Phoretic and Ectoparasitic Mites (Acari) of the Chrysomelidae
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
10 58 Phoretic and ectoparasitic mites (Acari) of the Chrysomelidae 2 JORGE A. SANTIAGO-BLAyl & ALEX FAIN 1 Department ofEntomological Sciences, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-0001, USA 2 Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de Belgiqlle, rue Valltier 29, B-1040 Bruxelles, Belgique Abstract agricultural weeds (Balloch & Mohyuddin, 1969; Mustaque & Balloch, 1979) and in forests (Kleinert, The Heterocoptidae, Canestriniidae, Podapolipidae (Astigmata) 1976; probably an underestimation of insect and mite and Hemisarcoptidae (ProstigIhata) are the mite families most abundance, compare to Erwin, 1983 and May, 1990). commonly reported as chrysomelid associates. Heterocoptids and canestriniids are predominantly commensals on cassidines and We will also point out some of the complexities hispines; they are probably abdominal exudatophagous or fun associated with the possible use of acarines as bio givorous. Podapolipids and hemisarcoptids have been found para logical control agents of leaf beetle pests. Finally, we sitising leaf beetles; their potential as biocontrol agents remains will suggest possible future research avenues on the experimentally undocumented. Apparently, there are no predatory subject. ' acarines specific to chrysomelids. The impact ofmites on leaf beetle populations appears to be limited. Abiotic factors such as tempera ture, relative humidity, and biotic factors such as host plant characteristics, ant predation, and insect parasitism are probably 2. Commensalism (Figs. 1-2) more important than acarines in regulating leaf beetle populations. Commensalism is an association between two 6rgan 1. Introduction isms in which one obtains an energetic benefit from the relation and the other is not affected. Heterocop The Acari (mites, ticks; Cliiggers, and others) and the tid- and canestriniid-chrysomelid relations are the Chrysomelidae, or leaf beetles, are two groups of best known among the commensal associations. major agricultural importance. Both cause losses by Chrysomelid-associated, as well as other perma their feeding and have been implicated ~s vectors of nent entomochorous acarines usually have several plant diseases (Fulton et al., 1980; Lapierre, 1980; morphological features associated with their life style. Waterworth et al., 1977). In addition, more than Generally, they have a flattened body, latigradous 30,000 species have been described for each group legs, and reduced chetotaxy. A hypopal deutonymph (Krantz, 1978; Lopatin, 1984) and many more will is absent and all stages of the mite can occur on the become known to science. bettle (OConnor, 1979). The bettles live long enough The literature on the biological associations of to allow the transfer of acarines from one host to these two groups is scarce. Apparently, the Italian another. acarologist Antonio Berlese (1897 in, OConnor, 1982) Heterocoptids may be more common than previ was the first to report an acari-chrysomelid associ ously suspected. Most of the known hosts of hetero ation. Further citations are scattered until recently coptids are chrysomelids. For example, OConnor when some consideration was given to the use of (1979) discovere4 about 60 new species to be placed mites as possible biological control agents of leaf in 15 genera and three subfamilies of the Heterocop beetles, such as the Colorado Potato Beetle, Lep~ tidae (Astigmata). tinotarsa decemlineata (Say) (Baker & Eickwort, 1975; It is speculated that heterocoptids feed mostly on Eickwort, 1982; OConnor, 1982). the exudates (=exudatophagy) produced in the leaf The purpose of this paper is to review the literature beetle's subelytral space (OConnor, 1982). Other het on acari-chrysomelid associations. Most reports on erocoptids feed on fungi (Laboulbeniales), which are mite-chrysomelid associations are limited to only potential parasites of chrysomelids, that can grow mentioning the relationship; Table 1 summarizes on the beetle's tergites. OConnor (1982) suggested these data. Commensal, parasitic, and predatory rela that this fungivory might represent a case of mutual tions and the potential of the mites as biocontrol ism. agents of leaf beetles will be examined. Competition Aerotocarus is a commensal canestriniid exclusively will not be included as it has not been reported associated with Physonota (Cassidinae) (Summers & among these taxa although several papers report the Schuster, 1979a). However, the impact of these mites coexistence of phytophagous mites and leaf beetles on on the beetles is unknown. P. H. Jolivet, M. L. Cox and E. Petitpierl'e (eds.), Novel aspects ofthe biology ofChrysomelidae, 407-417,1994. © 1994 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. 408 -Santiago-Blay and Fain Table 1. Associations of mites (Acari) and chrysomelids Mite taxon and author Host (subfamily) geographic Nature of association Reference distribution of association ORDER MESOSTIGMATA Laelapidae Berlese, 1892 Androlaelaps sp. Diabrotica uirgifera (Galerucinae), egg, larval predator Chiang, 1970 United States Stratiolaelaps sp. Diabrotica longicornis (Galerucinae), egg, larval predator Chiang, 1970 United States Uropodidae Berlese,1917 Uropoda sp. Diabrotica melanocephala predator Thompson and Simmonds, 1965 (Galerucinae), probably South America ORDER PROSTIGMATA Pyemotidae Oudemans, 1937 Pyemotes uentricosus (Newport, Promecotheca caeruleipennis reichii larval (especially 1st Taylor, 1937; Thompson and 1950) (Hispinae), Fiji instar) predator Simmonds, 1965 "Pyemotes uentricosus· Fidia uiticida (Eumolpinaa); egg, larval, pupal, Cross et al., 1975 Promecotheca mesuleipennis teneral adult predator (Hispinae) Pyemotes sp. Chaetocnema ectypa (Alticinae), USA predator Thompson and Simmonds, 1965 Podapolipidae Oudemans, 1931 Chrysomelobia elytrosphaerae Elytrosphaera xanthopyga under elytra Fain,1987d Fain,1987d (Chrysomelinae), Brazil C. labidomerae Eickwort, 1975 Leptinotarsa cacica (Chrysomelinae) adult parasite Drummond et al., 1984 L. decemlineata, Mexico adult parasite (Fig. 5) Eickwort 1982; Drummond et al., 1984; Hsiao, pers. -: :_-<;oinm. to JASB, 1992 L. undecemlineata adult parasite Drummond et al., 1984 Labidomera cliuicollis adult parasite (Fig. 3,4) Bocker and Eickwort, 1975; (Chrysomelinae), North America Eickwort, 1975 (nature and laboratory) C. mahunkai Regenfuss, 1968 Chrysolina (=Chrysomela) graminis adult parasite Regenfuss, 1968 (Chrysomelinae) Trombidiidae Leach, 1815 Teresothrombium susteri Promecotheca atra, P. nemorum parasite Feider, 1956 Feider, 1956 (larvae) (Hispinae) Trombidium holosericeum Leptinotarsa decemlineata parasite Thompson and Simmonds, 1965 (Linnaeus, 1758) (larvae) (Chrysomelinae), France T. parasiticum (DeGeer, 1783) Bromius obscurus (Eumolpinae) parasite <;>,udemans, 1912 (larvae) Trombidium sp. Diabrotica uittata (Galerucinae) protelean parasite Welbourne, 1982 Trombidium spp. Longitarsus paruulus (Alticinae), parasite Thompson and Simmonds, 1965 Ireland unidentified trombidiform Oulema spp. (Criocerinae), Poland egg predator Miczulski, 1973a Anystidae Oudemans, 1902 Anystis baccarum (Linnaeus, Oulema melanopus (Criocerinae), egg predator Borg,1983 1758) Sweden Erythraeidae Oudemans, 1902 Leptus ignotus (Oudemans, Phratora (=Phyllodecta) laticollis parasite Oudemans, 1912 1903) (larvae) (Chrysomelinae) The Netherlands Phoretic and ectoparasitic mites (Acari) of the Chrysomelidae 409 Table 1. (Continued) Mite taxon and author Host (subfamily) geographic Nature of association Reference distribution of association L. japonicus Kawashima, 1956 Chrysolina aurichalcea, Lypesthes parasite Kawashima, 1953 (larvae) fuluus (Eumolpinae), .Japan L. phyllotretae Feider, 1956 Phyllotreta atra, P. nemorum parasite Feider, 1956 (larvae) (Alticinae) L. stolae Haitlinger, 1987 Stolas nudicollis (Cassidinae), Brazil parasite Haitlinger, 1987 (larvae) Momorangia Southcott, Asphaera sp. (Alticinae), Minas parasite Fain and Santiago·B!ay, in 1972, n.sp. (larvae) Gerais, Brazil press (1993) ORDER ASTIGMATA Hemisarcoptidae Oudemans; 1908 Linobia cocclnellae' (Scopoli, Chrysomela populi (Chrysomelinae) hematophagus parasite OConnor, 1982 1763) Acaridae Latreille, 1802 Acarus sp. (the name Promecotheca caeruleipennis reichii predation? Taylor, 1937 Tyroglyphus has been (Hispinae), Fiji rejected) ffistiostomatidae Berlese, 1897 new genus, new species Lema nigripes (Criocerinae), Puerto phoretic commensal Fain and Santiago-B!ay, in (hypopus) Rico (Fig. 1) press (1993) Heterocoptidae Fain, 1966 Heterocoptes tarsii Fa_~~1966 Aspidomorpha santaecrucis fungivorous?, OConnor, 1979, 1982 (Cassidinae) widely distributed; commensal "two genera in the most Brontispa, Plesispa, Anisodera Laboulbeniales OConnor, 1979 primitive subfamily of (Hispinae), Oriental Region fungivores, Heterocoptidae" commensal "derived" subfamily of Dicladispa"i!:xothispa (Hispinae), fungivorous? , OConnor, 1979, 1982 Heterocoptidae Laccoptera, Aspidomorpha, commensal Conchyloctenia, Laccoptera (as Patrisma), Netosacantha (Cassidinae), sub-Saharan, Africa, and Madagascar "third subfamily" of Aspidomorpha, Laccoptera, Metriona, fungivorous?, OConnor, 1979, 1982 Heterocoptidae Thalspida, Thalspidosoma, commensal Basiprionota (Prioptera is a junior synony of Basiprionota) (Cassidinae), Oriental Region Canestriniidae Berlese, 1884 Acrotocarus alutaceus (Turk, Physonota alutacea (Cassidinae), fungivorous or Summers and Schuster, 1979a; 1948) Trinidad exudatophagous Turk,l948 commensal? A. crataepus Summers and Physonota dilata (Cassidinae) fungivorous or Summers and Schuster,