Next Article in Journal
The Relationship between Allometric Growth and the Stoichiometric Characteristics of Euhalophyte Suaeda salsa L. Grown in Saline–Alkali Lands: Biological Desalination Potential Prediction
Next Article in Special Issue
Role of Endophytic Entomopathogenic Fungi in Mediating Host Selection, Biology, Behavior, and Management of Tarnished Plant Bug, Lygus lineolaris (Hemiptera: Miridae)
Previous Article in Journal
Croton gratissimus Burch Herbal Tea Exhibits Anti-Hyperglycemic and Anti-Lipidemic Properties via Inhibition of Glycation and Digestive Enzyme Activities
Previous Article in Special Issue
Using Age-Stage Two-Sex Life Tables to Assess the Suitability of Three Solanaceous Host Plants for the Invasive Cotton Mealybug Phenacoccus solenopsis Tinsley
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Potential of Two Phytoseiid Mites as Predators of the Grape Erineum Mite, Colomerus vitis

by
Mahmoud M. Al-Azzazy
1,2 and
Saleh S. Alhewairini
1,*
1
Department of Plant Protection, College of Agriculture and Food, Qassim University, P.O. Box 6622, Buraidah 51452, Saudi Arabia
2
Department of Agricultural Zoology and Nematology, College of Agriculture, Al-Azhar University, Cairo 11651, Egypt
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2024, 13(14), 1953; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13141953
Submission received: 11 June 2024 / Revised: 14 July 2024 / Accepted: 15 July 2024 / Published: 17 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Plant–Insect Interactions—2nd edition)

Abstract

:
Phytoseius plumifer (Canestrini and Fanzago) and Euseius scutalis (Athias-Henriot) (Phytoseiidae) are generalist predatory mites important in controlling phytophagous mites on some agricultural crops. The biology of both species as potential biological control agents of the grape erineum mite, Colomerus vitis (Pagenstecher) (Eriophyidae) on grape leaf disks was studied in the laboratory at 33 ± 1 °C, 60%RH, 12:12 h L:D. The developmental time, survival, and reproductive parameters of P. plumifer and E. scutalis on C. vitis, date palm pollen as well as C. vitis plus date palm pollen were investigated. Both predators, P. plumifer and E. scutalis, thrived on the mixed diet of C. vitis and date palm pollen resulting in a shorter developmental time (6.16 and 6.69 days, respectively), higher oviposition rate (2.11 and 1.96 eggs/female/day, respectively), and higher intrinsic rate of increase (0.251 and 0.229 per female/day, respectively) than on any other diet. Date palm pollen was an adequate alternative food source for P. plumifer and E. scutalis. The results suggest that both predators have good potential to suppress C. vitis populations and that date palm pollen can support the population establishment of both predators in the absence or scarcity of the main prey in the environment. We discuss the relevance of our results for the biocontrol of C. vitis.

1. Introduction

Grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) is an economically important fruit crop in the world and, globally, the third most valuable horticultural crop after potatoes and tomatoes [1]. Worldwide vineyard surface accounts for 7.327 million hectares, with a total grape production of 77.8 Mio.t that sustains dried grape and fresh grape markets and wine elaboration worldwide. However, most grapevine cultivars are susceptible to mite infestations, which considerably limit grape production. Moreover, grape mite infestations are becoming worse owing to the excessive use of pesticides and the destruction of biodiversity in recent years [2]. It is well known that some serious mite species occur on grape leaves. One of the most devastating pests globally infecting grapevines is grape erineum mite, Colomerus vitis (Pagenstecher), which may result in total crop damage in case of severe infestation [3]. The feeding of this mite causes a decrease in leaf area, photosynthetic rate, and chlorophyll contents and an increase in leaf fresh weight due to the hyperplasia and hypertrophy of mesophyll and epidermal cells and leaf deformities as well as reduction in the growth of green grapevine shoots and causes damage in nurseries and vineyards [4,5,6,7]. Colomerus vitis-infested grape leaves initially show white patches on the lower leaf surface. The young leaves then twist, become fragile, and experience the formation of a layer of white fluff plaque at the back, which appears blister-like on the upper surface. Analogous to rusts, yellow, fungi-like spots form in the subsequent period and, finally, become reddish brown. When C. vitis infestation is severe, the grapevines cannot renew and grow new buds, which inhibits the ability of leaves, and it affects grape production [8]. Furthermore, C. vitis infestation in grape leaves causes the spread of grapevine pinot gris virus (GPGV) [5,9], as well as grape berry necrosis virus (GINV) [9]. Therefore, grape plant health management is needed which enhances productivity, prevents crop loss, and contributes towards food security.
Currently, pest management practices are generally limited to chemical pesticide application; vineyards are subjected to very high levels of synthetic pesticides [10]. The use of synthetic pesticides to manage phytophagous mites results in the resistance of mites to major pesticides, the resurgence of secondary diseases and pests, the lethal effects of pesticides on natural enemies and other non-target organisms, and the presence of pesticide residues in crops, as well as negative impacts on biodiversity and on the environment and human health [11,12,13]. These negative impacts strongly limit the sustainability of farming systems and primarily necessitate the development of non-chemical methods of pest control. Additionally, due to concerns regarding the adverse effects of chemical pesticides, there is an increasing demand for pesticide-free fruits. Consequently, it is imperative to find effective biological control agents against C. vitis [3]. The utilization of predatory mites as a tool in phytophagous mites’ management is important for sustainability and food security and a promising way to reduce the level of chemical pesticide use [14,15]. Phytoseiid mites are the most extensively studied and most applied biocontrol agents of phytophagous mites (particularly of the Eriophyoidea and Tetranychoidea), thrips and whiteflies in orchards, grapes, citrus crops, and greenhouses [16,17,18,19,20]. Most of all, phytoseiids are generalist predators and can survive and develop feeding on prey when they are available but are also capable of surviving on a broad range of other foods (plant exudates, pollen, nectar, fungi, etc.) when the prey are rare or absent [21]. Phytoseius plumifer (Canestrini and Fanzago) (Phytoseiidae) is an important generalist predator, and one of the most abundant natural enemies and an efficient predator of phytophagous mites on various crops in several countries [22,23]. It is found naturally on grapes in many countries around the world [19]. This predator is capable of preying on a range of prey-food types, including eriophyid mites, tetranychids, tarsonemids, and pollen as food [15,24,25,26]. Also, Euseius scutalis (Athias-Henriot) (Phytoseiidae) is a predator that can be considered in integrated pest management (IPM) programs against some pests. It appears to be adapted to several plants, such as fig, pomegranate, apple, okra, vines, avocado, citrus, etc. [27,28]. E. scutalis is a generalist predator capable of preying on a wide range of food items, including eriophyid mites, tetranychid mites, whiteflies, scale insects, and the eggs of some insects, in addition to pollen grains [29,30,31,32,33].
Habitually, generalist predacious mites can exploit different diets, including natural prey and pollen [34,35]. Furthermore, plant pollens can serve as a supply of nutrients and water complementary to a diet consisting of prey [36,37]. Many studies have shown that adding pollen to a crop can promote pest control by predacious mites [38]. The pollinivory of P. plumifer and E. scutalis offers the possibility to pre-establish populations in vineyards with the supplementation of pollen and allows them to sustain their populations in the grape crops when prey is scarce or absent and thus prevent severe declines in predatory mite populations during scarcities of primary prey. So far, no study has examined the potential of P. plumifer and E. scutalis as predators of the grape erineum mite, C. vitis. The main objective of the current laboratory study was to compare the potential of these predatory mite species as biocontrol agents of C. vitis. In particular, the developmental, survival, predation rate, and reproductive performance of the two phytoseiid mites was assessed, using C. vitis, date palm pollen, or a combination of both as food.

2. Results

2.1. Developmental Time and Survival of Immature Stages

Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis developed successfully on C. vitis, date palm pollen, and C. vitis plus date palm pollen. The mites developed the fastest when reared on C. vitis plus date palm pollen and the slowest on date palm pollen only (Table 1). That diet significantly affected the developmental time of E. scutalis but not that of P. plumifer. The predatory mite, P. plumifer, completed its development faster as compared to E. scutalis on all three diets. P. plumifer showed similar egg-to-adult developmental times of 6.16–6.37 days on the three diets, while E. scutalis required 6.69–8.44 days. Diet had no significant effect on the durations of the different developmental stages of P. plumifer. On the contrary, the predatory mite, E. scutalis, developed significantly faster on a mixed diet as compared to date palm pollen alone (p < 0.005) but not as compared to C. vitis alone (p = 0.130). The stages of this species developed faster on C. vitis alone as compared to date palm pollen alone (p = 0.021) but not as compared to a mixed diet (p = 0.845) (Table 1). On all tested diets, the survival of the immature stages was as high as 94.12 for P. plumifer and 91.80 for E. scutalis (Table 2). The interaction between diet and predator species was not significant, and there was not a noteworthy effect of predator species on survival from egg to adult. Tukey’s HSD test indicated that juvenile survival was not significantly affected by diet.

2.2. Adult Longevity

Overall, no significant difference in the pre-oviposition period was observed between C. vitis and pollen alone, whereas the shortest pre-oviposition period was recorded on a mixed diet for P. plumifer and E. scutalis. (Table 3). Diet had a clear significant effect on the generation period and female longevity in both predator species. There were insignificant differences between the pollen and C. vitis and C. vitis diet treatments (p = 0.0274), while there was a significant difference between treatments of pollen diet alone, C. vitis and pollen, and C. vitis (p = 0.0243). The generation period and female adult longevity lasted 9.22 and 28.48 days, 9.08 and 33.13 days, and 8.37 and 33.43 days when P. plumifer fed on date palm pollen, C. vitis, and C. vitis plus pollen, respectively. The corresponding periods were 12.81 and 24.11 days, 10.40 and 28.30 days, and 9.14 and 28.96 days when E. scutalis fed on date palm pollen, C. vitis, and C. vitis plus pollen, respectively. For both predators, the oviposition period differed significantly among food types (p = 0.064). When the mixed diet was the food source, the total oviposition period was the longest, whereas it was the shortest when the predators fed on pollen alone (Table 3).

2.3. Reproduction

Phytoseius plumifer and E. scutalis showed similar fecundity on either diet (p = 0.8543). In contrast, in both predatory mites, fecundity was significantly affected by diet (p < 0.001). On the grape erineum mite diet, total oviposition over the oviposition period averaged 53.94 ± 1.28 and 40.09 ± 1.22 eggs for P. plumifer and E. scutalis, respectively (p > 0.878). A combination of C. vitis and date palm pollen resulted in an average oviposition of 56.81 ± 1.30 and 44.16 ± 1.35 eggs over the oviposition period for the respective predators (p > 0.985). The addition of date palm pollen to the diet of C. vitis substantially increased the reproductive performance of both P. plumifer (p = 0.004) and E. scutalis (p < 0.001). In addition, P. plumifer and E. scutalis females fed on pollen alone exhibited a lower rate of fecundity than those feeding on grape erineum mite diet and the mixed diet. The post-oviposition periods of P. plumifer and E. scutalis did not differ between the three tested diets (Table 4).

2.4. Predation of P. plumifer and E. scutalis

The larvae of both predators were inactive and did not feed during the experiment, and the feeding activity started immediately after the predators entered the protonymphal stages. Both P. plumifer and E. scutalis successfully suppressed the population of C. vitis on the small laboratory-rearing units, in the absence of date palm pollen. The mean daily predation rate was significantly affected by predator age and diet (p < 0.001).
For both predators, the adults consumed more prey compared with the nymph stages. There was a significant difference in the predation rate of adult C. vitis between the two species of predatory mites, P. plumifer and E. scutalis. The total number of C. vitis prey consumed by P. plumifer and E. scutalis immature and adult stages are shown in (Table 5 and Table 6). In the absence of date palm pollen, immature females of P. plumifer significantly consumed a higher number of prey 106.86 ± 3.64 than E. scutalis 96.55 ± 2.17. The highest means for the daily predation of females were observed during the oviposition period, with the female of P. plumifer devouring an average of 2931.40 ± 16.62, while the female of E. scutalis consumed an average of 1994.52 ± 12.40. Thereafter, the daily consumption of predators fed on C. vitis decreased with age. At the end of the experiment, P. plumifer showed the highest predation rates on C. vitis in the absence of date palm pollen. The highest number of preys consumed during the life span was reported for P. plumifer females with 3525.63 ± 16.47 prey, while for E. scutalis, it was 2452.49 ± 10.53 prey (Table 5). So, it could be concluded that P. plumifer performance was better than E. scutalis against C. vitis. Providing date palm pollen with C. vitis resulted in a significant reduction in total prey consumption during P. plumifer and E. scutalis juvenile development from approx. 106.86 ± 3.64 and 96.55 ± 2.17 mites per predator female when mites were reared on C. vitis only to approx. 56.74 ± 1.47 and 46.60 ± 1.38 mites per predator female in the mixed diets for P. plumifer and E. scutalis, respectively. A similar trend was found for both predators during female longevity periods. Providing date palm pollen with C. vitis resulted in a significant reduction in the total prey consumption during P. plumifer and E. scutalis longevity from 3418.77 ± 14.50 and 2355.87 ± 15.85 mites per predator when mites were reared on C. vitis only to approx. 2052.00 ± 11.34 and 1247.65 ± 16.25 mites per predator in the mixed diets for P. plumifer and E. scutalis, respectively. Similarly, the highest means for the daily consumption rate of females were observed throughout the oviposition period, with the female of P. plumifer devouring an average of 1769.43 ± 10.42, while the female of E. scutalis devoured an average of 1037.83 ± 3.52. The highest number of preys consumed during the life span reported for P. plumifer females was 2108.74 ± 14.23 prey, while for E. scutalis, it was 36.56 ± 2.30 prey (Table 6).

2.5. Population Growth Parameters

Based on the above-mentioned findings, we calculated the life table parameters of P. plumifer and E. scutalis for each treatment. The highest life table parameter value was recorded when the predators were fed the mixed diet of C. vitis and date palm pollen. For both predators, the females reared on the mixed diet of C. vitis and date palm pollen showed the highest net reproductive rate (Ro), intrinsic rate of natural increase (rm), and finite rate of increase (λ). On the other hand, P. plumifer and E. scutalis individuals reared on the mixed diet had the shortest mean generation time (Table 7).

2.6. Sex Ratio

The diet had a clear significant effect on the sex ratio in both predators. As shown in Table 7, sex ratio on all diets ranged from 53 to 76%. There were insignificant differences between the treatments of mixed diet (pollen plus C. vitis) and C. vitis diet alone. Also, there was a significant difference between treatments of pollen diet alone and other diets. However, the maximum female-biased sex ratio was 76%, which was recorded for P. plumifer when fed on C. vitis only, while the minimum female-biased sex ratio was 53%, which was recorded for E. scutalis when fed on date palm pollen only.

3. Discussion

This study is the first documentation of the life history, predation capacity, fecundity, and life table parameters of P. plumifer and E. scutalis on the grape erineum mite as prey. It shows that the grape erineum mite is an acceptable prey and of high nutritional value for P. plumifer and E. scutalis resulting in a short developmental time and high fecundity rate. They were also able to develop and reproduce successfully when fed on fresh date palm pollen or on a mixed diet of grape erineum mite and date palm pollen. This is a significant step in the development of biocontrol strategies against the grape erineum mite. For both predators, larvae developed to the protonymphal stages without feeding. Non-feeding larvae behavior may be a mechanism for the avoidance of sibling cannibalism or reducing intraspecific competition. Similar findings have been observed in many phytoseiidae species [39].
The developmental time of the different life stages of P. plumifer on all three diets tested in the current study are considerably shorter than those stated by Moghadasi et al. 2006 for this predator when preying on spider mite, Tetranychus urticae Koch at 27 °C and 75–80% RH [40], or the eriophyid mite, Rhyncaphytoptus ficifoliae (Keifer) at 25 °C and 65% RH [25]. These researchers stated a mean total developmental time of P. plumifer females of 8.62 and 8.73 days on the respective prey species. The developmental time of female immatures of P. plumifer fed on fig spider mite Eotetranychus hirsti [41] at 35 °C and 60% RH are very close to the present results against C. vitis. On the other hand, the development of P. plumifer immature females was slightly longer in our study (6.37 days at 33 °C) than reported when fed on the eriophyid mite, Aceria olivi (5.67 d at 35 °C) [15]. In the present study, the developmental rate of E. scutalis was shorter (6.69 days) on a mixed date-palm-pollen–prey diet compared to date palm pollen alone, which is faster than on the other prey, including mites and insects such as Oligonychus afrasiaticus, Eutetranychus orientalis, T. urticae, R. ficifoliae, and Insulaspis palidulla (9.6, 8.19, 8.02, 7.00, and 6.75 days, respectively) [30,31,42], as well as pollens like sour orange pollen (Citrus aurantium L.), castor bean pollen (Ricinus communis L.), and alfalfa pollen (Medicago sativa L.) (7.90, 6.98, and 8.94 days, respectively) [43]. Muñoz-Cárdenas et al. (2014) noted a positive influence of a mixed diet of eggs from whiteflies and spider mites on the developmental time and fecundity of predatory mite Balaustium leanderi compared to either food alone [44]. A positive effect of a mixed diet on the development, predation capacity, reproduction, and life history parameters has been reported for other predacious mites as well [45].
The survival rate of immature stages was not significantly affected by diet, and it exceeded 90% for both predators on all three diets. The findings of Vervaet et al. (2022) support our results. They revealed that the survival rate of Pronematusu biquitus and Homeopronematus anconai during the immature stages exceeded 83% for both mites on three diets [45].
The pre-oviposition periods of P. plumifer and E. scutalis were close to those stated by Kasap and Şekeroğlu (2004) [28] and Hamedi et al. [46]. When P. plumifer and E. scutalis were fed on a mixed diet of C. vitis and date palm pollen, there was a significant increase in oviposition period, fecundity, and adult female longevity. Subsequently, predators’ performance was strong. The oviposition period and female longevity of P. plumifer were parallel to the findings stated by Kouhjani-Gorji et al. (2012) [47], Louni et al. (2014) [25], Shakarami and Bazgir (2017) [41], and Al-Azzazy and Alhewairini (2020b) [15] for P. plumifer feeding on T. urticae, R. ficifoliae, E. hirsti, and Tegolophus hassani.
The oviposition duration and adult female longevity of E. scutalis (22.49 and 28.96) on a mixed diet were close to that reported against Panonychus citri (21.3, 28.6) [28] and (20.22, 29.57) when E. scutalis fed on Crawlers of Bemisia tabaci [48]. Although the addition of date palm pollen to the rearing units lowered the grape erineum mite predation by both predators, it substantially increased the fecundity of the predatory mites, and oviposition was always higher. The highest oviposition was obtained when P. plumifer was fed on a mixed diet (56.81 eggs/female). This value was higher when compared to mites that fed on T. urticae (49.10 eggs/female) [49], on R. ficifoliae (28.47 eggs/female) [25], on E.hirsti (35.71 eggs/female) [41], and on Oxycenus niloticus (50.80 eggs/female) [15]; furthermore, the results of Al-Azzazy and Alhewairini (2020b) for P. plumifer fed on A. olivi (57.46 eggs/female) [15] were higher than that obtained in this study. The maximum oviposition of E. scutalis was (44.16 eggs/female), which was higher than reported by Kasap and Şekeroğlu (2004) [28] (39.7 eggs/female) with feeding on P. citri. Also, E. scutalis has shown total fecundity of (17.13, 19.96, 23.16, 25.92, and 26.52 eggs/female) on golden shower tree pollen, caper bush pollen, Tetranychus turkestani, date palm pollen, and cattail pollen, respectively [35]. Moreover, the results of Bounfour and McMurtry (1987) for this predator fed on Tetranycus pacificus eggs (59.0 eggs/female at 35 °C) [27] were considerably higher than the value estimated in the current study. The high fecundity for both predators in the current study might be due to feeding on mixing prey with pollen. In Amblydromalus limonicus, Samaras et al. (2021) showed that mixing prey with pollen resulted in higher fecundity and rm values, thus enhancing the medium-to long-term thrips-control potential [49].
In the current study, the addition of date palm pollen significantly lowered the predation rate of grape erineum mites by P. plumifer and E. scutalis, 59.81 and 52.77%, respectively. These results agree with those of Vervaet et al. (2022), who stated that H. anconai devoured fewer Aculops lycopersici adults in the presence of Typha latifolia L. pollen [45]. Similar findings have been obtained by Samaras et al. (2021), who showed the different effects of Zea mays, Typha angustifolia and Pinus brutia pollen on the predation rate of A. limonicus [49]. In the absence of date palm pollen, P. plumifer immature females consumed 106.86 prey of C. vitis in this study, while they devoured 108 individuals of Aceria ficus [50], 58.29 individuals of R. ficifoliae [25], and 127.46 individuals of T. hassani, 135.83 of O. niloticus, and 143.82 of A. olivi [15]. Euseius scutalis immature females devoured 96.62 prey of C. vitis in this study, while they consumed 40.78 individuals of R. ficifoliae and 65.30 of A. ficus [25].
The life table parameters of both predatory mites were clearly affected by diet. Several biological studies have confirmed that high-quality food sources result in higher values in life table parameters [51,52]. The rates of population growth were promising for P. plumifer fed on mixed stages of C. vitis and date palm pollen. This was proven by (rm), which was 0.251. The reported intrinsic rate of increase for P. plumifer on T. urticae (0.200 at 26 °C) [31], E. hirsti (0.180 at 30 °C), R. ficifoliae (0.154 at 25 °C), and corn pollen (0.112 at 27 °C) [24] was lower than that obtained in this study when P. plumifer fed on mixed stages of C. vitis and date palm pollen. Kouhjani-Gorji et al. (2012) estimated (rm) of 0.244 for P. plumifer fed on T. urticae at 35 °C [47]. Also Al-Azzazy and Alhewairini estimated (rm) of 0.277, 0.288 and 0.298 for P. plumifer fed on T. hassani, O. niloticus and A. olivi at 35 °C, respectively [15]. This is somewhat higher than our estimate. The values of (Ro), (rm), and (λ) of P. plumifer at 33 °C and 60% RH in the current study are higher than reported for N. barkeri against C. vitis at 35 °C and 50% RH [2]. P. plumifer performed better on C. vitis than N. barkeri, and this could be due to the moderate humidity level used in this study. In view of this, P. plumifer could be a useful biocontrol agent for C. vitis.
In the case of E. scutalis against T. urticae, E. orientalis, and Oligonychus afrasiaticus at 26 °C, the life table parameters (rm, λ, Ro) values were 0.220, 0.175, and 0.161; 1.247, 1.192, and 1.175; and 26.73, 13.24, and 13.60, respectively [31]. On alfalfa pollen (Medicago sativa L.), 0.153, 1.150, and 18.51 [43] and on eriophyid mite, A. ficus and R. ficifoliae, at 28 °C, 0.218, 1.243, and 12.51 and 0.215, 1.240, and 12.02, respectively [30], were seen, while in the current study, they were 0.229, 1.254, and 26.82 at 33 °C. This indicates that E. scutalis performs well on C. vitis as a generalist predator. The rather high intrinsic rate of the natural increase (rm) of P. plumifer and E. scutalis reached with a mixed diet could be highly favorable for mass production and augmentative release purposes. Therefore, date palm pollen can be considered an optimal supplementary food for P. plumifer and E. scutalis. In addition, any short-term negative impacts on predation rate due to preference of the pollen and floral nectar over the prey or predator satiation have been shown to be eventually overbalanced by an increase in the predation rate at the population level, i.e., long-term positive impacts of the mixed diet.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Stock Culture of Predators

The individuals of Phytoseius plumifer and E. scutalis were collected from unsprayed (for the previous 3 years) vineyards of Buraidah city (26.300366° N, 43.789661° E), Saudi Arabia, in the summer of 2021. The grape leaves containing the predators were cut and transferred to the laboratory. All predators were maintained separately on rearing units made of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) leaves which were placed underside facing up on daily moistened cotton in plastic trays (6 × 12), in an incubator at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH, and with a 16:8 (L:D) h photoperiod. The edges were bordered with water-saturated tissue paper to provide the predators with water and prevent them from escaping. The grape leaves infested with C. vitis were used to feed the predatory mites five times a week, adding date palm pollen with a thin paintbrush as a supplementary food. Water was added to the cotton every day to keep the arena humid. Predator eggs were collected and transferred individually to the new rearing arenas to obtain cohorts of individuals of the same age.
Fifteen microscope slides were prepared with each species to confirm their identification. The identification of both the predators was confirmed according to Chant and McMurtry (2007) [53].

4.2. Stock Cultures of Prey

Grape erineum mites were collected from a vineyard grown at the Experimental Research Station of the College of Agriculture and Food (Qassim, Saudi Arabia). The specimens of C. vitis were transferred to the laboratory and reared on grape seedlings as a permanent source of prey, kept in a climate room at 30 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH, and with a 16:8 (L:D) h photoperiod. All the usual agriculture practices such as fertilization and irrigation were followed.

4.3. Experimental Set-Up

All experiments were performed in an incubator at 33 ± 1 °C, with a 12:12 h (L:D) photoperiod, at an average daily relative air humidity of 60 ± 5%. Freshly excised grape leaf disks (3 × 3 cm) were used as rearing arenas. The leaves were placed with the lower surface facing up on daily moistened cotton inside a Pyrex® Petri dish (5 cm in diameter, 2 cm high). The edges were bordered with water-saturated cotton to provide water and avoid mite escape.

4.4. Pollen Collection

Fresh date palm pollen (Phoenix dactylifera L.) was collected from trees planted in the Qassim region, Saudi Arabia, and oven-dried at 25 °C for one day and then stored at −18 °C. Before use in the trials, a small amount of date palm pollen was refrigerated at 4 °C for up to 2 weeks for early use in the experiments.

4.5. Effects of Diet on Life History Parameters of P. plumifer and E. scutalis

For each predator, 30 to 40 fresh eggs (less than 7 h old) from the stock culture were transferred individually to the grape leaf arena. The immature developmental time, survival, sex ratio, fecundity, and longevity of P. plumifer and E. scutalis were determined by feeding them with one of the following food sources: (1) date palm pollen, (2) mixed stages of C. vitis, and (3) mixed stages of C. vitis plus date palm pollen. The mixed stages of C. vitis were provided by a carefully examined small disk (0.5 cm in diameter) of severely infested grape leaves to record the total number of mites per disk before introducing it into the rearing arenas on the grape leaf disk for 24 h, after which the number of consumed preys was recorded. Date palm pollen grains were placed on the rearing arenas using a fine brush, three times per week. Observations were made twice a day to determine the developmental time (egg, larva, protonymph, and deutonymph) and the survival of immature stages. For each rearing arena, after the emergence of adults, a single male was put in the new female’s rearing arena for mating. Males were then transferred into new leaf disks and individually reared until the end of their lifespan. Some cotton fibers were stuck on grape leaf disks to provide a suitable place for oviposition. The experimental units were monitored twice a day for any changes recorded until the death of the last female. This monitoring allowed us to determine the pre-oviposition, oviposition, and post-oviposition periods and the female and male longevity and fecundity. Once the adult stage was reached, the sex of the predators was determined. Whenever the quality of the rearing arena began to deteriorate, it was replaced with a fresh leaf disk. To test the sex ratio, daily, the eggs laid were placed individually into separate rearing units with a fine brush, and the hatched larvae were reared to adulthood to determine the sex ratio of the progeny.

4.6. Statistical Analysis

To assess immature development, pre-oviposition and post-oviposition periods, fecundity, adult longevity, predation, and life span of P. plumifer and E. scutalis and the effect of three food sources on these parameters, data were compared with analysis of variance (ANOVA), using SAS computer program version 9.2 (SAS, 2008). Means were separated by Duncan’s multiple range test (DMRT) at p < 0.05. The means of survival percentages were separated using Tukey’s honestly significant difference test (Tukey’s HSD test). The life table parameters for both predators were constructed based on Birch (1948). The sex ratio for both predators was analyzed using a Chi-square test.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, our results demonstrate that the grape erineum mite C. vitis is a suitable prey for both phytoseiids P. plumifer and E. scutalis, making them promising biocontrol agents of that pest. Furthermore, the addition of date palm pollen to the diet of C. vitis substantially increased the reproductive performance of both predators. Therefore, it can be concluded that the mixed diet of C. vitis and date palm pollen are good candidates for the mass rearing of P. plumifer and E. scutalis for use in augmentative biocontrol programs. Moreover, the addition of date palm pollen as an optimal supplementary food source can be an effective tool to boost the populations of P. plumifer and E. scutalis and enhance biocontrol even in the presence of a low grape erineum mite population.

Author Contributions

This manuscript was drafted by M.M.A.-A. and S.S.A. Laboratory work and statistical analysis were performed by M.M.A.-A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Qassim University (QU-APC-2024-9/1).

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

The researchers would like to thank the Deanship of Graduate Studies and Scientific Research at Qassim University for financial support (QU-APC-2024-9/1).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Alston, J.M.; Sambucci, O. Grapes in the World Economy. In The Grape Genome. Compendium of Plant Genomes; Cantu, D., Walker, M., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Al-Azzazy, M.M. Biological performance of the predatory mite Neoseiulus barkeri Hughes (Phytoseiidae): A candidate for controlling of three mite species infesting grape trees. Vitis 2021, 60, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Carew, M.E.; Goodisman, M.A.; Hoffmann, A.A. Species status and population genetic structure of grapevine eriophyoid mites. Entomol. Exp. Et Appl. 2004, 111, 87–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Javadi Khederi, S.; Khanjani, M.; Fayaz, B.A. Resistance of three grapevine cultivars to Grape Erineum Mite, Colomerus vitis (Acari: Eriophyidae), in field conditions. Persian. J. Acarol. 2014, 3, 63–75. [Google Scholar]
  5. Javadi Khederi, S.; Khanjani, M.; Gholami, M.; de Lillo, E. Sources of resistance to the erineum strain of Colomerus vitis (Acari: Eriophyidae) in grapevine cultivars. Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2018, 23, 405–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Javadi Khederi, S.; Khanjani, M.; Gholami, M.; de Lillo, E. Impact of the erineum strain of Colomerus vitis (Acari: Eriophyidae) on the development of plants of grapevine cultivars of Iran. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2018, 74, 347–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Bahirai, F.; Jafari, S.; Lotfollahi, P.; Shakarami, J. Eriophyoidea (Acari: Trombidiformes) of the Lorestan Province and first record of Aceria querci (Garnam, 1883) outside of the USA. Persian. J. Acarol. 2021, 10, 111–119. [Google Scholar]
  8. Cooper, M.; Hobbs, M.; Strode, B.; Varela, L. Grape erineum mite: Postharvest sulfur use reduces subsequent leaf blistering. Calif. Agric. 2020, 74, 94–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Malagnini, V.; de Lillo, E.; Saldarelli, P.; Beber, R.; Duso, C.; Raiola, A.; Zanotelli, L.; Valenzano, D.; Giampetruzzi, A.; Morelli, M.; et al. Transmission of grapevine Pinot gris virus by Colomerus vitis (Acari: Eriophyidae) to grapevine. Arch. Virol. 2016, 161, 2595–2599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Muneret, L.; Thiéry, D.; Joubard, B.; Rusch, A. Deployment of organic farming at a landscape scale maintains low pest infestation and high crop productivity levels in vineyards. J. Appl. Ecol. 2018, 55, 1516–1525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Geiger, F.; Bengtsson, J.; Berendse, F.; Weisser, W.W.; Emmerson, M.; Morales, M.B.; Ceryngier, P.; Liira, J.; Tscharntke, T.; Winqvist, C.; et al. Persistent negative effects of pesticides on biodiversity and biological control potential on European farmland. Basic. Appl. Ecol. 2010, 11, 97–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Guedes, R.N.C.; Smagghe, G.; Stark, J.D.; Desneux, N. Pesticides induced stress in arthropod pests for optimized integrated pest management programs. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2016, 61, 43–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Rincón, R.A.; Rodríguez, D.; Coy-Barrera, E. Botanicals Against Tetranychus urticae Koch Under Laboratory Conditions: A Survey of Alternatives for Controlling Pest Mites. Plants 2019, 8, 272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Al-Azzazy, M.M.; Alhewairini, S.S. Effect of temperature and humidity on development, reproduction, and predation rate of Amblyseius swirskii (Phytoseiidae) fed on Phyllocoptruta oleivora (Eriophyidae) and Eutetranychus orientalis (Tetranychidae). Int. J. Acarol. 2020, 46, 304–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Al-Azzazy, M.M.; Alhewairini, S.S. A life table analysis to evalu ate biological control of four mite species associated with olive trees using the predatory mite Phytoseius plumifer (Acari: Phytoseiidae) in Saudi Arabia. Pak. J. Agric. Sci. 2020, 57, 299–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Abou Jawdah, Y.; Ezzeddine, N.; Fardoun, A.; Kharroubi, S.; Sobh, H.; Atamian, H.S.; Skinner, M.; Parker, B. Biological Control of Three Major Cucumber and Pepper Pests: Whiteflies, Thrips, and Spider Mites, in High Plastic Tunnels Using Two Local Phytoseiid Mites. Plants 2024, 13, 889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Gerson, U.; Smiley, R.L.; Ochoa, R. Mites. (Acari) for Pest Control; Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, UK, 2003; p. 537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. McMurtry, J.A.; Moraes, G.J.D.; Sourassou, N.F. Revision of the lifestyles of phytoseiid mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) and implications for biological control strategies. Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2013, 18, 297–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Tixier, S.; Baldassar, A.; Duso, C.; Kreiter, S. Phytoseiidae in European grape (Vitis vinifera L.): Bio-ecological aspects and keys to species (Acari: Mesostigmata). Zootaxa 2013, 3721, 101–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Knapp, M.; Houten, Y.; Baal, E.; Groot, T. Use of predatory mites in commercial biocontrol: Current status and future prospects. Acarologia 2018, 58, 72–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Eini, N.; Jafari, S.; Fathipour, Y.; Prager, S. Experienced generation-dependent functional and numerical responses of Neoseiulus californicus (Acari: Phytoseiidae) long-term reared on thorn apple pollen. Acarologia. 2023, 63, 539–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Nadimi, A.; Kamali, K.; Arbabi, M.; Abdoli, F. Selectivity of three miticides to spider mite predator, Phytoseius plumifer (Acari: Phytoseiidae) under laboratory conditions. Agric. Sci. China 2009, 8, 326–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Jafari, S. Phytoseiid Mites of the Lorestan Province and Determining the Predation Efficiency of Neoseiulus barkeri (Phytoseiidae). Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran, 2010; p. 192. [Google Scholar]
  24. Khodayari, S.; Fathipour, Y.; Kamali, K. Life history parameters of Phytoseius plumifer (Acari: Phytoseiidae) fed on corn pollen. Acarologia 2013, 53, 185–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Louni, M.; Jafari, S.; Shakarami, J. Life table parameters of Phytoseius plumifer (Phytoseiidae) fed on Rhyncaphytoptus ficifoliae (Diptilomiopidae) under laboratory conditions. Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2014, 19, 275–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Khodayari, S.; Fathipour, Y.; Sedaratian, A. Prey stage preference, switching and mutual interference of Phytoseius plumifer (Acari: Phytoseiidae) on Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae). Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2016, 21, 347–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Bounfour, M.; McMurtry, J. Biology and ecology of Euseius scutalis (Athias-Henriot) (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Hilgardia 1987, 55, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kasap, İ.; Şekeroğlu, E. Life history of Euseius scutalis feeding on citrus red mite Panonychus citri at various temperatures. BiolControl 2004, 49, 645–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Nomikou, M.; Janssen, A.; Schraag, R.; Sabelis, M.W. Phytoseiid predators as potential biological control agents for Bemisia tabaci. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2001, 25, 271–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Momen, F.M.; Abdel-Khalek, A. Influence of diet on biology and life- table parameters of the predacious mite Euseius scutalis (A. H.) (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Arch. Phytopathol. 2008, 41, 418–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Al-Shammery, K.A. Different biological aspects of the predaceous mite Euseius scutalis (Acari: Gamasida: Phytoseiidae) and the effects due to feeding in three tetranychid mite species in Hail, Saudi Arabia. Asian J. biol. Sci. 2010, 8, 77–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Maoz, Y.; Gal, S.; Argov, Y.; Domeratzky, S.; Melamed, E.; Gan-Mor, S.; Palevsky, E. Efficacy of indigenous predatory mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) against the citrus rust mite Phyllocoptruta oleivora (Acari: Eriophyidae): Augmentation and conservation biological control in Israeli citrus orchards. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2014, 63, 295–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Stathakis, T.I.; Kapaxidi, E.V.; Papadoulis, G.T.; Papanikolaou, N.E. Predation by Euseius scutalis (Acari: Phytoseiidae) on Tetranychus urticae and Eutetranychus orientalis (Acari: Tetranychidae): Effect of prey density and developmental stage. Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2021, 26, 1940–1951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Xin, T.; Zhang, Z. Suitability of pollen as an alternative food source for different developmental stages of Amblyseius herbicolus (Chant) (Acari: Phytoseiidae) to facilitate predation on whitefly eggs. Acarologia 2021, 61, 790–801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Shishehbor, P.; Rahmani Piyani, A.; Riahi, E. Effects of different pollen diets in comparison to a natural prey, Tetranychus turkestani (Acari: Tetranychidae), on development, survival, and reproduction of Euseius scutalis (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2022, 27, 2111–2122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Coll, M.; Guershon, M. Omnivory in terrestrial arthropods: Mixing plant and prey diets. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2002, 47, 267–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Ghasemzadeh, S.; Leman, A.; Messelink, G.J. Biological control of Echinothrips americanus by phytoseiid predatory mites and the effect of pollen as supplemental food. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2017, 73, 209–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Duarte, M.V.A.; Venzon, M.; Bittencourt, M.C.D.; Rodriguez-Cruz, F.A.; Pallini, A.; Janssen, A. Alternative food promotes broad mite control on chilli pepper plants. BioControl 2015, 60, 817–825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Metwally, A.M.; Abou-Awad, B.A.; Al-Azzazy, M.M. Life table and prey consumption of the predatory mite Neoseiulus cydnodactylon Shehata and Zaher (Acari: Phytoseiidae) with three mite species as prey. J. Plant. Dis. Prot. 2005, 112, 276–286. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/45154911 (accessed on 1 January 2023).
  40. Moghadasi, M.; Hajizadeh, J.; Saboori, A.; Nowzari, J. Biology of Phytoseius plumifer (Canestrini & Fanzago) (Acari: Phytoseiidae) feeding on Tetranychus urticae Koch (Acari: Tetranychidae). In Conference: 14th National and 2nd International Conference of Biology; At Tarbiat Modares University: Tehran, Iran, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  41. Shakarami, J.; Bazgir, F. Effect of temperature on life table parameters of Phytoseius plumifer (Phytoseiidae) fed on Eotetranychus hirsti (Tetranychidae). Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2017, 22, 410–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Abou-Elella, G.M.; Saber, S.A.; El-Sawi, S.A. Biological aspects and life tables of the predacious mites, Typhlodromips swirskii (Athias-Henriot) and Euseius scutalis (Athias-Henriot) feeding on two scale insect species and plant pollen. Arch. Phytopathol. 2013, 46, 1717–1725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Al-Shammery, K.A. Plant pollen as an alternative food source for rearing Euseius scutalis (Acari: Phytoseiidae) in Hail, Saudi Arabia. J. Entomol. 2011, 8, 365–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Muñoz-Cárdenas, K.; Fuentes, L.S.; Cantor, R.F.; Rodríguez, C.D.; Janssen, A.; Sabelis, M.W. Generalist red velvet mite predator (Balaustium sp.) performs better on a mixed diet. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2014, 62, 19–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Vervaet, L.; Parapurath, G.; De Vis, R.; Leeuwen, T.V.; De Clercq, B. Potential of two omnivorous iolinid mites as predators of the tomato russet mite, Aculops lycopersici. J. Pest. Sci. 2022, 95, 1671–1680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Hamedi, N.; Fathipour, Y.; Saber, M. Sublethal effects of abamectin on the biological performance of the predatory mite, Phytoseius plumifer (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2011, 53, 29–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Kouhjani-Gorji, M.; Fathipour, Y.; Kamali, K. Life table parameters of Phytoseius plumifer (Phytoseiidae) fed on two-spotted spider mite at different constant temperatures. Int. J. Acarol. 2012, 38, 377–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Saleh, E.B.Y.; Mostafa, M.A.; Desuky, W.M.H.; El-Kawas, H.M.G. Thermal Units of the Predatory Mite, Euseius scutalis (Athisa-Henriot) (Acari: Phytoseiidae) Fed on Crawlers of Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Control 2015, 25, 663–667. [Google Scholar]
  49. Samaras, K.; Pappas, M.L.; Pekas, A.; Wäckers, F.; Broufas, G.B. Benefits of a balanced diet? Mixing prey with pollen is advantageous for the phytoseiid predator Amblydromalus limonicus. Biol. Control 2021, 155, 104531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Rasmy, H.; Elbanhawy, E.M. The Phytoseiidae mite Phytoseius plumifer as a predator of the Eriophyid mite Aceria ficus (Acarina). Entomophaga 1974, 19, 427–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Bouras, S.L.; Papadoulis, G.T. Influence of selected fruit tree pollen on life history of Euseius stipulates (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2005, 36, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Jiale, L.V.; Yang, K.; Wang, E.; Xuenong, X.U. Prey diet quality affects predation, oviposition and conversion rate of the predatory mite Neoseiulus barkeri (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2016, 21, 279–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Chant, D.A.; McMurtry, J.A. Illustrated Keys and Diagnoses for the Genera and Subgenera of the Phytoseiidae of the World; Indira Publishing House: West Bloomfield, MI, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
Table 1. Average development duration in days of the immature stages of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis feeding on three diets at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
Table 1. Average development duration in days of the immature stages of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis feeding on three diets at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
Predator
Species
DietSexEggLarvaProtonymphDeutonymphOverall
Developmental Time
Phytoseius plumiferDate palm pollen.Female2.31 ± 0.22 a1.05 ± 0.18 a1.39 ± 0.14 a1.62 ± 0.16 a6.37 ± 0.65 a
Male2.25 ± 0.18 a1.17 ± 0.12 a1.31 ± 0.12 a1.52 ± 0.14 a6.25 ± 0.60 a
mixed stages of C. vitisFemale2.38 ± 0.18 a1.05 ± 0.20 a1.30 ± 0.18 a1.56 ± 0.14 a6.29 ± 0.47 a
Male2.35 ± 0.16 a1.02 ± 0.10 a1.24 ± 0.11 a1.53 ± 0.12 a6.14 ± 0.52 a
mixed stages of C. vitis + date palm pollenFemale2.30 ± 0.14 a1.10 ± 0.04 a1.29 ± 0.05 a1.47 ± 0.05 a6.16 ± 0.45 a
Male2.30 ± 0.13 a1.08 ± 0.05 a1.25 ± 0.04 a1.43 ± 0.04 a6.06 ± 0.52 a
Euseius scutalisDate palm pollenFemale2.36 ± 0.25 a1.25 ± 0.20 a2.26 ± 0.28 a2.57 ± 0.18 a8.44 ± 0.72 a
Male2.32 ± 0.22 a1.22 ± 0.18 a2.23 ± 0.20 a2.84 ± 0.16 a8.25 ± 0.62 a
mixed stages of C. vitisFemale2.32 ± 0.15 a1.23 ± 0.17 a1.64 ± 0.18 b1.91 ± 0.12 b7.10 ± 0.52 b
Male2.30 ± 0.12 a1.22 ± 0.15 a1.62 ± 0.16 b1.85 ± 0.08 b6.99 ± 0.66 b
mixed stages of C. vitis + date palm pollenFemale2.30 ± 0.18 a1.21 ± 0.09 a1.51 ± 0.09 b1.67 ± 0.05 b6.69 ± 0.64 b
Male2.28 ± 0.14 a1.23 ± 0.07 a1.50 ± 0.11 b 1.64 ± 0.07 b6.65 ± 0.71 b
Different letters in each column denote significant difference within each species (ANOVA followed by Duncan’s multiple range test: p < 0.05).
Table 2. Survival of immature stages of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis feeding on three diets at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
Table 2. Survival of immature stages of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis feeding on three diets at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
Predator SpeciesDietStage Specific Survival (% ± SE)Survival to
Adulthood (% ± SE)
EggLarvaProtonymphDeutonymph
Phytoseiu splumiferDate palm pollen93.25 ± 3.89 91.25 ± 4.12 91.08 ± 4.54 90.91 ± 4.19 90.14 ± 4.12
C. vitis94.54 ± 4.11 96.30 ± 3.96 95.16 ± 3.28 93.52 ± 3.85 92.23 ± 3.43
C. vitis + pollen97.35 ± 3.81 98.54 ± 3.35 97.10 ± 3.49 94.29 ± 3.18 94.12 ± 3.81
Euseius scutalisDate palm pollen92.24 ± 3.60 90.60 ± 4.87 89.42 ± 4.74 90.17 ± 3.6190.37 ± 4.15
C. vitis93.97 ± 4.51 92.67 ± 4.45 92.25 ± 3.45 91.05 ± 3.53 91.80 ± 3.25
C. vitis + Pollen95.64 ± 3.78 94.30 ± 3.61 93.85 ± 3.56 92.14 ± 4.23 91.15 ± 2.89
No significative differences according to the Tukey HSD test.
Table 3. Average development duration in days of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis adults feeding on three diets at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
Table 3. Average development duration in days of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis adults feeding on three diets at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
Predator SpeciesDietPre
Oviposition
OvipositionPost
Oviposition
LongevityLife Span
FemaleMaleFemaleMale
Phytoseius plumiferDate palm pollen2.85 ± 0.18 a21.16 ± 0.1.24 a4.47 ± 0.24 a28.48 ± 1.16 a26.89 ± 1.25 a34.85 ± 1.35 a33.14 ± 1.88 a
mixed stages of C. vitis2.79 ± 0.19 a25.96 ± 0.79 b4.38 ± 0.30 a33.13 ± 0.96 b31.53 ± 1.82 b39.42 ± 1.46 b37.42 ± 1.42 b
mixed stages of C. vitis + date palm pollen2.21 ± 0.14 b26.87 ± 0.92 b4.35 ± 0.38 a33.43 ± 1.04 b32.27 ± 0.1.14 b39.59 ± 1.36 b38.43 ± 1.69 b
Euseius scutalisDate palm pollen4.37 ± 0.31 a16.58 ± 0.95 a3.16 ± 0.34 a24.11 ± 0.98 a19.47 ± 2.34 a32.55 ± 1.31 a27.72 ± 2.51 a
mixed stages of C. vitis3.30 ± 0.24 a21.12 ± 1.06 b3.88 ± 0.46 a28.30 ± 1.14 b25.95 ± 0.98 b35.40 ± 1.44 b32.94 ± 1.70 b
mixed stages of C. vitis + date palm pollen2.45 ± 0.16 c22.49 ± 0.83 b4.02 ± 0.20 a28.96 ± 1.26 c27.43 ± 0.1.05 c35.65 ± 1.33 c34.08 ± 1.51 c
Different letter denotes significant difference within species (ANOVA followed by Duncan’s multiple range test: p < 0.05).
Table 4. Fecundity of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis feeding on three diets at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
Table 4. Fecundity of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis feeding on three diets at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
DietPhytoseius plumiferEuseius scutalis
Total Fecundity ± SDDaily FecundityTotal Fecundity ± SDDaily Fecundity
Date palm pollen35.48 ± 1.12 Aa1.67 ± 0.0824.55 ± 1.07 Ab1.48 ± 0.04
C. vitis53.94 ± 1.28 Bb2.07 ± 0.0640.09 ± 1.22 Bc1.89 ± 0.09
C. vitis + Pollen56.81 ± 1.30 Bd2.11 ± 0.0944.16 ± 1.35 Be1.96 ± 0.05
The capital letter denotes the significance within the same column, and the small letter denotes the significance within the same row at p < 0.05.
Table 5. Predation rate by different stages of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis feeding on grape erineum mite, Colomerus vitis at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
Table 5. Predation rate by different stages of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis feeding on grape erineum mite, Colomerus vitis at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
Predatory StageSexP. plumiferE. scutalis
No. of Attacked Mite Individuals
Total Average
Mean ± SD
Daily Rate, Mean ± SDTotal Average, Mean ± SDDaily Rate, Mean ± SD
ProtonymphFemale43.84 ± 1.6833.72 ± 1.5237.34 ± 2.4322.76 ± 1.64
Male38.55 ± 2.1231.08 ± 2.0436.27 ± 2.5022.38 ± 1.20
DeutonymphFemale63.02 ± 2.4540.39 ± 2.3059.28 ± 3.1631.03 ± 2.36
Male58.00 ± 1.8937.90 ± 2.1158.14 ± 2.7031.42 ± 1.85
Pre-ovipositionFemale241.48 ± 3.1586.55 ± 2.07239.44 ± 3.6572.55 ± 2.25
OvipositionFemale2931.40 ± 16.62 a112.91 ± 4.53 a1994.52 ± 12.40 b94.43 ± 4.16 b
Post-ovipositionFemale245.89 ± 2.3056.13 ± 2.26165.52 ± 3.3542.66 ± 2.51
LongevityFemale3418.77 ± 14.50 a103.19 ± 3.08 a2355.87 ± 15.85 b83.24 ± 3.49 b
Male2845.36 ± 12.5390.24 ± 3.601882.93 ± 14.1472.56 ± 4.14
Life spanFemale3525.63 ± 16.47 a89.43 ± 3.14 a2452.49 ± 10.53 b69.27 ± 3.30 b
Male2941.91 ± 12.9078.61 ± 2.821977.34 ± 13.5760.02 ± 3.14
Means followed by different letters in each row for total average and daily rate separately denote significant differences (ANOVA followed by Duncan’s multiple range test: p < 0.05) (The comparation is made only with females).
Table 6. Predation rate by different stages of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis feeding on a mixed diet of the grape erineum mite, C. vitis plus date palm pollen at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
Table 6. Predation rate by different stages of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis feeding on a mixed diet of the grape erineum mite, C. vitis plus date palm pollen at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
Predatory StageSexP. plumiferE. scutalis
No. of Attacked Mite Individuals
Total Average, Mean ± SDDaily Rate, Mean ± SDTotal Average, Mean ± SDDaily Rate, Mean ± SD
ProtonymphFemale22.86 ± 1.2117.72 ± 0.9619.85 ± 0.7113.14 ± 0.64
Male22.47 ± 1.0617.97 ± 0.8018.61 ± 0.7512.40 ± 0.87
DeutonymphFemale33.88 ± 1.1223.04 ± 1.9126.75 ± 1.1816.01 ± 1.05
Male32.72 ± 1.3622.88 ± 1.2520.81 ± 0.9812.68 ± 0.90
Pre-ovipositionFemale143.07 ± 2.1164.73 ± 1.16129.55 ± 1.2352.87 ± 1.08
OvipositionFemale1769.43 ± 10.42 a65.85 ± 1.41 a1037.83 ± 3.52 b46.14 ± 3.16 b
Post-ovipositionFemale139.50 ± 2.0932.06 ± 0.9680.27 ± 1.4619.96 ± 0.84
LongevityFemale2052.00 ± 11.34 a61.38 ± 2.59 a1247.65 ± 16.25 b43.08 ± 2.14 b
Male1439.65 ± 13.6844.61 ± 1.831003.23 ± 10.72 b36.56 ± 2.30 b
Life spanFemale2108.74 ± 14.23 a53.26 ± 1.17 a1294.25 ± 14.9536.30 ± 2.48 b
Male1494.84 ± 10.8938.89 ± 1.341042.65 ± 7.84 b30.59 ± 2.27
Means followed by different letters in each row for total average and daily rate separately denote significant differences (ANOVA followed by Duncan’s multiple range test: p < 0.05). (The comparation is made only with females).
Table 7. Population growth parameters of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis feeding on three diets at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
Table 7. Population growth parameters of Phytoseius plumifer and Euseius scutalis feeding on three diets at 33 ± 1 °C, 60% ± 5% RH.
ParametersC. vitisC. vitis + PollenDate Palm Pollen
P. plumiferE. scutalisP. plumiferE. scutalisP. plumiferE. scutalis
Net reproduction rate (Ro)27.6524.3129.1226.8220.4619.10
Mean generation time (T) (days) 18.5719.6517.2118.7222.3625.48
Intrinsic rate of increase (rm)0.2420.2110.2510.2290.1940.175
Finite rate of increase (λ)1.2461.2121.3771.2851.1941.186
Sex ratio0.760.730.730.700.600.53
(f = 23; m = 7)(f = 22; m = 8)(f = 22; m = 8)(f = 21; m = 9)(f = 18; m = 12)(f = 16; m = 14)
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Al-Azzazy, M.M.; Alhewairini, S.S. The Potential of Two Phytoseiid Mites as Predators of the Grape Erineum Mite, Colomerus vitis. Plants 2024, 13, 1953. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13141953

AMA Style

Al-Azzazy MM, Alhewairini SS. The Potential of Two Phytoseiid Mites as Predators of the Grape Erineum Mite, Colomerus vitis. Plants. 2024; 13(14):1953. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13141953

Chicago/Turabian Style

Al-Azzazy, Mahmoud M., and Saleh S. Alhewairini. 2024. "The Potential of Two Phytoseiid Mites as Predators of the Grape Erineum Mite, Colomerus vitis" Plants 13, no. 14: 1953. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13141953

APA Style

Al-Azzazy, M. M., & Alhewairini, S. S. (2024). The Potential of Two Phytoseiid Mites as Predators of the Grape Erineum Mite, Colomerus vitis. Plants, 13(14), 1953. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13141953

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop