Downloads provided by UsageCountsCandidatus Liberibacter ̶ Pest Report and Datasheet to support ranking of EU candidate priority pests
EFSA; Baker Richard; Gilioli Gianni; Behring Carsten; Candiani Denise; Andrey, Gogin; Tomasz, Kaluski; +8 Authors
EFSA; Baker Richard; Gilioli Gianni; Behring Carsten; Candiani Denise; Andrey, Gogin; Tomasz, Kaluski; Kinkar Mart; Mosbach-Schulz Olaf; Maria, Neri Franco; Preti Stefano; Chiara, Rosace Maria; Siligato Riccardo; Stancanelli Giuseppe; Sara, Tramontini;
Candidatus Liberibacter ̶ Pest Report and Datasheet to support ranking of EU candidate priority pests
These two files are part of the outputs produced under the mandate M-2017-0056 of the European Commission requesting EFSA for technical assistance in the field of quarantine pests qualifying as priority pests as by Article 6(2) of the Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 on protective measures against pests of plants. Under the mandate EFSA produced: i) 1 methodology report (DOI available at the field "Related/alternate identifiers"), ii) 28 datasheets, one for each of the 28 candidate pests, and iii) 28 pest reports supporting the information provided in the datasheets. EFSA wishes to acknowledge the contribution of Jaime Cubero, Trond Rafoss, Christian Vernière, Antonio Vicent to the EKE and the review conducted by Donato Boscia.
EU; XLS; alpha@efsa.europa.eu
- University of Brescia Italy
- European Food Safety Authority Italy
pest risk assessment, priority pests, detection, spread, http://id.agrisemantics.org/gacs/C1157, yield loss, http://id.agrisemantics.org/gacs/C6599, http://id.agrisemantics.org/gacs/C10491, http://id.agrisemantics.org/gacs/C236, host plants, http://id.agrisemantics.org/gacs/C587, control, quality loss, potential distribution
pest risk assessment, priority pests, detection, spread, http://id.agrisemantics.org/gacs/C1157, yield loss, http://id.agrisemantics.org/gacs/C6599, http://id.agrisemantics.org/gacs/C10491, http://id.agrisemantics.org/gacs/C236, host plants, http://id.agrisemantics.org/gacs/C587, control, quality loss, potential distribution
selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources.This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).1 popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.Average influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).Average impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.Average views 30 downloads 37 - 30views37downloads
selected citations
Citations provided by BIP!
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
Citations provided by BIP!popularityPopularity provided by BIP!
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
Popularity provided by BIP!influenceInfluence provided by BIP!
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
Influence provided by BIP!impulseImpulse provided by BIP!
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
Impulse provided by BIP!viewsViews provided by UsageCounts
Views provided by UsageCountsdownloadsDownloads provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts 1
Average
Average
Average
30
37