Importation of French Bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L., and 

Runner Bean, Phaseolus coccineus L., from Kenya into the 

United States 

A Qualitative, Pathway-initiated Risk Assessment 

February 23, 2009 

Rev. 004 

Agency contact:

Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory 

Center for Plant Health Science and Technology 

United States Department of Agriculture 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 

Plant Protection and Quarantine 

1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 300 

Raleigh, NC 27606 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 ii

Executive Summary 

This assessment documents risks associated with the importation of fresh French beans, 

Phaseolus vulgaris L., and runner beans, Phaseolus coccineus L., from the Republic of Kenya to 

all the United States (all 50 States plus Territories). For this risk assessment, we assumed that 

beans exported to the United States would undergo the “high care” postharvest processing as 

described in this document, which includes a disinfectant wash and grading of each individual 

bean pod. A list of pests associated with fine beans in the Republic of Kenya was developed 

based on documents assembled by the Republic of Kenya, Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate 

Service (KEPHIS), USDA-APHIS Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) records of port 

interceptions, and a search of both print and electronic sources of information. From this pest list, 

we identified and further analyzed ten quarantine pests as likely to follow the pathway of French 

beans and runner beans from Kenya. Quarantine pests likely to follow the pathway and selected 

for further analysis include the arthropods: 

Bactrocera cucurbitae Coquillett (Diptera: Tephritidae) 

Chrysodeixis chalcites (Esper) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) 

Dacus ciliatus Loew (Diptera: Tephritidae) 

Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) 

Lampides boeticus (Linnaeus) (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) 

Liriomyza huidobrensis (Blanchard) (Diptera: Agromyzidae) 

Maruca vitrata Fabricius (Syn: Maruca testulalis Fabricius) (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green) (Syn: Phenacoccus hirsutus) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae)

Spodoptera littoralis (Boisduval) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) 

Thaumatotibia leucotreta Meyrick (Syn: Cryptophlebia leucotreta Meyrick) (Lepidoptera: 

Tortricidae) 

These quarantine pests were analyzed based on the PPQ Guidelines for Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk 

Assessments, Version 5.02 (PPQ, 2000). We determined that L. boeticus and M. vitrata posed a 

Medium risk, and eight pests—B. cucurbitae, C. chalcites, D. ciliatus, H. armigera, L. 

huidobrensis, M. hirsutus, S. littoralis, and T. leucotreta—posed a High risk of establishing and 

threatening U.S. agriculture and natural plant resources. The evidence available at this time is not 

sufficient to assume that the quality grading process will address the risks posed by the species of 

quarantine concern. A list of potential quarantine treatments to mitigate pest risks is provided in 

this document. However, final phytosanitary measures to mitigate pest risk along the commodity 

pathway will be determined during the development of a detailed pest risk management document, 

which will supplement this baseline analysis. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 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 Weed Potential of Phaseolus vulgaris L and Phaseolus coccineus L..2 

2.3. Previous Risk Assessments, and Pest Interceptions .....................................................2 

2.4. Pest Categorization–Identification of Quarantine Pests and Quarantine Pests Likely to 

Follow the Pathway........................................................................................................3 

2.5. Consequences of Introduction—Economic/Environmental Importance ....................22 

2.6. Likelihood of Introduction—Quantity Imported and Pest Opportunity .....................30 

2.7. Conclusion—Pest Risk Potential and Pests Requiring Phytosanitary Measures........34 

3. Contributors............................................................................................................................ 35 

4. Literature Cited ...................................................................................................................... 35 

5. Appendices............................................................................................................................... 45 

Appendix A. Map of production areas of French beans and runner beans in Kenya ........45 

Appendix B. Post harvest handling of Phaseolus vulgaris L. and Phaseolus coccineus L. in 

Kenya ...........................................................................................................................46 

Appendix C. Risk Mitigation Options ...............................................................................50 

Appendix D. USDA Kenya TDY trip report (selected excerpts) ......................................51 

Appendix E. Predicted distribution of Liriomyza huidobrensis in the conterminous United 

States............................................................................................................................58 

Appendix F. Predicted distribution of Maconellicoccus hirsutus in the conterminous United 

States............................................................................................................................59 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 1

1. Introduction 

This risk assessment was originally prepared by the Republic of Kenya, Kenya Plant Health 

Inspectorate Service (KEPHIS) to examine plant pest risks associated with importation into the 

United States (all 50 States plus Territories) of fresh pods of French beans, Phaseolus vulgaris L 

and runner beans, P. coccineus L., from the Republic of Kenya. The risk assessment was 

subsequently reviewed, updated and finalized by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)’s 

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

this risk assessment, we assumed that beans exported to the United States would undergo the 

“high care” postharvest processing as described in Appendix 2 of this document, which includes 

a disinfectant wash and grading of each individual bean. Estimates of risk are expressed in the 

qualitative terms of high, medium, or low. The risk assessment is “pathway-initiated” in that it is 

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

International plant protection organizations, such as the North American Plant Protection 

Organization (NAPPO) and the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) of the United 

Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization, provide standards for conducting pest risk analyses 

(IPPC, 2004, 2007a; NAPPO, 2004). The methods used to initiate, conduct, and report this plant 

pest risk assessment, as well as the use of biological and phytosanitary terms, are consistent with 

these standards. The IPPC standards describe three stages of pest risk analysis: Stage 1, Initiation; 

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

requirements of IPPC Stages 1 and 2. Details of the methodology and rating criteria can be found 

in the template document, Guidelines for Pathway-Initiated Pest Risk Assessments, Version 5.02 

(PPQ, 2000). 

IPPC (2007b) defines pest risk assessment as “evaluation of the probability of the introduction and 

spread of a pest and the magnitude of the associated potential economic consequences.” 

Quarantine pest is defined as “a pest of potential economic importance to the area endangered 

thereby and not yet present there, or present but not widely distributed and being officially 

controlled” (IPPC, 2007b). Thus, pest risk assessments should consider both the consequences and 

likelihood of introduction of quarantine pests. Both issues are addressed in this document. 

2. Risk Assessment 

2.1. Initiating Event: Proposed Action 

This risk assessment was developed in support of a request by the Republic of Kenya for USDA 

authorization to permit imports of French beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L) and runner beans, 

(Phaseolus coccineus L.) into the United States. Entry of this commodity into the United States 

presents a risk of introduction of exotic plant pests. Title 7, Part 319, Section 56 of the U.S. Code 

of Federal Regulations (7 CFR §319.56, 2008) provides regulatory authority for the importation 

of fruits and vegetables from foreign countries into the United States. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 2

2.2. Assessment of Weed Potential of Phaseolus vulgaris L and Phaseolus coccineus L. 

In this step we examined the potential of the commodity to become a weed after it enters the 

United States (Table 1). If the assessment were to indicate significant weed potential, then a 

“pest-initiated” risk assessment would be conducted. 

Table 1. Assessment of the Weed Potential of Phaseolus vulgaris L and Phaseolus coccineus L.

Commodity: French bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L and runner bean Phaseolus coccineus L. 

Phase 1: Many varieties of Phaseolus vulgaris L and Phaseolus coccineus L. are widely 

cultivated in the United States

Phase 2: Is the species listed in: 

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

No World's Worst Weeds: Distribution and Biology (Holm et al., 1997) 

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

Federal Noxious Weed Act (Gunn and Ritchie, 1982) 

No Economically Important Foreign Weeds (Reed, 1977) 

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

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

Biological Abstracts, AGRIS; search on “species name” combined with 

“weed”. Such a search returns a prohibitive number of references, a sample of 

which do not indicate weediness, but that there are weeds associated with 

cultivation of Phaseolus vulgaris L. and Phaseolus coccineus L. 

Phase 3: The literature indicate that Phaseolus vulgaris L. and Phaseolus coccineus L are not 

likely to become weeds in the United States because of imports from Kenya. 

2.3. Previous Risk Assessments, and Pest Interceptions 

2.3.1. Decision History for Phaseolus vulgaris and Phaseolus coccineus from eastern and 

southern Africa 

• 1990: P. vulgaris was denied entry from Kenya because of a lack of approved treatment for 

various fruit flies, including Dacus cucurbitae Coq. (syn: Bactrocera cucurbitae Coquillett) 

and Ceratitis capitata (Weid). 

• 1989: P. vulgaris from South Africa was denied entry because of a lack of approved 

treatment for a complex of pests including the insects Dacus ciliatus, Maruca testulalis, and 

Lampides boeticus. 

• 1986: P. vulgaris was denied entry from Zimbabwe because of a lack of approved treatment 

for a complex of bean pod pests including Dacus ciliatus and Maruca testulalis, and the 

pathogen Elsinoe phaseoli. 

• 1992: Entomology findings recommended to permit entry of immature pods of P. vulgaris

from Kenya with treatment for Cryptophlebia leucotreta, Dacus ciliatus, Dacus cucurbitae, 

and Maruca testulalis. However, because there was no treatment for the pathogen 

Phakopsora pachrhizi, the commodity was denied entry. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 3

2.3.2. Pest interceptions 

Six different pest taxa have been intercepted from 1999 to 2005 at U.S. ports on P. vulgaris and 

P. coccineus (Table 2), while four different pest taxa have been intercepted from Kenya by the 

European Plant Protection Organization (EPPO) on P. vulgaris over the same period. No pest 

interceptions have been reported on runner beans by EPPO (KEPHIS, 2006). 

Table 2. Pests intercepted at U.S. ports on two Phaseolus species (PestID, 2007). 

Pest Host Origin Year 

Agromyzidae spp. P. vulgaris Colombia 1997 

Anycylostomia stercorea P. vulgaris Trinidad and Tobago 1997 

Crocidosema aporema P. vulgaris Guatemala 2003 

Helicoverpa armigera P. coccineus Germany 2006 

Heliothis sp. P. vulgaris Unknown 1984 

Maruca vitrata P. vulgaris Puerto Rico 1987 

Maruca vitrata P. vulgaris Guatemala 2003 

Maruca vitrata P. vulgaris Puerto Rico 1989 

Maruca vitrata P. vulgaris Hawaii 1992 

Maruca vitrata P. vulgaris Guatemala 2003 

Table 3: Pests intercepted from Kenya by European Plant Protection Organization (EPPO) on 

Phaseolus vulgaris from 1999 to 2005. 

Pest Host Country(s) Year Interceptions 

Helicoverpa armigera Phaseolus vulgaris The Netherlands, UK 2002 5 

Phaseolus sp Ireland, Netherlands 2003/04 2 

Maruca vitrata Phaseolus sp. UK 2003 1 

Deudrix antalas Phaseolus sp. UK 2003 1 

Pyralidae Phaseolus sp. UK 2003 1 

2.4. Pest Categorization–Identification of Quarantine Pests and Quarantine Pests Likely to 

Follow the Pathway 

Common pests associated with P. vulgaris and P. coccineus that occur in Kenya are listed below 

(Table 4). This list includes information on the presence or absence of these pests in the United 

States, the affected plant part(s), the quarantine status of the pest with respect to the United 

States, an indication of the pest-host association, whether the pest is likely to follow the pathway 

and enter the United States on commercially exported beans, and pertinent references for pest 

distribution and biology. 

Plant parts of the commodity include: inflorescence, leaves, pods, roots, seeds, and stem. 

Analysis takes into consideration that the commodities will be shipped as pods, and that pests 

associated with other life stages are not likely to follow the pathway. For this risk assessment, we 

assumed that beans exported to the United States would undergo the “high care” postharvest 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 4

processing as described in Appendix 2 of this document, which includes a disinfectant wash and 

grading of each individual bean. 

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

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

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

would not be justified considering the pest already occurs in the United States; therefore, 

information on plant part association and whether the pest is likely to follow the pathway is not 

needed for non-quarantine pests. 

Table 4: Pests in Kenya associated with French beans, P. vulgaris L., and runner beans, Phaseolus 

coccineus L. 

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

ARTHROPODS 

ARACHNIDA

ACARI 

Prostigmata 

Tarsonemidae 

Polyphagotarsonemus latus

Banks 

Kenya; 

USA 

N/A No N/A PestID, 2007; CABI 

2006; CIE, 1986 

Tenuipalpidae 

Brevipalpus obovatus 

(Geijskes) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Le Pelley, 

1959 

Brevipalpus californicus 

(Banks)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI & EPPO, 2005;

CABI, 2004; Laycock 

& Templer, 1973 

Tetranychidae 

Mononychellus tanajoa

(Bondar) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI 2004; Farrell et 

al., 1995; Mailu 1996 

Tetranychus urticae (Koch) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

Anyango 2001; CABI 

2004; Le Pelley 1959; 

Seif et al., 2001; 

Tetranychus cinnabarinus

(Boisduval) (Syn: 

Tetranychus telarius) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Anyango, 2001; 

HCDA, MOA & JICA, 

2003; Le Pelley, 1959 

 

1

 Plant part affected: I = Inflorescence/Flower, L = Leaf, P = Pod, R = Root, S = Stem, Sd = Seed, Sh = Shoot, WP = Whole 

plant. N/A = Not Applicable. Even if non-quarantine pests are able to follow the pathway, phytosanitary measures against 

these pests would not be justified considering the pest already occurs in the United States; therefore, information on plant 

part association and whether the pest is likely to follow the pathway is not needed for non-quarantine pests. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 5

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

INSECTA 

Coleoptera: Bruchidae 

Acanthoscelides obtectus (Say) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Abate and Ampofo, 

1996; Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Mailu 

1996 

Bruchidius atrolineatus (Pic) Kenya Sd Yes No2 CABI, 2004; Warui, 

1984 

Callosobruchus analis 

(Fabricius)

Kenya Sd Yes No2 CABI, 2004; Warui 

1984 

Callosobruchus chinensis 

(Linnaeus) 

Kenya Sd Yes No2 Abate and Ampofo, 

1996; CABI, 2004; 

Mailu, 1996 

Callosobruchus maculatus 

(Fabricius)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Abate and Ampofo, 

1996; CABI, 2004; 

Warui, 1984 

Callosobruchus phaseoli 

(Gyllenhal)

Kenya Sd Yes No2 CABI, 2004; Warui, 

1984 

Callosobruchus rhodesianus 

(Pic)

Kenya Sd Yes No2 CABI, 2004; Warui, 

1984 

Zabrotes subfasciatus

(Boheman) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Abate and Ampofo, 

1996; Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004 

Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae 

Aulacophora foveicollis Lucas Kenya I, P, L, R, 

S 

Yes No3 PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; Berti, 1990. 

Monolepta spp. Kenya L Yes No Seif et al., 2001 

Ootheca spp. Kenya L Yes No Abate and Ampofo, 

1996; Seif et al., 2001 

Ootheca bennigseni (Weise) Kenya L, R, Sd, 

Sh 

Yes No2 Abate and Ampofo, 

1996; CABI, 2004; 

Muruli et al., 1980 

Ootheca mutabilis Sahlberg Kenya L, R, Sh Yes No Abate and Ampofo, 

1996; PestID, 2007; 

CABI, 2006; EPPO, 

2006; Sief et al., 2001 

Coleoptera: Curculionidae 

Alcidodes dentipes (Olivier) Kenya L, S Yes No CABI, 2004 

 

2

 Pests feed on stored products (dried). 

3 Because of its size, mobility, or biology, the pest is not expected to remain with the commodity during processing.
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 6

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Alcidodes leucogrammus

(Erichson) 

Kenya L, S Yes No Allen, et al., 1996; 

Farrell et al., 1995; 

Mailu 1996; Seif et al., 

2001 

Sitona lineatus Linnaeus Uganda, 

USA 

N/A No N/A PestID, 2007; 

Baliddawa, 1988; CABI 

2006; Williams et al., 

1995 

Systates pollinosus Gerst. Kenya L, R, S Yes No PestID, 2007; Hugo, 

1995; Rathore, No 

Date; Rheenen et al., 

1981 

Coleoptera: Dryophthoridae 

Sitophilus zeamais

(Motschulsky) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Coleoptera: Meloidae 

Coryna spp. Kenya I Yes No Seif et al., 2001 

Mylabris spp. Kenya, 

USA 

I Yes No Seif et al., 2001 

Coleoptera: Nitidulidae 

Carpophilus hemipterus 

(Linnaeus) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004, Noyes, 

1982 

Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae 

Tribolium castaneum (Herbst) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Mailu 

1996 

Diptera: Agromyzidae 

Liriomyza huidobrensis

(Blanchard) 

Kenya4 L, P, S Yes Yes PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2004, 2006; EPPO, 

2005; Steck, 2004

Liriomyza sativae (Blanchard) Sudan, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Mau & 

Kessing, 1991 

Liriomyza trifolii (Burgess in 

Comstock) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Mailu, 

1996 

 

4 Liriomyza huidobrensis Blanchard is reported to be present in California and is not under official control; this is the only 

report within the continental United States (CABI, 2005). Records of L. huidobrensis within the United States, however, 

appear to refer to L. langei Frick, which is a cryptic species of L. huidobrensis (Scheffer, 2000; Scheffer 2004; Scheffer et 

al., 2001). According to Reitz (2004), “there is no evidence that what is currently known as Liriomyza huidobrensis is 

established in the US.” Consequently, we are treating this species as a quarantine pest, but a final decision as to whether or 

not it is a quarantine pest is pending until surveys for this species in Oregon and Washington are completed (Colpetzer, 

2007). Depending on that decision, this risk analysis may need to be revised. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 7

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Ophiomyia centrosematis (de 

Meijere) 

Kenya L, R, St Yes No Abate and Ampofo, 

1996; Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Seif et al., 

2001 

Ophiomyia phaseoli (Tryon) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Abate and Ampofo, 

1996; Allen et al., 1996; 

Ampofo 1994; CABI, 

2004; Farrell et al., 

1995; HCDA, MOA & 

JICA 2003; Mailu, 

1996; Seif et al., 2001 

Ophiomyia spencerella Kenya R, S Yes No Abate and Ampofo, 

1996; Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Farrell et 

al., 1995; Mailu 1996; 

Seif et al., 2001 

Ophiomyia spp. Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2006; EPPO, 

2006; Ogecha et al., 

2000; PestID, 2007 

Diptera: Anthomyiidae 

Delia platura (Meigen) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Seif, et al., 

2001 

Diptera: Tephritidae 

Bactrocera cucurbitae

(Coquillett) 

Kenya, 

USA (HI)

I, L, P, R, 

S 

Yes Yes Alwood, 1999; CABI, 

2004; CIE, 1995; 

Kaneda et al., 1986; 

Tanaka et al., 1986 

Ceratitis capitata 

(Wiedemann)

Kenya, 

USA (HI)

P Yes5 No6 PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; CPHST, 2008A 

Dacus ciliatus Loew Kenya P Yes Yes PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; Hancock, 1989; 

CPHST, 2008A 

Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae 

Bemisia tabaci (Genn) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Mailu 

1996; Seif et al., 2001 

 

5

 Quarantine significant species with a limited distribution in the United States (NIS, 2004, 2006; PestID, 2007). 

6 A previous USDA pest risk assessment on P. vulgaris from Zambia provided scientific justification for C. capitata not 

following the pathway (CPHST, 2008b). Specifically they noted that: 1) none of the cited references in Liquido et al. 

(1998), which indicated that P. vulgaris was a host for C. capitata, included field or laboratory infestation data and 2) no 

interceptions of C. capitata occurred on P. vulgaris after 37 years of surveys (Liquido et al., 1990). Based on this 

precedent, we also do not expect C. capitata to follow the pathway. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 8

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Trialeurodes vaporarium 

(Westwood )

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Seif et al., 

2001 

Hemiptera: Aphididae 

Acyrthosiphon pisum (Harris) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Le Pelley, 

1959 

Aphis craccivora (Koch) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Abate and Ampofo, 

1996; Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Farrell et 

al., 1995; Mailu 1996; 

Millar 1994; Muruli et 

al., 1980; Seif et al., 

2001 

Aphis fabae (Scopoli) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Abate and Ampofo, 

1996; Allen et al., 

1996 ; Ampofo 1994, 

CABI, 2004; Farrell et 

al., 1995; Mailu 1996; 

Millar 1994; Seif et al., 

2001 

Aphis gossypii (Glover) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Le Pelley, 

1959; Millar, 1994 

Aphis spiraecola (Patch) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Millar, 

1994 

Macrosiphum euphorbiae 

(Thomas) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Le Pelley, 

1959 

Myzus persicae Sulzer Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; Millar, 1994. 

CIE, 1979 

Rhopalosiphum 

rufiabdominale (Sasaki) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Hemiptera: Cicadellidae 

Empoasca spp. Kenya L Yes No Allen et al., 1996; 

Ampofo 1994; Farrell et 

al., 1995; Muruli et al., 

1980 

Jacobiasca lybica (de 

Bergevin)

Kenya L S Yes No CABI, 2006; HYPPZ, 

1998; KMA, 1989; 

Lentini et al., 2000; 

PestID, 2007 

Hemiptera: Coreidae 

Acanathomia spp. Kenya I, P, Sd Yes No3 PestID, 2007; CPHST, 

2008A 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 9

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Anoplocnemis curcipes L. Kenya Sh Yes No Seif et al., 2001 

Clavigralla elongata

(Signoret) 

Kenya I, P, Sd Yes No3

 Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Mailu 

1996 

Clavigralla horrida (Germar) Kenya I, P, Sd Yes No3 Farrell et al., 1995; Seif 

et al., 2001 

Clavigralla tomentosicollis

(Stål) 

Kenya I, P, Sd Yes No3

 Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Farrell et 

al., 1995; Mailu 1996; 

Seif et al., 2001 

Fabrictilis australis 

(Fabricius)

Kenya L, P, Sh, 

S 

Yes No3 PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; KMA, 1989 

Leptoglossus gonagra 

(Fabricius)

Kenya, 

USA 

P7 No N/A PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; EPPO, 2006; 

Fasulo and Stansly, 

2007 

Riptortus dentipes (Fabricius) Kenya P, Sd Yes No3 Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Seif et al., 

2001 

Hemiptera: Diaspididae 

Pinnaspis buxi (Bouché) Tanzania L, S Yes No PestID, 2007; 

Lindinger, 1910; 

Tenbrink and Hara, 

1992 

Pinnaspis strachani (Cooley) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Pseudaulacaspis pentagona 

(Targioni Tozzetti) 

MacGillivray

Tanzania, 

USA 

N/A No N/A PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; EPPO, 2006; IIE, 

1996 

Selenaspidus articulatus 

(Morgan)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A PestID, 2007; Ebeling, 

1959; Greathead, 1976 

Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae 

Ferrisia virgata Cockerell Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A PestID, 2007; Ben-Dov, 

1994; CABI 2006; CIE, 

1966 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus

(Green) (syn. Phenacoccus 

hirsutus) 

Kenya, 

USA 

I, L, P, S, 

Sh 

Yes8 Yes CABI, 2007, 2006; Le 

Pelley, 1959 

 

7 Leptoglossus gonagra attacks the fruit of citrus (Fasulo and Stansly, 2007); therefore, we assumed it would also attack the 

pods of Phaseolus spp. 

8

 This pest has a limited distribution in California, Florida and is present in Hawaii (CABI, 2007). It is considered actionable

by APHIS-PPQ (PestID, 2007).
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 10

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Hemiptera: Pentatomidae 

Acrosternum 

pallidoconspersum

Kenya L Yes No CABI, 2004 

Nezara viridula (Linnaeus) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

Farrell et al., 1995; Le 

Pelley, 1959; Seif et al., 

2001 

Hemiptera: Tettigometridae 

Hilda patruelis (Stål) Tanzania R9 Yes No PestID, 2007; Bohlen, 

1973; CABI, 2006 ; 

Gwekewerere, 1995 

Lepidoptera: Arctiidae 

Alpenus (Spilosoma) 

investigatorum (Karsch)

Kenya L Yes No Seif et al., 2001 

Spilosoma (Diacrisia) jacksoni 

(Rothschild)

Kenya L Yes No Seif et al., 2001 

Lepidoptera: Crambidae 

Diaphania indica (Saunders) Kenya; 

USA 

(FL)

L, P Yes5 No3 PestID, 2007; CABI 

2006; EPPO, 2006; 

NHM Collection (as 

cited in CABI, 2006)

Maruca vitrata Fabricius 

[Syn: Maruca testtulalis 

(Geyer)] 

Kenya, 

USA (HI) 

I, L, P Yes5 Yes Allen, et al., 1996; 

Ampofo, 1994; CABI, 

2004, 2006; Farell, et 

al., 1995; Mailu, 1996; 

NHM, 2005 

Spoladea recurvalis

(Fabricius) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; IIE, 1991 

Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae 

Lampides boeticus (Linnaeus) Kenya, 

USA (HI) 

I, P, Sd Yes5 Yes CABI, 2004, 2006; 

CIE, 1995; NHM, 2005 

Lepidoptera: Noctuidae 

Agrotis ipsilon (Hufnagel) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004 ; HCDA, 

MOA & JICA, 2003; 

Le Pelley, 1959; Mailu, 

1996; Muruli et al ,. 

1980 

 

9 Hilda patruelis attacks the underground plant parts, assumed to be roots, of the Bambara groundnut, Vigna subterranea

(Gwekwerere, 1995). Therefore, we assumed it would also attack the roots of Phaseolus spp. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 11

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Agrotis segetum (Dennis and 

Schiffermuller)

Kenya Stem 

base 

Yes No Seif, et al., 2001 

Chrysodeixis chalcites (Esper) Kenya L, P Yes Yes CABI, 2004 

Helicoverpa armigera 

(Hübner) 

Kenya I, L, P Yes Yes Allen, et al., 1996; 

Ampofo, 1994; CABI, 

2004; Farrell, et al., 

1995; HCDA, MOA & 

JICA, 2003, Mailu, 

1996; Le Pelley, 1959; 

Seif, et al., 2001 ; 

CABI, 2006 

Heliothis sp. Kenya, 

USA 

I, L, P, 

Sh 

Yes Yes CABI, 2006; EPPO, 

2006; PestID, 2007 

Spodoptera exigua (Hübner) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen, et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Le Pelley, 

1959 

Spodoptera littoralis

(Boisduval) 

Kenya L, P Yes Yes Allen, et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Le Pelley, 

1959; NHM, 2005 

Thysanoplusia orichalcea

(Fabricius) 

Kenya L, P Yes No3 CABI, 2004, Khaemba 

& Mutinga, 1982 

Trichoplusia ni (Hübner) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Lepidoptera: Pyralidae 

Etiella zinckenella

(Treitschke) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Ampofo et al., 1986; 

CABI, 2004 

Lepidoptera: Sphingidae 

Agrius convolvuli (Linnaeus) Kenya Sh, L Yes No CABI, 2006; 

Carcasson, 1968; 

PestID, 2007 

Lepidoptera: Tortrichidae 

Thaumatotibia leucotreta 

Meyrick (Syn: 

Cryptophlebia leucotreta

Meyrick) 

Kenya L, P, Sd Yes Yes PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; EPPO, 2006; 

PPQ, 2002; Venette et 

al., 2003 

Orthoptera: Acrididae

Diabolocatantops axillaris 

(Thunberg)

Kenya L, P Yes No3

 PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; Kevan, 1950 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 12

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Locusta migratoria (Linnaeus) Kenya I, L, P, S, 

Sd, Sh, 

WP 

Yes No3 PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; Kevan, 1950 

Schistocerca gregaria 

(Forskål)

Kenya I, L, P, S, 

Sd, Sh, 

WP 

Yes No3 PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; Dirsh, 1974; 

KMA, 1989 

Thysanoptera: Thripidae

Frankliniella occidentalis

(Pergande) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Frankliniella schultzei 

(Trybom) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Seif et al., 

2001 

Megalurothrips sjostedti

(Trybom) 

Kenya L Yes No Allen, et al., 

1996; Ampofo, 1994; 

CABI, 2004; Farrell, et 

al., 1995; Le Pelly, 

1959; Mailu, 1996 

Sericothrips spp Kenya L, S Yes No HCDA, MOA & JICA, 

2003 

Thrips palmi Karny Sudan, 

USA (FL, 

HI) 

L, P, Sh Yes5 No3 PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; EPPO, 2006 

Thrips tabaci Lindeman Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; CIE, 1969 

FUNGI 

ANAMORPHIC FUNGI 

Acremonium strictum (W. 

Gams) 

[Syn: Cephalosporium 

acremonium (auct. mult. 

pro. parte, non Corda)] 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Farr et al 

2007; Farrell, et al, 

1995; Kedera, 1996; 

Kung’u & Boa, 1997; 

Macdonald & 

Chapman, 1997 

Alternaria alternata Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Careta, 1999; CABI, 

2004; Farr et al 2003 

Alternaria brassicicola 

(Schwein)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; Farr et al. 2007 

Alternaria cucumerina (Ell. & 

Ev.) Elliott 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Farr et al 2003; Kung’u 

& Boa, 1997 

Ascochyta boltshauseri (Sacc.) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Farrell, et al., 1995; 

Schwartz, 2003 

Aspergillus flavipes Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Farr et al 2007; Kung’u 

& Boa, 1997 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 13

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Aspergillus flavus (Link) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Farr et al 

2003; Ismail, 2001; 

Muriuki & Siboe, 1995 

Aspergillus niger (Tiegh.) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Farr et al 

2003; Kedera, 1996; 

Kung’u & Boa, 1997 

Aspergillus ochraceus (K. 

Wilhelm)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Farr et al 

2003 

Aspergillus tamari (Kita) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Farr et al., 

2003; Natrass, 1961; 

Farr et al., 2007 

Cercospora spp. Kenya, 

USA 

L Yes No Kedera, 1996; 

Schwartz, 2003 

Chalara elegans (Nag Raj & 

W.B. Kendr) 

[Syn: Thielaviopsis basicola 

(Berk, & Bloom) J.W. 

Carmichael] 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Farrell, et 

al., 1995 

Cladosporium spp. Kenya, 

USA 

R Yes No Kedera, 1996 

Colletotrichum 

lindemuthianum (Sacc. & 

Magnus) Briosi & Cavara 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen, et al., 

1996; CABI, 2004; 

Farrell, et al., 1995; 

HCDA, MOA & JICA, 

2003; Kedera, 1996; 

Kung’u & Boa, 1997 

Colletotrichum truncatum

(Schwein.) Andrus & W.D. 

Moore 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Farr et al 

2003; Schwartz, 2003 

Colletotrichum dematium

(Pers.) Grove 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Farr et al 2003; Kedera, 

1996 

Lasiodiplodia theobromae

(Pat.) Griffiths & Maubl. 

(Syn: Botryodiplodia 

theobromae Pat.)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Farr et al 2003; Kedera, 

1996 

Macrophomina phaseoli

(Tassi) Goid 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Farr et al 

2003; Schwartz, 2003 

Macrophomina phaseolina

(Tassi) Goid 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen, et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Farrell et 

al., 1995; Kedera, 1996; 

Kung’u & Boa, 1997; 

Schwartz, 2003 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 14

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Mycovellosiella phaseoli

(Drummond) Deighton 

Kenya L Yes No Allen et al., 1996; 

Kung’u & Boa, 1997 

Myrothecium roridum (Tode) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Farr et al 

2003 

Phaeoisariopsis griseola

(Sacc.) Ferraris. (Syn: 

Isariopsis griseola) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Farrell et 

al., 1995; Kedera, 1996; 

Kung’u & Boa, 1997; 

Wagara et al,. 2004 

Penicillium aurantiogriseum

(Dierckx)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Kedera, 1996; Kung’u 

& Boa 1997; Seif et al., 

2001 

Penicillium spp. Kenya N/A No10 N/A Khare, 1985 

Trichoderma harzianum Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Otieno et 

al., 2003 

Verticillium dahliae (Kleb) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Farr et al 2003; Kedera, 

1996 

ASCOMYCETES

Diaporthales 

Phoma exigua var. exigua

(Desm.) (Syn: Ascochyta 

phaseolorum) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Farr et al 2003; Farrell, 

1995; Kung’u & Boa 

1997

Phoma exigua var.

Dispersispora (Boerema et 

al.)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

Kedera, 1996; Kung’u 

& Boa, 1997; Schwartz, 

2003 

Erysiphales 

Erysiphe pisi DC. var. pisi

(Vanha) Weltzien 

[Syn: Erysiphe polygoni 

(DC. em. Salm)] 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen, et al., 

1996CABI, 2004; 

HCDA, MOA & JICA; 

2003; Farrell, et al., 

1995; Schwartz, 2003 

Leveillula taurica (Lév.) G. 

Arnaud 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Farr et al 

2003; Kedera, 1996 

Helotiales 

Botryotinia fuckeliana (de 

Bary) Whetzel 

[Syn: Botrytis cinerea (Pers; 

Fr)] 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Kung’u & 

Boa, 1997 

 

10 Genus listed as a nonreportable organism (PestID, 2007). 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 15

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) 

de Bary 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Farrell, et 

al., 1995; Kung’u & 

Boa, 1997 

Hypocreales 

Fusarium oxysporum 

(Schlechtendahl) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Kimenju 

et al,. 2004 

Fusarium pallidoroseum 

[Syn: Fusarium semitectum

(Berk. & Rav)] 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Farr et al 2003; Kedera, 

1996; Kung’u & Boa, 

1997 

Fusarium equisetin (Corda) 

Sacc [Syn Gibberella 

intricans (Wollenw)] 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Farr et al 2003; Kedera, 

1996 

Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. 

phaseoli (J.B. Kendr. & 

W.C. Snyder) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 

1996; CABI, 2004; 

Kedera, 1996 

Fusarium solani f. sp phaseoli 

(Burk) Snyd & Hans

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI 2004; Farrell., et 

al 1995; Kedera, 1996; 

Khare 1985; Otsyula et 

al., 1998; Seif, 2001 

Gibberella avenacea (R.J. 

Cook) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI ,2004; Farr et al 

2003 

Gibberella fujikuroi (Sawada) 

S. Ito (Syn: Fusarium 

moniliforme) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Kedera, 1996; 

Macdonald & 

Chapman, 1997 

Gibberella zeae (Schwein) 

Petch 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Glomerella cingulata

(Stonem) Spauld. & Schrenk 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Myriangiales 

Elsinoe phaseoli (Jenk. in 

Bruner & Jenk.)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen, et al., 1996; 

Farrell, et al., 1995 & 

2004; Kedera, 1996; 

Kung’u & Boa, 1997

Pleosporales 

Cochliobolus sativus (S. Ito & 

Kurib) Drechsler ex Dastur 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Saccharomycetales 

Nematospora coryli (Peglion) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Schwartz, 

2003 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 16

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Sordariales 

Chaetomium spirale Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Kung’u & Boa, 1997

BASIDIOMYCETES: Ceratobasidiales 

Thanatephorus cucumeris

(Frank) Donk (Syn:

Rhizoctonia solani) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen, et al., 1996; 

Farrell, et al 1995; 

Kedera, 1996; Kung’u 

& Boa, 1997; Otsyula et 

al ,. 1998 

BASIDIOMYCETES: Polyporales 

Corticium rolfsii (Curzi) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Farrell et 

al., 1995; Kedera, 1996; 

Kung’u & Boa, 1997 

DOTHIDEOMYCDCETES: Pleosporales

Cochliobolus sativus (S. Ito & 

Kurib.)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; Farr et al. 2007; 

OOMYCETES: Peronosporales

Peronospora spp. Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A HCDA, MOA & JICA, 

2003 

OOMYCETES: Saprolegniales 

Pythium aphanidermatum

(Edson) Fitzp 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Farr et al 

2003; Farrell, et al., 

1995 

Pythium spp. Kenya R Yes No Otsyula et al ., 1998 

UREDINIOMYCETES: Uredinales 

Phakopsora pachyrhizi (Syd. 

& P. Syd.)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Caldwell, & Laing, 

2002; CABI, 2004; 

Hall, 1991; Sinclar & 

Backman, 1989 

Uromyces appendiculatus

(Pers.) Unger 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen, et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; HCDA, 

MOA & JICA, 2003; 

Farrell, et al., 1995; 

Kedera, 1996; Kung’u 

& Boa, 1997; Seif, et al. 

2001; Schwartz, 2003 

Uromyces viciae-fabae (Pers.) 

J. Schröt. 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; HCDA, 

MOA & JICA, 2003; 

Kung’u & Boa, 1997; 

Schwartz, 2003 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 17

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

ZYGOMYCETES: Mucorales

Choanephora cucurbitarum 

(Berk. & Ravenel)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A PestID, 2007; CABI, 

2006; Farr et al. 2007; 

Rhizopus spp. Kenya, 

USA 

L, S Yes No CABI, 2004; Kedera, 

1996; Kung’u & Boa, 

1997 

BACTERIA 

GAMMAPROTEOBACTERIA 

ENTEROBACTERIALES: Enterobacteriaceae 

Serratia marcescens (Bizio) Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 ; Kaaya et 

al., 1993 

PSEUDOMONADALES: Pseudomonadaceae 

Pseudomonas aeruginosa 

(Schroeter) Migula 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Kaaya and 

Darji, 1989 

Pseudomonas marginalis pv. 

marginalis (Brown) Stevens 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Pseudomonas savastanoi pv.

phaseolicola (Burkholder) 

Gardan et al. [Syn: 

Pseudomonas syringae pv. 

phaseolicola (Burkholder) 

Young et al.] 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI 2004; Farrell et 

al., 1995; Kedera, 1996; 

Kung’u & Boa, 1997; 

Seif et.al., 2001; 

Schwartz, 2003 

Pseudomonas syringae pv. 

garcae (Amaral et al) Young 

et al. 

Kenya L, S, Sh Yes No CABI, 2004; Kung’u & 

Boa, 1997 

Pseudomonas syringae (Van 

Hall) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004, 

Pseudomonas syringae pv. 

syringae (Van Hall) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Kung’u & 

Boa, 1997; Schwartz, 

2003 

Pseudomonas syringae pv. 

tabaci (Wolf & Foster) 

Young et al., 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Kung’u & 

Boa, 1997 

Pseudomonas viridiflava

(Burkholder) Dowson 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

RHIZOBIALES: Rhizobiaceae

Rhizobium radiobacter

(Beijerinck & van Delden) 

Young 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 18

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

XANTHOMONADALES: Xanthomonadaceae

Xanthomonas axonopodis pv.

glycines (Nakano) Vauterin 

et al. 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Schwartz, 

2003 

Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. 

phaseoli (Smith) Vauterin et 

al. 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Farrell et 

al 1995; Kedera, 1996 

Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. 

vignicola (Burkholder) 

Vauterin et al. 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Kedera, 1996 

Xanthomonas campestris pv.

campestris (Pammel) 

Dowson 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

SPHINGOBACTERIA

SPHINGOBACTERIALES: Flexibacteraceae

Bacillus cereus (Frankland & 

Frankland) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Bacillus subtilis (Ehrenberg) 

Cohn 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

VIRUSES 

BROMOVIRIDAE: Alfamovirus 

Alfalfa mosaic virus Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; 

BROMOVIRIDAE: Cucumovirus

Cucumber mosaic virus Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; 

BUNYAVIRIDAE 

Potyvirus 

Bean common mosaic necrosis 

virus 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Guzmán 

et al., 1997; Spence & 

Walkey, 1995 

Bean common mosaic virus: Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Farrell et 

al., 1995; Kedera, 1996; 

Seif et al., 2001 

Bean yellow mosaic virus Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Bock et al., 1974; 

CABI, 2004 

Peanut mottle virus Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Bock et al., 1974; 

CABI, 2004 

Tospovirus 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 19

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Tomato spotted wilt virus Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Carlavirus 

Cowpea mild mottle virus Kenya L, S Yes No CABI, 2004 

UNASSIGNED VIRUS FAMILY 

Tobravirus 

Tobacco rattle virus Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Khurana 

&Garg, 2003 

Tobacco Mosaic Virus Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Hollings 

et al,. 1981 

NEMATODA 

ANGUINIDAE 

Ditylenchus dipsaci (Kühn,) 

Filip'ev 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

APHELENCHIDA 

Aphelenchus spp Kenya L,S Yes No Kimenju et al., 1999 & 

2004a 

CRICONEMATIDAE

Criconemella (De Grisse & 

Loof)

Kenya R, S Yes No CABI, 2004; Kimenju 

et al., 1999 & 2004a 

Hemicycliophora spp Kenya R Yes N o Kimenju et al., 1999 & 

2004a 

DOLICHODORIDAE

Tylenchorhynchus spp. Kenya L,R Yes No Hollis, 1962; Kimenju 

et al., 1999, 2004a; 

Schwartz, 2003 

HETERODERIDAE

Heterodera schachtii (A. 

Schmidt)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI Absracts, CABI, 

2004 

HOPLOLAIMIDAE 

Helicotylenchus dihystera 

(Cobb) Sher 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Kimenju 

et al., 2004a & b 

Helicotylenchus multicinctus 

(Cobb) Golden 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Helicotylenchus 

pseudorobustus (Steiner) 

Golden

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Desaeger 

& Rao, 2001 

Rotylenchulus parvus

(Williams) Sher 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Rotylenchulus reniformis

(Linford & Oliveira) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Hollis, 

1962 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 20

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Scutellonema spp. Kenya R Yes No Kimenju et al., 1999 & 

2004a 

Scutellonema brachyurus 

(Steiner) Andrássy 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Desaeger & Rao, 2001 

MELOIDOGYNIDAE

Meloidogyne arenaria (Neal, 

1889) Chitwood 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Meloidogyne incognita 

(Kofoid & White) Chitwood 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; HCDA, 

MOA & JICA, 2003; 

Kedera, 1996; Kimenju 

et al., 2004a & b; 

Mailu, 1996 

Meloidogyne javanica (Treub) 

Chitwood 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Desaeger 

& Rao, 2001; Kedera, 

1996; Kimenju et al., 

1999 & 2004a; Mailu, 

1997 

Meloidogyne hapla 

(Chitwood) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Kedera, 

1996; Kimenju et al., 

1999 & 2004a; 

Sutherland & Kibata, 

1993 

Meloidogyne kikuyuensis (de 

Grisses) 

Kenya R Yes No Mailu, 1996 

Meloidogyne acronea 

(Coetzee) 

Kenya L, R Yes No Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Mailu 

1996 

Meloidogyne africana Kenya L, R Yes No Mailu, 1996 

PRATYLENCHIDAE

Pratylenchus brachyurus

(Godfrey) Filipjev & 

Schuurmans Stekhoven 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Kimenju 

et al., 1998; Kimenju et 

al., 2004a 

Pratylenchus goodeyi (Sher & 

Allen) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; SON, 

1984 

Pratylenchus penetrans 

(Cobb) Filipjev & 

Schuurmans Stekhoven 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Allen et al., 1996; 

CABI, 2004; Hollis 

1962; Kimenju et al., 

2004a 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 21

Pests/ Diseases Distribution Part(s) 

affected1

Quarantine status Follow 

pathway 

References 

Pratylenchus thornei (Sher & 

Allen)

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004; Desaeger 

& Rao 2001 

Pratylenchus vulnus (Allen & 

Jensen) 

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A CABI, 2004 

Radopholus similis (Cobb) 

Thorne

Kenya, 

USA 

N/A No N/A Mailu, 1996; Ngundo & 

Taylor, 1973 

TRICHODORIDAE 

Trichodorus spp Kenya L, R Yes No Kimenju et al., 1999 & 

2004a 

Below we summarized the quarantine pests that are likely to follow the pathway on commercial 

shipments of French beans and runner beans from Kenya (Table 5). These pests are further 

analyzed in this risk assessment. Quarantine pests not included in Table 5 have the potential to 

be detrimental to U.S. agriculture or ecosystems; however, they were not subjected to further 

analysis because they are mainly associated with plant parts other than the parts of the 

commodity being shipped, or they are unlikely to be associated with the commodity during 

transport or processing because of their size, biology, or inherent mobility. 

Biological hazards associated with organisms not identified to the species level are not assessed 

if the genus (or broader taxon) is already present in the United States, because often there are 

many species within a genus, and we cannot know if the unidentified species occurs in the 

United States and, consequently, whether it meets the definition of a quarantine pest for the 

United States. Lack of specific identification may indicate the limits of current taxonomic 

knowledge, the life stage, or the quality of the specimen submitted for identification. By 

necessity, pest risk assessments focus on organisms for which biological information is available. 

Lack of specific identification does not rule out the possibility that a high risk quarantine pest 

was intercepted. Conversely, the development of detailed assessments for known pests that 

inhabit a variety of ecological niches, such as internal fruit feeders or foliage pests, allow 

effective mitigation measures to eliminate the known organisms as well as similar but 

incompletely identified organisms that inhabit the same niche. If pests identified to more specific 

levels (e.g., species) are intercepted in the future, then a re-evaluation of their risk may occur. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 22

Table 5. Quarantine Pests Selected for Further Analysis 

Insect scientific name Taxonomy 

Bactrocera cucurbitae Coquillett Insecta-Diptera-Tephritidae

Chrysodeixis chalcites (Esper) Insecta-Lepidoptera-Noctuidae

Dacus ciliatus Loew Insecta-Diptera-Tephritidae

Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) Insecta-Lepidoptera-Noctuidae

Lampides boeticus Linnaeus Insecta-Lepidoptera-Lycaenidae

Liriomyza huidobrensis (Blanchard) Insecta-Diptera-Agromyzidae

Maruca vitrata Fabricius a Insecta-Lepidoptera-Pyralidae

Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green) Insecta-Hemiptera-Pseudococcidae 

Spodoptera littoralis Boisduval Insecta-Lepidoptera-Noctuidae

Thaumatotibia leucotreta Meyrick Insecta-Lepidoptera-Tortricidae a

 Syn: M. testulalis Fabricius 

2.5. Consequences of Introduction—Economic/Environmental Importance 

Potential consequences of introduction are rated using five risk elements: 

1. Climate-Host Interaction 

2. Host Range 

3. Dispersal Potential 

4. Economic Impact 

5. Environmental Impact 

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

For each risk element, pests are assigned a rating of Low (1 point), Medium (2 points) or High (3 

points) (PPQ, 2000). A Cumulative Risk Rating is then calculated by summing all risk element 

values. The values determined for the Consequences of Introduction for each pest are summarized 

below (Table 6). 

The major sources of uncertainty 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 (Kaplan, 1992; Orr et al., 1993). To address 

this last source of uncertainty, factor lists were interpreted as illustrative and not exhaustive. 

Other traditionally recognized sources of uncertainty are the quality of the biological information 

(Gallegos and 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). 

Bactrocera cucurbitae Coquillett Risk ratings 

Risk Element 1: Climate-Host Interaction 

The current distribution of B. cucurbitae indicates it could survive in USDA Plant 

Hardiness Zones 9 to 11 (CABI, 2006; USDA-NA, 2003). There are hosts present 

within the United States that overlap the at-risk plant hardiness zones (USDA-NA, 

2003; NASS, 2002; NRCS, 2007). 

Medium (2) 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 23

Bactrocera cucurbitae Coquillett Risk ratings 

Risk Element 2: Host Range 

Bactrocera cucurbitae attacks multiple species in multiple plant families (Allwood 

et al., 1999; CABI, 2006). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 3: Dispersal Potential 

Bactrocera cucurbitae is capable of long distance flight, over 10 km, and can 

move long distances via human transport mechanisms (CABI, 2006; Fletcher, 

1989). This species is multivoltine and highly fecund, with over 1,000 eggs/female 

(Fletcher, 1987). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 4: Economic Impact 

Bactrocera cucurbitae larval feeding can reduce crop yield, produce fruit lesions 

and decomposition and result in quarantines and a loss of markets (CABI, 2006). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 5: Environmental Impact 

Bactrocera cucurbitae could impact species listed as Threatened and Endangered 

(USFWS, 2007) and cause the implementation of chemical and/or biological 

control programs (CABI, 2006; Clausen, 1978). 

High (3) 

Chrysodeixis chalcites (Esper) Risk ratings

Risk Element 1: Climate-Host Interaction 

This insect occurs in southern Europe, Canary Islands, Africa, Mauritius, Cape 

Verde Islands, and the Middle East (CABI, 2004). We estimate that this pest can 

establish in USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 8-11, but since Zone 11 is so small we 

still consider this a Medium risk rating. Hosts are present in the United States in 

those plant hardiness zones (NASS, 2002; NRCS, 2007). 

Medium (2) 

Risk Element 2: Host Range 

Chrysodeixis chalcites (Esper) is polyphagous. It is a major pest of Glycine max

(soyabean), Gossypium herbaceum (Arabian cotton), Lycopersicon esculentum

(tomato), Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco), Phaseolus (beans), P. vulgaris (common 

bean), Solanum tuberosum (potato). Other hosts include Arachis hypogaea

(groundnut), Aster, Brassica oleracea var. botrytis (cauliflower), B. oleracea

var. capitata (cabbage), Brassicaceae (cruciferous crops), Capsicum annuum

(bell pepper), Citrus, Cucumis sativus (cucumber), Lactuca sativa (lettuce), 

Lycopersicon pennellii , Medicago sativa (lucerne), Musa (banana), 

Pelargonium (pelargoniums), Triticum aestivum (wheat), and Zea mays (maize) 

(CABI, 2003). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 3: Dispersal Potential 

Chrysodeixis chalcites is a multivoltine species, with up to eight or nine 

generations per year (CABI 2004). Females lay from 14 to 281 eggs but are 

capable of laying more eggs, as reported by Gasim and Younis (1989) (i.e., 385, 

640 and 405 eggs at 20, 25 and 30°C, respectively). This organism can be 

carried long distances via human-mediated trade of plants and plant products 

with fruits and/or leaves (CABI, 2006). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 4: Economic Impact 

Chrysodeixis chalcites is a polyphagous multivoltine species that feeds on the 

High (3) 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 24

Chrysodeixis chalcites (Esper) Risk ratings

foliage and fruit of vegetable, fruit and ornamental crops (CABI, 2004). It is one 

of the most serious lepidopteran pests in many countries, although quantitative 

data measuring damage is lacking (CABI, 2004). It is one of the most important 

noctuid pests of fodder crops and also feeds on maize, potato and soybean 

(CABI, 2006). Markets can also be lost due to quarantine restrictions designed 

to keep the pest out (CABI, 2005). 

Risk Element 5: Environmental Impact 

This is a polyphagous insect, and is capable of attacking various Endangered 

and Threatened species, e.g., Solanum, Trifolium spp. (USFWS, 2006). If this 

pest is introduced to the United States, chemical and biological control are likely 

to be incorporated into agricultural programs. 

High (3) 

Dacus ciliatus Loew Risk ratings

Risk Element 1: Climate-Host Interaction 

The current distribution of D. ciliatus indicates it could survive in USDA Plant 

Hardiness Zones 9 to 11 (CABI, 2006; USDA-NA, 2003), and hosts are present in 

those zones (USDA-NA, 2003; NASS, 2002; NRCS, 2007). 

Medium (2) 

Risk Element 2: Host Range 

Dacus ciliatus attacks multiple species in multiple plant families (CABI, 2006). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 3: Dispersal Potential

Dacus ciliatus is probably capable of long distance flight, i.e. over 10 km, and can 

move long distances via human transport mechanisms (CABI, 2006; CABI and 

EPPO, 1997; Fletcher, 1987, 1989). This species is multivoltine and highly fecund, 

i.e., over 1,000 eggs/female (Fletcher, 1987). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 4: Economic Impact

Dacus ciliatus larval feeding can reduce crop yield, damage fruit and result in lost 

markets (CABI, 2006). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 5: Environmental Impact 

Dacus ciliatus could impact species listed as Threatened and Endangered (USFWS, 

2007) and cause the implementation of chemical control programs if introduced 

(CABI, 2006). 

High (3) 

Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) Risk ratings

Risk Element 1: Climate-Host Interaction 

This insect is widely distributed and occurs throughout Europe, the Middle East, 

Central and South Asia, the Far East, Africa, Australia, and Oceania (CABI, 

2004). Based on this distribution, we estimate establishment is possible in 

USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 5-11. There are hosts present in the United States in 

those plant hardiness zones (NASS, 2002; NRCS, 2007). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 2: Host Range 

Helicoverpa armigera is polyphagous. It is a major pest of cotton (Gossypium

spp.), pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan), chickpea (Cicer arietinum), tomato 

High (3) 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 25

Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) Risk ratings

(Lycopersicum esculentum), sorghum (Sorghum spp.) and cowpea (Vigna

unguiculata). Other hosts include groundnut (Arachis hypogaea), okra 

(Abelmoschus esculentus), peas (Pisum sativum), soybeans (Glycine max), other 

legumes, tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum), potatoes (Solanum tuberosum), maize 

(Zea mays), flax (Linum usitatissimum), a number of fruits (Prunus spp. and 

Citrus spp.), forest trees and a range of vegetable crops (CABI, 2003). 

Risk Element 3: Dispersal Potential 

Females in south Africa lay an average of 730 eggs, with a maximum of 1,600 

eggs over an oviposition period that can vary from 10-23 days (Matthews and 

Tunstall, 1994); females may produce up to 11 generations per year in tropical 

climates (Shanower et al., 1999). Larvae have limited mobility, but adults are 

capable of long distance flight (CABI, 2003; Farrow and Daly, 1987). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 4: Economic Impact 

Helicoverpa armigera is a pest of major importance in agricultural settings 

where it occurs, damaging a wide variety of food, fiber, oilseed, fodder and 

horticultural crops (CABI, 2003). Insecticides routinely have been used for 

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

H. armigera is an A2 pest for Europe, its establishment in the Continental 

United States could lead to loss of export markets (EPPO, 2003). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 5: Environmental Impact 

A wide range of wild plant species support larval development. As a 

polyphagous insect, it is capable of attacking various Endangered and 

Threatened species, e.g., Amaranthus spp. (CABI, 2003). If this pest is 

introduced to the United States, chemical and biological control are likely to be 

incorporated into agricultural programs. 

High (3) 

Lampides boeticus Linnaeus Risk ratings 

Risk Element 1: Climate-Host Interaction 

This pest is widespread and has been recorded in southern Europe, Africa, 

Oceania, the Middle East and southern Asia. Based on this distribution, we 

estimate it could become established in USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 5-11. 

There are hosts present within the United States that overlap the at-risk plant 

hardiness zones (NASS, 2002; NRCS, 2007). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 2: Host Range 

This insect feeds on multiple species in the genera: Cajanus, Canavalia, Cicer, 

Crotalaria, Glycine, Lablab, Medicago, Phaseolus, Pisum, Psophocarpus, 

Pueraria, Sesbania, Vicia, and Vigna (CABI, 2004). All of these genera are in 

the family Fabaceae, therefore, we rated L. boeticus medium. 

Medium (2) 

Risk Element 3: Dispersal Potential 

Lampides boeticus is a noted migrant, capable of long distance movement, often 

involving vast numbers of individuals (CABI, 2004). In the most optimal 

climates, the pest completes its life cycle in 20-53 days depending on the 

season, with females producing 30-120 eggs in 2-3 days (PPQ, 2002). 

High (3) 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 26

Lampides boeticus Linnaeus Risk ratings 

Risk Element 4: Economic Impact 

Lampides boeticus is usually a minor pest, but potentially serious (CABI 2004). 

It is a major pest of garden beans and, if not controlled, can cause considerable 

damage to crops (CABI, 2006). 

Medium (2) 

Risk Element 5: Environmental Impact 

Lampides boeticus feeds on species in the genera Crotalaria and Lupinus 

(CABI, 2006), which contain Endangered and Threatened species in areas of the 

United States outside Hawaii (USFWS, 2006), where L. boeticus is already 

established. Introduction of this pest into the United States could possibly lead 

to initiation of chemical and/or biological control programs. 

High (3) 

Liriomyza huidobrensis (Blanchard) Risk ratings 

Risk Element 1: Climate-Host Interaction 

Liriomyza huidobrensis is polyphagous (CABI, 2006; Steck, 2004). 

Consequently, we assumed its United States distribution would be limited by 

climate and conducted a geospatial analysis that estimated areas at risk for its 

permanent establishment as a pest (Appendix 5). We considered areas where L. 

huidobrensis could complete nine or more generations (≥ 2,520 DD at a base 

temperature of 7.2°C) and winter temperatures did not consistently reach its 

supercooling point (-19.55°C) to be at risk (Luo et al., 2002; PERAL/CIPM, 

2008; Wang et al., 2000; Yue and Bao, 2006). Our geospatial analysis estimated 

that L. huidobrensis could establish in USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 5 to 10 in 

the conterminous United States (USDA-NA, 2003). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 2: Host Range 

Liriomyza huidobrensis feeds on multiple plant species in multiple families 

(CABI, 2006, Steck, 2004). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 3: Dispersal Potential 

Liriomyza huidobrensis can exhibit nine generations per year in greenhouse 

conditions (Yue and Bao, 2006), a fecundity of 100 eggs per female (Hincapie 

et al., 1993) and can be transported long distances in agricultural commodities 

(PestID, 2007; Steck, 2004). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 4: Economic Impact 

Liriomyza huidobrensis is a major crop pest that mines leaves, pods and stems. 

This feeding causes aesthetic damage, reduced growth and host mortality 

(CABI, 2006; Steck, 2004). It is also a quarantine pest that could a loss of 

markets if introduced (PestID, 2007; CABI, 2006; Steck, 2004) 

High (3) 

Risk Element 5: Environmental Impact 

Liriomyza huidobrensis feeds on species in the genera Amaranthus, Cucurbita

and Solanum (CABI, 2006; USFWS, 2007). These genera contain species listed 

as endangered or threatened in the United States (USFWS, 2007). The 

introduction of L. huidobrensis could also cause the implementation of chemical 

and/or biological control programs (CABI, 2006). 

High (3) 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 27

Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green) Risk ratings 

Risk Element 1: Climate-Host Interaction 

Chong et al. (2008) generated a degree day model (Tmin = 14.5°C; Tmax = 

35°C and 347 DD per generation) that predicted M. hirsutus could complete at 

least one generation throughout the conterminous United States (Appendix F). 

Based on this model, we estimated that M. hirsutus could establish in USDA 

plant hardiness zones 2 to 10 in the conterminous United States. There are hosts 

present within the United States that overlap the at-risk plant hardiness zones 

(CABI, 2007; NASS, 2002). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 2: Host Range 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus is highly polyphagous and feeds on multiple species 

in multiple plant families (CABI, 2007). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 3: Dispersal Potential 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus exhibits up to 15 generations per year and females can 

lay up to 600 eggs (Hoy et al., 2006). It can also disperse long distance via 

human mediated transport (CABI, 2007; Dale and Maddison, 1984). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 4: Economic Impact 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus feeding can cause deformed fruits and shoots, stunted 

growth, sooty mold and crop mortality (CABI, 2007; Hoy et al., 2006). Its 

introduction could also result in quarantines (CABI, 2007).

High (3) 

Risk Element 5: Environmental Impact 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus can cause major ecological damage (CABI, 2007). It 

also feeds on plants in the genera: Abutilon, Clitoria, Helianthus, Hibiscus, 

Manihot, Prunus, Rhododendron and Ziziphus (CABI, 2007). These genera 

contain species listed as endangered or threatened in the United States (USFWS, 

2008). The introduction of M. hirsutus could also cause the implementation of 

biological control programs (CABI, 2007; Hoy et al., 2006; Kairo et al., 2000). 

High (3) 

Maruca vitrata Fabricius (Syn: Maruca testulalis Fabricius) Risk ratings

Risk Element 1: Climate-Host Interaction 

Maruca vitrata is found associated with legumes throughout the tropics (CABI, 

2003). Although the insect has been moved with legumes to other areas of the 

world, it does not survive in temperate climates (CABI, 2003). The tropics 

represent USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 10-13, but because only zones 10-11 are 

present in the United States, and because Zone 11 is so small, we gave a Low 

rating for this risk element. There are hosts present within the United States that 

overlap the at-risk plant hardiness zones (NASS, 2002; NRCS, 2007). 

Low (1) 

Risk Element 2: Host Range 

This insect feeds on multiple species in the genera: Caesalpinia, Cajanus, 

Canavalia, Crotalaria, Derris, Fabaceae, Glycine, Lablab, Phaseolus, 

Pueraria, Tephrosia, and Vigna (CABI, 2003). All of these genera are contained 

in the family Fabaceae, so M. vitrata is rated medium for host range. 

Medium (2) 

Risk Element 3: Dispersal Potential 

Females can lay up to 400 eggs, in small batches on flowers, buds, or pods of 

High (3) 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 28

Maruca vitrata Fabricius (Syn: Maruca testulalis Fabricius) Risk ratings

the host plant (Shanower et al., 1999). Adults live from five to seven days (Karel 

and Autrique, 1989), but over several generations the insect is capable of 

migrating from the coastal savannah in the south of Benin to the dry savannah in 

the north in one year (Tamo et al., 2002), a range of over 100 miles. 

Risk Element 4: Economic Impact 

This insect is considered one of the most injurious pests of beans in Hawaii 

(Ferguson, 1983). In conjunction with other pod-boring insects, M. vitrata

reduced seed production in pigeonpea by 25.7 to 62.7 percent in Kenya (OkeyoOwour and Khamala, 1980) and was reported to cause up to 31 percent injury in 

P. vulgaris (Karel, 1985). The establishment of this pest in the United States 

could lead to the loss of export markets, particularly Europe. 

High (3) 

Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact 

Maruca vitrata feeds on species in the genus Crotalaria (CABI, 2006), which 

has an Endangered species in Florida (USFWS, 2006). Its introduction into the 

United States could start chemical or biological control programs (CABI, 2007). 

High (3) 

Spodoptera littoralis (Boisduval) Risk ratings 

Risk Element 1: Climate-Host Interaction 

The insect is recorded in Africa, southern Europe, and the Middle East (CABI, 

2003). Therefore, we estimate it could become established in USDA Plant 

Hardiness Zones 8-11, but because Zone 11 is so small this equates to only a 

Medium risk. There are hosts present within the United States that overlap the atrisk plant hardiness zones (NASS, 2002; NRCS, 2007). 

Medium (2) 

Risk Element 2: Host Range 

The host range of S. littoralis covers over 40 families, containing at least 87 

species of plants of economic importance (CABI, 2003), among them cotton 

(Gossypium spp.), tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum), potato (Solanum tuberosum), 

tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum), onion (Allium cepa), citrus (Citrus spp.), 

beans (Phaseolus spp.), carrots (Daucus carota), peppers (Capsicum annuum), 

grapes (Vitis spp.), alfalfa (Medicago sativa) and various grasses (CABI, 2003). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 3: Dispersal Potential 

Noctuids are well known for their long-dispersal capabilities. Adults fly at 

night. The flight range during a 4-hour-period can be up to 1.5 km (CABI, 

2003). In the most optimal climates, the pest can have up to 7 overlapping 

generations per year, with an average of 20-1000 eggs produced by each female 

(CABI, 2003). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 4: Economic Impact 

This pest is one of the most destructive agricultural lepidopterans in its tropical/ 

subtropical range (CABI, 2003). It attacks several economically important crops 

throughout the year. Spodoptera littoralis lowers crop yield, increases 

production costs, and causes a loss of markets as a new quarantine pest. 

High (3) 

Risk Element 5: Environmental Impact 

Spodoptera littoralis feeds on species in the following genera that also contain 

High (3) 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 29

Spodoptera littoralis (Boisduval) Risk ratings 

Endangered and Threatened species: Allium, Solanum, Vigna, Amaranthus, 

Prunus, Hibiscus, Trifolium and Quercus (CABI, 2003; USFWS, 2002). Host 

shifts could occur, and S. littoralis could begin feeding on one or more of the 

Threatened or Endangered species. Introduction of this pest into the United 

States could lead to initiation of chemical and/or biological control programs. 

Thaumatotibia leucotreta Meyrick Risk ratings 

Risk Element 1: Climate-Host Interaction 

Thaumatotibia leucotreta’s current distribution indicates that it could establish in 

USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 9 to 11 in the United States (CABI, 2006; Maxwell, 

2001; USDA-NA, 2003). Hosts are present in the United States in these zones 

(NASS, 2002; NRCS, 2007). 

Medium (2) 

Risk Element 2: Host Range

Thaumatotibia leucotreta attacks over 70 types of plant in multiple families 

(CABI, 2006). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 3: Dispersal Potential 

Thaumatotibia leucotreta exhibits multiple generations per year and females can 

oviposit between 100 and 400 eggs (CABI, 2006; Daiber, 1980). It can also move 

in the fruit, pods and flowers of agricultural commodities (CABI, 2006). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 4: Economic Impact 

Thaumatotibia leucotreta has caused severe crop losses (CABI, 2006; Glas, 1991, 

Reed, 1974). Larval feeding can result in premature fruit ripening and external 

damage (CABI, 2006). If introduced into the United States, T. leucotreta could 

cause a loss of domestic and/or foreign markets (PestID, 2006). 

High (3) 

Risk Element 5: Environmental Impact

Thaumatotibia leucotreta could: 1) directly impact species that are listed as 

Threatened and Endangered by U.S. federal agencies (USFWS, 2007) and 2) cause 

the implementation of chemical and/or biological control programs (Moore et al., 

2004; Newton, 1987). 

High (3) 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 30

Table 6. Risk Ratings for Consequences of Introduction for P. vulgaris and P. coccineus from 

Kenya 

Pest Risk element 

Climate/ 

Host 

interaction

Host 

range 

Dispersal 

potential

Economic 

impact 

Environmental 

impact 

Cumulative 

Risk Ratingsa

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

Chrysodeixis chalcites Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (14) 

Dacus ciliatus Loew Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (14) 

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

Lampides boeticus High (3) Med (2) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (13) 

Liriomyza huidobrensis High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (15) 

Maconellicoccus 

hirsutus 

High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (15) 

Maruca vitrata Low (1) Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) Medium (12) 

Spodoptera littoralis Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (14) 

Thaumatotibia 

leucotreta 

Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (14) 

a Low is 5-8 points, Medium is 9-12 points and High is 13-15 points 

2.6. Likelihood of Introduction—Quantity Imported and Pest Opportunity 

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

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

the pathway (PPQ, 2000) (Table 7). 

2.6.1. Quantity annually imported 

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

country, then converted into standard units of 40-foot-long shipping containers. The Kenyan 

government expects to import 800 tons of French and runner beans into the United States annually. 

Assuming a capacity of roughly 27.5 tons per sea container, this volume translates into 29 

containers (KEPHIS, 2006), which is a Medium risk volume of import. 

2.6.2. Survive postharvest treatment 

The Kenya government wants to export French and runner beans as pre-packs containing French 

beans only or as a mixture with other vegetable, ready-to-eat, individual meals. The quality 

standards are very high for this market. According to the Fresh Produce Exporters Association of 

Kenya (FPEAK), the produce will be graded and must meet the following specifications to be 

shipped: mid to dark green in color, firm, turgid, breaking with a snap, stringless, calyx present 

and pest and disease free. Fruit exhibiting the following quality defects are to be culled: 

mechanical damage, bruising & scarring, disease and pests on pods , pest and disease damaged 

pods, dehydration, excessive curvature, seediness, pinched or broken tips, or adjoined pods. 

(COLEACP/PIP, 2005). The pods are to be blast-cooled for one hour on arrival at intake, or long 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 31

enough to bring temperature down to 6°C. They will be put into cold storage immediately 

following cooling, and maintained at 6-8oC (COLEACP/PIP, 2005). 

Insects are reviewed below with special attention to how apparent is the damage that they cause. 

Chrysodeixis chalcites excavates deep into pods, sometimes cutting them in two and the damage 

is borne externally and are visible to naked eye (CABI 2004) so it is rated Low to survive 

postharvest treatment. 

Several of the pests produce obvious damage to bean pods, as described following, and so we 

rated them Low risk to survive postharvest treatment. Helicoverpa armigera produces brown or 

black lesions when it feeds internally on bean pods (CABI, 2003). Lampides boeticus feeds on 

seeds in the pod and produces frass which is deposited at one end of the pod, where it may cause 

decay and show up as dark discoloration (CABI 2004). Liriomyza huidobrensis adult females 

produce punctures that are visible to the eye and the larva generate noticeable leaf mines lined 

with frass (CABI, 2006; Steck, 2004). Maruca vitrata produces unsightly holes and masses of 

wet excrement (Ferguson, 1983). 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus is an external feeder and can produce a woolly wax covering, 

honeydew, sooty mold and fruit deformities that could be detected by visual inspection (CABI, 

2007). Small infestations may be difficult to detect without a light microscope but we considered 

the washing and culling process likely to remove them (CABI, 2007; Neeley, 2006). Because of 

this, we ranked M. hirsutus Low to survive post harvest treatment. 

Spodoptera littoralis produces obvious exit holes and frass (CABI, 2003) [Note: Exited larvae 

will not follow the pathway]. This insect is rated Medium for this risk element because pods 

without exit holes may be more difficult to see. 

Thaumatotibia leucotreta is an internal feeder and does not generally cause obvious symptoms 

(CABI, 2006). Bactrocera cucurbitae and Dacus ciliatus are also internal feeders and could be 

difficult to detect. Consequently we rated these pests High for this risk element. 

2.6.3. Survive shipment 

Beans from Kenya would be transported under refrigeration and airfreighted to the United States 

(Appendix 2). The exact climatic conditions during shipment are not known, however. For green 

beans, P. vulgaris, in the United States, McGregor (1987) recommends temperatures of 4-7o

C (40-

45o

F) and 95 percent relative humidity to maintain the quality of the commodity during transport 

and storage. If properly packaged and held close to the recommended storage temperature and 

relative humidity, the time available for transit and storage is about 7-10 days (McGregor, 1987). 

Without detailed information on the transport of Kenyan beans, we assumed that the transport 

conditions would be close to those recommended by McGregor (1987). At temperatures of 4-7°C, 

we expect all the insects to survive; therefore we rated all insects High for this sub-element. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 32

2.6.4. Not detected at port-of-entry 

The postharvest procedures described above are basically inspections of the commodity to cull 

damaged or infested produce. The ratings for Not Detected at Port of Entry are, therefore, 

identical to those for Survive Postharvest Treatment for the internal feeders (see above; Table 7). 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus is an external feeder and can produce a woolly wax covering, 

honeydew, sooty mold and fruit deformities that could be detected by visual inspection (CABI, 

2007). However, small infestations may be difficult to detect without a light microscope (CABI, 

2007; Neeley, 2006). Because of this, we ranked M. hirsutus Medium to not be detected at the 

port of entry. 

2.6.5. Moved to suitable habitat 

The likelihood that a pest will be moved to an area with a suitable environment for survival is 

dependent on the potential distribution of markets for the host commodity throughout the country 

and the presence of suitable habitats for the pest. Because green beans are widely accepted across 

American society, we assumed they will be distributed throughout the entire United States. 

Consequently, evaluation of this sub-element focused on environmental/climate suitability, and 

the risk ratings for this sub-element were set to the same as the Climate-Host Interaction risk 

ratings in Consequences of Introduction (see above; Tables 6 and 7).

2.6.6. Contact with host material 

Even if the final destination of infested commodities is suitable for pest survival, pests must still 

come in contact with suitable host material. This process is dependent on two factors, the 

presence of host material in the region, and the pest’s potential for dispersal. 

Availability of hosts varies among the arthropods in their potential geographic range in the United 

States. Hosts of the very polyphagous species Bactrocera cucurbitae, Chrysodeixis chalcites, Dacus 

ciliatus, Helicoverpa armigera, Liriomyza huidobrensis, Spodoptera littoralis, and Thaumatotibia 

leucotreta, include temperate-zone or widely cultivated plants that should be available throughout 

their potential United States range. The host ranges of Lampides boeticus and Maruca vitrata are 

more limited; therefore, these insects would have less chance of encountering and colonizing hosts 

compared to the polyphagous species. 

The vegetables to be imported are for human consumption, and are, therefore, unlikely to come 

into direct, or near contact with susceptible hosts. The commodity will be refrigerated until it 

reaches the end-user. Pest insects cannot come into contact with host material unless food is 

discarded. Uneaten food could be disposed of as garbage or in a compost pile outside of the 

home. Only if the commodity is exposed to the outside in garbage or compost would insects be 

able to find hosts assuming that they could complete their development in a decaying product. 

Chrysodeixis chalcites, Helicoverpa armigera, Lampides boeticus, Maruca vitrata, and 

Spodoptera littoralis have similar life histories. It is unknown whether they can complete their 

development on rotting fruit alone; but all these species are mobile as larvae and would likely 

leave the host plant to find a new host, especially as fifth and sixth instar larvae (CABI, 2003). 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 33

Thaumatotibia leucotreta is an internal feeder and exits the host prior to pupation (CABI, 2006). 

If these Lepidoptera species survive to the adult stage and mate, they can readily fly and could 

presumably find oviposition sites. 

Liriomyza huidobrensis females can oviposit multiple eggs in the same area of the host plant and 

complete its lifecycle in plant debris or soil (Burgio et al., 2005; CABI, 2004; Steck, 2004). 

Liriomyza huidobrensis is also polyphagous, cold hardy and capable of flight (CABI, 2004; 

Vidal, 2005; Wang et al., 2000). These characteristics indicate that multiple adults could emerge 

from discarded pods, mate and locate suitable hosts in climates that are conducive for 

establishment. 

Bactrocera cucurbitae and Dacus ciliatus also have similar biologies. Multiple fruit flies often 

infest an individual fruit, so there is a potential for larvae to emerge as adults and find mates. 

They are capable of long distance travel via flight (CABI, 2006; Fletcher, 1989). 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus is polyphagous (CABI, 2007). However, it naturally disperses 

passively by wind in the crawler stage and may have a difficult time acquiring a host. 

Based on this evidence (host ranges, host availability, biological attributes), we rated Lampides 

boeticus, Maruca vitrata and Maconellicoccus hirsutus Medium; and Bactrocera cucurbitae, 

Chrysodeixis chalcites, Dacus ciliatus, Helicoverpa armigera, Liriomyza huidobrensis, Spodoptera 

littoralis, and Thaumatotibia leucotreta High for their ability to make contact with host material. 

Table 7. Risk Ratings for Likelihood of Introduction. The rating for “Quantity Imported 

Annually” was Medium (2) for all pests.

Pest Survive 

Postharvest 

Treatment 

Survive 

Shipment 

Not 

Detected 

at Port 

of Entry

Moved to 

Suitable 

Habitat 

Contact 

with Host 

Material 

Cumulative 

Risk Ratingsa

Bactrocera cucurbitae High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (16) 

Chrysodeixis chalcites Low (1) High (3) Low (1) Med (2) High (3) Medium (12)

Dacus ciliatus High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (16)

Helicoverpa armigera Low (1) High (3) Low (1) High (3) High (3) Medium (13) 

Lampides boeticus Low (1) High (3) Low (1) High (3) Med (2) Medium (12)

Liriomyza huidobrensis Low (1) High (3) Low (1) High (3) High (3) Medium (13)

Maruca vitrata Low (1) High (3) Low (1) Low (1) Med (2) Medium (10)

Maconellicoccus hirsutus Low (1) High (3) Med (2) High (3) Med (2) Medium (13)

Spodoptera littoralis Med (2) High (3) Med (2) Med (2) High (3) Medium (14)

Thaumatotibia leucotreta High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (16) a

 Low is 6-9 points, Medium is 10-14 points, and High is 15-18 points 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 34

2.7. Conclusion—Pest Risk Potential and Pests Requiring Phytosanitary Measures 

The summation of the values for the Consequences of Introduction and the Likelihood of 

Introduction yields Pest Risk Potential values (Table 8). This is an estimate of the risks 

associated with this importation. 

The risk assessment identified ten quarantine pests that are likely to follow the pathway of 

French beans and runner beans from Kenya into the United States: Bactrocera cucurbitae, 

Chrysodeixis chalcites, Dacus ciliatus, Helicoverpa armigera, Lampides boeticus, Liriomyza 

huidobrensis, Maruca vitrata, Maconellicoccus hirsutus, Spodoptera littoralis, and

Thaumatotibia leucotreta. We estimated that L. boeticus and M. vitrata have a Medium Pest Risk 

Potential, and that B. cucurbitae, D. ciliatus, C. chalcites, H. armigera, L. huidobrensis, M. 

hirsutus, S. littoralis, and T. leucotreta have a High Pest Risk Potential. 

According to PPQ (2000), pests with a Low Pest Risk Potential do not typically require 

mitigation measures, other than port-of-arrival inspection. A value within the Medium range 

indicates that specific phytosanitary measures may be necessary. A rating in the High range 

indicates that specific phytosanitary measures, supplemental to port-of-arrival inspection, are 

strongly recommended. Risk mitigation options for the quarantine pests of concern associated 

with beans from Kenya are listed in Appendix 3. We note that whereas the evidence does suggest 

that current grading procedures (due to quality, not phytosanitary considerations) are highly 

effective and do remove most of the pest of concern; they were not deemed sufficient by 

themselves to address all identified risks. We agree with the trip report (cited in the Appendix) 

that suggests supplementary mitigation measures, including destructive sampling and others, 

may be necessary in addition to the system currently in place. 

A detailed examination and choice of appropriate phytosanitary measures to mitigate pest risk is 

undertaken as part of the pest risk management phase and is not discussed in this document. 

Table 8. Pest Risk Potentials 

Pest Consequences 

of Introduction 

Likelihood of 

Introduction 

Pest Risk Potentiala

Bactrocera cucurbitae High (14) High (16) High (30) 

Chrysodeixis chalcites High (14) Medium (12) High (26) 

Dacus ciliatus High (14) High (16) High (30) 

Helicoverpa armigera High (15) Medium (13) High (28) 

Lampides boeticus High (13) Medium (12) Medium (25) 

Liriomyza huidobrensis High (15) Medium (13) High (28) 

Maruca vitrata High (13) Medium (10) Medium (23) 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus High (15) Medium (13) High (28) 

Spodoptera littoralis High (14) Medium (14) High (28) 

Thaumatotibia leucotreta High (14) High (16) High (30) a Low is 11-18 points, Medium is 19-26 points, and High is 27-33 points 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 35

3. Contributors 

Authors (original draft):

Chagema J. Kedera (PhD), Managing Director, KEPHIS 

Esther Kimani (PhD), OIC Plant Quarantine Station KEPHIS 

Philip Njoroge, KEPHIS 

Isaac Macharia, KEPHIS 

Samuel Muchemi, KEPHIS 

Benson Kuria, KEPHIS 

Cooperator: 

Lloyd Garcia, USDA APHIS / USAID REDSO 

Reviewers (also development of final draft): 

Glenn Fowler, USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST-PERAL 

Charles Thayer, NCSU-CIPM 

Leah Millar, USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST-PERAL 

Ron Sequeira, USDA-APHIS 

4. Literature Cited 

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

Notice of Quarantine). 

7 CFR § 319.56-48. 2008. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 7, Part 319.56-48 (7 CFR § 

319.56-48 – Conditions governing the entry of baby squash and baby courgettes from 

Zambia). 

Abate, T., and J.K.O. Ampofo. 1996. Insect pests of beans in Africa: their ecology and 

management. Annual Review of Entomology 41:45-73. 

Ahmad, F. 1998. Plant protection strategies for cotton in Pakistan. Pakistan Entomologist 

20(1/2):110-115. 

Allen, D.J., J.K.O. Ampofo, and C.S. Wortmann. 1996. Pests, Diseases, and Nutritional 

Disorders of the Common Bean In Africa: A Field Guide. CIAT, Cali Colombia 

Allwood, A.J., A. Chinajariyawong, S. Kritsaneepaiboon, R.A.I. Drew, E.L. Hamacek, D.L. 

Hancock, C. Hengsawad, J.C. Jipanin, M. Jirasurat, C.K. Krong, C.T.S. Leong, S. 

Vijaysegaran. 1999. Host plant records for fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Southeast 

Asia. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology. 47(Supplement 7):1-92. 

Ampofo, K. 1994. Field Pests of Bean in Africa. CIAT, Cali Colombia. 

Ampofo, J.K.O., Z.T. Dabrowski, and F.O. Omolo. 1986. Registration of germplasm line in 

maize. Crop Science 26 (3):650. 

Anyango, J.J. 2001. A Management strategy for mites and the potential for biological control in 

flower production. Insect Science and Its Application 23 (1):9-13. 

Baliddawa, C.W. 1988. The effect of crop microenvironment on the pea leaf weevil's behaviour: 

an explanation for weevil departure from diverse cropping systems. Insect Science and its 

Application. 9(4): 509-514. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 36

Ben-Dov, Y. 1994. A systematic catalogue of the mealybugs of the world (Insecta: Homoptera: 

Coccoidea: Pseudococcidae and Putoidae) with data on geographical distribution, host 

plants, biology and economic importance. 686 pp. 

Berti, N. 1990. Contribution to the study of Afrotropical Galerucinae. IX. The genus 

Aulacophora Chevrolat, description of a new genus, Chosnia gen. Nov. (Coleoptera, 

Chrysomelidae). Journal of African Zoology. 104(2): 109-126. 

Bier, V. M. 1999. Challenges to the acceptance of probabilistic risk analysis. Risk Analysis. 

19(4): 703-710. 

Bock, K.R., L. Magua, E.J. Guthrie, H.Y. Kulkarni, and E.M. Gathuru. 1974. Annual Report 

East African Agriculture and Forestry Research Organization, Record of Research, for 

1972. 

Bohlen, E. 1973. Crop pests in Tanzania and their control. Verlag, Berlin, Germany. 142 pp. 

Burgio, G.; A. Lanzoni, A. Masetti, and F. Manucci. 2005. Spatial patterns and sampling plan for 

Liriomyza huidobrensis (Diptera: Agromyzidae) and related parasitoids on lettuce. 

Environmental Entomology. 34(1): 178-183. 

CABI. 2003. Crop Protection Compendium, 2003 ed. CAB International, Wallingford, U.K. 

CABI. 2004. Crop Protection Compendium, 2004 ed. CAB International, Wallingford, U.K. 

CABI. 2005. Crop Protection Compendium, 2005 ed. CAB International, Wallingford, U.K. 

CABI. 2006. Crop Protection Compendium, 2006 ed. CAB International, Wallingford, U.K. 

CABI. 2007. Crop Protection Compendium, 2007 ed. CAB International, Wallingford, U.K. 

CABI and EPPO. 1997. Quarantine Pests for Europe, Second Edition: Data sheets on quarantine 

pests for the European Union and for the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection 

Organization. CAB International (CABI) and the European and Mediterranean Plant 

Protection Organization (EPPO), Oxon, UK. 

CABI and EPPO. 1997a. Data sheets on quarantine pests: Dacus ciliatus. 4 pp. 

CABI and EPPO. 2005. Citrus leprosis ‘rhabdovirus’. Data sheet on quarantine pests. 

http://www. eppo.org/QUARANTINE/virus/ Citrus_leprosies_virus/CILV00_ds.pdf. 

Caldwell, P. and M. Laing. 2002. Soybean Rust- A new disease on the move. 

http:///www/saspp.org/archived_articles/FeatureMarch.php. 

Carcasson, R.H. 1968. (Reprint 1976 by E.W. Classey ltd, 2nd edition) Revised catalogue of the 

African Sphingidae (Lepidoptera) with descriptions of the East African species. Journal 

of the East Africa Natural History Society and National Museum. 26(3): 1-115. 

Careta, G., E. Piontelli, A.P. Maria, and G. Delfrate. 1999. Some filamentious fungi on grassland 

vegetation from Kenya. Mycopathologia 145;155-169. 

Chong, J.H., A.L. Roda, and C.M. Mannion. 2008. Life history of the mealybug, 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae), at constant temperatures. 

Environmental Entomology. 37(2): 323-332. 

CIE. 1966. Distribution Maps of Plant Pests. No. 219. Wallingford, UK: CAB International. 

CIE. 1969. Distribution maps of plant pests. No. 20. Wallingford, UK. CAB International 

CIE. 1979. Myzus persicae Sulzer. Distribution Maps of Pests, Map 45. CAB International. 

CIE. 1986. Polyphagotarsonemus latus Banks. Distribution Maps of Pests, Map 191. CAB 

International. 

CIE. 1995. Lampides boeticus Linnaeus. Distribution Maps of Pests, Map 459. CAB 

International. 

CIE. 1995. Bactrocera (Zeugodacus) cucurbitae (Coquillett). Distribution Maps of Pests, Map 

64. CAB International. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 37

Clausen, C.P. 1978. Tephritidae (Trypetidae, Trupaneidae), In: Clausen, C.P. (ed.) Introduced 

Parasites and Predators of Arthropod Pests and Weeds: A World Review. Agricultural 

Handbook, United States Department of Agriculture. 480:320-335. 

COLEACP/ PIP 2005. French bean Technical itinerary. Pesticide Initiative Programme (PIP) 

Colpetzer, K. 2007. Personal communication with Keith Colpetzer, USDA-APHIS-PPQ New 

Pest Advisory Group (NPAG) Executive Secretary, on September 21, 2007. 

CPHST. 2008a. Biological and Taxonomic Support (BATS) Database. Center for Plant Health 

Science and Technology (CPHST), Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory. 

https://www.peral.org/BATS/index.cfm?CFID=928795&CFTOKEN=45278576. 

(Archived at PERAL). 

CPHST. 2008b. Importation of fine bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L., from Zambia into the 

Continental United States; A qualitative, pathway-initiated risk assessment Rev. 004. 

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

Analysis Laboratory. 30 pp. 

Daiber, C.C. 1980. A study of the biology of the false codling moth Cryptophlebia leucotreta 

(Meyr.): the adult and generations during the year. Phytophylactica, 12(4):187-193. 

Dale, P.S. and Maddison, P.A. 1984. Transport services as an aid to insect dispersal in the South 

Pacific. Commerce and the spread of pests and disease vectors. pp: 225-256 

Desaeger J., and M.R. Rao. 2001. The potential of mixed cover of Sesbania, Tephrosia and 

Crotoralia to minimize nematode problems on subsequent crops. http://www.ncsu.edu 

Last accessed 26th August 2005. 

Dirsh, V.M. 1974. Genus Schistocerca (Acridomorpha, Insecta). Series Entomologica. Volume 

10. 238 pp. 

Ebeling, W. 1959. Subtropical fruit pests. University of California. Los Angeles, USA. 

EPPO. 2005. Pest of Quarantine importance in Africa.

http://www.defra.gov.uk/planth/interc/5mar05.pdf, 

EPPO. 2006. PQR database (version 4.5). European and Mediterranean Plant Protection 

Organization (EPPO). Paris, France.

Farr, D.F., A.Y. Rossman, M.E. Palm, and E.B. McCray. 2003. Fungal Databases. United States 

Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Systematic Mycology and 

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

Farr, D.F., A.Y. Rossman, M.E. Palm, and E.B. McCray. 2007. Fungal Databases. United States 

Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Systematic Mycology and 

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

Farrell, G., G.N. Kibata, and J.A. Sutherland, J.A., eds. 1995. A review of crop protection research 

in Kenya. KARI/ODA Crop Protection Project. Kenya Agricultural Research Institute, 

Nairobi, Kenya. 165 pp. 

Farrow, R.A., and J.C. Daly. 1987. Long-range movements as an adaptive strategy in the genus 

Heliothis (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae): a review of its occurrence and detection in four pest 

species. Australian Journal of Zoology 35: 1-24. 

Fasulo, T.R. and P.A. Stansly. 2007. Plant bug pests of Florida citrus. University of Florida. The 

Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/CH042. 

Ferguson, D.C. 1983. Bean pod borer, Maruca testulalis Geyer. Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture. 

Fletcher, B.S. 1987. The biology of Dacine fruit flies. Annual Review of Entomology 32:115-144. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 38

Fletcher, B.S. 1989. Ecology; life history strategies of tephritid fruit flies, In: Robinson, A.S. and 

Hooper, G. (eds). Fruit Flies; their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control. World Crop 

Pests. Amsterdam, Holland: Elsevier, 3(B):195-208. 

Gallegos, D.P., and E.J. Bonano. 1993. Consideration of uncertainty in the performance assessment 

of radioactive waste disposal from an international regulatory perspective. Reliab. Eng. 

System Safety. 42: 111-123. 

Gasim, G.Y., and H.T. Younis. 1989. Biological studies on tomato leafworm Plusia chalcytes L. 

(Noctuidae: Lepidoptera) under effect of constant temperatures. Mesopotamia Journal of 

Agriculture, 21(2):325-334. 

Glas, M. 1991. Tortricids in miscellaneous crops. In: van der Geest, van Luis, eds. Tortricid 

Pests, Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control. World Crop Pests: 5. UK: Elsevier. 

Greathead, D.J. 1976. An East African parasite (Aphytis roseni DeBach and Gordh, Aphelinidae) 

for the control of Selenaspidus articulatus Morgen (Diaspididae) in Peru. East African 

Agricultural and Forestry Journal 41: 349. In Arthropods of Economic Importance: 

Diaspidae of the World. Database. 

Gunn, C.R., and C. Ritchie. 1982. Report of the Technical Committee to Evaluate Noxious 

Weeds; Exotic Weeds for Federal Noxious Weed Act. USDA Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Services (unpublished). 

Guzmán, P., M.R. Rojas, R.M. Davis, K. Kimble, R. Stewart, F.J. Sundstrom, and R.L. Gilbertson. 

1997. First report of bean common mosaic necrosis potyvirus (BCMNV) infecting common 

bean in California. Plant Disease. 81(7):831. 

Gwekwerere, Y. 1995. Pests and diseases of bambara groundnut in Zimbabwe. Proceedings of 

the workshop on conservation and improvement of Bambara groundnut (Vigna 

subterranea (L.) Verdc.). Begemann, J.H. and Mushonga, J. (eds.). November 14-16. 

Harare, Zimbabwe. 

Hall, R. 1991. Compendium of bean diseases. American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, 

Minnesota; USA. pp. 73. 

Hancock, D. L. 1989. Southern Africa. Pages 51-58 in A. S. Robinson and G. Hooper, (eds.). 

Fruit flies their biology, natural enemies and control, Volume 3A. Elsevier, Amsterdam. 

Hincapie, C.M.C., H.M.E. Saavedra, and P.A.L. Trochez. 1993. Life cycle, behaviour and 

natural enemies of Liriomyza huidobrensis (Blanchard) on bulb onion (Allium cepa L.). 

Revista Colombiana de Entomologia. 19(2): 51-57. 

Hollings, M., R.R. Pawley, and K.R. Bock. 1981. Virus diseases of French bean in Kenya. Annual 

Report of the Greenhouse Crop Research Institute pg 159. 

Hollis, J.P. 1962. A survey of Plant Parasitic Nematodes and their Control. FAO Plant Protection 

Bulletin Vol. 10: 97-106. 

Holm, L., J.V. Pancho, J.P. Herberger, and D.L. Plucknett. 1979. A Geographical Atlas of World 

Weeds. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 

Holm, L.G. 1997. World weeds: natural histories and distribution. John Wiley & Sons, N.Y. 

pp.1129. 

Hopper, B.E. [ed.]. 1995. NAPPO Compendium of Phytosanitary Terms. Nepean, Ontario, 

Canada: North American Plant Protection Organization. 

Horticultural Crops Development Authority (HCDA), Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) in 

conjunction with Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) 2003. Training Manual 

for Horticultural Crops- 2nd Edition, Nairobi, Kenya. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 39

Hoy, M.A., Hamon, A. and Nguyen, R. 2006. Featured creatures: pink hibiscus mealybug - 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green). University of Florida. 6 pp. 

Hugo, H.M. 1995. A review of insect pests attacking coffee roots, stems, branches and leaves in 

Kenya. 60(708): 2095-2102. 

HYPPZ. 1998. Jacobiasca lybica (Berg. and Zanon). HYPP Zoologie (HYPPZ) Homepage. 

IIE. 1991. Distribution maps of plant pests. No. 527. Wallingford, UK. CAB International. 

IIE. 1996. Distribution Maps of Pests No. 58 (second revision). International Institute of 

Entomology, London, UK. 5 pp. In Arthropods of Economic Importance: Diaspidae of 

the World. Database. 

IPPC. 2004. International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures, Publication No. 11: Pest risk 

analysis for quarantine pests including analysis of environmental risks and living 

modified organisms. Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), 

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Last accessed August 3, 2007. 

https://www.ippc.int/servlet/BinaryDownloaderServlet/34163_ISPM_11_E.pdf?filename

=1146658377367_ISPM11.pdf&refID=34163. 

IPPC. 2007a. International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures, Publication No. 2. Framework 

for Pest Risk Analysis. Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention 

(IPPC), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Last accessed June 13, 

2007, 

https://www.ippc.int/servlet/CDSServlet?status=ND0xMzM5OSY2PWVuJjMzPSomMz

c9a29z. 

IPPC. 2007b. International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures, Publication No. 5. Glossary of 

Phytosanitary Terms. Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), 

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Last accessed June 13, 2007, 

https://www.ippc.int/servlet/CDSServlet?status=ND0xMzM5OSY2PWVuJjMzPSomMz

c9a29z. 

Ismal, M.A. 2001. Deterioration and spoilage of peanut and desiccated coconut from two subsahara tropical East African countries due to the associated mycobiota and their 

degradative enzyme. Mycopathologia 150 (2):67-84. 

Kaaya, GP., K.V. Seshu-Reddy, E.D. Kokwaro, and D.M. Munyinyi. 1993. Pathogenicity of 

Beauveria bassiana, Metarhizium anisophilae and Serratia marcescens to banana weevil 

Cosmopolites sordidus. Biocontrol Science and Technology 3 (2):177-187. 

Kaaya, G.P., and N. Darji. 1989. Mortality of adult Tsetse, Glossina morsitans, caused by 

entomopathogenic bacteria. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology 54(1):32-38. 

Kairo, M.T.K, G.V. Pollard, D.D. Peterkin, and V.F. Lopez. 2000. Biological control of the 

hibiscus mealybug, Maconellicoccus hirsutus Green (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) in the 

Caribbean. Integrated Pest Management Reviews. 5(4): 241-254. 

Kaneda, M., S. Sugimoto, and K. Okubo. 1986. Fumigation of lower dosage ethylene dibromide 

against melon fly, Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett (Diptera: Tephritidae), in string beans. 

Research Bulletin of the Plant Protection Service, Japan: 105. 

Kaplan, S. 1992. 'Expert information 'versus 'expert opinions.' Another approach to the problem 

of eliciting/combining/using expert knowledge in PRA. Reliab. Eng. System Safety. 35: 

61-72. 

Karel, A.K. 1985. Yield losses from and control of bean pod borers, Maruca testulalis

(Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) and Heliothis armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Journal of 

Economic Entomology 78: 1323-1326. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 40

Karel, A.K., and A. Autrique. 1989. Insects and other pests in Africa, pp. 455-504, In H. F. 

Schwartz and M. A. Pastor-Corrales [eds.] Bean production problems in the tropics. 

Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical, Cali, Colombia. 

Kedera, C.J. 1996. Review of Kenyan Agricultural Research. Vol. 30: Plants Diseases. Kenyan 

Agricultural Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya. 

KEPHIS. 2006. Importation of French bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L. and runner beans, Phaseolus 

coccineus L. from Kenya into the United States (Draft January 2006 submitted to USDAAPHIS). Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service (KEPHIS), Nairobi. 48 pp. 

Kevan, D.K. McE. 1950. Orthoptera from the hills of south-east Kenya. Journal the East Africa 

Natural History Society. 19: 192-221. 

Khaemba, B.M, and M.J. Mutinga. 1982. Insect pest of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) in 

Kenya. Insect Science and its application, 3(4): 281-286. 

Khare, K.B. 1985. Fungi associated with maize and bean grown as a mixture by small-scale 

farmers in Kenya and their control. Turrialba 35 (1):101-103. 

Khurana, S.M.P., and I.D. Garg. 2003. Potato in Warm climates. Virus and virus like diseases of 

major crops in developing countries 2003; 167-193 

Kimenju, J.W., N.K. Karanja, and I. Macharia. 1999. Plant parasitic nematodes associated with 

common bean in Kenya and the effect of Meloidogyne infection on bean nodulation. 

African Crop Science Journal. 7(4): 503-510 

Kimenju, J.W., N.K. Karanja, and M.W. Nyongesa. 2004a. Diversity and abundance of 

nematodes in agroecosystems of Kenya. Journal of Tropical Microbiology 3:24-33 

Kimenju, J.W., D.M. Muiru, N.K. Karanja, W.M. Nyongesa, D.W. Miano, and G.K. Mutua. 

2004b. Assessing the role of organic soil amendments in management of rootknot 

nematodes on common beans, Phaseoulus vulgaris L. Journal of Tropical Microbiology 

3:14-23 

Kimenju, J.W., S.W. Waudo, A.W. Mwang’ombe, R.A. Sikora, and R.P. Schuster. 1998. 

distribution of lesion nematode associated with maize in Kenya and susceptibility of 

maize cultivars to Pratylenchus zeae. African Crop Science Journal. 6(4): 367-375. 

KMA. 1989. Information sheet dated September. Kenya Ministry of Agriculture (KMA). 

Nairobi, Kenya. Courtesy of D.N. Namu, Permanent Secretary. 

Kung'u, J.N. and E.R. Boa. 1997. Kenya checklist of fungi and bacteria on plants and other 

substrates. Kenyan Agricultural Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya. 

Laycock, D.H., and J.C. Templer. 1973. Pesticides for East Africa Tea. Pamphlet, Tea Research 

Institute of East Africa (23/73) 15 

Le Pelley, R.H. 1959. Agricultural insects of East Africa. Nairobi, Kenya: East African High 

Commission. 

Lentini, A., G. Delrio, and G. Serra. 2000. Observations on the infestations of Jacobiasca lybica

on grapevine in Sardinia. Bulletin OILB/SROP. 23(4):127-129. 

Lindinger, L. 1910. Afrikanische Schildläuse. III. Cocciden des ostlichen Afrikas. Jahrbuch der 

Hamburgischen Wissenschaftlichen Anstalten. Hamburg 27: 33-48a. as cited in ScaleNet. 

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

Liquido, N.J., R.T. Cunningham, and S. Nakagawa. 1990. Host plants of Mediterranean Fruit Fly 

(Diptera: Tephritidae) on the island of Hawaii (1949-1985 Survey). Journal of Economic 

Entomology. 83: 1863-1878. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 41

Liquido, N.J., P.G. Barr, and R.T. Cunningham. 1998. MEDHOST: An Encyclopedic 

Bibliography of the Host Plants of the Mediterranean Fruit Fly, Ceratits capitata

(Wiedemann). USDA-ARS. ARS-144, Version 1.0. 

Luo, J.C., Y.Y. Liu, and Y.H. Wei. 2002. Threshold temperature and effective temperature sum 

of Liriomyza huidobrensis. Entomological Knowledge. 39(2): 136-137. 

Macdonald, M.V., and R. Chapman. 1997. The incidence of Fusarium moniliforme on maize 

from Central America, Africa and Asia during 1992-1995. Plant Pathology 46:112-125. 

Mailu, A.M. 1996. Review of Kenyan agricultural research, Vol. 29: Pests of Plants. Kenyan 

Agricultural Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya 

Mau, R.F.L, and J.L.M. Kessing. 1991. Liriomyza trifolii (Burgess). Crop knowledge master, 

Celery leafminer. http:/ www.extento.hawaii.edu/kbase/crop/Type/liriom_htm 

Maxwell, B. 2001. African Climate Zones. Map. 

McGregor, B.M. 1987. Tropical Products Transport Handbook (Agricultural Handbook Number 

668). Office of Transportation, United States Department of Agriculture. viii + 1-148 pp. 

Millar, I.M. 1994. A Catalogue of the Aphids (Homoptera: Aphidoidea) of sub-Saharan Africa: 

Plant Protection Research Institute Handbook No. 4. Agricultural Research Council of 

South Africa. Pretoria, South Africa. 130 pp. 

Moore, S., W. Kirkman, and P. Stephen. 2004. CRYPTOGRAN: a virus for the biological 

control of false codling moth. SA Fruit Journal. 3(6):35-39. 

Morgan, M.G. and M. Henrion. 1990. Uncertainty. Cambridge Univ. Press, United Kingdom. 

332 pp. 

Muriuki, G.K., and G.M. Siboe. 1995. Maize flour contaminated with toxigenic fungi and 

mycotoxins in Kenya. African Journal of Health Science 2 (1):236-241. 

Muruli, B.I., R.S. Pathak, D.M. Mukunya, A.K. Karel, S.O. Keya, and H. Ssali. 1980. Cow pea 

research in Kenya. Tropical Grain Legume Bulletin 19: 13-16.Nakahara, S. 1982. 

Checklist of the armored scales (Homoptera: Diaspididae) of the conterminous United 

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

United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., USA. 110 pp. In Arthropods 

of Economic Importance: Diaspidae of the World. Database. 

NAPPO. 2004. North American Plant Protection Organization (NAPPO) Regional Standards for 

Phytosanitary Measures (RSPM): NAPPO glossary of phytosanitary terms, Ontario, 

Canada. (RSPM No. 5). 

NASS. 2002. 2002 Census of Agriculture. United States Department of Agriculture, National 

Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS). http://www.nass.usda.gov/census 

Natrass, R.M. 1961. Host list of Kenya fungi and bacteria. Mycol. Pap. 18:1-46. 

Neeley, A. 2006. Movement of cowpea, and its relatives (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp), as fresh 

immature fruit pods from Hawaii into the continental United States. United States 

Department of Agriculture. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. 64 pp. 

Newton, P.J. 1987. Efficacy of chitin synthesis inhibitors and synthetic pyrethroids against 

Cryptophlebia leucotreta (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) on citrus in South Africa. 

Phytophylactica. 19(1):95-97. 

Ngundo, B.W., and D.P. Taylor. 1973. The burrowing nematode, Radopholus similis from 

Tanzania and Kenya. East African Agricultural and Forestry Journal, 38(4):405-406. 

NHM. 2005. HOSTS: Host-Database of the World’s Lepidopterans. Natural History Museum 

NHM) of UK, London, UK. http://www.nhm.ac.uk/entomology/hostplants. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 42

NIS. 2004. Quarantine Status Confirmations. Personal communication to A. Koop on July 21, 

2004, from USDA-APHIS-PPQ National Identification Services (NIS). Archived at 

PERAL, Raleigh, NC. 

NIS. 2006. Quarantine Status Confirmations. Personal communication to L. C. Millar on October 

12, 2006 from USDA-APHIS-PPQ National Identification Services. Archived at PERAL, 

Raleigh, NC. 

Noyes, J.S. 1982. A new species of Zetecontis silvestri (Hymenoptera; Encyrtidae) from Israel 

and Kenya, a parasite of Carpophilus hemipterus (L) (Coleoptera; Nutidulidae). Bulletin 

of Entomological Research 72 (3):457-460. 

NRCS. 2007. 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) 

Ogecha, J., J.K.O. Ampofo, and J. Owuor. 2000. Development of an integrated pest management 

strategy for controlling bean stem maggot in South Western Kenya. Paper read at 

Proceedings of the 2nd Scientific Conference of the Soil Management and Legume 

Research Network Projects at Mombasa, Kenya. pp. 311-317. 

Okeyo-Owour, J.B.O., and C.P.M. Khamala. 1980. Insect podborer infestations and their 

influence on developing pods and final seed yields by pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) in 

Kenya. Kenya Journal of Science and Technology, B 1: 79-86. 

Orr, R.L., S.D. Cohen, and R.L. Griffin. 1993. Generic non-indigenous pest risk assessment 

process: "The generic process" (For estimating pest risk associated with the introduction 

of non-indigenous organisms). USDA-APHIS, Policy and Program Development, MD. 

40 pp. 

Otieno, W., M. Jeger, and A. Termorshuizen. 2003. Effect of infecting soil with Trichoderma 

harzianum and amendment with coffee pulp on survival of Amillaria Biocontrol 26 (3): 

293-301 

Otsyula, R.M., S.I. Ajanga, R.A. Buruchara, and C.S. Wortmann. 1998. Development of an 

integrated bean root rot control strategy for western Kenya. African Crop Science Journal 

6 (1) :61-67. 

PERAL/CIPM. 2008. NCSU-APHIS Plant Pest Forecasting System (NAPPFAST). United States 

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

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

and Risk Analysis Laboratory (PERAL); North Carolina State University, Center for 

Integrated Pest Management (CIPM). Raleigh, NC. http://www.nappfast.org 

PestID. 2007. Agricultural Activity Quarantine Systems. United States Department of 

Agriculture-Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service-Plant Protection and Quarantine. 

Database. 

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

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

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

PPQ. 2002. Electronic Files for Arthropods from Pests Not Known to Occur in the United States 

or of Limited Distribution and Insects Not Known to Occur in the United States. United 

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

Protection and Quarantine (PPQ), Policy and Program Development, Risk Analysis 

Systems. 941 pp. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 43

PPQ. 2009. Treatment schedules: T100 – Schedules for fruit, nuts and vegetables. USDA 

Treatment Manual. 80 pp. 

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

/05_02_t100schedules.pdf 

Rathore, M.P.S. No Date. Insect pests in agroforestry: Working paper no. 70. Report of the GTZ 

Fellowship. Nairobi, Kenya: International Centre for Research in Agroforestry. 78 pp. 

Reed, W. 1974. The false codling moth, Cryptophlebia leucotreta Meyr. (Lepidoptera: 

Olethreutidae) as a pest of cotton in Uganda. Cotton Growing Review. 51(3):213-225. 

Reed, C.F. 1977. Economically important foreign weeds. USDA Agric. Handbook. 498. 

Reitz, S. 2004. Personal communication with Stuart Reitz of USDA-ARS-CMAVE on April 8th, 

2004. 

Rheenen, H.A. van, O.E. Hasselbach, and S.G.S. Muigai. 1981. The effect of growing beans 

together with maize on the incidence of bean diseases and pests. Netherlands Journal of 

Plant Pathology. 87(5): 193-199. 

Scheffer, S.J. 2000. Molecular evidence of cryptic species within the Liriomyza huidobrensis

(Diptera: Agromyzidae). Journal of Economic Entomology. Volume: 93, Issue: 4, Pages: 

1146-1151. 

Scheffer, S.J. 2004. Personal communication with Sonja J. Scheffer, Ph. D., Systematic 

Entomology Laboratory, USDA. Beltsville, on April 2nd, 2004. 

Scheffer, S.J., and M.L. Lewis. 2001. Two nuclear genes confirm mitochondrial evidence of 

cryptic species within Liriomyza huidobrensis (Diptera: Agromyzidae). Ann Entomol Soc 

Am Md.:Entomological Society of America. 

Scheffer, S.J., A. Wijesekara, D. Visser, and R.H. Hallett. 2001. Polymerase Chain Reactionrestriction fragment-length polymorphism method to distinguish Liriomyza huidobrensis

from L. langei (Diptera: Agromyzidae) applied to three recent leafminer invasions. 

Horticultural Entomology. Journal of Economic Entomology 94(5): 1177-1182. 

Schwartz, H.F, 2003. Diseases of Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) The American Phytopathological 

Society. http://www.apsnet.org/online/common/names/bean.asp . Last accessed 24 October 

2005. 

Seif, A., A.M. Varela, S. Michalik, and B. Lohr. 2001. A guide to IPM in French Beans Production 

with emphasis on Kenya. ICIPE Science Press. Nairobi, Kenya 

Shanower, T.G., J. Romeis, and E.M. Minja. 1999. Insect pests of pigeonpea and their 

management. Annual Review of Entomology 44: 77-96. 

Sinclar, J.B., and P.A. Backman. 1989. Compendium of soy bean diseases. Third edition. APS 

Press, Minnesota, USA. 

Spence, N.J., and D.G.A. Walkey. 1995. Variation for pathogenicity among isolates of bean 

common mosaic virus in Africa and a reinterpretation of the genetic relationship between 

cultivars of Phaseolus vulgaris and pathotypes of BCMV. Plant Pathology, 44(3):527-

546; 26 ref. 

SON. 1984. Distribution of Plant-Parasitic Nematode Species in North America. Society of 

Nematologists (SON). 205 pp. 

Steck, G.J. 2004. Featured creatures: pea leafminer – Liriomyza huidobrensis. University of 

Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences/Florida Department of Agriculture 

and Consumer Services. http://creatures.ifas.ufl.edu/veg/leaf/pea_leafminer.htm 

Sutherland, J.A. and G.N. Kibata. 1993. KARI/ODA Crop protection project, Technical Report 

II, July 1992 – 1993. National Agricultural Research Laboratories. Pp 36 – 44. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 44

Tamo, M., D.Y. Arodokoun, N. Zenz, M. Tindo, C. Agboton, and R. Adeoti. 2002. The 

importance of alternative host plants for the biological control of two key cowpea insect 

pests, the pod borer Maruca vitratis (Fabricius) and the flower thrips Megalurothrips 

sjostedtj (Trybom), In: C.A. Fatokun, S.A. Tarawali, B.B. Singh, P.M. Kormawa and M. 

Tamo [eds.] Challenges and Opportunities for Enhancing Sustainable Cowpea 

Production. International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Ibadan, Nigeria. 

Tanaka, K., K. Sunagawa, Y. Oda, and T. Hokama. 1986. Methyl bromide fumigation for control 

of melon fly (Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett) in string beans. Research Bulletin of the Plant 

Protection Service, Japan: 67. 

Tenbrink, V.L., and A.H. Hara. 1992. Pinnaspis buxi (Bouche): Crop Knowledge Master. 5pp. 

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. 2002. Threatened and endangered species system (TESS). U. S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. <http://endangered.fws.gov/> last accessed October 24, 2005. 

USFWS. 2006. Threatened and endangered species system (TESS). U. S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. <http://endangered.fws.gov/> last accessed May 3, 2006. 

USFWS. 2007. Threatened and endangered species system (TESS). U. S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. <http://endangered.fws.gov/> last accessed April 2007. 

USFWS. 2008. Threatened and endangered species system (TESS). U. S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. <http://endangered.fws.gov/> last accessed December 2008. 

Venette, R.C., E.E. Davis, M. DaCosta, H. Heisler, and M. Larson. 2003. Mini Risk Assessment: 

False codling moth, Thauatotibia (=Cryptophlebia) leucotreta (Meyrick) [Lepidoptera: 

Tortrichidae]. St. Paul: University of Minnesota Department of Entomology. 30 pp. 

Vidal, S. 2005. Population dynamics and control of the pea leafminer, Liriomyza huidobrensis

Blanchard in outdoor celery. Bulletin OILB/SROP. 28(4): 1-6. 

Wagara, I.N., A.W. Mwang’ombe, J.W. Kimenju, R.A. Buruchara, R. JamnaDass, and P.A.O. 

Majiwa. 2004. Genetic diversity of Phaeoisariopsis griseola in Kenya as revealed by 

AFLP and group specific primers. Journal of Phytopathology 152: 235-242. 

Wang, Y., Z.R. Lei, J.Z. Wen, F.Z. Sun, and K.M. Wu. 2000. On the overwintering and coldhardiness of the vegetable leafminer Liriomyza sativae. Acta Phytophylacica Sinica. 

27(1): 32-36. 

Warui, C.W. 1984. Bruchid infestation of cowpea varieties in the field. Insect Science and Its 

Application 5 (4): 283-286. 

Williams, L., D.J. Schotzko, and L.E. O'Keefe. 1995. Pea leaf weevil herbivory on pea seedlings: 

effects on growth response and yield. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata. 76(3): 

255-269. 

WSSA. 1989. Composite List of Weeds. Weed Science Society of America. 

Yue, D.C., and G.J. Bao, 2006. A primary investigation for population dynamic of Liriomyza 

huidobrensis on vegetable in screen house. Chinese Bulletin of Entomology. 43(2): 239-

241. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 45

5. Appendices 

Appendix A. Map of production areas of French beans and runner beans in Kenya 

Fig. A1. Map of production areas of French beans and runner beans in Kenya (KEPHIS, 2006) 

French bean production 

Runner bean production areas

Bean production areas 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 46

Appendix B. Post harvest handling of Phaseolus vulgaris L. and Phaseolus coccineus L. in 

Kenya 

[Following is anexcerpt from KEPHIS, 2006] 

Harvesting. French beans and runner beans are hand-picked, collected in clean crates and 

transported to an on-farm storage house. 

Packing. Beans are received at the pack house dock and assessed based on size, freshness, and 

freedom from pests, damage, and debris. From the dock, quality assessed beans are sent to be 

processed either by “standard care” or “high care” procedures. In standard care, grading, sorting, 

and packing are done to the specifications of the client. The final standard care product requires 

further preparations, such as washing, before cooking and consumption. Sanitary practices as 

required to meet Euro-Retailer Produce Working Group, EUREPGAP, (see 

http://www.eurepgap.org/Languages/English/index_html) requirements are maintained 

throughout standard care processing. Beans processed following high care procedures are fully 

processed, meaning they have been hand cut to a predetermined size then sanitized. They are 

ready to cook and eat. High care processing is conducted in self contained facilities with 

controlled environments and access points. French beans are separated according to diameter 

then topped and tailed by hand. Runner beans are sliced to a specific length and / or shredded 

according to each customer’s specifications. Please refer to the flow diagram for standard care 

and high care processing. 

Storage. Beans are stored at 6o

 to 8o C and 95 to 100 percent RH for up to two days before 

shipping. 

Transport and shipping. Transportation of beans from farm to pack house is in plastic crates 

that identify the beans’ origin by field and farm. Trucks are refrigerated. Beans in pre-packs or 

plastic bags are packed in cardboard boxes on pallets for international shipment by air, see 

photograph 8. 

 

Fig. B1. Unprocessed beans Fig. B2. Loading dock for 

from the field. standard care and high care 

processing. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 47

Pre-cooling & storage at 5-8o C 

Beans proceeds to standard care

Beans proceed to high care facility 

Beans are individually graded, cleaned, 

and trimmed 

1st disinfectant wash, 5-8o C and 50 

ppm chlorine (bath changed every 100 

kgs.)

Beans are packaged in plastic bags or 

pre-pack 

Packaged beans are weighed, sealed, 

and labeled 

Packaged beans are cooled to 5o C 

Beans are hand 

trimmed/sliced/shredded 

Beans are individually graded 

2nd disinfectant wash at 3-5o C and 50 

ppm chlorine (wash is changed every 

100 kgs.) 

Beans are spun dry 

Beans are packaged in plastic bags or 

pre-packs, weighed, sealed, and labeled 

Beans are blast chilled to 2-5o C 

Packaged and chilled beans are boxed and palletized for air transport 

Beans arrive at processing facility. 

Beans receive a wash in potable water 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 48

 

Fig. B3. Standard care bean Fig. B4. Standard care processed beans 

packhouse. for pre-pack. 

 

Fig. B5. Hi-care processing facility, Fig. B6. Shredding runner 

runner beans. beans. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 49

 

Fig. B7. Shredded runner beans. Fig. B8. High care processed 

runner beans. 

Fig. B9. Cold storage facility. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 50

Appendix C. Risk Mitigation Options 

C1. Pod Borers 

A mitigation available for Maruca testulalis (Syn: Maruca vitrata), exotic legume pod borers, 

and leafminers on green pod vegetables is fumigation with methyl bromide (PPQ, 2009: T101-k2, T101-k-2-1). We suggest these mitigations for the lepidopteran pod borers analyzed in this 

assessment: Chrysodeixis chalcites, Helicoverpa armigera, Lampides boeticus, Spodoptera 

littoralis and Thaumatotibia leucotreta and the dipteran agromizid, Liriomyza huidobrensis. 

However, research is required to confirm efficacy of these treatments against these pest species. 

C2. Mealybugs 

The PPQ treatment manual recommends treatment schedule T104-a-2 (fumigation with tarpaulin 

or chamber at 70°F) for mealybugs on beans (PPQ, 2009). This mitigation could apply for 

Maconellicoccus hirsutus in this assessment. 

C3. Fruit Flies 

No specific mitigations were listed for fruit flies on beans (Phaseolus) (PPQ, 2009). We listed 

mitigation methods for Bactrocera cucurbitae and all other fruit flies on other imported food 

commodities below (Table C1). For Dacus ciliatus, trapping and hot water treatment have also 

been suggested as mitigations (7 CFR § 319.56-48, 2009; CABI and EPPO, 1997a). Except for 

the irradiation treatment, research would be needed to confirm the efficacy of these quarantine 

treatments for control of the fruit flies of concern. 

Table C1. Mitigation options for fruit flies on Kenya beans, by treatment schedule. 

Mitigation Method Treatment Schedule 

Methyl Bromide T101-c-1 

High Temperature Forced Air T103-b-1, T103-d 

Irradiation T105-a-1, T-105-a-2, T105-a-3 

Vapor Heat T-106-b, T106-c, T106-d 

Cold Treatment T107-h 

Methyl Bromide Plus Cold Treatment T108-a, T108-b 

Cold Treatment Plus Methyl Bromide T109-d-1 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 51

Appendix D. USDA Kenya TDY trip report (selected excerpts) 

Kenya TDY Trip Report 

21 January - 2 February, 2007 

TO: Allen Fleming, USAID / Kenya 

 David Atteberry, USAID/East Africa 

 Stephanie Wilcock, USAID/East Africa 

 Kevin Smith, USDA / Kenya 

 Megan Schildgen, USDA, Washington 

 Linda Logan, USDA, Egypt 

 Cheryl French, USDA, Senegal 

 Robert Griffin, USDA, North Carolina 

 Vic Harabin, USDA, North Carolina 

 Ron Sequeira, USDA, North Carolina 

FROM: Michael K. Hennessey, USDA-CPHST, Keith Colpetzer, USDA-CPHST, 

 Edward “Ned” Jones, USDA-CPHST, and Lloyd Garcia, USDA / USAID 

 PASA, Uganda 

DATE: 2 March, 2007 

RE: APHIS Phytosanitary evaluation of Kenya’s commercial fresh vegetable and fruit 

production: A pest risk analysis activity 

PURPOSE: 

The objectives of the TDY were to determine the relative phytosanitary pest mitigation value 

of Kenya’s current horticultural practices from a U.S. perspective. The program was 

conducted at the request of, and in cooperation with, Kenya’s Plant Health Inspectorate 

Service (KEPHIS), Fresh Producers’ Export Association of Kenya (FPEAK), and Kenya 

Horticultural Development Program (KHDP). The following activities were conducted to 

achieve the stated objective: 

1. Determine phytosanitary value of field and packhouse sanitary and pest management 

procedures used in Kenya for fresh vegetables and fruits (especially vegetables soon to 

enter the United States) for commercial markets, primarily in the European Union (EU). 

2. Evaluate Euro-Retailer Produce Working Group, Good Agricultural Practices 

(EurepGAP) and other EU export standards and determine whether they address and meet 

United States phytosanitary requirements. 

3. Observe and evaluate field production methods and get an overall view of kinds of pests 

and baseline pest infestation rates for target commodities. 

4. Record pest management methods that target quarantine and production pests. 

5. Develop commercially viable and statistically sound pest sampling procedures for 

quarantine pests. 

6. Evaluate whether risks associated with ready-to-cook and ready-to-eat vegetables shipped 

as multi-item packs are greater than vegetables shipped as single item packs. 

7. Determine whether shipping conditions provide additional phytosanitary safeguards. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 52

8. Obtain copies of documents detailing sanitary and integrated pest management (IPM) 

practices for various commodities. 

9. Obtain photographs of sanitary and IPM measures, pests, and commodities in the fields 

and packhouses. 

BACKGROUND

Kenya produces a large volume of fruit and vegetables for export to the European Union (EU). 

Approximately 5 percent of the fruits and vegetables sold in United Kingdom (UK) supermarkets 

come from Kenya. About 95 percent of fruits and vegetables grown in Kenya are consumed 

domestically. Exports to the EU must comply with sanitary, environmental, worker, and fair 

trade standards, such as the Euro-Retailer Produce Working Group’s Good Agricultural Practices 

(EurepGAP), which is Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) based, the British 

Retail Consortium (BRC) global standard for packhouse procedures, and ISO 14001, which 

protects the environment. Exports must also comply with standards developed by individual UK 

supermarkets (e.g., Tesco “Nature’s Choice” and Marks and Spencer Field-to-Fork), which are 

even more strict than the above standards. 

The costs associated with compliance and air freight are large (estimated at $1.80/kg). If the EU 

collects tariffs on Kenyan commodities when the Economic Partnership Agreements with 

African, Caribbean, and Pacific countries are renegotiated, compliance and shipping costs may 

exceed production costs. For these reasons, Kenya is searching for new markets. Kenya has 

submitted several commodity import requests and pest risk assessments to the USDA for 

evaluation. 

INFRASTRUCTURE

Kenya relies mainly on mobile phones, having 6.5 million mobile phone users. Kenya also has 

13,274 internet hosts and over one million internet users. A narrow gauge rail line that runs from 

the port of Kisumu on Lake Victoria to the port of Mombasa on the Indian Ocean services the 

country. This main line has several branches (e.g. Nanyuki and Kitale). Kenya has 5,588 mi of 

paved roads and 33,760 mi of unpaved roads that connect urban areas. The country has 15 

airports with paved runways; two of them, Jomo Kenyatta in Nairobi and Moi in Mombasa, 

provide international service. Kenya may build a new international airport in Eldoret to service 

the vast horticultural industry. In addition to good communication and transportation 

infrastructure, Kenya has at least five universities that teach agricultural disciplines; they are 

Egerton University, Jomo Kenyatta University, Kenyatta University, Moi University, and the 

University of Nairobi (World Fact Book). Infrastructure that helps support the agricultural 

industry follows: 

The Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service (KEPHIS) is the government agency responsible 

for protecting Kenya’s agriculture from foreign pests, diseases, and weeds. The agency 

encompasses the following laboratories and units: 

1. a plant inspection unit that enforces quality standards at entry and exit points and issues 

phytosanitary certificates and plant import permits 

2. an ISO 17025 certified analytical chemistry laboratory that tests pesticide residues and 

heavy metal contamination of agricultural commodities 

3. a laboratory that tests for genetically modified organisms and has the ability to perform 

molecular pest identifications 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 53

4. a plant quarantine station for post-entry observation of imported plant material 

5. a seed testing and certification laboratory that looks for fungi on imported seed 

6. a virology laboratory that also tests for Ralstonia and nematodes in potatoes 

7. a tissue culture laboratory that produces clean propagative material 

The virology and tissue culture laboratories work together and produce clean cassava, Irish 

potato, sisal, sweet potato, and pyrethrum for export to the Common Market for Eastern and 

Southern Africa (COMESA). The clean stock program for sweet potato includes viral indexing 

of imported material, cleaning during tissue culture, growing in a double door screen house, and 

a final check for disease prior to export. 

The Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) is the government agency responsible for 

agricultural research and extension. The Horticulture and Industrial Crops program within this 

agency develops new plant varieties and profitable crop protection programs. When new 

technologies are adequately developed, KARI transfers them to farmers throughout the country. 

The Horticultural Crops Development Authority (HCDA) is another government agency 

involved in the production of fresh Kenyan fruits and vegetables. The HCDA licenses exporters, 

provides extension in collaboration with other institutions, like KARI, facilitates trade by linking 

growers to markets, and provides marketing intelligence to the industry. They also help 

smallholders access markets by renting trucks and coolers in their modern packhouse, which is 

next to the airport, at a reduced rate. 

The Fresh Produce Exporters of Kenya (FPEAK) is a private organization that analyzes market 

trends, lobbies for the horticultural industry, and communicates sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) 

requirements, integrated pest management (IPM), and best management practices (BMP) to its 

members. They communicate with their members through a website 

(www.fpeak.org/home/index.asp), monthly electronic newsletters, conferences, and a quarterly 

publication, Horticultural Insight. 

The International Center of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE) is also located in Kenya. 

This institution, which is funded by public and private donors, conducts research, develops pest 

management strategies, and trains stakeholders in pest management practices. They employ 

taxonomic experts to help identify specific crop pests, and they maintain five different fruit fly 

colonies (i.e., Bactrocera invadens, Ceratitis capitata, C. cosyra, C. fasciventris, and C. rosa) on 

fruit or a carrot-based media. None of the above species are quarantine pests for Kenya. They 

also introduce and rear parasitoids under quarantine for eventual release to control the fruit flies. 

The fruit fly colonies are used, in part, to sustain the parasitoids and could be used to develop 

postharvest treatments. 

Jan 24 - East African Growers Ltd., Jessy Farm

We met Mr. Nicholas Ambanja, the general manager, and other staff at Jessy Farm. Mr. 

Ambanja told us that Jessy Farm is one of seven farms that are owned and operated by East 

African Growers Limited. They produce six different vegetables (i.e., baby corn, broad bean, 

broccoli, French bean, sugar snaps, and runner bean) on their 85 ha farm in Naro Moru. Mr. 

Erick Ogumu, the farm’s agronomist and technical manager, told us that they practice IPM and 

follow EurepGAP and Tesco Nature’s Choice production standards. He also told us that pest 

management strategies, which include chemical, cultural, and biological methods, are determined 

by a qualified, current, and informed farm manager. Our questions revealed that farm managers 

must have an agricultural degree and be trained in the British Agrochemical Standards Inspection 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 54

Scheme (BASIS) and the Fertilizer Advisors Certification and Training Scheme (FACTS). The 

latter requirements (i.e., BASIS and FACTS) satisfy the environmental focus of their customers 

in the UK. Farm managers must also stay current in pest management by training at institutions 

like ICIPE and KARI. Mr. Ogumu concluded that pest management strategies are largely based 

on the farm manager’s experience and expertise. For example, after a long period of rain, the 

manager will require a fungicide treatment for beans to prevent rust development. This appeared 

to be effective because we did not observe rust in the runner bean fields that we scouted. We also 

scouted courgettes; our observations are recorded under Findings. In addition to scouting these 

crops, we toured the farm’s beneficial insect rearing facilities and packhouse (Fig. 4.1), where 

raw materials are prepared for processing in the Nairobi packhouse. We witnessed an inspector 

administering truly systematic, skip samples of the harvest containers, where grab samples were 

taken and inspected from selected containers, before the harvested commodity was introduced 

into the field packhouse. Information from this inspection was recorded and fed forward to 

employees in the field pack house, where it helped focus the pack house inspection. The 

information was also fed back to the field to help improve field mitigations. We observed a few 

cultural practices during our tour that may influence pest populations, such as composting culls 

on site, planting trap crops, and preserving refugia for beneficial insects. 

Jan 29 - East African Growers Ltd. Packhouse

We met Mr. Peeush Mahajan, the managing director, and Mr. Vijay Kumar, the general manager, 

along with other staff at the East African Growers packhouse in Nairobi. They told us that the 

packhouse follows the BRC global standard. After a brief introduction, we toured their facility 

and observed product handling procedures. The first things we saw were courgettes and tender 

stem broccoli being offloaded. Every container had a sticker declaring that the vegetable was 

grown under EurepGAP and Tesco Nature’s Choice (TNC) production standards. The stickers 

also contained the farm’s name, production date, and the block where it was grown; this allows 

the packhouse to trace the product back to the exact area where it was grown. Next, we 

witnessed the first quality check, which occurred on the loading dock before the product was 

brought into the packhouse. The quality check consisted of systematically subsampling 15 

percent of the product for insects, disease, damage, and adherence to strict grade specifications. 

The raw product was rejected at this point if 50 percent or more of the subsample did not meet 

packhouse standards. If the product was accepted, the damage was qualitatively rated, as high, 

medium, or low, and the type of damage was reported to the workers before the product was 

introduced into the packing line. This feed forward mechanism helps workers eliminate quality 

problems. Inspection results were recorded and tracked. Next, we visited the low, medium, and 

high care packing units. Even with “low” care, the product was handled with great care; low 

simply distinguished the unwashed product from product that was washed with either potable 

water (i.e.e. medium care) or water containing 60-90 ppm of chlorine (i.e.e., high care). We 

witnessed a number of procedures throughout low, medium, and high care that would reduce pest 

and disease contamination. For example, workers hand-packed French beans. They visually 

inspected each bean before it went into the pack, and they visually inspected the pack before it 

was sealed (Fig. 4.2). We observed other practices that would mitigate pest risk including: the 

sanitary agitated wash in medium and high care (Fig. 4.3), passing sugar snaps over a light table , 

slicing runner beans (Fig. 4.4), and the final quality check, which occurred before the product 

was stored at 3 to 4oC. East African Growers also check shelf life by keeping product samples 

for 7 to 10 days. One practice that may influence pest populations on the farm is the practice of 

sending packhouse rejects back to the farm for composting. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 55

Jan 30 - Vegpro Packhouse

We met Mr. Bharat Patel, the managing director, and Mr. Shawn Brunner, the general manager, 

at the Vegpro packhouse in Nairobi. Mr. Brunner told us that they follow EurepGAP and the 

BRC global standard. After a brief introduction, we toured their facility and observed product 

handling procedures. It was similar to the other packhouses, with an initial quality check at 

offloading, a feed forward mechanism to help eliminate potential quality problems, a low and 

high care unit, light tables for sugar snap inspections, a variety of slicing techniques, a final 

quality check before cold storage, and shelf life monitoring. Mr. Brunner told us that they 

typically reject about 20 percent of the French beans that arrive for quality reasons, but, right 

now, they are rejecting between 50 and 60 percent for caterpillar damage. 

Jan 31 - International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE)

We met Dr. Bernhard Löhr, a Liriomyza expert, and Dr. Sunday Ekeski, a fruit fly expert. We 

discussed irradiation and collaborative research to develop alternative quarantine treatments for 

East African fruit flies. Dr. Ekeski told us that he has been working with French bean for five 

years and has not seen any evidence of fruit flies. He said chili pepper, passionfruit, eggplant, 

avocado, and mango are the major fruit fly hosts in Kenya. He also said that Bactrocera 

cucurbitae is most common on courgettes, but Dacus ciliatus can be found. He expressed 

concern over Bactrocera latifrons, which has not yet been detected in Kenya. Dr. Ekeski also 

told us that Bactrocera invadens oviposits in green banana. Dr. Löhr told us that there are four 

species of Liriomyza in Kenya, one of which has not yet been described. Dr. Löhr and Dr. Ekeski 

both expressed interest in working with vegetable pests. Apparently, they plan on studying 

western flower thrips (Frankliniella occidentalis) and red spider mite (Tetranychus evansi) in 

vegetables. 

a. Interceptions and Rejections - We learned from Dr Kedera that KEPHIS inspected and 

issued phytosanitary certificates for 91,956 consignments between 01 January 2006 and 

31 December 2006. Of these, only 71 were rejected at their final destination for failure to 

comply with importing country specific phytosanitary requirements; that’s an annual 

rejection rate of less than 0.08 percent. We also learned that none of the rejections were 

for consignments of French or runner bean. KEPHIS, apparently, inspects about 25 

consignments of vegetables for export every day and refuses to issue a phytosanitary 

certificate for about five consignments of French or runner bean each month. 

b. French bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) - We did not observe a single internal boring insects or 

disease on French bean. We only saw some external damage that was most likely caused 

by surface feeding caterpillars (Fig. 4.5). 

c. Runner bean (Phaseolus coccineus) - We observed internal boring caterpillars that we 

suspect were the cotton bollworm (Helicoverpa armigera) at several farms (Fig. 4.6). 

These caterpillars were common in certain areas. For example, six out the 50 fruit 

sampled at Jumbi Farm contained a larva, while none of the 50 fruit sampled at Longonot 

Farm contained a larva. 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 56

Table D1. Some United States quarantine pests of French bean that occur in Kenya 

Scientific name References 

Agrotis segetum Varela et al., 1999 

Alcidodes leucogrammus Varela et al., 1999 

Anoplocnemis curvipes CABI, 2005; Varela et al., 1999

Bactrocera cucurbitae CABI, 2005 

Chrysodeixis chalcites CABI, 2005 

Clavigralla elongate CABI, 2005; Varela et al., 1999

Clavigralla tomentosicollis CABI, 2005; Varela et al., 1999

Cowpea mild mottle virus CABI, 2005 

Frankliniella schultzei CABI, 2005; Varela et al., 1999

Helicoverpa armigera CABI, 2005; Varela et al., 1999

Maruca vitrata CABI, 2005; Varela et al., 1999

Megalurothrips sjostedti CABI, 2005; Varela et al., 1999

Ophiomyia centrosematis CABI, 2005; Varela et al., 1999

Ophiomyia phaseoli CABI, 2005; Varela et al., 1999

Ophiomyia spencerella Varela et al., 1999 

Phakospora pachyrhizi CABI, 2005 

Pseudomonas syringae pv. garcae CABI, 2005 

Riptortus dentipes CABI, 2005; Varela et al., 1999

Spodoptera littoralis CABI, 2005 

Thysanoplusia orichalcea CABI, 2005 

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. There are 18 control points (see flow chart) which would count as phytosanitary 

measures. The field and high care packhouse procedures and measures that Kenya uses to 

meet UK supermarket (e.g., Marks and Spencer) export standards provide sufficient 

phytosanitary protection against the introduction of external and internal feeding plant 

pests. The measures also provide sufficient phytosaniatry protection against diseases that 

produce obvious symptoms. The chlorine washes of high care are also effective against 

latent plant pathogens on the surface of the commodity. The above would apply to 

shelled garden pea, baby corn, baby carrot, French bean and other vegetables. 

2. EurepGAP, the BRC global standard, and EU supermarket standards meet United States 

regulatory requirements for certain commodities (e.g. tender stem broccoli, French bean, 

baby leek, and baby onion). The United States may require additional measures (e.g. 

destructive sampling, commodity slicing as opposed to whole, or pest free production 

areas) for commodities with internal pests including fruit flies or latent diseases (e.g. 

courgettes and chili peppers). 
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 57
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 58

Appendix E. Predicted distribution of Liriomyza huidobrensis in the conterminous United 

States. 

Fig. E1. Predicted distribution. Results are reported in frequency of years (1997 to 2006) where 

enough degree days occurred for L. huidobrensis to complete nine or more generations.
Pest Risk Assessment for Kenya Beans 

Rev. 004 February 23, 2009 59

Appendix F. Predicted distribution of Maconellicoccus hirsutus in the conterminous United 

States. 

Fig. F1. Predicted number of generations M. Hirsutus could complete in the conterminous 

United States. Our model results are based on average number of degree days from1998 to 2007, 

347 degree days per generation, a lower developmental temperature of 14.5°C and an upper 

developmental threshold of 35°C (Chong et al., 2008; PERAL/CIPM, 2008).