Importation of Fresh Tomato Fruit with Stems

(Solanum lycopersicum L.) (Synonym: Lycopersicon 

esculentum P. Mill.)

from the Republic of Korea

into the United States

A Pathway-Initiated Risk Assessment

July 2010

Rev. 07

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

Raleigh, North Carolina USA
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 ii July 20, 2010

Executive Summary

The Republic of Korea requested to export fresh tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) (Synonym: 

Lycopersicon esculentum), with stems, into all the United States. The commodity has not been 

imported into the United States from Korea before. A list of tomato pests in Korea was prepared 

based on (1) documents submitted by the Republic of Korea, (2) United States Department of 

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

intercepted pests, and (3) scientific literature. The commodity was not found to be a potential 

weed. Quarantine pests that were identified to the species level, and found likely to follow the 

pathway, were qualitatively analyzed using the methodology described in the USDA-APHIS 

Guidelines 5.02. This analysis allowed APHIS to estimate the Consequences of Introduction and 

the Likelihood of Introduction, and to arrive at an overall baseline Pest Risk Potential for each 

quarantine pest likely to follow the pathway. Eight quarantine pests likely to follow the import

pathway were identified.

Pests with high pest risk potential:

Bactrocera depressa (Shiraki) (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Helicoverpa assulta (Guenée) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Mamestra brassicae (L.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Ostrinia furnacalis (Guenée) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae)

Pests with medium pest risk potential:

Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)

Thrips palmi Karny (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)

Pests with low pest risk potential:

Ralstonia solanacearum race 3, biovar 2 (Smith) Yabuuchi (Burkholderiales: Ralstoniaceae)

Note that adherence to “Guidelines for Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk Assessments, Version 5.02” 

(USDA, 2000) required that Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3/ Biovar 2 be analyzed. However, as 

discussed in Appendix 1, the pathogen is not likely to become established via this pathway. We

evaluated the risk Korean tomato fruits pose for introducing Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3 

Biovar 2 (R3B2) (see Appendix 1) and concluded: “...the likelihood of introduction is reduced 

when the low likelihood of establishment is considered...Even when infected geraniums entered 

the U. S. in large quantities in 2003, and then came into contact with susceptible crops, there was 

no evidence that R3B2 was established as a consequence (APHIS, 2004b). Furthermore, given 

the large volumes of tomatoes already imported into the United States from R3B2 countries 

without establishment of this pathogen, it seems unlikely that tomato fruit for consumption is an 

effective pathway for introduction of R3B2.” 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 iii July 20, 2010

Table of Contents

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

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

2. Risk Assessment ........................................................................................................................ 1

2.1. Initiating Event: Proposed Action........................................................................................ 1

2.2. Assessment of Weed Potential of Tomato, Solanum lycopersicum L. ................................ 1

2.3. Current Status, Decision History and Pest Interceptions..................................................... 2

2.4. Pest Categorization .............................................................................................................. 5

2.5. Quarantine Pests Likely to Follow the Pathway................................................................ 26

2.6. Consequences of Introduction ........................................................................................... 26

2.7. Likelihood of Introduction................................................................................................. 38

2.8. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 41

3. Literature Cited ...................................................................................................................... 42

4. Authors and Reviewers........................................................................................................... 61

5. Appendices............................................................................................................................... 62

Appendix 1. Likelihood of Entry, Introduction and Establishment of Ralstonia solanacearum 

Race 3 Biovar 2 with Imported Tomato Fruit with Stems (Solanum lycopersicum L., 

Synonym: Lycopersicon esculentum) from the Republic of Korea.......................................... 62

Appendix 2. Risk Management Options for Importation of Fresh Tomato with Stems 

(Solanum lycopersicum L = Lycopersicon esculentum P. Mill) from the Republic of Korea 

into the United States................................................................................................................ 67
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 1 July 20, 2010

1. Introduction

This risk assessment has been prepared by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 

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

Center for Plant Health Science and Technology (CPHST), Plant Epidemiology and Risk 

Analysis Laboratory (PERAL) to examine plant pest risks associated with the importation, from 

the Republic of Korea into the United States, of fresh tomatoes with stems (Solanum 

lycopersicum L.; Syn: Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.). Estimates of risk are expressed in terms 

of high, medium, or low. The risk assessment is pathway-initiated in that it is based on the 

potential pest risks associated with the commodity as it enters the United States.

The International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) of the United Nations Food and 

Agriculture Organization (FAO) provides guidance for conducting pest risk analyses. The 

methods used to initiate, conduct, and report this pest risk analysis are consistent with guidelines 

provided by the FAO (IPPC, 1996a). Biological and phytosanitary terms (e.g., introduction, 

quarantine pest) conform to those outlined in International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures 

Publication No. 5, “Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms” (IPPC, 2002).

The IPPC defines pest risk assessment as “Determination of whether a pest is a quarantine pest 

and evaluation of its introduction potential;” quarantine pest is defined as “A pest of potential 

economic importance to the area endangered thereby and not yet present there, or present but not 

widely distributed and being officially controlled” (IPPC, 1996). Thus, pest risk assessments 

should consider both the consequences and likelihood of introduction of quarantine pests. These 

issues are addressed in this document.

Pest risk assessment is one component of an overall pest risk analysis. The IPPC describes three 

stages in pest risk analysis (IPPC, 1996): initiation (stage 1), risk assessment (stage 2), and risk 

management (stage 3). This document satisfies the requirements of stages 1 and 2. Details of the 

methodology and rating criteria used in this document can be found in the publication 

“Guidelines for Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk Assessments, Version 5.02” (USDA, 2000).

2. Risk Assessment

2.1. Initiating Event: Proposed Action

This commodity-based, pathway-initiated assessment is written in response to a request for 

USDA authorization to allow imports of a particular commodity presenting a potential plant pest 

risk. In this case, the importation into the United States of fresh tomato (Solanum lycopersicum

L.) fruit with stems from Korea is a potential pathway for introduction of exotic plant pests. Title 

7, Part 319, Section 56 of the United States Code of Federal Regulations (7 CFR §319.56)

provides regulatory authority for the importation of fruits and vegetables from foreign sources 

into the United States.

2.2. Assessment of Weed Potential of Tomato, Solanum lycopersicum L.

This step is important to the initiation phase of the assessment process because if the species 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 2 July 20, 2010

being considered for import poses a risk as a weed, then a “pest-initiated” pest risk assessment 

may be initiated. If the species to be imported passes the weediness screening, the 

pathway-initiated pest risk assessment continues. The results of the weediness screening for S. 

lycopersicum (Table 1) did not prompt a pest-initiated risk assessment.

Table 1. Assessment of the Weed Potential of Solanum lycopersicum L.

Commodity: Solanum lycopersicum L. (Solanaceae)

Phase 1: Solanum lycopersicum L., native to South America, is widely cultivated in the United States. 

Phase 2: Is the species listed in:

Yes Geographical Atlas of World Weeds (Holm et al., 1979)

No World's Worst Weeds (Holm et al., 1977)

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

No Report of the Technical Committee to Evaluate Noxious Weeds; Exotic 

Weeds for Federal Noxious Weed Act (Gunn and Ritchie, 1982) 

No Economically Important Foreign Weeds (Reed, 1977)

No Weed Science Society of America list (WSSA, 1989)

No Is there any literature reference indicating weediness, e.g., AGRICOLA, 

CABI, Biological Abstracts, AGRIS; search on "species name" combined with

"weed".

Phase 3: Conclusion: Solanum lycopersicum L. (Syn: Lycopersicon esculentum) is listed in Holm et al.

(1979) as a common weed of Taiwan and a weed of unknown importance in Honduras (Belize) and the 

United States.

This plant does not meet the definition of Federal Noxious Weed because it is not “new to, or not 

widely prevalent in the United States.”

2.3. Current Status, Decision History and Pest Interceptions

Currently, fresh tomato fruit imports from Korea are not authorized by 7 CFR §319.56.

Previous decision history for the importation of tomatoes is summarized in Table 2.

There are no records of pest interceptions on tomato from Korea in the USDA-APHIS, PPQ Port 

Information Network (PIN 309).

Table 2: Decision history for the entry of tomato into the United States (1950 to present)

Year Country Comments

1951 Iceland Entry permitted. 

1957 France Entry permitted subject to inspection at New York

1959 Argentina Entry denied due to presence of Rhagoletis ochraspis in Argentina

1960 Aruba Entry permitted. 

1960 Israel Entry denied. 

1962 Ecuador Entry permitted (North Atlantic)

1962 Venezuela Entry permitted (North Atlantic)

1964 British Guiana Entry permitted (North Atlantic)

1966 Paraguay Entry permitted
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 3 July 20, 2010

1968 New Zealand Entry permitted into Hawaii (port of Honolulu) under condition of direct or 

containerized Methyl bromide fumigation as a precaution against Halotydeus 

destructor

1969 Japan Entry approved into Hawaii. Subject to inspection on arrival. Must be 

certified as hothouse grown on Honshu Island or north thereof. 

1969 Egypt Entry denied. No approved treatments for two Gelechiidae pests

1969 Peru Entry denied. No approved treatments for Rhagoletis ochraspis. 

1970 Thailand Requested entry to Guam. Denied due to fruit fly eradication program in 

Guam. 

1970 Philippines Entry denied. No approved treatment known to be effective against all the 

fruit flies attacking tomatoes in the Philippines. (incl. Dacus caudatus). 

1970 Tasmania, Australia Entry denied. Concern over the red-legged earth mite. 

1970 Australia (Excluding 

Tasmania)

Entry denied. No approved treatment effective against quarantine-significant 

tomato pests which occur in Australia. 

1971 New Zealand Entry permitted into Hawaii under condition that shipment is certified as to 

freedom from red-legged earth mite.

1971 Chile Entry denied. No treatment for Rhagoletis ochraspis on tomato.

1972 Spain Existing entry decision amended to include Pacific ports. Subject to 

inspection.

1973 Spain & Canary Islands Green tomatoes permitted entry into North Atlantic and North Pacific ports 

subject to inspection. Transshipments to southern ports or California are 

prohibited.

1973 Tasmania, Australia Subject to inspection and certification that they have been grown on premises 

entirely free of red-legged earth mite. Port of Los Angeles only. 

1974 New Zealand Entry denied. No effective treatment for Lepidoptera pests on tomatoes. 

1978 Cook Islands Entry denied. Complex of insect pests for which no treatments are available

1978 Honduras Entry denied. Complex of fruit flies and other insect pests for which no 

treatments are available.

1978 New Hebrides Islands Entry denied. Complex of fruit flies and other insect pests for which no 

treatments are available. 

1980 Colombia Entry denied. Has plant pests for which no approved treatment is available. 

1982 Chile Entry denied. No acceptable treatment for fruit fly Rhagoletis ochraspis 

[tomatis].

1982 Ecuador Med fly

1983 Egypt Entry denied. No acceptable treatment for Dacus ciliatus

1983 Costa Rica Entry permitted of commercial shipments only and of green fruit only. 

Subject to inspection and treatment if warranted.

1984 Netherlands Entry permitted subject to inspection and treatment warranted by pest 

findings.

1986 Senegal Entry denied. No acceptable treatment for Dacus ciliatus. 

1986 New Zealand Entry denied. No acceptable treatment.

1987 Channel Islands Entry permitted subject to inspection.

1987 Canary Islands Commercial shipments of green tomatoes only. Inspection and treatment if 

warranted by pest findings. 

1987 Uruguay Entry permitted of commercial shipments only and of green fruit only. 

Subject to inspection and treatment if warranted.

1988 Spain Commercial shipments of green tomatoes permitted entry into all ports

subject to inspection.

1988 Israel Entry permitted of commercial shipments only and of green fruit only. 

1988 Panama Entry permitted of commercial shipments only. Subject to inspection and 

treatment if warranted.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 4 July 20, 2010

Year Country Comments

1951 Iceland Entry permitted. 

1957 France Entry permitted subject to inspection at New York

1959 Argentina Entry denied due to presence of Rhagoletis ochraspis in Argentina

1960 Aruba Entry permitted. 

1960 Israel Entry denied. 

1962 Ecuador Entry permitted (North Atlantic)

1962 Venezuela Entry permitted (North Atlantic)

1964 British Guiana Entry permitted (North Atlantic)

1966 Paraguay Entry permitted

1968 New Zealand Entry permitted into Hawaii (port of Honolulu) under condition of direct or 

containerized Methyl bromide fumigation as a precaution against Halotydeus 

destructor

1969 Japan Entry approved into Hawaii. Subject to inspection on arrival. Must be 

certified as hothouse grown on Honshu Island or north thereof. 

1969 Egypt Entry denied. No approved treatments for two Gelechiidae pests

1988 Turkey Entry permitted of commercial shipments only and of green fruit only. 

Subject to inspection and treatment if warranted. 

1988 Argentina Entry permitted of commercial shipments only and of green fruit only. 

Subject to inspection and treatment if warranted.

1988 Jordan Entry denied. No acceptable treatment for Dacus ciliatus. 

1989 Brazil Entry permitted of commercial shipments only and of green fruit only. 

Subject to inspection and treatment if warranted by pest findings. 

1989 Australia Entry denied. Due to quarantine pests which are difficult to detect during 

inspection. 

1990 USSR Entry approved. Inspection and treatment if warranted by pest findings

1991 Peru Entry denied. No approved treatment for Synchytrium endobioticum or 

Rhagoletis tomatis. 

1992 Belize Entry approved. Green fruit only. Subject to inspection. From Med fly free 

districts only.

1992 Poland Entry approved. Fruit only, subject to inspection

1993 South America (incl. 

Argentina, Colombia, 

Ecuador, Guyana, 

Paraguay, Uruguay, 

Venezuela)

Rescission of import permits. No approved treatment for tomato fruit moth 

Scrobipalpula absoluta. 

1993 Chile and Brazil Entry denied. No approved treatment for Scrobipalpula absoluta. 

1994 Spain (Almeria Province) Greenhouse grown red or pink tomatoes are permitted, entry subject to special 

certification

1995 Morocco Entry denied. No approved treatment facilities for Ceratitis capitata in 

Morocco.

1995 South Africa Entry denied. No approved treatment for pests Pterandrus rosa, Bactrocera 

punctatifrons, Ceratitis capitata, Ceratitis pedestris, Dacus ciliatus, and 

Dacus bivitattus on tomatoes. 

1995 Senegal Entry denied. Lack of quarantine treatment for Bactrocera ciliatus on tomato 

and pest data. 

1997 France Entry approved. All ports. From Brittany Region only with a systems 

approach to mitigate risk of Med fly.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 5 July 20, 2010

2.4. Pest Categorization

Table 3 presents information about geographic distribution, host associations and regulatory data 

for tomatoes from Korea; it serves as a basis for selecting pests for risk assessment. Table 3

includes: (1) the presence of pests in Korea relative to presence in the United States, (2) the 

generally affected plant part or parts, (3) the quarantine status of the pest in the United States, (4) 

whether the pest is likely to follow the pathway into the United States on tomatoes, and (5) 

pertinent citations for either the distribution, quarantine status, pathway status, or the biology of 

the pest.

Table 3. Pests in Korea associated with tomato (Solanum lycopersicum).

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

ARTHROPODS 

ACARI

Eriophyidae

Aculops lycopersici (Massee) KR, US F, I, L, S No Yes CABI, 2004; Jeppson 

et al., 1975; Kim et 

al., 2002; Nair, 1975

Tarsonemidae

Polyphagotarsonemus latus

(Banks)

KR, US F, I, L, S No Yes CABI, 2004; Hill, 

1983

Tarsonemus bilobatus Suski KR, US L No No CABI, 2004; Nakao, 

1991

Tarsonemus waitei Banks (= T. 

setifer Ewing)

KR, US I, L No No Cobanoglu, 1995; 

CABI, 2004; Dale et 

al., 1976; Jeppson et 

al., 1975; Lindquist, 

1978; Nemoto, 1985

Tetranychidae

Bryobia praetiosa Koch KR, US I, L No No Bolland et al., 1998; 

Jeppson et al., 1975

Tetranychus urticae Koch (= 

Tetranychus cinnabarinus

[Boisduval])

KR, US (CA, HI, 

TX)

F, L No Yes Bolland et al., 1998; 

CABI, 2004; Hill, 

1983; KNPQS, 2000a; 

Lee et al., 1999a

 

1 Distribution (specific states are listed only if distribution is limited): AZ = Arizona; CA = California; FL = Florida; HI = 

Hawaii; KR = Korea; LA = Louisiana; MI = Michigan; NY = New York; TX = Texas; US = United States (widespread); 

WA = Washington

2

Plant Parts: F = Fruit; I = Inflorescence; L = Leaf; R = Root; S = Stem; Sd = Seed

3 [Yes] indicates that this species is not under official control but the U.S. is temporarily considering it as a quarantine 

species until its official status is recognized (NIS, 2004).

4 Organisms listed at the level of genus, although regarded as quarantine pests because of their uncertain identity, are not 

considered for further analysis as their identity is not defined clearly enough to ensure that the risk assessment is 

performed on a distinct organism (IPPC, 2001).
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 6 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

COLEOPTERA

Anobiidae

Stegobium paniceum (L.) KR, US Sd No No5 CABI, 2004; Lee et 

al., 1992

Chrysomelidae

Psylliodes angusticollis Baly KR L Yes No KNPQS, 2000a

Coccinellidae

Epilachna vigintioctomaculata

Motschulsky

KR F, L Yes No6 KNPQS, 2000a

Epilachna vigintioctopunctata

(F.)

KR F, L Yes No7 KNPQS, 2000a

Curculionidae

Listroderes costirostris

Schönherr

KR, US L, S No No8 CABI, 2004

Sitophilus zeamais

Motschulsky

KR, US Sd No Yes CABI, 2004; 

Olalquiaga, 1980

COLLEMBOLA

Sminthuridae

Bourletiella hortensis (Fitch) KR, US L, S No No9 Arnett, 2000; 

KNPQS, 2000a

DIPTERA

Agromyzidae

Chromatomyia horticola

Goureau

KR L Yes No CABI, 2004

Liriomyza bryoniae

(Kaltenbach)

KR L Yes No CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Liriomyza trifolii Burgess KR, US L No No CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Drosophilidae

Drosophila melanogaster

Meigen

KR, US F No No10 CABI, 2004; Mason 

et al., 1976

Sciaridae

Bradysia spp. KR R Yes No Lee et al., 2001a

Bradysia difformis Frey (= 

Bradysia agrestis Sasakawa)

KR, US (NY) R, S No No11 Kim et al., 2004; 

Menzel et al., 2003

 

5

Species is a stored-product pest (CABI, 2004) and unlikely to occur on fresh tomato.

6

Pest is a moderately large (adult length: 7.5 mm ♀, 6 mm ♂) and brightly colored, external feeder (KFRI, 2000) that is 

unlikely to remain with tomato fruit through harvest and processing.

7

Pest is a moderately large (adult length: 5-8 mm) and brightly colored, external feeder (CABI, 2004) that is unlikely to 

remain with tomato fruit through harvest and processing.

8 Adults may feed externally on stems, cutting them off at the base (CABI, 2004).

9 Minute arthropods that are prone to jump when disturbed (Borror et al., 1989), and thus are unlikely to remain with the 

commodity through harvest and processing.

10 Species is attracted to overripe or fermenting fruit (Hardy, 1965), not of marketable quality.

11 Larvae may be found on the stems of young plants (Menzel et al., 2003).
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 7 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Tephritidae

Bactrocera depressa (Shiraki) KR F Yes Yes Han et al., 1994; 

KNPQS, 2000a; 

Okadome, 1962

HETEROPTERA

Coreidae

Acanthocoris sordidus

Thunberg

KR F, L, S Yes No12 KNPQS, 2000a; 

Mitchell, 2000

Miridae

Nesidiocoris tenuis (Reuter) KR, US (FL) I, L, S No No13 CABI, 2004

Pentatomidae

Dolycoris baccarum (L.) KR F, L Yes No14 KNPQS, 2000a

Nezara antennata Scott KR F, L Yes No15 CABI, 2004; Li et al., 

2001; NHRI, 2005; 

Shiraki, 1952b

Nezara viridula (L.) KR, US F, L, S No No16 CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Piezodorus hybneri (Gmelin) KR L Yes No CABI, 2004; Nair, 

1975; Son et al., 2000

HOMOPTERA

Aleyrodidae

Bemisia argentifolii Bellows &

Perring

KR, US L No No CABI, 2004

Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) KR, US L No No CABI, 2004

Trialeurodes vaporariorum

Westwood

KR, US F, L No Yes CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a; Mound & 

Halsey, 1978

Aphididae

Acyrthosiphon gossypii

Mordvilko

KR L Yes No KNPQS, 2000a

Aphis craccivora Koch KR, US L No No CABI, 2004; Hill, 

1983

Aphis fabae Scopoli KR, US I, L No No CABI, 2004

Aphis gossypii Glover KR, US I, L, S No Yes CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

 

12 Pest is a highly active, externally feeding insect (Mitchell, 2000) unlikely to remain with the commodity.

13 Literature suggests that N. tenuis is an active, externally feeding insect (e.g., Wheeler, 2000a, b), unlikely to remain with

the commodity through harvest and processing.

14 Pest is a moderately large (9-12 mm; Bernoux, 2002), active insect (Panizzi et al., 2000) that is unlikely to remain with the 

commodity through harvest and processing.

15 Pest tends to feed on developing fruit (Li et al., 2001; NHRI, 2005), and is unlikely to be present on harvested tomato.

16 Immature stages are found mainly on leaves (Avidov & Harpaz, 1969). Adults are large insects (length: 15 mm; CABI, 

2004) that are unlikely to remain with tomato fruit through harvest and processing.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 8 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Aphis spiraecola Patch (= 

Aphis citricola van der 

Goot)

KR, US I, L No No CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Aulacorthum solani

Kaltenbach

KR, US L No No Jensen et al., 2005; 

Kim et al., 2000b; 

KNPQS, 2000a

Brachycaudus helichrysi

Kaltenbach

KR, US I, L No No CABI, 2004

Cavariella salicicola

(Matsumura)

KR L Yes No KNPQS, 2000a

Hyalopterus pruni (Geoffroy) KR, US L No No KNPQS, 2000a; 

Stoetzel & Miller, 

1998

Lipaphis erysimi (Kaltenbach) KR, US I, L No No CABI, 2004; Mau & 

Martin Kessing, 1993; 

Pham et al., 2003

Macrosiphum euphorbiae

(Thomas)

KR, US L No No CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Melanaphis sacchari

(Zehntner)

KR, US (FL, HI, 

LA)

L No No CABI, 2004; UHCTAHR, 2005

Myzus persicae (Sulzer) KR, US L, S No Yes CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Rhopalosiphum maidis (Fitch) KR, US L No No CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Rhopalosiphum padi (L.) KR, US L No No CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Rhopalosiphum 

rufiabdominale (Sasaki)

KR, US R No No CABI, 2004

Cicadellidae

Asymmetrasca decedens

(Paoli) (= Empoasca

decedens [Paoli])

KR L Yes No CABI, 2004; El-Kady 

et al., 1974; 

Haghighian & 

Sadeghi, 2001

Cicadella viridis L. KR L Yes No CABI, 2004; Naito, 

1976; Vlasov et al., 

1992

Empoasca vitis (Gothe) KR L Yes No KNPQS, 2000a

Orosius orientalis

(Matsumura)

KR L Yes No CABI, 2004; Nagaich 

& Giri, 1973

Diaspididae

Aspidiotus destructor Signoret KR, US L No No CABI, 2004; Ben-Dov 

et al., 2005; Watson, 

2005

Aspidiotus nerii Bouché KR, US F, L, S No Yes CABI, 2004; Ben-Dov 

et al., 2005; Watson, 

2005
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 9 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Pinnaspis aspidistrae

(Signoret)

KR, US L No No Ben-Dov et al., 2005; 

Watson, 2005

Pinnaspis buxi (Bouché) KR, US L No No Watson, 2005

Pinnaspis strachani (Cooley) KR, US (FL, HI) F, L, S No Yes CABI, 2004; Watson, 

2005

Pseudococcidae

Planococcus citri (Risso) KR, US F, I, L, S No Yes CABI, 2004

Pseudococcus viburni

(Signoret)

KR, US F, I, L, R, S No Yes Kosztarab, 1996; BenDov et al., 2005

LEPIDOPTERA

Gelechiidae

Phthorimaea operculella

(Zeller)

KR, US F, L, S No Yes CABI, 2004; Hill, 

1983; KNPQS, 2000a

Hepialidae

Endoclita excrescens (Butler) KR F, L Yes No17 KNPQS, 2000a

Lymantriidae

Lymantria dispar (L.) KR, US L Yes No CABI, 2004; Forbush 

& Fernald, 1896

Noctuidae

Aedia leucomelas (L.) KR F, L Yes No18 Choi et al., 2000; Tóth 

& Cagáň, 2005; 

Zhang, 1994

Adris tyrannus (Guenée) (= 

Eudocima tyrannus

[Guenée])

KR F, L Yes No19 KNPQS, 2000a; 

Zhang, 1994

Agrotis ipsilon (Hufnagel) KR, US L, S No No20 CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Agrotis segetum (Denis & 

Schiffermüller)

KR L, S Yes No21 CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Anomis flava (F.) KR, US L No No CABI, 2004; 

Ferguson et al., 1999; 

Hill, 1983

Autographa gamma (L.) (= 

Plusia gamma [L.])

KR F, L Yes No22 Avidov & Harpaz, 

1969; Hill, 1987; 

Ronkay, 1982

 

17 Larvae attack developing fruit (Kim et al., 1997), and are unlikely to be present on mature fruit at harvest.

18 Fruit is attacked by the adult moth (Choi et al., 2000), which will not remain through harvest and processing.

19 Fruit is attacked by the adult moth (Lee et al., 1970), which will not remain through harvest and processing.

20 Larvae feed externally as cutworms at the base of stems near soil level (Carter, 1984).

21 Larvae feed externally as cutworms at the base of stems near soil level (Carter, 1984).

22 Larvae may feed on the surface of fruit (CABI, 2004), but are unlikely to remain through harvest and processing.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 10 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Calyptra thalictri

(Borkhausen)

KR F Yes No23 KNPQS, 2000a

Chrysodeixis eriosoma

Doubleday

KR, US (HI) F, L Yes No24 CABI, 2004

Eudocima fullonia (Clerck) (= 

Othreis fullonica L.)

KR, US (HI) F Yes No25 CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Hadula trifolii (Hufnagel) KR, US L No No CABI, 2004

Helicoverpa armigera

(Hübner)

KR F, I, L Yes Yes CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Helicoverpa assulta (Guenée) KR F, I, L Yes Yes CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Mamestra brassicae (L.) KR F, I, L, S Yes Yes CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Oraesia excavata (Butler) KR F Yes No26 KNPQS, 2000a

Mythimna separata Walker KR L Yes No CABI, 2004; Hill, 

1983

Peridroma saucia (Hübner) KR, US F, I, L, S No No27 CABI, 2004; Kim et 

al., 2000a

Pyrrhia umbra (Hufnagel) KR, US (MI) F, L No Yes CABI, 2004; Evans, 

1989; KNPQS, 2000a; 

Mirzalieva & 

Mirzaliev, 1988

Spodoptera exigua (Hübner) KR, US F, L No Yes CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Spodoptera litura (F.) KR, US (HI) F, L Yes No28 CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a; Schreiner, 

2000

Spodoptera mauritia (Guenée) KR, US (HI) L, S Yes No29 CABI, 2004; Sohn & 

Ronkay, 2001

Trichoplusia ni (Hübner) KR, US L No No CABI, 2004

Xestia c-nigrum (L.) KR, US I, L, S No No30 CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Pyralidae

Chilo suppressalis (Walker) KR, US (HI) S Yes No31 Ebert, 1973

 

23 Fruit is attacked by the adult moth (Lee et al., 1970), which will not remain through harvest and processing.

24 Larvae may chew into green tomato fruit (EPPO, 2005a), but are unlikely to remain through harvest and processing.

25 Fruit is attacked by the adult moth (Zhang, 1994), which will not remain through harvest and processing.

26 Fruit is attacked by the adult moth (Lee et al., 1970), which will not remain through harvest and processing.

27 Larvae may attack developing fruit (CABI, 2004), but are unlikely to be present on mature fruit at harvest.

28 Larvae may attack the green fruit , but do not generally bore into the fruit (Schreiner, 2000), and are unlikely to be present 

on mature fruit at harvest (CABI, 2004).

29 Larvae may feed externally on stems, cutting them off at the base (CABI, 2004).

30 Larvae may feed externally on stems, cutting them off at the base (CABI, 2004).

31 Tomato is a questionable host for Chilo suppressalis. Ebert (1973) is the only record of C. suppressalis on tomato. In this 

survey the pest was believed to only be on tomato because its primary host, rice, was harvested and no other food was 

available. Ebert states that tomato is not a preferred or typical host. Therefore, C. suppressalis would not typically occur in 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 11 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Omiodes indicata (F.) KR L Yes No CABI, 2004; Zhang, 

1994

Ostrinia furnacalis (Guenée) KR L, S Yes Yes CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner) (= 

Pyrausta nubilalis Huebner)

KR, US F, L, S No Yes CABI, 2004; Carter, 

1984; Shiraki, 1952b

Plodia interpunctella (Hübner) KR, US Sd No No32 CABI, 2004; Savov, 

1973

Udea ferrugalis (Hübner) KR L Yes No Lee et al., 1999b; 

Zandigiacomo, 1992; 

Zhang, 1994

Sphingidae

Acherontia styx (Westwood) KR F, L Yes No33 CABI, 2004; Choi et 

al., 2000

Agrius convolvuli (L.) KR L Yes No CABI, 2004; Shiraki, 

1952b

Dolbina exacta Staudinger KR L Yes No KNPQS, 2000a

ORTHOPTERA

Acrididae

Atractomorpha lata

(Motschulsky) (= 

Atractomorpha bedeli

Bolivar)

KR L Yes No ISPI, 2005; Kim et al., 

1987; KNPQS, 2000a; 

Shiraki, 1952a

Podisma mikado Bolivar KR L

27 Yes No CSHS, 2005; Shiraki, 

1952a

Gryllotalpidae

Gryllotalpa africana Palisot de 

Beauvois

KR, US (HI) R Yes No CABI, 2004; Hill, 

1983

THYSANOPTERA

Phlaeothripidae

Haplothrips aculeatus (F.) KR I, L Yes No CABI, 2004; 

Miyazaki & Kudo, 

1988

Haplothrips chinensis Priesner KR I Yes No Miyazaki & Kudo, 

1988; Wang, 1997; 

Woo, 1988

Thripidae

Frankliniella intonsa (Trybom) KR, US (WA) F, I, L No Yes CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Frankliniella occidentalis

(Pergande)

KR, US F, I, L No Yes CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

 

production sites and would not be likely to follow the pathway. 

32 Species is a stored-product pest (Savov, 1973).

33 Fruit is attacked by the adult moth (Choi et al., 2000), which will not remain through harvest and processing.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 12 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Frankliniella tenuicornis

(Uzel)

KR, US I, L No No KNPQS, 2000a; 

Nakahara, 1997

Hercinothrips femoralis

(Reuter)

KR, US (AZ, 

CA, FL, HI)

I, L, S No Yes CABI, 2004; Mau & 

Martin, 1993

Megalurothrips distalis

(Karny)

KR I, L Yes No CABI, 2004; Lee et 

al., 2003; Miyazaki & 

Kudo, 1988

Microcephalothrips 

abdominalis (Crawford)

KR, US (FL) I No No CABI, 2004; Mound 

& Kibby, 1998

Mycterothrips glycines

(Okamoto)

KR L Yes No Lee et al., 2003; 

Miyazaki & Kudo, 

1988; Mound & 

Kibby, 1998

Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood KR, US (HI) F, I, L Yes Yes CABI, 2004; Lee et 

al., 2003; Miyazaki & 

Kudo, 1988

Thrips hawaiiensis (Morgan) KR, US F, I, L No Yes CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Thrips palmi Karny KR, US (FL, HI) F, I, L, S [Yes] Yes CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

Thrips setosus Moulton KR L Yes No Lee et al., 2003; 

Loomans & Murai, 

1997; Miyazaki & 

Kudo, 1988

Thrips tabaci Lindeman KR, US F, I, L No Yes CABI, 2004; KNPQS, 

2000a

BACTERIA34

Burkholderia glumae (Kurita 

and Tabei) Urakami

Burkholderiales: 

Burkholderiaceae

KR, US R, S No Yes Jeong et al., 2003; 

Rush 2003; Shahjahan 

et al., 2000

Clavibacter michiganensis

subsp. michiganensis 

(Smith) Davis

Actinomycetales:

Microbacteriaceae

KR, US F, I, L, R, 

S, Sd 

No Yes CPC, 2005; 

Anonymous, 1998; 

Strand, 1998

Erwinia carotovora subsp. 

carotovora (Jones) Bergey 

et al. (Syn: Pectobacterium 

carotovora subsp. 

carotovora [Jones] Hauben )

Enterobacteriales:

Enterobacteriaceae

KR, US F, L, R, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Choi et al. 

1988; Park et al. 1997; 

Alippi et al., 1997

 

34 Bacterial nomenclature and taxonomy as in Euzéby (2005), or validly published in International Journal of Systematic 

Bacteriology (IJSB) or in the International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology (IJSEM).
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 13 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Erwinia chrysanthemi

Burkholder (Syn: Dickeya 

chrysanthemi, 

Pectobacterium 

chrysanthemi [Burkholder] 

Brenner) Enterobacteriales:

Enterobacteriaceae

KR, US F, L, R, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Chellemi 

et al., 1998; Choi & 

Han, 1989, 1990; Jin 

et al., 1994

Erwinia rhapontici (Millard) 

Burkholder (Syn: 

Pectobacterium rhapontici

(Millard) Patel and 

Kulkarni) Enterobacteriales:

Enterobacteriaceae

KR, US F, R, S, Sd No Yes CPC, 2005; Choi et 

al., 1990

Pseudomonas cichorii

(Swingle) Stapp

Pseudomonadales:

Pseudomonadaceae

KR, US F, R, S, Sd No Yes CPC, 2005; Choi et al. 

1988; Jones et al., 

1983; Wilkie & Dye, 

1974

Pseudomonas corrugata

Roberts and Scarlett

Pseudomonadales:

Pseudomonadaceae

KR, US F, L, S, Sd No Yes CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Sutra et 

al., 1997

Pseudomonas marginalis pv.

marginalis (Brown) Stevens

Pseudomonadales:

Pseudomonadaceae

KR, US F, I, L, R, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Choi & 

Han, 1990; Bartz, 

1979; Ibe & Grogan, 

1983

Pseudomonas syringae pv.

syringae van Hall 

Pseudomonadales:

Pseudomonadaceae

KR, US I, L, R, S, 

Sd

No Yes CPC, 2005; Lee et al., 

2002; Gitaitis et al., 

1985

Pseudomonas viridiflava 

(Burkholder) Dowson

Pseudomonadales:

Pseudomonadaceae

KR, US F, I, L, S, 

Sd

No Yes CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Choi & 

Kim,1989; Colin, 

1986
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 14 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Ralstonia solanacearum Race 

1 (Smith) Yabuuchi (Syn: 

Pseudomonas solanacearum

(Smith) Smith) 

Burkholderiales:

Ralstoniaceae

KR, US Whole 

plant

No Yes CPC, 2005; Jeong et 

al., 2003; Hayward & 

Hartman, 1994; 

EPPO, 2005e; Cho & 

Shin, 2004

Ralstonia solanacearum Race 

3 / Biovar 2 (Smith) 

Yabuuchi (Syn: 

Pseudomonas solanacearum 

(Smith) Smith)

Burkholderiales:

Ralstoniaceae

KR Whole 

plant

Yes Yes35 CPC, 2005; Jeong et 

al., 2003; Hayward & 

Hartman, 1994; 

EPPO, 2005e; Cho & 

Shin, 2004

Rhizobium radiobacter 

(Beijerinck & van Delden) 

Young (Syn: Agrobacterium 

tumefaciens [Beijerinck & 

van Delden] Conn)

Rhizobiales: Rhizobiaceae

KR, US R, S No No CPC, 2005; El-Sherif 

& Elwakil, 1991; 

Kwon et al., 2005

Xanthomonas euvesicatoria

(ex Doidge) spp. nov., spp. 

rev. Jones (X. campestris pv.

vesicatoria, Group A 

strains) Xanthomonadales: 

Xanthomonadaceae

KR, US F, I, L, S, 

Sd

No Yes CPC, 2005; Jones et 

al., 2004; Jung & 

Hwang, 2000; Bouzar 

et al., 1994

Xanthomonas vesicatoria

(Doidge) Dowson (Syn: 

Xanthomonas campestris pv. 

vesicatoria [Doidge] Dye, 

Group B strains)

Xanthomonadales: 

Xanthomonadaceae

KR, US F, I, L, S, 

Sd

No Yes CPC, 2005; Jones et 

al., 2004; Jung & 

Hwang, 2000; Bouzar 

et al., 1994; EPPO, 

2005b

FUNGI and CHROMISTANS36

Alternaria alternata (Fries) 

Keissl. Pleosporales:

Pleosporaceae 

KR, US F, L, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Alternaria solani Sorauer

Pleosporales: Pleosporaceae

KR, US F, L, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

 

35 See CPHST-PERAL Ad Hoc Report “Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3, biovar 2 Likelihood of Entry, Introduction, and 

Establishment, and Mitigation Recommendations: Supplement to the USDA-APHIS Pest Risk Assessment Importation of 

fresh tomato fruit with stems (Solanum lycopersicum L) from the Republic of South Korea into the United States” in 

Appendix, which concludes that although the pathogen may enter with the commodity, it is not likely to become 

established.

36 Fungal and Chromistan nomenclature and taxonomy as in Systematic Botany and Mycology Laboratory – USDA-ARS (Farr et

al., 2005), Index Fungorum (2005), supplemented by other literature sources; Mycotaxon, Mycologia etc. In Kingdom 

Chromista, this is indicated with the pathogen name.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 15 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Alternaria tenuissima

(Kunze:Fr.) Wiltshire (Syn: 

Alternaria citri var. cerasi 

Rudolph, Alternaria tomato

[Cooke] Weber) 

Pleosporales: Pleosporaceae

KR, US F, L, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al. 

2005; Cho & Shin, 

2004; Yu, 2001

Alternaria tomatophila 

Simmons Pleosporales:

Pleosporaceae

KR, US F, L, S No Yes Farr et al., 2005; Cho 

& Shin, 2004; Frazer 

& Zitter, 2003; 

Mutschler et al., 2005; 

Yu, 2001

Aspergillus fumigatus Fresen. 

Eurotiales: Trichocomaceae

KR, US F, Sd No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Aspergillus niger Tiegh.

Eurotiales: Trichocomaceae

KR, US F No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Athelia rolfsii (Curzi) Tu & 

Kimbr. (Syn: Corticium 

rolfsii Curzi, Pellicularia 

rolfsii E. West; Anamorph: 

Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc.) 

Polyporales: Atheliaceae

KR, US Whole 

plant

No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Botryotinia fuckeliana (de 

Bary) Whetzel (Syn:

Sclerotinia fuckeliana de 

Bary; Anamorph: Botrytis 

cinerea Pers.:Fr.) 

Helotiales: Sclerotiniaceae 

KR, US F, I, L, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Cercospora canescens Ellis & 

Martin (Syn: Cercospora 

vignicaulis Tehon)

Mycosphaerellales: 

Mycosphaerellaceae 

KR, US L No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005; Cho & Shin, 

2004; Shin & Braun, 

1993

Cercospora nicotianae Ellis & 

Everh. (Syn: Cercospora 

raciborskii Sacc. & Syd.) 

Mycosphaerellales: 

Mycosphaerellaceae

KR, US L, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Cladosporium herbarum

(Pers.:Fr.) Link (Syn: 

Cladosporium epiphyllum

[Pers.] Fries, 

Helminthosporium 

flexuosum Corda) 

Mycosphaerellales: 

Mycosphaerellaceae

KR, US F, L No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 16 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Colletotrichum acutatum

Simmonds (Syn: Glomerella 

acutata Guerber & Correll)

Phyllachorales:

Phyllachoraceae 

KR, US F, I, L, R, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Colletotrichum capsici (Syd.) 

Butler & Bisby (Syn: 

Vermicularia capsici Syd., 

Colletotrichum indicum

Dastur) Phyllachorales:

Phyllachoraceae

KR, US F, I, L, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Colletotrichum coccodes 

(Wallr.) Hughes (Syn:

Colletotrichum 

atramentarium [Berk. & 

Broome] Taubenhaus) 

Phyllachorales:

Phyllachoraceae

KR, US I, L, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005; Lee et al. 1991; 

Cho & Shin, 2004; 

Hong & Hwang, 1998

Colletotrichum dematium

(Pers.:Fr.) Grove (Syn:

Vermicularia compacta

Cooke & Ellis, Vermicularia 

dematium [Pers.] Fr., 

Vermicularia dianthi

Westend.) Phyllachorales:

Phyllachoraceae

KR, US F, I, L, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Colletotrichum nigrum Ellis & 

Halst. Phyllachorales:

Phyllachoraceae

KR, US F, I, L, S, 

Sd

No Yes Farr et al., 2005; Cho 

& Shin, 2004

Corynespora cassiicola (Berk. 

& Curtis) Wei (Syn: 

Helminthosporium 

cassiicola Berk. & Curtis, H.

vignae Olive, Cercospora 

vignicola E. Kawam.)

Pleosporales:

Corynesporascaceae 

KR, US F, L, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Diaporthe phaseolorum

(Cooke & Ellis) Sacc. (Syn:

D. batatas Harter & Field, 

D. phaseolorum var. 

batatatis [Harter & Field] 

Wehm., Diaporthe sojae

Lehman) Diaporthales:

Valsaceae 

KR, US F, S No Yes Farr et al., 2005; Cho 

& Shin, 2004
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 17 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Erysiphe cichoracearum var.

cichoracearum (DC) Mérat 

(Syn: E. cichoracearum, 

Golvinomyces 

cichoracearum [DC] 

Gelyuta, Numerous in Farr 

et al., 2005) Erysiphales:

Erysiphaceae 

KR, US F, I, L, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Erysiphe orontii (Castagne) 

Braun (Syn: Erysiphe 

cucurbitacearum Zheng & 

Chen, Erysiphe polyphaga

Hammarl., Erysiphe tabaci 

Sawada) Erysiphales:

Erysiphaceae 

KR, US F, I, L, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. 

lycopersici Snyder & H.N. 

Hansen (Syn: Fusarium 

bulbigenum var. lycopersici 

[Bruschi] Wollenw. & 

Reinking, Fusarium 

lycopersici Sacc., Fusarium 

lycopersici Bruschi) 

Hypocreales: Nectriaceae

KR, US L, R, S, Sd No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. 

radicis-lycopersici Jarvis & 

Shoemaker Hypocreales:

Nectriaceae

KR, US L, R, S, Sd No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. 

vasinfectum (Atk.) Snyder & 

Hansen (Syn: Fusarium 

vasinfectum Atk) 

Hypocreales: Nectriaceae

KR, US F, L, R, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Geotrichum candidum Link

(Syn: Oospora lactis

[Fresen.] Sacc., Oospora 

lactis var. parasitica

Pritchard & Porte 

Teleomorph: Galactomyces 

geotrichum [Butler & 

Petersen] Redhead & 

Malloch) 

Saccharomycetales: Incertae 

sedis

KR, US F No Yes CPC, 2005; Wells & 

Butterfield, 1999; 

Bartz et al., 2001; Farr 

et al., 2005
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 18 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Gibberella avenacea Cook 

(Syn: Anamorph: Fusarium 

avenaceum [Fr.] Sacc.) 

Hypocreales: Nectriaceae 

KR, US F, I, R, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Sung et 

al., 1977

Gibberella zeae (Schwein.:Fr.) 

Petch (Syn: Gibberella 

roseum [Link] Snyder & 

Hans., Gibberella roseum f. 

sp. cerealis [Cooke] Snyder 

& Hans.; Anamorph: 

Fusarium graminearum

Schwabe) Hypocreales:

Nectriaceae

KR, US F, I, L, R, 

S, Sd

No Yes CPC, 2005; Chung et 

al., 1982; Lee et al., 

1995; Farr et al., 2005

Glomerella cingulata 

(Stoneman) Spauld. & 

Schrenk (Syn: Physalospora 

anthurii R. Fisch., 

Physalospora cattleyae

Maubl. & Lasnier; 

Anamorph: Colletotrichum 

gloeosporioides [Penz.] 

Penz. & Sacc.,) Incertae 

sedis: Glomerellaceae

KR, US F, I, L, S, 

Sd

No Yes CPC, 2005; Chung, 

1993; Farr et al., 2005

Grovesinia pyramidalis Cline, 

Crane & Cline (Syn:

Cristulariella moricola

[Hino] Redhead, Sclerotium 

cinnamomi Sawada)

Helotiales: Sclerotiniaceae 

KR, US L No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005; Cho & Shin, 

2004; Dillard et al., 

1995

Macrophomina phaseolina 

(Tassi) Goid. (Syn:

Dothiorella phaseoli 

[Maubl.] Petr. & Syd., 

Macrophoma phaseoli 

Maubl., Macrophoma 

phaseolina Tassi) 

(Ascomycete - Incertae 

sedis: Incertae sedis)

KR, US F, I, L, R, 

S, Sd

No Yes CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004

Macrosporium spp. (Syn:

Alternaria spp.)

KR F, L, S Yes Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Mycovellosiella fulva (Cooke) 

Arx (Syn: Cladosporium 

fulvum Cooke, Fulvia fulva 

[Cooke] Cif.) 

Mycosphaerellales: 

Mycosphaerellaceae

KR, US F, I, L, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 19 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Myrothecium roridum Tode:Fr. 

(Syn: Myrothecium advena 

Sacc., Gliocladium nigrum

Moreau & Moreau)

Hypocreales: Incertae sedis 

KR, US L, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Nectria haematococca Berk. & 

Broome (Syn: Fusarium 

martii Appel & Wollenw., 

Fusarium solani [Mart.] 

Sacc.) Hypocreales: 

Nectriaceae 

KR, US R, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Oidiopsis sicula Scalia (Syn: 

(Anamorph) - Leveillula 

taurica [Lév] Arnaud)

Erysiphales: Erysiphaceae 

KR, US F, I, L, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Penicillium digitatum (Pers.) 

Sacc. Eurotiales: 

Trichocomaceae 

KR, US F, I, L, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Penicillium expansum Link 

(Syn: Coremium glaucum

Link, Penicillium glaucum

Link) Eurotiales: 

Trichocomaceae

KR, US F, L No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Penicillium italicum Wehmer 

Eurotiales: Trichocomaceae

KR, US F, I, L, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Penicillium oxalicum Currie & 

Thom Eurotiales: 

Trichocomaceae

KR, US F No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005 

Phoma exigua var. exigua

Desm. Pleosporales: 

Incertae sedis 

KR, US L, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005; Cho & Shin, 

2004; Boerema et al., 

2004

Phoma destructiva var. 

destructiva Plowr. (Syn:

Diplodina destructiva

[Plowr.] Petr., Phyllosticta 

lycopersici Peck) 

Pleosporales: Incertae sedis 

KR, US F, L, S, Sd No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005; Cho & Shin, 

2004; Boerema et al., 

2004

Phytophthora cactorum

(Lebert & Cohn) Schröt. 

(Kingdom - Chromista) 

Pythiales: Pythiaceae 

KR, US F, L, R, S, 

Sd

No Yes CPC, 2005; French, 

1989; Cho & Shin, 

2004
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 20 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Phytophthora capsici Leonian

(Syn: Phytophthora 

parasitica var. capsici

[Leonian] Sarej.) (Kingdom 

- Chromista) Pythiales: 

Pythiaceae 

KR, US F, L, R, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Erwin & 

Ribeiro, 1996; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Lee et al., 

2001b

Phytophthora cryptogea 

Pethybr. & Laff. (Kingdom 

- Chromista) Pythiales: 

Pythiaceae

KR, US F, I, L, R, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Erwin & 

Ribeiro, 1996

Phytophthora drechsleri 

Tucker (Syn: Phytophthora 

melonis Katsura, Pythium 

teratosporon Sideris) 

(Kingdom - Chromista) 

Pythiales: Pythiaceae 

KR, US R No No Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Phytophthora erythroseptica

var. erythroseptica

Waterhouse (Kingdom -

Chromista) Pythiales: 

Pythiaceae 

KR, US L, R, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Phytophthora infestans

(Mont.) de Bary (Kingdom 

- Chromista) Pythiales: 

Pythiaceae 

KR, US F, I, L, S, 

Sd

No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Phytophthora megasperma

Drechsler (Kingdom -

Chromista) Pythiales: 

Pythiaceae 

KR, US F, R, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Phytophthora nicotianae Breda 

de Haan (Syn: P. nicotianae

var. parasitica [Dastur] 

Waterh., P. parasitica

Dastur, P. parasitica var. 

nicotianae Tucker) 

(Kingdom - Chromista) 

Pythiales: Pythiaceae 

KR, US F, L, R, S, 

Sd

No Yes CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Erwin & 

Ribeiro, 1996

Pleospora herbarum (Pers.:Fr.) 

Rabenh. (Syn: Pleospora 

frangulae Fuckel, Pleospora 

herbarum var. citrorum

Sacc.; Anamorph: 

Stemphylium herbarum

Simmons) Pleosporales: 

Pleosporaceae 

KR, US F, L, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 21 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Pleospora tarda Simmons 

(Syn: Stemphylium 

botryosum Wallr.) 

Pleosporales: Pleosporaceae

KR, US F No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Pyrenochaeta lycopersici 

Schneid. & Gerlach 

Pleosporales: Incertae sedis 

KR, US R No No Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Pythium aphanidermatum

(Edson) Fitzp. (Kingdom -

Chromista) Pythiales: 

Pythiaceae 

KR, US F, R, S No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Pythium debaryanum Hesse 

(Kingdom - Chromista) 

Pythiales: Pythiaceae 

KR,US R No No Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Pythium deliense Meurs (Syn: 

Pythium indicum Balakr.)

(Kingdom - Chromista)

Pythiales: Pythiaceae

KR, US R No No Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Pythium irregulare Buisman 

(Kingdom - Chromista) 

Pythiales: Pythiaceae

KR, US R, S No No37 CPC, 2005; Moon & 

Schneider 1996

Pythium myriotylum Drechsler 

(Kingdom - Chromista) 

Pythiales: Pythiaceae

KR, US R, S No No36 CPC, 2005; Lee et al., 

1975; Farr et al., 2005

Pythium spinosum Sawada 

(Kingdom - Chromista) 

Pythiales: Pythiaceae

KR, US R, S No No36 Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Pythium ultimum Trow 

(Kingdom - Chromista) 

Pythiales: Pythiaceae

KR, US R, S No No37 CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Rhizopus stolonifer (Ehrenb.) 

Vuill. (Syn: Rhizopus 

nigricans Ehrenb., Mucor 

stolonifer Ehrenb.

Mucorales: Mucoraceae 

KR, US F No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Sclerotinia minor Jagger

Helotiales: Sclerotiniaceae 

KR, US F, S No Yes Farr et al., 2005; Cho 

& Shin, 2004

Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) 

de Bary Helotiales: 

Sclerotiniaceae 

KR, US F, I, L, R, 

S, Sd

No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

 

37 Although stems are listed as affected plant parts for these Pythium spp., typically infections occur where the stem contacts 

the soil (Jones et al., 1993; Blancard, 1992).
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 22 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Septoria lycopersici var. 

lycopersici Speg. (Syn: 

Septoria lycopersici Speg.)

Mycosphaerellales: 

Mycosphaerellaceae

KR, US F, L No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005; Cho & Shin, 

2004; Shin & Sameva, 

1999, 2004

Stemphylium lycopersici 

(Enjoji) Yamam. (Syn: 

Stemphylium floridanum

Hannon & Weber, 

Thyrospora lycopersici 

Enjoji) Pleosporales: 

Pleosporaceae

KR, US F, I, L No Yes CPC, 2005; Farr et al. 

2005; Cho & Shin, 

2004; Yu, 2001

Stemphylium solani Weber

Pleosporales: Pleosporaceae

KR, US L No No Farr et al., 2005; Cho 

& Shin, 2004; Yu, 

2001

Stemphylium vesicarium

(Wallr.) Simmons (Syn: 

Macrosporium parasiticum

Thüm., Stemphylium 

parasiticum [Thüm.] Elliott 

ex Henry; Teleomorph: 

Pleospora allii [Rabenh.] 

Ces. & De Not.) 

Pleosporales: Pleosporaceae

KR, US F, L No Yes CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Yu, 1998; Chary et al. 

1980

Thanatephorus cucumeris 

(Frank) Donk (Syn: 

Rhizoctonia solani Kühn 

[Anamorph]) 

Ceratobasidiales: 

Ceratobasidiaceae

KR, US F, I, L, R, 

S, Sd

No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Trichothecium roseum (Pers.) 

Link (Syn: Cephalothecium 

roseum Corda) 

(Ascomycetes) Incertae 

sedis: Incertae sedis

KR, US F, I No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Thielaviopsis basicola (Berk. 

& Broome) Ferraris (Syn: 

Chalara elegans Nag Raj & 

Kendr) Microascales:

Incertae sedis 

KR, US R No No Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Verticillium albo-atrum Reinke 

& Berthier Hypocreales: 

Incertae sedis 

KR, US F, I, L, R, 

S, Sd

No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

CPC, 2005; Farr et al., 

2005

Verticillium dahliae Kleb. 

Hypocreales: Incertae sedis 

KR, US F, I, L, R, 

S, Sd

No Yes CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 23 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

PROTOZOA

Spongospora subterranea f.sp.

subterranea Tomlinson 

Plasmodiophorales: 

Plasmodiophoraceae

KR, US R No No CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004

VIRUSES / VIROIDS38

Alfalfa Mosaic Virus

Alfamovirus Bromoviridae

KR, US Whole 

plant

No Yes CPC, 2005; Park et 

al., 1975; Brunt et al., 

1996a

Beet Curly Top Virus 

Hybrigeminivirus

Geminiviridae

KR, US L No No39 CPC, 2005; Lee et al., 

1999c; Brunt et al., 

1996b; Martin & 

Thomas, 1986

Broad Bean Wilt Virus

Fabavirus Comoviridae

KR, US L, S No No CPC, 2005; Lee et al., 

2000; Chang & 

Chung, 1987

Cucumber Mosaic Virus 

Cucumovirus Bromoviridae

KR, US Whole 

plant

No Yes CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Fuchs et 

al., 1996; Lee et al., 

1997

Cucumber Mosaic Virus -

Satellite RNA

KR, US Whole 

plant

No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

Jaegle et al. 1990; 

Cillo et al., 2004

Peanut Stunt Virus 

Cucumovirus Bromoviridae

KR, US Whole 

plant

No Yes40 CPC, 2005; Brunt et 

al., 1996c; Kim et al., 

1988; Mink, 1972

Potato Leafroll Virus 

Luteovirus Luteoviridae

KR, US F, I, L, S No No41 CPC, 2005; Hahm et 

al., 1991; Hassan et 

al., 1985

Potato Virus Y Potyvirus

Potyviridae

KR, US F, I, L, R, S No No41 CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Brunt et 

al., 1996d

Tobacco Mosaic Virus 

Satellivirus (Syn: Satellite 

Tobacco Mosaic Virus)

KR, US Whole 

plant

No Yes Cho & Shin, 2004; 

Brunt et al., 1996e; 

ICTVdB, 2004a

Tobacco Mosaic Virus 

Tobamovirus (Syn: Tomato 

Mosaic Virus) Luteoviridae

KR, US Whole 

plant

No Yes CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Brunt et 

al., 1996f

 

38 Virus nomenclature and taxonomy as in ICTVdB (2002).

39 Beet curly top virus may follow the pathway, but is unlikely to be transmitted in the absence of leafhopper vectors 

(Cicadellidae) on the commodity (Duffus, 1986).

40 There is evidence of seed transmission in peanut (Arachis hypogaea) at low levels (0.1%) and in soybean (Glycine max) at 

3-4% (CPC, 2005), although seed transmission in tomato has not been reported.

41 Potato leafroll virus and potato virus Y may follow the pathway, but are unlikely to be transmitted in the absence of aphid 

vectors on the commodity (Stevenson, et al., 2001).
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 24 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Tomato Aspermy Virus 

Cucumovirus Bromoviridae

KR, US Whole 

plant

No Yes CPC, 2005; Choi et 

al., 2001; ICTVdB, 

2004b

Tomato Mosaic Virus 

Tobamovirus (Syn: Tobacco 

Mosaic Virus- Tomato 

strain) Luteoviridae

KR, US Whole 

plant

No Yes CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004

Tomato Ringspot Virus 

Nepovirus Comoviridae

KR, US Whole 

plant

No Yes CPC, 2005; EPPO, 

2005c

Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus 

Tospovirus Bunyaviridae

KR, US Whole 

plant

No Yes42 CPC, 2005; Brunt et 

al., 1996g

NEMATODES43

Aphelenchoides ritzemabosi 

(Schwartz) Steiner & Buhrer 

Aphelenchida: 

Aphelenchoididae

KR, US F, L, S No Yes CPC, 2005; Hunt, 

1993; Handoo & 

Ellington, 2005; 

Evans et al., 1993

Ditylenchus destructor Thorne

Tylenchida: Anguinidae

KR , US R No No CPC, 2005; Young & 

Seong, 1995; Nickle, 

1991

Ditylenchus dipsaci (Kühn) 

Filipjev Tylenchida: 

Anguinidae

KR, US L, S No No CPC, 2005; Choi, 

1975; Park et al., 

1993; Handoo & 

Ellington, 2005; 

Evans et al., 1993

Helicotylenchus 

pseudorobustus (Steiner) 

Golden (Syn: 

Helicotylenchus microlobus) 

Tylenchida: Hoplolaimidae

KR, US R No No CPC, 2005; Choi, 

1975; Handoo & 

Ellington, 2005; 

Potter & Olthof, 1993

Heterodera glycines Ichinohe

Tylenchida: Heteroderidae

KR, US R No No CPC, 2005; EPPO, 

2005d; Handoo & 

Ellington, 2005

Hirschmanniella imamuri Sher 

Tylenchida: Pratylenchidae

KR R Yes No Choo et al., 1987

Hirschmanniella oryzae (van 

Breda de Haan) Luc & 

Goodey Tylenchida: 

Pratylenchidae

KR, US R No No CPC, 2005; Park et 

al., 1970

Meloidogyne arenaria (Neal) 

Chitwood Tylenchida:

Heteroderidae

KR, US R No No CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Choi, 

1981; Potter & Olthof, 

1993

 

42 The virus is persistently transmitted by thrips (Nault, 1997), one of which, Thrips palmi, is a vector (Yeh et al., 1992) and 

likely to follow the pathway.

43 Nematode nomenclature and taxonomy as in CPC (2005) and Nickle (1991).
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 25 July 20, 2010

Pest Geographic

Distribution1

Plant Part

Affected2

QuarantinePest3, 4Follow 

Pathway

References

Meloidogyne hapla Chitwood 

Tylenchida: Heteroderidae

KR, US R No No CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Choi, 

1981; Potter & Olthof, 

1993

Meloidogyne incognita

(Kofoid & White) Chitwood 

Tylenchida: Heteroderidae

KR, US R No No CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Choi, 

1981; Potter & Olthof, 

1993; Shepherd & 

Barker, 1990

Meloidogyne javanica (Treub) 

Chitwood Tylenchida:

Heteroderidae

KR , US R No No CPC, 2005; Cho & 

Shin, 2004; Choo et 

al., 1987; Potter & 

Olthof, 1993

Paratrichodorus minor

(Colbran) Siddiqi (Syn:

Paratrichodorus christiei) 

Dorylaimida: Trichodoridae

KR, US R No No CPC, 2005; Handoo 

& Ellington, 2005

Paratrichodorus porosus

(Allen) Siddiqi

Dorylaimida: Trichodoridae

KR, US R No No CPC, 2005; Lee, 

1976; Handoo & 

Ellington, 2005

Pratylenchus penetrans (Cobb) 

Filipjev & Schuurmans 

Stekhoven Tylenchida: 

Pratylenchidae

KR, US R No No CPC, 2005

Pratylenchus neglectus

(Rensch) Filipjev & S. 

Stekhoven Tylenchida: 

Pratylenchidae

KR R Yes No Brodie et al., 1993; 

Potter & Olthof, 1993; 

Anonymous, 1998

Tylenchorhynchus claytoni

Steiner Tylenchida: 

Dolichodoridae

KR, US R No No CPC, 2005; Choi et 

al., 1992; Moon et al., 

1995, Park et al., 

1998a

Xiphinema americanum Cobb

Dorylaimida: 

Xiphinematidae

KR, US R No No CPC, 2005; Handoo 

& Ellington, 2005; 

Lee & Han, 1976
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 26 July 20, 2010

2.5. Quarantine Pests Likely to Follow the Pathway

Table 4. Quarantine Pests Likely to Follow the Pathway

Organism

Bactrocera depressa (Shiraki) (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Helicoverpa assulta (Guenée) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Mamestra brassicae (L.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Ostrinia furnacalis (Guenée) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae)

Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3 / Biovar 2 (Smith) Yabuuchi (Burkholderiales: Ralstoniaceae)

44

Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)

Thrips palmi Karny (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)

2.6. Consequences of Introduction

Potential consequences of introduction are rated using five risk elements: Climate-Host 

Interaction, Host Range, Dispersal Potential, Economic Impact, and Environmental Impact. 

These elements reflect the biology, host ranges, and climatic/geographic distributions of the 

pests. For each risk element, pests are assigned a rating of Low (1 point), Medium (2 points) or 

High (3 points). (The criteria used to determine each rating are outlined in USDA [2000].) A 

Cumulative Risk Rating is then calculated by summing all risk element values. 

The values determined for the Consequences of Introduction for each quarantine pest in Korea of 

tomatoes are summarized in Table 5.

Bactrocera depressa (Shiraki) Risk ratings

Climate/Host Interaction 

The geographic distribution of B. depressa is within temperate to tropical Asia. It 

ranges from Hokkaido, south through the remaining islands of Japan and the 

Ryukyu archipelago, to mainland China (Sichuan) and Taiwan (White & ElsonHarris, 1992; Carrol et al., 2002). The species is widely distributed in Korea (Han 

et al., 1994). Given this distribution, it is estimated that B. depressa could 

become established in the United States in Plant Hardiness Zones 8-11.

High

(3)

Host Range

Hosts are predominantly Cucurbitaceae. The fly has been recorded on Cucurbita 

moschata and C. maxima, Cucumis metuliferus and C. sativus, Citrullus lanatus, 

Lagenaria siceraria, and Trichosanthes kirilowii (White & Elson-Harris, 1992; 

Mun et al., 2003). Larvae of B. depressa are reported to infest fruit of tomato 

(Solanum lycopersicum [Solanaceae]) in Korea (Han et al., 1994) and Japan 

(Okadome, 1962). Because B. depressa has been found in areas (e.g., 

mountainous regions of the Ryukyu Islands), from which cucurbits are absent, 

High

(3)

 

44 Adherence to “Guidelines for Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk Assessments, Version 5.02” (USDA, 2000) requires 

that Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3/ Biovar 2 be analyzed. However, as discussed in Appendix 1, the pathogen is 

not likely to become established via this pathway. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 27 July 20, 2010

Bactrocera depressa (Shiraki) Risk ratings

White & Elson-Harris (1992) suggested that the species probably had additional, 

non-cucurbit hosts.

Dispersal Potential

No information is available on reproduction in B. depressa. If its biology is 

similar to that of other Bactrocera species (Fletcher, 1989a; CABI, 2004), the 

species may exhibit high fecundity (e.g., > 1000 eggs per female), as is typical of 

the polyphagous dacine Tephritidae (Fletcher, 1987). Migratory movements are 

exhibited by several species of Bactrocera, in which flights up to 94 km (B. 

tryoni [Froggatt]) have been reported (Fletcher, 1989b). However, investigations 

into the population structure of B. depressa by Mun et al. (2003) indicated that 

the frequency of long-distance dispersal in this species is extremely low. Also, 

the fly’s restricted, East Asian distribution and a complete lack of U.S. port 

interception records (USDA-APHIS Port Information Network [PIN 309] 

database) suggest that it is not spread widely in commerce. Risk associated with 

the dispersal potential of B. depressa is estimated to be medium.

Medium

(2)

Economic Impact

Bactrocera depressa is said to be a significant pest of Cucurbita moschata

(pumpkin or winter squash) and C. maxima (Hubbard squash) in Korea and Japan 

(Mun et al., 2003). In their survey, Han et al. (1994) reported severe damage to 

C. moschata (≥ 31% of fruits); lesser damage (10-30%) to Citrullus lanatus

(watermelon), Lagenaria siceraria (bottle gourd), and ornamental pumpkin; and 

“mild” damage (≤ 10%) in tomato and melon. Damage is caused by larvae 

tunneling through and macerating fruit tissue (Fletcher, 1987). As Bactrocera

spp. are quarantine pests for numerous countries, including French Polynesia, 

New Caledonia, Turkey, Madagascar, Argentina, Brazil, New Zealand, Syria, 

Uruguay, and Chile (PRF, 2005), introduction of B. depressa could result in a 

loss of foreign markets for U.S. agricultural commodities, such as tomato and 

cucurbits. Additionally, the introduction of B. depressa could trigger eradication 

or control program, similar to those that have been initiated for other Tephritid 

fruit flies. The evidence supports an estimation of risk associated with the pest’s 

economic impact of high.

High

(3)

Environmental Impact

This pest potentially threatens native plants listed as Threatened or Endangered in 

Title 50, Part 17, Section 12 of the United States Code of Federal Regulations (50 

CFR §17.12). As close relatives of known hosts, Cucurbita okeechobeensis ssp. 

okeechobeensis, Solanum incompletum, S. sandwicense, and S. drymophilum are 

considered at risk of attack should B. depressa be introduced into the United 

States. Further, its introduction would likely result in the initiation of chemical or 

biological control programs similar to those targeting other tephritid pests 

(Roessler, 1989; Sivinski, 1996).

High

(3)
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 28 July 20, 2010

Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) Risk ratings

Climate/Host Interaction 

This pest is widely distributed in Africa, Europe, Asia, and Australasia, and 

occurs in several island groups of the Pacific (CABI, 2004); its distribution 

includes areas that experience continental climates (e.g., Germany, Ukraine; Fig. 

1). The moth is absent from the western hemisphere. Based on this temperate to 

tropical distribution, it is estimated that climatic conditions within Plant 

Hardiness Zones 6-11 (ARS, 1990; Carter, 1984) would be suitable for 

establishment of this pest in the United States.

High

(3)

Host Range

Helicoverpa armigera infests many different crop and non-crop plants across

several families, including Poaceae (Zea mays, Sorghum bicolor, Triticum 

aestivum), Solanaceae (Solanum lycopersicum, S. tuberosum, Nicotiana tabacum, 

Datura metel), Malvaceae (Gossypium hirsutus, Abelmoschus esculentus), 

Fabaceae (Pisum sativum, Phaseolus vulgaris, Arachis hypogaea, Glycine max), 

Rutaceae (Citrus spp.), Brassicaceae (Brassica oleracea), Asteraceae (Lactuca 

sativa, Helianthus annuus), Amaranthaceae (Amaranthus spp.), and Liliaceae 

(Allium cepa) (Carter, 1984; Zhang, 1994; CABI, 2004).

High

(3)

Dispersal Potential

Females lay from 300-3000 eggs during their lifetime (Avidov & Harpaz, 1969);

there may be up to six generations per year (CPC, 2005). The pest is capable of 

flying long distances. For example, adults are known to migrate from southern 

Europe to the U.K. (CABI, 2004). Larvae may be dispersed long distances in 

fruits (CPC, 2005; EPPO, 1997). Since 1984, the pest has been intercepted at 

U.S. ports at least 307 times on numerous commodities in cargo (PIN 309), thus 

indicating that international commerce may serve as an efficient means for its 

wide dispersal. Larvae are said to be frequently imported into Britain in fresh 

tomatoes and other produce (Carter, 1984).

High

(3)

Economic Impact

Helicoverpa armigera is a major pest everywhere it is established. Larvae attack

several crops, including tomato, maize, cotton, cabbage, and potato (Carter, 

1984; CPC, 2005), that are of considerable economic importance in the United 

States. Damage is caused by larvae boring into flower buds and fruits (Hill, 

1983). In India, losses of up to 50% of the potato crop have been recorded (CPC, 

2005). In tomato crops, yield losses exceeding 70% have been reported in 

Pakistan (Aheer et al., 1998). Insecticides routinely have been relied upon for 

control (e.g., Farooq Ahmad, 1998), which increases costs of crop production. As 

an A2 quarantine pest for Europe and East and Southern Africa, and an A1 

quarantine pest for Brazil (EPPO, 1997, 2003), establishment of H. armigera in 

the United States would likely lead to loss of export markets.

High

(3)

Environmental Impact

Hosts of H. armigera larvae include plants in the genera Allium, Amaranthus,

Helianthus, Prunus, Solanum, and Vigna (CABI, 2004). The pest thus represents 

a potential threat to related species in the United States listed as Threatened or 

Endangered (e.g., Allium munzii, Amaranthus brownii, A. pumilus, Helianthus 

eggertii, H. paradoxus, H. schweinitzii, Prunus geniculata, Solanum 

High

(3)
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 29 July 20, 2010

Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) Risk ratings

incompletum. S. sandwicense, S. drymophilum, and Vigna o-wahuensis). 

Introduction and establishment of this pest could result in the initiation of 

biological control programs, as has occurred to combat closely related species of

pest Heliothinae (e.g., H. zea [Boddie]; Oatman, 1978).

Figure 1. Plant hardiness zones for Europe (source: 

http://www.backyardgardener.com/zone/europe1zone.html).

Helicoverpa assulta (Guenée) Risk ratings

Climate/Host Interaction 

Helicoverpa assulta is distributed from the temperate zone to the tropics of the 

Old World (CABI, 2004). It occurs in sub-Saharan Africa, throughout South,

Southeast, and East Asia, and ranges south through Oceania to Australasia; its 

distribution includes areas that experience continental climates (e.g., China 

[Beijing, Hebei]; Fig. 2). Climatic conditions are estimated to be suitable for the 

survival and establishment of this insect in the United States in Plant Hardiness 

Zones 6-11 (ARS, 1990; Zhang, 1994).

High

(3)

Host Range

Helicoverpa assulta appears mainly to attack members of the Solanaceae,

including Nicotiana spp., Datura stramonium, Solanum lycopersicum, S. 

High

(3)
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 30 July 20, 2010

Helicoverpa assulta (Guenée) Risk ratings

melongena, Capsicum annuum, and Physalis spp.; other hosts are Zea mays

(Poaceae), Crocosmia spp. (Iridaceae), Perilla spp. (Labiatae), Vigna unguiculata

and Pisum sativum (Fabaceae), and Piper spp. (Piperaceae) ( Zhang, 1994; 

Robinson et al., 2001; CPC, 2005). Tomato has been reported to be the most 

important alternate host to tobacco (Marcos & Rejesus, 1992).

Dispersal Potential

Fecundity ranging from 423-505 eggs per female has been reported, and may be 

influenced by host plant (Nandihalli & Lee, 1995a). Up to three generations per 

year have been reported in Japan (CABI, 2004). Helicoverpa spp. (e.g., H. zea)

may disperse many miles by flight (Metcalf et al., 1962). Larvae of this pest can

be dispersed in shipped tomotoes (NPQS, 2000). The pest has been intercepted at 

U.S. ports in various commodities on at least 18 occasions (PIN 309). Evidence 

suggests that this pest has high reproductive and dispersal potentials.

High

(3)

Economic Impact

In Korea, population densities of this pest has been known to reach action 

thresholds requiring treatment (NPQS, 2000). Damage is caused by larvae boring 

into the fruits, which not only causes direct damage, but also may facilitate the 

entry of bacteria causing soft rots (Park et al., 1998b). In Korea, the moth is the

most seriously damaging insect pest of Capsicum annuum (Kim et al., 2002b). 

Rates of damage in unprotected tobacco crops exceeded 23% (Nandihalli & Lee, 

1995b). Insecticidal applications are a prevalent control tactic (Yang et al., 2004), 

which raises production costs. The insect is a quarantine pest for New Zealand 

(PRF, 2005), suggesting that its introduction could result in the loss of that 

market for U.S agricultural products.

High

(3)

Environmental Impact

Hosts of H. assulta include plants in the genera Cucurbita, Vigna, and Solanum 

(CPC, 2005; Zhang, 1994), which suggests that close relatives listed as 

Threatened or Endangered, such as Cucurbita okeechobeensis ssp. 

okeechobeensis, Solanum incompletum. S. sandwicense, S. drymophilum, and 

Vigna o-wahuensis, could be at risk of attack should the pest be introduced into 

the United States. Outbreaks on crops would likely trigger biological or chemical

control programs, as have been initiated elsewhere (e.g., Hirai et al., 1996; Yang 

et al., 2004).

High

(3)
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 31 July 20, 2010

Figure 2. Plant hardiness zones in China (source: 

http://www.backyardgardener.com/zone/china.html)

Mamestra brassicae (L.) Risk ratings

Climate/Host Interaction 

Mamestra brassicae occurs throughout Europe, ranging into temperate and 

subtropical Asia, and northern Africa (Carter, 1984); the distribution is mainly

between 70oN and 30oN (CABI, 2004). This distribution corresponds roughly to 

Plant Hardiness Zones 6-11 within the United States (ARS, 1990; Carter, 1984).

High

(3)

Host Range

This polyphagous pest attacks crops in several families, including Brassicaceae 

(particularly varieties of Brassica oleracea), Asteraceae (Lactuca sativa,

Chrysanthemum spp.), Chenopodiaceae (Beta vulgaris), Fabaceae (Pisum 

sativum, Phaseolus vulgaris), Liliaceae (Allium sativum), Solanaceae (Solanum 

lycopersicum, S. tuberosum, Nicotiana tabacum), Rosaceae (Prunus persica), 

Caryophyllaceae (Dianthus caryophyllus), Poaceae (Zea mays), Vitaceae (Vitis 

vinifera), Fagaceae (Quercus spp.), and Polygonaceae (Rheum spp.) (Carter, 

1984; Zhang, 1994; CABI, 2004). Although brassicas are said to be the most

preferred hosts (CABI, 2004), Rojas et al. (2001) found no difference in the mean 

number of eggs deposited on cabbage and tomato by females in choice tests.

High

(3)

Dispersal Potential

Fecundity averages 500-1500 eggs per female; there may be three generations per 

year (CABI, 2004). Larvae may disperse locally, from host to host, over short 

distances (CABI, 2004). Adults are said to be “sedentary” (Bues et al., 1988) and 

”non-migratory” (Poitout & Bues, 1976), indicating a low potential for rapid,

High

(3)
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 32 July 20, 2010

Mamestra brassicae (L.) Risk ratings

long-distance dispersal. However, the pest has been intercepted at U.S. ports at 

least 983 times on various commodities in cargo (including tomato; PIN 309), 

indicating its potential to move long distances rapidly in commerce.

Economic Impact

Mamestra brassicae is considered to be a serious pest of many crops, in which 

even small larval populations may be quite damaging (Hill, 1987). Damage is 

caused by larvae defoliating and tunneling into the interiors of plants or plant 

organs, including fruits, such as apple and tomato (Carter, 1984; CABI, 2004).

Feeding damage of 50% has been recorded in sugar beet (Onodera, 1998). 

Cabbage crops may suffer losses of up to 80% (CABI, 2004). Under certain 

cropping systems, damage may be too great to produce a commercially viable

cabbage crop (Brandsaeter et al., 1998). Control typically involves the 

application of insecticides (Steene, 1995; Beltrami et al., 2004), which increases 

costs of production. As the moth is a quarantine pest for New Zealand, the former 

states of Yugoslavia, and Southern Africa (EPPO, 2003; PRF, 2005), its 

introduction could result in a loss of foreign markets for U.S. agricultural 

products, such as tomato, cabbage, and cut flowers.

High

(3)

Environmental Impact

Hosts of this pest include species of Solanum, Allium, Quercus, and Prunus. It

therefore represents a potential threat to listed native plants, such as Solanum 

incompletum. S. sandwicense, S. drymophilum, Allium munzii, Quercus hinckleyi, 

and Prunus geniculata. Because of its status as a serious pest, introduction of M. 

brassicae likely would result in the initiation of chemical or biological control 

programs, as has occurred elsewhere (Rost, 1979).

High

(3)

Ostrinia furnacalis (Guenée) Risk ratings

Climate/Host Interaction 

Ostrinia furnacalis ranges from cold temperate regions to the tropics, occurring

throughout South and East Asia (including Siberia, China, India, Pakistan, Korea, 

Japan, Thailand, Vietnam, the Philippines, and Indonesia), Australia, Papua New 

Guinea, and parts of Oceania (e.g., the Mariana, Caroline, and Solomon Islands)

(CABI, 2004). Based on this distribution, the climatic conditions suitable for the 

survival and establishment in the United States correspond to Plant Hardiness 

Zones 6-11 (ARS, 1990; Zhang, 1994).

High

(3)

Host Range

Zea mays is the main host of O. furnacalis (CABI, 2004), but the moth feeds on

or in plants in several other families, including Cannabaceae (Canabis sativa, 

Humulus lupulus), Asteraceae (Artemisia spp.), Solanaceae (Capsicum annuum, 

Solanum lycopersicum, S. melongena), Malvaceae (Gossypium spp.), Fabaceae

(Phaseolus vulgaris), Amaranthaceae (Amaranthus spp.), and Polygonaceae 

(Polygonum spp.) (Zhang, 1994; Robinson et al., 2001; CABI, 2004). In Poaceae, 

in addition to Z. mays, hosts include Panicum miliaceum, Saccharum spp., 

Sorghum spp., Setaria spp., and Eleusine indica (Robinson et al., 2001).

High

(3)
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 33 July 20, 2010

Ostrinia furnacalis (Guenée) Risk ratings

Dispersal Potential

Females lay 500-1500 eggs in groups, mainly on the undersides of leaves (Hill, 

1983). This species has one or a few generations per year in the northern part of 

its range, and continuous and overlapping generations in the tropics (Parker et al, 

1995; CABI, 2004). Although Hill (1983) claimed that adults may fly several 

kilometers, indications are that O. furnacalis does not readily disperse. For 

example, in mark-release-recapture studies, Wang et al. (1994) concluded that, 

although potentially capable of migrating long distances, most adults did not do 

so. Since 1984, there has been only a single interception of the moth recorded at a 

U.S. port (PIN 309).

Medium

(2)

Economic Impact

Ostrinia furnacalis is one of the most important pests of maize in Asia and 

Australasia (Hill, 1983). Damage is caused by larvae boring into and within 

stems of hosts. Yield losses in maize crops of 4.8-30.9% in the Philippines and 

>20% in China have been recorded (Yang et al., 1993; CABI, 2004). Cultural 

practices and the application of insecticides are common control methods (Hill, 

1983), which increase crop production costs. As this moth is an A1 quarantine 

pest for Brazil and Southern and East Africa (EPPO, 2003), its introduction into 

the United States could result in a loss of foreign markets.

High

(3)

Environmental Impact

This pest represents a potential threat to native plants listed as Threatened or 

Endangered, such as Amaranthus brownii, A. pumilus, Solanum incompletum. S. 

sandwicense, S. drymophilum, Panicum fauriei var. carteri and P. niihauense. As 

a pest of several species of Poaceae (Nafus & Schreiner, 1991), the moth may

pose a potential threat to native grassland and prairie in the western United 

States. Its introduction likely would spur the initiation of chemical or biological 

control programs, as is common practice in other regions (Nafus & Schreiner, 

1991).

High

(3)

Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3 / Biovar 2 Risk ratings

Climate/Host Interaction 

Ralstonia solanacearum race 3, biovar 2 (R3-B2) strains are widely distributed 

throughout Asia, the Caribbean, Central America, Europe, Africa, and South 

America (Elphinstone, 2005c). Commercially cultivated hosts of the bacterium, 

including Solanum and Lycopersicon spp., are grown in more than six plant 

hardiness zones of the United States (NASS, 2005; USDA-NRCS, 2005).

Climatic conditions and host range are suitable for the survival and establishment 

of this pest in at least 4 Plant Hardiness Zones of the United States (USDA, 

2003).

High

(3)

Host Range

The natural host range of R. solanacearum R3-B2 strains is extensive, and 

includes both solanaceous and non-solanaceous crops and weeds (Janse et al., 

2004). Hosts infected belong to several plant families: Solanaceae, Asteraceae, 

High

(3)
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 34 July 20, 2010

Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3 / Biovar 2 Risk ratings

Brassicaceae, Chenopodiaceae, Cucurbitaceae, Geraniaceae, Fabaceae, 

Portulacaceae, Labiatae, Capparadidaceae, Polygonaceae, Urticaceae, 

Caryophyllaceae, Poaceae, Convolvulaceae, Scrophulariaceae, Asteraceae, 

Tropaeolaceae, and Verbenaceae (Janse et al., 2004). The following are hosts 

reported in the literature (Janse et al., 2004).

Solanaceae: Capsicum annuum, Solanum lycopersicum, Solanum tuberosum, 

Solanum melongena, Solanum phureja, Cyphomandra betaceae 

Solanaceous weeds: Datura stramonium, Physalis spp., Physalis angulatum, 

Solanum carolinense, Solanum cinereum, Solanum dulcamara, Solanum nigrum 

Non-solanaceous natural host plants: Bidens pinnata, Brassica rapa, 

Chenopodium spp., Melampodium perfoliatum, Momordica charantia, 

Pelargonium zonale, Phaseolus vulgaris, Portulaca oleracea, Salvia reflexa 

Natural latent hosts: Cleome monophylla, Galinsoga ciliate, Nicotiana 

glutinosa, Nicotiana rustica, Polygonum capitata, Solanum sisymbriifolium,

Urtica dioica, Beta vulgaris, Brassica juncea., B. napus, Brassica rapa, 

Browallia speciosa, Cerastium glomeratum, Chenopodium abrosioides, C. 

amaranticolor, C. paniculatum, Cucurbita pepo, Drymaria cordata, Erodium 

moschatum, Eupatorium cannabinum, Galinsoga parviflora, Glycine max, 

Gnaphalium elegans, Helianthus annuus, Hordeum vulgare, Hyoscyamus niger, 

Ipomea spp., Lycopersicon chilense, Nicandra physaloides, Nicotiana alata, 

Phaseolus vulgari, Phaseolus multiflorus, Physalis floridana, Pisum sativum,

Rumex spp., Salpiglossis sinuate, Spergula arvensis, Solanum capsisastrum,

Solanum caripense, Solanum luteum, Solanum sarrachoides, Solanum 

xanthophyllum, Soliva anthemidifolia, Tagetes spp., Tropaeolum majus, Verbena 

brasiliensis, Vicia faba, Vigna sinensis

Dispersal Potential

Ralstonia solanacearum R3-B2 bacteria are transmitted through contaminated 

soil, irrigation water, equipment or personnel (Coutinho, 2005). Spread has been 

demonstrated through infected potato tubers, plant-to-plant through soil, in 

waterways (streams and irrigation ponds) (Caruso et al. 2003) and on infected 

weed hosts (Stevenson et al., 2001). Infection occurs typically through wounds or 

natural openings in the plant’s surface, e.g. injured roots, stem wounds or stomata 

(EPPO 2005e). The bacteria may be spread by transplanting or propagating 

infected plants, by cutting infected plant material then cutting healthy plant 

material without disinfecting cutting tools, and by watering plants with 

contaminated irrigation water (USDA-APHIS, 2003). Ralstonia solanacearum

R3-B2 does not easily spread from plant to plant contact, by water splashing, nor 

is it spread aerially (USDA-APHIS, 2003). The primary pathway for 

international spread is via infected plant material, such as vegetative plant parts

or infested soil. Infected plant parts, including fruit and stems, may be 

transported long distances, dispersing the pathogen. The bacteria may survive in 

the soil for relatively short periods of time (Sequeira, 1994).

Medium

(2)
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 35 July 20, 2010

Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3 / Biovar 2 Risk ratings

Economic Impact

Ralstonia solanacearum R3-B2 may cause serious direct yield loss in infected 

hosts, both in agricultural food crops and ornamentals, in addition to economic 

impacts of monitoring and eradicating if the organism is introduced to new areas, 

such as the United States, where it has quarantine status (Elphinstone, 2005c).

Yield losses due to R. solanacearum R3-B2 vary depending upon cropping 

practices, host, cultivar, and soil type. In tomato production, bacterial wilt caused 

losses ranging from 15-55% in Taiwan, significant plant mortality (10-100%) and 

yield loss (0-91%) in India, and is widespread (88% infested) in production fields 

in Uganda (Elphinstone, 2005c). Impacts to other crop plants such as potato, 

tobacco, and ornamental plants also are economically significant. Global 

estimates of the impact of bacterial wilt on potato alone indicate that 1.5 million 

ha are affected, resulting in losses exceeding $950 million annually (Elphinstone, 

2005c). Costs of monitoring and eradication of R. solanacearum R3-B2 after 

introduction on geranium to the United States in 2003 were substantial (Writer, 

2003; USDA-APHIS, 2003). Loss of world markets for U.S. products due to 

establishment of R. solanacearum R3-B2 would have a serious negative impact 

on U.S. agriculture. The bacterium is an A2 quarantine pest for Europe and a 

quarantine pest for Canada (EPPO, 2003).

High

(3)

Environmental Impact 

Several species of both solanaceous and non-solanaceous crops and weeds are 

infected by R. solanacearum R3-B2 (Janse et al., 2004). Among species listed as 

Threatened or Endangered in the United States (USFWS, 1999) several may be 

potential hosts of R. solanacearum R3-B2 strains. Several species belong in the 

family Solanaceae: Goetzea elegans, Nothocestrum breviflorum, N. peltatum, 

Solanum drymophilum, S. incompletum and S. sandwicense. Additional species 

listed as Threatened or Endangered belonging to the same genera as other known 

susceptible species include: Bidens micrantha spp. kalealaha, Bidens wiebkei, 

Portulaca sclerocarpa, Cucurbita okeechobeensis spp. okeechobeensis,

Helianthus eggertii, Helianthus paradoxus, Helianthus schweinitzii, Verbena

californica, Vigna o-wahuensis (USFWS, 1999). Populations of the species listed 

above may be at risk if this bacterium enters and becomes established in the 

United States. Direct effects of infection as well as eradication efforts needed to 

control introduced populations of this pathogen would be detrimental to these 

species.

High

(3)

Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood Risk ratings

Climate/Host Interaction 

The distribution of S. dorsalis is largely subtropical to tropical, although its 

occurrence in Korea and Honshu, Japan, suggests that it can survive in cold 

temperate regions. Its range extends in Asia from Pakistan to Japan, south to the 

Philippines, and through parts of Melanesia to Australia (CPC, 2005). The pest has 

a restricted distribution in Africa. It is estimated that S. dorsalis could become 

established in the United States within Plant Hardiness Zones 8-11 (ARS, 1990).

High

(3)
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 36 July 20, 2010

Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood Risk ratings

Host Range

Scirtothrips dorsalis has been recorded on hosts in several families, including 

Allium cepa (Liliaceae), Mangifera indica (Anacardiaceae), Arachis hypogaea

(Fabaceae), Camellia sinensis (Theaceae), Citrus spp. (Rutaceae), Gossypium spp. 

(Malvaceae), Solanum lycopersicum (Solanaceae), Ricinus communis

(Euphorbiaceae), Nelumbo spp. (Nelumbonaceae), Vitis vinifera (Vitaceae) (CPC, 

2005); Zea mays (Poaceae), Zizyphus mauritiana (Rhamnaceae), Passiflora edulis

(Passifloraceae), Fragaria chiloensis (Rosaceae), Annona squamosa (Annonaceae)

(Chang, 1991); and Actinidia chinensis (Actinidiaceae) (Sakakibara & Nishigaki, 

1988).

High

(3)

Dispersal Potential

Fecundity ranges from 40-68 eggs per female; a female: male sex ratio of 6:1 has 

been reported (CPC, 2005). In China, 10-15 generations per year have been 

recorded (Li et al., 2004). The potential of Scirtothrips spp. for natural spread 

appears to be limited (EPPO, 1997). In international trade, S. dorsalis could be 

carried on plant materials; however, interceptions have been rare. For example, over 

the last 13 years, the species has been intercepted at U.S. ports on only 19 occasions

in cargo (PIN 309).

Medium

(2)

Economic Impact

In chili pepper, heavy infestation causes premature leaf drop (CPC, 2005); a yield 

reduction as high as 90% has been reported (Kumar, 1995). In India, the thrips is 

routinely controlled on this crop with various insecticides (Rai & Solanki, 2002), 

which increases production costs. As S. dorsalis is listed as an A1 quarantine pest 

for Europe (EPPO, 1997), its establishment in the United States could result in the 

loss of foreign markets for various agricultural commodities.

High

(3)

Environmental Impact

This pest has the potential to attack listed native plants in the United States, such as 

Allium munzii and Ziziphus celata. Its introduction could spur the initiation of 

biological control programs, as has occurred with other thrips in the United States 

and elsewhere (e.g., Clausen, 1978).

High

(3)

Thrips palmi Karny Risk ratings

Climate/Host Interaction 

Thrips palmi is subtropical to tropical in distribution; populations in temperate 

climates are able to overwinter in greenhouses or other artificial situations (CPC, 

2005). This thrips occurs in Asia, from Pakistan to Indonesia, in parts of the tropical 

Pacific and Africa, and, most recently, in the Caribbean, northern South America, 

and the state of Florida. It is estimated that this species could establish additional

populations in the United States only in southern regions, in areas corresponding to 

Plant Hardiness Zones 9-11.

Medium

(2)

Host Range

Among primary hosts are species of Cucurbitaceae and Solanaceae, including 

Cucurbita pepo and Solanum melongena. The thrips also has been recorded on 

High

(3)
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 37 July 20, 2010

Thrips palmi Karny Risk ratings

Allium cepa (Liliaceae), Helianthus annuus (Asteraceae), Citrus spp. (Rutaceae), 

Glycine max (Fabaceae), Gossypium spp. (Malvaceae), Mangifera indica

(Anacardiaceae), Oryza sativa (Poaceae), Persea americana (Lauraceae), and 

Sesamum indicum (Pedaliaceae) (CPC, 2005).

Dispersal Potential

Fecundity may exceed 200 eggs per female (CPC, 2005). At least 10 generations 

per year have been recorded on cucurbits (Chang, 1991). Originally restricted to 

South and Southeast Asia, over the past 25 years, T. palmi has spread rapidly to 

Australia, Africa, and the Western Hemisphere (CPC, 2005). Bournier (1986) 

suggested that rapid, long-distance dispersal is facilitated by the wind and aircraft 

transport of infested plant materials. The species has been intercepted over 8100 

times at U.S. ports during the last 20 years (PIN 309). This pest thus exhibits high 

reproductive and dispersal capacities.

High

(3)

Economic Impact

Thrips palmi is a serious pest of cucurbits and eggplant. Losses of 50-90% in these 

crops have been reported (CPC, 2005). On cucumber, feeding stunts plants, causes 

premature bud and fruit drop, and may deform surviving fruits; infestations as low 

as one thrips per leaf resulted in fewer tendrils and leaves, and killed plants 

(Childers, 1997). The species is a vector of tomato spotted wilt tospovirus (CPC, 

2005). It is reported to be difficult to control chemically, requiring repeated 

applications of insecticides to achieve acceptable levels of control (Sakimura et al., 

1986). It is listed as an A1 quarantine pest for Europe (EPPO, 1997). However, as 

T. palmi is established in the United States, and under no apparent official control, 

additional introductions are unlikely to result in a further loss of foreign markets for 

domestically produced commodities. The weight of evidence suggests that risk 

associated with the economic impact of this species is in the medium range.

Medium

(2)

Environmental Impact

This pest has the potential to attack plants listed as Endangered or Threatened 

and occurring beyond its present distribution in the United States (e.g., Allium 

munzii, Helianthus spp.). Further introductions could result in the initiation of 

biological control programs, which has been considered in other countries (e.g., 

Japan; Hirose et al., 1993).

High

(3)

Table 5. Risk Rating for Consequences of Introduction

Pest Climate/Host 

Interaction

Host 

Range

Dispersal 

Potential

Economic 

Impact

Environmental ImpactCumulative

Rating

Bactrocera depressa High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (14)

Helicoverpa armigera High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (15)

Helicoverpa assulta High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (15)

Mamestra brassicae High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (15)

Ostrinia furnacalis High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (14)

Ralstonia 

solanacearum race 3, 

biovar 2

High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (14)
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 38 July 20, 2010

Pest Climate/Host 

Interaction

Host 

Range

Dispersal 

Potential

Economic 

Impact

Environmental ImpactCumulative

Rating

Scirtothrips dorsalis High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (14)

Thrips palmi Med (2) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (13)

2.7. Likelihood of Introduction

Likelihood of introduction is a function of both the quantity of the commodity imported annually 

and pest opportunity, which consists of five criteria that consider the potential for pest survival 

along the pathway (USDA, 2000). The values determined for the Likelihood of Introduction for 

each pest are summarized in Table 6.

Adherence to the guidelines required that we analyze the pathogen Ralstonia solanacearum race 

3, biovar 2. Therefore, for consistency, the results of our analysis using the guidelines are 

included in the discussion below. However, for reasons that could not be addressed using the 

current PRA guidelines, this pest is not likely to become established in the United States via the 

importation of tomatoes from Korea. (See Appendix 1, “Likelihood of Entry, Introduction and 

Establishment of Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3 Biovar 2 with Imported Tomato Fruit with 

Stems (Solanum lycopersicum L., Synonym: Lycopersicon esculentum) from the Republic of 

Korea.”)

2.7.1. Quantity of commodity imported annually

The rating for the quantity imported annually is based on the amount reported by the exporter, 

and is converted into standard units of 40-foot-long shipping containers. The initial volume of 

tomatoes to be shipped to the United States is estimated to be approximately one container per 

year (KNPQS, 2000b). Therefore, this element is ranked low for all pests.

2.7.2. Survive post-harvest treatment

Post-harvest treatment for tomatoes from Korea will consist of hand-wiping harvested fruit prior 

to shipment (KNPQS, 2000b). Bactrocera depressa, the noctuid moths Helicoverpa armigera, H.

assulta, and Mamestra brassicae, as internal fruit feeders, would be expected to have a high 

probability (> 10%; USDA, 2000) of surviving such minimal post-harvest treatment. The pyralid 

moth Ostrinia furnacalis, if present within stems, would be subject to no post-harvest treatment, 

and, thus, also would has a high probability of surviving. Thus, the rating for this risk element is 

considered high for these insects. Similarly, superficial treatment is not likely to affect an 

internal bacterial infection of fruit. Thus Ralstonia solanacearum race 3, biovar 2 is also rated 

high for this element.

The thrips Scirtothrips dorsalis and Thrips palmi are external feeders, and would have a lesser 

probability of surviving post-harvest treatment. However, depending on their stage (egg, larva, 

adult) or instar, these insects might find shelter on fruit beneath the calyx. For example, many 

thrips (which may be as small as 0.5 mm in length) seek protection in narrow crevices on their 

hosts, and there is little wandering from these sites; thrips eggs are inserted into plant tissues 

(Lewis, 1973). Such cryptic behavior could afford them considerable protection from detection 

or removal. The thrips are considered to have a probability of surviving post-harvest treatment of 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 39 July 20, 2010

between 0.1% and 10% (i.e., in the medium range; USDA, 2000).

2.7.3. Survive Shipment

According to information provided by the Korean National Plant Quarantine Service (KNPQS, 

2000b), tomatoes will be shipped via air-cargo at a temperature of about 10oC. Insect survival at 

low temperatures is influenced by the duration of exposure (Chapman, 1998). Low temperatures 

above freezing are not immediately fatal for most insects; some may remain alive for 

considerable periods even at temperatures around 0°C. As temperatures drop, physiological 

adjustments that occur in the process of acclimation may lengthen the period during which 

insects can withstand the deleterious effects of chilling (Salt, 1961). For example, the tropical 

species, T. palmi, has been reported to survive temperatures as low as –3° to –7°C in unheated 

greenhouses in Japan (EPPO, 1997). The relatively benign conditions under which, and the rapid 

means by which, tomato fruit will be shipped Korea should be favorable for the survival of any

accompanying insects. Thus, all insects are rated high for this risk element.

Ralstonia solanacearum race 3, biovar 2 is known to survive long-distance transport. For 

example, the bacteria survived in geranium cuttings from Kenya during transport to the United 

States and the European Union (USDA-APHIS, 2003; Janse et al., 2004). Thus, R. solanacearum

race 3, biovar 2 is also rated high for this risk element.

2.7.4. Not detected at a port of entry

Estimating the risk that pests will not be detected at a port-of-entry involves consideration of pest 

size, mobility, and degree of concealment. Depending on the age of the infestation, internal 

feeders have a high probability of escaping detection at a port-of-entry, unless fruit is cut open.

Oviposition wounds made by B. depressa females, or entrance holes of H. armigera, H. assulta

or M. brassicae, on the outside of fruit might be detected by visual inspection. Other entrance

holes under the calyx and larvae in fruit would be more difficult to see. Similarly, for C. 

suppressalis and O. furnacalis, holes in stems might be evident, their detection facilitated by the 

presence of frass (fecal material) (Valdez & Adalla, 1983; Catindig & Heong, 2003). Because 

symptoms of infestation may be evident, these pests are rated medium for this risk element.

Scirtothrips dorsalis and T. palmi are external feeders; thus, their presence or the damage they

produce would tend to have a higher probability of detection than that of internal pests. 

However, if concealed beneath the calyx or in packing materials, or if present in the egg stage,

these minute insects would be more difficult to discover. Thrips are diminutive insects, 

individually so small that they easily pass unnoticed (Lewis, 1973). In particular, it is said to be 

extremely difficult to detect adults, larvae, or eggs in bulky shipments of plant material (Lewis, 

1997). These species are rated medium for this risk element.

Fruit and attached stems and calyces may harbor bacteria without showing symptoms of 

Ralstonia solanacearum race 3, biovar 2 infection. Visual detection is not an effective means of 

exclusion for this bacterium. This pest is rated high for this risk element.

2.7.5. Imported or moved subsequently to an area with an environment suitable for survival

Tomatoes from Korea are likely to be sold in every state. However, if it is assumed that demand 

for them is proportional to the size of the consumer population in potential markets, then imports 

might be concentrated more in some regions of the United States than in others, not all of which 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 40 July 20, 2010

may be conducive to pest survival. According to the latest census data (USCB, 2005), 30% and 

46% of the population resides in states wholly or partly within Plant Hardiness Zones 9, 10, or 

11 and 8, 9, 10, or 11, respectively. Three of the most populous states (California, Florida, and 

Texas) contain areas within Plant Hardiness Zones 8-11, and are likely to constitute large 

markets for the imports. Assuming that infestations will be randomly distributed among 

shipments, because they are considered capable of surviving in a range of states (those 

containing areas within Zones 8 or 9 and above) that may comprise a moderately high percentage 

of likely markets for Korean tomato, Bactrocera depressa, S. dorsalis and T. palmi are estimated 

to present a medium risk of being moved to habitat suitable for survival.

The remaining insects are estimated to be capable of survival in areas of the United States within 

Plant Hardiness Zones 6-11. States within these zones contain more than 89% of the U.S. 

population. Moreover, this region includes several of the most populous states (i.e., Illinois, New 

York, Ohio, Pennsylvania; USCB, 2005), to which a significant percentage of tomato imports 

likely would be diverted. Risk associated with the likelihood that these pests will be moved to 

suitable habitat in the United States is estimated to be high.

Since the early 1990s, evidence indicates that R. solanacearum race 3, biovar 2 may be

established in the ecosystems of several European countries (Van Elsas et al., 2000). Ralstonia

solanacearum race 3, biovar 2 causes disease in susceptible hosts in both tropical and temperate 

climates (Janse, 1996, 2004; Elphinstone, 2005c). Ralstonia solanacearum race 3 infects several 

major commercial hosts (potato, tomato, pepper, geranium) that grow throughout the United 

States in field or greenhouse locations (CPC, 2005). The bacterium also infects numerous weed 

hosts in which it survives until susceptible cultivated crops or ornamental hosts become available 

(Janse et al., 2004). It is rated high for this risk element.

2.7.6. Come into contact with host material suitable for reproduction

Assessment of the probability that a plant pest will come into contact with host material must 

take into account not only the availability, in time and space, of its host plants and of the 

particular plant parts fed upon or used for reproduction, but also the pest’s inherent powers of 

movement allowing it to find and colonize hosts successfully during the limited period of time, 

in which it remains viable. Although hosts of several of the pests include wild or cultivated 

species, such as those in the genera Prunus and Solanum, which have extensive distributions 

(including southern regions) in the United States (NASS, 2003; USDA-NRCS, 2005), their 

presence in areas of potential pest establishment, by itself, has little relevance to an assessment 

of a pest’s prospects for successful host finding.

Because tomatoes will be imported for consumption only, the fruits would be expected to have a 

limited chance of introduction directly into the natural or agricultural environments, in which

hosts might be found. The PIN 309 database, maintained by APHIS, provides a record of 

interceptions at U.S. ports of quarantine pests on various commodities (fruits and vegetables). As 

only a small percentage of goods passing through the ports is inspected, a reasonable assumption 

is that at least some of these pests also are present in the many more items that are entering the 

country without inspection, and are thus presented with opportunities to become established. Yet, 

there is no record of establishment for many of these pests. For example, since 1984, Mamestra

brassicae and Helicoverpa armigera have been intercepted at U.S. ports at least 983 and 307
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 41 July 20, 2010

times, respectively, on various commodities for consumption (PIN 309). During that period, 

neither moth has succeeded in becoming established.

Superimposed on the question of host access is that concerning the influence many of the 

mortality factors (e.g., predators; inclement weather) present in any environment (and the 

stochasticity often operating in these; Mack et al., 2000) would have on the probability that a

small animal, such as an insect, would survive long enough to encounter hosts. In a study of the 

success of various groups of invading organisms, Williamson & Fitter (1996) found that no 

greater than 1% of insects introduced into a new region became established. For the above 

reasons, risk that they will come into contact with host material is estimated to be medium for 

most of the pests, with the following exception. Thrips palmi is established in Florida (Nakahara, 

1994). That this species has a high probability of coming into contact with host material suitable 

for reproduction is demonstrated clearly by the fact that it already has done so. Risk, therefore, is 

estimated to be high.

Disposal of infested host material near agricultural areas, greenhouses, or unmanaged 

ecosystems could open pathways to other susceptible hosts, such as cultivated potato, tomato, 

and pepper or weed hosts. Ralstonia solanacearum race 3, biovar 2 survives in soil in association 

with plant debris, with roots of weed hosts (Hayward, 1991) or in a viable, but non-culturable 

state (Grey and Steck, 2001). In geranium production, ebb and flow irrigation systems in 

greenhouses are conducive to disease development (NAPPO, 2001). The main path for 

international spread is by infected plant parts. Ralstonia can easily be spread by water in field 

and greenhouse settings (Janse et al., 2004). It is rated high for this risk element.

Table 6. Likelihood of Introduction

Pest Quantity 

imported

Survive 

post-harvest 

treatment

Survive 

shipment

Not 

detected at 

POE

Moved to 

suitable 

habitat

Contact

with host 

material 

Cumulative

Rating

Bactrocera depressa Low (1) High (3) High (3) Med (2) Med (2) Med (2) Medium (13)

Helicoverpa 

armigera

Low (1) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) Med (2) Medium (14)

Helicoverpa assulta Low (1) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) Med (2) Medium (14)

Mamestra brassicae Low (1) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) Med (2) Medium (14)

Ostrinia furnacalis Low (1) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) Med (2) Medium (14)

Ralstonia 

solanacearum 

race 3, biovar 2

Low (1) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (16)

Scirtothrips dorsalis Low (1) Med (2) High (3) Med (2) Med (2) Med (2) Medium (12)

Thrips palmi Low (1) Med (2) High (3) Med (2) Med (2) High (3) Medium (13)

2.8. Conclusion

The summation of the values for the Consequences of Introduction and the Likelihood of 

introduction yields Pest Risk Potential values (USDA, 2000) (Table 7). This is an estimate of the 

risks associated with this importation.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 42 July 20, 2010

Pests with a Pest Risk Potential value of Low do not require specific mitigation measures, 

whereas a value within the Medium range indicates that specific phytosanitary measures may be 

necessary. The PPQ Guidelines state that a High Pest Risk Potential means that specific 

phytosanitary measures are strongly recommended, and that port-of-entry inspection is not 

considered sufficient to provide phytosanitary security. The choice of appropriate measures to 

mitigate risk is undertaken as part of Risk Management and is not addressed in this document.

Table 7. Pest Risk Potential

Pest species Consequences of 

Introduction

Likelihood of 

Introduction

Pest Risk 

Potential

Bactrocera depressa High (14) Medium (13) High (27)

Helicoverpa armigera High (15) Medium (14) High (29)

Helicoverpa assulta High (15) Medium (14) High (29)

Mamestra brassicae High (15) Medium (14) High (29)

Ostrinia furnacalis High (14) Medium (14) High (28)

Ralstonia solanacearum race 3, biovar 2 High (14) High (16) High45 (30)

Scirtothrips dorsalis High (14) Medium (12) Medium (26)

Thrips palmi High (13) Medium (13) Medium (26)

3. Literature Cited

Aheer, G.M., Muhammad Latif, and Muhammad Saeed. 1998. Quantitative losses of tomato 

fruits caused by tomato fruit borer, Heliothis armigera (Hb.). Pakistan Entomologist 

20(1/2): 87-88. [CAB Abstracts 2005/03-2005/07]

Alippi, A.M., Bó, E.D., Ronco, L.B., Casanova, P.E., and Aguilar, O.M. 1997. Tomato as a new 

host of Erwinia carotovora subsp. carotovora in Argentina. Plant Disease. 81(2): 230.

Allen, C. 2005. Email from C. Allen, Dept. Plant Pathology and Women’s Studies Program, 

Univ. Wisconsin-Madison to S. Redlin, 3/31/05.

Anonymous. 1998. List of Plant Diseases in Korea. 3rd Edition. Korean Society of Plant 

Pathology. 436 pp.

Arnett, R.H., Jr. 2000. American Insects: A Handbook of the Insects of America North of 

Mexico, 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

ARS. 1990. USDA plant hardiness zone map. USDA, Agric. Research Serv. Misc. Publ. No.

1475. Washington, DC. <http://www.usna.usda.gov/Hardzone/ushzmap.html?> last 

accessed, 11 August 2005.

Auclair, A.N.D., Fowler, G., Hennessey, G., M.K., Hogue, A.T., Keena, M., Lance, D.R.,

McDowell, R.M., Oryang, D.O. and Sawyer, A.J. 2005. Assessment of the risk of 

introduction of Anplophora glabripennis (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in municipal solid 

waste from the quarantine area of New York City to landfills outside of the quarantine 

 

45 Adherence to “Guidelines for Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk Assessments, Version 5.02” (USDA, 2000) required

that Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3/ Biovar 2 be analyzed. However, as discussed in Appendix 1, the pathogen 

actually has a Low likelihood of becoming established via this pathway.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 43 July 20, 2010

area: a pathway analysis of the risk of spread and establishment. J. Econ. Entomol.. 

98:47-60.

Avidov, Z. and I. Harpaz. 1969. Plant Pests of Israel. Jerusalem: Israel Univ. Press.

Ball, G.A. 2005. Personal communication. E-mail from G. Ball, Acting Area Director, USDA, 

APHIS, IS, Seoul, Korea to A. Belano, Import Specialist, USDA, APHIS, PPQ. 13 June 

2005.

Bartz, J. 1979. An outbreak of soft rot in commercial tomato fruit caused by a complex of 

pectolytic bacteria. Phytopathology 69: 1021.

Bartz, J. A., Eayre, C. G., Mahovic, M. J., Concelmo, D. E., Brecht, J. K., and Sargent, S. A.

2001. Chlorine concentration and the inoculation of tomato fruit in packinghouse dump 

tanks. Plant Dis. 85: 885-889.

Beltrami, G., M. Piazzi, and A. Vacchi. 2004. How to combat defoliating noctuids in beet. 

Informatore Agrario 60(18): 103-106. [CAB Abstracts 2004/01-2005/02]

Ben-Dov, Y., D.R. Miller, and G.A.P. Gibson. 2005. ScaleNet; 

http://198.77.169.79/scalenet/scalenet.htm [accessed August 2005].

Bernoux, J.Y. 2002. Dolycoris baccarum. Arthropods: Hétéroptères: Bugs. ChampYves: 

Mushrooms; http://champignon.champyves.free.fr/FicsHtml/I_dolycoris.htm [accessed 

August 2005].

Blancard, D. 1992. A color atlas of tomato diseases: observation, identification and control.

Manson Publish., London, UK. 212 pp.

Bolland, H.R., Guitierrez, J., and Flechtmann, C.H.W. 1998. World Catalogue of the Spider Mite 

Family (Acari: Tetranychidae). Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. 392 pp. 

Boerema, G. H., DeGruyter, J. Noordeloos, M. E. and Hamers, M. E. C. 2004. Phoma

identification manual: differentiation of specific and intra-specific taxa in culture. CABI 

Publishing.

Borror, D.J., C.A. Triplehorn, and N.F. Johnson. 1989. An Introduction to the Study of Insects, 

6th ed. Fort Worth, TX: Saunders College Publ.

Bournier, J.P. 1986. On the geographical distribution of Thrips palmi Karny. Cot. Fib. Trop. 

41(1): 59-61.

Bouzar, H., Jones, J.B., Stall, R.E., Hodge, N.C., Minsavage, G.V., Benedict, A.A., and Alvarez, 

A.M. 1994. Physiological, chemical, serological, and pathogenic analyses of a worldwide 

collection of Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria strains. Phytopathology, 

84(7):663-671.

Brandsaeter, L.O., J. Netland, and R. Meadow. 1998. Yields, weeds, pests and soil nitrogen in a 

white cabbage-living mulch system. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 16(3): 291-

309. [CAB Abstracts 1999]

Brodie, B.B., Evans, K., and Franco, J. 1993. Nematode parasites of potatoes, pp. 87-132. In

Evans, K., Trudgill, D.L., and Webster, J.M. (eds.). Plant Parasitic Nematodes in 

Temperate Agriculture. CAB International. Cambridge, UK. 648 pages.

Brunt, A., Crabtree, K., Dallwitz, M., Gibbs, A., Watson, L. and Zurcher, E. (eds.) (1996a -

onwards). Alfalfa Mosaic Virus. In: Plant Viruses Online: Descriptions and Lists from 

the VIDE Database. Version: 20th August 1996. Website:

http://image.fs.uidaho.edu/vide/descr009.htm Last accessed Aug 29, 2005. 

Brunt, A., Crabtree, K., Dallwitz, M., Gibbs, A., Watson, L. and Zurcher, E. (eds.) (1996b -

onwards). Beet Curly Top Virus. In: Plant Viruses Online: Descriptions and Lists from 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 44 July 20, 2010

the VIDE Database. Version: 20th August 1996.

http://image.fs.uidaho.edu/vide/descr081.htm Last accessed Aug 29, 2005.

Brunt, A., Crabtree, K., Dallwitz, M., Gibbs, A., Watson, L. and Zurcher, E. (eds.) (1996c -

onwards). Peanut Stunt Virus. In: Plant Viruses Online: Descriptions and Lists from the 

VIDE Database. Version: 20th August 1996.

http://image.fs.uidaho.edu/vide/descr585.htm Accessed Aug 28, 2005.

Brunt, A., Crabtree, K., Dallwitz, M., Gibbs, A., Watson, L. and Zurcher, E. (eds.) (1996d -

onwards). Potato Virus Y. In: Plant Viruses Online: Descriptions and Lists from the 

VIDE Database. Version: 20th August 1996. 

http://image.fs.uidaho.edu/vide/descr652.htm Accessed Aug 28, 2005.

Brunt, A., Crabtree, K., Dallwitz, M., Gibbs, A., Watson, L. and Zurcher, E. (eds.) (1996e -

onwards). Tobacco Mosaic Virus - Satellivirus. In: Plant Viruses Online: Descriptions 

and Lists from the VIDE Database. Version: 20th August 1996. 

http://image.fs.uidaho.edu/vide/descr802.htm Accessed Aug 28, 2005.

Brunt, A., Crabtree, K., Dallwitz, M., Gibbs, A., Watson, L. and Zurcher, E. (eds.) (1996f -

onwards). Tobacco Mosaic Virus. In: Plant Viruses Online: Descriptions and Lists from 

the VIDE Database. Version: 20th August 1996.

http://image.fs.uidaho.edu/vide/descr803.htm Accessed Aug 28, 2005.

Brunt, A., Crabtree, K., Dallwitz, M., Gibbs, A., Watson, L. and Zurcher, E. (eds.) (1996g -

onwards). Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus. In: Plant Viruses Online: Descriptions and Lists 

from the VIDE Database. Version: 20th August 1996.

http://image.fs.uidaho.edu/vide/descr837.htm Accessed Aug 28, 2005.

Bues, R., H.S. Poitout, and J.F. Toubon. 1988. Utilization in the framework of reasoned control, 

sex pheromones of four species of Noctuidae (Mamestra brassicae L., Scotia segetum

Schiff., Scotia ipsilon Hfn., Heliothis armigera Hbn.). Colloques de l’INRA (46): 139-

156. [CAB Abstracts 1989]

CABI. 2004. Crop Protection Compendium, Global Module, 2004 Edition. CAB International, 

Wallingford, United Kingdom. [CD-ROM]

Carrol, L.E., I.M. White, A. Friedberg, A.L. Norrbom, M.J. Dallwitz, and F.C. Thompson. 2002.

Bactrocera depressa (Shiraki). Pest Fruit Flies of the World: Descriptions, Illustrations, 

Identification, and Information Retrieval. Version: 8th August 2002; 

http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/Diptera/tephriti/pests/adults/www/bac_depr.htm [accessed 

September 2005].

Carter, D.J. 1984. Pest Lepidoptera of Europe. Junk, Dordrecht. 431 pp.

Caruso, P., Bertolini, E. Cambra, and López, M. M. 2003. A new and sensitive cooperational 

polymerase chain reaction for rapid detection of Ralstonia solancearum in water. Journal 

of Microbiological Methods 55: 257-272.

Caruso, P., Palomo, J. L., Bertolini, E., Alvarez, B., Lopez, M. M. and E. G. Biosca. 2005.

Seasonal variation of Ralstonia solanacearum Biovar 2 populations in a Spanish river: 

recovery of stressed cells at low temperatures. Applied and Environmental Microbiology

71: 140-148.

Catindig, J.L.A. and Heong, K.L. 2003. Stem Borers. Rice Doctor Fact Sheets. International Rice 

Research Institute;

http://www.knowledgebank.irri.org/riceDoctor_MX/default.htm#Welcome_to_Rice_Doc

tor.htm [accessed September 2005].
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 45 July 20, 2010

Chang, M.U., and Chung, J.D. 1987. Studies on viruses isolated from Lilium spp. in Korea. I. 

Broad bean wilt virus and cucumber mosaic virus. Korean Journal of Plant Pathology

3(3): 233-235.

Chang, N.T. 1991. Important thrips species in Taiwan, pp. 40-56. In N.S. Talekar (ed.). Thrips in 

Southeast Asia (AVRDC Publ. No. 91-342). Tainan, Taiwan: Asian Vegetable Research 

& Development Center.

Chapman, R.F. 1998. The Insects: Structure and Function, 4th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. 

Press.

Chary, S.J., Kumar, B.P., and Reddy, S.M. 1980. Hitherto unrecorded post-harvest diseases of 

tomato. Indian Phytopathology, 33(4): 624-625.

Chellemi, D.O., Dankers, H.A., Hill, K., Cullen, R.E., Simone, G.W., Gooch, M.D., and 

Allingham, J.E. 1998. Occurrence of bacterial stem rot, caused by Erwinia chrysanthemi, 

on field-grown tomato in Florida. Plant Disease 82(7):831.

Childers, C.C. 1997. Feeding and oviposition injuries to plants, pp. 505-537. In T. Lewis (ed.). 

Thrips As Crop Pests. Wallingford, U.K.: CAB International.

Cho, H.S., and Yu, S.H. 1998. Stemphylium vesicarium on garlic and other Allium spp. in Korea. 

Korean Journal of Plant Pathology14(6): 567-570.

Cho, W.D., and Shin, H.D., Eds. 2004. List of plant diseases in Korea. Fourth edition. Korean 

Society of Plant Pathology, 779 pages.

Cho, H.J., Kim, C.H., Park, J.S., and Jeoung, M.G. 1987. Distribution of root-knot nematodes, 

Meloidogyne spp. and their races in economic crops in Korea. Korean Journal of Plant 

Pathology 3(3):159-163.

Choi, Y.E. 1975. A taxonomical and morphological study of plant parasitic nematodes 

(Tylenchida) in Korea. Korean Journal of Plant Protection 14(4): 1-19.

Choi, Y.E. 1981. The root-knot nematodes, Meloidogyne spp., in Korea. Proceedings of the 3rd 

Research Planning Conference on root-knot nematodes, Meloidogyne spp., Region VI, 

20-24 July 1981, Jakarta, Indonesia.

Choi, D.-S., K.-C. Kim, and K.-C. Lim. 2000. The status of spot damage and fruit piercing pests 

on yuzu (Citrus junos) fruit. Korean Journal of Applied Entomology 39(4): 259-266. 

[CAB Abstracts 2001].

Choi, J.E. and Han, K.S. 1989. Studies on the bacterial soft rot disease of Liliaceae crops in 

Korea 2. Soft rot of garlic caused by Erwinia. Korean Journal of Plant Pathology 5(3):

271-276.

Choi, J.E. and Han, K.S. 1990. Bacterial fruit rot of pineapple by Erwinia chrysanthemi. Korean 

Journal of Plant Pathology 6(3):425-427.

Choi, J.E. and Kim, H.Y. 1989. Identification of bacteria causing rot disease of vegetables in the 

fields and post-harvest period in Korea. IV. Bacterial rot disease of lettuce. Korean 

Journal of Plant Pathology 5(1):65-71.

Choi, J.E., Park, J.S., and Kang, H.W. 1988. Bacterial soft rot of banana fruit caused by Erwinia

carotovora subsp. carotovora and Pseudomonas cichorii. Korean Journal of Plant 

Pathology 4(3): 202-206.

Choi, S.H., Kim, Y.T., Lee, K.H., and Kim, C.U. 1990. The shoot and stem rot of mulberry 

caused by Erwinia rhapontici. Korean Journal of Plant Pathology 6(1): 106-112.

Choi, S.K., Choi, J.K., Ryu, K.H., and Park, W.M. 2001. Generation of infectious cDNA clones 

of a Korean strain of tomato aspermy virus. Molecules and Cells 13(1): 52-60. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 46 July 20, 2010

Choi, Y.E., Cho, M.R., and Moon, Y.S. 1992. Nematodes associated with forest trees in Korea. I. 

Studies on nematodes associated with saplings. Korean Journal of Applied Entomology

31(1): 50-68.

Choo, H. Y., Kim, H. K., Park, J. C., Lee, S.M. and Lee, J. I. 1987. Studies on the patterns of 

plastic film house, their growing conditions and disease and pest occurrence on 

horticultural crops in southern part of Korea. Insects and nematodes associated with 

horticultural crops and effect of nursery soil conditions on the infection of root-knot 

nematode. Korean Journal of Plant Protection 26: 195-201.

Chung, B.K., Shim, J.S., Sung, J.-M., Heo, N.Y., and Park, I.S. 1982. An investigation on 

ascospore flight of the wheat scab fungus (Gibberella zeae) as a primary inoculum. 

Korean Journal of Mycology 10(2): 85-88.

Chung, B.K. 1993. Recent studies on fungal diseases of red pepper and oyster mushroom in 

Korea. Role of fungi as frontiers of biosciences: proceedings of the Asian Mycological 

Symposium in commemoration of the 20th anniversary of Korean Society of Mycology, 

October 1-4 1992, Seoul, Korea Seoul, Korea, Korean Society of Mycology, pp. 173-185.

Cillo, F., Finetti-Sialer, M.M., Papanice, M.A. and Gallitelli, D. 2004. Analysis of mechanisms 

involved in the cucumber mosaic virus satellite RNA-mediated transgenic resistance in 

tomato plants. Molecular Plant Microbe Interactions 17: 98-108.

Clausen, C.P. 1978. Thripidae, pp. 19-21. In C.P. Clausen (ed.). Introduced parasites and 

predators of arthropod pests and weeds: a world review. USDA Agric. Handbk. 480.

Cobanoglu, S. 1995. Some new Tarsonemidae (Acarina, Prostigmata) species for Turkish 

acarofauna. Turkiye Entomoloji Dergisi 19(2): 87-94. [CAB Abstracts 1996]

Cohen, M.B., A.M. Romena, and F. Gould. 2000. Dispersal by larvae of the stem borers 

Scirpophaga incertulas (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) and Chilo suppressalis (Lepidoptera: 

Crambidae) in plots of transplanted rice. Environmental Entomology 29(5): 958-971.

Colin J.E. 1986. Identification and characterization of Pseudomonas viridiflava (Burkholder) 

Dowson isolated from greasy cankers of wilting tomato plants in Morocco. Parasitica 

42(3): 93-95.

Coutinho, T.A. 2005. Introduction and prospectus of the survival of R. solanacearum. pp 29-38.

In Bacterial Wilt Disease and the Ralstonia solanacearum Species Complex. Allen, C., 

Prior, P., and Hayward, A.C. (eds.). The American Phytopathological Society, St Paul, 

MN. 510 p.

CPC. 2005. Crop Protection Compendium. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau International. 

Wallingford, United Kingdom. Online database. http://www.cabicompendium.org/cpc

CSHS. 2005. Grasshopper. Global Learning and Observation to Benefit Environment. Cheju 

Science High School; [accessed August 2005].

Dale, P.S., J.C. Hayes, and J. Johannesson. 1976. New records of plant pests in New Zealand. 

New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 19(2): 265-269. [CAB Abstracts 1976-

1978]

Dillard, H.R., Cobb, A.C., Garman, W.C., and Brewer, R. 1995. First report of zonate leaf spot 

on tomato, caused by Cristulariella moricola, in New York. Plant Disease 79: 319.

Dong, B., X. Li, and D. Gao. 2001. Study on release of Trichogramma chilonis Ishii for the 

control of Chilo suppressalis. Plant Protection 27(4): 45-46. [CAB Abstracts 2002]

Duffus, J.E. 1986. Beet curly top, pp 31-32. In: Whitney ED, Duffus JE, eds. Compendium of

Beet Diseases and Insects. St. Paul, MN: American Phytopathological Society Press.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 47 July 20, 2010

Ebert, G. 1973. The rice stem borer Chilo suppressalis Walker (Lep./Pyral.), a new pest for Iran. 

Entomologie et Phytopathologie Appliquees (35): 1-25. [CAB Abstracts 1972-1975]

El-Kady, E., A. Badawi, and F.A. Herakly. 1974. Population studies on different species of leafhoppers infesting certain truck crops in Egypt. Bulletin de la Societe Entomologique 

d’Egypte 57: 387-400.

El-Sherif, A.G. and Elwakil, M.A. 1991. Interaction between Meloidogyne incognita and 

Agrobacterium tumefaciens or Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. lycopersici on tomato. Journal 

of Nematology, 23(2):239-242.

Elphinstone, J. 2005a. Email from J. Elphinstone, CSL, United Kingdom to S. Redlin, 4/6/05. 

Elphinstone, J. 2005b. Email from J. Elphinstone, CSL, United Kingdom to S. Redlin, 4/8/05, 

(reference to his unpublished studies of infected tomato plants placed in compost in 

Egypt).

Elphinstone, J. 2005c. The current bacterial wilt situation: a global overview. pp 9-28. In Allen, 

C., P. Prior, and A. C. Hayward (eds.). Bacterial wilt disease and the Ralstonia 

solanacearum complex. American Phytopathological Soc. Press, St. Paul. 510 pp.

EPA. 2004. Primer for Municipal Waste Water Treatment Systems. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Water Management. Public. EPA 832-R-04-001. 30 pp.

EPPO. 1997. Quarantine Pests for Europe. CAB International, Wallingford. 1425 pp.

EPPO. 2003. EPPO Plant Quarantine Information Retrieval System (PQR), Ver. 4.2. Paris: 

European & Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization.

EPPO. 2005a. Chrysodeixis eriosoma (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae): green semi-looper. EPPO Alert 

List. European & Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization; 

http://www.eppo.org/QUARANTINE/Alert_List/insects/chrxer.htm [accessed September 

2005].

EPPO. 2005b. Datasheet on Quarantine Pests: Xanthomonas vesicatoria. Website:

http://www.eppo.org/QUARANTINE/QP_bacteria.htm Last accessed Aug 28, 2005.

EPPO. 2005c. Datasheet on Quarantine Pests: Tomato Ringspot Nepovirus. Website:

http://www.eppo.org/QUARANTINE/QP_virus.htm Last accessed Aug 28, 2005.

EPPO. 2005d. Datasheet on Quarantine Pests: Heterodera glycines. Website:

http://www.eppo.org/QUARANTINE/Alert_List/nematodes/hetdgl.htm Last accessed, 

Aug 29, 2005.

EPPO. 2005e. Datasheet on Quarantine Pests: Ralstonia solanacearum (race 2 and race 3).

Website: http://www.eppo.org/QUARANTINE/QP_bacteria.htm Last accessed, Aug 30, 

2005.

ERS (Economic Research Service, USDA and Bureau of Census, US Dept of Commerce.), 2005.

Tomatoes, fresh-market: Import and export volume, 1970-2005.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Tomatoes/trade.htm Last accessed Sept 2, 2005.

Erwin, D.C., and Ribeiro, O.K. 1996. Phytophthora Diseases Worldwide. APS Press, St. Paul, 

Minnesota, 562 pages.

Euzéby, J.P. 2005. List of prokaryotic names with standing in nomenclature (updated July 13, 

2005). URL: http://www.bacterio.net.

Evans, F. 1989. A list of the insects recorded from Evans’ old field, E.S. George Reserve, 

Livingston County, Michigan. E.S. George Reserve Biodiversity;

http://www.ummz.lsa.umich.edu/esgr/biota/EOFFAUNATXT.html [accessed September 

2005].
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 48 July 20, 2010

Evans, K., Trudgill, D.L., and Webster, J.M. 1993. Plant Parasitic Nematodes in Temperate 

Agriculture. CAB International. Cambridge, UK. 648 pages.

Farooq Ahmad. 1998. Plant protection strategies for cotton in Pakistan. Pakistan Entomologist 

20(1/2): 110-115. [CAB Abstracts 2005/03-2005/07]

Farr, D. F., Rossman, A.Y., Palm, M.E., & McCray, E.B. (n.d.) 2005. Fungal Databases, 

Systematic Botany & Mycology Laboratory, ARS, USDA. Retrieved Aug 28, 2005, from 

http://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/

Ferguson, D.C., C.E. Harp, P.A. Opler, R.S. Peigler, M. Pogue, J.A. Powell, and M.J. Smith. 

1999. Moths of North America. Jamestown, ND: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research 

Center; http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/distr/lepid/moths/mothsusa.htm (Version

12DEC2003) [accessed August 2005].

Fletcher, B.S. 1987. The biology of dacine fruit flies. Annual Review of Entomology 32: 115-

144.

Fletcher, B.S. 1989a. Life history strategies of tephritid fruit flies, pp. 195-208. In A.S. Robinson 

and G. Hooper (eds.). Fruit Flies: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control. (World 

Crop Pests, Vol. 3B). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Fletcher, B.S. 1989b. Movements of tephritid fruit flies, pp. 209-219. In A.S. Robinson and G. 

Hooper (eds.). Fruit Flies: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control. (World Crop 

Pests, Vol. 3B). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Forbush, E.H. and C.H. Fernald. 1896. The Gypsy Moth, Porthetria dispar (Linn.): A Report of 

the Work of Destroying the Insect in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Together 

with an Account of its History and Habits Both in Massachusetts and Europe. Boston: 

Wright & Potter Printing Co.

Frazer, J.T. and Zitter, T.A. 2003. Two species of Alternaria cause early blight of potato, 

(Solanum tuberosum) and tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum). Phytopathology 93: S27.

French, A.M. 1989. California Plant Disease Host Index. Calif. Dept. Food Agric., Sacramento, 

394 pages.

French, E. R. 1995. Interaction between strains of Ralstonia solanacearum, its hosts and the 

environment, pp. 94-104. In: Pentley, G. J., (ed.), Bacterial wilt disease in Asia and the 

South Pacific. ACYAR Proc., Canberra.

Fuchs, M., Provvidenti, R., Slightom, J.L., and Gonsalves, D. 1996. Evaluation of transgenic 

tomato plants expressing the coat protein gene of cucumber mosaic virus strain WL under 

field conditions. Plant Disease 80(3): 270-275.

Gitaitis, R.D., Jones, J.B., Jaworski, C.A., and Phatak, S.C., 1985. Incidence and development of 

Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae on tomato transplants in Georgia. Plant Disease 

69(1): 32-35.

Gould, J., Venette, R. and Seltzer, J. 2004. The pathways followed by fresh produce in the 

United States and how they impact the risk of establishment for exotic pests. Unpublished 

APHIS poster.

Grey, B.E. and Steck, T.R. 2001. The viable but nonculturable state of Ralstonia solanacearum

may be involved in long-term survival and plant infection. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 67, 

3866-3872.

Gunn, C.R. and Ritchie, C.A. 1982. 1982 Report of the Technical Committee to Evaluate 

Noxious Weeds; Exotic Weeds for the Federal Noxious Weed Act. (unpublished). 335 

pp.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 49 July 20, 2010

Haghighian, F. and S.E. Sadeghi. 2001. Report of Empoasca (Asymmetrasca) decedens Paoli, 

1932 (Hom.: Cicadellidae) from Iran. Journal of Entomological Society of Iran 21(2): 

109-110. [CAB Abstracts 2004/01-2005/02]

Hahm, Y.I., Cheong, S.R., Park, C.S., Ryu, O.H., Hahn, B.H., and Kim, J.G. 1991. Application 

of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the detection of potato viruses in Korea. 

Research Reports of the Rural Development Administration, Horticulture 33(3): 91-97.

Han, M.-J., S.-H. Lee, S.-B. Ahn, J.-Y. Choi, and K.-M. Choi. 1994. Distribution, damage and 

host plants of pumpkin fruit fly, Paradacus depressus (Shiraki). RDA Journal of 

Agricultural Science 36(1): 346-350.

Handoo, Z.A., and Ellington, D. 2005. USDA Nematode Collection Database. Website:

http://www.nem.barc.usda.gov/database/search.cfm Last accessed Aug 29, 2005.

Hardy, D.E. 1965. Insects of Hawaii. Vol. 12. Diptera: Cyclorrhapha II, Series Schizophora. 

Section Acalypterae I. Family Drosophilidae. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

Hartman, G.L., Hong, W.F. and Wang, T.C. 1991. Survey of bacterial wilt on fresh market 

hybrid tomatoes in Taiwan. Plant Protection Bulletin 33: 197-203.

Hassan, S., Thomas, P.E., Mink, G.I. 1985. Tomato yellow top virus: host range, 

symptomatology, transmission, and variability. Phytopathology 75(3): 287-291.

Hayward, A.C. 1991. Biology and epidemiology of bacterial wilt caused by Pseudomonas

solanacearum. Annual Review of Phytopathology 29: 65-87.

Hayward, A.C. and Hartman, G.L. (Eds.) 1994. Bacterial wilt: the disease and its causative 

agent, Pseudomonas solanacearum. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.

Hennessey, M.K. and S.C. Redlin. 2005. Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3 Biovar 2 Likelihood of 

Entry, Introduction, and Establishment, and Mitigation Recommendations: Supplement to 

the USDA-APHIS Pest Risk Assessment Importation of fresh paprika pepper fruit 

(Capsicum annuum L. var. annuum) from the Republic of South Korea into the 

continental United States. USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST-PERAL Ad Hoc Report. 10 pp.

Hill, D.S. 1983. Agricultural Insect Pests of the Tropics and Their Control, 2nd ed. Cambridge: 

Cambridge Univ. Press.

Hill, D.S. 1987. Agricultural Insect Pests of Temperate Regions and Their Control. Cambridge: 

Cambridge Univ. Press.

Hirai, K., Y. Miyakawa, and H. Takeuchi. 1996. Parasitization efficacy and movement distance 

by Trichogramma dendrolimi Matsumura on green peppers in a vinyl house. Proceedings 

of the Kanto-Tosan Plant Protection Society (43): 217-219. [CAB Abstracts 1997]

Hirose, Y., H. Kajita, M. Takagi, S. Okajima, B. Napompeth, and S. Buranapanichpan. 1993. 

Natural enemies of Thrips palmi and their effectiveness in the native habitat, Thailand. 

Biological Control 3(1): 1-5.

Holm, L., Doll, J., Holm, E., Pancho, J. and Herberger, J. 1997. World Weeds: Natural Histories 

and Distribution. New York: J. Wiley and Sons. 1129 pp.

Holm, L., Pancho, J.V., Herberger, J.P. and D.L. Plucknett. 1979. A Geographical Atlas of 

World Weeds. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Holm, L., Plucknett, D.L., Pancho, J.V. and J.P. Herberger. 1977. The World's Worst Weeds.

Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.

Hong, C. X. and Moorman, G. W. 2005. Plant pathogens in irrigation water: Challenges and 

opportunities. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 24: 189-208.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 50 July 20, 2010

Hong, J. K., and Hwang, B. K. 1998. Influence of inoculum density, wetness duration, plant age,

inoculation method, and cultivar resistance on infection of pepper plants by

Colletotrichum coccodes. Plant Disease 82: 1079-1083.

Hunt, D.J. 1993. Aphelenchida, Longidoridae, and Trichodoridae. CAB International, 

Cambridge, UK. 352 pages.

Ibe, S.N. and Grogan, R.G. 1983. Effect of controlled oxygen and carbon dioxide atmospheres 

on bacterial growth rate and soft rot of tomato fruits caused by Pseudomonas marginalis. 

Plant Disease 67(9): 1005-1008.

ICTVdB. 2002. Last updated 2004. International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses.

http://phene.cpmc.columbia.edu/ Last accessed Aug 29, 2005. 

ICTVdB. (The Universal Virus Database) 2004a. International Committee on Taxonomy of 

Viruses. 64.0.4.2.003 Tobacco mosaic virus satellite. Website:

http://www.ictvdb.rothamsted.ac.uk/ICTVdB/64042003.htm Last accessed Aug 28, 2005.

ICTVdB. (The Universal Virus Database) 2004b. International Committee on Taxonomy of 

Viruses. 10.0.4.0.003 Tomato aspermy virus. Website:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ICTVdb/ICTVdB/10040003.htm Last accessed Aug 28, 

2005. 

Index Fungorum, 2005. Website: www.indexfungorum.org Last accessed Aug 29, 2005.

Custodians of Site: CABI Bioscience, CBS and Landcare Research.

IPPC. 1996. Guidelines for pest risk analysis. International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures

Publication No. 2. Rome: Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention, 

United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.

IPPC. 2001. Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests. International Standards for Phytosanitary

Measures Publication No. 11. Rome: Secretariat of the International Plant Protection 

Convention, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.

IPPC. 2002. Glossary of phytosanitary terms. International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures 

Publication No. 5. Rome: Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention, 

United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.

ISPI. 2005. Atractomorpha lata (Motschulsky). ISPI Databases of Literature on Locusts and 

Grasshoppers (Acrididae). International Society for Pest Information; 

http://www.pestinfo.org/Literature/lit95.htm [accessed September 2005].

Jaegle, M., Devic, M., Longstaff, M., and Baulcombe, D. 1990. Cucumber mosaic virus satellite 

RNA (Y strain): analysis of sequences which affect yellow mosaic symptoms on tobacco. 

Journal of General Virology 71(9): 1905-12.

Janse, J.D. 1996. Potato brown rot in Western Europe – history, present occurrence and some 

remarks on possible origin, epidemiology and control strategies. Bull. OEPP, 26, 679-

695.

Janse, J.D., van den Beld, H.E., Elphinstone, J., Simpkins, S., Tjou-Tam-Sin, N.N.A, and van 

Vaerenbergh, J. 2004. Introduction to Europe of Ralstonia solanacearum Biovar 2, Race 

3 in Pelargonium zonale cuttings. Journal of Plant Pathology 86(2): 147-155.

Janse, J. D., van den Beld, H. E., Elphinstone, J., Simpkins, S., Tjou-Tam-Sin, L. N. A., and van 

Vaerenbergh, J.. 2005. Introduction into Europe of Ralstonia solanacearum Biovar 2, 

Race 3 in Pelargonium zonale cuttings from Kenya : pp 81-91. In: Allen, C., P. Prior, and 

A. C. Hayward (eds.). Bacterial wilt disease and the Ralstonia solanacearum complex.

American Phytopathological Soc. Press, St. Paul. 510 pp.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 51 July 20, 2010

Jensen, A.S., G.L. Miller, and M.B. Stoetzel. 2005. Aulacorthum solani Kaltenbach 1843. 

Aphidoidea World Wide Web Page. USDA Systematic Entomology Laboratory; 

http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/aphid/aphid_db.html [accessed August 2005].

Jeong, Y., Kim, J., Kim, S., Kang, Y., Nagamatsu, T., and Hwang, I. 2003. Toxoflavin produced 

by Burkholderia glumae causing rice grain rot is responsible for inducing bacterial wilt in 

many field crops. Plant Disease 87:890-895.

Jeppson, L.R., H.H. Keifer, and E.W. Baker. 1975. Mites Injurious to Economic Plants. 

Berkeley: Univ. of California Press.

Jin, K.S., Lee, S.W., Kim, J.J., Ryu, H.Y. 1994. Identification of bacterial isolates obtained from 

diseased orchid and aloe plants caused by Erwinia chrysanthemi. RDA Journal of 

Agricultural Science, Crop Protection 36(1): 301-306.

Jones, J.B., Engelhard, A.W., and Raju, B.C. 1983. Outbreak of a stem necrosis on 

chrysanthemum incited by Pseudomonas cichorii in Florida. Plant Disease 67(4): 431-

433.

Jones, J. B., Jones, J. P., Stall, R.E., and Zitter, T.A. 1993. Compendium of Tomato Diseases.

American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, MN. 73 pp.

Jones, J. B., Lacy, G. H., Bouzar, H., Stall, R. E. and Schaad, N. W. 2004. Reclassification of the 

Xanthomonads associated with bacterial spot disease of tomato and pepper. Systematic 

and Applied Microbiology 27: 755-762. 

Jung, H. W. and Hwang, B. K. 2000. Isolation, partial sequencing, and expression of

pathogenesis-related cDNA genes from pepper leaves infected by Xanthomonas

campestris pv. vesicatoria. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions 13(1): 136-142.

KFRI. 2000. Epilachna vigintioctomaculata. Tree Hospital. Korea Forest Research Institute; 

http://www.kfri.go.kr/treehospital/medical/InsectDetail_read.asp?insect=1&num1=07&n

um2=11&num3=0780 [accessed August 2005].

Kim, D.G., Park, D.G., Kim, S.H., Park, I.S. and S. K. Choi. 2002a. Morphology, biology and 

chemical control of tomato russet mite, Aculops lycopersici Massee (Acari: Eriophyidae) 

in Korea. Korean Journal of Applied Entomology. 41(4): 255-261. [CAB Abstracts 2003]

Kim, D.-H., J.-W. Lee, and W.-H. Park. 1987. A cytotaxonomic study of six species of the 

Korean Orthoptera. Korean Journal of Entomology 17(4): 215-223. [CAB Abstracts 

1989]

Kim, D.-H., H.-M. Kwon, and K.-S. Kim. 2000a. Current status of the occurrence of the insect 

pests in the citrus orchard in Cheju Island. Korean Journal of Applied Entomology 39(4): 

267-274. [CAB Abstracts 2001]

Kim, H.-H., H.-Y. Jeon, M.-R. Cho, C.-Y. Yang, H.-Y. Choo, H.-S. Lee, and H.-K. Rhee. 2004. 

Damage and control of Bradysia agrestis Sasakawa (Diptera: Sciaridae) in herbaceous 

flowering plants. Korean Journal of Horticulture Science and Technology 22(3): 351-357. 

[CAB Abstracts 2004/01-2005/02]

Kim, I.-S., K.-J. Hong, M.-J. Han, and M.-H. Lee. 1997. Survey on the occurrence of quarantine 

pests for export in major non-astringent persimmon (Diospyros kaki; Thunb.) production 

areas in Korea. RDA J. Crop Protect. 39(2): 67-71.

Kim, J.S., Lee, S.H., and Lee, M.W. 1988. Peanut stunt virus causing mosaic and stunting 

disease on groundnut in Korea. Korean Journal of Plant Pathology 4(2): 88-94.

Kim, T.-S., M.-S. Kwon, B.-S. Park, and H.-G. Park. 2002b. Development of hot pepper lines 

resistant to oriental tobacco budworm (Heliothis assulta) by transformation of modified 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 52 July 20, 2010

cry1Ac gene. Journal of the Korean Society for Horticultural Science 43(1): 34-38. [CAB 

Abstracts 2002]

Kim, Y.-H., J.-H. Roh, M.-K. Kim, D.-J. Im, and I.-B. Hur. 2000b. Seasonal occurrence of 

aphids and selection of insecticides for controlling aphids transmitting soybean mosaic. 

Korean Journal of Crop Science 45(6): 353-355. [CAB Abstracts 2001]

Kishun, R. 1987. Loss in yield of tomato due to bacterial wilt caused by Pseudomonas 

solanacearum. Indian Phytopathology. 40(2):152-155.

KNPQS. 2000a. List of Pests Associated with Tomatoes in Korea. Unpublished. Korea National 

Plant Quarantine Service.

KNPQS. 2000b. Information on the Estimated Export of Korean Tomatoes to the U.S. 

Unpublished. Korea National Plant Quarantine Service.

Korea. 2004. Opinion of the Government of Korea on APHIS draft PRAs on Korean paprika and 

sweet potato. 2 pp.

Kosztarab, M. 1996. Scale Insects of Northeastern North America: Identification, Biology, and 

Distribution. (Va. Mus. Nat. Hist. Spec. Publ. No. 3). Martinsville, VA: Virginia Museum 

of Natural History.

Kumar, N.K.K. 1995. Yield loss in chilli and sweet pepper due to Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood 

(Thysanoptera: Thripidae). Pest Management in Horticultural Ecosystems 1(2): 61-69. 

[CAB Abstracts 1996]

Kwon, S.W., Park, J.Y., Kim, J.S., Kang, J.W., Cho, Y.H., Lim, C.K., Parker, M.A. and Lee, 

G.B. 2005. Phylogenetic analysis of the genera Bradyrhizobium, Mesorhizobium, 

Rhizobium and Sinorhizobium on the basis of 16S rRNA gene and internally transcribed 

spacer region sequences. International Journal of Systematic Evolutionary Microbiology

55: 263-270.

Lee, Y.B. 1976. Two genera of Trichodoridae (Trichodoroidea: Nematoda) new to Korea. 

Korean Journal of Plant Protection 15(2): 75-78.

Lee, B. K., Kim, B. S., Chang, S. W., and Hwang, B. K. 2001b. Aggressiveness to pumpkin 

cultivars of isolates of Phytophthora capsici from pumpkin and pepper. Plant Disease 85: 

497-500.

Lee, E.K., Lee, Y.H., Yoo, J.D., and Long, P.G. 1975. Studies on Pythium spp. in Korea (I) 

Preliminary taxonomic and physiological studies. Korean Journal of Mycology 3(2): 7-

12.

Lee, G.-S., H.-Y. Kim, and S.-H. Lee. 2003. Taxonomic study on the Korean Terebrantia 

(Thysanoptera). RDA National Institute of Agricultural Science & Technology Research 

Report 1334: 731-751; 

http://www.niast.go.kr/WorkPds/workpdsDown.asp?idx=3393&tG=1 [accessed August 

2005].

Lee, H.-S., T.-S. Kim, H.-Y. Shin, H.-H. Kim, and K.-J. Kim. 2001a. Host plant and damage 

symptoms of fungus gnats, Bradysia spp. (Diptera: Sciaridae) in Korea. Korean Journal 

of Applied Entomology 40(2): 149-153. [CAB Abstracts 2002]

Lee, K.-W., N.R. Powers, and T.W. Walker. 1992. A preliminary survey of insects and mites 

associated with stored food products in Korea. Korean Journal of Entomology 22(1): 5-

12. [CAB Abstracts 1993-1994]

Lee, K.-Y., K.-B. Min, K.-S. Ahn, K.-S. Choi, Y.-D. Chang, and Y.-N. Youn. 1999b. 

Morphological characteristics and life cycle of Udea ferrugalis (Lepidoptera, Pyralidae) 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 53 July 20, 2010

attacking Angelica utilis. Korean Journal of Applied Entomology 38(2): 109-115. [CAB 

Abstracts 2000]

Lee, M.-L., S.-J. Suh, and Y.-J. Kwon. 1999a. Phylogeny and diagnostic markers of six 

Tetranychus species (Acarina: Tetranychidae) in Korea based on the mitochondrial 

cytochrome oxidase subunit I. Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 2(2): 85-92. [CAB 

Abstracts 2000]

Lee, S.-C., J.-K. Yoo, and C.-H. Yoo. 1970. Survey on the kinds of the fruit sucking moths and 

their damages in Korea (1). Korean Journal of Plant Protection 9(1): 37-41. [CAB 

Abstracts 1972-1975]

Lee, S.C., Park, J.B., and Davis, K.R. 1999c. Arabidopsis thaliana as a model host for studying 

symptom development during geminivirus infection. Plant Pathology Journal 15(2): 99-

104.

Lee, S. J., Lee, M. Y., Yi, S.Y., Oh, S. E., Choi, S.H., Her, N. H., Choi, D., Min, B. W., Yang, S. 

G., and Harn, C. H. 2002. A novel pathogen-induced basic region-Leucine zipper (bZIP) 

transcription factor from pepper. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions 15(6): 540-548.

Lee, S.Y., Park, S.J., and Choi, J.K. 1997. Characterization of an isolate of cucumber mosaic 

virus from forsythia (Forsythia koreana Nakai.). Korean Journal of Plant Pathology

13(5): 358-363.

Lee, U., Hong, J. S., Choi, J. K., Kim, K. C., Kim, Y. S., Curtis, I. S., Nam, H. G., and Lim, P. 

O. 2000. Broad bean wilt virus causes necrotic symptoms and generates defective RNAs 

in Capsicum annuum. Phytopathology 90: 1390-1395.

Lee, Y.B. and Han, S.C. 1976. The nematode genus Xiphinema (Dorylaimida: Longidoridae) 

from Korea. Korean Journal of Plant Protection 15(1): 17-21.

Lee, Y. H., Cho, W.D., Kim, W. K., Jin, K.S., and Lee, E.J. 1991. Report on host-unrecorded 

diseases identified from economical crops in Korea. Res. Rep. Rural Developm. Admin. 

33 : 15-19.

Lee, Y.W., Kim, J.C., Lee, D.H., Kang, H.J., and Yoshizawa, T. 1995. Natural occurrence of 

trichothecenes and zearalenone in the 1993 barley crop in Korea. Journal of the Food 

Hygienic Society of Japan 36(1): 85-88.

Lewis, T. 1973. Thrips: Their Biology, Ecology and Economic Importance. London: Academic 

Press.

Lewis, T. 1997. Flight and dispersal, pp. 175-196. In T. Lewis (ed.). Thrips As Crop Pests. 

Wallingford, U.K.: CAB International.

Li, J., G. Liu, and R. Peng. 2004. Bionomics and control of the yellow tea thrips, Scirothrips

[sic] dorsalis, infesting litchi. Entomological Knowledge 41(2): 172-173. [CAB Abstracts 

2004/01-2005/02]

Li, L.-y., R. Wang, and D.F. Waterhouse. 1997. The Distribution and Importance of Arthropod 

Pests and Weeds of Agriculture and Forestry Plantations in Southern China (ACIAR 

Monograph No. 46). Canberra: Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research.

Li, S., H. Wu, S. Liu, R. Liu, and X. Yuan. 2001. The occurrence of common green stink bug on 

apple trees and its control. China Fruits 2001(6): 31-32. [CAB Abstracts 2002]

Lim, Y. S., and Kim, B. S. 1994. Resistance to bacterial wilt in pepper (Capsicum annuum L.)

Korean Journal of Plant Pathology 10:73-77.

Lindquist, E.E. 1978. On the synonymy of Tarsonemus waitei Banks, T. setifer Ewing, and T. 

bakeri Ewing, with redescription of species (Acari: Tarsonemidae). Canadian 

Entomologist 110(10): 1023-1048.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 54 July 20, 2010

Loomans, A.J.M. and T. Murai. 1997. Culturing thrips and parasitoids, pp. 477-503. In T. Lewis 

(ed.). Thrips as Crop Pests. Wallingford, U.K.: CAB International.

Lopez-Real, J. and Foster, M. 1985. Plant pathogen survival during the composting of 

agricultural organic wastes, pp. 291-300. In: Gasser, J. K. R., (ed.), Composting of 

agricultural and other wastes. Elsevier, London. 320 pp.

Mack, R.N., D. Simberloff, W.M. Lonsdale, H. Evans, M. Clout, and F.A. Bazzaz. 2000. Biotic 

invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecol. Appl. 10(3): 

689-710.

Marcos, T.F. and R.S. Rejesus. 1992. Population dynamics of Helicoverpa spp. in tobaccogrowing areas of Ilocos Norte and La Union. Philippine Entomologist 8(6): 1227-1246. 

[CAB Abstracts 1993-1994]

Martin, M.W., and Thomas, P.E. 1986. Increased value of resistance to infection if used in 

integrated pest management control of tomato curly top. Phytopathology 76(5): 540-542.

Martins, O. M., Nabizadeh, F. and Rudilph, K. 2005. Seeds from infected tomato plants appear 

to be free from contamination by Ralstonia solanacearum when tested by PCR or 

microbiological assays: 95-100. In: Allen, C., P. Prior, and A. C. Hayward (eds.).

Bacterial wilt disease and the Ralstonia solanacearum complex. American 

Phytopathological Soc. Press, St. Paul. 510 pp.

Mason, H.C., R.T. Guest, R.T. Kwietniak, F.F. Smith, F. Gordon, Jr., and H.V. Anderson. 1976. 

Suppression of Drosophila melanogaster by direct field-released gamma-irradiated 

adults. Journal of Economic Entomology 69(3): 392-394. [CAB Abstracts 1976-1978]

Mau, R.F.L. and J.L. Martin. 1993. Hercinothrips femoralis (O.M. Reuter): banded greenhouse 

thrips. Crop Knowledge Master. University of Hawaii College of Tropical Agriculture & 

Human Resources Integrated Pest Management Program; 

http://www.extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/Type/h_femora.htm [accessed August 2005].

Mau, R.F.L. and J.L. Martin Kessing. 1993. Lipaphis erysimi (Kaltenbach): turnip aphid. Crop 

Knowledge Master. University of Hawaii College of Tropical Agriculture & Human 

Resources Integrated Pest Management Program; 

http://www.extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/Type/lipaphis.htm [accessed August 2005].

Menzel, F., J.E. Smith, and N.B. Colauto. 2003. Bradysia difformis Frey and Bradysia ocellaris

(Comstock): two additional Neotropical species of black fungus gnats (Diptera: 

Sciaridae) of economic importance: a redescription and review. Annals of the 

Entomological Society of America 96(4): 448-457.

Metcalf, C.L. , Flint, W.P., and Metcalf, R.L. 1962. Destructive and Useful Insects. McGrawHill Book Co., New York, New York. 1087 pp.

Mew, T. W., and Ho, W. C. 1977. Effect of soil temperature on resistance of tomato cultivars to 

bacterial wilt. Phytopathology 67: 909-911.

Mink, G.I. 1972. Peanut stunt virus. AAB Descriptions of Plant Viruses, 92. Website:

http://www.dpvweb.net/dpv/showadpv.php?dpvno=92 Last accessed Aug 29, 2005.

Mirzalieva, K.R. and B.T. Mirzaliev. 1988. The use of Trichogramma on tomatoes. Zashchita 

Rastenii Moskva (11): 30-31. [CAB Abstracts 1990]

Mitchell, P.L. 2000. Leaf-footed bugs (Coreidae), pp. 337-403. In C.W. Schaefer and A.R. 

Panizzi (eds.). Heteroptera of Economic Importance. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Miyazaki, M. and I. Kudo. 1988. Bibliography and host plant catalogue of Thysanoptera of 

Japan. Miscellaneous Publication of the National Institute of Agro-Environmental 

Sciences No. 3.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 55 July 20, 2010

Moon, B.J., and Schneider, R.W. 1996. Pathogenicity of Pythium species associated with seed 

and seedling rot in water-seeded rice. Korean Journal of Plant Pathology 12: 402-406.

Moon, Y.S., Lee, S.M., and Lee, W.K. 1995. Distribution of nematodes associated with saplings 

in Korea. FRI Journal of Forest Science, Seoul 51: 127-142.

Mound, L.A. and S.H. Halsey. 1978. Whitefly of the World: A Systematic Catalogue of the 

Aleyrodidae (Homoptera) with Host Plant and Natural Enemy Data. Chichester, UK: 

British Museum (Natural History)/John Wiley & Sons.

Mound, L.A. and G. Kibby. 1998. Thysanoptera: An Identification Guide, 2nd ed. Wallingford, 

U.K.: CAB International.

Mun, J., A.J. Bohonak, and G.K. Roderick. 2003. Population structure of the pumpkin fruit fly

Bactrocera depressa (Tephritidae) in Korea and Japan: Pliocene allopatry or recent 

invasion? Molecular Ecology 12(11): 2941-2951.

Muralirangan, M.C., M. Muralirangan, and P.D. Partho. 1997. Feeding behaviour and host 

selection strategies in acridids, pp. 163-182. In S.K. Gangwere, M.C. Muralirangan, and 

M. Muralirangan (eds.). The Bionomics of Grasshoppers, Katydids and Their Kin. 

Wallingford, U.K.: CAB International.

Mutschler, M.A., Kim, M.J. and Zitter, T.A. 2005. Deployment considerations for late blight and 

early blight resistances in tomatoes. Cornell University Vegetable MD Online. Website:

http://vegetablemdonlin.ppath.cornell.edu/NewsArticles/Tom_Deploy.htm Last accessed 

Aug 23, 2005.

Nafus, D.M. and I.H. Schreiner. 1991. Review of the biology and control of the Asian corn 

borer, Ostrinia furnacalis (Lep: Pyralidae). Tropical Pest Management 37(1): 41-56. 

[CAB Abstracts 1991-1992]

Nagaich, B.B. and B.K. Giri. 1973. Purple top roll disease of potato. American Potato Journal 

50(3): 79-85. [CAB Abstracts 1972-1975]

Nair, M.R.G.K. 1975. Insects and Mites of Crops in India. New Delhi: Indian Council of 

Agricultural Research.

Naito, A. 1976. Studies on the feeding habits of some leafhoppers attacking the forage crops. I. 

Comparison of the feeding habits of the adults. Japanese Journal of Applied Entomology

and Zoology 20(1): 1-8. [CAB Abstracts 1976-1978]

Nakahara, S. 1994. The genus Thrips Linnaeus (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) of the New World. 

USDA Tech. Bull. 1822.

Nakahara, S. 1997. Annotated list of the Frankliniella species of the world (Thysanoptera: 

Thripidae). Contributions on Entomology, International 2(4): 355-389.

Nakao, H. 1991. Studies on acarid mites (Acari: Astigmata) damaging vegetable plants. II. 

Damage to vegetative seedlings. Japanese Journal of Applied Entomology and Zoology

35(4): 303-309. [CAB Abstracts 1991-1992]

Nandihalli, B.S. and J.-H. Lee. 1995a. Effect of host food plants on the biology of the host, 

Helicoverpa assulta (Guenée), and its parasitoid, Campoletis chlorideae Uchida. 

Advances in Agricultural Research in India No. 3: 22-32. [CAB Abstracts 1997]

Nandihalli, B.S. and J.-H. Lee. 1995b. Seasonal occurrence of Campoletis chlorideae Uchida 

and its control efficacy on the oriental tobacco budworm, Helicoverpa assulta (Guenée), 

in tobacco fields in Suwon. Korean Journal of Applied Entomology 34(2): 147-153. 

[CAB Abstracts 1995]

NAPPO 2001. Ralstonia (Pseudomonas) solanacearum (E.F. Smith, 1896) Yabuuchi et al., 1995 

race 3, biovar 2. Phytosanitary Alert System. <http: www. Pestalert.org>.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 56 July 20, 2010

NASS. 2003. Crop values: 2002 summary (February 2003). USDA Natl. Agric. Stat. Serv. Pr 2 

(03); http://jan.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/nassr/price/zcv-bb/cpvl0203.pdf [accessed 

January 2004].

NASS 2005. USDA - National Agricultural Statistics Service, Reports by Commodity, Index of 

Estimates –Tomatoes / Vegetable crops.

http://www.usda.gov/nass/pubs/estindx3.htm#tomatoes Last accessed Aug 30, 2005.

Nault, L.R. 1997. Arthropod transmission of plant viruses: a new synthesis. Annals of the 

Entomological Society of America 90(5): 521-541.

Nemoto, H. 1985. Tarsonemid-mites injurious to flowers and their control. Proceedings of the 

Kanto-Tosan Plant Protection Society (32): 217. [CAB Abstracts 1985-1986]

NHRI. 2005. Nezara antennata: green rice bug. RDA National Horticultural Research Institute; 

http://nhribdc.nhri.go.kr/ddd/crop/bug/bug_finesname.htm [accessed September 2005].

NIAST. 2002. National Inst. Agric. Science and Technol. Research highlights [Korea].

http://www.niast.go.kr/english/sub/highlights.htm> Last accessed, 15 May 2002.

Nickle, W.R. 1991. Manual of Agricultural Nematology. Marcel Dekker, New York, NY. 1035 

pages.

NIS. 2004. Email (6/14/04) from National Identification Services (NIS) to Marina Zlotina, 

entomologist, USDA-APHIS-PPQ Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, 

confirming that Thrips palmi is actionable at US ports-of-entry and under consideration 

for official control.

NPPO. 2005. Letter from J. Baek, Korean NPPO Director to G. Ball, Acting APHIS Area 

Director, Seoul, June 21, 2005. Response to APHIS official request to clarify status of 

R3B2 in paprika in Korea for purposes of this analysis.

NPQS (National Plant Quarantine Service). 2000. Data sheet: Insect pests associated with hotpepper, dropwort, and tomato in Korea. Republic of Korea. Unpublished data sheet. 164 

(On file with USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST).

Oatman, E.R. 1978. Noctuidae, pp. 205-210. In C.P. Clausen (ed.). Introduced parasites and 

predators of arthropod pests and weeds: a world review. USDA Agric. Handbk. 480.

Okadome, T. 1962. Morphological characters of the Japanese trypetid-larvae (I) (Diptera: 

Trypetidae). Publications, Entomological Laboratory, University of Osaka Prefecture No. 

7: 43-48.

Olalquiaga F., G. 1980. Phytosanitary features of Easter Island. Revista Chilena de Entomologia 

10: 101-102. [CAB Abstracts 1981-1982]

Onodera, K. 1998. Effective control of cabbage army worm, Mamestra brassicae, on sugarbeet. 

Bulletin of Hokkaido Prefectural Agricultural Experiment Stations (75): 81-87. [CAB 

Abstracts 1999]

Panizzi, A.R., J.E. McPherson, D.G. James, M. Javahery, and R.M. McPherson. 2000. Stink 

bugs (Pentatomidae), pp. 421-474. In C.W. Schaefer and A.R. Panizzi (eds.). Heteroptera 

of Economic Importance. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Park, C.-Y. 2002. Paprika information and pest list. National Plant Quarantine Service, Republic 

of Korea. Unpublished memo to PPQ. 5 pp. (On file with USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST).

Park, D.-H., Y.-S. Kim, S.-G. Heu, I.-S. Myung, and C.-K. Lim. 1998b. Bacterial soft rot of 

pepper caused by Erwinia carotovora subsp. carotovora. Korean Journal of Plant 

Pathology 14(6): 738-740. [CAB Abstracts 1999]
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 57 July 20, 2010

Park, J.C., Song, W.Y., and Kim, H.M. 1997. Occurrence of bacterial soft rot of soybean sprout 

caused by Erwinia carotovora subsp. carotovora. Korean Journal of Plant Pathology

13(1): 13-17.

Park, E.K., La, Y.J., Heu, I., Lee, Y.D. 1975. Serological investigation of virus diseases of 

tobacco plant (Nicotiana tabacum L.) in Korea. Korean Journal of Plant Protection 14(2): 

59-63.

Park, S.-D., Park, S.-D., and Choi, B.-S. 1993. Fauna of plant-parasitic nematodes in medicinal 

herbs. RDA Journal of Agricultural Science, Crop Protection 35(1): 414-429.

Park, J.S., Han, S.C., and Lee, Y.B. 1970. Studies on the ecology and feeding preference of 

Hirschmanniella oryzae. Research Reports of the Office of Rural Development, Korea, 

Plant Environment 13: 93-98.

Park, S.D., Zakaullah, K., Choi, Y.E., and Choi, B.S. 1998a. Association and distribution of 

plant parasitic nematodes in peony (Paeonia lactiflora) fields of Korea. International 

Journal of Nematology 8:57-60.

Parker, B.L., Talekar, N.S. and Skinner, M. 1995. Field Guide: Insect Pests of Selected 

Vegetables in Tropical and Subtropical Asia. Publication 94-427.

PERAL. 2005. PRA: Importation of fresh paprika pepper fruit (Capsicum annuum L. var. 

annuum) from the Republic of South Korea into the continental United States. 75 pp.

Pham, T.V., J.-H. Kim, and Y. Song. 2003. Overwintering two aphid species, Lipaphis

pseudobrassicae and Myzus persicae (Homoptera: Aphididae), in southern greenhouse 

area in Korea. Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 6(1): 63-67. [CAB Abstracts 2003].

Poitout, S. and R. Bues. 1976. The incidence of adult migration in relation to the degree and 

structural variability of genetic heterogeneity in natural populations of Lepidoptera 

Noctuidae. Annales de Zoologie, Ecologie Animale 8(1): 69-81. [CAB Abstracts 1976-

1978]

Potter, J.W. and Olthof, T.H.A. 1993. Nematode pests of vegetable crops, pp. 171-208. In Evans, 

K., Trudgill, D.L., and Webster, J.M. (eds.). Plant Parasitic Nematodes in Temperate 

Agriculture. CAB International. Cambridge, UK. 648 pages.

PRF. 2005. Export Certification Project (EXCERPT) Database. Purdue Research Foundation.

Priou, S. 2005. Email from S. Priou, Head Bacteriology Unit, International Potato Center, Lima, 

Peru, to S. Redlin, 4/1/05.

Rai, A.B. and V.Y. Solanki. 2002. Chilli leaf curl suppression through the integration of 

chemical, botanical and microbial control of sucking pests. Indian Journal of Hill 

Farming 15(1): 26-34. [CAB Abstracts 2004/01-2005/02]

Reed, C.F. 1977. Economically Important Foreign Weeds, Potential problems in the United 

States. US Government Printing Office. Agriculture Handbook No. 498. 746 pp.

Roberts, R. C., van der Zwet, T., Miller, C. E. and Redlin, S. C.. 1998. The potential for spread 

of Erwinia amylovora and fire blight via commercial apple fruit: A critical review and 

risk assessment. Crop Prot. 17: 19-28.

Robinson, G.S., P.R. Ackery, I.J. Kitching, G.W. Beccaloni, and L.M. Hernández. 2001. 

Hostplants of the Moth and Butterfly Caterpillars of the Oriental Region. London: The 

Natural History Museum.

Roessler, Y. 1989. Insecticidal bait and cover sprays, pp. 329-336. In A.S. Robinson and G. 

Hooper (eds.). Fruit Flies: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control. (World Crop 

Pests, Vol. 3B). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 58 July 20, 2010

Rojas, J.C., T.D. Wyatt, and M.C. Birch. 2001. Oviposition by Mamestra brassicae (L.) (Lep., 

Noctuidae) in relation to age, time of day and host plant. Journal of Applied Entomology

125(3): 161-163.

Ronkay, L. 1982. Plusiinae (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) from Korea. Folia Entomologica Hungarica 

43(1): 137-145. [CAB Abstracts 1983]

Rost, M. 1997. Trichogramma for the biological control of the cabbage moth. Pflanzenschutz 

Wien 13(2): 4. [CAB Abstracts 1997]

Rush, M. C. 2003. Biotechnology and Control of Rice Diseases. LSU AgCenter.com. Website: 

http://www.agctr.lsu.edu/en/communications/publications/agmag/Archive/2003/Fall/Biot

echnolog Last accessed Aug 28, 2005.

Ryckeboer, J., Cops, S. and Coosemans, J. 2002. The fate of plant pathogens and seeds during 

anaerobic digestion and aerobic composting of source separated household wastes.

Compost Science & Utilization 10: 204-216. (abstract)

Sakakibara, N. and J. Nishigaki. 1988. Seasonal abundance of the chili thrips, Scirtothrips

dorsalis Hood (Thysanoptera: Thripidae), in a kiwi fruit orchard. Bulletin of the Faculty

of Agriculture, Shizuoka University 38: 1-6. [CAB Abstracts 1991-1992]

Sakimura, K., L.M. Nakahara, and H.A. Denmark. 1986. A thrips, Thrips palmi Karny

(Thysanoptera: Thripidae). Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services 

Division of Plant Industry Entomology Circular 280.

Salt, R.W. 1961. Principles of insect cold-hardiness. Annual Review of Entomology 6: 55-74.

Savov, D. 1973. The dried-fruit moth, Plodia interpunctella. Rastitelna Zashchita 21(12): 30-35. 

[CAB Abstracts 1976-1978]

Schreiner, I. 2000. Cluster caterpillar (Spodoptera litura [Fabricius]). Agricultural Pests of the 

Pacific ADAP 2000-3; http://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/adap2/information/pubs/2000-3.pdf

[accessed September 2005].

Sequeira, L. 1994. Epilogue: Life with a “Mutable and Trecherous Tribe”. In Hayward, A.C. and 

Hartman, G.L. (eds.). Bacterial Wilt, The Disease and its Causative Agent, Pseudomonas 

solanacearum, pp. 235-247.

Shahjahan, A.K.M., Rush, M.C., Groth, D. E. and Clark, C. A. 2000. Panicle blight: recent 

research points to a bacterial cause. Rice Journal. Website: 

http://www.ricejournal.com/backissues/april2000/story3.asp Last accessed Aug 24, 2005.

Sheng, C., H. Wang, S. Sheng, L. Gao, and W. Xuan. 2003. Pest status and loss assessment of 

crop damage caused by the rice borers, Chilo suppressalis and Tryporyza incertulas, in 

China. Entomological Knowledge 40(4): 289-294. [CAB Abstracts 2003]

Shepherd, J.A., and Barker, K.R. 1990. Nematode parasites of tobacco. In: Luc M, Sikora RA, 

Bridge J, (eds) Plant-parasitic nematodes in subtropical and tropical agriculture. 

Wallingford, UK: CAB International p 493-517.

Shin, H.D., and Braun, U. 1993. Notes on Korean Cercosporae and allied genera. Mycotaxon 49: 

351-362.

Shin, H.D., and Sameva, E.F. 1999. Taxonomic notes on the genus Septoria in Korea (I). 

Mycotaxon 73 : 215-233.

Shin, H.D. and Sameva, E.F. 2004. Septoria in Korea. National Institute of Agricultural Science 

and Technology, Suwon, Korea. 183 pp.

Shiraki, T. 1952a. Catalogue of injurious insects in Japan (exclusive of animal parasites). 

Economic and Scientific Section Natural Resource Division Preliminary Study No. 71. 

Vol. II. Tokyo: General Headquarters, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 59 July 20, 2010

Shiraki, T. 1952b. Catalogue of injurious insects in Japan (exclusive of animal parasites). 

Economic and Scientific Section Natural Resource Division Preliminary Study No. 71. 

Vol. III. Tokyo: General Headquarters, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers.

Sivinski, J.M. 1996. The past and potential of biological control of fruit flies, pp. 369-375. In

B.A. McPheron and G.J. Steck (eds.). Fruit Fly Pests: A World Assessment of their 

Biology and Management. Delray Beach, FL: St. Lucie Press.

Sohn, J.-C. and L. Ronkay. 2001. New records of Korean Noctuidae (Lepidoptera), with 

descriptions of a new species. Insecta Koreana 18(3): 219-227. [CAB Abstracts 2002]

Son, C.-K., S.-G. Park, Y.-H. Hwang, and B.-S. Choi. 2000. Field occurrence of stink bug and its 

damage in soybean. Korean Journal of Crop Science 45(6): 405-410. [CAB Abstracts 

2001]

Steene, F. van de. 1995. Evolution of the occurrence and control of insect pests in Brussels 

sprouts over the last decade. Parasitica 51(2/3): 103-113. [CAB Abstracts 1996]

Stevenson, W. R., Loria, R., Franc, G. D. and Weingartner, D. P. 2001. Compendium of Potato 

Diseases, 2nd Edition. APS Press.

Stoetzel, M.B. and G.L. Miller. 1998. Aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae) colonizing peach in the 

United States or with potential for introduction. Florida Entomologist 81(3): 325-345.

Strand, L. L. (Editor) 1998. Integrated Pest Management for Tomatoes, Fourth Edition.

University of California. 

Sung, J.M., Snyder, W.C., Chung, B.K., and Chung, B.J. 1977. Soil-borne diseases of barley in 

Korea caused by Fusarium spp. Korean Journal of Plant Protection 16(2): 115-119.

Sutra, L., Siverio, F., Lopez, M. M., Hunault, G., Bollet, C. , and L. Gardan 1997. Taxonomy of 

Pseudomonas strains isolated from tomato pith necrosis: emended description of 

Pseudomonas corrugata and proposal of three unnamed fluorescent Pseudomonas

genomospecies. International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology. 47(4): 1020–1033.

Termorshuizen, A. J., Volker, D., Blok, W. J., Brummler, E., Hartog, B. J., Janse, J. D., Knol, W. 

and Wenneker M. 2003. Survival of human and plant pathogens during anaerobic 

mesophilic digestion of vegetable, fruit, and garden waste. European Journal of Soil 

Biology 39: 165-171. (abstract).

Tóth, P. and Ľ. Cagáň. 2005. Organisms associated with the family Convolvulaceae and their 

potential for biological control of Convolvulus arvensis. Biocontrol News and 

Information 26(1): 17N-40N.

Tung, P. S., Rasco, E., Zaag, P. V., and Schmiediche, P. 1990. Resistance to Pseudomonas 

solancearum in the potato: II. Aspects of host-pathogen-environment interaction.

Euphytica 45:211-215.

UH-CTAHR. 2005. Tomato: insects and other pests. Crop Knowledge Master. Univ. Hawaii 

Coll. Trop. Agric. Hum. Resour. IPM Prog.; 

http://www.extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/crops/tomato.htm [accessed August 2005].

USCB. 2005. Section 1: population. Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2004-2005. U.S. 

Census Bureau; http://www.census.gov/prod/2004pubs/04statab/pop.pdf.

USDA. 2000. Guidelines for Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk Assessments, Version 5.02. USDAAPHIS, PPQ; http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/pra/commodity/cpraguide.pdf

USDA. 2003. US National Arboretum "Web Version" of the USDA Plant Hardiness Zone Map 

USDA Miscellaneous Publication No. 1475, Issued January 1990.

http://www.usna.usda.gov/Hardzone/ushzmap.html Last accessed Aug 30, 2005.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 60 July 20, 2010

USDA, NRCS. 2005. The PLANTS Database, Version 3.5 (http://plants.usda.gov). Data 

compiled from various sources by Mark W. Skinner. National Plant Data Center, Baton 

Rouge, LA 70874-4490 USA.

USDA-APHIS. 2003. Pest alert: Ralstonia solanacearum race 3, biovar 2.

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/ep/ralstonia/ Last accessed Aug 30, 2005.

USDA-APHIS. 2004. New pest response guidelines: Ralstonia solanacearum race 3, biovar 2-

southern wilt of geranium. 74 pp. Website: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/ep/ralstonia/

USFWS. 1999. US Fish and Wildlife Service Division of Endangered Species. Lists of 

Endangered and Threatened Plants at 50 CFR 17.12 

http://www.fws.gov/endangered/listdata.html Last accessed Aug 30, 2005.

Valdez, L.C. and C.B. Adalla. 1983. The biology and behavior of the Asian corn borer, Ostrinia

furnacalis Guenee (Pyralidae: Lepidoptera) on cotton. Philippine Entomologist 6(5/6): 

621-631.

Van Dersal, J. 2005. Personal communication. E-mail from Jeanne Van Dersal, Phytosanitary

Issues Management, Trade Director, USDA, APHIS, IS, re. Korea's interest to import 

tomatoes with stems. August 2005.

Van Elsas, J.D., Kastelein, P., Van Bekkum, P., Van der Wolf, J.M., De Vries, P.M., and Van 

Overbeck, L.S. 2000. Survival of Ralstonia solanacearum biovar 2, the causative agent 

of potato brown rot, in field and microcosm soils in temperate climates. Phytopathology

90: 1358-1366.

Vlasov, Y.I., L.N. Samsonova, and D.Z. Bogoutdinov. 1992. Circulation ways of tomato stolbur 

agent. Soviet Agricultural Sciences (6): 21-22. [CAB Abstracts 1995]

Wang, W.-J. 1997. Occurrence and control of thrips in rose. Bulletin of Taichung District 

Agricultural Improvement Station (57): 23-36. [CAB Abstracts 1998]

Wang, Z., D. Zhou, Y. Song, B. Li, G. Zhang, S. Gao, Y. Li, L. Zheng, Y. Wang, W. Xie, W. Li, 

and Y. Pan. 1994. Studies on the dispersal behavior and possible migration of 

overwintering adults of the Asian corn borer, using the release-and-recapture technique. 

Acta Phytophylacica Sinica 21(1): 25-31. [CAB Abstracts 1995]

Waskom, R., and Bauder, T. 2005. Homeowner’s guide to protecting water quality and the 

environment. Colorado State University Extension Publication.

www.ext.colostate.edu/pubs/water/xcm223.pdf Last accessed Sept 2, 2005.

Waterhouse, D.F. 1993. The Major Arthropod Pests and Weeds of Agriculture in Southeast Asia 

(ACIAR Monograph No. 21). Canberra: Australian Centre for International Agricultural

Research. 

Watson, G. W. 2005. Arthropods of Economic Importance: Diaspididae of the World.

http://ip30.eti.uva.nl/bis/diaspididae.php?menuentry=inleiding

Wearing, C. H., Hansen, J., Whyte, C., Miller, C. E. and Brown, J. 2001. The potential for spread 

of codling moth (Lepidoptera: Torticidae) via commercial sweet cherry fruit: a critical 

review and risk assessment. Crop Prot. 20: 465-488.

Wells, J. M., and Butterfield, J. E. 1999. Incidence of Salmonella on fresh fruits and vegetables

affected by fungal rots or physical injury. Plant Disease 83: 722-726.

Wheeler, A.G., Jr. 2000a. Plant bugs (Miridae) as plant pests, pp. 37-83. In C.W. Schaefer and 

A.R. Panizzi (eds.). Heteroptera of Economic Importance. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Wheeler, A.G., Jr. 2000b. Predacious plant bugs (Miridae), pp. 657-693. In C.W. Schaefer and 

A.R. Panizzi (eds.). Heteroptera of Economic Importance. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 61 July 20, 2010

White, I.M. and M.M. Elson-Harris. 1992. Fruit Flies of Economic Importance: Their 

Identification and Bionomics. Wallingford, U.K.: CAB International.

Wilkie, J.P., and Dye, D.W. 1974. Pseudomonas cichorii causing tomato and celery diseases in 

New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 17: 123-130.

Williamson, M. and A. Fitter. 1996. The varying success of invaders. Ecology 77(6): 1661-1666.

WMO. 2003. World Weather Information Service. Geneva: World Meterological Organization 

of the United Nations; http://www.worldweather.org/pilot.htm [accessed September 

2005].

Woo, K.S. 1988. Thrips as crop pests in Korea. Acta Phytopathologica et Entomologica 

Hungarica 23(3-4): 369-372.

Writer, J. 2003. USDA-APHIS-PPQ. Ralstonia Bacteria, a Select Agent, Disrupts Geranium 

Market http://www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/inside_aphis/featurePPQ-Ralstonia.htm.

WSSA. 1989. Composite list of weeds. Weed Science Society of America, Champaign, Illinois. 

112 pp. 

Yang, C.-Y., H.-Y. Jeon, M.-R. Cho, D.-S. Kim, and M.-S. Yiem. 2004. Seasonal occurrence of 

oriental tobacco budworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) male and chemical control at red 

pepper fields. Korean Journal of Applied Entomology 43(1): 49-54. [CAB Abstracts 

2004/01-2005/02]

Yang, Z., Z. Lu, G. Wang, Z. Wang, and F. Li. 1993. A preliminary study on the control 

threshold of the Asian corn borer. Plant Protection 19(5): 18-19. [CAB Abstracts 1995]

Yeh, S.-D., Y.-C. Lin, Y.-H. Cheng, C.-L. Jih, M.-J. Chen, and C.-C. Chen. 1992. Identification 

of tomato spotted wilt-like virus on watermelon in Taiwan. Plant Disease 76(8): 835-840.

Young, H.K., and Seong, H.O. 1995. In vitro culture and factors affecting population changes of 

Ditylenchus destructor of ginseng. Korean Journal of Plant Pathology 11: 39-46.

Yu, S.H. 2001. Korean species of Alternaria and Stemphylium. National Institute of Agricultural 

Science and Technology, Suwon, Korea, 212 pages.

Zandigiacomo, P. 1992. Pests found in soybean crops in north-eastern Italy. Informatore Agrario 

48(7): 57-59. [CAB Abstracts 1993-1994]

Zhang, B.-C. 1994. Index of Economically Important Lepidoptera. CABI, Wallingford, United 

Kingdom. 599 pp.

Zipper, C. R. B. Renaue, Jr., and A. Jantrania. 2003. On-site sewage treatment alternatives. 

Virginia Coop. Extension Pub. 448-407. http://www.ext.vt.edu/pubs/waterquality/448-

407/448-407.pdf. Last accessed 13 July 2005.

4. Authors and Reviewers

Authors:

A.D. Neeley, Entomologist, USDA APHIS PPQ / CPHST-PERAL

L.M. Ferguson, Plant Pathologist, USDA APHIS PPQ / CPHST-PERAL

T.W. Culliney, Entomologist, USDA APHIS PPQ / CPHST-PERAL

C. Devorshak, Entomologist, USDA APHIS PPQ / CPHST-PERAL

Reviewers:

T.W. Culliney, Entomologist, USDA APHIS PPQ / CPHST-PERAL

F. Mehdizadegan, Plant Pathologist, USDA APHIS PPQ / CPHST-PERAL
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 62 July 20, 2010

5. Appendices

Appendix 1. Likelihood of Entry, Introduction and Establishment of Ralstonia 

solanacearum Race 3 Biovar 2 with Imported Tomato Fruit with Stems (Solanum 

lycopersicum L., Synonym: Lycopersicon esculentum) from the Republic of Korea.

Contacts:

Lisa M. Ferguson, Plant Pathologist, USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST-PERAL, Raleigh, North 

Carolina, (lisa.m.ferguson@aphis.usda.gov). 

Scott C. Redlin, Plant Pathologist, USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST-PERAL, Raleigh, North 

Carolina (scott.c.redlin@aphis.usda.gov)

Executive Summary

We analyzed the likelihood of entry, introduction, and establishment of Ralstonia solanacearum

Race 3 Biovar 2 (R3B2) via the importation of fresh field-grown Korean tomato fruit with stems 

for consumption. Analysis follows previous work on likelihood of entry, introduction and 

establishment of R. solanacearum R3B2 on tomato fruit (Capsicum annuum L. var. annuum) 

from the Republic of Korea, conducted by APHIS (Hennessey and Redlin, 2005). The 

consequences of introduction of R3B2 are high. Bacterial wilt, caused by R. solanacearum (races 

1 and 3), occurs in most years in Korea, damaging Solanaceous hosts most severely under hot, 

humid growing conditions (Jeong, et al., 2003; Lim & Kim, 1994; Mew & Ho, 1977; Tung et al., 

1990). Prevalence of R3B2 strains in Korean tomato is unknown, but if infection occurs, stems 

of fruit are likely to be infected. Because the current request for tomato importation includes 

attached stems, R3B2 could enter with imported fruit. The likelihood of introduction and 

establishment are low, but likelihood of entry is uncertain because it is unclear if tomato fruit are 

infested with R3B2 bacteria.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Request: Evaluate the likelihood of entry, introduction, and establishment (IPPC, 2002) of R. 

solanacearum Race 3 Biovar 2 on field-grown tomato fruit with stems and need for mitigation.

This document is based on a previous Ad hoc request for paprika pepper from J. Van Dersal, 

Korea Trade Director, PIM, through R. Sequeira, NSPL, CPHST, 2005.

A. Likelihood of Entry

The PRA for this commodity (PERAL, 2005) submitted to the PPQ Phytosanitary Issues 

Management (PIM) staff analyzed “Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3” (synonymous with 

“Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3 Biovar 2” (R3B2)) (French, 1995). This PRA concluded that 

R3B2 follows the pathway with high consequences if introduced. Below we present evidence on 

host status, infectivity, and likelihood of entry:

1. Presence in Korean tomato: Evidence that tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L., Synonym: 

Lycopersicon esculentum) is a host of R. solanacearum Race 3 Biovar 2 comes from USDA-
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 63 July 20, 2010

APHIS, 2004, Janse et al. 2005, and Hartman et al. 1991. Two reports (NIAST, 2002; Park, 

2002) submitted to APHIS by the Korean NPPO indicated that the R3B2 was associated with 

pepper in Korea. In their official evaluation of the PRA sent to APHIS (Korea, 2004), the Korean 

government acknowledged having “Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3” in pepper and offered 

mitigation measures, however Korea did not provide evidence for that determination. We 

conclude that these strains reported in Korea may also infect tomato, due to clear host association 

of R. solanacearum R3B2 with tomato, lack of host specificity within the Solanaceae and reports 

of R. solanacearum infecting tomato in Korea (Cho & Shin, 2004; Jeong et al., 2003). In 

response to a recent inquiry about R3B2 in peppers, the Korean National Plant Protection 

Organization (NPPO) indicated that R3B2 was not commonly found in Korea, although they

provided no survey evidence to support the statement (Ball, 2005). The Korean NPPO 

responded, that R. solanacearum R3B2 had not been recorded in pepper (and later clarified it had 

not been recorded in tomato either), but only in potato in limited growing areas of Korea (NPPO, 

2005; NPPO, 2006).

2. Fruit as a host: There is evidence that R. solanacearum R3B2 does not infect tomato fruit or 

seed (Allen, 2005; Elphinstone, 2005a; Martins et al., 2005).

3. Attached fruit stems as a host: The fruit will be hand-harvested, but stems and calyxes of the 

fruit remain attached to the tomato fruit (Van Dersal, 2005). If tomato plants are infected, it is 

likely that at least stems and calyxes attached to the fruits will be infected (Martins et al., 2005; 

Elphinstone, 2005a). Martins et al., 2005 conducted experiments with infected tomatoes and 

recovered R. solanacearum (Biovars 1 & 3) from leaves, roots, stems and sepals (part of the 

calyx), but not from fruits, flower petals, nor seeds. Additionally, knives used for harvesting may

spread the bacteria from infected to healthy stems, an effective means of spreading the pathogen 

from plant to plant shown during harvest of infected geraniums (USDA-APHIS, 2004). 

4. Host fruit being exported: Direct losses in tomato yield caused by Ralstonia solanacearum

R3B2 vary widely based on cultivar, timing of infection (Kishun, 1987), soil type, climate, 

farming practices and bacterial strains (Elphinstone, 2005c). If the pathogen causes plant 

mortality prior to fruit set, it is unlikely that fruit with stems/calyxes containing the bacterium 

will be harvested. However, infected plants may not die, nor even show symptoms of bacterial 

wilt before producing fruit (Allen, 2005; Hartman et al., 1991). In large scale tomato production, 

R. solanacearum-infected plants occur in a patchy distribution (Hartman et al., 1991) and all 

marketable fruit, whether from healthy or infected plants are likely to be harvested. Typically 

fruit showing obvious symptoms of any disease would be removed in the packinghouse, but R. 

solanacearum R3B2 - infested fruit with stems may appear marketable and be exported.

5. Likelihood of Entry: Despite little published evidence regarding fruit as a source of R3B2, 

Ralstonia solanacearum experts (Allen, 2005; Priou, 2005) have expressed the opinion that there 

is a low likelihood that the bacteria could enter with the commodity.

Conclusion: Experimental evidence and expert judgment indicate low likelihood of entry of 

R3B2 into the U.S. via the importation of fresh tomato with stems for consumption. However, 

uncertainty about infection of tomato fruit and stems could increase that likelihood. The NPPO 

claims that the pathogen has been recorded for potatoes, but not for paprika peppers nor for 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 64 July 20, 2010

tomatoes in Korea. This statement comes from an official document of the exporting NPPO 

which also stated that R3B2 “is not found very often in Korea.” Conclusions on entry based on 

peppers previously analyzed may not be wholly applicable to tomatoes or other solanaceous 

fruits because of differences in susceptibility and lack of available data.

B. Likelihood of Establishment 

There are more studies on the ability of R3B2 to infect tomatoes than peppers. However, there 

are no studies assessing the risk to U. S. agriculture of importing tomatoes or any other fruit, for 

consumption from R3B2-infested sources. Below we address the likelihood of establishment in 

agricultural areas resulting from entry of R3B2 in tomato fruit with stems: 

1. Possible pathways: To illustrate the fate of exotic organisms on imported fresh produce we 

used a relevant study. Eight pathways were investigated by Gould et al. (2004) in a risk analysis 

that looked at fresh asparagus infested with lepidopteran eggs. The study examined disposal 

methods at 14 commercial import warehouses in the U.S. that represented 85% of the asparagus 

imports from Peru. That report concluded that of the discarded product (not initially sold for 

consumption): 76.0 % went unbagged into dumpsters; 4.5% went bagged into dumpsters; 11.2% 

was compacted then placed in landfill; 7.3% went to soup kitchens (consumed); 0.5% was put in 

the garbage disposal (municipal sewage); 0% went as discounted produce (consumed); 0% was 

composted; 0% went for animal feed. Dumpsters leading to landfills are a dead-end pathway for 

insect pests in municipal waste such as, Anoplophora glabripennis (Auclair et al., 2005).

However, very different assumptions apply to survival and spread of soil and waterborne 

bacteria, such as Ralstonia solanacearum R3B2 (Hong & Moorman, 2005). Infected plant 

material in cull piles or disposal sites, has been linked to contamination of surface water, credited 

with spreading R. solanacearum R3B2 (Caruso, et al. 2005). 

2. Consumer pathways: Consumers purchase fruit and take it home from supermarkets. A first 

discard scenario includes consuming fruit, but discarding stems and calyxes into a garbage 

disposal and finally into the waste water (sewage) system. In a second discard scenario, stems 

and calyxes are bagged and put into the trash destined for landfill. In the U.S. over 75% of the 

population is served by centralized waste water collection and treatment, the remaining 

population using other on-site systems to treat sewage and waste water (EPA 2004; Zipper, 

2003). Waste water (sewage) treatment standards have been developed to reduce populations of 

pathogens harmful to humans, which would likely be effective to reduce populations of bacteria 

such as R. solanacearum R3B2 (EPA, 2004; Zipper, 2003). There are no studies on the quantity

of fruits and vegetables discarded in backyard compost in the U. S. One foreign study estimated 

that up to 0.5% of U. S. apples purchased in Japan ended up as compost (Roberts et al., 1998).

Another study estimated that 5% of U. S. cherries purchased in New Zealand ended up as 

compost (Wearing et al., 2001). If it is assumed that 5% composting mirrors U. S. practices, then 

it is unlikely that the commodity would be discarded on compost piles. Although no studies have 

been done, it is assumed that all compost produced by consumers is used on home gardens or 

yards and not spread directly onto agricultural fields.

3. Irrigation water pathway: A main method of spread of the pathogen in crop systems is by

contaminated irrigation water (USDA-APHIS, 2004; Caruso et al., 2005). Symptoms of bacterial 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 65 July 20, 2010

wilt have been observed in susceptible solanaceous crops after irrigation with water from 

contaminated rivers. Outbreaks in Scotland and Spain have been traced to contaminated rivers 

along which infected solanaceous weeds, serving as reservoirs for the pathogen, were present.

Once introduced into river or surface water, the pathogen may remain viable and continue to be 

infective for two months at 25°C (Caruso et al., 2005). It is not known how much runoff from 

backyard compost piles contributes to irrigation water in the U. S., but the following is assumed:

a. There is probably low likelihood that most U.S. homeowner compost piles are near 

streams that are used for irrigation of agricultural crops, although there are no published 

reports on this. It is unclear if stormwater or irrigation run-off from homeowner’s 

properties deposited in local ponds, lakes, streams and rivers (Waskom & Bauder, 2002), 

may indeed be physically separate from irrigation water sources for commercial 

agricultural production (Waskom & Bauder, 2002).

b. It is unlikely that the pathogen would survive in compost for more than a few days 

(Elphinstone, 2005b) or weeks, depending on the quality of the compost. In a study of 

compost at 52°C, R. solanacearum was destroyed within one day (Ryckeboer et al., 

2002). In a study of compost at <40°C, R. solanacearum was inactivated within six 

weeks (Termershuizen et al., 2003). In a study of 35°C compost piles, the related 

bacterium Pseudomonas phaseolicola was inactivated after four days (Lopez-Real & 

Foster, 1985). Burial of infected geraniums under compost is one of the mitigations 

suggested for controlling the pathogen, according to USDA-APHIS (2004). 

c. The scenario which would allow pathogens from infected tomatoes to enter irrigation 

water would involve several intermediate steps, including rain or irrigation run-off within 

the limited amount of time bacteria remain viable, run-off flowing into a stream, uptake 

into an irrigation system, and contact with a susceptible host. Therefore, it is probably

unlikely that infected tomatoes would contaminate irrigation water and come into contact 

with crops. 

4. APHIS has long permitted the entry of tomato and pepper fruit for consumption from 

countries where R3B2 is known to occur. These commodities have been permitted entry with

only a port of entry inspection for R3B2. Inspections target visible pest or symptoms on fruit.

Asymptomatic but infected fruits would not be detected during inspection (PERAL, 2005). In 

2004 the US imported an estimated 2,054,645,000 lbs of tomatoes and an expected 

2,095,000,000 lbs in 2005 (ERS, 2005). To date, no known introductions of R3B2 have occurred 

as a result of these importations. This supports the assumption that even if R3B2 entered with 

fruit, there is a low likelihood of establishment.

Conclusions: In the PRA (PERAL, 2005) it was determined that there would be high risk 

consequences of introduction into temperate areas of the U. S., especially those near commercial 

potato and tomato production areas. In the PRA (PERAL, 2005), the likelihood of introduction 

and overall risk potential were also rated high. This analysis concludes that the likelihood of 

introduction is reduced when the low likelihood of establishment is considered. The likelihood 

that R3B2 could infect susceptible backyard hosts and become established by use of infested 

homeowner compost is probably higher than the likelihood that the pathogen could infect 

agricultural crops as a result of homeowner use of compost. Even when infected geraniums 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 66 July 20, 2010

entered the U. S. in large quantities in 2003, and then came into contact with susceptible crops, 

there was no evidence that R3B2 was established as a consequence (USDA-APHIS, 2004).

Furthermore, given the large volumes of tomatoes already imported into the United States from 

countries with R3B2 without establishment of this pathogen, it seems unlikely that tomato fruit 

for consumption is an effective pathway for introduction of R3B2.

Because other fruits from susceptible hosts for consumption, including tomatoes, eggplants, 

bitter gourd, and string beans (Janse et al., 2005) imported from countries reporting R3B2, would 

be likely to follow similar consumer pathways as described for above, the conclusions about 

establishment also would apply to them.

Table 1 summarizes the conclusions of this analysis.

Table 1. Ralstonia solanacearum R3B2: Unmitigated entry, establishment, and introduction, 

summary of likelihood estimates for tomato grown for consumption from Korea.

Event Likelihood 

Pathogen is present in Korea High (PERAL, 2005; 

NPPO, 2005) 

Pathogen is prevalent in tomato in Korea Unknown – low based 

on previous analysis of 

pepper (Ball, 2005; 

NPPO, 2005)

Magnitude of consequences of introduction High (PERAL, 2005) 

Asymptomatic but infected fruits would not be detected at port of entry High (PERAL, 2005) 

Pathogen enters in asymptomatic but infected commodity Low (Allen, 2005; 

Priou, 2005; Martins et 

al., 2005)

Low quality, symptomatic fruit would not be culled Low 

Commercial culls go to commercial compost, compactor, animal feed, 

garbage disposal, soup kitchen, or discounted produce 

Low

Commercial culls go to dumpster High

Infected culls in a dumpster would contaminate irrigation water Low

Establishment from fruits, stems, and seeds that are discarded into the 

garbage disposal where they end up in sewage or bagged and put in the 

trash where they end up in a municipal landfill 

Low 

High proportion of commodity discarded on compost piles Low 

U. S. homeowner compost piles are near streams that are used for 

irrigation 

Low 

The pathogen would survive in compost for more than a few days or 

weeks 

Low 

Infected tomatoes s in compost would contaminate irrigation water Low 

Establishment Low 

Introduction Low
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 67 July 20, 2010

Appendix 2. Risk Management Options for Importation of Fresh Tomato with Stems 

(Solanum lycopersicum L = Lycopersicon esculentum P. Mill) from the Republic of Korea 

into the United States. 

1. Introduction

The Republic of Korea requested permission to export fresh tomato fruit into the United States.

Because the commodity has not been imported from Korea before, the United States Department 

of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) conducted a 

pathway-initiated risk assessment to determine the unmitigated risks associated with importing 

fresh tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L = Lycopersicon esculentum P. Mill) from Korea (USDA, 

2005). In conducting the assessment, APHIS analysts first prepared a list of Korean pests 

associated with tomatoes based on (1) documents submitted by the Republic of Korea, (2) USDA 

APHIS records of intercepted pests, and (3) scientific literature. From this list, the analysts then 

determined which quarantine pests (identified to the species level) were likely to follow the 

tomato pathway and qualitatively analyzed them to determine the unmitigated risk each poses to 

the United States.

The 2007 Pest Risk Assessment identified the following pests as having high unmitigated pest 

risk potential:

Bactrocera depressa (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Helicoverpa assulta (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Mamestra brassicae (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Ostrinia furnacalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae)

The following pests were identified as having a medium unmitigated risk potential:

Scirtothrips dorsalis (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)

Thrips palmi (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)

The following pests were identified as having a low unmitigated risk potential:

Ralstonia solanacearum R3B2

The proposed importation of fresh tomato fruit from Korea, if approved, would be regulated by 

amendment to existing fruits and vegetables regulations [7 CFR § 319.56]. This document 

outlines possible phytosanitary measures and provides evidence to conclude that these measures 

will effectively prevent the introduction of quarantine pests. The appropriate level of protection 

may be achieved through the application of a single phytosanitary measure, such as inspection or 

a quarantine treatment, or a combination of measures.

The Plant Protection Act of 2000 (SEC. 401. 7 U.S.C. 7701) defines “Systems Approach” as

“...a defined set of phytosanitary procedures, at least two of which have an independent effect in 

mitigating pest risk associated with the movement of commodities.” Similarly, the FAO Standard 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 68 July 20, 2010

for Integrated Measures for Pest Risk Management (June 2002) proposed that a Systems 

Approach be defined as, “The integration of different pest risk management measures, at least 

two of which act independently, and which cumulatively achieve the desired level of 

phytosanitary protection” (FAO, 2002. Pest risk management is the decision-making process of 

reducing the risk of introduction of a quarantine pest (FAO, 1999) Systems Approaches are 

employed by an importing country as an alternative to the use of single measures that achieve an 

appropriate level of phytosanitary protection when a single phytosanitary measure is nonexistent, 

infeasible or undesirable.

Combining specific mitigation measures in a way that provides overlapping or sequential 

safeguards is distinctly different from applying single mitigation methodologies such as 

fumigation or inspection. Specific measures may be selected from a range of pre-harvest and 

post-harvest measures (e.g., surveys, inspections, sanitation, chemical treatments, etc) and 

include mitigation measures to compensate for uncertainty. PPQ uses systems approaches for the 

importation of many commodities including tomatoes from Spain, France, Morocco, and 

Western Sahara (7 CFR § 319.28, U.S. Federal Register, 2010), and lettuce and peppers from 

Israel (7 CFR § 319.56.24 U.S. Federal Register, 2006). These programs have performed 

successfully for many years. 

The phytosanitary measures required by 7 CFR § 319.56-28 (U.S. Federal Register, 2010) for 

importing greenhouse grown tomatoes from Spain, France, Morocco and West Sahara, and 

Australia include fruit fly trapping protocols, poor host status, and inspection.

2. Phytosanitary Options

A. Establishment of Pest-free Areas: As a sole mitigative measure, the establishment of pestfree areas or pest-free places of production may be completely effective in satisfying an 

importing country’s appropriate level of phytosanitary protection (IPPC, 1996b, 1999). This

option has proven to be successful in practice, obviating the need for post-harvest commodity

treatments to achieve probit-9-level security (e.g., TDOA, 2003). Establishment and maintenance 

of pest-free areas or production sites should be in compliance with international standards (e.g., 

IPPC, 1996b, 1999; NAPPO, 2004b).

B. Establishment of Areas of Low Pest Prevalence: According to the IPPC, an area of low pest 

prevalence may comprise all of a country, part of a country, or all or parts of several countries, in 

which a particular pest species occurs at low population densities and which is or are subject to 

effective surveillance and control or eradication measures (FAO, 1999). Procedures for the 

establishment and maintenance of areas of low pest prevalence should comply with international 

standards (e.g., NAPPO, 2003; IPPC, 2005). For example, elements of an operational plan for 

establishment and maintenance of such areas might include a geographic description to delimit 

the area; specification of an upper limit to pest densities; means to document and verify all 

necessary procedures and maintain records; specification of phytosanitary procedures (e.g., 

survey, pest control); and movement controls to prevent pest entry or re-entry into the area. The 

international standards recommend that the exporting country consult with the importing country

in the early stages of implementation to ensure that importing country requirements are met. In 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 69 July 20, 2010

particular, target or threshold population densities defining an area of low pest prevalence should 

be established in consultation with the importing country.

Any protocol for establishing and maintaining a pest-free area or area of low pest prevalence also 

should include a pest-reporting procedure and emergency action plan to address target pest 

detections in the pest-free or low-prevalence zones (IPPC, 1999, 2005; NAPPO, 2003, 2004b). 

C. Suppression/Control: Sanitation can effectively control pests, directly by eliminating the 

pests, and indirectly by eliminating safe hiding places and reducing food sources and inoculum 

levels (Agrios 1997; Bessin 2001; Jones and Benson 2001; Roosjen et al. 1999). Screens and 

doors exclude the entry of flying or crawling pests that cannot fit through them (Bessin 2001; 

Roosjen et al. 1999; Metcalf and Metcalf 1993).

Greenhouse production of tomatoes protects fruit from most pests that would require the use of 

pesticides and fungicides if they were field-grown (Jones, 1999). Current regulations (7 CFR

§ 319.56-28) require that tomatoes from Spain, France, Morocco and Western Sahara, Chile, and 

Australia be grown in insect-proof, pest-free greenhouses. To prevent pests from entering, the 

greenhouses are required to be equipped with double self-closing doors, and any vents or 

openings in the greenhouses (other than the double closing doors) are to be covered with 

screening in order to prevent the entry of pests into the greenhouse. 

To exclude plant pests, the mesh size of the screen is critical (Byrne, 1998). Two recent 

publications give the mesh size of screen required to keep out certain pests, as shown in Table 1.

In order to eliminate all insects from entering the greenhouses through the screening the screen 

size would have to be 0.2 mm or smaller (Table 1). Smaller screen sizes create additional 

problems in greenhouses, such as increased heat and fungal problems as a result of reduced air 

flow (Ghidiu and Roberts 2002; Ferguson and Murphy 2000). However, the standard screen size 

of 0.6 mm for tomato greenhouses effectively excludes medium to large insects, such as moths 

and fruit flies.

Table 1: Screen Hole Size (microns) 1 to Prevent Pest Entry.

Pest Ghidiu and Roberts, 2002 Bethke, 1994

Leafminers 640 608

Whiteflies 462 239

Aphids 340 355

Flower thrips 192 215

1

1 millimeter = 1,000 microns

Although some of the smallest pests may not be excluded by 0.6 mm screening, most pests 

would be expected to be excluded. Additionally, according to Baker (2005), “Although the pore 

sizes of some screening materials are large enough that the thrips are capable of wedging 

through, the screening still excludes many thrips. Evidently, these materials are not recognized 

by thrips as a suitable substrate to feed on. When the thrips probes the screening it may

instinctively resume flight searching for a suitable plant.” 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 70 July 20, 2010

Since the start of the tomato systems approaches in Spain and France the pest interceptions have 

been very low (Table 2). 

Table 2. Performance of Selected Tomato Import Programs

Event Spain France

Start of the program 1994 1998

Total shipment numbers 7543 68

Taxonomy Pest interceptionsa(no.)

Agromyzidae (Diptera) 12 1

Thrips species (Thysanoptera) 2 0

Macrolophus spp. (Heteroptera: Miridae) 0 3

Miridae (Heteroptera) 1 0

Theba (Mollusca: Helicidae) 2 0

Fusarium/Cladosporium 2 0

Stemphylium 3 0

Total 22 4

a PIN309, 2005

The screening effectiveness is demonstrated by the low numbers of interceptions and the absence 

of interceptions on larger inspections. As illustrated, the pests that were intercepted on tomatoes 

from these countries were generally very small, such as Agromyzidae and nymphal Miridae. The 

small size of these insects allowed them to fit though the greenhouse screening. However, as 

discussed, a smaller screen size, which would eliminate all insects, creates additional problems in 

greenhouses.

D. Phytosanitary certification inspections and monitoring: Fruit should be sampled and 

inspected periodically during the growing season and after harvest. Current regulations (7 CFR §

319.56-28) for tomatoes from Spain, France, Morocco and Western Sahara, Chile, and Australia

require that the national plant protection organizations inspect the greenhouses at least two 

months prior to shipping to establish their freedom from high risk quarantine pests. 

To monitor for Bactrocera depressa, current regulations (7 CFR § 319.56-28) for tomatoes from 

Spain, France, Morocco and Western Sahara, Chile, and Australia require McPhail traps, with an 

approved protein bait, be placed inside a buffer area 500 meters wide surrounding the registered 

greenhouses at a density of 1 traps/ 10 ha for a total of at least 10 traps. If tomatoes are grown in 

a greenhouse, at least one of these traps needs to be near a greenhouse. The current regulations in 

7 CFR § 319.56-28 require traps to be serviced every seven days and that traps be set for at least 

two months before export and continue to the end of the harvest. Inside the greenhouses: 

McPhail traps, with an approved protein bait, are placed inside the greenhouses at a density of 4 

traps/ha, with a minimum of at least 2 traps/greenhouse. Traps should be serviced on a weekly

basis. Unlike other Bactrocera species, B. depressa is not known to respond to methyl-eugenol 

or cuelure (IAEA, 2003; White & Elson-Harris, 1992). Protein baits and spiroketal may be used 

as attractants (IAEA, 2003). 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 71 July 20, 2010

For monitoring for thrips in greenhouses, Lewis (1997) suggests hanging flat sticky cards just 

above the crop, though cylindrical surface traps placed within a meter of crop level may be the 

most effective (Lewis, 1997). Since thrips are often attracted to specific colors, more information 

is needed on what color of sticky trap would be most effective. Yellow sticky traps have been 

shown to be effective in monitoring for certain thrips, especially Frankliniella occidentalis

(Steiner & Goodwin, 2005; Lewis, 1997) and are popular because yellow is generally the best 

color for attracting other pests such as whiteflies and aphids. In the past, blue or white traps have 

been used for Thrips palmi, and white or yellow traps have been used for Scirtothrips citri 

(Lewis, 1997); therefore, white sticky traps may be most effective.

Results of surveys should be negative for larvae of fruit flies, moths and external pests. Within a 

registered greenhouse, capture of a single fruit fly or other quarantine pest should result in the 

immediate cancellation of exports from that greenhouse until the source of the infestation is 

determined, the infestation has been eradicated, and measures are taken to preclude any future 

infestation. Outside the registered greenhouse, if one fruit fly of the species Bactrocera depressa 

is captured, the trap density and frequency of the trap inspection should be increased to detect a 

reproducing colony. Capture of three B. depressa within 2 kilometers of each other and within 30 

days should result in the cancellation of exports from all registered greenhouses within 2 

kilometers of the finds until the source of infestation is determined and the fruit fly infestation is 

eradicated similar to the current requirements for tomatoes from Australia (7 CFR § 319.56-28).

For each of the described monitoring measures, statistical procedures are available and should be 

used to verify, to a specified confidence level, the pest-free status of an area, given negative 

survey or trapping results (e.g., Venette et al., 2002; Barclay & Hargrove, 2005).

Each shipment of tomatoes should be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate of inspection 

issued by NPQS. Additionally, production areas should be subject to periodic, unannounced 

inspections by certified inspectors from PPQ and NPQS to ensure that they meet stipulated 

requirements. 

Post-harvest safeguards and packinghouse procedures: Harvested tomatoes should be 

covered with screens, plastic tarpaulins, or other pest-proof covers while in transit to the packing 

house and while awaiting packing. The tomatoes should be packed within 24 hours of harvest in 

a pest exclusionary packing house, consistent with the regulations already in place for Spain, 

France, Morocco and West Sahara, and Australia (7 CFR § 319.56-28). They should be packed 

in pest proof containers for shipment to the United States.

Tomatoes should be sized and culled (to remove damaged and deformed fruit). In the 

packinghouse, fruit should undergo mechanical brushing and cleansing using compressed air or 

other treatment to remove external pests, particularly from the region of the stem and calyx. Fruit 

then should be immersed in a water bath containing surfactant and, perhaps, a surface sterilant, 

such as chlorine bleach (e.g., NaOCl). Surfactants, such as common dishwashing detergent, may

show a high degree of insecticidal activity with minimal risk of phytotoxicity. For example, Liu 

& Stansly (2000) achieved mortalities of 95-99% in leaf-infesting populations of silverleaf

whitefly (Bemisia argentifolii Bellows & Perring) treated with detergent-water solutions ranging 

in concentration from 2-30 ml L-1. Detergent-water solutions of about 1 ml L-1are effective in 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 72 July 20, 2010

killing mealybugs and other Coccoidea on plants (Townsend, 1993). All fruit should be 

inspected prior to packing. Consignments should be transported in sealed, refrigerated vehicles.

While packing the tomatoes for export to the United States, the packing house should only accept 

tomatoes from registered approved production sites.

Quarantine treatments: Several quarantine treatments have been approved for tomatoes and are 

listed in the PPQ Treatment manual (USDA, 2004a).

Vapor heat treatments have been shown to be effective on tomato against the Tephritid fruit flies 

Bactrocera dorsalis, B. curcubitae, and Ceratitis capitata. Vapor heat treatment consists of 

raising the temperature of the fruit by saturated water vapor at 112oF until the center of the fruit 

reaches 112oF. The fruit is held at 112oF for 8.75 hours then cooled immediately. Pretreatment 

conditioning is optional but may prolong the life of the fruit. Vapor heat treatment for fruit flies 

is required for all tomato shipments from Hawaii. This treatment may also be effective against B. 

depressa, which is associated with tomatoes from Korea, but more research is needed.

Methyl bromide (CH3Br) fumigation is an option for disinfesting many tomato pests. It is 

effective in killing eggs and larvae of internal Diptera and Lepidoptera, as well as some surface 

feeders such as thrips, infesting fresh fruit. Methyl bromide may be used to treat hitchhikers and 

surface pests such as thrips, scales, leafminers, spider mites, etc (T-104-a-1). Under this 

treatment schedule, tomatoes are fumigated at a dosage rate of 3lbs/1000ft3at a temperature 

above 50oF for two hours. For internal pests on tomatoes including the tomato fruit moth 

Scrobopalpula absoluta and tomato fruit fly Rhagoletis tomatis, treatment schedule T-101-c-3-1 

requires that tomatoes be treated at a temperature of 70oF or above at a dosage rate of 

3lbs/1000ft3 for two hours. This treatment is required for tomatoes from Chile. Treatment 

schedule T-101-c-3 for tomatoes from Hawaii requires that fruit at a dosage rate of 2lbs/1000ft3

for 3.5 hours for temperatures above 70oF and for 4 hours for temperatures between 65 and 69oF. 

This treatment may be effective against other internal pests, including those associated with 

tomatoes from Korea, but more research is needed.

Treatment of commodities with ionizing radiation, employing x-rays, gamma rays (from 60Co or 

137Cs), or electron beams (beta rays), has been shown to be an effective means of controlling 

pests to achieve quarantine security (Hallman, 2000; Fields & White, 2002). Irradiation is listed 

as a treatment for tomatoes from Hawaii for Bactrocera spp. and Ceratitis capitata according to 

treatment schedule T105-a-1. 

APHIS has also established a final rule for generic doses of irradiation that require “a minimum 

generic dose of 150 Gy for all fruit flies of the family Tephritidae,” and “a minimum generic 

dose of 400 Gy for all plant pests of the class Insecta other than pupae and adults of the order 

Lepidoptera” for “all regulated articles (i.e., fruits, vegetables, cut flowers, and foliage)” (Shea, 

2006). There are two exceptions to these generic doses: 1) “lower minimum doses for certain 

fruit flies,” and 2) “new approved minimum doses for 10 plant pests” (Shea, 2006). Based on the 

final rule (Shea, 2006), irradiation is approved for all insect pests of concern on tomato from 

Korea at the following doses: 

 150 Gy: Bactrocera depressa (Diptera: Tephritidae)
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 73 July 20, 2010

 400 Gy: Larvae of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), Helicoverpa assulta 

(Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Mamestra brassicae (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Ostrinia 

furnacalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae); Scirtothrips dorsalis (Thysanoptera: Thripidae), 

Thrips palmi (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)

Since the object of irradiation is sterilization and not necessarily mortality, documentation of the 

dosage must accompany all irradiated shipments.

The probit-9-level security afforded by a quarantine treatment may be overwhelmed by a large 

volume of infested fruit (Powell, 2003). For this reason, adoption of a particular quarantine 

treatment should be in conjunction with efforts to maintain pest populations in production zones 

below specified densities (e.g., 0.01 fruit fly trap-1day-1; DeHaven, 2005), as would satisfy

requirements for the establishment of areas of low pest prevalence (IPPC, 2005).

Point-of-entry sampling and inspection: 

Upon arrival in the United States, consignments should be inspected, with particular attention 

given to paperwork and seals on vehicles, to ascertain that the chain of custody has remained 

intact. A random sample of fruit from each consignment should be inspected to detect a pest 

infestation rate of 10% or greater (USDA, 2004b).

3. Oversight

Pre-shipment programs: Inspection, treatment, or other mitigative measures performed in the 

greenhouse and packinghouse should be under the direct supervision of qualified APHIS and 

NPQS personnel, and in accordance with specified phytosanitary procedures. Such programs 

require monitoring all aspects of the application of any required phytosanitary measures and also 

aim to identify shortcomings or opportunities for program modifications (IPPC, 2002b).

Provision should be made for the formal recognition of approved areas, sites, or producers, as 

well as the specification of conditions for revoking approvals or refusing certification for export 

to the United States.

Shipments traceable to place of origin in Korea: 

A requirement that tomatoes be packed in containers with identification labels indicating the 

specific place of origin is necessary to ensure traceability to each production site.

4. Conclusions

There are several options available for mitigating the pests of concern from tomatoes from 

Korea. A systems approach may consist of a combination of measures including monitoring and 

management programs to achieve and maintain greenhouse sanitation, prevalence, packinghouse 

inspection and treatments, quarantine treatments, and maintenance of consignment security and 

traceability in transit, is most feasible. Options for risk mitigation are summarized in Table 3.

This document does not purport to establish specific work plans or to evaluate the quality of a 

specific program or systems approach. It identifies risks and provides information regarding 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 74 July 20, 2010

known mitigation measures. The specification and implementation of measures, as would be 

present in an operational work plan, is beyond the scope of this document.

Table 3. Summary of risk mitigation options (tomato, Solanum lycopersicum from Korea).

Measure(s) Pests Efficacy

Pest-free areas or 

places of production

All Satisfies requirements for appropriate level of protection

Suppression/Control Medium to large pests 

including Bactrocera 

depressa, Helicoverpa 

armigera, Helicoverpa 

assulta, Mamestra 

brassicae, Ostrinia 

furnicalis, may also be 

effective against thrips 

Plants will be grown solely in a greenhouse in which 

sanitary procedures are adequate to exclude plant pests.

Regular inspections are recognized as an important part 

of a pest management program (Kahn and Mathur 

1999).

Bactrocera depressa, adult moths of Helicoverpa 

armigera, Helicoverpa assulta, Mamestra brassicae,

and Ostrinia furnacalis, are relatively large (CABI 

2004; USDA 1982; Whittle 1986) and would easily be 

excluded by 0.6 mm mesh screening. 

Entryways equipped with automatically closing doors 

exclude flying adults of these pests (Kahn and Mathur 

1999).

Sanitation effectively controls or eliminates all types of 

pests directly by eliminating the pests, and indirectly by 

eliminating safe hiding places and reducing food sources 

and inoculum levels (Agrios 1997; Bessin 2001; Greer 

and Diver 2000; Jones and Benson 2001; Roosjen et al.

1999).

Inspections and 

monitoring

All, but must be used in 

combination with other 

measures

The relatively large size of Bactrocera depressa, 

Helicoverpa armigera, Helicoverpa assulta, Mamestra 

brassicae, Ostrinia furnicalis, and would allow 

detection of these pests at least during some stages of 

their development (CABI 2004; USDA 1982; Whittle 

1986). 

Fruit flies can be effectively monitored for exclusion 

through variety of proven traps (IAEA, 2003).

Damage caused by T. palmi is easy to identify because it 

is not unlike that caused by many other species of thrips.

Heavily infested plants are characterized by a silvered or 

bronzed appearance of the leaves, stunted leaves and 

terminal shoots and fruit is scarred and deformed (CABI 

2004). 

On chilli peppers (Capsicum frutescens), S. dorsalis

may occur in such large numbers that young leaves 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 75 July 20, 2010

Measure(s) Pests Efficacy

shrivel and curl ('leaf curl disease') with leaves and buds 

eventually abscising (CABI 2004). Feeding results in 

tissue browning and continuous lines or scratch marks in 

the epidermis of leaves (CABI 2004). Feeding on fruit 

may cause scarring or staining (Chang et al. 1995).

Thrips may be monitored within crops by checking the 

undersides of one or two leaves on 10 to 20 plants 

throughout the greenhouse weekly. Thrips can be 

detected early by checking several plants on each bench 

throughout the greenhouse on a weekly basis. Using 

yellow or blue sticky cards can help detect entrance of 

winged thrips into the greenhouse (Chen, 2000).

Sticky traps have been shown to be effective in 

monitoring for thrips (Lewis, 1997; Steiner & Goodwin, 

2005); however, more information is needed to 

determine the best color of trap, especially in attracting 

S. dorsalis (Lewis, 1997)

Phytosanitary 

certification

All, but must be used in 

combination with other 

measures

Requiring a phytosanitary certificate specifically listing 

the pests of concern identified in the pest risk 

assessment effectively requires NPQS to inspect the 

tomatoes specifically for these pests. Furthermore, 

listing these pests on the phytosanitary certificate raises 

the awareness of U.S. inspectors to the pests of concern 

with this commodity.

Packinghouse 

procedures

All, but should be used 

in combination with 

other measures 

Packing within 24 hours of harvest in a pest 

exclusionary house and safeguarding during transit 

reduces the exposure of harvested tomatoes to 

infestation by maintaining the pest exclusionary barrier 

established by the greenhouse and just as the greenhouse 

does (Jones, 1999) provides protection from pests.

Vapor heat treatment Fruit flies Approved for certain Tephritid fruit flies; more research 

is needed to verify would also be effective against B. 

depressa

Irradiation combined 

with low pest 

prevalence

All PPQ-recognized treatment

Methyl bromide 

fumigation 

combined with low 

pest prevalence

All Approved for certain internal pests of tomatoes, (USDA, 

2004a); more research is needed to verify it would also 

be effective against the specific internal pests associated 

with Korean tomatoes.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 76 July 20, 2010

5. Literature Cited

Agrios, G.N. 1997. Plant pathology. 4

th Edition. Academic Press, San Diego, California. 

APHIS. 2004b. New pest response guidelines: Ralstonia solanacearum race 3 biovar 2-southern 

wilt of geranium. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, Pest Detection and Management Programs. Riverdale, MD. 74 pp.

Baker. J.R. (Ed.) 2005. Insect and Related Pests of Flowers and Foliage Plants. Some important, 

common, and potential pests in the southeastern United States. North Carolina State 

University Cooperative Extension Service. Online version:

http://mrec.ifas.ufl.edu/Foliage/entomol/ncstate/nccredit.htm. Last accessed 9 August, 

2005. 

Barry, D.W. (Ed.) 1996. Greenhouse Pesticide Management. Section 10 – Management of 

Greenhouse Diseases [Web page]

http://www.ag.ndsu.nodak.edu/aginfo/pesticid/publications/GreenH/gpm1.htm#Greenhouse Pesticide. Last accessed 9 August, 2005.

Bessin. 2001. Controls for greenhouse ornamental insect pests. Univ. Kentucky Cooperative 

Extension Service Web page: 

http://www.uky.edu/Agriculture/Entomology/entfacts/trees/ef421.htm. Last accessed 9 

August, 2005.

Bethke, J. A. 1994. Considering installing screening? This is what you need to know.

Greenhouse Manager, April 1994, 34 - 36.

Byrne, P. 1998. Exclusion of Plant Pests with Screen. Training handout for USDA, APHIS 

Containment Facility Quarantine Officer Training, Riverdale, MD. August, 1998.

CABI. 2004. Crop Protection Compendium, 2004 Edition. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.

Chang, N. T., B. L. Parker, M. Skinner, and T. Lewis. 1995. Major pest thrips in Taiwan, pp. 

105-108, Thrips biology and management: Proceedings of the 1993 International 

Conference on Thysanoptera. Plenum Press, New York.

Chen, M.C. 2000. Integrated Pest Management for Thrips palmi Karny on Eggplant, Research 

Bulletin of Kaohsiung District Agricultural Improvement Station 11(2). 

DeHaven, W.R. 2005. Citrus from Peru. Proposed Rules. Fed. Register 70(189): 57206-57213.

FAO. 2002. International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures. Glossary of Phytosanitary

Terms, Publication No. 5. UN-FAO-IPPC, Italy.

FAO. 1999. 1997 International Plant Protection Convention (New Revised Text). Rome: 

Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention, United Nations Food and 

Agriculture Organization.

Ferguson, G. and Murphy, G. 2000. Screening of Greenhouses for Insect Exclusion. Factsheet 

00-021. Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food. Government of Ontario, Canada. 

www.gov.on.ca/OMAFRA/english/crops/facts/00-021.htm. Last accessed August 21, 

2005.

Fields, P.G. and N.D.G. White. 2002. Alternatives to methyl bromide treatments for storedproduct and quarantine insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 47: 331-359.

Ghidiu, G.M. and Roberts, W.J. 2002. Greenhouse Screening for Insect Control, Factsheet 

FS640. The State University of New Jersey, Rutgers Cooperative Extension. 

Gill, S., Dutky, E., Raupp, M., Davidson, J., Nakahara, S. 2001. Thrips Management in

Greenhouses FS-762. College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of 
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 77 July 20, 2010

Maryland, College Park, MD.

Greer, L. and Diver, S. 2000. Greenhouse IPM: Sustainable Thrips Control. National Center for 

Appropriate Technology, National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service 

Publication #IP148/63. http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/ghthrips.pdf. Last accessed 

August 21. 2005.

Hallman, G.J. 2000. Expanding radiation quarantine treatments beyond fruit flies. Agric. For. 

Entomol. 2(2): 85-95.

Hara, A.H., J.A. Yalemar, E.B. Jang, and J.H. Moy. 2002. Irradiation as a possible quarantine 

treatment for green scale Coccus viridis (Green) (Homoptera: Coccidae). Postharvest 

Biol. Technol. 25(3): 349-358.

IPPC. 1996a. Guidelines for pest risk analysis. International Standards for Phytosanitary

Measures Publication No. 2. Rome: Secretariat of the International Plant Protection

Convention, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.

IPPC. 1996b. Requirements for the establishment of pest free areas. International Standards for 

Phytosanitary Measures Publication No. 4. Rome: Secretariat of the International Plant 

Protection Convention, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.

IPPC. 1999. Requirements for the establishment of pest free places of production and pest free 

production sites. International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures Publication No. 10. 

Rome: Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention, United Nations Food 

and Agriculture Organization.

IPPC. 2001. Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests. International Standards for Phytosanitary

Measures Publication No. 11. Rome: Secretariat of the International Plant Protection 

Convention, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.

IPPC. 2002a. Glossary of phytosanitary terms. International Standards for Phytosanitary

Measures Publication No. 5. Rome: Secretariat of the International Plant Protection 

Convention, United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.

IPPC. 2002b. The use of integrated measures in a systems approach for pest risk management.

International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures Publication No. 14. Rome: 

Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention, United Nations Food and 

Agriculture Organization.

IPPC. 2003. Guidelines for the use of irradiation as a phytosanitary measure. International 

Standards for Phytosanitary Measures Publication No. 18. Rome: Secretariat of the 

International Plant Protection Convention, United Nations Food and Agriculture 

Organization.

IPPC. 2005. Requirements for the establishment of areas of low pest prevalence. International 

Standards for Phytosanitary Measures Publication No. 22. Rome: Secretariat of the 

International Plant Protection Convention, United Nations Food and Agriculture 

Organization.

Jarvis, W. R. 1992. Managing Diseases in Greenhouse Crops. APS Press, American 

Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, MN. 288 pp.

Jones, J.B. 1999. Tomato plant culture: inf the filed, greenhouse, and home garden. CRC Press 

LLC: Boca Raton, FL. 199 pp.

Jones, R. K. and D. M. Benson. 2001. Diseases of Woody Ornamentals and Trees in Nurseries.

APS Press, American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, MN.

Kahn, R. P. and S. B. Mathur. 1999. Containment Facilities and Safeguards. American 

Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, MN. 213 pp.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 78 July 20, 2010

Kang, I. 2002. Personal Communication Inho Kang, Manager, Export Office, Nonghyup, The 

National Agricultural Cooperative Federation, Korea to Lynn Evans-Goldner, Plant 

Pathologist, USDA, APHIS, PPQ. (Subject: Confirmation of scientific name of Sweet 

pepper for export to the United States from Korea. On file with USDA APHIS-PPQPDMP).

Korea. 2004. Opinion of the Government of Korea on APHIS draft PRAs on Korean paprika and 

sweet potato. (Letter on file with USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST).

Lewis, T. 1997. Field and Laboratory Techniques. In Thrips as Crop Pests. CAB International: 

Wallingford, UK. 740 pp. 

Liu, T.-X. and P.A. Stansly. 2000. Insecticidal activity of surfactants and oils against silverleaf 

whitefly (Bemisia argentifolii) nymphs (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) on collards and 

tomato. Pest Manage. Sci. 56(10): 861-866.

Lokhande, R. K., N. G. V. Rao and P. Mohan. 1995. A survey of insect and mite pests of chillies 

(Capsicum spp.) in its different phenological stages. Advances in Plant Sciences 8: 85-90. 

Metcalf, R. L. and R. A. Metcalf. 1993. Destructive and Useful Insects, 5th Edition. McGrawHill, Inc., NY. 

NAPPO. 1998. Surveillance for quarantine fruit flies (in a portion of a generally infested area). 

NAPPO Regional Standards for Phytosanitary Measures No. 10. Ottawa: Secretariat of the 

North American Plant Protection Organization.

NAPPO. 2003. Guidelines for the establishment, maintenance and verification of areas of low pest 

prevalence for insects. NAPPO Regional Standards for Phytosanitary Measures No. 20. 

Ottawa: Secretariat of the North American Plant Protection Organization.

NAPPO. 2004a. Detection of pink hibiscus mealybug (Maconellicoccus hirsutus Green), in the 

municipality of Bahia de Banderas in the State of Nayarit, Mexico. NAPPO Phytosanitary

Alert System. North American Plant Protection Organization;

http://www.pestalert.org/pestnewsdetails.cfm?newsID=297&keyword=MACONELLICOC

CUS%20HIRSUTUS [accessed October 2005].

NAPPO. 2004b. Guidelines for the establishment, maintenance and verification 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.

Ogawa, J.M., Zehr, E.I., Bird, G.W., Ritchie, D.F., Uriu, K. and Uyemoto, J.K. (Eds.). 1995. 

Compendium of Stone Fruit Diseases. American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, 

Minnesota. 98 pp.

Park, C.-Y. 2002. Paprika information and pest list. National Plant Quarantine Service, Republic 

of Korea. Unpublished memo to PPQ. 5 pp. (On file with USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST).

Powell, M.R. 2003. Modeling the response of the Mediterranean fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) 

to cold treatment. J. Econ. Entomol. 96(2): 300-310

Roosjen, M.G., Stigter, M. and Oomen, P.A. 1999. Greenhouse Pest Exclusion and Eradication 

Safeguards and Principles. In: Kahn, R.P. and Mathur, S.B., eds. Containment Facilities 

and Safeguards for Exotic Plant Pathogens and Pests. St. Paul, MN: APS Press. Pgs. 182-

185.

Steiner, M.Y. and S. Goodwin. 2005. Management of western flower thrips, Frankliniella 

occidentalis (Pergande) (Thysanoptera: Thripidae), in hydroponic strawberry crops using 

yellow sticky traps to determine action thresholds. 

TDOA. 2003. Texas Rio Grande Valley Mexican Fruit Fly, Anastrepha ludens, (Loew) [sic] 

Protocol—2003/2004. Unpublished report. Texas Department of Agriculture.
Pest Risk Assessment for Tomatoes from Korea

Rev. 07 79 July 20, 2010

Townsend, L. 1993. Houseplant insect control. Kentucky Coop. Ext. Serv. EntFact 405.

USDA. 1982. Pests Not Known to Occur in the United States or of Limited Distribution, No. 24: 

Rice Cutworm. USDA, APHIS, PPQ, Hyattsville, MD. 8 pp.

USDA. 2004a. Treatment Manual. USDA-APHIS, PPQ;

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/manuals/pdf_files/TM.pdf [accessed June 2005].

USDA. 2004b. Agricultural Quarantine Inspection Monitoring (AQIM) Handbook. USDAAPHIS, PPQ; http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/manuals/pdf_files/AQIM_Handbook.pdf

[accessed October 2005].

USDA. 2005a. Importation of Fresh Tomato Fruit with Stems (Solanum lycopersicum L.)

(Synonym: Lycopersicon esculentum P. Mill.) from the Republic of Korea into the United 

States 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. Raleigh, NC. 73 pp.

USDA. 2005b. Ralstonia solanacearum Race 3 Biovar 2 Likelihood of Entry, Introduction, and 

Establishment, and Mitigation Recommendations: Supplement to the USDA-APHIS Pest 

Risk Assessment Importation of fresh paprika pepper fruit (Capsicum annuum L. var. 

annuum) from the Republic of South Korea into the continental United States. 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. Raleigh, NC. 10 pp.

Whittle, K. 1986. Pests Not Known to Occur in the United States or of Limited Distribution No. 

74: Cabbage Moth- Mamestra brassicae L. September 1986. USDA, APHIS, PPQ.

Hyattsville, MD. 15 pp.