Category Archives: Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Entomology: Insects, Mites & Earthworms

A-Rated, Hymenoptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

An Ant | Pheidole dentigula

California Pest Rating  for
An Ant | Pheidole dentigula
 Hymenoptera: Formicidae
Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

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

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

map for Pheidole dentigula distribution

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

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

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Evaluate the host range of the pest.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

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

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest.

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

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

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

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

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

Economic Impact:  F

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 1

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

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

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

Environmental Impact: D

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact: Score 2

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Pheidole dentigula: Medium (10)

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

 –High = 13-15 points

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

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

Score: 0

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

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

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/13/18 – 5/28/18

*NOTE:

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

Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls 

A-Rated, Hymenoptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Tawny Crazy Ant | Nylanderia fulva

Some Tawny Crazy Ants

California Pest Rating  for
Tawny Crazy Ant | Nylanderia fulva
Hymenoptera:  Formicidae
Pest Rating: A  

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

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

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

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

Worldwide Distribution:

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

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

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

California Distribution:  Nylanderia fulva has never been found in the natural environment of California.

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

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

Consequences of Introduction: 

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

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

Score: 3

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

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

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

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

Evaluate the host range of the pest:

Score: 2

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

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

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest:

Score: 3

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

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

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

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

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

Economic Impact: A, B, D, F

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 3

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

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

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

Environmental Impact: A, B

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

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

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

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

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

Score the pest for Environmental Impact:

Environmental Impact Score: 3

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

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

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

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

Add up the total score and include it here:

-Low = 5-8 points

-Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

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

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

Score: 0

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

References:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/12/18 – 5/27/18

*NOTE:

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

Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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

Pest Rating: A  

Posted by ls 

A-Rated, Hymenoptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Compact Carpenter Ant | Camponotus planatus

California Pest Rating  for
Compact Carpenter Ant | Camponotus planatus
Hymenoptera:  Formicidae
Pest Rating: A

 

PEST RATING PROFILE 

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

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

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

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

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

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

California Distribution:  Camponotus planatus has never been found in the natural environment of California.

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

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

Consequences of Introduction: 

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

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

Score: 3

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

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

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

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

Evaluate the host range of the pest:

Score: 2

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

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

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest:

Score: 3

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

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

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

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

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

Economic Impact: A, D, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 3

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

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

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

Environmental Impact: A, E

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

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

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

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

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

Score the pest for Environmental Impact:

Environmental Impact Score: 3

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

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

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

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

Add up the total score and include it here:

-Low = 5-8 points

-Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

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

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

Score: 0

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

References:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/11/18 – 5/26/18

*NOTE:

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

Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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

Pest Rating: A

 

Posted by ls 

A-Rated, Acari, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Peacock Mite | Tuckerella sp

California Pest Rating for
Peacock Mite | Tuckerella sp.
Acari: Tuckerellidae
Pest Rating: A

 

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction:

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

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

Score: 3

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

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

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

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

Evaluate the host range of the pest:

Score: 3

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

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

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest:

Score: 3

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

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

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

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

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

Economic Impact: A, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 2

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

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

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

Environmental Impact: A, E

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

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

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

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

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

Score the pest for Environmental Impact:

Environmental Impact Score: 2

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

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

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

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

Add up the total score and include it here:

-Low = 5-8 points

-Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

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

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

Score: 0

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

References:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:*CLOSED

4/11/18 – 5/26/18

*NOTE:

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

Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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

Pest Rating: A

 

Posted by ls 

A-Rated, Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Plant Bug | Rubrocuneocoris calvertae

California Pest Rating  for
Plant Bug | Rubrocuneocoris calvertae Henry
Hemiptera: Miridae
Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction:

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

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

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

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

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

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

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

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

Economic Impact: A, B

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

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

Economic Impact Score: 2

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

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

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

Environmental Impact: B, D

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: 3

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

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

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

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

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

References:

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

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

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

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

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

Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/10/18 – 5/25/18

*NOTE:

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

Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls 

A-Rated, Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Stink Bug | Kalkadoona pallida

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

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction:

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

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

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

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

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

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

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

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

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

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

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

Economic Impact:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 1

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

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

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

Environmental Impact: B

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

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

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

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

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

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

Environmental Impact Score: 2

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

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

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

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

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

References:

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

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

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

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

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

Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/10/18 – 5/25/18

*NOTE:

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

Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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

Pest Rating: A

 

Posted by ls 

A-Rated, Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

False Trochanter Mealybug | Pseudococcus dolichomelos

California Pest Rating  for
False Trochanter Mealybug | Pseudococcus dolichomelos Gimpel and Miller
Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae
Pest Rating: A

 

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background:  This mealybug is found underground on the roots and crown of its host plants (Gimpel and Miller, 1996).  It presumably feeds on roots.  It has been associated with plants in at least 12 families: Amaryllidaceae, Asteraceae, Euphorbiaceae, Fabaceae, Hypericaceae, Onagraceae, Poaceae, Polygonaceae, Rosaceae, Solanaceae, Urticaceae, and Zingiberaceae (García Morales et al., 2016).  The biology of this recently-described (1996) species is poorly known.

Worldwide Distribution:  Pseudococcus dolichomelos occurs in the eastern United States (Florida, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Washington, D.C., and West Virginia) and Hawaii (García Morales et al., 2016; Gimpel and Miller, 1996; von Ellenrieder and Watson, 2016).

Official Control: Pseudococcus dolichomelos does not appear to be under official control anywhere.

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

California Interceptions:  Pseudococcus dolichomelos has been intercepted in California associated with cut flowers of Alpinia purpurata, Oncidium sp., and Zingiber sp. from Hawaii (PDR # 1367825, 1367535, 070P06137999, and 100P06282530), peaches from Utah (PDR # TR0P06024371), and primrose plants from Florida (PDR # 370P06678226).

The risk Pseudococcus dolichomelos would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Pseudococcus dolichomelos occurs over a wide portion of the United States, including areas with temperate (e.g., Michigan) as well as tropical/subtropical (e.g., Hawaii, south Texas) climates. This suggests that this species is capable of becoming established over a wide portion of California. It has been associated with a wide variety of plants in 12 families, so it is not expected to be limited by distribution of potential host plants.  Therefore, Pseudococcus dolichomelos 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: Pseudococcus dolichomelos has been associated with, and presumably feeds on at least 12 families of plants. 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: Pseudococcus dolichomelos has been intercepted multiple times on cut flowers and other commodities, so it is evidently capable of being spread artificially on infested plants.  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: Root-feeding mealybugs include species that are pests of food and ornamental plants.  However, dolichomelos is not known to be an economic pest anywhere it is known to occur, even though it occurs over a wide area.  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: Root-feeding mealybugs have the potential to impact the health of plants, as demonstrated by the fact that some are economically-significant pests. If Psuedococcus dolichomelos became established in California, it would encounter species of native plants, including many rare ones, that it has not previously been exposed to.  It is possible that it could have an impact of some of these plants.  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 Pseudococcus dolichomelos: Medium (11)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

The most important uncertainty regarding this species is its ability to significantly impact the health of plants; this has not been shown to be the case anywhere it currently occurs.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Pseudococcus dolichomelos is a root-feeding mealybug with a broad host range.  It is not known to occur in California, but it is likely capable of becoming established over a large portion of the state.  If this was to occur, it is not likely to become an economic pest, but there is a chance that it could impact the environment.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.

References:

García Morales, M., Denno, B.D., Miller, D.R., Miller, G.L., Ben-Dov, Y., and Hardy, N.B. 2016. ScaleNet: A literature-based model of scale insect biology and systematics.  Accessed November 7, 2017.  http://scalenet.info.

Gimpel, W. F. and Miller, D.R. 1996. Systematic analysis of the mealybugs in the Pseudococcus maritimus complex (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae). In (B.K. Gupta, ed.) Contributions on Entomology, International (pp. 38-42).  Associated Publishers.  Gainesville, Florida.  163 pp.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed March 7, 2018. http://scan1.acis.ufl.edu

von Ellenrieder, N., and Watson, G.  2016.  A new mealybug in the genus Pseudococcus Westwood (Hemiptera: Coccomorpha: Pseudococcidae) from North America, with a key to species of Pseudococcus from the New World.  Zootaxa.  4105: 65-87.

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

4/10/18 – 5/25/18

*NOTE:

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

Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls 

C-Rated, Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

A Burrowing Bug | Rhytidoporus indentatus

California Pest Rating  for
A Burrowing Bug | Rhytidoporus indentatus Uhler
Hemiptera: Cydnidae
Pest Rating: C

 

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background:  Rhytidoporus indentatus has an appearance typical of members of the family Cydnidae; it is small (3.8-5.8 mm in length), oval-shaped, dark, and shiny (Froeschner, 1954; Froeschner and Maldonado-Capriles, 1992).  Very little information is available on the biology of this species.  It has been found in caves in Cuba and Jamaica, and it was reported to feed on fruit and seeds in bat guano (Barroso and Díaz, 2014; Peck, 1992).  It has also been intercepted on various root commodities, which suggests it may feed on roots as well (see below).  The members of this family are referred to as “burrowing bugs” because most species live underground and feed on roots, but some live above ground and feed on fallen seeds or the exposed parts of plants.  Few species in this family are recognized as economically significant pests.  Among them are some species that damage cassava roots or peanuts (Bellotti et al., 1994; Chapin et al., 2006).  Besides the direct damage to the roots, feeding by these insects can allow infection by pathogens, including fungi.

Worldwide Distribution:  Rhytidoporus indentatus is known from Pacific islands (including Guam), the Greater Antilles (including Cuba), and the United States (southern Florida and Hawaii) (Bishop Museum, 2002; Froeschner, 1976; Lis and Zack, 2010).  It was also apparently collected from Baja California, although additional evidence of this species occurring there was not found (Cervantes Peredo and Ramos Rivera, 2017).  The Greater Antilles distribution is presumed to represent the native range of the species, and the Pacific island, Mexico, and United States records represent introductions (Froeschner, 1954).

Official Control: Rhytidoporus indentatus is not known to be under official control anywhere.

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

California Interceptions:  Rhytidoporus indentatus has been intercepted on ginger, sweet potatoes, taro, and turmeric from Hawaii (PDR # 926381, 926378, 1308357, 190P06060306, 190P06620121, and 190P06620007), in the soil of plants from Hawaii (PDR # 1239534), with cut flowers from Hawaii (PDR # 1040836, 1418527, 1418527, and 1396118), with palms from Florida (PDR # 1039799), and in miscellaneous shipments from Hawaii and Florida (PDR # 975978 and 1376006).

The risk Rhytidoporus indentatus would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Except for the record from Baja California, Rhytidoporus indentatus is apparently restricted to areas with a tropical or subtropical climate. The climate of California appears largely unsuitable, but it is possible that this species could become established in a limited portion of the state.  Therefore, Rhytidoporus indentatus 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: There is very little information available on the biology of Rhytidoporus indentatus. If it is assumed that the interception records represent feeding on the associated commodities, this species may feed on roots and seeds of a broad range of food plants.  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: Rhytidoporus indentatus presumably flies, as it is sometimes collected at light (Froeschner, 1976).  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: Rhytidoporus indentatus is found in the Caribbean, Florida, and Pacific islands.  Yet, there are no reports of this species being an economic pest, even though it presumable occurs in agricultural situations, based on the fact that it has been intercepted on commodities.  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: Rhytidoporus indentatus has been introduced to the United States (Florida and Hawaii) and other localities. Although this species presumably feeds on plants (possibly seeds and roots), there is no evidence that it can cause significant damage to plants.  As explained above, this species is not expected to become an economic pest, so it is unlikely that its establishment in California would trigger treatment programs. 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.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact.

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 Rhytidoporus indentatus: 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: Rhytidoporus indentatus is not known to be present in California.  It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

There is very little information on the biology of Rhytidoporus indentatus.  The absence of reports of it being a pest anywhere it has so far been introduced to suggests that there is a low pest potential in California as well.  However, it is possible that R. indentatus causes damage to roots underground but the damage is not recognized or not realized to be caused by this species.  There is also uncertainty regarding potential for environmental damage, because this species would have access to native plants in California that it has not previously encountered.  It could, for example, feed on seeds of a rare plant to the extent that populations of such a plant would be threatened.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

There is no evidence that Rhytidoporus indentatus is a pest or has an environmental impact anywhere it is found.  Although it is not possible to predict with certainty what impact it would have in California, it appears highly unlikely that this species would become a problem in this state if it became established here.  For these reasons, a “C” rating is justified.

References:

Barroso, A.A. and R.B. Díaz.  2014.  Estado de conservaciόn de Jimeneziella decui, una especie cavernícola de Cuba (Opiliones: Laniatores).  Revista Ibérica de Aracnología.  25: 43-57.

Bellotti, A.C., Braun, A.R., Arias, B., Castillo, J.A., and Guerrero, J.M.  1994.  Origin and management of neotropical cassava arthropod pests.  African Crop Science Journal.  2: 407-417.

Bishop Museum.  2002.  Hawaiian All-Species Checklist.  Accessed March 27, 2018. http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/checklist/query.asp

Chapin, J.W., Sanders, T.H., Dean, L.O., Hendrix, K.W., and J.S. Thomas.  2006.  Effect of feeding by a burrower bug, Pangaeus bilineatus (Say) (Heteroptera: Cydnidae), on peanut flavor and oil quality.  Journal of Entomological Science.  41(1): 33-39.

Froeschner, R.C.  1976.  The burrowing bugs of Hawaii, with description of a new species (Hemiptera: Cydnidae).  Proceedings of the Hawaiian Entomological Society.  22(2): 229-236.

Froeschner, R.C.  1954.  Monograph of the Cydnidae of the Western Hemisphere.  Ph.D. dissertation, Iowa State College.  552 pp.

Froeschner, R.C. and Maldonado-Capriles, J.  1992.  A synopsis of burrowing bugs of Puerto Rico with description of new species Melanaethus wolcotti (Heteroptera: Cydnidae).  Journal of Agriculture of the University of Puerto Rico.  76: 177-185.

Lis, J.A. and R.S. Zack.  2010.  A review of burrower bugs (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Cydnidae sensu lato) of Guam.  Zootaxa.  2523: 57-64.

Peck, S.B.  1992.  A synopsis of the invertebrate cave fauna of Jamaica.  National Speleological Society Bulletin.  54: 37-60.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network (SCAN).  Accessed March 28, 2017. http://symbiota4.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

4/10/18 – 5/25/18

*NOTE:

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

Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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

Pest Rating: C

Posted by ls 

A-Rated, Coleoptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Dwarf Siberian pine beetle | Dryocoetes pini

California Pest Rating  for
Dwarf Siberian Pine Beetle | Dryocoetes pini
Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae
Pest Rating: A

 

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: This species appears to occur primarily in areas with a temperate climate. It is possible that it could thrive in a large portion of California if it was introduced.  The tree genera that this species is known to feed upon occur throughout California.  Therefore, Dryocoetes pini receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: As stated above, Dryocoetes pini has been reported from several coniferous genera. Therefore, pini receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Dryocoetes pini is presumably capable of flight. Movement of wood (especially firewood) is a likely pathway for the human-aided dispersal of this species if it was to be introduced.  Reproductive potential is unknown for this species.  Therefore, pini receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: Dryocoetes pini has been reported to be associated with several genera of conifers, including Pinus.  There is a possibility that, if this species was to be introduced to California, it could have a different impact than what is observed in its native range, including killing trees, which could reduce yield of timber.  Significant infestations also have the potential to impact the recreational value of forests.  Therefore, it receives a Low (1) in this category.

Economic Impact:  A

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score: 1

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

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Major outbreaks of bark beetles have the potential to kill large numbers of trees, which can have long-lasting impacts. Such impacts could include changes in forest composition, destabilization of soil, and even fire dynamics (Jenkins et al., 2008).  There are rare or threatened conifers in California that could be impacted by the introduction of pini.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact: A, B

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: 3

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Dryocoetes pini: Medium (11)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

References:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

4/9/18 – 5/24/18

*NOTE:

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

Comment Format:

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

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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

Pest Rating: A

 

Posted by ls 

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Palm Mealybug | Palmicultor palmarum

image of Palm Mealybug and its damage
California Pest Rating for
Palm mealybug | Palmicultor palmarum (Ehrhorn)
Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae
Pest Rating: A

 

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Palmicultor palmarum is currently Q-rated. A pest rating proposal is required to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Palm mealybugs are slow moving, piercing-sucking insects that feed on plant sap and are usually found in clusters along leaf veins, on the undersides of leaves, and in hidden areas at joints. These insects exude honeydew that becomes infested by sooty mold and gives the leaves a dirty appearance. Ants may be attracted to the honeydew. Plants infested with mealybugs become weak and may eventually die3.

Known hosts include: Arecaceae: Areca catechu, Borassus flabellifer, Caryota mitis, Cocos nucifera, Dypsis lutescens, Elaeis guineensis, Hyophorbe indica, Phoenix roebelenii, Roystonea regia, Washingtonia filifera, Licuala spp. & Thrinax spp.; Pandanaceae: Freycinetia spp.; Fabaceae: Acacia asak; Poaceae: Phyllostachys spp.1, 5.

Worldwide Distribution: Palmicultor palmarum was described from Hawaii and has been introduced to many places in the world, including much of the Caribbean islands, the Bahamas, India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia, Maldives, New Caledonia, Niue, China, Mexico, and Florida in the continental United States 1.

Official Control: Palmicultor palmarum is listed as a harmful organism by the Republic of Korea and Egypt6.

California Distribution: Palmicultor palmarum has never been found in the environment in California.

California Interceptions: Palmicultor palmarum was found in 2017 at a nursery in San Diego County (PDR 370P06678075 & 370P06678076). It has been intercepted 53 times since 19904.

The risk Palmicultor palmarum (palm mealybug) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Host plants of Palmicultor palmarum are mostly palm trees, and this species appears to be restricted to areas with a tropical/subtropical climate; it is possible that it may become established in a limited portion of southern California. Therefore, Palmicultor palmarum receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Palmicultor palmarum has been reported to feed on plants of at least fifteen genera in four families. Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest.

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

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Scale insects have high reproductive rates and may disperse long distances when infested plants or plant parts are moved. Palmicultor palmarum frequently moves long distances in the trade of infested palm trees. Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest.

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: Palmicultor palmarum could reduce the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants with its presence and increasing crop production costs in nurseries. It is not expected to change cultural practices, vector other organisms, injure animals, or disrupt water supplies. It receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

Economic Impact: B, C

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

Economic Impact Score:  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: Palmicultor palmarum is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It might trigger new chemical treatments in orchards and the nursery industry and by residents who find infested plants unsightly. It is not expected to significantly impact cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings. It receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact:  D

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Impact Score: 2

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Palmicultor palmarum  (Palm mealybug):  Medium (10)

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

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

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:  

There have not been any recent surveys for Palmicultor palmarum.  It is possible that it could be present in coastal parts of the state.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Palmicultor palmarum is not known to be present in California. If it became established here, it could have a significant impact on the ornamental palm industry ($70 Million industry in California – Hoddle.) 2 Therefore, an “A” rating is justified.

References:
  1. García Morales, M., Denno, B.D., Miller, D.R., Miller, G.L., Ben-Dov, Y., and N.B. Hardy. Scale Net: A literature-based model of scale insect biology and systematics. Database. doi: 10.1093/database/bav118.  Accessed on 12/18/2017.             http://scalenet.info/catalogue/Palmicultor%20palmarum/

  2. Hoddle, M. Has the South American palm weevil, Rhynchophorus palmarum, established in southern California?  University of California, Riverside, Center for Invasive Species Research.  Accessed on 12/18/2017.  http://cisr.ucr.edu/palmarum.html
  3. Missouri Botanical Garden. Online, Accessed on 12/18/2017. http://www.missouribotanicalgarden.org/gardens-gardening/your-garden/help-for-the-home-gardener/advice-tips-resources/pests-and-problems/insects/mealybugs/mealybugs-indoors.aspx
  4. Pest and Damage Record Database, California Department of Food and Agriculture, Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services. Accessed on 12/18/2017. http://phpps.cdfa.ca.gov/user/frmLogon2.asp
  5. Stocks, I.   19: Recent Adventive Scale Insects in Florida and the Caribbean Region. pp. 346-347.   CABI.  Accessed on 12/18/2017. https://www.cabi.org/ISC/FullTextPDF/2013/20133231104.pdf
  6. USDA phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). Accessed on 12/18/2017  https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/
Author:

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

Responsible Party:

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

Comment Period:* CLOSED

3/16/18 – 4/30/18

*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 

Insects, Mites & Earthworms, Lepidoptera

Cucumber Moth | Diaphania indica

California Pest Rating for
Cucumber Moth | Diaphania indica (Saunders)
Lepidoptera: Crambidae
Pest Rating: A

 

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

Background:  Diaphania indica is a pest of cucurbit crops, including cucumber, melon, and watermelon.  It has also been reported to feed on plants in the families Fabaceae and Malvaceae (Arcaya et al., 2004; Ganehiarachchi, 1997; MacLeod, 2005).  Adults have a wingspan of 24-33 mm.  The hind and forewings have solid white centers and thick, brown margins (Evaratt et al., 2015).  Eggs are laid on the undersides of leaves.  The larvae feed on leaves as well as flowers and fruits (Ganehiarachchi, 1997; Kinjo and Arakaki, 2002).  This moth is mostly restricted to tropical and subtropical climates.  For example, in the United States, it is only found in Florida.  However, it has become a pest in greenhouses in Japan and Korea, and it may be capable of living in more temperate climates in these situations (Kinjo and Arakaki, 2002; MacLeod, 2008).

Worldwide Distribution:  Diaphania indica is native to the Old World tropics (Waterhouse, 1993).  It is reported from tropical and subtropical areas in Africa, Australia, the Middle East, Asia, Pacific islands, Central America, South America, and the southeastern United States (only in Florida) (Clavijo A., 1990).  There are a few records from Alabama and Texas, but these may not represent established populations (Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network).

Official Control: Diaphania indica is considered reportable by the United States Department of Agriculture.

California Distribution:  Diaphania indica is not known to occur in California.

California Interceptions:  Diaphania indica has been intercepted on mango fruit from Florida (PDR # 430P06135915).

The risk Diaphania indica would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: The distribution of Diaphania indica appears to be largely restricted to areas with a tropical or subtropical climate. It is possible that it could become established in a limited portion of California.  Therefore, Diaphania indica 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: Diaphania indica feeds on a variety of crop plants in three 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: Diaphania indica  Eggs or larvae could be moved with infested plants.  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: Diaphania indica feeds on a variety of crops in the family Cucurbitaceae, causing loss of fruit and plant mortality.  This species has achieved pest status both in fields as well as in greenhouses.  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.

5) Environmental Impact: There are native California plants in the family Cucurbitaceae. It is possible that, if established, Diaphania indica could disrupt natural communities where these plants occur.  Crop infestations could trigger treatments.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact: A, D

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

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

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

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

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

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

Environmental Impact Score: 3

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

There is no uncertainty regarding the potential of Diaphania indica to be a pest in the right environment.  However, there is significant uncertainty regarding its ability to become established in California, as this species is apparently restricted to tropical/subtropical climates (except for greenhouses).

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Diaphania indica is a pest of cucurbit crops and it is not known to occur in California.  It is possible that it could become established over a limited portion of the state, and if this occurred, this species could have economic and environmental impacts.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.

References:

Arcaya S., E., Díaz B., F., and Paz L., R.  2004.  Primer registro de Diaphania indica (Saunders, 1851) (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) en el cultivo de pepino en Venezuela.  Bioagro.  16(1): 73-74.

Clavijo A., J.A.  1990.  Systematics of black and white species of the genus Diaphania Hubner (1818) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae: Pyraustinae).  Ph.D. thesis.  McGill University.  215 pp.

Evaratt, M., Korycinska, A., and C. Malumphy.  2015.  Plant pest factsheet; cucurbit moths; Diaphania species.  Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs.

Ganehiarachchi, G.A.S.M.  1997.  Aspects of the biology of Diaphania indica (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae).  Journal of the National Science Council of Sri Lanka.  25(4): 203-209.

Kinjo, K. and N. Arakaki.  2002.  Effect of temperature on development and reproductive characteristics of Diaphania indica (Saunders) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae).  Applied Entomology and Zoology.  37(1): 141-145.

MacLeod, A.  2005 (revised).  Pest risk analysis for Diaphania indica.  Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Central Science Laboratory.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network (SCAN).  Accessed March 6, 2018. http://symbiota4.acis.ufl.edu

Waterhouse, D.F.  1993.  The Major Arthropod Pests and Weeds of Agriculture in Southeast Asia: Distribution, Importance and Origin.  Australian Center for International Agricultural Research.  141 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

3/15/18 – 4/29/18

*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 

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Whitefly | Aleurotrachelus anonae

California Pest Rating for
Whitefly | Aleurotrachelus anonae Corbett
Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae
Pest Rating: A

 

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Aleurotrachelus anonae was recently reported to be established on the island of Hawaii.  It is currently Q-rated, and a permanent pest rating proposal is required to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Aleurotrachelus anonae is a whitefly (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae).  The adults of Aleurotrachelus species are small (1-2 mm in length), whitish (covered by white wax), fly-like insects (Malumphy and Reid, 2017).  The immature stages are found on leaves, where they feed on plant fluids.  The last immature stage (“puparium”) of A. anonae is approximately 0.5 mm long, pale yellow, and oval in shape with finely-toothed margins (Corbett, 1935).  This species has been reported from Annona squamosa, Morus indica, Persea americana, and Zingiber sp.  Infestations on avocado in Hawaii apparently caused sooty mold, which grows on plant surfaces in association with the honeydew excreted by the whiteflies (Dubey and Ko, 2010; J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.; Malumphy and Reid.  2017; Mound and Halsey, 1978).

Worldwide Distribution:  Aleurotrachelus anonae is reported from Bangladesh, Malaysia, Taiwan, and Hawaii (Dubey and Ko, 2010; Evans, 2008; J. Matsunaga, pers. comm.).  An Aleurotrachelus infestation that may have been A. anonae was found in a nursery in Florida.  It is not known if this whitefly is currently present in that state (Stocks, 2016).

Official Control: Aleurotrachelus anonae is not known to be under official control anywhere.

California Distribution:  Aleurotrachelus anonae is not known to be present in California.

California Interceptions:  Aleurotrachelus anonae has not been intercepted in California.

The risk Aleurotrachelus anonae would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Aleurotrachelus anonae appears to have a moderate host range, and potential host trees are grown widely in California (Morus alba, the genus of which contains a reported host, and Persea americana, which was attacked in Hawaii and possibly in Florida). The areas where A. anonae is known to occur have tropical/subtropical climates. Aleurotrachelus anonae may be able to become established in a limited portion of southern California.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Although details are scarce, reports suggest that A. anonae feeds on plants in at least four 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: Adult whiteflies are capable of dispersing via flight, although they may not move great distances that way.  Immature Aleyrodidae are sedentary and affixed to the surface of their host plant and thus are easily dispersed via movement of infested plant material, as proven by their frequent interception at ports of entry.  Therefore, Aleurotrachelus anonae 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: Although Aleurotrachelus anonae has been reported to feed on several different plants, little is known regarding the impact of such feeding.  In support of the pest potential of A. anonae, other species of Aleurotrachelus are pests.  For example, A. socialis is the most important whitefly pest of cassava in Colombia, and A. atratus is a pest of coconut in Africa and South America (Holguín et al., 2006; Kityo et al., 2017).  Aleurotrachelus anonae was reported to attack avocado in Hawaii and possibly Florida.  The Hawaii infestation was associated with sooty mold, which can reduce photosynthesis in affected plants (Malumphy and Reid, 2017).  Avocados are an important crop in California, and if A. anonae was established in this state, it could lower yields of avocado.  This could trigger treatments as well.  Therefore, it receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Economic Impact:  A, 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: There are no native California plants in the host genera reported for A. anonae. However, mulberry (Morus alba) is planted in California.  Aleurotrachelus anonae has been reported to feed on another Morus species; if it was established in California, it could impact plantings of M. alba.  Infestations on crop or ornamental plants could trigger treatments.  Therefore, it receives a High (3) in this category.

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

Environmental Impact: D,E

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

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

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

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

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

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

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 Aleurotrachelus anonae: Medium (11)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Aleurotrachelus anonae 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 (11)

Uncertainty:

The field reports of A. anonae lack detail.  For example, except for the report of sooty mold associated with this species on avocado in Hawaii, there is no indication of the level of damage (if any) inflicted on host plants.  This may be an indication of a lack of impact on the host plants.  There is also uncertainty regarding the suitability of California’s climate for A. anonae.  The areas this species is currently known to occur in are tropical or subtropical.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Aleurotrachelus anonae is a whitefly that has been reported to feed on plants in at least four families.  One of these plants is avocado, an important crop in California.  Aleurotrachelus anonae is not known to be present in California.  It could potentially become established in southern portions of the state, and if it did so, it could impact agriculture and ornamental plantings.  For these reasons, an “A” rating is justified.

References:

Corbett, G. H. 1935. 48. Malayan Aleurodidae. Journal of the Federated Malay States Museums. 17 (4): 722-852.

Dubey, A.K. and C.-C. Ko.  2010.  Aleurotrachelus Quaintance & Baker (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) and allied genera from Taiwan.  Zootaxa.  2685: 1-29.

Evans, G.A.  2008.  The whiteflies (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) of the world and their host plants and natural enemies.  Version 2008-09-23.

Holguín, C.M., Carabali, A., and Bellotti, A.C.  2006.  Tasa intrínseca de crecimiento de Aleurotrachelus socialis (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) en yuca Manihot esculenta.  Revista Colombiana de Entomología.  32(2): 140-144.

Kityo, R., Cugala, D., and Nampala, P.  2017.  First record of parasitoids associated with the invasive coconut whitefly in Inhambane Province, Mozambique.  International Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Research.  3(2): 2568-2583.

Malumphy, C. and Reid, S.  2017.  Solanum or pepper whitefly, Aleurotrachelus trachoides.  Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs.

Mound, L.A. and Halsey, S.H.  1978.  Whitefly of the world.  A systematic catalogue of the Aleyrodidae (Homoptera) with host plant and natural enemy data.  British Museum and John Wiley and Sons.  340 pp.

Stocks, I.  2016.  Aleurotrachelus near anonae (Corbett), a new continental record whitefly in Florida.  Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Division of Plant Industry.  Pest Alert.

Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network.  Accessed November 28, 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

3/15/18 – 4/29/18

*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