Eriophyoid Mites: Progress and Prognoses Edward A. Ueckermann Editor Eriophyoid Mites: Progress and Prognoses Previously published in Experimental and Applied Acarology, Volume 51, Nos. 1–3, 2010 123 Editor Edward A. Ueckermann ARC-Plant Protection Research Institute Private Bag X134 Queenswood 0121 Pretoria South Africa [email protected] ISBN: 978-90-481-9561-9 Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg London New York Library of Congress Control Number: 2010928630 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010 No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Cover Illustration: The tomato rust mite, Aculops lycopersici, photo taken by Dr. Ron Ochoa of the USDA, Beltsville, Maryland, USA. Printed on acid-free paper Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com) Contents Preface E.A. Ueckermann . 1–2 What’s “cool” on eriophyoid mites? E. de Lillo & A. Skoracka . 3–30 Behavioural studies on eriophyoid mites: an overview K. Michalska, A. Skoracka, D. Navia & J.W. Amrine . 31–59 Plant–eriophyoid mite interactions: cellular biochemistry and metabolic responses induced in mite-injured plants. Part I R. Petanovic´ & M. Kielkiewicz . 61–80 Plant–eriophyoid mite interactions: specific and unspecific morphological alterations. Part II R. Petanovic´ & M. Kielkiewicz . 81–91 Host-plant specificity and specialization in eriophyoid mites and their importance for the use of eriophyoid mites as biocontrol agents of weeds A. Skoracka, L. Smith, G. Oldfield, M. Cristofaro & J.W. Amrine . 93–113 Effectiveness of eriophyid mites for biological control of weedy plants and challenges for future research L. Smith, E. de Lillo & J.W. Amrine Jr. 115–149 The impact of eriophyoids on crops: recent issues on Aculus schlechtendali, Calepitrimerus vitis and Aculops lycopersici C. Duso, M. Castagnoli, S. Simoni & G. Angeli . 151–168 An insight into some relevant aspects concerning eriophyoid mites inhabiting forests, ornamental trees and shrubs M. Castagnoli, M. Lewandowski, G.S. 6abanowski, S. Simoni & G.M. Soika . 169–189 The role of eriophyoids in fungal pathogen epidemiology, mere association or true interaction? E. Gamliel-Atinsky, S. Freeman, M. Maymon, E. Belausov, R. Ochoa, G. Bauchan, A. Skoracka, J. Peña & E. Palevsky . 191–204 The control of eriophyoid mites: state of the art and future challenges T. Van Leeuwen, J. Witters, R. Nauen, C. Duso & L. Tirry . 205–224 Adventive eriophyoid mites: a global review of their impact, pathways, prevention and challenges D. Navia, R. Ochoa, C. Welbourn & F. Ferragut . 225–255 DNA-based methods for eriophyoid mite studies: review, critical aspects, prospects and challenges M. Navajas & D. Navia . 257–271 Collection and detection of eriophyoid mites R. Monfreda, M. Lekveishvili, R. Petanovic & J.W. Amrine Jr. 273–282 Recommended procedures and techniques for morphological studies of Eriophyoidea (Acari: Prostigmata) E. de Lillo, C. Craemer, J.W. Amrine Jr. & G. Nuzzaci . 283–307 Exp Appl Acarol (2010) 51:1–2 DOI 10.1007/s10493-010-9345-0 Preface E. A. Ueckermann Published online: 26 February 2010 Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010 The first reference to eriophyoids was apparently made by Reaumur (1737) who referred to galls and erinea caused by arthropods. He described them as maggots which was more correct than subsequent taxonomists who considered them fungi. The first genera were described in the middle of the nineteenth century, namely Eriophyes by Siebold and Phytoptus by Dujardin. Studies of the morphology of these mites were introduced by the remarkable work of Nalepa (1887) with his astounding accuracy in view of the optical equipment then available. During the twentieth century Keifer made a considerable con- tribution to the knowledge of eriophyoids, which established a firm foundation for future research. Mainly single species were described then and this resulted in many loose entities. Due to the lack of keys, thoughts to establish order gradually took shape and resulted in a series of books, namely Mites Injurious to Economic Plants by Jeppson et al. (1975), Catalog of the Eriophyoidea of the world by Amrine and Stasny (1994) and World Crop Pests. Eriophyoid mites. Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control edited by Lindquist et al. (1996). The need to continue with the ordering of the Eriophyoidea house, remained in the minds of eriophyoid specialists and was recently triggered by a series of e-mail conver- sations between Enrico de Lillo and Anna Skoracka. With the support of the world erio- phydologists, they proposed a special eriophyoid session to the organizers of the 6th EURAAC symposium (Montpellier, July 2008). In the meantime they started by sending questionnaires to all eriophyoid specialists for their comments and the reaction was overwhelming. Unfortunately, financial, personal and health restrains have limited the presence of specialists like Jim Amrine, Jan Boczek, Evert Lindquist, George Oldfield and Valery Shevtchenko. In spite of this, about 30 specialists took part in this special session during which they took stock of the progress in a selected pool of eriophyoid research projects, since the red book of the world crop pest series on eriophyoid mites (Lindquist et al. 1996). Another aim of this session was to establish closer collaborations between all eriophyoidologists. It was also decided during this symposium to combine all the presented E. A. Ueckermann (&) ARC Plant Protection Res. Inst., Private Bag X134, Pretoria 0001, South Africa e-mail: [email protected] Reprinted from the journal 1 123 Exp Appl Acarol (2010) 51:1–2 papers and more in a special Proceedings publication. Jan Bruin, the co-Editor-in-Chief of Experimental and Applied Acarology, was approached and immediately reacted positively. Fourteen informative papers dealing with eriophyoids, their DNA, species interactions, quarantine importance, host specificity, potential as bio-control agents of weeds, chemical control, behaviour, their role in fungal pathogen epidemiology, influence in forests and on ornamentals, collecting and mounting techniques and their interaction with crops are presented here. This is an extensive and valuable update to eriophyoid science and a must for present and future researchers in this field. Sincere thanks to all the contributors and Experimental and Applied Acarology for their important role in this milestone in eriophyoid research. References Amrine JW, Stasny TA (1994) Catalog of the Eriophyoidea (Acarina: Prostigmata) of the world. Indira Publishing House, West Bloomfield, 798 pp de Reaumur RAF (1737) Des galles des plantes et des arbres, et des productions qui leur sont analogues; des insects qui habitant ces galles, & qui en occasionnent la formation & l’accroissement. In: Me´moires pour server a l’histoire des insects. Acad Roy Sci Paris 3(12):413–532 Jeppson LR, Keifer HH, Baker EW (1975) Mites injurious to economic plants. University of California, USA, 614 pp Lindquist EE, Sabelis MW, Bruin J (1996) Eriophyoid mites. Their biology, natural enemies and control. World Crop Pests. 6. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 790 pp Nalepa A (1887) Die Anatomie der Phytopten. Sitz. Kais. Akad. Wiss., Math.-natur. Kl. Wien Abt 96(4):115–165 123 2 Reprinted from the journal Exp Appl Acarol (2010) 51:3–30 DOI 10.1007/s10493-009-9297-4 What’s ‘‘cool’’ on eriophyoid mites? Enrico de Lillo Æ Anna Skoracka Received: 30 March 2009 / Accepted: 27 July 2009 / Published online: 16 September 2009 Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009 Abstract Fundamental knowledge on the morphology, biology, ecology, and economic importance of Eriophyoidea has been exhaustively compiled by Lindquist et al. (Erio- phyoid mites—their biology, natural enemies and control; Elsevier, 1996). Since that time, the number of recognized species and the economic importance of the taxon have increased substantially. The aim of this paper is to analyze and briefly review new findings from eriophyoid mites’ literature after Lindquist et al. book, stressing persistent gaps and needs. Much recent attention has been given to sampling and detection, taxonomy and system- atics, faunistic surveys, internal morphology, rearing techniques, biological and ecological aspects, biomolecular studies, and virus vectoring. Recommendations are made for integrating research and promoting broader dissemination of data among specialists and non-specialists. Keywords Plant parasites Á Pests Á Quarantine organisms Á Weed control agents Á Pathogen vectors Á Eriophyoidea Introduction The morphological, biological, behavioural, and ecological peculiarities of eriophyoid mites have been widely emphasized in the acarological literature since the late nineteentn century (Nalepa 1886–1929; Keifer 1938–1991; Lindquist 2001). After more than 150 years of investigations, about 4,000 eriophyoid species have been described from a vast array of host plants, and a huge number of species remains undiscovered (Amrine E. de Lillo (&) Department of Biology and Chemistry of Agro-Forestry and Environment (Di.B.C.A.), Entomological and Zoological Section, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Bari, via Amendola, 165/A, 70126 Bari, Italy e-mail: [email protected] A. Skoracka Department of