S… · Web viewspp.) with calyces and short stalks. Because this commodity has not been imported from Jordan before, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal

Agredo, M

Importation of Fresh Strawberry, Fragaria spp., Fruit with Flower Calyx and Short Stalk from Jordan into the Continental United States

A Pathway-Initiated Risk Assessment

March 8, 2010

Rev. 03

Agency Contact:

Center for Plant Health Science and Technology

Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory

United States Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Plant Protection and Quarantine

1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 300

Pest Risk Assessment for Strawberries from Jordan

Raleigh, NC 27606

ii

Rev. 03March 8, 2010

Executive Summary

The Kingdom of Jordan has requested approval for imports into the continental United States of fresh, field-grown strawberry fruit (Fragaria spp.) with calyces and short stalks. Because this commodity has not been imported from Jordan before, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) conducted a pathway-initiated risk assessment to determine the risks associated with importing these strawberries. APHIS analysts prepared a list of pests in Jordan that are known to be associated with Fragaria spp., using standard sources, including documents submitted by Jordan, records of intercepted pests, and scientific literature. We determined which quarantine pests were likely to follow the pathway, and qualitatively analyzed them to determine the unmitigated risk each poses to the United States. We found the following six quarantine pests that could be introduced into the continental United States via this pathway:

Pest

Taxonomy

Cacoecimorpha pronubana Hübner

Lepidoptera: Tortricidae

Chrysodeixis chalcites (Esper)

Lepidoptera: Noctuidae

Eutetranychus orientalis (Klein)

Acari: Tetranychidae

Monilinia fructigena Honey

Leotiomycetes: Helotiales

Spodoptera littoralis (Boisduval)


Thrips major Uzel

Thysanoptera: Thripidae

We rated all six pests with High Pest Risk Potential. We listed risk mitigation options for these pests. The choice of appropriate phytosanitary measures to mitigate pest risk is part of the pest risk management phase within APHIS and is not addressed in this document.

i

Table of Contents

Executive Summaryii

1. Introduction1

1.1. Botany and Origin1

1.2. Worldwide Production2

1.3. Production in Jordan2

2. Risk Assessment3

2.1. Initiating Event: Proposed Action3

2.2. Assessment of Weediness Potential of Fragaria spp.3

2.3. Current Status, Decision History, and Pest Interceptions5

2.4. Pest Categorization-Identification of Pests of Fragaria spp. in Jordan5

2.5. Quarantine Pests Likely to Follow the Pathway20

2.6. Consequences of Introduction21

2.7. Likelihood of Introduction31

2.8. Pest Risk Potential and Conclusion34

3. Authors and Reviewers34

4. Literature Cited34

5. Appendices50

Appendix A. Risk management options for importation of fresh strawberry (Fragaria spp.) from Jordan into the continental United States.50

Appendix B. Countries with permitted entry of strawberries into the United States.54

Appendix C. Decision sheets for Fragaria spp.55

Appendix D. Pest interceptions on Fragaria sp., F. ananassa, F. chiloensis, and F. vesca entering the United States57

0

1. Introduction

This risk assessment was prepared by analysts at the Center for Plant Health Science and Technology (CPHST) office in Colombia, Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). We examined potential pest risks associated with the importation of fresh fruits of strawberry (Fragaria spp.) from the Kingdom of Jordan into the continental United States. Strawberry fruit from Jordan is intended to be exported with flower calyces and short stalks (EHKJ, 2004). Leaving the calyx on the fruit is important to decrease perishability (Strand, 1994; Mitcham and Mitchell, 2002).

This pest risk assessment is pathway-initiated because it is based on the risks that may be associated with the importation of this commodity, and is qualitative in that risk is expressed in descriptive terms (High, Medium, and Low) rather than as probabilities or frequencies. The methodology and rating criteria are explained in “Guidelines for Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk Assessments, Version 5.02” (PPQ, 2000).

International plant protection organizations such as the North American Plant Protection Organization (NAPPO) and the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) provide guidance for conducting pest risk analyses. The methods used in this plant pest risk assessment are consistent with this guidance and are in accordance with the Framework for Pest Risk Analysis (IPPC, 2007: ISPM #2). Biological and phytosanitary terms used in this document are in accordance with those in the Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms (IPPC, 2007: ISPM #5). The guidelines describe three stages of pest risk analysis: Stage 1 (initiation), Stage 2 (risk assessment), and Stage 3 (risk management). A pest risk assessment is a component of an overall pest risk analysis; this document satisfies the requirements of Stages 1 and 2.

1.1. Botany and Origin

Fragaria species belong to the Rosaceae family. The genus Fragaria contains fifteen strawberry species that are distributed throughout the northern temperate regions of the world and one species that extends into South America. Fragaria virginiana and F. chiloensis are native to the Americas (CABI, 2007). There are five species of Fragaria native to or found in the United States (F. x ananassa, F. bringhurstii, F. chiloensis, F. vesca and F. virginiana). Within these five species there are 13 subspecies that are native or naturalized in the continental United States (NCRS, 2008). Northeast Asia contains the largest number of species.

The hybrid F. ananassa Duchesne was obtained in Europe in the mid-18th century from the crossing of F. virginiana Duchesne and F. chiloensis (L). This hybrid was rapidly cultivated by growers around the world because it was superior in many ways to the wild species that were the source of strawberry fruit (CABI, 2007). Other native species are still harvested from the wild, but these rarely appear in markets because of their small size and poor shelf life. Indigenous peoples of Chile selected and cultivated large-fruited clones of F. chiloensis that are still grown in that region (CABI, 2007). Also, color variants of F. vesca are grown for ornamental purposes, but only rarely for fruit. Today, wild species are mainly of interest for specific genes that they can contribute to the octoploid F. x ananassa (CABI, 2007).

1.2. Worldwide Production

North America is the largest producer of strawberries (Perez and Pollack, 2007). Strawberry production in California and Florida in 2007 was forecast to be 10,432,625 metric tons (2.3 billion pounds). California produced 88 percent of the U.S. crop in 2007, while Florida was second with about 10 percent (Perez and Pollack, 2007).

Although fresh strawberry imports are a relatively small portion of what is consumed in the United States, this volume has increased over the last five years (Perez and Pollack, 2007). In 2006, fresh strawberry imports were a record 69,581 metric tons, 25 percent greater than the previous year (Perez and Pollack, 2007). For 2007, 157.7 million pounds (71,519 metric pounds) were imported (Pollack and Perez, 2008). Almost all of those strawberries came from Mexico, but other suppliers included Argentina, China, Chile, Canada, Ecuador, New Zealand, Peru, and Poland (Perez and Pollack, 2007; Pollack and Perez, 2008).

1.3. Production in Jordan

In Jordan, strawberries are produced in 500 m2 (0.124 acre) plastic tunnels (Abu-El Samen, 2008). No open field plantations are used, but multi-span plastic tunnels are employed on a few farms. All strawberry production uses drip irrigation. The major varieties produced are Anar, Splinder, Camarosa, Ventana, Alpion, and C-scape. Transplants are produced in tissue culture from California and Europe, or by local producers in Jordan. The tunnels are re-planted each year. Commercial cultivars produce individual fruits weighing as much as 30-50 g, although 10-20 g is typical (CABI, 2007).

The cultivated area for strawberries in Jordan was 41.4 ha (102.3 acres) in 2006 and 60 ha (148.3 acres) in 2007 (Abu-El Samen, 2008). Total production was 828 tons in 2006 and 1,200 tons in 2007. In 2007, 700 tons were produced in the Jordan Valley and 500 tons in the highlands (Abu-El Samen, 2008). Exports of strawberries from Jordan to the European Union and Jordan’s neighboring countries—Israel, Iraq, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Syria—have increased rapidly in recent years (DOS, 2006; Magnani et al., 2004).

Integrated pest management (IPM) practices are used in strawberry production in Jordan in collaboration with GTZ (German Agency for Technical Cooperation)-Germany IPM projects. Primary treatments include predators and parasites of insect pests and restricted pesticide applications. The commonly used pesticides are Floromite (for management of red spider mites), Proclaim (for insect pest management), Boscalid (fungal diseases), and Bellis (Boscalid combined with pyraclostrobin) (fungal diseases) (Abu-El Samen, 2008; Sallato et al., 2007).

Soil fumigation with chemicals (e.g. MB and Dazomet) is practiced by farmers specially in the establishing of a new farm or site in addition to soil solarization (Katbeh Bader, 2010).2. Risk Assessment

2.1. Initiating Event: Proposed Action

We conducted this commoditybased, pathwayinitiated risk assessment in response to a request made by the Kingdom of Jordan (EHKJ, 2004) to the USDA to authorize the importation of fresh strawberry fruit (with flower calyx and short stalk) grown in Jordan (in the Jordan valley and highlands) into the continental United States. The importation is a potential pathway for the introduction of plant pests. USDA has regulatory authority for the importation of fruits and vegetables from foreign sources into the United States (7 CFR § 319, 2007).

2.2. Assessment of Weediness Potential of Fragaria spp.

The results of the weediness screening for Fragaria spp. did not prompt a weedinitiated risk assessment (Table 1).

Table 1. Assessment of weediness potential of Fragaria spp.

Commodity scientific name: Fragaria × ananassa Duchesne ex Rozier [Rosaceae]

Common name: Strawberry

The Fragaria genus has 15 species, but only Fragaria × ananassa contributes significantly to commercial production. It is the hybrid of two species: F. virginiana Duchesne from eastern North America and F. chiloensis (L.) Duchesne from North and South America, which is still grown in Chile (CABI, 2007). Fruits of wild native species are still harvested, but these rarely appear in markets because of their small size and short shelf-life (CABI, 2007). Other species, such as F. vesca, are mainly cultivated for ornamental purposes (CABI, 2007). Today, wild species are mainly of interest for specific genes that they can contribute to the octoploid F. x ananassa (CABI, 2007).

Synonyms: Fragaria × ananassa var. cuneifolia (Nutt. ex Howell) Staudt (= F. × ananassa nothosubsp. cuneifolia)

F. chiloensis var. ananassa (Duchesne ex Rozier) Ser.

F. cuneifolia Nutt. ex Howell (= F. × ananassa nothosubsp. cuneifolia)

F. × magna auct.

Potentilla × ananassa (Duchesne ex Rozier) Mabb. (NGRP, 2008)

Phase 1:

Fragaria spp. L. are reported in all states of the continental United States (NRCS, 2008). The hybrid Fragaria x ananassa is reported in the following states: Alaska, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maine, Missouri, North Carolina, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Washington (NRCS, 2008).

Phase 2:

The species is listed in:

YESGeographical Atlas of World Weeds (Holm et al., 1991a) as: F. indica (for Mauritius), F. vesca, and F. virginiana (both for the United States).

NOWorld’s Worst Weeds (Holm et al., 1991b).

NOWorld Weeds: Natural Histories and Distribution (Holm et al., 1997).

YESWeed Science Society of America (WSSA, 2007) as Fragaria virginiana.

NOFederal Noxious Weed List (PPQ, 2006).

NOEconomically Important Foreign Weeds (Reed, 1977).

NOIdentification of disseminules listed in the Federal Noxious Weed Act (Gunn and Ritchie, 1988).

NOGlobal Invasive Species Database (ISSG, 2008).

YESA Global Compendium of Weeds (Randall, 2003) as:

F. x ananassa: Naturalized, cultivation, escape, and casual alien. Cultivated medicinal and culinary uses.

F. chiloensis: Cultivated, medicinal and culinary uses.

F. chiloensis ssp. lucida: Naturalized.

F. indica: Weed. Cultivated medicinal and culinary uses.

F. moschata: Cultivation escape. Cultivated, medicinal and culinary uses.

F. muricata: Naturalized.

Fragaria spp.: Weed. Medicinal and culinary uses.

F. vesca: Weed, Naturalized. Cultivated, medicinal and culinary uses.

F. vesca ssp. americana: Weed.

F. virginiana: Weed. Cultivated, medicinal and culinary uses.

F. viridus: Weed.

NOInvasive Species of the World (Weber, 2003).

YESAlien Plant Invaders of Natural Areas (Swearingen, 2008) as: F. vesca ssp. vesca (NJ, invasive), F. chiloensis (HI, invasive).

NONoxious weeds in the United States and Canada (Rice, 2008).

NOState Regulated Noxious Weeds (APHIS, 2007).

Other: Scientific literature, Internet sources, etc.:

NOAGRICOLA (NAL, 2008), CAB (CABI, 2007), AGRIS (FAO, 2008).

NOFlorida's Invasive Species List, Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council (FLEPPC, 2007).

YES Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (USFWS, 2008a), as Fragaria vesca.

NONoxious weed list for Australian states and territories (Australian Weeds Committee, 2007).

Phase 3:

Fragaria sp. and Fragaria x ananassa are widely prevalent in the continental United States and the answer to four of the above questions is yes. In this case, we need to provide additional comments on our findings (PPQ, 2000):

· Fragaria vesca and F. virginiana are listed as weeds of unknown importance in the United States (Holm et al., 1991a), while Fragaria indica, Fragaria spp., F. vesca, F. vesca ssp. americana, F. virginiana, and F. viridus are also considered weeds (Randall, 2003)

· F. vesca ssp. vesca is invasive in NJ, and F. chiloensis is invasive in HI (Swearingen, 2008)

· F. vesca is “present on Pacific islands” (USFWS, 2008a)

Conclusion: We proceeded with the pest risk assessment for the following reasons: 1) Cropped strawberries are economically important (Wiersema and Leon, 1999); 2) cultivated and wild strawberries (Fragaria spp.) grow in 49 states without being under official control; and 3) Fragaria spp., as strawberry fruit, are currently permitted entry into the United States from 88 countries (PPQ, 2008a).

2.3. Current Status, Decision History, and Pest Interceptions

2.3.1. Current status

Strawberries are authorized to enter into the United States through all U.S. ports-of-entry from 88 countries (see Appendix B). Over the past few decades, no pest risk assessment has been conducted for the importation of strawberries into the United States.

2.3.2. Decision history

From 1924 to 1994, the importation of strawberries into the United States was denied from the following countries: Australia, French Guiana, Ghana, Guyana, Korea, Peru, the Philippines, and Zimbabwe. The principal risks detected in decision sheets were 1) Halotydeus destructor, 2) mites, 3) Dacus sp., and 4) Bactrocera sp. (CPHST, 2008).

Decisions without clear dates are as follows: Argentina (authorized entry via Miami), Belgium, Cuba, Ecuador, England, Europe, France, French Guiana, Haiti, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Peru (rejected at South Pacific ports), Scotland, Switzerland (decision unknown), Chile (approved), and the Philippines (denied) (CPHST, 2008). For further details see Appendix C.

2.3.3. Pest interceptions

From 1984 to 2008, many different pests were intercepted on F. x ananassa, F. chiloensis, Fragaria sp., and F. vesca at U.S. ports-of-entry (see Appendix D) (PestID, 2009).

2.4. Pest Categorization-Identification of Pests of Fragaria spp. in Jordan

2.4.1. Pest list

Below we present information on pests associated with Fragaria spp. (in any country) that occur in Jordan and neighboring countries (Table 2). The data includes (1) the presence or absence of these pests in the continental United States and pertinent citations for that distribution, (2) pertinent citations supporting the association of the pest with Fragaria spp., (3) the association of the pest with plant parts and pertinent citations showing that association, (4) the quarantine status of the pest in the continental United States, and (5) whether the pest is likely to follow the pathway into the United States on strawberry.

Table 2. Pests reported on Fragaria spp. and present in Jordan and neighboring countries.

Pest

Geographic distribution[footnoteRef:1] [1: We only considered the geographic distribution the continental United States, Jordan, and its neighboring countries: Israel, Iraq, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Syria. IS = Israel; IR = Iraq; JO = Jordan; EG = Egypt; SA = Saudi Arabia; SY = Syria; and US = United States.]

Reported on Fragaria spp.

Plant part affected[footnoteRef:2] [2: Plant parts: Fruit = F; Flower/Inflorescence = I; Leaf = L; Root = R; Shoot = Sh; Stem = S.]

Quaran-tine pest

Follow pathway

ARTHROPODS

ARACHNIDA

Acari: Tarsonemidae

Phytonemus pallidus (Banks)

JO (EHKJ, 2004); US (CABI, 2007)

EHKJ, 2004; INRA, 2008

N/A

No

N/A

Acari: Tenuipalpidae

Brevipalpus obovatus Donnadieu

JO (PestID, 2009); US (CABI, 2007)

MAG, 2008

N/A

No

N/A


Bryobia praetiosa Koch

JO (PestID, 2009); US (Migeon and Dorkeld, 2007)

Migeon and Dorkeld, 2007

N/A

No

N/A


JO (CABI, 2007; EPPO and CABI, 1997; Migeon and Dorkeld, 2007)

Migeon and Dorkeld, 2007

F (Poole, 1999); L (CABI, 2007; NAPPO, 2001)

Yes

Yes

Tetranychus cinnabarinus (Boisduval) Syn: Tetranychus telarius (L.)

JO (CABI, 2007; Kasem and Yakob, 1985); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Tetranychus urticae Koch

JO (CABI, 2007; EHKJ, 2004; Migeon and Dorkeld, 2007); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007; EHKJ, 2004; Migeon and Dorkeld, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

INSECTA

Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae

Altica (Haltica) oleracea (L.)

JO (Furth, 1980)

Furth, 1980

L (Cranshaw, 2006)

Yes

No[footnoteRef:3] [3: Altica (Haltica) oleracea is a flea beetle that feeds primarily on leaves. Because strawberries are harvested with the calyx attached, this beetle may occur on exported fruit, but it has never been intercepted on strawberry from anywhere (PestID, 2009). Furthermore, we found no other reliable references that this pest attacks strawberry. “Flea beetles” are so-called because they jump when disturbed, so overall this pest is highly unlikely to follow the pathway of commercial fruit.]

Coleoptera: Curculionidae

Hypera postica (Gyllenhal) Syn: Phytonomus variabilis Herbst.

JO (AQIS, 2008; EPPO, 1999); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae

Polyphylla fullo (Linnaeus)

JO (EHKJ, 2004); US (MA) (Herrmann et al., 2006)

EHKJ, 2004

R (INRA, 2008)

Yes

No

Melolontha melolontha Linnaeus

JO (AQIS, 2008)

CABI, 2007; Graham, 2008; INRA, 2008; Plant Health Australia, 2005

F (CABI, 2007); L, R (Graham, 2008; INRA, 2008)

Yes

No[footnoteRef:4] [4: Melolontha melolontha is an external feeder of fruits and pods (CABI, 2007) but larvae feed mainly on roots, while adults feed mainly on foliage (Graham, 2008; INRA, 2008). Adults are large (20-28 mm long, 12-13 mm wide) and have a dark head and pronotum (Graham, 2008), so they should be easily detected and removed during post-harvest processing. Thus, this insect is highly unlikely follow the pathway. ]

Diptera: Tephritidae

Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann)

JO (AQIS, 2008; EPPO, 1999; PestID, 2009)

Liquido et al., 1991; Thomas et al., 2005

F[footnoteRef:5] (CABI, 2007) [5: Strawberries are only a conditional host of C. capitata (Liquido et al., 1991; Thomas et al., 2005). Like many hosts of Medfly, strawberries can be infested when grown near primary hosts (e.g., stone fruits or citrus) with large Medfly populations (Steck, 2008). Ceratitis capitata has never been recorded on strawberries in Jordan (Katbeh-Bader, 2008), but it has been intercepted at U.S. ports-of-entry in various fruits from Jordan (PestID, 2009).]

Yes

No[footnoteRef:6] [6: Because of the conditional host status of strawberry for Medfly, and other factors, we think Medfly is highly unlikely to follow the pathway. Please see detailed discussion following the pest list.]

Hemiptera: Aphididae

Aphis gossypii Glover

JO (AQIS, 2008; CABI, 2007); US (CABI, 2007)

EHKJ, 2004; Strand, 1994

N/A

No

N/A

Aulacorthum solani Kaltenbach

JO; US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Brachycaudus helichrysi Kaltenbach


CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Macrosiphum euphorbiae (Thomas)

JO (CABI, 2007); US (CABI, 2007; Strand, 1994)

CABI, 2007; Strand, 1994

N/A

No

N/A

Macrosiphum rosae (Linnaeus)

IS (PestID, 2009; CABI, 2007); EG; US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Metopolophium dirhodum (Walker)

JO; US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Myzus persicae Sulzer

JO (AQIS, 2008; CABI, 2007; EPPO, 1999); US (CABI, 2007; Strand, 1994)

CABI, 2007; EHKJ, 2004

N/A

No

N/A

Sitobion fragariae (Walker)

JO (CABI, 2007); US (Jensen et al., 1999)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Hemiptera: Coccidae

Coccus hesperidum (Linnaeus)

JO (AQIS, 2008; Ben-Dov, 2006; EPPO, 1999); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Hemiptera: Diaspididae

Diaspidiotus perniciosus (Comstock) Cockerell, Danzig

IS (PestID, 2009); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Hemiptera: Lygaeidae

Nysius raphanus Howard

IS (PestID, 2009); US (CABI, 2007; Demirel and Cranshaw, 2006; Sweet, 2000)

Sweet, 2000

N/A

No

N/A

Hemiptera: Margarodidae

Icerya purchasi Maskell

JO (AQIS, 2008; CABI, 2007); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae

Planococcus citri (Risso)

JO (Ben-Dov, 2006; CABI, 2007); US (CABI, 2007)

Ben-Dov et al., 2008

N/A

No

N/A

Planococcus longispinus (Targioni Tozzetti)

JO (Ben-Dov, 2006; Ben-Dov et al., 2008); US (Ben-Dov et al., 2008)

Ben-Dov et al., 2008

N/A

No

N/A

Lepidoptera: Crambidae

Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner)

JO (AQIS, 2008); US (CABI, 2007)

Maas et al., 1998; Robinson et al., 2008

N/A

No

N/A

Udea ferrugalis (Hübner)

IS (PestID, 2009)

Flemish Entomological Society, 2008; Fitter and Peat, 1994; Robinson et al., 2008

L (Flemish Entomological Society, 2008; Fitter and Peat, 1994)

Yes

No[footnoteRef:7] [7: Udea ferrugalis has been intercepted on commodities other than strawberries from Israel (PestID, 2009). The larvae are very polyphagous on herbaceous plants, notably on leaves of Fragaria vesca (Fitter and Peat, 1994; Flemish Entomological Society, 2008). Larvae of U. ferrugalis live in turned-down leaves and later between two spun leaves, and they pupate in a cocoon in a partially cut section of the leaf (Flemish Entomological Society, 2008). Given this, this pest seems unlikely to follow the pathway.]

Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae

Anarsia lineatella Zeller

JO (Ahmed, 1984; AQIS, 2008; EPPO, 1999); US (CABI, 2007)

Robinson et al., 2008

N/A

No

N/A


Acronicta rumicis (Linnaeus) Syn: Acronycta salicis Curtis, A. diffusa Walker

JO (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007; Robinson et al., 2008

L (CABI, 2007)

Yes

No[footnoteRef:8] [8: All stages of A. rumicis could be easily detected on the fruit, and are likely to be eliminated during post-harvest processing. For example, full-grown larvae of the fifth instar reach about 40 mm in length and are dark brown, with an orange epicranial margin. The body is brown with a segmentally interrupted dorsal black band (CABI, 2007). Consequently, we do not expect this insect to follow the pathway.]

Agrotis ipsilon (Hufnagel) Syn: Euxoa ipsilon Hufnagel, Feltia ipsilon Hufnagel

JO (CABI, 2007; EHKJ, 2004); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007; EHKJ, 2004; Robinson et al., 2008

N/A

No

N/A

Agrotis segetum Denis & Schiffermüller Syn: Scotia segetum Denis & Schiffermüller, Euxoa segetum Denis & Schiffermüller

JO (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007; Robinson et al., 2008

L, R, S (CABI, 2007; DAFF, 2000)

Yes

No[footnoteRef:9] [9: Agrotis segetum could be detected by visual inspection because its eggs are stuck on plant residues and soil particles by a putty-like substance secreted by the female (CABI, 2007). We think larvae will not remain under the clayx, because 1) they are large, 45 to 50 mm, with recognizable coloring (INRA, 2008), 2) they pupate in the ground, and conceal themselves there during the day, and 3) the calyx is not known to carry this pest during trade and transport (CABI, 2007).]


JO (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

F, L (CABI, 2007; NAPPO, 2006)

Yes

Yes

Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner)

JO (CABI, 2007)

PestID, 2009

F (PestID, 2009)

Yes

No[footnoteRef:10] [10: Helicoverpa armigera has been intercepted once on commercial cargo. We found no references indicating that Fragaria is a normal host. Consequently, we do not expect it to be present on commercial shipments of strawberry fruits. ]

Helicoverpa zea (Boddie) Syn: Heliothis zea Boddie


Robinson et al., 2008; Strand, 1994

N/A

No

N/A

Mamestra brassicae (L.)

JO (PestID, 2009)

CABI, 2007; Benuzzi and Antoniacci, 1995

F (PestID, 2009); L (Freeman and Nicoli, 2002)

Yes

No[footnoteRef:11] [11: Mamestra brassicae is a serious pest attacking species of the genera Brassica, Chrysanthemum, Rumex, and Solanum (Robinson et al., 2001; Szwejda, 2006; Zhang; 1994). It has been intercepted from Jordan only once, but not on strawberries. Fragaria is a minor host, and the pest generally feeds on foliage (Benuzzi and Antoniacci, 1995; CABI, 2007; Freeman and Nicoli, 2002). Even if the calyx is included, we do not expect this pest to follow the pathway.]

Pseudaletia unipuncta (Haworth) Syn: Mythimna unipuncta Haworth

IS (CABI, 2007; PestID, 2009); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007 Robinson et al., 2008

N/A

No

N/A

Spodoptera exigua (Hübner)

JO (Al-Abbadi, 2001; CABI, 2007); US (CABI, 2007)


N/A

No

N/A


JO (CABI, 2007; El-Barakat, 1980)

CABI, 2007; INRA, 2008

F, L (CABI, 2007)

Yes

Yes

Trichoplusia ni (Hübner)

JO; US (CABI, 2007)


N/A

No

N/A



IS (Meijerman and Ulenberg, 2004); JO[footnoteRef:12] (Fauna Europaea Web Service, 2004; PestID, 2009); US (OR) (CABI, 2007; EPPO and CABI, 1999) [12: Cacoecimorpha pronubana is an important pest of Fragaria spp. It has been intercepted from Jordan only once, but is present in Israel (Meijerman and Ulenberg, 2004; PestID, 2009). Thus, we considered it present in Jordan.]

CABI, 2007; Meijerman and Ulenberg, 2004; Robinson et al., 2008

F (EPPO, 2002; Meijerman and Ulenberg, 2004); I, L (CABI, 2007)

Yes[footnoteRef:13] [13: Cacoecimorpha pronubana has a limited distribution in the continental United States, but is considered reportable/actionable (PestID, 2009).]

Yes


Frankliniella intonsa (Trybom)

JO; US (PestID, 2009)

Steiner and Goodwin, 2005; Buxton and Easterbrook, 1988

N/A

No

N/A

Thrips (Frankliniella) fuscipennis Haliday

JO, IS (Fauna Europaea Web Service, 2004; PestID, 2009); US (ITIS, 2008)

EPPO, 1998; Plant Health Australia, 2008; Steiner and Goodwin, 2005

N/A

No

N/A

Thrips major Uzel

JO (Fauna Europaea Web Service, 2004; PestID, 2009)

Buxton and Easterbrook, 1988; Plant Health Australia, 2008; Steiner and Goodwin, 2005

I, F (Buxton and Easterbrook, 1988; Steiner and Goodwin, 2005)

Yes

Yes

Thrips tabaci Lindeman

JO; US (CABI, 2007)

PestID, 2009; Gremo et al., 1997

N/A

No

N/A

BACTERIA and PHYTOPLASMAS[footnoteRef:14] [14: Bacterial classification and nomenclature are written according to Euzéby (2008).]

Erwinia amylovora (Burrill) Winslow et al.


Kabadjova-Hirstova et al., 2006

N/A

No

N/A

Rhizobium radiobacter (Beijerinck & van Delden) Young et al.

JO; US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Strawberry green petal phytoplasma (16S rRNA taxonomic group I, subgroup C)

IS (CABI, 2007; Spiegel and Frank, 1982; Weintraub et al., 2007); US (CABI, 2007; Maas, 1998)

CABI, 2007; Spiegel and Frank, 1982[footnoteRef:15] [15: This phytoplasma is leafhopper-borne and vectored. Species which vector the phytoplasma include Aphrodes bicincta, Euscelis lineolata, E. plebejus, andMacrosteles fascifrons. Of these, A. bicincta and E. lineolata are present in the Mediterranean basin (McKamey, 2001). Euscelis incisa ochreata Haupt 1927a: 27a: 27 [n.subsp. of plebejus] is the only one present in Israel (McKamey, 2001). However, we did not include these vectors here because we found no information that they are present in Jordan or its neighboring countries.]

N/A

No

N/A

FUNGI and CHROMISTANS[footnoteRef:16] [16: Fungal classification and nomenclature are written according to Index Fungorum (CABI, 2008), NCBI Taxonomy (National Library of Medicine, 2008) and SMML (Farr et al., 2007).]

Alternaria alternata (Fr: Fr) Keissl. (Ascomycetes: Pleosporales)

JO[footnoteRef:17] (Ali-Shtayeh et al., 1989; Bashan et al., 1991), US (CABI, 2007) [17: Bashan et al.(1991) found infested wild beets in Israel on sites just across the Jordan River from Jordan. ]

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Aspergillus niger Tieghem (Eurotiomycetes: Eurotiales)


Farr et al., 2007; Gubler and Converse, 1993

N/A

No

N/A

Botryotinia fuckeliana (de Bary) Whetzel Syn: Botrytis cinerea Pers.: Fr. (Leotiomycetes: Helotiales)


CABI, 2007; Farr et al., 1989; Farr et al., 2007; Gubler and Converse, 1993; Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, 2007; Strand, 1994

N/A

No

N/A

Cladosporium cladosporioides (Fresen.) G.A. de Vries (Dothideomycetes: Capnodiales)

EG, IS (CABI, 2007; PestID, 2009); US (CABI, 2007; Farr et al., 2008)

Koike et al., 2003

N/A

No

N/A

Colletotrichum acutatum J.H. Simmonds (Ascomycetes: Phyllachorales)

IS (Freeman and Katan, 1997), US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007; Farr et al., 2008

N/A

No

N/A

Didymella lycopersici Klebahn Syn: Phoma lycopersici Cooke (Dothideomycetes: incertae sedis)

JO; US (CABI, 2007)

Gubler and Converse, 1993

N/A

No

N/A

Fusarium oxysporum Schlechtendahl (Ascomycetes: Hypocreales)


Farr et al., 1989; Farr et al., 2007; Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Gibberella avenacea R.J. Cook Anamorph): Fusarium avenaceum (Fr.: Fr.) Sacc. (Ascomycetes: Hypocreales)

IR, IS, EG; US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Gibberella zeae (Schweinitz) Petch Syn: Fusarium roseum Link, Fusarium graminearum Schwabe (Acomycetes: Hypocreales)


Farr et al., 1989; Farr et al., 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Glomerella cingulata (Stoneman) Spaulding & H. Schrenk Syn: Colletotrichum gloeosporioides (Penz.) Penzig & Saccardo (Ascomycetes: Phyllachorales)


Farr et al., 1989; Farr et al., 2007; Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, 2007; Smith, 2006

N/A

No

N/A

Gnomonia comari P. Karst. (Ascomycetes: Diaporthales)

IS; US (CABI, 2007; Punithalingam, 1974)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Macrophomina phaseolina (Tassi) Goid. (Ascomycetes: Incertae sedis)

EG, IR, IS, SY, US (CABI, 2007)


N/A

No

N/A

Monilinia fructigena Honey Syn: Monilia fructigena (Aderhold & Ruhland) Honey Anamorph: M. fructigena Pers.:Fr. (Leotiomycetes: Helotiales)

JO (AQIS, 2008; EPPO, 1999)

CABI, 2007; Mackie and Kumar, 2005; SENASA, 2007

F (Mackie and Kumar, 2005)

Yes

Yes

Mycosphaerella fragariae (Tulasne) Lindau Syn: Ramularia brunnea Peck (Dothideomycetes: Capnodiales)

JO (EHKJ, 2004); US (CABI, 2007)

EHKJ, 2004; Farr et al., 1989; Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Nectria haematococca (Berk. & Broome) Samuels & Rossman Anamorph: Fusarium solani (Martius) Saccardo (Ascomycetes: Hypocreales)

JO (Abu-Blan et al., 1990; AQIS, 2008; EPPO, 1999); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007; Farr et al., 1989 ; Farr et al., 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Penicillium aurantiogriseum Dierckx Syn: Penicillium cyclopium (Ascomycetes: Eurotiales)

JO (Grishkan et al., 2003); US (Farr et al., 2008)

Gubler and Converse, 1993; Maas, 1998

N/A

No

N/A

Penicillium expansum Link Syn: Penicillium glaucum Link (Ascomycetes: Eurotiales)

IS, EG, SA (CABI, 2007); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007; Gubler and Converse, 1993; Maas, 1998

N/A

No

N/A

Phytophthora citrophthora (R.E. Sm. & E.H. Sm.) Leonian (Oomycetes: Pythiales)

JO (AQIS, 2008; CABI, 2007; EPPO, 1999); US (CABI, 2007)

Farr et al., 2007; Gubler and Converse, 1993

N/A

No

N/A

Phytophthora cryptogea Pethybr. & Laff. (Oomycetes: Pythiales)

JO; US (CABI, 2007)


N/A

No

N/A

Phytophthora fragariae C.J. Hickman (Oomycetes: Pythiales)

JO (AQIS, 2008; EPPO, 1999); US (CABI, 2007; EPPO and CABI, 1997)

Farr et al., 1989; Farr et al., 2007; Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, 2007; SENASA, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Phytophthora nicotianae Breda de Haan Syn: P. nicotianae var. parasitica (Dastur) G. M. Waterh., P. parasitica Dastur, P. parasitica var. nicotianae (Breda de Haan) Tucker (Oomycetes: Pythiales)

JO (AQIS, 2008; CABI, 2007; EPPO, 1999); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007; Farr et al., 1989; Farr et al., 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Podosphaera aphanis[footnoteRef:18] (Wallr.) U. Braun & S. Takamatsu Syn: Oidium fragariae Harz, P. aphanis var. aphanis (Wallr.), Sphaerotheca aphanis (Wallr). U. Broun, S. aphanis var. aphanis (Wallr). U. Broun, S. macularis f. sp. fragariae (Harz) Jacz. (Ascomycetes, Erysiphales) [18: Podosphaera aphanis var. aphanis is an antonym of P. aphanis (Braun, 2008).]

IS (Amsalem et al., 2006; Voytyuk et al., 2007); US (Dugan and Glawe, 2008; Farr et al., 2008; Pscheidt, 2008a)

Amsalem et al., 2006; Braun, 1995; Braun and Takamatsu, 2000; Braun et al., 2002; Maas, 1998; Pertot et al, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Podosphaera fuliginea (Schltdl.) U. Braun & S. Takam. Syn.: Sphaerotheca fuliginea (Schltdl.) Pollacci, S. humuli var. fuliginea (Schltdl.) E.S. Salmon (Leotiomycetes: Erysiphales)

JO (Al-Jaa'freh, 1990); US (Farr et al., 2007)

Farr et al., 1989

N/A

No

N/A

Podosphaera macularis (Wallr.) U. Braun & S. Takam. Syn: Sphaerotheca humuli (DC.) Burrill, S. macularis (Wallr.) Lind (Leotiomycetes: Erysiphales)

JO (EHKJ, 2004); US (CABI, 2007)

EHKJ, 2004; Mukerji, 1964

N/A

No

N/A

Pythium debaryanum R. Hesse (Oomycetes: Pythiales)

JO (Abu-Blan et al., 1990); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007; Gubler and Converse, 1993

N/A

No

N/A

Pythium irregulare Buisman (Oomycetes: Pythiales)

EG, IR, IS; US (CABI, 2007)


N/A

No

N/A

Pythium myriotylum Drechsler (Oomycetes: Pythiales)

IS (CABI, 2007); US (CABI, 2007; Farr et al., 2008)


N/A

No

N/A

Pythium ultimum Trow (Oomycetes: Pythiales)

JO; US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007; Farr et al., 1989; Farr et al., 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Rhizopus stolonifer (Ehrenb.: Fr.) Vuill. (Zygomycetes: Mucorales)

JO (Al-Mughrabi, 2003); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Libert) de Bary (Leotiomycetes: Helotiales)

JO (Abu-Blan et al., 1990; AQIS, 2008; EPPO, 1999); US (CABI 2006)

CABI, 2007; Farr et al., 1989; Farr et al., 2007; Gubler and Converse, 1993; Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc. Teleomorph: Athelia rolfsii, (Curzi) Tu & Kimbr., Corticium rolfsii Curzi (Basidiomycetes: Polyporales)

JO (AQIS, 2008; EPPO, 1999); US (Farr et al., 2008)

Gubler and Converse, 1993; Maas, 1998

N/A

No

N/A

Thanatephorus cucumeris (A.B. Frank) Donk Syn: Rhizoctonia solani J.G. Kühn (Agaricomycetes: Cantharellales)

JO (Abu-Blan, et al., 1990; AQIS, 2008; EPPO, 1999); US (CABI, 2007; Farr et al., 1989)

Farr et al., 1989; Farr et al., 2007; Gubler and Converse, 1993; Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Verticillium dahliae Klebahn (Sordariomycetes: Phyllachorales)

IS, JO (CABI, 2007; Tsror et al., 2001); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Mollusca

Agriolimax reticulatus Muller Syn: Deroceras reticulatum Muller (Limacidae)

IS (PestID, 2009); US (CABI, 2007)

INRA, 1998

N/A

No

N/A

NEMATODES[footnoteRef:19] [19: Nematode classification and nomenclature are written according to Ferris (2008).]

Aphelenchoides fragariae (Ritzema Bos) Christie (Aphelenchoididae)


CABI, 2007; Ferris, 2008

N/A

No

N/A

Ditylenchus dipsaci (Kühn) (Anguinidae)

JO; US (CABI, 2007)

EPPO, 2007; Ferris and Caswell-Chen, 1997; Ferris, 2008; UC-ANR, 2005

N/A

No

N/A

Helicotylenchus digonicus Thorne and Malek (Hoplolaimidae)

JO; US (Wouts and Yeats, 1994)

Celal, 2004

N/A

No

N/A

Helicotylenchus dihystera Cobb et al.


Park et al., 2005

N/A

No

N/A

Helicotylenchus pseudorobustus (Steiner) Golden (Hoplolaimidae)

JO; US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Heterodera ciceri Volvas et al. (Heteroderidae)

JO (CABI, 2007)

Ferris and Caswell-Chen, 1997

R (CABI, 2007)

Yes

No

Longidorus elongatus (de Man) Micoletzky (Longidoridae)

JO; US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007; Ferris, 2008

N/A

No

N/A

Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid & White) Chitwood (Meloidogynidae)

JO; US (CABI, 2007)

Ferris and Caswell-Chen, 1997; UC-ANR, 2005

N/A

No

N/A

Meloidogyne javanica (Treub) Chitwood (Meloidogynidae)

JO; US (CABI, 2007)

Ferris and Caswell-Chen, 1997; Ferris, 2008; UC-ANR, 2005

N/A

No

N/A

Merlinius brevidens (Allen) (Belonolaimidae)

JO (CABI, 2007); US (CABI, 2007; Wehunt et al., 1989)

Ferris and Caswell-Chen, 1997; Ferris, 2008

N/A

No

N/A

Pratylenchus penetrans (Cobb) Chitwood and Oteifa (Pratylenchidae)

EG, IS, SA (Galper et al., 1990), US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Pratylenchus thornei Sher & Allen (Pratylenchidae)

JO; US (CABI, 2007)

Ferris and Caswell-Chen, 1997

N/A

No

N/A

Pratylenchus vulnus Allen & Jensen (Pratylenchidae)

EG, IS; US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Scutellonema brachyurus (Steiner) Andrássy


Biosecurity New Zealand, 2007; CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

VIRUSES AND VIROIDS[footnoteRef:20] [20: Viral nomenclature is written according to NCBI (National Library of Medicine, 2008) and viral taxonomy and acronyms are written according to Van Regenmortel et al. (2005).]

Apple mosaic virus (ApMV) (Bromoviridae: Ilarvirus)

JO; US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007; Tzanetakis and Martin, 2005

N/A

No

N/A

Strawberry mild yellow edge virus (SMYEaV) (Flexiviridae: Potexvirus)

EG (Ragab et al., 2008), IS (CABI, 2007; ICTVdB Virus Descriptions, 2006); US (CABI, 2007)

CABI, 2007

N/A

No

N/A

Strawberry mottle virus (SMoV) (Tentative new family: bipartite picorna-like viruses: unclear genus)[footnoteRef:21] [21: Thompson et al. (2002) propose including SMoV as a tentative member of the Satsuma dwarf virus (SDV)-like lineage of picorna-like viruses. The close identity of SMoV and SDV-like viruses with the aphid transmissible RTSV suggests they form a new group between the Sequiviridae and the Comoviridae, or within the Comoviridae. ]

IS (CABI, 2007; Spiegel, 1986), US (Pscheidt, 2008b)

CABI, 2007; Thompson et al., 2002

N/A

No

N/A

Strawberry pallidosis virus (SPaV) (Closterovirideae: Crinivirus)

EG (Ragab et al., 2008), US (Tzanetakis et al., 2004)

Maas, 1998

N/A

No

N/A

Strawberry necrotic shock virus (formerly Tobacco streak virus-strawberry strain) (Bromoviridae: Ilarvirus)

IS, US (CABI, 2007; Maas, 1998; Tzanetakis et al., 2004)

CABI, 2007; Maas, 1998

N/A

No

N/A

Tomato ringspot virus (ToRSV) (Comoviridae: Nepovirus)

JO (EPPO and CABI, 1997); US (CABI, 2007)

Diekmann et al., 1994

N/A

No

N/A

2.4.2. Pest list discussion

Pests in Jordan on other commodities. We included pests intercepted from Jordan on commodities other than strawberries because they are reported to be Fragaria spp. pests. We included them even if they are quarantine pests for Jordan (Plant Protection Division, 2007; EPPO, 1999). Examples include Agrotis segetum, Brevipalpus obovatus, Ceratitis capitata, Coccus hesperidum, Frankliniella intonsa, Helicotylenchus pseudorobustus, Mamestra brassicae, Pratylenchus thornei, Scutellonema brachyurus, Tetranychus urticae, Thrips fuscipennis, and T. major (PestID, 2009).

Pests in neighboring countries on other commodities. We also included pests intercepted from Jordan’s neighboring countries on commodities other than strawberries if they were pests of strawberries (PestID, 2009). We think assuming that these pests may also be present in Jordan is reasonable. Examples include Agriolimax reticulatus, Anarsia lineatella, Aphis gossipii, Aulacorthum solani, Botrytis cinerea, Cacoecimorpha pronubana, Chrysodeixis chalcites, Cladosporium cladosporoides, Diaspidiotus perniciosus, Glomerella cingulata, Helicotylenchus digonicus, Hypera postica, Icerya purchasi, Macrosiphum euphorbiae, M. rosae, Nysius raphanus, Pseudaletia unipuncta, Spodoptera exigua, S. littoralis, Trichoplusia ni, and Udea ferrugalis (PestID, 2009).

Quarantine pests in neighboring countries on other commodities. We did not include pests present or intercepted from Jordan’s neighboring countries if they were quarantine pests for Jordan (Plant Protection Division, 2007). These pests are as follows:

· Diplocarpon earlianum (fungus), from Israel (CABI, 2007; Sivanesan and Gibson, 1976)

· Frankliniella occidentalis (insect), intercepted from Israel, Egypt, and Lebanon (PestID, 2009)

· Rhodococcus fascians (bacterium), from Egypt and Israel (CABI, 2007; Goethals et al., 2001; Putnam and Miller, 2007; Zutra et al., 1994)

· Strawberry crinkle virus (SCrV) from Israel (CABI, 2007; Brunt, 1996)

· Thrips palmi (insect), intercepted from Israel and the Syrian Arab Republic (PestID, 2009)

Spodoptera litura. This pest has been intercepted from Israel, but we did not include it because all records from this country and Jordan were found to be misidentifications (Pogue, 2008).

Pests not following the pathway. Quarantine pests listed that were not chosen for further analysis may be potentially detrimental to the agriculture or natural environment of the United States; however, a variety of reasons exist for not further analyzing these pests. Some of the pests are associated with plant parts other than commodity, such as roots, bulbs, or inflorescence. Other pests are not expected to be associated with the commodity during harvest and processing because of their inherent mobility, large size or disturbance by human activity. For some of the pests, association with the host is only known under laboratory conditions or artificial infestation. In such cases, the data are placed in the table mostly for information purposes.

Medfly. Strawberry is considered an “unlikely” or only “occasional” host of Medfly (Steck, 2008; Thomas et al., 2005; Weems, 1981). Strawberry is only infested by Medfly if they are grown near primary hosts that have large Medfly populations (Steck, 2008). This may explain the only report of a natural field infestation, which was in a garden in Hawaii (Kobayashi and Fujimoto, 1975, as cited by Liquido et al., 1991). Other reports are either laboratory reports or listings (INRA, 2009; Liquido et al., 1991; Thomas et al., 2005; Weems, 1981), not original source reports. Therefore, the listings may be based on the lone 1975 field infestation in Hawaii. PPQ has long permitted the entry of strawberries without specific mitigation measures for Medfly from many countries where it occurs (e.g., Israel, Morocco, Turkey, France, Spain), and it has only been intercepted one time on Fragaria fruit at a U.S. port-of-entry (PestID, 2009). That was in passenger baggage from Hungary, not on commercial fruit. This lack of interceptions suggests that commercial strawberry fruit are unlikely to be infested with Medfly.

In Jordan Medfly has never been recorded on strawberries (Katbeh-Bader, 2008). Strawberry crops are mainly grown in the middle part of the Jordan Valley, while citrus, the main host of Medfly in Jordan, is mainly grown in the northern part of the valley (Katbeh-Bader, 2008). To suppress the population levels of Medfly in the country, Jordan is a member of a regional project (with the Palestinian Authority and Israel) entitled "Strengthening the Area-Wide Control of Medfly Using Sterile Insect Technique" in cooperation with IAEA (Katbeh-Bader, 2008). Jordan also uses environmentally safe materials such as GF120 as bait spraying to suppress populations.

Based on this evidence, we think that Medfly is highly unlikely to follow the pathway of export-quality strawberry fruit from Jordan, so it was not further analyzed.

2.5. Quarantine Pests Likely to Follow the Pathway

We analyzed the quarantine pests expected to follow the pathway [i.e., be included in commercial shipments of strawberry] (Table 3) in detail below [Steps 5-7 (PPQ, 2000)].

Table 3. Quarantine pests likely to follow the pathway and selected for further analysis.

Pest

Taxonomy







Monilinia fructigena Honey

Leotiomycetes: Helotiales



Thrips major Uzel


2.6. Consequences of Introduction

Using our guidelines (PPQ, 2000), we assessed the Consequences of Introduction in five risk elements. We summarized the values for the Consequences of Introduction for each pest below (Table 4).

Cacoecimorpha pronubana

Risk ratings

Risk Element #1: Climate-Host Interaction

Cacoecimorpha pronubana is indigenous to the Mediterranean region and is present in many countries in Europe (e.g., Belgium, Croatia, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Serbia and Montenegro, Spain, Switzerland, the United Kingdom), Asia (Israel and Japan), and Africa (Algeria, Libya, Morocco, Morocco, South Africa, and Tunisia) (CABI, 2007; EPPO and CABI, 1997). It is present in the United States only in Oregon. In Europe, the insect has likely reached the limits of its natural range, and often maintains populations in northerly countries in greenhouses (CABI, 2007). The worldwide distribution of C. pronubana corresponds to Plant Hardiness Zones 5-11 (Magarey et al., 2008), and most hosts occur in the United States in these zones (NRCS, 2008). Thus, we rated this element as High.

High (3)

Risk Element #2: Host Range

Cacoecimorpha pronubana has been reported on 141 species in 47 families (Castresana et al., 1996). Dianthus caryophyllus is the most seriously affected, although other species have suffered serious infestations (CABI, 2007). Larvae of C. pronubana are very polyphagous and a very important pest on greenhouse grown strawberries (Alford, 1984). Other hosts include apple (Malus), cherry, olive (Olea), plum, currant, gooseberry (Ribes), blueberries (Vaccinium crymbosum), and vegetables such as peas (Lathyrus) (Meijerman and Ulenberg, 2004; Molina, 1988). Cacoecimorpha pronubana attacks ornamental plants such as Coronilla spp., Chrysanthemum morifolium, Cupressocyparis leylandii, Cytisus spp., Euphorbia spp., Fuchsia spp., Ilex aquifolium, Laurus nobilis, Ligustrum vulgare, Mahonia aquifolium, and Petunia spp. (Meijerman and Ulenberg, 2004). Additional hosts include Acacia spp., Acer spp., Allium porrum, Brassica spp., Chamaecyparis lawsoniana, Citrus spp., Citysus spp., Coriaria spp., Cupressus spp., Daucus carota, Jasminum spp., Laurus nobilis, Ligustrum spp., Solanum lycopersicum, Mahonia spp., Pelargonium spp., Picea spp., Pinus halepensis, Pisum sativum var. arvense, Populus spp., Rhododendron, Rosa spp., Rubus spp., Salix spp., Solanum tuberosum, Syringa vulgaris, Trifolium spp., Vicia faba, and V. faba var. major (Alford, 1984; Alford, 1995; Burballa et al., 1995; CABI, 2007; Castresana et al., 1996; EPPO and CABI, 1997; EPPO, 2004a; Siscaro et al., 1988; Vrie, 1991). Many of these hosts are wild and cropped plants in the continental United States (NRCS, 2008). Therefore, we rated the Host Range risk element as High.

High (3)

Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential

At a mean temperature of 15°C the complete life cycle of C. pronubana takes 123-147 days, but only 28-44 days at 30°C (EPPO and CABI, 1997). Eggs are laid in batches of 150-250. Each female can lay up to 700 eggs, which hatch after 8-51 days (CABI, 2007; Castresana et al., 1996). In the northern United Kingdom, adults emerge in April, then fly and deposit eggs until June. The second generation can appear in mid-August and fly until the end of September or the beginning of October. In glasshouses with a minimum temperature of 15°C (59°F), it has three to five generations per year (CABI, 2007). In North Africa, it has five or six generations per year.

Adults of C. pronubana can disperse locally, but international trade is the principal method for long-distance dispersal (CABI, 2007), as evidenced by 371 interceptions at U.S. ports from 1984 to 2008 (PestID, 2009). First instars can be carried by the wind. Thus, we rated it High for Dispersal Potential.

High (3)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact

Strawberries are often attacked by C. pronubana (Meijerman and Ulenberg, 2004). Its larvae burrow into the flesh beneath the calyx. Attacks on strawberry tend to be most severe on protected crops. Cacoecimorpha pronubana causes serious damage in various horticultural and ornamental crops in the open air and in glasshouses (Castresana et al., 1996), and particularly in the latter in northern countries (e.g., Poland) (EPPO, 1997).. Despite being polyphagous, in the Mediterranean area serious damage from C. pronubana is confined mainly to carnation crops, where losses have been reported since the 1920s. In France in 1972-1973, 25-35 percent of carnations were affected, and export losses were valued at about 100,000 French francs ($22,337). In Morocco, C. pronubana took 20 years to develop into a widespread pest on citrus (EPPO and CABI, 1997). In Algeria, it is found mainly on lemons, but is not considered a serious pest. In Italy (Sicily), C. pronubana attacks mainly olives, citrus weeds, and roses (EPPO and CABI, 1997; Siscaro et al., 1988). The pest can also attack shoots of young pine trees, threatening forestry nurseries (Castresana et al., 1996).

Wider establishment of C. pronubana in the continental United States would likely lead to the implementation of chemical control (Alford, 1995), lower yield of host crops, lower value of host crop commodities, and cause the loss of foreign and domestic markets. Consequently, we rated Economic Impact as High.

High (3)

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact

The host genera of C. pronubana contain one or more species listed as threatened or endangered within the continental United States. These include the endangered species Allium munzii (CA), Cupressus abramsiana (CA), Prunus geniculata (Rosaceae; FL), Rhododendron chapmanii (Ericaceae; FL), Trifolium amoenum (CA), T. stoloniferum (AR, IL, IN, KS, KY, MO, OH, WV), and T. trichocalyx (CA) (USFWS, 2008b). Examples of threatened species are C. goveniana ssp. goveniana (CA) and Euphorbia telephioides (FL). Wider establishment of C. pronubana in the United States could also stimulate chemical control and biological control programs, as happened in 2001 in nursery stocks (Green, 2002). Based on this evidence, we rated Environmental Impact as High.

High (3)

Chrysodeixis chalcites

Risk ratings


Chrysodeixis chalcites is primarily distributed in southern Europe and the Mediterranean, and the Middle East to southern Africa (CABI, 2007). This pest is native in the following countries: Albania, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, France (including Corsica), Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal (including Madeira), Romania, Serbia and Montenegro, Spain (including the Canary Islands), Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom in Europe; Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Turkey in Asia; and Algeria, Angola, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Comoros, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Egypt, Gambia, Guinea, Kenya, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius (including the Rodriguez Island), Morocco, Mozambique, Nigeria, Réunion, Saint Helena, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Tunisia, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe in Africa (CABI, 2007). Host plant species are widely distributed in the continental United States (NRCS, 2008). The potential areas where C. chalcites could be established correspond to Plant Hardiness Zones 8-11 (PERAL. 2008b). Because of its small size, Zone 11 does not count toward the total. Consequently, the risk rating for Host-Climate for C. chalcites is Medium.

Medium (2)


Chrysodeixis chalcites is a polyphagous pest with 34 host plant species in 19 families. The primary hosts of C. chalcites include beans, tobacco, tomatoes, cotton, cruciferae species, maize, soybeans, potatoes, and greenhouse crops (CABI, 2007; Kravchenko et al., 2005; Passoa, 1995; Zhang, 1994). The most important crops belong to the following families: Apiaceae, Asteraceae, Boraginaceae, Brassicaceae, Cucurbitaceae, Fabaceae, Geraniaceae, Lamiaceae, Liliaceae, Malvaceae, Moraceae, Poaceae, Rosaceae, Solanaceae, Ulmaceae, Urticaceae, and Verbenaceae (CABI, 2007; Kravchenko et al., 2005; Singh et al., 2003). We rated C. chalcites High for Host Range.

High (3)


Under natural conditions, C. chalcites is polyvoltine, with up to eight or nine generations per year in Egypt (CABI, 2007). Males live, on average, about 11 days, and female longevity is about 12 days. The number of eggs oviposited per female can vary considerably: means were 149-385 at 20°C, 640 at 25°C, and 405 eggs at 30°C (CABI, 2007). Females lay up to 1060 eggs (Amate et al., 1998). Although C. chalcites has been recorded in northern Europe, winter mortality prevents continual establishment, but it extends its distribution by establishing in glasshouses (CABI, 2007). A massive migratory dispersion of this pest has been recorded (Spitzer and Jaros, 2004). Fruit and leaves of plants can also carry the larvae long distances in trade (CABI, 2007), and several hundred interceptions of C. chalcites larvae have been recorded on different commodities (PestID, 2008). Overall, we rated it High for Dispersal Potential.

High (3)


Chrysodeixis chalcites and closely related species defoliate plants and feed on flowers and fruits (CABI, 2007; Mau and Martin Kessing, 1991). This pest also attacks crops under glasshouse production (Amate et al., 1998). Control measures for C. chalcites include pheromone trapping, chemical, and biological treatments (CABI, 2007), but mainly insecticides (Medina et al., 2007; Thomas, 2004). Those practices increase production costs (NAPPO, 2006). Chrysodeixis chalcites is considered a pest of national concern in the United States (CAPS, 2007), and its introduction and establishment in the United States will lead to loss of potential markets. Our risk rating for Economic Impact is High.

High (3)


Chrysodeixis chalcites is reported to attack species in 18 plant families. Families containing Endangered and Threatened plant species present in the continental United States include Asteraceae (Helianthus paradoxus and H. schweinitzii), Fabaceae (Trifolium amoenum, T. stoloniferum, and T. trichocalyx), and Solanaceae (Solanum drymophilum) (USFWS, 2008).

When C. chalcites is introduced, eradication programs are started (CFIA, 2006), likely using chemical and biological control. Our risk rating is High.

High (3)

Eutetranychus orientalis

Risk ratings


Eutetranychus orientalis is found in tropical savannahs and deserts where humidity is sufficient for egg survival (CABI, 2007). The species is present in Asia (from Turkey and Iran, to India, Japan, and China), Africa, and Europe (EPPO and CABI, 1997). It can establish in United States Plant Hardiness Zones 8-11 (Magarey et al., 2008), where one or more of its hosts are present (NRCS, 2008). Because of its small size, Zone 11 does not count toward to total. Therefore, our risk rating for Climate-Host Interaction is Medium.

Medium (2)


Citrus species are the main hosts of E. orientalis. In Egypt, lemons (C. limon), mandarins (C. reticulata) and oranges (C. sinensis) are all attacked. It also attacks a wide range of other crops, including almonds (Prunus dulcis), bananas (Musa paradisiaca), cassava (Manihot esculenta), cotton (Gossypium sp.), eggplant (Solanum melongena), figs (Ficus carica and F. macrophylla), guavas (Psidium guajava), luffa (Luffa sp.), mulberries (Morus sp. and Morus alba), olives (Olea europaea), pawpaws (Carica papaya), peaches (Prunus persica), pears (Pyrus sp. and P. comunis), Plumeria (Plumeria alba), quinces (Cydonia oblonga), Castorbean (Ricinus communis), sunflowers (Helianthus annuus), sweet potatoes (Ipomoea batatas), water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes), watermelons (Citrullus lanatus), Alstonia glaucescens, and over 50 other plant species in different families (CABI, 2007; EPPO and CABI, 1997). Thus, we rated it High.

High (3)


For E. orientalis, optimum conditions are 21°C (69.8°F) and 59-70 percent relative humidity (RH), although development proceeded between 18 and 30°C (64.4 and 86°F) and between 35 and 72 percent RH. High temperatures and humidity favor the development of E. orientalis, particularly the egg, which is sensitive to low humidity (EPPO and CABI, 1997). Females have a mean lifespan of 15.2 days, and lay between 6 and 8 eggs per day, with a maximum of 35 eggs per female (CABI, 2007; EPPO and CABI, 1997). Under optimal conditions, 25-27 generations per year are possible (CABI, 2007).

In general, wind currents are the main means of dispersal for E. orientalis. In international trade, this pest might be carried on plants (EPPO and CABI, 1997). Consequently, our risk rating for Dispersal Potential is High.

High (3)


Eutetranychus orientalis is an important pest of citrus. In India, out of seven Eutetranychus pests on citrus, only E. orientalis was a major pest in all areas (CABI, 2007). This mite causes defoliation and dieback of twigs in nurseries and orchards, resulting in premature fruit drop, lowering the yield of host crops (PPQ, 2002). Its activity is enhanced under dry conditions. The presence of this pest requires implementation of control programs which increase production costs. Eutetranychus orientalis is on the EPPO A2 list (CABI, 2007). It is not known to occur in the Western Hemisphere and its introduction into the United States can cause loss of foreign and domestic markets. Consequently, our risk rating for Economic Impact is High.

High (3)


Endangered species of the genera Prunus (e.g., P. geniculata, FL), Manihot (e.g., M. walkerae, TX), and Ziziphus (e.g., Z. celata, FL) are potential hosts (USFWS, 2008b) of E. orientalis. Biological and/or chemical control programs are likely to be implemented if the mite is introduced. Successful examples include control with predatory mites and a parasitic fungus in Jordan and Israel (CABI, 2007). Acaricides are commonly used for chemical control of this mite (CABI, 2007). Consequently, we rated it High for Environmental Impact.

High (3)

Monilinia fructigena

Risk ratings


Monilinia fructigena is found throughout western and southern Europe, extending into the Scandinavian countries, Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union, the Middle and Far East, India, North Africa and South America (CABI, 2007; Jones and Aldwinckle, 1990; Mordue, 1979). Monilinia fructigena survives a wide range of climatic conditions, evident from its distribution in countries with cold winters, as well as subtropical to tropical conditions. Based on its current distribution it would be likely to survive in a large area of the continental United States (NRCS, 2008). Cultivated host species, such as Capsicum spp. and Malus spp., are grown in more than six Plant Hardiness Zones of the continental United States (NRCS, 2008). Climatic conditions and distribution of potential hosts are suitable for the survival and establishment of this fungal pathogen in the Plant Hardiness Zones 5 to 10 of the continental United States (NRCS, 2008; Magarey et al., 2008). Thus, we rated this High.

High (3)


Monilinia fructigena infects multiple species, including: Berberidaceae: Berberis (Barberries); Betulaceae: Corylus avellana (European filbert); Cornaceae: Cornus mas (Cornelian cherry); Ebenaceae: Diospyros kaki (Oriental persimmon); Ericaceae: Rhododendron (Azalea), Vaccinium (Blueberries); Menispermaceae: Ficus carica (Common fig) ; Myrtaceae: Psidium guajava (Common guava); Rosaceae: Amelanchier canadensis (Downy serviceberry), Chaenomeles japonica (Flowering quince), Cotoneaster, Crataegus laevigata (English hawthorn), Cydonia oblonga (Common quince), Eriobotrya japonica (Loquat), Fragaria, Fragaria x ananassa (cultivated strawberry), Malus pumila (Paradise apple), Malus spp. (Apples), Mespilus germanica (Medlar), Prunus (Stone fruit), Prunus armeniaca (Apricot), Prunus avium (Sweet cherry), Prunus cerasus (Sour cherry), Prunus domestica (Plum), Prunus dulcis (Almond), Prunus persica (Peach), Prunus spinosa (Blackthorn), Prunus spp. (Cherries, Peaches, Plums), Pyrus spp. (Pears), P. communis (European pear), Rosa spp. (Roses), Rubus (Blackberry, Raspberry), R. occidentalis (Black raspberry), Sorbus aucuparia (Mountain ash); Solanaceae: Capsicum (Peppers), Solanum lycopersicum (Tomato); and Vitaceae: Vitis vinifera (Grapevine) (Batra, 1991; CABI, 2007; Liberato and Miles, 2007; Mordue, 1979; Van Leeuwen and Van Kesteren, 1998). Consequently, we rated Host Range as High.

High (3)


Conidia of M. fructigena form on mummified fruit and blighted twigs at temperatures of >5°C. At 20°C, sporulation takes place about 12 hours after soaking, and minimum moisture content of mummified fruit in which sporulation can take place at 26°C is 21 percent (CABI, 2007). Mycelial growth stops at 30-35°C, and mycelia are killed at 50°C (CABI, 2007). Sporogenous hyphae of M. fructigena produce a large number of long-lived conidia that are disseminated via air and water (CABI, 2007; Mordue, 1979; Van Leewen, 2000). Aerial dispersal of conidia spreads spores over a wide range, while water splash dispersal may spread spores short distances, to other parts of the same plant or sometimes between adjacent plants (CABI, 2007; Van Leewen, 2000). Animals, including birds, and insects such as wasps (Vespula spp.), beetles (especially Nitidulidae), Diptera (particularly Drosophila spp.), and some Lepidoptera are vectors of this pathogen (CABI, 2007; Mackie and Kumar, 2005). Apparently healthy harvested fruit can be contaminated with spores, or may be latently infected (CABI, 2007; Jones and Aldwinckle, 1990; Mackie and Kumar, 2005), allowing long-distance transport of the pathogen. Monilinia fructigena has been intercepted 1209 times at U.S. ports-of-entry, mostly on fruits (PestID, 2009). Thus, we rated Dispersal Potential High for M. fructigena.

High (3)


The brown rot disease caused by M. fructigena seriously damages fruit crops in temperate regions (van Leeuwen and van Kesteren, 1998), but economic losses vary by crop (Batra, 1991; Jones and Aldwinckle, 1990; Ogawa and English, 1995; Van Leewen, 2000). Control measures are usually not warranted, other than sanitation for apples or pears (Jones and Aldwinckle, 1990). Wounding agents such as insects and birds may facilitate the underlying disease dynamics, and controlling these agents may minimized crop losses (van Leeuwen and van Kesteren, 1998). For Prunus, protective fungicide treatments, reducing sources of inoculum, controlling insects which wound fruits, and post-harvest handling to minimize fungal development are components of control programs (CABI, 2007; Van Leewen, 2000). Apparently healthy harvested fruit may be latently infected or contaminated with M. fructigena spores (Batra, 1991; CABI, 2007). Fruit rot that develops in transit, storage, or at the market reduces quality, which impacts foreign market availability (Batra, 1991; CABI, 2007; Van Leewen, 2000). Introduction of the pathogen may result in domestic or international quarantine measures, but typically does not initiate species-specific control programs (CABI, 2007). Thus, we rated this risk element Medium.

Medium (2)


Monilinia fructigena can attack native plants federally listed as Threatened or Endangered (e.g., Prunus geniculata, Berberis spp., Rhododendron chapmanii), and state-listed protected species (e.g., seven species of Amelanchier, seven species of Cornus), which provide food for mammals and terrestrial birds (NRCS, 2008). As stated above, control programs for M. fructigena are rarely used. Consequently, we rated Environmental Impact as Medium.

Medium (2)

Spodoptera littoralis

Risk ratings


Spodoptera littoralis is present throughout the Mediterranean countries including Spain, Portugal, Greece, and Italy, as well as the Middle East, Israel, Egypt, and Africa. It has been introduced into central and southern Europe (CABI, 2007; Zhang, 1994). In the continental United States, the pest could establish in Hardiness Zones 8 to 11 (Magarey et al., 2008). Because of its small size, Zone 11 does not count toward the total. Our risk rating for Host-Climate is Medium.

Medium (2)


Spodoptera littoralis is a pest of greenhouse crops and vegetables (CABI, 2007; Zhang, 1994). The host range includes over 40 families, with at least 87 species of economic importance (CABI, 2007), such as alfalfa (Medicago sativa), beans (Phaseolus spp.), carrots (Daucus carota), citrus (Citrus spp.), cotton (Gossypium spp.), grapes (Vitis spp.), onion (Allium cepa), peppers (Capsicum annuum), potato (Solanum tuberosum), tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum), tomato (Solanum lycopersicum), and various grasses (CABI, 2007). Based on this evidence, we rated the Host Range as High risk.

High (3)


The lifecycle of S. littoralis can be completed in about five weeks (EPPO and CABI, 1997). This species produces ten generations each year, but only seven generations in greenhouses (Fraval, 1997). Females lay 1000-2000 eggs in masses of 100-300 (EPPO and CABI, 1997). Fecundity is reduced by high temperatures and low humidity; the greatest numbers of eggs (about 960) are produced at 30°C (86°F) and 90 percent RH (EPPO and CABI, 1997). Newly laid eggs of one strain of S. littoralis survived exposure to 1°C (33.8°F) for eight days (EPPO and CABI, 1997).

According to Salama and Shoukry (1972, cited by EPPO and CABI, 1997), the moths can fly 1.5 km in four hours overnight, facilitating dispersion and oviposition on different hosts. In international trade, eggs or larvae may be present on planting material, cut flowers, or vegetables (Table 5) (EPPO and CABI, 1997). Thus, we rated Dispersal Potential as High.

High (3)


Spodoptera littoralis is one of the most destructive agricultural lepidopteran pests within its subtropical and tropical range. Year-round, it attacks crops such as cotton, cowpea, groundnuts, potatoes, and tomatoes (EPPO and CABI, 1997). These crops are widespread in the continental United States (NRCS, 2008).

The establishment of S. littoralis would increase costs because of the chemical, biological, or other control methods that would be used. In addition, this pest could cause the loss of international and interstate markets since it would be considered a quarantine pest by other countries (EPPO and CABI, 1997). This pest is considered a pest of national concern in the United States for soybean and oat production (CAPS, 2007). Based on this evidence, the risk rating for Economical Impact for S. littoralis is High.

High (3)


Spodoptera littoralis attacks families containing Endangered and Threatened plant species present in the continental United States, such as Amarantaceae (Amaranthus pumilus), Asteraceae (Helianthus paradoxus, H. schweinitzii, Senecio franciscanus, and S. layneae), Cactaceae (Opuntia treleasei), Fabaceae (Trifolium amoenum, T. stoloniferum, T. trichocalyx), Fagaceae (Quercus hinckleyi), Liliaceae (Allium munzii), Cucurbitaceae (Cucurbita okeechobeensis ssp. okeechobeensis), Rosaceae (Prunus geniculata), and Verbenaceae (Verbena californica) (USFWS, 2008b). Establishment of this pest could lead to chemical and biological control programs being implemented. Our risk rating for Environmental Impact is High.

High (3)

Thrips major

Risk ratings


Thrips major has a holarctic distribution and is present in Africa, Europe, and Northern Asia (excluding China) (Alavi et al., 2007; Jenser et al., 2005; The Bay Science Foundation, 2008). Thrips major can survive in glasshouse crops (EPPO, 2004b; Vierbergen, 2001). Threshold developmental temperatures for populations of T. major are 4°C-11°C (Stacey and Fellowes, 2002). This pest could establish in Plant Hardiness Zones 3 to 11 of the continental United States (Magarey et al., 2008). Consequently, we rated it High.

High (3)


Thrips major attacks temperate fruits (apricots, apple, plums, pear, wild pear, sweet cherry, and peach) in higher elevations (600m) (Tunç, 1996). This pest also attacks Citrus sp. (Bournier, 1963). Other hosts of T. major include species in numerous plant families, as follows: Achillea spp., Asphodelus spp., Bellis sp., Beta vulgaris, Brassica oleracea, Buxus spp., Calycotoma villosa, Calystegia sepium, Calluna spp., Capsicum spp., Chenopodium spp., Clematis vitalba, Cydonia oblonga, Diplotaxis spp., Eriobotrya japonica, Euphorbia spp., Fragaria sp., Ligustrum ovalifolium, Lobularia maritima, Lythrum spp., Phaseolus sp., Pisum sativum, Polygonum aubertii, Pyrus sp., Rosa spp., Rubus fruticosus (blackberry), Salix sp., Solanum nigrum, Thalictrum sp., and Vicia faba. (Bournier, 1963; Buxton and Easterbrook, 1988; Childers, 1997; EPPO, 2004c; González-Zamora et al., 1994; Gremo et al., 1997; Loomans, 2006; Mound, 2007b; Plant Health Australia, 2008; Pobożniak, 2005; Steiner and Goodwin, 2005; Tekşam and Tunç, 2007; Terry, 1997: Trdan, 2001; Tunç, 1996; Vos et al., 1991; Wnuk and Pobożniak, 2003). Hence, the risk rating is High.

High (3)


On citrus in North Africa, at a threshold temperature of 20°C (68°F), T. major females lay 3-4 eggs per day within flowers and stems, with a total of about 100 eggs. Its life cycle takes from 40 to 45 days (Bournier, 1963).

The pronymph and nymph stages of T. major are semi-mobile, but the insects can move if ecological conditions become stressful. The males move quicker and fly more easily than the females (Bournier, 1963). All thrips stages may be dispersed by the movement of infested plants or plant parts that can disseminate this pest (EPPO, 2004b; Murphy and Ferguson, 2004), as shown by numbers of interceptions (Table 5). The repeated unintended introduction of thrips through international trade has contributed to their high invasion success (Morse and Hoddle, 2005; Kumm, 2002). Consequently, the risk rating is High.

High (3)


Thrips major is a pest of strawberries (EPPO, 1998; Buxton and Easterbrook 1988; Linder et al., 2000; Steiner and Goodwin, 2006; Steiner, 2008). It causes severe fruit distortion in late-season fruits, which dwarfs and twists fruits as achenes and the surrounding areas fail to develop. Distorted fruit is downgraded, causing financial losses (Buxton and Easterbrook, 1988). In apples, lemons, nectarines, strawberries, and oranges, Thrips spp. injure plants through bronzing, silvering, fruit discoloration, flower abortion, malformation of epidermis or distortion of fruits, and russeting around seeds caused by thrips feeding on late fruit (Bournier, 1963; EPPO, 1998; EPPO, 2004b; EPPO, 2004c Kirk, 1984; Steiner, 2008; Tommasini and Burgio, 2004). This damage lowers market grade and value (Morse and Hoddle, 2005; Steiner and Goodwin, 2005). Leaf feeding also diminishes plant vigor and fruit yield (EPPO, 1998). T. major is an important pest in greenhouses (Sauer, 1997; Vierbergen, 2001). Their presence promotes the application of pesticides and the release of biological controllers such as native predatory mites (Bournier, 1963; NSW Department of Agriculture, 1973; Steiner and Goodwin, 2005; Steiner and Goodwin, 2006). Management practices are likely to increase crop production costs. Establishment of this pest in the United States is unlikely to cause export market loss, because imported strawberries are likely to be treated for thrips as an external feeder when found at ports-of-entry (See Appendix A) (PPQ, 2009). Therefore, we rated Economic Impact as Medium.

Medium (2)


Thrips major is a pest of families containing Endangered and Threatened plant species present in the continental United States, such as Buxaceae (Buxus vahlii), Euphorbiaceae (Euphorbia haeleeleana, E. telephioides), Fabaceae (Vicia menziesii), Polygonaceae (Polygonum hickmanii), Ranunculaceae (Clematis morefieldii, C. socialis, Thalictrum cooleyi), Rosaceae (Prunus geniculata), and Solanaceae (Solanum drymophilum, S. incompletum, S. sandwicense) (USFWS, 2008b). The establishment of these pests could lead to the implementation of chemical and biological control programs (EPPO, 2004b; Parker and Skinner, 1997). Therefore, our risk rating for Environmental Impact is High.

High (3)

Table 4. Risk ratings for Consequences of Introduction.

Pest

Risk Elements

Cumulative risk ratinga

Climate-host

interaction

Host range

Dispersal potential

Econ. Impact

Environ. Impact


High (3)

High (3)

High (3)

High (3)

High (3)

High (15)


Med (2)

High (3)

High (3)

High (3)

High (3)

High (14)


Med (2)

High (3)

High (3)

High (3)

High (3)

High (14)


High (3)

High (3)

High (3)

Med (2)

Med (2)

High (13)


Med (2)

High (3)

High (3)

High (3)

High (3)

High (14)

Thrips major

High (3)

High (3)

High (3)

Med (2)

High (3)

High (14)

a Low is 5-8 points, Medium is 9-12 points, and High is 13-15 points

Table 5. Organisms intercepted at U.S. ports-of-entry, and no. of individuals of different stages found (if applicable), from 1984 to 2008 on any commodity and from different countries.

Organism

Interceptions (no.)

Individuals found (no.)

Immatures

Pupae

Adults

Eggs


386

476

4

11


271

285

20

18


2


192


116

188

5

2

Thrips major

2522

563

615

7,676

2.7. Likelihood of Introduction

We rated each pest for the Likelihood of Introduction based on two separate components. First, we estimated the amount of commodity likely to be imported (sub-element #1). Secondly, we estimated pest opportunity using five biological features (sub-elements #2-6). Details of the rating criteria are explained in PPQ (2000). We summarized our ratings and the overall value for the Likelihood of Introduction below (Table 6).

2.7.1. Quantity of Commodity Imported Annually

Volume imported is assessed in terms of the number of 40-foot long sea shipping containers expected (approximately 18,143 kg, or 40,000 pounds) (FAS, 2008). In Jordan in 2007, strawberries were cultivated on roughly 60 ha (148.3 acres) and yielded 1200 tons of fruit (Abu-El Samen, 2008). The Jordanian embassy (EHKJ, 2004) expects to export about 500 tons (1,102,311 lbs) of strawberries from Jordan to the continental United States per year. This may increase depending on the market demand and possible increases in cultivated area. This equals an annual imported volume of nearly 27 containers, which is Medium risk.

2.7.2. Survive Post-Harvest Treatment

Fruit marketed as fresh fruit are harvested as mature or three-quarters mature fruit with the calyx (or cap) and short stem attached. The post-harvest process for Jordanian strawberries is as follows. The fruit are collected in “field boxes” and graded first in the field. Within one hour, fruits are moved in refrigerated trucks at approximately 0°C (32°F). to warehouses. The fruit is taken to the quality control room, where it is graded again and culled to remove unwanted fruit. Fruit are then placed in “exportation boxes” of different sizes depending on the destination requirements, but generally in containers of 250-400 g holding one layer of fruits. Boxes are filled in perforated cardboard cases and move to the precooling room (at 0ºC) for 30-60 min (Abu-El Samen, 2008). They are then moved to cold rooms at 0-5°C (32-41°F) and stay there for 1 to 2 days. Finally, fruits are moved in refrigerated trucks to the airport. All exports to Europe are sent via direct flights that take from 4-6 hours (Abu-El Samen, 2008). Jordan indicated that the phytosanitary measures used for the exportation of strawberries into the United States are exclusionary screening, crop scouting and trapping, insect growth regulators (novel pesticides), conventional pesticide application, and good ventilation (EHKJ, 2004). Based on this information, our considerations and ratings for the pests follow.

Lepidoptera. Cacoecimorpha pronubana, Chrysodeixis chalcites, and Spodoptera littoralis larvae burrow into the flesh beneath the shelter of the calyx. Small neonate larvae may escape detection during normal post-harvest procedures. However, the presence of later instars on fruit would probably be detected due to the presence of frass and visible feeding damage (CABI, 2007). Consequently, we rated the likelihood of survival for these pests as Medium.

External feeders. The mite, Eutetranychus orientalis, and the Thrips spp. are tiny external feeders that could be concealed beneath the calyx. The egg stages of these pests will be difficult to detect, and the calyx, sepals, and stem parts on the fruit would likely provide shelter. The post-harvest information available for this commodity in Jordan does not include detailed practices to manage and mitigate these pests. Consequently, we rated E. orientalis and Thrips spp. High.

Monilinia fructigena. Healthy fruit at harvest could be contaminated with M. fructigena spores, and decay may occur during storage and marketing (Byrde and Willets, 1977). Latent infections do not produce early symptoms of disease, and differentiating the fungus is not possible until the fruit begins to ripen (CABI, 2007). Some post-harvest treatments to reduce M. fructigena development are described for different fruits (CABI, 2007), but Jordan did not include these practices. Thus, our risk rating for M. fructigena is High.

2.7.3. Shipment Survival

Pallets of cooled strawberries will be shipped from Jordan to the United States on 12-14 hour, non-stop flights (Abu-El Samen, 2008). In addition, pallets of cooled strawberries can be wrapped with plastic and carbon dioxide can be injected into the pallet. Carbon dioxide slows respiration and mold development and prolongs the shelf life of fruit. Given this, we do not expect shipping to significantly affect quarantine pests present in the shipment, either due to time or low temperatures. Interceptions of all pests (Table 5) corroborate this idea. Specifically, we do not expect that there would be mortality associated with shipping, nor would Lepidoptera larvae undergo significant changes in size or maturity.

Monilinia fructigena growth is reduced at temperatures of 5ºC or less, but this by itself does not eliminate the pathogen (CABI, 2007).

Thus, our rating for all pests for this sub-element is High.

2.7.4. Undetected at Port-of-Entry

Estimating the probability that these pests will not be detected at the port-of-entry involves the consideration of pest size, mobility, and degree of concealment.

E. orientalis and Thrips major) are minute external feeders, which could be concealed beneath the calyx or in packing materials. They may escape detection at low population densities or in the egg stage despite color differences. Because of this, we rated the risk of not detecting E. orientalis, and Thrips spp. as High.

Although the Lepidoptera are internal feeders, the later instars are large and feeding damage would be relatively easy to detect during normal inspection procedures. Interception data corroborates this (Table 5). Thus, for this sub-element we rated the risk for Cacoecimorpha pronubana, Chrysodeixis chalcites, and Spodoptera littoralis as Low.

Commodities infected with M. fructigena have been intercepted, but latent infections are difficult to detect (Luo et al., 2001). Thus, we rated the risk of not detecting this pathogen to be High.

2.7.5. Imported or Moved to Area with Environmental Suitability for Survival

Strawberries are the fifth most consumed fresh fruit in the United States (Boriss et al., 2006). We assume that the demand for strawberries is proportional to the size of the consumer population in potential markets, and that imports might be concentrated in certain regions of the United States, not all of which may be conducive to pest survival. Imported strawberries from Jordan are likely to be sold in most states of the continental United States; except California and Florida where strawberries have a surplus production that allow its net exportation (Garret, 2008). Even after accounting for this, the relatively wide distributions of the pests here (at least Zones 8-11) still meant the population in the other states was 35 percent or more of the total. Thus, for all pests we rated the risk of being moved to suitable areas as High.

2.7.6. Come into contact with host material suitable for reproduction

Cacoecimorpha pronubana, Chrysodeixis chalcites, and Spodoptera littoralis are all mobile as larvae (CABI, 2007), and could reach new hosts when discarded in compost piles or elsewhere. Their larvae can develop successfully on numerous species, and adult females will oviposit on numerous plants species (Meijerman and Ulenberg, 2004; Zhang, 1994). These Lepidoptera can also fly to search for hosts (Spitzer and Jaros, 2004; Vajgand et al., 2004; CABI, 2007; EPPO and CABI, 1997). We rated the risk of these Lepidoptera pests contacting host material suitable for reproduction as High.

The mite Eutetranychus orientalis has a wide host range (CABI, 2007). However, this pest attacks citrus, cotton, bananas, guavas, and other crops of warmer climates with limited in distribution in the United States (NRCS, 2008). Thus, these hosts are less likely to be encountered and colonized within the pest’s potential range (PERAL, 2008). We rated the risk for this mite as Medium.

The Thrips spp. have a wide host range of temperate fruits, including citrus (see above). Most of these hosts are harvested or wild distributed in the continental United States (NRCS, 2008). Pests on discarded fruit could survive and come in contact with hosts available. Consequently, we rated thrips High.

Monilinia fructigena infe

Documents

S… · Web viewspp.) with calyces and short stalks. Because this commodity has not been imported from Jordan before, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal