Predatory against the poultry red

Tuomo Tuovinen MTT Agrifood Research Finland

Nordic Poultry Conference 6–8 November 2013, Helsinki, Finland Introduction Occurrence of the poultry red mite

• The poultry red mite ’PRM’ is the most important ectoparasite of laying hens in Europe (Chauve 1998) • The prohibition of conventional cages was expected to cause higher infestations due to more hiding places for PRM • In Finland, PRM probably occurs in the majority of the commercial hen houses • In the EU egg industry, economic costs of PRM (control and losses) have been estimated at €130 million per year (van Emous 2005)

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 2 Introduction Occurrence of the poultry red mite

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 3 Introduction Effects of PRM on laying hens

• PRM feeds on blood of hens during night hours • Feeding of PRM may cause stress to hens and affect restless behavior • The presence of PRM can cause blood spots on eggs • Substantial feeding of PRM may reduce egg quality by thinning of shell • High infestation may cause anaemia and even death of hens • PRM may serve as a vector of pathogens • PRM may suck also human blood and cause skin irritation

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 4 Introduction Current control of PRM

• Prevention of initial infestation • PRM free pullets • Good hygiene to avoid PRM transportation by people, and goods • Disinfection during the production break • Chemical disinfectants, acaricides, heat treatment • Cleaning and vacuuming • Acaricides, also during the egg production • Phoxim (Byemite) registered as a vet medicin against PRM • Permethrin, Pyrethrins registered against insects and mites indoors (in general)

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 5 Introduction Problems in pesticide use

• Very few pesticides available (registered against PRM) • Organophosphate acaricide phoxim (Byemite) • Difficulties to use during egg laying period • ByeMite is allowed but difficult to avoid contamination of birds • Doubts of safety and environmental contamination • Development of resistance to synthetic pesticides in mite populations • Permethrin and other pyrethroids • Insufficent effectiveness • Difficult to get good coverage during egg laying period

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 6 Introduction Biological or non-chemical alternatives

• Biological pesticides, earlier used for plant protection • Bacteria: Bacillus thuringiensis, Sacharopolyspora spinosa (Spinosad) • Fungi: Beauveria bassiana, Metarrhizium anisopliae • Inert dust products • Silica based products (diatomaceous earths) • Sodium bicarbonate, aqueous suspension • Plant derived products • Extracts of neem (Azadirachtin) • Essential oils (e.g. Paralice) • Vaccination?

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 7 Introduction Biological control by predatory mites

• Only few known natural enemies of PRM • Cheyletus eruditus – : Cheyletidae • casalis – Acari: scimitus – Acari: Laelapidae • Model from greenhouses • Repeated ample releases of predators • Candidate species: soil-dwelling predaceous mites (Laelapidae) • Laboratory experiments: feeding and reproduction • Selected species: Stratiolaelaps scimitus (= miles) • Layer house experiments • Cage and free-range systems

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 8 Potential biocontrol agents

Cheyletus eruditus

• C. eruditus is a predatory mite that commonly lives in bulk food stores such as granaries. Photo: H. Taylor • It is also often found in feed, poultry litter, and mammal and bird nests. • Its diet comprises a variety of insects and mites. • It is present in many countries around the world.

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 9 Photo: APPI, FR Potential biocontrol agents

Androlaelaps casalis

• A. casalis is a soil dwelling predatory mite that preys on other

mites and small invertebrates. Photo: APPI, FR • It is present in soils world wide. • Recently, it has been introduced as a predatory mite against red poultry mite (e.g. Koppert B.V. NL)

Phot:o APPI, FR

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 10 Potential biocontrol agents

Stratiolaelaps scimitus ()

• S. scimitus is a soil dwelling predatory mite that is currently used in greenhouses against and gnat larvae. • It is mass produced in Finland • This species was selected as a candidate predator against poultry red mite in 2009

Photo:© MTT Izabela Agrifood Lesna Research Finland 8.11.2013 11 Laboratory experiments

• Stratiolaelaps scimitus (Hypoaspis miles) • Tests in petri dishes • Female and male predatory mites in dish • Fed daily by surplus of eggs, larvae or nymph stages of PRM • Registered: • Number of consumed PRM eggs, larvae and nymphs per day • Number of laid eggs/day/female

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 12 Laboratory experiments

Consumption of eggs and larvae of D. gallinae by two (female+male) Hypoaspis miles

10 100

8 80

6 60

4 40

Daily consumption Daily 2 20 Cumalitive consumption Cumalitive

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 13 Laboratory experiments

Egg production of Hypoaspis miles fed with eggs of D. gallinae

5 50

4 40

3 30

2 20 Eggs/female/day 1 10 Cumalitive egg number egg Cumalitive

0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 14 Laboratory experiments Summary

• Stratiolaelaps scimitus completed the life cycle when fed on PRM eggs and larvae • S. scimitus consumed 1,5 eggs or larvae of PRM/day • S. scimitus produced 1,5 eggs/day when fed by PRM • S. scimitus produced 40 eggs in 30 days when fed by PRM  Egg laying was comparable to the egg laying when fed by acariid mites (used in massproduction)  PRM lays 2-3 eggs/day – twice that of S. scimitus  For any control effect S. scimitus mites are needed more than the initial adult PRM population?

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 15 Cage battery experiments

• The first effort in a small (960 hens) layer house • Three batteries with pairwise cages of 8 layers • Weekly introductions of S. scimitus after the first ocular observation of PRM in slow release sachets (1000 mites) placed on the roof of the cages (only the middle battery)

III

72/71 70/69 68/67 66/65 64/63 62/61 60/59 58/57 56/55 54/53 Manure II 34/33 36/35 38/37 40/39 42/41 44/43 46/45 48/47 50/49 52/51 >>>>>

Green: treated cages Pink: untreated cages

I

Door © MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 16 The first experiment: Results - PRM population followed by corrugated cardboard traps - Green arrows indicate the introductions of S. scimitus

Biological control against Poultry red mite MTT layer house (2008) 250

200 Byemite 2x

150

100

DG,all stages / sample 50

0 22.10. 29.10. 5.11. 12.11. 19.11. 26.11. 3.12. 10.12. 17.12. Hypoaspis miles releases Untreated

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 17 The first experiment: conclusions

• In the beginning the treatment cages were significantly more infested than untreated • The ocular observation of PRM was too late for monitoring • During the first weeks some control effect noticed both in treated and untreated cages –the predatory mites moved also vertically in the battery (a few found in traps) • Majority of S. scimitus left the sachets in two weeks • After four weeks PRM population started to grow again • Too low humidity is a critical factor for predatory mites • Byemite treatments were effective and only a few mites were trapped in late December © MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 18 The second experiment: methods

• Monitoring of PRM by cardboard traps • First mites in the traps triggered the introductions • Fortnightly releases of S. scimitus and Hypoaspis aculeifer in slow release sachets (1000 mites) placed on the roof of the cages (only the middle battery)

III

72/71 70/69 68/67 66/65 64/63 62/61 60/59 58/57 56/55 54/53 Manure II 34/33 36/35 38/37 40/39 42/41 44/43 46/45 48/47 50/49 52/51 >>>>> Green: H. aculeifer Yellow: H. miles Pink: untreated cages

I

Door © MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 19 The second experiment: results

• Arrows indicate the release dates (4.2.-28.5.) • Vertical blue line indicates the possible effective period of earlier Byemite treatments • Four weeks after the last release of predatory mite PRM population exploded

Biological control against PRM (2009) Biological control, follow-up (2009) 5 500 4 400 3 300 2 200 1 100

0 PRM, all stages / trap 0 PRM, all stages / sample 28.1. 11.2. 25.2. 11.3. 25.3. 8.4. 22.4. 6.5. 20.5. 3.6. 27.5. 3.6. 10.6. 17.6. 24.6. 1.7. 8.7. H. aculeifer H. miles Untreated H. aculeifer H. miles Untreated

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 20 Second experiment: conclusions

• First PRM were noticed seven weeks after the last Byemite treatment • In the laboratory tests the effect of Byemite treatment lasted at most 100-120 days • Cardboard traps revealed the infestation in time • No real untreated control was possible to arrange in the same layer house • PRM population growth was slow when compared to the previous experience of PRM population • The results encouraged to start experiments in commercial layer houses

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 21 Farm experiments: how to manage?

• How to release the predatory mites • Cage batteries and free range aviaries – different methods? • Slow release sachets are possible only in cage batteries as hens will peck them immediately to pieces • In aviaries PRM spend the daytime in various places depending on the structures – how to get predators into the right places? • Several methods studied in free range aviaries • Short pieces of drain pipes, filled with predatory mite production materials fixed in perches • Same units put on roofs of nests • The idea was to provide predatory mites the possibility to reproduce in aviaries

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 22 Methods of introductions

Paper bags Pieces of drain pipes

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 23 Farm experiments: monitoring trap

Velcro trap (MTT model)

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 24 Farm experiments: results (example)

• Case: modern free-range aviary (2011-2012) • Two floors, in all 21000 layers • One quarter of the upper floor treated by S. scimitus, other parts (7/8) of the aviary left untreated • Releases of S. scimitus in pieces of pipes, 180 predators/layer (on the roof of nests in the treated part) at 3-4 weeks intervals • PRM follow-up by velcro-trap (MTT) fixed around perches in different parts of the aviary • Results • PRM numbers stayed low for two months, but exploded after four months • PRM numbers in the treated area did not differ from untreated • Indications of better effect in the perch next to the nests

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 25 Farm experiments: results Blue arrows: releases of S. scimitus (in pieces of drain pipes) Biocontrol experiment Modern two-floor aviary, 2011-12 5000

4000

3000

2000

1000 Poultry red mites / trap / mites red Poultry

0 15.12. 15.1. 15.2. 15.3. 15.4. 15.5. 15.6. 15.7. 15.8. 15.9.

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 26 Farm experiments: results (example)

• Case: conventional free-range hen house (2012) • Old cowhouse furnished for 7000 layers • Loose materials of S. scimitus spread on the roofs of nests and into the floor, each time10-35 predators/layer, at 4-5 weeks intervals, with a summer break, in all 110 predators/layer/year • PRM follow-up by velcro-traps fixed round perches in different parts of the aviary • Results • PRM numbers stayed tolerable in Jan-May, in June-Sept PRM was not monitored but no problems were reported, and again in Oct-Dec PRM numbers stayed low • Considerable numbers of S. scimitus were present in the traps

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 27 Farm experiments: results Blue arrows: releases of S. scimitus (in pieces of drain pipes) Biocontrol experiment Old conventional free range hen house, 2012 500

400

300

200

100 Poultry red mite / trap / mite red Poultry

0 1.1. 1.2. 1.3. 1.4. 1.5. 1.6. 1.7. 1.8. 1.9. 1.10. 1.11. 1.12. © MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 28 Farm experiments: results

• Case: organic free-range hen house (2013) • 9000 layers, in three separated units • High initial PRM infestation, high mortality of layers in the start of the test • Loose materials of S. scimitus spread on the roofs of nests and on the wooden perches, each time 75 predators/layer, at 2-3 weeks intervals, in all 375 predators/layer in June-August • PRM follow-up by velcro-traps fixed round perches • Results (preliminary) • PRM numbers stayed high, releases of S. scimitus affected the growth of PRM population but did not reduce it significantly • Layers’ mortality figures returned almost the normal level

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 29 Farm experiments: conclusions

• Introductions of Stratiolaelaps scimitus can limit the growth of PRM population in various environments • However, in most conditions S. scimitus was not able to reproduce or colonise in the henhouse • Repeated introductions are needed in most cases • Early detection of PRM is essential for proper timing of inroductions • Better release methods of predatory mites are needed • Construction and structures of henhouse devices may influence PRM population growth and success of biological control

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 30 Challenges for biological control by predatory mites

• Prevention of initial infestation: the basis of PRM control • Integration of different preventive and direct control methods • Reliable monitoring method in different layer systems • Improvement of structures for better coincidence of predator and prey • Improvement of release methods for biological control agents • Repeated introductions according to monitoring results: how much, how often? • Search for better biocontrol agents for PRM still going on

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 31 Acknowledgements

Thanks to: • Makera, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry • The Finnish Poultry Association • Biotus Ltd. • Poultry farms

© MTT Agrifood Research Finland 8.11.2013 32