Legend
Justification for qualification based on EPPO PM 4 Standards
Justification for disqualification
Additional or non-conclusive information
Standard text

back...

NAME OF THE ORGANISM: Robigovirus viridiavii (cherry green ring mottle virus) (CGRMV0)

GENERAL INFORMATION ON THE PEST

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

Cherry green ring mottle virus

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?:

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:

Not evaluated: Fruits (including hops) sector

Justification (if necessary):

2 – Status in the EU:

Is this pest already a quarantine pest for the whole EU?

Presence in the EU:

Yes

List of countries (EPPO Global Database):

Conclusion:

Candidate

Justification (if necessary):

Cherry green ring mottle virus has been reported in Europe: Czech Republic (Špak et al., 2016), France (Gentit et al., 2002), Poland (Komorowska et al., 2000), Slovenia (Beber et al., 2024).

HOST PLANT N°1: Prunus avium (PRNAV) 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):

Listed as 'Cherry green ring mottle foveavirus (CGRMV)' in EPPO Standard PM 4-29 Certification scheme for cherry; with testing recommended. In responses to the questionnaire, AT questioned whether economic impact on sweet cherry was really unacceptable. PL supported deregulation in the EU considering that plants for planting was not the main pathway. Evaluation continues on these criteria.
Remark: the assessment performed covers the given host species as well as interspecific hybrids with other Prunus species.

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:

Cherry green ring mottle virus (CGRMV, Robigovirus viridiavii) naturally infects sour cherry (P. cerasus), sweet cherry (P. avium), oriental flowering cherry (P. serrulata), and several other Prunus spp. like peach (P. persica) and apricot (P. armeniaca) (Jelkmann et al, 2011). The virus has been transmitted experimentally to P. mahaleb and P. tomentosa, but could not be graft transmitted to almond (P. amygdalus) (Parker, 1976; Zhang et al., 1998; cited in Jelkmann et al. (2011).
CGRMV has no known vector and is not seed transmitted (Fridlund, 1966; Gilmer & Brase, 1962; cited in Jelkmann et al., 2011).
The disease has been observed to spread slowly under field conditions; newly infected trees usually occur near known diseased trees, suggesting that root grafts may be involved (Ramsdell DC, 1995).
In new plantings, disease is established through use of infected plant material (Ramsdell DC, 1995).
The Fruit SEWG considered that plants for planting should be considered as a significant pathway.

5 - Economic impact:

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

Justification:

According to Jelkmann et al. (2011), the disease has been found after indexing of symptomless sweet cherry (Prunus avium) trees in North America and Europe. According to the same authors, the virus does render sour cherries (P. cerasus) of the variety ‘Montmorency’ unmarketable, whereas the ability of the virus to cause losses in sweet cherry is not confirmed. Latent infections of Prunus spp. are the norm. According to Parker et al (1976) and Spak et al. (2017), sweet cherry is often a symptomless carrier of CGRMV. However, duke cherry (P. cerasus x P. avium) does show symptoms (Spak et al., 2017). There is some suggestion that infected sweet cherry trees are slightly stunted compared to healthy ones (Parker et al., 1976).
In view of the frequency of CGRMV latent infections and its low economic impact, it is believed that CGRMV occurs worldwide (Jelkmann et al. 2011).

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:

Not 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?

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: no report of economic impact

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:

Beber A, Lamovšek J, Grubar B & Mavrič Pleško I (2024) First report of cherry green ring mottle virus in sweet cherries in Slovenia. Journal of Plant Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42161-024-01709-w.
Fridlund PR (1966) Transmission and lack of transmission of seven viruses through Prunus seed. Plant Disease Reporter 50, 902-904.
Gentit P, Foissac X, Svanella-Dumas L, Peypelut M, Macquaire G & Candresse T (2002). Molecular characterization of foveaviruses associated with the cherry necrotic mottle leaf disease and complete sequencing of an European isolate of cherry green ring mottle virus. Archives of virology 147(5), 1033-1042.
Gilmer R & Brase K (1962) Evidence against seed transmission of green ring mottle virus in mazzard cherry seedlings. Plant Disease Reporter 46, 356.
Jelkmann W, Rot M & Uyemoto JK (2011) Cherry green ring mottle virus. In Virus and Virus-like Diseases of Pome and Stone Fruits (eds Hadidi A, Barba M, Candresse T & Jelkmann W). American Phytopathological Society, St Paul, MN, USA. pages 115-117.
Komorowska B, Hasiów-Jaroszewska B & Czajka A (2020) Occurrence and detection of little cherry virus 1, little cherry virus 2, cherry green ring mottle virus, cherry necrotic rusty mottle virus, and cherry virus A in stone fruit trees in Poland. Acta Virologica 64(1), 100.
Parker KG, Fridlund PR & Glimer RM (1976) Green ring mottle. In Virus Diseases f Noninfectious Disorders of Stone Fruits in North America (eds Glimer RM, Moor JD, Nyland G, Welsh MF & Pine TS) Agricultural Research Service, Washington DC. Pages 193-199.
Ramsdell DC (1995) Sour cherry green ring mottle virus. In Compendium - of Stone Fruit Diseases (eds Ogawa JM, Zehr EI, Bird GW, Ritchie DF, Uriu K & Uyemoto JK (1995). American Phytopathological Society, St Paul, MN, USA. pages 76-77.
Špak J, Přibylová J, Šafářová D, Lenz O, Koloniuk I, Navrátil M, Fránová J, Špaková V & Paprštein F (2017) Cherry necrotic rusty mottle and Cherry green ring mottle viruses in Czech cherry germplasm. Plant Protection Science 53(4), 195-200.
Zhang YP, Kirkpatrick BC, Smart CD & Uyemoto JK (1998) cDNA cloning and molecular characterization of cherry green ring mottle virus. Journal of General Virology 79, 2275-2281,

HOST PLANT N°2: Prunus cerasus (PRNCE) 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:

Qualified

Justification (if necessary):

Listed as 'Cherry green ring mottle foveavirus (CGRMV)' in EPPO Standard PM 4-29 Certification scheme for cherry; with testing recommended.
Although PL considered in responses to the questionnaire that plants for planting was not the main pathway, this was not supported by enough justification.
Remark: the assessment performed covers the given host species as well as interspecific hybrids with other Prunus species.

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?

Conclusion:

Justification:

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:

Recommended for listing as an RNQP, based on EPPO PM4 Standards.

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:

REFERENCES: