United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Plant Protection and Quarantine



## Importation of Fresh Pitaya ( Hylocereus spp. and several other genera and species ) Fruit from Central America into

the Continental United States

Risk Management Document

August 9

, 20 1 0

Plant Health Program s (PHP) Regulations, Permits and Manuals ( RPM )

Contact Person: David LambRev. 5 August 9, 2010 3 Introduction

T he United States Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service ( USDA

- APHIS) received requests for USDA from Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala,

Honduras

, Nicaragua and Panama to authorize importations of fresh pitaya fruit into the

continental United States. Since importation of fresh pitaya fruit from these Central American countries is currently not authorized by United States regula tions 7 CFR §319.56, a pathway

initiated pest risk assessment (PRA) was prepared by APHIS ’ s Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) to identify the unmitigated pest risks associated with importation of fresh pitaya fruit from

all of Central America including Belize, Costa Rica

, El Salvador, Gu atemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama (USDA, 2007 ).

This document outlines the phytosanitary measures that APHIS will require if the proposed importation of pitayas from countries in Central America (CA) is approved. This proposed

amendment to the regulations will be establishing a performance standard based on a systems approach that must be met by the exporting country covered by the PRA prior to approval of market access for that specific country.

After the regula tory amendment establishing a performance standard for all of Central America is approved, issuance of permits allowing for importation of pitaya would be contingent up on the receipt of a formal request for U.S. market access from each of the exporting cou ntr ies and approval of an export program using the above standard. A site visit by APHIS to verify effectiveness of system approach components would be required before final approval of the export program will be given.

The risk assessment identified the following quarantine pests (t wo species of fruit fly and two mealybug s ) as having a high unmitigated risk potential:

Anastrepha ludens (Loew) (Diptera: Tephritidae) Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) (Diptera: Tephritidae) Dysmicoccus neobrevipes (Beardsley) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae)

Planococcus minor (Maskell) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae)

APHIS

- PPQ pest risk assessment guidelines (USDA, 2000) suggest that

, for quarantine pests given an overall high risk potential rating , specific phytosanitary measures bey ond standard port

of

- entry inspection are highly recommended to mitigate pest risk. Quarantine p ests estimated to present a low risk typically will not require specific mitigative measures beyond the port

- of

- entry inspection. T he port

- of

- entry inspection

, to which all im ported commodities are subject, can be expected to provide sufficient phytosanitary security.

The proposed importation of fresh pitaya fruit from Central America, if approved, would be regulated by amendment to existing fruit and vegetabl e import regulations (7 CFR §319.56)

. Pest risk management is the process of identifying ways to react to a perceived risk, e valuating the efficacy of these actions, and identifying the most appropriate options (IPPC, 2004 )

. This document outlines phytosan itary measures and provides evidence of their efficacy in prevent ingRev. 5 August 9, 2010 4 the int roduction of quarantine pests. The appropriate level of protection may be achieved through the application of a single phytosanitary measure, such as establishment of pest

- free are as , pest free place of production or a quarantine treatment, or a combination of measures in a systems approach

.

Risk Management Measures

The importation of pitayas from countries in Central America

, including Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatem ala, Honduras

, Nicaragua

, and Panama will be done using a systems approach including the following risk management measures :

Monitoring and Oversight

The NPPO of the exporting country must provide a workplan to AP HIS that details the activities

that the NPPO will, subject to APHIS’ s approval of the workplan, carry out to meet the requirements of the systems approach. APHIS will be directly involved with the NPPO in monitoring and auditing implementation of the systems approach.

In addition to conduc ting inspections at the packinghouses, the NPPO of the exporting country must monitor packinghouse operations to verify that the packinghouses are complying with the requirements of the systems approach.

If the NPPO of the exporting country finds that a place of production or packinghouse is not complying with the requirements of the systems approach, no fruit from the place of production or packinghouse will be eligible for export to the United States until APHIS and the NPPO of the exporting country co nduct an investigation and appropriate remedial actions have been implemented

.

The NPPO of the exporting country must review and maintain all forms and documents related to export program activities in places of production and packinghouses for at least 1 year and, as requested, provide them to APHIS for review.

Production Site Requirements

Pitayas must be grown in approved places of production that are registered with the NPPO of the exporting country

. The NPPO of the exporting country will visit an d inspect the production sites monthly, starting two months (60 days) before harvest

, and continue until the end of the shipping

season.

The personnel conducting the trapping and pest surveys must be hired, trained, and supervised by

the NPPO of t he expo rting country

. The NPPO of t he exporting country will certify that exporting places of production have effective fruit fly trapping programs, and follow control guidelines, when necessary, to reduce regulated pest populations. APHIS may monitor the place s of production if necessary

.

Trees and other structures, other than the crop itself, must not shade the crop during the day. NoRev. 5 August 9, 2010 5 other host of Anastrepha ludens or Ceratitis capitata can be grown within 100 meters of the edge

of the field

. Pitaya frui t that has fallen on the ground must be removed from the place of production at least once every seven days and may not be included in field containers of fruit to be packed for export. Harvested pitayas must be placed in field cartons or containers that are marked to show the place of production so that traceback is possible

.

Post

- harvest Procedures

Pitaya s must be packed within 24 hours of harvest in a pest

- exclusionary packinghouse. The packinghouse must be registered with the NPPO of the exporting c ountry . All openings to the outside of the packinghouse must be covered by screening with openings of not more than 1. 5 mm or by some other barrier that prevents pests from entering. The packinghouse must have double doors at the entrance to the facility and at the interior entrance to the area where the pitaya s are packed. The fruit must be safeguarded by a pest

- proof screen or plastic tarpaulin while in transit to the packinghouse and while awaiting packing. Fruit must be packed in insect

proof cartons or containers (which can be sealed at the packinghouse against the entry of pests)

, or covered with insect

- proof mesh or a plastic tarpaulin for transport to the United States. These safeguards must remain intact until arrival in the United States. During the time the packinghouse is in use for exporting pitaya fruit to the United States, the packinghouse may only accept fruit from registered, approved production sites.

Phytosanitary Inspection

A biometric sample of pitaya fruit (jointly agreed upon by APHIS and the NPPO) must be inspected in the exporting country by the NPPO of t he exporting country following any post

harvest processing. A biometric sample will be visually inspected for the quarantine pests Dysmicoccus neobrevipes and Planococcus mino r , and a portion of the fruit will be cut open to detect internal pests Anastrepha ludens and Ceratitis capitata

.

Fruit presented for inspection at the port of entry to the United States must be identified in the shipping documents accompanying each lot of fruit to specify the production site or sites, in which the fruit was produced, and the packing shed or sheds, in which the fruit was processed. This identification must be maintained until the fruit is released for entry into the United States.

The fr uit are subject to inspection at the port of entry for all quarantine pests of concern

, including t he fruit flies Anastrepha ludens and Ceratitis capitata

.

If Dysmicoccus neobrevipes and Planococcus minor are found, the entire lot of fruit will be prohibi ted from import into the United States unless it is treated with an approved quarantine treatment monitored by APHIS. If a single larva of the fruit fly of concern is found in a shipment from a place of production (either by the NPPO in the exporting coun try or at the

United States port of entry)

, the entire lot of fruit will be prohibited from export, and the place of production producing that fruit will be suspended from the export program until appropriate

measures, as agreed upon by the NPPO of the exp orting country and APHIS, have been taken.Rev. 5 August 9, 2010 6 Phytosanitary Certificate

Each consignment of fruit must be accompanied by a phyt osanitary certificate issued by NPPO

of the exporting country, providing an additional declaration (AD) stating that : “T he frui t in the consignment was produced in accordance with requirements in the 7 CFR 319.56

, inspected and

found free from Dysmicoccus neobrevipes

, Planococcus minor

, Anastrepha ludens and Ceratitis capitata

.

Pest free place of production for Anastrepha ludens and Ceratitis capitata

APHIS has on rare instances intercepted fruit flies in Cactaceae fruit (AQAS, 2008)

. R ecords of pitayas being host to either fruit fly species are either unverified references in old literature or based on cage infestations ( Norrbo m, 2004 ; Liquido et al., 1991 ; White and Elson

- Harris, 1992 ). Based on this, pitaya are considered to be poor hosts to fruit flies

. Pest free places of producti o n will be used in conjunction with a systems approach to mitigate risk from these fruit flie s.

Procedures for the establishment and maintenance of areas of pest free places of production must comply with international standards ( IPPC, 1999 ; NAPPO, 200 4 ).

Beginning at least one year before harvest begins and continuing through the end of the shipping

season , trapping in the places of pitaya production for Anastrepha luden s and Ceratitis capitata must be conducted with at least 1 trap per hectare of both McPhail trap s ( protein bait ) and Jackson trap (trimedlure) types

, serviced every 7 days

.

From two months prior to harvest to the end of the shipping season, if more than 0. 0 7 fruit flies per trap per day ( FTD ) of either of these fruit flies are trapped, pesticide bait treatments must be applied in the affected place of production in order for the place of productio n to remain eligible to export fruit

.

If , after pesticide bait treatments are applied, more than 0. 0 7 FTD (number of fruit flies per trap per day) of these fruit flies are trapped for more than two consecutive week s , the production site is ineligible for export until the rate of capture drops to less than 0.07 FTD. The production site will be prohibited from shipping under the systems approach until APHIS and the NPPO agree that the pest risk has been mitigated.

The NPPO must kee p records of fruit fly detections for each trap, update the records each time the traps are checked, and make the records available to APHIS inspectors upon request. The records must be maintained for at least 1 year.

Pest Free Area s for Ceratitis capita ta

APHIS currently recognizes all of Belize as a pest free area for the Medfly, Ceratitis capitata

. Procedures for the establishment and maintenance of pest free areas must comply with

international standards ( NAPPO, 200 4 ; IPPC 1996 , 2006 ). Since they are free of Medfly, Belize is not required to maintain Jackson traps in the pitaya production areas, however, Belize alreadyRev. 5 August 9, 2010 7 conducts a national fruit fly program, including Jackson traps, to maintain its pest free status for Medfly.

Efficacy of Risk Ma nagement Measures

A systems approach can provide an alternative to single measures to meet the appropriate level of phytosanitary protection, or can be developed to provide phytosanitary protection in situations, in which no single measure is available (I PPC, 2002)

. For example, Hass avocados from Mexico have been produced and exported to the United States under a systems approach

for Stenoma catenifer , seed and stem weevils and fruit flies for over eight years with no interceptions of quarantine pests (B edigian, 2004).

E stablishment of pest free places of production , in combination with other measures obviates the need for post

- harvest commodity treatments to achieve phytosanitary security (IPPC, 1996, 1999). Pest free places of production are a major component of the Mexico Hass avocado systems approach.

P itayas produced under this systems approach will also be subject to inspection by Department of Homeland Security

, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at the U.S. ports

- of

- entry. Infested

fruit wil l be rejected

, and traceback will be done by APHIS and the NPPO to identify and correct problems including removal of the packinghouse or area of production from the export program.

Summary

There are several risk management measures available for the hig h

- risk pests identified above that will permit the importation of pitayas from Central America while satisfying the appropriate level of phytosanitary protection for the United States (Table 1 ). A systems approach, employing a combination of measures acti ng independently, if properly implemented, mitigates risk and provides an acceptable level of phytosanitary protection.

Table 1 . Summary of risk management options for pitaya

, Hylocereus spp. , from Central

America

.

Measure Pest Efficacy

Post

- harvest pro cedures All but must be used in conjunction with pest free places of production

. Removal of any damaged or diseased fruit reduces the risk that pests will be exported to the United States. Phytosanitary inspection All but must be used in conjunction with pest free places of production

. Inspection ensures that various stages of any pest that are present will be detected; this is particularly effective against those pests whose later life stages are larger and more readily detected (Borror et al. 1989). Regu lar inspections are recognized as part of a balanced pest managementRev. 5 August 9, 2010 8 Measure Pest Efficacy

program (Kahn and Mathur 1999). Phytosanitary certificate All but must be used in conjunction with pest free places of production

. The phytosanitary certificate requires the NPPO to insp ect the pitayas for quarantine pests.

Pest Free Place of

Production Ceratitis capitata and Anastrepha ludens. Can provide phytosanitary security , as demonstrated by successful imports of tomato (7 CFR §319.56

- 2 8 in the past using systems approaches. A similar approach has also been used for Anastrepha spp. fruit flies in the Mexico avocado program (USDA, 2008)

. Pest Free Areas Ceratitis capitata Provides phytosanitary security, as demonstrated by successful recognition of a number of pest free

areas by APHIS. Belize is currently recognized as a pest free area for Ceratitis capitata by APHIS (USDA, 2009).Rev. 5 August 9, 2010 9 Author

Walter Gould, Senior Risk Manager

APHIS

- PPQ

References

AQAS . 2008 . Agricultural Quarantine Activity System Pest Interception Da tabase. U SDA

APHIS

- PPQ. Last access ed Sep t . 2007.

Bedigian, K. 2004. Mexican avocado import program. Federal Register 69(229): 69748

- 69774.

Borror, D. J., Triplehorn, C. A. and N. F. Johnson. 1989. Introduction to the study of insects, 6

ed. Harcourt Brace J ovanovich College Publishers, TX.

IPPC. 1996 . Requirements for the establishment of pest free areas. International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures No. 4. Rome: Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention, United Nations Food and Agri culture Organization.

IPPC. 1999. Requirements for the establishment of pest free places of production and pest free production sites. International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures No. 10. Rome:

Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Conve ntion, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.

IPPC. 2002 . The use of integrated measures in a systems approach for pest risk management. International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures No. 14. Rome: Secretariat of the

International Plant Pro tection Convention, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.

IPPC. 2004. Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests, including analysis of environmental risks and living modified organisms. International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures No. 11. Rome: Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.

IPPC. 2006

. E stablishment of pest free areas for fruit flies . International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures No. 26 . Rome: Secretaria t of the International Plant Protection Convention, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.

Kahn , R.P. and S.B. Mathur. 1999. Containment facilities and safeguards for exotic plant pathogens and pests. APS Press, St. Paul MN. 213pp.

Liquido , N.J., L.A. Shinoda and R.T. Cunningham. 1991. Host Plants of the Mediterranean Fruit Fly (Diptera: Tephritidae): An Annotated World Review. Entomological Soc. Am. Misc. Pub. 77. 52 pp.Rev. 5 August 9, 2010 10 NAPPO. 200 4 . Guidelines for the establishment, maintenance and ve rification of fruit fly pest

free areas in North America . NAPPO Regional Standards for Phytosanitary Measures No. 17

. Ottawa: Secretariat of the North American Plant Protection Organization.

Norrbom, A. L. 2004. The Diptera Site. Systematic Entomology Lab oratory, ARS, USDA

, Dept. of Ent., NMNH, SI. updated 17 Dec 2004.

< http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov:591/diptera/Tephritidae/TephIntro.html > last accessed Oct.

2008.

USDA. 2000. Guidelines for Pathway

- Initiated Pest Risk Assessments, Version 5.02. USDA

APHIS, PPQ; http://oars.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/pra/commodity/cpraguide.pdf

USDA. 2007. Importation of Fresh Pitaya Fruit ( Hylocereus spp. and several other genera and

spe cies ) from Central A merica into the Continental United States . A Multi

- genus Regional, Risk Analysis . United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Raleigh, NC. 41 pp.

USDA. 2008. Importation of Fresh Commercial Avocado ( Persea americana P. Mill.) Fruit

from Peru into the Continental United States

. Plant Health Programs (PHP) Commodity Import Analysis and Operations (CIAO) , Riverdale, MD. 12 pp.

USDA. 2009. Designated Pest(s) Free Areas That Meet AP HIS Requirements for

Pest

- free Areas Listed in 7 CFR 319.56

- 5 Revision 20090226_005 http://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/plants/manual s/ports/downloads/DesignatedPestFreeA reas.pdf last accessed Sept. 2009.

White, I.M. and M. M. Elson

- Harris. 1992. Fruit flies of economic significance: Their identification and bionomics. CAB International. Wallingford, Oxon, UK. 601 pp.