# Importation of F **resh Fruit of Andean Blackberry (**  **Rubus glaucus**  **Benth )**  **and Raspberry ( Rubus idaeus**  **Linnaeus )**  **into the Continental United States from**  **Ecuador**

**A Qualitative, Pathway** 

**- Initiated Risk Assessment** 



# June 21 **, 20**  **12 Version 1 (Original)** 

**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 Dr. Suite 300 Raleigh, NC 27606Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 ii 

## Executive Summary

The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of the United States Department of Agriculture prepared this p est risk assessment to examine plant pest risks associated with the importation of fresh field

- grown fruit of Andean b lackberry , Rubus glaucus Benth , and raspberry , Rubus idaeus Linnaeus , from the Republic of Ecuador into the continental United States. We developed a list of pests associated with Andean b lackberry and raspberry (in an y country) that occur in Ecuador on any host based on scientific literature, previous Plant Protection and Quarantine commodity risk assessments, records of intercepted pest s at ports

- of

- entry , information from specialized databases, and the opinion of experts in Andean blackberry and raspberry fruit production.

We identified three quarantine arthropod pests likely to follow the pathway with Andean blackberries and raspberri es imported from Ecuador :
**Taxonomy Scientific**  **Name Pest Risk Potential**  Diptera: Tephritidae Anastrepha fraterculus Wiedemann High Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) High Lepidoptera: Noctuidae Copitarsia decolora Guenée High

We found that the pest risk potential s for all three species w ere High

. Specific phy tosanitary
measures are strongl y recommended for pests with High Risk Potential. The selection of appropriate measures to mitigate risk is part of the risk management phase and is not addressed in this document

.Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 iii 

## Table of Contents

**Executive Summary**

**................................ ................................**  **................................ .......................**  **ii 1. Introduction** 

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

................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 1 1.2. Commodities Information

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

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

................................ ................................ ....................... 2 2.2. Assessment of Weed Potential of Rubus glaucus and Rubus idaeus

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

................................ ................... 4 2.4 . Pest Categorization

—Id entification of Pests

................................ ................................ ....... 6 2.5. Risk Assessment

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 21 **3. Pest Risk Potential and Conclusion**

**................................ ................................**  **........................ 27**  **4. Authors and Reviewers**

**................................ ................................**  **................................ ............**  **28 5. References** 

**................................ ................................**  **................................ ................................**  **. 28**  **6. Appendix**

**................................ ................................**  **................................ ................................**  **... 39**  Appendix A. Pests (alive) intercepted on Rubus spp. and Rubus idaeus from 1985 to 2011

.. 39Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 1 

## 1. Introduction
**1.1. Background**
This document was prepared b y the Plant Epidemiology and Risk Anal ys is L aboratory of the Center for Plant Health Science and Techno logy , USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHI S), Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ), in response to a request to evaluate the risks associated with the importation of commercially produced fresh fruit of Andean b lackberry ( Rubus glaucus Be nth) and raspberry ( Rubus idaeus Li nnaeus ) from Ecuador into the continental United States.
The International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) provides guidance for conducting pest risk anal ys es. The methods used here are consistent with guidelines provided by the IPPC, specificall y the International Standard for Ph yt osanitary Measures (ISPM) on Pest Risk Analysis for Quarantine Pests, Including Anal ys is of Environmental Risks and L iving Modified Organisms ( IP PC, 2009 : I SPM #11). The use of biological and phy tosanitary terms is consistent with the Glossary of Phy tosanitary Terms ( IPPC, 2009 : I SPM #5).
Three stages of pest risk anal ys is are described in international standards: Stage 1, Initiation; Stage 2, Risk Assessment; and Stage 3, Risk Manageme nt. This document satisfies the requirements of Stages 1 and 2.
This is a qualitative risk anal ys is; estimates of risk are expressed in terms of High, Medium, and Low pest risk potentials based on the combined ratings for specified risk elements (PPQ, 20 00 ) related to the probability

and consequences of importing Andean b lackberry and raspberry from Ecuador. For the purposes of this assessment High, Medium, and L ow probabilities will be defined as:
High: More likel y to occur than not to occur Medium: A s likely

to occur as not to occur Low: More likely

not to occur than to occur
The appropriate risk management strategy for a particular pest depends on the risk posed by that pest. I dentification of appropriate sanitary and phy tosanitary measures to miti gate the risk, if any, for this pest is undertaken as part of Stage 3 (Risk Management). Other than listing possible mitigation options for the pests of concern, we did not discuss risk management in this document.

**1.2. Commodities Information**

Blackberri es and raspberries are a diverse group of species and hy brids in the genus Rubus

. They
are members of the Rosaceae famil y. Rubus is one of the most diverse genera of flowering plants in the world, consisting of 12 subgenera, some with hundreds of species ( CABI, 2011; Ellis et al., 1991 ; Rieger, 2006). Two subgenera , I daeobatus and Eubatus , have attained major commercial significance as fruit crops ( Ellis et al., 1991).Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 2 The major species that produce edible fruit s include R ubus idaeus L. , namely , R. idaeus subsp. vulgatus Arrhe n. ( the European red raspberry) and R. idaeus subsp. strigosus Michx. (the American red raspberry) ; R. occidentalis L. (the E astern North American black raspberry) ; and R. glaucus Benth. ( a South American tetraploid black ra spberry) ( Ellis et al., 1 991 )

. Raspberries and blackberries are aggregate fruit s formed from a single five

- petaled flower, through the adhesion of man y separate carpels (drupelets), which ripen simultaneously ( Ellis et al., 1991 )

. Raspberries are differentiated from blackberries by the retention of the receptacle within the drupelets on fruit maturity (CABI, 2011).
Andean blackberry

shrubs produce fruit year
- round. The canes, 3

- 4 m (9.8

- 13.1 ft) long, have small thorns ( Popenoe et al., 1989 )

. Ande an blackberry can be propagated sexually, but is ty picall y propagated asexually (using tip layers or stem p ieces) ( Popenoe et al., 1989 )

. Plants require pest and disease control measures, and are often trellised (Finn, 1999; Popenoe et al., 1989). It s cult ivation has increased because its fruits are exported to the United States (Popenoe et al., 1989). Commercial production has been reported in Mexico , Central and South America (Finn, 1999; Popenoe et al., 1989; Strik et al., 2007 ). L ike other Rubus species, the Andean blackberry

exhibits a wide variability because of segregation ( Popenoe et al., 1989 ).

R ed raspberry

is a deciduous, shrub which grows from 0.5 m to 2 m ( 1.6

- 6.5 ft) in height (CABI, 2011)

. Ithas w oody

stems that are bristl y or prickly , and its l eaves are alternate and pinnate. It s f lowers are white in clusters of one to four in a compound cy me. The f ruit is compound and made up of individual red or pinkish

- purple drupelets (Tirmenstein, 1990). F ruit abscission zones occur at the point of attachment of each drup e to the receptacle (CABI, 2011)

. 

## 2. Risk **Assessment**
**2.1. Initiating Event: Proposed Action**
We prepared this commodity

- based, pathway

- initiated assessment in response to a request made by the Ecuadorian Animal and Plant Health Service ( SESA, 2006 ) to the USDA for authorization to allow imports of fresh Andean blackberries and raspberries to the continental United States

. Importation of these fruits grown in Ecuador is a potential pathway for introduction of plant pests. Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations 319 Part 56 ( 7 CFR § 319, 2009 ) provides regulatory

authority for the importation of fruits and vegetables from foreign sources into the United States.

**2.2. Assessment of Weed Potential of Rubus glaucus**  **and Rubus idaeus** 
If the species considered for import poses a risk as a weed pest, then a pest

- initiated risk assessment is conducted

. The results of the weed potential assessment for R

. glaucus and R

. idaeus did not prompt a weed

- initiated risk assessment (Table 1).Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 3 **Table 1.** Assessment of the weed potential of Rubus glaucus and R

. idaeus

. **Scientific name s**  **and author s**  : Rubus glaucus Benth (NRCS, 2011; USDA

- ARS, 2011 ). **Synonyms** : No synon ymfound. **Common names** : English: Andes berry , Andean b lackberry ; Spanish: m ora, m ora de Castilla (NRCS, 2011 ; USDA

- ARS, 2011 ; Wiersema and L eon, 1999 )

. Rubus idaeus Li nnaeus (NRCS, 2011 ; USD A

- ARS, 2011 )

. **Synonyms** : Rubus buschii (Rozanova) Grossh; R idaeus var. vulgatus Arrh. ; Rvulgatus var. buschii Rozanova ; R strigosus Michx. ; Ridaeus var. idaeus ; Ridaeus var. strigosus (Michx.) Maxim . (CABI, 2011). **Common names** : English: raspberry , red r aspberry ; Spanish: f rambuesa (USDA and ARS, 2011 ; Wiersema and Leon, 1999 )

. **Plant family** : Rosaceae ( USDA

- ARS, 2011 ; NRCS, 2011 ) **Phase 1:** Distribution in the United States Rubus glaucus Benth is present in the United States only in Hawaii (NRCS, 2011 ). Itwas introduced at Volcano and Pa'auilo Agricultural Experimental Stations, where it grew but did not provide commercially exploitable fruit crops (University of Hawaii, 1998). Rubus idaeus is widely

prevalent in the United States ; it is present in more than 35 states ( Tirmenstein, 1990; NRCS, 2011 ). **Phase 2:** Invasive/Weed Status: L isting as weed **Rubus glaucus**  **Rubus**

**idaeus Reference** 
NO NO CIPM, 2010; FLEPPC, 2011; Gunn and Ritchie, 1988; Holm et al., 1977;

Holm et al., 1997; I SSG, 2011; Reed, 1977; Skinner et al., 2011; PPQ, 2010 ; Weber, 2003; Wiersema and Leon, 1999 NO YES Holm et al., 1979; Swearingen, 2010; WSSA, 2010 YES NO IPPC, 2003; NRCS, 2011 YES YES Randall, 2007 **Phase 3:** Summary

and Conclusion Rubus glaucus Benth is reported as an invasive species in Hawaii and Ecuador (Galapagos Islands). In Hawaii, i t was introduced at the Volcano and Pa'auilo Agricultural Experimental Stations in the late 1960s , where it grew but did not provide commercially exploitable fruit crops. The canes were abandoned but birds dispersed the seeds ; the plant is now threatening the 'Ola'a Tract of Hawai'i Volcanoes National Park (Starr et al., 2003; University of Hawaii, 1998)

. In the Galapagos Islands (Ecuad or), it is considered as an aggressive invasive plant species and an eradication plan has been initiated (Buddenhagen, 2003).

Rubus idaeus Li nnaeus is listed as a common weed in Finland and a weed of unknown importance in the United States and Turkey ; it is also present in the flora of Australia ( Holm et al., 1979 )

.
R ubus glaucus and R

. idaeus are listed as world economic plant s and are widely naturalized and cultivated for their edible fruits ( IP GRI, 2008 ; Wiersema and Leon, 1999 ). Importation of blackberries and raspberries into the United S tates is permitted from several countries (APHIS, 2011).

**Conclusion:** Because R. idaeus is already widely distributed and naturalized in the United States , importation of fresh fruit from Ecuado r should not increase the weed potentialPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 4 beyond that existing at present. R ubus glaucus fruit is frequently imported into the United States; it is listed as a world economic plant , and is widely naturalized and cultivated for its edible fruits

. T he pest risk assessment therefore proceeds

. However, if evidence supporting the weed potential of this plant in the continental United States becomes available later , a weed risk assessment could be initiated.

**2.3**

**. Decision History,**  **Current Status, and Pest Interceptions** 
2.3.1. Decision History Below we summarize previous decisions regarding Rubus spp. importations (Table 2)

. 2.3.2. Current Status of Importations Currently , Title 7, Part 319, Section 56 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (7 CFR §319.56) does not permit the importation of fresh Andean blackberry and/or raspberry for human consumption from Ecuador into the continental United States. We examined the current status and summarized it below ( Table 3 )

.

**Table 2** 

**.** Prior d ecisions the United States h as made r egarding r equests to i mport Rubus spp. **Year Country**  **Decision Reason / Conditions**  1924 Mexico Approved At border ports 1928 Peru Entry denied Fruit flies presence in Peru 1930 England Approved Northern ports 1931 Norway Approved South pacific ports 1931 Sweden Approved Northern ports 1937 Chile Approved No record of injurious quarantine pests attacking Rubus spp. in Chile

. 1947 Central

America Approved Entry permitted through all ports. Berries should be free from leaf or stem contamination. 1949 Finland Approved Entry permitted only through North Atlantic ports. 1950 Mexico Approved Mexican Border and only for local consumption. 1966 Ecuador Approved North Atlantic and South Atlantic and Gulf ports. 1969 Australia Disapproved Presence of Bactrocera tryoni and lack of approved treatment. 1970 Colombia Approved Permitted into North Atlantic and South Atlantic and Gulf ports. Inspection on arrival. 1972 Haiti Approved All ports. Subject to inspection and freedom from plant parts. 1979 Chile Approved All ports. Inspection and treatment if warranted. 1982 France Approved All ports. Inspection and treatment if warranted. 1984 Australia

(Tasmania) Approved All ports. Subject to inspection and entomological findings.

1986 Spain Disapproved No approved treatments against complex of exotic pests. 1987 Jamaica Disapproved No approved treatments for Anastrepha spp. 1988 Argentina Disapproved The undetermined status of Rubus as a host of Anastrepha ; lack of pest information of this host from Argentina; no approved treatment available.Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 5 **Year Country**  **Decision Reason / Conditions**  1988 South Africa Disapproved No approved treatment available for Ceratitis spp. 1991 Nicaragua Approved All ports. Inspection and Treatment if warranted. 1991 Colombia;

Ecuador Immediate

prohibition Lack of approved treatment for Anastrepha fraterculus.

1992 Bolivia Disapproved Lack of approved treatment for Anastrepha fraterculus. 1992 Colombia Disapproved No approved treatment available. 1992 Australia Disapproved No approved treatment available. 1994 Colombia Approved North Atlantic and South Atlantic and Gulf ports. Only shipments from the free area of Anastrepha fraterculus

. 1996 South Africa Disapproved Presence of exotic pests and lack of approved treatment.

**Table 3.** Current status of blackberry and raspberry fruits from countries with permit of entry into the continental United States (APHIS, 2011 )

. **Permitted entry into all ports**  **from** : **Permitted entry through North Atlantic ports from**  : **Permitted entry through South Atlantic & Gulf ports from**  : Australia, from Tasmania only Albania Colombia 2 Belize Colombia 2 Chile, from all provinces Finland Costa Rica Netherlands El Salvador Norway France, continental France Sweden Guatemala The United Kingdom, from England, Honduras Orkney Islands, Scotland and Wales Mexico, from all areas 1 New Zealand Nicaragua Panama
1 Under the protocol of the National Agriculture Release Program (NARP). See the Fruits and Vegetables Im port Requirements m anual ( APHIS, 2011 ) for additional information regarding these commodities. 2 All consignments must be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate with the following additional declaration that

“the berries originated from an area outside of the quarantine area for Anastrepha fraterculus .”



### 2.3.3. Pest Interceptions Pest species intercepted between 1985 and 2011 on Rubus sp. and R

. idaeus entering the United States are listed in Appendix A. Since 1985 , 580 different species of pests have been intercepted 14 , 875 times from different countries ( PestID, 2011 ). Of these pests, several non

- quarantine pests, present in Ecuador were not included in Table 4 because the onl y evidence of Rubus spp. b eing a possible host was scant interception data , and n o other source has documented an association with species of Rubus spp. These pests are Planicephalus flavicosta (Stal) (Hemiptera : Cicadellidae), Anasa scorbutica (Fabricius) (Hemiptera: Coreidae), Xyonysius basalis (Dallas) (Hemiptera: Lygaeidae), Creontiades rubrinervis (Stål) ( Hemiptera: Miridae ) , Dysmicoccus brevipes (Cockerell) , Planococcus citri (Risso) , and Pseudococcus jackb eardsleyiPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 6 Gimpel & Miller ( Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae ), Neopamera bilobata (Say) (Hemiptera: Rhy parochromidae ), Apis mellifera Li nnaeus (Hymenoptera: Apidae), Solenopsis geminata (Fabricius) ( Hy

menoptera: Formicidae ), Agrotis subterranea (Fabricius) Sy n: Agrotis lutescens (Blanchard) , Helicoverpa zea (Boddie) , Spodoptera albula (Walker) Sy n: Spodoptera sunia (guenee) , and Spodoptera exigua (Hübner) ( Lepidoptera: Noctuidae ), Cadra cautella Walker , and Elasmopalpus lignosellus (Zeller) (Lepidoptera: Py ralidae) , Franklinothrips vespiformis (D.L. Crawford) ( Th ys anoptera: Aeolothripidae ), Haplothrips gowdeyi Franklin ( Thy sanoptera: Phlaeothripidae ), Frankliniella panamensis Hood, and Frankliniella williamsi Hood (Thy sanoptera: Thripidae) , and Lehmannia valentiana (Ferussac) (Mollusk) ( PestID, 2011 ).
The thrips species Frankliniella gardeniae Moulton, F

. intonsa (Try

bom) and F

. insularis ( Thy sanoptera: Thripidae ) were not listed in Table 4. Although these pests have been intercepted several times on Rubus spp. the only evidence of them occurring in Ecuador are single interceptions in a permit cargo ( PestID, 2011 )

. No other source s have documented the presence of these pests in Ecuador.
**2.4. Pest Categorization**

**— Identification of Pests** 

2.4.1. Pests as sociated with Andean blackberry and raspberry in Ecuador Below we list the pests associated with Andean blackberry and raspberry (in any

country) that
occur in Ecuador on any host ( Table 4 )

. In th at list , we identify 1) the scientific name of the pest , 2) the presence of pests in Ecuador and the United States, 3) the reference(s) that report the pest on the host, 4) the quarantine status of the pest in the United States, 5) the generall y affected plant part or parts, and 6) if the pest is likely to fol low the pathway

into the United States on Andean blackberry

and /or raspberry fruit. Each pest report has the pertinent citation (s) for the distribution, record on the host, and plant part association.
Please note that in the pest list (Table 4 ), we do not indicate for non

- quarantine pests if the pest is likely to follow the pathway . Even if non

- quarantine pests are able to follow the pathway , phy tosanitary measures against these pests would not be justified because they already occur in the continental Uni ted States. Therefore, for non
- quarantine pests “N/A ” (not applicable) is indicated in the columns for “Plant part association” and “Follow pathway

. ”Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 7 **Table 4.** Pests reported on Andean blackberry ( Rubus glaucus ) and raspberry ( Rubus idaeus ) an ywhere in the world and reported as present in Ecuador (on any host) **Pest Scientific Name Geographic**  **Distribution 1**  **Reported on Rubus** 

**spp. 2**  **Quaran**

 

** tine Pest** **Plant Part(s)**

**Association 3**  **Follow**

**Pathway ARTHROPODS**  **ARACHNIDA Acari: Tetranychidae**  Panonychus ulmi ( Koch) Syn: Paratetranychus pilosus Canestrini & Fanzago EC (Rogg, 2000); US (Bolland et al., 1998; CABI, 2011) Rg (Bolland et al.,

1998; CAF, 1992) No N/A N/A

Paratetranychus sp. EC (FDS, 1994) Ri, Rs (FDS, 1994) Yes L 4 (CABI, 2011) No
Tetranychus sp. EC (FDS, 1994; Moretta, 1995) Rg, Ri, Rs (FDS,

1994); Rg (CAF, 1992); Rs (Moretta, 1995) Yes L (CAF, 1992; Moretta, 1995 ) No

Tetranychus urticae Koch EC (Camacho, 1994; MAG, 1986; Sponagel, 1999) US (Bolland et al., 1998; CABI, 2011) Rg (Camacho, 1994 );

Ri (Aguilera et al., 1998; PMRA, 2007) No N/A N/A

**INSECTA Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae**  Macrodactylus sp. EC (Gara and Onore, 1989; MAG, 1986; Ruales, 1984) Rs (Gara and Onore,

1989) Yes L (Gara and Onore, 1989) No

Phyllophaga sp. EC (Gallegos et al., 2001) Rg (Gallegos et al.,

2001) Yes R ( Gallegos et al., 2001) No
**Diptera: Tephritidae** Anastrepha fraterculus Wiedemann EC ( CABI, 2011 ; Norrbom, 2004; Tigrero, 1998) Rg (Norrbom, 2004;

Tigrero, 1998); Rs (Alvarez and Acosta, 1997; Norrbom, 2004) Yes F (Norrbom, 2004 ; Tigrero, 1998 ) Yes

Anastrepha sp. EC (Camacho, 1994; Moretta, 1995; FDS, 1994; Sigcha, 2003) Rg (Camacho, 1994;

CAF, 1992; FDS, 1994; Sigcha, 2003); Rs (Moretta, 1995) Yes F (Moretta, 1995; Sigcha, 2003) Yes

1 Only geographic distribution in the continental United States and Ecuador is considered: CA= California; EC= Ecuador; FL= Florida; LA= Louisiana; MD= Maryland; OR= Oregon; US = Widespread in the United States; TX= Texas; WA= Washington State. 2 Reported on : Rg= Rubus glaucus ; Ri= Rubus idaeus ; Rs = Rubus sp. and/or other species of Rubus in Ecuador. R= both species R

. glaucus and R

. idaeus

. 3 F = Fruit; I = Inflorescence/Flower; L = Leaf; R = Root; S d = Seed; Sh = Shoot ; S = Stem 4 Plant parts affected by Paratetranychus sp. correspond to the record in the literature for Paratetranychus spp. on raspberry and other commodities ( CABI, 2011 ).Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 8 **Pest Scientific Name Geographic**  **Distribution 1**  **Reported on Rubus** 

**spp. 2**  **Quaran**

 

** tine Pest** **Plant Part(s)**

**Association 3**  **Follow**

**Pathway** Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) EC (CABI, 2011; Tigrero, 1998 ) R, Rg (Camacho,

1994 ; White and Elson

- Harris, 1992) Ri (Oroño et al., 2006) Yes F (Camacho, 1994; White and Elson

Harris, 1992) Yes

**Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae** Trialeurodes vaporariorum Westwood EC (Valarezo et al., 2004) US (CABI, 2011) Ri (CABI, 2011) No N/A N/A

**Hemiptera: Aphididae** Amphorophora rubi (Kaltenbach) EC (CAF, 1992) US (Jensen et al., 1999) Ri (CAF, 1992;

INRA, 2011) No N/A N/A

Aphis craccivora Koch EC (Jensen et al., 1999; Merino, 2003; Rogg, 2000) US (CABI, 2011; Jensen et al., 1999) Ri (Klein Koch and

Waterhouse, 2000) No N/A N/A

Aphis idaei van der Goot EC (CAF, 1992) Ri (CABI, 2011; CAF, 1992; INRA, 2011) Yes L, Sh (CAF, 1992) No

Aphis sp. EC (Moretta, 1995; FDS, 1994; Sigcha, 2003) R ( FDS, 1994 ;

Sigcha, 2003 ); Rs (Isaac and Orellana, 1985; Moretta, 1995 ) Yes L, Sh (Moretta, 1995) No

Aphis spiraecola Patch EC (CABI, 2011; MAG, 1986; Rogg, 2000) US (CABI, 2011; Jensen et al., 1999) Ri (Klein Koch and

Waterhouse, 2000) No N/A N/A

**Hemiptera: Coccidae** Coccus hesperidum Linnaeus EC (MAG, 1986; Rogg, 2000; Ruales, 1984) US (Arnett Jr., 2000; Ben

- Dov et al., 2011 ; CABI, 2011) Ri (Klein Koch and

Waterhouse, 2000) No N/A N/A

**Hemiptera: Coreidae** Leptoglossus zonatus (Dallas) EC (Moretta, 1995; Rogg, 2000; Ruales, 1984) US (Schaefer and Panizzi, 2000) Rs ( Moretta, 1995 No N/A N/APest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 9 **Pest Scientific Name Geographic**  **Distribution 1**  **Reported on Rubus** 

**spp. 2**  **Quaran**

 

** tine Pest** **Plant Part(s)**

**Association 3**  **Follow**

**Pathway Hemiptera: Diaspididae**  Aulacaspis rosae (Bouché) EC (Rogg, 2000) US (CABI, 2011) Ri ( Ben

- Dov et al.,

2011 ; CABI, 2011; Klein Koch and Waterhouse, 2000) No N/A N/A

Diaspidiotus perniciosus (Comstock) EC, US (CABI, 2011) R (CABI, 2011) No N/A N/A
Lepidosaphes ulmi Linnaeus EC (Rogg, 2000) US (CABI, 2011) Ri ( Ben

- Dov et al.,

2011 No N/A N/A
Pseudaulacaspis pentagona (Targioni Tozzetti) MacGillivray EC (Rogg, 2000) US ( Ben

- Dov et al., 2011 ; CABI, 2011; Miller, 2005) R (CABI, 2011) No N/A N/A

**Hemiptera: Margarodidae** Margarodes sp. EC (CAF, 1992) R (CAF, 1992) Yes R (CAF, 1992) No
**Hemiptera: Pentatomidae** Nezara viridula (Linnaeus) EC (Arias et al., 1992; Rogg, 2000) US (CABI, 2011) Ri (CABI, 2011) No N/A N/A

Thyanta perditor (Fabricius) EC (Merino, 2003; Rogg, 2000) US (Schaefer and Panizzi, 2000) Rs (PestID, 2011) No N/A N/A

**Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae** Pseudococcus viburni Signoret EC, US ( Ben

- Dov et al., 2011 ) Ri ( Ben

- Dov et al.,

2011 ; Klein Koch and Waterhouse, 2000) No N/A N/A

**Lepidoptera: Arctiidae** Lophocampa sp. EC (Gara and Onore, 1989) Rs (Gara and Onore,

1989) Yes L (Gara and Onore, 1989) No
**Lepidoptera: Hepialidae** Hepialus sp. EC (CAF, 1992; Moretta, 1995; FDS, 1994; Sigcha, 2003) R (CAF, 1992

Moretta, 1995; FDS, 1994; Sigcha, 2003 ) Yes R, S (Moretta, 1995) No

**Lepidoptera: Noctuidae** Agrotis ipsilon (Hufnagel) EC (CABI, 2011; MAG, 1986; Rogg, 2000; Ruales, 1984) US (Arnett Jr., 2000; CABI, 2011) Ri (Klein Koch and

Waterhouse, 2000) No N/A N/A

Copitarsia sp. EC (PestID, 2011; MAG, 1986; Rogg, 2000) R (PestID, 2011) Yes F (PestID, 2011) YesPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 10 **Pest Scientific Name Geographic**  **Distribution 1**  **Reported on Rubus** 

**spp. 2**  **Quaran**

 

** tine Pest** **Plant Part(s)**

**Association 3**  **Follow**

**Pathway** Copitarsia decolora Guenée Syn.: C. turbata ( Herrich & Schäffer) EC (Angulo and Olivares, 2003; Angulo and Olivares, 2010; MAG, 1986; Rogg, 2000; Ruales, 1984; Vaughan, 1982) Ri (Klein Koch and

Waterhouse, 2000) Yes F (PestID, 2011), L, S (Angulo, 2004) Yes 5

Euxoa scandens (Riley) EC (Rogg, 2000) US (Mello, 2005; Losey et al., 2003; Zhang, 1994) Ri (Robinson et al.,

2007) No N/A N/A

Peridroma saucia (Hübner) EC (MAG, 1986; Rogg, 2000; Ruales, 1984) US (CABI, 2011) Ri (CABI, 2011;

PMRA, 2007; Robinson et al., 2007) No N/A N/A

Spodoptera dolichos (Fabricius) EC (Pogue, 2003; Rogg, 2000) US (Heppner and Habeck, 1976; Losey et al., 2003) Ri (Robinson et al.,

2007) No N/A N/A

Spodoptera ornithogalli (Guenée) EC (Rogg, 2000) US (Arnett Jr., 2000; CABI, 2011; Zhang, 1994) Ri (Robinson et al.,

2007) No N/A N/A

Trichoplusia ni (Hübner) EC (Sponagel, 1999; Rogg, 2000) US (Arnett Jr., 2000; CABI, 2011; Zhang, 1994) Ri ( PMRA, 2007 ); Rs

(Rogg, 2000) No N/A N/A

**Phasmatodea: Diapheromeridae** Donusa phyllopoda Sellick EC (Gara and Onore, 1989) Rs (Gara and Onore,

1989) Yes L (Gara and Onore, 1989) No
**Thysanoptera: Thripidae** Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande) EC (CABI, 2011; Sponagel, 1999; Rogg, 2000; Tayupantha and Gallegos, 2001) US (Arnett Jr., 2000; CABI, 2011; Hoddle et al., 2004) Ri, Rs (PestID, 2011) No N/A N/A

5 Copitarsia decolora attack s mainly leaves and only occasionally fruit s of its hosts ( Angulo, 2004 )

. Nonetheless, species of Copitarsia have been intercepted frequently at U.S. ports

- of

- entry on fruit of Rubus species from Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, and Guatemala

. Consequently, this species is considered likely to follow the pathway of Andean blackberries and/or raspberries from Ecuador.Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 11 **Pest Scientific Name Geographic**  **Distribution 1**  **Reported on Rubus** 

**spp. 2**  **Quaran**

 

** tine Pest** **Plant Part(s)**

**Association 3**  **Follow**

**Pathway** Frankliniella sp. EC (Moretta, 1995) Ri (PestID, 2011); Rs (PestID, 2011; Moretta, 1995) Yes Fl, F , (Moretta, 1995); Fr (PestID, 2011) Yes

Thrips tabaci Lindeman EC (CABI, 2011; MAG, 1986; Sponagel, 1999) US (CABI, 2011) Ri (Klein Koch and

Waterhouse, 2000) No N/A N/A

**BACTERIA** Agrobacterium rubi (Hildebrand) Young et al. EC (Moretta, 1995) US (Bradbury, 1986; CABI, 2011) Ri (Bradbury, 1986);

Rs (Moretta, 1995) No N/A N/A

Erwinia amylovora (Burrill) Winslow et al. EC (Moretta, 1995; Rogg, 2000) US (Bradbury, 1986; CABI, 2011; Hayward and Waterston, 1965) Ri (Hayward and

Waterston, 1965; PMRA, 2007) No N/A N/A

Rhizobium radiobacter (Beijerinck & van Delden) Young et al. Syn.: Agrobacterium tumefaciens (Smith & Townsend) Conn EC (Moretta, 1995; FDS, 1994; Sigcha, 2003) US (Bradbury, 1986; CABI, 2011) Rg (Moretta, 1995;

FDS, 1994; Sigcha, 2003); Ri (Bradbury, 1986; PMRA, 2007) No N/A N/A

**FUNGI 23**  Alternaria sp. EC (MAG, 1986; MAG and IICA, 2001; PestID, 2011) Rs (MAG, 1986;

MAG and IICA, 2001; PestID, 2011) Yes L (MAG, 1986; MAG and IICA, 2001) No

Appendiculella calostroma (Desm.) Höhn. Syn.: Irene calastroma (Desm.) Höhn., Meliola puiggarii Speg., Sphaeria calostroma Desm. EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) US (Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (Farr and

Rossman, 2011); Rs (Wellman, 1977) No N/A N/A

Armillaria mellea (Vahl) P. Kumm. EC (MAG, 1986; FDS, 1994) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (CAF , 1992; Farr

and Rossman, 2011; FDS, 1994) No N/A N/A

Botryosphaeria obtusa (Schwein.) Shoemaker Syn.: Sphaeropsis malorum Peck EC (MAG, 1986) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (Farr and

Rossman, 2011 ) No N/A N/APest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 12 **Pest Scientific Name Geographic**  **Distribution 1**  **Reported on Rubus** 

**spp. 2**  **Quaran**

 

** tine Pest** **Plant Part(s)**

**Association 3**  **Follow**

**Pathway** Botryosphaeria ribis Grossenb. & Duggar EC (MAG, 1986; Rogg, 2000; Vaughan, 1982) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 201 2 ) R (CABI, 2011) No N/A N/A

Botryotinia fuckeliana (de Bary) Whetzel Syn.: Botrytis cinerea Pers., Sclerotinia fuckeliana (de Bary) Fuckel EC (FDS, 1994; Camacho, 1994; Isaac and Orellana, 1985 ; Moretta, 1995) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Rg (Camacho, 1994;

FDS, 1994); Ri (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011); Rs ( Isaac and Orellana, 1985 ; Moretta, 1995) No N/A N/A

Botrytis sp. EC (MAG, 2001) Rg (MAG, 2001) Yes F (MAG, 2001) Yes
Campanulospora rubi Salazar

- Yepes, Pardo

Card. & Buriticá EC ( Martin, 2002 ) Rg, Rs ( Martin, 2002 ) Yes L, S ( Martin, 2002 ) No

Cercospora sp. EC (CAF, 1992; Moretta, 1995; FDS, 1994; Sigcha, 2003) Rg (CAF, 1992; FDS,

1994; Sigcha, 2003); Rs (Moretta, 1995) Yes L (CAF, 1992; Moretta, 1995 ) No

Cladosporium sp. 6 EC (Farr and Rossman, 2011; MAG, 1986; PestID, 2011) US (Farr and Rossman, 2011) Rg (Farr and

Rossman, 2011; PestID, 2011 ) No N/A N/A

Colletotrichum acutatum Simmonds EC ( Yepes et al., 2007 ) US (CABI, 2012 ; Martin et al., 2000a) Ri ( Martin et al.,

2000 ; Vizuete et al., 2002 ) No F, L, R, S ( Martin et al., 2000 ; Yepes et al., 2007 ) Yes

Curvulariopsis cymbisperma (Pat.) M.B. Ellis EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Rs (Læssøe and

Petersen, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Yes L (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011) No

Cylindrocarpon destructans var

. destructans (Zinssm.) Scholten EC (Farr and Rossman, 2011; Vaughan, 1982) US (Farr and Rossman, 2011) Rg (Cedeño et al.,

2004) No N/A N/A

Cylindrocarpon sp. EC ( MAG, 2001 ) Rg ( MAG, 2001 ) Yes R, S ( MAG, 2001 ) No

6 Based on International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC, 2009) standards , risk mitigation measures are not considered for organisms identified only to genus level if that genus occurs in the United States.Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 13 **Pest Scientific Name Geographic**  **Distribution 1**  **Reported on Rubus** 

**spp. 2**  **Quaran**

 

** tine Pest** **Plant Part(s)**

**Association 3**  **Follow**

**Pathway** Didymella applanata (Niessl) Saccardo Syn.: Mycosphaerella rubina (Peck) House, Phoma argillacea (Bres.) Aa & Boerema, Phyllosticta argillacea Bres. EC (Moretta, 1995) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (CABI, 2011; Farr

and Rossman, 2011; PMRA, 2007); Rs (Moretta, 1995) No N/A N/A

Discostroma fuscellum (Berkeley & Broome) Huhndorf Syn.: Sporocadus lichenicola Corda EC (Moretta, 1995) US (Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri ( Farr and

Rossman, 2011 ); Rs ( Moretta, 1995 ) No N/A N/A

Elsinoë ampelina Shear EC 7

, US (CABI, 2011) Rg, Rs ( CABI, 2011) No N/A N/A

Elsinoe veneta (Burkholder) Jenk. Syn.: Gloeosporium venetum Speg., Plectodiscella veneta Burkholder, Sphaceloma necator (Ellis & Everh.) Jenk. & Shear EC (Moretta, 1995; Rogg, 2000) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (Farr and

Rossman, 2011; PMRA, 2007; Sivanesan and Critchet, 1976); Rs (Moretta, 1995; Rogg, 2000) No N/A N/A

Fusarium culmorum (W.G. Smith) Saccardo Syn.: F

. roseum f. cereale (Cooke) W.C. Snyder & H.N. Hansen EC (Ochoa, 1990; Vaughan, 1982) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (Farr and

Rossman, 2011) No N/A N/A

Fusarium oxysporum Schltdl.:Fr. (Ascomycetes: Hypocreales) EC (MAG, 1986; Rogg, 2000; Vaughan, 1982) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri ( CABI, 2011 ; Farr

and Rossman, 2011 ) No N/A N/A

Fusarium sp. (Hyphomycetes) EC ( MAG, 2001 ) Rg ( MAG, 2001 ) Yes R, S ( MAG, 2001 ) No

Gerwasia andinus (Lagerheim) Buriticá & Salazar Syn.: G

. lagerheimii (P. Magnus) Buriticá, Mainsia lagerheimii (P. Magnus) Jackson & Holway EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011; Salazar et al., 2007) Rg (Buriticá, 1999;

Farr and Rossman, 2011); Rs (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011; Salazar et al., 2007) Yes L (Buriticá, 1999) No

7 Reported in Colombia and Peru (neighboring countries) on raspberry and blackberry.Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 14 **Pest Scientific Name Geographic**  **Distribution 1**  **Reported on Rubus** 

**spp. 2**  **Quaran**

 

** tine Pest** **Plant Part(s)**

**Association 3**  **Follow**

**Pathway** Gerwasia clara (H.S. Jacks. & Holw.) Buriticá EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011; Salazar et al., 2007) Rs (Læssøe and

Petersen, 2011; Salazar et al., 2007) Yes L (Buriticá, 1999) No

Gerwasia cundinamarcensis (Mayor) Buriticá EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011) Rg (Buriticá, 1999);

Rs (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011; Salazar et al., 2007) Yes L (Buriticá, 1999) No

Gerwasia holwayii (Jackson) Buriticá EC (Salazar et al., 2007) Rs (Salazar et al.,

2007) Yes L (Buriticá, 1999) No
Gerwasia peruviana (Jackson) Buriticá Syn.: Mainsia peruviana Jackson EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011; Salazar et al., 2007) Rs (Læssøe and

Petersen, 2011; Salazar et al., 2007) Yes L (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011) No

Gerwasia quitensis (Lagerheim) Buriticá Syn.: Mainsia quitensis (Lagerheim) Jackson & Holway EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011; Salazar et al., 2007) Rs (Læssøe and

Petersen, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011; Salazar et al., 2007) Yes L (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011) No

Gerwasia sp. EC (Camacho, 1994) Rg (Camacho, 1994) Yes L (Camacho, 1994) No

Gerwasia tenella (Jackson & Holway) Buriticá EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011; Salazar et al., 2007) Rs (Læssøe and

Petersen, 2011) Yes L (Buriticá, 1999) No

Gerwasia variabilis (Mayor) Buriticá EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011; Salazar et al., 2007) Rg (Buriticá, 1999);

Rs (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011) Yes L (Buriticá, 1999) No

Gibberella aveneria R. J. Cook Syn: Fusarium

avenaceum (Corda:Fr.) Sacc. EC, US (CABI, 2011) Ri (CABI, 2011) No N/A N/A

Gloeosporium sp. EC (Camacho, 1994 ; FDS, 1994; Isaac and Orellana, 1985 ) Rg (Camacho, 1994);

Ri (FDS, 1994); Rs ( Isaac and Orellana, 1985 ) Yes L, S (Camacho, 1994; FDS, 1994; Isaac and Orellana, 1985) No

Glomerella cingulata (Stoneman) Spauld. & H. Schrenk Syn.: Colletotrichum gloeosporioides (Penz.) Penz. & Sacc. EC (MAG, 1986; Rogg, 2000; Vaughan, 1982) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (Gally et al., 1997) No N/A N/A

Gymnoconia nitens (Schwein.) F. Kern & H.W. Thurston EC (Moretta, 1995) US (Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (Farr and

Rossman, 2011; Laundon and Rainbow, 1969) No N/A N/APest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 15 **Pest Scientific Name Geographic**  **Distribution 1**  **Reported on Rubus** 

**spp. 2**  **Quaran**

 

** tine Pest** **Plant Part(s)**

**Association 3**  **Follow**

**Pathway** Gymnoconia sp. EC ( Camacho, 1994 ; CAF, 1992) Rg ( Camacho, 1994 ;

CAF, 1992) Yes L, S (CAF, 1992) No

Kuehneola loeseneriana Henn. EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011; (Farr and Rossman, 2011) Rs (Farr and

Rossman, 2011; Hernández and Hennen, 2003) Yes L, S (Hernández and Hennen, 2003) No

Leptosphaeria coniothyrium Fuckel Syn.: Coniothyrium fuckelii Sacc., Diapleella coniothyrium Fuckel, Kalmusia coniothyrium Fuckel EC (Moretta, 1995) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (CABI, 2011; Farr

and Rossman, 2011); Rs (Farr and Rossman, 2011; Moretta, 1995) No N/A N/A

Macrophoma sp

. EC (MAG, 1986; PestID, 2011) Rs (MAG, 1986;

PestID, 2011) Yes F (MAG, 1986; PestID, 2011) Yes

Meliola manca (Ellis & G. Martin) Hansf. EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011) US (Farr and Rossman, 2011) Rs (Læssøe and

Petersen, 2011) No N/A N/A

Mycosphaerella rubi Roark. Syn.: Septoria rubi Westend. EC ( Isaac and Orellana, 1985 ; Moretta, 1995) US (Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri ( Farr and

Rossman, 2011 ); Rs ( Isaac and Orellana, 1985 ; Moretta, 1995 ) No N/A N/A

Neonectria discophora (Mont.) Mantiri & Samuels Syn.: Cylindrocarpon ianthothele Wollenw, Hypomyces rubi (Osterw.) Wollenw , N

. discophora var. rubi Brayford & Samuels, Nectria mammoidea (Mont.) Mantiri & Samuels , N

. rubi Osterw EC (Moretta, 1995) US (Farr and Rossman, 2011) Rg (Cedeño et al.,

2004); Ri (Farr and Rossman, 2011) No N/A N/A

Oidium sp. EC ( CAF, 1992; Moretta, 1995 ; Sigcha, 2003 ) Rg (CAF, 1992;

Sigcha, 2003) ; Rs (Moretta, 1995) Yes L (CAF, 1992); F, L (Moretta, 1995) Yes

Ophionectria rubicola Pat

. EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011) Rs (Læssøe and

Petersen, 2011) Yes S (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011) NoPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 16 **Pest Scientific Name Geographic**  **Distribution 1**  **Reported on Rubus** 

**spp. 2**  **Quaran**

 

** tine Pest** **Plant Part(s)**

**Association 3**  **Follow**

**Pathway** Peronospora sp. EC (Camacho, 1994) Rg (Camacho, 1994) Yes L (Camacho, 1994) No
Peronospora sparsa Berk. EC (Moretta, 1995; UCE and Expoflores, 1999) US (Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri ( Farr and

Rossman, 2011 ); Rs ( Moretta, 1995 ) No N/A N/A

Phlebia incarnata (Schwein.) Nakasone & Burds. EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011) US (Farr and Rossman, 2011) Rs (Læssøe and

Petersen, 2011) No N/A N/A

Phragmidium rubi

- idaei (DC.) P. Karst. Syn.: P

. gracile Arthur, P

. imitans Arthur , Uredo gyrosa Rebent EC (Moretta, 1995) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (CABI, 2011; Farr

and Rossman, 2011); Rs (Farr and Rossman, 2011; Moretta, 1995) No N/A N/A

Phytophthora cactorum (Lebert & Cohn) J. Schröt. EC (Rodriguez and Velastegui, 1998; Rogg, 2000) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri ( Farr and

Rossman, 2011 ) No N/A N/A

Phytophthora cinnamomi Rands EC (CABI, 2011; Rogg, 2000; Vaughan, 1982) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (Farr and

Rossman, 2011) No N/A N/A

Phytophthora citrophthora (R.E. Sm. & E.H. Sm.) Leonian EC (CABI, 2011; Rogg, 2000) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (Farr and

Rossman, 2011; Wilcox and Latorre , 2002) No N/A N/A

Phytophthora cryptogea Pethybr. & Laff. EC (Rogg, 2000) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (CABI, 2011; Farr

and Rossman, 2011; Wilcox and Latorre, 2002) No N/A N/A

Phytophthora erythroseptica Pethybr. EC (Rogg, 2000) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (Farr and

Rossman, 2011) No N/A N/A

Phytophthora fragariae Hickman EC (CABI, 2011) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri ( CABI, 2011 ; Farr

and Rossman, 2011 ) No N/A N/APest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 17 **Pest Scientific Name Geographic**  **Distribution 1**  **Reported on Rubus** 

**spp. 2**  **Quaran**

 

** tine Pest** **Plant Part(s)**

**Association 3**  **Follow**

**Pathway** Phytophthora megasperma Drechsler Syn.: P

. megasperma var. Megasperma Drechsler E **C** (Rogg, 2000) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (Farr and

Rossman, 2011) No N/A N/A

Pleospora herbarum Pers.) Rabenh. EC (UCE and Expoflores, 1999) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (Farr and

Rossman, 2011) No N/A N/A

Rhizoctonia sp. EC ( MAG, 2001 ) Rg ( MAG, 2001 ) Yes R, S ( MAG, 2001 ) No

Rosellinia necatrix Prill. EC (MAG, 1986; Pionce and Olvera, 1997) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri ( CABI, 2011 ; Farr

and Rossman, 2011 ) No N/A N/A

Rosellinia sp. EC (CAF, 1992) Rg (CAF, 1992) Yes R (CAF, 1992) No

Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary EC (Rogg, 2000; Vaughan, 1982) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (CABI, 2011) No N/A N/A

Scutelliformis bicornus Salazar

- Yepes, Pardo

Card. & Buriticá EC ( Martin, 2002 ; Yepes et al., 2007 Rg, Rs ( Martin, 2002

Yepes et al., 2007 ; ) Yes L , S ( Martin, 2002 ; Yepes et al., 2007 ) No

Septoria sp. EC (FDS, 1994) Ri (FDS, 1994) Yes L 8 (Ellis et al., 1991; Horst, 2001) No

Sphaerotheca macularis (Wallr.:Fr.) Lind Syn.: S

. humuli (DC.) Burrill EC (Rogg, 2000) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (Farr and

Rossman, 2011) No N/A N/A

Sphaerotheca sp. EC (CAF, 1992; Moretta, 1995 ; FDS, 1994 ) Ri (CAF, 1992; FDS,

1994); Rs (Moretta, 1995) Yes Fr, L (Moretta, 1995) Yes

Stereum purpureum Pers. Syn.: Chondrostereum purpureum Pouzar EC (Farr and Rossman, 2011) US (CABI, 2011) Ri ( CABI, 2011 ; Farr

and Rossman, 2011 ) No N/A N/A

8 Species of Septoria causes leaf spo t on Rubus sp. ( Ellis et al., 1991; Horst, 2001 ).Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 18 **Pest Scientific Name Geographic**  **Distribution 1**  **Reported on Rubus** 

**spp. 2**  **Quaran**

 

** tine Pest** **Plant Part(s)**

**Association 3**  **Follow**

**Pathway** Thanatephorus cucumeris Donk Syn.: Rhizoctonia solani J.G. Kühn EC (MAG, 1986; Rogg, 2000; Vaughan, 1982) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (Farr and

Rossman, 2011) No N/A N/A

Verticillium albo

- atrum Reinke & Berthier EC (Moretta, 1995; Camacho, 1994) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Rg ( Camacho, 1994 );

Ri ( Farr and Rossman, 2011 ); Rs ( Moretta, 1995 ) No N/A N/A

Verticillium dahliae Kleb. EC (Moretta, 1995; Rogg, 2000) US (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011) Ri (CABI, 2011); Rs

(Moretta, 1995) No N/A N/A

Verticillium sp. EC (CAF, 1992; Isaac and Orellana, 1985 ; FDS, 1994) Rg (CAF, 1992; FDS,

1994); Rs ( Isaac and Orellana, 1985 ) Yes R, (CAF, 1992; Isaac and Orellana, 1985) No

Volutella setosa (Grev.) Berk. EC (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011) Rs (Læssøe and

Petersen, 2011) Yes L (Læssøe and Petersen, 2011) No

**MOLLUSKS** Deroceras reticulatum (Muller) Syn.: Agriolimax reticulatus Mueller EC (PestID, 2011) US (Berry, 1998; Getz, 1959; Willson, 1992) Ri (PestID, 2011) No N/A N/A

Guppya gundlachi (Pfeiffer) EC (PestID, 2011) US (Perez, 2007; Sandoval, 1999) Ri (PestID, 2011) No N/A N/A

**NEMATODES** Aphelenchus sp

. EC (Moretta, 1995) Rs (Moretta, 1995) Yes R (Moretta, 1995) No
Dorylaimus sp. EC (Moretta, 1995) Rs (Moretta, 1995) Yes R (Moretta, 1995) No
Helicotylenchus sp. EC (Moretta, 1995) Rs (Moretta, 1995) Yes R (Moretta, 1995) No
Meloidogyne arenaria (Neal) Chitwood EC (CABI, 2011; INIAP, 1992) US (CABI, 2011; Ferris, 2011) Ri (Ferris, 2011) No N/A N/A

Meloidogyne hapla Chitwood EC (CABI, 2011; INIAP, 1992) US (CABI, 2011; Ferris, 2011) Ri (Ferris, 2011) No N/A N/APest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 19 **Pest Scientific Name Geographic**  **Distribution 1**  **Reported on Rubus** 

**spp. 2**  **Quaran**

 

** tine Pest** **Plant Part(s)**

**Association 3**  **Follow**

**Pathway** Meloidogyne javanica (Treub) Chitwood EC (CABI, 2011; INIAP, 1992) US (CABI, 2011; Ferris, 2011) Ri (Ferris, 2011) No N/A N/A

Meloidogyne sp. EC (Moretta, 1995) Rs (Moretta, 1995) Yes R (Moretta, 1995) No

Mononchus sp. EC (Moretta, 1995) Rs (Moretta, 1995) Yes R (Moretta, 1995) No

Nacobbus sp. EC (Moretta, 1995) Rs (Moretta, 1995) Yes R (Moretta, 1995) No
Pratylenchus sp. EC (INIAP, 1992) Rg (INIAP, 1992) Yes R (INIAP, 1992) No
Pratylenchus neglectus (Rensch) Filipjev & S. Stekhoven EC, US (Ferris, 2011) Ri (Ferris, 2011) No N/A N/A

Pratylenchus penetrans (Cobb) Filipjev & Schuurmans Stekhoven EC ( Ferris, 2011 ; Moretta, 1995 ) US (CABI, 2011; Ferris, 2011) Ri ( Ferris, 2011 ) No N/A N/A

Trichodorus sp. EC (INIAP, 1992; Moretta, 1995) Rs (INIAP, 1992;

Moretta, 1995) Yes R (INIAP, 1992; Moretta, 1995) No

Tylenchorhynchus sp EC (MAG and IICA, 2001) US (Handoo et al., 2007) Ri (Handoo et al.,

2007 ; MAG and IICA, 2001) Yes R (Handoo et al., 2007) No

Tylenchus sp. EC (Moretta, 1995) Rs (Moretta, 1995) Yes R (Moretta, 1995) No
Xiphinema americanum Cobb EC (CABI, 2011 ) US (Handoo et al., 2007) Ri (CABI, 2011;

Handoo et al., 2007); Rs (Ferris, 2011) No N/A N/A

Xiphinema spp. EC (Moretta, 1995) Ri (Ferris, 2011; PMRA, 2007); Rs (Moretta, 1995) Yes R (Moretta, 1995; PMRA, 2007 ) No

**VIRUSES and**  **VIROIDS** Raspberry bushy dwarf virus EC, US ( Converse, 1991 ; Chamberlain et al., 2003 ; CABI, 2012 ) Rs ( Converse, 1991 ;

Chamberlain et al., 2003 ; CABI, 2012 ) No N/A N/A

Tomato ringspot virus EC, US ( Chamberlain et al., 2003 ; CABI, 2012 ; Converse, 1987 ; EPPO, 2006 ) Rs ( Chamberlain et

al., 2003 ; CABI, 2012 ; Converse, 1987 ; EPPO, 2006 ) No N/A N/APest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 20 2.4.2. Quarantine pests that are not candidates for further mitigation **General issues** . We excluded many of the organisms from further anal ys is because they did not satisfy the definition of a quarantine pest, or they were unlikel y to follow the pathway . For example , they were associated mainly with plant parts other than the commodity ; they were associated with the commodity , but were not reasonably expected to remain with the c ommodity during commercial production/processing; or they were intercepted as biological contaminants during inspection at ports

- of

- entry but would not be expected to be present with the commodity

. **Doubtful host association**

. W e could not conclude solely f rom scant interception data ( PestID, 2011 ) that the following organisms attack Rubus spp. : Diabrotica viridula Fabricius (Coleoptera: Chry somelidae) , Xyleborus affinis Eichhoff , and Xyleborus volvulus (Fabricius) ( Coleoptera: Scoly tidae ), Parlatoria ziziph i (Lucas) ( Hemiptera: Diaspididae ), Phenacoccus parvus Morrison and Planococcus minor (Maskell) ( Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae ), Paragonatas divergens (Distant) ( Hemiptera: Rhy parochromidae ), Corythaica cyathicollis (Costa) ( Hemiptera: Tingidae ), Phidotricha erigens Raganot (Lepidoptera: Py ralidae) , and Thrips palmi Karn y ( Thy sanoptera: Thripidae ). Therefore, we did not list them above.

The weevil Conoderus rufangulus has been intercepted on Rubus spp. shipments at United States ports

- of

- entry (PestID, 2011) , but we found no reports of Rubus spp. specifically as a host of C

. rufangulus

. Larvae are found at very low densities associated with assorted plant roots, notably grasses, corn, and flesh y roots (sugar beet) (Whittle, 1982). C onoderus rufa ngulus is a good flier and can contaminat e shipments of fruit from Chile (González, 1989) , and it is listed as a secondary or occasional pest in Chile (González, 1989; Prado, 1991). The only evidence for host status is the interceptions ; the biology of the pest indicates that th o se were intercepted hitchhik ers

. **Organisms i**  **dentified o**  **nly to g**  **enus** . Generall y, based on standards by the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC, 2009), we do not consider risk mitigation measures for organisms identified only

to the genus level if the genus in question is reported in the continental United States. Often there are many species within a genus, and we cannot know if the unidentified species occurs in the continental United States and, consequentl y, whether it meets the definition of a quarantine pest for the continental United States. In this risk assessment, the above statement applies to the arthropod s Frankliniella sp. and Noctuidae spp

. , and the pathogens Botrytis sp. , Macrophoma sp ., Oidium sp., and Sphae rotheca sp

. These genera are reported to occur in the continental United States (CABI, 2011; Farr and Rossman, 2011 ). Lack of specific identification may indicate the limits of current taxonomic knowledge or the life stage or quality of the specimen submitted for identification. 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. Conversel y, the development of detailed assessments for known pests that inhabit a variety of ecological niches, such as internal fruit feeders or foliage pests, allows effective mitigation measures to eliminate the known organisms as well as similar but incompletely identified organ isms that inhabit the same niche. If pests identified to higher taxa are intercepted in the future, we may reevaluate their risk.
2.4.3. Quarantine p ests l ikely to f ollow the p athway

and candidates for f

urther m itigation We identified three quarantine pests for further analy sis

— Anastrepha fraterculus
, Ceratitis capitata , and Copitarsia decolora (Table 5 ). All of these pests are reasonably expected to followPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 21 the pathway , i.e., be included in commercial shipments of Rubus glaucus and R

. idaeus fruit from Ecuador.

**Table 5.** Quarantine p ests (arthropods) l ikel y to f ollow the p athway

. **Organism Taxonomy**  Anastrepha fraterculus Diptera: Tephritidae Ceratitis capitata Diptera: Tephritidae Copitarsia decolora Lepidoptera: Noctuidae

**2.5. Risk Assessment**
2.5.1. Consequences of Introduction We considered the negative impacts resulting from the introduction and establishment of quarantine pests in this assessment. We rated the potential consequences of introduction using the five risk elements described in the Guidelines for the Pathway

- Initiated Pest Risk Assessments, Version 5.02 ( PPQ, 2000 ). For each risk element, we rated the pest Low (1 point), Medium (2 points), or High (3 points). We summed all the risk element values to calculate a cumulative risk rat ing score, which is a biological indicator of the potential of the pest to establish, spread, and cause economic and environmental impacts ( PPQ, 2000 ) . We summarized the ratings for the Consequences of Introduction below ( Table 6 )

.

**Anastrepha fraterculus Risk ratings**  **Risk Element #1: Climate**

**- Host Interaction**  Anastrepha fraterculus represents a species complex (e.g., CABI, 2011; Caceres et al., 2009; Foote et al., 1993; Weems, 2002; White and Elson

- Harris, 1992 ). The sibling species in this complex vary in morphology and pest status ( Foote et al., 1993; Weems, 2002 ). Anastrepha fraterculus occurs in North, Central, and South America and the Caribbean, ranging from southern Texas to Argentina ( CABI, 2011 ; Foote et al., 1993 ; PPQ, 2002 )

. Itoccurs in southern Texas (Rio Grande Valley), Mexico (restricted distribution), Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Trinidad and Tobago, Argentina (restricted distribution), Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Paraguay, P eru, Suriname, Uruguay, and Venezuela ( CABI, 2011; PPQ, 2002 ). This distribution covers a temperature range corresponding to USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 8

- 11 (Magarey et al., 2008). Thus, th ose areas would provide suitable climatic conditions for establishment of the pest. In these areas, multiple hosts of A. fraterculus are present (e.g., Citrus aurantium, Prunus persica, and Pyrus communis ) (Kartesz, 2011). Because Zone 11 only comprises approximately 0.1 percent of the United States (PERAL, 2008), we do n ot count it toward the total number of zones for determining the Climate

- Host Interaction risk rating. Therefore, we rate d this element as Medium. Medium (2)

**Risk Element #2: Host Range** Anastrepha fraterculus feeds on multiple genera in multiple plant families, including Actinidiaceae (

Actinidia ), Anacardiaceae ( Mangifera, Spondias, Anacardium ), Annonaceae (

Annona ), Combretaceae ( Terminalia ), Ebenaceae ( Diospyros ), Fabaceae ( Inga ), Juglandaceae (

Juglans ), Lauraceae (Persea ), Moraceae (Ficus ), Myrtaceae High (3)Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 22 **Anastrepha fraterculus Risk ratings**  (Eugenia, Feijoa, Psidium, Syzygium ), Oleaceae ( Olea ), Oxalidaceae ( Averrhoa ), Punicaceae (Punica ), Rosaceae ( Cydonia, Eriobotrya, Fragaria, Malus, Prunus, Pyrus, Rubiaceae ( Coffea ), Rutaceae ( Citrus, Fortunella ), Sapotaceae ( Manilkara, Pouteria ), Solanaceae ( Solanum ), Sterculiaceae ( Theobroma ), and Vitaceae ( Vitis ) ( CABI, 2011; White and Elson

- Harris, 1992 ). **Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential** Anastrepha fraterculus has high reproductive and dispersal potentials. Females can lay up to 50 eggs in a single fruit, depending on the maturity and variety of the host fruit ( PPQ, 2002 ). Under laboratory conditions, females deposit from 200 to 400 eggs total in host fruits (F letcher, 1989 ) . There can be six to seven generations per year ( PPQ, 2002 ). In mark

-release

-recapture experiments in Brazil, adults of A. fraterculus were captured up to 800 meters from their release point (Kovaleski et al., 1999). The most important means of long

- distance movement of A. fraterculus is the international trade of infested fruit ( CABI, 2011 ) . Since 1985, inspectors at U.S. ports

- of

- entry have intercepted Anastrepha species on fruits of different commodities (PestID, 2011). In addition, A. fra terculus can be transported as pupae in soil or in packaging or growing media accompanying plants ( CABI, 2011 ). High (3)

**Risk Element #4: Economic Impact** The A. fraterculus species complex damages economically important plants ( Weems, 2002 ). In Argentina, it is considered the most important pest of citrus ( PPQ, 2002 ). In Brazil, it causes severe yield losses in apple because of resulting fruit malformation and fruit drop, is a major concern of growers, and significantly restricts fresh fruit exports to countries with quarantine barriers (Sugayama et al., 1996). It is an important pest of guava and mango, and to some extent Prunus spp. ( CABI, 2011 ). The oviposition punctures (“stings”) alone may render fruit unmarketable (Gould and Raga, 2002). The introduction of A. fraterculus into new areas of the continental United States would likely stimulate control programs (APHIS, 1984 ; CABI, 2011; Guillen and Sanchez, 2007; Vera et al., 2007 ), thereby increasing crop production costs. Anastrepha fraterculus is a quarantine pest for numerous countries and regional plant protection organizations (CERIS, 2011; EPPO, 2007 ), and its introduction into the United States would likely lead to export restrictions of host commodities to markets outside of this pest’s known distribution. High (3)

**Risk Element #5: Environmenta l Impact**  Because of its broad host range, A. fraterculus may attack Federally threatened and endangered plant species in the continental United States, such as Prunus geniculata (endangered species in Florida) (USFWS, 2011). We consider this endangered species a potential host because it is in the same genus as known hosts of A. fraterculus

. However, A. fraterculus only affects the fruit of its hosts. We found no evidence that A. fraterculus damages the seeds or other non

- fruit parts of their hosts; therefore, we assume this fruit fly would have little, if any, direct effect on the population health of endangered plant species. The wider establishment of A. fraterculus in the continental United States would probably trigger the initiation of chemical control (APHIS, 1984 ; CABI, 2011; Guillen and Sanchez, 2007 ) and possibly classical biological control programs , as has occurred in Peru and Argentina ( Clausen, 1978; Wharton, 1989 ). Based on the potential indirect effects of contro l programs , as opposed to direct damage caused by this fruit fly, we rate this risk element Medium. Medium (2)Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 23 **Ceratitis capitata Risk ratings**  **Risk Element #1: Climate**

**- Host Interaction**  Ceratitis capitata (Medfly) is native to Africa and has spread throughout the Mediterranean region, Southern Europe (e.g., Spain, Italy, Cyprus), the Middle East, Western Australia, South and Central America (e.g., Argentina, Ecuador, Peru, Colombia), and Hawaii ( Fletcher, 1989 ; White and Elson

- Harris, 1992). The species can establish in California, Florida, and Texas, where it has been recorded intermittently, and subsequently eradicated (CABI, 2011). Based on this reported distribution, we estimate that Medfly could establ ish in areas of the continental United States corresponding to USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 8

- 11 (Magarey et al., 2008) . Multiple hosts of Medfly are present in these areas ( Citrus spp., Malus spp., Prunus spp., Pyrus communis , P. calleryana , Solanum lycoper sicum ) (Kartesz, 2011). Because Zone 11 only comprises approximately 0.1 percent of the United States (PERAL, 2008), we do not count it toward the total number of zones for determining the Climate

- Host Interaction risk rating. Therefore, we rate this eleme nt Medium. Medium (2)

**Risk Element #2: Host Range** Medfly is a polyphagous species that has been recorded from cultivated and wild hosts belonging to at least 51 genera among at least 30 plant families, including Anacardiaceae ( Anacardium, Mangifera, Spondias ), Annonaceae ( Annona ), Cactaceae ( Opuntia ), Malpighiaceae (

Malpighia ) , Moraceae (

Artocarpus, Ficus, Morus ), Myrtaceae (Eugenia, Feijoa, Psidium, Syzygium ), Punicaceae (Punica ) , Rosaceae ( Malus, Mespilus, Prunus ), Rutaceae ( Citrus ), Sapindaceae, (B lighia, Euphoria, Litchi ), Sapotaceae ( Chrysophyllum, Manilkara, Mimusops, Pouteria ), Solanaceae ( Capsicum, Solanum ), and Vitaceae ( Vitis ) (CABI, 2011; Liquido et al., 1991; Thomas et al., 2010; White and Elson

- Harris, 1992). High (3)

**Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential**  A female Medfly may lay up to 800 eggs (22 per day) during her lifetime (Thomas et al., 2010). The life cycle under favorable conditions [21.1

- 32.2  C (70

- 90°F)] may be completed in three weeks; however, under the climatic conditions in Florida (prevailing in the latitude of Orlando), 10 generations could develop under normal year

-round conditions (Knapp, 1998). Adult Medflies can fly as far as 32.2 km (20 miles) (Christenson and Foote, 1960; Steiner et al., 1962). Movement of infested co mmodities is the major means of dispersal to previously uninfested areas ( CABI, 2011 ). Since 1984, inspectors at U.S. ports

- of

- entry have intercepted Medfly over 3,000 times (PestID, 2011). Medfly may also be dispersed via puparia in soil or growing mediua accompanying plants ( CABI, 2011 ). High (3)

**Risk Element #4: Economic Impact** Because of its wide distribution and its wide host range, Medfly is ranked as the most important among economically important fruit flies (CABI, 2011; Weems, 1981). It
causes re duction of crop yield (Steck, 2006) and may also transmit fruit

-rotting fungi (CABI, 2011). Additionally, costs would be incurred to minimize the impact of Medfly on crop production, because the presence of larvae in the fruit may make the fruit unmarketab le (Andrew et al., 1977). The species is of quarantine significance for many countries (Steck, 2006). Its presence, even as temporary adventive populations, can lead to severe constraints for the export of fruits to uninfested areas in other parts of the

w orld; eradication of recurring populations of Medfly in an area (to maintain pest

- free status) can be very costly and resource intensive (Cayol et al., 2002; Steck, 2006). High (3)

**Risk Element #5: Environmental Impact** Because of its broad host range, Med fly may affect numerous Federal Threatened and Endangered (T&E) plant species in the continental United States [e.g., Argemone Medium (2)Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 24 **Ceratitis capitata Risk ratings**  pleiacantha ssp. pinnatisecta (E), Asimina tetramera (E), Berberis nevivii (E), Euphorbia telephioides (T), Prunus geniculata (E) , Ribes echinellum (T)] (USFWS, 2011). However, Medfly only affects the fruit of its hosts. We found no evidence that Medfly damages the seeds or other non

- fruit parts of its hosts; therefore, we assume this fruit fly would have little, if any, direct effe ct on the population health of threatened or endangered plant species. A potential and indirect effect of the establishment of Medfly is the continuance and possible increase in exotic fruit

- fly control programs, which would probably include chemical and b iological control (CABI, 2011; Ovruski et al., 2000; Purcell, 1998; APHIS, 2001 ; APHIS, 2011 ; Wharton, 1989). Based on the potential indirect effects of control programs , as opposed to direct damage caused by Medfly, we rate this risk element Medium.

**Copitarsia decolora Risk ratings**  **Risk Element #1: Climate** 

**- Host Interaction**  Copitarsia decolora occurs in Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela (Angulo and Olivares, 2003; Angulo and Olivares, 2010; Gomez, 1972 ; Lamborot et al., 1999; Liberman, 1986 ). Based on a comparison of this reported distribution with a global map of USDA Plant Hardiness Zones (Magarey et al., 2008), we estimate that C. decolora could establish in U.S. Plant Hardiness Zones 8

- 10. One or more of its potential hosts occur in these z ones ( Kartesz, 2011 ). Medium (2)

**Risk Element #2: Host Range** Copitarsia decolora is a polyphagous species that has been reported on Actinidia deliciosa (Actinidiaceae), Allium spp. (Liliaceae), Amaranthus cruentus (Amaranthaceae), Beta vulgaris (Chenopodiaceae), Brassica oleracea (Brassicaceae), Capsicum frutescens (Solanaceae), Chenopodium quinoa (Chenopodiaceae), Cynara scolymus (Asteraceae), Daucus carota (Apiaceae), Dianthus caryophyllus (Caryophyllaceae), Feijoa sellowiana (Myrtaceae), Fragaria ananassa (Rosaceae), Helianthus sp. (Asteraceae), Lactuca sativa (Asteraceae), Medicago sativa (Fabaceae), Pistacia vera (Anacardiaceae), Rubus sp. (Rosaceae), Simmondsia chinensis (Simmondsiaceae), Solanum tuberosum (Solanaceae), Tr iticum sp. (Poaceae), Vicia faba (Fabaceae), Zea mays (Poaceae) ( Angulo and Olivares, 2003 ; Arce de Hamity and Neder de Roman, 1992 ; Gome z, 1972; Guerrero et al., 2000; Lamborot et al., 1999). Copitarsia decolora attacks multiple species among multiple plant families. High (3)

**Risk Element #3: Dispersal Potential** C opitarsia decolora completes its life cycle in about 92 days at 17.3 °C and 78 percent relative humidity; a female can mature and deposit from 572 to 759 eggs during its life (Alcázar et al., 2004; Arce de Hamity and Neder de Roman, 1992 ) . Under laboratory conditions, C. decolora exhibited an average fecundity of 1038 eggs per female (Larraín, 1996). It completes three generations in a year during the spring

- summer period. Adul ts of Copitarsia can fly and spread locally. Long

- distance spread by this pest is accomplished via the movement of larvae in commercial plant materials, as evidenced by over 16,000 interceptions on a wide variety of commodities (PestID, 2011). High (3)

**Ri sk Element #4: Economic Impact**  Copitarsia decolora can reduce crop yields by killing seedlings and reduce the value of commodities by feeding on them or requiring controls (Alcázar et al., 2004 ). In Peru, C

. decolora is a major pest of potato (Alcala, 197 8). Defoliation on the order of 60 percent has been reported in rape ( Brassica napus var. napus ), although with no appreciable effect High (3)Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 25 **Copitarsia decolora Risk ratings**  on yield ( Larraín, 1996 ). Establishment of C

. decolora in the United States could cause a loss of foreign and domestic markets because it does not have a cosmopolitan distribution, and it attacks numerous crops of economic importance. The evidence would suggest that the risk associated with the potential economic impact of this pest is High. **Risk Element #5: Envi ronmental Impact**  Based on the Copitarsia decolora host range, it may negatively impact Federally threatened and endangered plants species in the continental United States, particularly congeners of current hosts, such as Amaranthus pumilus (DE, MA, MD, NC, NJ , NY, RI, SC, VA), Helianthus paradoxus (NM, TX), and Helianthus schweinitzii, (NC, SC) (USFWS, 2011 )

. As the species is a pest of important crops produced in the United States (e.g., potato, lettuce, grape, apple, and corn), biological and chemical control programs could be initiated where it is introduced ( Arce de Hamity and Neder de Roman, 1992 ; Klein Koch and Waterhouse, 2000; Angulo and Olivares, 2003 ). High (3)



### Table 6. Summary

risk ratings for Consequences of Introduction

. **Pest Risk elements**  **Cumulative Risk**  **Rating a**  **Climate**

**- Host**  **Interaction Host** 

**Range Dispersal** 

**Potential Economic** 

**Impact Environment** 

****

**al Impact** Anastrepha fraterculus Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (13) Ceratitis capitata Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) Med (2) High (13) Copitarsia decolora Med (2) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (14)

aLo w is 5

- 8 points, Medium is 9

- 12 points, and High is 13

- 15 points (PPQ, 2000).



### 2.5.2. L ikelihood of Introduction We summarized the ratings for the Likelihood of Introduction for each pest below ( Table 7 )

. **Quantity of commodity imported annually**

**.** The likelihood that an exotic species will arrive in the United States is related to the volume of a commodity shipped to the United States. In2005, Ecuador h ad approximately 4,275 hectares of Andean blackberry and raspberry crops , with a potential production of 6,840 metric tons of fruit ( PROFIAGRO, 2007a, 2007b; SESA, 2007). It is expected that initially

only a portion of Ecuador’s total pro duction will be exported to the United States due for internal demand of these fruits (372 gr/per capita/year) ( PROFIAGRO, 2007a, 2007b). This s ub

- element is estimated cons idering , the quantity of these fruits exported from Ecuador to other countries and the size of sea shipping containers . During 1999 to 2007, Ecuador exported an average of 13 metric tons of Andean blackberries and raspberries . In 2007, Ecuador registered 90 metric tons of these fruits exported to different countries ( PROFIAGRO, 2007a, 200 7b ). T he sea shipping containers that are ty pically used for estimating the volume of commodity

shipments are 40 feet (12.2 m) in length and hold approximately 40,000 pounds (18,182 kg or 20 tons) ( FAS, 2003 )

. Based on th e data, we estimated that the quantity of the commodity

exported annually

to the continental United States would be less than 10 shipping containers (40 feet) per year, resulting in a **Low** rating for all pests.

**Survive p**  **ost**

**- h**  **arvest t**  **reatment**

**.** Andean blackbe rries and raspberries exported from Ecuador

are harvested by

hand , placed in baskets, and carried to cold storage at 0  C (32  F)

. T he fruit isPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 26 then inspected and carried to the scale by size and maturity

grade ; fruit with defects and debris are removed

. Finally , the fruit is packed, weighed , and boxed in plastic baskets of 250 gram s each one, and placed in a cardboard box ( SESA, 2007 )

. Arthropods that feed internally are highly likely to survive these post

- harvest treatments . Therefore, we rated Anastreph a fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata **High** for this sub

- element.

External ly feeding arthropods are less likely to surviv e post

- harvest treatment s than internal feeding arthropods . For this reason , we rated C

. decolora **Medium**

. **Survive s**  **hipment**

**.** Andean blackberries and raspberries will be transported internally by truck under temperatures of 0.5 to 0  C and at relative humity of 85

- 90 percent
, prior to loading for air shipme nt to the continental United States ( SESA, 2007)

. Although we had no information on the timeframe for the storage and shipment of this commodity , we assume it is very short ( i.e

. , two day s or less). R ecords of interceptions of live adult and immature stages of external pests such as C. decolora on Rubus spp. and on other commodities from different countries indicate that external feeders can survive shipment ( PestID, 2011 )

. For internal feeders such as C

. capitata and species of A nastrepha (other than A. ludens ), PPQ (2011) currently recommends that fruit be treated at 1.67  C for 1 7 days or 1.11  C for 1 5 days to kill them . T herefore , a short shipment time is unlikely to affect the larval stages of these fruit flies

. C o nsequently, we rated these insects **High** for this sub

- element

.
**Not be**  **d etected at the**  **port**

**- of** 

**- e**  **ntry**

**.** Because internal feeders are well concealed, they are often highl y likely to escap e detection. Thus, we rated Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata **High** risk.

As an external pest , C

opitarsia decolora should be de tectable by trained inspectors . Th is is corroborated by numerous interceptions at U

. S

. ports

- of

- entry ( PestID, 2011 )

. We rated this pest **Medium** because it could escape detection by hiding in the hollow portion of the Andean blackberry

and raspberry

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

**.** 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 pre sence of suitable habitats for the pest. Risk ratings for this sub

- element are based on the proportion of the commodity that is likely

to move to locations suitable for pest survival. Andean blackberries and raspberries from Ecuador are likel y to be sold in every continental U.S.
s tate. Furthermore, if demand for this product is assumed to be proportional to the size of the consumer population in potential markets, then imports might be concentrated more in some regions of the United States than in others, not all of which may be conducive to pest survival. Forty
- three percent of the U.S. population resides in states wholly or partly within Plant Hardiness Zones 8 or above ( PERAL , 2008 ). Based on this assumption, areas suitable for these pests to establish permanent populations will likely include part of the country in the South and along the West Coast of the continental United States. Hosts of all of these pests and suitable temperatures for their reproduction would be available in those areas

. T herefore, we rated all insect s **High** for this sub

- element

.Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 27 **Come into contact with host material suitable for reproduction**

**.** Even if the final destination of infested commodities is suitable for pest survival, pests must still come into contact with suitable host material for their reproduction

. This process is depend s on two factors: the pest’s potential for dispersal, and the presence of host material in the region. All pests considered for analysis have the potential to be distrib uted great distances via human transport of infested host material. H osts of the extremely polyphagous species as Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata include widely cultivated plants that should be available throughout the potential range; these pests are rated High

. C opitarsia decolora also has a wide host range and can disperse aerial ly ; t herefore, it is given a High pest risk rating

.

**Table 7** 

**.** Risk Rating for Likelihood of Introduction

. **Pest Sub** 

**- Elements**  **Cumulative risk ratings**  **a Quantity**  **Imported Annually**  **Survive**

**Post**

  ** Harvest** **Treatment Survive** 

**Shipment Not be** 

**detected at port of**  **entry Moved to** 

**Suitable Habitat**  **Contact**

**with Host Material** 
Anastrepha fraterculus Low (1) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (16)

Ceratitis capitata Low (1) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (3) High (16)
Copitarsia decolora Low (1) Med (2) High (3) Med (2) High (3) High (3) Medium (14)

aLow is 6

- 9 points, Medium is 10

- 14 points and High is 15

- 18 points (PPQ, 2000).



## 3. **Pest Risk Potential and Conclusion**
We summed the Consequences of Introduction and the L ikelihood of Introduction values to esimate the Pest Risk Potentials for each pest (T able 8 )

. We found a pest risk potential of High for Anastrepha fraterculus, Ceratitis capitata , and Copitarsia decolora

. A High rating indicates that specific ph yt osanitary measures, supplemental to port

- of

- arrival inspection, are strongly recommended (PPQ, 2000)

.

**Table 8** 

**.** Pest Risk Potentials for quarantine pests on Andean bla ckberry and raspberry from Ecuador.
**Pest Consequences of**  **Introduction Likelihood of** 

**Introduction Pest Risk Potential**  **a** 

### Anastrepha fraterculus High ( 13 ) High ( 16 ) High ( 29 ) Ceratitis capitata High ( 13 ) High ( 16 ) High ( 29 ) Copitarsia decolora High ( 14 ) Medium (1 4 ) High ( 28 )

a 

### Lo w is 11

- 18 points, Medium is 19

- 26 points and High is 27

- 33 points

.Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 28 

## 4 **. Author s**  **and Reviewers**

**Authors:** Luis E. Forero, USDA

- APHI S

- PPQ

- CPHST

- PERAL Columbia Kayimbi M. Tubajika, USDA

- APHIS

- PPQ

- CPHST

- PERAL

**Reviewers:** James W Smith , USDA

- APHI S

- PPQ

- CPHST

- PERAL Lisa M. Ferguson, USDA

- APHIS

- PPQ

- CPHST

- PERAL Ashley Jackson, USDA

- APHI S

- PPQ

- CPHST

- PERAL , Editor



## 5 **. References**
7 CFR § 319. 2009. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 7, Part 319 (7 CFR §319.56

- Fruit and Vegetable Quarantine Regulations). Aguilera, A., R. Carrillo, R. Rebolledo, and F. Salazar. 1998. Antecedentes biológicos de Tetranychus urticae (Koch) (Acari: Tetranychidae) en frambueso cv. Heritage, en Temuco, Chile. Revista Chilena de Entomología (25):15

- 20. Alcala, C. P. 1978. Tachinid parasites of Copitarsia turbata Herr.

- Schäff. in the Mantaro Valley

. Revista Peruana Entomologia 21(1):126. Alcázar, J., G. Aldana, and S. May ta. 2004. El cultivo del ulluco en la sierra central del Perú. Centro Internacional de la Pap a, Lima, Perú. Capítulo V: Plagas y su Control. G. L ópez and M. Hermann, editors. 53

- 65 pp. Alvarez, A., and C. Acosta. 1997. Caracteristicas, daños, cultivos que atacan y control de la mosca de la fruta Anastrepha sp. Universidad agraria del Ecuador, Guayaquil, Ecuador. Andrew, C. O., J. C. Cato, and F. J. Prochaska. 1977. Potential economic impact of a fruit fly infestation on the US citrus industry . Proc. Florida State Hortic. Soc. 90:29

- 32. Angulo, A. 2004. Email from Dr Andres O. Angulo, Professor Associated, University of Concepción, Chile. Specialist in Systematic of Sudamerican Lepidopteran to Luis Ernesto Forero, Pest Risk Analy st, Center for Phy tosanitary Excellence CEF. Personal communication to L . Forero on Jul y 26, 2004, from Angulo, A. Angulo, A. O., and T. S. Olivares. 2003. Taxonomic update of the species of Copitarsia Hampson 1906, (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae: Cuculliinae). Gayana 67(1):33

- 38. Angulo, A. O., and T. S. Olivares. 2010. La polilla Copitarsia decolora : revisión del complejo de especies con base en la morfología genital masculina y de los huevos (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Revista de Biología Tropical 58(2):769

- 776. APHI S. 1984. Action Plan: South American Fruit Fly , Anastrepha fraterculus (Wiedem ann). United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHI S). 35 pp. APHI S. 2001. Fruitfl y Cooperative Control Program, Final Environmental Impact Statement

- 2001. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Pl ant Health Inspection Service, Riverdale, MD. 256 pp. APHI S. 2011. Fruits and Vegetables Import Requirements (FAVIR) Database. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHI S). https://epermits.aphis.usda.gov/manu al/index.cfm?ACTION=pubHome. (Archived at PERAL).Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 29 Arce de Hamity, M. G., and L . E. Neder de Roman. 1992. Important bioecological aspects of Copitarsia turbata (Herrich

- Schäffer) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in the determination of economic damage to crops of L actuca sativa L. from Quebrada de Humahuaca, Jujuy , Argentina. Revista Soc. Entomol. Argentina 50(1

- 4):73

- 87. Arias, M., J. Valarezo, O. Valarezo, and F. Chávez. 1992. Tecnología disponible para la problemática entomológica en cultivos del litoral. Boletín técnico No 69. INIAP, Proteca. Ecuador. Arnett Jr., R. H. 2000. American Insects: A Handbook of the Insects of America North of Mexico, 2nd ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. 1003 pp. Ben

- Dov, Y., D. R. Miller, and G. A. P. Gibson. 2011. ScaleNet, Scales on a Host, Natural Enemies and Associates of a Scale Query . Last accessed May 20, 2011, http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/scalenet/scalenet.htm

. Berry , R. E. 1998. Insects and Mites of Economic Importance in the Northwest. GRAY GARDEN SLUG Mollusca Agriolimax retic ulatum. OSU Bookstore, Inc., Corvallis, OR, USA. 221 pp. Bolland, H. R., J. Gutierrez, and C. H. W. Flechtmann. 1998. World Catalogue of the Spider Mite Family (Acari: Tetranychidae). Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands. 392 pp. Bradbury , J. F. 1986. Guide to P lant Pathogenic Bacteria. CAB International Mycological Institute, Slough, United Kingdom. 331 pp. Buddenhagen, C. 2003. Plan de manejo para la erradicación de Rubus glaucus Benth. (Rosaceae) en la Isla Santa Cruz, Galápagos. Charles Darwin Research Statio n, Galapagos. Buriticá, P. 1999. Directorio de Patógenos y Enfermedades de las Plantas de Importancia Económica en Colombia. Produmedios, Bogotá. 329 pp. CABI. 2011. Crop Protection Compendium. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau International (CABI). Walling ford, UK. (Archived at PERAL). CABI. 2012. Crop Protection Compendium. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau International (CABI). Wallingford, UK. Caceres, C., D. F. Segura, M. T. Vera, V. Wornoay porn, J. L . Cladera, P. Teal, P. Sapountzis, K. Bourtzis, A. Zacharopoulou, and A. S. Robinson. 2009. Incipient speciation revealed in Anastrepha fraterculus (Diptera; Tephritidae) b y studies on mating compatibility , sex pheromones, h ybridization, and cytology. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 97(1):152

- 165. CAF. 1992. Manual técnico del cultivo de la frambuesa. Manual técnico del cultivo de la mora. Corporación Andina de Fomento, (CAF). Centro Agric ola de Quito, Asistencia Agroempresarial Agribusiness Cia. L TDA, Quito, Ecuador. 27 pp. Camacho, L. 1994. Manejo del cultivo de la mora de castilla Rubus glaucus , Universidad agrária del Ecuador, Milagro, Ecuador. Cayol, J. P., Y. Rössler, M. Weiss, M. Bah dousheh, M. Omari, M. Hamalawi, and A. Almughayyar. 2002. Fruit fly control and monitoring in the Near East: shared concern in a regional transboundary

problem. Proceedings of 6th International Fruit Fly Sy mposium 6

- 10 May 2002, Stellenbosch, South Africa. Cedeño, L., C. Carrero, K. Quintero, H. Pinon, and W. Espinosa. 2004. Cylindrocarpon destructans var. destructans and Neonectria discophora var. rubi associated with black foot rot on blackberry

( Rubus glaucus Benth.) in Mérida, Venezuela. INCI 29(8):455

- 460. CERI S. 2011. Export Certification Project

- EXCERPT. Purdue University , Entomology Department, The Center for Environmental and Regulatory Information Systems (CERI S). http://excerpt.ceris.purdue.edu/ . (Archived at PERAL).Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 30 Chamberlain, C. J., J. Krau s, P. D. Kohmen, C. E. Finn, and R. R. Martin. 2003. First repport of raspberry bushy dwarf virus in rubus multibracteatus from China. Plant Dis. 87:603. Christenson, L . D., and R. H. Foote. 1960. Biology of fruit flies. Annual Review of Entomology 5(171

- 1 92). CIPM. 2010. States and Provinces Weed L ists. Western States and Provinces Weed L ists. Center for Invasive Plant Management (CIPM), Raleigh, NC. L ast accessed November 8, 2011, http://www.weedcenter.org

. Clausen, C. P. 1978. Tephritidae. Pages 320

- 335 in C. P. Clausen, (ed.). Introduced parasites and predators of arthropod pests and weeds: a world review. USDA Agriculture Handbook No. 480. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Research Service, Washington, D.C. Converse, R. H. 1987. Virus Diseases of Small Fruits. USDA

- ARS Agriculture Handbook 631 Converse, R. H. 1991. Diseases caused b y viruses and virus

- like agents. In: Ellis, M.A., R.H. Converse, R.N. Williams, and B. Williamson. Compendium of raspberry and b lackberry diseases and insects. APS Press, St. Paul, MN. p. 42

- 58. Ellis, M. A., R. H. Converse, R. N. Williams, and B. Williamson. 1991. Compendium of Raspberry

and Blackberry

Diseases and Insects. The American Phy topathological Society , APS Press, Saint Paul, Minnesota. 100 pp. EPPO. 2006. PQR database. European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (EPPO). www.eppo.org , Paris, France. EPPO. 2007. PQR

- EPPO Plant Quarantine Data Retrieval Sy stem Version 4.6. European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (EPPO), Paris, France. Farr, D. F., and A. Y. Rossman. 2011. Fungus

- Host Distribution Datbase. Sy stematic Botany and Mycology

L aboratory , ARS, USDA. Farr, D. F., and A. Y. Rossman. 2012. Fungus

- Host Distribution Datbase. Sy stematic Botany and Mycology

L aboratory , ARS, USDA. FAS. 2003. Glossary

. Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) , USDA. Last accessed September 29, 2007, http://www.fas.usda.gov/agexport/export_plan/glossary .htm#Container

. FDS. 1994. Re vista de la fundación "Desde El Surco". Información basica de 30 cultivos de exportación no tradicionales. Fundacion desde el Surco, (FDS), Quito, Ecuador. 15

- 30, 75

- 76 pp. Ferris, H. 2011. Nemabase 2011, Query an extended database for the Host Status of P lants to Nematodes. University

of California, Department of Nematology , Davis, California, USA. . http://plpnemweb.ucdavis.edu/Nemaplex/Nemabase2010/Nemabase%20Search%20Menu .htm . (Archived at PERAL). Finn, C. 1999. Temperate berry crops. In: Perspectives o n new crops and new uses. ASHS Press, Alexandria, VA. 324

– 334. pp. FLEPPC. 2011. L ist of Invasive Plant Species

– Summer/Fall 2011. Florida Exotic Pest Plant Council (FLEPPC). 4 pp. Fletcher, B. S. 1989. Fruit flies: their biology , natural enemies and control. Pages 195

- 208 in A. S. Robinson and G. Hooper (eds.). L ife history strategies of Tephritid Fruit Flies. Elsevier, Netherlands. Foote, R. H., F. L. Blanc, and A. L. Norrbom. 1993. Handbook of the Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) of America North of M exico. Comstock Publishing Associates, Ithaca, NY. 571 pp.Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 31 Gallegos, P., C. Asaquibay , R. Williams, A. Martínez, and G. Ayala. 2001. Control of the Larvae of the Beetle Phyllophaga sp. with Biological Products Metarhizium anisopliae and Beauveria sp. in th e Blackberry Crop Rubus glaucus Benth. XI National Seminar of Plant Protection. Memories. Technical University of Babahoyo, Agronom y School, Babaho yo, Ecuador. Gally , M. E., D. Lumbardini, and E. R. Wright. 1997. Antracnosis del frambueso ( Rubus idaeus ) y del bosenberry

( Rubus longanobaccus ) causada por Glomerella cingulata en Buenos Aires, Argentina. Fitopatologia 32(2):200

- 203. Gara, R., and G. Onore. 1989. Entomología Forestal. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia; Proyecto DINAF

- AID., Quito, Ecuador. G etz, L . L. 1959. Notes on the Ecology of Slugs: Arion circumscriptus, Deroceras reticulatum , and D. laeve . American Midland Naturalist 61(2):485

- 498. Gomez, J. 1972. L eafmining flies in crops of broad beans ( Vicia faba L.) in the central sierra of Peru. 15 : 239

- 243. [in Spanish; English summary]. Revista Peruana Entomologia 15(2):239

- 243. González, R. H. 1989. In sectos y ácaros de importancia agrícola y cuarentenaria en Chile. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias y Forestales de la Universidadde Chile. Editorial O grama, Santiago. 310 pp. Gould, W. P., and A. Raga. 2002. Pests of Guava. Pages 295

- 313 in J. E. Peña, J. L . Sharp, and M. Wysoki (eds.). Tropical fruit pests and pollinators: biology , economic importance, natural enemies and control. CABI Publishing, Wall ingford, UK. Guerrero, M. A., L. Lamborot, and J. E. Araya. 2000. Biological observations of Achryra similalis (Guenée) (Lepidoptera: Py ralidae) and other lepidopterans on amaranthus , Amaranthus cruentus L. (Amaranthaceae), in the Metropolitan Region of Ch ile. Bol. Sanid. Veg. Plag 26(4):591

- 598. Guillen, D., and R. Sanchez. 2007. Expansion of the national fruit fl y control programme in Argentina. Pages 653

- 660 in M. J. B. Vrey sen, A. S. Robinson, and J. Hendrichs (eds.). Area wide control of insect pests: from research to field implementation. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands. Gunn, C. R., and C. A. Ritchie. 1988. I dentification of Disseminules L isted in the Federal Noxious Weed Act. Technical Bulletin No. 1719. United States Department of Agriculture

- Agricultural Research Service. Handoo, Z. A., M. Golden, and D. Ellington. 2007. USDA Nematode Collection Search. Last accessed February , 2008, http://nt.ars

- grin.gov/nematodes/search.cfm

. Hay ward, A. C., and J. M. Waterston. 1965. Erwinia amylovora. IMI D escriptions of Fungi and Bacteria 5(44). Heppner, J. B., and D. H. Habeck. 1976. Insects Associated with Polygonum (Polygonaceae) in North Central Florida. I. Introduction and Lepidoptera. Florida Entomologist 59(3):231

- 239. Hernández, J. R., and J. F. Hennen. 2003. Rust fungi causing galls, witches' brooms, and other abnormal plant growths in northwestern Argentina. Mycologia 95(4):728

- 755. Hoddle, M. S., L . A. Mound, and S. Nakahara. 2004. Thy sanoptera recorded from California, U.S.A.: A checklist. Florid a Entomologist 87(3):317

- 323. Holm, L ., J. Doll, E. Holm, J. Rancho, and J. Herberger. 1997. World Weeds: Natural Histories and Distribution. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York. 1129 pp. Holm, L . G., J. V. Pancho, J. P. Herberger, and D. L . Plucknett. 1979. A Geographical Atlas of World Weeds. Krieger Publishing Company , Malabar, Florida, U.S.A. 391 pp.Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 32 Holm, L . G., D. L. Plucknett, J. V. Pancho, and J. P. Herberger. 1977. The World's Worst Weeds: Distribution and Biology. Krieger Publishing Company , Malabar , Florida, U.S.A. 597 pp. Horst, R. K. 2001. Westcott's Plant Disease Handbook (Sixth Edition). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA, U.S.A. IN IAP. 1992. Principales Fitonemátodos en el Ecuador, Su descripción, Biología y combate. Manual No 21. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIAP), Quito, Ecuador. INRA. 2011. HYPP Zoology , Raspberry . l'Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique ( INRA) . Last accessed November 15, 2011, http://www.inra.fr/internet/Produits/HYPPZ/CULTURES/6 c
--- 074.htm

. IPGRI. 2008. The International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI). New World Fruits Database

- Rubus glaucus on

- line resource. Last accessed January 16, 2008, http://www.bioversityinternational.org/Information_Sources/Species_Databases/ New_Wo rld_Fruits_Database/qryall3.asp?intIDSpecies=1045

. IPPC. 2003. Identification of risks and management of invasive alien species using the IP PC framework. Proceedings of the workshop on invasive alien species and the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), Braunschweig, Germany . 301 pp. IPPC. 2009. International Standards For Ph yt osanitary Measures, 1 to 32 (2009 edition). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention (IP PC), Rome, Italy

. 432 pp. Is aac, J., and A. Orellana. 1985. El cultivo de la mora. Instituto Nacional de Capacitación Campesina, Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia, Quito, Ecuador. 116 pp. ISSG. 2011. Global Invasive Species Database. Invasive Species S pecialist Group (ISSG), The World Conservation Union (IUCN). http://www.issg.org/database . (Archived at PERAL). Jensen, A. S., G. L . Miller, and M. B. Stoetzel. 1999. U.S. National Collection of Aphididae. Last accessed November 10, 2007, http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/aphid/aphframe.htm

. Kartesz, J. T. 2011. The Biota of North America Program (BONAP). North American Plant Atlas [maps generated from Kartesz, J.T. 2010. Floristic Sy nthesis of North America, Version 1.0. Biota of North America Program (BONAP). (in press)]. http://www.bonap.org/MapSwitchboard.html . (Archived at PERAL). Klein Koch, C., and D. F. Waterhouse. 2000. The distribution and importance of arthropods associated with agriculture and forestry in Chile (Distribución e importancia de los artró podos asociados a la agricultura y silvicultura en Chile). Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, AC IAR Monograph No. 68. 234 pp. Knapp, J. L . 1998. The Mediterranean Fruit Fl y ( Ceratitis capitata ). Entomology Circular No. 809. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry . 3 pp. Kovaleski, A., R. L. Sugayama, and A. Malavasi. 1999. Movement of Anastrepha fraterculus from native breeding sites into apple orchards in Southern Brazil. Entomologia experimentalis et applicata (Entomol. exp. appl.) 91(3):457

- 463. Læssøe, t., and J. H. Petersen. 2011. Fungi of Ecuador. University of Copenhagen and University of Aarhus, Denmark. http://192.38.46.40:591/Equafungi/EcuadorColl/FMPro?

- db=EcuaColl&

- lay=web&

- format=search.htm&

- view . (Archived at PERAL). Lamborot, L ., M. A. Guerrero, and J. E. Araya. 1999. L epidopteros asociados al cultivo de la quinoa ( Chenopodium quinoa Willdenow) en la zona central de Chile

- Lepidopterans associated with quinoa ( Chenopodium quin oa Willdenow), in the central zone of Chile. Bol. San. Veg. Plag. 25(2):203

- 207.Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 33 Larraín, S. P. 1996. Biologia de Copitarsia turbata (Lep. Noctuidae) bajo ambiente controlado. Agric. Tec 56(3):220

- 223. Laundon, G. F., and A. F. Rainbow. 1969. Gy mnoconia nitens. IMI Descriptions of Fungi and Bacteria 21(201). Liberman, M. 1986. The environmental impact of present

- day land use in the southern Bolivian plateau with emphasis on the cultivation of Chenopodium quinoa Willd. Revista Agric. Subtrop. Trop 80(4):50 9

- 538. Liquido, N. J., L . A. Shinoda, and R. T. Cunningham. 1991. Host plants of the Mediterranean fruit fly , Diptera Tephritidae. An annotated world review. Miscellaneous Publications of the Entomological Society of America. (77). 52 pp. Losey , J. E., R. A. Hufbauer, and R. G. Hartzler. 2003. Enumerating lepidopteran species associated with maize as a first step in risk assessment in the USA. Environmental Biosafety Research 2(4):247

- 261. MAG. 1986. Inventario de plagas, enfermedades y mal ezas del Ecuador. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería del Ecuador (MAG); Programa Nacional de Sanidad Vegetal, Quito, Ecuador. 186 pp. MAG. 2001. Informes de resultados; Laboratorio de fitopatología

. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia (MAG) . Tumbaco, Ecuador. MAG, and IICA. 2001. Identificación de mercados y tecnología para productos agrícolas tradicionales de exportación. Convenio MAG / IICA: Subprograma de Cooperación Técnica. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería de Ecuador ( MAG ) , Instituto Interame ricano de Cooperación para la Agricultura ( IICA ) , Quito, Ecuador. 29 pp. Magarey , R. D., D. M. Borchert, and J. W. Schlegel. 2008. Global plant hardiness zones for phy tosanitary risk anal ys is. Scientia Agricola 65:54

- 59. Martin, R. R. 2002. Virus diseases of Rubus in North America and strategies for their control. North American Bramble Grower Association Conference Proceedings. p. 11

- 15. Martin, R. R., B. J. Smith, and P. R. Bristow. 2000. Diseases of Caneberries ( Rubus spp.). http://www.apsnet.org/publications/commonnames/Pages/Caneberries.aspx . (Archived at PERAL). Mello, M. J. 2005. Inventory of Macrolepidoptera and Other Insects in the Boston Harbor Islands National Park Area. Northeastern Naturalist 12(sp3):99

- 144. Merino, G. 2003. Identificación científica, investigaciones y observaciones sobre algunos insectos del Ecuador. Ediciones Ab ya
- Yala, Quito, Ecuador. 118 pp. Miller, D. R. 2005. Selected Scale Insect Groups ( Hemiptera: Coccoidea) in the Southern Region of the United States. Florida Entomologist 88(4):482

- 501. Moretta, R. 1995. Identificacion de enfermedades y plagas en el cultivo de mora ( Rubus sp.), Universidad central del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador. Norrbom, A. 2004. Host plant database for Anastrepha and Toxotry pana (Diptera: Tephritidae: Toxotry panini). http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov:591/diptera/Tephritidae/TephIntro.html

. (Archived at PERAL). NRCS. 2011. 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). Ochoa, J. 1990. Reconocimiento, descripción y evaluación de las principales enfermedades de trigo y cebada en cinco localidades de la Sierra Ecuatoriana. Sexto Seminario Nacional de Sanidad Vegetal. Universidad Laica Vicente Rocafuerte de Guayaquil. INIAP, Guayaquil, Ecuador.Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 34 Oroño, L. E., P. Albornoz

- Medina, S. Núñez

- Campero, G. A. V. Nieuwenhove, L . P. Bezdjian, Crist ina B. Martin, P. Schliserman, and S. M. Ovruski. 2006. Update of host plant list of Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata in Argentina. Fruit Flies of Economic Importance: From Basic to Applied Knowledge. Proceedings of the 7th International Sy mpo sium on Fruit Flies of Economic Importance : 207

- 225. Ovruski, S., M. n. Aluja, J. Sivinski, and R. Wharton. 2000. Hy menopteran Parasitoids on Fruit

infesting Tephritidae (Diptera) in Latin America and the Southern United States: Diversity , Distribution, Taxonomic Status and their use in Fruit Fly Biological Control. Integrated Pest Management Reviews 5(2):81

- 107. PERAL . 2008. Plant Hardiness Zones of the United States: Area and Population Analy sis. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant H ealth Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine, Center for Plant Health Science and Technology, Plant Epidemiology

and Risk Analy sis Laboratory (PERAL) . 6 pp. Perez, K. E. 2007. Land Snail Website. Land Snail L ist for Texas. The University of No rth Carolina at Chapel Hill. Last accessed February , 2008, PestID. 2011. Pest Identification Database (PestID). United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine. https://mokcs14.aphis.usd a.gov/aqas/login.jsp. (Archived at PERAL). Pionce, C., and I. Olvera. 1997. Caracteristicas y manejo de las principales enfermedades infecciosas del cultivo de la Vid ( Vitis vinifera ), Universidad Agraria del Ecuador, Guayaquil, Ecuador. PMRA. 2007. CROC P rofile for Raspberry in Canada. Pest Management Regulatory Agency , (PMRA). Pesticide Risk Reduction Program, Agriculture and Agri

- Food Canada, Ontario, Canada. 63 pp. Pogue, M. 2003. World Spodoptera Database (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). http://www.sel.barc.u sda.gov:591/spod/Spodoptera.html . (Archived at PERAL). Popenoe, H., S. R. King, J. L eón, and L. S. Kalinowski. 1989. L ost crops of the Incas: little known plants of the Andes with promise for worldwide cultivation. Report of an Ad Hoc Committee on Technolo gy Innovation Board Science and Technology for International Development, National Research Council. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 415 pp. 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 L imited Distribution and Insects N ot 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 Analy sis Sy stems. 941 pp. PPQ. 2010. Treatment Manual. U

. S

. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine ( PPQ )

. Prado, C. E. 1991. Artropodos y sus enemigos naturales asociados a plantas cultivadas en Chile. Santiago: Instituto de Investigaciones Agrope cuarias. INIA Ser. Bol. Tec 169. PROFIAGRO. 2007a. Estudio de Factibilidad Frambuesa. Programa Fitosanitario Para El Agro (PROFIAGRO), Programa para la Mitigación de Barreras de Acceso a Mercado bajo el ATPDEA, Quito, Ecuador.Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 35 PROFIAGRO. 2007b. Estudio de Factibilidad Mora. Programa Fitosanitario Para El Agro (PROFIAGRO), Programa para la Mitigación de Barreras de Acceso a Mercado bajo el ATPDEA, Quito, Ecuador. Purcell, M. F. 1998. Contribution of Biological Control to Integrated Pest Management of Tephrit id Fruit Flies in the Tropics and Subtropics. Integrated Pest Management Reviews 3(2):63

- 83. Randall, R. P. 2007. A Global Compendium of Weeds, Online Database. Department of Agriculture of Western Australia. http://www.hear.org/gcw/ . (Archived at PERAL). Reed, C. F. 1977. Economically Important Foreign Weeds. Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture., U.S.A. 746 pp. Rieger, M. 2006. Blackberries and Raspberries ( Rubus spp.). HORT 3020, Introduction to Fruit Crops. University

o f Georgia, Department of Horticulture. Last accessed November 8, 2007, http://www.uga.edu/fruit/

. Robinson, G. S., P. R. Ackery , I. J. Kitching, G. W. Beccaloni, and L. M. Hernández. 2007. HOSTS

- a Database of the World's Lepidopteran Hostplants. Natural History Museum. http://internt.nhm.ac.uk/research/curation/projets/hostplants

. (Archived at PERAL). Rodriguez, J., and R. Velastegui. 1998. Identificación del agente causal de la pudrición de la raíz del manzano Malus domestica en la Provincia de Pichincha

. - , Volumen XII

- No 1. Quito, Ecuador. Revista de difusión científica de la Facultad de Ciencias Agrícolas de la Universidad Central del ecuador

- RUMIPAMBA 12(1):37

- 38. Rogg, H. W. 2000. Entomología Agricola del Ecuador. Quito, Ecuador. Ediciones ABYA

YALA. DocuTech, Quito, Ecuador. 602 pp. Ruales, C. 1984. Plagas del Ecuador, lista de insectos, ácaros y moluscos dañinos en plantas cultivadas y

forestales, granos almacenados maderas y animales domésticos. Escuela Superior Politéncica de Chimborazo, Riobamba, Ecuador. 112 pp. Salazar, M., V. M. Pardo, and P. Buriticá. 2007. Especies de Colombia, Ecuador y Perú Pertenecientes al Género Gerwasia Raciborski del Orden Uredinales.Species from Colombia, Ecuador and Peru belonging to the genus Gerwasia Raciborski from the order Uredinales. Caldasia 29(1):105

- 120. Sandoval, A. C. 1999. Zoogeografía de los gastrópodos terrestres de la región oriental de San Luis Potosí, México. Revista de Biología Tropical 47(3):493

- 502. Schaefer, C. W., and A. R. Panizzi (eds.). 2000. Heteroptera of Economic Importance. CRC Press, New York. 828 pp. SESA. 2006. Le tter for A Pe st Risk Analysi s for importation of Rubus idaeus and Rubus glaucus , Capsicum annum , Hylocereus spp and Physalis peruviana from Ec uador into the Unite d States. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia (MAG)

. . Servicio Ecuatoriano de Sanidad Agropecuaria (SESA)

. SESA. 2007. In formation Requested for management of Rubus idaeus and Rubus glaucus , Capsicum annum , Hylocereus spp and Physalis peruviana from Ecuador into the United States. Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia (MAG)

. Servicio Ecuatoriano de Sanidad Agropecuaria (SESA)

. , from Cardenas, J. Director Tecnico Area Agricola. SESA. Sigcha, F. 2003. Estudio del comportamiento Agronómico de Mora y granadillla en asocio con Alfalfa al segundo año de instalación. Guayllabamba

- Pichincha, Universidad central del Ecuador. , Quito, Ecuador. Sivanesan, A., and C. Critchet. 1976. Elsinoe veneta. IM I Descriptions of Fungi and Bacteria 49(484).Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 36 Skinner, K., L. Smith, and P. Rice. 2011. Noxious weeds in the US and Canada. Universit y of Montana, ARS, USDA. http://invader.dbs.umt.edu/Noxious_Weeds/

. (Archived at PERAL). Sponagel, K. 1999. El manejo de los insectos y acaros plagas en el cultivo de flores de cort e. Corporacion Proexant, Quito, Ecuador. Starr, F., K. Starr, and L. Loope. 2003. Rubus glaucus, Andean raspberry , Rosaceae. Haleakala Field Station, Maui, Hawai'i. United States Geological Survey

-- Biological Resources Division. Steck, G. J. 2006. Pest Alert. The Mediterranean fruit fly , Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) (Diptera: Tephritidae). Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry . L ast accessed July 18, 2011, Steiner, L . F., W. C. Mitc hell, and A. H. Baumhover. 1962. Progress of Fruit

- Fly Control by Irradiation Sterilization in Hawaii and the Marianas Islands. International Journal of Applied Radiation and Isotopes 13:427

- 434. Strik, B. C., J. R. Clark, C. E. Finn, and M. P. Banados. 20 07. Comprehensive Crop Reports. Worldwide Blackberry

Production. Hortechnology 17(2):205

- 213. Sugayama, R. L ., A. Malavasi, I. Nora, and E. S. Branco. 1996. Ovipositional responses to apple in a caged tree b y Anastrepha fraterculus in southern Brazil. Page s 67

- 69 in B. A. McPheron and G. J. Steck, (eds.). Fruit fl y pests: a world assessment of their biology and management. St. Lucie Press, Delray Beach, Florida. Sullivan, M., N. Breiter, D. Flores, E. Salinas, B. Salas, and C. Ramsey . 2007. Perpetual Draft. Soy bean Commodity

based survey . Center for Plant Health Science and Technology (CPHST)

- Cooperative Agriculture Pest Survey (CAPS), Raleigh, US. 475 pp. Swearingen, J. 2010. Invasive Plant Atlas of the Unites States. The University of Georgia

- Center fo r Invasive Species and Ecos ys tem Health in cooperation with the Plant Conservation Alliance's Alien Plant Working Group, National Park Service, USDA Forest Service, National Association of Exotic Pest Plant Councils, L ady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center and USDA NRCS PLANTS Database. Last accessed November 8, 2011, http://www.invasive.org/weedus/index.html

. Tay upantha, G., and P. Gallegos. 2001. Efecto de cinco ambientes de invernadero en la incidencia de Frankliniella occidentalis y Botrytis cinerea en Rosa. Revista de difusión científica de la Facultad de Ciencias Agrícolas de la Universidad Central del ecuador

RUMIPAMBA XV(1). Thomas, M. C., J. B. Heppner, R. E. Woodruff, H. V. Weems, G. J. Steck, and T. R. Fasulo. 2010. Featured Creatures: Cerati tis capitata

- Mediterranean fruitfl y. University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. Last accessed July 18, 2011, http://entnemdept.ifas.ufl.edu/creatures/

. Tigrero, J. 1998. Revisión de Especies de Moscas de la Fruta Presentes en el Ecuador. . Facultad de Ciencias Agropecuarias, IASA. Escuela Politécnica del Ejército, ESPE, Sangoquí, Ecuador. Tirmenstein, D. 1990. Rubus idaeus

. In . Fire Effects Information Sy stem. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fire Sciences Laboratory

. UCE, and Expoflores. 1999. Manual técnico de fitosanidad en floricultura. Facultad de Ciencias Agrícolas, Universidad Central del Ecuador (UCE) y Asociacion Nacional de Productores y/ o Exportadores de Flores del Ecuador( EXPOFLORES), Quito, Ecuador. 150 pp. University

of Hawaii. 1998. Hawaiian Alien Plant Studies. Pest Plants of Hawaiian Native Ecosy stems National Park Service Cooperative Park Studies Unit of the University ofPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 37 Hawaii, Manoa. Last accessed January 16, 2006 , http://www.botany .hawaii.edu/faculty/ cw_smith/aliens.htm

. USDA

- ARS. 2011. National Genetic Resources Program. Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Research Service (ARS). Beltsville, Maryland. http://www.ars

- grin.gov/cgi

bin/npgs/html/taxon.pl?32329 . (Archived at PERAL) USFWS. 2011. Threatened and endangered species sy stem. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Environmental Conservation Online Sy stem. Last accessed July 18, 2010, http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/listedPlants.jsp

. Valarezo, O., E. Cañarte, B . Navarrete, J. Guerrero, and B. Arias. 2004. Las "moscas blancas" en el Ecuador: diagnóstico de su situación, impacto y reguladores naturales. INIAP

- SESA., Quito, Ecuador. Vaughan, M. A. 1982. Corrección y actualización del inventario de plagas y enferm edades que afectan a los vegetales en el Ecuador. Programa de producción de alimentos básicos; Asistencia a la Junta del Acuerdo de Cartagena (JUNAC). Protección Vegetal FAO. 110 pp. Vera, T., S. Abraham, A. Oviedo, and E. Willink. 2007. Demographic and qu ality control parameters of Anastrepha fraterculus (Diptera: Tephritidae) maintained under artificial rearing. Florida Entomologist 90(1):53

- 57. Vizuete, B., M. L. Insuasti, J. Ochoa, and M. Ellis. 2002. Biological and Serological Characterization of Tree Tomato Virus Diseases in. Ecuador. www.oired.vt.edu/ipmcrsp/Publications/.../ecuador_topic11.pdf (Archived at PERAL). Weber, E. 2003. Invasive Plant Species of the World: A Reference Guide to Environmental Weeds. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK. 548 pp. Weems, H. V. 1981. Mediterranean Fruit Fl y Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann) (Entomology Circular No. 230). Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division o f Plant Industry

. Weems, H. V. 2002. Featured Creatures: Anastrepha fraterculus . University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. Last accessed January 4, 2011, http://creatures.ifas.ufl.edu/

. Wellman, F. L . 1977. Dictionary of tropical American crops and their diseases. Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, N.J., USA. 495 pp. Wharton, R. H. 1989. Classical biological control of fruit

- infesting Tephritidae. Pages 303

- 313 in A. S. Robinson and G. Hooper, (eds.). Fruit flies: their biology , natural en emies and control (World Crop Pests, Vol. 3B). Elsevier, Amsterdam. White, I . M., and M. M. Elson

- Harris. 1992. Fruit flies of economic significance: their identification and bionomics. CAB International in association with ACIAR, Wallingford, UK. 601 pp. Whittle. 1982. Pests not known to occur in the United States or of limited distribution, No. 80: A click beetle. USDA APHIS PPQ, Hyattsville, MD. Wiersema, J. H., and B. Leon. 1999. World economic plants: A standard reference. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florid a, USA. 749 pp. Wilcox, W. F., and B. A. L atorre. 2002. Identities and geographic distributions of Phytophthora spp. causing root rot of red raspberry in Chile. Plant Disease 86(1357

- 1362). Willson, H. R. 1992. Slugs on Ohio Field Crops. Ohio Pest Management & Survey Program. Field Crops Pest Management Circular (20).Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 38 WSSA. 2010. Revision of the Composite L ist of Weeds as compiled by the Standardized Plant Names subcommittee. Weed Science Society of America (WSSA). 80 pp. Yepes, M. S., V. M. P. Cardona, and P. B. Cespedes. 2007. Species from Colombia, Ecuador and Peru belonging to the genus Gerwasia Raciborski from the order Uredinales Caldasia 29(1):105

- 120. Zhang, B. C. 1994. Index of economicall y important L epidoptera. CAB International, Wallingford, UK. 599 pp.Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 39 

## 6 **. Appendi x**  **Appendix A. Pests**  **(alive) intercepted on**  **Rubus spp.**  **and Rubus idaeus**  **from 1985 to 20 11**  Data from PestID ( 2011 )

.

**Pest Imported as**  **Q uantity**  **Where** Acalitus sp. Fruit 25 Permit Cargo Acanthoscelides obreptus 1 Permit Cargo Acanthoscelides obtectus Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Acanthoscelides sp. Fruit; Leaf 3 Baggage; Permit Cargo Acanthoscelides stylifer Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Acari, species of Leaf; Plant 17 3 Baggage; Permit Cargo; Stores Acledra dimidiaticollis Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Adelidae , species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Aeolothripidae, species of Leaf 4 Permit Cargo; Stores Aeolothrips sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Agallia laevis Leaf 1 Stores Agriolimax sp. Leaf 1 Stores Agriotes sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Agromyzidae, species of Fruit; Leaf 28 Baggage; Permit Cargo ; Stores Agrotis ipsilon 1 Permit Cargo Aleyrodes lonicerae Leaf 4 Quarters; Stores Aleyrodidae, species of Leaf ; Plant 13 Baggage; Permit Cargo; Stores Alternaria sp. Fruit 2 Baggage Amorbia emigratella Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Amorbia sp. Cut Flower; Fruit 18 8 Baggage; General Cargo; Permit Cargo Anarsia sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Anasa scorbutica Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Anastrepha sp. Fruit 8 Baggage Anobiidae, species of Fruit 17 Permit Cargo Anomala sp. Fruit 1 7 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Anthicidae, species of 8 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Anthocoridae, species of Fruit ; Stem 260 Baggage; Permit Cargo Anthonomus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Anystidae, species of 1 Permit Cargo Ap hididae, species of Cutting; Fruit; Leaf; Plant 207 Baggage; Mail; Miscellaneous; Permit Cargo; Quarters; Stores Aphis spiraecola Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Ap hodiinae, species of 2 Permit Cargo Apis mellifera Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Aptinothrips rufus Plant 1 Baggage Aradidae, species of 1 Permit Cargo Araneae, species of 2 Permit Cargo Araneidae, species of Fruit 7 Permit Cargo Archipini, species of Cut Flower 1 Permit Cargo Arctiidae, species of Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Arhyssus sp. Fruit 1 Permit CargoPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 40 **Pest Imported as**  **Q uantity**  **Where** Asterobemisia carpini Cut Flower; Fruit; Leaf; Stem 2187 Baggage; Miscellaneous; Quarters; Stores
Asterolecanium palmae Leaf 1 Stores Atheas nigricornis Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Aulacorthum solani Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Autographa sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Balboa sp. Fruit 21 Permit Cargo Balboa variabilis Fruit 21 Permit Cargo Blapstinus punctulatus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Blapstinus sp. Fruit 6 Permit Cargo Blastobasidae, species of Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Blattidae, species of Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Blattodea, species of Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Brachyderes sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Brachypnoea sp. Fruit 6 Permit Cargo Braconidae, species of Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Bravothrips mexicanus Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Brochymena sp. 1 Permit Cargo Bruchidae, species of Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Bruchinae, species of Fruit 2 Permit Cargo By turidae, species of Cut Flower 1 Permit Cargo Cacoecimorpha pronubana Leaf 1 Stores Cadra cautella Fruit 4 Baggage Calligrapha sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Camponotus sp. 1 General Cargo Cantharidae, species of Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Capitophorus sp. Leaf 1 Stores Carabidae, species of Cut Flower; Fruit 6 Permit Cargo Carpophilus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Carposinidae, species of Fruit 33 Baggage; Permit Cargo; Caryedon serratus 1 General Cargo Catolethrus longulus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Caulophilus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Cecidomyiidae, species of Fruit; Leaf; Wood Product 6 7 Baggage; Mail; Permit Cargo; Stores
Ceraphronidae, species of Leaf 1 Baggage Ceratitis capitata Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Cercopidae, species of Cut Flower; Plant 2 Baggage; Permit Cargo Chaetocnema sp. Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Chloropidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Chramesus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Chrysobothris costifrons Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Chrysomela depressa Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Chrysomelidae, species of Fruit 7 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Chrysopidae, species of Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Cicadellidae, species of Cutting; Fruit; Leaf; Plant 5 1 Baggage; General Cargo; Miscellaneous; Permit Cargo; Stores;Pest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 4 1 **Pest Imported as**  **Q uantity**  **Where** Cladosporium sp. Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Clambidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Cleridae, species of Fruit 1 3 Permit Cargo Clinodiplosis sp. Cut Flower; Fruit 9 Baggage; Permit Cargo Coccidae, species of Cutting; Fruit; Leaf; Stem; 170 9 Baggage; Quarters; Stores
Coccinellidae, species of Fruit 1 3 Permit Cargo Coccus sp. Leaf 17 Stores Cochlicella sp. Leaf 2 Permit Cargo Colaspis sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Coleoptera, species of Cut; Flower; Fruit; Leaf 166 General Cargo; Permit Cargo; Stores Collembola, species of Cut Flower; Fruit ; Plant 84 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Condica mobilis 1 Permit Cargo Coniopterygidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Conotrachelus sp. Fruit 6 Permit Cargo Contarinia sp. Cutting; Fruit 5 Mail; Permit Cargo Copitarsia sp. Cut Flower, Fruit 2 1 Baggage; Permit Cargo Coreidae, species of Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Cornu aspersum Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Corticariidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Corylophidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Corythucha gossypii Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Corythucha sp. Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Cosmopterigidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Cossonus sp. 2 Permit Cargo Crambidae, species of Fruit 12 Baggage Crambinae, species of Fruit 17 Baggage Crematogaster sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Creontiades rubrinervis Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Creontiades sp. Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Crocidosema aporema Fruit 1 1 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Crophius costatus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Cryphula sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Cryptocephalus cribripennis 1 Permit Cargo Cucujidae, species of Fruit 35 Permit Cargo Cucujoidea, species of Fruit 10 Permit Cargo Cuerna sp. Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Curculionidae, species of Fruit; Leaf 2 Permit Cargo; Quarters Cyclorrhapha, species of Fruit 13 Permit Cargo Cyrtopeltis sp. Cutting 1 Baggage Dagbertus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Dalmochrimnus circumplicatus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo

Dasineura sp. Leaf 34 Baggage; Quarters; Stores Delia sp. Leaf 1 Stores Delphacidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Deltocephalinae, species of Fruit 1 Permit CargoPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 42 **Pest Imported as**  **Q uantity**  **Where** Dendrothrips degeeri Leaf 3 Stores Dermaptera, species of Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Deroceras laeve Leaf 1 Permit Cargo Diabrotica viridula Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Diachus sp. Fruit 7 Permit Cargo Diaspididae, species of Leaf ; Plant 5 Baggage; Stores Dinoderus minutus Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Dinoderus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Diplodia sp. Plant 1 Baggage Diplotaxis cavifrons Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Diplotaxis sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Diptera, species of Fruit; Leaf 46 Permit Cargo; Stores Disonycha sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Draeculacephala sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Drosophila sp. Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Drosophilidae, species of Cut Flower; Fruit; Leaf 11 General Cargo; Permit Cargo; Quarters Drymaeus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Dysmicoccus brevipes Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Dysmicoccus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Dy tiscidae, species of 1 Permit Cargo Empoasca sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Entomobryidae, species of Fruit 21 Permit Cargo Eotetranychus rubiphilus Leaf 101 Baggage; Stores; Eotetranychus sp. Leaf 60 Baggage ; Stores Epicaerus sp. Fruit 1 General Cargo Epipaschiinae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Epitrix sp. Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Eriophyes phyllocoptes Leaf 1 Stores Eriophyidae, species of Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Erythraeidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Euceropsylla sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Eurychilella sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Euschistus biformis Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Euschistus sp. Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Ferrisia virgata Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Formicidae, species of Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Formicinae, species of Fruit 14 Permit Cargo Frankliniella annulipes Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Frankliniella australis Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Frankliniella borinquen Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Frankliniella bruneri Fruit 48 Permit Cargo Frankliniella bruneri Fruit 12 Permit Cargo Frankliniella cephalica Fruit 11 Permit Cargo Frankliniella cestrum Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Frankliniella fallaciosa Fruit 8 Permit Cargo Frankliniella fulvipennis Fruit 16 Permit Cargo Frankliniella gardeniae Cut Flower; Fruit 5 7 Permit CargoPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 43 **Pest Imported as**  **Q uantity**  **Where** Frankliniella insularis Fruit 1 5 Permit Cargo Frankliniella intonsa Cut Flower 11 Baggage Frankliniella invasor Fruit 12 Permit Cargo Frankliniella kelliae Fruit 10 Permit Cargo Frankliniella occidentalis Cut Flower; Fruit ; Leaf 1125 Baggage ; General Cargo ; Mail ; Permit Cargo Frankliniella panamensis Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Frankliniella schultzei Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Frankliniella sp. Cut Flower; Fruit; Leaf 548 Baggage; General Cargo; Permit Cargo; Stores; Frankliniella williamsi Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Franklinothrips vespiformis Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Fusarium sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Galerucini, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Gelechiidae, species of Fruit; Leaf 1 6 Permit Cargo; Stores Gelechioidea, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Geobyrsa nodifera Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Geocoridae, species of Fruit 6 Permit Cargo Geocoris sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Geometridae, species of Cut Flower; Fruit; Leaf; Plant 248 Baggage; General Cargo; Permit Cargo; Stores Glyphonyx sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Gracillariidae, species of Fruit; Leaf 6 Baggage; Stores Grapholita sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Gryllidae, species of Cut Flower; Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Gryllus sp. Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Guppya gundlachi Fruit; Leaf 11 Permit Cargo; Stores Haplothrips gowdeyi Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Haplothrips sp. Leaf 4 Stores Haplothrips victoriensis Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Helicarionidae , species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Helicoverpa sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Helicoverpa zea Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Heliodinidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Heliothis sp. Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Hemiptera, species of Fruit 7 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Heteroptera, species of Fruit; Leaf 21 Permit Cargo; Quarters Homaemus sp. Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Homoptera, species of Leaf ; Plant 14 Baggage; Stores Hordeum sp. Fruit 0 Permit Cargo Hormostes sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Hymenoptera, species of Fruit; Plant 2 Baggage; Permit Cargo Hypatopa sp. 1 Permit Cargo Hypena cachialis 1 0 Permit Cargo Hypena sp. 1 Permit Cargo Hypothenemus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Idaea sp. Fruit 1 Permit CargoPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 44 **Pest Imported as**  **Q uantity**  **Where** Insecta, species of Fruit; Leaf 127 Baggage; Permit Cargo; Quarters; Stores Karnyothrips sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Kuehneola uredinis Cut Flower; Fruit; Plant 3 Baggage; General Cargo; Permit Cargo Lampyridae, species of Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Languriidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Largus sp. Fruit 3 Baggage; Permit Cargo Lasioderma serricorne Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Latridiidae , species of Fruit 2 2 Permit Cargo Lehmannia valentiana Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Lepidoptera, species of Fruit; Leaf; 74 Baggage; Permit Cargo; Stores Ligyrocoris litigiosus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Linepithema humile 1 General Cargo Linogeraeus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Liorhyssus hyalinus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Listronotus bonariensis Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Listronotus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Lithraeus egenus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Lobiopa sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Lobometopon sp. Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Longitarsus sp. Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Lophocampa annulosa 1 Permit Cargo Lycaenidae, species of Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Lyctinae, species of Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Lygaeidae, species of Fruit 15 Permit Cargo Lygaeoidea, species of Leaf; Fruit 20 Permit Cargo; Stores Lygaeospilus pusio Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Lygaeus reclivatus 1 Permit Cargo Lygus elisus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Lygus hesperus Fruit 7 Permit Cargo Lygus lineolaris Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Lygus mexicanus 2 Permit Cargo Lygus sp. Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Macrodactylus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Macrophoma sp. Leaf 1 Stores Macrosiphum sp. Leaf 9 Stores Mainsia pittieriana Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Megaris sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Melanopleurus bistriangularis Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Melanopleurus pyrrhopterus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Melanthrips sp. Leaf 1 Stores Melipotis fasciolaris 1 Permit Cargo Mem bracidae, species of Fruit; Leaf 1 Permit Cargo; Stores Merlinius brevidens Plant 1 Baggage Mesocriconema sp. Plant 1 Mail Mesostigmata, species of Plant 6 Baggage; Permit Cargo Mesoveliidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Metachroma sp. Fruit 1 Permit CargoPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 45 **Pest Imported as**  **Q uantity**  **Where** Microgryllus pallipes Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Micrutalis sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Miridae, species of Cut Flower; Fruit; Leaf 214 Baggage; General Cargo; Permit Cargo; Stores Mocis latipes 2 Permit Cargo Monacha sp. Leaf 1 Stores Moodna bisinuella Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Muscidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Mycetophagidae, species of Fruit 11 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Mycodiplosis sp. Leaf 4 Quarters; Baggage Mycterothrips sp. Leaf 3 Stores Myzocallis sp. Leaf 5 Stores Myzus ornatus Fruit ; Leaf 4 Permit Cargo Nabidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Neohydatothrips sp. Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Neopamera bilobata Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Neopamera sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Nepticulidae, species of Leaf 20 Stores Neurocolpus sp. Fruit 1 General Cargo Neuroptera, species of Fruit 1 2 Permit Cargo Nitidulidae, species of Cut Flower; Fruit 123 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Noctuidae, species of Cut Flower; Fruit; Leaf; 217 Permit Cargo; Stores; Nodonota sp. Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Nysius raphanus Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Nysius sp. Fruit 39 Miscellaneous ; Permit Cargo Ochrostomus pulchellus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Octotoma sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Olethreutinae, species of Fruit 2 5 Baggage; Permit Cargo Orius sp. Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Ormiscus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Oryzaephilus surinamensis 2 General Cargo Otiorhynchus singularis 6 Baggage Otiorhynchus sp. Root 2 Permit Cargo Otitidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Oxychilus sp. Leaf 1 Permit Cargo Ozophora sp. Cut Flower; Fruit 6 Permit Cargo Pachybrachis sp. Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Palpita flegia Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Paracoccus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Paragonatas divergens Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Parlatoria ziziphi Leaf 2 Stores Parthenolecanium corni Leaf 19 Baggage; Mail; Stores Parthenolecanium sp. Leaf 79 Baggage: Quarters; Stores Pentatomidae, species of Cut Flower; Fruit; Leaf 466 Baggage; General Cargo; Permit Cargo Pentatominae, species of Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Pentatomoidea, species of Fruit ; Leaf 336 Permit Cargo Phaedon sp. Fruit 1 Permit CargoPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 46 **Pest Imported as**  **Q uantity**  **Where** Phatnoma annulipes Fruit 1 Baggage Phidotricha erigens Fruit 2 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Phidotricha erigens Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Phlaeothripidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Phlaeothripidae, species of Fruit; Leaf; Plant 7 Baggage; General Cargo; Permit Cargo; Stores Phoma sp. 1 General Cargo Phomopsis sp. Leaf; Stem 1 Baggage; Stores Phoridae, species of Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Phragmidium sp. Fruit; Leaf ; Plant 2 Baggage; Permit Cargo Phragmidium violaceum Leaf; Plant 2 Baggage; General Cargo Phycitinae, species of Fruit 3 Baggage; Permit Cargo Phyllophaga sp. Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Phyllotreta sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Phyrdenus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Phytocoris sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Phytocoris sp. 2 Permit Cargo Phy toseiidae, species of Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Pityophthorus sp. Fruit 9 Permit Cargo Planicephalus flavicosta Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Planococcus citri Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Planococcus minor Fruit 6 Permit Cargo Platynota sp. Fruit 1 3 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Plodia interpunctella Fruit 9 Baggage Plusiinae , species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Plutella xylostella Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Polymerus sp. Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Pristiphora sp. Plant 3 Baggage Proeulia sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Prytanes formosa Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Pseudocercospora sp. Leaf 1 Quarters Pseudochermes fraxini Leaf 1 Stores Pseudococcidae, species of Cut Flower; Fruit; Leaf 61 Permit Cargo Pseudococcus jackbeardsleyi Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Pseudococcus sp. Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Pseudococcus viburni Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Pseudopachybrachius sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Pseudopamera aurivilliana Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Pseudoscorpiones, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Psocoptera , species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Psocoptera, species of Cut Flower; Fruit; Leaf 105 General Cargo; Permit Cargo; Quarters Psyllidae, species of Leaf 3 Stores Psylliodes sp. Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Pteromalidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Pterophoridae, species of Cut Flower 1 Permit Cargo Pterophoridae, species of Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Ptinidae, species of 1 General CargoPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 47 **Pest Imported as**  **Q uantity**  **Where** Puccinia sp. Plant 1 Baggage Pucciniastrum americanum Fruit 10 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Punctidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Py ralidae, species of Fruit; Leaf 8 Baggage; Permit Cargo; Stores Py ralinae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Py raustinae, species of Leaf; Fruit 5 Baggage; Permit Cargo Reduviidae, species of Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Resseliella sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Rhinacloa sp. Fruit 16 Permit Cargo Rhinacloa sp. Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Rhopalidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Rhyparochromidae, species of Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Rotylenchus robustus Plant 15 Baggage; Mail Saissetia sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Saturniidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Scarabaeidae, species of Fruit ; Plant 2 Baggage; Permit Cargo Scarinae, species of Leaf 3 Baggage Sciaridae, species of Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Scirtothrips abditus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Scirtothrips lumarius Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Scolytidae, species of Fruit 6 Permit Cargo Scutelleridae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Scythrididae, species of Fruit 4 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Scythris sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Seticosta rubicola Fruit 33 Permit Cargo Seticosta sp. Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Sibinia primita Cut Flower 1 Permit Cargo Silvanidae, species of Fruit 5 Baggage; Permit Cargo Sitobion sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Sitophilus oryzae Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Sitophilus sp. Cut Flower; Fruit 45 Permit Cargo Sminthuridae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Sminthuridae, species of Fruit; Leaf 8 Permit Cargo; Stores Solenopsis geminata Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Sparganothis sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Sphyrocoris punctellus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Spintherophyta sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Spodoptera albula Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Spodoptera dolichos Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Spodoptera eridania Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Spodoptera exigua Fruit 4 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Spodoptera frugiperda Fruit 10 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Spodoptera latifascia Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Spodoptera sp. Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Spoladea recurvalis 1 Permit Cargo Staphylinidae, species of Fruit 22 Permit Cargo Stator pruininus Fruit 1 Permit CargoPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 48 **Pest Imported as**  **Q uantity**  **Where** Stator vachelliae Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Stethaulax sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Stratiomyidae, species of 7 Permit Cargo Sy rphidae, species of Cut Flower; Fruit 92 Baggage; Permit Cargo Sy rphinae, species of Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Systena sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Tachinidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Tarsonemidae, species of Fruit 7 Permit Cargo Tarsonemus sp. Cut Flower; Fruit; Leaf 37 Miscellaneous; Permit Cargo; Stores Tarsonemus sp. Plant 1 Permit Cargo Tenebrionidae, species of Fruit 9 Permit Cargo Tephritidae, species of Fruit 24 Baggage Tetranychidae, species of Fruit; Leaf; Plant 2 1 Baggage; Permit Cargo; Stores Tetranychus pacificus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Tetranychus sp. Fruit; Leaf 34 Permit Cargo; Stores Thripidae, species of Fruit; Leaf 72 Baggage; General Cargo; Permit Cargo; Quarters; Stores Thrips annulatus Leaf 1 Stores Thrips flavus Leaf 2 Stores Thrips imaginis Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Thrips major Cut Flower; Leaf 10 General Cargo; Permit Cargo; Stores Thrips minutissimus Leaf 2 Stores Thrips obscuratus Fruit 109 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Thrips palmi Fruit , Leaf 4 Permit Cargo , Stores Thrips simplex Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Thrips sp. Fruit; Leaf ; Plant 20 Baggage; Permit Cargo; Stores Thrips tabaci Fruit 6 Permit Cargo Thyanta perditor Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Tineidae, species of Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Tischeria sp. Leaf 3 Stores Tischeriidae, species of Leaf 3 Stores Tortricidae, species of Cut Flower; Cutting; Fruit; Leaf 316 Baggage; General Cargo; Permit Cargo; Stores Tortricinae, species of Fruit; Leaf; 212 General Cargo; Permit Cargo; Stores Tribolium sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Trichapion sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Trichoptera, species of Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Trogoderma sp 1 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Tropidosteptes sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Tydeidae, species of Plant 9 Baggage; Mail Tydeus caudatus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Tylenchorhynchus dubius Plant 4 Mail Tyrophagus sp. Plant 5 Baggage Veliidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Vespidae, species of Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Xestocephalus desertorum Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Xyleborus affinis Fruit 9 Permit CargoPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 49 **Pest Imported as**  **Q uantity**  **Where** Xyleborus ferrugineus Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Xyleborus sp. Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Xyleborus volvulus Fruit 2 Permit Cargo; Unknown Xyonysius basalis Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Xyonysius californicus Fruit 6 General Cargo; Permit Cargo



### Table 10. Pests **(alive) intercepted on**  **Rubus idaeus Pest**  **Origin Imported as**  **Q uanti**  **t y**  **Where** Acanthoscelides pyrrhomelas Chile Fruit 4 Permit Cargo

Acanthosomatidae , species of Chile Fr uit 2 Permit Cargo

Acledra dimidiaticollis Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Acledra sp. Chile Fruit 6 Permit Cargo Acrididae , species of Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Agriolimacidae , species of Chile Fruit 8 Permit Cargo Agriolimax reticulatus Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Agromyzidae , species of Chile , Mexico Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Agrotis lutescens Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Agrotis sp. Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Alphitobius diaperinus Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Altica sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Amnestus sp. Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Amorbia sp. Mexico 1 Permit Cargo Amplicephalus sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Anacampsis sp. Chile Fruit 7 Permit Cargo Anthaxia concinna Chile Fruit 6 Permit Cargo Anthonomus sp. Mexico Fruit 1 General Cargo Ap hididae , species of Mexico Fruit 1 General Cargo Apion sp. Chile Fruit 10 Permit Cargo Arhyssus tricostatus Chile Fruit 13 Permit Cargo Athysanini sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Balclutha sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Blapstinus punctulatus Chile Fruit 40 Permit Cargo Carposinidae , species of New Zealand Fruit 14 Permit Cargo Chelymorpha varians Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Chrysomelidae , species of Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Cicadellidae , species of Chile ; Unknown Fruit , Plant 4 1 B aggage, Permit Cargo Cladosporium sp. Norway 1 General Cargo Coccidae , species of Unknown 1 Stores Coleophora sp. Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Conoderus rufangulus Chile Fruit 45 Permit Cargo Conoderus sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Copitarsia sp. Chile Fruit 44 Permit Cargo Coreidae sp. Chile Fruit 32 Permit Cargo Corythaica cyathicollis Chile Fruit 3 Permit CargoPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 50 **Pest Origin**  **Imported as Q**  **uanti t** **y Where**  Crambidae , species of Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Cryptophagidae , species of Mexico Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Curculionidae , species of Chile; Mexico Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Delphacidae , species of Chile Fruit 15 Permit Cargo Delphacodes sp. Chile Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Deroceras ( agriolimax ) Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Deroceras laeve Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Diachus sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Drosophila sp. Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Drosophila suzukii Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Elasmopalpus lignosellus Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Elateridae , species of Chile Fruit 6 Permit Cargo Empoasca sp. Chile Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Erythroneura sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Euschistus servus Mexico 1 Permit Cargo Frankliniella australis Chile Fruit 584 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Frankliniella cestrum Chile Fruit 457 Baggage; Permit Cargo Frankliniella occidentalis Chile ; Mexico Flower, Fruit 26 Permit Cargo Frankliniella sp. Chile Fruit 26 Permit Cargo Franklinothrips vespiformis Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo
Galgupha albipennis Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Gelechiidae , species of Chile Fruit 57 Permit Cargo Gelechioidea , species of Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Geniocremnus sp. Chile Fruit 2 6 Permit Cargo Geometridae , species of Chile; Mexico; New Zealand ; Unknown Fruit 2 5 Baggage; General Cargo ; Permit Cargo Gnorimoschema sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Gomphiothrips sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Grammophorus minor Chile Fruit 10 Permit Cargo Gryllidae , species of Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Gryllus sp. Chile Fruit 9 Permit Cargo Hadeninae sp. Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Harmostes serratus Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Harmostes sp. Chile Fruit 13 Permit Cargo Helicidae sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Helicoverpa sp. Chile; New Zealand Fruit 4 General Cargo; Permit Cargo Helicoverpa zea Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Heliothinae sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Heliothis sp. Chile; New Zealand Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Hemiptera , species of Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Heteroptera , species of Chile Fruit 316 Permit Cargo Homoptera , species of Chile Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Hoplosphyrum griseus Chile Fruit 30 Permit Cargo Hylamorpha elegans Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Hylurgus ligniperda Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Hymenoptera , species of Chile 2 Permit CargoPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 51 **Pest Origin**  **Imported as Q**  **uanti t** **y Where**  Hypurus bertrandi Chile 1 Permit Cargo Kuschelina decorata Chile Fruit 18 Permit Cargo Kuschelina sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Lema bilineata Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Lepidoptera , species of Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Leptoglossus chiliensis Chile Fruit 39 Permit Cargo Leptoglossus sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Lexiphanes sp. Chile Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Liorhyssus sp. Chile Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Listroderes sp. Chile Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Listronotus sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Lithraeus egenus Chile Fruit 23 Permit Cargo Lixus sp. Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Lycaenidae , species of Chile ; Mexico Fruit 1 4 Permit Cargo Lyctus sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Lygaeidae , species of Chile , Mexico Fruit 1 4 Permit Cargo Lygaeoidea , species of Chile Fruit 21 Permit Cargo Lygaeus albo

- ornatus Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Lygus sp. Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Lysathia sp. Chile Fruit 7 Permit Cargo Megacerus eulophus Chile Fruit 10 Permit Cargo Melacoryphus circumlitus Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Mem bracidae , species of Chile Fruit 9 Permit Cargo Microgryllus pallipes Chile Fruit 1 7 Permit Cargo Miridae , species of Chile; Guatemala ; Mexico; Netherlands Fruit 1 5 General Cargo; Permit Cargo

Nabidae , species of Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Nabis sp. Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Naupactus xanthographus Chile Fruit 17 Permit Cargo Nematus desantisi Chile Fruit 7 Permit Cargo Neopamera bilobata Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Neotermes chilensis Chile Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Nezara viridula Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Noctuidae , species of Chile Fruit 170 Permit Cargo Noctuinae sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Nomophila sp. Chile Fruit 4 Permit Cargo Nysius sp. Chile ; Mexico Flower, Fruit 81 Permit Cargo Oecophoridae , species of Chile Fruit 5 Permit Cargo Oedionychus sp. Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Oenopiella unidentata Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Olethreutinae sp. Chile Fruit 6 Permit Cargo Orius sp. Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Paria sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Pentatomidae , species of Chile; Mexico Fruit 56 Permit Cargo Pentatomoidea , species of Chile Fruit 53 Permit Cargo Phenacoccus parvus Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Phlaeothripidae , species of Chile Fruit 2 Permit CargoPest Risk Assessment for Andean blackberry and raspberry from Ecuador



### Ver. 1 June 21, 2012 52 **Pest Origin**  **Imported as Q**  **uanti t** **y Where**  Phthorimaea sp. Chile 1 Permit Cargo Plusiinae sp. Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Polymerus sp. Chile Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Porotermes quadricollis Chile Fruit 11 Permit Cargo Proeulia sp. Chile Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Prostephanus sulcicollis Chile Fruit 1 General Cargo Pseudococcidae , species of Chile Fruit 35 Permit Cargo Pseudococcus sp. Chile Fruit 14 Permit Cargo Psocoptera , species of Mexico 1 Permit Cargo Pterophoridae , species of Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Pucciniastrum americanum Mexico Fruit 0 Permit Cargo
Pyralidae sp. Chile; New Zealand Fruit 9 Permit Cargo Pyraustinae sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Rhopalidae , species of Chile Fruit 159 Permit Cargo Rhyephenes sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Rhyparochromidae , species of Chile 1 Permit Cargo

Saturniidae , species of Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Scutelleridae , species of Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Sibinia albovittata Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Sibinia sp. Chile Fruit 2 Permit Cargo Sitona sp. Chile Fruit 10 Permit Cargo Smicronyx sp. Chile 1 Permit Cargo Sminthuridae , species of Chile Fruit 3 Permit Cargo Sminthurides sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Tenebrionidae , species of Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Tettigoniidae , species of Mexico Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Thrips obscuratus New Zealand Fruit 27 Permit Cargo Thrips sp. Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Thyanta sp. Chile Fruit 10 Permit Cargo Tingidae , species of Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Tomarus villosus Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Tortricidae , species of Chile; Mexico; New Zealand Fruit 1 7 Permit Cargo

Tortricinae sp. Chile Fruit 148 Permit Cargo Triozidae , species of Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Xenogenus gracilis Chile Fruit 1 Permit Cargo Xerophloea sp. Chile Fruit 7 Permit Cargo