Importation of Fresh Fruit of Highbush Blueberry

(Vaccinium corymbosum Linnaeus) and its hybrid varieties

Southern Highbush Blueberry [V. corymbosum x 

angustifolium (V. x atlanticum) and V. corymbosum x 

virgatum] into the Continental United States from Morocco

A Qualitative, Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk Assessment

March 23, 2012

Version 2

Agency Contact:

Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory

Center for Plant Health Science and Technology

United States Department of Agriculture 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Plant Protection and Quarantine

1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 300

Raleigh, NC 27606
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 ii

Executive Summary

The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the United States Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) prepared this document to examine plant pest risks associated with the 

movement of fresh fruit of the varieties Misty, Sharpblue (also Sharpeblue), Biloxi, Gulf Coast, 

O’Neal, Star, and Emerald of southern highbush blueberry (Ericaceae) from Morocco into the 

continental United States. These blueberry varieties are variously considered to be Vaccinium 

corymbosum L. or its hybrids V. corymbosum x angustifolium [possible synonym V. atlanticum] 

and V. corymbosum x virgatum (syn. V. ashei) (NGRP, 2011; NRCS, 2011). Morocco has 

proposed to have the commodity treated with post-harvest cold storage, but it has not been 

certified to meet or exceed PPQ T107-a as a condition of entry (Hilali, 2010). In addition, 

Morocco will be growing blueberry plants within net houses and utilizing hand-picking, handsorting, and hand-grading (Hilali, 2010).

We developed a list of pests reported in Morocco that attack blueberry, based on the scientific 

literature, port-of-entry pest interception data, and information provided by the government of 

Morocco. From the pest list, we identified two quarantine pests that follow the commodity

pathway of fresh blueberry fruit from Morocco and that are candidates for further mitigation.

Type Taxonomy Pest Scientific Name Pest Risk 

Potential

Arthropods Diptera: Tephritidae Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) High

Fungi Ascomycetes: Heliotales Monilinia fructigena Honey ex Whetzel 1945 High

We rated Ceratitis capitata and Monilinia fructigena both as High risk. This risk analysis is only 

valid when the described post-harvest processing procedures are followed; otherwise, additional 

analyses for quarantine pests of concern could be required. Risk management will be addressed 

further in a separate risk mitigation document.
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 iii

Table of Contents

Executive Summary...................................................................................................................... ii

1. Introduction............................................................................................................................... 1

1.1. Background.......................................................................................................................... 1

1.2. Standard Post-Harvest Processing ....................................................................................... 1

2. Risk Assessment ........................................................................................................................ 2

2.1. Initiating Event: Proposed Action........................................................................................ 2

2.2. Assessment of the Weed Potential of Blueberry ................................................................. 2

2.3. Current Status ...................................................................................................................... 3

2.4. Pest Categorization .............................................................................................................. 6

2.5. Analysis of Quarantine Pests............................................................................................. 15

3. Pest Risk Potential and Conclusions..................................................................................... 20

4. Authors and Reviewers........................................................................................................... 20

5. Literature Cited ...................................................................................................................... 21
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 1

1. Introduction

1.1. Background

This document was prepared by the Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory of the 

Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service (APHIS), Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ), in response to a request to evaluate the 

risks associated with the importation of commercially produced fresh fruit of southern highbush 

blueberry, Vaccinium corymbosum L. and its hybrids V. corymbosum x angustifolium and V. 

corymbosum x virgatum (syn. V. ashei), (Ericaceae) from Morocco into the continental United 

States.

The International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) provides guidance for conducting pest risk 

analyses. The methods used here are consistent with guidelines provided by the IPPC, 

specifically the International Standard for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) on ‘Pest Risk 

Analysis for Quarantine Pests, Including Analysis of Environmental Risks and Living Modified 

Organisms’ (IPPC, 2009: ISPM #11). The use of biological and phytosanitary terms is consistent 

with the ‘Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms and the Compendium of Phytosanitary Terms’ (IPPC, 

2009: ISPM #5). 

Three stages of pest risk analysis are described in international standards: Stage 1, Initiation, 

Stage 2, Risk Assessment, and Stage 3, Risk Management. This document satisfies the 

requirements of Stages 1 and 2. 

This is a qualitative risk analysis; estimates of risk are expressed in terms of High, Medium, and 

Low pest risk potentials based on the combined ratings for specified risk elements (PPQ, 2000) 

related to the probability and consequences of importing this fresh fruit of southern highbush 

blueberry, Vaccinium corymbosum L. and its hybrids V. corymbosum x angustifolium and V. 

corymbosum x virgatum (syn. V. ashei), (Ericaceae) commodity from Morocco. For the purposes

of this assessment High, Medium, and Low probabilities will be defined as:

High: More likely to occur than not to occur

Medium: As likely to occur as not to occur

Low: More likely not to occur than to occur

The appropriate risk management strategy for a particular pest depends on the risk posed by that 

pest. Identification of appropriate sanitary and phytosanitary measures to mitigate the risk, if any, 

for this pest is undertaken as part of Stage 3 (Risk Management). Other than listing possible 

mitigation options for the pests of concern, we did not discuss risk management in this 

document.

1.2. Standard Post-Harvest Processing 

We assumed that the commodity would undergo the following minimal standard post-harvest 

processing described by the government of Morocco (Hilali, 2010): 

 Grow blueberry varieties of poor to fair host preference for Ceratitis capitata 

(Mediterranean fruit fly, or Medfly)
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 2

 growing blueberries within net houses

 standard schedule of fungicide sprays

 hand-harvesting daily when berries are first ripe

 hand-packing and hand-grading

 extended cold treatment that has not been certified to meet the requirements of PPQ 

T107-a, based on information received from Morocco.

2. Risk Assessment

2.1. Initiating Event: Proposed Action

We prepared this commodity-based, pathway-initiated pest risk assessment in response to a 

request for the USDA’s authorization to import fresh blueberry fruit from Morocco into the 

continental United States (Hilali, 2010). The movement of fruits and vegetables from foreign 

countries, such as Morocco, into the United States is regulated in 7 CFR §319.56 (2011). 

Currently, the entry of fresh blueberry fruit from Morocco into the continental United States is 

not authorized under 7 CFR §319.56; the government of Morocco seeks a change in this Federal 

Regulation to allow entry.

2.2. Assessment of the Weed Potential of Blueberry

If the species considered for import poses a risk as a weed pest, then a “pest-initiated” risk 

assessment is conducted. The results of the weed potential screening for blueberry did not 

prompt a pest-initiated risk assessment (Table 1).

Table 1. Assessment of weed potential of Vaccinium corymbosum Linnaeus and hybrids.

Commodity scientific name: Vaccinium corymbosum Linnaeus (Ericaceae) and Vaccinium 

hybrids of V. corymbosum x angustifolium and V. corymbosum x virgatum (syn. V. ashei).

Common name: highbush blueberry, southern highbush blueberry (CABI, 2011)

Phase 1: Consider whether the species is new to or not widely prevalent in the United States

(exclude plants grown under USDA permit in approved containment facilities).

The species Vaccinium corymbosum (highbush blueberry) and the parents of its hybrids

(southern highbush blueberry) are all native to the United States with distributions, as follows:

V. corymbosum: AL, AR, CT, DC, DE, GA, IL, IN, KY, LA, MA, MD, ME, MI, MS, NC, NH, NJ, 

NY, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, VA, VT, WA, WI, WV; V. angustifolium: CT, DE, IA, IL, IN, 

MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, NC, NH, NJ, NY, OH, PA, RI, TN, VA, VT, WI, WV; and V. virgatum 

(syn. V. ashei): AL, AR, FL, GA, LA, MS, NC, SC, TX (NGRP, 2011; NRCS, 2011).

Phase 2: Invasive / Weed Status: Listing as Weed

The species is listed in:

NO Geographical Atlas of World Weeds (Holm et al., 1991a)

NO World’s Worst Weeds (Holm et al., 1991b)

NO World Weeds: Natural Histories and Distribution (Holm et al., 1997)

NO Weed Science Society of America (WSSA, 2010)

NO Federal Noxious Weed List (PPQ, 2010)

NO Economically Important Foreign Weeds (Reed, 1977)
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 3

NO Identification of disseminules listed in the Federal Noxious Weed Act (Gunn and 

Ritchie, 1988)

NO Global Invasive Species Database (ISSG, 2010).

YES A Global Compendium of Weeds (Randall, 2011) 

NO Invasive Species of the World (Weber, 2003)

NO Invasive Plant Atlas of the United States (CISEH, 2011) 

NO Noxious weeds in the United States and Canada (Rice, 2010)

NO State Noxious Weeds. Invasive and Noxious weeds (NRCS, 2011)

Other: Scientific literature, Internet sources, etc.:

NO Florida's Invasive Species List, Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council (FLEPPC, 2009)

NO Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk (PIER, 2010)

NO Noxious weed list for Australian states and territories (Australian Weeds 

Committee, 2010)

Phase 3: Summary and Conclusions

Vaccinium corymbosum, V. angustifolium, and V. virgatum (syn. V. ashei) are present in 33 

U.S. states and territories and are native to the United States (NRCS, 2011). Specific 

information referring to blueberry as a weed in other parts of the world, with specific patterns 

of invasion, is described in Randall (2007) as “invasive, a weed of natural areas, or an 

established escape from cultivation”. Eight species of Vaccinium are listed by Holm et al. 

(1991a) as weeds whose ranks of importance are unknown, but all these species; i.e.: V. 

angustifolium, V. arboretum, V. ovalifolium, V. ovatum, V. oxycoccus, V. parvifolium, V. 

stamineum, and V. vitis-idaea, are native to the United States, so their weed potential is not 

rated.

Conclusion: We proceeded with the commodity pathway-initiated pest risk assessment 

because Vaccinium corymbosum, V. angustifolium, and V. virgatum (syn. V. ashei) are native

to the continental United States and are grown as crops (NRCS, 2011). Because blueberry is 

native in the continental United States, importing fresh fruit from Morocco should not increase 

the plant’s weed potential beyond that existing at present. A pest-initiated weed risk 

assessment is therefore not necessary.

2.3. Current Status

Blueberry fruit for consumption of species V. corymbosum [and the hybrids V. corymbosum x 

angustifolium and V. corymbosum x virgatum (syn. V. ashei)] may enter the continental United 

from Canada, Mexico, New Zealand, and South Africa (Table 2); it is not authorized to enter 

from any other countries or territories (APHIS, 2011). Vaccinium angustifolium, Vaccinium 

ashei (junior synonym of V. virgatum), and Vaccinium corymbosum (highbush blueberry, 

southern highbush blueberry, arandano azule [Spanish]) may also be entered under the broader 

category, Vaccinium spp., from Argentina, Armenia, Australia (Tasmania only), Aberbaijan, 

Belarus, Belgium, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Chile, Colombia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, 

Iceland, Japan (all areas other than Amami, Bonin, Ryukyu, Tokara, and Volcano Islands), 

Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, 

Peru, Poland, Russian Federation, Sweden, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, the United 
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 4

Kingdom (England, Orkney, Scotland, and Wales), Uruguay, and Uzbekistan (APHIS, 2011; 

NGRP, 2011) (Table 3).

Table 2. Countries or regions from which blueberry fruit are permitted entry into the continental 

United States (APHIS, 2011).

Country or Region Requirement for Entry for Blueberry

Canada 1) Enterable into all ports-of-entry in the United States; 2) if field-grown, 

grown May 1 through October 31; and 3) subject to inspection at port-ofentry and all general requirements of 7 CFR 319.56-10.

Mexico 1) Enterable into all ports-of-entry in the United States, 2) import permit 

required, and 3) subject to inspection at port-of-entry and all general 

requirements of 7 CFR 319.56-3.

New Zealand 1) Enterable into all ports-of-entry in the United States, 2) subject to 

inspection at port-of-entry and all general requirements of 7 CFR 319.56-

3, and 3) if PPQ Form 203 is lacking, requires a phytosanitary certificate 

issued by Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF) in New Zealand 

with the declaration “The fruit in this consignment have been inspected 

and found free of all life stages of Epiphyas postvittana.”

South Africa 1) Import permit required; 2) subject to inspection at port-of-entry and all 

general requirements of 7 CFR 319.56-3; 3) may or may not be precleared:

a) if pre-cleared: i) may enter all ports-of-entry and ii) be accompanied by 

PPQ Form 203 signed by the APHIS inspector for the country; or b) if not 

pre-cleared: i) must receive treatment T101-i-1-1 or T107-a, ii) may enter 

only at ports located north of 39 latitude and east of 104 longitude, and 

iii) at ports with approved cold treatment facilities; 4) must be 

accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate issued by the National Plant 

Protection Organization of South Africa; 5) commercial consignments 

only; and 6) condition of entry treatment T101-i-1-1 or T107-a.

Table 3. Countries or regions from which Vaccinium spp. are permitted entry into the continental 

United States (APHIS, 2011).

Country Conditions

Argentina 1) Import permit is required; 2) subject to inspection at port-of-entry

and all general requirements of 7 CFR 319.56-3; 3) condition of entry

treatment T107-a-1or T101-i-1-1 unless accompanied by a 

phytosanitary certificate with the declaration “Meets the provisions of 

7 CFR 319.56-5” then waive treatment; 4) if treatment has not been 

completed before entry, may arrive only at, a) ports located north of 

39 latitude and east of 104 longitude, and b) ports that have approved 

cold treatment facilities; and 5) if pre-cleared, must be accompanied by

PPQ Form 203 signed by the APHIS inspector on site.
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 5

Country Conditions

Armenia

Azerbaijan

Belarus

Bulgaria

Estonia

Finland

Georgiaa

Iceland

Japanb

Kazakhstan

Kyrgyzstan

Lithuania

Moldova, Republic of

Netherlands

New Zealand

Norway

Poland

Russian Federation

Sweden

Tajikistan

Turkmenistan

Ukraine

United Kingdomc

Uzbekistan

1) Enterable into all ports-of-entry in the United States, 2) import 

permit is required, and 3) subject to inspection at port-of-entry and all 

general requirements of 7 CFR 319.56-3.

Belgium

Denmark

1) Import permit is required and 2) subject to inspection at port-ofentry and all general requirements of 7 CFR 319.56-3, 3) enterable into 

North Atlantic (NA) ports only (north of 39 latitude and east of 104

longitude).

Bolivia

Colombia

Ecuador

Guatemala

Peru

Uruguay

1) Import permit is required; 2) subject to inspection at port-of-entry

and all general requirements of 7 CFR 319.56-3; 3) condition of entry

treatment T107-a-1or T101-i-1-1 unless accompanied by a 

phytosanitary certificate with the declaration “Meets the provisions of 

7 CFR 319.56-5” then waive treatment; 4) if treatment has not been 

completed before entry, may arrive only at a) ports located north of 39

latitude and east of 104 longitude, and b) ports that have approved 

cold treatment facilities; 5) if pre-cleared, must be accompanied by

PPQ Form 203 signed by the APHIS inspector on site; 6) commercial 

consignments only; and 7) must be accompanied by a phytosanitary

certificate issued by the National Plant Protection Organization of the 

country of origin.
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 6

Country Conditions

Chile 1) Enterable into all ports-of-entry in the United States; 2) import 

permit is required; 3) subject to inspection at port of entry and all 

general requirements of 7 CFR 319.56-3; 4) commercial consignment 

only; and 5) phytosanitary certificate pest-free area: consignment must 

be accompanied by a Chilean Phytosanitary Certificate with the 

additional declaration stating “The fruit in this consignment comes 

from an area that is not under quarantine for Mediterranean fruit fly

(Ceratitis capitata).”

Australia (Tasmania 

only)

1) Enterable into all ports-of-entry in the United States; 2) import 

permit is required; 3) subject to inspection at port-of-entry and all 

general requirements of 7 CFR 319.56-3; 4) required that each 

consignment be certified as Tasmanian origin by an authorized official 

of Tasmania; and 5) each container be marked to identify it as being of 

Tasmanian origin.

a Country of

b All areas other than Amami, Bonin, Ryukyu, Tokara, and Volcano Islands

c

England, Orkney Islands, Scotland, and Wales

2.4. Pest Categorization

2.4.1. Pests associated with blueberry

The pests associated with blueberry (in any country) that occur in Morocco (on any host) are 

listed in Table 4. We identified the presence or absence of these pests in the continental United 

States, the quarantine status of the pests with respect to the continental United States, the 

generally affected plant part or parts, whether quarantine pests are likely to follow the pathway

and enter the continental United States on commercial blueberry fruit, and pertinent references. 

We developed this pest list based on the scientific literature, USDA port-of-entry pest 

interception data, and information provided by the government of Morocco. Pests in shaded rows 

are quarantine pests that are candidates for further risk mitigation, since we consider them 

reasonably likely to follow the pathway of commercial fruit shipments. We summarize these 

pests in a separate table (Table 5). 

Please note that in the pest list (Table 4), we do not provide information on whether the pest is 

likely to follow the pathway for non-quarantine pests. Even if non-quarantine pests are able to 

follow the pathway, phytosanitary measures against these pests would not be justified because 

they already occur in the continental United States. Therefore, for non-quarantine pests we 

indicate “Follow pathway” with N/A (not applicable).
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 7

Table 4. Pests associated with blueberry, Vaccinium corymbosum, that are also present in Morocco.

Scientific Name Reported on 

Vaccinium

Morocco and U.S. 

Distribution1

Quarantine pest2Plant part(s) 

association3

Follow 

pathway3

ARTHROPODS

ACARI: Tarsonemidae

Tarsonemus sp. PestID, 2011 MO: PestID, 2011; US:

CABI, 2011 (as 

synonym) 4

Yes Fl, Fr, L, S, T

(CABI, 2011)

Yes

ACARI: Tenuipalpidae

Brevipalpus sp. PestID, 2011 MO: PestID, 2011; US:

CABI, 2011

Yes L, S (CABI, 

2011)

No

ACARI: Tetranychidae

Tetranychus urticae 

Koch

Hilali, 2010 MO: Hilali, 2010; US: 

CABI, 2011

No Fl, Fr, L, St

(CABI, 2011)

N/A

INSECTA

Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae

Chaetocnema sp. PestID, 2011 MO: PestID, 2011; US:

CABI, 2011

Yes Fl, Fr, L, S, R

(CABI, 2011)

Yes

Coleoptera: Curculionidae/Apioninae

Apion sp. PestID, 2011 MO: PestID, 2011; US:

Arnett, 1985

Yes S, T (CABI, 

2011)

No

Coleoptera: Curculionidae/Brachyderinae

Sitona sp. PestID, 2011 MO: CABI, 2011,

PestID, 2011; US: 

Arnett, 1985, CABI, 

2011

Yes L, R (CABI, 

2011)

No

Coleoptera: Curculionidae/Cylindrorhininae

Listroderes sp. PestID, 2011 MO: CABI, 2011; US: 

Arnett, 1985, CABI, 

2011

Yes L, S, R (CABI, 

2011)

No

Coleoptera: Curculionidae/Scolytinae

Orthotomicus sp. PestID, 2011 MO: CABI, 2011; US: 

Arnett, 1985, CABI, 

2011

Yes S, T (CABI, 

2011)

No

Diptera: Tephritidae

Ceratitis capitata 

(Wiedemann)

Hilali, 2010; Follett et 

al., 2011

MO: Hilali, 2010,

CABI, 2011; US: CABI, 

20115

[Yes] Fr (CABI, 

2011)

Yes6

 

1 Geographic Distribution: MO = Morocco, US = United States. Individual U.S. states are listed only if the pest species is 

considered a quarantine pest for the United States.

2 Brackets [] around the quarantine status designation indicate that the pest has a limited distribution in the continental United 

States and is either under official control or under consideration for official control.

3

Plant part association: Fl = flower, Fr = fruit, L = leaf, R = root, S = stem, T = twig. For non-quarantine pests, N/A (not 

applicable) is used for “Follow Pathway.”

4 Polyphagotarsonemus latus, formerly Tarsonemus latus, is distributed in Morocco and the United States (CABI, 2011).

5 Eradicated or under official control.
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 8

Scientific Name Reported on 

Vaccinium

Morocco and U.S. 

Distribution1

Quarantine pest2Plant part(s) 

association3

Follow 

pathway3

Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae

Bemisia tabaci 

(Genadius)

Hilali, 2010 MO: Hilali, 2010, 

CABI, 2011; US: CABI, 

2011

No7 N/A N/A

Trialeurodes 

vaporariorum

Westwood

PestID, 2011 MO: CABI, 2011; US: 

Arnett, 1985, CABI, 

2011

No N/A N/A

Trialeurodes sp. PestID, 2011 MO: CABI, 2011, 

PestID, 2011; US: 

Arnett, 1985, CABI, 

2011

Yes Fl, Fr, L

(CABI, 2011)

Yes

Hemiptera: Aphididae

Aphis fabae Scopoli Blackman and 

Eastop, 2000, 2006; 

Isaacs and Woodford, 

2007

MO: CABI, 2011; US: 

CABI, 2011

No N/A N/A

Aphis gossypii Glover Blackman and 

Eastop, 2000, 2006; 

Isaacs and Woodford, 

2007

MO: CABI, 2011; US: 

CABI, 2011

No N/A N/A

Aphis spiraecola Patch Blackman and 

Eastop, 2006

MO: CABI, 2011; US: 

CABI, 2011

No N/A N/A

Aphis sp. Hilali, 2010 MO: Hilali, 2010,

CABI, 2011; US: CABI, 

2011

Yes Fl, L, S, T

(CABI, 2011)

No

Macrosiphum 

euphorbiae Thomas

Blackman and 

Eastop, 2006

MO: CABI, 2011; US: 

CABI, 2011

No N/A N/A

Neomyzus 

circumflexus 

(Buckton);

syns. Aulacorthum 

circumflexum 

Buckton, Myzus 

circumflexus 

Buckton

Blackman and 

Eastop, 2006

MO: Mimuer, 1934,

CABI, 1990, Mau and 

Kessing, 2007; US: 

CABI, 1990, Mau and 

Kessing, 2007

No N/A N/A

Sitobion sp. Blackman and 

Eastop, 2006

MO: CABI, 2011; US: 

CABI, 2011

Yes Fl, Fr, L, S

(CABI, 2011)

Yes

Toxoptera aurantii 

Boyer de 

Fonscolombe

Blackman and 

Eastop, 2006

MO: CABI, 2011; US: 

CABI, 2011

No N/A N/A

 

6 Ceratitis capitata, or Mediterranean fruit fly (Medfly) may follow the pathway because standard harvest and postharvest 

processing may not meet USDA requirements for cold storage (§1.2). Specifically, the use of non-preferred varieties and 

growth inside net houses may eliminate contact with the fruit, but cold storage after harvest has not been certified to meet 

the requirements of PPQ T107-a that will kill any insects present. See discussion in section 2.4.2.

7 No action required except for whitefly-infested tomato from Dominican Republic (PestID, 2011).
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 9

Scientific Name Reported on 

Vaccinium

Morocco and U.S. 

Distribution1

Quarantine pest2Plant part(s) 

association3

Follow 

pathway3

Hemiptera: Diaspididae

Chionaspis salicis 

(Linnaeus)

Ben-Dov et al., 2011 MO: Ben-Dov et al.,

2011; US: Ben-Dov et 

al., 2008

No N/A N/A

Diaspidiotus 

ostreaeformis 

(Curtis)

Ben-Dov et al., 2011 MO: Ben-Dov et al.,

2011; US (20 states): 

Ben-Dov et al., 2011

No N/A N/A

Diaspidiotus zonatus 

(Frauenfeld)

Ben-Dov et al., 2011 MO: Ben-Dov et al.,

2011

[Yes] Fr, S, T (CABI, 

2011)

8

Yes9

Fiorinia sp. Ben-Dov et al., 2011; 

PestID, 2011

MO: Ben-Dov et al., 

2011; PestID, 2011

US: Arnett, 1985

Yes L (PestID) No

Hemiberlesia sp. CABI, 2011; PestID, 

2011

MO: CABI, 2011; BenDov et al., 2011

US: Arnett, 1985; 

CABI, 2011; Ben-Dov 

et al., 201110

Yes Fr, L, S (CABI, 

2011)

Yes

Lepidosaphes ulmi 

(Linnaeus)

Ben-Dov et al., 2011 MO: Ben-Dov et al.,

2011; US: Ben-Dov et 

al., 2011

No N/A N/A

Hemiptera: Lygaeidae

Nysius sp. PestID, 2011 MO: PestID, 2011; US: 

Arnett, 1985

Yes Fr, L (CABI, 

2011)

Yes

Lepidoptera: Noctuidae

Agrotis sp. PestID, 2011 MO: PestID, 2011; US: 

Arnett, 1985; CABI, 

2011

Yes L, S, R (CABI, 

2011)

No

Lepidoptera: Tortricidae

Grapholita sp. PestID, 2011 MO: CABI, 2011; 

PestID, 2011; US: 

Arnett, 1985; CABI, 

2011

Yes Fl, Fr (CABI, 

2011)

Yes

Thysanoptera: Thripidae

Heliothrips 

haemorrhoidalis 

Bouché

Hummer et al., 2009 MO: CABI, 2011; US: 

CABI, 2011

No N/A N/A

Thrips sp. PestID, 2011 MO: PestID, 2011; US:

Arnett, 1985

Yes Fl, Fr, L

(CABI, 2011)

Yes

 

8 We found no information about plant part association for this species. Entries based on Diaspidiotus general biology 

(CABI, 2011).

9 Armored scales (Diaspididae) may enter on commercial fruit for consumption, but are highly unlikely to become 

established via this pathway. Please see discussion in section 2.4.2 for more details.

10 Hemiberlesia rapax attacks Vaccinium corymbosum and is virtually cosmopolitan in distribution (CABI, 2011).
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 10

Scientific Name Reported on 

Vaccinium

Morocco and U.S. 

Distribution1

Quarantine pest2Plant part(s) 

association3

Follow 

pathway3

FUNGI AND CHROMISTANS

Alternaria alternata CABI, 2011; Farr et 

al, 2011

MO: CABI, 2011; Farr 

et al, 2011; US: CABI,

2011; Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Alternaria tenuissima 

(Kunze: Fr.) 

Wiltshire

Milholland and 

Meyer, 1984; Caruso 

and Ramsdell, 1995; 

Farr et al, 2011

MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971; 

US: CABI, 2011; Farr et 

al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Alternaria sp. PestID, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: CABI, 2011; Farr et 

al, 2011

Yes Fr, L, S (CABI, 

2011)

Yes

Ascochyta sp. PestID, 2011 MO: PestID, 2011; US:

Farr et al, 2011

Yes Fr, L. S (CABI, 

2011)

Yes

Botryosphaeria 

dothidea 

(Moug.:Fr.) Ces. & 

De Not.

Milholland and 

Meyer, 1984; Farr et 

al, 2011

MO: Rieuf, 1969; US: 

CABI, 2011; Farr et al, 

2011

No N/A N/A

Botryosphaeria obtusa

(Schwein.) 

Shoemaker;

syn. Physalospora 

obtusa (Schwein.) 

Cooke

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971; 

US: Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Botryosphaeria sp. PestID, 2011 MO: CABI, 2011; 

PestID, 2011; US: 

CABI, 2011; Farr et al, 

2011

Yes Fl, Fr, L, S

(CABI, 2011)

Yes

Botrytis cinerea 

Pers.:Fr.; 

anamorph: 

Botryotinia 

fuckeliana (de Bary) 

Whetzel

Milholland and 

Meyer, 1984; Hilali, 

2010; CABI, 2011; 

Farr et al, 2011

MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971; 

Hilali, 2010; CABI, 

2011; US: CABI, 2011; 

Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Camarosporium sp. PestID, 2011 MO: PestID, 2011; US:

Farr et al, 2011

Yes L, S, T (Farr et 

al, 2011)

No

Cercospora sp. Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971; 

US: CABI, 2011; Farr et 

al, 2011

Yes S (CABi, 2011) No

Colletotrichum sp. PestID, 2011 MO: PestID, 2011; US: 

CABI, 2011; Farr et al, 

2011

Yes Fl, Fr, L, S

(CABI, 2011)

Yes
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 11

Scientific Name Reported on 

Vaccinium

Morocco and U.S. 

Distribution1

Quarantine pest2Plant part(s) 

association3

Follow 

pathway3

Davidiella tassiana

(De Not.) Crous & 

U. Braun 

Syn.:

Mycosphaerella 

tassiana (De Not.) 

Johans. Anamorph: 

Cladosporium 

herbarum (Pers. : 

Fr.) Link

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971; 

US: Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Glomerella cingulata 

(Stoneman) Spauld. 

& H. Schrenk

Anamorph: 

Colletotrichum 

gloeosporioides 

(Penz.) Penz. & 

Sacc. In Penz.

Caruso and Ramsdell, 

1995; Farr et al, 2011

MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971; 

US: CABI, 2011; Farr et 

al, 2011

No N/A N/ A

Kalmusia 

coniothyrium

(Fuckel) Huhndorf

Syn.: Leptosphaeria 

coniothyrium 

(Fuckel) Sacc. 

Anamorph: 

Microsphaeropsis 

fuckelii (Sacc.) 

Boerema

CABI, 2011; Farr et 

al, 2011

MO: CABI, 2011; US: 

CABI, 2011

No N/A N/A

Monilinia fructigena

Honey ex Whetzel 

CABI, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971 Yes Fl, Fr, S

(CABI, 2011)

Yes11

Mycosphaerella sp. PestID, 2011 MO: PestID, 2011 Yes Fr, L, S (CABI, 

2011)

Yes

Nectria cinnabarina 

(Tode: Fr.) Fr.

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Penicillium expansum 

Link

CABI, 2011; Farr et 

al, 2011

MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: CABI, 2011

No N/A N/A

Pestalotiopsis 

maculans (Corda) 

Nag Raj

Syns.: P. guepini 

Desmaz, Pestalotia 

guepini Desmaz

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

 

11 This pathogen may, but is unlikely, to follow the pathway because of the following standard production, harvest, and postharvest processing measures (see §1.2): regular fungicide applications, harvest of slightly immature fruit, indoor 

production to eliminate wounds from attacking insects, visual inspection and culling (Hilali, 2010). See discussion in 

section 2.4.2.
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 12

Scientific Name Reported on 

Vaccinium

Morocco and U.S. 

Distribution1

Quarantine pest2Plant part(s) 

association3

Follow 

pathway3

Pestalotiopsis sp. PestID, 2011 MO: PestID, 2011; US: 

Farr et al, 2011

Yes L, S, T (Farr et 

al, 2011)

/No

Pestalotiopsis 

maculans (Corda) 

Nag Raj

syn. P. guepini 

Desmaz., Pestalotia 

guepini Desmaz.

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Phaeosphaeria sp. PestID, 2011 MO: CABI, 2011,

PestID, 2011; US:

CABI, 2011

Yes Fl, L (CABI, 

2011)

No

Phoma sp. PestID, 2011 MO: CABI, 2011,

PestID, 2011; US:

CABI, 2011

Yes L, R, S (CABI, 

2011)

No

Phyllactinia guttata 

(Wallr.: Fr.) Lév.;

syn. P. corylea 

(Pers.) P. Karst

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Phytophthora 

cinnamomi Rands

Milholland and 

Meyer, 1984; Caruso 

and Ramsdell, 1995; 

CABI, 2011

MO: CABI, 2011, Farr 

et al, 2011; US: CABI, 

2011; Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Pleospora herbarum 

(Pers.: Fr.) Rabenh.

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Podosphaera 

clandestina (Wallr.: 

Fr.) Lev.;

syn. P. oxycanthae 

(DC) de Bary

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Rhizoctonia solani 

Kühn

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Rhizopus stolonifer 

(Ehrenb.: Fr.) Vuill.

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Sclerotinia minor 

Jagger

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Sclerotinia 

sclerotiorum (Lib.) 

de Bary

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971,

CABI, 2011; US: CABI, 

2011, Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Thielaviopsis basicola 

(Berk. & Br.) 

Ferraris

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Trichothecium roseum 

(Pers.: Fr.) Link

Farr et al, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: Farr et al, 2011

No N/A N/A

Uredo sp. PestID, 2011 MO: PestID, 2011; US:

CABI, 2011

Yes L, S (PestID) No
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 13

Scientific Name Reported on 

Vaccinium

Morocco and U.S. 

Distribution1

Quarantine pest2Plant part(s) 

association3

Follow 

pathway3

NEMATODES

Helicotylenchus 

dihystera (Cobb) 

Sher. 

CABI, 2011 MO, US: CABI, 2011 No N/A N/A

Pratylenchus 

penetrans (Cobb) 

Filipjev & 

Schuurmans 

Stekhoven

CABI, 2011 MO, US: CABI, 2011 No N/A N/A

BACTERIA

Pseudomonas syringae 

pv. syringae van 

Hall

CABI, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: CABI, 2011

No N/A N/A

Pseudomonas 

viridiflava

(Burkholder 1930) 

Dowson 1939

CABI, 2011 MO, US: CABI, 2011 No N/A N/A

Rhizobium radiobacter 

(Beijerinck & van 

Delden) Young et 

al.;

syn. Agrobacterium 

tumefaciens (Smith 

& Townsend) Conn

CABI, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: CABI, 2011

No N/A N/A

Rhizobium rhizogenes 

(Riker et al.) Young 

et al.;

syn. Agrobacterium 

rhizogenes (Riker et 

al.) Conn

CABI, 2011 MO: Rieuf, 1969-1971

US: CABI, 2011

No N/A N/A

VIRUSES

Tobacco ringspot 

nepovirus

CABI, 2011 MO, US: CABI, 2011 No N/A N/A

2.4.2. Quarantine pests following the pathway but not candidates for further risk mitigation

General issues. Quarantine pests not listed above could be detrimental to agriculture or 

ecosystems in the continental United States, but they are not candidates for risk mitigation for a 

variety of reasons. For example, they are mainly associated with plant parts other than the 

commodity; they may be associated with the commodity, but would not reasonably remain with 

the commodity through standard harvest and post-harvest processing; they have been intercepted 

as biological contaminants of these commodities during U.S. agricultural port-of-entry

inspection, but would not likely be present in commercial shipments; or the organism was 

identified (in the literature or in USDA’s interception data) only to the genus level, and the genus 

in question occurs in the continental United States.
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 14

Lack of specific identification. Generally, based on standards by the International Plant 

Protection Convention (IPPC, 2009), we do not consider risk mitigation measures for organisms 

identified only to the genus level if the genus in question is reported in the continental United 

States. Often there are many species within a genus, and we cannot know if the unidentified 

species occurs in the continental United States and, consequently, whether it meets the definition 

of a quarantine pest for the continental United States. In this risk assessment, the preceding 

statement applies to the arthropod genera Chaetocnema, Grapholita, Hemiberlesia, Nysius, 

Tarsonemus, Trialeurodes, Sitobion, and Thrips, and to the pathogen genera Alternaria, 

Ascochyta, Botryosphaeria, Colletotrichum, Mycosphaerella, and Pestalotiopsis. These genera 

are reported to occur in the continental United States (Ben-Dov et al., 2011; CABI, 2011; Farr et 

al, 2011). Lack of specific identification may indicate the limits of current taxonomic knowledge

or the life stage or the quality of the specimen submitted for identification. Pest risk assessments 

focus on organisms for which biological information is available. Lack of specific identification 

does not rule out the possibility that a high-risk quarantine pest was intercepted. Conversely, the 

development of detailed assessments for known pests that inhabit a variety of ecological niches, 

such as internal fruit feeders or foliage pests, allows effective mitigation measures to eliminate 

the known organisms as well as similar but incompletely identified organisms that inhabit the 

same niche. If pests identified to higher taxa are intercepted in the future, we may reevaluate 

their risk.

Armored scale. We did not further analyze the armored scale Diaspidiotus zonatus (Hemiptera: 

Diaspididae) identified in this risk assessment as a quarantine pest likely to follow the pathway, 

because armored scales are highly unlikely to establish via this pathway due to their very limited 

ability to disperse to new host plants (Miller et al., 1985; PERAL, 2007). Only a certain 

immature form of armored scales, the crawler stage, can self-disperse. Crawlers are highly 

unlikely to successfully disperse by walking from their natal host since they are not capable of 

rapid movement over bare soil or rough surfaces. They typically disperse by being blown from 

plant to plant in the wind. Additionally, their dispersal period is limited to approximately 24 

hours, after which they start feeding, become firmly anchored to the host tissue, and lose their 

legs. Adult females have no wings or legs. Dispersal from fruit discarded into the environment is 

highly unlikely because of low wind speeds at ground level and low survival rate of crawlers on 

the ground or on decaying fruit or fruit peels.

2.4.3. Quarantine pests likely to follow the pathway that are candidates for risk mitigation

Medfly. Medfly, Ceratitis capitata, is a candidate for further mitigations, because the following 

processes may not eliminate it from the blueberry fruit pathway (Hilali, 2010):

 Blueberry production area of Morocco may be a pest-free area, but has not been certified as 

such based on trapping and isolation from citrus-producing areas

 The southern highbush blueberry varieties selected for export are poor hosts of Medfly 

(Follett et al., 2011)

 Blueberries will be grown within net houses that may not prevent oviposition

 Hand-harvesting and hand-packing of small quantities will be practiced

 Cold storage following harvest and prior to shipping has not been certified to meet or exceed 

PPQ T107-a cold treatment for Medfly (USDA, 2011)
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 15

Monilinia fructigena. The fungus Monilinia fructigena is a candidate for further mitigation 

because production, harvest, and postharvest processing measures, while likely to remove 

infected fruit from the pathway, may not be 100 percent effective. First, blueberry is not a 

commonly infected by M. fructigena,which typically infects plants in the Rosaceae, most 

frequently pome fruits (Malus spp., Pyrus spp.).and occasionally stone fruits (Prunus spp.) 

(Cline, 2005).Picking fruit at a stage slightly less than fully mature, and growing them in nets 

and under cover and eliminating insect, wind, or hail damage to fruit, will further reduce its 

susceptibility to the pathogen, which often infests damaged fruit. Regular chemical treatment of 

developing fruit with fungicides should further reduce the number of infected fruit. Finally, fruit 

will be visually inspected and any fruit that are damaged or suspected to be infected with brown 

rot are likely to be culled in the production facility or in the packinghouse. These practices may

not remove 100 percent of Monilinia fructigena.

2.5. Analysis of Quarantine Pests

For the quarantine pests selected for further analysis, we assess their likelihood of introduction 

into the continental United States and the undesirable consequences that may occur from their 

introduction. We rated pests using the criteria in the Guidelines for Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk

Assessments, Version 5.02 (PPQ, 2000). We calculated a cumulative risk rating, or Pest Risk 

Potential, for each pest by summing all risk element values. Below we summarize the values for 

each pest (Table 8).

The major sources of uncertainty present in this risk assessment include the quality of the 

biological information and the amount of information available on the regional flora and fauna. 

Inherent biological variation within a population of organisms introduces uncertainty as well.

2.5.1. Consequences of Introduction

Here we assess the undesirable consequences that may occur from the introduction of pests. For 

each quarantine pest, the potential consequences of introduction are rated in five areas called 

“Risk Elements”. They are Climate-Host Interaction, Host Range, Dispersal Potential, Economic 

Impact, and Environmental Impact. These Risk Elements reflect the biology, host range, and 

climatic/geographic distribution of each pest and are supported by biological information on each 

of the analyzed pests that is summarized in this section.

Ceratitis capitata Risk ratings

Risk Element #1: Climate/Host Interaction 

Ceratitis capitata (Medfly) is native to Africa and has spread throughout the 

Mediterranean region, Southern Europe (e.g., Spain, Italy, Cyprus), the Middle 

East, Western Australia, South and Central America (e.g., Argentina, Ecuador, 

Peru, Colombia), and Hawaii (Fletcher, 1989; White and Elson-Harris, 1992). 

The species can establish in California, Florida, and Texas, where it has been 

recorded intermittently and subsequently eradicated (CABI, 2011). Based on a 

comparison of this reported distribution with a global map of USDA Plant 

Hardiness Zones (Magarey et al., 2008), we estimate that Medfly could become 

established in the areas of the continental United States corresponding to USDA 

Medium (2)
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 16

Ceratitis capitata Risk ratings

Plant Hardiness Zones 8-11. Multiple hosts of Medfly are present in those zones

(e.g., Citrus spp., Malus spp., Prunus spp., Pyrus communis, P. calleryana, 

Solanum lycopersicum) (Kartesz, 2011). Because Zone 11 only comprises 

approximately 0.1 percent of the United States (PERAL, 2008), we do not count 

it toward the total number of zones for determining the Climate-Host Interaction 

risk rating. Therefore, we rate this element Medium (taken from PERAL Pest 

Notes).

Risk Element #2: Host Range

Medfly is a polyphagous species that has been recorded from cultivated and 

wild hosts belonging to at least 51 genera among at least 30 plant families, 

including Anacardiaceae (Anacardium, Mangifera, Spondias), Annonaceae

(Annona), Cactaceae (Opuntia), Malpighiaceae (Malpighia), Moraceae

(Artocarpus, Ficus, Morus), Myrtaceae (Eugenia, Feijoa, Psidium, Syzygium),

Punicaceae (Punica), Rosaceae (Malus, Mespilus, Prunus), Rutaceae (Citrus), 

Sapindaceae, (Blighia, Euphoria, Litchi), Sapotaceae (Chrysophyllum, 

Manilkara, Mimusops, Pouteria), Solanaceae (Capsicum, Solanum), and 

Vitaceae (Vitis) (CABI, 2011; Liquido et al., 1991; Thomas et al., 2010; White 

and Elson-Harris, 1992).

High (3)

Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential

A Medfly female may lay up to 800 eggs (22 per day) during her lifetime 

(Thomas et al., 2010). The life cycle under favorable conditions [21.1-32.2°C 

(70-90°F)] may be completed in three weeks; however, under the climatic 

conditions in Florida (i.e., at the latitude of Orlando), 10 generations could 

develop under normal year-round conditions (Knapp, 1998). Adult Medflies can 

fly as far as 32.2 km (20 miles) (Christenson and Foote, 1960; Steiner et al., 

1962). Movement of infested commodities is the major means of dispersal to 

previously uninfested areas (CABI, 2011). Since 1984, inspectors at U.S. portsof-entry have intercepted Medfly over 3,000 times (PestID, 2011). Medfly may

also be dispersed via puparia in soil or growing media accompanying plants 

(CABI, 2011).

High (3)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact

Because of its wide distribution and its wide host range, Medfly is the most 

important of the economically important fruit flies (CABI, 2011; Weems, 1981). It 

reduces crop yields (Steck, 2006) and may transmit fruit-rotting fungi (CABI, 

2011). Additionally, costs would be incurred to minimize the impact of Medfly

on crop production, because the presence of larvae in the fruit may make the 

fruit unmarketable (Andrew et al., 1977). The species is of quarantine 

significance for many countries (Steck, 2006). Its presence, even as temporary

adventive populations, can lead to severe constraints for the export of fruits to 

uninfested areas in other parts of the world; eradication of recurring populations 

of Medfly in an area (to maintain pest-free status) can be very costly and 

resource intensive (Cayol et al., 2002; Steck, 2006).

High (3)

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact

Because of its broad host range, Medfly may affect numerous Federal 

Threatened and Endangered (T&E) plant species in the continental United States

Medium (2)
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 17

Ceratitis capitata Risk ratings

[e.g., Argemone pleiacantha ssp. pinnatisecta (E), Asimina tetramera (E), 

Berberis nevivii (E), Euphorbia telephioides (T), Prunus geniculata (E), Ribes 

echinellum (T)] (USFWS, 2011). However, Medfly only affects the fruit of its 

hosts. We found no evidence that Medfly damages the seeds or other non-fruit 

parts of its hosts; therefore, we assume this fruit fly would have little, if any, direct 

effect on the population health of threatened or endangered plant species. A 

potential and indirect effect of the establishment of Medfly is the continuance 

and possible increase in exotic fruit-fly control programs, which would probably

include chemical and biological control (APHIS, 2001; APHIS. 2011; CABI, 

2011; Purcell, 1998; Ovruski et al., 2000; Wharton, 1989). Based on the potential 

indirect effects of control programs, as opposed to direct damage caused by

Medfly, we rate this risk element Medium.

Risk Elements #1 - #5 are consistent with riskratings for Ceratitis capitata from 

blueberries from South Africa and Uraguay (USDA, 2007a, 2007b).

Monilinia fructigena Risk Ratings

Risk Element #1: Climate/Host Interaction 

Monilinia fructigena is found throughout western and southern Europe and 

extends into the Scandinavian countries, eastern Europe, the former Soviet 

Union, the Middle East, India, and North Africa (CABI, 2011)

High (3)

Risk Element #2: Host Range

Monilinia fructigena, under suitable environmental conditions, will infect not only all 

cultivated drupaceous and pomaceous species, but also many other species including

Amelanchier spp. (serviceberry), Capsicum spp. (peppers), Diospyros kaki

(persimmon), Fragaria ananassa (strawberry), Malus domestica (apple), Malus 

sylvestris (crabapple), Prunus spp. (apricot, peach, and plum), Pyrus communis

(pear), Solanum lycopersicum (tomato), and Vitis vinifera (grape) (CABI, 2011).

High (3)

Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential

The conidia of M. fructigena are “dry air” spores that are set free by air currents 

and wind. The conidiophores elevate the spore chains above the infected tissues 

and thus provide better exposure to air currents. Infected fruits and peduncles 

are in positions on the tree that are suitable for efficient take-off and aerial 

dispersal of spores. The conidia of M. fructigena are disseminated by wind 

when temperatures are high, when relative humidity is low, and often at high 

UV light intensities. Rain splashes are important as a means of liberating spores

(CABI, 2011). Almost any insect attracted to rotting flowers or fruit has the 

potential to pick up and carry spores from sporulating mycelium to healthy,

susceptible tissues, but those that create new wounds provide the necessary sites 

of infection for M. fructigena. The most important animal vectors are birds, 

wasps (Vespula spp.), beetles, especially the nitidulid beetles (Carpophilus

spp.), flies (Diptera) including Drosophila spp., and Lepidoptera (CABI, 2011).

High (3)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact

Monilina fructigena causes significant losses both before and after harvest, but 

Medium (2)
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 18

Monilinia fructigena Risk Ratings

it is not easy to assess the overall losses because they are highly visible but are 

rarely worth the implementation of specific control measures. Early-maturing 

cultivars are most affected, but the majority of diseased fruits are those that 

would be rejected for other reasons such as bruising or bird and insect damage. 

Monilinia fructigena is less damaging than Monilinia fructicola or Monilinia 

laxa, although it occasionally causes economically important losses of apple 

[Malus domestica] and plum [Prunus domestica] fruits, particularly in hot and 

humid summers (CABI, 2011).

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact

The ability to spread to widely distributed species of Amelanchier serviceberry 

and Malus crabapple species (USDA, NRCS 2011) places the whole of the 

North American continent at risk. There is a threatened and endangered species 

of Prunus present in Florida that would also be at risk (USFWS, 2011).

High (3)

Table 5. Summary of the risk ratings and values for the Consequences of Introduction

Pest Climate- Host 

interaction

Host 

Range

Dispersal 

Potential

Economic 

Impact

Environmental ImpactCumulative 

ratinga

Ceratitis capitata Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (13)

Monilinia fructigena High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (14)

a Low = 5-8 points, Medium = 9-12 pts, High = 13-15 points

2.5.2. Likelihood of Introduction

Likelihood of Introduction is a function of the quantity of the commodity imported annually and 

pest opportunity. Pest opportunity consists of five criteria that consider the potential for pest 

survival along the pathway (PPQ, 2000). We summarized the ratings below (Table 6).

Quantity Imported Annually. Volume imported is assessed in terms of the expected number of 

40-foot long sea shipping containers (approximately 40,000 pounds each). Since the production 

of blueberries in Morocco is new and about 200 hectares, we project only a small volume for 

exportation (Hilali, 2010). Based on this estimate, we rated the Quantity Imported Annually

Low.

Survive Post-harvest Treatment. In this risk element, we evaluate the efficacy of standard postharvest treatments in terms of the mortality of pests exposed to the treatments. As noted in section 

1.2 of this risk assessment, we assumed that the commodity would undergo hand-picking, handgrading, and cold storage for shipment. Cold treatment can kill Ceratitis capitata if done to PPQ 

standards, but Morocco’s cold treatment has not been certified to meet that standard. Impacts of

net house production, hand-picking, and routine fungicide treatments on the pest are unknown.

C. capitata is an internal feeder, and M. fructigena has a latent period, creating considerable 

uncertainty about any observable effects; therefore we rate Survive Post-harvest Treatment High. 

Survive Shipment. Morocco proposes that cold storage and shipment will be followed that can be 

certified to meet PPQ T107-a (Hilali, 2010). Shipping trays will be clear plastic boxes labeled to 
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 19

meet USDA specifications, and because they are clear, in-shipment spoilage will be readily

apparent. However, shipping conditons are unlikely to mitigate C. capitata; and M. fructigena is 

known from environments that experience sub-freezing temperatures. For these reasons, we rate 

Survive Shipment High

Not Detected at Port-of-Entry. Ceratitis capitata produces oviposition scars but eggs are laid 

below the skin of the fruit and larvae are internal feeders; therefore Medfly may be overlooked 

during inspection (CABI, 2011). Egg hatch and larval feeding under the storage and shipment 

conditions stated by Morocco (Hilali, 2010) may take as long as 29 days, and fruits must be 

destructively sampled to find internal feeders (CABI, 2011). Not Detected at Port of Entry is 

therefore rated High for Medfly. The United States already imports a number of host plant 

commodities from other countries where M. fructigena occurs (7CFR § 319.56-2r) without 

requiring measures beyond normal port of entry inspection; but due to latency of infection

Monilinia fructigena may not be readily detected by visual inspection of the fruit at ports of entry so 

Not Detected at Port of Entry is rated High (Podleckis and Usnick, 2005).

Moved to Suitable Habitat. Initial shipments will arrive in JFK Airport in Jamaica, NY (Hilali, 

2010). Once a successful importation record is established, future shipments are anticipated to be to 

New York and to Philadelphia, PA (Hilali, 2010). Shipping is anticipated to take place from 

February to August (Hilali, 2010). Because moderately warm temperatures and breezes are required 

to move Monilinia fructigena, and because the ports of entry may be suitable for Medfly, a highly

mobile pest as an adult, during the summer months, we rate Moved to Suitable Habitat High for M. 

fructigena and C. capitata.

Contact with Host Material. These shipments will be consumed in metropolitan areas, and the 

chance of being discarded in municipal trash or recycling containers in proximity to production 

orchards is negligible. However, at least 46 states in the conterminous U. S. have species of 

Vaccinium that may serve as hosts to C. capitata, and M. fructigena can infect at least 20 genera 

in 10 plant families, we rate Contact with Host Material High for both pests.

These ratings are consistent with prior ratings of M. fructigena on apricots from Spain, sand 

pears from China, and peppers from Korea (USDA, 2005, 2009, 2010); and ratings of C. capitata

on blueberries from South Africa and Uruguay (USDA, 2007a, b).

Table 6. Summary of the ratings for the quantity imported annually, pest opportunity, and the overall 

Likelihood of Introduction. 

Pest Quantity 

imported 

annually 

Ratings for Pest Opportunity Overall 

rating 

(value)a

Survive 

post-harvest 

treatment

Survive 

shipment

Not detected 

at port(s)-ofentry

Moved to 

suitable 

habitat

Contact 

with Host 

Material

Ceratitis capitata Low (1) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (16)

Monilinia fructigena Low (1) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (16)

a Low = 6 - 9 points, Medium = 10 - 14 pts, High = 15 - 18 pts
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 20

3. Pest Risk Potential and Conclusions

We identified three quarantine pests that could follow the pathway of commercially imported 

blueberry fruit from Morocco, one of which—Diaspidiotus xonatus—is highly likely to be 

mitigated by the standard post-harvest processing measures for blueberries in Morocco (Hilali, 

2010), and which we did not assess here.

We assessed two pests that may require additional mitigation: Ceratitis capitata, and Monilinia 

fructigena. Pest risk potential is the sum of the Consequences of Introduction and the Likelihood 

of Introduction values. Pest risk potential is a baseline estimate of the risks associated with the 

importation of the commodity in the absence of phytosanitary measures specific for the pests of 

concern. We rated Monilinia fructigena High risk overall, and rated Ceratitis capitata High

overall (Table 7). Those ratings were despite the following production, harvest, and post-harvest 

procedures (section 1.2): 1) growth in an area not yet certified as a Medfly-free area, 2) growth 

in net houses, 3) regular application of fungicides, 4) hand-picking and hand-grading, and 5) cold 

storage that has not been certified to meet or exceed PPQ T107-a.

Low risk pests do not typically require mitigation measures, other than port-of-arrival inspection 

(PPQ, 2000). A rating of Medium indicates that specific phytosanitary measures may be 

necessary. A rating of High indicates that specific phytosanitary measures, supplemental to portof-arrival inspection, are strongly recommended. A detailed examination and choice of 

appropriate phytosanitary measures to mitigate pest risk is undertaken as part of the pest risk 

management phase and is not discussed in this document.

Table 7. Pest Risk Potentials (PRP) for pests on blueberry from Morocco

Pest Consequences of 

Introduction rating

Likelihood of 

Introduction rating

Pest Risk Potentiala

Ceratitis capitata High (13) High (16) High (29)

Monilinia fructigena High (14) High (16) High (30)

aLow is 11-18 points, Medium is 19-26 points, and High is 27-33 points

4. Authors and Reviewers

Authors J. W. Smith (entomology, primary contact)a

S. C. Redlin (plant pathology)a

Reviewers L. P. Newton (entomology)

a

N. D. Arciniegas (plant pathology)

b

a USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST-PERAL

b USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST-PERAL-Colombia
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 21

5. Literature Cited

AgMRC. 2011. Agricultural Marketing Resource Center.

http://www.agmrc.org/commodities__products/fruits/citrus/citrus_profile.cfm (archived 

at PERAL).

Andrew, C. O., J. C. Cato, and F. J. Prochaska. 1977. Potential economic impact of a fruit fly

infestation on the U.S. citrus industry. Florida State Horticultural Society 90:29-32.

APHIS. 2001. Fruitfly Cooperative Control Program, Final Environmental Impact Statement -

2001. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service (APHIS), Riverdale, MD. 256 pp.

APHIS. 2011a. Fruits and Vegetables Import Requirements (FAVIR). United States Department 

of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). 

https://epermits.aphis.usda.gov/manual/index.cfm?action=pubHome. (Archived at 

PERAL).

APHIS. 2011b. Exotic Fruit Fly Strategic Plan, FY 2011-2015. United States Department of 

Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Fruit Fly 

Exclusion and Detection Programs, Riverdale, MD. 24 pp.

Arnett, R. H., Jr. 1985. AMERICA INSECTS: A handbook of the insects of America north of 

Mexico. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York, NY. 850 pp.

Australian Weeds Committee. 2010. Noxious Weed List for Australian States and Territories.

http://www.weeds.org.au/awc.htm (Archived at PERAL).

Ben-Dov, Y., Miller, D.R. & Gibson, G.A.P. 2001. ScaleNet, Life Histories. 27 June 2001. 

http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/scalenet/lifehist.htm

Blackman, R. L. and V. F. Eastop. 2000. APHIDS ON THE WORLD”S CROPS: An 

Identification and Information Guide, 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Chichester, West 

Sussex, UK. 466 pp.

Blackman, R. L. and V. F. Eastop. 2006. APHIDS ON THE WORLD’S HERBACEOUS 

PLANTS AND SHRUBS: Volume 1, Host Lists and Keys. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Chichester, West Sussex, UK. 1024 pp.

CABI. 1990. Distribution Maps of Pests, Series A (Agricultural), Map no. 72. Aulacorthum 

circumflexum (Buckton). CAB International Institute of Entomology. London, UK. 3 pp.

CABI. 2011. Crop Pest Compendium, CAB International. Wallingford, Oxon, UK. Last accessed 

September 29, 2011. http://www.cabicompendium.org/cpc/findadatasheet.asp

Caruso, F. L. and D. C. Ramsdell. 1995. COMPENDIUM OF BLUEBERRY AND 

CRANBERRY DISEASES. American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, MN. 87 pp.

Cayol, J. P., Y. Rössler, M. Weiss, M. Bahdousheh, M. Omari, M. Hamalawi, and A. 

Almughayyar. 2002. Fruit fly control and monitoring in the Near East: shared concern in 

a regional transboundary problem. Proceedings of 6th International Fruit Fly Symposium 

6-10 May 2002, Stellenbosch, South Africa. 

CISEH. 2011. Invasive plant atlas of the United States. The University of Georgia, Center for 

Invasive Species and Ecosystem Health (CISEH) and the National Park Service.

http://www.bugwood.org/. (Archived at PERAL).

Christenson, L. D., and R. H. Foote. 1960. Biology of Fruit Flies. Annual Review of Entomology

5:171-192.

Farr, D. F., A. Y. Rossman, M. E. Palm, and E. B. McCray. 2011. Fungal Databases. United 

States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Systematic Mycology
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 22

and Microbiology Laboratory. http://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/. (Archived at 

PERAL)

FLEPPC. 2009. List of Invasive Species. Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council (FLEPPC).

http://www.fleppc.org/list/List-WW-F09-final.pdf. (Archived at PERAL).

Fletcher, B. S. 1989. Life history strategies of tephritid fruit flies. Pages 195-208 in A. S. 

Robinson and G. Hooper, (eds.). Fruit flies, their biology, natural enemies and control 

(World Crop Pests, Vol. 3B). Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Follett, P. A., F. T. Zee, R. T. Hamasaki, K. Hummer, and S. T. Nakamato. 2011. Susceptibility

of Low-Chill Blueberry Cultivars to Mediterranean Fruit Fly, Oriental Fruit Fly, and 

Melon Fly (Diptera: Tephritidae). 2011. Journal of Economic Entomology 104(2): 566-

570.

Gunn, C. R., and C. A. Ritchie. 1988. Identification of disseminules listed in the federal Noxious 

Weed Act (Technical Bulletin Number 1719.). United States Department of Agriculture, 

Agricultural Research Service. 313 pp.

Hilali, A. 2010. Request to Amend Regulation 7CFR, part 319: Add blueberries and raspberries 

to the USDA Approved List for importation to the United States from Morocco. Ministry

of Agriculture and Fisheries, Rabat, Morocco. 15 pp.

Holm, L. G., J. V. Pancho, J. P. Herberger, and D. L. Plucknett. 1991a. A GEOGRAPHICAL 

ATLAS OF WORLD WEEDS. Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, Florida. 330 pp.

Holm, L. G., D. L. Plucknett, J. V. Pancho, and J. P. Herberger. 1991b. THE WORLD’S 

WORST WEEDS: Distribution and biology. Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, 

Florida. 609 pp.

Holm, L. G., J. Doll, E. Holm, J. V. Pancho, and J. P. Herberger. 1997. WORLD WEEDS: 

Natural histories and distribution. John Wiley & Sons, New York. 1129 pp.

Hummer, K.E., R. Williams, and J. Mota. 2009. Pests of Blueberries on Sao Miguel, Azores, 

Portugal. ISHS Acta Horticulturae. 810: 287-292.

IPPC. 2009. International Standards For Phytosanitary Measures, 1 to 32 (2009 edition). Food 

and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Secretariat of the International Plant 

Protection Convention (IPPC), Rome, Italy. 432 pp.

Isaacs, R. and J. A. T. Woodford. 2007. IPM Case Studies: Berry Crops. In: H. F. van Emden 

and R. Harrington (eds.). APHIDS AS CROP PESTS. CAB International. Wallingford, 

Oxfordshire, UK. pp. 561-572.

ISSG. 2010. Global Invasive Species Database. The World Conservation Union Species Survival

Commission, Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG).

http://www.issg.org/database/welcome/ (Archived at PERAL).

Kartesz, J. T. 2011. The Biota of North America Program (BONAP). North American Plant 

Atlas [maps generated from Kartesz, J.T. 2010. Floristic Synthesis of North America, 

Version 1.0. Biota of North America Program (BONAP). (in press)]. 

http://www.bonap.org/MapSwitchboard.html. (Archived at PERAL).

Knapp, J. L. 1998. The Mediterranean Fruit Fly (Ceratitis capitata). Entomology Circular No. 

809. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant 

Industry. 3 pp.

Liquido, N. J., L. A. Shinoda, and R. T. Cunningham. 1991. Host plants of the Mediterranean 

fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae): An annotated world review. Miscellaneous Publications 

of the Entomological Society of America (77). 52 pp.
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 23

Magarey, R. D., D. M. Borchert, and J. W. Schlegel. 2008. Global plant hardiness zones for 

phytosanitary risk analysis. Scientia Agricola 65:54-59.

Mau, R. F. L. and J. L. M. Kessing. 2007. Crop Knowledge Master: Neomyzus circumflexus

(Buckton). http://www.extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/type/neomyzus.htm (Accessed 

May 23, 2011).

Milholland, R. D. and J. R. Meyer. 1984. DISEASES AND ARTHROPODS OF 

BLUEBERRIES. North Carolina Agricultural Research Service, Raleigh, NC. 33 pp.

Miller, D. R., V. L. Blackburn, J. A. Davidson, and W. F. Gimpel, Jr. 1985. Pest risk assessment 

of armored scales on certain fruit [report submitted to USDA, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine]. United States Department of 

Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Beltsville, MD. 35 pp.

Mimuer, J.-M. 1934. Aphididae du Maroc. Mémoires de la Société des Sciences Naturelles du 

Maroc (Old Series XL) 40: 1-72; Myzus circumplexus on p. 38.

NGRP. 2011. Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). United States Department of 

Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, National Genetic Resources Program 

(NGRP). http://www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/index.pl?language=en. (Archived at 

PERAL)

NRCS. 2011. The PLANTS Database, National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge, LA.

http://plants.usda.gov (Accessed May 24, 2011).

Ovruski, S., M. n. Aluja, J. Sivinski, and R. Wharton. 2000. Hymenopteran Parasitoids on Fruitinfesting Tephritidae (Diptera) in Latin America and the Southern United States: 

Diversity, Distribution, Taxonomic Status and their use in Fruit Fly Biological Control. 

Integrated Pest Management Reviews 5(2):81-107.

PERAL. 2007. Phytosanitary risks associated with armored scales in commercial shipments of 

fruit for consumption to the United States, Revision Original. United States Department 

of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and 

Quarantine, Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, Plant Epidemiology and 

Risk Analysis Laboratory (PERAL), Raleigh, NC. 24 pp.

PERAL. 2008. Plant Hardiness Zones of the United States: Area and Population Analysis. 

United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, 

Plant Protection and Quarantine, Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, Plant 

Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory (PERAL). 6 pp.

PestID. 2011. Pest Identification Database (PestID). United States Department of Agriculture, 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine.

PIER. 2010. Plant Threats to Pacific Ecosystems: PIER species listed by scientific name 

beginning with the letter V. http://www.hear.org/pier/scientificnames/scinamev.htm

(Accessed April 27, 2011).

Podleckis, E. V. and S. J. Usnick. 2005. Information memo for the Record, Fragrant Pear from 

Peoples Republic of China. (Archived at PERAL).

PPQ. 2000. Guidelines for pathway-initiated pest risk assessments (Version 5.02). United States 

Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection 

and Quarantine (PPQ), Riverdale, MD. 30 pp.

PPQ. 2010. Federal Noxious Weed List. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Plant Protection and Quarantine 

(PPQ).
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 24

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/plant_pest_info/weeds/downloads/weedlist2010doc.pdf.

Purcell, M. F. 1998. Contribution of Biological Control to Integrated Pest Management of 

Tephritid Fruit Flies in the Tropics and Subtropics. Integrated Pest Management Reviews 

3(2):63-83.

Randall, R. P. 2007. A Global Compendium of Weeds. Hawaiian Ecosystems at Risk and 

Department of Agriculture of Western Australia. http://www.hear.org/gcw/.

Reed, C. F. 1977. Economically important foreign weeds (Agriculture Handbook No. 498). 

United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 746 pp.

Rice. 2010. Noxious weeds in the US and Canada. INVADERS Database System Division of 

Biological Sciences, University of Montana, Missoula, MT.

http://invader.dbs.umt.edu/Noxious_Weeds/. (Archived at PERAL).

Rieuf, P. 1969-1971. Parasites et saprophytes des plantes au Maroc (Parasites and saprophytes of 

plants in Morocco). Cahiers de la Recherche Agronomique 27: 1-178; 28: 179-357; 29: 

362-463; 30: 469-570.

Steck, G. J. 2006. Pest Alert. The Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) 

(Diptera: Tephritidae). Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 

Division of Plant Industry. Last accessed July 18, 2011, 

http://www.freshfromflorida.com/pi/enpp/ento/medfly.html.

Steiner, L. F., W. C. Mitchell, and A. H. Baumhover. 1962. Progress of Fruit-Fly Control by

Irradiation Sterilization in Hawaii and the Marianas Islands. International Journal of 

Applied Radiation and Isotopes 13:427-434.

Thomas, M. C., J. B. Heppner, R. E. Woodruff, H. V. Weems, G. J. Steck, and T. R. Fasulo. 

2010. Featured Creatures: Ceratitis capitata - Mediterranean fruitfly. University of 

Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. Last accessed July 18, 2011, 

http://entnemdept.ifas.ufl.edu/creatures/.

USDA. 2005. Importation of Fresh Paprika Pepper Fruit (Capsicum annuum L. var. annuum) 

from the Republic of Korea into the Continental United States. USDA-APHIS-PPQCPHST, Raleigh, NC. 50 pp.

USDA. 2007a. Qualitative Pathway-Initiated Risk Assessment of the Importation of Blueberry

Fruits (Vaccinium species) from the Republic of South Africa into the United States.

USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST, Raleigh, NC. 29 pp.

USDA. 2007b. Importation of fresh highbush and rabbit-eye blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum

L. & V. virgatum Aiton) fruit into the Continental United States from Uruguay. USDAAPHIS-PPQ-CPHST, Raleigh, NC. 56 pp.

USDA. 2009. Importation of Fresh Fruit of Chinese Sand Pear, Pyrus pyrifolia, from China, 

including the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau, into the Entire 

United States, Inclduing all Territories. USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST, Raleigh, NC. 79 pp.

USDA. 2010. Importation of Fresh Apricot, Prunus armeniaca (L.) Fruit from Continental Spain 

into the United States, including Hawaii and U. S. Territories. USDA-APHIS-PPQCPHST, Raleigh, NC. 50 pp.

USDA. 2011. USDA Treatment Manual: United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and 

Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine.

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/plants/manuals/ports/downloads/treatment.pdf

(Accessed May 26, 2011).
Pest Risk Assessment for Blueberry from Morocco

Ver. 2 March 23, 2012 25

USDA, NRCS. 2011. The PLANTS Database. National Plant Data Team, Greensboro, NC, 

USA. http://plants.usda.gov, 27 January 2012 (Archived at PERAL).

USFWS. 2011. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Environmental Conservation Online System.

http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/listedPlants.jsp (Archived at PERAL). 

Weber, E. 2003. INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES OF THE WORLD: A reference guide to 

environmental weeds. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK. 548 pp.

Weems, H. V. 1981. Mediterranean Fruit Fly Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) (Entomology 

Circular No. 230). Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division 

of Plant Industry.

Wharton, R. 1989. Biological control of fruit-infesting Tephritidae. in R. Cavalloro, (ed.). Fruit 

Flies of Economic Importance 87. Commission of the European Communities. 

Coordination of Agricultural Research, International Organization for Biological Control. 

West Palaeartic Regional Section. Balkema Publishers, Brookfield, VT, USA. 629 pp.

White, I. M., and M. M. Elson-Harris. 1992. Fruit flies of economic significance: their 

identification and bionomics. CAB International in association with ACIAR, 

Wallingford, UK. 601 pp.

WSSA. 2011. Composite list of weeds. Weed Science Society of America. 

https://www.gpdd.info/search.cfm?search=pestList. (Archived in GPDD; PERAL).

WSSA. 2010. Composite list of weeds. Weed Science Society of America (WSSA).

https://www.gpdd.info/search.cfm?search=pestList. (Archived at PERAL).