Dayoub, Ahmad Malek ¹ and Boubou, Angham ²

¹Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Tishreen University, Latakia, Syria.
²✉ Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Tishreen University, Latakia, Syria.

2023 - Volume: 63 Issue: 3 pages: 744-750

Original research

Keywords

Abstract

Introduction

Several solanaceous plants are of considerable economic importance worldwide because they are used as food, ornamentals and sources of medicinal compounds. In Syria, solanaceous species such as tomato, eggplant, potato, and pepper are widely cultivated. They are affected by some phytophagous mites, among which the two-spotted spider mite and the tomato red spider mite (respectively, Tetranychus urticae Koch and Tetranychus evansi Baker and Pritchard, Tetranychidae), the broad mite (Polyphagotarsonemus latus (Banks), Tarsonemidae), and the tomato russet mite (Aculops lycopersici (Tryon), Eriophyidae) are some of the main pests of solanaceous crops worldwide (Zhang 2003; Navajas et al. 2013).

Phytoseiids are the best known and most studied group of predatory mites, owing to their known successful use for the biological control of small insect and mite pests on numerous crops (McMurtry et al. 2013; Knapp et al. 2018). However, on solanaceous crops, the presence of unfavorable traits (physical and chemical barriers) for phytoseiid predators, notably in tomato, often makes their efficacy unsatisfactory (Gerson et al. 2003; Vervaet et al. 2021; Paspati et al. 2021). The control of the major mite pests of these crops remains a great challenge and requires continued research. Therefore, prospecting for predatory mites in different agroecosystems, as well as on wild host plants which serve as reservoirs, may lead to the discovery of promising species for biological control programs.

The Syrian coastal region, which includes Latakia and Tartus governorates, produces more than a third of the total national production of tomato and eggplant under both open-field and protected conditions (AASA 2020). Surveys were conducted in this region between 2018 and 2020 to identify the natural enemies of phytophagous mites on solanaceous plants. Five phytoseiid species have been reported in association with T. evansi on cultivated and wild solanaceous plants (Dayoub et al. 2022). In this study, we present additional records of phytoseiid mites found in association with other phytophagous mites on solanaceous plants in the Syrian coastal region.

Material and methods

Surveys of phytoseiids and associated phytophagous mites on some wild and cultivated Solanaceae plants were conducted in Latakia and Tartus governorates between 2018 and 2020, at 40 sites. These sites included 37 that were cultivated with tomato, Solanum lycopersicum L., (4 greenhouses + 5 open fields) and eggplant, Solanum melongena L., (7 greenhouses + 21 open fields), as well as three uncultivated areas with naturally growing black nightshade plants (Solanum nigrum L.). At each site, 30 leaves of each plant species were randomly collected, placed in a plastic bag and transported to the laboratory, where samples were examined under a stereomicroscope (Micros, Ladybird MZ1240, Austria). Mites were collected in 70% ethanol, subsequently mounted in Hoyer's medium and identified using a microscope (OPTIKA B195, Italy) with an attached digital camera (OPTIKA C-B10, 10 megapixel, Italy). The measurements of the single newly recorded species from Syria are given in micrometers, adopting the systems of setal notation for the dorsum and venter of Rowell et al. (1978) and Chant and Yoshida-Shaul (1991), respectively. Relevant taxonomic structures were measured using OPTIKA PROVIEW software (version x64, 4.11.18081.20201205). Voucher specimens were deposited at the Laboratory of Plant Protection Research, Faculty of Agriculture, Tishreen University, Latakia, Syria.

Identification was carried out to genus/species level using the identification keys provided in the following publications: Tetranychidae (Jeppson et al. 1975), Tenuipalpidae (Welbourn et al. 2003; Mesa et al. 2009; Çobanoğlu et al. 2016), Tarsonemidae (Zhang 2003; Nucifora and Vacante 2004), Phytoseiidae (Chant 1960; Barbar 2013; Kreiter et al. 2016, 2020; Toyoshima et al. 2016; Ferragut 2018; Döker et al. 2020).

Results

A total of 471 phytoseiid specimens of 12 species of the three subfamilies (Amblysiinae Muma, Phytoseiinae Berlese and Typhlodrominae Scheuten) were collected (Table 1). Most species belonged to Amblyseiinae (8 species), followed by Typhlodrominae (3 species) and Phytoseiinae (1 species). The most abundant and frequent phytoseiid species was Phytoseiulus persimilis Athias-Henriot; 223 specimens (ca. 47.3% of all phytoseiids); these were collected in 22 sites (21 cultivated and one uncultivated sites). The following most abundant species were Neoseiulus californicus (McGregor) (83 specimens, ca. 17.6%) and Phytoseius finitimus Ribaga (73 specimens, ca. 15.5%), but the former was only collected at two localities (an eggplant greenhouse and an open eggplant field), while the latter was more frequent (collected in one tomato and seven eggplant open fields). The remaining phytoseiids were found in much lower numbers, though some were frequent, such as Typhlodromus (Typhlodromus) athiasae Porath and Swirski (6 sites), Amblyseius swirskii Athias-Henriot (5 sites), and Typhlodromus (Anthoseius) recki Wainstein (4 sites). Only three phytoseiid species were detected in greenhouses; P. persimilis was the only species found in all 11 greenhouses surveyed, while N. californicus and N. barkeri Hughes were only detected there once each (Table 2).

Five species of phytophagous mites from three families were found in association with the phytoseiids: T. urticae (Tetranychidae), Brevipalpus obovatus Donnadieu, Brevipalpus californicus (Banks), Tenuipalpus punicae Pritchard and Baker (Tenuipalpidae), and P. latus (Tarsonemidae) (Table 2). Tetranychus urticae was the most common phytophagous species, sometimes found at very high population levels. It was also the sole pest mite collected from greenhouses crops in association with the predatory mite P. persimilis.

In this study, Amblyseius andersoni (Chant) is reported for the first time from Syria. It was collected on open-field tomato plants infested with T. urticae. The measurements of the single female collected in this study are: dorsal shield 370 long and 219 wide. Setae j1 28, j3 52, j4 7, j5 6, j6 8, J2 8, J5 10, z2 13, z4 17, z5 6, Z1 10, Z4 85, Z5 165, s4 81, S2 17, S4 11, S5 9, r3 24, R1 13. Distances between st1–st3 63, st2–st2 64, st5–st5 74. Ventrianal shield 133 long, 90 wide at level of ZV2 and 91 wide at anus level; JV5 68. Calyx of spermatheca 8 long. Fixed cheliceral digit 30 long, with 8 teeth and a pilus dentilis; movable digit 28 long, with three teeth. Leg macrosetae: SgeI 31, SgeII 35, SgeIII 44, StiIII 31, SgeIV 81, StiIV 65, StIV 74.

Discussion

This study documents the occurrence of 12 phytoseiid species on solanaceous plants in the Syrian coastal region, among which 5 are recorded for the first time in Tartus governorate: Euseius stipulatus (Athias-Henriot), P. persimilis, N. barkeri, N. californicus and T. (A.) recki. One phytoseiid species, (Typhlodromus (Anthoseius) rickeri Chant), was never reported on Solanaceae before, while A. andersoni is a new record for the Syrian phytoseiid fauna, as its previous citations in Syria referred to misidentifications of A. swirskii, according to Barbar et al. (2022). The latter two species are very similar, but can be distinguished by a few morphological characteristics, as the considerably longer seta Z5 and macrosetae SgeIV and StiIV, and the u-shaped spermathecal calyx in A. andersoni, as opposed to the v-shaped calyx in A. swirskii (Ferragut et al. 2010; Döker et al. 2020).

Phytoseiulus persimilis was the predominant phytoseiid species found both in greenhouses and on outdoor solanaceous plants, while the remaining species were mainly collected from outdoor solanaceous plants. In a previous survey for natural enemies of T. evansi on solanaceous plants in the Syrian coastal region, P. persimilis was also the most frequent and abundant phytoseiid species collected (Dayoub et al. 2022). This species is one of the most common phytoseiids reported on solanaceous plants in different countries, certainly because of commercial biological control introductions (Tixier et al. 2020a). In Syria, an Egyptian strain of P. persimilis, adapted to greenhouse conditions, was introduced in 2005, mass reared and released to control T. urticae in greenhouses strawberry in Latakia since 2006 (Halloum and Shaabo 2006). Many evaluations have shown its efficacy for controlling T. urticae in experimental tomato greenhouses in the Syrian coastal region (Mofleh 2010; Sakr et al. 2018). However, we presume that P. persimilis was already present in this region where natural populations of this predator are currently observed on wild plants and in areas where introductions have not been done (Barbar 2013, 2014; Dayoub et al. 2022). In addition, this species has been recorded since the last century in various countries neighboring Syria, as Lebanon (Dosse and Musa 1967) and Turkey (Sekeroglu and Kazak 1993), in areas on the Mediterranean coastal strip bordering the Syrian coastal region.

Other phytoseiids frequently found in this study were P. finitimus, T. (T.) athiasae, A. swirskii, and T. (A.) recki. These have also been commonly found on different cultivated and wild solanaceous plants, in association with various prey mites, in previous surveys in this region (Barbar 2016, 2017; Dayoub et al. 2022; Ebraheem et al. 2022). They are considered among the phytoseiid species prevalent on Solanaceae in the West Palearctic region (Tixier et al. 2020a). Their high occurrence on solanaceous plants and their usual association with phytophagous mites suggest them to be promising for biological control applications on solanaceous crops. The results of recent laboratory experiments using T. (A.) recki were encouraging enough to consider this predator a good candidate for biological control of T. urticae (Tixier et al. 2020b; Ersin et al. 2021). Thus, further studies on the potential of the phytoseiid species identified here as biological control agents should be conducted on tomato and eggplant in greenhouses and open fields in the Syrian coastal region.

References

1. AASA. 2020. Annual Agricultural Statistical Abstract. Damascus, Syria: Department of Planning and Statistics Division of Agricultural Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture and Agrarian Reform.
2. Barbar Z. 2013. Survey of phytoseiid mite species (Acari: Phytoseiidae) in citrus orchards in Lattakia governorate, Syria. Acarologia, 53(3): 247-261. https://doi.org/10.1051/acarologia/20132098
3. Barbar Z. 2014. Occurrence, population dynamics and winter phenology of spider mites and their phytoseiid predators in a citrus orchard in Syria. Acarologia, 54(4): 409-423. https://doi.org/10.1051/acarologia/20142143
4. Barbar Z. 2016. The mite fauna (Acari) of two Syrian citrus orchards, with notes on their morphology and economic importance. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 21(8):991-1008. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.21.8.1
5. Barbar Z. 2017. Evaluation of three pesticides against phytophagous mites and their impact on phytoseiid predators in an eggplant open-field. Acarologia, 57(3):529-539. https://doi.org/10.24349/acarologia/20174170
6. Barbar Z., Parker B., Skinner M. 2022. Phytoseiidae (Acari: Mesostigmata) of Syria: new records and first description of the male of Eharius stathakisi Döker. Acarologia, 62(1): 12-21. https://doi.org/10.24349/2y2g-zk3m
7. Chant D.A. 1960. Descriptions of five new species of mites from India (Acarina: Phytoseiidae, Aceosejidae). Can. Entomol., 92(1): 58-65. https://doi.org/10.4039/Ent9258-1
8. Chant D.A., Yoshida-Shaul E. 1991. Adult ventral setal patterns in the family Phytoseiidae (Acari: Gamasina). Intern. J. Acarol., 17(3): 187-199. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647959108683906
9. Çobanoğlu S., Ueckermann E.A., Sağlam H.D. 2016. The Tenuipalpidae of Turkey, with a key to species (Acari: Trombidiformes). Zootaxa, 4097(2): 151-186. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4097.2.1
10. Dayoub A.M., Dib H., Boubou A. 2022. Distribution and predators of the invasive spider mite Tetranychus evansi (Acari: Tetranychidae) in the Syrian coastal region, with first record of predation by the native Scolothrips longicornis (Thysanoptera: Thripidae). Acarologia, 62(3): 597-607. https://doi.org/10.24349/0k8s-gas6
11. Döker İ., Kazak C., Karut K. 2020. The genus Amblyseius Berlese (Acari: Phytoseiidae) in Turkey with discussion on the identity of Amblyseius meridionalis. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 25(8): 1395-1420. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.25.8.4
12. Dosse G., Musa S. 1967. Phytophagous mites in Lebanon and their predators. Magon, Institut de Recherches Agronomiques, Liban, 12: 1-23.
13. Ebraheem R., Khadour A., Hanna Y., Dwya L., Nakoul G., Barbar Z. 2022. Additional mite records (Acari: Mesostigmata, Sarcoptiformes, Trombidiformes) from Syria. Syr. J. Agric. Res., 9(3): 353-361.
14. Ersin F., Turanli F., Cakmak I. 2021. Development and life history parameters of Typhlodromus recki (Acari: Phytoseiidae) feeding on Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae) at different temperatures. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 26(2): 496-508. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.26.2.12
15. Ferragut F. 2018. New records of phytoseiid mites of the subfamilies Typhlodrominae and Phytoseiinae (Acari: Phytoseiidae) from Spain, with description of a new species and re-description of four species of Typhlodromus Scheuten. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 23(5): 883-910. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.23.5.8
16. Ferragut F., Pérez Moreno I., Iraola V., Escudero A. 2010. Ácaros depredadores em las plantas cultivadas. Família Phytoseiidae. Ediciones Agrotécnicas, Madrid, 202 pp.
17. Gerson U.L., Smiley R., Ochoa R. 2003. Mites (Acari) for Pest Control. Malden: Blackwell Science Ltd.539 pp. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470750995
18. Halloum M., Shaabo A. 2006. Arab and Near East Plant Protection Newsletter (No. 43). Arab Society for Plant Protection. https://asplantprotection.org/en/number-43-december-2006/
19. Jeppson L.R., Keifer H.H., Baker E.W. 1975. Mites injurious to economic plants. Berkeley: Univ. of California Press. pp. 614. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520335431
20. Knapp M., van Houten Y., van Baal E., Groot T. 2018. Use of predatory mites in commercial biocontrol: Current status and future prospects. Acarologia, 58(Suppl): 72-82. https://doi.org/10.24349/acarologia/20184275
21. Kreiter S., dos Santos V.V., Tixier M.-S., Fontaine O. 2016. An unexpected occurrence of Amblyseius swirskii (Athias-Henriot) in La Reunion Island (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Acarologia, 56(2): 175-181. https://doi.org/10.1051/acarologia/20162254
22. Kreiter S., Payet R.-M., Douin M., Fontaine O., Fillâtre J., Le Bellec F. 2020. Phytoseiidae of La Réunion Island (Acari: Mesostigmata): three new species and two males described, new synonymies, and new records. Acarologia, 60(1): 111-195. https://doi.org/10.24349/acarologia/20204361
23. McMurtry J.A., De Moraes G.J., Sourassou N.F. 2013. Revision of the lifestyles of phytoseiid mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) and implications for biological control strategies. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 18(4): 297-320. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.18.4.1
24. Mesa N.C., Ochoa R., Welbourn W.C., Evans G.A., De Moraes G.J. 2009. A catalog of the Tenuipalpidae (Acari) of the World with a key to genera. Zootaxa, 2098(1): 1-185. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.2098.1.1
25. Mofleh M. 2010. The efficiency of some predators in biological control of Tetranychus urticae (Koch) (Acari: Tetranychidae) in greenhouses [Ph.D.]. Latakia, Syria: Tishreen University. pp. 125. [in Arabic]
26. Navajas M., de Moraes G.J., Auger P., Migeon A. 2013. Review of the invasion of Tetranychus evansi: Biology, colonization pathways, potential expansion and prospects for biological control. Exp. Appl. Acarol., 59(1): 43-65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-012-9590-5
27. Nucifora A., Vacante V. 2004. Citrus mites in Italy. VII. The family Tarsonemidae. Species collected and notes on ecology. Acarologia, 44(1/2): 49-67.
28. Paspati A., Rambla J.L., Gresa M.P.L., Arbona V., Gómez-Cadenas A., Granell A., González-Cabrera J., Urbaneja A. 2021. Tomato trichomes are deadly hurdles limiting the establishment of Amblyseius swirskii Athias-Henriot (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Biol. Control., 157: p.104572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2021.104572
29. Rowell H.J., Chant D.A., Hansell R.I.C. 1978. The determination of setal homologies and setal patterns on the dorsal shield in the family Phytoseiidae (Acarina: Mesostigmata). Can. Entomol., 110(8): 859-876. https://doi.org/10.4039/Ent110859-8
30. Sakr I., Mofleh M., Suliman R. 2018. The Efficacy of Some Plant Extracts, Pesticides and Natural Enemies in Controlling of Tetranychus urticae Koch Populations on the Greenhouse Tomato. Syr. J. Agric. Res., 5(2): 217-228. [in Arabic]
31. Sekeroglu E., Kazak C. 1993. First record of Phytoseiulus persimilis (Acari: Phytoseiidae) in Turkey. Entomophaga, 38(3): 343-345. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02374451
32. Tixier M.-S., Douin M., Kreiter S. 2020a. Phytoseiidae (Acari: Mesostigmata) on plants of the family Solanaceae: results of a survey in the south of France and a review of world biodiversity. Exp. Appl. Acarol., 81(3): 357-388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-020-00507-0
33. Tixier M.-S., Douin M., Rocio O., Gonzalez L., Pount B., Kreiter S. 2020b. Distribution and biological features of Typhlodromus (Anthoseius) recki (Acari: Phytoseiidae) on Tetranychus urticae, T. evansi (Acari: Tetranychidae) and Aculops lycopersici (Acari: Eriophyidae). Acarologia, 60(4):684-697. https://doi.org/10.24349/acarologia/20204396
34. Toyoshima S., Kishimoto H., Kaneko M., Amano H. 2016. Occurrence of Amblyseius andersoni (Chant) (Acari: Phytoseiidae) in deciduous fruit tree orchards in Japan. J. Acarol. Soc. Jpn., 25(1): 37-43. https://doi.org/10.2300/acari.25.37
35. Vervaet L., De Vis R., De Clercq P., Van Leeuwen T. 2021. Is the emerging mite pest Aculops lycopersici controllable? Global and genome-based insights in its biology and management. Pest Manag. Sci., 77(6): 2635-2644. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.6265
36. Welbourn W.C., Ochoa R., Kane E.C., Erbe E.F. 2003. Morphological observations on Brevipalpus phoenicis (Acari: Tenuipalpidae) including comparisons with B. californicus and B. obovatus. Exp. Appl. Acarol., 30(1): 107-133. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:APPA.0000006545.40017.a0
37. Zhang Z.Q. 2003. Mites of greenhouses: Identification, biology and control. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing. pp. 244.

instructions