Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T01:09:02.772Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

PHYTOSEIIDAE (ACARINA: MESOSTIGMATA) IN THE NEW JERSEY APPLE ORCHARD ENVIRONMENT WITH DESCRIPTIONS OF SPERMATHECAE AND THREE NEW SPECIES1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

H. B. Specht
H. B. Specht
Affiliation:
Research Station, Canada Department of Agriculture, Kentville, Nova Scotia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In New Jersey, Typhlodromus pomi (Parrott) was the only predacious phytoseiid mite on most non-sprayed apple and deciduous trees. It also became the most numerous phytoseiid mite recolonizing apple trees a year after toxic spray residues had dissipated. Amblyseius fallacis (Garman) was the first phytoseiid mite collected from apple trees following cessation of toxic sprays and was usually abundant at the time of large red mite populations; later, an influx of several different species occurred. A. fallacis was the most common phytoseiid mite on low growing plants and was able to tolerate higher residues of toxic materials than other species. Other phytoseiids taken from sprayed apple trees in order of abundance included A. driggeri n. sp., A. amicus (Chant), T. longipilus Nesbitt, T. conspicuus (Garman), T. mexicanus (Garman), T. caudiglans Schuster, and A. pepperi sp. n. Species other than T. pomi found on non-sprayed apple trees were A. finlandicus (Oudemans), T. longipilus, T. caudiglans, and T. conspicuus. None of these species was entirely confined to apple. Five other species were collected that were not found on apple: T. flumenis Chant, T. pyri Scheuten, A. elongatus (Garman), A. okanagensis (Chant), and A. picketti sp. n. Three species collected from greenhouse plants in association with tetranychid mites were: A. fallacis, T. longipilus, and A. picketti.

Three new species of Amblyseius are described. Two undescribed males and the spermathecae of the females are illustrated.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 100 , Issue 7 , July 1968 , pp. 673 - 692
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1968

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

Anderson, N. H., Morgan, C. V. G., and Chant, D. A.. 1958. Notes on occurrence of Typhlodromus and Phytoseius spp. in southern British Columbia (Acarina: Phytoseiinae). Can. Ent. 90: 275–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Athias-Henriot, C. 1958. Phytoseiidae et Aceosejidae (Acarina, Gamasina) d'Algerie II. Phytoseiidae:cle des genres, genres Amblyseius Berlese (suite) et Seiulus Berlese. Bull. Soc. Hist. nat. Afr. N. 49: 23–43.Google Scholar
Balevski, A. 1960. The brown apple mite Bryobia redikorzevi Reck. in Bulgaria and its control. Nauch. Trud. tsent. nauch. Inst. Zasht. Rast. 3: 5–45.Google Scholar
Ballard, R. C. 1954. The biology of the predacious mite Typhlodromus fallacis (Garman) (Phytoseiidae) at 78°F. Ohio J. Sci. 54: 175–179.Google Scholar
Boezek, J., and Kropezynska, D.. 1966. Proba charakterystyki fauny roztoczy wystepujacych na roslinach w Polsce. (Characteristics of the mite fauna of plants in Poland.) Zesz. nauk. Szk. glow. Gosp. wiejsk. Ser. Ogrodnickwo 3: 63–78.Google Scholar
Bohm, H. 1960. Investigations on the enemies of spider mites in Austria. Pflanzenschutzberichte 25: 23–46.Google Scholar
Bravenboer, L. 1959. The chemical and biological control of the spider mite Tetranychus telarius Koch. Proefschr. Landb Hogesch. Wageningen.Google Scholar
Burrell, R. W., and McCormick, W. J.. 1964. Typhlodromus and Amblyseius (Acarina: Phytoseiidae) as predators on orchard mites. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 57: 483–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carmona, M. M. 1962. Contribuicao para o conhecimento dos acaros das plantas cultivadas em Portugal II. (A contribution to the knowledge of the mites of cultivated plants in Portugal.) Agronomia lusit. 24: 5–20.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A. 1957. Descriptions of some Phytoseiidae mites (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Part I. Nine new species from British Columbia with keys to the species of British Columbia. Part II. Redescriptions of eight species described by Berlese. Can. Ent. 89: 289–308.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A. 1959. Phytoseiid mites (Acarina. Phytoseiidae) Part I. Bionomics of seven species in Southeastern England. Part II. A taxonomic review of the family Phytoseiidae, with descriptions of 38 new species. Can. Ent., Suppl. 12.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A. 1963. Some mortality factors and the dynamics of orchard mites. Mem. ent. Soc. Can., No. 32.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A. 1965. Generic concepts in the family Phytoseiidae (Acarina: Mesostigmata). Can. Ent. 97: 351–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chant, D. A., and Baker, E. W.. 1965. The Phytoseiidae (Acarina) of Central America. Mem. ent. Soc. Can., No. 41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clancy, D. W., and McAlister, H. J.. 1956. Selective pesticides as aids to biological control of apple pests. J. econ. Ent. 49: 196–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clancy, D. W., and McAlister, H. J.. 1958. Effects of spray practices on apple mites and their predators in West Virginia. Proc. 10th int. Congr. Ent. Montreal (1956). Vol. 4. pp. 597–601.Google Scholar
Collyer, E. 1956. Notes on the biology of some predacious mites on fruit trees in South-eastern England. Bull. ent. Res. 47: 205–214.Google Scholar
Collyer, E. 1964 a. The occurrence of some mites of the family Phytoseiidae in New Zealand, and the descriptions of seven new species. Acarologia 6: 632–646.Google Scholar
Collyer, E. 1964 b. Phytophagous mites and their predators in New Zealand orchards. N.Z. J. agric. Res. 7: 551–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, F., and Baker, E. W.. 1953. A guide to the predatory phytoseiid mites of the United States. Pinellas Biol. Lab. Pub. 1.Google Scholar
Dean, H. A. 1953. Spider mites of citrus and Texas citrus mite control in the lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas. J. econ. Ent. 45: 1051–1056.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, H. A. 1957. Predators of Oligonychus pratensis (Banks) Tetranychidae. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 50: 164–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeLeon, D. 1959. Seven new Typhlodromus from Mexico with collection notes on three other species (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Fla Ent. 42: 113–121.Google Scholar
DeLeon, D. 1965. Phytoseiid mites from Puerto Rico with descriptions of new species (Acarina: Mesostigmata). Fla Ent. 48: 121–131.Google Scholar
Dosse, G. 1956. Uber die entwicklung einiger Raubmilben bei verschiedenen Nahrungstieren (Acar., Phytoseiidae). Pflanzenschutzberichte 16: 122–136.Google Scholar
Dosse, G. 1960. Uber den Einfluss der Raubmilbe Typhlodromus tiliae Oud. auf die Obstbaumspinnmilbe Metatetranychus ulmi Koch (Acari). Pflanzenschutzberichte 24: 113–137.Google Scholar
Ehara, S. 1958. Three predatory mites of the genus Typhlodromus from Japan. Annotnes zool. jap. 31: 53–57.Google Scholar
English, L. L., and Snetsinger, R.. 1957. The biology and control of Eotetranychus multidigatuli (Ewing) a spider mite of honey locust. J. econ. Ent. 50: 784–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, G. O. 1963. Observations on the chaetotaxy of the legs in the free-living Gamasina (Acari: Mesostigmata). Bull. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.) Z. 10: 277–303.Google Scholar
Fleschner, C. A., and Ricker, D. W.. 1954. Typhlodromid mites on citrus and avocado trees in southern California. J. econ. Ent. 47: 356–357.Google Scholar
Garman, P. 1948. Mite species from apple trees in Connecticut. Bull. Conn. agric. Exp. Stn, No. 520.Google Scholar
Garman, P. 1958. New species belonging to the genera Amblyseius and Amblyseiopsis with keys to Amblyseius, Ambtyseiopsis, and Phytoseiulus. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 51: 69–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hantsbarger, W. M., and O'Neill, W. J.. 1954. Predacious mites of the family Laelaptidae in North-central Washington. J. econ. Ent. 47: 176–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, C. F., and McBurnie, H. V.. 1943. Sampling technique for determining populations of the citrus red mite and its predators. U.S. Dep. Agric. Circ. 671.Google Scholar
Herbert, H. J. 1953. Progress report on predacious mite investigations in Nova Scotia (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). 83rd Ann. Rep. (1952) ent. Soc. Ont. pp. 27–29.Google Scholar
Herbert, H. J. 1956. Laboratory studies on some factors in the life history of the predacious mite Typhlodromus tiliae Oudms. (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Can. Ent. 88: 701–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennett, C. E. 1958. Some predacious mites of the subfamilies Phytoseiinae and Aceosejinae (Acarina: Phytoseiidae, Aceosejidae) from central California with descriptions of new species. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 51: 471–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kido, H., and Stafford, E. M.. 1955. The biology of the grape bud mite Eriophyes vitis (Pgst.). Hilgardia 24: 119–142.Google Scholar
Kramer, P. 1961. Untersuchungen uber den Einfluss einiger Arthropoden auf Raubmilben (Acari). Z. angew. Zool. 48: 257–311.Google Scholar
LeRoux, E. J. 1961. Effect of “modified” and “commercial” spray programs on the fauna of apple orchards in Quebec. Ann. ent. Soc. Queb. (1960), 6: 87–121.Google Scholar
Malcolm, D. R. 1955. Biology and control of the timothy mite, Paratetranychus pratensis (Banks). Tech. Bull. Wash. agric. Exp. Stn, No. 17.Google Scholar
Mathys, G. 1955. Etude faunistique des acariens des pommiers en Suisse romande. Landw. Jbr 69: 815–825.Google Scholar
McMurtry, J. A., and Scriven, G. T.. 1966. Studies on predatory-prey interactions between Amblyseius hibisci and Oligonychus punicae (Acarina: Pyhtoseiidae, Tetranychidae) under greenhouse conditions. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 59: 793–800.Google Scholar
Muma, M. H. 1964 a. The population of Phytoseiidae on Florida citrus. Fla Ent. 47: 5–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muma, M. H. 1964 b. Annotated list and keys to Phytoseiidae (Acarina: Mesostigmata) associated with Florida citrus. Bull. Fla agric. Exp. Stn, No. 685.Google Scholar
Muma, M. H., Metz, L. J., and Farrier, M. H.. 1967. New species and records of Phytoseiidae (Acarina: Mesostigmata) from North Carolina forest litter. Fla Ent. 50: 199–206.Google Scholar
Nesbitt, H. 1951. A taxonomic study of the Phytoseiinae (family Laelaptidae) predacious upon Tetranychidae of economic importance. Zool. Verh., Leiden 12.Google Scholar
Oatman, E. R. 1959. Euorpean red mite control and population studies on apple in Wisconsin. J. econ. Ent. 52: 871–877.Google Scholar
Oatman, E. R. 1965. Effects of preblossom miticides and subsequent insecticide applications on mite populations on apple in Wisconsin. J. econ. Ent. 58: 335–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, R. O. 1955. Cycle evolutif du tetranyque a deux points, Tetranychus bimaculatus Harvey (Acari: Tetranychidae) dans le sud-ouest du Quebec. Naturaliste Can. 82: 5–30.Google Scholar
Parent, B. 1958. Efficacite des predateurs sur le tetranyque rouge du pommier Panonychus ulmi (Koch), dans les vergers du Quebec. Ann. ent. Soc. Queb. 4: 62–69.Google Scholar
Parrott, P. J., Hodgkiss, H. E., and Schoene, W. J.. 1906. The apple and pear mites. Bull. N.Y. St. agric. Exp. Stn, No. 283.Google Scholar
Porath, A., and Swirski, E.. 1965. A survey of Phytoseiid mites (Acarina: Phytoseiidae) on citrus, with a description of one new species. Israel J. agric. Res. 15: 87–100.Google Scholar
Putman, W. L., and Herne, D. H.. 1961. Relations between Typhlodromus caudiglans Schuster (Acarina: Phytoseiidae) and phytophagous mites in Ontario peach orchards. Can. Ent. 96: 925–943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rambier, A. 1958. Les tetranyques nuisibles a la vigne en France continentale. Revue Zool. agric. appl. 57: 1–20.Google Scholar
Ristich, S. S. 1956. Mass rearing and testing techniques for Typhlodromus fallacis (Gar.). J. econ. Ent. 49: 476–479.Google Scholar
Schuster, R. O. 1959. A new species of Typhlodromus near T. bakeri (Garman) and a consideration of the occurrence of T. rhenanus Oud. in California. Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 61: 88–90.Google Scholar
Schuster, R. O., and Gonzalez, R. H.. 1963. Redescription and notes on Amblyseius cucumeris (Oudemans) (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Acarologia 5: 185–188.Google Scholar
Schuster, R. O., and Pritchard, A. E.. 1963. Phytoseiid mites of California. Hilgardia 34: 191–285.Google Scholar
Smith, F. F., Henneberry, T. J., and Boswell, A. L.. 1963. The pesticide tolerance of Typhlodromus fallacis (Garman) and Phytoseiulus persimilis A. H. with some observations on the predator efficiency of P. persiwzilis. J. econ. Ent. 56: 274–278.Google Scholar
Specht, H. B. 1963. Oligonychus bicolor (Banks) (Acarina: Tetranychidae) in Nova Scotia. Can. Ent. 95: 1021–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Specht, H. B., and Dondale, C. D.. 1960. Spider populations in New Jersey apple orchards. J. econ. Ent. 53: 810–814.Google Scholar
Thomas, H. A., Specht, H. B., and Driggers, B. F.. 1959. Arthropod fauna found during the first season trial of a selective spray schedule in a New Jersey apple orchard. J. econ. Ent. 52: 819–820.Google Scholar
Van DeVrie, M. 1961. The distribution of phytophagous and predacious mites on leaves and shoots of apple trees. Entomophaga 9: 233–238.Google Scholar
Vernon, J. D. R. 1962. Control of Cyclamen mite on cyclamen and strawberries. Pl. Path. 11: 121–125.Google Scholar
Wiackowski, S. K., and Suski, Z. W.. 1963. Wstepne studia nad drapnieznymi roztoezami z rodziny Phytoseiidae (Acarina) w Polsce. (Preliminary studies on predacious mites of the family Phytoseiidae in Poland.) Pr. Inst. Sadow. Skierniew. 7: 233–237.Google Scholar
Womersley, H. 1954. Species of the subfamily Phytoseiinae (Acarina: Laelaptidae) from Australia. Aust. J. Zool. 2: 169–191.Google Scholar
Zaher, M. A., and El-Badry, E. A.. 1963. Abundance of mites and insects predacious on Tetranychid and Tenuipaled mites in Giza (Acarina). Bull. Soc. ent. Egypte 46: 429–441.Google Scholar