EFSA Journal (Jan 2023)

Commodity risk assessment of Prunus persica and P. dulcis plants from Türkiye

  • EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH),
  • Claude Bragard,
  • Paula Baptista,
  • Elisavet Chatzivassiliou,
  • Paolo Gonthier,
  • Josep Anton Jaques Miret,
  • Annemarie Fejer Justesen,
  • Alan MacLeod,
  • Christer Sven Magnusson,
  • Panagiotis Milonas,
  • Juan A Navas‐Cortes,
  • Stephen Parnell,
  • Roel Potting,
  • Philippe Lucien Reignault,
  • Emilio Stefani,
  • Hans‐Hermann Thulke,
  • Wopke Van der Werf,
  • Antonio Vicent Civera,
  • Lucia Zappalà,
  • Andrea Lucchi,
  • Pedro Gómez,
  • Gregor Urek,
  • Umberto Bernardo,
  • Giovanni Bubici,
  • Anna Vittoria Carluccio,
  • Michela Chiumenti,
  • Francesco Di Serio,
  • Elena Fanelli,
  • Agata Kaczmarek,
  • Cristina Marzachì,
  • Olaf Mosbach‐Schulz,
  • Jonathan Yuen

DOI
https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7735
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 21, no. 1
pp. n/a – n/a

Abstract

Read online

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 persica and P. dulcis, as budwood/graftwood, rooted or grafted on rootstocks of either P. persica, P. dulcis, P. armeniaca, P. davidiana or their hybrids, imported from Türkiye, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by Türkiye. All pests associated with the commodity were evaluated against specific criteria for their relevance for this opinion. Four quarantine pests (peach rosette mosaic virus, tomato ringspot virus, Anoplophora chinensis, Scirtothrips dorsalis) and 14 non‐regulated pests (Hoplolaimus galeatus, Lasiodiplodia pseudotheobromae, Neoscytalidium dimidiatum, Neoscytalidium novaehollandiae, Didesmococcus unifasciatus, Euzophera semifuneralis, Lepidosaphes malicola, Lepidosaphes pistaciae, Maconellicoccus hirsutus, Malacosoma parallela, Nipaecoccus viridis, Phenacoccus solenopsis, Pochazia shantungensis, Russellaspis pustulans) that fulfilled all relevant criteria were selected for further evaluation. For these 18 pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical Dossier from Türkiye 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 fungi from Botryosphaeriaceae family (L. pseudotheobromae, N. dimidiatum and N. novaehollandiae) being the pests most frequently expected on the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated with 95% certainty that between 9,813 and 10,000 bundles (consisting of 10 or 25 plants each) per 10,000 would be free from the above‐mentioned fungi in the Botryosphaeriaceae family.

Keywords