NAME OF THE ORGANISM: Pseudomonas 1PSDMG
GENERAL INFORMATION ON THE PEST
Name as submitted in the project specification (if different):
Pseudomonas ssp.
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?:
No
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: Vegetable propagating and planting material (other than seeds) 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: Vegetable propagating and planting material (other than seeds) sector
Justification (if necessary):
For the 'Vegetable propagating and planting material (other than seeds)' Sector, FR is the only EU Member State suggesting to list this entry at a higher level than the Species level. FR indicated that it would cover Pseudomonas cepacia and P. gladioli on Allium cepa and A. porrum.
Experts recommended to analyse individually these two species causing a potential poblem on this host (no other species appear to be of concern to this host). Therefore experts concluded that it would be unneccessary to include the whole genus.
Experts recommended to analyse individually these two species causing a potential poblem on this host (no other species appear to be of concern to this host). Therefore experts concluded that it would be unneccessary to include the whole genus.
2 – Status in the EU:
Is this pest already a quarantine pest for the whole EU?
No
Presence in the EU:
List of countries (EPPO Global Database):
Conclusion:
Justification (if necessary):
HOST PLANT N°1: Allium cepa (ALLCE) for the Vegetable propagating and planting material (other than seeds) sector.
Origin of the listing:
2 - Vegetable seedling sector: Commission Directive 93/61/EC
Plants for planting:
Plants intended for planting
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):
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: the listing of the pest at a higher level than species level is not justified.
8 - Tolerance level:
Is there a need to change the Tolerance level:
No
Proposed Tolerance levels:
Delisting.
9 - Risk management measures:
Is there a need to change the Risk management measure:
No
Proposed Risk management measure:
Delisting.
REFERENCES:
HOST PLANT N°2: Allium porrum (ALLPO) for the Vegetable propagating and planting material (other than seeds) sector.
Origin of the listing:
2 - Vegetable seedling sector: Commission Directive 93/61/EC
Plants for planting:
Plants intended for planting
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):
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: the listing of the pest at a higher level than species level is not justified.
8 - Tolerance level:
Is there a need to change the Tolerance level:
No
Proposed Tolerance levels:
Delisting.
9 - Risk management measures:
Is there a need to change the Risk management measure:
No
Proposed Risk management measure:
Delisting.
REFERENCES: