2008
DOI: 10.1590/s1519-566x2008000400015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Population dynamics of Aceria guerreronis Keifer (Acari: Eriophyidae) and associated predators on coconut fruits in Northeastern Brazil

Abstract: Neotropical Entomology 37(4): 457-462 (2008) PALAVRAS-CHAVE: Ácaro do coqueiro, ácaro predador, controle biológico, PhytoseiidaeABSTRACT -Aceria guerreronis Keifer can cause severe damage to coconuts in several countries around the world. Rare studies have been conducted to determine the predatory mites associated with A. guerreronis in Brazil. The study evaluated the prevalence of A. guerreronis and associated predators on the bracts and on the surface of the fruits underneath the bracts, for 12 months, o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
34
1
19

Year Published

2009
2009
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(55 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
1
34
1
19
Order By: Relevance
“…However, this was not the case. Although the predatory mites A. neochiapensis, E. citrifolius, Proprioseiopsis neotropicus (Ehara), and Proprioseiopsis ovatus (Garman) were found in this study, but not in studies conducted in northern and northeastern Brazil (Lawson-Balagbo et al 2008, Reis et al 2008, de Souza 2010, their densities were very low, corresponding to not more than three mites per 1,000 fruits. In addition, these mites were also infrequent, occurring in at most 3.3% of the analyzed plants, contrasting with the occurrence of the coconut mite on 35.3% of the plants.…”
Section: Effect Of Environmental Factorscontrasting
confidence: 70%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, this was not the case. Although the predatory mites A. neochiapensis, E. citrifolius, Proprioseiopsis neotropicus (Ehara), and Proprioseiopsis ovatus (Garman) were found in this study, but not in studies conducted in northern and northeastern Brazil (Lawson-Balagbo et al 2008, Reis et al 2008, de Souza 2010, their densities were very low, corresponding to not more than three mites per 1,000 fruits. In addition, these mites were also infrequent, occurring in at most 3.3% of the analyzed plants, contrasting with the occurrence of the coconut mite on 35.3% of the plants.…”
Section: Effect Of Environmental Factorscontrasting
confidence: 70%
“…Studies to evaluate the levels of occurrence of the coconut mite and its natural enemies in Brazil have been conducted almost exclusively in the north and northeast regions (Navia et al 2005, Reis et al 2008, de Souza 2010. Unpublished observations in São Paulo suggest its incidence to be low; growers from this state do not consider it as major problem on coconut.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It causes severe damage to the crop by attacking the meristematic tissues underneath the bracts. According to recent assessments the abundance of the coconut mite and its damage to the crop may be lower, and the predator fauna associated with coconut mite may be richer in certain areas of Brazil than in Africa (Benin, Ghana and Tanzania) and Sri Lanka (Fernando et al 2003;Lawson-Balagbo et al 2008;Reis et al 2008;Negloh et al 2010;Fernando et al, unpublished). Over the past two decades, attempts were made to control the pest through the use of chemicals and biopesticides.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The predatory mite Neoseiulus paspalivorus (DeLeon) (Acari: Phytoseiidae) is the most common natural enemy associated with the coconut mite in Brazil (Lawson-Balagbo et al 2008;Reis et al 2008). In Benin and Ghana, West Africa, N. paspalivorus was also frequently reported on infested coconuts (Negloh et al 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A espécie é encontrada predominantemente em folhas (Gondim Jr & Moraes 2001), mas ocasionalmente também é coletado em frutos infestados por Aceria guerreronis Keifer (Reis et al 2008). As dimensões relativamente grandes do predador difi cultam sua penetração abaixo das brácteas dos frutos, onde se encontra A. guerreronis; a distância entre a superfície do fruto e a superfície ventral das brácteas pode variar de 75 μm a 99 μm, dependendo da variedade (Aratchige 2007).…”
unclassified