Experimental & Applied Acarology

, Volume 22, Issue 3, pp 125–137 | Cite as

Review Reflections on the biology, morphology and ecology of the Macrochelidae

  • G.W. Krantz
Article

Abstract

The Macrochelidae is a cosmopolitan family of predatory mesostigmatic mites, many of which occupy specialized and often unstable habitats. Most known species have adapted to life in dung deposits where prey is plentiful and the potential exists for rapid population growth. Phoresy on co-occurring flying insects plays a vital role in assuring niche continuity for macrochelids in these ephemeral substrates. A brief general review of some of the earlier highlights of macrochelid research is presented, followed by a discussion of the emergence of phoresy as a major survival strategy in the Macrochelidae associated with dung beetles. Special emphasis is placed on the behavioural and chemical mechanisms that mediate phoretic specificity of macrochelid species in the unique n-dimensional universes of their scarab hosts. Phylogenetic analysis of selected phoretic and non-phoretic macrochelid taxa has shown a strong correlation between phoretic state and evolutionary position, indicatin g that an increasing commitment to phoresy in the Macrochelidae is correlated with an advance from early derivative to terminal taxa. Laboratory and field observations have confirmed the importance of chemical, behavioural and ecological factors in maintaining the integrity of the relationship between phoretically specific macrochelids and their dung beetle hosts. © Rapid Science Ltd. 1998

Phoresy phoretic specificity dung beetles phylogeny. 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Athias-Binche, F. 1994. La Phoresie chez les Acariens. Aspects Adaptatifs et Evolutifs. Editions du Castillet, Perpignan, France.Google Scholar
  2. Axtell, R.C. 1963. Effect of Macrochelidae (Acarina: Mesostigmata) on house fly production from dairy cattle manure. J. Econ. Entomol. 56: 317-321.Google Scholar
  3. Axtell, R.C. 1969. Macrochelidae (Acarina: Mesostigmata) as biological control agents for synanthropic flies. In Proceedings of the Second International Congress of Acarology, G.O. Evans (e.d), pp. 401-416. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest.Google Scholar
  4. Berlese, A. 1918. Centuria quarta di Acari nuovi. Redia 13: 113-190.Google Scholar
  5. Binns, E.S. 1982. Phoresy as migration - some functional aspects of phoresy in mites. Biol. Rev. 57: 571-620.Google Scholar
  6. Bregetova, N.G. and Koroleva, E.G. 1960. The macrochelid mites (Gamasoidea, Macrochelidae) in the USSR. Parazit. Sb. 19: 32-154.Google Scholar
  7. Canestrini, G. and Canestrini, R. 1882. I Gamasi Italiani. Atti Soc. Ven.-trent. Sci. 8: 31-82.Google Scholar
  8. Canestrini, G. and Fanzago, F. 1877. Intorno agli Acari italiani. Atti R. Inst. Ven. Sci. 5(4): 69-208.Google Scholar
  9. Costa, M. 1966. Notes on macrochelids associated with manure and coprid beetles in Israel. I. Macrocheles robustulus(Berlese, 1904), development and biology. Acarologia 8: 532-548.Google Scholar
  10. Costa, M. 1967. Notes on macrochelids associated with manure and coprids in Israel. II. Three new species of the Macrocheles pisentiicomplex with notes on their biology. Acarologia 9: 304-329.Google Scholar
  11. Costa, M. 1969. The association between mesostigmatic mites and coprid beetles. Acarologia 11: 411-428.Google Scholar
  12. Evans, G.O. and Browning, E. 1956. British mites of the subfamily Macrochelinae Trägårdh (Gamasina, Macrochelidae). Bull. Br. Mus. Nat. Hist. (Zool.) 4: 1-55.Google Scholar
  13. Evans, G.O. and Hyatt, K.H. 1963. Mites of the genus MacrochelesLatr. (Mesostigmata) associated with coprid beetles in the collections of the British Museum (Natural History). Bull. Br. Mus. Nat. Hist. (Zool.) 9: 327-401.Google Scholar
  14. Filipponi, A. 1955. Sulla natura dell'associazione tra Macrocheles muscaedomesticaee Musca domestica. Riv. Parassitol. 16: 83-102.Google Scholar
  15. Filipponi, A. 1959. Due specie riproduttivamente isolate sotto il nome di Macrocheles glaber(Mueller) (Acarina, Mesostigmata). Riv. Parassitol. 20: 199-212.Google Scholar
  16. Filipponi, A. 1962. Metodi sperimentali nella sistematica degli acari macrochelidi (Acarina, Mesostigmata, Macrochelidae). Parassitologia 4: 113-146.Google Scholar
  17. Filipponi, A. 1964a. The feasibility of mass producing macrochelid mites for field trials against houseflies. Bull. Wld Hlth Org. 31: 499-501.Google Scholar
  18. Filipponi, A. 1964b. Experimental taxonomy applied to the Macrochelidae (Acari: Mesostigmata). In Proceedings of the First International Congress of Acarology, G.O. Evans (ed.) pp. 92-100. Acarologia, Paris.Google Scholar
  19. Filipponi, A. and Cervone, L. 1957. Isolamento sessuale fra due specie di Macrochelesforetiche e predatrici di Musca domesticae. Rend. Ist. Super. Sanitá (Roma) 20: 1025-1036.Google Scholar
  20. Filipponi, A. and Cicolani, B. 1974. Influenza della temperatura sulla feconditá longevitá e capacitá moltiplicativa nello intervallo ottimale di Macrocheles matrius(Acarina, Mesostigmata). Riv. Parassitol. 35: 291-306.Google Scholar
  21. Filipponi, A. and Dojmi di Lupis, G. 1963. Sul regime dietetico di alcuni macrochelidi (Acari: Mesostigmata), associati in natura a muscidi di interesse sanitario. Riv. Parassitol. 24: 277-288.Google Scholar
  22. Filipponi, A. and Francaviglia, G. 1964. Larviparitá facoltativa in alcuni macrochelidi (Acari: Mesostigmata) associati a muscidi di interesse sanitario. Parassitologia 6: 99-113.Google Scholar
  23. Filipponi, A. and Mosna, B. 1968. Influenza di fattori ecologici e genetici sulla natalitá e mortalitá di Macrocheles robustulus(Berlese, 1904). Ann. Ist. Super. Sanitá (Roma) 4: 551-571.Google Scholar
  24. Filipponi, A. and Pegazzano, F. 1960. Acari del genere Glyptholaspisnom. nov. pro Macrocheles(Macrocheles) Berlese 1918 (Mesostigmata, Macrochelidae). Redia 45: 133-171.Google Scholar
  25. Filipponi, A. and Pegazzano, F. 1962. Specie italiane del gruppo-glaber(Acarina, Mesostigmata, Macrochelidae, Macrocheles). Redia 47: 211-238.Google Scholar
  26. Filipponi, A. and Pegazzano, F. 1963. Specie italiane del gruppo-subbadius(Acarina, Mesostigmata, Macrochelidae). Redia 48: 69-91.Google Scholar
  27. Filipponi, A. and Pegazzano, F. 1967. Contributo alla conoscenza del genere HolostaspellaBerlese, 1903 (Acari: Mesostigmata: Macrochelidae). Redia 50: 219-259.Google Scholar
  28. Hutchinson, G.E. 1957. Concluding remarks, Cold Spring Harbor Symposium. Quant. Biol. 22: 415-427.Google Scholar
  29. Jalil, M. and Rodriguez, J.G. 1970. Studies of behavior of Macrocheles muscaedomesticae(Acarina: Macrochelidae) with emphasis on its attraction to the house fly. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 63: 738-744.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Koch, C.L. 1836-1841. Deutschlands Crustaceen, Myriapoden und Arachniden, G.A.W. Herrich-Schäfer (ed.), Hefte 1-39, Regensburg (Fr. Pustet).Google Scholar
  31. Kramer, P. 1876. Zur Naturgeschichte einiger Gattungen aus der Familie der Gamasiden. Arch. Naturgesch. 42: 46-105.Google Scholar
  32. Krantz, G.W. 1961. Free-living Mesostigmata from Garamba National Park, Congo. I. Two new genera of Macrochelidae. Proc. Parc Nat. Garamba (Mission H. De Saeger) 24: 3-13.Google Scholar
  33. Krantz, G. 1962. A review of the genera of the family Macrochelidae Vitzthum 1930 (Acarina: Macrochelidae). Acarologia 4: 143-173.Google Scholar
  34. Krantz, G.W. 1965. A review of the genus NeopodocinumOudemans 1902 (Acarina: Macrochelidae). Acarologia 7: 139-226.Google Scholar
  35. Krantz, G.W. 1967. A review of the genus HolocelaenoBerlese, 1910 (Acarina: Macrochelidae). Acarologia 9: 1-146.Google Scholar
  36. Krantz, G.W. 1981. Two new glabergroup species of Macrocheles(Acari: Macrochelidae) from southern Africa. Int. J. Acarol. 7: 3-16.Google Scholar
  37. Krantz, G.W. 1983. Mites as biological control agents of dung-breeding flies, with special reference to the Macrochelidae. In Biological Control of Pests by Mites, M.A. Hoy, G.L. Cunningham and L. Knutson (eds), pp. 91-98. University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  38. Krantz, G.W. 1991. Nature of the association between pisentii-group mites (Acari: Macrochelidae: Macrocheles) and dung beetles of the genus Scarabaeus(Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) in southern France. Acarologia 32: 3-11.Google Scholar
  39. Krantz, G.W. and Mellott, J.L. 1968. Two new species of Macrocheles(Acarina: Macrochelidae) from Florida, with notes on their host-specific relationships with geotrupine beetles (Scarabaeidae: Geotrupinae). J. Kansas Entomol. Soc. 41: 48-56.Google Scholar
  40. Krantz, G.W. and Mellott, J.L. 1972. Studies on phoretic specificity in Macrocheles mycotrupetesand M. peltotrupetesKrantz and Mellott (Acari: Macrochelidae), associates of geotrupine Scarabaeidae. Acarologia 14: 317-344.Google Scholar
  41. Krantz, G.W. and Redmond, B.L. 1988. On the structure and function of the cribrum, with special reference to Macrocheles perglaber(Gamasida: Macrochelidae). In Progress in acarology, G.P. Channabasavanna and C.A. Viraktamath (eds), pp. 179-185. Oxford & IBH Publ. Co., New Delhi.Google Scholar
  42. Krantz, G.W. and Royce, L.A. 1992. Descriptions of the immature stases of Macrocheles mycotrupetesKrantz and Mellott (Acari: Macrochelidae), with remarks on form, function, and phoresy. Acarologia 33: 305-311.Google Scholar
  43. Krantz, G.W. and Royce, L.A. 1994. Observations on the biology and behavior of Macrocheles mycotrupetesKrantz and Mellott (Acari: Macrochelidae). Int. J. Acarol. 20: 115-121.Google Scholar
  44. Krantz, G.W., Royce, L.A., Lowry, R.R. and Kelsey, R. 1991. Mechanisms of phoretic specificity in Macrocheles(Acari: Macrochelidae). In Modern Acarology, Vol. 2, F. Dusbabek and V. Bukva (eds), pp. 561-569. Academia, Prague and SPB Academic Bv, The Hague.Google Scholar
  45. Krauss, W. 1970. Die europäischen Arten der Gattungen MacrochelesLatreille 1829 und GeholaspisBerlese 1918. Acarologie, Schrift. Vergleichende Milben. 14: 1-60.Google Scholar
  46. Lumaret, J.P. and Kirk, A. 1987. Ecology of dung beetles in the French Mediterranean region (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Acta Zool. Mex. (NS) 24: 1-55.Google Scholar
  47. Norton, R.A., Kethley, J.B., Johnston, D.E. and OConnor, B.M. 1993. Phylogenetic perspectives on genetic systems and reproductive modes of mites. In Evolution and Diversity of Sex Ratio in Insects and Mites, D.L. Wrensch and M.A. Ebbert (eds), pp. 8-99. Chapman & Hall, New York.Google Scholar
  48. Nutting, W.B. 1968. Host specificity in parasitic acarines. Acarologia 10: 165-180.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Pereira, C. and de Castro, M.P. 1945. Contribuicão para o conhecimento da especie tipo de MacrochelesLatr. (Acarina): M. muscaedomesticae(Scopoli, 1772) emend. Arq. Inst. Biol. São Paulo 16: 153-186.Google Scholar
  50. Petrova, A.D. 1967. New species of mites of the family Macrochelidae Vitzthum, 1930. Zool. Zh. 46: 1037-1047.Google Scholar
  51. Petrova, A.D. and Taskaeva, E.Z. 1964. Gamasoid mites (Parasitiformes, Gamasoidea) from southern China (1st communication). Bull. Mosc. O-va Isp. Prirodi, Otd. Biologii 69: 47-61.Google Scholar
  52. Petrova, A.D. and Taskaeva, E.Z. 1968. Gamasoid mites (Parasitiformes, Gamasoidea) from southern China. Report 2. Zool. Zh. 47: 1179-1191.Google Scholar
  53. Polak, M. 1996. Ectoparasitic effects on host survival and reproduction: the Drosophila- Macrochelesassociation. Ecology 77: 1379-1389.Google Scholar
  54. Wallace, M.M.H. and Holm, E. 1983. Establishment and dispersal of the introduced predatory mite, Macrocheles peregrinusKrantz, in Australia. J. Aust. Entomol. Soc. 22: 345-348.Google Scholar
  55. Wallace, M.M.H., Tyndale-Biscoe, M. and Holm, E. 1979. The influence of Macrocheles glaberon the breeding of the Australian bushfly, Musca vetustissimain cow dung. In Recent Advances in Acarology, Vol. 2 J.G. Rodriguez (ed.), pp. 217-222. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman and Hall 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • G.W. Krantz

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations