Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T19:50:14.652Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Biology and host specificity of the Chondrilla gall mite Aceria chondrillae (G. Can.) (Acarina, Eriophyidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

L. A. Caresche  and
A. J. Wapshere
L. A. Caresche
Affiliation:
CSIRO Biological Control Unit, 335 Avenue Abbé Paul Parguel, 34000 Montpellier, France
A. J. Wapshere
Affiliation:
CSIRO Biological Control Unit, 335 Avenue Abbé Paul Parguel, 34000 Montpellier, France
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Eriophyid gall mite, Aceria chondrillae (G. Can.), which is distributed from south-east Russia to Portugal, was studied in the Mediterranean region as part of a biological control programme against skeleton weed (Chondrilla juncea) for Australia. The mite induces the vegetative and flower buds of Chondrilla to form leafy galls in which the full life-cycle is completed, causing stunting of the plant and reducing seeding. The mite overwinters in the rosettes of C. juncea without inducing gall development or reproducing. Populations decrease markedly during winter, recover in spring and infestations spread rapidly during summer. Reproduction is sexual and spermatophores are deposited by the males. Amblyseius sp. preys on A. chondrillae without marked effect. Tests made by placing fully developed galls of A. chondrillae on 75 species of plant including certain Cichoriaceae closely related to Chondrilla showed that the mite was highly specific to Chondrilla. Comparative tests with four geographical strains of A. chondrillae against six forms of C. juncea of various geographical origins indicated that the strains were specialised to their usual host form of the plant. A Greek strain of the mite readily attacked the main Australian form of C. juncea, and this strain has been introduced into Australia as a biological control agent for the weed.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 64 , Issue 2 , October 1974 , pp. 183 - 192
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Buhr, H. (1964–65). Bestimmungstabellen der Gallen (Zoo- und Phytocecidien) an Pflanzen Mittel- und Nordeuropas. Band I (1964), 1–761; Band II (1965), 763–1572. Jena, Gustav Fischer.Google Scholar
Canestrini, G. (1892). Prospetto dell'Acarofauna italiana, Vol. 5.—pp. 643–644. Padova, Stabilimento Prosperini.Google Scholar
Caresche, L. A. (1970). The biological control of skeleton weed, Chondrilla juncea L., entomological aspects. In Simmonds, F. J. (Ed.) Proceedings of the first International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Delemont, 1969. pp. 5–10. Farnham Royal, Slough, CAB. (Miscellaneous Publication Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control no. 1).Google Scholar
Caresche, L. A. The specificity and host specialisation of three insects and a mite living on Chondrilla juncea L. In Proceedings of the second International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Rome, 1971 (in press).Google Scholar
Emelyanova, N. A., Pravdin, F. N., Kuzina, O. S. & Lisitzuina, L. N. (1932). Pests of Chondrilla in the sandy regions of Kazakhstan.—Trans. Rubb. Guttperch. Inst. 6, 47–54. [In Russian with German summary.]Google Scholar
Harris, P. & Zwölfer, H. (1968). Screening of phytophagous insects for biological control of weeds.—Can. Ent. 100, 295–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houard, C. (1909). Les zoocécidies des plantes d'Europe et du bassin de la Méditerranée. Tome 2.—pp. 1031–1060. Paris.Google Scholar
Ishaaya, I. & Sternlicht, M. (1969). Growth accelerators and inhibitors in lemon buds infested by Aceria sheldoni (Ewing) (Acarina: Eriophyidae).—J. exp. Bot. 20, 796–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keifer, H. H. (1952). The Eriophyid mites of California (Acarina: Eriophyidae).—Bull. Calif. Insect Survey 2, 1–123.Google Scholar
Mani, M. S. (1964). Ecology of plant galls.—434 pp. The Hague, Junk (Monographiae biologicae XII).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, J. (1952). Rapports entre l'évolution cytologique du tissu nourricier d'Eriophyes macrorrhynchus Nal. et la biologie de l'acarien.—C.r. Acad. Sci. Paris 235, 1545–1547.Google Scholar
Nalepa, A. (1904). Beiträge zur Systematik der Eriophyiden.—Denkschr. Akad. Wiss. Wien 77, 131–132.Google Scholar
Nalepa, A. (1929). Neuer Katalog der bisher beschriebenen Gallmilben, ihrer Gallen und Wirtspflanzen.—Marcellia 25, 67–183.Google Scholar
Oldfield, G. N., Hobza, R. F. & Wilson, N. S. (1970). Discovery and characterization of spermatophores in the Eriophyoidea (Acari).—Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 63, 520–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, O. (1912). Über die Apogamie bei Chondrilla juncea.—Svensk. Bot. Tidskr. 6, 915–919.Google Scholar
Sternlicht, M. & Goldenberg, S. (1971). Fertilisation, sex ratio and postembryonic stages of the citrus bud mite Aceria sheldoni (Ewing) (Acarina, Eriophyidae).—Bull. ent. Res. 60, 391–397.Google Scholar
Wapshere, A. J. (1970). The assessment of biological control potential of the organisms attacking Chondrilla juncea L.—In Simmonds, F. J. (Ed.) Proceedings of the first International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Delemont, 1969. pp. 81–89. Farnham Royal, Slough, CAB. (Miscellaneous Publication Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control no. 1).Google Scholar
Wapshere, A. J. (in press a). A comparison of strategies for screening biological control organisms. In Proceedings of the second International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Rome, 1971.Google Scholar
Wapshere, A. J. (in press b). Recent work on the assessment of the biological control potential of the Chondrilla organisms. In Proceedings of the second International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, Rome, 1971.Google Scholar