Although we're almost halfway through 2026, we're excited to present our 2025 review...and last year was an eventful one for the clinic!

The biggest news was our move from Gardner Hall to the Varsity Research Building in late April. It was a lot of work to design and relocate the lab, but we're happy to announce that the new space has been wonderful! Visitors, from extension agents to homeowners, have all been praising the ease of getting to the lab as well as how bright and welcoming it is. If you're ever in the neighborhood and want to say hi, please stop by! Of course we also welcome any samples you have for diagnosis.

Another big change was hiring our new vegetable pathology diagnostician, Ashley Philbrick. We are very excited to have her in the lab and she's been doing a great job. I'm sure you'll hear more from Ashley in the future!

2025 Data

Last year we received 2,709 samples (2,219 at the PDIC plus 493 at the Turf Diagnostic Lab), identifying 3,122 problems from them. Below are some statistics about these samples. Note that in some cases we include turf data, and other times it's excluded.

The first graph shows the percentage of samples submitted by the type of plant or other host. As usual, trees and shrubs were the most often submitted plant type, with 27% of all samples being this category. Although we don't diagnose turf and other grass samples at the PDIC (they are processed by the Turf Diagnostics Lab), this type of host was the second most submitted, comprising 18% of all samples. After that, 13% of samples were vegetables and herbs (e.g. tomatoes, peppers, cucurbits) and another 13% were field crops (e.g. corn, soybean, tobacco, cotton). Nine percent (9%) of samples were perennial ornamentals, while small fruits (e.g. grapes, blackberries, blueberries) made up 7% of the samples submitted. The remaining categories represented less than 5% of samples each (see below).

Next we summarized the proportion of samples from each type of site. In this regard, 30% of the samples submitted came from home landscapes. Next were those from field crops (20%), then from golf courses (12%). Plants grown in greenhouses represented 12% of the samples submitted, while those from container nurseries followed at 7% of samples. Finally, samples submitted from households, almost always for pest identification, made up 5% of samples. The remaining sites (e.g. commercial grounds, field nurseries, orchards/vineyards, and forests/natural areas) made up less than 4% of samples submitted, each (see below).

At the clinic we diagnose samples based off photos or material sent to us to see in person (physical samples). While photos can sometimes show clear culprits allowing for remote ID, many things, like plant pathogens, require portions or whole plants to be submitted to us (or specimens of arthropods, when that's the case). However, even when we receive a physical sample, we also like to have photos of the site to gain a better understanding of the situation.

So, which kinds of samples did we receive? Most often we received only a physical sample (43% of the time), while image-only samples made up 28% of the samples. Samples that had both a physical component and images were submitted 29% of the time.

As for who submitted samples, the majority were by county agriculture extension agents, usually for their local clients (35% of samples). Clients submitted samples for themselves 31% of the time, while consultants (e.g. crop consultants, pest management providers, and NCDA&CS specialists) made up 30% of submissions.

We certainly have a seasonality to our samples with peak activity in the summer (see graph below). We received the fewest samples in December (53), while at the peak in July we received over six times as many samples (327). If we consider each month to have about 22 work days, that means we received about 15 samples each day in July. All of this makes sense in light of crops being grown and homeowner yard activities peaking over the summer.

Below is a table showing the "Top 40" (actually 43 due to ties) hosts submitted. Tobacco was the most commonly submitted plant in 2025, with 159 samples submitted, similar to years past. However, after that there was an upset in the rankings: strawberry took second spot (126 samples), beating out tomato (115 samples), for the first time in the last few years. This is likely due to a very aggressive and destructive emerging pathogen on strawberry called Neopestalotiopsis. Beyond that, households (representing pest IDs) and several common plants (cucurbits, boxwoods, arborvitae, soybean) were most frequently submitted.

Finally, what counties sent in the most samples? As usual Wake county, one of the largest and most populous counties (and where we are located), submitted the most samples in 2025 (303; almost 14% of all samples!). The next four counties (Orange, Mecklenburg, Buncombe, and Guilford) are home to some of the largest cities in NC, so it makes sense that we got a lot of samples from them too.

New Findings

The clinic was involved in identifying five (5) pathogens or pests new to the US or North Carolina. Below is a brief description of these findings.

A Monstera plant was submitted with various leaf symptoms (above). On the leaves, the pathologist found spores (inset) of aroid leaf rust (Pseudocerradoa paullula), representing the first find of this pathogen in North Carolina. The pathogen was not deemed to be of regulatory importance.

A Dracaena plant was submitted (above), exhibiting stem rot symptoms. Although no good pathogens were found, one fungus that grew out from the material was identified as either Sarcopodium or Actinostilbe (insets). The fungus is a secondary saprophyte, and either of the genera would be new finds for North Carolina.

A poppy (Papaver sp.) was submitted with yellowing leaves, leaf spots, and necrotic areas on the leaves (above). Two pathogens were found, one of which, a leaf smut (Entyloma fuscum) (inset), was a new find for North Carolina.

Several purslane plants (Portulaca sp.) were submitted with rot in the lower stems and base of the plants (above). The fungal pathogen causing dichotomophthora rot (Dichotomophthora indica) was observed sporulating on the material (inset), and this was a first finding of the fungus for North Carolina.

Several samples, both physical and images, came into the clinic in quick succession in late 2025 regarding a new insect pest for North Carolina: the two-spot cotton leafhopper/cotton jassid (Amrasca biguttula). This leafhopper is native to the Old World but made its way into the US in 2024 (FL). The hosts included cotton, okra, and hibiscus (all in the mallow family, Malvaceae), but it wall also feed on and damage asters and eggplant, among others. All samples of this pest were from the southeastern region of the state. The two-spot cotton leafhopper is fairly distinct (light green with a pair of small spots on the wing membrane), but to confirm the ID male genitalia and genetic barcoding were used where possible.

[Special thanks to Mike Munster for compiling and cleaning up the data for this review]