PEST RISK ANALYSIS FOR FEW IMPORTANT PESTS FROM PAST DECADE

1. PEST RISK ANALYSIS FOR FEW IMPORTANT
PESTS FROM PAST DECADE
KARTOORI SAISANTHOSH
PGS15AGR6678
Dept. of SEED SCI &TECH
UAS DHARWAD
1

2. PEST RISK ANALYSIS FOR SCIRTOTHRIPS DORSALIS
•PRA INITIATION
•What is the name of the pest? : Scirtothrips dorsalis
•What is the reason for the PRA? :
•This PRA updates a previous PRA from 2001 following a sudden
increase in the detection of S. dorsalis in consignments of produce
from India, Kenya, St. Lucia and Thailand during 2005.
•What is the PRA area : This PRA considers the EU as the PRA
area

3. PEST RISK ASSESSMENT
• Does the pest occur in the PRA area or does it arrive regularly as a natural migrant? :
No it doesnt occur in the PRA area. It is not a natural migrant.
• Is there any other reason to suspect that the pest is already established in the PRA
area? No. There is no reason to suspect that the pest is already established in the PRA area?
• What is the pest’s status in the European Union Plant Health Directive?
• Scirtothrips dorsalis is listed in Annex II/A1 of Council Directive 2000/29/EC. (A pest
whose introduction and spread within all Member States shall be banned if present on
certain plants or plant products. In the case of S. dorsalis, these plants are, Citrus,
Fortunella, Poncirus, and their hybrids).
• What is the pest’s status in the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection
Organisation (EPPO)? regulated pest list

4. • What are the pests host plants? Scirtothrips dorsalis is highly polyphagous having been
recorded from more than 100 plant species spread across 40 families.
• What hosts are of economic and/or environmental importance in the PRA area? Citrus
is the single most important host. Other hosts of importance are grape vines, onions, sweet
peppers, roses, strawberries and tomatoes.
• If the pest needs a vector, is it present in the PRA area? No vector is required. This is a
free living organism.
• What is the pest’s present geographical distribution? It occurs widely across tropical Asia
from Pakistan to Japan and southwards to northern Australia.
• How likely is the pest to enter the PRA area? : Very likely
• How likely is the pest to establish outdoors in the PRA area : Likely
• How likely is the pest to establish in protected environments in the PRA area? : Quickly

5. • What is the pest’s potential to cause economic and/or environmental damage
within the PRA area? : Small
• What is the pest’s potential as a vector of plant pathogens? it is a vector of three
plant viruses, Groundnut chlorotic fan-spot virus, Groundnut yellow spot virus and
Tobacco streak virus
PEST RISK MANAGEMENT
• How likely is the pest to continue to be excluded from the PRA area: Unlikely
• How likely are outbreaks to be eradicated : Unlikely
• What management options are available for containment and control?
• Infested plants should be kept separated from other hosts to inhibit spread. Statutory
action can be taken, e.g. treat with insecticides (malathion, nicosoap, nicotine space
treatments).

6. PEST RISK ANALYSIS FOR LEUCINODES ORBONALIS
• PRA INITIATION
• What is the name of the pest?: Leucinodes orbonalis
• What is the reason for the PRA?: There have been many interceptions of this
species in the UK. There were 40 finds. Most recent interceptions have been on
produce imported from either India or Thailand, with the remaining interceptions
from Bangladesh, Denmark, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Pakistan.
• What is the PRA area? whole EPPO region concentrating on the European and
Mediterranean area, i.e. EPPO west of the Ural mountains.

7. PEST RISK ASSESSMENT
• Does the pest occur in the PRA area or does it arrive regularly as a natural
migrant? L. orbonalis does not occur in the PRA area, nor does it arrive as a
natural migrant. However, it is occasionally detected in consignments of produce
imported into the UK.
• Is there any other reason to suspect that the pest is already established in the
PRA area? No, there are no records indicating that L. orbonalis is established
anywhere within the PRA area.
• What is the pest’s status in the Plant Health Directive (Council Directive)
L. orbonalis is not listed in Council Directive.
• What is the pest’s status in the European and Mediterranean Plant
Protection Organisation (EPPO)? does not appear on any of the EPPO pest
lists
• What are the pest’s host plants: Anacardiaceae, Cucurbitaceae, Solanaceae etc.
• What hosts are of economic and/or environmental importance in the PRA area?
• Potato, tomato, peas, pumpkin, beet root.

8. • If the pest needs a vector, is it present in the PRA area? No vector is
required.
• What is the pest’s present geographical distribution: NA, CA, SA, Africa,
Asia.
• How likely is the pest to enter the PRA area: Unlikely
• How likely is the pest to establish outdoors in the PRA area: Very unlikely
• How likely is the pest to establish in protected environments in the PRA
area: Very unlikely
• How quickly could the pest spread within the PRA area: Very slowly
• What is the pest’s potential to cause economic and/or environmental
damage in the PRA area: Very Small
• What is the pest’s potential as a vector of plant pathogens: no records

9. PEST RISK MANAGEMENT
• What are the prospects for continuing to exclude the pest from the
• PRA area? a) Outdoors: Very good b) In protection: Very good
• How likely are outbreaks to be eradicated? Very likely
• What management options are available for containment and control?
Destruction of infested crops, plus weed hosts, would be the most effective
method of ensuring eradication of the pest. Alternatively, insecticide
treatments could be used.
• Conclusions L. orbonalis represents little threat to the UK or northern EPPO
region, although monitoring of suitable protected environments that are near
points of entry of infested produced may be advisable. Member states with
more suitable climates should be informed of the findings of this PRA.

10. The number of interceptions of L. orbonalis by
country of origin between June 1999 and May 2006
The number of interceptions of L. orbonalis by
month between June 1999 and May 2006

11. Pest Risk Analysis of Helicoverpa armigera
• PRA INITIATION it is considered to be relevant for the entire EU and that
phytosanitary measures are required when it is found on any plants or plant
products. EU Member states, in particular The Netherlands and United
Kingdom, frequently intercept on imported produce and some ornamental
cuttings. These imports often originate from Third Countries. It is capable of
migrating over long distances during late summer, leading to transient findings
all over Europe.
• PEST RISK ASSESMENT:
• Probability of introduction, Entry, Geographical distribution.
• The global distribution of pest is present and widespread in Asia, Africa and
Oceania (EPPO, 2006). H. armigera is established in the following EU
Member States: Bulgaria, Greece, Portugal, Romania, Spain (widespread) and
Cyprus, France, Hungary and Italy (restricted distribution).

12. • Major host plants or habitats
• H. armigera is a highly polyphagous species. The most important crop hosts are tomato,
cotton, pigeon pea, chickpea, sorghum and cowpea.
• Pathway(s) for entry: Five pathways were assessed in the PRA:
• 1. Cut flowers 2. Vegetables 3. Cuttings 4. Natural spread 5.
Passenger luggage
• Spread:
• 1. human assistance 2. natural means
• Pest Risk Management:
• Pathway 1. Import of cuttings of mainly Pelargonium and Chrysanthemum
• The entry risk of this pathway is rated ‘moderate’. Furthermore, when found in glasshouses,
populations of H. armigera have been eradicated relatively easily in the past. Therefore, the
abovementioned EU requirements (IVAI – 27.1) give sufficient protection.

13. • Natural spread / migration
• H. armigera is established in large parts of the EU, is a polyphagous species and can
migrate over long distances, sometimes in large numbers. Climatic conditions are
considered the key factor that limit the distribution of H. armigera. If the (climatic)
conditions become suitable in areas outside the current area of distribution, natural
migration or simply spread will result in the (temporary) establishment of the pest.
Therefore, measures aimed at containment or exclusion are not a viable option. The only
plausible containment measure is to make sure that EU trade of propagation material
(especially Pelargonium and Chrysanthemum) is free from the pest, in order to protect
glasshouse crops outside the current area of distribution.
CONCLUSION
• Helicoverpa armigera should be removed from Annex IAII as the prospects and efficacy
of measures for continued exclusion are limited. The only plausible measure to protect
glasshouses in northern EU countries is to make sure that EU trade of propagation
material is free from the pest. The current EU requirements provide sufficient protection.

14. An illustration of the current infested area
(approximation) and countries where
longdistance migration of H. armigera moths
has been reported (M).
Distribution map of Helicoverpa armigera (EPPO,
2006).