Regulatory plant pathology rev10.ppt

Regulatory Plant Pathology

The problem: significant geographic barriers to gene flow between continents has shaped the evolution of contemporary biota

Global Commerce has been eliminating those barriers

Pangea reunited in the Homogenocene?

Plant Diseases that have been spread by movement of plant material: Diseases

White pine blister rust Chestnut blight Dutch elm disease Dogwood anthracnose Pitch Canker Port Orford cedar root disease Sudden oak death

Insects: Asian gypsy moth Asian longhorn beetle Citrus longhorn beetle Emerald ash borer Sirex noctilio + numerous coleoptera

Who Regulates Movement of Plants and Plant Pests?

International IPPC: International Plant Protection Convention

Regional

IPPC Regional Organizations NAPPO: North American Plant Protection Organization EPPO: European Plant Protection Organization SAPPO: South American Plant Protection Organization

Federal

USDA APHIS-PPQ National Plant Board

State

State Departments of Agriculture State and Regional Plant Boards

Perspectives !! State regulators

–! Oregon Department of Agriculture

–! Other State Ag Departments

!! Federal regulators –! USDA Animal and Plant

Health Inspection Service (APHIS) "! Plant Protection and

Quarantine (PPQ) –! Home Land Security

"! Customs and Border Protection Pitch Canker in Monterey,

CA!

International Plant Protection Convention, IPPC

Administered by United Nations FAO Established 1952 Concern about international regulation of plant pests began with potato late blight 1845-1860, grape Phylloxera introduction to Europe from North America, 1881 IPPC established 1952 Currently 177 member nations

Phytosanitary Agreement (1989) authorizes the IPPC to provide international standards for phytosanitary measures implemented by governments to protect their plant resources from harmful pests, while ensuring that these measures are justified and are not used as unjustified barriers to international trade.

IPPC: 1997 Revision of International Plant Protection Convention MISSION: Development of international standards for phytosanitary measures (ISPMs) Exchange of official information in terms of obligations under the IPPC Capacity building / technical assistance to facilitate the implementation of the

IPPC

#!Reviews the state of plant protection around the world; #! Identifies action to control the spread of pests into new areas; #!Develops and adopts international standards; #!Establishes rules and procedures for resolving disputes; #!Establishes rules and procedures for the sharing of phytosanitary

information; #!Cooperates with international organizations on matters covered by the

Convention IPPC functions through national plant protection organizations, NPPOs Enforcement is by each member country according to its specific statutes

International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) is an international treaty whose purpose is to secure a common and effective action to prevent the spread and introduction of pests of plants and plant products, and to promote appropriate measures for their control.

The NPPO of the exporting country has the sole authority to undertake phytosanitary certification and should establish a management system to deal with the legislative and administrative requirements. The NPPO undertakes operational responsibilities, including sampling and inspection of plants, plant products and other regulated articles; detection and identification of pests; surveillance of crops; performance of treatments; and establishing and maintaining a record-keeping system.

The phytosanitary certificates are the documentary assurance that the phytosanitary certification process as described under the IPPC has been undertaken. The model phytosanitary certificates as described in the Annex to the IPPC should be used.

NPPOs should, when performing pest risk analysis, base it on biological or other scientific and economic evidence, following the relevant ISPMs (international standards for phytosanitary measures). In doing this, threats to biodiversity resulting from effects on plants should also be taken into account.

The taxonomic identity of the organism should be specified because any biological and other information used should be relevant to the organism in question. If the organism has not yet been fully named or described, then, to be determined as a pest, it should at least have been shown to be identifiable, consistently to produce injury to plants or plant products (e.g. symptoms, reduced growth rate, yield loss or any other damage) and to be transmissible or able to disperse.

Risk assessments are a key component of international phytosanitary regulation

NAPPO Mission and Strategic Goals “Provide a forum for public and private sectors in Canada, the United States and Mexico to collaborate in the development of science-based standards intended to protect agricultural, forest and other plant resources against regulated plant pests, while facilitating trade. Participate in related international cooperative efforts.” Strategic Goals :

Protecting Plant Resources and the Environment Capacity Building Communicating Results Building partnerships An effective Dispute Settlement Mechanism Sound Management Practices A Stable Funding Base

Regional Plant Protection Organizations: NAPPO

Regional Plant Protection Organizations: NAPPO

Federal agencies !! USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service PPQ –! Write federal regulations

"! Controls the import & export of plants to prevent spread of pests

"! Applies to pests exotic to the U.S. "! Protects the U.S. & its territories "! Regulates country-to-country and state-to-state movement

–! Federal regulations supercede state regulations –! Management plans for established exotic pests

!! Department of Homeland Security CPB –! Inspections at borders and ports of entry –! Inspects incoming shipments, international trade

APHIS-PPQ is the NPPO of the USA APHIS-PPQ Mission: safeguard agriculture and natural resources from the entry, establishment, and spread of animal and plant pests and noxious weeds into the United States of America; and supports trade and exports of U.S. agricultural products. APHIS-PPQ Regulates international movements of plants, plant products and plant pests between the USA and other countries and regulates interstate movements of plants and plant pests.

Federal Agencies USDA-APHIS-PPQ, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Plant Protection and Quarantine Program

Federal Statutory Authority for Regulation of Plant Pests: Plant Quarantine Act of 1912

enacted after dual disasters: white pine blister rust ca. 1905 (eastern USA) chestnut blight ca. 1906 Quarantine #1 restricted importation of 5 needle pine Additional quarantines imposed on importation of Ribes spp.

Plant Protection Act of 2000 Supercedes and repeals most of Plant Quarantine Act Consolidates regulation of plant pests, noxious weeds, biological control organisms

The PPA gives the Secretary of Agriculture, and through delegated authority, USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), the ability to prohibit or restrict the importation, exportation, and the interstate movement of plants, plant products, certain biological control organisms, noxious weeds, and plant pests.

PLANT PEST.—The term ‘‘plant pest’’ means any living stage of any of the following that can directly or indirectly injure, cause damage to, or cause disease in any plant or plant product: (A) A protozoan. (B) A nonhuman animal. (C) A parasitic plant. (D) A bacterium. (E) A fungus. (F) A virus or viroid. (G) An infectious agent or other pathogen. (H) Any article similar to or allied with any of the articles specified in the preceding subparagraphs.

Plant Protection Act of 2000 Definitions

1. Publishing a public notice describing procedures and standards for import requests; 2. Conducting a study outlining the role and application of systems approaches associated with proposals to import plants and plant products; 3. Establishing uniform procedures for conducting warrantless inspections; 4. Developing guidelines for the issuance of subpoenas; 5. Creating guidelines for the standardization of civil penalties that will be applied consistently nationwide for specific violations; 6. Establishing internal procedures for cost recovery of expenses related to the disposal of smuggled or illegal agricultural products that are abandoned after APHIS takes regulatory action at U.S. ports of entry; 7. Soliciting public comment at regional public meetings on a concept paper prior to publication of a proposed rule for noxious weeds; and 8. Publishing regulations for the movement of biological control organisms.

Civil Penalties and Subpoena Power The PPA increases civil penalties to a maximum of $50,000 However, the maximum of $1,000 remains for first-time offenders carrying an agricultural product through U.S. ports of entry for personal use only. Any business or group violating the PPA can now be fined a maximum of $250,000 and no more than $500,000 per adjudication.

APHIS Authorities under PPA 2000

!! DHS/USDA inspect all shipments of most agricultural commodities

!! Inspection rigor based on local & national experience (alerts & policy)

!! Trend analysts monitor interceptions & pathways of top priority exotic pests

Cargo inspection Risk Assessment Lists of quarantine pests Identification

APHIS uses several approaches for preventing entry of plant pests

Pest Interceptions

!! Interceptions: Organisms found during inspections of imported commodities or with international travelers, conveyances, in mail, etc. Significant interceptions are those classified as quarantine, plant pests.

!! Priority for identification: Urgent, Routine

Area Identifiers

!! Located at medium-large ports & some universities

!! 3 disciplines: entomology, botany, pathology

!! Some multidisciplinary (Pathology/botany)

!! Coverage: –! Local port –! Nearby States –! Selected foreign sites

(preclearance)

The National Plant Board is a non-profit organization of the plant pest regulatory agencies of each of the states and Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. NPB was formed in 1925 Members of the NPB represent the plant regulatory agencies of all 50 states and Puerto Rico Works cooperatively with APHIS-PPQ and other federal agencies (USDA Forest Service, ARS) and state commercial operators to prevent the entry of new pests and diseases into the country. Four regional Plant Boards (Eastern, Central, Southern, Western) coordinate regional plant pest regulation.

Purposes of the National Plant Board as stated in its constitution include: 1. To represent the regional plant boards at the national level and to carry out instructions issued by the regional plant boards. 2. To bring out greater uniformity and efficiency in the promulgation and enforcement of plant quarantines and plant inspection polices and practices in the various states. 3. To act as a national clearing-house for information in plant quarantines and plant inspection polices and procedures. 4. To promote harmony and uniformity in the field of plant pest regulation. 5. To maintain contacts with the United States Department of Agriculture and other federal and state agencies concerning quarantine policies that have national, regional or individual state effects.

The protection of the growing filbert industry of the Pacific coast has to depend, therefore, upon the effective enforcement of the exisitng regulations which prohibit the importation of plants, cuttings, or other propagative material of either the American wild hazel or the cultivated filbert from the territory included within the range of Corylus americana.

Eastern Filbert Blight Quarantine 1921 H. P. Barss of OSU, former Botany and Plant Pathology Chair Argued before the western plant board for a quarantine against movement of American wild hazel (C. americana) or European hazels (filbert) from the territory included within the natural range of the native C. americana

Plant Pest Regulatory Agencies State Departments of Agriculture, Natural Resources, Plant Industry etc Interstate Coordination National Plant Board Regional and National Organization of State Plant Regulatory Agencies

State Plant Protection Agencies

Regulatory Plant Pathology

!!Protection –! Federal quarantines –! State quarantines –! Control area orders –! Administrative

directives

!!Protect & Enhance –! Survey & Detection –! Control & eradication –! Certification Sudden oak death, Kent Lake,

CA (photo by S. Frankel)

Protection

!! State Level: –! Quarantines –! Control area orders –! Administrative

directives !! Federal Level:

–! Quarantines –! Management Plans

State quarantine

!!Controls the import & export of plants to prevent the spread of pests to Oregon

!!Applies to pests exotic to Oregon !!Done at the request of industry or other

agency (Regional or National Plant Board) !!Prevent spread from state to state &/or

county to county !!Does not apply to other countries

Identifying a quarantine

pest

Biotic Agent

Pest Elsewhere

LIkely to enter

Natural spread possible

Not present Present

Could establish

Economic impact likely

Quarantinable pest

Limited distribution

Officially controlled

Quarantinable pest

When is a state quarantine written?

Legislature

Fee-based inspection program

Quarantine or CAO written

Consensus

No quarantine or CAO

No Consensus

Advisory committee formed

Request is made

Federal quarantine

Chrysanthemum white rust: !! Caused by Puccinia horiana !! Deforms and stunts infected plants !! Teliospores can infect mums 0.25 - 0.5 mi away !! Native to China & Japan !! Established in FL, EU, AUS, SAm, & AFR

State quarantine Sudden oak death: !! Caused by Phytophthora

ramorum !! First reported in Europe in 1993,

CA in 1995, OR in 2001 !! Attacks >60 hosts in >15 plant

families !! Spreads via rain-splash, plant

material, soil !! Origin unknown !! Affects both natural resouces

and agricultural commodity plants

Infected tan oak!

Continuing Quarantine for SOD?

Potential responses: !! Maintain quarantine

–! protect against new races

–! protect from further introductions

!! Change quarantine to CAO

!! Official control program

!! Drop quarantine

Infected Douglas fir (photo by D. Rizzo)!

Oregon s response in Curry County

Oregon opted to: !! Maintain quarantine !! Place infection

centers under quarantine

!! Attempt eradication –! Administrative

directives issued "! Hosts destroyed "! Sites monitored for 2-yr Photo by F. Arnold!

Federal quarantine for SOD

!! Adopted 2/14/02 !! Controls movement of

host materials from quarantined areas –! Certification program

!! Supercedes ODA s quarantine

China Camp State Park, CA!

SOD in Nursery Stock !! Nursery Inspection

program !! May be a regulatory

incident or interception !! Interception

–! Return to sender –! Destroy –! Maintain quarantine

!! Incident –! Destroy –! Detective work –! Maintain quarantine

Infected Viburnum bodnantense!

Control area order

!! Applies to diseases already established in Oregon

!! Imposed to limit &/or slows the spread of the disease

!! Done at the request of industry

!! Requires inspection by ODA

Dwarf Mistletoe on Monterey Pine!

Federal management plan

!! For pests already established in US (e.g., gypsy moth)

!! Goal is to slow spread –! Survey & detection –! Control efforts in

infested states –! Eradication in non-

infested states Before GM

After GM

GM federal management plan

Lymantria dispar !! State coordinates

activities !! Survey and detection

–! Trapping program –! Visual inspections

!! Eradication –! Spray program (Btk) –! Monitor for 2-yr after

treatment

Gypsy moth egg masses

Survey & detection programs

Plum Pox Virus: !! Virus certification program !! Various symptoms,

reduces fruit value !! Spread by aphids, in

infected plants !! Established in EU, reported

in CAN & Pennsylvania !! Eradication underway in

U.S. Photo courtesy of Penn State!

Imported timber inspections

!! Protect Oregon timber and agricultural interests from exotic pests

!! Monitor pathway for entry –! Untreated logs &

lumber –! Untreated SWPM

!! Fee-based program

Control & eradication program

Dutch elm disease: !! Caused by Ophiostoma ulmi and O.

novo-ulmi !! Causes tree mortality !! State quarantine supports county/city

programs !! Established in five counties & all

states except AK, AZ, FL, HI, LA, NV, NM, UT, & WA

CAO to enhance value

Rapeseed (canola) production

!! Produced for food, industrial, & seed markets –! Oilseed quality –! Oilseed purity

!! Limit or prevent cross-pollination

!! Industry/grower support required

!! ODA s role is limited

Certification programs

!! Grass seed certification –! Nematodes –! Fungi –! Debris

!! Endophyte certification

!! Vegetable seed certification

!! Mint certification !! Virus-free certification

Mint certification

Verticillium on mint !! CAO is for any Verticillium spp. !! Causes stunting, twisting & curling of upper

leaves, & eventually death !! Issue phytosanitary certificates for clean

plants !! Inspect plants not eligible for OSU

certification

Grass seed certification

Anguina agrostis (Nematode) !! Found only on Agrostis spp. !! Causes galls on flowers and is a vector for

Corynebacterium (Rathayibacter) rathyi (bacterial head blight of orchardgrass)

!! Seed-borne !! Found in GER, UK, AUS, NZ, Scandinavia,

US, CAN, and RUS !! International quarantines for this pest

USDA RECALLS INDIAN PINE CONES WASHINGTON, Dec. 19, 2003--The U.S. Department of Agriculture s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is announcing a national recall on pine cones originating in India. Recent imports of these pine cones have been found to contain serious quarantine pests warranting the removal of these items from store shelves. The infested pine cones have been found in Frank s Nursery, K-mart, Target, Walmart, JoAnn Fabrics, Lowe s, Dollar Tree and Safeway stores nationwide. The recall applies to items with the following UPC codes:

The Safety Net Leaks

Regardless of risk assessment and port inspections, introductions of new and damaging plant pests continue to occur

Haack 2006. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 36:269-288

Data from USDA APHIS Port Information Network

McCullough et al 2006. Biological Invasions 6:611-630

Data from USDA APHIS Port Information Network

Data from USDA APHIS Port Information Network

Haack 2006. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 36:269-288

McCullough et al 2006. Biological Invasions 6:611-630

Data from USDA APHIS Port Information Network

McCullough et al 2006. Biological Invasions 6:611-630

Data from USDA APHIS Port Information Network

There are lots of undiscovered microbes, insects etc that have potential to cause damage in a new environment or on a new host

Phytophthora pinifolia in Chile, 2006

What about organisms that are unknown, undetectable by visual inspection, not currently on quarantine lists?

15-Mayo- 2007

Problems with Regulatory Pathology as Currently Practiced •! Reliance on species lists of identified pests •! Emphasis on systems approach in risk mitigation: assumes

combinations of partially effective risk reduction measures are additive

•! Reliance on risk models with high uncertainties •! Reliance on exporters for compliance •! Reliance on inspections to detect noncompliance •! Border protection emphasizes bioterroism, not biosecurity •! Conflicting mission: protect agriculture and natural resouces

and facilitate commerce •! Reluctance to impose penalties other than loss of commodity •! It has not worked very well, has it? •! Based on sound science ?

Preventing Exotic Pathogen Threats to Forests - A Sideways Scientific Look Clive Brasier We have a prevention system that is Systematic International Well regulated and policed Nonetheless, Sudden Oak Death is just another symptom of a historical problem Although the current system of prevention is often excellently and expertly carried out by regulatory agencies - The system cannot succeed, because it is not yet properly science based.

Biological weaknesses List dependent. Essentially a list system derived from 'Noahs ark' and from Linnaean systematics and routinely based on the morphospecies (pathogen looks like x - therefore it is x), not the species and genotypes of modern population biology. Leaves both legal and identification loopholes.

Non Darwinian. Not yet caught up with 1850s science. Evolutionary theory warns us that the greatest threat is from organisms that have evolved in 'other' biogeographical zones, but have not yet escaped and so are still 'waiting' to cause serious damage on new hosts. These threats need to be anticipated.

Reactive not proactive. The present schedules, however, tend to cover mainly those pathogens that have already escaped outside their original evolutionary zone and are already causing noticeable damage on new (non co-evolved) hosts as they spread (DED, Chestnut blight, Pinewood nematode, Plane wilt, Cypress canker, Dogwood anthracnose...).

Structural rigidity. Present system, being largely list, not process, driven may lack the flexibility to embrace major new risk processes related to or even arising directly from it, including:

Trojan horse syndrome: Fungistatic compounds widely used by plant trade temporarily mask disease symptoms on exported stock. Promotes effective spread of exotic pathogens (SOD? Includes many exotic Phytophthoras). Typhoid Mary syndrome: Non-host carriers. Organisms threatening to forests are exported on apparently innocuous plant 'carriers'. (cf Rhododendrons and SOD). A classic Darwinian scenario (no evolved resistance in the threatened tree hosts) Hybridisation syndrome: Rapid evolution of new hybrid pathogens and new diseases is promoted by the present trade structure. These hybrids are neither detected, nor properly covered by the current system.

Market forces and policy Weakest link. Within multi-state ecopoltical units such as the EU, the system may operate at the level of weakest state, which promotes risk. This is the very antithesis of how living organisms evolved to restrict the spread of diseases via multiple compartments or 'fire walls' ie it is a non-Darwinian structure. Non-Keynesian. System not 'responsible economics' based. Lacks central environmental Keynesian principle that 'polluter pay'. Therefore- no feedback loop on the economic or the regulatory system. Institutionalisation. A lack of market pressure in favour of progressive and sustainable bioprotection policy can allow markets and regulators to become entrenched and conservative. Become part of the problem, not part of the solution? (Fisheries protection issues come to mind) Nelsonian approach. A consequence of defensiveness from regulators over unspoken weaknesses of a system can be resistance to policy changes and to strategic thinking. And resistance to funding of research that could further expose the weaknesses. Better - inaction or avoidance: "I see no risks..."

Effective intelligence and scientific insight are our first line of defence. Globally and locally correct regulatory protocols, based on these insights, are our second.

Clive Brasier

Emeritus Mycologist, Forest Research Agency, Farnham, Surrey GU10 4LH, UK; [email protected]

American Chestnut: the shrub that used to be a tree

Chestnut Blight

1950

1940 1930

1914

1904

1909

Range of American Chestnut and Spread of Chestnut Blight 1905 - 1950

Range of American Chestnut 3.6 million hectares Rate of spread ca 37 km/yr

100 years before SOD…

White pine blister rust top kill

stem canker with aecia

Alternate host Ribes spp.

1705 Pinus strobus introduced to Europe Blister rust found in Estonia in 1854, Finland 1861, Germany 1865, Denmark 1883. Established throughout Europe by 1900. Geneva, NY in 1906 traced to nurseries in Germany and France Vancouver, BC 1921, from P. strobus seedlings from France, 1910

1705 1854

1865

1883 1906

1910

Siberian stone pine

Spread of White Pine Blister Rust in Western North America 1910-1998

WPBR spread in episodic pulses (wave years)

1925 1925

1953

1953

1966

1966

1998

1998

1910

Port-Orford Cedar killed by Phytophthora lateralis

Spread of Phytophthora lateralis 1923 - 1995

1923

1952

1960 1980

1995

Sirex noctilio and Amylosterum areolatum

Some recent detections:

New York Feb 2005 Indiana, July 2002

Sirex damage to Monterey Pine

Mycangia of Sirex noctilio

Amylostereum basidiocarp

C.M. Brasier 2001Biosicence 51:123-133