Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T14:47:48.788Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Laboratory studies on the role of an egg predator, Blattisocius tarsalis (Berlese) (Acari: Ascidae), in relation to the natural control of Ephestia Cautella (Walker) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in Warehouses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

C. P. Haines
C. P. Haines
Affiliation:
Tropical Stored Products Centre (Tropical Products Institute), Slough, Berks., UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Effective control of Ephestia cautella (Wlk.) by Blattisocius tarsalis (Berl.) has occasionally been observed in warehouses. It has been postulated that this control is negated by fumigation under sheets, because of differential effects on the moth and its predator, and removal of alternative prey. The biology of B. tarsalis was studied at 27°C and 73% RH. On eggs of E. cautella, development took 5·9 days and there was 7% mortality; on eggs of Tribolium oastaneum (Hbst.), development took 7·4 days and there was 48% mortality. When offered a choice of eggs of the two pest species, the mites very rarely preyed on those of T. castaneum. The number of E. cautella eggs consumed (after correction for partial consumption) was 3·8 (total) by nymphs, 2·4/day by ovipositing females, 1·5/day by non-ovipositing females, and 0·8/day by males. The sex ratio (female: male) was 2·5:1. Adult life-span averaged about 55 days (maximum 153 days), and the oviposition period lasted about 20 days. Females laid up to 5 eggs/day at peak oviposition. The potential rate of increase of B. tarsalis on E. cautella eggs was very high, far exceeding that of its prey. These data confirm previous postulates concerning the role of B. tarsalis in natural control of E. cautella, and support the hypothesis that fumigation reduces predator-effectiveness. Modification of control regimes might allow greater natural control by the mite and reduce the increasing pest status of the moth.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 71 , Issue 4 , December 1981 , pp. 557 - 574
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Athias-Henriot, C. (1959). Phytoseiidae et Aceosejidae (Acarina, Gamasina) d'Algérie. III. Contribution aux Aceosejinae.—Bull. Soc. Hist. not. Afr. N. 50, 158–195.Google Scholar
Barker, P.S. (1968). Effectiveness of malathion against four species of mites that inhabit stored grain.—J. econ. Ent. 61, 944–946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chmielewski, W. (1971 a). Wyniki badań morfologicznych, biologicznych i ekologicznych nad roztoczkiem suszowym Carpoglyphus lactis (L.).—Pr. nauk. Inst. Ochr. Rośl. 13 (1), 87–106.Google Scholar
Chmielewski, W. (1971 b). Morfologia, biologia i ekologia Carpoglyphus lactis (L., 1758) (Glycyphagidae, Acarina).—Pr. nauk. Inst. Ochr. Rośl. 13 (2), 63–166.Google Scholar
Darst, P. H. & King, E. W. (1969). Biology of Melichares tarsalis in association with Plodia interpunctella.—Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 62, 747–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flanders, S. E. & Badgley, M. E. (1960). A host-parasite interaction conditioned by predation.—Ecology 41, 363–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flanders, S. E. & Badgley, M. E. (1963). Prey-predator interactions in self-balanced laboratory populations.—Hilgardia 35, 145–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, W. M. (1970 a). Warehouse ecology studies of bagged maize in Kenya—I. The distribution of adult Ephestia (Cadra) cautella (Walker) (Lepidoptera, Phycitidae).—J. stored Prod. Res. 6, 147–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, W. M. (1970 b). Warehouse ecology studies of bagged maize in Kenya—II. Ecological observations of an infestation by Ephestia (Cadra) cautella (Walker) (Lepidoptera, Phycitidae).—J. stored Prod. Res. 6, 157–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, W. M. (1970 c). Warehouse ecology studies of bagged maize in Kenya—IV. Reinfestation following fumigation with methyl bromide gas.—J. stored Prod. Res. 6, 177–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haines, C. P. (1974). Insects and arachnids from stored products: a report on specimens received by the Tropical Stored Products Centre 1972–1973.—Rep. trop. Prod. Inst. no. L 39, 22 pp.Google Scholar
Haines, C. P. (1976). The use of synthetic sex pheromones for pest management in stored-product situations.—Pestic. Sci. 7, 647–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haines, C. P. (1979). A revision of the genus Blattisocius Keegan (Mesostigmata: Ascidae) with especial reference to B. tarsalis (Berlese) and the description of a new species.—Acarologia 20, 19–38.Google Scholar
Haines, C. P. (1981). Insects and arachnids from stored products: a report on specimens received by the Tropical Stored Products Centre 1973–1977.—Rep. trop. Prod. Inst. no. L 54, 73 pp.Google Scholar
Haines, C. P. & Read, J. S. (1977). The effect of synthetic female sex pheromones on fertilization in a warehouse population of Ephestia cautella (Walker) (Lepidoptera, Phycitidae).—Rep. trop. Prod. Inst. no. L 45, 10 pp.Google Scholar
Howe, R. W. (1962). The effects of temperature and humidity on the oviposition rate of Tribolium castaneum (Hbst.) (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae).—Bull. ent. Res. 53, 301–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howe, R. W. (1965). A summary of estimates of optimal and minimal conditions for population increase of some stored products insects.—J. stored Prod. Res. 1, 177–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, A. M. (1948). The mites associated with stored food products.—168 pp. London, Minist. Agric. Fish.Google Scholar
Hughes, A. M. (1976). The mites of stored food and houses.—Tech. Bull. Minist. Agric. Fish. Fd no. 9, 400 pp.Google Scholar
Hughes, T. E. (1959). Mites, or the Acari.—225 pp. London, Athlone Press.Google Scholar
Keegan, H. L. (1944). On a new genus and species of parasitid mite.—J. Parasit. 30, 181–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindquist, E. E. (1963). A revision of mites of the subfamily Blattisocinae (Acarina: Blattisocidae) in America north of Mexico.—Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley. (University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor. Michigan. No. 64–2093).Google Scholar
McGraw, J. R. & Farrier, M. H. (1969). Mites of the superfamily Parasitoidea (Acarina: Mesostigmata) associated with Dendroctonus and Ips (Coleoptera: Scolytidae).—Tech. Bull. N. Carol, agric. Exp. Stn no. 192, 162 pp.Google Scholar
Nesbitt, H. H. J. (1951). A taxonomic study of the Phytoseiinae (family Laelaptidae) predaceous upon Tetranychidae of economic importance.—Zool. Verh. Leiden no. 12, 64 pp.Google Scholar
Oudemans, A. C. (1929). Acarologische Aanteekeningen C.—Ent. Ber., Amst. 8, 28–36.Google Scholar
Treat, A. E. (1966). A new Blattisocius (Acarina: Mesostigmata) from noctuid moths.—Jl N. Y. ent. Soc. 74, 143–159.Google Scholar
Treat, A. E. (1969). Association of the mite Blattisocius tarsalis with the moth Epizeuxis aemula.—Jl N. Y. ent Soc. 77, 171–175.Google Scholar
Treat, A. E. (1973). Blattisocius tarsalis: behavior in association with the moth Epizeuxis aemula.—pp. 749–751in Daniel, M. & Rosický, B. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 3rd International Congress of Acarology held in Prague August 31–September 6, 1971.—837 pp. The Hague, Netherlands, Dr W. Junk B.V.; Prague, Czechoslovakia, Academia.Google Scholar
White, E. G. & Huffaker, C. B. (1969 a). Regulatory processes and population cyclicity in laboratory populations of Anagasta kühniella (Zeller) (Lepidoptera: Phycitidae). I.—Competition for food and predation.—Researches Popul. Ecol. Kyoto Univ. 11, 57–83.Google Scholar
White, E. G. & Huffaker, C. B. (1969 b). Regulatory processes and population cyclicity in laboratory populations of Anagasta kühniella (Zeller) (Lepidoptera: Phycitidae). II.—Parasitism, predation, competition and protective cover.—Researches Popul. Ecol. Kyoto Univ. 11, 150–185.Google Scholar
Zar, J. H. (1974). Biostatistical analysis.—620 pp. New Jersey, Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar