Gamasida (Arachnida: Acari) Edáficos de Piracicaba, Estado de São Paulo

Abstract

-The objectives of this work were to identify the edaphic mites collected in Piracicaba, State of São Paulo, and to determine the specific predominance in each of the environments studied. Soil samples were collected in three different environments, namely in an area of secondary forest, an area of perennial crops, represented by a rubber tree plantation (Hevea brasiliensis Müll. Arg.), clone RRIM 600 and an area of annual crops (corn followed by bean). Litter samples were collected in the patch of secondary forest and the rubber tree plantation. The edaphic mites were extracted through a modification of the Berlese-Tullgren method. A total of 49 species in 30 genera of Gamasida were identified in the soil and litter substrata. In the soil, the most abundant species in the secondary forest were Ologamasus sp. 1 (Ologamasidae) and Cosmolaelaps sp. 1 (Laelapidae). In the rubber tree plantation, Vulgarogamasus sp. (Parasitidae) and Cosmolaelaps sp. 2 (Laelapidae) were the most abundant species. In the area of annual crops, Protogamasellus mica (Athias-Henriot) (Ascidae) was by far the dominant species. In the litter, the most abundant species in the secondary forest were Ologamasus sp. 1 and Ologamasus sp. 2 (Ologamasidae), Podocinum sagax Berlese (Podocinidae) and Cosmolaelaps sp. 1 (Laelapidae), while in the rubber tree plantation the dominant species were Cosmolaelaps sp. 2 (Laelapidae) and Amblyseius hexadens Karg (Phytoseiidae).

Diversity of edaphic Rhodacaroid mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Rhodacaroidea) in natural ecosystems in the state of São Paulo, Brazil

“…However, Smith et al (1998) reported a slightly higher number of ologamasid than of rhodacarid mites in the Montane Cordillera Ecozone of Canada. The low numbers of rhodacarids observed in this study agree with the data obtained recently by Mineiro & Moraes (2001). In that study, the authors recovered only a few rhodacarids from soil and from litter layers in a rubber tree (Hevea brasiliensis Müll.…”

“…Mites of that family were rare in the areas where this study was conducted. Similarly, no digamasellids were found by Mineiro & Moraes (2001) in the study referred to above.…”

“…Van den Berg & Ryke (1967) and Mineiro & Moraes (2001) also found ologamasids to be the predominant mesostigmatic mites in the litter (but not in the soil), of natural tropical ecosystems. The abundance of Rhodacaridae in the soil layers of both the Cerrado and Mata Atlântica may relate to their relatively small size, light sclerotization and freely articulated body parts, all of which allow them to move easily in the confined interstitial spaces between soil particles (Lee 1970, Krantz & Ainscough 1990.…”

Diversidad de ácaros (Acari: Prostigmata, Mesotigmata, Astigmata) asociados a la hojarasca de formaciones vegetales del Parque Universitario de la UCLA, Venezuela

“…MINEIRO & MORAES (2001) consiguieron que la mayor abundancia de ácaros Mesostigmata provenientes de hojarasca de un bosque secundario en São Paulo, Brasil estuvo representada por Ologamasidae (57,5%) y Podocinidae (9,4%), mientras que en la hojarasca de caucho se encontró que Laelapidae fue colectada en mayor porcentaje (26,3%), seguido de Phytoseiidae (25,5%). Probablemente, la mayor abundancia de Macrochelidae observada en el presente estudio este relacionada con el método de muestreo puesto que, con las trampas de caída también fueron colectados una amplia variedad de artrópodos, principalmente insectos, que llevaban estos ácaros sobre su cuerpo debido al hábito forético de Macrochelidae.…”

Ácaros prostigmata y mesostigmata asociados a la hojarasca en el bosque de galería del Parque Universitario de la UCLA, Estado Lara, Venezuela

“…Vásquez et al (2007) registraron mayor abundancia en la familia Macrochelidae (80,1%), seguido de Ameroseiidae, Ologamasidae y Phytoseiidae en el matorral, mientras que en el Bosque Deciduo, Macrochelidae (27,5%) fue señalada como la más abundante seguida de Parasitidae (20,3%), Ascidae (15,5%), Parholaspidae (9,7%) y Laelapidae (9,2%). Por otra parte, Mineiro & Moraes (2001) señalaron que los mayores porcentajes de colecta correspondieron a Ologamasidae (57,5%) y Podocinidae (9,4%) en el bosque secundario, mientras que en la hojarasca de caucho se encontró que Laelapidae fue colectada en mayor porcentaje (26,3%), seguido de Phytoseiidae (25,5%).…”