Prevention of introduction and spread of emerging plant

pests and diseases

Michael Jeger*, Centre for Environmental Policy,

Imperial College London and Chair, EFSA Plant Health Panel

Giuseppe Stancanelli and Marco Pautasso, Animal and Plant Health Unit, EFSA, Parma

Context • Prevention of the entry, establishment and spread of

plant pests and diseases is a key component of risk management in relation to plant pests and diseases in the European Union.

• As part of its risk assessment mandate, the Plant Health Panel of EFSA evaluates risk reduction options in its scientific opinions using a variety of approaches.

• In particular the use of quantitative as opposed to purely qualitative methods has been recognised as an important issue in assessing the effectiveness of risk reduction options.

Developments at EFSA

• The use of quantitative methods by the Plant Health Panel was reviewed with some comparison to the work of other EFSA Panels in relation to biological hazards (http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/search/doc/251e.pdf).

• The Opinions of the Plant Health Panel (2006 - May 2011) were examined, with particular attention paid to whether quantitative methods were used in evaluating the effectiveness of risk reduction options.

• In only four opinions (out of 46) were quantitative methods explicitly used in the evaluation of risk reduction options in relation to one or more aspects of entry, establishment, spread, and impact.

EFSA Opinions on biological hazards (2004 - May 2011)

EFSA Opinions on biological hazards (2004 - May 2011)

EFSA Opinions on biological hazards (2004 - May 2011)

A growing temporal trend

Methods used

Additional issues

EFSA Opinions

• Monilinia fructicola (http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2119.htm)

• Tilletia indica

(http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/1621.htm) • Dryocosmus kuriphilus

(http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/1619.htm) • Pine wood nematode

(http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/1055.htm)

from: Sanoamuang & Gaunt (1996) Plant Disease

Puffing from apothecia of Monilinia fructicola

Apr Jan Feb Mar

May Jun Jul Aug

Sep Oct Nov Dec

EFSA PLH Opinion on Monilinia fructicola (2011)

EFSA PLH Opinion on D. kuriphilus (2010)

Actual spread of Dryocosmus kuriphilus in Piemonte, NW Italy (2002-2009)

Actual spread of Dryocosmus kuriphilus in Italy (as of 2009)

EFSA PLH Opinion on D. kuriphilus (2010)

Simulated spread of Dryocosmus kuriphilus (2010-2016)

Actual spread of Dryocosmus kuriphilus in France (as of 2012)

Actual spread of Dryocosmus kuriphilus in France (as of Sep 2014)

vs. predicted spread for 2014 (EFSA 2010)

Bunted wheat grains (Tilletia indica)

Source: EPPO

Importance of the influence variables in the updated model for wheat for grain, on average teliospores on surface after 1st year

EFSA PLH Opinion on Tilletia indica (2010)

Importance of the influence variables in the updated model for durum wheat, on average teliospores on surface after 1st year

EFSA PLH Opinion on Tilletia indica (2010)

Pine wood nematodes

Source: Wikipedia Commons

Pine wood nematodes: USDA risk reduction 100% effective?

EFSA PLH Opinion on Bursaphelenchus xylophilus (2009)

The EFSA Plant Health Panel published in 2012 a guidance on evaluating risk reduction options: “Guidance of the Scientific Panel on Plant Health on methodology for evaluation of the effectiveness of options for reducing the risk of introduction and spread of organisms harmful to plant health in the EU territory” (http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2755.htm) The Opinion included guidance on: •quantitative methods to be applied by the Panel for evaluation of the effectiveness of options; •information and data to be provided to demonstrate the effectiveness of options; and •experimental designs & statistical methods for assessing the effectiveness of options to reduce the level of risk of introduction & spread.

EFSA PLH (2012) guidance on evaluating risk reduction options In particular stress was placed on: •computing confidence/credibility levels to assess uncertainty over effectiveness, •comparing effectiveness to some standard, •comparing the equivalence of any two risk reduction options, •estimating dose-effectiveness relationships, •and choosing an appropriate statistical model according to the type of available data.

Acknowledgements EFSA Plant Health Panel & ALPHA Unit