Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii potted plants from Turkey

Abstract

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High‐risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by potted plants (2–3 years old) of Berberis thunbergii produced in nurseries and imported into the EU from Turkey, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the NPPO of Turkey. The relevance of any pest for this Opinion was based on evidence following defined criteria. Two species, the EU‐quarantine pest Bemisia tabaci and the non‐regulated pest Malacosoma parallela, fulfilled the relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Turkey 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 estimated degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with B. tabaci being the pest most frequently expected on the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9,928 and 10,000 plants per 10,000 would be free of B. tabaci. The role of Berberis thunbergii as possible host of Puccinia spp. is discussed in the body of the opinion.

Full text

SCIENTIFIC OPINION
ADOPTED: 19 May 2022
doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7392
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii potted
plants from Turkey
EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH),
Claude Bragard, Paula Baptista, Elisavet Chatzivassiliou, Francesco Di Serio, Paolo Gonthier,
Josep Anton Jaques Miret, Annemarie Fejer Justesen, Alan MacLeod,
Christer Sven Magnusson, Panagiotis Milonas, Juan A Navas-Cortes, Stephen Parnell,
Philippe Lucien Reignault, Emilio Stefani, Hans-Hermann Thulke, Wopke Van der Werf,
Antonio Vicent Civera, Jonathan Yuen, Lucia Zappal
a, Jane Debode, Charles Manceau,
Ciro Gardi, Olaf Mosbach Schulz, Antigoni Akrivou, Spyridon Antonatos, Despoina Beris,
Christos Kritikos, Maria Kormpi, Dimitrios Papachristos, Chrysavgi Reppa and Roel Potting
Abstract
The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk
assessments for commodities listed in the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as
‘High-risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks
posed by potted plants (2–3 years old) of Berberis thunbergii produced in nurseries and imported into
the EU from Turkey, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical
information provided by the NPPO of Turkey. The relevance of any pest for this Opinion was based on
evidence following defined criteria. Two species, the EU-quarantine pest Bemisia tabaci and the non-
regulated pest Malacosoma parallela, fulfilled the relevant criteria and were selected for further
evaluation. For these pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Turkey
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 estimated degree of pest
freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with B. tabaci being the pest most frequently expected on
the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between
9,928 and 10,000 plants per 10,000 would be free of B. tabaci. The role of Berberis thunbergii as
possible host of Puccinia spp. is discussed in the body of the opinion.
Keywords: barberry, European Union, commodity risk assessment, plant health, plant pest
Requestor: European Commission
Question number: EFSA-Q-2020-00086, EFSA-Q-2020-00087, EFSA-Q-2020-00088, EFSA-Q-2020-
00089, EFSA-Q-2020-00090
Correspondence: plants@efsa.europa.eu
EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal
© 2022 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley-VCH GmbH on behalf of
European Food Safety Authority.

Panel members: Claude Bragard, Paula Baptista, Elisavet Chatzivassiliou, Francesco Di Serio, Paolo
Gonthier, Josep Anton Jaques Miret, Annemarie Fejer Justesen, Alan MacLeod, Christer Sven
Magnusson, Panagiotis Milonas, Juan A Navas-Cortes, Stephen Parnell, Roel Potting, Philippe L
Reignault, Emilio Stefani, Hans-Hermann Thulke, Wopke Van der Werf, Antonio Vicent Civera, Jonathan
Yuen and Lucia Zappal
a.
Declarations of interest: The declarations of interest of all scientific experts active in EFSA’s work
are available at https://ess.efsa.europa.eu/doi/doiweb/doisearch.
Acknowledgments: EFSA wishes to acknowledge the important contribution of the trainee Patricia
Nascimento.
Suggested citation: EFSA PLH Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Health), Bragard C, Baptista P,
Chatzivassiliou E, Di Serio F, Gonthier P, Jaques Miret JA, Justesen AF, MacLeod A, Magnusson CS,
Milonas P, Navas-Cortes JA, Parnell S, Reignault PL, Stefani E, Thulke H-H, Van der Werf W, Civera AV,
Yuen J, Zappal
a L, Debode J, Manceau C, Gardi C, Schulz OM, Akrivou A, Antonatos S, Beris D, Kritikos
C, Kormpi M, Papachristos D, Reppa C and Potting R, 2022. Scientific Opinion on the commodity risk
assessment of Berberis thunbergii potted plants from Turkey. EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392, 43 pp.
https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7392
ISSN: 1831-4732
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs License,
which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and no
modifications or adaptations are made.
Reproduction of the images listed below is prohibited and permission must be sought directly from the
copyright holder:
Figure 2: Provided by the NPPO of Turkey.
The EFSA Journal is a publication of the European Food Safety
Authority, a European agency funded by the European Union.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 2 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392
© 2022 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley-VCH GmbH on behalf of
European Food Safety Authority.

Table of Contents
Abstract...................................................................................................................................................... 1
1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1. Background and terms of reference as provided by European Commission ........................................... 4
1.1.1. Background ..................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1.2. Terms of reference ........................................................................................................................... 4
1.2. Interpretation of the terms of reference ............................................................................................. 4
2. Data and methodologies ................................................................................................................... 6
2.1. Data provided by the NPPO of Turkey................................................................................................ 6
2.2. Literature searches performed by EFSA.............................................................................................. 7
2.3. Methodology .................................................................................................................................... 8
2.3.1. Commodity data............................................................................................................................... 8
2.3.2. Identification of pests potentially associated with the commodity ......................................................... 8
2.3.3. Listing and evaluation of risk mitigation measures............................................................................... 9
2.3.4. Expert knowledge elicitation.............................................................................................................. 9
3. Commodity data............................................................................................................................... 10
3.1. Description of the commodity............................................................................................................ 10
3.2. Description of the production areas ................................................................................................... 10
3.3. Production and handling processes .................................................................................................... 10
3.3.1. Growing conditions........................................................................................................................... 10
3.3.2. Source of planting material ............................................................................................................... 10
3.3.3. Production cycle ............................................................................................................................... 11
3.3.4. Pest monitoring during production ..................................................................................................... 11
3.3.5. Post-harvest processes and export procedure ..................................................................................... 11
4. Identification of pests potentially associated with the commodity ......................................................... 11
4.1. Selection of relevant EU-quarantine pests associated with the commodity ............................................ 11
4.2. Selection of other relevant pests (non-regulated in the EU) associated with the commodity ................... 12
4.3. Overview of interceptions.................................................................................................................. 13
4.4. List of potential pests not further assessed......................................................................................... 13
4.5. Summary of pests selected for further evaluation ............................................................................... 13
5. Risk mitigation measures .................................................................................................................. 13
5.1. Possibility of pest presence in the export nurseries ............................................................................. 14
5.2. Risk mitigation measures applied in Turkey ........................................................................................ 14
5.3. Evaluation of the current measures for the selected relevant pests including uncertainties ..................... 15
5.3.1. Overview of the evaluation of Bemisia tabaci...................................................................................... 15
5.3.2. Overview of the evaluation of Malacosoma parallela............................................................................ 16
5.3.3. Outcome of Expert Knowledge Elicitation ........................................................................................... 16
6. Conclusions...................................................................................................................................... 19
References.................................................................................................................................................. 19
Glossary ..................................................................................................................................................... 20
Abbreviations .............................................................................................................................................. 21
Appendix A –Data sheets of pests selected for further evaluation via expert knowledge elicitation.................... 22
Appendix B –Web of Science All Databases Search String.............................................................................. 38
Appendix C –List of pests that can potentially cause an effect not further assessed ......................................... 42
Appendix D –Excel file with the pest list of Berberis spp................................................................................ 43
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 3 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

1. Introduction
1.1. Background and terms of reference as provided by European
Commission
1.1.1. Background
The Plant Health Regulation (EU) 2016/2031
1
, on the protective measures against pests of plants,
has been applied from December 2019. Provisions within the above Regulation are in place for the
listing of ‘high risk plants, plant products and other objects’(Article 42) on the basis of a preliminary
assessment, and to be followed by a commodity risk assessment. A list of ‘high risk plants, plant
products and other objects’has been published in Regulation (EU) 2018/2019
2
. Scientific opinions are
therefore needed to support the European Commission and the Member States in the work connected
to Article 42 of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031, as stipulated in the terms of reference.
1.1.2. Terms of reference
In view of the above and in accordance with Article 29 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002
3
, the
Commission asks EFSA to provide scientific opinions in the field of plant health.
In particular, EFSA is expected to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in the
relevant Implementing Act as “High risk plants, plant products and other objects”. Article 42,
paragraphs 4 and 5, establishes that a risk assessment is needed as a follow-up to evaluate whether
the commodities will remain prohibited, removed from the list and additional measures will be applied
or removed from the list without any additional measures. This task is expected to be on-going, with a
regular flow of dossiers being sent by the applicant required for the risk assessment.
Therefore, to facilitate the correct handling of the dossiers and the acquisition of the required data
for the commodity risk assessment, a format for the submission of the required data for each dossier
is needed.
Furthermore, a standard methodology for the performance of “commodity risk assessment”based
on the work already done by Member States and other international organisations needs to be set.
In view of the above and in accordance with Article 29 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002, the
Commission asks EFSA to provide scientific opinion in the field of plant health for Berberis thunbergii
exported from Turkey in the EU taking into account the available scientific information, including the
technical dossier provided by Turkey.
1.2. Interpretation of the terms of reference
The EFSA Panel on Plant Health (hereafter referred to as ‘the Panel’) was requested to conduct a
commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii from Turkey following the Guidance on commodity
risk assessment for the evaluation of high-risk plant dossiers (EFSA PLH Panel, 2019a).
The EU quarantine pests that are regulated as a group in the Commission Implementing Regulation
(EU) 2019/2072 were considered and evaluated separately at species level.
Annex II of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 lists certain pests as non-European
populations or isolates or species. These pests are regulated quarantine pests. Consequently, the
respective European populations, or isolates, or species are non-regulated pests.
Annex VII of the same Regulation, in certain cases (e.g. point 32), makes reference to the
following countries that are excluded from the obligation to comply with specific import requirements
for those non-European populations, or isolates, or species: Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canary Islands, Faeroe Islands, Georgia, Iceland, Liechtenstein,
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
1
Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 of the European Parliament of the Council of 26 October 2016 on protective measures against
pests of plants, amending Regulations (EU) 228/2013, (EU) 652/2014 and (EU) 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of
the Council and repealing Council Directives 69/464/EEC, 74/647/EEC, 93/85/EEC, 98/57/EC, 2000/29/EC, 2006/91/EC and
2007/33/EC. OJ L 317, 23.11.2016, pp. 4–104.
2
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 of 18 December 2018 establishing a provisional list of high risk plants,
plant products or other objects, within the meaning of Article 42 of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 and a list of plants for which
phytosanitary certificates are not required for introduction into the Union, within the meaning of Article 73 of that Regulation
C/2018/8877. OJ L 323, 19.12.2018, pp. 10–15.
3
Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general
principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in
matters of food safety. OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, pp. 1–24.
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 4 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Norway, Russia (only the following parts: Central
Federal District (Tsentralny federalny okrug), Northwestern Federal District (SeveroZapadny federalny
okrug), Southern Federal District (Yuzhny federalny okrug), North Caucasian Federal District (Severo-
Kavkazsky federalny okrug) and Volga Federal District (Privolzhsky federalny okrug), San Marino,
Serbia, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine and United Kingdom (except Northern Ireland
4
). Those countries
are historically linked to the reference to ‘non-European countries’existing in the previous legal
framework, Directive 2000/29/EC.
Consequently, for those countries,
i) any pests identified, which are listed as non-European species in Annex II of Implementing
Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 should be investigated as any other non-regulated pest.
ii) any pest found in a European country that belongs to the same denomination as the pests
listed as non-European populations or isolates in Annex II of Implementing Regulation (EU)
2019/2072, should be considered as European populations or isolates and should not be
considered in the assessment of those countries.
Pests listed as ‘Regulated Non-Quarantine Pest (RNQP)’in Annex IV of the Commission
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072, and deregulated pests (i.e. pests which were listed as
quarantine pests in the Council Directive 2000/29/EC and were deregulated by Commission
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072) were not considered for further evaluation.
In its evaluation, the Panel:
•Checked whether the information provided by the applicant (Republic of Turkey, Ministry of
Agriculture and Forestry, National Plant Protection Organization –NPPO of Turkey) in the
technical dossier (hereafter referred to as ‘the Dossier’) was sufficient to conduct a commodity
risk assessment. When necessary, additional information was requested to the applicant.
•Selected the relevant union EU-regulated quarantine pests and protected zone quarantine
pests (as specified in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072
5
, hereafter
referred to as ‘EU quarantine pests’) and other relevant pests present in Turkey and associated
with the commodity.
•Assessed whether the applicant country implements specific measures for Union quarantine
pests for which specific measures are in place for the import of the commodity from the
specific country in the relevant legislative texts for emergency measures (https://ec.europa.eu/
food/plant/plant_health_biosecurity/legislation/emergency_measures_en); the assessment was
restricted to whether the applicant country applies those measures. The effectiveness of those
measures was not assessed.
•Assessed whether or not the applicant country implements the special requirements specified
in Annex VII (points 1–101) of the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072
targeting Union quarantine pests for the commodity in question from the specific country.
•Assessed the effectiveness of the measures described in the dossier for those Union quarantine
pests for which no specific measures are in place for the import of the commodity from the
specific applicant country and other relevant pests present in the applicant country and
associated with the commodity.
Risk management decisions are not within EFSA’s remit. Therefore, the Panel provided a rating
based on expert judgement regarding the likelihood of pest freedom for each relevant pest given the
risk mitigation measures implemented by the NPPO of Turkey.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
4
In accordance with the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the
European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 5(4) of the Protocol on Ireland/
Northern Ireland in conjunction with Annex 2 to that Protocol, for the purposes of this Annex, references to Member States
include the United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland.
5
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 of 28 November 2019 establishing uniform conditions for the
implementation of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 of the European Parliament and the Council, as regards protective measures
against pests of plants, and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 690/2008 and amending Commission Implementing
Regulation (EU) 2018/2019, OJ L 319, 10.12.2019, p. 1–279.
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 5 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

2. Data and methodologies
2.1. Data provided by the NPPO of Turkey
The Panel considered all the data and information (hereafter called ‘the Dossier’) provided by the
NPPO of Turkey and received by EFSA on 9 January 2020 and 15 June 2020, including the additional
information provided by the NPPO of Turkey on 17 December 2021, after EFSA’s request. The Dossier
is managed by EFSA.
The structure and overview of the Dossier is shown in Table 1. The number of the relevant section
is indicated in the opinion when referring to a specific part of the Dossier.
The data and supporting information provided by the NPPO of Turkey formed the basis of the
commodity risk assessment.
Table 2shows the main data sources used by the NPPO of Turkey to compile the Dossier (details
on literature searches can be found in the Dossier Section 2.1).
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Table 1: Structure and overview of the Dossier
Dossier
section Overview of contents Filename
1.0 Technical dossier on Berberis BARBERRY_Technical_Report-TR-27.11.2019.pdf
2.0 Technical dossier on Berberis (second
submission)
Barberry_Tecnical_Report-TR-05.05.2020_V2
Commented.pdf
3.0 Additional information provided by NPPO of
Turkey
Question_and_answer_on_Berberis_spp.pdf
Table 2: Database sources used in the literature searches by the NPPO of Turkey
Acronym/
short title
Database name and
service provider URL of database Justification for
choosing database
PPTI Name: Plant Protection
Technical Instructions
Provider: NPPO of Turkey
https://www.tarimorman.gov.tr/TAGEM/
Belgeler/Bitki%20Zararl%C4%B1lar%
C4%B1%20Ziraiai%20M%C3%BCcadele
%20Teknik%20Talimatlar%C4%B1.pdf
https://www.tarimorman.gov.tr/TAGEM/
Belgeler/Bitki%20Hastal%C4%B1klar%
C4%B1%20ve%20Yabanc%C4%B1%
20Ot%20Zirai%20M%C3%BCcadele%
20Teknik%20Talimatlar%C4%B1.pdf
These instructions are
prepared regarding pests
in Turkey, which cause
damages on their hosts
economically. They cover
total of 644 pests
including bacteria,
phytoplasmas, fungi,
insects, viruses and
viroids.
CABI ISC CABI Invasive Species
Compendium
Provider: CAB International
https://www.cabi.org/ISC EFSA recommendation
EPPO GD EPPO Global Database
Provider: European and
Mediterranean Plant
Protection Organization
https://gd.eppo.int/ EFSA recommendation
Plant
Protection
Bulletin
Plant Protection Bulletin
published by the Plant
Protection Central
Research Institute
https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/bitkorb The journal is published
four times a year with
original research articles
in English or Turkish
languages on plant
protection and health.
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 6 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

2.2. Literature searches performed by EFSA
Literature searches were undertaken by EFSA to complete a list of pests potentially associated with
Berberis spp. Two searches were combined: (i) a general search to identify pests of Berberis spp., in
different databases; and (ii) a tailored search to identify whether these pests are present or not in
Turkey. The searches were launched on 23 August 2021. No language, date or document type
restrictions were applied in the search strategy.
The Panel used the databases indicated in Table 3to compile the list of pests associated with
Berberis spp. As for Web of Science, the literature search was performed using a specific, ad hoc
established search string (see Appendix B). The search strategy used for Web of Science Databases
was designed combining common names for pests and diseases, terms describing symptoms of plant
diseases and the scientific and English common names of the commodity. The following species,
indicated in the dossier, were included in the search: Berberis thunbergii, Berberis spp.
All pests already retrieved using the other databases were removed from the search terms in order
to be able to reduce the number of records to be screened. The string was run in ‘All Databases’with
no range limits for time or language filters.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Table 3: Databases used by EFSA for the compilation of the pest list associated with the species of
genus Berberis spp. relevant for this Dossier
Database Platform/Link
Aphids on World Plants https://www.aphidsonworldsplants.info/C_HOSTS_AAIntro.htm
CABI Crop Protection Compendium https://www.cabi.org/cpc/
Database of Insects and their Food Plants https://www.brc.ac.uk/dbif/hosts.aspx
Database of the World’s Lepidopteran
Hostplants
https://www.nhm.ac.uk/our-science/data/hostplants/search/index.
dsml
EPPO Global Database https://gd.eppo.int/
EUROPHYT https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/europhyt/
Leaf-miners https://www.leafmines.co.uk/html/plants.htm
Nemaplex https://nemaplex.ucdavis.edu/Nemabase2010/PlantNematodeHost
StatusDDQuery.aspx
Plant Viruses Online https://bio-mirror.im.ac.cn/mirrors/pvo/vide/famindex.htm
International Committee on Taxonomy of
Viruses
(ICTV) - Master Species List
https://talk.ictvonline.org/files/master-species-lists/m/msl/12314
Scalenet https://scalenet.info/associates/
Spider Mites Web https://www1.montpellier.inra.fr/CBGP/spmweb/advanced.php
USDA ARS Fungi Database https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/fungushost/fungushost.
cfm
Index Fungorum https://www.indexfungorum.org/Names/Names.asp
Mycobank https://www.mycobank.com
Web of Science: All Databases (Web of
Science Core Collection, CABI: CAB
Abstracts, BIOSIS Citation Index, Chinese
https://www.webofknowledge.com
Acronym/
short title
Database name and
service provider URL of database Justification for
choosing database
Fauna
Europaea
Name: Fauna Europaea
Provider: Museum f€
ur
Naturkunde Leibniz-Institut
f€
ur Evolutions- und
Biodiversit€
atsforschung
https://fauna-eu.org/ Fauna Europaea is
Europe’s main zoological
taxonomic index. The
database lists scientific
names and distributions
of all living, currently
known, multicellular,
European land and fresh
water animal species
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 7 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Additional searches, limited to retrieve documents, were run when developing the opinion. The
available scientific information including previous EFSA opinions on the relevant pests and diseases
(see pest data sheets in Appendix A) and the relevant literature and legislation (e.g. Regulation
(EU) 2016/2031; Commission Implementing Regulations (EU) 2018/2019; (EU) 2018/2018 and (EU)
2019/2072) were taken into account.
2.3. Methodology
When developing the opinion, the Panel followed the EFSA Guidance on commodity risk assessment
for the evaluation of high-risk plant dossiers (EFSA PLH Panel, 2019a).
In the first step, pests potentially associated with the commodity in the country of origin (EU-
quarantine pests and other pests) that may require risk mitigation measures are identified. The EU
non-quarantine pests not known to occur in the EU were selected based on evidence of their potential
impact in the EU. After the first step, all the relevant pests that may need risk mitigation measures
were identified.
In the second step, the implemented risk mitigation measures for each relevant pest were
evaluated in terms of efficacy or compliance with EU requirements as explained in Section 1.2.
A conclusion on the likelihood of the commodity being free from each of the relevant pests was
determined and uncertainties were identified using expert judgements.
Pest freedom was assessed by estimating the number of infested/infected potted plants out of
10,000 exported potted plants.
2.3.1. Commodity data
Based on the information provided by the NPPO of Turkey, the characteristics of the commodity
were summarised.
2.3.2. Identification of pests potentially associated with the commodity
To evaluate the pest risk associated with the importation of Berberis thunbergii imported from
Turkey, a pest list was compiled. The pest list is a compilation of all identified plant pests associated
with Berberis spp. based on information provided in the Dossier Section 4 and on searches performed
by the Panel.
The scientific names of the host plants (i.e. Berberis spp., Berberis thunbergii, etc.) were used
when searching in the EPPO Global database (EPPO online) and CABI Crop Protection Compendium.
EUROPHYT was consulted by searching for the interceptions associated with commodities imported
from Turkey, at species and genus level, from 1994 to May 2020 and TRACES for interceptions from May
2020 to present (April 2022). For the pests selected for further evaluation, a search in the EUROPHYT
and/or TRACES was performed for the interceptions from the whole world, at species and genus level.
The titles and abstracts of the scientific papers retrieved were screened and the pests associated
with Berberis spp. were included in the pest list. The pest list was eventually further compiled with
other relevant information (e.g. EPPO code per pest, taxonomic information, categorisation,
distribution) useful for the selection of the pests relevant for the purposes of this opinion.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Database Platform/Link
Science Citation Database, Current Contents
Connect, Data Citation Index
FSTA, KCI-Korean Journal Database, Russian
Science Citation Index, MEDLINE
SciELO Citation Index, Zoological Record)
World Agroforestry https://www.worldagroforestry.org/treedb2/speciesprofile.php?
Spid=1749
Catalogue of the Cecidomyiidae (Diptera) of
the world
https://www.ars.usda.gov/ARSUserFiles/80420580/Gagne_2014_
World_Cecidomyiidae_Catalog_3rd_Edition.pdf
Catalogue of the Eriophyoidea (Acarina:
Prostigmata) of the world
https://www.cabi.org/isc/abstract/19951100613
Global Biodiversity Information Facility
(GBIF)
https://www.gbif.org/
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 8 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

The compiled pest list (see Microsoft Excel® file in Appendix D) includes all identified pests that
use Berberis spp. as a host.
The evaluation of the compiled pest list was done in two steps: first, the relevance of the
EU-quarantine pests was evaluated (Section 4.1); second, the relevance of any other plant pest was
evaluated (Section 4.2).
2.3.3. Listing and evaluation of risk mitigation measures
The proposed risk mitigation measures were listed and evaluated. When evaluating the likelihood of
pest freedom at origin, the following types of potential infection/infestation sources for Berberis
thunbergii in nurseries and relevant risk mitigation measures were considered (see also Figure 1):
•pest entry from surrounding areas,
•pest entry with new plants/seeds,
•pest spread within the nursery.
The effect of risk mitigation measures adopted in the plant nurseries (as communicated by the
NPPO of Turkey) was evaluated with Expert Knowledge Elicitation (EKE) according to the Guidance on
uncertainty analysis in scientific assessment (EFSA Scientific Committee, 2018).
Information on the biology, estimates of likelihood of entry of the pest to the nursery and spread
within the nursery and the effect of the measures on a specific pest is summarised in pest data sheets
compiled for each pest selected for further evaluation (see Appendix A).
2.3.4. Expert knowledge elicitation
To estimate the pest freedom of the commodities, an Expert Knowledge Elicitation (EKE) was
performed following EFSA guidance (Annex B.8 of EFSA Scientific Committee, 2018). The specific
question for EKE was defined as follows: ‘Taking into account (i) the risk mitigation measures listed in
the Dossier, and (ii) other relevant information, how many of 10,000 Berberis thunbergii potted plants
will be infested with the relevant pest/pathogen when arriving in the EU?’
The risk assessment uses individual potted plants as the most suitable unit. The following reasoning
is given:
i) There is no quantitative information available regarding clustering of plants during production.
ii) For the pests under consideration, a cross-contamination during transport is not likely.
iii) Potted plants will be finally distributed to final consumers by wholesaler and retailers.
The uncertainties associated with the EKE were taken into account and quantified in the probability
distribution applying the semi-formal method described in Section 3.5.2 of the EFSA-PLH Guidance on
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Figure 1: Conceptual framework to assess likelihood that plants are exported free from relevant
pests. Source EFSA PLH Panel (2019b)
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 9 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

quantitative pest risk assessment (EFSA PLH Panel, 2018). Finally, the results were reported in terms
of the likelihood of pest freedom. The lower 5% percentile of the uncertainty distribution reflects the
opinion that pest freedom is with 95% certainty above this limit.
3. Commodity data
3.1. Description of the commodity
According to the information provided in the dossier and the additional information received, the
species planned to be exported is Berberis thunbergii (family: Berberidaceae). The following varieties
are planned to be exported: B. thunbergii var. atropurpureum, B. thunbergii var. green, B. thunbergii
var. red rocket, B. thunbergii var. maria and B. thunbergii var. atropurpurea nana.
B. thunbergii is a deciduous species therefore, based on the period of export (see Table 4) these
are expected to be dormant plants without leaves for most of this period. However, if exported in
March, April or October, the plants may have leaves. The age of the plants at the time of export is
between 2 and 3 years. The size of the commodity is between 20 and 40 cm tall. All B. thunbergii
plants are exported as potted plants.
According to ISPM 36 (FAO, 2016), the commodity can be classified as ‘rooted plants in pots’.
3.2. Description of the production areas
B. thunbergii plants for export are grown and cultivated outdoors in containers (pots).
The main production areas of B. thunbergii plants for export are located in 14 provinces in Turkey
(Figure 2). Forest nurseries located throughout Turkey may be providers of starting material (plantlets)
for the ornamental production nurseries.
3.3. Production and handling processes
3.3.1. Growing conditions
B. thunbergii plants for export are produced in open field nurseries.
3.3.2. Source of planting material
Genetic material from registered forest nurseries (Technical dossier on Berberis -second
submission-, Section 3) is the source of propagation material used by the production nurseries for the
production of plants intended for export. There is no other available information on the reproductive
material.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Figure 2: Main production areas (indicated in green) in Turkey of Berberis plants for export (provided
by the NPPO of Turkey)
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 10 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

3.3.3. Production cycle
Exported plants are 2–3 years old.
Production starts with winter or summer cuttings taken from mother plants. The age of the mother
plants, the size of the cuttings and the growing conditions were not specified in the dossier. All stages
of the plants are grown in pots with turf on a jute black base without ground connection. However,
based on the pictures included in the dossier, it seems that the pots are, at some stages, in contact
with soil.
Limited information was provided on any chemical, physical or biological phytosanitary measures
adopted during the cultivation period (Additional information provided by NPPO of Turkey, Section 19).
3.3.4. Pest monitoring during production
Forest nurseries affiliated with the General Directorate of Forestry (not directly exporting/importing
nurseries) are stated to be inspected by forestry inspectors as a routine work (at least once a month).
According to the dossier forest nurseries are inspected once a year for phytosanitary requirements by
the Provincial Directorate of Agriculture.
Production nurseries are inspected at least once a year, regardless whether they are exporting or
not. According to the dossier, for the identification of viruses, bacteria, fungi and nematodes in the
plants to be exported, 1 kg sample is taken from growing media in pots as composite sample. Also,
samples from leaves, stems, etc., are to be taken separately by the inspector and send to the
laboratory for analysis. In the production nurseries of ornamentals, all plants are to be inspected
visually, and samples are taken from symptomatic plants if necessary. There is no information on the
frequency of these inspections and on pests identified during the inspections and laboratory testing.
Traded ornamental plants are required to be free from any kind of disease symptoms or pests. No
information is provided on actions taken in case a harmful organism is identified in the nursery.
3.3.5. Post-harvest processes and export procedure
The planned production for export in the EU in 2020 was estimated to be 7,950 plants. The months
on which the plants are to be exported to the EU are indicated in Table 4(Dossier, Section 5.4).
Exportation may be done in mixed loads of Berberis spp. with other (not specified) species and it is
mainly done from production sites in the provinces Adana, Antalya,
_
Izmir and Sakarya.
Plants are loaded on refrigerated trucks for export. The relative humidity content of the loaded
trailer is between 85% and 95% and temperature is between 2°C and 4°C. However, from the pictures
provided, it is not clear if the trucks shown can ensure these conditions.
The size of the consignment varies according to the age of the plants, the size of the pots and the
loading capacity of the trucks. The pots are stacked one by one in a row in the refrigerated trucks. If
the plants are located in the production sites of different companies, the exporter company collects the
plants to be shipped to its own production area.
4. Identification of pests potentially associated with the commodity
The search for potential pests associated with Berberis spp. rendered 614 species (see Microsoft
Excel® file in Appendix C).
4.1. Selection of relevant EU-quarantine pests associated with the
commodity
The EU listing of union quarantine pests and protected zone quarantine pests (Commission
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072) is based on assessments concluding that the pests can
enter, establish, spread and have potential impact in the EU.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Table 4: Scheduling of Berberis thunbergii plants planned to be exported to the EU (indicated in
grey)
January February March April May June July August September October November December
Berberis
L.
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 11 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

The relevance of an EU-quarantine pest for this opinion was based on evidence that:
a) the pest is present in Turkey;
b) Berberis spp. is a host of the pest;
c) one or more life stages of the pest can be associated with the specified commodity.
Pests that fulfilled all criteria were selected for further evaluation.
Table 5presents an overview of the evaluation of the four EU-quarantine pest species that are
reported to use Berberis spp. as a host with regard to their relevance for this Opinion.
Of these four EU-quarantine pest species evaluated, one is present in Turkey and was selected for
further evaluation as it fulfils the criteria to be selected for further evaluation (Bemisia tabaci).
4.2. Selection of other relevant pests (non-regulated in the EU)
associated with the commodity
The information provided by NPPO of Turkey, integrated with the search EFSA performed, was
evaluated in order to assess whether there are other potentially relevant pests of Berberis spp. present
in the country of export. For these potential pests that are non-regulated in the EU, pest risk
assessment information on the probability of entry, establishment, spread and impact is usually
lacking. Therefore, these pests were also evaluated to determine their relevance for this opinion based
on evidence that:
a) the pest is present in Turkey;
b) the pest is (i) absent or (ii) has a limited distribution in the EU;
c) Berberis spp. is a host of the pest;
d) one or more life stages of the pest can be associated with the specified commodity;
e) the pest may have an impact in the EU.
Based on the information collected, 605 potential pests not regulated in the EU, known to be
associated with Berberis were evaluated for their relevance to this opinion. Species were excluded
from further evaluation when at least one of the conditions listed above (a-e) was not met. Details can
be found in Appendix D(Microsoft Excel® file). Of the evaluated pest species not regulated in the EU,
one insect species (Malacosoma parallela) was selected for further evaluation, because it met all the
selection criteria. More information on this pest species can be found in the pest datasheets
(Appendix A).
Several Puccinia species, including Puccinia graminis, are present in the EU, and therefore, the
Panel concluded not to select them for further evaluation. However, because of the importance of
these cereal rust pathogens for the EU, the panel wants to report the following notes:
•Berberis is an alternate host for several rust species, including P. graminis and P. striiformis.
•P. graminis is present in Turkey and reported on Berberis species.
•Berberis thunbergii is not reported as a host for P. graminis.
•Interspecific hybrids of B. thunbergii can be a host of Puccinia graminis (e.g. Bartaula
et al., 2019).
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Table 5: Overview of the evaluation of the four EU-quarantine pest species reported in Berberis
spp.
No.
Pest name
according to EU
legislation
(a)
EPPO
code Group
Pest
present in
Turkey
Berberis spp.
confirmed as
a host
(reference)
Pest can be
associated
with the
commodity
Pest
relevant
for the
opinion
1Phymatotrichopsis
omnivora
PHMPOM Fungi No Yes Yes No
2Phytophthora
ramorum
PHYTRA Oomycete No Yes Yes No
3Bemisia tabaci BEMITA Insects Yes Yes Yes Yes
4Toxoptera citricida TOXOCI Insects No Yes Yes No
(a): Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072.
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 12 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

•P. striiformis is present in Turkey but not on Berberis species.
•It is important to avoid planting of Berberis species in proximity to cereal fields.
•New stem rust races could be introduced with the trade of Berberis plants.
•Genetic diversity and new virulence combinations can develop on introduced Berberis plants.
•Arrival of new stem rust races by wind to Europe can also happen and cannot be prevented.
•P. graminis is present in EU and has no quarantine status in EU, but has a quarantine status in
Canada and USA.
•Import of and domestic movement of Berberis species (including B. thunbergii) is regulated in
Canada (D-01-04: Plant Protection Import and Domestic Movement Requirements for Barberry
(Berberis, Mahoberberis and spp.) under the Canadian Barberry Certification Program).
4.3. Overview of interceptions
Data on the interception of harmful organisms on plants of Berberis spp. can provide information
on some of the organisms that can be present on Berberis spp. despite the current measures taken. In
the EUROPHYT/TRACES database (assessed on April 2022) of interceptions in the EU, there is no
record of interceptions on Berberis from Turkey (EUROPHYT and TRACES, online).
Bemisia tabaci is the most intercepted pest species on plants for planting in the EU. There were 72
interceptions of B. tabaci on different commodities imported into the EU from Turkey, mainly on fruits
of Capsicum annum. Considering imports of Berberis plants from Turkey to the EU, between 1994 and
2022, there are no records of interceptions of B. tabaci (EUROPHYT and TRACES, online, [Accessed:
26 April 2022]).
4.4. List of potential pests not further assessed
From the pests not selected for further evaluation, the Panel highlighted two species that can
potentially have an impact (see Appendix C) but for which the currently available evidence does not
provide reasons for further evaluation in this opinion. The detailed reason is provided for each species
in Appendix C.
4.5. Summary of pests selected for further evaluation
The two pests identified to be present in Turkey and can be associated with potted plants of
Berberis spp. destined for export are listed in Table 6. The effectiveness of the risk mitigation
measures applied to the commodity was evaluated for these selected pests.
5. Risk mitigation measures
For each selected pest (Table 6), the Panel assessed the possibility that it could be present in a
Berberis spp. nursery and assessed the probability that pest freedom of a consignment is achieved by
the implemented risk mitigation measures acting on the pest under evaluation.
The information used in the evaluation of the effectiveness of the risk mitigation measures is
summarised in a pest datasheet (see Appendix A).
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Table 6: List of relevant pests selected for further evaluation
Current
scientific
name
EPPO
code
Name used in
the EU
legislation
Taxonomic
information Group Regulatory status
1Bemisia
tabaci
BEMITA Bemisia tabaci
(European
populations)
Aleyrodidae Insect EU protected zone quarantine
pest according to Commission
Implementing Regulation (EU)
2019/2072
2Malacosoma
parallela
MALAPA Malacosoma
parallela
Lasiocampidae Insect No quarantine status in the EU
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 13 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

5.1. Possibility of pest presence in the export nurseries
For each pest (Table 6), the Panel evaluated the likelihood that the pest could be present in a
Berberis spp. nursery by evaluating the possibility that Berberis spp. in the export nursery are infested
either by:
•introduction of the pest from the environment surrounding the nursery;
•introduction of the pest with new plants/seeds;
•spread of the pest within the nursery.
5.2. Risk mitigation measures applied in Turkey
•With the information provided by the NPPO of Turkey (Dossier sections 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3), the
Panel summarised the risk mitigation measures (see Table 7) that are implemented in the
production nurseries.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Table 7: Overview of implemented risk mitigation measures for Berberis spp. plants designated for
export to the EU from Turkey
Number Risk mitigation
measure Implementation in Turkey
1 Registration of the
nursery and
Phytosanitary
management
Turkey is a member of the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) and
is obliged to implement the International Standards on Phytosanitary Measures
(ISPM) published by the IPPC. All nurseries producing ornamental plants are
required to be a member of the ornamental plant grower union in Turkey and
inspected at least once a year. A plant passport or export certificate is issued.
2 Phytosanitary
certificates and
plant passport
Phytosanitary Certificates/Re-Export Phytosanitary Certificates are issued in
exportation of plants and plant products with respect to plant health. Plant
health inspectors are responsible from exportation and importation controls,
sampling and issuing certificates. Nurseries are officially inspected at least once
a year and for issuing the export certificate.
3 Growing media Is composed entirely of peat or fibre of Cocos nucifera L. and has not been
previously used for growing plants or for any other agricultural purposes. It is
also stored and maintained under appropriate conditions to keep it free from
quarantine pests. Appropriate measures are taken to ensure that the growing
medium is kept free from Union quarantine pests, including at least: physical
isolation of the growing medium from soil and other possible sources of
contamination, hygiene measures and using water free from Union quarantine
pests.
4 Pesticide application There is a database for registered pesticides in Turkey. There are no products
registered for Berberis. For all crops in Turkey, pesticides are applied according
to the technical instructions for plant protection and according to the principles
of integrated pest management.
5 Surveillance and
monitoring
Both processes are conducted according to Turkish phytosanitary regulations.
There are no targeted surveys for the actionable pests.
6 Sampling and
laboratory testing
For the identification of viruses, bacteria, fungi and nematodes in the seedlings
to be exported, 1 kg sample is taken from growing media in pots as composite
sample. Samples from leaves, stems, are taken separately by the inspector and
sent to the laboratory for analysis.
7 Refrigeration Transportation is made with refrigerated trucks. The dispatch is made as pots
and the pots are stacked one by one in a row in the truck. The moisture
content is between 85% and 95%. Trailers temperature must be between 2°C
and 4°C.
8 tPreconsignment
inspection
Prior to export, planting material for which a Phytosanitary Certificate is to be
issued shall be subjected to phytosanitary inspection. Only certified plants for
planting may be exported. Phytosanitary inspectors are responsible for export
controls, sampling and issuing certificates.
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 14 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

5.3. Evaluation of the current measures for the selected relevant pests
including uncertainties
For each pest, the relevant risk mitigation measures acting on the pest were identified. Any limiting
factors on the efficacy of the measures were documented. All the relevant information including the
related uncertainties deriving from the limiting factors used in the evaluation are summarised in a pest
datasheet provided in Appendix A.
Based on this information, for each relevant pest, an expert judgement has been given for the
likelihood of pest freedom of commodities taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting
on the pest and their combination.
An overview of the evaluation of each relevant pest is given in the sections below (Sections 5.3.1–
5.3.2). The outcome of EKE on pest freedom after the evaluation of the proposed risk mitigation
measures is summarised in Section 5.3.3.
5.3.1. Overview of the evaluation of Bemisia tabaci
Rating of the
likelihood of pest
freedom
Pest free with some exceptional cases (based on the Median)
Percentile of the
distribution
5% 25% Median 75% 95%
Proportion of
pest-free plants
9,928
out of 10,000
plants
9,950
out of 10,000
plants
9,969
out of 10,000
plants
9,885
out of 10,000
plants
9,997
out of 10,000
plants
Proportion of
infested plants
3
out of 10,000
plants
15
out of 10,000
plants
31
out of 10,000
plants
50
out of 10,000
plants
72
out of 10,000
plants
Summary of the
information used
for the evaluation
The whiteflyB. tabaci is a polyphagous pest with a wide host range of more than 1,000
different plant species. B. tabaci is widespread in Turkey and Berberis spp. has been
reported as a host of B. tabaci in Turkey. Due to its polyphagous nature the pest can be
present in the surrounding environment of the nurseries producing Berberis thunbergii.
Plants are mostly grown in the open field and the whitefly could enter the nursery by
flight. All life stages of B. tabaci (eggs, larvae, and adults) can be present on the leaves of
the plants.
There is no export of plants in the spring and summer period (indicated in dossier from
April to September). B. thunbergii is a deciduous plant. In general, dormant deciduous
plants without leaves are not considered a pathway for B. tabaci. However, it is uncertain
if the export period of dormant plants indicated in the dossier excludes the presence of
leaves of the exported B. thunbergii plants. B. thunbergii plants traded in March, April or
October could have leaves and B. tabaci could be present.
Measures taken against the pest and their efficacy
The relevant applied measures are: (i) regular inspections in the nurseries (at least 1
inspection per year) (ii) export inspections. No information was provided on targeted
treatments against Bemisia tabaci in nurseries producing Berberis plants for export.
Interception records
B. tabaci has been intercepted on plants from Turkey. There are no records of
interceptions of B. tabaci on Berberis plants from Turkey.
Shortcomings of current measures/procedures
There is no clear indication of a targeted inspections and treatments for B. tabaci in
ornamental nurseries producing Berberis.
Main uncertainties
There is high uncertainty on the exact trading season and the implementation of the risk
mitigation measures targeting Bemisia in the nurseries.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 15 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

5.3.2. Overview of the evaluation of Malacosoma parallela
Rating of the
likelihood of pest
freedom
Pest free with some exceptional cases (based on the Median)
Percentile of the
distribution
5% 25% Median 75% 95%
Proportion of
pest-free bundles
9,956
out of 10,000
plants
9,971
out of 10,000
plants
9,982
out of 10,000
plants
9,991
out of 10,000
plants
9,998
out of 10,000
plants
Proportion of
infested bundles
2
out of 10,000
plants
9
out of 10,000
plants
18
out of 10,000
plants
29
out of 10,000
plants
44
out of 10,000
plants
Summary of the
information used
for the evaluation
Possibility that the pest could become associate with the commodity
The lepidopteran pest M. parallela is extremely polyphagous and causes most damage in
its native range to Quercus spp., Prunus spp. and Malus spp. Significant damage also
occurs on various other woody species, including Berberis and many native species of
Central Asia. Malacosoma parallela is present in Turkey, with no further details on its
distribution.
M. parallela can spread by flights of adult moths. All stages of the life cycle can be
transported on host plants moving in trade, particularly plants for planting and cut
branches. Eggs, larvae and pupae (cocoons) may be associated with wood carrying bark
and may be present as contaminants on other commodities.
Measures taken against the pest and their efficacy
The relevant applied measures are: (i) regular inspections in the nurseries (at least one
inspection per year) (ii) export inspections. No information was provided on targeted
treatments against M. parallela in nurseries producing Berberis plants for export.
Interception records
There are no records of interceptions of Berberis plants for planting from Turkey.
Shortcomings of current measures/procedures
Egg masses might be overlooked by non-trained personnel.
Some of the pesticides listed in the dossier might be effective against the moth. However,
no details are given on which pesticides are applied from those listed in the Dossier,
Section 2.0, on the pesticide application schedule and on the application methods.
Main uncertainties
–The pest is reported in Turkey with no details on its distribution.
–Egg masses might be overlooked by non-trained personnel.
–The insecticide applications are not targeted to M. parallela and may not be
effective.
5.3.3. Outcome of Expert Knowledge Elicitation
Table 8and Figure 3show the outcome of the EKE regarding pest freedom after the evaluation of
the implemented risk mitigation measures for all the evaluated pests. Figure 4provides an explanation
of the descending distribution function describing the likelihood of pest freedom after the evaluation of
the implemented risk mitigation measures for Berberis thunbergii plants designated for export to the
EU for Bemisia tabaci.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 16 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Table 8: Assessment of the likelihood of pest freedom following evaluation of current risk mitigation measures against Bemisia tabaci and Malacosoma
parallela on Berberis spp. potted plants designated for export to the EU. In panel A, the median value for the assessed level of pest freedom for
each pest is indicated by ‘M’, the 5% percentile is indicated by L and the 95% percentile is indicated by U. The percentiles together span the
90% uncertainty range regarding pest freedom. The pest freedom categories are defined in panel B of the table
Number Group* Pest species Sometimes
pest free
More often
than not
pest free
Frequently
pest free
Very
frequently
pest free
Extremely
frequently
pest free
Pest free with
some
exceptional
cases
Pest free with
few
exceptional
cases
Almost
always
pest free
1 Insect Bemisia tabaci LM U
2 Insect Malacosoma
parallela
LM U
PANEL A
Pest freedom category Pest-free plants out of 10,000 Legend of pest freedom categories
Sometimes pest free ≤5,000 LPest freedom category includes the elicited
lower bound of the 90% uncertainty range
More often than not pest free 5,000 to ≤9,000 MPest freedom category includes the elicited
median
Frequently pest free 9,000 to ≤9,500 UPest freedom category includes the elicited
upper bound of the 90% uncertainty range
Very frequently pest free 9,500 to ≤9,900
Extremely frequently pest free 9,900 to ≤9,950
Pest free with some exceptional cases 9,950 to ≤9,990
Pest free with few exceptional cases 9,990 to ≤9,995
Almost always pest free 9,995 to ≤10,000
PANEL B
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 17 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Figure 3: Elicited certainty (y-axis) of the number of pest-free Berberis spp. potted plants (x-axis;
log-scaled) out of 10,000 plants designated for export to the EU from Turkey for all
evaluated pests visualised as descending distribution function. Horizontal lines indicate the
percentiles (starting from the bottom 5%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 95%). The Panel is 95%
confident that 9,928 and 9,956 or more plants per 10,000 will be free from Bemisia tabaci
and Malacosoma parallela, respectively
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 18 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

6. Conclusions
There are two pests identified to be present in Turkey and considered to be potentially associated with
potted plants of 2–3 years old of Berberis thunbergii imported from Turkey and relevant for the EU.
The likelihood of the pest freedom after the evaluation of the implemented risk mitigation measures
for potted plants of 2–3 years old of B. thunbergii. Designated for export to the EU was estimated.
For Bemisia tabaci, the likelihood of pest freedom following the evaluation of current risk mitigation
measures, it was estimated as ‘Pest free with some exceptional cases’with the 90% uncertainty range
reaching from ‘Extremely frequently pest free’and to ‘Almost always pest free’. The Expert Knowledge
Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9,928 and 10,000 plants per 10,000 will be free
from Bemisia tabaci.
For Malacosoma parallela, the likelihood of pest freedom following evaluation of current risk
mitigation measures was estimated as ‘Pest free with some exceptional cases’with the 90%
uncertainty range reaching from ‘Pest free with some exceptional cases’to ‘Almost always pest free’.
The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9,956 and 10,000 plants
per 10,000 will be free from Malacosoma parallela.
References
Bartaula R, Melo ATO Kingan S, Jin Y and Hale I, 2019. Mapping non-host resistance to the stem rust pathogen in
an interspecific barberry hybrid. BMC Plant Biology, 19, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12870-019-1893-9/
TABLES/5
CABI (Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International), online. CABI Crop Protection Compendium. Available
online: https://www.cabi.org/cpc/
EFSA PLH Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Health), 2018. Guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment. EFSA Journal
2018;16(8):5350, 86 pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5350
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Figure 4: Explanation of the descending distribution function describing the likelihood of pest
freedom after the evaluation of the implemented risk mitigation measures for plants
designated for export to the EU based on based on the example of Bemisia tabaci
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 19 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

EFSA PLH Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Health), 2019a. Guidance on commodity risk assessment for the evaluation
of high risk plants dossiers. EFSA Journal 2019;17(4):5668, 20 pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5668
EFSA PLH Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Health), 2019b. Commodity risk assessment of black pine (Pinus thunbergii
Parl.) bonsai from Japan. EFSA Journal 2019;17(5):5667, 184 pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5667
EFSA Scientific Committee, 2018. Scientific Opinion on the principles and methods behind EFSA’s Guidance on
Uncertainty Analysis in Scientific Assessment. EFSA Journal 2018;16(1):5122, 235 pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/
j.efsa.2018.5122
EPPO (European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization), online. EPPO Global Database. Available
online: https://www.eppo.int/ [Accessed: 30 October 2020].
EUROPHYT, online. European Union Notification System for Plant Health Interceptions - EUROPHYT. Available online:
https://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/plant_health_biosecurity/europhyt/index_en.htm [Accessed: 3 April 2021].
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), 1995. ISPM (International standards for
phytosanitary measures) No 4. Requirements for the establishment of pest free areas. Available online: https://
www.ippc.int/en/publications/614/
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), 2016. ISPM (International standards for
phytosanitary measures) No. 36. Integrated measures for plants for planting. FAO, Rome, 22 pp. Available
online: https://www.ippc.int/en/publications/636/
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), 2017. ISPM (International standards for
phytosanitary measures) No. 5. Glossary of phytosanitary terms. FAO, Rome. Available online: https://www.
ippc.int/en/publications/622/
TRACES-NT, online. TRAde Control and Expert System. Available online: https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/tracesnt
[Accessed: 3 April 2021].
Glossary
Control (of a pest) Suppression, containment or eradication of a pest population (FAO, 1995,
2017).
Entry (of a pest) Movement of a pest into an area where it is not yet present, or present but
not widely distributed and being officially controlled (FAO, 2017).
Establishment (of a
pest)
Perpetuation, for the foreseeable future, of a pest within an area after entry
(FAO, 2017).
Impact (of a pest) The impact of the pest on the crop output and quality and on the
environment in the occupied spatial units.
Introduction (of a pest) The entry of a pest resulting in its establishment (FAO, 2017).
Measures Control (of a pest) is defined in ISPM 5 (FAO, 2017) as ‘Suppression,
containment or eradication of a pest population’(FAO, 1995). Control
measures are measures that have a direct effect on pest abundance.
Supporting measures are organisational measures or procedures supporting
the choice of appropriate risk mitigation measures that do not directly affect
pest abundance.
Pathway Any means that allows the entry or spread of a pest (FAO, 2017).
Phytosanitary measures Any legislation, regulation or official procedure having the purpose to
prevent the introduction or spread of quarantine pests, or to limit the
economic impact of regulated non-quarantine pests (FAO, 2017).
Protected zone A Protected zone is an area recognised at EU level to be free from a harmful
organism, which is established in one or more other parts of the Union.
Quarantine pest A pest of potential economic importance to the area endangered thereby
and not yet present there, or present but not widely distributed and being
officially controlled (FAO, 2017).
Regulated non-
quarantine pest
A non-quarantine pest whose presence in plants for planting affects the
intended use of those plants with an economically unacceptable impact and
which is therefore regulated within the territory of the importing contracting
party (FAO, 2017).
Risk mitigation measure A measure acting on pest introduction and/or pest spread and/or the
magnitude of the biological impact of the pest should the pest be present.
A risk mitigation measure may become a phytosanitary measure, action or
procedure according to the decision of the risk manager.
Spread (of a pest) Expansion of the geographical distribution of a pest within an area (FAO,
2017)
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 20 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Abbreviations
CABI Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International
EKE Expert Knowledge Elicitation
EPPO European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
FUN Fungi
INS Insect
ISPM International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures
NEM Nematode
PLH Plant Health
PRA Pest Risk Assessment
RNQPs Regulated Non-Quarantine Pests
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 21 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Appendix A –Data sheets of pests selected for further evaluation via
expert knowledge elicitation
A.1. Bemisia tabaci
A.1.1. Organism information
Taxonomic
information
Current valid scientific name: Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius, 1889)
Synonyms: Aleurodes inconspicua,Aleurodes tabaci,Bemisia achyranthes,Bemisia
bahiana,Bemisia costa-limai,Bemisia emiliae,Bemisia goldingi,Bemisia gossypiperda,
Bemisia gossypiperda mosaicivectura,Bemisia hibisci,Bemisia inconspicua,Bemisia
longispina,Bemisia lonicerae,Bemisia manihotis,Bemisia minima,Bemisia minuscula,
Bemisia nigeriensis,Bemisia rhodesiaensis,Bemisia signata,Bemisia vayssieri
Name used in the EU legislation: Bemisia tabaci Genn. (non-European populations)
known to be vector of viruses [BEMITA]
Order: Hemiptera
Family: Aleyrodidae
Common name: tobacco whitefly
Name used in the Dossier: Bemisia tabaci
Group Insects
EPPO code BEMITA
Regulated status The pest is listed in Annex II/A of Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 as Bemisia tabaci Genn.
(non-European populations) known to be vector of viruses [BEMITA], and in Annex III
as protected zone quarantine pest (European populations).
Pest status in
Turkey
Widespread (EPPO global database), the formerly defined Biotypes B and Q (now
species considered as MEAM1 and MED) are present in Turkey (EFSA, 2013).
Host status on
Berberis
Berberis species are reported as host plants for B. tabaci (Bayhan et al., 2006; EFSA,
2013; Li et al., 2011). In Turkey, it is also reported as a pest in cotton and vegetable
crops (Bayhan et al., 2006). B. tabaci is highly polyphagous, and therefore, the panel
assumes that B. thunbergii can be a host for B. tabaci.
PRA information EFSA Scientific Opinion on the risks to plant health posed by Bemisia tabaci species
complex and viruses it transmits for the EU territory (EFSA PLH Panel, 2013). B. tabaci
was identified as an actionable pest for the commodity risk assessment of Lonicera
plants from Turkey (EFSA, 2022).
Other relevant information for the assessment
B. tabaci is a complex of at least 28 indistinguishable morphocryptic species. Twenty-six of them, endemic in
countries around the world, are so far not reported in Europe (EFSA PLH Panel, 2013). The terms ‘European
populations’and ‘non-European populations’of B. tabaci used in the Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 do not refer to
specific populations or taxonomic entities but stipulate a geographic origin of B. tabaci, from inside and outside
Europe, respectively. In Regulation (EU) 2019/2072, Turkey is considered as European. In this respect, B. tabaci
populations in Turkey are considered to be European populations. In the EU, non-European populations of B. tabaci
have a quarantine status, while European populations have a quarantine status for specified protected zones.
Biology During oviposition, females insert eggs with the pedicel directly into leaf tissue (Paulson
and Beardsley, 1985). It has four instars. The first instar with legs, called crawler, finds a
permanent spot on a leaf and stays there for the rest of its nymphal development
(Walker et al., 2009).
The pest is a phloem-feeder and can be found mainly on leaves (Cohen et al., 1996).
B. tabaci has a high reproductive potential and each female can lay an average of 80 to
more than 300 eggs during their lifetime. The number of eggs laid depends on
temperature and the host plant, but generally under favourable conditions (e.g. tomato
production in greenhouses) even the introduction of only a few founding insects will lead
to a massive upsurge in insect densities. Under these conditions, four to five insect
generations per year can develop (EFSA, 2013).
B. tabaci adults can have directional and active flights. Whiteflies seldom need to fly
more than a few centimetres to a few metres to find suitable host plants. However, they
may cover distances of a few kilometres. B. tabaci adults can spread over longer
distances by passive transport with wind.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 22 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Symptoms Main type of
symptoms
Wide range of symptoms can occur on plants due to direct
feeding of the pest, contamination of honeydew and sooty
moulds, transmitted viruses and phytotoxic responses.
Plants exhibit one or more of these symptoms: chlorotic
spotting, vein yellowing, intervein yellowing, leaf yellowing,
yellow blotching of leaves, yellow mosaic of leaves, leaf
curling, leaf crumpling, leaf vein thickening, leaf enations,
leaf cupping, stem twisting, plant stunting, wilting, leaf loss
and silvering of leaves (CABI, online; EPPO, 2004).
Presence of
asymptomatic
plants
No asymptomatic period is known to occur in the infested
plants. However, eggs and first-instar larvae are difficult to
detect. Symptoms of the infestation by the insect are
visible.
Confusion with other
pathogens/pests
B. tabaci can be easily confused with other species such as
glasshouse whiteflyTrialeurodes vaporariorum,B. afer,
T. lauri,T. packardi,T. ricini and T. variabilis. A microscopic
slide is needed for morphological identification (EPPO, 2004).
Host plant range B. tabaci is a polyphagous pest with a wide host range, including more than 1,000
different plant species (Abd-Rabou and Simmons, 2010). Some species of Berberis are
hosts of the pest.
Evidence that the
commodity can be a
pathway
All life stages of B. tabaci (eggs, larvae and adults) are present on the leaves of the
plants. Therefore, plants without leaves are not considered a pathway for B. tabaci.
However, if plants are traded with leaves, this could be a pathway for B. tabaci.
It is possible that Berberis plants exported from Turkey to the EU could be exported
with leaves.
Surveillance
information
In dossier Section 1.5.3, it is stated that the site of production has been found free
from B. tabaci on official inspections carried out at appropriate times to detect the
pest.
A.1.2. Possibility of pest presence in the nursery
A.1.2.1. Possibility of entry from the surrounding environment
Bemisia tabaci is a polyphagus species that is widespread in Turkey and reported occurring in many
horticultural crops. Berberis plants are grown in open field nurseries. Flying adults of Bemisia tabaci,
able to fly or be transferred by the wind over kilometres, can enter the nursery from host plants that
might be present in the surrounding environment.
Uncertainties:
It is not known what is the pressure of the B. tabaci population in the surrounding environment of
the nursery.
Taking into consideration the above evidence and uncertainties, the Panel considers that it is
possible for the pest to enter the nursery from the surrounding environment.
A.1.2.2. Possibility of entry with new plants/seeds
Bemisia tabaci could enter the nursery with infested propagation material of host plants species.
Uncertainties:
–The origin of the propagation material in relation to the infested areas;
–The presence and the numbers of other host plants in the export nursery
Taking into consideration the above evidence and uncertainties, the Panel considers it is possible
that the pest could enter the nursery with new plants.
A.1.2.3. Possibility of spread within the nursery
Flying adults can spread from infested host plants within the nursery.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 23 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Uncertainties: There are no uncertainties.
Taking into consideration the above evidence and uncertainties, the Panel considers that the
transfer of the pest within the nursery is possible.
A.1.3. Information from interceptions
Bemisia tabaci is the most intercepted pest species on plants for planting in the EU. There were 72
interceptions of B. tabaci on different commodities imported into the EU from Turkey, mainly on
Capsicum annum. Considering imports of Berberis plants from Turkey to the EU, between 1994 and
2022, there are no records of interceptions of B. tabaci (EUROPHYT and TRACES, online, [Accessed:
4 May 2022]).
A.1.4. Evaluation of the risk mitigation options
In the table below, all risk mitigation measures currently applied in Turkey are listed and described
and an indication of their effectiveness on B. tabaci is provided.
The possibility of the presence of B. tabaci on potted plants and the control effect of the risk
mitigation measures applied was already assessed for Lonicera plants to be exported to the EU (EFSA,
2022). Therefore, the panel assessed the differences of the production areas, production methods and
pest management actions and time of export between of Lonicera and Berberis production in Turkey.
The panel concluded that there were only minor differences between the production systems of
Berberis and Lonicera in Turkey which had no significant effect on the evaluation of the level of pest
freedom of the exported plants. Therefore, the results of the Expert Knowledge Elicitation for B. tabaci
from the Lonicera dossier (deciduous Lonicera) were used for the estimation of pest freedom of
B. tabaci on deciduous B. thunbergii from Turkey.
No. Risk mitigation
measure (name) Description Effective Evaluation/
Uncertainties
1 Certified material Turkey is a member of the International
Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) and is
obliged to implement the International
Standards on Phytosanitary Measures
(ISPM) published by the IPPC.
Yes Plants originate from
certified nurseries.
2 Phytosanitary
certificates and
plant passport
Phytosanitary Certificates/Re-Export
Phytosanitary Certificates are issued in
exportation of plants and plant products
with respect to plant health. Plant health
inspectors are responsible from
exportation and importation controls,
sampling and issuing certificates.
Yes Uncertainties
Information is not sufficient
to judge the quality of
inspections., etc.).
3 Growing media Is composed entirely of peat or fibre of
Cocos nucifera L. and has not been
previously used for growing plants or for
any other agricultural purposes. It is also
stored and maintained under appropriate
conditions to keep it free from quarantine
pests.
No B. tabaci is present on
leaves only.
4 Pesticide application For all crops in Turkey, pesticides are
applied according to the Technical
Instructions for Plant Protection and
according to the principles of integrated
pest management.
A list of pesticide active ingredients and
doses authorised on ornamental plants
was provided.
No details on frequencies of application
have been provided.
Yes Among the insecticides
listed, there are active
ingredients that can be
effective against B. tabaci.
Uncertainties:
The frequency of
application is not known.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 24 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

No. Risk mitigation
measure (name) Description Effective Evaluation/
Uncertainties
5 Surveillance and
monitoring
Both processes are conducted according
to Turkish phytosanitary regulations.
Nurseries are inspected once per year.
Yes Symptoms of B. tabaci
infestations could be
detected.
Uncertainties:
The details of surveillance
and monitoring are not
given (e.g. number of
plants, intensity of surveys
and inspections, etc.).
6 Sampling and
laboratory testing
For the identification of viruses, bacteria,
fungi and nematodes in the seedlings to
be exported, 1 kg sample is taken from
growing media in pots as composite
sample. Also samples from leaves, stems,
etc., are taken separately by the inspector
and send to the laboratory for analysis.
The seedlings in the production area are
examined macroscopically for pests.
No
7 Refrigeration Transportation is made with refrigerated
trucks. The dispatch is made as pots
(piece) and the pots are stacked one by
one in a row in the truck. The moisture
content is between 85% and 95%. Trailers
temperature must be between 2°C and 4°C.
Yes Low temperatures can slow
down its development but
not kill the insect
Uncertainties:
No uncertainties
8 Pre-consignment
inspection
Prior to export, planting material for which
a Phytosanitary Certificate is to be issued
shall be subjected to phytosanitary
inspection. Only certified plants for
planting may be exported. Phytosanitary
inspectors are responsible for export
controls, sampling and issuing certificates.
Yes Symptoms and presence of
B. tabaci infestations could
be detected.
Uncertainties:
Information is not sufficient
to judge the quality of
inspections.
A.1.4.1. Reasoning for a scenario which would lead to a reasonably low number
of infested consignments
•There are targeted inspections and treatments for B. tabaci.
•The pest population pressure in the surrounding environment is very low.
•Suitable hosts are not widely distributed in the production area.
•Plants are traded in the months when population level of Bemisia is very low.
•Weed control in the nurseries prevent overwintering populations of Bemisia.
A.1.4.2. Reasoning for a scenario which would lead to a reasonably high number
of infested consignments
•There are nurseries producing Berberis spp. plants located in the area where B. tabaci is
present in high populations.
•There are suitable hosts in the production area, in close proximity with Berberis plants.
•The pest could go undetected during inspections of the nursery and no specific treatments are
applied.
•The exported Berberis species are mostly not in dormant stage (if traded in March/April or in
October) and they have leaves.
•Population level of Bemisia in March, April and October could be high.
•Lack of effective weed control in the nurseries does not prevent the introduction of Bemisia
from overwintering populations on weeds.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 25 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

A.1.4.3. Reasoning for a central scenario equally likely to over- or underestimate
the number of infested consignments (Median)
•The trade of the Berberis plants takes place in seasons when the activity of B. tabaci is very
low.
•In general, plants are expected to have no leaves at the time of export, but plants traded in
March/April or October could have leaves.
A.1.4.4. Reasoning for the precision of the judgement describing the remaining
uncertainties (1st and 3rd quartile/interquartile range)
•We express high uncertainty on the exact trading season and the implementation of the risk
mitigation measures targeting Bemisia in the nurseries.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 26 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

A.1.5. Elicitation outcomes of the assessment of the pest freedom for Bemisia tabaci on Berberis thunbergii
plants
Based on the numbers of estimated infested grafted plants, the pest freedom was calculated (i.e. = 10,000 –the number of infested plants per 10,000).
The fitted values of the uncertainty distribution of the pest freedom are shown in Table A.2.
Table A.2: The uncertainty distribution of plants free of Bemisia tabaci per 10,000 plants calculated by Table A.1
Percentile 1% 2.5% 5% 10% 17% 25% 33% 50% 67% 75% 83% 90% 95% 97.5% 99%
Values 9,920 9,950 9,970 9,985 9,999
EKE results 9,920 9,924 9,928 9,935 9,943 9,950 9,957 9,969 9,980 9,985 9,990 9,994 9,997 9,998 9,999
The EKE results are the fitted values.
Table A.1: Elicited and fitted values of the uncertainty distribution of pest infestation by Bemisia tabaci per 10,000 plants
Percentile 1% 2.5% 5% 10% 17% 25% 33% 50% 67% 75% 83% 90% 95% 97.5% 99%
Elicited values 1 15 30 50 80
EKE 1.01 1.86 3.26 6.07 9.9 14.7 19.7 30.5 42.7 49.6 57.4 65 72 76 80
The EKE results are BetaGeneral (1.0242, 1.6196, 0.42, 85) fitted with @Risk version 7.6.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 27 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 28 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

A.1.6. Reference list
Abd-Rabou S and Simmons AM, 2010. Survey of reproductive host plants of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera:
Aleyrodidae) in Egypt, including new host records. Entomological News, 121, 456–465. https://doi.org/
10.3157/021.121.0507
CABI (Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International), online. Datasheet Bemisia tabaci (tobacco whitefly).
Available online: https://www.cabi.org/cpc/datasheet/8927 [Accessed: 19 October 2021].
CABI (Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International), online. Datasheet Bemisia tabaci MEAM10 (silverleaf
whitefly). Available online: https://www.cabi.org/cpc/datasheet/8925 [Accessed: 19 October 2021].
Cohen AC, Henneberry TJ and Chu CC, 1996. Geometric relationships between whitefly feeding behaviour and
vascular bundle arrangements. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 78, 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1570-7458.1996.tb00774.x
De Barro PJ, Liu S-s, Boykin LM and Dinsdale AB, 2011. Bemisia tabaci: a statement of species status. Annual
Review of Entomology, 56, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-112,408-085504
EFSA PLH Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Health), 2013. Scientific Opinion on the risks to plant health posed by
Bemisia tabaci species complex and viruses it transmits for the EU territory. EFSA Journal 2013;11(4):3162, 45
pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3162
EPPO (European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization), online_a. EPPO A2 List of pests recommended
for regulation as quarantine pests, version 2019–09. Available online: https://www.eppo.int/ACTIVITIES/plant_
quarantine/A2_list [Accessed: 19 October 2021].
EPPO (European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization), online_b. Bemisia tabaci (BEMITA). Available
online: https://gd.eppo.int/taxon/BEMITA [Accessed: 19 October 2021].
EPPO (European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization), 2004. PM 7/35. Bemisia tabaci. OEPP/EPPO
Bulletin, 34, 155–157.
EUROPHYT, online. European Union Notification System for Plant Health Interceptions - EUROPHYT. Available
online: https://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/plant_health_biosecurity/europhyt/index_en.htm [Accessed: April
2022].
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Figure A.1: (a) Elicited uncertainty of pest infestation per 10,000 deciduous plants for Bemisia tabaci
complex (histogram in blue–vertical blue line indicates the elicited percentile in the
following order: 1%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 99%) and distributional fit (red line); (b)
uncertainty of the proportion of pest-free grafted plants per 10,000 (i.e. = 1 –pest
infestation proportion expressed as percentage); (c) descending uncertainty distribution
function of pest infestation per 10,000 plants
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 29 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Li SJ, Xue X, Ahmed MZ, Ren SX, Du YZ, Wu JH, Cuthbertson AGS and Qiu BL, 2011. Host plants and natural
enemies of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) in China. Insect Science, 18, 101–120. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1744-7917.2010.01395.x
Paulson GS and Beardsley JW, 1985. Whitefly (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) egg pedicel insertion into host plant
stomata. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 78, 506–508. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/78.4.506
TRACES-NT, online. TRAde Control and Expert System. Available online: https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/tracesnt
[Accessed: April 2022].
Yassin MA and Bendixen LE, 1982. Weed hosts of the cotton whitefly(Bemisia tabaci (Genn.)) Homoptera
Aleyrodidae. Research Bulletin 1,144. The Ohio State University –Ohio Agricultural Research and Development
Center. Available online: https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/62967/1/OARDC_research_bulletin_n1144.
pdf
Walker GP, Perring TM and Freeman TP, 2009. Life history, functional anatomy, feeding and mating behaviour. In
Stansly PA and Naranjo SE (eds.), Bemisia: Bionomics and management of a global pest. Springer, Dordrecht,
Netherlands. pp. 109–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2,460-2_4
A.2. Malacosoma parallela
A.2.1. Organism information
Taxonomic
information
Current valid scientific name: Malacosoma parallela Staudinger
Synonyms: Bombyx neustria var. parallela Staudinger, 1887 (Zolotuhin and Zahiri, 2008)
Name used in the EU legislation: –
Order: Lepidoptera
Family: Lasiocampidae
Common name: mountain ring silk moth
Name used in the Dossier: Malacosoma parallela
Group Insects
EPPO code MALAPA
Regulated status The pest is included in the EPPO A2 list (EPPO, online).
Pest status in
Turkey
Malacosoma parallela is present in Turkey, with no further details on its distribution
(EPPO, online; CABI).
Pest status in the
EU
Malacosoma parallela is absent in the EU.
Host status on
Berberis
Berberis species are reported as a host of Malacosoma parallela (EPPO, online).
PRA information EPPO Pest Risk Assessments available (EPPO, online):
•Pest Risk Management report
•Report of a Pest Risk Assessment
•Pest Risk Assessment Scheme
M. parallela was identified as an actionable pest in the EFSA commodity risk assessment
of Malus domestica plants from Turkey (EFSA, 2022)
Other relevant information for the assessment
Biology Larvae of the moth are a notorious defoliating pest of forest trees. In its current area of
distribution, main outbreaks of M. parallela occur in mountain forests at an altitude of
1,000–1,800 m where the pest finds optimal conditions for its development. It can occur
up to 2,400 m. Flight peaks of M. parallela usually occur between June and July,
depending on altitude. The moth completes one generation per year. Adults have a
crepuscular behaviour. Copulation occurs 2–3 h after emergence of the adults. Eggs are
laid in groups; egg masses usually contain from 100 to 400 eggs covered by a thick
layer of special female secretion (spumaline), which is shining whitish grey and silvery
when fresh and then turns dark. Egg masses are laid around thin branches of host
plants. The layer of secretion protects eggs against unfavourable conditions during
overwintering. One female usually makes one egg mass, but sometimes two or three.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 30 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Neonate larvae appear from the end of March at the same time as young leaves of host
plants. Usually all hatch during 1–2 days and begin to make a web nest on branches.
They feed on young leaves around the nest. The nest is usually constructed by the
group of individuals hatched from one egg mass. It can be up to 25 cm long and 17 cm
wide. When caterpillars reach third or fourth instar, the group usually leaves the first
nest and constructs new ones (two or three) in places where there is more food. Larvae
moult inside nests and feed on leaves around the nest. They leave the nests at the fifth
or sixth instar and then continue to live individually. The length of their development
time depends much on the altitude and host plant. Larvae moult five times before
making cocoons on leaves and in other different places at the end of May and in June
(Grechkin, 1956; Degtyareva, 1964; Sarkissyan, 1972; Romanenko, 1981; Maslov,
1988).
Symptoms Main type of
symptoms
Defoliation of host plants is usually very spectacular. The presence
of egg masses, nests and individual caterpillars is easily detected.
Moths are attracted by sources of light
Presence of
asymptomatic
plants
No, if present the pest is easy to detect
Confusion with
other pests
Egg masses encircle thin branches of host plants similar to the egg
masses of the closely related European species Malacosoma
neustria.
Host plant range M. parallela is extremely polyphagous and causes most damage in its native range to
Quercus spp., Prunus spp. and Malus spp. Significant damage also occurs on various
other woody species, including many native species of Central Asia: Berberis integerrima,
Chaenomeles japonica,Cotoneaster insignis,Cotoneaster suavis,Crataegus hissarica,
Crataegus pontica,Crataegus turkestanica,Cydonia oblonga,Prunus armeniaca,Prunus
avium,Prunus cerasus,Prunus divaricata,Prunus mahaleb,Prunus padus,Prunus
persica,Pyrus communis,Rosa canina,Rosa corymbifera,Rosa kokanica,Rosa
maracandica,Salix excelsa,Salix tenuijulis,Sorbus persica,Sorbus turkestanica. Other
native and planted deciduous trees and shrubs are damaged occasionally: Atraphaxis
pyrifolia, Elaeagnus angustifolia, Fraxinus sogdiana, Hippophae rhamnoides, Juglans
regia, Lonicera korolkowii, Lonicera nummulariifolia, Myricaria bracteata, Populus alba,
Populus tremula, Ribes nigrum, Ribes rubrum, Rubus idaeus, Rubus turkestanicu and
Ulmus minor (Pavlovskii and Shtakelberg, 1955; Grechkin, 1956; Degtyareva, 1964;
Sarkissyan, 1972; Romanenko, 1981; Maslov, 1988).
Reported evidence
of impact
M. parallela is an important defoliator of many deciduous trees in different countries in
Eastern Europe, Central Asia (Armenia, Tajikistan). Outbreaks often last for two
consecutive years. It was especially noted as a very dangerous pest of oak in the
mountains of Armenia (Sarkissyan, 1972) and of forests, fruit trees and shrubs of
Rosaceae,Fagaceae and Elaeagnaceae in the mountains of Tajikistan (Grechkin, 1956;
Degtyareva, 1964). It attacks both stressed and healthy trees of different ages.
Outbreaks occur throughout large mountain areas, often resulting in 100% defoliation
and sometimes leading to the death of trees and forests. Damage may be caused by
this species alone, or in association with Yponomeuta padellus,Euproctis kargalica,
Erschoviella musculana,Lymantria dispar or other defoliators. Attacks may result in
serious changes in the environment over large areas, including problems of erosion.
Pathways and
evidence that the
commodity is a
pathway
All stages of the life cycle can be transported on host plants moving in trade, particularly
plants for planting and cut branches. Eggs, larvae and pupae (cocoons) may be
associated with wood carrying bark.
Surveillance
information
No surveillance information is currently available from the Turkish NPPO.
A.2.2. Possibility of pest presence in the nursery
A.2.2.1. Possibility of entry from the surrounding environment
If present in the surroundings, the pest can enter the nursery as Turkey is producing Berberis
plants for planting outdoors. The pest could enter the nursery mainly by active dispersal (flight). Being
highly polyphagous, the pest could be associated with many host plants occurring in the surroundings.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 31 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Uncertainties:
–No data available on the distribution of the pest or population densities in the areas of
production in Turkey.
Taking into consideration the above evidence and uncertainties, the Panel considers that it is
possible for the pest to enter the nursery.
A.2.2.2. Possibility of entry with new plants/seeds
The pest (larvae, pupae and mainly eggs) can be transported on host plants, particularly plants for
planting and cut branches. The presence of the pest can be easily detected by visual inspection;
however, egg masses can be overlooked by non-trained personnel.
Uncertainties:
–Uncertain if certified material is inspected for this pest
Taking into consideration the above evidence and uncertainties, the Panel considers it possible that
the pest could enter the nursery, though unlikely because all stages can be detected by visual inspection.
A.2.2.3. Possibility of spread within the nursery
If the pest enters the nursery from the surroundings, it could spread either by adult flight, larval
movement or infested plant material. Active dispersal of larvae is possible especially if plants are
touching with each other (as in stoolbeds). Given that the pest is polyphagous, the pest could be
associated with other host plants produced in the nursery.
Taking into consideration the above evidence, the Panel considers that the transfer of the pest
within the nursery is possible.
A.2.3. Information from interceptions
There are no records of interceptions of Berberis plants from Turkey due to the presence of
M. parallela between 1994 and April 2022 (EUROPHYT and TRACES-NT, online).
A.2.4. Evaluation of the risk mitigation options
In the table below, all risk mitigation measures currently applied in Turkey are listed and an
indication of their effectiveness on M. parallela is provided. The description of the risk mitigation
measures currently applied in Turkey is provided in Table 6.
No. Risk mitigation
measure (name) Description Effective Evaluation/Uncertainties
1 Certified material Turkey is a member of the International
Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) and
is obliged to implement the
International Standards on
Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM)
published by the IPPC.
Yes Uncertainties:
The details of the
certification process are not
given (e.g. number of plants,
intensity of surveys and
inspections, etc.).
2 Phytosanitary
certificates and plant
passport
Phytosanitary Certificates/Re-Export
Phytosanitary Certificates are issued in
exportation of plants and plant products
with respect to plant health. Plant
health inspectors are responsible from
exportation and importation controls,
sampling and issuing certificates.
Yes Uncertainties:
Information is not sufficient
to judge the quality of
inspections., etc.
3 Growing media Is composed entirely of peat or fibre of
Cocos nucifera L. and has not been
previously used for growing plants or
for any other agricultural purposes. It is
also stored and maintained under
appropriate conditions to keep it free
from quarantine pests.
No M. parallela is present on
leaves only.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 32 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

No. Risk mitigation
measure (name) Description Effective Evaluation/Uncertainties
4 Pesticide application For all crops in Turkey, pesticides are
applied according to the Technical
Instructions for Plant Protection and
according to the principles of integrated
pest management.
A list of pesticide active ingredients and
doses authorised on ornamental plants
was provided.
No details on frequencies of application
have been provided.
Yes Uncertainties:
The frequency of application
is not known.
5 Surveillance and
monitoring
Both processes are conducted
according to Turkish phytosanitary
regulations. Nurseries are inspected
once per year.
Yes Potential M. parallela
infestations could be easily
detected, though egg
masses might be overlooked
by non-trained personnel.
Uncertainties:
Specificfigures on the
intensity of survey (sampling
effort) are not provided.
6 Sampling and
laboratory testing
For the identification of viruses,
bacteria, fungi and nematodes in the
seedlings to be exported, 1 kg sample
is taken from growing media in pots as
composite sample. Also samples from
leaves, stems, etc., are taken separately
by the inspector and send to the
laboratory for analysis. The seedlings in
the production area are examined
macroscopically for pests.
No
7 Refrigeration Transportation is made with refrigerated
trucks. The dispatch is made as pots
(piece) and the pots are stacked one by
one in a row in the truck. The moisture
content is between 85% and 95%.
Trailers temperature must be between
2°C and 4°C.
Yes Low temperatures can slow
down its development but
not kill the insect
8 Pre-consignment
inspection
Prior to export, planting material for
which a Phytosanitary Certificate is to
be issued shall be subjected to
phytosanitary inspection. Only certified
plants for planting may be exported.
Phytosanitary inspectors are responsible
for export controls, sampling and
issuing certificates.
Yes The presence of M. parallela
infestations could be
detected.
Information is not sufficient
to assess the quality of
inspections.
A.2.4.1. Reasoning for a scenario which would lead to a reasonably low number
of infested consignments
•Limited distribution/climatic restrictions.
•All material is produced within the nurseries.
•Insecticides are effective against eggs, larvae and adults.
•Natural enemies are present in the environment.
•Visual inspection is performed by trained personnel.
•Control of mother plants.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 33 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

A.2.4.2. Reasoning for a scenario which would lead to a reasonably high number
of infested consignments
•Berberis is a preferred host.
•Spread to more areas in Turkey/no climatic restrictions.
•Most of the propagation material is produced in other nurseries.
•Natural and human-assisted dispersal play a role in spreading the pest.
•Insecticides are not effective against eggs, larvae and adults.
•Natural enemies are not present or affected by pesticide treatments.
•Inspections are not effective in identifying pest presence.
A.2.4.3. Reasoning for a central scenario equally likely to over- or underestimate
the number of infested consignments (Median)
Due to the limited information available about pest presence and pressure in the nursery area, the
panel considers lower values for being as likely as higher values.
A.2.4.4. Reasoning for the precision of the judgement describing the remaining
uncertainties (1st and 3rd quartile/interquartile range)
Main uncertainties:
•Data on efficacy of inspections are limited.
•Timing of insecticide applications is unclear.
•Pest pressure in the nursery areas is not known.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 34 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

A.2.4.5. Elicitation outcomes of the assessment of the pest freedom for Malacosoma parallela
The following tables show the elicited and fitted values for pest infestation (Table A.3) and pest freedom (Table A.4).
Based on the numbers of estimated infested plants, the pest freedom was calculated (i.e. = 10,000 –number of infested plants per 10,000). The fitted
values of the uncertainty distribution of the pest freedom are shown in Table A.4.
Table A.4: The uncertainty distribution of plants free of Malacosoma parallela per 10,000 plants calculated by Table A.3
Percentile 1% 2.5% 5% 10% 17% 25% 33% 50% 67% 75% 83% 90% 95% 97.5% 99%
Values 9,950 9,970 9,983 9,991 10,000
EKE results 9,950 9,953 9,956 9,961 9,966 9,971 9,975 9,982 9,989 9,991 9,994 9,997 9,998 9,999.1 9,999.6
The EKE results are the fitted values.
Table A.3: Elicited and fitted values of the uncertainty distribution of pest infestation by Malacosoma parallela per 10,000 plants
Percentile 1% 2.5% 5% 10% 17% 25% 33% 50% 67% 75% 83% 90% 95% 97.5% 99%
Elicited values 0 9 17 30 50
EKE 0.379 0.906 1.76 3.43 5.68 8.51 11.5 17.8 25.1 29.4 34.3 39.2 44.0 47.3 50.1
The EKE results are the BetaGeneral (1.0569, 1.8654, 0, 54.5) distribution fitted with @Risk version 7.6.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 35 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 36 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

A.2.5. Reference list
CABI (Centre for Agriculture and Bioscience International), online. Datasheet Malacosoma parallela (mountain ring
silk moth). Available online: https://www.cabi.org/isc/datasheet/32330 [Accessed: 27 April 2022].
EFSA PLH Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Health), Bragard C, Baptista P, Chatzivassiliou E, Gonthier P, Jaques Miret JA
and Yuen J, 2022. Commodity risk assessment of Malus domestica plants from Turkey. EFSA Journal 2022;20
(5):7301, 35 pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7301
EPPO (European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization), 2005. Data sheets on quarantine pests,
Malacosoma parallela. OEPP/EPPO, Bulletin OEPP/EPPO Bulletin, 35, 431–433.
EPPO (European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization), online_b. Malacosoma parallela (MALAPA).
Available online: https://gd.eppo.int/taxon/MALAPA [Accessed: 27 April 2022].
EUROPHYT, online. European Union Notification System for Plant Health Interceptions - EUROPHYT. Available
online: https://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/plant_health_biosecurity/europhyt/index_en.htm [Accessed: April
2022].
Degtyareva VI, 1964. The Main Lepidopteran Pests of Trees and Shrubs of the Central Part of Gissar Mountain
Ridge and Gissar valley. Izdatel’stvo Akademii Nauk Tadzhikskoi SSR, Dushanbe (TJ) (in Russian).
Grechkin VP, 1956. Important species of pests of mountain forests of Tajikistan. Zoologicheskii Zhurnal, 35, 1,476–
1,492 (in Russian).
Maslov AD, 1988. Guide to Forest Protection against Pests and Diseases. Agropromizdat, Moscow (RU) (in
Russian).
Pavlovskii EN and Shtakelberg AA, 1955. Guide to Forest Pests. Izdatel’stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR, Moscow–
Leningrad (RU) (in Russian).
Romanenko KE, 1981. Pests of Field Shelter Belts in Kirgizia. Ilim, Frunze (KG) (in Russian).
Sarkissyan RA, 1972. Population Dynamics of Euproctis chrysorrhoea and Malacosoma parallela in the Zangezur
Mountains of the Armenian SSR.
TRACES-NT, online. TRAde Control and Expert System. Available online: https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/tracesnt
[Accessed: April 2022].
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Figure A.2: (a) Elicited uncertainty of pest infestation per 10,000 bundles (histogram in blue–vertical
blue line indicates the elicited percentile in the following order: 1%, 25%, 50%, 75%,
99%) and distributional fit (red line); (b) uncertainty of the proportion of pest-free
bundles per 10,000 (i.e. = 1 –pest infestation proportion expressed as percentage); (c)
descending uncertainty distribution function of pest infestation per 10,000 plants
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 37 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Appendix B –Web of Science All Databases Search String
In the table below, the search string used in Web of Science is reported. In total, 242 papers were
retrieved. Titles and abstracts were screened, and 26 pests were added to the list of pests (see
Appendix D).
Web of Science All
databases
TOPIC:
(“Berberis”OR “barberry”)
AND
TOPIC:
(“pathogen*”OR pathogenic bacteria OR fung* OR oomycet* OR myce* OR bacteri*
OR virus* OR viroid* OR insect$ OR mite$ OR phytoplasm* OR arthropod* OR
nematod* OR disease$ OR infecti* OR damag* OR symptom* OR pest$ OR vector OR
hostplant$ OR “host plant$”OR host OR “root lesion$”OR decline$ OR infestation$ OR
damage$ OR symptom$ OR dieback* OR “die back*”OR malaise OR aphid$ OR
curculio OR thrip$ OR cicad$ OR miner$ OR borer$ OR weevil$ OR “plant bug$”OR
spittlebug$ OR moth$ OR mealybug$ OR cutworm$ OR pillbug$ OR “root feeder$”OR
caterpillar$ OR “foliar feeder$”OR virosis OR viruses OR blight$ OR wilt$ OR wilted OR
canker OR scab$ OR rot OR rots OR “rotten”OR “damping off”OR “damping-off”OR
blister$ OR smut OR “mould”OR “mould”OR “damping syndrome$”OR mildew OR
scald$ OR “root knot”OR “root-knot”OR rootkit OR cyst$ OR “dagger”OR “plant
parasitic”OR “parasitic plant”OR “plant$parasitic”OR “root feeding”OR “root$feeding”
OR “Acari”OR “host$”OR “gall”OR “gall$”OR “whitefly”OR “whitefl*”OR
“aleyrodidae”OR “Thysanoptera”OR “Moths”OR “scale”OR “scale$”OR “Thripidae”
OR “leafhoppers”OR “leafhopper$”OR “plant pathogens”OR “Fungal”OR “Aphididae”)
NOT
TOPIC:
(“heavy metal$”OR “pollut*”OR “weather”OR “propert*”OR probes OR “spectr*”OR
“antioxidant$”OR “transformation”OR “Secondary plant metabolite$”OR metabolite$
OR Postharvest OR Pollin* OR Ethylene OR Thinning OR fertil* OR Mulching OR
Nutrient$ OR “human virus”OR “animal disease$”OR “plant extracts”OR
“immunological”OR “purified fraction”OR “traditional medicine”OR “medicine”OR
mammal$ OR bird$ OR “human disease$”OR “cancer”OR “therapeutic”OR “psoriasis”
OR “blood”OR “medicinal ethnobotany”OR “Nitrogen-fixing”OR “patients”OR
“Probiotic drugs”OR “Antioxidant”OR “Anti-Inflammatory”OR “plasma levels”OR
“ethnomedicinal”OR “traditional uses of medicinal plants”OR “Antitumor”OR
“Neuroprotective”OR “Hypoglycemic”)
NOT
TOPIC:
(“Abortiporus biennis”OR “Bryobia rubrioculus”OR “Eotetranychus carpini”OR
“Paraplonobia berberis”OR “Sonotetranychus albiflorae”OR “Tetranychus turkestani”
OR “Tetranychus urticae”OR “Thyatira batis”OR “Timora beatrix”OR “Diacrisia
unifascia”OR “Chionaema bellissima”OR “Agylla albifinis”OR “Agylla metaxantha”OR
“Agylla ramelana”OR “Berberisomyia sobolevi”OR “Jaapiella kovalevi”OR
“Amegosiphon platycaudum”OR “Aphis nasturtii”OR “Aphis odinae”OR “Aphis
spiraecola”OR “Aulacorthum solani”OR “Berberidaphis lydiae”OR “Liosomaphis atra”
OR “Liosomaphis berberidis”OR “Liosomaphis ornata”OR “Myzus persicae”OR
“Toxoptera aurantii”OR “Toxoptera citricida”OR “Metopolophium berberinutritum”OR
“Wahlgreniella nervata”OR “Greenidea kumaoni”OR “Macrosiphum pachysiphon”OR
“Prociphilus erigeronensis”OR “Rhopalosiphum rufiabdominalis”OR “Xenosiphonaphis
conandri”OR “Hydaphias hofmanni”OR “Tricaudatus polygoni”OR “Macrosiphum
euphorbiae”OR “Aphis berberidorum”OR “Aphis patagonica”OR “Liosomaphis
himalayensis”OR “Arge ochropus”OR “Bemisia tabaci”OR “Caliroa annulipes”OR
“Coccus hesperidum”OR “Diaspidiotus perniciosus”OR “Lobesia botrana”OR “Aporia
crataegi”OR “Callirhopalus bifasciatus”OR “Omphalocera dentosa”OR “Coryphista
meadii”OR “Alcis repandata”OR “Argyresthia bonnetella”OR “Calliteara pudibunda”OR
“Dasineura berberidis”OR “Eupithecia exiguata”OR “Eupithecia subfuscata”OR
“Euproctis similis”OR “Gonocerus acuteangulatus”OR “Hemithea aestivaria”OR
“Lacanobia thalassina”OR “Melanchra persicariae”OR “Odontopera bidentata”OR
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 38 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

“Pareulype berberata”OR “Phlogophora meticulosa”OR “Rhagoletis cerasi”OR
“Rhagoletis meigenii”OR “Rheumaptera cervinalis”OR “Spilosoma luteum”OR
“Strymonidia pruni”OR “Agrochola helvola”OR “Alypia octomaculata”OR “Athyma
opalina”OR “Attacus taprobanis”OR “Auchmis detersa”OR “Auchmis inextricata”OR
“Biston regalis”OR “Cadra cautella”OR “Calliteara grotei”OR “Callosamia promethea”
OR “Carposina berberidella”OR “Cheimophila salicella”OR “Gastropacha quercifolia”
OR “Hyalophora cecropia”OR “Hyperchiria incisa”OR “Hyphantria cunea”OR
“Larerannis orthogrammaria”OR “Lycia hirtaria”OR “Lymantria dispar”OR
“Neostauropus sikkimensis”OR Omphalocera cariosa”OR “Parocystola acroxantha”OR
“Phtheochroa decipiens”OR “Plodia interpunctella”OR “Pseudoglaea olivata”OR
“Rheumaptera undulata”OR “Rhopobota myrtillana”OR “Samia cynthia”OR “Samia
walkeri”OR “Somena scintillans”OR “Trabala vishnou”OR “Triphosa haesitata”OR
“Orgyia leucostigma”OR “Lindingaspis rossi”OR “Cacoecimorpha pronubana”OR
“Drosophila suzukii”OR “Malacosoma americanum”OR “Malacosoma parallela”OR
“Ceratitis capitata”OR “Ceroplastes ceriferus”OR “Thyridopteryx ephemeraeformis”OR
“Aleuroplatus berbericolus”OR “Aleuroplatus ovatus”OR “Bemisia berbericola”OR
“Bemisia shinanoensis”OR “Aceria caliberberis”OR “Acleris variegana”OR “Anomoia
purmunda”OR “Arge berberidis”OR “Conistra ligula”OR “Ditula angustiorana”OR
“Diurnea lipsiella”OR “Exapate congelatella”OR “Gymnoscelis rufifasciata”OR
“Lasioptera berberina”OR “Orientus ishidae”OR “Ourapteryx sambucaria”OR
“Phyllocoptes granulatus”OR “Pseudotelphusa tessella”OR “Pulvinaria floccifera”OR
“Rhagoletis berberidis”OR “Peribatodes rhomboidaria”OR “Hypomecis punctinalis”OR
“Ectropis crepuscularia”OR “Lasiocampa quercus”OR “Crocallis tusciaria”OR
“Doloploca punctulana”OR “Ligdia adustata”OR “Lycia graecarius”OR “Zeuzera pyrina”
OR “Athetis lepigone”OR “Ceroplastes sinensis”OR “Aphis fabae”OR “Agonoscena
pegani”OR “Bactericera berberae”OR “Cacopsylla curtiantenna”OR “Cyamophila
fabra”OR “Cyamophila otidaexocha”OR “Euphyllura berberae”OR “Trioza berbericola”
OR “Trioza berberidis”OR “Trioza fissa”OR “Trioza inlechsis”OR “Trioza lischines”OR
“Trioza longipennis”OR “Trioza nilisches”OR “Trioza scottii”OR “Trioza striacauda”OR
“Trioza subberbericola”OR “Aonidiella aurantii”OR “Aonidiella citrina”OR “Arctorthezia
pseudoccidentalis”OR “Aspidaspis densiflorae”OR “Aspidiotus nerii”OR “Cerococcus
koebelei”OR “Cerococcus parrotti”OR “Ceroplastes japonicus”OR “Ceroplastes
pseudoceriferus”OR “Chrysomphalus aonidum”OR “Chrysomphalus dictyospermi”OR
“Coccura suwakoensis”OR “Coccus pseudomagnoliarum”OR “Diaspidiotus africanus”
OR “Diaspidiotus uvae”OR “Dynaspidiotus britannicus”OR “Epidiaspis leperii”OR
“Erimococcus kimmericus”OR “Heliococcus sulcii”OR “Hemiberlesia lataniae”OR
“Icerya purchasi”OR “Lecanodiaspis prosopidis”OR “Lecanodiaspis thamnosmae”OR
“Lepidosaphes malicola”OR “Lepidosaphes ulmi”OR “Magnococcus berberis”OR
“Neoselenaspidus silvaticus”OR “Paracoccus burnerae”OR “Parlatoreopsis longispina”
OR “Parlatoria camelliae”OR “Parlatoria oleae”OR “Parlatoria pergandii”OR
“Parthenolecanium persicae”OR “Peliococcus morrisoni”OR “Phenacoccus aceris”OR
“Phenacoccus berberis”OR “Phenacoccus tataricus”OR “Pseudaulacaspis cockerelli”OR
“Pseudaulacaspis pentagona”OR “Pseudococcus comstocki”OR “Spiroporococcus
braggi”OR “Pseudococcus maritimus”OR “Puccinia arrhenatheri”OR “Didymosphaeria
oblitescens”OR “Gnomonia comari”OR “Leptosphaeria fuscella”OR “Monilinia
fructigena”OR “Roselinia necatrix”OR “Verticillium albo-atrum”OR “Verticillium
dahliae”OR “Alternaria alternata”OR “Erysiphe berberidicola”OR “Puccinia graminis f.
sp. Tritici”OR “Puccinia striiformoides”OR “Sclerotinia sclerotiorum”OR “Thyronectria
berberidis”OR “Erysiphe communis”OR “Eutypa lata”OR “Rebentischia unicaudata”
OR “Rhizoctonia solani”OR “Sclerotium rolfsii”OR “Pleospora herbarum”OR “Puccinia
graminis f. oryzae”OR “Puccinia graminis”OR “Puccinia striiformis”OR “Phoma
glomerata”OR “Phyllactinia guttata”OR “Septoria berberidis”OR “Phytophthora
nicotianae var. Parasitica”OR “Polychaeton quercinum”OR “Hymenochaete colliculosa”
OR “Heterobasidion annosum”OR “Phytophthora cinnamomi”OR “Phytophthora
ramorum”OR “Phymatotrichum omnivorum”OR “Puccinia graminis”OR “Phytophthora
kernoviae”OR “Didymella nigricans”OR “Lyomyces sambuci”OR “Neofusicoccum
luteum”OR “Anguilospora longissima”OR “Anguilospora crassa”OR “Bacillispora
aquatica”OR “Campylospora parvula”OR “Epicoccum nigrum”OR “Thyronectria lamyi”
OR “Heliscus lugdunensis”OR “Diplodina berberidina”OR “Amphisphaeria berberidicola”
OR “Amphisphaeria dusenii”OR “Apiosporium salicinum”OR “Ascochyta australis”OR
“Ascochyta berberidina”OR “Asteromassaria berberidicola”OR “Belonium
subantarcticum”OR “Blennoria patagonica”OR “Botryosphaeria dothidea”OR
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 39 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

“Botryosphaeria ribis”OR “Calospora etilis”OR “Camarosporium antarcticum”OR
“Camarosporium berberidicola”OR “Camarosporium berberidis”OR “Capnodium
berberidis”OR “Cercospora boutelouae”OR “Ceuthospora foliicola”OR “Ceuthospora
magellanica”OR “Chaetomium setosum”OR “Ciboria ranikhetiensis”OR “Cladosporium
aecidiicola”OR “Cladosporium fumago”OR “Cladosporium quitense”OR “Cladosporium
ushuwaiense”OR “Coccomyces coronatus”OR “Colletotrichum aotearoa”OR
“Coniochaeta ligniaria”OR “Coniochaeta niesslii”OR “Coniochaeta sanguinolenta”OR
“Coniothyrium berberidiphilum”OR “Coniothyrium berberidis”OR “Coniothyrium bergii”
OR “Coniothyrium insitivum”OR “Coronophora paucispora”OR “Corticium calceum”OR
“Corticium incarnatum var. Antarcticum”OR “Corticium solani”OR “Coryneum foliicola”
OR “Crumenula antarctica”OR “Cucurbitaria oromediterranea”OR “Cumminsiella
antarctica”OR “Cumminsiella mirabilissima”OR “Cumminsiella santa”OR “Cumminsiella
standleyana”OR “Cumminsiella stolpiana”OR “Cumminsiella wootoniana”OR “Desmella
quitensis”OR “Diaporthe detrusa”OR “Diatrype berberidis”OR “Dicaeoma poculiforme”
OR “Dichomera macrospora”OR “Didymella aliena”OR “Didymella cadubriae”OR
“Didymosphaeria berberidincola”OR “Didymosphaeria epidermidis”OR “Diplodia
berberidis”OR “Diplodia mahoniae”OR “Diplodia microsporella”OR “Dothidea
berberidis”OR “Dothidea hippophaes”OR “Dothidea indica”OR “Dothiorella ribis”OR
“Edythea berberidis”OR “Edythea quitensis”OR “Edythea soratensis”OR “Edythea
tenella”OR “Eichleriella leucophaea”OR “Epitea berberidis”OR “Eriosphaeria australis”
OR “Erysiphe berberidis”OR “Erysiphe dimorpha”OR “Erysiphe golovinii”OR “Erysiphe
multappendicis”OR “Erysiphe polygoni”OR “Erysiphe sichuanica”OR “Erysiphe
thaxteri”OR “Eutypa peraffinis”OR “Eutypella aequilinearis”OR “Eutypella russodes”
OR “Excipularia fusispora”OR “Fenestella rostrata”OR “Fumago pannosa”OR “Fumago
vagans”OR “Gambleola cornuta”OR “Gibbera patagonica”OR “Guignardia cytisi”OR
“Haematomyxa pakistani”OR “Helminthosporium velutinum”OR “Helotium buccinula”
OR “Helotium caudatum”OR “Helotium titubans”OR “Hendersonia dickasonii”OR
“Hendersonia sarmentorum”OR “Heterosporium berberidis”OR “Hirneola antarctica”
OR “Hoehneliella perplexa”OR “Hymenoscyphus buccinula”OR “Hymenoscyphus
leucopus”OR “Hyphoderma praetermissum”OR “Hypoderma brachysporum”OR
“Junghuhnia vincta”OR “Karschia fuegiana”OR “Keissleriella cladophila”OR “Lachnum
albidulum”OR “Laestadia angulata”OR “Lambertella berberidis”OR “Lambertella
kumaonica”OR “Laschia antarctica”OR “Leptosphaeria artemisiae”OR “Leptosphaeria
berberidicola”OR “Leptosphaeria berberidis”OR “Leptosphaeria castagnei”OR
“Leptosphaeria coniothyrium”OR “Leptosphaeria inconspicua”OR “Leptosphaeria
punjabensis”OR “Leptothyrium berberidis”OR “Lophiostoma macrostomoides”OR
“Lophiostoma quadrinucleatum”OR “Lophodermium berberidis”OR “Lophodermium
hysterioides”OR “Marasmius copelandii”OR “Marasmius salalis”OR “Marasmius
sphaerodermus”OR “Massaria berberidicola”OR “Massaria marginata”OR “Massarina
polymorpha”OR “Melanomma pulvis-pyrius”OR “Melanomma pulviscula”OR “Melasmia
berberidis”OR “Metasphaeria desolationis”OR “Microdiplodia microsporella”OR
“Microthyrium fagi”OR “Moellerodiscus berberidis”OR “Monochaetia berberidicola”OR
“Monochaetia berberidis”OR “Montagnella berberidis”OR “Mycoporum hippocastani”
OR “Mycosphaerella ambiens”OR “Mycosphaerella berberidis”OR “Nectria antarctica”
OR “Nectria berberidicola”OR “Nectria lamyi”OR “Odontia arguta”OR “Oncopodium
antoniae”OR “Otthia amelanchieris”OR “Otthia lisae”OR “Pestalotia berberidis”OR
“Pestalotia jodhpurensis”OR “Pestalotia osyridis”OR “Pestalotiopsis japonica”OR
“Pestalozzina berberidina”OR “Pestalozzina berberidis”OR “Phaeodothis winteri”OR
“Phoma berberidella”OR “Phoma berberina”OR “Phoma empetrifolia”OR “Phoma
herbarum”OR “Phomopsis berberidis”OR “Phyllactinia berberidis”OR “Phyllosticta
berberidicola”OR “Phyllosticta berberidis”OR “Phyllosticta garbovskii”OR “Phyllosticta
japonica”OR “Phyllosticta mahoniicola”OR “Phyllosticta westendorpii”OR
“Phytophthora plurivora”OR “Platysporoides togwotiensis”OR “Pleosphaeria fuegiana”
OR “Pleospora aggregata”OR “Pleospora amelanchieris”OR “Pleospora berberidicola”
OR “Pleospora berberidis”OR “Pleospora coronata”OR “Pleospora orbicularis”OR
“Pleospora quadriseptata”OR “Pleospora rudis”OR “Pleospora togwotiensis”OR
“Polyporus lepideus”OR “Polyporus vaporarius”OR “Poria punctata”OR
“Pseudocercospora berberidis-vulgaris”OR “Pseudocercospora nandinae”OR “Puccinella
graminis”OR “Puccinia antarctica”OR “Puccinia barri-aranae”OR “Puccinia berberidis”
OR “Puccinia berberidis-darwinii”OR “Puccinia culmicola”OR “Puccinia droogenis”OR
“Puccinia fendleri”OR “Puccinia magelhaenica”OR “Puccinia magellanica”OR “Puccinia
meyeri-alberti”OR “Puccinia montanensis”OR “Puccinia naumanniana”OR “Puccinia
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 40 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

poculiformis”OR “Puccinia rameliana”OR “Puccinia ramelianoides”OR “Puccinia
stolpiana”OR “Puccinia wurthii”OR “Pucciniastrum goeppertianum”OR “Pucciniosira
clemensiae”OR “Pucciniosira cornuta”OR “Pythium debaryanum”OR “Ramaria
subaurantiaca”OR “Ramularia berberidis”OR “Rebentischia pomiformis”OR
“Rhabdospora berberidis”OR “Rosellinia sanguinolenta”OR “Rosellinia subsimilis”OR
“Saccardoella berberidis”OR “Saccardoella transylvanica”OR “Sarcostroma berberidis”
OR “Sclerotium dothideoides”OR “Scytinostroma duriusculum”OR “Seimatosporium
berberidicola”OR “Sphaeropsis berberidis”OR “Sporoschisma saccardoi”OR
“Stagonospora berberidina”OR “Stenella quitensis”OR “Stictis polycocca”OR
“Stylodothis indica”OR “Tassia laurina”OR “Thyridium vestitum”OR “Thyronectria
caudata”OR “Togninia minima”OR “Trametes versicolor”OR “Tryblidaria esfandiarii”
OR “Tryblidaria pakistani”OR “Uredo berberidis”OR “Uredo clemensiae”OR “Uredo
stolpiana”OR “Uropyxis naumanniana”OR “Uropyxis quitensis”OR “Valsaria insitiva”
OR “Zignoella longispora”OR “Phoma macrostoma”OR “Aureobasidium pullulans”OR
“Phoma andina”OR “Cyrtidula hippocastani”OR “Dasyscyphus australis var. Lasiopoda”
OR “Dasyscyphus minutissimus”OR “Diaporthe koelreuteriae”OR “Nectria episphaeria”
OR “Nodulosphaeria robusta”OR “Phyllosticta mahoniae”OR “Nectria cinnabarina”OR
“Cumminsiella texana”OR “Curreya berberidis”OR “Cytospora berberidis”OR
“Cucurbitaria berberidis”OR “Parodiella negeriana”OR “Plowrightia berberidis”OR
“Puccinia brachypodii”OR “Botrytis cinerea”OR “Erysiphe berberidis var. Asiatica”OR
“Microsphaera grossulariae”OR “Myrothecium inundatum”OR “Pezicula microspora”OR
“Microsphaera alni”OR “Acarosporina berberidis”OR “Aecidium aridum”OR “Aecidium
berberidis-morrisonensis”OR “Aecidium berberidis-ruscifoliae”OR “Aecidium
jacobsthalii-henrici”OR “Aecidium leveilleanum”OR “Aecidium montanum”OR
“Aecidium navarinum”OR “Aecidium niitakense”OR “Aecidium subflammans”OR
“Aecidium teodorescui”OR “Aecidium tubiforme”OR “Agaricus aulaxinus”OR “Agaricus
berberidicola”OR “Agaricus subflammans”OR “Agyrium subantarcticum”OR “Aecidium
haussknechtianum”OR “Puccinia pseudostriiformis”OR “Puccinia pygmaea”OR
“Coccomyces dentatus”OR “Microsphaeropsis conielloides”OR “Phyllosticta
capitalensis”OR “Puccinia minshanensis”OR “Puccinia brachypodii-phoenicoidis”OR
“Meloidogyne javanica”OR “Meloidogyne hapla”OR “Meloidogyne arenaria”OR
“Xiphinema brevicolle”OR “Pratylenchus penetrans”OR “Merlinius brevidens”OR
“Pratylenchus vulnus”OR “Boleodorus typicus”OR “Rotylenchus buxophilus”OR
“Boleodorus impar”OR “Boleodorus volutus”OR “Boleodorus thylactus”OR “Tylenchus
bhitaii”OR “Xiphinema globosum”OR “Meloidogyne incognita”OR “Apple mosaic virus”
OR “Cucmber mosaic virus”OR “Impatiens necrotic spot virus”OR “Tomato spotted wilt
virus”OR “Pseudomonas syringae pv. berberidis”OR “Phytoplasma - 16SrV-B
subgroup”OR “Phytoplasma - 16SrII-C subgroup”OR “Phytoplasma - 16SrXIII-F
subgroup”OR “Geocenamus dobroticus”OR “Paratylenchus vandenbrandei”OR
“Criconemoides morgensis”OR “Irantylenchus vicinus”OR “Neopsilenchus magnidens”
OR “Trophurus impar”OR “Pratylenchoides alkani”OR “Merlinius brevidens”OR
“Scutylenchus tartuensis”OR “Puccinia meyeri-albertii”OR “Pseudargyrotoza
conwagana”OR “Rhagastis mongoliana mongoliana”OR “Sphenoraia berberii”OR
“Sphenoraia yajiangensis”OR “Stenoluperus nipponensis”OR “Xyleborus brevis”OR
“Zeugophora cyanea”OR “Rhagastis mongoliana centrosinaria”OR “Rhagastis
mongoliana pallicosta”OR “Orhespera glabricollis”OR “Orhespera impressicollis”OR
“Pandemis ribeana”OR “Phenacoccus prodigialis”OR “Euscotia inextricata”OR
“Elasmostethus brevis”OR “Aphthona varipes”OR “Aporia agathon”OR “Aporia hippia”
OR “Aporia leucodice”OR “Attacus atlas”OR “Cacia cretifera”OR “Colletotrichum
acutatum”OR “Colletotrichum gloeosporioides”OR “Gloeosporium berberidis”OR
“Alternaria macrospora”OR “Alternaria solani”OR “Aspergillus flavus”OR “Cercospora
citrullina”OR “Clonostachys rosea”OR “Colletotrichum coccodes”OR “Colletotrichum
coffeanum”OR “Colletotrichum kahawae”OR “Diaporthe tersa”OR “Fusarium
lateritium”OR “Fusarium falciforme”OR “Fusarium nematophilum”OR “Fusarium
oxysporum”OR “Fusarium solani”OR “Haplothrips andresi”OR “Haplothrips
angusticornis”OR “Acaudaleyrodes rachipora”OR “Metcalfa pruinose”OR “Taeniothrips
inconsequens”OR “Corthylus punctatissimus”OR “Malacosoma neustria”OR “Aphis
pomi”OR “Rhopalosiphum rufiabdominale”OR “Contarinia nasturtii”OR “Dendrothrips
saltatrix”OR “Haplothrips reuteri”OR “Mycterothrips albidicornis”OR “Thrips
meridionalis”OR “Thrips tabaci”OR “Thrips trehernei”OR “Metcalfa pruinosa”)
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 41 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Appendix C –List of pests that can potentially cause an effect not further
assessed
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
Table C.1: List of potential pests not further assessed
Pest name EPPO
code Group
Pest
present
in
Turkey
Present
in the
EU
Berberis
confirmed
as a host
(reference)
Pest can be
associated
with the
commodity
Impact
Justification
for inclusion in
this list
Erysiphe
berberidicola
–Fungi Yes No Yes Yes Uncertain No records of
official control in
EU. Genus of
Erysiphe
contains fungi
with impact, but
and there is no
information
available on
potential impact
for Erysiphe
berberidicola.
Lepidosaphes
malicola
LEPSML Insects Yes Limited
(Greece,
Bulgaria)
Yes Yes Uncertain No records of
official control in
EU; limited
information on
damage; apple
damage
reported in
Israel.
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 42 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392

Appendix D –Excel file with the pest list of Berberis spp.
Appendix D can be found in the online version of this output (in the ‘Supporting
information‘section): https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7392.
Commodity risk assessment of Berberis thunbergii plants from Turkey
www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 43 EFSA Journal 2022;20(6):7392