Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus SLU SE

Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus Germanus Slu Se-PDF Download

  • Date:18 May 2020
  • Views:9
  • Downloads:0
  • Pages:22
  • Size:366.70 KB

Share Pdf : Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus Germanus Slu Se

Download and Preview : Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus Germanus Slu Se


Report CopyRight/DMCA Form For : Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus Germanus Slu Se


Description:

This rapid pest risk analysis PRA provides a quick assessment of the risks posed by the pest to Sweden which is the PRA area being assessed The format is an adapted version of the EPPO Express PRA scheme EPPO 2012 Definition of terms used as well as the rating scheme and assessments are done in line with the guidance given in EPPO CAPRA system EPPO 2011 The likelihood of entry and

Transcription:

Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus, The economic impact was assessed to be medium based on a combination of i. that the species have been established in Europe for 65 years with few reports of. economic impact and ii that there is a risk for a similar shift towards increased. impact as have been recorded in North America From an environmental point of. view the main concern is that X germanus have become one of the most common. scolytids in several areas where it has established But there are no reports that it. has caused any local extinction of native species Therefore the environmental. impact was assessed to be small,Management options. It is assessed to be difficult to prevent the introduction of X germanus to Sweden. especially the risk of introduction due to natural spread Once established there are. several management options available in high value plantations e g ornamental. plant nurseries and apple orchards For example suitable breeding material such as. dead or dying hosts may be removed in order to avoid population build up The. main option to prevent damage to stored logs in the forest is just in time felling. Assessment in relation to the definition of quarantine pests. The results presented in this rapid PRA shows that Xylosandrus germanus does not. fulfil all of the criteria for a union quarantine pest e g it is widely distributed. within the EU territory In addition it indicates that X germanus does not fulfil all. criteria for a protected zone quarantine pest for Sweden e g due to limited. possibilities to prevent natural spread from Denmark. Key uncertainties and further investigation needed. There is currently not enough support to claim that X germanus is established in. Sweden However there is a high risk that established populations remain. undetected due to reasons specified in this rapid PRA Targeted surveys would. decrease the uncertainty whether X germanus is established in Sweden or not. Such surveys would also be a tool for early detection of all invasive scolytids that. are attracted to ethanol baited traps For example a Citizen Science approach may. be used for large scale monitoring of invasive bark and ambrosia beetles. Steininger et al 2015 www backyardbarkbeetles org It would also be desirable. if the development of X germanus both nationally and internationally is followed. to detect any shift towards increased impact, A key uncertainty of this PRA is related to the assessment of the magnitude of. impact should this species become established in Sweden A full systematic. review especially of the grey literature may decrease this uncertainty. Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus,Pest risk assessment. Name of the pest,Latin name Xylosandrus germanus Blandford.
Synonyms Xyleborus orbatus Blandford and Xyleborus germanus Blandford. Common names Japanischer Nutzholzborkenk fer DE Schwarzer. Nutzholzborkenk fer DE Borkenkaefer Japanischer Nutzholz DE. Borkenkaefer Schwarzer Nutzholz DE Smaller alder bark beetle EN Small. alder bark beetle EN Black timber bark beetle EN Black stem borer EN Petit. scolyte noir du Japon FR Xyl bore germanique FR Xylebore japonique FR. Han no kikuimusi JA Hannoki kikuimushi JA, Taxonomic position Domain Eukaryota Kingdom Metazoa Phylum. Arthropoda Subphylum Uniramia Class Insecta Order Coleoptera Family. Scolytidae Genus Xylosandrus Species Xylosandrus germanus. Reason for performing the rapid PRA, In 2016 Xylosandrus germanus was trapped in a monitoring program. administrated by the Swedish Board of Agriculture,Does a relevant earlier PRA exist. A Rapid PRA of Xylosandrus germanus was performed in 2014 for the UK by The. Forest Research Inward 2014 In summary it was concluded that for the UK the. likelihood of entry and the likelihood of establishment were both high the potential. spread moderate to rapid and the potential economic environmental and social. impact was expected to be small to medium With regard to risk management it. was stated that options for control management of an outbreak are limited since. for example containment by restricting movement of wood would not be efficient. due to the pest s good dispersal abilities and polyphagous nature However the risk. of damage may be reduced by good silvicultural management It was concluded. that better knowledge of the species distribution was needed and targeted trapping. was performed The known distribution in UK in April 2017 is still in accordance. with the description under the heading Current area of distribution point below. D Inward personal communication, According to the UK Plant Health Risk Register there is no statutory actions. against findings of this insect in the UK It should however be noted that X. germanus was already known to be established in the UK when their Rapid PRA. was performed, The Rapid PRA for the UK is to a large extent relevant also for Sweden but the.
current Rapid PRA was considered necessary to perform since i it would provide. Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus, an assessment in relation to the conditions in Sweden ii it would add new. information about the species published after 2014 and iii an in depth analysis. about the abundance of X germanus in different European countries was needed. Regulatory status of the pest, Xylosandrus germanus is not listed in the EC Plant Health Directive Council. Directive 2000 29 EC nor in the lists of EPPO This may be due to that X. germanus has been established in Europe for such a long time i e it established in. Germany already in 1954 Wichmann 1955 Accordingly X germanus is listed. in EPPOs list of pests which should not appear in EPPO Quarantine lists EPPO. 1992 Species are added to this list due to their wide distribution their status as. quality pests or their unimportance EPPO 1992,Current area of distribution. Xylosandrus germanus is present in large parts of Europe as well as in several. countries in North America and Asia The list provided by CABI 2015 and EPPO. Global Database 2016 of where the pest is present are in general agreement For. Europe they list the following countries Austria Belgium Croatia Czech. Republic France Germany Hungary Italy Netherlands Poland Russian. Federation Russian Far East and Southern Russia Slovenia Spain and. Switzerland However X germanus is also established in Denmark Hansen and. J rum 2014 United Kingdom Allen et al 2016 Inward 2015 Romania Olenici. et al 2014 and Ukraine Nazarenko and Gontarenko 2014 Interestingly X. germanus was also found in Kaliningrad in 2015 Mandelshtam M Y personal. communication It should be noted that there is a high risk that the presence of this. species remain unnoticed in a country for many years due to its concealed mode of. life and its preference for hosts that are already stressed dying or dead as well as. that detection requires specialist identification skills. For many European countries where the presence of X germanus has been. reported there is convincing empirical data showing that it is very abundant but. there are also many countries for which enough information to determine its. abundance was not found A summary of the abundance of X germanus in. different European countries is listed below, Austria In 1992 X germanus was trapped in two locations in the western. part of Austria i e in Feldkirch and Rankweil three individuals in total. Holzschuh 1993 In 1994 close to Salzburg 11 and 16 individuals were. found in two different trees Geiser and Geiser 2000 In 2012 in a large. monitoring project of saproxylic beetles in the Biosph renparks. Wienerwald close to Vienna X germanus was the most abundant species. 21 500 individuals 70 of the total number Holzinger et al 2014. Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus, Belgium In the For t de Soignes in the south eastern edge of Brussels X.
germanus was found to be the most abundant scolytid Gr goire et al. 2001 During June to July in 2001 9655 individuals of X germanus were. caught in 18 traps and X germanus constituted 80 of all trapped. scolytids Gr goire et al 2001 During the period July to August another. 3963 individuals were caught in 100 traps where X germanus constituted. 84 of all trapped scolytids Gr goire et al 2001 In another study in. 2002 eight traps were installed in two stands and 93 and 70 individuals of. X germanus were caught i e 37 and 47 respectively of all trapped. scolytids Henin and Versteirt 2004 X germanus has also been observed. in 29 other stands in Belgium Henin and Versteirt 2004 In six of these. stands several tens of individuals were present in the captures In a study. where an experimental approach was used to evaluate if frost increases. beech susceptibility to scolytine ambrosia beetles X germanus was caught. in landing traps at all 15 experimental trees in total 1234 beetles were. trapped La Spina et al 2013, Croatia In a study where traps were set up in oak stands in Jastrebarsko in. Zagreb county and in Otok near Vinkovci X germanus was the second. most frequent species in the traps In total 1 466 individuals of X. germanus were trapped and they thereby constituted 8 of all trapped. ambrosia beetles Franjevic et al 2016, Denmark In 2012 X germanus was found in Keldskov on the island. Lolland where one individual was observed walking on an ash stem. Hansen and J rum 2014 In 2013 X germanus was found in Broby. Overdrev 80 km south west of Copenhagen where three individuals were. caught in a trap hinged in an old sun exposed weakened oak tree Hansen. and J rum 2014 The species is considered to be spreading in Denmark. and in 2014 it was trapped in window traps in four locations in Gribskov. 50 km north of Copenhagen and in 2015 it was found on ash both in. J gersborg Dyrehave 15 km north of Copenhagen and in Keldskov Palle. J rum personal communication, France In a study including traps from 50 sites in northern France X. germanus dominated the communities constituting about 45 of the. trapped individuals in total 10 729 X germanus were trapped Bouget and. Noblecourt 2005, Germany A survey showed that already in 1954 X germanus was present. in at least 24 sites in Germany Wichmann 1955 X germanus is. considered to be very abundant in Rheinland Pfalz and Nordrhein. Westfalen in western Germany Henin and Versteirt 2004 who cites other. sources The species has also been shown to be present in three out of. eight Natural Forest Reserves of the Bavarian Forest in south eastern. Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus, Germany in total 79 individuals were trapped Blaschke and Bussler.
2012 In a study of emergence of Coleoptera from beech logs in a. managed broadleaved forest X germanus was one of the two most. common scolytids Kappes and Topp 2004 The emergence of X. germanus varied between 0 1000 individuals m2, Italy In a study located in north eastern Italy X germanus was trapped in. 24 out of 25 forests in total 1219 individual were trapped Rassati et al. 2016 In a study in Bosco della Fontana where window flight traps were. set up around artificially killed red oaks Quercus rubra in a nature. reserve in northern Italy X germanus constituted 16 of the trapped. ambrosia beetles in total 24 532 individuals were trapped Faccoli and. Rukalski 2004, Netherlands X germanus has been observed in 10 places distributed over. a large part of the Netherlands Vorst et al 2008, Poland X germanus has been found in eleven sites across a large part of. Poland Mokrzycki and Grodzki 2014 Mokrzycki 2016 In several of. these sites the populations seems to have increased recently e g in one. site one individual were trapped in 2013 and in 2015 210 individuals were. trapped Mokrzycki 2016, Romania In Voievodeasa Forest Reserve in northern Romania 20 traps. were set out in 2011 and 2012 and X germanus were caught in all traps. both years except in two traps in 2011 Olenici et al 2014 In total 71. individuals were trapped 2011 and 97 in 2012 According to Olenici et al. 2015 X germanus has also been found in three other places in Romania. i e in Arad Cacica and Leaota, Russia In a mixed coniferous broadleaf forest near Vladivostok in the.
Russian Far East X germanus was trapped in all eight ethanol baited. Sweeney et al 2016 In total 60 individual of X germanus was trapped. i e 3 of all Scolytinae species, Slovakia In Duchonka in west Slovakia 19 40 and 77 individuals of X. germanus were caught in 2010 2011 and 2012 respectively Galko 2013. Slovenia X germanus has been found in three locations in Slovenia In the. north western part Sabotin Nova Gorica in south eastern part Arnova. sela pri Brezicah and in the central part close to Ljubljana EPPO Global. Database Jurc 2010 Jurc and Repe 2012, Spain In 2003 four individuals of X germanus were trapped in northern. Spain L pez et al 2007 In 2011 2012 it was found in four new locations. Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus, in northern Spain 29 9 3 and 2 individuals Goldarazena et al 2014. Goldarazena personal communication, Switzerland In 1995 20 000 m3 of debarked round wood of spruce Picea. abies and fir Abies alba were attacked by X germanus Graf and. Manser 2000 In 1996 seven traps were set out in the same region and on. average 365 X germanus were caught per trap Graf and Manser 2000 In. 1997 four traps were set out and 140 X germanus were caught per trap. and in 1998 six traps were set out and 47 X germanus were caught per. trap There is also a report from Switzerland of large scale mass attacks on. logs of beech Fagus sylvatica stored in the forest According to the. abstract of Maksymov 1987 In the same study attacks were also. recorded on oak Quercus robur and spruce Picea abies. UK In a saproxylic survey in an area close to London 18 traps were set. out in 2008 and X germanus was trapped in all of them in total 883. individuals Allen et al 2016 Surprisingly X germanus was not trapped. again in that area in subsequent studies with the exception of 2012 when it. was trapped in all 10 traps used in total 193 individuals In West Sussex. 34 individuals were caught in 2010 and 2 individuals in 2011 In 2014 a. number of individuals were found in South Hampshire According to. Inward 2015 it has also been trapped in moderate numbers 25. individuals in 2012 and 2013 in North Hampshire, Is the pest present and is it widely distributed 1 in Sweden.
Xylosandrus germanus has been trapped twice in Sweden and in both cases close to. potentially colonized imported wood material In 1996 one individual was caught. in a window trap in Nybro inside the flooring manufacturer K hrs area where for. example oak from Germany was stored Lundberg 1996 In 2016 one individual. was caught in the harbor in Kalmar in one of the baited traps used in the. monitoring program administrated by the Swedish Board of Agriculture Lindel w. 2017 unpublished report to SJV Based on these two observations X germanus. cannot be considered established or widely distributed in Sweden However there. is a high risk that the presence of this species remains unnoticed in a country for a. long time due to its concealed mode of life and and its preference for hosts that are. already stressed dying or dead In addition specialist identification skills are. required to determine if a found beetle is X germanus Further monitoring would. decrease the uncertainty about whether this species is established in Sweden or not. Definition can be found in ISPM 5 Supplement 1,Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus. Host plants and their occurrence in Sweden, cabi has a very wide host range and it may be able to attack almost any woody. plant stem CABI 2015 The beetle does not feed on the plant material but uses the. hosts as a medium for growing the symbiotic ambrosia fungi it feeds on It seems. to only require a woody material with suitable density and moisture content Thus. it appears as if this species is more limited by finding hosts in a suitable condition. e g stressed or recently dead than on finding specific host plant species. Examples of hosts of importance for Sweden are Abies alba Alnus glutinosa. Betula pendula Fagus sylvatica Malus domestica Picea abies Pinus sylvestris. Quercus robur and Tilia spp Thus available hosts are present in almost the whole. Is the pest a vector, X germanus is closely associated with symbiotic ambrosia fungi such as. Ambrosiella hartigii Weber and McPherson 1984 and Ambrosiella grosmanniae. Mayers et al 2015 The fungus is transported in special spore carrying structures. in the beetles i e mycangium and introduced into the gallery system by the. females before oviposition begins Beaver 1989 The fungal cultures subsequently. produced in the wood are used as an exclusive source of food for both adults and. larvae The Ambrosiella fungi may cause staining of the wood around the galleries. but is not regarded as pathogenic CABI 2015, X germanus may also act as a vector for pathogenic fungi and the beetle has. mainly been associated with different Fusarium spp that may cause dieback. wilting and cankers on affected trees This association has been observed in for. example walnut Juglans spp Frigimelica et al 1999 Kessler 1974 Although not. considered an important vector X germanus has also been shown to be able to. transmit the Dutch Elm disease Buchanan 1940,Is a vector needed.
Pathways and likelihood of entry into Sweden, Wood and wood products Wood and wood products are considered to be the. most likely pathway for X germanus The beetle reside within the wood and are. thereby both protected from adverse climatic conditions during transportation and. become difficult to detect at points of entry Rassati et al 2016 It has for example. Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus, been found in wood packing material such as dunnage pallets and containers. USDA 2011 X germanus is present in large parts of Europe as well as in several. countries in North America and Asia and large volumes of potentially infested. material is imported to Sweden from these countries The two individuals of X. germanus that has been trapped in Sweden Lundberg 1996 Lindel w 2017. unpublished report to SJV most likely entered through this pathway. Plants for planting Woody plant stems with almost any diameter 0 9 50 cm in. diameter can be colonized by X germanus Reed et al 2015 and plants for. planting is therefore considered a potential pathway Plant for planting is however. judged to be a less important pathway than Wood and wood products due to the. much smaller volumes of suitable hosts material that is transported within this. pathway and because attacked living plants frequently shows symptoms that makes. it easier to detect colonized material This pathway is assessed to be unlikely but. with a high uncertainty and further investigation are needed to reduce this. uncertainty, Natural spread X germanus can fly at least 2 km Gr goire et al 2001 The high. spread capacity of X germanus is also supported by i that its initial spread was. several tens of kilometres per year both in Germany and in USA Henin and. Versteirt 2004 ii in France it spread from one to 51 out of 101 D partements. during 30 years Nageleisen et al 2016 and iii it is generally believed that it has. spread from the population that first established in Germany to 18 other European. countries e g Lakatos and Kajimura 2007 However these observations of. spread rates have probably been a result of a combination of natural spread and. human assisted spread The likelihood of entry into Sweden through natural spread. is assessed to be likely based on the species high spread capacity and the fact that it. has recently established in a neighboring country i e in Denmark Hansen and. J rum 2014,Rating of the likelihood of entry,Very Unlikely Moderately Likely Very Uncertainty. unlikely likely likely ratinga,Wood and wood Low,Natural spread Medium.
Plants for planting High,Low medium high,Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus. Likelihood of establishment outdoors and under protected. cultivation in Sweden, The likelihood that Xylosandrus germanus can establish outdoors in Sweden is. assessed to be very likely since, X germanus is highly polyphagous and suitable hosts are widely. distributed in Sweden, Sweden share K ppen Geiger climate type with areas where X germanus. is present e g at Latitude 49 2501 Longitude 84 4998 in Quebec CABI. 2015 Peel et al 2007 In some European countries however the species. has not been found at higher altitudes e g in Romania it was found up to. 900 m a s l Olenici et al 2014 and reference therein X germanus is still. expanding its range northward in Europe thus there is some uncertainty. whether the climate in the northern areas and in areas at high altitudes in. Sweden is suitable, The sibling mating behavior of X germanus leading to that adult females.
are already fertilized when they disperse increases the likelihood of. establishment, The likelihood that Xylosandrus germanus will establish on plants grown under. protected cultivation is assessed to be very unlikely since there does not seem to be. any reports of that,Rating of the likelihood of establishment. Very Unlikely Moderately Likely Very Uncertainty,unlikely likely likely ratinga. Outdoors Low,Protected Low,cultivation,Low medium high. Potential spread after introduction, Xylosandrus germanus can fly at least 2 km Gr goire et al 2001 According to.
Henin and Versteirt 2004 the initial spread of X germanus was several tens of. kilometres per year both in Germany and in USA Even more relevant is a mapping. of the estimated spread year by year in France from the first observation in 1984. until it had been observed in 51 out of 101 D partements in 2014 Nageleisen et. al 2016 These spread rates was likely a combination of natural spread and spread. Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus, due to transport of colonized material It is assessed that the spread rate in Sweden. after an introduction would be somewhat lower since cut trees nowadays are stored. in the forest for a shorter time which decreases the risk that the trees become. colonized before they are transported away Mainly due to that it is not known in. the studies cited above whether it is one population that has spread or whether new. introductions have contributed to the expansion of the area occupied the. uncertainty was assessed to be medium,Rating of the magnitude of spread within Sweden. Very low Low Moderate High Very Uncertainty,rate high ratinga. Spread rate Medium,Low medium high,Economic environmental and social impact. Previous expert opinions on the potential impact of Xylosandrus germanus differ. substantially According to CABI 2015 representing a global perspective X. germanus should be considered a high risk quarantine pest According to Ranger. and Reding 2008 it has emerged as a key pest of nursery stock in the United. States According to Jurc and Repe 2012 the influence to Slovenian forest could. be major According to Mokrzycki and Grodzki 2014 it may become a serious. pest in Central Europe including Poland According to Bouget and Noblecourt. 2005 the species does not currently appear to be a major threat in Western Europe. but based on recent reports the impact is likely to increase in the region According. to Inward 2014 the economic environmental and social impact in UK is expected. to be small to medium According to Latakos and Kajimura 2007 it is a major. invasive species in North America but in Europe it should still be considered a. secondary pest which cause no remarkable damage, X germanus lives in a symbiotic relationship with its associated ambrosia fungi.
which may cause staining of the wood and the beetle may also vector pathogenic. fungi such as Fusarium spp Frigimelica et al 1999 Kessler 1974 The impact. assessed in this rapid PRA is the impact of this beetle fungi complex. A key question for assessing the impact of X germanus is whether it kills healthy. plants There are several reports of X germanus attacks on apparently healthy. trees e g walnut trees Weber and McPherson 1984 young oak trees. Heidenreich 1960 and chest nut trees Oliver and Mannion 20019 However. according to a recent review apparently healthy trees under attack by X germanus. are likely to be or have been physiologically stressed Ranger et al 2016 In. conclusion it is unclear whether X germanus sometimes kill healthy plants but in. most cases it attacks hosts that are stressed dying or recently dead Ranger et al. Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus, As specified under the heading Current area of distribution above X germanus. have become one of the most common scolytid in many forested areas where it has. established This has implications for both the economic environmental and social. Economic impact, In North America X germanus is one of the economically most important. ambrosia beetles in nurseries Ranger and Reding 2008 Ranger et al 2010 USDA. 2011 The host range is extremely wide and the list of attacked plants in nurseries. includes dogwood Cornus spp honeylocust Gleditsia triacanthos L Japanese. snowbell Styrax japonicus S et Z magnolia Magnolia spp maple Acer spp. oak Quercus spp and redbud Cercis spp Ranger et al 2016 Attacks do not. always kill the trees but in such cases the aesthetic value and tree growth may be. seriously reduced Ranger et al 2016 Weber 1982 Severe damage has also. recently been recorded in apple orchards in New York where tree losses of up to. 30 have been reported Agnello et al 2015 2016, In Europe the economic impact of X germanus seem to be less severe than in. North America still there are reports of damage on Fagus spp Quercus spp. Juglans regia Picea abies Pinus sylvestris and Abies alba according to Henin and. Versteirt 2004 who cites other sources In 1995 X germanus colonized 20 000. m3 of round timber of Norway spruce and fir in the Swiss Central Plateau and in. the Jura region Graf and Manser 2000 The economic impact of colonization of. timber is a result of both the direct excavation of galleries and the wood staining. caused by the ambrosia fungus which in this case caused an estimated loss of value. of 1 million Swiss Francs Graf and Manser 2000,Environmental impact. Xylosandrus germanus is considered to have the potential to have a negative. impact on the diversity of scolytid communities Henin and Versteirt 2004 Bouget. and Noblecourt 2005 This is supported by a study in Belgium indicating that X. germanus had a niche overlap with several native species Henin and Versteirt. 2004 Despite that some of the native species were specialists on a particular type. of substrate e g Ernopocerus fagi which only colonizes branches less than 8 cm in. diameter X germanus could be found on all types of substrates e g stumps small. branches limbs and logs Henin and Versteirt 2004 However there seems to be. no reports that X germanus have caused any local extinction of native species. despite i the apparent niche overlap with native species ii the very high. population densities and iii the fact that X germanus have been established both in. Europe and North America for a very long time 65 and 85 years respectively. Based on this limited information and the lack of reports of any other. environmental impact caused by X germanus the potential environmental impact. within Sweden is assessed to be small but with a high uncertainty. Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus,Social impact.
Despite that Xylosandrus germanus has a long history as an invasive species and is. very common in many of the areas where it has established there seems to be no. reports on social impact Therefore the potential social impact within Sweden is. assessed to be very small,Uncertainty, There are many examples of beetle fungus symbioses that has shifted from. colonizing dead trees to colonizing live trees in their introduced ranges Hulcr and. Dunn 2011 Typically this is a shift from being a secondary pest on a wide range. of host to becoming a primary pest on a narrow range of hosts One example is the. redbay ambrosia beetle Xyleborus glabratus and its fungal partner Raffaelea spp. This symbiosis has started to kill trees of the family Lauraceae within its new range. and has eradicated mature redbay Persea borbonia along the southern Atlantic. coast of North America and is now threating the avocado growing regions Hulcr. and Dunn 2011 Such shifts may already have occurred for X germanus in some. regions e g X germanus had been in the apple growing regions in New York for a. long time but it only recently began to kill the trees and now hundreds of trees are. killed annually in this region Agnello et al 2015 2016 Such shifts are hard to. predict and increase the uncertainty in all the impact assessments made. Rating of the magnitude of potential impact within Sweden. Very small Small Medium Large Very Uncertainty,large ratinga. Economic High,Environmental High,Social Medium,Low medium high. Risk management options,Management to prevent introduction. The main pathway for X germanus is wood and wood products Detection of. infested wood is difficult since X germanus makes its galleries in the sapwood and. the entrance holes are just one millimeter in diameter The polyphagous nature of. the species also means that the pathway is not limited to wood and wood products. from certain host species X germanus has also been found in wood packing. material USDA 2011 and monitoring and management of this pathway is difficult. since packing material may become widely distributed before the beetles emerge. from the wood, The efficiency of the different treatments currently used to prevent the entry of pest.
species in wood varies when it comes to X germanus Debarking will not remove. Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus, the beetles from already colonized material as they are situated in the sapwood nor. will it prevent the colonization of wood Graf and Manser 2000 Haack and. Petrice 2009 A heat treatment of 56 C for 30 min e g ISPM 15 is sufficient to. kill a range of insect IPPC 2017 USDA 2016 In an experiment where wood. was experimentally infested with adults of X germanus 100 were killed at 52 C. by hot water treatments and at 58 C by microwave irradiation according to the. abstract in Suh 2014 However such treatments do not prevent the wood from. being recolonized with X germanus should the conducive environmental. conditions be fulfilled Haack and Petrice 2009 Some fumigant like. methylbromide appear to successfully kill X germanus in wood Based on the. abstract of Oogita et al 1998, For the pathway plants for planting detection and management is easier than for. the pathway wood and wood material mainly due to that infested plants. frequently show signs of poor health Sometimes infestations can also be detected. based on the characteristic frass tooth picks which are created when the beetles. excavate their galleries These signs of attacks are however frequently short lived. as they are easily destroyed Management option for this pathway may for example. include preventative contact insecticide treatments inspections and destruction of. infested material, Natural spread of X germanus from e g Denmark is considered likely and surveys. and eradication measures if the pest is detected may be performed in an attempt to. prevent establishment through this pathway The effectiveness of this approach is. hampered by the difficulties to detect this species early enough to prevent. establishment and there appears to be no records in the literature of attempts to stop. the natural spread of this species, In conclusion it is assessed to be difficult to prevent the introduction of. Xylosandrus germanus to Sweden,Management after introduction.
If X germanus is detected early enough it may be possible to eradicate the founder. populations Such early detection may be achieved by for example using a Citizen. Science approach to conduct large scale monitoring of invasive bark and ambrosia. beetles Steininger et al 2015 http www backyardbarkbeetles org. Healthy plants are seldom attacked by X germanus Thus maintaining healthy. plants should be the foundation of any integrated pest management program. against this pest Ranger et al 2016, For detection and monitoring of X germanus ethanol baited traps are frequently. used Ethanol has been shown to be the most attractive stress related volatile for. this species Ranger et al 2010 However it should be noted that X germanus is. significantly less attracted to ethanol baited traps than other ambrosia beetles e g. Rapid Pest Risk Analysis Xylosandrus germanus, in one study X germanus was the dominant species attacking the trees but they. only constituted 1 7 of the total trap catches Oliver and Mannion 2001 Ranger. et al 2010 Thus the abundance of X germanus in an area may be underestimated. in relation to other ambrosia beetles when ethanol baited traps are used for. monitoring, Monitoring the flight is a key element in the management of X germanus in high. value plantations such as ornamental plant nurseries apple orchards etc It is. considered difficult to control X germanus with insecticides and the monitoring is. used to time the application of insecticides with the time of the attacks Once the. beetles have entered the trees there is no effective management method to control. them Frank et al 2013 To be effective contact insecticides has to be applied. repeatedly until the flight period is over Frank et al 2013 Oliver and Manion. 2001 Whether the insecticides approved in Sweden are effective against X. germanus remains to be investigated, Other management options in high value plantations includes sanitation where. suitable breeding material such as cut branches and brush piles surrounding. nurseries are removed to avoid a populations build up Hulcr and Stelinski 2017. An alternative is to use this breeding material as traps i e to remove the material. after it has been attacked but before the offspring has emerged Traps may also be. created by injecting ethanol into selected trees or stem sections Ranger et al 2010. Reding et al 2016 Recent research also shows that it may be possible to use. biological control fungi in the future to control X germanus Castrillo et al 2016. The need for control is increased when the plants becomes stressed e g after. flooding including excessive irrigation or late frost Hulcr and Stelinski 2017. To prevent the damage caused by X germanus to stored logs in the forest Graf and. Manser 2000 suggest just in time felling In Sweden just in time felling is. already practiced to a high degree This is partly due to that conifer logs left in the. forest are frequently attacked by Ips typographus and Tomicus minor as well as the. ambrosia beetle Trypodendron lineatum In Sweden the maximum amount of fresh. spruce and pine allowed to be left in the forest is also regulated by the forestry act. 29 which a bit simplified states that the amount that exceeds five cubic meter. should be removed within a particular time frame These current practices in. Sweden would probably not prevent high population levels since X germanus can. breed in stumps and branches etc but it should considerably reduce the potential. impact of X germanus since logs of spruce and pine are available for a shorter. period in the forest However the economic impact may become significant in. situations where large volumes of suitable host materials becomes available e g. after extensive storm fellings As mentioned previously it is difficult to control X. germanus with insecticides and the insecticides used in some countries against the. ambrosia beetle Trypodendrum lineatum i e Chlorpyrifos Alfa Cypermethrin. Cypermethrin Deltamethrin Permethrin and Endosulfan does not provide. sufficient protection against X germanus Graf and Manser 2000.

Related Books