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.

The EFSA Panel on Plant health was requested to deliver a scientific opinion on how far the existing requirements for the bonsai pine species subject to derogation in Commission Decision 2002/887/EC would cover all plant health risks from black pine (Pinus thunbergii Parl.) bonsai (the commodity defined in the EU legislation as naturally or artificially dwarfed plants) imported from Japan, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by Japan. The relevance of an EU-regulated pest for this opinion was based on: (a) evidence of the presence of the pest in Japan; (b) evidence that P. thunbergii is a host of the pest and (c) evidence that the pest can be associated with the commodity. Sixteen pests that fulfilled all three criteria were selected for further evaluation. The relevance of other pests present in Japan (not regulated in the EU) for this opinion was based on (i) evidence of the absence of the pest in the EU; (ii) evidence that P. thunbergii is a host of the pest; (iii) evidence that the pest can be associated with the commodity and (iv) evidence that the pest may have an impact in the EU. Three pests fulfilled all four criteria and were selected for further evaluation (Crisicoccus pini, Sirex nitobei and Urocerus japonicus). For the selected 19 pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier were evaluated. Limiting factors on the effectiveness of the measures were documented. For each of the 19 pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including any uncertainties. For all evaluated pests, the median likelihood of the pest freedom is 99.5% or higher and within the 90% uncertainty range it is 99% or higher.

IntroductionPruning wounds are the main entry points for fungi causing grapevine trunk diseases (GTDs). Several studies identified factors influencing the temporal dynamics of wound susceptibility, which include the fungal species and inoculum dose, weather conditions, grape variety, pruning date, and so forth. Here, we conducted a quantitative analysis of literature data to synthesise outcomes across studies and to identify the factors that most affect the length of pruning wound susceptibility.MethodsWe extracted data on the frequency at which the inoculated wounds showed GTD symptoms or an inoculated pathogen was reisolated following artificial inoculation at the time of pruning or in the following days. A negative exponential model was fit to these data to describe changes in wound susceptibility as a function of time since pruning, in which the rate parameter changed depending on specific factors.Results and DiscussionThe results show that wound susceptibility is high at the time of pruning, and they remain susceptible to invasion by GTD fungi for months after pruning. Infection incidence on wounds was higher for fungi associated with Botryosphaeria dieback than those associated with Eutypa dieback or Esca complex, and wound susceptibility decreased faster for Eutypa dieback than for other GTD agents. Grapevine variety and pruning season also affected the wound susceptibility period. Sauvignon Blanc remains susceptible to GTDs longer than other varieties. We also found that the time of pruning can affect infection dynamics, especially for more susceptible varieties. The results increase our understanding of GTD epidemiology and should help growers control infections.

The application of organic materials to soil can recycle nutrients and increase organic matter in agricultural lands. Digestate can be used as a nutrient source for crop production but it has also been shown to stimulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from amended soils. While edaphic factors, such as soil texture and pH, have been shown to be strong determinants of soil GHG fluxes, the impact of the legacy of previous management practices is less well understood. Here we aim to investigate the impact of such legacy effects and to contrast them against soil properties to identify the key determinants of soil GHG fluxes following digestate application. Soil from an already established field experiment was used to set up a pot experiment, to evaluate N 2 O, CH 4 and CO 2 fluxes from cattle-slurry-digestate amended soils. The soil had been treated with farmyard manure, green manure or synthetic N-fertilizer, 18 months before the pot experiment was set up. Following homogenization and a preincubation stage, digestate was added at a concentration of 250 kg total N/ha eq. Soil GHG fluxes were then sampled over a 64 day period. The digestate stimulated emissions of the three GHGs compared to controls. The legacy of previous soil management was found to be a key determinant of CO 2 and N 2 O flux while edaphic variables did not have a significant effect across the range of variables included in this experiment. Conversely, edaphic variables, in particular texture, were the main determinant of CH 4 flux from soil following digestate application. Results demonstrate that edaphic factors and current soil management regime alone are not effective predictors of soil GHG flux response following digestate application. Knowledge of the site management in terms of organic amendments is required to make robust predictions of the likely soil GHG flux response following digestate application to soil.

EFSA has carried out a public consultation on the draft Guidance of the EFSA Scientific Panel on Plant Health (PLH Panel) on commodity risk assessment for the evaluation of high risk plants dossiers with the aim of collecting input from the scientific community and all interested parties. 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. The draft Guidance provided the methodology to be followed when performing a commodity risk assessment for high risk commodities. Following international standards on pest risk analysis this Guidance describes a twostep approach for the assessment of pest risk associated with a specified commodity. In the first step, pests associated with the commodity that may 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 allows key uncertainties to be identified.