Evaluation of infesting field bindweed (<i>Convolvulus arvensis</i>L.) with<i>Aceria malherbae</i>Nuzzaci (Acari: Eriophyidae) under glasshouse conditions

Rodríguez-Navarro, Silvia; Flores-Macías, Antonio; Torres-Martínez, Gustavo

doi:10.1080/01647950808683718

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the augmentations of A. malherbae in Mexico, Rodriguez-Navarro et al [147,148] did investigate inoculation levels and quality standards (number of mites per gall, number of galls per plants, infested stems, etc.) required for the successful laboratory rearing of a biocontrol agent over multiple generations without loss of genetic diversity [149,150].…”

Section: Release and Post-release Monitoring Of Eriophyid Mites: Last But Not Least Steps Of Classical Biological Control Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eriophyid Mites in Classical Biological Control of Weeds: Progress and Challenges

Marini¹,

Weyl

Vidović

et al. 2021

Insects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A classical biological control agent is an exotic host-specific natural enemy, which is intentionally introduced to obtain long-term control of an alien invasive species. Among the arthropods considered for this role, eriophyid mites are likely to possess the main attributes required: host specificity, efficacy, and long-lasting effects. However, so far, only a few species have been approved for release. Due to their microscopic size and the general lack of knowledge regarding their biology and behavior, working with eriophyids is particularly challenging. Furthermore, mites disperse in wind, and little is known about biotic and abiotic constraints to their population growth. All these aspects pose challenges that, if not properly dealt with, can make it particularly difficult to evaluate eriophyids as prospective biological control agents and jeopardize the general success of control programs. We identified some of the critical aspects of working with eriophyids in classical biological control of weeds and focused on how they have been or may be addressed. In particular, we analyzed the importance of accurate mite identification, the difficulties faced in the evaluation of their host specificity, risk assessment of nontarget species, their impact on the weed, and the final steps of mite release and post-release monitoring.

show abstract

Section: Release and Post-release Monitoring Of Eriophyid Mites: Last But Not Least Steps Of Classical Biological Control Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eriophyid Mites in Classical Biological Control of Weeds: Progress and Challenges

Marini¹,

Weyl

Vidović

et al. 2021

Insects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Chemical control of field bindweed or correhuela (C. arvensis), a highly problematic weed, has been frequently studied (e.g. Tamayo-Esquer & Gaillardon, 1989); also cultural control (Robles et al, 2006) and biological control with mites (Rodríguez-Navarro, Flores-Macías, & Torres-Martínez, 2008;Rodríguez-Navarro, Rodríguez-Morell, Alemán-Martínez, Flores-Macías, & Torres-Martínez, 2011;Rodríguez-Navarro, Torres-Martínez, & Olivares-Orozco, 2004) have been studied, but as far as we know, the biological control for this weed has not been generalized. The use of C. arvensis also has been explored for phytoremediation by heavy metal accumulation (Cruz-Jiménez et al, 2005;Gardea-Torresdey, Peralta-Videa, Montes, de la Rosa, & Corral-Díaz, 2004;Montes, Peralta-Videa, Parsons, Corral Díaz, & Gardea-Torresdey, 2013;Montes-Holguin et al, 2006).…”

Section: Control and Use Of Non-native Weedsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biodiversity, distribution, ecology and management of non-native weeds in Mexico: a review

Espinosa‐García

Villaseñor

2017

Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In South Africa, the mite was permitted in 1994 and has been released, but it has not been widely distributed nor monitored (Craemer 1995). Moreover, there is interest to introduce the mite in Mexico (Rodríguez-Navarro et al 2008).…”

Section: Status Of Introduced Eriophyidsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of eriophyid mites for biological control of weedy plants and challenges for future research

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eriophyid mites have been considered to have a high potential for use as classical biological control agents of weeds. We reviewed known examples of the use of eriophyid mites to control weedy plants to learn how effective they have been. In the past 13 years, since Rosenthal's 1996 review, 13 species have undergone some degree of pre-release evaluation (Aceria genistae, A. lantanae, Aceria sp. [boneseed leaf buckle mite (BLBM)], A. salsolae, A. sobhiani, A. solstitialis, A. tamaricis, A. thalgi, A. thessalonicae, Cecidophyes rouhollahi, Floracarus perrepae, Leipothrix dipsacivagus and L. knautiae), but only four (A. genistae, Aceria sp. [BLBM], C. rouhollahi and F. perrepae) have been authorized for introduction. Prior to this, three species (Aceria chondrillae, A. malherbae and Aculus hyperici) were introduced and have become established. Although these three species impact the fitness of their host plant, it is not clear how much they have contributed to reduction of the population of the target weed. In some cases, natural enemies, resistant plant genotypes, and adverse abiotic conditions have reduced the ability of eriophyid mites to control target weed populations. Some eriophyid mites that are highly coevolved with their host plant may be poor prospects for biological control because of host plant resistance or tolerance of the plant to the mite. Susceptibility of eriophyids to predators and pathogens may also prevent them from achieving population densities necessary to reduce host plant populations. Short generation time, high intrinsic rate of increase and high mobility by aerial dispersal imply that eriophyids should have rapid rates of evolution. This raises concerns that eriophyids may be more likely to lose efficacy over time due to coevolution with the target weed or that they may be more likely to adapt to nontarget host plants compared to insects, which have a longer generation time and slower population growth rate. Critical areas for future research include life history, foraging and dispersal behavior, mechanisms controlling host plant specificity, and evolutionary stability of eriophyid mites. This knowledge is critical for designing and interpreting laboratory and field experiments to measure host plant specificity and potential impact on target and nontarget plants, which must be known before they can be approved for release. One of the more successful examples of an eriophyid mite controlling an invasive alien weed is Phyllocoptes fructiphilus, whose impact is primarily due to transmission of a virus pathogenic to the target, Rosa multiflora. Neither the mite nor the virus originated from the target weed, which suggests that using "novel enemies" may sometimes be an effective strategy for using eriophyid mites.

show abstract

Evaluation of infesting field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensisL.) withAceria malherbaeNuzzaci (Acari: Eriophyidae) under glasshouse conditions

Cited by 5 publications

References 3 publications

Eriophyid Mites in Classical Biological Control of Weeds: Progress and Challenges

Eriophyid Mites in Classical Biological Control of Weeds: Progress and Challenges

Biodiversity, distribution, ecology and management of non-native weeds in Mexico: a review

Effectiveness of eriophyid mites for biological control of weedy plants and challenges for future research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About