Category Archives: Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Entomology: Insects, Mites & Earthworms

A Thrips | Coremothrips pallidus Hood

California Pest Rating for
Coremothrips pallidus Hood: a thrips
Thysanoptera: Thripidae
Pest Rating: A

 


PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

Coremothrips pallidus was recently reported to be established in Hawaii (Mound et al., 2017).  It is currently Q-rated, and a permanent pest rating proposal is required to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Coremothrips pallidus is a tiny (~1 mm in length), pale yellowish-white thrips (Hood, 1925).  It has been found feeding on avocado leaves in Hawaii (Mound et al., 2017).  Adults and larvae were found on Guettarda scabra (Rubiaceae) in Guadeloupe, which suggests that this plant was being fed upon (Etienne et al., 2015).  It has also been found on leaves of other plants in the families Bixaceae, Combretaceae, Sterculiaceae, and Ulmaceae, but it is not known if these records represent feeding (Cavalleri, 2015; Etienne et al., 2015; Goldarazena et al., 2012; Hood, 1925).

Worldwide Distribution:  Coremothrips pallidus has been reported from Central America (Panama), South America (Brazil), and the Caribbean (Guadeloupe, Saint Vincent, and Trinidad) (Cavalleri, 2005; Etienne et al., 2015; Monteiro, 2002; Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network).  It was recently reported to be established on the islands of Hawaii and Oahu in Hawaii (Mound et al., 2017).

Official Control: Coremothrips pallidus is not known to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  Coremothrips pallidus is not known to be present in California.

California Interceptions:  Coremothrips pallidus has not been intercepted in California.

The risk Coremothrips pallidus would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Coremothrips pallidus appears to feed on at least two species of plants, including avocado. Avocado is widely planted in southern California.  However, this thrips is apparently restricted to tropical or subtropical areas.  It is possible that it could become established in a limited portion of California.  Therefore, Coremothrips pallidus receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Although pallidus has been reported from several plants species, only two of these plants are considered verified hosts here: Avocado (because the report specified that feeding had occurred) and Guettarda scabra (because adults and larvae were found on this plant), representing two families. It is likely that some of the other plants in the families listed above (under Background) were also fed upon.  Therefore, C. pallidus receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Coremothrips pallidus has wings and presumably flies.  It could also be dispersed artificially via transport of infested plant material.  Lastly, it may be capable of wind-aided dispersal.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: Coremothrips pallidus has been reported to feed on avocado, which is an important crop in California.  If this species was established in California, it is possible that it could lower the value of avocados.  Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

Economic Impact: B

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 1

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Coremothrips pallidus feeds on plants in at least two families. If this species became established in California, it would encounter plants that are not present in the area of its current distribution.  If it fed on these plants, it is possible that this thrips could have an impact on natural communities.    Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact: A

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

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

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

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

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

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

Environmental Impact Score: 2

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Coremothrips pallidus: 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: Coremothrips pallidus is not known to occur in California.  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

7) The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: Medium (9)

Uncertainty:

Coremothrips pallidus is fairly widely distributed, and yet there do not appear to be any reports of this species being a pest.  It is therefore possible that this proposal is overly pessimistic and this thrips may not become a problem even if it was established in California. Some thrips are vectors of plant viruses, and it is possible (though no reports were found of C. pallidus vectoring diseases) that this species could transmit virus diseases of avocado if it was established in California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Coremothrips pallidus is a plant-feeding thrips that attacks avocado and is not known to be present in California.  If it became established in this state, it could impact avocado cultivation and could also have environmental impacts.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

Cavalleri, A.  2005.  Comunidades de tripes (Insecta: Thysanoptera) em flores e ramos, com ênfase em Asteraceae, no Parque Estadual de Itapuã, Vlamão, RS.  Ph.D. dissertation.  Instituto de Biociências da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre.

Etienne, J., Ryckewaert, P., and B. Michel.  2015.  Thrips (Insecta: Thysanoptera) of Guadeloupe and Martinique: Updated check-list with new information on their ecology and natural enemies.  Florida Entomologist.  98(1): 298-304.

Goldarazena, A., Gattesco, F., Atencio, R., and C. Korytowski.  2012.  An updated checklist of the Thysanoptera of Panama with comments on host associations.  Check List.  8(6): 1232-1247.

Hood, J.D.  1925.  New neotropical Thysanoptera collected by C.B. Williams.  1925.  Psyche.  32: 48-69.

Monteiro, R.  2002.  The Thysanoptera fauna of Brazil.  Pages 325-340 in R. Marullo and L. Mound, editors.  Thrips and Tospoviruses: Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Thysanoptera.  Australian National Insect Collection, Canberra.  390 pp.

Mound, L.A., Matsunaga, J.N., Bushe, B., Hoddle, M.S., and A. Wells.  2017.  Adventive Thysanoptera species in the Hawaiian Islands: New records and putative host associations.  Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society.  49: 17-28.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed 13 November 2017.  http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu


Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/30/18 – 6/14/18


*NOTE:

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


Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating: A

 


Posted by ls 

Thrips | Indusiothrips seshadrii Priesner

California Pest Rating  for
Indusiothrips seshadrii Priesner: thrips
Thysanoptera: Thripidae
Pest Rating: A

 


PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

A specimen of Indusiothrips seshadrii was recently found on Oahu Island, Hawaii (Mound et al., 2017).  It is currently Q-rated, and a permanent pest rating proposal is required to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Indusiothrips seshadrii is a small (~1 mm in length), whitish-yellow thrips (Priesner, 1952).  It has been reported from unidentified ferns in India and Hawaii (Mound et al., 2017; Priesner, 1952).  This species appears to be rarely collected, and little additional information is available regarding its biology.

Worldwide Distribution:  Indusiothrips seshadrii is known from, and is presumed native to India and Malaysia (Kudô, 1992; Priesner, 1952).  It has been introduced to Oahu, Hawaii (Mound et al., 2017).

Official Control: Indusiothrips seshadrii is not known to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  Indusiothrips seshadrii is not known to occur in California.

California Interceptions:  Indusiothrips seshadrii has not been intercepted in California.

The risk Indusiothrips seshadrii would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Although seshadrii is presumed to feed on ferns, the species it feeds on are not known. California has many species of native ferns, and it is possible that I. seshadrii could find suitable host plants over much of the state.  However, this thrips is currently known to be limited to areas with a tropical climate.  For this reason, I. seshadrii is not expected to be capable of establishing over more than a very limited area.  Therefore, Indusiothrips seshadrii receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Indusiothrips seshadrii may feed on ferns. However, it is not known what species in particular act as hosts.  The fact that it is known from India, Malaysia, and Hawaii suggests that more than a single species of fern is involved.  To incorporate this uncertainty, host range will be considered to be moderate.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: This species has wings and presumably flies (Priesner, 1952).  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: Indusiothrips seshadrii is presumed to feed on ferns.  It has not been reported to be a pest, and it does not appear to pose an economic threat to California.  Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

Economic Impact:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 1

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Indusiothrips seshadrii is presumed to feed on ferns. No reports were found indicating the extent, if any, of damage inflicted by these thrips on ferns.  However, this could simply be because the host plants are not economically significant.  There are many rare, native ferns in California.  If this thrips became established in California, it could feed on and impact our native ferns.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact:  B

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

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

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

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

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

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

Environmental Impact Score: 2

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Indusiothrips seshadrii: Low (8)

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

7) The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: Low (8)

Uncertainty:

No reports were found indicating that I. seshadrii has any economic or environmental impact, although this could simply reflect a lack of study of the biology of this species because it does not feed on economically-significant plants.  It is possible that I. seshadrii may not be capable of becoming established in California because it requires a tropical climate.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Indusiothrips seshadrii is a thrips that apparently feeds on ferns and is not known to be present in California.  It poses a risk to the environment, including rare fern species, of which there are many in California.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

Kudô, I.  1992.  A new Malaysian thrips with notes on some species of Dendrothripoides and Indusiothrips (Thysanoptera, Thripidae).  Insecta Matsumurana.  47: 91-101.

Mound, L.A., Matsunaga, J.N., Bushe, B., Hoddle, M.S., and A. Wells.  2017.  Adventive Thysanoptera species in the Hawaiian Islands: New records and putative host associations.  Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society.  49: 17-28.

Priesner, H.  1952.  On some new genera and species of Thysanoptera from the Oriental region.  Indian Journal of Entomology.  13: 183-200.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed 18 December 2017. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu


Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/30/18 – 6/14/18


*NOTE:

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


Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating: A

 


Posted by ls 

Weevil | Dryophthorus homoeorhynchus Perkins

California Pest Rating for 
Dryophthorus homoeorhynchus Perkins: weevil
Coleoptera: Dryopthoridae
Pest Rating: C

 


PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background:  This beetle is black in color, elongate, and 4.5-6 mm in length.  The species has a short rostrum (“beak”) (Perkins, 1900).  Larvae of all species of Dryophthorus, including D. homoeorhynchus, apparently feed on rotting plant material, primarily wood.  Dryophthorus homoeorhynchus is reported to feed on decomposing Chrysodracon species (Dracaenaceae) in Hawaii (Swezey, 1931; Swezey, 1954; Wagner et al., 2005).  Other species in the genus are reported to feed on rotting hardwood and conifer wood, and at least one species has been reported to feed on rotting tree fern fronds (Hawaiian Entomological Society, 1928; O’Brien, 1997).

Worldwide Distribution:  This beetle is native to, and is only known to occur in Hawaii.  The species has been reported from Hawaii, Oahu, Maui, and Molokai islands (Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2009; Swezey, 1954).

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

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

California Interceptions:  This beetle was intercepted on pineapple from Hawaii in February 2004 (California Department of Food and Agriculture).

The risk Dryophthorus homoeorhynchus would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Dryophthorus homoeorhynchus is only known to occur in Hawaii. If this beetle requires the climate found in its current area of distribution, then only a small portion of California would offer a similar suitable climate.   At least one species in the family Dracaenaceae, Dracaena draco, is grown as an outdoor plant in California and could possibly serve as a host plant for homoeorhynchus.  Due to the apparent climate restrictions, it appears unlikely that this beetle could become established in more than a small portion of California.  Therefore, D. homoeorhynchus receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Dryophthorus homoeorhynchus is only known to feed on the genus Chrysodracon. Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: The biology of homoeorhynchus is poorly known.  The beetle is assumed to fly.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: This beetle is only known to feed on dead plant material, as are all other members of the genus.  Negative economic impacts are unlikely if this beetle became established in California.  The species apparently feeds on decomposing plant material, not freshly-cut wood, and is known to be restricted to plants in the family Dracaenaceae, therefore there is little risk to timber. Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

Economic Impact:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 1

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Negative environmental impacts of this species if it became established in California appear minimal. The species feeds on dead plant material, and it appears to be restricted to a family of plants, the Dracaenaceae, that do not include any native California species.  Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact:

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: 1

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Dryophthorus homoeorhynchus: Low (6)

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

7) The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: Low (6)

Uncertainty:

Dryophthorus homoeorhynchus may be able to tolerate cooler temperatures than are present in its native distribution.  If this is the case, the species could become established over a greater portion of California if suitable plant material is present.  The beetle may also be able to feed on plants in families other than Dracaenaceae.  Feeding on living plant tissue, however, has not been reported in Hawaii and apparently all species in the genus Dryophthorus feed on dead, rotting plant tissue.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Dryophthorus homoeorhynchus is a tropical/subtropical beetle that feeds on dead plants in the family Dracaenaceae, and it is a member of a genus that is apparently restricted to dead, rotting plant material.  This beetle appears to pose no threat, economic or environmental, to California.  For these reasons, a “C” rating is justified.


References:

California Department of Food and Agriculture.  Pest and damage record database.  Accessed March 22, 2018. https://pdr.cdfa.ca.gov/PDR/pdrmainmenu.aspx

Hawaiian Entomological Society.  1928.  January 6, 1927; notes and exhibitions.  Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society.  7: 1-31.

Natural Resources Conservation Service.  2009.  At-risk species and habitats lists.  Biology Technical Note.  22: 1-403.

O’Brien, C.W.  1997.  A catalog of the Coleoptera of America north of Mexico.  Family: Curculionidae.  Subfamilies: Acicnemidinae, Cossoninae, Rhytirrhininae, Molytinae, Petalochilinae, Trypetidinae, Dryophthorinae, Tachygoninae, Thecesterninae.  United States Department of Agriculture.  48 pp.

Perkins, R.C.L.  1900.  II.  Coleoptera Rhyncophora, Proterhinidae, Heteromera and Cioidae.  117-270 in   (D. Sharp, ed.) Fauna Hawaiiensis.  Cambridge University Press.  London.  579 pp.

Swezey, O.H.  1931.  Some new records of insects on Molokai.  Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society.  7: 485-488.

Swezey, O.H.  1954.  Forest entomology in Hawaii.  Bernice P. Bishop Museum Special Publication.  44: 1-265.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed March 20, 2018. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu

Wagner, W.L., Herbst, D.R., and Lorence, D.H.  2005.  Flora of the Hawaiian Islands.  Accessed March 20, 2018. http://botany.si.edu/pacificislandbiodiversity/hawaiianflora/index.htm


Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/30/18 – 6/14/18


*NOTE:

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


Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating: C

 


Posted by ls 

A Leafhopper | Paraulacizes irrorata (Fabricus)

California Pest Rating for
Paraulacizes irrorata (Fabricius): a leafhopper
Hemiptera: Cicadellidae
Pest Rating: A

 


PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background:  This is a large (~14 mm in length) leafhopper that is dark with numerous tiny, yellow spots (Overall and Rebek, 2017; Young, 1968).  It is reported to feed on a variety of plants, including thistles (Cirsium spp.) (Asteraceae), crape myrtle (Lagerstroemia indica) (Lythraceae), Virginia wildrye (Elymus virginicus) (Poaceae), horseweed (Conyza canadensis) (Asteraceae), prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola) (Asteraceae), wholeleaf rosinweed (Silphium integrifolium) (Asteraceae), and sorghum (Sorghum sp.) (Poaceae).  It is found in vineyards, fruit orchards, and tree nurseries, so it is possible that it feeds on grapevines and trees (Ma et al., 2010; Myers et al., 2007; Overall, 2013).  Eggs are laid inside twigs and woody/hardened stems and leaf petioles (Tipping et al., 2006).  In a study in North Carolina vineyards, P. irrorata was shown to carry Xylella fastidiosa, the bacteria that causes Pierce’s disease and almond leaf scorch (Myers et al., 2007; Sisterson et al., 2010).  However, P. irrorata has not yet been shown to transmit the disease (Overall and Rebek, 2017).

Worldwide Distribution:  Paraulacizes irrorata is reported from the central, northeastern, and southeastern United States, Canada (Ontario), and northern Mexico (Maw et al., 2000; Pajero et al., 2008).

Official Control: Paraulacizes irrorata is not known to be under official control anywhere.

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

California Interceptions:  Paraulacizes irrorata has been intercepted on plants from Arkansas, West Virginia, Louisiana, and Oklahoma in 1992, 2000, and 2007, in a trailer from Arkansas in 2017, on aircraft from Tennessee in 2000 and 2002, and on a FedEx shipment from Florida in 2017 (California Department of Food and Agriculture).

The risk Paraulacizes irrorata would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: The distribution of Paraulacizes irrorata extends from northern Mexico to Ontario, Canada.  This suggests that it could become established over a wide area in California.  This leafhopper feeds on a wide variety of plants, and there are likely suitable host plants in much of the state.  Therefore, Paraulacizes irrorata receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Paraulacizes irrorata has been reported to feed on at least seven genera of plants in three families, but it probably has a much broader host range than this. Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Paraulacizes irrorata presumably flies.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: Paraulacizes irrorata feeds on a broad range of plants.  The feeding damage could possibly lower crop yield, but a more serious concern, and a general one for the family Cicadellidae, is the potential for vectoring plant diseases.  It is not known if irrorata can vector plant diseases, but it has been confirmed as a carrier of Xylella fastidiosa, the bacteria that causes Pierce’s disease and almond leaf scorch.  If it was introduced to California, P. irrorata could potentially vector such pathogens and impact crops, including grapes and almonds.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Economic Impact:  A, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 2

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: The presence of Praulacizes irrorata could trigger treatment programs. Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact:  D

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: 2

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Paraulacizes irrorata: Medium (12)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

The possible impact of Paraulacizes irrorata is somewhat speculative and it is based on demonstrated examples of impact from other cicadellid species and the possibility of this leafhopper vectoring Pierce’s disease (or other diseases) in crops, including grapes.  This leafhopper has not been proven to transmit any plant diseases.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Paraulacizes irrorata is a plant-feeding insect that is potentially capable of vectoring plant diseases, including the causative agent of Pierce’s disease, Xylella fastidiosa.  There is little evidence that P. irrorata has a significant economic or environmental impact in its current range.  However, if it was established in California, this insect would be exposed to a new combination of variables, including new host plants and plant diseases; it is difficult to predict what impacts could result.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

California Department of Food and Agriculture.  Pest and damage record database.  Accessed April 2, 2018. https://pdr.cdfa.ca.gov/PDR/pdrmainmenu.aspx

Maw, H.E.L., Foottit, R.G., Hamilton, K.G.A., and Scudder, G.G.E.  2000.  Checklist of the Hemiptera of Canada and Alaska.  National Research Council, Canada.  220 pp.

Myers, A.L., Sutton, T.B., Abad, J.A., and Kennedy, G.G.  2007.  Pierce’s disease of grapevines; Identification of the primary vectors in North Carolina.  Phytopathology.  97: 1440-1450.

Overall, L.M.  2013.  Incidence of Xylella fastidiosa in Oklahoma, survey of potential insect vectors, and identification of potential plant reservoir hosts.  Ph.D. Dissertation.  Oklahoma State University.  155 pp.

Overall, L.M. and Rebek, E.J.  2017.  Insect vectors and current management strategies for diseases caused by Xylella fastidiosa in the southern United States.  Journal of Integrated Pest Management.  8: 1-12.

Paiero, S.M., Marshall, S.A., Pratt, P.D., and Buck, M.  2008.  The insects of Ojibway Prairie, a southern Ontario tallgrass prairie.

Sisterson, M.S., Thammiraju, S.R., Lynn-Patterson, K., Groves, R.L., and Daane, K.M.  2010.  Epidemiology of diseases caused by Xylella fastidiosa in California: Evaluation of alfalfa as a source of vectors and inocula. Plant Disease. 94: 827-834.

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

Tipping, C., Triapitsyn, S.V., and Mizell III, R.F.  2006.  First record of an egg parasitoid for the North American proconiine sharpshooter Paraulacacizes irrorata (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae), with notes on rearing techniques.  Florida Entomologist.  89(2): 288-289.

Young, D.A.  1968.  Taxonomic study of the Cicadellinae (Homoptera: Cicadellidae); Part 1: Proconiini.  United States National Museum Bulletin.  261.  287 pp.


Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/30/18 – 6/14/18


*NOTE:

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


Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating: A

 


Posted by ls 

Longhorned Beetle | Arhopalus pinetorum (Wollaston)

California Pest Rating for
Arhopalus pinetorum (Wollaston) |  Longhorned Beetle
Coleoptera: Cerambycidae
Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background:  Arhopalus pinetorum is a reddish-brown beetle that is approximately 14 mm in length (Wollaston, 1863).  Like most other cerambycids, the larvae develop in wood.  This species is apparently restricted to dead pine trees with bark; it has been reported to develop in pines that are native to its area of distribution (including Canary Island pine, Pinus canariensis) as well as introduced pines (García, 2005; Vives, 2007).

Worldwide Distribution:  Arhopalus pinetorum is native to the Canary Islands of Spain and the Madeira archipelago of Portugal.  This beetle is rated as Near Threatened by the IUCN because of its small area of distribution, although it can be abundant where it occurs (Dodelin et al., 2017; Vives, 2007).

Official Control: Arhopalus pinetorum is not known to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  This beetle is not known to be present in California, although it was found in Los Angeles County in 2001 (see California Interceptions, below) (Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network).

California Interceptions:  This species was trapped in Los Angeles County in July 2001 (Duerr, 2005; Rabaglia et al., 2008).

The risk Arhopalus pinetorum would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: The distribution of pinetorum includes areas with Mediterranean, desert, and subtropical climates. The climate of a large portion of California could be suitable for the establishment of this species, but northern and high mountain areas may be too cold.  Pines are widely distributed in California, and A. pinetorum is not restricted to pine species that occur in its native range, so suitable host plants are likely to be present statewide.  Therefore, this species receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: This species is apparently limited to pines (Pinus species). It originally may have been restricted to the native Pinus canariensis, but has been reported to feed on other (unidentified) species as well.  Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Other Arhopalus species fly, and it is presumed that pinetorum can as well (Pawson et al., 2010).  Arhopalus pinetorum may be artificially dispersed through the movement of wood products, including firewood.  Arhopalus is the most commonly-intercepted genus of cerambycid in wood products and wood packing materials at United States ports of entry (Eyre and Haack, 2017).  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: This beetle is apparently restricted to dead pines.  No reports were found of any Arhopalus species attacking healthy, living trees.  Cerambycids that attack dead trees (trees that have been cut or killed by fire or other causes) reduce the value of the wood, both through their tunneling as well as from staining by fungi that invade through the beetle’s tunnels (Lowell et al., 2010).  More rapid harvesting of wood is one method used to avoid such damage.  Arhopalus species are capable of degrading fire-killed trees before they can be harvested (Bradbury, 1998; Eaton and Lyon, 1955; Hosking and Bain, 1977).  Arhopalus pinetorum could impact salvage harvesting of fire-killed timber in California.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Economic Impact:  B, D

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 2

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Arhopalus pinetorum is only known to feed on dead pine trees. Therefore, it is not likely to threaten living trees.  However, it could compete with native wood-feeding insects, and may influence the degradation of dead pines in California.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact:  A

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: 2

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Arhopalus pinetorum: 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: The 2001 detection in Los Angeles County represents the only known find of this species in this state.  For the purpose of this proposal, it is assumed that A. pinetorum is not established in California.  The species receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

7) The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: Medium (9)

Uncertainty:

This beetle would possibly display broader feeding preferences in California.  There is some suggestion in the literature that Arhopalus species may sometimes attack trees that are living (but “sick” or otherwise compromised), but documented examples of such attacks were not found (Wang and Leschen, 2003).  If living (whether stressed or not) trees could be attacked in California by A. pinetorum, then the risk posed by this beetle has been underestimated in this proposal.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Arhopalus pinetorum is a beetle that feeds on dead pine trees.  This species could become established in a large portion of California, and if this occurred, it could have an impact on the timber industry and on the native decomposer fauna associated with dead pines.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

Bradbury, P.M.  1998.  The effects of the burnt pine longhorn beetle and wood-staining fungi on fire damaged Pinus radiata in Canterbury.  New Zealand Forestry.  43: 28-31.

Dodelin, B., Alexander, K., Audisio, P., Jansson, N., Legakis, A., Liberto, A., Makris, C., and X. Vazquez.  2017. Arhopalus pinetorum. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.  Accessed February 20, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017-3.RLTS.T86803993A87310373.en

Duerr, D.A. 2005. Early detection and rapid response pilot project.  In (K.W. Gottshalk, ed.)

Proceedings, 16th United States Department of Agriculture Interagency research forum on gypsy moth and other invasive species 2005.  USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station. (pp. 16-17)

Eaton, C.B. and R.L. Lyon.  1955.  Arhopalus productus (Lec.), a borer in new buildings.  United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service California Forest and Range Experiment Station Technical Paper.  11: 1-11.

Eyre, D. and R.A. Haack.  2017.  Invasive cerambycid pests and biosecurity measures.  In (Q. Wang, ed.) Cerambycidae of the World: Biology and Pest Management.  CRC Press.  (pp. 563-618).

García, R.  2005.  Distribución de la familia Cerambycidae (Coleoptera) en la isla de La Palma.  Revista de Estudios Generales de la Isla de La Palma.  1: 141-170.

Hosking, G.P. and J. Bain.  1977.  Arhopalus ferus (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae); its biology in New Zealand.  New Zealand Journal of Forestry Science.  7(1): 3-15.

Lowell, E.C., Rapp, V.A., Haynes, R.W., and C. Cray.  2010.  Effects of fire, insect, and pathogen damage on wood quality of dead and dying western conifers.  United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.  General Technical Report PNW-GTR-816.  73 pp.

Pawson, S., Watson, M., and A. Brin.  2010.  Relative attraction of Arhopalus ferus to white and yellow site lighting at Port Tauranga.  Scion.

Rabaglia, R., Duerr, D., Acciavatti, R., and I. Ragenovich.  2008.  Early detection and rapid response for non-native bark and ambrosia beetles.  United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Health Protection.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed February 26, 2017. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu

Vives, E.  2007.  Nuevo catálogo de los Cerambycidae (Coleoptera) de la Península Ibérica, islas Baleares e islas atlánticas: Canarias, Açores y Madeira.  Sociedad Entomológica Aragonesa.  Zaragoza.  211 pp.

Wang, Q. and R.A.B. Leschen.  2003.  Identification and distribution of Arhopalus species (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Aseminae) in Australia and New Zealand.  New Zealand Entomologist.  26: 53-59.

Wollaston, T.V.  1863.  On the Canarian longicorns.  Journal of Entomology.  2(8): 99-110.


Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/25/18 – 6/9/18


*NOTE:

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


Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating: A

 


Posted by ls 

Jewel Beetle | Actenodes auronotatus (Gory & Laporte)

California Pest Rating for
Jewel Beetle | Actenodes auronotatus (Gory & Laporte)
Coleoptera: Buprestidae
Pest Rating: A

 


PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background:  Adult Actenodes auronotatus are approximately 1.5 cm in length.  The upper surface is brown and slightly bronzy with metallic golden-green spots (Fisher, 1942).  The larvae of this beetle, like most buprestids, live in and feed on wood.  This beetle has been found inside (presumably having developed in) the wood of Avicennia germinans (Verbenaceae), Cajanus cajan (Fabaceae), and Taxodium distichum (Cupressaceae) (Fisher, 1942; Hanula,1993; MacRae and Basham, 2013).  When information on the condition of the wood was given, it was reported to be dead.  Actenodes auronotatus has also been associated with (but not necessarily feeding on) Casuarina equisetifolia (Casuarinaceae) (Capelouto, 1949).  Other Actenodes species are associated with Acacia (Fabaceae), Acer (Aceraceae), Carya (Juglandaceae), Gleditsia (Fabaceae), Prosopis (Fabaceae), Quercus (Fagaceae), Ulmus (Ulmaceae), and Zelkova (Ulmaceae) species (Camacho-Pantoja, 2009; Hansen et al., 2012; MacRae and Bellamy, 2013; Nelson and MacRae, 1990; Westcott, 1990; Westcott et al., 1989).  Some of these records were of beetles reared from, or collected from the inside of branches of live trees, but in these cases, it was not reported if the branches themselves were alive or dead.

Worldwide Distribution:  This species is reported from Cuba, Haiti, eastern Mexico, and the southeastern United States (Florida, Georgia, and Louisiana) (Cancino and Blanco, 2002; Carlton et al., 2014; Fisher, 1942; García et al., 2010; Hespenheide and Bellamy, 2004; Peck, 2005).  Blackwelder (1944) reported A. auronotatus from Chile, but more recent reports of this species in that country were not found.

Official Control: Actenodes auronotatus is not known to be under official control anywhere.

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

California Interceptions:  Actenodes auronotatus was intercepted in a trailer from Florida in May 2006 (California Department of Food and Agriculture).

The risk Actenodes auronotatus would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Actenodes auronotatus is apparently restricted to areas with tropical or subtropical climates, and it seems likely that if it can establish in California, it would be restricted to a limited area. Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: This beetle has been found inside and presumably developed in the wood of at least three botanical families. Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Actenodes auronotatus presumably flies and can be moved in infested wood, including firewood.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: Actenodes auronotatus has not been reported to feed on living trees, and no reports were found of any species in this genus being a pest.  However, some species of Buprestidae that are known to primarily feed on injured or dead trees can attack apparently healthy (though possibly stressed, from drought, for example) trees (Fettig, 2016; Furniss and Carolin, 1977).  There is little information available on the biology of auronotatus or the genus Actenodes.  If A. auronotatus can attack living trees, it could lower yield of timber.   Even if A. auronotatus cannot attack living trees, it could damage cut timber, lowering its value.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Economic Impact:  A, B

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 2

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

4) Environmental Impact: If Actenodes auronotatus can attack living trees, it could impact forest ecosystems in California. Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact:  A

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: 2

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Actenodes auronotatus: 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: Actenodes auronotatus is not known to be present in California.  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

The limited biological information available on A. auronotatus means that there is significant uncertainty in this proposal.  The most significant uncertainty is that regarding the potential for A. auronotatus to attack living trees.  Some buprestids that normally live in dying or dead trees attack living trees in dry conditions (e.g., during droughts).  Climate change may result in greater drought stress in California, which could make trees more susceptible to beetles like this one.  There is also uncertainty regarding the size range of wood that A. auronotatus utilizes.  It may only use branches, in which case the economic impact on already-cut wood would likely be minimal.  This proposal has taken a cautious approach.  It is possible that this  beetle feeds only on dead branches, in which case it would likely not pose an economic threat to California (because living trees and cut timber of larger dimensions would not be attacked).  In this case, it could still pose an environmental threat, because it would likely compete with native beetles that live inside dead wood.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Actenodes auronotatus is a member of a beetle family that includes important forest pests.  Although this species is not known to attack living trees, little is known about the biology of this species to exclude that possibility.  There is evidence that other buprestids that normally live in dead or dying trees can sometimes attack live trees.  If A. auronotatus can attack living trees or cut timber, it could have economic and environmental impacts in California, where it is not yet known to be present.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

Blackwelder, R.E.  1944.  Checklist of the coleopterous insects of Mexico, Central America, the West Indies, and South America.  Bulletin of the United States National Museum. 185(2): 189–341.

California Department of Food and Agriculture.  Pest and damage record database.  Accessed February 14, 2018. https://pdr.cdfa.ca.gov/PDR/pdrmainmenu.aspx

Camacho-Pantoja, A.  2009.  Árboles de importancia forestal hospedantes de Buprestidae (Coleoptera) en México.  In (A.E. Martínez, E.E. Venegas, J.A.A. Soto, and M.P.C. Grijalva, eds.): Memoria del XV Simposio Nacional de Parasitología Forestal (pp. 36-39).

Capelouto, R.  1949.  Notes on the Florida Buprestidae (Coleoptera).  The Florida Entomologist.  32(3): 109-114.

Carlton, C.E., Johnson, W., Allison, J.D., MacRae, T.C., Tishechkin, A., Virgets, W., Ferro, M.L., and J.-S. Park.  2014.  Buprestidae of Louisiana: From traditional faunistics to early detection of the Emerald Ash Borer (poster).

E.R. Cancino and J.M.C. Blanco.  2002.  Artrópodos terrestres de los estados de Tamaulipas y Nuevo León, México.  Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas.  377 pp.

Fettig, C.J.  2016.  Chapter 18: Native bark beetles and wood borers in Mediterranean forests of California.  In (T.D. Paine and F. Lieutier, eds.) Insects and Diseases of Mediterranean Forests (pp. 499-528).  Springer.  892 pp.

Fisher, W.S.  1942.  A revision of the North American species of buprestid beetles belonging to the tribe Chrysobothrini.  United States Department of Agriculture Miscellaneous Publication.  470: 1-275.

Furniss, R.L. and V.M. Carolin.  1977.  Western forest insects. USDA Forest Service Miscellaneous Publication, Washington, DC.

García, I.F., Reyes Sánchez, E.E., and A.D. Álvarez.  2010.  Colección entomológica “Juan C. Gundlach”: Serie Elateriformia (Coleoptera).  Poeyana.  499: 5-12.

Hansen, J.A., Basham, J.P., Oliver, J.B., Youseef, N.N., Klingeman, W.E., Moulton, J.K., and D.C. Fare.  2012.  New state and host plant records for metallic woodboring beetles (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) in Tennessee, U.S.A.  The Coleopterists Bulletin.  66(4): 337-343.

Hanula, J.L.  1993.  Relationship of wood-feeding insects and coarse woody debris.  In (J.W. McMinn and D.A. Crossley, Jr., eds.) Biodiversity and Coarse Woody Debris in Southern Forests (pp. 55-81).  United States Department of Agriculture.  146 pp.

Hespenheide, H.A. and C.L. Bellamy.  2004.  The first Antillean Pachyschelus, and a new Leiopleura, from Hispaniola (Coleoptera: Buprestidae).  Folia Heyrovskana.  12(2-3): 105-112.

MacRae, T.C. and J.P. Basham.  2013.  Distributional, biological, and nomenclatural notes on Buprestidae (Coleoptera) occurring in the U.S. and Canada.  Pan-Pacific Entomologist.  89(3): 125-142.

MacRae, T.C. and C.L. Bellamy.  2013.  Two new species of Actenodes Dejean (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) from southern Mexico, with distributional and biological notes on Buprestidae from Mexico and Central America.  Pan-Pacific Entomologist.  89(2): 102-119.

Nelson, G.H. and T.C. MacRae.  1990.  Additional notes on the biology and distribution of Buprestidae (Coleoptera) in North America.  The Coleopterists Bulletin.  44(3): 349-354.

Peck, S.B.  2005.  A checklist of the beetles of Cuba with data on distributions and bionomics.  Arthropods of Florida and Neighboring Land Areas.  Volume 18.  Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.  241pp.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed February 9, 2018. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu

Westcott, R.L.  1990.  Distributional, biological and taxonomic notes on North American Buprestidae (Coleoptera).  Insecta Mundi.  4(1-4): 73-80.

Westcott, R.L., Atkinson, T.H., Hespenheide, H.A., and G.H. Nelson.  1989.  New country and state records, and other notes for Mexican Buprestidae (Coleoptera).  Insecta Mundi.  3(3): 217-232.


Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/25/18 – 6/9/18


*NOTE:

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


Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating: A

 


Posted by ls 

Hypothenemus eruditus Westwood

California Pest Rating for
Hypothenemus eruditus Westwood
Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae
Pest Rating: B

 


PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background: This tiny (1-1.2 mm in length) bark beetle is one of the most widely-distributed and variable species in the genus Hypothenemus (Bright and Stark, 1973).  The beetle has been reported to feed on hundreds of species of plants and other materials as well, including fungus and even the cover of a book (evidently the reason for the choice of the name eruditus) (Huang, 2016; Turner and Beaver, 2015; Wood, 1982).  In plants, it is reported to feed in dying twigs and branches (Bright and Stark, 1973).  Females mate with their flightless male siblings before leaving the gallery.  Hypothenemus eruditus does not appear to cause any recognized economic or environmental impact (Huang, 2016; Turner and Beaver, 2015).  Recent work suggest that there may be multiple (>10) cryptic species that are currently identified as Hypothenemus eruditus; this is perhaps not surprising, given the many synonyms listed for it, its minute size, and its morphological variability (Huang, 2016; Kirkendall and Jordal, 2006).

Worldwide Distribution: Hypothenemus eruditus is widely distributed.  The species occurs in Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, North America, Central America, and South America.  In the United States, it occurs in the eastern United States and in California (Bright and Stark, 1973; Wood, 1982.

Official Control: Hypothenemus eruditus is not known to be under any official control.

California Distribution:  Hypothenemus eruditus has been reported from Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, and Santa Barbara counties.  Records representing collections exclusive of nurseries were found for the following localities: Santa Barbara County: Arroyo Hondo Preserve (2002); Santa Rosa Island, Cherry Canyon, Torrey pines grove, and Windmill Canyon (2008); San Diego County: Santee (2012) (PDR# 1316740) (Bright and Stark, 1973; CDFA Pest and Damage Record; Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network).

California Interceptions: Hypothenemus eruditus has been intercepted twice on shipments entering California: Once on dried twigs from Laos (PDR# 050455) and once on Polyscias fruticosa from Florida (PDR# 063283).  As mentioned above, this beetle was also found on avocado in a residential garden in Santee, San Diego County, California (PDR# 1316740).

The risk Hypothenemus eruditus would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Hypothenemus eruditus occurs widely in the United States.  The species occurs in California and on the east coast, from New Hampshire to Florida and west to Illinois and Texas.  This suggests that eruditus could become established over a significant portion of California.  The list of hosts includes hundreds of species of plants and fungi.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Hypothenemus eruditus is known to feed on hundreds of species of plants, as well as fungi. Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Hypothenemus eruditus is capable of sustained flight. Females mate with their flightless male siblings, so they leave their development site ready to colonize new host material (Huang, 2016).  The beetle can also be transported in wood and wood products. Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: Hypothenemus eruditus is not known to be an economically-significant pest (Huang, 2016).  The species already occurs in California and the eastern United States and it has a widespread world distribution.  However, no reports have been found suggesting that it has an economic impact.  However, there is the possibility that other species, including cryptic ones, could be identified at eruditus.  Such species could pose a threat to California agriculture, for example, lowering crop yield and increasing crop production costs.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Economic Impact: A, B

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: Medium (2)

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Hypothenemus eruditus is not known to have an environmental impact anywhere. The beetle already occurs in California and the eastern United States and no reports were found of it having an environmental impact.  However, this could reflect a lack of research rather than a lack of impact.  In addition, there is the possibility that other species of Hypothenemus, including cryptic ones, could be identified at eruditus.  Such species could pose a threat to the environment, for example, by disrupting natural communities.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact: A

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: Medium (2)

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Hypothenemus eruditus: High (13)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Although this species is likely present in additional areas of California, Hypothenemus eruditus has been reported from outdoor, non-nursery localities in Santa Barbara and San Diego Counties.  It receives a Low (-1) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

The most significant uncertainty regarding Hypothenemus eruditus is the species identity itself.  There is evidence that there are actually multiple (>10) species that are currently recognized as H. eruditus.  There is a risk that a species with biological characteristics differing from those considered for H. eruditus could be intercepted and not be regulated because it is identified as that species.  Such a cryptic species could have greater (than is recognized for H. eruditus) potential for economic and/or environmental impact.  Systematic research on Hypothenemus is needed.  There is also a significant likelihood that H. eruditus is more widespread in California than is currently known.  It is a tiny beetle and is not easy to identify.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Hypothenemus eruditus is widely distributed and is not known to have any economic or environmental impacts.  However, there is evidence that multiple cryptic species of Hypothenemus may be currently identified as H. eruditus.  A cautious approach has been taken and a “B” rating is justified.


References:

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

Huang, Y.T.  2016.  Featured creatures: Hypothenemus eruditus Westwood.  University of Florida. http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/creatures/trees/beetles/Hypothenemus_eruditus.htm

Kirkendall, L. R. and B.H. Jordal.  2006.  The bark and ambrosia beetles (Curculionidae, Scolytinae) of Cocos Island, Costa Rica and the role of mating systems in island zoogeography.  Biological Journal of the Linnean Society.  89: 729-743.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed 5 February 2018. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu

Turner, C.R. and R.A. Beaver.  2015.  Hypothenemus eruditus Westwood and Hypothenemus seriatus (Eichhoff) (Curculionidae: Scolytinae: Cryphalini) in Britain.  The Coleopterist.  24(1): 12-15.

Wood, S.L.  1982.  The bark and ambrosia beetles of North and Central America (Coleoptera: Scolytidae), a taxonomic monograph.  Great Basin Naturalist Memoirs.  6: 1-1356.


Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/25/18 – 6/9/18


*NOTE:

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


Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating: B


Posted by ls 

Pink Hibiscus Mealybug | Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green)

California Pest Rating for
Pink Hibiscus Mealybug | Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green)
Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae
Pest Rating:  A

 


PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

August 26, 2014, Dr. Gillian Watson identified Maconellicoccus hirsutus from a sample collected on 100 heavily infested silk oak trees at a golf course in Rancho Mirage, Riverside County.  The mealybug was previously eradicated from Riverside County in 2011.  Follow-up surveys have revealed that the pest is now widespread and abundant in Riverside County.  An updated pest rating proposal is needed to determine future direction.

History & Status:

BackgroundMaconellicoccus hirsutus is a highly polyphagous mealybug that feeds on the stems, leaves, buds, fruit, and roots of plants in more than 200 genera in 77 plant families1,2.  Economically important hosts include grapes, citrus, avocado, cotton, Prunus spp., Solanum spp., and ornamentals.  While feeding, the mealybug injects toxic saliva into plants that inhibits cell enlargement, causing stunting of new growth and curling and contortion of leaves7.  Entire plants may be stunted and deformed7.  High populations can lead to the death of plants7.  The mealybug can spread long distances through the trade in host plants and fruit.

Worldwide Distribution: Maconellicoccus hirsutus is considered to be native to southern Asia1,2 and has invaded much of the Caribbean, Africa, Asia, Australia, Oceania, and South America.  In North America it has been found in Mexico, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, and Imperial and Riverside counties, California3.  It has recently been detected and is under eradication in Tennessee6.

Official Control: Maconellicoccus hirsutus is listed as a quarantine pest by many nations including Antigua and Barbuda4, Bermuda4, Brazil4, Cayman Islands4, Chile4, Colombia4, Costa Rica4, Ecuador4, El Salvador4, Guatemala4, Honduras4, Israel4, Jamaica4, Japan4, Republic of Korea4, Mexico4, Morocco4, Nicaragua4, Panama4, Paraguay4, Peru4, South Africa4, Turkey4, Uruguay4, and the European Union2.

California DistributionMaconellicoccus hirsutus has been present in Imperial County since 1999.  The mealybug was detected in Riverside County in 2011 and successfully eradicated by the county.  The mealybug was detected again in Riverside County in 2014 infesting 100 silk oak trees at a golf course.

California Interceptions:  Maconellicoccus hirsutus is occasionally intercepted on fruit or plants headed for destinations within California, most often on longan fruits.

The risk Maconellicoccus hirsutus (pink hibiscus mealybug) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Maconellicoccus hirsutus, due to its polyphagous nature, is likely to encounter suitable hosts throughout California. The present distribution of the mealybug corresponds to USDA plant hardiness zones 9-131, which encompasses much of California.  Pink hibiscus 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: Maconellicoccus hirsutus is known to feed on plants in more than 200 genera in 77 plant families.  The mealybug 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: Pink hibiscus mealybug has a high reproductive rate.  Each female lays 150-600 eggs and there can be up to 15 generations per year2.  The crawlers of this mealybug are reported to be very active and are capable of spreading to nearby plants; furthermore, they may be dispersed by wind or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or animals.  The mealybugs may also be spread long distances through the movement of infested plants or fruit.  Maconellicoccus hirsutus 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: Maconellicoccus hirsutus has been present in Imperial County since 1999, where it has been successfully controlled by biological control agents.  No economic damages in California are presently attributed to this pest.  In the presence of effective biological control, the mealybug is not expected to lower crop yields.  In the absence of effective biological control, yields are likely to be reduced (see uncertainty section below).  As it feeds on a wide variety of ornamentals, the mealybug may increase crop production costs in nurseries by triggering new chemical treatments to ensure clean nursery stock.  The mealybug is listed as a quarantine pest by many nations and its presence is likely to disrupt markets for California fresh fruit.  Pink hibiscus mealybug is not expected change cultural practices, vector pestiferous organisms, injure agriculturally important animals, or interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.  Maconellicoccus hirsutus 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: Maconellicoccus hirsutus is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes.  Algodones Dunes sunflower (Helianthus niveus tephrodes), Bakersfield cactus (Opuntia basilaris var. treleasei), and small-leaved rose (Rosa minutifolia) are listed as threatened or endangered plants in California and are potential hosts of this mealybug.  An infestation of the mealybug in Riverside County in 2011 was eradicated by the county, indicating that the presence of this pest may trigger additional official treatment programs.  Additional treatments are also likely in the nursery industry and by residents who find infested plants unsightly.  In some cases, the mealybug is likely to be managed by biological control programs such that it does not significantly impact cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings.  However, due to its extremely high reproductive rate and broad host range it is likely to sometimes cause significant damage to ornamental plants as it encounters them before biological control agents.  Maconellicoccus hirsutus 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: 3

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Maconellicoccus hirsutus (pink hibiscus 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: Maconellicoccus hirsutus is only known to be established in Imperial and Riverside counties. The mealybug receives a Low (-1) in this category.

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

There have been no recent statewide surveys for the mealybug, so it may have a larger distribution within California.  In the absence of surveys or official control, trading partners are likely to regulate the entire state, so range expansions of pink hibiscus mealybug may not trigger new impacts on fruit exports.  Pheidole megacephala (bigheaded ant) has recently been detected in California.  This is an aggressive ant that is likely to tend pink hibiscus mealybug and consume all parasites and predators it encounters, reducing the effectiveness of biological control5.  As bigheaded ant expands its range through southern California it is likely to facilitate the invasion of Maconellicoccus hirsutus and may disrupt the presently successful biological control program.  If this were to occur, yield of economically important crops such as almonds, peaches, pistachios, walnuts, olives, and citrus may be reduced.  Crop quality and production costs by increase in the long term.  This may elevate the economic impact of the pest to High (3).

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Maconellicoccus hirsutus is a highly polyphagous mealybug with a limited distribution within California at present.  If it enters commercial fruit groves and vineyards the presence of the mealybug is likely to close or restrict export markets for fresh fruit.  If found outside of its present distribution, it will likely trigger treatment or biological control programs.  Although pink hibiscus mealybug has been known to be present in California since 1999 it remains under official active management programs including survey and biological control.  The “A” rating is supported while these remain in effect.


References:

1Culliney, T.W.  2014.  Deregulation Evaluation of Established Pests (DEEP); DEEP Report on Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green): Egyptian hibiscus mealybug, pink hibiscus mealybug.

2Data sheets on quarantine pests:  Maconellicoccus hirsutus.  2005.  European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization.  OEPP/EPPO Bulletin 35, 413-415.  http://www.eppo.int/QUARANTINE/insects/Maconellicoccus_hirsutus/DS_Maconellicoccus_hirsutus.pdf

3Ben-Dov, Y. 2014. ScaleNet, Maconellicoccus hirsutus. Available online at http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/pseudoco/Maconellicoccushirsutus.htm  Accessed on 9 April 2014.

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

5Buckley, Ralf and Penny Gullan.  1991.  More aggressive ant species (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) provide better protection for soft scales and mealybugs (Homoptera: Coccidae, Pseudococcidae).  Biotropica 23(3): 282-286. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2388205?uid=3739560&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21104122016081

6NAPIS; Email updated dated September 2, 2014.  http://pest.ceris.purdue.edu/capsreview.php?code=IRAWBIA

7Hoy, Marjorie A., Avas Hamon, and Ru Nguyen. 2006. Common name: pink hibiscus mealybug. University of Florida Featured Creatures. http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/creatures/orn/mealybug/mealybug.htm


Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/25/18 – 6/9/18


*NOTE:

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


Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating:  A

 


Posted by ls

Granulate Ambrosia Beetle | Xylosandrus crassiusculus Motschulsky

California Pest Rating for
Granulate Ambrosia Beetle  |  Xylosandrus crassiusculus Motschulsky
Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae
Pest Rating: A

 


PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background:  Xylosandrus crassiusculus is a moderate-sized (adult females are 2-2.9 mm in length) ambrosia beetle that feeds on over 200 species of plants in 41 families, including alder, azalea, beech, cottonwood, elm, hickory, oaks, pines, maples, and carob (Sargent et al., 2008).  It attacks both stressed and apparently healthy trees, including seedlings, and is considered a pest of ornamental trees in the United States.  The beetle also utilizes freshly-cut wood (Sargent et al., 2008).  Like other ambrosia beetles, the adults and larvae feed on a symbiotic fungus rather than the wood itself.  Adult females mate with males before leaving their gallery, and they can also reproduce via arrhenotokous parthenogenesis (An unmated female lays unfertilized eggs that develop into males. The female mates with her male progeny and then deposits fertilized eggs, which develop into females) (Wood, 1982).

Worldwide Distribution:  Xylosandrus crassiusculus is thought to be native to Southeast Asia.  The species has been introduced to Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, Central America, South America, Hawaii, and the eastern United States (Flechtmann and Atkinson, 2016; United Kingdom Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs, 2015).  Specimens were collected in 1999, 2000, and (in larger numbers) 2004 at a location in Oregon.  The source was apparently wood from the southeastern United States imported for use in railroad ties.  This led to an eradication effort that was reported to be successful in 2010.  In 2015 and 2016, however, more X. crassiusculus were found in the same area, which led to another eradication effort.  This beetle appears to have been successfully eradicated from the area by the end of 2016 (LaBonte, 2010; LaBonte, 2016; LaBonte et al., 2005).

Official Control:  Xylosandrus crassiusculus does not appear to be under official control anywhere, although it is on the EPPO Alert List, and it was the subject of eradication efforts in Oregon.

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

California Interceptions:  Xylosandrus crassiusculus has been intercepted on plant material (including cut flowers and foliage) from Florida and Hawaii (PDR # 023370, 1396560, 1256568, 1251403, 1252446, 053195, and 150P06086553).  One interception was made from incense cedar boards that possibly originated in Louisiana (PDR # 1312482).

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

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Xylosandrus crassiusculus has become established in many areas of the world representing a wide variety of climates. The species may be limited to forests, as it feeds on wood and because the symbiotic fungus probably requires a certain range of humidity.  The range expansion in the eastern United States has been limited to approximately the distribution of the eastern deciduous forests, but the species apparently became established at a location in Oregon before it was eradicated there, which suggests that more humid areas on the west coast would be suitable for this species (Flechtmann and Atkinson, 2016).  The beetle feeds on many species of trees, including pines and oaks.  All of this suggests that it could become established over a wide portion of California.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Xylosandrus crassiusculus is known to feed on over 200 species of plants in 41 families. A wide host range is not unusual for an ambrosia beetle, probably because the fungal symbiosis releases the beetle from some of the constraints of a more typical bark beetle lifestyle (i.e., phloem feeding).  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Adult female Xylosandrus crassiusculus Sibling mating and arrhenotokous parthenogenesis mean a single female can found a population.  This species is evidently capable of being moved with wood shipments.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: Xylosandrus crassiusculus is a pest of ornamental and fruit trees in the United States.  The species causes wilting and death, especially in young trees.  In addition, as an ambrosia beetle, crassiusculus inoculates its galleries with a fungus that serves as food for adults and larvae.  This fungus may not be pathogenic, but other fungi are also carried by the beetles, including known plant pathogens.  In addition, beetle damage can allow other, opportunistic (and sometimes pathogenic) fungi to infect the tree.  This beetle also uses cut logs for development, and is known to damage them and lower their value.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

Economic Impact: A, B, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 3

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

Environmental Impact: Xylosandrus crassiusculus has not been reported to have a significant impact on the environment anywhere it has been introduced. However, in tests, crassiusculus was attracted to California bay laurel (Umbellularia californica) and was apparently able to develop on this tree (Mayfield et al., 2013).  Therefore, it is possible that Xyleborus crassiusculus could pose a threat to California forests.  In addition, this beetle is known to cause damage to ornamental trees.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact: A, E

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: 3

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Xylosandrus crassiusculus: High (15)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Xylosandrus crassiusculus is not known to occur in California (Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network).  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

Lack of evidence for environmental impact may only reflect environmental impact receiving less attention and research than economic impact, so it is possible that this species has an impact on the environment in areas to which it has been introduced.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Xylosandrus crassiusculus is a highly polyphagous pest that has demonstrated an ability to become established over a wide area and has become a pest of ornamental trees.  The species is not known to be present in California, and its potential introduction to this state poses a risk of economic and environmental damage.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.


References:

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

European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization.  2015.  EPPO Alert List.  Accessed February 14, 2018. http://www.eppo.int/DATABASES/pqr/pqr.htm

Flechtmann, C.A.H. and T.H. Atkinson.  2016.  First records of Xylosandrus crassiusculus (Motschulsky) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) from South America, with notes on its distribution and spread in the New World.  The Coleopterists Bulletin.  70(1): 79-83.

LaBonte, J.R.  2010.  Eradication of an ambrosia beetle, Xylosandrus crassiusculus (Motschulsky), in Oregon.  In (K. McManus and K.W. Gottschalk, eds.) 2010 Research Forum on Invasive Species (pp. 41-43).

LaBonte, J.R.  2016.  Exotic wood boring insects program.  Oregon Department of Agriculture, Plant Protection & Conservation Programs, Annual Report.  2016: 24-25.

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

Mayfield, A.E., MacKenzie, M., Cannon, P.G., Oak, S.W., Horn, S., Hwang, J., and P.E. Kendra.  2013.  Suitability of California bay laurel and other species as hosts for the non-native redbay ambrosia beetle and granulate ambrosia beetle.  Agricultural and Forest Entomology.  15: 227-235.

Sargent, C., Raupp, M., Sardanelli, S., Shrewsbury, P., Clement, D., and M.K. Malinoski.  2008.  Granulate ambrosia beetle; Xylosandrus crassiusculus Motschulsky (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae).  University of Maryland Entomology Bulletin.

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

United Kingdom Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs.  2015.  Rapid pest risk analysis (PRA) for Xylosandrus crassiusculus. https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/phiw/riskRegister/downloadExternalPra.cfm?id=3939

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


Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/24/18 – 6/8/18


*NOTE:

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


Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating: A

 


Posted by ls

Xyleborus pfeilii (Ratzeburg)

California Pest Rating for
Xyleborus pfeilii (Ratzeburg)
Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae
Pest Rating: A

 


PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction:

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

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

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: There is evidence suggesting that ambrosia beetles that have brother-sister mating, which is the case with pfeilii, have an enhanced ability to disperse and colonize new areas. A single female can found a new population, and she does not have to be fertilized.  She can produce sons from unfertilized eggs and mate with them.  Movement of infested firewood would achieve rapid, long-distance dispersal.  In addition, X. pfeilii flies (specimens have been caught with funnel traps) (Humble, 2001; Mudge et al., 2001).  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: Xyleborus pfeilii does not appear to have any recognized economic impact, even though it was introduced to much of Europe and has been present there for almost 200 years.  There is some doubt that economically-important trees in California would be significantly impacted, considering that most such trees are probably members of genera well-represented in Europe, and this beetle is apparently not a significant pest there.  There is the chance that it could vector a plant-pathogenic fungus to economically-important trees.  Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

Economic Impact:  E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 1

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Xyleborus pfeilii is not known to have had an environmental impact in Europe. There is a chance, however, that this species could have a different impact in the environment of California, where there are tree species not found in Europe.  Ambrosia beetles are less constrained in their host plant choices, and this makes it more difficult to predict what trees might be attacked in a new environment.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact: A, B

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: 3

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Xyleborus pfeilii: High (13)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Although there are a few trapping records of this beetle from more than ten years ago, there is no further evidence of its occurrence in the state of California.  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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


References:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/24/18 – 6/8/18


*NOTE:

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


Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating: A

 


Posted by ls 

Black Twig Borer | Xylosandrus compactus (Eichhoff)

California Pest Rating for
Black Twig Borer | Xylosandrus compactus (Eichhoff)
Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae
Pest Rating: A

 


PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction:

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

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

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Female Xylosandrus compactus Sibling mating and parthenogenesis means that a single adult female emerging from its gallery can establish a new population.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Economic Impact:  A, B, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 3

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Xylosandrus compactus attacks a diversity of plants and would be expected to damage numerous species of plants in California if it became established here. The fact that it is known to attack such a wide variety of plants means it is likely that some endangered plants could also be at risk.  This risk is demonstrated by the fact that this beetle attacked native trees in Italy, including species of Quercus and Viburnum, genera which include native California species.  This beetle attacks ornamental trees, causing dieback of branches (Hayato, 2007).  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact:  A, B, E

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: 3

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Xylosandrus compactus: High (15)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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


References:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/24/18 – 6/8/18


*NOTE:

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


Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating: A


Posted by ls 

Black Timber Bark Beetle | Xylosandrus germanus (Blandford)

California Pest Rating for
Black Timber Bark Beetle | Xylosandrus germanus (Blandford)
Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae
Pest Rating: A

 


 

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction:

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

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

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Adult female Xylosandrus germanus Sibling mating and arrhenotokous parthenogenesis mean a single female is capable of founding a population.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: This species has been reported to attack a range of ornamental and fruit (e.g., apple) trees.  Even if attacks do not result in the death of the tree, growth and aesthetics are impacted.  This species causes damage to cut timber as well.  All ambrosia beetles carry fungi; besides the symbiotic fungus, germanus could vector other, potentially pathogenic fungi.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Economic Impact:  A, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 2

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Although Xylosandrus germanus was introduced to large areas of Europe and the United States and has been present there for decades, environmental impact has been minimal. Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact:

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: 1

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Xylosandrus germanus: Medium (12)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Xylosandrus germanus is not known to be present in the state of California.  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

References:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/24/18 – 6/8/18


*NOTE:

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


Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating: A

 


Posted by ls