PeMoScoring: a rapid screening of emerging threats caused by invasive plant pests.

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2814644/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

PeMoScoring: a rapid screening of emerging threats caused by invasive plant pests.

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2814644/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Invasive species are anticipated to emerge in the future with equal or even higher rates than those recorded in the past. Plant pest emergence has serious negative environmental, economic, and social implications. The European Food Safety Authority was requested to develop a methodology for scoring the identified pests that may be eligible to be assessed as a potential threat. The methodology that was developed, PeMoScoring, consists in a list of criteria/questions to be answered choosing among pre-set scores. The result feeds a multi-criteria analysis that, by pairwise comparison with a set of reference pests, allows concluding whether the pest under evaluation provides sufficient evidence to be considered a threat (positive PeMo) or not (negative PeMo). In this article, PeMoScoring is described by using practical examples of four insects that have been previously evaluated: Arboridia kakogawana, Phenacoccus solenopsis, Adelges tsugae and Singhiella simplex. The PeMoScoring results, which were positive for the first two and negative for the last two pests respectively, are compared in terms of the information leading to the specific outcome. Overall, PeMoScoring proves to be a practical tool that can generate fast and reproducible results. Given its plasticity for prioritising pests in the context of risk analysis of emerging threats, accessibility should be granted before long to potential users within and outside the field of plant health.

plant health

pest risk assessment

global trade

quarantine

invasion management

insect pest

One of the pest risk assessment backbones is the “functional separation” between risk assessment and risk management, as stated in FAO and WHO (2019) and in EC 178/2002 (also known as the “General food law”). To ensure an efficient and reactive system to emerging threats, in our case represented by invasive plant pests, on one side the independence of risk assessors from risk managers should be preserved, on the other a continuous and transparent dialogue among actors should be guaranteed. PeMoScoring is a tool that encourages this dialogue.

Risk managers face the continuously increasing effects of global trade to biological invasions (Hulme, 2021): from higher commodity trade volumes to the integration of new regions in the geography of international trade, expanding source pools of potential invasive species (Liebhold et al., 2017; Seebens et al., 2018). As far as plant protection is concerned, there are numerous examples available in the scientific literature that indicate the negative effects on crops (Bucci, 2018; De Groote et al., 2020), ecosystem functions (Martín, 2019; Cancellario et al., 2023), sustainability of rural economies (De Groote et al., 2020; Schneider et al., 2020) and cultural heritage (Semeraro et al., 2021). Furthermore, risk managers are aware that pre-invasion costs of management are lower than those of actions taken post-invasion (Cuthbert et al., 2022) and that resources should be timely allocated to targeted actions to obtain results efficiently. Therefore, the rapid identification of the invasive potential of given species as they emerge is pivotal to the protection of natural and managed environments. To support decision makers in this task, possible emerging threats should be proactively retrieved and evaluated by risk assessors, applying systems selective enough to filter the true threats from the general noise and to recognise the most important risk drivers.

The early detection of emerging plant health threats can be achieved by using event-based surveillance systems, which rely on monitoring and collecting events from information sources (Balajee et al., 2021), such as media and scientific publications (EFSA et al., 2022; Ferilli et al., 2019). This method may timely alert organisations about emerging threats in parallel with the usual surveillance activities (Thomas et al., 2011). The process relies on signals that are indicative of events related to plant pest invasive processes. For instance, the observation of unusual symptoms on a given crop, reported in the media may indicate a change in host range of a given pest or its extension of the area of distribution.

In the framework of the European Plant Health regime, the European Commission (EC) Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety (DG SANTE) mandated its agency devoted to assessment of risks associated with the food chain, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), to perform a horizon scanning exercise with the aim to identify emerging and recurring plant health threats for the European Union (EFSA et al., 2021). From the screening of scientific and media sources, EFSA determines pest species that, not (yet) regulated, could deserve further attention and potential actions by risk managers. The next step is for EFSA to submit those pests to a screening developed ad hoc: the PeMoScoring. This scheme is based on a relative ranking methodology that requires the assessor to answer a set of questions, whose answers will feed a multicriteria matrix (EFSA et al., 2022). The results provide the risk managers a signal about the potential risks and therefore the urgency of the actions to be taken in response to the most alarming emerging plant health threats, although PeMoScoring is not meant to replace a full pest risk assessment (PRA) outcome.

PeMoScoring (named after an abbreviation of pest and monitoring) is a proactive and practical tool consisting of a rapid screening of the risk connected to emerging threats, in view of a more structured and comprehensive PRA process. Between February and June 2022, the horizon scanning activities identified on average 20 emerging plant pests each month. Eventually, the pests suggested for further actions due to the positive PeMoScoring were from 5–20% out of the initial number.

PeMoScoring allows screening and ranking a large as well as increasing number of species, even in presence of limited information on those pests, thereby making the timely identification of potential threats feasible and efficient.

The aim of this article is to present the PeMoScoring methodology and its step-by-step application on four plant pests selected. We intend to provide the readers with a practical idea about the efficacy of this methodology and its potential implication in the decision-making on phytosanitary concerns.

For the scanning of media and scientific sources, EFSA uses the IT platform of the Medical Information System (MEDISys)^{^[1]} developed by the EC Joint Research Centre (JRC). This is a fully automatic event-based surveillance system that was initially developed for public health surveillance (Linge et al., 2009) and later expanded to cover plant health threats. The system collects and automatically analyses articles which are grouped according to multilingual categories, source, and country. In spring 2022 the scanning process was covering 19,000 sources in 79 languages from 204 countries all over the world, with these figures set to increase further due to the regular update of new sources and categories. The system also provides the possibility of categorising the selection of automatically retrieved articles according to individual categories that correspond to specific keywords (Linge et al., 2012). The categories, which have been manually created, correspond to the scientific name and the multilingual common names for a given pest as keywords. By the beginning of spring 2022, the system included more than 2,130 pests grouped in terms of their status in the legislation: ANNEX II Part A of the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/ 2072^{^[2]}, ANNEX II Part B of the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/ 2072, Other EU legal acts^{^[3]}, European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organisation (EPPO) Lists (A1^{^[4]}, A2^{^[5]} and Alert List^{^[6]}) and pests non-listed in EU legal acts or in EPPO Lists. In addition to the categories corresponding to already known pests for EFSA, generic keywords (‘pest’, ‘plant disease’, ‘crop’, ‘yield losses’) have been added to enable the retrieval of articles regarding the discovery of new and emerging pests of plants, which are non-listed in the EU plant health regulation.

Based on these categories, hundreds of articles are retrieved daily by the system. A further selection of these automatically-retrieved-articles is manually performed. This selection is based on specific criteria, which differ depending on the status of the pest in the EU legislation (non-listed pests, pests included in the lists of the EPPO and quarantine pests) (EFSA et al., 2022). For the quarantine pests, scientific articles may refer to new diagnostic, surveillance, detection, identification and control methods, epidemiology, risk management, estimation and communication, potential distribution, impact of implemented measures, potential impact of pest invasion. Furthermore, media and scientific articles are selected when the topic is related to the eradication in an area where the pest is known to occur. For all the above-mentioned pests, media and scientific articles with the following topics are considered eligible: novel taxon with a description of its impact on the plant species concerned, first finding in areas known to be free from the pest, new finding in regions where the pest has already been known to occur and new host plant. Articles that were manually selected from MEDISys reported, for example, the first finding of Neofusicoccum mediterraneum in Italy (Brunetti et al., 2022), a new finding of Citrus concave gum-associated virus in the US (Diaz‐Lara et al., 2022) and Hordeum vulgare as a new host plant for Chinese wheat mosaic virus (Kondo et al., 2022). These are all non-listed pests by the EU plant health regulation. Articles satisfying at least one of the above-mentioned criteria are included in a monthly newsletter, published in the EFSA Journal (Wiley) and presented each month to the Plant Health section of the Plants, Animals, Food and Feed (PAFF) Committee. The overall aim of this newsletter serves as an alert report for the quarantine pests as well as the new and emerging plant health threats.

The selection of the articles and their inclusion in the Plant Health Newsletter constitutes only the very first step of the horizon scanning process, which aims to identify early signals of potential invasive pests. The next step is the screening of the identified pests in terms of their potential threat to the EU, which can be done using the PeMoScoring.

The pests eligible to the PeMoScoring, in the EU horizon scanning context, have to fulfil the following conditions: a) they can cause damages to plant species of economic relevance to the EU, b) they should be able to enter the EU territory by at least one commodity not banned for import into the EU or by natural spread from non-EU territories.

PeMoScoring is composed of 15 criteria including:

data about the pest (host range, distribution, spread mechanisms including vectors transmission, type of damages),
data about host plants (distribution and surface area covered by the hosts in the area under assessment),
data about the European specific scenario (trade pathways prohibited by the EU legislation, suitability of European climate, availability of detection and control measures).

PeMoScoring is currently implemented in Microsoft Excel, therefore any Excel basic user should be able to reproduce its structure, following the exemplum provided in Appendix A (PeMoScoring multicriteria matrix). Additional guidance is provided by EFSA et al., 2022. Current efforts are oriented towards a more accessible platform for all interested users. The information needed to conduct the screening is obtained from publications; when decisive, experts’ judgement can be requested. Even if the method is conceived to allow screening pests under limited evidence availability, some novel taxa are so scarcely known to impede conducting even a partial PeMoScoring. In these circumstances, the species remains monitored on the horizon scanning tool until more evidence is obtained.

During the screening, the assessor replies to the questions/criteria organised in a multicriteria matrix, for each pest of interest. A rate is associated to each answer and all the rates combined define a final score called net Phi value, ranging from -1 to +1 and representing the minimum and maximum levels of expected risk, respectively. This value is submitted to a pairwise comparison with Phi values of other pests used as reference, therefore enabling to position the new scored pest within the reference ranking system. In this way, the assessor obtains a relative ranking for all pests scored. To decide whether a pest can be suggested for further action, it is necessary to define a threshold that distinguishes between “negative” (insufficient evidence of risk, therefore no action) and “positive” pests (sufficient evidence of risk, supporting the possibility of further action). This definition of the threshold is based on the scoring of a set of reference pests, commonly recognizing as threats for the EU. Density functions used to determine the threshold are provided by EFSA et al. (2022). This methodology allows to change the set of reference pests, and, therefore, revise the threshold, keeping PeMoScoring updated with time and needs. The threshold is a straightforward numerical information, that provides the assessor with a defined outcome: whether the pest scored positive (Phi higher or equal to the threshold) or negative (Phi lower than the threshold). PeMoScored pests are signalled in the monthly EFSA newsletter with an icon (⚠️).

Case studies selected

Insect pests represent the most numerous taxa introduced in novel geographic ranges (Seebens et al., 2017), with damage potential causing massive yet underestimated costs worldwide (Bradshaw et al., 2016). Insects are the most represented pest taxon in our personal experience as well, when running PeMoScoring exercises. Therefore, four insect species are presented, displaying the information used to PeMoScore these species: data about the pest, data about host plats, data about the scenario of the area of assessment.

Adelges tsugae (Annand) (Hemiptera: Adelgidae), Arboridia kakogawana (Matsumura) (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae), Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae), and Singhiella simplex (Singh) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) are the four species selected. Arboridia kakogawana and Phenacoccus solenopsis have been raised to the attention of EU risk managers as possible plant health threats while Adelges tsugae and Singhiella simplex are kept monitored on MEDISys without immediate further action. The information needed to run PeMoScoring are of easy access online, i.e.: open sources, and should not require a high level of users’ specialisation to be collected and fed to the PeMo-criteria. These characteristics make PeMoScoring a fast-response and user-friendly tool.

Arboridia kakogawana

Arboridia kakogawana, the Japanese grape leafhopper, is an insect of the Cicadellidae family. It was first described in Asia (Japan, Korea, China), then found in Russia and Ukraine (Gnezdilov et al., 2008). More recently the pest was spotted in Serbia, Bulgaria and Romania (Chireceanu et al., 2019; Tomov, 2020; Šćiban et al., 2021) inflicting symptoms in European vineyards (Gnezdilov et al., 2008; Chireceanu et al., 2019). The infested leaves show bleaching spots along the central vein of their upper side and, in the case of severe attacks, on their whole surface. When pest populations are numerous, the spots merge, forming large chlorotic zones with negative consequences on the physiological functioning of the leaves (Chireceanu et al., 2019). Grapes are not attacked by the pest (Biosecurity Australia, 2011).

Concerning the potential entry by trade, the main pathway, represented by grapevine plants (Vitis sp.) is closed by the current EU legislation, while Parthenocissus quinquefolia its other known host species, constitutes an open pathway and is also present in the EU territory as a non-cultivated species. A. kakogawana has already entered the EU, a territory of natural and historical vocation for wine production. According to the State of the Vitiviniculture World Market 2018 (http://www.oiv.int), Europe vineyards account for approximately 52.7% of the total vine cultivation area worldwide (Cardell et al., 2019). Some areas of the EU territory show climatic similarities with the ones in the known distribution of the pest, according to the Köppen–Geiger classification from the Institute for Veterinary Public Health of the University of Vienna, based on Kottek et al. (2006) rescaled after Rubel et al. (2017)[7]. This version of the Köppen–Geiger climate classification, is chosen to provide a quick comparison in the PeMoScoring analysis, since also adopted by the EFSA tool to support climate suitability analysis (EFSA and Maiorano, 2022). PeMoScoring users can decide whether adopting another climate classification, according to their needs. A. kakogawana adults can actively fly from one plant to the neighbouring one (Martynov et al., 2019), although precise information on its flight capability is missing. Transportation of infested plants contributes to the pest’s movement. Wood with bark has been also deemed as a possible carrier of A. kakogawana, given that the bark of broad-leaved trees is an overwintering shelter. Plant protection products are used for its control (Baranets, 2021), while biological control options based on parasitoids are under development (Hu and Triapitsyn, 2016; Triapitsyn et al., 2020).

Phenacoccus solenopsis

The insect P. solenopsis, commonly known as the cotton mealybug, is presumably native to North America (Tinsley, 1898). It is a polyphagous species, attacking about 300 plant species mostly belonging to Anacardiaceae, Amaranthaceae, Asteraceae, Cucurbitaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Fabaceae, Lamiaceae, Liliaceae, Nyctaginaceae, Malvaceae and Solanaceae (Health et al., 2021). Many host plants, such as tomato, eggplant, sunflower (Beshr et al., 2016) and cotton (Suresh, 2010), are important crops for the EU agriculture (Eurostat, 2023).

P. solenopsis has a widespread distribution in non-EU territory; it has been found in tropical and subtropical regions in the Americas, Middle East, Asia and Africa (Fand and Suroshe, 2015). From these regions, human assisted spread to the EU territory is possible by the importation of plants for planting, fresh fruits, vegetables and cut flowers, infested with adult females, nymphal instars, and eggs (Arif et al., 2012). The European climatic conditions for the establishment of P. solenopsis are sub-optimal, although irrigation can be a factor facilitating its establishment in the Mediterranean (Wang et al., 2010). Indeed, the pest has already been under official control in Cyprus (EPPO Global Database, 2010). Furthermore, it was recently reported in Italy (Sannino et al., 2019), in Greece and France (EPPO Global Database, 2020). Its detection is possible during visual inspections, although it could remain unnoticed if present on the roots of herbaceous plants (Spodek et al., 2018). The morphology of the adult female can be used for identification at the species level (Ramamurthy, 2008). Although the pest is not able to spread over long distances by itself, its movement can be facilitated by the wind. Humans, animals and agricultural machinery can passively disperse the first (crawling) instar of the mealybug on local scales (Arif et al., 2012).

Reported symptoms on cotton, include dehydration, halt of plant growth and, if severe infestation occurs, even defoliation, loss of flower buds, flowers, and immature bolls (Hodgson et al., 2008). Yield losses between 30 to 60% have been reported in India and Pakistan on cotton (Fand and Suroshe, 2015). Plant death occurred after severe infestation on tomato (Ibrahim et al., 2015).

Control methods include mechanical, biological (Spodek et al., 2018) and chemical control (Health et al., 2021).

Adelges tsugae

Adelges tsugae, the hemlock woolly adelgid, is an invasive aphid-like insect of the Adelgidae family (Paradis et al., 2007). This insect seems to be native to Asia, where it is currently present in China, India, Japan and Taiwan. It is widespread in North America and Canada. It feeds on plants of the Pinaceae family, mainly Tsuga sp. (hemlock) and Picea sp. (spruce) (Canadian Food Inspection Agency, 2021). Picea abies and P. sitchensis are economically important plants for the commercial forestry sector in the EU (Calin et al., 2015; Cameron, 2015; Neiva et al., 2018).

A consistent trade of Pinaceae wood in the EU territory exists, including wood imported from areas where the pest is present (EFSA et al., 2023). A.tsugae adults lay very small eggs, up to 300 together in a single clutch, recognizable from the woolly ovisac made of white waxy filaments (Canadian Food Inspection Agency, 2021). Given the actual distribution of the pest, the possibility that it could arrive in Europe through natural means is unlikely. However, larvae can be transported by birds over long distances (Canadian Food Inspection Agency, 2021). Tsuga spp. are cultivated in Europe, mainly in Northern countries (Euro+Med PlantBase, 2005). Some areas of the EU territory show climatic similarities with the ones in the known distribution of the pest, according to the Köppen–Geiger climate classification adopted and describe above. The pest can be spread if carried on plants for planting or by agricultural practices. Birds are thought to be one of the main carriers (Canadian Food Inspection Agency, 2021 Russo et al., 2016). Serious infestations caused by the hemlock woolly adelgid can provoke trees’ death, within 4-15 years (Canadian Food Inspection Agency, 2021). Physical, chemical and biological control measures are available (Jeffrey S. Ward, 2004; Mausel et al., 2010). Trials for natural control, mainly with predators, are under study (Crandall et al., 2020; Mayfield et al., 2015).

Singhiella simplex

Singhiella simplex, the ficus whitefly, is an insect from Southeast Asia (Hodges, 2007; Malumphy and Guillem, 2021). It infests several species of Ficus spp., mainly grown and traded worldwide as ornamental plants (Laudani et al., 2019).

Singhiella simplex suck the sap on both sides of the leaves, causing yellowing, defoliation, honeydew secretion, sooty mold and branch dieback. These symptoms can eventually lead to stunting, wilting and even plant death (Mannion et al., 2008). The severity of the impact depends not only on the infestation level, but also on other factors such as temperature, irrigation, and fertilisation (Ahmed et al., 2022). Contrary to other Aleurodidae, S. simplex doesn’t produce white wax (Ahmed et al., 2022), neither specific symptoms, requiring the use of dichotomous keys for its identification, otherwise complex in the field (Hodges 2007).

S. simplex has been considered as an invasive pest since it invaded Africa, North and South America as well as the Middle East (EPPO Global Database, 2020). The international trade of Ficus trees, which is an open pathway for entry in the EU, has been deemed as the reason for its wide distribution (Laudani et al., 2019; Ahmed et al., 2022). In the EU, it has been reported in Cyprus (EPPO Global Database, 2014), France (EPPO Global Database, 2017), Italy (Laudani et al., 2019), in the Balearic Islands and Gibraltar (Malumphy and Guillem, 2021). The pest spreads at short distances: adults have a limited flying capacity, displacing from one leaf to another (Ahmed et al., 2022). Its limited flight capacity suggests that the pest is unlikely to reach other EU countries by natural means dispersal. Although, infested leaves transported by atmospheric agents, represent a mean of dispersal not to underestimate. Therefore, fallen or pruned leaves should be carefully removed from the fields (Mannion 2010). Control measures include scouting of host plants, chemical and biological control.

[1] https://medisys.newsbrief.eu/medisys/groupedition/en/PlantHealthAll.html

[2] Commission implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 of 28 November 2019 establishing uniform conditions for the implementation of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 of the European Parliament and the Council, as regards protective measures against pests of plants, and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 690/2008 and amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019. Official Journal of the European Union L 319, latest consolidated version.

[3] https://food.ec.europa.eu/plants/plant-health-and-biosecurity/legislation/control-measures_en

[4] EPPO A1 List: https://www.eppo.int/ACTIVITIES/plant_quarantine/A1_list

[5] EPPO A2 List: https://www.eppo.int/ACTIVITIES/plant_quarantine/A2_list

[6] EPPO Alert List: https://www.eppo.int/ACTIVITIES/plant_quarantine/alert_list

[7] https://koeppen-geiger.vu-wien.ac.at/present.htm

In this section an analysis on the main criteria driving the final Phi net value for each pest is provided. This is done in accordance with the Report on the Proposal of a ranking methodology for plant threats in the EU (EFSA et al., 2022).

Arboridia kakogawana

The pest was mentioned by the EFSA Plant Health Newsletters in September 2019, March 2020 as well as March and May 2021. It was scored as a positive pest in 2020. As a follow up to the obtained positive PeMoScoring, the European Commission mandated EFSA for a pest categorisation on the same pest, published in 2022 (EFSA et al, 2022). The categorisation concluded that this pest can be considered as a potential Union quarantine pest. In the meanwhile, A. kakogawana was added to the EPPO Alert List, corroborating the validity of the PeMoScoring conclusions.

The main drivers of the scoring results are the following:

The cultivated area of host plants in hectares (Criterion 7): Grapevine cultivation covers a vast area with the PRA area (EU).
Multiple ways of spread by human assistance (Criterion 12): In this case, the trade of plants for planting and wood with bark, which is a commodity for transformation, can facilitate the spread of the pest over a long distance.

According to EFSA et al., 2022, these two criteria allowed a clear differentiation between negative and positive reference pests (those used to calibrate the tool) during the evaluation of the PeMoScoring methodology.

On the other hand, aspects that lowered the final scoring are:

Host plants range (Criterion1): the pest has a restricted diet.
Control measures (Criterion 15) are available.

Phenacoccus solenopsis

This pest appeared firstly in the Plant Health Newsletter of February 2020, that included a scientific article documenting the first detection of the insect in Algeria. This pest was scored as positive (Phi=-0.0670). The pest categorisation produced on a later stage (EFSA et al., 2021), as a follow up request by the EU Commission concluded that P. solenopsis satisfies the criteria to be regarded as a potential Union quarantine pest.

The main risk drivers identified through the PeMoScoring are the following:

The extremely wide host range of the pest (Criterion 1)
The large area of cultivated host plants (Criterion 7)
Multiple ways of spread by human assistance (Criterion 12)
Massive yield losses (Criterion 13)
Plant death (Criterion 14) is additionally reported.

On the other hand, aspects that lowered the final scoring are:

The possibility of spread by natural means, restricted at local scale (Criterion 11).
Presence of existing control measures that could limit the pest’s impact (Criterion 15).

Adelges tsugae

The pest was reported by the EFSA Plant Health Newsletters in May 2017, February 2019 and April 2020. It was scored later in 2020 as a negative pest by the PeMoScoring (Phi=-0.1024). Therefore, the pest was not selected for further actions.

The scored criteria that have led to this PeMoScoring for A. tsugae are mainly the following:

-The narrow host range (Criterion 1)

-Low yield losses (Criterion 13)

-Existing efficient control measures against the pest (Criterion 15)

The absence of the pest in the EU area (Criterion 5) and the inability to enter in this area (Criterion 4) were additional low scores.

Singhiella simplex

This pest was included in the Plant Health Newsletter of December 2019, which included a scientific article reporting the first detection of this insect in Italy. Subsequently, the pest was scored as negative (Phi=-0.1468), implying that insufficient evidence is currently supporting the hypothesis of a potential risk.

The scored criteria that have led to the negative PeMoScoring for this pest are mainly the following:

-The host range (Criterion 1): S. simplex feeds on a limited range of ornamental species

-The relatively small area of cultivated host plants (Criterion 7)

-Efficient control measures against the pest (Criterion 15)

The effectiveness of PeMoScoring exercise and the importance of the criteria

Overall, PeMoScoring appears to be an easy, practical and quick tool that could make a difference in fast-decision-making in the context of pest risk assessment. Compared to the Expert Knowledge Elicitations and other Horizon Scanning processes through expert consensus for pest prioritisation (Adams-Hosking et al. 2016; Mulema et al., 2022; Roy et al., 2019) PeMoScoring requires less time, resources and effort. One user with basic knowledge of Excel and literature search can perform this exercise immediately after the first time a non-listed pest is mentioned in a media or scientific article, with reference and justification for possible uncertainties on the outcome. For this reason, the result for each pest can be communicated to the risk managers even within one day after the first retrieval of a pest from the monitoring process. An additional advantage compared to Expert Knowledge Elicitations is its reproducible functioning. Each result can be updated in the presence of new information that may be retrieved by the media and scientific monitoring. However, PeMoScoring results should not be perceived as risk assessment statements, but instead as means to facilitate the process of the risk assessment itself. Making PeMoScoring more accessible to all potential users, is one of the main objectives to pursue in the near future.

The current climate crisis, trade flows, and changes in land-use are associated with increased biological invasions (Anderson et al., 2004; Harvey, 2022; Kiritani, 2011; Musolin, 2007). Climate crisis is also projected to further worsen the consequences of the unintentional entry of pests through trade into novel geographic ranges (Ayres and Lombardero, 2000; Douma et al., 2016). Given the foreseeable challenges that plant protection is facing, the horizon scanning activities become even more crucial (Sutherland and Woodroof, 2009). The absence of practical and quick ways to early detect the emerging invasive pests from a plethora of herbivore taxa would severely impede rapid decision making against future biological invasions of concern in agroforestry. Time may reveal the actual contribution of the PeMoScoring tool in halting the entry of pests in EU territory, which is one of the most efficient strategies in biological invasion management (Hulme, 2017). Its application might additionally be explored in the risk assessment of classical biocontrol programs (Barratt et al. 2010; Loomans, 2021) as well as in the fields of human and animal health.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Magali Larenaudie for her constant and valuable contribution to the Horizon Scanning project. The authors are grateful to the reviewers: Susan P. Worner, Michal Kuchár, Fionnuala Bulman and Antonios E. Tsagkarakis, for their comments and suggestions, which considerably improved the quality of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Competing interests

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Adams-Hosking, C, McBride, MF, Baxter, G, Burgman, M, de Villiers, D, Kavanagh, R, Lawler, I, Lunney, D, Melzer, A, Menkhorst, P, Molsher, R, Moore, BD, Phalen, D, Rhodes, JR, Todd, C, Whisson, D and McAlpine, CA (2016), Use of expert knowledge to elicit population trends for the koala (Phascolarctos cinereus). Diversity Distrib., 22: 249-262. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12400
Ahmed MZ, McKenzie CL, Revynthi AM, Evans GA, Mottern JL, Mannion CM, Osborne LS and Weber D (2022) Pest Status, Survey of Natural Enemies, and a Management Plan for the Whitefly Singhiella simplex (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in the United States. Journal of Integrated Pest Management, 13. https://doi.org/10.1093/jipm/pmac007
Anderson PK, Cunningham AA, Pate, NG, Morales FJ, Epstein PR, Daszak P (2004) Emerging infectious diseases of plants: pathogen pollution, climate change and agrotechnology drivers. Trends in ecology & evolution, 19(10), 535-544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.07.021
Arif MI, Rafiq M, Wazir S, Mehmood N, Ghaffar A (2012) Studies on Cotton Mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis (Pseudococcidae: Homoptera), and its Natural Enemies in Punjab, Pakistan. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology, https://doi.org/14:557-562 10.1016/S2095-3119(18)61972-0
Ayres MP, & Lombardero MJ (2000) Assessing the consequences of global change for forest disturbance from herbivores and pathogens. Science of the Total Environment, 262(3), 263-286. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-9697(00)00528-3
Baranets L, Balan G, Perepelitsa O, Leshchenko A (2021). Biological efficacy of insecticides in the control of japanese grape cicada (Arboridia kakogowana Mats.) In the conditions of the south of Ukraine. Proceedings of the Vth international Eurasian agriculture and natural sciences congress http://lib.osau.edu.ua/jspui/handle/123456789/3602
Barratt, BIP, Howarth, FG, Withers, TM, Kean, JM, & Ridley, GS (2010) Progress in risk assessment for classical biological control. Biological control, 52(3), 245-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2009.02.012
Beshr SM, Badr SA, Ahmad AA and Mohamed G, 2016. New record of host plants of invasive mealybug Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Tinsley, 1898),(Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) in Alexandria and Behaira governorates. Journal of Entomology, 13:155-160 https://doi.org/10.3923/je.2016.155.160
Biosecurity Australia (2011) Draft non-regulated risk analysis report for table grapes from the Republic of Koreahttps://www.agriculture.gov.au/sites/default/files/sitecollectiondocuments/ba/plant/2011/Draft_RA_table_grapes_from_Korea.pdf
Blackburn TM, Pysek P, Bacher S, Carlton JT, Duncan RP, Jarosik V, Wilson JR and Richardson DM (2011). A proposed unified framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol Evol, 26:333-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2011.03.023
Blackmer JL, Hagler JR, Simmons GS and Cañas LA (2004) Comparative dispersal of Homalodisca coagulata and Homalodisca liturata (Homoptera: Cicadellidae). Environmental Entomology, 33:88-99. https://doi.org/10.1653/024.105.0403
Bradshaw, CJ, Leroy B, Bellard C, et al (2016) Massive yet grossly underestimated global costs of invasive insects. Nature communications, 7(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12986
Brondizio ES, Settele J, Díaz S, Ngo HT (2019) Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.
Brunetti A, Matere A, Lumia V, Pasciuta V, Fusco V, Sansone D, Marangi P, Cristella N, Faggioli F, Scortichini M (2022) Neofusicoccum mediterraneum Is Involved in a Twig and Branch Dieback of Olive Trees Observed in Salento (Apulia, Italy). Pathogens, 11:53. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens11010053
Bucci EM (2018). Xylella fastidiosa, a new plant pathogen that threatens global farming: Ecology, molecular biology, search for remedies. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 502:173-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2018.05.073
Calin M, Costache C, Braasch H, Zaulet M, Buburuzan L, Petrovan V, Dumitru M, Mota M, Vieira P and Belbahri L (2015) New reports ofBursaphelenchusspecies associated with conifer trees in Romania. Forest Pathology, 45:239-245. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/efp.12163
Canadian Food Inspection Agency (2021) Adelges tsugae (Hemlock Woolly Adelgid) - Fact Sheet https://inspection.canada.ca/plant-health/invasive-species/insects/hemlock-woolly-adelgid/fact-sheet/eng/1325616708296/1325618964954 Accessed 18 March 2023
Cancellario T, Laini A, Wood PJ et al. (2023) Among demons and killers: current and future potential distribution of two hyper successful invasive gammarids. Biol Invasions. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-023-03000-y
Cameron A (2015) Building Resilience into Sitka Spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.) Forests in Scotland in Response to the Threat of Climate Change. Forests, 6:398-415. https://doi.org/10.3390/f6020398
Chireceanu C, Nedelcea D and Seljak G (2019) First record of the Japanese grape leafhopper Arboridia kakogawana (Matsumura, 1932) (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae) from Romania. EPPO Bulletin, 49:391-397. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/epp.12585
Compton SG, Stavrinides M, Kaponas C and Thomas PJ (2019) No escape: most insect colonisers of an introduced fig tree in Cyprus come from the plant’s native range. Biological Invasions, 22:211-216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-019-02132-4
Crandall, RS, Jubb CS, Mayfield III AE, Thompson B, McAvoy TJ, Salom SM, Elkinton JS (2020) Rebound of Adelges tsugae spring generation following predation on overwintering generation ovisacs by the introduced predator Laricobius nigrinus in the eastern United States. Biological Control, 145, 104264.
Cuthbert RN, Diagne C, Hudgins EJ, Turbelin A, Ahmed DA, Albert C, Bodey TW, Briski E, Essl F, Haubrock PJ, Gozlan RE, Kirichenko N, Kourantidou M, Kramer AM and Courchamp F (2022) Biological invasion costs reveal insufficient proactive management worldwide. Sci Total Environ, 819:153404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153404
De Groote H, Kimenju SC, Munyua B, Palmas S, Kassie M, Bruce A (2020) Spread and impact of fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda J.E. Smith) in maize production areas of Kenya. Agric Ecosyst Environ, 292:106804. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2019.106804
Diaz‐Lara A, Wunderlich L, Nouri MT, Golino D and Al Rwahnih M (2022) Incidence and detection of negative‐stranded RNA viruses infecting apple and pear trees in California. Journal of Phytopathology, 170:15-20
Douma JC, Pautasso M, Venette RC, Robinet C, Hemerik L, Mourits MCM, Schans J and van der Werf W (2016) Pathway models for analysing and managing the introduction of alien plant pests: an overview and categorization. Ecological Modelling, 339:58-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.08.009
EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) and Maiorano A (2022) Scientific Reporton the SCAN-Clim: a tool to support pest climate suitability analysis based on climate classification.EFSA Journal 2022;20(2):7104, 18 pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7104
EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), Mannino MR, Larenaudie M, Linge JP, Candresse T, Jaques Miret JA, Jeger MJ, Gachet E, Maiorano A, Muñoz Guajardo I, Stancanelli G (2021) Horizon Scanning for Plant Health: report on 2017-2020 activities. EFSA supporting publication 2021: 18( 1): EN-2010.113 pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/sp.efsa.2021.EN-2010
EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), Tayeh C, Mannino MR, Mosbach-Schulz O, Stancanelli G, Tramontini S, Gachet E, Candresse T, Jaques Miret JA, Jeger MJ (2022) Scientific Report on the proposal of a ranking methodology for plant threats in the EU. EFSA Journal 2022; 20( 1):7025, 59 pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7025
EFSA PLH Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Health), Bragard C, Baptista P,Chatzivassiliou E, Di Serio F, Gonthier P, Jaques Miret JA, Justesen AF, Magnusson CS, Milonas P, Navas-Cortes JA, Parnell S, Potting R, Reignault PL, Stefani E, Thulke H-H, Van der Werf W, VicentCivera A, Yuen J, Zappalà L,Grégoire J-C, Malumphy C, Kertesz V, Maiorano A and MacLeod A, (2023) Scientific Opinion on the pest categorisation of Urocerus albicornis. EFSA Journal 2023;21(3):7845, 20pp.
EFSA PLH Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Health), Bragard C, Baptista P, Chatzivassiliou E, Di Serio F, Gonthier, P, Jaques Miret JA, Justesen AF, Magnusson CS, Milonas P, Navas-Cortes JA, Parnell S, Potting R, Reignault PL, Stefani E, Thulke HH, Van der Werf W, Vicent Civera A, Yuen J, Zappalà L, Gregoire JC, Malumphy C, Kertesz V, Maiorano A, MacLeod A (2022) Scientific Opinion on the pest categorisation of Arboridia kakogawana. EFSA Journal 2022; 20(1):7023, 23 pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7023
EFSA PLH Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Health), Bragard C, Di Serio F, Gonthier P, Jaques Miret JA, Justesen AF, Magnusson CS, Milonas P, Navas-Cortes JA, Parnell S, Potting R, Reignault PL, Thulke HH, Van der Werf W, Civera AV, Yuen J, Zappalà L, Gregoire JC, Malumphy C, Campese C, Czwienczek E, Kertesz V, Maiorano A, MacLeod A (2021) Scientific Opinion on the pest categorisation of Phenacoccus solenopsis. EFSA Journal 2021;19(8):6801, 36 pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6801
Eurostat (2023) Crop production in EU standard humidity https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/APRO_CPSH1/default/table?lang=en&category=agr.apro.apro_crop.apro_cp.apro_cpsh Accessed on 20 March 2023
Euro+Med PlantBase (2005) the information resource for Euro-Mediterranean plant diversity https://www.emplantbase.org/home.html Accessed on 18 March 2023
Fand BB and Suroshe SS (2015) The invasive mealybug Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley, a threat to tropical and subtropical agricultural and horticultural production systems – A review. Crop protection, 69:34-43. https://doi.org /10.1016/j.cropro.2014.12.001
Fantle-Lepczyk JE, Haubrock PJ, Kramer AM, Cuthbert RN, Turbelin AJ, Crystal-Ornelas R, Diagne C, Courchamp F (2022) Economic costs of biological invasions in the United States, Science of The Total Environment, 806: 3.
FAO and WHO (2019) Codex 2019: The year of food safety. Rome. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO. ISBN 978-92-5-131587-3
Ferilli F, Stancanelli G, Linge JP, Mannino MR (2019) A New Online Resource to Monitor New or Emerging Plant Pests: MEDISYS Media Monitoring and the Case of Xylella fastidiosa. Phytopathology, 109:216-218. https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-07-18-0241-A
Fiorenza A, Aiello D, Costanzo MB, Gusella G, Polizzi G (2022) A New Disease for Europe of Ficus microcarpa Caused by Botryosphaeriaceae Species. Plants (Basel), 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11060727
Gnezdilov VM, Sugonyaev ES, Artokhin KS (2008) Arboridia kakogawana (Matsumura)(Hemiptera Cicadellidae Typhlocybinae)–a new pest of grapevine in Southern Russia. Redia, 91:51-54
Hallett SG (2006) Dislocation from coevolved relationships: a unifying theory for plant invasion and naturalization? Weed Science, 54(2), 282-290.
Harvey JA, Tougeron K, Gols R, Heinen R, Abarca M, Abram PK et al. (2022) Scientists' warning on climate change and insects. Ecological monographs, e1553.
Heger T, Jeschke JM (2014) The enemy release hypothesis as a hierarchy of hypotheses. Oikos, 123(6), 741-750.
Hodges G (2007) The fig whitefly Singhiella simplex (Singh)(Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae): a new exotic whitefly found on Ficus species in south Florida. Pest Alert DPI-FDACS http://www.freshfromflorida.com/pi/enpp/ento/Singhiella% 20simplex. html
Hodgson C, Abbas G, Arif MJ, Saeed S and Karar H, 2008. Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Sternorrhyncha: Coccoidea: Pseudococcidae), an invasive mealybug damaging cotton in Pakistan and India, with a discussion on seasonal morphological variation. Zootaxa, 1913:1–35-31–35
Hu HY, Triapitsyn S (2016) Anagrus turpanicus sp. n.(Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) from China, an egg parasitoid of Arboridia kakogowana (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae). Zootaxa, 4161(4), 573-578.
Hulme PE (2017) Climate change and biological invasions: evidence, expectations, and response options. Biological Reviews, 92(3), 1297-1313.
Hulme P (2021) Unwelcome exchange: International trade as a direct and indirect driver of biological invasions worldwide. One Earth, 4(5), 666-679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2021.04.015
Ibrahim SS, Moharum FA and Abd El-Ghany NM (2015) The cotton mealybug Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) as a new insect pest on tomato plants in Egypt. Journal of Plant Protection Research, 55:48-51. doi: 10.1515/jppr-2015-0007
IPBES (2019) Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the intergovernmental science policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services. IPBES secretariat, Bonn. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo. 3831673
Ward JS, Cheah C AS, Onken BP, Cowles RS (2004) Eastern Hemlock Forests: Guidelines to Minimize the Impacts of Hemlock Wooly Adelgid. In: Agriculture USDo (ed.). Place.
Kiritani K (2011) Impacts of global warming on Nezara viridula and its native congeneric species. Journal of Asia-pacific Entomology - J ASIA-PAC ENTOMOL. 14. 221-226. 10.1016/j.aspen.2010.09.002.
Kondo H, Masejima H, Maruyama K, Fujita M and Ohki T (2022) First Report of Chinese wheat mosaic virus Infecting Barley in Japan. Plant Disease.
Kottek M, Grieser J, Beck C, Rudolf B and Rubel F (2006) World Map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorologische Zeitschrif, 15, 259–263.
Laudani F, Giunti G, Zimbalatti G, Campolo O, Palmeri V (2019) Singhiella simplex (Singh) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae), a new aleyrodid species for Italy causing damage on Ficus. EPPO Bulletin, 50:268-270. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/epp.12635
Linge JP, Steinberger R, Weber T, Yangarber R, van der Goot E, Al Khudhairy D, Stilianakis N (2009) Internet surveillance systems for early alerting of health threats. Eurosurveillance, 14:19162
Linge JP, Verile M, Tanev H, Zavarella V, Fuart F, van der Goot E (2012) Media monitoring of public health threats with medisys. C. WILLIAM, CWR. WEB-STER, D. BALAHUR, et al:17-31
Loomans AJ (2021) Every generalist biological control agent requires a special risk assessment. BioControl, 66(1), 23-35.
Malumphy C, Guillem R (2021) Seven species of whitefly new for Gibraltar, including fig whitefly Singhiella simplex (Singh) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Entomologist's Monthly Magazine, 157:168-172. https://doi.org/10.31184/m00138908.1573.4080
Mannion C, Osborne L, Hunsberger A, Mayer H and Hodges G, (2008). Ficus whitefly: a new pest in South Florida. University of Florida, IFAS Extension Bulletin.
Mannion C (2010) Whiteflies in the Landscape. University of Florida, IFAS Extension Bulletin, Nov., 2010.
Martín PR (2019) Invasive Pomacea snails: actual and potential environmental impacts and their underlying mechanisms. CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources, 14. https://doi.org/10.1079/pavsnnr201914042
Martynov V, Nikulina T, Gubin A Levchenko I (2019) Arboridia kakogawana (Matsumura, 1932)(Hemiptera: Cicadellidae: Typhlocybinae) a new invasive grapevine pest in Donbass. Subtropical and ornamental horticulture, 68:208-215
Mausel DL, Salom SM, Kok LT and Davis GA (2010) Establishment of the hemlock woolly adelgid predator, Laricobius nigrinus (Coleoptera: Derodontidae), in the Eastern United States. Environ Entomol, 39:440-448. https://doi.org/10.1603/EN09088
Mayfield AE, Reynolds BC, Coots CI et al. (2015) Establishment, hybridization and impact of Laricobius predators on insecticide-treated hemlocks: exploring integrated management of the hemlock woolly adelgid. Forest Ecology and Management, 335, 1-10.
Microsoft Corporation (2018) Microsoft Excel. Retrieved from https://office.microsoft.com/excel
Mulema J, Day R, Nunda W et al. (2022) Prioritization of invasive alien species with the potential to threaten agriculture and biodiversity in Kenya through horizon scanning. Biol Invasions 24, 2933–2949. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-022-02824-4
Musolin DL (2007) Insects in a warmer world: ecological, physiological and life‐history responses of true bugs (Heteroptera) to climate change. Global Change Biology, 13(8), 1565-1585.
Neiva DM, Araújo S, Gominho J, Carneiro AdC, Pereira H, 2018. An integrated characterization of Picea abies industrial bark regarding chemical composition, thermal properties and polar extracts activity. PLoS One.
Ogden NH, Wilson JR, Richardson DM, Hui C, Davies SJ, Kumschick S, Le Roux JJ, Measey J, Saul W-C and Pulliam JR (2019) Emerging infectious diseases and biological invasions: a call for a One Health collaboration in science and management. Royal Society open science, 6:181577
Paradis A, Elkinton J, Hayhoe K and Buonaccorsi J (2007) Role of winter temperature and climate change on the survival and future range expansion of the hemlock woolly adelgid (Adelges tsugae) in eastern North America. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 13:541-554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-007-9127-0
Pimentel D, Zuniga R and Morrison D (2005) Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States. Ecological Economics, 52:273-288. https://doi.org/.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.10.002
Ramamurthy ATaVV (2008) On the problems in diagnostics of cotton mealybug Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae). Entomon, 33:277-282
Roy HE, Bacher S, Essl F, et al. (2019) Developing a list of invasive alien species likely to threaten biodiversity and ecosystems in the European Union. Glob Change Biol. 25:1032–1048. https://doi.org/10.1111/ gcb.14527
Rubel F, Brugger K, Haslinger K and Auer I (2017). The climate of the European Alps: shift of very high resolution Köppen-Geiger climate zones 1800–2100. Meteorologische Zeitschrift, 26, 115–125
Russell JC (2012) Do invasive species cause damage? Yes. BioScience, 62:217-217
Schneider K, van der Werf W, Cendoya M, Mourits M, Navas-Cortes JA, Vicent A and Oude Lansink A (2020) Impact of Xylella fastidiosa subspecies pauca in European olives. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 117:9250-9259. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1912206117
Šćiban M, Mirić R and Kosovac A, 2021. FIRST RECORD OF THE JAPANESE GRAPE LEAFHOPPER ARBORIDIA KAKOGAWANA (HEMIPTERA: AUCHENORRHYNCHA: CICADELLIDAE: TYPHLOCYBINAE) IN SERBIA. Acta Entomologica Serbica, 26:71-74
Seebens H, Blackburn TM, Dyer EE et al. (2017) No saturation in the accumulation of alien species worldwide. Nature communications, 8(1), 1-9.
Seebens H, Blackburn TM, Dyer EE et al. (2018) Global rise in emerging alien species results from increased accessibility of new source pools. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(10), E2264-E2273.
Semeraro T, Gatto E, Buccolieri R, Catanzaro V, De Bellis L, Cotrozzi L, Lorenzini G, Vergine M and Luvisi A (2021) How Ecosystem Services Can Strengthen the Regeneration Policies for Monumental Olive Groves Destroyed by Xylella fastidiosa Bacterium in a Peri-Urban Area. Sustainability, 13:8778
Spodek M, Ben-Dov Y, Mondaca L, Protasov A, Erel E and Mendel Z (2018) The cotton mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) in Israel: pest status, host plants and natural enemies. Phytoparasitica, 46:45-55. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s12600-018-0642-1
Suresh S, Jyothimani, R, Sivasubramanian, P, Karuppuchamy P, Samiyappan R, Jonathan EI (2010) Invasive mealybugs of Tamil Nadu and their management. . Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences
Sutherland WJ, Woodroof HJ (2009) The need for environmental horizon scanning. Trends in ecology & evolution. Oct 1;24(10):523-7.
Thomas CS, Nelson NP, Jahn GC, Niu T, Hartley DM (2011) Use of media and public-domain Internet sources for detection and assessment of plant health threats. Emerg Health Threats J, 4:7157. https://doi.org/10.3402/ehtj.v4i0.7157
Tinsley J (1898) Notes on Coccidae with descriptions of new species. The Canadian Entomologist, 30:317-320
Tomov R (2020) First record of the Japanese grape leafhopper Arboridia kakogawana (Matsumura, 1932) (Homoptera: Cicadellidae, Erythroneurini) in Bulgaria. Acta Zoologica Bulgarica, 72:691-695
Triapitsyn SV, Adachi-Hagimori T, Rugman-Jones PF, Kado N, Sawamura N, Narai Y (2020) Egg parasitoids of Arboridia apicalis (Nawa, 1913)(Hemiptera, Cicadellidae), a leafhopper pest of grapevines in Japan, with description of a new species of Anagrus Haliday, 1833 (Hymenoptera, Mymaridae). ZooKeys, 945, 129.
Wang Y, Watson GW, Zhang R (2010) The potential distribution of an invasive mealybug Phenacoccus solenopsis and its threat to cotton in Asia. Agricultural and Forest Entomology, 12:403-416. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-9563.2010.00490.x
Weber E (2017) Invasive plant species of the world: a reference guide to environmental weeds, Cabi.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

PeMoScoring: a rapid screening of emerging threats caused by invasive plant pests.

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methodology

Results & Discussion

Declarations

References

Status:

Version 1