An overview of the recent changes, reviews and additions to the UK Plant Health Risk Register, highlighting key pests and documents
Who runs it — and why you should care The UK Plant Health Risk Register catalogues pests, pathogens and vectors that could threaten the nation’s plants and crops. A scientific committee supported by regulatory teams maintains the register to guide policy, inspections and front‑line responses.
Entries are not static: whenever new interceptions, lab results, stakeholder feedback or scientific papers appear, the committee rechecks scores and recommendations so decisions rest on the latest evidence.
This summary — what it does Below is a concise roundup of recent register activity: rescoring exercises, focused reviews and full pest risk analyses (PRAs).
Each item keeps its original publication date and explains why the change matters for surveillance, trade and contingency planning.
How updates happen Think of the register as a living reference. Some updates are full PRAs, giving a comprehensive assessment of host range, likely impacts and mitigation options.
Others are narrower: rescoring exercises, short reviews prompted by fresh distribution records, or revisions when a control measure’s assumed effectiveness changes. Updates are published continuously and always include a clear rationale and the original publication date for traceability — for example, a consistency review of soya pests was posted on 26/02/.
Recent focused reviews and rescoring Both routine cycles and ad hoc checks feed the register. Some entries received only minor numeric tweaks; others were rescored more substantially after new data emerged.
- – Soya pests (26/02/): A consistency review aligned scoring across related taxa and pathways, reassessed surveillance evidence and tested mitigation assumptions. Several entries were rescored and monitoring priorities clarified.
- Short targeted updates (26/11/and 29/12/): Numerical scores were adjusted where fresh information warranted change; two updates revised mitigated risk scores following completed PRA work.
Why rescoring matters A change in likelihood or impact ratings has practical consequences. Higher scores typically lead to tighter import checks and accelerated contingency planning; lower scores can free inspection resources and alter response plans. Keeping a public audit trail helps regulators, importers and growers understand why decisions changed and adapt accordingly.
New entries and full PRAs The committee regularly adds new pests and publishes full PRAs to underpin listing and control choices.
- – Group review — Agrilus beetles (13/10/): Scores adjusted after new distribution records and biological data; border agencies and plant health services were notified.
- New additions (05/08/): Three pests added, including Anoplophora horsfieldii; official notices outlined mitigation options and surveillance triggers.
- Specific examples: Diaprepes abbreviatus (citrus root weevil) received a full PRA on 10/07/. The draft PRA for Pochazia shantungensis entered stakeholder consultation on 28/05/and was finalised shortly after.
These PRAs underpin the technical case regulators use to change import conditions or to shift surveillance priorities.
Breadth of coverage and throughput From January to August the register assessed and added numerous entries across insects, nematodes, fungi and viruses. Key screening and addition dates include 11/02/, 10/03/and 19/05/. Some assessments concluded low risk — for instance, fruit fly reviews published 27/12/— while others prompted heightened scrutiny.
The archive — a practical resource The register archive is the public record of scientific judgement and regulatory intent. It records additions, legislative updates, host‑list changes and monthly summaries stretching through and earlier. Notable archival items include a host‑list update (26/10/), a legislative status change (16/12/) and the site’s move to a new web address (03/05/).
Who uses the archive — and how – Regulators: review past decisions and legal changes. – Researchers: verify historical assessments and assumptions. – Industry groups: track host‑list updates to adjust compliance. – Local authorities and diagnostic labs: consult monthly summaries to set surveillance baselines.
This summary — what it does Below is a concise roundup of recent register activity: rescoring exercises, focused reviews and full pest risk analyses (PRAs). Each item keeps its original publication date and explains why the change matters for surveillance, trade and contingency planning.0
