Entomophaga

, Volume 34, Issue 2, pp 275–287 | Cite as

Biological studies including population growth parameters of the predatory miteAmblyseius barkeri [Acarina.: Phytoseiidae] at 25°C in the laboratory

  • J. Bonde
Article
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

Amblyseius barkeri (Hughes) fed onThrips tabaci (Lind.) at 25°C showed an average duration of 2.2, 0.8 and 3.2 days for the egg, larval and nymphal stages, with mortalities at 1.0, 1.0 and 3.1%, respectively. Females represented 63% of the population and required multiple matings for optimal fertility. The oviposition period was 20.3 days and the average oviposition rate 2.3 eggs per day. The intrinsic rate of increase was 0.22 per day. The expected life span was 29.6 days for ♀♀ and 27.4 days for ♂♂.A. barkeri ♂♂ and ♀♀ both consumed 3.3 nymphs of thrips per day (mean value for the feeding stages). The larva does not take up food. In the absence of thripsA. barkeri was able to consume two-spotted spider mites,Tetranychus urticae (Koch), and their eggs, adult broad mites,Polyphagotarsonemus latus (Banks), and pollen of various plants. Cannibalism was observed when food was lacking. Certain morphological features, egglaying, mating and predatory behaviour are described.

Key-Words

Amblyseius barkeri Phytoseiidae Thrips population growth biological control Tetranychus urticae Polyphagotarsonemus latus pollen 

Résumé

Les durées moyennes de développement des œufs, des larves et des nymphes d'Amblyseius barkeri (Hughes) nourris deThrips tabaci (Lind) ont été respectivement 2,2, 0,8 et 3,2 jours, avec des mortalités respectives de 1,0, 1,0 et 3,1%. Les ♀♀ ont constitué 63% de la population, et pour obtenir la fertilité optimum, plusieurs accouplements ont été nécessaires. La période d'oviposition était de 20,3 jours, et l'oviposition moyenne a été de 2,3 œufs par jour. L'accroissement réel était de 0,22 par jour. La durée de vie attendue était de 29,6 jours pour les ♀♀ et de 27,4 jours pour les ♂♂. LesA. barkeri ♂♂ ainsi que les ♀♀ ont consommé 3,3 nymphes de thrips par jour (valeur moyenne des stades de nourritures). Les larves ne mangent pas. Faute de thrips,A. barkeri peut consommer des tétranyches tisserands,Tetranychus urticae (Koch), et leurs œufs, des acariens jaunes adultes,Polyphagotarsonemus latus (Banks), et du pollen de plusieurs plantes. Dans le cas de nourriture insuffisante, du cannibalisme a été observé. Les caractéristiques morphologiques, l'oviposition, l'accouplement et le comportement prédateur sont décrits.

Mots Clés

Amblyseius barkeri Phytoseiidae thrips accroissement des populations lutte biologique Tetranychus urticae Polyphagotarsonemus latus pollen 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amano, H. &Chant, D. A. — 1977. Life history and reproduction of two species of predacious mites,Phytoseiulus persimilis Athias-Henriot andAmblyseius andersoni (Chant) [Acarina: Phytoseiidae]. —Can. J. Zool., 55, 1978–1983.Google Scholar
  2. Badii, M. H. &McMurtry, J. A. — 1984. Life history of and life table parameters forPhytoseiulus longipes with comparative studies onP. persimilis andTyphlodromus occidentalis [Acarina: Phytoseiidae]. —Acaralogia, XXV, 111–123.Google Scholar
  3. Ballard, R. C. — 1954. The biology of the predacious miteTyphlodromus fallacis (Garman) [Phytoseiidae] at 78°F. —The Ohio J. Sci., 54, 175–179.Google Scholar
  4. Beglyarov, G. A. &Suchalkin, F. A. — 1983. A predacious mite — a potential natural enemy of the tobacco thrips. (Ru). —Zashch Rast., 9, 24–25.Google Scholar
  5. Birch, L. C. — 1948. The intrinsic rate of natural increase of an insect population. —J. Anim. Ecol., 17, 15–26.Google Scholar
  6. Dosse, G. — 1955. Aus der Biologie der RaubmilbeTyphlodromus cucumeris Oud. [Acar.: Phytoseiidae]. —Z. fur Pflanzenkr. und Pflanzenschutz, 69, 593–598.Google Scholar
  7. El-Badry, E. A. &Elbenhawy, E. M. — 1968. Studies on the mating behaviour of the predacious miteAmblyseius gossipi [Acarina: Phytoseiidae]. —Entomophaga, 13, 159–162.Google Scholar
  8. El-Badry, E. A. &Zaher, M. A. — 1961. Life-History of the predator miteTyphlodromus [Amblyseius] cucumeris Oudemans. —Bull. Soc. Entomol. Egypte, 45, 427–434.Google Scholar
  9. Hansen, L. S., Jakobsen, J. &Reitzel, J. — 1984. Extent and Economics of Biological Control ofTetranychus urticae andTrialeurodes vaporariorum in Danish Glasshouses. —E.P.P.O. Bull., 14, 393–399.Google Scholar
  10. Hansen, L. S. & Geyti, J. — 1987. Possibilities and limitations of the use ofAmblyseius mckenziei Sch. & Pr. for biological control of thrips [Thrips tabaci Lind.] on glasshouse crops of cucumbers. — In: Integrated and biological control in protected crop (R. Cavalloro, ed.) pp. 145–150. —a; a; balkema/Rotterdam/Brookfield, 251 p.Google Scholar
  11. Hansen, L. S. — 1988. Control ofThrips tabaci [Thysanoptera] on glasshouse cucumber using large introductions of predatory mitesAmblyseius barkeri [Phytoseiidae]. — Entomophaga, 33, (in press).Google Scholar
  12. Jakobsen, J. — 1987. Muligheder for biologisk bekæmpele af blomstertripsenFrankliniella occidentalis ved hjælp af tripsrovmidenAmblyseius barkeri. (Da). —Danske Plantevœrnskonference, 1987, 73–79.Google Scholar
  13. Kamburov, S. S. — 1971. Feeding, Development and Reproduction ofAmblyseius largoensis on Various Food Substances. —J. Econ. Entomol., 64, 643–648.Google Scholar
  14. Knisley, C. B. &Swift, F. C. — 1971. Biological Studies ofAmblyseius umbraticus [Acarina: Phytoseiidae]. —Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 64, 813–822.Google Scholar
  15. Kolodochka, L. A. — 1984. Analysis of some ecological characteristics of parthenogenetic and bisexual species of phytoseiid mites. (Ru). —Vestnik Zoologii, 5, 47–53.Google Scholar
  16. Kolodochka, L. A. — 1985. Pre-adult development of some species of predacious phytoseiid mites at a constant temperature. (Ru). —Vestnik Zoologii, 3, 56–59.Google Scholar
  17. Krebs, C. J. — 1978. Ecology. The Experimental Analysis of Distribution and Abundance, 678 pp. —Harper & Row, New York.Google Scholar
  18. Lee, M. S. &Davis, D. W. — 1968. Life History and Behaviour of the Predatory MiteTyphlodromus occidentalis in Utah. —Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 61, 251–255.Google Scholar
  19. McMurtry, J. A. &Scriven, G. T. — 1964. Biology of the Predacious MiteTyphlodromus rickeri [Acarina: Phytoseiidae]. —Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 57, 362–367.Google Scholar
  20. Nachman, G. — 1974. Principper for biologisk bekæmpelse af væksthusspindemidenTetranychus urticae (Koch) ved hjælp af rovmidenPhytoseiulus persimilis (Athias-Henriot) belyst ved populationdynamiske modeller og laboratorieforsøg. (Da). —Unpublished Masters Degree thesis. University of Copenhagen, 1974.Google Scholar
  21. Nedstam, B. — 1984. Biologisk bekampning av trips i växthusgurka. (Sw). —Forsöksledarmotet i Alnarp 1984. Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet.Google Scholar
  22. Pickford, R. J. J. — 1983. A selective method of thrip control of cucumber. —Bull. S.R.O.P., 1983/VI/3, 177–180.Google Scholar
  23. Putman, W. L. — 1962. Life-History and Behaviour of the Predacious MiteTyphlodromus (T.) caudiglans Schuster [Acarina: Phytoseiidae] in Ontario, with notes of the Prey of Related Species. —Can. Entomol., 94, 163–177.Google Scholar
  24. Ramakers, P. M. J. — 1978. Possibilities for biological control ofThrips tabaci Lind. [Thysanoptera: Thripidae] in glasshouses. —Med. Fac. Landbouww. Rijksuniv. Gent, 43, 463–469.Google Scholar
  25. Ramakers, P. M. J. — 1980. Biological control ofThrips tabaci [Thysanoptera: Thripidae] withAmblyseius spp. [Acari: Phytoseiidae]. —Bull. S.R.O.P./W.P.R.S., 1980/III/3, 203–208.Google Scholar
  26. Ramakers, P. M. J. &van Lieburg, M. J. — 1982. Start of commercial production and introduction ofAmblyseius mckenziei Sch. & Pr. [Acarina: Phytoseiidae] for the control ofThrips tabaci Lind. [Thysanoptera: Thripidae] in glasshouses. —Med. Fac. Landbouww. Rijksuniv. Gent, 47, 541–545.Google Scholar
  27. Ramakers, P. M. J. — 1983. Mass production ofAmblyseius mckenziei andAmblyseius cucumeris. —Bull. S.R.O.P./W.P.R.S., 1983/VI/3, 203–206.Google Scholar
  28. Samsøe-Petersen, L. — 1983. Laboratory methods for testing side effects of pesticides on juvenile stages of the predatory mitePhytoseiulus persimilis [Acarina, Phytoseiidae] based on detached bean leaves. —Entomophaga, 28, 167–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schulten, G. G. M., van Arendonk, R. C. M., Russell, V. M. &Roorda, F. A. — 1978. Copulation, egg production and sex-ratio inPhytoseiulus persimilis andAmblyseius bibens [Acari: Phytoseidae]. —Entomol. Exp. & Appl., 24, 145–153.Google Scholar
  30. Sciarappa, W. J. &Swift, F. C. — 1977. Biological studies ofTyphlodromus sessor [Acarina: Phytoseiidae]. —Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 70, 285–288.Google Scholar
  31. Stenseth, C. — 1986. Bekjempelse av nelliktrips pa slangeagurk i veksthus. (No). —Forsk. Fors. Landbr., 37, 15–22.Google Scholar
  32. Takafuji, A. &Chant, D. A. — 1976. Comparative studies of the two species of predacious phytoseiid mites [Acarina: Phytoseiidae] with special reference to their responses to the density of their prey. —Res. Popul. Ecol., 17, 255–310.Google Scholar
  33. Woets, J. — 1973. Integrated control in vegetables under glass in the Netherlands. —Bull. O.I.L.B./S.R.O.P., 1973/4, 26–31.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Lavoisier Abonnements 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Bonde
    • 1
  1. 1.National Research Centre for Plant ProtectionLyngbyDenmark

Personalised recommendations