Regulated non-quarantine pest Project

An EU funded project for the benefit of the whole EPPO region

back...



NAME OF THE ORGANISM: Erwinia amylovora (ERWIAM)


GENERAL INFORMATION ON THE PEST

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

Pest category:
 
Bacteria


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: Fruits (including hops) sector
Is it justified that the pest is listed at a taxonomic rank below species level?
 
Not relevant

Conclusion:
 
  • Candidate: Fruits (including hops) sector
Justification (if necessary):
 
Fire blight has been described in nearly 200 plant species, mostly within the family Rosaceae, and within the subfamily Maloideae. The most frequent host genera are Chaenomeles, Cotoneaster, Crataegus, Cydonia, Eriobotrya, Malus, Mespilus, Pyrus, Photinia, Pyracantha, Sorbus and Stranvaesia (EFSA PLH, 2014). This is justified to continue the evaluation of E. amylovora on host plants listed at the genus level.

2 – Status in the EU:
 
Is this pest already a quarantine pest for the whole EU?
 
No

Presence in the EU:
 
Yes

List of countries (EPPO Global Database):
 
Austria (2014); Belgium (2015); Bulgaria (2012); Croatia (2007); Cyprus (1990); Czech Republic (2013); Denmark (1987); Estonia (2013); Finland (2014); France (2011); Germany (2013); Greece (2000); Greece/Kriti (1990); Hungary (2012); Ireland (2010); Italy (2013); Italy/Sicilia (1992); Latvia (2014); Lithuania (2010); Luxembourg (1984); Netherlands (2015); Poland (2001); Romania (2011); Slovakia (2005); Slovenia (2003); Spain (2016); Sweden (2008); United Kingdom (2014); United Kingdom/England (2014); United Kingdom/Northern Ireland (2014); United Kingdom/Scotland (2014)

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: Eriobotrya (1EIOG) for the Fruits (including hops) sector.


Origin of the listing:
 
IIA2AWG

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?
 
No
 
Conclusion:
 
Evaluation continues

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

 
Justification:
 
The main risk of introduction and spread of fire blight over medium and long distances is through plant material contaminated with E. amylovora, and mainly through plant nursery materials, because the pathogen can live as an epiphyte or an endophyte in buds and shoots. Once infections have taken place, rain and wind (especially thunderstorms) play an important role in the transport of inoculum over short distances and probably also over medium to long distances (aero currents). Insect pollinators are efficient carriers over short and medium distances. Workers in orchards can serve as an efficient system of disseminating E. amylovora, especially over short to medium distances, by means of hands, clothing, pruning and spraying tools (EFSA PLH, 2014). To conclude, if the pest is present on the plants for planting, it may be easily spread over the place of production and no curative measure will be available. Taking preventive measures into account (e.g. spraying of copper compounds), plants for planting are considered to be a significant pathway compared to others. It is justified to regulate this pathway.

5 - Economic impact:

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

Justification:
 
E. amylovora is an important pest of loquat (Eriobotrya japonica) in Mediterranean countries. The pest caused outbreaks in loquat orchards (in Spain: Lopez et.al, 2002 and 1999; Turkey: Tokgonul, 1994). A serious outbreak of E. amylovora on loquat was reported from Israel (Zilberstaine et al., 1996). All tested loquat cultivars in Turkey and Greece were found to be highly susceptible for leave infections (Aktepe et al., 2014; Tsiantos & Psallidas, 2004). Publications about trials to combat E. amylovora in loquat (Turkey: Bastas & Maden, 2007; Israel: Miriam et al, 1999) or about Streptomycin resistance (Israel: Manulis et al., 1999 and 1998) gives some indication about the importance of E. amylovora on this host. Some authors indicated that the damage to loquat (Eriobotrya) and apple is less severe than to quince and pear (Beniglio & Ozakman, 1999; Momol & Yegen, 1993). Whatever the direct economic impacts on this host, E. amylovora can have indirect unacceptable economic impacts on Malus and Pyrus plants for planting.

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

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?
 
No

Conclusion:
 
Candidate

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?
 
Yes
 
Conclusion:
 
candidate

Justification:
 
Although no curative measures are available (thermotherapy / chemical), current measures in Council Directive 2000/29 (removal of symptomatic plants) are appropriate (although they fail to address asymptomatic infections).

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

Justification:
 

CONCLUSION ON THE STATUS:
 
Recommended for listing as an RNQP - based on data and its indirect unacceptable economic impact on Malus, Pyrus and Cydonia plants for planting.


8 - Tolerance level:

Is there a need to change the Tolerance level:
 
No

Proposed Tolerance levels:
 
Zero tolerance based on visual examination.

9 - Risk management measures:

Is there a need to change the Risk management measure:
 
Yes

Proposed Risk management measure:
 
The proposed measures are without prejudice to additional measures needed to provide the appropriate level of assurance in relation to plants moving into the protected zone or other areas where Erwinia amylovora is recognised as a quarantine organism:
- Non-certified material (‘CAC’):
(a) Plants produced in areas known to be free from Erwinia amylovora;
or
(b) The production site has been inspected at an appropriate time during the last growing season and plants showing symptoms, and any surrounding host plants, have been immediately rogued out and destroyed.

- Pre-basic, Basic, Certified material: Additional measures could include
• Isolation from host plants of Erwinia amylovora, or
• [where this is legally enforceable] Inspection of host plants in the immediate vicinity and removal and destruction of any symptomatic plants.


REFERENCES:
  • Aktepe B P, Aysan Y & Tepe S (2014) Determination of fire blight susceptibility of loquat cultivars. Acta Horticulturae 1056, 231-233;
  • Bastas K K & Maden S (2007) Evaluation of host resistance inducers and conventional products for fire blight management in loquat and quince. Phytoprotection 88, 93-101;
  • EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH) (2014) Scientific Opinion on the pest categorisation of Erwinia amylovora (Burr.) Winsl. et al. EFSA Journal 2014;12(12):3922, 37 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3922 http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/3922.pdf;
  • EU COM (2016) 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 Erwinia amylovora (Burr.) Winsl. et al.;
  • Lopez M M, Gorris M T, Llop P, Cambra M, Rosello M, Berra D, Borruel M, Plaza B, Garcia P & Palomo J L (2001) Chronicle of a disease foretold (that advances slowly): the 2001 Spanish situation. Acta Horticulturae 590, 35-38;
  • Lopez M M, Llop P, Donat V, Penalver J, Rico A, Ortiz A, Murillo J, Llorente I, Badosa E & Montesinos E (1999) Fire blight in Spain: situation and monitoring. Acta Horticulturae 489, 187-191;
  • Manulis S, Zutra D, Kleitman F, Dror O, David I, Zilberstaine M & Shabi E (1998) Distribution of streptomycin-resistant strains of Erwinia amylovora in Israel and occurrence of blossom blight in the autumn. Phytoparasitica 26, 223-230;
  • Miriam Z, Shula M & Frieda K (1999) Etiology and control measures of fire blight in Loquat. Acta Horticulturae 489, 495-497;
  • Momol M T & Yegen O (1993) Fire blight in Turkey: 1985-1992. Acta Horticulturae 338, 37-39;
  • Tokgonul S (1994) Studies on fire blight (Erwinia amylovora) on apple, quince and loquat in the east Mediterranean region of Turkey. [Turkish] Bitki Koruma Bulteni 31, 31-38;
  • Tsiantos J & Psallidas P (2004) Fire blight resistance in various loquat, apple and pear cultivars and selections in Greece. Journal of Plant Pathology 86, 227-232;
  • Zilberstaine M, Herzog Z, Manulis S & Zutra D (1996) Outbreak of fire blight threatening the loquat industry in Israel. Acta Horticulturae 411, 177-178;