Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Scientific Panel on Plant Heath was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on two pest risk analyses made by the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (EPPO) on invasive alien plants (American skunk cabbage and floating pennywort). The Panel was in particular asked a) whether these organisms can be considered as harmful for the endangered area of the European Community and thus potentially eligible for addition to the list of harmful organisms in the plant health Directive 2000/29/EC, and b) whether the identified management options are appropriate through an evaluation of their efficacy, feasibility and impact.This document presents the opinion of the Panel on Plant Health on the pest risk analysis made by EPPO on Hydrocotyle ranunculoides L. f.H. ranunculoides is a stoloniferous, perennial, aquatic plant, known as floating pennywort. It is native to North America, where it is considered endangered in some areas, but has been introduced and subsequently naturalised in water bodies within a number of European countries, including Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and United Kingdom (UK). It is reported as invasive in Belgium, the Netherlands and the UK, forming dense mats of vegetation in still and slow-flowing water courses. An important pathway of entry and spread is the intentional introduction of H. ranunculoides through the trade in aquatic plants.H. ranunculoides is considered an invasive alien plant by EPPO and is included on the EPPO Action List (pests which EPPO recommend member countries to consider for inclusion in their phytosanitary regulations), with the entire EPPO region considered an endangered area.In delivering this opinion the Panel conducted a detailed review of the EPPO pest risk analysis provided, using the internationally accepted standard for pest risk analysis for quarantine pests ISPM No 11.The Panel concluded from the available information that H. ranunculoides is invasive, but considered that the key factors that determine invasive behaviour are not identified in the document. Damage is documented only for a limited area of the EC, in the Netherlands and the UK. Further analysis of the factors contributing to invasive behaviour, particularly the effect of water quality, and high nutrient levels (eutrophy), is required in order to confirm the level of risk posed by H. ranunculoides and identify more clearly the areas of the Community at risk.More detailed examination of pathways, including the scenarios by which the trade in H. ranunculoides can lead to the presence of the plant in natural or semi-natural water bodies is also required before the efficacy, feasibility and impact of risk management options can be evaluated.In order to confirm the risk posed to the Community and enable further consideration of management options, the Panel recommends the provision of further data on:(a) the effect of abiotic factors on the establishment, development, reproduction, survival and dispersal of the plant in both the native and introduced range;(b) the population dynamics of the plant in areas where it is present but not invasive;(c) the volume of trade in H. ranunculoides as an ornamental plant entering and moving within the EC, including further analysis of the means by which it can reach natural water bodies;(d) the nature and occurrence of areas within the EC where conditions are favourable to invasive behaviour of the plant. This could be assisted by the combined use of a geographic information system (GIS), such as the Water Information System for Europe (WISE) and more detailed information of the factors, including eutrophication, which favour the establishment of H. ranunculoides;(e) the environmental damage caused by the plant in areas where it is invasive.

Ce rapport est disponible dans : EFSA Journal | Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Scientific Panel on Plant Heath was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on two pest risk analyses made by the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (EPPO) on invasive alien plants (American skunk cabbage and floating pennywort). The Panel was in particular asked a) whether these organisms can be considered as harmful for the endangered area of the European Community and thus potentially eligible for addition to the list of harmful organisms in the plant health Directive 2000/29/EC, and b) whether the identified management options are appropriate through an evaluation of their efficacy, feasibility and impact.This document presents the opinion of the Panel on Plant Health on the pest risk analysis made by EPPO on Hydrocotyle ranunculoides L. f.H. ranunculoides is a stoloniferous, perennial, aquatic plant, known as floating pennywort. It is native to North America, where it is considered endangered in some areas, but has been introduced and subsequently naturalised in water bodies within a number of European countries, including Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, and United Kingdom (UK). It is reported as invasive in Belgium, the Netherlands and the UK, forming dense mats of vegetation in still and slow-flowing water courses. An important pathway of entry and spread is the intentional introduction of H. ranunculoides through the trade in aquatic plants.H. ranunculoides is considered an invasive alien plant by EPPO and is included on the EPPO Action List (pests which EPPO recommend member countries to consider for inclusion in their phytosanitary regulations), with the entire EPPO region considered an endangered area.In delivering this opinion the Panel conducted a detailed review of the EPPO pest risk analysis provided, using the internationally accepted standard for pest risk analysis for quarantine pests ISPM No 11.The Panel concluded from the available information that H. ranunculoides is invasive, but considered that the key factors that determine invasive behaviour are not identified in the document. Damage is documented only for a limited area of the EC, in the Netherlands and the UK. Further analysis of the factors contributing to invasive behaviour, particularly the effect of water quality, and high nutrient levels (eutrophy), is required in order to confirm the level of risk posed by H. ranunculoides and identify more clearly the areas of the Community at risk.More detailed examination of pathways, including the scenarios by which the trade in H. ranunculoides can lead to the presence of the plant in natural or semi-natural water bodies is also required before the efficacy, feasibility and impact of risk management options can be evaluated.In order to confirm the risk posed to the Community and enable further consideration of management options, the Panel recommends the provision of further data on:(a) the effect of abiotic factors on the establishment, development, reproduction, survival and dispersal of the plant in both the native and introduced range;(b) the population dynamics of the plant in areas where it is present but not invasive;(c) the volume of trade in H. ranunculoides as an ornamental plant entering and moving within the EC, including further analysis of the means by which it can reach natural water bodies;(d) the nature and occurrence of areas within the EC where conditions are favourable to invasive behaviour of the plant. This could be assisted by the combined use of a geographic information system (GIS), such as the Water Information System for Europe (WISE) and more detailed information of the factors, including eutrophication, which favour the establishment of H. ranunculoides;(e) the environmental damage caused by the plant in areas where it is invasive.

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Plant Heath was asked to issue a scientific opinion on the pest risk assessment made by Poland on Ambrosia spp., requested by Poland to be inserted as a harmful organism in point c of section II, part A of Annex I to the Council Directive 2000/29/EC.The Polish risk assessment relates to three species of the genus Ambrosia: A. artemisiifolia L. (common ragweed), A. trifida L. (giant ragweed) and A. psilostachya DC (perennial ragweed). These plants are native to North America and are considered invasive both in their native area and in other parts of the world, including several countries in Europe. Ambrosia spp. are of particular public concern due to the allergenic properties of their pollen.The Panel examined in detail the document provided by Poland. The review evaluated the accuracy and relevance of data, the information provided for pest risk assessment purposes, the quality and quantity of data considered, and the quality of methods applied to conduct the risk assessment. The review was based on the principles and terminology of the International Standard on Phytosanitary Measures ISPM No. 11: Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests including analysis of environmental risks and living modified organisms (2004) by the International Plant Protection Convention (FAO IPPC, 2006).With regard to the criteria of a quarantine pest, the Panel on Plant Health concludes that the Polish document does not provide sufficient evidence to assess on a scientifically sound basis whether Ambrosia spp. qualify as quarantine pests for Poland.The most important shortcomings are:- The pest of phytosanitary concern for Poland has been identified at a genus level. The genus Ambrosia includes too many species to be considered together, even if only three species A. artemisiifolia, A. trifida and A. psilostachya are deemed to pose a threat. Biological and ecological data clearly indicate that each of the three species would require its own or a better structured pest risk assessment clearly discriminating among the species of concern.- The document clearly states that Ambrosia spp. are present in Poland. Detailed information on the current distribution and the abundance in Poland of each of the three Ambrosia species is necessary. Moreover, more species-specific details are needed on their habitats, the locations of occurrence and their status (established or not).- Data on the different introduction pathways need to be revised. The current distribution for each of the three species outside Poland, especially in countries that are important trading partners of Poland, should be added to identify in more detail the risk for further introduction. More accurate data are required on the assessed pathways of the three species; alternative pathways (via bird seed, spreading by soil, machinery and tyres) should also be considered.- It is not possible to conclude from the document whether Ambrosia spp. would be of potential economic importance for Poland, i.e. through direct or indirect effects on cultivated plants in agriculture, uncultivated/unmanaged plants, wild flora, habitats or ecosystems. Impacts on human health are also not given sufficient attention.- The endangered area is not defined.However, there is scientific evidence both in the provided document and the existing literature that Ambrosia spp. can cause detrimental impacts on human health due to their allergenic properties. The control of Ambrosia spp. is difficult in certain crops and in non-cultivated areas.The Panel on Plant Health therefore recommends that the pest risk assessment should be revised and updated. As stated above, it should be undertaken for each of the species of concern. In order to assess the risks related to each Ambrosia spp., additional information and amendments would be needed regarding the following aspects:- current distribution and abundance in Poland (providing references and/or official surveys data), including listing of habitats, the locations and the status (established or not);- current distribution outside Poland, to identify in more detail the risk of further introduction into the country;- more accurate data on the pathways already assessed; consideration of alternative pathways (bird seed, spreading by soil, machinery and tyres);- more accurate assessment of the potential for establishment in Poland (including photoperiod and climatic conditions, and other abiotic factors);- update on the efficacy of control measures;- effects on crop yield, at least for the main crops. This is important as the levels of infestation with Ambrosia spp. and the efficiency of the methods of control are not the same for all crops;- potential economic importance (including impacts on human health and other social impacts);- identification of the endangered area;- discussion of uncertainties on all aspects of the pest risk assessment.

Ce rapport est disponible dans : EFSA Journal | Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Plant Heath was asked to issue a scientific opinion on the pest risk assessment made by Poland on Ambrosia spp., requested by Poland to be inserted as a harmful organism in point c of section II, part A of Annex I to the Council Directive 2000/29/EC.The Polish risk assessment relates to three species of the genus Ambrosia: A. artemisiifolia L. (common ragweed), A. trifida L. (giant ragweed) and A. psilostachya DC (perennial ragweed). These plants are native to North America and are considered invasive both in their native area and in other parts of the world, including several countries in Europe. Ambrosia spp. are of particular public concern due to the allergenic properties of their pollen.The Panel examined in detail the document provided by Poland. The review evaluated the accuracy and relevance of data, the information provided for pest risk assessment purposes, the quality and quantity of data considered, and the quality of methods applied to conduct the risk assessment. The review was based on the principles and terminology of the International Standard on Phytosanitary Measures ISPM No. 11: Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests including analysis of environmental risks and living modified organisms (2004) by the International Plant Protection Convention (FAO IPPC, 2006).With regard to the criteria of a quarantine pest, the Panel on Plant Health concludes that the Polish document does not provide sufficient evidence to assess on a scientifically sound basis whether Ambrosia spp. qualify as quarantine pests for Poland.The most important shortcomings are:- The pest of phytosanitary concern for Poland has been identified at a genus level. The genus Ambrosia includes too many species to be considered together, even if only three species A. artemisiifolia, A. trifida and A. psilostachya are deemed to pose a threat. Biological and ecological data clearly indicate that each of the three species would require its own or a better structured pest risk assessment clearly discriminating among the species of concern.- The document clearly states that Ambrosia spp. are present in Poland. Detailed information on the current distribution and the abundance in Poland of each of the three Ambrosia species is necessary. Moreover, more species-specific details are needed on their habitats, the locations of occurrence and their status (established or not).- Data on the different introduction pathways need to be revised. The current distribution for each of the three species outside Poland, especially in countries that are important trading partners of Poland, should be added to identify in more detail the risk for further introduction. More accurate data are required on the assessed pathways of the three species; alternative pathways (via bird seed, spreading by soil, machinery and tyres) should also be considered.- It is not possible to conclude from the document whether Ambrosia spp. would be of potential economic importance for Poland, i.e. through direct or indirect effects on cultivated plants in agriculture, uncultivated/unmanaged plants, wild flora, habitats or ecosystems. Impacts on human health are also not given sufficient attention.- The endangered area is not defined.However, there is scientific evidence both in the provided document and the existing literature that Ambrosia spp. can cause detrimental impacts on human health due to their allergenic properties. The control of Ambrosia spp. is difficult in certain crops and in non-cultivated areas.The Panel on Plant Health therefore recommends that the pest risk assessment should be revised and updated. As stated above, it should be undertaken for each of the species of concern. In order to assess the risks related to each Ambrosia spp., additional information and amendments would be needed regarding the following aspects:- current distribution and abundance in Poland (providing references and/or official surveys data), including listing of habitats, the locations and the status (established or not);- current distribution outside Poland, to identify in more detail the risk of further introduction into the country;- more accurate data on the pathways already assessed; consideration of alternative pathways (bird seed, spreading by soil, machinery and tyres);- more accurate assessment of the potential for establishment in Poland (including photoperiod and climatic conditions, and other abiotic factors);- update on the efficacy of control measures;- effects on crop yield, at least for the main crops. This is important as the levels of infestation with Ambrosia spp. and the efficiency of the methods of control are not the same for all crops;- potential economic importance (including impacts on human health and other social impacts);- identification of the endangered area;- discussion of uncertainties on all aspects of the pest risk assessment.

v | 2007 | ok

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Plant Heath was asked to issue a scientific opinion on the pest risk assessment made by Lithuania on Ambrosia spp., requested by Lithuania to be inserted as a harmful organism in point c of section II, part A of Annex I to the Council Directive 2000/29/EC.The Lithuanian risk assessment relates to three species of the genus Ambrosia: A. artemisiifolia L. (common ragweed), A. trifida L. (giant ragweed) and A. psilostachya DC (perennial ragweed). These plants are native to North America and are considered invasive both in their native area and in other parts of the world, including several countries in Europe. Ambrosia spp. are of particular public concern due to the allergenic properties of their pollen.The Panel examined in detail the three documents provided by Lithuania. The review evaluated the accuracy and relevance of data, the information provided for pest risk assessment purposes, the quality and quantity of data considered, and the quality of methods applied to conduct the risk assessment. The review was based on the principles and terminology of the International Standard on Phytosanitary Measures ISPM No. 11: Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests including analysis of environmental risks and living modified organisms (2004) by the International Plant Protection Convention (FAO IPPC, 2006).With regard to the criteria of a quarantine pest, the Panel on Plant Health concludes that the Lithuanian documents do not provide sufficient evidence to assess on a scientifically sound basis whether Ambrosia spp. qualify as quarantine pests for Lithuania.The most important shortcomings are:* The pest of phytosanitary concern for Lithuania has been identified at a genus level. The genus Ambrosia includes too many species to be considered together, even if only three species A. artemisiifolia, A. trifida and A. psilostachya are deemed to pose a threat. Biological and ecological data clearly indicate that each of the three species would require its own or a better structured pest risk assessment clearly discriminating among the species of concern.* The documents clearly state that A. artemisiifolia and A. trifida are present in Lithuania. A. psilostachya is not reported. A table showing the number of plants of A. artemisiifolia in several sites and years is provided. Two maps showing sites infested with A. artemisiifolia and A. trifida in Lithuania are provided but without any date. Detailed information on the abundance of A. artemisiifolia and A. trifida over the years is necessary. Moreover, more specific details are needed on their habitats and their status (established or not).* Data on the different introduction pathways need to be revised. The current distribution for each of the three species outside Lithuania, especially in countries that are important trading partners of Lithuania, should be added to identify in more detail the risk for further introduction. More accurate data are required on the assessed pathways of the three species; alternative pathways (via bird seed, spreading by soil, machinery and tyres) should also be considered.* The impacts on crop yields and on human health are discussed in two documents provided by Lithuania, but it is not possible to conclude from these documents that Ambrosia spp. would be of potential economic importance for Lithuania, i.e. through direct or indirect effects on cultivated plants in agriculture, uncultivated/unmanaged plants, wild flora, habitats or ecosystem. Impacts on human health are also not given sufficient attention.* The endangered area is not defined.However, there is scientific evidence both in the provided document and the existing literature that Ambrosia spp. can cause detrimental impacts on human health due to their allergenic properties. The control of Ambrosia spp. is difficult in certain crops and in non cultivated areas.The Panel on Plant Health therefore recommends that the pest risk assessment should be revised and updated. As stated above, it should be undertaken for each of the species of concern. In order to assess the risks related to each Ambrosia spp., additional information and amendments would be needed regarding the following aspects:* current distribution and abundance in Lithuania of the species already present A. artemisiifolia and A. trifida (providing references and/or official surveys data), including listing of habitats and the status (established or not);* current distribution of Ambrosia spp. outside Lithuania, to identify in more detail the risk of further introduction into the country;* more accurate data on the pathways already assessed; consideration of alternative pathways (bird seed, spreading by soil, machinery and tyres);* more accurate assessment of the potential for establishment in Lithuania (including photoperiod and climatic conditions, and other abiotic factors);* update on the efficacy of control measures;* effects on crop yield for the main crops. This is important as the levels of infestation with Ambrosia spp. and the efficiency of the methods of control are not the same for all crops;* more accurate assessment of potential economic importance (including impacts on human health and other social impacts);* identification of the endangered area;* discussion of uncertainties on all aspects of the pest risk assessment.

Ce rapport est disponible dans : EFSA Journal | Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Plant Heath was asked to issue a scientific opinion on the pest risk assessment made by Lithuania on Ambrosia spp., requested by Lithuania to be inserted as a harmful organism in point c of section II, part A of Annex I to the Council Directive 2000/29/EC.The Lithuanian risk assessment relates to three species of the genus Ambrosia: A. artemisiifolia L. (common ragweed), A. trifida L. (giant ragweed) and A. psilostachya DC (perennial ragweed). These plants are native to North America and are considered invasive both in their native area and in other parts of the world, including several countries in Europe. Ambrosia spp. are of particular public concern due to the allergenic properties of their pollen.The Panel examined in detail the three documents provided by Lithuania. The review evaluated the accuracy and relevance of data, the information provided for pest risk assessment purposes, the quality and quantity of data considered, and the quality of methods applied to conduct the risk assessment. The review was based on the principles and terminology of the International Standard on Phytosanitary Measures ISPM No. 11: Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests including analysis of environmental risks and living modified organisms (2004) by the International Plant Protection Convention (FAO IPPC, 2006).With regard to the criteria of a quarantine pest, the Panel on Plant Health concludes that the Lithuanian documents do not provide sufficient evidence to assess on a scientifically sound basis whether Ambrosia spp. qualify as quarantine pests for Lithuania.The most important shortcomings are:* The pest of phytosanitary concern for Lithuania has been identified at a genus level. The genus Ambrosia includes too many species to be considered together, even if only three species A. artemisiifolia, A. trifida and A. psilostachya are deemed to pose a threat. Biological and ecological data clearly indicate that each of the three species would require its own or a better structured pest risk assessment clearly discriminating among the species of concern.* The documents clearly state that A. artemisiifolia and A. trifida are present in Lithuania. A. psilostachya is not reported. A table showing the number of plants of A. artemisiifolia in several sites and years is provided. Two maps showing sites infested with A. artemisiifolia and A. trifida in Lithuania are provided but without any date. Detailed information on the abundance of A. artemisiifolia and A. trifida over the years is necessary. Moreover, more specific details are needed on their habitats and their status (established or not).* Data on the different introduction pathways need to be revised. The current distribution for each of the three species outside Lithuania, especially in countries that are important trading partners of Lithuania, should be added to identify in more detail the risk for further introduction. More accurate data are required on the assessed pathways of the three species; alternative pathways (via bird seed, spreading by soil, machinery and tyres) should also be considered.* The impacts on crop yields and on human health are discussed in two documents provided by Lithuania, but it is not possible to conclude from these documents that Ambrosia spp. would be of potential economic importance for Lithuania, i.e. through direct or indirect effects on cultivated plants in agriculture, uncultivated/unmanaged plants, wild flora, habitats or ecosystem. Impacts on human health are also not given sufficient attention.* The endangered area is not defined.However, there is scientific evidence both in the provided document and the existing literature that Ambrosia spp. can cause detrimental impacts on human health due to their allergenic properties. The control of Ambrosia spp. is difficult in certain crops and in non cultivated areas.The Panel on Plant Health therefore recommends that the pest risk assessment should be revised and updated. As stated above, it should be undertaken for each of the species of concern. In order to assess the risks related to each Ambrosia spp., additional information and amendments would be needed regarding the following aspects:* current distribution and abundance in Lithuania of the species already present A. artemisiifolia and A. trifida (providing references and/or official surveys data), including listing of habitats and the status (established or not);* current distribution of Ambrosia spp. outside Lithuania, to identify in more detail the risk of further introduction into the country;* more accurate data on the pathways already assessed; consideration of alternative pathways (bird seed, spreading by soil, machinery and tyres);* more accurate assessment of the potential for establishment in Lithuania (including photoperiod and climatic conditions, and other abiotic factors);* update on the efficacy of control measures;* effects on crop yield for the main crops. This is important as the levels of infestation with Ambrosia spp. and the efficiency of the methods of control are not the same for all crops;* more accurate assessment of potential economic importance (including impacts on human health and other social impacts);* identification of the endangered area;* discussion of uncertainties on all aspects of the pest risk assessment.

The importance of efficaciously assessing the risk for introduction and establishment of pest species is an increasingly important ecological and economic issue. Evaluation of climate is fundamental to determining the potential success of an introduced or invasive insect pest. However, evaluating climatic suitability poses substantial difficulties; climate can be measured and assessed in a bewildering array of ways. Some physiological filter, in essence a lens that focuses climate through the requirements and constraints of a potential pest introduction, is required. Difficulties in assessing climate suitability are further exacerbated by the effects of climate change. Gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar L.) is an exotic, tree‐defoliating insect that is frequently introduced into the western United States. In spite of an abundance of potential host species, these introductions have yet to result in established populations. The success of eradication efforts and the unsuccessful establishment of many detected and undetected introductions may be related to an inhospitable climate. Climatic suitability for gypsy moth in the western United States, however, is potentially improving, perhaps rapidly, due to a general warming trend that began in the mid 1970s and continues today. In this work, we describe the application of a physiologically based climate suitability model for evaluating risk of gypsy moth establishment on a landscape level. Development of this risk assessment system first required amassing databases that integrated the gypsy moth climatic assessment model, with host species distributions, and climate (historical, present, and future). This integrated system was then used to evaluate climate change scenarios for native host species in Utah, with the result that risk of establishment will dramatically increase during the remainder of the 21st century under reasonable climate change scenarios. We then applied the risk assessment system to several case histories of detected gypsy moth introductions in Utah. These applications demonstrated the general utility of the system for predicting risk of establishment and for designing improved risk detection strategies.

Ce rapport est disponible dans : EFSA Journal | The European Commission requested EFSA to provide a scientific opinion on the Pest Risk Analysis (PRA) made by Spain on Bactrocera zonata, a fruit fly listed in the quarantine list of the Community plant health legislation (Council Directive 2000/29/EC) and in particular to consider the threats posed by Bactrocera zonata to the whole Community, to identify the fruit species at risk and to determine whether the management measures proposed are appropriate.Bactrocera zonata (Saunders), the peach fruit fly, attacks ripe fruit of many species, especially mango, peach and guava, rendering them inedible. It is common in many tropical and sub-tropical countries of Asia, especially the Indian sub-continent, and has recently invaded Egypt. It is absent from the European Community and listed in Annex I Part A Section I of the Council Directive 2000/29/EC under the synonym Dacus zonatus as a harmful organism whose introduction into, and spread within, all member states shall be banned. In 2005, Spain detected Bactrocera larvae, assumed to be B. zonata, in two consignments of citrus from Egypt and conducted a pest risk assessment and an analysis of risk management options following the 1997 version of the EPPO pest risk analysis (PRA) scheme. The Spanish PRA concluded that B. zonata poses a serious threat to fruit production in the Mediterranean countries of Europe and that appropriate management measures should include phytosanitary treatments before export, targeted entry inspections and the prohibition of fruit carried by passengers.The EFSA Scientific Panel on Plant Health conducted a detailed review of the Spanish PRA and concluded that the PRA does provide sufficient evidence to support the listing of B. zonata in Annex I Part A Section I of the Council Directive 2000/29/EC. The additional work required to determine the threat to the whole community, identify the fruit species at greatest risk and select the most appropriate management options is outlined.The Panel found that, although the Spanish pest risk assessment could be improved, it did provide sufficient evidence to justify an analysis of risk management options. It confirmed that B. zonata is capable of entering, establishing, spreading and causing significant impacts on fruit production in southern member states. However, the pest risk assessment could be improved, principally by (a) clearly defining the PRA area, (b) updating, extending and analysing data on the different pathways B. zonata could enter the Community, (c) conducting a detailed assessment of the climatic suitability of the EC for B. zonata, (d) defining which member states and areas are most endangered, (e) identifying the fruit species that are most at risk, (f) further exploring the potential impacts on export markets and (g) summarising the key uncertainties.The Spanish analysis of risk management options could also be enhanced since it (i) follows an old EPPO standard that contains a number of ambiguities and inconsistencies, (ii) does not analyse a key pathway (fresh fruit carried by passengers) in detail, (iii) rejects or fails to recognise several management options that, while insufficient on their own, could, when combined with others, form part of a systems approach, (iv) overlooks measures, such as surveillance trapping, the male annihilation technique and insecticides, that can be very effective in the importing country and (v) does not determine the extent to which the measures identified interfere with trade, are cost-effective and have no undesirable social or environmental consequences.