Abstract This Scientific Opinion reviews existing models that assess eradication and containment strategies of the pinewood nematode (PWN) Bursaphelenchus xylophilus. The objective was to characterise modelling approaches, validation data and methods used to investigate possible interventions. A literature search was conducted in Web of Science and Scopus in October 2025 with no restriction on publication date. After removal of deduplication, 1560 references were recorded. The systematic literature review was conducted in three stages: Phase 1 identified studies reporting spread models; Phase 2 pre‐selected models able to represent host‐vector systems and intervention measures; and Phase 3 consisted of a structured technical appraisal informed by a set of 85 items covering biological realism, spatial and temporal structure, parameterisation, validation, management scenarios and operational applicability. These items supported qualitative appraisal and were not used for formal scoring. The review retained 125 studies after Phase 1 and 28 after Phase 2. In Phase 3, six modelling studies were identified that investigate the efficiency of actionable intervention protocols for PWN outbreaks. Ordinary differential equation models and several partial differential equation models were not considered sufficient for spatially defined measures, such as clear‐cutting and buffer zones, because they lacked the required spatial resolution or biological and operational detail. The most suitable approaches were spatially explicit grid‐based, network‐based or individual‐based models able to represent local spread, landscape heterogeneity and vector‐mediated transmission. In these modelling studies, validation efforts addressed space–time patterns of observed outbreak data from different regions. Although none of the six identified modelling studies were suitable for a comprehensive investigation of sets of intervention measures, all were considered potentially adaptable through targeted refinement and improved parameterisation. Required improvements include explicit representation of surveillance and detection, sequential application of measures in response to outbreak development, implementation delays in control measures, incomplete host removal, host dynamics, climate or landscape variability and, where relevant, human‐mediated pest dispersal. The review identifies existing models and additional capabilities required for quantitative assessment of PWN control and containment strategies.

The European Commission requests EFSA to provide scientific opinions in the field of plant health in accordance with Article 29 of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002. Annex VI of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 lists plants, plant products and other objects whose introduction into the Union from certain third countries is prohibited. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by 1- to 2-year-old grafted bare root plants without leaves of Vitis spp. from the Republic of Moldova, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by Moldova. All pests associated with the commodity were evaluated for their relevance for this opinion. Eight pests (one EU quarantine pest and seven Vitis spp. RNQPs) that fulfilled all the criteria were selected for further evaluation. For the selected pests, the risk mitigation measures implemented in Moldova and described in the technical dossier were evaluated. For the selected pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom considering the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with grapevine fleck virus (GFkV, Maculavirus vitis ) and ‘ Candidatus Phytoplasma solani’ being the pests most frequently expected on the imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated with 95% certainty that 9900 or more units per 10,000 will be free from the above-mentioned pests.

Abstract The European Commission submitted to the EFSA Panel on Plant Health a Dossier from the United States proposing the use of a vacuum–steam–heat treatment as a stand‐alone phytosanitary measure to mitigate the risk of entry of Bretziella fagacearum, Geosmithia morbida and its vector Pityophthorus juglandis (thousand cankers disease complex) into the EU when trading oak (Quercus alba, Q. rubra) and walnut (Juglans nigra) logs with bark from the US. The proposed treatment consists of heating the sapwood to 56°C for 30 min at a depth of 5 cm from the cambium under vacuum and steam conditions. EFSA assessed the likelihood that logs of oak and walnut target species would be free from EU quarantine pests, basing its evaluation solely on the efficacy of the proposed treatment. In addition to B. fagacearum, G. morbida and P. juglandis, 14 other EU quarantine pests were identified as relevant because they are present in the US and are potentially associated with the commodities. The assessment was based on the information provided by the applicant country and on systematic literature reviews conducted by EFSA to determine the survival temperature and wood colonisation depth of the target pests. The evidence gathered was evaluated through an Expert Knowledge Elicitation (EKE) to estimate the likelihood of pest freedom of logs after the treatment assuming that all logs were infested. The vacuum–steam–heat treatment substantially reduces the presence of target pests infesting the sapwood. The EKE indicated with 95% certainty that between 9021 and 10,000 treated Q. alba logs per 10,000 and that between 9347 and 10,000 treated Q. rubra logs per 10,000 will be free from B. fagacearum. The EKE indicated with 95% certainty that between 9862 and 10,000 treated J. nigra logs per 10,000 will be free from G. morbida and that between 9948 and 10,000 treated J. nigra logs per 10,000 will be free from P. juglandis. However, the treatment is expected to be much less effective against pests which infest wood deeper than 5 cm from the cambium such as the species Arrhenodes minutus. The EKE indicated with 95% certainty that between 1109 and 10,000 logs per 10,000 will be free from A. minutus.

Non-persistently transmitted (NPT) plant viruses are a major threat to global food security, and are transmitted between plants by aphid vectors, being acquired and inoculated through brief epidermal probes. This fast mode of transmission makes control of NPT viruses difficult. Companion plants-a secondary plant species intercropped with the main host-could be used for disease control. Two options are 'trap' and 'repellent' companions that, respectively, attract the aphid away from the main host or repel the aphid from the field. However, while explored for aphid pest control, their use has been scarcely explored for NPT virus control despite experimental evidence of their efficacy. Using a mechanistic mathematical model of NPT virus transmission, we show that both companion plant types can control NPT viruses. However, trap plants appear to be a more reliable method, with more consistent control efficacy and yield benefits across a range of different model parameterisations. Repellent plants may be most useful in scenarios with highly mobile aphids migrating across an infected landscape. With less mobile aphids, such plants can worsen an epidemic by increasing aphid movement, despite decreasing aphid numbers. We also show that virus manipulation of plant phenotype (in particular 'attract-and-deter'), which changes aphid behaviour to increase virus transmission, often reduces control efficacy, particularly for trap plants, but in certain circumstances can increase repellent plant control efficacy. Overall, we conclude that these companion plant types, rarely considered for control of NPT viruses, could be valuable tools.

The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as 'High risk plants, plant products and other objects'. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by rooted plants in pots of Hamamelis mollis imported from the United Kingdom (UK). The assessment was performed considering the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the UK. All pests associated with the commodities were evaluated against specific criteria. Two EU regulated pests (Phytophthora ramorum non-EU isolates and Scirtothrips dorsalis), present in the UK and potentially associated with the commodity, were considered as relevant for this Opinion. No pests non-regulated in the EU were identified to be selected for further evaluation.

Understanding, predicting and managing the spread of plant pathogens is crucial given the economic, societal and climatic benefits of plants, including crops and trees. Mathematical models have long been used to investigate disease dynamics in plants. An important component of such models is to account for spatial structure, since plant hosts are immobile and a majority of disease spread will often be localised. Here we apply a lattice-based mathematical modelling approach, a pair approximation, to model disease spread. While this method has previously been used to develop epidemiological theory, it has not been used to predict spread in a specific pathosystem. We fit our lattice-based epidemiological model to experimental data relating to Bahia bark scaling of citrus, an economically-important disease in north-eastern Brazil, and compare its performance to a more commonly used dispersal-kernel modelling approach. We show that the lattice-based model fits the data well, predicting a significant degree of near-neighbour infections, with similar estimated values of epidemiologically-meaningful parameters to the dispersal model. We highlight the pros and cons of the lattice-based approach and discuss how it may be used to predict disease spread and optimise control of plant diseases.

The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health (PLH) to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as 'High risk plants, plant products and other objects'. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by rooted plants in pots of Robinia pseudoacacia 'Frisia' imported from the United Kingdom (UK). The assessment was performed considering the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the UK. All pests potentially associated with the commodity were evaluated against specific criteria. Two EU-regulated pests (Bemisia tabaci and Phytophthora ramorum non-EU isolates), present in the UK and potentially associated with the commodity, were considered as relevant for this Opinion. No non-regulated pests in the European Union were identified to be selected for further evaluation.

A report commenting on three quantitative pest risk assessments (qPRA) of the EFSA PLH Panel (Panel) was published in November 2025 by the Office for Risk Assessment & Research (BuRO) of the Netherlands Food and Product Safety Authority. In that report, the approaches applied by the Panel in three qPRA were narratively scrutinised against an unpublished protocol. According to the conclusions of the BuRO's report, all three qPRA approaches were methodologically valid and appropriate in substance. However, several assumptions made by the Panel in its assessments were debated and individual values of model parameters were questioned and/or replaced by BuRO calculations. This Panel statement responds to the specific comments, mathematically reviews the calculations in the BuRO's report and highlights how quantitative assessments under uncertainty may slightly differ in their output values when different risk assessors find different consensus interpretations of available background evidence. Some quantitative recalculations by BuRO required mathematical correction. Other recalculations depended on alternative ad hoc assumptions or parameter interpretations that the Panel does not consider sufficiently substantiated to replace those used in the assessments. Therefore, the conclusions of the three qPRA by the Panel remain unchanged. The Panel proposes recommendations to facilitate future commenting by external assessors on Panel outputs.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to evaluate the likelihood of pest freedom at entry in the EU, including both regulated and non‐regulated pests, potentially associated with unrooted cuttings of the genera Petunia and Calibrachoa produced under physical isolation in Uganda. The relevance of any pest for this opinion was based on evidence collected according to specific criteria, following the methodology used for high‐risk plants adapted for the specificity of this assessment. Twelve EU‐regulated pests [Bemisia tabaci (non‐European populations), cowpea mild mottle virus (CpMMV, Carlavirus vignae), potato leaf roll virus (PLRV, Polerovirus PLRV), potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd, Pospiviroid fusituberis), potato virus S (PVS, Carlavirus sigmasolani, non‐EU isolates), potato virus × (PVX, Potexvirus ecspotati, non‐EU isolates), Ralstonia solanacearum, Ralstonia pseudosolanacearum, Scirtothrips dorsalis, tomato leaf curl Uganda virus (ToLCUV), tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV, Orthotospovirus tomatomaculae) and tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV, Begomovirus coheni)] and one non‐regulated pest (Nipaecoccus viridis) were selected for further evaluation. For the selected pests, the risk mitigation measures implemented in Uganda and described in the technical dossier were evaluated taking into account the factors reducing their efficacy. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest. The degree of pest freedom varies between the pests evaluated, with the contact‐transmitted viroid and virus [potato spindle tuber viroid (PSTVd, P. fusituberis) and potato virus × (PVX, P. ecspotati, non‐EU isolates)] being the pests most frequently expected on Petunia and Calibrachoa spp. imported unrooted cuttings. Expert knowledge elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9916 and 10,000 per 10,000 Petunia and Calibrachoa spp. unrooted cuttings would be free from these pests.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by unrooted cuttings of Salix species (S. aegyptiaca, S. eriocephala, S. gmelinii, S. miyabeana, S. purpurea, S. rehderiana, S. schwerinii, S. udensis, S. viminalis) imported from the United Kingdom (UK). The assessment was performed considering the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the UK. All pests potentially associated with the commodities were evaluated against specific criteria. Only two EU Regulated pests (the fungus Entoleuca mammata and the oomycete Phytophthora ramorum (non‐EU isolates)), present in the UK and potentially associated with the commodity, were considered as relevant for this Opinion. No pests non‐regulated in the EU were identified to be selected for further evaluation.

Plant diseases occurring across wild and crop plants present modelling and management challenges. Wild plant and crop pathosystems differ in ecological structure, evolutionary dynamics and responsiveness to human intervention. At the interface, pathogens may spill over, spill back, persist or evolve, shaped by host diversity, dispersal processes and landscape connectivity. The potential importance of factors including pathogen dispersal, host life history and spatial configuration are examined through a qualitative comparison of case studies: Puccinia graminis, Phakopsora pachyrhizi, Xylella fastidiosa, Pyricularia oryzae Triticum lineage and Austropuccinia psidii. These examples illustrate how wild hosts may function as reservoirs, recombination partners or spillover targets, and how their role influences management efficacy and evolutionary risk. We explore the consequences of this wild-crop interface through two central questions: (i) how should plant diseases involving wild and cultivated pathosystems be managed, and (ii) what proportion of management effort should be allocated to each system? We show the principles underpinning answers to these questions via a conceptual framework based on a generic compartmental model incorporating asymmetric transmission and system-specific interventions, thereby accounting for key aspects of pathogen spread within and between wild host and crop populations. Finally, we identify critical data needs and modelling directions to better inform disease management on the wild plant-crop interface and argue for a more integrative approach bridging ecological and anthropogenic drivers of epidemics. This article is part of the theme issue 'Wild plant pathosystems'.

The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by (a) rooted plants in pots and (b) bare root plants and whips of Lonicera ligustrina var . pileata, L. ligustrina var . yunnanensis and Lonicera periclymenum from the United Kingdom (UK). The assessment was performed considering the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the UK. All pests potentially associated with the commodities were evaluated against specific criteria. Five EU-quarantine pests [honeysuckle yellow vein virus (HYVV, Begomovirus macrotylomae ), Bemisia tabaci, Meloidogyne fallax, Phytophthora ramorum and Scirtothrips dorsalis ], present in the UK and which could be associated with the commodity, were considered relevant for this Opinion. No pests non-regulated in the EU were identified to be selected for further evaluation.

Following the discovery of a quarantine plant pest or disease, delimitation is urgently conducted to define the boundaries of the infested area, typically through surveys that detect the presence or absence of the pest. Swift and accurate delimitation is crucial after a pest or pathogen enters a new region for containment or eradication. Delimiting an area that is too small allows the pest to spread uncontrollably, while delimited areas that are too large can lead to excessive economic costs, making eradication cost-prohibitive. Despite its significance, there is a lack of comprehensive reviews on delimiting strategies and their effectiveness in managing plant pests; many current practices are ad-hoc and not scientifically based. In this study, we used an individual-based model to simulate the spread of Huanglongbing (citrus greening), a priority EU pest, and evaluated three delimiting strategies across various host distribution landscapes. We found that an adaptive strategy was most effective, especially when tailored to the polycyclic nature of the pest. This underscored the need for specific delimiting approaches based on the epidemiological characteristics of the target pest.

Abstract Following the commodity risk assessment of Prunus persica and P. dulcis plants for planting from Türkiye, in which Lepidosaphes pistaciae (Hemiptera: Diaspididae), the pistachio oyster scale or yellow pistachio scale, was identified as a pest of possible concern, the EFSA Panel on Plant Health performed a pest categorisation for the territory of the European Union (EU). L. pistaciae is reported as a polyphagous pest which, however, mainly affects plants of the genus Pistacia. Originating from Asia, it is widely distributed in pistachio producing countries of Central, South and West Asia. Within the EU, the pest has been reported from Cyprus and Greece. However, its precise distribution within Cyprus and Greece is unknown. It completes two generations per year and overwinters as a fully developed adult female. The eggs are hidden under the female's body and hatch around April. First‐instar nymphs, crawlers, move on host plants for a short period of time before becoming permanently settled and initiating feeding, mainly on leaves but also on branches and fruits. Young females appear in early June and mature ones in late June. Plants for planting and fruits provide potential pathways for entry into the EU. Climate suitability suggests that it could further establish in large parts of the EU. In Iran, L. pistaciae is considered a devastating pest for cultivated pistachio. L. pistaciae was detected in Greece over 30 years ago with small population densities and without any records of damage. It was also found in Cyprus in 1967 and nowadays is not considered a major pest. Its ability to cause an impact in the EU is uncertain considering the lack of evidence on impact in Cyprus and Greece. Phytosanitary measures are available to reduce the likelihood of entry. While the fulfilment of the criterion on having an economic or environmental impact in the EU is associated with a key uncertainty, all the other criteria assessed by EFSA for consideration as a potential quarantine pest are met.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘High risk plants, plant products and other objects’. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by: grafted potted plants up to 15 years old or bundles of grafted bare root plants up to 3 years old or graftwood up to 2 years old of Prunus armeniaca, P. cerasifera, P. domestica, P. incisa or P. persica imported from the United Kingdom (UK), taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the UK. All pests associated with the commodities were evaluated against specific criteria for their relevance for this opinion. Two quarantine pests, Candidatus Phytoplasma aurantifolia‐related strains (Pear decline Taiwan II, Crotalaria witches' broom phytoplasma, Sweet potato little leaf phytoplasma) and Scirtothrips dorsalis, two protected zone quarantine pests, Bemisia tabaci (European population) and Erwinia amylovora, and two non‐regulated pests, Eulecanium excrescens and Colletotrichum aenigma, that fulfilled all relevant criteria were selected for further evaluation. The risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical Dossier from the UK were evaluated, taking into account the possible limiting factors. For these pests, expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom, taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The degree of pest freedom varied among the pests evaluated, with E. amylovora being the most frequently expected pest on the imported potted plants. The expert knowledge elicitation indicated with 95% certainty that between 9956 and 10,000 potted plants per 10,000 would be free from the above‐mentioned bacterium.

Following the commodity risk assessment of Acer palmatum plants grafted on Acer davidii from China, in which Morganella longispina (Hemiptera: Diaspididae) was identified as a pest of possible concern, the European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to conduct a pest categorisation of M. longispina for the territory of the European Union (EU). The origin of the scale insect M. longispina is uncertain, with either South America or eastern Asia suggested as the native range. The geographic distribution of the species includes many countries of the continents of Africa, North and South America, Asia and Oceania. M. longispina is polyphagous, feeding on plants assigned to 86 genera in 42 families. Important crops of the EU that may be affected by this insect are avocado, citrus, fig, peach, plum, olive and walnut. It is a viviparous insect with several generations per year in Algeria. Host availability and climate suitability indicate that the southern EU countries would support the establishment of M. longispina. The introduction of this pest would likely have an economic impact on several crops in the EU as it can cause significant damage to host plants. Uncertainty exists, however, about the magnitude of yield and quality losses due to the insect, and this is a key uncertainty. M. longispina is not listed in Annex II of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2072. Phytosanitary measures are available to reduce the likelihood of entry, establishment and spread of the pest into the EU. All criteria assessed by EFSA for consideration as a potential quarantine pest are met.

Plant diseases impair the yield and quality of crops and threaten the health of natural plant communities. Epidemiological models can predict disease and inform management. However, data are scarce, because traditional methods to measure plant diseases are resource intensive, which often limits model performance. Optical sensing offers a methodology to acquire detailed data on plant diseases across various spatial and temporal scales. Key technologies include multispectral, hyperspectral, and thermal imaging, as well as light detection and ranging; the associated sensors can be installed on ground-based platforms, uncrewed aerial vehicles, airplanes, and satellites. However, despite enormous potential for synergy, optical sensing and epidemiological modeling have rarely been integrated. To address this gap, we first review the state of the art to develop a common language accessible to both research communities. We then explore the opportunities and challenges in combining optical sensing with epidemiological modeling. We discuss how optical sensing can inform epidemiological modeling by improving model selection and parameterization and providing accurate maps of host plants. Epidemiological modeling can inform optical sensing by boosting measurement accuracy, improving data interpretation, and optimizing sensor deployment. We consider outstanding challenges in (A) identifying particular diseases; (B) data availability, quality, and resolution; (C) linking optical sensing and epidemiological modeling; and (D) emerging diseases. We conclude with recommendations to motivate and shape research and practice in both fields. Among other suggestions, we propose standardizing methods and protocols for optical sensing of plant health and developing open access databases including both optical sensing data and epidemiological models to foster cross-disciplinary work. [Formula: see text] Copyright © 2025 The Author(s). This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.

The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as 'high risk plants, plant products and other objects'. This Scientific Opinion covers the plant health risks posed by the following commodities: Alnus cordata and A. glutinosa as specimen trees (from 7 to 25 years old) in pots imported into the EU from the UK. A list of pests potentially associated with the commodities was compiled. The relevance of each pest was assessed based on evidence following defined criteria. Three pests were selected for further evaluation: one EU-protected zone quarantine pest (Entoleuca mammata), one EU quarantine pest (Phytophthora ramorum (non-EU isolates)) and one non-quarantine pest (Phytophthora siskiyouensis). For the selected pests, the risk mitigation measures implemented in the UK and specified in the technical dossier were evaluated. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. In the assessment of risk, the age of the plants was considered, as larger trees are more likely to be infested mainly due to longer time grown in the field. In addition, large canopies and root systems are more difficult to inspect, thereby making the detection of pests more challenging on large trees. The degree of pest freedom varies between the pests evaluated, with E. mammata being the pest most frequently expected on imported Alnus spp. specimen trees. Expert Knowledge Elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9905 and 10,000 per 10,000 Alnus spp. specimen trees would be free from E. mammata.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ‘high‐risk plants, plant products and other objects’. Taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by the applicant country, this Scientific Opinion covers the plant health risks posed by the following commodities: Alnus cordata, A. glutinosa and A. incana graftwood, bare‐root plants and rooted plants in pots up to 7 years old imported into the EU from the UK. A list of pests potentially associated with the commodities was compiled. The relevance of each pest was assessed based on evidence following defined criteria. Two EU‐quarantine pests (Entoleuca mammata, Phytophthora ramorum (non‐EU isolates)) and one non‐quarantine pest (Phytophthora siskiyouensis) were selected for further evaluation. For the selected pests, the risk mitigation measures implemented in the UK and specified in the technical dossier were evaluated taking into account the factors reducing their efficacy. For these pests, an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the risk mitigation measures acting on the pest, including uncertainties associated with the assessment. The degree of pest freedom varies between the pests evaluated, with E. mammata being the pest most frequently expected on imported Alnus spp. small trees. Expert knowledge elicitation indicated, with 95% certainty, that between 9927 and 10,000 per 10,000 Alnus spp. small trees (bare‐root plants or rooted plants in pots up to 7 years old) would be free from E. mammata.

Abstract The European Commission requested the EFSA Panel on Plant Health to prepare and deliver risk assessments for commodities listed in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/2019 as ’High‐risk plants, plant products and other objects'. This Scientific Opinion covers plant health risks posed by Acer plants (A. griseum, A. platanoides, A. rubrum, A. saccharum, A. saccharinum, A. tataricum and A. tataricum subsp. ginnala, Acer × freemani) imported from Ukraine as dormant plants: (a) 1–4 years old bare root plants and (b) 1–2 years old plants in pots, taking into account the available scientific information, including the technical information provided by Ukraine. All pests associated with the commodity were evaluated against specific criteria for their relevance for this opinion. Two EU protected zone quarantine pests, i.e. Cryphonectria parasitica, and Entoleuca mammata and one EU‐quarantine pest, i.e. Lopholeucaspis japonica fulfilled all relevant criteria and were selected for further evaluation. For the selected pests, the risk mitigation measures proposed in the technical dossier from Ukraine were evaluated taking into account the possible limiting factors. For the selected pests an expert judgement is given on the likelihood of pest freedom taking into consideration the distribution of the pest in Ukraine, risk mitigation measures acting on the pest and uncertainties associated with the assessment. The degree of pest freedom varies among the pests evaluated, with L. japonica being the pest most frequently expected on imported plants. The Expert Knowledge Elicitation (EKE) indicated with 95% certainty that between 9748 and 10,000 per 10,000 bare root 1–4 years old plants will be free from L. japonica.