Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-21T15:06:00.728Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of prey and pollen on interactions between Typhlodromus bagdasarjani and Phytoseiulus persimilis (Acari: Phytoseiidae) on cucumber (Cucurbitaceae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 August 2017

Mona Moghadasi  and
Hossein Allahyari
Mona Moghadasi
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Protection, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj 3158711167, Iran
Hossein Allahyari*
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Protection, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj 3158711167, Iran
*
1Corresponding author (e-mail: allahyar@ut.ac.ir)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Intraguild predation is a notable factor to proper application of biocontrol agents to reduce pest populations. Intraguild predation was studied between Typhlodromus bagdasarjani Wainstein and Arutunjan (Acari: Phytoseiidae) and Phytoseiulus persimilis Athias-Henriot (Acari: Phytoseiidae) in presence and absence of Tetranychus urticae Koch (Acari: Tetranychidae) as well as pollen. Intraguild predation between two predators was bidirectional. The highest and the lowest predation rates of both predators in absence and presence of T. urticae as well as in the pollen treatments were on heterospecific eggs and deutonymphs, respectively. Typhlodromus bagdasarjani consumed more heterospecific eggs compared with P. persimilis. When pollen was added, predation of T. bagdasarjani significantly reduced on heterospecific eggs and deutonymphs in absence and presence of T. urticae treatments, respectively. However, predation rate of P. persimilis on heterospecific stages was not significantly affected by pollen addition. Oviposition of both predators was higher in presence of T. urticae than in its absence and oviposition of P. persimilis was significantly higher on heterospecific stages than T. bagdasarjani. Pollen addition had a significant effect on increasing the oviposition rate of T. bagdasarjani. Extraguild prey presence had a nonsignificant effect on the consumption rate of intraguild prey by the intraguild predators. However, presence of extraguild prey led to a significant increase in oviposition rate of both predators.

Type
Behaviour & Ecology
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 149 , Issue 5 , October 2017 , pp. 581 - 591
Copyright
© Entomological Society of Canada 2017 

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.)

Footnotes

Subject editor: David Siaussat

References

Abad-Moyano, R., Urbaneja, A., and Schausberger, P. 2010. Intraguild interactions between Euseius stipulatus and the candidate biocontrol agents of Tetranychus urticae in Spanish clementine orchards: Phytoseiulus persimilis and Neoseiulus californicus . Experimental and Applied Acarology, 50: 23–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cakmak, I., Janssen, A., and Sabelis, M. 2006. Intraguild interactions between the predatory mites Neoseiulus californicus and Phytoseiulus persimilis . Experimental and Applied Acarology, 38: 33–46.Google Scholar
Cakmak, I., Janssen, A., Sabelis, M.W., and Baspinar, H. 2009. Biological control of an acarine pest by single and multiple natural enemies. Biological Control, 50: 60–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daneshmandi, A., Rahmani, H., Walzer, A., and Jalaeian, M. 2014. Intraguild predation among three phytoseiid species in the absence of Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Phytoseiidae, Tetranychidae). In Proceedings of the 3rd Integrated Pest Management Conference. Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran. Pp. 57–62.Google Scholar
Daneshvar, H. 1993. Distribution of two predatory mite Amblydromella kettanehi and Euseius libanesi (Acari: Phytoseiidae) in Iran. In Proceedings of the 11th Iranian Plant Protection Congress. University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran. Pp. 260.Google Scholar
Faraji, F., Hajizadeh, J., Ueckermann, E.A., Kamali, K., and McMurtry, J.A. 2007. Two new records for Iranian phytoseiid mites with synonymy and keys to the species of Typhloseiulus Chant and McMurtry and Phytoseiidae in Iran (Acari: Mesostigmata). International Journal of Acarology, 33: 231–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farazmand, A., Fathipour, Y., and Kamali, K. 2015a. Control of the spider mite Tetranychus urticae using phytoseiid and thrips predators under microcosm conditions: single-predator versus combined-predators release. Systematic & Applied Acarology, 20: 162–170.Google Scholar
Farazmand, A., Fathipour, Y., and Kamali, K. 2015b. Intraguild predation among Scolothrips longicornis (Thysanoptera: Thripidae), Neoseiulus californicus and Typhlodromus bagdasarjani (Acari: Phytoseiidae) under laboratory conditions. Insect Science, 22: 263–272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ganjisaffar, F., Fathipour, Y., and Kamali, K. 2011a. Effect of temperature on prey consumption of Typhlodromus bagdasarjani (Acari: Phytoseiidae) on Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae) conditions. International Journal of Acarology, 37: 556–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ganjisaffar, F., Fathipour, Y., and Kamali, K. 2011b. Temperature-dependent development and life table parameters of Typhlodromus bagdasarjani (Phytoseiidae) fed on two-spotted spider mite. Experimental and Applied Acarology, 55: 259–272.Google Scholar
Ghasemloo, Z., Pakyari, H., and Arbab, A. 2016. Cannibalism and intraguild predation in the phytoseiid mites Phytoseiulus persimilis and Typhlodromus bagdasarjani (Acari: Phytoseiidae). International Journal of Acarology, 42: 149–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guzman, C., Sahun, R.M., and Montserrat, M. 2016. Intraguild predation between phytoseiid mite species might not be so common. Experimental and Applied Acarology, 68: 441–453.Google Scholar
Hatherly, I.S., Bale, J.S., and Walters, K.F.A. 2005. Intraguild predation and feeding preferences in three species of phytoseiid mite used for biological control. Experimental and Applied Acarology, 37: 43–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holt, R.D. and Polis, G.A. 1997. A theoretical framework for intraguild predation. The American Naturalist, 149: 745–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janssen, A., Pallini, A., Venzon, M., and Sabelis, M.W. 1998. Behaviour and indirect interactions in food webs of plant-inhabiting arthropods. Experimental and Applied Acarology, 22: 497–521.Google Scholar
Kamali, K., Ostovan, H., and Atamehr, A. 2001. A catalog of mites and ticks (Acari) of Iran. Islamic Azad University Scientific Publication Center, Tehran, Iran.Google Scholar
Lucas, É. 2005. Intraguild predation among aphidophagaous predators. European Journal of Entomology, 102: 351–364.Google Scholar
Lucas, É., Coderre, D., and Brodeur, J. 1998. Intraguild predation among aphid predators: characterization and influence of extraguild prey density. Ecology, 79: 1084–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, É. and Rosenheim, J.A. 2011. Influence of extraguild prey density on intraguild predation by heteropteran predators: a review of the evidence and a case study. Biological Control, 59: 61–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maleknia, B., Fathipour, Y., and Soufbaf, M. 2016. Intraguild predation among three phytoseiid species, Neoseiulus barkeri, Phytoseiulus persimilis and Amblyseius swirskii . Systematic & Applied Acarology, 21: 417–426.Google Scholar
McMurtry, J.A. and Croft, B.A. 1997. Life-styles of phytoseiid mites and their roles in biological control. Annual Review of Entomology, 42: 291–321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McMurtry, J.A., De Moraes, G.J., and Sourassou, N.F. 2013. Revision of the lifestyles of phytoseiid mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) and implications for biological control strategies. Systematic & Applied Acarology, 18: 297–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meszaros, A., Tixier, M.S., Cheval, B., Barbar, Z., and Kreiter, S. 2007. Cannibalism and intraguild predation in Typhlodromus exhilaratus and T. phialatus (Acari: Phytoseiidae) under laboratory conditions. Experimental and Applied Acarology, 41: 37–43.Google Scholar
Moghadasi, M., Saboori, A., Allahyari, H., and Zahedi Golpayegani, A. 2013. Prey stages preference of different stages of Typhlodromus bagdasarjani (Acari: Phytoseiidae) to Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae) on rose. Persian Journal of Acarology, 2: 531–538.Google Scholar
Moghadasi, M., Saboori, A., Allahyari, H., and Zahedi Golpayegani, A. 2014. Life table and predation capacity of Typhlodromus bagdasarjani (Acari: Phytoseiidae) feeding on Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae) on rose. International Journal of Acarology, 40: 501–508.Google Scholar
Momen, F.M. and Abdel-Khalek, A. 2009. Cannibalism and intraguild predation in the phytoseiid mites Typhlodromus swirskii, Euseius scutalis and Typhlodromus athiasea (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Acarina, 17: 223–229.Google Scholar
Negloh, K., Hanna, R., and Schausberger, P. 2012. Intraguild predation and cannibalism between the predatory mites Neoseiulus neobaraki and N. paspalivorus, natural enemies of the coconut mite Aceria guerreronis . Experimental and Applied Acarology, 58: 235–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overmeer, W.P.J. 1985. Rearing and handling. In Spider mites: their biology, natural enemies and control. Volume 1B. Edited by W. Helle and M.W. Sabelis. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Pp. 161–170.Google Scholar
Polis, G.A., Myers, C.A., and Holt, R.D. 1989. The ecology and evolution of intraguild predation: potential competitors that eat each other. Annual Review of Ecology Systematics, 20: 297–330.Google Scholar
Rosenheim, J.A., Kaya, H.K., Ehler, L.E., Marois, J.J., and Jaffee, B.A. 1995. Intraguild predation among biological-control agents: theory and evidence. Biological Control, 5: 303–335.Google Scholar
Schausberger, P. 1997. Inter- and intraspecific predation on immatures by adult females in Euseius finlandicus, Typhlodromus pyri and Kampimodromus aberrans (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Experimental and Applied Acarology, 21: 131–150.Google Scholar
Schausberger, P. and Croft, B.A. 2000a. Cannibalism and intraguild predation among phytoseiid mites: are aggressiveness and prey preference related to diet specialization? Experimental and Applied Acarology, 24: 709–725.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schausberger, P. and Croft, B.A. 2000b. Nutritional benefits of intraguild predation and cannibalism among generalist and specialist phytoseiid mites. Ecological Entomology, 25: 473–480.Google Scholar
Schausberger, P. and Walzer, A. 2001. Combined versus single species release of predaceous mites: pedator–predator interactions and pest suppression. Biological Control, 20: 269–278.Google Scholar
Skirvin, D.J. and Fenlon, J.S. 2003. The effect of temperature on the functional response of Phytoseiulus persimilis (Acari: Phytoseiidae. Experimental and Applied Acarology, 31: 37–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walzer, A., Blümel, S., and Schausberger, P. 2001. Population dynamics of interacting predatory mites, Phytoseiulus persimilis and Neoseiulus californicus, held on detached bean leaves. Experimental and Applied Acarology, 25: 731–743.Google Scholar
Walzer, A. and Schausberger, P. 1999a. Cannibalism and interspecific predation in the phytoseiid mites Phytoseiulus persimilis and Neoseiulus californicus: predation rates and effects on reproduction and juvenile development. BioControl, 43: 457–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walzer, A. and Schausberger, P. 1999b. Predation preferences and discrimination between con- and heterospecific prey by the phytoseiid mites Phytoseiulus persimilis and Neoseiulus californicus . BioControl, 43: 469–478.Google Scholar
Walzer, A. and Schausberger, P. 2011. Threat-sensitive anti-intraguild predation behaviour: maternal strategies to reduce offspring predation risk in mites. Animal Behaviour, 81: 177–184.Google Scholar