2017
DOI: 10.1051/acarologia/20174165
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of different artificial diets for rearing the predatory mite Neoseiulus californicus (Acari: Phytoseiidae): diet-dependent life table studies

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the present study, this parameter varied from 0.1010 to 0.1540 day −1 . Variable growth rates of N. californicus as a consequence of different diets including natural prey such as Panonychus ulmi (Koch) (0.25 day −1 ; El Taj and Chuleui 2012), T. urticae (0.1545 day −1 ; Khanamani et al ., 2017 a ), and Thrips tabaci Lindeman (0.041 day −1 ; Rahmani et al ., 2009); artificial diets (−0.2089 to 0.0782 day −1 ; Khanamani et al ., 2017 c ); and different pollen grains (0.0057–0.2318 day −1 ; Khanamani et al ., 2017 a ) have been reported. Such variation may be attributed not only to different food items offered to predators, but also to different experimental conditions, genetic variation among predator populations, and/or different data analysis procedures.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the present study, this parameter varied from 0.1010 to 0.1540 day −1 . Variable growth rates of N. californicus as a consequence of different diets including natural prey such as Panonychus ulmi (Koch) (0.25 day −1 ; El Taj and Chuleui 2012), T. urticae (0.1545 day −1 ; Khanamani et al ., 2017 a ), and Thrips tabaci Lindeman (0.041 day −1 ; Rahmani et al ., 2009); artificial diets (−0.2089 to 0.0782 day −1 ; Khanamani et al ., 2017 c ); and different pollen grains (0.0057–0.2318 day −1 ; Khanamani et al ., 2017 a ) have been reported. Such variation may be attributed not only to different food items offered to predators, but also to different experimental conditions, genetic variation among predator populations, and/or different data analysis procedures.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the explicit reason that phytoseiid predatory mites can feed on different food sources including spider mites, different insects, fungi, pollen, plant exudates, and nematodes (McMurtry et al ., 2013), they have been given much interest in the last decades. The preference of different food items including different pollen grains (Riahi et al ., 2016, 2017 a ; Khanamani et al ., 2017 a ), powdery mildew (Zemek and Prenerova, 1997; Duso et al ., 2003), factitious prey (Riahi et al ., 2017 b ), as well as artificial foods (Nguyen et al ., 2015; Riahi et al ., 2017 c ; Khanamani et al ., 2017 c ) to support the various phytoseiid mites’ population has been frequently addressed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An example is the mass rearing of Phytoseiulus persililis on Tetranychus urticae Koch [179]. The optimum growth of predator mite, Neoseiulus californicus, was observed when grown on an artificial diet supplemented with eggs of Ephestia kuehniella, Artemia franciscana cysts and maize bran [182]. Such artificial diets are important in reproduction, development and survival of the predators during rearing as well as reduction of production costs.…”
Section: Predators and Parasitoids As Biopesticides In Agriculturementioning
confidence: 99%