Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T02:03:13.143Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

POPULATION STUDIES OF PHYTOPHAGOUS MITES AND PREDATORS ON APPLE IN SOUTHWESTERN QUEBEC

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

B. Parent
Affiliation:
Research Station, Canada Department of Agriculture, Saint-Jean, Quebec

Abstract

Ecological studies, undertaken to determine the fluctuations of phytophagous mites and predators in apple orchards, were conducted in 1955, 1956, and 1957 at Rougemont, Que., in two plots sprayed only with fungicides for the control of apple scab, Venturia inaequalis (Cke) Wint., and in a third one sprayed, in addition to fungicides, with all insecticides needed for the control of destructive insects. Phytophagous mites were more numerous in the plot sprayed with insecticides than in plots sprayed only with fungicides, and densities of the mites in the latter plots were inversely proportional to densities of predators. A similar relationship existed in the insecticide plot between the amount of chemicals used and numbers of predators present. The principal mite predators were Typhlodromus rhenanus (Oudms.), most effective against the two-spotted spider mite, Tetranychus urticae Koch, and Mediolata mali (Ewing), most effective against the European red mite, Panonychus ulmi (Koch).

Résumé

Des études écologiques furent poursuivies en 1955, 1956 et 1957 à Rougemont, Qué., en vue de déterminer les fluctuations des populations de tétranyques phytophages et de leurs prédateurs dans les vergers. Le travail fur effectue dans trois parcelles expérimentales dont deux étaient traitées exclusivement avec des fongicides pour la répression de la tavelure du pommier, Venturia inaequalis (Cke) Wint., et une troisième, avec tous les pesticides nécessaires à la répression des maladies et des insectes nuisibles. Les tétranyques phytophages étaient beaucoup plus nombreux dans la parcelle traitée avec insecticides et fongicides que dans les parcelles n'ayant reçu que des fongicides. Les densités des populations de prédateurs et celles des tétranyques phytophages étaient inversement proportionnelles, et la même relation existait entre les traitements insecticides et les populations de prédateurs. Les principaux acariens prédateurs étaient Typhlodromus rhenanus (Oudms.), particulièrement efficace contre le tétranyque à deux points, Tetranychus urticae Koch, et Mediolata mali (Ewing), qui préférait le tétranyque rouge du pommier, Panonychus ulmi (Koch).

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1967

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

Anderson, N. H., and Morgan, C. V. G.. 1958. The role of Typhlodromus spp. (Acarina: Phytoseiidae) in British Columbia apple orchards. Proc. 10th int. Congr. Ent., Montreal 1956. Vol. 4. pp. 659665.Google Scholar
Boulanger, L. W. 1963. The effect of some fungicides on European red mite populations in Maine. J. econ. Ent. 56(3): 298300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chant, D. A. 1958. On the ecology of typhlodromid mites in southern England. Proc. 10th int. Congr. Ent., Montreal 1956. Vol. 4. pp. 649658.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A. 1961. An experiment in biological control of Tetranychus telarius (L.) (Acarina: Tetranychidae) in a greenhouse using the predaceous mite Phytoseiulus persimilis Athias-Henriot (Phytoseiidae). Can. Ent. 93: 437443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clancy, D. W., and McAlister, H. J.. 1958 a. Effects of spray practices on apple mites and their predators in West Virginia. Proc. 10th int. Congr. Ent., Montreal 1956. Vol. 4. pp. 597601.Google Scholar
Clancy, D. W., and McAlister, H. J.. 1958 b. New possibilities in apple pest control. Proc. 10th int. Congr. Ent., Montreal 1956. Vol. 3. pp. 181185.Google Scholar
Collyer, E. 1953. Biology of some predatory insects and mites associated with the fruit-tree red spider mite (Metatetranychus ulmi (Koch)) in Southeastern England. IV. The predator-mite relationship. J. hort. Sci. 28(4): 246259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collyer, E. 1964 a. A summary of experiments to demonstrate the role of Typhlodromus pyri Scheut. in the control of Panonychus ulmi (Koch) in England. Acarologia, fasc.h.s. 1964. (C.R. 1er Cong. Int. Acarologie, Fort Collins, Col., 1963).Google Scholar
Collyer, E. 1964 b. Phytophagous mites and their predators in New Zealand orchards. N.Z. J. agric. Res. 7(4): 551568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collyer, E., and Kirby, A. H. M.. 1955. Some factors affecting the balance of phytophagous and predaceous mites on apple in Southeast England. J. hort. Sci. 30(2): 97108.Google Scholar
Collyer, E., and Kirby, A. H. M.. 1959. Further studies on the influence of fungicide sprays on the balance of phytophagous and predaceous mites on apple in South-East England. J. hort. Sci. 34(1): 3950.Google Scholar
Collyer, E., and Massee, A. M.. 1958. Some predators of phytophagous mites and their occurrence in Southeastern England. Proc. 10th int. Congr. Ent., Montreal 1956. Vol. 4. pp. 623626.Google Scholar
Foot, W. H. 1962. Competition between two species of mites. I. Experimental results. Can. Ent. 94: 365375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foot, W. H. 1963. Competition between two species of mites. II. Factors influencing intensity. Can. Ent. 95: 4557.Google Scholar
Henderson, C. F., and McBurnie, H. V.. 1943. Sampling technique for determining populations of the citrus red mite and its predators. U.S. Dep. Agric. Circ. 671Google Scholar
Herbert, H. J. 1958. A new species of Typhlodromus Scheuten, 1957 (Acarina: Phytoseiidae), with notes on life histories and food habits of Typhlodromus sp. n. and T. tiliae Oudms. Can. Ent. 90: 429433.Google Scholar
Herbert, H. J. 1959. Note of feeding ranges of six species of predaceous mites (Acarina: Phytoseiidae) in the laboratory. Can. Ent. 91: 812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herbert, H. J. 1962 a. Overwintering females and the number of generations of Typhlodromus (T.) pyri Scheuten (Acarina: Phytoseiidae) in Nova Scotia. Can. Ent. 94: 233242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herbert, J. H. 1962 b. Influence of Typhlodromus (T.) pyri Scheuten on the development of Bryobia arborea N. & A. populations in the greenhouse. Can. Ent. 94: 870873.Google Scholar
Kuenen, D. J., and Post, A.. 1958. Influence of treatments on predators and other limiting factors of Metatetranychus ulmi (Koch). Proc. 10th int. Congr. Ent., Montreal 1956. Vol. 4, pp. 603606.Google Scholar
Lord, F. T. 1949. The influence of spray programs on the fauna of apple orchards in Nova Scotia. III. Mites and their predators. Can. Ent. 81: 202230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lord, F. T. 1956. The influence of spray programs on the fauna of apple orchards in Nova Scotia. IX. Studies on means of altering predator populations. Can. Ent. 88: 129137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lord, F. T. 1962. The influence of spray programs on the fauna of apple orchards in Nova Scotia. XI. Effects of low dosages of DDT on predator populations. Can. Ent. 94: 204216.Google Scholar
Lord, F. T., Herbert, H. J., and MacPhee, A. W.. 1958. The natural control of phytophagous mites on apple trees in Nova Scotia. Proc. 10th int. Congr. Ent., Montreal 1956. Vol. 4. pp. 617622.Google Scholar
MacPhee, A. W. 1953. The influence of spray programs on the fauna of apple orchards in Nova Scotia. V. The predaceous thrips Haplothrips faurei Hood. Can. Ent. 85: 3340.Google Scholar
MacPhee, A. W., and Sanford, K. H.. 1956. The influence of spray programs on the fauna of apple orchards in Nova Scotia. X. Supplement to VII. Effects on some beneficial arthropods. Can. Ent. 88: 631634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacPhee, A. W., and Sanford, K. H.. 1961. The influence of spray programs on the fauna of apple orchards in Nova Scotia. XII. Second supplement to VII. Effects on beneficial arthropods. Can. Ent. 98: 671673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, J., and Morgan, C. V. G.. 1956. Notes on limitations of natural control of phytophagous insects and mites in a British Columbia orchard, Can. Ent. 88(1): 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, C. V. G., and Anderson, N. H.. 1957. Some aspects of Ryania-Glyodin spray schedule in British Columbia apple orchards. I. Entomological, horticultural and economic aspects. Can. J. Pl. Sci. 37: 423433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, C. V. G., Anderson, N. H., and Swales, J. E.. 1958. Influence of some fungicides on orchard mites in British Columbia, Can. J. Pl. Sci. 38: 94105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parent, B. 1961. Effects de certains produits antiparasitaires sur Typhlodromus rhenanus (Oudms) et Mediolata mali (Ewing), deux acariens prédateurs du Tétranyque rouge du pommier. Ann. ent. Soc. Queb. 6: 5558.Google Scholar
Parent, B., and Cinq-Mars, L.. 1958. Influence de quelques fongicides sur le Tétranyque rouge du pommier, Metatetranychus ulmi (Koch). Rep. Queb. Soc. Prot. Pl. 40: 137140.Google Scholar
Parent, B., and Cinq-Mars, L.. 1964. Fluctuations des populations de Panonychus ulmi (Koch) sur les pommiers traités à la dodine, au niacide, au dichlone et au thirame, dans le sud-ouest du Québec. Phytopr. 45(2): 5965.Google Scholar
Parent, B., Cinq-Mars, L., Paradis, R., and Crête, R.. 1955. Influence de certains fongicides sur les principaux acariens des vergers du Québec. Rep. Queb. Soc. Prot. Pl. 37: 101110.Google Scholar
Pickett, A. D., and Patterson, N. A.. 1953. The influence of spray programs on the fauna of apple orchards in Nova Scotia. IV. A Review. Can. Ent. 85: 472478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickett, A. D., Putman, W. L., and LeRoux, E. J.. 1958. Progress in harmonizing biological and chemical control of orchard pests in Eastern Canada. Proc. 10th int. Congr. Ent. Montreal 1956 Vol. 3. pp. 169174.Google Scholar
Putman, W. L., and Herne, D. C.. 1958. Natural control of phytophagous mites (Tetranychidae and Eriophyidae) in Ontario peach orchards. Proc. 10th Int. Congr Ent., Montreal 1956. Vol. 4. pp. 667673.Google Scholar
Putman, W. L., and Herne, D. C.. 1959. Gross effects of some pesticides on populations of phytophagous mites in Ontario peach orchards and their economic implications. Can. Ent. 91: 567579.Google Scholar
Putman, W. L., and Herne, D. C.. 1960. Effects of Sevin on phytophagous mites and predators in an Ontario peach orchard. Can. J. Pl. Sci. 40: 198201.Google Scholar
Putman, W. L., and Herne, D. C.. 1964. Relations between Typhlodromus caudiglans Schuster (Acarina: Phytoseiidae) and Phytophagous mites in Ontario peach orchards. Can. Ent. 96(7): 925943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanford, K. H., and Lord, F. T.. 1962. The influence of spray programs on the fauna of apple orchards in Nova Scotia. XXII. Effects of Perthane on predators. Can. Ent. 94: 928934.Google Scholar
Snetsinger, R. 1959. Population relationships of spider mites and Typhlodromid mites on apple trees in Central Illinois. Trans. Ill. Sta. Acad. Sci. 53(3–4): 128133.Google Scholar
Van de Vrie, M. 1962. The influence of spray chemicals on predator and phytophagous mites on apple trees in laboratory and field trials in the Netherlands. Entomophaga 7(3): 243250.Google Scholar
Van de Vrie, M. 1964. The effect of experimental spray schedule on the population of Metatetranychus ulmi (Koch) and Typhlodromus pyri Scheuten. Entomophaga 9(3): 243246.Google Scholar
Van de Vrie, M., and de Fluiter, H. J.. 1958. Some observations on the effects of insecticides and acaricides on the population of the European red spider mite (Metatetranychus ulmi Koch) and its principal predators in commercial orchards in the Netherlands. Proc. 10th int. Congr. Ent., Montreal 1956. Vol. 4. pp. 603606.Google Scholar