{"id":3543,"date":"2017-03-24T12:44:09","date_gmt":"2017-03-24T19:44:09","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?p=3543"},"modified":"2024-04-26T10:57:26","modified_gmt":"2024-04-26T17:57:26","slug":"diaporthe-vaccinii-shear-1931","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?p=3543","title":{"rendered":"Diaporthe vaccinii Shear 1931"},"content":{"rendered":"
California Pest Rating for<\/strong><\/h5>\n
Diaporthe vaccinii <\/em><\/strong>Shear 1931<\/strong><\/h5>\n
Pest Rating: C<\/strong><\/h5>\n
\n
PEST RATING PROFILE<\/strong><\/h5>\n
Initiating Event: <\/strong><\/h5>\n

On February 3, 2017, CDFA was requested by the USDA APHIS for information on the export of Vaccinium<\/em> plants from California to the EU, in preparation of a federal risk assessment of the introduction of a quarantine fungal pathogen, Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em> into the EU through USA-originated Vaccinium<\/em> spp.\u00a0 Subsequently, the status and risk of this pathogen in California is assessed here and a permanent rating is proposed.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

History & Status:<\/strong><\/h5>\n

Background<\/u><\/strong>:\u00a0 Diaporthe vaccinii <\/em>is also known by its asexual\/anamorph name, Phomopsis vaccinii,<\/em> and causes stem cankers, twig blight, leafspots, and fruit rot of Vaccinium<\/em> spp. (blueberries and cranberries) (EFSA, 2014).\u00a0 While D. vaccinii<\/em> is considered the prominent species of Diaporthe<\/em> on Vaccinium<\/em> spp. worldwide, there are other species within Diaporthe<\/em> and Phomopsis<\/em> that attack Vaccinium<\/em> spp. causing diseases that include stem cankers, twig blight, and fruit rot similar to D. vaccinii<\/em> \u00a0(EFSA, 2014).\u00a0 Also, as symptomless (latent) infections of D. vaccinii<\/em> may occur, diagnosis of the disease based on symptoms alone is not reliable but can be obtained through molecular analysis.<\/p>\n

Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em> is regarded as native to North America and has been reported from Vaccinium<\/em>-growing regions in the USA and Canada (Lombard et al<\/em>., 2014). During the 1960-70s twig blight disease of blueberries became a serious problem in blueberry-growing regions of Wisconsin, Indiana, and southern Michigan, and in the 1980-90s increased tremendously in prevalence and severity in the southeastern USA, particularly North Carolina (Milholland, 1995).\u00a0 However, D. vaccinii<\/em> is not known to be present in California and Vaccinium<\/em> spp. originating in California and shipped under certification to international trading partners, continue to test free of the pathogen by CDFA (Heaton, 2017).<\/p>\n

In California, blueberry production has been increasing over the past decade.\u00a0 Blueberry cultivation is done mostly in cool northern coastal regions, however, southern cultivars with low chilling-hour requirements needed to break dormancy are also farmed in the San Joaquin Valley and southern coastal regions Bremer et al<\/em>., (2008).\u00a0 In 2015, blueberries were cultivated on 5,700 harvested acres in California yielding a production of 624,000 cwt for a total value of $116,979 (CASR, 2015-2016).<\/p>\n

Disease Development<\/u>:\u00a0<\/strong> The epidemiology of the fungus has been studied in the USA.\u00a0 The pathogen overwinters in infected and dead twigs, and possibly on plant debris (fallen twigs, leaves and fruits).\u00a0 Ascospores and conidia are disseminated in the crop under wet and humid conditions.\u00a0 In North Carolina, rain-dispersed conidia of the anamorph Phomopsis vaccinii<\/em> have been trapped throughout the growing season with the largest numbers trapped between blossom budbreak to bloom (EPPOa, 2016; Milholland, 1982).<\/p>\n

The pathogen enter host tissues mainly through wounds and to a lesser extent directly into the tips of young, succulent shoots,\u00a0 Healthy unwounded blueberry plants were not infected even after one month of exposure to natural field inoculum (EFSA, 2014). Once the fungus enters the stem through the vascular tissue, it progresses downwards towards the base, girdling the old branches at their junction and killing the part of the plant above the girdle (CABI, 2017).\u00a0 The fungus also enters host vascular tissues through open flower buds and, it is believed that blueberry blight develops primarily from infection of flower buds at budbreak through bloom in North Carolina (Milholland, 1982). \u00a0\u00a0Conidia on germination enter berries throughout the growing season and remain dormant until maturation causing soft rot and leakage of juice at harvest (Milholland & Daykin, 1983).\u00a0 Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em> has been reported to be an endophyte of apparently healthy blueberry and cranberry stems (CABI, 2017).<\/p>\n

Germ tubes of germinating conidia enter leaves producing spots.\u00a0 About 2-3 weeks later, pycnidia with conidia are apparent on stems and leaf spots.\u00a0 The pathogen has been isolated from fruiting bodies found on overwintered cranberry leaves in New Jersey, but not\u00a0 in Wisconsin from vines collected in the spring from beds in which dieback had been very severe in the late summer of the preceding year (Friend & Boone, 1968). \u00a0Overwintering was indicated to be necessary for ascocarp (sexual fruiting body) development, completing the life cycle, perpetuating the species, and producing a source of inoculum for infection in the next season.\u00a0 However, in the southeastern USA, the pathogen is reported to overwinter in infected blueberry twigs and produce conidia from pycnidia (asexual fruiting body) in the following year (EFSA, 2014).\u00a0 A correlation has also been indicated between vine dieback and dry conditions, with the latter predisposing the plant to dieback (Friend & Boone, 1968).<\/p>\n

The pathogen grows well in a wide temperature range of 4-32\u00b0C and optimum pH 5-6.\u00a0 In experiments, the most favorable temperature range for conidium germination and growth was 21-24\u00b0C wherein 95% conidia germinated and either entered plants through wounds or directly at the tips of young succulent blueberry shoots held inside a damp chamber.\u00a0 About 71% shoots became blighted four days after inoculation. In artificially inoculated plants, the fungus caused cankers and dieback symptoms above 30\u00b0C (Weingartner and Klos, 1975).<\/p>\n

Dispersal and spread:<\/em> Long distance dispersal occurs through movement of infected plant vines (EPPOa, 2016). Other modes for spread include infected plant debris, leaves, twigs, and fruit, rain\/irrigation water splash.<\/p>\n

Hosts:<\/em> Principal hosts include Vaccinium macrocarpon <\/em>(cranberry), V. oxycoccos <\/em>(small cranberry), V. oxycoccos<\/em> var. intermedium<\/em> (Americana and European cranberries), V. corymbosum<\/em> (highbush blueberry), V. ashei<\/em> (rabbiteye blueberry).\u00a0 While D. vaccinii<\/em> is restricted to Vaccinium<\/em> species, the wild European species, V<\/em>. oxycoccos<\/em> which usually occurs in mountain bogs could be a reservoir host for the pathogen (EPPOa, 2016).\u00a0 Other hosts are Gaultheria shallon <\/em>(salal), Rhododendron<\/em> sp. (Farr & Rossman, 2017).<\/p>\n

Symptoms<\/em>: \u00a0In North Carolina, the predominant symptom was blighting in one-year-old susceptible blueberry cultivars. Systemic invasion has also been reported (Milholland, 1982). \u00a0Infected succulent, current-year shoots wilt in 4 days and are covered with minute lesions.\u00a0 Major branches and frequently entire plants are killed as the fungus continues to travel downwards through the stem at an average rate of 5.5 cm in 2 months.\u00a0 Regardless of the stem, cankers are long and narrow and are covered by the bark or epidermis.\u00a0 On blueberry stems over two-years-old, a brown discoloration of the stem xylem below wilt symptoms can be observed.\u00a0 However, inoculated stems only produce localized lesions.\u00a0 Infected leaves develop spots which enlarge to 1 cm with pycnidia\/conidiomata appearing in two weeks.\u00a0 The pathogen may remain dormant until favorable conditions allow it to continue growing.\u00a0 Infection of crowns frequently end in the death of stem originating from the crown.\u00a0 Infected fruits turn reddish-brown, soft, mushy, often split and leak juice at harvest (CABI, 2017; EPPOa, 2016).\u00a0 The fungus penetrated blueberry fruit at all stages of development and remains latent until maturation (Milholland and Daykin, 1983).<\/p>\n

In cranberry, Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em> does not cause twig blight disease similar to blueberry, but occurs on shoots and leaves without causing significant damage (CABI, 2017).\u00a0 It is also a storage rot pathogen of cranberries, mainly causing a viscid rot of fruit, which becomes soft and discolored.\u00a0 Also, infected upright stems turn yellow then orange and brown before dying back (Milholland, 1995).<\/p>\n

It is important to note that in blueberry, symptoms similar to twig blight disease can be caused by other fungal pathogens such as Godronia cassandrae, Colletotrichum<\/em> spp., Fusarium<\/em> spp., and Botryosphaeria dothidea<\/em>.\u00a0 In cranberry, upright dieback is also caused by the fungus, Synchronoblastia crypta <\/em>(EPPOc, 2009; CABI, 2017).<\/p>\n

Damage Potential:\u00a0 <\/em>\u00a0\u00a0Fruit loss of two to three pints per bush with twig blight of blueberry disease were reported in North Carolina (Milholland, 1982).\u00a0 Fruit loss of 0.5% out of 15.2% defective fruit were accredited to D. vaccinii<\/em> (Milholland & Daykin, 1983). \u00a0The pathogen is not considered to cause appreciable economic loss in cranberry, except in Massachusetts.\u00a0 Fruit loss has been considered minor due to D. vaccinii,<\/em> being attributed more to the presence of other accompanying pathogens than to D. vaccinii<\/em> (CABI, 2017).<\/p>\n

Worldwide Distribution<\/u>:<\/strong> Asia<\/em>: China; Europe<\/em>: Latvia (present with restricted distribution); North America<\/em>: Canada, USA; South America<\/em>: Chile (CABI, 2017; Farr & Rossman, 2017; EPPOa, 2016). \u00a0\u00a0The pathogen was eradicated or no longer present in most of the EU (EPPOa, 2016).\u00a0 In the USA, it has been found in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Washington, and Wisconsin.<\/p>\n

Official Control<\/u>:<\/strong> Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em> is listed as a quarantine pest for the European Union (EPPOb, 2016).\u00a0 The pathogen is on the \u2018Harmful Organism\u2019 lists for Argentina, China, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Israel, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, and Taiwan (USDA PCIT, 2017).<\/p>\n

California Distribution<\/u>:<\/strong> Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em> is not known to be established in California.<\/p>\n

California Interceptions<\/u>:<\/strong> None.<\/p>\n

The risk Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em> would pose to California is evaluated below.<\/p>\n

Consequences of Introduction:\u00a0 <\/strong><\/h5>\n

1) Climate\/Host Interaction: <\/strong>Blueberry is the main host for Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em> in California.\u00a0 Blueberries are grown in northern coastal and southern coastal regions and in the San Joaquin Valley.\u00a0 The pathogen grows well within a wide temperature range (4-32\u00b0C) and requires wet and humid conditions for spore dispersal and germination and fungal growth. Humid conditions along the coast may be more conducive for the pathogen than the drier environments of the San Joaquin Valley.\u00a0 A \u2018Medium\u2019<\/span><\/strong> score is given for climate-host interaction.<\/p>\n

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California.<\/p>\n

Score: 2<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.<\/p>\n

– Medium (2)<\/strong> may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.<\/span><\/p>\n

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.<\/p>\n

2) Known Pest Host Range:<\/strong> Vaccinium<\/em> are the main host for Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Evaluate the host range of the pest.<\/p>\n

Score: 1<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

– Low (1)<\/strong> has a very limited host range.<\/span><\/p>\n

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.<\/p>\n

– High (3) has a wide host range.<\/p>\n

3) Pest Dispersal Potential:<\/strong> The pathogen has high reproductive capability resulting in production of numerous ascospores, and conidia, however, these are primarily dependent on water splash for dispersal. Long distance spread occurs primarily through movement of infected plants. A \u2018Medium\u2019<\/span> <\/strong>rating is given to this category.<\/p>\n

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest.<\/p>\n

Score: 2<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.<\/p>\n

– Medium (2)<\/strong> has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.<\/span><\/p>\n

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.<\/p>\n

4) Economic Impact: <\/strong>Under suitable environmental conditions, Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em> may infect blueberries causing storage rot of mature fruit causing significant losses in crop yield, value and market.<\/p>\n

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below.<\/p>\n

Economic Impact:<\/strong> A, B, C<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

A<\/strong>. The pest could lower crop yield.<\/span><\/p>\n

B<\/strong>. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).<\/span><\/p>\n

C<\/strong>. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).<\/span><\/p>\n

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.<\/p>\n

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.<\/p>\n

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.<\/p>\n

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.<\/p>\n

Economic Impact Score<\/strong>: 3<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.<\/p>\n

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.<\/p>\n

– High (3)<\/strong> causes 3 or more of these impacts.<\/span><\/p>\n

4) Environmental Impact: <\/strong>No significant impact on the environment is expected.<\/p>\n

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.<\/p>\n

Environmental Impact: \u00a0None<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.<\/p>\n

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.<\/p>\n

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.<\/p>\n

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.<\/p>\n

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home\/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.<\/p>\n

Environmental Impact Score: 1<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

– Low (1)<\/strong> causes none of the above to occur.<\/span><\/p>\n

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.<\/p>\n

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.<\/p>\n

Consequences of Introduction to California for Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em>:<\/strong> Low (9) <\/strong><\/span><\/h5>\n

Add up the total score and include it here.<\/p>\n

-Low = 5-8 points<\/p>\n

–Medium<\/strong> = 9-12 points<\/span><\/p>\n

-High = 13-15 points<\/p>\n

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information<\/strong>: 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.<\/p>\n

Evaluation is \u2018Not established\u2019 (0)<\/span>.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Score: (0)<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

–Not established (0)<\/strong> Pest never detected in California<\/u>, or known only from incursions.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

-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.<\/p>\n

-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.<\/p>\n

Final Score:<\/h5>\n

7) The final score is<\/strong> the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: (Score)<\/p>\n

Final Score: <\/em><\/strong>\u00a0Score of Consequences of Introduction \u2013 Score of Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information = <\/strong>9<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

Uncertainty: \u00a0<\/strong><\/h5>\n

None.<\/p>\n

Conclusion and Rating Justification: <\/strong><\/h5>\n

Based on the evidence provided above the proposed rating for Diaporthe vaccinii <\/em>is C<\/span>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n
References:<\/strong><\/h5>\n

B<\/strong>remer, V., G, Crisosto, R. Molinar, M. Jimenez, S. Dollahite, and C. H. Crisosto.\u00a0 2008.\u00a0 San Joaquin Valley blueberries evaluated for quality attributes.\u00a0 California Agriculture, 62 (3): 91-96.\u00a0 http:\/\/CaliforniaAgriculture.ucop.edu<\/p>\n

C<\/strong>ABI.\u00a0 2017.\u00a0 Phomopsis vaccinii<\/em> (Phomopsis<\/em> twig blight of blueberry) full datasheet.\u00a0 Crop Protection Compendium. \u00a0http:\/\/www.cabi.org\/cpc\/datasheet\/18747<\/a><\/p>\n

C<\/strong>ASR.\u00a0 2015-2016. California agricultural statistics review 2015-2016.\u00a0 California Department of Food and Agriculture.\u00a0 https:\/\/www.cdfa.ca.gov\/Statistics\/PDFs\/2016Report.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n

E<\/strong>FSA.\u00a0 2014.\u00a0 Scientific opinion on the pest categorization of Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em> Shear.\u00a0 European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Parma, Italy.\u00a0 EFSA Journal 12: 3774.<\/p>\n

E<\/strong>PPOa.\u00a0 2016.\u00a0 Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em> data sheets on quarantine pests.\u00a0 Prepared by CABI and EPPO for the EU under contract 90\/399003.\u00a0\u00a0 https:\/\/www.eppo.int\/QUARANTINE\/data_sheets\/fungi\/DIAPVA_ds.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n

EPPOb.\u00a0 2016.\u00a0 EPPO A2 list of pests recommended for regulation as quarantine pests (version 2016-09).\u00a0 https:\/\/www.eppo.int\/QUARANTINE\/listA2.htm<\/a><\/p>\n

EPPOc.\u00a0 2009.\u00a0 Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em> Diagnostics.\u00a0 OEPP\/EPPO Bulletin 39, 18-24.<\/p>\n

F<\/strong>arr, D. F., and A. Y. Rossman.\u00a0 2017.\u00a0 Fungal Databases, Systematic Mycology and Microbiology Laboratory, ARS, USDA. Retrieved March 13, 2017, from http:\/\/nt.ars-grin.gov\/fungaldatabases\/<\/a><\/p>\n

F<\/strong>riend, R. J., and D. M. Boone. \u00a01968. \u00a0Diaporthe vaccinii<\/em> associated with dieback of cranberry in Wisconsin. Plant Disease Reporter, 52:341-344.<\/p>\n

H<\/strong>eaton, J.\u00a0 2017.\u00a0 J. Heaton, CDFA, email to D. Schnabel, cc: T. Walber and J. Chitambar, CDFA, sent Friday, March 10, 2017 9:01:02 am.<\/p>\n

L<\/strong>ombard, L., G. C. M. Van Leeuwen, V. Guarnaccia, G. Polizzi, P. C. J. Van Rijswick, K. C. H. M. Rosendahl, J. Gabler, and P. W. Crous.\u00a0 2014.\u00a0 Diaporthe<\/em> species associated with Vaccinium<\/em>, with specific reference to Europe.\u00a0 Phytopathologia Mediterranea 53: 85-97.<\/p>\n

Milholland, R. D. \u00a01982. \u00a0Blueberry twig blight caused by Phomopsis vaccinii<\/em>. Plant Disease, 66:1034-1036<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Milholland R. D. 1995.\u00a0 Phomopsis twig blight and fruit rot.\u00a0 In<\/em> Compendium of Blueberry and Cranberry Diseases.\u00a0 APS Press, The American Phytopathological Society, pg. 13-14.<\/p>\n

M<\/strong>ilholland, R. D., and M. E. Daykin.\u00a0 1983.\u00a0 Blueberry fruit rot caused by Phomopsis vaccinii<\/em>.\u00a0 Plant Disease 67: 325-326.<\/p>\n

U<\/strong>SDA PCIT.\u00a0 2017.\u00a0 USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System. Retrieved March 13, 2017. 6:04:39 pm CDT.\u00a0 https:\/\/pcit.aphis.usda.gov\/PExD\/faces\/ReportHarmOrgs.jsp.<\/p>\n

W<\/strong>eingartner, D. P., and E. J. Klos. \u00a01975. \u00a0Etiology and symptomatology of canker and dieback diseases on highbush blueberries caused by Godronia (Fusicoccum) cassandrae<\/em> and Diaporthe (Phomopsis) vaccinii<\/em>. Phytopathology, 65(2):105-110<\/a><\/p>\n

\n
Responsible Party:<\/strong><\/h5>\n

John J. Chitambar, Primary Plant Pathologist\/Nematologist, California Department of Food and Agriculture, 3294 Meadowview Road, Sacramento, CA 95832. Phone: 916-262-1110, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.<\/p>\n

\n
Comment Format:<\/h5>\n

\u2666 \u00a0Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s)\u00a0being commented on, as shown below.<\/p>\n

Example Comment:
\n<\/strong>Consequences of Introduction: \u00a01. Climate\/Host Interaction:\u00a0[Your comment that relates to \u201cClimate\/Host Interaction\u201d here.<\/em>]<\/p>\n

\u2666 \u00a0Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.<\/p>\n

\u2666 \u00a0Comments may not be posted if they:<\/p>\n

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to\u00a0the pest rating proposal;<\/p>\n

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic,\u00a0sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal\u00a0material;<\/p>\n

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms\u00a0of discrimination;<\/p>\n

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.<\/p>\n

\u2666 \u00a0Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.<\/p>\n

\u2666 \u00a0Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the\u00a0website to be viewed, not just submitted.<\/p>\n

\n

Pest Rating: C<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n

Posted by ls<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

California Pest Rating for Diaporthe vaccinii Shear 1931 Pest Rating: C PEST RATING PROFILE Initiating Event: On February 3, 2017, CDFA was requested by the USDA APHIS for information on the export of Vaccinium plants from California to the EU, in preparation of a federal risk assessment of the introduction of a quarantine fungal pathogen, … Continue reading Diaporthe vaccinii Shear 1931<\/span> →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1117,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[8,4],"tags":[544,45],"class_list":["post-3543","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-fungi","category-plant-pathology","tag-diaporthe-vaccinii","tag-plant-pathogen"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p5l8vQ-V9","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":4307,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?p=4307","url_meta":{"origin":3543,"position":0},"title":"Diaporthe pseudophoenicicola R. R. Gomes, C. Glienke & Crous 2013","author":"Admin","date":"December 29, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"California Pest Rating for Diaporthe pseudophoenicicola R. R. Gomes, C. Glienke & Crous 2013 Pest Rating: C PEST RATING PROFILE Initiating Event: On June 15, 2017, a shipment of an unknown plant, exhibiting symptoms of leaf spotting and destined to a commercial florist in Los Angeles County, was intercepted by\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Fungi"","block_context":{"text":"Fungi","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?cat=8"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":3285,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?p=3285","url_meta":{"origin":3543,"position":1},"title":"Diaporthe pseudomangiferae","author":"Admin","date":"January 31, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0California Pest Rating for Diaporthe pseudomangiferae R. R. Gomes, C. Glienke & Crous Pest Rating: C PEST RATING PROFILE Initiating Event: On December 15, 2016, a shipment of Cacao seed pods with symptoms of necrotic spotting and rot and destined to a private citizen in Contra Costa County, was intercepted\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Fungi"","block_context":{"text":"Fungi","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?cat=8"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":11656,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?p=11656","url_meta":{"origin":3543,"position":2},"title":"Synchytrium vaccinii Thomas 1889 Cranberry red gall","author":"Heather.Martin","date":"June 21, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"California Pest Rating for Synchytrium vaccinii Thomas 1889 Cranberry red gallPest Rating: A download pest rating *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 permits[@]cdfa.ca.gov. Posted by tn","rel":"","context":"In "A-Rated"","block_context":{"text":"A-Rated","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?cat=669"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":3783,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?p=3783","url_meta":{"origin":3543,"position":3},"title":"Thekopsora minima P. Syd. & Syd. 1915","author":"Admin","date":"June 29, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"California Pest Rating for Thekopsora minima P. Syd. & Syd. 1915 Pest Rating: C PEST RATING PROFILE Initiating Event: On May 2, 2017, a shipment of blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) plants showing symptoms of rust were intercepted in San Francisco by San Francisco County Agricultural Officers.\u00a0 The shipment had originated in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Fungi"","block_context":{"text":"Fungi","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?cat=8"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":6720,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?p=6720","url_meta":{"origin":3543,"position":4},"title":"diaporthe helianthi munt.-cvetk., mihaljc. & m. petrov 1981","author":"Heather.Martin","date":"December 30, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"California Pest Rating for Diaporthe helianthi Munt.-Cvetk., Mihaljc. & M. Petrov 1981 Pest Rating: B download pest rating *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 permits[@]cdfa.ca.gov. Posted by ka","rel":"","context":"In "B-Rated"","block_context":{"text":"B-Rated","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?cat=670"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":8033,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?p=8033","url_meta":{"origin":3543,"position":5},"title":"Diaporthe foeniculina (Sacc.) Udayanga & Castl. 2014","author":"Heather.Martin","date":"February 1, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"California Pest Rating for Diaporthe foeniculina (Sacc.) Udayanga & Castl. 2014Pest Rating: B DOWNLOAD PEST RATING *NOTE\u00a0 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 permits[@]cdfa.ca.gov. Posted by\u00a0tn","rel":"","context":"In "B-Rated"","block_context":{"text":"B-Rated","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/?cat=670"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3543","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1117"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3543"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3543\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10513,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3543\/revisions\/10513"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3543"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3543"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cdfa.ca.gov\/Section3162\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3543"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}