### United States

Department of Agriculture

Animal and

Plant Health Inspection

Service

August 25

, 200 9

Rev. 10 

# Importation of Fruit of ‘Hass’ Avocado
,

Persea Americana
, from Peru into the

Continental United States

A Qualitative, Pathway

- Initiated Risk Assessment

Agency Contact : Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory Center for Plant Health Science and Technology Plant Protection and Quarantine Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service United States Department of Agriculture 1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 300 Raleigh, NC 27606Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 ii 

### Executive Summary

This assessment examines the risks associated with the importation of  ̳Hass‘ avocado

, Persea

americana Miller., fruit from Peru into the United State s. Among the pests found affecting

a vocado in Peru were six quarantine pests

— five insects and one viroid

— that may be associated

with fresh avocado fruit from Peru as a pathway for introduction into the United States. These
pests are as follows :

Insects

A nastrepha fraterculus Wiedemann (Diptera: Tephritidae) Ceratitis capitata Wiedemann (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Coccus viridis (Green) (Hemiptera: Coccidae)

Ferrisia malvastra (McDaniel) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) Stenoma catenifer Walsingham (Lepidoptera: Oec ophoridae)

Viroid Potato spindle tuber viroid

We qualitatively analyzed t hese quarantine pests using the methodology described in the USDA

APHIS Guidelines Ver. 5.02

, which examines pest biology in the context of the Consequences of

Introduction and Li kelihood of Introduction

, and estimates overall Pest Risk Potential s

. Scale insects, Coccus viridis and Ferrisia malvastra

, received Medium rating s for Pest Risk Potential

. Both fruit flies

—

Anastrepha fraterculus

, and Ceratitis capitata

— and the seed moth

, Stenoma catenifer

, were rated High risk

. Although the viroid was rated High in the risk assessment, an additional analysis for the Likelihood of Establishment of the pathogen entering on avocados for consumption estimated the p robability to be Low (Appendi x B ). Therefore, no mitigation measures are required against potato spindle tuber viroid . Specific phytosanitary measures may be necessary for pests with a baseline Pest Risk Potential of Medium. Port

- of

- entry inspections are insufficient to safeguard U

. S

. agriculture from pests that are rated High and mitigation measures are suggested to provide phytosanitary security.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 iii 

## Table of Contents

Executive Summary

................................ ................................ ................................ .... ii

1. Introduction

................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 1

2. Risk Assessment

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

................................ ................................ ..................... 1

2.2. Assessment of Weediness Potential of Persea americana (avocado).

................................ 3 2.3. Previous Risk Assessments, Current Status, and Pest Interceptions

................................ ... 4

2.4. Pest List: Pests Associated with avocado in Peru

................................ .............................. 4 2.5. Consequences of Introduction

................................ ................................ ........................ 20

2.6. Likelihood of Introduction

................................ ................................ .............................. 27 2.7. Conclusion: Pest Risk Potential and Phytosanitary Measures

................................ .......... 30



### 3. Risk Mitigation

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 31

3.1. Prior to Harvest

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 32

3.2. Post

- harvest and Prior to Shipping

................................ ................................ ................. 33 3.3. During Shipping and at U.S. Ports

- of

- entry

................................ ................................ .... 34 3.4. Monitoring

................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 36

3.5. Conclusions

................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 36



### 4. Authors and Reviewers

................................ ................................ ......................... 38

5. Literature Cited

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 38

6. Appendices

................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 50 Appendix A. Pest interceptions from selected countries in South America (excluding Peru) from the pest identification database

................................ ................................ .................. 50 Appendix B. Likelihood of Entry, Introduction, and Establishment of Potato Spindle Tuber Viroid (PSTVd) with Imported  ̳Hass‘ Avocado, Persea americana , Fruit from Peru.

....... 53Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 1 

### 1. Introduction

The Animal and Plant Health Inspection S ervice (APHIS) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) prepared this pest risk assessment to examine plant pest risks associated with the importation of fresh  ̳Hass‘ avocado

, Persea americana f r uits from Peru into the continental

United State s. This is a qualitative pest risk assessment

. E stimates of risk are expressed in qualitative terms of high, medium, or low

, rather than in numerical terms

, such as probabilities or frequencies. The details of methodology and rating criteria are in the Gui delines for Pathway

- Initiated Pest Risk Assessment, version 5.0 ( PPQ, 2000 ).

International plant protection organizations

, such as the North American Plant Protection Organization (NAPPO) and the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) provide

gu idance for conducting pest risk analyses. The methods used to initiate, conduct, and report this pest risk assessment are consistent with the guidelines provided by NAPPO and IPPC. The use of biological and phytosanitary terms conforms to the Glossary of P hytosanitary Terms (IPPC

, 200 7:

ISPM # 5 ).

Avocado is part of the Lauraceae plant family

, which has about 50 genera ( Ploetz et al

. , 1994)

. Most members of the family have aromatic foliage and include bays, camphor, cinnamon, and

sassa fras. Three races of a vocado are generally recognized: Mexican, West Indian and

Guatemalan ; t he se races vary in their sensitivity to cold and fruit characteristics. Hass

, of the

Guatemalan race

, is the leading variety produced in California. Hass has the a dvantages of year round production and excellent storage life and fruit quality. In 1987

, Peru ranked 18 th in annual production of avocado with 24,000 metric tons compared to Mexico ‘s 357,000 metrics tons ( Ploetz et al

. , 1994). Peru vian a vocados for export are currently produced in Lima (20

, 180 Metric Tons in 1999) , Ica (2

, 656) and Moquega (2

, 632) (Fig. 1

, SENASA, 2002A ).



### 2. Risk Assessment

2.1. Initiating Event: Proposed Action

This assessment was initiated in response to an official request for USDA au thorization to allow imports under 7 CFR §319.56, the regulation which provides authority to USDA for restricting or prohibiting the importation of fruits and vegetables based on the risk of introducing harmful exotic plant pests into the United States. Th e PRA request was made by G.A. Ball, Import Specialist, Riverdale, MD, on October 31, 2001. Importing ―Hass‘ avocados ( Persea americana) from Peru into the United States is a potential pathway for the introduction of pests. This pest risk

assessment is com

modity

- based and therefore pathway

- initiated.

2.1.1. Correspondence with Peru December 29, 2000. Facsimile (2725) from Ing. Alicia de la Rosa Brachowicz, General Director Plant Health, SENASA to Dr Lou Vanechos, Area Director APHIS

- IS, Chile. The

letter i ncluded a request to export Persea americana fruit to the United States and contained the enclosed document ―The Phytosanitary Status of the avocado ( Persea americana Miller)
in Peru.‖Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 2 Figure 1

. Avocado production in Peru ( SENASA, 2002A ).

January, 11, 2002. Facsimile from Robert V. Flanders, Risk Assessment Branch Chief, APHIS to Ing. Alicia de la Rosa Brachowicz, General Director Plant Health, SENASA to Dr Lou Vanechos, Area Director APHIS

- IS, Chile. The letter indicated that APHIS has a backlog of

PRA s. SENASA was offered the chance to conduct the PRA as a way to expedite the risk
assessment process. January, 14, 2002. Letter from Ing. Alicia de la Rosa Brachowicz, General Director Plant Health, SENASA to Dr Lou Vanechos, Area Director APHIS

- IS, Chile

. It indicated that Annabella Reszcynski was compiling information on the cultivation of Avocado in Peru. March 27, 2002. Letter from Alan S. Green (USDA/APHIS) to Dra. Elsa Carbonell Tores, SENASA. The letter acknowledged receipt of the report ―The Phytos anitary Status of the avocado ( Persea americana Miller) in Peru.‖ The letter requested additional information relating to the harvest, packaging, shipment and export of avocados from Peru.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 3 June 14, 2002

. L etter (1653

- 2002

- AG

- SENASA

- DGSV

- DDF) from Ing. Alic ia de la Rosa Brachowicz, General Director Plant Health, SENASA to Dr Lou Vanechos, Area Director

APHIS

- IS, Chile. The letter listed helpful reference material for the PRA process. July 11, 2002

. L etter (1867

- 2002

- AG

- SENASA

- DGSV

- DDF) from Ing. Alicia de l a Rosa Brachowicz, General Director Plant Health, SENASA to Dr Lou Vanechos, Area Director

APHIS

- IS, Chile. The letter provide d the additional information requested by Alan S. Green on March, 27 2002.
June 17, 2003

. L etter from Ing. Alicia de la Rosa Brac howicz, General Director Plant Health, SENASA to Dr Lou Vanechos, Area Director APHIS

- IS, Chile. The letter indicate d that only the ―Hass‖ variety of avocado should be considered for export.

2.1.2. Documents S upplied by Peru

1. ―The P hytosanitary S tatus of the avocado ( Persea americana Miller) in Peru.‖ December,

2002. DGSV

- DVF/DDF

, 12 pp.

2. I nformation about the phytosanitary condition of the a vocado ( Persea americana Miller) In Peru. October, 2001

3. Draft proposal for the application of pest risk mitigation m easures in the export ation of avocado ( Persea americana ) to the United States from Peruvian sites where the avocado seed moth ( S tenoma catenifer ) is not known to occur. SENASA, August, 2002.

4. ―Importation of avocado fruit ( Persea Americana ) from Peru. A P es t R isk A ssessment.‖ SENASA, Dec 2002.

2. 2. Assessment of Weediness Potential of Persea americana ( avocado ).

The weediness assessment is presented below (Table 1).

Table 1

. Assessment of weediness potential of avocado

Phase 1 : Persea americana is widely cultivated in California and Florida ; (Ploetz et al., 1994; NRCS, 2003 ) ; avocadoes are also grown in T e x a s (Vines, 1960)

. Phase 2 : Is the species listed in:

NO Geographical Atlas of World Weeds (Holm et. al., 1979)

NO World's Worst Weeds (Holm et. al.

, 1977) or World Weeds: Natural

Histories and Distribution (Holm et al

. , 1997)

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

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

NO Economically Important Foreign Weeds (Reed, 1977)

NO Weed Science Soc iety of America list (WSSA, 2007 )

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

. , AGRICOLA

,

CAB

, Biological Abstracts

, AGRIS ; search on "species name" combined with "weed").

Phase 3 : Conclusion: Avocado is not co nsidered to be an economically important weed.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 4 2. 3. Previous Risk Assessments, Current Status, and Pest Interceptions

2. 3.1. Decision History

F or avocado fruit ( limited to the last 30 years for South America ) included one record: 19 69

- Peru

, avocado : Entry was denied for lack of effective treatments for Ceratitis capitata

, Anastrepha fraterculus

, A

. serpentina and Stenoma ca tenifer

.

Avocado importation requests from other South American countries were denied in the following years due to lack of eff

ective treatments for S. catenifer and/or Anastrepha sp. :

1961

- Columbia

1970

- Columbia

1974

- Brazil, Columbia

1 977

- Chile

1991

- Argentina

1994

- Ecuador

2.3.2. Current status USDA does not currently authorize the importation of a vocado from South America except f or from Chile (PPQ, 2004). Importation of a vocado from Peru is currently not authorized

. A l ist of

actionable and non

- actionable pests (with the exception of non

- reportable) intercepted on

avocado from Peru i s presented below ( Table 2 )

.

2 .3.3. Pest interceptions

We list ed pest interceptions on avocado for selected South American countries below (Appendix A)

. All interceptions we re in baggage, quarters, and stores.

2.4. Pest List: Pests Associated with avocado in Peru

We listed the pests associated with avocado below (Table 3). The table was compiled from scientific and regulatory reports, including pest lists provided by Peruvian officials. For each pest,

we summarize information on the presence or absence in the United States, commodity association (i.e., the generally attacked/infected plant parts), quarantine status in the United States, and the likelihood that the pest could move with the commodity in commerce (i.e

. follow the pathway) ( Table 3 )

.

Organisms listed at the level of genu s (or family), although regarded as quarantine pests because of their uncertain identity, are not further analyzed due to the lack of evidence of the risks that they pose ( see discussion after the pest list ).

Numer ous pests included below a re not subjecte d to further analyses because they are widely established in the United States; they are associated with plant parts other than the commodity; or they are associated with the commodity, but not likely to remain with the commodity due to

various factors inc luding processing.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 5 Table 2. Pest interceptions (recorded as events) on avocado, Persea americana , fruit from Peru, 1985 to 2008 (PestID, 2008).

Pest Interceptions (no.)
Abgrallaspis sp

. 1
Anastrepha sp. (Tephritidae) 2
Cladosporium sp. 1
Chrysomphal us pinnulifer (Diaspididae) 4
Curculionidae, species of 2
Diaspididae, species of 9

Fiorinia sp. (Diaspididae) 1
Heilipus sp. (Curculionidae) 2
Hemiberlesia diffinis 1
Oecophoridae, species of 2
Pentatomidae, species of 1
Phomopsis sp. 1
Phycitina e (Pyralidae)

Pinnaspis sp

. (Diaspididae) 5
Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis (Diaspididae) 11
Pseudococcidae, species of 3
Sphaceloma sp. 1
Stenoma catenifer (Oecophoridae) 11

Total 58

Table 3. Pests reported on avocado in any country and present in Peru on any host.

Scientific Name, Classification Distribu

tion 1 Plant part

a ffected 2 Quara n
ti n e p est 3 Follow

p ath w ay 3 Refe r ences

ARTHROPODS

Acari : Tarsonemidae
Polyphagotarsonemus latus

Banks PE, US L, S, F, I No Yes CABI , 2002

Acari : Tetranychidae
Oligonychus mangiferus (Rahman and Sapra) PE L Yes No Bolland et al

. , 1998 ; Hill,

1983

1 Distribution: CA = California, FL= Florida, GA = Georgia, NY = New Yor k, PE = Peru, USA = United States of America, TX

= Texas.

2 Plant part affected: F = fruit, I = flower or inflorescence, L = leaves, S = stem, R = roots, Sd = seed, Pd = Pod, U = unknow n

3 Quarantine Pest : U = Unknown. Brackets indicate that the species, a lthough not fitting the definition of a quarantine pest (IPPC, 2002), is considered actionable (APHIS, PPQ, National Identification Services)Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 6 Scientific Name, Classification Distribu

tion 1 Plant part

a ffected 2 Quara n
ti n e p est 3 Follow

p ath w ay 3 Refe r ences

Oligonychus peruvianus (McGregor) PE, US L No No Bolland et al

. , 1998; CABI

, 2003
Oligonychus punicae (Hirst) PE, US L No No Bolland et al

. , 1998; Hofshi,

2005
Oligonychus yothersi (McGregor) PE, US L No No Bolland et al

. , 1998
Panonychus citrii (McGregor) PE, US L No No Bolland et al

. , 1998; Wolfe et
al

. , 1969; Wysoki et al

. , 2002
Tetranychus mexicanus (McGregor) PE, US L No No Bolland et al

. , 1 998

Tetranychus neocaledonicus

André PE, US L No No Bolland et al

. , 1998

Tetranychus sp. PE L Yes No Alata Condor, 1973
Tetranychus urticae Koch PE, US L No No Bolland et al

. , 1998 ; Wolfe et
al

. , 1969;

INSECTA
Coleoptera : Cerambycidae

Dero brachus asperatus Bate s PE S Yes No Alata Condor, 1973 ; Hovore,

2003
Oncideres poecilla Bates PE S Yes No Alata Condor, 1973; Wolfe et
al

. , 1969; Wysocki et al

. , 2002

Oncideres sp. PE , US S Yes No Alata Condor, 1973 ; CABI,

2003
Coleoptera : Curculionoi dae
Copturomimus sp. L. PE S Yes No Alata Condor, 1973; Wysoki

et al ., 2002;
Heilipus empiricus (Pascoe) PE F, S 4 Yes No 5 Alata Condor, 1973;
Heilipus sp. PE

, US ( FL ) F, S d , R Yes No 6 Laurencao et al

. , 2003; Pena (2003); PestID, 2008 ; Wolfenbar ger (1948)

Pantomorus cervinus Boheman PE, US L, F, S, R No Yes CABI , 2002
Rhynchophorus palmarum L. PE R, S

, F 7 [ Yes ] No 8 CABI

, 2005

4 Based on biology of Heilipus catagraphus (Wysoki et al., 2002).

5 H. empiricus is only mentioned in the literatu re once by Alata Condor (1973). We found no other information about this species. According to SENASA (2005), this species is very rare in Peru and does not pose any economic threat. Heilipus sp. were intercepted twice on avocado in the passenger luggage f rom Peru (PestID, 2008) , but this was insufficient evidence of its ability to follow the pathway. Thus, w e did not further analyze this species. However, we reserve the right to add to the pathway any species of Heilipus if these insects are intercept ed on avocados from Peru

, because H. empiricus might be a misidentification by Alta Condor (1973) of some other species from the genus Heilipus

. 6 We listed Heilipus sp. based on two interceptions in a passenger baggage , but that is not sufficient evidence to c onclude that it

will follow the pathway. However, as stated above, we reserve the right to add any species of Heilipus to the pathway in the

future should they be intercept ed in commercial avocado s from Peru. Also, see Conclusion section for more informati on.

7 Predominantly a pest of palms; When reported on other plants, R. palmarum was feeding on ripe fruits but not causing economic damage (CABI, 2005). Avocado is a minor host of this species (CABI, 2005).

8 Eggs are usually inserted into previous ly damag e d tissue (CABI, 2005) , but o nly mature

, un ripe avocado fruits will be imported.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 7 Scientific Name, Classification Distribu

tion 1 Plant part

a ffected 2 Quara n
ti n e p est 3 Follow

p ath w ay 3 Refe r ences

Coleoptera : Languriidae

Toramus sp. PE , US Sd, Pd No 9 Yes Alata Condor, 1973
Coleoptera : Histeridae

Ac r i tu s sp. PE , US U No 9 U Alata Condor, 1973 ; Anonymous

, 2006a
Coleoptera : Nitulidae
Carpophilus sp. PE, US F No 9 Yes Alata Condor, 1973
Coleoptera : Scarabeidae

Pelidnota chlorana Er. PE I , L Yes No Arellano Cruz, 1998
Coleoptera : Scolytid ae Pagiocerus frontalis Fabricus PE, US S No No Alata Condor, 1973
Diptera : Agromyzidae
Liriomyza trifolii Burgess in

Comstock PE, US L No No CABI , 2003; NZPPO, 1999

Diptera : Cecidomy i idae
Clinodiplosis sp. PE, US I , Sd , L No 9 Yes Alat a Condor, 1973
Diptera : Lonchaeidae
Neosilba pendula PE S, F Yes No 10 Hofshi, 2005

Silba sp. PE S, F Yes 6 No 1 0 Alata Condor, 1973; CABI

, 2002 ; Katsoyannos, 1983
Diptera : Muscidae
Atherigona orientalis Schiner PE

, US L, S , F No Yes CABI , 20 02
Diptera : Tephritidae
Anastrepha fraterculus

Wiedemann PE F Yes Yes CABI , 2002; Norrbom 2004;

Ovr u ski et al ., 2003; Putruele,
1996; White and Elson

- Harris,

1992 ; Wille, 1952
Anastrepha serpentina ( Wiedemann ) PE F Yes No 11 Bush, 1957; CABI , 2002

Ceratitis capitata Wiedemann PE F Yes Yes CABI , 2002; Hofshi, 2005; Liquido et al

., 1990, 1998; Metcalf & Metcalf, 1993; Putruele , 1996; Snell, 2006;

White & Elson

- Harris, 1992

Furthermore, t his is a large insect

— larvae reach up to 4

- 6 cm in length, and adults are 4

- 5 cm

— that is likely to be noticed during packing.

9 Listed as  ̳ Non

- reportable ‘ in Pes t Identification database (PestID, 2008). Also, see Courneya (2003)

. 10 These species are secondary pests that attack hosts previously damaged by primary invaders, particularly fruit flies (McAlpin e and Steyskal, 1982; White and Elson

- Harris, 1992 ). Culling damaged fruit and mitigating against fruit flies is likely to remove these pests from the pathway.

11 Avocado is a poor host for A. serpentina (Bush, 1957; Aluja et al., 200 4). T herefore this pest is unlikely to follow the pathway.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 8 Scientific Name, Classification Distribu

tion 1 Plant part

a ffected 2 Quara n
ti n e p est 3 Follow

p ath w ay 3 Refe r ences

Xanthaciura major Malloch PE, US I 12 No No Alata Condor, 1973 ; Morin et

a l

. , 1997; Peña and Bennett,

1995
Hemiptera : Aetalionidae

Aetalion reticulatum L. PE F, S, I , L Yes No 13 Alata Condor, 1973; Briceno,
1977, Dominguez Gil, 19 7 8
Hemiptera : Aleyrodidae

Aleurodicus cocois Curtis PE L Yes No Lopez and Kairo, 1999; Seguenas and Camara, 2002; Silva, 197 8
Aleurodicus dispersus Russell PE, US (FL) L [ Yes ] 14 No CABI , 2003

Aleurodicus pulvinatus (= A.

ridescens ) PE L Yes No CABI , 2003

Hemiptera : Aphididae
Aphis gossypii (Glover) PE, US L, S, I No No Blackman & Eastop, 2000 ; CABI , 2003
Aphis spiraecola Patch PE, US L, S, I No No CABI , 2003

Myzus persicae Sulzer PE, US L, S No No CABI , 2002

Toxoptera aurantii Boyer de

Fonscolombe PE, US L, S, I No No Blackman and Eastop, 2000;

CABI , 200 3
Hemiptera : Coccidae
Ceroplastes cirripediformis

Comstock PE, US L, S No No Ebeling, 1959; Ben

- Dov et al.,

2003
Ceroplastes floridensis Comstock PE, US L, S 15 No No Ebeling, 1959; Ben

- Dov et al.,

2003
Coccus hesperidum (L) PE, US L, S No No CABI , 2003; Ben

- Dov et al.,

2 003

Coccus viridis (Green) PE, US (FL) L, S, F [ Yes ] 16 Yes CABI, 2003 ; Courneya,

2004b , 2006; Ben

- Dov et al.,

2003

Parasaissetia nigra Nietner PE, US L, S No No CABI , 2002

Parthenolecanium corni (Bouché) PE, US L, S No No CABI , 2002; Swirski et al

., 199 7
Protopulvinaria pyriformis

Cockerell PE, US ( FL ) L, F, S No Yes Alata Condor, 1973; Ebeling,

1959 ; Wysoki et al

. , 2002
Saissetia coffeae Walker PE, US L, S No No CABI , 2002

12 Based on biology of Xa nthaciura connexionis (Morin et al., 1997).

13 This insect is an external pest and affects fruit at the early stages of development by causing fruit darkening or premature drop (Dominguez Gil, 1978). D amaged fruit are likely to be eliminated during culling.

14 Courneya (2004a)

15 Based on biology of C. cirripediformis

16 Courneya (2004b)Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 9 Scientific Name, Classification Distribu

tion 1 Plant part

a ffected 2 Quara n
ti n e p est 3 Follow

p ath w ay 3 Refe r ences

Saissetia oleae Oliver PE, US L, S No No CABI , 2002
Hemiptera : Diaspididae
Acutaspis sp. PE, US L, S, F Yes Yes Alata Condor, 1973 ; Peña et
al ., 2003
Acutaspis albopicta (Cockerell) PE, US (TX, CA) L, F [ Yes ] Yes 17 Courneya, 2005; Ben

- Dov et al., 2003
Acutaspis subnigra McKenzie PE L Yes No Ben

- Dov et al., 2003
Aspidiotus destructor PE, US L, F No Yes CABI, 2002 ; Miller and Davidson, 2005
Chrysomphalus aonidum (L

. ) PE, US L, S, F No Yes
Chrysomphalus dictyospermi Morgan PE, US L, S, F No Yes CABI, 2003

Fiorinia fioriniae Targ. PE, US L, F No Yes Alata Condor, 1973; Wysoki

et al ., 2002
Hemiberlesia cyanophyilli Signoret [Syn. Abgrallaspis cyanophylli (Signoret)] PE , US L, S, F 18 No Yes Alata Condor, 1973; CABI,

2003

Hemiberlesia lataniae Signoret PE, US L, S, F No Yes CABI, 2002; Nakahara, 1982
Hemiberlesia palmae (Cockerell) PE, US (CA, FL) L No No Ben

- Dov et al., 2003

Hemiberlesia rapax (Comstock) PE, US L, S, F No Yes CABI, 2003; UCIPM, 2003

Howardia biclavis (Comstock) PE, US U No U Ben

- Dov et al., 2003
Lopholeucaspis cockerelli (Grandpré & Charmoy) PE, US U No U Ben

- Dov et al., 2003

Oceanaspidiotus spinosus (Comstock) PE, US L, Bark No No Ben

- Dov et al., 2003

Pinnaspis aspidistrae (Signoret) PE, US S, L, F No Yes SENASA, 2002c ; Ben

- Dov et al., 2003

Pinnaspis sp. PE , US S, L, F Yes Yes PestID, 2008

Pinnas pis strachani (Cooley) PE, US S, L, F No Yes Ben

- Dov et al., 2003
Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis

Green PE, US (FL) F 19 , L [ Yes ] Yes 1 7 Anon., 1979; Coile and Dixon, 2000; Cavey , 200 7 ; PestID, 2008
Selenaspidus articulatus Morgan PE, US (CA) L, S, F No Yes C ABI, 2002 ; Miller and Davidson, 2005; Wolfe et al

., 1969; Wysoki et al

. , 2002

17 The armored scales A. albopicta and P. trilobitiformis may enter the United States on c ommercial fruit for consumption, but are unlikely to establish via this pathway . Pleas e see discussion following the pest list for a detailed explanation.

18 Based on biology of Hemiberlesia lataniae (CABI, 2003).

19 This scale specie s has been intercepted on fruit at U

. S . ports

- of

- entry (PestID, 2008)

.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 10 Scientific Name, Classification Distribu

tion 1 Plant part

a ffected 2 Quara n
ti n e p est 3 Follow

p ath w ay 3 Refe r ences

Unaspis citri Comstock PE, US L, F No Yes Alata Condor, 1973; Ben

- Dov et al., 2003 ; Wolfe et al

., 1969; Wysoki et al

. , 2002
Hemiptera : Margarodidae
Icerya purchasi Maske ll PE, US L, S No No CABI, 2003; Mendel et al

., 1992
Hemiptera : Membracidae
Tylopelta sp. PE S 20 Yes No Alata Condor, 1973
Hemiptera : Miridae
Dagbertus sp. PE, US L, I , F Yes No 21 Leston, 1979 ; Pena, 2003; Yarita Rubinos, 2005
Hemiptera : Pent atomidae
Pentatomidae, species of PE, US L, F Yes No 22 PestID, 2008
Hemiptera : Pseudococcidae
Dysmicoccus brevipes Cockerell PE. US L, S, R, F No Yes CABI, 2003

Ferrisia malvastra (McDaniel) PE , US (AZ , FL ) L, F, S 23 [ Yes ] Yes Gullan et al ., 2 003; Miller et
al ., 2002; Ben

- Dov et al.,

2003

Ferrisia virgata Cock PE, US L, F, S No Yes CABI, 2003

Nipaecoccus nipae Maskell PE, US L, S, F No Yes CABI, 2003

Planococcus citri (Risso) PE, US L, S, F, R No Yes CABI, 2003;
Pseudococcus longispinu s Targioni PE, US S, F, L No Yes CABI, 2002

Hemiptera : Triozidae

Trioza perseae Tuthill PE L Yes No Alata Condor, 1973; Chavez

et al

. , 1985; Hollis and Martin, 1997

Hymenoptera : Formicidae
Acromyrmex hispidus Santaschi PE L Yes No Alata Co ndor, 1973; Arellano
Cruz, 1998; San Juan, 2003
Atta cephalotes L. PE L Yes No Alata Condor, 1973; CABI,

2003

Atta sexdens (L.) PE L Yes No Arellano Cruz, 1998; Ebeling,

1959 ; Wolfe et al

., 1969;

20 Based on biology of the family Membra cidae

. 21 Dagbertus sp. typically affects only young fruit, causing them to drop later, and prefers to oviposit on flowers (Pena, 2003). For these reasons, the pest is highly unlikely to follow the pathway.

22 Because of its size, biology, and mobility, thi s pest is not expected to stay on the commodity through harvest, and standard handling and processing. Pentatomidae (species of) has only been intercepted 5 times , all in baggage (not cargo) and only on c e on fruit. This indicates that insects in this famil y are unlikely to follow commercial export quality fruit.

23 Based on biology of Ferrisia virgata

.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 11 Scientific Name, Classification Distribu

tion 1 Plant part

a ffected 2 Quara n
ti n e p est 3 Follow

p ath w ay 3 Refe r ences

Lepidoptera : Geometridae

Sabulodes caberata Guene é PE, US (CA) L No No Alata Condor, 1973; Condit,
1915; Robinson et al

., , 200 4 ; Wolfe et al

., 1969; Wysocki et
al

. , 2002
Lepidoptera : Gracilariidae
Phyllocnistis n. sp. PE , US (FL) L Yes No CABI, 2002 ; Peña, 2003;

Wolfe et al

., 1969; Wysocki et

a l

. , 2002
Lepidoptera : Lymantriidae

Eloria sp. PE L , S Yes No Alata Condor, 1973 ; U.S. Congress, 1993
Lepidoptera : Noctuidae
Chrysodeixis includens (Walker) [Syn. Pseudoplusia includens (Walker)] PE, US L, F, I No No 24 CABI, 2003

Helicoverp a zea (Boddie) PE, US L, I, F, Sd No Yes CABI, 2003; Robinson et al

, 2004

Peridroma saucia Hübner PE, US L, S, F, I No No 2 4 CABI, 2002
Spodoptera eridania Stoll PE, US L, F No No 2 4 CABI, 2002
Lepidoptera : Oecophoridae
Stenoma catenifer Walsingh am PE 25 L, F , Sd Yes Yes Alata Condor, 1973, CABI, 2002; Ebeling, 1959; Wolfe et
al

., 1969; Wysoki et al

. , 2002
Lepidoptera : Pyralidae

Jocara zetila Druce PE L Yes No Alata Condor, 1973; Arellano
Cruz, 1998
Stericta albifasciata (Druce) [Syn. Jocar a ban Dyar] PE L Yes No CABI, 2002; Ebeling, 1959 Zhang, 1994
Lepidoptera : Psychidae
Oiketicus kirbyi Guilding PE L Yes No Alata Condor, 1973; Arce et
al

., 1987; Ponce et al

., 19 79 ; Rhainds et al

., 1996
Lepidoptera : Sesiidae
Aegeria sp. PE, U S S (trunk) 26 Yes No Alata Condor, 1973; BFW, 2004; Zhang, 1994
Lepidoptera : Tortricidae
Platynota sp. PE, US L Yes No Alata Condor, 1973

24 External feeder; damaged fruits are likely to be eliminated from packing by visual culling.

25 The pest has a limited distribution in Peru (CABI, 2005)

. 26 W e based this information on that for Sesia sp. of the same family

, Ses iidae. Larvae of this family are generally stem borers.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 12 Scientific Name, Classification Distribu

tion 1 Plant part

a ffected 2 Quara n
ti n e p est 3 Follow

p ath w ay 3 Refe r ences

Thysanoptera : Thripidae
Heliothrips haemorrhoidalis

Bouche PE, US L, F No Yes CABI, 2002

Selenothrips rubrocinctus Giard PE, US L, F No Yes CABI, 2002

VIRUSES

Avocado sunblotch viroid PE

, US (CA

, FL) L, F, S, I No Yes Ploetz, et al

., 1994, Vargas, et
al

. 1991
Potato spindle tuber viroid PE L, F, S, I Yes 27 Yes CABI 2003; Querci, et al

. 1995

ALGAE
Cephaleuros viriscens Künze ( Trentepohliales, Trentepohliaceae ) PE , US (FL) L, S No 28 No Alfieri et al ., 1993; Bazán de Segura, 1959 ; Brannen, 2004

BACTERIA

Rhizobium radiobacter (Beijerinck & van Delden 1902) Young (Rhizobiaceae, Rhizobiales) PE, US R, S No No CABI, 2002

FUNGI and CHROMISTANS

Armillaria sp. 29 (Agaricales,

Marasmiaceae ) PE R, S Yes No CABI 2003; Gonzalez and Abad, 1975; Wellman, 1977
Aspergillus niger Tiegh

. (Anamorphic Emericella

, Eurotiales, Trichocomaceae.) PE, US F, L, R, S, I No Yes CABI 2003; Torres and Gamarra, 1988; Wellman,

1977
Botryodiplodia sp. ( Anamorphic Ascomycetes ) PE, US F, I , L, S No Yes Farr et al

., 2004 ; Torres and
Gamarra, 1988
Botryosphaeria dothidea (Moug.) Ces. & de Not. (= Physolospora

perseae Doid ge). (Anamorph:

Fusicoccum sp. Dothideales, Botryosphaeriaceae.) PE, US F, L, S 30 No Yes Bazán de Segura, 1959; CABI
2003; Farr et al ., 2004, Kirk, et al. , 2001 b ; Ploetz et al.,

1994.

Botrytis cinerea Pers.: Fr (Anamorphic Helotiales, Sclerotiniaceae) PE , US L, S, I , F,

Sd No Yes CABI 2003; Wellman, 1977

27 Potato Spindle Tuber Viroid was declared absent from the United States (NAPPO, 2004a).

28 Listed as non

- reportable ( PestID, 2008 )

. 29 R eported as Armillaria mellea. As currently accepted, A. mellea is a northern hemisphere species except for a single introduction into South Africa (Coetzee et al. 2001). Reports of its occurrence in South America are likely to be error s . A

recent stud y (Coetzee and Wingfield 2003) identified A

. luteobubalina and A. novae

- zelandiae from Chile and Argentina. Both of these species occur in Australia and New Zealand, but not in the United States. It is uncertain which species of

Armillaria was detected in Peru

, theref ore the quarantine status is ―Yes

. ‖

30 We based t hese associations on the biology of P. pyricola Nose ( Botryosphaeria berengeriana f.sp. pyricola ).Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 13 Scientific Name, Classification Distribu

tion 1 Plant part

a ffected 2 Quara n
ti n e p est 3 Follow

p ath w ay 3 Refe r ences

Ceratocystis fimbriata Ellis &

Halst (Microascales, Ceratocystidaceae) PE, US F, L, R, S No 2 8 No 31 CABI 2003; Farr et al ., 2004;

Cercospora lingue Speg. (Anamorphic Mycosphaerellales, Mycosphaerellaceae) PE L, F No 32 Yes Farr et al ., 2004; Wellman,

1977

Cercospora perseae 33 Ell. & Mart. (Anamorphic Mycosphaerellales, Mycosphaerellaceae) PE, US L, F No Yes Farr et al ., 2004; Palm, pers.
com. 2005; Wellman, 1977

Cladosporium sp. (Anamorphic Mycosphaerellale s, Mycosphaerellaceae ) PE R, S, F Yes Yes CABI, 2003; PestID, 2008

Corticium salmonicolor Berk . & Broome. (= Erythricium

salmonicolor (Berk. & Broome) Burd. Polyporales,

Phanerochaetaceae ) PE, US L, S No No CABI 2003; Farr et al ., 2004; Wellman, 1977

Curv ularia lunata (Wakk.) Boedijn. (= Acrothecium

lunatum Wakk. Teleomorph:

Cochliobolus lunatus R.R.

Nelson & Haasis. Pleosporales, Pleosporaceae ) PE, US L No No CABI 2003; Wellman, 1977

Fusarium lateritium Nees. (Teleomorph Gibberella

baccata (Wallr.) Sacc. Hypocreales, Nectriaceae) PE, US F, R, S, I

, No Yes CABI 2003; Icochea et al

. , 1994; Wellman, 1977

Fusarium roseum Link. (Teleomorph Gibberella zea (Schwein.) Petch. Hypocreales, Nectriaceae) PE, US F, R, S, L No Yes CABI 2003; Icochea et al

. , 1994; Wel lman, 1977

31 Ceratocystis fimbriata typically only causes stem and trunk cankers of its hosts but has been r eported to cause superficial lesions on cocoa pods (CABI, 2005). The fungus produces sticky spores that are splash dispersed (Hodges, 2006) or moved by insects and pruning tools (CABI, 2005). Fruit infections of avocado have not been documented and the ski n of the avocado, if it

could be contaminated with the sticky spores, is highly unlikely to contact a fresh wound in a host plant in the United States. Ceratocystis fimbriata has not been intercepted at U.S. ports

- of

- entry on any commodity from any country ( 1985 to September, 2008; P estID, 2008 )

. Standard post

- harvest treatments and processing such as cleaning from dirt and dust and washing in low concentration of a bleach solution (see Risk Mitigation section : post

- harvest procedures in the packing house) are likely to eliminate any spores from the surface

. 32 Cercospora lingue is listed in Wellman, 1977, but is not a recognized Cercospora fide (Chupp, 1953) and its status is u nclear (Crous and Braun, 2003). C onsequently, we did not fu rther analyze it

. 33 Cer cospora persae and C. purpurea are sometimes found together on the same leaf, however they are morphologically distinct species (Chupp, 1953).Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 14 Scientific Name, Classification Distribu

tion 1 Plant part

a ffected 2 Quara n
ti n e p est 3 Follow

p ath w ay 3 Refe r ences

Fusarium oxysporum Schlecht. ( Anamorphic Gibberella

. Hypocreales, Nectriaceae ) PE, US F, R, S, L No Yes CABI 2003; Icochea et al

., 1994; Wellman, 1977

Fusarium solani (Martius) Sacc. (Teleomorph Nectria

haematococca (Wollenw.)

Gerlach. Hypocre ales,

Nectriaceae ) PE, US S, R No No CABI 2003; Farr et al ., 2004

Gibberella avenacea R.J. Cook (Anamorph Fusarium

avenaceum (Fr.) Sacc. Hypocreales, Nectriaceae.) PE, US F, I , L, S No Yes CABI, 2002

Glomerella cingulata (Stonem.) Spauld. & Schrenk ( Incertae

sedis

, Glomerellaceae ) PE, US F, L, S, I

, Sd No Yes CABI 2003; F arr et al ., 2004

Lasiodiplodia theobromae (Pat.)

Griffiths & Maubl. ( anamorph ic Botryosphaeriaceae ) PE, US F, I , L, S No Yes CABI 2003; Bazán de Segura,

1959

Macrophomina phaseolina (Tassi) Goid (Anamorphic Ascomycetes) PE, US F, I , L, R, S,

Sd No Yes CABI 2003; Farr et al ., 2004

Mucor sp. ( Mucorales

, Mucoraceae ) PE L, F Yes Ye s Arce et al ., 1974; Wellman,

1977
Mycena citricolor (Berk. & Curtis) Sacc. (Anamorph Stilbella flavidum (Cooke)

Henn. Agaricales, Tricholomataceae). PE, US (FL) 34 L, F, S Yes 3 4 No 35 CABI, 2002; Wellman, 1977

Nectria rigidiuscula Berk. &

Broome. (Anamorph Fusarium rigidiusculum W.B. Snyder &

H.P. Hansen. Hypocreales, Nectriaceae) PE, US S, F No Yes CABI, 2002

34 Mycena citricolor is reported as present in Florida (CABI, 2002). However, Florida expert s indicate that it has not been detected there since 1926 (Schubert, 2002).

35 M ycena citricolor seems unlikely to follow the pathway , as we found no reference that it specifically attacks avocado fruit. For example, Mariau ( 2001) and Wellman ( 1977) report M. citricolor infects the fruit of coffee, but do not report that it infect s avocado fruit. Most references refer to M. citricolor as a pest of coffee (Mariau, 2001; CABI, 2004; Thurston, 1989; Wellman, 1977)

. Avocado is not listed as a ny kind of host in CABI (2004) . On coffee, the disease produces sub

- circular spots on leaves

, initially brown becoming pale

- brown to straw

- colored. Similar spots may be produced on stalks an d berries. The main effect is to cause leaf fall with a consequent reduction in growth and yield of the coffee tree (CABI, 2004) . Although it has been reported in Peru (Farr et al., 2004; CABI, 2004) , it has not been intercepted on avocado fruit or any fruit from any country since at least 1985, the earliest APHIS computerized interception data available (PestID, 2008)

. Because M. citricolor is primarily a leaf spotting disease, primarily a disease of coffee ( Coffea spp.)

, and has neither been reported on nor intercepted

on avocado fruit, we did not consider it likely to follow the pathway.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 15 Scientific Name, Classification Distribu

tion 1 Plant part

a ffected 2 Quara n
ti n e p est 3 Follow

p ath w ay 3 Refe r ences

Nigrospora oryzae (Berk. & Broome) Petch. Teleomorph Khuskia oryzae H.J. Huds.. Trichosphaeriales, Taxonomic position of family uncertain. PE, US L, F No Yes CABI, 2002; Vallejos and
Mattos, 1990; Wellman, 1977

Oidium sp. (powdery mildew) (Anamorphic Erysiphales, Erysiphaceae) PE L Yes No Alfieri, 1984; Bazán de Segura, 1959;

Pellicularia koleroga Cooke (= Corticium koleroga (Cooke)

Höhn. Ceratoba sidiales, Ceratobasidiaceae) PE, US S, L No No CABI, 2002; Wellman, 1977

Pestalotiopsis guepinii (Desm.) Steyaert. (= Pestalotia guepinii

Desm. Anamorphic Pestalosphaeria

. Xylariales, Amphisphaeriaceae). PE, US L, F No Yes Alfieri, 1984; Bazán de Segura , 1959

Pestalotia leprogena Speg. (Anamorphic Broomella

. Xylariales, Amphisphaeriaceae). PE, US L No No Farr et al ., 2004; Wellman,

1977

Pestalotiopsis neglecta (Thüm.) Stayaert . (= Pestalotia neglecta Thüm). Anamorphic Pestalosphaeria

. Xylariales, Amphi sphaeriaceae) PE, US L, S, F No Yes Farr et al ., 2004; Wellman,

1977

Phomopsis sp. (Anamorphic Diaporthe

. Diaporthales, Valsaceae) PE F, S Yes Yes Alfieri, 1984; PestID, 2008

Phytophthora cactorum (Lebert & Cohn) J. Schröt. (Pythiales, Pythiaceae) PE, U S L, S, F, R No Yes CABI, 2003

Phytophthora cinnamomi Rands. Pythiales, Pythiaceae PE, US L, S, R No No Bazán de Segura, 1959; CABI, 2002; Ploetz, et al

. , 1994
Phytophthora citrophthora (R.H. Sm. & E. Sm.) Leonian. (Pythiales, Pythiaceae) PE, US F, L, R , S,

Sd No Yes CABI, 2003; Farr et al ., 2004

Phytophthora nicotianae Breda

de Haan var. parasitica (Dastur) G.M. Waterhouse ( Pythiales

, Pythiaceae ) PE, US L, S, F, R No Yes Alfieri, et al

., 1984; Farr, et
al

. , 1989; CMI, 1964; CABI,

2003

Phytophthora palmivora (E. J. Butler) E. J. Butler ( Pythiales

, Pythiaceae ) PE, US L, S, F, R, I No Yes CABI, 2003; Wellman, 1977Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 16 Scientific Name, Classification Distribu

tion 1 Plant part

a ffected 2 Quara n
ti n e p est 3 Follow

p ath w ay 3 Refe r ences

Polyporus hirsutus (Wulfen) Fr. (Polyporales , Polyporaceae) PE, US S No No Farr et al ., 2004; Wellman,

1977
Pseudocercospora purpurea (Cooke) Deighton (= Cercospora purpurea Cooke). Anamorphic Mycosphaerellales, Mycosphaerellaceae. PE, US F, L No Yes Bazán de Segura, 1959; CABI
2003; Farr et al

., 2004; Ploetz

et al

. 1994; Wellman, 1977

Pycnoporus sanguineus (L.)

Murrill (= Polyporus sanguineus (L.) Fr. Polyporales, Polyporaceae.) PE, US S No No Farr et al ., 2004; Renjifo and Trujillo, 1992

Pythium ultimum Trow ( Pythiales

, Pythiaceae ) PE, US R No No CABI, 2003; Perez et al

. , 1994; Wellman, 1977

Rhizoctonia solani Kühn. (Tel eomorph Thanatephorus

cucumeris (Frank) Donk. Ceratobasidiales, Ceratobasidiaceae) PE, US L, S, F, R, I

, Sd No Yes CABI, 2003; Farr et al ., 2004; Wellman, 1977

Rhizoctonia sp. (Anamorphic Ceratobasidiales, Ceratobasidiaceae) PE L, S, F, R, I

, Sd Yes Yes P erez, 1999; Wellman, 1977

Rigidoporus microporus (Sw.)

Overeem. Polyporales, Meripilaceae. PE, US R, S No No CABI, 2003; Farr et al ., 2004

Rosellinia bunodes (Berk. & Br.)

Sacc. Xylariales, Xylariaceae. PE R, S Yes No Menge and Ploetz, 2003; Ploetz, et al

. , 1994; Watson, 1971; CMI, 1985, CABI
2003; Farr et al ., 2004

Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary ( Helotiales

, Sclerotiniaceae ) PE, US L, S, F, I , R No Yes CABI, 2002

Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc. (Teleomorph Athelia rolfsii (Curzi) C.C. Tu & Kimbr. Polyporales, Atheliaceae) PE, US L, S, F, R, I

, Sd No Yes CABI, 2003; Well man, 1977

Sphaceloma perseae Jenk. Anamorphic Elsinöe

. Myriangiales, Elsinoaceae. PE, US (FL, TX) F, I , L No Yes Alfieri, et al

., 1984; CABI,
2002; Farr et al ., 2004; Pernexny, 2000.
Sphaeropsis tumefaciens Hedges. (Anamorphic Ascomycetes.) PE, US (FL) S No 2 8 No CABI, 2003; Timmer, 2003

Verticillium dahliae Kleb. (Anamorphic Hypomyces

. Hypocreales, Hypocreaceae) PE, US L, S, F, R, I

, Sd No Yes CABI, 2003; Farr et al ., 2004;Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 17 Scientific Name, Classification Distribu

tion 1 Plant part

a ffected 2 Quara n
ti n e p est 3 Follow

p ath w ay 3 Refe r ences

NEMATODES
Tylenchida : Belonolaimidae
Tylenchorhynchus sp. PE R Yes No Torres, 1977; Wellman, 1977
Tylenchida : Hoplolaimidae
Helicotylenchus dihystera (Cobb)

Sher PE, US R No No CABI, 2003

Helicotylenchus multicinctus (Cobb) Golden PE, US R No No CABI, 2003

Helicotylenchus sp. PE R No No Torres, 1977; Wellman, 1977
Rotylenchulu s reniformis Linford

& Oliveira PE, US R No No CABI, 2003

Tylenchida : Heteroderidae
Meloidogyne sp. PE R Yes No Delgado and Rosas, 1977; Wellman, 1977
Tylenchida : Pratylenchidae
Pratylenchus brachyurus (Godfrey) Filipjev &

Schuurmans Stekhoven PE, US R, S No No CABI, 2003

Radopholus similis (Cobb)

Thorne PE, US R, S No No Anonymous, 1984; Anonymous, 1992; CABI,
2003; PestID, 2008 ; Ploetz, et
al

., 1994
Dorylaimida : Xiphinematidae
Xiphinema floridae Lamberti &

Bleve

- Zecheo PE, US (FL) R No No Lamberti

, et al

. 1987; Lehman, 2002

MOLLUSCA
Helix aspersa Muller [=Sy. Cornu

aspersum (Muller)] PE, US L, S, R, F,

Sd No 36 No 37 CABI, 2003

36 Action required to PR, FL, an d AL ( Courneya, 2004a ).

37 T his large p est is un likely to stay on the commodity through harvest and standard handling and processing

. Table 4. Quarantine Pests Likely to be Associated with avocado imported from Peru Type Pests Taxonomy Arthropods Anastr epha fraterculus Wiedemann Diptera: Tephritidae

Ceratitis capitata Wiedemann Diptera: Tephritidae

Coccus viridis (Green) Hemiptera: Coccidae

Ferrisia malvastra (McDaniel) Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae Stenoma catenifer Walsingham Lepidoptera: Oecophori dae

Viroid Potato spindle tuber viroidPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 18 2.4.1. General d iscussion

We listed the quarantine pests selected for fu rther analysis above ( Table 4 )

. We only analyzed

further those quarantine pests that can be reasonably expected to follow the pathway of

com mercial shipments of export avocado fruit

. Other quarantine pests not included in this

summary could be detrimental to U.S. agriculture

, but were not further analyzed for a variety of reasons, as follows: the pest‘s primary association is with plant parts other than the commodity,

such as Aleurodicus cocois

, Aleurodicus pulvinatus

, Oligonychus mangiferus

, Oncideres poecilla

, Trioza perseae

, etc

. , which are associated with leaf or stem feeding (Bolland et al

., 1998; CABI , 2003; Hollis and Martin, 1997; Lopez and Kairo, 1999); pests may be intercepted during inspection by Agricultural O fficers as biological contaminants of the commodity ( PestID,

2008 ) , but biological contaminants are not expected to be present in every shipment

.

Also, t he biological hazard o f organisms identified to the o rder, family or generic levels wa s not
assessed ; however, if pests identified to higher taxa are intercepted in the future, then a reevaluation of their risk may occur. In this risk assessment, this applies to the arthropods Acutaspis sp. and Pinnaspis sp., and the pathogens Phomopsis sp

. , Cladosporium sp.
, and

Oidium sp. Generally, the biological hazard of organisms not identified to the species level is not assessed because there are many species within a genus, and it is no t reasonable to assume that the biology of all organisms within a genus is identical. The l ack of species ‘ identification may indicate the limits of the current taxonomic knowledge, the life stage, or the quality of the specimen submitted for identificatio n. By necessity, pest risk assessments focus on the organisms for which biological information is available. The lack of identification at a specific level does not rule out the possibility that a high risk quarantine pest was intercepted or that the inter cepted pest was not a quarantine pest. Conversely, development of detailed assessments for known pests that inhabit a variety of ecological niches, such as the surfaces and/ or interiors of fruit, stems or roots, allow effective mitigation measures to elimi nate the known organisms

, as well as similar

, but incompletely identified organisms that inhabit the same niche.

Other plant pests listed in Table 3 that were not chosen for further scrutiny may be potentially detrimental to the agricultural systems of t he United States ; however, there were a variety of reasons for not subjecting them to further analysis

.

2.4.2. Anastrepha species discussion In the past, Anastrepha species were one of the greatest concerns in allowing the importation of

Mexican avocados

. A review of the current literature, however, suggests that under most circumstances, Hass avocados do not serve as hosts for An a strepha spp., as indicated by recent laboratory and field (Aluja et al

. 2004) tests conducted in Mexico. The research prompted a re

evaluation of the potential of Anastrepha spp. to infe s t Hass avocado in Mexico. The re

evaluation concluded that uninjured, commercially produced Hass avocados in Mexico do not

serve as hosts for the Anastrepha ludens, A. serpentina, and A. obliqua

. Nevertheless, the current

re

- evaluation of  ̳ Anastrepha sp.

- Hass avocado‘ relationships is based on experiments conducted in Mexico only, and, therefore, should be extrapolated to other regions of the world with caution

, considering that Norrbom (2004) l ists a field study by Wille (1952) that shows avocado is a host

for some of the species in Peru. In addition, the Mexican studies indicated that Hass avocado could possibly be a host f or species of Anastrepha under some environmental or tree stressPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 19 circums tances (Aluja et al

. 2004). Anastrepha fraterculu s is variable in its pest status in different regions, and isozyme and karyotype studies suggest that what has been considered fraterculus consists of several closely similar ―sibling species‖ (Foote et al

., 1993 and references therein). This species complex has not yet been studied in sufficient detail to permit a clear separation of the included species (White and Elson

- Harris, 1992) : thus, in Venezuela, Andean and lowland populations are distinct species, and populations from southern and north

- eastern Brazil also have marked genetic differences. Also, ― there is evidence that the Mexican morphotype differs significantly from South American morphotypes ‖ (Aluja et al ., 2004 and references ther e in) and

this wa s one of the reason s why A. fraterculus was not investigated in Mexico by Aluja et al

. (2004). R eliable research is very limited regarding actual host status of avocado for several Anastrepha species in different parts of the Western Hemisphere which leads to a high uncertainty

level. Given available evidence, we believe that A. fraterculus could be considered a pest of

avocado in Peru (Jiron et al ., 1988; White and Elson

- Harris, 1992; Uchôa et al ., 2002) while A. obliqua and A. serpentina are less likely t o infest avocados (Bush, 1957; Uramoto et al

. , 2001; Norrbom, 2004; Aluja et al., 2004).

Two species of Anastrepha had dubious records of a host association with avocado. Anastrepha

striata only occasionally infest s avocado in the field in Costa Rica and Brazil (Jiron et al., 1988; Uchôa et al., 2002). Likewise, for A. obliqua , o nly one record of a host relationship exists, from Brazil, where three females were ―recovered from host fruit‖ of unspecified numbers and of unknown variety (Uramoto et al

. , 2001 ) , and Norrbom ( 2004 ) reported that avocado is not a

natural host for A. obliqua . Most importantly, recent trials in Mexico definitively established that

avocado is not a host of either A. obliqua or A. striata ( Aluja et al

. 2004 )

.

Considering genetic di versity of A. fraterculus

, more data on the suitability of Hass avocado as a host should be collected in Peru. This would be based on results of adult fly trappings in avocado groves, fruit cuttings for possible larval infestations, as well as further expe riments designed to actually identify their status as pests of avocado.

2.4.3. Armored scales discussion

In the draft pest risk assessment for Hass avocados imported from Peru that was made available to the public for comment on May 25, 2006, we listed Ac utapsis albopicta and Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis as quarantine pests and analyzed the risk associated with them

. In this revised risk assessment however, these armored scales are not further analyzed because, although they may enter on commercial fruit f or consumption, armored scales are not expected to become established, and therefore introduced, via this pathway (Miller, 1985; PERAL , 2007). A recent review of the literature, APHIS

- PPQ operational data, and expert opinion concludes that, even assuming h igh 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 cause high level consequences, the specific pathway repr esented by commercially produced fruit shipped without leaves, stems or contaminants constitutes an extremely low risk ( PERAL , 2007). This low risk is explained by poor ability of armored scales to disperse to new host plants from fruits for consumption, a nd consequently, by their low probability of establishment ( PERAL , 2007). The following characteristics of armored scales contribute to their poor dispersal capabilities:Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 20 Legs and wings are absent in females and in feeding immature forms. Males possess win gs 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, survival of which decreases with long distance wind dispersal. Cr awlers can be passively dispersed by wind from one plant to another only during a time period of approximately 24 hours. No further dispersal is possible after the crawlers start feeding as they lose their legs during the first molt and the mouth parts are deeply inserted in the host, anchoring them firmly to the substrate. 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

fr uit or fruit peel. There is a low probability of active dispersal of crawlers by walking from their natal host since they are not capable of rapid movement over bare soil or rough surfaces. An additional reason for not analyzing the armored scales in this risk assessment is that commercially produced avocado fruit is expected to have a low infestation rate of armored scales due to requirements of industry quality standards. Processing, culling, and inspection of fruit

infested with armored scales can furth er reduce the prevalence and survival of this group of pests.

2. 5. Consequences of Introduction

The undesirable consequences that may occur from the introduction of quarantine pests is

assessed in this section. For each quarantine p est, the potential C onsequences of I ntroduction are
rated in five areas called ―Risk Elements‖ : c limate

- h ost i nteraction, h ost r ange, d ispersal p otential,

e conomic i mpact and e nvironmental i mpact. The ratings are determined using the criteria in the

risk a ssessment Guidelines, Version 5.02 (PPQ, 2000). A cumulative risk rating is then calculated by summing the values ; we summarized t he se ratings below ( Table 5 )

.

The major sources of uncertainty present in this risk assessment are similar to those in other risk

assessments : the use of a developing process ( PPQ, 2000 ; Orr, et al ., 1993), the approach used to combine risk elements (Bier, 1999; Morgan and Henrion, 1990), and the evaluation of risk by comparisons to lists of factors within the guidelines (Kapla n, 1992; Orr et al ., 1993). To address this last source of uncertainty, the lists of factors a re interpreted as illustrative and not exhaustive.

Ano ther traditionally recognized source of uncertainty is the quality of the biological information (Gallegos a nd Bonano, 1993)

, which includes uncertainty whenever biological information is lacking on the regional flora and fauna. Inherent biological variation within a population of organisms also introduces uncertainty (Morgan and Henrion, 1990).

Anastrepha fra terculus Wiedemann (Diptera: Tephritidae) Risk ratings

Risk Element #1: Climate

- Host Interaction

The A. fraterculus species complex is widely distributed in Central and South America, with restricted distribution in Mexico (CAB, 2001a; Weems, 2002 ).

T his group occurs from the south of Texas to Argentina (Foote et al ., 1993). A

conservative estimate is that this insect can survive in Plant Hardiness Zones 7

- 10

of the Continental United States ( USDA

- NA, 2003 ). High (3)

Risk Element #2: Host Range High (3)Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 21 Anastrepha fra terculus Wiedemann (Diptera: Tephritidae) Risk ratings
Anastrepha fraterculus is extremely polyphagous. Preferred hosts include Myrtaceae, Eugenia and Syzygium spp. and guava. Other hosts of this species are Terminalia catappa (Combretaceae), Malus pumila and Prunus spp. (Rosaceae),

Annona spp. (Annonaceae), Citrus spp. (Rutaceae), Coffea spp. (Rubiaceae),

Ficus carica (Moraceae), Juglans spp. (Juglandaceae), Diospyros kaki (Ebenaceae), Manilkara zapota (Sapotaceae), Persea americana (Lauraceae),

Solanum quitoense (Solanaceae), Theobroma cacao (Sterculiaceae), Olea

europa ea (Oleaceae), and Vitis vinifera (Vitaceae) ( CABI , 2003 ) ; Passiflora spp. (Passifloraceae) (Aguiar

- Menezes et al

., 2002)

. Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential Females deposit 200

- 400 eggs in host fruits (White & Elson

- Harris, 1992). Reproduction is continuous, as adults are present year

- round ( CABI , 2003 ). In international trade, the major means of dispersal to previously un

- infested areas is the transport of fruit containing larvae. For most regions, the most important fruits liable to carry thi s species are mango and guava ( CABI , 2003 ). High (3)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact Anastrepha fraterculus is the most economically important Anastrepha in Brazil and other South American countries because of its broad host range (Foote et al

., 1993). I n Brazil, where it causes severe yield losses in apple, the pest is of major concern to growers, and represents a significant constraint to fresh fruit export into countries with quarantine barriers (Sugayama et al ., 1996). The insect is also an important pest of guava and mango, and to some extent Citrus and Prunus spp. ( CABI , 2003 ). Introduction and establishment of this fruit fly will increase cost of production due to application of pesticides and initiation of monitoring

programs. Anastrepha fraterculu s is an important pest of quarantine significance and its establishment will lead to losses of foreign and domestic markets. High (3)

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact The extreme polyphagy of this species predisposes it to attack plants in the Unite d

States listed as Threatened or Endangered , such as Prunus ( P. geniculata , FL ) (USFWS, 200 4 ). Its wider establishment in the United States would likely lead to the initiation of chemical or biological control programs. High (3)

Ce ratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) Risk ratings

Risk Element #1: Climate

- Host Interaction Ceratitis capitata is found in Southern Europe and West Asia, throughout Africa, South and Central America, and in Northern Australia ( CABI , 2002). We estimate

t h is species could establish within Plant Hardiness Zones 7

- 10 of the c ontinental

United States ( USDA

- NA, 2003 ). High (3)

Risk Element #2: Host Range This pest has been recorded on a wide variety of host plants in several families, including Rubiaceae ( Coffea spp.), Solanaceae ( Capsicum annuum ), Rutaceae ( Citrus spp.), Rosaceae ( Malus pumila

, Prunus spp), Moraceae ( Ficus carica ), High (3)Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 22 Ce ratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) Risk ratings
Myrtaceae ( Psidium guajava ), Sterculiaceae ( Theobroma cacao ), Arecaceae ( Phoenix dactylifera ) and Anacardiaceae ( Mangifera ind ica ) ( CABI , 2002)

, Lauraceae ( Persea americana ) (Putruele, 1996)

. Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential Eggs are deposited in host fruit in small batches of six to eight (Hassan, 1977), around 300 per female (Weems, 1981). In warm climates breedin g is continuous throughout the year , as there are several overlapping generations (Hassan, 1977)

. Adult s can fly 20 or more kilometers ( CABI , 2002). Transport of infested fruits is the major means of movement and dispersal to previously un

- infested areas ( CABI , 2002). High (3)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact Ceratitis capitata is an important pest in Africa, and can be spread in suitable climates worldwide, making it the single most important pest species in its family (CABI, 2005). In Mediterranean count ries, the pest is particularly damaging to citrus and peach crops increasing cost of production due to expenses related to control programs. It may also transmit fruit

- rotting fungi (CABI, 2005). Ceratitis capitata is of quarantine significance worldwide, especially for Japan and the United States, where we spent considerable resources in order to prevent introduction of this fly (CABI, 2005). Its presence can lead to severe constraints for fruit export leading to losses of foreign and domestic markets (CAB I, 2005). High (3)

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact

The introduction and establishment of C. capitata in the United States will trigger the initiation of chemical control, particularly bait sprays. The species is highly polyphagous, and can attack th e following species listed as Threatened or Endangered: Prunus geniculata (FL) ; Argemone pleiacantha ( NM) ; Asimina

tetramera (FL); Berberis nevivii

, B. pinnata

, B. sonnei

, (CA); Cucurbita

okeechobeensis (FL); Echinocereus chisoensis

, E. reichenbachii

, E. i ridiflorus ( TX ) ; E. fendleri ( NM ) ; E. triglochidiatus (AZ); Euphorbia telephioides (FL); Opuntia treleasei ( CA ); Ribes echinellum (FL, SC); and Ziziphus celata (FL) (USFWS, 2006). As s pecies of Opuntia are hosts, damage can disrupt critical

habitats in the Southw est (Chavez

- Ramirez et al ., 1997). High (3)

Coccus viridis (Green) (Hemiptera: Coccidae) Risk ratings

Risk Element #1: Climate

- Host Interaction This species is pantropical in distribution. It has been reported from India through

Indo

- China, Mala

ysia, the Philippines

, Indonesia, Oceania and sub

- Saharan Africa ( CABI , 200 3 ). In the New World, it is present in Florida, and ranges from Mexico and Central America to northern South America and the Caribbean ( CABI , 2002).

We estimate that C. viridis coul d establish in the continental United States through out
Plant Hardiness Zones 8

- 10 ( USDA

- NA, 2003 )

. Medium (2)

Risk Element #2: Host Range This species is polyphagous. Primary hosts include Citrus spp. (Rutaceae), Coffea High (3)Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 23 Coccus viridis (Green) (Hemiptera: Coccidae) Risk ratings

arabica (Rubiaceae), Artocarpus s p. (Moraceae), Camellia sinensis (Theaceae),

Manihot esculenta (Euphorbiaceae), Mangifera indica (Anacardiaceae), Psidium guajava (Myrtaceae), and Theobroma cacao (Sterculiaceae) ( CABI , 2002). Other

hosts include Alpinia purpurata (Zingiberaceae), Chrysant hemum sp. (Asteraceae), Manilkara zapota (Sapotaceae), and Nerium oleander (Apocynaceae) ( CABI , 2002)

, Persea americana (Lauraceae) (Peña, 2003; Ben

Dov et al., 2003 )

. Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential Females may deposit up to 500 eggs ( CABI

, 2002) ; t here may be several generations per year (Kosztarab, 1997). In spite of the slow rate of natural dispersal (Tandon and Veeresh, 1988), the scale can quickly spread through the transport of infested plant

materials. Coccus viridis has been intercep ted numerous times by PPQ on many plants from many countries ( PestID, 2008 ). High (3)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact

Coccus viridis is a major pest of coffee in Haiti (Aitken

- Soux, 1985) and India (Narasimham, 1987). In Brazil, infestations of 50 scales per plant caused significant damage to coffee seedlings, reducing leaf area and plant growth rate (Silva and Parra, 1982). Coccus viridis is a major cause of yield loss in New Guinea coffee crop (Williams, 1986). In India, the infestation of C. viridis an d the sooty mold ( Capnodium citri ) that accompanied it significantly altered the quality of citrus fruit (Haleem, 1984). This pest is mostly known to be a minor pest of tropical crops, particularly coffee. Most of these hosts are not grown in the United St ates or of minor economic importance. In Florida the preferred host is groundsel bush, Baccharis halimifolia L., a non

- cultivated plant. Preferred cultivated hosts are gardenia and ixora. In Florida, the records include 174 host plants for the green scale (Dekle

and Fasulo , 2001)

. This scale may occur on cultivated hosts in commercial nurseries and usually infestations are accompanied by sooty mold. Implementation of chemical control of the scale as well as the control of the ants protecting the

scale from its natural enemies increases the cost of production (Dekle and Fasulo

, 2001). High (3)

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact As a polyphagous organism, C

. viridis is likely to attack native plants in the United

States , some of which could be Threatened or Endangered ( e.g., Senecio layneae

– CA; Cucurbita okeechobeensis

– FL; Manihot walkerae

– TX; Verbena californica

- CA) ( USFWS, 200 4 )

. If this species were introduced to citrus production areas of

California and Texas

, it could have a negative impact an d stimulate the initiation of additional biological control programs, such as release of pred a tors ( e.g
., ladybird

Chilocorus , caterpillars Eublemma , parasites Coccophagus

, or the parasitic f ungus Cephalosporium lecanii ) (CABI, 2005)

. It is also possible, however, that native natural enemies in the new areas of scale introductions would be able to suppress populations of the pest. Thus, C

. viridis is already present in Florida where several entomopathogenic fungi play an important role in the natural limita tions of this scale on citrus ( Peer Review , 2006)

. Chemical sprays that are already in place against

other scale insects should be able to control C. viridis

. Medium (2)Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 24 Ferrisia malvastra (McDaniel) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) Risk ratings

Risk Elemen t #1: Climate

- Host Interaction The species is widely distributed in Africa ( from South Africa to Israel )

, Americas ( from Argentina to Mexico )

, Australia , Oceania

, and India ( Ben

- Dov et al., 2003 ). It

is estimated that it could establish in Plant Hardiness Zones 7

- 10 of the C ontinental

United States ( USDA

- NA, 2003 ). High (3)

Risk Element #2: Host Range This species is widely polyphagous. The m ost important host families include Cruciferae ( Brassica rapa ), Euphorbiaceae ( Euphorbia hirta

, Manihot esculenta ), Lauraceae ( Persea Americana ), Fabaceae ( Arachis hypogaea

, Phaseolus vulgaris ), Malvaceae ( Gossypium hirsutum ), Rutaceae ( Citrus paradise ), Solanaceae ( Lycopersicon esculentum

, Solanum tuberosum ), Chenopodiaceae ( Suaeda monoica )

, Compositae ( Erigeron ), Cra ssulaceae ( Sedum ) ( Ben

- Dov et al., 2003 )

. High (3)

Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential Note: We found no information about dispersal potential for this species.

C onsequently, we based our analysis on information for F. vi r g ata

.

In India

, several overlap ping generations occur per year , but only three generations occur in Egypt (CABI, 2003) . F ecundity ranges from 109 to 185 eggs per generation, and may exceed 500. The oviposition period is 20

- 29 days , while the incubation period is about 3

- 4 hours. Nymphs molted 3 (females) and 4 (males) times, and the development period varied from 26

- 47 and 31

- 57 days, respectively ( CABI , 2003). Longevity of the adult female was 36

- 53 days and 1

- 3 days for the male. The primary dispersal stage is the first instar

, which n aturally disperses by wind and animals. The females are active and mobile until they start to produce an ovisac and lay eggs. All life stages may be carried on consignments of plant material and fruit. Ferrisia malvastra was intercepted three times and

Fer risia sp. 153 times , with 43 interceptions in commercial and permit cargo (PestID, 2008)

. We ranked this species High for this element. High (3)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact

Ferrisia malvastra is a widespread

, polyphagous species ( U SDA, 2003a ). Although it is not commonly known to be a significant plant pest, it has been

confused with F. virgata and prior to recognition of F. malvastra as distinct from F. virgata

, F. m alvastra may have been misidentified as F. virgata ( Culik et al

., 2006 ). It is considered to be a pest in the United States ( Miller et al . 2002 ) and is of concern as a po tential agricultural pest in Israel ( Ben

- Dov 2005 ). We found no good evidence that F. malvastra is a pest of economic significance, but it damages multiple species and is a vector of "swollen shoot", a virus disease of cacao in West Africa ( Ben

- Dov et al., 2003 ). Taking into account the pest's broad distribution, its polyphagy, and the ability to transmit a viral pathogen, we gave it a Medium rating for this risk factor. Me dium (2)

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact Medium (2)Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 25 Ferrisia malvastra (McDaniel) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) Risk ratings As a polyphagous pest

, F. malvastra is likely to attack native plants in the United

States . Some of these could be Threatened or Endangered , such as Euphorbia telephioides ( FL), Manihot walkerae ( TX )

, Suaeda californica

, ( CA )

, Erigeron ( E

. decumbens

– OR, E. maguirei

– UT, E. parishii

– CA, E. rhizomatus

– NM), and Sedum integrifolium ( MN, NY ) ( USFWS, 200 4 )

. I ntroduction of this species in areas where the related species

, F. vi r g ata

, is already present and con trolled, may not lead

to the initiation of additional programs

Potato Spindle Tuber Viroid (PSTVd) Risk ratings

Risk Element #1: Climate

- Host Interaction Climate is unlikely to limit the distribution of the viroid. PSTVd is found in a wide range of climates from temperate to tropical (CABI, 2004). Before being

eradicated from the United States it was found in thirteen states from North Dakota to Mississippi, which corresponds to more than four hardiness zones. High (3)

Risk Element #2: Hos t Range The primary natural host of PSTVd is potato, but the viroid also affects tomato

and other Solanum spp. (Peters and Runia, 1985). The experimental host range of PSTVd includes a wide range of Solanaceous species, as well as species from

other famil ies (Singh, 1973). Sweet potatoes ( Ipomoea batatas ) (Convolvulaceae), avocados ( Persea americana ) (Lauraceae) and Solanum

muricatum have recently been described as hosts, in addition to wild Solanum spp. hosts (Salazar, 1989; Owens et al., 1992; Querci et al., 1995; Behjatnia et al., 1996; Shamloul et al., 1997). The viroid attacks plant hosts from several families therefore the ranking is High. High (3)

Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential

PSTVd may be spread by contact between infected and healthy plants (CABI, 2004). It may also be transmi tted by pollen or aphid vectors (in association with PLRV) over short distances (CABI, 2004). The dispersal potential of the viroid in avocado fruit is unknown. In potato, tubers are the most important means of

PSTVd di ssemination over both long and short distances (Salazar, 1989). The increased use of true potato seed (TPS) for potato propagation is another potential avenue for spread of the disease if measures are not maintained to certify

disease

- free status (Singh an d Crowley, 1985a; Salazar, 1989). Medium (2)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact PSTVd can cause up to a 90 percent yield reduction in avocado (Querci et al., 1995) Losses in potato vary from 3 to 64 percent (Le Clerg et al.,1944; Singh et al., 1971). Howev er, the severe strain reduced the yield by up to 64 percent. Re

establishment of PSTV in the seed potato producing areas of the United States could lead to the losses of potential markets. High (3)

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact

There are no known host plants that are listed as Threatened or Endangered in the continental United States (USFWS, 2004). The environmental impact of the Low (1)Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 26 Potato Spindle Tuber Viroid (PSTVd) Risk ratings
pathogen is likely to be minimal since the disease used to be widely spread throughout North America (CABI, 2004).

Stenoma ca tenifer Walsingham (Lepidoptera: Oecophoridae) Risk ratings

Risk Element #1: Climate

- Host Interaction

Th is moth is distributed in the Western Hemisphere, from Mexico to Brazil ( CABI , 2003). Suitable climatic conditions for this species in the Continental United

States include Plant Hardiness Zones 9

- 10 ( USDA

- NA, 2003 ). Medium (2)

Risk Element #2: Host Range The seed moth infests species in several genera of Lauraceae : Beilschmiedia

, Chlorocardium rodiei (greenheart tree), Persea a meric ana (avocado), P.

schiedeana (coyo ) ( CABI , 2003)

. We rated t his factor Medium. Medium (2)

Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential

F emales lay eggs on the skin of the fruit, and the larvae bore into the pulp and seed; on Perse a (in environmental chamber), the re could be approximately 164 eggs laid per female, and up to 206 eggs per female on Chlorocardium rodiei ( CABI , 2003)

. The aver age life cycle is 46 days with thee generations per year (FAO, 1999). In tropical regions

, th is pest is present throughout the y ear due to the availability of host plants with diverse flowering periods ( CABI , 2003)

. Stenoma ca tenifer populations increase during the growing season, reaching the highest level before harvest ( CABI , 2003)

. Because larvae are internal, S.

ca tenifer can be spread worldwide via humans. High (3)

Risk Element #4: Economic Impact Stenoma catenifer is a major pest of avocado in Latin America ( CABI , 2003). The proportion of damaged fruit may reach 100 percent in Brazil (with total fruit loss), 80 percent in V enezuela, and 100 percent in Ecuador ( CABI , 2003). High (3)

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact

N o plants in the genus Persea are listed as Threatened or Endangered (USFWS,

200 4 ), but s everal states do

. Thus, P

. borbonia (L.) Spreng. is endangered in

M aryland and P. palustris (Raf.) Sarg. i s endangered in Arkansas. S pecies from the Lauraceae family are Federally listed as Threate ne d and Endange re d (e.g.

, Lindera melissifolia (Walt.) Blume). P reference tests were not conducted for these species, but th ey could be hosts for S. catenifer

. If S. ca tenifer was introduced

, new spray programs will likely be initiated si nce current programs only target external lepidopteran avocado pests .(Bailey and Olsen, 1990a,b; Glenn

et al ., 2003 )

. In Brazil, S. catenifer is currently controlled by organophosphates, carbamates, and pyrethroids (Ventura et al ., 1999)

. In Mexico, insecticides have to be applied at least 12 times to be effective (Wysoki et al

., 2002). N ew biological control programs co u ld be developed based on t he reports of the egg parasitism in natural populations. For example, in Brazil, natural egg infestations by Trichogramma pretiosum and Trichogrammatoidea annulata can reach 40
percent (Hohmann and Meneguim, 1993) . One of th e s e species ( T. annulata ) High (3)Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 27 Stenoma ca tenifer Walsingham (Lepidoptera: Oecophoridae) Risk ratings

occurs in the United States where it ha s been released against the navel orange

worm ( Peer Review , 2006). Introduction of the new control programs could be detrimental to the beneficial fauna of the current pests, however, there is a high degree of uncertainty t o the exact impact. We are erring on the side of caution and assigning High ranking for this risk factor.

Table 5. Summary of the risk r atings for Consequences of Introduction

Pest Risk elements Overall rating a Climate /

Host

interaction Host

Range Dispersal

potential Economic

impact Environ.

impact

Anastrepha fraterculus High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (15)

Ceratitis capitata High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (15)

Coccus viridis Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (13)

Ferrisia malvastra High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) Med (2) High (13)
Potato Spindle Tuber

Viroid High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) Low (1) Medium (12)

Stenoma catenifer Med (2) Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (13)

a Low is 5

- 8 points, Medium is 9

- 12 points and High is 13

- 15 points

2. 6. Likelihood of Introduction

The rating for the Likelihood of Introduction is the sum of the ratings values for the Quantity Imported Annually and Pest Opportunity (Table 6). The li kelihood that an exotic pest will be introduced depends on the amount of the potentially

- infested commodity that is imported. The assessment of Pest Opportunity is based on the biological features exhibited by the pest‘s interaction with the commodity, and represent a series of independent events that must take place before a pest outbreak can occur. The five components are as follows: availability of postharvest treatments, whether the pest can survive through the interval of normal shipping procedures,

wh ether the pest can be detected during a port

- of

- entry inspection, the interactions among factors that influence the rate of establishment, and factors affecting population establishment.

2.6.1. Quantity imported annually

T he amount reported by the country of proposed export , in standard unit s of 4 0

- foot long shipping containers (Table 6), was 250 containers in 2003, 375 in 2004, and 500 in 2005 ( SENASA, 2002b ). This is greater than 100 containers, so the risk factor is High.

2.6.2. Survive Postharvest Tre atment
We rated Anastrepha fraterculu s
, Ceratitis capitata

, and Stenoma ca tenifer High for th is sub

ele ment because the larvae are internal feeders that are not likely to be affected by a surface

-Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 28 cleansing postharvest treatment, such as washing and culling , especially if the extent of the damage is not very obvious

.

We rated Coccus viridis and Ferrisia malvastra Medium because they are external feeders that are likely to be dislodged by a surface

- cleansing postharvest treatment . D epending on their stage ( egg, immature, adult) or instar, however, these insects might find shelter on fruit, particularly at the calyx end

, on a bumpy surface or in packing materials. T he Coccoidea have sessile stages that live firmly pressed to plant surfaces ; t his posture and t heir water

- repellent, waxy cuticles can make them difficult to see or dislodge, especially if sheltered at the stem end of the fruit.

Pota t o Spindle Tuber Viroid (P S T V d ) , like other viruses or viroids

, is expected to survive treatment

, and we therefore r at ed it High risk

.

2.6.3. Survive Shipment

We rated a ll of the pests High risk for th is sub

- ele ment

. T he internal feeders are protected from adverse environmental conditions by the plant part tissue, while other pests are expected to take shelter in roug h or pitted areas on the plant part surface. F ruit can be shipped by airfreight , which makes delivery time short, and may or may not be refrigerated. T he temperature conditions and

time frames associated with un

- refrigerated air or sea transport are insuff icient to reduce population levels of these pests. Further evidence of the ability of numerous pests to survive with

avocado fruit shipment s is in the fact that, since 1985, officers at U

. S

. ports

- of

- entry have intercepted 17,402 pest s on avocado fruit , in cluding permit and general cargo , stores, quarters, mail

, and passenger bagg age (P estID, 2008 )

. Interceptions from South America are presented below ( Appendix A )

. P S T V d replicates autonomously and moves systemically within the plant. The viroid would be

ex pected to survive shipment and is therefore ranked High

.

2.6.4. Not Detected at the Port

- of

- Entry

We rated Anastrepha fraterculus, Ceratitis capitata, and Stenoma ca tenifer High risk for this sub

element because th ese internal pest s are only intercepted by destructive sampling. D epending on the age of infestation, the fruit fly pests can have a high probability of escaping detection at a port

- of

entry; fruit fly

- infested fruit can go unrecognized (White and Elson

- Harris, 1992).

Staining of fruits by soo ty molds and large, obvious infestations can lead to the easy detection of

Ferrisia malvastra and Coccus viridis . S parser populations of these relatively small insects (especially eggs and early instars), particularly if concealed at the stem end of fruits or in packing materials, would be more difficult to discover

, despite the color differences with the plant part

. Consequently

, we rated these pests Medium

.

PSTVd may not be detected upon entry. PSTVd has been found in potato seed (CABI, 2004).

S ome avoc ado fruits ex h ibit pronounced symptoms (Querci et al

. , 1995), but these f r uits are unlikely to be packed. It is unclear if asymptomatic fruit contain viable inoculum quantities, so we ranked the pest M edium here

. 2.6.5. Moved to a Suitable Habitat

A reas s uitable for these pests to establish permanent populations include parts of the South and the West Coast of the continental United States, which comprises about 20 percent of the total land area.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 29 Domestic Hass avocado consumption indicates 

### that states wher e avocados are grown

— C alifornia and Florida

— annually consume an average of about 36 percent of the total volume

of avocados from all sources ( Bellamore, 2006 ). If Hass avocados from Peru are allowed entry into the entire United States market, we expect a p roportionately high share of th e imports will go to California and Florida

.

Based on their known distributions in warm temperate and tropical climates, we rated a ll of the arthropods Medium for this sub

- element due to their need for specific temperature ranges.

PSTVd can establish in a broad range of climates so there is a H igh likelihood of it being moved to a

suitable climate.

2.6.6. Contact with Host Material

This varies among the arthropods in their potential geographic range within the United Stat es

. Hosts of the polyphagous species Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata (see above) should be available throughout the potential range

. We rated t he se pests High for this sub

- element

.

Hosts of Coccus viridis are more limited in distribution in the United States , and are therefore less likely to be contacted

. Ferrisia malvastra hosts include some temperate

- zone or widely cultivated plants ( NRCS, 2003 ), but Coccoidea biology reduce s the likelihood of successful establishment in the

United States

. Specifically, their sessile nature greatly limit s the chances of contact ing hosts (Miller, 1985; Gullan and Kosztarab, 1997). Successful establishment of these insects in a new environment depend s on at least two necessary conditions: close proximity of s usceptible hosts

, and presence on the imported fruit of  ̳crawlers‘ (or other mobile forms) to transfer to new hosts. Since these circumstances are highly unlikely to co

- occur (Miller, 1985), we rated all scale insects Low for this element.

PSTV d is unlik ely to come into contact with hosts. In potato, natural spread of PSTV d is through seed or aphid transmission (CABI, 2004). PSTVd and a rel a ted viroid Avocado Sunblotch Viroid (ASBVd) are known to be transmitted through seed or pollen of infected plants (D esjardins et al., 1984; Fernow et al., 1970). Establishment would require infected seed or fruit tissue to come into

contact with a host. This may r equire propagation of the seed rather than normal disposal; hence

we rated the r isk Low

.

As mentioned above

, Stenoma ca tenifer feed s on avocado and some other species from L auraceae

. We expect the host range to include species of native Persea borbonia

, P. humilis

, and P. palustris

, grown in South and South East of the Continental United States

. The territory w ith the available hosts comprises approximately of less than 20 percent of total Continental United States ( NRCS , 2006)

. For this reason, we rated it Medium for this factor.

Port

- of

- entry inspection will probably be inadequate to provide phytosanitary se curity for all quarantine pests that are likely to follow the pathway; therefore, the development of specific phytosanitary measures is recommended. Postharvest mitigation measures to reduce infestations of external and internal feeders are necessary and s hould be implemented for imports to be

authorized.Pest Risk Assessment for Peru Avocados

Rev. 005 October 27, 2008 30 Table 6. Summary of the ratings for the Quantity Imported Annually, the Pest Opportunity, and the rating for the overall Likelihood of Introduction

Pest Quantity

imported

a nnually Ratings for Pest Oppo rtunity Likelihood of

Introduction rating a Survive postharvest

t reatment Survive

s hipment Not detected

at p ort

- of

entry Moved to

s uitable

h abitat Contact

host

m aterial

Anastrepha fraterculus High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (1 7)

Ceratitis capitata High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (17)

Coccus viridis High (3) Med (2) High (3) Med (2) Med (2) Low (1) Med (13)

Ferrisia malvastra High (3) Med (2) High (3) Med (2) Med (2) Low (1) Med (13)
Potato Spindle

Tuber Viroid High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) Low (1) High (15)

Stenoma catenifer High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) Med (2) High (16)

a Low: 6

- 9 points, Medium: 10

- 14 points, High: 15

- 18 point

2.7

. Conclusion: Pest Risk Poten tial and Phytosanitary Measures

The sum of the values for Consequences of Introduction and Likelihood of Introduction gives values for Pest Risk Potential (Table 7). This is a baseline estimate of the risks associated with this importation, and the reduct ion of risk occurs through the use of mitigation measures.

Specific phytosanitary measures may be necessary for pests with a baseline Pest Risk Potential of Medium ( Coccus viridis, Ferrisia malvastra )

. Both fruit flies, Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratiti s capitata , had High Pest Risk Potential s . The Guidelines (PPQ, 2000) state that a High Pest Risk Potential means that specific phytosanitary measures are strongly recommended, and that port

- of

entry inspection is not considered sufficient to provide phyto sanitary security.

N ote that any species of Heilipus seed beetles may later be considered to follow the pathway if

these insects are intercepted on avocados imported from Peru. We included Heilipus sp. in the pest list based on two interceptions on avoc ado from Peru in baggage but this was not sufficient

evidence to indicate that the pest follows the pathway. We have a high degree of uncertainty

associated with the Heilipus species based mostly on a lack of sufficient evidence about this genus

in Peru an d its economic importance there.

Likewise, uncertainty exists about whether or not other genera of seed weevils are associated with avocado in Peru. For example, Conotrachelus species were intercepted from Peru in permit and commercial cargo of different commodities, other than avocado ( 1985

- 2008; PestID, 2008 ). Despite this , we have no information on species of Conotrachelus that occur in Peru and may feed on avocado. We therefore did not include any species from this genus in the pest list. Species

from the genus Conotrachelus , however, are well known pests of avocados ( Wysoki et al

., 2002) and one or more of these species might occur on avocados in Peru. Seed weevils from generaPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 31 Heilipus and Conotrachelus are known to be in the pathway on avocados impor ted by the United

States from other countries (7 CFR §319.56; PestID , 2008 ).

The conclusions from pest risk assessment are used to decide whether risk management is required and the strength of measures to be u sed (Stage 2 of PRA) (IPPC, 2007: ISPM #2 ). Pest risk management (Stage 3 of PRA) is the process of identifying ways to react to a perceived risk, evaluating the efficacy of these procedures, and recommending the most appropriate options (IPPC, 2007: ISPM #s 2 and 14 ). We described r isk mitigation o ptions below, with their efficacy and application.

Table 7. Pest Risk Potential

Pest Consequences of

Introduction Likelihood of

Introduction Pest Risk Potential a

Anastrepha fraterculus High (15) High (17) High (32)
Ceratitis capitata High (15) High (17 ) High (32)
Stenoma catenifer High (13) High (16) High (29)
Potato Spindle Tuber Viroid Medium (12) High (15) High (27) b

Coccus viridis High (13) Medium (13) Medium (26)

Ferrisia malvastra High (13) Medium (13) Medium (26)

a Low = 11

- 18 points, Medium = 19

- 26 points and High = 27

- 33 points.

b Determined to be L ow based on analysis in Appendix B

.



### 3. R isk Mitigation

The appropriate level of protection associated with the risks of commodity import ations can be achieved by the application of a single ph ytosanitary measure, such as inspection, quarantine treatment, or a combination of measures. Specific mitigations may be selected from a range of

pre

- harvest and post

- harvest options (Table 8) , and may include other safeguarding measures. Measures may be a dded or the strength of measures may be increased to compensate for uncertainty associated with evidence of a risk

. 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 re quired (mandated); and 4) subject to monitoring and control by the responsible national plant pro tection organization (IPPC, 2007: ISPM #14 ).

A systems approach to mitigate risks involved with mature green  ̳Hass‘ avocado imports from Peru might combine a variety of measures: 1) certification of pest

- free areas, pest

- free places of production, or areas of low pest prevalence for certain quarantine pests; 2) programs to control pests within orchards ( e.g ., mechanical, chemical, cultural); 3) preclearance ov ersight by USDA

APHIS officials; 4) packinghouse procedures to eliminate external pests ( e.g ., washing, brushing, inspection of fruit); 5) quarantine treatments to disinfest fruit of internal and external pests; 6) consignments inspected and certified to b e free of quarantine pests; 7) fruit traceable to origin, packing facility, grower, and field; 8) consignments subject to sampling and inspection afterPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 32 arrival in the United States; and 9) limits on distribution and transit within the United States.

3.1. Prior to Harvest

3.1.1. Pest

- F

ree Areas Establishment of pest

- free areas, pest

- free places of production, and pest

- free production sites, as well as areas of low pest prevalence, may be an effective alternative to post

- harvest quarantine

treatments or a component of systems approach (IPPC, 2007: ISPM #14 ). If used, p est

- free areas or production sites should be e stablish ed and maint ained in compliance with relevant ISPM s (IPPC

, 2007: ISPM #s 2, 10, and 22) and NAPPO S tandard No. 17 ( NAPPO 2004 b ). Export

fr om Peru c ould be considered only from production areas that participate in the Integrated Fruit Fly Management program. Currently, this program includes trappings for fruit flies during the avocado growing season (SENASA, 2005). We that pre

- harvest trappin g programs are as important as monitoring population levels during the harvest season. Overall, the trapping schedules should satisfy the requirements of the appropriate international and regional standards,

such as those mentioned above.

Fruit flies/

Anas trepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata

. Basic requirements for the trapping program for establishing fruit fly pest free areas (PFA) are found in NAPPO S tandard No. 17 ( NAPPO

, 2004b). Specific trapping levels for A

. fraterculus and C

. capitata should be identified in the Workplan and are not discussed in this document. In addition to the trappings, an exclusion of untreated host fruit imports into PFA is required. Also, mandatory are treatments of all capture sites and strict increase of trapping levels at first capture, trapping in pueblos as well as in orchards, suspension of exports on second capture in 1 sq mile in the same life cycle. We suggest a periodic APHIS review of the program and possibly a pre

- clearance of shipments.

Seed moth/

Stenoma caten ifer

. If used, e stablish ing a pest

- free area for th is pest should be based on official sample prior to export season, orchard cleanliness, verification sampling and inspection of lots at harvest; certification of being harvested from pest free place of pro duction

.

The municipality should be surveyed at least annually and found to be free from the seed moth.

The survey should cover a specific area (as stated in the W orkplan) and include randomly selected portions of each registered orchard and areas with w ild or backyard avocado trees. The survey should be conducted during the growing season and completed prior to the harvest of the

avocados

. Specifics for this survey could be similar to those approved for t h e importation of Hass

avocados from Mexico into t he United States as described in the Code of Federal Regulations ( 7 CFR § 319, 2003 ).

A second option is a pest

- free place of production based on a higher level of official sampling, orchard cleanliness, and higher levels of verification sampling s and in spection s of lots at harvest as well as a phytosanitary certification of production in a pest free place

.

Scales/ Coccus viridis and Ferrisia malvastra

. Effective IPM programs achieving low pest prevalence of these scales combined with inspection is a pos sible mitigation option. Freedom from the scales could be verified by conducting an official survey or lot freedom based on inspection ofPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 33 shipping lot.

3.1.2. Control Program Mechanical, cultural, or chemical means ( e.g
., orchard sanitation, pre

- harvest insecticidal, fungi cidal, and herbicidal sprays) c ould be used to control pests within the orchards routinely to

achieve pest

- free areas or pests

- free production sites. Sanitation and pesticid e applications, as essential components of best management pract ices, are mainstays of commercial fruit production ( e.g ., Kirk et al ., 2001 a ).

3.1.3. Phytosanitary Certification Inspections

Fruit c ould be sampled and inspected periodically during the growing season and after harvest for quality control and as phytosa nitary pre cautionary measures. Orchards c ould be surveyed periodically; at these times, a random sample of fruit per tree will be inspected to detect for presence of quarantine pests . Results of surveys must be negative for quarantine pests. Production

are as also c ould be subject to scheduled audits and periodic, unannounced inspections by certified inspectors from PPQ and SENASA; these inspections will insure that production areas will meet stipulated requirements for the issuance of a phytosanitary certif icate required for each consignment. This measure is useful for detecting pests present during the growing season that may be more difficult to detect post

- harvest. Detection methods need to be combined with other measures to ensure the absence of pests of concern. Statistical procedures are available to verify, to a specified confidence level, the pest

- free status of an area, given negative survey or trapping results (Barclay and Hargrove, 2005).

3.2. Post

- harvest and Prior to Shipping

Removal of infecte d or infested plant material reduces the likelihood that quarantine organisms would be present with a shipment. R outine post

- harvest and packing practices for avocados to be exported to the United States might include safeguards similar to those applied fo r avocados imported from Mexi c o ( 7 CFR § 319

. 56

- 2ff

, 2003 ; now 7 CFR § 319

. 56

- 30

, 2008 )

. For example, removal and disposal of fallen a vocado fruit from the orchard at least once every 7 days . Other safeguards might include plac ing fruit in containers or fi eld boxes marked with a n orchard registration number , protecting fruit from fruit flies with insect

- proof screens or tarpaulin s before they are moved, or moving fruit from the orchard to the packinghouse within 3 hours of harvest. Maintaining fruit identif

ication from field boxes or containers to the shipping boxes would allow

avocados to be traced back to the orchard of origin if pests are found at the packinghouse or during entry inspection in the United States.

In addition, t he packinghouse might accept fruit only from orchards certified for participation in

the avocado export program. To preve nt insects from entering the packinghouse

, a ll openings

could be covered by screening or by some other barrier. The packinghouse could also have double

doors at th e entrance to the facility and at the interior entrance to the area where the avocados are packed. Prior to the culling process, a sample of 300 avocados per shipment could be selected, cut, and inspected to be found free from quarantine pests.
Prior to b eing packed in boxes, each avocado fruit could be cleaned of all stems, leaves, and otherPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 34 portions of plants to remove external pests

. Most avocado fruit can be cleaned by gently wiping the surface with a clean soft cotton cloth or gloves. It may be necess ary to use a moist cloth if the dirt particles or surface stains are difficult to remove. The cloth should periodically be dipped in a mild solution of household bleach (150 ppm hypochlorous acid or household bleach) to minimize the spread of possible late nt diseases. Larger

- scale operations may choose to clean the avocados by hand

- rubbing individual fruit dumped in a tank of sanitized water. The wash water should be sanitized with 150 ppm hypochlorous acid (household bleach) maintained at a pH of 6.5. Thi s is equal to 2 oz of household bleach (such as Marvex) per 5 gallons of water, or .3 liters of bleach per 100 liters of water. Avocadoes can also be cleaned mechanically by passing the fruit over a series of roller brushes wetted from above with spray noz zles (GMC, 2006)

.

During the grading process, any damaged, diseased, or infested fruit could be removed and separated from the commodity destined for export. Each selected fruit should be labeled with a sticker that bears registration number of the packi nghouse. Any avocados that have not been packed or loaded into a refrigerated truck or refrigerated container by the end of the work day must be kept in the screened packing area.

3.3. D uring Shipping and at U.S. Ports

- of

- entry

3.3.1. Shipping conditions

The boxes could be kept in a refrigerated truck or refrigerated container while in transit to the port of first arrival in the United States. Prior to leaving the packinghouse, the truck or container

could be secured with a seal that will be broken when t he truck or container is opened. Once sealed, the refrigerated truck or refrigerated container should remain unopened until it reaches the port of entry

. Each shipment of avocado s should be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate issued by SENASA statin g that all of the conditions of the W orkplan have been met.

3.3.2. Limits on Distribution and Transit within the United States Some imported commodities harboring exotic pests are authorized for shipment only to certain locations ( e.g
., Alaska or North At lantic ports) or during a specific season (usually the one with the coldest temperatures). These additional measures limit the risk of establishment for many exotic pests. The importation of avocados into the United States is anticipated during the harvest season in Peru, which is during May

– August, with the peak harvest during June and July. These months are warmest in the continental United States and could be very suitable for survival of exotic pests. Shortening the importation season to May only and confining shipments to Alaska and North Atlantic ports during these months could somewhat increase the level of protection.

3.3.3. Point

- of

- entry Sampling and Inspection Inspect consignments u pon arrival in the United States, paying particular attention to paperwork,

to ensure that the chain of custody has remained intact. A random sample of fruit from each consignment might be inspected (depending on the W orkplan conditions) to detect a pest

infestation rate of 10 percent or greater (USDA, 2004).

3.3.4. Quarantine treatments Fumigation and Refrigeration

. Treatments of avocado against Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata

, are governed by the rule 7 CFR § 305.2 ( 200 8 ). Fumigation with methyl bromide atPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 35 normal atmospheric pressure followed by refrige rated storage in accordance with the procedures

described in this section of the CFR is effective against the above mentioned fruit fl y but is not effective against other dangerous pests of avocado.

The fumigant is methyl bromide applied at normal atmosp heric pressure with the dosage of two pounds per 1,000 cubic feet for 2 1⁄2 hours at 70 o F or above. In addition, cold treatment T107

- a is effective against Ceratitis capitata in avocado under 34 o F for 14 days or 36 o for 18 days. For avocados from Peru, th e s e specific treatment s should be effective only against Ceratitis capitata

. We have no current data on the efficacy of this treatment against the fruit flies Anastrep h a spp. and the moth Stenoma catenifer on avocado

.

M any treatments are available , however

, against Anastrepha spp. in other fruits and vegetables. For citrus, for example, the t reatment is T101

- j

- 2

- 1, which is fumigation with methyl bromide at

NAP

— chamber at 80

— 85 o F with the condition that the infestation level is less than 0.5 percent

of the lot. Another option for citrus is to treat Anastrepha spp. with high

- temperature forced air treatment (Treatment: T103

- a

- 1)

. For mango, to treat against Anastrepha spp., available

treatment is T102

- a Hot water dip. Apples, grapes, apricots, tangerine and other fruits could be subject to different schedules of C old treatment against Anastrepha spp. Specific efficacy data are needed to verify that any of the available treatments against Anastrepha spp. could be used for treating this group of pest s in avocad o.

Treatment T104

- a

- 1 and T104

- a

- 2 with methyl bromide at NAP

------ tarpaulin or chamber are approved by APHIS for scale insects ( Coccus viridis ) and mealybugs ( Ferrisia malvastra ) at 70° F or above (maximum dosage, 2 pounds/1,000 ft 3 ), for 0.5 or 2.0 hours, d epending on concentration readings.

Irradiation

. Recently approved irradiation treatment with the generic dose of 400 Gy for all pests of the phylum Arthropoda, excluding adults and pupae of the order Lepidoptera could be a

valuable option for controllin g external pests Coccus viridis and Ferrisia malvastra and fruit flies Anastrepha spp., and Ceratitis capitata ( Treatments for Fruits and Vegetables, 2006 ). The

treatment could be questionable against the moth Stenoma catenifer since not all of its larvae
pupat e outside the fruit, in the soil

, as reported in CABI ( 2005)

. I n some cases
, larvae pupate inside the seed (Arrellano Cruz, 1998) and thus

, irradiation could be ineffective against this pest

. Irradiation dose of 150 Gy is effective treatment against f ruit flies and could be used in combination with other measures to mitigate the rest of the pest complex. In spite of the effectiveness of the treatment against fruit fly pests, it appears that avocado fruit is sensitive to

irradiation and even dose of 80 Gy causes loss of the fruit quality (Peer Review, 2006). It is the responsibility of exporting parties to decide regarding tradeoffs between efficacy of the treatment and its effect on the quality of the commodity.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 36 3.4. Monitoring

3.4.1. Pre

- shipment P rograms I nspection , treatment, or other mitigative measures performed in the field and packinghouse should be under the direct supervision of qualified APHIS and SENASA personnel, and in accordance with specified phytosanitary procedures. Such programs cal l for monitoring of all aspects of any required phytosanitary measures, in addition to identifying the shortcomings and opportunities for program modifications. Provisions should be made for the formal recognition of approved areas, sites, or producers, as well as the specification of conditions for revoking approvals or refusing certification for export to the United States.

3.4.2. Field Survey and Trapping Survey procedures include visual inspection, fruit cutting, and field trapping. Surveys should be

c onducted at regular intervals during the growing season to determine the presence or absence of
pests. Specific methodologies of trapping s and s u rvey s for each quarantine pest of concern should

be outlined in the W orkplan. Growers will receive or be denied certification for export on the basis of survey or trapping results.

3.4.3. Shipments Traceable to Place of Origin in Peru A system of identification labels and record keeping is required for avocado indicating the specific place of origin to ensure trac eability to each production site.

3.5

. Conclusions

The number and diversity of pests that require mitigation make it unlikely that a single mitigative measure will be adequate to reduce risks of their introduction into the United States. For this

reason, a combination of measures in a systems approach is most feasible. The system should include the following safeguards: monitoring of orchards and management programs to achieve and maintain area pest freedom; packinghouse inspection and post

- harvest treatm ents; and maintenance of consignment security and traceability in transit.

This document does not purport to establish specific work plans or to evaluate the quality of a specific program or systems approach. It identifies risks and provides information r egarding known mitigative measures. The specific implementation of measures, as would be present in an operational W orkplan, is beyond the scope of this document.

Table 8. Summary of risk mitigation o ptions for Avocado from Peru
Measure(s) Pest Efficacy

Pest

- free areas or places of production All Satisfies requirements for appropriate level of protection
Control program, including

mechanical , cultural, or chemical means, and monitoring All Research required to demonstrate efficacy

Fruit cutting sample s combined Anastrepha spp., Adequate sampling size s atisfiesPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 37 Measure(s) Pest Efficacy
with low pest prevalence Ceratitis capitata

, Stenoma catenifer requirements for appropriate level

of protection

Packinghouse procedures, including cleaning, brushing

, washing and visual culling Exter n al feeders

Coccus viridis

and Ferrisia

malvastra Research required to demonstrate

efficacy on avocado. Washing with warm soapy water and brushing is used extensively against these pests in foliage and cut flowers.

Point

- of

- entry sampling and insp ection including fruit cuttings

combined with other treatments Most of the external pests;

most of the internal pests

when fruit is cut Certain small insects, such as scales

demonstrate low rate of detection during routine visual inspections.

Shaker

- box te chnique and/or microscopic evaluations might be

needed to reduce level of risk. For cut fruit, sample size should be adequate to

detect infestation
Irradiation 150 Gy for fruit flies

combined with low prevalence of other pests plus fruit cutting and insp ection for Stenoma catenifer All pests Research required to demonstrate efficacy . Due to sensitivity of avocado to irradiation, data might be needed to identify a lower specific doze.

Methyl

- Bromide fumigation ( T104

- a

- 1

, schedule for mealybugs) combined w ith low pest prevalence Coccus viridis Approved by APHIS to treat surface
pests such as scales on vegetables, including avocado

.

Methyl

- Bromide fumigation ( T104

- a

- 2, schedule for mealybugs) combined with low pest prevalence Ferrisia

malvastra Approved by APHIS to treat

mealybugs

Fumigation with Methyl

- Bromide followed by cold treatment Ceratitis capitata Approved by APHIS to treat certain

fruit flies in avocado

. Cold treatment Ceratitis capitata Approved by APHIS to treat C. capitata in avocado
Methy l

- Bromide fumigation, or hot water dip, or high temperature forced air Anastrepha spp. Different schedules approved by

APHIS for a number of fruits. Research required to demonstrate efficacy on

avocadoPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 38 

### 4

. Authors and Reviewers

CPHST, PERAL

Authors

Ro ger D. Magarey

, Plant Pathologi st
Marina Zlotina, Entomologist

Reviewers

Leah Millar, Entomologist Heather Hartzog, Plant Pathologist

Michael Hennessey, Entomologist



### 5

. Literature Cited

7 CFR § 319 .56

- 2ff

. 2003. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 7, Part 319 (7 CFR § 319.56

- 2ff

— Administrative instructions governing movement of Hass avocados from Michoacan, Mexico
, to approved States). 7 CFR § 305 .2 . 2008. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations. Title 7, Part 305 ( 7 CFR § 305.2

. Approved treatments )

. 7 CFR § 319 .56

- 30 . 2008 . U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 7, Part 319 (7 CFR § 319.56

- 30

— Hass avocados from Michoacan, Mexico ). Aguiar

- Menezes, E., E. Menezes, P. C. Cassino and M. A. Soares. 2002. Passion Fruit. In: Peña, J., J. Sharp and M. Wysoki, eds. Tropical Fruit pests and pollinators, CAB International,

Wallin g ford, UK., pp., 361

- 390.

Aitken

- Soux, P. 1985. Some pests and diseases generally encountered in coffee nurseries. Feuille

Extens. Abstract. (53): 1

- 5 (in French). Alata Condor, J. 1973. Lista de Insectos y Otros Animales Daninos a la Agricultura en el Peru.

Manual N 38. Ministerio de Agricultura, Direccion General de Investigacion Agraria, Centro Regional de Investigacion Agraria N1, Estacion Experimental Agricola de la Molina, Departamen to de Entomologia. 176 pp. Alfieri, S.A., Langdon, K.R., Wehlburg, C. and Kimbrough, J.W. 1984. Index of Plant Diseases in Florida. Bulletin 11. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry, Gainesville. 389 pp.

Alfie ri, S. A., Langdon, K. R., Kimbrough, J. W., El

- Gholl, N. E., and Wehlburg, C. 1993. Diseases and disorders of Plants in Florida. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industr y, Gainesville, Florida. pp. 1114. Aluja, M ., Diaz

- Fleischer, F., and J. Arredondo, J. 2004. Nonhost status of commercial Persea

americana ―Hass‖ to Anastrepha ludens

, Anastrepha obliqua

, Anastrepha serpentina

, and Anastrepha striata (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Mexico. J. Econ. Entomol. 97 (2): 293

– 309.

APHIS. 2006. Regulated plant pest list. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/regpestlist/

. Last

accessed October 2006. Anonymous, 1984. Distribution of Plant Parasitic Nematode Species in North Am erica. Society ofPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 39 Nematologists. 205 pp. Anonymous. 1992. Radopholus similis . Pg. 390

- 395. In: Quarantine Pests for Europe. C.A.B. International, Wallingford, Oxon, U.K. Anonymous. 2006a. Coleoptera: Histeridae present in the Entomological Museum of Lund

U niversity. http://www.biomus.lu.se/zoomus/ZooDoc/VetSam/ZooEnt/OrdCol/ListCol/027Histeridae

.html. Anonymous. 2006b. Arthropods of economic importance. Diaspididae of the world. http://ip30.eti.uva.nl/BIS/diaspididae.php?menuentry=sorten&id=80

. Arce, B. H., M. G. Valdivia R. C. Dongo, and R. M. Koc. 1974. Effect of fourteen fungicides on

micro

- organisms that affect seed germination of Yungas purple groundnut. Abstract.

Invest. Agropec. 4 (1

- 2): 47

- 55 (in Spanish, English summary) Arce, J. J. C., Peres, F.O. and F. E. Berti. 1987. Biolog ia do bicho do cesto Oiketicus kirbyi (Lands.

- Guilding, 1827) (Lepidoptera, Psychidae) em folhas de Eucalyptus spp. An. Esc. Sup. Agric. Luiz Qu eiroz. 44 (1) 341

- 358 (in Spanish, English summary). Arellano Cruz, G. 1998. El ―barrenador del fruto del palto‖ Stenoma catenifer Walsh y su control

natural en Chanchamayo y Satipo. Revis. Asoc. Peru. Ecol. 1 (1): 55

- 58 (in Spanish)

. Bailey, J. B., and K. N. Ols en. 1990a. Chemical control of A morbia

, an insect pest of avocado and citrus. California Agric. 44:189

- 198. Bailey, J.B., and K. N. Olsen. 1990b. Supplemental chemical control of omnivorous looper on

avocados. California Agric. 44:8

- 9. Ballou, C. H. 19 36

. El aguacate como planta hosperda del adulto de la mosca prieta. Rev. Gr. Com. y TArab. 5(5): 16. 312. Barclay, H. J., and J. W. Hargrove. 2005. Probability models to facilitate a declaration of pest

free status, with special reference to tsetse (Dip tera: Glossinidae). Abstract. Bull. Entomol. Res. 95(1): 1

- 11 Bazán de Segura, C. 1959. Principales Enfermedades de las Plantas en el Perú. Asociaciones de Agricultures de Cañete e Ica y el Comité de Defensa Técnica del Algodonero de la

Sociedad Nacional A graria [ed.], 70 pp. Behjatnia

, S

. A

. A

. , I.B. Dry, L.R. Krake, B.D. Condé, M.I. Connelly, J.W. Randles, M.A. Rezaian, 1996. New potato spindle tuber viroid and tomato leaf curl geminivirus strains

from a wild Solanum sp. Abstract. Phytopathology, 86(8):880

- 886. Bellamore, T. 2006. Comment of the California Avocado Co mm ission on Docket No. APHIS

2006

- 0072, Availability of a Draft Risk Assessment for Hass Avocados from Peru.

Ben

- Dov Y. 2005. The malvastrum mealybug Ferrisia malvastra (Hemiptera: Coccoidea:

P seudococcidae), distribution, host plants and pest status in Israel. Phytoparasitica 33:

154

- 156.

Ben

- Dov, Y., D. R. Miller, and G. A. P. Gibson. 2003. ScaleNet. http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/scalenet/scalenet.htm . (Archived at PERAL)

BFW. 2004. Bundesamt und Forschungszentrum für Wald ( BFW; Austrian Federal Office and

Research Centre for Forests). Glasflügler, Erlenglasflügler und andere Arten

- Sesia sp. Bier, V.M. 1999. Challenges to the acceptance of probabilistic risk analysis. Risk Analysis 19 (4):

703

- 710. Blackman, R. L., and V.F. Eastop. 2000. Aphids and the World‘s Cr ops: an Identification and

Information Guide. 2 nd ed. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Chichester, England. 466 Pp.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 40 Bolland , H. R., J. Gutierrez, and C.H.W. Flechtmann 1998. World Catalogue of the Spider Mite Family (Acari: Tetranychidae). Koninklijke Brill NV, L eiden, The Netherlands. 392 Pp. Brannen, P. M. 2004. Orange felt (Orange Cane Blotch) of Blackberry. The Southern Region, Small Fruits Consortium. (Vol. 4 No. 3). Briceno, V. A. 1977. Notes on some arthropods of blackberry ( Rubus spp.) in the Venezuelan

An des. Abstract. Frutas. 7 (33): 6

- 10 (in Spanish, English summary). Bush, G. L. 1957. Some notes on the susceptibility of avocados in Mexico to attack by the Mexican fruit fly. Proc. Rio Grande Val. Hort. Soc. 11:75

- 78. CABI, 2002. Crop Protection Compendiu m. CAB International (CABI) , Wallingford, UK. CABI, 2003. Crop Protection Compendium. CAB International (CABI) , Wallingford, UK. CABI, 2004. Crop Protection Compendium. CAB International (CABI) , Wallingford, UK. CABI, 2005. Crop Protection Compendium. CA B International (CABI) , Wallingford, UK. CABI, 2007 . Crop Protection Compendium. CAB International (CABI), Wallingford, UK. Cavey, J. 2007. Email (April 05, 2007) from Joseph Cavey, Entomologist, USDA

- APHIS

- PPQ National Identification Services, to Marina Zl otina, Entomologist, USDA

- APHIS

- PPQ

CPHST Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory (on file with USDA

- APHIS

PPQ

- CPHST

- PERAL C.M.I., 1964. Descriptions of Pathogenic Fungi and Bacteria No. 35. Phytophthora nicotianae

var parasitica . Commonwealth Agr icultural Bureaux, England. C.M.I., 1985. Distribution Maps of Plant Diseases No. 358. Rosellinia bunodes. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, England. Chavez, H., Pereira, C., and R. Gonzalez. 1985. Chicharrita del agucate Trioza perseae Tuthil (Homoptera: Psyllidae) plaga potebcial del aguacate en zones atlas Del estado de Lara. Boletin de Entomologica Venzolana 4:17

- 24.

Chavez

- Ramirez, F., Wang, X., Jones, K., Hewitt, D. and P. Felker. 1997. Ecological

Characterization of O puntia Clones in South Texas: Im plications for Wildlife Herbivory and Frugivory. Journal of the Professional Association for Cactus Development, 2: 9

- 19. Chupp, E. 1953. A Monograph of the Fungus Genus Cercospor a. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. 667 pp. Coetzee, M.P.A., B. Wingfield, P. Bloomer, G.S. Ridley, M.J . Wingfield

. 2003. Molecular identification and phylogeny of Armillaria isolates from South America and Indo

Malaysia. Mycologia 95: 285

- 293. Coetzee, M.P.A., Wingfield, B.D., Harrington, T.C., Steimel, J., Coutinho, T.A., Wingfie ld, M.F.

2001. The root rot fungus Armillaria mellea introduced into South Africa by early Dutch

settlers. Molecular Ecology 10: 387

- 396. Coile, H. and W. Dixon. 2000. Trilogy. 39. Florida Department of Ag. Cons. Services. Condit, I. J. 1915. The avocado industry in California. Proc. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 12: 13

- 22. Courneya, P. 200 3

. Email ( October 17, 200 3 ) from Paul Courneya, Entomologist, USDA

APHIS

- PPQ National Identification Services, to Roger Magarey, Plant Pathologist, and

Marina Zlotina , Entomologi st, USDA

- APHIS

- PPQ

- CPHST Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory (Archived at PERAL)

. Courneya, P. 2004a Email (February 24, 2004) from Paul Courneya, Entomologist, USDA

APHIS

- PPQ National Identification Services, to Leah Millar, Entomologist, USD A

APHIS

- PPQ

- CPHST Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory ( Archived atPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 41 PERAL). Courneya, P. 2004b

. Email (February 25, 2004) from Paul Courneya, Entomologist, USDA

APHIS

- PPQ National Identification Services, to Marina Zlotina, Entomologist, USDA

A PHIS

- PPQ

- CPHST Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory (Archived at PERAL)

. Courneya, P. 2005 Email (January 03, 2005) from Paul Courneya, Entomologist, USDA

- APHIS

PPQ National Identification Services, to Marina Zlotina, Entomologist, USDA

- APHIS

P PQ

- CPHST Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory (Archived at PERAL) Crous, P.W., Braun, U. 2003. Mycosphaerella and its anamorphs: 1. Names published in Cercospora and Passalora

. Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures, Utrecht, The

Netherlands. 571 pp. Culik, M. P., D. dos S. Martins, and P. J. Gullan. 2006. First records of two mealybug species in Brazil and new potential pests of papaya and coffee. Journal of Insect Science 6:23 Dekle, G. W. and T. R. Fasulo

. 2001. Featured Creatures: green scale Coccus viridis (Green) (Insecta: Hemiptera: Coccidae). http://creatures.ifas.ufl. edu/orn/scales/green_scale.htm. Delgado, B. T. E, and S. C. Rosas. 1977. Cassava, results of research and recommendations for

its cultivation in Peru

. Abstract. Inf

. Espec

. Di

r

. Gen

. Investig

. Min

. Aliment Peru. No. 65,

30 P p . (in Spanish, English summary). Desjardins, P.R., Drake, R.J., Sasaki, P.J., Atkins, E.L., and Bergh, B.O. 1984. Pollen transmission of Avocado Sun Blotch viroid and the fate of the pollen recipient tree.

Abstract. Phytopathology 74:845. Dominguez Gil, O. E. 19 7 8. Insectos perjudic i ales del guanabano ( Annona muricata L.) en el Estado Zulia, Venezuela. Revista F acult. Agron. 4 ( 3 ): 149

- 163 (in Spanish). Ebeling, W. 1959. Subtropical Fruit Pests. University of California. 436 pp. Farr, D. F., Bills, G.F., Chamuris, G.P. and A. Y. Rossman. 1989. Fungi on plants and plant products in the United States. Am

. Phytopath

. Soc

., St. Paul, MN

. 1252 pp. Farr, D. F., A. Y. Rossman, M.E. Palm, and E. B. McCray (n. d.). 200 4 . Fungal Databases, Systematic Botany and Mycology Laboratory, ARS, USDA<http://nt.ars

grin.gov/fungaldatabases/fungushost/FungusHostDisplayFrame.cfm> : Last accessed 5

Feb. 2004. Fernow, K.H., Peterson, L.C., and Palaisted, R.L. 1970. Spindle Tuber Virus in seed and pollen of infected potato plants. Abstract. Am. Potato J. 47:75

- 80. Foote, R.H., Blanc , F.L. , and Norrbom , A.L . 1993. Handbook of the Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) of America North of Mexico. Ithaca, NY: Comstock Publ. Assoc. Gallegos, D. P., and E. J. Bonano. 1993. Consideration of uncertainty in the performance assessment of radioactive waste disposal from an international regulatory perspective. Reliability Engineering and System Safety. 42: 111

- 123. Glenn, H., J. E. Pena, R. Baranowski , R., and R. Duncan. 2003. Lepidopterous pests of Florida

avocado: biodynamics, mortality factors and control. Pests of avocado in Florida. Actas, V Congreso Mundial del Aguacate, 19

- 24 Octubre, Granada

- Malaga, 2:503

- 508.

GMC. 2006. Avocado Product Care. G uyana Marketing Corporation (GMC)

. http://www.newgmc.com/avocado.html. Gonzalez, F.R. and C.J. Abad. 1975. Armillaria mellea Quel. Departamento de Industrias Forestales. Revista Forestal del Peru. Lima, Peru. 6(1/2): 89

- 93. Gullan, P.J. and M. Kosztarab. 1 997. Adaptations in scale insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 42: 23

-Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 42 50.

Gullan, P.J., D.A. Downie, and S. A. Steffan. 2003. 

### A new pest species of the mealybug genus

Ferrisia Fullaway (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) from the United States. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 96(6 ): 723

- 737. Gunn, C.R. and Ritchie , C. 1982. Report of the Technical Committee to Evaluate Noxious Weeds; Exotic Weeds for Federal Noxious Weed Act. (unpublished). Haleem, S.A. 1984. Studies on fruit quality of sweet orange as affected by soft green scale and sooty mould. South Ind. Hort. 32(5): 267

- 269. Harrington, T.C. 2000. Host specialization and speciation in the American wilt pathogen Ceratocystis fimbriata

. Fitopath. Bras. 25S: 262

- 263. Hassan, E. 1977. Major Insect and Mite Pest [sic] of Australian Crops. Gatton, Qld.: Ento Press

. Hill, D.S. 1983. Agricultural Insect Pests of the Tropics and Their Control, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. 746 P. Hodges, C. 2006. Ceratocystis fimbriata. Datasheet. National Information Center for State and

Pr ivate Forestry. http://spfnic.fs.fed.us/exfor/data/pestreports.cfm?pestidval=106&langdisplay=english. Hofshi, R. 2005. Peru

– Avocado industry in the desert. In: Growers. http://www.avocado.org/growers/pages/growers_605.php.

Hohmann

, C

. L

. and A. M. Meneg uim

. 1993. Preliminary observations on the occurrence of avocado borer, Stenoma catenifer Wals in the state of Parana. Anais da Sociedade Entomológica do Brasil, 22(2):417

- 419 (in Portuguese, English summary) Hollis, D. , and Martin , J.H. 1997. Jumping plan tlice (Hemiptera: Psylloidea) attacking avocado
pear trees, Persea americana , in the New World, with a review of Lauraceae

- feeding among psylloids. Bull. Entomol. Res. 87 (5): 471

- 480. Holm, L.G., D.L. Plucknett, J.V. Pancho, and J. P. Herberger

. 1977. The World's Worst Weeds. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. 609 pp. Holm, L.G., D oll, J, Holm, E., Pancho, J.

, and J. P. Herberger

. 1997. World Weeds: Natural

Histories and Distribution. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 1129 pp. Holm, L.G., Pancho J.V., Herbe rger J.P. and Plucknett. D.L. 1979. A Geographical Atlas of

World Weeds. John Wiley and Sons, New York. Hovore, F.T. 2003. Checklist of the Cerambycidae and Disteniidae (Coleoptera) of Costa Rica

. http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:LLWOOw

uc80J:www.hovor e.com/pdf/Cerambycidae_of_Costa_Rica_2003.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&ct

=clnk&cd=1

. Icochea, T., Duarte, V and Clark. C.A. 1994. Occurrence of sweetpotato chlorotic leaf distortion

in Brazil and Peru caused by Fusarium lateritium . Pl ant Dis. 78 : 754

. IPPC. 2007. Inter national 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. Jiron, L., A. L. Norrbom, and J. Soto

- Manitiu. 1988. A preliminary list of the fruit flies of the

genus Anastrepha (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Costa Rica. Fla. Entomol. 71(2): 130

- 137. Kaplan, S. 1992. 'Expert informa tion 'versus 'expert opinions.' Another approach to the problem of elicting/com

bining/using expert knowledge in PRA. Reliab. Eng. System Safety 35: 61

- 72. Katsoyannos, B. I. 1983. Field observations on the biology and behavior of the black fig fly SilbaPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 43 adipata (Diptera: Lonchaeidae) and trapping experiments. Abstract. Zeitsch. Angew an. Entomol. 95 (5): 471

- 476. Kirk, K., R. Bessin, J. Hartman, J. O‘Leary and J. Strang. 2001 a . Total quality assurance: apple production: best management practices. Kentucky Coop. Ext. Serv. ID

- 137. Kirk, M., Cannon, P.F. and David, J.C. 2001 b

. Dictiona ry of the Fungi. CABI Bioscience, UK. Kosztarab, M. 1997. Deciduous forest trees, pp. 347

- 355. In Y. Ben

- Dov and C.J. Hodgson (eds.). Soft Scale Insects: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control. Vol. 7B.

Amsterdam: Elsevier Sci. Publ. B.V. Lamberti, F., Jatala, P. and Agostinelli, A. 1987. A report of some Xiphinema species occurring in Peru (Nematoda, Dorylaimida. Nematologia Mediterranea. 15:103

- 109

. Laurencao, A., H. Soares, and G. Rosado

- Neto. 2003. Occurrence and damage of Heilipus rufipes Perty (Co leoptera:Curculionidae) larvae in avocado trees ( Persea Americana Mill.) in the state of Ceara, Brazil. Neotrop. Entomol. 32: 363

- 364 (in Portuguese, English summary) <http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S1519

- 566X2003000200028&lng=en& nrm=iso&tlng=en> Last accessed 03 Oct. 2006. Le Clerg E.L., Lombard P.M., Eddins A.H., Cook H.T., and Campbell J.C. 1944. Effect of different amounts of spindle tuber and leaf roll on yields of Irish potatoes. American Potato Journal, 21:60

- 71. Lehman, P.S . 2002. Phytoparasitic nematodes reported from Florida. Florida Department of Agriculture. Leston, D. 1979. The Species of Dagbertus (Hemiptera: Miridae) Associated with Avocado in Florida. Florida Entomolog ist, Vol. 62 (4): 376

- 379

. Liquido, N. J., R.T. C unningham, and S. Nakagawa. 1990. Host plants of Mediterranean fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) on the island of Hawaii (1949

- 1985 survey). J. Econ. Entomol. 83 (5): 1863

- 1878. Liquido, N. J., Barr P. G., and R. T. Cunningham. 1998. An encyclopedic bibliog raphy of the host plants of the Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann). USDA

- ARS

- 144, version 1, cd database. Lopez, V. F., and Kairo , M. Y. K.

. 1999. Coconut whitefly in Nevis. Pest Cabweb. Biocontrol

News and Information. General News. 2 0 (1). <http://pest.cabweb.org/Journals/BNI/Bni20

- 1/gennews.htm McAlpine, J. and Steyskal, G. 1982. A revision of Neosilba with a key to the world genera of Lonchaeidae. (Diptera). Canadian Entomologist. 114: 105

- 129

. Mariau, D. 2001. [Diseases of Tropical Tree Crops]. Enfield, NH, USA: Science Publishers, Inc. and CIRAD, France. xi + 237 + illustrations. Marin Acosta, J.C. 1973. Preliminary list of pests of Annonaceae, sapodilla ( Achras zapota L.) and guava ( Psidium guajava L.) in Venezuela. Agron. Trop. 23(2): 205

- 216. [in Spanish; English summary]. Mendel, Z

., Blumberg

, D. and Wysoki , M

. 1992. Biological control of four homopterans in Israeli horticulture: achievements and problems

. Phytoparasitica. 20: 45

- 49

. Menge, J.A. and P loetz, R.C. 2003. Diseases of avocado

. In R.C. Ploetz. Diseases of Tropical Fruit Crops. CABI Publishing. CABI, UK, 527 pp. Metcalf, R. L., and Metcalf , R.A

. 1993. Destructive and Useful Insects, Their Habits and Control,

Fifth Edition. McGraw

- Hill Inc., New York. Miller, D. R. 198 5. Pest risk assessment of armored scales on certain fruit (USDA

- ARS ReportPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 44 submitted to USDA

- APHIS

- PPQ). USDA Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, MD.

Miller

, D

. R

. , G. L. Miller, and G. W. Watson. 2002. Invasive species of mealybugs (Hemiptera:

Ps eudococcidae) and their threat to U.S. agriculture. Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 104: 825

- 836. Miller, D., and J. A. Davidson. 2005. Armored scale insect pests of trees and shrubs (Hemiptera: Diaspididae). Comstock Publishing Asso ciates; Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, NY. 442 pp. Morgan, M.G., and M. Henrion. 1990. Uncertainty. Cambridge Univ. Press, United Kingdom 332

p p. Morin , L., Hill , R.L. and Matayoshi , S

. 1997. Hawaii‘s successful biological control strategy for mist flower (

Ageratina riparia )

– can it be transferred to New Zealand. Biocontrol. 18 (3): 77

- 88. Mourichon, X. 1994. Serious citrus dieback in Colombia caused by Ceratocystis fimbriata . Fruits

Paris 49: 5

- 6, 415

- 416. Nakahara, S. 1982. Checklist of the Armored Scale s (Homoptera: Diaspididae) of the

Conterminous United States. USDA, APHIS, PPQ. 110 pp.

NAPPO. 2004 a . North American Plant Protection Organization‘s Phytosanitary Pest Alert System. Official Pest Reports: Absence of Potato Spindle Tuber Viroid (PSTVd) in t he

United States. Date posted: 03/04/2004. http://www.pestalert.org/oprDetail_print.cfm?oprid=101.

NAPPO. 2004b. Guidelines for the establishment, maintenance and verification of fruit fly pest free areas in North America. NAPPO Regional Standards for Phyt osanitary Measures No. 17. Ottawa: Secretariat of the North American Plant Protection Organization. Narasimham, A.U. 1987. Scale insects and mealybugs on coffee, tea and cardamom and their natural enemies. J. Coffee Res. 17(1): 7

- 13.

NRCS. 2006. The PLANT S Database. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), The National Plant Data Center. http://plants.usda.gov. (Archived at PERAL) Norrbom, A. L. 2004. Host plant database for Anastrepha and Toxotrypana (Diptera: Tephritidae: Toxotrypanini). Diptera Data Dissemination Disk (CD

- ROM) 2: 5,984 records Noyes, J.S. 2003. Universal Chalcidoidea Database. World Wide Web electronic publication. <www.nhm.ac.uk/entomology/chalcidoids/index.html>. Last accessed 29 Dec. 2004. NRCS. 2003. 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) NZPPO. 1999. Import Health Standard: Commodity Sub

- class: Fresh Fruit/Vegetables avocado,
Persea americana, from Tonga. New Zealand National Plant Protection Organization (NZPPO) . 14 P. http://www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity/imports/plants/standards/avocado

to.pdf. Last accessed 16 Oct. 2003. Orr, R. L., Cohen, S. D. , 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 40

pp. Ovruski, S ., Schliserman, P., and M. Aluja. 2003. Native and introduced host plants of Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) in northwestern Argentina. J. Econ. Entomol. 96: 1108

- 1118.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 45 Owens R

. A

. , Khurana S

. M

. P

. , Smith D

. R

. , Singh M

. N

. , and Garg I

. D

. , 1992. A new mild strain of potato spindle tuber viroid isolated from wild Solanum spp. in India. Abstract. Plant Disease, 76(5):527

- 529.

Peer Review. 2006. Peer review report for Importation of  ̳Hass‖ avocado ( Persea americana )

fruit from Peru into the Continental United States. August 30, 2006. USDA

- APHIS

- PPQ, Riverdale, MD. Peña, J. E., and Bennett , F.D. 1995. Arthropods associated with Annona spp. in the Neotropics. 78 (2): 329

- 349.

Pe ñ a, J. E. 2003. Pests of avocado in Florida. Actas, V Congreso Mundial del Aguacate, 19

- 24 Octubre, Granada

- Malaga, 2:487

- 494. Peña, J., Pantoja, A., Duncan, R., de Coss, M., Halbert, S., Evans, G. and Hammon , A. 2003. Survey of Homopteran pests of papaya in Florida. Florida Entomological Society 2003

Annua l Meeting, July 27

- 30 2003 , Hutchinson Island, FL. Abstracts (display presentations). <http://www.flaentsoc.org/2003annmeetabstracts.html.

PERAL. 2007. Phytosanitary Risks Associated with Armored Scales in Commercial Shipments of Fruit for Consumption to t he United States, Revision Original . United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory (PERA L), Raleigh, NC.
Perez, W. 1999. Fungi present on sexual seeds of maca ( Lepidium meyenii Walp.). Fitopat. 34 (1): 29

- 34 (in Spanish, English summary). Perez, W., L. Gutarra, and E. French. 1994. Pythium ultimum Trow. causing watery rot in potato

tubers in Peru

. Fitopat. 29 (3): 191

- 195 (in Spanish, English summary). PestID. 2008. Pest Identification Database (PestID). United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine. https://mokcs14.aphis.u sda.gov/aqas/login.jsp. (Archived at PERAL)

Peters D

. and W.T. Runia

. 1985. The host range of viroids. In: Maramorosch K, McKelvey Jr JJ, eds. Subviral Pathogens of Plants and Animals; Viroids and Prions. New York, USA: Academic Press, 21

- 38. Ploetz, R.C., Zentmyer, G.A., Nishijima, W.T., Rohrbach

, K.G. and Ohr , H.D

. 1994. Compendium of Tropical Fruit Diseases. APS Press, American Ph y topathological Society, St. Paul, MN. 88 pp. Ponce, O. T., Pelaez , H. I. , and De la Cruz , L. J

. 19 79

. Biological study of the bagworm Oiketicus kirbyi Lands Guilding (Lepidoptera: Psychidae) on banana and a survey of its principal parasites. Acta Agronom. 29 (1

- 4): 41

- 46 (in Spanish, English summary )

. PPQ. 2000. Guidelines for pathway

- initiated pest risk assessments (Version 5.0 2). United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ), Riverdale, MD. 30 pp. PPQ. 2004. Regulating the Importation of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (On

- line manual.)

. United States Depa rtment of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ)

. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/manuals/pdf_files/20Fruits_and_Vegetables.pdf Putruele, M. T. G. 1996. Hosts for Ceratitis capitata and Anastrepha frat erculus in the northeastern province of Entre Ríos, Argentina, p. 343

- 345. In : B. A. McPheron & G. J. Steck, eds., Fruit fly pests: A world assessment of their biology and management. St.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 46 Lucie Press, Delray Beach. 586 p. Querci, M., Owens, R.A., Vargas, C . and Salazar, L.F. 1995. Detection of potato spindle tuber viroid in avocado growing in Peru. Plant Disease. 79:196

- 202. Reed, C.F. 1977. Economically Important Foreign Weeds. Agriculture Handbook No. 498. 746

pp. Renjifo, R.J., and C. F. Trujillo. 1992. Natural durability of the wood of nine species of

Bombacaceae. Rev. For. Peru. 19 (1): 83

- 92 (in Spanish, English summary). Rhainds, M., Gries, G. and Chinchilla , C

. 1996. Development of a sampling method for first instar Oiketicus kirbyi (Lepidoptera: Ps ychidae) in oil palm plantations. J. Econ. Entomol. 89 (2): 396

- 401. Robinson, G.S., P.R. Ackery, I.J. Kitching, G.W. Beccaloni and L.M. Hernandez. 2004. HOSTS

- A database of the hostplants of the world's Lepidoptera. The Natural History Museum. London, U nited Kingdom. <http://www.nhm.ac.uk/ entomology/hostplants/>. Last

accessed 12 Nov. 2004. Rosen, D. 1990a. Armored scale insects, their biology, natural enemies and control, Vol A., Elsevier, NY 383 p. Rosen, D. 1990b. Armored scale insects, their biolog y, natural enemies and control, Vol B., Elsevier, NY 688 p. San Juan, A. 2003. Leafcutter Ant Common Names.

< h ttp://www.blueboard.com/leafcutters/names.htm>. Last accessed 29 Oct. 2003. Schubert, T. S. 2002. Letter to Leah Millar, Entomologist USDA

- APHIS

- PPQ. Email (June 25, 2002) from Timothy Schubert, Mycologist, Florida Division of Plant Industry to Leah Millar, Entomologist, USDA

- APHIS

- PPQ, confirming the status of Mycena citricolor in

Florida.

Salazar L

. F

. , 1989. Potato spindle tuber. In Plant Protect ion and Quarantine. Volume II. Selected Pests and Pathogens of Quarantine Significance [edited by Kahn, R.P.]. Boca Raton, Florida, USA; CRC Press, Inc., 155

- 167.

Seferssa. 2004. Diccionario de Especialidades Agroquimicas. FOLIDOL ® M

- 72. <http://www.sefe rssa.com.mx/DEA/productos/204.htm>. Last accessed 29 Dec. 2004. Seguenas, Y., E., and C. Corman Camara. 2002. Efecto del Neem Azadirchacta indica (Triology 70 y Neemix 4.5) en el control de mosca blanca Aleurodicus cocois en el palto cultivado

en Huimanal XLIV Convencion Nacional de Entomologia, Lima, 3

- 7 Nov. 2002. 100 Universidad Nacional Agraria La Molina. <http://www.lamolina.edu.pe/convencionentomologia/insecticidas_botanicos.htm> Last

accessed 04 Oct. 2006.

SENASA. 2002 a

. Draft proposal for the applic ation of pest risk mitigation measures in the exports of avocado ( Persea American ) to the U nited States of A merica from sites in P eru where the avocado seed moth ( Stenoma catenifer ) is not known to occur. Ministry of Agriculture, Peru

. SENASA. 2002 b

. Impor tation of avocado fruit ( Persea Americana ) from Peru. A Pest Risk

Assessment. SENASA, Dec 2002.

SENASA. 2002 c

. Phytosanitary Status of the Avocado in Peru. Ministry of Agriculture, Peru

. SENASA

. 2005. Fax from SENASA to Dr. Cathleen Enright from 14 June 20 05. On file with

USDA

- APHIS. Shamloul A.M., Hadidi A., Zhu S.F., Singh R.P. and Sagredo B. 1997. Sensitive detection ofPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 47 potato spindle tuber viroid using RT

- PCR and identification of a viroid variant naturally infecting pepino plants. Abstract. Canadian J ournal of Plant Pathology, 19(1):89

- 96. Silva, A. B. 1978. Aleurodicus cocois attacking pepper Piper nigrum in Para state, Brazil. Anais

Soc. Entomol. Brasil. 6 (1): 136

- 137. Silva, C.G. and Parra , J.R.P . 1982. Biology and injuriousness of Coccus viridis (Green, 1889) (Homoptera

- Coccidae) on coffee seedlings ( Coffea spp.). Abstract. An. Soc. Entomol. Brasil 11(2): 181

- 195. Silva, N.M. , da Silveira Neto, S. and Zucchi , R.A. 1996. The natural host plants of Anastrepha in the state of Amazonas, Brazil, pp. 3 53

- 357. In B.A. McPheron and G.J. Steck (eds.). Fruit Fly Pests: A World Assessment of their Biology and Management. Delray Beach, FL: St.

Lucie Press. Singh R

. P

. and Clark M

. C

. , 1973. Similarity of host response to both potato spindle tuber and

citrus exo cortis viruses. Abstract. FAO Plant Protection Bulletin, 21(6):121

- 125. Singh R.P. and Crowley C.F., 1985. Successful management of potato spindle tuber viroid in seed
potato crop. Abstract. Canadian Plant Disease Survey, 65(1):9

- 10. Singh R.P., Finnie R.E ., and Bagnall R.H., 1971. Losses due to the potato spindle tuber virus.

Abstract. American Potato Journal, 48:262

- 267. Snell, W. 2006. Memo (October 27, 2006) from Wilmer Snell, PIM Trade Manager, USDA

APHIS

- PPQ, to Marina Zlotina, Entomologist, USDA

- APHI S

- PPQ

- CPHST Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory ( Archived at PERAL). Sugayama, R.L., Malavasi , Nora, A.I. and Branco , E.S . 1996. Ovipositional responses to apple in a caged tree by Anastrepha fraterculus in southern Brazil, pp. 67

- 69. In B.A. McPheron and G.J. Steck (eds.). Fruit Fly Pests: A World Assessment of their Biology and Management. Delray Beach, FL: St. Lucie Press. Swirski, E., Wysoki, M. and Ben

- Dov , Y

. 1997. Avocado, pp. 231

- 239. In: Y. Ben

- Dov and C. J. Hodson [Eds.]. Soft Scale I nse cts

– Their Biology, Natural Ene mies and Control (7B).

Elsevier Science B.V. Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 442 Pp. Tandon, P.L. and Veeresh , G.K. 1988. Inter

- tree spatial distribution of Coccus viridis (Green) on mandarin. Int. J. Trop. Agric. 6(3/4): 270

- 275. Thurston, H. D. 1989. [Tropical Plant Diseases 2nd Edition]. St. Paul, MN: The American Phytophathological Society. vii + 200p. Timmer, L.W. 2003. Sphaeropsis knot. In L.W. Timmmer, S.M. Garnsey, J.H. Graham Eds. ―Compendium of Citrus Diseases.‖ 2 nd Edition. APS Press, St Paul, MN. Torres, E. C. 1977. Phytoparasitic nematodes of sugarcane in Peru

. Abstract. Nematrop. 7: 2 (in Spanish, English summary). Treatments for Fruits and Vegetables . 2006

. Federal Register 71 ( 18) : 4451

- 4464 ( January 27, 2006). Uchôa F., M. A., I. de Oliveira, R. M. S. Molina and R. A. Zucchi. 2002. Species diversity of frugivorous flies (Diptera: Tephritoidea) from hosts in the cerrado of the state of Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil. Neotropical Entomol. 31: 515

- 524.

UCIPM. 2003. UC IPM Pest Management Guidelines: Avocado

- Armored Scales. University of California Statewide Integrated Pest Management (UCIPM) Program. <http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/r8300211.html . Last accessed 16 Oct. 2003. Uramoto, K., Zucchi, R. A., and Walder, M. M. 2001. Biodiversity of Anastrepha fruit flies (Dip., Tephritidae) on the Luiz de Queiroz campus, Piracicaba, Sao Paulo, Brazil. Abstract,Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 48 Fourth Meeting of the Working Group on Fruit Flies of the Western Hemisphere, Mendoza, Argentina, November 21

- 25, 2 001: 37

- 38. <http://www.iicasaninet.net/pub/sanveg/pdf/4th_fruit_flies.pdf.> Last accessed 8/14/04. U.S. Congress. 1993. U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment, Alternative Coca Reduction Strategies in the Andean Region, OTA

- F

- 556 (Washington, DC: U nited States Government Printing Office, July 1993). Chapter6. Coca biological control issues, P. 194. <http://www.wws.princeton.edu/cgi

bin/byteserv.prl/~ota/disk1/1993/9307/930708.PDF>. Last accessed 12 Nov. 2004. USDA. 2004. Agricultural Quarantine Insp ection Monitoring (AQIM) Handbook. USDA

- APHIS, PPQ. ( http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/manuals/pdf_files/AQIM_Handbook.pdf). Last

a ccessed 12 Oct. 2005.

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. 200 4

. Threatened and endangered species system (TESS). United States Fish and

Wildlife Serv. http://ecos.fws.gov/t ess_public/TESSWebpage. Last accessed 1 0 Oct.

200 6

. Vallejos, O. V., and C. L. Mattos. 1990. Mycoflora of Oryza sativa L. and its relationship with aflatoxins in Lambayeque. Fitopatologia., 25 (2): 54

- 59 (in Spanish, English summary). Vargas,C.O., Querci, M. and Salazar, L.F. 1991 Identification and dissemination of avocado sunblotch viroid in Persea americana L. in Peru and the presence of another viroid in

avocado. Fitopatologia. 26:23

- 27

. Vasquez, J., C. Delgado, J. Couturi, and Matile

- Ferrero. 2002. Har mful insects for the guava tree ( Psidium guajava L: Myrtaceae) in Peruvian Amazonia. Fruits 57: 323

- 334 (in French, English summary).
Ventura, M., D. Destro, E. Lopes, and R. Montalvan. 1999. Avocado moth (Lepidoptera: Stenomidae) damage in two avocado cul tivars. Florida Entomol. 82: 625

- 631. Vines, R. A. 1960. Trees, shrubs, and woody vines of the Southwest. University of Texas Press,

Austin. 1104 p. Watson, A.J. 1971. Foreign Bacterial and Fungal Diseases of Food, Forage and Fiber Crops. Weems, H.V., Jr. 1981. Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) (Diptera: Tephritidae). Fla. Dept. Agric. Consumer Serv. Div. Plant Ind. Entomol. Circ. 230

. Weems, H. 2002 a

. Anastrepha fraterculus (Wiedemann) (Diptera: Tephritidae). E ntomology Circular No. 217. FL. Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry. http://creatures.ifas.ufl.edu/fruit/. Wellman, F. L. 1977. Dictionary of Tropical American Crops and their Diseases. Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, New Jersey. 495 pp. White, I. M. and Elson

- Harris , M. M. 1992. Fruit flies of Economic Significance: Their

identification and bionomics. CAB International, Wallingford, UK. 601 pp. Wille, J. E. 1952. Entomologia Agricola del Peru. Sanidad Vegetal, Direccion G eneral de Agricultura, Ministerio de Agricultura, Lima, Peru [eds.], Aramburu Raybada HNOS. S.A., Lima. 543 pp. Williams, D.J. 1986. Scale insects (Homoptera: Coccoidea) on coffee in Papua New Guinea. Pap. New Guin. J. Agric. For. Fish. 34(1

- 4): 1

- 7.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 49 Wolfe , H, R. Franciosi, E. Van Oordt, and R. Figueroa

. 1969. El culivo del palto en el Peru. Minesterio de Agricultura y Pesqueria, Estacion experimental Agricola de La Molina, Lima, Peru, Bulletin Tecnico 73 (in Spanish)

. Wolfenbarger, D. O. 1948. Heilipus sq uamosus Lec., A new enemy of the avocado. California Avocado Society 1948 Yearbook. 33: 98

- 102. WSSA. 2007. Composite List of Weeds. Weed Science Society of America (WSSA). http://www.wssa.net/Weeds/ID/WeedNames/namesearch.php . (Archived at PERAL) Wysoki

, M., M. A . Van den Berg, G. Ish

- Am, S. Gazit, J. E. Peña

, and G. K. Waite. 2002. Pests

and Pollinators of Avocado , pp. 223

- 294

. In: J. E. Peña, J. L. Sharp, and M. Wysoki [Eds]. Tropical Fruit Pests and Pollinators: Biology, Economic Importance, Natural

Ene mies and Control. CABI Publishing. 430 Pp. Yarita Rubinos, Y. 2005. Ciclo Biologico y Algunos Aspectos Del Comportamiento de Dagbertus sp. (Hemiptera : Miridae) en Cultivo de Palto en el fundo Frusol, Viru La Libertad, Agosto 2004 a Marzo 2005 Zhang

, B. C. 1994. Index of Economically Important Lepidoptera. CAB International,

Wallin g ford, Oxon, UK. 599 pp.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 50 

### 6. Appendices

Appendix A

. Pest interceptions from selected countries in South America (exc luding Peru )

from the pest identification datab a se ( PestID, 2008 ) 38

Pest Country a Total

ARG BOL BRA CHI COL ECU VEN
Abgrallaspis sp. (Diaspididae) 1 1 2
Agrotis sp. (Noctuidae) 25 1 2 6
Aleyrodidae, species of 1 1
Anastrepha sp. (Tephritidae) 2 2 1 5
Apion sp. (Curculionidae) 1 1
Arhyssus tricostatus (Spinola) (Rhopalidae) 1 1
Ascochyta , species of 1 1

Athlia rustica erichson (Scarabaeidae) 1 1
Aulacaspis tubercularis newstead (Diaspididae) 1 1 1 3

Blapstinus punctulatus solier (Tenebrionidae) 3 3

Blapstinus sp. (Tenebrionidae) 1 1
Bruchidae, species of 1 1
Cerambycidae, species of 1 1
Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) (Tephritidae) 1 1

Cladosporium sp. 1 1 2
Coccotrypes sp. (Scolytidae) 1 1

Coelom ycetes, species of 1 1
Conoderus rufangulus (Gyllenhal) (Elateridae) 1 1

Conotrachelus perseae 1 1

Conotrachelus sp. (Curculionidae) 3 3
Copitarsia sp. (Noctuidae) 18 18
Crambidae, species of 1 1
Chrysomphalus pinnulifer (Diaspididae) 1 1
Curculionidae, species of 1 1
Diaspididae, species of 1 1 2 4

Diaspis sp. (Diaspididae) 1 1

38 Interceptions from Chile include commercial and permit cargo since Chile is the only country in South America from

which commercial importations of avocados to the United States is authorized. All interceptions from other countries are from baggage, stores or holds due to the absence of trade in avocados from these countries.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 51 Pest Country a Total

ARG BOL BRA CHI COL ECU VEN
Elateridae, species of 1 1
Gelechiidae, species of 1 3 1 5
Geometridae, species of 1 1
Grammophorus minor (Schwarz) (Elateridae) 1 1

Gryllus sp. (Gryllidae) 2 2
Hadeninae, species of (Noctuidae) 15 15
Heilipus sp. (Curculionidae) 1 1 2
Heliothinae, species of 1 1
Hemiberlesia diffinis (Newstead) (Dias pididae) 1 1

Homoptera, species of 1 1 2
Hoplosphyrum griseus (Philippi) (Gryllidae) 9 9
Hylurgus ligniperda (Fabricius) (Scolytidae) 1 1
Lepidoptera, species of 1 1
Lepidosaphes sp. (Diaspididae) 2 2

Ligyrus villosus burmeister (Scarabaeidae) 5 5
Lithraeus egenus (Blanchard) (Bruchidae) 2 2
Melanaspis sp. (Diaspididae) 1 1
Micrapate scabrata (Erichson) (Bostrichidae) 1 1

Microgryllus pallipes philippi (Gryllidae) 5 5

Mic rosphaeropsis sp. 1 1

Monochaetinula sp. (Coelomycetes) 1 1
Noctuidae, species of 3 3
Nomophila sp. (Pyralidae) 2 2

Nysius sp. (Lygaeidae) 2 2
Oecophoridae, species of 1 1
Palinaspis sp. (Diaspididae) 1 1
Phaeoseptoria sp. 1 1

Phoma sp. 1 1 2
Phomopsis sp. 3 3
Phyllosticta sp. (Coelomycetes) 1 1
Pseudaletia impuncta (Guenee) (Noctuidae) 3 3

Pseudaletia sp. (Noctuidae) 1 1
Pseudaonidia trilobitiformis (green) (Diaspididae) 1 2 5 1 9Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 52 Pest Country a Total

ARG BOL BRA CHI COL ECU VEN
Pseudococcidae, species of 1 1 4 1 2 3 14 6

Pseudococcus sp. (Pseudococcidae) 81 8 1
Pyraustinae, species of (Crambidae) 1 1
Rhyephenes sp. (Curculionidae) 1 1

Sitona sp. (Curculionidae) 1 1
Spha celoma sp. 1 1
Stenoma catenifer Walsingham (Oecophoridae) 3 2 2 30 9 4 6

Syrphidae, species of 1 1
Tenebrionidae, species of 1 1

Tomarus villosus (Scarabaeidae) 6 6
Tortricinae, species of 2 2
Vinsonia stellifera (C occidae) 1 1

a ARG

– Argentina, BOL

– Bolivia, BRA

- Brazil, CHI

– Chile, COL

– Col o mbia, ECU

– Ecuador, VEN

– Venezuela.Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 53 Appendix B

. Likelihood of Entry, Introduction, and Establishment of Potato Spindle Tuber Viroid (PSTVd) with Imported ‘Hass’ Avocado, Persea americana
, Fruit from Peru.

Executive Summary

In the Peruvian Avocado PRA, the consequences of introduction and likelihood of introduction of PSTVd were analyzed and rated as medium for both measures. Here we evaluate d the likelihood

of establishment based on three pathways, commercial fruit disposal, residential disposal, and seed propagation, and found the overall likelihood of establishment of the pest to be Low.

Pathways for Establishment

In the PRA it was determined that PSTVd is u nlikely to come into contact with hosts. In potato, natural spread of PSTVd is through seed or aphid transmission (CABI, 2004). PSTVd and a related viroid, Avocado Sun blotch Viroid (ASBVd), are known to be transmitted through seed or pollen of infected pl ants (Desjardins et al., 1984; Fernow et al., 1970). Establishment would require infected seed or fruit tissue to come into contact with a host. W e evaluate the likelihood of establishment based on three pathways, commercial fruit disposal, residential dis posal, and seed propagation. We did not evaluate the likelihood of an irrigation water pathway but this was considered less likely.

1. Warehouse disposal pathway

. To illustrate the fate of exotic organisms on imported fresh produce we used a relevant stud y. Eight pathways were investigated by Gould et al

. (2004) in a risk analysis that looked at fresh asparagus infested with lepidopteran eggs. The study examined disposal methods at 14 commercial import warehouses in the United States that represented 85

pe rcent of the asparagus imports from Peru. That report concluded that of the discarded product (not initially sold for consumption): 76.0 percent went unbagged into dumpsters; 4.5 percent went bagged into dumpsters; 11.2 percent was compacted then placed in landfill; 7.3 percent went to soup kitchens (consumed); 0.5 percent was put in the garbage disposal (municipal sewage); 0
percent went as discounted produce (consumed); 0 percent was composted; 0 percent went for

animal feed. Dumpsters leading to landfill s are a dead

- end pathway for insect pests in municipal

waste , such as Anoplophora glabripennis (Auclair et al

., 2005). We assume that the same is true with this pathogen

. PSTVd only moves with plant material in the absence of a vector. If all plant

materia l is accounted for in the dumpsters and landfills , the viroid is mitigated if all insect vectors are considered mitigated.

2. Residential disposal pathways

. Consumers purchase fruit and take it home from supermarkets. A first discard scenario includes con suming fruit, but discarding stems and calyxes into a garbage disposal and finally into the waste water (sewage) system. In a second discard scenario, stems and calyxes are bagged and put into the trash destined for landfill. In the United

States over 75 p ercent of the population is served by centralized waste water collection and treatment, the remaining population using other on

- site systems to treat sewage and waste water (EPA 2004; Zipper, 2003). Waste water (sewage) treatment standards have been develo ped to reduce populations of pathogens harmful to humans, and this may reduce the viability of PSTVd (EPA, 2004; Zipper, 2003). There are no studies on the quantity of fruits and vegetables discarded in backyard compost in the U. S. One foreign study estim ated that up to 0.5 percent ofPest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 54 U. S. apples purchased in Japan ended up as compost (Roberts et al ., 1998). Another study

estimated that 5 percent of U. S. cherries purchased in New Zealand ended up as compost (Wearing et al ., 2001). If it is assumed that 5 percent composting mirrors U. S. practices, then it is unlikely that the commodity would be discarded on compost piles. Although no studies have been done, it is assumed that all compost produced by consumers is used on home gardens or yards and not sprea d directly onto agricultural fields.

3. Seed Propagation pathway. Avocado seeds are frequently propagated in biology classes. Often students are allowed to take their plants home after completion of the class. There is no

data available to determine the fate of these plants but some assumptions can be made. Most plants would probably remain indoors and die and be disposed under considerations discussed

above. The only possible scenario would be for a propagated tree to be planted outside in proximity to other hosts such as potato or avocado. The avocado tree is relatively frost sensitive and would not survive in most of the United States ( Scorza and Wiltbank, 1975 ). For these

reasons, we consider this pathway to be L ow risk.

Conclusions

In the PRA it w as determined that there would be a high probability of introduction. We

conclude , however, that the probability of establishment is L ow and, consequently, the overall probability of the pest follo wing the pathway is L ow.

Table 1. Likelihood of PSTVd fo llowing pathway based on establishment and introduction

Event Likelihood
Consequences of Introduction High a

Likelihood of Introduction High a

Likelihood of establishment: Warehouse disposal pathway Consumer disposal pathway Propagation pathway

Overa ll risk of establishment Low

Low

Low

Low

Overall likelihood Low

a From Risk Assessment above

Contacts

USDA

- APHIS

- PPQ

- CPHST

- PERAL, Raleigh, North Carolina, Roge r D. Magarey, Plant Pathologist ( Rog er.D.Magarey@aphis.usda.gov ) Marina Zlotina, Entomologist (Marina.A.Zlotina@aphis.usda.gov)Pest Risk Assessment for Avocado from Peru

Rev. 10 August 25 , 2009 55 Literature cited

Auclair, A.N.D., Fowler, G., Hennessey, G., M.K., Hogue, A.T., Keena, M., Lance, D.R., McDowell, R.M., Oryang, D.O. and Sawyer, A.J. 2005. Asse ssment of the risk of

introduction of Anplophora glabripennis (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in municipal solid waste from the quarantine area of New York City to landfills outside of the quarantine

area: a pathway analysis of the risk of spread and establishm ent. J. Econ. Entomol.. 98:47

- 60. CABI, 2003. Crop Protection Compendium. CAB International (CABI) , Wallingford, UK. Desjardins, P.R., Drake, R.J., Sasaki, P.J., Atkins, E.L., and Bergh, B.O. 1984. Pollen

transmission of Avocado Sun Blotch viroid and the f ate of the pollen recipient tree. Phytopathology 74:845.

EPA. 2004. Primer for Municipal Waste Water Treatment Systems. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) , Office of Water Management. Public. EPA 832

- R

- 04

- 001. 30 pp. Gould, J., Venette, R. and Seltzer, J. 2004. The pathways followed by fresh produce in the United States and how they impact the risk of establishment for exotic pests. Unpublished APHIS
poster. Fernow, K.H., Pete rson, L.C., and Palaisted, R.L. 1970. Spindle Tuber Virus in seed and pollen

o f infected potato plants. Am. Potato J. 47:75

- 80. Roberts, R. C., van der Zwet, T., Miller, C. E. and Redlin, S. C.. 1998. The potential for spread

of Erwinia amylovora and fire blight via commercial apple fruit: A critical review and risk

assessment. Crop Prot. 17: 19

- 28. Scorza, R.SD. and Wiltbank, W.J. 1975. E valuation of avocado cold hardiness Proceedings of Florida State Horticultural Society. 88:496

- 499. Wearing, C. H., Hansen, J., Whyte, C., Miller, C. E. and Brown, J. 2001. The potential for spread of codling moth (Lepidoptera: Torticidae) via commercial sweet cherry fruit: a critical

review and risk assessment. Crop Prot. 20: 465

- 488. Zipper, C. R. B. Renaue, Jr., and A. Jantrania. 2003. On

- site sewage treatment alternatives. Virginia Coop. Extensi on Pub. 448

- 407. http://www.ext.vt.edu/pubs/waterquality/448

- 407/448

- 407.pdf

. Last accessed 13 July 2005.