Tag Archives: Invertebrate

Quadrastichus erythrinae Kim | Erythrina gall wasp

California Pest Rating for
Quadrastichus erythrinae Kim: Erythrina gall wasp
(Hymenoptera: Eulophidae)
Pest Rating: B

 


PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

In April 2015 the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) released a Deregulation Evaluation of Established Pests (DEEP) report that proposed to change the status of Quadrastichus erythrinae to non-actionable.  A pest rating proposal is required to determine future direction on this pest in California.

History & Status:

BackgroundQuadrastichus erythrinae is an emerging pest gall wasp that disfigures the leaves and young shoots of more than 60 species of coral trees (Erythrinia spp.)1,2.  It may be transported long distances when infested plants or plant parts such as fallen leaves are moved1.  Female wasps insert eggs inside young leaves and stem tissue1.  As larvae develop, they induce galls which cause leaves to curl and shoots to become swollen1.  Larvae pupate inside leaves and stems and adults chew their way out as they emerge1.  Heavy infestations can cause defoliation and death of trees1Quadrastichus erythrinae was first found in Hawaii in 2005 and within 2 years caused 95% mortality of Erythrina trees1.

Worldwide Distribution: Quadrastichus erythrinae is believed to be native to Africa1.  From there it has spread through much of Asia and the Pacific islands including Hawaii1.  In the Americas it is established in Brazil, Guadeloupe, Martinique, and Florida1.

Official Control: Quadrastichus erythrinae is listed as a harmful organism by China, but is not known to be under official control in any other states or nations3.

California DistributionQuadrastichus erythrinae has never been found in the environment of California.

California InterceptionsQuadrastichus erythrinae has never been intercepted in California.

The risk Quadrastichus erythrinae (Erythrina gall wasp) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: The current distribution of Quadrastichus erythrinae corresponds to USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 10-13.  This indicates that the pest is likely to be limited to the warmest parts of southern California.  Quadrastichus erythrinae receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Quadrastichus erythrinae is only known to feed on coral trees in the genus Erythrina.  It receives a Low (1) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

Low (1) has a very limited host range.

Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Quadrastichus erythrinae has a high reproductive rate.  Each female carries an average of 320 eggs and can complete a life cycle in 20 days1.  These gall wasps may be transported long distances when infested plants or plant parts are moved and disperse locally by flying, wind, or by hitchhiking on clothing, animals, or equipment1Quadrastichus erythrinae receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: If Quadrastichus erythrinae were to establish in California it is not expected to lower any crop yields.  It may reduce the value of Erythrina nursery stock and increase production costs of those trees.  The gall wasp is not expected to disrupt any markets, change cultural practices, vector other organisms, injure animals, or interfere with water supplies.  Quadrastichus erythrinae receives a Low (1) in this category.

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

A.  The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D.  The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

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

Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Quadrastichus erythrinae is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem practices.  It is not likely to directly affect threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats.  It may trigger additional treatment programs in the nursery industry and by residents who wish to save their coral trees.  Coral trees are grown as ornamentals in southern California and may be extirpated by Quadrastichus erythrinae.  Erythrina gall wasp receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Quadrastichus erythrinae (Erythrina gall wasp):  Medium (9)

Add up the total score and include it here.

Low = 5-8 points

Medium = 9-12 points

High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Quadrastichus erythrinae has never been found in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:  

There have not been any surveys for Quadrastichus erythrinae in California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Quadrastichus erythrinae has never been found in California.  However, if it were to establish in the state its effects are likely to be limited to coral trees in the nursery industry and southern California landscape.  A “B” rating is justified.

References:

1 CABI Invasive Species Compendium.  Datasheet on Quadrastichus erythrinae (Erythrina gall wasp).  http://www.cabi.org/isc/datasheet/46220

2 Baez, Ignacio. DEEP Report Quadrastichus erythrinae Kim: Erythrina gall wasp. Deregulation Evaluation of Established Pests (DEEP). Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Lab. Center for Plant Health Science and Technology.

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


Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:  CLOSED

The 45-day comment period opened on January 15, 2016 and closed on February 29 , 2016.


Comment Format:

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

Example Comment: 

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating: B


Posted by ls

Radionaspis indica (Marlatt) | Mango Scale

California Pest Rating for
Radionaspis indica (Marlatt): Mango Scale
Hemiptera:  Diaspididae
Pest Rating:  B

 


PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

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

History & Status:

BackgroundRadionaspis indica is a monophagous scale insect that feeds on the trunk, branches, and buds of mango trees (Mangifera indica (Anacardiaceae)).  Severe infestations can cause cracking of bark, exudation of sap, and decline of branches2Radionaspis indica may rapidly disperse long distances in the trade of infested mango fruit or nursery stock.

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

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

California DistributionRadionaspis indica has never been found in the environment of California.

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

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

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Mango trees require warm, dry weather to set fruit. In California the best locations are away from immediate marine influences in the deserts, foothills, and the warmest cove locations of the California Central Valley4,5, 6.  Mango trees are also sometimes grown as ornamental plants in urban environments and are present in the nursery industry.  Radionaspis indica is expected to be able to establish in all of these environments.  It receives a Medium(2) in this category.

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

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Radionaspis indica only feeds on mango and receives a Low(1) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

Low (1) has a very limited host range.

Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Armored scales have high reproductive potential.  Mango fruit is not considered to be a good pathway for dispersal of Radionaspis indica due the limited mobility of female armored scales and crawlers and the species’ limited host range.  However, the scales have high dispersal potential because they are able to disperse long distances rapidly on nursery stock and are able to disperse to any nearby trees by crawling, by wind, or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or other animals.  Radionaspis indica receives a High(3) in this category.

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

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: California growers produce between 250,000 and 4,000,000 pounds of mango annually6.  This is a high value commodity produced for local sales at specialty markets and demand is increasing6.  California grown mangos are generally produced organically5.  If Radionaspis indica were to enter California and become established in groves it could potentially reduce yields of this crop if heavy infestations cause branch dieback2.  Furthermore, the scale has potential to both lower crop value by disfiguring fruit and nursery stock with its presence and increase production costs by triggering new chemical treatments.  Radionaspis indica receives a Medium(2) in this category.

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

A.  The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D.  The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

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

Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Radionaspis indica (mango scale): Medium(10).

Add up the total score and include it here.

Low = 5-8 points

Medium = 9-12 points

High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Radionaspis indica has never been found in California and receives a Not established(0) in this category.

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:

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

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

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

References:

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

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

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

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

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

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


Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:  CLOSED

The 45-day comment period opened on January 15, 2016 and closed on February 29 , 2016.


Comment Format:

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

Example Comment: 

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating:  B


Posted by ls

Tarophagus colocasiae (Matsumura) | Taro Planthopper

California Pest Rating for
Tarophagus colocasiae (Matsumura): Taro Planthopper
Hemiptera: Delphacidae
Pest Rating:  B

 


PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:  

Tarophagus colocasiae is commonly intercepted by California’s high risk programs.  This planthopper is currently assigned a temporary rating of “Q” and is therefore in need of a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

BackgroundTarophagus colocasiae is a planthopper that is considered a serious pest of taro (Colocasia esculenta)1.  The planthopper feeds by sucking sap and/or xylem from the plant tissue1.  Feeding produces honeydew, sooty mold, and necrotic areas on leaves and discoloration of bark on stems1.  Heavy infestations may cause stunting and/or wilting of the taro plants.  Taro planthopper is also reported to vector alomae and bobone diseases, which are caused by rhabdoviruses, between taro plants.  The planthopper may spread long distances by the movement of infested taro plants, leaves, or roots.

Worldwide Distribution: Tarophagus colocasiae is widespread in Southeast Asia and the Pacific islands1.  It has been present in Hawaii since at least 1930.  The planthopper was confirmed to be present in Florida in June 2015 and is likely established in both Jamaica and Cuba4.

Official Control: Tarophagus colocasiae is not listed as a quarantine pest by any other states or nations2.  However, Tarophagus proserpina is listed as a quarantine pest by Japan and Korea and that species may be a synonym of T. colocasiae.

California DistributionTarophagus colocasiae has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions:  Between January 1, 2000 and January 6, 2015, Tarophagus colocasiae was intercepted 133 times on consignments from Hawaii.  127 of the interceptions were on taro.  The remainder were on betel leaf (1), ginger (1), galanga (2), and sweet potato (2).

The risk Tarophagus colocasiae (taro planthopper) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Taro grows in USDA plant hardiness zones 8 through 11 and is grown in gardens and small-scale commercial farms in Fresno and Sacramento California3. Tarophagus colocasiae is expected to be able to establish wherever these plants are grown.  It receives a Medium (2) in this category.

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

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

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

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

2) Known Pest Host Range: Tarophagus colocasiae is only known to feed on taro and related aroids.  It receives a Low (1) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

Low (1) has a very limited host range.

Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Taro planthoppers may be moved long distances when infested taro plants, leaves, or roots are moved.  However, their wings do not fully develop and they are not considered to be good fliers.  Planthoppers have high reproductive rates.  Tarophagus colocasiae receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

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

4) Economic Impact: If Tarophagus colocasiae were to establish in California it would be likely to lower the yield of commercial taro farms and gardens.  The planthopper would also be likely to increase crop production costs.  Taro leafhopper may also vector diseases between taro plants.  It receives a High (3) in this category.

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

A.  The pest could lower crop yield.

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

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

D.  The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

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

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

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

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

Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

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

5) Environmental Impact: Tarophagus colocasiae is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes.  Taro planthopper is not expected to directly affect threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats.  The planthopper may trigger additional treatment programs by gardeners and growers of commercial taro.  The planthopper may also significantly impact taro plants in home/urban gardens.  Taro planthopper receives a High (3) in this category.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

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

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

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

Consequences of Introduction to California for Tarophagus colocasiae (Taro Planthopper):  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: Tarophagus colocasiae has never been found in the environment of California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

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

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

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

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

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

Final Score:

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

Uncertainty:

Tarophagus colocasiae is frequently intercepted.  Presumably, the planthopper sometimes escapes detection and enters California.  There have not been any formal surveys for the pest in the state, so it is possible that it may have established in some locations.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Tarophagus colocasiae has never been found in the environment of California.  However, if it were to enter the state economic and environmental impacts would be limited to taro plants in home gardens and small-scale commercial farms.  A “B” rating is justified.

References:

1CABI Plantwise Knowledge Bank.  http://www.plantwise.org/KnowledgeBank/Datasheet.aspx?dsid=52786

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

3Robinson, Ramona and Cara Allen.  2014.  Taro root (Colocasia escuelenta) reported naturalizing in California.  California Department of Parks and Recreation.  http://www.cal-ipc.org/symposia/archive/pdf/2014/Poster2014_Robison.pdf

4 Halbert, Susan E. and Charles R. Bartlett. The taro planthopper, Tarophagus colocasiae (Matsumura), a new delphacid planthopper in Florida. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Pest Alert.  http://www.freshfromflorida.com/Divisions-Offices/Plant-Industry/Plant-Industry-Publications/Pest-Alerts/Tarophagus-colocasiae


Responsible Party:

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


Comment Period:  CLOSED

The 45-day comment period opened on January 15, 2016 and closed on February 29 , 2016.


Comment Format:

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

Example Comment: 

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

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

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

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

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

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

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

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

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


Pest Rating:  B


Posted by ls