**United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service**  **Plant Protection and Quarantine**



## Risk Management Document



## Importation of Banana, **Musa spp.,**  **as Fresh, Hard Green Fruit from**  **the Philippines to Guam, Hawaii, and the**

**Northern Mariana Islands**

**February 13**  **, 2013** 

**Plant Health Programs (PHP) R**  **egulations, Permits and Manuals (**  **RPM )**  **Contact Person: Meredith Jones** 2



### Introduction A Pest Risk Assessment (PRA) was submitted by the Philippine Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI ) to Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service ( APHI S ) in December 2005 in suppor t of a market access request for Philippine green bananas to Guam (BPI , 2005). This pest risk assessment was prepared for Dole Philippines, Inc., Dole Asia Ltd., Makati, Philippines. In May 2007, BPIamended the market access request to include Hawaii and the Northern Mariana Is lands

. APHI S r eviewed the relevant literature and pest interception records and revised the PRA submitted by

BPI (USDA, 20 12 a ) . The APHI S pest list identified 6 2 quarantine pe sts of banana which might potentially follow the pathway of fresh green bananas from the Philippines :

**Tax a**  **Pest** Arthropod s Acari: Tenuipalpidae Brevipalpus californicus (Banks) Brevipalpus phoenicis (Geijskes) Coleoptera: Anthribidae Araecerus coffeae (Fabricius) Coleoptera: Cerambycidae Sybra alternans Wiedemann Coleoptera: Curculionidae Metamasius hemipterus Li nnaeus Philicoptus waltoni (Boheman) Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae Scapanes australis Boisduval Diptera: Muscidae Atherigona orientalis Schiner Diptera: Tephritidae Bactrocera occi pitalis (Bezzi) Bactrocera philippinensis Drew and Hancock Bactrocera musae (Tryon) Diptera: Stratiomyidae Hermetia illucens (Linnaeus) Hemiptera: Aphididae Rhopalosiphum padi Li nnaeus Hemiptera: Coccidae Ceroplastes cirripediformis Comstock Ceroplas tes rubens Maskell Coccus longulus (Douglas) Hemiptera: Coreidae Leptoglossus gonagra (Fabricius) Hemiptera: Diaspididae Aonidiella aurantii (Maskell) Aonidiella comperei McKenzie Aonidiella orientalis (Newstead) Aspidiotus coryphae Cockerell and Rob inson Aspidiotus excisus Green Chrysomphalus aonidum (Linnaeus) Hemiberlesia lataniae (Signoret) Hemiberlesia palmae (Cockerell) Hemiberlesia rapax (Comstock)3

**Tax a**  **Pest** Lepidosaphes beckii (Newman) Lepidosaphes similis Beardsley Mycetaspis personata (Comstock) Par latoria proteus (Curtis) Pinnaspis aspidistrae aspidistrae (Signoret) Pinnaspis buxi (BouchT) Pinnaspis musae Takagi Pinnsaspis strachani (Cooley ) Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli (Cooley ) Selenaspidus articulatus (Morgan) Unaspis citri (Comstock) Arthropods H emiptera: Margarodidae Icerya aegyptiaca Douglas Icerya pulcher (Leonardi) Icerya seychellanum (Westwood) Hemiptera: Pentatomidae Tessaratoma papillosa (Drury ) Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae Geococcus coffeae Green Maconellicoccus hirsutus (Green) Planococ cus lilacinus (Cockerell) Pseudococcus cryptus Hempel Pseudococcus jackbeardsleyi Gimpel and Miller Pseudococcus longispinus (Targioni Tozzetti) Rastrococcus invadens Williams Rastrococcus spinosus (Robinson) Lepidoptera: Limacodidae Parasa lepida (Crame r) Lepidoptera: Noctuidae Agrotis ipsilon (Hufnagel) Spodoptera exigua (Hubner) Lepidoptera: Py

ralidae Diaphania indica (Saunders) Orthoptera: Acrididae Chondracris rosea (DeGeer) Locusta migratoria (Linnaeus) Melicodes tenebrosa Walker Valanga nigri cornis Burmeister Thy sanoptera: Thripidae Hercinothrips femoralis (Reuter) Thrips florum Schmutz Thrips hawaiiensis (Morgan) Mollusca Achitinidae Achatina fulica Bowdich Weed Imperata cylindrica (L.) Beauv. Bacteria Burkholderiales:

Burkholdericeae R alstonia solanacearum (Smith) Yabuuchi et al ., Race 2, Biovar 1

Since the PRA was developed APHI S has deregulated several pests including :4

Chaetanaphothrips signipennis (Bagnall ), Planococcus minor (Maskell) and Sybra alternans (Wiedemann ) and these pe sts have been removed from the RMD (USDA, 2012b)

. The pest s listed in this RMD are all expected to be excluded from the pathway of fresh hard green bananas by mitigation measures that are standard industry practices in the Philippines ( BPI , 2005; USDA, 20 12 a )

. The mitigation measures expected to exclude these pests are from the following list provided to APHI S by

BPI (BPI , 2005)

. 

### Industry **Standard Practices** A list of industry

standard practices for banana production in the Philippines w a s submitted to APHI S by

BPI(BPI , 2005 ). BPIindicated that these are standard industry practices, and they will mitigate all risk from pests in green bananas from the Philippines. These practices include the following: a) Use of tissue culture (tc) seedlings in n ew plantings. Tc seedlings are relatively free from insect and disease pests. b) Excellent weed management to limit proliferation of insect and disease pests. c) Pseudostem sanitation to eliminate refuse and breeding sites of insect pests. d) Fruit obstruc tion removal (FOR) to prevent fruit damage as well as eliminate bridges that may be utilized by the pests to infest the fiuit. e) Insecticidal bud injection to kill the banana flower thrips. f ) Insecticide spray on the pseudostem to eliminate insect pests i.e., mealybugs, aphids, etc. g) Regular bunch spray containing insecticide to prevent mealybugs and scale insects from colonizing the developing fruit bunch. This spray would eliminate fruit flies if present. h) Chlorpyrifos

- impregnated polyethylene (PE) bags are used to cover the fruit bunches after bunch spray to fu rther prevent mealybug, scale and fruit fly insect infestation on the fruit. Bags also prevent from disease infections. i) Additional Chlorpyrifos

- impregnated PE material (in a form of "strip " or "square") is installed on the fruit as additional control against insect pests when needed. j) Bunches for harvest are identified or tagged one (1) day before harvest in an operation called "pre

- calibration". Bunches, in the process, are inspected lik ewise for the presence of insect pests. Bunches with mealybugs, scales, other insect and disease damage are discarded during harvest. k) Upon arrival of the fruit at the packing plant, fruit bunches are sprayed with highpressure water to eliminate any poss ible, although highly improbable, mealybug infestation. 1) While bunches are waiting to be de

- handed, the “fruit inspector” in the packing plant will check for insect damage, particularly mealybug infestation, on individual bunches. m) During de

- handing, individual hands are thoroughly inspected by the "de

- hander" for possible mealybug infestation and any other evidence of insect damage.5

n) After de

- handing, individual hands are thoroughly cleaned with soap and water by the fruit selectors and further brus hed with high

- pressure water to eliminate possible infestation of mealybugs. o) The individual hands are again inspected to conf i rm freedom from mealybugs and other insects during weighing and immediately before packing inside the box. p) Unused pallets an d those that are clean, dry and free f rom trash, soil, weed seeds and non - weed contaminants are utilized by the industry. q) Fruits stay in the wharf no more than 3 hours before being loaded in the vessel or into cold storage. W

harf areas are maintained, k ept clean and are situated away from population areas and farms. Regular cleaning of wharf is done to prevent any source of contamination on exportable fruits. r) Vessels are cleaned with the recommended disinfectant before loading. Some vessels use ozone for disinfection between loads. Some of these practices are viewed as necessary by APHI S and will be included as required risk mitigations. APHI S will also requ ire some additional mitigations that are not on this list provided by

BPI

. 

### Risk Management **Measures -**  **Sy stems approach for green bananas** 
T he following mitifgation measures are required for the sy stems approach for fresh green bananas. **Monitoring and Oversight .**  The NPPO of the Philippines must provide a workplan to APHI S that details the acti vities that the NPPO of Philippines will, subject to APHI S’ approval of the workplan, carry

out to meet the requirements of the sy stems approach and specific quarantine treatments that may

be required . APHI S will be directly involved with BPI in monitorin g and auditing implementation of the sy stems approach and/or any quarantine treatments

. The NPPO of the Philippines must visit and inspect registered places of production starting when fruit bags are emplaced and continuing until the end of the shippin g season, to verify that the growers are complying with the requirements of the sy stems approach including following pest management guidelines and fruit bagging

. Inaddition to conducting inspections at the packinghouses, the NPPO of the Philippines mu st monitor packinghouse operations to verify that the packinghouses are complying with the requirements of the sy stems approach. If the NPPO of the Philippines determines that a place of production or packinghouse is not complying with the requirements of the sy stems approach, no fruit from the place of production or packinghouse will be eligible for export to the United States until the NPPO of the Philippines conduct an investigation and appropriate remedial actions have been implemented

. The NPPO of the Philippines must review and maintain all forms and documents related to export program activities in places of production and packinghouses for at least 1 year and, as6

requested, provide them to APHI S for review. **Registered places of production .**  B ananas must be grown in places of production that are registered with the NPPO of the Philippines

. To register, the places of production must provide Philippine 's NPPO with the following information: Grower, exporter, orchard, and places of production name , region, township, province, locality , area planted to each fruit , and approximate date of harvest. Registration must be renewed annually

. The NPPO of the Philippines will certify

that each place of production follows pest control guidelines to reduce re gulated pest populations. APHI S may monitor the places of production if necessary

. Registration of places of production will allow trace back to the places of production if pest problems are found on fruit shipped to the United States. Problem places of production can then be removed from the program until further mitigation measures have been taken to reduce pest populations. **Traceability.** Harvested bananas must be placed in field cartons or containers that are marked to show the official registration number of the places of production . The place of production where the bananas were grown must remain identifiable when the fruit leaves the place of production , at the packinghouse, and throughout the export process. Fruit presented for inspection at th e United States port of entry must be identified in the shipping documents accompany ing each lot of fruit to specify the places of production or sites in which the fruit was produced , and the packing house or houses in which the fruit was processed. This i dentification must be maintained until the fruit is released for entry into the United States. **Place of production pest management program including**  **cover ing**  **b ananas with pesticide**  **impregnated bags**

. Each place of production must follow a pest manage ment program specified by the NPPO to reduce populations of quarantine pests

. This includes applying pesticides to reduce pest populations and bagging bananas after flower drop with plastic bags impregnated with pesticides

. If at any

time during the grow ing period when the bag is covering the fruit, the bag falls off, or the bag is torn so that fruit flies can enter, that fruit is no longer eligible for export to the United States

. **Fruit fly population monitoring and management**  **for l ow prevalence**  **places of production**  **.** Lo w prevalence will be used as part of a sy stems approach to mitigate risk from Bactrocera species fruit fl ies

. Procedures for the establishment and maintenance of areas of low pest prevalence must comply

with international standards (NAPP O, 2003; I PPC, 2005). Beginning at least three months before harvest begins and continuing through the completion of harvest, trapping in the places production of banana for Bactrocera fruit fly species must be conducted with at least 1 trap per 0.2 km 2 b y the NPPO. APHI S

- approved traps baited with APHI S

approved baits must be used and serviced at least once every 2 weeks. I f more than 2

. 0 FTD (number of fruit flies per trap per day ) fruit flies are trapped, pesticide bait treatments (or bait stations) mu st be applied in the affected place of production in order for the place of production to remain eligible to export bananas . The NPPO keeps records of fruit fly detections for each trap, updates the records each time the traps are checked, and makes the re cords available to APHI S inspectors upon request. The records must be maintained for at least 1 year after harvest.7

**Bananas harvested hard green (no color break or yellow visible**  **) .**  The bananas must be harvested at a mature green state. N one of the bananas harvested for export may be at or past color break (turning yellow)

. Damaged fruit must not be harvested for export. **Safeguarding.** Bananas must be safeguarded from exposure to fruit flies from harvest to export, including being packaged so as to pre vent access by fruit fly and other injurious insect pests. **Packing houses.**  Packing houses must prevent the entry of pests ( pest exclusionary packing houses) with double

- door entry and other measure s designed to exclude fruit flies and other pests of quar antine concern. The packinghouse operations for export of bananas must be m onitored by Phillipine NPPO. No other fruit is allowed in a packing house during the time export fruit is being packed.
**Post**
**- harvest processing.**  After harvest all damaged or d iseased fruits must be culled at the packinghouse

. Fruit will be washed with a high pressure water spray , dehanded and washed with soap and water. Fruit for export must be packed into new, clean boxes, crates or other packing materials

. **NPPO Inspection**  **.** F ruit must be inspected in the Philippines at an APHI S

- approved inspection site under the direction of BPI inspectors , following any post

- harvest processing. A sample of boxes from each consignment must be selected by BPI at a rate to be mutually agree d upon by BPIand APHI S. The fruit from these boxes must be visually inspected for quarantine pests

. A portion of the fruit being inspected must be cut to detect internally feeding quarantine pests

. **Phytosanitary certificate**  **.** Each consignment of frui t must be accompanied by a phy tosanitary certificate issued by

the NPPO of the Philippines that contains an additional declaration stating that “ the fruit in the consignment was grown and packed in accordance with the approved sy stems approach and inspecte d and found free of quarantine pests ”

. **Port of Entry Inspection.**  Fruit must be inspected at the first United States port of entry by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) inspectors from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

. A sample of boxes from ea ch consignment will be inspected for quarantine pests

. If significant intereceptions of quarantine pests occur, APHI S may ask BPIto suspend those places of production pending the result of an investigation by BPIwhen they

may either be removed from the program or required to take remedial measures. 

### Efficacy **of Risk Management Measures**  There are several measures available for mitigating the pests of concern from bananas from the Philppines . The measures chosen for risk m anagement on banan a s from th e Philippines are summarized in Table 1

.8

**Table 1**

**. Summary of risk**  **management measures**  **that are components of a systems approach**  **for bananas**  **fro m**  **the Philippines to Guam, Haw**  **aii and the Northern Mariana Islands** 

**. Measure(s)**  **Pests Efficacy**  Monitorin g and Oversight All pests , but must be used in conjunction with other measures as part of a systems approach. These measures are standard for many im port programs and assist in maintaining quality of the program. Registered Places of Production All pests , but must be used in conjunction with other measures as part of a systems approach. Places of production are registered to effectively ma intain quality

control and traceback.
Traceability All pests , but must be used in conjunction with other measures as part of a systems approach. Traceability allows track back to places of production if pests are found by

inspection at the port of arrival to the United States. Places of production with quarantine pests can be removed from the program. Places of producti on Registration All pests , but must be used in conjunction with other measures as part of a systems approach. Registration of places of production is required to ma nage places of production requirements and restrict access to the program to qualified sites

. Commercially

grown consignments from registered places of production use good agricultural practices to reduce or eliminate pests. APHIS pest interception database indicates that commercial consignments are much less likely to have pest interceptions th an non - commercial consignments or passenger baggage. Place of production registration is part of traceability

that allows track back to places of production if pests are found by inspection at the port of arrival to the United States. P laces of production with pests of quarantine concern can be removed from the program. Place of production pest management program including bananas covered with pesticide impregnated bags

. All pests , but must be used in conjunction with other measures as part of a systems a pproach. B agging also mitigate s against all Arthropod pests and some diseases such as Ralstonia solanacearum

. Pesticide impregnated bags are industry standard practices in Central and South America production of bananas (Matlock & de la Cruz, 2003; Polido ro et al. , 2008; Sim mo nds, 1966). These bags reduce the num ber of quarantine pests that may follow the pathway of bananas. Bagging also m itigates the bacterial disease Ralstonia solanacearum Race 2 Biovar 1 (Hay

ward, 2006; Jones, 2000; PCARRC, 2006; Sogu ilon et al. , 1995).9

**Table 1**

**. Summary of risk**  **management measures**  **that are components of a systems approach**  **for bananas**  **fro m**  **the Philippines to Guam, Haw**  **aii and the Northern Mariana Islands** 

**. Measure(s)**  **Pests Efficacy**  Fruit fly population mo nitoring and ma nagem ent for l ow prevalence places of production

. B actrocera spp. fruit flies Several species of Bactrocera including Bactrocera musae, B. occipitalis, and B. philippinensis are present in the Ph ilippines that m ay attack bananas. Bananas and especially green bananas are generally considered to be poor hosts to most species of fruit flies ; however , B. musae is recorded as attacking green bananas. Fruit fly trapping and management is a key compon ent part of low prevalence systems approaches for many

commodities including tomatoes and peppers grown in pest exclusionary structures, and the papaya systems approach from Central and South America ( Title 7, Code of Federal Regulations , 319.56

- 25, 28, 31 and 40)

. Bananas harvested hard green (no color break or y ellow visible). B actrocera spp. fruit flies Harvesting bananas at a hard green stage is a standard industry

practice for banana production in Central and South America, Hawaii, and most of the w orld. Ripe bananas are much more likely to be infested with Tephritid fruit flies (Armstrong, 1983; 2001; Allwood & Drew, 1996). Safeguarding

– fruit is protected during transit from infestation by pests. B actrocera spp. fruit flies Safeguarding is stand ard for any im port program where the fruit is a host to fruit flies. Most fruits become more susceptible to infestation after harvest and safeguarding prevents infestation , for example tomatoes from various countries and Mexican avocados ( Title 7, Code of Federal Regulations , 319.56

- 28 and 30)

. Packinghouses All pests , but specifically for B actrocera spp. fruit flies

. Pest exclusionary packinghouses are a standard APHIS requirement for import programs where the fruit is fruit fly

host material, for exampl e the Mexican avocado program uses this risk mitigation ( Title 7, Code of Federal Regulations , 319.56

- 30 ). Postharvest Processing All pests , but must be used in conjunction with other measures as part of a systems approach. Banana postharvest processing i ncludes washing that removes surface pests such as mi tes, scale insects, me aly bugs and any other surface feeding pests , and culling that removes any visible pests and dam aged and diseased fruit (BPI, 2005). NPPO inspection All pests , but must be used in conjunction with other measures as part of a systems approach. Inspections are recognized as an important part of a pest management program (Kahn & Mathur 1999). T rained inspectors can recognize infestations of pest s and the damage or diseases they cau se to the fruits which would allow detection of these pests in some cases (CABI, 200 7 ; NAPPO, 1998; USDA, 1982; USDA, 2004; W hittle, 1986) Phy tosanitary certification All pests , but must be used in conjunction with other measures as part of a systems appr oach. Requiring a phy tosanitary

certificate requires the NPPO to inspect the bananas for pests

.10

**Table 1**

**. Summary of risk**  **management measures**  **that are components of a systems approach**  **for bananas**  **fro m**  **the Philippines to Guam, Haw**  **aii and the Northern Mariana Islands** 

**. Measure(s)**  **Pests Efficacy**  Phy tosanitary i nspection at port of entry All pests , but must be used in conjunction with other measures as part of a systems approach. Inspections are recogni zed as an im portant part of a pest management program (Kahn and Mathur , 1999). T rained inspectors can recognize infestations of pest and the damage or disease they cause to the fruits which would allow detection of these pests in some cases (CABI, 200 7 ; NA PPO, 1998; USDA, 1982; USDA, 2004; W hittle, 1986)

.



### Summary
Bananas are export ed from Central and South America and Hawaii using m ost of the components described in this sy stems approach for bananas from the Philippines

. Over 3.8 to 4 million m etric tons of bananas have been imported into the United States every year from 2003 to 2007 (NASS, 2008). Given the huge amount of fruit imported, the number of pest intercep tions is very small, with about 1,400 interceptions of actionable quarantine pes ts in that time period for bananas worldwide ( AQAS

- PestI D , 201 2 )

. The majority of these interceptions are mealy bugs, scarabeid beetles and weevils. The Scarabeids and weevils intercepted are not internally feeding on bananas , but are adult hitchhikers. M ealy bugs are external feeders that are readily detected by inspect ion at the port of entry

. APHI S has intercept ed only four o f the 6 2 quarantine pests listed in the PRA ( AQAS

- PestI D , 201 2 ) in bananas from all sources including passenger baggage and comme rcial cargo in the past five years. These interceptions include Metasimius hemipterus , Maconellicoccus hirsutus and Planococcus lilacinus ; however , the volume of bananas imported is very large. APHI S has no record s of interception s of Ralstonia solanace arum on bananas from any source ( AQAS

- PestI D. 2012 ). Inthe proposed Philippine banana sy stems approach, any place of production with interception s of quarantine pests can be either removed from the program or required to take remedial measures. Accordi ng to BPI , bananas are currently exported from the Philipp i nes to Japan using part of the sy stems approach listed here (BPI , 2005) . According to BPI , no quarantine pests have been intercepted using this approach.
APHI S concludes that commercial consignm ents of Philippine bananas may safely be imported into Guam, Hawaii and the Northern Mariana I slands without the risk of introducing pests using the combination of the mitigations in the sy stems approach listed above.11



### Au **thor s** 
Jos é R. Hern ández, Ph.D

. Senior Risk Manager Regulations, Permits and Manuals Walter Gould , Ph.D. Senior Risk Manager R egulations, P ermits and M anuals



### References

Allwood, A.J. and R.A.I . Drew. 1996. Management of Fruit Flies in the Pacific : A regional sy

mposium, Nadi, Fiji 28

– 31 October 1996 . 267 pp. http://www.aciar.gov.au/sy stem/files/sites/aciar/files/node/550/PR+76+Fruit+Flies.pdf#p age=171 AQAS

- PestI D . 20 1 2 . Agricultural Quarantine Activity Sy stem Pest Interception Database. U SDA

- APHI S

- PPQ. L ast access January 20 1 2

. Armstrong, J.W. 1983. Infestation biology of three fruit fly

(Diptera: Tephritidae) species on ‘Brazilian,’ ‘Valery ’ and William’s’ cultivars of banana in Hawaii. Journal of Economic Entomology

76: 539

- 543. Armstrong, J.W. 200 1. Quarantine s ecurity of b ananas at h arvest m aturity a gainst Mediterranean and o riental f

ruit f lies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Hawaii . Journal of Economic Entomology

94: 302

- 314. BPI . 2005. Importation Of Banana (Musa Acuminata Cultivars and Hy brids) a s Commercial Shiplments o f Fresh Mature Hard Green Fruit f rom the Philippines t o Continental United States

. A Qualitative, Pathway

- In itiated Risk Assessment for a Commodi ty

. Republic of the Philippines Department of Agriculture Bureau of Plant Industry . 92 pp. CABI . 200 7 . Crop Protection Compendium, 200 7 Edition. CAB International, Wallingford, UK. Hay ward, A.C. 2006. Fruit rots of banana caused by Ralstonia solanacearum race 2: questions of nomenclature, transmission and control. InfoMusa. 15(1

- 2): 7

- 10. IP PC . 2005. International Standards for Phy tosanitary Measures. R equirements for the establishment of areas of low pest prevalence. IS PM 22 . UN

- FAO

- IP PC, Italy

. Jones, D, R. 2000. Introduction to Banana, Abacá and Enset. Pages 1

- 36 In : Diseases of Banana, Abacá, and Enset, Jones, D. R. (ed.). CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK

.12

Kahn, R. P. and S. B. Mathur. 1999. Containment Facilities and Safeguards. American Phy topathological Society , St. Paul, MN. 213 pp. Matlock, R.B. and R. de la Cruz. 2003. Ants as i ndicators of p esticide i mpacts in b anana
. Environmental Entomology 32: 816

- 829. NAPPO. 1998. Surveillance for quarantine fruit flies (in a portion of a generally infested area). NAPPO Regional Standards for Phy tosanitary Measures No. 10. Ottawa: Secretariat of the North American Plant Protection Organization. NAPPO. 2003. Guidelines for the Establishment, Maintenance and Verification of Areas of L ow Pest Pr evalence for Insects

. NAPPO Regional Standards for Phy tosanitary Measures No. 20. Ottawa: Secretariat of the North American Plant Protection Organization. NASS. 2008. National Agricultural Statistics Service. Hawaii bananas annual summary 2007. http://www.nass.usda.gov/hi/fruit/xban07.pdf PCARRD. 2006. Control of “bugtok” disease in “saba” banana. Philippine Organic Agriculture In formation Network. Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research and Development. Accessed June 27, 2011 at: http://pcarrd.dost.gov.ph/phil

organic/Technologies/control%20bugtok.htm

. Polidoro, B.A., R.M. Dahlquist, L .E. Castillo, M.J. Morra, E. Somarriba and N.A. Bosque

- Pérez. 2008. Pesticide application practices, pest knowledge, and cost

- benefits of plantain production in the Bribri

- Cabé car I ndigenous Territories, Costa Rica . Environmental Research 10 8: 98

- 106. Simmonds, N. E. 1966. Bananas. 2 nd edition. L ongman, London. 512 pp. Soguilon, C. E., Magnaye, L. V., and Natural, M. P. 1995. Bugto k Disease of Banana. Musa Disease Fact Sheet N o 6. International Network for the Improvement of Banana and Planta in, Montpellier, France. USDA. 1982. Pests Not Known to Occur in the United States or of L imited Distribution, No. 24: Rice Cutworm. USDA, APHI S, PPQ, Hyattsville, MD. 8 pp. USDA. 2000. Guidelines for Pathway

- In itiated Pest Risk Assessments. Version 5.02. USDA, APHI S, PPQ. Riverdale, MD. 30 pp. USDA. 2004. Agricultural Quarantine Inspection Monitoring (AQI M) Handbook. USDA

APHI S, PPQ; http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/manuals/port/AQI M_Chapters.htm [accessed July

2009]. USDA. 20 12 a
. Importation of Banana, Musa spp., as Fresh, Hard Green Fruit from the Philippines to Guam, Hawaii and the Northern Mariana I slands

. January , 20 12 Rev. 002

. USDA, APHI S, PPQ, CPHST, Raleigh, NC

. 52 pp. USDA. 2012b. Official Control

- The Federally Recognized State Managed Phy

tosanitary Program. Pests No L onger Regulated per FRSMP Evaluation

. http ://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/plant_pest_info/frsmp/non

- reg - pests.shtml access October 2012. Whittle, K. 1986. Pests Not Known to Occur in the United States or of L imited Distribution No. 74: Cabbage Moth

- Mamestra brassicae L. September 1986. USDA, A PHI S, PPQ. Hyatt sville, MD. 15 pp.