Evidence for Synonymy Between Tetranychus Urticae And
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Evidence for synonymy between Tetranychus urticae and Tetranychus cinnabarinus (Acari, Prostigmata, Tetranychidae): Review and new data Philippe Auger, Alain Migeon, Edward A. Ueckermann, Louwrens Tiedt, Maria Navajas Navarro To cite this version: Philippe Auger, Alain Migeon, Edward A. Ueckermann, Louwrens Tiedt, Maria Navajas Navarro. Ev- idence for synonymy between Tetranychus urticae and Tetranychus cinnabarinus (Acari, Prostigmata, Tetranychidae): Review and new data. Acarologia, Acarologia, 2013, 53 (4), pp.383-415. 10.1051/ac- arologia/20132102. hal-00979843 HAL Id: hal-00979843 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00979843 Submitted on 16 Apr 2014 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivatives| 4.0 International License Acarologia 53(4): 383–415 (2013) DOI: 10.1051/acarologia/2013XXXX EVIDENCE FOR SYNONYMY BETWEEN TETRANYCHUS URTICAE AND TETRANYCHUS CINNABARINUS (ACARI, PROSTIGMATA, TETRANYCHIDAE): REVIEW AND NEW DATA Philippe AUGER1,*, Alain MIGEON1, Edward A. UECKERMANN2, 3, Louwrens TIEDT3 and Maria NAVAJAS1 (Received 19 April 2013; accepted 02 June 2013; published online 19 December 2013) 1 Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, UMR CBGP (INRA / IRD / CIRAD / Montpellier SupAgro), Campus international de Baillarguet, CS 30016, F-34988 Montferrier-sur-Lez cedex, France. (*Corresponding author) [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 2 ARC-Plant Protection Research Institute, Private bag X134, Queenswood, Pretoria, 0121, South Africa. [email protected] 3 North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, Laboratory for Electron Microscopy, CRB, Potchefstroom, 2520 South Africa. [email protected] ABSTRACT — The species status of Tetranychus cinnabarinus remains uncertain for some acarologists. In the present paper, we propose to examine the taxonomic status of this tetranychid mite through a review of studies that aimed to clarify its taxonomical position. We present and discuss the main results concerning the principal aspects investigated literature published since the description of Boisduval in 1867. These studies concern morphological, biological and molecular data which have been used to separate or to synonymise T. cinnabarinus and Tetranychus urticae. Additional new morphological and biological data are also included. In light of the data presented, the authors conclude that T. cinnabarinus should be considered as a synonym of the polymorphic species T. urticae to which it constitutes the red form. KEYWORDS — synonymy; Tetranychidae; green form; red form; breeding; morphology; molecular data INTRODUCTION inus Boisduval, 1867 has caused a lot of ink to flow. One of the main reasons is that its original descrip- In the genus Tetranychus Dufour the taxonomic sta- tion is succinct and mainly based on the colour of tus of the tetranychid mites known as Tetranychus the mite: "une belle couleur rouge aurore" meaning urticae Koch, 1836 complex [or Tetranychus telarius a beautiful aurora red colour. Since the second part (L., 1758) sensu Pritchard and Baker, 1955] is a long of the last century, the validity of the taxonomical standing issue among acarologists. In the last cata- status of T. cinnabarinus has been often questioned. logue of the spider mite family (Bolland et al., 1998), Numerous authors have addressed this complex is- 44 species names have been synonymised with T. sue without reaching a consensus on the validity or urticae and 47 in the Spider Mites Web database (Mi- synonymy of this taxon with T. urticae. In addition geon and Dorkeld, 2006-2013). Among them, the to the body colour of the mite, several other criteria case of the systematic status of Tetranychus cinnabar- have been used either in support of the separation http://www1.montpellier.inra.fr/CBGP/acarologia/ 383 ISSN 0044-586-X (print). ISSN 2107-7207 (electronic) Auger P. et al. TABLE 1: Criteria used to separate and synonymize Tetranychus urticae and Tetranychus cinnabarinus in the literature dealing with the taxonomic status of the red form of T. urticae. Literature supporting the validity of Literature supporting the synonymy of T. cinnabarinus T. cinnabarinus with T. urticae Dorsal integumentary lobe shape (1, 2, 3, 4, 5); Morphological Aedeagus shape (4, 6); Foreleg chaetotaxy (4, 5); Dorsal integumentary lobe shape (24); criteria Combination of characters (5); Taxonomical monography (32, 33, 34, 35) Taxonomical monography (30, 31) Reproductive isolation (1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17); Ability to enter in diapause (6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 19, 20,); Reproductive isolation defective (22, 25, 26, 27, 36); Biological criteria Host plant adaptation (8, 10, 21); Ability to enter in diapause (22, 25, 28, 29) Physiological traits (4, 22, 23); Population genetics (23) Literature cited (1) Boudreaux (1956), (2) Monroe (1963), (3) Brandenburg and Kennedy (1981), (4) Kuang and Cheng (1990), (5) Zhang and Jacobson (2000), (6) Dillon (1958), (7) Taylor and Smith (1956), (8) Hussey and Parr (1958), (9) Parr and Hussey (1960), (10) Van de Bund and Helle (1960), (11) Boudreaux (1963), (12) Boudreaux and Dosse (1963a), (13) Dosse and Boudreaux (1963), (14) Dosse and Nuber (1963), (15) Saba (1975), (16) Smith (1975), (17) Jordaan (1977), (18) Boudreaux (1958a), (19) Helle and Van de Bund (1962), (20) Hazan et al. (1971), (21) Dosse (1952), (22) Gotoh and Tokioka (1996), (23) Goka et al. (1996), (24) Mollet and Sevacherian (1984), (25) Dupont (1979), (26) Boer (1982), (27) Gotoh et al. (1993), (28) Helle and Overmeer (1973), (29) Vaz Nunes (1986), (30) Zhang (2003), (31) Meyer (1974), (32) Meyer (1987), (33) Baker and Tuttle (1994), (34) Bolland et al. (1998), (35) Ehara (1999), (36) Attwa et al. (2011). or on the contrary to synonymize T. urticae and T. data have increased the confusion regarding valid- cinnabarinus. Table 1 summarizes the main relevant ity of this taxon. literature on this topic. The aim of the present paper is to review the lit- More recently, molecular approaches have been erature used to separate or synonymize T. urticae added to morphological criteria to address the con- and T. cinnabarinus. The criteria examined include: troversy on the taxonomical status of T. cinnabari- colour of mites, morphological features like the dor- nus. Unexpectedly, molecular analyses have partly sal integumentary lobe pattern, aedeagus shape and revived this controversy. While most of the molec- female leg I chaetotaxy; biology concerning breed- ular studies conclude that the two forms are syn- ing, diapause and host plant adaptation and molec- onymous (Navajas, 1998; Hinomoto et al., 2001; de ular approach with phylogenetical relationships be- Mendonça et al., 2011; Sun et al., 2012) or do not tween the two taxa. The ability to develop resis- achieve to separate them (Xie et al., 2006b; Xie et tance to pesticides in the two colour forms was not al., 2008), a recent work wrapped up to the valid- investigated. In our opinion, data do not allow to ity of this species (Li et al., 2009). While molecular know if the resistance development in a colour form studies have proved to be of high value for system- is more due to its innate capacity to develop resis- atics studies of many groups including the Acari, tance than to variable selection pressures as a result DNA sequences information needs to be manipu- of differences in amounts and types of pesticides lated with much precaution. In particular, the relia- applied. bility of the DNA data available in public sequence DNA databases, i.e. GenBank, might lack proper In addition, for two of the criteria above taxonomy. In the case of difficult taxonomic issues mentioned we performed biological experiments as T. cinnabarinus, wrongly attributed sequences to (crosses) and morphological measurements (shape species is responsible for erroneous inferences con- of the aedeagus) on five red and green populations. cerning the taxonomic position of this species (Hi- By analysing together published information and nomoto et al., 2007; Ros and Breeuwer, 2007; de new data, this paper sheds new light on the taxo- Mendonça et al., 2011). Thus, rather than solving nomical status of T. cinnabarinus and allows to con- the taxonomic position of T. cinnabarinus, molecular clude on its synonymy with T. urticae. 384 Acarologia 53(4): 383–415 (2013) MATERIALS AND METHODS using a Leica DM LB 2 phase contrast microscope (10 x 25 HC Plan, Fluotar 100) at a magnification SEM photographs of 2000. Measured parameters are shown in Fig- Mites were fixed in 70 % ethanol for 24 h and ure 1. Measurements were obtained using the imag- dehydrated in an ethanol series of 80 %, 90 %, ing software Perfect Image® (Clara Vision) coupled and 2X 100 % for 15 min each. The dehydrated with Progres® Capture Pro 2.6 software for image samples were critical point dried using liquid car- acquisition. Data were analysed with an ANOVA bon dioxide as transitional fluid. After drying the completed by the Newman-Keuls test (α = 5 %).