Abstract
The EFSA Plant Health Panel performed a pest categorisation of Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola, five clearly defined fungi of the C. gloeosporioides complex causing anthracnose. The pathogens are widely distributed in at least three continents. C. aenigma and C. siamense are reported from Italy and C. alienum from Portugal, including the Madeira Islands, with a restricted distribution. C. perseae and C. theobromicola are not known to be present in the EU. However, there is uncertainty on the status of the pathogens worldwide and in the EU because of the taxonomic re‐evaluation of the genus Colletotrichum and the lack of specific surveys. The pathogens are not included in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 and there are no reports of interceptions in the EU. With the exception of C. perseae, which has a very limited number of hosts, the other four Colletotrichum species have relatively wide host ranges. Therefore, this pest categorisation focused on those hosts for which there is robust evidence that the pathogens were formally identified by a combination of morphology, pathogenicity and multilocus sequence analysis. Host plants for planting and fresh fruits are the main entry pathways into the EU. Host availability and climate suitability factors occurring in some parts of the EU are favourable for the establishment of the pathogens. No yield losses have been reported so far in the EU but in non‐EU areas of their current distribution, the pathogens have a direct impact on cultivated hosts that are also relevant for the EU. Phytosanitary measures are available to prevent the further introduction and spread of C. aenigma, C. alienum and C. siamense into the EU as well as the introduction and spread of C. perseae and C. theobromicola. C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola satisfy the criteria that are within the remit of EFSA to assess for these species to be regarded as potential Union quarantine pests.
Keywords: anthracnose, Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, pest risk, plant health, plant pest, quarantine
1. Introduction
1.1. Background and Terms of Reference as provided by the requestor
1.1.1. Background
The new Plant Health Regulation (EU) 2016/2031, on the protective measures against pests of plants, is applying from 14 December 2019. Conditions are laid down in this legislation in order for pests to qualify for listing as Union quarantine pests, protected zone quarantine pests or Union regulated non‐quarantine pests. The lists of the EU regulated pests together with the associated import or internal movement requirements of commodities are included in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072. Additionally, as stipulated in the Commission Implementing Regulation 2018/2019, certain commodities are provisionally prohibited to enter in the EU (high risk plants, HRP). EFSA is performing the risk assessment of the dossiers submitted by exporting to the EU countries of the HRP commodities, as stipulated in Commission Implementing Regulation 2018/2018. Furthermore, EFSA has evaluated a number of requests from exporting to the EU countries for derogations from specific EU import requirements.
In line with the principles of the new plant health law, the European Commission with the Member States are discussing monthly the reports of the interceptions and the outbreaks of pests notified by the Member States. Notifications of an imminent danger from pests that may fulfil the conditions for inclusion in the list of the Union quarantine pest are included. Furthermore, EFSA has been performing horizon scanning of media and literature.
As a follow‐up of the above‐mentioned activities (reporting of interceptions and outbreaks, HRP, derogation requests and horizon scanning), a number of pests of concern have been identified. EFSA is requested to provide scientific opinions for these pests, in view of their potential inclusion by the risk manager in the lists of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 and the inclusion of specific import requirements for relevant host commodities, when deemed necessary by the risk manager.
1.1.2. Terms of Reference
EFSA is requested, pursuant to Article 29(1) of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002, to provide scientific opinions in the field of plant health.
EFSA is requested to deliver 53 pest categorisations for the pests listed in Annex 1A, 1B, 1D and 1E (for more details see mandate M‐2021‐00027 on the Open.EFSA portal). Additionally, EFSA is requested to perform pest categorisations for the pests so far not regulated in the EU, identified as pests potentially associated with a commodity in the commodity risk assessments of the HRP dossiers (Annex 1C; for more details see mandate M‐2021‐00027 on the Open.EFSA portal). Such pest categorisations are needed in the case where there are not available risk assessments for the EU.
When the pests of Annex 1A are qualifying as potential Union quarantine pests, EFSA should proceed to phase 2 risk assessment. The opinions should address entry pathways, spread, establishment, impact and include a risk reduction options analysis.
Additionally, EFSA is requested to develop further the quantitative methodology currently followed for risk assessment, in order to have the possibility to deliver an express risk assessment methodology. Such methodological development should take into account the EFSA Plant Health Panel Guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment and the experience obtained during its implementation for the Union candidate priority pests and for the likelihood of pest freedom at entry for the commodity risk assessment of High Risk Plants.
1.2. Interpretation of the Terms of Reference
Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola are five of a number of pests listed in Annex 1C to the terms of reference (ToR) to be subject to pest categorisation to determine whether it fulfils the criteria of a potential Union quarantine pest for the area of the EU excluding Ceuta, Melilla and the outermost regions of Member States referred to in Article 355(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), other than Madeira and the Azores, and so inform EU decision‐making as to its appropriateness for potential inclusion in the lists of pests of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/ 2072. If a pest fulfils the criteria to be potentially listed as a Union quarantine pest, risk reduction options will be identified.
1.3. Additional information
The pest categorisation was initiated following the commodity risk assessment of Persea americana from Israel.
2. Data and methodologies
2.1. Data
2.1.1. Information on pest status from NPPOs
In the context of the current mandate, EFSA is preparing pest categorisations for new/emerging pests that are not yet regulated in the EU. When official pest status is not available in the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization (EPPO) Global Database (EPPO, online), EFSA consults the NPPOs of the relevant MSs. To obtain information on the official pest status for Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum and C. siamense, EFSA has consulted the NPPOs of Italy, Portugal and Spain. The results of this consultation are presented in Section 3.2.2.
2.1.2. Literature search
A literature search on Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola and their synonyms was conducted at the beginning of the categorisation in the ISI Web of Science bibliographic database, using the scientific name of the pest as search term. Papers relevant for the pest categorisation were reviewed, and further references and information were obtained from experts, as well as from citations within the references and grey literature.
2.1.3. Database search
Pest information, on host(s) and distribution, was retrieved from the EPPO Global Database, the CABI databases and scientific literature databases as referred above in Section 2.1.1.
Data about the import of commodity types that could potentially provide a pathway for the pest to enter the EU and about the area of hosts grown in the EU were obtained from EUROSTAT (Statistical Office of the European Communities).
The Europhyt and TRACES databases were consulted for pest‐specific notifications on interceptions and outbreaks. Europhyt is a web‐based network run by the Directorate General for Health and Food Safety (DG SANTÉ) of the European Commission as a subproject of PHYSAN (Phyto‐Sanitary Controls) specifically concerned with plant health information. TRACES is the European Commission's multilingual online platform for sanitary and phytosanitary certification required for the importation of animals, animal products, food and feed of non‐animal origin and plants into the European Union and the intra‐EU trade and EU exports of animals and certain animal products. Up until May 2020, the Europhyt database managed notifications of interceptions of plants or plant products that do not comply with EU legislation, as well as notifications of plant pests detected in the territory of the Member States and the phytosanitary measures taken to eradicate or avoid their spread. The recording of interceptions switched from Europhyt to TRACES in May 2020.
GenBank was searched to determine whether it contained any nucleotide sequences for Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola, which could be used as reference material for molecular diagnosis. GenBank® (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/) is a comprehensive publicly available database that as of August 2019 (release version 227) contained over 6.25 trillion base pairs from over 1.6 billion nucleotide sequences for 450,000 formally described species (Sayers et al., 2020).
2.2. Methodologies
The Panel performed the pest categorisation for Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola, following guiding principles and steps presented in the EFSA guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment (EFSA PLH Panel, 2018), the EFSA guidance on the use of the weight of evidence approach in scientific assessments (EFSA Scientific Committee, 2017) and the International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures No 11 (FAO, 2013).
The criteria to be considered when categorising a pest as a potential Union quarantine pest (QP) are given in Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 Article 3 and Annex I, Section 1 of the Regulation. Table 1 presents the Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 pest categorisation criteria on which the Panel bases its conclusions. In judging whether a criterion is met, the Panel uses its best professional judgement (EFSA Scientific Committee, 2017) by integrating a range of evidence from a variety of sources (as presented above in Section 2.1) to reach an informed conclusion as to whether or not a criterion is satisfied.
Table 1.
Pest categorisation criteria under evaluation, as derived from Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 on protective measures against pests of plants (the number of the relevant sections of the pest categorisation is shown in brackets in the first column)
| Criterion of pest categorisation | Criterion in Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 regarding Union quarantine pest (article 3) |
|---|---|
| Identity of the pest (Section 3.1 ) | Is the identity of the pest clearly defined, or has it been shown to produce consistent symptoms and to be transmissible? |
| Absence/presence of the pest in the EU territory (Section 3.2 ) |
Is the pest present in the EU territory? If present, is the pest in a limited part of the EU or is it scarce, irregular, isolated or present infrequently? If so, the pest is considered to be not widely distributed. |
| Pest potential for entry, establishment and spread in the EU territory (Section 3.4 ) | Is the pest able to enter into, become established in, and spread within, the EU territory? If yes, briefly list the pathways for entry and spread. |
| Potential for consequences in the EU territory (Section 3.5 ) | Would the pests' introduction have an economic or environmental impact on the EU territory? |
|
Available measures (Section 3.6 ) |
Are there measures available to prevent pest entry, establishment, spread or impacts? |
| Conclusion of pest categorisation (Section 4 ) | A statement as to whether (1) all criteria assessed by EFSA above for consideration as a potential quarantine pest were met and (2) if not, which one(s) were not met. |
The Panel's conclusions are formulated respecting its remit and particularly with regard to the principle of separation between risk assessment and risk management (EFSA founding regulation (EU) No 178/2002); therefore, instead of determining whether the pest is likely to have an unacceptable impact, deemed to be a risk management decision, the Panel will present a summary of the observed impacts in the areas where the pest occurs, and make a judgement about potential likely impacts in the EU. Whilst the Panel may quote impacts reported from areas where the pest occurs in monetary terms, the Panel will seek to express potential EU impacts in terms of yield and quality losses and not in monetary terms, in agreement with the EFSA guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment (EFSA PLH Panel, 2018). Article 3 (d) of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 refers to unacceptable social impact as a criterion for quarantine pest status. Assessing social impact is outside the remit of the Panel.
3. Pest categorisation
3.1. Identity and biology of the pest
3.1.1. Identity and taxonomy
Is the identity of the pest clearly defined, or has it been shown to produce consistent symptoms and/or to be transmissible?
Yes, the identities of Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola are clearly defined.
The genus Colletotrichum constitutes a large monophyletic group of ascomycete fungi with more than 200 accepted species classified into at least 14 species complexes and singletons (Damm et al., 2019). The genus includes endophytes, saprobes and plant pathogens, with the latter being responsible for several diseases of many crops worldwide (Cannon et al., 2012; Udayanga et al., 2013). In the past, cultural and morphological characters (colour and growth rate of the colonies, size and shape of conidia and appressoria, presence or absence of setae, etc.) were used to identify Colletotrichum at species level (Von Arx, 1957; Sutton, 1980, 1992). However, as these characters vary depending on the culture medium and the environmental conditions (light, temperature, etc.), the identification of Colletotrichum species based exclusively on these features is unreliable (Cai et al., 2009; Damm et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2016). Based on literature, identification of Colletotrichum at species level is performed using a polyphasic approach that combines cultural and morphological characteristics, pathogenicity tests and multilocus gene sequencing analysis (Cai et al., 2009; Cannon et al., 2012; Weir et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2016). The vast majority of Colletotrichum species are now classified into 15 complexes, i.e. C. acutatum, C. agaves, C. boninense, C. caudatum, C. destructivum, C. dematium, C. dracaenophilum, C. gigasporum, C. gloeosporioides, C. graminicola, C. magnum, C. orbiculare, C. orchidearum, C. spaethianum and C. truncatum (Marin‐Felix and Zhang, 2017; Damm et al., 2019; Talhinhas and Baroncelli, 2021). Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola are distinct fungal species belonging to the C. gloeosporioides species complex, which consists of 57 closely related species (Weir et al., 2012; Jayawardena et al., 2021; Talhinhas and Baroncelli, 2021).
Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola are fungi of the family Glomerellaceae. The EPPO Global Database (online) provides the following taxonomic identification for each of the above‐mentioned Colletotrichum species:
-
1
Colletotrichum aenigma
Preferred scientific name: Colletotrichum aenigma B.S. Weir & P.R. Johnston.
Order: Phyllachorales.
Family: Glomerellaceae.
Genus: Colletotrichum.
Species: Colletotrichum aenigma.
Common names: anthracnose.
Synonyms: Colletotrichum populi C.M. Tian & Z. Li.
The EPPO code 1 (Griessinger and Roy, 2015; EPPO, 2019) for this species is COLLAE (EPPO, online).
-
2
Colletotrichum alienum
Preferred scientific name : Colletotrichum alienum B.S. Weir & P.R. Johnston.
Order: Phyllachorales.
Family: Glomerellaceae.
Genus: Colletotrichum.
Species: Colletotrichum alienum.
Common names: anthracnose.
The EPPO code1 (Griessinger and Roy, 2015; EPPO, 2019) for this species is COLLAI (EPPO, online).
-
3
Colletotrichum perseae
Preferred scientific name : Colletotrichum perseae G. Sharma & S. Freeman.
Order: Phyllachorales.
Family: Glomerellaceae.
Genus: Colletotrichum.
Species: Colletotrichum perseae.
Common names: anthracnose.
The EPPO code 1 (Griessinger and Roy, 2015; EPPO, 2019) for this species is COLLPV (EPPO, online).
-
4
Colletotrichum siamense
Preferred scientific name : Colletotrichum siamense Prihastuti, L. Cai & K.D. Hyde.
Order: Phyllachorales.
Family: Glomerellaceae.
Genus: Colletotrichum.
Species: Colletotrichum siamense.
Common names: anthracnose.
Synonyms: No synonyms for this species are provided by EPPO Global Database or CABI. However, the following synonyms of C. siamense are reported by Farr and Rossman (online; https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/):
-
•
Colletotrichum communis G. Sharma, A.K. Pinnaka & B.D. Shenoy
-
•
Colletotrichum dianesei N.B. Lima, M.P.S. Câmara & S.J. Michereff
-
•
Colletotrichum endomangiferae W.A.S. Vieira, M.P.S. Camara & S.J. Michereff
-
•
Colletotrichum hymenocallidis Y.L. Yang, Zuo Y. Liu, K.D. Hyde & L. Cai
-
•
Colletotrichum jasmini‐sambac Wikee, K.D. Hyde, L. Cai & McKenzie
-
•
Colletotrichum melanocaulon V. Doyle, P.V. Oudem & S.A. Rehner
The EPPO code 1 (Griessinger and Roy, 2015; EPPO, 2019) for this species is COLLSM (EPPO, online).
-
5
Colletotrichum theobromicola
Preferred scientific name: Colletotrichum theobromicola Delacroix.
Order: Phyllachorales.
Family: Glomerellaceae.
Genus: Colletotrichum.
Species: Colletotrichum theobromicola.
Common names: anthracnose.
Synonyms: No synonyms for this species are provided by EPPO Global Database or CABI. However, the following synonyms are reported by Farr and Rossman (online; https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/):
-
•
Colletotrichum fragariae A.N. Brooks
-
•
Colletotrichum gloeosporioides f. stylosanthis Munaut
-
•
Colletotrichum pseudotheobromicola Chethana, J.Y.Yan, X.H. Li & K.D. Hyde
The EPPO code 1 (Griessinger and Roy, 2015; EPPO, 2019) for this species is COLLTH (EPPO, online).
3.1.2. Biology of the pest
Species of the genus Colletotrichum show different lifestyles that vary between species complexes, with most species being able to sequentially switch between lifestyles (de Silva et al., 2017a). The lifestyle patterns found in Colletotrichum species can be broadly categorised as necrotrophic, hemi‐biotrophic, saprotrophic, latent or quiescent, and endophytic. Evidence suggests that the interaction between the host plant and the endophytic Colletotrichum species can sometimes switch from mutualistic to antagonistic or pathogenic depending on the physiological condition of the plant, host genotype and environmental conditions (de Silva et al., 2017a). Therefore, Colletotrichum species may have different interactions with their hosts and exhibit differences in their life cycles independently whether they belong to the same species complex or not (da Silva et al., 2020). Occurrence of cross‐pathogenicity between Colletotrichum species from different hosts is also observed (Bragança et al., 2016; Eaton et al., 2021).
Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola have life cycles similar to those of other Colletotrichum species (Figure 1). Their life cycles include both asexual and sexual reproductive stages (Cannon et al., 2012; de Silva et al., 2017a). Infection occurs via an appressorium that develops from the germinating conidium on the plant surface, followed by turgor‐driven penetration of the cuticle (Deising et al., 2000) and, in some cases, also of the epidermal cells by fungal hyphae (Bailey et al., 1992). Establishment within plant tissues is aided via production by the fungus of host‐induced virulence effectors (Kleemann et al., 2012; O'Connell et al., 2012). Subsequently, the pathogens enter a biotrophic phase during which they remain quiescent or latent within the host tissues until environmental conditions and host physiology become conducive for their reactivation and further development (Boufleur et al., 2020). The biotrophic life strategies adopted by Colletotrichum species may also contribute to their prominence as symptomless endophytes of living plant tissues (Lu et al., 2004; Joshee et al., 2009; Rojas et al., 2010; Yuan et al., 2011). Following the biotrophic phase, Colletotrichum spp. enter a necrotrophic phase that results in death of host plant cells and the appearance of disease symptoms. During their active growth in the plant tissues, the pathogens produce acervuli (asexual fruiting structures) with masses of mucilage‐embedded conidia (Figure 1). The mucilaginous matrix is composed of glycoprotein and germination inhibitors that protect conidia against desiccation and toxins produced by the host defence mechanism (Leite and Nicholson, 1992). The conidia are dispersed over relatively short distances by water (rain, irrigation), wind‐driven rain (de Silva et al., 2017a). Dispersal is also possible by insects (Gasparoto et al., 2017). They are produced on the infected host tissues throughout the season resulting in polycyclic disease cycles. The sexual stage of many Colletotrichum species, including C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola, has been observed in in vitro cultures on synthetic media but not under field conditions (Jayawardena et al., 2021).
Figure 1.
General life cycle of Colletotrichum species (from de Silva et al., 2017a)
No information for the potential of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola to survive in soil (with or without plant debris) exists. Nevertheless, in general, Colletotrichum species do not survive for long periods in soil (Bergstrom and Nicholson, 1999; Ripoche et al., 2008), although there are notable exceptions (Eastburn and Gubler, 1990; Dillard and Cobb, 1998; Freeman et al., 2002; Feil et al., 2008; Ripoche et al., 2008) and survival structures, such as melanised microsclerotia, have been observed in several species (e.g. C. truncatum, C. sublineola and C. coccodes) (Dillard and Cobb, 1998; Boyette et al., 2007; Sukno et al., 2008). However, no information exists in the literature on the formation of microsclerotia by C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola.
Although it has not been documented, seeds of host plants are possibly one of the main sources of primary inoculum for the above‐mentioned five Colletotrichum species, similarly to other Colletotrichum species (Cannon et al., 2012).
Like other Colletotrichum species, host infection by C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense or C. theobromicola depends on different factors including humidity, temperature, host physiology and inoculum level (Freeman et al., 1998). In general, warm, wet or humid environmental conditions favour host infection by Colletotrichum species. According to Zhang et al. (2020a,b), the optimum temperature for the in vitro mycelial growth of C. aenigma and C. siamense was 28°C. At 36°C, no mycelial growth of C. aenigma was observed, whereas C. siamense proved to be more tolerant to temperatures higher than 36°C suggesting the potential threat posed by this species to hosts grown in areas with hot and rainy weather.
3.1.3. Host range/Species affected
With the exception of C. perseae, which, so far, has been reported to affect a very limited number of hosts, the other four Colletotrichum species, i.e. C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. siamense and C. theobromicola, have relatively wide host ranges (see Appendix A). It should be noted that, in some cases, more than one of the above‐mentioned five Colletotrichum species were identified to be associated with anthracnose on a single host, whereas in other cases, other species of the C. gloeosporioides complex or of other Colletotrichum species complexes were also involved (Schena et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2015; Sharma et al., 2017; Yokosawa et al., 2017; Fu et al., 2019; Chen et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2020a,b). The host range of each of the five Colletotrichum species and particularly that of C. perseae, which has been identified recently (Sharma et al., 2017), might be wider than that currently reported as, in the past, when molecular tools were not available, Colletotrichum species identified as C. gloeosporioides sensu lato based on morphology and pathogenicity, might have belonged to one of the above‐mentioned species.
Given that Colletotrichum species are commonly found on many plant species as pathogens, endophytes and occasionally as saprobes, and that their accurate identification and their discrimination from other closely‐related Colletotrichum species is only possible by using molecular tools, this Pest categorisation will focus on those hosts for which there is robust evidence in the literature that (i) the pathogens were isolated and identified by both morphology and multilocus gene sequencing analysis, (ii) the Koch's postulates were fulfilled through pathogenicity tests performed on unwounded plant tissues, and (iii) their impacts on crop yield were documented. The reported hosts in the literature of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola that fulfil the above‐mentioned criteria are considered by the Panel as main hosts and are listed in Table 2. Appendix B provides an overview on the main hosts which can be infected or co‐infected by more than one of the five Colletotrichum species.
Table 2.
Main hosts of Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola
| Colletotrichum species | Main hosts | References |
|---|---|---|
| C. aenigma | Actinidia arguta | Wang et al. (2019) |
| Aquilaria sinensis | Li et al. (2021a,b) | |
| Camellia spp. (C. japonica, C. oleifera, C. sinensis, C. sasanqua) | Yang et al. (2019), Wang et al. (2020b), Chen et al. (2019) | |
|
Capsicum annuum |
Sharma et al. (2022), Diao et al. (2017) | |
| Diospyros kaki | Andrioli et al. (2021) | |
| Fragaria × ananassa | Zhang et al. (2020a,b) | |
| Juglans regia | Wang et al. (2020a,b,c) | |
|
Malus domestica |
Lee et al. (2021), Yokosawa et al. (2017), Zhang et al. (2021a,b,c) | |
| Olea europaea | Schena et al. (2014) | |
| Persea americana | Sharma et al. (2017) | |
| Pyrus spp. (P. pyrifolia, P. x bretschneideri, P. communis) | Fu et al. (2019) | |
| Prunus avium | Chethana et al. (2019) | |
| Selenicereus undatus | Meetum et al. (2015) | |
| Synsepalum dulcificum | Truong et al. (2018) | |
| Vitis vinifera | Kim et al. (2021) | |
| C. alienum | Camellia spp. | Liu et al. (2015) |
|
Mangifera indica |
Ahmad et al. (2021), Tovar‐Pedraza et al. (2020) | |
| Olea europaea | Moreira et al. (2021) | |
| Persea americana | Sharma et al. (2017) | |
| C. perseae | Capsicum annum | Sharma et al. (2022) |
| Olea europaea | Moral et al. (2021) | |
| Persea americana | Sharma et al. (2017), Hofer et al. (2021) | |
| Vitis vinifera | Yokosawa et al. (2020) | |
| C. siamense | Allium cepa | Chowdappa et al. (2015) |
| Annona muricata | Costa et al. (2019) | |
| Annona squamosa | Costa et al. (2019 | |
|
Camellia spp. |
Liu et al. (2015), Zhao et al. (2021), Peng et al. (2022), Jayawardena et al. (2016) | |
|
Capsicum annum |
de Silva et al. (2017b, 2019), de Oliveira et al. (2017), Diao et al. (2017), Sharma and Shenoy (2014), Mongkolporn and Taylor (2018), Suwannarat et al. (2017) | |
| Carica papaya | Zhang et al. (2021a,b,c) | |
| Carya illinoinensis | Oh et al. (2021) | |
| Citrus spp. | Wang et al. (2021) | |
| Citrus reticulata | Cheng et al. (2013) | |
| Citrus sinensis | Douanla‐Meli and Unger (2017) | |
| Coffea arabica | Serrato‐Diaz et al. (2020) | |
| Corchorus capsularis | Niu et al. (2016) | |
| Ctenanthe oppenheimiana | Xu et al. (2020) | |
| Dioscorea cayennensis | de Souza Junior and Assuncao (2021) | |
| Fragaria × ananassa | Zhang et al. (2020a,b), Wang et al. (2022) | |
| Gossypium hirsutum | Salunkhe et al. (2020) | |
| Juglans regia | Wang et al. (2017) | |
| Malus domestica | Yokosawa et al. (2017) | |
| Malus niedzwetzkyana | Han et al. (2022) | |
|
Mangifera indica |
Giblin et al. (2018), Pardo‐De la Hoz et al. (2016) | |
| Magnolia grandiflora | Zhou et al. (2022) | |
| Manihot carthaginesis | Oliveira et al. (2018) | |
| Manihot esculenta | Liu et al. (2019) | |
| Manihot tomentosa | Oliveira et al. (2018) | |
| Musa acumitata | Uysal and Kurt (2020) | |
| Olea europaea | Schena et al. (2014) | |
| Persea americana | Fuentes‐Aragon et al. (2020), Sharma et al. (2017), Hofer et al. (2021) | |
| Prunus persica | Tan et al. (2022) | |
| Punica granatum | Xavier et al. (2019) | |
| Pyrus spp. (P. pyrifolia, P. bretschneideri, P. communis) | Fu et al. (2019) | |
| Ricinus communis | Tang et al. (2021) | |
| Selenicereus undatus | Meetum et al. (2015) | |
| Synsepalum dulcificum | Truong et al. (2018) | |
| Vitis caribaea | Santos et al. (2018) | |
| Vitis riparia | Santos et al. (2018) | |
| Zinnia elegans | Li et al. (2021a,b) | |
| Ziziphus mauritiana | Shu et al. (2021) | |
| C. theobromicola | Allium fistulosum | Matos et al. (2017) |
| Anacardium occidentale | Veloso et al. (2018) | |
| Annona spp. | Morita et al. (2015); Costa et al. (2019) | |
| Anthurium spp. | Chaves et al. (2020) | |
| Butia odorata | Dorneles et al. (2017) | |
| Buxus spp. | Singh et al. (2015) | |
| Campomanesia phaea | Santos et al. (2017) | |
| Centrosema pubescens | Pakdeeniti et al. (2022) | |
| Citrus spp. | Wang et al. (2021) | |
| Coffea arabica | Serrato‐Diaz et al. (2020) | |
| Copernicia prunifera | Araujo et al. (2018) | |
| Eucalyptus spp. | Rodrigues et al. (2014) | |
| Gossypium arboretum cv. indicum | Kang et al. (2022) | |
| Malpighia emarginata | Bragança et al. (2014) | |
| Malus domestica | Alaniz et al. (2015) | |
| Mangifera indica | Pardo‐De la Hoz et al. (2016) | |
| Manihot esculenta | Oliveira et al. (2018, 2020) | |
| Manilkara zapota | Martins et al. (2018) | |
|
Olea europaea |
Schena et al. (2014), Lima et al. (2020), Moreira et al. (2021) | |
| Persea americana | Sharma et al. (2017) | |
| Punica granatum | Xavier et al. (2019) | |
| Theobroma cacao | Rojas et al. (2010) |
3.1.4. Intraspecific diversity
The sexual stage of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola has been observed in in vitro cultures but not under field conditions. However, other species of the C. gloeosporioides complex form perithecia (sexual fruiting bodies) on their hosts (Dowling et al., 2020). The ability of Colletotrichum species to differentiate sexual reproductive stages enhances their genomic plasticity and adaptation to various and/or adverse environmental conditions, including the selection of fungicide‐resistant populations. It is generally acknowledged that the risk of fungicide resistance development increases when sexual recombination occurs in the life cycle (FRAC, 2014). With this respect, many isolates of C. siamense from commercial peach orchards in South Carolina (USA) were found to be resistant to quinone outside inhibitors (QoI) fungicides and some even dual resistant to QoI and benzimidazole fungicides (Hu et al., 2015).
No information exists in the literature on differences in aggressiveness among isolates of each of the five Colletotrichum species, although such differences have been reported for other species of the C. gloeosporioides complex (Wang et al., 2021).
3.1.5. Detection and identification of the pest
Are detection and identification methods available for the pest?
Yes, methods for the detection and identification of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola and their discrimination from other closely related Colletotrichum species are available.
Plants infected by C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense or C. theobromicola show symptoms of anthracnose, which may include dark brown stem and fruit spots, stem cankers, pre‐ and post‐harvest fruit rot, leaf spots and wilt, shoot‐tip dieback and defoliation (Rodrigues et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2015; Diao et al., 2017; Sharma et al., 2017, 2022; de Silva et al., 2017b; Giblin et al., 2018; Chethana et al., 2019; Costa et al., 2019; Chaves et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2020; Chung et al., 2020; Mao et al., 2020; Yokosawa et al., 2020; Andrioli et al., 2021; Carbone et al., 2021; Huang et al., 2021; Luo et al., 2021; Moral et al., 2021; Oo et al., 2021; Han et al., 2022). However, these symptoms are similar to those caused by other Colletotrichum species belonging either to the C. gloeosporioides complex or to other Colletotrichum species complexes. If fruiting structures (acervuli with conidia and/or perithecia with ascospores) are detected on the symptomatic plant tissues using a magnifying lens, they are similar to those of other Colletotrichum species. It should be also noted that during the biotrophic phase, the pathogens remain quiescent or latent within the host tissues until environmental conditions and host physiology become conducive for their reactivation and the development of disease symptoms (see Section 3.1.2 Biology of the pest). Based on the above, it is unlikely that C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola could be detected based only on visual inspection of their host plants.
The pathogens can be readily isolated on culture media and description of their cultural and morphological characteristics is available in the literature (Prihastuti et al., 2009; Rojas et al., 2010; Weir et al., 2012; Sharma et al., 2017; Hassan et al., 2018; Fu et al., 2019; Ahmad et al., 2021). However, as some of these characteristics are similar to or overlap with those of other Colletotrichum species, and moreover, they vary under changing environmental conditions (Cai et al., 2009; Liu et al., 2016), the pathogens cannot be reliably identified based only on morphology. A polyphasic approach, combining the application of molecular methods, such as multilocus gene sequencing analysis with morphological and pathogenicity data, is currently recognised as being the most reliable method for the identification of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola and their discrimination from other closely related Colletotrichum species (Cai et al., 2009; Cannon et al., 2012; Weir et al., 2012). More specifically, C. aenigma can be distinguished from other closely related Colletotrichum species based on sequence analysis of tub2 and gs genes (Weir et al., 2012); C. alienum using cal or gs genes (Weir et al., 2012); C. perseae can be well resolved with sequence analysis of ApMAT and gs genes (Sharma et al., 2017); C. siamense is distinguished by cal or tub2 gene sequence data and C. theobromicola by ITS sequences (Weir et al., 2012). Nucleotide sequences of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola are available in GenBank (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank) and could be used as reference material for molecular diagnosis.
No EPPO Standards are available for the detection and identification of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense or C. theobromicola.
3.2. Pest distribution
3.2.1. Pest distribution outside the EU
The current geographical distribution of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola outside the EU is shown in Table 3 and Figures 2, 3, 4, 5, 6–2, 3, 4, 5, 6. The records are based on CABI Crop Protection Compendium (online; accessed on 15/2/2022), Farr and Rossman (online; https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/; accessed on 15/2/2022) and other sources (published articles until May 2022) as well as on whether the species is included in the EPPO Global Database (online; last accessed on 15/2/2022). Details of the current geographical distribution of each of the above‐mentioned pathogens outside the EU are presented in Appendix C.
Table 3.
Distribution of Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola outside the EU based on CABI Crop Protection Compendium (online), EPPO Global Database (online), Farr and Rossman (online; https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/) and other sources
| Colletotrichum species | Distribution |
|---|---|
| C. aenigma | Brazil, China, Colombia, Iran, Israel, Japan, Malaysia, Republic of Korea, Thailand, UK, USA |
| C. alienum | Australia, China, Hawaii, Israel, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa, Uruguay, USA, Zimbabwe |
| C. perseae | Australia, Chile, Israel, Japan, New Zealand |
| C. siamense | Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Brazil, China, Colombia, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Kenya, Laos, Malaysia, Malawi, Mexico, New Zealand, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Puerto Rico, Republic of Korea, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Uruguay, USA, Vietnam, Zimbabwe |
| C. theobromicola | Argentina, Angola, Australia, Brazil, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, India, Israel, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Panama, Philippines, Puerto Rico, Republic of Korea, Thailand, Uruguay, USA |
Figure 2.
Global distribution of Colletotrichum aenigma [Data Source: CABI CPC (online; last accessed on 5 May 2022), Farr and Rossman (online; last accessed on 5 May 2022) and other literature sources]
Figure 3.
Global distribution of Colletotrichum alienum [Data Source: CABI CPC (online; last accessed on 5 May 2022), Farr and Rossman (online; last accessed on 5 May 2022) and other literature sources]
Figure 4.
Global distribution of Colletotrichum perseae [Data Source: CABI CPC (online; last accessed on 5 May 2022), Farr and Rossman (online; last accessed on 5 May 2022) and other literature sources]
Figure 5.
Global distribution of Colletotrichum siamense [Data Source: CABI CPC (online; last accessed on 5 May 2022), Farr and Rossman (online; last accessed on 5 May 2022) and other literature sources]
Figure 6.
Global distribution of Colletotrichum theobromicola [Data Source: CABI CPC (online; last accessed on 5 May 2022), Farr and Rossman (online; last accessed on 5 May 2022) and other literature sources]
There is uncertainty with respect to the actual geographical distribution of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola outside the EU, as in the past, when molecular tools (i.e. multigene phylogenetic analysis) were not available, the pathogens might have been misidentified based on morphology and pathogenicity tests only, which cannot reliably identify them.
3.2.2. Pest distribution in the EU
Is the pest present in the EU territory? If present, is the pest in a limited part of the EU or is it scarce, irregular, isolated or present infrequently? If so, the pest is considered to be not widely distributed.
Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum and C. siamense have been reported to be present in the EU, with a restricted distribution. More specifically, C. aenigma and C. siamense have been reported from Italy and C. alienum from Portugal, including Madeira Islands. There are no reports of C. perseae and C. theobromicola being present in the EU.
According to Schena et al. (2014), C. aenigma was isolated from Citrus sinensis, Pyrus communis and Olea europaea in Italy during the period 1992–2011 and was tested for its pathogenicity on detached olive fruits (cv. Coratina). Results showed that C. aenigma was a weak pathogen on green olives, but it induced noticeable rot on olives at the colour changing stage (ripening olives). In Mosca et al. (2014) studies, one isolate of C. aenigma from P. communis originated in Apulia (Italy) was used as reference material. According to the NPPO of Italy, the only report of C. aenigma in Italy is on Olea europaea; the NPPO further noted that the fungus is a weak pathogen with sporadic presence.
C. alienum has been reported from Portugal, including Madeira Islands. More specifically, in their studies, Liu et al. (2013) used three reference isolates of C. alienum obtained from the Culture Collection of the Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute (former CBS‐KNAW Fungal Biodiversity Centre), the Netherlands. Two isolates were identified on Leucadendron spp. (cv. High Gold) in Portugal in 2000 and the third one on Protea cynaroides in Madeira Islands in 2001. No other report is available in the literature on the presence of C. alienum in Portugal, including Madeira Islands.
Far and Rossman (online; https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/) reported C. alienum as being present in Spain and cited Crous et al. (2013). However, this is an unreliable record as, in none of the primary literature sources (Crous et al., 2013; Liu et al., 2013), C. alienum is reported as present in Spain. The NPPO of Spain stated that C. alienum is not known to be present in Spain.
In a study on the biodiversity of fungi on Vitis vinifera (grapevine), Jayawardena et al. (2018) isolated among other fungi, C. siamense from grapevines grown in the Forlì‐Cesena Province, Italy. However, the pathogenicity of the fungus on grapevine was not investigated. According to the NPPO of Italy, C. siamense has been isolated in 2021 from receptive stigmas of walnut fruit but compared to other Colletotrichum species (C. fioriniae and C. nymphaeae), to date it is not pathogenic on walnut in Italy.
C. perseae and C. theobromicola have not been reported from the EU territory.
There is uncertainty with respect to the actual distribution of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola in the EU, as in the past, when molecular tools (i.e. multigene phylogenetic analysis) were not available, the pathogens might have been misidentified based on morphology and pathogenicity tests, which cannot reliably identify them.
3.3. Regulatory status
3.3.1. Commission Implementing Regulation 2019/2072
Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola are not listed in Annex II of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072, an implementing act of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031.
3.3.2. Hosts or species affected that are prohibited from entering the Union from third countries
A list of hosts included in Annex VI of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 is provided in Table 4. Some of the hosts which belong to the genera Acacia, Annona, Diospyros, Jasminum, Juglans, Persea, Prunus, Persea as well as Ficus carica, are included in the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 on high‐risk plants.
Table 4.
List of plants, plant products and other objects that are Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola hosts whose introduction into the Union from certain third countries is prohibited (Source: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072, Annex VI, Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/419, Annex II and Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1936, Annex II, Part A)
|
Annex VI of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 List of plants, plant products and other objects whose introduction into the Union from certain third countries is prohibited | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Description | CN code | Third country, group of third countries or specific area of third country | |
| 8. | Plants for planting of […} Malus Mill., Prunus L., Pyrus L. […]., other than dormant plants free from leaves, flowers and fruits |
ex 0602 10 90 ex 0602 20 20 ex 0602 20 80 ex 0602 40 00 ex 0602 90 41 ex 0602 90 45 ex 0602 90 46 ex 0602 90 47 ex 0602 90 48 ex 0602 90 50 ex 0602 90 70 ex 0602 90 91 ex 0602 90 99 |
Third countries other than Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canary Islands, Faeroe Islands, Georgia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Norway, Russia (only the following parts: Central Federal District (Tsentralny federalny okrug), Northwestern Federal District (Severo‐ Zapadny 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 the United Kingdom |
| 9. | Plants for planting of […] Malus Mill., Prunus L. and Pyrus L. and their hybrids, and Fragaria L., other than seeds |
ex 0602 10 90 ex 0602 20 20 ex 0602 90 30 ex 0602 90 41 ex 0602 90 45 ex 0602 90 46 ex 0602 90 48 ex 0602 90 50 ex 0602 90 70 ex 0602 90 91 ex 0602 90 99 |
Third countries other than Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Canary Islands, Egypt, Faeroe Islands, Georgia, Iceland, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Liechtenstein, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Norway, Russia (only the following parts: Central Federal District (Tsentralny federalny okrug), Northwestern Federal District (Severo‐ Zapadny 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, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Kingdom (1) and United States other than Hawaii |
| 10. | Plants of Vitis L., other than fruits |
ex 0602 10 10 ex 0602 20 10 ex 0604 20 90 ex 1404 90 00 |
Third countries other than Switzerland |
| 11. | Plants of Citrus L., [………], and their hybrids, other than fruits and seeds | ex 0602 10 90 ex 0602 20 20 ex 0602 20 30 ex 0602 20 80 ex 0602 90 45 ex 0602 90 46 ex 0602 90 47 ex 0602 90 50 ex 0602 90 70 ex 0602 90 91 ex 0602 90 99 ex 0604 20 90 ex 1404 90 00 | All third countries |
| 19. | Soil as such consisting in part of solid organic substances | ex 2,530 90 00 ex 3824 99 93 | Third countries other than Switzerland |
| 20. | Growing medium as such, other than soil, consisting in whole or in part of solid organic substances, other than that composed entirely of peat or fibre of Cocos nucifera L., previously not used for growing of plants or for any agricultural purposes | ex 2530 10 00 ex 2530 90 00 ex 2703 00 00 ex 3101 00 00 ex 3824 99 93 | Third countries other than Switzerland |
|
Annex II of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/419 List of plants, plant products and other objects, originating from third countries, and the corresponding measures for their introduction into the Union territory, as referred to in Article 2 | |||
|
Jasminum polyanthum Franchet, unrooted cuttings of plants for planting |
ex 0602 10 90 | Israel |
(a) Official statement that: (i) the plants are free from …Colletotrichum siamense;…. (iv) the production site has been subject to official inspections for the presence of …Colletotrichum siamense every three weeks and found free from those pests; (v) immediately prior to export, consignments of the plants have been subjected to an official inspection for the presence of ….and to an official inspection for the presence of Colletotrichum siamense including testing of symptomatic plants |
|
Annex II, Part A of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1936 List of plants, plant products and other objects, originating from third countries, and the corresponding measures for their introduction into the Union territory, as referred to in Article 2 | |||
| Ficus carica L., rooted, dormant, without leaves, 1‐year‐old plants for planting with a maximum diameter of 2 cm at the base of the stem, and 1‐year‐old rooted cuttings without leaves of plants for planting with growing medium and with a maximum diameter of 1 cm at the base of the stem |
ex 0602 20 20 ex 0602 20 80 ex 0602 90 45 ex 0602 90 46 ex 0602 90 48 ex 0602 90 50 ex 0602 90 70 |
Israel |
(a) Official statement that: (i) the plants are free from …Colletotrichum siamense… (iv) immediately prior to export, consignments of the plants have been subjected to an official inspection for the presence of … and to an official inspection for the presence of Colletotrichum siamense and… including random sampling and testing of the plants; |
| Persea americana Mill., rooted, with leaves, grafted plants for planting with growing medium and with a maximum diameter of 1 cm at the base of the stem |
ex 0602 90 41 ex 0602 90 45 ex 0602 90 48 ex 0602 90 50 |
Israel |
(a) Official statement that: (i) the plants are free from … Colletotrichum aenigma, Colletotrichum alienum,… Colletotrichum perseae, Colletotrichum siamense, Colletotrichum theobromicola,… (iv) immediately prior to export, consignments of the plants have been subjected to an official inspection for the presence of Colletotrichum aenigma, Colletotrichum alienum,… Colletotrichum perseae, Colletotrichum siamense, Colletotrichum theobromicola… including random sampling and testing of the plants; |
| Persea americana Mill., unrooted cuttings of plants for planting with a maximum diameter of 2 cm |
ex 0602 10 90 |
Israel |
(a) Official statement that: (i) the plants are free from … Colletotrichum aenigma, Colletotrichum alienum,… Colletotrichum perseae, Colletotrichum siamense, Colletotrichum theobromicola,… (iv) immediately prior to export, consignments of the plants have been subjected to an official inspection for the presence of Colletotrichum aenigma, Colletotrichum alienum,… Colletotrichum perseae, Colletotrichum siamense, Colletotrichum theobromicola… including random sampling and testing of the plants |
3.4. Entry, establishment and spread in the EU
3.4.1. Entry
Is the pest able to enter into the EU territory? If yes, identify and list the pathways.
Yes. C. aenigma, C. alienum and C. siamense have already entered the EU and they may further enter via the host plants for planting and the fresh fruit pathways. Similarly, C. perseae and C. theobromicola could potentially enter the EU territory via the host plants for planting and the fresh fruit pathways.
Comment on plants for planting as a pathway.
Host plants for planting is a main pathway for the entry of the pathogens into the EU territory.
The Panel identified the following main pathways for the entry of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola into the EU territory:
-
1
host plants for planting, and
-
2
fresh fruit of host plants,
originating in infested third countries (Table 3).
The pathogens could potentially enter the EU territory on nuts, cut flowers and plant parts of their hosts for ornamental or medicinal purposes. However, these are considered minor pathways for the entry of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola into the EU.
Although seeds are reported as one of the primary sources of inoculum for many Colletotrichum species, there is no evidence of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola being transmitted by seeds of their host plants. Therefore, uncertainty exists on seeds of host plants as a pathway for the entry of the above‐mentioned five Colletotrichum species into the EU.
No information specific for C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola exists in the available literature on their potential to survive in soil, but in general, Colletotrichum species appear to be poor competitors in soil (see Section 3.1.2 Biology of the pest). Therefore, uncertainty exists on the soil and other substrates associated or not with host and non‐host plants for planting as a pathway of entry of the pathogens into the EU territory.
C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola are unlikely to enter the EU by natural means (rain, wind‐driven rain, insects, etc.) because of the long distance between the infested third countries and the EU Member States. Although there are no quantitative data available, spores of the pathogens may be also present as contaminants on other substrates or objects (e.g. non‐host plants, second hand agricultural machinery and equipment, crates, etc.) imported into the EU. Nevertheless, these are considered minor pathways for the entry of the pathogens into the EU territory.
It should be noted that among the host plant genera included in Table 5, Annona L., Diospyros L., Juglans L., Malus Mill., Persea Mill. and Prunus L. are considered high‐risk plants [Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 of 18 December 2018] (see Section 3.3).
Table 5.
Potential pathways for Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola into the EU 27
| Pathways | Life stage | Relevant mitigations [e.g. prohibitions (Annex VI), special requirements (Annex VII) or phytosanitary certificates (Annex XI) within Implementing Regulation 2019/2072] |
|---|---|---|
| Description (e.g. host/intended use/source) | ||
| Host plants for planting other than seeds | Mycelium, acervuli with conidia, perithecia with ascospores |
|
| Host plants other than fruits and seeds | Mycelium, acervuli with conidia, perithecia with ascospores |
|
| Fruits of host plants | Mycelium, acervuli with conidia |
Among the third countries from which a phytosanitary certificate is not required, Turkey has been reported to be infested with C. siamense (see Section 3.2.1).
|
| Leaves of host plants | Mycelium, acervuli with conidia, perithecia with ascospores |
|
| Parts of host plants, other than fruit and seeds | Mycelium, acervuli with conidia, perithecia with ascospores |
Among the third countries from which a phytosanitary certificate is not required, Turkey has been reported to be infested with C. siamense.
|
| Soil associated or not with host and non‐host plants for planting | Microsclerotia |
|
| Growing medium associated or not with host and non‐host plants | Microsclerotia |
|
| Machinery and vehicles which have been operated for agricultural or forestry purposes | Microsclerotia, with high uncertainty because of lack of information |
|
The volume of fresh produce of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola main hosts originated in infested third countries and imported into the EU territory during the period 2016–2020 is presented in Table 6. Appendix D provides import statistics for individual third countries.
Table 6.
EU 27 annual imports of fresh produce of main hosts from countries where Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola are present, 2016–2020 (in 100 kg) Source: Eurostat accessed on 18/3/2022
| Commodity | HS code | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh persimmons | 0810 70 00 | 3331.48 | 3844.34 | 2205.98 | 3346.16 | 6724.66 |
| Fresh strawberries | 0810 10 00 | 42,131.12 | 48,341.86 | 44,872.39 | 35,151.25 | 84,609.94 |
| Fresh tamarinds, cashew apples, lychees, jackfruit, sapodillo plums, passion fruit, carambola and pitahaya * | 0810 90 20 | 163,404.09 | 179,632.91 | 184,705.55 | 201,001.91 | 184,088.82 |
| Fresh or dried walnuts, in shell and shelled |
0802 31 0802 32 |
811,100.06 | 804,843 | 778,627.4 | 866,407.4 | 901,531.72 |
| Fresh apples |
0808 10 |
1,571,609.85 | 1,811,900.59 | 2,401,452.66 | 1,513,510.15 | 1,688,051.46 |
| Fresh or chilled olives |
0709 92 |
1542.04 | 1023.52 | 836.70 | 2042.29 | 6381.46 |
| Fresh or dried avocados |
0804 40 00 |
2,063,188.12 | 2,256,280.11 | 2,726,949.69 | 3,008,254.47 | 3,136,713.56 |
| Fresh pears |
0808 30 |
1,630,892.91 | 1,358,291.97 | 1,378,444.99 | 1,140,281.00 | 1,320,026.96 |
| Fresh cherries (excl. Sour cherries) |
0809 29 00 |
2556.84 | 6513.03 | 6182.85 | 3435.61 | 11,509.14 |
| Fresh grapes |
0806 10 |
349,475.09 | 419,133.7 | 400,203.5 | 273,610.8 | 286,902.3 |
| Fresh or dried guavas, mangoes and mangosteens |
0804 50 00 |
1,407,147.77 | 1,482,471.03 | 1,562,860.63 | 1,845,650.38 | 1,938,656.55 |
| Coffee, whether or not roasted or decaffeinated; coffee husks and skins; coffee substitutes containing coffee in any proportion | 0901 | 20,987,474.19 | 19,595,095.83 | 20,172,408.67 | 20,827,757.53 | 20,131,232.09 |
| Coconuts, Brazil nuts and cashew nuts, fresh or dried, whether or not shelled or peeled | 0801 | 125,274 | 109,479 | 121,257.1 | 119,455.8 | 111,733.7 |
| Citrus fruit, fresh or dried | 0805 | 14,000,959.74 | 13,944,079.72 | 15,893,049.64 | 13,821,011.24 | 15,818,866.58 |
| Cocoa beans, whole or broken, raw or roasted | 1801 00 00 | 86,869.22 | 83,223.42 | 31,753.83 | 23,668.46 | 22,433.73 |
| Vegetable and strawberry plants | 0602 90 30 | 52,806.04 | 51,745.84 | 56,746.49 | 63,535.72 | 24,547.54 |
| Indoor flowering plants with buds or flowers (excl. cacti) | 0602 90 91 | 8799.73 | 7811.9 | 16,582.99 | 24,858.15 | 17,842.82 |
| Indoor rooted cuttings and young plants (excl. cacti) | 0602 90 70 | 33,711.04 | 49,916.36 | 58,639.58 | 61,749.60 | 61,853.04 |
| Sum | 43,299,765.04 | 42,155,900.84 | 45,762,558.49 | 43,748,119.72 | 45,674,010.54 |
Aggregated data that include also non‐hosts.
Notifications of interceptions of harmful organisms began to be compiled in Europhyt in May 1994 and in TRACES in May 2020. No records of interceptions by EU Members States specific for C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense or C. fructicola exist in Europhyt (accessed on 6 September 2022). Nevertheless, until May–June 2020, there have been 21 interceptions of unidentified at species level Colletotrichum. No records of any of the five Colletotrichum species exist in TRACES database since May 2020 (accessed on 15/5/2022). However, there is only one report of C. acutatum.
3.4.2. Establishment
Is the pest able to become established in the EU territory?
Yes. C. aenigma, C. alienum and C. siamense are present in the EU, which indicates that both the biotic (host availability) and abiotic (climate suitability) factors occurring in parts of the EU are also favourable for the establishment of the other two species, i.e. C. perseae and C. theobromicola.
Given their biology, the five Colletotrichum species could potentially be transferred from the pathways of entry to the host plants grown in the EU via splash‐dispersed spores, contaminated soil and other plant growth substrates associated with plants for planting, and rain or irrigation water. The frequency of this transfer will depend on the volume and frequency of the imported commodities, their destination (e.g. nurseries, retailers, packinghouses) and its proximity to the hosts grown in the EU territory, as well as on the management of plant residues and fruit waste.
Climatic mapping is the principal method for identifying areas that could provide suitable conditions for the establishment of a pest taking key abiotic factors into account (Baker et al., 2000). Availability of hosts is considered in Section 3.4.2.1. Climatic factors are considered in Section 3.4.2.2.
3.4.2.1. EU distribution of main host plants
As noted above and shown in Appendix A, except for C. perseae, whose host range is limited so far to pepper, olive, avocado and grapevine, the other four Colletotrichum species, i.e. C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. siamense and C. theobromicola have relatively wide host ranges. In addition, most of the main hosts of the above‐mentioned five Colletotrichum species (Table 2) are widely distributed in the EU territory, in commercial production (fields, orchards, greenhouses) and in home gardens. The harvested area of most of the main hosts of each of the above‐mentioned Colletotrichum species cultivated in the EU 27 in recent years is shown in Table 7. Appendix E provides production statistics for individual Member States.
Table 7.
Harvested area of some of the Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola main hosts in EU 27, 2016–2020 (1,000 ha). Source EUROSTAT (accessed 18/03/2022) https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/apro_cpsh1/default/table?lang=en
| Crop | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strawberries | 103.78 | 103.76 | 106.42 | 101.16 | 83.84 |
| Apples | 505.66 | 504.61 | 506.27 | 491.08 | 483.01 |
| Pears | 115.13 | 113.81 | 113.54 | 110.66 | 107.05 |
| Cherries | 172.45 | 173.37 | 175.49 | 176.30 | 177.86 |
| Avocados | 12.24 | 12.72 | 13.22 | 17.50 | 19.60 |
| Walnuts | 72.61 | 74.15 | 80.60 | 87.62 | 96.69 |
| Grapes | 3,136.15 | 3,133.32 | 3,135.50 | 3,155.20 | 3,156.22 |
| Olives | 5,043.87 | 5,056.93 | 5,098.62 | 5,070.49 | 5,105.13 |
| Citrus fruits | 519.01 | 502.84 | 508.99 | 512.83 | 519.98 |
3.4.2.2. Climatic conditions affecting establishment
Of the five Colletotrichum species, C. aenigma and C. perseae have been reported from three continents (i.e. C. aenigma from America, Asia and Europe and C. perseae from America, Asia and Oceania), C. theobromicola from four continents (i.e. Africa, America, Asia and Oceania) and C. alienum and C. siamense from all the five continents (i.e. Africa, America, Asia, Europe and Oceania).
The global Köppen–Geiger climate zones (Kottek et al., 2006) describe terrestrial climate in terms of average minimum winter temperatures and summer maxima, amount of precipitation and seasonality (rainfall pattern).
Based on the data available in the literature on the exact locations of the infested areas, C. aenigma has been reported from areas with BSh, BSk, Cfa, Cfb, Csa, Dfb and Dfc climate zones; C. alienum from areas with BSh, BSk, Cfa, Cfb, Cfc, Csa, Csb and Dfc climate zones; C. perseae from areas with BSh, Cfa, Cfb, Csa and Dfb climate zones; C. siamense from areas with BSh, BSk, Cfa, Cfb, Cfc, Csa, Csb, Csc, Dfb and Dfc climates and C. theobromicola from areas with BSh, BSk, Cfa, Cfb, Cfc, Csa, Dfb and Dfc climates. The above‐mentioned climate zones, where each of those five Colletotrichum species is currently present, are comparable to those occurring in parts of the EU territory where hosts are also grown (Figures 7, 8, 9, 10–11).
Figure 7.
Distribution of seven Köppen–Geiger climate types, i.e. BSh, BSk, Cfa, Cfb, Csa, Dfb and Dfc that occur in the EU and in countries where Colletotrichum aenigma has been reported. The legend shows the list of Köppen–Geiger climates. Red dots indicate point locations where C. aenigma was reported (Appendix C.1)
Figure 8.
Distribution of eight Köppen–Geiger climate types, i.e. BSh, BSk, Cfa, Cfb, Cfc, Csa, Csb and Dfc that occur in the EU and in countries where Colletotrichum alienum has been reported. The legend shows the list of Köppen–Geiger climates. Red dots indicate point locations where C. alienum was reported (Appendix C.2)
Figure 9.
Distribution of five Köppen–Geiger climate types, i.e. BSh, Cfa, Cfb, Csa and Dfb that occur in the EU and in countries where Colletotrichum perseae has been reported. The legend shows the list of Köppen–Geiger climates. Red dots indicate point locations where C. perseae was reported (Appendix C.3)
Figure 10.
Distribution of 10 Köppen–Geiger climate types, i.e. BSh, BSk, Cfa, Cfb,Cfc, Csa, Csb, Csc, Dfb and Dfc that occur in the EU and in countries where Colletotrichum siamense has been reported. The legend shows the list of Köppen–Geiger climates. Red dots indicate point locations where C. siamense was reported (Appendix C.4)
Figure 11.
Distribution of eight Köppen–Geiger climate types, i.e. BSh, BSk, Cfa, Cfb, Cfc, Csa, Dfb and Dfc that occur in the EU and in countries where Colletotrichum theobromicola has been reported. The legend shows the list of Köppen–Geiger climates. Red dots indicate point locations where C. theobromicola was reported (Appendix C.5)
Therefore, it can be concluded that the climatic conditions occurring in some parts of the EU territory are favourable for the establishment of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola. However, uncertainty exists on whether the pathogens could potentially establish in EU areas belonging to other than the climate zones shown in Figures 7, 8, 9, 10–11, where hosts are also present.
3.4.3. Spread
Describe how the pest would be able to spread within the EU territory following establishment?
Following establishment, Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola could potentially spread within the EU territory by natural and human‐assisted means.
Host plants for planting is one of the main means of spread of the pathogens within the EU territory.
Following their introduction into the EU territory, C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola, similarly to other Colletotrichum species, could potentially spread via natural and human‐assisted means.
Spread by natural means. Colletotrichum species can spread locally mainly by water (rain, irrigation) (Madden et al., 1996; Freeman et al., 2002; Mouen Bedimo et al., 2007; Penet et al., 2014). Wind‐driven rain and insects may also contribute to the dispersal of Colletotrichum spp. spores (Gasparoto et al., 2017). In some pathosystems (e.g. C. acutatum sensu stricto and C. gloeosporioides sensu stricto affecting citrus), spread of the pathogens may also occur via wind‐disseminated ascospores (Silva‐Junior et al., 2014). However, there is uncertainty on the potential of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola to spread via wind‐borne ascospores, as the presence of their sexual stage has not been reported so far under field conditions (see Section 3.1.2 Biology of the pest).
Spread by human‐assisted means. The pathogens can spread over long distances via the movement of infected host plants for planting (rootstocks, grafted plants, scions, etc.), including dormant plants, as well as fresh fruits, contaminated agricultural machinery, tools, irrigation, etc.
Uncertainty exists on the potential of the pathogens to spread via the seeds of their host plants and soil or other plant growth substrates, due to lack of evidence.
3.5. Impacts
Would the pests' introduction have an economic or environmental impact on the EU territory?
Yes, the introduction of, C. perseae, C. theobromicola and the further introduction of Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum and C. siamense in the EU is likely to have yield and quality impacts in some parts of the territory. Nevertheless, the magnitude of the impacts is not known, especially in cases where more than one of the above‐mentioned Colletotrichum species would co‐infect a single host.
Species of the genus Colletotrichum are known to infect several economically important cultivated tropical, subtropical and temperate fruit crops, vegetables and ornamentals, causing severe damage and, consequently, resulting in significant losses (Bailey and Jeger, 1992; Lima et al., 2011; Cannon et al., 2012; Anderson et al., 2013; Guarnaccia et al., 2016; de Silva et al., 2017b).
In the areas of their current distribution, C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola are reported to cause anthracnose and pre‐ and post‐harvest fruit rots on their host plants (see Section 3.1.5).
Andrioli et al. (2021) reported that in Brazil, early infection of sweet persimmon fruit by anthracnose caused by C. aenigma, C. asianum, C. fructicola and C. nymphaeae caused premature fruit drop. Moreover, the disease developed further during fruit ripening and after harvest, leading to post‐harvest losses of 50–90%. In China, anthracnose of strawberry caused by C. aenigma, C. siamense, C. fructicola and C. gloeosporioides sensu stricto was responsible for nearly 50% of seedlings necrosis and > 40% of production losses in nurseries as well as for up to 80% yield losses (Chen et al., 2020). Chung et al. (2020) reported that in Taiwan from 2010 to 2016, C. siamense together with C. karstii, C. fructicola and C. boninense was responsible for a 30–40% loss of strawberry seedlings and of approximately 20% loss of plants after transplanting. In Hubei province, China, an incidence of 45% of strawberry crown rot caused by C. siamense was reported by Luo et al. (2021).
C. aenigma was identified to be the causal agent of anthracnose outbreaks in different vineyards in Gimcheon, South Korea (Kim et al., 2021); the most severely affected vineyards showed a disease incidence on grape berries of up to 50% with the infected berries displaying sunken necrotic lesions covered by orange conidial masses. In 2020, a 5% fruit damage caused by C. aenigma and C. perseae was estimated on pepper crops in two different locations in Southern (Fatsail) and Central Israel (Sde Warburg), respectively (Sharma et al., 2022). At both locations, anthracnose symptoms were observed only on pepper fruits and not on leaves or stems. According to Wang et al. (2020c), C. aenigma was the causal agent of a serious anthracnose disease of walnut orchards in Xingtai Hebei, China. Disease symptoms included brown to black circular or irregular sunken lesions on walnut fruits, with an incidence of 31–41% and circular to irregular brown to grey lesions on leaves, with an incidence of 1–2%. Additionally, Wang et al. (2017) identified C. siamense as the causal agent of walnut anthracnose in Shandong Province, China, which resulted in 50% yield loss.
Ahmad et al. (2021) reported that in 2019, 30% of mango fruits at different markets of the Fengtai district, Beijing, China, exhibited severe typical symptoms of anthracnose caused by C. alienum. Li et al. (2019) identified C. siamense as the most dominant among 13 Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose on mango crops in the Provinces of Hainan, Yunnan, Sichuan, Guizhou, Guangdong and Fujian of Southern China. The same authors reported that the annual yield loss because of the disease was 30–60% reaching 100% under favourable climatic conditions.
Anthracnose is the most devastating disease of olive in Uruguay (Leoni et al., 2018), particularly in orchards located in areas characterised by frequent high relative humidity and rainfall (around 1,100 mm per year). During the last 10 years, those areas were massively planted with olives for oil production using an intensive rainfed plantation system, which favours anthracnose development. According to Moreira et al. (2021), since 2017, severe anthracnose outbreaks have been observed in those areas leading to high yield losses and decreased olive oil quality (increased acidity and decreased organoleptic properties). C. alienum and C. theobromicola were identified as the causal agents of those outbreaks together with C. acutatum sensu stricto, C. nymphaeae and C. fioriniae of the C. acutatum complex (Moreira et al., 2021).
Avocado is a high value crop grown in tropical and subtropical areas worldwide. Under the subtropical Mediterranean conditions of Israel, avocado fruit that set during the winter are seriously affected by post‐harvest anthracnose which causes significant reduction in their shelf‐life and marketability (Freeman et al., 1998). Sharma et al.'s (2017) studies showed that nine Colletotrichum species among which C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola were involved in anthracnose disease of avocado in Israel. In Chile, anthracnose has increased during the last decades along with the establishment of new avocado orchards in humid areas. A survey carried out by Bustamante et al. (2020) in four commercial orchards located in the regions of Valparaiso, Metropolitana and O'Higgins (Chile) revealed that C. perseae and nine more Colletotrichum species belonging to four different Colletotrichum species complexes were associated with avocado anthracnose.
Although no quantitative data are available, C. alienum has been identified as the most economically important pathogen of Proteaceae in Australia, Europe and South Africa (Crous et al., 2013; Liu et al., 2013).
In India, chilli anthracnose caused by both C. siamense and C. fructicola was reported to adversely affect the quality of chilli fruits resulting in significant yield losses and reduced marketability (Sharma and Shenoy, 2014). Similarly, Oo et al. (2021) reported that C. siamense caused typical anthracnose symptoms on approximately 15–20% of chilli fruits (cv. Manita) growing in Goesan County, Chungcheong province, South Korea. C. siamense and C. truncatum were identified as the causal agents of severe anthracnose outbreaks in onion crops in southwest India (Chowdappa et al., 2015). Pérez‐Mora et al. (2020) showed that in northern Sinaloa, Mexico, C. siamense was the only Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose symptoms (petal necrosis, fruit lesions) on Mexican lime (C. aurantifolia) resulting in high crop losses and unmarketable fruits. C. siamense was reported to cause a 50–90% incidence of anthracnose on red‐fleshed apples (Malus niedzwetzkyana) in commercial orchards in Shandong province, China (Han et al., 2022).
Nine Colletotrichum species among which C. siamense and C. theobromicola were found to be associated with anthracnose of Annona spp., the most important disease of annonaceous crops in Brazil, causing yield losses of up to 70% particularly in periods of extended rainfall during the flowering and fruit developmental stages (Costa et al., 2019). It should be noted that A. squamosa (sugar apple) and A. muricata (soursop) have been arousing great interest in the international market for their fresh and processed fruit as well as for the production of biocomposites of medicinal, allelopathic or pesticide importance (Lemos, 2014). According to Veloso et al. (2018), C. siamense was the most dominant among seven Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose on cashew in Brazil with more than 40% yield losses.
Citrus anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum spp. is a serious disease limiting production globally. Preharvest anthracnose reduces yield, while post‐harvest anthracnose affects fruit quality, negatively impacting fruit export and marketability (Phoulivong et al., 2012). During a survey conducted in citrus orchards severely affected by anthracnose in Australia (Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland), Wang et al. (2021) identified six Colletotrichum species as the causal agents among which C. siamense and C. theobromicola. C. siamense was also reported to cause anthracnose of papaya fruit in China with an average disease incidence of 30% and over 60% in some orchards (Zhang et al., 2021a,b,c). According to Pardo‐De la Hoz et al. (2016), six Colletotrichum species of the C. gloeosporioides complex, among which C. siamense and C. theobromicola and three species of the C. boninense complex were associated with up to 60% of yield losses in mango plantations in the state of Tolima, Colombia.
It should be noted that, in cases where anthracnose disease on a single host was reported to be associated with more than one of the five Colletotrichum species (i.e. C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola) or in cases where other species of the C. gloeosporioides complex or of other Colletotrichum species complexes were also involved, the individual contribution of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense or C. theobromicola to the overall impact was not determined (Schena et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2015; Sharma et al., 2017; Yokosawa et al., 2017; Fu et al., 2019; Chen et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2020a,b).
Based on the above, it is expected that the introduction of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola into the EU territory would potentially cause yield and quality losses in parts of the risk assessment area where susceptible hosts are grown. However, neither the magnitude of this impact is known nor whether the agricultural practices and chemical control measures currently applied in the EU could potentially reduce the impact of the pathogens' introduction. It is worth mentioning that, although C. aenigma and C. siamense are reported from Italy and C. alienum from Portugal, including Madeira Islands, no crop losses have been reported so far.
3.6. Available measures and their limitations
Are there measures available to prevent pest entry, establishment, spread or impacts such that the risk becomes mitigated?
Yes. Although not specifically targeted against C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense or C. theobromicola, existing phytosanitary measures (see Sections 3.3.2 and 3.4.1) mitigate the likelihood of the pathogens' entry into the EU territory. Potential additional measures also exist to further mitigate the risk of entry and spread of the pathogens in the EU (see Section 3.6.1).
3.6.1. Identification of potential additional measures
Phytosanitary measures (prohibitions) are currently applied to some hosts of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola, (see Section 3.3.2). Potential additional control measures are listed in Table 8. Additional potential risk reduction options and supporting measures are shown in Sections 3.6.1.1 and 3.6.1.2.
Table 8.
Selected control measures (a full list is available in EFSA PLH Panel et al., 2018) for pest entry/establishment/spread/impact in relation to currently unregulated hosts and pathways. Control measures are measures that have a direct effect on pest abundance
| Control measure/Risk reduction option (Blue underline = Zenodo doc, Blue = WIP) | RRO summary | Risk element targeted (entry/establishment/spread/impact) |
|---|---|---|
| Require pest freedom | Plants, plant products and other objects come from a pest‐free country or a pest‐free area or a pest‐free place of production. | Entry/Spread |
| The use of transplants raised from pathogen‐free propagation material, as well as growing transplants in weed‐free areas and away from other crops that are known hosts of the pathogens may represent an effective control measure. | Entry/Spread | |
| Managed growing conditions |
Anthracnose disease is generally more severe in tropical and subtropical countries. Hot and humid environmental conditions support the spread of Colletotrichum spp. Therefore, proper field drainage, plant distancing, cutting of pruning debris into small pieces for faster decomposition and removal of severely infected plants in the field or in the greenhouse represent effective strategies to manage anthracnose. |
Entry/Spread/Impact |
|
Crop rotation, associations and density, weed/volunteer control |
Crop rotation (wherever feasible) and control of volunteer plants may also represent effective means to reduce inoculum sources and potential survival of the pathogens on alternative hosts. | Establishment/Spread/Impact |
|
Infection of host plants by the pathogens usually occurs from conidia formed on infected plants or plant debris which can act as inoculum sources. These propagules are dispersed from the infected plant parts and debris to healthy plants by rain splash, free water or high humidity. To reduce the sources of inoculum, pruning of the infected by the pathogens plant parts is highly recommended. |
Spread/Impact | |
|
Biological control and behavioural manipulation |
Some antagonistic fungi and bacteria have been tested in vitro for the biological control of the pathogens, but none of them was effective under field conditions. | Impact |
| Chemical treatments on crops including reproductive material | Several effective fungicides are available to control anthracnose‐causing species of Colletotrichum. Copper compounds, triazoles and strobilurins are effective in field treatment as well as when applied on reproductive material. The possibility of selection of fungicide‐resistant populations to triazoles and strobilurins must be considered. | Establishment/Spread/Impact |
|
Copper compounds, triazoles and strobilurins are effective as post‐harvest treatments against Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose and post‐harvest fruit rot. Calcium chloride is reported to improve the shelf‐life and quality of fruits that are known hosts of anthracnose pathogens. The possibility of selection of fungicide‐resistant populations should not be ruled out. |
Entry/Spread | |
|
Irradiation, mechanical cleaning (brushing, washing), sorting and grading and removal of diseased plant parts could be adopted on consignment or during processing of susceptible host plants or fruit. In the packinghouse, proper sanitation practices (e.g. good drainage systems to channel out wastewater or sewage during on‐farm fruit disinfection) should be built and regularly cleaned. |
Entry/ Spread | |
|
Cleaning and disinfection of facilities, tools and machinery |
Cleaning, disinfection and disinfestation (sanitation) of equipment and facilities (including premises, storage areas) are good cultural and handling practices employed in the production and marketing of any commodity and may contribute to mitigate likelihood of entry or spread of Colletotrichum species. | Entry/Spread |
| Limits on soil | Limits on soil are an efficient measure. | Entry/Spread |
|
Although no specific studies are available on C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola, it is likely that the pathogens could potentially survive in infected plant debris in soil, similarly to other Colletotrichum species. Therefore, soil and substrate disinfection with chemical or physical (heat, soil solarisation) means represents a suitable option for control. |
Entry/Establishment/Spread/Impact | |
|
Although Colletotrichum species could potentially spread via contaminated irrigation water, physical or chemical treatment of irrigation water is likely not to be feasible. |
Spread/Impact | |
|
Treatment of the waste (deep burial, composting, incineration, chipping, production of bio‐energy…) in authorised facilities and official restriction on the movement of waste. |
Spread | |
| Heat and cold treatments |
Hot water treatment at temperatures of 50–60°C for 5–60 min, depending on the host tolerance, may be applied to reduce the likelihood of infestation of the pathogens in susceptible plants or plant organs. The combination of hot water and calcium chloride may increase the efficacy of the treatment. As Colletotrichum spp. are adapted to high temperatures, cold treatment could also mitigate infection of consignments by the pathogens. |
Entry/Spread |
|
Specific requirements for mode and timing of transport of commodities to prevent escape of the pest and/or contamination.
If plant material, potentially infected or contaminated with Colletotrichum spp. has to be transported (including proper disposal of infested waste material), specific transport conditions (type of packaging/protection, time of transport, transport means) should be defined to prevent the pathogens from escaping. These may include, albeit not exclusively: physical protection; removal of leaves and peduncles from fruit commodities; sorting prior to transport, sealed packaging, etc. |
Entry/Spread | |
| Post‐entry quarantine and other restrictions of movement in the importing country |
This information sheet covers post‐entry quarantine (PEQ) of relevant commodities; temporal, spatial and end‐use restrictions in the importing country for import of relevant commodities; prohibition of import of relevant commodities into the domestic country. ‘Relevant commodities’ are plants, plant parts and other materials that may carry pests, either as infection, infestation or contamination. Recommended for plant species known as hosts of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola. |
Establishment/Spread |
3.6.1.1. Additional potential risk reduction options
Potential additional control measures are listed in Table 8.
3.6.1.2. Additional supporting measures
Potential additional supporting measures are listed in Table 9.
Table 9.
Selected supporting measures (a full list is available in EFSA PLH Panel, 2018) in relation to currently unregulated hosts and pathways. Supporting measures are categorisation measures or procedures supporting the choice of appropriate risk reduction options that do not directly affect pest abundance
| Supporting measure | Summary | Risk element targeted (entry/establishment/spread/impact) |
|---|---|---|
| Inspection and trapping |
Inspection is defined as the official visual examination of plants, plant products or other regulated articles to determine if pests are present or to determine compliance with phytosanitary regulations (ISPM 5). The effectiveness of sampling and subsequent inspection to detect pests may be enhanced by including trapping and luring techniques. As the symptoms caused by C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola on their hosts are similar to those of other anthracnose causing Colletotrichum species on the same hosts, it is unlikely that the pathogens could be detected at species level based on visual inspection only. |
Entry/Establishment/Spread |
|
Examination, other than visual, to determine if pests are present using official diagnostic protocols. Diagnostic protocols describe the minimum requirements for reliable diagnosis of regulated pests. Laboratory testing based on morphological characters and multilocus gene sequencing analysis is required for the detection and reliable identification of the pathogens. |
Entry/Spread | |
| Sampling |
According to ISPM 31, it is usually not feasible to inspect entire consignments, so phytosanitary inspection is performed mainly on samples obtained from a consignment. It is noted that the sampling concepts presented in this standard may also apply to other phytosanitary procedures, notably selection of units for testing. For inspection, testing and/or surveillance purposes the sample may be taken according to a statistically based or a non‐statistical sampling methodology. Necessary as part of other risk reduction options |
Entry/Spread |
|
Phytosanitary certificate and plant passport |
An official paper document or its official electronic equivalent, consistent with the model certificates of the IPPC, attesting that a consignment meets phytosanitary import requirements (ISPM 5) a) export certificate (import) b) plant passport (EU internal trade) Recommended for plant species known as hosts of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola |
Entry/Spread |
| Certified and approved premises |
Mandatory/voluntary certification/approval of premises is a process including a set of procedures and of actions implemented by producers, conditioners and traders contributing to ensure the phytosanitary compliance of consignments. It can be a part of a larger system maintained by the NPPO in order to guarantee the fulfilment of plant health requirements of plants and plant products intended for trade. Key property of certified or approved premises is the traceability of activities and tasks (and their components) inherent the pursued phytosanitary objective. Traceability aims to provide access to all trustful pieces of information that may help to prove the compliance of consignments with phytosanitary requirements of importing countries. Certified and approved premises reduce the likelihood of the plants and plant products originating in those premises to be infected by the pathogens |
Entry/Spread |
| Certification of reproductive material (voluntary/official) |
Plants come from within an approved propagation scheme and are certified pest free (level of infestation) following testing; Used to mitigate against pests that are included in a certification scheme The risk of entry and/or spread of the above‐mentioned Colletotrichum species is reduced if host plants for planting, including seeds for sowing, are produced under an approved certification scheme and tested free of these pathogens. |
Entry/Spread |
| Delimitation of Buffer zones |
ISPM 5 defines a buffer zone as ‘an area surrounding or adjacent to an area officially delimited for phytosanitary purposes in order to minimise the probability of spread of the target pest into or out of the delimited area, and subject to phytosanitary or other control measures, if appropriate’ (ISPM 5). The objectives for delimiting a buffer zone can be to prevent spread from the outbreak area and to maintain a pest‐free production place (PFPP), site (PFPS) or area (PFA). In the case of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola delimitation of a buffer zone around an outbreak area can prevent spread of the pathogens and maintain a pest‐free area, site or place of production. |
Spread |
| Surveillance | C. aenigma, C. alienum and C. siamense have been reported to be present in the EU. Surveillance would be an efficient supporting measure to define the actual distribution of each of those pathogens in the affected MSs and prevent its spread. | Spread |
3.6.1.3. Biological or technical factors limiting the effectiveness of measures
-
•
Latently infected plants and plant products are unlikely to be detected by visual inspection.
-
•
The similarity of symptoms and signs caused by C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola with those of other Colletotrichum species makes impossible the detection of the pathogens based on symptoms and signs (e.g. fruiting bodies).
-
•
The lack of rapid diagnostic methods based on serological or molecular approaches does not allow proper in planta identification of the pathogens at entry. Thorough post‐entry laboratory analyses may not be feasible for certain commodities as isolation in pure culture is needed prior to proceed with DNA extraction and molecular identification based on multigene sequencing.
-
•
The wide host range of some of those Colletotrichum species (i.e. C. siamense) limits the possibility to develop standard diagnostic protocols for all potential hosts.
-
•
The genome plasticity and the possibility of sexual reproduction leading to genetic recombination in C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola may limit the efficacy of chemical control approaches by favouring the selection of fungicide‐resistant populations.
3.7. Uncertainty
Uncertainty on the actual distribution of the five Colletotrichum species in the EU, particularly with respect to records where multilocus gene sequencing analysis was not used for the identification of the isolated Colletotrichum species.
4. Conclusions
Of the five Colletotrichum species, C. aenigma and C. siamense are reported to be present in Italy and C. alienum in Portugal, including Madeira Islands, with a restricted distribution. C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola satisfy the criteria that are within the remit of EFSA to assess for these species to be regarded as potential Union quarantine pests (Table 10).
Table 10.
The Panel's conclusions on the pest categorisation criteria defined in Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 on protective measures against pests of plants (the number of the relevant sections of the pest categorisation is shown in brackets in the first column)
| Criterion of pest categorisation | Panel's conclusions against criterion in Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 regarding Union quarantine pest | Key uncertainties |
|---|---|---|
| Identity of the pest (Section 3.1 ) | The identities of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola are clearly defined | None |
| Absence/presence of the pest in the EU (Section 3.2 ) |
If present, is the pest in a limited part of the EU or is it scarce, irregular, isolated or present infrequently? If so, the pest is considered to be not widely distributed. C. aenigma and C. siamense are reported from Italy and C. alienum from Portugal, including Madeira Islands, with a restricted distribution. C. perseae and C. theobromicola have not been reported from the EU territory. |
Uncertainty on the actual distribution of the five Colletotrichum species in the EU, particularly with respect to records where multilocus gene sequencing analysis was not used for the identification of the isolated Colletotrichum species. |
|
Pest potential for entry, establishment and spread in the EU (Section 3.4 ) |
C. aenigma, C. alienum and C. siamense have already entered the EU and they may further enter into, become established in, and spread within the EU. Similarly, C. perseae and C. theobromicola could potentially enter into, become established in, and spread within the EU territory.. The main pathways for the entry/further entry of the pathogens into, and spread within, the EU territory are: (i) host plants for planting, and (ii) fresh fruit of host plants, originating in infested third countries. Spores of the pathogens may be also present as contaminants on other substrates (e.g. non‐host plants, and other objects, etc.) imported into the EU, although these are considered minor pathways for the entry of the pathogens into the EU territory. C. aenigma, C. alienum and C. siamense are present in the EU, which indicates that both the biotic (host availability) and abiotic (climate suitability) factors occurring in parts of the EU are also favourable for the establishment of C. perseae and C. theobromicola, too. Following establishment, the five Colletotrichum species could spread within the EU territory by natural and human‐assisted means. |
None |
|
Potential for consequences in the EU (Section 3.5 ) |
The introduction and spread of the pathogens in the EU is likely to have yield and quality impacts in some parts of the territory. No associated crop losses have been reported so far from Italy and Portugal where C. aenigma, C. siamense (Italy) and C. alienum (Portugal) occur locally. |
None |
| Available measures (Section 3.6 ) | Although not specifically targeted against C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola, existing phytosanitary measures mitigate the likelihood of the pathogens' entry into the EU territory. Potential additional measures also exist to further mitigate the risk of entry into, establishment within, or spread of the pathogens within the EU. | None |
| Conclusion (Section 4 ) | C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola meet all the criteria assessed by EFSA for consideration as Union quarantine pests. | None |
| Aspects of assessment to focus on/scenarios to address in future if appropriate: | The main knowledge gap concerns the need to ascertain the present distribution of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola within the EU territory. Given that all the data available in the literature have been explored, the Panel considers that systematic surveys should be carried out and Colletotrichum isolates in culture collections should be re‐evaluated using appropriate pest identification methods (e.g. multilocus gene sequencing analysis) to define the current geographical distribution of C. aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola in the EU territory | |
Glossary
- Containment (of a pest)
Application of phytosanitary measures in and around an infested area to prevent spread of a pest (FAO, 2018)
- Control (of a pest)
Suppression, containment or eradication of a pest population (FAO, 2018)
- 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, 2018)
- Eradication (of a pest)
Application of phytosanitary measures to eliminate a pest from an area (FAO, 2018)
- Establishment (of a pest)
Perpetuation, for the foreseeable future, of a pest within an area after entry (FAO, 2018)
- Greenhouse
A walk‐in, static, closed place of crop production with a usually translucent outer shell, which allows controlled exchange of material and energy with the surroundings and prevents release of plant protection products (PPPs) into the environment.
- Hitchhiker
An organism sheltering or transported accidentally via inanimate pathways including with machinery, shipping containers and vehicles; such organisms are also known as contaminating pests or stowaways (Toy and Newfield, 2010).
- 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, 2018)
- Pathway
Any means that allows the entry or spread of a pest (FAO, 2018)
- 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, 2018)
- 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, 2018)
- Risk reduction option (RRO)
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 RRO 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, 2018)
Abbreviations
- EPPO
European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization
- FAO
Food and Agriculture Organization
- IPPC
International Plant Protection Convention
- ISPM
International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures
- MS
Member State
- PLH
EFSA Panel on Plant Health
- PZ
Protected Zone
- TFEU
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
- ToR
Terms of Reference
Appendix A – Host plants/species affected by each of the five Colletotrichum species
Source: CABI (online), Farr and Rossman (online; https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/) and other sources.
A.1. Host plants/species affected by Colletotrichum aenigma
| Host status | Host name | Plant family | Common name | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cultivated hosts | Actinidia arguta | Actinidiaceae | Hardy kiwi | Wang et al. (2019) |
| Aquilaria sinensis | Thymelaeaceae | Agarwood | Li et al. (2021a,b) | |
| Camellia japonica | Theaceae | Common camellia | Yang et al. (2019) | |
| Camellia oleifera | Theaceae | Tea oil camellia | Wang et al. (2020b) | |
| Camellia sinensis | Theaceae | Tea plant; tea tree | Wang et al. (2020b) | |
| Camelia sasanqua | Theaceae | Sasanqua camellia | Chen et al. (2019) | |
| Capsicum annuum | Solanaceae | Pepper | Sharma et al. (2022) | |
| Diospyros kaki | Ebenaceae | Persimmon | Andrioli et al. (2021) | |
| Fragaria × ananassa | Rosaceae | Strawberry | Chen et al. (2020) | |
| Juglans regia | Juglandaceae | Walnut | Wang et al. (2020c) | |
| Malus domestica | Rosaceae | Apple | Yokosawa et al. (2017) | |
| Olea europaea | Oleaceae | Olive | Schena et al. (2014) | |
| Persea americana | Lauraceae | Avocado | Sharma et al. (2017) | |
| Populus sp. | Salicaceae | Poplar | Jayawardena et al. (2016) | |
| Populus nigra var. italica * | Salicaceae | Black poplar | Li et al. (2012) | |
| Pyrus pyrifolia | Rosaceae | Nashi pear | Fu et al. (2019) | |
| Pyrus × bretschneideri | Rosaceae | Chinese white pear | Fu et al. (2019) | |
| Pyrus communis | Rosaceae | European pear | Fu et al. (2019) | |
| Prunus avium | Rosaceae | Sweet cherry | Chethana et al. (2019) | |
| Sedum kamtschaticum | Crassulaceae | Stonecrop | Choi et al. (2017) | |
| Selenicereus undatus | Cactaceae | Dragon fruit; pitahaya | Meetum et al. (2015) | |
| Synsepalum dulcificum | Sapotaceae | Miracle fruit | Truong et al. (2018) | |
| Vigna unguiculata | Fabaceae | Cowpea | Alizadeh et al. (2015) | |
| Vitis vinifera | Vitaceae | Grapevine | Lopez‐Zapata et al. (2019), Kim et al. (2021) | |
| Wild weed hosts | _ | _ | _ | _ |
| Artificial/experimental host | _ | _ | _ | _ |
As Colletotrichum populi.
A.2. Host plants/species affected by Colletotrichum alienum
| Host status | Host name | Plant family | Common name | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cultivated hosts | Aquilaria sinensis | Thymelaeaceae | Agarwood | Liu et al. (2020) |
| Camellia spp. | Theaceae | Common camellia; tea oil camellia; tea tree | Liu et al. (2015) | |
| Diospyros kaki | Ebenaceae | Persimmon | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Fragaria × ananassa | Rosaceae | Strawberry | Shivas et al. (2016) | |
| Grevillea sp. | Proteaceae | Spider flowers | Liu et al. (2013), Shivas et al. (2016) | |
| Leucadendron spp. | Proteaceae | – | Liu et al. (2013) | |
| Leucospermum spp. | Proteaceae | – | Liu et al. (2013) | |
| Malus domestica | Rosaceae | Apple | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Mangifera indica | Anacardiaceae | Mango | Tovar‐Pedraza et al. (2020) | |
| Nerium oleander | Apocynaceae | Oleander | Shivas et al. (2016) | |
| Olea europaea | Oleaceae | Olive | Moreira et al. (2021) | |
| Persea americana | Lauraceae | Avocado | Liu et al. (2013), Sharma et al. (2017) | |
| Platostoma palustre | Lamiaceae | Chinese mesona | Hsieh et al. (2020) | |
| Protea cynaroides | Proteaceae | King protea | Liu et al. (2013) | |
| Serruria sp. | Proteaceae | Spiderhead | Liu et al. (2013) | |
| Wild weed hosts | _ | _ | _ | _ |
| Artificial/experimental hosts | _ | _ | _ | _ |
A.3. Host plants/species affected by Colletotrichum perseae
| Host status | Host name | Plant family | Common name | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cultivated hosts | Capsicum annuum | Solanaceae | Pepper | Sharma et al. (2022) |
| Olea europaea | Oleaceae | Olive | Moral et al. (2021) | |
| Persea americana | Lauraceae | Avocado | Sharma et al. (2017) | |
| Vitis vinifera | Vitaceae | Grapevine | Yokosawa et al. (2020) | |
| Wild weed hosts | _ | _ | _ | _ |
| Artificial/experimental hosts | _ | _ | _ | _ |
A.4. Host plants/species affected by Colletotrichum siamense
| Host status | Host name | Plant family | Common name | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cultivated hosts | Acacia confusa | Mimosaceae | False koa | Liu et al. (2022) |
| Alchornea tiliifolia | Euphorbiaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Allium cepa | Amaryllidaceae | Onion | Chowdappa et al. (2015) | |
| Alpinia pusilla | Zingiberaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Amaryllis vittata | Amaryllidaceae | Barbados lily | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Amherstia nobilis | Fabaceae | Orchid tree | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Annona muricata | Anonnaceae | Soursop | Costa et al. (2019) | |
| Annona squamosa | Annonaceae | Sugar apple | Costa et al. (2019) | |
| Arenga caudata | Arecaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Artabotrys hexapetalus | Annonaceae | Climbing ylang‐ylang | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Anthurium sp. | Araceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Aspidistra sp. | Asparagaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Bambusa vulgaris | Poaceae | Common bamboo | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Bauhinia purpurea | Fabaceae | Australian orchid tree | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Calliandra haematocephala | Mimosaceae | Red powder puff | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Camellia chrysantha | Theaceae | Camellia | Zhao et al. (2021) | |
| Camellia japonica | Theaceae | Common camellia | Peng et al. (2022) | |
| Camellia oleifera | Theaceae | Tea oil camellia | Liu et al. (2015) | |
| Camellia sinensis | Theaceae | Tea plant | Jayawardena et al. (2016) | |
| Capsicum annuum | Solanaceae | Pepper | Sharma and Shenoy (2014) | |
| Capsicum frutescens | Solanaceae | Bird's eye chilli | Noor and Zakaria (2018) | |
| Carica papaya | Caricaceae | Papaya | Zhang et al. (2021a,b,c) | |
| Carya illinoinensis | Juglandaceae | Pecan | Oh et al. (2021) | |
| Castanea henryi | Fagaceae | Henry's chestnut | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Celtis sinensis | Cannabaceae | Japanese hackberry | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Cenchrus purpureus | Poaceae | Elephant grass | Hyde et al. (2018) | |
| Cenostigma tocantinum | Leguminosae | – | Ferreira e Ferreira et al. (2020) | |
| Cercis chinensis | Fabaceae | Chinese redbud | Ji et al. (2019) | |
| Chamaerops humilis | Arecaceae | Mediterranean palm | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Chrysalidocarpus lutescens | Palmae | Madagascar palm | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Cinnamomum burmannii | Lauraceae | Batavia cinnamon | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Cinnamomum camphora | Lauraceae | Camphor | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Cinnamomum kotoense | Lauraceae | – | Zhou et al. (2016) | |
| Citrus spp. | Rutaceae | Citrus | Wang et al. (2021) | |
| Citrus reticulata | Rutaceae | Mandarin | Cheng et al. (2013) | |
| Citrus sinensis var. brasiliensis | Rutaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Clerodendrum wallichii | Lamiaceae | Swaddling flower | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Clinacanthus nutans | Acanthaceae | Sabah snake grass | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Coffea arabica | Rubiaceae | Coffee | Prihastuti et al. (2009) | |
| Corchorus capsularis | Malvaceae | White jute | Niu et al. (2016) | |
| Cornus hongkongensis | Cornaceae | Dogwood | Wang et al. (2021) | |
| Crinum asiaticum | Amaryllidaceae | Crinum lily | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Cymbidium ensifolium | Orchidaceae | Oriental cymbidium | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Cymbidium hybrid | Orchidaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Cymbopogon citratus | Poaceae | Lemon grass | Hyde et al. (2018) | |
| Dichotomanthus tristaniaecarpa | Rosaceae | – | Liu et al. ( 2022 ) | |
| Dionaea muscipula | Droseraceae | Venus flytrap | Shivas et al. (2016) | |
| Dioscorea cayennensis | Dioscoreaceae | Yam | De Souza Jr and Assuncao (2021) | |
| Diospyros kaki | Ebenaceae | Persimmon | Chang et al. (2018) | |
| Dracaena angustifolia | Asparagaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Dracaena cambodiana | Asparagaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Dracaena fragrans | Asparagaceae | Cornstalk dracaena | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Dypsis lutescens | Arecaceae | Areca palm | Chou et al. (2019) | |
| Elettaria cardamomum | Zingiberaceae | Cardamom | Chethana et al. (2016) | |
| Ensete superbum | Musaceae | Cliff banana | Kumar et al. (2017) | |
| Eriobotrya japonica | Rosaceae | Loquat | Shivas et al. (2016) | |
| Erythrina crista‐galli | Fabaceae | Cockspur coral tree | Li et al. (2021) | |
| Erythrina variegata | Fabaceae | Indian coral tree | Guterres et al. (2020) | |
| Erythrophloeum fordii | Leguminosae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Euonymus japonicus | Celastraceae | Evergreen spindle | Wu et al. (2020) | |
| Excentrodendron hsienmu | Malvaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Excoecaria cochinchinensis | Euphorbiaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Ficus carica | Moraceae | Fig | Shivas et al. (2016) | |
| Ficus elastica | Moraceae | Rubber tree | Jayawardena et al. (2016) | |
| Fragaria × ananassa | Rosaceae | Strawberry | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Gossypium hirsutum | Malvaceae | Cotton | Salunkhe et al. (2020) | |
| Heliconia rostrata | Musaceae | False bird of paradise | Chaves et al. (2020) | |
| Hevea sp. | Euphorbiaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Hibiscus tiliaceus | Malvaceae | Coastal hibiscus | Rocha et al. (2021) | |
| Homalomena occulta | Araceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Hymenocallis spp. | Amaryllidaceae | Spider lily | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Ilex cornuta | Aquifoliaceae | Chinese holly | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Iris tectorum | Iridaceae | Iris | Liu et al. (2017) | |
| Jasminum mesnyi | Oleaceae | Chinese jasmine | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Jasminum sambac | Oleaceae | Arabian jasmine | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Jatropha integerrima | Euphorbiaceae | Spicy jatropha | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Juglans regia | Juglandaceae | walnut | Wang et al. (2017) | |
| Lagerstroemia speciosa | Lythraceae | Pride of India | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Licania tomentosa | Chrysobalanaceae | Lisboa et al. (2018) | ||
| Liriodendron chinese × tulipifera | Magnoliaceae | Tulip poplar | Zhu et al. (2019) | |
| Litsea honghoensis | Lauraceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Litchi chinensis | Sapindaceae | litchi | Ling et al. (2019) | |
| Macadamia integrifolia | Proteaceae | Macadamia | Prassanath et al. (2020) | |
| Machilus ichangensis | Lauraceae | – | Cheng et al. (2019) | |
| Machilus pauhoi | Lauraceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Maesa indica | Primulaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Magnolia × alba | Magnoliaceae | White sandalwood | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Magnolia grandiflora | Magnoliaceae | Magnolia | Zhou et al. (2022) | |
| Malus domestica | Rosaceae | Apple | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Malus niedzwetzkyana | Rosaceae | Red‐fleshed apple | Han et al. (2022) | |
| Mandevilla sp. | Apocynaceae | Rock trumpet | Watanabe et al. (2016) | |
| Mangifera indica | Anacardiaceae | Mango | Giblin et al. (2018) | |
| Manihot esculenta | Euphorbiaceae | Cassava | Liu et al. (2019) | |
| Mentha sp. | Lamiaceae | Mint | James et al. (2014) | |
| Monstera deliciosa | Araceae | Split‐leaf philodendron | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Murraya sp. | Rutaceae | – | Liu et al. (2015) | |
| Musa acuminata | Musaceae | Banana | Uysal and Kurt (2020) | |
| Musa paradisiaca | Musaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Nelumbo nucifera | Nelumbonaceae | Lotus | Chen and Kirschner (2018) | |
| Ocinum basilicum | Lamiaceae | Basil | Ismail et al. (2021) | |
| Olea europaea | Oleaceae | Olive | Schena et al. (2014) | |
| Ophiopogon japonicus | Asparagaceae | Dwarf lilyturf | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Opuntia cochenillifera | Cactaceae | Conforto et al. (2017) | ||
| Orchid | Orchidaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Paramongaia weberbaueri | Amaryllidaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Parthenocissus tricuspidata | Vitaceae | Ivy | Schena et al. (2014) | |
| Peperomia sp. | Piperaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Persea americana | Lauraceae | Avocado | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Philodendron selloum | Araceae | Lacy tree philodendron | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Piper nigrum | Piperaceae | Black pepper | James et al. (2014) | |
| Pistacia vera | Anacardiaceae | Pistachio | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Platostoma palustre | Lamiaceae | Chinese mesona | Hsieh et al. (2020) | |
| Plukenetia volubilis | Euphorbiaceae | Mountain peanut | Wang et al. (2020a) | |
| Plumeria alba | Apocynaceae | – | Ismail et al. (2021) | |
| Pongamia pinnata | Leguminosae | Indian beech | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Protea cynaroides | Proteaceae | King protea | Liu et al. (2013) | |
| Prunus persica | Rosaceae | Peach | Tan et al. (2022) | |
| Psidium guajava | Myrtaceae | Common guava | Rodriguez‐Palafox et al. (2021), Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Pterocarpus sp. | Fabaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Punica granatum | Lythraceae | Pomegranate | Xavier et al. (2019) | |
| Pyrus communis | Rosaceae | Pear | Fu et al. (2019) | |
| Pyrus pyrifolia | Rosaceae | Nashi pear | Fu et al. (2019) | |
| Renanthera coccinea | Orchidaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Rhaphiolepis indica | Rosaceae | Indian hawthorn | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Ricinus communis | Euphorbiaceae | Castor bean | Tang et al. (2021) | |
| Rosa chinensis | Rosaceae | Rose | Feng et al. (2019) | |
| Rubus reflexus | Rosaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Saccharum spp. | Poaceae | – | Cavalcanti Marins et al. (2022) | |
| Salix matsudana | Salicaceae | Chinese willow | Zhang et al. (2021a,b,c) | |
| Salvia rosmarinus | Lamiaceae | Rosemary | James et al. (2014) | |
| Saraca indica | Fabaceae | Asoka tree | Jayawardena et al. (2016) | |
| Sarcandra glabra | Chloranthaceae | Herba sarcandrae | Ye et al. (2016) | |
| Saururus chinensis | Saururaceae | Lizard's tail | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Schefflera heptaphylla | Araliaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Schima noronhae | Theaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Selenicereus spp. | Cactaceae | Dragon fruit | Zhao et al. (2018) | |
| Smilax ocreata | Smilacaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Solanum betaceum | Solanaceae | Tamarillo | Pardo‐De la Hoz et al. (2016) | |
| Sophora tonkinensis | Fabaceae | – | Song et al. (2021) | |
| Sphagneticola trilobata | Asteraceae | Singapore daisy | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Spondias purpura | Anacardiaceae | Jocote | Carvalho et al. (2019) | |
| Syngonium auritum | Araceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Tetrastigma obovatum | Vitaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Theobroma cacao | Malvaceae | Cacao tree | Serrato‐Diaz et al. (2020) | |
| Uvaria chamae | Annonaceae | – | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Vaccinium spp. | Ericaceae | Cranberry | Jayawardena et al. (2016) | |
| Vernicia montana | Euphorbiaceae | Mu oil tree | Yang et al. (2021) | |
| Vitis caribaea x Riparia do Traviü | Vitaceae | Caribbean grape | Santos et al. (2018) | |
| Vitis riparia | Vitaceae | Riverbank grape | Santos et al. (2018) | |
| Vitis vinifera | Vitaceae | Grapevine | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Washingtonia robusta | Arecaceae | Mexican fan palm | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Zinnia elegans | Asteraceae | Zinnia | Li et al. (2021a,b) | |
| Ziziphus mauritiana | Rhamnaceae | Indian jujube | Shu et al. (2021) | |
| Wild weed hosts | Commelina sp. | Commelinaceae | Dayflower | Weir et al. (2012) |
| Cycas debaoensis | Cycadaceae | Han et al. (2021) | ||
| Dichotomanthus tristaniaecarpa | Rosaceae | Liu et al. (2022) | ||
| Kadsura coccinea | Schisandraceae | Wang et al. (2017) | ||
| Mallotus oppositifolius | Euphorbiaceae | Partridge tea | Liu et al. (2018) | |
| Solanum rostratum | Solanaceae | Beaked nightshade | Liu et al. (2022) | |
| Sterculia spp. | Malvaceae | – | Zhang et al. (2020a,b) | |
| Uraria picta | Fabaceae | – | Srivastava et al. (2017) |
A.5. Host plants/species affected by Colletotrichum theobromicola
| Host status | Host name | Plant family | Common name | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cultivated hosts | Anacardium occidentale * | Anacardiaceae | Cashew | Veloso et al. (2018) |
| Allium fistulosum | Amaryllidaceae | Welsh onion | Matos et al. (2017) | |
| Annona cherimola * | Annonaceae | Cherimoya | Villanueva‐Arce et al. (2008) | |
| Annona diversifolia | Annonaceae | Soursop | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Annona muricata | Annonaceae | Soursop | Costa et al. (2019) | |
| Annona squamosa | Annonaceae | Sugar apple | Costa et al. (2019) | |
| Anthurium spp. | Araceae | Anthurium | Chaves et al. (2020) | |
| Butia odorata | Arecaceae | Jelly palm | Dorneles et al. (2018) | |
| Buxus spp. | Buxaceae | Boxwood | Hawk et al. (2018) | |
| Campomanesia phaea | Myrtaceae | Cambuci | Santos et al. (2017) | |
| Centrosema pubescens | Fabaceae | Butterfly pea | Pakdeeniti et al. (2022) | |
| Citrus spp. | Rutaceae | Citrus | Wang et al. (2021) | |
| Coffea arabica | Rubiaceae | Coffee | James et al. (2014) | |
| Copernicia prunifera | Arecaceae | Carnaubeira palm | Araujo et al. (2018) | |
| Cyclamen persicum | Primulaceae | Persian cyclamen | Liu et al. (2011) | |
| Eucalyptus spp. | Myrtaceae | Eucalyptus | Rodrigues et al. (2014) | |
| Feijoa sellowiana | Myrtaceae | Feijoa | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Fragaria × ananassa | Rosaceae | Strawberry | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Gossypium arboretum cv. indicum ** | Malvaceae | Cotton | Kang et al. (2022) | |
| Limonium spp. | Plumbaginaceae | Sea lavender | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Malpighia emarginata | Malpighiaceae | Acerola cherry | Braganca et al. (2014) | |
| Malus domestica | Rosaceae | Apple | Munir et al. (2016) | |
| Mangifera indica | Anacardiaceae | Mango | Pardo‐De la Hoz et al. (2016) | |
| Manihot esculenta | Euphorbiaceae | Cassava | Oliveira et al. (2018) | |
| Manilkara zapota | Sapotaceae | Sapodilla | Martins et al. (2018) | |
| Olea europaea | Oleaceae | Olive | Lima et al. (2020) | |
| Persea americana | Lauraceae | Avocado | Sharma et al. (2017) | |
| Prunus avium ** | Rosaceae | Sweet cherry | Chethana et al. (2019) | |
| Punica granatum | Lythraceae | Pomegranate | Xavier et al. (2019) | |
| Quercus spp. | Fagaceae | Oak | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Senna obtusifolia * | Fabaceae | Chinese senna | Howard and Albregts (1973) | |
| Stylosanthes spp. | Fabaceae | Pencilflower | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Theobroma cacao | Malvaceae | Cacao tree | Rojas et al. (2010) | |
| Wild weed hosts | Aeschynomene falcata | Fabaceae | – | Shivas et al. (2016) |
| Fragaria vesca | Rosaceae | Wild strawberry | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Hopea odorata * | Dipterocarpaceae | – | Rashid et al. (2021) | |
| Potentilla canadensis * | Rosaceae | – | Grand (1985) |
As Colletotrichum fragariae.
As Colletotrichum pseudotheobromicola.
Appendix B – Aggregate table of main hosts of the five Colletotrichum species
| HOST NAME | C. aenigma | C. alienum | C. perseae | C. siamense | C. theobromicola |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actinidia arguta | • | ||||
| Allium cepa | • | ||||
| Allium fistulosum | • | ||||
| Anacardium occidentale | • | ||||
| Annona spp. | • | • | |||
| Anthurium spp. | • | ||||
| Aquilaria sinensis | • | ||||
| Butia odorata | • | ||||
| Buxus spp. | • | ||||
| Camellia spp. | • | • | • | ||
| Capsicum annuum | • | • | • | ||
| Campomanesia phaea | • | ||||
| Centrosema pubescens | • | ||||
| Carica papaya | • | ||||
| Carya illinoinensis | • | ||||
| Citrus spp. | • | • | |||
| Citrus sinensis | • | ||||
| Citrus reticulata | • | ||||
| Coffea arabica | • | • | |||
| Copernicia prunifera | • | ||||
| Corchorus capsularis | • | ||||
| Ctenanthe oppenheimiana | • | ||||
| Dioscorea cayennensis | • | ||||
| Diospyros kaki | • | ||||
| Eucalyptus spp. | • | ||||
| Fragaria × ananassa | • | • | |||
| Gossypium arboretum cv. indicum | • | ||||
| Juglans regia | • | ||||
| Malpighia emarginata | • | ||||
| Malus domestica | • | • | • | ||
| Malus niedzwetzkyana | • | ||||
| Mangifera indica | • | • | • | ||
| Manihot carthaginesis | • | ||||
| Manihot esculenta | • | ||||
| Manihot tomentosa | • | ||||
| Manikara zapota | • | ||||
| Olea europaea | • | • | • | • | |
| Persea americana | • | • | • | • | • |
| Protea spp. | • | ||||
| Prunus avium | • | • | |||
| Prunus persica | • | ||||
| Punica granatum | • | • | |||
| Pyrus x bretschneideri | • | • | |||
| Pyrus pyrifolia | • | • | |||
| Pyrus communis | • | • | |||
| Selenicereus undatus | • | • | |||
| Synsepalum dulcificum | • | • | |||
| Theobroma cacao | • | ||||
| Vitis caribaea × Riparia do Traviü | • | ||||
| Vitis riparia | • | ||||
| Vitis vinifera | • | • | |||
| Zinnia elegans | • | ||||
| Ziziphus mauritiana | • |
Appendix C – Distribution of the five Colletotrichum species
C.1. Distribution of Colletotrichum aenigma
Distribution records based on CABI (online) and Farr and Rossman (online; https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/).
| Region | Country | Subnational (e.g. State) | Status | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| North America | USA* | N/A | Present | Jayawardena et al. (2016) |
| South America | Brazil | Rio Grande do Sul (Farroupilha) | Present | Andrioli et al. (2021) |
| Colombia | La Union, Valle del Cauca | Present | López‐Zapata et al. (2019), Guevara‐Suarez et al. (2022) | |
| EU (27) | Italy | Apulia | Present | Schena et al. (2014) |
| Other Europe | UK | N/A | Present | Baroncelli et al. (2015) |
| Asia | China |
|
Present | Chen et al. (2019), Chethana et al. (2019), Diao et al. (2017), Fu et al. (2019), Han et al. (2016); Li et al. (2021a,b), Wang et al. (2015, 2019); Yan et al. (2015), Yang et al. (2019); Zhang et al. (2020a,b) |
| Iran |
|
Present | Alizadeh et al. (2015) | |
| Israel |
|
Present | Chen et al. (2020), Diao et al. (2017), Fuentes‐Aragón et al. (2018), Liu et al. (2015); Sharma et al. (2017, 2022), Vieira et al. (2014), Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Japan |
|
Present | Chen et al. (2020), Costa et al. (2019), Liu et al. (2015), Sharma et al. (2017), Yokosawa et al. (2017), Vieira et al. (2014), Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Malaysia |
|
Present | Zakaria (2021) | |
| Republic of Korea |
|
Present | Choi et al. (2017), Kim et al. (2021), Lee et al. (2021) | |
| Thailand |
|
Present | Meetum et al. (2015) |
Reported by Jayawardena et al. (2016) but no ref is cited.
As Colletotrichum populi.
C.2. Distribution of Colletotrichum alienum
Distribution records based on Farr and Rossman (online; https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/) and other sources.
| Region | Country | Subnational (e.g. State) | Status | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| North America | USA |
|
Present | Crous et al. (2013) |
| Hawaii | N/A | Present | Crous et al. (2013) | |
| Mexico |
|
Present | Tovar‐Pedraza et al. (2020) | |
| South America | Uruguay |
|
Present | Moreira et al. (2021) |
| EU (27) | Portugal |
|
Present | Liu et al. (2013) |
| Africa | South Africa |
|
Present | Liu et al. (2013) |
| Zimbabwe | N/A | Present | Crous et al. (2013) | |
| Asia | China |
|
Present | Ahmad et al. (2021) |
| Israel |
|
Present | Sharma et al. (2017) | |
| Oceania | Australia |
|
Present | Costa et al. (2019), Crous et al. (2013), Mo et al. (2018), Schena et al. (2014), Shivas et al. (2016), Weir et al. (2012) |
| New Zealand |
|
Present | Alaniz et al. (2019), Diao et al. (2017), Liu et al. (2015), Vieira et al. (2014), Weir et al. (2012) |
C.3. Distribution of Colletotrichum perseae
Distribution records based on Farr and Rossman (online; https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/) and other sources.
| Region | Country | Sub‐national (e.g. State) | Status | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Asia | Israel |
|
Present | Sharma et al. (2017, 2022) |
| Japan |
|
Present | Yokosawa et al. (2020) | |
| South America | Chile |
|
Present | Bustamante et al. (2020) |
| Oceania | Australia | N/A | Present | Moral et al. (2021) |
| New Zealand | Tauranga (Bay of Plenty) | Present | Hofer et al. (2021) |
C.4. Distribution of Colletotrichum siamense
Distribution records based on CABI (online), Farr and Rossman (online; https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/) and other sources.
| Region | Country | Subnational (e.g. State) | Status | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| North America | Mexico |
|
Present | Pérez‐Mora et al. (2020) |
| USA |
|
Present | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| South America | Argentina |
|
Present | Larran et al. (2015), Fernandez et al. (2018) |
| Brazil |
|
Present | Costa et al. (2019), Fantinel et al. (2017), Lima et al. (2013), Oliveira et al. (2018), Santos et al. (2018), Soares et al. (2020) | |
| Colombia |
|
Present | Pardo‐De la Hoz et al. (2016) | |
| Uruguay |
|
Present | Carbone et al. (2021) | |
| Central America | Puerto Rico |
|
Present | Serrato‐Diaz et al. (2020) |
| EU (27) | Italy* | Forlì‐Cesena | Present | Jayawardena et al. (2018) |
| Africa |
Egypt |
N/A |
Present |
Douanla‐Meli and Unger (2017) |
|
Ghana |
|
Present |
Douanla‐Meli and Unger (2017) | |
| Kenya | N/A | Present | Silva et al. (2012) | |
| Nigeria | N/A | Present | Silva et al. (2012) | |
|
Malawi |
|
Present |
Weir et al. (2012) |
|
|
South Africa |
N/A |
Present |
Weir et al. (2012) |
|
| Zimbabwe | N/A |
Present |
Liu et al. (2013) | |
| Asia | Bangladesh |
|
Present | Azad et al. (2020) |
| China |
|
Present | Weir et al. (2012), Xu et al. (2015) | |
| India |
|
Present | Sharma and Shenoy (2014) | |
| Indonesia |
|
Present | Radiastuti et al. (2019), Sukarno et al. (2021), Zhafarina et al. (2021) | |
|
||||
| Israel |
|
Present | Sharma et al. (2017) | |
| Japan |
|
Present | Yokosawa et al. (2017) | |
| Laos |
|
Present | Phoulivong et al. (2012) | |
| Malaysia |
|
Present | de Silva et al. (2019) | |
| Pakistan |
|
Present | Abid et al. (2019) | |
| Philippines |
|
Present | Reyes et al. (2021) | |
| South Korea |
|
Present | Hassan et al. (2018), Oo et al. (2021) | |
| Sri Lanka |
|
Present | de Silva et al. (2019) | |
| Taiwan |
|
Present | Wu et al. (2020) | |
| Thailand |
|
Present | Weir et al. (2012), de Silva et al. (2019) | |
| Turkey |
|
Present | Uysal and Kurt (2020) | |
| Vietnam* |
|
Present | Weir et al. (2012) | |
| Oceania | Australia |
|
Present | Weir et al. (2012), Wang et al. (2021) |
| New Zealand |
|
Present | Hofer et al. (2021) |
As C. jasmine‐sambac.
C.5. Distribution of Colletotrichum theobromicola
Distribution records based on CABI (2022), Farr and Rossman (online; https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/) and other sources.
| Region | Country | Sub‐national (e.g. State) | Status | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| North America | USA |
|
Present | Weir et al. (2012), Hawk et al. (2018) |
| Mexico | Present | Cristobal‐Martinez et al. (2016) | ||
| Central America | Panama |
|
Present | Weir et al. (2012), Solís et al. (2022) |
| Caribbean | Puerto Rico |
|
Present | Serrato‐Diaz et al. (2020) |
| South America | Argentina |
|
Present | Lima et al. (2020) |
| Brazil |
|
Present | Matos et al. (2017), Stadnik et al. (2019) | |
| Colombia |
|
Present | Pardo‐De la Hoz et al. (2016) | |
| Costa Rica |
|
Present | Ruiz‐Campos et al. (2022) | |
| Uruguay |
|
Present | Alaniz et al. (2015), Moreira et al. (2021) | |
| Africa | Angola | N/A | Present | Silva et al. (2012) |
| Asia | China |
|
Present | Solís et al. (2022) |
| India |
|
Present | Sharma et al. (2017) | |
| Israel |
|
Present | Sharma et al. (2017), Solís et al. (2022) | |
| Japan |
|
Present | Morita et al. (2015) | |
| Philippines |
|
Present | Dela Cueva Fe et al. (2021) | |
| Republic of Korea |
|
Present | Kang et al. (2022) | |
| Thailand |
|
Present | Pakdeeniti et al. (2022) | |
| Oceania | Australia |
|
Present | Weir et al. (2012), Wang et al. (2021) |
| New Zealand |
|
Present | Weir et al. (2012) |
As C. fragariae.
Appendix D – EU 27 annual imports of fresh produce of hosts from countries where Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola are present, 2016–2020 (in 100 kg)
Source: Eurostat accessed on 18/3/2022.
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh persimmons | United Kingdom | 875.83 | 297.06 | 703.77 | 2,188.73 | 3,067.48 |
| Thailand | : | : | 0.07 | : | : | |
| Japan | : | 0.27 | 0.76 | 0.27 | 0.02 | |
| Brazil | 33.63 | 315.72 | 337.60 | 974.78 | 428.63 | |
| South Korea | : | : | 0.05 | 0.80 | : | |
| Israel | 2,404.45 | 3,231.29 | 1,158.64 | 181.58 | 3,211.13 | |
| China | 17.57 | : | 5.09 | : | 17.40 | |
| Sum | 3,331.48 | 3,844.34 | 2,205.98 | 3,346.16 | 6,724.66 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh strawberries | United Kingdom | 10,860.25 | 13,845.53 | 6,788.52 | 16,708.13 | 25,121.30 |
| Japan | 0.97 | 1.38 | 0.36 | 0.33 | 0.09 | |
| South Korea | 0.12 | : | : | : | : | |
| USA | 2,881.84 | 1,572.86 | 354.26 | 10.12 | 3.11 | |
| Israel | 4.28 | 5.10 | : | : | : | |
| China | 1,500.00 | 1,250.00 | : | : | : | |
| South Africa | 20.46 | 64.44 | 176.31 | 25.35 | 124.80 | |
| Argentina | : | : | : | 19.20 | : | |
| Colombia | : | : | : | 0.57 | : | |
| Mexico | 49.87 | 34.38 | 41.34 | 80.00 | 6.66 | |
| Kenya | 0.70 | 0.64 | 0.01 | |||
| Turkey | 26,813.33 | 31,567.47 | 37,510.96 | 18,307.54 | 59,353.98 | |
| Sum | 42,131.12 | 48,341.86 | 44,872.39 | 35,151.25 | 84,609.94 | |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh or dried walnuts, shelled and in shell | United Kingdom | 15,274.36 | 13,547.81 | 15,560.94 | 18,851.19 | 22,022.85 |
| Thailand | : | : | : | : | 0.01 | |
| Japan | 0.01 | : | : | 0 | : | |
| Brazil | : | 15.75 | 0.05 | : | 0.12 | |
| South Korea | : | : | : | : | 0.58 | |
| USA | 793,088.61 | 774,219.27 | 732,846.81 | 828,789.85 | 831,274.57 | |
| Israel | 218.03 | 7.55 | 7.32 | 8.920 | 2.32 | |
| Iran | 18.99 | 8.37 | 85.24 | 102.01 | 10.38 | |
| China | 2,500.06 | 17,044.27 | 30,127.04 | 18,655.46 | 48,220.89 | |
| Sum | 811,100.06 | 804,843 | 778,627.4 | 866,407.4 | 901,531.7 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh apples | United Kingdom | 208,071.14 | 340,412.05 | 555,318.23 | 214,996.32 | 310,964.24 |
| Thailand | : | 3.79 | : | : | : | |
| Japan | 7.61 | 0.53 | 0.95 | : | 19.25 | |
| Brazil | 154,768.58 | 249,520.21 | 242,632.64 | 139,015.43 | 92,900.91 | |
| South Korea | : | : | : | 4.17 | : | |
| USA | 0.05 | 545.82 | 2,874.22 | : | : | |
| Israel | 2,225.55 | 1,037.58 | 936.63 | 1,813.20 | 755.03 | |
| Iran | : | : | 2,945.28 | 0.38 | 676.65 | |
| China | 13,188.53 | 1,644.89 | 15,539.34 | 780.15 | 4,778.37 | |
| South Africa | 298,162.64 | 252,068.96 | 334,615.90 | 258,077.03 | 329,086.35 | |
| Argentina | 120,597.09 | 148,910.00 | 222,092.84 | 144,581.51 | 163,000.90 | |
| Australia | 1,048.66 | 4,926.09 | 9,159.46 | 8,311.03 | 3,638.72 | |
| Colombia | 785.39 | 1,376.06 | 745.60 | 1,397.11 | 1,065.38 | |
| Taiwan | : | : | : | 2.97 | : | |
| Bangladesh | : | 2.64 | 2.18 | 0.63 | 4.05 | |
| Nigeria | : | 0.76 | : | : | : | |
| Pakistan | : | : | : | 1.95 | 0.08 | |
| India | 0.01 | : | : | : | 0.45 | |
| Turkey | 240.22 | 1,610.74 | 17,594.86 | 2,311.21 | 19,023.31 | |
| Viet Nam | : | : | 0.20 | : | : | |
| Sri Lanka | : | : | : | 0.15 | : | |
| New Zealand | 751,627.60 | 754,736.56 | 966,920.91 | 728,052.41 | 759,371.40 | |
| Panama | 436.80 | |||||
| Uruguay | 20,879.17 | 55,103.38 | 30,072.47 | 14,164.50 | 2,310.32 | |
| Sum | 1,571,602 | 1,811,900 | 2,401,452 | 1,513,510 | 1,688,032 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh or chilled olives | United Kingdom | 1,375.44 | 1,004.14 | 769.35 | 1,339.85 | 4,669.79 |
| Thailand | 0.08 | 0.71 | 0.59 | 0.48 | 0.03 | |
| USA | 0.95 | 0.61 | 0.00 | : | 0.19 | |
| Israel | 3.44 | 0.14 | : | 0.22 | 0.00 | |
| Iran | : | : | : | 2.01 | : | |
| China | : | 0.08 | : | : | : | |
| Australia | : | : | 0.02 | : | 0.00 | |
| South Africa | : | : | 0.02 | 0.31 | 0.01 | |
| Argentina | : | : | : | 0.61 | : | |
| Australia | : | : | 0.02 | : | 0.00 | |
| Kenya | : | : | : | 0.11 | : | |
| Bangladesh | 11.80 | 15.44 | 23.98 | 12.89 | 18.93 | |
| India | : | : | : | 0.10 | 5.05 | |
| Turkey | 150.33 | 2.30 | 42.74 | 685.71 | 1,687.46 | |
| Sum | 1,542.04 | 1,023.42 | 836.72 | 2,042.29 | 6,381.46 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh or dried avocados | United Kingdom | 89,364.19 | 100,238.31 | 104,652.29 | 117,434.53 | 125,600.43 |
| Thailand | 3.68 | 9.76 | 9.66 | 9.06 | 3.39 | |
| Brazil | 44,357.36 | 71,040.50 | 68,697.61 | 78,673.73 | 48,183.83 | |
| USA | 8,819.53 | 1.19 | 2,546.86 | 0.02 | 4.66 | |
| Israel | 301,123.91 | 424,267.97 | 370,378.23 | 437,318.01 | 345,664.24 | |
| China | 193.97 | 35.28 | : | 1.23 | 0.04 | |
| South Africa | 419,768.89 | 315,854.56 | 652,817.98 | 401,352.79 | 416,290.22 | |
| New Zealand | 0.85 | 0.61 | : | : | 0.03 | |
| Australia | : | : | : | 0.01 | : | |
| Mexico | 503,687.52 | 445,611.06 | 463,741.28 | 767,878.48 | 716,092.02 | |
| Israel | 301,123.91 | 424,267.97 | 370,378.23 | 437,318.01 | 345,664.24 | |
| Zimbabwe | 13,030.06 | 20,378.85 | 36,539.24 | 32,020.52 | 38,872.63 | |
| Argentina | 950.00 | : | : | : | : | |
| Colombia | 152,115.55 | 210,139.60 | 251,050.33 | 387,367.23 | 663,148.97 | |
| Mexico | 503,687.52 | 445,611.06 | 463,741.28 | 767,878.48 | 716,092.02 | |
| Kenya | 228,426.16 | 243,947.31 | 404,593.87 | 346,231.90 | 435,308.72 | |
| Nigeria | 1.06 | 3.15 | 3.18 | 0.51 | : | |
| India | 0.04 | 2.06 | 0.52 | 0.06 | : | |
| Turkey | 213.41 | 477.05 | 1,530.93 | 2,172.09 | 1,864.65 | |
| Zimbabwe | 13,030.06 | 20,378.85 | 36,539.24 | 32,020.52 | 38,872.63 | |
| Viet Nam | 1.00 | : | : | 0.05 | : | |
| Sri Lanka | 7.03 | 4.88 | 5.63 | 2.00 | 11.95 | |
| Angola | : | : | 3.85 | : | 3.54 | |
| Panama | : | : | : | 474.24 | : | |
| Sum | 2,579,906 | 2,722,270 | 3,227,230.2 | 3,808,153 | 3,891,678 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh pears | United Kingdom | 36,698.28 | 32,267.61 | 16,605.43 | 10,203.21 | 16,864.50 |
| Japan | 2.50 | 0.02 | 0.45 | : | : | |
| Brazil | 208.68 | : | 251.27 | 926.88 | : | |
| South Korea | 789.33 | 1,036.40 | 666.02 | 819.04 | 628.26 | |
| USA | 214.47 | 454.76 | 471.49 | 12.54 | : | |
| Israel | : | 664.59 | : | 569.20 | 219.49 | |
| Iran | : | : | 32.40 | : | 7.50 | |
| China | 102,076.61 | 98,191.53 | 116,993.12 | 82,741.84 | 99,293.92 | |
| South Africa | 865,862.63 | 759,193.32 | 655,428.91 | 590,939.08 | 583,331.56 | |
| Argentina | 611,166.07 | 434,480.03 | 519,079.90 | 390,070.38 | 505,997.93 | |
| Australia | : | : | 1,224.72 | : | : | |
| Nigeria | : | : | 1.00 | : | 0.36 | |
| Turkey | 13,874.34 | 32,003.71 | 67,690.28 | 63,998.83 | 113,683.44 | |
| Sum | 1,630,892.9 | 1,358,292 | 1,378,445 | 1,140,281 | 1,320,027 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
| Fresh cherries (excl. Sour cherries) | United Kingdom | 2,100.45 | 2,245.25 | 4,635.62 | 2,497.09 | 11,131.10 |
| Japan | : | : | : | 0.02 | : | |
| Brazil | : | : | : | 15.45 | : | |
| USA | 453.30 | 4,267.78 | 1,541.48 | 923.05 | 216.04 | |
| Israel | 3.09 | : | : | : | : | |
| Iran | : | 0.00 | 5.75 | : | 162.00 | |
| Sum | 2,556.84 | 6,513.03 | 6,182.85 | 3,435.61 | 11,509.14 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh grapes | United Kingdom | 140,433.00 | 153,809.85 | 115,241.01 | 74,593.85 | 56,236.27 |
| Thailand | 0.37 | 0.14 | 0.16 | : | 0.87 | |
| Japan | 4.84 | 1.19 | 1.17 | 1.15 | 20.67 | |
| Brazil | 194,152.79 | 249,279.81 | 271,987.56 | 196,465.22 | 228,091.31 | |
| South Korea | : | 2.88 | 4.32 | 0.09 | : | |
| USA | 1,714.93 | 8,868.74 | 4,413.37 | 1,866.20 | 1,072.48 | |
| Israel | 13,169.16 | 7,165.09 | 6,397.33 | 318.24 | 1,080.90 | |
| Iran | : | : | 2,158.50 | 366.00 | 399.80 | |
| China | 0.00 | 6.00 | 0.03 | : | : | |
| Australia | 2.95 | 0.50 | : | : | : | |
| Sum | 349,478.04 | 419,134.2 | 400,203.45 | 273,610.8 | 286,902.3 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh or dried guavas, mangoes and mangosteens | South Africa | 8,550.13 | 13,015.45 | 9,739.99 | 12,116.95 | 8,656.28 |
| New Zealand | 0.01 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.07 | 0.10 | |
| Australia | 25.72 | 94.18 | 62.92 | : | : | |
| Mexico | 35,095.07 | 40,848.36 | 46,001.68 | 50,935.79 | 51,841.89 | |
| Israel | 143,726.08 | 140,551.30 | 108,353.48 | 121,875.16 | 98,143.59 | |
| China | 38.95 | 51.87 | 180.81 | 78.23 | 104.34 | |
| USA | 78,874.11 | 45,478.21 | 54,660.34 | 82,580.54 | 82,852.21 | |
| Argentina | 14.40 | : | : | : | : | |
| Colombia | 2,321.38 | 2,553.75 | 3,139.67 | 6,833.02 | 4,131.75 | |
| Kenya | 232.06 | 4.08 | 65.09 | 10.30 | 66.53 | |
| Thailand | 6,460.81 | 7,401.80 | 6,911.89 | 6,743.92 | 5,260.84 | |
| Taiwan | : | : | 3.48 | 17.34 | 0.92 | |
| Bangladesh | 438.53 | 256.66 | 331.27 | 310.73 | 323.91 | |
| Malawi | : | : | : | : | 648.00 | |
| Nigeria | 0.78 | 0.10 | 1.13 | 1.95 | 0.03 | |
| Pakistan | 17,149.78 | 15,912.58 | 21,867.43 | 29,207.33 | 16,196.50 | |
| India | 5,989.34 | 8,148.87 | 9,470.36 | 9,315.51 | 7,347.61 | |
| Turkey | 0.12 | 0.21 | 24.09 | 68.86 | 38.93 | |
| Japan | 0.66 | : | : | : | 0.01 | |
| Viet Nam | 794.89 | 950.37 | 1,346.64 | 1,546.69 | 965.31 | |
| Indonesia | 1,981.20 | 2,004.36 | 2,926.64 | 2,386.27 | 1,406.94 | |
| Sri Lanka | 1,254.27 | 1,003.35 | 765.31 | 813.83 | 423.16 | |
| Angola | : | : | 486.65 | 658.15 | 351.50 | |
| Brazil | 1,025,325.4 | 1,158,717.1 | 1,241,860.6 | 1,437,569.2 | 1,577,043.9 | |
| Panama | : | 0.18 | 0.70 | : | : | |
| Sum | 1,328,273.7 | 1,436,993 | 1,508,200.3 | 1,763,070 | 1,855,804 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Citrus fruit, fresh or dried | South Korea | 12.70 | 0.01 | : | 21.09 | 15.00 |
| South Africa | 5,278,830.95 | 5,802,017.61 | 6,381,124.73 | 6,196,837.96 | 7,830,147.60 | |
| Argentina | 2,412,706.76 | 1,913,772.23 | 2,242,298.89 | 1,585,087.09 | 1,403,348.80 | |
| Australia | 3,279.84 | 1,284.38 | 644.97 | 10,645.40 | 2,343.47 | |
| Colombia | 44,825.37 | 79,400.99 | 123,887.46 | 136,914.85 | 172,197.70 | |
| Mexico | 570,402.80 | 553,818.66 | 589,021.12 | 443,743.54 | 349,648.63 | |
| Kenya | : | : | 8.80 | : | 34.56 | |
| Thailand | 426.42 | 1,283.13 | 659.74 | 624.93 | 194.87 | |
| Taiwan | 157.49 | : | : | : | 0.01 | |
| Bangladesh | 227.61 | 229.58 | 159.67 | 322.42 | 1,183.66 | |
| Nigeria | : | : | 0.03 | 0.10 | 200.00 | |
| Pakistan | : | : | 2.45 | 0.59 | : | |
| India | 246.80 | 1.00 | 449.63 | 88.51 | 254.95 | |
| Turkey | 2,569,671.58 | 2,026,980.05 | 3,149,386.85 | 2,102,077.48 | 2,574,009.13 | |
| Japan | 352.58 | 417.44 | 270.73 | 319.24 | 162.50 | |
| Brazil | 864,863.09 | 903,432.95 | 900,907.24 | 822,134.46 | 902,590.26 | |
| USA | 301,229.06 | 231,210.47 | 185,706.99 | 177,755.45 | 148,608.92 | |
| Israel | 799,118.49 | 969,403.62 | 824,601.66 | 812,738.57 | 878,713.18 | |
| Zimbabwe | 297,550.62 | 328,595.48 | 397,906.49 | 348,303.06 | 391,868.70 | |
| Viet Nam | 28,649.46 | 46,738.17 | 70,934.07 | 73,964.35 | 63,730.02 | |
| Indonesia | 566.73 | 555.70 | 779.35 | 836.73 | 864.54 | |
| China | 827,840.57 | 1,084,857.27 | 1,024,163.15 | 1,108,595.22 | 1,098,689.98 | |
| Sri Lanka | 0.82 | 80.98 | 135.62 | 0.20 | 60.10 | |
| Sum | 14,000,959.7 | 13,944,079.7 | 15,893,049.6 | 13,821,011.2 | 15,818,866.6 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fresh tamarinds, cashew apples, lychees, jackfruit, sapodillo plums, passion fruit, carambola and pitahaya | South Africa | 39,656.26 | 45,282.45 | 30,643.15 | 27,215.68 | 19,903.15 |
| Australia | : | : | : | : | 12.50 | |
| Colombia | 69,743.63 | 72,656.37 | 83,639.84 | 89,847.31 | 90,741.20 | |
| Mexico | 543.90 | 212.78 | 1,295.08 | 669.87 | 2,331.91 | |
| Kenya | 714.44 | 221.45 | 603.11 | 481.00 | 697.14 | |
| Thailand | 9,774.93 | 10,279.68 | 12,461.38 | 14,900.21 | 10,138.75 | |
| Taiwan | 11.92 | : | 10.59 | 25.97 | 8.97 | |
| Bangladesh | 140.15 | 222.55 | 291.61 | 206.12 | 382.00 | |
| Nigeria | : | : | : | 1.91 | 3.09 | |
| Pakistan | 2.22 | 3.34 | 8.17 | : | : | |
| India | 324.19 | 621.75 | 1,095.12 | 1,168.69 | 754.33 | |
| Turkey | : | : | 8.61 | 18.92 | 23.40 | |
| Japan | : | : | 0.07 | 0.02 | : | |
| Brazil | 49.36 | 147.37 | 368.88 | 966.63 | 1,220.26 | |
| USA | 3.97 | 3.00 | 0.07 | 0.02 | ||
| Israel | 2,943.37 | 2,919.30 | 1,061.09 | 1,125.92 | 594.86 | |
| Zimbabwe | 3,880.59 | 3,622.61 | 3,725.92 | 4,324.34 | 4,886.79 | |
| Viet Nam | 33,078.82 | 38,428.61 | 44,070.83 | 52,846.33 | 45,652.67 | |
| Indonesia | 103.20 | 333.37 | 297.72 | 246.67 | 441.64 | |
| China | 314.75 | 287.38 | 1,112.11 | 1,014.77 | 823.41 | |
| Sri Lanka | 347.84 | 392.81 | 104.84 | 104.62 | 85.24 | |
| Angola | 0.20 | 98.60 | 205.72 | 435.93 | ||
| Iran | 6.25 | : | 1.75 | 0.50 | 3.88 | |
| Sum | 161,639.99 | 175,634.8 | 180,897.75 | 195,371.2 | 179,141.18 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coffee, whether or not roasted or decaffeinated; coffee husks and skins; coffee substitutes containing coffee in any proportion | South Korea | 26.96 | 42.26 | 2,135.94 | 13.79 | 35.16 |
| South Africa | 2,867.11 | 915.21 | 279.46 | 314.60 | 131.21 | |
| Argentina | 45.24 | 2.23 | 32.16 | 12.80 | 3.74 | |
| Australia | 444.13 | 437.59 | 494.10 | 543.81 | 228.46 | |
| Colombia | 1,758,248.35 | 1,684,213.76 | 1,569,515.05 | 1,656,882.11 | 1,541,733.58 | |
| Mexico | 235,341.78 | 217,362.60 | 272,525.32 | 329,751.67 | 363,292.19 | |
| Kenya | 240,945.59 | 215,953.40 | 206,693.36 | 241,045.70 | 221,434.83 | |
| Thailand | 3,072.97 | 1,049.26 | 13,173.87 | 6,502.86 | 2,591.27 | |
| Taiwan | 3.01 | 1.22 | 9.80 | 35.34 | 2.30 | |
| Bangladesh | : | : | : | 0.00 | 0.03 | |
| Malawi | 3,353.26 | 1,921.31 | 2,425.91 | 1,591.15 | 4,794.93 | |
| Nigeria | 687.64 | 878.40 | 749.61 | 6.27 | 175.92 | |
| Pakistan | 0.00 | : | : | : | : | |
| India | 1,386,868.49 | 1,456,990.52 | 1,548,969.71 | 1,367,326.79 | 1,083,355.51 | |
| Turkey | 3,826.13 | 3,473.77 | 3,986.39 | 4,187.14 | 6,527.21 | |
| Japan | 28.78 | 127.93 | 63.32 | 113.01 | 384.22 | |
| Brazil | 8,884,451.03 | 8,059,774.02 | 8,340,175.81 | 9,322,630.20 | 9,326,189.77 | |
| USA | 19,453.40 | 36,377.42 | 32,323.21 | 44,134.86 | 82,825.73 | |
| Israel | 428.35 | 341.94 | 222.41 | 197.59 | 244.48 | |
| Zimbabwe | 3,826.96 | 316.30 | 567.38 | 1,817.41 | 675.95 | |
| Viet Nam | 7,061,355.60 | 6,350,171.59 | 7,155,297.73 | 6,730,345.99 | 6,420,701.22 | |
| Indonesia | 940,766.27 | 1,155,325.36 | 575,414.13 | 769,517.70 | 773,805.47 | |
| China | : | 0.01 | : | : | : | |
| Sri Lanka | 406,073.82 | 359,543.82 | 393,659.33 | 288,971.81 | 199,635.62 | |
| New Zealand | 0.24 | 5.33 | 6.48 | 6.56 | 13.83 | |
| Angola | 2,970.62 | 4,348.14 | 4,225.81 | 7,120.66 | 12,574.44 | |
| Panama | 9,404.34 | 7,648.87 | 3,451.12 | 3,463.82 | 4,206.02 | |
| Uruguay | 0.00 | : | 0.55 | : | 0.00 | |
| Sum | 20,964,490 | 19,557,222 | 20,126,398 | 20,776,534 | 20,045,563 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coconuts, Brazil nuts and cashew nuts, fresh or dried, whether or not shelled or peeled | New Zealand | 26.96 | 42.26 | 2,135.94 | 13.79 | 35.16 |
| Argentina | 2,867.11 | 915.21 | 279.46 | 314.60 | 131.21 | |
| Australia | 45.24 | 2.23 | 32.16 | 12.80 | 3.74 | |
| Colombia | 444.13 | 437.59 | 494.10 | 543.81 | 228.46 | |
| Thailand | 1,758,248.35 | 1,684,213.76 | 1,569,515.05 | 1,656,882.11 | 1,541,733.58 | |
| Brazil | 235,341.78 | 217,362.60 | 272,525.32 | 329,751.67 | 363,292.19 | |
| USA | 240,945.59 | 215,953.40 | 206,693.36 | 241,045.70 | 221,434.83 | |
| Israel | 3,072.97 | 1,049.26 | 13,173.87 | 6,502.86 | 2,591.27 | |
| Panama | 3.01 | 1.22 | 9.80 | 35.34 | 2.30 | |
| Mexico | : | : | : | 0.00 | 0.03 | |
| Sum | 125,274 | 109,479 | 121,257.1 | 119,455.8 | 111,733.7 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cocoa beans, whole or broken, raw or roasted | New Zealand | : | 0.15 | 0.06 | 0.20 | : |
| Australia | 0.30 | 0.65 | 125.20 | : | 0.05 | |
| Colombia | 71,129.12 | 71,178.89 | 20,815.98 | 12,962.68 | 12,353.08 | |
| Thailand | 4.80 | 0.32 | 5.00 | : | 0.22 | |
| Japan | 2,027.95 | 18.72 | 1.00 | 0.02 | 0.18 | |
| Brazil | 1,966.17 | 2,492.11 | 2,330.62 | 3,166.30 | 2,690.30 | |
| USA | 1,038.76 | 2,040.19 | 500.84 | 199.11 | 453.78 | |
| Israel | : | : | 0.06 | 3.29 | 6.60 | |
| Panama | 4,998.44 | 5,041.40 | 5,110.17 | 3,953.48 | 5,902.14 | |
| Mexico | 5,703.68 | 2,450.99 | 2,864.90 | 3,383.38 | 1,027.38 | |
| Sum | 86,869.22 | 83,223.42 | 31,753.83 | 23,668.46 | 22,433.73 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Vegetable and strawberry plants |
Australia | : | : | 4.05 | : | : |
| Brazil | 0.16 | 1.01 | 393.78 | : | 0.85 | |
| China | 0.02 | 180.00 | 0.92 | 2.28 | ||
| Israel | 213.07 | 9.27 | 34.04 | 17.44 | 17.61 | |
| Iran | : | : | : | : | 7.15 | |
| Japan | : | : | : | 1.03 | 0.28 | |
| Mexico | 0.20 | : | : | : | 1.23 | |
| New Zealand | 0.16 | 0.01 | : | 1.35 | 0.31 | |
| Thailand | : | : | 0.08 | : | : | |
| South Africa | 5.89 | 58.73 | 2.00 | 17.88 | 5.94 | |
| United Kingdom | 47,542.28 | 46,794.49 | 51,438.19 | 59,693.77 | 22,252.55 | |
| USA | 4,848.40 | 4,711.58 | 4,447.01 | 3,506.85 | 1,794.38 | |
| Chile | 5.60 | 13.96 | 4.05 | 1.72 | 0.67 | |
| India | 0.03 | 2.40 | 0.03 | 2.05 | 2.08 | |
| Turkey | 189.82 | 154.19 | 243.06 | 292.47 | 462.21 | |
| Viet Nam | 0.41 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.24 | : | |
| Sum | 52,806.04 | 51,745.84 | 56,746.49 | 63,535.72 | 24,547.54 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Indoor flowering plants with buds or flowers (excl. cacti) | Australia | : | : | 0.01 | 2.39 | : |
| China | 2.38 | 0.22 | 7.10 | 835.87 | 91.43 | |
| Israel | 20.03 | 44.45 | 0.80 | : | : | |
| Japan | : | 0.12 | : | : | 4.06 | |
| South Korea | : | : | : | : | 0.02 | |
| Thailand | 33.64 | 43.34 | 44.54 | 30.72 | 15.35 | |
| South Africa | : | 0.01 | : | : | : | |
| United Kingdom | 8,640.36 | 6,843.20 | 10,090.13 | 9,548.07 | 5,541.82 | |
| USA | 23.87 | 2.94 | 25.72 | 61.07 | 23.56 | |
| Egypt | : | 397.71 | : | : | : | |
| Indonesia | : | 0.02 | : | : | 0.17 | |
| Laos | 2.90 | 9.40 | : | : | : | |
| Sri Lanka | 1.07 | 0.48 | 16.81 | : | 0.61 | |
| Turkey | 30.70 | 441.28 | 6,244.99 | 13,343.48 | 11,649.26 | |
| Taiwan | 44.42 | 27.98 | 152.89 | 1,036.55 | 485.84 | |
| Philippines | : | : | : | : | 0.70 | |
| Viet Nam | : | 0.75 | : | : | : | |
| Costa Rica | 0.36 | : | : | : | 30.00 | |
| Sum | 8,799.73 | 7,811.9 | 16,582.99 | 24,858.15 | 17,842.82 |
| 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Indoor rooted cuttings and young plants (excl. cacti) | Australia | 128.71 | 347.76 | 354.52 | 369.02 | 384.96 |
| Brazil | 21.51 | 165.09 | 656.62 | 247.66 | 54.81 | |
| China | 2,752.64 | 9,997.46 | 13,466.13 | 14,163.88 | 19,018.51 | |
| Colombia | 85.70 | 21.77 | 241.38 | 484.53 | 211.31 | |
| Israel | 5,296.44 | 4,669.39 | 4,532.24 | 4,572.86 | 4,385.72 | |
| Iran | : | 1.44 | : | : | : | |
| Japan | 2.61 | 1.11 | 11.20 | 13.28 | 12.09 | |
| South Korea | 0.33 | 2.64 | 18.06 | 0.32 | 6.81 | |
| Mexico | 1.28 | 0.30 | : | : | : | |
| Malaysia | 162.98 | 130.92 | 208.38 | 692.96 | 481.63 | |
| New Zealand | 27.20 | 117.07 | 396.42 | 79.56 | 0.89 | |
| Thailand | 5,088.95 | 5,155.52 | 5,186.67 | 5,025.07 | 5,508.39 | |
| Uruguay | : | : | 0.12 | : | : | |
| South Africa | 1,350.18 | 3,955.46 | 3,726.06 | 3,245.41 | 2,856.00 | |
| Zimbabwe | : | 43.61 | 2.28 | 97.28 | : | |
| United Kingdom | 84.26 | 98.89 | 314.16 | 1,674.00 | 807.85 | |
| USA | 206.43 | 169.98 | 201.85 | 398.31 | 114.98 | |
| Chile | 2.90 | 224.23 | 447.94 | 499.94 | 273.69 | |
| Egypt | 18.06 | 35.42 | 84.34 | 51.13 | 33.11 | |
| Ghana | 28.14 | : | 338.65 | 880.13 | 1,087.52 | |
| Indonesia | 59.17 | 353.38 | 901.69 | 985.39 | 888.74 | |
| India | 457.56 | 672.09 | 4,428.20 | 4,581.08 | 4,284.74 | |
| Sri Lanka | 401.65 | 1,033.74 | 1,445.74 | 1,403.22 | 1,119.29 | |
| Malawi | : | : | : | : | 0.64 | |
| Nigeria | : | : | 0.53 | 1.43 | 1.10 | |
| Turkey | 1,416.01 | 1,710.10 | 2,039.26 | 2,570.49 | 1,728.18 | |
| Taiwan | 808.70 | 878.53 | 815.69 | 842.29 | 480.22 | |
| Philippines | 10.69 | 20.21 | 17.61 | 113.19 | 114.45 | |
| Viet Nam | 234.78 | 1,831.48 | 2,166.63 | 2,159.08 | 2,520.12 | |
| Costa Rica | 15,064.16 | 18,278.77 | 16,637.21 | 16,598.09 | 15,477.29 | |
| Sum | 33,711.04 | 49,916.36 | 58,639.58 | 61,749.60 | 61,853.04 |
Appendix E – EU 27 and member state cultivation/harvested/production area of Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola hosts (in 1,000 ha)
| Strawberries | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EU 27 | 103.78 | 103.76 | 106.42 | 101.16 | 83.84 |
| Belgium | 1.90 | 1.98 | 1.97 | 1.97 | 1.60 |
| Bulgaria | 0.68 | 0.66 | 0.73 | 0.71 | 0.74 |
| Czechia | 0.71 | 0.69 | 0.71 | 0.68 | 0.46 |
| Denmark | 1.17 | 1.16 | 1.15 | 1.11 | 1.07 |
| Germany | 14.30 | 14.16 | 14.00 | 13.20 | 12.86 |
| Estonia | 0.44 | 0.53 | 0.62 | 0.63 | 0.66 |
| Ireland | 0.19 | 0.19 | 0.19 | 0.18 | 0.18 |
| Greece | 1.49 | 1.47 | 1.47 | 1.61 | 1.72 |
| Spain | 6.87 | 6.82 | 7.03 | 7.26 | 7.35 |
| France | 3.34 | 3.37 | 3.35 | 3.35 | 3.33 |
| Croatia | 0.37 | 0.37 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.30 |
| Italy | 4.88 | 4.86 | 4.72 | 4.74 | 4.62 |
| Cyprus | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 |
| Latvia | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.49 | 0.50 |
| Lithuania | 0.78 | 0.84 | 0.83 | 0.88 | 0.94 |
| Luxembourg | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| Hungary | 0.79 | 0.79 | 0.73 | 0.73 | 0.88 |
| Malta | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Netherlands | 1.72 | 1.69 | 1.62 | 1.64 | 1.52 |
| Austria | 1.14 | 1.14 | 1.21 | 1.19 | 1.18 |
| Poland | 50.78 | 49.84 | 49.18 | 49.90 | 32.90 |
| Portugal | 0.39 | 0.31 | 0.32 | 0.55 | 0.81 |
| Romania | 2.72 | 3.25 | 3.27 | 3.30 | 3.29 |
| Slovenia | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.11 | 0.14 |
| Slovakia | 0.17 | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.27 | 0.21 |
| Finland | 6.30 | 6.89 | 10.16 | 4.40 | 4.44 |
| Sweden | 2.01 | 1.97 | 2.07 | 1.96 | 2.08 |
| Pears | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EU 27 | 115.13 | 113.81 | 113.54 | 110.66 | 107.05 |
| Belgium | 9.69 | 10.02 | 10.15 | 10.37 | 10.66 |
| Bulgaria | 0.41 | 0.45 | 0.57 | 0.70 | 0.50 |
| Czechia | 0.74 | 0.71 | 0.75 | 0.80 | 0.83 |
| Denmark | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.29 | 0.30 | 0.30 |
| Germany | 1.93 | 2.14 | 2.14 | 2.14 | 2.14 |
| Estonia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Ireland | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Greece | 4.08 | 4.07 | 4.41 | 4.34 | 5.42 |
| Spain | 22.55 | 21.89 | 21.33 | 20.62 | 20.22 |
| France | 5.30 | 5.25 | 5.24 | 5.25 | 5.38 |
| Croatia | 0.93 | 0.71 | 0.80 | 0.86 | 0.73 |
| Italy | 32.29 | 31.73 | 31.34 | 28.71 | 26.60 |
| Cyprus | 0.07 | 0.07 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.06 |
| Latvia | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.20 |
| Lithuania | 0.80 | 0.82 | 0.82 | 0.82 | 0.85 |
| Luxembourg | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.01 |
| Hungary | 2.87 | 2.90 | 2.84 | 2.81 | 2.62 |
| Malta | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Netherlands | 9.40 | 9.70 | 10.00 | 10.09 | 10.00 |
| Austria | 0.46 | 0.46 | 0.49 | 0.50 | 0.54 |
| Poland | 7.49 | 7.26 | 7.30 | 7.22 | 5.10 |
| Portugal | 11.99 | 11.54 | 11.21 | 11.33 | 11.33 |
| Romania | 3.15 | 3.12 | 3.10 | 3.08 | 3.09 |
| Slovenia | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.21 | 0.21 | 0.23 |
| Slovakia | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.11 | 0.10 |
| Finland | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.05 |
| Sweden | 0.12 | 0.12 | 0.11 | 0.10 | 0.11 |
| Cherries | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EU 27 | 172.45 | 173.37 | 175.49 | 176.30 | 177.86 |
| Belgium | 1.32 | 1.40 | 1.14 | 1.14 | 1.12 |
| Bulgaria | 9.60 | 10.06 | 11.23 | 12.16 | 11.73 |
| Czechia | 2.19 | 2.11 | 2.07 | 2.16 | 2.15 |
| Denmark | 0.79 | 0.66 | 0.56 | 0.53 | 0.61 |
| Germany | 7.14 | 7.96 | 7.94 | 7.94 | 7.89 |
| Estonia | 0.00 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.01 |
| Ireland | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Greece | 15.57 | 15.83 | 16.21 | 16.24 | 20.70 |
| Spain | 26.95 | 27.59 | 27.50 | 27.60 | 27.91 |
| France | 8.14 | 8.01 | 8.13 | 8.03 | 7.96 |
| Croatia | 3.43 | 3.53 | 2.94 | 2.85 | 3.12 |
| Italy | 29.97 | 29.27 | 29.16 | 29.21 | 29.01 |
| Cyprus | 0.21 | 0.23 | 0.22 | 0.23 | 0.23 |
| Latvia | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.12 | 0.10 |
| Lithuania | 0.72 | 0.73 | 0.76 | 0.77 | 0.77 |
| Luxembourg | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Hungary | 15.49 | 15.65 | 15.88 | 15.93 | 16.62 |
| Malta | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Netherlands | 0.82 | 0.81 | 0.79 | 0.78 | 0.79 |
| Austria | 0.24 | 0.25 | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.30 |
| Poland | 36.81 | 36.44 | 36.91 | 37.29 | 34.00 |
| Portugal | 6.43 | 6.30 | 6.14 | 6.50 | 6.49 |
| Romania | 6.13 | 6.02 | 7.06 | 6.09 | 5.94 |
| Slovenia | 0.18 | 0.19 | 0.20 | 0.21 | 0.21 |
| Slovakia | 0.17 | 0.19 | 0.21 | 0.20 | 0.16 |
| Finland | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Sweden | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.04 |
| Avocados | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EU 27 | 12.24 | 12.72 | 13.22 | 17.50 | 19.60 |
| Belgium | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Bulgaria | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Czechia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Denmark | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Germany | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Estonia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Ireland | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Greece | 0.48 | 0.60 | 0.72 | 1.08 | 1.10 |
| Spain | 11.44 | 11.81 | 12.16 | 14.10 | 15.85 |
| France | 0.23 | 0.23 | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.24 |
| Croatia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Italy | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Cyprus | 0.09 | 0.08 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.10 |
| Latvia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Lithuania | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Luxembourg | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Hungary | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Malta | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Netherlands | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Austria | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Poland | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Portugal | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.98 | 2.31 |
| Romania | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Slovenia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Slovakia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Finland | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Sweden | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Walnuts | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EU 27 | 72.61 | 74.15 | 80.60 | 87.62 | 96.69 |
| Belgium | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.08 | 0.10 | 0.10 |
| Bulgaria | 6.28 | 5.05 | 6.18 | 6.36 | 7.10 |
| Czechia | 0.18 | 0.19 | 0.17 | 0.13 | 0.16 |
| Denmark | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Germany | 0.00 | 0.29 | 0.29 | 0.29 | 0.29 |
| Estonia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Ireland | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Greece | 12.04 | 13.19 | 15.27 | 14.82 | 20.27 |
| Spain | 9.63 | 10.37 | 11.00 | 11.44 | 12.29 |
| France | 21.36 | 21.63 | 22.17 | 25.88 | 24.99 |
| Croatia | 5.40 | 5.55 | 6.70 | 7.21 | 8.11 |
| Italy | 4.54 | 4.35 | 4.50 | 4.67 | 4.93 |
| Cyprus | 0.21 | 0.19 | 0.18 | 0.21 | 0.21 |
| Latvia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Lithuania | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Luxembourg | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 |
| Hungary | 4.85 | 5.08 | 5.40 | 6.00 | 6.40 |
| Malta | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Netherlands | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Austria | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.18 |
| Poland | 2.47 | 2.38 | 2.31 | 2.27 | 2.70 |
| Portugal | 3.32 | 3.54 | 3.85 | 5.37 | 5.40 |
| Romania | 1.67 | 1.60 | 1.59 | 1.62 | 1.91 |
| Slovenia | 0.27 | 0.34 | 0.38 | 0.44 | 0.47 |
| Slovakia | 0.19 | 0.21 | 0.36 | 0.63 | 1.17 |
| Finland | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Sweden | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Grapes | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
| EU 27 | 3,136.15 | 3,133.32 | 3,135.50 | 3,155.20 | 3,156.22 |
| Belgium | 0.24 | 0.24 | 0.30 | 0.38 | 0.49 |
| Bulgaria | 36.55 | 34.11 | 34.11 | 30.05 | 28.74 |
| Czechia | 15.80 | 15.81 | 15.94 | 16.08 | 16.14 |
| Denmark | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Germany | : | : | : | : | : |
| Estonia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Ireland | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Greece | 98.09 | 101.75 | 100.34 | 101.85 | 104.21 |
| Spain | 935.11 | 937.76 | 939.92 | 936.89 | 931.63 |
| France | 751.69 | 750.46 | 750.62 | 755.47 | 759.06 |
| Croatia | 23.40 | 21.90 | 20.51 | 19.82 | 21.45 |
| Italy | 673.76 | 670.09 | 675.82 | 697.91 | 703.90 |
| Cyprus | 6.07 | 5.93 | 6.67 | 6.67 | 6.79 |
| Latvia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Lithuania | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Luxembourg | 1.26 | 1.26 | 1.25 | 1.24 | 1.24 |
| Hungary | 68.12 | 67.08 | 66.06 | 64.92 | 59.63 |
| Malta | 0.68 | 0.68 | 0.42 | 0.42 | 0.45 |
| Netherlands | 0.14 | 0.16 | 0.17 | 0.16 | 0.17 |
| Austria | 46.49 | 46.33 | 46.50 | 46.36 | 46.16 |
| Poland | 0.62 | 0.67 | 0.73 | 0.74 | 0.90 |
| Portugal | 179.17 | 178.95 | 179.25 | 175.65 | 175.67 |
| Romania | 174.17 | 175.32 | 172.80 | 176.34 | 175.59 |
| Slovenia | 15.84 | 15.86 | 15.65 | 15.57 | 15.29 |
| Slovakia | 8.71 | 8.47 | 8.01 | 7.92 | 7.73 |
| Finland | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Sweden | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.08 |
| Olives | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EU 27 | 5,043.87 | 5,056.93 | 5,098.62 | 5,070.49 | 5,105.13 |
| Belgium | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Bulgaria | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Czechia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Denmark | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Germany | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Estonia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Ireland | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Greece | 969.07 | 940.52 | 963.12 | 903.08 | 906.02 |
| Spain | 2,521.69 | 2,554.83 | 2,579.00 | 2,601.90 | 2,623.72 |
| France | 17.38 | 17.38 | 17.40 | 17.72 | 17.62 |
| Croatia | 18.18 | 18.68 | 18.70 | 18.61 | 20.28 |
| Italy | 1,144.95 | 1,149.47 | 1,142.12 | 1,139.47 | 1,145.52 |
| Cyprus | 10.61 | 10.83 | 10.76 | 11.06 | 11.11 |
| Latvia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Lithuania | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Luxembourg | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Hungary | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Malta | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Netherlands | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Austria | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Poland | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Portugal | 360.81 | 363.97 | 366.23 | 377.28 | 379.44 |
| Romania | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Slovenia | 1.17 | 1.24 | 1.30 | 1.37 | 1.42 |
| Slovakia | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Finland | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| Sweden | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
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, Potting R, Stefani E, Thulke H‐H, Van der Werf W, Vicent Civera A, Yuen J, Zappalà L, Migheli Q, Vloutoglou I, Czwienczek E, Maiorano A, Streissl F and Reignault PL, 2022. Scientific Opinion on the pest categorisation of Colletotrichum aenigma, C. alienum, C. perseae, C. siamense and C. theobromicola . EFSA Journal 2022;20(8):7529, 80 pp. 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7529
Requestor European Commission
Question numbers EFSA‐Q‐2022‐00205, EFSA‐Q‐2022‐00206, EFSA‐Q‐2022‐00207, EFSA‐Q‐2022‐00208, EFSA‐Q‐2022‐2022‐00209
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 Zappalà.
Declarations of interest If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu.
Acknowledgments EFSA wishes to acknowledge the contribution of Caterina Campese, Malayka Picchi and Oresteia Sfyra to this opinion.
Reproduction of the images listed below is prohibited and permission must be sought directly from the copyright holder: Figure 1: © British Mycological society. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Adopted: 8 July 2022
Notes
An EPPO code, formerly known as a Bayer code, is a unique identifier linked to the name of a plant or plant pest important in agriculture and plant protection. Codes are based on genus and species names. However, if a scientific name is changed, the EPPO code remains the same. This provides a harmonised system to facilitate the management of plant and pest names in computerised databases, as well as data exchange between IT systems (Griessinger and Roy, 2015; EPPO, 2019).
References
- Abid M, Chohan S, Perveen R and Anees M, 2019. First report of bitter rot of apple caused by Colletotrichum siamense in Pakistan. Plant Disease, 103, 583–584. 10.1094/PDIS-09-18-1573-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Ahmad T, Wang J, Zheng Y, Mugizi AE, Moosa A, Nie C and Liu Y, 2021. First record of Colletotrichum alienum causing postharvest anthracnose disease of mango fruit in China. Plant Disease, 105, 1852. 10.1094/PDIS-09-20-2074-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Alaniz S, Hernandez L and Mondino P, 2015. Colletotrichum fructicola is the dominant and one of the most aggressive species causing bitter rot of apple in Uruguay. Tropical Plant Pathology, 40, 265–274. 10.1007/s40858-015-0025-9 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Alaniz S, Cuozzo V, Martínez V, Stadnik MJ and Mondino P, 2019. Ascospore infection and Colletotrichum species causing Glomerella leaf spot of apple in Uruguay. The Plant Pathology Journal, 35, 100–111. 10.5423/PPJ.OA.07.2018.0145 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Alizadeh A, Javan‐Nikkhah M, Zare R, Fotouhifar K‐B, Damm U and Stukenbrock EH, 2015. New records of Colletotrichum species for the mycobiota of Iran. Mycologia Iranica, 2, 95–109. 10.22043/mi.2015.19967 [DOI]
- Anderson JM, Aitken E, Dann EK and Coates LM, 2013. Morphological and molecular diversity of Colletotrichum spp. causing pepper spot and anthracnose of lychee (Litchi chinensis) in Australia. Plant Pathology, 62, 279–288. 10.1111/j.1365-3059.2012.02632.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Andrioli J, Scariot FJ, Delamare APL and Echeverrigaray S, 2021. Morphological characterization and molecular identification of Colletotrichum species associated to sweet persimmon anthracnose in Southern Brazil. Ciȇncia Rural, Santa Maria, 51, 9. 10.1590/0103-8478cr20200728 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Araujo MBM, Lima CS, Rabelo Filho FAC, Ootani MA, Bezerra AME and Cardoso JE, 2018. First report of Colletotrichum theobromicola and C. tropicale causing anthracnose on fruits of carnauba palm in Brazil. Plant Disease, 102, 244. 10.1094/PDIS-06-17-0860-PDN [DOI]
- Azad R, Hamza A, Khatun MM, Nasrin S, Tanny T, Das KC, Salimullah M and Alam I, 2020. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing leaf spot in Aloe vera in Bangladesh. Plant Disease, 104, 3058. [Google Scholar]
- Bailey JA and Jeger MJ (eds.), 1992. Colletotrichum: Biology Pathology and Control. CAB International, Wallingford, UK. 162 pp. [Google Scholar]
- Bailey JA, O'Connell RJ, Pring RJ, Nash C. 1992. Infection strategies of Colletotrichum species. In: Bailey JA and Jeger MJ (eds.), Colletotrichum. Biology, Pathology and Control. CABI, Wallingford, UK. pp. 88–120. [Google Scholar]
- Baroncelli R, Zapparata A, Sarrocco S, Sukno SA, Lane CR, Thon MR, Vannacci G, Holub E and Sreenivasaprasad S, 2015. Molecular Diversity of anthracnose pathogen populations associated with UK strawberry production suggests multiple introductions of three different Colletotrichum species. PLoS ONE, 10, e0129140. 10.1371/journal.pone.0129140 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bergstrom GC and Nicholson L, 1999. The biology of corn anthracnose: knowledge to exploit for improved management. Phytopathology, 83, 596–608. 10.1094/pdis.1999.83.7.596 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Boufleur TR, Castro RRL, Rogério F, Ciampi‐Guillardi M, Baroncelli R and Massola Júnior NS, 2020. First report of Colletotrichum musicola causing soybean anthracnose in Brazil. Plant Disease, 104, 1858. [Google Scholar]
- Boyette CD, Hoagland RE and Weaver MA, 2007. Biocontrol efficacy of Colletotrichum truncatum for hemp sesbania (Sesbania exaltata) is enhanced with unrefined corn oil and surfactant. Weed Biology and Management, 7, 70–76. 10.1111/j.1445-6664.2006.00230.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Braganca CAD, Nogueira AF Jr, Rogerio F and Massola NS Jr, 2014. First report of anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum theobromicola on Barbados cherry (Malpighia emarginata) in Brazil. Plant Disease, 98, 1272. 10.1094/pdis-01-14-0099-pdn [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bragança CAD, Damm U, Baroncelli R, Massola Júnior NS and Crous PW, 2016. Species of the Colletotrichum acutatum complex associated with anthracnose diseases of fruit in Brazil. Fungal Biology, 120, 547–561. 10.1016/j.funbio.2016.01.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bustamante M, Fernandez Y, Osorio‐Navarro C and Henriquez JL. 2020. Identification of Colletotrichum spp. causing postharvest anthracnose of avocados in Chile. In Abstracts of Presentations of the APS Plant Health 2020 Annual Meeting, 10–14 August 2020. 10.1094/PHYTO-110-12-S2.1 [DOI]
- CABI CPC, online. Crop Protection Compendium. CAB International, UK. Available online. https://www.cabi.org/cpc Accessed: 20 May 2022 [Google Scholar]
- CABI , 2022. Invasive Species Compendium. Available online: https://www.cabi.org/isc [Accessed: 20 May 2022].
- Cai L, Hyde KD, Taylor PWJ, Weir BS, Waller J, Abang MM, Zhang JZ, Yang YL, Phoulivong S, Liu ZY, Prihastuti H, Shivas RG, McKenzie EHC and Johnston PR, 2009. A polyphasic approach for studying Colletotrichum . Fungal Diversity, 39, 183–204. [Google Scholar]
- Cannon PF, Damm U, Johnston PR, Weir BS. 2012. Colletotrichum – current status and future directions. Studies in Mycology, 73, 181–213. Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3458418/ [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Carbone MJ, Moreira Y, Mondino P and Alaniz S, 2021. First report of anthracnose on peach fruit caused by Colletotrichum siamense in Uruguay. Plant Disease, 105, 4154. 10.1094/PDIS-05-21-0950-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Carvalho AS, Melo MP, Silva JP, Matos KS and Beserra JEA Jr, 2019. Identification of Colletotrichum species associated with anthracnose of Spondias spp. in Brazil. Forest Pathology, 49, e12554. 10.1111/efp.12554 [DOI]
- Cavalcanti Marins EF, da Silva MJS, da Silva JL, Silva‐Cabral JRA, Costa JFO, Feijo FM, Assuncao IP and Lima GSA, 2022. Colletotrichum species associated with sugarcane red rot in Brazil. Fungal Biology, 126, 290–299. 10.1016/j.funbio.2022.02.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Chang T, Hassan O, Jeon JY, Shin JS, Oh NK and Lim TH, 2018. First report of anthracnose of persimmon (Diospyros kaki L. f.) caused by Colletotrichum siamense in Korea. Plant Disease, 102, 443–444. 10.1094/PDIS-07-17-0958-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Chaves TP, Miranda ARS, da Paz LC, Netto MSB, Lima GSA and Assuncao IP, 2020. First report of Colletotrichum theobromicola causing anthracnose on Anthurium sp . Australasian Plant Disease Notes, 15, 27. [Google Scholar]
- Chen K‐L and Kirschner R, 2018. Fungi from leaves of lotus (Nelumbo nucifera). Mycological Progress, 17, 275–293. 10.1007/s11557-017-1324-y [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Chen X, Wang T, Guo H, Zhu PK and Xu L, 2019. First report of anthracnose of Camellia sasanqua caused by Colletotrichum aenigma in China. Plant Disease, 103, 1423. [Google Scholar]
- Chen XY, Dai DJ, Zhao SF, Shen Y, Wang HD and Zhang CQ, 2020. Genetic diversity of Colletotrichum spp. causing strawberry anthracnose in Zhejiang, China. Plant Disease, 104, 351–1357. 10.1094/PDIS-09-19-2026-RE [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Cheng BP, Huang YH, Song XB, Peng AT, Ling JF and Chen X, 2013. First Report of Colletotrichum siamense causing leaf drop and fruit spot of Citrus reticulata Blanco cv. Shiyue Ju in China. Plant Disease, 97, 1508. 10.1094/pdis-04-13-0352-pdn [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Cheng S, Jiang J‐W, Hsiang T, Sun Z‐X and Zhou Y, 2019. First report of anthracnose on Machilus ichangensis caused by Colletotrichum siamense in China. Plant Disease, 103, 2958. [Google Scholar]
- Chethana CS, Chowdappa P, Biju CN, Praveena R and Sujatha AM, 2016. Molecular and phenotypic characterization revealed six Colletotrichum species responsible for anthracnose disease of small cardamom in South India. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 146, 465–481. [Google Scholar]
- Chethana KWT, Jayawardene RS, Zhang W, Zhou YY, Liu M, Hyde KD, Li XH, Wang J, Zhang KC and Yan JY, 2019. Molecular characterization and pathogenicity of fungal taxa associated with cherry leaf spot disease. Mycosphere, 10, 490–530. [Google Scholar]
- Choi H‐W, Lee YK and Hong SK, 2017. First report of Colletotrichum aenigma causing anthracnose on Sedum kamtschaticum in Korea. Plant Disease, 101, 2150. 10.1094/PDIS-07-17-0938-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Chou T, Xu W, Mukhtar I, Quan X, Jiang S, Huang R, Chen B and Xie B, 2019. First report of leaf spot disease caused by Colletotrichum siamense on Chrysalidocarpus lutescens in China. Plant Disease, 103, 1425. 10.1094/PDIS-11-18-2049-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Chowdappa P, Chethana CS and Pavani KV, 2015. Colletotrichum siamense and C. truncatum are responsible for severe outbreaks of anthracnose on onion in Southwest India. Journal of Plant Pathology, 97, 77–86. [Google Scholar]
- Chung P‐C, Wu H‐Y, Wang Y‐W, Ariyawansa HA, Hu H‐P, Hung T‐H, Tzean S‐S and Chung C‐L, 2020. Diversity and pathogenicity of Colletotrichum species causing strawberry anthracnose in Taiwan and description of a new species, Colletotrichum miaoliense sp. nov. Scientific Reports, 10, 14664, 10. 10.1038/s41598-020-70878-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Conforto C, Lima NB, Garcete‐Gómez JM, Câmara MPS and Michereff SJ, 2017. First report of Colletotrichum siamense and C. fructicola causing cladode brown spot in Nopalea cochenillifera in Brazil. Journal of Plant Pathology, 99, 812. 10.4454/jpp.v99i3.3974 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Costa JFO, Kamei SH, Silva JRA, Miranda ARGS, Netto MB, da Silva SJC, Correia KC, Lima GSA and Assuncao IP, 2019. Species diversity of Colletotrichum infecting Annona spp. in Brazil. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 153, 1119–1130. [Google Scholar]
- Cristobal‐Martinez AL, de Jesus Y‐MM, Solano‐Vidal R, Segura‐Leon O and Hernandez‐Anguiano AM, 2016. Diversity of Colletotrichum species in coffee (Coffea arabica) plantations in Mexico. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 147, 605–614. 10.1007/s10658-016-1029-0 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Crous PW, Denman S, Taylor JE, Swart L, Bezuidenhout CM, Hoffman L, Palm ME and Groenewald JZ, 2013. Cultivation and disease of Proteaceae: Leucadendron, Leucospermum, and Protea. 2nd Edition. CBS Biodiversity, Series N/A: 360. CBS‐KNAW Fungal Biodiversity: Centre. 360 pp. [Google Scholar]
- da Silva LL, HLA HLAM, HLN C, Santana MF and de Queiroz MV, 2020. Colletotrichum: species complexes, lifestyle, and peculiarities of some sources of genetic variability. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 104, 1891–1904. 10.1007/s00253-020-10363-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Damm U, Cannon PF, Woudenberg JHC, Johnston PR, Weir BS, Tan YP, Shivas RG and Crous PW, 2012. The Colletotrichum boninense species complex. Studies in Mycology, 73, 1–36. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Damm U, Sato T, Alizadeh A, Groenewald JZ and Crous PW, 2019. The Colletotrichum dracaenophilum, C. magnum and C. orchidearum species complexes. Studies in Mycology, 92, 1–46. 10.1016/j.simyco.2018.04.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- de Oliveira CVS, Matos KS, de Albuquerque DMC, Hanada RE and da Silva GF, 2017. Identification of Colletotrichum isolates from Capsicum chinense in Amazon. Genetics and Molecular Research, 16, 1–10. 10.4238/gmr16029601 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- de Silva DD, Crous PW, Ades PK, Hyde KD and Taylor PW, 2017a. Life‐styles of Colletotrichum species and implications for plant biosecurity. Fungal Biology Reviews, 31, 155–168. [Google Scholar]
- de Silva DD, Ades PK, Crous PW and Taylor PWJ, 2017b. Colletotrichum species associated with chili anthracnose in Australia. Plant Pathology, 66, 254–267. 10.1111/ppa.12572 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- de Silva DD, Groenewald JZ, Crous PW, Ades PK, Nasruddin A, Mongkolporn O and Taylor PWJ, 2019. Identification, prevalence and pathogenicity of Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose of Capsicum annuum in Asia. IMA Fungus, 10, 8. 10.1186/s43008-019-0001-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- de Souza Junior FJC and Assuncao MC, 2021. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing anthracnose in Dioscorea cayennensis in Brazil. Journal of Plant Pathology, 103, 1065. 10.1007/s42161-021-00872-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Deising HB, Werner S and Wernitz M, 2000. The role of fungal appressoria in plant infection. Microbes and Infection, 2, 1631–1641. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dela Cueva Fe M, Laurel NR, Dalisay TU and Sison MLJ, 2021. Identification and characterisation of Colletotrichum fructicola . C. tropicale and C. theobromicola causing mango anthracnose in the Philippines. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection, 54, 1989–2006. 10.1080/03235408.2021.1968234 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Diao Y‐Z, Zhang C, Liu F, Wang W‐Z, Liu L and Cai Land Liu X‐L, 2017. Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose disease of chili in China. Persoonia, 38, 20–37. 10.3767/003158517X692788 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dillard HR and Cobb AC, 1998. Survival of Colletotrichum coccodes in infected tomato tissue and in soil. Plant Disease, 82, 235–238. 10.1094/pdis.1998.82.2.235 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dorneles KR, Eloy J and Dallagnol LJ, 2018. Colletotrichum theobromicola causing anthracnose on butia fruits in Brazil. Forest Pathology, 48, e12399. 10.1111/efp.12399 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Douanla‐Meli C and Unger J‐G, 2017. Phylogenetic study of the Colletotrichum species on imported citrus fruits uncovers a low diversity and a new species in the Colletotrichum gigasporum complex. Fungal Biology, 121, 858–868. 10.1016/j.funbio.2017.06.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dowling M, Peres N, Villani S and Schnabel G, 2020. Managing Colletotrichum on fruit crops: a “complex” challenge. Plant Disease, 104, 2301–2316. 10.1094/PDIS-11-19-2378-FE [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Eastburn DM and Gubler WD, 1990. Strawberry anthracnose: detection and survival of Colletotrichum acutatum in soil. Plant Disease, 74, 161–163. 10.1094/pd-74-0161 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Eaton MJ, Edwards S, Inocencio HA, Machado FJ, Nuckles EM, Farman M, Gauthier NA and Vaillancourt LJ. 2021. Diversity and cross‐infection potential of Colletotrichum causing fruit rots in mixed‐fruit orchards in Kentucky. 10.1094/PDIS-06-20-1273-RE [DOI] [PubMed]
- EFSA PLH Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Health) , Jeger M, Bragard C, Caffier D, Candresse T, Chatzivassiliou E, Dehnen‐Schmutz K, Gregoire J‐C, Jaques Miret JA, MaclLeod A, Navajas Navarro M, Niere B, Parnell S, Potting R, Rafoss T, Rossi V, Urek G, Van Bruggen A, Van Der Werf W, West J, Winter S, Hart A, Schans J, Schrader G, Suffert M, Kertesz V, Kozelska S, Mannino MR, Mosbach‐Schulz O, Pautasso M, Stancanelli G, Tramontini S, Vos S and Gilioli G, 2018. Guidance on quantitative pest risk assessment. EFSA Journal 2018;16(8):5350, 86 pp. 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5350 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- EFSA Scientific Committee , Hardy A, Benford D, Halldorsson T, Jeger MJ, Knutsen HK, More S, Naegeli H, Noteborn H, Ockleford C, Ricci A, Rychen G, Schlatter JR, Silano V, Solecki R, Turck D, Benfenati E, Chaudhry QM, Craig P, Frampton G, Greiner M, Hart A, Hogstrand C, Lambre C, Luttik R, Makowski D, Siani A, Wahlstroem H, Aguilera J, Dorne J‐L, Fernandez Dumont A, Hempen M, Valtuena Martınez S, Martino L, Smeraldi C, Terron A, Georgiadis N and Younes M, 2017. Scientific Opinion on the guidance on the use of the weight of evidence approach in scientific assessments. EFSA Journal 2017;15(8):4971, 69 pp, 15. 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4971 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- EPPO (European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization) , 2019. Available online: EPPO codes. https://www.eppo.int/RESOURCES/eppo_databases/eppo_codes
- EPPO (European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization) , online EPPO Global Database. Available online: https://gd.eppo.int
- Fantinel VS, Muniz MFB, Blume E, Araujo MM, Poletto T, Dutra A, Tonetto T, Harakava R and Maciel CG, 2017. First Report of Colletotrichum siamense Causing Anthracnose on Acca sellowiana Fruits in Brazil. Plant Disease, 101. 10.1094/PDIS-01-17-0096-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) , 2013. ISPM (International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures) 11—Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests. FAO, Rome, 36 pp. Available online: https://www.ippc.int/sites/default/files/documents/20140512/ispm_11_2013_en_2014-04-30_201405121523-494.65%20KB.pdf
- FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) , 2018. ISPM (International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures) ISPM 5 Glossary of phytosanitary terms. Revised version adopted CPM 13, April 2018. FAO, Rome, Available online: https://www.ippc.int/en/publications/621/
- Farr DF and Rossman AY, online. Fungal Databases, U.S. National Fungus Collections, ARS, USDA. Available online: https://nt.ars-grin.gov/fungaldatabases/ [Google Scholar]
- Feil WS, Butler EE, Duniway JM and Gubler WD, 2008. The effects of moisture and temperature on the survival of Colletotrichum acutatum on strawberry residue in soil. Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology, 25, 362–370. 10.1080/07060660309507091 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Feng FS, Zhou GY and Li H, 2019. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing anthracnose on Rosa chinensis in China. Plant Disease, 103, 1422. [Google Scholar]
- Fernandez LN, Alaniz S, Mondino P, Roesclin R, Maumary RL, Gariglio N and Favaro MA, 2018. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing apple bitter rot in Central Argentina. Plant Disease, 102, 250. 10.1094/PDIS-07-17-1071-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Ferreira e Ferreira AFT, Silva BNS, Mota AJ and Lima JSLB, 2020. Cenostigma tocantinum, a new host of Colletotrichum siamense . Forest Pathology, 50, e12623. 10.1111/efp.12623 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- FRAC (Fungicide Resistance Action Committee) , 2014. Pathogen risk list 2014. Fungicide Resistance Action Committee, CropLife International, Brussells, Belgium. Available online: http://www.frac.info/docs/default-source/publications/pathogen-risk/pathogen-risk-list.pdf
- Freeman S, Katan T and Shabi E, 1998. Characterization of Colletotrichum species responsible for anthracnose diseases of various fruits. Plant Disease, 82, 596–605. 10.1094/PDIS.1998.82.6.596 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Freeman S, Shalev Z and Katan J, 2002. Survival in soil of Colletotrichum acutatum and C. gloeosporioides pathogenic on strawberry. Plant Disease, 86, 965–970. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fu M, Crous PW, Bai Q, Zhang PF, Xiang J, Guo YS, Zhao FF, Yang MM, Hong N, Xu WX and Wang GP, 2019. Colletotrichum species associated with anthracnose of Pyrus spp. in China. Persoonia, 42, 1–35. 10.3767/persoonia.2019.42.01 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fuentes‐Aragón D, Juárez‐Vázquez SB, Vargas‐Hernández M and Silva‐Rojas HV, 2018. Colletotrichum fructicola, a member of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides sensu lato, is the causal agent of anthracnose and soft rot in avocado fruits cv. “Hass”. Mycobiology, 46, 92–100. 10.1080/12298093.2018.1454010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Fuentes‐Aragon D, Silva‐Rojas HV, Guarnaccia V, Mora‐Aguilera JA, Aranda‐Ocampo S, Bautista‐Martinez N and Teliz‐Ortiz D, 2020. Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose on avocado fruit in Mexico: current status. Plant Pathology, 69, 1513–1528. 10.1111/ppa.13234 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Gasparoto MCG, Lourenço SA, Tanaka FAO, Spósito MB, Marchini LC, Silva Junior GJ and Amorim L, 2017. Honeybees can spread Colletotrichum acutatum and C. gloeosporiodes among citrus plants. Plant Pathology, 66, 777–782. [Google Scholar]
- Giblin FR, Tan YP, Mitchell R, Coates LM, Irwin JAG and Shivas RG, 2018. Colletotrichum species associated with pre‐ and post‐harvest diseases of avocado and mango in eastern Australia. Australasian Plant Pathology, 47, 269–276. 10.1007/s13313-018-0553-0 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Grand LF, 1985. North Carolina Plant Disease Index. North Carolina Agric. Res. Serv. Techn. Bull., 240, 1–157. [Google Scholar]
- Griessinger D and Roy A‐S, 2015. EPPO codes: a brief description. Available online: https://www.eppo.int/media/uploaded_images/RESOURCES/eppo_databases/A4_EPPO_Codes_2018.pdf
- Guarnaccia V, Vitale A, Cirvilleri G, Aiello D, Susca A, Epifani F, Perrone G and Polizzi G, 2016. Characterisation and pathogenicity of fungal species associated with branch cankers and stem‐end rot of avocado in Italy. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 146, 963–976. 10.1007/s10658-016-0973-z [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Guevara‐Suarez M, Cárdenas M, Jiménez P, Afanador‐Kafuri L and Restrepo S, 2022. Colletotrichum species complexes associated with crops in Northern South America: a review. Agronomy, 12, 548. 10.3390/agronomy12030548 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Guterres DC, Azevedo DMQ, Oliveira WM and Furtado GQ, 2020. Erythrina variegata is a new host species to Colletotrichum siamense in Brazil. Forest Pathology, 5, e12625. 10.1111/efp.12625 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Han YC, Zeng XG, Xiang FY, Ren L, Chen FY and Gu YC, 2016. Distribution and characteristics of Colletotrichum spp. associated with anthracnose of strawberry in Hubei, China. Plant Disease, 100, 996–1006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Han S, Ma J, Li Y, Li S, Liu Y, Qiao T, Lin T, Yang C, Luo T, Xiang L and Zhu T, 2021. Brown leaf spot of Cycas debaoensis caused by Colletotrichum siamense in Sichuan, China. Plant Disease, 105, 2019. 10.1094/pdis-10-20-2149-pdn [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Han F‐Y, Zhang Y‐T, Liu Z‐Z, Ge L, Wang L‐D, Ji Y‐P, Qi Y‐K, Zhu W‐C and Wang Q‐H, 2022. First report of red‐fleshed apple anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum siamense . Plant Disease, 106, 1299. 10.1094/PDIS-06-21-1132-PDN [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hassan O, Jeon JY, Chang T, Shin JS and Oh NK, 2018. Molecular and morphological characterization of Colletotrichum species in the Colletotrichum gloeosporioides complex associated with persimmon anthracnose in South Korea. Plant Disease, 102, 101–1024. 10.1094/PDIS-10-17-1564-RE [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hawk T, Rhodes SC, McBride S and Ong KL, 2018. First report of boxwood dieback caused by Colletotrichum theobromicola in Texas. Plant Disease, 102, 242. 10.1094/PDIS-06-17-0821-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Hofer KM, Braithwaite M, Braithwaite LJ, Sorensen S, Siebert B, Pather V, Goudie L, Williamson L, Alexander BJR and Toome‐Heller M, 2021. First report of Colletotrichum fructicola, C. perseae and C. siamense causing anthracnose disease of avocado (Persea americana) in New Zealand. Plant Disease, 105, 1564. 10.1094/PDIS-06-20-1313-PDN [DOI]
- Howard CM and Albregts EE, 1973. Cassia obtusifolia, a possible reservoir for inoculum of Colletrotrichum fragariae . Phytopathology, 63, 533–534. [Google Scholar]
- Hsieh C‐W, Chuang Y‐Y, Lee M‐Z and Kirschner R, 2020. First inventory of fungi in symptomless and symptomatic Chinese Mesona indicates phytopathological threat. Plant Disease, 104, 2391–2397. 10.1094/pdis-03-20-0475-re [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hu M‐J, Grabke A and Schnabel G, 2015. Investigation of the Colletotrichum gloeosporioides species complex causing peach anthracnose in South Carolina. Plant Disease, 99, 797–805. 10.1094/PDIS-10-14-1076-RE [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Huang YX, Zhang YQ, Hu HQ and Feng NJ, 2021. First report of anthracnose on Hymenocallis littoralis caused by Colletotrichum siamense in China. Plant Disease, 105, 3740. 10.1094/PDIS-02-21-0405-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Hyde KD, Norphanphoun C, Chen J, Dissanayake AJ, Doilom M, Hongsanan S, Jayawardena RS, Jeewon R, Perera RH, Thongbai B, Wanasinghe DN, Wisitrassameewong K, Tibpromma S and Stadler M, 2018. Thailand's amazing diversity: up to 96% of fungi in northern Thailand may be novel. Fungal Diversity, 93, 215–239. [Google Scholar]
- Ismail SI, Rahim NA and Zulperi D, 2021. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing blossom blight on thai basil (Ocimum basilicum) in Malaysia. Plant Disease, 105, 1209. 10.1094/PDIS-06-20-1371-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- James, R.S. , Ray, J , Tan, Y.P. , and Shivas, R.G. 2014. Colletotrichum siamense, C. theobromicola, and C. queenslandicum from several plant species and the identification of C. asianum in the Northern Territory, Australia. Australasian Plant Disease Notes, 9, 138.
- Jayawardena RS, Hyde KD, Damm U, Cai L, Liu M, Li XH, Zhang W, Zhao WS and Yan JY, 2016. Notes on currently accepted species of Colletotrichum . Mycosphere, 7, 1192–1260. 10.5943/mycosphere/si/2c/9 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Jayawardena RS, Hyde KD, Chethana KWT, Daranagama DA, Dissanayake AJ, Goonasekara ID, Manawasighe IS, Mapook A, Jayasiri SC, Karunarathna A, Li CG, Phukhamsakda C, Senanayake IC, Wanasinghe DN, Camporesi E, Bulgakov TS, Li XH, Liu M, Zhang W and Yan JY, 2018. Mycosphere notes 102–168: Saprotrophic fungi on Vitis in China, Italy, Russia and Thailand. Mycosphere, 9, 1–114. [Google Scholar]
- Jayawardena RS, Bhunjun CS, Hyde KD, Gentekaki E and Itthayakorn P, 2021. Colletotrichum: lifestyles, biology, morpho‐species, species complexes and accepted species. Mycosphere, 12, 519–699. [Google Scholar]
- Ji J, Wang T, Xu X, Wang XY, Wu QQ, Li WY, Kan YC and Yao LG, 2019. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing leaf spot on redbud in China. Plant Disease, 103, 585. 10.1094/PDIS-08-18-1331-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Joshee S, Paulus BC, Park D and Johnston PR, 2009. Diversity and distribution of fungal foliar endophytes in New Zealand Podocarpaceae. Mycological Research, 113, 1003–1015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kang D, Kim J, Lee Y, Balaraju K and Jeon Y, 2022. First report of anthracnose of Gossypium indicum caused by Colletotrichum theobromicola in Korea. Plant Disease, 106, 1068. 10.1094/pdis-07-21-1386-pdn [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kim JS, Hassan O, Go MJ and Chang T, 2021. First report of Colletotrichum aenigma causing anthracnose of grape (Vitis vinifera) in Korea. Plant Disease, 105, 2729. 10.1094/PDIS-11-20-2458-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Kleemann J, Rincon‐Rivera LJ, Takahara H, Neumann U, van Themaat EVL, van der Does HC, Hacquard S, Stüber K, Will I, Schmalenbach W, Schmelzer E and O'Connell RJ, 2012. Sequential delivery of host‐induced virulence effectors by appressoria and intracellular hyphae of the phytopathogen Colletotrichum higginsianum . PLoS Pathogens, 8, e1002643. 10.1371/journal.ppat.1002643 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kottek M, Grieser J, Beck C, Rudolf B and Rubel F, 2006. World map of the Köppen_Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorologische Zeitschrift, 15, 259–263. 10.1127/0941-2948/2006/0130 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Kumar VS, Nair BA, Nair PVR, Annamalai A, Jaishanker R, Umamaheswaran K, Sooraj NP and Peethambaran CK, 2017. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing anthracnose of cliff banana in India. Plant Disease, 101, 390. 10.1007/s42161-020-00534-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Larran S, Bahima JV, Dal Bello G, Franco E and Balatti P, 2015. Colletotrichum siamense causing anthracnose in Bauhinia forficata subsp. pruinosa in Argentina. Colletotrichum siamense causing anthracnose in Bauhinia forficata subsp. pruinosa in Argentina. Australasian Plant Disease Notes, 10, 7–2. 10.1007/s13314-015-0160-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Lee S‐Y, Ten LN, Ryu J‐J, Kang I‐K and Yung H‐Y, 2021. Colletotrichum aenigma associated with apple bitter rot on newly bred cv. RubyS Apple. Research in Plant Disease, 27, 70–75. 10.5423/RPD.2021.27.2.70 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Leite B and Nicholson RL, 1992. Mycosporine‐alanine: a self‐ inhibitor of germination from the conidial mucilage of Colletotrichum graminicola . Experimental Mycology, 16, 76–86. 10.1016/0147-5975(92)90043-Q [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Lemos EEP, 2014. A produção de anonáceas no Brasil. In: Palestra anonáceas – V Congresso Internacional e Encontro Brasileiro sobre Annonaceae: do gene a exportação. Botucatu‐SP. v., 36, 77–85. [Google Scholar]
- Leoni C, Bruzzone J, Villami JJ, Martínez C, Montelongo MJ, Bentancur O and Conde‐Innamorato P, 2018. Percentage of anthracnose (Colletotrichum acutatum s.s.) acceptable in olives for the production of extra virgin olive oil. Crop Protection, 108, 47–53. 10.1016/j.cropro.2018.02.013 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Li Z, Liang Y‐M and Tian C‐M, 2012. Characterization of the causal agent of poplar anthracnose occurring in the Beijing region. Mycotaxon, 120, 277–286. 10.5248/120.277 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Li Q, Bu J, Shu JYZ, Tang L, Huang S, Guo T, Mo J, Luo S, Solangi GS and Hsiang T, 2019. Colletotrichum species associated with mango in southern China. Scientific Reports, 9, 18891. 10.1038/s41598-019-54809-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Li C, Liu JA and Zhou GY, 2021a. First report that Colletotrichum aenigma causes leaf spots on Aquilaria sinensis in China. Plant Disease, 105, 3302. 10.1094/PDIS-11-20-2381-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Li W, He Y‐Q, Fu T, Lin L, Liu F, Wang Z‐L and Wang G‐L, 2021b. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing anthracnose on Zinnia elegans in China. Plant Disease, 105, 1226. 10.1094/pdis-04-20-0803-pdn [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Lima WG, Spósito MB, Amorim L, Gonçalves FP and de FilhoLima PAM, 2011. Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, a new causal agent of citrus post‐bloom fruit drop. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 131, 157–165. 10.1007/s10658-011-9795-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Lima NB, MVA B, de Morais MA, MAG B, Michereff SJ, Hyde KD and MPS C, 2013. Five Colletotrichum species are responsible for mango anthracnose in northeastern Brazil. Fungal Diversity, 61, 75–88. 10.1007/s13225-013-0237-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Lima NB, Pastor SE, Maza CE, Conforto E, Gil SV and Roca M, 2020. First report of anthracnose of olive fruit (Olea europaea) caused by Colletotrichum theobromicola in Argentina. Plant Disease (online), 104, 589. 10.1094/PDIS-06-19-1207-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Ling JF, Song XB, Xi PG, Cheng BP, Cui YP, Chen X, Peng AT, Jiang ZD and Zhang LH, 2019. Identification of Colletotrichum siamense causing litchi pepper spot disease in mainland China. Plant Pathology, 68, 1533–1542. 10.1111/ppa.13075 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Lisboa DO, Silva MA, Pinho DB, Pereira OL and Furtado GQ, 2018. Diversity of pathogenic and endophytic Colletotrichum isolates from Licania tomentosa in Brazil. Forest Pathology, 48, e12448. 10.1111/efp.12448 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Liu B, Munster M, Johnson C and Lous FJ, 2011. First report of anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum fragariae on cyclamen in North Carolina. Plant Disease, 95, 1480. 10.1094/pdis-06-11-0475 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Liu F, DammU CL and Crous PW, 2013. Species of the Colletotrichum gloeosporioides complex associated with anthracnose diseases of Proteaceae. Fungal Diversity, 61, 89–105. 10.1007/s13225-013-0249-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Liu F, Weir BS, Damm U, Crous PW, Wang Y, Liu B, Wang M, Zhang M and Cai L, 2015. Unravelling Colletotrichum species associated with Camellia: employing ApMat and GS loci to resolve species in the C. gloeosporioides complex. Persoonia, 35, 63–86. 10.3767/003158515X687597 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Liu Y, Li B, Wang C, Liu C, Kong X, Zhu J and Dai H, 2016. Genetics and molecular marker identification of a resistance to Glomerella leaf spot in apple. Horticulture Plant Journal, 2, 121–125. [Google Scholar]
- Liu D, Li PL, Li J, Luo X, Gong GS, Zhang M, Yan JM, Huang Y and Wang Q, 2017. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing anthracnose on Iris tectorum in Sichuan Province of China. Plant Disease, 101, 2150–2151. 10.1094/PDIS-07-17-1029-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Liu X, Shi T, Li B, Cai J, Li C and Huang G, 2019. Colletotrichum species associated with cassava anthracnose in China. Journal of Phytopathology, 167, 1–9. 10.1111/jph.12765 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Liu HN, Liu JA and Zhou GY, 2020. First report of Colletotrichum alienum causing anthracnose on Aquilaria sinensis in China. Plant Disease, 104, 283. 10.1094/PDIS-01-19-0155-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Liu F, Ma ZY, Hou LW, Diao YZ, Wu WP, Damm U, Song S and Cai L, 2022. Updating species diversity of Colletotrichum, with a phylogenomic overview. Sudies in Mycology, 101, 1–56. 10.3114/sim.2022.101.01 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- López‐Zapata S, Castaῆo‐Zapata J, Arango‐Isaza R and Vásquez‐Barajas DA, 2019. Caracterización del agente causante de la deformación de los frutos de la uva (Vitis vinifera L.) var. Red Globe en La Unión, Valle del Cauca, Colombia. Revista de la Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales, 43, 241–249. 10.18257/raccefyn.844Rev [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Lu G, Cannon PF, Reid A and Simmons CM, 2004. Diversity and molecular relationships of endophytic Colletotrichum isolates from the Iwokrama Forest Reserve, Guyana. Mycological Research, 108, 53–63. 10.1017/S0953756203008906 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Luo C, Hu Y and Shu B, 2021. Characterization of Colletotrichum siamense causing crown rot crown rot of strawberry in Jingzhou, Hubei Province. Notulac Botanicae Agrobotanici Cluj‐Napoca, 49, article number 12441. Available online: https://www.notulaebotanicae.ro/index.php/nbha [Google Scholar]
- Madden LV, Yang XS and Wilson LL, 1996. Effects of rain intensity on splash dispersal of Colletotrichum acutatum . Phytopathology, 86, 864–874. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mao S‐F, Chen H‐D, Zhao Y‐J and Li Y‐J, 2020. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing anthracnose on Photinia x fraseri in China. Plant Disease, 105, 510. 10.1094/PDIS-06-20-1221-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Marin‐Felix Y, Groenewald JZ, Cai L, Chen Q, Marincowitz S, Barnes I, Bensch K, Braun U, Camporesi E, Damm U, de Beer ZW, Dissanayake A, Edwards J, Giraldo A, Hernandez‐Restrepo M, Hyde KD, Jayawardena RS, Lombard L, Luangsaard J, AR MT, Rossman AY, Sandoval‐Denis M, Shen M, Shivas RG, Tan YP, van der Linde EJ, Wingfield MJ, Wood AR, Zhang JQ, Zhang Y and Crous C, 2017. Genera of phytopathogenic fungi: GOPHY 1. Studies in Mycology, 86, 99–216. 10.1016/j.simyco.2017.04.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Martins MV, Araujo LJ, Ootani MA, FMP V, Cardoso JE, IBL C, FJT G and Fonseca WL, 2018. First report of Colletotrichum theobromicola causing leaf spot in sapote (Manilkara zapota) seedlings in Brazil. Plant Disease, 102, 2641–2642. [Google Scholar]
- Matos KS, Santana KFA, Catarino AM, Hanada RE and Silva GF, 2017. First report of anthracnose on welsh onion (Allium fistulosum) in Brazil caused by Colletotrichum theobromicola and C. truncatum . Plant Disease, 101, 1055–1056. [Google Scholar]
- Meetum P, Leksomboon C and Kanjanamaneesathian M, 2015. First report of Colletotrichum aenigma and C. siamense, the causal agents of anthracnose disease of dragon fruit in Thailand. Journal of Plant Pathology, 97, 402.
- Mo J, Zhao G, Li Q, Soalngi GS, Tang L, Guo TX, Huang SP and Hsiang T, 2018. Identification and Characterization of Colletotrichum Species Associated with Mango Anthracnose in Guangxi, China. Plant Disease, 102, 1283–1289. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Mongkolporn O and Taylor PWJ, 2018. Chili anthracnose: Colletotrichum taxonomy and pathogenicity. Plant Pathology, 67, 1255–1263. 10.1111/ppa.12850 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Moral J, Agusti‐Brisach C, Raya MC, Jurado‐Bello J, Lopez‐Moral A, Roca LF, Chattaoui M, Rhouma A, Nigro F, Sergeeva V and Trapero A, 2021. Diversity of Colletotrichum Species associated with olive anthracnose worldwide. Journal of Fungi, 7, 741. 10.3390/jof7090741 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Moreira V, Mondino P and Alaniz S, 2021. Olive anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum in Uruguay: symptoms, species diversity and pathogenicity on flowers and fruits. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 160, 663–681. [Google Scholar]
- Morita K, Sugawara Y, Minoshima A, Hoshi H, Yoshzawa Y, Kagiwada S, Ishikawa S and Horei H, 2015. The first record of anthracnose on atemoya fruit caused by Colletotrichum theobromicola in Japan. Annual Report of the Kanto‐Tosan Plant Protection Society, No., 62, 73–77. [Google Scholar]
- Mouen Bedimo JA, Bieysse D, Nyasse S, Nottéghem JL and Cilas C, 2007. Role of rainfall in the development of coffee berry disease in Coffea arabica caused by Colletotrichum kahawae, in Cameroon. Plant Pathology, 59, 324–329. http://10.1111/j.1365‐3059.2009.02214.x [Google Scholar]
- Munir M, Amsden B, Dixon E, Vaillancourt L and Ward Gauthier NA, 2016. Characterization of Colletotrichum species causing bitter rot of apple in Kentucky orchards. Plant Disease, 100, 2194–2203. 10.1094/pdis-10-15-1144-re [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Niu XP, Gao H, Chen Y and Qi JM, 2016. First report of anthracnose on white jute (Corchorus capsularis) caused by Colletotrichum fructicola and C. siamense in China. Plant Disease, 100, 1243. 10.1094/PDIS-12-15-1418-PDN [DOI]
- Noor NM and Zakaria L, 2018. Identification and characterization of Colletotrichum spp. associated with chili anthracnose in peninsular Malaysia. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 151, 961–973. [Google Scholar]
- O'Connell RJ, Thon MR, Hacquard S, Amyotte SG, Kleemann J, Torres MF, Damm U, Buiate EA, Epstein L, Alkan N, Altmüller J, Alvarado‐Balderrama L, Bauser CA, Becker C, BirrenBW CZ, Choi J, Crouch JA, Duvick JP, Farman MA, Gan P, Heiman D, Henrissat B, Howard RJ, Kabbage M, Koch C, Kracher B, Kubo Y, Law AD, Lebrun M‐H, Lee Y‐H, Miyara I, Moore N, Neumann U, Nordström K, Panaccione DG, Panstruga R, Place M, Proctor RH, Prusky D, Rech G, Reinhardt R, Rollins JA, Rounsley S, Schardl CL, Schwartz DC, Shenoy N, Shirasu K, Sikhakolli UR, Stüber K, Sukno SA, Sweigard JA, Takano Y, Takahara H, Trail F, van der Does HC, Voll LM, Will I, Young S, Zeng Q, Zhang J, Zhou S, Dickman MB, Schulze‐Lefert P, van Themaat EVL, Ma L‐J and Vaillancourt LJ, 2012. Life‐style transitions in plant pathogenic Colletotrichum fungi deciphered by genome and transcriptome analyses. Nature Genetics., 44, 1060–1065. 10.1038/ng.2372 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Oliveira SAS, Silva LL, Diamantino MSAS and Ferreira CF, 2018. First report of Colletotrichum theobromicola and C. siamense causing anthracnose on cultivated and wild cassava species in Brazil. Plant Disease, 102, 819. 10.1094/PDIS-09-17-1502-PDN [DOI]
- Oliveira SAS, Silva LL, de Souza Nascimento D, Diamantino MSAS, Ferreira CF and de Oliveira TAS, 2020. Colletotrichum species causing cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) anthracnose in different eco‑zones within the Recôncavo Region of Bahia, Brazil. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection, 127, 411–416. 10.1007/s41348-020-00327-9, Colletotrichum species causing cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) anthracnose in different eco‐zones within the Recôncavo Region of Bahia, Brazil [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Oo MM, Kim M‐R, Kim D‐G, Kwak T‐S and Oh S‐K, 2021. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing anthracnose of chili pepper fruit in Korea. Plant Disease, 105, 1567. 10.1094/PDIS-10-20-2297-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Pakdeeniti P, Tamakaew N, Suwannarach N, Senwanna C, Haituk S, Withee P, Kumla J and Cheewangkoon R, 2022. First report of Colletotrichum theobromicola causing centro anthracnose leaf spot in Thailand. Plant Disease, 106, 1306. 10.1094/PDIS-06-21-1289-PDN [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pardo‐De la Hoz CJ, Calderon C, Rincon AM, Cardenas M, Danies G, Lopez‐Kleine L, Restrepo S and Jimenez P, 2016. Species from the Colletotrichum acutatum, Colletotrichum boninense and Colletotrichum gloeosporioides species complexes associated with tree tomato and mango crops in Colombia. Plant Pathology, 65, 227–237. 10.1111/ppa.12410 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Penet L, Guyader S, Pétro D, Salles M and Bussière F, 2014. Direct splash dispersal prevails over indirect and subsequent spread during rains in Colletotrichum gloeosporioides infecting Yams. PLOS ONE. 10.1371/journal.pone.0115757 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Peng X, Yuan Y, Zhang S and Zhou X, 2022. First report of anthracnose on Camellia japonica caused by Colletotrichum siamense in Zhejiang Province, China. Plant Disease, 106, 768. 10.1094/PDIS-08-21-1600-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Pérez‐Mora JL, Mora‐Romero GA, Beltrán‐Peῆa H, García‐León E, Lima NB, Camacho‐Tapia M and Tovar‐Pedraza JM. 2020. First report of Colletotrichum siamense and C. gloeosporioides causing anthracnose of Citrus spp. in Mexico. Plant Disease, 105, 496. 10.1094/PDIS-08-20-1743-PDN [DOI]
- Phoulivong S, McKenzie EHC and Hyde KD, 2012. Cross Infection of Colletotrichum Species; A Case Study with Tropical Fruits. Current Research in Environmental & Applied Mycology, 2, 99–111. 10.5943/cream/2/2/2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Prasannath K, Galea VJ and Akinsanmi OA, 2020. Characterisation of leaf spots caused by Neopestalotiopsis clavispora and Colletotrichum siamense in macadamia in Australia. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 156, 1219–1225. 10.1007/s10658-020-01962-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Prihastuti H, Cai L, Chen H, McKenzie EHC and Hyde KD, 2009. Characterization of Colletotrichum species associated with coffee berries in northern Thailand. Fungal Diversity, 39, 89–109. [Google Scholar]
- Radiastuti N, Bahalwan HAA and Susilowati D, 2019. Phylogenetic study of endophytic fungi associated with Centella asiaticafrom Bengkulu and Malaysian accessions based on the ITS rDNAsequence. Biodiversitas, 20, 1248–1258. 10.13057/biodiv/d200503 [DOI]
- Rashid H, Chowdhury S, Ahmed R, Azad AK, Raihan T and Haque MMU, 2021. First record of Colletotrichum fragariae causing leaf spot on Hopea odorata in Bangladesh. New Disease Reports, 44, e12021. 10.1002/ndr2.12021 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Reyes RDC, Parayao AM and Waing KGD, 2021. Identification and evaluation of enzymatic ability of fungal endophytes from Citrofortunella microcarpa (Bunge) Wijnands. Studies in Fungi, 6, 35–468. 10.5943/sif/6/1/35 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Ripoche A, Jacqua G, Bussiere F, Guyader S and Sierra J, 2008. Survival of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides (causal agent of yam anthracnose) on yam residues decomposing in soil. Applied Soil Ecology, 38, 270–278. [Google Scholar]
- Rocha VAL, Barguil BM, Rego TJS and Beserra JEA Jr, 2021. First report of anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum siamense on Hibiscus tiliaceus in Brazil. Forest Pathology, 52, e12724. 10.1111/efp.12724 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Rodrigues AL, Pinho DB, Lisboa DO, Nascimento RJ, Pereira OL, Alfenas AC and Furtado GQ, 2014. Colletotrichum theobromicola causes defoliation, stem girdling and death of mini‐cuttings of Eucalyptus in Brazil. Tropical Plant Pathology, 39, 326–330. 10.1590/S1982-56762014000400007 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Rodriguez‐Palafox EE, Vásquez‐López A, Márquez‐Licona G, Lima NB, Lagunes‐Fortiz E and Tovar‐Pedraza JM, 2021. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing anthracnose of guava (Psidium guajava) in Mexico. Plant Disease, 105, 3290. 10.1094/PDIS-03-21-0530-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Rojas EI, Rehner SA, Samuels GJ, Van Bael SA, Herre EA, Cannon P, Chen R, Pang J, Wang R, Zhang Y, Peng Y‐Q and Sha T, 2010. Colletotrichum gloeosporioides s.l. associated with Theobroma cacao and other plants in Panama: multilocus phylogenies distinguish pathogen and endophyte clades. Mycologia, 102, 1318–1338. 10.3852/09-244 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ruiz‐Campos C, Umaña‐Rojas G and Gómez‐Alpízar L, 2022. Identificación multilocus de especies de Colletotrichum asociadas a la antracnosis de papaya. Agronomía Mesoamericana, 33, 45495. 10.15517/am.v33i1.45495 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Salunkhe VN, Gawande SP, Gokte‐Narkhedkar N, Nagrale DT, Hiremani NS and Waghmare VN, 2020. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing leaf anthracnose on cotton in India. Plant Disease, 104, 2025. 10.1094/PDIS-09-19-1992-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Santos RF, Massola NS Jr, Bremer Neto H, Jacomino AP and Sposito MB, 2017. First report of Colletotrichum theobromicola causing anthracnose leaf and twig spot in Cambuci (Campomanesia phaea) in Brazil. Plant Disease, 101, 506. 10.1094/PDIS-08-16-1196-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Santos RF, Ciampi‐Guillardi M, Amorim L, Massola NS Jr and Sposito MB, 2018. Aetiology of anthracnose on grapevine shoots in Brazil. Plant Pathology, 67, 692–706. 10.1111/ppa.12756 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Sayers EW, Cavanaugh M, Clark K, Ostell J, Pruitt KD and Karsch‐Mizrachi I, 2020. Genbank. Nucleic Acids Research, 48(Database issue), D84, D86. 10.1093/nar/gkz956 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Schena L, Mosca S, Cacciola SO, Faedda R, Sanzari SM, Agosteo GE, Segreeva V and di San Lio GM, 2014. Species of the Colletotrichum gloeosporioides and C. boninense complexes associated with olive anthracnose. Plant Pathology, 63, 437–446. 10.1111/ppa.12110 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Serrato‐Diaz LM, Marino YA and Bayman P, 2020. Pathogens causing anthracnose and fruit rots of coffee associated with the coffee berry borer and the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana in Puerto Rico. Phytopathology, 110, 1541–1552. 10.1094/phyto-02-20-0057-r [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sharma G and Shenoy BD, 2014. Colletotrichum fructicola and C. siamense are involved in chilli anthracnose in India. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection, 47, 1179–1194. 10.1080/03235408.2013.833749 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Sharma G, Maymon M and Freeman S, 2017. Epidemiology, pathology and identification of Colletotrichum including a novel species associated with avocado (Persea americana) anthracnose in Israel. Scientific Reports, 7, 15839. 10.1038/s41598-017-15946-w [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sharma G, Maymon M, Elazar M and Freeman S, 2022. First report of Colletotrichum aenigma and C. perseae causing anthracnose disease on Capsicum annuum in Israel. Crop Protection, 152, 105853. 10.1016/j.cropro.2021.105853 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Shivas RG, Tan YP, Edwards J, Dinh Q, Maxwell A, Andjic V, Liberato JR, Anderson C, Beasley DR, Bransgrove K, Coates LM, Cowan K, Daniel R, Dean JR, Lomavatu MF, Mercado‐Escueta D, Mitchell RW, Thangavel R, Tran‐Nguyen LTT and Weir BS, 2016. Colletotrichum species in Australia. Australasian Plant Pathology, 45, 447–464. 10.1007/s13313-016-0443-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Shu J, Guo T, Li Q, Tang L, Huang S, Mo J, Yu Z and Forte‐Perri V, 2021. First report of leaf spot caused by Colletotrichum fructicola and C. siamense on Ziziphus mauritiana in Guangxi, China. Plant Disease, 105, 2021. 10.1094/pdis-09-20-1863-pdn [DOI]
- Silva DN, Talhinhas D, Varzea VMP, Cai L, Salgueiro Paulo O and Batista D, 2012. Application of the Apn2/MAT locus to improve the systematics of the Colletotrichum gloeosporioides complex: an example from coffee (Coffea spp.) hosts. Mycologia, 104, 396–409. 10.3852/11-145 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Silva‐Junior GJ, Spósito MB, Marin DR, Ribeiro‐Junior PJ and Amorim L, 2014. Spatiotemporal characterization of citrus post bloom fruit drop in Brazil and its relationship to pathogen dispersal. Plant Pathology, 63, 519–529. 10.1111/ppa.12138 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Singh R, Graney L and Williamson M, 2015. First report of boxwood dieback caused by Colletotrichum theobromicola in the United States. Plant Disease, 99, 1274. 10.1094/PDIS-09-14-0948-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Soares MGO, Alves E, Silveira AL, Pereira FD and Guimarães SSC, 2020. Colletotrichum siamense is the main aetiological agent of anthracnose of avocado in south‐eastern Brazil. Plant Pathology, 70, 154–166. 10.1111/ppa.13262 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Solís M, Wingfield MJ, Greyling I and Pham NQ, 2022. A serious shoot and leaf disease caused by Colletotrichum theobromicola discovered on eucalypts in South Africa. Southern Forests, 84, 1–13. 10.2989/20702620.2021.2005454 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Song L, Jiang N, Chen Q and Zhang Z, 2021. First report of leaf spot caused by Colletotrichum siamense on Sophora tonkinensis . Australasian Plant Disease Notes, 16, 11. [Google Scholar]
- Srivastava AK, Saroj A, Kumar A, Khaliq A, Kumar B, Singh SC and Samad A, 2017. New record of Uraria blossom blight caused by Colletotrichum siamense in India. Plant Disease, 101, 836. [Google Scholar]
- Stadnik MJ, Velho AC, Rockenbach MF, Alaniz S and Mondino P, 2019. Genetic and pathogenic diversity of Colletotrichum species associated with apple diseases in southern Brazil and Uruguay. Acta Horticulturae, 1, 71–76. 10.17660/ActaHortic.2019.1261.13 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Sukarno N, Ginting RCB, Widyastuti U, Darusman LK, Kanaya S, Batubara I, Aryantha INP and Waite M, 2021. Endophytic fungi from four Indonesian medicinal plants and their inhibitory effect on plant pathogenic Fusarium oxysporum . HAYATI Journal of Biosciences, 28, 152. https://journal.ipb.ac.id/index.php/hayati/article/view/36785 [Google Scholar]
- Sukno SA, García VM, Shaw BD and Thon MR, 2008. Root infection and systemic colonization of maize by Colletotrichum graminicola . Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 74, 823–832. 10.1128/aem.01165-07 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sutton BC, 1980. The Coelomycetes. Fungi Imperfecti with pycnidia, acervuli and stromata. Commonwealth: Mycological Institute, Kew, UK, 696 pp. [Google Scholar]
- Sutton BC, 1992. The genus Glomerella and its anamorph Colletotrichum . In: Bailey JA and Jeger MJ (eds.), Colletotrichum: Biology, Pathology and Control. CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK. pp. 1–23. [Google Scholar]
- Suwannarat S, Steinkellner S, Songkumarn P and Sangchote S, 2017. Diversity of Colletotrichum spp. isolated from chili pepper fruit exhibiting symptoms of anthracnose in Thailand. Mycological Progress, 16, 686. 10.1007/s11557-017-1304-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Talhinhas P and Baroncelli R, 2021. Colletotrichum species and complexes: geographic distribution, host range and conservation status. Fungal Diversity, 110, 109–198. 10.1007/s13225-021-00491-9 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Tan Q, Schnabel G, Chaisiri C, Yin L‐F, Yin W‐X and Luo C‐X, 2022. Colletotrichum Species Associated with Peaches in China. Journal of Fungi, 8, 313. 10.3390/jof8030313 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Tang JR, Liu YL, Yin XG and Lu JN, 2021. First report on Colletotrichum siamense causing anthracnose of castor bean in Zhanjiang, China. Plant Disease, 105, 3293. 10.1094/PDIS-01-21-0119-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Tovar‐Pedraza JM, Mora‐Aguilera JA, Nava‐Diaz C, Lima NB, Michereff SJ, Sandoval‐Islas JS, Camara MPS, Teliz‐Ortiz D and Leyva‐Mir SG, 2020. Distribution and pathogenicity of Colletotrichum species associated with mango anthracnose in Mexico. Plant Disease, 104, 137–146. 10.1094/pdis-01-19-0178-re [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Toy SJ and Newfield MJ, 2010. The accidental introduction of invasive animals as hitchhikers through inanimate pathways: a New Zealand perspective. Revue Scientifique Et Technique/OfficeInternational Des Epizooties, 23, 123–133. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Truong HH, Sato T, Ishikawa S, Minoshima A, Nishimura T and Hirooka Y, 2018. Three Colletotrichum species responsible for anthracnose on Synsepalum dulcificum (miracle fruit). International Journal of Phytopathology, 7, 89–101. 10.33687/phytopath.007.03.2658 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Udayanga D, Manamgoda DS, Liu X, Chukeatirote E and Hyde KD, 2013. What are the common anthracnose pathogens of tropical fruits? Fungal Diversity. 10.1007/s13225-013-0257-2 [DOI]
- Uysal A and Kurt S, 2020. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing anthracnose on banana fruits in Turkey. Journal of Plant Pathology, 102, 967. 10.1007/s42161-020-00534-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Veloso JS, Camara MPS, Lima WG, Michereff SJ and Doyle VP, 2018. Why species delimitation matters for fungal ecology: Colletotrichum diversity on wild and cultivated cashew in Brazil. Fungal Biology, 122, 677–691. 10.1016/j.funbio.2018.03.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Vieira WA, Michereff SJ, Morais MA Jr, Hyde KD and Câmara MPS, 2014. Endophytic species of Colletotrichum associated with mango in northeastern Brazil. Fungal Diversity, 67, 181–202. 10.1007/s13225-014-0293-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Villanueva‐Arce R, Yanez‐Morales MJ and Hernandez‐Anguiano AM, 2008. Species of Colletotrichum in Cherimoya (Annona cherimola Mill.). Agrociencia, 42, 689–701. [Google Scholar]
- Von Arx JA, 1957. Die Arten der Gattung Colletotrichum Cda. Phytopathologische Zeitschrift, 29, 414–468. [Google Scholar]
- Wang W, Fu D‐D, Zhang R and Sun G‐Y, 2015. Etiology of apple leaf spot caused by Colletotrichum spp. Mycosystema, 34, 13–25. [Google Scholar]
- Wang Q‐H, Fan K, Li D‐W, Niu S‐G, Hou L‐Q and Wu X‐Q, 2017. Walnut anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum siamense in China. Australasian Plant Pathology, 46, 585–595. 10.1007/s13313-017-0525-9 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Wang Y, Qin HY, Liu YX, Fan ST, Sun D, Yang YM, Li CY and Ai J, 2019. First report of anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum aenigma on Actinidia arguta in China. Plant Disease, 103, 372–373. [Google Scholar]
- Wang W, Zhang J and Li J, 2020a. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing stem tip dieback of sacha inchi (Plukenetia volubilis) in China. Plant Disease, 104, 2726. 10.1094/PDIS-03-20-0458-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Wang Y, Chen J‐Y, Xu X, Cheng J, Zheng L, Huang J and Li D‐W, 2020b. Identification and characterization of Colletotrichum species associated with anthracnose disease of Camellia oleifera in China. Plant Disease, 104, 474–482. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Wang X, Liu X, Wang R, Fa L, Chen L, Xin X, Zhang Y, Tian H, Xia M and Hou X, 2020c. First report of Colletotrichum aenigma causing walnut anthracnose in China. Plant Disease, 225, 225. 10.1094/pdis-07-20-1430-pdn [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Wang W, de Silva DD, Moslemi A, Edwards J, Ades PK, Crous PW and Taylor PWJ, 2021. Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose of citrus in Australia. Journal of Fungi, 7, 47. 10.3390/jof7010047 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Wang C, Tang Y, Qiao N, Zhang D, Chi W, Liu J, Pan H and Li J, 2022. First report of Colletotrichum black leaf spot on strawberry caused by Colletotrichum siamense in China. Journal of Phytopathology, 170, 279–281. 10.1111/jph.13080 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Watanabe K, Ikeda H, Sakashita T and Sato T, 2016. Anthracnose of genus Mandevilla caused by Colletotrichum truncatum and C. siamense in Japan. Journal of General Plant Pathology, 82, 33–37. 10.1007/s10327-015-0635-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Weir BS, Johnston PR and Damm U, 2012. The Colletotrichum gloeosporioides species complex. Studies in Mycology, 73, 115–180. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Wu C‐J, Chen H‐K and Ni H‐F, 2020. Identification and characterization of Colletotrichum species associated with mango anthracnose in Taiwan. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 157, 1–15. 10.1007/s10658-020-01964-4 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Xavier KV, Achala NKC, Peres NA, Deng Z, Castle W, Lovett W and Vallad GE, 2019. Characterization of Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose of pomegranate in the Southwestern United States. Plant Disease, 103, 2771–2780. 10.1094/pdis-03-19-0598-re [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Xu ZY, Zhang S, Hu HQ and Ren L, 2015. First report of anthracnose on Ctenanthe oppenheimiana caused by Colletotrichum siamense in China. Plant Disease, 105, 227. 10.1094/PDIS-06-20-1277-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Xu ZY, Zhang S, Hu HQ and Ren L, 2020. First report of anthracnose on Ctenanthe oppenheimiana caused by Colletotrichum siamense in China. Plant Disease (online). 10.1094/PDIS-06-20-1277-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Yan J‐Y, Jayawardena MMRS, Goonasekara ID, Wang Y, Zhang W, Liu M, Huang J‐B, Wang Z‐Y, Shang J‐J, Peng Y‐L, Bahkali A, Hyde KD and Li X‐H, 2015. Diverse species of Colletotrichum associated with grapevine anthracnose in China. Fungal Diversity, 71, 233–246. 10.1007/s13225-014-0310-9 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Yang S, Wang HX, Yi YJ and Tan LL, 2019. First report that Colletotrichum aenigma causes leaf spots on Camellia japonica in China. Plant Disease, 103, 2127. [Google Scholar]
- Yang D, Zhang Y, Zhang YT, Wang QH, Qi YK, Zhu WC, Liu Y and Han FY, 2021. First report of leaf spot disease caused by Colletotrichum siamense on Vernicia montana in China. Plant Disease, 105, 1566. 10.1094/PDIS-12-20-2609-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Ye Y, Qin L, Jiang S, Wei J, Cui Y, Powell CA and Zhang M, 2016. First report of anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum siamense on Sarcandra glabra in China. Plant Disease, 100, 862. [Google Scholar]
- Yokosawa S, Eguchi N, Kondo K‐I and Sato T, 2017. Phylogenetic relationship and fungicide sensitivity of members of the Colletotrichum gloeosporioides species complex from apple. Journal of General Plant Pathology, 83, 291–298. [Google Scholar]
- Yokosawa S, Eguchi N and Sato T, 2020. Characterization of the Colletotrichum gloeosporioides species complex causing grape ripe rot in Nagano Prefecture, Japan. Journal of General Plant Pathology, 86, 163–172. 10.1007/s10327-020-00907-5 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Yuan ZL, Su ZZ, Mao LJ, Peng YQ, Yang G‐M, Lin F‐C and Zhang C‐L, 2011. Distinctive endophytic fungal assemblage in stems of wild rice (Oryza granulata) in China with special reference to two species of Muscodor (Xylariaceae). Journal of Microbiology, 49, 15–23. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zakaria L, 2021. Diversity of Colletotrichum Species Associated with Anthracnose Disease in Tropical Fruit Crops—A Review. Agriculture, 11, 297. 10.3390/agriculture11040297 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Zhafarina S, Wibowo A and Widiastuti A, 2021. Multi‐genetic analysis of Colletotrichum spp. associated with postharvest disease of fruits anthracnose in special region of Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Pak. J. Biol. Sci., 24(1), 53–65, 24, 53–65. 10.3923/pjbs.2021.53.65 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zhang L, Song L, Xu X, Zou X, Duan K and Gao Q, 2020a. Characterization and fungicide sensitivity of Colletotrichum species causing strawberry anthracnose in Eastern China. Plant Disease, 104, 1960–1968. 10.1094/PDIS-10-19-2241-RE [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zhang Y, Shen R, Mo Y, Li Q, Lin W and Yuan G, 2020b. Colletotrichum siamense: a novel leaf pathogen of Sterculia nobilis Smith detected in China. Forest Pathology, 50, e12575. 10.1111/efp.12575 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Zhang Y, Sun W, Ning P, Guo T, Huang S, Tang L, Li Q and Mo J, 2021a. First report of anthracnose of papaya (Carica papaya) caused by Colletotrichum siamense in China. Plant Disease, 105, 2252. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang Z, Yan M, Li W, Guo Y and Ling X, 2021b. First report of Colletotrichum aenigma causing apple Glomerella leaf spot on the Granny Smith cultivar in China. Plant Disease, 105, 1563. 10.1094/PDIS-10-20-2298-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Zhang M‐Y, Si Y‐Z, Ju Y, Li D‐W and Zhu LH, 2021c. First report of leaf spot caused by Colletotrichum siamense on Salix matsudana in China. Plant Disease, 105, 3744. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao HJ, Chen SC, Chen YF, Zou CC, Wang XL, Wang ZH, Liu AR and Ahammed GJ, 2018. First report of red dragon fruit (Hylocereus polyrhizus) anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum siamense in China. Plant Disease, 6, 862. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao J, Liu T, Zhang DP, Wu HL, Pan LQ, Liao NY and Liu WC, 2021. First report of anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum siamense and C. fructicola of Camellia chrysantha in China. Plant Disease, 105, 2020.
- Zhou Z, Li YL and Yuan CY, 2016. First report of Colletotrichum siamense causing anthracnose on Cinnamomum kotoense in Henan Province, China. Plant Disease, 100, 2330. 10.1094/PDIS-05-16-0649-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Zhou Y, Yang D, Zhang L‐P, Zeng Y‐C and Zhang Y, 2022. First report of leaf spot caused by Colletotrichum siamense on Magnolia grandiflora in China. Plant Disease, 106, 769. 10.1094/pdis-08-21-1698-pdn [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Zhu L‐H, Wan Y, Zhu Y‐N, Huang L, Liu C‐L and Li D‐W, 2019. First report of species of Colletotrichum causing leaf spot of Liriodendron chinese x tulipifera in China. Plant Disease, 100, 1431. 10.1094/PDIS-12-18-2265-PDN [DOI] [Google Scholar]