NAME OF THE ORGANISM: Arabis mosaic virus (ARMV00)
GENERAL INFORMATION ON THE PEST
Name as submitted in the project specification (if different to the preferred name):
Viruses and viroids
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?
Is the pest defined at the species level or lower?:
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
Is it justified that the pest is listed at a taxonomic rank below species level?
- Candidate: Ornamental sector
2 – Status in the EU:
Is this pest already a quarantine pest for the whole EU?
Presence in the EU:
List of countries (EPPO Global Database):
Austria (2014); Belgium (2007); Bulgaria (1995); Croatia (2012); Czech Republic (2007); Denmark (1993); Finland (2011); France (2000); Germany (2009); Hungary (2009); Ireland (1997); Italy (2007); Latvia (1990); Lithuania (2006); Luxembourg (1996); Netherlands (2015); Poland (2012); Romania (2011); Slovenia (1996); Spain (2011); Sweden (1993); United Kingdom (1996); United Kingdom/England (2002); United Kingdom/Northern Ireland (1984); United Kingdom/Scotland (1994)
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: Fragaria (1FRAG) for the Ornamental sector.
Origin of the listing:
Plants for planting:
Plants intended for planting, other than seeds
3 - Is the pest already listed in a PM4 standard on the concerned host plant?
Justification (if necessary):
Fragaria x ananassa is covered by EPPO PM 4/11 Standard. There are various varieties of ornamental strawberry grown, of different species such as F. chiloensis or F. vesca, with different flower colours or foliage. Fragaria chiloensis, F. vesca and F. x ananassa (cultivated strawberry) are all minor hosts according to the EPPO Global Database. Ornamental strawberry may be propagated vegetatively (e.g. cv. Lipstick) or by seed (alpine strawberry F. vesca).
4 - Are the listed plants for planting the main* pathway for the "pest/host/intended use" combination? (*: significant compared to others):
Some clones of Fragaria vesca (Alpine) showed chlorotic symptoms when infected with ArMV, but most are symptomless except for a loss of vigour. No immunity was detected amongst 13 species of Fragaria (F. chiloensis, F. corymbosa, F. cuneifolia, F. moschata, F. moupinensis, F, nilgerrensis F. nipponica, F. nubicola, F. orientalis, F. platypeltata, F. vesca, F. virginiana and F. viridis) (USDA, 1987). Compared to strawberry plants for fruit production symptoms seem to be less severe but this is based on limited information, so it is concluded they could react to the pest in a similar way. Therefore it is concluded plants for planting are a pathway, and can be considered a significant pathway compared to others.
5 - Economic impact:
Are there documented reports of any economic impact on the host?
No specific documented references could be found for impacts on ornamental strawberry, as distinct from F. x ananassa - cultivated strawberry.
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?
Specific evidence cannot be found of economic impact on ornamental strawberries. Impacts on strawberries for fruit production have been recorded. Experts concluded that ornamental strawberries should not be considered as a significant pathway to economic damage in fruit production (only one among many vegetatively propagated ornamental hosts).
CONCLUSION ON THE STATUS:
Disqualified: ornamentals are not a significant pathway to economic damage in fruit production (only one among many vegetatively propagated ornamental hosts).
8 - Tolerance level:
Is there a need to change the Tolerance level:
Proposed Tolerance levels:
9 - Risk management measures:
Is there a need to change the Risk management measure:
Proposed Risk management measure:
- EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH) (2013) Scientific opinion on the risk to plant health posed by Arabis mosaic virus, Raspberry ringspot virus, Strawberry latent ringspot virus and Tomato black ring virus to the EU territory with the identification and evaluation of risk reduction options. EFSA Journal 2013;11(10):3377, 83 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3377". http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/3377.pdf;
- EPPO (2008) Certification scheme for strawberry. Bulletin OEPP/EPPO Bulletin 38, 430–437;
- 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 Arabis mosaic virus, Raspberry ringspot virus, Strawberry latent ringspot virus and Tomato black ring virus;
- United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) (1987) Virus Diseases of Small Fruit. Ed. Converse, R.H., Agriculture Handbook, 631. Available at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1394&context=bioscifacpub;