Giordano, Thomas ¹ ; Andolina, Francesco ² ; Cerasa, Giuliano ³ ; Marotta, Ilaria ⁴ ; Rizzo, Roberto ⁵ ; Lo Verde, Gabriella ⁶ ; de Lillo, Enrico ⁷ and Tsolakis, Haralabos ⁸

¹University of Palermo, Department of Agricultural, Food and Forest Sciences (SAAF), Palermo, Italy.
²University of Palermo, Department of Agricultural, Food and Forest Sciences (SAAF), Palermo, Italy.
³University of Palermo, Department of Agricultural, Food and Forest Sciences (SAAF), Palermo, Italy.
⁴University of Palermo, Department of Agricultural, Food and Forest Sciences (SAAF), Palermo, Italy.
⁵CREA - Research Centre for Plant Protection and Certification, Palermo, Italy.
⁶University of Palermo, Department of Agricultural, Food and Forest Sciences (SAAF), Palermo, Italy.
⁷University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Department of Soil, Plant and Food Sciences (DiSSPA – Entomology and Zoology), Bari, Italy.
⁸University of Palermo, Department of Agricultural, Food and Forest Sciences (SAAF), Palermo, Italy.

2025 - Volume: 65 Issue: 3 pages: 927-933

Original research

Keywords

Abstract

Introduction

Mango (Mangifera indica L., Anacardiaceae) is native to South Asia, particularly eastern India, Myanmar and the Andaman Islands (Bally 2006; Derese et al. 2017). It is now cultivated in many tropical and subtropical regions worldwide. In the Mediterranean basin, it is found in Israel, Egypt and southern Spain (Rodríguez Pleguezuelo et al. 2012). In recent years, mango cultivation has progressively spread to southern Italy, particularly along of Sicily's northern coasts, where cultivars such as Kensington Pride, Tommy Atkins, Osteen, Maya, Kent, Irwin, Glenn and Keitt are grown (Lauricella et al. 2017).

Mango hosts numerous and diverse phytophagous insects and mites in its area of origin. Some of them are beginning to spread to new cultivation areas. Among these alien pests, the scale insects Icerya seychellarum (Westwood) (Hemiptera: Margarodidae) and Aulacaspis tubercularis (Newstead) (Hemiptera: Diaspididae) occur in several Mediterranean countries such as Egypt, Israel, Spain and Italy (del Pino et al. 2020; Lo Verde et al. 2020; Moharum and Bakry 2015). Here we report the first European detection of the eriophyid mite Cisaberoptus kenyae Keifer (Acari: Eriophyidae), known also as mango leaf-coating mite or silver blotch mite, and briefly review its distribution, taxonomy, life history and implications for Sicilian orchards in the perspective of a future further expansion of mango as a consequence of the climatic changes.

Cisaberoptus kenyae Keifer, 1966

Keifer (1966) described C. kenyae from mango in Kenya. Afterwards, it has been reported and re-described from many subtropical and tropical areas of the Australian, Afrotropical, Neotropical, and Oriental (Amrine and de Lillo, unpublished database) and Palearctic Realms, classification according to Udvardy (1975), like Egypt and Israel in the Mediterranean basin (Palearctic region) (Knihinicki and Boczek 2002; Wysoki et al. 1992; Yamaguchi et al. 2006).

Morphological identification follows Keifer (1966) and Elhalawany et al. (2021). Cisaberoptus was treated as a junior synonym of Aceria by Amrine et al. (2003). Subsequent re-examination of specimens, including the collection of males of C. kenyae, led to the revalidation of C. kenyae as a distinct species and the reinstatement of Cisaberoptus as a valid genus (Chandrapatya et al. 2017). However, the taxonomic status of these mites remains under investigation.

The life cycle lasts 7.64 days at 25 °C and 60% relative humidity (Abou-Awad et al. 2009). In Egypt, 13-16 generations per year have been reported on the Hindi and Alphonso mango cultivars, with density peaks in January, May and November (Abou-Awad et al. 2009; Elhalawany et al. 2021). In Israel, intra-plant migration usually begins between March and May (Sternlicht and Goldenberg, 1976). However, the seasonal dynamics and the intra-plant distribution of this species vary between the different environments (e.g. Elhalawany et al. 2021; Melo et al. 2023).

Initially, the mites settle on the buds, then petioles, followed by leaf blades, first along the midrib and then towards the margins (Sternlicht and Goldenberg 1976). Feeding activity promotes the formation of a dense protective white-silver layer similar to a spider web that houses all developmental stages of the mite (Ramani 2019) (Figure 1a, b). There are three main hypotheses on the origin of the leaf-coating: Sternlicht and Goldenberg (1976) reported that the feeding activity of the mite, initially induces secretion of ''... a milky substance, which hardens into a white, crusty, membranous film covering different places infested by the mites, and giving the upper surface of the leaf, at sites of mite infestation, a silvery grey blotch'', and afterwards injured tissues become brown necrotic areas (Figure 2a, b). Two years later, Hassan and Keifer (1978), not considering the previous hypothesis by Sternlicht and Goldenberg, reported that the leaf-coating consists in crude and irregular strands with various forms and bunches which is different from the webbing caused by Aceria knorri Keifer on Lepisanthes rubiginosa (Roxb.) Leenh (Sapindaceae). The authors assumed that the white leaf-coating on mango infested leaves is ''... some sort of regurgitation''. All following papers on this mite avoided to refer on the nature of the coating, while a recent review on webbing of Aberoptus species considers C. kenyae a web producer mite because of modifications of the gnathosoma and legs considered consistent with spinning ability of the species (Chetverikov et al. 2023).

Regardless of the leaf-coating nature, Ramani (2019) found conspicuous changes in the mesophyll tissues of the infested parts of the mango leaves, consisting of a reduction in cell size and of chloroplasts number in the palisade tissues. Moreover, the dense leaf coating hindering light penetration leads to a significant reduction in photosynthesis, accelerating the plant defoliation (Ramani 2019).

Environmental factors appear to have a limited influence on the population of C. kenyae, as the mobile stages remain protected under the web-like layer. On the other hand, leaf exposure seems to influence the population distribution, with a preference for shaded areas (Abou-Awad et al. 2009). The eriophyid's infestation level and population density of the eriophyid appear to be closely related to the different mango cultivars, as demonstrated by Ramani and Haq (1989) on five different mango varieties in India.

Several predatory mites of the Phytoseiidae family were found on mango plants infested with C. kenyae in Egypt, including Amblyseius swirskii Athias-Henriot and Typhlodromus mangiferus Zaher & El-Borolossy, which maintained a constant presence for several months, indicating their potential role as biological control agents (BCAs) (Abou-Awad et al. 2010).

Italian records

Cisaberoptus kenyae was detected in several mango orchards on the northern coast of Sicily (Table 1). The presence of potential predators on plants showing symptoms of coating was assessed using the shaking method (Tsolakis and Ragusa 2015). Additionally, leaves showing typical symptoms induced by eriophyids were collected and examined in the laboratory under a Wild M38 stereoscope, to discover the presence of the mites and any natural enemies. Cisaberoptus kenyae was found exclusively on the Keitt cultivar at the 2^nd and 3^rd sampling sites. It should be mentioned that the Kensington pride cultivar was infested at the 4^th site, where no other cultivars were present, but not at the 3^rd site where the Keitt cultivar was also present.

Cisaberoptus kenyae adults were collected from leaf samples in mango orchards located at Lascari (Palermo) (38°00′22.95″N 13°55′18.42″E) and preserved in a 70% ethanol solution before being cleared and mounted for the identification. Eriophyids were cleared using Keifer's Booster and mounted on slides with Keifer's F-Medium (Amrine and Manson 1996). A phase contrast microscope (BX50, Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) was used to identify morphological characters following the generic key provided by Amrine et al. (2003) and through comparisons with the new genera described after that publication. The mite morphology was then compared with the species associated with mango up to now (around 20 valid species) and in particular with the description given for C. kenyae by Keifer (1966) and Elhalawany et al. (2021). Several specimens of Iphiseius degenerans (Berlese) and A. swirskii were collected on infested leaves at the 1^st and 4^th sampling sites respectively. Both species were found under the leaf coating. In Egypt, the latter phytoseiid can complete its life cycle by feeding on the eriophyids, and its predatory efficiency is positively correlated with the increase in temperatures and a decrease in relative humidity rates (Abou-Awad et al. 2009; Abou-Awad et al. 2010). Both predators are well-known as BCAs and commercially available for the biological control of thrips and spider mites in greenhouses. The other two phytoseiids, namely Typhlodromus (Typhlodromus) phialatus Athias-Henriot and Typhlodromus (Typhlodromus) setubali Dosse, were found in Sicilian mango fields. These species are widespread and common on the the main Mediterranean crops (Ferragut et al. 1992; Tixier et al. 2019). They belong to the type III generalist predatory mites, able to feed, survive, and reproduce on different food sources (McMurtry et al. 2013). Their natural occurrence in the field implies a solid base for their use in future biocontrol programs.

Considerations

The increasing introduction of alien phytophagous insects and mites into new geographical areas is strongly linked to the international trade in live plants. This is particularly true for alien species that are challenging to detect during inspections of imported plants and fruits, due to their aspect (shape and size) and lifestyle. Following the spread of mango and other tropical fruit species in Sicily, several alien pests have already been found, i.e. Oligonychus perseae Tuttle, Baker & Abbatiello, A. tubercularis, I. seychellarum and Aceria litchii Keifer (Giordano et al. 2024; Lo Verde et al. 2020; Zappalà et al. 2015). The occurrence of C. kenyae in different mango crops of varying ages and cultivars suggests that the pest is now well settled and widely distributed in Sicily. Further investigations are currently underway to confirm the actual level of establishment of the mite in other mango orchards, quantify the damage caused during the growing season, and assess the presence of other potential natural enemies. The Sicilian populations in such a northern area appear well-suited for clarifying this species' still unclear taxonomic status. Moreover, given the growing economic importance of tropical fruit cultivation in Sicily, it is essential to implement continuous monitoring in orchards and nurseries to detect and promptly prevent the introduction of new alien species.

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the private owners of the several orchards in which surveys were carried out.

References

1. Abou-Awad B., Metwally A., Al-Azzazy M. 2009. Ecological, biological and control studies on the leaf coating and webbing mite Cisaberoptus kenyae Keifer (Eriophyoidea: Eriophyidae) in Egypt. Acarines, 3(1): 65-71. https://doi.org/10.21608/ajesa.2009.4968
2. Abou-Awad B., Metwally A., Al-Azzazy M. 2010. Typhlodromips swirskii (Acari: Phytoseiidae) a predator of eriophyid and tetranychid mango mites in Egypt. Acta Phytopathol. Entomol. Hung., 45(1): 135-148. https://doi.org/10.1556/APhyt.45.2010.1.12
3. Amrine Jr J., Manson D. 1996. 1.6. 3 Preparation, mounting and descriptive study of eriophyoid mites. World Crop Pests, 6: 383-396. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1572-4379(96)80023-6
4. Amrine Jr J., Stasny T.A., Flechtmann C.H. 2003. Revised keys to world genera of Eriophyoidea (Acari: Prostigmata). Indira Publishing House, pp. 244.
5. Bally I.S.E. 2006. Mangifera indica (mango). Species Profiles Pac. Isl. Agrofor.: 1-25. Available from: https://raskisimani.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/mangifera-mango.pdf
6. Chandrapatya A., Konvipasruang P., Amrine J.W.Jr. 2017. Catalog of Thai Eriophyoidea (Acari: Prostigmata) with illustrations and keys to genera of Thai mites. Printing Office, Extension and Training Office, Kasetsart University, pp. 526.
7. Chetverikov P.E., Craemer C., Gankevich V.D., Vishnyakov A.E., Zhuk A.S. 2023. A new webbing Aberoptus species from South Africa provides insight in silk production in gall mites (Eriophyoidea). Diversity, 15(151): 1-31. https://doi.org/10.3390/d15020151
8. del Pino M., Bienvenido C., Boyero J.R., Vela J.M. 2020. Biology, ecology and integrated pest management of the white mango scale, Aulacaspis tubercularis Newstead, a new pest in southern Spain-a review. Crop Prot., 133: 105160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2020.105160
9. Derese S., Guantai E., Souaibou Y., Kuete V. 2017. Mangifera indica L. (Anacardiaceae). In: Kuete V. (Ed). Medicinal Spices and Vegetables from Africa, Elsevier Academic Press. p. 451-483. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809286-6.00021-2
10. Elhalawany A.S., Amrine J.W., Ueckermann E.A. 2021. A new species and new record of eriophyoid mites (Trombidiformes: Eriophyoidea) from mango in Egypt with a note on the population dynamics of four eriophyoid species. Acarines, 15(1): 1-22. https://doi.org/10.21608/ajesa.2021.240501
11. Ferragut F., Laborda R., Costa-Comelles J., García-Marí F. 1992. Feeding behavior of Euseius stipulatus and Typhlodromus phialatus on the citrus red mite Panonychus citri [Acari: Phytoseiidae, Tetranychidae]. Entomophaga, 37: 537-544. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02372323
12. Giordano T., Lamendola M., Mezzano M., Scuderi D., Gugliuzza G., Tsolakis H. 2024. Invasion of the erinose mite Aceria litchii (Eriophyoidea, Eriophyidae) in Europe. Int. J. Acarol., 50(4): 392-394. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2024.2336015
13. Hassan E., Keifer H. 1978. The mango leaf-coating mite, Cisaberoptus kenyae K. (Eriophyidae, Aberoptinae). The Pan-Pacific Entomologist, 54(3): 185-193. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/part/268020
14. Keifer H.H., (1966). Eriophyid Studies B-18. Bureau of Entomology, Californian Department of Agriculture, 1-20.
15. Knihinicki D.K., Boczek J. 2002. New eriophyoid mites (Acari: Eriophyoidea) from Australia. Int. J. Acarol., 28(3): 241-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647950208684298
16. Lauricella M., Emanuele S., Calvaruso G., Giuliano M., D'Anneo A. 2017. Multifaceted health benefits of Mangifera indica L. (Mango): The inestimable value of orchards recently planted in Sicilian rural areas. Nutrients, 9(5): 525. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu9050525
17. Lo Verde G., Cerasa G., Altamore B., Farina V. 2020. First record of Icerya seychellarum and confirmed occurrence of Aulacaspis tubercularis (Hemiptera: Coccomorpha) in Italy. Phytoparasitica, 48: 175-182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12600-020-00792-w
18. McMurtry J.A., De Moraes G.J., Sourassou N.F. 2013. Revision of the lifestyles of phytoseiid mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) and implications for biological control strategies. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 18(4): 297-320. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.18.4.1
19. Melo A.S., Melo J.W., Paz-Neto A.A., Gondim jr. M.G. 2023. Mite diversity and intra-plant distribution in mango crop. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 28(5): 864-875. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.28.5.8
20. Moharum F., Bakry M. 2015. Survey of scale insects (Hemiptera: Coccoidea) on different host plants in southern Egypt. Glob. J. Agric. Food Saf. Sci. 2: 96-110. Available from: https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/20163173470
21. Ramani N., Haq M.A. 1989. Incidence and relative abundance of the Mango Mite, Cisaberoptus kenyae (Acari: Eriophyidae). In: Channabasavanna G.P., Viraktamath C.A. (Eds). Progress in Acarology, vol. 2. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, India, 115-119.
22. Ramani N. 2019. Feeding impact of Cisaberoptus kenyae Keifer (Acari: Eriophyidae) on photosynthetic efficiency and biochemical parameters of Mangifera indica L. Acarological Studies, 1(2): 84-94. Available from: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/775642
23. Rodríguez Pleguezuelo C., Durán Zuazo V., Muriel Fernández J., Franco Tarifa D. 2012. Physico-chemical quality parameters of mango (Mangifera indica L.) fruits grown in a Mediterranean subtropical climate (SE Spain). J. Agric. Sci. Technol., 14(2): 365-374. Available from: http://jast.modares.ac.ir/article-23-12099-en.html
24. Sternlicht M., Goldenberg S. 1976. Mango eriophyid mites in relation to inflorescence. Phytoparasitica, 4: 45-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02981079
25. Tixier M.-S., Principato D., Douin M., Kreiter S., Tsolakis H. 2019. Mites of the genus Typhlodromus (Acari: Phytoseiidae) from Southern France: combined morphological and molecular approaches for species identification. Zootaxa, 4604 (2): 242-280. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4604.2.2
26. Tsolakis H., Ragusa S. 2015. Considerations on systematics of the Phytoseiidae (Acari: Mesostigmata), with definition of a new species group and description of a new species. Zootaxa, 3926(2): 229-243. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3926.2.4
27. Udvardy M.D.F. 1975. A Classification of the Biogeographical Provinces of the World. Occasional Paper 18. Morges, Switzerland: International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources: 1-48.
28. Wysoki M., Ben-Dov Y., Swirski E., Izhar Y. 1992. The arthropod pests of mango in Israel. Acta Hortic. 341: 452-466. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.1993.341.50
29. Yamaguchi T., Iwamoto J., Goto H., Nojima H., Omatu N., Torigoe H., Yasuda K., Setokuchi O., Hayashikawa S. 2006. Insect pests of the mango plant, Mangifera indica, on the Amami islands, Japan. Kyushu Plant Prot. Res., 52: 60-65. (in Japanese) https://doi.org/10.4241/kyubyochu.52.60
30. Zappalà L., Kreiter S., Russo A., Tropea Garzia G., Auger P. 2015. First record of the persea mite Oligonychus perseae (Acari: Tetranychidae) in Italy with a review of the literature. Int. J. Acarol., 41(2): 97-99. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2015.1014415

instructions