Risk Management Proposal:   
Actinidia  Plants for Planting  
 
FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
23 March 2018   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Plant Imports  
Plant s, Food & Environment  
Ministry for Primary Industries  
Pastoral House  
25 The Terrace  
PO Box 2526  
Wellington  6140  
New Zealand  
 
Tel: +64 4 894 0100  
Fax: +64 4 894 0662  
 
Email: plantimports@mpi.govt.nz 
i Table of Contents  
Submissions  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  3 
Summary  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................  4 
1. Introduction  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........  7 
 Objective  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  7 
 Purpose  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............  7 
 Background ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 7 
 Commodity description  ................................ ................................ .....................  7 
 Format of the standard  ................................ ................................ .....................  8 
 Scope of this risk management proposal  ................................ ..........................  9 
2. Context  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..............  10 
 Domestic  ................................ ................................ ................................ .........  10 
 International  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 11 
 Strength of measures  ................................ ................................ .....................  11 
3. Risk management appr oach  ................................ ................................ ...........  12 
 Source information  ................................ ................................ ..........................  12 
 Risk management measures  ................................ ................................ ..........  12 
4. Proposed risk management measures for Actinidia plants for planting  .... 16 
 Proposed requirements for screening for regulated pests  ..............................  16 
 Proposed requirements for post entry quarantine  ................................ ...........  20 
 Summary of regulated pests  ................................ ................................ ...........  22 
5. Feasibility and practicality of proposed requirements  ................................ . 30 
 Import permit  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 31 
Appendix 1:  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  33 
  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 3 of 36 
     Submissions  
The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) invites comment from interested parties on the proposed new 
import health standard  for Actinidia  Plants for Planting (i.e. nursery stock) . The proposed import health 
standard is supported by this risk management proposal.  
The p urpose of an import health standard is defined as follows in section 22(1) of the Biosecurity Act 
1993 (the Act): “An import health standard specifies requirements that must be met to effectively 
manage risks associated with importing risk goods, including  risks arising because importing the goods 
involves or might involve an incidentally imported new organism”.  
MPI must consult with interested parties in accordance with section 23 of the Act and MPI’s consultation 
policy before issuing or amending an impor t health standard under section 24A of the Act. MPI therefore 
seeks formal comment on the proposed import health standard . 
The following points may be of assistance in preparing comments:  
 
 Wherever possible, comments should be specific to a particular sect ion/requirement of the 
standard;  
 Where possible, reasons, data and supporting published references to support comments are 
requested;  
 The use of examples to illustrate particular points is encouraged.   
MPI encourages respondents to forward comments electro nically. Please include the following in your 
submission:  
 
 The title of the consultation document in the subject line of your email;  
 Your name and title (if applicable);  
 Your organisation’s name (if applicable);  
 Your address . 
Send submissions to: plantimports@mpi.govt.nz . 
If you wish to forward submissions in writing, please send them to the following address.  
Plant Imports  
Plants, Food & Environment  
Ministry for Primary Industries  
PO Box 2526  
Wellington 6 140 
New Zealand  
All submissions must arrive by close of business on Friday 4 May . Submissions  received by the closure 
date will be considered during the development of the final standard. Submissions received after the 
closure date may be held on file for consideration when the issued standard is next revised/reviewed.  
Official Information Act 1982  
Please note that your submission is public information and it is MPI policy to publish submissions and 
the review of submissions on the MPI website. Submissions  may also be the subject of requests for 
information under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA). The OIA specifies that information is to be 
made available to requesters unless there are sufficient grounds for withholding it, as set out in the OIA. 
Subm itters may wish to indicate grounds for withholding specific information contained in their 
submission, such as the information is commercially sensitive or they wish personal information to be 
withheld.  Any decision to withhold information requested under  the OIA is reviewable by the 
Ombudsman.    
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 4 of 36 
     Summary  
(1) This summary give s an overview of the proposed  import requirements for Actinidia plants for 
planting  (nursery stock), as identified in the draft Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for 
Planting  (hereaf ter referred to as ‘the standard’).  
(2) The standard sets the requirements for importing new varieties of kiwifruit (including kiwiberry) 
into New Zealand for breeding or production . 
(3) It is important to note that it is the requirements of the standard that are the subject of public 
consultation. This risk management proposal supports the standard and should be read in full, 
and in conjunction with the standard, to give an effective understanding of the rationale behind 
the proposed import requirements and of the  import health standard development process 
undertaken by MPI.  
Background  
(4) Actinidia plants for planting  have not been eligible for import since the previous import health 
standard was suspended in  September 2013 . 
(5) MPI has developed new import requirements f or Actinidia , based on information in the MPI Import 
Risk Analysis for “Actinidia Plants for Planting ( tissue culture )”, and is undertaking public 
consultation on the draft standard . 
Scope of the standard  
(6) The only goods which will be eligible for import ar e tissue culture s and dormant cuttings:  
a) Tissue cultures  will be deflasked into a greenhouse where they will be  screened for  
regulated pests before they become eligible for a biosecurity clearance;  
b) Dormant cuttings must only be used to generate tissue cultu res which will then be deflasked 
into a greenhouse for disease screening.  The cuttings themselves will never receive a 
biosecurity clearance and must be destroyed once tissue cultures have been  generated . 
(7) Restricting the  commodity type to tissue culture s allows pathogens  that would be not be present 
on tissue cultures to be excluded from the import pathway . This  allow ed import requirements to 
be developed  within a  relatively short time , and also means that there will be less biosecurity risk 
associated with  imported Actinidia  plants that will be held in a post entry quarantine  greenhouse 
in New Zealand.  
(8) The requirements listed above are discussed in Part 1.4 of this risk management proposal.  
Format of the standard  
(9) The standard has been prepared as a stand -alone document that includes only the requirements 
for Actinidia , and uses the standardised format that was developed as part of the MPI 
Requirements and Guidance Programme . 
(10) This format was designed to ensure that MPI requirements a re easy to understand , and 
develope d in a clear and consistent way. The same format will be used when MPI develops or 
reviews import requirements for plants for planting of other horticultural species.  
(11) Appendix 3 of the standard includes a list of regulated pests of Actinidia plant s for planting. This 
list is intended to be incorporated into the MPI electronic database (ePest) in the future, and will 
be removed from the standard when this is done.  
 
  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 5 of 36 
     Screening for regulated pests  
(12) The approach taken when developing phytosanitary requi rements for Actinidia plants for planting  
is similar to that applied to other horticultural species under the existing Import Health Standard 
155.02.06: Importation of Nursery Stock . However, this is t he first new standard for plants for 
planting to be developed in recent  years, and also the first since the post entry quarantine facility 
standard was re -issued in 2016.  
(13) As such, MPI has incorporated more stringent pest screening requirements into the sta ndard, 
including measures that have not yet been used for other commodity types . This includes  
applying specific environmental conditions to increase the likelihood of detecting certain regulated 
pests  in post entry quarantine. In MPI’s view, t his represen ts a significant step forward in terms of 
increasing the likelihood of detecting regulated pests  (particularly fungi) in imported plant s. 
(14) Part 2.3 of the standard describes the screening requirements that will apply for all Actinidia 
plants for planting , as follows:  
a) Plants will be screened for signs and symptoms of pests and disease over two growing 
seasons (each of nine months) and a two month period of dormancy in between seasons;  
b) Plants will be exposed to spring -, summer - and autumn -like conditions throu ghout each 
growing season;  
c) During the summer -like conditions of the first growing season, plants will be exposed to 
additional environmental conditions that are  known to be conducive to growth and/or 
symptom expression of certain regulated pests of Actinid ia. 
(15) Methods used to screen for regulated pests include the following:  
a) Two plant health inspections per week, by the operator of the facility holding the plants, for 
the duration of the quarantine period;  
b) Ten plant health inspections by an MPI Inspector;  
c) Pre-determined testing (for example using polymerase chain reaction [PCR] or culture -
based techniques) to detect specified regulated pests (as identified in Table 1 of the 
standard);  
d) Diagnostic testing as required to identify any disease symptoms that are ob served during 
plant health inspections.  
(16) The measures described above are discussed in Part 4.1 of this risk management proposal.  
Post entry quarantine  
(17) Plants will be held in a post entry quarantine greenhouse whilst disease screening is being 
undertaken. T his will prevent any regulated pests escaping into the wider environment.  
a) The greenhouse must be approved under the MPI Facility Standard: Post Ent ry Quarantine 
for Plants ; 
b) Plants must be held in a Level 3B greenhouse for the first growing season, but may be 
transferred to a Level 3A g reenhouse for the second season.  
(18) The proposed requirements for post entry quarantine are discussed in Part 4.2 of t his risk 
management proposal . 
Offshore risk management  
(19) Part 1.8 of the standard gives three options for importing Actinidia plants for planting  into New 
Zealand, as follows:   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 6 of 36 
     a) Plants may be produced under an Export Plan ; 
b) Plants may be produced at an Offshor e Facility ; 
c) Plants may be produced in any way other than the options listed above.  
(20) When plants are produced using one of the first two options listed above, phytosanitary measures 
for some (or all) regulated pests listed in the standard will be applied pri or to export, and MPI will 
recognise these measures as meeting the requirements of the standard. Depending on what 
measures were applied prior to export, there will be fewer disease screening requirements in New 
Zealand. This means that that the time taken  for disease screening in New Zealand may be 
shorter, and/or may be done  in a lower level of quarantine greenhouse.  
(21) MPI may require plants produced using one of the first two options to undergo audit testing on 
arrival in New Zealand to verify the effectiv e application of offshore phytosanitary measures. If 
this is the case, this testing will be done in a post entry quarantine facility after the plants arrive in 
New Zealand.  
(22) When plants are produced in any other way, all of the measures described in Part 2 .3 of the 
standard will need to be applied in post entry quarantine in New Zealand.   
(23) More detail about options for offshore risk management are provided in Part 3.2.1 of this risk 
management proposal.  
Feasibility and practicality of proposed requirements  
(24) MPI recognise that restricting the scope of the standard to tissue culture s may result in some 
limitations in the varieties that can be imported in cases where tissue cultures are not available. 
This is why dormant cuttings are eligible for import, for the purpose of producing tissue culture 
which will then be deflasked for disease screening. It is acknowledged that the quarantine 
process will take longer if tissue cultures need to be generated in New Zealand.  
(25) Actinidia germplasm has previously been imported  into New Zealand as tissue cultures. This 
highlights that this is a feasible means of import for members of the Actinidia genus.  
(26) MPI acknowledge that the environmental conditions proposed in the standard may have an 
adverse effect on plant health. However  it is considered important to impose these conditions in 
order to give the greatest certainty that plants released into New Zealand will be free from 
regulated pests.  
(27) Plants that are multiplied during the quarantine period will not be subject to these env ironmental 
conditions. As such, if desired, large numbers of plants derived from parental plants (that were  
exposed to these conditions ) will be eligible for biosecurity clearance at the end of the quarantine 
period.  
   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 7 of 36 
     1. Introduction  
 Objective   
(28) MPI’s objecti ves in developing an import health standard for Actinidia  Plants for Planting are to:  
a) Reopen the pathway for the import of Actinidia plants for planting into New Zealand , to give 
the New Zealand kiwifruit industry access to new, disease free germplasm ;  
b) Ensure that the known biosecurity risk from regulated pest s associated with imported 
Actinidia  plants for pl anting is managed appropriately;  
c) Allow a period of time in post entry quarantine to allow the expression of any unknown risk 
organisms.  
 Purpose  
(29) The pu rpose of this risk management proposal is to:  
a) Summarise the known biosecurity  risks that may be associated with imported  Actinidia 
plants for planting;  
b) Show how the measures proposed in the standard will effectively manage known biosecurity 
risks, and are consistent with New Zealand’s domestic legislation and international 
obligations ; 
c) Provide information to support the consultation on the draft import health standard (hereafter 
referred to as ‘ the standard ’).  
(30) The risk management proposal is not itself the  subject of consultation. However, MPI will accept 
comments and suggestions on the risk management proposal  in order to improve future 
consultations  on import health standards . 
 Backgr ound  
(31) Imports of Actinidia  plants for planting  were suspended on 6 Septemb er 2013 because  the MPI 
Chief Technical Officer (CTO) determin ed that the biosecurity risks associated with Actinidia  
could no longer be effectively managed under the existing import health standard  155.02.06: 
Importation of Nursery Stock.  
(32) After the import  health standard  was suspended, MPI intended to review and reissue the 
standard  following the completion of a risk analysis and public consultation.  
(33) This work was put on hold in 2 014 due to resource constraints, however MPI has subsequently 
received reques ts from industry, and from the National Plant Protection Organisation (NPPO) of 
Italy, to re -assess the import requirements for Actinidia  germplasm.  Work on import health 
standard development resumed in June 2017.  
 Com modity description  
(34) The standard applies  only to permitted species of Actinidia  plants for planting (including kiwifruit 
and kiwiberry) that are listed in the MPI Plants Biosecurity Index  (PBI). Interspecific hybrids of all 
permitted  species will be eligible for import provided that  every  species in the parentage is 
identified  with the full scientific name (genus and species).  
(35) The following plant parts are proposed as  eligible for import:  
a) Tissue cultures derived  from aerial pla nt parts:   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 8 of 36 
     i. The standard defines tissue culture s as ‘p lants in vitro  that have been prepared as 
tissue culture from one parent by asexual reproduction (clonal techniques) under 
sterile conditions ’; 
ii. “Plants in vitro ” is defined as ‘a  commodity class for plant s growing in an aseptic 
medium in a closed container ’ (in ISPM 5: Glossary of phytosanitary terms ); 
iii. The tissue cultures must be derived from aerial plant parts . The standard will not 
specify the type of aerial plant parts that may be used, but this can inc lude tissue 
cultures derived from stems, shoots, leaves, terminal and axillary buds, flowers, 
petiole segments, anthers, pollen, seeds, embryos and endosperm;  
iv. Tissue cultures derived from root or basal stem tissues close to the soil level will not 
be eligi ble for import.  
b) Dormant cuttings imported solely for the purpose of generating tissue cultures:  
i. Dormant cuttings have been included in the standard for the sole purpose of 
allowing tissue culture s to be generated in a post entry quarantine tissue culture 
facility in New Zealand;  
ii. The option to import dormant cuttings for the purpose of initiating tissue cultures in 
New Zealand has been included to allow import of cultivars of Actinidia that are not 
available as tissue cultures from offshore sources . Once the  tissue cultures have 
been generated, the cuttings from which they were derived will be disposed of using 
the approved quarantine waste system ; 
iii. Tissue cultures derived from the imported dormant cuttings will be deflasked and be 
screened for regulated pests  in a post entry quarantine greenhouse in New Zealand ; 
iv. The same risks will be associated with domestically generated tissue cultures as 
with those of offshore origin. Hence the hazard identification, risk analysis and 
proposed risk management requirements apply equally to all Actinidia tissue 
cultures regardless of whether they were generated in New Zealand or offshore.  
c) The type of material which  will be screened for regulated pests  is restricted to plants in 
tissue culture  (which will be deflasked into a g reenhouse) . This restriction allow s numerous 
pathogens that are not known to be present within  tissue cultures to be excluded from the 
risk analysis,  simplifying the risk analysis and making it easier to evaluate  import 
requirements.  
(36) Reference is made to ‘ Actinidia plants for planting’ throughout this document. When this  phrase is 
used, it applies only to the commodity type that was considered when developing this standard 
(i.e. tissue culture s). The phrase does not apply to any other types of Actinidia plants for planting 
(such as whole plants, cuttings, pollen, or seeds).  
 Format  of the standard  
(37) MPI welcomes comment on the proposed format of t he standard : 
a) The standard has been prepared as a stand -alone document  that include s only the 
requirements for Actini dia plants for planting ; 
b) The document uses the standardised format that was developed as part of the MPI 
Requirements and Guidance Programme . This format was designed to ensure that MPI 
requirements a re easy to understand , and develope d in a clear and cons istent way ;  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 9 of 36 
     c) The format differs considerably from that used in the existing import health standard for 
Importation of Nursery Stock (which contains the import requirements for all other species of 
nursery stock eligible for import into New Zealand) ; 
d) MPI int end to transition other import health standards for high value crops ( which  are 
currently included in the existing import health standard for importation of nursery stock) to 
the proposed new format when the import requirements for these species are review ed. 
(38) Rather than using the term ‘nursery stock ’, the commodity type is referred to as ‘plants for 
planting’. This change has bee n made to be consistent with  the terminology used in  the 
International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM’s)  as follows . 
a) ‘Plants for planting’ is defined in ISPM 5: Glossary of phytosanitary terms  as ‘Plants 
intended to remain planted, to be planted or replanted ’; 
b) ‘Planting’ is defined as ‘Any operation for the placing of plants in a growing medium, or by 
grafting or similar  operations, to ensure their subsequent growth, reproduction or 
propagation ’. 
(39) Parts 1 – 3 and the appendices  of the standard set out all biosecurity  requirements for importing 
this commodity . The Introduction to the standard , and any information contained within guidance 
boxes,  does not form part of the legal requirements , and  is intended to provide general 
information in regards to the standard.  
(40) Parts 1 and 3 of the standard describe ‘general requirements’ and ‘phytosanitary inspection and 
certification re quirements’, respectively. Requirements in these Parts will remain unchanged in 
subsequent  standards that are developed for high value crops , regardless of the commodity 
being imported . 
(41) Part 2 of the standard describes specific requirements that will apply  only to Actinidia plants for 
planting . This part of the standard will change in subsequent standard, to reflect the commodity -
specific requirements.  
(42) When the standard ha s been finalised, a guidance document will be produced. This document  will 
give backgr ound information  to assist in meeting the requirements , but will not form part of the 
legal requirements  of the standard . 
 Scope  of this risk management proposal  
(43) This risk management proposal includes : 
a) A summary of  regulated pests associated with Actinidia plants for planting ; 
b) A description of the risk management measures proposed to manage these regulated pests;  
c) A discussion on the feasibility and practicality of the proposed risk management measures  
included in the standard . 
  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 10 of 36 
     2. Context   
 Domestic  
(44) Plant healt h is a key component of New Zealand’s biosecurity system. The biosecurity system is 
regulated through the Biosecurity Act 1993. Section 22 of the Act describes an import health 
standard and outlines the types of matters that should be considered in an impo rt health 
standard .  
(45) MPI is the government authority responsible for maintaining biosecurity standards  for the effective 
management of risks associated with the importation of risk goods into New Zealand (Part 3, 
Biosecurity Act 1993).  
(46) The biosecurity syst em in New Zealand operates a series of components (pre-border, border and 
post border) that together provide a high level of assurance that pests are unlikely to establish in 
New Zealand. No one part of the system is able to achieve the necessary assurance  on its own.  
(47) No biosecurity system is capable of reducing risk to zero. The objective of New  Zealand’s 
biosecurity system is to reduce to an acceptable level the likelihood of unwanted impacts 
occurring. Within this system, the objective of an import healt h standard is to  effectively manage 
the risks associated with imported goods in order to reduce to an acceptable level the likelihood 
of entry and establishment of regulated pest s (including pests, diseases and weeds).  
(48) An organism is ‘regulated’ by MPI if it could cause unacceptable consequences (i.e. likely to 
cause unacceptable economic, environmental, socio -cultural or human health impacts in New 
Zealand) if it were to enter and establish in  New Zealand, provided the organism is:  
a) Not present in New Zeal and; or 
b) If present in New Zealand is under official control ; and 
c) Is able to establish and spread in New Zealand . 
(49) Organisms that are present in New Zealand may also be regulated , when found in association 
with imported goods, if they are known vectors of regulated pest s. 
(50) The focus of an import health standard  for plant -based goods is to manage phytosanitary risks 
before the goods  arrive at the New Zealand border. The expectation is that, to the greatest extent 
possible, consignments of plants and plant produ cts meet New Zealand’s phytosanitary import 
requirements on arrival ( i.e. risk is managed off -shore).  
(51) In the case of plants for planting , regulated pests  can survive in living plant material that does not 
show any signs of infection. Therefore , if specifie d in an import health standard , plants for 
planting  must enter  post entry quarantine and be screened to verify that they are free from 
regulated pest s before receiving a biosecurity clearance . The standard may allow such screening 
to be done either offshor e, or after the plants arrive in New Zealand.  
(52) MPI monitors the pathway performance related to each import health standard  to ensure 
biosecurity risks are effectively managed . This is achieved through verification and inspection 
activities at the border an d, where necessary, audits of offshore production systems.  
(53) MPI is committed to the principles of transparency and evidence -based technical justification for 
all phytosanitary measures,  new and amended, imposed on importing pathways.   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 11 of 36 
     
 International  
(54) Where pos sible, phytosanitary import requirements are aligned with international standards, 
guidelines, and recommendations1 as per New Zealand’s obligations under Article 3.1 of the 
World Trade Organisation (WTO) Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytos anitary 
Measures; WTO, 1995 (SPS Agreement).  
(55) The SPS Agreement sets in place rules that protect each country’s sovereign right to take the 
measures necessary to protect the life or health of its people, animals, and plants while at the 
same time facilitati ng trade. It embodies and promotes the use of science -based risk 
assessments to manage the risks associated with the i nternational movement of goods.  
(56) In keeping with New Zealand ’s obligations under the SPS Agreement and the IPPC  (International 
Plant Protec tion Convention ), phytosanitary measures must:  
a) Be scientifically justified and only for regulated pests. The strength of any phytosanitary 
measure will depend on the assessment of risk, with an emphasis on the consequences of 
the pest establishing in New Z ealand;  
b) Not discriminate unfairly between countries or between imported and domestically produced 
goods;  
c) Not be more trade restrictive than required;  
d) Be based on international standards wherever possible, but WTO members can adopt a 
measure that is more st ringent than an international standard, provided the measure is 
scientifically justified.  
 Strength of measures  
(57) Measures are required for regulated pests where the ‘probability of introduction and spread’ on a 
pathway is unacceptable (i.e. if a regulated pe st is able to enter through the pathway, find a 
suitable host, and establish and spread in New Zealand).  
(58) The greater the risk a pest will cause  unwanted harm , the greater the level of assurance MPI 
requires that the pest is managed in a consignment.  The re quired strength of a measure depends 
on the risk posed by a particular regulated pest  on a particular  pathway  and is  determined by a 
combination of the consequences the pest may cause if it was introduced into New Zealand and 
the likelihood that the pest w ill enter and establish from a pathway.  
(59) Plant s for planting  are one of the most high risk pathways for the inadvertent introduction of pests 
and diseases to new areas. Part of the reason for this is that plant pests can survive in living plant 
material tha t does not show any signs of infection /infestation , and the living plant material may 
allow the pests to establish . Because plants imported for planting  may be multiplied and/or widely 
distributed throughout the country , including in key areas of commercia l production , the likelihood 
of pests surviving and being transferred to suitable  domestic hosts is higher than for many other 
import pathways. This is why, if required in an  import health standard , plant s for planting  must be 
screened for regulated pests  before they are cleared for entry into New Zealand . 
  
                                                             
 
1 Note that international standards, guidelines or recommendations referred to in the WTO agreement are those of Codex, OIE (Wo rld Organisation for 
Animal Health) and the IPPC.   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 12 of 36 
     3. Risk management a pproach  
(60) This Part of the risk management proposal includes a description of the information used to 
develop the standard, and describes the types of risk management measures that may be  applied 
to plants for planting that are imported into New Zealand.  
 Source information  
(61) The following information was used to identify risk organisms associated with Actinidia plants for 
planting, and to evaluate the appropriate measures to manage their ent ry and establishment in 
New Zealand:  
a) MPI risk analyses;  
b) Import health standard 155.02.06: Importation of Nursery Stock;  
c) Information from domestic stakeholders;  
d) The MPI emerging risk database;  
e) Relevant literature (scientific journals, webpages, books, datab ases etc.);  
f) Information received from the requesting NPPO;  
g) Interception records (MPI) . 
 Risk management measures  
(62) Risk management measures that may be considered when developing an import health standard 
for plants for planting are discussed below. These mea sures can be applied either before  export 
(i.e. pre -border) or at the New Zealand border.  
(63) As noted earlier in this document, plants for planting present a particularly high biosecurity risk,  
including  for the following reasons (taken from ISPM 36: Integrat ed measures for plants for 
planting ): 
a) Some pests do not cause distinct visual symptoms, particularly at low pest incidence;  
b) Symptoms of infestation may be latent or masked at the time of inspection (e.g. as a result 
of pesticide use, nutrient imbalances, d ormancy of plants at time of dispatch, presence of 
other non -regulated pests or by removal of symptomatic leaves);  
c) Small insects or eggs may be hidden under bark or scales of buds etc.;  
d) The type of packaging, size and physical state of the consignment can influence the 
effectiveness of inspection;  
e) Detection methods for many pests, particularly pathogens, may not be available.  
(64) Based on the above, when importing many types of plants for planting, greater emphasis is put 
into measures that are applied at the border ( including  post entry quarantine) than for other 
commodity types . 
(65) Where possible, an import health standard will include options to manage risk offshore.  
3.2.1 Pre-border  measures  
(66) Generic  pre-border risk management measures that may be applied include:  
a) Com mercial production to reduce pest  prevalence, including production of  tissue culture s; 
b) Treatment for regulated insects, mites, nematodes and/or fungi;   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 13 of 36 
     c) Official pre -export inspection and phytosanitary certification  by the NPPO of the exporting 
country  to ve rify that pre -export measures have been undertaken and were effective , and 
that the consignment is free from visibly detectable regulated pests . 
(67) As well as  the generic risk management measures , specific measures may  be applied  offshore  to 
manage risk assoc iated with some, or all regulated pests that are listed in an import health 
standard  for plants for planting . 
(68) The option for measures to be applied offshore is included in Part 1. 8 of the standard, which 
allows Actinidia plants for planting to be produced according to an Export Plan , or at an Offshore 
Facility  (see Parts 3.2.1.1  and 3.2.1.2  of this risk management proposal ). 
(69) When specific measures are applied offshore , the plants for planting are likely to  have fewer 
disease screening requirements on arrival in New Zealand : 
a) The requirements for screening for regulated pests on arrival in New Zealand , along with the 
level of post entry quarantine and the length of the quarantine period  will depend on the 
number and type of phytosanitary measures that have been  applied offshore;  
b) These measures will be evaluated when an Export Plan  is agreed, or when an Offshore 
Facility  is approved;  
c) Phytosanitary requirements that must b e applied in New Zealand will be identified in the 
import permit for each consignment  (as discussed in Part 5.1 of this risk management 
proposal ). 
(70) Audit testing may be required after plants arrive in New  Zealand  to verify the effective application 
of phytosanitary measures  that were applied prior to export . If audit testing is required, plants may 
need to be held in a post entry quarantine facility until testing is completed. Any audit testing 
requirements will b e identified when MPI agrees on an Export Plan  or approves an Offshore 
Facility . 
3.2.1.1  Production according to an Export Plan  
(71) An Export Plan  is an agreement between MPI and the NPPO of the exporting country  that 
describe s all activities that support the effectiv e application of phytosanitary  measures that are 
applied prior to export.  
a) An Export Plan  will not be agreed upon until a CTO is satisfied that the Export Plan  meets 
New Zealand ’s expectations for biosecurity;  
b) An Export Plan  must be agreed before imports ca n commence;  
c) Any countries with an Export Plan  for Actinidia plants for planting  will be identified in  the MPI  
e-Pest database ; 
d) There are no Export Plans  in place for Actinidia plants for planting  at the time of writing this 
risk management proposal.  
(72) A comb ination of the following measures may be included in an Export Plan  to manage 
biosecurity risk associated with some, or all, of the regulated pests associated with Actinidia 
plants for planting:  
a) Country freedom , where a CTO  is satisfied that a country has country freedom status in 
relation to a particular pest. To ensure country freedom, measures described in ISPM 8: 
Determination of pest status in an area  and ISPM 4: Requirements for the establishment of 
pest free areas  must be applied  by the exporting cou ntry; 
b) Production in a pest free area , using systems to establish and maintain freedom as 
described in ISPM 4: Requirements for the establishment of pest free areas ;  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 14 of 36 
     c) Pest free place of  production  under the supervision of the NPPO of the exporting country, a s 
described in ISPM 10: Requirements for the establishment of pest free places of production 
and pest free production sites ; 
d) The use of  Integrated measures for plants for planting  under the supervision of the NPPO of 
the exporting country, as described in ISPM 36:  Integrated measures for plants for planting . 
3.2.1.2  Production in an MPI approved offshore facility : 
(73) MPI can approve  an Offshore Facility  to undertake some (or all) of the screening for regulated 
pests that would otherwise be done in post entry quarantin e in New Zealand;  
(74) Offshore facilities must be approved to the MPI Standard PIT -OS-TRA-ACPQF: Accreditation of 
Offshore Plant Qua rantine Facilities and Operators ; 
(75) More information about offshore facilities, and the process for approval of an Offshore Facility , 
can be found on the MPI website at http://mpi.govt.nz/news -and-resources/resources/registers -
and-lists/offshore/ ;  
(76) There are no approved offshore facilities for Actinidia plants for planting  at the time of writing this 
risk management proposal.  
3.2.2 Measures at the border  
(77)  Measures and ver ification activities that are applied at the border include:  
a) Inspection of documents to verify that the phytosanitary certificate , and other associated 
documents, comply with the requirements of the standard;  
b) Inspection  of plants  at the place of first arri val to verify freedom from visible  pests . For 
horticultural crops,  it is expected that all plants will be inspected at the border ; 
c) Remedial action (for example treatment) if a regulated pest is detected during  the on-arrival 
inspection , or if any required treatments were not applied prior to export;  
d) Screening  plants for regulated pests in a post entry quarantine facility, using  some or all of 
the following measures:  
i. Growth under environmental conditions conducive to disease development;  
ii. Inspection s for sign s and symptoms of regulated pests ; 
iii. Diagnostic testing to verify whether a regulated pest is present in plants showing 
signs or symptoms of diseases;  
iv.  Pre-determined testing  (for example using biological indexing, microbial culturing , or 
polymerase chain re action [ PCR ]). 
(78) The following factors are considered when determining the disease screening measures that will 
be applied, the  length of the quarantine period, and/or  the type of post entry quarantine facility in 
which the plants must be held : 
a) Likelihood of  entry of a regulated  pest on a particular  import pathway:  
i) Whether a particular regulated  pest is likely to be associated with the plant parts 
being imported ( for example seeds vs. tissue cultures vs. bulbs vs. whole plants);  
ii) Presence or absence of the qua rantine pest in the exporting country;  
iii) Whether material is produced under an Export Plan  or at an Offshore Facility ;  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 15 of 36 
     iv) Available treatment methods (for example fungicide, insecticide or other treatment 
before plants enter PEQ).  
b)  Pathogen biology:  
i. Mode of tra nsmission;  
ii. Whether vectors are present (or likely to be present) in New Zealand;  
iii. Whether vectors are likely to be present in close proximity to the PEQ facility;  
iv. Whether the same (or related) species as the imported plants , or other known host 
species,  are likely to be present in close proximity to the PEQ facility ; 
v. Epidemiological characteristics . 
c) Available disease screening  methods ( for example growing season inspection, biological 
indexing, PCR);  
d) Likelihood of establishment of a quarantine pest via an im port pathway;  
e) Potential environmental , economic , human health and /or socio -cultural consequences  of 
establishment.   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 16 of 36 
     4. Proposed risk  management  measures  for Actinidia plants for 
planting  
(79) This section  of the risk management proposal  includes the following:  
a) A description of the  proposed requirements for screening  for regulated pests ; 
b) A description of the proposed requirements for  post entry quarantine including the length of 
the quarantine period and the level of post entry quarantine greenhouse  in which Actinid ia 
plants for planting  must be held ; 
c) A summary of all regulated pests  (or groups of regulated pests ) and a description of the 
disease screening  measure (s) that are proposed  for each pest.  
(80) All of t he measures  described in this section  will be required for plants that are not produced 
under an Export Plan , or at an Offshore Facility . Plants that are produced using one of these 
options  will have fewer requirements on arrival in New Zealand  because  some, or all of the 
required measures will have been applied pr ior to export . 
(81) For each consignment of Actinidia plants for planting , the phytosanitary measures that  need to be 
applied in New Zealand will be identified on the import permit , as discussed in Part 5.1 of this risk 
management p roposal . 
 Proposed requirements  for screening for regulated pests   
(82) All Actinidia plants for planting  will be screened for regulated pests as described in Part 2.3 of the 
standard.  
(83) Screening will consist of  a combination of some or all of the following measu res, depending on 
the characteristics of the regulated pest : 
a) Exposing plants to specific environmental conditions conducive to disease development;  
b) Regular plant health inspections to detect any signs or symptoms of regulated pests;  
c) Specific testing (for e xample using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or culture based 
identification to detect regulated pests.  
4.1.1 Environmental conditions  
(84) Part 2.3.1 of the standard identifies the environmental conditions  under which Actinidia plants for 
planting  must be grown. Thi s is intended to  increase the likelihood of detecting disease 
organism s either directly (by inducing expression of visible disease symptoms), or in directly (by 
increasing the titre of an organism before samples are taken for pre -determined testing).  
(85) Growin g plants under  conditions conducive to disease  development is listed as a general 
requirement that may be considered for post entry quarantine facilities in ISPM 34: Design and 
operation of post -entry quarantine stations for plants , and is recognised as a risk management 
measure in ISPM 36: Integrated measures for plants for planting . This  measure was  
recommended for further investigation by Johnson (2014)2 to increase the possibility of detecting 
organisms  that may be  present on plant material  imported  into New Zealand, and to further 
reduce overall biosecurity risk.  
                                                             
 
2 Johnson, N. (2014). Barriers to importation of plant germplasm. https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/6949 -barriers -to-importation -of-plant -germplasm .  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 17 of 36 
     (86) Where possible, the environmental  parameters  described in the standard are based on conditions 
known to be conducive to growth and/or symptom expression of regulated pests of Actinidia 
plants f or planting. While these conditions  may not be optimal for every regulated pest, applying 
these conditions should increase the  efficacy of disease screening . 
(87) Exposing plants  to a wide range of environmental conditions in post entry quarantine  will also 
maximise the likelihood of symptom  expression of  new disease  organisms , and allow more 
effective management of biosecurity risk associated with these organisms . 
(88) It is proposed that all Actinidia plants for planting  should be subjected to the conditions descri bed 
in the following sections (included in Part 2.3.1 of the standard).  
4.1.1.1  Spring -like conditions for three months  
(89) At the start of each growing season, p lants must be held for three months at a daytime 
temperature range between 18 C and 21C and night time te mperatures between 15C and 
18C. 
(90) This temperature range is generally considered conducive to the detection of viral diseases 
(either directly when symptoms are expressed, or indirectly by testing). In particular, Pelargonium 
zonate spot virus is known to show symptoms early in spring, which may disappear in summer. 
Similarly, the bacterium Pseudomonas syringae pv. actinidiae is more likely to be detected when 
plants are grown under cool conditions.  
(91) The three month period of growth under spring -like conditi ons during the first growing season will 
be long enough to ensure that there is sufficient plant growth to enable the first batch of samples 
to be taken for pre -determined testing (see Part 4.1.3 ). 
4.1.1.2  Summer -like conditions for fo ur months  
(92) Following the spring -like conditions, p lants must be held for four months at a daytime temperature 
range between 21 C and 25C and night time temperatures between  18C and 21C (except 
when plants are being held as described in clause (94)).  
(93) This is conducive to the expression of symptoms of certain fungal diseases (including Verticillium 
nonalfalfae  and some of regulated fungi listed in Appendix 1 ), and  will also provide cond itions 
suitable for detecting  phytoplasmas.  
(94) During the summer -like period in the first growing season, it is proposed that plants should be 
exposed to the following additional environmental conditions:  
a) A continuous 28 day  period at a minimum relative humid ity of 85% (whilst temperatures are 
maintained at 21 C to 25C). During this time, plants must be subjected to continuous 
misting for two 48 hour periods. There must be at least two weeks between each misting 
period ; 
b) High humidity  in conjunction with warm temperatures and sustained leaf wetness will 
encourage  the expression of foliar symptoms of fungal infection. In the absence of specific 
data for some of the fungi that are regulated on Actinidia , applying these conditions is 
considered an effective way to  increase the likelihood of disease symptom expression.  
(95) A continuous four week period with a daytime temperature range between of 25C and 30C, and 
night time temperatures above 20 C. Plants must continue to be held at a  minimum relative 
humidity of 8 5% during this time : 
a) These conditions are conducive to symptom expression and growth of the oomycete 
species that are regulated on Actinidia plants for planting  and should increase the likelihood  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 18 of 36 
     of detecting Ceratocystis fimbriata , Pectobacterium carotovorum subsp. actinidiae and some 
of the fungal genera listed in Appendix 1 ; 
b) This regime must be applied after plants have been exposed to conditions described in 
paragraph (94)a) . 
(96) It is sugge sted that the additional environmental conditions should be applied part way through 
the summer growth period (for example during the second and third months). This will allow 
plants to re -acclimatise to growth at lower temperatures before autumn -like cond itions are 
applied.  
(97) The conditions described in paragraph (94) are only required in the first growing season, although 
plants will continue to be closely inspected for signs and symptoms of disease throughout the 
second growing  season.  
4.1.1.3  Autumn -like conditions for two months  
(98) Plants must be held for two  months at a temperature range between 15C and 18C for the 
autumn -like period of each growing season  although lower temperatures may be applied at night 
time.  
(99) It is considered impo rtant for plant health to expose plants to autumn -like temperatures prior to 
transitioning into dormancy to mimic the natural seasonal cycle.  
4.1.1.4  Dormancy for two months  
(100) Plants must be held dormant (at around 4 C) for two months  at the end of the first growin g 
season  to ensure that there is a clear separation between seasons , and to mimic the natural 
seasonal cycle.  
4.1.2 Plant health inspections  
(101) All plants must be regularly inspected throughout the quarantine period , as described in Part 
2.3.3 of the standard,  to detect the expression of any disease symptoms , and to identify any 
regulated pests , as soon as possible . 
4.1.2.1  Inspections by the post entry quarantine facility operator (or nominated delegate)  
(102) The facility operator (or a nominated delegate) must inspect all plan ts for signs and symptoms of 
pests and diseases two times per week for the duration of the quarantine period:  
a) As stated in the post entry quarantine facility standard, if plants are bagged and held in cool 
storage for dormancy , inspections ar e not required  during this time;  
b) It is a requirement of the post entry quarantine facility standard that accurate records must 
be kept of all inspections;  
c) The facility standard also describes actions that must be taken following the detection of a 
pest or disease  in pos t entry quarantine . 
(103) Information about inspections by the operator is given in part 3.6.1 of both the MPI Facility 
Standard: Post Entry Quarantine for P lants  and the Guidance Document: Post Entry Quarantine 
for Plants . Part 3.7 of these documents includes information about reporting timeframes and 
actions to be taken by the facility operator if a disease organism is detected in post entry 
quarantine.   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 19 of 36 
     4.1.2.2  Inspections by the MPI inspector  
(104) The MPI inspector must inspect all plants in the  post entry quarantine greenhouse for signs and 
symptoms of regulated pest s and disease at regular intervals throughout the quarantine period.  
(105) A total of ten inspections will be done by the inspector (five in each growing season ): 
a) During the first growing season, inspections should be completed as follows : 
i. Inspection 1: within  14-28 days of plants entering a state of active growth in the 
Level 3B greenhouse;  
ii. Inspection 2: during the final 14 days of the three month period of spring like growth 
in the first growing season;  
iii. Inspection 3:  when plants are being grown between 21 C and  25C with relative 
humidity above 85% and after at least one 48 hour period of leaf wetness;  
iv. Inspection 4:  either during the final seven days of the 28 day period  at 25C to 
30C, or in the seven days immediately following the completion of this period;  
v. Inspection 5:  during the final 28 days of growth under autumn -like conditions.  
b) Inspections will be done at similar times in the second growing season. However, timings 
may be slightly different because the specific environmental conditions required in the 
summer of the first growing season are not needed in the second season.  
(106) Information about inspections by the MPI inspector is given in part 3.6.2 of the MPI Facility 
Standard: Post Entry Quarantine for Plants  and the Guidance Document: Post Entry Quarantine 
for Plants . 
4.1.3 Testing for regulated pests  
(107) All plants will require  testing to verify freedom from regulated pests as follows:  
a) Diagnostic testing:  
i. Diagnostic testing may be undertaken when disease symptoms become evident on 
a plant in post entry quarantine to verify the regulatory status of the organism  
causing the symptoms;  
ii. Depending on the type of symptoms, samples may be tested for the presence of 
various classes of disease organism, including bacteria, fungi, oomycetes, 
phytoplasmas, viroids and viruses;  
iii. The exact diagnostic test(s) that will be done  will be decided on by the MPI 
inspector, and by staff at the diagnostic facility. This will depend on the type of 
disease symptom(s) that are present.  
b)  Pre-determined testing : 
i. This is required for all regulated pests listed in Table 1 of the standard , regardless of 
whether or not the plant is showing signs or symptoms of pests or disease ; 
ii. Pre-determined testing is required to provide additional assurance that a 
consignment is free from particularly high risk regulated pests, and/or if it is 
recognised that  growing season inspection may not effectively manage the risk (e.g. 
when it is known that a particular regulated pest has a prolonged latent period).   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 20 of 36 
     (108) All testing must be done in a diagnostic facility accredited to the MPI Standard 155.04.03: A 
standard for diagnostic facilities which undertake the identification of new organisms, excluding 
animal patho gens . 
 Proposed requirements for post entry quarantine  
(109) On arrival in New Zealand, all Actinidia plants for planting will require post entry quarantine in a 
greenhouse accredited to the MPI Facility Standard: Post Entry Quarantine for Plants , as 
described in Part 2.4 of the standard.  The purpose of this is to ensure that any regulated pests 
that are imported in association with Actinidia plants for plant ing do not escape into the wider 
environment whilst plants are being screened for these pests . 
a) The facility standard sets the operational and structural requirements for post entry 
quarantine facilities ; 
b) All facilities are regularly audited by MPI to ensur e ongoing compliance with all relevant 
standards.  
(110) The quarantine period and level of post entry quarantine are discussed in the following sections.  
4.2.1 Quarantine  period  
(111) Actinidia plants for planting  will require 20 months  post entry quarantine before they will become 
eligible for a biosecurity clearance (unless they are produced under an Export Plan  or from an 
Offshore Facility , as described in Part 3.2.1  of this risk management proposal) . 
a) This is the minimum amount of time that wi ll be required to screen plants for regulated 
pests;  
b) During this  time the plants will have  two complete growing seasons , with  one period of 
dormancy  in between the first and second growing seasons ; 
c) Factors which were considered when determining the length of the quarantine period are 
discussed below . 
(112) It is now known that in addition to systemic pathogens (including viruses, phytoplasmas and 
bacteria), fungal and oomycete disease organisms  may also be transmitted through  plants in 
tissue culture.  
a) There is li mited evidence about how long it will take for disease symptoms to be expressed 
in greenhouse plants that are derived from infected tissue cultures . If fungi or oomycete 
disease organisms are present in tissue culture, it is probable that they would initia lly be  at 
very low levels, and it could take some time for a disease organism to multiply  and colonise 
host tissue,  and induce symptoms in deflasked plants.  As such, a single growing season 
may not be long enough for dis ease symptoms to become evident;  
b) The quarantine period must be long enough to ensure that, when combi ned with other risk 
management measures (such as pre-determined testing  and/or the application of specific 
environmental conditions ), risk will be effectively managed before a biosecurity clearance is 
issued.  
(113) The two growing season period combined with the application of specific environmental 
conditions and pre -determined testing for high risk organisms is intended  to maximise the 
likelihood of detecting regulated pests and hence minimise biosecurity risk. This amount of time is 
not considered prohibitively long given the potential impacts that new regulated pests could have 
on the kiwifruit industry, other industries or on the wider environment, if they established in New 
Zealand.   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 21 of 36 
     (114) As well as managing known risk, post entry qua rantine is an important measure by which new 
risk organisms or new host associations are identified on the plants for planting pathway . There 
are multiple examples of new host associations being identified in plants in post entry quarantine 
in New Zealand,  including examples of virus detection in Actinidia . This highlights the need for the 
quarantine period to be long enough to allow organisms which may be at very low concentrations , 
and for which no tests are available,  to build up sufficiently to induce s ymptoms . 
(115) MPI accept  that ther e is a high level of uncertainty  to consider when setting a post entry 
quarantine period. The proposed quarantine period of 20 months provide a high likelihood of 
detecting any disease organisms that are present in imported plants for planting , while at th e 
same time being a balanced approach in terms of not imposing overly restrictive quarantine 
requirements . 
(116) MPI has an active project examining the likelihood of  fungal and oomycete disease organisms 
being present on the tissue culture pathway. Import  requi rements for Actinidia plants for planting  
will be re -evaluated if new evidence is found about the likelihood of  these organism s being 
present in tissue culture.  
4.2.2 Level  of post entry quarantine  
(117) It is proposed that all tissue cultures should be deflasked into  a Level 3B quarantine greenhouse 
for disease screening in the first growing season. I n the second growing season, the importer 
may elect to transfer plants to a Level 3A greenhouse for the remainder of the quarantine period.  
4.2.2.1  Level 3B post entry quarantine  greenhouse  
(118) A Level 3B post entry quarantine greenhouse is the most secure level of quarantine facility under 
the MPI Facility Standard: Post Entry Qua rantine for Plants . This level of facility can contain 
highly mobile spore -dispersed organisms , which is considered particularly important in the first 
growing season . This is because plants will be of an unknown phytosanitary status (aside from 
being vis ually inspected by the NPPO of the exporting country prior to export) and will be 
exposed to environmental conditions that may be conducive to the production of dispersal 
structures such as windborne spores.  
(119) The first growing season will be used to verify freedom from high risk disease organisms 
including Ceratocystis fimbriata , Phytophthora spp., Pseudomonas syringae pv. actinidiae and 
Pectobacterium carotovorum subsp . actinidiae . These organisms require containment in a Level 
3B greenhouse  because of thei r means of dispersal, and/or because of the potential high impact 
of the se regulated pests . 
(120) Pre-determined testing for all organisms listed in Table 1 of the standard will also be done while 
plants are in the Level 3B greenhouse.  
4.2.2.2  Level 3A post entry quaran tine greenhouse  
(121) Quarantine in a Level 3A greenhouse  for the second growing season  is considered to correspond  
with the level of residual risk  associated with Actinidia plants for planting  for the following 
reasons:  
a) Screening for highly mobile and particula rly high risk disease organisms , along with all pre -
determined testing,  will have been done in  the first growing season , so the plants will no 
longer be of unknown phytosanitary status;  
b) Plants will have been regularly inspected for disease symptoms over th e previous nine 
months, with remedial action  (e.g. treatment)  taken if any regulated pests are identified.   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 22 of 36 
     (122) Although risk will be lower in the second growing season, it is recognised that sporulating 
organisms (which may not be contained within a Level 3A g reenhouse based solely on the 
physical requirements for this level of facility) could still be present in the imported plants . 
However, the following operational measures are considered sufficient to manage  this risk during 
the second season:  
a) Regular plant  health inspections (twice per week) must be completed by the post entry 
quarantine facility  operator  in order to detect any disease symptoms as soon as practical;  
b) Contingency plans must be developed to describe actions that will be taken to contain any 
spore-borne disease organisms within the facility in the event that disease symptoms are 
observed;  
c) Operational restrictions must be applied to minimise the likelihood of spores being dispersed 
outside the PEQ facility. In particular, overhead irrigation will  be prohibited; this will minimise 
the chances of fungi which are aerially dispersed (e.g. by rain splash) from escaping from 
the facility.  
(123) Level 3A post entry quarantine greenhouses must be fitted with a mechanically ventila ted heating 
and cooling system . This will enable  relevant environmental conditions to be maintained 
throughout the  second  growing season.  
(124) If a request is made to transfer plants to a Level 3A greenhouse, this will only be allowed if:  
a) All environmental conditions were applied as required  in the first growing season;  
b) All pre -determined testing was completed during the first growing season;  
c) Remedial actions were taken to manage the risk associated with any regulated pests that 
were detected in the first growing season , including verificatio n that any remedial actions 
were effective . 
 Summary of regulated pests  
(125) This part of the risk management proposal summarises  all regulated pests identified on the 
Actinidia plants for planting pathway and identifies the measures that are proposed to manage 
each regulated pest .  
4.3.1 Insects and mites:  
(126) MPI did not identify the types of insects and mites that may be present on Actinidia plants for 
planting. This is because the generic risk management measure of transferring plants into tissue 
culture and multiplyi ng these plants in vitro is expected to  reduce to an acceptable level the 
likelihood of insects or mites being present for the following reasons:  
a) Selection and processing of healthy mother plant material will minimise the likelihood of 
insects or mites bei ng transferred into tissue culture;  
b) If any insects or mites were present they would be  visibly detectable, and/or would be  likely 
to contaminate growing medium with bacteria or fungi that are associated with the ir activity ; 
c) Contaminated c ultures would be d iscarded as a normal part of in vitro  plant management;  
d) Discarding contaminated cultures would remove any insect s or mite s. 
(127) Dormant cuttings can be imported to generate  tissue cultures that will go through  post entry 
quarantine  because:  
a) The current measure s for treatment of insects or mites on dormant cuttings, included in the 
Import Health Standard 155.02.06: Importation of Nursery Stock, will manage risks  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 23 of 36 
     associated with any insects or mites  that may be present on dormant cuttings  of Actinidia . 
These meas ures are  included in Appendices 1 and 2 of the standard ; 
b) These treatment s will be applied prior to export . The  NPPO of the exporting country will 
verify that the correct treatments were applied on the Disinfestation and/or Disinfection 
Treatment section of  the phytosanitary certificate;  
c) Once the tissue cultures have been generated, t he measures described in paragraph (126)  
will manage any residual risk from insects or mites that may be imported in association with 
dormant cuttin gs, as will  disposal of cuttings in the quarantine waste.  
4.3.2 Fungi  
(128) Twelve  species of  fungi  were identified as regulated pests  on Actinidia plants for planting , as 
discussed in the following sections .  
4.3.2.1  Ceratocystis fimbriata  
(129) Screening for  two complete  growing seasons  is considered appropriate to manage the risk 
associated with C. fimbriata , provided that the following measures are applied:  
a) Plants must be exposed to environmental conditions conducive to expression of symptoms 
of infection with C. fimbriata (desc ribed in paragraph (95)); 
b) Plants must be regularly inspected for signs and symptoms of C. fimbriata throughout the 
quarantine period . This must include at least two inspections per week by the facility 
operator and regular insp ections during the growing season by the MPI inspector ; 
c) Plant  sample s must be tested for C. fimbriata  by PCR , using stem samples collected at the 
end of the  first summer growth period . 
(130) The measures described above are considered justified because : 
a) C. fimbr iata causes severe symptoms on Actinidia plants, with annual mortality rates of up to 
30%, and the death of most affected plants. Infected plants have reduced fruit size and 
lower production;  
b) C. fimbriata could also cause significant disease on other plant  genera of environmental 
and/or economic significance in New Zealand.  
(131) The proposed screening is likely to result in effective detection of the pathogen because:  
a) When  Actinidia plants were held in a greenhouse at temperatures between 18 °C to 35 °C 
following  inoculation with C. fimbriata , multiple inoculated plants died during the 60 day 
experiment, and there was significant xylem discolouration in all inoculated plants. In the 
same study, plants held at lower temperatures (26 °C±3°C) in a growth chamber had le ss 
mortality and less xylem discolouration ; 
b) Pre-determined testing using is required as well as growing season inspection, to increase 
the likelihood of detecting C. fimbriata , given that it is not known how long it would take for 
plants derived from tissu e culture to show symptoms . 
4.3.2.2  Verticillium nonalfalfae  
(132) Screening for  two complete growing seasons is considered appropriate to manage the risk 
associated with V. nonalfalfae  provided that the following measures are applied:  
a) Plants must be regularly inspected  for signs and symptoms of V. nonalfalfae  throughout the 
quarantine period .  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 24 of 36 
     b) Plant  samples  must be tested for V. nonalfalfae  by PCR or by culture -based identification , 
using stem samples collected during the first summer growth period before plants are 
expo sed to temperatures above  25°C. 
(133) The measures described above are considered justified because  V. nonalfalfae  causes severe 
symptoms on Actinidia plants, with up to 80% mortality in some orchards . 
(134) The proposed screening  is likely to result in effective dete ction of the pathogen  because : 
a) In general, d iseases caused by V. nonalfalfae  are favoured by moderate temperatures and 
supressed by higher temperatures;  
b) Experimental inoculation of one -year old Actinidia plants held at 24°C with 16 hours of light 
per day  induced characteristic wilting on 90% of plants wi thin eight weeks of inoculation;  
c) Pre-determined testing using PCR or by culture -based identification is required as well as 
growing season inspection,  to increase the likelihood of detecting V. nonalfalfae . This is 
because it is not known how long it would take for plants derived from tissue culture to show 
symptoms, and because plants infected with V. nonalfalfae  may be asymptomatic . 
4.3.2.3  All other  regulated fungi  (listed in Appendix  1:) 
(135) Screening for  two complete growing seasons is considered appropriate to manage the risk 
associated with the ten species of regulated fungi  listed in Appendix  1:, provided that the 
following measure s are applied:  
a) Plants must be exposed to  environmental conditions that are conducive to expression of 
symptoms of fungal disease as described in paragraph (94)a)  and (95) of this risk 
management proposal ; 
b) Plants must be regularly inspected for signs and sympto ms of fungal disease throughout the 
quarantine period . 
(136) The measures described above are considered justified because : 
a) Actinidia is a very important crop in New Ze aland, meaning that even a low level of impact 
can translate to a very high financial cost and/or high socio -cultural impacts ; 
b) There is always uncertainty around the potential impacts of a disease organism in a new 
environment. The fungal species listed in  Appendix  1: may not be major pathogens in the 
environment in which they were first detected, however it is considered important to 
effectively manage the risk associated with these organisms. This is because the i mported 
plants (or their progeny) will be grown in commercial production areas (making it highly likely 
that any regulated pests associated with the plants will establish), and because of the high 
level of uncertainty around the impacts these regulated pes ts could have in New Zealand . 
(137) The proposed screening is likely to result in effective detection of these pathogens  because:  
a) The environmental conditions that must be applied during post entry quarantine are known 
to be conducive to symptom expression f or some of the se pathogens ; 
b) For other  species,  there is little (or no) information about what conditions are conducive to 
disease development. However, because the conditions that will be applied  are generally 
known to be conducive to fungal disease developmen t, this will maximise the likelihood of 
detecting these fungi.  
4.3.3 Oomycetes  
(138) Four species of oomycetes were identified as regulated pests  on Actinidia plants for planting , as 
follows:   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 25 of 36 
     4.3.3.1  Phytophthora drechsleri  and Phytophthora palmivora  
(139) Screening for  two complet e growing seasons is considered appropriate to manage the risk 
associated with P. drechsleri  and P. palmivora , provided that the following measures are applied:  
a) Plants must be exposed to environmental conditions conducive to expression of symptoms 
of infec tion with these species of Phytophthora  (see paragraph (95) of this risk management 
proposal);  
b) Plants must be regularly inspected for signs and symptoms of P. drechsleri and/or  P. 
palmivora throughout the quaran tine period ; 
c) Plant samples must be tested using PCR or by culture -based identification,  using stem 
samples collected at the end of the  summer growth period . 
(140) The measures described above are considered justified to manage the pathogens because : 
a) P. drechsler i can cause severe symptoms  on Actinidia plants, including leaf chlorosis, 
scorch and defoliation, root and stem rot coupled with eventual death of infected vines ; 
b) P. palmivora has similar effects, including crown and root rots and necrotic lesions under t he 
bark resulting in eventual death of infected vines.  
(141) The proposed  screening is likely to result in effective detection of these pathogens because:  
a) In greenhouse experiments, two year old Actinidia seedlings that were inoculated with P. 
drechsleri  and in cubated at 24 °C to 30 °C showed symptoms of root rot and defoliation 10 
days after inoculation;  
b) In greenhouse experiments, artificial inoculation of root tissue of 8 month old Actinidia 
seedlings  with P. palmivora  induced leaf necrosis and defoliation and a  40% reduction in 
roots two months after inoculat ion; plants were maintained at 25 °C to 30 °C in the daytime, 
and above 20 °C at night ; 
c) PCR testing or culture -based identification  is required as well as growing season inspection 
to increase the likelihood of  detecting Phytophthora spp., because  it is not known how long it 
would take for plants derived from tissue culture to show symptoms.  
4.3.3.2  Phytopythium helicoides  and Phytopythium vexans   
(142) Screening for  two complete growing seasons is considered appropriate to m anage the risk 
associated with P. helicoides  and P. vexans , provided that the following measures are applied:  
a) Plants must be exposed to environmental conditions conducive to expression of symptoms 
of infection with Phytopythium  spp. (see paragraph (95) of this risk management proposal);  
b) Plants must be regularly inspected for signs and symptoms of P. helicoides and/or  P. 
vexans throughout the quarantine period;  
c) Plant samples must be tested using PCR or culture -based identificatio n using stem samples 
collected at the end of the  summer growth period .  
(143) The measures described above are considered justified to manage the pathogens because : 
a) P. helicoides causes leaf curl and necrosis followed by plant decline and death, as well as 
root and collar rot. Disease incidence of up to 38% has been reported on Actinidia  in China;  
b) P. vexans has been recorded in Turkey as causing root and collar rot, leaf curling and 
necrosis and general plant decline. Pathogenicity testing on one -year old potted kiwifruit 
induced symptoms on over 65% of inoculated plants within 40 days ;  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 26 of 36 
     c) Phytopythium litorale , which has similar optimal and maximum growth temperatures has 
established in New Zealand . 
(144) The proposed screening  is likely to result in effective detection o f these pathogens  because:  
a) The Phytopythium genus is characterised by high optimal growth temperatures . An optimal 
temperature of 34 C was reported in culture for strains of P. helicoides from kiwifruit, and 
hyphal growth occurr ed within a 7C to 42C temp erature range. P. vexans  has a similarly 
wide growth range ( between 4C and 37C); 
b) Pre-determined testing using PCR or culture based identification is required as well as 
growing season inspection to increase the likelihood of detecting Phytopythium spp.,  given 
that it is not known how long it would take for plants derived  from tissue culture to show 
symptoms.  
4.3.4 Bacteria  
(145) Four species of bacteria  were identified as regulated pests  on Actinidia plants for planting, as 
discussed in the following sections:  
4.3.4.1  Acidov orax valerianellae  
(146) Screening for  two complete growing seasons  is considered appropriate to manage the risk 
associated with A. valerianellae , provided that the following measures are applied:  
a) Regular growing season inspection s to detect signs or symptoms of  infection with A. 
valerianellae . 
(147) The measures described above are  considered justified and sufficient to manage the pathogen 
because  this is a newly recorded disease which so far has only been reported from Actinidia in 
Korea and there is no information a bout the potential impact.  
(148) The proposed screening  is likely to result in effective detection of these pathogens  because:  
a) Disease symptoms associated with A. valerianellae increase as the  temperature and  relative 
humidity  increase ; 
b) Although there is no spec ific information about what environmental conditions lead to 
optimal pathogen development , reports from other hosts suggest that symptom 
development is rapid ; 
c) Plants will be held under high temperature and relative humidity in post entry quarantine , 
and will be regularly  inspected for disease symptoms  during this time . 
4.3.4.2  Pectobacterium carotovorum  subsp. actinidiae  
(149) Screening for  two complete growing seasons is considered appropriate to manage the risk 
associated with P. carotovorum subsp. actinidiae , provided  that the following measures are 
applied:  
a) Plants must be exposed to specific environmental conditions conducive to expression of 
symptoms of infection with P. carotovorum subsp. actinidiae  (see paragraph (95) of this risk 
management proposal);  
b) Plants must be regularly inspected for signs and symptoms of P. carotovorum subsp. 
actinidiae throughout the quarantine period ; 
c) Plant samples must be tested using PCR or culture -based identification, using samples that 
are collected at the end of the  summer growth period .  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 27 of 36 
     (150) The measures described above are co nsidered justified to manage the pathogen because  P. 
carotovorum subsp. actinidiae  causes sudden leaf blight and die back or blight on young canes 
and severe infection can  kill plants . 
(151) The proposed screening  is likely to result in effective detection of P. carotovorum subsp. 
actinidiae  because:  
a) This organism  has a high optimal growth temperature (above 25 C), and disease symptoms 
become evident in summer ; 
b) Testing is require d as well as growing season inspection to increase the likelihood of 
detecting P. carotovorum subsp. actinidiae given that it is not known how long it would take 
for plants derived from tissue culture to show symptoms.  
4.3.4.3  Pseudomonas syringae  pv. actinidiae  
(152) Screening for two complete growing seasons is considered appropriate to manage the risk 
associated with P. syringae  pv. actinidiae , provided that the following measures are applied:  
a) Plants must be grown under specific environmental conditions conducive to g rowth of P. 
syringae  pv. actinidiae as described in paragraphs (89) and (90) of this risk management 
proposal;  
b) Plants must be regularly inspected for signs and symptoms of P. syringae  pv. actinidiae  
throughout the quarantine period ; 
c) Plant  samples  must be tested for P. syringae pv. actinidiae by PCR, using leaf samples that 
are collected after plants have been grown at 18 C to 21C for at least two months, and 
before plants are exposed to higher tempe ratures.  
(153) The measures described above are considered justified to manage the pathogen because : 
a) P. syringae  pv. actinidiae  causes leaf spotting, flower wilt, bacterial ooze (red exuda te), 
cankers and cane die -back. Infection can lead to vine death and resul ts in significant 
production losses;  
b) Although one biovar of P. syringae  pv. actinidiae (Psa3) is present in New Zealand, this 
biovar is under official control. Other virulent strains are not present in New Zealand, and 
can have significant impacts . 
(154) The mea sures described above are likely to result in effective detection of the pathogen  because : 
a) P. syringae  pv. actinidiae  has a low optimal growth temperature  meaning that disease 
symptoms are likely to be expressed under the spring -like conditions proposed fo r disease 
screening ; 
b) Testing by PCR is required as well as  growing season inspection because P. syringae  pv. 
actinidiae  can be found as a contaminant of tissue culture, and may be asymptomatic . 
Furthermore,  there is  evidence that disease symptoms may not b ecome evident  in the field 
during the first two to three years of infection.  
4.3.5 Phytoplasmas  
(155) Phytoplasmas belonging to the 16SrI (aster yellows), 16SrXII (stolbur) and 16SrX (apple 
proliferation) groups  were identified as risks on Actinidia plants for plantin g.  
(156) Screening for two complete growing  seasons  is considered appropriate to manage the risk 
associated with  these organisms, provided that the following measures are applied :  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 28 of 36 
     a) Plants must be regularly inspected for signs and symptoms of  phytoplasma infectio n 
throughout the quarantine period ; 
b) Plants must undergo specific PCR testing for phytoplasmas  using samples that are collected 
towards the end of the summer growth period . 
(157) The measures described above are considered justified because  phytoplasmas have been  
associated with symptoms including premature reddening of the leaves with downward curling 
and crinkling.  
(158) The measures are likely to result in effective detection of phytoplasmas because.  
a) Any disease symptoms arising from phytoplasma infections will be id entified during growing 
season inspections;  
b) PCR testing is required to detect any  asymptomatic infections.  
4.3.6 Viruses  
(159) Three species of virus were identified as regulated pests on Actinidia plants for planting , as 
discussed in the following sections:  
4.3.6.1  Actinidia  chlorotic ringspot -associated virus  (AcCRaV)  
(160) Post entry quarantine for 20 months with two complete growing seasons is considered 
appropriate to manage the risk associated with AcCRaV, provided that the following measures 
are applied : 
a) Regular inspection fo r signs and symptoms of AcCRaV throughout the quarantine period ; 
b) Plant samples must be tested for A cCRaV by PCR, using leaf samples that are collected 
after plants have been grown in spring -like conditions for at least two months (see clause 
(89)). 
(161) The measures described above are considered justified because  AcCRaV  is a newly described 
virus and it is not known whether it is likely to cause production losses or other damage, or if it will 
have synergistic interactions with othe r virus species . 
(162) The proposed screening  is likely to result in effective detection of the virus  because : 
a) Any disease symptoms caused by the virus will be detected in post entry quarantine;  
b) PCR primers will be used to detect any asymptomatic  infections.    
4.3.6.2  Pelargonium zonate spot virus  (PZSV)  
(163) Post entry quarantine for 20 months  with two complete growing seasons is considered 
appropriate to manage the risk associated with  PZSV , provided that the following measures are 
applied:  
a) Plants must be regularly inspecte d for signs and symptoms of PZSV  throughout the 
quarantine period ; 
b) Plant samples must be tested for  PZSV  by PCR  and by herbaceous indexing using the 
indicators Chenopodium quinoa , Nicotiana benthamiana , N. glutinosa  and N. tabacum . 
These tests must be done  using leaf samples that are collected after plants have been 
grown  in spring -like conditions for at least two months  (see clause (89)), and before plants 
are exposed to summer -like conditions . 
(164) The measures described above are considered justified to manage the virus because  PZSV  can 
induce severe symptoms on kiwifruit .  
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 29 of 36 
     (165) The proposed screening  is likely to result in effective detection of the virus  because:  
a) Symptoms of PZSV appear early in spring  under conditions similar to those  proposed for 
disease screening ;  
b) PCR testing is required in addition to growing season inspection because t he virus has been 
isolated from symptomless Actinidia leaves.  
c) Herbaceous indexing is required to provide a higher degree of confidence that all stra ins of 
the virus will be detected . 
4.3.6.3  Tomato necrotic spot associated virus  (TNSaV)  
(166) Screening for  two complete growing seasons is considered appropriate to manage the risk 
associated with TNSaV, provided that the following measures are applied : 
a) Regular inspec tion for signs and symptoms of TNSaV throughout the quarantine period ; 
b) Plant samples must be tested for TNSaV by PCR, using leaf samples that are collected after 
plants have been grown  in spring -like conditions for at least two months . 
(167) The measures describ ed above are considered justified to manage the virus because  TNSaV  is a 
newly described virus and it is not known whether it is likely to cause production losses or other 
damag e: 
(168) The proposed screening  is likely to result in effective detection of the vir us because : 
a) Any disease symptoms caused by the virus will be detected in post entry quarantine;  
b) PCR primers will be used to detect any asymptomatic  infections.  
   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 30 of 36 
     5. Feasibility and practicality of proposed requirements  
(169) Tissue cultures (or plants derived from tissue cultures) are the only  plant par ts that will be  able to 
receive a  biosecurity clearance  under the standard.  
a) The scope of the import risk analysis , and the standard, was restricted to tissue culture s. 
This allowed numerous pathogens that would be not be present on tissue cultures  to be 
excluded from the import  pathway , so allowed import requirements to be finalised within a  
relatively short time;  
b) It was considered important to re -open the import pathway  to help the New Zealand kiwifruit 
industry have access to new varieties of Actinidia ; 
c) Actinidia plants for planting have previously been imported into New  Zealand  as plants in 
tissue culture , meaning that  this is expected to be a feasible pathway for import ; 
d) Because  some cultivars  may not be available i n tissue culture, the standard allows the 
import of  dormant cuttings to initiate  tissue cultures  in New Zealand.  This means that there 
should be no t be any  undue restrictions on the cultivars that can be imported . It is 
recognised that it will take longer for new cultivars  to receive a biosecurity clearance if tissue 
cultures need to be generated in New Zealand . 
(170) A key risk management measure in the standard is the application of environmental conditions 
that will be  conducive to the expression of disease sy mptoms.  In particular, this includes exposing 
plants to high humidity , high leaf moisture levels, and  high temperatures in the summer -like 
period of the first growing season : 
a) MPI recognise that this may encourage the growth of non -regulated disease organis ms of 
local origin , which could result in increased costs (if these organisms  need to be identified) . 
However, contamination with local origin organisms in the first growing season will be 
minimised because all air entering the Level 3B post entry quaranti ne greenhouse  must  be 
filtered through fine dust filters  (which will exclude most  disease propagules) ; 
b) These environmental conditions may not be optimal for plant growth. This means that an 
extra period of growth may be required during  the first growing se ason to develop plants  to a 
stage where this treatment will not have an unacceptable adverse effect on plant health , or 
to allow resumption of growth after the conditions have been applied ; 
c) This risk management measure is required  because  the most rapid di sease development 
usually occurs when  environmental conditions, in particular moisture and temperature, are 
optimal for development of the particular disease organism . These conditions are not 
necessarily optimal for the growth of the plant itself ( Agrios,  2005)3. Any tissue culture plants 
that are multiplied during the disease screening period  will not be exposed to these 
environmental conditions, meaning that only plants that are deflasked into the greenhouse 
for inspection and testing would be affected ; 
d) MPI acknowledge that  additional equipment (for example a misting system) may be needed 
to effectively maintain some of the required conditions  in the first growing season ; 
e) All operating manuals for greenhouses  that hold Actinidia plants for planting will i nclude a 
description of the conditions that will be applied during each growing season, and how these 
will be monitored , maintained  and recorded . The operating manual must be approved by 
                                                             
 
3 Agrios, G.N., 2005. Plant Pathology. 5th eds. Department of Plant Pathology. Univers ity of Florida. United States of America.   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 31 of 36 
     MPI before plants can be transferred to  the greenhouse. This will hel p to ensure that 
conditions are maintained correctly throughout the quarantine period.  
(171) Plants will remain in post entry quarantine for a minimum of 20 months before they will become 
eligible for a biosecurity clearance . 
a) Plants can be multiplied during the post entry quarantine period. This may be done either in 
the Level 3B greenhouse (if sufficient space is available),  in a Level 3A greenhouse in the 
second  growing season, or by multiplying tissue cultures in a Level 3 tissue culture facility.  
This means t hat large numbers of plants, especially tissue cultures, could be available  for 
release  by the time a biosecurity clearance  is issued ; 
b) When plants are obtained from an Offshore Facility , or in accordance with an Export Plan, 
there may be fewer post entry q uarantine requirements on arrival in New Zealand . This 
means that the quarantine period may be shorter, as described in  Part 3.2.1 . 
 Import permit  
(172) As described  in Part 1.6 of the standard, the import permit will identify:  
a) The re gulated pests for which screening is required in New Zealand;  
b) The minimum quarantine period  (based the regulated pests for which screening is required 
in New Zealand) ; 
c) The level of post entry quarantine greenhouse and/or tissue culture laboratory in which 
consignments must be held  (based the regulated pests for which screening is required in 
New Zealand) . 
(173) Listing these requirements on the import permit is considered the best way to clearly identify  the 
phytosanitary measures that will be required  for each c onsignment of Actinidia plants for planting  
after they arrive in New Zealand. This is because when plants are produced under an Export Plan  
or are obtained from  an Offshore Facility , some phytosanitary measures will have been applied 
prior to export.  Howev er, the exact measures which are applied will differ between facilities.  
(174) If plants are obtained from an y other   source, the import permit will indicate  that all phytosanitary 
measures described in the  standard must be applied after plants arrive in New Zea land, namely 
that: 
a) Plants must undergo all screening described in Part 2.3 of the standard on arrival in New 
Zealand before they can become eligible for a biosecurity clearance;  
b) The minimum quarantine period will be 20 months , although this may be extended  if 
regulated pests are detected ; 
c) Plants must be deflasked and held in  a Level 3B greenhouse for the first growing season ; 
d) Plants  may be  transferred to a Level 3A greenhouse for the second growing season 
provided that all pre -determined testing has been co mpleted with negative test results 
returned and plants were  effectively treated for any regulated pests that were detected 
during the first growing season  (as described in Part 4.2.2.2 ); 
e) The post entry quarantin e facility(s) in which the plants must be held will be identified on the 
import permit.  
(175) If plants are obtained under an Export Plan , or from an approved facility, some of the required 
phytosanitary measures will have been applied prior to import. In this c ase, the import permit will 
identify the residual requirements that must be applied in New Zealand, including:  
a) The requirements of Part 2.3 that must applied in New Zealand;   
Risk management proposal for Actinidia Plants for Planting       Page 32 of 36 
     b) The minimum quarantine period;  
c) The level of post entry quarantine greenhouse ; 
d) In this case, the length of the quarantine period and type of post entry quarantine 
greenhouse will depend on the specific regulated pests for which phytosanitary measures 
have been applied prior to export . This will be different for each Export Plan or Offsho re 
Facility . 
(176) The outcome of including the above details on the import permit will be that for all Actinidia plants 
for planting , regardless of source, all phytosanitary measures described in the standard will be 
applied before plants become eligible for cl earance.   
Draft risk management proposal for Actinidia plants for planting    Page 33 of 36 
     
 Appendix  1: 
Summary of regulated fungi  identified in the risk analysis  for which risk management measures are 
described in Part 4.3.2.3   
 
Disease organism  Notes  
Colletotrichum 
simmondsii  
 - Recorded as an endophyte on Actinidia . 
- Causes fruit rots on various other plant genera including Capsicum , Fragaria, 
Persea  and Vaccinium . Vitis is also recorded as a host.  
Colletotrichum 
taiwanense  
  - Recorded on Actinidia  in China as causing considerable blossom and fruit drop 
in 2011 and 2012.  
- This was the first report of Actinidia  as a host of this species, no subsequent 
reports to date.  
- Inoculation on stems of detached fruit resulted in symptoms within four days 
when stems were held at 95% relative humidity and 25 C. 
Corynespor a cass iicola  - Recently recorded in China as causing extensive leaf necrosis and defoliation 
along with reductions in fruit quality and yield.  
- C. cass iicola is present in New Zealand, but has not been recorded on 
Actinidia . Six phylogenetic lineages have be en described within C. cassicola , 
and there is evidence of host specificity within each lineage.  
- It is not certain which lineage has been identified on Actinidia in China, likewise 
it is not known whether the Actinidia -infecting  lineage is present in New 
Zealand.  
- In the field, infected Actinidia plants showed severe symptom development at 
average temperatures of around 24 C and high humidity (90%).  
Diaporthe tulliensis  - Recently isolated from severe stem cankers on Actinidia chinensis in China in 
2015 and e xperimentally demonstrated to be virulent towards shoots and fruit.  
- Limited information available as the first record of D. tulliensis on Actinidia was 
in 2015, and it was co -isolated with two other species of Diaporthe , both of 
which are present in New Ze aland and non -regulated.  
- Artificial inoculation of D. tulliensis  on detached shoots of A. chinensis induced 
visible disease symptoms within seven days.  
- No information found about what conditions are conducive to disease 
development on Actinidia . 
Erysiphe actinidiae  var. 
actinidiae  
Erysiphe actinidiae  var. 
argutae  - Both cau se powdery mildew on leaves and stems of  Actin idia spp. 
- Recorded from temperate to tropical regions, and l ikely to be able to establish in 
New Zealand.  
- Limited information on potential imp act in New Zealand . 
- Disease symptoms likely to be expressed when plants are grown under humid 
conditions (e. g. >85% relative humidity) at temperatures between 23 C and 
30C. 
Phyllosticta actinidiae  - Causes brown spot disease on leaves of Actinidia  spp. and is recorded from 
Russia and China.  
- Appears to have a limited impact with no records found in relation to losses 
cause d by this disease.  
- Very little information about biology of this organism . It is noted that the length 
of time taken for  symptoms to be e xpressed can vary depending on the life 
cycle of the particular species of Phyllosticta .  
Draft risk management proposal for Actinidia plants for planting    Page 34 of 36 
     
 Pseudocercospora 
actinidiae  
Pseudocercospora 
hangzhouensis  - Cause sooty mould on leaves and fruit dimples, along with post -harvest fruit 
softening and rotting.  
- Limited  information about impacts, but members of this genus may be serious 
pathogens on other host species (e.g. citrus and avocado), classified by KVH 
as presenting a moderate threat.  
- Symptoms induced on plants within two months  of inoculation with P. actinidia e. 
Pucciniastrum 
actinidiae  - A host specific basidiomycete that causes rust symptoms on Actinidia  spp. and 
is reported from China, Japan and Taiwan.  
- Little is known about impacts on Actinidia , however Pucciniastrum actinidiae it 
is considered to be capable  of establishing in New Zealand.  
- Limited information about environmental conditions required for disease 
development of P. actinidiae . Information about other members of the genus 
indicates that in some cases  disease symptoms appear within 11 days of 
infec tion (when plants were artificially inoculated and held in humid conditions 
at 20 -25C for 48 hours after inoculation), although symptom expression can 
take much longer (for example up to one year after field infection) for other 
members of the genus.