National Plant Protection Organizations Research Articles

Opportunities for improving risk communication during the permitting process for entomophagous biological control agents: a review of current systems

Concerns about potentially irreversible non-target impacts from the importation and release of entomophagous biological control agents (BCAs) have resulted in increasingly stringent national import requirements by National Plant Protection Organizations worldwide. However, there is a divergence of opinions among regulators, researchers, environmentalists, and the general public on ways to appropriately manage associated risks. Implementation of a comprehensive and effective risk communication process might narrow the opinion gaps. Results from a comprehensive survey conducted in the United States were used to describe communication habits of stakeholders involved in biological control and identify areas that are fundamental in an efficient process. In addition, this study critically reviews risk communication practices and how phytosanitary decisions are communicated in the permitting systems for entomophagous BCAs of several countries to identify risk communication tools used in an effective risk communication framework. The following barriers to efficient risk communication were identified: absence of a formalized risk communication process, undefined risk communication goals and target audiences, lack of credibility and objectivity of information sources, inefficiency of mode of distribution of messages, insufficient public participation, and lack of transparency of decision making processes. This paper suggests the creation and/or enhancement of modes of distribution of risk messages to increase coverage, understanding, and guidance. For instance, messages should be presented in different formats such as internet, brochures, and newspapers. Surveys, public meetings, and trainings/workshops are tools that can be used to characterize stakeholders’ diversity and develop risk messages specific to the targeted audience. Implementation of a participatory decision making process will increase stakeholder involvement and trust in the risk management plan. Development of practical mechanisms, such as public hearings will increase all stakeholders’ involvement in the risk assessment process. A clear framework describing how public comments will be incorporated in the decision making process should be implemented. Finally, to ensure a streamlined risk communication process, there must be consistency in the messages disseminated by federal, state, and local agencies.

A decision‐support scheme that generates contingency plans and prioritizes action during pest outbreaks*

The decision‐support scheme (DSS) for action at outbreaks developed under PRATIQUE (Enhancements of Pest Risk Analysis Techniques) brings together a set of guidance and tools, using the CAPRA application. The DSS is initiated by the collation of key information on the current outbreak situation, and then compares candidate measures in order to derive a strategy for action and/or contingency. It is hoped that this deliverable will assist national plant protection organizations (NPPOs) to address and justify eradication campaigns effectively. The rationale behind the DSS and its key features are presented and discussed.

Beyond compliance: project on an integrated systems approach for pest risk management in South East Asia

The Beyond Compliance project, which began in July 2011 with funding from the Standards and Trade Development Facility for 2 years, aims to enhance competency and confidence in the South East Asian sub‐region by applying a Systems Approach for pest risk management. The Systems Approach involves the use of integrated measures, at least two of which are independent, that cumulatively reduce the risk of introducing exotic pests through trade. Although useful in circumstances where single measures are inappropriate or unavailable, the Systems Approach is inherently more complicated than single‐measure approaches, which may inhibit its uptake. The project methodology is to take prototype decision‐support tools, such as Control Point‐Bayesian Networks (CP‐BN), developed in recent plant health initiatives in other regions, including the European PRATIQUE project, and to refine them within this sub‐regional context. Case studies of high‐priority potential agricultural trade will be conducted by National Plant Protection Organizations of participating South East Asian countries in trials of the tools, before further modifications. Longer term outcomes may include: more robust pest risk management in the region (for exports and imports); greater inclusion of stakeholders in development of pest risk management plans; increased confidence in trade negotiations; and new opportunities for trade.

Supply chain risk model for quantifying the cost-effectiveness of phytosanitary measures

A chain risk model (CRM) has been developed to calculate the cost-effectiveness of phytosanitary measures. The CRM is a quantitative model for phytosanitary assessments of all kinds of agricultural product chains. In the CRM, chain stages are connected by the product volume streams at which infections of pests can be spread from one stage to another. The arrangement of the stages in the chain can be varied by the model's user. Primary infection of a pest in the chain stages can take place by imported commodities, from a former chain stage and from outside. Spread of pests is simulated by a spread factor and the multiplying factor of the product itself, estimated by the model user. The costs of measurements assessed and their effect on the pest or detection of the pest have to be entered in the model. The result of the model calculations is the cost effectiveness of a measurement or set of measurements. An additional result is an overview of the distribution of infected lots in the chain. Experience with the CRM has been gained by applying it to two actual problems: Clavibacter michicanensis subsp. michicanensis, which causes bacterial wilt and canker of tomato ( Lycopersicon esculentum L.) and Potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd) in potato ( Solanum tuberosum L.), which is also called tomato bunchy top virus. Both cases confirm the hypothesis that CRM is applicable for the assessment of various sets of measurements, like checks in different chain stages and application of a quality care system in some stages. The CRM is primarily intended for use by the Dutch Plant Protection Service (nVWA) but can also be used by other national plant protection organizations. The generic and flexible model can be used for calculations on topics as assessment of new detection techniques, assessment of risk reduction measurements on pathways and assessment of different alternatives of sampling in relation to different kinds of phytosanitary checks.

Normes OEPP EPPO Standards Efficacy evaluation of plant protection products Evaluation biologique des produits phytosanitaires

Normes OEPP EPPO Standards Efficacy evaluation of plant protection products Evaluation biologique des produits phytosanitaires

Normes OEPP/EPPO Standards Guidelines for pest risk analysis Directives pour l’analyse du risque phytosanitaire

EPPO BulletinVolume 41, Issue 3 p. 313-314 Free Access Normes OEPP/EPPO Standards Guidelines for pest risk analysis Directives pour l’analyse du risque phytosanitaire First published: 22 November 2011 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2338.2011.02520.xAboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat PM 5 Approval EPPO Standards are approved by EPPO Council. The date of approval appears in each individual standard. In the terms of Article II of the IPPC, EPPO Standards are Regional Standards for the members of EPPO. Review EPPO Standards are subject to periodic review and amendment. The next review date for this set of EPPO Standards is decided by the EPPO Working Party on Phytosanitary Regulations. Amendment record Amendments will be issued as necessary, numbered and dated. The dates of amendment appear in each individual standard (as appropriate). Distribution EPPO Standards are distributed by the EPPO Secretariat to all EPPO member governments. Copies are available to any interested person, under particular conditions, upon request to the EPPO Secretariat. Scope EPPO Guidelines on Pest Risk Analysis are intended to be used by National Plant Protection Organizations, in their capacity as bodies responsible for the establishment of phytosanitary regulations and the application of phytosanitary measures while respecting the requirements of the International Plant Protection Convention, ISPM no. 1 (Phytosanitary principles for the protection of plants and the application of phytosanitary measures in international trade), ISPM no. 2 (Framework for pest risk analysis) and ISPM no. 11 (Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests including analysis of environmental risks and living modified organisms). They are also used by the technical bodies of EPPO to formulate recommendations on phytosanitary measures to the National Plant Protection Organizations. Outline of requirements EPPO Standards on pest risk analysis provide detailed guidance on the analysis of risk from individual pests for a defined area, in relation to their potential status as quarantine pests. The standards are based on the many years of experience of EPPO experts in the EPPO Panel on Pest Risk Analysis development, EPPO Panel on Phytosanitary Measures and EPPO Panel on Invasive Alien Species, who have assessed the status of pests as candidates for the EPPO A1 and A2 lists of pests recommended for regulation, and who have analysed the criteria used for this purpose. They conform to ISPM no. 2 (Framework for pest risk analysis) and ISPM no. 11 (Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests including analysis of environmental risks and living modified organisms) and use the terms of ISPM no. 5 (Glossary of phytosanitary terms). Existing EPPO Standards in this series Three EPPO Standards on pest risk analysis have already been approved and published. Each standard is numbered in the style PM 5/1 (1), meaning an EPPO Standard on Phytosanitary Measures (PM), in series no. 5 (Guidelines on pest risk analysis), in this case standard no. 1, first version. The existing standards are: PM 5/1(1) Guidelines on pest risk analysis (PRA). No. 1. Checklist of information required for pest risk analysis (PRA). Bulletin OEPP/EPPO Bulletin 23, 191–198. PM 5/2 (2). No. 2 Pest risk analysis on detection of a pest in an imported consignment. Bulletin OEPP/EPPO, Bulletin 32, 235–239. PM 5/3(5) Decision-support scheme for quarantine pests – version 2011. This standard is published on the EPPO website (http://archives.eppo.org/EPPOStandards/pra.htm). A computer program CAPRA has been developed by the EPPO Secretariat in the framework of the European Union 7th framework program protect PRATIQUE (Grant agreement No 212 459) and with the support of the EPPO Panels. This program is based on the latest version of the Decision-support scheme for quarantine pests. This software aims to assist pest risk analysts in running the EPPO decision-support scheme for Pest Risk Analysis. It includes links to useful datasets, examples and guidance to ensure consistency in performing pest risk analysis. It can be downloaded at http://capra.eppo.org/. References IPPC (1997) International Plant Protection Convention (new revised text). FAO, Rome (IT). IPPC (2010) Glossary of phytosanitary terms. ISPM no. 5 in International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures. IPPC Secretariat, FAO, Rome (IT). https://www.ippc.int/file_uploaded/1273490046_ISPM_05_2010_E.pdf [accessed on 17 October 2011]. OEPP/EPPO (2011) EPPO Standard PM 1/2 EPPO A1 and A2 lists of pests recommended for regulation in EPPO countries. http://www.eppo.org/QUARANTINE/quarantine.htm [accessed on 17 October 2011]. Volume41, Issue3December 2011Pages 313-314 ReferencesRelatedInformation

Regulated non‐quarantine pests: fact or fiction?

A new category of officially regulated pests has been introduced during the past decade. The aim of this new categorization is to protect plant health and, in particular, farmers’ and growers’ crops against the introduction of pests via propagation material. The phytosanitary term ‘regulated non‐quarantine pests’ (RNQPs) is relatively new. It was introduced in 1997 as part of the new revised text of the International Plant Protection Convention. These RNQPs differ from the common category of quarantine pests in that they can be widespread within the territory of concern. Unlike quarantine pests, a level of tolerance could be applied for RNQPs infesting certain plants for planting. Some certification systems for the production of propagation material may specify certain tolerance levels, however, these systems are usually not regulated by national plant protection organizations and the tolerance levels are usually not based on scientific evidence. To date, only a few countries have applied the concept of RNQPs: notably Uruguay and Brazil. To apply the concept and, in particular, to determine specific tolerance levels presents many challenges. The concept may be embraced in the coming years by the European Community as part of the revision of the EU Council Directive 2000/29/EC.

Transportation of nonindigenous species via soil on international aircraft passengers’ footwear

The potential for transported soil to harbour and spread nonindigenous species (NIS) is widely recognised and many National Plant Protection Organisations (NPPOs) restrict or prohibit its movement. However, surprisingly few studies have surveyed soil while it is in transit to provide direct support for its role in accidental introductions of NIS. Moreover, there are few border interception records for soil organisms because they are neither easily detected nor routinely isolated and identified. Better data would improve evaluations of risks from soil transported via different pathways, enable targeting of management resources at the riskiest pathways, and support development of new risk management methods. We surveyed organisms present in soil that had been removed from footwear being carried in the baggage of international aircraft passengers arriving in New Zealand and recorded high incidences, counts and diversities of viable bacteria, fungi, nematodes and seeds, as well as several live arthropods. These included taxa that have not been recorded in New Zealand and were therefore almost certainly nonindigenous to this country. In each gram of soil, there was an estimated 52–84% incidence of genera that contain species regulated by New Zealand’s NPPO, which suggests many were potentially harmful. Variation in the incidences and counts of soil organisms with sample weight, footwear type and season at the port of departure indicated it may be possible to develop methods for targeting management resources at the riskiest footwear. Comparisons with previously published data supported the hypothesis that survival of soil organisms is greater when they are transported in protected (e.g. in luggage) rather than unprotected environments (e.g. external surfaces of sea containers); this offers opportunities to develop methods for targeting management resources at the most hazardous soil pathways.

Normes OEPP/EPPO Standards Efficacy evaluation of plant protection products Evaluation biologique des produits phytosanitaires

Normes OEPP/EPPO Standards Efficacy evaluation of plant protection products Evaluation biologique des produits phytosanitaires

Normes OEPP/EPPO Standards National regulatory control systems Systèmes de lutte nationaux réglementaires

EPPO BulletinVolume 40, Issue 3 p. 387-388 Free Access Normes OEPP/EPPO Standards National regulatory control systems Systèmes de lutte nationaux réglementaires First published: 15 November 2010 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2338.2010.02412.xAboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat PM 9/11 (1), PM 9/12 (1) Addendum PM 9/1 (2) Approval EPPO Standards are approved by EPPO Council. The date of approval appears in each individual standard. In the terms of Article II of the IPPC, EPPO Standards are Regional Standards for the members of EPPO. Review EPPO Standards are subject to periodic review and amendment. The next review date for this set of EPPO Standards is decided by the EPPO Working Party on Phytosanitary Regulations. Amendment record Amendments will be issued as necessary, numbered and dated. The dates of amendment appear in each individual standard (as appropriate). Distribution EPPO Standards are distributed by the EPPO Secretariat to all EPPO member governments. Copies are available to any interested person under particular conditions upon request to the EPPO Secretariat. Scope EPPO Standards on national regulatory control systems are intended to be used by National Plant Protection Organizations, in their capacity as bodies responsible for official control of regulated pests. Appendices Definitions Area of low pest prevalence: an area, whether all of a country, part of a country, or all or parts of several countries, as identified by the competent authorities, in which a specific pest occurs at low levels and which is subject to effective surveillance, control or eradication measures. Containment: application of phytosanitary measures in and around an infested area to prevent spread of a pest. Eradication: application of phytosanitary measures to eliminate a pest from an area. Incursion: an isolated population of a pest recently detected in an area, not known to be established, but expected to survive for the immediate future. Monitoring: an official ongoing process to verify phytosanitary situations. Official control: the active enforcement of mandatory phytosanitary regulations and the application of mandatory phytosanitary procedures with the objective of eradication or containment of quarantine pests or for the management of regulated non-quarantine pests. Outbreak: a recently detected pest population, including an incursion, or a sudden significant increase of an established pest population in an area. Pest-free area: an area in which a specific pest does not occur as demonstrated by scientific evidence and in which, where appropriate, this condition is being officially maintained. Pest-free place of production: place of production in which a specific pest does not occur as demonstrated by scientific evidence and in which, where appropriate, this condition is being officially maintained for a defined period. Phytosanitary procedure: any officially prescribed method for implementing phytosanitary regulations including the performance of inspections, tests, surveillance or treatments in connection with regulated pests. Quarantine area: an area within which a quarantine pest is present and is being officially controlled. Suppression: the application of phytosanitary measures in an infested area to reduce pest populations. Surveillance: an official process which collects and records data on pest occurrence or absence by survey, monitoring or other procedures. Survey: an official procedure conducted over a defined period of time to determine the characteristics of a pest population or to determine which species occur in an area. Outline of requirements EPPO Standards on national regulatory control systems describe procedures for official control of individual regulated pests, for the purpose of their eradication or containment, or demonstration or maintenance of pest-free areas, pest-free places of production or areas of low pest prevalence. These standards conforms to supplement No. 1 of ISPM no. 5 Glossary of phytosanitary terms: ‘Guidelines on the interpretation and application of the concept of official control for regulated pests’. References EPPO/CABI (1997) Quarantine Pests for Europe, 2nd edn. CAB International, Wallingford (GB). Google Scholar EU (2000) Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the community. Official Journal of the European Communities L169, 1– 112. Google Scholar FAO (1997) International Plant Protection Convention (new revised text). FAO, Rome (IT). Google Scholar IPPC (2002) Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms. ISPM no. 5. Supplement no. 1. Guidelines on the interpretation and application of the concept of official control for regulated pests . IPPC Secretariat, FAO, Rome (IT). Google Scholar Volume40, Issue3December 2010Pages 387-388 ReferencesRelatedInformation

THE INTERNATIONAL PLANT DIAGNOSTIC NETWORK (IPDN) IN AFRICA: IMPROVING CAPACITY FOR DIAGNOSING DISEASES OF BANANA (MUSA SPP.) AND OTHER AFRICAN CROPS

Bananas (Musa spp.) are subject to a number of diseases that are difficult to diagnose early in development when control measures are most likely to be successful. Rapidly spreading new diseases, such as Xanthomonas wilt present unique diagnostic challenges. Surveys conducted in East and West Africa documented the lack of sufficient equipment, supplies, reference materials and training in the majority of plant pathology laboratories charged with disease diagnoses. To begin to address these issues, the International Plant Diagnostic Network (IPDN) was established in East and West Africa in 2006, through the Integrated Pest Management Collaborative Research Support Program (IPM CRSP). The IPDN is a diagnostic, communication and data network, modeled in part on the United States National Plant Diagnostic Network. Software for digital imaging and diagnosis and information management provides a platform for enhanced diagnosis and communication amongst clinicians and their clientele. Improved diagnostics tools and protocols were also developed and tested, including a PCR assay for Xanthomonas wilt. Training programs were conducted in Benin in 2006, Kenya and the United States of America in 2007, and Uganda and Mali in 2008, to enhance technical capacity amongst diagnosticians in East and West Africa. Initiatives such as IPDN can benefit by collaboration with other similar internet-based initiatives in Africa. One such activity is the East Africa Phytosanitary Information Committee (EAPIC). EAPIC is linked to the Food and Agricultural Organization's International Plant Portal to provide the official national plant protection organization posting of plant pests for each respective country, which now includes Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia. The plant pest list will serve as a foundation from which to develop harmonized border inspection protocols, which in turn support capacity building efforts in plant pest survey, identification and communication systems, such as IPDN.

Invasive alien plants in plant health: a review of the past ten years

The International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) provides the background for National Plant Protection Organisations (NPPOs) to regulate and control invasive alien species that are harmful to plants. This subject was specifically discussed for the first time 10 years ago at IPPC level, and further explored by an IPPC open‐ended working group. The resulting concept was considered at EU level, and the EU Council supported the suitability of the plant health framework for these species, requesting the EU Commission to further analyse the needs for regulatory work in the EU plant health regime. Subsequently the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (EPPO) started a new working programme. The international conference ‘Invasive alien species and the IPPC’ set a signal for IPPC contracting parties to encourage their NPPOs to enforce actions on invasive alien species. IPPC standards on pest risk analysis (PRA) were adapted so as to include invasive alien species harmful to plants, and a memorandum of cooperation was adopted between the Secretariats of the IPPC and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). At present, the EU Commission, DG Environment is developing a European strategy on invasive alien species. The EU Plant Health Regulatory System is currently subjected to a major evaluation process in which a clearer inclusion of invasive alien species into the system is one of the strategic discussions.

RESOLVING THE STATUS OF MONILINIA spp. IN SOUTH AFRICAN STONE FRUIT ORCHARDS

Geographical distribution records of pathogens and pests are the basis for phytosanitary decision-making. Monilinia fructicola, one of the three Monilinia species responsible for brown rot of stone fruit, is listed as a regulated pest for South Africa. Many disputes about the justification of this classification have arisen during the past years as records have been published regarding the presence of this pathogen in South Africa. Results of several surveys conducted from 1985 in stone fruit orchards, revealed that M. laxa is the only causal agent of brown rot in South Africa. However, another notification of non-compliance (interception of regulated pests) was received by the National Plant Protection Organisation of South Africa in 2003 stating that M. fructicola was detected on consignments of South African Prunus fruits (P. domestica) in the United Kingdom. A detection survey according to inspections and sampling relevant to the biology of Monilinia species were conducted in the identified orchards at various stages throughout the year. Molecular techniques with species-specific primers for M. fructicola, M. laxa and M. fructigena based on the EPPO Diagnostic Protocol for M. fructicola were used for the identification of presumptive positive Monilinia isolates. The absence of M. fructicola from South African stone fruit orchards was again confirmed by this survey and its status in South Africa can be reported as: absent, not known to occur, confirmed by a detection survey. The regulated status of M. fructicola in South Africa is therefore scientifically justified by the results from this survey.

Normes OEPP/EPPO Standards Phytosanitary treatments Traitements phytosanitaires

Normes OEPP/EPPO Standards Phytosanitary treatments Traitements phytosanitaires

Normes OEPP/EPPO Standards Phytosanitary procedures Procédures phytosanitaires

Normes OEPP/EPPO Standards Phytosanitary procedures Procédures phytosanitaires

Pathway analysis: aquatic plants imported in 10 EPPO countries

Pathway analyses are regarded by National Plant Protection Organizations as a very efficient way to address the risks posed by invasive alien species. Data on import of aquatic plants was obtained from 10 EPPO countries (Austria, Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Latvia, Switzerland and Turkey) and aggregated in order to consider whether invasive or potentially invasive alien plants could be introduced in the EPPO region through this pathway. This study highlights that this pathway mainly consists of the import of tropical plants for use in aquaria, and which do not represent a risk due to their climatic requirements. However, a few species require thorough attention owing to the threats they cause. Of the 247 species recorded as imported, only 10 are currently considered to be a threat, representing 4% of the total number of plants imported. These 10 invasive or potentially invasive species continue to be traded in huge quantities in spite of the fact that Crassula helmsii and Eichhornia crassipes are recommended for regulation by EPPO, Azolla filiculoides, Egeria densa, Elodea nuttalli, Lagarosiphon major, Ludwigia grandiflora and Myriophyllum aquaticum should have their entry and spread prevented by countries and Hydrilla verticillata and Pistia stratiotes are recorded on the EPPO Alert List. Six additional species have been identified as representing a moderate to high potential risk: Alternanthera sessilis, Adiantum raddianum, Gymnocoronis spilanthoides, Hygrophila polysperma, Limnophila sessiliflora and Syngonium podophyllum. These species could be subject to further investigation, possibly a pest risk analysis, to evaluate the risk they may represent.

Normes OEPP EPPO Standards Phytosanitary treatments Traitements phytosanitaires

Normes OEPP EPPO Standards Phytosanitary treatments Traitements phytosanitaires

Development of National Reference Laboratories in the European Union1

Since 2004 discussions on the need for greater international co‐operation and coordination between diagnostic laboratories have taken place at several meetings of the EU Heads of National Plant Protection Organisations (NPPOs) and of the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (EPPO). Technical discussions on criteria for, and tasks and responsibilities of, National Reference Laboratories (NRLs) took place in a Commission Expert Working Group in September 2007. The meeting was attended by representatives from 13 Member States. The experts discussed the issues broadly and very actively and it was possible to elaborate an agreed Guidance Paper containing the main elements for the establishment of NRLs, including a priority list of individual pests for which such laboratories are needed. At their meeting in December 2007, the EU Heads of the NPPOs supported the establishment of NRLs as far as possible and where necessary. It was agreed that the Guidance Paper is a suitable common basis for the establishment of NRLs in the Member States and that it should be reviewed on the basis of the experience gained at national level.

General crop inspection procedure for potatoes

General crop inspection procedure for potatoes

Normes OEPP EPPO Standards Efficacy evaluation of plant protection products Evaluation biologique des produits phytosanitaires

Normes OEPP EPPO Standards Efficacy evaluation of plant protection products Evaluation biologique des produits phytosanitaires