Overview of the evaluation of Coniella castaneicola for bundles of whips and seedlings
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	9,847 out of 10,000 bundles	9,920 out of 10,000 bundles	9,955 out of 10,000 bundles	9,977 out of 10,000 bundles	9,994 out of 10,000 bundles
Percentile of the distribution	5%	25%	Median	75%	95%
Proportion of infected bundles	6 out of 10,000 bundles	23 out of 10,000 bundles	45 out of 10,000 bundles	80 out of 10,000 bundles	153 out of 10,000 bundles
Summary of the information used for the evaluation	Possibility that the pest could become associated with the commodity Coniella castaneicola is present in the UK, although reports are still scattered. Despite there is uncertainty on the host status of A. pseudoplatanus, Acer sp. is reported as a host of the pathogen. Infection may occur by means of conidia through wounds. Infection courts represented by wounds and injuries of biotic and abiotic origin are expected to be present. The hosts can be present either inside or in the surroundings of the nurseries. Altogether, this suggests that the association with the commodity may be possible. Measures taken against the pest and their efficacy General measures taken by the nurseries are effective against the pathogen. These measures include (a) the use of certified plant material; (b) the treatment of the growing media; (c) inspections, surveillance, monitoring, sampling and laboratory testing; (d) the removal of infected plant material; and (e) application of pest control products. Interception records In the EUROPHYT/TRACES‐NT database, there are no records of notification of Acer plants for planting neither from the UK nor from other countries due to the presence of C. castaneicola between the years 1995 and December 2022 (EUROPHYT/TRACES‐NT, online). Shortcomings of current measures/procedures None observed. Main uncertainties – The level of susceptibility of Acer spp. to the pathogen. – Whether symptoms on Acer spp. are recognisable and may be promptly detected. – The presence/abundance of the pathogen in the area where the nurseries is located. – How accurate is the removal of infected leaves which may represent a source of inoculum from the ground. – Effect of fungicide treatments against the pathogen.

Overview of the evaluation of Coniella castaneicola for bare root plants/trees up to 7 years old
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	9,841 out of 10,000 plants	9,922 out of 10,000 plants	9,958 out of 10,000 plants	9,981 out of 10,000 plants	9,996 out of 10,000 plants
Percentile of the distribution	5%	25%	Median	75%	95%
Proportion of infected plants	4 out of 10,000 plants	19 out of 10,000 plants	42 out of 10,000 plants	78 out of 10,000 plants	159 out of 10,000 plants
Summary of the information used for the evaluation	Possibility that the pest could become associated with the commodity Coniella castaneicola is present in the UK, although reports are still scattered. Despite there is uncertainty on the host status of A. pseudoplatanus, Acer sp. is reported as a host of the pathogen. Infection may occur by means of conidia through wounds. Infection courts represented by wounds and injuries of biotic and abiotic origin are expected to be frequent. The hosts can be present either inside or in the surroundings of the nurseries. Altogether, this suggests that the association with the commodity may be possible. Measures taken against the pest and their efficacy General measures taken by the nurseries are effective against the pathogen. These measures include (a) the use of certified plant material; (b) the treatment of the growing media; (c) inspections, surveillance, monitoring, sampling and laboratory testing; (d) the removal of infected plant material; and (e) application of pest control products. Interception records In the EUROPHYT/TRACES‐NT database, there are no records of notification of Acer plants for planting neither from the UK nor from other countries due to the presence of C. castaneicola between the years 1995 and December 2022 (EUROPHYT/TRACES‐NT, online). Shortcomings of current measures/procedures None observed. Main uncertainties – The level of susceptibility of Acer spp. to the pathogen. – Whether symptoms on Acer spp. are recognisable and may be promptly detected. – The presence/abundance of the pathogen in the area where the nurseries is located. – How accurate is the removal of infected leaves which may represent a source of inoculum from the ground. – Effect of fungicide treatments against the pathogen.

Overview of the evaluation of Coniella castaneicola for plants in pots up to 7 years old
Rating of the likelihood of pest freedom	Extremely frequently pest free (based on the Median).
Percentile of the distribution	5%	25%	Median	75%	95%
Proportion of pest‐free plants	9,813 out of 10,000 plants	9,894 out of 10,000 plants	9,935 out of 10,000 plants	9,963 out of 10,000 plants	9,987 out of 10,000 plants
Percentile of the distribution	5%	25%	Median	75%	95%
Proportion of infected plants	13 out of 10,000 plants	37 out of 10,000 plants	65 out of 10,000 plants	106 out of 10,000 plants	187 out of 10,000 plants
Summary of the information used for the evaluation	Possibility that the pest could become associated with the commodity Coniella castaneicola is present in the UK, although reports are still scattered. Despite there is uncertainty on the host status of A. pseudoplatanus, Acer sp. is reported as a host of the pathogen. Infection may occur by means of conidia through wounds. Infection courts represented by wounds and injuries of biotic and abiotic origin are expected to be frequent. Plants can be exported during the vegetation period (with leaves). The hosts can be present either inside or in the surroundings of the nurseries. Altogether, this suggests that the association with the commodity may be possible. Measures taken against the pest and their efficacy General measures taken by the nurseries are effective against the pathogen. These measures include (a) the use of certified plant material; (b) the treatment of the growing media; (c) inspections, surveillance, monitoring, sampling and laboratory testing; (d) the removal of infected plant material; and (e) application of pest control products. Interception records In the EUROPHYT/TRACES‐NT database, there are no records of notification of Acer plants for planting neither from the UK nor from other countries due to the presence of C. castaneicola between the years 1995 and December 2022 (EUROPHYT/TRACES‐NT, online). Shortcomings of current measures/procedures None observed. Main uncertainties – The level of susceptibility of Acer spp. to the pathogen. – Whether symptoms on Acer spp. are recognisable and may be promptly detected. – The presence/abundance of the pathogen in the area where the nurseries is located. – How accurate is the removal of infected leaves which may represent a source of inoculum from the ground. – Effect of fungicide treatments against the pathogen.