| Legend |
|---|
| Justification for qualification based on EPPO PM 4 Standards |
| Justification for disqualification |
| Additional or non-conclusive information |
| Standard text |
NAME OF THE ORGANISM: Neofabraea vagabunda {Neofabraea alba} (PEZIAL)
GENERAL INFORMATION ON THE PEST
Name as submitted in the project specification (if different):
Neofabraea alba (Pezicula alba)
Pest category:
Fungi
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
If necessary, please list the species:
-
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):
-
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):
-
Conclusion:
Candidate
Justification (if necessary):
Neofabraea vagabunda had been reported amongst others in: France (Giraud et al., 2019), Germany (Weber & Parm, 2010), Italy (Cameldi et al., 2017), Netherlands (Köhl et al., 2018), Poland (Michalecka et al., 2016) and Spain (Romero et al., 2016).
HOST PLANT N°1: Cydonia oblonga (CYDOB) for the Fruits (including hops) sector.
Origin of the listing:
Commission Implementing Directive (EU) 2014/98/EU and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072
Plants for planting:
Plants intended for planting
3 - Is the pest already listed in a PM4 standard on the concerned host plant?
Yes
Conclusion:
Evaluation continues
Justification (if necessary):
Inspection for 'Pezicula alba' recommended in EPPO Standard PM 4-27 Pathogen-tested material of Malus, Pyrus and Cydonia. In responses to the questionnaire, FR and NL supported deregulation in the EU. NL considered that plants for planting was not the main pathway, and FR that the pest was widespread in French orchards. Evaluation continues on analysis of pathways.
4 - Are the listed plants for planting the main* pathway for the "pest/host/intended use" combination? (*: significant compared to others):
No
Conclusion:
Not candidate
Justification:
The disease is mostly reported from pome fruits, where it is one of the species involved in bull’s eye rot (post-harvest disease) (e.g. cameldi et al., 2017). It has been reported from other plant species, like olive (Romero et al., 2015; Trouillas et al., 2019).
Neofabraea vagabunda is known to survive in existing cankers, dead materials, or bark splits. It is spread by spores produced on infected material present in the orchard (leaf litter, mummies on the tree). When rain was excluded, infection by N. vagabunda was drastically reduced (Giraud et al., 2019).
In apple orchards, Neofabraea vagabunda (N. alba) was detected in almost all samples of cankers and mummies at high concentrations. The pathogen was also consistently present at lower concentrations on apple leaf litter, fruit spurs and prunings, as well as on dead grasses and weeds. It was also found on leaf litter of pear, and grasses and weeds in pear orchards (Köhl et al., 2018).
Although nursery stock might introduce N. vagabunda into a new region, other sources are driving infection once the fungus is present. Sota-Alvear et al. (2013) suggested that introduction of N. vagabunda into Chili might have occurred with the introduction of nursery stocks, and/or the import of apple fruit from countries where different species of Neofabraea occurred.
[Remark: In responses to the questionnaire, NL commented that the pest is airborn. FR and NL commented that the pest is already widespread in nature/orchards.]
Neofabraea vagabunda is known to survive in existing cankers, dead materials, or bark splits. It is spread by spores produced on infected material present in the orchard (leaf litter, mummies on the tree). When rain was excluded, infection by N. vagabunda was drastically reduced (Giraud et al., 2019).
In apple orchards, Neofabraea vagabunda (N. alba) was detected in almost all samples of cankers and mummies at high concentrations. The pathogen was also consistently present at lower concentrations on apple leaf litter, fruit spurs and prunings, as well as on dead grasses and weeds. It was also found on leaf litter of pear, and grasses and weeds in pear orchards (Köhl et al., 2018).
Although nursery stock might introduce N. vagabunda into a new region, other sources are driving infection once the fungus is present. Sota-Alvear et al. (2013) suggested that introduction of N. vagabunda into Chili might have occurred with the introduction of nursery stocks, and/or the import of apple fruit from countries where different species of Neofabraea occurred.
[Remark: In responses to the questionnaire, NL commented that the pest is airborn. FR and NL commented that the pest is already widespread in nature/orchards.]
5 - Economic impact:
Are there documented reports of any economic impact on the host?
Yes
Justification:
Neofabraea vagabunda is one of the pathogens that infects developing fruits during the growing season and remain quiescent without causing symptoms during either the growing season or the first weeks in post-harvest storage. Typically, symptoms of disease occur after several months in cold storage with a controlled atmosphere, causing bull’s eye rot in apples (Köhl et al., 2018).
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:
There is impact, but it cannot be described as unacceptable. There is barely a relation between the presence of the fungus on the plant, and damage later in storage.
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: plants for planting are not considered to be a significant pathway.
8 - Tolerance level:
Is there a need to change the Tolerance level:
Yes
Proposed Tolerance levels:
Delisting
9 - Risk management measures:
Is there a need to change the Risk management measure:
Yes
Proposed Risk management measure:
Delisting
REFERENCES:
- Cameldi I, Neri F, Menghini M, Pirondi A, Nanni IM, Collina M, Mari M (2017) Characterization of Neofabraea vagabunda isolates causing apple bull's eye rot in Italy (Emilia-Romagna region). Plant Pathology 66(9), 1432-1444. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppa.12684.
- Giraud M, Coureau C, Westercamp P & Perrin (2019) Epidemiology of Neofabraea vagabunda: State of the knowledge. V International Symposium on Post Harvest Pathology, Liège Belgium, 19-24 May, 2019.
- Köhl J, Wenneker M, Groenenboom-de Haas BH, Anbergen R, Goossen-van de Geijn HM, Lombaers-van der Plas CH, Pinto FAMF & Kastelein P (2018) Dynamics of post-harvest pathogens Neofabraea spp. and Cadophora spp. in plant residues in Dutch apple and pear orchards. Plant Pathology 67, 1264-1277.
- Michalecka M, Bryk H, Poniatowska A & Pulawska J (2016) Identification of Neofabraea species causing bull's eye rot of apple in Poland and their direct detection in apple fruit using multiplex PCR. Plant Pathology 65: 643-654.
- Romero J, Raya MC, Roca LF, Moral J & Trapero A (2016) First report of Neofabraea vagabunda causing branch cankers on olives in Spain. Plant Disease 100, 527. (on olive)
- Trouillas FP, Nouri MT, Lawrence DP, Moral J, Travadon R, Aegerter BJ & Lightle D (2019). Identification and characterization of Neofabraea kienholzii and Phlyctema vagabunda causing leaf and shoot lesions of olive in California. Plant disease 103(12), 3018-3030.
- Weber RWS & Palm G (2010) Resistance of storage rot fungi Neofabraea perennans, N. alba, Glomerella acutata and Neonectria galligena against thiophanate-methyl in Northern German apple production [Resistenz der Lagerfäule-Erreger Neofabraea perennans, N. alba, Clomerella acutata und Neonectria galligena gegen Thiophanate-Methyl in der Apfelproduktion Norddeutschlands]. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection 117(4): 185-191.