Category Archives: Hemiptera

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Ceroplastes rubens Maskell: Red wax scale

California Pest Rating for
Ceroplastes rubens Maskell: Red wax scale
Hemiptera:  Coccidae
Pest Rating:  A
PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

February 26, 2014, USDA distributed a Deregulation Evaluation of Established Pests (DEEP) report proposing to change the status of Ceroplastes rubens, red wax scale, from actionable to non-actionable for the entire United States.  The insect is currently A-rated by CDFA, so a pest rating proposal is needed to determine future direction.

History & Status:

Background:  Ceroplastes rubens is a highly polyphagous scale, feeding on hundreds of species of plants in at least 80 families1,5.  It is considered to be a serious pest of citrus2,3,4,5; however, biological control programs have been successful at keeping populations below damaging levels1,3.   In addition to citrus, other economically important hosts in California include avocado, Prunus spp., apple, fig, and an extremely wide variety of ornamentals1,5.  Adults and nymphs feed on foliage, twigs, and stems and are said to have a preference for the upper surface of leaves4.  Red wax scale can move long distances through the international trade of infested plants or plant parts.

Worldwide Distribution: Ceroplastes rubens is so widely distributed that its origin is uncertain.  It is thought to possibly be native to Africa, India, or Sri Lanka2.  From there it has spread widely across much of Asia, Oceania, Australia, and the Caribbean1.  It has also been found in Colombia and greenhouses in Europe1.  The scale has been known from Hawaii since 1894 and Florida since 19551.

Official Control: Ceroplastes rubens is not known to be under official control in any states or nations.

California Distribution:  Ceroplastes rubens has not been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions:  Ceroplastes rubens is commonly intercepted by California on shipments of nursery stock from Florida and Hawaii.  The scale is also frequently intercepted by USDA on plants, cuttings, cut flowers, leaves, and fruit1.  Although these interceptions are most common in passenger baggage, they also include finds on large permitted commercial shipments of plants (Aglaonema sp. and Schefflera sp.) from Costa Rica to California1 that would have been likely to contaminate the state’s nursery industry.

The risk Ceroplastes rubens (red wax scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: The present distribution of Ceroplastes rubens extends across USDA plant hardiness zones 7-13. This corresponds to most of California, with the exception of high elevation areas.  The polyphagous nature of the scale makes it likely that it will find suitable hosts throughout this area.  Red wax scale receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California.  Score: 3

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Ceroplastes rubens is known to feed on hundreds of plant species in at least 80 families1,5.  The scale receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score: 3

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Ceroplastes rubens has a high reproductive rate.  In Australia the scale has two generations per year with each female producing an average of about 300 eggs4.  The scales may be spread long distances by wind, as hitchhikers on clothing or animals, or by commerce in infested plants.  Red wax scale receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest.  Score: 3

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact:  Ceroplastes rubens may lower crop value and increase production costs in the nursery and fresh fruit industries.  The insects disfigure plants by their presence and their honeydew contributes to the development of sooty mold, which can lower the value of ornamental plants and fruit.  The scale is not known to be listed as a quarantine pest in any nations; however, due to its absence from most of the Americas and New Zealand, it is reasonable to conclude that the scale could interrupt some fresh fruit export markets.  Red wax scale receives a Medium(2) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below.

Economic Impact: B, C

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 2

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Ceroplastes rubens is likely to trigger new chemical treatments by the nursery industry and by residents who find infested plants unsightly.  Potential hosts of red wax scale include plants listed as threatened or endangered in California including Nevin’s barberry (Berberis nevenii), island barberry (Berberis pinnata insularis), small-leaved rose (Rosa minutifolia), and Algodones Dunes sunflower (Helianthus niveus ssp. tephrodes).  Red wax scale receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

Environmental Impact: B, D

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact.

Environmental Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Ceroplastes rubens (red wax scale):  High(14)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Ceroplastes rubens has not been found in the environment of California and receives a Not established(0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High(14)

Uncertainty:

It is possible that Ceroplastes rubens would be managed by existing IPM programs in California fruit production.  It is also possible that existing packing house procedures would mitigate potential trade disruptions.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Ceroplastes rubens (red wax scale) is a highly polyphagous scale insect that is likely to have significant economic and environmental impacts in California.  The scale is likely to contaminate fresh fruit (Citrus and Prunus spp.) with its presence and sooty mold, reducing fruit marketability and possibly disrupting export markets.  The scale is also likely to increase production costs in the nursery industry as it feeds on an extremely wide variety of ornamental plants.  Red wax scale is likely to trigger new chemical treatments in the nursery and fruit industries, as well as by residents who find infested plants unsightly.  At least four threatened or endangered plants are potential hosts of the scale in California and are likely to be directly affected by feeding.  These potential economic and environmental impacts justify an A-rating for Ceroplastes rubens.

References:

1Culliney, T.W.  2014.  Deregulation Evaluation of Established Pests (DEEP); DEEP Report on Ceroplastes rubens Maskell: Red wax scale.

2Loch, A.D. 1997.  Natural enemies of pink wax scale, Ceroplastes rubens Maskell (Hemiptera: Coccidae), on umbrella trees in southeastern Queensland.  Australian Journal of Entomology 36:303-306.  http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1440-6055.1997.tb01475.x/pdf

3UC Riverside, Red wax scale.  http://www.faculty.ucr.edu/~legneref/biotact/ch-92.htm

4Malumphy, C. and D. Eyre.  2011.  Pink wax scale: Ceroplastes rubens.  Plant pest factsheet.  The Food and Environment Research Agency (Fera). U.K.  http://www.fera.defra.gov.uk/plants/publications/documents/factsheets/ceroplastesRubens.pdf

5Dekle, G.W.  2001.  Featured Creatures: Red wax scale: Ceroplastes rubens.  Florida Dept. of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry.  http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/creatures/orn/scales/red_wax_scale.htm

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating:  A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Dysmicoccus grassii (Leonardi): Alazon Mealybug

California Pest Rating for
Dysmicoccus grassii (Leonardi): Alazon Mealybug
Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae
Pest Rating: A
PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

Dysmicoccus grassii is frequently intercepted by CDFA and requires a pest rating proposal to support its pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Dysmicoccus grassii is a polyphagous mealybug that feeds on tropical and subtropical plants and where it is commonly found feeding around the peduncle of fruit1.  This feeding can cause yellowing and rot of green fruit1.  The mealybug is considered to be a pest of bananas in the Canary Islands and Nigeria1.  Known hosts include: Anacardiaceae: mango (Mangifera indica2) ; Annonaceae: sugar apple (Annona squamosa2); Asparagaceae: Mexican grass tree (Dasylirion longissimum2); Asteraceae: Eupatorium odoratum2; Bignoniaceae: calabash tree (Crescentia cujete2); Bromeliaceae: pineapple (Ananas comosus2), Andrea inermis2; Caricaceae: papaya (Carica papaya2) ; Combretaceae: tropical almond (Terminalia catappa2); Cucurbitaceae: chayote (Sechium edule2); Euphorbiaceae: Codiaeum spp.2; Fabaceae: Acacia spp.2; Lauraceae: Persea spp.2; Liliaceae: Asparagus spp.; Lythraceae: pomegranate (Punica granatum2); Malvaceae: Theobroma cacao1,2; Melastomataceae: Melastoma spp.2; Moraceae: Artocarpus spp.2, weeping fig (Ficus benjamina2); Musaceae: Musa acuminata2, Musa sapientum2, Musa spp.2; Passifloraceae: passion fruit (Passiflora edulis2); Polygonaceae: sea grape (Coccoloba uvifera2); Rubiaceae: coffee (Coffea arabica2), robusta coffee (Coffea canephora1); Verbenaceae: teak (Tectona grandis2).  Dysmicoccus grassii may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Dysmicoccus grassii is considered to be native to Central and South America1.  From there it has spread to Malaysia, the Canary Islands, France, Italy, Sicily, and Nigeria2.

Official Control: Dysmicoccus grassii (including its synonym D. alazon) are listed as harmful organisms by China, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Egypt3.

California Distribution:  Dysmicoccus grassii has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions:  Between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2014 Dysmicoccus grassii was intercepted by CDFA’s dog teams, border stations, and high risk programs 134 times.  These interceptions are typically on fruit or plants from Florida and Mexico.  It was also found in one nursery in Los Angeles County on plants imported from Florida.

The risk Dysmicoccus grassii (alazon mealybug) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Host plants of Dysmicoccus grassii are commonly grown in California and the mealybug is expected to be able to establish wherever these are grown. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California.  Score: 1

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Dysmicoccus grassii is known to feed on at least 25 species of plants in 22 families.  However, many of these are tropical plants that are not commonly grown in California.  It receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score: 2

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Mealybugs are capable of rapid reproduction and can be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.  They may also disperse locally by crawling, wind, or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or animals.  Dysmicoccus grassii receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score: 3

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Dysmicoccus grassii can disfigure unripe fruit when it feeds and might lower crop yields.  It may reduce the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants with its presence.  The presence of the mealybug may disrupt markets for California agricultural commodities as several of California’s trading partners consider it a harmful organism.  Dysmicoccus grassii receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. 

Economic Impact: A, B, C

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Dysmicoccus grassii is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes.  It is not expected to directly affect threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats.  The mealybug could trigger additional private treatment programs in orchards, the nursery industry, and by residents who find infested plants or fruit damage unacceptable.  Many of the host plants of Dysmicoccus grassii are commonly grown as ornamentals and in home/urban gardens in California and may be significantly impacted.  The mealybug receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

Environmental Impact: D, E

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact.

Environmental Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Dysmicoccus grassii (Alazon Mealybug):  High (14)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Dysmicoccus grassii has never been found in the environment of California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (14)

Uncertainty:

Dysmicoccus grassii is frequently intercepted by CDFA.  Presumably, it enters California at other times undetected.  It is possible that it has been introduced and is established in some localities.  Alternatively, it could be failing to establish.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Dysmicoccus grassii has never been found in the environment of California and is likely to have significant economic and environmental impacts.  An “A” rating is justified.

References:

1 Culik, Mark P., David dos Santos Martins, and Penny J. Gullan. 2006. First records of two mealybug species in Brazil and new potential pests of papaya and coffee. Journal of Insect Science 6(23): 1-6. http://jinsectscience.oxfordjournals.org/content/jis/6/1/23.full.pdf

2 Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy.  ScaleNet.  http://scalenet.info/validname/Dysmicoccus/grassii/

3 USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD).  https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Ceroplastes rusci (L.): Fig wax scale

California Pest Rating for
Ceroplastes rusci (L.): Fig wax scale
Hemiptera:  Coccidae
Pest Rating:  A
PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

February 26, 2014, USDA distributed a Deregulation Evaluation of Established Pests (DEEP) report proposing to change the status of Ceroplastes rusci, fig wax scale, from actionable to non-actionable for the continental United States.  The scale would remain actionable for Hawaii and the Pacific territories.  The insect is currently assigned a rating of “A” by CDFA, so a pest rating proposal is needed to determine future direction.

History & Status:

Background:  Ceroplastes rusci is considered a serious pest of fruit trees in many countries2.  Fig wax scale feeds by inserting its stylet into host leaves, shoots, and fruit2.  Heavy infestations of the scale cause yellowing, loss of foliage, and poor fruit set2.  The scale is polyphagous, feeding on a wide variety of plants in at least 48 families1.  Economically important hosts include almond, grape, citrus, pistachio, avocado, cotton, fig, palms, pear, and many ornamentals.  Ceroplastes rusci can move long distances through the shipment of infested palm trees as well as other host plants and plant parts.

Worldwide Distribution: Ceroplastes rusci is thought to be native to tropical Africa2.  From there it has spread to parts of the Caribbean, Europe, southwestern Asia, Vietnam, and southern South America1.  The scale has been known to be in Florida since 19941.

Official Control: Ceroplastes rusci is considered a quarantine pest by Australia2 and probably other nations.  The USDA proposal also recommends that it remain a quarantine pest for Hawaii.

California Distribution:  Ceroplastes rusci has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions:  Ceroplastes rusci is regularly intercepted by California, most often on palm nursery stock from Florida.

The risk Ceroplastes rusci (Fig wax scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: The present distribution of Ceroplastes rusci corresponds to USDA plant hardiness zones 8-13. This indicates that the scale would be able to establish a widespread distribution over most of California.  The polyphagous nature of the scale makes it likely to encounter suitable hosts throughout this area.  Ceroplastes rusci receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California.  Score: 3

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Ceroplastes rusci feeds on a wide variety of plants in at least 48 families.  The scale receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score: 3

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Scale insects have high reproductive potential.  Fig wax scale frequently moves long distances in the trade of infested palm trees and other host plant products.  Ceroplastes rusci receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score: 3

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Ceroplastes rusci feeds on many economically important crops where it has the potential to reduce fruit set2, lowering crop yield.  The scale is likely to increase production costs in the nursery and fruit industries and lower the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants with its presence.  Fig wax scale is treated as a quarantine pest by Australia and possibly other nations.  The USDA proposal also recommends that the scale remain actionable in Hawaii.  This has the potential to trigger a loss of markets, especially for California’s fresh fruit exports.  Fig wax scale can also vector plant viruses2.  Ceroplastes rusci receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

Economic Impact: A, B, C, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Ceroplastes rusci is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes.  There are no threatened or endangered plants in California that are likely to be host species.  Fig wax scale is not expected to disrupt critical habitats.  The scale may trigger additional treatment programs in the nursery and fruit industries and by residents who find infested plants unsightly.  It is not expected to significantly impact cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings.  Ceroplastes rusci receives a Medium(2) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

Environmental Impact:  D

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact.

Environmental Impact Score: 2

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Ceroplastes rusci (Fig wax scale):  High(14).

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Ceroplastes rusci has never been detected in the environment of California and receives a Not established(0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High(14)

Uncertainty:

There have been no formal surveys for Ceroplastes rusci and it is frequently intercepted on palms, so there could be localized populations of the scale within the state.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

If Ceroplastes rusci were to enter and establish in California it would find many of our high-value crops to be suitable hosts including almond, grape, citrus, pistachio, avocado, cotton, fig, palms, pear, and many ornamentals.  The scale is likely to have significant impacts on these crops including lower yield, increased production costs, lost markets in Hawaii, Australia and other nations, and increased plant pathogen transmission.  Environmental impacts of the scale are expected to be limited to increased treatments by residents and in the nursery and fruit industries.  An A-rating is justified.

References:

1Culliney, T.W.  2014.  Deregulation Evaluation of Established Pests (DEEP); DEEP Report on Ceroplastes rusci (L.): Fig wax scale.

2Vu, Nga Thi, Rod Eastwood, Chat Thi Nguyen, and Lam Van Phan.  2006.  The fig wax scale Ceroplastes rusci (Linnaeus) (Homoptera: Coccidae) in south-east Vietnam:  Pest status, life history and biocontrol trials with Eublemma amabilis Moore (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae).  Entomological Research 36: 196-201.  http://www.oeb.harvard.edu/faculty/pierce/people/eastwood/resources/pdfs/Ceroplastes-2006.pdf

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating:  A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Dysmicoccus neobrevipes (Annona/Gray Pineapple Mealybug)

California Pest Rating for
Dysmicoccus neobrevipes (Annona/Gray Pineapple Mealybug)
Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae
Pest Rating: A
PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

Dysmicoccus neobrevipes has an internal CDFA rating of “Q”. A permanent pest rating proposal is required to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Dysmicoccus neobrevipes is a mealybug with pantropical distribution. It is a highly polyphagous mealybug presenting a host range of more than 40 families of plants, including among others Agave, Ananas, Annona, Brassica, Citrus, Cucurbita, Ficus, Mangifera, Musa, Solanum lycopersicum, and Yucca (4, 10). It vectors pineapple wilt and green spot disease (9) and due to this, it is considered the most economically important pest of pineapple and is the primary cause of pineapple crop failure in Hawaii (3). The Annona mealybug is ovoviviparous; the eggs hatch within the female resulting in live births of young nymphs. One female produces about 350 nymphs in 30 days. Adults are found on leaves, stems, aerial roots and fruit clusters (7).

Worldwide Distribution: Dysmicoccus neobrevipes is thought to be native to tropical America, with a few records from sub-tropical localities. It is found in 39 countries (see 10), including all pineapple growing areas of Fiji, Jamaica, Malaysia, Mexico, Micronesia, Philippines, and Taiwan (3). It is known to have been introduced in China, Japan, Sri Lanka and Lithuania (2).

U.S. Distribution: Dysmicoccus neobrevipes is present in Hawaii and Florida (1, 2, and 10).

U.S. Quarantine Interceptions: Dysmicoccus neobrevipes has been intercepted 3,600 times on a variety of hosts at U.S. ports of entry between 1995 and 2012. This species is commonly intercepted from southern Asia, particularly The Philippines, on a diversity of tropical fruits and from many areas of South America on agave and tropical fruits (4).

Official Control: Dysmicoccus neobrevipes has been listed as a harmful organism in Japan (8).

California Distribution:  Dysmicoccus neobrevipes has not been found in the natural environment in California (5).

California Interceptions:  Dysmicoccus neobrevipes has been intercepted multiple times through border station inspections, dog teams, high risk pest exclusion and through incoming quarantine shipments. Between January 2000 and August 2016, it has been intercepted 71 times (5). It has not yet been found in the natural or agricultural environment in California.

The risk Dysmicoccus neobrevipes (Annona/Gray Pineapple Mealybug) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Hosts like beans, citrus, cotton, cowpeas, pumpkin and tomatoes are grown throughout California and this presents the possibility of rapid spread and establishment of this pest throughout the state (2). Pineapples and Banana are grown in coastal areas of California and Dysmicoccus neobrevipes could spread and get established in these areas (6). It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California:

Score: 3

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Dysmicoccus neobrevipes is highly polyphagous and is found on 40 plant families (10). It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest:

Score: 3

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Dysmicoccus neobrevipes reproduces parentally. One female can give birth to 350 nymphs in 30 days. The life span averages about 90 days. Larvae, also known as crawlers, have flattened bodies and long hairs which aid in their dispersal by wind. (3). Certain species of caretaking ants aid the mealybugs in colonizing new plants by providing them shelter, protecting them from predators and keeping them clean from secreted honeydew.  It receives a High (3) in this category

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest:

Score: 3

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Since the ants aid mealybugs to colonize new plants, there can be significant costs associated with cultural and chemical control of ant species throughout the state on its many hosts. Dysmicoccus neobrevipes is a vector of mealybug wilt and green spot disease of pineapples. The wilt disease alone can cause yield loss of up to 35% in pineapples (9). It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below:

Economic Impact:  A, B, E

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

Economic Impact Score: 3

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Dysmicoccus neobrevipes is not likely to impact threatened or endangered species. However infestations could trigger additional private treatment by growers. Chemicals used for ant control may have detrimental environmental impacts because of their slow degradation (3). Pineapple and banana growing regions of southern California coast are likely to be impacted by this pest. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below:

Environmental Impact:  A, D

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction of Annona/Gray Pineapple Mealybug into California:  High (15)

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Dysmicoccus neobrevipes has not been found in the natural or agricultural environment of California. Therefore, it receives a Not Established (0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included:

Score: 0

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: (15)

Uncertainty:

Dysmicoccus neobrevipes has been intercepted many times by CDFA through regulatory pathways. There are ample opportunities for this pest to be introduced into California through various ports of entry.  If it goes undetected, there is a good possibility that it can spread and get established based on its rapid dispersal potential and wide host range.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Dysmicoccus neobrevipes has not been found in the natural or agricultural environment in California. If this species were to become established in California, there could be significant economic and environmental impacts. Based on all the above evidence, an “A” rating is proposed at this time.

References:
  1. Egelie, Ashley A and Gillett-Kaufman, Jennifer L., University of Florida, Entomology and Nematology Department: Publication # EENY-635, September 2015 http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/creatures/FRUIT/MEALYBUGS/pineapple_mealybug.htm
  2. Invasive Species Compendium: Distribution maps for plant pests, Accessed 10/14/2016 http://www.cabi.org/isc/datasheet/20251
  3. Kessing JLM, Mau RFL, 2007. Dysmicoccus neobrevipes (Beardsley). Crop Knowledge Master. http://www.extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/type/d_neobre.htm
  4. Miller, D., A. Rung, G. Parikh, G. Venable, A.J. Redford, G.A. Evans, and R.J. Gill. 2014. Scale Insects, Edition 2. USDA APHIS Identification Technology Program (ITP). Fort Collins, CO. [August 13 2016] <http://idtools.org/id/scales/>: Dysmicoccus brevipes (Cockerell) http://idtools.org/id/scales/factsheet.php?name=6966
  5. Pest and Damage Report Database: Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services, California Department of Food and Agriculture: Accessed 9/30/2016
  6. Pineapple fruit facts: California rare fruit Growers https://www.crfg.org/pubs/ff/pineapple.html
  7. Plant Health Australia: Exotic Threat: Pineapple Mealybug- Fact Sheet http://www.planthealthaustralia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Grey-pineapple-mealy-bug-FS.pdf
  8. USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT): Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD), Accessed 10/13/2016  https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/PExD/faces/ReportFormat.jsp
  9. Sether DM, Hu JS, 2002. Yield impact and spread of Pineapple mealybug wilt associated virus-2 and mealybug wilt of pineapple in Hawaii. Plant Disease, 86(8):867-874.
  10. ScaleNet: http://scalenet.info/catalogue/Dysmicoccus%20neobrevipes/ Accessed 10/13/2016

Responsible Party:

Raj Randhawa, 1220 ‘N’ Street, Room 221, Sacramento CA 95814, (916)403-6617, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov

Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:
Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Howardia biclavis (mining scale)

5119004-mining-scale(Howardia-biclavis)
California Pest Rating for
Howardia biclavis (mining scale)
Hemiptera: Diaspididae
Pest Rating: A
PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

Howardia biclavis has an internal CDFA rating of A.
A pest rating proposal is required to support an official pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Howardia biclavis is an armored scale insect. It reproduces parthenogenetically without males 2. The number of days for each developmental stage and number of generations per year depend on temperature, humidity and rain fall 3. Howardia biclavis completes its life cycle in 30 days. It infests the bark, leaves and fruit of the host plant by burrowing beneath the epidermal layer. It has a wide host range covering 68 families (194 genera). Recorded hosts include acacia, allamanda, bougainvillea, cassia, fig, ebony, gardenia, hibiscus, ixora, jasmine, kelumpang, lantana, lychee, mango, papaya, plumeria, poinsettia, pulasan, sapodilla, and sapote 4.

Worldwide Distribution: Howardia biclavis is thought to be originated in the New World tropics 7 or Africa 8. It is now found worldwide and has been reported in 71 countries 4. In the Unites States, it was first recorded at Kona, Hawaii in 1895 by Maskell 1.

Official Control: Howardia biclavis has been listed as a harmful organism by Chile, French Polynasia, Republic of Korea, Mexico and Taiwan 5.

California Distribution:  Howardia biclavis was found in California Nurseries prior to 1950 and was eradicated by 1956. It was eradicated subsequently whenever found 9. Based on CDFA pest and damage records database, it has not been detected in California’s natural or agricultural environment between January 2000 through August 2016 10.

California Interceptions:  Howardia biclavis has been intercepted multiple times through border station inspections, dog teams and high risk pest exclusion activities. Between January 2000 and August 2016, it has been intercepted 116 times 10.

The risk Howardia biclavis (Mining scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Host plants of Howardia biclavis are grown throughout California and this presents the possibility of rapid spread and establishment of this pest within the state. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California.  Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Howardia biclavis is highly polyphagous and its host range includes 68 plant families covering 194 genera of plants 4. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Howardia biclavis reproduces parthenogenetically and completes its life cycle in 30 days. The crawler stage of this insect can be easily transported by people, animals, birds, ants and wind currents. Wind also acts as a dispersal agent. Long distance dispersal happens by passive transport of infested material and short distance dispersal occurs when crawlers search out places to settle and feed. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Howardia biclavis is expected to lower crop value because it feeds on plant juices and causes loss of vigor, deformation of infested plant parts, loss of leaves and sometimes death of plants. As armored scale are chiefly spread by movement of nursery stock, possibly resulting in quarantine triggers and loss of markets for California grown nursery stock. Mining scale has been reported as an economic pests of woody ornamentals in Florida. It is considered a serious world pest. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Howardia biclavis causes deformation of infested plants. Growers can find the infested plants unsightly. This would significantly impact cultural practices, urban gardening and ornamental plantings. Growers would need additional residential pesticide treatments if it were to infest the urban and ornamental plant environment. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Mining Scale:  High (15)

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Howardia biclavis has not been found and established in natural environment of California. Therefore, it receives a Not Established (0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: (15)

Uncertainty:

Howardia biclavis has been intercepted many times by CDFA. There is a possibility that it may have entered the State and gone undetected. If it goes undetected, there is a good possibility that it will establish on its wide host range.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Howardia biclavis has been found in nurseries in California in the 1950’s and was eradicated. It has not been found in the natural environment in the last 15 years, but if it were to become established in the State, there would be significant economic and environmental impacts. Based on all the above evidence presented, an “A” rating is justified.

References:

1 Tenbrink, Victoria L. and Hara, Arnold H. 1992. Hawaii Crop Knowledge Master: Howardia biclavis (Comstock). Accessed: 9/28/2016
http://www.extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/type/h_biclav.htm

2 Brown, S.W. 1965. Chromosomal survey of the armored and palm scale insects (Coccoidea: Diaspididae and Phoenicococcidae) Hilgardia 36: 189-294.

3 Beardsley, J. W. Jr. & R. H. Gonzalez. 1975. The biology and ecology of armored scales. Annual Review of Entomology 20: 47-73.

4 Scale net database: Howardia biclavis (Comstock), Accessed 9/30/2016
http://scalenet.info/catalogue/Howardia%20biclavis/

5 USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT): Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD), Accessed 9/28/2016
https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/PExD/faces/PExDReport.jsp

6 Invasive Species Compendium: Distribution maps for plant pests, Accessed 9/30/2016
http://www.cabi.org/isc/datasheet/27709

7 Miller, D.R. Davidson, J.A. 2005 Armored Scale Insect Pests of Trees and Shrubs. Cornell University Press. xiv + 442 pp.

8 Watson, G.W. 2002 Arthropods of Economic Importance: Diaspididae of the World: Howardia biclavis (mining scale), Accessed 9/29/2016
http://wbd.etibioinformatics.nl/bis/diaspididae.php?selected=beschrijving&menuentry=soorten&id=128

9 Gill, Raymond J. 1997: The Scale Insects of California: Part 3: The Armored Scales (Homoptera Diaspididae). California Department of Food and Agriculture, Technical Series in Agricultural Biosystematics and Plant Pathology, 3: 307 pp. https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/plant/ppd/PDF/Technical_Series_03.pdf

10 Pest and Damage Report Database: Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services, California Department of Food and Agriculture: Accessed 9/30/2016

Responsible Party:

Raj Randhawa, Senior Environmental Scientist; California Department of Food and Agriculture; 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA 95814; Tel. (916) 654-0312; plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦  Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment: 

Consequences of Introduction:  1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦  Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦  Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦  Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦  Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Trioza brevigenae Mathur: Ficus Leaf-rolling Psyllid

38058-FRLP-PhotobyDonald.R.Hodel-UCCE-web
California Pest Rating for
Trioza brevigenae Mathur: Ficus Leaf-rolling Psyllid
Hemiptera: Triozidae
Pest Rating:  B
PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

On August 10, 2016 Dr. Alessandra Rung identified a sample of psyllids collected in Carson (Los Angeles County) as Trioza brevigenae, Ficus leaf-rolling psyllid.  On August 25, 2016 USDA National Identification Services confirmed this as a new record for the Western Hemisphere.  A pest rating proposal is required to determine a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Trioza brevigenae is only known to feed on new leaves of curtain fig (Ficus microcarpa).  Feeding causes a distinctive, tight leaf roll.  Trioza brevigenae may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Trioza brevigenae is native to India.  California is the first other location in which it has been reported.

Official Control: Trioza brevigenae is not known to be under official control in any other states or nations.

California Distribution:  Trioza brevigenae has been confirmed from Los Angeles County.  There are also reports of the psyllid from Orange, Ventura, San Diego, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties.

California Interceptions:  Trioza brevigenae is not known to have ever been intercepted in California.

The risk Trioza brevigenae (Ficus leaf-rolling psyllid) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Ficus microcarpa is a popular ornamental that grows in USDA plant hardiness zones 9-11, corresponding with much of the San Joaquin Valley, Coastal, and Southern California. Trioza brevigenae is expected to be able to establish throughout these regions wherever suitable host plants are found.  It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California.  Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Trioza brevigenae is only known to feed on curtain fig (Ficus microcarpa).  It receives a Low (1) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Psyllids have high reproductive rates and can disperse locally by flying.  They may also be transported long distances when infested plants or leaves are moved or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or animals.  Trioza brevigenae receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Ficus microcarpa plants are a valuable component of the nursery industry.  However, Trioza brevigenae has already established a widespread distribution in Southern California and there have been no reports of economic impacts.  It is likely that existing nursery practices for other Ficus microcarpa pests are limiting impacts from this new one.  Due to the absence of this psyllid from the entirety of North America there could be disruptions to markets for California produced Ficus microcarpa nursery stock.  Trioza brevigenae receives a Low (1) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Trioza brevigenae is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes.  It is not likely to affect threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats.  It may trigger new treatment programs by residents who find highly infested landscape plants unacceptable.  Ficus microcarpa trees are widely grown as ornamentals in California and are likely to be significantly impacted by this pest.  Trioza brevigenae receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Trioza brevigenae (Ficus leaf-curling psyllind):  Medium (11)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Trioza brevigenae has been confirmed from Los Angeles County and is also reported to be widespread across southern California. It receives a Medium (-2) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: Medium (9)

Uncertainty:

There have not been any recent surveys for this psyllid in other parts of California, so it may be more widespread.  Over the last three years many new Ficus pests have been found in southern California including ficus whitefly (Singhiella simplex), ficus eye-spot midge (Horidiplosis ficifolii), Cuban-laurel thrips (Gynaikothrips uzeli), and curtain fig psyllid (Macrohomotoma gladiata).  It is possible that new treatments that are already necessary for these other new pests will preclude some of the economic and environmental impacts from additional new pests such as Trioza brevigenae.  Alternatively, the psyllid might have a larger host range in California than has been documented elsewhere.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Trioza brevigenae is considered to be widespread in southern California and is likely to have significant economic and environmental impacts as it expands its range to other parts of the state.  A “B” rating is justified.

References:

1 Hodel, Donald R., Gevork Arakelian, Linda M. Ohara, Cheryl Wilen, and Surendra K. Dara. 2016. The Ficus Leaf-Rolling Psyllid: A New Pest of Ficus microcarpa.  PalmArbor 2016-2: 1-9.  http://ucanr.edu/sites/HodelPalmsTrees/files/242336.pdf

2 Hodel, Donald R., Gevork Arakelian, Linda M. Ohara, Surendra K. Dara, and Cheryl Wilen. 2016. Ficus leaf-rolling psyllid, Trioza brevigenae: a new pest of Ficus microcarpa in southern California.  UC ANR Pest News. http://ucanr.edu/blogs/blogcore/postdetail.cfm?postnum=21788

3 Dara, Surendra K. 2016. A new psyllid pest on ornamental trees in California.  Entomology today.  https://entomologytoday.org/2016/08/23/a-new-psyllid-pest-on-ornamental-trees-in-california/

4 Ficus Tree Encounters New Pest. American Nurseryman.  http://www.amerinursery.com/pest-management/ficus-tree-encounters-new-pest/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Pest Rating:  B

Posted by ls 

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Asiothrixus antidesmae (Takahashi): Whitefly [No Common Name]

California Pest Rating for
Asiothrixus antidesmae (Takahashi): Whitefly [No Common Name]
Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae
Pest Rating:  A
PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

In September 2016 the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) New Pest Advisory Group (NPAG) released a report on Asiothrixus antidesmae that recommended that USDA establish a non-reportable/non-actionable port policy for the whitefly in the continental United States.  Stephen Brown requested comments on this proposal.

History & Status:

Background:  Asiothrixus antidesmae is a whitefly that feeds by sucking phloem from a variety of plants including:  Apocynaceae: Alyxia stellata (maile); Araceae: Alocasia sp. (taro), Anthurium andraeanum (flamingo lily); Calophyllaceae: Calophyllum inophyllum (Alexandrian laurel); Clusiaceae: Garcinia eugenifolia (saptree); Dillenaceae: Dillenia spp.; Lamiaceae: Ocimum spp. (basil); Lecythidaceae: Barringtonia sp.; Phyllanthaceae: Antidesma spp. (chinalaurel); Piperaceae: Piper betel; Rubiaceae: Gardenia jasminoides (cape jasmine), G. taitensis (Tahitian gardenia), Ixora spp., Morinda citrifolia (Indian mulberry); Smilacaceae: Smilax sp.  The whitefly can be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Asiothrixus antidesmae is native to Taiwan.  From there is has spread to Nauru, Palau, Tahiti, Western Samoa, Brunei, the Philippines, Singapore, Sulawesi, Thailand, Guadeloupe, and Saint Lucia.  In the United States it has been found in Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Florida.

Official Control: Asiothrixus antidesmae is not known to be under official control in any other states or nations.

California Distribution:  Asiothrixus antidesmae has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions:  Asiothrixus antidesmae was intercepted by CDFA 6 times between January 1, 1987 and September 27, 2016 on shipments of fresh plant parts from Hawaii, usually betel leaves (Piper betel).

The risk Asiothrixus antidesmae (whitefly) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: According to the NPAG report Asiothrixus antidesmae is expected to establish a widespread distribution in California. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California.  Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Asiothrixus antidesmae is known to feed on plants in 13 genera in 10 families.  It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Whiteflies are capable of rapid reproduction and can be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.  Asiothrixus antidesmae receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Asiothrixus antidesmae is not considered to be an economic pest.  It is not expected to lower crop yields.  It might increase nursery stock production costs.  It is not expected to disrupt markets, change cultural practices, vector other organisms, injure animals, or interfere with water supplies.  Asiothrixus antidesmae receives a Low (1) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: If Asiothrixus antidesmae were to establish in California it is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes.  It is not likely to directly affect threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats.  It might trigger new chemical treatments in the nursery industry and by residents who find infested ornamental plants unacceptable.  A variety of tropical ornamental plantings could be affected by this pest.  Asiothrixus antidesmae receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Asiothrixus antidesmae (Whitefly): High (13)

Add up the total score and include it here.

 –Low = 5-8 points

 –Medium = 9-12 points

 –High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Asiothrixus antidesmae has never been found in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (13)

Uncertainty:

There are a wide variety of whiteflies already present in California including some with significantly overlapping host ranges.  It is possible that natural enemies of these existing whiteflies and competitive effects will help mitigate any impacts of Asiothrixus antidesmae.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Asiothrixus antidesmae has never been found in California and is expected to have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to establish in the state.  An “A” rating is justified.

References:

Smith, J.W. 2016.  NPAG Report Asiothrixus antidesmae (Takahashi): Whitefly [no common name].  United States Department of Agriculture New Pest Advisory Group.

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Pest Rating:  A

Posted by ls 

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Fiorinia externa Ferris: Elongate Hemlock Scale

1122010-ElongateHemlockScale-byEricDay-VirginiaPolytech-bugwood-web
California Pest Rating for
Fiorinia externa Ferris:  Elongate Hemlock Scale
Hemiptera:  Diaspididae
Pest Rating:  A
PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

Fiorinia externa is often intercepted by CDFA and presently has a temporary rating of “Q”.  A pest rating proposal is required to determine a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Fiorinia externa is an armored scale insect that is considered to be a pest of ornamental and forest conifers1.  These insects overwinter as mated females or eggs1.  Females begin laying eggs within their waxy covers in early spring1.  As eggs hatch, crawlers disperse to other needles on the same plant where they settle on the underside1.  There they insert their mouthparts and feed1.  They reach maturity in 7-8 weeks in Pennsylvania1.  Feeding causes needles to develop yellow banding and drop prematurely1.  This damage causes foliage to appear thin and weakens the trees, making them vulnerable to secondary invaders1.  Known hosts include 43 species2 including: Cupressaceae:  Biota orientalis5, Juniperus chinensis5 (Chinese juniper), Juniperus rigida5 (temple juniper); Pinaceae:  Abies spp.1,3 (firs), Cedrus spp.1 (cedars), Picea spp.1,3 (spruces), Pinus spp.1,3 (pines), Pseudotsuga menziesii1,3 (douglas fir), Tsuga canadensis1,2 (eastern hemlock), T. caroliniana1,2 (Carolina hemlock), and Tsuga diversifolia (northern Japanese hemlock); Taxaceae: Taxus spp.1 (yews).   Fiorinia externa may be carried long distances when infested plants or plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Fiorinia externa is native to Japan1,2 and is also found in China5.  It was first found in New York in 19081 and has since been found in Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Ohio, Rhode Island, Virginia, and the District of Columbia.  Interceptions by CDFA also indicate that the scale is also established in North Carolina.

Official Control: Neither Fiorinia externa nor Fiorinia spp. are known to be under official control by any other states or nations4.

California Distribution:  Fiorinia externa has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions:  Fiorinia externa was intercepted 97 times between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2014 by CDFA’s high risk inspections, dog teams, and other quarantine programs.  Most of the interceptions have been on fraser fir (Abies fraseri) from North Carolina.

The risk Fiorinia externa (elongate hemlock scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Species of Abies, Picea, Pinus, Pseudotsuga, Taxus, and Tsuga are native to the forests of California and are grown as ornamentals. Fiorinia externa is likely to establish wherever these host plants are grown.  Elongate hemlock scale receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California.  Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Fiorinia externa is known to feed on 43 species of plants in 9 genera in three plant families.  It receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Female elongate hemlock scales produce an average of 20 eggs during their lifetime and a generation may be completed every seven to eight weeks during the growing season1.  Crawlers typically remain on the same plant but may be dispersed long distances by wind or by hitchhiking on clothing, animals, or equipment.  They may also be carried long distances when infested plants or plant parts are moved.  Elongate hemlock scale receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: If Fiorinia externa were to enter California it is likely that the scale would lead to lower yields and increased production costs in managed forests, Christmas tree farms, and in the nursery industry.  The scale is not expected to disrupt markets, change cultural practices, vector other pestiferous organisms, injure animals, or interfere with water supplies.  Elongate hemlock scale receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: The establishment of Fiorinia externa in California would be likely to disrupt natural communities, as it infests forests and increases the susceptibility of trees to other pests and diseases.  The scale is not expected to directly affect any threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats.  Elongate scale insect is likely to trigger additional treatment programs in managed forests, Christmas tree farms, and the nursery industry.  The scale is also likely to significantly impact cultural practices and ornamental plantings.  Fiorinia externa receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Fiorinia externa (elongate hemlock scale): High (13)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Fiorinia externa has never been found in the environment and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (13)

Uncertainty:

Impacts on forests may potentially be more significant than loss of trees.  Stands of dead trees may affect the rate of runoff and water supplies and could affect the stability of mountain and canyon slopes.  There have not been any recent formal surveys of the scales of conifers in California.  It is possible that Fiorinia externa could be present in some localities.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Elongate hemlock scale (Fiorinia externa) has never been found in the environment of California and would likely have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to enter the state.  An “A”-rating is justified.

References:

1 Hoover, Gregory A. 2009. Elongate Hemlock Scale (Fiorinia externa Ferris) Fact Sheet.  Pennsylvania State University.  http://ento.psu.edu/extension/factsheets/elongate-hemlock-scale

2 McClure, Mark S.  Pest Alert: Elongate Hemlock Scale.  USDA Forest Service Northeastern Area NA-PR-01-02  http://www.na.fs.fed.us/spfo/pubs/pest_al/ehscale/ehscale.htm

3 Elongate Hemlock Scale Fiorinia externa Ferris.  PSU Christmas Tree Pest Fact Sheets.  http://extension.psu.edu/pests/ipm/agriculture/christmas-tree/pest-fact-sheets/needle-discoloration-and-injury/elongate-hemlock-scale.pdf

4 USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD).  https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

5 SEL Catalog Query results for Fiorinia externa Ferris.  http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/diaspidi/Fioriniaexterna.htm

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Pest Rating:  A

Posted by ls 

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Boxwood Scale | Pinnaspis buxi (Bouche)

California Pest Rating for
Pinnaspis buxi (Bouché): Boxwood Scale
Hemiptera: Diaspididae
Pest Rating: A
PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

Pinnaspis buxi is frequently intercepted by CDFA.  A pest rating proposal is required to support its permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Pinnaspis buxi is a widespread, polyphagous armored scale insect that feeds on a wide variety of hosts.  Known hosts include Apocynaceae: Nerium odorum1,2; Aquifoliaceae: Ilex vomitoria1,2; Araceae: Aglaonema philippinensis1,2, Alocasia sp.1,2, Anthurium magnificum1,2, Anthurium crystallinum1,2, Anthurium grandi1,2, Anubias sp.1,2, Colocasia esculenta1,2, Epipremnum sp.1,2, Homalomena philippinensis1,2, Monstera deliciosa1,2, Monstera sp.1,2, Philodendron sp.1,2, Philodendron pertusum1,2, Pothos seemanii1,2, Rhodospatha sp.1,2, Scindapsus sp.1,2, Scindapsus aureus1,2, Spathiphyllum sp.1,2; Arecaceae: Acrocomia sp.1,2, Acrocomia media1,2, Areca lutescens1,2, Areca catechu1,2, Areca sp.1,2, Calamus sp.1,2, Chamaerops sp.1,2, Chrysalidocarpus lutescens1,2, Cocos nucifera1,2, Daemonorops lewisianus1,2, Dictyosperma sp.1,2, Dictyosperma album1,2, Howeia forsteriana1,2, Howeia belmoreana1,2, Licuala grandis1,2, Neodypsis1,2, Phoenix sp.1,2, Pinanga kuhlii1,2, Raphia sp.1,2, Rhapis sp.1,2, Tachycarpus sp.1,2, Thrinax excelsa1,2, Trachycarpus sp.1,2, Veitchia joannis1,2; Asteraceae: Chrysanthemum morifolium1,2; Bromeliaceae: Tillandsia sp.1,2, Vriesea polonia1,2; Burseraceae: Canarium commune1,2; Buxaceae: Buxus sp.1,2, Buxus sempervirens1,2; Celastraceae: Siphonodon celastrineus1,2; Cucurbitaceae: Momordica charantia1,2, Momordica sp.1,2; Cupressaceae: Cunninghamia sp.1; Cyperaceae: Cyperus alternifolius1,2; Ebenaceae: Diospyros sp.1,2, Diospyros oleoides1,2; Euphorbiaceae: Aleurites montana1,2, Hevea brasiliensis1,2; Fabaceae: Cassia fistula1,2, Hardwickia binata1,2, Inocarpus fagifer1,2, Kentia sp.1,2, Phaseolus vulgaris1,2, Tamarindus indica1,2; Heliconiaceae: Heliconia bihai1,2, Heliconia sp.1,2; Iridaceae: Dietes bicolor2, Moraea bicolor1; Juncaceae: Prinonium sp.1,2; Lecythidaceae: Barringtonia edulis1,2; Liliaceae: Aloe sp.1,2, Cordyline terminalis1,2, Cordyline fruticosa1,2, Dracaena sp.1,2; Lythraceae: Punica granatum1; Magnoliaceae: Magnolia glandiflora1,2, Michelia chambaka1,2; Malvaceae: Gossypium barbadense1,2, Hibiscus arnottianus1,2, Hibiscus sp.1,2, Sida sp.2, Theobroma cacao1; Marantaceae: Maranta sp.1,2; Meliaceae: Dysoxylum sp.2, Sandoricum sp.1,2, Trichilia sp.1,2; Moraceae: Artocarpus integrifolia1,2, Artocarpus heterophyllus1,2, Ficus glomerata1,2; Musaceae: Musa sp.1,2; Ochnaceae: Schuurmansia sp.1,2; Oleaceae: Olea cuspidata1,2, Olea sp.1,2; Orchidaceae: Dendrobium sp.1,2, Epidendrum sp.1,2; Pandanaceae: Pandanus sp.1,2, Pandanus conideus1,2, Pandanus hornei1,2, Pandanus odoratissimus1,2, Pandanus seychellarum1,2, Pandanus upoluensis1,2, Pandanus utilis1,2; Pinaceae: Pinus sp.1,2; Piperaceae: Piper sp.1,2; Polypodiaceae: Asplenium sp.1,2; Proteaceae: Helicia sp.1,2; Pteridaceae: Adiantum aethiopicum1,2; Rubiaceae: Coprosma laevigata1,2, Morinda citrifolia1,2; Rutaceae: Citrus sp.1,2; Smilacaceae: Smilax sp.1,2; Solanaceae: Lycopersicon esculentum1,2; Strelitziaceae: Strelitzia sp.1,2, Strelitzia reginae1,2; Thymelaeaceae: Daphne oleoides2; Ulmaceae: Celtis philippinensis1,2; Verbenaceae: Lantana commersoni1,2.  The scale can spread long distances when infested plants or plant products are moved in commerce.

Worldwide Distribution: Pinnaspis buxi is widespread in Afrotropical, Australasian, Nearctic, Neotropical, Oriental, and Palearctic regions2.  In the United States it can be found in Florida, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico & Vieques Island, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Hawaiian Islands2.

Official Control: Pinnaspis buxi is listed as a quarantine pest by Costa Rica, Japan, New Zealand, and Seychelles.

California Distribution:  Pinnaspis buxi has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions:  Pinnaspis buxi is commonly intercepted.  Between January 1, 2000 and December 4, 2014 the scale was intercepted 857 times.  Interceptions were typically on plants or plant material imported from Hawaii, Costa Rica, and Florida.

The risk Pinnaspis buxi (boxwood scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Pinnaspis buxi is highly polyphagous and feeds on a wide variety of plants, many of which are grown in California. The scale is likely able to establish wherever host plants are grown.  Boxwood scale receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California.  Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California, or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Pinnaspis buxi feeds on a wide variety of plants in at least 44 families.  It receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Scale insects have high reproductive rates.  They may spread long distances when host plants are moved.  Furthermore, they may spread by wind or by hitchhiking on clothing, animals, or equipment.  Pinnaspis buxi receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Despite the worldwide distribution and polyphagous nature of Pinnaspis buxi it does not appear to be documented as causing economic damage.  Nevertheless, it is listed as a quarantine pest by several nations so it has the potential to trigger a loss of markets.  Furthermore, it may increase production costs in citrus and in nursery industries as growers may treat to ensure fruit or plant cleanliness.  Pinnaspis buxi receives a Medium(2) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Pinnaspis buxi is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes.  It is not expected to directly affect threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats.  The scale may trigger additional chemical treatment programs by the citrus and nursery industries and by residents who find infested plants unsightly.  It is not expected to significantly impact cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings.  Boxwood scale receives a Medium(2) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Pinnaspis buxi (Boxwood Scale):  High(13)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Pinnaspis buxi has never been found in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High(13)

Uncertainty:

Pinnaspis buxi is commonly intercepted.  It is likely that the scale has entered California many other times and escaped detection.  There have been no formal surveys for this scale in the state.  It is therefore possible that it could be present in some locations in California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Pinnaspis buxi is a polyphagous scale that may has never been found in the environment of California.  If it were to enter the state, it could be expected to have economic impacts in the nursery and citrus industries.  It may also have environmental impacts by triggering new chemical treatments.  An “A”-rating is justified.

References:

1Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy.  ScaleNet.

http://scalenet.info/catalogue/Pinnaspis%20buxi/

2SEL Catalog query results: http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/diaspidi/Pinnaspisbuxi.htm

3 USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD).  https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls 

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Mango Shield Scale | Milviscutulus mangiferae (Green)

5508173-soft-scale-milviscutulus-mangiferae-byAllesandraRung
California Pest Rating for
Milviscutulus mangiferae (Green): Mango Shield Scale
Hemiptera:  Coccidae
Pest Rating:  A
PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

Since 1991 Milviscutulus mangiferae has been regularly intercepted by CDFA’s border stations and dog teams.  This scale insect presently has a temporary rating of “Q”.  A pest rating proposal is needed to establish a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Milviscutulus mangiferae is a highly polyphagous scale insect that feeds on a wide variety of plants.  Known hosts include:  Anacardiaceae: Campnosperma brevipetiolata1, Gluta turtur1, mango (Mangifera indica1, Mangifera sp.1); Annonaceae: susung-kalabaw (Uvaria rufa1); Apocynaceae: Adenium sp.2, Alstonia spectabilis1, Alyxia sp.2, Plumeria sp.1, yellow oleander (Thevetia peruviana1); Araceae: elephant ear (Caladium sp.1), Colocasia sp.2, Diffenbachia sp.2, Epipremnum sp.1; Araliaceae: Meryta macrophylla1, Schefflera sp.1; Arecaceae: Chamaedorea sp.2, coconut (Cocos nucifera1), fruit salad plant (Monstera deliciosa1); Asparagaceae: ti (Cordyline terminalis1), Cordyline fruticosa1; Dracaena sp.2; Asteraceae: Wedelia biflora1; Bignoniaceae:  Spathodea sp.2; Bixaceae: achiote (Bixa orellana1); Boraginaceae: Cordia myxa1; Bromeliaceae: pineapple (Ananas sp.1); Caricaceae: papaya (Carica papaya1); Combretaceae: Terminalia complanata1, Terminalia brassii1,  tropical almond (Terminalia catappa1); Convolvulaceae: woodrose (Merremia sp.1); Elaeocarpaceae: Elaeocarpus sp.1; Euphorbiaceae: Breynia cernua1, croton (Codiaeum variegatum1); Pimelodendron amboinicum1; Fabaceae: Gliricidia sp.1; Flagellariaceae: Flagellaria sp.1; Gnetaceae: paddy oats (Gnetum gnemon1); Lauraceae: cinnamon (Cinnamomum sp.1); Chinese cinnamon (Cinnamomum cassia1), cinnamon (Cinnamomum zeylanica1), Laurus sp.2, Litsea zeylanica1, avocado (Persea americana1); Malpighiaceae: wild crapemyrtle (Malpighia glabra1); Malvaceae: Hibiscus sp.1; Meliaceae: Lansium sp.2; Moraceae: jackfruit (Artocarpus integrifolia1), Artocarpus sp.1, breadfruit (Artocarpus altilis1), jackfruit (Artocarpus heterophyllus1), Artocarpus integra1, Hauli tree (Ficus septica1), Ficus sp.1; Ficus gibbosa1, Ficus glandulifera1, Ficus theophrastoides1, dye fig (Ficus tinctoria1), lechechiva (Pseudolmedia havanensis1); Musaceae: banana (Musa sp.2); Myristicaceae: Gymnacranthera sp.1, nutmeg (Myristica moschata1); Myrtaceae: Callistemon sp.2, Decaspermum sp.1, lemon eucalyptus (Eucalyptus citriodora1), rainbow eucalyptus (Eucalyptus deglupta1), malay apple (Eugenia malaccensis1), clove (Eugenia caryophyllata1), rotra (Eugenia jambolona1), jambos (Eugenia jambos1), Eugenia parkeri1, Eugenia sp.1, rose apple (Eugenia aquea1), white stopper (Eugenia axillaris1), Jambosa sp.1, myrtle (Myrtus sp.2), common guava (Psidium guajava1), costa rican guava (Psidium friedrichsthalianum1), rose myrtle (Rhodomyrtus tomentosa1); Oleaceae: Jasminum trifoliatum1; Opiliaceae: false olive (Champereia manillana1); Orchidaceae: alien orchid (Dendrobium spectabile1), vanilla (Vanilla sp.1); Phyllanthaceae: bishop wood (Bischofia javanica1); Pittosporaceae: Pittosporum sp.2; Primulaceae: Parathesis cubana1, Rapanea quianensis1; Rhizophoraceae: Gynotroches axilaris1, Rhizophora apiculata1, red mangrove (Rhizophora mucronata1); Rosaceae:  Rosa sp.2; Rubiaceae: Bouvardia sp.2, Gardenia florida1, jungle geranium (Ixora coccinea1), noni (Morinda citrifolia1), Platanocephalus chinensis1, Platanocephalus morindaefolius1, Psychotria elyptica1, Psychotria rubra1, Timonius sp.1; Rutaceae: lemon (Citrus limon1), orange (Citrus sinensis1); Sapindaceae: ackee (Blighia sapida1), Dimocarpus sp.2, Guioa sp.1; Sapotaceae: Palaquium formosanum1, Pometia pinnata1; Solanaceae: Cuban raintree (Brunfelsia nitida1); Strelitziaceae: Strelitzia sp.1; Verbenaceae: Vitex pubescens1; Zingiberaceae: ginger (Zingiber sp.).  Milviscutulus mangiferae may spread long distances on infested plants and plant material from this extensive host list.

Worldwide Distribution: Milviscutulus mangiferae is widespread in the Australasian, Afrotropical, Oriental, and Neotropical regions1.  It has also been found in Israel1, Japan1, and Hawaii1.  In North America the scale has been found in Mexico, Florida, and Texas1.

Official Control:  Milviscutulus mangiferae is considered a quarantine pest by Japan and the Republic of Korea3.

California Distribution:  Milviscutulus mangiferae has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions:  Milviscutulus mangiferae has been regularly intercepted by CDFA since 1991, most commonly on shipments of mango (Mangifera indica) and ti leaves (Cordyline terminalis) from Florida and Hawaii.  The scale insect was found on Schefflera sp. plants at a nursery in Oxnard (Ventura County) in 2003 (PDR 1266877).  It was found on mango and cherimoya plants at a nursery in Bonita (San Diego County) in October 2013 (PDRs 370P06143908, 370P06143909, 370P06144251, 370P06144252, 370P06144253) and again May 2014 (PDRs 370P06228020, 370P06228022).

The risk Milviscutulus mangiferae (mango shield scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: The distribution of Milviscutulus mangiferae is primarily tropical. However, it is found in at least one nation with a Mediterranean climate similar to that of California (Israel1).  Host plants are commonly grown in the warmer parts of California and the scale insect is likely to establish in these areas.  Milviscutulus mangiferae receives a Medium(2) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California.  Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Milviscutulus mangiferae feeds on a wide variety of plants in at least 44 plant families.  It receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Milviscutulus mangiferae has a high reproductive rate and three generations per year1.  Scales may be moved long distances in commerce of infested plants or plant parts and may be dispersed locally by wind or by hitchhiking on clothing, animals, or equipment.  Milviscutulus mangiferae receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Milviscutulus mangiferae can damage fruit by contaminating it with honeydew, leading to the growth of sooty mold4.  Heavy infestations may reduce plant vigor and leaf size, causing yellowing of leaves, leaf drop, and dieback4.  This damage could reduce fruit yields.  The presence of this scale may increase production costs in orchards and nurseries as some growers are likely to treat.  The scale insect also has the potential to disrupt markets by disfiguring citrus and avocado fruit as well as nursery stock.  Milviscutulus mangiferae receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Milviscutulus mangiferae is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes.  It may feed on the endangered small-leave rose (Rosa minutifolia).  The scale is not expected to disrupt critical habitats.  It may trigger additional private treatment programs by fruit production and nursery industries and by residents who find infested plants unsightly.  Milviscutulus mangiferae feeds on a wide variety of plants that are grown as ornamentals and, in the absence of its natural enemies, may have a significant impact on them.  The scale receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Milviscutulus mangiferae (mango shield scale):  High(14)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Milviscutulus mangiferae has never been detected in the environment of California and receives a Not established(0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score:  High(14)

Uncertainty:

It is possible that this insect will be managed by existing management practices in fruit production and nursery industries.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Milviscutulus mangiferae has not been found in the environment of California.  Its entry into the environment of the state may have significant economic and environmental impacts.  An “A” rating is justified.

References:

1Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy.  ScaleNet.

http://scalenet.info/catalogue/Milviscutulus%20mangiferae/

2SEL Catalog.

http://idtools.org/id/scales/factsheet.php?name=6894

3USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD).  https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

4Grimshaw, Judy F. and John F. Donaldson.  2007.  New records of mango shield scale Milviscutulus mangiferae (Green) (Hemiptera: Coccidae) and Brevennia rehi (Lindinger) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) in north Queensland.  Australian Journal of Entomology 46: 96-98.  http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/fiji/pdf/grimshaw-donaldson2007.pdf

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Pest Rating:  A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Lesser Snow Scale | Pinnaspis strachani (Cooley)

Lesser Snow Scale
California Pest Rating for
Pinnaspis strachani (Cooley): Lesser Snow Scale
Hemiptera: Diaspididae
Pest Rating:  A
PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

Pinnaspis strachani is frequently intercepted by CDFA.  A pest rating proposal is required to support the permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Pinnaspis strachani is a highly polyphagous armored scale insect that feeds on a wide variety of plants.  Known hosts include:  Acanthaceae: Justicia sp.1, Thunbergia grandiflora1; Amaryllidaceae: Agave fourcroytes1, Crinum sp.1, Crinum asiaticum1, Eucharis sp.1, Polianthes tuberosa1; Anacardiaceae: Anacardium occidentale1, Mangifera sp.1, Mangifera odorata1, Mangifera indica1; Annonaceae: Annona muricata1, Annona squamosa1, Annona sp.1, Annona reticulata1, Cananga odorata1, Polyalthia longifolia1, Uvaria sp.1; Apocynaceae: Calotropis procera1, Nerium sp.1, Pachypodium sp.1, Parsonsia sp.1, Plumeria sp.1, Plumeria alba1, Plumeria rubra1, Plumeria tuberculata1, Vallesia glabra1; Araceae: Colocasia esculenta1, Rhaphidophora sp.1; Araliaceae: Arailia sp.1, Schefflera sp.1, Arecaceae: Acanthophoenix sp.1, Attalea gomphocarpa1, Chamaerops , Chrysalidocarpus sp.1, Cocos nucifera1, Cocos sp.1, Elaeis guineensis1, Heterospathe sp.1, Howea sp.1, Kentia sp.1, Latania sp.1, Licuala sp.1, Livistona sp.1, Phoenix dactylifera1, Rhapis sp.1, Roystonea regia1, Sabal sp.1, Thrinax sp.1, Trachycarpus sp.1, Veitchia joannis1, Verschaffeltia1; Asparagaceae: Agave sisalana1, Agave americana1, Cordyline sp.1, Dracaena sp.1, Furcraea gigantea1, Liriope sp.1, Yucca sp.1; Asteraceae: Chrysanthemum indicum1, Fitchia sp.1, Psiadia sp.1, Scalesia incisa1, Scalesia affinis1; Boraginaceae: Coldenia fusca1, Cordia lutea1, Cordia alba1, Cordia macrostachya1, Heliotropium arborescens1, Messerschmidia argentea1, Tournefortia sp.1, Tournefortia argentea1; Brassicaceae: Thelypodium sp.1, Bromeliaceae: Ananas comosus1, Bromelia sp.1; Cannaceae: Canna indica1; Combretaceae: Conocarpus erecta1, Terminalia sp.1, Terminalia catappa1, Terminalia calamansanay1, Terminalia complanata1; Convolvulaceae: Ipomoea batatas1, Ipomoea grandiflora1; Crassulaceae: Bryophyllum pinnata1; Cucurbitaceae: Benincasa cerifera1, Cucurbita sp.1, Cucurbita maxima1, Cucurbita pepo1, Sechium sp.1, Sechium edulis1, Trichosanthes sp.1; Cycadaceae: Cycas sp.1, Cycas revoluta1, Dioon edule1, Zamia sp.1; Dioscoreaceae: Dioscorea alata1, Dioscorea bulbifera1, Dioscorea sp.1, Ebenaceae: Diospyros chloroxylon1, Diospyros kaki1; Elaeocarpaceae: Muntingia calabura1; Euphorbiaceae: Acalypha wilkesiana1, Aleurites moluccana1, Chamaesyce amplexicaulis1, Croton lucidus1, Croton sp.1, Euphorbiaceae heterophylla1, Euphorbiaceae sp.1, Euphorbiaceae nivulia1, Euphorbiaceae pulcherrima1, Excoecaria agallocha1, Hevea brasiliensis1, Hippomane mancinella1, Jatropha curcas1, Manihot sp.1, Manihot esculenta1, Pedilanthus sp.1, Ricinus communis1; Fabaceae: Acacia melanoxylon1, Albizia stipulata1, Albizia sp.1, Bahuinia variegata1, Bauhinia sp.1, Bauhinia pauletia1, Bauhinia purpurea1, Bauhinia sp.1, Caesalpinia sp.1, Caesalpinia pulcherrima1, Caesalpinia crista1, Cajanus indicus1, Cajanus sp.1, Cajanus cajan1, Canavalia microcarpa1, Cassia alata1, Cassia tora1, Cassia occidentalis1, Crotalaria usaramoensis1, Crotalaria hirsuta1, Crotalaria sp.1, Delonix regia1, Desmodium lasiocarpum1, Enterolobium cyclocarpum1, Erythrina subumbrans1, Erythrina sp.1, Erythrina poeppigiana1, Erythrina lithosperma1, Erythrina indica1, Erythrina glauca1, Galactia striata1, Inocarpus fagiferus1, Intsia bijuga1, Lablab purpureus1, Leucaena leucocephala1, Lonchocarpus pentaphyllus1, Macroptilium lathyroides1, Mimosa pigra1, Mimosa pudica1, Phaseolus vulgaris1, Pithecolobium saman1, Prosopis sp.1, Pueraria thunbergiana1, Samanea saman1, Sophora tomentosa1, Wistaria sp.1; Geraniaceae: Geranium sp.1, Pelargonium radula1, Pelargonium zonale1; Gesneriaceae: Saintpaulia sp.1; Heliconiaceae: Heliconia sp.1; Hernandiaceae: Hernandia ovigera1, Hernandia peltata1; Lamiaceae: Ocimum gratissimum1; Lauraceae: Cassytha filiformis1, Cinnamomum camphora1, Persea americana1; Lecythidaceae: Barringtonia sp.1, Barringtonia asiatica1, Barringtonia thurstonii1, Barringtonia butonica1; Liliaceae: Aloe sp.1, Asparagus officinalis1, Asparagus sprengeri1, Asparagus plumosus1, Cordyline terminalis1, Ophiopogon japonicus1, Ophiopogon intermedius1, Rhipogonum scandens1, Sansevieria metallica1, Sansevieria sp.1, Yucca gloriosa1; Lythraceae: Lagerstroemia indica1, Punica granatum1; Magnoliaceae: Magnolia grandiflora1; Malvaceae: Abutilon hybridum1, Abutilon sp.1, Althaea officinalis1, Bastardia vicosa1, Ceiba sp.1, Ceiba pentrandra1, Dombeya sp.1, Gossypium sp.1, Gossypium hirsutum1, Gossypium barbadense1, Gossypium arboreum1, Guazuma ulmifolia1, Hibiscus sp.1, Hibiscus syriacus1, Hibiscus tiliaceus1, Hibiscus sabdariffa1, Hibiscus rosa-sinensis1, Hibiscus mutabilis1, Hibiscus manihot1, Hibiscus esculentus1, Malvastrum americanum1, Malvaviscus arboreus1, Ochroma sp.1, Pachira insignis1, Sida sp.1, Sida acuta1, Sterculia sp.1, Thespesia sp.1, Thespesia propulnea1, Triumfetta semitriloba1, Urena lobata1, Vitis vinifera1, Waltheria ovata1; Marantaceae: Calathea zebrina1, Maranta sp.1; Meliaceae: Cedrela salvadorensis1, Melia azedarach1; Menispermaceae: Cissampelos pareira1; Moraceae: Artocarpus heterophyllus1, Artocarpus altilis1, Ficus carica1, Ficus palmata1, Morus nigra1; Moringaceae: Moringa oleifera1; Musaceae: Musa sp.1, Musa sapientum1; Myrtaceae: Eucalyptus grandis1; Nyctaginaceae: Bougainvillea sp.1, Cryptocarpus pyriformis1; Ochnaceae: Lophira alata1; Olacaceae: Schoepfia sp.1, Oleaceae: Jasminum grandifolium1, Jasminum sambac1; Orchidaceae: Aerides1, Cymbidium sp.1, Cypripedium sp.1, Dendrobium sp.1, Odontoglossum sp.1, Orchis sp.1, Paphiopedilum insigne1, Phalaenopsis sp.1, Renanthera sp.1, Rhynchostylis sp.1, Trichoglottis sp.1; Pandanaceae: Pandanus sp.1, Pandanus odoratissimus1; Passifloraceae: Passiflora edulis1; Piperaceae: Piper nigrum1; Poaceae: Cenchrus ciliaris1, Cenchrus glauca1, Cymbopogon sp.1, Cynodon dactylon1, Panicum sp.1; Polygonaceae: Antigonon sp.1, Antigonon leptopus1, Coccoloba sp.1, Polygala sancti-georgii1, Polygala galapageia1, Polygala andersonnii1, Polygonum glabrum1; Polypodiaceae: Niphobolus fissus1; Portulacaceae: Portulaca sp.1, Proteaceae: Grevillea heliosperma1, Grevillea robusta1, Persoonia sp.1; Pteridaceae: Asplenium nidus1; Pteridophyta: Neottopteris rigida1, Nephrolepis davalliodes1, Platycerium grande1; Rhamnaceae: Colubrina arborences1, Scutia pauciflora1, Ziziphus sp.1, Ziziphus jujuba1; Rhizophoraceae: Bruguiera gymnorhiza1, Rhizophora mangle1; Rosaceae: Prunus sp.1, Prunus persica1, Pyrus sp.1; Rubiaceae: Genipa sp.1, Morinda royoc1, Morinda citrifolia1, Randia sp.1; Rutaceae: Aegle marmelos1, Atlantia citrioides1, Balsamocitrus paniculata1, Balsamocitrus chevaliere1, Balsamocitrus dawei1, Casimiroa sp.1, Citrus aurantifolia1, Citrus unshiu1, Citrus sp.1, Citrus sinensis1, Citrus paradisi1, Citrus maxima1, Citrus macrophylla1, Citrus limon1, Citrus grandis1, Citrus aurantium1, Feronia limonia1, Feroniella pentaphylla1, Limonia glutinosa1, Limonia acidissima1, Micromelum minutum1, Murraya exotica1, Murraya paniculata1, Murraya koenigii1, Zanthoxylum sp.1, Zanthoxylum martinicense1; Salicaceae: Salix chilensis1, Salix sp.1, Salix babylonica1; Santalaceae: Viscum sp.1; Sapindaceae: Dodonaea viscosa1, Litchi chinensis1, Melicoccus sp.1, Melicoccus bijugatus1, Sapindus sp.1; Sapotaceae: Pouteria obavata1; Solanaceae: Capsicum annuum1, Capsicum sp.1, Capsicum frutescens1, Cestrum diurnum1, Datura metel1, Lycopersicon esculentum1, Solanum seaforthianum1, Solanum wendlandii1, Solanum torvum1, Solanum sp.1, Solanum erianthum1, Solanum melongena1; Strelitziaceae: Ravenala madagascariensis1, Strelitzia sp.1; Symplocaceae: Symplocos sp.1; Ulmaceae: Trema guineensis1, Trema micranthum1; Urticaceae: Laportea sp.1, Soleirolia sp.1; Verbenaceae: Clerodendron thomsonae1, Gmelina arborea1, Lantana involucrata1, Stachytarpheta sp.1; Vitaceae: Cissus sp.1, Vitis sp.1; Zingiberaceae: Alpinia purpurata1, Zingiber officinale1; and Manoranjitham sp.1.  Pinnaspis strachani may be spread long distances in the commerce of infested plants or plant parts.

Worldwide Distribution: Pinnaspis strachani is widespread in Australasian, Oceanic, Afrotropical, Oriental, and Neotropical regions1.  In North America it has been reported in Mexico, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas1.  It is also present in Hawaii.

Official Control: Pinnaspis strachani is listed as a quarantine pest by Honduras, Japan, New Zealand, and Taiwan3.

California Distribution:  Pinnaspis strachani has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions:  Pinnaspis strachani was intercepted 1,401 times by California between January 1, 2000 and December 12, 2014.  Interceptions are most common on plants and fruit from Hawaii, Florida, and Costa Rica.

The risk Pinnaspis strachani (lesser snow scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Host plants are commonly grown as crops and ornamentals in California and Pinnaspis strachani is likely to establish wherever they grow. The scale receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California.  Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California, or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Pinnaspis strachani is highly polyphagous.  It is known to feed on hundreds of species of plants in at least 74 families.  It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Scale insects have high reproductive rates and may disperse long distances when infested plants or plant parts are moved.  They may also be spread by wind or by hitchhiking on plants, animals, or equipment.  Pinnaspis strachani receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Pinnaspis strachani is documented as a pest of many crops including citrus, olives, and cotton1.  Known hosts also include grapes, Prunus and avocado.  The scale may lower yields in these crops and increase production costs by triggering new management programs.  Pinnaspis strachani is also listed as a quarantine pest by several of California’s trading partners and therefore has the potential to trigger a loss of markets.  It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Pinnaspis strachani is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes.  The scale may directly affect threatened or endangered species including Thelypodium stenopetalum (slender-petaled thelypodium), Chamaesyce hooveri (Hoover’s spurge), Croton wigginsii (Wiggins’ croton), and Polygonum hickmanii (Scott’s valley polygonum).  The scale is not expected to disrupt critical habitats.  Pinnaspis strachani may trigger new chemical treatments in agriculture and by residents who find infested plants unsightly.  The scale may also significantly impact a wide variety of ornamental plantings and home/urban gardens.  Lesser snow scale receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Pinnaspis strachani (lesser snow scale):  High (15)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Pinnaspis strachani has never been detected in the environment of California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High(15)

Uncertainty:

Pinnaspis strachani is commonly intercepted and presumably has remained undetected on other consignments.  It may already be present in some localities in California or may have failed to establish.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Pinnaspis strachani (lesser snow scale) has never been found in the environment of California and can be expected to have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to establish here.  An “A”-rating is justified.

References:

1Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy.  ScaleNet.

http://scalenet.info/catalogue/Pinnaspis%20strachani/

2SEL Catalog query results: http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/diaspidi/Pinnaspisstrachani.htm

3 USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD).  https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls 

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

White Peach Scale | Pseudaulacaspis pentagona (Targioni)

White Peach Scale | Psuedaulacaspis pentagona
California Pest Rating for
Pseudaulacaspis pentagona (Targioni): White Peach Scale
Hemiptera: Diaspididae
Pest Rating: A
PEST RATING PROFILE
Initiating Event:

Pseudaulacaspis pentagona is frequently intercepted by CDFA.  A pest rating proposal is required to justify its pest rating.

History & Status:

Background:  Pseudaulacaspis pentagona is a highly polyphagous armored scale insect.  It is considered an important economic pest of peach trees and woody ornamentals and has destroyed many peach orchards in the southeast USA1.  Known hosts include: Acanthaceae: Acanthus sp.2, Asystasia2, Crossandra sp. 2; Actinidiaceae: Actinidia arguta2, Actinidia polygama2, Actinidia sp. 2; Amaranthaceae: Gomphrena sp. 2, Salicornia fruticosa2; Anacardiaceae: Mangifera sp. 2, Mangifera indica2, Rhus sp. 2, Schinus sp. 2, Spondias sp. 2; Apocynaceae: Allamanda cathartica2, Allamanda grandiflora2, Allamanda sp. 2, Asclepius sp. 2, Calotropis procera2, Calotropis2, Catharanthus roseus2, Cynanchym perrieri2, Ervatamia orientalis2, Marsdenia clausa2, Nerium oleander2, Nerium sp. 2, Plumeria alba2, Plumeria rubra2, Plumeria sp. 2, Plumeria acutifolia2, Rhynchospermum verticulatum2, Rhynchospermum sp. 2, Tylophora asthmatica2, Vinca rosea2; Aquifoliaceae: Ilex sp. 2, Ilex opaca2; Araceae: Philodendron sp. 2, Symplocarpus2; Araliaceae: Arailia sp. 2, Aralia spinosa2, Aralia elata2, Hedera sp. 2, Kalopanax septemlobus2; Arecaceae: Chrysalidocarpus lutescens2, Cocos nucifera2, Phoenix2; Asteraceae: Arctium sp. 2, Bahia fastigata2, Helianthus sp. 2, Helianthus annuus2, Mikania2; Berberidaceae: Berberis2, Mahonia sp. 2, Betulaceae: Osmanthus ilicifolius2, Osmanthus asiaticus2, Ostrya2; Bignoniaceae: Bignonia2, Catalpa ovata2, Catalpa syringifolia2, Catalpa vulgaris2, Catalpa yunnanensis2, Catalpa sp. 2, Catalpa bignonioides2, Catalpa bungei2, Tecoma sp. 2, Boraginaceae: Ehretia ovalifolia2, Ehretia acuminata2, Heliotropium peruvianum2, Messersmidia argentea2, Tournefortia argentea2, Brassicaceae: Brassica willdenovii2, Brassica rapa2, Iberis sp. 2; Cannabaceae: Trema sp. 2; Capparaceae: Cleome spinosa2; Caricaceae: Carica papaya2, Carica sp. 2; Caryophyllaceae: Dianthus sp. 2; Casuarinaceae: Casuarina2; Celastraceae: Euonymus alata2, Euonymus sp. 2, Euonymus europaea2, Orixa japonica2; Clusiaceae: Calophyllum sp. 2, Hypericum sp. 2, Mammea americana2; Convolvulaceae: Argyreia speciosa2, Argyreia nervosa2, Ipomea batatas2, Ipomea purpurea2, Ipomea sp. 2, Ipomoea tiliacea2, Cornaceae: Cornus sp. 2; Crassulaceae: Bryophyllum calycinum2, Bryophyllum pinnatum2, Kalanchoe nadijae2, Kalanchoe orgyalis2, Kalanchoe pinnatum2, Kalanchoe sp. 2, Sedum sp. 2; Cucurbitaceae: Citrullus vulgaris2, Cucurbita sp. 2; Cycadaceae: Cycas revoluta2, Cycas media2, Cycas sp. 2, Zamia2; Ebenaceae: Diospyros sp. 2, Diospyros kaki2, Diospyros virginiana2; Elaeagnaceae: Elaeagnus2; Euphorbiaceae: Aleurites2, Codiaeum sp. 2, Croton sp. 2, Euphorbiaceae sp. 2, Hevea2, Jatropha gossypifolia2, Jatropha curcas2, Jatropha integerrima2, Jatropha sp. 2, Macaranga sp. 2, Mallotus japonicus2, Manihot sp. 2, Manihot esculenta2, Pedilanthus tithymaloides2, Poinsettia2, Ricinus communis2, Ricinus sp. 2, Sapium sebiferum2, Sebastiana ligustrina2; Fabaceae: Acacia sp. 2, Acacia arabica2, Albizia stipulata2, Bauhinia sp. 2, Cajanus cajan2, Cassia alata2, Cercis sp. 2, Cercis canadensis2, Crotaleria juncea2, Crotolaria sp. 2, Cytisus scoparius2, Cytisus nigricans2, Erythrina poeppigiana2, Erythrina indica2, Erythrina glauca2, Erythrina sp. 2, Genista sp. 2, Gleditschia triacanthos2, Gleditschia sp. 2, Gleditschia ferox2, Glycine max2, Kennedya2, Lespedeza sp. 2, Ononis sp. 2, Phaseolus vulgaris2, Pueraria sp. 2, Robinia pseudoacacia2, Sarothamnus2, Sophora japonica2, Vigna sp. 2; Fagaceae: Castanea sp. 2, Castanea crenata2, Quercus acutissima2; Geraniaceae: Geranium sp. 2, Pelargonium zonale2, Pelargonium inquinans2, Pelargonium sp. 2; Ginkgoaceae: Ginkgo2; Grossulariaceae: Ribes sp. 2; Hydrangeaceae: Hydrangea sp. 2; Juglandaceae: Juglans regia2, Juglans mandshurica2, Juglans sp. 2, Juglans nigra2, Pterocarya stenoptera2; Lamiaceae: Callicarpa sp. 2, Nepeta sp. 2; Lauraceae: Cinnamomum2, Sassafras sp. 2; Liliaceae: Draceana sp. 2; Loganiaceae: Buddleia davidii2, Gelsemium sp. 2; Loranthaceae: Loranthus sp. 2; Lythraceae: Lagerstroemia flos-reginae2; Magnoliaceae: Magnolia sp. 2; Malvaceae: Althaea rosea2, Althaea sp. 2, Dombeya sp. 2, Firmiana simplex2, Firmiana plantanifolia2, Gossypium sp. 2, Gossypium brasiliense2, Guazuma ulmifolia2, Hibiscus sp. 2, Hibiscus diversifolius2, Hibiscus esculentum2, Hibiscus manihot2, Hibiscus mutabilis2, Hibiscus rosa-sinensis2, Hibiscus tiliaceus2, Malachra sp. 2, Malvastrum tricuspidatum2, Montezuma speciosissima2, Sida2, Sterculia plantifolia2, Sterculia sp. 2, Theobroma sp. 2, Tilia miqueliana2, Triumfetta bartramia2, Urena sinuata2, Urena lobata2; Meliaceae: Cedrela sp. 2, Cedrela toona2, Melia sp. 2, Melia azedarach2; Moraceae: Broussonetia sp. 2, Broussonetia kazinoki2, Broussonetia papyrifera2, Castilla sp. 2, Ficus sp. 2, Morus nigra2, Morus rubra2, Morus sp. 2, Morus alba2, Morus indica2, Morus bombycis2; Musaceae: Strelitzia2; Myrtaceae: Eugenia sp. 2, Psidium2; Oleaceae: Chionanthus virginicus2, Fraxinus chinensis2, Fraxinus excelsior2, Fraxinus sp. 2, Jasminum sp. 2, Jasminum sp. 2, Ligustrum obtusifolium2, Ligustrum japonicum2, Ligustrum ibota2, Ligustrum sp. 2, Osmanthus sp. 2, Syringa vulgaris2, Syringa sp. 2; Onagraceae: Fuchsia sp. 2; Orchidaceae:, Ellaeanthus sp. 2, Stanhopea sp. 2; Pandanaceae: Pandanus sp. 2; Passifloraceae: Passiflora sp. 2, Passiflora edulis2, Passiflora quadrangularis2; Piperaceae: Piper sp. 2, Piper umbellatum2, Potomorphe umbellata2; Pittosporaceae: Pittosporum sp. 2; Platanaceae: Phytolacca rivinoides2, Platanocephalus indicus2, Platanus2; Polygalaceae: Polygala2; Ranunculaceae: Clematis sp. 2, Delphinium sp. 2, Paeonia2; Rhamnaceae: Hovenia dulcis2, Rhamnus alaternus2, Rhamnus sp. 2, Rhamnus elaternum2, Ziziphus sp. 2; Rosaceae: Amygdalus communis2, Amygdalus sp. 2, Amygdalus armeniaca2, Amygdalus persica2, Armeniaca2, Cerasus2, Cliffortia polygonifolia2, Cotoneaster sp. 2, Cydonia sp. 2, Cydonia oblonga2, Cydonia vulgaris2, Kerria japonica2, Malus pumila2, Malus formosana2, Malus sylvestris2, Persica vulgaris2, Photinia serrulata2, Prunus sp. 2, Prunus mume2, Prunus communis2, Prunus domestica2, Prunus laurocerasus2, Prunus persica2, Prunus yedoensis2, Prunus subhirtella2, Prunus sargentii2, Prunus salicina2, Prunus pseudocerasus2, Prunus amygdaloides2, Prunus armeniaca2, Prunus avium2, Prunus pognostyla2, Prunus cerasus2, Pyrus serotina2, Rosa2, Rubus2, Sorbus commixta2, Spiroea japonica2, Stranvaesia niitakayamensis2; Rubiaceae: Bouvardia2, Cinchona sp. 2, Galium sp. 2, Morinda citrifolia2, Palicourea sp. 2; Rutaceae: Citrus maxima2, Citrus reticulata2, Citrus sp. 2, Citrus aurantium2, Evodia rutaecarpa2, Zanthoxylum2, Zanthoxylum piperitum2; Salicaceae: Flacourtia2, Populus sp. 2, Populus sieboldi2, Populus alba2, Salix warburgii2, Salix nigra2, Salix kinuyanagi2, Salix glandulosa2, Salix chaenomeloides2, Salix babylonica2, Salix sp. 2; Santalaceae: Phoradendron flavescens2; Sapindaceae: Acer2, Aesculus pavia2, Aesculus hippocastanum2, Koelreuteria paniculata2, Nephelium2; Sapotaceae: Sideroxilon marmulano2; Saxifragaceae: Deutzia scabra2, Ribes rubrum2, Ribes grossularia2, Ribes sinanense2; Scrophulariaceae: Angelonia salicariaefolia2, Buddleja sp. 2, Myoporum pictum2, Paulownia tomentosa2, Paulownia sp. 2, Scrophularia2, Veronica2; Simaroubaceae: Ailanthus glandulosa2, Picrasma quassioides2; Solanaceae: Capsicum grossum2, Capsicum annum2, Capsicum sp. 2, Datura suaveolens2, Lycopersicon esculentum2, Nicotiana tabacum2, Solanum verbascifolium2, Solanum rugosum2, Solanum uporo2, Solanum auriculatum2, Solanum sp. 2; Theaceae: Camellia sp. 2, Thea sinensis2; Ulmaceae: Aphananthe aspera2, Celtis australis2, Celtis sinensis2, Trema lamarckiana2, Trema micrantha2, Ulmus campestris2, Ulmus sp. 2, Zelkova serrata2; Urticaceae: Boehmeria sp. 2, Urtica dioica2; Verbenaceae: Callicaria superba2, Callicarpa americana2, Callicarpa lanata2, Lantana sp. 2, Stachytarpheta indica2, Stachytarpheta jamaicensis2, Stachytarpheta dichotoma2, Stachytarpheta mutabilis2, Stachytarpheta sp. 2, Stachytarpheta urticifolia2, Stachytarpheta urticaefolia2, Verbena sp. 2, Verbena bonariensis2; Vitaceae: Quinaria2, Vitis vinifera2, Vitis sp. 2.  White peach scale may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Pseudaulacaspis pentagona is believed to be native to Japan or China but has spread throughout much of the world1.  It is established in the east from Texas to Florida and as far north as Maine1.  It was first found in Hawaii in 19971.

Official Control: Pseudaulacaspis pentagona is listed as a harmful organism by Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bolivia, Chile, French Polynesia, Georgia, Honduras, Japan, Kazakhstan, Mexico, the Republic of Moldova, the Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam3.

California Distribution:  Pseudaulacaspis pentagona has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions:  Pseudaulacaspis pentagona has been intercepted by CDFA’s high risk programs, dog teams, and border stations 408 times.  Many of these interceptions have been on papaya and kiwi fruits from Hawaii and kiwi fruits from Italy.

The risk Pseudaulacaspis pentagona (white peach scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction: 

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Due to its highly polyphagous nature and current establishment in a range of climates from Hawaii to Canada white peach scale can be expected to establish a widespread distribution in California. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California.  Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Pseudaulacaspis pentagona is known to feed on hundreds of species of plants belonging to at least 76 families.  Known hosts include many economically important crops.  White peach scale receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Female Pseudaulacaspis pentagona lay an average of 80-100 eggs and have 2-4 generations per year1.  Scale insects can be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.  They may also disperse locally by crawling, wind, or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or animals.  White peach scale receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: If Pseudaulacaspis pentagona were to enter California it would be expected to lower the yields of many crops, especially stone fruit.  It is likely to increase crop production costs.  Many of California’s trading partners list white peach scale as a harmful organism, indicating that trade disruptions would be likely.  White peach scale receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Pseudaulacaspis pentagona is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes.  It is likely to feed on multiple threatened or endangered plant species including Nevin’s barberry (Berberis nevinii), island barberry (Berberis pinnata insularis), and small-leaved rose (Rosa minutifolia).  It is not expected to disrupt critical habitats.  White peach scale would likely trigger additional official or private treatment programs in orchards, the nursery industry, and by residents who find infested plants unacceptable.  It is also likely to significantly impact cultural practices, home/urban gardening, and a wide range of ornamental plantings.  Pseudaulacaspis pentagona receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Pseudaulacaspis pentagona (White Peach Scale):  High (15)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Pseudaulacaspis pentagona has never been found in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (15)

Uncertainty:

There have not been any recent surveys of California for white peach scale.  It is possible it could be present at some localities.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Pseudaulacaspis pentagona has never been found in California and is likely to have major economic and environmental impacts if it were to enter the state.  An “A” rating is justified.

References:

1 Branscome, Deanna. 2012. Common name: white peach scale. University of Florida Featured Creatures.  http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/creatures/orn/scales/white_peach_scale.htm

2 Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy.  ScaleNet.

http://scalenet.info/catalogue/Pseudaulacaspis%20pentagona/

3 USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD).  https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Pest Rating:  A

Posted by ls