Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T12:41:16.172Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

MORPHOLOGY, ONTOGENY, AND INTRASPECIFIC VARIABILITY OF THE YEW BIG BUD MITE, CECIDOPHYOPSIS PSILASPIS (ACARI: ERIOPHYIDAE)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Valin G. Marshall ,
Marilyn R. Clayton  and
Deanna N. Newsom
Valin G. Marshall
Affiliation:
Canadian Forest Service, Natural Resources Canada, 506 West Burnside Road, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada V8Z 1M5
Marilyn R. Clayton
Affiliation:
Canadian Forest Service, Natural Resources Canada, 506 West Burnside Road, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada V8Z 1M5
Deanna N. Newsom
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, COOP Program, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada V8W 2Y2
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

All ontogenetic stases of the yew big bud mite, Cecidophyopsis psilaspis (Nalepa), from British Columbia were studied by scanning electron and light microscopy and were compared with an English population of this species. The species was redescribed from the two populations, which were found to be quite similar in general appearance and in most of the morphometric data analyzed. Spermatophores in this species are similar to those observed in other Eriophyoidea. Details of a male spermatophoric organ are described and illustrated for the first time in an eriophyoid mite. Moulting in C. psilaspis is shown to be prodehiscent. The data reported here neither support nor reject the alternative hypothesis that the first active stase is larval versus nymphal. However, to account for the ontogenetic evidence, the first active stase is herein considered larval.

Résumé

Toutes les stases ontogénétiques d’une population de la Colombie-Britannique du phytopte des bourgeons de l’if, le Cecidophyopsis psilaspis (Nalepa), ont été examinées par microscopie électronique à balayage et microscopie optique et comparées à celles d’une population de la même espèce provenant d’Angleterre. Une nouvelle description de l’espèce a été proposée au terme de cet examen. Les deux populations se ressemblaient passablement en ce qui a trait à l’aspect général et à la majorité des données morphométriques analysées. Les spermatophores chez cette espèce sont semblables à ceux observés chez les autres Eriophyoidea et sont décrits en détail et illustrés pour la première fois chez un Eriophyoidea. La mue chez le C. psilaspis est de type prodéhiscent. Les données présentées ici ne confirment ni n’infirment l’hypothèse alternative selon laquelle la première stase active est la larve plutôt que la nymphe. Toutefois, eu égard aux données ontogénétiques recueillies, la larve est considérée ici comme étant la première stase active.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 130 , Issue 3 , June 1998 , pp. 285 - 304
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abou-Awad, B.A. 1981. Bionomics of the mango rust mite Metaculus mangiferae (Attiah) with description of immature stages (Eriophyoidea: Eriophyidae). Acarologia 22: 151–155.Google Scholar
Alberti, G., Fernandez, N.A., and Kümmel, G.. 1991. Spermatophores and spermatozoa of oribatid mites (Acari: Oribatida). Part II. Functional and systematical considerations. Acarologia 32: 435–449.Google Scholar
Amrine, J.W. Jr., and Stasny, T.A.. 1994. Catalog of the Eriophyoidea (Acarina: Prostigmata) of the World. Indira Publishing House, West Bloomfield, MI.Google Scholar
Amrine, J.W. Jr., Duncan, G.H., Jones, A.T., Gordon, S.C., and Roberts, I.M.. 1994. Cecidophyopsis mites (Acari: Eriophyidae) on Ribes spp. (Grossulariaceae). International Journal of Acarology 20: 139–168.Google Scholar
Bartkowiak, S., Białobok, S., Bugała, W., Czartoryski, A., Hejnowicz, A., Król, S., Srodon, A., and Szaniawski, R.K.. 1978. Cis pospolity—Taxus baccata L. [The yew—Taxus baccata L.]. Nasze Drzewa Lesne Monografie Popularnonaukowe 3 (1975): 1–183. (In Polish, translated to English by H. Markiewicz for the Department of Agriculture and the National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C. Available from U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.)Google Scholar
Boczek, J., and Kozlowski, J.. 1985. Variation among offspring of one female Aculus schlectendali (Nalepa) (Acari: Eriophyidae). International Journal of Acarology 11: 151–155.Google Scholar
Boczek, J., Zawadzki, W., and Davis, R.. 1984. Some morphological and biological differences in Aculus fockeui (Nalepa and Trouessart) (Acari: Eriophyidae) on various host plants. International Journal of Acarology 10: 81–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, A.L. 1979. Critical point drying—principles and procedures. Scanning Electron Microscopy 2 (1979): 303–322.Google Scholar
Davis, R., Flechtmann, C.H.W., Boczek, J.H., and Barké, H.E.. 1982. Catalogue of Eriophyid Mites (Acari: Eriophyoidea). Warsaw Agricultural University Press, Warsaw.Google Scholar
de Lillo, E. 1991. Preliminary observations of ovoviviparity in the gall-forming mite, Aceria caulobius (Nal.) (Eriophyoidea: Eriophyidae). pp. 223–229in Schuster, R., and Murphy, P.W. (Eds.), The Acari: Reproduction, Development and Life history Strategies. Chapman and Hall, London, U.K.Google Scholar
Duncan, R.W., Bown, T.A., Marshall, V.G., and Mitchell, A.K., 1997. Yew big bud mite. Canadian Forestry Service Pacific Forest Research Centre Forest Pest Leaflet 79.Google Scholar
Evans, G.O. 1992. Principles of Acarology. C.A.B International, Wallingford, Oxon, U.K.Google Scholar
Farkas, H. 1965. Familie Eriophyidae, Gallmilben. Die Tierwelt Mitteleuropas. Band 3, Lieferung 3, Neubearbeitet. Quelle and Meyer, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Feres, R.J.F. 1992. A new species of Calacarus Keifer (Acari, Eriophyidae, Phyllocoptinae) from Hevea brasiliensis Muell. Arg. (Euphorbiaceae) from Brazil. International Journal of Acarology 18: 61–65.Google Scholar
Flechtmann, C.H.W. 1995. Two new species of eriophyid mites (Acari, Prostigmata, Eriophyoidea) from Miconia candolleana Triana from Brazil. International Journal of Acarology 21: 83–88.Google Scholar
Hayes, T.L., and Pawley, J.B.. 1975. Very small biological specimens. pp. 45–81in Hayat, M.A. (Ed.), Principles and Techniques of Scanning Electron Microscopy. Biological Applications. Vol. 3. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York.Google Scholar
Hodgman, M.G. 1966. The big bud mite of yew. Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society 91: 133–134.Google Scholar
Jauffret, F., and Westphal, E.. 1974. Étude ultrastructurale de la transformation du méristème apical du Taxus baccata L. sous l'action d'un Acarien, le Cecidophyes psilaspis Nal. Compte Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences (Paris), Série D 278 (13): 1769–1772.Google Scholar
Jeppson, L.R., Keifer, H.H., and Baker, E.W.. 1975. Mites Injurious to Economic Plants. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
Johnson, W.T., and Lyon, H.H.. 1991. Insects that Feed on Trees and Shrubs. 2nd ed. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Keifer, H.H. 1959. Eriophyid studies XXVI. California Department of Agriculture Bulletin 47: 271–281.Google Scholar
Krantz, G.W. 1973. Observations on the morphology and behavior of the filbert rust mite, Aculus comatus (Prostigmata: Eriophyoidea) in Oregon. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 66: 709–717.Google Scholar
Krantz, G.W. 1978. A Manual of Acarology. 2nd ed. Oregon State University Bookstores, Inc., Corvallis, OR.Google Scholar
Lamb, K.P. 1953. A revision of the gall-mites (Acarina, Eriophyidae) occurring on tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum Mill.), with a key to the Eriophyidae recorded from solanaceous plants. Bulletin of Entomological Research 44: 343–350.Google Scholar
Lattin, J.D. 1998. A review of the insects and mites found on Taxus spp. with emphasis on western North America. USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station General Technical Report GRT 433. In press.Google Scholar
Lindquist, E.E. 1996. External anatomy and notation of structures. pp. 3–31in Lindquist, E.E., Sabelis, M.W., and Bruin, J. (Eds.), Eriophyoid Mites, their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control. Elsevier Scientific Publications, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Massee, A.M. 1961. The gall mites (Arachnida: Acarina: Eriophyidae) of Kent Transactions of the Kent Field Club 1: 110–118.Google Scholar
Michalska, K., and Boczek, J.. 1991. Sexual behavior of males attracted to quiescent deutonymphs in the Eriophyoidea (Acari). pp. 549–553in Dusbábek, F., and Bukva, V. (Eds.), Modem Acarology. Vol. 2. Proceedings of the 8th International Congress of Acarology, České Budějovice, Czechoslovakia, 6–11 August 1990. Academia, Prague, and SPB Academic Publishing bv, The Hague, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Mitchell, A.K. 1992. The yews and taxol: a bibliography (1970–1991). Canadian Forestry Service Pacific Forest Research Centre Information Report BC–X–338.Google Scholar
Mitchell, A.K., Duncan, R.W., Bown, T.A., and Marshall, V.G.. 1997. Origin and distribution of the yew big bud mite, Cecidophyopsis psilaspis (Nalepa), in British Columbia. The Canadian Entomologist 129: 745–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nalepa, A. 1893. Neue Gallmilben. 8. Fortsetzung. Anzeiger der Kaiserlichen Akademie Wissenschaften Mathematische-naturwissenschaftenliche Klasse Wien 30 (18): 190–191.Google Scholar
Nalepa, A. 1898. Eriophyidae (Phytoptidae). Das Tierreich. 4. Lieferung. Acarina. Verlag von R. Friedländer und Sohn, Berlin.Google Scholar
Norton, R.A., and Kethley, J.B.. 1994. Ecdysial cleavage lines of acariform mites (Arachnida, Acari). Zoologica Scripta 23(3): 175–191.Google Scholar
Nuzzaci, G., and Solinas, M.. 1984. An investigation into sperm formation, transfer, storage, and utilization in eriophyid mites. pp. 491–503in Griffiths, D.A., and Bowman, C.E. (Eds.), Acarology VI. Vol. 1. Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of Acarology, Edinburgh University, Edinburgh, Scotland, 5–11 September 1982. Ellis Horwood Limited, Chichester, West Sussex, U.K.Google Scholar
Oldfield, G.N., Hobza, R.F., and Wilson, N.S.. 1970. Discovery and characterization of spermatophores in the Eriophyoidea (Acari). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 63: 520–526.Google Scholar
Oldfield, G.N., Newell, I.M., and Reed, D.K.. 1972. Insemination of protogynes of Aculus cornutus from spermatophores and description of the sperm cell. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 65: 1080–1084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petanovic, R.U., and Stevanovic, V.B.. 1993. On the distribution, morphology and intraspecific variability of Eriophyes dryadis Roiv. (Acari, Eriophyoidea). Acarologia 34: 331–336.Google Scholar
Peters, B.G. 1955. A note on handling and processing nematodes. pp. 417–418in Kevan, D.K.McE. (Ed.), Soil Zoology. Butterworths Scientific Publications, Ltd., London, U.K.Google Scholar
Postner, M. 1972. Klasse Arachnida, Spinnentiere. pp. 29–79in Schwenke, W. (Ed.), Die Forstschädlinge Europas. Vol. 1. Verlag Paul Parey, Hamburg and Berlin.Google Scholar
Roivainen, H. 1947. Eriophyid news from Finland. Acta Entomologica Fennica 3: 1–51.Google Scholar
Scher, S., and Schwarzschild, B.. 1989. Pacific yew: a facultative riparian conifer with an uncertain future. pp. 172–175in Abell, D.L. (Technical Coordinator), Proceedings of the California Riparian Systems Conference: Protection, Management, and Restoration for the 1990s, 22–24 September 1988, Davis, CA. U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report PSW–110.Google Scholar
Shevchenko, V.G. 1957. Zhiznennyi tsikl ol'chovogo gallovogo kleshcha Eriophyes (s.str.) laevis (Nalepa, 1891) Nalepa, 1898 (Acariformes, Tetrapodili). [Life cycle of alder gall mite, Eriophyes (s.str.) laevis (Nalepa, 1891) Nalepa, 1898 (Acariformes, Tetrapodili).] (In Russian with English summary.) Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie (Revue d'Entomologie de l'URSS) 36(3): 598–618.Google Scholar
Sternlicht, M., and Goldenberg, S.. 1971. Fertilisation, sex ratio and postembryonic stages of the citrus bud mite Aceria sheldoni (Ewing) (Acarina, Eriophyidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research 60: 391–397.Google Scholar
Sternlicht, M., and Griffiths, D.A.. 1974. The emission and form of spermatophores and the fine structure of adult Eriophyes sheldoni Ewing (Acarina, Eriophyoidea). Bulletin of Entomological Research 63: 561–565.Google Scholar
Taylor, K.B. 1970. The Eriophyoidea of the coniferales of the New York area. Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
van Dijk, P.J.S. 1959. Bestrijding van rondknop in Taxus. pp. 70–72in Proefstation voor de boomkwekerij, 1959 Jaarboek. Proefstation voor de Boomkwekerij Boskoop, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Weidhaas, J.A., and Reeves, R.M., 1963. The occurrence and importance of tetranychid and eriophyid mites on woody plants in New York. pp. 25–29in Naegele, J.A. (Ed.), Advances in Acarology. Vol. 1. Comstock Publishing Associates, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Woodring, J.P. 1970. Comparative morphology, homologies, and functions of the male system in oribatid mites (Arachnida: Acari). Journal of Morphology 132: 425–451.Google Scholar