EPPO Bulletin最新文献

{"title":"Corrigendum – Withdrawal of PM 7/009(1) Cacoecimorpha pronubana and PM 7/010(1) Cacyreus marshalli","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/epp.13059","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.13059","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Panel considered that these protocols were too old (approved in 2001), outdated in their content and consequently would need to be completely rewritten. In addition, these EPPO A2 pests are considered now to be relatively widespread in the EPPO region. The Panel considered that these are not pests of particular concern and therefore not a priority for EPPO's diagnostic work. It was therefore decided to withdraw the 2 protocols.</p>","PeriodicalId":34952,"journal":{"name":"EPPO Bulletin","volume":"54 3","pages":"390"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/epp.13059","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143186449","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"PM 7/45(2) Cryphonectria parasitica","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/epp.13049","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.13049","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;This Standard describes a diagnostic protocol for &lt;i&gt;Cryphonectria parasitica&lt;/i&gt;.1&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This Standard should be used in conjunction with PM 7/76 Use of EPPO diagnostic protocols.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Approved in 2004–09. Revised in 2024–08.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Authors and contributors are given in the Acknowledgements section.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Cryphonectria parasitica&lt;/i&gt; is a bark-inhabiting fungus causing blight of chestnut (&lt;i&gt;Castanea&lt;/i&gt; spp.) and other susceptible tree genera and species (mostly &lt;i&gt;Quercus&lt;/i&gt; spp.) (EPPO, &lt;span&gt;2022a&lt;/span&gt;). It is native from Eastern Asia, where it was reported in China, Japan and the Korean peninsula, but by the end of the nineteenth century, the disease spread to North America and was reported in Europe in the late 1930s. There is variation in susceptibility between host tree species. The most susceptible are the American chestnut (&lt;i&gt;Castanea dentata&lt;/i&gt;) and the European chestnut (&lt;i&gt;Castanea sativa&lt;/i&gt;). The virulent form of the disease develops quickly in these species causing necrosis of bark and mortality of the distal part of the tree (Heiniger &amp; Rigling, &lt;span&gt;1994&lt;/span&gt;). Hypovirulence due to infection of the fungus by the RNA virus, &lt;i&gt;Cryphonectria&lt;/i&gt; hypovirus 1 (CHV 1), has however, enabled the regrowth of chestnut trees and stands in many regions of Europe. Virulent and hypovirulent strains of the fungus give rise to different types of cankers and this may, in some cases, make detection and identification difficult. In more tolerant hosts (in Europe, mostly &lt;i&gt;Quercus petraea&lt;/i&gt; and less often &lt;i&gt;Quercus robur&lt;/i&gt;, &lt;i&gt;Quercus ilex&lt;/i&gt; and other oaks, as well as hybrids between the European chestnut and Asian chestnut species) or in its hypovirulent form, chestnut blight appears as perennial ‘healing’ cankers with superficial infections of the bark that rarely causes the death of branches, sprouts or the whole tree. Further information on biology and geographical distribution can be found in EFSA (&lt;span&gt;2014&lt;/span&gt;) and EPPO (&lt;span&gt;2022a&lt;/span&gt;). A datasheet providing more information on the biology is also available in EPPO Global Database EPPO (&lt;span&gt;2022b&lt;/span&gt;). See also Fulbright (&lt;span&gt;1999&lt;/span&gt;), Heiniger &amp; Rigling (&lt;span&gt;1994&lt;/span&gt;), Rigling &amp; Prospero (&lt;span&gt;2018&lt;/span&gt;), Roane et al. (&lt;span&gt;1986&lt;/span&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;A flow diagram describing the diagnostic procedure for &lt;i&gt;C. parasitica&lt;/i&gt; is presented in Figure 1.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Name:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;i&gt;Cryphonectria parasitica&lt;/i&gt; (Murrill) M.E. Barr.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Other names:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;i&gt;Endothia parasitica&lt;/i&gt; (Murrill) P.J. Anderson &amp; H.W. Anderson.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Taxonomic position:&lt;/b&gt; &lt;i&gt;Fungi: Ascomycota: Diaporthales: Cryphonectriaceae&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;EPPO Code:&lt;/b&gt; ENDOPA.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Phytosanitary categorization:&lt;/b&gt; EPPO A2 list: no. 69, EU PZ Quarantine pest (Annex III) &amp; EU-RNQP (Annex IV).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Host plants may carry the fungus in the bark (to the depth of the cambium).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The fungus can be identified either from its fruiting bodies formed on chestnut or oak ","PeriodicalId":34952,"journal":{"name":"EPPO Bulletin","volume":"54 3","pages":"321-335"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/epp.13049","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143184966","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Corrigendum PM 7/024 (5) Xylella fastidiosa","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/epp.13060","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.13060","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;\u0000 &lt;b&gt;Background information&lt;/b&gt;\u0000 &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In the EPPO diagnostic protocol PM 7/024 (5) &lt;i&gt;Xylella fastidiosa&lt;/i&gt; (EPPO, &lt;span&gt;2023&lt;/span&gt;), the test of Hodgetts et al. (2021) is recommended under Section 3.4 on Screening test in Section 3.4.2.2 and as an identification and subspecies determination test in Section 4. It is described in full in Appendix 11.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It should be noted that during a Proficiency Test (PT) organized by the European Union Reference Laboratory for bacteriology (EURL-BAC) on &lt;i&gt;Xylella fastidiosa&lt;/i&gt; some issues concerning analytical sensitivity and analytical specificity have been encountered with this test (Vreeburg et al., &lt;span&gt;2024a&lt;/span&gt;). A lower analytical sensitivity for subsp. &lt;i&gt;pauca&lt;/i&gt; ST74 has been observed compared to the other subspecies. Therefore, using Hodgetts et al. (2021) as a single test for screening is not recommended.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In terms of assignment of subspecies in Section 4.2, the results of the PT showed that for Hodgetts et al. (2021) some of the subsp. &lt;i&gt;pauca&lt;/i&gt; strains from sequence type 74 (ST74) can cross react with the test for subsp. &lt;i&gt;fastidiosa&lt;/i&gt; (Vreeburg et al., &lt;span&gt;2024a&lt;/span&gt;). It is therefore recommended to laboratories using this test to include ST74 strains in the set of strains selected for verification of this test.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In Section 4.2 Molecular tests for the identification of &lt;i&gt;X. fastidiosa&lt;/i&gt; and assignment of &lt;i&gt;X. fastidiosa&lt;/i&gt; subspecies it is stated: ‘In other cases, subspecies assignment may be performed by subspecies-specific molecular tests (Pooler &amp; Hartung, 1995, see Appendix 18; Hernandez-Martinez et al., 2006, see Appendices 19 and 20) or Sanger sequencing.’&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It should be noted that during the PT organized by the EURL-BAC on &lt;i&gt;Xylella fastidiosa&lt;/i&gt; subspecies determination, several participants used the conventional PCR tests of Hernandez-Martinez et al. (2006). These participants found that these conventional PCR tests could not distinguish between subsp. &lt;i&gt;sandyi&lt;/i&gt; and subsp. &lt;i&gt;morus&lt;/i&gt;, since both subspecies produced a PCR product of 638 bp (Vreeburg et al., &lt;span&gt;2024b&lt;/span&gt;).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It is therefore recommended to laboratories performing Hernandez-Martinez et al. (2006), that if a band of 638 bp is obtained, then additional tests (Appendices 10, 11, 16 or 17) should be performed to distinguish between subsp. &lt;i&gt;sandyi&lt;/i&gt; and subsp. &lt;i&gt;morus&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;\u0000 &lt;b&gt;List of changes:&lt;/b&gt;\u0000 &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Using Hodgetts et al. (2021) as a single test for screening on plant samples is not recommended&lt;/b&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Section 4 of Appendix 11 for exclusivity is modified as follows (new text in bold):&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;[ ]: 100%.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;With Hodgetts et al. (2021) some of the subsp. &lt;i&gt;pauca&lt;/i&gt; strains from sequence type 74 (ST74) can cross react with the test for subsp. &lt;i&gt;fastidiosa&lt;/i&gt; (Vreeburg et al&lt;/b&gt;., &lt;span&gt;&lt;b&gt;2024a&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;b&gt;). It is therefore recommended to laboratories using this test to include ST74 strains","PeriodicalId":34952,"journal":{"name":"EPPO Bulletin","volume":"54 3","pages":"391-392"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/epp.13060","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143186331","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Revision of the EPPO datasheets: a successful project","authors":"Anne-Sophie Roy","doi":"10.1111/epp.13051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.13051","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Since the 1970s, EPPO has been producing datasheets to provide NPPOs of its member countries with short descriptions of the pests that are included in the EPPO A1 and A2 Lists of pests recommended for regulation as quarantine pests. Over time, the EPPO datasheets have been produced in the form of short papers published in the EPPO Bulletin, and in collaboration with CABI, in the two editions of the reference book ‘Quarantine Pests for Europe’. In 2020, a project co-financed by EPPO and the European Commission was initiated with the objectives to update the contents of the EPPO datasheets and to transform them into dynamic datasheets displayed in the EPPO Global Database (https://gd.eppo.int). EPPO datasheets follow a standardized format and some of their sections, i.e. pest identity, host, and geographical distribution are automatically generated from the database, thus greatly facilitating the update of this information which may change rapidly.</p><p>A list of 319 pests was agreed between EPPO and the European Commission, and a grant agreement was signed in March 2020 for a 4.5 year period, establishing the conditions of the collaboration and co-financing. For each of these 319 pests, experts from all over the world were appointed and were given the challenging task to produce new or revised datasheets within 2–3 months. The role of the EPPO Secretariat has been to select authors according to their knowledge about the pests concerned, ensure consistency between datasheets, and coordinate the whole project. Specific IT tools have been developed in-house to manage the development of hundreds of datasheets, with many different experts over a 4.5-year period. Bilateral teleconferences were also regularly organized between EPPO and the European Commission to monitor the progress of the project.</p><p>In September 2024, the EPPO Secretariat could proudly announced that the 319 datasheets were all published in the EPPO Global Database.</p><p>This project has mobilized more than 170 authors from 40 countries, as well as a large part of the EPPO Secretariat (scientific officers and administrative staff). Although demanding, this project has created useful synergies and contributed to enrich the contents of the EPPO Global Database. In most cases, authors have provided additional information (e.g. host plants, geographical records), as well as pictures of pests. Furthermore, this project has contributed to enlarge the EPPO network within the EPPO region and worldwide.</p><p>The EPPO Secretariat would like to thank the European Commission for this fruitful collaboration. All authors should be warmly thanked for their dedication to this project, without their enthusiastic participation this successful outcome would not have been possible.</p><p>Workflow</p>","PeriodicalId":34952,"journal":{"name":"EPPO Bulletin","volume":"54 3","pages":"345-354"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/epp.13051","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143187211","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"PM 7/130 (2) Guidelines on the authorization of laboratories to perform diagnostic activities for regulated pests","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/epp.13045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.13045","url":null,"abstract":"<p>These guidelines describe the process and requirements for authorization of a laboratory by a National Plant Protection Organization (NPPO) to perform diagnostic activities for regulated pests. This Standard should be used in conjunction with PM 7/76 <i>Use of EPPO Diagnostic Standards</i>.</p><p>Approved as an EPPO Standard in 2016-09.1 Revised in 2024-09 following the revision of the NAPPO Standard RSPM 9 on the Authorization of Laboratories for Phytosanitary Testing (NAPPO, <span>2021</span>).</p><p>Authors and contributors are given in the Acknowledgements section.</p><p>In many countries the diagnostics for regulated pests are performed in laboratories of the NPPO or in governmental agencies/institutes working for the NPPO (hereafter called NPPO laboratories). However, in some countries NPPOs authorize other laboratories to perform pest diagnostic activities, and this is an increasing trend in the EPPO region.</p><p>In 2016, guidelines for the authorization of laboratories were established to ensure harmonization across the EPPO region. Specific regulations have been established in some countries (e.g. the regulation 2017/625/EU2 for EU countries).</p><p>In order to be authorized to perform diagnostics for regulated pests, laboratories should agree to fulfil a number of obligations including the ones listed in Section 3.1. prior to authorization. Laboratories should also meet the requirements detailed in Section 3.2 before applying for authorization. If the laboratory is accredited under ISO 17025 for activities covered under the scope of the authorization, it is considered to fulfil the technical requirements described for these activities below.</p>","PeriodicalId":34952,"journal":{"name":"EPPO Bulletin","volume":"54 3","pages":"317-320"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/epp.13045","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143187210","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"PM 3/96 (1) Official controls of passenger luggage at points of entry","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/epp.13034","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.13034","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Specific scope:&lt;/b&gt; This Standard provides recommendations to National Plant Protection Organizations (NPPOs) on the process for passenger luggage checks, including risk profiling, at airport points of entry. The Standard also provides guidance on inspection of plants or plant products and other regulated articles found in passenger luggage. Some elements of this Standard may also be applicable to passengers using other forms of travel (e.g. ship, train or by road). The Standard also provides guidance on cooperation with relevant authorities such as customs and provides general guidance to NPPOs on awareness raising for passengers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Specific Approval:&lt;/b&gt; This Standard was first approved in 2024–09.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;International passenger luggage can contain plants or plant products (e.g. cuttings, fruit, vegetables, cut flowers, and wood products) and other regulated articles (e.g. soil) (hereafter referred to as plants or plant products unless otherwise stated) that can be infested with pests. Such items may be intended for planting, private consumption (either during travel or upon entry), as souvenirs, or for sale in the country of destination. Each year, for air travel alone, billions of passengers travel on flights world-wide. In 2019, there were approximately 38.3 million flights transporting 4.5 billion passengers worldwide (ICAO, &lt;span&gt;2019&lt;/span&gt;). Although most passengers are unlikely to carry prohibited plants or plant products, surveys globally highlight sufficient interceptions to warrant a control system. In New Zealand for example, a survey of 6816 passengers luggage entering the country identified 3% were carrying fresh or dried plant products. In the United States of America, between 1984 and 2000, over 290 000 specimens of alien insects were intercepted from passenger luggage at international airports (Liebhold et al., &lt;span&gt;2006&lt;/span&gt;). From 2016 to 2021, large quantities of plant products were found in the luggage of passengers travelling from outside the EU to Italy. Several non-native pests were recorded mainly from fruits and vegetables including some quarantine pests (Pace et al., &lt;span&gt;2022&lt;/span&gt;). EPPO Pest Risk Analysis frequently identifies international passengers and their luggage as a potential pathway for the entry of pests into the EPPO region (for example fruit flies, beetles and caterpillars of Lepidoptera [EPPO, &lt;span&gt;2010&lt;/span&gt;, &lt;span&gt;2020a&lt;/span&gt;, &lt;span&gt;2020b&lt;/span&gt;]).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Even if the amount of regulated plants or plant products in passenger luggage is mostly limited to small quantities, there is a chance that small items may be infested with pests constituting a risk in the country of destination. Plants or plant products may not only be purchased directly from nurseries or orchards, but could also originate from local markets or traders, which may be supplied with products grown in private gardens or collected in the natural environment. These items can pose a pest risk as they are not usually tre","PeriodicalId":34952,"journal":{"name":"EPPO Bulletin","volume":"54 3","pages":"261-273"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/epp.13034","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143187077","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"PM 3/98 (1) Inspection of growing media associated with consignments of plants for planting","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/epp.13039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.13039","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Specific scope:&lt;/b&gt; This Standard describes the inspection and sampling of growing medium (including soil) associated with consignments of plants for planting to ensure the growing media is free from pests. The Standard does not cover inspection of plants for planting in the consignment. Growing media moved as a separate commodity or contaminating a commodity is also not considered in this Standard. The Standard includes relevant EPPO A1 and A2 pests1 recommended for regulation. This Standard provides guidance that may be relevant to inspections for export.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Specific approval:&lt;/b&gt; This Standard was first approved in 2024–09.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Many plants for planting are imported or traded within the EPPO region with growing media. ISPM 5 Glossary of phytosanitary terms (IPPC, &lt;span&gt;2019&lt;/span&gt;) defines growing medium as ‘Any material in which plant roots are growing or intended for that purpose’. Soil is included in this definition of growing media and consequently this Standard will refer to growing media without re-specifying that growing media includes soil. Plant pests such as bacteria, nematodes, molluscs, insects and fungi can all be associated with growing media. Growing media can provide a substrate for pests to survive and possibly reproduce on the host or in the soil. In addition, pests in soil have the potential to be introduced into a suitable habitat as the plants may be replanted, even in outdoor situations. As a result, growing media attached to plants is considered as a high-risk pathway for the introduction or spread of quarantine pests (ISPM 40 &lt;i&gt;International movement of growing media in association with plants for planting&lt;/i&gt;, IPPC, &lt;span&gt;2017a&lt;/span&gt;). EPPO has long recognized the risk of movement of soil with plants for planting and in 2016 an EPPO Council declaration was published where the Council reiterated that the intercontinental movement of soil with plants for planting is a high risk for plant health (https://www.eppo.int/RESOURCES/position_papers/council_soil_movement).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Growing media acts to protect the root system and enables the plant to sustain vitality and survival while being moved. Some plants such as bonsai are mainly imported with growing media attached.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Many countries in the EPPO region have restrictions on the import of growing media attached to plants. The pest risk of growing media depends on a number of different factors such as the type of media, its origin, production mode, treatment, storage, and the way the plants for planting have been produced (ISPM 40: IPPC, &lt;span&gt;2017a&lt;/span&gt;). Soil attached to plants is mostly prohibited from import into the EPPO region and only certain types of growing media are allowed for import and these must have been stored and/or treated to ensure freedom from pests.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Inspection and testing is performed to verify that growing media attached to or associated with plants for planting does not represent a risk.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;ISPM 5 &lt;i&gt;Glossary of phytosanitary","PeriodicalId":34952,"journal":{"name":"EPPO Bulletin","volume":"54 3","pages":"289-305"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/epp.13039","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143187079","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"First report of Scaphoideus titanus (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae) in Germany (Baden-Württemberg)","authors":"L. Askani,&nbsp;O. Zimmermann,&nbsp;C. Zimmermann,&nbsp;F. Rinke,&nbsp;B. Jarausch,&nbsp;C. Hoffmann,&nbsp;K. Zikeli,&nbsp;R. Fuchs","doi":"10.1111/epp.13053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.13053","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In August 2024, adult individuals of <i>Scaphoideus titanus</i> were detected for the first time in Germany on yellow sticky traps in two different vineyards (<i>Vitis vinifera</i>) in Baden-Württemberg. This leafhopper is the main vector of Grapevine flavescence dorée phytoplasma (FD). According to initial analyses, however, the flavescence dorée-causing phytoplasma could not be detected in the trapped leafhoppers. An area of 80 hectares of non-contiguous vineyards is declared as infested.</p>","PeriodicalId":34952,"journal":{"name":"EPPO Bulletin","volume":"54 3","pages":"366-368"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143187082","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Corrigendum: EPPO Standard PM 5/6 (1) EPPO prioritization process for invasive alien plants","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/epp.13052","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.13052","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The EPPO Panel on Invasive Alien Plants would like to update some information presented in EPPO Standard PM 5/6 (1) EPPO Prioritization Process for Invasive Alien Plants (EPPO, <span>2012a</span>).</p><p>In PM 5/6, the references to the EPPO Standard PM 3/67 <i>Guidelines for the management of invasive alien plants or potentially invasive alien plants which are intended for import or have been intentionally imported</i> should be deleted. The Standard was withdrawn in 2023.</p><p>The references to ISPM no. 11 (Pest Risk Analyses for Quarantine Pests including analysis of environmental risks and living modified organisms) should be changed to ISPM 11 Pest Risk Analyses for Quarantine Pests.</p><p>The text which states:</p><p>‘<i>The guidelines on pest risk analysis of EPPO Standard PM 5/3 Decision-support scheme for quarantine pests should be followed for the performance of a PRA</i>’.</p><p>should be replaced by.</p><p>‘<i>The guidelines on pest risk analysis of EPPO Standard PM 5/3 Decision-support scheme for quarantine pests may be followed for the performance of a PRA or, for a simplified scheme, the EPPO Standard PM 5/5 Decision-support scheme for an Express Pest Risk Analysis (EPPO</i>, <span>2012b</span><i>), and the additional guidance can be used.</i>’</p><p>The reference to EPPO Plant Quarantine Data Retrieval system (PQR) should be changed to EPPO Global Database: https://gd.eppo.int/. This resource should be used to cross-check the validity of species names cited in the Standard.</p><p>\u0000 <b>Other specific updates</b>\u0000 </p><p>Additional resources to assess the distribution and origin of plants include:</p><p>Plants of the World Online: https://powo.science.kew.org/</p><p>The World Flora Online: https://www.worldfloraonline.org/</p><p>Reference to specific EUNIS habitat types has been updated and the following website should be consulted for up-to-date classifications: https://eunis.eea.europa.eu/</p><p>Köppen-Geiger high-resolution maps have been recently updated for six approximately 30- year periods within 1901-2099: https://www.gloh2o.org/koppen/</p><p>For up-to-date maps of biogeographical regions in Europe consulate: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/biogeographical-regions-in-europe-2</p><p>The DAISIE database is available via https://www.gbif.org/dataset/39f36f10-559b-427f-8c86-2d28afff68ca</p><p>The Global Invasive Species Information Network (GISIN) website is no longer available.</p><p>The Global Invasive Species database is available via https://www.iucngisd.org/gisd/</p><p>An additional resource for introduced and invasive species is the Global Register of Introduced and Invasive Species: https://griis.org/</p>","PeriodicalId":34952,"journal":{"name":"EPPO Bulletin","volume":"54 3","pages":"393"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/epp.13052","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143187076","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cereal aphid species: their natural enemies and efficiency of Lysiphlebus testaceipes (Cresson, 1880) to control Rhopalosiphum maidis (Fitch, 1856)","authors":"Dalila Haouas,&nbsp;Lassaad Mdellel,&nbsp;Mayssa Zgolli,&nbsp;Mohamed Habib Manai,&nbsp;Jean Pierre Sarthou","doi":"10.1111/epp.13050","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.13050","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Cereal grains both for human consumption and animal feed are an essential component of global food systems. However, during production they are often targeted by various pest insects, including aphids. A survey was carried out from 2017 to 2021 in six cereal production sites in Tunisia to evaluate aphid diversity and identify natural enemies on <i>Triticum turgidum</i> subsp. <i>durum</i> (durum wheat), <i>Hordeum vulgare</i> (barley), <i>Avena sativa</i> (oat) and <i>Triticum secale</i> (triticale). Six aphid species belonging to four genera were recorded: <i>Diuraphis noxia</i>, <i>Rhopalosiphum maidis</i>, <i>R. padi</i>, <i>Schizaphis graminum</i>, <i>Sitobion avenae</i> and <i>Sitobion fragariae</i>. Among these, <i>S. avenae</i> and <i>R. padi</i> emerged as the most prevalent species across the majority of sites, infesting durum wheat, barley and triticale. <i>Sc. graminum</i>, <i>R. maidis</i> and <i>D. noxia</i> were less frequent, while <i>S. fragariae</i> was exclusively found on oat plants. Common aphid predators observed included <i>Coccinella algerica</i>, <i>Hippodamia variegata</i> and <i>C. undecimpunctata</i>, as well as syrphid flies such as <i>Episyrphus balteatus</i> and <i>Sphaerophoria rueppellii</i>. <i>Lysiphlebus testaceipes</i> was the sole parasitoid species detected, emerging exclusively from <i>R. padi</i> and <i>R. maidis</i> mummies. Furthermore, the study on the efficacy of <i>L. testaceipes</i> against <i>R. maidis</i> indicated that parasitism levels increased with the number of introduced parasitoid pairs. Aphid and natural enemy diversity were also evaluated.</p>","PeriodicalId":34952,"journal":{"name":"EPPO Bulletin","volume":"54 3","pages":"369-380"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/epp.13050","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143187081","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}