NAME OF THE ORGANISM: Paysandisia archon PAYSAR

GENERAL INFORMATION ON THE PEST

Name as submitted in the project specification (if different):

Pest category:

Insecta

1- Identity of the pest/Level of taxonomic listing:

Is the organism clearly a single taxonomic entity and can it be adequately distinguished from other entities of the same rank?

Yes

Is the pest defined at the species level or lower?:

Yes

Can listing of the pest at a taxonomic level higher than species be supported by scientific reasons or can species be identified within the taxonomic rank which are the (main) pests of concern?

Not relevant: Ornamental sector

If necessary, please list the species:

Is it justified that the pest is listed at a taxonomic rank below species level?

Not relevant

Conclusion:

Candidate: Ornamental sector

Justification (if necessary):

2 – Status in the EU:

Is this pest already a quarantine pest for the whole EU?

Presence in the EU:

Yes

List of countries (EPPO Global Database):

Belgium (2015); Cyprus (2009); France (2012); Greece (2010); Greece/Kriti (2010); Italy (2011); Italy/Sicilia (2004); Spain (2016); Spain/Islas Baleares (2009)

Conclusion:

candidate

Justification (if necessary):

Data of the presence of this pest on the EU territory are available in EPPO Global Database (https://gd.eppo.int/).

HOST PLANT N°1: Washingtonia (1WATG) for the Ornamental sector.

Origin of the listing:

IIA2AWG

Plants for planting:

Plants intended for planting, having a diameter of the stem at the base of over 5 cm

3 - Is the pest already listed in a PM4 standard on the concerned host plant?

Conclusion:

Evaluation continues

4 - Are the listed plants for planting the main* pathway for the "pest/host/intended use" combination? (*: significant compared to others):

Conclusion:

Not candidate

Justification:

The pest can be carried by palmae plants for planting. All the immature stages (eggs, larvae and pupae) can be carried in the plant material as they and their symptoms are usually invisible (EFSA-PLH, 2014). Plants for planting are not the main pathway in areas where the pest is present because of the natural dispersal capacity of the pest: The pest is a strong flier. "CIRAD (unpublished data) registered for females a daily flight distance of minimum 6 m, mean 310 m and maximum 3 km" (EFSA-PLH, 2014). Plants for planting are the main pathway for introduction into areas where the pest is not yet present (EFSA-PLH, 2014).

5 - Economic impact:

Are there documented reports of any economic impact on the host?

Justification:

What is the likely economic impact of the pest irrespective of its infestation source in the absence of phytosanitary measures? (= official measures)

Is the economic impact due to the presence of the pest on the named host plant for planting, acceptable to the propagation and end user sectors concerned?

Is there unacceptable economic impact caused to other hosts (or the same host with a different intended use) produced at the same place of production due to the transfer of the pest from the named host plant for planting?

Conclusion:

Not evaluated

Justification:

6 - Are there feasible and effective measures available to prevent the presence of the pest on the plants for planting at an incidence above a certain threshold (including zero) to avoid an unacceptable economic impact as regards the relevant host plants?

Conclusion:

not evaluated

Justification:

7- Is the quality of the data sufficient to recommend the pest to be listed as a RNQP?

Conclusion:

Not evaluated

Justification:

CONCLUSION ON THE STATUS:

Disqualified: Although the pest was considered as a candidate for the RNQP Status by the IIA2AWG, experts considered that plants for planting are not the main pathway in area where the pest is present. This pest is not recommended for a RNQP status. A protected zone status would be more adapted to protect area where the pest is not yet present (quarantine pest status).

8 - Tolerance level:

Is there a need to change the Tolerance level:

Yes

Proposed Tolerance levels:

Delisting.

9 - Risk management measures:

Is there a need to change the Risk management measure:

Yes

Proposed Risk management measure:

Delisting.

REFERENCES:

EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH) (2014) Scientific Opinion on the pest categorisation of Paysandisia archon (Burmeister). EFSA Journal 2014; 12(7): 3777;
EU COM (2014) Recommendation of the Working Group on the Annexes of the Council Directive 2000/29/EC – Section II – Listing of Harmful Organisms as regards the future listing of Paysandisia archon;