Hernandes, Leticia Molina ¹ and Lofego, Antonio Carlos ²

¹✉ Graduation Program in Biodiversity, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Institute of Biosciences, Humanities and Exact Sciences, São José do Rio Preto 15054-000, São José do Rio Preto, São Paulo, Brazil.
²Department of Biological Sciences, Graduation Program in Biodiversity, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Institute of Biosciences, Humanities and Exact Sciences, São José do Rio Preto 15054-000, São José do Rio Preto, São Paulo, Brazil.

2026 - Volume: 66 Issue: 4 pages: 909-928

Review

Keywords

Abstract

Introduction

The family Phytoseiidae is composed of several predatory species, with some ones used in biological control. These mites are naturally found on the leaves of various plants, where they find food and shelter (Moraes and Flechtmann 2008). Many of these mites feed not only on prey (which are largely phytophagous mites), but also on pollen, plant exudates, and fungi (McMurtry and Croft 1997). The genus Euseius is a good representative of this type of predator, classified by McMurtry et al. 2013 as type IV predatory mites, that is, generalist predators that use pollen as an important part of their diet. The species Euseius citrifolius Denmark and Muma was described from specimens collected in Paraguay by Denmark and Muma in 1970, and since then, many records of this species have been noted in the Neotropics, especially in Brazil (Lofego et al. 2024; Demite et al. 2026). These records often show co-occurrences with several species of phytophagous mites (Oliveira et al. 2012; Montes et al. 2012; Barroso et al. 2019). This species has a rapid life cycle that completes in seven days, from egg to adult stage, although it may be faster depending on its diet (Furtado and Moraes 1998). Some studies demonstrate that E. citrifolius performs well in preying on some species of phytophagous mites, especially those belonging to the family Tenuipalpidae (De Vis et al. 2006; Cardoso et al. 2010; Cano 2020; Amaral 2022). Considering these characteristics, E. citrifolius could be a promising species for use in integrated pest management programs, whether in augmentative biological control or especially for conservation control. According to Tixier (2018), to implement conservation biological control, it is necessary to study certain characteristics of predatory mites, including the presence of the predator on reservoir plants and its dispersal capacity between reservoir plants and the crops. According to Bellini et al. (2008), E. citrifolius was present not only on cultivated rubber trees but also on spontaneous euphorbiaceous plants within the crop. In coffee cultivation, Ferla et al. (2023) also found that this predator was present both on coffee and in intercropped plants. Furthermore, Araújo et al. (2022) demonstrated that the abundance of predators, including E. citrifolius, is positively influenced by the heterogeneity and complexity of the habitat in rubber tree plantations. Thus, as suggested by these studies and following the proposition of Tixier (2018), E. citrifolius seems to have some of the characteristics necessary to be implemented in conservation biological control programs.

In this scenario, considering its widespread and frequent occurrence, its good predatory capacity against pest mites, its presence in cultivated and uncultivated plants, and its presence in a variety of climates and habitats in South America and especially in Brazil, E. citrifolius emerges as a predatory species of great importance for conservative biological control of agricultural pests. However, despite these attributes, there is no literature review study for this species that could provide a basis and direction for further studies. In this context, this study aimed to fill this gap, seeking to evaluate what is already consolidated knowledge, and knowledge gaps.

Material and methods

Searches were conducted using the keyword ''Euseius citrifolius'' in the following databases: Scielo, PubMed, Database Phytoseiidae (Available on: https://www.lea.esalq.usp.br/phytoseiidae ), and Capes Periodicals. Scientific articles, theses, and dissertations were considered to obtain the data. To better assess the topics of the studies on E. citrifolius, the information found was classified into three categories: occurrence and distribution, morphological and molecular characterization, and bioecology. Publications available up to December 18, 2025, were considered.

Some studies were considered in more than one category. The term ''occurrence'' is used for the related presence of the species in plants.

The geographical coordinates were taken directly from the studies when available, or approximate coordinates were used when only the name of the collection site was provided. Geographic data were disregarded when they were nonspecific to the species or when they were too broad. The map was created using the QGIS 3.24.1 program.

The correct spelling of the scientific names of the plants mentioned in this study, as well as information on their family, plant type, and whether they are native or introduced, was verified and obtained from the REFLORA (Available on: https://reflora.jbrj.gov.br/consulta ) and Plant of the World Online – POWO (Available on: https://powo.science.kew.org ) platforms. To determine whether plant species are cultivated or not, the information was checked in POWO and in the National Register of Cultivars (RNC) (Available on: https://sistemas.agricultura.gov.br/snpc/cultivarweb/cultivares_registradas.php ?) for plants found in Brazil. Cultivated plants were defined as any plant maintained or planted by humans for various uses (Kinlock et al. 2025).

Results and discussion

A total of 104 publications with data related to E. citrifolius were found. The majority (89 – 85%) deal with some data about occurrence and/or distribution. Fifteen studies (13%) concerned morphological and molecular characterization, of which only two focused on molecular characterization. The remaining eight percent are biology studies, represented by only nine papers.

The first publication dates to 1970, containing a description and first reports of E. citrifolius in citrus orchards (Denmark and Muma 1970). It was not until 12 years later that another publication on the species was recorded, marking the first study of its biology (Moraes and McMurtry 1981). Since then, there have been a few publications, and from the 2000s onwards, publications have been produced every year, reaching up to 7 publications in a single year (Figure 1).

Across these 104 publications, approximately 160 researchers and more than 50 institutions worked with this species. Most of the publications originated from Brazilian groups or were produced in collaboration with them, notably involving the Acarology Laboratory at ESALQ, Piracicaba and the Acarology Laboratory at UNESP, São José do Rio Preto.

Occurrences and distribution

Eighty-nine studies containing information on the occurrence and geographic distribution of E. citrifolius were found and evaluated. These studies reveal records of this species only in South and Central American countries: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Paraguay, Peru, and Nicaragua. Most of them are from Brazil, with records in 19 of the 26 Brazilian states (Figure 2).

Of all the studies analyzed in this research, 84 contained information on the number of mites found; of these, 79 reported co-occurrence of E. citrifolius with other species of the same genus. In 60% of these studies, E. citrifolius was the most abundant mite compared to other species of the genus, such as Euseius alatus De Leon, Euseius concordis (Chant), and Euseius sibelius (De Leon) although these other species have been recorded in more or the same countries and regions as E. citrifolius. Thus, these data show that when present, E. citrifolius is quite abundant, and can co-occur with other predators.

Euseius citrifolius was found on 226 plant species, belonging to 56 families and 63 genera (Table 1). The most reported species are cultivated plants, only 21 are non-cultivated and native plants. Also, the species occurs more in native plants than introduced ones. Besides that, the most plants are trees or shrub/tree, but E. citrifolius can occurs in various types of plants like grasses, lianas and herbs (Table 1).

The families with the highest occurrence are Fabaceae, Solanaceae, Euphorbiaceae and Arecaceae (Figure 3). Among host plants, many are of economic importance, such as: coffee (Mineiro et al. 2006a, b), coconut (Barroso et al. 2019), citrus (Ferreira et al. 2018), banana (Barroso et al. 2019), rubber tree (Daud and Feres 2013), grapevine (Domingos et al. 2014), peach (Montes et al. 2011), jatropha (Lofego et al. 2013), guava (Denmark and Muma 1970) and tomato (Furtado et al. 2014). In the literature this species was more reported in rubber trees (12 reports), guava (8 reports), coffee (8 reports), citrus (5 reports) and peach (5 reports) (Table 1).

These plants, in monoculture systems, often present phytophagous mite pests, such as Raoiella indica Hirst on coconut and banana cultivars, Brevipalpus phoenicis (Geijskes) on citrus and coffee plantations, Tenuipalpus heveae Baker on rubber tree plantations, among others. E. citrifolius has previously been reported in the literature as co-occurring with all these species (Demite and Feres 2005; Bellini et al. 2008; Montes et al. 2012; Abreu et al. 2014; Mineiro and Raga 2020; Barroso et al. 2019; Ferla et al. 2023). In studies showing its co-occurrence with R. indica (Barroso et al. 2019) and in those with B. phoenicis (Montes et al. 2012; Abreu et al. 2014), E. citrifolius was the most abundant predatory mite. Furthermore, Montes et al. 2012 suggest that the presence of this predator in peach orchards may have accounted for the low density of phytophagous mites found in their study.

In addition, this predator occurs in several plants considered reservoirs and commonly used in intercropping systems, such as Inga edulis Mart. (Fabaceae) (Ferla et al. 2023), Swietenia macrophylla King (Meliaceae) (Demite et al. 2021), Urochloa brizantha (A.Rich.) R.D.Webster (Poaceae) (Lofego et al. 2009). Thus, understanding this predator's locomotion across different environments and plant communities, and especially its impact on pest species, is fundamental.

Morphological and molecular characterizations

Denmark and Muma (1970) described E. citrifolius from specimens collected in Asunción, Paraguay. Following this work, twelve other studies presented new morphological data, such as structural measurements of the populations studied and illustrations, for this species (Moraes and McMurtry 1983; Feres and Moraes 1998; Gondim and Moraes 2001; Noronha and Moraes 2002; Lofego et al. 2004; Guanilo et al. 2008 a, b; Lofego et al. 2009; Demite et al. 2017; Lofego et al. 2024; Castro et al. 2024). All these studies demonstrate the existence of intraspecific morphological variability, as initially observed by Noronha and Moraes (2002). The variation was less or equal to 10% in comparison with the original description for shields and about 10 or 15% for setaes, but always the difference was less than 10 µm. This difference could be considered a normal intraspecific variation (Tixier 2013).

Noronha and Moraes (2002) suggested that morphological variation may be linked to the geographical differentiation, with an effect of the location where the population was collected. This hypothesis is consistent with observations in literature for this species and shown in Table 2. These data (Table 2) show that in comparison with the original description population, the population of São Paulo, Peru and Argentina has the longer body length. Besides that, populations from the state of São Paulo tend to have slightly longer body length than populations from other regions of Brazil, especially in comparison with regions geographically more distant. One possible explanation for this is that abiotic factors like altitude, temperature, seasonality and precipitation can influence the body size (Yu et al. 2025; Tixier et al. 2003). The effect of temperature in morphology was demonstrated for Euseius concordis (Chant) (Lopes et al. 2018) and Amblydromalus limonicus (Garman & McGregor) (Vangansbeke et al. 2020). In both studies the mites have higher body length at low temperatures. This can explain part of the variation morphology found in this review.

In addition to local climatic characteristics, another factor that could explain the differences found would be the diet of these mites in natura. Ferreira et al. (2021) observed that for Neoseiulus tunus (De Leon), diet plays an important role in modifying morphological measurements, both of shields (ventrianal shield and width of dorsal shield) and setae. This same observation was made by Lopes et al. (2018) for E. concordis. Besides that, the host plants can influence in the morphological variation, as suggested for Typhlodromus (Anthoseius) recki Wainstein (Tixier et al. 2021) and Kampimodromus aberrans (Oudemans) (Tixier et al. 2003). Thus, given that morphological measurements can apparently vary with the environment in which an individual lives, characterizing the extent of this intraspecific variation is extremely important, as these measurements are used as diagnosis for species differentiation. Furthermore, it would be interesting to verify whether there are differences in bioecological parameters between these populations with different morphological traits.

Although morphological variability exists in E. citrifolius, molecular studies based on ITS1 and ITS2 markers also suggest that this represents intraspecific variation, given the low or nonexistent genetic difference between the populations studied (Noronha et al. 2003). However, molecular studies using other markers to provide taxonomic information, including for other populations, might be interesting to carry out.

Another molecular characterization of E. citrifolius was, conducted by Santos and Tixier (2018), in which they considered six molecular markers to elucidate the likely ancestral region and phylogenetic relationships of the Euseiini tribe. This study indicates that the ancestor of the genus Euseius is possibly from the Neotropical region. Furthermore, the authors classified as belonging to Clade I and with a higher occurrence in the plant families Euphorbiaceae, Rosaceae, Rutaceae, and Solanaceae. These same families were found here for E. citrifolius, but the highest records are Fabaceae, Solanaceae, Euphorbiaceae and Arecaceae. Across all these families, E. citrifolius is recorded on both cultivated plants (majority) and non-cultivated ones. Furthermore, the species was found on 30 native plant species belonging to the families Euphorbiaceae (15) and Solanaceae (15) (Table 1). These records align with the findings of Santos and Tixier (2018), indicating that these families may be associated with the center of diversification for Euseiini species in South America.

Bioecology

A total of nine studies on bioecological parameters related to E. citrifolius were found. Among them, only four evaluated the complete life cycle of this predatory mite (Moraes and McMurtry 1982; Furtado and Moraes 1998; Amaral 2022; Domingos et al. 2025). In these studies, E. citrifolius was able to complete its development cycle by feeding on the following phytophagous mites: Tetranychus urticae (Koch), Tetranychus pacificus McGregor, Mononychellus tanajoa (Bondar), Oligonychus punicae (Hirst) and Tenuipalpus heveae. Furthermore, Furtado and Moraes (1998) observed that when fed Typha angustifolia L. pollen, E. citrifolius had a shorter generation time and higher rates of reproduction, growth, oviposition, and longevity than when fed T. urticae and M. tanajoa. However, Amaral (2022), in a study with another population and with T. heveae as food, showed even higher rates of reproduction, growth, oviposition, and longevity than those found by Furtado and Moraes (1998) for prey and pollen. Domingos et al. (2025) also demonstrated that E. citrifolius has a higher reproduction rate when fed with O. punicae and T. urticae than with pollen from Ricinus communis L (Euphorbiaceae). Thus, although the populations tested were different and the conditions also, these studies demonstrate that E. citrifolius can complete its life cycle with a variety of foods, including mite pests and pollen.

Six other studies evaluating only E. citrifolius predation on the following prey: Brevipalpus phoenicis (Tenuipalpidae) (Gravena et al. 1994), Oligonychus ilicis (McGregor) (Tetranychidae) (Franco et al. 2010), Tenuipalpus heveae (Tenuipalpidae) (Cardoso et al. 2010; Amaral 2022), Raoiella indica (Tenuipalpidae) (Cano 2020), Calacarus heveae Feres (Eriophyidae) (Amaral 2022), Eutetranychus banksi McGregor (Tetranychidae) (Amaral 2022) and Frankliniella sp. (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) (De Vis et al. 2006) (Table 3). In all these studies, the authors demonstrated that E. citrifolius might possibly play an important role in the control of these pests. Among these studies and among the species tested, the highest predation rate was observed on R. indica (Cano 2020), with a consumption of 52.03 ± 4.50 eggs/female/day. This predation rate is like that found for the predatory mite Neoseiulus barkeri Hughes (56.2 ± 2.0) when fed on this same prey and which is commercially available for inundate biological control of this pest but does not occur naturally in Brazilian and neotropical agroecosystems (Filgueiras et al. 2020). Thus, these studies demonstrate the potential of E. citrifolius as a biological control agent.

De Vis et al. (2006) evaluated the oviposition and survival of E. citrifolius with different foods, namely: B. phoenicis, T. heveae, C. heveae, T. urticae, Oligonychus gossypii (Zacher) and T. angustifolia. They obtained slightly higher oviposition results when E. citrifolius was fed with mites of the family Tenuipalpidae than when fed with pollen from T. angustifolia or mites from the families Tetranychidae and Eriophyidae (Table 4). Similar results were found by Amaral (2022) in which, despite the wide variety of pollens tested (Table 4), E. citrifolius obtained higher oviposition when fed with the mite T. heveae (Tenuipalpidae). Available data demonstrate that the best predation rates for E. citrifolius were achieved when tests were conducted with a high prey density and when the offered prey was Tenuipalpidae. Biological data on this species when fed on T. heveae also demonstrate that this predatory mite could develop using only this prey as food and showed good growth, reproduction, and longevity rates.

In addition to occurring in various regions and hosts, as already indicated previously, studies with an ecological focus have indicated the capacity of E. citrifolius to occur in variable environmental conditions, being able to occur throughout the year in a given area, demonstrating adaptation to climatic variations that occur throughout the year (Lofego and Moraes 2006; Demite et al. 2011; Abreu et al. 2014). The species is also found in diverse biomes -such as Atlantic Forest, Amazon, Caatinga, Pantanal, and Cerrado (Zacarias and Moraes 2001; Lofego and Moraes 2006; Demite et al. 2011; 2017; Rezende and Lofego 2011; Mendonça et al. 2019; Conceição et al. 2021; Rodrigues et al. 2020), in well as in uncultivated areas (Feres et al. 2007; Lofego and Moraes 2006; Lofego et al. 2017; Demite et al. 2011; 2013), or more disturbed environments, such as agroecosystems and even urban areas (Daud and Feres 2005; Montes et al. 2012; Abreu et al. 2014; Lofego et al. 2013). Furthermore, studies show that E. citrifolius can be present in environments and on plants with insecticide applications (Hesketh and Sato 2023), showing a possible adaptability of this predator, as already shown for other predatory mites (Argolo et al. 2014; Salman et al. 2015; Serra et al. 2026). Bioecological data indicate that E. citrifolius is a resilient predatory mite that could exert pest control across diverse environment, making it a key species in conservation biological control. Other Euseius species have proven important in controlling multiple pests; for instance, Euseius stipulatus (Athias-Henriot) and Euseius sojaensis (Ehara) are significant in citrus orchard. Euseius stipulatus has been successfully used in classical biological control programs in Peru (Vásquez et al. 2023; Santana-Mayorga et al. 2025) and the United States (McMurtry et al. 2015). However, it yielded less successful results against E. banksi in Spanish citrus orchard, likely due to the consumption of alternative food sources and intraguild predation (Abad-Moyano et al. 2010; López-Olmos and Ferragut 2024). Euseius sojaensis has proven important for the conservation biological control of Panonychus citri (McGregor) (Acari: Tetranychidae) and Aculops pelekassi (Keifer) (Acari: Eriophyidae) in Japan, demonstrating population growth and successful pest control when supported by pollen-producing plants (Tsuchida and Masui, 2025). Meanwhile, Euseius amissibilis Meshkov showed promise in controlling Trialeurodes vaporariorum (Gennadius) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) and Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande) on greenhouse roses; however, in semi-field trials involving pollen, it failed to effectively control thrips while maintaining efficacy against whiteflies (Van Houten et al. 2016). Thus, understanding the field behavior of a predatory species, particularly a generalist like those in the Euseius genus, is crucial for establishing its effectiveness as a biological control agent. Therefore, further field studies on E. citrifolius are needed to better evaluate its role in maintaining control over phytophagous mites.

Conclusions

In general, this review demonstrates that most studies involving E. citrifolius focus on occurrence records, indicating a wide distribution in Brazil and with some records in other countries like: Argentina, Colombia, Paraguay, Peru and Nicaragua. We also observed that this predator is most commonly found on the plant families Fabaceae, Solanaceae, Euphorbiaceae, and Arecaceae and the species compiled in this review can be used as a guide for searching for this species in natura, or for choosing the best plants as reservoirs in integrated cropping programs.

There are also a good number of studies on morphological characterization, thus allowing the recognition of morphological variations and facilitating the identification of this species.

Bioecological studies have shown that, in addition to being frequent, E. citrifolius is often the most abundant predator in some environments. Furthermore, these studies demonstrate that this predator can complete its life cycle and have a population increase by consuming various types of prey and pollen. Judging by the studies already carried out, considering the frequency, abundance, and predation potential of phytophagous mites, it is presumed that E. citrifolius could play a role in the control of mite pests in some preserved environments and agroecosystems.

Despite this, important information is lacking for this predator to be used in pest control programs, such as field studies, with no studies having been performed, as well as more studies on food preferences. Since this predator is a generalist, it is also important to understand its predation potential in relation to different types of prey that have not yet been studied, to understand its possible range of action, as well as to verify its acceptance of alternative foods to improve mass breeding strategies and maintain the predator in the field.

Another gap in knowledge about this species is the molecular characterization of populations. In our searches, we found only one study on the subject, and in that study, only two nuclear markers were used. Thus, studies involving mitochondrial markers to better assess molecular differences between populations would be interesting.

Finally, we can conclude that E. citrifolius is an abundant species that have demonstrated a good predatory capacity, especially with Tenuipalpidae mites. This reinforces the potential of this species as a natural enemy of various agricultural pests and the importance of including it in pest management programs.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the Coordination Foundation for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) – Finance Code 001 for the financial support of this study. Additionally, A.C. Lofego received a research productivity fellowship from CNPq [Proc. no. 310937/2025-6].

References

1. Abad-Moyano R., Urbaneja A., Schausberger P. 2010. Intraguild interactions between Euseius stipulatus and the candidate biocontrol agents of Tetranychus urticae in Spanish clementine orchards: Phytoseiulus persimilis and Neoseiulus californicus. Exp. Appl. Acarol., 50: 23-34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-009-9278-7
2. Abreu F. A., Reis P. R., Marafeli P. P., Silva R. A., Bernardi L. F. O., Carvalho C. F. 2014. Influence of rainfall on mite abundance in coffee. Coffee Science, 9 (3): 329-335.
3. Amaral F. S. R. 2022. Potencial de fitoseídeos (Acari: Phytoseiidae) como agentes de controle biológico de três espécies de ácaros fitófagos em seringueira. [Phd Thesis]. São Paulo: Unesp. pp. 92.
4. Araújo F. G., Lima E. L., Costa, E., Daud R. D. 2022. Influence of natural vegetation conservation on the distribution of mites in rubber tree crops. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 27 (8):1629-1647. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.27.8.13
5. Argolo P.S., Jacas J.A., Urbaneja A. 2014. Comparative toxicity of pesticides in three phytoseiid mites with different life-style occurring in citrus: Euseius stipulatus, Neoseiulus californicus and Phytoseiulus persimilis. Exp. Appl. Acarol., 62(1): 33-46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-013-9726-2
6. Baldo F. B., Mineiro J. L. C., Raga A. 2018. Diversity and population dynamics of mites in peach and plum trees (Rosaceae) in the Southwest State of São Paulo, Brazil. Int. J. Acarol., 44 (2-3):129-137. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2018.1436589
7. Barbosa F. R., Gondim JR. M. G. C., Moreira W. A., Alencar J. A., Souza E. A., Silva C. S. B., Souza A. M., Miranda I. G. 2005.Arthropods-pest and predators associated with mango trees at the Vale do São Francisco, Northestern Brazil. Neotrop. Entomol, 34 (3): 471-474. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2005000300016
8. Barroso G., Rocha C. M., Moreira G. F., Hata F. T., Roggia S., Ventura M. U., Pasini A., Silva J. E. P., Holtz A. M., Moraes G. J. 2019.What is the southern limit of the distribution of red palm mite, Raoiella indica (Acari: Tenuipalpidae), in agricultural lands in Brazil? Fla. Entomol.,102 (3): 581-585. https://doi.org/10.1653/024.102.0334
9. Bellini M. R., Feres R. J. F., Buosi R. 2008. Mites (Acari) from rubber trees (Hevea brasiliensis Muell. Arg., Euphorbiaceae) and spontaneous euphorbiaceous in rubber trees cultivation. Neotrop. Entomol., 37 (4); 463-471. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2008000400016
10. Bellini M. R., Moraes G. J., Feres R. J. F. 2005a. Mites (Acari) of two cultivation systems adopted in northwestern State São Paulo. Neotrop. Entomol., 34 (3): 475-484. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2005000300017
11. Bellini M. R., Moraes G. J., Feres R. J. F. 2005b.Weeds as alternative substrates to phytoseiids (Acari, Phytoseiidae) in rubber tree Hevea brasilienis, Muell. Arg. (Euphorbiaceae) cultivation. Rev. Bras. Zool., 22: 35-42. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-81752005000100005
12. Buosi R., Feres R. J. F., Oliveira A. R., Lofego A. C., Hernandes F. A. 2006. Plant inhabiting mites (Acari) of the ''Estação Ecológica de Paulo de Faria'', State of São Paulo, Brazil. Biota Neotrop., 6. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1676-06032006000100009
13. Cano L. M. G. 2020. Diversity and biological control of mites on banana plants in different regions of the state of São Paulo. [Master's thesis]. São Paulo: Instituto Biológico. pp.71.
14. Cardoso M. S. M., Vieira M. R., Figueira J. C., Silva H. A. S. 2010. Predatory activity of Euseius citrifolius Denmark & Muma (Acari: Phytoseiidae) on Tenuipalpus heveae Baker (Acari: Tenuipalpidae). Arq. Inst. Biol.,77 (3): 471-476. https://doi.org/10.1590/1808-1657v77p4712010
15. Castro E. B., Vieira M. R. 2011. Acarofauna (Arachnida, Acari) associated to Genipa americana L. (Rubiaceae) in Ilha Solteira, São Paulo. Rev. Biol. Neotrop., 8: 33-39. https://doi.org/10.5216/rbn.v8i1.13664
16. Castro I. S., Azevedo, A. O., Vinhas N. A. N., Schlemer S. M., Wurlitzer W. B., Freitas E. M., Heiden G., Ferla N. J. 2024. Phytoseiid mites associated with Asteraceae plants in the Pampa biome with description of two new species. Int. J. Acarol., 50 (7): 570-586. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2024.2387717
17. Castro T. M. M. G., Moraes G. J. 2010. Diversity of phytoseiid mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae) in the Atlantic Forest of São Paulo. Syst. Biodivers., 8 (2): 301-307. 10.1080/14772001003801375 https://doi.org/10.1080/14772001003801375
18. Conceição E. M., Demite P. R., Rezende J. M., Carniello M. A., Lofego A. C. 2021. Phytoseiidae (Acar: Parasitiformes: Mesostigmata) inhabiting native plants from three biomes in Mato Grosso State, Brazil, with description of a new species. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 26 (12): 2268-2286. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.26.12.6
19. Daud R. D., Feres R. J. F. 2005. Diversity and Fluctuation of Mites Population (Acari) on Mabea fistulifera Mart. (Euphorbiceae) in Two Semideciduos Forest Remnants in São José do Rio Preto, State of São Paulo, Brazil. Neotrop. Entomol., 34 (2): 191-201. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2005000200007
20. Daud R. D., Feres R. J. F. 2013. Community structure of mites (Arachnida: Acari) in six rubber tree clones. Int. J. Acarol., 39 (8): 589-596. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2013.856470
21. Daud R. D., Feres R. J. F., Buosi R. 2007. Mites (Acari: Arachnida) associated with Bauhinia variegata L. (Leguminosae) in northeast of State of São Paulo, Brazil. Neotrop. Entomol., 36 (2): 322-325. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2007000200025
22. Daud R. D., Silva E. R. O., Feres R. J. F. 2010. Influence of Cecropia pachystachya on the incidence of mites (Arachnida, Acari) and Leptopharsa heveae (Insecta, Hemíptera) in rubber tree plantations. Rev. Biol. Neotrop., 7 (2): 49-60.
23. De Vis R. M. J., Moraes G. J., Bellini M. R. 2006. Mites (Acari) of Rubber Trees (Hevea brasiliensis Muell. Arg., Euphorbiaceae) in Piracicaba, State of São Paulo, Brazil. Neotrop. Entomol., 35: 112-120. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2006000100015
24. Demite P. R. Lofego A. C., Feres R. J. F. 2011. Phytoseiidae (Acari) in forest fragments in the State of São Paulo Brazil. Zootaxa, 3086: 31-56. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3086.1.2
25. 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 plants in Brazil, with description of a new species. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 22 (12): 2141-2177. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.22.12.9
26. Demite P. R., Feres R. J. F. 2005. Influence of neighboring vegetation in the distribution of mites in a rubber tree culture (Hevea brasiliensis Muell. Arg., Euphorbiaceae) in São José do Rio Preto, SP, Brazil. Neotrop. Entomol., 34 (5): 829-836. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2005000500016
27. Demite P. R., Feres R. J. F. 2007. Occurrence and fluctuation of mite populations associated with rubber tree crop neighbor of fragments of cerrado. Neotrop. Entomol., 36: 117-127. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2007000100015
28. Demite P. R., Feres R. J. F., Lofego A. C. 2015. Influence of agricultural environment on the plant mite community in forest fragments. Braz. J. Biol., 75 (2): 369-404. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.14913
29. Demite P. R., Feres R. J. F., Lofego A. C., Oliveira A. R. 2009. Plant inhabiting mites (Acari) From the Cerrado biome of Mato Grosso State, Brazil. Zootaxa, 2061: 45-60. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.2061.1.3
30. Demite P. R., Lofego A. C., Feres R. J. F. 2013. Mite (Acari; Arachnida) diversity of two native plants in fragments of a semideciduous seasonal forest in Brazil. Syst. Biodivers., 11 (2): 141-148. https://doi.org/10.1080/14772000.2013.806368
31. Demite P. R., Moraes G. J., McMurtry J. A., Denmark H. A., Castilho R. C. 2026. Phytoseiidae Database [Internet]. Available from: \textless www.lea.esalq.usp.br/phytoseiidae>
32. Demite P. R., Rezende J. M., Lofego A. C., Amaral F. S. R., Barreto M. R., Moraes G. J. 2021. Phytoseiid mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae) from Mato Grosso State, Central Western Brazil. An. Acad. Bras. Cienc., 93: e20200729. https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-3765202120200729
33. Denmark H. A., Muma M. H.1970. Some phytoseiid mites of Paraguay (Phytoseiidae: Acarina). Fla. Entomol., 53 (4): 219-227. https://doi.org/10.2307/3493192
34. Domingos C. A., Melo A. S., Matheus M. L. T., Oliveira J. E. M., Melo J. W. S., Gondim Jr M. G. C. 2025. Differences in the effects of pollen and prey-based diets on the biological performance of Euseius citrifolius (Acari: Phytoseiidae): an important predator for phytophagous mites management in grapevines. Exp. Appl. Acarol., 95, 16: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-025-01044-4
35. Domingos C. A., Melo J. W. S., Oliveira J. E. M., Gondim Jr., M. G. C. 2014. Mites on grapevines in northeast Brazil: occurrence, population dynamics and within plant distribution. Int. J. Acarol., 40 (2):145-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647954.2014.891651
36. Escobar- Garcia H. A., Andrade D. J., Beard J. J., Ochoa R. 2024. Peacock mites on cannon-ball tree, Couroupita guianensis (Lecythidaceae) in the Southeast Region of Brazil. Acarologia, 64 (4): 1138-1148. https://doi.org/10.24349/a2ld-gvdp
37. Feres R. J. F. 2000. Survey and naturalistic remarks on the acarological fauna (Acari, Arachnida) from Hevea spp. (Euphorbiaceae) in Brazil. Rev. Bras. Zool., 17:157-173. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-81752000000100011
38. Feres R. J. F., Bellini M. R., Rossa-Feres D. C. 2003. Occurrence and diversity of mites (Acari, Arachnida) associated with Tabebuia roseo-alba (Ridl.) Sand (Bignoniaceae), from São José do Rio Preto, São Paulo State, Brazil. Rev. Bras. Zool., 20 (3): 373-378. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-81752003000300002
39. Feres R. J. F., Buosi R., Daud R. D., Demite P. R. 2007. Ecological patterns of the mite community on euphorbiaceous plants from a Semidecidual forest remnant in the State of São Paulo. Biota Neotrop., 7 (2):185-194. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1676-06032007000200022
40. Feres R. J. F., Flechtmann C. H. W. 1995. Mites (Acari) associated with bamboo (Bambusa sp.) in a woody area from northwestern São Paulo State, Brazil. Rev. Bras. Zool., 12 (3): 533-546. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-81751995000300008
41. Feres R. J. F., Moraes G. J. 1998. Phytoseiid mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) from woody areas in the State of Sao Paulo, Brazil. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 3:125-132. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.3.1.20
42. Feres R. J. F., Nunes M. A. 2001. Mites (Acari, Arachnida) associated with weed Euphorbiaceae in monoculture planting of the amazonian rubber tree (Hevea Braziliensis Muell. Arg., Euphorbiaceae) n Northwestern São Paulo State, Brazil. Rev. Bras. Zool., 18 (4): 1253-1264. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-81752001000400020
43. Feres R. J. F., Rossa-Feres D., Daud R. D., Santos R. 2002. Mites diversity (Acari, Arachnida) from rubber tree (Hevea brasiliensis Muell. Arg., Euphorbiaceae) in Northwestern of São Paulo State, Brazil. Rev. Bras. Zool., 19: 137-144. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-81752002000100011
44. Feres R. J. F., Vieira M. R., Daud R. D., Pereira Jr. E. G. Oliveira G. F., Dourado C. L. 2009. Mites (Arachnida, Acari) on ornamental plants in northwestern São Paulo, Brazil: occurrence and injury caused by phytophagous species. Rev. Bras. Entomol., 53 (3): 466-474. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0085-56262009000300024
45. Ferla J. J., Araújo G. J., Venzon M., Nascimento P. H. M. G., Kalile M. O., Pancieri S. D., Cardoso A. C., Martins E. F., Ferla N. J., Pallini A. 2023. Intercropped Plants Provide a Reservoir of Predatory Mites in Coffee Crop. Agriculture, 13, 285: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13020285
46. Ferla N. J., Moraes G. J. 2002a. Mites (Arachnida, Acari) on rubber tree (Hevea brasiliensis Muell. Arg.) in the State of Mato Grosso, Brazil. Rev. Bras. Zool., 19 (3): 867-888. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-81752002000300025
47. Ferla N. J., Moraes G. J. 2002b. Predators mites (Acari) in native and cultivated plants of the State of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Rev. Bras. Zool., 19 (4): 1011-1031. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-81752002000400006
48. Ferreira C. T., Krug C., Garcia M. V.B., Moraes G. J. 2018. Leprosis mite and other mite species (Acari) associated to orange groves in Brazilian Central Amazon. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 23 (3): 449-462. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.23.3.4
49. Ferreira M. M, Nuvoloni F. M, Mondim A. S, Lofego A. C. 2021. Does diet affect morphological parameters of Neoseiulus tunus (De Leon) (Acari: Phytoseiidae)? Acarologia, 61 (2): 486-496. https://doi.org/10.24349/acarologia/20214443
50. Fiaboe K. K. M., Gondim Jr. M.G.C., Moraes G.J., Ogol C. K. P. O. 2007. Knapp M. Surveys for natural enemies of the tomato red spider mite Tetranychus evansi (Acari: Tetranychidae) in northeastern and southeastern Brazil. Zootaxa, 1395: 33-58. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1395.1.2
51. Filgueiras R. M. C., Mendes J. A., Sousa-Neto E. P., Monteiro N. V., Melo J. W. S. 2020. Neoseiulus barkeri Hughes (Acari: Phytoseiidae) as a potential control agent for Raoiella indica Hirst (Acari: Tenuipalpidae). Syst. Appl. Acarol., 25 (4): 593-606. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.25.4.1
52. Franco R., Reis P. R., Zacarias M., Oliveira D. C. 2010. Influence of the Webbing Produced by Oligonychus ilicis (McGregor) (Acari: Tetranychidae) on Associated Predatory Phytoseiids. Neotrop. Entomol., 39: 97-100. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2010000100013
53. Furtado I. P., Kreiter S., Moraes G. J., De Tixier M. S., Flechtmann C. H. W., Knapp M. 2005. Plant mites (Acari) from Northeastern Brazil, with description of two new species of the family Phytoseiidae (Mesostigmata). Acarologia, 45 (2-3): 131-143.
54. Furtado I. P., Moraes G. J. 1998. Biology of Euseius citrifolius, a candidate for the biological control of Mononychellus tanajoa (Acari: Phytoseiidae, Tetranychidae). Syst. Appl. Acarol., 3: 43. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.3.1.6
55. Furtado I. P., Moraes G. J., Kreiter S., Flechtmann C. H. W., Tixier M. S., Knapp M. 2014. Plant inhabiting phytoseiid predators of midwestern Brazil, with emphasis on those associated with the tomato red spider mite, Tetranychus evansi (Acari: Phytoseiidae, Tetranychidae). Acarologia, (4): 425-431. https://doi.org/10.1051/acarologia/20142138
56. Furtado I. P., Moraes G. J., Kreiter S., Knapp M. 2006. Search for effective natural enemies of Tetranyhcus evansi in south and southeast Brazil. Exp. Appl. Acarol., 40: 157-174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-006-9045-y
57. Furtado I. P., Toledo S., Moraes G. J., Kreiter S., Knapp M. 2007. Search for effective natural enemies of Tetranychus evansi (Acari: Tetranychidae) in northwest Argentina. Exp. Appl. Acarol., 43 (2):121-127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-007-9104-z
58. Gondim Jr. M. G. C., Moraes G. J. 2001. Phytoseiid mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) associated with palm trees (Arecaceae) in Brazil. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 6: 65-94. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.6.1.11
59. Gravena S., Benetoli I., Moreira P.H.R., Yamamoto P.T. 1994. Euseius citrifolius Denmark & Muma predation on citrus leprosis mite Brevipalpus phoenicis (Geijskes) (Acari: Phytoseiidae: Tenuipalpidae). An. Soc. Entomol. Brasil, 23(2): 209-218. https://doi.org/10.37486/0301-8059.v23i2.931
60. Guanilo A. D., 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
61. Guanilo A. D., 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
62. Hernandes F. A., Feres R. J. F. 2006. Diversity and seasonal occurrence of mites (Acari) in a Rubber Tree Crop (Hevea brasiliensis, Muell. Arg.) in Northwestern São Paulo, Brazil. Neotrop. Entomol., 35 (4): 523-535. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2006000400016
63. Hesketh P. M., Sato M. E. 2023. Acaricide resistance in predatory mites of the genus Euseius (Acari: Phytoseiidae) and predation capacity on Brevipalpus yothersi (Acari: Tenuipalpidae). Crop Prot. 172: 106322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2023.106322
64. Kinlock N.L., Adams D.W., Dawson W., Essl F., Kartesz J., Kreft H., Nishino M., Pergl J., Pyšek P., Weigelt P., van Kleunen M. 2025. Naturalization of ornamental plants in the United States depends on cultivation and historical land cover context. Ecography, 2025(12): e07748. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecog.07748
65. Lofego A. C., Demite P. R., Moraes G. J., Kishimoto R. G. 2009. Phytoseiid mites on grasses in Brazil (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Zootaxa, 2240: 41-59. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.2240.1.3
66. Lofego A. C., Moraes G. J. 2006. Mites (Acari) Associated to Myrtaceae in Areas of Cerrado in the State of São Paulo with Faunistic Analysis of Families Tarsonemidae and Phytoseiidae. Neotrop. Entomol., 35 (6): 731-746. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2006000600003
67. Lofego A. C., Moraes G. J., Castro L. A. 2004. Phytoseiid mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) on Myrtaceae in the State of São Paulo, Brazil. Zootaxa, 516: 1-18. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.516.1.1
68. Lofego A. C., Rezende J. M., Demite P. R., Feres R. J. F. 2017. Mite fauna associated with Cecropia pachystachya Trec. (Urticaceae) - the importance of the plant as reservoir and dissemination means for predatory mites. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 22 (10): 1780-1794. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.22.10.16
69. Lofego A. C., Rezende J. M., Verona R. L. C., Feres R. J. F. 2013. Mites (Acari) associated with three species of the genus Jatropha (Euphorbiaceae) in Brazil, with emphasis on Jatropha curcas. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 18 (4): 411-423. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.18.4.10
70. Lofego, A. C., Barbosa, M. F. D. C., Demite, P. R., Moraes, G. J. 2024. Phytoseiidae (Acari: Mesostigmata) of the subfamily Amblyseiinae from Brazil. Zootaxa, 5439 (1): 1-306. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5439.1.1
71. Lopes P. C., Kanno R. H., Sourassou N. F., Moraes G. J. 2018. Effect of temperature and diet on the morphology of Euseius concordis (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Syst. Appl. Acarol., 23 (7): 1322-1332. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.23.7.9
72. López-Olmos S., Ferragut F. 2024. Within-tree distribution and seasonal dynamics of Eutetranychus banksi and Euseius stipulatus (Acari: Tetranychidae, Phytoseiidae) on citrus: Implications for the biological control of the pest. Acarologia, 64(2): 480-498. https://doi.org/10.24349/pv5i-1hqj
73. 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
74. McMurtry J. A., Moraes G. J. 1989. Some phytoseiid mites from Peru with descriptions of four new species (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Int. J. Acarol., 15 (3): 179-188. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647958908683843
75. McMurtry J. A., 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
76. McMurtry J.A., Sourassou N.F., Demite P.R. 2015. The Phytoseiidae (Acari: Mesostigmata) as Biological Control Agents. In: Carrillo D., de Moraes G.J., Peña J.E. (Eds). Prospects for Biological Control of Plant Feeding Mites and Other Harmful Organisms. Cham: Springer International Publishing. p. 133-149. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15042-0_5
77. Mendonça A. L., Lofego A. C., Pott A., Daud R. D., Demite P. R. 2019. Phytoseiidae (Parasitiformes: Mesostigmata) from the Pantanal, Mato Grosso do Sul State, Brazil. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 24 (4): 587-612. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.24.4.6
78. Mineiro J. L. C., Raga A. 2020. Mites associated with Citrus latifolia (Rutaceae) from an orchard at Artur Nogueira municipality, São Paulo state, Brazil. Entomol. Commun., 2: ec02014. https://doi.org/10.37486/2675-1305.ec02014
79. Mineiro J. L. C., Raga A., Sato M. E., Lofego A. C. 2009. Mites associated with coffee plants (Coffea spp.) in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. Part I. Mesostigmata. Biota Neotrop, 9(1): 37-46. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1676-06032009000100005
80. Mineiro J. L. C., Sato M. E., Raga A., Arthur V., Gangani K. G., Barbosa F. V. 2006a. Diversity of mites (Arachnida: Acari) on five cultivars of two species of coffee (Coffea spp.) in Garça, state of São Paulo, Brazil. Arq. Inst. Biol, 73(3): 333-341. https://doi.org/10.1590/1808-1657v73p3332006
81. Mineiro J. L. C., Sato M. E., Raga A., Arthur V., Moraes G. J., Sarreta F. O., Carrijo A. 2006b. Diversity of mites (Arachnida: Acari) on Coffea arabica L. cv. ′Mundo Novo′, in Jeriquara and Garça counties, state of São Paulo. Biota Neotrop, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1590/S1676-06032006000200012
82. Montes S. M. N. M., Raga A., Boliani A. C., Mineiro J. L. C., Santos P.C. 2011. Effect of fungicides on the mite fauna of Prunus persica L. cultivars in Presidente Prudente, SP, Brazil. J. Plant Prot. Res, 51(3): 285-293. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10045-011-0047-3
83. Montes S. M. N. M., Raga A., Boliani A. C., Mineiro J. L. C., Santos P.C. 2012. Mite fauna (Arachnida: Acari) on peach cultivars in Presidente Prudente, São Paulo, Brazil. J. Plant Stud, 1(2): 173-179. https://doi.org/10.5539/jps.v1n2p173
84. Moraes G. J., Alencar J. A., Lima J. L. S., Yaninek J. S., Delalibera Jr. I. 1993. Alternative plant habitats for common phytoseiid predators of the cassava green mite (Acari: Phytoseiidae, Tetranychidae) in northeast Brazil. Exp. Appl. Acarol, 17: 77-90. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00156945
85. Moraes G. J., Barbosa M. F. C., Castro T. M. M. G. 2013. Phytoseiidae (Acari: Mesostigmata) from natural ecosystems in the State of São Paulo, Brazil. Zootaxa, 3700(3): 301-347. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3700.3.1
86. Moraes G. J., McMurtry J. A. 1981. Biology of Amblyseius citrifolius (Denmark & Muma). Hilgardia, 49(1): 1-29. https://doi.org/10.3733/hilg.v49n01p029
87. Moraes G. J., McMurtry J. A. 1983. Phytoseiid mites (Acarina) of northeastern Brazil with descriptions of four new species. Int. J. Acarol, 9(3): 131-148. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647958308683326
88. Moraes G. J., Mesa N. C., Braun A. 1991. Some phytoseiid mites of Latin America (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Int. J. Acarol, 17(2): 117-139. https://doi.org/10.1080/01647959108683892
89. Moraes G., Flechtmann, C. 2008. Manual de acarologia: Acarologia básica e ácaros de plantas cultivadas no Brasil. Ribeirão Preto: Holos, pp. 288.
90. Noronha A. C. S., Moraes G. J. 2002. Intra and interpopulational morphological variations of Euseius citrifolius Denmark & Muma and Euseius concordis (Chant) (Acari, Phytoseiidae). Rev. Bras. Zool, 4(19): 1111-1122. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-81752002000400016
91. Noronha A. C., Mota A, Moraes G. J., Coutinho L. L. 2003. Molecular characterization of mite populations of Euseius citrifolius Denmark & Muma and Euseius concordis (Chant) (Acari: Phytoseiidae) using sequences of the ITS1 and ITS2 regions. Neotrop. Entomol, 32(4): 591-596. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2003000400009
92. Nuvoloni F. M., Feres R. J. F., Demite P. R. 2011. Mites associated to Xylopia aromatica (Lam.) Mart. (Annonaceae) in urban and rural fragments of semidecidual forest. Rev. Bras. Entomol, 55(4): 571-577. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0085-56262011000400013
93. Oliveira D. C., Moraes G. J., Dias C. T. S. 2012. Status of Aceria guerreronis Keifer (Acari: Eriophyidae) as a pest of coconut in the state of São Paulo, southeastern Brazil. Neotrop. Entomol, 41(4): 315-323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13744-012-0051-y
94. Rezende J. M., Lofego A. C. 2011. Phytoseiidae (Acari: Mesostigmata) on plants of the central region of the brazilian cerrado. Acarologia, 51(4): 449-463. https://doi.org/10.1051/acarologia/20112027
95. Rezende J. M., Lofego A. C. 2012. Mites (Mesostigmata, Prostigmata, Astigmatina) associated with weeds among physic nut crops (Jatropha curcas L.: Euphorbiaceae) in Brazil. Syst. Appl. Acarol, 17(1): 15-26. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.17.1.5
96. Rodrigues J. K., Furtado I. P., Lofego A. C. 2020. Mites (Arachnida: Acari) associated with plants of family Myrtaceae from the Caatinga Domain, Brazil. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 25(5): 942-956. https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.25.5.14
97. Salman S.Y., Aydınlı F., Ay R. 2015. Etoxazole resistance in predatory mite Phytoseiulus persimilis A.-H. (Acari: Phytoseiidae): Cross-resistance, inheritance and biochemical resistance mechanisms. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol., 122: 96-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2014.12.014
98. Santana D. L. Q., Flechtmann C. H. W. 1998. Mite (Arthropoda, Acari) associates of palms (Arecaceae) in Brazil. I. Present status and new records. Rev. Bras. Zool, 15(4): 959-963. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-81751998000400014
99. Santana Mayorga R.C., Vásquez Freitez C., Artieda Rojas J.R., Telenchana N. 2025. Measurement of the efficiency of predation of Phytoseiidae as biological control. Rev. Cient. Salud BIOSANA, 5(1): 64-75. https://doi.org/10.62305/biosana.v5i1.377
100. Santos V. V., Tixier M. 2018. Integrative taxonomy approach for analysing evolutionary history of the tribe Euseiini Chant & McMurtry (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Syst. Biodivers, 16(3): 302-319. https://doi.org/10.1080/14772000.2017.1401562
101. Serra G, Ripamonti L, Addanki VA, Tirello P, Duso C, Pozzebon A. 2026. Unexpected Persistence of the Predatory Mite Amblyseius andersoni Under Insecticide Exposure in Italian Apple Orchards. Insects, 17(3):338. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects17030338
102. Silva E. A., Reis P. R., Zacarias M. S., Marafeli P. P. 2010. Fitoseídeos (Acari: Phytoseiidae) associados a cafezais e fragmentos florestais vizinhos. Ciênc. agrotec, 34(5): 1146-1153. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-70542010000500010
103. Silva M. Z., Sato M. E., Oliveira C. A. L. 2012. Diversity and population dynamics of mites in citrus orchard. Bragantia, 71(2): 210-218. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0006-87052012005000013
104. Sousa J. M., Gondim Jr. M. G. C., Lofego A. C., Moraes G. J. 2015. Mites on Annonaceae species in northeast Brazil and in the state of Para. Acarologia, 55(1): 5-18. https://doi.org/10.1051/acarologia/20152147
105. Spongoski S., Reis P. R, Zacarias M. S. 2005. Acarofauna of cerrado's coffee crops in Patrocínio, Minas Gerais. Ciênc. agrotec, 29(1): 9-17. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-70542005000100001
106. Tixier M.-S. 2018. Predatory Mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) in Agro-Ecosystems and Conservation Biological Control: A Review and Explorative Approach for Forecasting Plant-Predatory Mite Interactions and Mite Dispersal. Front. Ecol. Evol., 6: 192. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2018.00192
107. Tixier M.-S. 2013. Statistical approaches for morphological continuous characters: a conceptual model applied to Phytoseiidae (Acari: Mesostigmata). Zool. Scr., 42(3): 327-334. https://doi.org/10.1111/zsc.12004
108. Tixier M.-S., Kreiter S., Cheval B., Auger P. 2003. Morphometric variation between populations of Kampimodromus aberrans (Oudemans) (Acari: Phytoseiidae): Implications for the taxonomy of the genus. Invertebr. Syst., 17(2): 349-358. https://doi.org/10.1071/IS02004
109. Tixier M.-S., Martinez S.P., Douin M. 2021. Markers of life history traits: variation in morphology, molecular and amino acid sequences within Typhlodromus (Anthoseius) recki Wainstein (Acari: Mesostigmata: Phytoseiidae). Biol. J. Linn. Soc., 132(1): 53-73. https://doi.org/10.1093/biolinnean/blaa103
110. Tsuchida Y., Masui S. 2025. Cover crop providing windborne pollen enhances the efficacy of biocontrol of multiple pests by Euseius sojaensis in citrus orchards. J. Pest. Sci., 98: 1475-1484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-024-01856-0
111. Van Houten Y.M., Hoogerbrugge H., Oude Lenferink K., Knapp M., Bolckmans K.J.F. 2016. Evaluation of Euseius gallicus as a biological control agent of western flower thrips and greenhouse whitefly in rose. J. Acarol. Soc. Jpn., 25(S1): 147-159. https://doi.org/10.2300/acari.25.Suppl_147
112. Vangansbeke D., Duarte M.V., Gobin B., Tirry L., Wäckers F., De Clercq P. 2020. Cold-born killers: exploiting temperature-size rule enhances predation capacity of a predatory mite. Pest. Manag. Sci., 76(5): 1841-1846. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.5713
113. Vásquez C., Colmenárez Y.C., Greco N., Ramos M. 2023. Current Status of Phytoseiid Mites as Biological Control Agents in Latin America and Experiences from Argentina Using Neoseiulus californicus. Neotrop. Entomol., 52(2): 240-250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13744-023-01026-4
114. Yu B., Pan X., Wu H., Liu D. 2025. Variations in body size and reproductive mode of oribatid mites along an altitudinal gradient in a temperate mountain region. Geoderma, 454: 117173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2025.117173
115. Zacarias M. S., Moraes G. J. 2001. Phytoseiid mites (Acari) associated with rubber trees and other euphorbiaceous plants in southeastern Brazil. Neotrop. Entomol, 30(4): 579-586. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1519-566X2001000400011

instructions