Search

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to evaluate the probability of entry of pests (likelihood of pest freedom at entry), including both regulated and non‐regulated pests, associated with unrooted cuttings of the genera Petunia and Calibrachoa produced under physical isolation in Costa Rica. The relevance of any pest for this opinion was based on evidence collected according to specific criteria, following the methodology used for high‐risk plants adapted for the specificity of this assessment. Twenty‐two EU regulated pests (beet curly top virus, Bemisia tabaci, Chloridea virescens, Eotetranychus lewisi, Epitrix cucumeris, Epitrix tuberis, euphorbia mosaic virus, Helicoverpa zea, Liriomyza huidobrensis, Liriomyza sativae, Liriomyza trifolii, pepper golden mosaic virus, potato spindle tuber viroid, Ralstonia pseudosolanacearum, Ralstonia solanacearum, Spodoptera ornithogalli, squash leaf curl virus, Thrips palmi, tomato golden mosaic virus, tomato leaf curl Sinaloa virus, tomato spotted wilt virus, tomato yellow leaf curl virus) and one pest that is not regulated in the EU (Aleurodicus dispersus) fulfilled all relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Costa Rica were evaluated taking into account possible factors limiting their efficacies. Additionally, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The estimated degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with tomato spotted wilt virus being the pest most frequently expected on the imported cuttings. The expert knowledge elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty that between 9927 and 10,000 bags containing unrooted cuttings of Petunia spp. and Calibrachoa spp. per 10,000 would be free of tomato spotted wilt virus.

Abstract In accordance with the EFSA Strategy 2027 outlining the need for fit‐for‐purpose protocols for EFSA generic scientific assessments, the EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH Panel) developed standard protocols to harmonise the problem formulation process and outputs for mandates addressing recurrent scientific questions. Three types of recurring EFSA plant health mandates require generic scientific assessments: (i) pest categorisation; (ii) commodity risk assessment for the purpose of derogation to provisions of the EU plant health law and (iii) quantitative pest risk assessment. The three standard protocols are tailored to the appropriate level of detail and build on the existing guidance documents laying out the methods for conducting risk assessment in the plant health domain. To develop a standard protocol for pest categorisation, the PLH Panel adapted the latest version of the standard template reporting the evidence needs and the assessment questions to conclude whether a pest fulfils the criteria for being considered a potential quarantine pest for the EU. To develop a standard protocol for commodity risk assessment, the PLH Panel adapted the procedure and standard templates used for commodity risk assessment of high risk plants. To develop a standard protocol for quantitative pest risk assessments (qPRA), the Panel reviewed the existing guidance document on qPRA and the qPRAs published by the PLH Panel. The hierarchy of assessment questions and sub‐questions used were identified and extracted. Based on this, a hierarchically organised IT‐tool was formulated as protocol for the planning and documentation of future qPRAs.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘high risk plants, plant products and other objects’. Taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the applicant country, this Scientific Opinion covers the plant health risks posed by the following commodities: Sorbus aucuparia bare‐root plants and rooted plants in pots up to 7 years old and specimen trees in pots up to 15 years old imported into the EU from the UK. A list of pests potentially associated with the commodities was compiled. The relevance of any pest was assessed based on evidence following defined criteria. Three EU quarantine pests (Entoleuca mammata and Phytophthora ramorum (non‐EU isolates), Erwinia amylovora), were selected for further evaluation. For two of the selected pests (E. mammata and P. ramorum), the risk mitigation measures implemented in the UK and specified in the technical dossier were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The degree of pest freedom varies between the pests evaluated, with P. ramorum being the pest most frequently expected on the imported S. aucuparia plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9812 and 10,000 bare‐root S. aucuparia plants per 10,000 will be free from P. ramorum.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to evaluate the probability of entry of pests (likelihood of pest freedom at entry), including both regulated and non‐regulated pests, associated with unrooted cuttings of the genera Petunia and Calibrachoa produced under physical isolation in Kenya. The relevance of any pest for this opinion was based on evidence following defined criteria, based on the methodology used for High‐Risk Plants adapted for the specificity of this assessment. Fourteen EU‐regulated pests (Bemisia tabaci, cowpea mild mottle virus, Liriomyza huidobrensis, Liriomyza sativae, Liriomyza trifolii, potato leafroll virus, potato spindle tuber viroid, Ralstonia pseudosolanacearum, R. solanacearum, Scirtothrips dorsalis, tomato mild mottle virus, tomato spotted wilt virus, tomato yellow leaf curl virus and Xanthomonas vesicatoria) and six EU non‐regulated pests (Aleurodicus dispersus, pepper veinal mottle virus, Nipaecoccus viridis, Phenacoccus solenopsis, Tetranychus neocaledonicus and tomato yellow ring virus) fulfilled all relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Kenya were evaluated, taking into account the possible limiting factors. Additionally, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom, taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The estimated degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with T. neocaledonicus being the pest most frequently expected on the imported cuttings. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9942 and 10,000 bags containing unrooted cuttings of Petunia spp. and Calibrachoa spp. per 10,000 would be free of T. neocaledonicus.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘high risk plants, plant products and other objects’. Taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the applicant country, this Scientific Opinion covers the plant health risks posed by the following commodities: Cornus alba and Cornus sanguinea bare‐root plants and rooted plants in pots up to 7 years old imported into the EU from the UK. A list of pests potentially associated with the commodities was compiled. The relevance of any pest was assessed based on evidence following defined criteria. Four EU quarantine pests (Meloidogyne fallax, Phytophthora ramorum (non‐EU isolates), tobacco ringspot virus, and tomato ringspot virus) and one EU non‐regulated pest (Discula destructiva), were selected for further evaluation. For the selected pests, the risk mitigation measures implemented in the technical dossier from the UK were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with P. ramorum being the pest most frequently expected on the imported C. alba and C. sanguinea plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9823 and 10,000 bare‐root C. alba and C. sanguinea plants per 10,000 will be free from P. ramorum.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to evaluate the probability of entry of pests (likelihood of pest freedom at entry), including both, regulated and non‐regulated pests, associated with unrooted cuttings of the genera Petunia and Calibrachoa produced under physical isolation in Guatemala. The relevance of any pest for this opinion was based on evidence following defined criteria, based on the methodology used for high‐risk plants adapted for the specificity of this assessment. Twenty EU regulated pests (Bemisia tabaci, pepper golden mosaic virus, pepper huasteco yellow vein virus, squash leaf curl virus, tomato severe leaf curl virus, tomato yellow leaf curl virus, tomato spotted wilt virus, Liriomyza huidobrensis, Liriomyza sativae, Liriomyza trifolii, Bactericera cockerelli, Eotetranychus lewisi, Epitrix subcrinita, Epitrix cucumeris, Helicoverpa zea, Chloridea virescens, Spodoptera ornithogalli, Ralstonia solanacearum, Ralstonia pseudosolanacearum, Xanthomonas vesicatoria) and one EU non‐regulated (Phenacoccus solenopsis) pest fulfilled all relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Guatemala were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors, and an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The limited and partially conflicting information provided in the dossier contributes to the wide estimates of pest freedom. The estimated degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with Ralstonia spp. (R. solanacearum and R. pseudosolanacearum) being the pest most frequently expected on the imported cuttings. The expert knowledge elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9916 and 10,000 bags containing unrooted cuttings per 10,000 would be free of Ralstonia spp.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by plants of Acer palmatum imported from the United Kingdom (UK) as: (a) 1‐ to 2‐year‐old bare root plants for planting and (b) 1‐ to 7‐year‐old plants in pots, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the UK. All pests associated with the commodity were evaluated against specific criteria for their relevance for this opinion. Six EU quarantine pests and four pests not regulated in the EU fulfilled all relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures implemented in the technical dossier from the UK were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For the selected pests an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with Meloidogyne mali or M. fallax being the pest most frequently expected on the imported plants. The expert knowledge elicitation indicated with 95% certainty that 9,792 or more plants in pots per 10,000 will be free from Meloidogyne mali or M. fallax.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by plants of Acer campestre imported from the UK as: (a) 1‐ to 7‐year‐old bare root plants for planting, (b) 1‐ to 15‐year‐old plants in pots and (c) bundles of 1‐ to 2‐year‐old whips and seedlings, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the UK. All pests associated with the commodity were evaluated against specific criteria for their relevance for this opinion. Six EU quarantine pests and four pests not regulated in the EU fulfilled all relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For the selected pests, the risk mitigation measures implemented in the technical dossier from the UK were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. In the assessment of risk, the age of the plants was considered, reasoning that older trees are more likely to be infested mainly due to longer exposure time and larger size. The degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with Phytophthora ramorum being the pest most frequently expected on the imported plants. The expert knowledge elicitation indicated with 95% certainty that 9,757 or more 1‐ to 15‐year‐old plants in pots per 10,000 will be free from P. ramorum.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by plants of Fagus sylvatica imported from the United Kingdom (UK) as: (a) 1‐ to 7‐year‐old bare root plants for planting, (b)

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. Taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the applicant country, this Scientific Opinion covers the plant health risks posed by the following commodities: Crataegus monogyna bare root plants and rooted plants in pots imported into the EU from the UK. A list of pests potentially associated with the commodities was compiled. The relevance of any pest was assessed based on evidence following defined criteria. Only the quarantine pest Erwinia amylovora was selected for further evaluation. For E. amylovora the special requirements specified in the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 are fulfilled by the UK and no other pests for further evaluation were selected.

Abstract The European Commission submitted to the EFSA Panel on Plant Health a dossier by USDA proposing to use sulfuryl fluoride on ash log shipments to treat Agrilus planipennis for phytosanitary certification. After collecting additional evidence from USDA APHIS, external experts and literature, the Panel performed a quantitative assessment on the likelihood of pest freedom from A. planipennis, at the point of entry in the EU, of two different commodities fumigated with sulfuryl fluoride: (a) ash logs with bark; and (b) debarked ash logs. An expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The likelihood of pest freedom from A. planipennis is lower for ash logs with bark compared with debarked ash logs. With 95% certainty, the Panel concludes that between 9,740 and 10,000 containers of ash logs with bark per 10,000 and between 9,989 and 10,000 containers of debarked ash logs per 10,000 will be free from A. planipennis, when fumigated with sulfuryl fluoride at the specific treatment regime proposed by the USDA APHIS.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by plants of Prunus domestica grafted on Prunus cerasifera imported from Ukraine, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by Ukraine. All pests associated with the commodity were evaluated against specific criteria for their relevance for this opinion. One quarantine pest (Lopholeucaspis japonica), two protected zone quarantine pests (Erwinia amylovora and Xanthomonas arboricola pv. pruni) and one non‐regulated pest (Eotetranychus prunicola) that fulfilled all relevant criteria were selected for further evaluation. For these four pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Ukraine were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For the selected pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with Xanthomonas arboricola pv. pruni being the pest most frequently expected on the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated with 95% certainty that between 9,870 and 10,000 bundles (consisting of 10 plants each) per 10,000 would be free from Xanthomonas arboricola pv. pruni.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High‐risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by potted plants (2–3 years old) of Berberis thunbergii produced in nurseries and imported into the EU from Turkey, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the NPPO of Turkey. The relevance of any pest for this Opinion was based on evidence following defined criteria. Two species, the EU‐quarantine pest Bemisia tabaci and the non‐regulated pest Malacosoma parallela, fulfilled the relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Turkey were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The estimated degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with B. tabaci being the pest most frequently expected on the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9,928 and 10,000 plants per 10,000 would be free of B. tabaci. The role of Berberis thunbergii as possible host of Puccinia spp. is discussed in the body of the opinion.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by dormant grafted plants, rootstocks, budwood and scions of Malus domestica imported from Turkey, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by Turkey. All pests associated with the commodities were evaluated against specific criteria for their relevance for this opinion. Three quarantine pests (Anoplophora chinensis, Lopholeucaspis japonica and tomato ringspot virus), one protected zone quarantine pest (Erwinia amylovora) and 12 non‐regulated pests (Calepitrimerus baileyi, Cenopalpus irani, Cicadatra persica, Didesmococcus unifascuiatus, Diplodia bulgarica, Euzophera semifuneralis, Hoplolaimus galeatus, Maconellicoccus hirsutus, Malacosoma parallela, Pochazia shantungensis, Pratylenchus loosi, Russellaspis pustulans and Pyrolachnus pyri) that fulfilled all relevant criteria were selected for further evaluation. For E. amylovora, special requirements are specified in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072. Based on the information provided in the dossier, the specific requirements for E. amylovora were not met. For Anoplophora chinensis, special measures are specified in Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2012/138. The exporting country does meet the requirement for a certificate regarding plants for planting that originate from Turkish provinces other than Istanbul. For the 14 remaining selected pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Turkey were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For the selected pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with D. bulgarica being the pest most frequently expected on the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated with 95% certainty that between 9,863 and 10,000 bundles (consisting of 10 or 25 plants each) per 10,000 would be free from D. bulgarica.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation EU/2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by unrooted cuttings of Jasminum polyanthum that are imported from Uganda, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the NPPO of Uganda. The relevance of any pest for this opinion was based on evidence following defined criteria. Six species, two EU‐regulated pests (Bemisia tabaci, non‐European populations and Scirtothrips dorsalis) and four EU non‐regulated pests (Coccus viridis, Diaphania indica, Pulvinaria psidii and Selenaspidus articulatus), fulfilled all relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Uganda were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The estimated degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with B. tabaci and S. dorsalis being the pests most frequently expected on the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9,950 and 10,000 plants per 10,000 would be free of B. tabaci.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by defoliated and in dormant phase, grafted bare rooted plants for planting of Malus domestica imported from Moldova, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the applicant country. A list of 1,118 pests potentially associated with the commodity species was compiled. The relevance of these pests was assessed following defined criteria and based on evidence. The EU‐quarantine pest Xiphinema rivesi non‐EU populations fulfilled these criteria and was selected for further evaluation. For this pest, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Moldova were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For this pest, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on it, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9,991 and 10,000 plants per 10,000 would be free of X. rivesi.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High‐risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by potted plants (2–4 years old) of specified Lonicera species produced in nurseries and that are imported from Turkey, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the NPPO of Turkey. The relevance of any pest for this Opinion was based on evidence following defined criteria listed in Section 4.1. Three species, the EU‐quarantine pests Lopholeucaspis japonica and Meloidogyne chitwoodi and the protected zone quarantine pest Bemisia tabaci, fulfilled these criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Turkey were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The estimated degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with B. tabaci on evergreen species of Lonicera spp. being the pest most frequently expected on the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9,293 and 10,000 plants per 10,000 would be free of B. tabaci.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’). This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by 1‐ to 3‐year‐old dormant grafted plants and rootstocks of Malus domestica imported from Ukraine, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by Ukraine. All pests associated with the commodity were evaluated against specific criteria for their relevance for this opinion. Two quarantine pests (Lopholeucaspis japonica and Tobacco ringspot virus), one protected zone quarantine pest (Erwinia amylovora) and one non‐regulated pest (Eotetranychus prunicola) that fulfilled all relevant criteria were selected for further evaluation. For Erwinia amylovora, for which special requirements are specified in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072, Annex X, item 9, the fulfilment of these requirements was evaluated. Based on the information provided in the dossier, the specific requirements for Erwinia amylovora were not met. For the three remaining selected pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Ukraine were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For the selected pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with Eotetranychus prunicola being the pest most frequently expected on the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated with 95% certainty that between 9,912 and 10,000 bundles (consisting of 50 plants each) per 10,000 would be free from Eotetranychus prunicola.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation EU/2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by bare rooted and potted plants of Nerium oleander that are imported from Turkey, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the Turkish NPPO. The relevance of any pest for this opinion was based on evidence following defined criteria. One species, the EU non‐regulated pest Phenacoccus solenopsis, fulfilled all relevant criteria and was selected for further evaluation. For this pest, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Turkey were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For this pest, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9,719 and 10,000 plants per 10,000 would be free of P. solenopsis.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation EU/2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by bare rooted and potted plants of Robinia pseudoacacia that are imported from Turkey, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the Turkish NPPO. The relevance of any pest for this opinion was based on evidence following defined criteria. Three species, the EU‐quarantine pests Anoplophora chinensis and Lopholeucapsis japonica, and the EU non‐regulated pest Pochazia shantungensis fulfilled all relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Turkey were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The estimated degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with L. japonica being the pest most frequently expected on the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9,521 and 10,000 plants per 10,000 would be free of L. japonica.

The use of soil as support for built-up areas represents only one of its several functions. Farmlands at the fringe of conurbations have more chance of being converted into built-up areas due to the favourable topography and the accessibility to existing infrastructure, being in the vicinity of urban areas. We analysed the global land-take during the period 2000–2014. The data are based on a global dataset describing the spatial evolution of human settlements using the Global Human Settlement Layer, which was derived from Landsat images collected in 1975, 1990, 2000 and 2014. Although the global land-take represents roughly 0.1% of the global terrestrial Earth, it affects 1% of the naturally fertile soils, according to the proposed Soil Productivity Indexes (SPI), based upon the potential soil productivity, calculated on the basis of the Harmonized World Soil Database. We have found that, few large conurbations develop on potentially high productive soil, while scarcely productive soils sustain the expansion of several megalopolises. On a global scale and through the centuries, considered comparatively as individual overall age of settlements, a trend between the intrinsic quality of the soils and its use for settlement purposes as major competitor, was not observed.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation EU/2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers all plant health risks posed by unrooted cuttings of Jasminum polyanthum produced in a protected environment (greenhouse) that are imported from Israel, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the NPPO of Israel by 15 March 2020. The relevance of an EU quarantine pest for this opinion was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in Israel; (ii) Jasminum is a host of the pest; and (iii) the pest can be associated with the commodity. The relevance of any other pest, not regulated in the EU, was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in Israel; (ii) the pest is absent in the EU; (iii) Jasminum is a host of the pest; (iv) the pest can be associated with the commodity and (v) the pest may have an impact and can pose a potential risk for the EU territory. Six species, the EU‐quarantine pest Scirtothrips dorsalis, and the EU non‐regulated pests Aonidiella orientalis,Milviscutulus mangiferae,Paracoccus marginatus,Pulvinaria psidii and Colletotrichum siamense fulfilled all relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Israel were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The estimated degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with S. dorsalis being the pest most frequently expected on the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9,958 and 10,000 bags per 10,000 would be free of S. dorsalis.

Abstract The EFSA Panel on Plant health was requested to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in the relevant Implementing Acts as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’ (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 establishing a provisional list of high‐risk plants, plant products or other objects, within the meaning of Article 42 of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031). The current scientific opinion covers all plant health risks posed by dormant bare rooted plants for planting of Malus domestica (1–2 years old) imported from Serbia, considering the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the Plant Protection Directorate from Serbia on 27 December 2019. The relevance of an EU‐quarantine pest for this opinion was based on evidence that: (a) the pest is present in Serbia; (b) the pest uses M. domestica as a host; (c) one or more life stages of the pest can be associated with the specified commodity. The relevance for this opinion of pests not regulated in the EU was based on the following criteria: (i) the pest is present in Serbia; (ii) the pest is not present in the EU; (iii) M. domestica is a host of the pest; (iv) the pest can be associated with the commodity and (v) the pest may have an impact and can pose potential risk for the EU territory. After the assessment of 1191 potential pests, one bacterium, Erwinia amylovora, fulfilled all criteria and accordingly, was selected for further evaluation. For this bacterium, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier were evaluated. Limiting factors on the effectiveness of the measures were also considered. For the selected species, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on E. amylovora, including any uncertainties. Based on the outcomes of an Expert Knowledge Elicitation, the Panel is considering a pallet as a unit; and taking into account the uncertainties associated with the assessment, the panel is 95% sure that 9,934 or more pallets out of 10,000 will be pest free.

Abstract The EFSA Panel on Plant Health was requested to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in the relevant Implementing Acts as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’ [Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 establishing a provisional list of high risk plants, plant products or other objects, within the meaning of Article 42 of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031]. The current Scientific Opinion covers all plant health risks posed by bare rooted plants for planting of Robinia pseudoacacia (1 year old with a stem diameter of less than 2.5 cm) imported from Israel, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by Israel by 26 December 2019. The relevance of an EU‐quarantine pest for this opinion was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in Israel; (ii) R. pseudoacacia is a host of the pest, and (iii) the pest can be associated with the commodity. The relevance of this opinion for other non EU‐regulated pests was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in Israel (ii) the pest is absent in the EU; (iii) R. pseudoacacia is a host of the pest; (iv) the pest can be associated with the commodity and (v) the pest may have an impact and can pose a potential risk for the EU territory. Two pests (one insect and one fungus, Euwallacea fornicatus and Fusarium euwallaceae) that fulfilled all criteria were selected for further evaluation. For the two selected pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Israel were evaluated. Limiting factors in the effectiveness of the measures were documented. For the selected pests an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment, therefore the Panel is 95% sure that 9,950 or more plants per 10,000 will be free from these two pests.

Abstract The EFSA Panel on Plant Health was requested to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in the relevant Implementing Acts as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’ [Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 establishing a provisional list of high‐risk plants, plant products or other objects, within the meaning of Article 42 of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031]. The current Scientific Opinion covers all plant health risks posed by Albizia julibrissin imported from Israel, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by Israel. The relevance of an EU‐regulated pest for this opinion was based on evidence that: (i) the pest is present in Israel; (ii) A. julibrissin is a host of the pest and (iii) the pest can be associated with the commodity. The relevance of this opinion for other non EU‐regulated pests was based on evidence that (i) the pest is present in Israel; (ii) the pest is absent in the EU; (iii) A. julibrissin is a host of the pest; (iv) the pest can be associated with the commodity and (v) the pest may have an impact and can pose a potential risk for the EU territory. Three pests (two insects, Aonidiella orientalis and Euwallacea fornicatus; one fungus, Fusarium euwallaceae) that fulfilled all criteria were selected for further evaluation. For the three selected pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier were evaluated. Limiting factors on the effectiveness of the measures were documented. For the selected pests, an expert judgement on the likelihood of pest freedom is given taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The Panel is 95% sure that 9,950 or more units per 10,000 will be pest free from these three pests.

Abstract Article 42 of the European Regulation (EU) 2016/2031, on the protective measures against pests of plants, introduces the concept of ‘high risk plants, plant products and other objects’ that are identified on the basis of a preliminary assessment to be followed by a commodity risk assessment. Following a request of the European Commission, this Guidance was developed to establish the methodology to be followed when performing a commodity risk assessment for high risk commodities (high risk plants, plant products and other objects). The commodity risk assessment performed by EFSA will be based on the information provided by the National Plant Protection Organisations of non‐EU countries requesting a lifting of import prohibition of a high risk commodity. Following international standards on pest risk analysis, this Guidance describes a two‐step approach for the assessment of pest risk associated with a specified commodity. In the first step, pests, associated with the commodity, that require risk mitigation measures are identified. In the second step, the overall efficacy of proposed risk reduction options for each pest is evaluated. A conclusion on the pest‐freedom status of the commodity is achieved. The method requires key uncertainties to be identified.

Abstract EFSA was asked for a partial risk assessment of Spodoptera frugiperda for the territory of the EU focussing on the main pathways for entry, factors affecting establishment, risk reduction options and pest management. As a polyphagous pest, five commodity pathways were examined in detail. Aggregating across these and other pathways, we estimate that tens of thousands to over a million individual larvae could enter the EU annually on host commodities. Instigating risk reduction options on sweetcorn, a principal host, reduces entry on that pathway 100‐fold. However, sweetcorn imports are a small proportion of all S. frugiperda host imports, several of which are already regulated and further regulation is estimated to reduce the median number entering over all pathways by approximately 10%. Low temperatures limit the area for establishment but small areas of Spain, Italy and Greece can provide climatic conditions suitable for establishment. If infested imported commodities are distributed across the EU in proportion to consumer population, a few hundreds to a few thousands of individuals would reach NUTS 2 regions within which suitable conditions for establishment exist. Although S. frugiperda is a known migrant, entry directly into the EU from extant populations in sub‐Saharan Africa is judged not feasible. However, if S. frugiperda were to establish in North Africa, in the range of thousands to over two million adults could seasonally migrate into the southern EU. Entry into suitable NUTS2 areas via migration will be greater than via commercial trade but is contingent on the establishment of S. frugiperda in North Africa. The likelihood of entry of the pest via natural dispersal could only be mitigated via control of the pest in Africa. If S. frugiperda were to arrive and become a pest of maize in the EU, Integrated Pest Management (IPM) or broad spectrum insecticides currently used against existing pests could be applied.

Abstract The Panel on Plant Health performed a pest categorisation of the weevil Anthonomus quadrigibbus Say, (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), for the EU. A. quadrigibbus is a well‐defined and distinguishable species, recognised as an occasional pest of apples, pears and sour cherries in North America where it also feeds on a range of wild rosaceous plants such as Crataegus and Amelanchier. Adults feed on leaves, flowers and fruit. Feeding damage to fruit reduces quality. Females oviposit into young fruit, causing surface blemishes and resulting in distortion as the fruit develops. Marketability is subsequently reduced. Larvae and pupae develop within host fruit. Most infested fruit fall prematurely, reducing yield. A. quadrigibbus was regarded as a more serious pest in the early 20th century. A. quadrigibbus is not known to occur in the EU and is listed in Annex IIAI of Council Directive 2000/29/EC under the synonym Tachypterellus quadrigibbus. Host plants for planting and infested fruit could potentially provide a pathway into the EU. Considering the climatic similarities between North America and Europe, and that wild and commercial hosts occur widely within the EU, A. quadrigibbus has the potential to establish within the EU. There would be one generation per year, as in North America. Impacts could be expected in apple, pear and perhaps sour cherry orchards. The level of impacts would be uncertain. There is also uncertainty regarding whether A. quadrigibbus would extend its host range to include other Rosaceae within the EU. Phytosanitary measures are available to reduce the likelihood of introduction of A. quadrigibbus. All criteria assessed by EFSA for consideration as a potential Union quarantine pest are met. As A. quadrigibbus is not known to occur in the EU, this criterion assessed by EFSA to consider it as a Union regulated non‐quarantine pest is not met.

Abstract The Panel on Plant Health performed a pest categorisation of the citrus snow scale, Unaspis citri (Comstock) (Hemiptera: Diaspididae), for the European Union (EU). This is a well‐defined and distinguishable species, native to south‐eastern Asia, which has spread to many tropical and subtropical regions. U. citri can be a pest of citrus and has been cited on over 28 different species in 16 plant families. In the EU, U. citri occurs in the Azores. There is uncertainty as to whether it occurs in continental Portugal. Reports of it occurring in Greece and Spain are likely to be invalid and based on interception records from these countries. An old Italian record is a misidentification. U. citri is listed in Annex IIAI of 2000/29/EC as a harmful organism. The international trade of hosts, as either plants for planting, fruit or cut flowers, provide potential pathways into the EU. However, current EU legislation prohibits the import of citrus plants for planting from third countries. U. citri is mostly confined to coastal humid tropical areas and does not occur in semi‐arid areas that are irrigated. Nevertheless, given that it occurs in the Azores and that there are regional climatic similarities between places where U. citri occurs and climates within the EU, and taking EU host distribution into account, U. citri has the potential to establish in the EU, especially in citrus‐growing regions around the Mediterranean where losses in quality and yield of citrus could occur. Phytosanitary measures are available to inhibit the likelihood of introduction of U. citri. Considering the criteria within the remit of EFSA to assess the status as a potential Union quarantine pest (QP), or as a potential regulated non‐quarantine pest (RNQP), U. citri meets the criteria assessed by EFSA for consideration as a potential Union QP.

Abstract The Panel on Plant Health performed a pest categorisation of the citrus thrips, Scirtothrips citri (Moulton) (Thysanoptera: Thripidae), for the European Union (EU). This is a well‐defined and distinguishable species, occurring in North America and Asia. Its precise distribution in Asia is uncertain. S. citri is a pest of citrus and blueberries and has been cited on over 50 different host species in 33 plant families. Whether all plants reported as hosts are true hosts, allowing population development of S. citri, is uncertain. S. citri feeds exclusively on young actively growing foliage and fruit. It is not known to occur in the EU and is listed in Annex IIAI of 2000/29/EC as a harmful organism. The international trade of hosts, as either plants for planting or cut flowers, provide potential pathways into the EU. However, current EU legislation prohibits the import of citrus plants for planting. Furthermore, measures aimed at the import of plants for planting in a dormant stage (no young foliage or fruits present) with no soil/growing medium attached, decreases the likelihood of the pest's entry via other hosts. Considering that there are regional climatic similarities where S. citri occurs in the USA with climates in the EU, and taking EU host distribution into account, S. citri has the potential to establish in the EU, especially in citrus and blueberry growing regions around the Mediterranean where quality losses in citrus and yield losses in blueberry could occur. Phytosanitary measures are available to inhibit the likelihood of introduction of S. citri from infested countries. Considering the criteria within the remit of EFSA to assess its status as a potential Union quarantine pest (QP) or as a potential regulated non‐quarantine pest (RNQP), S. citri meets with no uncertainties the criteria assessed by EFSA for consideration as a potential Union QP.

Abstract The Panel on Plant Health performed a pest categorisation of the South African citrus thrips, Scirtothrips aurantii Faure (Thysanoptera: Thripidae), for the European Union (EU). This is a well‐defined and distinguishable species, recognised as a pest of citrus and mangoes in South Africa, which has been cited on more than 70 different plants, including woody and herbaceous species. It feeds exclusively on young actively growing foliage and fruit. S. aurantii is not known to occur in the EU and is listed in Annex IIAI of 2000/29/EC as a harmful organism presenting a risk to EU plant health. The international trade of hosts as either plants for planting or cut flowers provide potential pathways into the EU. However, current EU legislation prohibits the import of citrus plants. Furthermore, measures aimed at the import of plants for planting in a dormant stage (no young foliage or fruits present) with no soil/growing medium attached, decreases the likelihood of the pest entry with such plants. Interceptions have occurred on Eustoma grandiflorum cut flowers. Considering climatic similarities between some of the countries where S. aurantii occurs (South Africa, Australia) and the EU, its thermal biology and host distribution in the EU, S. aurantii has the potential to establish, especially in citrus‐growing regions of the EU. S. aurantii would most probably breed all year long around the Mediterranean and could cause crop losses in citrus, especially oranges. Phytosanitary measures are available to inhibit the introduction of S. aurantii. Considering the criteria within the remit of EFSA to assess its status as a potential Union quarantine pest (QP) or as a potential regulated non‐quarantine pest (RNQP), S. aurantii meets with no uncertainties the criteria assessed by EFSA for consideration as a potential Union QP.

Abstract The European Commission requested EFSA to conduct a pest categorisation of Toxoptera citricida (Hemiptera: Aphididae), an oligophagous aphid developing and reproducing parthenogenetically on tender leaf and flower flush of citrus (Rutaceae). T. citricida is a taxonomic entity with reliable methods available for detection and identification. It is regulated in the EU by Council Directive 2000/29/EC where it is listed in Annex IIAI as a harmful organism whose introduction and spread into the EU shall be banned. T. citricida is native to tropical regions of Southeast Asia and has spread to most citrus‐growing areas worldwide, except California and the Mediterranean basin, causing significant damage to citrus as it is the most efficient vector of the Citrus tristeza virus (CTV). T. citricida occurs in Madeira and, with a restricted distribution, in the north‐west of the Iberian Peninsula, mostly on backyard citrus trees. This may have hindered the effectiveness of the official control measures in these areas. There are further phytosanitary measures in place in the EU in order to limit entry via traded commodities. Citrus plants for planting are regulated and are a closed pathway. However, there is uncertainty regarding host status of some non‐rutaceous plants on which this aphid has been recorded and so other plant genera may provide additional pathways. The EFSA Plant Health Panel concludes that the establishment of T. citricida in the main EU citrus growing areas around the Mediterranean would have significant impacts because of its ability to vector CTV. Considering the criteria within the remit of EFSA to assess the status as a potential Union quarantine pest (QP), as a potential protected zone quarantine pest (PZQP) or as a potential regulated non‐quarantine pest (RNQP), T. citricida meets with no uncertainties the criteria assessed by EFSA for consideration as a potential Union QP.

Abstract The Panel on Plant Health performed a pest categorisation of Tecia solanivora (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) the Guatemalan potato tuber moth, for the EU. T. solanivora is a well‐defined species which feeds exclusively on Solanum tuberosum. It was first described from Costa Rica in 1973 and has spread through Central America and into northern South America via trade of seed potatoes. It has also spread to Mexico and the Canary Islands and most recently to mainland Spain where it is under official control in Galicia and Asturias. Potatoes in the field and storage can be attacked. Some authors regard T. solanivora as the most important insect pest of potatoes globally. T. solanivora is currently regulated by Council Directive 2000/29/EC, listed in Annex II/AI as Scrobipalpopsis solanivora. Larvae feed and develop within potato tubers; infested tubers therefore provide a pathway for pest introduction and spread, as does the soil accompanying potato tubers if it is infested with eggs or pupae. As evidenced by the ongoing outbreaks in Spain, the EU has suitable conditions for the development and potential establishment of T. solanivora. The pest could spread within the EU via movement of infested tubers; adults can fly and disperse locally. Larval feeding destroys tubers in the field and in storage. In the warmer southern EU, where the development would be fastest, yield losses would be expected in potatoes. Measures are available to inhibit entry via traded commodities (e.g. prohibition on the introduction of S. tuberosum). T. solanivora satisfies all of the criteria assessed by EFSA to satisfy the definition of a Union quarantine pest. It does not satisfy EU regulated non‐quarantine pest (RNQP) status because it is under official control. There are uncertainties over the effectiveness of preventing illegal imports via passenger baggage and the magnitude of potential impacts in the cool EU climate.

Abstract The Panel on Plant Health performed a pest categorisation of Listronotus bonariensis (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), the Argentine stem weevil, for the EU. L. bonariensis is a well‐defined species, recognised as a serious pest of pasture grasses, especially Lolium spp. and Poa annua, in New Zealand, and a rare pest of cereals in Argentina, Brazil and New Zealand. Larvae feed within the tillers and stems of grasses; adults can cut emerging cotyledons although they usually graze on leaves. Larval damage is most serious. Larval feeding causes a reduction in pasture quality that impacts on the production of grazing animals. L. bonariensis is not known to occur in the EU and is listed in Annex IIAI of Council Directive 2000/29/EC. L. bonariensis established in New Zealand via imported grass seeds and has been intercepted on grass seeds entering the EU. Considering the climatic similarities of the regions where the pest occurs and the very great extent to which hosts are grown across the EU, L. bonariensis has the potential to establish within the EU with two or three generations possible per year. Impacts could occur in grassland pastures and perhaps occasionally in cereals. In New Zealand, endophytic fungi occurring on potential hosts deter L. bonariensis from ovipositing on leaves and are toxic to larvae. Whether endophytic fungi on grasses in Europe could provide some resistance to L. bonariensis is uncertain. Phytosanitary measures are available to reduce the likelihood of introduction of this weevil. L. bonariensis fits all of the criteria assessed by EFSA to satisfy the definition of a Union quarantine pest. L. bonariensis does not meet the criterion of occurring in the EU territory for it to be regarded as a Union regulated non‐quarantine pest.

Abstract The Panel on Plant Health performed a pest categorisation of the strawberry blossom weevil, Anthonomus bisignifer Schenkling, (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), for the EU. Anthonomus bisignifer is a well‐defined and distinguishable species, recognised as an occasional pest of strawberry (Fragaria) fruit production in Japan where it is also feeds on Rubus and Rosa spp. Adults clip developing buds, preventing fruit development and reducing yield. Losses are variable and are likely to depend on the cultivars attacked. Severe damage to Fragaria spp. has been reported but is rare. Flowers of ornamental garden Rosa spp. are more commonly damaged. Anthonomus bisignifer is not known to occur in the EU. A. bisignifer is listed in Annex IIAI of Council Directive 2000/29/EC. Host plants for planting could provide a pathway although only a few non‐EU countries can export Fragaria plants for planting to the EU and A. bisignifer is not known to occur in any of them. However, Rubus and Rosa plants for planting could provide a potential pathway to introduce A. bisignifer. Considering climatic similarities of the region where A. bisignifer occurs and where hosts occur in the EU, A. bisignifer has the potential to establish within the EU. There would be one generation per year, as in Japan. Impacts could be expected on field grown and protected Fragaria, field grown Rubus and garden Rosa spp. There is uncertainty regarding which other hosts exist within Rosaceae, hence impacts could potentially be seen on other species too. Phytosanitary measures are available to reduce the likelihood of introduction of A. bisignifer. All criteria assessed by EFSA for consideration as a potential Union quarantine pest are met. As A. bisignifer is not known to occur in the EU, this criterion assessed by EFSA to consider it as a Union regulated non‐quarantine pest is not met.

Abstract The European Commission requested EFSA to conduct a pest categorisation of Anthonomus grandis (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), an oligophagous pest weevil feeding on Malvaceae, including Gossypium spp., Hampea spp., Cienfuegosia spp. and Hibiscus pernambucensis. Marginal reproduction has also been observed on the ornamental Hibiscus syriacus. A. grandis is a taxonomic entity with reliable methods available for identification. It is regulated in the EU by Council Directive 2000/29/EC where it is listed in Annex IIB as a harmful organism whose introduction into EU Protected Zones (PZ) (Greece and the Spanish Communities of Andalusia, Catalonia, Extremadura, Murcia and Valencia) is regulated. A. grandis is native to tropical regions of Mesoamerica and has spread to other cotton‐growing areas in the Americas, from the USA to Argentina, causing significant damage to this crop. An eradication programme is in progress in the USA and has been successful in 16 previously infested states. In the EU, phytosanitary measures are in place in order to limit entry via traded commodities. Cotton seeds and fruit, as well as unginned cotton are currently regulated for the PZ but remain a potential pathway. Furthermore, ornamental Malvaceae (e.g. Hibiscus spp.) originating in infested areas may provide additional pathways. The EFSA Plant Health Panel concludes that A. grandis could establish and spread in the cotton‐growing areas of southern EU. Considering the criteria within the remit of EFSA to assess the status as a potential Union quarantine pest (QP), as a potential protected zone quarantine pest (PZQP), or as a potential regulated non‐quarantine pest (RNQP), A. grandis satisfies with no uncertainties the criteria to be regarded as a Union QP. However, it does not meet the criterion of occurrence in the EU territory (for PZQP) plus that of plants for planting being the principal means of spread (for RNQP).

Abstract The Panel on Plant Health performed a pest categorisation of Hishimonus phycitis (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae) for the EU. H. phycitis is a well‐defined species, occurring in tropical and subtropical Asian countries from Iran to Malaysia. H. phycitis is polyphagous. Hosts of particular relevance to the EU include Citrus spp. and Solanum melongena. While harmful in its own right as a leafhopper extracting host nutrients through feeding, it is regarded in the Middle East more significantly as a vector of Witches' broom disease of lime phytoplasma, which limits production of Citrus aurantifolia, and in India as a vector of brinjal little‐leaf phytoplasma impacting S. melongena yields. H. phycitis is currently regulated by Council Directive 2000/29/EC, listed in Annex II/AI as Hishomonus phycitis (sic). Eggs planted on host plants for planting could provide a pathway for entry into the EU. The EU has eco‐climatic conditions that are also found in countries where H. phycitis occurs although it is unknown whether H. phycitis occurs in those areas. There is therefore considerable uncertainty around EU establishment. Any establishment is likely to be limited to the warmest areas around the Mediterranean. As a free‐living organism with adults capable of flight, spread within the EU would be possible but confined to the limited area where establishment could occur. Measures are available to inhibit entry via traded commodities (e.g. prohibition on the introduction of Citrus plants for planting; sourcing other hosts from pest free areas). H. phycitis does satisfy all of the criteria that are within the remit of EFSA to assess to be regarded as a Union quarantine pest. It is uncertain if eggs of H. phycitis would carry phytoplasmas into the EU as transovarial transmission from infected females to eggs has not been demonstrated.

Abstract The European Commission requested EFSA to conduct a pest categorisation of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) a pest with hosts in 27 plant families. Favoured hosts include maize, rice and sorghum (Poaceae). Hosts also include crops within the Brassicaceae, Cucurbitaceae, Solanaceae, Rutaceae and other families. S. frugiperda is a taxonomic entity with reliable methods for identification. It is regulated in the EU as a harmful organism whose introduction into the EU is banned. It is native to tropical and subtropical regions of the Americas and migrates to temperate regions in North and South America during the summer. Establishment in temperate areas is prevented by its inability to overwinter. S. frugiperda has been intercepted on plant produce entering the EU. Phytosanitary measures are available to impede entry via traded commodities. In 2016, S. frugiperda was reported damaging maize in Africa. Subsequent reports indicate that it continues to spread severely damaging maize and other crops. If S. frugiperda spreads into north Africa, the likelihood of adults migrating into the temperate EU increases. Within the scope and level of analysis appropriate for pest categorisation, the EFSA Plant Health Panel concludes that S. frugiperda could establish in a small area of the southern EU from where it is likely to enter more northern regions forming transient summer populations, particularly in maize growing regions where impacts on yield could occur. However, uncertainties regarding establishment remain. Considering the criteria within the remit of EFSA to assess as regards status as a potential Union quarantine pest (QP) or as a potential regulated non‐quarantine pest (RNQP), S. frugiperda satisfies the criteria to be regarded a Union QP but does not meet the criteria of (i) occurring in the EU territory, and (ii) plants for planting being the principal means of spread, criteria required for RNQP status.

Key priorities in biochar research for future guidance of sustainable policy development have been identified by expert assessment within the COST Action TD1107. The current level of scientific understanding (LOSU) regarding the consequences of biochar application to soil were explored. Five broad thematic areas of biochar research were addressed: soil biodiversity and ecotoxicology, soil organic matter and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, soil physical properties, nutrient cycles and crop production, and soil remediation. The highest future research priorities regarding biochar’s effects in soils were: functional redundancy within soil microbial communities, bioavailability of biochar’s contaminants to soil biota, soil organic matter stability, GHG emissions, soil formation, soil hydrology, nutrient cycling due to microbial priming as well as altered rhizosphere ecology, and soil ph buffering capacity. Methodological and other constraints to achieve the required LOSU are discussed and options for efficient progress of biochar research and sustainable application to soil are presented. First published online: 14 Dec 2016