Xylella fastidiosa (Pierce's disease of grapevines)
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature
- Distribution Table
- History of Introduction and Spread
- Risk of Introduction
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
- Growth Stages
- List of Symptoms/Signs
- Biology and Ecology
- Means of Movement and Dispersal
- Pathway Vectors
- Plant Trade
- Wood Packaging
- Vectors and Intermediate Hosts
- Environmental Impact
- Impact: Biodiversity
- Threatened Species
- Social Impact
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Detection and Inspection
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.Generate report
PicturesTop of page
IdentityTop of page
Preferred Scientific Name
- Xylella fastidiosa (Wells et al., 1987)
Preferred Common Name
- Pierce's disease of grapevines
International Common Names
- English: alfalfa dwarf; almond leaf scorch; citrus variegated chlorosis; dwarf lucerne; leaf scorch disease; oleander leaf scorch; pear leaf scorch; pecan fungal leaf scorch; pecan leaf scorch; periwinkle wilt; phony disease of peach; plum leaf scald
- Spanish: enfermedad de Pierce (grape); pecosita (citrus, Argentina)
- French: chlorose variégée; des agrumes (citrus); maladie de Pierce (grape); nanisme de lucerne
Local Common Names
- Brazil: amarelinho (citrus); requeima do cafeeiro (coffee)
- XYLEFA (Xylella fastidiosa)
Summary of InvasivenessTop of page
Xylella fastidiosa has a wide plant host range and spectrum of insect species capable of serving as vectors which should increase the bacterium's invasiveness and make it difficult to prevent introduction via live plants from the tropical or subtropical Americas. The spread of phony disease of peach within the south-eastern USA from the 1890s until about 1930 and of citrus variegated chlorosis disease of orange throughout Brazil in the 1990s indicates that new strains of X. fastidiosa have the potential to spread over a few years to cause increasing damage. Intersubspecific homologous recombination of strains is implicated in the potential for invasion of new host plants (Nunney et al., 2014).
X. fastidiosa represents a very serious threat for the EPPO region. In 2013 the bacterium was reported causing serious damage to olive trees in Puglia, Italy. It was also detected in numerous other host plants (mainly ornamentals). Colonisation of a host with X. fastidiosa does not always equate to disease development and an endophytic life stage has been suggested (Chatterjee et al., 2008). These non-symptomatic hosts and hosts which are slow to develop symptoms can limit the effectiveness of quarantine procedures and may provide a reservoir for maintenance of the pathogen in the wider environment. According to the EFSA Panel on Plant Health (European Food Safety Authority, 2015), establishment and spread of X. fastidiosa in the EU is very likely. The consequences are considered to be major because yield losses and other damage would be high and require costly control measures.
X. fastidiosa is included in the EPPO A1 list of pests recommended for regulation as quarantine pests. Among potential insect vectors, only Homalodisca vitripennis, Xyphon fulgida, Draeculacephala minerva and Graphocephala atropunctata are also listed in the EPPO A1 list. The European Food Safety Authority suggests that all xylem sap feeder insects should be regarded as potential vectors of X. fastidiosa. Elbeaino et al. (2014b) detected X. fastidiosa in the phloem feeder Euscelis lineolatus in Italy, suggesting that potential vectors may include phloem feeding insects. Further studies are needed to confirm transmission in E. lineolatus. Newly introduced isolates of X. fastidiosa are likely to be transmitted by endemic vector species even without the introduction of non-native vectors (Almeida et al., 2005).
In summary, X. fastidiosa may have the potential to invade agro-ecosystems in Mediterranean regions wherever suitable vectors (overwintering in the adult stage and thus able to inoculate vines during spring) are endemic or become established. The same may be true for tropical-subtropical Asia and Africa.
Taxonomic TreeTop of page
- Domain: Bacteria
- Phylum: Proteobacteria
- Class: Gammaproteobacteria
- Order: Xanthomonadales
- Family: Xanthomonadaceae
- Genus: Xylella
- Species: Xylella fastidiosa
Notes on Taxonomy and NomenclatureTop of page
Xylella fastidiosa (Wells et al., 1987) is the xylem-limited bacterium causing Pierce's disease of grapevine and other plant diseases. Different strains of the same species cultured from different hosts by the same techniques cause disease in other plant hosts. Two such diseases are phony disease of peach and plum leaf scald, which were previously listed and described separately by EPPO (1986). Another strain causes citrus variegated chlorosis in South America. Relationships between strains are still in the process of being categorized. Most attempts to characterize strains have used molecular methods (Chen et al., 1995; Hendson et al., 2001; Schuenzel et al., 2005) rather than plant host range studies, which are limited by quarantine restrictions and the unusually large range of plants that many strains of X. fastidiosa can infect.
X. fastidiosa taxonomy has recently been revisited in view of available genetic diversity data based on a multi-locus sequence typing approach (Yuan et al., 2010). X. fastidiosa can be divided into four generally accepted subspecies which have evolved in distinct geographical regions with each subspecies showing a high degree of host specificity (Almeida and Nunney, 2015). X. fastidiosa subsp. fastidiosa, thought to be native to southern Central America (Nunney et al., 2010), is associated primarily with Pierce’s disease of grapevines and almond leaf scorch. X. fastidiosa subsp. multiplex, thought native to temperate and subtropical North America, is associated with scorch disease in a wide range of trees, including phony peach disease and plum leaf scorch. X. fastidiosa subsp. pauca, thought to be native to South America, is associated with strains causing disease in citrus and coffee (Nunney et al., 2012). X. fastidiosa subsp. sandyi, believed to originate from the southern region of the USA (Yuan et al., 2010), is associated with oleander leaf scorch.
A fifth subspecies X. fastidiosa subsp. tashke was proposed to include isolates associated with leaf scorch in Chitalpa tashkentensis, an ornamental landscaping tree (Randall et al., 2009). However, the phylogenetic placement of this strain is still in doubt and the subspecies is not generally accepted.
A further subspecies, X. fastidiosa subsp. morus, was proposed for a strain associated with mulberry leaf scorch (occurring in the eastern USA and California). Multi-locus sequence typing places this strain in a group distinct from the four currently described subspecies (Nunney et al., 2014).
An isolate associated with pear leaf scorch in Taiwan was classified as a new genotype of X. fastidiosa based on 16S rDNA sequencing (Leu and Su, 1993; Su et al., 2012, 2014). However, multi-locus sequence typing suggests this strain is substantially distinct from all other known genotypes. Almeida and Nunney (2015) suggest that this strain would be better assigned to a new species.
Complete genome sequences are available for citrus (Simpson et al., 2000), grape (Van Sluys et al., 2003), almond and oleander (Bhattacharyya et al., 2002; Van Sluys et al., 2002) strains. Host range and cross-inoculation studies are still needed to determine host-specialized forms (pathovars) within X. fastidiosa (Purcell and Hopkins, 1996). For example, Brazilian citrus and coffee strains were shown to cause disease in grape (Li et al., 2002), although grape disease caused by X. fastidiosa in Brazil has not been observed. The grapevine-virulent strains do not infect peach, whereas the strains virulent in peach do not cause disease in grapevine (Hopkins, 1988). The information here refers principally to the fairly well characterized grapevine, almond, citrus and coffee strains. It only very briefly attempts to cover the diseases caused by X. fastidiosa sensu lato on other hosts.
DescriptionTop of page
X. fastidiosa is a fastidious Gram-negative, xylem-limited bacterium, rod-shaped with rippled cell walls. It is strictly aerobic (microaerophilic), non-flagellate, does not form spores and measures 0.1-0.5 x 1-5 µm. The peach strain was given by Nyland et al. (1973) as 0.35 x 2.3 µm. See also Bradbury (1991). Thread-like strands (fimbriae) attached to the polar ends of bacterial cells can be observed in electron microscopy (Mircetich et al., 1976) and scanning electron microscopy (Feil et al., 2003b). These probably function in bacterial attachment and 'twitching' movement (Meng et al., 2005).
DistributionTop of page
The distribution given is for the grapevine, peach, coffee and citrus pathogens. Apparently some strains of X. fastidiosa sensu lato (oak strains) occur farther north in North America (Hartman et al., 1996; Goodwin and Zhang, 1997).
Grapevines with symptoms of Pierce's disease in Kosovo, former Yugoslavia, were confirmed as harbouring grape-virulent stains of X. fastidiosa (Berisha et al., 1996). These were tolerant grape varieties capable of harbouring populations of X. fastidiosa with mild symptoms. This record is considered dubious and to date there are no reports of natural spread of Pierce's disease to other vines.
An isolated record from almonds in India (Jindal and Sharma, 1987) is based on a test described in the 1970s; it requires confirmation by more modern methods. In Taiwan pear leaf scorch is caused by a strain of X. fastidiosa (Leu et al., 1993, 1998). Multi-locus sequence typing suggests that this strain is genetically dissimilar to described X. fastidiosa genotypes and would be assigned a new subspecies or even a new species (Almeida and Nunney, 2015).
Güldr et al. (2005) suggested the occurrence of almond leaf scorch in Turkey, however this has not been confirmed by any other studies or surveys. According to the NPPO of Turkey (2014), this record should be considered as invalid.
The citrus disease has been reported from Argentina (Brlansky et al., 1991) and spread within Brazil, from Sao Paulo and Minas Gerais, as first reported in 1987, to north-eastern Brazil by 1996 (Laranjeira et al., 1996). The grapevine disease has been reported from Venezuela (Jimenez, 1985; Hernandez and Ochoa, 1994).
Pierce's disease has been confirmed in all states along the Gulf of Mexico from Florida to Texas; New Mexico, Arizona and California; northern Mexico and Costa Rica, but probably throughout Central America; Venezuela.
Phony peach has been confirmed in south-eastern USA from Florida north to North Carolina and west as far as Missouri and eastern Texas. Records for Montana (CABI/EPPO, 2006) and Nebraska (Sherald, 1993b) require further confirmation.
Plum leaf scorch is reported in Paraguay, Argentina, southern Brazil (Leite et al., 1997); and in the USA along the Gulf coast (Raju et al., 1982).
Coffee leaf scorch is widespread in Brazil (de Lima et al., 1996, 1998).
Tree leaf scorches are reported in the USA from Florida to New York and the Ontario Peninsula of Canada (rare, unconfirmed) and eastward to the central midwest (Kentucky, Kansas, Nebraska) and south-west as far as Texas.
See also CABI/EPPO (1998, No. 290).
Distribution TableTop of page
The 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.
|Continent/Country/Region||Distribution||Last Reported||Origin||First Reported||Invasive||Reference||Notes|
|India||Absent, unreliable record||Jindal and Sharma, 1987; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Himachal Pradesh||Absent, unreliable record||EPPO, 2014|
|Iran||Restricted distribution||Amanifar et al., 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|Lebanon||Absent, invalid record||EPPO, 2016; EPPO, 2016|
|Taiwan||Present||Leu et al., 1998; Su et al., 2013; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|Turkey||Absent, invalid record||NPPO of Turkey, 2014; Guldr et al., 2005; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|Morocco||Unconfirmed record||Rieuf, 1962|
|Canada||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-British Columbia||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Ontario||Present, few occurrences||Goodwin and Zhang, 1997; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|Mexico||Present||Raju et al., 1980; Guevara, 1997; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|USA||Widespread||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Alabama||Widespread||Hewitt, 1958; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Arizona||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Arkansas||Present||Hewitt, 1958; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-California||Present||Purcell and Hopkins, 1996; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Delaware||Present||Sherald, 1993b; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-District of Columbia||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Florida||Widespread||Hewitt, 1958; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Georgia||Widespread||Hewitt, 1958; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Indiana||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Kentucky||Present||Hartmann et al., 1996; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Louisiana||Present||Hewitt, 1958; Singh et al., 2010; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Maryland||Present||Sherald, 1993b; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Mississippi||Widespread||Hewitt, 1958; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Missouri||Present||Sherald, 1993b; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Montana||Absent, unreliable record||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015||record requires confirmation.|
|-Nebraska||Absent, unreliable record||Sherald, 1993b; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015||record requires confirmation.|
|-New Jersey||Present||Sherald, 1993b; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-New Mexico||Present||Sherald, 1993b; Randall et al., 2011; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-New York||Present||Sherald, 1993b; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-North Carolina||Present||Hewitt, 1958; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Oklahoma||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Oregon||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Pennsylvania||Present||Sherald, 1993b; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Rhode Island||Present||Stoner, 1958|
|-South Carolina||Present||Hewitt, 1958; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Tennessee||Present||Hartmann et al., 1996; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Texas||Widespread||Hewitt, 1958; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Virginia||Present||Hewitt, 1958; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Washington||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-West Virginia||Present||Sherald, 1993b; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
Central America and Caribbean
|Costa Rica||Present||Goheen et al., 1979; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|Puerto Rico||Present||CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|Argentina||Present||Native||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|Brazil||Present||Coletta and Machado, 2003; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Bahia||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Espirito Santo||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Goias||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Minas Gerais||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Para||Present||Poltronieri et al., 2005; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Parana||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Rio de Janeiro||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Rio Grande do Sul||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Santa Catarina||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Sao Paulo||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|-Sergipe||Present||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|Paraguay||Present||Native||EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|Peru||Absent, confirmed by survey||EPPO, 2014|
|Venezuela||Present||Hernandez Garboza & Ochoa Corona, 1994; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
|Austria||Absent, confirmed by survey||EPPO, 2015|
|Belgium||Absent, confirmed by survey||EPPO, 2016|
|Czech Republic||Absent, intercepted only||EPPO, 2018|
|Finland||Absent, confirmed by survey||EPPO, 2018|
|France||Transient: actionable, under eradication||EPPO, 2015|
|-Corsica||Transient: actionable, under eradication||EPPO, 2018|
|Germany||Transient: actionable, under eradication||EPPO, 2018|
|Italy||Restricted distribution||Carlucci et al., 2013; EPPO, 2014; CABI/EPPO, 2015; EPPO, 2015; European Food Safety Authority, 2016|
|Lithuania||Absent, confirmed by survey||EPPO, 2016; IPPC, 2016|
|Netherlands||Absent, confirmed by survey||NPPO of the Netherlands, 2013; EPPO, 2015|
|Serbia||Absent, invalid record||EPPO, 2015|
|Spain||Transient: actionable, under eradication||EPPO, 2018|
|-Balearic Islands||Transient: actionable, under eradication||EPPO, 2018|
|Switzerland||Transient: actionable, under eradication||EPPO, 2016|
|Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)||Absent, invalid record||Berisha et al., 1996; CABI/EPPO, 2015|
History of Introduction and SpreadTop of page
Phony disease of peach spread within the south-eastern USA from the 1890s until about 1930 (Turner and Pollard, 1959), and the spread of citrus variegated chlorosis disease of orange throughout Brazil in the 1990s (Laranjeira, 1997) was documented. The origins of these strains are unknown but are likely to be endemic to unknown regions of the Americas.
In 2013 X. fastidiosa was recorded in Europe, causing serious damage to olive groves in Puglia, Italy. It was also detected in numerous other host plants (mainly ornamentals). In 2015, the bacterium was reported on ornamental plants on the island of Corsica. The subspecies of X. fastidiosa which occurred in France (subsp. multiplex) was different to that which occurs in Italy (clustered in a clade closest to subsp. pauca (Elbeaino et al., 2014a)).
Characteristic symptoms of Pierce's disease of grapevine were observed in Taiwan in 2002. X. fastidiosa subsp. fastidiosa was subsequently identified, confirming the first report of Pierce's disease in Asia (Su et al., 2013).
Risk of IntroductionTop of page
The greatest threats are to mild winter regions with one or more of the following crops: grapevines, citrus, almond, stone fruits (Prunus spp.), coffee, oleander, lucerne or where the tree species that can be potentially affected by leaf scorch diseases occur.
EPPO considers X. fastidiosa as an A1 quarantine pest (EPPO, 1989) and it is also a quarantine pest for COSAVE. In the EPPO region, it is clear that the grapevine strain of X. fastidiosa has the potential to kill large numbers of grapevines and to make areas unfit for growing Vitis vinifera. Its vectors in North America do not occur in the EPPO region, but vector capacity is so non-specific that one could certainly expect European Cicadellinae (e.g., Cicadella viridis) or Cercopidae to transmit the bacterium if introduced. After the recent introduction and spread of the vector Homalodisca vitripennis in California, USA, this leafhopper has become extremely abundant on citrus and other crops in southern California (Sorensen and Gill, 1996). This illustrates that this exotic vector species can become abundant in Mediterranean climates, despite originating in a humid subtropical region (south-eastern USA). The main danger in the long term in Europe is that X. fastidiosa could become established in natural vegetation which would then act as a reservoir for infection of vineyards or other susceptible crops or forest trees. It is less likely that Pierce’s disease would become a problem in the production of planting material, for it is easily detected, can be prophylactically eliminated by hot-water treatment, and is rapidly self-eliminating if introduced into fields. Nevertheless, infected planting material could introduce the disease to new areas. Hoddle (2004) modelled the distribution of X. fastidiosa in California and projected the model to predict world distribution. Cold winter temperatures were seen as the limiting factor for X. fastidiosa establishment and X. fastidiosa is only likely to establish as a serious problem in the warmer parts of the EPPO region, which have winter temperatures approaching those of the southern USA. Species distribution models employed by Bosso et al. (2016a) suggest that X. fastidiosa in Italy has the potential to spread beyond the current boundaries of distribution and affect wide areas of Italy outside of Apulia. Mediterranean climates are particularly favourable for X. fastidiosa establishment and X. fastidiosa may establish within Portugal, Spain, Corsica, Albania, Montenegro, Greece and Turkey as well as all countries of northern Africa and the Middle East (Bosso et al., 2016b). The persistence of X. fastidiosa in the cooler climate of Kosovo, former Yugoslavia, over several years suggests Pierce's disease could also become established in coastal parts of southern France, and northern Italy. Information on the incidence and severity of the disease in the former Yugoslavia was not available as of early 1998. The potential natural range and severity of Pierce’s disease in Europe may depend on the distribution and biology of potential vectors and is accordingly rather difficult to assess.
The South American strain on citrus also presents a major risk, for the climatic conditions of Mediterranean countries seem favourable to its development. The reported damage in Brazil suggests potential damage even greater than for the grapevine disease. No critical evaluation of possible European vectors has yet been made, but the arguments developed above for grapevine should certainly also apply to citrus.
The peach strain is relatively less important, but X. fastidiosa still presents a definite danger for peaches, plums, almonds, oaks and, sensu lato, for other fruit and amenity trees (see Hosts) (Dunez, 1981).
HabitatTop of page
X. fastidiosa occupies habitats of insect vectors where suitable host plants occur. For citrus, habitats are chiefly commercial orchards. For Pierce's disease strains, habitats may be riparian vegetation, irrigated pastures, hay fields, or ornamental landscapes.
Hosts/Species AffectedTop of page
No grapevine (Vitis spp.) species are known to be immune to Pierce’s disease strains of X. fastidiosa, but American species used as rootstocks (V. aestivalis, V. berlandieri, V. candicans, V. rupestris) and hybrids derived from them are tolerant and some may be resistant, as is V. rotundifolia (Goheen and Hopkins, 1988). Almonds and lucerne can be hosts of the grapevine strains, but the diseases caused by X. fastidiosa in these three crop species are independent within California, USA, suggesting as yet unidentified biological differences (Purcell, 1980b). A very high percentage (>75% of those tested) of crop, wild plant and weed species can carry Pierce’s disease strains of the bacterium without symptoms (e.g. wild grasses, sedges, lilies, various bushes and trees) (Raju et al., 1983; Hopkins and Adlerz, 1988; Hill and Purcell, 1995b). It is likely that in most symptomless host species, X. fastidiosa multiplies to lower populations and moves systemically less often than in pathological hosts. For example, blackberry (Rubus spp.) can be a systemic host, but the bacterium multiplies in mugwort (Artemisia douglasiana) without systemic movement (Hill and Purcell, 1995b). Hosts can be classified as propagative or non-propagative, systemic or non-systemic, and symptomatic or non-symptomatic (Purcell and Saunders, 1999b). Propagative, systemic hosts are the best hosts for efficient vector acquisition of bacteria, but vectors can acquire the bacterium from non-systemic hosts. Acquisition efficiency is proportional to the populations of live bacterial cells within plant tissues (Hill and Purcell, 1997).
Peach (Prunus persica) strains of X. fastidiosa cause peach phony disease (Wells et al., 1983), which also attacks Prunus salicina (causing leaf scald). All cultivars, forms and hybrids of peach are attacked, whether on their own roots or other rootstocks. Plums (Prunus domestica), almonds (P. dulcis), apricots (P. armeniaca) and the wild P. angustifolia were reported susceptible to phony disease before the association with X. fastidiosa was established. This reported range partly overlaps that of the grapevine-infecting strains. Various perennial weeds of orchards, such as Sorghum halepense, may act as reservoirs for the peach-infecting strain (Yonce, 1983; Yonce and Chang, 1987), but the plant host range of Prunus strains from the south-eastern USA has not been investigated extensively. Pierce's disease strains also cause almond leaf scorch disease (Davis et al., 1980), but the almond strains infect grape in low populations and without causing disease (Almeida and Purcell, 2003).
X. fastidiosa in the wide sense also causes leaf scorch in Acer rubrum (Sherald et al., 1987), Morus rubra (Kostka et al., 1986), Platanus occidentalis (Sherald, 1993a,b) (wilt and leaf scorch), Quercus rubra (Chang and Walker, 1988), Ulmus americana and Vinca minor (stunt). Strains from Ulmus and from P. occidentalis are not reciprocally infectious (Sherald, 1993a). The bacteria involved are not known to be transmissible to grapevine. Diseases of numerous woody ornamental plants in southern California, USA, including olive, date palm and rosemary, have been associated with X. fastidiosa but a causal relationship is still unproven (Wong and Cooksey, 2004). Until their relationships and pest significance have been clarified, they can all be regarded as potentially dangerous for Europe and the Mediterranean region.
X. fastidiosa causes citrus variegated chlorosis in Brazil (Lee et al., 1991; Chang et al., 1993; Hartung et al., 1994) and Argentina (Brlanksy et al., 1993). The disease affects mostly sweet oranges (Citrus sinensis); it has been observed especially on cultivars Pera, Hamlin, Natal and Valencia. It occurs on trees propagated on all commonly used rootstocks in Brazil: C. limonia, C. reshni and C. volkameriana. The disease has not been observed on C. latifolia or mandarins (C. reticulata), even when the trees were planted in severely affected orange groves (Li et al., 2000). The effectiveness of removing diseased citrus trees to prevent further spread of variegated chlorosis in citrus (Rodas, 1994) strongly suggests that most spread of this disease is from tree to tree within the crop. Control measures require the production of disease-free nursery trees in protected environments.
Citrus blight in Florida, USA, has been associated with X. fastidiosa (Adlerz et al., 1989; Hopkins et al., 1996); however the preponderance of evidence suggests that it is not the cause of blight (Derrick and Timmer, 2000).
Plum leaf scald is an important crop-limiting disease caused by X. fastidiosa from Brazil through Argentina. The South American plum leaf scald strains appear to differ from those in North America, as there are no reports of phony disease of peach in South America. The plum leaf scald strains in Brazil may have wide plant host ranges (Leite et al., 1997). A leaf scorching disease of coffee (De Lima et al., 1998) is caused by strains of X. fastidiosa that appear to be closely related to the citrus variegated chlorosis strains (Rosato et al., 1998), but its ability to cause disease in citrus (Li et al., 2001) is controversial.
In Europe and the Mediterranean region, grapevine and citrus are clearly the most significant potential crop hosts, although peach and plum are also important. Strains that cause leaf scorch diseases in oak, elm, sycamore (plane) (Hearon et al., 1980), mulberry (Kostka et al., 1986) and other tree species are also potentially damaging. Many other hosts could carry the bacterium, without necessarily being significantly affected.
X. fastidiosa has been implicated as the causal agent of olive quick decline syndrome in Europe. In 2013, X. fastidiosa subsp. pauca was associated with quick decline syndrome on olive, almond and oleander in Europe (southern Italy, Apulia region) (European Food Safety Authority, 2015). Symptomatic olive trees were often affected by multiple pests, including X. fastidiosa, several fungal species, and Zeuzera pyrina (leopard moth) (Nigro et al., 2013). Recent experimental evidence (Saponari et al., 2016) has confirmed X. fastidiosa as the causal agent of olive quick decline syndrome in Italy (European Food Safety Authority, 2016). In the USA a study evaluating olive as a host for X. fastidiosa concluded that subsp. multiplex was present but was not the cause of the leaf scorch and dieback symptoms observed on olive trees in California (Krugner et al., 2014). However, X. fastidiosa subsp. pauca has been implicated as a causal agent of olive plant dieback and leaf desiccation in Argentina (Haelterman et al., 2015). More recently, leaf scorch symptoms on olive trees in Brazil have been associated with X. fastidiosa subsp. pauca (Coletta-Filho et al., 2016).
The host range of X. fastidiosa based on the available peer-reviewed literature is presented in European Food Safety Authority (2015).
According to the European Food Safety Authority (2016), the current list of host plant species for X. fastidiosa consists of 359 plant species (including hybrids) from 204 genera and 75 different botanical families.
Host Plants and Other Plants AffectedTop of page
|Acer macrophyllum (broadleaf maple)||Aceraceae||Other|
|Acer negundo (box elder)||Aceraceae||Other|
|Acer platanoides (Norway maple)||Aceraceae||Other|
|Acer rubrum (red maple)||Aceraceae||Wild host|
|Acer saccharum (sugar maple)||Aceraceae||Main|
|Agrostis gigantea (black bent)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Albizia julibrissin (silk tree)||Fabaceae||Other|
|Alternanthera ficoidea (rabbit meat)||Amaranthaceae||Wild host|
|Ambrosia artemisiifolia (common ragweed)||Asteraceae||Wild host|
|Avena fatua (wild oat)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Baccharis halimifolia (groundsel-bush)||Asteraceae||Other|
|Baccharis pilularis (coyote brush)||Asteraceae||Other|
|Bidens pilosa (blackjack)||Asteraceae||Other|
|Borreria latifolia (broadleaf buttonweed)||Rubiaceae||Wild host|
|Brachiaria (signalgrass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Bromus diandrus (great brome)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Capsella bursa-pastoris (shepherd's purse)||Brassicaceae||Wild host|
|Carex (sedges)||Cyperaceae||Wild host|
|Carya illinoinensis (pecan)||Juglandaceae||Main|
|Catharanthus roseus (Madagascar periwinkle)||Apocynaceae||Other|
|Celastrus orbiculatus (Asiatic bittersweet)||Salacia||Other|
|Cenchrus echinatus (southern sandbur)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Cercis occidentalis (Western redbud)||Fabaceae||Other|
|Citrus hystrix (mauritius bitter orange)||Rutaceae||Other|
|Citrus latifolia (tahiti lime)||Rutaceae||Main|
|Citrus limon (lemon)||Rutaceae||Other|
|Citrus reticulata (mandarin)||Rutaceae||Main|
|Citrus reticulata x paradisi (tangelo)||Rutaceae||Main|
|Citrus sinensis (navel orange)||Rutaceae||Main|
|Coffea (coffee)||Rubiaceae||Wild host|
|Coffea arabica (arabica coffee)||Rubiaceae||Other|
|Commelina benghalensis (wandering jew)||Commelinaceae||Other|
|Conium maculatum (poison hemlock)||Apiaceae||Wild host|
|Convolvulus arvensis (bindweed)||Convolvulaceae||Wild host|
|Conyza canadensis (Canadian fleabane)||Asteraceae||Wild host|
|Cornus florida (Flowering dogwood)||Cornaceae||Other|
|Cynodon (quickgrass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Cynodon dactylon (Bermuda grass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Cyperus (flatsedge)||Cyperaceae||Wild host|
|Cyperus eragrostis (Tall flatsedge)||Cyperaceae||Wild host|
|Datura wrightii||Solanaceae||Wild host|
|Digitaria (crabgrass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Digitaria horizontalis||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Digitaria insularis (sourgrass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Echinochloa crus-galli (barnyard grass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Echinochloa frumentacea (Japanese millet)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Eriochloa contracta||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Erodium cicutarium (common storksbill)||Geraniaceae||Wild host|
|Erodium moschatum||Geraniaceae||Wild host|
|Euphorbia hirta (garden spurge)||Euphorbiaceae||Other|
|Fagus crenata (Japanese beech)||Fagaceae||Other|
|Fragaria vesca (wild strawberry)||Rosaceae||Wild host|
|Geranium dissectum (cutleaf geranium)||Geraniaceae||Wild host|
|Ginkgo biloba (kew tree)||Ginkgoaceae||Other|
|Hedera helix (ivy)||Araliaceae||Other|
|Heteromeles salicifolia (toyon)||Rosaceae||Wild host|
|Hibiscus schizopetalus (fringed hibiscus)||Malvaceae||Other|
|Hordeum murinum (mouse barley)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Ilex vomitoria (Yaupon)||Aquifoliaceae||Other|
|Ipomoea (morning glory)||Convolvulaceae||Other|
|Jacaranda mimosifolia (jacaranda)||Bignoniaceae||Other|
|Juglans californica (california walnut)||Juglandaceae||Other|
|Lactuca serriola (prickly lettuce)||Asteraceae||Wild host|
|Lagerstroemia indica (Indian crape myrtle)||Lythraceae||Other|
|Lantana camara (lantana)||Verbenaceae||Other|
|Lavandula dentata||Lamiaceae||Wild host|
|Lepidium didymum (lesser swine-cress)||Brassicaceae||Other|
|Ligustrum lucidum (broad-leaf privet)||Oleaceae||Other|
|Liquidambar styraciflua (Sweet gum)||Hamamelidaceae||Main|
|Liriodendron tulipifera (tuliptree)||Magnoliaceae||Other|
|Lolium (ryegrasses)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Lolium multiflorum (Italian ryegrass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Lonicera japonica (Japanese honeysuckle)||Caprifoliaceae||Other|
|Ludwigia grandiflora (water primrose)||Onagraceae||Wild host|
|Magnolia grandiflora (Southern magnolia)||Magnoliaceae||Other|
|Malva parviflora (pink cheeseweed)||Malvaceae||Other|
|Marrubium vulgare (horehound)||Lamiaceae||Wild host|
|Medicago (medic)||Fabaceae||Wild host|
|Medicago polymorpha (bur clover)||Fabaceae||Wild host|
|Medicago sativa (lucerne)||Fabaceae||Main|
|Megathyrsus maximus (Guinea grass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Morus alba (mora)||Moraceae||Main|
|Morus nigra (black mulberry)||Moraceae||Other|
|Morus rubra (red mulberrytree)||Moraceae||Other|
|Nandina domestica (Nandina)||Berberidaceae||Other|
|Nerium oleander (oleander)||Apocynaceae||Main|
|Olea europaea subsp. europaea (European olive)||Oleaceae||Other|
|Paspalum dilatatum (dallis grass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Passiflora foetida (red fruit passion flower)||Passifloraceae||Wild host|
|Persea americana (avocado)||Lauraceae||Other|
|Phoenix reclinata (senegal date palm)||Arecaceae||Other|
|Phyla nodiflora||Verbenaceae||Wild host|
|Phyllanthus tenellus||Euphorbiaceae||Wild host|
|Pistacia vera (pistachio)||Anacardiaceae||Other|
|Plantago lanceolata (ribwort plantain)||Plantaginaceae||Wild host|
|Platanus occidentalis (sycamore)||Platanaceae||Main|
|Poa annua (annual meadowgrass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Poaceae (grasses)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Polygala myrtifolia||Polygalaceae||Wild host|
|Polygonum aviculare (prostrate knotweed)||Polygonaceae||Wild host|
|Polygonum lapathifolium (pale persicaria)||Polygonaceae||Wild host|
|Portulaca oleracea (purslane)||Portulacaceae||Wild host|
|Prunus (stone fruit)||Rosaceae||Main|
|Prunus angustifolia (Mountain cherry tree)||Rosaceae||Main|
|Prunus avium (sweet cherry)||Rosaceae||Other|
|Prunus cerasifera (myrobalan plum)||Rosaceae||Other|
|Prunus cerasus (sour cherry)||Rosaceae||Other|
|Prunus domestica (plum)||Rosaceae||Other|
|Prunus dulcis (almond)||Rosaceae||Main|
|Prunus mahaleb (mahaleb cherry)||Rosaceae||Other|
|Prunus persica (peach)||Rosaceae||Main|
|Prunus salicina (Japanese plum)||Rosaceae||Main|
|Prunus serotina (black cherry)||Rosaceae||Other|
|Quercus alba (white oak)||Fagaceae||Other|
|Quercus coccinea (scarlet oak)||Fagaceae||Other|
|Quercus falcata (red oak)||Fagaceae||Other|
|Quercus laevis (Turkey oak)||Fagaceae||Other|
|Quercus laurifolia (Laurel oak)||Fagaceae||Other|
|Quercus macrocarpa (mossy-cup oak)||Fagaceae||Other|
|Quercus nigra (water oak)||Fagaceae||Other|
|Quercus palustris (pin oak)||Fagaceae||Other|
|Quercus phellos (Willow oak)||Fagaceae||Other|
|Quercus rubra (northern red oak)||Fagaceae||Other|
|Quercus velutina (black oak)||Fagaceae||Other|
|Ranunculus repens (creeping buttercup)||Ranunculaceae||Wild host|
|Richardia brasiliensis (white-eye (Australia))||Rubiaceae||Other|
|Rosmarinus officinalis (rosemary)||Lamiaceae||Other|
|Rubus (blackberry, raspberry)||Rosaceae||Wild host|
|Rumex crispus (curled dock)||Polygonaceae||Wild host|
|Salsola kali (common saltwort)||Chenopodiaceae||Wild host|
|Sambucus (Elderberry)||Caprifoliaceae||Wild host|
|Schinus molle (false pepper tree)||Anacardiaceae||Other|
|Senecio vulgaris||Asteraceae||Wild host|
|Senna obtusifolia (sicklepod)||Fabaceae||Other|
|Senna tora (sicklepod)||Fabaceae||Wild host|
|Silybum marianum (variegated thistle)||Asteraceae||Wild host|
|Sisymbrium irio||Brassicaceae||Wild host|
|Solanum americanum||Solanaceae||Wild host|
|Solanum elaeagnifolium (silverleaf nightshade)||Solanaceae||Wild host|
|Sonchus (Sowthistle)||Asteraceae||Wild host|
|Sonchus oleraceus (common sowthistle)||Asteraceae||Wild host|
|Sorghum halepense (Johnson grass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Spartium junceum (Spanish broom)||Fabaceae||Wild host|
|Stellaria media (common chickweed)||Caryophyllaceae||Wild host|
|Taraxacum officinale complex (dandelion)||Asteraceae||Wild host|
|Trifolium (clovers)||Fabaceae||Wild host|
|Ulmus americana (American elm)||Ulmaceae||Wild host|
|Urochloa decumbens (signal grass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Urochloa plantaginea (marmeladegrass)||Poaceae||Wild host|
|Urtica urens (annual nettle)||Urticaceae||Wild host|
|Vaccinium corymbosum (blueberry)||Ericaceae||Other|
|Veronica (Speedwell)||Scrophulariaceae||Wild host|
|Vinca minor (common periwinkle)||Apocynaceae||Wild host|
|Vitis candicans (Mustang grape)||Vitaceae||Wild host|
|Vitis labrusca (fox grape)||Vitaceae||Main|
|Vitis rupestris (sand-grape)||Vitaceae||Main|
|Vitis vinifera (grapevine)||Vitaceae||Main|
|Xanthium spinosum (bathurst burr)||Asteraceae||Wild host|
Growth StagesTop of page Flowering stage, Fruiting stage, Seedling stage, Vegetative growing stage
SymptomsTop of page
The most characteristic symptom of primary infection is leaf scorch. An early sign is sudden drying of part of a green leaf, which then turns brown while adjacent tissues turn yellow or red. The desiccation spreads and the whole leaf may shrivel and drop, leaving only the petiole attached. Diseased stems often mature irregularly, with patches of brown and green tissue. In later years, infected plants develop late and produce stunted chlorotic shoots. Chronically infected plants may have small, distorted leaves with interveinal chlorosis and shoots with shortened internodes. Highly susceptible cultivars rarely survive more than 2-3 years, despite any signs of recovery early in the second growing season. Young vines succumb more quickly than do older vines. More tolerant cultivars may survive chronic infection for more than 5 years (Hewitt et al., 1942; Goodwin and Purcell, 1992).
Young shoots are stunted and bear greener, denser foliage (due to shorter internodes) than healthy trees. Lateral branches grow horizontally or droop, so that the tree seems uniform, compact and rounded. Leaves and flowers appear early, and leaves remain on the tree longer than on healthy trees. Affected trees yield increasingly fewer and smaller fruits until, after 3-5 years, they become economically worthless (Hutchins, 1933).
Trees can start showing the symptoms of variegated chlorosis from nursery size up to more than 10 years of age. Younger trees (1-3 years) become systemically colonized by X. fastidiosa much faster than do older trees. Trees more than 8-10 years old are not usually totally affected, but rather have symptoms on the extremities of branches. Affected trees show foliar chlorosis resembling zinc deficiency with interveinal chlorosis. The chlorosis appears on young leaves as they mature and may also occur on older leaves. Newly affected trees show sectoring of symptoms, whereas trees which have been affected for a period of time show the variegated chlorosis throughout the canopy. As the leaves mature, small, light-brown, slightly raised gummy lesions (becoming dark-brown or even necrotic) appear on the underside, directly opposite the yellow chlorotic areas on the upper side.
Fruit size is greatly reduced; it may take 550 affected fruits to fill a field box, compared with 250 normal fruits. The sugar content of affected fruit is higher than in non-affected fruit, and the fruit has a hard rind, causing damage to juicing machines. Blossom and fruit set occur at the same time on healthy and affected trees, but normal fruit thinning does not occur on affected trees and the fruits remain small but open earlier. Since more fruits remain, total production is not greatly reduced. On affected trees of cv. Pera and other orange cultivars, fruits often occur in clusters of 4-10, resembling grape clusters. Affected trees show stunting and slow growth rate; twigs and branches die back and the canopy thins, but affected trees do not die (Chang et al., 1993a,b; Lee et al., 1991, 1993).
Control has been achieved by removing inoculum in established orange groves and using sanitary measures to prevent infection of nurseries and new groves. All symptomatic branches from trees older than 3 years are cut off up to 1 m below the most basal symptoms. Symptomatic trees less than 4 years old are removed. To prevent the infection of nursery trees, nurseries are located away from citrus plantings, sharpshooters are controlled prophylactically by insecticides, and buds are taken from trees tested free of X. fastidiosa and grown vectors in screen houses or glass houses to exclude vectors. The effectiveness of these measures (Rodas, 1994) indicates that most spread of variegated chlorosis is from tree to tree within citrus orchards (Laranjeira, 1997).
On olives, quick decline syndrome is characterised by the development of leaf scorch symptoms and desiccation of small twigs and branches. Symptoms generally initiate in the upper part of the canopy on one or two branches, and then extend to the remainder of the crown. Severely affected plants are often pruned heavily, favouring spindly new growth which also succumbs to scorch symptoms. The tree may send out suckers from the base of the plant which subsequently die back, until the root system dies entirely (Martelli, 2016a). Grafting experiments have demonstrated that it takes at least 7 months for leaf scorch symptoms to appear on the grafted plant part (European Food Safety Authority, 2015).
Symptoms are found on all known varieties of olive. Older varieties, such as Ogliarola Salentina, Cellina di Nardò and common varieties Frantoio and Coratina, appear susceptible. It is suggested that the variety Leccino seems less susceptible, although records are based on field observations and are yet to be experimentally confirmed. Apparent variation in olive varietal susceptibility may be the result of differences in disease vector pressures in the areas where the disease is present (European Food Safety Authority, 2015).
Vector feeding causes no visible damage. Xylem feeders are prodigious feeders, consuming hundreds of times their body volumes per day in xylem sap. Most non-xylem-feeding leafhoppers produce a sugary or particulate excrement, but that of xylem feeders is watery, drying to a fine whitish powder (brochosomes) where abundant (Rakitov, 2004). The excrement of froghopper nymphs takes the form of persistent bubbles or 'froth'; that surrounds the body of the insect, presumably to provide protection from natural enemies.
List of Symptoms/SignsTop of page
|Fruit / abnormal shape|
|Fruit / mummification|
|Fruit / reduced size|
|Leaves / abnormal colours|
|Leaves / abnormal forms|
|Leaves / abnormal patterns|
|Leaves / necrotic areas|
|Leaves / yellowed or dead|
|Roots / reduced root system|
|Stems / dieback|
|Stems / discoloration of bark|
|Stems / internal discoloration|
|Stems / stunting or rosetting|
|Whole plant / dwarfing|
|Whole plant / plant dead; dieback|
Biology and EcologyTop of page
X. fastidiosa proliferates only in xylem vessels, in roots, stems and leaves. The vessels are ultimately blocked by bacterial aggregates and by tyloses and gums formed by the plant, although disease induction may not be due simply to water blockage (Goodwin et al., 1988). Pierce's disease strains of the bacterium are efficiently acquired by vector insects, with no latent period, and persist in infective adult insects indefinitely (Severin, 1949). In tests made during the 1940s in California, USA, 75 of 100 tested plant species proved to be hosts from which vectors could acquire the pathogen by feeding (Freitag, 1951). Additional studies with culturing and targeted gene amplification (PCR) of X. fastidiosa revealed additional symptomless hosts (Purcell and Saunders, 1999b; Costa et al., 2004; Wistrom and Purcell, 2005). Most of these hosts have only very mild (slight stunting) or no symptoms when infected.
Winter climate is a key factor in delimiting the areas where X. fastidiosa can persist from one season to the next. Pierce's disease and phony disease only occur in areas with a mild winter, presumably in relation to survival of the bacterium in dormant plants (Purcell, 1980a). Experimental cold therapy of diseased grapevines suggests that freezing temperatures can eliminate the bacterium directly from plants (Purcell, 1980a). Wet winters promote survival of high vector populations and favour disease spread in regions with dry summers. In temperate climates with regular freezing winter temperatures, infections of X. fastidiosa established in grapevines during the early growing season are most likely to persist until the following year (Purcell, 1981; Feil et al., 2003a). In California, USA, there is no evidence of vine to vine spread of chronic infections, probably because when bacteria first appear in new foliage (Smart et al. 1998), the chances of establishing infections that will survive the subsequent winter are small. For this reason, vectors that survive the winter may be especially important in establishing early season infections. The lack of potential vectors that overwinter as adults and thus can introduce new infections into woody plants may explain the absence of natural spread or establishment in temperate climate regions such as Europe.
X. fastidiosa is reported to be transmitted to seedlings from infected fresh seed in citrus (Li et al., 2003). This should be taken into account when importing citrus seed for propagation but is not likely to present a risk for introducing the bacterium via commercial fruit. The bacterium is sensitive to dry conditions commonly found in most seeds, but tests of seed transmission have only been reported for citrus. It tends to multiply rapidly in infected grapevines. Infected vines are conspicuous the year after infection and are easily destroyed or die within one to several years, depending on vine cultivar and age. Newly planted vines that are infected by grafting die within a year. In non-systemic hosts such as willow, X. fastidiosa dies within weeks of infecting a xylem cell via vector inoculation (Purcell and Saunders, 1999). Bacterial populations are maintained in natural vegetation by vector transmission to and latent multiplication in wild plants.
On citrus, the variegated chlorosis disease appears to spread from tree to tree within citrus groves (Laranjeira, 1997; Laranjeira et al., 1998). The 9-12 months incubation before symptoms appear in orange trees facilitates the spread of infected nursery trees and probably explains the rapid movements of the disease across Brazil within a decade (Coletta-Filho et al., 2000). Regulations in Brazil now require that nursery trees are produced under screens to prevent infection. The vectors of citrus strains appear to have the same vector group specificity (suctorial xylem feeders) as grapevine strains, but transmission trials indicate that vector transmission is much less efficient in citrus compared with grape (Lopes et al., 1996; Roberto et al., 1996; Yamamoto et al., 2002).
Virtually all sucking insects that feed predominantly on xylem fluid are potential vectors (Purcell, 1989). Leafhoppers (Cicadellidae) in the subfamily Cicadellinae (sharpshooters) and spittle bugs or froghoppers (Cercopidae) are by far the most common species of known vectors within the natural range of X. fastidiosa in North America. As previously predicted, cicadas (Cicadidae) are vectors as well (Paião et al., 2002). Cicadella viridis (Cicadellinae) and the meadow spittle bug, Philaenus spumarius (Cercopidae), are common and widespread in central and southern Europe (Pavan and Gambon, 2003) and reported to occur on grape (Hering, 1966). In California, USA, all tested members of the subfamily Cicadellinae (including Carneocephala fulgida, Draeculacephala minerva and Graphocephala atropunctata) were vectors of the grapevine strain (Hewitt et al., 1949). Homalodisca vitripennis, H. insolita, Oncometopia orbona, Graphocephala versuta and Cuerna costalis are reported vectors of the peach strain (Turner and Pollard, 1959; Yonce, 1983). All these are xylem-feeding, suctorial insects which acquire the bacterium rapidly when feeding (less than 2 h). The bacterium adheres to the mouthparts and is released directly from them when the insect feeds again (Purcell et al., 1979). It multiplies in the vector but does not circulate in its haemolymph, nor does it require a latent period before transmission (unlike a phytoplasma). Very few live cells in the vector's head are needed for efficient transmission (Hill and Purcell 1995a). Transmission is usually from wild, generally symptomless, hosts to cultivated hosts (grapevines, peaches) rather than between cultivated hosts, though the latter can occur. Feeding preferences of G. atropunctata for different grapevine cultivars have been noted, but these seem to not have a role in field susceptibility (Purcell, 1981). A study of X. fastidiosa vectors on olive trees in Italy suggests that potential vectors may include the phloem-feeder Euscelis lineolatus (Elbeaino et al., 2014b). Further studies are needed to confirm transmission.
The biology of the vectors is important in understanding the epidemiology of the disease. In California, USA, species such as D. minerva and C. fulgida inhabit permanent pastures alongside vineyards, or live on weeds within them. Irrigation and weed control practices which produce foci of preferred host plants, including Cynodon dactylon and Echinochloa crus-galli, increase vector populations and the spread of the bacterium (Purcell and Frazier, 1985). Other species, such as G. atropunctata, multiply on grapevine but overwinter on a variety of other wild hosts, chiefly in riparian vegetation.
Means of Movement and DispersalTop of page
X. fastidiosa is dispersed by its vectors on a local scale. Vectors could also be carried internationally on plants, or fruits, of grapevine, peach or other plants. Tests of grape fruit clusters as an acquisition source for feeding vectors resulted in no transmission by an efficient vector (Purcell and Saunders 1995). Vector eggs are inserted into plant tissues, making visual detection difficult. The bacterium is not passed through the eggs of the vectors. Immature vectors (nymphs) do not retain infectivity after moulting but can rapidly reacquire the bacterium by feeding on infected plants. The bacterium could be spread in planting material, but this has not been considered a major risk for grapevine in North America, where such material does not survive long enough to present a hazard (Goheen and Hopkins, 1988). Hot-water treatments (50°C for 20 min, 45°C for 180 minutes) eliminate viable bacteria from dormant cuttings (Goheen et al., 1973). X. fastidiosa has presumably reached the limit of its natural distribution in America, so that infected planting material presents a relatively minor risk of introduction and establishment. The situation in the EPPO region is quite different, because large areas of susceptible grapevines are at risk, and the bacterium could readily be introduced on grapevine planting material or in a wide range of species of symptomless plant hosts from which vector spread may be possible. Rooted cuttings from grapevines with Pierce’s disease can appear viable and healthy for 3 months, and yet test positive for X. fastidiosa (Montague et al., 2016). Vines infected with X. fastidiosa therefore have the ability to produce asexually propagated cuttings, and potentially contaminate non-infected vineyards. Of greatest importance in preventing the establishment of X. fastidiosa diseases in Europe is to prevent the introduction and establishment of a vector that overwinters as an adult, thus being able to carry the pathogen through the winter and establish infections during spring. A prime candidate is the leafhopper Homalodisca vitripennis, which rapidly invaded California, USA, and shortly thereafter became abundant in French Polynesia and Hawaii. This sharpshooter has an extremely wide host range, and climate-matching models predict it could become established in southern Europe and in subtropical and tropical Africa and Asia (Hoddle, 2004).
Introduction of new vectors can radically change the epidemiology of diseases caused by X. fastidiosa, as demonstrated in southern California in the late 1990s (Blua et al., 1999; Purcell and Saunders, 1999a). Vector abundance, host plant preferences, and other behaviour (flight, transmission efficiency) are key components of the rate of spread of X. fastidiosa.
European Food Safety Authority (2015) provides a list of the known the vectors of X. fastidiosa in the Americas, and potential vectors of the bacterium in Europe. Only one vector species, Philaenus spumarius, has been proved to be able to transmit the strain of X. fastidiosa involved in the outbreak in Apulia, Italy (Saponari et al., 2014). This species is the only confirmed vector identified so far in Europe.
Planting of X. fastidiosa-free trees in new citrus groves is a key control component of citrus variegated chlorosis in Brazil. Movement of vegetative propagative materials may introduce the bacterium over long distances.
Pathway VectorsTop of page
|Clothing, footwear and possessions||Bacteria in living vector insects or plants (dormant or non-dormant)||Yes|
|Land vehicles||Bacteria in living vector insects||Yes|
|Bacteria in living vector insects or plants (dormant or non-dormant). Cultured bacteria are highly i||Yes|
|Plants or parts of plants||Yes|
Plant TradeTop of page
|Plant parts liable to carry the pest in trade/transport||Pest stages||Borne internally||Borne externally||Visibility of pest or symptoms|
|Bulbs/Tubers/Corms/Rhizomes||Yes||Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope|
|Flowers/Inflorescences/Cones/Calyx||Yes||Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope|
|Fruits (inc. pods)||Yes||Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope|
|Leaves||Yes||Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope|
|Roots||Yes||Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope|
|Seedlings/Micropropagated plants||Yes||Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope|
|Stems (above ground)/Shoots/Trunks/Branches||Yes||Pest or symptoms not visible to the naked eye but usually visible under light microscope|
|True seeds (inc. grain)||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|
|Growing medium accompanying plants|
Wood PackagingTop of page
|Wood Packaging not known to carry the pest in trade/transport|
|Loose wood packing material|
|Processed or treated wood|
|Solid wood packing material with bark|
|Solid wood packing material without bark|
Vectors and Intermediate HostsTop of page
|Bucephalogonia xanthophis||European Food Safety Authority, 2015.||Insect|
|Diceroprocta apache||European Food Safety Authority, 2015.||Insect|
|Dilobopterus costalimae||European Food Safety Authority, 2015.||Insect||Brazil|
|Dorisiana viridis||European Food Safety Authority, 2015.||Insect|
|Graphocephala atropunctata||European Food Safety Authority, 2015.||Insect|
|Homalodisca vitripennis||European Food Safety Authority, 2015.||Insect|
|Philaenus spumarius||European Food Safety Authority, 2015.||Insect|
ImpactTop of page
X. fastidiosa precludes a profitable commercial production of susceptible bunch grapes (Vitis vinifera) in most of the south-eastern USA, where the pathogen is endemic in natural vegetation, vectors abound, a mild winter climate allows good bacterial survival, and temperatures during the spring and summer support rapid bacterial growth. It causes severe localized losses in California and western Texas, USA, and Mexico. Peach and plum crops in the coastal plain of the Gulf of Mexico and the southern Atlantic states (Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana) in the USA are severely affected by phony disease.
Losses to X. fastidiosa caused by tree leaf scorches in a growing number of tree species (oaks, mulberry, maple, sweet gum, sycamore (plane), elm) do not ordinarily include direct mortality and have not been calculated, but are probably substantial. Sycamore leaf scorch has destroyed young plantations for sycamore pulp wood (Leininger et al., 2001). During the 1990s, a strain of X. fastidiosa that causes a lethal disease of oleander in California (Hendson et al., 2001), and the rapid dissemination of citrus strains in Brazil illustrated the rapidity with which new strains can spread.
Citrus variegated chlorosis causes major losses in Brazil and the Missiones district of Argentina. According the Fundecitrus sampling (http://www.fundecitrus.com.br/english/est_cvc_us.html#inc_cvc), three major citrus regions had 44-63% of commercial trees with fruit symptoms in 2005. It will probably ultimately affect citrus production in all South American citrus east of the Andes. Plum leaf scorch causes the loss of entire orchards in Brazil and Paraguay within several years after the disease first appears in orchards.
Coffee leaf scorch has caused uncalculated losses, especially in some newer coffee cultivars. It has the potential to become a major new problem in regions with high populations of xylem sap-feeders, all of which are likely to be vectors.
In the USA, within the main areas where X. fastidiosa occurs naturally (coastal plains of the Gulf of Mexico), Vitis vinifera and V. labrusca cannot be cultivated because they are rapidly infected due to high rates of natural spread. As a consequence, only selections of V. rotundifolia (muscadine) and specially bred resistant hybrids can be cultivated. The same situation exists throughout tropical America. In California, however, X. fastidiosa occurs only in 'hot spots'. V. vinifera has to be cultivated outside these hot spots. There have been considerable losses in the past, before this situation was clarified. Vector habitats can be eliminated as a preventative measure, but this is not possible in all situations. Insecticide treatment against its vectors has been only partially successful (Purcell, 1979). Antibiotic treatment of grapevines against X. fastidiosa is not effective enough for commercial use and has unfavourable health and environmental characteristics. The recent establishment in California of an invasive species, Homalodisca vitripennis, dramatically increased the risks of Pierce's disease losses (Blua et al., 1999; Purcell and Saunders, 1999a).
Pierce's disease is thus a major constraint on grapevine production in the USA and tropical AmericaIt does not occur in all grapevine-producing areas of the USA largely because of climatic constraints. However, the incidence of the disease can dramatically increase with the introduction of new vectors, as illustrated in California with H. vitripennis.
By contrast, phony disease of peach does not kill trees or cause dieback, but it does significantly reduce the size and number of fruits. An analysis of biophysical effects on peach trees (Anderson and French,1987) found the disease was extremely important in the south-eastern USA in the 1940s, when about half of the trees in 5-year-old orchards were often found to be affected and older orchards entirely so. However, the efficient control methods now available (insecticides, destruction of infected trees, elimination of wild host plants around orchards) allow better control, except in areas where incidence is very high.
The impact of X. fastidiosa and olive quick decline syndrome in Italy is yet to be fully determined. However, it is estimated that the infection (as of October 2015) covers about 10,000 ha of arable land, accounting for about one million infected trees. Olive/oil production is a primary asset to the Apulia region of Italy (Martelli et al., 2016).
Environmental ImpactTop of page
No ecological changes have been documented. Pierce's disease may limit the distribution of grape species in eastern North America, as all native grape species in the south-eastern USA are tolerant of X. fastidiosa, and the endemic grape species in north-eastern North America are susceptible. Sycamore (Platanus) populations in the southern USA are more tolerant or resistant than are more northerly sycamore populations. These trends may occur in other, as yet, unstudied forest species.
The European Food Safety Authority identified two separate categories of environmental consequences: the direct and indirect impact on the host plants themselves, and the indirect impact caused by the control methods implemented against the disease, in particular insecticide treatments.
Impact: BiodiversityTop of page
No quantitatively documented impacts on biodiversity have been reported, but diseases of forest trees (oak, sycamore, maple, liquidamber) in eastern North America may affect forest biodiversity (including faunal diversity) where these diseases are most severe. The intensive use of insecticide treatments implemented to limit disease transmission and control the insect vector is likely to have numerous far reaching consequences for the environment, for example through modification of food webs (European Food Safety Authority, 2015).
Threatened SpeciesTop of page
|Threatened Species||Conservation Status||Where Threatened||Mechanism||References||Notes|
|Lupinus westianus var. aridorum (scrub lupine)||NT (IUCN red list: Near threatened) NT (IUCN red list: Near threatened); USA ESA listing as endangered species USA ESA listing as endangered species||Florida||Pathogenic||Stout et al., 2001|
Social ImpactTop of page
Pierce's disease precludes the commercial culture of bunch grapes (Vitis vinifera) in the south-eastern USA and limits profitable commercial peach culture near the Gulf of Mexico and south Atlantic coast. There may be similar but still unevaluated impacts on other crops such as lucerne and plum. Citrus variegated chlorosis disease is not present in over a third of the main orange crop in Brazil, causing losses in the world's largest crop of sweet orange (Fundecitrus, 2006). The intensive use of insecticide treatments implemented to limit disease transmission and control the insect vector is likely to have numerous far reaching consequences for the environment, for example, through modification of food webs (European Food Safety Authority, 2015).
Risk and Impact FactorsTop of page Impact mechanisms
DiagnosisTop of page
The most sensitive and reliable detection method is polymerase chain reaction (Minsavage et al., 1994). Positive results have been obtained with lucerne, peach, oak, citrus, oleander, plum and numerous grape and almond strains with the Minsavage et al. primer. ELISA is less sensitive and problems have arisen with false positives. Culturing on PW medium (Davis et al., 1983) provides definitive proof of living bacteria in a plant, estimates of populations of viable bacteria (Hill and Purcell, 1995a), and facilitates later strain identification.
Work by Pooler et al. (1997) allows a much larger sized sample of plant tissue to be processed for PCR and avoids plant inhibitors, which are probably the biggest obstacle to using PCR to detect X. fastidiosa in plant materials, in addition to the irregular distribution of the bacterium within plants making it very easy to miss in the small tissue samples used for PCR. Some plants have inhibitors of PCR that a typical DNA extraction procedure would not completely avoid.
Li et al. (2013) have recently developed two TaqMan-based assays, one targeting the 16S rDNA signature region for the identification of X. fastidiosa at the species level and the other specific identification of the citrus variegated chlorosis (CVC) strains (Li et al., 2013).
Detection and InspectionTop of page
Symptoms are not reliable for detection of infected plants in transit.
X. fastidiosa can be detected microscopically (light or electron) in vessels in cross-sections of petioles (French et al., 1977) or by examining xylem sap squeezed from symptomatic stems or petioles or flushed from stems or petioles onto microscope slides (De Lima et al., 1998). Flushing of xylem sap from shoots with a pressure chamber allows the testing of larger sample sizes and avoids inhibitors for PCR (Bextine and Miller, 2004). Methods such as grafting to susceptible indicator plants or vector tests (Hutchins et al., 1953) are still available, and may have their place in certification schemes in which woody indicators are routinely used. X. fastidiosa can also be isolated onto suitable selective media (Davis et al., 1978, 1983; Raju et al., 1982; Wells et al., 1983). The identity of cultured bacteria can be confirmed by SDS-PAGE (Bazzi et al., 1994). Serological methods are less sensitive (10- to 100-fold) than culture but are the easiest means of detecting and identifying the bacterium, by ELISA or use of fluorescent antibodies (French et al., 1978; Walter, 1987; Hopkins and Adlerz, 1988; Sherald and Lei, 1991). Strains differ in quantitative reaction to antisera and in ease and efficiency of culture. DNA hybridization probes and PCR primers specific to X. fastidiosa have been developed (Firrao and Bazzi, 1994; Minsavage et al., 1994). X. fastidiosa can also be detected in its insect vectors (Yonce and Chang, 1987). The characterization and identification of strains chiefly employs molecular genetic methods (e.g., Chen et al., 1992; Hendson et al., 2001; Coletta-Filho et al., 2003), and can be expected to remain indefinitely in a state of change.
Different diagnostic methods used or developed for the detection and identification of X. fastidiosa are detailed in Janse (2009). Recent advances in detection include on-site molecular detection using real-time loop-mediated isothermal amplification (Yaseen et al., 2015).
Similarities to Other Species/ConditionsTop of page
Zinc deficiency may cause similar patterns of chlorosis in grape and citrus but are distinctively different in pattern to an experienced observer. Diseased plants do not respond to zinc fertilization. In grape, esca (France, Italy, Spain) or measles (USA) has leaf scorching symptoms similar to Pierce's disease, but esca normally occurs early in the summer (June, July in Europe) following at least several days of hot weather, whereas Pierce's disease symptoms begin to appear after fruits begin to colour (verasion).
Prevention and ControlTop of page
Grapevine-growing countries should prohibit or severely restrict importation of grapevine planting material from countries where X. fastidiosa occurs. As recommended by EPPO (1990), if planting material is imported under licence, it should be maintained in post-entry quarantine for 2 years and shown to be free from the pest. Imported plants and fruits should be free from vectors, possibly by use of an appropriate treatment. A temperature treatment has been shown to eliminate the bacterium (45°C for at least 3 h) (Goheen et al., 1973), and may have potential as a phytosanitary measure.
Citrus-growing countries should similarly prohibit or severely restrict importation of citrus planting material from South America. Peach and other Prunus material from a country where the peach or plum strain occurs should come from a reliable certification scheme, with particular emphasis on preventing re-infection of healthy material via the vectors.
While the hazard presented by X. fastidiosa in other hosts (oak, plane, maple and others) still has to be evaluated, inspection services should be aware that these hosts and the many symptomless hosts also present a certain risk.
Chemical control of Xylella diseases has not been successful in the field. Tetracycline drenches cause a temporary remission of symptoms in potted grapevines (Hopkins and Mortenson, 1971).
ReferencesTop of page
Adlerz WC, Bistline FW, Russo LW, Hopkins DL, 1989. Rate of spread of citrus blight reduced when sharpshooter leafhoppers (Homoptera: Cicadellidae) are controlled. Journal of Economic Entomology, 82(6):1733-1737
Almeida RPP, Blua MJ, Lopes JRS, Purcell AH, 2005. Vector transmission of Xylella fastidiosa: applying fundamental knowledge to generate disease management strategies. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 98(6):775-786. http://www.esa.catchword.org
Almeida RPP, Purcell AH, 2003. Biological traits of Xylella fastidiosa strains from grapes and almonds. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 69:7447-7452.
Amanifar N, Taghavi M, Izadpanah K, Babaei G, 2014. Isolation and pathogenicity of Xylella fastidiosa from grapevine and almond in Iran. Phytopathologia Mediterranea, 53(2):318-327. http://www.fupress.com/pm/
Berisha B, Chen YD, Xu BY, Chen TA, 1996. Isolation of Pierce's disease bacteria from grapevines in Europe. Phytopathology, 86:S119.
Bextine BR, Miller TA, 2004. Comparison of whole-tissue and xylem fluid collection techniques to detect Xylella fastidiosa in grapevine and oleander. Plant Disease, 88:600-604.
Bhattacharyya A, Stilwagen S, Ivanova N, D'Souza M, Bernal A, Lykidis A, Kapatral V, Anderson I, Larsen N, Los T, Reznik G, Selkov EJr, Walunas TL, Feil H, Feil WS, Purcell A, Lassez JL, Hawkins TL, Haselkorn R, Overbeek R, Predki PF, Kyrpides NC, 2002. Whole-genome comparative analysis of three phytopathogenic Xylella fastidiosa strains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99(19):12403-12408; 32 ref.
Bosso L, Febbraro Mdi, Cristinzio G, Zoina A, Russo D, 2016. Shedding light on the effects of climate change on the potential distribution of Xylella fastidiosa in the Mediterranean basin. Biological Invasions, 18(6):1759-1768. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10530-016-1118-1
Bosso L, Russo D, Febbraro Mdi, Cristinzio G, Zoina A, 2016. Potential distribution of Xylella fastidiosa in Italy: a maximum entropy model. Phytopathologia Mediterranea, 55(1):62-72. http://www.fupress.net/index.php/pm/article/view/16429
Brlansky RH, Davis CL, Lee RF, Timmer LW, 1993. Immunogold localization of xylem-inhabiting bacteria affecting citrus in Argentina and Brazil. In: Moreno LWT, DaGraca JV, eds. Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the International Organization of Citrus Virologists, New Delhi, India. Riverside, California, USA, 311-319.
Brlansky RH, Davis CL, Timmer LW, Howd DS, Contreras J, 1991. Xylem-limited bacteria in citrus from Argentina with symptoms of citrus variegated chlorosis. Phytopathology, 81:1210.
Carlucci A, Lops F, Marchi G, Mugnai L, Surico G, 2013. Has Xylella fastidiosa "chosen" olive trees to establish in the Mediterranean basin? Phytopathologia Mediterranea, 52(3):541-544. http://www.fupress.com/pm/
Chang CJ, Garnier M, Zreik L, Rossetti V, Bové JM, 1993. Citrus variegated chlorosis: cultivation of the causal bacterium and experimental reproduction of the disease. Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the International Organisation of Citrus Virologists, New Delhi, India.
Chang CJ, Garnier M, Zreik L, Rossetti V, Bove JM, 1993. Culture and serological detection of the xylem-limited bacterium causing citrus variegated chlorosis and its identification as a strain of Xylella fastidiosa. Current Microbiology, 27(3):137-142
Chen J, Lamikanra O, Chang CJ, Hopkins DL, 1995. Randomly amplified polymorphic DNA analysis of Xylella fastidiosa Pierce's disease and oak leaf scorch pathotypes. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 61(5):1688-1690; 22 ref.
Coletta Filho HD, Borges KM, Machado MA, 2000. Occurrence of Xylella fastidiosa in sweet orange candidate mother trees and percentage of transmission to nursery tree using infected budwood. Laranja, 21(2):335-343; 14 ref.
Coletta-Filho HD, Francisco CS, Lopes JRS, Oliveira AFde, Silva LFde Oda, 2016. First report of olive leaf scorch in Brazil, associated with Xylella fastidiosa subsp. pauca. Phytopathologia Mediterranea, 55(1):130-135. http://www.fupress.net/index.php/pm/article/view/17259
Costa HS, Raetz E, Pinckard TR, 2004. Plant hosts of Xylella fastidiosa in and near southern California vineyards. Plant Disease, 88:1255-1261.
Davis MJ, Purcell AH, Thomson SV, 1978. Pierce's disease of grapevines: isolation of the causal bacterium. Science, 199:75-77.
Davis MJ, Raju BC, Brlansky RH, Lee RF, Timmer LW, Norris RC, McCoy RE, 1983. Periwinkle wilt bacterium: axenic culture, pathogenicity and relationships to other Gram-negative, xylem-inhabiting bacteria. Phytopathology, 73(11):1510-1515
De Lima JEO, Miranda VS, Roberto SR, Carlos EF, 1996. Distribuit¦o de Xylella fastidiosa no cafeeiro, nas regiSes cafeeiras, eseu isolamento in vitro. Fitopatologia, 21(3): 392-393.
Dellapé G, Logarzo GA, Virla EG, Paradell SL, 2011. New records on the geographical distribution of South American sharpshooters (Cicadellidae: Cicadellinae: Proconiini) and their potential as vectors of Xylella fastidiosa. Florida Entomologist, 94(2):364-366. http://www.fcla.edu/FlaEnt/
Elbeaino T, Valentini F, Kubaa RA, Moubarak P, Yaseen T, Digiaro M, 2014. Multilocus sequence typing of Xylella fastidiosa isolated from olive affected by "olive quick decline syndrome" in Italy. Phytopathologia Mediterranea, 53(3):533-542. http://www.fupress.com/pm/
Elbeaino T, Yaseen T, Valentini F, Moussa IEB, Mazzoni V, D'Onghia AM, 2014. Identification of three potential insect vectors of Xylella fastidiosa in southern Italy. Phytopathologia Mediterranea, 53(2):328-332. http://www.fupress.com/pm/
EPPO, 1990. Specific quarantine requirements. EPPO Technical Documents, No. 1008. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization.
EPPO, 2013. First report of Xylella fastidiosa in the EPPO region. Special Alert. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. http://www.eppo.int/QUARANTINE/special_topics/Xylella_fastidiosa/Xylella_fastidiosa.htm
EPPO, 2014. PQR database. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. http://www.eppo.int/DATABASES/pqr/pqr.htm
EPPO, 2015. PQR database. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization.
EPPO, 2016. EPPO Global database (available online). Paris, France: EPPO. https://gd.eppo.int/
EPPO, 2018. EPPO Global Database. https://gd.eppo.int/
European Food Safety Authority, 2015. Scientific opinion on the risks to plant health posed by Xylella fastidiosa in the EU territory, with the identification and evaluation of risk reduction options. EFSA Journal, 13(1):3989. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/3989.pdf
European Food Safety Authority, 2016. Scientific opinion on four statements questioning the EU control strategy against Xylella fastidiosa EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH) Requestor: European Commission Question number: EFSA-Q-2016-00180. EFSA Journal, 14(3):4450. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4450
Feil H, Feil WS, Purcell AH, 2003. Effects of date of inoculation on the within-plant movement of Xylella fastidiosa and persistence of Pierce's disease within field grapevines. Phytopathology, 93(2):244-251; 24 ref.
Freitag JH, 1951. Host range of the Pierce's disease virus of grapes as determined by insect transmission. Phytopathology, 41:920-934.
Fundecitrus, 2006. Fund for Citrus Plant Protection. Citrus Variegated Chlorosis (CVC) statistics. http://www.fundecitrus.com.br/nglish/est_cvc_us.html.
Goheen AC, Hopkins DL, 1988. Pierce's disease. In: Compendium of Grape Diseases. St Paul, Minnesota, USA: APS Press, 44-45.
Goheen AC, Nyland G, Lowe SK, 1973. Association of a rickettsialike organism with Pierce's disease of grapevines and alfalfa dwarf and heat therapy of the disease in grapevines. Phytopathology, 63(3):341-345
Goodwin P, Purcell AH, 1992. Pierce's disease. In: Grape Pest Management, 2nd Edition. Oakland, USA: University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, 76-84.
Goodwin PH, DeVay JE, Meredith CP, 1988. Physiological responses of Vitis vinifera cv. 'Chardonnay' to infection by the Pierce's disease bacterium. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology, 32(1):17-32
Goodwin PH, Zhang S, 1997. Distribution of Xylella fastidiosa in southern Ontario as determined by the polymerase chain reaction. Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology, 19:13-18.
Guevara J, 1997. Occurrence of Pierce's Disease (Xyllela fastidiosa) in grape of the Guadalupe Valley, Baja California, Mexico. Phytopathology, 87:S36.
Guldr ME, Caglar BK, Castellano MA, 2005. First report of almond leaf scorch in Turkey. Journal of Plant Pathology, 87:246.
Habib W, Nigro F, Gerges E, Jreijiri F, Al-Masri Y, El-Riachy M, Choueiri E, 2016. Xylella fastidiosa does not occur in Lebanon. Journal of Phytopathology, 164(6):395-403. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1439-0434
Haelterman RM, Tolocka PA, Roca ME, Guzmán FA, Fernández FD, Otero ML, 2015. First presumptive diagnosis of Xylella fastidiosa causing olive scorch in Argentina. Journal of Plant Pathology, 97(2):393. http://sipav.org/main/jpp/index.php/jpp/article/view/3357/2027
Hartung JS, Beretta J, Brlansky RH, Spisso J, Lee RF, 1994. Citrus variegated chlorosis bacterium: axenic culture, pathogenicity, and serological relationships with other strains of Xylella fastidiosa. Phytopathology, 84(6):591-597
Hendson M, Purcell AH, Chen DQ, Smart C, Guilhabert M, Kirkpatrick B, 2001. Genetic diversity of Pierce's disease strains and other pathotypes of Xylella fastidiosa. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 67(2):895-903; 37 ref.
Hering M, 1966. Occurrence of the meadow spittle bug, Philaenus spumarius, on vines. Weinberg und Keller, 13:459-462.
Hewitt WB, 1958. The probable home of Pierce's disease virus. Plant Disease Reporter, 42:211-215.
Hewitt WB, Frazier NW, Jacob HE, Freitag JH, 1942. Pierce's disease of grapevines. California Agricultural Experimental Station Circular, 353: 1-32.
Hoddle MS, 2004. The potential adventive geographic range of glassy-winged sharpshooter, Homalodisca coagulata and the grape pathogen Xylella fastidiosa: implications for California and other grape growing regions of the world. Crop Protection, 23:691-699.
Hopkins DL, 1988. Xylella fastidiosa: a xylem-limited bacterial pathogen of plants. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 27:271-290.
Hopkins DL, Mortensen JA, 1971. Suppression of Pierce's disease symptoms by tetracycline antibiotics. Plant Disease Reporter, 55:610-612.
Hopkins DL, Thompson CM, Wichman RL, Russo LW, Bistline FW, 1996. Inoculation of mature trees with Xylella fastidiosa produces citrus blight. Phytopathology, 86:S106.
Hutchins LM, 1933. Identification and control of the phony disease of the peach. Georgia Office of State Entomology Bulletin, 78: 55 pp.
Hutchins LM, Cochran WF, Turner WF, Weinberger JH, 1953. Transmission of phony disease virus from tops of certain affected peach and plum trees. Phytopathology, 43:691-696.
IPPC, 2016. Information on Pest Status in the Republic of Lithuania in 2015. IPPC Official Pest Report, No. LTU-01/2. Rome, Italy: FAO. https://www.ippc.int/
Janse JD, 2010. Diagnostic methods for phytopathogenic bacteria of stone fruits and nuts in COST 873. Bulletin OEPP/EPPO Bulletin [EPPO Conference on Diagnostics by the Food and Environment Research Agency (Fera), York, UK, 10-15 May 2009.], 40(1):68-85. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/loi/epp
Krugner R, Sisterson MS, Chen JC, Stenger DC, Johnson MW, 2014. Evaluation of olive as a host of Xylella fastidiosa and associated sharpshooter vectors. Plant Disease, 98(9):1186-1193. http://apsjournals.apsnet.org/loi/pdis
Laranjeira FF, 1997. Ten years of citrus variegated chlorosis: What do we know? Laranja, 18:123-141.
Lee RF, Derrick KS, Beretta MJG, Chagas CM, Rosetti V, 1991. Citrus variegated chlorosis: a new destructive disease of citrus in Brazil. Citrus Industry, October 1991, 12-14.
Leininger TD, Britton KO, Chang CJ, 2001. Determining the role of bacterial leaf scorch, canker stain, and botryosphaeria canker in the dieback of plantation sycamores in the Southeastern United States. Shade tree wilt diseases. Proceedings from Wilt Diseases of Shade Trees: a National Conference, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA, 25-28 August, 1999, 209-216; 24 ref.
Leu HH, Leu LS, Lin CP, 1998. Development and application of monoclonal antibodies against Xylella fastidiosa, the causal bacterium of pear leaf scorch. Journal of Phytopathology, 146(1):31-37; 22 ref.
Li WB, Pria WD, Lacava PM, Qin X, Hartung JS, 2003. Presence of Xylella fastidiosa in sweet orange fruit and seeds and its transmission to seedlings. Phytopathology, 93:953-958.
Li WB, Pria WDJr, Teixeira DC, Miranda VS, Ayres AJ, Franco CF, Costa MG, He CX, Costa PI, Hartung JS, 2001. Coffee leaf scorch caused by a strain of Xylella fastidiosa from citrus. Plant Disease, 85(5):501-505; 21 ref.
Li WB, Teixeira DC, Hartung JS, Huang Q, Duan YP, Zhou LJ, Chen JC, Lin H, Lopes S, Ayres AJ, Levy L, 2013. Development and systematic validation of qPCR assays for rapid and reliable differentiation of Xylella fastidiosa strains causing citrus variegated chlorosis. Journal of Microbiological Methods, 92(1):79-89. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167701212003417
Li WB, Zhou CH, Pria J·nior WD, Teixeira DC, Miranda VS, Pereira EO, Ayres AJ, He CX, Costa PI, Hartung JS, 2002. Citrus and coffee strains of Xylella fastidiosa induce Pierce's disease in grapevine. Plant Disease, 86(11):1206-1210; 40 ref.
Lima JEOde, Miranda VS, Hartung JS, Brlansky RH, Coutinho A, Roberto SR, Carlos EF, 1998. Coffee leaf scorch bacterium: axenic culture, pathogenicity, and comparison with Xylella fastidiosa of citrus. Plant Disease, 82(1):94-97; 32 ref.
Lopes JRS, Beretta MJG, Harakava R, 1996. Confirmação da transmissão por cigarrinhas do agente causal da clorose variegada dos citros, Xylella fastidiosa. Fitopatologia Brasileira, 21:343.
Marcelletti S, Scortichini M, 2016. Genome-wide comparison and taxonomic relatedness of multiple Xylella fastidiosa strains reveal the occurrence of three subspecies and a new Xylella species. Archives of Microbiology, 198(8):803-812. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00203-016-1245-1
Martelli GP, Boscia D, Porcelli F, Saponari M, 2016. The olive quick decline syndrome in south-east Italy: a threatening phytosanitary emergency. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 144(2):235-243. http://rd.springer.com/journal/10658
Meng YZ, Li YX, Galvani CD, 2005. Upstream migration of Xylella fastidiosa via pilus-driven twitching motility. Journal of Bacteriology, 187:5560-5567.
Minsavage GV, Thompson CM, Hopkins DL, Leite RMVBC, Stall RE, 1994. Development of a polymerase chain reaction protocol for detection of Xylella fastidiosa in plant tissue. Phytopathology, 84(5):456-461
Montague T, Hellman EW, Appel D, Krawitzky M, 2016. Assexual propagation of grapevine transmits Pierce's disease pathogen (Xylella fastidiosa) to rooted cuttings. International Journal of Fruit Science, 16(2):135-149.
Nigro F, Boscia D, Antelmi I, Ippolito A, 2013. Fungal species associated with a severe decline of olive in southern Italy. Journal of Plant Pathology, 95(3):668. http://sipav.org/main/jpp/index.php/jpp/article/view/2985
Nunney L, Hopkins DL, Morano LD, Russell SE, Stouthamer R, 2014. Intersubspecific recombination in Xylella fastidiosa strains native to the United States: infection of novel hosts associated with an unsuccessful invasion. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 80(3):1159-1169. http://aem.asm.org/content/80/3/1159.abstract
Nunney L, Yuan XL, Bromley R, Hartung J, Montero-Astúa M, Moreira L, Ortiz B, Stouthamer R, 2010. Population genomic analysis of a bacterial plant pathogen: novel insight into the origin of Pierce's disease of grapevine in the U.S. PLoS ONE, No.November:e15488. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0015488
Nunney L, Yuan XL, Bromley RE, Stouthamer R, 2012. Detecting genetic introgression: high levels of intersubspecific recombination found in Xylella fastidiosa in Brazil. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 78(13):4702-4714. http://aem.asm.org/content/78/13/4702.abstract
Nyland GA, Goheen AC, Lowe SK, Kirkpatrick HC, 1973. The ultrastructure of a rickettsia-like organism from a peach-tree affected with phony disease. Phytopathology, 63:1275-1278.
Paião FG, Meneguim AM, Casagrande EC, Leite RP, 2002. Envolvimento de cigarras (Homoptera, Cicadidae) na transmissão de Xylella fastidiosa em cafeeiro. Fitopatologia Brasileira, 27:67.
Pavan F, Gambon N, 2003. Life cycle and phenology of the green leafhopper, Cicadella viridis (L.) (Homoptera: Cicadellidae), in two different climatic areas of northeastern Italy. Bollettino di Zoologia Agraria e di Bachicoltura, 35:241-256.
Poltronieri LS, Cunha Junior JO, Trindade DR, Cardoso SS, Brioso PS, 2005. Molecular detection of Xylella fastidiosa in citrus in the state of Para, Brazil. (Detecção molecular de Xylella fastidiosa em citros no Estado do Pará.) Fitopatologia Brasileira, 30(2):199. http://www.scielo.br/pdf/fb/v30n2/a18v30n2.pdf
Pooler MR, Myung IS, Bentz J, Sherald J, Hartung JS, 1997. Detection of Xylella fastidiosa in potential insect vectors by immunomagnetic separation and nested polymerase chain reaction. Letters in Applied Microbiology, 25(2):123-126; 27 ref.
Raju BC, Nome SF, Docampo D, Goheen AC, Nyland G, Lowe SK, 1980. Alternative hosts of Pierces disease of grapevines that occur adjacent to grape growing areas in California, USA. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 31(2):144-148
Raju BC, Wells JM, Nyland G, Brlansky RH, Lowe SK, 1982. Plum leaf scald: isolation, culture, and pathogenicity of the causal agent. Phytopathology, 72:1460-1466.
Rakitov RA, 2004. Powdering of egg nests with brochosomes and related sexual dimorphism in leafhoppers (Insecta, Hemiptera, Cicadellidae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 140:353-381.
Randall JJ, Goldberg NP, Kemp JD, Radionenko M, French JM, Olsen MW, Hanson SF, 2009. Genetic analysis of a novel Xylella fastidiosa subspecies found in the southwestern United States. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 75(17):5631-5638. http://aem.asm.org
Rieuf P, 1962. Principal Vine diseases in Morocco. Al Awamia Revue de Recherche Agronomique Maroccaine, 5:129-138.
Roberto SR, Coutinho A, Lima JEOde, Miranda VS, Carlos EF, 1996. Transmission of Xylella fastidiosa by the leafhoppers Dilobopterus costalimai, Acrogonia terminalis and Oncometopia facialis in citrus. Fitopatologia Brasileira, 21(4):517-518; 6 ref.
Rodas V, 1994. Convivencia com a clorose variegada dos citros. Laranja, 15:129-134.
Rosato YB, Rodrigues NJ, Miranda VS, Carlos EF, Manfio GP, 1998. Diversity of a Xylella fastidiosa population isolated from Citrus sinensis affected by citrus variegated chlorosis in Brazil. Systematic & Applied Microbiology, 21:593-598.
Saponari M, Boscia D, Altamura G, D'Attoma G, Cavalieri V, Loconsole G, Zicca S, Dongiovanni C, Palmisano F, Susca L, Morelli M, Potere O, Saponari A, Fumarola G, Carolo MDi, Tavano D, Savino V, Martelli GP, 2016. Pilot project on Xylella fastidiosa to reduce risk assessment uncertainties. EFSA supporting publication 2016:EN-1013. 60 pp. https://www.efsa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/scientific_output/files/main_documents/1013e
Saponari M, Loconsole G, Cornara D, Yokomi RK, Stradis Ade, Boscia D, Bosco D, Martelli GP, Krugner R, Porcelli F, 2014. Infectivity and transmission of Xylella fastidiosa by Philaenus spumarius (Hemiptera: Aphrophoridae) in Apulia, Italy. Journal of Economic Entomology, 107(4):1316-1319. http://docserver.ingentaconnect.com/deliver/connect/esa/00220493/v107n4/s4.pdf?expires=1417689363&id=0000&titleid=10264&checksum=AA27FF807E35E05F19AA8D60C6E92702
Schaad NW, Postnikova E, Lacy G, Fatmi MB, Chang CJ, 2004. Xylella fastidiosa subspecies: Xylella fastidiosa subsp piercei, subsp nov., X-fastidiosa subsp multiplex subsp. nov., and X-fastidiosa subsp pauca subsp nov. Systematic and Applied Microbiology, 27:290-300.
Schuenzel EL, Scally M, Stouthamer R, Nunney L, 2005. A multigene phylogenetic study of clonal diversity and divergence in North American strains of the plant pathogen Xylella fastidiosa. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 71:3832-3839.
Severin HHP, 1949. Transmission of the virus of Pierce's disease by leafhoppers. Hilgardia, 19:190-202.
Sherald JL, 1993b. Bacterial leaf scorch of landscape trees. Center for Urban Ecology Information Bulletin. Washington, DC, USA: National Park Service.
Simpson AJG, Reinach FC, Arruda P, Abreu FA, Acencio M, Alvarenga R, Alves LMC, Araya JE, Bala GS, Baptista CS, Barros MH, Bonaccorsi ED, Bordin S, BovT JM, Briones MRS, Bueno MRP, Camargo AA, Camargo LEA, Carraro DM, Carrer H, Colauto NB, Colombo C, Costa FF, Costa MCR, Costa-Neto CM, Coutinho LL(et al), 2000. The genome sequence of the plant pathogen Xylella fastidiosa. Nature (London), 406(6792):151-157; 50 ref.
Sluys MAvan, Oliveira MCde, Monteiro-Vitorello CB, Miyaki CY, Furlan LR, Camargo LEA, Silva ACRda, Moon DH, Takita MA, Lemos EGM, Machado MA, Ferro MIT, Silva FRda, Goldman MHS, Goldman GH, Lemos MVF, El-Dorry H, Tsai SM, Carrer H, Carraro DM, Oliveira RCde, Nunes LR, Siqueira WJ, Coutinho LL, Kimura ET, Ferro ES(et al), 2003. Comparative analyses of the complete genome sequences of Pierce's disease and citrus variegated chlorosis strains of Xylella fastidiosa. Journal of Bacteriology, 185(3):1018-1026; 39 ref.
Smart CD, Hendson M, Guilhabert MR, 1998. Seasonal detection of Xylella fastidiosa in grapevines with culture, ELISA and PCR. Phytopathology, 88:S83.
Stoner WN, 1958. Field symptoms indicate occurrence of "alfalfa dwarf" or "Pierce’s disease" virus in Rhode Island. Plant Disease Reporter, 42:573-580.
Stout IJ, Woiak SJ, Bard AM, 2001. Population dynamics of the scrub lupine and some management implications. In: Proceedings of the Florida scrub symposium 2001 [ed. by Zattau DP ]. Jacksonville, Florida, USA: US Fish and Wildlife Service,
Su CC, Chang CJ, Yang WJ, Hsu ST, Tzeng KC, Jan FJ, Deng WL, 2012. Specific characters of 16 rRNA gene and 16S-23S rRNA internal transcribed spacer sequences of Xylella fastidiosa pear leaf scorch strains. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 132:203-216.
Su CC, Deng WL, Jan FJ, Chang CJ, Huang H, Chen J, 2014. Draft genome sequence of Xylella fastidiosa pear leaf scorch strain in Taiwan. Genome Announcements, 2(2):e00166-14. http://genomea.asm.org/content/2/2/e00166-14.full
Su ChiouChu, Chang CJ, Chang CheMing, Shih HsienTzung, Tzeng KuoChing, Jan FuhJyh, Kao ChinWen, Deng WenLing, 2013. Pierce's disease of grapevines in Taiwan: isolation, cultivation and pathogenicity of Xylella fastidiosa. Journal of Phytopathology, 161(6):389-396. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1439-0434
Turner WF, Pollard HN, 1959. Insect transmission of phony peach disease. United States Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin No. 1193.
Van Sluys MA, Monteiro-Vitorello CB, Camargo LEA, 2002. Comparative genomic analysis of plant-associated bacteria. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 40:169-189.
Walter B, 1987. La maladie de Pierce: mieux vaut prévenir que guérir. Phytoma, 390:32-34.
Weimer JL, 1936. Alfalfa dwarf, a virus disease transmissible by grafting. Journal of Agriculture Research, 53:333-347.
Wells JM, Raju BC, Hung HY, Weisburg WG, Mandelco-Paul L, Brenner DJ, 1987. Xylella fastidiosa gen. nov., sp. nov.: Gram-negative, xylem-limited, fastidious plant bacteria related to Xanthomonas spp. International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology, 37(2):136-143
Wistrom C, Purcell AH, 2005. The fate of Xylella fastidiosa in vineyard weeds and other alternate hosts in California. Plant Disease, 89:994-999.
Wong F, Cooksey DA, 2004. Documentation and characterization of Xylella fastidiosa strains in landscape plants. Pierce’s Disease Research Symposium. San Diego, California, USA, 7-10 December, 2004.
Yamamoto PT, Roberto SR, Pria J·nior WD, Felippe MR, Miranda VS, Teixeira Ddo C, Lopes JRS, 2002. Transmission of Xylella fastidiosa by Acrogonia virescens and Homalodisca ignorata (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae) to citrus plants. Summa Phytopathologica, 28(2):178-181; 13 ref.
Yaseen T, Drago S, Valentini F, Elbeaino T, Stampone G, Digiaro M, D'Onghia AM, 2015. On-site detection of Xylella fastidiosa in host plants and in "spy insects" using the real-time loop-mediated isothermal amplification method. Phytopathologia Mediterranea, 54(3):488-496. http://www.fupress.net/index.php/pm/article/view/15250/15850
Yonce CE, 1983. Geographical and seasonal occurrence, abundance, and distribution of phony peach disease vectors and vector response to age and condition of peach orchards and a disease host survey of Johnsongrass for rickettsia-like bacteria in the southeastern United States. Journal of the Georgia Entomological Society, 18(3):410-418
Yonce CE, Chang CJ, 1987. Detection of xylem-limited bacteria from sharpshooter leafhoppers and their feeding hosts in peach environs monitored by culture isolations and ELISA techniques. Environmental Entomology, 16(1):68-71
Yuan XL, Morano L, Bromley R, Spring-Pearson S, Stouthamer R, Nunney L, 2010. Multilocus sequence typing of Xylella fastidiosa causing Pierce's disease and oleander leaf scorch in the United States. Phytopathology, 100(6):601-611.
ContributorsTop of page
19/07/16 Reviewed by:
Rebekah Robinson, Royal Horticultural Society, RHS Garden Wisley, Woking, UK
Distribution MapsTop of page
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/