| Legend |
|---|
| Justification for qualification based on EPPO PM 4 Standards |
| Justification for disqualification |
| Additional or non-conclusive information |
| Standard text |
NAME OF THE ORGANISM: Longidorus macrosoma (LONGMA)
GENERAL INFORMATION ON THE PEST
Name as submitted in the project specification (if different):
Pest category:
Nematoda
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?
No
Presence in the EU:
Yes
List of countries (EPPO Global Database):
-
Conclusion:
Candidate
Justification (if necessary):
Present in Europe (e.g. Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherland and United-Kingdom) (Tiefenbrunner et al., 2011). Additional information is provided in the pathway section.
HOST PLANT N°1: Fragaria (1FRAG) 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):
EPPO Standard PM 4/11 Certification scheme for strawberry recommends soil testing for nematode vectors, including Longidorus macrosoma (vector of raspberry ringspot virus).
In the responses to the questionnaire, DE and NL questioned the classification of organisms with vector properties as RNQP when not causing any direct impact. The methodology developed during the RNQP Project part 1 indicated that ‘Impact of vectors pathogens combinations may need to be considered as well as direct impact’. According to Regulation 2016/2031, Annex I, section 4 'Criteria to identify pests which qualify as a Union regulated non-quarantine pest' (as referred to in Articles 36 and 38), the ‘effects on the establishment, spread and impact of other pests, for example due to the capacity of the pest concerned to act as a vector for other pests’ should be considered for economic impact. According to ISPM 21, Section 3.3.1, ‘The ability to act as a vector for other pests may nevertheless be a relevant factor.’ Although, opportunity of listing such pests in the EU regulation is a decision by risk managers, EPPO had a general discussion in the Fruit SEWG on this issue, if needed.
NL also argued that the pest was soilborne and present in production areas. However, plants for planting may be moved with soil.
The Fruit SEWG decided to have a specific discussion on the importance of plants for planting as a pathway and about economic impact.
In the responses to the questionnaire, DE and NL questioned the classification of organisms with vector properties as RNQP when not causing any direct impact. The methodology developed during the RNQP Project part 1 indicated that ‘Impact of vectors pathogens combinations may need to be considered as well as direct impact’. According to Regulation 2016/2031, Annex I, section 4 'Criteria to identify pests which qualify as a Union regulated non-quarantine pest' (as referred to in Articles 36 and 38), the ‘effects on the establishment, spread and impact of other pests, for example due to the capacity of the pest concerned to act as a vector for other pests’ should be considered for economic impact. According to ISPM 21, Section 3.3.1, ‘The ability to act as a vector for other pests may nevertheless be a relevant factor.’ Although, opportunity of listing such pests in the EU regulation is a decision by risk managers, EPPO had a general discussion in the Fruit SEWG on this issue, if needed.
NL also argued that the pest was soilborne and present in production areas. However, plants for planting may be moved with soil.
The Fruit SEWG decided to have a specific discussion on the importance of plants for planting as a pathway and about economic impact.
4 - Are the listed plants for planting the main* pathway for the "pest/host/intended use" combination? (*: significant compared to others):
?
Conclusion:
Justification:
Host plants of Longidorus macrosoma include Prunus and Pyrus (CABI, 2021). Importance of Fragaria as a host plant for L. macrosoma is uncertain (Chapman, 1983).
The nematode is actively moving < 1m per year. Consequently, the main pathway for dispersal is via soil, growth medium, soil attached to roots, etc. Dissemination of the virus can occur if nematode vectors are dispersed with soil movements caused by rain or erosion. Nematodes may be carried in the soil adhering to farm equipment and machinery or, occasionally, to the feet of birds and other animals. Some nematodes can also be dispersed by wind-blown soil dust; however, this is unlikely for longidorids which generally do not withstand desiccation (EFSA PLH Panel, 2013).
Long-distance dispersal of longidorids occurs when plants intended for planting (e.g. nursery stock) with soil adhering to the roots are harvested from infested fields and transported to new areas (EFSA PLH Panel, 2013). When moved with naked roots, plants for planting is not a pathway.
This nematode is relatively widespread. However, it is not known whether it is already present in most fields:
In all Austrian winegrowing regions soil samples were taken from viticultural as well as agricultural areas and tested for nematodes of the family Longidoridae. To obtain a complete overview of the distribution of Longidoridae, samples were also taken from the riparian forests along the rivers Danube and March. The species L. macrosoma was not found in some agricultural areas of Austria. However, it is considered quite common in Europe e.g. as is the case in Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherland and United-Kingdom (Tiefenbrunner et al., 2011).
In Spain, L. macrosoma is common in vineyards and fruit orchards (Arias & Andrés, 1989), reported from 14.1% of soil samples collected from commercial vineyards in southern Spain (Teliz et al., 2007). It is reported from Andalucia, Aragon, Castilla y Leon, Cataluna and Madrid (SEF, 2023).
There is uncertainty whether strawberry plants for planting should be considered as a significant pathway.
The nematode is actively moving < 1m per year. Consequently, the main pathway for dispersal is via soil, growth medium, soil attached to roots, etc. Dissemination of the virus can occur if nematode vectors are dispersed with soil movements caused by rain or erosion. Nematodes may be carried in the soil adhering to farm equipment and machinery or, occasionally, to the feet of birds and other animals. Some nematodes can also be dispersed by wind-blown soil dust; however, this is unlikely for longidorids which generally do not withstand desiccation (EFSA PLH Panel, 2013).
Long-distance dispersal of longidorids occurs when plants intended for planting (e.g. nursery stock) with soil adhering to the roots are harvested from infested fields and transported to new areas (EFSA PLH Panel, 2013). When moved with naked roots, plants for planting is not a pathway.
This nematode is relatively widespread. However, it is not known whether it is already present in most fields:
In all Austrian winegrowing regions soil samples were taken from viticultural as well as agricultural areas and tested for nematodes of the family Longidoridae. To obtain a complete overview of the distribution of Longidoridae, samples were also taken from the riparian forests along the rivers Danube and March. The species L. macrosoma was not found in some agricultural areas of Austria. However, it is considered quite common in Europe e.g. as is the case in Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherland and United-Kingdom (Tiefenbrunner et al., 2011).
In Spain, L. macrosoma is common in vineyards and fruit orchards (Arias & Andrés, 1989), reported from 14.1% of soil samples collected from commercial vineyards in southern Spain (Teliz et al., 2007). It is reported from Andalucia, Aragon, Castilla y Leon, Cataluna and Madrid (SEF, 2023).
There is uncertainty whether strawberry plants for planting should be considered as a significant pathway.
5 - Economic impact:
Are there documented reports of any economic impact on the host?
No
Justification:
In general, Longidorus spp. and Xiphinema spp. can cause direct feeding damage which can result in yield loss. However, there are many factors affecting the level of impact to the yield. The main factors include (but not limited to) infestation level, host, maturity of host, virus presence and external stresses. The potential damage from nepoviruses is typically of greater concern than direct nematode feeding.
Tomato black ring virus (TBRV), Arabis mosaic virus (AMV), Raspberry ringspot virus (RRV) and Strawberry latent ringspot virus (SLRV) are reported from this host (Fera internal records).
L. macrosoma is reported to vector RRV (Taylor & Brown, 1997).
Reaction of strawberry cultivars to the viruses vectored are largely unknown.
Tomato black ring virus (TBRV), Arabis mosaic virus (AMV), Raspberry ringspot virus (RRV) and Strawberry latent ringspot virus (SLRV) are reported from this host (Fera internal records).
L. macrosoma is reported to vector RRV (Taylor & Brown, 1997).
Reaction of strawberry cultivars to the viruses vectored are largely unknown.
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?
No
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: uncertainty whether plants for planting should be considered as a significant pathway and no impact reported on strawberry by the nematode or the viruses vectored.
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:
- Arias M, Andrés MF (1989) Virus-vector nematodes in cereals and fruit crops in Spain. EPPO Bulletin 19, 625-632.
- CABI (2021) Longidorus macrosoma. CABI digital library (accessed 24/October/2024). https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/10.1079/cabicompendium.121127
- Chapman D (1983) The effectiveness of 1,3-dichloropropene for controlling vector nematodes with reference to the MAFF Certification Scheme for strawberry nursery stock. Plant Pathology 32, 273-279.
- EFSA PLH Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Health) (2013) Scientific opinion on the risk to plant health posed by Arabis mosaic virus, Raspberry ringspot virus, Strawberry latent ringspot virus and Tomato black ring virus to the EU territory with the identification and evaluation of risk reduction options. EFSA Journal 2013;11(10):3377, 83 pp.doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3377.
- Goodey T (1940) The nematode parasites of plants catalogued under their hosts. The nematode parasites of plants catalogued under their hosts.
- SEF (2023) Longidorus atenuatus, L. elongatus y L. macrosomar. En “Patógenos de plantas descritos en España”. Sociedad Española de Fitopatología.
- Taylor CE & Brown DJF (1997) Nematode Vectors of Plant Viruses. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, pp.1-286
- Téliz D, Landa BB, Rapoport HF Pérez Camacho F, Jiménez-Diaz RM & Castillo P (2007) Plant-parasitic nematodes infecting grapevine in southern Spain and susceptible reaction to root-knot nematodes of rootstocks reported as moderately resistant. Plant Disease 91, 1147-1154.
- Tiefenbrunner W, Gangl H, Leitner G, Riedle-Bauer M & Tiefenbrunner A (2011) Verbreitung und Häufigkeit wurzelparasitärer Nematoden der Familie Longidoridae in den Weinbauregionen Österreichs. Mitteilungen Klosterneuburg 61, 121-144.
HOST PLANT N°2: 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):
In EPPO Standard PM 4/29 Certification scheme for cherry, soil should be tested and found free from virus-transmitting nematodes of the genera Longidorus and Xiphinema. Longidorus macrosoma is listed as a vector of 'Raspberry ringspot nepovirus' (RpRSV, causing Pfeffinger disease).
In the responses to the questionnaire, DE and NL questioned the classification of organisms with vector properties as RNQP when not causing any direct impact. The methodology developed during the RNQP Project part I indicated that ‘Impact of vectors pathogens combinations may need to be considered as well as direct impact’. According to Regulation 2016/2031, Annex I, section 4 'Criteria to identify pests which qualify as a Union regulated non-quarantine pest' (as referred to in Articles 36 and 38), the ‘effects on the establishment, spread and impact of other pests, for example due to the capacity of the pest concerned to act as a vector for other pests’ should be considered for economic impact. According to ISPM 21, Section 3.3.1, ‘The ability to act as a vector for other pests may nevertheless be a relevant factor.’ Although, opportunity of listing such pests in the EU regulation is a decision by risk managers, EPPO had a general discussion in the Fruit SEWG on this issue.
NL also argued that the pest was soilborne and present in production areas. However, plants for planting may be moved with soil.
The Fruit SEWG decided to have a specific discussion on the relative importance of plants for planting as a pathway.
Remark: the assessment performed covers the given host species as well as interspecific hybrids with other Prunus species.
In the responses to the questionnaire, DE and NL questioned the classification of organisms with vector properties as RNQP when not causing any direct impact. The methodology developed during the RNQP Project part I indicated that ‘Impact of vectors pathogens combinations may need to be considered as well as direct impact’. According to Regulation 2016/2031, Annex I, section 4 'Criteria to identify pests which qualify as a Union regulated non-quarantine pest' (as referred to in Articles 36 and 38), the ‘effects on the establishment, spread and impact of other pests, for example due to the capacity of the pest concerned to act as a vector for other pests’ should be considered for economic impact. According to ISPM 21, Section 3.3.1, ‘The ability to act as a vector for other pests may nevertheless be a relevant factor.’ Although, opportunity of listing such pests in the EU regulation is a decision by risk managers, EPPO had a general discussion in the Fruit SEWG on this issue.
NL also argued that the pest was soilborne and present in production areas. However, plants for planting may be moved with soil.
The Fruit SEWG decided to have a specific discussion on the relative importance of plants for planting as a pathway.
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):
No
Conclusion:
Not candidate
Justification:
Host plants of Longidorus macrosoma include Prunus and Pyrus (CABI, 2021), including Prunus avium (Arias, 1983).
The nematode is actively moving < 1m per year. Consequently, the main pathway for dispersal is via soil, growth medium, soil attached to roots, etc. Dissemination of the virus can occur if nematode vectors are dispersed with soil movements caused by rain or erosion. Nematodes may be carried in the soil adhering to farm equipment and machinery or, occasionally, to the feet of birds and other animals. Some nematodes can also be dispersed by wind-blown soil dust; however, this is unlikely for longidorids which generally do not withstand desiccation (EFSA PLH Panel, 2013).
Long-distance dispersal of longidorids occurs when plants intended for planting (e.g. nursery stock) with soil adhering to the roots are harvested from infested fields and transported to new areas (EFSA PLH Panel, 2013). When moved with naked roots, plants for planting is not a pathway.
This nematode is relatively widespread. However, it is not known whether it is already present in most fields:
In all Austrian winegrowing regions soil samples were taken from viticultural as well as agricultural areas and tested for nematodes of the family Longidoridae. To obtain a complete overview of the distribution of Longidoridae, samples were also taken from the riparian forests along the rivers Danube and March. The species L. macrosoma was not found in some agricultural areas of Austria. However, it is considered quite common in Europe e.g. as is the case in Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherland and United-Kingdom (Tiefenbrunner et al., 2011).
In Spain, L. macrosoma is common in vineyards and fruit orchards (Arias & Andrés, 1989), reported from 14.1% of soil samples collected from commercial vineyards in southern Spain (Teliz et al., 2007). It is reported from Andalucia, Aragon, Castilla y Leon, Cataluna and Madrid (SEF, 2023).
The Fruit SEWG considered that this free living nematode was very vulnerable. Even when plants for planting are cultivated in the field, new substrate is generally used for repotting. The substrate used is most often cleaned/steamed, bought from professional operators, and the risk that these nematodes are transported with plants for planting is considered limited.
Considering production practices and uncertainty on distribution, the Fruit SEWG concluded that plants for planting should not be considered a significant pathway.
The nematode is actively moving < 1m per year. Consequently, the main pathway for dispersal is via soil, growth medium, soil attached to roots, etc. Dissemination of the virus can occur if nematode vectors are dispersed with soil movements caused by rain or erosion. Nematodes may be carried in the soil adhering to farm equipment and machinery or, occasionally, to the feet of birds and other animals. Some nematodes can also be dispersed by wind-blown soil dust; however, this is unlikely for longidorids which generally do not withstand desiccation (EFSA PLH Panel, 2013).
Long-distance dispersal of longidorids occurs when plants intended for planting (e.g. nursery stock) with soil adhering to the roots are harvested from infested fields and transported to new areas (EFSA PLH Panel, 2013). When moved with naked roots, plants for planting is not a pathway.
This nematode is relatively widespread. However, it is not known whether it is already present in most fields:
In all Austrian winegrowing regions soil samples were taken from viticultural as well as agricultural areas and tested for nematodes of the family Longidoridae. To obtain a complete overview of the distribution of Longidoridae, samples were also taken from the riparian forests along the rivers Danube and March. The species L. macrosoma was not found in some agricultural areas of Austria. However, it is considered quite common in Europe e.g. as is the case in Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherland and United-Kingdom (Tiefenbrunner et al., 2011).
In Spain, L. macrosoma is common in vineyards and fruit orchards (Arias & Andrés, 1989), reported from 14.1% of soil samples collected from commercial vineyards in southern Spain (Teliz et al., 2007). It is reported from Andalucia, Aragon, Castilla y Leon, Cataluna and Madrid (SEF, 2023).
The Fruit SEWG considered that this free living nematode was very vulnerable. Even when plants for planting are cultivated in the field, new substrate is generally used for repotting. The substrate used is most often cleaned/steamed, bought from professional operators, and the risk that these nematodes are transported with plants for planting is considered limited.
Considering production practices and uncertainty on distribution, the Fruit SEWG concluded that plants for planting should not be considered a significant pathway.
5 - Economic impact:
Are there documented reports of any economic impact on the host?
Justification:
In general, Longidorus spp. and Xiphinema spp. can cause direct feeding damage which can result in yield loss. However, there are many factors affecting the level of impact to the yield. The main factors include (but not limited to) infestation level, host, maturity of host, virus presence and external stresses. The potential damage from nepoviruses is typically of greater concern than direct nematode feeding.
Tomato black ring virus (TBRV) (Zagrai et al., 2022), Arabis mosaic virus (AMV) (Fera internal records), Raspberry ringspot virus (RRV) (Zagrai et al., 2022) and Strawberry latent ringspot virus (SLRV) (Fera internal records) are reported from this host.
L. macrosoma is reported to vector RRV (Taylor & Brown, 1997).
Tomato black ring virus (TBRV) (Zagrai et al., 2022), Arabis mosaic virus (AMV) (Fera internal records), Raspberry ringspot virus (RRV) (Zagrai et al., 2022) and Strawberry latent ringspot virus (SLRV) (Fera internal records) are reported from this host.
L. macrosoma is reported to vector RRV (Taylor & Brown, 1997).
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: plants for planting not considered as 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:
- Arias M (1983) Nematodos transmisores de virus de los árboles frutales. Bol. Serv. Plagas 9, 167-181.
- Arias M, Andrés MF (1989) Virus-vector nematodes in cereals and fruit crops in Spain. EPPO Bulletin 19, 625-632.
- CABI (2021) Longidorus macrosoma. CABI digital library (accessed 24/October/2024). https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/10.1079/cabicompendium.121127
- EFSA PLH Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Health) (2013) Scientific opinion on the risk to plant health posed by Arabis mosaic virus, Raspberry ringspot virus, Strawberry latent ringspot virus and Tomato black ring virus to the EU territory with the identification and evaluation of risk reduction options. EFSA Journal 2013;11(10):3377, 83 pp.doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3377.
- SEF (2023) Longidorus atenuatus, L. elongatus y L. macrosomar. En “Patógenos de plantas descritos en España”. Sociedad Española de Fitopatología.
- Taylor CE & Brown DJF (1997) Nematode Vectors of Plant Viruses. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, pp.1-286
- Téliz D, Landa BB, Rapoport HF Pérez Camacho F, Jiménez-Diaz RM & Castillo P (2007) Plant-parasitic nematodes infecting grapevine in southern Spain and susceptible reaction to root-knot nematodes of rootstocks reported as moderately resistant. Plant Disease 91, 1147-1154.
- Tiefenbrunner W, Gangl H, Leitner G, Riedle-Bauer M & Tiefenbrunner A (2011) Verbreitung und Häufigkeit wurzelparasitärer Nematoden der Familie Longidoridae in den Weinbauregionen Österreichs. Mitteilungen Klosterneuburg 61, 121-144.
- Zagrai LA, Zagrai I, Rosu-Mares SD & Moldovan C (2022) Assessment of the virus infections occurrence in new established plum and sweet cherry orchards in Transylvania, Romania. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca 50(2), pp.12734-12734.