Category Archives: Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Entomology: Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Insects, Mites & Earthworms, Thysanoptera

Hercinothrips bicinctus (Bagnall): Banana-silvering Thrips

July 25, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Hercinothrips bicinctus (Bagnall): Banana-silvering Thrips

Thysanoptera: Thripidae

Pest Rating: B

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

In April 2016 the Banana-silvering thrips Hercinothrips bicinctus was found by a dog-team on a shipment of Passiflora leaves from San Diego County. A trace-back survey found that the thrips were infesting passion flower vines in an outdoor garden at a residence. A pest rating proposal is required to assign a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Hercinothrips bicinctus is considered to be a polyphagous thrips that breeds on the leaves of a variety of plants, often in greenhouses¹. Nymphs and adults live on leaves, stems, and fruit. Eggs are inserted into plant tissue². Primary hosts include banana, passion fruit, choko, and some weeds³. Feeding causes leaf damage² and silvery or brown patches on fruit². Infested fruit may crack, allowing decay organisms to enter². Hercinothrips bicinctus may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Hercinothrips bicinctus is thought to be native to Africa¹. From there it has invaded Australia, New Zealand, Bermuda, Mexico, and Hawaii. There is also an unconfirmed record from Brazil⁴.

Official Control: Hercinothrips bicinctus is listed as a harmful organism by Colombia, Costa Rica, Indonesia, Israel, Jamaica, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Timor-Leste⁵.

California Distribution: Hercinothrips bicinctus has only been found at a single residential property in San Diego County.

California Interceptions: Hercinothrips bicinctus has only been intercepted twice in California, in June 2009 on various leis from HI, and in April 2016 on a mailed shipment of Passiflora and Persea sp. leaves from the infested property.

The risk Hercinothrips bicinctus (Banana-silvering thrips) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Based on its present tropical and subtropical distribution, Hercinothrips bicinctus is expected to establish throughout the warmer parts of coastal and southern California. It receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California. Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Hercinothrips bicinctus is polyphagous. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Thrips have high reproductive rates and can rapidly spread long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved. Hercinothrips bicinctus receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Most of the damage caused by Hercinothrips bicinctus is limited to disfigured leaves and blemished fruit. This type of damage could potentially lower the yield of production nurseries and fruit crops or increase production costs. However, other thrips with similar biologies such as Hercinothrips femoralis (banded greenhouse thrips) are already widespread in California. Existing management techniques for these thrips that are already present are likely to limit economic impacts from this new thrips. However, Hercinothrips bicinctus is listed as a harmful organism by many nations and has not yet been found anywhere else in the continental United States. It is possible that its presence in California could disrupt markets. Hercinothrips bicinctus receives a Low (1) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: If it becomes established in California, Hercinothrips bicinctus is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. However, this thrips colonized native plants as it invaded Australia and it might do the same thing in California. Due to the polyphagous nature of the thrips this could include threatened or endangered species. Fortunately, Hercinothrips bicinctus is not expected to disrupt critical habitats. It could trigger new treatment programs by residents who find infested plants unsightly. Banana plants are common ornamentals in California and will likely be significantly impacted by this pest. Herciniothrips bicinctus receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Hercinothrips bicinctus (Banana-silvering Thrips): Medium (12)**

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Hercinothrips bicinctus is only known from a single residential property in San Diego County. It receives a Low (-1) in this category.

Evaluate the known distribution in California. Only official records identified by a taxonomic expert and supported by voucher specimens deposited in natural history collections should be considered. Pest incursions that have been eradicated, are under eradication, or have been delimited with no further detections should not be included.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: Medium (11)

Uncertainty:

It is possible that Hercinothrips bicinctus is more widespread in southern California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Existing management practices for other thrips are likely to limit economic damage from the establishment of Hercinothrips bicinctus in California. However, its establishment could disrupt markets and have significant environmental impacts. A “B”-rating is justified.

References:

¹ Hoddle MS, Mound LA, Paris DL. 2012. Thrips of California. CBIT Publishing, Queensland. http://keys.lucidcentral.org/keys/v3/thrips_of_california/identify-thrips/key/california-thysanoptera-2012/Media/Html/browse_species/Hercinothrips_bicinctus.htm

²Hill, Dennis S. 2008. Pests of Crops in Warmer Climates and Their Control. Skegness Lincs: Springer. https://books.google.com/books?id=U5dezH9_eEMC&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=Hercinothrips+bicinctus+pest&source=bl&ots=wP_kfwwlIV&sig=-XAxXb2RsC1KJE8vYQnHWgypTR8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiEoqXI1K_NAhUU-2MKHfoVDkoQ6AEISTAL#v=onepage&q=Hercinothrips%20bicinctus%20pest&f=false

³ Treverrow, N.L. 1987. Banana rust thrips and banana silvering thrips. NSW Agriculture AGFACTS. http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/120039/banana-rust-silvering-thrips.pdf

⁴ Mound, L.A. & R. Marullo. 1996. The Thrips of Central and South America: An Introduction: (Insecta: Thysanoptera). Memoirs on Entomology, International, 6: 1- 487.

⁵ USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦ Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:

Consequences of Introduction: 1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦ Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦ Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦ Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦ Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: B

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Balclutha rubrostriata (Melichar): Red streaked leafhopper

July 25, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Balclutha rubrostriata (Melichar): Red streaked leafhopper

Hemiptera: Cicadellidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

In July 2014 USDA’s New Pest Advisory Group (NPAG) distributed a report recommending that the status of Balclutha rubrostriata (red streaked leafhopper) be changed to non-actionable for the entire United States. The species was first found in Texas in 2008 during a wood borer survey and is now widespread and abundant in that state and spreading into Louisiana. A pest rating proposal is needed to determine future direction.

History & Status:

Background: Balclutha rubrostriata feeds on a wide variety of grasses and is sometimes considered a pest in grass crops because it negatively impacts seed production. Hosts include a variety of grass (Poaceae) species including rice (Oryza sativa), sugarcane (Saccharum officianarum), bluegrass (Bothriochloa spp.), King Ranch bluestem (B. ischaemum), Australian bluestem (B. bladhii), and little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium). It has also been found on sesame (Sesamum indicum (Pedaliaceae)). This leafhopper may be a vector of sugarcane white leaf phytoplasma. The leafhopper has been found carrying the phytoplasma but it is currently unknown if the insect can transmit the phytoplasma to plants. Balclutha adults, nymphs, or eggs are sometimes moved long distances by commerce in infested plants or as hitchhikers.

Worldwide Distribution: Balclutha rubrostriata is known to be present in parts of North Africa, Asia, Oceania, the Caribbean, and the Middle East. In the United States it is present in Hawaii, Texas, Louisiana, Puerto Rico, and possibly Florida.

Official Control: Balclutha rubrostriata is not under official control in any other countries or states.

California Distribution: Balclutha rubrostriata has never been found in California.

California Interceptions: In 2003 a single female Balclutha sp. was intercepted on Malonggai leaves from Hawaii (PDR P205345) but could not be assigned a specific epithet. It is likely that eggs and nymphs are intercepted more frequently but also cannot be identified.

The risk Balclutha rubrostriata would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Grasses are widespread in California and Balclutha rubrostriata is expected to be capable of establishing where they grow. The leafhopper receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California. Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: The host range of Balclutha rubrostriata is thought to be limited to a wide variety of grasses, including rice. The leafhopper receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Leafhoppers are jumping insects with limited dispersal capabilities and most species have only one generation per year. However, Balclutha rubrostriata has rapidly become abundant and widespread in Texas, demonstrating high reproductive potential. Furthermore, the insects may be transported long distances through commerce in infested plants. Balclutha rubrostriata receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Balclutha rubrostriata is known to lower yields in grass production and may be expected to increase production costs. Growers in Australia treat with dimethoate to control the leafhopper. However, despite its abundance the leafhopper has not yet emerged as a pest in Texas. Balclutha rubrostriata receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Balclutha rubrostriata is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. The leafhopper may feed on several species of native grasses that are listed as threatened or endangered species. The leafhopper is not expected to disrupt critical habitats. The leafhopper is likely to trigger additional private treatment programs in grass production where seed yield is important. Balclutha rubrostriata is not expected to significantly impact cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings. Red streaked leafhopper receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Balclutha rubrostriata (red streaked leafhopper): High (13)**

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Balclutha rubrostriata has never been found in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (13)

Uncertainty:

CABI lists yam (Discorea spp.), cotton (Gossypium spp.), and corn (Zea mays) as additional hosts of Balclutha rubrostriata but this does not appear to be supported by literature. If these other crops are suitable hosts then the entry of this leafhopper to California could have additional economic and environmental impacts.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Red streaked leafhopper (Balclutha rubrostriata) has never been found in California. If it were to enter the state, the leafhopper may have significant economic impacts on grass production, including rice. The leafhopper may also have significant environmental impacts including triggering new chemical treatments in grass industries and by feeding on threatened and endangered grasses. An “A” rating is justified.

References:

Newton, Leslie P. 2014. NPAG Report on Balclutha rubrostriata (Melichar): Red streaked leafhopper. New Pest Advisory Group (NPAG). Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory. Center for Plant Health Science & Technology.

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦ Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:

Consequences of Introduction: 1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦ Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦ Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦ Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦ Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Aonidiella orientalis (Newstead): Oriental Scale

June 24, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Aonidiella orientalis (Newstead): Oriental Scale

Hemiptera: Diaspididae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Aonidiella orientalis is frequently intercepted by CDFA. A pest rating proposal is required to support its pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Aonidiella orientalis is a highly polyphagous armored scale insect. It feeds on the leaves of a wide variety of plants and is regarded as an economic pest of citrus, tea, dates, palms, papaya, mango, and ornamentals¹. Known hosts include: Acanthaceae: Adhatoda vasica¹, Barleria cristata¹, Thunbergia grandiflora¹; Amaranthaceae: Bassia latifolia¹; Anacardiaceae: Mangifera indica¹, Pistacia integerrima¹, Spondias cytherea¹; Annonaceae: Annona squamosa¹, Annona glabra¹, Annona¹, Polyalthia korihthi¹, Polyathia¹, Rollinia emarginata¹; Apocynaceae: Alstonia scholaris¹, Alstonia¹, Calotropis¹, Calotropis procera¹, Carissa carandas¹, Carissa¹, Nerium¹, Nerium oleander¹, Plumeria¹, Tabernaemontana coronaria¹, Tabernaemontana¹; Araliaceae: Hedera¹; Arecaceae: Cocos nucifera¹, Cocos¹, Inodes neglecta¹, Loroma amethystiora¹, Phoenix¹, Phoenix dactylifera¹, Phoenix¹, Roystonea regia¹; Aristolochiaceae: Aristolochia¹; Asparagaceae: Agave variegata¹, Agave sisalana¹, Agave americana¹, Agave¹; Bignoniaceae: Bignonia vinusta¹, Bignonia radicans¹, Kigelia pinnata¹, Oroxylum indicum¹, Tecoma australis¹, Tecoma undulata¹, Tecoma stans¹; Boraginaceae: Cordia rothii¹, Cordia myxa¹, Cordia¹, Cordia obliqua¹, Ehretia serrata¹; Burseraceae: Boswellia serrata¹, Bursera serrata¹; Buxaceae: Buxus sempervirens¹; Cactaceae: Cactus¹, Opuntia¹; Cannaceae: Canna indica¹; Capparaceae: Crataeva religiosa¹; Caprifoliaceae: Lonicera chinensis¹, Sambucus javanica¹; Caricaceae: Carica papaya¹, Carica papaya¹; Celastraceae: Catha edulis¹, Celastrus paniculata¹; Combretaceae: Quisqualis indica¹, Terminalia belerica¹, Terminalia arjuna¹; Convolvulaceae: Calonyction roxburghii¹, Ipomoea¹, Porana paniculata¹; Cunoniaceae: Weinmannia¹; Cycadaceae: Cycas revoluta¹, Cycas¹; Ebenaceae: Diospyros¹, Diospyros montana¹, Diospyros embryopteris¹; Elaeagnaceae: Elaeagnus pungens¹; Euphorbiaceae: Acalypha¹, Bischofia javanica¹, Croton tiglium¹, Mallotus philippinensis¹, Phyllanthus myrtifolius¹, Poinsettia¹, Putranjiva roxburghii¹, Ricinus¹, Ricinus communis¹, Sapium sebiferum¹; Fabaceae: Acacia cyanophila¹, Albizia lebbek¹, Albizia¹, Atylosia¹, Atylosia candollii¹, Bauhinia variegata¹, Bauhinia¹, Bauhinia purpurea¹, Bauhinia alba¹, Bauhinia vahlii¹, Bauhinia racemosa¹, Butea frondosa¹, Caesalpinia bonducella¹, Cassia¹, Cassia auriculata¹, Cassia fistula¹, Ceratonia siliqua¹, Dalbergia¹, Dalbergia lanceolaria¹, Dalbergia sissoo¹, Erythrina crista¹, Inga dulcis¹, Poinciana regia¹, Pongamia glabra¹, Saraca indica¹, Tamarindus¹, Tamarindus indica¹, Tephrosia¹; Heliconiaceae: Heliconia¹; Liliaceae: Aloe vera¹, Asparagus sprengeri¹, Asparagus¹; Lythraceae: Lagerstroemia indica¹, Lawsonia inermis¹, Punica granatum¹; Magnoliaceae: Magnolia grandiflora¹; Malpighiaceae: Hiptage madablota¹; Malvaceae: Adansonia¹, Bombax malabaricum¹, Eriodendron anfractuosum¹, Grewia asiatica¹, Hibiscus¹, Pterospermum acerifolium¹, Sterculia¹, Sterculia alata¹; Melastomataceae: Osbeckia¹, Wrightia coccinea¹, Meliaceae: Azedarach indica¹, Cedrela toona¹, Melia volkensii¹, Melia¹, Melia indica¹, Melia composita¹, Melia azadirachta¹, Swietenia mahagoni¹; Menispermaceae: Cocculus laurifolius¹; Moraceae: Broussonetia papyrifera¹, Ficus benghalensis¹, Ficus salicifolia¹, Ficus glomerata¹, Ficus infectoria¹, Ficus nitida¹, Ficus orbicularis¹, Ficus palmata¹, Ficus religiosa¹, Ficus carica¹, Ficus retusa¹, Ficus roxburghii¹, Ficus¹, Ficus elastica¹, Maclura aurantiaca¹, Morus¹, Morus alba¹, Morus laevigata¹; Moringaceae: Moringa pterygosperma¹; Musaceae: Musa¹, Musa sapientum¹; Myrtaceae: Callistemon rigidus¹, Eucalyptus¹, Eugenia jambolana¹, Eugenia¹, Myrrhinium rubriflorum¹, Myrtus communis¹, Psidium guajava¹; Nyctaginaceae: Bougainvillea¹, Mirabilis jalapa¹, Nyctaginia¹; Ochnaceae: Ochna squarrosa¹; Oleaceae: Jasminum¹, Olea europaea¹; Orchidaceae:¹; Oxalidaceae: Averrhoa carambola¹; Poaceae: Panicum¹; Podocarpaceae: Podocarpus neriifolius¹, Podocarpus lamberti¹; Polygonaceae: Antigonon leptopus¹; Proteaceae: Grevillea robusta¹; Ranunculaceae: Clematis paniculatus¹; Rhamnaceae: Rhamnus persicus¹, Ziziphus oenoplia¹, Ziziphus¹, Ziziphus jujuba¹; Rhizophoraceae: Bruguiera sexangulata¹, Rhizophora mucronata¹; Rosaceae: Eriobotrya japonica¹, Prunus armeniaca¹, Pyrus sinensis¹, Rosa¹; Rubiaceae: Stephegyne parviflora¹; Rutaceae: Aegle marmelos¹, Aegle¹, Casimiroa¹, Chloroxylon swietenia¹, Citrus trifoliata¹, Citrus limon¹, Citrus aurantium¹, Citrus¹, Feronia elephantum¹, Limonia¹, Murraya exotica¹, Murraya exotica¹; Salicaceae: Populus alba¹, Populus euphratica¹, Salix tetrasperma¹; Santalaceae: Santalum album¹; Sapindaceae: Acer pictum¹, Acer oblongum¹, Dodonaea viscosa¹, Litchi chinensis¹, Nephelium litchi¹, Sapindus detergens¹; Sapotaceae: Mimusops elengi¹, Mimusops kauki¹; Simaroubaceae: Ailanthus aladulosa¹; Solanaceae: Solanum melongena¹, Solanum arundo¹; Theaceae: Camellia¹, Thea¹; Ulmaceae: Celtis¹, Celtis australis¹, Ulmus integrifolia¹, Ulmus¹; Verbenaceae: Callicarpa macrophyla¹, Citharexylum subserratum¹, Clerodendrum phlomoides¹, Duranta ellisi¹, Duranta plumieri¹, Gmelina arborea¹, Nyctanthes arbor-tristis¹, Vitex negundo¹; Vitaceae: Vitis vinifera¹, Zamiaceae: Zamia¹; Zingiberaceae: Alpinia nutans¹. Aonidiella orientalis may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Aonidiella orientalis is presumably native to Asia and has spread through much of the Neotropical, Afrotropical, Palearctic, and Oceanic regions. In North America it is only known to be established in Florida¹.

Official Control: Aonidiella orientalis is listed as a harmful organism by Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Honduras, Japan, and the Republic of Korea².

California Distribution: Aonidiella orientalis has never been found in California.

California Interceptions: From 1987 through 2015 Aonidiella orientalis was intercepted 225 times by CDFA’s high risk programs, dog teams, and border stations. Many of these interceptions have been on coconut, papaya, and mango from Florida, Brazil, and Mexico.

The risk Aonidiella orientalis (Oriental scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Due to its highly polyphagous nature and known distribution across a range of climates Aonidiella orientalis can be expected to establish a widespread distribution in California. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California. Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Aonidiella orientalis is known to feed on hundreds of species in at least 67 plant families. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Scale insects are capable of rapid reproduction and can be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved. They may also disperse locally by crawling, wind, or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or animals. Aonidiella orientalis receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Aonidiella orientalis is considered an economic pest of several crops that are grown in California and may be expected to lower crop yields and increase crop production costs. Oriental scale is listed as a harmful organism by several of California’s trading partners. If the scale were to enter the state it may disrupt markets for fresh fruit and nursery stock. Aonidiella orientalis receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Aonidiella orientalis is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It may feed on endangered and threatened species such as small-leaved rose (Rosa minutifolia). Oriental scale is not expected to disrupt critical habitats. It may trigger additional official or private treatment programs in orchards, the nursery industry, and by residents who find infested plants unacceptable. Aonidiella orientalis may also significantly impact cultural practices, home/urban gardening, and ornamental plantings. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Aonidiella orientalis (Oriental Scale): High (15)**

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Aonidiella orientalis has never been found in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (15)

Uncertainty:

There have not been any recent surveys for oriental scale in California. It is possible that it could be established in some localities.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Aonidiella orientalis has never been found in California and is likely to have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to enter the state. An “A” rating is justified.

References:

¹ Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy. ScaleNet.

http://scalenet.info/catalogue/Aonidiella%20orientalis/

http://scalenet.info/validname/Aonidiella/orientalis/

² USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦ Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:

Consequences of Introduction: 1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦ Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦ Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦ Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦ Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Clavaspis herculeana (Common Name): Herculeana Scale

June 24, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Clavaspis herculeana (Common Name): Herculeana Scale

Hemiptera: Diaspididae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Clavaspis herculeana is commonly intercepted by CDFA. A pest rating proposal is required to support its pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Clavaspis herculeana is a polyphagous armored scale insect. It burrows beneath the surface of twigs and branches and feeds by sucking juices from plants while concealed beneath the epidermis of its host-plants^1,2. Known hosts include: Anacardiaceae: mango (Mangifera indica^1,2), Mangifera cambodiana^1,2, Mangifera spp.^1,2; Florida poisontree (Metopium toxiferum^1,2), ambarella (Spondias dulcis^1,2), jocote (Spondias purpurea^1,2), Spondias cytherea^1,2; Annonaceae: sugar apple (Annona squamosa^1,2), soursop (Annona muricata^1,2), Annona spp.^1,2; Apocynaceae: Plumeria rubra, Plumeria sp. (numerous CDFA interceptions); Bignoniaceae: pink trumpet tree (Tabebuia heterophylla^1,2); Bixaceae: buttercup tree (Cochlospermum vitifolium^1,2); Caricaceae: papaya (Carica papaya^1,2); Euphorbiaceae: tung-oil tree (Aleurites fordii^1,2), Aleurites spp.^1,2; Fabaceae: sweet acacia (Acacia farnesiana^1,2), Acacia flexicaulis^1,2, golden shower tree (Cassia fistula^1,2), royal Poinciana (Delonix regia^1,2), coast coral tree (Erythrina caffra^1,2), coral tree (Erythrina indica^1,2), Erythrina spp.^1,2, Lonchocarpus spp.^1,2, Lonchocarpus latifolius^1,2, sensitive plant (Mimosa pudica^1,2), monkey-pod (Pithecellobium saman^1,2); Lauraceae: Cinnamomum sp.^1,2, true cinnamon tree (Cinnamomum zeylanicum^1,2); Magnoliaceae: southern magnolia (Magnolia grandiflora^1,2); Malvaceae: Eriodendron anfractuosum^1,2, Eriodendron spp.^1,2, Gossypium spp.^1,2; Meliaceae: Cedrela toona^1,2; Moraceae: common fig (Ficus carica^1,2), Ficus spp.^1,2, Roxburgh fig (Ficus roxburgii^1,2), sacred fig (Ficus religiosa^1,2), Ficus capensis^1,2, old fustic (Maclura tinctoria^1,2), white mulberry (Morus alba^1,2); Myristicaceae: Myristica hypargyraea^1,2; Myrtaceae: Eugenia spp.^1,2; Polygonaceae: Muehlenbeckia sagittiformis^1,2; Proteaceae: southern silky oak (Grevillea robusta^1,2); Rhizophoraceae: Rhizophora spp.^1,2; Rosaceae: loquat (Eriobotrya japonica^1,2), pear (Pyrus spp.^1,2), rose (Rosa spp.^1,2); Rubiaceae: buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis^1,2); Rutaceae: Citrus spp.^1,2; Salicaceae: poplar (Populus spp.^1,2), Xylosma venosum^1,2; Santalaceae: Phoradendron randiae^1,2; Styracaceae: Halesia spp.^1,2; Verbenaceae: Avicennia nitida^1,2. Clavaspis herculeana may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Clavaspis herculeana is widespread in many parts of the Australasian, Afrotropical, Oriental, Palearctic, and Neotropical regions^1,2. It is present in Mexico, Texas, Florida, and Hawaii^1,2.

Official Control: Clavaspis herculeana is listed as a harmful organism by Japan and the Republic of Korea³.

California Distribution: Clavaspis herculeana has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: From 1988 through 2015 Clavaspis herculeana was intercepted 45 times by California’s high risk programs, dog teams, and border stations. Most of these interceptions have occurred on plants or fresh plant parts from Hawaii, primarily Plumeria rubra or Plumeria sp.

The risk Clavaspis herculeana (Herculeana scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Clavaspis herculeana is polyphagous on a wide variety of plants that are widely grown in California and is likely to establish wherever they are grown. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California. Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Clavaspis herculeana is known to feed on plants in at least 25 families. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Scale insects are capable of rapid reproduction and can be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved. They may also disperse locally by crawling, wind, or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or animals. Its cryptic habits mean that herculeana scale may easily be dispersed by trade in infested plants without being detected. Clavaspis herculeana receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Clavaspis herculeana has not been documented as lowering any crop yields. It may lower the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants with its presence and increase fresh fruit production costs. Herculeana scale is listed as a harmful organism by several of California’s trading partners and its entry to the state may disrupt fresh fruit and nursery stock export markets. This scale is not expected to change cultural practices, vector other organisms, injure animals, or disrupt water supplies. Clavaspis herculeana receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Clavaspis herculeana is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It is likely to feed on endangered or threatened species including small-leaved rose (Rosa minutifolia). Herculeana scale is not expected to disrupt critical habitats. It may trigger additional treatment programs in fresh fruit and nursery industries. It is not expected to significantly impact cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings. Clavaspis herculeana receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Clavaspis herculeana (Herculeana scale): High (14)**

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Clavaspis herculeana has never been found in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (14)

Uncertainty:

Clavaspis herculeana is reported to be associated with the fungus Septobasidium saccardinum^1,2. This relationship is not clear.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Clavaspis herculeana has never been found in California and is expected to have significant economic impacts to California’s fresh fruit and nursery industries if it enters the state. It is also expected to have significant environmental impacts. An “A” rating is justified.

References:

¹ Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy. ScaleNet. http://scalenet.info/validname/Clavaspis/herculeana/

² SEL Catalog. http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/diaspidi/Clavaspisherculeana.htm

³ USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦ Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:

Consequences of Introduction: 1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦ Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦ Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦ Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦ Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Halticus bractatus (Say): Garden Fleahopper

June 24, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Halticus bractatus (Say): Garden Fleahopper

Hemiptera: Miridae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Halticus bractatus was recently intercepted by one of CDFA’s border stations on outdoor plants from Florida. Although this insect is included on some old pest lists with a “C” rating, all PDRs for the species to date have been assigned a temporary rating of “Q”. A pest rating proposal is required to assign a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Halticus bractatus is a polyphagous pest that feeds on a variety of crops including citrus¹. It prefers to feed on hosts in the family Fabaceae including alfalfa, beans, peas, and clovers but will readily feed on many other plants including barley, beets, cabbage, celery, corn, cotton, cucumber, eggplant, lettuce, oats, pepper, potato, pumpkin, squash, sweet potato, tomato, tobacco, and wheat^1,2. It also feeds on many weeds and occasionally other insects². Adult females insert eggs into the stems of vegetation². Nymphs and adults suck juices from the stems and surfaces of leaves². Feeding causes whitish or yellow speckling on the foliage, stunts plant growth, and may cause the death of seedlings². Nymphs and adults deposit black fecal material that reduces the marketability of vegetables². Halticus bractatus may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Halticus bractatus is widespread in the eastern United States and Canada as far west as the Rocky Mountains^1,2. It is found throughout Central and South America^1,2. It is also present in Hawaii.

Official Control: Halticus bractatus is listed as a harmful organism by Guatemala, Mexico, Japan, and the Republic of Korea³.

California Distribution: Halticus bractatus has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: Halticus bractatus has been intercepted twice by CDFA on outdoor plants from Florida and Ocimum sp. from Hawaii. Unidentified species of Halticus have also been intercepted twice on plant cuttings and herbs from Hawaii.

The risk Halticus bractatus (garden fleahopper) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Halticus bractatus is widespread east of the Rockies from Canada to Argentina. It is likely capable of establishing a widespread distribution in California and receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California. Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Halticus bractatus is highly polyphagous and receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Halticus bractatus has a high reproductive rate. Under favorable conditions it can complete a generation in 30 days and each female produces 80-100 eggs. Despite its polyphagous nature and widespread distribution in the eastern United States it has only been intercepted by CDFA a few times. This indicates it may not move often in commerce. Halticus bractatus receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Halticus bractatus is not typically a pest of commercial agriculture because it is controlled by insecticides used against more damaging pests². If it were to establish in California it is not expected to lower crop yields. It may reduce the value of nursery stock and fresh vegetables by disfiguring these commodities. It is also listed as a harmful organism by several of California’s trading partners and therefore has the potential to disrupt markets. It is not expected to change cultural practices, vector other organisms, injure animals, or interfere with water supplies. Halticus bractatus receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: If Halticus bractatus were to establish in California it is not likely to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It may feed on threatened and endangered species such as showy indian clover (Trifolium amoenum), Pacific grove clover (Trifolium polyodon), and Monterey clover (Trifolium trichocalyx). It is not likely to disrupt critical habitats. It is not expected to trigger new treatment programs in commercial agriculture. However, in Florida it is a common early season pest in home gardens. Home/urban gardening may be significantly impacted by this pest and it may trigger new treatment programs in this environment. Halticus bractatus receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Halticus bractatus (Garden Leafhopper): High (13)**

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Halticus bractatus has never been found in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (13)

Uncertainty:

In the eastern United States Halticus bractatus is attacked by many other organisms including egg and nymph parasitoids, predatory mites, and nematodes². It is possible that the bug could be more damaging in California in the absence of these natural enemies.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Halticus bractatus has not been found in California and it is likely to have significant impacts if it were to establish in the state. An “A”-rating is justified.

References:

¹ Henry, Thomas J. 1983. The Garden Fleahopper Genus Halticus (Hemiptera: Miridae): Resurrection of an Old Name and Key to Species of the Western Hemisphere. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 85(3):607-611. https://research.amnh.org/pbi/library/0332.pdf

² Capinera, John L. 2014. Common name: garden fleahopper. University of Florida Featured Creatures. http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/creatures/veg/leaf/fleahopper.htm

³USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦ Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:

Consequences of Introduction: 1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦ Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦ Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦ Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦ Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Ceroplastes stellifer (Westwood): Stellate Scale

June 24, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Ceroplastes stellifer (Westwood): Stellate Scale

(synonym Vinsonia stellifera)

Hemiptera: Coccidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Ceroplastes stellifer is regularly intercepted by CDFA and is presently assigned a temporary rating of “Q”. A pest rating proposal is required to determine a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Ceroplastes stellifer is a polyphagous soft scale insect that feeds on a variety of plants including many crops and ornamentals. Some of the known hosts include: Anacardiaceae: mango (Mangifera indica¹), Mangifera sp.¹; Apocynaceae: blackboard tree (Alstonia scholaris¹), Ervatamia orientalis¹, frangipani (Plumeria acutifolia¹); Araliaceae: Schefflera sp.¹; Arecaceae: coconut (Cocos nucifera¹), Cocos sp.¹; Aspleniaceae: Asplenium sp.¹; Clusiaceae: Clusia sp.¹, purple mangosteen (Garcinia mangostana¹), bitter garcinia (Garcinia spicata¹), kokum (Garcinia indica¹), Garcinia sp.¹; Ebenaceae: velvet apple (Diospyros discolor¹); Euphorbiaceae: bishop wood (Bischofia javanica¹); Lauraceae: camphor tree (Cinnamomum camphora¹), avocado (Persea americana¹); Liliaceae: asparagus fern (Asparagus sprengeri¹); Moraceae: Artocarpus integra¹, banyan (Ficus benghalensis¹), Ficus antimesma¹; Musaceae: Musa sp.¹; Myrtaceae: Eucalyptus sp.¹, jambos (Eugenia jambos¹), jambul (Eugenia jambolana¹), water apple (Eugenia aquea¹), Eugenia sp.¹, java plum (Syzygium cuminii¹); Orchidaceae: blood red broughtonia (Broughtonia sanguinea¹), Cattleya sp.¹, Cypripedium niveum¹, fringed star orchid (Epidendrum ciliare¹), Epidendrum sp.¹, Stanhopea sp.¹; Phyllanthaceae: Chinese-laurel (Antidesma bunius¹); Polypodiaceae: Adiantum sp.¹; Primulaceae: coralberry (Ardisia polycephala¹); Rutaceae: grapefruit (Citrus grandis¹), bitter orange (Citrus aurantium¹), Citrus sp.¹, orangeberry (Glycosmis pentaphylla¹), Jambolana sp.¹; Sapotaceae: sapodilla (Achras sapota¹), Lucuma caimito¹, Palaquium sp.¹; Strelitziaceae: traveller’s palm (Ravenala madagascariensis¹); Zingiberaceae: red ginger (Alpinia purpurata¹). The scale has also been found feeding on additional hosts^3,4. Ceroplastes stellifer may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: The native range of Ceroplastes stellifer is uncertain but early records are from the Caribbean¹. It is now widespread in parts of Australia, the Pacific, Africa, Asia, and South America¹. In the United States it is found in Florida, Alabama, and Georgia¹. Interceptions indicate that it may also be present in Hawaii.

Official Control: Ceroplastes stellifer is listed as a harmful organism by China, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Mexico (see Vinsonia stellifera)².

California Distribution: Ceroplastes stellifer has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: From 1987 through 2015 Ceroplastes stellifer was intercepted 251 times by CDFA’s high risk programs and dog teams. Interceptions have occurred on plants and fresh plant parts from Hawaii, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Jamaica, and Florida.

The risk Ceroplastes stellifer (stellate scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: The known distribution of Ceroplastes stellifer is primarily tropical and subtropical. The scale is expected to be able to establish throughout the warmer parts of California and receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California. Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Ceroplastes stellifer is known to feed on a wide variety of plants in at least 21 families. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Scale insects have high reproductive rates and may disperse long distances when infested plants or plant parts are moved. They may also be spread by wind or by hitchhiking on plants, animals, or equipment. Ceroplastes stellifer receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Ceroplastes stellifer is not documented reducing crop yields. It might reduce the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants with its presence and increase crop production costs in nurseries and orchards. It is not expected to change cultural practices, vector other organisms, injure animals, or disrupt water supplies. Stellate scale receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Ceroplastes stellifer is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It is not expected to feed on any threatened or endangered species or disrupt critical habitats. It might trigger new chemical treatments in orchards and the nursery industry and by residents who find infested plants unsightly. Host plants of the scale are common as ornamentals and in home gardens and might be significantly affected by this pest. Stellate scale receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Ceroplastes stellifer (Stellate Scale): High (13**)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Ceroplastes stellifer has not been found in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (13)

Uncertainty:

There have not been any recent surveys for stellate scale. It could be present in some localities.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Ceroplastes stellifer has never been found in California and is likely to have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to establish in the state. An “A” rating is justified.

References:

¹ Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy. ScaleNet. http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/coccidae/Ceroplastesstellifer.htm

http://scalenet.info/validname/Vinsonia/stellifera/

² USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

³Scale Insect Fact Sheet: Ceroplastes stillifer (Westwood). http://idtools.org/id/scales/factsheet.php?name=6919

⁴ Hodgson, Chris J. and Ana L.B.G. Peronti. 2012. A revision of the wax scale insects (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea: Ceroplastinae) of the Afrotropical region. Zootaxa 3372: 265pp. http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/list/2012/3372.html

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦ Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:

Consequences of Introduction: 1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦ Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦ Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦ Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦ Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Dysmicoccus texensis (Tinsley): A Mealybug

June 22, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Dysmicoccus texensis (Tinsley): A Mealybug

Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Dysmicoccus texensis is regularly intercepted by CDFA and presently has a temporary rating of “Q”. A pest rating proposal is required to assign a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Dysmicoccus texensis is a mealybug that is often found feeding on plant roots, where large populations prevent water and nutrient absorption, weaken plants, and reduce crop yields³. It is considered a pest of great pest importance on coffee in Brasil³(Rubiaceae: Coffea sp.¹). It has also been observed feeding, sometimes on aerial plant parts, on other hosts including: Anacardiaceae: Mangifera indica¹; Araceae: Dieffenbachia sp.¹; Bromeliaceae: Vriesea macrostachya¹; Euphorbiaceae: Manihot esculenta¹; Fabaceae: Acacia cornigera¹, Acacia veracruzensis¹, Acacia sphaerocephala¹, Acacia farnesiana¹, Inga inga¹, Inga ruiziana¹, Inga punctata¹, Inga laurina¹, Trifolium sp.¹; Malvaceae: Theobroma cacao¹, Theobroma amplexicaule¹, Meliaceae: Guarea sp.¹; Musaceae: Musa textilis¹, Musa paradisiaca¹; Myrtaceae: Psidium guajava¹; Polygonaceae: Coccoloba sp.¹; Rutaceae: Citrus latifolia¹; Citrus aurantium¹; Solanaceae: Solanum sp.¹. Coffee root mealybug may be transported long distances through commerce in infested plants or plant parts.

Worldwide Distribution: Dysmicoccus texensis is native to the Neotropical region including southern Texas, Mexico, Central America, and South America¹. It is also found in the Bahamas, Jamaica, Puerto Rico, Trinidad, and the U.S. Virgin Islands¹.

Official Control: Dysmicoccus texensis is not known to be under official control in any other states or nations².

California Distribution: Dysmicoccus texensis has never been found in the environment in California.

California Interceptions: Dysmicoccus texensis was intercepted 44 times by CDFA’s border stations, dog teams, and high risk programs between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2014. The mealybug was found on limes, grapefruit, bananas, bell peppers, sugar apple, and aerial parts of unidentified plants.

The risk Dysmicoccus texensis (coffee root mealybug) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Host plants of Dysmicoccus texensis are commonly grown in California as both crops and ornamentals. Dysmicoccus texensis is likely to establish wherever hosts are grown. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California. Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Dysmicoccus texensis is known to feed on at least 24 species of plants in 13 families. It receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Mealybugs have high reproductive rates and may be dispersed long distances by the movement of infested plants or fresh plant parts. They may also be dispersed locally by wind or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or animals. Dysmicoccus texensis receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Although known hosts of Dysmicoccus texensis include economically important crops such as Citrus and Solanum, it is primarily considered a pest of coffee. Yields of other crops are not likely to be significantly reduced. However, the mealybug may increase production costs in the nursery industry. It has potential to lower the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants with its presence. Although D. texensis is not known to be considered a quarantine pest, several of California’s trading partners are significant producers of coffee. Since the mealybug is well documented as a serious pest of coffee, it is reasonable to expect that its presence could trigger disruptions of fresh fruit exports. Dysmicoccus texensis receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Dysmicoccus texensis is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. Trifolium is a host of D. texensis and several species of Trifolium are listed as threatened or endangered plants in California. These potential hosts include showy Indian clover (Trifolium amoenum), Pacific Grove clover (Trifolium polyodon), and Monterey clover (Trifolium trichocalyx). Dysmicoccus texensis is not expected to disrupt critical habitats. The mealybug may trigger new chemical treatments in orchards and the nursery industry. It is not expected to have significant impacts on cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings. Dysmicoccus texensis receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Dysmicoccus texensis: High (13)**

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Dysmicoccus texensis has never been found in the environment of California. It receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (13)

Uncertainty:

There have not been any recent surveys for Dysmicoccus texensis. It is possible that it could be present in some parts of the state.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Dysmicoccus texensis has never been found in the environment California. Its entry to the state is likely to have significant economic and environmental impacts. An “A” rating is justified.

References:

¹ Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy. ScaleNet. Dysmicoccus texensis is the valid name. http://scalenet.info/validname/Dysmicoccus/texensis/

²USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

³Neves, Pedro Manuel Oliveira Janeiro, Lenira Viana Costa Santa-Cecília, Jair Campos de Moraes, Luís Cláudio Paterno Silveira, and Alcides Moino Junior. 2006. Coffee root mealybug biology control entomopathogenic nematodes. Universidade Federal de Lavras. http://www.openthesis.org/documents/Biologics-aspects-Dysmicoccus-texensis-Tinsley-331392.html

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦ Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:

Consequences of Introduction: 1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦ Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦ Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦ Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦ Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Aleurodicus dispersus Russell (Spiraling Whitefly)

June 22, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Aleurodicus dispersus Russell (Spiraling Whitefly)

Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

In October 2013, USDA released a DEEP report proposing to deregulate Aleurodicus dispersus (spiraling whitefly). The insect is currently “Q”-rated by CDFA, so a pest rating proposal is needed to determine future direction.

History & Status:

Background: Spiraling whitefly is highly polyphagous, feeding on plants in 49 different plant families. Known hosts include such economically important pests as avocado, citrus, eggplant, pepper, rose, Prunus spp., and palms. Interceptions indicate that the whitefly often moves long distances in the trade of plants and flowers.

Worldwide Distribution: The native range of spiraling whitefly is believed to be the tropical Americas. It was described from Florida in 1965 from specimens collected as early as 1950. Since then it has been found to have a widespread distribution including Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and Mexico. Furthermore, it is reported in numerous nations in Central America, the Caribbean, South America, Europe and the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and Oceania.

Official Control: Arizona has a state quarantine against all citrus whiteflies. Aleurodicus dispersus is also listed as a harmful organism by Antigua and Barbuda, Chile, China, French Polynesia, Grenada, Guatemala, Honduras, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Korea, Mexico, Morocco, and New Zealand².

California Distribution: Spiraling whitefly has not been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: Spiraling whitefly is frequently intercepted on shipments of plants, leaves, and flowers from Hawaii and Florida. It has been intercepted more than 1300 times since 11/29/2000.

The risk spiraling whitefly would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Spiraling whitefly has been present in Florida for over 60 years but has not spread beyond the central portion of the state. Primarily a tropical species, it is reportedly limited by cold temperatures. In California the whitefly would likely be limited to southern and coastal areas. Spiraling whitefly receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California. Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Spiraling whitefly is a highly polyphagous insect that is known to feed on plants from 49 different plant families. The whitefly receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Whiteflies reproduce rapidly and can be spread long distances by wind or through the movement of plants and flowers. Spiraling whitefly receives a High(3) in this category.

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Spiraling whitefly was originally considered an economic pest in Hawaii when it was introduced. However, damage is now limited as a successful biological control agent was introduced. In the absence of this biological control agent in California, the whitefly may be expected to lower crop yield by both sucking juices from plants and reducing their photosynthetic capacity by contaminating leaf surfaces with sooty mold. They may also lower crop value by triggering treatment and/or disfiguring nursery stock with their presence and with sooty mold. Furthermore, Arizona maintains a quarantine against all citrus whiteflies and many of California’s trading partners list Aleurodicus dispersus as a harmful organism. This could lead to disruptions in markets for California citrus. Spiraling whitefly receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Rosa minutafolia (small-leaved rose) is listed as an endangered species in California and is a potential host for spiraling whitefly. The whitefly may also trigger additional chemical treatments. The whitefly receives a High(3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Aleurodicus dispersus (Spiraling Whitefly): High(14)**

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Spiraling whitefly has not been found in the environment of California. It receives a Not established(0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High(14)

Uncertainty:

Spiraling whitefly has been intercepted more than a thousand times in California. However, it has never been found in the environment. This may indicate that environmental conditions in the state are unfavorable for establishment of the species.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

In the absence of a successful biological control program in California, spiraling whitefly is expected to have significant economic and environmental impacts. An “A”-rating is justified.

References:

¹Zlotina, Marina 2013. Deregulation Evaluation of Established Pests (DEEP); DEEP Report on Aleurodicus dispersus Russell: Spiralling Whitefly

² USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦ Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:

Consequences of Introduction: 1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦ Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦ Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦ Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦ Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (Cooley): Magnolia White Scale

June 21, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (Cooley): Magnolia White Scale

Hemiptera: Diaspididae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is frequently intercepted by CDFA and requires a pest rating proposal to support its pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is a highly polyphagous armored scale insect that is a pest of many ornamental plants in the nursery industry¹. The scales live on the upper and lower leaf surfaces and green stems of plants². Infestations can cause loss of vigor, spots on foliage, deformation of infested plant parts, loss of leaves, and may lead to death of plants². Known hosts include: Actinidiaceae: Actinidia spp.^3,4; Adoxaceae: Viburnum sp.^3,4; Agavaceae: Yucca sp.³; Amaryllidaceae: Agapanthus sp.^3,4, Eurycles sp.^3,4; Anacardiaceae: Anacardium occidentale^3,4, Campnosperma brevipetiolata^3,4, Mangifera indica^3,4, Mangifera sp.^3,4; Annonaceae: Annona squamosa^3,4, Artabotrys hexapetutus³, Canangium odoratum^3,4; Apocynaceae: Adenium sp.^3,4, Allamanda sp.^3,4, Alyxia olivaeformis^3,4, Calotropis gigantea⁴; Nerium indicum^3,4, Nerium oleander^3,4, Nerium sp.^3,4, Plumeria acuminata^3,4, Plumeria acutifolia^3,4, Plumeria sp.^3,4, Thevetia peruviana^3,4, Trachelospermum asiaticum^3,4, Trachelospermum jasminoides^3,4, Trachelospermum sp.^3,4, Willughbeia sp.^3,4; Aquifoliaceae: Ilex cinerea³, Ilex crenata^3,4, Ilex integra^3,4, Ilex latifolia^3,4, Ilex sp.^3,4, Ilex viridis³; Araceae: Acorus gramineus^3,4, Alocasia sp.^3,4, Philodendron sp.^3,4; Araliaceae: Fatsia japonica^3,4, Hedera canariensis^3,4, Hedera helix^3,4, Hedera rhombea^3,4; Arecaceae: Archontophoenix alexandrae^3,4, Areca catechu^3,4, Areca sp.^3,4, Arecastrum romanzoffianum^3,4, Arenga engleri^3,4, Butia capitata^3,4, Caryota sp.^3,4, Chamaerops humilis^3,4, Chrysalidocarpus dictyospermi^3,4, Chrysalidocarpus lutescens^3,4, Chrysalidocarpus sp.^3,4, Clinostigma savoryana^3,4, Clinostigma sp.^3,4, Cocos nucifera^3,4, Cocos sp.^3,4, Corypha elata^3,4, Elaeis sp.^3,4, Howeia sp.^3,4, Livistona sp.^3,4, Neodypsis baroni^3,4, Nipa fruticans^3,4, Phoenix roebelenii^3,4, Rhapis humilis^3,4, Sabal mexicana^3,4, Seaforthia sp.^3,4, Serenoa repens^3,4, Trachycarpus sp.^3,4; Asclepiadaceae: Calotropis gigantean³; Asparagaceae: Asparagus sp.^3,4, Dracena sp.⁴, Yucca sp.⁴; Asteraceae: Helianthus annuus^3,4, Helianthus sp.^3,4, Pyrrhopappus carolinianus^3,4; Berberidaceae: Nandina domestica^3,4; Bignoniaceae: Tabebuia pentaphylla^3,4; Bromeliaceae: Bromelia sp.^3,4, Vriesea sp.^3,4; Burseraceae: Canarium album³; Buxaceae: Buxus sp.^3,4; Cannaceae: Canna generalis^3,4; Caprifoliaceae: Viburnum arboricolum^3,4; Viburnum awabuki^3,4, Viburnum odoratissimum^3,4, Weigela sp.^3,4; Caricaceae: Carica papaya^3,4; Celastraceae: Euonymus sacrosancta^3,4, Schaefferia sp.^3,4; Clusiaceae: Calophyllum inophyllum^3,4; Combretaceae: Terminalia catappa^3,4; Cornaceae: Aucuba japonica^3,4, Cornus controversa^3,4, Cornus florida^3,4; Crassulaceae: Bryophyllum sp.^3,4; Cycadaceae: Cycas circinalis^3,4, Cycas revoluta^3,4, Cycas sp.^3,4, Zamia floridana^3,4, Zamia sp.^3,4; Daphniphyllaceae: Daphniphyllum sp.^3,4; Ebenaceae: Diospyros lotus^3,4, Diospyros sp.^3,4; Elaeocarpaceae: Elaeocarpus decipiens^3,4, Elaeocarpus photiniaefolius^3,4; Ericaceae: Chimaphila maculata^3,4, Rhododendron sp.^3,4; Euphorbiaceae: Aleurites moluccana^3,4, Aleurites sp.^3,4, Bischofia javanica^3,4, Daphniphyllum glaucescens^3,4, Daphniphyllum macropodum^3,4, Daphniphyllum teijsmanni^3,4, Euphorbia humistrata^3,4, Excoecaria orientalis^3,4, Hevea brasiliensis^3,4, Hevea sp.^3,4, Jatropha hastata^3,4, Sapium sebiferum^3,4; Fagaceae: Lithocarpus sp.^3,4; Garryaceae: Aucuba sp.^3,4; Gnetaceae: Gnetum luofuerise³; Hamamelidaceae: Liquidambar formosana^3,4; Heliconiaceae: Heliconia sp.^3,4; Hemerocallidaceae: Dianella sp.³; Hippocastanaceae: Aesculus turbinate³; Hydrangeaceae: Deutzia scabra crenata^3,4; Iridaceae: Iris sp.^3,4, Moraea bicolor^3,4; Lardizabalaceae: Akebia lobata^3,4, Akebia quinata^3,4, Akebia trifoliate^3,4; Lauraceae: Machilus kobu^3,4, Persea americana^3,4; Lecythidaceae: Barringtonia speciose^3,4; Liliaceae: Cordyline terminalis^3,4, Dianella ensifolia^3,4, Dianella montana^3,4, Dianella tasmanica^3,4, Liriope muscari^3,4, Nolina sp.^3,4, Phormium tenax^3,4, Sansevieria nilotica^3,4, Yucca gloriosa^3,4, Yucca recurvifolia^3,4; Loganiaceae: Fagraea berteriana^3,4; Loranthaceae: Dendrophthoe falcate³, Ettingsh sp.³; Magnoliaceae: Magnolia denudata^3,4, Magnolia grandiflora^3,4, Magnolia kobus^3,4, Magnolia officinalis^3,4, Magnolia soulangeana^3,4, Magnolia sp.^3,4, Magnolia virginiana^3,4, Michelia alba^3,4, Michelia champaca^3,4, Michelia compressa^3,4, Michelia figo^3,4, Michelia fuscata^3,4, Michelia sp.^3,4, Schizandra chinensis^3,4; Malvaceae: Hibiscus sp.^3,4; Marantaceae: Clinogyne virgata^3,4; Melastomaceae: Melastoma sp.^3,4; Meliaceae: Aglaia odorata^3,4; Moraceae: Ficus carica^3,4, Ficus microcarpa³, Ficus pumila^3,4, Ficus sp.^3,4, Ficus wightiana^3,4, Morus alba^3,4, Morus sp.^3,4; Musaceae: Musa paradisiaca^3,4, Musa sp.^3,4, Strelitzia nicolai^3,4, Strelitzia reginae^3,4; Myristicaceae: Myristica fragrans^3,4, Myristica laurifolia^3,4, Myristica moschata^3,4, Myristica sp.^3,4; Myrtaceae: Callistemon sp.^3,4, Eugenia^3,4, Pimenta officinalis^3,4, Syzigium eumini³; Oleaceae: Olea sp.^3,4, Osmanthus fragrans^3,4, Syringa amurensis^3,4; Pandanaceae: Pandanus odoratissimus^3,4; Phyllanthaceae: Bischofia sp.^3,4; Poaceae Bambusa sp.^3,4; Podocarpaceae: Podocarpus nagi^3,4; Polygonaceae: Polygonum spp.^3,4; Pteridophyta: Adiantum sp.^3,4; Rhizophoraceae: Rhizophora mangle^3,4, Rhizophora sp.^3,4; Rosaceae: Prunus padus^3,4; Rubiaceae: Adina rubella^3,4, Gardenia jasminoides^3,4, Gardenia sp.^3,4, Ixora coccinea³; Ruscaceae: Dracaena sp.³; Rutaceae: Calodendrum spp.^3,4, Citrus sp.^3,4; Sarraceniaceae: Sarracenia purpurea^3,4; Saxifragaceae: Deutzia sp.^3,4, Ribes sp.^3,4; Solanaceae: Capsicum annuum^3,4; Strelitziaceae: Ravenala madagascariensis^3,4, Strelitzia sp.^3,4; Symplocaceae: Symplocos ramosissima^3,4; Taxaceae: Taxus cuspidata^3,4, Taxus sp.^3,4, Torreya sp.^3,4; Theaceae: Camellia japonica^3,4, Camellia oleifera^3,4, Camellia sasanqua^3,4, Camellia sinensis^3,4, Camellia sp.^3,4, Eurya acuminata^3,4, Eurya crenatifolia^3,4, Eurya japonica^3,4, Eurya strigillosa^3,4, Thea sinensis^3,4; Trochodendraceae: Trochodendron aralioides^3,4; Ulmaceae: Aphananthe sp.^3,4; Verbenaceae: Stachytarpheta jamaicensis^3,4; Xanthorrhoeaceae: Dianella sp.⁴; Uncertain: Zorisma ovalifolia^3,4. Pseudalacaspis cockerelli may be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is probably native to Asia². From there it has spread throughout much of the world^3,4. It was first found in Hawaii in 1898² and Florida in 1942¹. Within the continental United States it is now considered widespread in the Gulf States and Georgia¹.

Official Control: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is listed as a harmful organism by Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Panama, and Peru⁵.

California Distribution: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli has not been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is regularly found by CDFA’s high risk inspections, border stations, dog teams, and nursery inspections. Between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2014 the scale was intercepted 2,187 times, typically on nursery stock and fresh plant parts from Florida and Hawaii.

The risk Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (magnolia white scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is highly polyphagous and is likely to find suitable hosts throughout California and establish a widespread distribution in the state. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California. Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli feeds on hundreds of species of plants in at least 81 families. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Scale insects are capable of rapid reproduction and can be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved. They may also disperse locally by crawling, wind, or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or animals. Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is likely to reduce the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants with its presence. It is also likely to increase production costs by triggering new management programs. The scale is also considered a quarantine pest by several of California’s trading partners. Its presence in the state may disrupt markets for nursery stock and fresh fruit. Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is likely to trigger additional treatment programs in the nursery industry and by residents who find infested plants unsightly. The scale insect is also likely to significantly affect many ornamental plantings. It receives a High (3) rating in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

Consequences of Introduction to California for Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (Magnolia White Scale): High (14)

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli has not been found in the environment of California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (14)

Uncertainty:

Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli is frequently intercepted by CDFA. Presumably, it enters California at other times undetected. It is possible that it has been introduced and is established in some localities. Alternatively, it could be failing to establish.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli has not been found in California and is expected to have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to establish in the state. An “A” rating is justified.

References:

¹ Hamon, Avas B. 2015. University of Florida Featured Creatures. Common name: false oleander scale. http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/creatures/orn/scales/false_oleander_scale.htm

² Tenbrink, Victoria L. and Arnold H. Hara. 1992. Hawaii Crop Knowledge Master: Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (Cooley). http://www.extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/Type/p_cocker.htm

³ SEL Catalog.

⁴ Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy. ScaleNet.

http://scalenet.info/catalogue/Pseudaulacaspis%20cockerelli/

http://scalenet.info/validname/Pseudaulacaspis/cockerelli/

⁵ USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦ Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:

Consequences of Introduction: 1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦ Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦ Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦ Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦ Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Ripersiella hibisci (Kawai & Takagi): Root Mealybug

April 12, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Ripersiella hibisci (Kawai & Takagi): Root Mealybug

Hemiptera: Rhizoecidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Ripersiella hibisci is frequently intercepted by CDFA and is presently assigned a temporary rating of “Q”. A pest rating proposal is required to assign a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Ripersiella hibisci is a polyphagous mealybug that feeds exclusively on the roots of plants^1,2. This mealybug inhabits the rootball or the area between the rootball and the plant container where it is difficult to detect¹. Heavily infested plants show poor growth, wilt, and turn yellow or grey¹. Plants may be prevented from flowering and eventually die¹. Known hosts include: Amaryllidaceae: Crinum asiaticum²; Apocynaceae: Nerium oleander²; Araceae: Dieffenbachia spp.²; Arecaceae: Areca spp.², Butia capitata (PDR 1316475), Caryota sp. (1075104), Chambeyronia macrocarpa (1316833), Dypsis decaryi (1253915), Gronophyllum spp.², Ptychosperma macarthurii (1075011), Phoenix roebellenii², Phoenix canariensis², Ravenea rivularis (1075143), Rhapis excelsa (1040975), Rhapis multifida (1308317), Rhapis spp.², Sabal spp.², Syragus romanzoffiana (1122973), Wodyetia bifurcata (1317460); Bromeliaceae: Cryptanthus spp.²; Commelinaceae: Dichorisandra thyrsiflora²; Cyperaceae: Carex spp.²; Ericaceae: Rhododendron sp.¹; Geraniaceae: Pelargonium spp.²; Lythraceae: Cuphea hyssopifolia², Punica granatum¹; Malvaceae: Hibiscus rosa-sinensis²; Marantaceae: Calathea sp.¹; Moraceae: Ficus benjamina (1230171), Ficus sp.¹; Oleaceae: Ligustrum ovalifolium¹; Poaceae: Hakonechloa macra²; Rhamnaceae: Sageretia theezans¹; Rubiaceae: Serissa foetida¹, Serissa spp.²; Solanaceae: bell pepper (Capsicum annuum (58665)); Ulmaceae: Ulmus parvifolia¹, Zelkova serrata¹, Zelkova spp.²; Zingiberaceae: Zingiber sp. (1188341). Ripersiella hibisci may be transported long distances when infested plants are moved.

Worldwide Distribution: Ripersiella hibisci is probably native to China or Japan. From there it has spread to Hawaii, Florida, and Puerto Rico².

Official Control: Ripersiella hibisci is listed as a quarantine pest by the European Union¹.

California Distribution: Ripersiella hibisci has not been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: Ripersiella hibisci has been intercepted 275 times by CDFA on plants from Hawaii, Florida, Texas, and Arizona. Most interceptions have occurred on palms.

The risk Ripersiella hibisci (root mealybug) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Host plants for Ripersiella hibisci are grown throughout most of California. As it feeds on roots below ground, the mealybug has some protection from temperature extremes. Root mealybug receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California. Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Ripersiella hibisci is known to feed on at least 40 species of plants in 20 families. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Mealybugs are capable of rapid reproduction and can be transported long distances when infested plants or fresh plant parts are moved. Ripersiella hibisci may also disperse locally by the crawlers being flushed out of plant pots when the plants are watered, then crawling into adjacent plant pots through drainage holes in their bases; also through wind, or by hitchhiking on clothing, equipment, or animals¹. Its cryptic habits mean that root mealybug may easily be dispersed by trade in infested plants without being detected. Ripersiella hibisci receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Ripersiella hibisci is likely to lower the value of nursery stock by disfiguring plants or reducing plant quality. It is also likely to increase production costs of nursery stock. Root mealybug may also disrupt markets. Ripersiella hibisci receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Ripersiella hibisci is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It may feed on threatened or endangered plants such as white sedge (Carex albida) and Tompkins’s sedge (Carex tompkinsii). Root mealybug is not expected to disrupt critical habitats. It may trigger treatment programs in the nursery industry and urban areas. Host plants of Ripersiella hibisci are widely grown as ornamentals in California and may be significantly impacted. The mealybug receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Ripersiella hibisci (root mealybug): High (14)**

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Ripersiella hibisci has never been found in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (14)

Uncertainty:

Interceptions of Ripersiella hibisci by both California and Europe have yielded many new host records. It is likely that the host range of this mealybug will continue to expand.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Ripersiella hibisci has never been found in California and is likely to have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to establish in the state. An “A” rating is justified.

References:

¹ MacLeod, A. 2005. Rhizoecus hibisci. Data sheets on quarantine pests. European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. http://www.eppo.int/QUARANTINE/insects/Rhizoecus_hibisci/DS_Rhizoecus_hibisci.pdf

² Miller, Dug, Yair Ben-Dov, Gary Gibson, and Nate Hardy. ScaleNet. http://scalenet.info/validname/Ripersiella/hibisci/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦ Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:

Consequences of Introduction: 1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦ Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦ Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦ Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦ Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls

Hymenoptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Wasmannia auropunctata (Roger): Little Fire Ant

April 12, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Little Fire Ant: Eli Sarnat, PIAkey: Invasive Ants of the Pacific Islands, USDA APHIS ITP, Bugwood.org — Little Fire Ant. Photo by: Eli Sarnat, PIAkey: Invasive Ants of the Pacific Islands, USDA APHIS ITP, Bugwood.org

Wasmannia auropunctata (Roger): Little Fire Ant

Hymenoptera: Formicidae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Wasmannia auropunctata is regularly intercepted by CDFA and is presently assigned a temporary rating of “Q”. A pest rating proposal is required to assign a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Wasmannia auropunctata is a common tramp ant species notorious for its painful and long-lasting sting¹. These tiny ants nest under leaf debris, rotten limbs, stones, in the crotches of trees, in clumps of grass, and behind the sheaths of palms¹. An entire colony can establish inside a macadamia nut shell². The ants are highly adaptable and do well under wet or dry conditions and in open or shady areas¹. They feed on honeydew, dead arthropods, small animals, live insects, and forage in homes for oily foods¹. Wasmannia auropunctata can easily spread long distances hidden in plants, logs, greenwaste, gravel, and even cars².

Worldwide Distribution: Wasmannia auropunctata is native to a large region that spans from central Argentina to southern Texas⁴. From there it has spread throughout the Caribbean, to parts of tropical Africa, and to Hawaii and other Pacific islands⁴. It was first found in Florida in 1924 and Hawaii in 1999⁴.

Official Control: Wasmannia auropunctata is listed as a harmful organism by Bermuda, French Polynesia, Japan, and Taiwan³.

California Distribution: Wasmannia auropunctata has not been found in the environment of California except for possibly in 1937⁴.

California Interceptions: Wasmannia auropunctata has been intercepted 46 times by CDFA’s high risk programs and border stations. Most interceptions have been on cut flowers, fruit, and plants from Hawaii and Florida.

The risk Wasmannia auropunctata would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Wasmannia auropunctata is found primary in warm climates. It has been present in Florida for more than 90 years but has not spread beyond the southern half of the state. It is native to southern Texas but has not spread. Wasmannia auropunctata will probably be limited to southern and coastal California. It receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California. Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Wasmannia auropunctata is a generalist forager that can feed on a wide variety of sources. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: Ants are capable of rapid reproduction and can disperse long distances when colonies or queens are moved. Wasmannia auropunctata receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Wasmannia auropunctata is not expected to lower crop yields or increase crop production costs. It is listed as a harmful organism by several of California’s trading partners and could cause trade disruptions as a contaminating pest on a wide variety of commodities. It is not expected to vector other pestiferous organisms. Wasmannia auropunctata is known to tend honeydew producing insects and may consume parasitoids, disrupting biological control of pests. They are also known to be attracted to eyes for moisture². Stings associated with this behavior sometimes lead to epidemics of blindness in animals². This may lead to changes in cultural practices in livestock production. The ants are not expected to interfere with water supplies. Wasmannia auropunctata receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: Invasive ants such as Wasmannia auropunctata may cause slow, long-term ecological changes that have potential to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. They may also trigger new treatment programs by residents who find infestations and the associated stings and blind pets unacceptable and in the nursery and livestock industries. This may lead to significant impacts on cultural practices. Wasmannia auropunctata receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Wasmannia auropunctata (Little Fire Ant): High (14)**

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Wasmannia auropunctata is not known to be present in California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (14)

Uncertainty:

There are already other invasive tramp ant species established in California. These other ants may preclude some of the economic and environmental impacts of Wasmannia auropunctata.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Wasmannia auropunctata is not known to be present in California and is expected to have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to establish in the state. An “A” rating is justified.

References:

¹ Brooks, Shawn and J.C. Nickerson. Common name: little fire ant. University of Florida Featured Creatures. http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/creatures/urban/ants/little_fire_ant.htm

² Little Fire Ant: Wasmannia auropunctata. http://hdoa.hawaii.gov/pi/files/2014/05/2014-LFA-Brochure.pdf

³ USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

⁴ Wetterer, James K. 2013. Worldwide spread of the little fire ant, Wasmannia auropunctata (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Terrestrial arthropod reviews 6: 173-184. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=13&ved=0CGoQFjAM&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fprofile%2FJames_Wetterer%2Fpublication%2F257645059_Worldwide_spread_of_the_little_fire_ant_Wasmannia_auropunctata_%2528Hymenoptera_Formicidae%2529%2Flinks%2F02e7e5258d69a288fd000000.pdf&ei=2VokVdW3KYfBgwSqwIGYCw&usg=AFQjCNF29YvMf8xw_JFsjIN_lj5aEincAg&bvm=bv.89947451,d.eXY

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦ Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:

Consequences of Introduction: 1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦ Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦ Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦ Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦ Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.

Pest Rating: A

Posted by ls

Hemiptera, Insects, Mites & Earthworms

Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis (Green): Trilobe Scale

April 12, 2016 Jason Leathers

California Pest Rating for

Psuedaonidia trilobitiformis (Green) — Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis (Green): Trilobe Scale
Photo Credit: National Bureau of Agricultural Insect Resources (NBAIR)

Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis (Green): Trilobe Scale

Hemiptera: Diaspididae

Pest Rating: A

PEST RATING PROFILE

Initiating Event:

Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is commonly intercepted by CDFA and presently has a temporary rating of “Q”. A pest rating proposal is required to determine a permanent pest rating.

History & Status:

Background: Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is a polyphagous, widespread armored scale insect. Known hosts include: Agavaceae: Agave mexicana¹, Cordyline sp.¹, Cordyline neo-caledonyca¹, Dracaena sp.¹; Anacardiaceae: Anacardium sp.¹, Anacardium occidentale¹, Mangifera sp.¹, Mangifera indica¹, Nothopegia colebrookiana¹, Schinus molle¹, Schinus terebinthifolius¹, Sclerocarya caffra¹; Annonaceae: Annona sp.¹, Annona reticulata¹, Annona squamosa¹, Cananga odoratum¹; Apocynaceae: Acocanthera abessinica¹, Carissa carandas¹, Carissa madagascariensis¹, Carissophyllum sp.¹, Catharanthus roseus¹, Cerbera oppositifolia¹, Echites sp.¹, Nerium sp.¹, Nerium indicum¹, Nerium oleander¹, Ochrosia oppositifolia¹, Plumeria acutifolia¹, Plumeria rubra¹, Thevetia sp.¹, Thevetia peruviana¹, Trachelospermum foetidum¹; Araceae: Monstera deliciosa¹, Philodendrom sp.¹, Pothos aureus¹; Arecaceae: Cocos nucifera¹, Dictyosperma alba¹, Elaeis guineensis¹, Hyphaene thebaica¹; Bignoniaceae: Crescentia cujete¹, Pyrostegia venusta¹; Boraginaceae: Cordia myxa¹; Bromeliaceae: Ananas sativa¹; Caricaceae: Carica papaya¹; Combretaceae: Terminalia arjuna¹, Terminalia catappa¹; Corylaceae: Corylus sp.¹; Ebenaceae: Diospyros sp.¹, Diospyros eriantha¹, Diospyros kaki¹; Euphorbiaceae: Aleurites sp.¹, Aleurites fordi¹, Aleurites moluccana¹, Aleurites montana¹, Codiaeum sp.¹, Gelonium lanceolatum¹, Hura crepitans¹, Jatropha curcas¹; Fabaceae: Acacia simplicifolia¹, Acacia spirorbis¹, Bauhinia sp.¹, Bauhinia monandra¹, Bauhinia variegata¹, Cassia sp.¹, Cassia siamea¹, Cassia spectabilis¹, Clitoria terneata¹, Crotalaria sp.¹, Dalbergia sp.¹, Dalbergia championii¹, Derris indica¹, Mucuna bennettii¹, Pithecolobium unguis-cati¹; Fagaceae: Quercus sp.¹; Flacourtiaceae: Flacourtia ramontchi¹, Hydnocarpus wightiana¹, Scolopia oldhamii¹; Fumariaceae: Fumaria sp.¹; Guttiferae: Calophyllum inophyllum¹; Hydrangeaceae: Hydrangea sp.¹; Lauraceae: Cinnamomum zeylanicum¹, Laurus nobilis¹, Machilus sp.¹, Persea sp.¹, Persea americana¹, Persea gratissima¹; Lecythidaceae: Barringtonia asiatica¹; Liliaceae: Taetsia neocaledonica¹; Magnoliaceae: Michelia champaca¹; Malvaceae: Hibiscus sp.¹; Marantaceae: Maranta sp.¹; Meliaceae: Xylocarpus obovatus¹; Moraceae: Artocarpus sp.¹, Artocarpus altilis¹, Artocarpus communis¹, Artocarpus heterophyllus¹, Artocarpus incisa¹, Artocarpus integrifolius¹, Brosimum utile¹, Cudrania cochinchinensis¹, Ficus sp.¹, Ficus awkeotsang¹, Ficus benghalensis¹, Ficus elastica¹, Ficus pumila¹, Ficus religiosa¹, Ficus repens¹, Ficus retusa¹, Ficus scandens¹, Ficus swinhoei¹, Ficus thonningii¹, Ficus trichoclada¹, Ficus wightiana japonica¹; Myrtaceae Eugenia sp.¹, Eugenia jaboticaba¹, Myrtus sp.¹, Psidium sp.¹, Psidium cattleianum¹, Psidium guajava¹; Naucleaceae: Cephalanthus sp.¹; Nyctaginaceae: Bouganvillea sp.¹; Oleaceae: Jasminum sp.¹; Passifloraceae: Passiflora sp.¹, Passiflora edulis¹, Passiflora laurifolia¹, Passiflora quadrangularis¹; Pittosporaceae: Pittosporum sp.¹; Polygonaceae: Coccoloba uvifera¹; Punicaceae: Punica granatum¹; Rhamnaceae: Ziziphus sp.¹, Ziziphus spina-christi¹; Rosaceae: Eriobotrya japonica¹, Mespilus germanica¹, Prunus domestica¹, Pyrus sp.¹, Rosa sp.¹; Rubiaceae: Coffea sp.¹, Coffea arabica¹, Coffea liberica¹, Ixora sp.¹, Ixora coccinia¹; Rutaceae: Citrus sp.¹, Citrus aurantium¹, Citrus aurantium bigaradia¹, Citrus bergamia¹, Citrus decumana¹, Citrus grandis¹, Citrus histrix¹, Citrus limetta¹, Citrus limon¹, Citrus maxima¹, Citrus nobilis unchiu¹, Citrus sinensis¹, Murraya exotica¹; Santalaceae: Santalum austro-caledonicum¹; Sapindaceae: Dodonaea viscosa¹, Euphoria longana¹, Litchi sinensis¹; Sapotaceae: Achras sapota¹, Mimusops sp.¹, Mimusops elengi¹; Solanaceae: Capsicum sp.¹, Capsicum annuum¹, Capsicum frutescens¹; Sterculiaceae: Theobroma cacao¹; Theaceae: Camellia sp.¹, Camellia japonica¹, Eurya japonica¹, Thea japonica¹; Thymelaeaceae: Peddiea africana¹; Tiliaceae: Grewia sp.1; Verbenaceae: Premna sp.¹, Tectona grandis¹; Vitaceae: Vitis vinifera¹.

Worldwide Distribution: Although it was first found in Sri Lanka, the native range of Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is uncertain. From its origin it has spread through much of Africa, Asia, Australia, the Pacific, South America, and Central America¹. In the continental United States the scale is known to be present in Florida¹.

Official Control: Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is listed as a quarantine pest by Japan, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand².

California Distribution: Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis has never been found in the environment of California.

California Interceptions: Between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2014 Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis was intercepted by CDFA’s dog teams, border stations, and high risk programs 139 times. These interceptions have occurred on a wide variety of commodities from Hawaii, Florida, Mexico, and many other countries in Central and South America. Many of the interceptions are on mango.

The risk Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis (trilobe scale) would pose to California is evaluated below.

Consequences of Introduction:

1) Climate/Host Interaction: Host plants of Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis are grown throughout California as agricultural crops and ornamentals. The scale insect is likely to establish wherever these plants are grown. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate if the pest would have suitable hosts and climate to establish in California. Score:

– Low (1) Not likely to establish in California; or likely to establish in very limited areas.

– Medium (2) may be able to establish in a larger but limited part of California.

– High (3) likely to establish a widespread distribution in California.

2) Known Pest Host Range: Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is highly polyphagous. The scale insect is known to feed on more than 174 plant species in 50 families. It receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the host range of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) has a very limited host range.

– Medium (2) has a moderate host range.

– High (3) has a wide host range.

3) Pest Dispersal Potential: The biology of Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is not well documented. However, scale insects have high reproductive rates. They are capable of moving long distances through commerce in infested plants and plant parts. Trilobe scale receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the natural and artificial dispersal potential of the pest. Score:

– Low (1) does not have high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– Medium (2) has either high reproductive or dispersal potential.

– High (3) has both high reproduction and dispersal potential.

4) Economic Impact: Trilobe scale is known to feed on many plants that are economically important in California including citrus, avocado, and grapes. However, despite its polyphagous nature and widespread distribution, Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis is not well-documented to be a plant pest and is therefore not expected to lower crop yields. It may increase crop production costs as growers may treat to control scale populations for quarantine purposes. Trilobe scale is listed as a quarantine pest by several of California’s trading partners. The presence of this scale in California may have significant impacts on California fresh fruit exports. Trilobe scale is not expected to change normal cultural practices, vector other pestiferous organisms, injure animals, or interfere with water supplies. Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis receives a Medium (2) in this category.

Evaluate the economic impact of the pest to California using the criteria below. Score:

A. The pest could lower crop yield.

B. The pest could lower crop value (includes increasing crop production costs).

C. The pest could trigger the loss of markets (includes quarantines).

D. The pest could negatively change normal cultural practices.

E. The pest can vector, or is vectored, by another pestiferous organism.

F. The organism is injurious or poisonous to agriculturally important animals.

G. The organism can interfere with the delivery or supply of water for agricultural uses.

– Low (1) causes 0 or 1 of these impacts.

– Medium (2) causes 2 of these impacts.

– High (3) causes 3 or more of these impacts.

5) Environmental Impact: If Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis were to enter California it is not expected to lower biodiversity, disrupt natural communities, or change ecosystem processes. It may directly affect threatened or endangered species, such as Rosa minutifolia (small-leaved rose), by feeding on them. It is not expected to disrupt critical habitats. It may trigger additional private treatment programs in fruit production and nursery industries. Since it is not well-documented as a pest in other locations, trilobe scale is not expected significantly impact cultural practices, home/urban gardening, or ornamental plantings. Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis receives a High (3) in this category.

Evaluate the environmental impact of the pest on California using the criteria below.

A. The pest could have a significant environmental impact such as lowering biodiversity, disrupting natural communities, or changing ecosystem processes.

B. The pest could directly affect threatened or endangered species.

C. The pest could impact threatened or endangered species by disrupting critical habitats.

D. The pest could trigger additional official or private treatment programs.

E. The pest significantly impacts cultural practices, home/urban gardening or ornamental plantings.

Score the pest for Environmental Impact. Score:

– Low (1) causes none of the above to occur.

– Medium (2) causes one of the above to occur.

– High (3) causes two or more of the above to occur.

**Consequences of Introduction to California for Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis (Trilobe Scale): High (14)**

Add up the total score and include it here.

–Low = 5-8 points

–Medium = 9-12 points

–High = 13-15 points

6) Post Entry Distribution and Survey Information: Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis has never been found in the environment of California and receives a Not established (0) in this category.

–Not established (0) Pest never detected in California, or known only from incursions.

–Low (-1) Pest has a localized distribution in California, or is established in one suitable climate/host area (region).

–Medium (-2) Pest is widespread in California but not fully established in the endangered area, or pest established in two contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

–High (-3) Pest has fully established in the endangered area, or pest is reported in more than two contiguous or non-contiguous suitable climate/host areas.

Final Score:

The final score is the consequences of introduction score minus the post entry distribution and survey information score: High (14)

Uncertainty:

Although it is not well-documented as a pest in other localities, Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis could have a more significant impact in California.

Conclusion and Rating Justification:

Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis has never been found in California and would be likely to have significant economic and environmental impacts if it were to enter the state. An “A”-rating is justified.

References:

¹ SEL Catalog Query Results. http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/catalogs/diaspidi/Pseudaonidiatrilobitiformis.htm

http://scalenet.info/catalogue/Pseudaonidia%20trilobitiformis/

² USDA Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance & Tracking System (PCIT) Phytosanitary Export Database (PExD). https://pcit.aphis.usda.gov/pcit/

Responsible Party:

Jason Leathers, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, CA, 95814, (916) 654-1211, plant.health[@]cdfa.ca.gov.

Comment Format:

♦ Comments should refer to the appropriate California Pest Rating Proposal Form subsection(s) being commented on, as shown below.

Example Comment:

Consequences of Introduction: 1. Climate/Host Interaction: [Your comment that relates to “Climate/Host Interaction” here.]

♦ Posted comments will not be able to be viewed immediately.

♦ Comments may not be posted if they:

Contain inappropriate language which is not germane to the pest rating proposal;

Contains defamatory, false, inaccurate, abusive, obscene, pornographic, sexually oriented, threatening, racially offensive, discriminatory or illegal material;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting sexual harassment or other forms of discrimination;

Violates agency regulations prohibiting workplace violence, including threats.

♦ Comments may be edited prior to posting to ensure they are entirely germane.

♦ Posted comments shall be those which have been approved in content and posted to the website to be viewed, not just submitted.