Skip to main content

Evaluation of new scientific information on Phyllosticta citricarpa in relation to the EFSA PLH Panel (2014) Scientific Opinion on the plant health risk to the EU


Panel members at the time of adoption

Claude Bragard, David Caffier, Thierry Candresse, Elisavet Chatzivassiliou, Katharina Dehnen-Schmutz, Gianni Gilioli, Jean-Claude Gregoire, Josep Anton Jaques Miret, Michael Jeger, Alan MacLeod, Maria Navajas Navarro, Bjoern Niere, Stephen Parnell, Roel Potting, Trond Rafoss, Vittorio Rossi, Gregor Urek, Ariena Van Bruggen, Wopke Van Der Werf, Jonathan West and Stephan Winter


Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH) was asked to assess two publications, authored by Magarey et al. and Martınez-Minaya et al. from 2015, with regard to a need to update the EFSA Scientific Opinion from 2014 on the risk of Phyllosticta citricarpa (Guignardia citricarpa) for the EU territory. The EFSA PLH Panel was also requested to assess any other relevant scientific information published after the finalisation of the EFSA Scientific Opinion. The fungus P. citricarpa (McAlpine) Van der Aa causes the citrus disease citrus black spot (CBS), and is regulated as quarantine organism in Council Directive 2000/29/EC. The Panel assessed the two publications in detail as well as all relevant publications published until 31 March 2016. A comparison with the EFSA PLH Panel (2014) was made, survey data on CBS from South Africa used in Magarey et al. (2015) were evaluated, and the citrus production areas in the EU were characterised and compared with results from Magarey et al. (2015). Uncertainty and model sensitivity were discussed. It was concluded that the evidence presented in Magarey et al. from 2015 does not require an updating of EFSA PLH Panel (2014). The conclusion in the Opinion that probability of CBS establishment in the EU is moderately likely is not affected by the paper by Magarey et al. (2015) predicting establishment in some of the EU locations they selected. The high level of uncertainty regarding the probability of establishment is also unchanged by Magarey et al. (2015). The Panel concluded that Martınez-Minaya et al. (2015) does not provide new evidence requiring an update to EFSA PLH Panel (2014), principally because it had already been concluded that global climate zones are based on factors and thresholds that are broad and not necessarily representative of those that are critical for the pathogen and its host.