Advertisement

Entomophaga

, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp 213–228 | Cite as

The genusPhytoseiusRibaga, 1902 (Acarina: Phytoseiidae)

  • D. A. Chant
  • C. Athias-Henriot
Article

Keywords

Plant Pathology 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Athias-Henriot, C. — 1957.Phytoseiidae etAceosejidae (Acarina, Gamasina) d'Algérie. I. GenresBlattisocius Keegan,Iphiseius Berlese,Amblyseius Berlese.Phytoseius Ribaga,Phytoseiulus Evans. —Bull. Soc. Hist. Nat. Afr. Nord,48, 319–352.Google Scholar
  2. Banks, N. — 1909. New Canadian mites. —Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington,11, 133–143.Google Scholar
  3. Camin, J. H. & F. E. Gorirossi. — 1955. A revision of the suborderMesostigmata (Acarina), based on new interpretations of comparative morphological data. —Chicago Acad. Sci. Spec. Publ. 11.Google Scholar
  4. Canesthini, C. &F. Fanzago. — 1876. Nuovi acari italiani. —Atti Soc. Veneto-Trent.,5, 130–142.Google Scholar
  5. Chant, D. A. — 1957. Descriptions of two new phytoseiid genera (Acarina:Phytoseiidae), with a note onPhytoseius Ribaga, 1902. —Canad. Ent.,89, 357–363.Google Scholar
  6. Chant, D. A.In press. Phytoseiid mites (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Part I: Bionomics of seven species in Southeastern England. Part II: A taxomic review of the familyPhytoseiidae, with description of 37 new species.Google Scholar
  7. Cunliffe, F. & E. W. Baker. — 1953. A guide to the predatory phytoseiid mites of the United States. —Pinellas Biol. Lab. Pub., 1.Google Scholar
  8. De Leon, D. — 1959. A new genus and three new species of phytoseiid mites from Mexico with collection records onPhytoseius plumifer (C. & F.) andP. macropilis (Banks). —Ent. News,70 (6), 147–152.Google Scholar
  9. Evans, G. O. — 1957. An introduction to the BritishMesostigmata (Acarina) with keys to the families and genera. —J. Linn. Soc. London, Zool.,43, 203–256.Google Scholar
  10. Garman, P. — 1948. Mite species from apple trees in Connecticut. —Connecticut Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull., 520, 1–27.Google Scholar
  11. Murgatroyd, J. H. — 1952.Phytoseius spoofi (Ouds.) (Acari,Laelaptidae) new to Britain. —Ent. Mon. Mag.,88, 264.Google Scholar
  12. Nesbitt, H. H. J. — 1951. A taxonomic study of thePhytoseiinae (FamilyLaelaptidae) predacious uponTetranychidae of economic importance. —Zool. Verhandel. 1 (12), 1–64.Google Scholar
  13. — — 1954. Some random notes on the mite fauna of Limburg with the description of two new species. —Natuurhist. Maandbl.,43, 19–24.Google Scholar
  14. Oudemans, A. C. — 1915a. Acarologische Aanteekeningen. —Ent. Ber.,4 (83), 184.Google Scholar
  15. ——1915b. Notizen über Acari, XXII (Parasitidae). —Arch. Naturgesch.,81A (1), 161–165.Google Scholar
  16. Ribaga, C. — 1902. Gamasidi planticoli. —Riv. Pat. Veg. Portici,10, 175–178.Google Scholar
  17. Wainstein, B. A. — 1959. Novyi podrod i vid rodaPhytoseius Ribaga, 1902 (Phytoseiidae, Parasitiformes). —Zool. J.,38 (9), 1361–1365.Google Scholar
  18. Womersley, H. — 1954. Species of the subfamilyPhytoseiinae (Acarina,Laelaptidae) from Australia. —Austral. J. Zool.,2, 169–191.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Le François 1960

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. A. Chant
    • 1
    • 2
  • C. Athias-Henriot
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Entomology Research Institute for Biological ControlBellevilleCanada
  2. 2.École nationale d'agricultureAlgerFrance

Personalised recommendations