Population Dynamics of Predatory Mites on Chilies and their Efficacy Against Whitefly (Aleyrodidae) Under Laboratory Conditions
Main Article Content
Abstract
Almost 160 plant species are being infested by whiteflies (Aleyrodidae) throughout South Asian countries including Pakistan. Whiteflies are tiny, sap-sucking insects that may become an abundant pest in vegetable and ornamental plantings, especially during warm weather. Whitefly was initially controlled by using different synthetic chemicals, but now resistance is developed in sucking pests against different groups of chemicals, so the trend has now lifted towards the use of biological control agents. Predatory mites are voracious predators that can feed on all instars of whiteflies including adults. The objective of this trial was to check the population fluctuation of predatory mites on chilies in relation to metrological factors and to know the feeding rates of predatory mites against whiteflies instars under laboratory conditions. According to the results, the maximum population (3.49) of a predatory mite on chilies leaves was observed in the last week of March, while the minimum population (1.34) was observed during 3rd week of February and March which was mainly due to heavy rainfall (34mm in February and 46mm in March). Overall, there was also a small increase in the population with the temperature rise. To evaluate the predatory potential, four treatments (T1, T2, T3, T4), were considered by using different instars of mites in each cell as prey with a predator and T4 as control. Fifteen individuals of each stage of whitefly from eggs to 4th instar were provided in different cells of each predatory mite. The results showed that predatory behavior tends to decrease while feeding against the egg stage to the 4th instar. As in the case of Treatment # 3 (T3), the feeding was gradually reduced against prey from 7.33 to 5.00 while feeding on the 1st to 4th instar. The predatory potential of T1 was less than T3 due to fewer mites in T1 (2/cell). Thus, it is concluded that predatory mites can be used as potential biocontrol agents against all stages of Bemisia species.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
References
[2] Oliveira M. R. V., T. J. Henneberry, and P. Anderson. 2001. History, current status and collaborative research projects for Bemisia tabaci. Crop Prot. 20: 709-723.
[3] Gelman D. B., M. B. Blackburn, and J. S. Hu. 2005. Identification of the molting hormone of the sweet potato (Bemisia tabaci) and greenhouse (Trialeurodes vaporariorum) whitefly. J. Insect. Physiol. 51: 47-53.
[4] De Barrow P. J., S. S. Liu, L. M. Boykin, and A. B. Dinsdale. 2011. Bemisia tabaci: A statement of species status. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 56: 1-19.
[5] Jones C. M., K. Gorman, I. Denholm, and M. S. Williamson. 2008. High-throughput allelic discrimination of B and Q biotypes of the whitefly, Bemisia tabaci, using TaqMan allele-selective PCR. Pest Mgmt. Sci. 64: 12-15.
[6] Alegbejo M.D. 2001. Whitefly transmitted plant viruses in Nigeria. J. Sustain. Agric. 17: 99-109.
[7] Simon B, J. L. Cenis, S. Demichelis, C. Rapisarda, P. Cacigli, and D. Bosco. 2003. Survey of Bemisa tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) biotypes in Italy with the description of a new biotype (T) from Euphorbia characias. Bull. Entomol. Res. 93: 259-264.
[8] Bolckmans K., Y. V. Houten, and H. Hoogerbrugge. 2006. Biological control of the tobacco whitefly (Bemisia tabaci) and of western flower thrips (Frankliniella occidentalis) with the phytoseiid predatory mite Agistemus swirskii Athias-Henriot, 1962. Assoc. Natural BioCont. Prod. 7: 6-7.
[9] Messelink G, and S. Steenpaal. 2003. Nieuwe roofmijten tegen trips in komkommer. Groenten and Fruit, J. Entomol. 43: 34-35.
[10] Nomikou M, A. Janssen, R. Schraag, and M. W. Sabelis. 2001. Phytoseiid predators as potential biological control agents for Bemisia tabaci. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 25: 271-291.
[11] Kolokytha P. D., A. A. Fantinou, and G. T. Papadoulis. 2011. Temperature and diet effects on immature development of predatory mite Typhlodromusathenas Swirski and Ragusa (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Environ. Entomol. 40: 1577-1584.
[12] Rai A.B., V. T. Vora, and C. V. Patel. 1995. Investigations on the integrated control of Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae) infesting brinjal in South Gujarat. Abstract presented in: Fifth Nation. Symp. Acar. Uni. Agric. Sci. Bangalore, September 22: 76-77.
[13] Saber S. A., and F. M. Momen. 2005. Influence of plant leaf texture on the development, reproduction and life table parameters of the predacious mite Cydnoseius zaheri (Phytoseiidae: Acarina). Acta Phytopathologica et Entomologica Hungarica, J. Entomol. 40: 177-184.
[14] Skirvin D. J., and J. S. Fenlon. 2001. Plant species modify the functional response of phytoseiulus persimilis (Phytoseiidae: Acarina) to Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae): Implementation for biological control. Bull. Entomol. Res. 91: 61-67.
[15] Meena R. S., O.P. Ameta, and B.L. Meena. 2013. Population dynamics of sucking pests and their correlation with weather parameters in chilli, Capsicum annum L. crop. The Bioscan. 8(1): 177-180.
[16] Cuthbertson A. G. S. 2014. The feeding rate of predatory mites on life stages of Bemisia tabaci Mediterranean species. Insects. J. Insect. Sci. 5: 609-614.
[17] Waqas M. S., M. A. Aqueel, M. Afzal, A. B. M. Raza, M. Kamran, I. Mustafa, and M. A. Bakar. 2014. Influence of temperature on the seasonal abundance of predatory mites euseius scutalis in few cotton cultivars. Int. J. Agric. Appl. Sci. 6: 24-28.
[18] Phyllis G, S. Weintraub, V. Kleitman, N. S. Alchanatis, and E. Palevsky. 2007. Factors affecting the distribution of a predatory mite on greenhouse sweet pepper. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 42: 23–35.
[19] Heung-Su L., and D. R. Gillespie DR. 2011. Life tables and development of Amblyseius swirskii (Acari: Phytoseiidae) at different temperatures. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 53: 17-27.
[20] Calvo F. J., K. Bolckmans, and J. E. Belda. 2011. Control of Bemisia tabaci and Frankliniella occidentalis in cucumber by Amblyseius swirskii. BioCont. 56: 185-192.