Cinara cupressi sensu lato (Cypress aphid)
Index
- Pictures
- Identity
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Description
- Distribution
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Risk of Introduction
- Habitat
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Growth Stages
- Symptoms
- List of Symptoms/Signs
- Biology and Ecology
- Natural enemies
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Plant Trade
- Wood Packaging
- Impact Summary
- Impact
- Environmental Impact
- Impact: Biodiversity
- Social Impact
- Diagnosis
- Detection and Inspection
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- References
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.
Generate reportPictures
Top of pageIdentity
Top of pagePreferred Scientific Name
- Cinara cupressi sensu lato
Preferred Common Name
- Cypress aphid
Other Scientific Names
- Cinara canadensis Hottes and Bradley, 1953
- Cinara cupressi (Buckton)
- Cinara cupressivora Watson and Voegtlin, 1999
- Cinara sabinae
- Lachnus cupressi Buckton, 1881
- Lachnus juniperinus Mordwilko, 1895
- Lachnus sabinae Gillette and Palmer, 1924
- Neochmosis cupressi
Summary of Invasiveness
Top of pageC. cupressi sensu lato (Cinara cupressivora) is an aphid, most likely native to North America and Syria. It is reported as causing significant damage or as having been recently introduced to parts of Europe, Africa, South America and the Middle East. At least one of the populations within C. cupressi sensu lato (Cinara cupressivora) is highly invasive, having become newly established on three continents in the last 25 years (since the 1980s). This has happened accidentally as the result of the introduction of whole plants for ornamental and/or forestry purposes. The aphids are very difficult to see and can easily be missed at quarantine inspection unless the inspector is alerted to their possible presence. Populations of cypress trees and other host plants have been decimated in some introduced areas.
Taxonomic Tree
Top of page- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Metazoa
- Phylum: Arthropoda
- Subphylum: Uniramia
- Class: Insecta
- Order: Hemiptera
- Suborder: Sternorrhyncha
- Unknown: Aphidoidea
- Family: Aphididae
- Genus: Cinara
- Species: Cinara cupressi sensu lato
Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Top of pageWatson et al. (1999) carried out a multivariate analysis of the morphology of C. cupressi sensu lato specimens from around the world. They concluded that some of the component populations might represent distinct species (e.g. C. sabinae and the previously undescribed pest population in Africa), although they cannot be satisfactorily distinguished morphologically.
On the basis of morphological and biological differences, Watson et al. (1999) described the aphid population damaging Cupressaceae in Africa and elsewhere, as a new species, Cinara cupressivora. They suggested that it probably originated on Cupressus sempervirens in an area between eastern Greece and just south of the Caspian sea (Watson et al., 1999). Part of the evidence supporting the separation of this population was the host-plant preferences. Also the areas of origin of the host-plants that were damaged most seriously, with the slow development of aphids on and serious damage being caused to hosts of New World origin. In addition, the faster development on and less serious damage to C. sempervirens and other hosts originating in Europe/Asia Minor. Watson et al. (1999) could not find any samples of C. cupressivora from North America. However, because C. cupressivora could not always be reliably separated from other members of C. cupressi sensu lato using morphological characters alone, Remaudière and Binazzi (2003) synonymized it with C. cupressi (Buckton).
It seems likely that C. cupressivora, C. sabinae and C. cupressi (Buckton) are good species, but are not reliably separable using morphological characters alone. It will probably require molecular studies to characterize the number and identities of distinct species within C. cupressi sensu lato. Once the number of taxa has been clarified it may be possible to find more reliable means of identifying them using morphological characters.
Description
Top of pageC. cupressi sensu lato are distinguished from other members of the subgenus, Cupressobium by having little or no pigment in the middle of the hind tibia and the presence of no more than four to eight setae on the base of antennal segment VI, confined to its basal half (Watson et al., 1999).
The different populations or taxa in C. cupressi sensu lato cannot be reliably separated using morphological characters alone, although Watson et al. (1999) provided a discriminant function that helps to identify some specimens of Cinara cupressivora. Their multivariate analysis also demonstrated that Cinara sabinae might be partially identifiable using morphology.
Distribution
Top of pageThe known distributions of C. cupressi (Buckton) and Cinara cupressivora overlap in Britain only (Watson et al., 1999).
The distribution map includes records based on specimens of C. cupressi sensu lato from the collection in the Natural History Museum (London, UK): dates of collection are noted in the List of countries (NHM, various dates). The specimens from Ethiopia are Cinara cupressivora Watson & Voegtlin (i.e. members of C. cupressi sensu lato) and were collected in Addis Ababa from a heavy, localized infestation.
Distribution Table
Top of pageThe distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.
Last updated: 10 Feb 2022Continent/Country/Region | Distribution | Last Reported | Origin | First Reported | Invasive | Reference | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Africa |
|||||||
Burundi | Present | Introduced | 1988 | Invasive | |||
Congo, Democratic Republic of the | Present | Introduced | 1990 | Invasive | |||
Ethiopia | Present, Localized | Introduced | |||||
Kenya | Present | Introduced | 1990 | Invasive | |||
Libya | Present | Introduced | First reported: pre-1994; Original citation: Al Najar & Nefrya, 2000 | ||||
Malawi | Present | Introduced | 1986 | Invasive | |||
Mauritius | Present | Introduced | 1999 | Invasive | |||
Morocco | Present | Introduced | Invasive | First reported: pre-1994 | |||
Rwanda | Present | Introduced | 1989 | Invasive | |||
South Africa | Present | Introduced | Invasive | First reported: pre-1993 | |||
Tanzania | Present | Introduced | 1987 | Invasive | |||
Uganda | Present | Introduced | 1989 | Invasive | |||
Zimbabwe | Present | Introduced | 1990 | Invasive | |||
Asia |
|||||||
India | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
-Sikkim | Present | ||||||
Israel | Present | Introduced | 1980 | Invasive | |||
Jordan | Present | Introduced | Invasive | First reported: pre-1987 | |||
Syria | Present | Native | |||||
Turkey | Present | ||||||
Yemen | Present | Introduced | Invasive | First reported: pre-1999 | |||
Europe |
|||||||
Belgium | Present | Introduced | Invasive | First reported: pre-1980 | |||
Bulgaria | Present | Introduced | Invasive | First reported: pre-1988 | |||
Czechia | Present | Introduced | 1961 | As: Cinara cupressi | |||
France | Present | Introduced | Invasive | First reported: pre-1980 | |||
Germany | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Greece | Present | ||||||
Italy | Present | Introduced | Invasive | First reported: pre-1978 | |||
Netherlands | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
Poland | Present | ||||||
Portugal | Present | Introduced | Invasive | First reported: pre-1996 | |||
Slovakia | Present | ||||||
Spain | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
United Kingdom | Present | Introduced | Invasive | ||||
North America |
|||||||
Canada | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
-British Columbia | Present | 1990 | |||||
-Ontario | Present | 1990 | |||||
United States | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
-Arizona | Present | Native | 1990 | ||||
-California | Present | 1990 | |||||
-Colorado | Present | Native | 1990 | ||||
-Hawaii | Present | Introduced | 2000 | As: Cinara cupressi | |||
-Pennsylvania | Present | 1990 | |||||
-Utah | Present | Native | 1990 | ||||
Oceania |
|||||||
Australia | Present | Introduced | 1921 | As: Cinara cupressi | |||
South America |
|||||||
Argentina | Present | ||||||
Brazil | Present | Present based on regional distribution. | |||||
-Sao Paulo | Present | Introduced | 2000 | Invasive | Original citation: Sousa Silva & Ilharco, 2001 | ||
Chile | Present | Introduced | 2003 | As: Cinara cupressi | |||
Colombia | Present | Introduced | Invasive | First reported: pre-1991 |
History of Introduction and Spread
Top of pageIn Europe: Italy, pre-1978 (Binazzi, 1978); Belgium and France, pre-1980 (Latteur and Grasso, 1980; Rabasse and Grasso, 1980); Bulgaria, pre-1988 (Scheurer, 1991); and Portugal, pre-1996 (Ilharco, 1996).
In the Middle East: Israel, 1980 (Mendel and Golan, 1983); Jordan, pre-1987 (Mustafa, 1987); and Yemen, pre-1999 (Watson et al., 1999).
In Africa: Malawi, 1986 (Ciesla, 1991); Tanzania, 1987 (Ciesla, 1991); Burundi, 1988 (Ciesla, 1991); Rwanda and Uganda, 1989 (Ciesla, 1991); Kenya, Congo Democratic Republic (Zaire) and Zimbabwe, 1990 (Ciesla, 1991); South Africa, pre-1993 (Watson et al., 1999); Libya and Morocco, pre-1994 (Al Najar and Nefrya, 2000; Watson et al., 1999); and Mauritius, 1999 (Watson et al., 1999).
In South America: Colombia, pre-1991 (Ciesla, 1991); and Brazil (Sao Paulo), 2000 (Sousa Silva and Ilharco, 2001).
Risk of Introduction
Top of pageHabitat
Top of pageHosts/Species Affected
Top of pageHost Plants and Other Plants Affected
Top of pageSymptoms
Top of pageIt has not yet been ascertained whether the damage caused by the cypress aphid is due to mechanical damage, to a hypersensitive reaction of the tree to attack, or to toxicity of the aphids' saliva (Inserra et al., 1979).
List of Symptoms/Signs
Top of pageSign | Life Stages | Type |
---|---|---|
Fruit / honeydew or sooty mould | ||
Fruit / premature drop | ||
Fruit / reduced size | ||
Growing point / dieback | ||
Growing point / external feeding | ||
Growing point / honeydew or sooty mould | ||
Inflorescence / dieback | ||
Inflorescence / discoloration (non-graminaceous plants) | ||
Inflorescence / honeydew or sooty mould | ||
Leaves / abnormal colours | ||
Leaves / abnormal leaf fall | ||
Leaves / necrotic areas | ||
Leaves / yellowed or dead | ||
Stems / dieback | ||
Stems / external feeding | ||
Stems / honeydew or sooty mould | ||
Whole plant / early senescence | ||
Whole plant / plant dead; dieback |
Biology and Ecology
Top of pageEnvironmental tolerances may vary between different populations within C. cupressi sensu lato. As mentioned above, L. juniperinus and C. sabinae survive cold winters in Central Europe and central North America, whereas the known distribution of C. cupressivora (in tropical areas, around the Mediterranean sea and on the edges of southern and western Europe) suggests that it might not be able to tolerate extreme cold (Watson et al., 1999). However, Kairo and Murphy (1999) found that the development threshold was as low as 0.61°C. The last population becomes damaging on forest trees that are growing in prolonged hot and dry conditions.
Members of C. cupressi sensu lato avoid strong light and dense colonies develop in the shade, with up to 80 aphids per 10 cm of branch. The aphids feed on the bark of small twigs and branches in the inner and lower parts of the main canopy (Ciesla, 1991). The sugary honeydew that is excreted coats nearby surfaces including the foliage. Sooty mould often develops on these sugary deposits.
The natural dispersal of cypress aphids is through the flight of the winged forms, which are produced a few times each year in response to crowding and environmental cues. The winged aphids are strong fliers and may be carried for long distances by the wind. Also, the aphids are very well camouflaged against the tree bark and they are easily transported on planting stock (Ciesla, 1991).
Natural enemies
Top of pageNatural enemy | Type | Life stages | Specificity | References | Biological control in | Biological control on |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Pauesia juniperorum | Parasite | Adults; Arthropods|Nymphs | Malawi |
Notes on Natural Enemies
Top of pageChilima and Owour (1992) list the indigenous natural enemy species found either attacking or associated with the cypress aphid in Kenya. Many of these predators are almost certainly generalists and unlikely to be well adapted to coniferous plant pests that are exotic to the region (Murphy et al., 1994).
In Italy, natural enemies such as coccinellids, syrphids and neuroptera, even when present in large numbers, were unable to prevent the damage caused by the cypress aphid (Inserra et al., 1979).
Means of Movement and Dispersal
Top of pageThe cypress aphids can be transported on imported plant material (Remaudière and Binazzi, 2003).
Plant Trade
Top of pagePlant parts liable to carry the pest in trade/transport | Pest stages | Borne internally | Borne externally | Visibility of pest or symptoms |
---|---|---|---|---|
Seedlings/Micropropagated plants | arthropods/adults; arthropods/larvae; arthropods/nymphs | Yes | Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope | |
Stems (above ground)/Shoots/Trunks/Branches | arthropods/adults; arthropods/larvae; arthropods/nymphs | Yes | Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope |
Plant parts not known to carry the pest in trade/transport |
---|
Bark |
Bulbs/Tubers/Corms/Rhizomes |
Flowers/Inflorescences/Cones/Calyx |
Fruits (inc. pods) |
Growing medium accompanying plants |
Leaves |
Roots |
True seeds (inc. grain) |
Wood |
Wood Packaging
Top of pageWood Packaging not known to carry the pest in trade/transport |
---|
Loose wood packing material |
Non-wood |
Processed or treated wood |
Solid wood packing material with bark |
Solid wood packing material without bark |
Impact Summary
Top of pageCategory | Impact |
---|---|
Animal/plant collections | Negative |
Animal/plant products | None |
Biodiversity (generally) | Negative |
Crop production | None |
Environment (generally) | Negative |
Fisheries / aquaculture | None |
Forestry production | Negative |
Human health | Negative |
Livestock production | None |
Native fauna | Negative |
Native flora | Negative |
Rare/protected species | Negative |
Tourism | Negative |
Trade/international relations | Negative |
Transport/travel | None |
Impact
Top of pageIn the southern and eastern African region, the cypress aphid killed a total of US$27.5 million worth of cypress trees in 1991 and was causing a loss in annual growth increment of US$9.1 million per year (Murphy et al., 1996).
Environmental Impact
Top of pageImpact: Biodiversity
Top of pageThe endemic species, Juniperus procera, has also been negatively impacted by cypress aphid attack but is more widespread and less endangered than the Mulanje cedar (Ciesla, 1991).
Social Impact
Top of pageDiagnosis
Top of pageDetection and Inspection
Top of pageSimilarities to Other Species/Conditions
Top of page- Cinara fresai has five to seven accessory hairs on the fourth rostral segment, and seven to twelve hairs distributed over the whole length of the base of antennal segment VI. However, in C. cupressi sensu lato, there are two to four hairs on the fourth rostral segment and only four to seven hairs on the base of antennal segment VI, confined to its basal half.
- Cinara juniperi has the hind tibia heavily pigmented over its entire length and six to thirteen hairs distributed over the whole length of the base of antennal segment VI. However, in C. cupressi sensu lato, the middle of the hind tibia lacks pigment and there are only four to seven hairs on the base of antennal segment VI, confined to its basal half.
- Cinara tujafilina lacks pigment on the base of the hind tibia and has eight to fourteen hairs distributed over the whole length of the base of antennal segment VI. However, in C. cupressi sensu lato, the base of the hind tibia has some pigmentation and there are only four to seven hairs on the base of antennal segment VI, confined to its basal half.
Prevention and Control
Top of pageDue to the variable regulations around (de)registration of pesticides, your national list of registered pesticides or relevant authority should be consulted to determine which products are legally allowed for use in your country when considering chemical control. Pesticides should always be used in a lawful manner, consistent with the product's label.
Host-plant ResistanceInfestation of the arboretum at Muguga Research Station, Kenya, created a natural experiment. Observations on the impact of infestation on different tree species in the arboretum indicated that there is a wide range of tolerance between different species (Obiri, 1994). Thuja spp. and Cupressocyparis leylandii were most tolerant, whereas Widdringtonia and Callitris species were least tolerant. In the genus Cupressus, the most tolerant species were Cupressus torulosa, Cupressus funebris and Cupressus arizonica, whereas the most susceptible were Cupressus benthamii [Cupressus lusitanica var. benthamii], Cupressus lusitanica (the main commercial species grown in Kenya) and Cupressus lindleyi [Cupressus lusitanica var. lusitanica]. Results with hybrid trees indicated that resistance breeding through hybridization might offer a viable long-term solution to the aphid problem.
The study of a stand of mature Cupressus lusitanica in Kenya indicated that the degree of aphid damage varied from one tree to another (Orondo and Day, 1994). C. lusitanica seedlings from open-pollinated seeds of 18 families were exposed to cypress aphid attack to determine the genetic basis and inheritance of resistance (Kamunya et al., 1997). The progeny of some highly susceptible trees were highly resistant, indicating that resistance was being transmitted in the pollen from resistant neighbours. The results indicated that there was a strong additive genetic control, which could allow for the effective selection and breeding for resistance. It was suggested that one cycle of selection might yield a resistant population. A subsequent study found that selection for resistance to aphid damage was unlikely to have adverse effects on economically important traits such as the height and diameter of the trunk (Kamunya et al., 1999).
Another study of resistance in 32 families of C. lusitanica in Tanzania identified the best families from Kenya and Uganda. Ten families were recommended for use in breeding, to widen the genetic base of future forests in the region (Mugasha et al., 1997).
Biological Control
A biological control agent, Pauesia juniperorum, was introduced to Malawi from Europe (Chilima, 1995) and has reduced the impact of the cypress aphid there. It was subsequently introduced to Kenya and Uganda (Day et al., 2003). Day et al. (2003) reported that the assessment of the outcome of this introduction has commenced in Kenya and that it was successful in Uganda.
Chemical Control
Cypress aphids live deep inside the canopy because they avoid bright light. Consequently they would be very difficult to reach using topical applications of insecticides.
References
Top of pageAl Najar OL; Nefrya KMN, 2000. Survey for aphid species in Libya. Arab Journal of Plant Protection, 18(1):24-27.
Chapman JD, 1994. Notes on Mulanje cedar - Malawi's national tree. Commonwealth Forestry Review, 73(4):235-242,272-273.
Chilima CZ; Owour AL, 1992. A review of the natural enemies of Eulachnus rileyi (Williams), Pineus pini (L), Cinara cupressi (Buckton) and Cinara cronartii Tissot and Pepper in Africa. International Institute of Biological Control unpublished report.
Eastop VF, 1972. A taxonomic review of the species of Cinara Curtis occurring in Britain (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Bulletin of the British Museum Natural History (Entomology), 27(2):101-186.
Gillette CP; Palmer MA, 1924. New Colorado Lachnini. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 17:1-44.
Ilharco FA, 1996. 2nd addition to the catalogue of the aphids of continental Portugal (Homoptera, Aphidoidea). Agronomia Lusitana, 45(1-3):5-66.
Khaemba BM; Wanjala FME, 1993. Some aspects of the biology of Cinara cupressi Buckton (Homoptera: Lachnidae) when bred under laboratory condition. Insect Science and its Application, 14(5):693-695.
Latteur G; Grasso V, 1980. About the recent presence of Cinara cupressi (Buckton) in Belgium. In: Raddi P, ed. Il Cipresso: malattie e difesa, 223-224.
Mordwilko A, 1895. Zur Biologie und Systematik der Baumlause (Lachninae Pass. partim) des Weichselgebietes. Zoologischer Anzeiger, Leipzig, 18:102.
Murphy ST; Chilima CZ; Cross; AE; Abraham; YJ; Kairo MTK; Allard GB; Day RK, 1994. Exotic conifer aphids in Africa: ecology and biological control. In Leather SR, Watt AD, Mills NJ, Walters KFA, Eds. Individuals, populations and patterns in ecology. Andover, UK: Intercept Ltd, 233-242.
Murphy ST; Nair KSS; Sharma JK, 1996. Status and impact of invasive conifer aphid pests in Africa. In: Varma RV, ed. Impact of diseases and insect pests in tropical forests. Proceedings of the IUFRO Symposium, Peechi, India, 23-26 November 1993. Peechi, India: Kerala Forest Research Institute (KFRI), 289-297.
Rabasse JM; Grasso V, 1980. Les insectes ravageurs des cypres en France. In: Raddi P, ed. Il Cipresso: malattie e difesa, 217-222.
Remaudière G; Binazzi A, 2003. Les Cinara du Pakistan II. Le sous-genre Cupressobium [Hemiptera, Aphididae, Lachninae]. Revue française d'Entomologie (NS), 25(2):85-96.
Sousa Silva CR; Ilharco FA, 2001. First report of Cinara cupressi (Lachninae: Cinarini) in Brazil. Revista de Biologia Tropical, 49(2):768.
Distribution References
CABI, Undated. Compendium record. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated a. CABI Compendium: Status inferred from regional distribution. Wallingford, UK: CABI
CABI, Undated b. CABI Compendium: Status as determined by CABI editor. Wallingford, UK: CABI
NHM, 2004. Specimen record from the collection in the Natural History Museum (London, UK)., London, UK: Natural History Museum (London).
Distribution Maps
Top of pageSelect a dataset
Map Legends
-
CABI Summary Records
Map Filters
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/