000246086 001__ 246086
000246086 005__ 20170829105747.0
000246086 037__ $$a1784-2016-141903
000246086 041__ $$aen_US
000246086 084__ $$aQ19
000246086 084__ $$aQ57
000246086 245__ $$aKhapra beetle, Trogoderma granarium interceptions and eradications in Australia and around the world
000246086 260__ $$c2016-10-11
000246086 269__ $$a2016-10-11
000246086 270__ $$mbenedict.white@uwa.edu.au$$pWhite,   Ben
000246086 336__ $$aWorking or Discussion Paper
000246086 490__ $$aWorking papers
000246086 490__ $$a1609
000246086 520__ $$aThe number of recorded intercepts and eradications of khapra beetle (Trogoderma granarium) have increased in Australia and the United States in recent years. Khapra beetle is one of the most destructive stored grain pests, and infestations can destroy the quality of grain and other commodities rendering the product unfit for human consumption. This pest can be easily transported from khapra beetle countries undetected as live beetles, eggs and larvae or in a state of diapause, with the transfer of people and goods around the world. Historically, discovery of khapra beetle post-border has generally resulted in costly eradication programs including methyl bromide fumigation and years of surveillance. Misidentification, failed detection or lack of preparedness has led to slow responses and at times the wide distribution of the pest prior to action. The United States spent over thirteen years (1953 - 1966) eradicating a large scale khapra beetle outbreak that involved fumigation of over 600 sites of infestation and undertaking approximately 97,000 property inspections at a cost of USD $96 – 130 million (2016 dollars). In a first, the United States demonstrated khapra beetle was eradicable, when all infestations are detected, progressively eliminated and reinfestation’s controlled. Later other infestations were detected and eradicated between 1978 and 1997, and the occasional domestic eradication program since. In this paper past khapra beetle incursions, intercepts and eradications in Australia and other countries have also been reviewed. In 2007, a post-border detection in Western Australia was eradicated. Factors contributing to the successful response strategy included the small scale infestation, limited distribution and technical feasibility of the fumigation. Prior preparedness and agreement and cooperation across government, industry and community also led to the rapid response to the incursion. The eradication programs described in this paper were found to be economically justified, although actual losses from pest damage were not that significant. For any exporting country where khapra beetle is endemic costly phytosanitary measures and trade implications come into effect. Therefore, eradication programs are worthwhile and likely to be the optimal response when costs are compared with expected damages avoided. In identifying the optimal response program an understanding of pest biology and behaviour is critical. In this paper we also compare response strategies to khapra beetle infestations with the Australian outbreak of the warehouse beetle (Trogoderma variabile) in 1977 – 1993. We explore the differences in pest characteristics that led to the successful eradication of one and not the other. Finally we consider the problems that are currently of most concern, which are the ability to eradicate khapra beetle in the absence of methyl bromide and the development of resistance to phosphine. Given the inevitability of future khapra beetle incursions, resolving these issues will be essential to maintaining global market access for grain exporting countries such as Australia, the United States and Canada.
000246086 542__ $$fLicense granted by Marit Kragt (marit.kragt@uwa.edu.au) on 2016-10-13T12:45:57Z (GMT):

<p class="ds-paragraph">
By depositing this Content ("Content") in AgEcon Search, I agree that I am 
solely responsible for any consequences of uploading this Content to AgEcon 
Search and making it publicly available, and I represent and warrant that:

I am either the sole creator and the owner of the copyrights and all other 
rights in the Content; or, without obtaining another’s permission, I have the 
right to deposit the Content in an archive such as AgEcon Search.

To the extent that any portions of the Content are not my own creation, they 
are used with the copyright holder’s express permission or as permitted by law.
 Additionally, the Content does not infringe the copyrights or other 
intellectual property rights of another, nor does the Content violate any 
laws or another’s rights of privacy or publicity.

The Content contains no restricted, private, confidential, or otherwise 
protected data or information that should not be publicly shared.

I understand that AgEcon Search will do its best to provide perpetual access
 to my Content. In order to support these efforts, I grant the Regents of the
 University of Minnesota ("University"), through AgEcon Search, the following
 non-exclusive, irrevocable, royalty-free, world-wide rights and licenses:

to access, reproduce, distribute and publicly display the Content, in whole
 or in part, in order to secure, preserve and make it publicly available, and

to make derivative works based upon the Content in order to migrate the
 Content to other media or formats, or to preserve its public access.

These terms do not transfer ownership of the copyright(s) in the Content.
 These terms only grant to the University the limited license outlined above.
</p>

000246086 650__ $$aAgricultural and Food Policy
000246086 6531_ $$aBiosecurity
000246086 6531_ $$aEradication
000246086 6531_ $$aKhapra beetle (Trogoderma granarium)
000246086 6531_ $$aWarehouse beetle (Trogoderma variabile)
000246086 6531_ $$aBioeconomic
000246086 6531_ $$aDecision-making
000246086 700__ $$aDay, Cheryl
000246086 700__ $$aWhite, Ben
000246086 8564_ $$s728441$$uhttp://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/246086/files/SARE%20WP1609_Day%20and%20White.pdf
000246086 887__ $$ahttp://purl.umn.edu/246086
000246086 909CO $$ooai:ageconsearch.umn.edu:246086$$qGLOBAL_SET
000246086 912__ $$nSubmitted by Marit Kragt (marit.kragt@uwa.edu.au) on 2016-10-13T12:52:27Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
SARE WP1609_Day and White.pdf: 728441 bytes, checksum: 3e0bdd37a7c822c18dd56a6daa3d5e9c (MD5)
000246086 912__ $$nMade available in DSpace on 2016-10-13T12:52:27Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
SARE WP1609_Day and White.pdf: 728441 bytes, checksum: 3e0bdd37a7c822c18dd56a6daa3d5e9c (MD5)
  Previous issue date: 2016-10-11
000246086 982__ $$gUniversity of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics>Working Papers
000246086 980__ $$a1784