Share this article    

       

       

New records of phytoseiid mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae) in Belgium with an identification key to Belgian species

Döker, Ismail ¹ ; Vangansbeke, Dominiek ² and Merckx, Jonas ³

¹✉ Cukurova University, Agricultural Faculty, Department of Plant Protection, Acarology Laboratory, Adana, Turkey & Biodiversity Inventory for Conservation NPO (BINCO), Walmersumstraat 44, 3380 Glabbeek, Belgium.
²Biodiversity Inventory for Conservation NPO (BINCO), Walmersumstraat 44, 3380 Glabbeek, Belgium & Biobest N.V., Ilse Velden 18, 2260 Westerlo, Belgium.
³Biodiversity Inventory for Conservation NPO (BINCO), Walmersumstraat 44, 3380 Glabbeek, Belgium & Biobest N.V., Ilse Velden 18, 2260 Westerlo, Belgium.

2022 - Volume: 62 Issue: 4 pages: 1070-1083

https://doi.org/10.24349/yshq-dgl8

---

Original research

Keywords

Belgium biological control fauna identification key new records predatory mites

Abstract

---

Introduction

Predatory mites from the family Phytoseiidae (Acari: Mesostigmata) are important natural enemies of phytophagous mites and small insects, such as whiteflies, thrips and psyllids (McMurtry and Croft 1997; McMurtry et al. 2013; Jorge et al. 2021). Several phytoseiids are commercially available and are being used as biological control agents in a wide range of crops (Knapp et al. 2018). However, the determination of native populations is of great importance due to their adaptations to specific environmental conditions (Gerson 2014).

Despite the relatively large number of phytoseiids reported in its neighbouring countries such as France (more than 80 species), Germany (more than 70 species), The Netherlands (about 30 species), as well as some other countries in north Europe such as Poland (about 40 species) and United Kingdom (about 30 species), only 17 valid species of phytoseiids have been reported from Belgium (Demite et al. 2022).

Previous faunistic studies showed no indication of presence of Amblyseius herbicolus (Chant), Neoseiulus reductus (Wainstein), Kampimodromus corylosus Kolodochka, Paraseiulus triporus (Chant & Yoshida-Shaul), and Typhlodromus (Anthoseius) rhenanoides Athias-Henriot in Belgium (Nesbitt 1951; Chant 1959; Malevez 1976; Karg 1982; André 1986; Evans and Momen 1988; Fain et al. 1993; Döker et al. 2014). In this study we reported these five species for the first time in Belgium. Some additional morphological information and new illustrations for the new records as well as an identification key for the Belgian species of Phytoseiidae are presented in the study.

Material and methods

Samples were collected from several locations in Belgium. The samples were examined under a stereobinocular and stored in 70% ethanol. Phytoseiid mites were cleared in 60% lactic acid during 24 hours at 50 ºC, then mounted on microscope slides in Hoyer's medium. Further examinations and measurements were performed under an Axio Imager A2 (Carl Zeiss, Germany) microscope equipped with differential interference contrast (DIC) optical system. Pictures were taken with Axiocam 506 colour (Carl Zeiss, Germany). Most images were captured in stacks with focal depth controlled manually. Selected images were combined using computer program, Helicon Focus 7.6.4 Pro (Helicon Soft Ltd., 2000). The taxonomic system used follows Chant and McMurtry (2007). The setal nomenclature used follows Lindquist and Evans (1965) as adapted by Rowell et al. (1978) for the family Phytoseiidae. The ventral setal pattern notations follow Chant and Yoshida-Shaul (1991). Nomenclature of the dorsal solenostomes (gland pores) follows that of Athias-Henriot (1975). Measurements are given in micrometers (µm) presented as mean followed by the range in parenthesis if more than two specimens were measured. The dorsal shield length was measured from the anterior to posterior margins along the midline.

Results

Subfamily Amblyseiinae Muma

Tribe Amblyseiini Wainstein

Genus Amblyseius Berlese

Amblyseius herbicolus (Chant)

Typhlodromus (Amblyseius) herbicolus Chant, 1959: 84.

(Figure 1)

Material examined — Five females from cherry laurel, Prunus laurocerasus L. (Rosaceae) in Ghent, Belgium, (51°03′04.4″N, 3°45′16.9″E), 27 September 2021, collector D. Vangansbeke.

Re-description — Female (n = 5) – Dorsum (Figure 1a). Dorsal shield smooth with seven pairs of solenostomes (gd1, gd2, gd4, gd5, gd6, gd8 and gd9). Length of dorsal shield 388 (385–390), width (at level of s4) 252 (250–255), width (at level of S2) 248 (240–260). Dorsal setae smooth except Z4 and Z5 slightly serrated; measurements of setae as follows: j1 39 (38–40), j3 43 (40–45), j4 7 (5–8), j5 6 (5–8), j6 6 (5–8), J2 8 (8–10), J5 7 (5–8), z2 12 (10–13), z4 9 (8–10), z5 7 (5–8), Z1 8 (6–8), Z4 103 (98–105), Z5 266 (250–270), s4 98 (95–105), S2 11 (10–13), S4 10 (8–13), S5 9 (8–10), r3 11 (10–13), R1 9 (8–10). Peritreme extending between setae j1.

Venter (Figure 1b, c). All ventral shields smooth. Distances between (st1– st3) 71 (69–73), st2– st2 77 (75–80), st5– st5 72 (67–75). Ventrianal shield vase-shaped with three pairs of preanal setae (ZV2 in left side out of shield in one specimen) and one pair of large crescentic pores (gv3), distance between pre-anal pores 25 (23–28). Length of ventrianal shield 120 (115–125), width at level of setae ZV2 53 (49–56), width at level of paranal setae 72 (69–74). Setae ZV1, ZV3, JV4 and JV5 integument surrounding ventrianal shield (JV4 absent in right side of a specimen). Setae JV5 smooth 54 (53–55) in length.

Chelicera (Figure 1d). Fixed digit of chelicera with 12 teeth; movable digit with four teeth.

Spermatheca (Figure 1e, f). Calyx of spermatheca trumpet-shaped, elongated, flaring distally 29 (28–30) in length. Atrium enlarged, wider than base of calyx. Major duct long; minor duct well-developed.

Legs. GeII, GeIII and GeIV each with seven setae. All legs with macrosetae. Measurements of macrosetae as follows: SgeI 47 (45–48), SgeII 39 (38–40), SgeIII 47 (45–48), StiIII 39 (38–40), StIII 37 (35–38), SgeIV 113 (110–118), StiIV 81 (80–83) and StIV 70 (68–73).

Remarks — Amblyseius herbicolus is a new record for the Belgian fauna. Morphological characters and measurements of the current specimens are very close to those of the original description and re-descriptions (Chant 1959; Denmark and Muma 1989; Demite et al. 2017; Zannou et al. 2007; Guanilo et al. 2008a, b; Ferragut et al. 2010; Akyazı et al. 2016; Kreiter et al. 2018; Döker et al. 2020; Liao et al. 2020). Ventral seta ZV2 in one of the examined specimens in the left side is inserted on integument surrounding ventrianal shield (out of ventrianal shield, see Figure 1c). In addition, setae JV4 is absent in the right side of the same specimen. Based on our best knowledge, these variations are reported for the first time for A. herbicolus.

Tribe Neoseiulini Chant and Mcmurtry

Genus Neoseiulus Hughes

Neoseiulus reductus (Wainstein)

Amblyseius reductus Wainstein, 1962: 143.

(Figure 2)

Material examined — One female was collected from blackberry (Rubus sp.), in De Haan, Belgium (51°16′51.7″N, 3°02′52.5″E), 9 January 2022, collector D. Vangansbeke. A second female was collected from blackberry (Rubus sp.), in Oostende, Belgium, (51°13′28.1″N, 2°55′36.9″E), 2 February 2022, collector D. Vangansbeke.

Re-description — Female (n = 2) – Dorsum (Figure 2a). Dorsal shield smooth with five pairs of solenostomes (gd1, gd2, gd6, gd8 and gd9). Length of dorsal shield 320–331, width (at level of s4) 167–174, width (at level of S2) 187–190. Dorsal setae smooth except Z4 and Z5 slightly serrated; measurements of setae as follows: j1 20–22, j3 30–34, j4 19–21, j5 17–19, j6 23, J2 25–26, J5 10–11, z2 30–33, z4 34–38, z5 19–22, Z1 26–30, Z4 48–51, Z5 65, s4 45–46, S2 43, S4 32–34, S5 31–32, r3 28–30, R1 21–23. Peritreme extending between setae j3–z2.

Venter (Figure 2b). Sternal shield striated with some faint patches of reticulations. Distances between (st1–st3) 62–64, st2–st2 62–63. Genital shield faintly reticulated, width at level of setae st5 54–59. Ventrianal shield pentagonal, preanal area striated, postanal area reticulated; with three pairs of preanal setae and one pair of large crescentic pores (gv3), distance between pre-anal pores 16–18. Length of ventrianal shield 110–112, width at level of setae ZV2 80–82, width at level of paranal setae 68–72. Setae ZV1, ZV3, JV4 and JV5 integument surrounding ventrianal shield. Setae JV5 smooth 35–40 in length.

Chelicera (Figure 2c). Fixed digit of chelicerae with six teeth; movable digit with one tooth.

Spermatheca (Figure 2d). Calyx of spermatheca saccular, elongated, flaring distally 17–18 in length. Atrium nodular attached to the calyx with very short neck. Major duct long; minor duct well-developed.

Legs. GeII, GeIII and GeIV with eight, seven and seven setae, respectively. Leg IV with three macrosetae. Measurements of macrosetae as follows: SgeIV 25–26, StiIV 24–25 and StIV 38–40.

Remarks — Neoseiulus reductus is a new record for the Belgian fauna. Morphological characters and measurements of the current specimens are very close to those of the original description and re-descriptions (Wainstein 1962; Kolodochka, 1978; Miedema 1987; Cakar et al. 2020; Inak et al. 2020). However, as opposed to the aforementioned descriptions, sternal shield striated with some faint patches of reticulations and genital shield reticulated in Belgian specimens.

Tribe Kampimodromini Kolodochka

Subtribe Kampimodromina Chant and McMurtry

Genus Kampimodronus Nesbitt

Kampimodromus corylosus Kolodochka

Kampimodromus corylosus Kolodochka, 2003: 51.

(Figure 3)

Material examined — One female (11 January 2022) and four females (30 January 2022) from common hazel Corylus avellana L. (Betulaceae) in Gent, Belgium, (51°02′44.5″N, 3°44′47.6″E), collector D. Vangansbeke.

Re-description — Female (n = 5) – Dorsum (Figure 3a). Dorsal shield reticulated with five pairs of solenostomes (gd1, gd2, gd6, gd8 and gd9). Length of dorsal shield 296 (293–298), width (at level of s4) 170 (166–172), width (at level of S2) 170 (164–174). Dorsal setae serrated except j4, j5, j6, J2, Z1 smooth; measurements of setae as follows: j1 17 (16–17), j3 21 (21–22), j4 16 (16–17), j5 14 (13–14), j6 17 (16–18), J2 21 (17–23), J5 8 (7–9), z2 25 (24–26), z4 32 (31–33), z5 18 (17–18), Z1 20 (19–21), Z4 38 (37–39), Z5 48 (46–49), s4 39 (35–41), S2 42 (40–45), S5 18 (18–19), r3 38 (36–40), R1 25 (24–26). Peritreme extending between setae j3–z2.

Venter. All ventral shields smooth except ventrianal shield with some faint striations posterior to setae JV2. Distances between (st1–st3) 63 (61–65), st2–st2 57 (56–58), st5–st5 48 (46–49). Ventrianal shield elongated with three pairs of preanal setae and one pair of large crescentic solenostomes (gv3), distance between pre-anal pores 15 (12–16). Length of ventrianal shield 96 (94–100), width at level of setae ZV2 50 (48–52), width at level of paranal setae 48 (48–49). Setae ZV1, ZV3, JV4 and JV5 integument surrounding ventrianal shield. Setae JV5 serrated 32 (29–34) in length.

Chelicera (Figure 3b). Fixed digit of chelicerae with three teeth; movable digit smooth.

Spermatheca (Figure 3c). Calyx of spermatheca cup-shaped, flaring distally 9 (8–10) in length. Atrium nodular attached to calyx without neck. Major duct long; minor duct developed.

Legs. GeII, GeIII and GeIV eight, seven and eight setae, respectively. Leg IV with two macrosetae both with two barbs and blunt or slightly knobbed tip. Macrosetae basitarsus IV 22 (20–23) and telotarsus IV 21 (20–22) in length.

Remarks — Kampimodromus corylosus is a new record for the Belgian fauna. Morphological characters and measurements of the current specimens are very close to those of the original description and re-descriptions (Kolodochka 2003; Tixier et al. 2008; Cargnus et al. 2012). Similar to the Belgian material, Kolodochka (2003) described macroseta on basitarsus IV with two barbs. We here recognized and illustrated an additional macroseta on telotarsus which have also two barbs, and blunt tip. Therefore, the presence or absence of modified macrosetae on legs, as an additional diagnostic character, should also be investigated in other species in this genus.

Subfamily Typhlodrominae Wainstein

Tribe Paraseiulini Wainstein

Paraseiulus Muma

Paraseiulus triporus (Chant & Yoshida-Shaul)

Typhlodromus triporus Chant & Yoshida-Shaul, 1982: 3029.

(Figure 4)

Material examined — One female from black alder (Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertn., Betulaceae), 27 November 2021, in Ghent, Belgium (51°02′44.4″N, 3°44′47.4″E). Three females from blackberry (Rubus sp., Rosaceae), 22 January 2022, in Ghent, Belgium, (51°02′43.7″N, 3°44′59.7″E). One female from blackberry plant (Rubus sp., Rosaceae), 19 February 2022, in Merelbeke, Belgium, (51°00′54.9″N, 3°44′34.4″E), collector D. Vangansbeke.

Re-description — Female (n = 5) – Dorsum (Figure 4a, b, c). Dorsal shield strongly reticulated with three pairs of solenostomes (gd2, gd6 and gd9). Length of dorsal shield 372 (370–375), width (at level of s4) 179 (172–184), width (at level of S2) 206 (200–214). Dorsal setae smooth except Z5 slightly serrated; measurements of setae as follows: j1 19 (17–21), j3 27 (24–31), j4 20 (19–21), j5 20 (19–21), j6 27 (23–30), J2 29 (28–30), J5 12 (11–13), z2 32 (31–32), z4 36 (35–36), z5 21 (18–26), z6 25 (22–27), Z4 31 (28–34), Z5 46 (45–48), s4 37 (32–42), s6 38 (35–41), S2 40 (38–41), S4 32 (30–33), S5 34 (33–34), r3 33 (32–33), R1 29 (27–32). Peritreme extending between setae j1–j3.

Venter. Sternal and genital shields smooth, ventrianal shield striated. Distances between (st1–st2) 48 (46–52), st2–st2 61 (58–63), st5–st5 64 (61–66). Ventrianal shield elongated two pairs of preanal setae without preanal pores. Length of ventrianal shield 121 (119–123), width at level of setae ZV2 51 (47–56), width at level of paranal setae 62 (57–69). Setae ZV1, ZV3, JV4 and JV5 integument surrounding ventrianal shield. Setae JV5 smooth 39 (36–41) in length.

Chelicera (Figure 4d). Fixed digit of chelicera with four teeth and pilus dentilis; movable digit with one tooth.

Spermatheca (Figure 4e). Calyx of spermatheca bell-shaped, progressively narrowing where it joins c-shaped atrium, base weakly sclerotized.

Legs. GeII, GeIII and GeIV with eight, seven and seven setae, respectively. Leg IV with one macroseta, StIV 30 (28–34).

Remarks — Paraseiulus triporus is a new record for the Belgian fauna. Morphological characters and measurements of the current specimens are very close to those of the original description and re-descriptions (Chant and Yoshida-Shaul 1982; Miedema 1987; Faraji et al. 2007; Ferragut et al. 2010; Papadoulis et al. 2009).

Tribe Typhlodromini Wainstein

Genus Typhlodromus

Subgenus Anthoseius De Leon

Typhlodromus (Anthoseius) rhenanoides Athias-Henriot

Typhlodromus rhenanoides Athias-Henriot, 1960: 85.

(Figure 5)

Material examined — Ten females and two males from cherry laurel, Prunus laurocerasus L. (Rosaceae) in Ghent, Belgium, (51°03′04.4″N, 3°45′16.9″E), 27 September 2021, collector D. Vangansbeke.

Re-description — Female (n = 10) – Dorsum (Figure 5a, b, c). Dorsal shield reticulated with five pairs of solenostomes (gd2, gd4, gd6, gd8 and gd9). Length of dorsal shield 348 (340–355), width (at level of s4) 185 (180–188), width (at level of S2) 192 (190–195). Dorsal setae smooth except Z4 and Z5 slightly serrated; measurements of setae as follows: j1 28 (26–31), j3 31 (27–35), j4 16 (15–18), j5 18 (15–19), j6 21 (20–24), J2 25 (22–27), J5 10 (9–11), z2 18 (17–21), z3 26 (25–30), z4 25 (23–28), z5 17 (15–19), Z4 46 (44–49), Z5 69 (63–76), s4 30 (29–33), s6 33 (30–37), S2 38 (35–41), S4 40 (37–44), S5 22 (18–27), r3 28 (25–30), R1 29 (27–30). Peritreme extending to almost base of setae j1.

Venter (Figure 5d). All ventral shields smooth. Distances between (st1–st2) 37 (35–38), st2–st2 58 (58–60), st5–st5 63 (60–65). Ventrianal shield pentagonal with three pairs of preanal setae and one pair of rounded solenostomes (gv3), distance between pre-anal pores 37 (35–38). Length of ventrianal shield 109 (108–110), width at level of setae ZV2 103 (103–105). Setae ZV1, ZV3, JV4 and JV5 integument surrounding ventrianal shield. Setae JV5 smooth 60 (55–66) in length.

Chelicera (Figure 5e). Fixed digit with four teeth and pilus dentilis; movable digit with two teeth.

Spermatheca (Figure 5f). Calyx saccular or tubular, flaring distally, 22 (20–23) in length; atrium nodular attached to calyx without neck. Major duct as wide as atrium, minor duct visible.

Legs. GeII, GeIII and GeIV each with seven setae. Leg IV with three macrosetae, all knobbed apically. Measurements of macrosetae as follows; SgeIV 26 (24–28), StiIV 33 (32–34) and StIV 64 (62–65).

Male (n = 2) – Similar to female in many aspects. Dorsum. Setae r3 and R1 on shield. Dorsal shield reticulated, with five pairs of solenostomes (gd2, gd4, gd6, gd8 and gd9). Length of dorsal shield 270–288, width (at level of s4) 145–160, width (at level of S2) 150–155. Dorsal setae smooth, except Z5 slightly serrated. Measurements of dorsal setae as follows: j1 20–23, j3 25–28, j4 13–15, j5 13–15, j6 15–18, J2 18, J5 8, z2 15–18, z3 18–20, z4 18–20, z5 13, Z4 38–40, Z5 48–50, s4 20–25, s6 23–25, S2 25–28, S4 25–28, S5 15–18, r3 18–20 and R1 18. Peritreme extending to level of setae between setae j3–z2.

Venter. Sternogenital shield smooth. Ventrianal shield triangular, reticulated, with four pairs of pre-anal setae (JV1, JV2, JV3, and ZV2); with one pair of small rounded solenostomes (gv3) between setae JV3. Length of ventrianal shield 105–108, width (at anterior corners, widest point) 153–155. Setae JV5 smooth, much longer than other ventral setae (25–28).

Chelicera. Fixed digit with four teeth and pilus dentilis; movable digit with one tooth, spermatophoral process L-shaped, foot 25–28 in length, with toe slightly developed.

Legs. Genua II, III, and IV each with seven setae. Leg IV with three knobbed macrosetae, SgeIV 18, StiIV 18–20 and StIV 45–48.

Remarks — Typhlodromus (Anthoseius) rhenanoides is a new record for the Belgian fauna. Morphological characters including the presence of preanal pores and measurements of the current specimens are very close to those of the original description and re-descriptions (Athias-Henriot 1960; Schuster and Pritchard 1963; Papadoulis et al. 2009; Ferragut et al. 2010). However, as oppose to the all previous descriptions, three knobbed macrosetae on leg IV are present in the Belgian material, as previously mentioned by Faraji et al. (2011b) based on the specimens collected from France.

Key to Belgian Species of Phytoseiidae

1. Setae z3 and s6 absent
...... 2

—Either or both setae z3 and s6 present
...... 12

2. Sternal shield with median posterior projection; deutosternal groove wider (\textgreater5 μm in width); with forward migration of preanal setae JV2 and ZV2; preanal setae of male usually arranged in tangential row rather than triangular pattern
...... Euseius Wainstein 3

— Sternal shield without posterior projection; deutosternal groove narrower (< 5 μm in width); without forward migration of preanal setae JV2 and ZV2; preanal setae of male usually arranged in a triangular pattern rather than tangential row
...... 4

3. Calyx of spermatheca short and bulged
...... E. finlandicus (Oudemans)

— Calyx of spermatheca tubular
...... E. gallicus Kreiter & Tixier

4. Seta S4 absent
...... Kampimodromus Nesbit – K. corylosus Kolodochka

— Seta S4 present
...... 5

5. Ratio seta s4:Z1 < 3.0:1.0; setae s4, Z4, and usually Z5 not greatly longer than other dorsal setae
...... 6

— Ratio seta s4:Z1 < 3.1:1.0; setae s4, Z5, and usually Z4 markedly longer than other dorsal setae
...... 9

6. Macrosetae present on leg II and III in addition to leg IV
...... Aristadromips Chant & McMurtry – A. masseei (Nesbitt)

— Macroseta present only on leg IV
...... Neoseiulus Hughes 7

7. Genu II with seven setae
...... N. alpinus (Schweizer)

— Genu II with eight setae
...... 8

8. Peritreme long extending level of seta j1; ventrianal shield with small rounded solenostomes
...... N. cucumeris (Oudemans)

— Peritreme short extending between setae j3–z2; ventrianal shield with large elliptical solenostomes
...... N. reductus (Wainstein)

9. Ratio seta s4:S2< 3.0:1.0
...... Amblyseius Berlese 10

— Ratio seta s4:S2\textless2.7:1.0
...... Transeius Chant and McMurtry 11

10. Female ventrianal shield vase-shaped
...... A. herbicolus (Chant)

— Female ventrianal shield pentagonal
...... A. andersoni (Chant)

11. Calyx of spermatheca short, length and width subequal
...... T. wainsteini (Gomelauri)

— Calyx of spermatheca elongated, saccular
...... T. namurensis (Fain, Vangeluwe, Degreef and Wauthy)

12. Setae J2, S2, and S4 absent Phytoseius Ribaga
...... P. macropilis (Banks)

— Setae J2, S2, and S4 present
...... 13

13. Seta z6 present Paraseiulus Muma
...... Paraseiulus triporus (Chant and Yoshida-Shaul)

— Seta z6 absent
...... 14

14. Seta Z1 present
...... Neoseiulella Muma – N. aceri (Collyer)

— Seta Z1 absent
...... Typhlodromus Scheuten 15

15. Seta S5 present
...... 16

— Seta S5 absent
...... 19

16. Preanal pores present
...... 17

— Preanal pores absent
...... 18

17. Leg IV with three macrosetae, knobbed apically; macrosetae StIV longer than the distance between its base and dorsal slit organ; genu II with eight setae; movable digit of chelicera with two teeth
...... T. (A.) rhenanoides Athias-Henriot

— Leg IV with only one macroseta, sharp pointed and shorter than the distance between its base and dorsal slit organ; genu II with eight setae; movable digit of chelicera with one tooth
...... T. (A.) rhenanus (Oudemans)

18. Calyx of spermatheca short, bell-shaped
...... T. (A.) foenilis Oudemans

— Calyx of spermatheca elongate
...... T. (A.) richteri Karg

19. Dorsal shield with three pairs of solenostomes
...... 20

— Dorsal shield with four pairs of solenostomes
...... 21

20. Seta Z4 as long as distance between its insertion and that of Z5; calyx of spermatheca elongate, with short neck
...... T. (T.) pyri Scheuten

— Seta Z4 shorter than distance between its insertion and that of Z5; calyx of spermatheca cup-shaped with long neck between atrium and calyx
...... T. (T.) tubifer Wainstein

21. Preanal pores present
...... T. (T.) andrei Karg

— Preanal pores absent
...... T. (T.) tiliae Oudemans

Notes on the identification key

Amblyseius potentillae (Garman) reported by Malevez (1976), Typhlodromus (Anthoseius) picea (Karg & Edland) reported by Karg & Edland (1987) are considered junior synonyms of A. andersoni and T. (A.) foenilis Oudemans as suggested by Chant & Yoshida-Shaul (1990) and Evans & Edland (1998), respectively. The previous report of Transeius similis (Koch) by Chant (1959) in Belgium is considered as T. wainsteini due to status of the former as nomen dubium, as suggested by Chant and McMurtry (2004), Faraji et al. (2011a) and Khaustov et al. (2021). Moreover, Transeius namurensis (Fain, Vangeluwe, Degreef and Wauthy) is suspected as a junior synonym of Graminaseius graminis (Chant), due to insufficient diagnostic characters used to separate these two species in its original description and the descriptions of the latter (Chant 1956; Kolodochka 1978; Döker et al. 2019). We included this species to the identification key on a provisional basis, as we are unable to examine its type materials. The list of recorded species was obtained online database created by Demite et al. (2022).

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Cukurova University Scientific Projects Foundation Units, grant number: FAY-2022-14495.

---

References

1. Akyazi R., Ueckermann E.A., Soysal M. 2016. The new distribution of Amblyseius herbicolus in Turkey (Parasitiformes, Phytoseiidae) with a key of Amblyseius species found in Turkey. Acarologia, 56: 237-244. https://doi.org/10.1051/acarologia/20162241
2. André H.M. 1986. Notes on the ecology of corticolous epiphyte dwellers. 4. Actinedida (especially Tydeidae) and Gamasida (especially Phytoseiidae). Acarologia, 27; 107-115.
3. Athias-Henriot C. 1960. Phytoseiidae et Aceosejidae (Acarina: Gamasina) d'Algérie. IV. Genre Typhlodromus Scheuten, 1857. Bull. Soc. Hist. Nat. Afr. N., 51: 62-107.
4. Athias-Henriot C. 1975. Nouvelles notes sur les Amblyseiini. II. Le relevé organotaxique de la face dorsale adulte (Gamasides, protoadéniques, Phytoseiidae). Acarologia, 17:20-29.
5. Cakar T., Yanar D., Döker I. 2020. Re-descriptions of Neoseiulus reductus (Wainstein) and Typhlodromus (Anthoseius) caucasicus (Abbasova) (Acari: Phytoseiidae) from Turkey. Turkish J. Biol. Cont. 11: 208-216. https://doi.org/10.31019/tbmd.774853
6. Cargnus E., Girolami V., Zandigiacomo P. 2012. Re-examination of specimens of three species of Kampimodromus Nesbitt (Acari: Phytoseiidae) from north-eastern Italy. Int. J. Acarol., 38: 583-594. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2012.710247
7. Chant D.A. 1956. Some mites of the subfamily Phytoseiinae (Acarina: Laelaptidae) from southeastern England, with descriptions of new species. Can. Entomol., 88: 26-37. https://doi.org/10.4039/Ent8826-1
8. Chant D.A. 1959. Phytoseiid mites (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Part I. Bionomics of seven species in southeastern England. Part II. A taxonomic review of the family Phytoseiidae, with descriptions of thirty-eight new species. Can. Entomol. 61: 1-166. https://doi.org/10.4039/entm9112fv
9. Chant D.A.., McMurtry JA. 2004. A review of the subfamily Amblyseiinae Muma (Acari: Phytoseiidae): Part IV. Tribe Amblyseiini Wainstein, subtribe Arrenoseiina Chant & McMurtry. Int. J. Acarol., 30: 291-312. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647950408684399
10. Chant D.A, McMurtry J.A. 2007. Illustrated keys and diagnoses for the genera and subgenera of the Phytoseiidae of the world (Acari: Mesostigmata). West Bloomfield: Indira Publishing House. pp. 219.
11. Chant D.A, Yoshida-Shaul E. 1991. Adult ventral setal patterns in the family Phytoseiidae (Acari: Gamasina). Int. J. Acarol., 17: 187-199. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647959108683906
12. Chant D.A, Yoshida-Shaul E. 1982. A world review of the soleiger species group in the genus Typhlodromus Scheuten (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Can. J. Zool., 60: 3021-3032. https://doi.org/10.1139/z82-385
13. Chant D.A, Yoshida-Shaul E. 1990. The identities of Amblyseius andersoni (Chant) and A. potentillae (Garman) in the family Phytoseiidae (Acari: Gamasina). Int. J. Acarol., 16: 5-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647959008683857
14. Demite P.R., Dias M.A., Cavalcante A.C.C., Ramos M.V.V., Lofego A.C. 2017. Phytoseiid mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae) associated with Cerrado biome plantas in Brazil, with description of a new species. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 22: 2141-2177. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.22.12.9
15. Demite P.R., de Moraes G.J., McMurtry J.A., Denmark H.A., Castilho R.C. 2022. Phytoseiidae Database. Available from: www.lea.esalq.usp.br/phytoseiidae (accessed 20 May 2022).
16. Denmark H.A., Muma M.H. 1989. A revision of the genus Amblyseius Berlese, 1914 (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Occasional Papers of the Florida State Collection of Arthropods, 4: 149 pp.
17. Döker I., Kazak C., Karut K. 2019. The genus Graminaseius Chant & McMurtry (Acari: Phytoseiidae) in Turkey with descriptions of two new species and re-description of Graminaseius graminis (Chant). Syst. Appl. Acarol., 24: 731-741. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.24.5.2
18. Döker I., 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: 1395-1420. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.25.8.4
19. Döker I., Witters J., Pijnakker J., Kazak C., Tixier M.-S., Kreiter S. 2014. Euseius gallicus Kreiter & Tixier (Acari: Phytoseiidae) is present in four more countries in Europe: Belgium, Germany, The Netherlands and Turkey. Acarologia, 54: 245-248. https://doi.org/10.1051/acarologia/20142132
20. Evans G.O., Edland T. 1998. The genus Anthoseius De Leon (Acari: Mesostigmata) in Norway. Fauna Norv., Ser. B., 45: 41-62.
21. Evans G.O., Momen F. 1988. The identity of Seiulus rhenanus Oudemans. and Typhlodromus foenilis Oudemans. (Acari: Phytoseiidae). J. Nat. Hist., 22: 209-216. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222938800770151
22. Fain A., Vangeluwe D., Degreef M., Wauthy G. 1993. Observations on mites inhabiting nests of Bubo bubo (L.) (Strigiformes, Strigidae) in Belgium. Belg. J. Zool., 123: 3-26.
23. Faraji F., Cobanoglu S., Cakmak I. 2011a. A checklist and a key for the Phytoseiidae species of Turkey with two new species records (Acari: Mesostigmata). Int. J. Acarol., 37(Supl. 1): 221-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2011.558851
24. Faraji F., Roig J., Bakker F. 2011b. Some new records of Phytoseiidae from southwest Europe with description of a new species from Spain (Acari: Mesostigmata). Int. J. Acarol., 37: 331-346. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2010.519722
25. Faraji F., Shiroodbakhshi M., Ostovan H., McMurtry J.A. 2007. Redescription of the female of Paraseiulus triporus and Proprioseiopsis dacus (Acari: Phytoseiidae) based on material collected from citrus in northern Iran. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 12: 199-204. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.12.3.4
26. Ferragut F., Pérez Moreno I., Iraola V., Escudero A. 2010. Ácaros depredadores em las plantas cultivadas. Família Phytoseiidae. Madrid, Spain: Ediciones Agrotécnicas. pp. 202.
27. Gerson U. 2014. Pest control by mites (Acari): Present and future. Acarologia, 54: 371-394. https://doi.org/10.1051/acarologia/20142144
28. Guanilo A.D., de Moraes G.J., Knapp M. 2008a. Phytoseiid mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) of the subfamily Amblyseiinae Muma from Peru, with description of four new species. Zootaxa, 1880: 1-47. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1880.1.1
29. Guanilo A.D., de Moraes G.J., Toledo S., Knapp M. 2008b. Phytoseiid mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) from Argentina, with description of a new species. Zootaxa, 1884: 1-35. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1884.1.1
30. Inak E., Cobanoglu S., Sade E., Tixier M.S. 2020. Molecular characterization of phytoseiid mites in Turkey based on the internal transcribed spacer (ITS) region, with a new record for the country. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 81: 201-213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-020-00504-3
31. Jorge S.J., Rueda-Ramírez D., de Moraes G.J. 2021. Predation capacity of phytoseiid mites (Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae) from Brazil on eggs of Diaphorina citri (Hemiptera: Liviidae). Phytoparasitica, 49: 603-611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12600-021-00898-9
32. Karg W. 1982. Diagnostic and systematics of predatory mites of the family Phytoseiidae Berlese in orchards. Zool. Jahrb. Syst., 109: 188-210.
33. Karg W., Edland T. 1987. Neue Raubmilbenarten der Phytoseiidae Berlese, 1916. Deut. Entomol. Z. 34: 387-395.
34. Khaustov V.A., Joharchi O., Döker I. 2021. Review of the genus Transeius Сhant & McMurtry (Acari: Phytoseiidae) of Russia. Syst. Appl. Acarol. 26: 1952-1973. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.26.10.9
35. Knapp M., van Houten Y., van Baala E., Groot T. 2018. Use of predatory mites in commercial biocontrol: current status and future prospects. Acarologia, 58: 72-82. https://doi.org/10.24349/acarologia/20184275
36. Kolodochka L.A. 1978. Manual for the identification of plant-inhabiting phytoseiid mites. Kiev, Ukraine: Akademii Nauk Ukrainian SSR, Instituta Zoologii, Naukova Dumka. pp. 79 pp. [in Russian].
37. Kolodochka L.A. 2003. A new species of the genus Kampimodromus (Parasitiformes, Phytoseiidae) from Ukraine and Moldova. Acarina, 11: 51-55.
38. Kreiter S., Payet R.M., Fillâtre J., Azali H.A. 2018. First records of Phytoseiidae (Acari: Mesostigmata) from one island of the Comoros Archipelago. Acarologia, 58: 529-545. https://doi.org/10.24349/acarologia/20184256
39. Liao L.R., Ho C.C., Lee H.C., Ko C.C. 2020. Phytoseiidae of Taiwan (Acari: Mesostigmata). Taipei, Taiwan: National Taiwan University Press; p. 538.
40. Lindquist E.E., Evans G.O. 1965. Taxonomic concepts in the Ascidae, with a modified setal nomenclature for the idiosoma of the Gamasina Acarina: Mesostigmata. Mem. Ent. Soc. Can., 47: 1-64. https://doi.org/10.4039/entm9747fv
41. Malevez N. 1976. Observations sur l′entomofaune d'un verger de pommiers dans une perspective de lutte intégrée. Parasitica, 32: 109-140.
42. McMurtry J.A., Croft B.A. 1997. Life-Styles of Phytoseiid Mites and Their Roles in Biological Control. Annu. Rev. Entomol., 42: 291-321. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.42.1.291
43. 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: 297-320. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.18.4.1
44. Miedema E. 1987. Survey of phytoseiid mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) in orchards and surrounding vegetation of northwestern Europe, especially in the Netherlands. Keys, descriptions and figures. Neth. J. Plant Pathol., 93(Supl.2): 1-64. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01984462
45. Nesbitt H.H.J. 1951. A taxonomic study of the Phytoseiidae (Family Laelaptidae) predaceous upon Tetranychidae of economic importance. Zool. Verh., 12, 64 pp.+ 32 plates.
46. Papadoulis G.Th., Emmanouel N.G., Kapaxidi, E.V. 2009. Phytoseiidae of Greece and Cyprus (Acari: Mesostigmata). West Bloomfield: Indira Publishing House. pp. 200.
47. Rowell H.L., 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: 859-876. https://doi.org/10.4039/Ent110859-8
48. Schuster R.O., Pritchard A.E. 1963. Phytoseiid mites of California. Hilgardia, 34: 191-285. https://doi.org/10.3733/hilg.v34n07p191
49. Tixier M.-S., Kreiter S., Croft B.A., Cheval B. 2008. Kampimodromus aberrans (Acari: Phytoseiidae) from the USA: morphological and molecular assessment of its density. Bull. Entomol. Res., 98: 125-134. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485307005457
50. Wainstein B.A. 1962. Some new predatory mites of the family Phytoseiidae (Parasitiformes) of the USSR fauna. Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie, Russia, 41, 230-240; Entomol. Rev., 41: 139-146 [English translation].
51. Zannou I.D., de Moraes G.J., Ueckermann E.A., Oliveira A.R., Yaninek J.S., Hanna R. 2007. Phytoseiid mites of the subtribe Amblyseiina (Acari: Phytoseiidae: Amblyseiini) from sub-Saharan Africa. Zootaxa, 1550: 1-47. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1550.1.1

---

Please read and follow the instructions to post any comment or correction.