Arabuli, Tea ¹

¹✉ Institute of Zoology, Ilia State University, Giorgi Tsereteli Str. 3, Tbilisi 0162, Georgia & Institute of Entomology, Agricultural University of Georgia, Kakha Bendukidze Campus, 240 David Aghmashenebeli Alley, 0131, Tbilisi, Georgia.

2025 - Volume: 65 Issue: 4 pages: 1054-1067

Original research

Keywords

Abstract

Introduction

False spider mites are phytophagous, and they have significant economic importance in horticulture and agriculture. Some species of tenuipalpid mites are ranked as potential exotic pest mites, including Brevipalpus californicus (Banks, 1904), B. obovatus Donnadieu, 1875, B. yothersi Baker, 1949 and B. phoenicis (Geijskes, 1939); they have been reported as vectors of several viral diseases in citrus, coffee, passion fruit, orchids, and various ornamental plants (Beard et al. 2015). Additionally, species like Tenuipalpus granati Sayed, 1946 and T. punicae Pritchard & Baker, 1958 are important in quarantine, and they are considered hazardous agricultural and environmental pests (Childers et al. 2006).

The family Tenuipalpidae (Acari: Prostigmata: Tetranychoidea) is widespread all over the world, and the genus Tenuipalpus Donnadieu is the largest in the family (Mesa et al. 2009; Castro et al. 2016).

The genus Tenuipalpus was established by Donnadieu (1875). Mitrofanov & Strunkova (1979) divided the tribe Tenuipalpini into nine genera based on the number of dorsal setae and palp segmentation as follows: Ultratenuipalpus Mitrofanov 1973, Deleoniella Mitrofanov 1973, Extenuipalpus Reck 1959, Amblypalpus Mitrofanov & Strunkova 1978, Tenuipalpus Donnadieu, 1875, Tuttlepalpus Mitrofanov 1973, Aegyptopalpus Mitrofanov 1973, Colopalpus Pritchard & Baker 1958 (Syn: Gnathopalpus Mitrofanov 1973) and Deleonipalpus Mitrofanov 1973. Meyer (1979) synonymized those genera with the genus Tenuipalpus except for Ultratenuipalpus, which she considered a valid genus; by using the same morphological characters, she proposed six species groups in the genus Tenuipalpus: albae, caudatus, elegans, granati, quadrisetosus, and trisetosus. Only two species groupings, caudatus and proteae, were later identified by Baker & Tuttle (1987) based on the presence or absence of setae f2 (seven and six pairs of dorsolateral setae, respectively). Additionally, the caudatus species group was further subdivided into three groups: anoplus (one pair of setae 3a, one pair of setae 4a), bakeri (two pairs 3a, one pair 4a), and annonae (one pair 3a, two pairs 4a) subgroups. Afterwards, Meyer (1993) separated the proteae group into three subgroups: rhusi (one pair 3a, one pair 4a), keiensis (one pair 3a, two pairs 4a), and xerocolus (two pairs 3a, two pairs 4a). Meyer also added two new subgroups to the caudatus group: pacificus (two pairs 3a, two pairs 4a) and eriophyoides (one pair 3a, four pairs 4a). Recently, Castro et al. (2016) proposed the division of the genus Tenuipalpus into two groups: Tenuipalpus sensu stricto, with a pair of lateral projections associated with setae c3, and Tenuipalpus sensu lato, lacking lateral projections associated with setae c3. Elgoni et al. (2023) created diagnostic keys to species groups of Tenuipalpus sensu lato (273 species) based on the new combination of the genus Tenuipalpus proposed by Castro et al. 2016. They also categorize new species groups using Tenuipalpus sensu lato morphological characteristics.

Mites of the family Tenuipalpidae from Georgia were predominantly studied by Reck (1951, 1953, 1956, 1959), Arabuli (2008, 2015, 2025), Arabuli & Kvavadze (2013), and Arabuli et al. (2015). In consequence, about 36 species of flat mites have been reported from the country so far.

Previously, 7 species of Tenuipalpus were recorded from Georgia: T. baeri Reck, 1956; T. cheladzeae Gomelauri, 1960; T. dubinini Reck, 1951; T. granati Sayed, 1946; T. kobachidzei Reck, 1951; T. punicae Pritchard & Baker, 1958; T. zhizhilashviliae Reck, 1953. Five of them have been described from Georgia (Gomelauri, 1960; Reck, 1951, 1953, 1956). Among the examined species of Tenuipalpus distributed in different regions of Georgia, only one, T. cheladzeae, belongs to the sensu stricto group; the newly recorded T. rosae and other species are members of the sensu lato group.

In the current paper, we redescribe and illustrate the newly recorded species T. rosae from the Caucasus region. The species was originally described from Alushta, Ukraine, by Kadzhaja (1955) which is about 1000 kilometers from the new location. The morphology of the male and female reproductive organs was not mentioned in the original description (Kadzhaja, 1955). In addition, the palp–tarsus was described as bearing one long setae; however, recent research shows one minute eupathidium (2–3) distally and one long solenidion (6–7), while other morphological features are similar. The chaetotaxy of the idiosoma and legs, as well as the morphology of the reproductive organs for this species are presented here. This detailed redescription helps to fill the gaps about the misunderstanding information in different literature date and identification keys. Additionally, a key for Georgian species of the genus Tenuipalpus is provided.

Materials and Methods

Material was collected on September 10, 2016 in Didi Dighomi, Tbilisi, Georgia. The mites were placed in plastic bags along with the host plant (Rosa sp.). The mites were extracted from the host plants using a dipping-washing-filtering method. The solution was filtered through a sieve (400 mesh, 38 μm sieve opening), and mites that remained on the sieve were washed onto a petri plate using 70% ethanol. The specimens were mounted on glass slides in Hoyer's medium using a stereomicroscope (UNITRON Z650HR). Mites were examined under a differential interference contrast (DIC) microscope (ACCU–SCOPE EXC–350). Species identification were performed with the help of diagnostic taxonomic keys and available literature. The images of the re-described individuals were captured by using a camera attached to a microscope (ACCU–SCOPE S/N1706124) and then illustrated. The terminology used in this study follows Lindquist (1985) and Mesa et al. (2009). Chaetotaxy of the legs is based on Lindquist (1985). All measurements are presented in micrometers (µm). The dimensions of the body were measured as the distance between setae v2–h1 (length) and sc2–sc2 (width). The lengths of each seta were measured from the basal insertions to the tips; the distance between setae was measured as the distance between their bases. Legs were measured from the coxal part to the end of the tarsus. The specimens of re–described species, were deposited in Ilia State University, Institute of Zoology, Acarology Collection. The slides of the new recorded species are: 1070, 1378, 1395, 1444, and 1541; additional specimens are preserved in 96% ethanol.

Results

Family Tenuipalpidae Berlese, 1913

Genus Tenuipalpus Donnadieu, 1876

Type species: Tenuipalpus palmatus Donnadieu, 1876 (=T. caudatus (Dugès), 1834).

Baker, 1945: 34; Baker & Pritchard, 1953: 317; Baker & Pritchard, 1960: 564; Baker & Tuttle, 1972: 31; Baker, Tuttle & Abbatiello, 1975: 4; Castro et al. 2016: 108; Collyer, 1973: 915; De Leon, 1965: 65; Evans et al. 1993: 129; Gonzalez, 1968: 38; Hatzinikolis, 1987: 56; Livschitz & Mitrofanov, 1967: 9; Meyer, 1979: 3; Mitrofanov, 1973: 1318; Pritchard & Baker, 1958: 235.

Aegyptopalpus Mitrofanov, 1973: 1318. Type species: Tenuipalpus granati Sayed, 1946, a synonym (Meyer 1979: 3).

Deleonipalpus Mitrofanov, 1973: 1319. Type species: Tenuipalpus barticanus De Leon, 1965, a synonym (Meyer 1979: 4).

Gnathopalpus Mitrofanov, 1973: 1318. Type species: Tenuipalpus rosae Kadzhaja, 1955, a synonym (Meyer 1979: 4).

Tuttlepalpus Mitrofanov, 1973: 1318. Type species: Tenuipalpus trisetosus Baker &Tuttle, 1964, a synonym (Meyer 1979: 3).

Generic diagnosis of the genus Tenuipalpus

Diagnosis — Tenuipalpus sensu lato (Castro et al. 2016)

Lateral body projections associated with setae c3 absent. Prodorsum wider than opisthosoma or elongate–ovate; prodorsum with three pairs of setae (v2, sc1, sc2; except for T. elegans (Collyer) which lacks v2); opisthosoma with 8–10 pairs of setae (c3, d3, e3, f3, h1, h2 present; c2, d2, e2 absent; c1, d1, e1, f2 present or absent (d1, e1 rarely absent); setae h2 elongate, flagelliform. Venter with one to two pairs of setae 3a (3a2 present or absent) and one to four pairs of setae 4a (4a2, 4a3, 4a4 present or absent); two pairs of pseudanal setae ps2–3.

Diagnosis — Tenuipalpus sensu stricto (Castro et al. 2016)

Dorsum with one pair of lateral projections anterior to setae sc2; lateral projections associated with setae c3 present; prodorsum with three pairs of setae (v2, sc1, sc2); dorsal opisthosoma with 10 pairs of setae (c1, c3, d1, d3, e1, e3, f2, f3, h1, h2 present; except for T. lalbaghensis Channabasavanna & Lakkundi, f2 is missing); lateral setae sc2, c3, e3, f2, f3, h1, c1, d1, and e1 variable in shape from lanceolate, obovate, ovate to minute; setae h2 elongate, flagellate. Venter with one to two pairs of setae 3a (3a2 present or absent) and one pair of setae 4a; two to three pairs of pseudanal setae (ps2–3 present; setae ps1 present or absent). Femora, genua and tibiae with setae d inserted in lateral position on tubercles.

Remark

According to Castro et al. (2016), the species belonging to the Tenuipalpus sensu lato group is characterized by having one to four pairs of intercoxal setae 4a. Elgoni et al. (2023), in the description of the Tenuipalpus sensu lato group, reported a venter with one to five pairs of setae 4a (4a1 always present; 4a2, 4a3, 4a4, 4a5 present or absent). Referring to the revised literature data (Reck, 1951:296; 959:124; Pritchard & Baker, 1958:237) and the Tenuipalpus mite material collected in Georgia, it is obvious that T. dubinini, has five or six pairs of intercoxal setae 4a (Figure 7).

Redescription of Tenuipalpus rosae Kadzhaja, 1955

Tenuipalpus rosae Kadzhaja, 1955

(Figures 1–6)

Material examined

Host and location — Rosa sp. (Rosaceae), Didi Dighomi (41.79874°N 44.74818°E, altitude 539 m above sea level), Tbilisi, Georgia; 10th of September 2016.

Material deposition — The specimens of T. rosae Kadzhaja, 1955 are deposed in the Institute of Zoology, Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia. Six females and three males in microscope slides; additional material is preserved in alcohol (T. Arabuli leg.).

Diagnosis

Female — The prodorsum is wider than the opisthosoma and has lateral margins that extend beyond the opisthosoma edges; the dorsum has two pairs of well-developed lateral projections anterior to the setae sc2. The distance between c3–c3 is almost three times as long as the distance between h2–h2; accordingly, the opisthosoma has a distinctive bell shape. Dorsal setae varying in size and shape, they are mostly short and smooth, except seta sc2, e3, f3, h1 that are narrowly lanceolate, and h2 long, flagellate; venter with two pairs of setae 3a (3a1, 3a2) and four pairs of 4a (4a1, 4a2, 4a3, 4a4), ventral and genital shields indistinct with one pair of aggenital and two pairs of genital setae; anal shield with two pairs of setae; palp 3-segmented; spermatheca a short tube terminating in a knob. Tarsi I–IV with 9(1ω)–9(1ω)–5–5 setae. Pretarsal claws and claw-like empodium present with tenent hairs.

Male — As per female except: opisthosoma distinctly narrower. Setae ps3 modified as accessory genital stylets. Tarsi I–IV with an additional solenidion, ω′, present.

Description

Female — (Figures 1–3) (n = 6). Color in life red. The prodorsum is distinctively wider than the opisthosoma and Y-shaped ridges stretching from eyes posteriorly. Body size: v2–h1 280–300; sc2–sc2 180–185; lengths of leg I 135–138; leg II 122–120; leg III 100–105; leg IV 90–97.

Dorsum – (Figure 1). Dorsum with irregular striae; prodorsum with strong wrinkles laterally and broken unclear striae medially. Projection on anterior margin of prodorsum with incision, depth of notch 23–25. Prodorsal setae v2 and sc1 short, almost equal in length; sc2 long, lanceolate and noticeably barbed; about 6 times as long as sc1. Lengths of prodorsal setae v2 6–7, sc1 5–6, sc2 36–38. Opisthosoma with transverse striae between c1–e1 and strong longitudinal wrinkles lateral to c1–e1, and with irregular striae posterior to e1; opisthosomal pores present anterior to e3; bearing one pair of humeral setae (c3), three pairs of dorsocentral setae (c1, d1 and e1), five pairs of dorsolateral setae (d3, e3, f3, h2 and h1; f2 absent). Setae c1, c3, d1, d3 and e1 short, subequal in length; e3, f3 and h1 lanceolate, barbed; e3 and f3 subequal in length and about five times as long as d1; setae h1 about three times as long as e1; h2 flagelliform, elongate and serrate at the beginning (Figure 1). Lengths of dorsal setae as follows: c1 7–8, c3 7–8, d1 5–6, d3 7–8, e1 5–6, e3 32–34, f3 30–32, h1 18–20, h2 152–156. Distances between dorsal setae: v2–v2 45-48, sc1–sc1 132–135, sc2–sc2 177–180, c1–c1 55–57, c3–c3 182–185, d1–d1 30–32, d3–d3 152–154, e1–e1 16–17, e3–e3 104–107, f3–f3 88–89, h1–h1 38–40, h2–h2 60–61.

Venter – (Figure 2A). Ventral cuticle between 1a–4a and 4a–ag mostly smooth; cuticle on the genital plate between ag–g1–2 mostly with transverse striae; lateral opisthosomal cuticle with longitudinal striae. Ventral setae fine and smooth. Two pairs of setae 3a1–2 and four pairs of setae 4a1–4 present. Setae 1a, 3a2 and 4a1–4 flagelliform; setae 3a1 short and setiform; setae 3a2 almost eight times as long as 3a1; setae 4a1–4 extend beyond the bases of agential setae; the longest setae 4a1 extend beyond the bases of genital setae. Aggenital setae (ag) slightly shorter than genital setae (g1–2). Lengths of setae: 1a 108–115, 1b 75–78, 1c 24–26, 2b 62–65, 2c 20–22, 3a 114–16, 3a2 114–116, 3b 20–22, 4a1 93–95, 4a2 88–90, 4a3 74–77, 4a4 72–75, 4b 18–20, ag 19–20, g1 23–25, g2 24–26, ps2 16–18, ps3 20–22.

Spermatheca – (Figure 2B). Slender and elongated tube terminating into a small bulb. Lengths of spermatheca 52–25.

Gnathosoma – (Figure 2C). Palp three–segmented; length of palp segments: first 4–5, second 19–21, third 3–5; palp–tarsus short, with one solenidion 6–7 and one minute eupathidium 2–3 distally; second segment of palp elongate and with barbed dorsal seta d 21–22. Ventral infracapitulum with seta m 20–21.

Legs – (Figure 3). Legs shorter than body. Setal formulae of leg segments as follows: coxae 2–2–1–1; trochanters 1–1–2–1; femora 4–4–2–1; genua 2–2–1–1; tibiae 4–4–3–3; tarsi 9(1ω)–9(1ω) –5–5. Tarsi I and II each with one solenidion ω″ (Figure 3: A and B). Tarsal claws pad–like.

Male — (Figures 4–6) (n=3). Color in life red. The opisthosoma is noticeably narrower than the prodorsum. Body size: v2–h1 246–250; sc2–sc2 160–162; lengths of leg I 178–182; leg II 148–152; leg III 120–122; leg IV 124–126.

Dorsum – (Figure 4). Dorsum with irregular striae laterally. Projection on anterior margin of prodorsum with incision, depth of notch 17–20. Prodorsum smooth, covered with few faint transverse striae and oblique striae posterior to sc1. Opisthosoma distinctly narrower than propodosoma. Region between c1–d1 smooth; with strong longitudinal wrinkles lateral to c1–e1 and with irregular striae anterior to e1; opisthosomal pores well-developed anterior to e3. Dorsal setae similar to those of the female. Lengths of dorsal setae as follows: v2 8–10, sc1 9–11, sc2 30–32, c1 8–9, c3 9–11, d1 7–9, d3 15–16, e1 7–9, e3 24–27, f3 24–26 h1 14–16, h2 155–158. Distances between dorsal setae: v2–v2 38–40, sc1–sc1 120–122, sc2–sc2 158–160, c1–c1 34-36, c3–c3 134–136, d1–d1 25–27, d3–d3 108–110, e1–e1 7–9, e3–e3 70–72, f3–f3 62–65, h1–h1 27–28, h2–h2 40–42.

Venter – (Figure 5A). Ventral cuticle without transverse striae. Ventral setae similar to female except setae ps3 modified as accessory genital stylets, concealed by the anal valves. Lengths of setae: 1a 98–100, 1b 84–86, 1c 20–23, 2b 72–75, 2c 18–20, 3a1 12–14, 3a2 102–106, 3b 21–23, 4a1 73–75), 4a2 75–76, 4a3 80–82, 4a4 82–84, 4b 16–17, ag 15–16, g1 16–17, g2 15–17, ps2 10–11, ps3 8–9.

Aedeagus – (Figure 5B). The aedeagus is narrow, elongate, sclerotized, and tapering to a blunt point distally; a narrow coiled membranous tube is present basally, terminating in a region that opens into a membranous vesicle.

Gnathosoma – Palp three-segmented, the length of palp segments: first 4–6, second 20–23, third 5–6; palp–tarsus short with with one solenidion 7–8 and one minute eupathidium 2–3 distally; second segment of palp elongate and with one barbed seta d 22–25. Ventral infracapitulum with seta m 20–21.

Legs – (Figure 6). Setal formulae of leg segments similar to adult female except tarsi I–IV with an additional solenidion, ω′, present.

Notes

All specimens collected for the current study have four pairs of posterior medioventral setae 4a. However, Reck (1959) noted that intercoxal setae could include four or five pairs of setae 4a.

Discusion

Kadzhaja (1955) described T. rosae from specimens collected on Rosa sp. in Ukraine; the information about the type specimens depository was not mentioned in the original description. Before the current investigation, T. rosae was registered in Ukraine (Kadzhaia, 1955; Mitrofanov, 1973; Livshitz & Mitrofanov, 1967; Mitrofanov & Strunkova, 1979; Zhovnerchuk et al. 2021) and in Greece (Hatzinikolis, 1986, 1987). Livshitz & Mitrofanov (1967) redescribed T. rosae using the material collected by Kadzhaja in Ukraine on August 18, 1963; however, the information on where the type and paratype specimens are deposited is not mentioned in the paper.

Later, T. rosae was moved to the genus Gnathopalpus by Mitrofanov (1973) and to the genus Colopalpus by Mitrofanov & Strunkova (1979). Meyer (1979) considered these two genera synonymous of Tenuipalpus. Mesa et al. (2009) and Zhovnerchuk et al. (2021) provided comprehensive information regarding the distribution and synonym of T. rosae, although the type depository is listed as unknown in both works. The recently discovered species T. rosae was only collected at one site in Georgia for the current study. For the morphological analysis, three males and six females were mounted, and extra material was kept in ethanol. The new location is roughly 1000 kilometers from Alushta, Ukraine, where the species was first reported. The current redescription of T. rosae provides additional novel data (e.g., leg setae, setal measurements and the morphology of the female and male reproductive organs). In addition, the present study shows a palp–tarsus with a minute eupathidium distally and one long solenidion, instead of the palp–tarsus with a single long setae reported in the original description.

In some identification keys, the morphological characters differ from the actual features of T. Rosae, which can lead to confusion during species identification. Pritchard & Baker (1958) developed an identification key for the genus Tenuipalpus, indicating that T. rosae has eight pairs of posterior medioventral setae (4a) instead of 4 pairs. Later, Meyer (1979) used the same characteristic (eight pairs of posterior medioventral setae) in her identification key, which was based on that proposed by Pritchard & Baker (1958). Furthermore, the morphological characters used in the most recent identification key provide for the genus Tenuipalpus complicate the taxonomy of the species. According to Elgoni et al. (2023), the venter contains one pair of 3a in T. rosae and two pairs of 3a in T. crassus Andre, 1953; however, T. rosae actually possesses two pairs of 3a (Figures 2A and 5A), making the use of the key to identify the species challenging. Based on the literature, both T. crassus and T. rosae have two pairs of 3a; the primary distinction between them is the number of setae 4a: T. rosae has four pairs (or five – according to Reck (1959)), whereas T. crassus has three pairs (Mitrofanov & Strunkova, 1979).

Key to known species of Tenuipalpus from Georgia (based on adult females)

1. Lateral projections associated with setae c3 present, genua I with 3 setae, tibia I–II with 4 setae
...... Tenuipalpus sensu stricto (sensu Castro et al. 2016) ... Tenuipalpus cheladzeae Gomelauri, 1960

—Lateral projection without associated setae c3 absent
...... Tenuipalpus sensu lato (sensu Castro et al. 2016) ... 2

2. Dorsal opisthosoma with 8 pairs of setae, Tenuipalpus granati Species Group (sensu Elgoni et al. 2023). Dorsocentral setae c1 present, setae d1 and e1 absent; venter with 1 pair of 3a and 2 pairs of posterior medioventral setae 4a
...... Tenuipalpus granati Sayed, 1946

— Dorsal opisthosoma with more than 8 pairs of setae
...... 3

3. Dorsal opisthosoma with 9 pairs of setae
...... Tenuipalpus dubinini Species Group (sensu Elgoni et al. 2023) ... 4

— Dorsal opisthosoma with 10 pairs of setae
...... Tenuipalpus carolinensis Species Group (sensu Elgoni et al. 2023) ... 5

4. Trochanter and femora IV with 2 setae; venter with 5-6 pairs of posterior medioventral setae 4ae
...... Tenuipalpus dubinini Reck, 1951

— Trochanter and femora IV with 1 seta; venter with 4 pairs of posterior medioventral setae 4ae
...... Tenuipalpus rosae Kadzhaja, 1955

5. Venter with 2 pairs of 3a setae
...... Tenuipalpus kobachidzei Reck, 1951

— Venter with 1 pair of 3a setae
...... 6

6. Dorsocentral setae long; setae c1 longest, reaching to the basis of d1; genua I and II with 3 setae
...... Tenuipalpus baeri Reck, 1956

— Dorsocentral setae (c1, d1, e1) minute and equal in size; genua I and II with 1 or two setae setae
...... 7

7. Genua I and II, each with 1 setae
...... Tenuipalpus zhizhilashviliae Reck, 1953

— Genua I and II with 2 setae
...... Tenuipalpus punicae Pritchard & Baker, 1958

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers, whose helpful comments improved the manuscript as well as Philippe Auger for managing it.

References

1. Arabuli T. 2008. Tetranychoid mites (Acari: Tetranychoidea) fauna of Georgia. Proceedings of Georgian Academy of Science. Biol Ser B, 6, 86-97.
2. Arabuli T, Kvavadze E. 2013. New record for Caucasus fauna: Cenopalpus (Cenopalpoides) wainsteini Livschitz & Mitrofanov, 1967 (Acari: Tenuipalpida), additional description and three new host plants. International Journal of Acarology, 39, 538-541. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2013.837961
3. Arabuli T, Çobanoglu S, Kvavadze E. 2015 New Records of Tenuipalpid mites (Acari: Tenuipalpidae) for Georgian and Caucasus Fauna. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 39, 335-337. https://doi.org/10.3906/zoo-1401-54
4. Arabuli T. 2015. Two New Records and List of Tenuipalpid mites (Acari: Tenuipalpidae) for Georgian Fauna. Proceedings of the Institute of Zoology, Vol. XXIV, 33-45. https://doi.org/10.3906/zoo-1401-54
5. Arabuli T. 2025. New species and new record of flat mites (Acari: Tenuipalpidae) from Georgia (Caucasus). Systematic and Applied Acarology 30(3), 611-624. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.30.3.8
6. Baker EW. 1945. Mites of the genus Tenuipalpus (Acarina: Trichadenidae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington, 47(2), 33-38.
7. Baker EW, Pritchard AE. 1960. The tetranychoid mites of Africa. Hilgardia, 29(11), 455-574. https://doi.org/10.3733/hilg.v29n11p455
8. Baker EW, Tuttle DM, 1987. The false spider mites of Mexico (Tenuipalpidae: Acari). United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Technical Bulletin 1706:1-236.
9. Baker EW, Tuttle DM. 1972. New species and further notes on the Tetranychoidea mostly from Southwestern United States (Acarina: Tetranychidae and Tenuipalpidae). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 116, 1-36. https://doi.org/10.5479/si.00810282.116
10. Baker EW, Tuttle DM, Abbatiello MJ. 1975. The false spider mites of northwestern and north central Mexico (Acarina: Tenuipalpidae). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 194, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.5479/si.00810282.194
11. Beard JJ, Ochoa R, Braswell WE, Bauchan GR. 2015. Brevipalpus phoenicis (Geijskes) species complex (Acari:Tenuipalpidae)-a closer look. Zootaxa, 3944 (1), 1-67. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3944.1.1
12. Castro EB, Kane EC, Feres RJF, Ochoa R, Bauchan GR. 2016. Definition of Tenuipalpus sensu stricto (Acari, Tenuipalpidae), with redescription of Tenuipalpus caudatus (Dugès) and description of a new species from Costa Rica. International Journal of Acarology, 42(2), 106-126. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2015.1130941
13. Childers CC, Welbourn WC, Fashing NJ, McDonald E, Ochoa R. 2006. A ranking model and list to identify foreign tetranychoidea pests of agricultural and environmental significance to the United States. USDA-APHIS. http://www.lucidcentral.org/keys/v3/mites/
14. Collyer E. 1973. A new species of the genus Dolichotetranychus (Acarina: Tenuipalpidae) from New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Science, 16, 747-749.
15. Donnadieu AL. 1875. Recherches pour servir a l′histoire des Tétranyques. Thèses. Faculté des Sciences de Lyon-Francia, 1-131.
16. De Leon D. 1965. New Tenuipalpidae (false spider mites) from British Guiana with notes on four described species. Florida Entomologist, 48(1), 65-75. https://doi.org/10.2307/3493527
17. Elgoni NA, Kamran M, Alatawi FJ. 2023. Tenuipalpus Sensu Lato Donnadieu (Acari: Prostigmata: Tenuipalpidae); New Species Groups, a New Species, and Keys to the World Species. Animals (Basel). Oct 20;13(20):3278. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13203278
18. Evans G, Cromroy HL, Ochoa R. 1993. The Tenuipalpidae of Honduras (Tenuipalpidae: Acari). Florida Entomologist, 76(1), 126-155. https://doi.org/10.2307/3496021
19. Gomelauri LA. 1960. Novi vid klesha poda Tenuipalpus iz Gruzii (Acarina: Tenuipalpidae) [New species in the genus Tenuipalpus from the Georgia, Gruzia, SSR (Acarina: Tenuipalpidae)]. Reports of the Academy of Science of the Georgian SSR. Soobshcheniya Akademii Nauk Gruzinskoi, 24(1), 77-79. (in Russian)
20. González RH. 1968. Acaros plantícolas del género Tenuipalpus en Chile (Acarina: Tenuipalpidae). Revista Chilena de Entomología, 6, 37-46.
21. Kadzhaja GS. 1955. Novy vid kleshcha-ploskotelki (Pseudoleptidae) [New species of flat mite (Pseudoleptidae)]. Sbornik Acadeniya Nauk Stud Tiblis. Univ. Stalina, Moscow, 7, 65-69. (in Russian)
22. Hatzinikolis Ε. 1986. The genus Tenuipalpus (Acari: Tenuipalpidae) in Greece. Entomologia Hellenica, 4, 19-22. https://doi.org/10.12681/eh.13928
23. Hatzinikolis EN. 1987. A revision of tenuipalpid mites of Greece (Acarina: Tenuipalpidae). Entomologia Hellenica, 5(2), 47-60. https://doi.org/10.12681/eh.13948
24. Lindquist EE. 1985. Anatomy, phylogeny and systematic. 1.1.1. External anatomy. In: Spider Mites, Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control (eds., Helle, W. and M. Sabelis), Amsterdam, Elsevier, Vol. 1A, pp. 3-28.
25. Livshitz IZ, Mitrofanov VI. 1967. Materiali k poznaniu fauni kleshi-plascatselki [Materials to the cognition of the flat mite's fauna (Acariformes: Tenuipalpidae)]. Proceedings Nikitsky Botanic Garden, 39, 1-72. (In Russian, English Summary)
26. Mesa NC, Ochoa R, Welbourn WC, Evans GA, Moraes G. 2009. A catalog of the Tenuipalpidae (Acari) of the World with a key to genera. Zootaxa, 2098, 1-185. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.2098.1.1
27. Meyer MKP. 1979. The Tenuipalpidae (Acari) of Africa with keys to the world fauna. Pretoria (South Africa): Entomology Memoir Department of Agriculture Republic South Africa, 50(1), 1-133.
28. Meyer MKP. 1993. A revision of the genus Tenuipalpus Donnadieu (Acari: Tenuipalpidae) in the Afrotropical region. Entomology Memoir, Department of Agriculture Republic South Africa 88:1-84.
29. Mitrofanov VI. 1973. Revision of the system of phytophagous mites of the subfamily Tenuipalpinae s. str. (Trombidiformes, Tenuipalpidae). Zoologicheskii Zhurnal, 52:1315-1320. (in Russian)
30. Mitrofanov VI, Strunkova ZI. 1979. Opredelitel Kleshchei-ploskotelok, USSR [A key to false spider mites of USSR]. 148, 1-148. (in Russian)
31. Pritchard AE, Baker EW. 1958. The false spider mites (Acarina: Tenuipalpidae). University of California Publications in Entomology, 14, 175-274.
32. Reck GF. 1951. Kleshchi rodov Tenuipalpus, Brevipalpus e Brevipalpoides (Trichadenidae, Acarina) po materialam iz Gruzii. [Mites of the genera Tenuipalpus, Brevipalpus and Brevipalpoides (Tricnadenidae, Acarina) based on the materials from Georgia]. Trudy Instituta Zoologii Akademiya Nauk Gruzinskoi SSR, 10, 289-297. (in Russian)
33. Reck GF. 1953. Κ izucheniu fauni tetranikhovikh kleshchei Gruzii [Research investigation on the fauna of the Tetranychidae in Georgia]. Trudy Instituta Zoologii, Akademiya Nauk Gruzinskoi SSR, 11, 167-171. (in Russian)
34. Reck GF. 1956. Novie vidi tetranickovick kleshchei iz Vostochnoi Gruzzii [New species of tetranychid mites from Eastern Georgia]. Trudy Instituta Zoologii, Akademiya Nauk Gruzinskoi SSR, 15, 5-28. (in Russian)
35. Reck GF. 1959. Opredelitel tetranykhovikh kleshei [Identification key of tetranychoid mites] Tbilisi, Georgia, Publishing House of the Academy of Science of GSSR, 150 pp. (in Russian)
36. Sayed MT. 1946. Description of Tenuipalpus granati nov. sp. and Brevipalpus pyri nov. sp. (Acarina: Trichadenidae). Bulletin of the Society Fouad Ier. Entomology, 30, 99-103.
37. Zhovnerchuk OV, Bondareva LM, Chumak PYa. 2021. An annotated checklist of Tenuipalpidae (Acari: Trombidiformes) of Ukraine. Українська ентомофауністика,12(2): 31-35. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5542193

instructions