (Broughtonia sanguinea¹), Cattleya sp.¹, Cypripedium niveum¹, fringed star orchid (Epidendrum ciliare¹), Epidendrum sp.¹, Stanhopea sp.¹; Phyllanthaceae: Chinese-laurel (Antidesma bunius¹); Polypodiaceae: Adiantum sp.¹; Primulaceae: coralberry (Ardisia polycephala¹); Rutaceae: grapefruit (Citrus grandis¹), bitter orange (Citrus aurantium¹), Citrus sp.¹, orangeberry (Glycosmis pentaphylla¹), Jambolana sp.¹; Sapotaceae: sapodilla (Achras sapota¹), Lucuma caimito¹, Palaquium sp.¹; Strelitziaceae: traveller’s palm (Ravenala madagascariensis¹); Zingiberaceae: red ginger (Alpinia purpurata¹). The scale has also been found feeding on additional hosts^3,4. Ceroplastes stellifer may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: The native range of Ceroplastes stellifer is uncertain but early records are from the Caribbean¹. It is now widespread in parts of Australia, the Pacific, Africa, Asia, and South America¹. In the United States it is found in Florida, Alabama, and Georgia¹. Interceptions indicate that it may also be present in Hawaii.

Official Control: Ceroplastes stellifer is listed as a harmful organism by China, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Mexico (see Vinsonia stellifera)².

California Distribution: Ceroplastes stellifer has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: From 1987 through 2015 Ceroplastes stellifer was intercepted 251 times by CDFA’s high risk programs and dog teams. Interceptions have occurred on plants and fresh plant parts from Hawaii, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Jamaica, and Florida.

The risk Ceroplastes stellifer (stellate scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: The known distribution of Ceroplastes stellifer is primarily tropical and subtropical. The scale is expected to be able to establish throughout the warmer parts of California and 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: Ceroplastes stellifer is known to feed on a wide variety of plants in at least 21 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: Scale insects have high reproductive rates and may disperse long distances when infested plants or plant parts are moved. They may also be spread by wind or by hitchhiking on plants, animals, or equipment. Ceroplastes stellifer 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: Ceroplastes stellifer is not documented reducing crop yields. It might reduce the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants with its presence and increase crop production costs in nurseries and orchards. It is not expected to change cultural practices, vector other organisms, injure animals, or disrupt water supplies. Stellate scale receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Ceroplastes stellifer is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It is not expected to feed on any threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats. It might trigger new chemical treatments in orchards and the nursery industry and by residents who find infested plants unsightly. Host plants of the scale are common as ornamentals and in home gardens and might be significantly affected by this pest. Stellate scale receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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 Ceroplastes stellifer (Stellate Scale): 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: Ceroplastes stellifer has not 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 (13)

Uncertainty:

There have not been any recent surveys for stellate scale. It could be present in some localities.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Ceroplastes stellifer has never been found in California and is likely to have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to establish in the state. An “A” rating is justified.

References:

¹ Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy. ScaleNet. http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/coccidae/Ceroplastesstellifer.htm

http://scalenet.info/validname/Vinsonia/stellifera/

² USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

³Scale Insect Fact Sheet: Ceroplastes stillifer (Westwood). http://idtools.org/id/scales/factsheet.php?name=6919

⁴ Hodgson, Chris J. and Ana L.B.G. Peronti. 2012. A revision of the wax scale insects (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea: Ceroplastinae) of the Afrotropical region. Zootaxa 3372: 265pp. http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/list/2012/3372.html

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, 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

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Dysmicoccus texensis (Tinsley): A Mealybug

June 22, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Dysmicoccus texensis (Tinsley): A Mealybug

Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Dysmicoccus texensis is regularly intercepted by CDFA and presently has a temporary rating of “Q”. A pest rating proposal is required to assign a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Dysmicoccus texensis is a mealybug that is often found feeding on plant roots, where large populations prevent water and nutrient absorption, weaken plants, and reduce crop yields³. It is considered a pest of great pest importance on coffee in Brasil³(Rubiaceae: Coffea sp.¹). It has also been observed feeding, sometimes on aerial plant parts, on other hosts including: Anacardiaceae: Mangifera indica¹; Araceae: Dieffenbachia sp.¹; Bromeliaceae: Vriesea macrostachya¹; Euphorbiaceae: Manihot esculenta¹; Fabaceae: Acacia cornigera¹, Acacia veracruzensis¹, Acacia sphaerocephala¹, Acacia farnesiana¹, Inga inga¹, Inga ruiziana¹, Inga punctata¹, Inga laurina¹, Trifolium sp.¹; Malvaceae: Theobroma cacao¹, Theobroma amplexicaule¹, Meliaceae: Guarea sp.¹; Musaceae: Musa textilis¹, Musa paradisiaca¹; Myrtaceae: Psidium guajava¹; Polygonaceae: Coccoloba sp.¹; Rutaceae: Citrus latifolia¹; Citrus aurantium¹; Solanaceae: Solanum sp.¹. Coffee root mealybug may be transported long distances through commerce in infested plants or plant parts.

Worldwide Distribution: Dysmicoccus texensis is native to the Neotropical region including southern Texas, Mexico, Central America, and South America¹. It is also found in the Bahamas, Jamaica, Puerto Rico, Trinidad, and the U.S. Virgin Islands¹.

Official Control: Dysmicoccus texensis is not known to be under official control in any other states or nations².

California Distribution: Dysmicoccus texensis has never been found in the environment in California.

California Interceptions: Dysmicoccus texensis was intercepted 44 times by CDFA’s border stations, dog teams, and high risk programs between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2014. The mealybug was found on limes, grapefruit, bananas, bell peppers, sugar apple, and aerial parts of unidentified plants.

The risk Dysmicoccus texensis (coffee root mealybug) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Host plants of Dysmicoccus texensis are commonly grown in California as both crops and ornamentals. Dysmicoccus texensis is likely to establish wherever hosts are grown. It receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Dysmicoccus texensis is known to feed on at least 24 species of plants in 13 families. It receives a Medium (2) 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: Mealybugs have high reproductive rates and may be dispersed long distances by the movement of infested plants or fresh plant parts. They may also be dispersed locally by wind or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or animals. Dysmicoccus texensis 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: Although known hosts of Dysmicoccus texensis include economically important crops such as Citrus and Solanum, it is primarily considered a pest of coffee. Yields of other crops are not likely to be significantly reduced. However, the mealybug may increase production costs in the nursery industry. It has potential to lower the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants with its presence. Although D. texensis is not known to be considered a quarantine pest, several of California’s trading partners are significant producers of coffee. Since the mealybug is well documented as a serious pest of coffee, it is reasonable to expect that its presence could trigger disruptions of fresh fruit exports. Dysmicoccus texensis receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Dysmicoccus texensis is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. Trifolium is a host of D. texensis and several species of Trifolium are listed as threatened or endangered plants in California. These potential hosts include showy Indian clover (Trifolium amoenum), Pacific Grove clover (Trifolium polyodon), and Monterey clover (Trifolium trichocalyx). Dysmicoccus texensis is not expected to disrupt critical habitats. The mealybug may trigger new chemical treatments in orchards and the nursery industry. It is not expected to have significant impacts on cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings. Dysmicoccus texensis receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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 Dysmicoccus texensis: 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: Dysmicoccus texensis has never been found in the environment 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 have not been any recent surveys for Dysmicoccus texensis. It is possible that it could be present in some parts of the state.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Dysmicoccus texensis has never been found in the environment California. Its entry to the state is likely to have significant economic and environmental impacts. An “A” rating is justified.

References:

¹ Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy. ScaleNet. Dysmicoccus texensis is the valid name. http://scalenet.info/validname/Dysmicoccus/texensis/

²USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

³Neves, Pedro Manuel Oliveira Janeiro, Lenira Viana Costa Santa-Cecília, Jair Campos de Moraes, Luís Cláudio Paterno Silveira, and Alcides Moino Junior. 2006. Coffee root mealybug biology control entomopathogenic nematodes. Universidade Federal de Lavras. http://www.openthesis.org/documents/Biologics-aspects-Dysmicoccus-texensis-Tinsley-331392.html

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, 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

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Aleurodicus dispersus Russell (Spiraling Whitefly)

June 22, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Aleurodicus dispersus Russell (Spiraling Whitefly)

Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

In October 2013, USDA released a DEEP report proposing to deregulate Aleurodicus dispersus (spiraling whitefly). The insect is currently “Q”-rated by CDFA, so a pest rating proposal is needed to determine future direction.

History & Status:

Background: Spiraling whitefly is highly polyphagous, feeding on plants in 49 different plant families. Known hosts include such economically important pests as avocado, citrus, eggplant, pepper, rose, Prunus spp., and palms. Interceptions indicate that the whitefly often moves long distances in the trade of plants and flowers.

Worldwide Distribution: The native range of spiraling whitefly is believed to be the tropical Americas. It was described from Florida in 1965 from specimens collected as early as 1950. Since then it has been found to have a widespread distribution including Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and Mexico. Furthermore, it is reported in numerous nations in Central America, the Caribbean, South America, Europe and the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and Oceania.

Official Control: Arizona has a state quarantine against all citrus whiteflies. Aleurodicus dispersus is also listed as a harmful organism by Antigua and Barbuda, Chile, China, French Polynesia, Grenada, Guatemala, Honduras, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Korea, Mexico, Morocco, and New Zealand².

California Distribution: Spiraling whitefly has not been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: Spiraling whitefly is frequently intercepted on shipments of plants, leaves, and flowers from Hawaii and Florida. It has been intercepted more than 1300 times since 11/29/2000.

The risk spiraling whitefly would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Spiraling whitefly has been present in Florida for over 60 years but has not spread beyond the central portion of the state. Primarily a tropical species, it is reportedly limited by cold temperatures. In California the whitefly would likely be limited to southern and coastal areas. Spiraling whitefly 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: Spiraling whitefly is a highly polyphagous insect that is known to feed on plants from 49 different plant families. The whitefly 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: Whiteflies reproduce rapidly and can be spread long distances by wind or through the movement of plants and flowers. Spiraling whitefly 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: Spiraling whitefly was originally considered an economic pest in Hawaii when it was introduced. However, damage is now limited as a successful biological control agent was introduced. In the absence of this biological control agent in California, the whitefly may be expected to lower crop yield by both sucking juices from plants and reducing their photosynthetic capacity by contaminating leaf surfaces with sooty mold. They may also lower crop value by triggering treatment and/or disfiguring nursery stock with their presence and with sooty mold. Furthermore, Arizona maintains a quarantine against all citrus whiteflies and many of California’s trading partners list Aleurodicus dispersus as a harmful organism. This could lead to disruptions in markets for California citrus. Spiraling whitefly receives a High(3) in this category.

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

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Rosa minutafolia (small-leaved rose) is listed as an endangered species in California and is a potential host for spiraling whitefly. The whitefly may also trigger additional chemical treatments. The whitefly receives a High(3) in this category.

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

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 Aleurodicus dispersus (Spiraling Whitefly): 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: Spiraling whitefly has not been found in the environment 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(14)

Uncertainty:

Spiraling whitefly has been intercepted more than a thousand times in California. However, it has never been found in the environment. This may indicate that environmental conditions in the state are unfavorable for establishment of the species.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

In the absence of a successful biological control program in California, spiraling whitefly is expected to have significant economic and environmental impacts. An “A”-rating is justified.

References:

¹Zlotina, Marina 2013. Deregulation Evaluation of Established Pests (DEEP); DEEP Report on Aleurodicus dispersus Russell: Spiralling Whitefly

² USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, 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

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (Cooley): Magnolia White Scale

June 21, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (Cooley): Magnolia White Scale

Hemiptera: Diaspididae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is frequently intercepted by CDFA and requires a pest rating proposal to support its pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is a highly polyphagous armored scale insect that is a pest of many ornamental plants in the nursery industry¹. The scales live on the upper and lower leaf surfaces and green stems of plants². Infestations can cause loss of vigor, spots on foliage, deformation of infested plant parts, loss of leaves, and may lead to death of plants². Known hosts include: Actinidiaceae: Actinidia spp.^3,4; Adoxaceae: Viburnum sp.^3,4; Agavaceae: Yucca sp.³; Amaryllidaceae: Agapanthus sp.^3,4, Eurycles sp.^3,4; Anacardiaceae: Anacardium occidentale^3,4, Campnosperma brevipetiolata^3,4, Mangifera indica^3,4, Mangifera sp.^3,4; Annonaceae: Annona squamosa^3,4, Artabotrys hexapetutus³, Canangium odoratum^3,4; Apocynaceae: Adenium sp.^3,4, Allamanda sp.^3,4, Alyxia olivaeformis^3,4, Calotropis gigantea⁴; Nerium indicum^3,4, Nerium oleander^3,4, Nerium sp.^3,4, Plumeria acuminata^3,4, Plumeria acutifolia^3,4, Plumeria sp.^3,4, Thevetia peruviana^3,4, Trachelospermum asiaticum^3,4, Trachelospermum jasminoides^3,4, Trachelospermum sp.^3,4, Willughbeia sp.^3,4; Aquifoliaceae: Ilex cinerea³, Ilex crenata^3,4, Ilex integra^3,4, Ilex latifolia^3,4, Ilex sp.^3,4, Ilex viridis³; Araceae: Acorus gramineus^3,4, Alocasia sp.^3,4, Philodendron sp.^3,4; Araliaceae: Fatsia japonica^3,4, Hedera canariensis^3,4, Hedera helix^3,4, Hedera rhombea^3,4; Arecaceae: Archontophoenix alexandrae^3,4, Areca catechu^3,4, Areca sp.^3,4, Arecastrum romanzoffianum^3,4, Arenga engleri^3,4, Butia capitata^3,4, Caryota sp.^3,4, Chamaerops humilis^3,4, Chrysalidocarpus dictyospermi^3,4, Chrysalidocarpus lutescens^3,4, Chrysalidocarpus sp.^3,4, Clinostigma savoryana^3,4, Clinostigma sp.^3,4, Cocos nucifera^3,4, Cocos sp.^3,4, Corypha elata^3,4, Elaeis sp.^3,4, Howeia sp.^3,4, Livistona sp.^3,4, Neodypsis baroni^3,4, Nipa fruticans^3,4, Phoenix roebelenii^3,4, Rhapis humilis^3,4, Sabal mexicana^3,4, Seaforthia sp.^3,4, Serenoa repens^3,4, Trachycarpus sp.^3,4; Asclepiadaceae: Calotropis gigantean³; Asparagaceae: Asparagus sp.^3,4, Dracena sp.⁴, Yucca sp.⁴; Asteraceae: Helianthus annuus^3,4, Helianthus sp.^3,4, Pyrrhopappus carolinianus^3,4; Berberidaceae: Nandina domestica^3,4; Bignoniaceae: Tabebuia pentaphylla^3,4; Bromeliaceae: Bromelia sp.^3,4, Vriesea sp.^3,4; Burseraceae: Canarium album³; Buxaceae: Buxus sp.^3,4; Cannaceae: Canna generalis^3,4; Caprifoliaceae: Viburnum arboricolum^3,4; Viburnum awabuki^3,4, Viburnum odoratissimum^3,4, Weigela sp.^3,4; Caricaceae: Carica papaya^3,4; Celastraceae: Euonymus sacrosancta^3,4, Schaefferia sp.^3,4; Clusiaceae: Calophyllum inophyllum^3,4; Combretaceae: Terminalia catappa^3,4; Cornaceae: Aucuba japonica^3,4, Cornus controversa^3,4, Cornus florida^3,4; Crassulaceae: Bryophyllum sp.^3,4; Cycadaceae: Cycas circinalis^3,4, Cycas revoluta^3,4, Cycas sp.^3,4, Zamia floridana^3,4, Zamia sp.^3,4; Daphniphyllaceae: Daphniphyllum sp.^3,4; Ebenaceae: Diospyros lotus^3,4, Diospyros sp.^3,4; Elaeocarpaceae: Elaeocarpus decipiens^3,4, Elaeocarpus photiniaefolius^3,4; Ericaceae: Chimaphila maculata^3,4, Rhododendron sp.^3,4; Euphorbiaceae: Aleurites moluccana^3,4, Aleurites sp.^3,4, Bischofia javanica^3,4, Daphniphyllum glaucescens^3,4, Daphniphyllum macropodum^3,4, Daphniphyllum teijsmanni^3,4, Euphorbia humistrata^3,4, Excoecaria orientalis^3,4, Hevea brasiliensis^3,4, Hevea sp.^3,4, Jatropha hastata^3,4, Sapium sebiferum^3,4; Fagaceae: Lithocarpus sp.^3,4; Garryaceae: Aucuba sp.^3,4; Gnetaceae: Gnetum luofuerise³; Hamamelidaceae: Liquidambar formosana^3,4; Heliconiaceae: Heliconia sp.^3,4; Hemerocallidaceae: Dianella sp.³; Hippocastanaceae: Aesculus turbinate³; Hydrangeaceae: Deutzia scabra crenata^3,4; Iridaceae: Iris sp.^3,4, Moraea bicolor^3,4; Lardizabalaceae: Akebia lobata^3,4, Akebia quinata^3,4, Akebia trifoliate^3,4; Lauraceae: Machilus kobu^3,4, Persea americana^3,4; Lecythidaceae: Barringtonia speciose^3,4; Liliaceae: Cordyline terminalis^3,4, Dianella ensifolia^3,4, Dianella montana^3,4, Dianella tasmanica^3,4, Liriope muscari^3,4, Nolina sp.^3,4, Phormium tenax^3,4, Sansevieria nilotica^3,4, Yucca gloriosa^3,4, Yucca recurvifolia^3,4; Loganiaceae: Fagraea berteriana^3,4; Loranthaceae: Dendrophthoe falcate³, Ettingsh sp.³; Magnoliaceae: Magnolia denudata^3,4, Magnolia grandiflora^3,4, Magnolia kobus^3,4, Magnolia officinalis^3,4, Magnolia soulangeana^3,4, Magnolia sp.^3,4, Magnolia virginiana^3,4, Michelia alba^3,4, Michelia champaca^3,4, Michelia compressa^3,4, Michelia figo^3,4, Michelia fuscata^3,4, Michelia sp.^3,4, Schizandra chinensis^3,4; Malvaceae: Hibiscus sp.^3,4; Marantaceae: Clinogyne virgata^3,4; Melastomaceae: Melastoma sp.^3,4; Meliaceae: Aglaia odorata^3,4; Moraceae: Ficus carica^3,4, Ficus microcarpa³, Ficus pumila^3,4, Ficus sp.^3,4, Ficus wightiana^3,4, Morus alba^3,4, Morus sp.^3,4; Musaceae: Musa paradisiaca^3,4, Musa sp.^3,4, Strelitzia nicolai^3,4, Strelitzia reginae^3,4; Myristicaceae: Myristica fragrans^3,4, Myristica laurifolia^3,4, Myristica moschata^3,4, Myristica sp.^3,4; Myrtaceae: Callistemon sp.^3,4, Eugenia^3,4, Pimenta officinalis^3,4, Syzigium eumini³; Oleaceae: Olea sp.^3,4, Osmanthus fragrans^3,4, Syringa amurensis^3,4; Pandanaceae: Pandanus odoratissimus^3,4; Phyllanthaceae: Bischofia sp.^3,4; Poaceae Bambusa sp.^3,4; Podocarpaceae: Podocarpus nagi^3,4; Polygonaceae: Polygonum spp.^3,4; Pteridophyta: Adiantum sp.^3,4; Rhizophoraceae: Rhizophora mangle^3,4, Rhizophora sp.^3,4; Rosaceae: Prunus padus^3,4; Rubiaceae: Adina rubella^3,4, Gardenia jasminoides^3,4, Gardenia sp.^3,4, Ixora coccinea³; Ruscaceae: Dracaena sp.³; Rutaceae: Calodendrum spp.^3,4, Citrus sp.^3,4; Sarraceniaceae: Sarracenia purpurea^3,4; Saxifragaceae: Deutzia sp.^3,4, Ribes sp.^3,4; Solanaceae: Capsicum annuum^3,4; Strelitziaceae: Ravenala madagascariensis^3,4, Strelitzia sp.^3,4; Symplocaceae: Symplocos ramosissima^3,4; Taxaceae: Taxus cuspidata^3,4, Taxus sp.^3,4, Torreya sp.^3,4; Theaceae: Camellia japonica^3,4, Camellia oleifera^3,4, Camellia sasanqua^3,4, Camellia sinensis^3,4, Camellia sp.^3,4, Eurya acuminata^3,4, Eurya crenatifolia^3,4, Eurya japonica^3,4, Eurya strigillosa^3,4, Thea sinensis^3,4; Trochodendraceae: Trochodendron aralioides^3,4; Ulmaceae: Aphananthe sp.^3,4; Verbenaceae: Stachytarpheta jamaicensis^3,4; Xanthorrhoeaceae: Dianella sp.⁴; Uncertain: Zorisma ovalifolia^3,4. Pseudalacaspis cockerelli may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is probably native to Asia². From there it has spread throughout much of the world^3,4. It was first found in Hawaii in 1898² and Florida in 1942¹. Within the continental United States it is now considered widespread in the Gulf States and Georgia¹.

Official Control: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is listed as a harmful organism by Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Panama, and Peru⁵.

California Distribution: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli has not been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is regularly found by CDFA’s high risk inspections, border stations, dog teams, and nursery inspections. Between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2014 the scale was intercepted 2,187 times, typically on nursery stock and fresh plant parts from Florida and Hawaii.

The risk Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (magnolia white scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is highly polyphagous and is likely to find suitable hosts throughout California and establish a widespread distribution in the state. It receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli feeds on hundreds of species of plants in at least 81 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: Scale insects are capable of rapid reproduction and can be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved. They may also disperse locally by crawling, wind, or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or animals. Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli 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: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is likely to reduce the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants with its presence. It is also likely to increase production costs by triggering new management programs. The scale is also considered a quarantine pest by several of California’s trading partners. Its presence in the state may disrupt markets for nursery stock and fresh fruit. Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is likely to trigger additional treatment programs in the nursery industry and by residents who find infested plants unsightly. The scale insect is also likely to significantly affect many ornamental plantings. It receives a High (3) rating in this category.

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

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 Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (Magnolia White Scale): 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: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli has not been found in the environment of California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score

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

Uncertainty:

Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is frequently intercepted by CDFA. Presumably, it enters California at other times undetected. It is possible that it has been introduced and is established in some localities. Alternatively, it could be failing to establish.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli 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 Hamon, Avas B. 2015. University of Florida Featured Creatures. Common name: false oleander scale. http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/creatures/orn/scales/false_oleander_scale.htm

² Tenbrink, Victoria L. and Arnold H. Hara. 1992. Hawaii Crop Knowledge Master: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (Cooley). http://www.extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/Type/p_cocker.htm

³ SEL Catalog.

⁴ Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy. ScaleNet.

http://scalenet.info/catalogue/Pseudaulacaspis%20cockerelli/

http://scalenet.info/validname/Pseudaulacaspis/cockerelli/

⁵ USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, 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

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Ripersiella hibisci (Kawai & Takagi): Root Mealybug

April 12, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Ripersiella hibisci (Kawai & Takagi): Root Mealybug

Hemiptera: Rhizoecidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Ripersiella hibisci is frequently intercepted by CDFA and is presently assigned a temporary rating of “Q”. A pest rating proposal is required to assign a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Ripersiella hibisci is a polyphagous mealybug that feeds exclusively on the roots of plants^1,2. This mealybug inhabits the rootball or the area between the rootball and the plant container where it is difficult to detect¹. Heavily infested plants show poor growth, wilt, and turn yellow or grey¹. Plants may be prevented from flowering and eventually die¹. Known hosts include: Amaryllidaceae: Crinum asiaticum²; Apocynaceae: Nerium oleander²; Araceae: Dieffenbachia spp.²; Arecaceae: Areca spp.², Butia capitata (PDR 1316475), Caryota sp. (1075104), Chambeyronia macrocarpa (1316833), Dypsis decaryi (1253915), Gronophyllum spp.², Ptychosperma macarthurii (1075011), Phoenix roebellenii², Phoenix canariensis², Ravenea rivularis (1075143), Rhapis excelsa (1040975), Rhapis multifida (1308317), Rhapis spp.², Sabal spp.², Syragus romanzoffiana (1122973), Wodyetia bifurcata (1317460); Bromeliaceae: Cryptanthus spp.²; Commelinaceae: Dichorisandra thyrsiflora²; Cyperaceae: Carex spp.²; Ericaceae: Rhododendron sp.¹; Geraniaceae: Pelargonium spp.²; Lythraceae: Cuphea hyssopifolia², Punica granatum¹; Malvaceae: Hibiscus rosa-sinensis²; Marantaceae: Calathea sp.¹; Moraceae: Ficus benjamina (1230171), Ficus sp.¹; Oleaceae: Ligustrum ovalifolium¹; Poaceae: Hakonechloa macra²; Rhamnaceae: Sageretia theezans¹; Rubiaceae: Serissa foetida¹, Serissa spp.²; Solanaceae: bell pepper (Capsicum annuum (58665)); Ulmaceae: Ulmus parvifolia¹, Zelkova serrata¹, Zelkova spp.²; Zingiberaceae: Zingiber sp. (1188341). Ripersiella hibisci may be transported long distances when infested plants are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Ripersiella hibisci is probably native to China or Japan. From there it has spread to Hawaii, Florida, and Puerto Rico².

Official Control: Ripersiella hibisci is listed as a quarantine pest by the European Union¹.

California Distribution: Ripersiella hibisci has not been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: Ripersiella hibisci has been intercepted 275 times by CDFA on plants from Hawaii, Florida, Texas, and Arizona. Most interceptions have occurred on palms.

The risk Ripersiella hibisci (root mealybug) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Host plants for Ripersiella hibisci are grown throughout most of California. As it feeds on roots below ground, the mealybug has some protection from temperature extremes. Root mealybug 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: Ripersiella hibisci is known to feed on at least 40 species of plants in 20 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: Mealybugs are capable of rapid reproduction and can be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved. Ripersiella hibisci may also disperse locally by the crawlers being flushed out of plant pots when the plants are watered, then crawling into adjacent plant pots through drainage holes in their bases; also through wind, or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or animals¹. Its cryptic habits mean that root mealybug may easily be dispersed by trade in infested plants without being detected. Ripersiella hibisci 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: Ripersiella hibisci is likely to lower the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants or reducing plant quality. It is also likely to increase production costs of nursery stock. Root mealybug may also disrupt markets. Ripersiella hibisci receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Ripersiella hibisci is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It may feed on threatened or endangered plants such as white sedge (Carex albida) and Tompkins’s sedge (Carex tompkinsii). Root mealybug is not expected to disrupt critical habitats. It may trigger treatment programs in the nursery industry and urban areas. Host plants of Ripersiella hibisci are widely grown as ornamentals in California and may be significantly impacted. The mealybug receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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 Ripersiella hibisci (root mealybug): 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: Ripersiella hibisci has never been found in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

Interceptions of Ripersiella hibisci by both California and Europe have yielded many new host records. It is likely that the host range of this mealybug will continue to expand.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Ripersiella hibisci has never been found in California and is likely to have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to establish in the state. An “A” rating is justified.

References:

¹ MacLeod, A. 2005. Rhizoecus hibisci. Data sheets on quarantine pests. European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. http://www.eppo.int/QUARANTINE/insects/Rhizoecus_hibisci/DS_Rhizoecus_hibisci.pdf

² Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy. ScaleNet. http://scalenet.info/validname/Ripersiella/hibisci/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, 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

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis (Green): Trilobe Scale

April 12, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Psuedaonidia trilobitiformis (Green) — Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis (Green): Trilobe Scale
Photo Credit: National Bureau of Agricultural Insect Resources (NBAIR)

Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis (Green): Trilobe Scale

Hemiptera: Diaspididae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is commonly intercepted by CDFA and presently has a temporary rating of “Q”. A pest rating proposal is required to determine a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is a polyphagous, widespread armored scale insect. Known hosts include: Agavaceae: Agave mexicana¹, Cordyline sp.¹, Cordyline neo-caledonyca¹, Dracaena sp.¹; Anacardiaceae: Anacardium sp.¹, Anacardium occidentale¹, Mangifera sp.¹, Mangifera indica¹, Nothopegia colebrookiana¹, Schinus molle¹, Schinus terebinthifolius¹, Sclerocarya caffra¹; Annonaceae: Annona sp.¹, Annona reticulata¹, Annona squamosa¹, Cananga odoratum¹; Apocynaceae: Acocanthera abessinica¹, Carissa carandas¹, Carissa madagascariensis¹, Carissophyllum sp.¹, Catharanthus roseus¹, Cerbera oppositifolia¹, Echites sp.¹, Nerium sp.¹, Nerium indicum¹, Nerium oleander¹, Ochrosia oppositifolia¹, Plumeria acutifolia¹, Plumeria rubra¹, Thevetia sp.¹, Thevetia peruviana¹, Trachelospermum foetidum¹; Araceae: Monstera deliciosa¹, Philodendrom sp.¹, Pothos aureus¹; Arecaceae: Cocos nucifera¹, Dictyosperma alba¹, Elaeis guineensis¹, Hyphaene thebaica¹; Bignoniaceae: Crescentia cujete¹, Pyrostegia venusta¹; Boraginaceae: Cordia myxa¹; Bromeliaceae: Ananas sativa¹; Caricaceae: Carica papaya¹; Combretaceae: Terminalia arjuna¹, Terminalia catappa¹; Corylaceae: Corylus sp.¹; Ebenaceae: Diospyros sp.¹, Diospyros eriantha¹, Diospyros kaki¹; Euphorbiaceae: Aleurites sp.¹, Aleurites fordi¹, Aleurites moluccana¹, Aleurites montana¹, Codiaeum sp.¹, Gelonium lanceolatum¹, Hura crepitans¹, Jatropha curcas¹; Fabaceae: Acacia simplicifolia¹, Acacia spirorbis¹, Bauhinia sp.¹, Bauhinia monandra¹, Bauhinia variegata¹, Cassia sp.¹, Cassia siamea¹, Cassia spectabilis¹, Clitoria terneata¹, Crotalaria sp.¹, Dalbergia sp.¹, Dalbergia championii¹, Derris indica¹, Mucuna bennettii¹, Pithecolobium unguis-cati¹; Fagaceae: Quercus sp.¹; Flacourtiaceae: Flacourtia ramontchi¹, Hydnocarpus wightiana¹, Scolopia oldhamii¹; Fumariaceae: Fumaria sp.¹; Guttiferae: Calophyllum inophyllum¹; Hydrangeaceae: Hydrangea sp.¹; Lauraceae: Cinnamomum zeylanicum¹, Laurus nobilis¹, Machilus sp.¹, Persea sp.¹, Persea americana¹, Persea gratissima¹; Lecythidaceae: Barringtonia asiatica¹; Liliaceae: Taetsia neocaledonica¹; Magnoliaceae: Michelia champaca¹; Malvaceae: Hibiscus sp.¹; Marantaceae: Maranta sp.¹; Meliaceae: Xylocarpus obovatus¹; Moraceae: Artocarpus sp.¹, Artocarpus altilis¹, Artocarpus communis¹, Artocarpus heterophyllus¹, Artocarpus incisa¹, Artocarpus integrifolius¹, Brosimum utile¹, Cudrania cochinchinensis¹, Ficus sp.¹, Ficus awkeotsang¹, Ficus benghalensis¹, Ficus elastica¹, Ficus pumila¹, Ficus religiosa¹, Ficus repens¹, Ficus retusa¹, Ficus scandens¹, Ficus swinhoei¹, Ficus thonningii¹, Ficus trichoclada¹, Ficus wightiana japonica¹; Myrtaceae Eugenia sp.¹, Eugenia jaboticaba¹, Myrtus sp.¹, Psidium sp.¹, Psidium cattleianum¹, Psidium guajava¹; Naucleaceae: Cephalanthus sp.¹; Nyctaginaceae: Bouganvillea sp.¹; Oleaceae: Jasminum sp.¹; Passifloraceae: Passiflora sp.¹, Passiflora edulis¹, Passiflora laurifolia¹, Passiflora quadrangularis¹; Pittosporaceae: Pittosporum sp.¹; Polygonaceae: Coccoloba uvifera¹; Punicaceae: Punica granatum¹; Rhamnaceae: Ziziphus sp.¹, Ziziphus spina-christi¹; Rosaceae: Eriobotrya japonica¹, Mespilus germanica¹, Prunus domestica¹, Pyrus sp.¹, Rosa sp.¹; Rubiaceae: Coffea sp.¹, Coffea arabica¹, Coffea liberica¹, Ixora sp.¹, Ixora coccinia¹; Rutaceae: Citrus sp.¹, Citrus aurantium¹, Citrus aurantium bigaradia¹, Citrus bergamia¹, Citrus decumana¹, Citrus grandis¹, Citrus histrix¹, Citrus limetta¹, Citrus limon¹, Citrus maxima¹, Citrus nobilis unchiu¹, Citrus sinensis¹, Murraya exotica¹; Santalaceae: Santalum austro-caledonicum¹; Sapindaceae: Dodonaea viscosa¹, Euphoria longana¹, Litchi sinensis¹; Sapotaceae: Achras sapota¹, Mimusops sp.¹, Mimusops elengi¹; Solanaceae: Capsicum sp.¹, Capsicum annuum¹, Capsicum frutescens¹; Sterculiaceae: Theobroma cacao¹; Theaceae: Camellia sp.¹, Camellia japonica¹, Eurya japonica¹, Thea japonica¹; Thymelaeaceae: Peddiea africana¹; Tiliaceae: Grewia sp.1; Verbenaceae: Premna sp.¹, Tectona grandis¹; Vitaceae: Vitis vinifera¹.

Worldwide Distribution: Although it was first found in Sri Lanka, the native range of Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is uncertain. From its origin it has spread through much of Africa, Asia, Australia, the Pacific, South America, and Central America¹. In the continental United States the scale is known to be present in Florida¹.

Official Control: Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is listed as a quarantine pest by Japan, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand².

California Distribution: Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: Between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2014 Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis was intercepted by CDFA’s dog teams, border stations, and high risk programs 139 times. These interceptions have occurred on a wide variety of commodities from Hawaii, Florida, Mexico, and many other countries in Central and South America. Many of the interceptions are on mango.

The risk Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis (trilobe scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Host plants of Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis are grown throughout California as agricultural crops and ornamentals. The scale insect is likely to establish wherever these plants are grown. It receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is highly polyphagous. The scale insect is known to feed on more than 174 plant species in 50 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: The biology of Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is not well documented. However, scale insects have high reproductive rates. They are capable of moving long distances through commerce in infested plants and plant parts. Trilobe scale 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: Trilobe scale is known to feed on many plants that are economically important in California including citrus, avocado, and grapes. However, despite its polyphagous nature and widespread distribution, Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is not well-documented to be a plant pest and is therefore not expected to lower crop yields. It may increase crop production costs as growers may treat to control scale populations for quarantine purposes. Trilobe scale is listed as a quarantine pest by several of California’s trading partners. The presence of this scale in California may have significant impacts on California fresh fruit exports. Trilobe scale is not expected to change normal cultural practices, vector other pestiferous organisms, injure animals, or interfere with water supplies. Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: If Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis were to enter California it is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It may directly affect threatened or endangered species, such as Rosa minutifolia (small-leaved rose), by feeding on them. It is not expected to disrupt critical habitats. It may trigger additional private treatment programs in fruit production and nursery industries. Since it is not well-documented as a pest in other locations, trilobe scale is not expected significantly impact cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings. Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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 Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis (Trilobe Scale): 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: Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis has never been found in the environment of California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

Although it is not well-documented as a pest in other localities, Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis could have a more significant impact in California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

References:

¹ SEL Catalog Query Results. http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/diaspidi/Pseudaonidiatrilobitiformis.htm

http://scalenet.info/catalogue/Pseudaonidia%20trilobitiformis/

² USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, 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

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Planococcus minor (Maskell): Pacific Mealybug

March 9, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Planococcus minor (Maskell): Pacific Mealybug

Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Planococcus minor is frequently intercepted by CDFA and is presently assigned a temporary rating of “Q”. A pest rating proposal is required to assign a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Planococcus minor is a highly polyphagous mealybug that feeds on a wide variety of valuable agricultural crops and ornamental plants. Infestations may cause reduced yield, lower plant or fruit quality, stunted growth, discoloration, and leaf loss¹. The mealybugs also excrete large volumes of honeydew that reduces photosynthetic activity and attracts ants as it builds up on leaves and fruit¹. The mealybug can be an economic pest at low population densities by vectoring viruses that kill plants¹. However, it has not emerged as a serious economic pest in much of its range presumably due to the presence of predators and parasitoids¹. Known hosts include: Acanthaceae: Aphelandra sp.², Graptophyllum sp.², Justica carnea², Odontonema sp.², Pachystachys coecinea²; Amaranthaceae: Amaranthus sp.²; Anacardiaceae: cashew (Anacardium occidentale²), mango (Mangifera indica²), Rhus sp.², ambarella (Spondias dulcis²); Annonaceae: custard apple (Annona reticulata²), sugar apple (Annona squamosa²), soursop (Annona muricata²), ylang-ylang (Cananga odorata²); Apiaceae: celery (Apium graveolens²); Apocynaceae: Araujia sericofera², Hoya sp.², Plumeria rubra²; Araceae: Aglaonema sp.², Alocasia sp.², giant taro (Alocasia macrorhiza²), taro (Colocasia esculenta²), giant swamp taro (Cryptosperma chamissonis²), Dieffenbachia sp.², centipede tongavine (Epipremnum pinnatum²), Philodendron fonzii², water cabbage (Pistia stratioites²), Rhaphidophora vitiensis², arrowleaf elephant ear (Xanthosoma sagittifolium²), Xanthosoma nigrum²; Araliaceae: Aralia sp.², ivy (Hedera helix²), Polyscias guilfoylei², umbrella tree (Schefflera actinphylla²); Arecaceae: betel tree (Areca catechu²), Balaka seemanni², Chrysalidocarpus sp.², coconut tree (Cocos nucifera²), Kentia palm (Howeia forsteriana²); Asparagaceae: Dracaena sp.²; Asteraceae: black-jack (Bidens pilosa²), endive (Cichorium endivia²), Dahlia sp.², lilac tasselflower (Emilia sonchifolia²), Helianthus sp.², climbing hempvine (Mikania scandens²), sweetscent (Pluchea odorata²), node weed (Synedrella nodiflora²), French marigold (Tagetes patula²), Tithonia sp.², beach sunflower (Wedelia biflora²), common zinnia (Zinnia elegans²); Balsaminaceae: garden balsam (Impatiens balsamina²), Impatiens sultani²; Bignoniaceae: Bignonia sp.²; Boraginaceae: Spanish elm (Cordia alliodora²), Tournefortia argentata²; Brassicaceae: broccoli etc (Brassica oleracea²), Chinese cabbage (Brassica chinensis²), radish (Raphanus sativus²); Bromeliaceae: pineapple (Ananas comosus²); Burseraceae: java almond (Canarium indicum²), santa cruz nut (Canarium harveyi²); Cactaceae: higo chumbo (Harrisia portoricensis²); Casuarinaceae: Casuarina equisetifolia²; Clusiaceae: Alexandrian laurel balltree (Calophyllum inophyllum²); Combretaceae: Lumnitzera coccinea², tropical almond (Terminalia catappa²), Commelinaceae: Commelina sp.², Tradescantia sp.², Convolvulaceae: beach morning-glory (Ipomoea pes-caprae²), sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas²), Merremia peltata²; Corynocarpaceae: Corynocarpus sp.²; Cucurbitaceae: watermelon (Citrullus lanatus²), cucumber (Cucumis sativus²), muskmelon (Cucumis melo²), squash (Cucurbita moschata²), squash (Cucurbita maxima²), squash (Cucurbita pepo²), chayote (Sechium edule²); Cyperaceae: coco-grass (Cyperus rotundus²); Dioscoreaceae: purple yam (Dioscorea alata²); Euphorbiaceae: chenille plant (Acalypha hispida²) , copperleaf (Acalypha godseffiana²), Acalypha tricolor², candlenut (Aleurites moluccana²), Antidesma sp.², garden croton (Codiaeum variegatum²), Croton sp.², poinsettia (Euphorbiaceae pulcherrima²), fireplant (Euphorbiaceae heterophylla²), Euphorbiaceae geniculata², Euphorbiaceae atoto², river poison tree (Excoecaria agallocha²), Glochidion ramiflorum², rubber tree (Hevea brasiliensis²), Barbados nut (Jatropha curcas²), Macaranga aleuritoides², blush macaranga (Macaranga tanarius²), Macaranga macrophylla², Macaranga harveyana², food wrapper plant (Mallotus japonicus²), cassava (Manihot esculenta²), stonebreaker (Phyllanthus niruri²), castor oil plant (Ricinus communis²); Fabaceae: Acacia spirobis², soapbush wattle (Acacia holosericea²), needle bush (Acacia farnesiana²), Formosan Koa (Acacia confusa²), saga tree (Adenanthera pavonina²), peanut (Arachis hypogaea²), Napoleon’s plume (Bauhinia monandra²), Cajanus indicus², pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan²), Calliandra houstoniana², candle bush (Cassia alata²), Cassia imperialis², butterfly pea (Centrosema pubescens²), Erythrina sp.², Flemingia sp.², Gliricidia maculata², Gliricidia sepium², soybean (Glycine max²), Tahitian chestnut (Inocarpus fagifer²), white leadtree (Leucaena glauca²), white leadtree (Leucaena leucocephala²), sensitive plant (Mimosa pudica²), giant sensitive tree (Mimosa pigra²), velvet bean (Mucuna pruriens²), lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus²), siratro (Phaseolus atropurpureus²), bean (Phaseolus vulgaris²), Wisteria sp.²; Geraniaceae: Pelargonium sp.²; Heliconiaceae: Heliconia aurantiaca²; Iridaceae: Gladiolus sp.²; Lamiaceae: painted nettle (Coleus blumei²), Epimeredi indicum², comb bushmint (Hyptis pectinata²), sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum²), sage (Salvia officinalis²); Lauraceae: avocado (Persea americana²); Lecythidaceae: fish poison tree (Barringtonia asiatica²); Liliaceae: common asparagus fern (Asparagus plumosus²), pale grass lily (Caesia parviflora²), spider lily (Crinum asiaticum²); Loganiaceae: false coffee tree (Fagraea racemosa²); Lythraceae: crape myrtle (Lagerstroemia indica²), Pemphis acidula²; Magnoliaceae: banana shrub (Michelia figo²); Malvaceae: Abutilon sp.², Gossypium sp.², sea hibiscus (Hibiscus tiliaceus²), sunset muskmallow (Hibiscus manihot²), Kleinhovia hospita², Pavonia sp.², Theobroma cacao², Chinese bur (Triumfetta rhomboidea²); Marantaceae: Maranta sp.²; Moraceae: breadfruit (Artocarpus altilis²), jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus²), paper mulberry (Broussonetia papyrifera²), panama rubber tree (Castilloa elastica²), Ficus opositica², fig (Ficus carica²), Ficus congesta², weeping fig (Ficus benjamina²), white mulberry (Morus alba²); Musaceae: pink velvet banana (Musa velutina²), latundan banana (Musa sapientum²); Myristicaceae: Myristica macrantha²; Myrtaceae: rainbow eucalyptus (Eucalyptus deglupta²), jambolan (Eugenia cumini²), mountain apple (Eugenia malaccensis²), common guava (Psidium guajava²); Oleaceae: Jasminum sp.², Onagraceae: primrose willow (Ludwigia octovalis²); Orchidaceae: Dendrobium veratrifolium²; Pandanaceae: Pandanus edulis², Pandanus foetida², Pandanus maliformis², Pandanus odoratissimus²; Passifloraceae: passion fruit (Passiflora edulis²); Phyllanthaceae: bishop wood (Bischofia javanica²); Piperaceae: Piper puberulum², kava (Piper methysticum²), matico (Piper aduncum²); Poaceae: sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum²), corn (Zea mays²); Proteaceae: macadamia nut (Macadamia tetraphylla²); Rhamnaceae: Alphitonia zizyphoides²; Rosaceae: Asian pear (Pyrus serotina²), china rose (Rosa chinensis²); Rubiaceae: Borreria laevis², Liberian coffee (Coffea liberica²), arabica coffee (Coffea arabica²), robusta coffee (Coffea canephora²), gardenia (Gardenia jasminoides²), beach gardenia (Guettarda speciosa²), jungle geranium (Ixora coccinea²), great morinda (Morinda citrifolia²), Tahitian gardenia (Randia tahitensis²); Rutaceae: bitter orange (Citrus aurantium²), lemon (Citrus limon²), grapefruit (Citrus paradisi²), key lime (Citrus aurantifolia²), mandarin orange (Citrus reticulata²), orange (Citrus sinensis²), pomelo (Citrus grandis²), Evodia hortensis²; Sapotaceae: sapodilla (Manilkara zapota²), taun (Pometia pinnata²); Scrophulariaceae: coral fountain (Russelia equisetiformis²); Solanaceae: raintree (Brunfelsia hispida²), chili pepper (Capsicum frutescens²), bell pepper (Capsicum annuum²), angel’s trumpet (Datura suaveolens²), devil’s trumpet (Datura metel²), tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum²), turkey berry (Solanum torvum²), potato (Solanum tuberosum²), indian nightshade (Solanum indicum²), eggplant (Solanum melongena²), Theaceae: tea plant (Camellia sinensis²); Urticaceae: Boehmeria sp.², Leucosyke sp.², native mulberry (Pipturus argenteus²), Procris pedunculata²; Verbenaceae: pagoda flower (Clerodendrum paniculatum²), java glorybower (Clerodendrum fallax²), Clerodendrum disparifolium², Premna taitensis², Premna obtusifolia², Stachytarpheta sp.², teak (Tectona grandis²), Verbena sp.², simpleleaf chastetree (Vitex trifolia²); Vitaceae: grapevine (Vitis vinifera²); Zingiberaceae: red ginger (Alpinia purpurata²), shellflower (Alpinia nutans²), green cardamom (Elettaria cardamomum²), white ginger lily (Hedychium coronarium²), torch ginger (Nicolaia speciosa²), ginger (Zingiber officinale²). Planococcus minor may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Planococcus minor is probably Asian in origin¹. From there it has invaded much of the Neotropical region spanning from Mexico south to Argentina^1,2. It was first found in Hawaii in 2009 and Florida in 2010.

Official Control: Planococcus minor is listed as a harmful organism by China, the Republic of Korea, and Japan³.

California Distribution: Planococcus minor has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: Planococcus minor has been intercepted 89 times by CDFA’s high risk programs, border stations and dog teams. Interceptions have occurred on plants and fresh plant parts mostly from Hawaii, but also from Florida, Washington, and Pennsylvania.

The risk Planococcus minor (pacific mealybug) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Host plants of Planococcus minor are widely grown throughout California as agricultural crops and ornamentals. The mealybug is likely to establish wherever suitable host material is found 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: Planococcus minor feeds on more than 250 plants belonging to 66 families 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: Pacific mealybug can complete a generation in less than a month and each female lays between 206 and 270 eggs, indicating a high reproductive rate. Mealybugs can be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved. They may also disperse locally by crawling, wind, or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or animals. Planococcus minor 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: Planococcus minor may lower the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants with its presence and sooty mold. It may also increase production costs for a wide variety of crops. Several of California’s trading partners list pacific mealybug as a harmful organism, so exports of fresh fruit including citrus and grapes may be disrupted. Pacific mealybug has been implicated in the transmission of virus diseases between plants¹. Furthermore, honeydew secreted by the mealybugs will attract ants, which may injure parasitic wasps, disrupting biological control programs for other pests. Planococcus minor receives a High (3) in this category.

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

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Planococcus minor is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It may feed on threatened and endangered species such as Wiggins’ croton (Croton wigginsii) and small-leaved rose (Rosa minutifolia). The mealybugs are not likely to disrupt critical habitats. They may trigger new treatment programs in agriculture and by residents who find infested plants unsightly. Pacific mealybug feeds on a wide variety of popular ornamental plants and plants common in home/urban gardens. Planococcus minor receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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 Planococcus minor (Pacific Mealybug): 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: Planococcus minor has never been found in California and 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 (15)

Uncertainty:

Recent formal mealybug surveys in California have focused on Proteas and would have been unlikely to detect pacific mealybug. It is possible that the mealybug could be present in some localities.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Planococcus minor has never been found in California and is likely to have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to establish in the state. An “A” rating is justified.

References:

¹ Francis, Antonio W., Moses T.K. Kairo, and Amy L. Roda. 2012. Passionvine mealybug, Planococcus minor (Maskell) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae). University of Florida Extension. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/IN/IN92000.pdf

²Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy. ScaleNet. http://scalenet.info/validname/Planococcus/minor

³ USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, 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

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Thysanofiorinia nephelii (Maskell): Longan Scale

March 8, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Thysanofiorinia nephelii (Maskell): Longan Scale

Hemiptera: Diaspididae

Pest Rating: B

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

August 23, 2012 Ron Eng (CDFA) requested a permanent rating for longan scale (Thysanofiorinia nephelii) as follow-up to a find of the Q-rated pest on a longan tree in a nursery in Santa Ana.

History & Status:

Background: Longan scale is an armored scale insect that is sometimes considered a pest of the tropical fruits longan (Dinocarps longan) and lychee (Litchi chinensis). In addition to those primary hosts it has also been occasionally recorded on other hosts: “Kentia sp.” (a palm), “Cassia” (a leguminous tree), Euphorbia longena (a spurge), and Indigofera sp. (a flowering plant) (SEL). Longan scale may be spread long distances by the movement of infested plants and fruit.

Worldwide Distribution: Longan scale is believed to be native to mainland Asia (India to China) but has invaded Australia, Japan, Taiwan, the Northern Mariana Islands, Brazil, Cuba, Algeria, and Hawaii (sometime before 1932). It was first detected in Florida, the nation’s leading producer of longan and lychee fruit, in 1996 and considered an emerging pest. Although it had spread to seven counties by 2007, there were no reports of significant economic damage (Suh et.al. 2007).

Official Control: Thysanofiorinia nephelii is not known to be under official control in any other states or nations. The scale was downgraded to non-actionable by USDA in March 2011.

California Distribution: Longan scale has never been collected in the environment in California.

California Interceptions: This scale was found in regulatory situations by CDFA 164 times between 1992 and August 2012. The majority of these were interceptions of crawlers (the 1st instar nymphs) on longan and lychee fruit purchased out of state. The scale has also been found 5 times on trees in nurseries.

The risk Thysanofiorinia nephelii (longan scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Longan scale has not spread beyond southern Florida since it established there. Longan and lychee are only grown in limited areas of Southern California and the scale would probably be restricted to those areas if it were to enter the state. Longan scale receives a Low (1) rating for 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: Longan scale feeds primarily on longan and lychee, two tropical sapindaceous fruit trees in two different genera. However, it has also been reported on four other hosts in three different plant families. Longan scale receives a Medium (2) for host range.

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: Scale insects have high reproductive rates. Crawlers of longan scale have been intercepted on longan and lychee fruit many times and may be able to disperse through this pathway. However, fruit would have to be disposed of in close proximity to a host tree. Adult female longan scales have been detected on trees in nurseries. This pathway is how the longan scale is thought to have spread within Florida (Suh et. al. 2007) and is the highest risk pathway for spread within California. Due to its ability to move long distances through nursery stock longan scale 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: California has approximately 23 ha of longan and lychee orchards (Crane et. al. 2005) worth an estimated $500,000 annually. Additionally, there is a market for longan and lychee nursery stock in Southern California. Furthermore, discussions on internet forums indicate there is interest among residents in growing more longan and lychee fruit in the state. However, no major economic damage has been reported from the introduction of this scale to Florida’s industry. Longan scale is not expected to lower yields on these trees but it could increase production costs in some cases by triggering chemical treatment. It is presumed that the fruits grown in California are produced for domestic consumption so no export issues are considered. Longan scale is not known to vector any pathogens, injure animals, or interfere with water supplies. Longan scale receives a Low (1) for economic impact.

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

A. The pest could lower crop yield.
B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).
C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).
D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.
E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.
F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.
G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.
– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.
– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Longan scale is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. There are no plants listed in California’s threatened and endangered plant list from the genera listed as hosts for the scale (Dinocarps, Litchi, Kentia, Euphorbia, Cassia, or Indigofera). The scale is not expected to disrupt critical habitats. Although the scales are often controlled by natural enemies in Florida they do sometimes reach high populations that require additional treatment programs. The scale is not expected to significantly change cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings. Longan scale receives a Medium (2) for environmental impact.

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

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 Thysanofiorinia nephelii (Longan Scale): 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: Longan scale has never been found in the environment of California and 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:

A variety of ants that tend Homoptera, such as longan scale, are abundant in California. Ants could protect the scales from natural enemies, causing them to reach higher populations more rapidly than in Florida, thereby triggering more chemical treatments. The market for Asian fruit is expanding in the United States. Although lychee and longan do not thrive in California at present, changes in technology or the environment could change this in the future. If lychee and longan production were to expand in California in the future then longan scale may become a more damaging insect. Furthermore, the possibility exists that longan scale could colonize additional host plants in California.

Longan scale was intercepted in regulatory situations 164 times between 1992 and 2012. Presumably the scale enters California many additional times and is not intercepted. Since it has never been found in our environment, it is possible that environmental conditions (such as the lack of humidity) preclude its establishment. Alternatively, it is possible that the scale is already here and no one has looked for or noticed it.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Evidence suggests that the introduction of Longan Scale would be of low economic consequences to California. Despite the scale’s invasive nature and ability to travel in international and domestic trade of longan and lychee fruit and nursery stock, there is only one scientific paper in the literature that mentions its pest potential. It has not had major economic consequences since its detection in Florida in 1996. The pest has a limited host range and would probably not affect the environment of California, with the exception of possible additional treatments by longan and lychee growers.

Evidence also suggests that the introduction of longan scale to California is highly likely to happen. It has been detected in regulatory situations many times. It is likely to survive post-harvest treatments and shipment to California. Due to the small size of crawlers and immobility of adults it is likely to at least occasionally escape detection by inspectors. It is capable of living on and spreading through nursery stock and is likely to be introduced to favorable environments for establishment through that pathway.

The scale has never been detected in the environment of California. Additionally, rare fruit markets are expanding and we do have a small commercial longan and lychee fruit industry that may be affected by the pest. Therefore, it is recommended that the permanent pest rating be set to “B”.

References:

Crane, J.H., Zee, F., Bender, G.S., Faber, B., Brunner, B. and Chia, C.L. 2005. COMMERCIAL

SAPINDACEOUS FRUIT PRODUCTION IN THE USA. Acta Hort. (ISHS) 665:93-104

http://www.actahort.org/books/665/665_11.htm

Suh, S.J., G. S. Hodges, and A. C. Hodges. 2007. Notes on the Longan Scale, Thysanofiorinia nephelii (Hemiptera: Coccoidea: Diaspididae) in Florida. Florida Entomologist 90(2): 407-409. http://journals.fcla.edu/flaent/article/view/75670/73328

SEL: http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/diaspidi/Thysanofiorinianephelii.htm

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, 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: B

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Lindingaspis floridana Ferris: Floridana Scale

March 8, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Lindingaspis floridana Ferris: Floridana Scale

Hemiptera: Diaspididae

Pest Rating: B

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Lindingaspis floridana was intercepted by a CDFA dog team in a parcel of mango fruit shipped from Florida to Sacramento. This insect presently has a temporary rating of “Q”. A pest rating proposal is required to support a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Lindingaspis floridana is an armored scale insect that feeds on the leaves of mango (Mangifera indica), fig (Ficus spp.), and olive (Olea spp.)¹. It may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Lindingaspis floridana is presumably native to Asia. It was first found in Florida in 1921². It has also spread to Haiti and Jamaica¹.

Official Control: Lindingaspis floridana is listed as a harmful organism by Costa Rica, Japan, and Korea³.

California Distribution: Lindingaspis floridana has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: Lindingaspis floridana has been intercepted by CDFA’s dog teams and high risk programs 6 times since August 1, 2014. It was also intercepted once on July 3, 2001. All of the interceptions for which data was recorded occurred on mango fruit.

The risk Lindingaspis floridana (floridana scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Species of Ficus and Olea are commonly planted as ornamentals and crops throughout much of California. Mango plants are restricted to warmer parts of the state. Lindingaspis floridana is likely capable of establishment everywhere suitable hosts are available. It receives a High (3) in this category.

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Lindingaspis floridana is known to feed on three genera of plants in three plant families. It receives a Medium (2) 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: Scale insects have high reproductive rates and may disperse long distances when infested plants or plant parts are moved. They may also be spread by wind or by hitchhiking on plants, animals, or equipment. Lindingaspis floridana receives a High (3) in this category.

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

4) Economic Impact: Although Lindingaspis floridana feeds on economically important plants, it is not considered to be a pest². There is a closely related similar scale, Lindingaspis rossi, that is already present in California^4,5. Lindingaspis rossi is highly polyphagous and feeds on the leaves of many plants including all of the hosts of Lindingaspis floridana⁵. Therefore if Lindingaspis floridana were to establish in California it is not expected to have major economic impacts. It is not expected to lower crop yields, lower crop values, change cultural practices, vector other organisms, injure animals, or interfere with water supplies. However, Costa Rica, Japan and Korea list Lindingaspis floridana on their harmful organism lists³. Japan, Korea, and Vietnam list Lindingaspis rossi on their harmful organism lists³. It is therefore possible that Lindingaspis floridana could affect exports to some markets such as Costa Rica. Lindingaspis floridana receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

A. The pest could lower crop yield.
B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).
C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).
D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.
E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.
F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.
G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.
– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.
– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: If Lindingaspis floridana were to establish in California it is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It is not expected to directly affect threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats. It is not likely to trigger new treatment programs or have significant impacts to cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings. Lindingaspis floridana receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

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 Lindingaspis floridana (Floridana Scale): 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: Lindingaspis floridana has never been found in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

Lindingaspis rossi is already present in California and feeds on the same hosts as Lindingaspis floridana as well as many other plants. There have been no formal surveys to look for Lindingaspis floridana in California. It is therefore possible that Lindingaspis floridana may already be present in some localities in California but has not been recognized as something new.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Lindingaspis floridana has never been found in California. If it were to establish in the state it might have trade impacts. A “B” rating is justified.

References:

¹ SEL Catalogue Query Results/ScaleNet: Lindingaspis floridana Ferris. http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/diaspidi/Lindingaspisfloridana.htm

² Miller, Douglass R., Gary L. Miller, Greg S. Hodges, and John A. Davidson. 2005. Introduced Scale Insects (Hemiptera: Coccoidea) of the United States and Their Impact on U.S. Agriculture. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 107(1):123-158. http://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/40540/PDF

³ USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

⁴ McKenzie, Howard L. 1956. The Armored Scale Insects of California. Bulletin of the California Insect Survey Volume 5. http://essig.berkeley.edu/documents/cis/cis05.pdf

⁵ SEL Catalogue Query Results/ScaleNet: Lindingaspis rossi (Maskell). http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/diaspidi/Lindingaspisrossi.htm

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, 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: B

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Paraleyrodes bondari Peracchi: Bondar’s Nesting Whitefly

March 1, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Paraleyrodes bondari Peracchi: Bondar’s Nesting Whitefly

Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

On February 9, 2016 USDA announced that it had changed the status of Paraleyrodes bondari from actionable to non-actionable based on a recommendation from the National Plant Board¹. Stephen Brown subsequently requested a rating proposal for Paraleyrodes bondari.

History & Status:

Background: Paraleyrodes bondari is a whitefly that feeds on the upper and lower leaf surfaces of a variety of plants². Infested plants develop a coating of sooty mold and strands of white wax². Known hosts include Annonaceae: sugar apple (Annona squamosa²); Arecaceae: coconut (Cocos nucifera²), Chamaedorea sp.²; Lauraceae: avocado (Persea americana²), til (Ocotea foetens²), canary laurel (Apollonias barbujana²); Meliaceae: Trichilia sp.²; Malvaceae: Chinese hibiscus (Hibiscus rosa-sinensis²); Moraceae: banyantree (Ficus benghalensis²), weeping fig (Ficus benjamina²), curtain fig (Ficus microcarpa²); Myrtaceae: Surinam cherry (Eugenia uniflora²), guava (Psidium guajava²); Rutaceae: orange (Citrus sinensis⁵), mandarin orange (Citrus reticulata⁵), lemon (Citrus limon⁵), Citrus spp.² Paraleyrodes bondari may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Paraleyrodes bondari is Neotropical in origin² with a known range from Brazil to Honduras. From there it has spread to Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Taiwan, Comoros, Mauritius, Reunion, and Maderia². It was first found in southern Florida by Stephen Brown in 2011² and by 2012 had spread to six counties³.

Official Control: All citrus whiteflies are considered quarantine pests by the State of Arizona. Paraleyrodes bondari is not known to be under official control in any other states or nations. However, Bermuda and Jordan both list all whiteflies as harmful organisms⁴.

California Distribution: Paraleyrodes bondari has never been found in California.

California Interceptions: Paraleyrodes bondari has never been intercepted by CDFA. However, unidentified species of Paraleyrodes were intercepted 39 times from 2001 to 2015 on plants and fresh plant parts from Hawaii and Florida.

The risk Paraleyrodes bondari (Bondar’s Nesting Whitefly) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Host plants of Paraleyrodes bondari are widespread in urban and rural residential areas of California and are important agricultural crops. The whitefly is likely to encounter suitable hosts through much of the state. The present distribution of Paraleyrodes bondari corresponds with tropical climates. It is likely that the whitefly will be limited to warmer parts of coastal and southern California. Paraleyrodes bondari 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: Paraleyrodes bondari feeds on at least eighteen species of plants in eight families including important crops and ornamentals. 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: Whiteflies are capable of rapid reproduction and may be transported long distances by wind or when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved. Paraleyrodes bondari 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: Paraleyrodes bondari has not been documented reducing any crop yields. It may lower the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants with its presence and sooty mold. Arizona considers all citrus whiteflies to be quarantine pests and Paraleyrodes bondari has not been found in that state. Its presence in California could disrupt markets. Bondar’s nesting whitefly is not expected to change cultural practices, vector other organisms, injure animals, or disrupt water supplies. Paraleyrodes bondari receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

– 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 Paraleyrodes bondari were to establish in California it is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It is not expected to directly affect threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats. It may trigger new treatment programs in groves, the nursery industry, and by residents who find infested plants unsightly. Hosts of the whitefly are popular as both ornamentals and in home/urban gardens and may be significantly affected. Paraleyrodes bondari receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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 Paraleyrodes bondari (Bondar’s Nesting Whitefly): 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: Paraleyrodes bondari has never been found in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

The whitefly has not been documented to reduce crop yields. However, populations in infested areas are suppressed by Encarsia variegata (Aphelinidae)². It is possible that this whitefly could be more damaging in California if it were to establish without this parasitoid.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Paraleyrodes bondari has never 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 Collins, Joe 2015. Letter from National Plant Board to Ricardo Valdez. https://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/plant_pest_info/frsmp/downloads/non-reg-pests/pnr-12-21-15.pdf

² Stocks, Ian C. 2012. Bondar’s Nesting Whitefly, Paraleyrodes bondari, a whitefly (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) New to Florida Attacking Ficus and Other Hosts. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Pest Alert DACS-P-01801. http://www.fortlauderdale.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=4794

³ Distribution of Bondar’s Nesting Whitefly, Paraleyrodes bondari. May 25, 2012. http://entomology.ifas.ufl.edu/hodges/white_website/maps/Whitefly_Bondars_Nesting_Map_8X11.pdf

⁴ USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

⁵ Martin, J.H. 1996. Neotropical whiteflies of the subfamily Aleurodicinae established in the western Palearctic (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Journal of Natural History 30: 1849-1859. http://www.eurekamag.com/002/002903436.pdf

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, 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

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Radionaspis indica (Marlatt) | Mango Scale

January 15, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Radionaspis indica (Marlatt): Mango Scale

Hemiptera: Diaspididae

Pest Rating: B

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Since 2005 Radionaspis indica has been regularly intercepted on mango fruit by CDFA’s border stations and dog teams. This scale insect presently has a temporary rating of “Q”. A pest rating proposal is needed to establish a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Radionaspis indica is a monophagous scale insect that feeds on the trunk, branches, and buds of mango trees (Mangifera indica (Anacardiaceae)). Severe infestations can cause cracking of bark, exudation of sap, and decline of branches². Radionaspis indica may rapidly disperse long distances in the trade of infested mango fruit or nursery stock.

Worldwide Distribution: Radionaspis indica may be native to India and is also found in Indonesia, the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, Cape Verde, Senegal, Cuba, the British Virgin Islands, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and Panama³. In the United States the scale is found in Hawaii, Florida, and Puerto Rico³. Regular interceptions of the scale on mangos from Mexico suggest that it is established in that country.

Official Control: Radionaspis indica is not known to be under official control in any states or nations.

California Distribution: Radionaspis indica has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: Between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2015 Radionaspis indica was intercepted 69 times on mango fruit by CDFA’s border stations and dog teams. It was also intercepted once on papaya.

The risk Radionaspis indica (mango scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Mango trees require warm, dry weather to set fruit. In California the best locations are away from immediate marine influences in the deserts, foothills, and the warmest cove locations of the California Central Valley^{4,5, 6}. Mango trees are also sometimes grown as ornamental plants in urban environments and are present in the nursery industry. Radionaspis indica is expected to be able to establish in all of these environments. 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: Radionaspis indica only feeds on mango and receives a Low(1) 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: Armored scales have high reproductive potential. Mango fruit is not considered to be a good pathway for dispersal of Radionaspis indica due the limited mobility of female armored scales and crawlers and the species’ limited host range. However, the scales have high dispersal potential because they are able to disperse long distances rapidly on nursery stock and are able to disperse to any nearby trees by crawling, by wind, or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or other animals. Radionaspis indica 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: California growers produce between 250,000 and 4,000,000 pounds of mango annually⁶. This is a high value commodity produced for local sales at specialty markets and demand is increasing⁶. California grown mangos are generally produced organically⁵. If Radionaspis indica were to enter California and become established in groves it could potentially reduce yields of this crop if heavy infestations cause branch dieback². Furthermore, the scale has potential to both lower crop value by disfiguring fruit and nursery stock with its presence and increase production costs by triggering new chemical treatments. Radionaspis indica receives a Medium(2) in this category.

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

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Radionaspis indica is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. The scale is not expected to feed on any endangered or threatened species or disrupt critical habitats. It is possible that its entry could trigger new treatment programs in orchards and nurseries and by residents who find infested trees unsightly. The scale is not expected significantly impact cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings. Radionaspis indica receives a Medium(2) in this category.

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

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 Radionaspis indica (mango scale): 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: Radionaspis indica has never been found in California and 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(10)

Uncertainty:

It is possible that sometimes the presence of Radionaspis indica on fruit is indicative of home-grown mangos that have not been produced under commercial phytosanitary safeguards. Any failure to take action on Radionaspis indica infested fruit may increase the risk of introducing exotic fruit flies and other more damaging pests into California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

The impacts of the entry of Radionaspis indica into California are expected to be limited to mango groves, nurseries, and scattered ornamental plantings. Nevertheless, this scale insect may have significant economic and environmental impacts to this growing industry. A “B” rating is justified.

References:

¹Litz, Richard E. 2009. The Mango: Botany, Production, and Uses. CABI. 680pp. http://books.google.com/books?id=oloEhPYqE8QC&dq=Radionaspis+indica&source=gbs_navlinks_s

²Peña, Jorge E. 1994. Update on status of pests of tropical fruit crops in south Florida. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 107: 340-342. http://fshs.org/proceedings-o/1994-vol-107/340-342%20%28PENA%29.pdf

³ Ben-Dov, Y. (2014) ScaleNet, Radionaspis indica. Accessible online at: http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/diaspidi/Radionaspisindica.htm

⁴Grown in California website. Mango fruit facts page. http://www.grownincalifornia.com/fruit-facts/mango-facts.html

⁵Marks, Michael. 2013. Mango orchards in California? San Jose Mercury News. http://www.mercurynews.com/food-wine/ci_24089949/mango-orchards-california

⁶Karp, David. 2014. Mango madness. Sunset. http://www.sunset.com/travel/california/mango-madness

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, 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: B

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae (Kuwana) | Crapemyrtle Scale

January 15, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae (Kuwana): Crapemyrtle Scale

Synonym: Eriococcus lagerstroemiae

Hemiptera: Eriococcidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

In July 2015 the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) inquired about California’s position on deregulating Eriococcus lagerstroemiae (Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae). A pest rating proposal is required to determine a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae is a scale insect that feeds on the branches, twigs, trunk, stems, and leaves of its host-plants¹. It also feeds on the fruit of persimmon¹. Heavy infestations of the scale are not known to be fatal to trees but they do have significant aesthetic impacts that often lead to host removal¹. Layers of the scale on plants lead to extensive honeydew deposits, growth of sooty mold, dieback, decline, and decrease in the number and size of flowers¹. The sooty mold turns trunks, leaves, and twigs charcoal black¹. Known hosts of the scale include: Buxaceae: Korean boxwood (Buxus microphylla koreana²); Combretaceae: axlewood (Anogeiussus latifolia²), Anogeiussus sp.²; Ebenaceae: persimmon (Diospyros kaki²); Euphobiaceae: food wrapper plant (Mallotus japonicas²), needlebush (Glochidion puberum²); Fabaceae: Dalbergia sp.², soybean (Glycine max²); Lythraceae: crapemyrtle (Lagerstroemia indica²); Japanese crapemyrtle (Lagerstroemia japonica²), giant crapemyrtle (Lagerstsoemia flosreginae²); Moraceae: fig (Ficus carica²); Myrtaceae: Myrtus sp.²; Oleaceae: border privet (Ligustrum obtusifolium²); Punicaceae: pomegranate (Punica granatum²); Rosaceae: paradise apple (Malus pumila²); Chinese quince (Pseudocydonia sp.¹); Rubus sp.; Ulmaceae: Chinese hackberry (Celtis sinensis). The primary hosts are considered to be crapemyrtle, persimmon, Chinese quince, and pomegranate¹. Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae is native to China, India, Japan, South Korea, and possibly Mongolia¹. It was found in Texas in 2004. Since then it has spread throughout eastern Texas and to four counties in Arkansas, seven in Louisiana, five in Oklahoma, one in Tennessee, one in Virginia, and one in Mississippi¹.

Official Control: Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae is not known to be under official control in any other states or nations³. However, the USDA proposal would keep the scale actionable in Hawaii¹.

California Distribution: Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae has never been found in California.

California Interceptions: Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae has never been intercepted by CDFA.

The risk Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae (Crapemyrtle scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae is expected to establish throughout plant hardiness zones 6-10¹. This corresponds to almost all of California. Host plants of the scale are grown throughout the state as ornamentals and crops. Crapemyrtle scale is likely 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: Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae is known to feed on a variety of plants in twelve families, many of which are widely cultivated in California. It receives a Medium (2) 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: Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae has 2-4 generations per year and each adult female lays an average of 220 eggs¹. The scales may disperse long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved. They may also be spread by wind or by hitchhiking on plants, animals, or equipment. Crapemyrtle scale 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 Asia Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae is the major pest of crapemyrtle trees, and is also a serious pest of pomegranate and persimmon trees. If this scale insect were to establish in California it is expected to lower yields in pomegranate and persimmon groves. It is also likely to lower the value of persimmon fruit and all host nursery stock. Since the USDA has proposed to keep crapemyrtle scale actionable in Hawaii, this scale is also likely to disrupt markets for California fruit and nursery stock if it were to establish in the state. Crapemyrtle scale is not expected to change cultural practices, vector other organisms, injure animals, or interfere with water supplies. Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae receives a High (3) in this category.

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

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: If Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae were to establish in California it is not likely to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It is not likely to directly affect threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats. It is very likely to trigger new treatment programs in orchards and by residents who find infested plants unsightly. Crapemyrtle, pomegranate, and persimmon trees are common ornamentals in California and are likely to be significantly affected by this pest. Many of the host trees have been removed from areas in Texas where the scale has established¹. Crapemyrtle scale receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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 Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae (Crapemyrtle Scale): 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: Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae has not been found in California. The severe aesthetic impacts attributed to infestations of the scale and ease of detection since it is the only bark scale known to occur on crapemyrtle¹ make it unlikely that this pest is present anywhere in California. Crapemyrtle scale receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

It is possible that this scale could colonize additional host plants in California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

References:

¹Miller, Leah. 2015. NPAG Report Eriococcus lagerstroemiae Kuwana: crapemyrtle scale. New Pest Advisory Group (NPAG).

² SEL Catalogue Query Results/ScaleNet: Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae (Kuwana). http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/eriococc/Acanthococcuslagerstroemiae.htm

³ USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, 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

The CDFA's Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services Division grants the public opportunities to comment on proposed pest ratings. The following type of proposals are available for comment:

California Pest Rating for

Ceroplastes stellifer (Westwood): Stellate Scale

(synonym Vinsonia stellifera)

Hemiptera: Coccidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

History & Status:

Consequences of Introduction:

Consequences of Introduction to California for Ceroplastes stellifer (Stellate Scale): High (13)

Final Score

Uncertainty:

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

References:

Responsible Party:

Comment Format:

Pest Rating: A

California Pest Rating for

Dysmicoccus texensis (Tinsley): A Mealybug

Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

History & Status:

Consequences of Introduction:

Consequences of Introduction to California for Dysmicoccus texensis: High (13)

Final Score

Uncertainty:

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

References:

Responsible Party:

Comment Format:

Pest Rating: A

California Pest Rating for

Aleurodicus dispersus Russell (Spiraling Whitefly)

Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

History & Status:

Consequences of Introduction:

Consequences of Introduction to California for Aleurodicus dispersus (Spiraling Whitefly): High(14)

Final Score

Uncertainty:

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

References:

Responsible Party:

Comment Format:

Pest Rating: A

California Pest Rating for

Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (Cooley): Magnolia White Scale

Hemiptera: Diaspididae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

History & Status:

Consequences of Introduction:

Consequences of Introduction to California for Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (Magnolia White Scale): High (14)

Final Score

Uncertainty:

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

References:

Responsible Party:

Comment Format:

Pest Rating: A

California Pest Rating for

Ripersiella hibisci (Kawai & Takagi): Root Mealybug

Hemiptera: Rhizoecidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

History & Status:

Consequences of Introduction:

Consequences of Introduction to California for Ripersiella hibisci (root mealybug): High (14)

Final Score:

Uncertainty:

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

References:

Responsible Party:

Comment Format:

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Ceroplastes stellifer (Stellate Scale): High (13**)

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Dysmicoccus texensis: High (13)**

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Aleurodicus dispersus (Spiraling Whitefly): High(14)**

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Ripersiella hibisci (root mealybug): High (14)**

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis (Trilobe Scale): High (14)**

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Planococcus minor (Pacific Mealybug): High (15)**

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Thysanofiorinia nephelii (Longan Scale): Medium(9)**

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Lindingaspis floridana (Floridana Scale): Medium (10)**