NAME OF THE ORGANISM: Tospovirus 1TOSPG

GENERAL INFORMATION ON THE PEST

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

Pest category:

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?

Yes

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?

No: 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:

Not candidate: Ornamental sector

Justification (if necessary):

The genus Tospovirus takes its name from the Tomato spotted wilt virus, which was the first species to be described in 1915. The development of molecular genetic techniques has allowed the identification of several additional species (8 definite species and 15 not yet approved additional species). Currently 24 tospoviruses are considered by the Panel on Plant Health (EFSA, 2012). Only 3 out of the 24 (TSWV, INSV and IYSV) are already present in the EU territory. Both the host(s) and vector(s) of these viruses are present in a large part of the EU territory and they currently affect crops in several Member States. TSWV has the broadest range of host and insect vectors and is commonly found in the risk assessment area. Both INSV and IYSV are also present in the EU territory but are not under official control (Remark: because of the limited impact caused by IYSV, in 2009 the species was consequently removed from the EPPO lists).

When replying to the RNQP Questionnaire, for the 'Vegetable propagating and planting material (other than seeds)' Sector, FI is the only EU Member State suggesting to continue to list this entry at a higher level than the Species level, arguing that all symptomatic virus infections should be prohibited. However this would be covered by the 'Substantially free from' general requirement. GB considered this entry as important but did not support a listing at a higher level than the species level. Experts did not support listing at a higher level than the species level.

For the Ornamental Sector, the only two countries identifying this entry as important (HR, FI), agreed with restricting this entry to the Impatiens necrotic spot tospovirus and to the Tomato spotted wilt virus. Experts did not support listing at a higher level than the species level.

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):

Conclusion:

Justification (if necessary):

HOST PLANT N°1: Dianthus caryophyllus (DINCA) for the Ornamental sector.

Origin of the listing:

Commission Directive 93/49/EEC

Plants for planting:

Plants intended for planting

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:

Justification:

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:

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:

Justification:

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

Conclusion:

Justification:

CONCLUSION ON THE STATUS:

Disqualified: HR and FI are the only EU Member States which identified this entry as important. They proposed to restrict this entry to the Impatiens necrotic spot tospovirus and to the Tomato spotted wilt tospovirus. No EU Member State gave justification(s) for a listing at a higher level than the species level. Please refer to the summary sheet of these two pests for additional information. This entry will be covered by the 'Substantially free from' requirement that will remain in the Ornamental EU Marketing Directive.

8 - Tolerance level:

Is there a need to change the Tolerance level:

Proposed Tolerance levels:

Delisting.

9 - Risk management measures:

Is there a need to change the Risk management measure:

Proposed Risk management measure:

Delisting.

REFERENCES: