First report of <i>Meloidogyne mali</i> causing root galling to elm trees in the UK

Prior, Thomas; Tozer, H. F.; Yale, R.; Jones, Eleanor P.; Lawson, Rebecca; Jutson, L.; Correia, Manuel E.; Stubbs, Jack; Hockland, S.; Karssen, Gerrit

doi:10.5197/j.2044-0588.2019.039.010

Cited by 13 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The nematode has also been reported as M. ulmi in Austria (de Jong et al., online). M. mali is believed to be more widespread in the EU than actually reported because elm plants grown in the Netherlands under the breeding programme against Dutch elm disease caused by Ophiostoma ulmi on plots infested with the nematode were shipped from the Netherlands to 10 other European countries (Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Spain, Slovakia, Romania and the United Kingdom) (Ahmed et al., 2013; EPPO, 2017). These programmes began in the 1980s (Prior et al., 2019). Host status on Malus sylvestris Apples, M. domestica and M. sylvestris are considered as hosts EPPO, online_d, Ahmed 2013) PRA information Available Pest Risk Assessments: –Risks to plant health posed by EU import of soil or growing media (EFSA PLH Panel, 2015); –A quick scan pest risk analysis for the Meloidogyne mali (Pylypenko, 2016); –Pest risk analysis for Meloidogyne mali (EPPO, 2017); –UK risk register details for Meloidogyne mali (DEFRA, online). Other relevant information for the assessment Biology Meloidogyne mali , the apple root‐knot nematode, belongs to the group of root knot nematodes, Meloidogyne spp., which includes more than 100 named species.…”

Section: Appendix a – Data Sheets Of Pests Selected For Further Evalu...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Commodity risk assessment of Malus sylvestris plants from United Kingdom

Bragard¹,

Baptista²,

Chatzivassiliou³

et al. 2023

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 rooted plants and bundles of bare root plants or rooted cell grown young plants of Malus sylvestris imported from the UK, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the UK. All pests associated with the commodities were evaluated against specific criteria for their relevance for this opinion. Two quarantine pests (tobacco ringspot virus and tomato ringspot virus), one protected zone quarantine pest (Erwinia amylovora) and four non‐regulated pests (Colletotrichum aenigma, Meloidogyne mali, Eulecanium excrescens and Takahashia japonica) that fulfilled all relevant criteria were selected for further evaluation. For Erwinia amylovora, special requirements are specified in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072. Based on the information provided in the dossier, these specific requirements for E. amylovora are met. For the remaining six pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical Dossier from the UK were evaluated, taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, 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 scales (Eulecanium excrescens and Takahashia japonica) being the pests most frequently expected on the imported bundles of bare root plants or rooted cell grown young plants. The expert knowledge elicitation indicated with 95% certainty that between 9,976 and 10,000 bundles (one bundle consisting of 5–15 plants for bare root plants or 25–50 plants for cell grown young plants) per 10,000 would be free from the above‐mentioned scales.

show abstract

Section: Appendix a – Data Sheets Of Pests Selected For Further Evalu...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Commodity risk assessment of Malus sylvestris plants from United Kingdom

Bragard¹,

Baptista²,

Chatzivassiliou³

et al. 2023

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The fitted values of the uncertainty distribution of the pest freedom are shown in Table A.30. Pest status in the UK Meloidogyne mali is present in the UK in Southern Englandtwo sites in Farnham and Surrey (Dossier Section 3.0) where it was found on elm trees in 2018, as consequence of introduction in the past of infected elms from the Netherlands (Prior et al, 2019).…”

Section: Yesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Commodity risk assessment of Acer platanoides plants from the UK

Bragard¹,

Baptista²,

Chatzivassiliou³

et al. 2023

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 platanoides imported from the United Kingdom (UK) as: (a) 1‐ to 7‐year‐old bare root plants for planting, (b) 1‐ to 7‐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. 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.

show abstract

“…The transport or introduction of living elm cuttings or saplings is, however, a much greater risk because of other non-native pests and pathogens they may harbour. In Britain alone, the elm yellows mycoplasma, the elm zig-zag sawfly and the apple root knot nematode (origin probably Japan) have all been introduced or detected in the past decade, and there is evidence that the nematode (EPPO 2017;Prior et al 2019) and the mycoplasma were introduced on young rooted plants of resistant elms. The nematode is believed to have been imported to the Netherlands on elms from Japan for resistance breeding prior to World War II, and was subsequently distributed to at least ten other European countries on elm selections (EPPO 2017).…”

Section: Unintended Biosecurity Breachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complexities underlying the breeding and deployment of Dutch elm disease resistant elms

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dutch elm disease (DED) is a vascular wilt disease caused by the pathogens Ophiostoma ulmi and Ophiostoma novo-ulmi with multiple ecological phases including pathogenic (xylem), saprotrophic (bark) and vector (beetle flight and beetle feeding wound) phases. Due to the two DED pandemics during the twentieth century the use of elms in landscape and forest restoration has declined significantly. However new initiatives for elm breeding and restoration are now underway in Europe and North America. Here we discuss complexities in the DED ‘system’ that can lead to unintended consequences during elm breeding and some of the wider options for obtaining durability or ‘field resistance’ in released material, including (1) the phenotypic plasticity of disease levels in resistant cultivars infected by O. novo-ulmi; (2) shortcomings in test methods when selecting for resistance; (3) the implications of rapid evolutionary changes in current O. novo-ulmi populations for the choice of pathogen inoculum when screening; (4) the possibility of using active resistance to the pathogen in the beetle feeding wound, and low attractiveness of elm cultivars to feeding beetles, in addition to resistance in the xylem; (5) the risk that genes from susceptible and exotic elms be introgressed into resistant cultivars; (6) risks posed by unintentional changes in the host microbiome; and (7) the biosecurity risks posed by resistant elm deployment. In addition, attention needs to be paid to the disease pressures within which resistant elms will be released. In the future, biotechnology may further enhance our understanding of the various resistance processes in elms and our potential to deploy trees with highly durable resistance in elm restoration. Hopefully the different elm resistance processes will prove to be largely under durable, additive, multigenic control. Elm breeding programmes cannot afford to get into the host–pathogen arms races that characterise some agricultural host–pathogen systems.

show abstract

First report of Meloidogyne mali causing root galling to elm trees in the UK

Cited by 13 publications

References 4 publications

Commodity risk assessment of Malus sylvestris plants from United Kingdom

Commodity risk assessment of Malus sylvestris plants from United Kingdom

Commodity risk assessment of Acer platanoides plants from the UK

Complexities underlying the breeding and deployment of Dutch elm disease resistant elms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About