NAME OF THE ORGANISM: Raspberry ringspot virus (RPRSV0)
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):
Bulgaria (2011); Czech Republic (2011); Finland (2011); France (2011); Germany (2015); Greece (1996); Ireland (1993); Italy (1993); Latvia (2011); Luxembourg (1992); Netherlands (2015); Portugal (2011); United Kingdom (2011); United Kingdom/England (1994); 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: Rubus (1RUBG) 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):
Rubus is covered by EPPO PM 4/10 Standard. There are at least 10 species of Rubus grown for ornamental purposes for different flower colours or foliage. However experts recommended analysing the economic impact for Rubus ornamentals. Evaluation continues on the economic impact only.
4 - Are the listed plants for planting the main* pathway for the "pest/host/intended use" combination? (*: significant compared to others):
Usually propagated vegetatively and no references could be found to the susceptibility or resistance of ornamental Rubus as compared to the variation in normal Rubus cultivars, so it is proposed to conclude they would react to the pest in a similar way.
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 Rubus species as distinct from fruiting species.
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?
There are no data available on the economic impact on ornamental rubus. Experts considered that ornamental Rubus is a very minor use. Therefore they concluded that the ‘substantially free from’ requirement is sufficient to prevent indirect unacceptable economic impacts.
CONCLUSION ON THE STATUS:
Disqualified: no data of economic impact on ornamentals. Experts considered that ornamental Rubus is a very minor use. Therefore they concluded that the ‘substantially free from’ requirement is sufficient to prevent indirect unacceptable economic impacts.
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 (2009) Certification scheme for Rubus. Bulletin OEPP/EPPO Bulletin 39, 271–277;
- 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;