National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan

Acknowledgements

This plan has been prepared by the Plant Biosecurity Cooperative Research Centre (PBCRC), with advice from the National Fruit Fly Advisory Committee and the National Plant Biosecurity Strategy Implementation Committee. Numerous individuals and organisations provided input to the National Fruit Fly RD&E Plan during its development and consultation phase.

This National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan is a component of both the National Plant Biosecurity RD&E Strategy (itself a component of the National Primary Industries RD&E Framework) and the National Fruit Fly Strategy (NFFS) (PHA 2008). This plan was endorsed by the National Fruit Fly Advisory Committee in February 2015. This Plan provides direction on the research, development and extension required to fully implement the NFFS.

Further information

National Fruit Fly Strategy http://www.planthealthaustralia.com.au/national-programs/fruit-fly/draft-national-fruit-fly-strategy/

National Plant Biosecurity RD&E Strategyhttp://www.npirdef.org/cms_strategy/20

Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan writing group

Anthony Clarke (Chair) Queensland University of Technology/Plant Biosecurity CRCPat Barkley Private consultantKim James Private consultantJo Luck Plant Biosecurity CRCMichael Robinson Plant Biosecurity CRCPhil Taylor Macquarie UniversityDarryl Barbour Department of Agriculture/Plant Biosecurity CRCPlant Biosecurity CRC Secretariat

Contributions from Heleen Kruger (social sciences), and Peter Leach and Andrew Jessup (market access research). Andrew Jessup also provided comprehensive technical feedback on the consultation.

Plant Biosecurity Cooperative Research Centre

Address: Level 2, Building 22, Innovation Centre University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT 2617

Postal Address: LPO Box 5012, Bruce, ACT 2617

Telephone: +61 2 6201 2882Facsimile: +61 2 6201 5067Email: info@pbcrc.com.auWebsite: www.pbcrc.com.au

ABN: 13 115 589 707

Established and supported under the Cooperative Research Centres Programme.

7. Glossary of terms 32

1

Contents

Executive Summary 2 Background 2 The National Fruit Fly Strategy and a Fruit Fly RD&E Plan 2 Vision of the National Fruit Fly RD&E Plan 2 Key recommendations 3

Introduction 4 The National Fruit Fly Strategy 4 The National Plant Biosecurity RD&E Strategy 4 Thechangingfruitflychallenge 5 Stakeholders 6

Developing the Plan 7 Alignment to national Rural Research and Development Priorities 7

National Research, Development and Extension Plan 8 Vision 8 Objectives 8 New areas of priority 8

RD&E investment recommendations 9 1. Coordination 9 2. Extension, Community and Capacity 9 3.Controllingfruitflies 10 4. Trade and Market access 11 5.FutureIssues 12

Implementation of the National RD&E Plan 13 Situation analysis and Audit 13 Prioritisation process 13 Resources 13 Existing investment mechanisms 13 New investment mechanisms 13

Research,DevelopmentandExtensioninvestmentareas 15 Theme 1: Managing exotic risk 17 Theme 2: Pre-harvest Controls 22 Theme3:Post-harvestmeasures 35 Theme4:Marketaccessandregulatoryissues 40 Theme5:Socialissues 43 Theme 6: Capacity 46 Theme7:Corescience 50

Keydocumentsconsulted 52

Glossary 54

National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan

2 National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan

Background

Nearly 60,000 people are employed in the Australian horticultural sector, growing fruits and vegetables for domestic and export markets. Australia’s horticultural industry is the nation’s third largest agricultural industry, with the total value of Australian horticultural production in 2012-13 being over $9 billion.

Due to a combination of regulatory withdrawal of key insecticides and climate driven changes in pest abundance, Australia’s horticultural sector is currently under serious threat from a group of horticulture specific pest insects, the tephritid fruit flies.

Fruit flies lay their eggs directly into near-ripe and ripe fruits and vegetables, where the eggs hatch into maggots which feed upon the fruit flesh. Over 75% of Australia's fruit and vegetable exports, valued at around $640 million in 2012-13, are susceptible to fruit fly.

An inability to control fruit fly will see the decline and potential loss of some horticultural communities, a reduction in the amount and quality of fresh produce available to Australian consumers and the loss of international markets.

The National Fruit Fly Strategy and a Fruit Fly RD&E Plan

The Draft National Fruit Fly Strategy (NFFS) (Plant Health Australia 2008) provides a comprehensive assessment of Australian fruit fly challenges, and a specific set of recommendations and strategies to address those challenges: the Strategy has been widely endorsed. The NFFS remains current in most respects, although the urgency of the fruit fly problem has become significantly greater.

As part of the NFFS, this National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension (RD&E) Plan establishes the future direction for improving the focus, efficiency and effectiveness of fruit fly RD&E for Australia’s horticultural industries.

The Fruit Fly RD&E Plan recognises a wide range of stakeholders, from individual growers, through specialist RD&E funders and providers, to the State and Australian governments. These stakeholder groups were involved in the development of this Plan, either through representation on the expert writing group or through a national consultation process.

Vision of the National Fruit Fly RD&E Plan

The vision of this Plan aligns with that of the NFFS: Fruit flies are not a constraint to sustainable production or a significant barrier to national and international market access.

Consistent with this vision, the Plan identifies the RD&E investments areas required to manage the risks to the economy, industry, and community, of (i) exotic fruit fly pests entering and establishing; and (ii) of endemic species limiting production and market access. The Plan is driven by the principles that fruit fly RD&E needs to benefit growers and allow them to maintain viable businesses; and that fruit fly RD&E is not just a grower issue but needs to involve the whole community.

This RD&E Plan has two major components. The first half of the document identifies broad areas of RD&E needs, to manage fruit fly both now and in the future. The second half of the document provides detailed, specific recommendations for RD&E investment areas, which are broken down into seven themes:

• Theme 1: Managing Exotic Risk

• Theme 2: Pre-harvest Controls

• Theme 3: Post-harvest measures

• Theme 4: Market access and regulatory issues

• Theme 5: Social issues

• Theme 6: Capacity

• Theme 7: Core science

The broad RD&E needs identified in the first half of the document are linked to the detailed RD&E investment areas.

Queensland fruit fly (Bactrocera tryoni) is a significant horticultural pest which can infest many varieties of fruit

and vegetables - photo by Jaye Newman.

Executive Summary

National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan 3

Key recommendations

The following recommendations align with the five major areas for fruit fly RD&E investment within this plan:

• Coordination

• Extension, Community and Capacity

• Controlling Fruit Flies

• Trade and Market Access

• Future Issues

This Plan recommends that;

1. National coordination for fruit fly RD&E and improved resourcing is urgently needed to maximise the benefits gained from RD&E investment and to ensure consistent information is provided to growers and other end-users. A coordinated National RD&E Plan is integral to the successful delivery of the NFFS and, as such, the National Fruit Fly Advisory Committee should investigate the different contemporary models by which such coordination and resourcing could be achieved and seek to implement the most appropriate.

2. There is a major need for regional development and extension of fruit fly research, including working directly with growers to trial and develop control strategies optimized for local regions and crops. Urgent consideration should be given to the models for provision of fruit fly development and extension services in Australia’s major horticultural production areas, including by the private sector.

3. R&D support continues to be provided for biosecurity preparedness and quarantine activities targeted at preventing the entry and establishment of offshore fruit fly threats. Particular focus should be applied to mitigating the risk posed by Oriental fruit fly.

4. RD&E activities targeting rapid replacement options for dimethoate and fenthion should focus on the registration of new chemicals and new uses for existing registered chemicals, and optimisation of existing controls such as MAT, protein bait spray, crop hygiene and mass trapping.

5. RD&E activities targeting medium to long-term fruit fly infield controls should work within an integrated pest management framework, which will decrease the need and reliance on synthetic pesticides. Such control or eradication strategies include Sterile Insect Technique, mass trapping, crop hygiene, eradication, protein baiting, MAT and use of natural enemies. The combination of these techniques into a systems approach can be used for market access.

6. An R&D focus be applied to fruit fly eradication technologies (such as SIT, MAT and protein baiting), to make the eradication of fruit flies technically easier and hence economically more justifiable.

7. R&D targeting medium and long-term outcomes for fruit fly disinfestation should focus on the development of new methodologies and statistical approaches which can provide the same importer confidence and regulatory approvals as currently achieved, but with reduced logistical effort, time and/or cost.

8. Standardised approaches for market access RD&E and field operations should be developed and implemented to ensure international acceptance of Australian fruit fly market access datasets for fresh commodities. This includes updating national codes of practice for fruit fly.

9. RD&E focus is applied to the ‘other’ fruit fly pests of Australia, including resolving the systematics and taxonomy of the Bactrocera tryoni complex and developing biological data sets (including confirmed host lists) and management tools for native fruit fly species other than B. tryoni and C. capitata.

10. Systematic and taxonomic research should be carried out to develop accurate and user-friendly diagnostics to separate native pest fruit flies from native non-pests and exotics.

11. The National Fruit Fly Advisory Committee coordinates and implements this Plan, supporting an audit of activity, a prioritisation process and exploring resourcing arrangements via existing and/or new funding mechanisms.

Executive Summary

4 National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan

Australian horticulture

The horticultural industries contribute significantly to the prosperity of people living in rural and regional Australia, while providing the fresh fruit and vegetables which all Australians take for granted. Australia’s horticulture industry has long enjoyed a domestic and international reputation for quality, primarily due to our high standards across all stages of the supply chain, from farm to consumer. Nearly 60,000 people are employed in Australia, predominantly through small enterprises, to grow fruit, vegetables and nuts for the domestic and export markets. A further 6,250 are employed in fruit and vegetable processing (DAFF 2013). In 2011-12, based on gross value of production, Australia’s horticultural industry was the nation’s third largest agricultural industry and the sector is growing.

Fruit flies and horticulture

Australia’s horticultural sector is currently under serious threat as a result of one group of pest insects: the tephritid fruit flies. Fruit flies lay their eggs directly into near-ripe and ripe fruit, where the eggs hatch into maggots which feed upon the fruit. The negative impact of fruit fly is caused by two issues. Firstly, direct crop loss, and hence product available for sale, is caused by maggot feeding, the introduction of decay organisms, and premature fruit drop. The second problem of fruit fly is that their presence in production areas can lead to very significant market access loss, as fruit flies are considered by all our trading partners as major quarantine pests. The Minister for Agriculture recently noted that the total value of Australian horticulture production in 2012-13 was over $8 billion. It was also noted that over 75% of Australia's fruit and vegetable exports, valued at around $640 million in 2012-13, are susceptible to fruit fly.

Australia has two serious fruit fly pests, the native Queensland fruit fly (Bactrocera tryoni), found in most (but not all) non-arid areas of the Northern Territory, Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria; and the introduced Mediterranean fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata) established in Western Australia. These are only two of approximately 90 fruit infesting fruit flies within Australia, but of these 90 fewer than 10 have been recorded from commercial fruit. The Oriental fruit fly (Bactrocera dorsalis), arguably the world’s worst fruit fly pest, occurs in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea and continuously threatens to enter Australia through the north. If it did enter, it could rapidly spread through nearly all Australian production areas.

The National Fruit Fly Strategy

The Draft National Fruit Fly Strategy (NFFS) (Plant Health Australia 2008) provides a comprehensive assessment of the Australian fruit fly challenge, and a specific set of recommendations and strategies to address those challenges: the

Strategy has been widely endorsed. The NFFS remains current in most respects, although the urgency of the fruit fly problem has become significantly greater. Within the NFFS, recommendations 13, 14 and 15 deal explicitly with R&D, and most others implicitly.

• Recommendation 13: Maintain and enhance fruit fly research capability, capacity and resources.

• Recommendation 14: Develop a process for ongoing prioritisation of fruit fly research and development activities to provide clear direction for current scientific activities and proactively identify emerging research needs consistent with the directions of this strategy.

• Recommendation 15: Develop and strengthen fruit fly research and development collaborations and linkages, nationally and internationally, and ensure these cover the different sectors involved in fruit fly management.

In mid-July 2014, The Hon. Barnaby Joyce MP, Federal Minister of Agriculture, called for a reinvigoration of the NFFS through the creation of a new National Fruit Fly Advisory Committee. Under the guidance of the National Fruit Fly Advisory Committee, PBCRC was charged with taking a key role in coordinating a national approach on fruit fly research and building an enhanced and collaborative research capacity to the benefit of all states, territories and affected industries.

The National Plant Biosecurity RD&E Strategy

In April 2007, the Primary Industries Ministerial Council, with support from all research and development corporations (RDCs) and the Australian Council of the Deans of Agriculture, agreed to establish a National Framework for Primary Industries Research, Development and Extension. The Framework aims to facilitate greater coordination among the Australian Government, state governments, CSIRO, RDC, industry and university sectors to better harmonise their roles in RD&E related to primary industries and ensure that they work together effectively to maximise net benefits to Australia. It supports a strong culture of collaboration and coordination between the bodies, strengthens national research capability to better address sector and cross sector issues and focuses RD&E resources so they are used more effectively, efficiently and collaboratively, thereby reducing capability gaps, fragmentation and unnecessary duplication in primary industries RD&E.

The Framework has produced 14 sectoral strategies and eight cross-sectoral strategies, each led by a relevant government and industry body. The Plant Biosecurity RD&E Strategy was endorsed in November 2013 and identified the development

Introduction

National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan 5

and implementation of a national fruit fly RD&E plan as an important early activity. The National Plant Biosecurity RD&E Strategy Implementation Committee, formed in August 2014 and hosted by Plant Health Australia, has identified fruit fly as the first pest to be worked through as part of the Strategy’s vision for building a fully integrated national plant biosecurity system. This twenty year National Fruit Fly RD&E Plan thus constitutes a component of both of the NFFS and the National Plant Biosecurity RD&E Strategy.

ThechangingfruitflychallengeFruit flies are nothing new to Australian horticulture, having first been recorded as causing economic losses in the 1880s (Tryon 1889). However, since the publication of the NFFS in 2008 there has been a major increase in concern about fruit flies due to two key issues.

The first is the regulatory withdrawal of the organophosphate pesticides dimethoate and fenthion (D&F) for many fruit fly susceptible commodities. D&F have been used since the early 1970s to both control fruit flies in the field and as post-harvest treatments for disinfestation. Unfortunately, the organophosphate insecticides have been linked with both human and environmental health issues and independent

reviews by the APVMA have seen them withdrawn from postharvest use for all fruit fly affected commodities except tropical and subtropical fruit with inedible peel.

The second key issue is the loss of fruit fly area freedom over most of south-eastern Australia. Currently, at the state level, only Tasmania, Western Australia and South Australia are considered free of Queensland fruit fly, and the maintenance area freedom of the important Riverland horticultural production district of South Australia requires significant investment. The loss of area freedom was brought about by repeated outbreaks and increasing population densities of Queensland fruit fly in south-east Australia; under climate change this situation will almost certainly continue.

The combination of chemical withdrawal and loss of area freedoms has placed huge economic and management imposts on producers of fruit fly susceptible commodities in nearly all parts of Australia. The profitability, and indeed sustainability, of a number of horticultural sectors are threatened and both emergency and long term responses are required to ensure that fruit fly does not permanently limit the Australian horticultural sector.

Introduction

"Please act!

The consequences of inaction will be catastrophic.

This issue belongs not only to growers and industry, but to all Australian people who want to eat readily available, reasonably priced and clean food."

Stone-fruitgrower,RiverlandS.A.,30September2014,consultationresponse.

Mediterranean fruit fly (Ceratitis capitata)- photo courtesy of the Agricultural Research Service Photo Unit at the United States Department of Agriculture.

6 National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan

Stakeholders

There are large numbers of stakeholders associated with fruit fly RD&E in Australia and the complexity of the stakeholder arrangements is illustrated in Figure 3.1 of the NFFS. The following stakeholder groups are critical to this RD&E Plan – to both its inputs and outcomes.

Australian Government: The Australian Government’s activities in fruit fly are focused on regulating the Australian border and managing the risk of exotic fruit flies entering and establishing. The Australian Government is responsible for the conduct of pest risk analyses to assess the likelihood of fruit flies of quarantine concern entering, establishing and spreading within Australia through various pathways, and establishing appropriate risk mitigation measures to reduce the pest risk to an acceptably low level. From a product certification perspective, the Australian Government is also responsible for negotiating market access, ensuring that Australian exports meet importing country requirements, and that any pest free area requirements or fruit fly treatments have been fully met. As part of general surveillance and preparedness activities, the Australian Government is also involved in fruit fly survey and/or response activities in Northern Australia through the Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy, the Torres Strait through the Torres Strait Fruit Fly Strategy, and in Australia’s near neighbours through the International Plant Health Program. These programs are delivered in partnerships with state and international agencies.

State governments: All Australian state governments maintain active fruit fly RD&E. Tasmania, as the state least affected by fruit fly, maintains a trapping network to demonstrate fruit fly freedom but few other activities. All other states maintain fruit fly surveillance, research, development, extension and regulatory activities, including the accreditation and maintenance of pest free areas. While some states have withdrawn certain aspects of their fruit fly RD&E support in recent times, other states have increased theirs, and overall they remain key players in fruit fly RD&E. The states both invest heavily in, and have very significant expertise in fruit fly RD&E.

Industry: The horticulture industry is diverse, both in the number of individual members and administrative structures. The basis of the industry is the individual growers, who

generally run small to medium enterprises, but the horticultural industry also includes large production enterprises, cooperatives, packers and exporters. Individual growers may be represented by, or participate within local or regional grower groups and peak industry bodies. The industry is both the largest user and funder of RD&E.

Plant Health Australia: Plant Health Australia is a not-for-profit company which liaises between the Australian Government and plant-based industries to enhance plant biosecurity. It has an important extension role and also carries out development activities. As the host of the National Fruit Fly Strategy and the National Plant Biosecurity Strategy it has a unique stakeholder role in fruit fly RD&E.

Specialist RD&E investors: This group of stakeholders includes Horticulture Australia Ltd (now Horticulture Innovation Australia Ltd (HIAL)), The Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, State funding agencies and the Australian Research Council. Of these, HIAL is particularly important as an investor of joint Australian Government and horticulture grower levy monies.

Specialist RD&E providers: This group of stakeholders includes CSIRO, the states, the universities, Cooperative Research Centres, agricultural development companies and private crop consultants. The universities and CSIRO fund R&D from both internal sources and through external grants; while PBCRC funds and carries out research through one large grant: all organisations run largely not-for-profit. The rapidly growing private agricultural RD&E sector consists largely of small and medium size enterprises (SMEs) which carry out development and extension for profit.

Broader community: The broader Australian community are important stakeholders with respect to fruit fly RD&E. When implementing regional fruit fly management, the community need to be engaged in fruit fly control through the management of their backyard trees and by not carrying fruit between regions. Local governments have the ability to levy rates and employ local staff who can be involved in area-wide management campaigns. Community perceptions and acceptance are also of importance in the development of controls and treatments such as irradiation and genetically modified products.

Introduction

National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan 7

An expert writing group was brought together by the Plant Biosecurity CRC, the organisation tasked by the Minister to develop this plan, between June and November 2014.The expert writing group has many years of experience with fruit fly, with expertise covering fruit fly research and development, regulatory market access, grower experience/needs, RD&E funding, and project management. Additional specialist support was sought for input on market access research and social science RD&E. Some members of the writing group were also members of the National Fruit Fly Advisory Committee and the National Plant Biosecurity Strategy Implementation Committee. The writing group chair, Anthony Clarke PhD FRES, is Professor and Chair of Fruit Fly Biology and Management at the Queensland University of Technology, a co-appointed position with the Plant Biosecurity CRC.

The first step of developing the Plan was to review the NFFS (PHA 2008) and the NFFS Implementation Plan to understand the RD&E recommendations and strategies, and identify and specific gaps or changes since those documents were drafted.

As the second step of Plan development, the group consulted with industry, government and the research community. Consultation was largely online and through letters of invitation to growers, grower groups, peak industry bodies, researchers, relevant CRCs and RDCs. The invitation to contribute was widely repeated through the rural media and a website was created to capture online responses. Members of the writing group also

consulted directly and spoke to growers, individual researchers, research agencies, regulators and research managers. Forty-two formal submissions were received, additional to the hundreds of conversations held over the period. All responses were assessed, considered and incorporated as appropriate.

Alignment to national Rural Research and Development Priorities

This Plan supports the following national Rural Research and Development Priorities.

• Productivity and adding value: Improve the productivity and profitability of existing industries and support the development of viable new industries.

• Supply chain and markets: Better understand and respond to domestic and international market and consumer requirements and improve the flow of such information through the whole supply chain, including to consumers.

• Climate variability and climate change: Build resilience to climate variability and adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change.

• Biosecurity: Protect Australia’s community, primary industries and environment from biosecurity threats.

• Supporting the Rural Research and Development Priorities: Improve the skills to undertake research and apply its findings.

Developing the Plan

8 National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan

The vision and objectives of this Plan align with those of the National Fruit Fly Strategy.

Vision

Fruit flies are not a constraint to sustainable production or a significant barrier to national and international market access.

Objectives

• To reduce the risk of fruit fly incursions from overseas and the spread of economically significant species within Australia as far as practicable.

• To optimise early detection and response to non-endemic and economically significant endemic fruit flies to minimise their impact.

• To manage fruit fly through effective and efficient use of tools, technology and people in order to establish, maintain or modify the fruit fly status of an area to support trade and sustainable production.

• To raise awareness of biosecurity generally and fruit flies specifically to empower growers, industry, government and community to work collaboratively to minimise the impacts of fruit fly on production, environment and trade.

• To establish and maintain an intelligence network that imparts information to target risks and threats, supports the risk assessment process and facilitates development and ongoing implementation of the fruit fly management system.

New areas of priority

Since the publication of the NFFS in 2008, new priority areas for fruit fly have emerged and these are also dealt with in this Plan.

• Improved controls: The loss of dimethoate and fenthion has put emphasis on the short-term refinement and extension of existing fruit fly controls, and on the medium to long-term development of novel controls.

• Eradication: In regions where fruit flies are under regulatory control, or where they are not naturally endemic, eradication of outbreaks or newly established populations is a priority control strategy for growers, exporters and regulators. Renewed focus needs to be placed on the science and practice of fruit fly eradication.

• Northern Australia: Both Australian and relevant state governments have placed emphasis on the development of agriculture in tropical Australia. Fruit flies will impact negatively on tropical horticulture, while a dramatically enlarged northern production will offer a ‘stepping-stone’ for the entry of exotic fruit flies. RD&E for tropical and exotic fruit flies thus increases in importance.

• Grower focus: Innovative rural research and development is essential for profitability and productivity improvements in agriculture. Outputs of fruit fly R&D must be of commercial benefit to growers either directly, or indirectly through reduced risk (for example by border quarantine).

"R&D makes a very significant contribution to growth in agricultural productivity. This [rural R&D] programme provides grants for collaborative research that will lead to better returns for producers

and support continued innovation across Australian agriculture."

TheHon.BarnabyJoyceMP,mediarelease15October2014.

"If the intention of the RD & E is for the benefit of the rural community, then the ability of the producer to manage fruit fly cost effectively to remain in business should be the ultimate goal. As prices received per

unit of produce have been stagnant for 20 years, the cost of management of fruit fly needs to be no more, or preferably lower than it has been. If it is greater, then it means

that fruit fly can be controlled, but for whose benefit; researchers?"

Queenslandgrower,18September2014.

National RD&E Plan

National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan 9

Consistent with its vision and aims, the Plan identifies RD&E investment areas required to manage the risks to the economy, industry, and community, of (i) exotic fruit fly pests entering and establishing; and (ii) of endemic species limiting production and market access. The Plan is driven by the principles that fruit fly RD&E needs to benefit growers and allow them to maintain viable businesses; and that fruit fly RD&E is not just a grower issue but needs to involve the whole community.

The following section recommends five major areas for fruit fly RD&E investment:

• Coordination

• Extension, community and capacity

• Controlling fruit flies

• Trade and market access

• Future issues

Each major area is further divided, as appropriate, and linked to the detailed RD&E investment areas.

1. Coordination

1.1 The need for national coordination and resourcing

Both growers and researchers report that fruit fly management in Australia is badly hampered through there being no single body coordinating research, development and extension. Currently RD&E coordination roles are being undertaken by Plant Health Australia, Horticulture Innovation Australia Ltd, the Plant Biosecurity CRC, the NFF Advisory Committee, the National Plant Biosecurity Strategy Implementation Committee, Primary Industries Standing Committee, and the SITplus initiative. This confusion is very obvious at ground level, and a consistent message from growers, grower groups and researchers throughout the consultancy period was the need for a single, national body responsible for fruit fly management. In addition, it is recognised that the fruit fly management situation has become increasingly difficult over the past decade and that historic funding levels are not sufficient to maintain a ‘status quo’. To address this relative decline and deliver against this Plan, adequate resourcing is required for priority RD&E projects and initiatives.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 6, sub-theme 6.5.

2. Extension, Community and Capacity

2.1Theneedforregionallybasedfruitflybiosecurityofficers

The loss of capacity in regional entomology and local horticultural extension has directly and negatively affected fruit fly management. As an immediate priority, investment needs to be made to support regionally based professionals who can carry out on-station and on-farm trials to adopt and extend primary research to the needs of local growers. Such staff also need to work with local growers, the local community, local government, rural sellers of insecticides and others to develop and implement both on-farm and area-wide IPM strategies which best fit the need of that community. These officers will also act as intermediates between specialist researchers and growers, providing a two-way information exchange between groups. Ideally the biosecurity officers would not be working in isolation, but as part of a larger, nationally coordinated effort. The Australian grains industry regional biosecurity officers are a working example of how this system might operate.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 6, sub-theme 6.1.

2.2Fruitflyisnotjustagrowerissue

This was a thematic issue which came through in many responses; i.e. that the wider community in towns must be part of the fruit fly solution and growers cannot do it all on their own. Fruit fly is as much a socio-political and ethical issue as it is a biological one, and there is a requirement for shared responsibility between levels of government, industry and the wider community.

"Amalgamation of all fruit fly related bodies into one force with action, not talk, heading the agenda."

Stateresearcher,4September2014.

KEY RECOMMENDATION:

National coordination for fruit fly RD&E issues and improved resourcing is urgently needed to maximise the

benefits gained from RD&E investment and to ensure consistent information is provided to growers and other end-users. The National Fruit Fly Advisory Committee should investigate the different models by which such

coordination and resourcing could be achieved.

"The information is largely there, communicating it to growers has been the difficulty in WA.

Wider industry communications have not proven to be effective (websites, newsletters, flyers), growers

are looking for one-on-one discussion and support. One-on-one extension programs for at least two years."

WAgrower,7September2014.

KEY RECOMMENDATION:

Urgent consideration be given to the employment and location of fruit fly biosecurity (development and extension) officers in Australia’s major horticultural

production areas. Using the fruit fly management tools currently available, these officers should work directly

with growers to trial and develop control strategies optimised for the local region and crops.

RD&E investment recommendations

10 National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan

RD&E investment recommendations

However, what exactly ‘shared responsibility’ means with respect to fruit fly, and how to gain and maintain engagement from different participants, is not easily addressed and needs new research. Local fruit fly biosecurity officers would play an important role in community engagement.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 5, sub-themes 5.1 & 5.2.

2.3 Regional differences

Fruit fly is not the same problem in all parts of Australia. Mediterranean fruit fly is the dominant pest species in Western Australia, while Queensland fruit fly is the major pest species in eastern Australia. Similarly, growers in the tropics have a suite of pest species which do not occur in temperate areas. Even geographically close communities have different issues. For example, growers in South Australia are still concerned with maintaining area freedom, while growers just across the border in Victoria and southern NSW are concerned with regaining area freedom. This Plan is national and does not prioritise specific RD&E recommendations for these regional differences, although it does recognise the biological and economic differences between production regions. Individual regions can develop their own RD&E priorities using this plan based on local issues, and for some R&D (e.g. SIT, lure technology) there will be existing information available that needs to be applied through good local extension. Thus the RD&E investment areas identified will need to be prioritised by region, horticultural industry and resources available.

Link to RD&E investment areas: no specific RD&E investment recommendations made, but this acknowledgement of local differences is linked to recommendation 2.1 on the need for regional biosecurity officers.

2.4 Capacity

Regardless of how good the RD&E Plan is, nothing will be achieved to control fruit fly over the next twenty years without the capacity, both human and physical, to do so. Capacity in fruit fly RD&E is shared by the Australian Government, CSIRO, the state departments of agriculture and a small number of universities. Notably, state agriculture departments have reduced their development and extension capacity in recent years, and while some of this capacity has been taken over by the private sector in terms of IPM scouts and horticulture consultants, a renewed investment

is urgently needed to develop local R&D capacity and grower networks. Changes in funding cycles are also required to provide more secure career pathways for research and technical staff.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 6, sub-themes 6.2, 6.3 & 6.4.

2.5Corescience

‘Core science’ covers those research disciplines (molecular biology, insect physiology, behaviour and ecology, modelling, statistics) which provide the underpinning science upon which operational research and development are based. Core science also provides the ‘blue-sky’ or discovery-science which is the basis for the over-the-horizon controls which are currently difficult or impossible to predict. By supporting core science disciplines, fruit fly R&D will be able to provide the innovative research required develop and maintain novel fruit fly controls. Clearly ‘core science’ and ‘capacity’ are closely aligned: the core science will only get done if appropriate capacity is maintained and funded.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 6, sub-themes 6.2, 6.3; Theme 7, sub-theme 7.1.

3.Controllingfruitflies

3.1 Managing exotic risk

Fruit flies are a global agricultural issue, with nearly all regions of the world having different native fruit fly species; these different pest species can and do invade other regions. For Australia, the threat of offshore pests entering and establishing is substantial. This is particularly the case as tropical agriculture develops; northern Australia will become a stepping stone for invasive fruit flies from Asia and PNG. A recent study has shown that one Asian species, the Oriental fruit fly (Bactrocera dorsalis), is the single greatest plant biosecurity threat facing Australia, with an estimated impact cost of over $1 billion if it enters and establishes (Cook et al., 2010). Beyond Oriental fruit fly, there are over forty other exotic fruit fly species with the potential to have significant economic and pest management impacts. Australia needs to maintain active surveillance and an RD&E Plan to proactively manage the very significant risk posed by offshore fruit flies.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 1, sub-themes 1.1 to 1.5.

"Public education media program to notify public to clean up fruit in backyards and unoccupied orchards/orchards that have fallen into disuse. Make

links with local shires, growers’ cooperatives and other agencies selling supplies to horticulturalists, to engage

their help to deliver this message."

WAgrower,11September2014.

"Six fruit fly species are repeatedly detected in the Torres Strait which threaten to cross to mainland

Australia. These incursions pose a potential threat … To ensure this effort remains as effective as possible,

research also needs to target strategies to best manage this issue."

PeakIndustrybody,17October2014.

National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan 11

3.2 Immediate dimethoate and fenthion replacements

On 16 October 2014 the APVMA removed fenthion from all uses for fruit fly control except as a postharvest dip for tropical and subtropical fruit with inedible peel. Along with the earlier withdrawal of dimethoate, this leaves all fruit fly affected industries, except the tropical fruit industry, without effective pesticide controls. Numerous alternative controls do exist for fruit fly management, but these currently have limited uptake and development for many horticultural commodities. Emergency development and extension needs to be undertaken to provide short-term alternatives to dimethoate and fenthion.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 2, sub-themes 2.2, 2.4 & 2.6.

3.3 Eradication

In states which are currently fruit fly free, districts which have recently lost area freedom, and very isolated production areas (such as in WA), eradication is a preferred control option. Fruit flies are a group of insects for which eradication is highly feasible and which has been repeatedly demonstrated (Suckling et al., 2014). R&D is needed to refine current surveillance and eradication tools, and to develop new tools which would increase the efficiency of eradication programs.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 1, sub-theme 1.5; Theme 2, sub-theme 2.1, 2.4, 2.8, 2.9 & 2.11.

3.4 Integrated Pest Management and Area-wide Integrated Pest Management

In the absence of effective cover sprays, Australian fruit fly management will need to rely on a suite of control tools applied within an integrated pest management (IPM) framework. As fruit flies are mobile pests, which move around a cropping district to new hosts as they come into season, fruit fly control is best done at an ‘area-wide’ (A-W) level, where the ‘area’ may be a whole cropping district, or a well-defined geographic area (e.g. a river valley). IPM and A-W IPM integrate individual control tools including the Sterile Insect Technique, although A-W IPM can operate in the absence of SIT. Developing A-W IPM for fruit fly control in Australia will require addressing a complex suite of RD&E, not the least of which is community engagement. To be sustainable for the grower, fruit fly IPM needs to be integrated as one component of their whole crop IPM.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 2, sub-themes 2.1, 2.4, 2.5, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10; Theme 4, sub-theme 4.2; Theme 5, sub-themes 5.1, 5.2; Theme 6, sub-theme 6.1. (see also below 5.4, ‘A future without pesticides’).

4. Trade and Market access

4.1 Disinfestation tools

Industry is seeking improved post-harvest control options for fruit fly, specifically treatments that have a rapid turnaround, are efficacious, cost-effective, non-damaging, do not adversely affect product quality and are suitable for both sea and airfreight.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 3, sub-themes 3.1 to 3.5.

KEY RECOMMENDATION:

R&D support continues to be provided for biosecurity preparedness and quarantine activities targeted at preventing the entry and establishment of offshore

fruit fly threats. Particular focus should be applied to mitigating the risk posed by Oriental fruit fly.

RD&E investment recommendations

KEY RECOMMENDATION:

RD&E activities targeting rapid replacement options for dimethoate and fenthion should focus on the

registration of new chemicals and new uses for existing registered chemicals, and optimisation of existing

controls such as MAT, protein bait spray, crop hygiene and mass trapping.

"Please do it quickly as there are NO proven adequate methods of commercial scale control available when Fenthion is taken away from growers - or ridiculous

withholding periods imposed."

NSWgrower,28September2014.

KEY RECOMMENDATION:

An R&D focus be applied to fruit fly eradication technologies (such as SIT, MAT and protein baiting), to make the eradication of fruit flies technically easier and

hence economically more justifiable.

"The loss of key chemicals such as Fenthion and Dimethoate has meant growers now rely on Area

Wide Management (AWM), which involves monitoring, sanitation, lures, and baits, to manage fruit fly. AWM, however, has variable and limited success in managing

fruit fly and stronger control strategies need to be developed. Improved extension programs would

support the wider adoption of AWM to improve its effectiveness."

PeakIndustrybody,17October2014.

KEY RECOMMENDATION:

RD&E activities targeting medium to long-term fruit fly infield controls should work within an integrated pest management framework, which will decrease the need and reliance on synthetic pesticides. Such

control or eradication strategies include Sterile Insect Technique, mass trapping, crop hygiene, eradication,

protein baiting, MAT and use of natural enemies. The combination of these techniques into a systems

approach can be used for market access.

12 National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan

4.2 Evidence-based regulations

To guarantee market access opportunities for Australian commodities, be they domestic or international markets, market access negotiators need to have the scientific evidence to argue market access cases with their counterparts in importing states or countries. Research and development is required to deliver market access disinfestation data packages which are consistent and based on the best scientific knowledge. Standard operating procedures for pest management are also required for growers targeting export markets so as to facilitate the gaining and maintaining of market access.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 3, sub-theme 3.4; Theme 4, sub-themes 4.1 & 4.2.

5.FutureIssues5.1NorthernAustraliadevelopment

The Australian Government, Queensland, the Northern Territory and Western Australia have all identified increased growth and investment in tropical agriculture as priority areas. A greatly increased tropical horticultural industry will require more knowledge of Australia’s endemic tropical pest fruit flies, including detailed hosts lists, both for infield control and for market access. These new productions areas will also create a stepping-stone for new exotic fruit flies to other areas. Australia’s most serious exotic fruit fly threats are all found to our north, and increased production of tropical horticultural crops will increase the likelihood of those flies finding suitable breeding sites if they should enter.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 1, sub-themes 1.1 to 1.5; Theme 4, sub-theme 4.1.

5.2Climatechange

Under predicted climate change scenarios, it is anticipated that flies currently restricted to the tropics and sub-tropics will move south, while species already in the temperate zone may increase in abundance and their active seasons lengthen. Tasmania and New Zealand will also be under much greater risk of fruit fly invasion. From a market access view point, markets such as northern Europe which are currently less concerned about fruit fly because of climate unsuitability may become more fruit fly aware. Preparedness for climate change will involve the generation of new control and market access datasets for the tropical species, and better modelling of the distributions of all species.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 2, sub-theme 2.7; Theme 4, sub-theme 4.1.

5.3Afuturewithoutpesticides

While pesticides, if they are available, remain a preferred control option for many growers, experience from Europe and North America is clearly illustrating that within the next twenty years traditional pesticides will either be entirely banned, or used as only one component of more complex, integrated strategies (i.e. integrated pest management). The European Union has already directed that all pest management undertaken in its member nations should be done as integrated pest management (European Union 2009), and the USA has a national framework for promoting IPM (USDA ARS 2013). Australia will almost certainly have to follow this path, if only to gain access to these lucrative markets.

Link to RD&E investment areas: Theme 2, sub-themes 2.1, 2.3, 2.5, 2.7; Theme 3, sub-theme 3.5; Theme 6, sub-theme 6.2, 6.3; Theme 7, sub-theme 7.1.

KEY RECOMMENDATION:

R&D targeting medium and long-term outcomes for fruit fly disinfestation should focus on the development

of new methodologies and statistical approaches which can provide the same importer confidence and regulatory approvals as currently achieved, but with

reduced logistical effort, time and/or cost.

"Currently NSW [citrus] growers have to ship fruit under cold sterilisation. This costs $4.00 per carton and when a carton ranges between $5 to $15 back to a grower it

is a significant cost. It also shortens the shelf life of fruit and there is always the risk of container temperature failure which can result in dumping of the fruit in a foreign land, and that can be a very costly exercise.

An alternative to Cold Sterilisation is needed by NSW Growers."

Industry Policy Advisor, NSW Farmers, 29September2014.

KEY RECOMMENDATION:

Standardised approaches for market access RD&E and field operations should be developed and implemented so as to ensure international acceptance of Australian

fruit fly market access datasets and fresh commodities. This includes updating national codes of practice for

fruit fly.

KEY RECOMMENDATION:

RD&E focus should be applied to the ‘other’ fruit fly pests of Australia, including resolving

the systematics and taxonomy of the Bactrocera tryoni complex and developing biological data sets (including confirmed host lists) and management tools for native fruit fly species other than B. tryoni and C. capitata.

KEY RECOMMENDATION:

Systematic and taxonomic research be carried out to develop accurate and user friendly

diagnostics to separate native pest fruit flies from native non-pests and exotics.

RD&E investment recommendations

National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan 13

Situation analysis and AuditA full audit of current fruit fly RD&E activities needs to be undertaken in 2015. Previous audits are now dated, do not cover research activities unless funded by publically reported grants (this misses, for example, activities funded internally by the states and university postgraduate research), and miss the many extension activities by peak industry bodies and regional grower groups. Prioritisation processOnce this Plan is endorsed, a prioritisation process needs to be undertaken in 2015, concurrent with the capacity audit, to prioritise all areas. This should involve consultation with all stakeholders identified in the Plan. As identified in the NFFS (Recommendation 14), this process should be undertaken on a regular basis in order to maintain currency. It is expected that this will be a core function of the NFF Advisory Committee, supported by the Plant Biosecurity CRC.

ResourcesThe full implementation of the NFFS and this RD&E Plan will need significant new investment from government and industry if its outcomes are to be achieved.

The case for investing in all aspects of fruit fly management has been made by the NFFS and subsequently costed in independent cost-benefit analyses (Harvey et al. 2010; Abdalla et al. 2012; White et al. 2012; Florec et al. 2013). Depending on the analysis undertaken, it has been found that return on investment for fruit fly management ranges from 8.3:1 to 15.6:1 (PHA 2009, ABARES 2012). The economics of investing in fruit fly RD&E has not been assessed independently of other fruit fly investment areas, but the average return on rural RD&E in Australia is 11:1, with additional social and environmental non-cash benefits (Rural RDC 2008). There is no obvious reason why fruit fly RD&E would vary greatly from this average.

Existing investment mechanisms

HIA: The newly created Horticulture Innovation Australia Limited is a not-for-profit, grower-owned Research and Development Corporation (RDC) for Australia’s horticulture industry. Replacing the previous Horticulture Australia Ltd (HAL), HIA invests grower levy and voluntary contribution funds matched with Commonwealth Government funds.

PBCRC: The Plant Biosecurity Cooperative Research Centre Ltd is a company limited by guarantee with an independent, skills-based board of directors. Its participants are both plant biosecurity research providers and research users, whose contributions to the PBCRC are matched by Commonwealth funding under the Cooperative Research Centre scheme.

ARC: The Australian Research Council’s discovery and linkage programs can fund university based researches, although the schemes are highly competitive and focus on more fundamental aspects of fruit fly biology.

RIRDC: The Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation is the second RDC with capacity to invest in fruit fly RD&E. Under its ‘New and Developing Plant Industries’ portfolio there are a number of crops for which fruit fly management will be required.

Voluntary levies or fees: At state, regional or area-wide levels, support for fruit fly RD&E can be generated. Current examples of such voluntary fees include grower levies in Sunraysia in Victoria and Carnarvon in Western Australia.

New investment mechanismsWhile the economic and social benefits of increasing investment in fruit fly management have been made clear, the mechanisms by which those investments can be made are still unclear. This section suggests some possible mechanisms as a basis for discussion.

Australian Fruit Fly Commission: An Australian Fruit Fly Commission, with a role of both national coordination and implementation, could be funded by Australian and state governments and an industry levy for its core coordination and operational/extension activities. The Fruit Fly Commission would engage external research agencies and leverage third-party funding to achieve its research objectives.

Implementation of the RD&E Plan

"Long-term funding (20 years) would be required to achieve the objectives of the NFFS and implementation

plan and to ensure projects are not abandoned. We would long like to see a long-term commitment that it

be progressed and supported well into the future."

PeakIndustrybody,29September2014.

14 National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan

Implementation of the RD&E Plan

Landcare model: Landcare Australia Limited (www.landcareonline.com.au/) was formed by the Commonwealth Government in 1989 as a private non-profit company to manage the national public awareness and sponsorship campaign for the Decade of Landcare. The operation of community Landcare recognises the effectiveness of community groups in promoting self-reliance, developing social capital and social norms for positive landcare outcomes: this participatory approach has become the dominant policy paradigm in Australia. Many horticultural production communities have already formed, or are forming, local fruit fly management groups in response to the problem and a Landcare model would logically flow from grower driven initiatives.

Key Centre: From time to time the Government funds one-off centres, often with matching or leveraged money. There are several mechanisms by which this can, or has been achieved:

• ARC Co-funded Centres (http://www.arc.gov.au/ncgp/ce/ce_2014/2014_coe_funding.htm) Centres of Excellence (e.g. Centre of Excellence for Biosecurity Risk Analysis).

• ARC Special Research Initiatives (e.g. SRI for Tropical Health and Medicine - http://www.arc.gov.au/ncgp/sri/Tropical_Health.htm).

Biosecurity levy arrangements: Many industries have in place levy arrangements under the Emergency Plant Pest Response Deed, as well as research and development levies. It is possible these levies could be matched by the Australian Government for fruit fly RD&E. An alternative arrangement has been developed in Sunraysia where the Greater Sunraysia Pest Free Area Industry Development Committee, comprising two members each from the table grape, citrus

and stone fruit industries, is funding fruit fly management and eradication efforts through a grower levy initially set at $3 a tonne with a contribution from the Victorian Government on a 70% industry/30% government basis.

Mixed models: It is important to recognise that solving the fruit fly problem in Australia has many facets, ranging from discovery science, through to regulatory harmonisation, to implementing practical management options for growers. A single funding scheme is unlikely to meet all these needs. It is thus reasonable to seek different mechanisms for different purposes. For instance, grower-based funding might be sought to fund field-based extension officers or entomologists, for which growers can see a direct and immediate return for their investment. The annual HIAL funding call may remain the most appropriate mechanism to fund developmental research, while an ARC Key Centre or similar may fund more basic and strategic research.

KEY RECOMMENDATION:

The National Fruit Fly Advisory Committee coordinates and implements this Plan, supporting an audit of activity, a prioritisation process, and exploring

resourcing arrangements via existing and/or new funding mechansims.

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

15

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Them

e 1

: M

anag

ing

Exo

tic

Ris

k1

7

Su

b-t

hem

e 1

.1:

Entr

y p

ath

way

s1

7

1.1.

1 Pa

thw

ay a

naly

sis

1.1.

2 Pe

st p

rior

itisa

tion

1.1.

3 W

ind-

born

e th

reat

s

Su

b-t

hem

e 1

.2:

Su

rvei

llan

ce1

8

1.2.

1 N

ew lu

res

1.2.

2 O

ptim

isin

g tr

ap p

lace

men

t 1.

2.3

With

in c

omm

odity

det

ectio

n 1.

2.4

Sm

art

trap

s 1.

2.5

Com

mun

ity s

urve

illan

ce

Su

b-t

hem

e 1

.3:

Inva

sion

bio

log

y1

9

1.3.

1 Clim

ate

mat

chin

g of

exo

tic fru

it fli

es

1.3.

2 H

ost

mat

chin

g of

exo

tic fru

it fli

es

1.3.

3 Li

fe h

isto

ries

of ex

otic

fru

it fli

es

1.3.

4 O

ffsh

ore

rese

arch

Su

b-t

hem

e 1

.4:

Dia

gn

osti

cs20

1.4.

1 Fr

uit

fly s

yste

mat

ics

1.4.

2 Fr

uit

fly k

ey

1.4.

3 D

iagn

ostic

sta

ndar

ds

1.4.

4 Ra

pid

sort

ing

and

iden

tifica

tion

Sub-theme1.5:Response

21

1.5.

1 N

atio

nal i

ncur

sion

res

pons

e st

rate

gies

1.

5.2

Indu

stry

bio

secu

rity

pla

ns

Them

e 2

: P

re-h

arve

st C

ontr

ols

22

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.1:

Mon

itor

ing

an

d d

etec

tion

22

2.1.

1 Bet

ter

lure

s 2.

1.2

Opt

imis

ing

trap

s 2.

1.3

Opt

imis

ing

trap

pla

cem

ent

2.1.

4 Sm

art

trap

s II

2.

1.5

Infe

stat

ion

dete

ctio

n 2.

1.6

Low

den

sity

mon

itoring

2.

1.7

Wor

king

key

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.2:

Cov

er s

pra

ys2

4

2.2.

1 Re

gist

ratio

n 2.

2.2

New

pes

ticid

es

2.2.

3 N

on-l

etha

l che

mic

al t

reat

men

t

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.3:

Nat

ura

l en

emie

s an

d b

iolo

gic

al c

ontr

ol2

4

2.3.

1 Pa

rasi

toid

s 2.

3.2

Para

site

s 2.

3.3

Path

ogen

s

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.4:

Lure

-an

d-k

ill25

2.4.

1 M

AT

2.4.

2 SPL

AT a

nd o

ther

car

rier

s 2.

4.3

Prot

ein

bait

spra

y 2.

4.4

Bai

t st

atio

ns

2.4.

5 Fe

mal

e lu

res

2.4.

6 Bet

ter

mal

e lu

res

2.4.

7 Tr

ap c

rops

2.

4.8

Repe

llent

s/de

terr

ents

2.

4.9

Che

mos

terila

nts

Sub-theme2.5:Hostplantandhostfruitinteractions

27

2.5.

1 Con

ditio

nal n

on-h

ost

stat

us

2.5.

2 N

on-h

ost

stat

us

2.5.

3 Va

riet

al r

esis

tanc

e 2.

5.4

Can

opy

arch

itect

ure

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.6:

Ph

ysic

al b

arri

ers

28

2.6.

1 W

hole

orc

hard

net

ting

2.6.

2 Fe

ncin

g 2.

6.3

Bor

der

plan

tings

2.

6.4

Kaol

in c

lays

2.

6.5

Min

eral

and

bot

anic

al o

ils

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.7:

Ph

enol

ogy

and

dis

trib

uti

on m

odel

s2

9

2.7.

1 Ec

olog

ical

dat

a 2.

7.2

Pred

ictiv

e m

odel

ling

I 2.

7.3

Pred

ictiv

e m

odel

ling

II

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.8:

Pop

ula

tion

sou

rce

con

trol

30

2.8.

1 Cro

p hy

gien

e 2.

8.2

Fera

l and

wild

sou

rces

2.

8.3

Urb

an,

peri-u

rban

and

aba

ndon

ed o

rcha

rd s

ourc

es

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.9:

Ste

rile

In

sect

Tec

hn

iqu

e3

1

2.9.

1 M

ale-

only

line

2.

9.2

Mal

e fit

ness

2.

9.3

Liqu

id la

rval

die

t 2.

9.4

Pre-

rele

ase

supp

lem

ents

2.

9.5

Rele

ase

stra

tegi

es

2.9.

6 M

ale

disc

rim

inat

ion

16

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Sub-theme2.10:IPMandArea-WideIPM

32

2.10

.1 I

PM m

odel

2.

10.2

Wor

king

AVM

mod

els

2.10

.3 L

ands

cape

eco

logy

2.

10.4

Com

mun

ity e

ngag

emen

t 2.

10.5

Man

agem

ent

syst

ems

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.11

: R

egio

nal

era

dic

atio

n3

4

2.11

.1 E

cono

mic

s of

era

dica

tion

2.11

.2 E

radi

catio

n

Them

e 3

: P

ost-

har

vest

mea

sure

s35

Sub-theme3.1:Refinementandim

provementof

exi

stin

g t

reat

men

ts35

3.1.

1 Fu

mig

atio

n3.

1.2

Hea

t tr

eatm

ent

3.1.

3 Col

d tr

eatm

ents

3.

1.4

Irra

diat

ion

3.1.

5 Che

mic

al t

reat

men

t3.

1.6

Atm

osph

eric

man

ipul

atio

n3.

1.7

Mic

row

ave

trea

tmen

ts3.

1.8

Com

bina

tion

trea

tmen

ts

Su

b-t

hem

e 3

.2:

Pro

tect

ion

3

7

3.2.

1 N

eed

for

prot

ectio

n3.

2.2

Prot

ectio

n m

etho

ds3.

2.3

Hyg

iene

Su

b-t

hem

e 3

.3:

Det

ecti

on3

7

3.3.

1 Pa

ckin

g sh

ed d

etec

tion

Su

b-t

hem

e 3

.4:

New

res

earc

h a

nd

dat

a p

roto

cols

38

3.4.

1 Re

view

of pr

otoc

ols

3.4.

2 N

ew d

isin

fest

atio

n pr

otoc

ols

Sub-theme3.5:Biologyofdeath

39

3.5.

1 H

eat

shoc

k pr

otei

ns

3.5.

2 Sta

ge d

epen

dent

sen

sitiv

ity

3.5.

3 M

odes

of ac

tion

Them

e 4

: M

arke

t ac

cess

an

d r

egu

lato

ry is

sues

40

Su

b-t

hem

e 4

.1:

Mar

ket

acce

ss d

ata

sets

40

4.1.

1 Tr

opic

al a

nd ‘l

esse

r’ fl

ies

4.1.

2 Q

ueen

slan

d fr

uit

fly c

ompl

ex

4.1.

3 Tr

ade

info

rmat

ion

Su

b-t

hem

e 4

.2:

Pro

toco

ls4

1

4.2.

1 Sy

stem

s ap

proa

ches

4.

2.2

Are

a fr

eedo

m

4.2.

3 Are

as o

f lo

w p

est

prev

alen

ce

4.2.

4 Pr

otoc

ols

for

Pest

Fre

e Are

as a

nd P

reva

lenc

e 4.

2.5

Cod

es o

f Pr

actic

e 4.

2.6

ICAs

Theme5:Socialissues

43

Sub-theme5.1:Fruitflyasasocio-politicalissue

43

5.1.

1 En

gagi

ng t

he b

road

er c

omm

unity

5.

1.2

Regi

onal

indu

stry

voi

ce

5.1.

3 Lo

cal g

over

nmen

t

Sub-theme5.2:Growersandthecommunityas'full'partners

44

5.2.

1 G

row

er a

nd in

dust

ry g

roup

s 5.

2.2

Gro

wer

per

cept

ions

5.

2.3

Part

icip

ator

y re

sear

ch

Them

e 6

: C

apac

ity

46

Su

b-t

hem

e 6

.1:

Reg

ion

al s

up

por

t4

6

6.1.

1 Re

gion

al fru

it fly

bio

secu

rity

offi

cers

Su

b-t

hem

e 6

.2:

Res

earc

h a

nd

Dev

elop

men

t ca

pac

ity

47

6.2.

1 Str

ateg

ic r

esea

rch

staf

f 6.

2.2

Cha

nged

fun

ding

cyc

les

Su

b-t

hem

e 6

.3:

Pro

fess

ion

al n

etw

orks

47

6.3.

1 In

tern

atio

nal s

ympo

sium

s 6.

3.2

TAAO

6.

3.3

Nat

iona

l mee

tings

Su

b-t

hem

e 6

.4:

Ph

ysic

al I

nfr

astr

uct

ure

48

6.4.

1 R&

D n

etw

ork

Sub-theme6.5:ManagerialInfrastructure

49

6.5.

1 N

atio

nal f

ruit

fly c

oord

inat

ion

Them

e 7

: C

ore

scie

nce

50

Su

b-t

hem

e 7

.1:

Cor

e sc

ien

ce50

7.1.

1 M

olec

ular

bio

logy

7.

1.2

Phys

iolo

gy a

nd b

ehav

iour

7.

1.3

Ecol

ogy

7.1.

4 M

odel

ling

7.1.

5 Sta

tistic

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

17

Them

e 1

: M

anag

ing

exo

tic

risk

Them

e O

verv

iew

: Fr

uit

flies

are

a g

loba

l agr

icul

tura

l iss

ue,

with

alm

ost

all r

egio

ns o

f th

e w

orld

hav

ing

diff

eren

t na

tive

frui

t fly

spe

cies

. T

hese

diff

eren

t pe

st s

peci

es c

an,

and

do in

vade

oth

er r

egio

ns:

for

exam

ple

the

Orien

tal f

ruit

fly h

as s

prea

d an

d es

tabl

ishe

d in

Afr

ica

and

part

s of

the

Sou

th P

acifi

c, w

hile

th

e Am

eric

an e

aste

rn c

herr

y fr

uit

fly h

as r

ecen

tly in

vade

d Eu

rope

. Fo

r Aus

tral

ia,

the

thre

at o

f of

fsho

re p

ests

ent

erin

g an

d es

tabl

ishi

ng in

Aus

tral

ia is

ver

y si

gnifi

cant

. Th

is is

par

ticul

arly

the

cas

e as

tro

pica

l agr

icul

ture

dev

elop

s, a

s no

rthe

rn A

ustr

alia

will

bec

ome

a st

eppi

ng s

tone

for

inva

sive

fru

it fli

es f

rom

Asi

a an

d Pa

pua

New

Gui

nea.

One

suc

h Asi

an s

peci

es,

the

Orien

tal f

ruit

fly (

Bac

troc

era

dors

alis

), is

the

sin

gle

grea

test

hor

ticul

tura

l thr

eat

faci

ng A

ustr

alia

, w

ith a

n es

timat

ed in

vasi

on c

ost

of $

1.26

bill

ion

(Coo

k et

al.

2010

). I

f es

tabl

ishe

d in

Aus

tral

ia,

inte

rnat

iona

l exp

erie

nce

sugg

ests

tha

t O

rien

tal f

ruit

fly m

ay d

ispl

ace

all

exis

ting

frui

t fly

pes

ts,

rapi

dly

beco

min

g ou

r si

ngle

mos

t im

port

ant

pest

spe

cies

, re

quirin

g ne

w m

arke

t ac

cess

pro

toco

ls t

o be

neg

otia

ted

and

agre

ed.

The

entr

y an

d su

bseq

uent

era

dica

tion

of a

n ex

otic

fru

it fly

is e

xpen

sive

; w

hen

Orien

tal f

ruit

fly in

vade

d no

rth

Que

ensl

and

in t

he m

id-1

990s

(th

en u

nder

the

nam

e of

Asi

an

Papa

ya fru

it fly

), t

he e

radi

catio

n co

st w

as $

36 m

illio

n an

d th

e gr

ower

cos

t ap

prox

imat

ely

$100

mill

ion

(Can

trel

l et

al.

2001

).

Aus

tral

ia n

eeds

to

mai

ntai

n an

act

ive

RD

&E

Plan

to

proa

ctiv

ely

man

age

the

very

sig

nific

ant

risk

pos

ed b

y of

fsho

re f

ruit

flies

. Th

is in

clud

es d

evel

opin

g to

ols,

ca

paci

ty a

nd p

rofe

ssio

nal n

etw

orks

whi

ch c

an;

(i)

bett

er p

redi

ct t

hrea

ts,

for

exam

ple

thro

ugh

bett

er p

athw

ay a

naly

sis

and

the

deve

lopm

ent

of f

orm

al

inte

rnat

iona

l net

wor

ks w

hich

sha

re k

now

ledg

e of

em

erge

nt t

hrea

ts;

(ii)

str

engt

hen

bord

er p

rote

ctio

n th

roug

h op

timis

ed s

urve

illan

ce a

nd r

apid

fru

it fly

id

entifi

catio

n; a

nd (

iii)

incr

ease

the

like

lihoo

d of

suc

cess

ful e

radi

catio

n in

eve

nt o

f an

exo

tic fru

it fly

incu

rsio

n.

Alig

ns w

ith N

FFS r

ecom

men

datio

ns 4

, 5,

6,

7 &

8 a

nd N

FFS I

mpl

emen

tatio

n Str

ateg

y Pr

ojec

ts 2

& 3

.

Su

b-t

hem

e 1

.1En

try

pat

hw

ays

Nee

dTr

ade

in fru

it fly

sus

cept

ible

com

mod

ities

is t

ight

ly r

egul

ated

aro

und

the

wor

ld b

ecau

se o

f th

e pe

rcei

ved

risk

of

frui

t fly

m

ovem

ent,

yet

info

rmal

ana

lysi

s of

mos

t ex

otic

incu

rsio

ns s

ugge

st t

hey

are

thro

ugh

non-

com

mer

cial

fru

it m

ovem

ent

by

tour

ists

. G

ood

quan

tifica

tion

of s

uch

anal

yses

wou

ld g

reat

ly c

hang

e th

e em

phas

is o

n w

here

and

how

pat

hway

s ar

e co

ntro

lled.

Ou

tcom

eBet

ter

targ

eted

inve

stm

ent

in m

anag

ing

path

way

s th

roug

h w

hich

exo

tic f

ruit

flies

mig

ht e

nter

Aus

tral

ia,

and

henc

e re

duce

d risk

of pe

st e

ntry

. O

utp

uts

Tool

s an

d te

chni

ques

for

the

iden

tifica

tion

of n

ew a

nd e

mer

ging

fru

it fly

pes

ts a

nd p

athw

ays.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

5.2,

5.3

, 7.

2, P

R2

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s1

.1.1

Pat

hw

ay a

nal

ysis

Output:Pathwaysanalysedforpotentialglobalfruitflyincursions

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Im

prov

e up

on o

ur c

urre

nt le

vel o

f pr

epar

edne

ss t

hrou

gh a

com

preh

ensi

ve a

naly

sis

of h

ow,

whe

n an

d w

here

fru

it fly

pes

ts t

hat

have

cau

sed

seriou

s im

pact

to

indu

stry

and

the

env

iron

men

t ar

rive

d (b

y di

sper

sal o

r m

utat

ion)

. Th

is v

ulne

rabi

lity

anal

ysis

will

fra

me

our

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

fut

ure

thre

ats

by d

eter

min

ing

hist

oric

al r

ates

of

incu

rsio

ns b

y th

ese

high

-im

pact

spe

cies

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 3-

5 ye

ars

1.1

.2 P

est

pri

orit

isat

ion

Output:Toolscreatedforfruitflypestprioritisation

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Bio

secu

rity

pes

t pr

ioritis

atio

n ap

proa

ches

hav

e be

en d

evel

oped

by

grou

ps s

uch

as C

EBRA.

Det

erm

ine

if su

ch m

odel

s ca

n be

use

d as

pre

dict

ors

for

pote

ntia

l inv

asiv

e fr

uit

fly p

ests

, an

d so

impr

ove

the

quan

tifica

tion

of

incu

rsio

n an

d es

tabl

ishm

ent

succ

ess.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

3-7

year

s

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

18

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

1.1

.3 W

ind

-bor

ne

thre

ats

Output:Improvedpreparednessandresponsetowind-bornefruitflythreats

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Im

prov

e pr

epar

edne

ss a

nd r

espo

nse

to w

ind-

born

e fr

uit

fly in

curs

ions

. Pe

st f

ruit

flies

abs

ent

from

Aus

tral

ia o

ccur

in o

ur n

ear

nort

hern

Asi

an a

nd w

este

rn P

acifi

c ne

ighb

ours

. In

itial

ana

lysi

s sh

ows

that

, at

leas

t fo

r th

e To

rres

Str

ait,

incr

ease

d in

curs

ions

may

be

linke

d to

sea

sona

l win

d pa

tter

ns.

Bet

ter

asse

ssm

ent

of w

ind

disp

ersi

on o

f fr

uit

flies

will

impr

ove

pre-

bord

er s

urve

illan

ce a

nd p

ost-

bord

er p

repa

redn

ess,

par

ticul

arly

in li

ght

of t

he p

ropo

sed

inte

nsifi

catio

n of

ag

ricu

lture

in n

orth

ern

Aust

ralia

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 3-

7 ye

ars

Su

b-t

hem

e 1

.2S

urv

eilla

nce

Nee

dTh

e ab

ility

to

erad

icat

e an

exo

tic fru

it fly

is v

ery

tight

ly li

nked

to

how

ear

ly t

hat

entr

y is

det

ecte

d. I

f an

exo

tic fl

y is

det

ecte

d so

on a

fter

ent

ry,

then

era

dica

tion

is m

ore

likel

y to

be

tech

nica

lly f

easi

ble

and

econ

omic

ally

via

ble.

If

the

pest

is a

lrea

dy w

ell

esta

blis

hed

and

wid

espr

ead

whe

n fir

st d

etec

ted,

the

n er

adic

atio

n m

ay b

e ne

ither

tec

hnic

ally

nor

eco

nom

ical

ly v

iabl

e. A

n ef

ficie

nt b

orde

r su

rvei

llanc

e pr

ogra

m is

cen

tral

for

rap

id d

etec

tion

of e

xotic

pes

ts,

whi

le e

ffici

ency

of

a su

rvei

llanc

e pr

ogra

m is

ne

eded

to

ensu

re t

hat

oper

atio

nal c

osts

are

min

imis

ed w

hile

mai

ntai

ning

eff

ectiv

enes

s.O

utc

ome

Bet

ter

abili

ty t

o de

tect

exo

tic fru

it fli

es w

hich

ent

er A

ustr

alia

, so

incr

easi

ng t

he c

hanc

e of

the

ir s

ubse

quen

t er

adic

atio

n.O

utp

uts

New

tec

hnol

ogy

and

bett

er c

omm

unity

eng

agem

ent

for

surv

eilla

nce

of f

ruit

fly p

ests

.A

lign

men

t to

NFF

S &

NFF

S

Imp

lem

enta

tion

Pla

n6.

2, 7

.1,

7.5,

7.6

, 7.

7, P

R2

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s1

.2.1

New

lure

s Output:Luresavailableformonitoringcurrently‘non-lure’responsivefruitflyspecies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Fru

it fli

es a

re g

ener

ally

det

ecte

d us

ing

trap

s ba

ited

with

the

mal

e lu

res

met

hyl e

ugen

ol a

nd c

ue-

lure

. Sev

eral

impo

rtan

t pe

st fru

it fli

es s

peci

es d

o no

t re

spon

d to

eith

er o

f th

ese

two

lure

s. N

ew lu

res,

suc

h as

has

bee

n fo

und

with

zin

gero

ne for

B.

jarv

isi,

are

urge

ntly

req

uire

d fo

r th

ese

trad

ition

ally

‘non

-lur

e re

spon

sive

’ spe

cies

.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

3-5

year

s1

.2.2

Op

tim

isin

g t

rap

pla

cem

ent

Output:Guidelinesavailableforoptimisingfruitflytrapplacementwithrespecttotrappingefficacyand

efficiency

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: L

arge

are

a gr

id b

ased

pat

tern

tra

ppin

g pr

ogra

ms

are

wid

ely

rega

rded

as

inef

ficie

nt,

yet

the

natio

nal s

tand

ards

cur

rent

ly c

all f

or g

rid

base

d fr

uit

fly t

rapp

ing

at p

orts

of

entr

y. U

sing

bio

logi

cal d

ata

and

mod

ern

anal

ytic

al

appr

oach

es a

s th

e ba

sis

for

desi

gnin

g ne

w t

rapp

ing

arra

ys,

both

the

effi

cacy

and

effi

cien

cy o

f fr

uit

fly s

urve

illan

ce c

ould

be

incr

ease

d. T

ime

to im

pact

: 2-

5 ye

ars

1.2

.3 W

ith

in c

omm

odit

y d

etec

tion

Output:Toolsavailableforautomaticdetectionofthepresenceoffruitflyinim

portedcom

modities

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Ver

y la

rge

amou

nts

of fru

it fly

sus

cept

ible

fre

sh c

omm

oditi

es e

nter

Aus

tral

ian

port

s ev

ery

day.

Aut

omat

ed m

eans

of de

tect

ing

frui

t fly

infe

stat

ion

in t

hose

impo

rtat

ions

, m

ost

likel

y th

roug

h ‘s

mar

t no

se’ t

echn

olog

y, w

ould

gr

eatly

str

engt

hen

bord

er q

uara

ntin

e. T

ime

to im

pact

: 5-

10 y

ears

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

19

1.2

.4 S

mar

t tr

aps

Output:Automaticdetectionandreportingtoolsavailableforfruitflysurveillancetraps

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Cur

rent

ly,

all f

ruit

fly s

urve

illan

ce t

raps

nee

d to

be

man

ually

col

lect

ed a

nd s

orte

d. T

his

gene

rally

co

nstit

utes

the

gre

ates

t pa

rt o

f su

rvei

llanc

e co

sts.

Eco

nom

ical

ly v

iabl

e re

mot

e tr

aps

whi

ch c

ould

det

ect,

iden

tify

and

then

re

port

on

frui

t fly

cap

ture

s of

bio

secu

rity

con

cern

wou

ld g

reat

ly s

trea

mlin

e th

e na

tiona

l sur

veill

ance

sys

tem

.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

5-15

yea

rs1.2.5Com

munitysurveillance

Output:Remotecommunitiesengagedwithfruitflysurveillance,sostrengtheningbordersecurity

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: T

he g

reat

est

thre

at o

f ex

otic

fru

it fly

ent

ry is

in n

orth

ern

Aust

ralia

, ov

er v

ery

larg

e re

mot

e ar

eas.

In

crea

sed

enga

gem

ent

with

tra

ditio

nal o

wne

rs o

n fr

uit

fly a

nd o

ther

issu

es o

f bi

osec

urity

con

cern

wou

ld g

reat

ly s

tren

gthe

n no

rthe

rn A

ustr

alia

n su

rvei

llanc

e. T

ime

to im

pact

: 3-

20 y

ears

Su

b-t

hem

e 1

.3In

vasi

on b

iolo

gy

Nee

dA g

reat

man

y ex

otic

fru

it fly

spe

cies

hav

e th

e po

tent

ial t

o en

ter

Aust

ralia

, bu

t th

is d

oes

not

mea

n th

at a

ll w

ould

bec

ome

pest

s, o

r, if

they

wer

e pe

sts,

how

sig

nific

ant

they

wou

ld b

ecom

e. I

f th

ey d

o en

ter,

we

curr

ently

can

not

pred

ict

how

far

the

y m

ight

spr

ead,

or

wha

t th

eir

pref

erre

d ha

bita

ts m

ight

be

with

in a

loca

l are

a. T

his

type

of

info

rmat

ion

is n

eede

d to

prior

itise

su

rvei

llanc

e ef

fort

s an

d de

sign

em

erge

ncy

resp

onse

s. W

e in

clud

e in

thi

s se

ctio

n re

sear

ch o

n th

e Spo

tted

Win

g D

roso

phila

, D

roso

phila

suz

ukii,

whi

ch,

whi

le n

ot a

tep

hriti

d sp

ecie

s, s

hare

s a

sim

ilar

biol

ogy

and

pote

ntia

l im

pact

to

man

y of

the

tru

e fr

uit

flies

.O

utc

ome

Bet

ter

abili

ty t

o pr

ioritis

e su

rvei

llanc

e ac

tiviti

es a

gain

st in

divi

dual

fru

it fly

pes

ts,

and

to p

rior

itise

the

nee

d fo

r an

d si

ze o

f an

em

erge

ncy

resp

onse

in t

he e

vent

of an

incu

rsio

n.O

utp

uts

Det

aile

d da

ta s

heet

s on

the

pot

entia

l pes

t st

atus

of ex

otic

fru

it fly

spe

cies

, in

clud

ing

likel

y af

fect

ed c

omm

oditi

es a

nd

indu

stries

, po

tent

ial r

ate

and

rang

e of

spr

ead,

pot

entia

l inf

esta

tion

leve

ls in

aff

ecte

d co

mm

oditi

es,

and

likel

y in

tera

ctio

ns w

ith

othe

r fr

uit

fly s

peci

es a

nd t

he lo

cal e

nviron

men

t.A

lign

men

t to

NFF

S &

NFF

S

Imp

lem

enta

tion

Pla

n5.

2, 5

.3,

PR2

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s1.3.1Clim

atematchingofexoticfruitflies

Output:Newknowledgetoinformriskassessmentsontheabilityofexoticfruitfliestoacclim

atetoAustralian

envi

ron

men

tal c

ond

itio

ns

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Man

y fr

uit

fly s

peci

es o

f th

reat

to

Aust

ralia

are

cur

rent

ly t

ropi

cal a

nd s

ubtr

opic

al s

peci

es,

and

ther

efor

e la

rgel

y of

qua

rant

ine

conc

ern

to t

he far

nor

th.

How

ever

, th

e po

tent

ial o

f su

ch s

peci

es t

o sp

read

mor

e w

idel

y in

to

tem

pera

te p

rodu

ctio

n ar

eas

unde

r cl

imat

e ch

ange

will

gre

atly

incr

ease

the

ir li

kely

pes

t st

atus

. Suc

h sp

read

, as

sho

wn

for

Que

ensl

and

frui

t fly

, w

ill a

lso

be in

fluen

ced

by b

oth

thei

r ab

ility

to

adap

t to

new

con

ditio

ns a

nd t

heir in

nate

env

iron

men

tal

tole

ranc

es.

Rese

arch

is r

equi

red

on e

nviron

men

tal t

oler

ance

s an

d ad

apta

tion

abili

ties

of f

ruit

flies

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 4-

15 y

ears

1.3.2Hostmatchingofexoticfruitflies

Output:Newknowledgetoinformriskassessmentsonthehostandhabitatpreferencesofexoticfruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Kno

win

g ho

st u

se p

atte

rns

of e

xotic

flie

s an

d th

eir

pref

erre

d en

viro

nmen

tal c

ondi

tions

are

key

is

sues

, bo

th for

des

igni

ng s

urve

illan

ce a

rray

s an

d ta

rget

ing

cont

rols

in e

vent

of

an in

curs

ion.

Suc

h in

form

atio

n is

unk

now

n, o

r kn

own

only

at

a su

perfi

cial

leve

l (e.

g. a

sim

ple,

unr

anke

d ho

st li

st)

for

mos

t ex

otic

fru

it fli

es o

f co

ncer

n to

Aus

tral

ia.

Tim

e to

im

pact

: 4-

15 y

ears

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

20

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

1.3.3Lifehistoriesofexoticfruitflies

Ou

tpu

t: N

ew k

now

led

ge

to in

form

ris

k as

sess

men

ts o

n t

he

rep

rod

uct

ive,

dis

per

sive

an

d c

omp

etit

ive

cap

acit

y of

exoticfruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Fru

it fli

es v

ary

grea

tly in

the

ir r

epro

duct

ive,

dis

pers

ive

and

com

petit

ive

capa

city

, gr

eatly

in

fluen

cing

the

ir o

vera

ll in

vasi

ve c

apac

ity.

Wor

king

with

offsh

ore

colle

ague

s, m

ore

basi

c bi

olog

y of

thi

s ty

pe n

eeds

to

be

gath

ered

for

fru

it fli

es w

hich

thr

eate

n Au

stra

lia,

so t

heir t

rue

inva

sive

cap

acity

can

be

dete

rmin

ed.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

4-15

yea

rs1

.3.4

Off

shor

e re

sear

ch

Ou

tpu

t: N

ew k

now

led

ge

to in

form

ris

k as

sess

men

ts a

nd

incu

rsio

n m

anag

emen

t D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: M

ost

exot

ic fru

it fli

es o

f th

reat

to

Aust

ralia

com

e fr

om c

ount

ries

whe

re f

undi

ng f

or r

esea

rch

is

high

ly li

mite

d or

abs

ent.

In

such

cas

es A

ustr

alia

can

gai

n m

uch

bene

fit b

y fu

ndin

g of

fsho

re r

esea

rch.

Thi

s is

par

ticul

arly

the

ca

se w

here

the

info

rmat

ion

need

ed b

y Aus

tral

ia is

not

the

sam

e as

mig

ht b

e ne

eded

for

loca

l cro

p pr

otec

tion

(for

exa

mpl

e tr

ialli

ng n

ovel

lure

s, o

r ga

ther

ing

gene

ral l

ife-h

isto

ry d

ata,

or

test

ing

cont

rol s

trat

egie

s).

Su

b-t

hem

e 1

.4D

iag

nos

tics

Nee

dTh

ere

are

over

400

0 sp

ecie

s of

fru

it fly

, bu

t on

ly a

ppro

xim

atel

y 10

0 of

the

se a

re p

ests

. Sep

arat

ing

pest

fro

m n

on-p

est

spec

ies

is t

he c

ore

com

pone

nt o

f an

y su

rvei

llanc

e pr

ogra

m,

and

the

area

of

grea

test

cha

lleng

e to

Aus

tral

ia.

Aus

tral

ia n

o lo

nger

has

an

empl

oyed

fru

it fly

tax

onom

ist,

whi

le t

he s

tand

ard

mol

ecul

ar ‘b

arco

des’

whi

ch a

re m

eant

to

supp

ort

quar

antin

e in

the

abs

ence

of

spe

cial

ist

taxo

nom

ists

are

not

orio

usly

inef

ficie

nt for

fru

it fli

es.

The

field

is f

urth

er c

ompl

icat

ed b

y th

e fa

ct t

hat

stan

dard

ta

xono

my

of fru

it fli

es is

bas

ed o

n ad

ult

char

acte

rs,

but

it is

the

mag

gots

whi

ch a

re in

terc

epte

d in

com

mod

ity t

rade

and

the

se

rem

ain

esse

ntia

lly u

nide

ntifi

able

. O

utc

ome

Bet

ter

abili

ty t

o ac

cura

tely

iden

tify

both

adu

lt an

d im

mat

ure

frui

t fly

spe

cies

, be

the

y ex

otic

or

ende

mic

to

Aust

ralia

, th

roug

h im

prov

ed c

olla

bora

tion

betw

een

frui

t fly

tax

onom

y re

sear

cher

s an

d fr

ont

line

diag

nost

icia

ns.

Ou

tpu

tsFa

ster

, ch

eape

r, m

ore

accu

rate

iden

tifica

tion

of fru

it fli

es.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

7.5,

7.6

, 8.

2, 8

.3,

PR2,

PR3

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s1.4.1Fruitflysystematics

Ou

tpu

t: A

rob

ust

sys

tem

atic

fra

mew

ork,

incl

ud

ing

res

olu

tion

of

pes

t sp

ecie

s co

mp

lexe

s, p

rovi

din

g t

he

bas

is f

or

accuratefruitflydiagnostics

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: R

obus

t di

agno

stic

s is

bui

lt up

on s

ound

tax

onom

y, w

hich

itse

lf sh

ould

be

built

upo

n a

syst

emat

ic

fram

ewor

k. M

uch

frui

t fly

tax

onom

y, p

artic

ular

ly in

the

gen

us B

actr

ocer

a, d

oes

not

have

a s

yste

mat

ic b

asis

. Th

is is

pa

rtic

ular

ly p

robl

emat

ic for

spe

cies

com

plex

es,

such

as

the

Orien

tal f

ruit

fly,

Ban

ana

fly a

nd B

actr

ocer

a ta

u co

mpl

exes

, al

l of

whi

ch c

onta

in s

peci

es o

f gr

eat

econ

omic

impo

rtan

ce b

ut for

whi

ch t

he r

elat

ions

hips

bet

wee

n ta

xa a

re u

nkno

wn.

Sys

tem

atic

s in

fru

it fli

es n

ot o

nly

need

s a

mol

ecul

ar a

ppro

ach,

but

for

ver

y cl

osel

y re

late

d sp

ecie

s al

so r

equi

res

quan

tifica

tion

of t

raits

suc

h as

phe

rom

ones

, m

ate

com

patib

ility

and

oth

ers,

col

late

d w

ithin

an

inte

grat

ive

syst

emat

ic f

ram

ewor

k. A

wel

l-po

pula

ted

and

robu

st s

yste

mat

ic p

hylo

geny

for

fru

it fli

es w

ill for

m t

he b

asis

for

all

futu

re f

ruit

fly d

iagn

ostic

s. T

ime

to im

pact

: 3-

6 ye

ars

1.4.2Fruitflykey

Output:Diagnostickeyswhichcanbeusedbynon-specialiststoidentifyunknownfruitflyspecimens

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Ide

ntify

ing

an u

nkno

wn

frui

t fly

spe

cim

en is

ext

raor

dina

rily

diffi

cult.

Adu

lt ke

ys a

re e

ither

no

n-ex

iste

nt o

r ef

fect

ivel

y un

usab

le t

o al

l exc

ept

a ra

pidl

y di

min

ishi

ng h

andf

ul o

f ex

pert

s. N

ew g

ener

atio

n m

ulti-

entr

y,

com

preh

ensi

vely

illu

stra

ted

keys

, bu

ilt a

s ap

plic

atio

ns for

mob

ile d

evic

es,

wou

ld g

reat

ly a

id f

ruit

fly s

urve

illan

ce a

nd

quar

antin

e. T

ime

to im

pact

: 3-

6 ye

ars

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

21

1.4

.3 D

iag

nos

tic

stan

dar

ds

Output:Approvednationaldiagnosticstandardswhichcanbeusedtoconfirmtheidentityofbothadultand

larvalpestfruitflyspecies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Dev

elop

men

t of

mol

ecul

ar d

iagn

ostic

too

ls f

or a

dult

and

larv

al f

ruit

flies

has

bee

n gr

eatly

impe

ded

by t

he a

bsen

ce o

f a

com

preh

ensi

ve p

hylo

gene

tic fra

mew

ork,

lack

of

adeq

uate

sam

ple

size

s to

wor

k up

on,

and

conf

usio

n ar

ound

spe

cies

lim

its w

ithin

fru

it fly

spe

cies

com

plex

es.

As

thes

e is

sues

are

res

olve

d, r

obus

t di

agno

stic

mar

kers

, w

hich

wor

k fo

r bo

th a

dult

and

imm

atur

e fr

uit

flies

, ne

ed t

o be

dev

elop

ed a

nd im

plem

ente

d fo

r fr

ont

line

diag

nost

icia

ns a

s pa

rt o

f SPH

DS

appr

oved

Nat

iona

l Dia

gnos

tic S

tand

ards

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 4-

10 y

ears

1.4.4Rapidsortingandidentification

Output:Toolsavailablefortherapidsortingandidentificationoflargefruitflytrapcatches

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: S

ortin

g th

roug

h hu

ndre

ds o

r ev

en t

hous

ands

of

spec

imen

s fr

om a

sin

gle

trap

is a

logi

stic

al

prob

lem

in a

reas

with

hig

h en

dem

ic fru

it fly

num

bers

. M

achi

ne le

arni

ng w

ith r

obot

ic s

ortin

g co

uld

grea

tly r

educ

e th

is lo

gist

ic

cons

trai

nt.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

5-15

yea

rs

Sub-theme1.5

Res

pon

seN

eed

Des

pite

the

bes

t ef

fort

s of

pre

-bor

der

and

bord

er p

rote

ctio

n, A

ustr

alia

n an

d in

tern

atio

nal e

xper

ienc

es s

how

tha

t on

e or

mor

e in

curs

ions

by

exot

ic fru

it fly

pes

ts a

re h

ighl

y lik

ely

with

in t

he n

ext

twen

ty y

ears

. If

res

pond

ed t

o qu

ickl

y, f

ruit

flies

are

a g

roup

of

inse

cts

for

whi

ch it

has

bee

n sh

own

that

era

dica

tion

is a

chie

vabl

e (S

uckl

ing

et a

l. 20

14).

Hav

ing

wel

l dev

elop

ed e

mer

genc

y re

spon

se p

roto

cols

in t

he e

vent

of an

incu

rsio

n is

hig

hly

desi

rabl

e. I

f an

incu

rsio

n is

not

era

dica

ted,

the

n in

dust

ry n

eeds

to

deal

with

the

new

pes

t an

d pe

st m

anag

emen

t pl

ans

are

need

ed.

Ou

tcom

eBet

ter

prep

ared

ness

(em

erge

ncy

resp

onse

pro

toco

ls)

to r

espo

nd t

o an

exo

tic f

ruit

fly in

curs

ion

thro

ugh

erad

icat

ion

or,

if un

succ

essf

ul,

thro

ugh

deta

iled

indu

stry

pes

t m

anag

emen

t pl

ans.

Ou

tpu

tsSha

rper

res

pons

es t

o fr

uit

fly in

curs

ions

thr

ough

dev

elop

men

t of

fru

it fly

em

erge

ncy

resp

onse

and

incu

rsio

n re

spon

se p

lans

.A

lign

men

t to

NFF

S &

NFF

S

Imp

lem

enta

tion

Pla

n4.

2, 4

.4,

PR1,

PR2

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s1.5.1Nationalincursionresponsestrategies

Output:Regularlyupdatednationalincursionresponsestrategiesforbothlureandnon-lureresponsivefruitfly

spec

ies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Rev

iew

Aus

tral

ian

and

inte

rnat

iona

l era

dica

tion

and

resp

onse

pro

cedu

res

for

frui

t fli

es a

nd

deve

lop,

in c

olla

bora

tion

with

app

ropr

iate

Aus

tral

ian,

Sta

te a

nd in

dust

ry b

odie

s, a

nd in

alig

nmen

t w

ith t

he E

mer

genc

y Pl

ant

Pest

Res

pons

e D

eed,

incu

rsio

n re

spon

se s

trat

egie

s fo

r ex

otic

fru

it fli

es d

etec

ted

in A

ustr

alia

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 1-

20 y

ears

1.5.2Industrybiosecurityplans

Output:Up-to-datefruitflyincursioncontingencyplansandcontrolmethodsincorporatedintoindustry

bio

secu

rity

pla

ns

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Whi

le fru

it fli

es a

re li

sted

ver

y hi

ghly

as

thre

ats

in in

dust

ry b

iose

curity

pla

ns,

ther

e is

oft

en li

ttle

or

no a

dditi

onal

info

rmat

ion

on t

he in

dust

ry’s

res

pons

e to

fru

it fly

in t

he e

vent

of

an in

curs

ion.

Wor

king

with

PH

A a

nd r

espe

ctiv

e in

dust

ries

, em

bed

deta

iled

frui

t fly

res

pons

e st

rate

gies

into

indu

stry

bio

secu

rity

pla

ns.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

1-20

yea

rs

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

22

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

Them

e 2

: P

re-h

arve

st c

ontr

ols

Them

e O

verv

iew

: Fr

uit

flies

are

the

prim

ary

pre-

harv

est

inse

ct p

ests

of ho

rtic

ultu

re in

all

Aust

ralia

n st

ates

exc

ept

Tasm

ania

and

Sou

th A

ustr

alia

(w

here

the

y ar

e ab

sent

). E

stim

ates

of th

e di

rect

pro

duct

ion

loss

cos

ts o

f fr

uit

fly v

ary

sign

ifica

ntly

, bu

t w

ith t

he t

otal

ann

ual i

nter

natio

nal a

nd d

omes

tic e

xpor

t va

lue

of

Aus

tral

ian

frui

t fly

sus

cept

ible

hor

ticul

tura

l pro

duct

ion

valu

ed a

t ap

prox

imat

ely

$1.5

billi

on (

NFF

S),

the

n ev

en a

hig

hly

cons

erva

tive

2 pe

r ce

nt lo

ss a

cros

s th

e in

dust

ry is

wor

th $

30m

illio

n/an

num

. Th

e re

al c

osts

of fr

uit

fly a

re m

uch

mor

e, a

s th

is e

stim

ate

does

not

incl

ude

the

crop

pro

tect

ion

cost

s, w

ithou

t w

hich

mos

t fr

uit

fly s

usce

ptib

le in

dust

ries

cou

ld n

ot p

rodu

ce c

omm

erci

ally

acc

epta

ble

crop

s. S

ince

the

rel

ease

of

the

draf

t N

FFS in

200

8, t

he r

egul

ator

y w

ithdr

awal

of

the

orga

noph

osph

ate

inse

ctic

ides

dim

etho

ate

and

fent

hion

for

mos

t fr

uit

fly u

ses,

and

the

alm

ost

entir

e co

llaps

e of

are

a fr

ee (

and

asso

ciat

ed b

uffe

r) z

ones

in

sout

h-ea

st A

ustr

alia

, ha

s se

vere

ly e

xace

rbat

ed t

he fru

it fly

pro

blem

. Sev

eral

indu

stries

are

now

at

sign

ifica

nt r

isk

of f

ailu

re d

ue t

o fr

uit

fly;

the

low

-chi

ll st

one

frui

t in

dust

ry in

far

nor

ther

n N

SW

and

sou

th-e

ast

Que

ensl

and

is o

ne s

uch

exam

ple.

The

loss

of co

ver-

spra

ys a

nd a

rea

free

dom

pre

sent

ext

rem

e ch

alle

nges

for

the

ent

ire

frui

t fly

sta

keho

lder

com

mun

ity,

the

brun

t of

whi

ch is

bor

ne b

y gr

ower

s.

To m

eet

this

crisi

s, a

ran

ge o

f RD

&E

stra

tegi

es n

eed

to b

e pu

t in

pla

ce,

so t

hat

alte

rnat

ive

trea

tmen

ts c

an b

e of

fere

d to

gro

wer

s in

the

imm

edia

te t

erm

, w

hile

st

rate

gic

rese

arch

and

dev

elop

men

t co

nsol

idat

es t

he o

ptio

ns for

new

con

trol

s in

the

med

ium

and

long

ter

m.

A k

ey a

spec

t of

the

RD

&E

Plan

for

pre

-har

vest

co

ntro

l is

that

it w

ill n

ever

be

as e

asy

as it

was

in t

he p

ast.

Gro

wer

s co

uld

achi

eve

high

leve

ls o

f in

field

fru

it fly

con

trol

thr

ough

a s

mal

l num

ber

of la

te s

easo

n sp

rays

. Pr

evio

us s

pray

reg

imes

req

uire

d lit

tle b

iolo

gica

l und

erst

andi

ng o

f th

e pe

st,

whi

le s

till g

ivin

g ve

ry g

ood

cont

rol.

Even

if r

epla

cem

ents

for

dim

etho

ate

and

fent

hion

are

fou

nd,

the

glob

al p

atte

rn in

pes

t m

anag

emen

t is

tha

t tr

aditi

onal

pes

ticid

es a

re b

eing

pha

sed

out

and

alte

rnat

ive

stra

tegi

es,

base

d on

mor

e en

viro

nmen

tally

‘frien

dly’

too

ls,

will

bec

ome

the

norm

. Th

e Eu

rope

an U

nion

has

alrea

dy d

irec

ted

that

pes

t m

anag

emen

t w

ithin

its

mem

ber

natio

ns s

houl

d on

ly

be u

nder

take

n th

roug

h an

Int

egra

ted

Pest

Man

agem

ent

appr

oach

(Eu

rope

an U

nion

200

9).

Inte

grat

ed P

est

Man

agem

ent

does

not

exc

lude

the

use

of

pest

icid

es,

but

they

bec

ome

only

one

com

pone

nt o

f a

larg

er m

anag

emen

t to

olbo

x. F

or p

re-h

arve

st fru

it fly

con

trol

in A

ustr

alia

, ov

er a

tw

enty

yea

r tim

efra

me,

thi

s m

eans

th

at;

(i)

frui

t fly

con

trol

will

inva

riab

ly u

se m

ultip

le t

echn

ique

s w

ithin

an

inte

grat

ive

fram

ewor

k; (

ii) m

anag

emen

t is

like

ly t

o be

app

lied

at t

he le

vel o

f m

ultip

le

farm

s or

who

le p

rodu

ctio

n di

strict

s; a

nd (

iii)

the

appl

icat

ion

of c

ontr

ol t

ools

will

req

uire

muc

h m

ore

soph

istic

ated

kno

wle

dge

of t

he p

hysi

olog

y, b

iolo

gy a

nd

ecol

ogy

of t

he t

arge

t or

gani

sms.

Thi

s w

ill n

eed

to b

e su

ppor

ted,

bot

h im

med

iate

ly a

nd in

to t

he lo

nger

ter

m,

by a

muc

h st

reng

then

ed e

xten

sion

pro

gram

; th

is is

de

alt

with

late

r in

thi

s do

cum

ent.

Alig

ns w

ith N

FFS r

ecom

men

datio

ns 7

, 9,

10,

18

& 1

9 an

d N

FFS I

mpl

emen

tatio

n Str

ateg

y Pr

ojec

ts 3

, 4

& 5

.

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.1M

onit

orin

g a

nd

det

ecti

onN

eed

Nea

rly

all a

spec

ts o

f in

field

pes

t co

ntro

l sho

uld

rely

on

know

ing

how

man

y of

the

tar

get

orga

nism

s ar

e pr

esen

t. I

n so

me

resp

ects

fru

it fli

es a

re w

ell s

uite

d fo

r m

onito

ring

, as

man

y Bac

troc

era

spec

ies

and

Med

fly r

espo

nd t

o lu

res.

Des

pite

the

se

posi

tives

, th

ere

are

man

y w

eakn

esse

s w

ith r

espe

ct t

o fr

uit

fly m

onito

ring

in A

ustr

alia

. N

ot a

ll pe

st s

peci

es r

espo

nd t

o lu

res,

ex

istin

g lu

res

vary

in t

heir e

ffec

tiven

ess

base

d on

loca

l var

iabl

es,

rela

tions

hips

bet

wee

n tr

ap c

atch

and

infe

stat

ion

are

not

know

n, a

nd s

o on

. As

a ba

sis

for

mor

e ef

fect

ive

and

effic

ient

infie

ld f

ruit

fly c

ontr

ols,

key

R&

D is

sues

aro

und

mon

itoring

nee

d to

be

reso

lved

.O

utc

ome

Bet

ter

infie

ld c

ontr

ol o

f pe

st fru

it fli

es t

hrou

gh b

ette

r ab

ility

to

mat

ch c

ontr

ols

with

pop

ulat

ion

num

bers

.O

utp

uts

A k

now

ledg

e ba

se a

roun

d fr

uit

fly m

onito

ring

whi

ch w

ill b

ette

r lin

k tr

ap c

atch

with

rea

l pop

ulat

ion

num

bers

, an

d ne

w o

r im

prov

ed lu

res

with

bet

ter

attr

actio

n to

tar

get

frui

t fli

es.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

7.5,

7.6

, 7.

7, P

R3,

PR4,

PR5

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

23

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s2

.1.1

Bet

ter

lure

s Output:Moreeffectiveluresavailableformonitoringandcontrollingfruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

The

sta

ndar

d fr

uit

fly lu

res,

cue

-lur

e an

d m

ethy

l eug

enol

, va

ry in

the

ir a

ttra

ctan

cy t

o di

ffer

ent

spec

ies

and

loca

l wea

ther

con

ditio

ns (

e.g.

tem

pera

ture

and

hum

idity

). C

hem

ical

ana

logu

es o

f cu

e-lu

re s

how

gre

at p

rom

ise

as

bett

er fru

it fly

att

ract

ants

; de

velo

ping

the

se c

hem

ical

s, a

nd u

nder

stan

ding

how

the

y op

erat

e in

the

fiel

d, is

a k

ey fi

rst

step

in

impr

ovin

g m

onito

ring

. Th

is in

vest

men

t ar

ea is

als

o di

rect

ly r

elev

ant

to s

ubth

eme

2.4

‘Bet

ter

lure

and

kill

’.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

2-5

year

s2

.1.2

Op

tim

isin

g t

rap

s Output:Atrapdesignwhichmaximisesflycapture

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: M

any

differ

ent

frui

t fly

tra

p ty

pes

are

curr

ently

in u

se in

Aus

tral

ia.

Thes

e tr

aps

have

bee

n de

sign

ed

for

diff

eren

t op

erat

iona

l and

com

mer

cial

pur

pose

s, a

nd t

his

has

resu

lted

in t

raps

of

vary

ing

effic

ienc

y. R

&D

is n

eede

d to

co

mpa

re t

he e

ffici

ency

of ex

istin

g tr

aps

unde

r st

anda

rd c

ondi

tions

, an

d to

dev

elop

a n

ew t

rap

desi

gn if

req

uire

d.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

2-5

year

s.2

.1.3

Op

tim

isin

g t

rap

pla

cem

ent

Output:Guidelinesavailableforoptimisingfruitflytrapplacementwithrespecttotrappingefficacyand

efficiency

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: A

s fo

r bo

rder

sur

veill

ance

(se

e su

b-th

eme

1.2)

, si

gnifi

cant

gai

ns in

effi

cien

cy c

an b

e m

ade

by

optim

isin

g tr

ap p

lace

men

t, r

athe

r th

an r

elyi

ng o

n st

anda

rd t

rapp

ing

grid

s. T

ime

to im

pact

: 3-

5 ye

ars

2.1

.4 S

mar

t tr

aps

II

Output:Automaticdetectionandreportingtoolsavailableforfruitflymonitoringtraps

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

For

non

-end

emic

are

as w

here

fru

it fly

pop

ulat

ions

may

be

low

, au

tom

ated

sam

plin

g an

d re

port

ing

will

sig

nific

antly

dec

reas

e co

sts

and

incr

ease

res

pons

e tim

es.

Use

of

the

Nat

iona

l Bro

adba

nd N

etw

ork

and

digi

tal i

mag

e te

chno

logy

will

gre

atly

adv

ance

thi

s ar

ea,

as m

ight

the

aut

omat

ed c

hem

ical

or

win

g-be

at r

ecog

nitio

n of

tar

get

flies

.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

3-6

year

s2.1.5Infestationdetection

Output:Amobiletoolwhichallowsthedetectionoffruitflyeggsandlarvaeinfruitandvegetables

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Cur

rent

fru

it fly

sur

veill

ance

met

hods

tar

get

adul

t fr

uit

flies

, bu

t fr

uit

infe

stat

ion

leve

ls m

ay b

e m

ore

mea

ning

ful t

o a

grow

er.

Han

d-he

ld d

evic

es w

hich

can

det

ect

eggs

or

youn

g m

aggo

ts in

fru

it w

ith h

igh

confi

denc

e ar

e ne

eded

for

thi

s to

occ

ur.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

5-10

yea

rs2

.1.6

Low

den

sity

mon

itor

ing

Output:Statisticaltoolswhichallowestimationoftruefruitflypopulationnumberswhentrapcatchesarevery

low

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: G

reat

con

trov

ersy

exi

sts

arou

nd t

he w

orld

with

res

pect

to

‘trap

ped

belo

w d

etec

tabl

e lim

its’

vers

us ‘e

radi

catio

n’.

As

Aust

ralia

is li

kely

to

seek

to

rene

w a

rea

free

dom

s th

roug

h er

adic

atio

n, s

tatis

tical

and

exp

erim

enta

l ap

proa

ches

nee

d to

be

appl

ied

to t

he q

uest

ion

of t

rue

popu

latio

n si

ze a

nd b

iose

curity

ris

k, w

hen

popu

latio

ns a

re v

ery

low

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 3-

5 ye

ars

2.1

.7 W

orki

ng

key

Output:Adiagnostictoolwhichcanbeusedbynon-specialiststoidentifyAustralia’sfruitflyfauna

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Aus

tral

ia h

as n

early

100

spec

ies

of e

ndem

ic,

frui

t in

fest

ing

frui

t fli

es.

No

wor

kabl

e di

agno

stic

too

l ex

ists

for

the

se s

peci

es a

nd t

his

nega

tivel

y im

pact

s on

the

abi

lity

to d

eter

min

e th

e fly

spe

cies

cau

ght

in t

raps

, es

peci

ally

in

ende

mic

are

as.

New

gen

erat

ion

diag

nost

ics

need

to

be d

evel

oped

for

Aus

tral

ian

pest

and

non

-pes

t fr

uit

flies

.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

3-5

year

s (s

ee a

lso

sub-

them

e 1.

4)

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

24

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.2C

over

sp

rays

Nee

dTh

e re

gula

tory

loss

of th

e lo

ng-s

ervi

ng c

over

spr

ays

dim

etho

ate

and

fent

hion

for

mos

t in

field

fru

it fly

con

trol

pur

pose

s ha

s le

ft

a hu

ge h

ole

in A

ustr

alia

n fr

uit

fly m

anag

emen

t. W

hile

alte

rnat

ive

cont

rols

exi

st a

nd c

an b

e im

prov

ed,

inse

ctic

ides

stil

l pla

y a

fund

amen

tal a

nd im

port

ant

role

in in

sect

pes

t m

anag

emen

t. U

rgen

t re

sear

ch is

nee

ded

to g

ener

ate

perm

its f

or a

ltern

ativ

e ex

istin

g ch

emic

als,

and

long

er t

erm

foc

us n

eeds

to

be g

iven

to

findi

ng n

ew c

hem

ical

con

trol

s.O

utc

ome

Bet

ter

infie

ld c

ontr

ol o

f pe

st fru

it fli

es.

Ou

tpu

tsCom

mer

cial

pes

ticid

e pr

oduc

ts w

hich

can

be

appl

ied

as p

art

of t

he c

ontr

ol ‘t

oolb

ox’ f

or in

field

con

trol

of

frui

t fli

es.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

Non

e id

entifi

ed.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s2

.2.1

Reg

istr

atio

n

Ou

tpu

t: R

egis

trat

ion

ava

ilab

le f

or e

xist

ing

act

ive

ing

red

ien

ts

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

In

the

shor

t te

rm,

urge

nt r

esea

rch

is n

eede

d to

gai

n re

gist

ratio

n fo

r ex

istin

g ag

ricu

ltura

l che

mic

als

whi

ch a

re n

ot c

urre

ntly

per

mitt

ed for

fru

it fly

con

trol

. Re

sear

ch is

nee

ded

not

sole

ly f

or r

egis

trat

ion,

but

als

o fo

r in

field

re

sear

ch o

n ho

w b

est

thes

e ch

emic

als

can

be a

pplie

d w

ithin

the

cro

ppin

g cy

cle.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

1-3

year

s2

.2.2

New

pes

tici

des

Output:Newactivechemicalingredientsavailableforthecontrolofpestfruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

The

dev

elop

men

t of

new

act

ive

pest

icid

e in

gred

ient

s is

a lo

ng t

erm

pro

cess

bey

ond

the

likel

y sc

ope

of r

esea

rch

fund

ed u

nder

thi

s Pl

an.

Nev

erth

eles

s, fru

it fly

res

earc

hers

nee

d to

rem

ain

cogn

isan

t of

new

act

ive

com

poun

ds b

eing

dev

elop

ed a

nd e

nsur

e th

ey a

re t

rial

led

agai

nst

frui

t fli

es a

t th

e ea

rlie

st o

ppor

tuni

ty.

Col

labo

ratio

ns w

ith t

he

chem

ical

com

pani

es a

re a

key

ele

men

t of

thi

s ac

tion.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

5-20

yea

rs2

.2.3

Non

-let

hal

ch

emic

al t

reat

men

t O

utp

ut:

Reg

istr

atio

n p

erm

its

avai

lab

le f

or c

hem

ical

tre

atm

ents

wh

ich

pro

tect

th

e cr

op t

hro

ug

h m

ean

s ot

her

th

an

poi

son

ing

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: P

rodu

cts

exis

t w

hich

can

pro

tect

the

cro

p th

roug

h m

eans

oth

er t

han

pois

onin

g. A

gric

ultu

ral o

ils,

for

exam

ple,

hav

e be

en s

how

n to

dec

reas

e fr

uit

fly o

vipo

sitio

n in

exp

erim

enta

l situ

atio

ns,

and

othe

r re

pelle

nt/d

eter

rent

ch

emic

als

are

likel

y to

exi

st.

Rese

arch

is n

eede

d to

ope

ratio

nalis

e ex

istin

g tr

eatm

ents

in t

his

clas

s, a

nd t

o de

velo

p ne

w o

nes

base

d on

fru

it fly

beh

avio

ur s

tudi

es.

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.3N

atu

ral e

nem

ies

and

bio

log

ical

con

trol

Nee

dIn

Aus

tral

ia,

natu

ral e

nem

ies

have

not

tra

ditio

nally

bee

n us

ed a

s pa

rt o

f th

e fr

uit

fly c

ontr

ol t

oolb

ox.

This

is c

ontr

ary

to t

he

situ

atio

n in

tern

atio

nally

, w

here

the

re is

qui

te s

igni

fican

t re

sear

ch,

deve

lopm

ent

and

impl

emen

tatio

n as

soci

ated

with

fru

it fly

nat

ural

ene

mie

s. T

he n

atur

al e

nem

ies

of fru

it fli

es c

onsi

dere

d he

re in

clud

e fr

ee-l

ivin

g sp

ecia

list

para

sito

ids,

pat

hoge

nic

orga

nism

s w

hich

can

be

appl

ied

as b

iope

stic

ides

, an

d in

tern

al m

icro

orga

nism

s w

hich

neg

ativ

ely

influ

ence

the

fitn

ess

of fl

ies.

Ou

tcom

eBet

ter

infie

ld c

ontr

ol o

f pe

st fru

it fli

es.

Ou

tpu

tsFo

r bi

opes

ticid

es,

com

mer

cial

pro

duct

s w

hich

can

be

appl

ied

as p

art

of t

he c

ontr

ol ‘t

oolb

ox’ f

or in

field

con

trol

of

frui

t fli

es.

For

free

livi

ng a

gent

s, t

he d

evel

opm

ent

of m

anip

ulat

ive

stra

tegi

es w

hich

lead

to

gene

ral d

epre

ssio

n of

fru

it fly

pop

ulat

ions

at

an

area

-wid

e le

vel.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

Non

e id

entifi

ed.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

25

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s2

.3.1

Par

asit

oid

s Output:Parasitoidsabletobeusedaspartofarea-widemanagementorSITagainstfruitfly

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Opi

ine

brac

onid

s ar

e fr

ee li

ving

egg

/lar

val/

pupa

l end

opar

asito

ids

of f

ruit

flies

. Re

sear

ch is

ne

eded

in a

ll as

pect

s of

the

bio

logy

and

eco

logy

of th

ese

was

ps,

part

icul

arly

with

res

pect

to

how

wild

pop

ulat

ions

mig

ht b

e m

anip

ulat

ed t

o he

lp s

uppr

ess

fly p

opul

atio

ns,

and

how

cul

ture

d po

pula

tions

mig

ht b

e m

ass-

rear

ed t

o be

rel

ease

d al

ongs

ide

SIT

flie

s. T

ime

to im

pact

: 3-

10 y

ears

2.3

.2 P

aras

ites

Output:Parasitesusedaspartoflong-term,sustainablecontrolofpestfruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Fru

it fli

es c

arry

a n

umbe

r of

inte

rnal

par

asite

s w

hich

can

neg

ativ

ely

affe

ct t

heir fi

tnes

s, t

he b

est

know

n of

whi

ch a

re W

olba

chia

. M

anip

ulat

ing

Wol

bach

ia for

fru

it fly

con

trol

is a

long

ter

m,

high

ris

k re

sear

ch p

ath,

whi

ch if

su

cces

sful

, co

uld

lead

to

very

dra

mat

ic c

ontr

ol g

ains

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 10

-15

year

s2

.3.3

Pat

hog

ens

Output:Pathogen-basedproductsregisteredasbiopesticidesforthecontrolofpestfruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

The

re is

som

e ve

ry s

catt

ered

lite

ratu

re s

how

ing

that

bot

h ad

ult

and

pre-

pupa

l fru

it fli

es a

re

susc

eptib

le t

o pa

thog

enic

fun

gi,

viru

ses

and

nem

atod

es.

This

wor

k ha

s be

en e

xplo

rato

ry in

Aus

tral

ia,

but

is m

ore

deve

lope

d in

tern

atio

nally

. Fo

cuse

d re

sear

ch a

nd d

evel

opm

ent

in t

his

area

cou

ld le

ad t

o ra

pid

gain

s an

d th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

com

mer

cial

bi

opes

ticid

es a

gain

st p

est

frui

t fli

es.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

3-10

yea

rs

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.4Lu

re-a

nd

-kill

Nee

d‘L

ure-

and-

kill’

is a

gen

eric

pes

t m

anag

emen

t te

rm w

hich

des

crib

es a

ny c

ontr

ol t

echn

ique

in w

hich

pes

ts a

re a

ttra

cted

to

a sp

ecifi

c lo

catio

n by

som

e fo

rm o

f lu

re,

at w

hich

poi

nt t

hey

are

kille

d (c

omm

only

with

a p

estic

ide)

. Lu

re-a

nd-k

ill t

echn

ique

s ar

e hi

ghly

sui

tabl

e fo

r or

gani

c ag

ricu

lture

, as

the

pes

ticid

e is

gen

eral

ly c

onta

ined

(e.

g. w

ithin

a t

rap)

and

so

the

crop

is n

ot

expo

sed

to t

he c

hem

ical

. Th

ere

are

seve

ral w

ell e

stab

lishe

d lu

re-a

nd-k

ill a

ppro

ache

s fo

r fr

uit

flies

and

fur

ther

dev

elop

men

t an

d re

finem

ent

of t

hese

app

roac

hes

is c

entr

al t

o th

e on

goin

g pr

e-ha

rves

t m

anag

emen

t of

fru

it fly

in A

ustr

alia

. O

utc

ome

Bet

ter

infie

ld c

ontr

ol o

f pe

st fru

it fli

es

Ou

tpu

tsA r

ange

of ne

w a

nd/o

r im

prov

ed,

com

mer

cial

ly a

vaila

ble

cont

rol t

ools

to

be u

sed

as p

art

of t

he c

ontr

ol ‘t

oolb

ox’ f

or in

field

co

ntro

l of fr

uit

flies

.A

lign

men

t to

NFF

S &

NFF

S

Imp

lem

enta

tion

Pla

n9.

8

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s2

.4.1

MA

T Output:TheMaleAnnihilationTechnique(MAT)optimisedforusebygrowersagainstpestfruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

The

MAT

app

roac

h us

es c

ue-l

ure

baite

d w

icks

or

waf

ers,

mix

ed w

ith a

n in

sect

icid

e, t

o lu

re a

nd k

ill

mal

e B.

tryo

ni.

Furt

her

rese

arch

is n

eede

d to

find

mor

e at

trac

tive

cue-

lure

ana

logu

es,

dete

rmin

e th

e at

trac

tive

dist

ance

of

the

lure

s un

der

differ

ent

cond

ition

s, a

nd t

o op

timis

e th

e de

nsity

of

MAT

dev

ices

in a

pro

duct

ion

area

. Im

med

iate

ter

m r

esea

rch

is

need

ed t

o te

st t

he e

ffica

cy o

f di

ffer

ent

com

mer

cial

MAT

dev

ices

aga

inst

eac

h ot

her.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

1-5

year

s

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

26

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

2.4

.2 S

PLA

T an

d o

ther

car

rier

s O

utp

ut:

Sp

ecia

lised

Ph

erom

one

& L

ure

Ap

plic

atio

n T

ech

nol

ogy

(SP

LAT)

tes

ted

an

d o

pti

mis

ed u

nd

er A

ust

ralia

n

con

dit

ion

s an

d a

vaila

ble

for

com

mer

cial

use

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: S

PLAT

is a

pro

prie

tary

, w

ax-b

ased

pro

duct

pro

duce

d in

the

USA

. It

is c

onsi

dere

d to

hav

e m

any

bene

fits

as a

car

rier

of bo

th t

he ‘l

ure’

and

‘kill

’ com

pone

nts

of lu

re-a

nd-k

ill a

gain

st f

ruit

flies

. Re

sear

ch n

eeds

to

be fi

nalis

ed

to v

alid

ate

SPL

AT a

gain

st M

edfly

and

Qfly

in A

ustr

alia

und

er d

iffer

ent

envi

ronm

enta

l and

com

mer

cial

con

ditio

ns.

Pro

duct

s si

mila

r to

SPL

AT a

lso

need

to

be t

este

d. T

ime

to im

pact

: 2-

3 ye

ars

2.4

.3 P

rote

in b

ait

spra

y Output:Proteinbaitspraytechnologyoptimisedforusebygrowersagainstpestfruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Alo

ng w

ith M

AT,

prot

ein

bait

spra

y is

the

sec

ond

stan

dard

lure

-and

-kill

app

roac

h us

ed t

o co

ntro

l fr

uit

fly.

It o

pera

tes

on t

he p

rem

ise

that

fru

it fli

es,

espe

cial

ly fem

ales

, ne

ed p

rote

in t

o se

xual

ly m

atur

e an

d la

y eg

gs.

This

ph

ysio

logi

cal r

equi

rem

ent

is m

anip

ulat

ed t

hrou

gh t

he a

pplic

atio

n of

spo

t or

str

ip s

pray

s of

poi

sone

d ye

ast

derive

d pr

otei

n, t

o w

hich

fem

ales

com

e to

fee

d an

d so

are

kill

ed.

Ther

e ar

e m

any

prob

lem

s w

ith t

he u

se o

f pr

otei

n ba

it sp

rays

; cu

rren

t pr

otei

ns

are

only

wea

kly

attr

activ

e, m

atur

e Q

fly fem

ales

may

req

uire

muc

h le

ss p

rote

in t

han

orig

inal

ly t

houg

ht,

curr

ent

appl

icat

ion

tech

nolo

gies

req

uire

wee

kly

reap

plic

atio

n, a

nd p

rote

in m

ay b

urn

folia

ge o

r m

ark

frui

t in

som

e cr

ops.

Res

earc

h to

ove

rcom

e al

l th

ese

oper

atio

nal w

eakn

esse

s, for

bot

h Q

fly a

nd M

edfly

, is

req

uire

d. T

ime

to im

pact

: 2-

6 ye

ars

2.4

.4 B

ait

stat

ion

s Output:Baitstationtechnologyoptimisedforusebygrowersagainstpestfruitflies

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: B

ait

stat

ions

fol

low

the

sam

e pr

inci

ple

of p

rote

in b

ait

spra

y, b

ut t

he b

ait

is c

onta

ined

and

so

phys

ical

ly s

epar

ated

fro

m t

he c

rop.

Thi

s ha

s ad

vant

ages

for

org

anic

pro

duct

ion,

neg

ates

phy

otox

ic e

ffec

ts t

o th

e cr

op,

can

allo

w s

trat

egic

pla

cem

ent

of t

he lu

re,

and

with

the

rig

ht a

ttra

ctan

t ca

n be

long

last

ing.

Res

earc

h is

nee

ded

to o

ptim

ise

bait

stat

ions

, th

roug

h th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

long

-las

ting

attr

acta

nts

and

killi

ng a

gent

s, t

he s

afe

use

of k

illin

g ag

ents

, th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

str

onge

r fe

mal

e at

trac

tant

s an

d im

prov

ed b

ait

stat

ion

devi

ces

that

are

idea

lly b

iode

grad

able

. In

ter

ms

of

proc

edur

es,

dens

ities

and

dep

loym

ent

shou

ld b

e op

timis

ed a

nd e

valu

atio

n m

ust

be b

ased

on

frui

t in

fest

atio

n le

vels

(IA

EA

2009

).

2.4.5Femalelures

Output:Com

merciallyavailabletrapswhichtargetmature,gravidfemalefruitfly

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

In

the

lure

-and

-kill

too

l box

for

Qfly

, lu

res

are

avai

labl

e fo

r m

ales

and

imm

atur

e fe

mal

es b

ut

not

the

egg

layi

ng m

atur

e fe

mal

e. F

emal

e lu

res

base

d on

fru

it ba

sed

odou

rs a

nd v

isua

l fru

it m

imic

s of

fer

pote

ntia

l as

com

mer

cial

ly v

iabl

e co

ntro

l opt

ions

, as

do

lure

s ba

sed

on b

acte

rial

met

abol

ic v

olat

iles.

Thi

s is

a c

ompl

ex R

&D

are

a in

whi

ch

only

initi

al r

esea

rch

has

been

und

erta

ken

so far

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 4-

8 ye

ars

2.4

.6 B

ette

r m

ale

lure

s Output:Moreeffectiveluresavailableformonitoringandcontrollingfruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

The

sta

ndar

d fr

uit

fly lu

res,

cue

-lur

e an

d m

ethy

l eug

enol

, va

ry in

the

ir a

ttra

ctan

cy t

o di

ffer

ent

spec

ies

and

loca

l wea

ther

con

ditio

ns (

e.g.

tem

pera

ture

and

hum

idity

). C

hem

ical

ana

logu

es o

f cu

e-lu

re s

how

gre

at p

rom

ise

as

bett

er fru

it fly

att

ract

ants

; de

velo

ping

the

se c

hem

ical

s, a

nd u

nder

stan

ding

how

the

y op

erat

e in

the

fiel

d, is

a k

ey fi

rst

step

in

impr

ovin

g us

e of

MAT

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 2-

5 ye

ars

2.4

.7 T

rap

cro

ps

Ou

tpu

t: C

omm

erci

ally

via

ble

rec

omm

end

atio

ns

on t

he

use

of

trap

cro

ps

and

sen

tin

el t

rees

as

par

t of

a

managementtool-boxforpestfruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Som

e pa

rtic

ular

fru

it ty

pes

(e.g

. gu

ava)

are

hig

hly

attr

activ

e to

fru

it fli

es.

The

appr

opriat

e pl

antin

g an

d m

anag

emen

t of

flie

s on

tho

se p

lant

s co

uld

act

as a

pop

ulat

ion

‘sin

k’ f

or lo

cal f

ruit

flies

. N

ext

gene

ratio

n re

sear

ch c

ould

in

vest

igat

e G

M p

lant

s w

hich

are

bot

h at

trac

tive

and

toxi

c to

the

flie

s. N

o re

sear

ch h

as b

een

done

on

eith

er t

he b

iolo

gy o

r im

plem

enta

tion

of s

uch

cont

rols

for

fru

it fly

man

agem

ent

in A

ustr

alia

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 3-

15 y

ears

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

27

2.4

.8 R

epel

len

ts/

det

erre

nts

Output:Com

merciallyavailableproductswhichcanbeusedbygrowerstorepelordeterfruitfliesfrom

their

crop

s D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: W

hile

the

opp

osite

of at

trac

tant

s, r

epel

lent

s an

d de

terr

ents

logi

cally

fit

with

in t

hiss

ub-t

hem

e. J

ust

as fru

it fly

’s c

ompl

ex c

hem

ical

eco

logy

sug

gest

s se

vera

l nov

el a

venu

es f

or a

ttra

ctin

g fli

es,

the

sam

e co

mpl

ex e

colo

gy s

ugge

st

nove

l app

roac

hes

for

findi

ng c

hem

ical

det

erre

nts

to p

ush

flies

aw

ay –

for

exa

mpl

e so

me

bact

eria

l odo

urs

are

know

n to

det

er

frui

t fli

es fro

m o

vipo

sitio

n si

tes.

Bot

h at

trac

tant

s an

d re

pelle

nts

can

be u

sed

toge

ther

in ‘p

ush-

pull’

man

agem

ent

stra

tegi

es.

2.4

.9 C

hem

oste

rila

nts

Output:Com

mercialchemosterilantsavailableasaregisteredproductforareawidefruitflycontrol

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: C

hem

oste

rila

nts

act

in t

he s

ame

way

as

SIT

, by

ste

rilis

ing

wild

mal

e fli

es s

o th

at m

ated

wild

fe

mal

es b

ecom

e in

fert

ile.

Che

mos

terila

nts

have

bee

n re

sear

ched

for

50

year

s, b

ut h

ave

had

little

or

no u

ptak

e du

e to

hu

man

hea

lth c

once

rns

(ear

ly p

rodu

cts)

or

oper

atio

nal i

ssue

s in

dis

trib

utin

g th

e ch

emos

terila

nt in

the

fiel

d. N

ew g

ener

atio

n ch

emos

terila

nts

need

bot

h fu

rthe

r re

sear

ch a

nd d

evel

opm

ent

to m

ake

them

com

mer

cial

ly v

iabl

e.

Sub-theme2.5

Hos

t p

lan

t an

d h

ost

fru

it in

tera

ctio

ns

Nee

dAdu

lt m

ale

and

fem

ale

flies

res

t, fee

d an

d sh

elte

r on

pla

nts,

bot

h cr

op a

nd n

on-c

rop,

whi

le t

he f

emal

e la

ys h

er e

ggs

into

fr

uit

whe

re t

he la

rvae

dev

elop

. Fr

uit

resi

stan

ce b

reed

ing,

man

ipul

atin

g ro

ostin

g si

tes

and

unde

rsta

ndin

g pr

ovis

iona

l non

-hos

t st

atus

for

mar

ket

acce

ss a

re a

ll ap

plie

d ou

tcom

es w

hich

fol

low

fro

m u

nder

stan

ding

the

se in

tera

ctio

ns.

Aus

tral

ia n

eeds

to

expl

ore

and

expl

oit

thes

e ar

eas

of fru

it fly

wea

knes

s.O

utc

ome

Bet

ter

infie

ld c

ontr

ol o

f pe

st fru

it fli

es.

Ou

tpu

tsN

ew c

omm

odity

cul

tivar

s w

hich

are

mor

e re

sist

ant

to fru

it fly

att

ack,

gro

wer

gui

delin

es f

or m

anip

ulat

ing

frui

t fly

abu

ndan

ce

in t

he fi

eld

by m

odify

ing

cano

py a

nd c

rop

arch

itect

ure,

app

rove

d re

gula

tions

for

mar

ket

acce

ss b

ased

on

non-

host

and

pr

ovis

iona

l non

-hos

t st

atus

. A

lign

men

t to

NFF

S &

NFF

S

Imp

lem

enta

tion

Pla

n7.

7, 9

.4

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s2.5.1Conditionalnon-hoststatus

Output:Technicallyjustifiedguidelinesontheuseofconditionalnon-hoststatusasamarketaccesstool

availableforrelevantfruitflyaffectedcom

modities

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Sev

eral

cro

ps (

e.g.

ban

ana,

pap

aya)

hav

e co

nditi

onal

non

-hos

t st

atus

for

mar

ket

acce

ss b

ased

on

rip

enes

s at

pic

king

(i.e

. ha

rd g

reen

). M

ore

rese

arch

is r

equi

red

to g

ener

ate

cond

ition

al n

on-h

ost

stat

us f

or o

ther

pot

entia

l cr

ops.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

2-10

yea

rs2.5.2Non-hoststatus

Output:Technicallyjustifiedguidelinesontheuseofnon-hoststatusasamarketaccesstoolavailablefor

relevantfruitflyaffectedcom

modities

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

New

defi

nitio

ns o

f ho

st s

tatu

s te

stin

g ar

e lik

ely

to b

e ap

prov

ed u

nder

the

IPP

C in

the

nex

t tw

o to

th

ree

year

s. O

nce

this

inte

rnat

iona

l agr

eem

ent

is in

pla

ce,

non-

host

sta

tus

can

be t

este

d an

d co

nfirm

ed f

or m

arke

t ac

cess

pu

rpos

e. T

ime

to im

pact

: 3-

7 ye

ars

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

28

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

2.5.3Varietalresistance

Output:NewvarietiesandGMlinesavailableinwhichfruitflyresistanceisincorporatedasaselectedtrait

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: I

t is

wel

l rec

ogni

sed

that

diff

eren

t sp

ecie

s an

d va

riet

ies

of f

resh

com

mod

ities

sho

w v

aryi

ng

susc

eptib

ilitie

s to

fru

it fly

dam

age.

Whi

le t

his

is o

bser

ved,

and

in s

ome

case

s re

sist

ance

mec

hani

sms

iden

tified

, in

Aus

tral

ia

such

tra

its h

ave

neve

r be

en in

corp

orat

ed in

to b

reed

ing

prog

ram

s. B

oth

trad

ition

al b

reed

ing

and

new

gen

erat

ion

plan

t bi

otec

hnol

ogy

man

ipul

atio

n ha

ve t

he p

oten

tial t

o le

ad t

o fr

uit

whi

ch a

re f

ruit

fly r

esis

tant

; th

is s

houl

d be

a m

ajor

new

re

sear

ch t

hrus

t. T

ime

to im

pact

: 5-

20 y

ears

2.5.4Canopyarchitecture

Output:Recom

mendationsavailableforcanopypruning/trainingandorcharddesignthatminimisefruitfly

atta

ck

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Fru

it fli

es u

se h

ost

plan

ts n

ot o

nly

to la

y eg

gs b

ut a

lso

for

shel

tering

. Cha

nges

in c

anop

y an

d or

char

d ar

chite

ctur

e ha

ve b

een

show

n to

cha

nge

the

abun

danc

e of

pes

t fr

uit

flies

(Bal

agaw

i et

al.

2012

), b

ut o

nly

min

imal

re

sear

ch h

as b

een

done

on

this

top

ic in

Aus

tral

ia.

Giv

en t

hat

orch

ardi

sts

alre

ady

chan

ge p

runi

ng r

egim

es a

nd o

rcha

rd la

yout

fo

r a

num

ber

of r

easo

ns,

incl

udin

g kn

owle

dge

of h

ow t

his

mig

ht in

fluen

ce f

ruit

fly a

ttac

k (f

or b

ette

r or

wor

se)

wou

ld b

e va

luab

le.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

5-20

yea

rs

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.6P

hys

ical

bar

rier

sN

eed

If fl

ies

can

be p

hysi

cally

sto

pped

fro

m r

each

ing

frui

t to

ovi

posi

t th

en t

he f

ruit

fly p

robl

em is

sol

ved.

In

som

e co

untr

ies

this

is

ach

ieve

d th

ough

indi

vidu

al fru

it ba

ggin

g, b

ut e

xcep

t fo

r no

n-co

mm

erci

al p

urpo

ses

this

app

roac

h is

unl

ikel

y to

be

viab

le in

Aus

tral

ia b

ecau

se o

f hi

gh s

alar

y co

sts.

Oth

er t

ypes

of ph

ysic

al b

arrier

s m

ay w

ork

and

shou

ld b

e re

sear

ched

as

part

of

the

frui

t fly

too

l-bo

x.O

utc

ome

Bet

ter

infie

ld c

ontr

ol o

f pe

st fru

it fli

es.

Ou

tpu

tsRe

com

men

datio

ns for

com

mer

cial

ly s

uita

ble

prod

ucts

and

pra

ctic

es w

hich

lim

it fr

uit

fly a

cces

s to

fru

it.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

9.8

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s2

.6.1

Wh

ole

orch

ard

net

tin

g

Output:Com

merciallyavailablewhole-orchardnettingavailableforcontrollingfruitflyinhighvaluecrops

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Ful

l orc

hard

net

ting

has

been

sho

wn

to p

rovi

de e

xcel

lent

fru

it fly

con

trol

. H

owev

er,

such

net

ting

is e

xpen

sive

, ca

n be

pro

ne t

o st

orm

and

hai

l dam

age,

and

nee

ds t

o be

app

ropr

iate

ly m

anag

ed t

o al

low

acc

ess

to p

ollin

ator

s an

d na

tura

l ene

mie

s, w

hile

not

pro

mot

ing

the

build

-up

of o

ther

pes

ts,

such

as

scal

es.

Dev

elop

men

t op

port

uniti

es e

xist

for

co

mm

erci

al c

ompa

nies

to

mak

e w

hole

orc

hard

fru

it fly

net

ting

a vi

able

opt

ion

for

high

val

ue c

rops

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 3-

5 ye

ars

2.6

.2 F

enci

ng

O

utp

ut:

Rec

omm

end

atio

ns

avai

lab

le o

n t

he

use

(or

non

-use

) of

fen

ces

as a

com

mer

cial

ly v

iab

le c

ontr

ol t

ool f

or

fruitfly

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Ver

y lit

tle is

kno

wn

abou

t th

e ro

le w

hich

fen

ces

may

pla

y in

lim

iting

fru

it fly

mov

emen

t. I

f fli

es d

id

not

fly o

ver

fenc

es o

f a

give

n he

ight

, th

en it

may

be

poss

ible

to

sim

ply

fenc

e or

char

ds o

r cr

ops

with

app

ropr

iate

net

ting.

All

rese

arch

and

dev

elop

men

t re

mai

ns t

o be

don

e fo

r th

is t

opic

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 2-

4 ye

ars

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

29

2.6

.3 B

ord

er p

lan

tin

gs

Output:Recom

mendationsavailableontheuseofborderplantingsaspartoftheon-farmtool-boxforfruitfly

con

trol

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: B

orde

r pl

antin

gs a

re u

nlik

ely

to p

hysi

cally

blo

ck fl

ies

to a

cro

p (a

lthou

gh t

his

is p

ossi

ble

if fe

nces

ar

e fo

und

to w

ork)

, bu

t re

sear

ch h

as s

how

n th

at fl

ies

may

leav

e a

crop

to

roos

t in

bor

der

plan

tings

whe

re t

hey

coul

d th

en b

e ta

rget

ed for

pes

ticid

e or

bai

t-sp

ray

cont

rol.

Som

e im

port

ant

inte

rnat

iona

l res

earc

h ha

s be

en d

one

in t

his

area

but

Aus

tral

ian

rese

arch

is jus

t be

ginn

ing.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

3-6

year

s2

.6.4

Kao

lin c

lays

O

utp

ut:

Rec

omm

end

atio

ns

avai

lab

le o

n t

he

use

of

kaol

in c

lays

as

a p

rote

ctiv

e fr

uit

bar

rier

ag

ain

st o

vip

osit

ing

fruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Kao

lin c

lays

are

use

d in

sev

eral

indu

stries

to

prev

ent

sun

burn

of

frui

t. L

abor

ator

y w

ork

has

show

n ka

olin

s w

ill d

eter

fem

ale

frui

t fly

fro

m o

vipo

sitin

g, b

ut fi

eld

tria

ls w

ere

less

suc

cess

ful a

nd r

emov

al o

f th

e ka

olin

may

be

dam

agin

g to

som

e co

mm

oditi

es.

Dev

elop

men

t is

nee

ded

to s

ee if

kao

lin c

lays

can

be

mad

e to

wor

k in

app

ropr

iate

cro

ps.

Ti

me

to im

pact

: 3-

6 ye

ars

2.6.5Mineralandbotanicaloils

O

utp

ut:

Rec

omm

end

atio

ns

on t

he

use

of

min

eral

an

d b

otan

ical

oils

as

pro

tect

ive

fru

it b

arri

ers

agai

nst

ovi

pos

itin

g

fruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Min

eral

oil

depo

sits

dis

play

rep

elle

nt a

nd o

ther

beh

avio

ural

eff

ects

on

frui

t fli

es.

The

resp

onse

s to

hy

droc

arbo

ns a

re p

ossi

bly

rela

ted

to q

uite

spe

cific

mol

ecul

ar s

truc

ture

s w

hich

‘mim

ic’ n

atur

al r

epel

lent

s, b

ut t

his

need

s to

be

test

ed.

Oils

can

cau

se d

amag

e to

cro

ps a

nd a

ny r

esea

rch

need

s to

tak

e a

holis

tic v

iew

on

the

bene

fits

and

cost

s.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

5 ye

ars

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.7P

hen

olog

y an

d d

istr

ibu

tion

mod

els

Nee

dAus

tral

ian

agricu

lture

is p

reci

sion

bas

ed,

with

gro

wer

s ha

ving

acc

ess

to d

etai

led

pred

ictiv

e m

odel

ling

for

near

ly a

ll as

pect

s of

the

ir o

rcha

rd m

anag

emen

t, fro

m w

ater

ing

regi

mes

to

flow

erin

g tim

e. I

n co

ntra

st,

even

res

earc

hers

do

not

have

acc

ess

to

a po

pula

tion

phen

olog

y m

odel

for

pes

t fr

uit

flies

whi

ch w

orks

. Pr

edic

tive

geog

raph

ic m

odel

s w

ork

only

at

a co

ntin

enta

l lev

el

and

mod

el t

he im

pact

of ab

iotic

var

iabl

es.

As

an u

nder

lyin

g co

mpo

nent

of

mos

t in

field

con

trol

str

ateg

ies

– fr

om M

AT t

o SIT

–

ther

e is

an

urge

nt n

eed

for

a su

ite o

f in

tegr

ated

fru

it m

odel

s w

hich

can

info

rm b

oth

rese

arch

ers

and

grow

ers.

For

res

earc

hers

th

ey w

ill o

ffer

new

way

s to

ans

wer

diffi

cult

rese

arch

issu

es;

for

grow

ers

they

will

hel

p op

timis

e th

e ap

plic

atio

n of

con

trol

too

ls.

Ou

tcom

eBet

ter

infie

ld c

ontr

ol o

f pe

st fru

it fli

es.

Ou

tpu

tsA s

uite

of co

mpu

ter

mod

els

whi

ch c

an g

uide

bot

h re

sear

cher

s an

d gr

ower

s in

how

the

y m

anag

e fr

uit

flies

. M

odel

s w

ith

appr

opriat

e ‘d

ash

boar

ds’ c

usto

mis

ed t

o en

d us

er n

eeds

.A

lign

men

t to

NFF

S &

NFF

S

Imp

lem

enta

tion

Pla

n7.

5, 7

.6,

9.4,

9.7

, PR

4

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s2

.7.1

Eco

log

ical

dat

a Output:Biologicaldataavailableforinformingthedevelopmentofpredictivemodelsforfruitflymanagement

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Dev

elop

ing

mod

els

for

Aus

tral

ia’s

fru

it fly

pes

ts is

pro

blem

atic

bec

ause

muc

h ba

sic

data

is

abse

nt o

r in

adeq

uate

for

mod

ellin

g pu

rpos

es.

The

type

of da

ta n

eede

d in

clud

es,

but

is n

ot li

mite

d to

; co

nsta

nt t

empe

ratu

re

deve

lopm

ent

rate

s; im

pact

of lo

w a

nd h

igh

tem

pera

ture

s on

the

dev

elop

men

t an

d m

orta

lity

of a

ll lif

e st

ages

and

on

the

activ

ity o

f ad

ult

flies

; se

ason

al a

bund

ance

; ab

unda

nce

with

res

pect

to

land

scap

e fe

atur

es;

clar

ifica

tion

of t

he im

pact

of

rain

fall

on a

ctiv

ity a

nd m

orta

lity

of a

dult

flies

; id

entif

ying

and

defi

ning

the

cue

s th

at t

rigg

er t

he o

nset

and

the

ter

min

atio

n of

ove

r-w

inte

ring

. Th

e ge

nera

tion

of s

uch

data

sho

uld

be d

one

in c

onju

nctio

n w

ith m

odel

lers

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 1-

7 ye

ars

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

30

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

2.7

.2 P

red

icti

ve m

odel

ling

I

Ou

tpu

t: A

su

ite

of p

red

icti

ve m

odel

s w

hic

h c

an b

e u

sed

by

dif

fere

nt

stak

ehol

der

s, r

ang

ing

fro

m g

row

ers

to

researchers,toinformandpredictfruitflymanagementdecisions

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

‘Mod

ellin

g’ is

a g

ener

ic t

erm

and

diff

eren

t m

odel

s se

rve

diff

eren

t pu

rpos

es,

whi

le t

he u

nder

lyin

g as

sum

ptio

ns o

f di

ffer

ent

mod

els

vary

dra

mat

ical

ly.

At a

min

imum

fru

it fly

sta

keho

lder

s ne

ed;

(i)

pred

ictiv

e ph

enol

ogy

mod

els

whi

ch t

ake

into

acc

ount

bot

h lo

cal b

iotic

and

abi

otic

var

iabl

es,

and

impo

sed

cont

rol t

reat

men

ts;

(ii)

land

scap

e m

odel

s w

ithin

a

GIS

fra

mew

ork;

and

(iii

) la

rge

scal

e di

stribu

tion

mod

els.

Oth

er m

ore

spec

ialis

t m

odel

s in

clud

e th

ose

whi

ch c

an o

ptim

ise

trap

pl

acem

ent

for

surv

eilla

nce

and

mon

itoring

, an

d th

ose

whi

ch a

id in

curs

ion

man

agem

ent

and

erad

icat

ion.

The

gen

erat

ion

of

such

mod

els

shou

ld b

e in

con

junc

tion

with

dat

a ga

ther

ers.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

1-7

year

s2

.7.3

Pre

dic

tive

mod

ellin

g I

I Output:Newinformationavailableforgrowers,regulatorsandresearcherswhichwillim

provefruitfly

man

agem

ent

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Onc

e va

lidat

ed m

odel

s ha

ve b

een

crea

ted

ther

e ar

e nu

mbe

r of

key

act

iviti

es w

hich

can

be

unde

rtak

en u

sing

the

m.

Thes

e in

clud

e th

e ap

plic

atio

n of

mod

els

to;

(i)

dete

rmin

e th

e di

stribu

tion

boun

daries

of

frui

t fly

sp

ecie

s, in

clud

ing

how

the

y m

ight

cha

nge

with

sea

son,

or

how

the

y m

ight

cha

nge

in r

espe

ct t

o cl

imat

ic c

ondi

tions

and

clim

ate

chan

ge;

(ii)

det

erm

ine

appr

opriat

e ou

tbre

ak a

nd r

eins

tate

men

t ca

lend

ars

for

a sp

ecifi

c re

gion

; (i

ii) a

ccur

atel

y pr

edic

t w

inte

r w

indo

ws;

and

(iv

) be

inte

grat

ed in

to o

n-fa

rm d

ecis

ion

supp

ort

tool

s to

opt

imis

e tim

ing

of m

anag

emen

t. T

ime

to im

pact

: 3-

10

year

s

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.8P

opu

lati

on s

ourc

e co

ntr

olN

eed

A la

rge

part

of so

lvin

g th

e fr

uit

fly p

robl

em r

elie

s on

red

ucin

g or

elim

inat

ing

sour

ce p

opul

atio

ns,

be t

hat

sour

ce a

n ea

rlie

r cr

op,

fera

l tre

es,

aban

done

d or

char

ds,

or n

ativ

e ho

sts.

Des

pite

thi

s im

port

ance

, re

lativ

ely

little

is k

now

n ab

out

the

cont

ribu

tion

that

fer

al t

rees

or

aban

done

d or

char

ds,

for

exam

ple,

mak

e to

the

siz

e of

a lo

cal f

ruit

fly p

opul

atio

n. S

imila

rly,

m

echa

nism

s fo

r im

plem

entin

g or

char

d hy

gien

e w

hich

are

sui

ted

for

mod

ern

farm

man

agem

ent

need

to

be d

evel

oped

. G

ood

RD

&E

in t

his

area

will

gre

atly

hel

p re

duce

pes

t fr

uit

fly p

opul

atio

ns a

t bo

th t

he f

arm

and

are

a-w

ide

leve

ls.

O

utc

ome

Less

fru

it fly

dam

age

due

to lo

wer

fru

it fly

pop

ulat

ion

leve

ls.

Ou

tpu

tsCom

mer

cial

ly jus

tified

rec

omm

enda

tions

for

red

ucin

g fr

uit

fly p

opul

atio

ns t

hrou

gh c

rop

hygi

ene

and

the

man

agem

ent

of n

on-

com

mer

cial

tre

es.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

12.4

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s2

.8.1

Cro

p h

ygie

ne

Output:Com

merciallyjustifiedrecom

mendationsfortheneedandpracticeofcrophygieneinmajorhorticultural

crop

s D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: C

rop

hygi

ene,

the

des

truc

tion

or r

emov

al o

f fa

llen

frui

t w

ithin

an

orch

ard,

is a

cor

ners

tone

of

mos

t fr

uit

fly m

anag

emen

t pa

ckag

es.

The

requ

ired

info

rmat

ion

to s

uppo

rt t

his

prac

tice

is,

how

ever

, la

ckin

g, a

s ar

e co

mm

erci

ally

ac

cept

able

mec

hani

sms

by w

hich

it c

an b

e ac

hiev

ed.

Ther

e is

litt

le d

oubt

tha

t fo

r so

me

high

ly s

usce

ptib

le c

rops

, hy

gien

e w

ill

be c

ritic

al,

but

for

crop

s w

hich

are

ver

y po

or fru

it fly

hos

ts t

hen

prac

ticin

g hy

gien

e m

ay im

pose

a c

ost

whi

ch is

not

bio

logi

cally

ju

stifi

ed.

If c

rop

hygi

ene

is fou

nd t

o be

critic

al,

then

rec

omm

enda

tions

and

eng

inee

ring

sol

utio

ns n

eed

to b

e fo

und

as t

o ho

w

to o

pera

tiona

lise

the

prac

tice

in a

com

mer

cial

ly v

iabl

e fo

rm;

thes

e m

ay in

clud

e po

st-h

arve

st o

rcha

rd s

pray

s, s

oil t

reat

men

ts,

or m

echa

nica

l fru

it co

llect

ion.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

3-6

year

s

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

31

2.8

.2 F

eral

an

d w

ild s

ourc

es

Output:Com

merciallyjustifiedrecom

mendationsfortheneedtocontrolferalfruittreesandotherwildsources

offruitfly

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

A s

tand

ard

reco

mm

enda

tion

for

area

-wid

e m

anag

emen

t is

the

rem

oval

of

fera

l and

oth

er

unm

anag

ed t

rees

. As

for

crop

hyg

iene

, th

e sc

ienc

e be

hind

suc

h re

com

men

datio

ns is

lack

ing,

des

pite

the

cos

ts in

volv

ed in

ca

rryi

ng o

ut t

he r

ecom

men

datio

n. T

he c

ontr

ibut

ion

that

fru

it fr

om f

eral

or

wild

hos

ts m

ake

to a

tot

al lo

cal fl

y po

pula

tion

is

likel

y to

var

y dr

amat

ical

ly d

epen

ding

on

the

frui

t ty

pe,

time

of r

ipen

ing,

the

num

ber

of t

rees

invo

lved

, ho

w h

eavi

ly p

aras

itise

d ar

e th

e m

aggo

ts,

and

so o

n. R

esea

rch

is n

eede

d to

mak

e ju

stifi

able

rec

omm

enda

tions

on

fera

l tre

e m

anag

emen

t. T

ime

to

impa

ct:

3-5

year

s2

.8.3

Urb

an,

per

i-u

rban

an

d a

ban

don

ed o

rch

ard

sou

rces

Output:Reducedfruitflydamageinorchardsbymanagingfruitfliesinurbantrees

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: I

t ha

s be

en k

now

n fo

r a

long

tim

e th

at t

he g

reat

est

sour

ces

of f

ruit

flies

are

fro

m u

nten

ded

frui

t tr

ees

in b

acky

ards

, pe

ri-u

rban

sm

all h

oldi

ngs

and

aban

done

d or

char

ds.

Part

icul

arly

in d

istr

icts

whe

re a

rea

free

dom

or

area

of

low

pes

t pr

eval

ence

sta

tus

is b

eing

tar

gete

d, r

egul

ator

y an

d so

cial

inte

rven

tions

are

req

uire

d to

ens

ure

indi

vidu

als

man

age

thei

r fr

uit

tree

s, o

r al

low

the

m t

o be

rem

oved

. Th

is a

ctio

n sh

ould

als

o be

ext

ende

d to

inte

rven

tions

tar

getin

g ab

ando

ned

orch

ards

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 5-

10 y

ears

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.9S

teri

le I

nse

ct T

ech

niq

ue

Nee

dTh

e Ste

rile

Ins

ect

Tech

niqu

e is

a w

ell-

deve

lope

d co

ntro

l app

roac

h in

whi

ch m

ass

rear

ed,

ster

ilise

d m

ales

are

rel

ease

d in

to t

he

envi

ronm

ent.

Fem

ales

mat

ed w

ith s

uch

mal

es la

y in

fert

ile e

ggs,

and

as

long

as

ther

e ar

e en

ough

ste

rile

mal

es t

o ou

tcom

pete

th

e w

ild m

ale

popu

latio

n, s

uppr

essi

on a

nd e

radi

catio

n ca

n fo

llow

. SIT

is r

egar

ded

arou

nd t

he w

orld

as

a co

re t

ool i

n ar

ea-w

ide

man

agem

ent

of fru

it fli

es.

The

deve

lopm

ent

of a

com

mer

cial

ly v

iabl

e SIT

pro

gram

pro

duci

ng a

dequ

ate

ster

ile fl

ies

to m

eet

dem

and

will

gre

atly

incr

ease

the

like

lihoo

d of

long

ter

m,

sust

aina

ble

frui

t fly

con

trol

in A

ustr

alia

.O

utc

ome

Bet

ter

infie

ld c

ontr

ol o

f pe

st fru

it fli

es,

incl

udin

g er

adic

atio

n an

d en

hanc

ed e

mer

genc

y re

spon

se.

Ou

tpu

tsCom

mer

cial

ly s

usta

inab

le S

IT p

rodu

ctio

n an

d di

stribu

tion

syst

ems

in A

ustr

alia

, fu

lly in

tegr

ated

with

loca

l A-W

IPM

pro

gram

s.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

9.8,

10,

19

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s2

.9.1

Mal

e-on

ly li

ne

Ou

tpu

t: A

Bac

troc

era

tryo

ni m

ale-

only

lin

e w

hic

h c

an b

e u

sed

in c

omm

erci

al S

IT

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

In

SIT

onl

y th

e m

ales

are

nee

ded.

Pro

duci

ng f

emal

es d

oubl

es f

acto

ry p

rodu

ctio

n co

sts,

whi

le

rele

ased

ste

rile

fem

ales

can

pot

entia

lly s

till d

amag

e fr

uit

by o

vipo

sitin

g; f

or t

hese

rea

sons

a m

ale

only

str

ain

is c

onsi

dere

d es

sent

ial i

n SIT

. Bot

h tr

aditi

onal

sel

ectio

n an

d ge

netic

eng

inee

ring

app

roac

hes

can

be a

pplie

d to

the

gen

erat

ion

of a

line

in

whi

ch f

emal

es c

an b

e se

lect

ivel

y re

mov

ed.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

3-5

year

s2.9.2Malefitness

Output:Massreared,sterilemaleswhichhavehighlevelsofgeneticandphysicalfitnesscomparedtowildmales

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: M

ass

rele

ased

mal

es n

eed

to b

e ab

le t

o su

rviv

e in

the

wild

onc

e re

leas

ed a

nd o

ut-c

ompe

te w

ild

mal

es f

or a

cces

s to

fem

ales

; to

geth

er t

his

cons

titut

es m

ale

fitne

ss.

The

stud

y of

mal

e fit

ness

foc

uses

on

seve

ral a

reas

of

both

ph

ysio

logi

cal a

nd s

exua

l fitn

ess

and

all a

reas

nee

d to

be

addr

esse

d. T

ime

to im

pact

: 3-

5 ye

arsRD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

32

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

2.9

.3 L

iqu

id la

rval

die

t O

utp

ut:

A li

qu

id la

rval

die

t d

evel

oped

an

d in

use

in a

B.

tryo

ni m

ass

rear

ing

fac

ility

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: I

n fr

uit

fly r

earing

fac

tories

, th

e us

e of

liqu

id d

iets

ove

r so

lid d

iets

off

ers

num

erou

s ad

vant

ages

in

term

s of

spa

ce a

nd h

andl

ing.

Mak

ing

a liq

uid

diet

whi

ch w

orks

for

flie

s, a

nd w

hich

can

be

up-s

cale

d to

fac

tory

leve

l, re

quires

bo

th e

ntom

olog

ical

and

eng

inee

ring

res

earc

h co

mpo

nent

s. T

ime

to im

pact

: 3-

5 ye

ars

2.9

.4 P

re-r

elea

se s

up

ple

men

ts

Ou

tpu

t: P

re-r

elea

se s

up

ple

men

ts f

or a

du

lt m

ale

B.

tryo

ni f

ully

res

earc

hed

an

d o

per

atio

nal

ised

for

use

in

com

mer

cial

SIT

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: M

ale

fitne

ss c

an b

e in

crea

sed

thro

ugh

chem

ical

and

die

tary

sup

plem

ents

whi

ch d

ecre

ase

the

time

a fly

nee

ds t

o re

ach

mat

urity

and

whi

ch m

ake

them

mor

e se

xual

ly c

ompe

titiv

e. T

here

has

bee

n so

me

smal

l sca

le r

esea

rch

done

on

this

for

B.

tryo

ni,

but

not

rese

arch

tak

ing

lab

findi

ngs

to f

acto

ry s

cale

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 3-

5 ye

ars

2.9.5Releasestrategies

Ou

tpu

t: S

trat

egie

s op

tim

ised

for

rel

easi

ng

ste

rilis

ed m

ale

B.

tryo

ni a

s p

art

of c

omm

erci

al S

IT

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

‘Rel

ease

str

ateg

ies’

with

in S

IT c

over

bot

h th

e ph

ysic

al m

echa

nism

of

fly r

elea

se a

nd t

he

inte

grat

ion

of S

IT a

s pa

rt o

f la

rger

con

trol

str

ateg

ies.

The

re a

re n

umer

ous

phys

ical

rel

ease

tec

hnol

ogie

s de

velo

ped

inte

rnat

iona

lly,

incl

udin

g se

mi-

auto

mat

ed a

eria

l rel

ease

, an

d di

ffer

ent

rele

ase

stra

tegi

es,

e.g.

mic

ro-S

IT o

r AW

-SIT

. Sig

nific

ant

inve

stm

ent

need

s to

be

mad

e in

to S

IT fl

y ph

ysic

al r

elea

se m

echa

nism

s an

d th

e in

tegr

atio

n of

SIT

as

a co

mpo

nent

of

erad

icat

ion

or A

W-I

PM p

rogr

ams.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

5-10

yea

rs2

.9.6

Mal

e d

iscr

imin

atio

n

Output:TheabilitytodiscriminatebetweenwildmalesandSITmaleswith100percentconfidence

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: S

IT m

ales

nee

d to

abl

e to

be

told

apa

rt f

rom

wild

mal

es f

or r

egul

ator

y an

d op

erat

iona

l pur

pose

s.

Trad

ition

al d

ye m

arki

ng is

pro

ne t

o er

ror

and

new

met

hods

, w

hich

wou

ld a

llow

aut

omat

ed r

epor

ting,

are

nee

ded.

Tim

e to

im

pact

: 3-

5 ye

ars

Sub-theme2.10

IPM

an

d A

rea-

Wid

e IP

MN

eed

In t

he a

bsen

ce o

f ef

fect

ive

cove

r sp

rays

, Aus

tral

ian

frui

t fly

man

agem

ent

will

nee

d to

rel

y on

a s

uite

of

cont

rol t

ools

app

lied

with

in a

n in

tegr

ated

pes

t m

anag

emen

t fr

amew

ork.

As

frui

t fli

es a

re m

obile

pes

ts w

hich

mov

e ar

ound

a c

ropp

ing

dist

rict

to

new

hos

ts a

s th

ey c

ome

into

sea

son

(inc

ludi

ng n

on-c

omm

erci

al,

fera

l and

wild

nat

ive

host

s),

frui

t fly

con

trol

is b

est

done

at

an ‘a

rea-

wid

e’ le

vel,

whe

re t

he ‘a

rea’

may

be

a w

hole

cro

ppin

g di

strict

or

a w

ell-

defin

ed g

eogr

aphi

c ar

ea (

e.g.

a r

iver

val

ley)

. IP

M a

nd A

-W I

PM p

rim

arily

inte

grat

e th

e in

divi

dual

con

trol

too

ls c

over

ed p

revi

ousl

y bu

t th

ere

are

also

spe

cific

RD

&E

issu

es

asso

ciat

ed w

ith c

ombi

ning

the

se a

ppro

ache

s. W

ith r

espe

ct t

o th

e Ste

rile

Ins

ect

Tech

niqu

e, S

IT is

con

side

red

inte

rnat

iona

lly a

s a

key

elem

ent

of a

rea-

wid

e m

anag

emen

t. H

owev

er,

as d

emon

stra

ted

in t

he C

entr

al B

urne

tt c

itrus

pro

duct

ion

area

, ar

ea-w

ide

man

agem

ent

can

occu

r su

cces

sful

ly in

the

abs

ence

of SIT

. R&

D f

or a

rea-

wid

e m

anag

emen

t sh

ould

the

refo

re n

ot w

ait

until

SIT

is

ful

ly m

atur

e in

Aus

tral

ia b

ut b

e de

velo

ped

conc

urre

ntly

with

the

nat

iona

l SIT

pro

gram

.

Ou

tcom

eBet

ter

infie

ld c

ontr

ol o

f pe

st fru

it fli

es.

Ou

tpu

tsAn

inte

grat

ed fru

it fly

con

trol

‘too

lbox

’ whi

ch o

ptim

ises

the

mix

of

indi

vidu

al c

ontr

ol t

ools

for

indi

vidu

al g

row

ers,

com

mod

ities

an

d pr

oduc

tion

area

s.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

9.3,

9.4

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

33

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s2.10.1IPMmodel

Output:Agrowerusable,model-basedtoolwhichsupportstheintegrationofmultiplefruitflycontroltools

wit

hin

an

IP

M f

ram

ewor

k D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: I

nteg

ratio

n of

a r

obus

t, p

redi

ctiv

e fr

uit

fly p

heno

logy

mod

el w

ith e

ffica

cy d

ata

from

sep

arat

e co

ntro

l too

ls (

e.g.

MAT

, SIT

, pr

otei

n ba

it sp

ray)

, su

ch t

hat

the

best

com

bina

tion

and

timin

g of

tre

atm

ents

can

be

dete

rmin

ed

for

com

mod

ity,

regi

on,

and

seas

on.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

3-10

yea

rs2.10.2WorkingAWMmodels

Ou

tpu

t: A

for

mal

ised

ass

essm

ent

of A

WM

in A

ust

ralia

, w

ith

inte

rnat

ion

al c

omp

aris

ons,

to

det

erm

ine

wh

at

asp

ects

of

fru

it A

WM

wor

k fo

r A

ust

ralia

n p

rod

uce

rs a

nd

wh

ich

do

not

, to

info

rm s

ub

seq

uen

t R

D&

E D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: A

WM

for

fru

it fly

has

bot

h su

ccee

ded

and

faile

d pr

evio

usly

in A

ustr

alia

, as

it h

as d

one

in o

ther

co

untr

ies.

A r

evie

w n

eeds

to

be u

nder

take

n to

exa

min

e bo

th s

ucce

ssfu

l and

uns

ucce

ssfu

l AW

M c

ases

in A

ustr

alia

to

dete

rmin

e w

hich

asp

ects

wor

ked,

and

whi

ch d

idn’

t. C

ompa

riso

ns w

ith a

lim

ited

num

ber

of in

tern

atio

nal c

ases

wou

ld a

lso

be a

ppro

pria

te.

2.10.3Landscapeecology

Output:Knowledgeonthelandscapeecologyoffruitflywhichcanbeusedtoinformarea-wideIPM

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: I

n ar

ea-w

ide

cont

rol,

it is

rec

ogni

sed

that

flie

s br

eed

at s

ites

away

fro

m m

anag

ed c

rops

. Suc

h si

tes

may

incl

ude

aban

done

d or

char

ds,

fera

l pla

nts,

non

-com

mer

cial

pla

ntin

gs a

nd w

ild n

ativ

e ho

sts.

Flie

s m

ay a

lso

use

othe

r as

pect

s of

the

land

scap

e fo

r sh

elte

ring

, lo

catin

g m

ates

, ob

tain

ing

moi

stur

e, e

tc.

The

land

scap

e ec

olog

y of

fru

it fli

es in

Aus

tral

ia is

ess

entia

lly u

nkno

wn

and

mus

t be

res

earc

hed

if ar

ea-w

ide

cont

rols

, su

ch a

s SIT

, ar

e to

wor

k m

ost

effe

ctiv

ely.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

3-10

yea

rs2.10.4Com

munityengagement

Ou

tpu

t: E

ng

agem

ent

stra

teg

ies

wh

ich

max

imis

e th

e lik

elih

ood

of

par

tici

pat

ion

in a

rea-

wid

e p

rog

ram

s b

y al

l m

emb

ers

of t

he

com

mu

nit

y D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: I

t ha

s be

en d

emon

stra

ted

man

y tim

es b

oth

inte

rnat

iona

lly a

nd d

omes

tical

ly t

hat

area

-wid

e co

ntro

ls c

anno

t be

app

lied

in t

he a

bsen

ce o

f gr

ower

and

rur

al c

omm

unity

eng

agem

ent.

Any

ser

ious

dev

elop

men

t of

are

a-w

ide

man

agem

ent

appr

oach

es for

fru

it fly

con

trol

in A

ustr

alia

mus

t be

acc

ompa

nied

by

soci

al s

cien

ce r

esea

rch

and

exte

nsio

n to

m

axim

ise

com

mun

ity e

ngag

emen

t. T

ime

to im

pact

: 3-

10 y

ears

2.10.5Managementsystems

Ou

tpu

t: E

ffec

tive

man

agem

ent

syst

ems

to e

nsu

re s

ucc

essf

ul a

rea-

wid

e IP

M

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

A c

omm

on d

enom

inat

or o

f al

l suc

cess

ful A

W-I

PM p

rogr

ams,

irre

spec

tive

of t

he c

ombi

natio

n of

tac

tics

used

or

the

degr

ee o

f ce

ntra

lised

coo

rdin

atio

n, is

an

effe

ctiv

e m

anag

emen

t st

ruct

ure.

Man

ager

ial c

halle

nges

(H

endr

ichs

et

al.

2007

) in

clud

e:

(1)

obta

inin

g th

e co

mm

itmen

t of

all

priv

ate

and

publ

ic s

take

hold

ers

to s

uppo

rt,

part

icip

ate

in a

nd fi

nanc

e th

e AW

pro

gram

, (2

) ca

rryi

ng o

ut a

ppro

pria

te fea

sibi

lity

stud

ies,

(3

) de

velo

ping

a p

rofe

ssio

nal b

usin

ess

plan

for

the

pro

gram

, (4

) es

tabl

ishi

ng a

n ef

fect

ive

and

dedi

cate

d or

gani

satio

n w

ith ful

l tim

e st

aff

to c

oord

inat

e an

d im

plem

ent

the

prog

ram

,(5

) im

plem

entin

g a

trai

ning

pro

gram

,(6

) es

tabl

ishi

ng c

omm

unic

atio

n m

echa

nism

s am

ong

all r

ural

and

urb

an s

take

hold

ers,

(7

) es

tabl

ishi

ng a

sys

tem

of pr

ogra

m e

valu

atio

n, a

nd

(8)

obta

inin

g re

sear

ch s

uppo

rt for

the

pro

gram

.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

34

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

Su

b-t

hem

e 2

.11

Reg

ion

al e

rad

icat

ion

Nee

dCom

plet

e er

adic

atio

n of

fru

it fly

fro

m a

reg

ion

is w

ithou

t do

ubt

the

best

for

m o

f fr

uit

fly m

anag

emen

t. N

umer

ous

tool

s ex

ist

whi

ch m

ake

frui

t fly

era

dica

tion

tech

nica

lly fea

sibl

e, a

s ha

s be

en d

emon

stra

ted

man

y tim

es in

Aus

tral

ia a

nd in

tern

atio

nally

. Re

gain

ing

area

fre

edom

for

pro

duct

ion

dist

rict

s w

hich

hav

e re

cent

ly lo

st t

his

stat

us is

an

RD

&E

area

of

high

impo

rtan

ce,

as is

er

adic

atio

n of

Med

fly fro

m p

rodu

ctio

n ar

eas

in W

A.

Ou

tcom

eU

nres

tric

ted

mar

ket

acce

ss a

nd n

il in

field

con

trol

cos

ts d

ue t

o an

abs

ence

of

frui

t fly

.O

utp

uts

Ope

ratio

nal,

econ

omic

and

reg

ulat

ory

tool

s to

gui

de in

vest

men

t an

d ac

tion

in f

ruit

fly e

radi

catio

n pr

ogra

ms.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

18,

19

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s2

.11

.1 E

con

omic

s of

era

dic

atio

n

Output:Econom

icguidelinesavailableforassessingtheeconom

icfeasibilityoferadicatingMedflyandQ-flyfrom

p

rod

uct

ion

are

as

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Whi

le t

echn

ical

ly fea

sibl

e, e

radi

catio

n ov

er v

ery

larg

e ar

eas

is c

ostly

. Cos

t-be

nefit

ana

lyse

s of

suc

h er

adic

atio

n pr

ogra

ms

gene

rally

onl

y fo

cus

on d

irec

t co

sts

and

prod

uctio

n be

nefit

s, w

ithou

t co

nsid

erat

ion

of fl

ow-o

n be

nefit

s (e

.g.

priv

ate

hous

ehol

der

prod

uctio

n, r

egio

nal e

mpl

oym

ent/

unem

ploy

men

t).

Suc

h fe

asib

ility

stu

dies

wou

ld b

ette

r in

form

po

licy

mak

ers

of t

he v

alue

or

othe

rwis

e of

era

dica

tion.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

1-3

year

s2

.11

.2 E

rad

icat

ion

Output:Operationalguidelinesavailableforim

plementingMedflyandQflyeradicationfromproductionareas

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: T

echn

olog

ies

for

erad

icat

ing

frui

t fli

es a

re w

ell k

now

n bu

t th

eir

impl

emen

tatio

n is

larg

ely

relia

nt

on p

erso

nal e

xper

tise.

Nat

iona

l gui

delin

es s

houl

d be

dev

elop

ed f

or f

ruit

fly e

radi

catio

ns,

incl

udin

g bo

th o

pera

tiona

l fru

it fly

co

ntro

ls (

e.g.

SIT

, ba

it sp

rays

, et

c.)

and

regu

lato

ry c

ontr

ols

(e.g

. fr

uit

mov

emen

t re

strict

ions

, gr

ower

aw

aren

ess,

etc

.).

Ti

me

to im

pact

: 1-

3 ye

ars

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

35

Them

e 3

: P

ost-

har

vest

mea

sure

s

Them

e O

verv

iew

: In

are

as w

here

fru

it fli

es a

re p

rese

nt,

post

-har

vest

tre

atm

ents

whi

ch r

educ

e th

e risk

of

frui

t fly

infe

stat

ion

in p

icke

d fr

uit

to a

leve

l acc

epta

ble

to a

tra

ding

par

tner

rem

ain

the

stra

tegi

es e

asie

st t

o de

velo

p, jus

tify

and

impl

emen

t fo

r ga

inin

g an

d re

gain

ing

dom

estic

and

inte

rnat

iona

l mar

ket

acce

ss;

as

such

the

y ar

e a

core

com

pone

nt o

f an

y fr

uit

fly R

D&

E Pl

an.

They

are

als

o ne

eded

if a

pre

-har

vest

mar

ket

acce

ss p

rogr

am (

e.g.

are

a fr

eedo

m,

AWM

or

syst

ems

appr

oach

) fa

ils.

The

need

for

res

earc

h an

d de

velo

pmen

t in

pos

t-ha

rves

t m

easu

res

is a

s ur

gent

as

in a

ny o

ther

are

a of

fru

it fly

man

agem

ent.

Int

erna

tiona

l and

do

mes

tic lo

ss o

f lo

ng-u

sed

post

-har

vest

che

mic

al t

reat

men

ts (

e.g.

met

hyl b

rom

ide,

fen

thio

n) a

re r

estr

ictin

g av

aila

ble

trea

tmen

ts;

trad

ition

al e

xper

imen

tal

appr

oach

es t

o ge

nera

ting

post

-har

vest

dat

a se

ts a

re b

ecom

ing

proh

ibiti

vely

exp

ensi

ve;

hum

an c

apab

ility

is r

apid

ly d

eclin

ing;

whi

le t

radi

tiona

l fun

ding

mod

els

have

not

allo

wed

for

inno

vatio

n to

hel

p ad

dres

s th

ese

prob

lem

s.

Rese

arch

is r

equi

red

to d

eliv

er m

arke

t ac

cess

dis

infe

stat

ion

data

pac

kage

s an

d tr

eatm

ents

in a

muc

h sh

orte

r tim

efra

me.

Ind

ustr

y is

see

king

impr

oved

pos

t-ha

rves

t co

ntro

l opt

ions

for

fru

it fly

tha

t ha

ve a

rap

id t

urna

roun

d, a

re e

ffica

ciou

s, c

ost-

effe

ctiv

e, n

on-d

amag

ing,

do

not

adve

rsel

y af

fect

pro

duct

qua

lity

and

are

suita

ble

for

both

sea

and

airfr

eigh

t. G

iven

thi

s, t

he fol

low

ing

sub-

them

e ar

eas

reco

mm

end

RD

&E

area

s w

hich

foc

us o

n ne

w a

nd im

prov

ed s

ingl

e st

ep

disi

nfes

tatio

n tr

eatm

ents

, re

sear

ch o

n co

mbi

natio

n tr

eatm

ents

, an

d ‘b

lue

sky’

res

earc

h w

hich

off

ers

the

pote

ntia

l of

tota

lly n

ew t

reat

men

ts,

or a

t le

ast

nove

l w

ays

to im

prov

e cu

rren

t tr

eatm

ents

.

Alig

ns w

ith N

FFS r

ecom

men

datio

ns 1

, 7

& 9

and

NFF

S I

mpl

emen

tatio

n Str

ateg

y Pr

ojec

t 8.

Su

b-t

hem

e 3

.1Refinementandim

provementofexistingtreatments

Nee

dA la

rge

num

ber

of a

ctua

l and

pot

entia

l dis

infe

stat

ion

trea

tmen

ts a

re a

vaila

ble.

Som

e ar

e al

read

y op

erat

iona

l and

sim

ply

need

re

finem

ent,

som

e ar

e st

ill u

nder

dev

elop

men

t an

d ne

ed m

ore

rese

arch

to

oper

atio

nalis

e. M

akin

g th

ese

exis

ting

tech

nolo

gies

w

ork

is t

he k

ey fi

rst

step

in a

pos

t-ha

rves

t RD

&E

prog

ram

. W

hile

larg

ely

a te

chni

cal R

&D

pro

gram

, so

cial

sci

ence

res

earc

h is

als

o re

quired

. Ir

radi

atio

n is

wid

ely

rega

rded

by

post

-har

vest

res

earc

hers

as

the

idea

l pos

t-ha

rves

t tr

eatm

ent,

yet

bro

ader

so

ciet

al a

ccep

tanc

e of

thi

s ap

proa

ch is

larg

ely

lack

ing,

as

it m

ay b

e fo

r m

icro

wav

e tr

eatm

ents

. Soc

ial s

cien

tists

nee

d to

wor

k w

ith b

oth

the

broa

der

com

mun

ity a

nd fru

it fly

res

earc

hers

to

unde

rsta

nd a

nd fi

nd s

olut

ions

to

thes

e so

ciet

al b

arrier

s to

ad

optio

n.O

utc

ome

Bet

ter

post

-har

vest

con

trol

mea

sure

s fo

r fr

uit

fly.

Ou

tpu

tsA s

uite

of ne

w a

nd im

prov

ed p

ost-

harv

est

disi

nfes

tatio

n tr

eatm

ents

for

fru

it fly

, w

hich

hav

e hi

gh t

reat

men

t ef

ficac

y,

com

mer

cial

via

bilit

y, a

nd b

road

pub

lic a

ccep

tanc

e.A

lign

men

t to

NFF

S &

NFF

S

Imp

lem

enta

tion

Pla

n1.

2, 9

.6,

PR8

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s3

.1.1

Fu

mig

atio

n

Output:Fumigant-basedtreatmentsavailableforthefruitflydisinfestationoffreshcom

modities

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Pro

duce

rs a

nd e

xpor

ters

are

bec

omin

g in

crea

sing

ly r

elia

nt o

n fu

mig

atio

n to

pro

vide

eff

ectiv

e no

n-da

mag

ing

cont

rol o

f pe

sts

to a

cces

s m

arke

ts.

The

rese

arch

nee

d in

clud

es a

rep

lace

men

t fo

r m

ethy

l bro

mid

e, d

evel

opm

ent

of

quar

antin

e tr

eatm

ents

bas

ed o

n fu

mig

ants

, re

sear

ch o

f lo

w d

ose

met

hyl b

rom

ide

and

eval

uatio

n of

oth

er p

ossi

ble

fum

igan

ts

incl

udin

g et

hane

din

itrile

, et

hyl f

orm

ate

and

phos

phin

e. T

ime

to im

pact

: 5-

10 y

ears

3.1

.2 H

eat

trea

tmen

t Output:Heattreatmentsavailableforthefruitflydisinfestationoffreshcom

modities

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Cov

ers

post

-har

vest

hea

t tr

eatm

ents

to

elim

inat

e fr

uit

fly a

nd o

ther

pes

ts o

f qu

aran

tine

conc

ern

with

out

inju

ring

the

hos

t m

ater

ials

. In

clud

es h

igh

tem

pera

ture

for

ced

air,

vapo

ur h

eat

and

hot

wat

er t

reat

men

ts.

Hea

t tr

eatm

ent

data

set

s ha

ve b

een

com

plet

ed for

cur

rent

Aus

tral

ian

pest

spe

cies

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: N

/A

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

36

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

3.1

.3 C

old

tre

atm

ents

Output:Coldtreatmentsavailableforthefruitflydisinfestationoffreshcom

modities

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: C

old

tem

pera

ture

tre

atm

ents

to

elim

inat

e pe

sts

of q

uara

ntin

e co

ncer

n as

soci

ated

with

fru

its a

nd

vege

tabl

es w

ithou

t ha

rmin

g th

e co

nditi

on o

r qu

ality

of th

e co

mm

odity

. In

clud

es c

old

disi

nfes

tatio

n at

; 0°

C,

1°C,

2°C,

3°C a

nd

high

er.

Rese

arch

is r

equi

red

to im

prov

e pr

esen

t ex

port

pro

toco

ls a

nd d

evel

op c

old

trea

tmen

ts w

ithin

a s

hort

er t

ime

fram

e.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

5-10

yea

rs3

.1.4

Irr

adia

tion

Output:Irradiationtreatmentsavailableforthefruitflydisinfestationoffreshcom

modities

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Res

earc

h is

req

uire

d to

gai

n Fo

od S

cien

ce A

ustr

alia

New

Zea

land

(FS

AN

Z)

gene

ric

or p

rodu

ct

spec

ific

appr

oval

for

var

ious

tro

pica

l and

tem

pera

te fru

it as

wel

l as

rasp

berr

ies,

blu

eber

ries

and

pas

sion

frui

t. L

ower

irra

diat

ion

dose

res

earc

h fo

r fr

uit

fly is

req

uire

d. T

ime

to im

pact

: 5-

7 ye

ars

3.1.5Chemicaltreatment

Output:Chemicaltreatmentsavailableforthefruitflydisinfestationoffreshcom

modities

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

With

the

loss

of a

num

ber

of p

ost-

harv

est

chem

ical

s, t

here

is a

res

earc

h ne

ed t

o in

vest

igat

e ‘g

ener

ally

reg

arde

d as

saf

e’ (

GRAS

) al

tern

ativ

es.

This

are

a al

so in

clud

es s

hort

ter

m A

PVM

A a

ppro

vals

and

per

mits

for

di

met

hoat

e an

d fe

nthi

on d

ip t

reat

men

ts,

low

con

cent

ratio

n fe

nthi

on t

reat

men

t an

d de

velo

pmen

t of

oth

er p

estic

ides

. Ti

me

to

impa

ct:

1-5

year

s3

.1.6

Atm

osp

her

ic m

anip

ula

tion

Output:Atmosphericmanipulationtreatmentsavailableforthefruitflydisinfestationoffreshcom

modities

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Red

uctio

n of

oxy

gen,

or

used

with

mix

ture

s of

CO

2 or

oth

er g

ases

, or

com

bine

d w

ith h

eat

or

cold

. In

clud

es c

ontr

olle

d at

mos

pher

es,

mod

ified

atm

osph

eres

, pl

astic

wra

ppin

g, a

ctiv

e w

rapp

ing,

SO

2 lin

ers

and

low

pre

ssur

e di

sinf

esta

tion.

Res

earc

h is

nee

ded

to d

evel

op n

ew c

ombi

natio

n tr

eatm

ents

tha

t w

ill s

atis

fy in

tern

atio

nal t

radi

ng p

artn

ers.

Ti

me

to im

pact

: 5-

10 y

ears

3.1

.7 M

icro

wav

e tr

eatm

ents

Output:Microwaveavailableforthefruitflydisinfestationoffreshcom

modities

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Res

earc

h is

cur

rent

ly u

nder

way

to

prov

e m

icro

wav

e te

chno

logy

for

use

as

a re

sidu

e fr

ee

disi

nfes

tatio

n m

etho

d to

kill

pes

ts o

f qu

aran

tine

conc

ern.

Mic

row

ave

is a

noth

er f

orm

of

heat

tre

atm

ent

and

need

s re

sear

ch o

n ef

ficac

y an

d pr

oduc

t to

lera

nce.

Res

earc

h is

req

uire

d to

add

ress

eve

n he

atin

g of

pro

duct

, to

pro

duce

new

mic

row

ave

heat

dat

a se

ts t

o ki

ll fr

uit

flies

, an

d to

dev

elop

com

mer

cial

tre

atm

ent

equi

pmen

t fo

r st

akeh

olde

r us

e. T

ime

to im

pact

: 10

-15

year

s.3

.1.8

Com

bin

atio

n t

reat

men

ts

Output:Com

binationtreatmentsavailableforthefruitflydisinfestationoffreshcom

modities

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Use

of tw

o or

mor

e en

d-po

int

trea

tmen

ts in

com

bina

tion

to r

educ

e tr

eatm

ent

times

and

/or

kill

pest

s of

qua

rant

ine

conc

ern.

Inc

lude

s lo

w p

ress

ure

and

ther

mal

tre

atm

ents

, et

hyl f

orm

ate

and

cold

tre

atm

ent,

con

trol

led

atm

osph

ere

tem

pera

ture

tre

atm

ents

(CAT

TS)

and

post

-har

vest

sys

tem

s ap

proa

ches

. N

ew e

ffec

tive

mul

tiple

or

com

bina

tion

trea

tmen

ts a

re n

eede

d th

at w

ill s

atis

fy in

tern

atio

nal t

radi

ng p

artn

ers.

Pos

sibl

e co

mbi

natio

n tr

eatm

ents

incl

ude

cold

and

co

ntro

lled

atm

osph

ere,

col

d an

d lo

w d

ose

Met

hyl b

rom

ide,

col

d an

d hi

gh/l

ow p

ress

ure,

col

d an

d et

hyl f

orm

ate.

Tim

e to

im

pact

: 5-

10 y

ears

.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

37

Su

b-t

hem

e 3

.2P

rote

ctio

nN

eed

Man

y m

arke

t ac

cess

pro

toco

ls r

equi

re p

hysi

cal p

rote

ctio

n of

the

pic

ked

crop

fro

m f

ruit

fly,

thro

ugh

the

pack

ing

shed

and

in

the

supp

ly li

ne.

The

biol

ogic

al b

asis

for

thi

s re

quirem

ent

is n

ot w

ell j

ustifi

ed a

nd m

ay b

e fr

uit

fly s

peci

es a

nd/o

r co

mm

odity

de

pend

ent.

Ou

tcom

eBet

ter

post

-har

vest

con

trol

mea

sure

s fo

r fr

uit

fly.

Ou

tpu

tsRe

sear

ch w

hich

jus

tifies

the

nee

d or

oth

erw

ise

for

phys

ical

pro

tect

ion

of t

he c

rop

from

fru

it fly

aft

er h

arve

st,

and

oper

atio

nal

guid

elin

es for

inst

allin

g pr

otec

tion

barr

iers

if r

equi

red.

A

lign

men

t to

NFF

S &

NFF

S

Imp

lem

enta

tion

Pla

nN

one

iden

tified

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s3

.2.1

Nee

d f

or p

rote

ctio

n

Output:Biologicaldatatosupporttheneed,orotherwise,ofprotectingpickedfruitfromfruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

The

bio

logi

cal n

eed

for

prot

ectio

n of

the

cro

p af

ter

harv

est,

i.e.

do

frui

t fli

es s

ting

frui

t af

ter

pick

ing,

is n

ot k

now

n an

d re

lies

larg

ely

on a

necd

otal

obs

erva

tion.

Doc

umen

ting

the

prop

ensi

ty o

f fr

uit

fly t

o at

tack

har

vest

ed

frui

t w

ould

info

rm t

he n

eed

for

prot

ectio

n an

d w

hat

part

s of

the

pos

t-pi

ckin

g ch

ain

need

tha

t pr

otec

tion.

Iss

ues

to a

ddre

ss

wou

ld in

clud

e fly

spe

cies

, co

mm

odity

typ

e an

d lo

catio

n in

the

cha

in (

e.g.

pic

ker

to s

hed,

she

d to

pal

let)

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 1-

3 ye

ars

3.2

.2 P

rote

ctio

n m

eth

ods

Output:Com

merciallyviablerecom

mendationsandproductstoprotectpickedfruitfromfruitflies

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

If pi

cked

fru

it ne

eds

to b

e pr

otec

ted

from

flie

s, d

evel

opm

ent

rese

arch

nee

ds t

o be

und

erta

ken

on

prot

ectiv

e m

echa

nism

s, e

.g.

phys

ical

bar

rier

s, a

ir-c

urta

ins.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

3-5

year

s3

.2.3

Hyg

ien

e Output:Com

merciallyviableandbiologicallyjustifiedrecom

mendationsonthesafedisposalofrejectfruit

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: A

ll co

mm

erci

al s

heds

hav

e du

mps

for

fru

it re

ject

ed o

n th

e pa

ckin

g lin

e. T

he r

isk

thes

e po

se a

s so

urce

s of

fru

it fly

are

not

und

erst

ood

and

need

to

be s

tudi

ed,

and

impl

icat

ions

for

man

agin

g th

e du

mps

des

crib

ed.

Tim

e to

im

pact

: 1-

3 ye

ars

Su

b-t

hem

e 3

.3D

etec

tion

Nee

dD

isin

fest

atio

n pr

otoc

ols

are

requ

ired

bec

ause

it is

cur

rent

ly n

ot p

ossi

ble

to a

ccur

atel

y de

term

ine

if a

frui

t pi

ece

is in

fest

ed

whe

n on

ly e

ggs

or y

oung

larv

ae a

re p

rese

nt.

If it

wer

e, s

uch

frui

t co

uld

be c

ulle

d in

the

pac

king

she

d, g

uara

ntee

ing

only

cle

an

frui

t w

as p

acke

d. T

he a

bilit

y to

det

ect

eggs

and

larv

ae in

fru

it w

ould

, w

ith s

ubse

quen

t au

tom

atic

cul

ling

of t

hat

frui

t, b

e a

‘hol

y gr

ail’

in p

ost-

harv

est

trea

tmen

ts.

Ou

tcom

eBet

ter

post

-har

vest

con

trol

mea

sure

s fo

r fr

uit

fly.

Ou

tpu

tsA c

omm

erci

ally

usa

ble

dete

ctio

n de

vice

, in

tegr

ated

with

pac

king

she

d so

rtin

g an

d cu

lling

equ

ipm

ent,

whi

ch c

an d

etec

t an

d cu

ll fr

uit

fly in

fest

ed fru

it w

ith 1

00 p

er c

ent

confi

denc

e.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

7.7

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

38

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s3

.3.1

Pac

kin

g s

hed

det

ecti

on

Ou

tpu

t: A

com

mer

cial

ly u

sab

le d

etec

tion

dev

ice,

inte

gra

ted

wit

h p

acki

ng

sh

ed s

orti

ng

an

d c

ulli

ng

eq

uip

men

t.

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Det

ectio

n m

etho

dolo

gies

will

alm

ost

cert

ainl

y be

bas

ed o

n ‘s

mar

t no

se’ t

echn

olog

y an

d w

ill b

e re

quired

to

wor

k in

stan

tly,

at v

ery

high

sen

sitiv

ity,

and

in a

n en

viro

nmen

t rich

with

fru

it an

d in

orga

nic

odou

rs.

Onc

e an

op

erat

iona

l det

ectio

n de

vice

is d

evel

oped

, de

velo

pmen

tal e

ngin

eering

will

be

requ

ired

to

retr

ofit

the

equi

pmen

t to

com

mer

cial

pa

ckin

g lin

es.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

5-10

yea

rs

Su

b-t

hem

e 3

.4N

ew r

esea

rch

an

d d

ata

pro

toco

lsN

eed

Rega

rdle

ss o

f th

e di

sinf

esta

tion

met

hodo

logy

use

d, g

athe

ring

pos

t-ha

rves

t da

ta s

uita

ble

for

mar

ket

acce

ss n

egot

iatio

ns

requ

ires

labo

ur in

tens

ive

tria

ls in

volv

ing

man

y th

ousa

nds

of in

divi

dual

fru

it tr

eatm

ents

/sam

ples

. Th

e co

st o

f ge

nera

ting

the

new

dat

a re

quired

for

a s

ingl

e m

arke

t ac

cess

pro

toco

l can

now

eas

ily r

each

$1

mill

ion.

Suc

h co

sts

are

incr

easi

ngly

pro

hibi

tive

to b

oth

gove

rnm

ent

and

indu

stry

. N

ew R

&D

is n

eede

d to

dev

elop

mor

e ef

ficie

nt a

nd e

ffec

tive

expe

rim

enta

l pro

toco

ls a

nd

anal

ytic

al a

ppro

ache

s w

hich

sup

ply

data

of th

e sa

me

confi

denc

e to

impo

rter

s an

d m

arke

t ac

cess

neg

otia

tors

, bu

t w

hich

are

ch

eape

r an

d qu

icke

r to

impl

emen

t.O

utc

ome

Bet

ter

post

-har

vest

con

trol

mea

sure

s fo

r fr

uit

fly.

Ou

tpu

tsN

ew e

xper

imen

tal a

nd a

naly

tical

pro

toco

ls for

pos

t-ha

rves

t as

sess

men

t w

hich

can

gen

erat

e da

ta o

f hi

gh c

onfid

ence

to

impo

rter

s an

d m

arke

t ac

cess

neg

otia

tors

, an

d w

hich

are

mor

e ef

ficie

nt t

han

curr

ent

appr

oach

es.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

PR8

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s3

.4.1

Rev

iew

of

pro

toco

ls

Output:Ajustifiedbasisfortheregulatoryandtraderequirementsassociatedwithmarketaccessdatasets

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

The

typ

e of

dat

a co

nsid

ered

‘sui

tabl

e’ f

or m

arke

t ac

cess

neg

otia

tions

has

dev

elop

ed o

ver

time

and

ofte

n ap

pear

s m

ore

string

ent

than

is n

eede

d fo

r bi

olog

ical

ris

k re

duct

ion.

A r

evie

w o

f cu

rren

t st

anda

rds,

und

erta

ken

with

in a

co

mbi

ned

hist

oric

al,

biol

ogic

al,

stat

istic

al a

nd r

egul

ator

y fr

amew

ork,

is n

eces

sary

to

dete

rmin

e ho

w m

uch

of c

urre

nt p

ract

ice

is jus

tified

, ve

rsus

the

sim

ple

resu

lt of

unj

ustifi

ed p

rogr

essi

ve c

hang

e ov

er t

ime.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

5-10

yea

rs3

.4.2

New

dis

infe

stat

ion

pro

toco

ls

Output:Moreefficientandeffectivedisinfestationprotocols

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Cur

rent

pos

t-ha

rves

t di

sinf

esta

tion

expe

rim

ents

are

stil

l lar

gely

bas

ed a

roun

d Pr

obit

anal

ysis

, a

stat

istic

al t

echn

ique

whi

ch r

equi

res

very

larg

e sa

mpl

e si

zes

to g

ener

ate

a hi

gh d

egre

e of

con

fiden

ce in

a s

peci

fied

Prob

it va

lue

(= t

he t

reat

men

t re

spon

se o

r m

orta

lity

with

in a

giv

en p

opul

atio

n).

New

ana

lytic

al a

ppro

ache

s, s

uch

as B

ayes

ian

tech

niqu

es,

shou

ld b

e de

velo

ped

for

post

-har

vest

dat

a to

det

erm

ine

if th

e ex

perim

enta

l pro

toco

ls c

an b

e m

ade

mor

e ef

ficie

nt,

whi

le

prov

idin

g th

e sa

me

leve

l of co

nfide

nce.

Tim

e to

impa

ct:

5-10

yea

rs

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

39

Sub-theme3.5

Bio

log

y of

dea

thN

eed

Mos

t po

st-h

arve

st t

reat

men

ts foc

us o

n de

ath,

i.e.

cau

sing

mor

talit

y to

egg

s an

d m

aggo

ts in

fru

it. D

espi

te t

his

focu

s, w

e kn

ow

very

litt

le a

bout

the

act

ual c

ause

of de

ath

resu

lting

fro

m d

iffer

ent

trea

tmen

ts.

For

exam

ple,

in h

eat

trea

tmen

ts,

is d

eath

ca

used

by

ther

mal

sho

ck,

or v

ery

rapi

d ag

ing,

or

a co

mbi

natio

n of

bot

h? K

now

ing

the

answ

ers

to s

uch

ques

tions

cou

ld h

elp

optim

ise

trea

tmen

ts,

allo

w t

he s

tudy

of su

b-le

thal

effec

ts,

iden

tify

nove

l mor

talit

y in

duci

ng m

echa

nism

s an

d so

on.

Ess

entia

lly

this

is a

dis

cove

ry r

esea

rch

area

with

the

pot

entia

l to

open

as

yet

unre

cogn

ised

ave

nues

for

pos

t-ha

rves

t co

ntro

ls.

Ou

tcom

eBet

ter

post

-har

vest

con

trol

mea

sure

s fo

r fr

uit

fly.

Ou

tpu

tsStr

ateg

ic b

asic

res

earc

h w

hich

stu

dies

the

phy

siol

ogic

al b

asis

of

deat

h in

fru

it fli

es,

prov

idin

g th

e sc

ient

ific

basi

s fo

r no

vel

post

-har

vest

con

trol

s in

fru

it fly

. A

lign

men

t to

NFF

S &

NFF

S

Imp

lem

enta

tion

Pla

nN

one

iden

tified

.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s3.5.1Heatshockproteins

Ou

tpu

t: A

mol

ecu

lar

bas

ed a

pp

roac

h w

hic

h w

ill m

ake

the

dev

elop

men

t of

new

th

erm

al d

isin

fest

atio

n t

reat

men

ts

mor

e ra

pid

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: H

eat-

shoc

k pr

otei

ns a

re o

ne o

f th

e m

ost

cons

erve

d ge

ne f

amili

es a

cros

s al

l ani

mal

s an

d ar

e ve

ry w

ell s

tudi

ed.

For

heat

and

col

d di

sinf

esta

tion

trea

tmen

ts,

the

stud

y of

hea

t sh

ock

prot

eins

off

ers

a w

ay o

f ex

amin

ing

trea

tmen

t ef

fect

s at

the

mol

ecul

ar a

nd c

ellu

lar

leth

al,

allo

win

g fo

r be

tter

foc

used

tre

atm

ents

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 5-

10 y

ears

3.5.2Stagedependentsensitivity

O

utp

ut:

A p

red

icti

ve m

eth

od w

hic

h w

ill m

ake

the

dev

elop

men

t of

new

dis

infe

stat

ion

tre

atm

ents

mor

e ra

pid

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: M

ost

post

-har

vest

tre

atm

ents

impa

ct d

iffer

ent

live

stag

es (

i.e.

eggs

, th

ree

larv

al in

star

s)

differ

entia

lly.

Why

thi

s sh

ould

be

is u

nkno

wn,

but

the

abi

lity

to p

redi

ct t

his

with

out

runn

ing

full

tria

ls f

or a

ll lif

e st

ages

wou

ld

grea

tly b

enefi

t th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

new

pos

t-ha

rves

t tr

eatm

ent

prot

ocol

s. T

ime

to im

pact

: 5-

10 y

ears

3.5.3Modesofaction

Output:Ascientificapproachwhichmayleadtoentirelynoveldisinfestationtreatments

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: T

he m

ode

of a

ctio

n, i.

e. w

hat

caus

es d

eath

, fo

r ne

arly

all

post

-har

vest

tre

atm

ents

is u

nkno

wn.

O

nly

one

rese

arch

labo

rato

ry in

the

wor

ld,

base

d in

Flo

rida

, is

doi

ng t

his

type

of

rese

arch

. U

nder

stan

ding

mod

e of

act

ion,

ba

sed

on m

olec

ular

, ce

llula

r an

d w

hole

org

anis

m p

hysi

olog

y, o

ffer

s a

way

of

deve

lopi

ng n

ew c

ontr

ol t

ools

. Ti

me

to im

pact

: 5-

15 y

ears

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

40

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

Them

e 4

: M

arke

t ac

cess

an

d r

egu

lato

ry is

sues

Them

e O

verv

iew

: Bei

ng a

ble

to c

ontr

ol f

ruit

flies

and

dem

onst

rate

ris

k re

duct

ion

stra

tegi

es (

e.g.

sys

tem

s ap

proa

ches

or

post

-har

vest

dis

infe

stat

ion

trea

tmen

ts)

are

not

in t

hem

selv

es s

uffic

ient

to

guar

ante

e m

arke

t ac

cess

opp

ortu

nitie

s fo

r Au

stra

lian

com

mod

ities

. Fo

r th

is t

o ha

ppen

gro

wer

s an

d ex

port

ers

need

to

be

awar

e of

new

and

cha

ngin

g m

arke

t op

port

uniti

es s

o th

at n

ew c

omm

erci

al e

xpor

t op

port

uniti

es c

an b

e ta

rget

ed;

whi

le m

arke

t ac

cess

neg

otia

tors

nee

d to

hav

e th

e sc

ient

ific

evid

ence

req

uire

d to

arg

ue m

arke

t ac

cess

cas

es w

ith t

heir c

ount

erpa

rts

in im

port

ing

coun

trie

s or

inte

rsta

te.

Suc

h ev

iden

ce m

ay e

xist

but

may

not

be

col

late

d in

a w

ay w

hich

is e

asily

acc

esse

d by

rel

evan

t pa

rtie

s, w

hile

new

bio

logi

cal d

ata

may

als

o ne

ed t

o be

gat

here

d fo

r so

me

data

set

s. T

he p

rovi

sion

of

mar

ket

acce

ss d

ata

sets

for

bot

h in

tern

atio

nal a

nd d

omes

tic t

rade

is a

ver

y im

port

ant

com

pone

nt o

f bo

th t

he N

FFS a

nd t

he N

FFS I

mpl

emen

tatio

n Str

ateg

y; t

he

R&

D c

ompo

nent

s of

pro

vidi

ng s

uch

data

set

s ar

e ad

dres

sed

here

.

Alig

ns w

ith N

FFS r

ecom

men

datio

ns 1

, 9

& 1

2 an

d N

FFS I

mpl

emen

tatio

n Str

ateg

y Pr

ojec

ts 8

, 9,

10,

11

& 1

3.

Su

b-t

hem

e 4

.1M

arke

t ac

cess

dat

a se

tsN

eed

Mar

ket

acce

ss for

fru

it fly

affec

ted

com

mod

ities

req

uire

s di

ffer

ent

info

rmat

ion

for

expo

rter

s an

d re

gula

tors

. In

dust

ries

and

ex

port

ers

need

tra

de s

tatis

tics,

mar

ket

inte

llige

nce

and

mor

e in

ord

er t

o re

spon

d pr

ompt

ly t

o ch

angi

ng m

arke

t re

quirem

ents

an

d ne

w m

arke

t op

port

uniti

es.

Bot

h do

mes

tic a

nd in

tern

atio

nal m

arke

t ac

cess

neg

otia

tors

nee

d da

ta s

ets

whi

ch id

entif

y th

e po

tent

ial b

iolo

gica

l ris

ks a

ssoc

iate

d w

ith a

n ex

port

com

mod

ity,

as w

ell a

s th

e risk

red

uctio

n m

etho

ds a

ssoc

iate

d w

ith r

educ

ing

thos

e risk

s. H

avin

g bo

th d

ata

sets

ava

ilabl

e an

d re

gula

rly

upda

ted

posi

tions

Aus

tral

ian

grow

ers

for

prom

pt,

posi

tive

actio

n in

hi

ghly

com

petit

ive

mar

ket

plac

es.

Ou

tcom

eIn

crea

sed

mar

ket

acce

ss o

ppor

tuni

ties

for

Aust

ralia

n fr

uit

fly s

usce

ptib

le c

omm

oditi

es.

Ou

tpu

tsCur

rent

and

reg

ular

ly u

pdat

ed m

arke

t ac

cess

dat

a se

ts a

vaila

ble

to A

ustr

alia

n ho

rtic

ultu

ral i

ndus

trie

s, e

xpor

ters

and

mar

ket

acce

ss n

egot

iato

rs w

hich

can

be

used

to

both

iden

tify

and

then

rap

idly

res

pond

to

new

or

chan

ging

mar

ket

oppo

rtun

ities

.A

lign

men

t to

NFF

S &

NFF

S

Imp

lem

enta

tion

Pla

n1.

2, 1

.3,

PR13

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s4.1.1Tropicaland‘lesser’flies

Output:DatasetsonAustralianfruitfliesotherthanQflyandMedflyavailableformarketaccessnegotiations

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Int

erna

tiona

l mar

kets

are

incr

easi

ng r

eque

stin

g in

form

atio

n on

Aus

tral

ia’s

pes

t fr

uit

flies

oth

er

than

Que

ensl

and

frui

t fly

and

Med

iterr

anea

n fr

uit

fly.

Bas

ic b

iolo

gica

l inf

orm

atio

n to

car

ry o

ut im

port

ris

k an

alys

es o

n th

ese

appr

oxim

atel

y te

n sp

ecie

s is

alm

ost

entir

ely

lack

ing

– an

d th

is d

efici

ency

may

see

the

eve

ntua

l clo

sure

of

som

e m

arke

ts.

New

in

form

atio

n ne

eds

to b

e ge

nera

ted

and

colla

ted

into

mar

ket

acce

ss d

ata

pack

ages

for

Aus

tral

ia’s

‘oth

er’ f

ruit

fly s

peci

es.

4.1.2Queenslandfruitflycomplex

Output:ThebiologicalspeciesstatusoftaxawithintheQueenslandfruitflycomplexconfirmedtosupport

mar

ket

acce

ss n

egot

iati

ons

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Que

ensl

and

frui

t fly

is o

ne o

f fo

ur t

axon

omic

ally

clo

sely

rel

ated

spe

cies

, th

e ot

hers

bei

ng B

. ne

ohum

eral

is,

B.

aqui

loni

s an

d B.

mel

as.

Unc

erta

inty

exi

sts

over

the

bio

logi

cal s

peci

es s

tatu

s of

the

latt

er t

wo

spec

ies,

w

hich

may

be

taxo

nom

ic s

ynon

yms

(i.e

. th

e sa

me

spec

ies)

of B.

tryo

ni.

Som

e tr

adin

g pa

rtne

rs a

re in

crea

sing

ly r

eque

stin

g in

form

atio

n fo

r th

ese

othe

r m

embe

rs o

f th

e co

mpl

ex,

and

an in

tegr

ativ

e ta

xono

mic

app

roac

h is

nee

ded

to r

esol

ve t

he s

peci

es

limits

.4

.1.3

Tra

de

info

rmat

ion

Output:Com

modityspecificexportdatapackagesavailabletoexportersandproducerstosupportinternational

mar

ket

acce

ss

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

As

part

of su

ppor

ting

the

tota

l pro

duct

ion

syst

em,

data

set

s co

ntai

ning

tra

de s

tatis

tics,

cha

ngin

g m

arke

t re

quirem

ents

and

opp

ortu

nitie

s sh

ould

be

colla

ted

and

mad

e av

aila

ble

to h

ortic

ultu

ral i

ndus

trie

s.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

41

Su

b-t

hem

e 4

.2P

roto

cols

Nee

dAs

a si

gnat

ory

to b

oth

the

Wor

ld T

rade

Org

anis

atio

n Agr

eem

ent

of S

anita

ry a

nd P

hyto

sani

tary

Mea

sure

s an

d th

e In

tern

atio

nal

Plan

t Pr

otec

tion

Con

vent

ion,

man

agem

ent

of A

ustr

alia

n fr

uit

fly s

usce

ptib

le c

rops

des

tined

for

inte

rnat

iona

l mar

kets

is m

ost

appr

opriat

ely

done

und

er t

he for

mal

ope

ratin

g gu

idel

ines

of th

e IP

PC’s

Int

erna

tiona

l Sta

ndar

ds f

or P

hyto

sani

tary

Man

agem

ent

(ISPM

s).

Ther

e ar

e IS

PMs

both

spe

cific

ally

and

gen

eral

ly a

pplic

able

to

frui

t fly

, bu

t im

plem

entin

g th

ese

in A

ustr

alia

as

a ba

sis

for

subs

eque

nt in

tern

atio

nal m

arke

t ac

cess

req

uire

s ta

rget

ed lo

cal r

esea

rch.

Sim

ilarly

the

dom

estic

equ

ival

ents

of

the

ISPM

s,

the

Inte

rsta

te C

ertifi

catio

n Ass

uran

ce p

roto

cols

, ne

ed r

egul

ar u

pdat

ing

or w

ritin

g.O

utc

ome

Incr

ease

d m

arke

t ac

cess

opp

ortu

nitie

s fo

r Au

stra

lian

frui

t fly

sus

cept

ible

com

mod

ities

.O

utp

uts

Dom

estic

and

inte

rnat

iona

l mar

ket

acce

ss c

ases

for

fru

it fly

sus

cept

ible

com

mod

ities

bas

ed o

n th

e be

st p

ossi

ble

scie

nce,

fo

llow

ing

and

impl

emen

ting

inte

rnat

iona

lly a

gree

d pr

otoc

ols.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

1.1,

1.4

, 2.

2, 9

.6,

12.5

, PR

9, P

R10

, PR

11

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s4

.2.1

Sys

tem

s ap

pro

ach

es

Ou

tpu

t: A

ccep

ted

met

hod

olog

ies

and

ap

pro

ach

es t

o th

e u

se o

f sy

stem

s ap

pro

ach

es f

or g

ain

ing

mar

ket

acce

ss b

y fruitflyaffectedcom

modities

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Sys

tem

s ap

proa

ches

(as

defi

ned

in I

SPM

35)

req

uire

the

inte

grat

ion

of t

wo

or m

ore

inde

pend

ent

trea

tmen

ts t

o re

duce

pla

nt b

iose

curity

ris

k to

a le

vel a

ccep

tabl

e to

the

impo

rtin

g na

tion.

Whi

le a

logi

cal a

ppro

ach,

the

re a

re

sign

ifica

nt o

pera

tiona

l and

sta

tistic

al is

sues

with

app

lyin

g it

and

ther

e ar

e ve

ry f

ew c

urre

ntly

app

rove

d in

tern

atio

nal s

yste

ms

appr

oach

es for

fru

it fly

. Re

sear

ch n

eeds

to

be d

one

on b

oth

the

basi

c sc

ienc

e of

sys

tem

s ap

proa

ches

(e.

g. c

olla

ting

diff

eren

t ty

pes

of d

ata

into

a s

ingl

e en

d po

int

‘val

ue’)

and

spe

cific

fiel

d ex

ampl

es le

adin

g to

mar

ket

acce

ss w

hich

can

be

used

as

exem

plar

s.

4.2

.2 A

rea

free

dom

Output:Researchfindingstodevelopacceptedregulatoryandoperationalguidelinesformaintaining,andas

requiredregaining,marketaccessforfruitflyaffectedcom

moditiesthroughtheuseofareafreedom

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: S

peci

fic r

esea

rch

issu

es a

roun

d ar

ea f

reed

om(a

s de

fined

in I

SPM

4 a

nd I

SPM

26)

incl

ude

dete

rmin

ing

the

size

of co

ntai

nmen

t zo

nes,

the

like

lihoo

d of

fly

popu

latio

ns p

ersi

stin

g be

low

det

ecta

ble

limits

and

the

bes

t co

mbi

natio

n of

tre

atm

ents

to

erad

icat

e ou

tbre

aks.

4.2

.3 A

reas

of

low

pes

t p

reva

len

ce

Output:Researchfindingstodevelopacceptedregulatoryandoperationalguidelinesformaintaining,and

asrequiredregaining,marketaccessforfruitflyaffectedcom

moditiesthroughtheuseofareasoflowpest

pre

vale

nce

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: A

reas

of lo

w p

est

prev

alen

ce (

as d

efine

d un

der

ISPM

29)

off

er a

ver

y si

gnifi

cant

opp

ortu

nity

fo

r Au

stra

lian

prod

ucer

s, e

spec

ially

tho

se in

sou

ther

n st

ates

whe

re f

ruit

flies

may

be

natu

rally

rar

e or

sea

sona

lly a

bsen

t.

How

ever

, IS

PM 2

9 is

sile

nt o

n w

hat

num

ber

of fl

ies

cons

titut

es ‘l

ow p

est

prev

alen

ce’.

Ans

wer

ing

this

is a

com

plex

que

stio

n, a

s it

cent

res

on t

he r

elat

ions

hip

betw

een

adul

t fly

abu

ndan

ce a

nd in

fest

atio

n in

a p

artic

ular

cro

p. T

his

will

var

y de

pend

ing

on t

he

crop

, ot

her

host

s in

the

env

iron

men

t, s

easo

n an

d fr

uit

fly s

peci

es.

To a

nsw

er t

his

will

req

uire

col

lect

ion

of t

arge

ted

biol

ogic

al

data

com

bine

d w

ith p

heno

logi

cal a

nd la

ndsc

ape

mod

ellin

g. T

he e

xist

ing

Cod

es o

f Pr

actic

e fo

r Q

fly a

nd M

edfly

are

eff

ectiv

ely

syst

ems

for

ALP

P an

d th

ese

docu

men

ts p

rovi

de t

he b

asis

for

impl

emen

ting

ALP

P.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

42

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

4.2

.4 P

roto

cols

for

Pes

t Fr

ee A

reas

an

d A

reas

of

Low

Pes

t P

reva

len

ce

Ou

tpu

t: A

ccep

ted

reg

ula

tory

an

d o

per

atio

nal

gu

idel

ines

for

usi

ng

PFA

an

d A

LPP

as

mar

ket

acce

ss t

ools

for

fru

it

flyaffectedcom

modities

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Bot

h th

e U

SA a

nd N

Z h

ave

stan

dard

nat

iona

l pro

toco

ls f

or g

row

ers/

expo

rter

s w

ho a

re s

eeki

ng t

o ga

in m

arke

ts t

hrou

gh t

he u

se o

f pe

st fre

e ar

eas

or a

reas

of lo

w p

est

prev

alen

ce.

Usi

ng d

ata

gain

ed f

rom

inve

stm

ent

area

s 4.

2.1

– 4.

2.3,

and

dev

elop

ed in

con

junc

tion

with

mar

ket

acce

ss n

egot

iato

rs,

deve

lop

natio

nally

agr

eed

prod

uctio

n m

anua

ls f

or

expo

rt o

rien

tate

d cr

ops.

4.2.5CodesofPractice

Output:Up-to-dateCodesofPracticeforQflyandMedfly

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

The

Nat

iona

l Cod

es o

f Pr

actic

e fo

r Q

ueen

slan

d fr

uit

fly a

nd M

edite

rran

ean

frui

t fly

nee

d to

be

upda

ted

on a

reg

ular

bas

is,

taki

ng in

to a

ccou

nt c

hang

es in

nat

iona

l cos

t sh

arin

g ar

rang

emen

ts,

spec

ies

dist

ribu

tions

and

sc

ient

ific

know

ledg

e.4

.2.6

IC

As

Output:InterstateCertificationAssuranceavailabletoallowinterstatetradeoffruitflyaffectedcom

modities

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

The

Int

erst

ate

Cer

tifica

tion

Ass

uran

ce (

ICA)

sche

me

supp

orts

the

dom

estic

tra

de o

f fr

uit

fly

affe

cted

com

mod

ities

. O

ngoi

ng r

esea

rch

and

deve

lopm

ent

is n

eede

d, o

n a

regi

onal

and

com

mod

ity s

peci

fic b

asis

, to

ens

ure

new

ICAs

are

avai

labl

e to

sup

port

dom

estic

tra

de.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

43

Theme5:Socialissues

Them

e O

verv

iew

: Sol

ving

the

fru

it fly

pro

blem

is n

ot o

nly

depe

nden

t on

sol

ving

a b

iolo

gica

l pes

t pr

oble

m.

Frui

t fly

is a

soc

io-p

oliti

cal a

nd e

thic

al is

sue,

with

a

requ

irem

ent

for

shar

ed r

espo

nsib

ility

bet

wee

n go

vern

men

t, in

dust

ry a

nd t

he w

ider

com

mun

ity.

Failu

re o

f an

y on

e se

ctor

to

fully

eng

age

is li

kely

to

lead

to

failu

re o

f th

e w

hole

sys

tem

. H

owev

er,

wha

t ex

actly

‘sha

red

resp

onsi

bilit

y’ m

eans

with

res

pect

to

frui

t fly

, an

d ho

w t

o ga

in a

nd m

aint

ain

enga

gem

ent

from

di

ffer

ent

part

icip

ants

, is

not

eas

ily a

ddre

ssed

and

nee

ds n

ew r

esea

rch.

Fac

tors

nee

d to

be

iden

tified

tha

t w

ithho

ld g

row

ers

and

the

broa

der

com

mun

ity f

rom

be

ing

‘full‘

par

tner

s in

add

ress

ing

frui

t fly

rel

ated

issu

es;

nove

l met

hods

nee

d to

be

inve

stig

ated

to

empo

wer

loca

l gov

ernm

ents

in t

he f

ruit

fly a

rena

; an

d re

itera

tive

eval

uatio

n ne

eds

to b

e m

ade

of a

war

enes

s an

d ed

ucat

ion

activ

ities

to

ensu

re c

hang

e pr

actic

es h

ave

occu

rred

. In

stitu

tiona

l iss

ues,

suc

h as

pol

icy

sett

ings

and

reg

ulat

ions

ver

sus

ince

ntiv

es,

also

nee

d to

be

exam

ined

to

best

ach

ieve

des

ired

out

com

es.

Alig

ns w

ith N

FFS r

ecom

men

datio

ns 3

& 6

.

Sub-theme5.1

Fruitflyasasocio-politicalissue–A

sh

ared

res

pon

sib

ility

Nee

dIt

is w

idel

y re

cogn

ised

tha

t m

anag

ing

frui

t fly

will

req

uire

inpu

t fr

om t

he e

ntire

frui

t fly

sta

keho

lder

com

mun

ity;

grow

ers,

re

sear

cher

s, t

he g

ener

al c

omm

unity

, ex

port

ers

and

gove

rnm

ent

at a

ll le

vels

. But

wha

t do

es ‘s

hare

d re

spon

sibi

lity’

or

‘a w

orki

ng p

artn

ersh

ip’ b

etw

een

gove

rnm

ent,

indu

stry

and

the

com

mun

ity m

ean

in t

he c

onte

xt o

f fr

uit

fly?

Wha

t do

es

an ‘e

nabl

ing

gove

rnm

ent’

for

frui

t fly

con

trol

look

like

with

lim

ited

reso

urce

s? F

or e

xam

ple,

a g

row

er s

aid

“I d

on’t

wan

t go

vern

men

t ha

nd-o

uts,

but

I n

eed

gove

rnm

ent

to b

e th

e su

ppor

t w

orke

r, n

ot t

he p

olic

eman

, be

caus

e at

the

mom

ent

gove

rnm

ent

is a

pol

icem

an o

nly

(enf

orce

r of

reg

ulat

ion)

". A

nd w

hat,

for

exa

mpl

e, c

an r

ealis

tical

ly b

e as

ked

from

tow

n re

side

nts

to c

ontr

ol fru

it fly

and

how

doe

s th

is d

iffer

bet

wee

n to

wns

? Fo

r in

stan

ce,

can

we

expe

ct m

ore

com

mun

ity s

uppo

rt in

sm

all t

owns

tha

t ar

e hi

ghly

dep

ende

nt o

n ho

rtic

ultu

re,

vers

us a

larg

e re

gion

al c

entr

e th

at h

as a

bro

ad a

gric

ultu

re a

nd n

on-

agricu

ltura

l eco

nom

ic b

ase?

The

se t

ypes

of qu

estio

ns n

eed

to b

e ad

dres

sed

and

the

answ

ers

inco

rpor

ated

into

a s

olut

ion

if fr

uit

fly is

to

be m

anag

ed e

ffec

tivel

y.O

utc

ome

Gre

ater

eng

agem

ent

by a

ll fr

uit

fly s

take

hold

ers

in m

anag

ing

the

frui

t fly

pro

blem

.O

utp

uts

Str

ateg

ies

and

enga

gem

ent

mec

hani

sms

whi

ch h

elp

build

link

ages

bet

wee

n th

e di

ffer

ent

mem

bers

of

the

frui

t fly

sta

keho

lder

gr

oup.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

3.1,

3.3

, 6.

1, 6

.3

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s5.1.1.Engagingthebroadercom

munity

Output:Com

munitiesmoreengagedwithhelpingsolvethefruitflyproblem

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: W

hat

is t

he a

ppro

pria

te r

ole

for

the

broa

der

com

mun

ity?

Do

they

nee

d to

be

enga

ged

in t

he

deci

sion

-mak

ing

and

agen

da s

ettin

g pr

oces

s (i

mpl

ied

in t

he w

ord

part

ners

hip)

or

are

they

sim

ply

an e

xten

sion

of

the

‘indu

stry

-gov

ernm

ent’

appa

ratu

s to

add

ress

fru

it fly

issu

es in

ord

er t

o ga

in m

arke

t ac

cess

? 5.1.2Regionalindustryvoice

Output:IndividualgrowersandgrowergroupswithgreaterparticipationinsettingthefruitflyRD&Eagenda

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

How

do

regi

ons

get

a vo

ice?

Oft

en n

atio

nal i

ndus

try

bodi

es a

re le

ss c

once

rned

abo

ut is

sues

, in

clud

ing

frui

t fly

, th

at d

o no

t af

fect

mos

t gr

ower

s of

the

rel

evan

t co

mm

odity

. H

owev

er,

frui

t fly

mig

ht b

e of

par

amou

nt

impo

rtan

ce for

a r

egio

nal i

ndus

try.

Who

is in

dust

ry?

Ther

e ap

pear

s to

be

a lo

t of

em

phas

is o

n in

dust

ry b

odie

s, b

ut m

any

grow

ers

are

not

mem

bers

of in

dust

ry b

odie

s fo

r a

rang

e of

rea

sons

. Are

the

y st

ill ‘p

artn

ers’

? H

ow d

o w

e de

al w

ith ‘p

artn

ers’

w

ho a

re n

ot t

akin

g up

the

ir r

espo

nsib

ilitie

s?

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

44

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

5.1.3Localgovernment

Output:Shireandotherlocalgovernmentsempoweredtoactivelyassistinfruitflymanagement

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

As

frui

t fly

can

hav

e a

sign

ifica

nt im

pact

on

the

econ

omic

wel

l-be

ing

of a

loca

l shi

re if

the

reg

ion

is d

epen

dent

on

frui

t fly

-sen

sitiv

e cr

ops,

the

re is

a n

eed

for

loca

l cap

acity

to

set

enfo

rcea

ble

rule

s. A

logi

cal c

andi

date

in t

his

spac

e se

ems

to b

e lo

cal g

over

nmen

t, h

owev

er lo

cal g

over

nmen

t ha

s no

pow

er t

o is

sue

legi

slat

ion.

Thi

s m

eans

tha

t at

a lo

cal

leve

l the

re is

oft

en li

mite

d ca

paci

ty t

o se

t en

forc

eabl

e ru

les

for

back

yard

s, d

erel

ict

orch

ards

, ab

sent

ee la

ndho

lder

s, e

tc.,

even

as

a b

ack-

up m

easu

re if

oth

er e

ngag

emen

t st

rate

gies

fai

l. Are

the

re w

ays

to o

verc

ome

this

, su

ch a

s gi

ving

mor

e po

wer

to

loca

l gov

ernm

ent?

Sub-theme5.2

Gro

wer

s an

d t

he

com

mu

nit

y as

‘fu

ll’ p

artn

ers

Nee

dG

row

ers

are

the

prim

ary

stak

ehol

ders

in fru

it fly

man

agem

ent,

but

due

to

the

dist

ribu

ted

natu

re o

f Au

stra

lia’s

hor

ticul

ture

in

dust

ry g

row

ers

may

hav

e th

e sm

alle

st v

oice

. Th

ere

is a

n ur

gent

nee

d to

iden

tify

and

miti

gate

the

fac

tors

tha

t w

ithho

ld

grow

ers

(and

the

bro

ader

com

mun

ity)

to b

e ‘fu

ll’ p

artn

ers

in a

ddre

ssin

g fr

uit

fly r

elat

ed is

sues

.O

utc

ome

Gro

wer

s an

d th

e w

ider

loca

l com

mun

ity b

ette

r en

gage

d an

d em

pow

ered

to

man

age

frui

t fly

.O

utp

uts

Str

ateg

ies

and

enga

gem

ent

mec

hani

sms

whi

ch s

tren

gthe

n gr

ower

and

loca

l com

mun

ity le

ader

ship

in f

ruit

fly r

esea

rch,

de

velo

pmen

t an

d ex

tens

ion

issu

es.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

3.1,

3.3

, 6.

1, 6

.3

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s5.2.1Growerandindustrygroups

Output:Localfruitflyactiongroupswithstrongsupportfrom

bothgrowersandgovernment.

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: S

ome

loca

l and

reg

iona

l fru

it fly

/gro

wer

bod

ies

seem

to

lack

res

ourc

es a

nd c

apac

ity t

o be

re

spon

sive

and

del

iver

on

loca

l nee

ds.

In o

ther

cas

es r

egio

nal b

odie

s st

rugg

le t

o ac

hiev

e go

od g

row

er a

tten

danc

e at

m

eetin

gs.

In s

ome

case

s, t

here

are

indi

vidu

als

who

hav

e go

od r

elat

ions

hips

with

indi

vidu

als

in s

tate

or

fede

ral g

over

nmen

t,

whi

ch b

enefi

ts lo

cal p

rogr

ess.

Wha

t ca

n w

e le

arn

from

var

ious

exp

erie

nces

and

lite

ratu

re a

bout

wha

t w

orks

and

doe

sn’t w

ork

in t

his

cont

ext

and

how

can

tho

se e

lem

ents

tha

t w

ork

wel

l be

enco

urag

ed a

nd s

uppo

rted

? Are

the

re w

ays

that

indu

stry

can

ha

ve m

ore

inpu

t in

tra

de n

egot

iatio

ns a

bout

mar

ket

acce

ss p

roto

col,

to e

nsur

e th

ey a

re p

ract

ical

on-

farm

and

stil

l mee

t th

e im

port

ing

coun

trie

s’ r

equi

rem

ents

?5.2.2Growerperceptions

Ou

tpu

t: G

row

ers

wh

o u

nd

erst

and

cu

rren

t re

gu

lato

ry a

nd

gov

ern

men

t op

erat

ion

al c

ond

itio

ns

and

can

op

tim

ise

thei

r w

ork

pra

ctic

es w

ith

in t

hem

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: W

hat

are

grow

ers’

per

cept

ions

of ‘th

e fig

ht a

gain

st f

ruit

fly’?

For

exa

mpl

e, r

esea

rch

sugg

ests

tha

t m

any

grow

ers

and

resi

dent

s do

not

und

erst

and

the

shift

tha

t pl

ant

bios

ecur

ity h

as u

nder

gone

in t

he la

st f

ew d

ecad

es.

Man

y st

ill s

ee s

tate

dep

artm

ents

of ag

ricu

lture

and

the

fed

eral

Dep

artm

ent

of A

gric

ultu

re a

s pr

imar

ily r

espo

nsib

le f

or a

ddre

ssin

g m

any

bios

ecur

ity r

elat

ed is

sues

suc

h as

fru

it fly

con

trol

and

exp

ect

gove

rnm

ent

to b

e hi

ghly

res

pons

ive

to lo

cal n

eeds

, as

in

the

1960

s. H

ence

the

y fe

el d

eser

ted

by g

over

nmen

t, w

hich

affec

ts t

heir t

rust

in a

nd p

erce

ptio

n of

gov

ernm

ent.

Man

y do

n’t

seem

to

unde

rsta

nd t

hat

due

to t

he c

hang

e in

the

inte

rnat

iona

l ‘ru

les

of t

he g

ame’

, Aus

tral

ia n

eeds

to

spen

d a

larg

e am

ount

of

res

ourc

es t

o ab

ide

by in

tern

atio

nal c

onve

ntio

ns u

nder

the

Wor

ld T

rade

Org

anis

atio

n an

d In

tern

atio

nal P

lant

Pro

tect

ion

Con

vent

ion

in o

rder

to

ensu

re it

rem

ains

a ‘r

eput

able

pla

yer’

in t

he in

tern

atio

nal s

cene

, an

impo

rtan

t co

nditi

on f

or a

hea

lthy

expo

rt in

dust

ry.

Suc

h pe

rcep

tions

nee

d to

be

unde

rsto

od a

nd e

ither

mod

ified

or

wor

ked

arou

nd.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

45

5.2.3Participatoryresearch

O

utp

ut:

Gro

wer

s b

ette

r en

gag

ed w

ith

ad

apti

ng

new

res

earc

h a

nd

dev

elop

men

t ou

tpu

ts

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Out

com

es fro

m r

esea

rch

inve

stm

ent

are

ofte

n un

derm

ined

by

a la

ck o

f up

take

by

grow

ers

and

othe

rs.

Part

icip

ator

y re

sear

ch in

volv

es e

ngag

ing

grow

ers

from

the

sta

rt in

the

res

earc

h pr

oces

s, in

clud

ing

shap

ing

the

rese

arch

foc

us.

Gro

wer

s be

com

e ac

tive

part

icip

ants

in t

he r

esea

rch

proc

ess,

suc

h as

allo

win

g an

d un

dert

akin

g re

sear

ch-

rela

ted

activ

ities

on

thei

r la

nd.

Alth

ough

not

nam

ed t

hat

way

, th

is is

in b

road

ter

ms

wha

t ha

ppen

ed in

Cen

tral

Bur

nett

whe

n Q

ueen

slan

d D

AFF

par

tner

ed w

ith t

he lo

cal i

ndus

try

to im

plem

ent

AWM

in t

he r

egio

n. D

AFF

sta

ff c

onsu

lted

with

gro

wer

s an

d lo

cal c

onsu

ltant

s ab

out

the

rese

arch

pro

ject

. Th

e re

sear

ch d

esig

n in

clud

ed r

esea

rch

ques

tions

put

for

war

d by

gro

wer

s. L

ocal

s m

entio

ned

this

pro

cess

as

an im

port

ant

fact

or in

the

suc

cess

of

AWM

in C

entr

al B

urne

tt.

Idea

lly p

artic

ipat

ing

grow

ers

mee

t re

gula

rly

with

eac

h ot

her

and

rese

arch

ers

to in

terp

ret

findi

ngs

and

dire

ct f

utur

e ac

tiviti

es (

soci

al le

arni

ng).

Due

to

the

high

le

vel o

f ow

ners

hip,

find

ings

fro

m s

uch

rese

arch

hol

ds far

mor

e cr

edib

ility

and

hen

ce u

ptak

e th

an b

ring

ing

in r

esea

rch

findi

ngs

from

els

ewhe

re.

This

app

roac

h ca

n be

ext

ende

d to

citi

zen

scie

nce,

whe

re t

own

resi

dent

s ca

n al

so b

e en

gage

d in

the

res

earc

h pr

oces

s, for

exa

mpl

e sc

hool

s or

peo

ple

from

gar

deni

ng c

lubs

mig

ht b

e w

illin

g to

mon

itor

new

tra

ps o

r ot

her

tech

nolo

gies

in

thei

r sc

hool

gro

unds

/ ba

ckya

rds.

Thi

s ha

s th

e po

tent

ial t

o ex

pand

man

pow

er,

incr

ease

s aw

aren

ess

of t

he p

est

and

resu

lts in

be

tter

upt

ake

of r

esul

ts.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

46

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

Them

e 6

: C

apac

ity

Them

e O

verv

iew

: Re

gard

less

of ho

w g

ood

the

RD

&E

Plan

, no

thin

g w

ill b

e ac

hiev

ed t

o co

ntro

l fru

it fly

ove

r th

e ne

xt t

wen

ty y

ears

with

out

the

capa

city

, bo

th h

uman

and

phy

sica

l, to

do

so.

His

torica

lly,

capa

city

in fru

it fly

RD

&E

has

been

sha

red

by t

he A

ustr

alia

n G

over

nmen

t, C

SIR

O,

the

stat

e de

part

men

ts

of a

gric

ultu

re a

nd a

sm

all n

umbe

r of

uni

vers

ities

. CSIR

O a

nd t

he u

nive

rsiti

es c

arried

out

pre

dom

inan

tly d

isco

very

and

str

ateg

ic r

esea

rch,

whi

le t

he s

tate

s ha

d re

spon

sibi

lity

for

rese

arch

, de

velo

pmen

t an

d ex

tens

ion,

and

the

Aus

tral

ian

Gov

ernm

ent

for

bord

er p

rote

ctio

n an

d m

arke

t ac

cess

neg

otia

tions

. Sin

ce

its for

mat

ion

in t

he 1

980s

the

Aus

tral

ian

Cen

tre

for

Inte

rnat

iona

l Agr

icul

tura

l Res

earc

h (A

CIA

R)

has

cont

inuo

usly

fun

ded

offs

hore

fru

it fly

res

earc

h an

d de

velo

pmen

t in

Asi

a an

d th

e Pa

cific

and

has

thu

s pl

ayed

an

impo

rtan

t ro

le in

mai

ntai

ning

bot

h re

gion

al a

nd A

ustr

alia

n fr

uit

fly c

apac

ity.

The

curr

ent

situ

atio

n in

cap

acity

stil

l refl

ects

par

t of

thi

s hi

stor

ical

pat

tern

, bu

t w

ith s

ome

sign

ifica

nt d

iffer

ence

s. N

otab

ly s

tate

agr

icul

ture

dep

artm

ents

hav

e gr

eatly

red

uced

the

ir d

evel

opm

ent

and

exte

nsio

n ca

paci

ty,

espe

cial

ly in

reg

iona

lly lo

cate

d ex

tens

ion

staf

f an

d fie

ld e

ntom

olog

ists

who

ser

vice

d a

part

icul

ar

prod

uctio

n ar

ea o

r cr

op t

ype.

Som

e of

thi

s re

gion

al c

apac

ity h

as b

een

take

n ov

er b

y th

e pr

ivat

e se

ctor

, in

ter

ms

of I

PM s

cout

s an

d ho

rtic

ultu

re c

onsu

ltant

s. I

n or

der

to m

aint

ain

a vi

able

and

effec

tive

natio

nal c

apac

ity in

fru

it fly

RD

&E,

a c

apac

ity w

hich

has

the

pot

entia

l to

cove

r th

e fu

ll sp

ectr

um o

f re

quired

act

iviti

es

from

dis

cove

ry s

cien

ce t

o gr

ower

sup

port

, th

e fo

llow

ing

issu

es n

eed

to b

e ad

dres

sed.

Alig

ns w

ith N

FFS r

ecom

men

datio

ns 1

3, 1

5 &

17

Su

b-t

hem

e 6

.1R

egio

nal

su

pp

ort

Nee

dTh

e lo

ss o

f ca

paci

ty in

reg

iona

l ent

omol

ogy

and

loca

l hor

ticul

ture

ext

ensi

on c

apac

ity h

as d

irec

tly a

nd n

egat

ivel

y af

fect

ed f

ruit

fly m

anag

emen

t. B

oth

as a

n im

med

iate

prior

ity,

and

in t

he fut

ure,

inve

stm

ent

need

s to

be

mad

e to

sup

port

reg

iona

lly b

ased

pr

ofes

sion

als

who

can

car

ry o

ut o

n-st

atio

n an

d on

-far

m t

rial

s to

ado

pt p

rim

ary

rese

arch

to

the

need

s of

the

ir lo

cal g

row

ers.

Suc

h of

ficer

s ne

ed t

o w

ork

with

loca

l gro

wer

s an

d th

eir

com

mun

ity t

o de

velo

p an

d im

plem

ent

both

on-

farm

and

are

a-w

ide

IPM

str

ateg

ies

whi

ch b

est

fit t

he n

eed

of t

hat

com

mun

ity.

Ou

tcom

eBet

ter

abili

ty for

gro

wer

s to

mak

e in

form

ed fru

it fly

man

agem

ent

deci

sion

s, le

adin

g to

mor

e vi

able

and

sus

tain

able

loca

l ho

rtic

ultu

ral c

omm

uniti

es.

Ou

tpu

tsEn

hanc

ed c

apac

ity for

the

out

puts

of fr

uit

fly R

&D

to

be c

omm

unic

ated

to

grow

ers

in f

orm

s te

sted

for

loca

l pro

duct

ion

area

s,

and

for

grow

ers

to p

rovi

de in

form

atio

n an

d fe

edba

ck t

o th

e fr

uit

fly R

&D

com

mun

ity.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

No

iden

tified

alig

nmen

t.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s6.1.1Regionalfruitflybiosecurity(researchandextension)officers

Output:Regionallybasedprofessionalswhocanoptimisefruitflycontrolsforlocalproductionareasandcrops,

wh

ile f

acili

tati

ng

net

wor

ks o

f g

row

ers,

loca

l gov

ern

men

t an

d t

he

wid

er lo

cal c

omm

un

ity

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: R

egio

nally

bas

ed e

ntom

olog

ists

and

ext

ensi

on s

taff

hav

e hi

stor

ical

ly p

laye

d a

pivo

tal r

ole

in t

he

frui

t fly

RD

&E

syst

em.

Thro

ugh

prof

essi

onal

net

wor

ks t

hey

have

had

acc

ess

to n

ew r

esea

rch

and

deve

lopm

ent,

whi

le b

eing

re

gion

ally

bas

ed t

hey

have

had

firs

t-ha

nd k

now

ledg

e of

the

ir lo

cal g

row

ers

need

s, a

s w

ell a

s gr

ower

tru

st,

and

have

bee

n ab

le t

o te

st n

ew c

ontr

ols

unde

r lo

cal c

ondi

tions

. Th

is k

ey r

ole,

in t

he f

orm

of

frui

t fly

‘bio

secu

rity

offi

cers

’ urg

ently

nee

ds t

o be

rei

nvig

orat

ed,

with

the

app

oint

men

t of

ded

icat

ed p

rofe

ssio

nals

for

key

hor

ticul

tura

l pro

duct

ion

area

s ar

ound

Aus

tral

ia.

The

mod

el o

f re

gion

al b

iose

curity

offi

cers

as

used

by

the

grai

ns in

dust

ry c

ould

be

easi

ly a

dopt

ed f

or f

ruit

fly.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

47

Su

b-t

hem

e 6

.2R

esea

rch

an

d D

evel

opm

ent

cap

acit

yN

eed

Cap

acity

to

carr

y ou

t fr

uit

fly R

&D

cur

rent

ly e

xist

s in

Aus

tral

ia,

but

this

situ

atio

n w

ill c

hang

e ov

er t

ime.

Inc

reas

ingl

y,

labo

rato

ries

aro

und

Aust

ralia

are

run

ning

larg

ely

on c

ontr

acte

d st

aff,

com

mon

ly li

nked

to

a sp

ecifi

c re

sear

ch p

roje

ct w

ith

grea

t un

cert

aint

y of

con

tinui

ng e

mpl

oym

ent.

With

in t

he s

tate

gov

ernm

ents

, on

ly a

few

res

earc

h en

tom

olog

ists

are

spe

cific

ally

al

loca

ted

to fru

it fly

res

earc

h an

d m

ost

shar

e th

eir

frui

t fly

wor

k w

ith r

esea

rch

on o

ther

pes

ts o

r pl

ant

bios

ecur

ity p

robl

ems.

Th

e si

tuat

ion

is t

he s

ame

in u

nive

rsiti

es,

whe

re r

esea

rch

fello

ws

and

post

docs

are

fun

ded

for

spec

ific

proj

ects

, an

d m

ost

cont

inui

ng a

cade

mic

s ha

ve ‘d

ay job

s’ (

i.e.

teac

hing

, su

perv

isio

n, a

dmin

istr

atio

n) w

hich

lim

it th

eir

abili

ty t

o co

ntribu

te t

o lo

ng t

erm

R&

D.

Impo

rtan

tly,

this

impa

cts

on t

he a

bilit

y of

res

earc

hers

to

inve

st in

fun

dam

enta

l res

earc

h an

d bi

olog

ical

in

vest

igat

ions

, an

d he

nce

the

abili

ty t

o pu

rsue

nov

el s

olut

ions

. To

att

ract

the

bes

t sk

ills

to f

ruit

fly R

&D

the

re n

eeds

to

be a

cl

ear

oppo

rtun

ity for

res

earc

hers

to

esta

blis

h a

care

er a

nd a

n in

tere

stin

g/en

gagi

ng R

D&

E pr

ogra

m.

Ou

tcom

eH

igh

qual

ity a

nd in

nova

tive

R&

D o

utpu

ts w

hich

sup

port

gro

wer

s’ n

eeds

for

fru

it fly

man

agem

ent.

O

utp

uts

A s

tabl

e pr

ofes

sion

al c

omm

unity

cap

able

of su

ppor

t fr

uit

fly R

&D

nee

ds in

to t

he f

utur

e.A

lign

men

t to

NFF

S &

NFF

S

Imp

lem

enta

tion

Pla

n13

.1

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s6

.2.1

Str

ateg

ic r

esea

rch

sta

ff

Output:Astablefruitflyresearchcom

munityengagedindiscoveryandstrategicresearchforthedevelopment

ofnovelfruitflymanagementtools

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

In

addi

tion

to fi

eld

ento

mol

ogis

ts,

a vi

able

fru

it fly

R&

D c

omm

unity

req

uire

s st

able

res

earc

h te

ams

focu

sing

on

the

5-20

yea

r R&

D o

bjec

tives

. To

ach

ieve

thi

s, c

urre

nt f

ruit

fly s

peci

fic a

ppoi

ntm

ents

nee

d to

be

supp

orte

d an

d ne

w o

nes

crea

ted.

6

.2.2

Ch

ang

ed f

un

din

g c

ycle

s

Output:Amorestablefruitflyresearchcom

munity,especiallyforprofessionalofficersandearlycareer

rese

arch

ers

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Fun

ding

cyc

les

of o

ne t

o th

ree

year

s le

ad t

o gr

eat

job

inse

curity

for

sta

ff a

ppoi

nted

thr

ough

su

ch p

roje

cts.

A c

hang

e of

fun

ding

cyc

les

for

stra

tegi

c R&

D in

itiat

ives

fro

m t

hree

yea

rs t

o fiv

e ye

ars

wou

ld g

ive

grea

ter

empl

oym

ent

stab

ility

for

con

trac

t st

aff an

d op

port

unity

for

indi

vidu

al a

nd t

eam

dev

elop

men

t.

Su

b-t

hem

e 6

.3P

rofe

ssio

nal

net

wor

ksN

eed

The

frui

t fly

pro

blem

con

cern

s al

l sta

tes

and

terr

itories

of Au

stra

lia,

as w

ell a

s m

ost

coun

trie

s ar

ound

the

wor

ld.

For

this

re

ason

fru

it fly

RD

&E

prof

essi

onal

s ar

e di

sper

sed

both

nat

iona

lly a

nd g

loba

lly a

nd s

trat

egie

s ne

ed t

o be

put

in p

lace

to

ensu

re

that

net

wor

ks e

xist

thr

ough

whi

ch in

form

atio

n ca

n be

exc

hang

ed a

nd c

olla

bora

tive

RD

&E

unde

rtak

en.

Ou

tcom

eStr

onge

r pr

ofes

sion

al li

nkag

es n

atio

nally

and

inte

rnat

iona

lly,

max

imis

ing

dom

estic

R&

D c

olla

bora

tions

and

ens

urin

g Au

stra

lia

stay

s cu

rren

t w

ith in

tern

atio

nal d

evel

opm

ents

.O

utp

uts

A m

ore

effic

ient

and

effec

tive

frui

t fly

R&

D c

omm

unity

.A

lign

men

t to

NFF

S &

NFF

S

Imp

lem

enta

tion

Pla

n15

.1

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

48

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s6

.3.1

In

tern

atio

nal

sym

pos

ium

s Output:AustralianfruitflyR&Dprofessionalslinkedtoworldbestpractice

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

The

fou

r ye

arly

Int

erna

tiona

l Sym

posi

ums

of F

ruit

Flie

s of

Eco

nom

ic I

mpo

rtan

ce (

ISFF

EI)

are

the

prim

ary

inte

rnat

iona

l fru

it fly

mee

tings

. Pr

esen

tatio

ns c

over

all

area

s of

app

lied

frui

t fly

man

agem

ent.

Fun

ding

of

Aust

ralia

n fr

uit

fly R

D&

E pr

ofes

sion

als

to p

artic

ipat

e w

ithin

the

ISFF

EI w

ould

cre

ate

valu

able

net

wor

ks a

nd e

nsur

e Au

stra

lia s

tays

cur

rent

w

ith in

tern

atio

nal t

rend

s.6

.3.2

TA

AO

Output:AustralianfruitflyR&Dprofessionalsactivelyparticipatinginregionalfruitflyactivities

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: T

he T

ephr

itid

Wor

kers

of Asi

a, A

ustr

alia

and

Oce

ania

(TA

AO

) is

a r

ecen

tly r

einv

igor

ated

reg

iona

l ne

twor

k of

fru

it fly

wor

kers

. Au

stra

lian

supp

ort

for

TAAO

will

hel

p bu

ild r

egio

nal l

inka

ges,

str

engt

heni

ng r

esea

rch

on a

ll Bac

troc

era

frui

t fli

es.

6.3

.3 N

atio

nal

mee

tin

gs

Output:MaximisedcollaborationandminimisedduplicationwithintheAustralianfruitflyRD&Ecommunity

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Whi

le t

he ‘c

ore’

Aus

tral

ian

frui

t fly

wor

kers

all

know

eac

h ot

her,

ther

e is

a m

uch

wid

er c

omm

unity

of

RD

&E

prof

essi

onal

s w

ho w

ork

with

fru

it fli

es w

ho a

re n

ot p

art

of t

his

grou

p. N

atio

nal f

ruit

fly R

D&

E m

eetin

gs,

held

at

leas

t on

ce e

very

18

mon

ths

and

atte

nded

by

as w

ide

a re

pres

enta

tion

of t

he R

D&

E co

mm

unity

as

poss

ible

(in

clud

ing

regi

onal

ly

base

d sc

ient

ists

, bo

rder

pro

tect

ion

staf

f, st

uden

ts a

nd p

ostd

ocs)

wou

ld s

igni

fican

tly s

tren

gthe

n th

e na

tiona

l fru

it fly

eff

ort.

Su

b-t

hem

e 6

.4P

hys

ical

In

fras

tru

ctu

reN

eed

The

phys

ical

infr

astr

uctu

re for

fru

it fly

RD

&E

in A

ustr

alia

cur

rent

ly li

es w

ithin

the

indi

vidu

al R

&D

org

anis

atio

ns in

volv

ed.

Som

e co

untr

ies,

e.g

. M

exic

o, a

re m

ovin

g to

war

ds s

ingl

e na

tiona

l fru

it fly

RD

&E

faci

litie

s as

a w

ay o

f co

ordi

natin

g re

sear

ch e

ffor

ts.

This

str

ateg

y is

unl

ikel

y to

wor

k in

Aus

tral

ia g

iven

the

siz

e of

the

nat

ion

and

the

dive

rsity

of

hort

icul

tura

l sys

tem

s in

volv

ed.

A

dist

ribu

ted

phys

ical

net

wor

k, e

ither

bui

lt ar

ound

exi

stin

g fa

cilit

ies

or w

ith n

ew f

acili

ties,

wou

ld b

e be

tter

sui

ted

to A

ustr

alia

n si

tuat

ion.

O

utc

ome

A s

usta

ined

fru

it fly

RD

&E

capa

city

in A

ustr

alia

.O

utp

uts

A n

etw

ork

of r

egio

nal l

abor

ator

ies

capa

ble

of u

nder

taki

ng fru

it fly

R&

D a

nd in

form

ing

exte

nsio

n.A

lign

men

t to

NFF

S &

NFF

S

Imp

lem

enta

tion

Pla

n15

.1

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s6

.4.1

R&

D n

etw

ork

Ou

tpu

t: A

nat

ion

al c

oord

inat

ed,

bu

t d

istr

ibu

ted

R&

D n

etw

ork

con

sist

ing

of

a sm

all n

um

ber

of

rese

arch

hu

bs.

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: A

rran

gem

ents

nee

d to

be

mad

e fo

r na

tiona

l prior

itisa

tion

and

fund

ing

of c

ritic

al r

esea

rch

and

oper

atio

nal i

nfra

stru

ctur

e fo

r fr

uit

fly R

&D

. D

iscu

ssio

ns s

houl

d be

hel

d as

par

t of

Prim

ary

Indu

stries

Sta

ndin

g Com

mitt

ee

stra

tegi

es.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

49

Sub-theme6.5

Man

ager

ial I

nfr

astr

uct

ure

Nee

dFr

uit

fly R

D&

E in

Aus

tral

ia is

cur

rent

ly g

reat

ly w

eake

ned

by t

he la

ck o

f a

perm

anen

t ad

min

istr

ativ

e in

fras

truc

ture

with

a c

lear

lin

e of

rep

ortin

g an

d fin

anci

al r

espo

nsib

ility

. At

the

mom

ent

seve

ral g

roup

s ha

ve a

dmin

istr

ativ

e an

d or

fina

ncia

l coo

rdin

atio

n ro

les

for

at le

ast

som

e pa

rt o

f th

e na

tiona

l fru

it fly

effor

t. T

hese

incl

ude

the

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Adv

isor

y Com

mitt

ee,

the

Plan

t Bio

secu

rity

CRC,

Hor

ticul

ture

Inn

ovat

ion

Aus

tral

ia L

td,

Plan

t H

ealth

Aus

tral

ia,

the

Nat

iona

l Pla

nt B

iose

curity

RD

&E

Impl

emen

tatio

n Com

mitt

ee,

Prim

ary

Indu

stries

Sta

ndin

g Com

mitt

ee a

nd t

he S

ITpl

us C

onso

rtiu

m.

Thes

e gr

oups

are

add

ition

al

to t

he in

tern

al m

anag

emen

t st

ruct

ure

of e

very

org

anis

atio

n w

ithin

Aus

tral

ia w

hich

em

ploy

s at

leas

t on

e pe

rson

invo

lved

in

frui

t fly

RD

&E.

Giv

en t

his

crow

ded

situ

atio

n it

is n

ot s

urpr

isin

g th

at c

onfu

sion

and

dup

licat

ion

exis

ts.

This

con

fusi

on is

ver

y ob

viou

s at

the

gro

und

leve

l, an

d a

cons

iste

nt m

essa

ge f

rom

gro

wer

s, g

row

er g

roup

s an

d re

sear

cher

s th

roug

hout

the

con

sulta

ncy

period

was

the

nee

d fo

r a

sing

le,

natio

nal b

ody

to b

e re

spon

sibl

e fo

r fr

uit

fly m

anag

emen

t, e

.g.

“Am

alga

mat

ion

of a

ll fr

uit

fly r

elat

ed b

odie

s in

to o

ne for

ce w

ith a

ctio

n, n

ot t

alk,

hea

ding

the

age

nda.

” Sev

eral

diff

eren

t m

odel

s ex

ist

for

how

thi

s m

ight

be

achi

eved

and

the

se n

eed

to b

e ex

plor

ed,

and

the

pref

erre

d op

tion

impl

emen

ted,

as

soon

as

poss

ible

. O

utc

ome

Bet

ter

man

agem

ent

of a

ll as

pect

s of

fru

it fly

RD

&E

in A

ustr

alia

.O

utp

uts

A s

ingl

e, n

atio

nal b

ody

char

ged

with

coo

rdin

atin

g an

d im

plem

entin

g fr

uit

fly R

D&

E in

Aus

tral

ia.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

Nea

rly

all r

ecom

men

datio

ns o

f th

e N

FFS c

ould

be

bett

er a

chie

ved

thro

ugh

the

exis

tenc

e of

a s

ingl

e, n

atio

nal c

oord

inat

ion

cent

re.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s6.5.1Nationalfruitflycoordination

Output:Asingle,nationalcoordinationcentreforallaspectsoffruitflyRD&E.

Des

crip

tion

an

d a

ctio

ns:

Cre

atio

n of

a s

ingl

e, n

atio

nal b

ody

with

a r

ole

of b

oth

coor

dina

ting

and

impl

emen

ting

frui

t fly

RD

&E.

Dev

elop

men

t of

suc

h a

body

sho

uld

be c

onsi

dere

d by

bot

h th

e N

FF A

dvis

ory

Com

mitt

ee a

nd t

he N

atio

nal P

lant

Bio

secu

rity

Str

ateg

y Im

plem

enta

tion

Com

mitt

ee.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

50

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

Them

e 7

: C

ore

scie

nce

Them

e O

verv

iew

: Th

roug

hout

the

RD

&E

them

es a

bove

are

sev

eral

dis

cipl

ines

con

side

red

by t

he w

ritin

g gr

oup

as ‘c

ore

scie

nce’

. W

e re

fer

to ‘c

ore

scie

nce’

as

tho

se b

road

res

earc

h di

scip

lines

whi

ch p

rovi

de t

he u

nder

pinn

ing

scie

nce

upon

whi

ch o

pera

tiona

l res

earc

h an

d de

velo

pmen

t ar

e ba

sed.

Cor

e sc

ienc

e al

so

prov

ides

the

‘blu

e-sk

y’ o

r di

scov

ery-

scie

nce,

whi

ch a

re t

he b

asis

for

the

ove

r-th

e-ho

rizo

n co

ntro

ls w

hich

are

cur

rent

ly d

ifficu

lt or

impo

ssib

le t

o pr

edic

t. G

iven

th

is,

we

list

core

sci

ence

as

a se

para

te t

hem

e to

rec

ogni

se t

he o

ngoi

ng n

eed

for

basi

c an

d st

rate

gic-

basi

c re

sear

ch in

fru

it fly

man

agem

ent.

Alig

ns w

ith N

FFS r

ecom

men

datio

ns 1

3 &

14

Su

b-t

hem

e 7

.1C

ore

scie

nce

Nee

dW

hile

it is

pos

sibl

e to

pre

dict

fut

ure

frui

t fly

R&

D n

eeds

, an

ticip

ated

adv

ance

s in

sci

ence

and

tec

hnol

ogy

mak

e it

diffi

cult,

if

not

rest

rict

ive,

to

pred

ict

how

tho

se n

eeds

are

bes

t m

et.

By

supp

ortin

g co

re s

cien

ce d

isci

plin

es,

frui

t fly

R&

D w

ill b

e ab

le t

o pr

ovid

e th

e in

nova

tive

rese

arch

req

uire

d to

dev

elop

and

mai

ntai

n no

vel f

ruit

fly c

ontr

ols.

Ou

tcom

eTh

e be

st p

ossi

ble

frui

t fly

man

agem

ent

in A

ustr

alia

for

the

nex

t tw

enty

yea

rs.

Ou

tpu

tsIn

nova

tive

scie

nce

solu

tions

for

fru

it fly

man

agem

ent.

Alig

nm

ent

to N

FFS

& N

FFS

Im

ple

men

tati

on P

lan

13.1

, 13

.2,

14.2

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s7

.1.1

Mol

ecu

lar

bio

log

y Output:ActivefruitflyR&Dprogramsutilisingmolecularbiologyapproaches

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: I

n th

e la

st t

wo

deca

des

no fi

eld

of b

iolo

gica

l res

earc

h ha

s de

velo

ped

as r

apid

ly a

s m

olec

ular

bi

olog

y, a

nd t

here

is e

very

sig

n th

at t

his

prog

ress

will

con

tinue

. Th

e cu

rren

t po

tent

ial o

f m

olec

ular

bio

logy

is b

est

seen

in t

he

hum

an h

ealth

sci

ence

s, w

here

tar

gete

d m

edic

atio

ns a

re b

eing

des

igne

d to

figh

t di

seas

e an

d ill

ness

bas

ed o

n ou

r kn

owle

dge

of

indi

vidu

al g

enes

. Th

is d

epth

of kn

owle

dge

and

appl

icat

ion

is s

till o

nly

rare

ly a

pplie

d to

inse

ct s

yste

ms,

but

the

re a

re a

lrea

dy

area

s fo

r w

hich

it is

con

side

red

unac

cept

able

to

wor

k w

ithou

t a

mol

ecul

ar b

asis

(e.

g. s

yste

mat

ics

and

diag

nost

ics)

, w

hile

ne

arly

all

subt

hem

es in

The

mes

1-4

do,

or

in t

he fut

ure

will

, be

nefit

fro

m m

olec

ular

bio

logy

res

earc

h. A

s w

e m

ove

into

the

fiv

e, t

en a

nd t

wen

ty y

ear

timef

ram

es o

f th

is P

lan,

mol

ecul

ar b

iolo

gy w

ill b

ecom

e a

rout

ine

R&

D t

ool,

and

also

the

mos

t lik

ely

prov

ider

of tr

uly

nove

l fru

it fly

con

trol

s.

7.1

.2 P

hys

iolo

gy

and

beh

avio

ur

Outputs:ActivefruitflyR&Dprogramsutilisinginsectphysiologicalandbehaviouralapproaches

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: F

ruit

flies

are

beh

avio

ural

ly c

ompl

ex o

rgan

ism

s w

ith c

ompl

ex n

eura

l, ci

rcul

ator

y, r

espi

rato

ry a

nd

repr

oduc

tive

syst

ems.

An

unde

rsta

ndin

g of

fru

it fly

phy

siol

ogy

and

beha

viou

r ca

n ai

d R&

D o

bjec

tives

as

dive

rse

as p

redi

ctin

g ge

ogra

phic

ran

ge c

hang

es u

nder

clim

ate

chan

ge (

e.g.

how

wel

l can

the

inse

ct s

urvi

ve e

xtre

me

tem

pera

ture

eve

nts?

),

pred

ictin

g th

e su

cces

s of

SIT

(e.

g. h

ow c

ompe

titiv

e is

spe

rm p

rodu

ced

by S

IT fl

ies?

), a

nd d

esig

ning

new

gen

erat

ion

lure

s (e

.g.

how

are

pla

nt v

olat

ile c

hem

ical

s pr

oces

sed

in t

he b

rain

?).

Phys

iolo

gica

l and

beh

avio

ural

stu

dies

, us

ing

both

tra

ditio

nal

and

mol

ecul

ar b

ased

app

roac

hes,

will

rem

ain

a lo

ng t

erm

cor

e sc

ienc

e fo

r fr

uit

fly m

anag

emen

t. B

oth

phys

iolo

gica

l and

ph

enol

ogic

al u

nder

stan

ding

als

o ca

n de

liver

direc

t im

prov

emen

ts in

fru

it fly

con

trol

, in

clud

ing

unde

rsta

ndin

g w

hen

popu

latio

ns

emer

ge a

nd b

ecom

e a

risk

to

com

mer

cial

ly g

row

n pr

oduc

e.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

Nat

iona

l Fru

it Fl

y Re

sear

ch,

Dev

elop

men

t an

d Ex

tens

ion

Plan

51

7.1

.3 E

colo

gy

Outputs:ActivefruitflyR&Dprogramsutilisinginsectecologyapproaches

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: E

colo

gy is

the

stu

dy o

f or

gani

sms

in t

he e

nviron

men

t. A

rob

ust

ecol

ogic

al k

now

ledg

e of

the

Aus

tral

ian

frui

t fly

spe

cies

has

bee

n re

peat

edly

iden

tified

as

a ke

y ga

p in

our

abi

lity

to c

ontr

ol t

hese

inse

cts.

Exa

mpl

es o

f th

e ty

pe o

f qu

estio

ns for

whi

ch e

colo

gica

l ans

wer

s ar

e ne

eded

incl

ude;

wha

t dr

ives

the

abu

ndan

ce o

f fli

es in

the

fiel

d an

d ho

w

does

tha

t ab

unda

nce

chan

ge d

urin

g th

e ye

ar;

whe

re d

o fli

es m

ate

in t

he fi

eld

so w

e ca

n ta

rget

SIT

rel

ease

s; h

ow d

o fli

es

mov

e ar

ound

the

land

scap

e an

d w

here

do

they

com

e fr

om b

efor

e en

tering

an

orch

ard?

All

such

kno

wle

dge

will

hel

p fo

cus

the

deve

lopm

ent

and

appl

icat

ion

of c

ontr

ols.

Eco

logy

sho

uld

be b

ased

upo

n an

und

erst

andi

ng o

f th

e in

sect

’s p

hysi

olog

y, a

nd r

elie

s he

avily

on

tool

s pr

ovid

ed b

y m

olec

ular

bio

logy

, m

odel

ling

and

stat

istic

s.7

.1.4

Mod

ellin

g

Outputs:ActivefruitflyR&Dprogramsutilisingmodellingapproaches

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: A

ver

y br

oad

term

cov

erin

g a

mul

titud

e of

app

roac

hes,

we

refe

r to

mod

ellin

g he

re a

s th

e de

velo

pmen

t an

d ap

plic

atio

n of

com

pute

r ba

sed

tool

s w

hich

hel

p us

sum

mar

ise

and

com

bine

kno

wle

dge,

und

erst

and

obse

rved

mec

hani

sms

and

patt

erns

, an

d pr

edic

t an

swer

s to

que

stio

ns r

elev

ant

to f

ruit

fly m

anag

emen

t. E

xam

ples

of

mod

els

(and

the

typ

e of

que

stio

ns t

hey

can

answ

er)

need

ed for

fru

it fly

incl

ude;

(i)

phe

nolo

gy m

odel

s (w

hen

are

flies

in m

y or

char

d?);

(ii)

land

scap

e m

odel

s (w

here

are

flie

s in

my

orch

ard

com

ing

from

?);

and

(iii)

exo

tic p

athw

ay m

odel

s (w

hat

is t

he

high

est

risk

ent

ry p

oint

?).

Mod

ellin

g is

a w

ay o

f su

mm

aris

ing

and

pres

entin

g RD

&E

outp

uts

for

all t

hem

es in

thi

s Pl

an a

nd

prov

ides

use

r-ac

cess

ible

too

ls t

o le

vera

ge a

nd a

pply

res

earc

h. M

odel

s ca

n al

so b

e re

fined

to

prov

ide

cont

inuo

us im

prov

emen

t as

und

erpi

nnin

g re

sear

ch is

com

plet

ed.

7.1.5Statistics

Outputs:ActivefruitflyR&Dprogramsutilisingadvancedstatisticalapproaches

D

escr

ipti

on a

nd

act

ion

s: T

he s

tatis

tical

sci

ence

s ar

e co

ncer

ned

with

the

dev

elop

men

t an

d ap

plic

atio

n of

app

ropr

iate

an

alyt

ical

too

ls t

o kn

owle

dge,

and

the

n us

ing

thos

e to

ols

to s

uppl

y fo

rmal

con

fiden

ce s

tate

men

ts a

bout

the

infe

renc

es w

hich

ca

n be

dra

wn

from

tha

t kn

owle

dge.

To

put

it le

ss for

mal

ly,

stat

istic

s he

lps

us m

ake

deci

sion

s w

ithin

a r

epea

tabl

e fr

amew

ork.

Sta

tistic

s is

a c

ore

disc

iplin

e to

all

bran

ches

of sc

ienc

e an

d is

use

d to

ana

lyse

dat

a, b

ut a

lso

to in

form

how

tha

t da

ta is

bes

t co

llect

ed.

Str

ong

stat

istic

al s

uppo

rt is

nee

ded

for

all R

D&

E th

emes

in t

his

Plan

. A s

tron

g un

ders

tand

ing

of t

he s

tatis

tics

of r

isk

also

hel

p de

fine

the

nece

ssar

y le

vel o

f pr

otec

tion

for

com

mer

cial

pat

hway

s an

d as

sist

s in

pro

vidi

ng a

ssur

ance

tha

t fr

uit

fly

cont

rol m

easu

res,

or

com

bina

tions

of m

easu

res

can

achi

eve

this

leve

l.

RD

&E

inve

stm

ent

area

s

52 National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan

ABARES (2014). Benefit-cost analysis of the long term containment strategy for exotic fruit flies in the Torres Strait. ABARES, Canberra.

Abdalla A., Millist N., Buetre B.& Bowen, B.(2012). Benefit–cost analysis of the National Fruit Fly Strategy Action Plan. ABARES report to client prepared for Plant Health Australia, Canberra.

APVMA (2010). Human Health Risk Assessment of Dimethoate. Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, Canberra.

APVMA (2011). Dimethoate Residues and Dietary Risk Assessment Report. Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, Canberra.

APVMA (2012). Fenthion Residues and Dietary Risk Assessment Report. Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, Canberra.

Balagawi S., Jackson K., Hamacek E.L. & Clarke A.R. (2012). Spatial and temporal foraging patterns of Queensland fruit fly, Bactrocera tryoni (Froggatt) (Diptera: Tephritidae), for protein and implications for management. Australian Journal of Entomology 51: 279-288.

Bateman M.A. (1991). The Impact of Fruit Flies on Australian Horticulture. Horticultural Policy Council, Report No. 3, Report to the Honourable John Kerin, Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, Canberra.

Cantrell B., Chadwick B. & Cahill A. (2001). Fruit Fly Fighters: Eradication of the Papaya Fruit Fly. Collingwood, Vic: CSIRO Publishing.

Clarke A.R., Powell K.S., Weldon C.W. & Taylor P.W. (2011). The ecology of Bactrocera tryoni (Froggatt) (Diptera: Tephritidae): what do we know to assist pest management? Annals of Applied Biology 158: 26-54.

Cook D., Hurley M., Liu S., Siddique A., Lowell K. & Diggle A. (2010). Enhanced risk analysis tools. Final project report for the Cooperative Research Centre for National Plant Biosecurity, Canberra. Pp 479.

DAFF (2013). Australian Food Statistics 2011-12, Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Canberra.

Dominiak B.C.& Ekman J.H. (2013).The rise and demise of control options for fruit fly in Australia. Crop Protection 51: 57-67.

El-Sayed A.M., Suckling D.M., Byers J.A., Jang E.B. & Wearing C.H. (2009).Potential of “Lure and Kill” in long-term pest management and eradication of invasive species. Journal of Economic Entomology 102: 815-835.

European Union (2009). Directive 2009/128/EC Establishing a framework for Community action to achieve sustainable use of pesticides. http://www.pcs.agriculture.gov.ie/regulations/Directive_2009_128_%20EC.pdf

Florec V., Sadler R.J., White B. & Dominiak B.C. (2013). Choosing the battles: The economics of area wide pest management for Queensland fruit fly. Food Policy 38: 203–213.

Growcom (2011). Food security issues for the Australian horticulture industry. A report prepared for HAL project AH09009.

Ha A., Larson K., Harvey S., Fisher B. & Malcolm B. (2010). Benefit-cost analysis of options for managing Queensland fruit fly in Victoria. Evaluation Report Series 11, Department of Primary Industries, Melbourne.

Hafi A., Arthur T., Symes M. & Millist N. (2013). Benefit-cost analysis of the long term containment strategy for exotic fruit flies in the Torres Strait. ABARES Report to client prepared for the National Biosecurity Committee, Canberra.

Harvey S., Fisher B., Larson K. & Malcolm B. (2010). A benefit cost analysis on management strategies for Queensland Fruit Fly: methods and observations. 54th Annual Conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

Hendrichs J., Kenmore P., Robinson A.S. & Vreysen M.J.B. (2007). Area-wide integrated pest management (AW-IPM): principles, practice and prospects. Pp 3-33 in: Area-wide Control of Insect Pests (M.J.B.Vreysen, A.S. Robinson & J. Hendrichs eds). Springer, AA Dordrech, The Netherlands.

Horticulture Australia Limited (2010). Review of Rural Research & Development Corporations. Response to the Productivity Commission Issues Paper.

IAEA (2009). Development of Bait Stations for Fruit Fly Suppression in Support of SIT. IAEA, Vienna.

Lloyd A.C., Hamacek E.L., Kopittke R.A., Peek T., Wyatt P.M., Neale C.J., Eelkema M. & Gu H. (2010). Area-wide management of fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in the Central Burnett district of Queensland, Australia. Crop Protection 29: 462-469.

Madge P., Mobbs P., Bailey P. & Perepelicia N. (1997). Fifty years of fruit fly eradication in South Australia. Primary Industries and Resources South Australia. Pp 69.

Mumford J.D., Knight J.D., Cook D.C., Quinlan M.M., Pluske J. & Leach A.W. (2001). Benefit cost analysis of Mediterranean fruit fly management options in Western Australia. Imperial College, Ascot.

PHA (2008). Draft National Fruit Fly Strategy, Plant Health Australia, Canberra.

PHA (2009). Economic assessment of the implementation of the proposed National Fruit Fly Strategy: Part 1, Plant Health Australia, August, Canberra.

Key documents consulted

National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan 53

PHA (2010). National Fruit Fly Strategy Implementation Action Plan, Plant Health Australia, Canberra.

PHA (2010). National Plant Biosecurity Strategy, Plant Health Australia, Canberra 2010

Plant Health Committee (2013). Review of the Long-term Containment Strategy for Exotic Fruit Flies in Torres Strait. Canberra.

Rural RDC (2008). Measuring economic, environmental and social returns from Rural Research and Development Corporations’ investment. Rural R&D Corporations, Canberra.

Sharma V. & Alam A. (2013). Current trends and emerging challenges in horticulture. Journal of Horticulture 1: e101. doi:10.4172/horticulture.1000e101.

Suckling D.M., Stringer L.D., Stephens A. E.A., Woods B., Williams D.G., Baker G. & El-Sayed A.M. (2014). From integrated pest management to integrated pest eradication: technologies and future needs. Pest Management Science 70: 179-189.

Suckling D.M., Kean J.M., Stringer L.D., Cáceres-Barrios C., Hendrichs J., Reyes-Flores J. & Dominiak B.C. (2014).Eradication of tephritid fruit fly pest populations: outcomes and prospects. Pest Management Science: in press.

Sutherst R.W., Collyer B.S. & Yonow T. (2000).The vulnerability of Australian horticulture to the Queensland fruit fly, Bactrocera (Dacus) tryoni, under climate change. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 51: 467-480.

Tryon H. (1889). Inquiry into diseases affecting the fruit-trees and other economic plants in the Toowoomba district. Parliamentary Paper, Brisbane.

USDA ARS (2013). National road map for integrated pest management. http://www.ipmcenters.org/Docs/IPMRoadMap.pdf

White B., Sadler R., Florec V. & Dominiak B. (2012). Economics of Surveillance: a bioeconomic assessment of Queensland fruit fly. Contributed paper 56th AARES Annual Conference, Fremantle, Western Australia, Feb 7-10, 2012.

Wissemann A., Rogers J. & Duffield B. (2003). Changing roles for a state agriculture department: Driving forces and organisational responses in the 21st century. Australian Journal of Public Administration 62: 59-69.

Key documents consulted

54 National Fruit Fly Research, Development and Extension Plan

Glossary

Acronym MeaningALPP Areas of low pest prevalenceAPVMA Australian Pesticide and Veterinary Medicines AuthorityA-W Area-wideA-W IPM Area-wide integrated pest managementAWM Area wide managementCRCs Cooperative Research CentresCSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganisationDAFF Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and ForestryD&F Dimethoate and fenthionFSANZ Food Safety Australia New ZealandHAL Horticulture Australia LimitedHIAL Horticulture Innovation Australia LimitedICA Interstate Certification AssuranceIPM Integrated pest managementISFFEI International Symposiums of Fruit Flies of Economic ImportanceISPM International Standard for Phytosanitary ManagementMAT Male annihilation technologyMedfly Mediterranean fruit fly or Ceratitis capitataNFFS National Fruit Fly StrategyNSW New South WalesPBCRC Plant Biosecurity Cooperative Research CentrePHA Plant Health AustraliaQfly Queensland fruit fly or Bactrocera tryoniR&D Research and developmentRDCs Research and Development CorporationsRD&E Research, development and extensionSIT Sterile insect techniqueSME Small and medium size enterpriseTAAO Tephritid Workers of Asia, Australia and Oceania WA Western Australia