Importation of Banana, Musa spp., as Fresh, Hard Green Fruit 

from the Philippines to the Continental United States

A Qualitative Pathway-Initiated Risk Assessment

July 21, 2009

Rev. 02

Agency Contact:

Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory

Center for Plant Health Science and Technology

United States Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Plant Protection and Quarantine

1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 300

Raleigh, NC 27606
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 ii

Executive Summary

In this assessment we examined the risks associated with the importation of mature hard green 

bananas (Musa spp.) from the Philippines into the continental United States. We developed a list

of quarantine pests associated with banana in the Philippines that could be introduced into the 

continental United States via this pathway. We qualitatively analyzed the quarantine pests that 

could follow the pathway based on international standards and internal guidelines described in the 

PPQ Guidelines for Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk Assessments, Version 5.02 (PPQ, 2000a). In this 

analysis, we examined pest biology in the context of Consequences of Introduction and Likelihood 

of Introduction. We analyzed sixteen quarantine pests that could follow the pathway of bananas 

from the Philippines: 

Taxa Scientific name Pest risk potential

Diptera: Tephritidae Bactrocera musae (Tryon) High

Bactrocera occipitalis (Bezzi) High

Bactrocera philippinensis Drew and Hancock High

Coleoptera: Cerambycidae Sybra alternans Wiedemann Medium

Hempitera: Coccidae Ceroplastes rubens Maskell Medium

Coccus viridis (Green) Medium

Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae Dysmicoccus neobrevipes Beardsley Medium 

Geococcus coffeae Green Medium

Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green) Medium

Planococcus lilacinus (Cockerell) Medium

Planococcus minor (Maskell) Medium 

Pseudococcus cryptus Hempel Medium

Rastrococcus invadens Williams Medium 

Rastrococcus spinosus (Robinson) Medium

Fungi Cercospora hayi Calpouzos Low

Guignardia musae Racib. Low

We gave ratings of High to the fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae), Medium to Sybra alternans, both

scales (Hemiptera: Coccidae), and all mealybugs (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae), and a Low rating 

for the two fungi. All of these pests pose phytosanitary risks to American agriculture. Pests with 

Low risk ratings will typically not require specific mitigation measures; the port-of-entry

inspection to which all imported commodities are subjected is likely to provide sufficient 

phytosanitary security. However, we list options for risk mitigation for all pests at the end of this 

document.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 iii

Table of Contents

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

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

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

1.2. Standard production and post-harvest processing................................................................ 1

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

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

2.2 Botanical and Horticultural Background .............................................................................. 2

2.3 Assessment of the Weed Potential of Musa spp. .................................................................. 4

2.4. Decision History, Current Status, and Pest Interceptions.................................................... 6

2.4. Pests reported on banana in the Philippines....................................................................... 10

2.5. Quarantine pests following the pathway and analyzed further.......................................... 29

2.6. Consequences of Introduction............................................................................................ 30

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

2.8. Conclusion - Pest Risk Potential and Pests Requiring Phytosanitary Measures ............... 41

3. Risk Mitigation Options............................................................................................................ 42

4. Literature Cited ......................................................................................................................... 46

5. Authors and Reviewers............................................................................................................. 58

6. Appendices................................................................................................................................ 59

Appendix A: Pest mitigation measures built in the production and processing operations of 

Philippine bananas intended for export..................................................................................... 59

Appendix B: Banana pest list provided by the Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant 

Industry, the Philippines and Dole Fruit Company, Philippines .............................................. 61
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 1

1. Introduction

1.1. Background

This pest risk assessment was originally prepared for Dole Philippines, Inc., Dole Asia Ltd., 

Makati, Philippines. A request for market access has been submitted previously by the Bureau of 

Plant Industry (BPI), Department of Agriculture of the Philippines, to the Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service (APHIS), U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). This RA was 

submitted by Lealyn A. Ramos, Director/Officer-in-Charge, BPI, to APHIS in support of the 

request for market access.

In this assessment we examined the risks associated with the importation as mature, green 

banana fruits of Musa spp., which include Musa acuminata cultivars and M. acuminata x M.

balbisiana hybrids, from the Philippines into the continental United States. We use the word 

“green” herein to mean banana fruit harvested in the mature (hard) green stage, which is Stage 1 

in the banana fruit growth cycle, and packed for export within 24 hours of harvesting. We did the 

assessment on the basis of pests and pathogens of the genus Musa with edible fruits, in general, 

and M. acuminata and its hybrids or cultivars in particular (please see Section 2.2 for botanical 

details). Hereafter, we will refer to the commodity as “Musa spp.”

In this risk assessment we estimated risk using the qualitative terms “high”, “medium” and “low” 

rather than probabilities or frequencies. The details of the methodology and rating criteria are in 

the document: Guidelines for Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk Assessments, Version 5.02 (PPQ, 

2000a). Regional and international plant protection organizations, such as the North American 

Plant Protection Organization (NAPPO) and the International Plant Protection Convention 

(IPPC), provide guidance for conducting pest risk analyses (IPPC, 2007: ISPM #11). The 

methods used to initiate, conduct, and report this assessment, as well as the use of biological and 

phytosanitary terms, are based on these standards. The IPPC standards describe three stages of 

pest risk analysis: Stage 1, Initiation: Stage 2, Risk Assessment; and Stage 3, Risk Management.

This document satisfies the requirements of IPPC Stages 1 and 2, and provides mitigation 

options for Stage 3. 

1.2. Standard production and post-harvest processing measures

The following processes, described by the exporters (Appendix A), are standard and completed 

for all exported products. These processes will be subject to verification and compliance checks. 

Although it may be useful and appropriate during the creation of the risk assessment to assume 

these standard processes apply to all exported fruit, we could not do that here.

In standard banana operations, growers apply insecticides and fungicides as injections and 

sprays, and cover developing bunches with plastic bags impregnated with insecticides. These 

practices are done to control thrips, scale insects, mealybugs, aphids, fruit flies, and other 

external insect pests, as well as bacterial and fungal diseases.

Exporters inspect banana bunches one day before harvest and cull infested fruit. At the packing 

plant, they spray fruit bunches with high-pressure water, and examine and cull fruit again for 
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 2

pest infestations or other damage. Then they separate the bunches into “hands”—smaller 

individual bunches of bananas—thoroughly clean them with soapy, chlorinated water, and 

inspect yet again for pest infestation. Finally, fruit are packed into clean boxes and pallets are 

loaded into shipping vessels or cold storage. This all happens within three hours of harvest.

2. Risk Assessment

2.1 Initiating Event: Proposed Action

This risk assessment is commodity-based, and therefore is “pathway-initiated.” The original risk 

assessment was completed by Robert P. Kahn and Philip Lima, Consultants in Plant Protection 

and Quarantine, in a contract (dated September 20, 2004) with Dole Food Company, represented 

by James Prideaux, Director, Dole, Philippines, Inc., to assess the potential risk of importing into 

continental United States commercial shipments of mature hard green bananas of Musa 

acuminata cultivars and M. acuminata x M. balbisiana and other hybrids. The importation into 

the United States of the fresh fruit of species or hybrids of Musa is a potential pathway for the 

introduction of plant pests of quarantine significance to the United States. The regulatory

authority for the importation of fruits and vegetables from foreign sources into the continental 

United States may be found in the Code of Federal Regulations (7 CFR § 319.56, 2005).

2.2 Botanical and Horticultural Background

Bananas are classified under two genera, Musa and Ensete, in the family Musaceae and Order 

Zingiberales. In this document we did not assess the genus Ensete, which includes E. 

ventricosum, an African species known as the Abyssinian banana (Jones, 2000a; Wiersema and 

León, 1999). The genus Musa contains ornamental, fiber, wild, and edible species. We did not 

assess M. textilis, or abaca, which is a species grown commercially in the Philippines as a source 

of fiber known as Manila hemp.

The edible species of the genus Musa that we assessed here include M. acuminata Colla, M. 

balbisiana Colla, and M. troglodytarum L., and hybrids such as Musa x paradisiaca or M. 

acuminata x M. balbisiana. Musa acuminata and M. balbisiana are characterized further by their 

genomes, which are designated as “A” for those derived from M. acuminata sources and “B” for 

M. balbisiana. AA and BB are used to denote diploids, AAA and BBB for triploids and AAAA, 

and BBBB for tetraploids (Simmonds, 1966).

Dole is primarily interested in exporting Cavendish bananas; cultivars in this subgroup include

Dwarf Cavendish, Giant Cavendish, Grand Nain (AAA), and Williams. Stanfilco, a Division of 

Dole Philippines, mainly produces the Dwarf Cavendish cultivar, but also produces selections 

from Giant Cavendish (such as SFC-18, also known as Supersweet). Other varieties to be 

exported in smaller quantities include M. acuminata cultivars Lakatan (AA) and Señorita (AA); 

M. acuminata x M. balbisiana cultivar Tindok (AAB); and M. acuminata cultivars Bungulan and 

Morado (AAA) (Munez, 2004).
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 3

Banana plants are parthenocarpic: fruits develop without pollination (Simmonds, 1966). 

Triploids and cultivated diploids of M. acuminata are seedless. The plant is a monocotyledonous 

herbaceous perennial. The plant or mat consists of:

 a fleshy rhizome (sometimes called a corm or head)

 a fibrous root system

 a pseudostem, which arises from the rhizome, consisting of fused petiole bases (i.e., tightly

packed leaf sheaths)

 other suckers that arise from the rhizome

 one sucker, retained for continued growth of the mat referred to as the “maiden” or “maiden 

plant” when the main pseudostem is known as the “mother” or “mother plant”

 other suckers for propagation, often referred as “followers” or as “seed” but not seed in the 

botanical sense

 leaves (also known as “sword-, spear-, or arrow-leaves) that emerge from the pseudostem to 

form a canopy

 a peduncle or stalk upon which bracts, inflorescences, i.e., separate female and male flowers

(sometimes called bells), and fruits are borne

 a bunch, which is a collective term for a series of hands (also referred to as tiers) consisting 

of fruits known as fingers

 crowns, which are the fleshy part of a hand, and give rise to pedicels that support fingers

We used many of these terms in the pest list (Table 6). More detailed descriptions of the banana 

plant morphology are available (Crane and Balerdi, 1998; Jones, 2000a; Karamura and 

Karamura, 1995; Morton, 1987; Price, 1995; Robinson, 1993; and Simmonds, 1966).

Since thrips are associated with flowers, we present the following description of male and female 

flowers (Crane and Balerdi, 1998). In Florida, the inflorescence emerges from the center of the 

pseudostem 10-15 months after planting, when 26-32 leaves are present. The flowers are 

arranged spirally along the axis of the inflorescence in groups of 10-20. A purplish fleshy bract 

covers each group of flowers and can be shed. The first flowers are functionally female, and the 

last to emerge are functionally male. In edible cultivars, the ovaries develop parthenocarpically

into clusters of fruits (i.e., hands).

Bananas grow best under humid and uniformly warm to hot conditions. Consequently, bananas 

are grown in humid tropical climates within latitudes of 30° N and S of the equator, but are most 

productive within 20° N and S. Most multinational companies produce bananas within 16° north 

or south latitudes (Watson, 1997). Robinson (1993) states, “The banana is primarily a crop of the 

humid tropical lowlands which are areas characterized by less than 10° N and S latitude, less 

than 100 meters altitude, not less than 19° C mean minimum temperature, and more than 100 

mm of rain each month.” In the Philippines, bananas are grown in similar tropical humid 

climates.

Tropical areas are also characterized by less fluctuation between high and low temperatures than 

subtropical areas where there may be an unfavorable range of too high and too low temperatures.

In South Africa, bananas are grown under subtropical rather than tropical conditions. During 

winter months, cold night temperatures between 12° and 5°C are devastating to the banana crop.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 4

Temperatures approach the ideal there only during the summer months, when daily minimum 

temperatures are above 18°C (Robinson, 1993).

In the continental United States, tropical areas are found in the Key West Islands, which are in 

Plant Hardiness Zone 11 [mean average daily temperature = above 5°C (USDA-NA, 2003)].

About 300 acres of bananas are grown commercially in the sub-tropical areas (Zones 9 and 10) at

Homestead, Florida (Ploetz, 2004, personal communication). The only other Zone 11 area in the

continental United States is in the southern tip of California, which is mostly desert and not 

suitable for banana production. Musa spp. are not listed in a California Plant Disease Host Index 

(French, 1989).

In subtropical areas of Zone 10, bananas are grown in gardens in southern Florida and along the 

Gulf Coast. However, the plants are subject to frequent damaging or killing frosts characteristic 

of subtropical areas. In Zone 9 of Louisiana, banana cultivars are grown as ornamentals, but not 

commercially for fruit (NRCS, 2005; Hardy, 2004). Some hardier ornamental species or cultivars 

are grown, but may produce no fruit or only small fruits (Hardy, 2004). In Texas, ornamental 

Musa species are grown extensively in areas where bananas cannot survive (Sauls, 2004). 

In Florida, the influence of temperature on banana plant growth has been described (Crane and 

Belerdi, 1998) as follows: 

 Shoots grow best at 26-28°C and fruits grow best at 29-30°C

 Plant growth slows below 16°C and stops at 10°C

 Symptoms of chilling injury that occur below 16°C but above 0°C include a failure of flower 

stalk or fruit bunch to emerge, a dull yellow or greenish gray color to ripening fruit, distorted 

fruit, and an increase in fruit rotting

 Chilling damage and irreversible freeze damage may occur at or below 0°C. Symptoms 

include water-soaking appearance of aboveground parts, desiccation, browning, and death of 

leaves, pseudostems, and fruit

 Temperature below -7°C usually kill plants to the ground but new growth may sprout when 

warm weather returns

 Temperatures above 37°C may result in leaf scorch and narrowing of newly emerged leaf

blades

Banana plant growth is also influenced by humidity, wind, drought, flooding, soil type and 

moisture, fertilizer, and shading (Crane and Belerdi, 1998; Simmonds, 1966; Robinson, 1993; 

and Turner, 1995).

2.3 Assessment of the Weed Potential of Musa spp. 

The results of the screening for weed potential of Musa species did not prompt a pest-initiated 

risk assessment.

In addition to the references listed in the “Guidelines” (PPQ, 2000a) for the preparation of Table 

1, we also consulted A Global Compendium of Weeds (Randall, 2002), which is based on over 

700 references or databases. This compendium includes Musa x hybrids, M. acuminata, M. 

basjoo, M. liukiuensis, M. textilis, M. tikap, and M. troglodytarum,” but no countries considered 

them to be quarantine, noxious, or sleeper (poses a potential threat) weeds. Where these species 
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 5

are listed as “weeds,” they are further classified as: [1] weed (economic weeds, i.e. pests of 

agriculture), [2] naturalized (self-sustaining and spreading without human assistance), [3] 

introduced (species that have been planted and that may or may not become naturalized; some 

species are desirable in some locations), [4] casual alien (survive without human assistance but 

do not develop persistent populations, and [5] cultivation escapes (escaped from cultivated area –

includes some crop or pasture species). As in Table 1, the weed potential is considered as 

negligible in the context of risk assessment.

Table 1. Assessment of the Weed Potential of Musa spp.

Commodity: Fresh green banana fruits, Musa spp. (Musaceae).

Phase 1: In the continental United States, banana production is limited to humid areas in Plant 

Hardiness Zone 11 (USDA-NA, 2003) although bananas will grow in sub-tropical areas (Zone 

10). Musa spp. for commercial fruit production are located south of Homestead, Florida (Zone 

11) (Ploetz, 2004, personal communication). According to plant surveys in the Plant Profile 

Database (NRCS, 2005), M. acuminata is in Florida and Musa x paradisiaca is in Louisiana 

and Florida; but M. troglodytarum and M. balbisiana are not listed as occurring in the United 

States. Frost is a limiting factor for banana plant growth in the subtropical continental United 

States. In the continental United States, edible banana plants and ornamental cultivars in home 

gardens exist in subtropical areas of Florida, the Gulf Coast, and the southern areas of 

California that may be subject to frost or arid limitations. Banana production in the continental 

United States is not significant enough to be listed in a statistical publication (NASS, 2004).

Phase 2: Is the species listed in:

YES A Geographical Atlas of the World Weeds (Holm et al., 1979).

Musa acuminata is listed as “present as a weed (defined as: the species is present and 

behaves as a weed but its economic importance is unknown)” in Malaysia, as is M. x

paradisiaca in Jamaica. The latter hybrid is listed as part of the flora of Israel but needs 

evidence confirming that it could behave as a weed.

NO The World’s Worst Weeds (Holm et al., 1977).

NO 1982 Report of the Technical Committee to Evaluate Noxious Weeds;

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

NO Economically Important Foreign Weeds (Reed, 1977). 

NO Composite List of Weeds (WSSA, 1989).

NO World Weeds (Holm et al., 1997).

NO A Global Compendium of Weeds (Randall, 2002).

NO Is there any literature reference indicating weediness (e. g., AGRICOLA, CABI,

Biological Abstracts, and AGRIS search on “species name” combined with “weed”).

Phase 3: Musa species are not widely prevalent in continental United States. The weed 

potential of Musa species is considered as negligible based on the following: [1] The climate in 

the continental United States is a limiting factor, [2] The bananas of commerce are seedless,

thus limiting spread by man or via natural pathways, [3] A survey of the literature listed in this 

Table and the following paragraph does not support a conclusion that species of edible bananas 

are weedy. A pest-initiated risk assessment of Musa species as weeds is not warranted.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 6

2.4. Decision History, Current Status, and Pest Interceptions

2.4.1. Decision history

Below we summarized the decisions made by a panel of APHIS entomologists and plant 

pathologists based on assessments of pest data for bananas from the Philippines in “fact sheets”

(Table 2).

2.4.2. Current Status of Banana Imports 

Bananas are currently allowed into the United States from numerous countries (Table 3).

Table 2. Results from available decision sheets since 1970 concerning recommendations for the 

entry into the United States of commercial shipments of banana fruit from the Philippines 

(CPHST, 2008).

Date Origin Ports Requested Decision Rationale

6/7/70 Philippines All Approved North Atlantic ports. Subject to EDB 

treatment as a condition of entry with a 

note that EDB treatment may affect 

flavor

4/11/72 Philippines Guam Approved Permit entry subject to phytosanitary

conditions at origin and inspection on 

arrival

6/20/83 Philippines Guam Denied No acceptable treatment available for 

Dacus dorsalis

9/22/86 Philippines Honolulu Denied A complex of Dacus spp. fruit flies for 

which there are no known treatments

3/3/88 Philippines Guam Denied No acceptable treatment available for 

Dacus dorsalis

9/24/93 Philippines Hawaii Denied Undetermined species of Bactrocera

Table 3. Imports allowed of banana fruit, flowers, or leaves, and the approved ports (APHIS, 

2004).

Country Plant Parts Ports

Asia And Oceania

American Samoa * Green fruit All1

Cook Islands (Also see Table 2) Green fruit All

Japan (from specified areas) Fruit, leaves Alaska, Guam, 

Northern Marianas

Korea, Republic of (South Korea) Fruit Guam, Northern 

Marianas

 

1

“All” means all ports of entry where PPQ officers are stationed or their areas of coverage, including Guam, 

Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 7

Country Plant Parts Ports

Micronesia, Federated States of 

(from named islands)

Fruit Guam, Northern 

Marianas

Samoa Green fruit All

Tonga Green fruit All

Vanuatu Fruit All

South America

Argentina * Fruit All

Bolivia * Fruit, Leaves All

Brazil * Fruit, Leaves, Stem All

Chile * Fruit, Leaves All

Colombia * Fruit, Leaves All

Ecuador * Flower, Fruit, Leaves All

French Guiana * Fruit, Leaves All

Guyana * Fruit, Leaves All

Paraguay * Fruit, Leaves All

Peru * Fruit, Leaves All

Suriname * Fruit, Leaves All

Uruguay * Fruit All

Venezuela * Fruit All

North America Including Central America

Aruba * Fruit All

Barbados Flowers, Fruit, Leaves All

Belize * Flowers In Bracts With Stem, 

Fruit, Leaves

All

Bermuda Fruit, Leaves All

Costa Rica * Fruit, Leaves All

Dominican Republic Flower, Fruit All

El Salvador * Fruit, Leaves All

Guatemala * Fruit, Leaves All

Honduras * Flower, Fruit, Leaves All

Mexico Flower, Fruit, Leaves (Commercial 

Shipments Only)

Fruit (Release Program Protocol) *

All 

Netherlands Antilles: Curacao Fruit, Leaves All

Nicaragua * Fruit, Leaves All

Panama * Fruit, Leaves All
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 8

Country Plant Parts Ports

Trinidad And Tobago * Fruit All

West Indies, All Countries2* Fruit, Leaves All

Africa

Algeria Fruit, Leaves All

Angola Fruit North Pacific

Benin Fruit, Leaves All

Burkina Faso Fruit, Leaves All

Cameroon Fruit, Leaves All

Congo, Democratic Republic of the Fruit, Leaves All

Congo, Republic of the Fruit, Leaves All

Côte D’Ivoire Fruit, Leaves All

Egypt Fruit, Leaves All

Ghana Fruit, Leaves All

Guinea, Republic of Fruit, Leaves All

Liberia Fruit, Leaves All

Mali Fruit, Leaves All

Mauritania Fruit, Leaves All

Morocco Fruit, Leaves All

Niger Fruit, Leaves All

Nigeria Fruit, Leaves All

Senegal Fruit, Leaves All

Sierra Leon Fruit, Leaves All

Togo Fruit, Leaves All

Tunisia Fruit, Leaves All

Europe

Spain: Canary Islands Fruit, leaves All

* = no written permits required (APHIS, 2004)

2.4.3. Pest Interception Records for Musa spp.

Pests are intercepted on imported articles, including commodities, at U.S.-authorized ports-ofentry. Such interceptions indicate that the commodity can serve as a pathway for the entry of the 

pest. Pest interceptions at U.S. ports-of-entry (including Hawaii) on banana fruit in baggage from 

the Philippines (PestID, 2009) are shown below (Table 4). However, the baggage may not have 

originated in the country listed below: passengers may have been in transit from another country.

Because they are pertinent to the APHIS risk assessments and regulations for bananas exported 

to the United States, we separately listed interceptions at U. S. ports-of-entry (including Hawaii) 

 

2 West Indies includes (APHIS, 2004): Antigua, Bahamas, Barbados, Cayman Islands, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican 

Republic, Grenada, Guadeloupe, Haiti, Jamaica, Martinique, Montserrat; Nevis; St. Barthelemy, St. Eustatius, St. 

Kitts, St. Lucia, St. Martin, St. Vincent, and British Virgin Islands. (Some of these area are listed separately)
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 9

on bananas in baggage from Pacific Ocean islands, which have been approved for exportation of 

green bananas into the United States (including US Territories) (Table 5).

APHIS regulations permitting green bananas from Hawaii to Guam and to the continental U.S. 

are found in 7 CFR § 318.13–4i (2005). Bactrocera dorsalis occurs in Hawaii, but not in Guam 

or in the Philippines (IIE, 1986). As a result of studies conducted in Hawaii, mature green 

bananas without precocious ripening and morphological aberrations that are grown under certain 

horticultural conditions are not likely to be hosts of B. dorsalis in nature (Armstrong 1983, 

2001). Miller and Chang (1998) analyzed Armstrong’s results and recommended conditions of 

entry into the continental U.S. and the territories.

Table 4. Pest interceptions on banana fruit in baggage from the Philippines (PestID, 2009).

Organism Interceptions 

(no.)

Organism Interceptions 

(No.)

Aphididae, species of 2 Maconellicoccus hirsutus 1

Aspidiotus sp. 1 Margarodidae, species of 1

Coccidae, species of 3 Phomopsis musicola 1

Coccus sp 1 Phyllosticta musarum 135

Dacus sp. 2 Phyllosticta spp. 2

Diaspididae, species of 2 Pinnaspis musae 1

Dysmicoccus neobrevipes 60 Planococcus lilacinus 6

Dysmicoccus spp. 5 Planococcus minor 6

Flatidae, species of 1 Planococcus sp. 1

Gryllidae, species of 1 Pseudococcidae, species of 52

Guignardia musae 45 Pseudococcus cryptus 1

Icerya pulcher 8 Pseudococcus spp. 3

Icerya sp. 4 Pyralidae, species of 2

Imperata sp. (seed) 1 Thripidae, species of 1

Lepidosaphes similis 2 Tineidae, species of 1

Lymantriidae, species of 1 Uxantis siccifolia 1
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 10

Table 5. Pest interceptions on banana fruit in baggage from Pacific Ocean islands

Island group Organism Interceptions (No.)

American Samoa Aphidae, species of 1

Dysmicoccus neobrevipes 3

Planococcus minor 2

Pseudococcidae, species of 2

Guam Diaspididae, species of 2

Dysmicoccus neobrevipes 3

Hesperidae, species of (leaf) 1

Phyllosticta musarum 1

Pseudaulacaspis sp. 1

Pseudococcidae, species of 3

Samoa Dysmicoccus neobrevipes 1

Pseudococcidae, species of 3

Tonga Planococcus minor 3

Pseudococcus sp. 1

Tephritidae, species of 1

2.4. Pests reported on banana in the Philippines

Below we list pests reported in the scientific and regulatory literature to occur on Musa species 

and cultivars in the Philippines are recorded in (Table 6). We also include information on the 

presence of these pests in the continental United States, as well as the parts of the host that are 

infested or infected, and quarantine status of the pest.

In the table below, the “pathway” is defined as commercial hard green mature banana fruits. 

They are subjected to the growing-season pest-management procedures and also phytosanitary

safeguards during harvesting, packing and shipping, which are applied within 24 hours of 

harvest, as described in Appendix A. Hard or mature green bananas are harvested, and these are 

equivalent to Stage 1 (e.g., McGregor, 1987; Nakasone and Paull, 1998) in the following banana 

industry standard:

 Stage 1 = dark green or green

 Stage 2 = green with a trace of yellow around the finger stalk, or light green

 Stage 3 = more green than yellow

 Stages 4-7 = more yellow than green, to yellow with brown spots.

Note: In the pest list, information on plant part association and whether the pest is likely to 

follow the pathway is only provided for quarantine pests, not for non-quarantine pests. Even if 

non-quarantine pests are able to follow the pathway, phytosanitary measures against these pests 

would not be justified as they already occur in the United States. Therefore, information on plant 

part association and whether the pest is likely to follow the pathway is not needed for nonquarantine pests and is indicated with “n/a” (not applicable).
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 11

Some pests with limited distribution in the United States are being considered for official 

control. APHIS is treating these pests as provisional quarantine pests (IPPC, 2003) until their

official statuses are recognized. Quarantine pests in this category have their status denoted with 

brackets as follows: [Yes]. 

Table 6. Pests associated with Musa spp. (in any country) and present in the Philippines (on any host).

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

FUNGI AND CHROMISTANS

Aspergillus flavus Link: Fr.

(Ascomycetes: Eurotiales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al. 2009

Aspergillus niger Tiegh.

(Ascomycetes: Eurotiales)

PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004

Asteromella paradisiaca Petr. 

(Ascomycetes: Incertae sedis)

PH L Yes No Farr et al. 2009; CABI, 

2009

Athelia rolfsii (Curzi) C. C. Tu & 

Kimbrough. 

Syn: Corticium rolfsii Curzi

(Basidomycetes: Pleosporales) 

Anamorph = Sclerotium rolfsii

Sacc. 

PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004

Beltraniella portoricensis (F. 

Stevens) Piroz. & S.D. Patil

Syn: Ellisiopsis gallesiae Bat. & 

Nascim.

Teleomorph: Pseudomassaria 

carolinensis M.E. Barr & Hodges 

(Ascomycetes: Xylariales)

PH, US (FL, 

PR, VI, SC)

L [Yes] No Farr et al., 2009; CABI, 

2009

Bipolaris sacchari (E.J. Butler) 

Shoemaker (Ascomycetes:

Pleosporales)

PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004

Ceratocystis paradoxa (Dade) C. 

Moreau 

Syn: Ceratostomella paradoxa

Dade (Pyrenomycetes: 

Ophiostomatales)

Anamorph: Charlara paradoxa

(De Seynes) Sacc., Thielaviopsis 

paradoxa (De Seynes) Honn. 

PH, US n/a No n/a Anon., 1982; BPI/Dole, 

2004; CABI, 2004; Farr et 

al., 2009; Muirhead and 

Jones, 2000

 

3

PH = Philippines; US = continental United States, selected States: AL = Alabama, AZ = Arizona, CA = California, CT = 

Connecticut, DE = Delaware, FL = Florida, GA = Georgia, HI = Hawaii, IA = Iowa, LA = Louisiana, PA = Pennsylvania,

PR = Puerto Rico, SC = South Carolina, TX = Texas, VI = Virgin Islands; WW = world-wide or cosmopolitan.

4 B = bracts, C = crown, F = fruit, Fl = reported as flowers or inflorescences, L = leaves, n/a = not applicable, P = peduncle, 

Ps = pseudostem, sometimes reported as “stem”, R = roots, Rh = rhizome also sometimes reported as corm, S = sucker, 

when reported as such, it is equivalent to Ps. (Please see Section 2.2 for a more detailed explanation of these terms). W = 

whole plant.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 12

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Cercospora hayi Calpouzos

(Ascomycetes: Mycosphaerellales)

PH C, F, P Yes Yes BPI/Dole, 2004; Jones and 

Stover, 2000; Kaiser and 

Lukezic, 1965, 1966; 

PCARRD, 1988

Cladosporium cladosporioides

(Fresen.) G.A. De Vries 

(Ascomycetes: Mycosphaerellales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Cladosporium herbarum (Pers. : Fr.) 

Link

Teleomorph: Davidiella tassiana

(De Not.) Crous & U. Braun

(Ascomycetes: Mycosphaerellales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Cochliobolus geniculatus R.R. 

Nelson 

Anamorph: Curvularia geniculata

(Tracy & Earle) Boedijn

(Ascomycetes: Pleosporales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Cochliobolus lunatus R.R.Nelson & 

Haasis 

Anamorph = Curvularia lunata

(Wakk.) Boedijn 

(Loculoascomycetes: Dothideales)

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Meredith, 1963

Colletotrichum capsici (Syd.) E.J. 

Butler & Bisby (Ascomycetes:

Phyllachorales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009; CABI, 

2004

Colletotrichum musae (Berk. & M. 

A. Curt. von Arx. 

Syn: Gloeosporium musarum

Cooke and Massee (Ascomycetes:

Phyllachorales)

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Farr et al., 2009; 

Jones and Stover, 2000; 

PCARRD, 1988; Weber, 

1973

Cordana musae (Zimm.) Höhne.

(Ascomycetes: Incertae sedis)

PH, US n/a No n/a Anon., 1982; BPI/Dole, 

2004; Farr et al., 1989; 

Gaskalla, 2004; Jones, 

2000c; PCARRD, 1988

Corynespora cassiicola (Berk. & 

M.A. Curtis) C.T. Wei

(Ascomycetes: Pleosporales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Curvularia lunata (Wakker) Boedijn

Teleomorph: Cochliobolus lunatus

R.R. Nelson & Haasis 

(Ascomycetes: Pleosporales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Deightoniella torulosa (Syd.) M. B. 

Ellis Syn: Helminthosporium 

torulosum (Syd.) F.S. Ashby

(Ascomycetes: Incertae sedis)

PH, US n/a No n/a Anon., 1982; BPI/Dole, 

2004; Farr et al., 1989; 

Gaskalla, 2004; Jones, 

2000d; Jones and Stover, 

2000
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 13

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Fusarium incarnatum (Desm.) Sacc

Syn: Fusarium pallidoroseum

(Cooke) Sacc.(Ascomycetes:

Hypocreales)

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; Farr et 

al., 1989; Jones and 

Stover, 2000; PCARRD, 

1988

Fusarium lateritium Nees : Fr.

Teleomorph: Gibberella baccata

(Wallr.) Sacc. (Ascomycetes: 

Hypocreales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Fusarium moniliforme J. Sheld.

Teleomorph: Gibberella 

moniliformis Wineland

(Ascomycetes: Hypocreales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Fusarium oxysporum Schlecht. f. sp.

cubense (E. F. Smith) W. C. 

Synder & N. H. Hans.

(Ascomycetes: Hypocreales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Alfieri et al., 1994; Anon., 

1982; BPI/Dole, 2004; 

CABI, 2004; Gaskalla, 

2004; Jeger, et al.,1995, 

PCARRD, 1988; Ploetz et 

al., 1990; Ploetz and Pegg, 

2000

Fusarium roseum Link: Fr. 

(Ascomycetes: Hypocreales)

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; Farr et 

al., 1989; PCARRD, 1988 

Fusarium sacchari (E.J. Butler) W. 

Gams (Ascomycetes:

Hypocreales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009, CABI, 

2004

Fusarium sambucinum Fuckel

Teleomorph: Gibberella pulicaris

(Fr.: Fr.) Sacc. (Ascomycetes: 

Hypocreales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Fusarium solani (Mart.) Sacc.

Teleomorph: Haematonectria 

haematococca (Berk. & Broome) 

Samuels & Rossman

(Ascomycetes: Hypocreales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Fusarium subglutinans (Wollenw. & 

Reinking) P.E. Nelson, Toussoun 

& Marasas

Teleomorph: Gibberella 

subglutinans (E. Edwards) P.E. 

Nelson, Toussoun & Marasas

(Ascomycetes: Hypocreales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al. 2009

Gibberella fujikuroi (Sawada) Ito in 

Ito & K.Kimura (Ascomycetes: 

Hypocreales). 

Anamorph = Fusarium fujikuroi 

Nirenberg

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Ploetz, 1994 
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 14

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Glomerella cingulata (Stoneman) 

Spauld. & H.Schrenk

(Ascomycetes: Incertae sedis)

Anamorph = Colletotrichum 

gloeosporioides (Penz.) Penz. in 

Sacc. 

PH, US n/a No n/a ARS, 1970; CABI, 2004; 

Farr et al., 2009; Gaskalla, 

2004

Guignardia mangiferae A.J. Roy

(Ascomycetes: Dothideales)

Anamorph: Phyllosticta 

capitalensis Henn.

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Guignardia musae Racib.5

Syn: G. sydowiana Trotter

Anamorph = Phyllosticta 

musarum (Cooke) van der Aa., 

Phyllostictina musarum (Cooke) 

Petr., Sphaeropsis musarum

Cooke (Ascomycetes:

Dothideales)

PH, US (HI) B, F, L [Yes] Yes PestID, 2009; BPI/Dole, 

2004; CABI, 2004: Jones, 

2000f; Jones and Stover, 

2000; PCARRD, 1988; 

Farr et al. 2009

Lasiodiplodia theobromae (Pat.) 

Griffon & Maubl.

Syn: Botryodiplodia theobromae

Pat., Botryosphaeria rhodina

(Ascomycetes: Dothideales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Alfieri et al., 1994; 

BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Farr et al., 2009; 

Jones, 2000a; PCARRD, 

1988; Weber, 1973 

Lenzites tenuis Hook.

(Basidiomycetes: Polyporales)

PH Ps Yes No Farr et al. 2009; CABI, 

2009

Macrophomina phaseolina (Tassi)

Goid. (Ascomycetes: Incertae 

sedis)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al. 2009

Marasmiellus inoderma (Berkeley) 

Singer. 

Syn: M. semiustus (Berk. & M. A. 

Curtis), Marasmius semiustus 

Berkeley & Curtis; Singer 

(Basidiomycetes: Agaricales)

PH L, Ps, R Yes No Jones and Lomerio, 2000

Mycosphaerella fijiensis Morelet 

Anamorph = Pseudocercospora 

fijiensis (Morelet) Deighton

(Ascomycetes: Mycosphaerellales)

PH, US (FL, 

HI, PR)

n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Carlier et al., 2000; 

Crane and Balerdi, 1998; 

Farr et al., 2009; Gaskalla, 

2004; Jeger et al., 1995; 

Marin et al., 2003; 

PCARRD, 1988; Ploetz, 

2001; Stover, 1972; 

Wardlaw, 1972

 

5 Guignardia musae (teleomorph) and Phyllosticta musarum (anamorph) are two forms or morphs that exhibit different 

symptoms. Therefore, confusion exists about the taxonomy of the causal agent. This pathogen is an actionable pest in the 

continental United States, but does not require action in Hawaii (PestID, 2009).
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 15

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Mycosphaerella musae (Speg.) Syd. 

& P. Syd. (Ascomycetes: 

Mycosphaerellales)

PH, US (HI, 

PR, VI)

n/a No n/a Farr, et al. 2009

Mycosphaerella musicola J.L.Mulder 

in J.L.Mulder & Stover 

(Loculoascomycetes: 

Dothideales). Anamorph = 

Pseudocercospora musae Speg.

(Ascomycetes: Mycosphaerellales)

PH, US L [Yes] No Alfieri et al., 1994; 

BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Crane and Balerdi,

1998; Farr et al., 2009; 

Gaskalla, 2004; Jeger et 

al., 1995; Jones, 2000b; 

PCARRD, 1988; Stover, 

1972; Wardlaw, 1972

Nigrospora sphaerica (Sacc.) E.W. 

Mason (Ascomycetes: 

Trichosphaeriales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Periconia byssoides Pers.

(Ascomycetes: Incertae sedis)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Pestalotiopsis disseminata (Thüm.) 

Steyaert (Ascomycetes: 

Xylariales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Pestalotiopsis palmarum (Cooke) 

Steyaert 

Syn: Pestalotia palmarum Cooke

(Ascomycetes: Xylariales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Phoma sorghina (Sacc.) Boerema, 

Dorenb. & Kesteren 

(Ascomycetes: Pleosporales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Phyllosticta sp. (Coelomycetes) PH, US F Yes Yes PestID, 2009

Phytophthora nicotianae Breda de 

Haan (Kingdom Chromista, 

Oomycetes: Pythiales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Pithomyces chartarum (Berk. & 

M.A. Curtis) M.B. Ellis 

Sporidesmium bakeri Syd. & P. 

Syd. (Ascomycetes: Pleosporales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Pyricularia grisea (Cooke) Sacc. 

Teleomoph = Magnaporthe grisea

(Herbert) Barr. (Ascomycetes:

Incertae sedis)

PH, US n/a No n/a Alfieri et al., 1994; 

BPI/Dole, 2004; Farr et 

al., 1989; Gaskalla, 2004; 

Jeger et al., 1995; Jones 

and Stover, 2000; Stover, 

1972

Pythium debaryanum Auct. non R. 

Hesse (Kingdom Chromista; 

Oomycetes: Peronosporales)

PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 16

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Ramichloridium musae (Stahel ex. E. 

B. Ellis) De Hoog 

Syn: Periconiella musae Stahel ex 

Ellis. (Ascomycetes: Incertae 

sedis)

PH6F, L, P Yes No7Jeger et al., 1995; Jones, 

2000e; PCARRD, 1988

Rhizoctonia grisea (J.A. Stev.) J. 

Matz

Teleomorph: Corticium sasakii 

(Shirai) Matsumoto

(Basidiomycetes: Polyporales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Rhizopus stolonifer (Ehrenb.: Fr.) 

Vuill. 

Syn: R. nigricans Ehrenb.

(Zygomycetes: Mucorales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Rigidoporus microporus (Sw. : Fr.) 

Overeem (Basidiomycetes: 

Polyporales)

PH, US (HI, 

PR)

n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Rosellinia bunodes (Berk. & 

Broome) Sacc. (Ascomycetes: 

Xylariales)

PH, US (VI, 

PR)

R [Yes] No Farr et al., 2009

Schizophyllum commune Fr.: Fr. 

(Basidiomycetes: Agaricales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Thanatephorus cucumeris (A.B. 

Frank) Donk 

Anamorph: Rhizoctonia solani

J.G. Kühn (Basidiomycetes: 

Ceratobasidiales)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Torula herbarum (Pers. : Fr.) Link

(Ascomycetes: Incertae sedis)

PH, US n/a No n/a Farr et al., 2009

Uredo musae Cummins 

(Urediniomycetes: Uredinales)

PH L Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; Jones, 

2000f

Uromyces musae P. Hen 

(Urediniomycetes: Uredinales) 

PH L Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; Jones, 

2000f; Weber, 1973

BACTERIA AND PHYTOPLASMAS

Erwinia carotovora subsp. 

atroseptica (van Hall) Dye

PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004 

 

6 Periconiella musae occurs world-wide, but is not specifically listed as present in the United States.

7

“Tropical Speckle Disease” is caused by two fungi: P. musae, and Veronaea musae Stahel ex Ellis. [Syn = Chloridium 

musae Stahel]. Tropical Speckle is a leaf disease and causes two types of foliar symptoms. In the Umlalog variety (AAA , 

Cavendish subgroup), the ends of fingers are sometimes affected, and the fruit is rendered unacceptable for export (Jones, 

2000d). Infected fruit would not be likely to follow the pathway because the symptoms are highly visible and such fruit 

would be culled.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 17

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Erwinia carotovora subsp.

carotovora (Jones) Bergey et al.

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; 

Bradbury, 1986; CABI, 

2004; Jeger et al., 1995; 

Thwaites et al., 2000; 

Weber, 1973

Erwinia chrysanthemi Burkholder et 

al.

PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Jeger et al., 

1995

Erwinia chrysanthemi pv. zeae

(Saet) Victoria et al.

PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004

Erwinia carotovora subsp. 

atroseptica (van Hall) Dye

PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004 

Ralstonia solanacearum (Smith)

Yabuuchi et al., Race 1 

Syn: Pseudomonas solanacearum,

Bulkholderia solanacearum

(Infects diploid bananas)

PH, US n/a No n/a Alfieri et al., 1994; 

BPI/Dole, 2004; 

Bradbury, 1986; CABI, 

2004; CABI/EPPO 1999a; 

BPI/Dole, 2004; Jeger et 

al., 1995

Ralstonia solanacearum (Smith)

Yabuuchi et al., Race 2, Biovar 18

(Infects triploid bananas)

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; 

Bradbury, 1986; CABI, 

2004; CABI/EPPO, 

1999b; Jeger et al., 1995; 

PCARRD, 1988; Thwaites 

et al., 2000; Wardlaw, 

1972; Weber, 1973 

VIRUSES AND VIROIDS 9

Abacá mosaic potyvirus10 [Also 

known as the Abacá mosaic strain 

of sugarcane mosaic potyvirus]

PH W Yes No Bajet and Magnaye, 2002; 

BPI/Dole, 2004; 

Diekmann and Putter, 

1996; Thomas and 

Magnaye, 2000

Banana bract mosaic potyvirus PH W Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Diekmann and 

Putter, 1996; Thomas et 

al., 2000

 

8 Bugtok and Moko diseases have distinct symptoms and host ranges, but are caused by the same race and biovar of the 

bacterium, Ralstonia solanacearum Race 2 Biovar 1 (Thwaites et al., 2000). Bugtok is not recognized in commercially 

grown dessert bananas, but the disease has become a limiting factor in the cultivation of cooking bananas in areas of the 

southern Philippines (Soguilon et al., 1995). Differences in disease expression may be due to differences in production 

practices between cooking bananas and dessert bananas (Molina, 2005). 

9 Because bananas are seedless and intended for consumption, viruses are unlikely to be transmitted to susceptible hosts in 

the United States. Therefore, viruses are highly unlikely to follow the pathway.

10 Abacá mosaic potyvirus (AbMV) is a strain of sugarcane mosaic potyvirus (SCMV--Ab) (CABI, 2004; Gambley et al., 

2004). The strain is not present in the United States; and its host, Musa textilis, a fiber crop, is not grown in the continental 

United States (Brunt et al., 1996; Thomas and Magnaye, 2000). AbMV has been experimentally transmitted from abacá to 

banana using aphid vectors (Gambley et al., 2004).
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 18

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Banana bunchy top nanovirus PH, US (HI) W [Yes] No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Diekmann and 

Putter, 1996; Jeger, et al., 

1995; Thomas and IskraCarauna, 2000; PCARRD, 

1988

Banana streak badnavirus PH, US (FL) W [Yes] No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Diekmann and 

Putter, 1996; Lockhart and 

Jones, 2000b

Cucumber mosaic cucumovirus 

(banana mosaic)

PH, US n/a No n/a Alfieri et al., 1994; BPI, 

Dole, 2004; CABI, 2004; 

Gaskalla, 2004; Lockhart 

and Jones, 2000b; 

PCARRD, 1988

NEMATODA

Criconematidae

Criconemella sp. PH, US R Yes No CABI, 2004

Hemicriconemoides mangiferae

Siddiqi

PH, US (CA, 

DE, FL)

R [Yes] No Anon., 1984; CABI, 2004; 

Handoo, 2007 

Heteroderidae 

Meloidogyne arenaria (Neal) 

Chitwood

PH, US n/a No n/a Anon., 1984; CABI, 2004; 

De Waele, 2000; 

PCARRD, 1988 

Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid & 

White) Chitwood 

PH, US n/a No n/a Anon., 1984; BPI/Dole, 

2004; CABI, 2004; 

PCARRD, 1988

Meloidogyne javanica (Treub) 

Chitwood 

PH, US n/a No n/a Anon., 1984; CABI, 2004; 

De Waele, 2000

Hoplolaimidea

Helicotylenchus multicinctus (Cobb) 

Golden

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Crane and 

Balerdi,1998; Gowen, 

2000; Ploetz et al., 1994

Hopolaimus seinhorsti Luc PH, US n/a No n/a Anon., 1984; BPI/Dole, 

2004; CABI, 2004

Rotylenchulus reniformis Linford & 

Oliveira 

PH, US n/a No n/a Anon., 1984; CABI, 2004; 

De Waele, 2000

Longidoridae

Longidorus sp. PH, US R Yes No Anon., 1984; CABI, 2004

Pratylenchidae

Pratylenchus coffeae (Zimmermann) 

Filipjev & Schuurmans Stekhoven 

PH, US n/a No n/a Anon., 1984; CABI, 2004; 

Gowen, 2000; Ploetz et 

al., 1994
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 19

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Pratylenchus penetrans (Cobb) 

Filipjev & Schuurmans Stekhoven 

PH, US n/a No n/a Anon., 1984; CABI, 2004; 

Gowen, 2000 

Pratylenchus zeae Graham PH, US n/a No n/a Anon., 1984; CABI, 2004; 

Gowen, 2000 

Radopholus similis (Cobb) Thorne PH, US R, Rh [Yes] No Anon., 1982; Anon., 

1984; BPI/Dole, 2004; 

CABI, 2004; Crane and 

Balerdi, 1998; PCARRD, 

1988; Ploetz et al., 1994; 

Sarah, 2000

WEEDS

Imperata cylindrica (L.) Beauv.11 PH n/a Yes No CABI, 2004; 7 CFR 360, 

2008; NRCS, 2005

Imperata sp. PH, US n/a Yes No PestID, 2009; 7 CFR 360, 

2008

ARTHROPODS

Acari: Acaridae

Tyrophagus putrescentiae (Schrank) PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004

Acari: Tenuipalpidae

Brevipalpus californicus (Banks) PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004

Brevipalpus phoenicis (Geijskes) PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004

Acari: Tetranychidae

Eutetranychus orientalis Klein PH L Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004 ;CABI, 

2004

Oligonychus orthius Rimando PH L Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004 

Oligonychus velascoi (Rimando) PH L Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; Cayme 

and Gapasin, 1987

Tetranychus cinnabarinus

(Boisduval)

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 20004; CABI, 

2004; 

Tetranychus neocaledonicus Andre PH, US (FL) n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Gaskala, 2004

Tetranychus piercei (McGregor) PH L, Ps Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004

Tetranychus urticae (Koch) PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004

Coleoptera: Anthribidae

Araecerus coffeae (Fabricius) = A. 

fasciculatus (De Geer)

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004

 

11 One interception of Imperata sp. was associated with banana fruit from the Philippines. The genus Imperata is quarantine 

significant because I. brasiliensis Trin. and I. cylindrica (L.) Raeusch are Federal Noxious Weeds (7 CFR 360, 2008). 

Bananas carried by passengers were typically locally grown for consumption. In baggage, the banana skin or any 

associated plant material (leaf debris, bracts, etc) could have been contaminated with Imperata seeds. The origin of any 

baggage is subject to doubt since it may have originated in a different country visited by the passenger. Commercial 

bananas are unlikely to be a pathway for the entry of weed seed, because they will be removed during production and postharvest processing.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 20

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Coleoptera: Cerambycidae

Sybra alternans Wiedemann PH, US (FL) F, Ps [Yes] Yes Chen et al., 2000; 

Thomas, 2000

Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae

Hispodonta sp. PH Fl, L, Ps Yes No Cayabyab et al., 2000

Coleoptera: Curculionidae

Cosmopolites sordidus (Gemar) PH, US (FL) C, R, Rh, 

Ps

[Yes] No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Gaskala, 2004; 

Gold and Messiaen, 2000; 

Gold et al., 2002; 

Muniappan and Bjork, 

1984; PCARRD, 1988; 

Smith, 1995

Metamasius hemipterus Linnaeus PH, US (FL) L, Ps, W [Yes] No CABI, 2004; Gold et al., 

2002

Odoiporus longicollis (Olivier) PH L, Ps Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Capco, 1956; Gold 

et al., 2002

Philicoptus demissus (Heller) PH F, L Yes No12 BPI/Dole, 2004; Stephens, 

1984

Philicoptus iliganus (Heller) PH F, Fl, L, R Yes No13 BPI/Dole, 2004; 

Muniappan and Bjork, 

1984; PCARRD, 1988; 

Stephens, 1984

Philicoptus sp.14 PH F, L Yes No15 Stephens, 1984

Philicoptus stringifons (Heller) PH F, Fl, L Yes No16 BPI/Dole, 2004; Stephens, 

1984

Philicoptus waltoni (Boheman) PH F Yes No17 El-Sayed and Suckling, 

2004; Hill, 1983

 

12 This pest has never been intercepted on Musa spp. (PestID, 2009). Philicoptus demissus is a large (6-7 mm), mobile beetle 

(Stephens, 1984) that is unlikely to remain with bananas through commercial processing. 

13 This pest has never been intercepted on Musa spp. (PestID, 2009). The larvae of P. iliganus feed on roots of banana, while 

adults feed externally on the peels of the fruit, thereby leading to the common name of peel-scarring beetle (Stephens, 

1984). As an adult, the beetle is a large (6-8 mm), flightless and drops to the ground when disturbed (Stephens, 1984). 

Therefore, this beetle is highly unlikely to follow the pathway. 

14 Stephens (1984) discussed two undescribed species within the genus Philicoptus (sp. 1 and sp. 2). These species feed on 

the flowers, leaves, and fruits of bananas in the Philippines.

15 Beetles in the genus Philicoptus are large (6-8 mm) and mobile weevils (Stephens, 1984) that are unlikely to remain with 

bananas through commercial processing. This genus has never been intercepted on Musa spp. (PestID, 2009).

16 Philicoptus stringifons is not a proven pest of bananas, but it fed on banana flowers and fruit in the laboratory (Stephens, 

1984). This pest has never been intercepted on Musa spp. (PestID, 2009). It is a large (about 7 mm), mobile beetle 

(Stephens, 1984) that is unlikely to remain with bananas through commercial processing. 

17 Philicoptus waltoni has never been intercepted on Musa spp. (PestID, 2009). We found no other data on its feeding habits, 

but think it will behave similarly to others in the same genus (e.g., P. demissus, P. iliganus, and P. stringifons). These 

weevils are all relatively large in size (6-8 mm), mobile, and drop from fruit when disturbed (Stephens, 1984). Thus, P. 

waltoni seems highly unlikely to follow the pathway of commercial banana fruit. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 21

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae

Oryctes rhinoceros (Linnaeus) PH L Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004

Scapanes australis Boisduval PH F, L, Ps, 

W

Yes No18 CABI, 2004

Xylotrupes gideon (Linnaeus) PH L Yes No CABI, 2004

Diptera: Muscidae

Atherigona orientalis Schiner PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004

Diptera: Stratiomyidae

Hermetia illucens (Linnaeus) PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; Stephens, 

1975; Tomberlin and 

Sheppard, 2001; Woodley, 

1989

Diptera: Tephritidae

Bactrocera musae (Tryon) PH F Yes Yes BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Carroll et al., 2002; 

Drew et al.,1982; Pacify, 

2002; Smith, 1977; White 

and Elson-Harris, 1992 

Bactrocera occipitalis (Bezzi) PH F Yes Yes Anon., 2002; BPI/Dole, 

2004; Carroll et al., 2002; 

Drew and Hancock, 1994; 

IIE, 1994a; Pacifly, 

2002a; Sengebau, 2001; 

White and Elson-Harris, 

1992

Bactrocera philippinensis Drew and 

Hancock

PH F Yes Yes Anon., 2002; BPI/Dole, 

2004; Carroll et al., 2002; 

Drew and Hancock, 1994; 

IIE, 1994b; Pacifly, 

2002b; Sengebau, 2001; 

White and Elson-Harris, 

1992

Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae

Aleurocanthus woglumi Ashby PH, US (Fl, 

TX)

L, Ps [Yes] No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004

Aleurodicus dispersus Russell PH, US (FL) L [Yes] No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004

 

18 Adults of S. australis burrow into the pseudostem of bananas, which causes plants to fall over and grow bunches out of the

side of the stem (French, 2006). The rhinoceros beetle is very large and mobile (CABI, 2004), and is unlikely to remain 

with bananas through commercial processing.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 22

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Hemiptera: Aphididae

Aphis gossypii Glover PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Muniappan and 

Bjork, 1984

Pentalonia nigronervosa (Coquerel) PH, US (CA, 

FL)

n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Gold et al., 2002; 

Mau, et al., 1994; 

Muniappan and Bjork, 

1984; PCARRD, 1988; 

Silva and Fancelli, 1998

Rhopalosiphum (Aphis) maidis

(Fitch) 

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004

Rhopalosiphum nymphaeae 

(Linnaeus)

PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Capco, 1956

Rhopalosiphum padi Linnaeus PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004

Hemiptera: Coccidae

Ceroplastes cirripediformis

Comstock

PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Ben-Dov et 

al., 2005

Ceroplastes rubens Maskell PH, US (FL) F, L, Ps [Yes] Yes CABI, 2004; Ben-Dov et 

al., 2005

Coccus hesperidium Linnaeus PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; Ben-Dov 

et al.. 2005

Coccus longulus (Douglas) PH, US n/a No n/a Ben-Dov et al., 2005

Coccus sp. PH, US F, L, Ps Yes Yes CABI, 2004; PestID, 2009

Coccus viridis (Green) PH, US (FL) F, L, Ps [Yes] Yes CABI, 2004; Capco, 

1956; Hill, 1983; Moore 

and Tudela, 1999; Nafus, 

2000; Ben-Dov et al., 

2005; PPQ, 2000b

Parasaissetia nigra (Nietner) PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Ben-Dov et 

al., 2005

Saissetia coffeae (Walker) PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Ben-Dov et 

al., 2005

Vinsonia stellifera (Westwood) PH, US (AL, 

FL, GA)

L, Ps [Yes] No Ben-Dov et al., 2005; 

Thomas, 2000

Hemiptera: Coreidae

Leptoglossus gonagra (Fabricius) PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Baranowski 

and Slater, 1986; 

Muniappan and Bjork, 

1984
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 23

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Hemiptera: Diaspididae19

Abgrallaspis (Hemiberlesia)

cynaophylli (Signoret)

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; Ben-Dov 

et al., 2005; Velasquez, 

1971

Abgrallaspis (Hemiberlesia) palmae

(Cockerell)

PH, US n/a No n/a PCARRD, 1988; Ben-Dov 

et al., 2005

Aonidiella aurantii (Maskell) PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Ben-Dov et 

al., 2005; Velasquez, 1971

Aonidiella comperei McKenzie PH F, L, Ps Yes Yes19 Ben-Dov et al., 2005; 

Velasquez, 1969

Aonidiella inornata McKenzie PH, US (TX) F, L, Ps [Yes] Yes19 Muniappan and Bjork, 

1984; Ben-Dov et al., 

2005; Velasquez, 1971

Aonidiella orientalis (Newstead) PH, US (Fl) n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Ben-Dov et 

al., 2005; Velasquez, 1971

Aspidiotus coryphae Cockerell and 

Robinson 

PH F, L, Ps Yes Yes19 BPI/Dole, 2004; Ben-Dov 

et al., 2005; Velasquez, 

1971

Aspidiotus destructor Signoret PH, US (CT, 

Fl, GA, PA)

n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Muniappan and 

Bjork, 1984; PCARRD, 

1988; Ben-Dov et al., 

2005; Velasquez, 1971

Aspidiotus excisus Green PH, US (FL) n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; Ben-Dov 

et al., 2005; Velasquez, 

1971

Aspidiotus sp. PH, US F, L, Ps Yes Yes19 PestID, 2009; CABI, 2004

Chrysomphalus aonidum (Linnaeus)

= C. ficus Ashmead

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Muniappan and 

Bjork, 1984; Ben-Dov et 

al., 2005; Velasquez, 1971

Chrysomphalus dictyospermi

(Morgan)

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; Ben-Dov 

et al., 2005; Velasquez, 

1971

Hemiberlesia lataniae (Signoret) PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Ben-Dov et al., 

2005; Velasquez, 1971

Hemiberlesia palmae (Cockerell) PH, US (CA, 

FL)

n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; Ben-Dov 

et al., 2005; Velasquez, 

1971

 

19 Armored scales are external feeders, and appear in various colors on stem, leaves, and fruit, such as red scale (Aonidiella 

aurantii), Florida red scale (Chrysomphalus aonidum) and the purple scale (Lepidosaphes beckii) (Smith et al., 1997).

Infestations begin on the underside of leaves, and in severe infestations, armored scales attach to stalks and fruit (Pinese 

and Piper, 1994). Armored scales may follow the pathway on fruit or vegetables for consumption but are highly unlikely to 

establish (PERAL, 2007). For more details, see discussion after table.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 24

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Hemiberlesia rapax (Comstock) PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; Ben-Dov 

et al., 2005

Ischnaspis longirostris (Signoret) PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Ben-Dov et 

al., 2005

Lepidosaphes beckii (Newman) PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Ben-Dov et 

al., 2005

Lepidosaphes similis Beardsley PH F, L, Ps Yes Yes19 CPHST, 2008

Mycetaspis personata (Comstock) PH, US (FL) n/a No n/a Ben-Dov et al., 2005

Parlatoria proteus (Curtis) PH, US n/a No n/a Ben-Dov et al., 2005

Pinnaspis aspidistrae (Signoret) PH, US n/a No n/a Ben-Dov et al., 2005

Pinnaspis buxi (BouchT) PH, US n/a No n/a Ben-Dov et al., 2005

Pinnaspis musae Takagi PH F, L, Ps Yes Yes19 PestID, 2009; BPI/Dole, 

2004; Ben-Dov et al., 

2005

Pinnsaspis strachani (Cooley) PH, US (FL) n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Ben-Dov et al., 

2005

Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (Cooley) PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; Ben-Dov 

et al., 2005

Selenaspidus articulatus (Morgan) PH, US (CA, 

FL)

n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Ben-Dov et 

al., 2005

Unaspis citri (Comstock) PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Ben-Dov et 

al., 2005

Hemiptera: Flatidae

Uxantis siccifolia (Stal) PH L, Ps Yes No PestID, 2009

Hemiptera: Margarodidae20

Icerya aegyptiaca Douglas PH F, L, Ps, 

W

Yes No CABI, 2004; Hill, 1983; 

Muniappan and Bjork, 

1984; PPQ, 2000b

Icerya pulcher (Leonardi) PH F, L, Ps, 

W

Yes No PestID, 2009

Icerya seychellarum (Westwood) PH F, L, Ps, 

W

Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Hill, 1983

Icerya sp. PH, US F Yes No CABI, 2004; PestID, 2009

Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae

Dysmicoccus brevipes (Cockerell) PH, US (CA, 

FL, LA)

n/a No n/a Ben-Dov, 1994; BPI/Dole, 

2004; CABI, 2004; Martin 

Kessing and Mau, 1992; 

Ben-Dov et al., 2005

 

20 Members of this family are large scales commonly known as “giant coccids” or “ground pearls” (Borror et al., 1989), and

can be easily seen during inspection. The species present in the Philippines prefer leaves and young twigs, but may be 

found on fruit and stems (CABI, 2004). Members of this family are unlikely follow the pathway on export quality fruit, and 

have never been intercepted on commercial bananas (PestID, 2009).
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 25

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Dysmicoccus neobrevipes Beardsley PH, US (FL) F, L, Ps [Yes] Yes PestID, 2009; Ben-Dov, 

1994; BPI/Dole, 2004; 

Miller and Miller, 2002; 

PCARRD, 1988; Ben-Dov 

et al., 2005

Dysmicoccus sp. PH, US F, L, Ps Yes Yes CABI, 2004; PestID, 2009

Ferrisia virgata (Cockerell) PH, US n/a No n/a Ben-Dov, 1994; BPI/Dole, 

2004; CABI, 2004; BenDov et al., 2005

Geococcus coffeae Green PH, US (CA, 

FL)

F, Fl, L, Ps [Yes] Yes Ben-Dov, 1994; CABI, 

2004; Ben-Dov et al., 

2005

Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green) PH, US (CA, 

FL) 

F, Fl, L, R, 

Ps

[Yes] Yes PestID, 2009; Ben-Dov, 

1994; BPI/Dole, 2004; 

CABI, 2004; Hill, 1983; 

Ben-Dov et al., 2005

Nipaecoccus nipae (Maskell) PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Tilos, 2008

Planococcus citri (Risso) PH, US n/a No n/a Ben-Dov, 1994; BPI/Dole, 

2004; CABI, 2004; BenDov et al., 2005

Planococcus lilacinus (Cockerell) PH F, Fl, L, 

Ps, W

Yes Yes PestID, 2009; CABI, 

2004; Ben-Dov et al., 

2005

Planococcus minor (Maskell) = P. 

pacificus Cox

PH F, L, Ps Yes Yes PestID, 2009; BPI/Dole, 

2004; CABI, 2004; BenDov et al., 2005

Planococcus sp. PH, US F, L Yes Yes CABI, 2004; PestID, 2009

Pseudococcus cryptus Hempel PH F Yes Yes PestID, 2009; Ben-Dov et 

al., 2005

Pseudococcus jackbeardsleyi Gimpel 

and Miller = P. elisae Borchsenius

PH, US (FL, 

TX)

n/a No n/a Ben-Dov, 1994; BPI/Dole,

2004; CABI, 2004; BenDov et al., 2005; Thomas, 

2000

Pseudococcus longispinus (Targioni 

Tozzetti)

PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Muiniappan and 

Bjork, 1984

Pseudococcus sp. PH, US F, Fl, L, 

Ps, W

Yes Yes PestID, 2009; Ben-Dov, 

1994; CABI, 2004; BenDov et al., 2005

Rastrococcus invadens Williams PH F, L, Ps Yes Yes Ben-Dov, 1994; BPI/Dole, 

2004; Ben-Dov et al., 

2005

Rastrococcus spinosus (Robinson) PH F, L, Ps Yes Yes Ben-Dov, 1994; BPI/Dole, 

2004
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 26

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Hemiptera: Tingidae

Stephanitis typicus (Distant) PH L Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Capco, 1956; 

Muniappan and Bjork, 

1984

Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae

Erionota torus Evans PH L Yes No De Jong, and Treadaway, 

1993

Erionota thrax (Linnaeus) PH L Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Monty, 1970; 

Muniappan and Bjork, 

1984; PCARRD, 1988; De 

Jong, and Treadaway, 

1993

Erionota thrax mindana Evans PH L Yes No Sands et al., 1991

Lepidoptera: Limacodidae

Darna diducta Snellen PH L Yes No CABI, 2004

Parasa lepida (Cramer) PH F, L Yes No21 CABI, 2004; Waterhouse, 

1993

Thosea sinensis Walker = 

Hindothosea cervina Moore

PH L Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Muniappan and 

Bjork, 1984

Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae

Olene mendosa Hubner = Dasychira 

mendosa (Hubner)

PH L Yes No CABI, 2004; Waterhouse, 

1993

Lepidoptera: Noctuidae

Agrotis ipsilon (Hufnagel) PH, US n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Zhang, 1994

Eudocima (= Othreis) fullonia

(Clerck)

PH F Yes No22 CABI, 2004; Denton et 

al., 1989, 1999; Martin 

Kessing and Mau, 1993; 

Muniappan et al., 1995; 

Zhang, 1994

Spodoptera exigua (Hubner) PH, US n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Zhang, 1994

Spodoptera (= Prodena) litura

(Fabricius)

PH L Yes No CABI, 2004

Tiracola plagiata (Walker) PH F, L, Ps Yes No23 BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Pinese and Piper, 

1994

 

21 Parasa lepida is a large external feeder (CABI, 2004), and has never been intercepted on commercially produced Musa 

(PestID, 2009). Therefore, this pest is highly unlikely to follow the pathway. 

22 Eudocima fullonia has never been intercepted on commercially produced species of Musa (PestID, 2009). It is a large moth 

that feeds externally on banana, and the adult is an active flyer. It is highly unlikely to follow the pathway (CABI, 2004).
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 27

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae

Melanitis leda ismene Cramer PH L Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004

Lepidoptera: Psychidae

Cryptothelea (= Eumeta) fuscescens

(Snellen)

PH L Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; Capco, 

1956; PCARRD, 1988

Lepidoptera: Pyralidae

Cnaphalocrocis medinalis (Guenee) PH L Yes No CABI, 2004; Zhang, 1994

Diaphania indica (Saunders) PH, US (FL) F, L [Yes] No24 CABI, 2004; Zhang, 1994

Tirathaba rufivena (Walker) PH Fl Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Zhang, 1994

Lepidoptera: Thyrididae

Rodenura intimalis (Moore) PH L, Ps Yes No Capco, 1956

Lepidoptera: Zygaenidae

Artona catoxantha (Hampson) PH L Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Zhang, 1994

Orthoptera: Acrididae25

Chondracris rosea (DeGeer) PH F, Fl, L, 

Ps, W 

Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004

Locusta migratoria (Linnaeus) PH F, Fl, L, 

Ps, W

Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004

Melicodes tenebrosa Walker PH F, Fl, L, Ps Yes No Capco, 1956

Valanga nigricornis Burmeister PH F, Fl, L, Ps Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Muniappan and 

Bjork, 1984

Thysanoptera: Thripidae26

Chaetanaphothrips signipennis

(Bagnall)

PH, US (FL) F, L, Ps [Yes] No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Hara et al., 2002;

PCARRD, 1988; Silva 

and Fancelli, 1998

 

23 The larvae of T. plagiata cause sporadic damage to banana during hot summers after the wet season, and rarely merit 

specific treatment in Queensland (Pinese and Piper 1994). Tiracola plagiata is unlikely to be a pest in commercial banana 

plantations, and therefore it is unlikely to follow the pathway.

24 Diaphania indica has never been intercepted on commercially produced species of Musa (PestID, 2009). It is a large 

external feeder (CABI, 2004) that is likely to be removed during post-harvest processing. Therefore, this pest is highly 

unlikely to follow the pathway.

25 This family is part of the suborder Caelifera, which is known as “jumping Orthoptera” (Borror et al., 1989). The species in 

this family are relatively large and mobile, and are therefore unlikely to remain with commercially produced bananas after 

post-harvest processing.

26 Thrips spp. feed on developing fruit and cause a corky scab that decreases fruit quality (Peña et al., 2002). Cracked and

corky bananas would be culled during the harvesting and post-harvesting procedures. Therefore, thrips are unlikely to 

follow the pathway of commercial bananas.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 28

Pest (Scientific name and 

taxonomy)

Geographic 

distribution3

Plant part 

affected4

Quarantine pest Follow 

pathway

References

Elixothrips brevisetis (Bagnall) PH, US (FL) Fl, L, Ps [Yes] No BPI/Dole, 2004; Mau and 

Martin Kessing, 1993; 

Muniappan and Bjork, 

1984; Thomas, 2000

Hercinothrips femoralis (Reuter) PH, US (AZ, 

CA, FL)

n/a No n/a CABI, 2004; Muniappan 

and Bjork, 1984; Silva 

and Fancelli, 1998

Thrips florum Schmutz PH F, Fl Yes No BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Muniappan and 

Bjork, 1984; PCARRD, 

1988; Silva and Fancelli, 

1998

Thrips hawaiiensis (Morgan) = T. 

albipes Bagnall

PH, US (CA, 

GA, SC, TX)

n/a No n/a BPI/Dole, 2004; CABI, 

2004; Muniappan and 

Bjork, 1984

MOLLUSCA: Achitinidae

Achatina fulica Bowdich PH F, L, Ps, 

R, W

Yes No27 CABI, 2004

 

27 Achatina fulica is a large, normally five to 10 cm, external feeder that attacks the entire plant, but prefers cuttings or 

seedlings (CABI, 2004). Because the snail, its slime trail, and its eggs (about five mm) are so conspicuous, commercial 

bananas for export are highly unlikely to be a pathway for this pest.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 29

2.5. Quarantine pests following the pathway and analyzed further

Organisms identified to the genus, or higher taxonomic level, are not analyzed further, even 

though individual species within those taxonomic groups are potential pests that may or may not 

occur within the United States. The IPPC guidelines do not require risk assessment of pests 

identified only by genus name (IPPC, 2007: ISPM #11). By necessity, pest risk assessments 

focus on those organisms for which adequate biological and taxonomic information is available.

Often, there are many species within a genus, and it is not reasonable to assume that the biology

of all organisms within a genus is identical. Lack of species identification may indicate the limits 

of the current taxonomic knowledge, the life stage or the quality of the specimen submitted for 

identification. The lack of identification at the species level does not rule out the possibility that 

a high risk quarantine pest was intercepted or that the intercepted pest was not a quarantine pest.

By developing detailed assessments for known pests that inhabit a variety of niches on the parent 

commodity, for example, on the surface of, within the stem or fruit, on the flowers, etc., effective 

mitigation measures may be developed to eliminate the known pests, and any similar unknown 

ones that inhabit the same niches. Lack of biological information on any given insect or pathogen 

should not be equated with a low risk.

We did not further analyze the armored scales Aonidiella comperei, A. inornata, Aspidiotus 

coryphae, Lepidosaphes similis, and Pinnaspis musae. Armored scales may enter on commercial 

fruit for consumption but are highly unlikely to establish via this pathway (PERAL, 2007). A 

recent critical review of the literature, APHIS-PPQ operational data, and expert opinion 

concludes that, even assuming high quantities of imported fruit infested with armored scale 

species that could be parthenogenic, highly fecund, polyphagous, invasive, theoretically able to 

survive in most of the United States, and capable of causing high level consequences, the 

specific pathway of commercially produced fruit shipped without leaves, stems, or contaminants 

is extremely low risk (PERAL, 2007). This low risk is explained by the poor ability of armored 

scales to disperse to new host plants from fruits for consumption, and consequently, by a very

low probability of establishment. The following characteristics of armored scales contribute to 

their poor dispersal capability:

 Legs and wings are absent in females and in feeding immature forms. Males possess wings 

but are short-lived, do not feed, and tend to mate with nearby females. 

 Self-dispersal of armored scales occurs by immature forms, or “crawlers.” They are the most 

vulnerable life stage. Crawlers can be passively dispersed by wind from one plant to another 

only during a time period of approximately 24 hours, and the survival rate decreases with 

distance. After the crawlers start feeding, the mouth parts are deeply inserted in the host, and 

their legs are lost during the first molt, so no further dispersal is possible.

 Dispersal from fruit discarded in the environment is considered very unlikely because of low 

wind speeds at ground level, and low survival rate of crawlers on the ground or on decaying 

fruit material. Active dispersal of crawlers from their natal host is highly unlikely since they 

cannot move well or quickly over bare soil or rough surfaces. 

Processing, culling, and inspection of fruit infested with armored scales can further reduce the 

prevalence and survival of this group of pests.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 30

Table 7. Quarantine pests that are present in the Philippines and could follow the pathway of 

commercial banana fruit.

Taxa Scientific name

Fungi Cercospora hayi Calpouzos

Guignardia musae Racib.

Coleoptera: Cerambycidae Sybra alternans Wiedemann

Diptera: Tephritidae Bactrocera musae (Tryon)

Bactrocera occipitalis (Bezzi)

Bactrocera philippinensis Drew and Hancock

Hempitera: Coccidae Ceroplastes rubens Maskell

Coccus viridis (Green)

Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae Dysmicoccus neobrevipes Beardsley

Geococcus coffeae Green

Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green)

Planococcus lilacinus (Cockerell)

Planococcus minor (Maskell)= P. pacificus Cox

Pseudococcus cryptus Hempel

Rastrococcus invadens Williams

Rastrococcus spinosus (Robinson)

2.6. Consequences of Introduction

We rated the Consequences of Introduction using five risk elements related to pest biology (PPQ, 

2000a). For each risk element, we rated the pests Low (1 point), Medium (2 points), or High (3 

points). We summed the five risk elements to give a Cumulative Risk Rating, which indicates the 

potential of the pest to establish, spread, and cause economic and environmental impacts. We 

summarized the ratings for the Consequences of Introduction below (Table 8).

Due to the limited availability of data for some mealybug species, the group of mealybugs was 

analyzed as one entity by using data from more commonly studied species.

Bactrocera spp. [B. musae, B. occipitalis, and B. philippinensis] Risk ratings

Risk Element #1: Climate – Host Interaction

Bactrocera musae is found in the tropical areas of the Philippines, Papua New 

Guinea, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Australia. Bactrocera occipitalis is found 

in Borneo, Palau and the Philippines, and has also been recorded in Asia on 

mango and guava (Sengebau, 2001). Bactrocera philippinensis is reported only in 

the Philippines and Palau. It was found in Australia in 1997 and eradicated 

(CABI, 2004). All species could establish within U.S. Plant Hardiness Zones 9-11

(PERAL, 2008). Because of its small size, Zone 11 does not count towards the 

total. Consequently, the risk rating for this element is Medium.

Medium (2)

Risk Element #2: Host range

We found no reports of any of these species on green bananas in the Philippines.

High (3)
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 31

Bactrocera spp. [B. musae, B. occipitalis, and B. philippinensis] Risk ratings

Bactrocera musae has been reported from 10 genera and 9 plant families. Hosts 

include banana (Musa spp., Musaceae); guava (Psidium guajava, Myrtaceae); 

pawpaw (Carica papaya, Caricaceae); chili and tomato (Solanaceae). Reports 

are mostly from banana (Sar, et al., 2001: Smith, 1977; CABI, 2004). 

Bactrocera occipitalis infests mango (Mangifera indica, Anacardiaceae); guava 

(Psidium guajava, (Myrtaceae), citrus (Citrus microcarpa (Rutaceae) (Allwood, 

et al., 1999 and Pacifly, 2002). Banana is a host in Palau (Anon., 2002). Other 

hosts include Carambola (Averrhoa carambola, Oxalidaceae); mandarin (Citrus 

reticulata, Rutaceae); sapodilla (Manilkara zapota, Sapotaceae) and the 

mombin (Spondias purpurea, Anacardiaceae) (CABI, 2004). 

Bactrocera philippinensis infests mango (Anacardiaceae), breadfruit (Artocarpus 

altilis, Moraceae), carambola (Oxalidaceae), pawpaw (Caricaceae); mandarin 

(Rutaceae), sapodilla (Pouteria deklitan, Sapotaceae); guava (Myrtaceae), 

Spondias purpurea (Anacardiaceae), and Malay apple (Syzygium malaccense, 

Myrtaceae) (Allwood, et al., 1999; CABI, 2004). Banana as a host was reported 

in Palau (Anon., 2002). 

Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential

For this element we have referred to information available for related Bactrocera, 

since we found little biological information on these three species. Fruit flies 

generally have high reproductive potential and high dispersal capability, e.g. the 

B. dorsalis complex (Bateman, 1972). Adults reproduce year round and live one 

to three months, or longer in cooler temperatures. Tropical fruit flies are strong 

fliers and are capable of dispersing long distances (Bateman, 1972). Bactrocera

spp. are able to fly 50-100 km (Fletcher, 1989). Transportation in infested fruit is 

also a major means of dispersal.

High (3)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact

The three Bactrocera species attack a large variety of fruits and vegetables 

throughout their known distribution, reducing yields (Norrbom, 2004). Damage 

can reach 100 percent in field environments (CABI, 2004). 

Thailand considers all three species of Bactrocera to be quarantine pests (CERIS, 

2009; EPPO, 2007). Bactrocera musae is a quarantine pest for French Polynesia 

(CERIS, 2009). Bactrocera philippinensis is a quarantine pest for New Zealand, 

and both B. occipitalis and B. philippinensis are European Union quarantine pests 

(EPPO, 2007). Thus, introduction of any of these into the United States would 

likely cause the loss of foreign markets. Costly fruit fly control programs are also 

likely to be instituted (Norrbom, 2004).

High (3)

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact

No hosts of the three Bactrocera species are listed as Threatened or Endangered 

in the United States (USFWS, 2006). However, these species are pests of important 

commercial crops such as citrus, tomato, and peppers. If introduced into the United 

States, chemical and/or biological control programs are highly likely to be started.

Medium (2)
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 32

Cercospora hayi Risk ratings

Risk Element #1: Climate – Host Interaction

The fungus occurs in tropical areas, including Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, 

Ecuador, Suriname, and some Caribbean Islands (Jones and Stover, 2000) and in 

the Philippines (BPI/Dole 2004). Given this, C. hayi could survive in U.S. Plant

Hardiness Zones 10-11 (PERAL, 2008). Because of its small size, Zone 11 does 

not count towards the total. Consequently, we rated this element Low.

Low (1)

Risk Element #2: Host range

The reported host range is only cultivars of Musa species with edible fruits. 

Kaiser and Lukezic (1965) suggest that this fungus may be a saprophyte on plants 

genetically unrelated to Musa. Jones and Stover (2000) cite a publication of 

Stover that the fungus is a common saprophyte on hanging banana-leaf trash and 

on leaves of dying weeds. Many other Cercospora species were named after the 

host upon which they were described without cross-reference to other species in 

the genus. Consequently, some uncertainty exists as to the host range of many 

Cercospora species. As a weak pathogen, this fungus appears to be confined to 

multiple species within a single genus. A fungus resembling C. hayi has been 

found sporulating on other herbaceous plants in banana plantations but only on 

dead, not live, tissue (Kaiser and Lukezic, 1965).

Low (1)

Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential

Conidia of the fungus are readily disseminated by wind, rain, and dew (Kaiser 

and Lukezic, 1965), but Jones and Stover (2000) reported that sporulation does 

not occur in diamond-spot lesions, the characteristic external symptom in 

ripening fruit. This specific pathogen has not been intercepted at U.S. ports-ofentry, but unidentified species of Cercospora have been intercepted numerous 

times on various commodities (PestID, 2009).

Medium (2)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact

The fungus is considered a weak pathogen (Kaiser and Lukezic, 1965). It is often 

found on hanging banana leaf trash, but also causes small brown lesions on the 

crowns and on peduncles (Jones and Stover, 2000). In association with Fusarium 

pallidoroseum, which is not a quarantine pest, it causes diamond-spot lesions on 

fruit. In Central America, C. hayi has caused damage but is no longer considered 

to limit banana production (Jones and Stover, 2000).

Low (1)

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact

Control measures implemented on infected banana were the same as for other 

fungi (Jones and Stover, 2000). If introduced, this species is unlikely to impact 

any of the relevant environmental risk factors.

Low (1)

Guignardia musae Risk Rating

Risk Element #1: Climate – Host Interaction

The fungus occurs in tropical areas of South and East Asia, including the 

Philippines, and the Australasia-Oceania region, including Hawaii (Jones, 

2000d). It is also in Africa and Central America, but some taxonomic confusion 

exists, because typical symptoms have not been seen there. Based on this 

Low (1)
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 33

Guignardia musae Risk Rating

distribution, the fungus could survive in Plant Hardiness Zones 10 and 11 

(PERAL, 2008). Because of its small size, Zone 11 does not count towards the 

total. Consequently, the risk rating for this element is Low. 

Risk Element #2: Host Range

The host range is restricted to species of Musa (Jones, 2000d).

Low (1)

Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential

The fungus is spread mainly by conidia, but also by ascospores. Conidia are 

exuded from pycnidia as gelatinous tendrils, and then spread by water drops 

along leaves or fruits. Spread by wind-blown spores has not been reported. 

However, this pathogen has been intercepted worldwide 91 times at U.S. portsof-entry, indicating that it can be moved long distances through human-assisted 

means (PestID, 2009).

Medium (2)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact

The introduction of the pest could lower the yield and value of Musa spp. 

Because the acres of commercial banana production are limited to 300 acres near 

Homestead, Florida (Ploetz, 2004) and to the commercial plant nurseries 

featuring ornamental Musa species in Texas (Sauls, 2004), the economic risk to 

the continental United States is Low.

Low (1)

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact

We do not expect the introduction of this fungus to affect any factors described 

for this risk element. Species in Musaceae are not listed in CITES (2005), which 

is the only known host for this pathogen.

Low (1)

Mealybugs [Dysmicoccus neobrevipes, Geococcus coffeae, Maconellicoccus 

hirsutus, Planococcus lilacinus, P. minor, Pseudococcus cryptus, Rastrococcus 

invadens, and R. spinosus] 

Risk ratings

Risk Element #1: Climate – Host Interaction

Examples are given for commonly studied species, as follows.

Dysmicoccus neobrevipes occurs throughout Central America, northern South 

America, the Caribbean, Indo-China, the Philippines, and Oceania (Ben-Dov et 

al., 2005; CABI, 2004). 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus occurs in the Philippines, Indonesia, Oceania, 

southern Australia, and south, southeast, and east Asia. It occurs as far north as 

Lebanon, Africa, Central America, and the Caribbean (CABI, 2004). 

Planococcus lilacinus occurs in south Asia, the islands of the South Pacific, east 

Africa, Central America, and northern South America (CABI, 2004). 

Planococcus minor is reported in south Asia, Australia, and the islands of the 

South Pacific, Africa, tropical areas of the New World, and Mexico (Ben-Dov 

et al., 2005). 

Thus, we estimate that all mealybugs could survive in areas of the continental 

United States corresponding to U.S. Plant Hardiness Zones 9-11 (PERAL, 2008). 

Because of its small size, Zone 11 does not count towards the total. 

Consequently, the risk rating for this element is Medium.

Medium (2)
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 34

Mealybugs [Dysmicoccus neobrevipes, Geococcus coffeae, Maconellicoccus 

hirsutus, Planococcus lilacinus, P. minor, Pseudococcus cryptus, Rastrococcus 

invadens, and R. spinosus] 

Risk ratings

Risk Element #2: Host range

Each of the mealybug species is a polyphagous feeder with a very wide host 

range across numerous families. Selected examples are as follows:

Dysmicoccus neobrevipes: Ananas comosus (Bromeliaceae), Malus pumila

(Rosaceae) (CABI, 2004); Musa paradisiaca (Musaceae), Helianthus annuus

(Asteraceae) (Nakahara, 1981); Agave sisalana (Agavaceae), Citrus spp. 

(Rutaceae), Cucurbita maxima (Cucurbitaceae), Zea mays (Poaceae), and 

Lycopersicon esculentum (Solanaceae) (Ben-Dov et al., 2005).

Maconellicoccus hirsutus: Glycine max (Fabaceae), Artocarpus spp. (Moraceae), 

Persea americana (Lauraceae), Citrus spp. (Rutaceae), Averrhoa carambola

(Oxalidaceae), Passiflora edulis (Passifloraceae), Musa paradisiaca

(Musaceae), Theobroma cacao (Sterculiaceae), and Vitis vinifera (Vitaceae), 

(Ben-Dov et al., 2005). 

Planococcus lilacinus: Citrus spp. (Rutaceae), Mangifera indica (Anacardiaceae), 

Coffea spp. (Rubiaceae), Theobroma cacao (Sterculiaceae), Vitis spp. (Vitaceae), 

Cocos nucifera (Arecaceae), Bambusa vulgaris (Poaceae), Tamarindus indica

(Caesalpiniaceae), and Psidium guajava (Myrtaceae) (CABI, 2004). 

Planococcus minor: Musa spp. (Musaceae), Citrus spp. (Rutaceae), Solanum spp. 

(Solanaceae), Theobroma cacao (Sterculiaceae), Coffea spp. (Rubiaceae), 

Mangifera indica (Anacardiaceae), Vitis vinifera (Vitaceae), Persea americana

(Lauraceae), Cucumis spp. (Cucurbitaceae), Zea mays (Poaceae), Pyrus pyrifolia

(Rosaceae), and Asparagus plumosus (Liliaceae) (Ben-Dov, 1994; CABI, 2004).

High (3)

Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential

Each species can passively disperse by wind during the first-instar crawler stage 

(Gullan and Kosztarab, 1997). Mealybugs can be transported long distances in 

shipments of commodities, and many species have been intercepted numerous times 

at U.S. ports-of-entry on a variety of plants (PestID, 2009). 

Generally, mealybugs have multiple generations per year and produce hundreds 

of eggs per female, with wide ranges of fecundity even in a single species across 

hosts. Specific examples from frequently studied mealybugs are listed below.

Maconellicoccus hirsutus: from 150-600 eggs per female, with as many as 15 

generations per year (CABI, 2004). 

Planococcus lilacinus: from 55-152 eggs (Loganathan and Suresh, 2001). It has 

two or three generations per year (IPM DANIDA, 2003). 

Planococcus minor: 200 to over 400 eggs per female, depending on the host plant 

(Maity et al., 1998; Martinez and Suris, 1998; Sahoo et al., 1999). It has as many

as 10 generations per year (Sahoo et al., 1999). 

High (3)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact

Biological and chemical controls are often implemented to control mealybugs 

(Peña et al., 2002). Because many of the host plants attacked by the mealybugs 

are commercially or environmentally important in the continental United States, 

introduction might cause the loss of international and domestic markets. 

High (3)
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 35

Mealybugs [Dysmicoccus neobrevipes, Geococcus coffeae, Maconellicoccus 

hirsutus, Planococcus lilacinus, P. minor, Pseudococcus cryptus, Rastrococcus 

invadens, and R. spinosus] 

Risk ratings

Feeding by large mealybug populations may cause a loss of host plant vigor. 

Also, honeydew deposited on leaves and fruit by mealybugs serves as a medium 

for the growth of black sooty molds, which interfere with photosynthesis and 

reduce the market value of the crop (Cox, 1989; Peña et al., 2002). Specific 

examples from frequently studied mealybugs are listed below.

Dysmicoccus neobrevipes attacks some valuable commercial crops, and is a 

particularly serious pest of pineapple, Ananas comosus. This species is also a 

vector of the virus causing pineapple wilt disease (Rohrbach et al., 1988). 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus caused estimated annual losses to crops and the 

environment in Grenada of $3.5 million, before biological controls were 

implemented (CABI, 2004). Other seriously damaged (20 to 100 percent) crops 

include cotton in Egypt, tree cotton and grapes in India, and the fiber crop 

Hibiscus sabdariffa var. altissima (roselle) in India and Bangladesh.

Planococcus lilacinus causes severe damage to young cacao trees by killing the tips 

of branches (CABI, 2004). It is also a major pest of tamarind in India (Hill, 1983) 

and can damage a wide range of other economically important crops (see above). 

In coffee, it causes serious damage by attacking roots and shoots (CABI, 2004). 

In India, chemical and biological control programs are necessary to control this 

pest in cacao, coffee, custard apple, and mandarin orange (CABI, 2004). 

Planococcus minor is an important pest of coffee in India (Reddy et al., 1997), and 

severe outbreaks (originally attributed to P. citri [Risso]) have been reported on 

coffee and sugarcane in New Guinea (CABI, 2004). 

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact

The introduction of any of the mealybugs would likely initiate chemical or 

biological control programs, such as for Maconellicoccus hirsutus in the Greater 

Caribbean Region. All species are polyphagous and could infest plants listed as 

Threatened or Endangered in the continental United States. 

High (3)

Scales [Ceroplastes rubens and Coccus viridis] Risk ratings

Risk Element #1: Climate – Host Interaction

Ceroplastes rubens occurs in subtropical and tropical regions. It is found in East 

and South Asia, Oceania (including Australia), eastern and southern parts of 

Africa, Hawaii, Florida, and parts of the Caribbean (CABI, 2004). Coccus viridis

is present in northeastern Australia, sub-Saharan Africa, Central America, India, 

the South Pacific, northern South America, Florida and Hawaii (CABI, 2004). 

We estimate that both C. rubens and C. viridis could survive in U.S. Plant 

Hardiness Zones 9-11 (PERAL, 2008). Because of its small size, Zone 11 does 

not count towards the total. Consequently, the risk rating for this element is 

Medium.

Medium (2)

Risk Element #2: Host range

Both species attack Citrus spp. (Rutaceae), Artocarpus altilis (Moraceae),

Camellia sinensis (Theaceae), Coffea spp. (Rubiaceae), Mangifera indica

High (3)
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 36

Scales [Ceroplastes rubens and Coccus viridis] Risk ratings

(Anacardiaceae), and Psidium guajava (Myrtaceae) (CABI, 2004). Ceroplastes 

rubens attacks numerous other wild and cultivated hosts, including Alpinia 

purpurata (Zingiberaceae), Annona sp. (Annonaceae), Artemisia sp. (Asteraceae), 

Cinnamomum verum (Lauraceae), Cocos nucifera (Arecaceae), Litchi chinensis

(Sapindaceae), Myristica fragrans (Myristicaceae), Prunus spp. (Rosaceae), Pinus

spp. (Pinaceae) (CABI, 2004), and Dimocarpus longan (Sapindaceae) (Ben-Dov 

et al., 2005). Coccus viridis attacks a wide variety of other hosts when Citrus is 

not available. Besides those above, major hosts include Manihot esculenta 

(Euphorbiaceae) and Theobroma cacao (Sterculiaceae) (CABI, 2004).

Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential

Both C. rubens (CABI, 2004) and C. viridis (Kosztarab, 1997) complete two or 

more generations per year. Ceroplastes rubens females may deposit over 1000 

eggs, but mean fecundity is just below 300, while C. viridis females can mature 

up to 500 eggs (CABI, 2004). 

Like other scales, these species have limited motility. The first instar “crawler” 

stage of scales can passively disperse from a few meters to hundreds of kilometers 

with wind (Gullan and Kosztarab, 1997), but long-distance dispersal is primarily

via infested plant materials (CABI, 2004). Since 1985, the genus Ceroplastes has 

been intercepted on plant materials at U.S. ports-of-entry over 4,800 times, and 

most interceptions were C. rubens (PestID, 2009). Coccus viridis has been 

intercepted over 11,000 times on fresh commodities.

High (3)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact

Both species cause indirect damage by promoting the growth of sooty mold, which 

reduces photosynthetic efficiency and growth, and lowers market value of fresh 

fruit (CABI, 2004). Both species are also likely to cause a loss of markets if

either becomes widely established in the United States.

Ceroplastes rubens causes direct damage by phloem feeding (CABI, 2004).

Coccus viridis usually causes minor damage, but it can devastate certain crops. 

It is a major pest of Citrus in Bolivia and Coffea in Haiti and India (Aitken 

Soux, 1985; Ben-Dov, 1993; Narasimham, 1987). As few as 50 insects per 

Coffea plant can reduce leaf area, plant growth and yield (Silva and Parra, 1982). 

High (3)

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact

Because both species are pests of citrus, widespread establishment in the United 

States is likely to initiate chemical and/or biological control programs. Ceroplastes 

rubens is polyphagous, so it could probably attack plants in the United States listed 

as Threatened or Endangered. Its hosts Euphorbia, Lindera, and Rhus (CABI, 

2004), have congeners—E. haeleeleana, E. telephioides, L. melissifolia, and R. 

michauxii—listed in 50 CFR §17.12 (USFWS, 2006) and occurring in areas of the 

continental United States climatically suitable for C. rubens. Coccus viridis could 

also attack plants listed as Threatened or Endangered in the United States, such

as Manihot walkerae.

High (3)
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 37

Sybra alternans Risk ratings

Risk Element #1: Climate – Host Interaction

Sybra alternans, or long-horned beetle, is found in Indonesia, Philippines, 

Micronesia, the Hawaiian Islands (Chen et al., 2000), and southern Florida 

(Thomas, 2000). The species could establish in Plant Hardiness Zones 10-13 

(PERAL, 2008). Zones 10 and 11 are in the continental United States, but Zone 

11 is too small to count towards the total. Hence, we rated this element Low.

Low (1)

Risk Element #2: Host range

Cerambycid beetles are known as wood-boring pests. Long-horned beetle has a 

wide host range that includes the dry or dead limbs of the following plants: fig 

(Ficus), Pandanus, breadfruit (Artocarpus), cotton (Gossypium), Euphorbia 

multiformis, Hibiscus, Barringtonia, Cycas, and Triphasia (Chen et al., 2000). 

Also, long-horned beetle is known to feed on the stems of jack beans (Canavalia 

ensiformis), dead stems of basil (Ocimum basilicum) and cocklebur (Xanthium 

strumarium), pineapple (Ananas comosus), garden bean (Phaseolus vulgaris), 

Cordia fruits, peduncles of passion fruit (Passiflora edulis), and pseudo-bulbs of 

orchid species (Chen et al., 2000). The study by Chen et al. (2000) was the first 

report of this beetle feeding on banana. The find was also unusual because longhorned beetle fed on the banana fruit. We rated this element High.

High (3)

Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential

Long-horned beetle populations can quickly increase and spread (Chen et al., 

2000). We found no biological information for this beetle. Anoplophora 

glabripennis, the Asian longhorned beetle, which is in the same family and 

subfamily as this long-horned beetle, disperses about 1500 m in a single season 

(Smith et al., 2001). While adult long-horned beetles can fly, it is more likely to 

be dispersed by human-assisted movement of eggs, larvae, or pupae on host 

material, as with A. glabripennis (CABI, 2004).

High (3)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact

In Hawaii, where long-horned beetle is established, it has become a pest of 

banana (Chen et al., 2000) and the papala tree (Giffin, 2003). Very little 

biological information is available for this beetle and little is known about its 

possible impacts. Exotic Cerambycid beetles introduced into the continental 

United States can have very detrimental effects on endemic tree species, leading 

to costly control efforts. For example, from 1996 through 2000, survey, 

eradication, restoration, public education, and research costs for A. glabripennis

were estimated to be $35M (Haack et al., 2000). Conservatively, we rated longhorned beetle High for this element, though it has not yet been shown to use live 

tree hosts like A. glabripennis.

High (3)

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact

Of the known hosts of long-horned beetle, at least one related species, Euphorbia 

telephiodes, is listed as Threatened or Endangered in the United States (USFWS, 

2006). However, this species was first detected in Florida in the dead limbs of 

Ficus in 1992 (Thomas, 2000), and there have been no additional reports of range 

expansion or economic damage in the United States (Haack, 2006).

Medium (2)
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 38

Table 8. Risk Rating for Consequences of Introduction

Pest Risk elements Cumulative 

risk ratingsa

Climate-host 

interaction

Host 

range

Dispersal 

potential

Economic 

impact

Environmental 

impact

Cercospora hayi Low (1) Low (1) Med (2) Low (1) Low (1) Low (6)

Guignardia musae Low (1) Low (1) Med (2) Low (1) Low (1) Low (6)

Sybra alternans Low (1) High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) Medium (12)

Bactrocera spp.b Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (13)

Scalesc Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (14)

Mealybugsd Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (14)

a

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

b

Includes B. musae, B. occipitalis, and B. philippinensis

c

Includes Ceroplastes rubens and Coccus viridus

d

Includes Dysmicoccus neobrevipes, Geococcus coffeae, Maconellicoccus hirsutus, Planococcus 

lilacinus, P. minor, Pseudococcus cryptus, Rastrococcus invadens, and R. spinosus.

2.7. Likelihood of Introduction

We rated pests for Likelihood of Introduction based on six sub-elements. Each element is rated 

High (3), Medium (2), or Low (1), and the scores of the six sub-elements are added to give an 

overall score for the Likelihood of Introduction (Table 9).

2.7.1. Quantity of Commodity Imported Annually

The estimated volume of bananas from the Philippines to be imported is less than 100 containers 

per year. All pests are rated Medium for this element.

2.7.2. Survive Post-harvest Treatment:

Cercospora hayi. Surface sterilization in the laboratory killed spores, but not mycelia (Kaiser 

and Lukezic, 1966). Therefore, the fungal spores are not likely to survive post-harvest safeguards

(Appendix A), but mycelium embedded in the host tissue may survive. We rated this pest High

for this sub-element.

Guignardia musae. Free spores would not survive post-harvest treatment (Appendix A). The 

chlorine treatment of banana hands in tanks would most likely penetrate the fungus fruiting 

bodies. Many common fungicides used in commercial banana production control G. musae, and

bagging the banana bunches reduce fruit infection (Jones, 2000d). We rated this fungus Low.

Bactrocera spp. Bactrocera musae can lay eggs into green fruit (Vijaysegaran, 1997), or sting 

and oviposit in very immature fruit (Gold et al., 2002), but eggs may not fully develop except in 

fruit approaching maturity (Gold et al., 2002). Additionally, commercial bananas harvested 

during the mature 'hard green' stage are reportedly not hosts of B. musae for quarantine purposes 

(Gold et al., 2002). Still, because of the uncertainties about egg development, we rated the fruit 

flies Medium.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 39

Sybra alternans. This pest survives shipment in conventionally produced bananas coming from 

Hawaii (Chen et al., 2000), which indicates it survived post-harvest treatment. We rated it High

for this element.

Scale insects and mealybugs. These pests—Ceroplastes rubens, and Coccus viridis; 

Dysmicoccus neobrevipes, Maconellicoccus hirsutus, Planococcus lilacinus, P. minor, 

Pseudococcus cryptus, Rastrococcus invadens, and R. spinosus—have sessile stages that live 

firmly pressed to the plant surfaces (Hill, 1983). Their small size, tendency to repel water, waxy 

coverings, and tendency to firmly attach to the substrate make them difficult to dislodge, 

especially if they are sheltered at the stem or blossom end of the fruit (Hill, 1983). Thus we rated 

the scales and mealybugs High for this sub-element.

2.7.3. Survive Shipment

Cercospora hayi. Mycelia in lesions, or free spores, could survive shipment. Mycelia in 

colonized leaf tissue have survived at least 15 weeks, and non-germinated conidia have survived 

at least five weeks (Kaiser and Lukezic, 1966). We rated this fungus High for this sub-element.

Guignardia musae. We found no published research on the viability of spores. Any spores 

surviving post-harvest processing would most likely survive shipment, because conventional 

shipping conditions are not extreme enough to kill spores. We rated this fungus High.

Sybra alternans. We found no research on the effects of cold on this pest. Although S. alternans

is tropical, being an internal feeder may allow it to survive conventional shipping conditions of 

banana, as observed on shipments from Hawaii (Chen et al., 2000). Therefore, we rated it High.

Bactrocera spp. Bananas are shipped in cool temperatures to prevent ripening but those 

temperatures are not cold enough to affect the survival of Bactrocera larvae. We rated 

Bactrocera spp. High here.

Scale insects and mealybugs. These are external feeders, and therefore are less likely to survive 

post-harvest treatments than internal feeders. However, many scales prefer tight, protected areas, 

such as cracks and crevices (Kosztarab, 1997) and can therefore be more protected than other 

external pests. We found no evidence that scales or mealybugs are affected by cold conditions

during shipment. Thus, we rated the scales and mealybugs High for this sub-element.

2.7.4. Not Detected at the Port-of-entry

Unless specific protocols with special commodity inspection are in place, we assumed standard 

inspection protocols for like commodities.

Fungi. Standard inspection procedures should detect both the lesions caused by Guignardia 

musae (Jones and Stover, 2000), and the brown spots caused by Cercospora hayi. We rated both 

fungi Low for this sub-element.

Sybra alternans. This is an internal feeder, but its larvae produce large, frass-filled tunnels that 

are easier to detect than other internal pests (Chen et al., 2000). We rated this pest Medium.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 40

Bactrocera spp. Fruit flies are highly likely to escape detection at a port-of-entry because the 

larvae are internal feeders (White & Elson-Harris, 1992). We rated these insects High.

Scale insects and mealybugs. These pests feed externally and are likely to be detected during a 

port-of-entry inspection. We rated them Low.

2.7.5. Imported or Subsequently Moved to an Area with an Environment Suitable for Survival

Most of the potential markets for bananas are located outside of the ecological range of Musa 

species in the continental United States, which means the fruit is unlikely to be moved to a 

suitable environment for these pests. 

Cercospora hayi and Guignardia musae. For the reasons above, we rated these pests Low for 

this sub-element.

Sybra alternans. This beetle has occurred in southern Florida since 1992 (Thomas, 2000), and no 

additional range expansion or economic damage in the United States has been reported (Haack, 

2006). Since it is already present in its suitable area, we rated it Low for this element.

Bactrocera spp. These fruit flies could establish in Plant Hardiness Zones 9-11, which makes up 

9.9 percent of the continental United States (PERAL, 2008). Therefore we rated these pests 

Medium.

Scales and mealybugs. As with the fruit flies above, these pests could establish in hardiness 

zones 9-11, and therefore we rated them Medium for this sub-element.

2.7.6. Come into Contact with Host Material Suitable for Reproduction

Cercospora hayi or Guignardia musae. These pests are unlikely to contact Musa spp., except in 

very small areas of the continental United States. We rated them Low for this sub-element.

Sybra alternans. While this pest only survives in warmer climates, some of its hosts (Chen et al., 

2000) could be available in zones 10 and 11 of the continental United States. We rated this pest 

Medium for this sub-element.

Bactrocera spp. Multiple fruit flies often infest one host, which means larvae can emerge and

more easily find mates (White and Elson-Harris, 1992). Fruit flies can fly long distances 

(Fletcher, 1989) and disperse to attractive hosts (up to 0.8 km for male baited traps) (White and 

Elson-Harris, 1992). Hence, if moved to an area where hosts are prevalent, these pests are likely

to find hosts. While some of the suitable hosts such as mango, guava, and pawpaw have limited 

distributions in the continental United States, tomato, peppers, and citrus are more widely

available. For these reasons, we gave them a High rating for this sub-element.

Scales and mealybugs. These pests lack wings and have limited powers of dispersal (Gullan & 

Kosztarab, 1997), and thus cannot locate hosts quickly. Successful establishment in a new 

environment depends at least two necessary conditions occurring: 1) close proximity of 

susceptible hosts, and 2) presence on the imported fruit of crawlers or other mobile forms (Blank 

et al., 1993). These circumstances are highly unlikely to occur together. Thus, these pests have a 

Low likelihood of contacting host material suitable for reproduction.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 41

Table 9. Risk Rating for Likelihood of Introduction. 

Pest Risk sub-elements Cumulative 

risk 

ratingsa, b

Survive postharvest 

treatment

Survive 

shipment

Not 

detected 

at port-ofentry

Moved to 

suitable 

habitat

Contact 

host 

material

Bactrocera spp.c Med (2) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (15)

Cercospora hayi High (3) High (3) Low (1) Low (1) Low (1) Medium (11)

Guignardia musae Low (1) High (3) Low (1) Low (1) Low (1) Low (9)

Mealybugsd High (3) High (3) Low (1) Med (2) Low (1) Medium (12)

Scalese High (3) High (3) Low (1) Med (2) Low (1) Medium (12)

Sybra alternans High (3) High (3) Med (2) Low (1) Med (2) Medium (13)

a

Low = 6 – 9 points, Medium = 10 – 14 points, High = 15 – 18 points

b For all pests, the ratings for ‘Quantity imported annually’ were Medium, so two points were 

added to the sum of each pest in the ‘Cumulative risk rating.’

c

Includes B. musae, B. occipitalis, and B. philippinensis.

d

Includes Dysmicoccus neobrevipes, Geococcus coffeae, Maconellicoccus hirsutus, Planococcus 

lilacinus, P. minor, Pseudococcus cryptus, Rastrococcus invadens, and R. spinosus.

e

Includes Ceroplastes rubens and Coccus viridus.

2.8. Conclusion - Pest Risk Potential and Pests Requiring Phytosanitary Measures

To estimate the Pest Risk Potential for each pest, we summed the cumulative risk ratings for the 

Consequences of Introduction and the Likelihood of Introduction (Table 10). The fruit flies had a 

High pest risk potential; the mealybugs, scales, and beetle were Medium risk; and Cercospora 

hayi and Guignardia musae were Low risk.

Pest Risk Potential ratings have the following suggested meanings (PPQ, 2000a):

Low: pest will typically not require specific mitigation procedures. The port-of-entry

inspection to which all imported commodities are subjected can be expected to 

provide sufficient phytosanitary security.

Medium: specific phytosanitary measures may be necessary.

High: specific phytosanitary measures are strongly recommended. Port-of-entry inspection is 

not considered sufficient to provide phytosanitary security.

The choice of appropriate phytosanitary measures to mitigate risks is undertaken as part of Risk 

Management, and is not addressed in this document. We do, however, list mitigation options for 

these pests below.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 42

Table 10. Pest risk potentials for pests on Philippine bananas to the continental United States

Type Pest Cumulative risk ratings Pest risk potentiala

Consequences 

of introduction

Likelihood of 

introduction

Total Rating

Fruit flies B. musae

B. occipitalis

B. philippinensis

High (13) High (15) 28 High

Mealybugs Dysmicoccus neobrevipes 

Geococcus coffeae

Maconellicoccus hirsutus

Planococcus lilacinus

P. minor

Pseudococcus cryptus

Rastrococcus invadens

R. spinosus

High (14) Medium (12) 26 Medium

Scales Ceroplastes rubens

Coccus viridus

High (14) Medium (12) 26 Medium

Cerambycidae Sybra alternans Medium (12) Medium (13) 25 Medium

Fungi Cercospora hayi Low (6) Medium (11) 17 Low

Guignardia musae Low (6) Low (9) 15 Low

a

Low = 11 – 18 points, Medium = 19 – 26 pts, High = 27 – 33 pts

3. Risk Mitigation Options

Above we identified and analyzed quarantine significant pests that are present in Philippine 

bananas and follow the pathway. Even if the commodity is subject to port-of-entry inspections, 

the quarantine pests discussed in this assessment will likely require additional mitigation 

measures. The three fruit flies had High pest risk potentials, eleven pests had Medium pest risk 

potentials, and the two fungi Low pest risk potentials.

Pest risk management is the decision-making process of reducing the risk of introduction of a 

quarantine pest (IPPC, 2007: ISPM #11). The appropriate level of protection for an importing 

country can be achieved by the application of a single phytosanitary measure, such as inspection 

or quarantine treatment, or a combination of measures. If no single measure is likely to reduce 

pest risk to an acceptable level, then a combination of measures may be needed. The 

combination of specific phytosanitary measures that provides overlapping or redundant 

safeguards is called a “systems approach.” Systems approaches vary in complexity; however, all 

require the integration of two or more measures that act independently of each other, with the 

cumulative effect of achieving the desired level of phytosanitary protection (IPPC, 2007: ISPM 

#14). Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) uses systems approaches for the importation of 

many commodities; including Unshu oranges from Japan (7 CFR § 319.28, 2008), and tomatoes 

from Central america, Chile, Spain, France, Morocco, and Western Sahara (7 CFR § 319.56-28, 

2008). These programs have performed successfully for many years. Specific mitigations may be 

selected from a range of pre-harvest and post-harvest options, and may include other 
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 43

safeguarding measures. Measures may be added, or the strength of measures increased, to 

compensate for uncertainty. At a minimum, for a measure to be considered for use in a systems 

approach, it must be: 1) clearly defined, 2) efficacious, 3) officially required (mandated), and 4) 

subject to monitoring and control by the responsible national plant protection organization 

(IPPC, 2007: ISPM #14).

Below we present a list of mitigation options for these pests (Table 11), except for most of the 

standard postharvest processing measures, which were described above (1.2) and detailed in 

Appendix A. These options are based on current existing fruits and vegetables regulations for 

approved bananas or Musa spp., and mitigation options specific to the quarantine pests of 

concern that could apply to this commodity (7 CFR § 319.56, 2008; PPQ, 2009).

Table 11. Summary of risk mitigation options for bananas from the Philippines.

Measure(s) Pests Efficacy

Pre-harvest and harvest measures

Pest-free areas or 

places of production

All (Cercospora hayi, 

Guignardia musae, 

Sybra alternans,

Bactrocera spp., 

Scales, and Mealybugs)

Satisfies requirements for appropriate level of 

protection

Harvesting immature 

(hard green) bananas

Bactrocera spp. Commercial bananas collected in the “hard 

green” stage (Stage 1) (e.g., McGregor, 1987; 

Nakasone and Paull, 1998) may not be hosts for

fruit flies. There are mixed results for B. musae

(Gold et al., 2002; Vijaysegaran, 1997), and we 

found no data for B. occipitalis or B. 

philippinensis as to whether harvesting banana 

fruit in the hard green stage may remove the 

fruit as a potential host. Further research is 

required to confirm the treatment efficacy. 

Selected post-harvest processing measures

Inspections and 

monitoring

All; must be used in 

combination with other 

measures

Cercospora hayi produces visible brown spots 

on the banana fruit, crowns, and the penducles 

(Jones and Stover, 2000). Guignardia musae 

causes leaf spotting on older banana leaves 

(Jones, 2000d), which would be visible and 

most likely treated with fungicide in 

commercially produced banana.

Sybra alternans feeds internally on banana 

fruit, but leaves visible exit holes and black 

tunnels (Chen et al., 2000).

Bactrocera spp. feed internally on banana fruit, 

but could potentially leave both oviposition 
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 44

Measure(s) Pests Efficacy

punctures and exit holes of larvae (CABI, 2004) 

that could be detected by careful inspection.

Scales and mealybugs feed externally and are 

easily seen upon inspection. These insects also 

encourage the growth of sooty mold due to the 

high levels of honeydew deposits on leaves; 

therefore these groups of pests would likely be 

seen during inspections (CABI, 2004).

Packinghouse 

procedures

All; should be used in 

combination with other 

measures 

Packinghouse procedures for banana include 

washing, rinsing, and culling for faults and 

pests. 

The efficacy of the elimination of pests is 

unknown and would require additional 

research.

Post-harvest mitigations

Vapor heat treatment Bactrocera spp. The approved treatment for vapor heat of 

Bactrocera spp., which includes B. occipitalis

and B. phlippinensis, is T106-d-1 for mango 

from the Philippines, which requires 114.8 oF 

water vapor for 10 minutes (PPQ, 2009). This 

may be a feasible treatment because the species 

are closely related, but efficacy research is

needed.

Irradiation Bactrocera spp. The approved treatment for irradiation of fruit 

flies on fruits and vegetables is T105-a-1, 

which includes a minimum of 150 Gray (15 

krad), and is not to exceed 1000 Gray (100 

krad) (PPQ, 2009).

Irradiation Sybra alternans, Scales 

and Mealybugs 

(Ceroplastes rubens, 

Coccus viridus, 

Dysmicoccus 

neobrevipes, 

Geococcus coffeae, 

Maconellicoccus 

hirsutus, Planococcus 

lilacinus, P. minor, 

Pseudococcus cryptus, 

Rastrococcus invadens, 

and R. spinosus)

PPQ recognizes the generic dose of 400 Gray

for quarantine treatment on all regulated plant 

articles for all insect pests, except for 

Lepidopteran pupae and adults (PPQ, 2009).

Methyl bromide Sybra alternans The approved treatment for internal feeders on 
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 45

Measure(s) Pests Efficacy

fumigation 

Bactrocera spp.

Scales and Mealybugs

(Ceroplastes rubens, 

Coccus viridus, 

Dysmicoccus 

neobrevipes, 

Geococcus coffeae, 

Maconellicoccus 

hirsutus, Planococcus 

lilacinus, P. minor, 

Pseudococcus cryptus, 

Rastrococcus invadens, 

and R. spinosus)

pineapple is T101-r-2, which requires 2 

lbs/1000ft3 methyl bromide for 2 hours at 70 oF 

(PPQ, 2009). This treatment may be applicable 

for banana but additional research would be 

needed. 

The approved treatment for Ceratitis capitata 

on multiple commodities requires 2lbs/1000ft3

methyl bromide for 2 hours at 70 oF, which 

corresponds to T101-c-1, T101-c-3, T101-d-3, 

T101-h-2-1, T101-i-1-1, T101-m-2-1, and 

T101-w-1-2 (PPQ, 2009). Bactrocera is in the 

same subfamily (Dacinae) as Ceratitis, so this

treatment might be applicable for Bactrocera 

spp., but additional research is needed. 

The approved treatment for external feeders and 

leaf miners on multiple commodities is T104-a1, which requires 4 lbs/1000ft3 methyl bromide 

for 2 hours at 40 oF (PPQ, 2009). 

Cold treatment Bactrocera spp. The approved cold treatments on multiple 

commodities for C. capitata are T107-a and 

T107-a-1, which require temperatures of 34 oF 

for 15 days and 35 oF for 17 days (PPQ, 2009). 

Bactrocera is in the same subfamily (Dacinae) 

as Ceratitis, so this treatment might be 

applicable for Bactrocera spp., but additional 

research is needed. Cold treatment may not be 

feasible for banana because it could damage the 

fruit. Research on efficacy is needed. 

Methyl bromide 

fumigation + Cold 

treatment

Bactrocera spp. The approved methyl bromide plus cold 

treatment for C. capitata on multiple 

commodities (T108-a) is a two step process, 

requiring 2lbs/1000ft3 methyl bromide for 2 

hours at 70 oF, followed by 33 - 37 oF for 4 

days (PPQ, 2009). Bactrocera is in the same 

subfamily (Dacinae) as Ceratitis, so this
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 46

Measure(s) Pests Efficacy

treatment might be applicable for Bactrocera 

spp., but additional research is needed. 

Cold treatment + 

Methyl bromide 

treatment

Bactrocera spp. The approved cold treatment plus methyl 

bromide fumigation for C. capitata on multiple 

commodities from Australia (T109-d-1) is a 

two step process, requiring 33 oF for 21 days, 

followed by 2lbs/1000ft3 methyl bromide for 2 

hours at 70 oF (PPQ, 2009). Bactrocera is in the 

same subfamily (Dacinae) as Ceratitis, so this

treatment might be applicable for Bactrocera 

spp., but additional research is needed. 

4. Literature Cited

7 CFR § 318.13–4i. 2005. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 7, Part 318 (7 CFR 318.13–4i 

– Administrative instructions; conditions governing the movement of green bananas from 

Hawaii).

7 CFR § 319.28. 2008. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 7, Part 319 (7 CFR 319.28 –

Notice of quarantine). 

7 CFR § 319.56. 2005. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 7, Part 319 (7 CFR 319.56 –

Fruits and Vegetables).

7 CFR § 319.56-28. 2008. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 7, Part 319 (7 CFR 319.56-28 

– Tomatoes from certain countries).

7 CFR § 360. 2008. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 7, Part 360 (7 CFR § 360 – Noxious 

Weed Regulations). 

Aitken Soux, P. 1985. Some pests and diseases generally encountered in coffee nurseries. In: 

Feuille d'Extension. 1985, No. 53, 5 pp.

Alfieri, Jr., S. A., Langdon, K. R., Kimbrough, J, W., El-Gholl, N. E., and Wehlburg, C. 1994.

Diseases and Disorders of Plants in Florida. Florida Department of Agriculture and 

Consumer Services, Gainesville, Florida. 1114 pp.

Allen, R.C. 1969. A revision of the genus Leptoglossus Guerin (Hemiptera: Coreidae). 

Entomologica Americana 45(2): 35-140.

Allwood, A. 1997. New fruit fly incursion in Darwin, northern Australia Bactrocera

philippinensis. AG-Alert, No. 18, 2 pp. South Pacific Commission, Suva, Fiji.

Allwood, A. J., Chinajariyawong, A., Drew, R. A. I., Hamacek, E. L., Hancock, D. L., 

Hengsawad, C., Jinapin, J. C., Jirasurat, M., Kong Krong, C., Kritsaneepaiboon, S., 

Leiong, C. T. S., and Vijaysegaran, S. 1999. Host plant records for fruit flies (Diptera: 

Tephritidae) in South-East Asia. The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology. Supplement 7, 92 pp.

Anon. 1982. A Handbook of Plant Diseases in Colour, Vol. 1, Fruits and Vegetables, 2nd Ed.

Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Brisbane. 

Anon. 1984. Distribution of Plant Parasitic Nematodes Species in North America. Nematode 

Geographical Distribution Committee of the Society of Nematologists. 205 pp.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 47

Anon. 2002. National report to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. Office 

of Environmental Response and Coordination, Republic of Palau.

www.unccd.int/cop/reports/asia/national/2002/Palau-eng. Last accessed 12/15/04.

APHIS. 2004. Fruit and Vegetable Manual, Reference Section 

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/manuals/pdf_files/FV_Chapters.htm.

Armstrong, J. W. 1983. Infestation biology of three fruit fly (Diptera: Tephrititdae) species on 

“Brazilian”, “Valery” and “William’s” cultivars of banana in Hawaii. J. Econ. Entomol. 

76: 539-543.

Armstrong, J. W. 2001. Quarantine security of bananas at harvest maturity against Mediterranean 

and Oriental fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Hawaii. J. Econ. Entomol. 94(1):302-

314. 

ARS. 1970. Index of Plant Diseases in the United States. Agricultural Research Service,

Washington, DC. 532 pp. (1960 publication, reprinted in 1970.)

Bajet, N. B. and Magnaye, L. V. 2002. Virus diseases of banana and abacá in the Philippines.

Los Baños, Laguna: (PARRFI). 82 pp.

Baranowski, R. M. and Slater, J. S. 1986. Coreidae of Florida (Hemiptera, Heteroptera). Florida 

Dept. Agr & Cons. Serv., Div. Plant Industry, Gainsville, FL.

Bateman, M. A. 1972. The Ecology of Fruit Flies. Annual Review of Entomology. 17: 493:518.

Ben-Dov, Y. 1993. A Systematic Catalogue of the Soft Scale Insects of the World (Homoptera: 

Coccoidea: Coccidae) with data on geographical distribution, host plants, biology and 

economic importance. Sandhill Crane Press, Inc., Gainesville, FL. 536 pp.

Ben-Dov, Y. 1994. A Systematic Catalogue of the Mealybugs of the World (Insecta: Homoptera: 

Coccoidea: Pseudococcidae and Putoidae). Intercept Ltd., Andover, UK. 686 pp.

Ben-Dov, Y., D. R. Miller, and G. A. P. Gibson. 2005. ScaleNet. 

http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/scalenet/scalenet.htm. (Archived at PERAL)

Bier, V.M. 1999. Challenges to the acceptance of probabilistic risk analysis. Risk Analysis 19: 

703-710. 

Biosecurity Australia. 2008. Final Import Risk Analysis Report for the Importation of Cavendish 

Bananas from the Philippines, Part C. Canberra: Biosecurity Australia.

Blank, R. H., M. H. Olson, and G. S. C. Gill. 1993. An assessment of quarantine risk of 

armoured scale (Hemiptera: Diaspididae) fruit infestation on kiwifruit. New Zealand 

Journal of Crop and Horticultural Science. 21:139-145.

Borror, D. J., C. A. Triplehorn, N. F. Johnson. 1989. An introduction to the study of insects, 6th

ed. Saunders College Publishing, Harcourt Brace College Publishers, New York, NY. 

875 pp.

BPI/Dole. 2004. List of pests and pathogens known to occur on banana in the Philippines.

Bureau of Plant Industry, Department of Agriculture, Philippines. Letter dated August 12, 

2004 from A. Munez (Dole Fruit Co.) to R. P. Kahn.

Bradbury, J, F. 1986. Guide to Plant Pathogenic Bacteria. CAB International Mycological 

Institute, Kew, UK. 332 pp.

Brunt, A.A., Crabtree, K., Dallwitz, M.J., Gibbs, A.J., Watson, L. and Zurcher, E.J. (eds.) (1996 

onwards). Plant Viruses Online: Descriptions and Lists from the VIDE Database. 

Version: 20th August 1996. http://biology.anu.edu.au/Groups/MES/vide/. Last accessed 

2/06/05.

Buddenhagen, I. and Elsasser, T. A. 1962. An insect-spread bacterial wilt epiphytotic of Bluggoe 

bananas. Nature 194:164-65.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 48

Buddenhagen, I. and Kelman, A. 1964. Biological and physiological aspects of bacterial wilt 

cause by Pseudomonas solanacearum. Annual Review of Plant Pathology 2:203-230.

CABI. 2004. Crop Protection Compendium. CAB International (CABI), Wallingford, Oxon UK.

CABI. 2009. Index Fungorum. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau International (CABI), 

Wallingford, UK. Last accessed March 2009. 

http://www.indexfungorum.org/Names/Names.asp. 

CABI/EPPO. 1999a. Distribution Maps of Plant Diseases. Map 783, Edition 1, Ralstonia 

solanacearum (Smith) Yabuuchi Race 1. CAB International (CABI), European and 

Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (EPPO), Wallingford, Oxon UK.

CABI/EPPO. 1999b. Distribution Maps of Plant Diseases. Map 784, Edition 1, Ralstonia 

solanacearum (Smith) Yabuuchi Race 2. CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon UK.

Capco, S. R. 1956. A list of plant pests of the Philippines with special references to field crops, 

fruit trees and vegetables. Dept. Agr. Natural Res., Bureau of Plant Industry. Manila, 

Philippines. 

Carlier, J., Fouré, E., Gauhl, F., Jones, D. R., Lepoivre, P., Mourichon, X., Pasberg-Gauhl, C., 

and Romero, R. A. 2000. Black leaf streak. Pages 37-79 In: Diseases of Banana, Abacá, 

and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Carroll, L. E., White, I. M., Freidberg, A., Norrbom, A. L., Dallwitz, M. J. and Thompson, F. C.

2002. Pest fruit flies of the world: description, illustrations, identification, and 

information retrieval. Version: 8th August 2002. 

http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/Diptera/tephriti/pests/adults/. Last accessed 1/31/2005.

Cayabyab, B. F., Ligat, B. S., Bayot, R. G., Ebuenga, M. D., Padella, C. L., Aquino, A. G., 

Bacud, S. A., and Recuenco-Adorada, J. D. 2000. Hispodonta sp. (Hispinae, 

Chrysomelidae, Coleoptera), a potentially harmful non-quarantine pest of banana in the 

Philippines. Philippine Entomologist 14(1):101-102.

Cayme, T. L. and Gapasin, D. P. 1987. Biology, host range and natural enemies of the coconut 

spider mite, Oligonychus velascoi Rimando. Annals of Tropical Research 9(2):59-67. 

CERIS. 2009. Export Certification Project - EXCERPT. Purdue University, Entomology

Department, Center for Environmental and Regulatory Information Systems (CERIS). 

http://excerpt.ceris.purdue.edu/. (Archived at PERAL).

Chen, H., Ota, A. and Fonsah, G. 2000. Infestation of Sybra alternans (Cerambycidae: 

Coleoptera), a long-horned beetle in a Hawaii banana plantation. Hawaii Agr. Res. Ctr., 

Tropical Fruit Report 4.

CITES. 2005. Appendices I, II, and III. Convention on International Trade of Endangered 

Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, Valid until 12 June 2005.

http://www.cites.org/eng/append/appendices.shtml. Last accessed 2/05/05.

Clarke, A. R., K. F. Armstrong, A. E. Carmichael, J. R. Milner, S. Raghu, G. K. Roderick, and 

D. K. Yeates. 2004. Invasive phytophagous pests arising through a recent tropical 

evolutionary radiation: The Bactrocera dorsalis complex of fruit flies. Annual Review of 

Entomology, 50:293-319.

http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev.ento.50.071803.130428.

Cox, J. M. 1989. The mealybug genus Planococcus (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae). Bull. Brit. 

Mus. Nat. Hist. (Ent.) 58(1): 1-78.

CPHST. 2008. Biological and Taxonomic Support (BATS) Database. Center for Plant Health 

Science and Technology (CPHST), Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 49

https://www.peral.org/BATS/index.cfm?CFID=928795&CFTOKEN=45278576. 

(Archived at PERAL).

Crane, J. H. and C. F. Balerdi. 1998. The Banana in Florida. Document HS-10 Department of 

Horticultural Sciences, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida.

http://hammock.ifas.ufl.edu. Last accessed 12/04/04.

De Jong, R and Treadaway, C. G. 1993. The Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera) of the Philippines. 

Zoologische Verhandelingen No. 288. Nationaal Natuurhistorisch Museum, Leiden, 

Netherlands. 125 pp.

De Waele, D. 2000. Root-knot nematodes. Pages 303-323 In: Diseases of Banana, Abacá, and 

Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Denton, G. R. W., R. Muniappan, M. Marutani, J. MacConnell, and T. S. Lali. 1989. Biology

and natural enemies of the fruit-piercing moth Othreis fullonia (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

rom Guam. Agr. Exp. Sta., Col. Agr. and Life Sci., Univ. Guam, Mangilao, Guam.

Denton, G. R. W., R. Muniappan, L. Austin, and O. H. Diambra. 1999. Fruit-piercing moths of 

Micronesia. Technical Report #27. Agr. Exp. Sta., Col., Agr. and Life Sci., Univ. Guam, 

Mangilao, Guam.

Diekmann, M. and C. A. J. Putter. 1996. MUSA, 2nd Edition, FAO/IPGRI Technical Guidelines 

for the Safe Movement of Germplasm, No, 15, Food and Agriculture Organization of the 

United Nations, Rome/International Plant Genetics Resources Institute, Rome. 28 pp.

Drew, R. A. I. 1983. Report on the pest status of fruit flies in mango fruit in the Philippines.

Queensland Department of Primary Industries, Australia. 

Drew, R. A. I. and D. L. Hancock. 1994. The Bactrocera dorsalis complex of fruit flies (Diptera: 

Tephritidae: Dacinae) in Asia. Bull. Ent. Res. Sup. Series No. 2, CAB International, 

Wallingford, Oxon, UK. 68 pp.

Drew, R. A. I., Hooper, G. H. S., Bateman, M. A. 1982. Economic fruit flies of the South Pacific 

region, (2nd Ed.). Queensland Dept. of Primary Industries. Brisbane.

Duffus, J. E. 1971. Role of weeds in the incidence of virus diseases. Ann. Rev. Phytopathol. 9: 

319-340.

El-Sayed, A. and M. Suckling. 2004. List of New Zealand invasive species.

http://www.improvedbiosecurity.org/NzInvaders/index.php. Last accessed 2/8/05.

EPPO. 2007. EPPO Plant Quarantine Information Retrieval System (PQR), Ver. 4.6. Paris: 

European & Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization.

FAO. 2001. International Standard for Phytosanitary Measures: Pest Risk Analysis for

Quarantine Pests. Publication No. 11, May, 2001. Secretariat of the International Plant 

Protection Convention, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, 

27 pp.

Farr, D. F., G. F. Bills, G. P. Chamuris, and A. Y. Rossman. 1989. Fungi on Plant and Plant 

Products in the United States. APS Press, St. Paul. 1225 pp.

Farr, D. F., Rossman, A. Y, Palm, M. E., and McCray, E. B. 2009. Fungal Databases, Systemic 

Botany and Mycology Laboratory, ARS, USDA. htpp://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases 

Last accessed March 2009.

Fletcher B. S., 1989. Ecology; life history strategies of tephritid fruit flies, In: Robinson A. S., 

Hooper G., (eds.), Fruit Flies; their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control. World Crop 

Pests. Amsterdam, Holland: Elsevier, 3(B):195-208.

French, A. M. 1989. California Plant Disease Host Index. California Department of Agriculture, 

Sacramento, 395 pp.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 50

French, B. R. 2006. Growing the major food plants of Papua New Guinea: A description of the 

crops, how and where they are grown, and some of the problems with their production. 

Food Plants International. Database. Tasmania, Australia. 

http://www.foodplantsinternational.com/index.php?sec=home

Gallegos, D.P. and E.J. Bonano. 1993. Consideration of uncertainty in the performance 

assessment of radioactive waste disposal from an international regulatory perspective. 

Relaiability Engineering and System Safety 42: 111-123. 

Gambley, C, F., J. E. Thomas, L.V. Magnaye, and L. Herradura. 2004. Abacá Mosaic virus: a 

distinct strain of Sugarcane Mosaic virus. Australian Plant Pathology 33(4):475-484. 

Abstract consulted February 15, 2005, http://www.publish.csiro.au/paper/AP04050.htm . 

Gaskala, R. D. 2004. Letter to Robert Kahn, dated 12/14/04, transmitting information about 

insect, nematode, and pathogens pests of Musa spp. in Florida as well as Plant Pathogen 

Inspection Reports of findings in Florida plant nurseries. 

Giffin, J. 2003. Pu’u Wa’awa’a Biological Assessment. State of Hawaii, Department of Land and 

Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife. Pu’u Wa’awa’a, North Kona, 

Hawaii. 92 pp.

Gold, C. S., and S. Messiaen. 2000. The banana weevil, Cosmopolites sordidus. Musa pest fact 

sheet No. 4: pp. 1-4, INIBAP, Montpellier, France.

Gold, C. S., Pinese, B., and Peña, J. E. 2002. Pests of banana. Pages 13-56, In Tropical Fruit 

Pests and Pollinators. Peña, J. E., Sharp, J. L. and Wysoki, M. (eds). CAB International, 

Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Gowen, S. R. 2000. Root-lesion Nematodes, Pages 303-306, and Spiral Nematodes, pages 306-

307 In: Diseases of Banana, Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, 

Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Gullan, P. J., and Kosztarab, M. 1997. Adaptations in scale insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 42: 23-

50. 

Gunn, C. R. and Ritchie, C. 1982. 1982 Report of the Technical Committee to Evaluate Noxious 

Weeds: Exotic Weeds for the Federal Noxious Weed Act. 335 pp.

Haack, R. A., T. M. Poland, and R. T. Gao. 2000. The United States experience with the exotic 

cerambycid Anoplophora glabripennis: Detection, quarantine, and control. In: 

Quarantine pests, risks for the forestry sector and their effects on foreign trade. 

Proceedings on CD-ROM of Silvotecna 14, 27-28 June 2000, Concepcion, Chile. 

CORMA, Concepcion, Chile. 12 pp. 

Haack, R. A. 2006. Exotic bark- and wood-boring Coleoptera in the United States: recent 

establishments and interceptions. Can. J. For. Res. 36: 269–288.

Hancock, D. L., E. L. Hamacek, A. C. Lloyd, and M. M. Elson-Harris. 2000. The distribution 

and host plants of fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Australia. Dept. of Primary

Industries, State of Queensland, Brisbane.

Handoo, Z.A. 2007. USDA Nematode Collection. Beltsville, MD: USDA-ARS Nematology

Laboratory, Plant Sciences Institute; http://nt.ars-grin.gov/nematodes/search.cfm.

Hara, A. H., Mau, R., F. L., Heu, R., Jacobsen, C., and DuPonte, N. R. 2002. Banana rust thrips.

Damage to banana and ornamentals in Hawaii. Coop. Ext. Ser., Coll. Trop. Agr. Hum. 

Res. (CTAHR) Univ. Hawaii at Manoa.

Hardy, T. 2004. Letter dated November 24, 2004 to R. P. Kahn from Tad Hardy, Horticulture 

and Quarantine Division, Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 51

Hill, D. S. 1983. Agricultural Insect Pests of the Tropics and their Control. Cambridge 

University Press, Cambridge, UK. 746 pp.

Holm, L. G., Doll, J., Holm, E., Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1997. World Weeds: Natuaral 

Histories and Distribution. John Wiley & Sons, New York. 1129 pp.

Holm, L. G., Pancho, J. V., Herberger, J. P., and Plucknett, D. L. 1979. A Geographical Atlas of 

World Weeds, (Second printing, 1991). Krieger Publishing Co., Malabar, FL. 391 pp. 

Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., and Herberger, J. P. 1977. The World's Worst 

Weeds,. Krieger Publishing Co., Malabar, FL. 609 pp.

IIE. 1986. Batrocera dorsalis (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae) (Oriental fruit fly). International 

Institute of Entomology, Distribution Maps of Pests, Series A, 109 (revised). CAB 

International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK. 

IIE. 1994a. Bactrocera occipitalis (Bezzi) (Diptera: Tephritidae). International Institute of 

Entomology, Distribution Maps of Pests, Series A, 549. CAB International, Wallingford, 

Oxon, UK. 

IIE. 1994b. Bactrocera philippinensis Drew & Hancock (Diptera: Tephritidae). International 

Institute of Entomology, Distribution Maps of Pests, Series A, 548. CAB International, 

Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

IPM DANIDA. 2003. Mealybugs. IPM Thailand. 

http://www.ipmthailand.org/en/Pests/Mealybugs.htm. 

IPPC. 2007. International Standards For Phytosanitary Measures, 1 to 29 (2007 edition). Food 

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

Protection Convention (IPPC), Rome, Italy. 376 pp.

ISPP, (not dated). Committee on Common Names of Plant Diseases: Banana diseases. 

International; Society for Plant Pathology.

http://www.isppweb.org/names_banana_pathogen.asp. Last accessed 10/18/04.

Jeger, M. J., Eden-Green, J. M., Thresh, J. M., Johanson, A., Waller, J. M. and Brown, A. E.

1995. Banana diseases. Pages 317-381 In: Bananas and Plantains, Gowen, S., (ed.). 

Chapman & Hall, London.

Jones, D. R (collator), 1997. Diseases of Banana and Plantain (Musa spp.) Common Names of 

Plant Diseases. http://apsnet.org/online/common/names/banana.asp. Last updated 

10/9/97, last accessed 11/15/04.

Jones, D, R. 2000a. Sigatoka. Pages 79-92 In: Diseases of Banana, Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. 

R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Jones, D, R. 2000b. Cordana leaf spot. Pages 99-102 In: Diseases of Banana, Abacá, and Enset, 

Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Jones, D, R. 2000c. Deightoniella leaf spot. Pages 102-104 In: Diseases of Banana, Abacá, and 

Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Jones, D, R. 2000d. Tropical Speckle. Pages 116-120 In: Diseases of Banana, Abacá, and Enset, 

Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Jones, D. R. 2000e. Freckle. Pages 120-125 In: Diseases of Banana, Abacá, and Enset, In: 

Diseases of Banana, Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, 

Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Jones, D. R. 2000f. Rust. Pages 125-127 In: Diseases of Banana, Abacá, and Enset, In: Diseases 

of Banana, Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, 

UK.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 52

Jones, D. R. and Lomerio, E. O. 2000. Pseudostem heart rot. Pages 166-167 In: Diseases of 

Banana, Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, 

UK.

Jones, D. R. and Stover, R. H. 2000. Preharvest Diseases. Pages 173-190 In: Diseases of Banana, 

Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Jordon, R. 2001. USDA Climate Zones. Miscellaneous Publication No. 1475. Issued January

1990. Authored by Henry M. Cathey while Director, U.S. National Arboretum Edited, 

formatted and prepared for the US National Arboretum web site by Ramon Jordan, 

March 1998 & Revised March 2001. http://www.usna.usda.gov/Hardzone/ushzmap.html

Kaiser, W. J. and Lukezic, F. L. 1965. Brown spot disease of banana fruit caused by Cercospora 

hayi. Phytopathology 55:977-980.

Kaiser, W. J. and Lukezic, F. L. 1966. Influence of certain environmental conditions of spore 

dispersal and survival of Cercospora hayi from Banana. Phytopathology 56:1290-1293.

Karamura, E. B. and Karamura, D. A. 1995. Banana morphology—part II: The aerial shoot.

Pages 190-205 In: Bananas and Plantains, Gowen, S. (ed.). Chapman & Hall, London.

Kosztarab, M. 1997. Deciduous forest trees. Pages? In Soft Scale Insects: Their Biology, Natural 

Enemies and Control Vol. 7B, edited by Y. Ben-Dov and C. J. Hodgson. Amsterdam: 

Elsevier.

Hua, L.-z. 2000. List of Chinese Insects Vol. 1. Zhongshan (Sun Yat-sen) University Press, 

Guangzhou, China. 

Lewis, T. 1973. Thrips: Their Biology, Ecology and Economic Importance. London: Academic 

Press.

Lockhart, B. E. L. and Jones, D. R. 2000a. Banana mosaic. Pages 256-263 In: Diseases of 

Banana, Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, 

UK. 

Lockhart, B. E. L. and Jones, D. R. 2000b. Banana streak. Pages 263-274 In: Diseases of 

Banana, Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK

Loganathan, M., and Suresh, S. 2001. A record of mealybug, Planococcus lilacinus (Cockrell) 

(Pseudococcidae : Hemiptera) on cauliflower. Insect Environment 7 (1): 11-12. 

(Abstract) 

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

phytosanitary risk analysis. Scientia Agricola 65(Special): 54-59.

Maity, D. K., A. K. Sahoo, and S. K. Mandal. 1998. Evaluation of laboratory hosts for rearing 

and mass multiplication of Planococcus minor (Maskell) (Pseudococcidae: Hemiptera).

Environment and Ecology 16(3):530-532.

Marin, D. H., Romero, R. A., Guzmán, M., and Sutton, T. B. 2003. Black sigatoka: An 

increasing threat to banana cultivation. Plant Disease 87:208-222.

Martin Kessing, J. L. and Mau, R. F. L. 1992. Dysmicoccus neobrevipes (Beardsley). Gray

Pineapple Mealy bug. Crop Knowledge Master, Dept. Ent. Honolulu, Hawaii.

Http://www.extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/Type/d_neobre.htm. Last accessed 9/9/04.

Martin Kessing, J. L. and Mau, R. F. L. 1993. Othreis fullonia ( ClerK). Pacific fruit-piercing 

moth. Crop Knowledge Master, Dept. Ent. Honoloulu, Hawaii.

http://extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/Type/othreis.htm

Martinez, M. d. l. A., and M. Suris. 1998. Biology of Planococcus minor Maskell (Homoptera: 

Pseudococcidae) under laboratory conditions. Revista de Proteccion Vegetal 13(3):199-

201.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 53

Mau, R. F. L and Martin Kessing, J. L. 1993. Elixothrips brevisetis (Bangnall). Banana Rind 

Thrips. Crop Knowledge Master, Dept. Ent., Honolulu, Hawaii.

http://www.extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/Type/e_brevis.htm. Last accessed 9/9/04.

Mau, R. F. L. and Martin Kessing, J. L. 2000. Coccus viridis (Green). Green Scale. Crop 

Knowledge Master, Dept. Ent. Honolulu, Hawaii.

http://www.extento.hawaii..edu/kbase/crop/Tyupe/c_viridi.htm. Last accessed 1/19/05.

Mau, R. F. L., Martin Kessing, J. L., Tenbrink, V. L., and Hara, A. H. 1994. Pentalonia 

nigroneruosa (Coquerel) Banana Aphid. Crop Knowledge Master, Dept. Ent. Honolulu, 

Hawaii. http://www.extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/Type/pentalon.htm. Last accessed

9/9/04.

McGregor, B. M. 1987. Tropical products transport handbook, United States Department of 

Agriculture. 148 pp.

Meredith, D. S. 1963. Some graminicolous fungi associated with spotting of banana leaves in 

Jamaica. Annals of Applied Biology 51:371-378.

Miller, C. E. and Chang. L.W. 1988. Inspectional requirements for green bananas from Hawaii.

Risk Analysis Systems, Policy and Program Development, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA, Riverdale, MD. 

Miller, G. L. and Miller, D. R. 2002. Dysmicoccus Ferris and similar genera (Hemiptera: 

Coccoidea: Pseudococcidae) of the Gulf state region including a description of a new 

species and new United States Records. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 104(4):968-979. 

Molina, A. B. 2005. Managing bacterial wilt/fruit rot of banana in Southeast Asia. Pages 26-31 

In: Proceedings of the workshop held in Kampala, Uganda 14-18 February 2005.

Monty, J. 1970. Notes on a new insect pest in Mauritius: the banana leaf-roller Erinona thrax L.

(Lepidoptera, Hesperiidae). Ref. Agr. Sucriere Ile Maurice, Apr/June 1976, 49(2):107-

109.

Moore, A. and Tudela, A. 1999. Insect Pests of Micronesia. Northern Marianas College, Saipan.

http://www.crees.org/plantprotection/AubWeb/bugweb/bugroot.htm.

Morgan, M.G. and M. Henrion 1990. Uncertainty. Cambridge Univ. Press, United Kingdom. 

pp.332. 

Morton, J. 1987. Banana. Pages 29-46 In: Fruits of Warm Climates. Julia F. Morton, Miami. 

http://.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/morton/banana.html.

Muirhead, I. F. and D. R. Jones. 2000. Postharvest Diseases. Pages 190-211 In: Diseases of 

Banana, Abacá, and Enset, D. R. Jones (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Mulcrone, L. 2004. Fruit flies – in the home garden. Department of Primary Industries and 

Fisheries, Queensland government. http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/business/7325.htm. 

Munez, A. 2004. Letters to R. P. Kahn dated August 12, 2004 transmitting information about 

banana varieties and genomes; and pest management procedures and safeguards during 

the growing season and post-harvest.

Munez, A. 2005. Response to questions concerning fruit flies and pathogens in a letter inquiry by 

R. P. Kahn, dated 1/30/05.

Muniappan, R. and Bjork, C. 1984. Plant quarantine program in the Philippines. A study team 

report. College of Agr. and Life Sci., Univ. Guam, Mangilao, Guam.

Muniappan, R., Silva-Krott, I. U. and Lali, T. S. 1995. Distribution of larval host plants of the 

fruit piercing moth, Othreis fullonia. Chemoecology 5/6(2):75-77.

Nafus, D. 2000. Green Scale (Coccus viridis De Lotto). Agricultural Pests of the Pacific. Agri. 

Dev. In Amer. Pacific ADAP 2000-7. Univ. Hawaii, Honolulu.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 54

Nakahara, S. 1981. The proper placements of the nearctic soft scale species assigned to the genus 

Lecanium Burmeister (Homoptera: Coccidae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society 

of Washington 83(2):283-286.

Nakasone, H. Y. and R. E. Paull. 1998. Tropoical fruits. CAB International Wallingford, UK. 

445 pp.

Narasimham, A. U. 1987. Scale insects and mealybugs on coffee, tea and cardamom and their 

natural enemies. Journal of Coffee Research 17 (1):7-13.

NASS. 2004. Agricultural Statistics. National Agricultural Statistics Service, USDA. U. S. 

Government Printing Office, Washington DC.

Norrbom, A. I. 2004. Fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) Economic Importance. The Diptera Site.

Systematic Entomology Laboratory, ARS, USDA, Dept. Ent., National Museum of 

Natural History. http://ww.sel.barc.usda.gov/diptera/tephriti/TephEclm.htm.

Norris, R. F., and M. Kogan. 2005. Ecology of interactions between weeds and arthropods. Ann. 

Rev. Entomol. 50: 479-503.

NRCS. 2005. The PLANTS Database. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural 

Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), The National Plant Data Center. 

http://plants.usda.gov. (Archived at PERAL)

Orr, R.L., S.D. Cohen and R.L. Griffin. 1993. Generic non-indigenous pest risk assessment 

process: "The generic process" (For estimating pest risk associated with the introduction 

of non-indigenous organisms). USDA-APHIS, Policy and Program Development, MD, 

pp. 40. 

Pacifly. 2002. Banana fly. (Bactrocera musae (Tryon)). Pacific fruit fly web. Secretariat of the 

Pacific Community. http://spc.int/Pacifly/Species_profiles/B-musae.htm.

Pacifly. 2002a. Bactrocera occipitalis (Bezzi). Pacific fruit fly web. Secretariat of the Pacific 

Community. http://www.spc.int/Pacifly/Species_profiles/B_occipitalis.htm.

Pacifly. 2002b. Bactrocera philippinensis Drew and Hancock. Pacific fruit fly web. Secretariat 

of the Pacific Community. http://spc.int./Pacifly/Species_profiles/B_philippinensis.htm.

PCARRD. 1988. The Philippines Recommends for Banana. Tech. Bull. Series No. 66. Philippine 

Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research and Development.

Dept. Sci. Tech. Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines.

Peña, J. E., J. L. Sharp, and M. Wysoki. 2002. Tropical Fruit Pests and Pollinators: Biology, 

economic importance, natural enemies and control. CABI Publishing, CAB International, 

New York, NY.

PERAL. 2007. Phytosanitary Risks Associated with Armored Scales in Commercial Shipments 

of Fruit for Consumption to 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

(PERAL), Raleigh, NC. 24 pp.

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

United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspectin Serivce, 

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

Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory (PERAL), Raleigh, NC. 6 pp.

PestID. 2009. Pest Identification Database (PestID). United States Department of Agriculture, 

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

https://mokcs14.aphis.usda.gov/aqas/login.jsp. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 55

Pinese, B. 1987. Soil and bunch applications of insecticides for control of the banana rust thrips. 

Queensland Journal of Agricultural and Animal Sciences, 44 (2):107-111.

Pinese, B., and R. Piper. 1994. Bananas: insect and mite management. Dept. Primary Industries, 

Queensland, Australia. 67 pp. 

Ploetz, R. 1998. Banana diseases in the subtropics: A review of their importance, distribution and 

management. Proc. Int. Symp. Banana in Subtropics. ISHS. Acta Hort. 490:262-276.

Ploetz, R. C. 1994. Part 1. Banana. Pages 2-22 In Compendium of Tropical Fruit Diseases.

Ploetz, R. C., Zentmyer, G. A., Nishijima, W. T., Rohrbach, K. G., and Ohr, H. D. (eds).

APS Press, St. Paul. 

Ploetz, R. C. 2001. Banana Black Sigatoka. APSnet Education Center. 

http://apsnet.org/education/feature/banana. Last accessed 2/07/05.

Ploetz, R. C., Herbert, J., Sebasigari, K., Hernandez, Pegg, K. G., Ventura, J. A. , and Mayato, L. 

S. 1990. Importance of Fusarium wilt in different banana-growing regions. Pages 9-26 In

Fusarium wilt of Bananas, Ploetz, R. C. (ed). APS Press, St. Paul, MN.

Ploetz, R. C. and Pegg, K. G. 2000. Fusarium wilt. Pages 143-159 In: Diseases of Banana, 

Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

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

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

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

PPQ. 2000b. Regulated Pest List, 6/16/00. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and 

Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ). Riverdale, 

Maryland.

PPQ. 2009. Treatment Manual. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ). 780 pp.

Price, N. S. 1995. Banana morphology – Part I: roots and rhizomes. Pages 179-189 In: Bananas 

and Plantains, Gowen, S, (ed.). Chapman & Hall, London.

Punithalingam, E. 1975. Some new species and combinations in Phomopsis. Trans. Br. Mycol. 

Soc 64(3)426-435.

Randall, R. P. 2002. A Global Compendium of Weeds. R. G. and F. J. Richardson (Publishers) 

Melbourne. 905 pp.

Reddy, K. B., P. K. Bhat, and R. Naidu. 1997. Suppression of mealybugs and green scale 

infesting coffee with natural enemies in Karnataka. Pest Management and Economic 

Zoology 5(2):119-121.

Reed, C. F. 1977. Economically Important Foreign Weeds. Agriculture Handbook No. 498. 

United States Dept. Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service/Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, Washington, DC. 746 pp.

Robinson, J. C. (compiler). 1993. Handbook of banana growing in South Africa. Institute for 

Tropical and Subtropical Crops. Nelspruit, South Africa. Pp 1-17.

Rohrbach, K. G., J. W. Beardsley, T. L. German, N. J. Reimer, and W. G. Sanford. 1988.

Mealybug wilt, mealybugs, and ants on pineapple. Plant Disease 72(7): 558-565.

Sahoo, A. K., A. B. Ghosh, S. K. Mandal, and D. K. Maiti. 1999. Study on the biology of the 

mealybug, Planococcus minor (Maskell) Pseudococcidae: Hemiptera. Journal of 

Interacademicia 3(1):41-48.

Sands, D. P. A., Sands, M. C., and Arura, M. 1991. Banana skipper, Erionota thrax (L.) 

(Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae) in Papua New Guinea: a new pest in the South Pacific 

Region. Micronesica Supp. 3:93-98.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 56

Sar, S., Balagawi, S, Mararuai, A., and Putulan, D. 2001. Fruit fly research and development in 

PNG.

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:g8pNPXIH2ogJ:www.aciar.gov.au/web.nsf/doc/JF

Sarah, J. L. 2000. Burrowing Nematode. Pages 295-302 In: Diseases of Banana, Abacá, and 

Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Sauls, J. W. 2004. Letter to R. P. Kahn dated 11/17/04. 

Sengebau, F. M. 2001. Bactrocera philippinensis and Bactrocera occipitalis recorded in Palau.

Pest Alert No. 23. Plant Protection Service, Sec. Pacific Community, Suva, Fiji.

Silva, S. de O. and Fancelli, M. 1998. Banana Insect Pests. In Sauco, V. G. (Ed.) Proc. Int. 

Symp. Banana in Subtropics. Acta Hort. 490. ISHS, Tenerife, Spain. 

Silva, C. G., and J. R. P. Parra. 1982. Biology and injuriousness of Coccus viridis (Green, 1889)

(Homoptera Coccidae) on coffee seedlings (Coffea spp.). Anais da Sociedade 

Entomologica do Brasil 11(2):181-195.

Simmonds, N. E. 1966. Bananas. 2

nd edition. Longman, London. 512 pp.

Smith, M. T., J. Bancrott, G. Li, R. Gao, and S. Teale. 2001. Dispersal of Anoplophora 

glabripennis (Cerambycidae). Environmental Entomology. 30(6):1036 – 1040.

Smith, D., Beattie, G. A. C. and Broadley, R., (editors). 1997. Citrus Pests and their natural 

enemies: integrated pest management in Austalia. Quennsland Dept. of Primary

Industries. Series: Information series Q197030. 272 pp. 

Smith, E. 1995. Banana weevil borer control in Southeastern Queensland. Aust. J. Exp.Agric. 

35(8):1154-1172. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organizatio. East 

Melbourne, Australia .

Smith, E., S., C. 1977. Studies on the biology and commodity control of the banana fruit fly, 

Dacus musae (Tryon), in Papua New Guinea. Papua-New Guinea Agricultural Journal,

28(2-4):47-56.

Soguilon, C. E., Magnaye, L. V., and Natural, M. P. 1995. Bugtop Disease of Banana. Musa 

Disease Fact Sheet No 6. International Network for the Improvement of Banana and 

Plantain, Montpellier, France.

Starr, F., Martz, K., and Loupe, L. 1999. Banana poka (Passiflora mollissima) An Alien Plant 

Report. U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division.

http://www.hear.org/species/reports/pasmol_fskm_awwa_report.pdf.

Stephens, C. S. 1975. Hermetia illucens (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) as a banana pest in Panama.

Tropical Agriculture (Trinidad), 52(2):173-178.

Stephens, C. S. 1984. Bionomics of three Philicoptus banana pests (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) 

and notes on other weevils in Mindanao, Philippines. Phil. Agr. 67:243-253.

Stover, R. H. 1972. Banana, Plantain and Abaca and Diseases. Commonwealth Mycological 

Institute, Kew, Surry, Oxon, Wallingford, UK. 316 pp.

Thomas, J. E. and Iskra-Caruana, M. L. 2000. Bunchy top. Pages 241-253 In: Diseases of 

Banana, Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, 

UK.

Thomas, J. E., Iskara-Caruana, M. L. Magnaye, L. V., and Jones, D. R. 2000. Bract Mosaic. 

Pages 253-263 In: Diseases of Banana, Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB 

International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Thomas, J. E. and Magnaye, J. V. 2000. Abacá mosaic. Pages 279-283 In: Diseases of Banana, 

Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 57

Thomas, M. C. 2000. The exotic invasion of Florida. A report on arthropod immigration into the 

sunshine state. TRI-OLOGY, Vol. 39, No. 3. May-June 2000. 

http://www.doacs.state.fl.us/pi/enpp/00-may-jun.html.

Thwaites, R., Eden-Green, S. J., and Black, R. 2000. Diseases caused by bacteria. Pages 213-239 

In: Diseases of Banana, Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, 

Wallingford, Oxon, UK.

Tilos, J. C. 2008. Mealybugs endanger Valencia coco, banana farms. PIA Press Release, 6 Nov 

2008, PIA Daily News Reader. Philippine Information Agency. 

http://www.pia.gov.ph/default.asp?m=12&r=&y=&mo=&mo=&fi=p081106.htm&no=79

Tomberlin J. K, and Sheppard, C, D. 2001. Lekking behavior of the black soldier fly (Diptera: 

Stratiomyidae). Florida Entomologist 84(4). http://www.fcla.edu/FlaEnt/fe84p729.html.

Turner, D. W. 1995. The Response of the Plant to the Environment. Pages 206-229 In: Bananas 

and Plantains, Gowen, S., (ed.). Chapman & Hall, London.

USDA-NA. 2003. The 2003 U.S. National Arboretum "web version" of the USDA Plant 

Hardiness Zone Map. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), National 

Arboretum (NA). http://www.usna.usda.gov/Hardzone/ushzmap.html. (Archived at 

PERAL)

USFWS. 2006. Threatened and endangered species system (TESS). U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. <http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/SpeciesReport.do?dsource=plants>. 

Valmayor, R. V., Jones, D. R., Subijanto, Polprasid, P, and Jamaluddin, S. H. 1990. Bananas & 

Plantains in southeast Asia. INIBAP (International Network for the Improvement of 

Banana and Plantain) Network for Asia and the Pacific. Montpellier, France. 43 pp.

Velasquez, F. J. 1971. Some Philippine armored scale insects of the tribe Aspidiotini 

(Diapididae, Homoptera). Philippine Entomologist 2(2):89-154.

Vijaysegaran, S. 1997. Fruit fly research and development in tropical Asia. Pages 21-29 In: 

Management of Fruit Flies in the Pacific, Eds. A. J. Allwood & R.A.I. Drew, 1996.

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, Canberra, ACT.

Wade, N. L., Kavanagh, E. e., and Sepiah, M. 1993. Effects of modified atmosphere storage on 

banana postharvest diseases and the control of banana bunch rot. Postharvest Biology and 

Technology 3(2):143-154. (Abstract).

http://koala.nal.usda.gov/webspirs/showFullRecordContent.ws. Last accessed 11/4/2004.

Wardlaw, C. W. 1972. Banana Diseases including Plantains and Abaca. Longman Group Ltd., 

London. 878 pp.

Waterhouse DF, 1993. The major arthropod pests and weeds of agriculture in Southeast Asia. 

Canberra, Australia: ACIAR.

Watson, Brian. 1997. Agronomy/Agroclimatology Notes for the Production of Banana.

MAAFFA, Australia. 

Weber, G. F. 1973. Bacterial and Fungal Diseases of Plants in the Tropics. University of Florida 

Press, Gainesville, FL. Pp. 24-47. 

White, I. M. and Elson-Harris, M. M. 1992. Fruit Flies of Economic Significance; Their 

Identification and Bionomics. CAB International. Wallingford, Oxon, UK. 601 pp.

Wiersema. J. H. and León, B. 1999. World Economic Plants. CRC Press, Boca Raton. 747 pp.

Williams, D. J. 2004. Mealybugs of southern Asia. The Natural History Museum, London, 896 

pp.

Woodley, N. E., 1989. Family Stratiomyidae, No. 33. Australiasian/Oceanian Diptera CatalogWeb Version. http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/aocat/strat.html. Last accessed 11/15/2004.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 58

WSSA. 1989, Composite List of Weeds. Weed Society of America, Champaign, Illinois.

Yong De, R. and Treadaway, C. G. 1993. The Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera) of the Philippines. 

Zoologische Verhandelingen. National Natuurhistorisch Museum, Leiden, Netherlands.

125 pp.

Zhang, B-C. 1994. Index of Economically Important Lepidoptera. CAB International.

Wallingford, Oxon, UK. 599 pp.

5. Authors and Reviewers 

Authors:

Robert P. Kahn, Plant Pathologist and Consultant, 14104 Flint Rock Terrace, Columbia, MD

21045

Philip Lima, Entomologist and Consultant, 5517 Phelps Luck Drive, Rockville, MD 20853

Christie Bertone, Entomologist (USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST-PERAL)

Reviewers of Draft by R. P. Kahn and P. Lima:

Jorge Peña, Entomologist, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, 

Homestead, FL 33031

R. C. Ploetz, Plant Pathologist, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of 

Florida, Homestead, FL 33031

John Lightfield, 307 Cone Branch, Middletown, MD 21769

USDA Reviewers

USDA-APHIS-PPQ

Center for Plant Health Science and Technology

Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory

Nicanor Liquido, Risk Analyst

Lawrence Brown, Plant Pathologist
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 59

6. Appendices

Appendix A: Pest mitigation measures built in the production and processing operations of 

Philippine bananas intended for export.

The following measures are standard farm operations and packing station practices that are 

aimed at preventing or reducing the likelihood of pests such as mealybugs, scale insects, fruit 

flies, freckle pathogens, or bunchy top disease from being present in the exported banana fruits.

A1. Insect Pest Management:

a) Use of tissue culture seedlings in new plantings. 

b) Weed control to eliminate alternate hosts, thus reducing resident insect pest populations in 

plantations.

c) Pseudostem sanitation to eliminate insect breeding sites.

d) Fruit obstruction removal to prevent fruit damage as well as to eliminate bridges that may be 

utilized by insects to infest fruits.

e) Insecticidal bud injection to control the banana flower thrips.

f) Insecticidal sprays on the pseudostem to eliminate insect pests, e.g., scale insects, mealybugs, 

aphids, and other external pests.

g) Regular bunch sprays with insecticide(s) to prevent mealybugs, scale insects, and other pests 

from colonizing the developing fruit bunch. These sprays also kills foraging fruit flies, if 

present. 

h) Chlorpyrifos-impregnated polyethylene (PE) bags are used to cover the fruit bunches after 

bunch spray to further prevent infestation by mealybugs, scales, other external pests, and fruit 

flies, if present. 

i) Additional Chlorpyrifos-impregnated PE material (in a form of “strip” or “square”) is 

installed on the fruit as additional control against insect pests when needed.

j) Bunches for harvest are identified/tagged one day before harvest in a procedure called “precalibration.” Bunches, in the process, are inspected likewise for the presence of insect pests. 

Bunches with mealybugs, scales and other insect infestations are discarded during harvest.

k) Upon arrival of the fruit at the packing plant, fruit bunches are sprayed with high-pressure 

water to eliminate any possible, although highly improbable, mealybug and other external 

pests infestation.

l) While bunches are waiting to be de-handed, the “fruit inspector” in the packing plant will 

check for insect damage, particularly mealybug infestation, on individual bunches. 

m)During de-handing, individual hands are thoroughly inspected by the “de-hander” for 

possible mealybug and other surface insect infestations and for any other evidence of insect 

damage. To remove fruit that may have fruit fly infestation, hands with “faults” are culled 

during de-handing. “Faults” include fruits that are precociously ripened, damaged and/or 

with compromised skin integrity, and with tip rot and fused fingers. 

n) After de-handing, individual hands are thoroughly cleaned with soap and water by the fruit 

selectors and further brushed with high-pressure water to eliminate possible surface insect 

infestation.

o) The individual hands are again inspected to confirm freedom from mealybugs and other 

surface insects during weighing and immediately before packing inside the shipping box.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 60

p) Only new pallets and those that are clean, dry and free from any trash, soil, weed seeds and 

other contaminants are utilized by the industry.

q) Fruits in boxes packed in pallets are brought to the wharf, and within or less than 3 hours 

loaded into the shipping vessel or into cold storage facility. Wharf areas are kept clean and 

situated away from houses and farms. Regular cleaning of wharf is done to remove any 

source of contamination. 

r) Vessels are cleaned with the recommended disinfectant before loading. Some vessels use 

ozone for disinfection between loads.

A2. Diseases

a) Use of disease free tissue culture seedlings in new plantings. 

b) Application of weed management practices to eliminate alternate hosts of diseases and/or 

their vectors.

c) Strict tools disinfection to prevent spread of diseases like moko (R. solanacearum) and fruit 

rot (E. carotovora pv. carotovora).

d) Disease surveys (i.e., sigatoka, moko and bunchy top) are done regularly. All moko and 

bunchy top infected plants are eradicated within 24-hours from detection.

e) Each fruit bunch receives at least 2 cycles of bunch spray containing fungicide to control 

fruit fungal diseases.

f) Each developing bunch is deflowered two times before bagging thereby making visits of 

insect that carry pathogens like the ones causing Moko and bugtok less likely. 

g) Each developing bunch is treated with insecticide-fungicide sprays; such insecticide 

prevents/deters insect vectors from being attracted to the developing bunch and subsequently 

transmitting diseases. 

h) Bunches are bagged with chlorpyrifos-impregnated polybag that prevents further insect 

vector incursions after bagging. At the time of bagging, bunches already received at least 2 

fungicidal bunch sprays. 

i) Debudding is by hand, not with the use of knife. Therefore, further fruit infection due to 

inoculum transmission by insects would be negligible after debudding. Debudding has long 

been demonstrated by Buddenhagen and Elsasser (1962) and Buddenhagen and Kelman 

(1964) as an effective measure to prevent occurrence of insect transmission of moko disease.

j) Bunches for harvest are identified one day before harvest in a procedure “pre-calibration.” 

Bunches, in the process, are inspected likewise for the presence of diseases. In the case of 

moko infection, the symptoms clearly manifest in terms of pre-mature ripening, rupture and 

fruit malformation. The whole mat on which moko infected fruit was detected is eradicated 

immediately following standard eradication procedures, while bunches with fruit rot disease 

are discarded outright. 

k) During harvest, the stalk of the bunch is inspected for the presence of internal disease 

symptoms (discolored vascular bundles) of moko and discolored vascular bundles at the cut 

surface of the peduncle. Infected bunches including the whole mat are eradicated 

immediately.

l) During processing in the packing plant, fruits are treated with a mixture of chlorine and 

aluminum sulphate in the dehanding and floatation tanks. The aluminum sulphate binds and 

removes the sap from the solution to keep the desired concentration and efficacy of chlorine. 

Chlorine is lethal to bacterial and fungal pathogens that adhere on the surface of the fruits.
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 61

Appendix B: Banana pest list provided by the Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Plant 

Industry, the Philippines and Dole Fruit Company, Philippines

Source: Munez, 2004

Scientific Name Common Name Order Family Reference

1 Abgrallaspis 

cyanophylli 

(Signoret)

Cyanophyllum 

scale

Hemiptera Diaspididae Sugimoto, 1994; 

Velasquez. 1971

2 Aleurocanthus woglumi

Ashby

Citrus whitefly Hemiptera Aleyrodidae Martin, 1999; Mound & 

Halsey, 1978

3 Aleurodicus dispersus

Russell

Spiraling 

whitefly

Hemiptera Aleyrodidae Lit & Calilung, 1994; 

Waterhouse, 1993

4 Aphis gossypili Glover Cotton aphid; 

melon aphid

Hemiptera Aphidae Waterhouse, 1993

5 Araecerus coffeae

(Fabricius) Syn = 

Araecerus 

fasciculatus (De 

Geer)

Coffee bean 

weevil

Coleoptera Anthribidae Mphuru, 1974; 

Waterhouse, 1993

6 Artona catoxantha

(Hampson)

Syn = Brachartona 

catoxantha

(Hampson

Coconut leaf 

moth

Lepidoptera Zygaenidae Merino, 1938

7 Aspidiotus coryphae 

Cockerell & 

Robinson

Hard scale Hemiptera Diaspididae Sugimoto, 1994; 

Velasquez, 1971

8 Aspidiotus destructor

Signoret

Transparent 

scale; coconut 

scale

Hemiptera Diaspididae PCARRD, 1988; 

Sugimoto, 1994; 

Velasquez, 1971; 

Waterhouse, 1993

9 Aspidiotus excisus

Green

Hard scale Hemiptera Diaspididae Sugimoto, 1994; 

Velasquez. 1971

10 Atherigona orientalis Pepper fruit fly Diptera Muscidae CABI, 2002

11 Bactrocera musae Banana fruit fly Diptera Tephritidae CABI, 2002

12 Bactrocera occipitalis 

(Bezzi)

Fruit fly Diptera Tephritidae Drew & Hancock, 1994

13 Bactrocera 

philippinensis Drew

& Hancock

Philippine fruit 

fly

Diptera Tephritidae Drew & Hancock, 1994

14 Chaetanaphothrips 

signipennis 

(Bagnall)

Banana rust 

thrips; red rust 

thrips

Thysanoptera Thripidae PCARRD, 1988

15 Chondracris rosea Citrus locust Orthoptera Acrididae CABI, 2002

16 Chrysomphalus 

aonidum

Circular ecale Hemiptera Diaspididae CABI, 2002

17 Chrysomphalus 

dictyospermi

Spanish red scale Hemiptera Diaspididae CABI, 2002

18 Coccus hesperidium

Linnaeus

Soft brown scale Hemiptera Coccidae Sugimoto, 1994; Swirski 

et al., 1997

19 Cosmopolites sordidus

(Germar)

Banana weevil 

borer; banana 

root weevil

Coleoptera Curculionidae Deang et al., 1971; 

PCARRD, 1988
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 62

Scientific Name Common Name Order Family Reference

20 Cryptothelea 

fuscescens (Snellen)

Bag worm Lepidoptera Psychidae Kalshoven, 1981; 

PCARRD, 1988

21 Dysmicoccus brevipes

(Cockerell)

Pineapple 

mealybug

Hemiptera Pseudococcidae Sugimoto, 1994;

22 Dysmicoccus 

neobrevipes

Beardsley

Grey pineapple 

mealybug

Hemiptera Pseudococcidae Ben-Dov, 1994; 

PCARRD, 1988; 

Sugimoto, 1994

23 Elixothrips brevisetis

Bagnall

Banana rind 

thrips

Thysanoptera Thripidae Mau & Kessing, 1993a

24 Erionota thrax

(Linnaeus) Syn = 

Pelopidas thrax 

(Linnaeus)

Banana skipper; 

banana leaf 

roller

Lepidoptera Hesperiidae De Jong & Treadaway 

1993; Hoffmann, 1935; 

PCARRD, 1988

25 Ferrisia virgata 

(Cockerell)

Striped 

mealybug

Hemiptera Pseudococcidae Waterhouse, 1993

26 Hemiberlesia lataniae

(Signoret)

Latania scale Hemiptera Diaspididae CABI, 2002; Velasquez, 

1971

27 Hemiberlesia palmae

(Cockerell)

Citrus black 

scale

Hemiptera Diaspididae PCARRD, 1988; 

Sugimoto, 1994; 

Velasquez, 1971

28 Hemiberlesia rapax

(Comstock)

Greedy scale Hemiptera Diaspididae Sugimoto, 1994;

29 Hermetia illucens

(Linnaeus)

American soldier 

fly

Rueda et al., 1990

30 Icerya seychellarum 

(Westwood)

Seychelles scale Hemiptera Margarodidae Sugimoto, 1994;

31 Locusta migratoria Migratory locust Orthoptera Acrididae CABI, 2002

32 Melanitis leda ismene Rice butterfly Lepidoptera Nymphalidae CABI, 2002

33 Odoiporus longicollis

Olivier

Banana stem 

weevil; banana 

stem borer

Coleoptera Curculionidae Uichanco, 1936

34 Oryctes rhinoceros Rhinoceros 

beetle

Coleoptera Scarabaeidae CABI, 2002

35 Pentalonia 

nigronervosa 

Coquerel

Banana aphid Hemiptera Aphidae Lomerio & Calilung, 

1993; PCARRD, 1988

36 Philicoptus demissus 

(Heller)

Peel-scarring 

weevil

Coleoptera Curculionidae Stephens, 1984

37 Philicoptus iliganus

(Heller)

Peel-scarring 

weevil

Coleoptera Curculionidae PCARRD, 1988; Stephens, 

1984

38 Philicoptus sp. 1 Peel-scarring 

weevil

Coleoptera Curculionidae Stephens, 1984

39 Philicoptus sp. 2 Peel-scarring 

weevil

Coleoptera Curculionidae Stephens, 1984

40 Philicoptus stringifrons 

(Heller)

Peel-scarring 

weevil

Coleoptera Curculionidae Stephens, 1984

41 Pinnapsis musae

Takagi

Hard scale Hemiptera Diaspididae Sugimoto, 1994;

42 Pinnaspis strachani Lesser snow 

scale

Hemiptera Diaspididae CABI, 2002
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 63

Scientific Name Common Name Order Family Reference

43 Planococcus citri

(Risso)

Citrus mealybug Hemiptera Pseudococcidae Waterhouse, 1993

44 Planococcus minor

(Maskell)

Syn = P. pacificus Cox

Passionvine 

mealybug; 

Pacific 

mealybug

Hemiptera Pseudococcidae Ben-Dov., 1994

45 Pseudaulacapsis 

cockerelli (Cooley)

Mango scale; 

Oleander scale

Hemiptera Diaspididae Sugimoto, 1994;

46 Pseudococcus 

jackbeardsleyi

Gimpel & Miller

Syn = P. elisae

Borchsenius

Banana 

mealybug

Hemiptera Pseudococcidae Ben-Dov., 1994; Lit & 

Calilung, 1994

47 Pseudococcus 

longispinus

(Targioni Tozzetti)

Longtail 

mealybug

Hemiptera Pseudococcidae Lit & Calilung, 1994

48 Rastrococcus spinosus

Robinson

Mealybug Hemiptera Pseudococcidae Ben-Dov., 1994; Williams, 

1989

49 Rhopalosiphum maidis

(Fitch)

Syn = Aphis maidis

(Fitch

Corn aphid; 

maize aphid

Hemiptera Aphidae Waterhouse, 1993

50 Spodoptera exigua Beet armyworm Lepidoptera Noctuidae CABI, 2002

51 Stephanitis typica 

(Distant)

Banana lacewing 

bug

Hoffmann, 1935; 

Waterhouse, 1993

52 Thosea sinensis

(Walker)

Cup moth; 

Assam nettle; 

saddle-back 

nettle

Lepidoptera Limacodidae Waterhouse, 1993

53 Thrips florum Schmutz Banana flower 

thrips; scab 

thrips

Thysanoptera Thripidae Palmer & Wetton, 1987; 

PCARRD, 1988

54 Thrips hawaiiensis Hawaiian flower 

thrips

Thysanoptera Thripidae CABI, 2002

55 Tiracola plagiata Plague 

caterpillar

Lepidoptera Noctuidae CABI, 2002

56 Tirathaba rufivena Coconut spike 

moth

Lepidoptera Pyralidae CABI, 2002

57 Valanga nigricornis 

Burmeister

Grasshopper Orthoptera Acrididae Waterhouse, 1993

58 Eutetranychus 

orientalis

Citus brown mite CABI, 2002

59 Oligonychus orthius

(Rimando)

Spider mite Corpuz-Raros, 1989; 

Rimando, 1962

60 Oligonychus velascoi

(Rimando)

Coconut spider 

mite

Corpuz-Raros, 1989; 

Rimando, 1962

61 Tetranychus 

cinnabarinus

(Boisduval)

Spider mite Corpuz-Raros, 1989;
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 64

Scientific Name Common Name Order Family Reference

62 Tetranychus 

neocaledonicus

Andre

Spider mite Corpuz-Raros, 1989;

63 Tetranychus piercei

(McGregor)

Red spider mite McGregor, 1950

64 Tetranychus urticae

(Koch)

Two-spotted 

spider mite

Corpuz-Raros, 1989;

Bacteria:

65 Erwinia carotovora

(Jones) Bergy, 

Harrison, Breed, 

Hammer & Huntoon

Corm rot Enterobacteriales Enterobacteriaceae Phil. Dept. of Agric,

2001; San Juan, 1980

66 Ralstonia 

solanacearum

(Smith, 1896) 

Yabuuchi et al., 

1995 Race 2 Syn = 

Pseudomonas 

solanacearum

Moko/Bugtok Burkholderiales Burkholderiaceae Phil. Dept. of Agric, 2001; 

Jones, 2000a

Fungi:

67 Aspergillus niger Tiegh Collar rot, fruit 

rot

Mitosporic Fungi Hyphomycetes CABI, 2002

68 Botryodiplodia 

theobromae Pat.

Anamorph = 

Lasiodiplodia 

theobromae (Pat.)

Griff. & Maubl.)

Crown rot, 

finger rot

Mitosporic fungi Coelomycetes PCARRD, 1988; CABI, 

2002

69 Ceratocystis paradoxa

(Dade) C. Moreau 

Anamorph = 

Charlara paradoxa 

(DeSeynes) Sac. 

Syn =Thielaviopsis 

paradoxa (Der 

Syanes) Honn.

Corm rot, black 

end, fingertip rot

Ophiostomatales Ophiostomataceae CABI, 2002

Ceratostomella 

paradoxa Dade

(teleomorph);

Ophiostoma paradoxa

(Dade) Nannf.

(teleomorph);

Sporoschisma 

paradoxum De 

Seynes (teleomorph)

70 Cercospora hayi

Calpouzos

Brown spot,

diamond spot

Mitosporic fungi Hyphomycetes PCARRD, 1988; CABI, 

2002

71 Colletotrichum musae

(Berk. & Curt.) von 

Arx

Anthracnose, 

crown rot

Mitosporic fungi Coelomycetes BPI, 2000
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 65

Scientific Name Common Name Order Family Reference

Gloeosporium 

musarum Cooke &

Massee

PCARRD, 1988

72 Cochliobolus lunatus

R.R. Nelson & 

Hasis. Anamorph = 

Curvularia lunata

(Wakk.) Biedjin

Loculoascomycetes Dothideales CABI, 2002

73 Cordana musae

(Zimm) Hohnel

Cordana leaf 

spot

Mitosporic Fungi Phil. Dept. of Agric, 

2001;

74 Deightoniella 

torulosa(Syd.) Ellis 

Speckle Mitosporic fungi Hyphomycetes Phil. Dept. of Agric,

2001;

75 Fusarium oxysporum f. 

sp. Cubense (Smith) 

Sny. & Han.

Fusarium wilt, 

Panama Disease

Ascomycetes 

Hypocreales

HyHypocreaceae Phil. Dept. of Agric, 

2001; Jones, 2000a

76 Fusarium moniliforme

Sheldon

Teleomorph = 

Gibberella fujikuroi

(J. Sawada) 

Wollenw.)

Crown rot, fruit 

rot

Ascomycetes

Hypocreales

Hypocreaceae PCARRD, 1988

77 Fusarium 

pallidoroseum 

(Cooke)

Crown rot, fruit 

rot

Ascomycetes Hypocreaceae PCARRD, 1988

Sacc. F. semitectum

auct. non

Hypocreales

78 Fusarium roseum

Link:Fr.

Crown rot, fruit 

rot

Ascomycetes 

Hypocreales

Hypocreaceae PCARRD, 1988

79 Guignardia musae

Racib.

Freckle Dothideales Mycosphaerellaceae Jones, 2000a; Conde, 2001

80 Mycosphaerella 

fijiensis

Black sigatoka, Ascomycetes Mycosphaerellaceae Phil. Dept. of Agric, 

2001; Jones, 2000a

M. fijiensis var. 

difformis Mulder &

Stover;

Paracercospora 

fijiensis (Morelet) 

Deighton;

black leaf streak Dothideales

Cercospora fijiensis

Morelet

Pseudocercospora 

fijiensis (Morelet0

81 Mycosphaerella 

musicola J.L.Mulder 

& Stover

Yellow sigatoka Ascomycetes Mycosphaerellaceae Jones, 2000a

Pseudocercospora 

musae (A. 

Zimmerm.) 

Deighton

Dothideales
Pest Risk Assessment for Philippine Bananas to Continental United States

Rev. 02 July 21, 2009 66

Scientific Name Common Name Order Family Reference

82 Pyricularia grisea

(Cooke) Sacc. Syn = 

Magnaporthe grisea

(Hebert) Barr.)

Pitmark, fruit 

pitting disease, 

Johnson spot

Ascomycetes Magnaporthaceae Jones, 2000a; Phil. Dept. 

of Agric, 2001

83 Remichloridium musae

(Stahel 

ex E.B. Ellis) De Hoog

Speckle PCARRD, 1988

Chloridium musae

Stahel nom. Inval; 

Periconiella musae

Stahel ex M.B. Ellis; 

Veronaea musae 

Stahel ex M. B. Ellis

84 Uredo musae Cummins Rust Uredinales Pucciniaceae CIE, 1971

85 Uromyces musae Henn. Rust Uredinales Pucciniaceae Teodoro, 1937; PCARRD, 

1988

Nematodes:

86 Helicotylenchus 

multicinctus

Banana spiral 

nematode

Tylenchida Hoploplaimidae CABI, 2002

87 Hopolaimus seinhorsti 

Luc

Lance nematode Tylenchida Hoploplaimidae CABI, 2002

88 Meliodogyne arenaria 

Neal

Root knot 

nematode

Tylenchida Meloidogynidae Taylor et al., 1982

89 Meliodogyne incognita

(Kofoid & White)

Root knot 

nematode

Tylenchida Meloidogynidae Timm, 1965

90 Radopholus similes 

(Cobb) Thorne

Burrowing 

nematode

Tylenchida Pratylenchidae Booth & Stover. 1974

91 Rotylenchus reniformis

Linford & Oliveira

Reniform 

nematode

Tylenchida Heteroderidae CABI, 2002

Viruses:

92 Abaca mosaic 

polyvirus

Abaca mosaic, 

sugarcane

mosaic

Jones, 2000a

93 Banana bract mosaic 

potyvirus

Banana bract 

mosaic virus

Jones, 2000a

94 Banana bunchy top 

nanavirus

Banana bunchy 

top

Jones, 2000a

95 Banana streak 

badnavirus

Banana streak Jones, 2000a

96 Cucumber mosaic 

cucumovirus

Mosaic, 

infectious

chlorosis, heartrot, virus sheath 

rot

Phil. Dept. of Agric, 2001