Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-f46jp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-15T11:09:52.821Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phytoseiid Mites (Acarina: Phytoseiidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

D. A. Chant
D. A. Chant*
Affiliation:
Entomology Laboratory, Belleville, Ontario
Get access

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Other
Information
The Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Canada , Volume 91 , Supplement S12 , 1959 , pp. 5 - 166
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1959

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., Morgan, C. V. G., and Chant, D. A., 1958. Notes on the occurrence of Typhlodromus and Phytoseius spp. in southern British Columbia (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Canadian Ent. 90: 275–279.Google Scholar
Athias-Henriot, C. 1957a. Phytoseiidae et Aceosejidae (Acarina, Gamasina) d'Algérie I. Genres Blattisocius Keegan, Iphiseius Berlese, Amblyseius Berlese, Phytoseius Ribaga, Phytoseiulus Evans. Bull. Soc. Hist. Nat. Afrique Nord 48: 319–352.Google Scholar
Athias-Henriot, C. 1957b. Typhlodromus ornatus n.sp. et Typhlodromus longilaterus n.sp. (Acarina, Phytoseiidae) mésostigmates prédateurs d'Algérie. Rev. Pat. Veg. Ent. Agrie. Francee 36: 215–222.Google Scholar
Athias-Henriot, C. 1958. Phytoseiidae et Aceosejidae (Acarina, Gamasina) d'Algéric II. Phytoseiidae: clé des genres, genres Amblyseius Berlese (suite) et Seiulus Berlese. Bull. Soc. Hist. Nat. Afrique Nord 49: 23–43.Google Scholar
Athias-Henriot, C. 1959. Acariens planticoles d'Algérie I. 5e contribution au genre Amblyseius Berlese (Phytoseiidae). II. Première liste d'Actinochitinosi (Cheyletidae, Caligonellidae, Hemisarcoptidae). Bull. Acad. Roy. Belgique (Ser. 5) 45: 130–153.Google Scholar
Austin, M. D., and Massee, A. M.. 1947. Investigations on the control of the fruit tree red spider mite (Metatetranychus ulmi Koch) during the dormant scason. J. Pomol. 23: 227–253.Google Scholar
Baker, E. W., and Wharton, G. W.. 1952. An introduction to acarology. The Macmillan Co., 465 pp.Google Scholar
Ballard, R. C. 1954. The biology of the predacious mite Typhlodromus fallacis (Garman) (Phytoseiidae) at 78°F. Ohio J. Sci. 54; 175–179.Google Scholar
Banks, N. 1904. A treatise on the Acarina or mites. Proc. United States Nat. Mus. 28: 114 pp.Google Scholar
Banks, N. 1905. Descriptions of some new mites. Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington 7: 133–142.Google Scholar
Banks, N. 1909. New Canadian mites. Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington 11: 133–143.Google Scholar
Banks, N. 1915. The Acarina or mites. United States Dept. Agr. Rep. 108. 153 pp.Google Scholar
Berlese, A. 1887. Acari, Myriapoda, et Scorpiones in Italia reperta. Fase. 41. Padua.Google Scholar
Berlese, A. 1889. Acari, Myriapoda, et Scorpiones in Italia. Fasc. 54. Padua.Google Scholar
Berlese, A. 1914. Acari nuovi. Redia 10: 113–150.Google Scholar
Berlese, A. 1917. Centuria secunda di Acari nuovi. Redia 12: 172.Google Scholar
Berlese, A. 1917b. Centuria terza di Acari nuovi. Redia 12: 289–338.Google Scholar
Berlese, A. 1921. Acari, Myriapoda et Pseudoscorpiones Indice Sinonimico. Redia 14: 95.Google Scholar
Berlese, A. 1923. Centuria secunda di Acari nuovi. Redia 15: 255.Google Scholar
Blair, C. A. 1951. Damage to applc leaves by the fruit tree red spider mite, Metatetranychus ulmi (Koch). Rep. E. Mailing Res. Sta. 1950: 152–154.Google Scholar
Blair, C. A., and Groves, J. R.. 1952. Biology of the fruit tree red spider mite, Metatetranychus ulmi (Koch) in south-eastern England. J. Hort. Sci. 27: 14–43.Google Scholar
Canestrini, C., and Fanzago, F.. 1876. Nuovi acari Italiani, ser. ii. Atti. Soc. Veneto-Trent. 5: 130–142.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A. 1955. Notes on mites of the genus Typhlodromus Scheuten, 1857 (Acarina: Laelaptidae), with descriptions of the males of some species and the females of a new species. Canadian Ent. 87: 496–503.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A. 1956. Some new mites of the subfamily Phytoseiinae (Acarina: Laelaptidae) from southeastern England, with descriptions of new species. Canadian Ent. 88: 26–37.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A. 1957a. Descriptions of some phytoseiid mites (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Part I. Nine new species from British Columbia with keys to the species of British Columbia. Part II. Redescriptions of eight species described by Berlese. Canadian Ent. 89: 289–308.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A. 1957b. Note on the status of some genera in the family Phytoseiidae (Acarina). Canadian Ent. 89: 528–532.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A. 1957d. Descriptions of two new phytoseiid genera (Acarina: Phytoseiidae), with a note on the genus Phytoseius Ribaga, 1902. Canadian Ent. 89: 357–363.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A. 1958. Immature and adult stages of some British Phytoseiidae Berl. 1916 (Acarina). J. Linn. Soc. London, zoology 43: 599–643.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A. 1959. Description of a new species of Typhlodromus (Acarina: Phytoseiidae) from Eastern Asia. Canadian Ent. 91: 29–31.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A., and Muir, R. C.. 1955. A comparison of the imprint and brushing machine methods for estimating the number of fruit tree red spider mite, Metatetranychus ulmi (Koch), on apple leaves. Rep. E. Mailing Res. Sta. 1954 (1955): 141–145.Google Scholar
Chant, D. A., Denmark, H. A., and Baker, E. W., 1959. A new subfamily, Macroseiinae Nov., of the family Phytoseiidae (Acarina: Gamasina). Canadian Ent. 91: 808–811.Google Scholar
Clancy, D. W., and Pollard, H. N.. 1952. The effect of DDT on mite and predator populations in applc orchards. J. Econ. Eilt. 45: 108–114.Google Scholar
Collyer, Elsie. 1949. The predator aspect of the fruit tree red spider problem. Rep. E. Malling Res. Sta. 1948: 108–110.Google Scholar
Collyer, Elsie. 1952. Biology of some predatory insects and mites associated with the fruit tree red spider mite (Metatetranychus ulmi (Koch)) in south-Castern England. I. The biology of Blepharidopterus angulatus (Fall.). J. Hort. Sci. 27: 117–129.Google Scholar
Collyer, Elsie. 1953a. Idem. IV. The predator-mite relationship. J. Hort. Sci. 28: 246–259.Google Scholar
Collyer, Elsie. 1953b. Insect population balance and chemical control of pests: predators of the fruit tree red spider mite. Chem & Ind. (Rev.). 1953: 1044–1046.Google Scholar
Collyer, Elsie. 1953c. Biology of some predatory insects and mites associated with the fruit tree red spider mite (Metatetranychus ulmi (Koch)) in south-eastern England. III. Further predators of the mite. J. Hort. Sci. 28: 98–113.Google Scholar
Collyer, Elsie. 1956. Notes on the biology of some predacious mites on fruit trees in south-eastern England. Bull. Ent. Res. 47: 205–214.Google Scholar
Collyer, Elsie. 1957. Two new species of the genus Typhlodromus Scheuten, 1857 (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. 12: 199–203.Google Scholar
Collyer, Elsie, and Kirby, A. H. M.. 1955. Some factors affecting the balance of phytophagous and predacious mites on apple in south-eastern England, J. Hort. Sci. 30: 97–108.Google Scholar
Cooreman, J. 1943. Note sur la faune des hautes-fagnes en Belgique XI. Acariens (Parasitiformes). Bull. Mus. Roy. Hist. Nat. Belgique 19: 25.Google Scholar
Cottier, W. 1934. The natural enemies of the European red mite in New Zealand. New Zealand J. Sci. Tech. 16: 68–80.Google Scholar
Creighton, J. T. 1938. Factors influencing insect abundance, J. Econ. Ent. 31: 735–739.Google Scholar
Cunliffe, F., and Baker, E. W.. 1953. A guide to the predatory phytoseiid mites of the United States. Pinellas Biol. Lab. Pub. No. 1.Google Scholar
Cutright, C. R. 1942. The season's experiments with red mite control. Proc. Ohio Hort. Soc. 75: 32–44.Google Scholar
Cutright, C. R. 1944. Populations of the European red mite as affected by spray schedules. J. Econ. Ent. 37: 499–502.Google Scholar
Dean, H. 1957. Predators of Oligonychus pratensis (Banks), Tetranychidae. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 50: 164–165.Google Scholar
DeBach, P. 1946. An insecticidal check method for measuring the efficiency of entomophagous insects. J. Econ. Ent. 39: 695–697.Google Scholar
DeBach, P. 1951. The necessity for an ecological approach to pest control on citrus in California. J. Econ. Ent. 44: 443–447.Google Scholar
De Leon, D. 1957. Three new Typhlodromus from southern Florida (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Florida Ent. 40: 141–144.Google Scholar
De Leon, D. 1959. A new genus and three new species of Phytoseiid mites from Mexico with collection records on Phytoseius plumifer (C. & F.) and P. macropilis (Banks). Ent. News 70: 147–152.Google Scholar
Dosse, G. 1957. Morphologie und Biologie von Typhlodromus zwölferi n.sp. (Acar., Phytoseiidae). Z. Angew. Ent. 41: 301–311.Google Scholar
Dosse, G. 1958a. Über einige neue Raubmilbenarten (Acar. Phytoseiidae). Pflanzen. Berichte 21: 44–61.Google Scholar
Dosse, G. 1958b. Die Spermathecae, ein zusätliches Bestimmungsmerkmal bei Raubmilben (Acar., Phytoseiidae). Ibid. 20: 1–11.Google Scholar
Ehara, S. 1958. Three predatory mites of the genus Typhlodromus from Japan (Phytoseiidae). Annot. Zool. Japonenses 31: 53–57.Google Scholar
Ehara, S. 1959. Some predatory mites of the genera Typhlodromus and Amblyseius from Japan (Phytoseiidae). Acarologia 1: 285–295.Google Scholar
Errington, P. L. 1946. Predation and vertebrate populations. Quart. Rev. Biol. 21: 144–177. 221–245.Google Scholar
Evans, G. Owen. 1952a. A new typhlodromid mite predacious on Tetranychus bimaculatus Harvey in Indonesia. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. 5: 413–416.Google Scholar
Evans, G. Owen. 1952b. On a new predatory mite of economic importance. Bull. Ent. Res. 43: 397–401.Google Scholar
Evans, G. Owen. 1953. On some mites of the genus Typhlodromus Scheuten, 1857, from S.E. Asia. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. 6: 449–467.Google Scholar
Evans, G. Owen. 1954. The genus Iphiseius Beri. (Acarina: Laelaptidae). Proc. Zool. Soc. London 124: 517–526.Google Scholar
Evans, G. Owen. 1957. The genera Podocinum Berl. and Podocinella gen. nov. (Acarina: Mesostigmata). Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 12, 10: 913–932.Google Scholar
Evans, G. Owen. 1958. An introduction to the British Mesostigmata (Acarina) with keys to families and genera. J. Linn. Soc. 43: 203–259.Google Scholar
Evans, G. Owen. 1959. Some mesostigmatid mites from a nest of social spiders in Uganda. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 13, 1: 580–590.Google Scholar
Fleschner, C. A., and Ricker, D. W.. 1953. Natural enemies of mites on avocados. California Citrusgr. 38: 418–419.Google Scholar
Fleschner, C. A., and Ricker, D. W.. 1954. Typhlodromid mites on citrus and avocado trees in southern California. J. Econ. Ent. 47: 356–357.Google Scholar
Fox, I. 1946. A new genus, Borinquolaelaps, and new species of mites from rats in Puerto Rico. J. Parasital. 32: 445–452.Google Scholar
Fox, I. 1949. Five new mites from rats in Puerto Rico. Florida Ent. 32: 37–40.Google Scholar
Garman, P. 1937. Connecticut State Entomologist, 36th report. 1936. Bull. Connecticut Agr. Expt. Sta. 396: 372–377.Google Scholar
Garman, P. 1938. Connecticut State Entomologist, 37th report. 1937. Ibid. 408: 219–220.Google Scholar
Garman, P. 1948. Mite species from apple trees in Connecticut. Ibid. 520.Google Scholar
Garman, P. 1958. New species belonging to the genera Amblyseius and Amblyseiopsis, with keys to Amblyseius, Amblyseiopsis, and Phytoseiulus. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 51: 69–79.Google Scholar
Garman, P., and McGregor, E. A.. 1956. Four new predaceous mites (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Bull. Southern California Acad. Sci. 55: 7–13.Google Scholar
Garman, P., and Townsend, S. F.. 1938. The European red mite and its control. Bull. Connecticut Agr. Expt. Sta. 418.Google Scholar
Gilliatt, F. C. 1935. Some predators of the European red mite. Paratetranychus pilosus C. & F., in Nova Scotia. Canadian J. Res.> (D) 13: 19–38.+(D)+13:+19–38.>Google Scholar
Henderson, C. F., and McBurnie, H. V.. 1943. Sampling techniques for determining populations of citrus red mite and its predators. United States Dept. Agr. Circ. 671.Google Scholar
Herbert, H. J. 1953. Progress report on predacious mite investigations in Nova Scotia (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Rep. Ent. Soc. Ontario (1952): 27–29.Google Scholar
Herbert, H. J. 1956. Laboratory studies on some factors of the life-history of the predacious mite Typhlodromus tiliae Oudms. (Acarina: Phytoseiidae). Canadian Ent. 88: 701–704.Google Scholar
Holloway, J. K., Henderson, C. F., and McBurnie, H. V.. 1942. Population increase of citrus red mite associated with the use of sprays containing inert granular residues. J. Econ. Ent. 35: 348–350.Google Scholar
Houser, J. S., and Cutright, C. R.. 1941. The European red mite. Proc. Ohio Hort. Soc. 74: 26–34.Google Scholar
Hueck, H. J., Kuenen, D. J., Den Boer, P. J., and Jaegar-Draafsel, E.. 1952. The increase of egg-production of the fruit tree red spider mite (Metatetranychus ulmi Koch) under influence of DDT. Physiol. Comp. 2: 371–377.Google Scholar
Hughes, A. M. 1948. The mites associated with stored food products. Min. Agr. Fish., London. H. M. Stationery Office. 168 pp.Google Scholar
Huffaker, C. B., and Kennett, C. E.. 1953. Developments towards biological control of cyclamen mite on strawberries in California. J. Econ. Ent. 46: 802–812.Google Scholar
Huffaker, C. B., and Kennet, C. E.. 1956. Experimental studies on predation: predation and cyclamen-mite populations on strawberries in California. Hilgardia 26: 191–222.Google Scholar
Kennett, C. 1958. Some predacious mites of the subfamilies Phytoseiinae and Aceosejinae (Acarina: Phytoseiidae, Aceosejidae) from Central California with descriptions of new species. Ann. Ent. Soc. America 51: 471–479.Google Scholar
Koch, C. L. 1839. Deutschlands Crustaceen, Myriapoden, und Arachniden. Regensburg.Google Scholar
Kuenen, D. J. 1946. Het fruitspit en zijn bestrijding. Meded. Tuinbouw. 44. 68 pp.Google Scholar
Kuenen, D. J. 1947. On the ecological significance of two predators of Metatetranychus ulmi C. L. Koch (Acari: Tetranychidae). Tijdschr. Ent. 88: 303–312.Google Scholar
Quenen, D. J. 1949. The fruit tree red spider (Metatetranychus ulmi Koch) and its relation to its host plant. Tijdschr. Ent. 91: 83–102.Google Scholar
Lack, D. 1954. The natural regulation of animal numbers. Clarendon Press, London.Google Scholar
Listo, J., Listo, E. M., and Kanervo, V.. 1939. Tutkimuksia hedelmapuupunkista (Para-tetranychus pilosus C. & F.). Valt. Matalousk. Julk. 99: 143 pp.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. Canadian Ent. 81: 202–230.Google Scholar
MacGill, Elsic I. 1939. A gamasid mite (Typhlodromus thripsi n. sp.), a predator of Thrips tabaci Lind. Ann. Appl. Biol. 26: 309–317.Google Scholar
Marle, Greta. 1951. Observations on the dispersal of the fruit tree red spider mite, Metatetranychus ulmi (Koch). Rep. E. Mailing Res. Sta. 1950: 155–159.Google Scholar
Massee, A. M. 1932. Some injurious and beneficial mites on top and soft fruits, J. Pomol. 10: 106–129.Google Scholar
Massee, A. M. 1953. Insect population balance and chemical control of pests: Insecticides in apple orchards. Chem. & Ind. (Rev.) 1953: 1004–1005.Google Scholar
Massee, A. M. 1954. The pests of fruit and hops. Crosby Lockwood & Sons, Ltd., London.Google Scholar
Massee, A. M. 1955. Problems arising from the use of insecticides: Effects on balance of animal populations. Rep. E. Malling Res. Sta. 1954 (1955): 137–140.Google Scholar
Mathvs, G. 1954. Contribution éthologique à la résolution du complexe Bryobia praetiosa Koch (Acar., Tetranych.). Mitt. Schweiz. Ent. Ges. 27: 137–146.Google Scholar
McGregor, E. A. 1954. Two new mites in the genus Typhlodromus (Acarina, Phytoseiidae). Bull. Southern California Acad. Sci. 53: 89–92.Google Scholar
McGregor, E. A. 1956. The mites of citrus trees in southern California. Mem. Southern California Acad. Sci. 3: 5–42.Google Scholar
Morgan, C. V. G. 1952. Effects of low winter temperatures on some orchard mites. Proc. Ent. Soc. British Columbia 48: 90–93.Google Scholar
Morgan, C. V. G., and Anderson, N. H.. 1957. Some aspects of a ryania-glyodin spray schedule in British Columbia apple orchards. I. Entomological, horticultural, and economic aspects. Canadian J. Plant Sci. 37: 423–433.Google Scholar
Morgan, C. V. G., and Anderson, N. H.. 1958. Notes on parathion-resistant strains of two phytophagous mites and a predacious mite in British Columbia. Canadian Ent. 90: 92–97.Google Scholar
Morgan, C. V. G., Chant, D. A., Anderson, N. H., and Ayre, G. L.. 1955. Methods for estimating orchard mite populations, especially with the mite brushing machine. Canadian Ent. 87: 189–200.Google Scholar
Muma, M. H. 1955a. Factors contributing to the natural control of citrus mites in Florida. J. Econ. Ent. 48: 432–438.Google Scholar
Muma, M. H. 1955b. Phytoseiidae (Acarina) associated with citrus in Florida. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 48: 262–272.Google Scholar
Nesbitt, H. H. J. 1946. Three new mites from Nova Scotia apple trees. Canadian Ent. 78: 15–22.Google Scholar
Nesbitt, H. H. J. 1951. A taxonomic study of the Phytoseiinae (Family Laelaptidae) pre-daceous upon Tetranychidae of economic importance. Zool. Verh. 12.Google Scholar
Nesbitt, H. H. J. 1954. Random notes on the mite fauna of Limburg. Natuur. Maanblad. 43: 19–24.Google Scholar
Newcomer, E. J., and Yothers, M. A.. 1929. Biology of the European red mite in the Pacific northwest. United States Dept. Agr. Bull. 89. 70 pp.Google Scholar
Nicholson, A. J. 1954. An outline of the dynamics of animal populations. Australian J. Zool. 2: 9–65.Google Scholar
Oudemans, A. C. 1905. Bizonderheden over bekende en nieuwe Acari. Tijdschr. Ent. 48: lxxvii-lxxxi.Google Scholar
Oudemans, A. C. 1915a. Acarologische aanteekeningen 56: Ent. Bericht. 4: 180–188.Google Scholar
Oudemans, A. C. 1915b. Arch. Naturges. 81A: 159–161.Google Scholar
Oudemans, A. C. 1929. Acarologische aanteekeningen 100. Ent. Bericht. 8: 11–36.Google Scholar
Oudemans, A. C. 1930. Idem. 101–103. Ent. Bericht. 8: 48–99Google Scholar
Parrott, P. J., Hodgkiss, H. E., and Schoene, W. J.. 1906. The Eriophyidae Pare I. The apple and pear mites. New York Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 283: 302–303.Google Scholar
Peterson, A. 1953. A manual of entomological techniques. Edwards Bros., Inc., Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Pickett, A. D., Patterson, N. A., Stultz, H. T., and Lord, F. T.. 1946. The influence of spray programs on the fauna of apple orchards in Nova Scotia: I. An appraisal of the problem and a method of approach. Sci. Agr. 26: 590–600.Google Scholar
Pickett, A. D., and Patterson, N. A.. 1953. Idem. IV. A Review. Canadian Ent. 85: 472–478.Google Scholar
Putman, W. L. 1955. Bionomics of Stethorus punctillum Weise (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) in Ontario. Canadian Ent. 87: 9–33.Google Scholar
Ribaga, C. 1902. Gamasidi planticoli. Riv. Pat. Veg. 10: 175–178.Google Scholar
Rodriguez, J. G. 1951. Mineral nutrition of the two-spotted spider mite, Tetranychus bimaculatus Harvey. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 44: 511–526.Google Scholar
Schuster, R. O. 1957. A new species of Typhlodromus from California (Phytoseiidae: Acarina). Pan-Pacific Ent. 33: 203–205.Google Scholar
Schuster, R. O. 1959. A new species of Typhlodromus near T. bakert (Garman) and a consideration of the occurrence of T. rhenanus (Oud.) in California. Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington 61: 88–90.Google Scholar
Scheuten, A. 1857. Einiges über Milben. Arch. Naturges. 23: 104–112.Google Scholar
Schweizer, J. 1922. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der terrestrichen Milbenfauna der Schweiz. Verh. Naturf. Ges. Basel. 33: 23–112.Google Scholar
Schweizer, J. 1949. Die Landmilben des Schweizerischen Nationalparkes. Ergeh. Wissenschaflt. Untersuchung. Schweiz. Nationalparkes 2: 79.Google Scholar
Smith, H. E., and DeBach, P.. 1942. The measurement of the effect of entomophagous insects on populations of their hosts. J. Econ. Ent. 35: 845–849.Google Scholar
Smith, L. M., and Summers, F. M.. 1949. The structure and biology of the red spider predator “Hypoaspis” macropilis (Banks). Proc. Ent. Soc. Washington. 51: 209–218.Google Scholar
Solomon, M. E. 1949. The natural control of animal populations. J. Anim. Ecol. 18. 1–35.Google Scholar
Solomon, M. E. 1957. Dynamics of insect populations. Ann. Rev. Ent. 2: 121–142.Google Scholar
Thor, Sig. 1930. Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Invertebraten Fauna von Svalbard. Skrift. Svalbard Ishavet 27: 1–156.Google Scholar
Ullyett, G. C. 1953. Biomathematics and insect population problems. Mem. Ent. Soc. South Africa 2. 89 pp.Google Scholar
Venables, E. P., and Dennys, A. A.. 1941. A new method of counting orchard mites. J. Econ. Ent. 34: 324.Google Scholar
Vitzthum, Graf H. von. 1941. Acarina in Bronns Klassen und Ordnungen des Terreichs 5 (iv): 764–767.Google Scholar
Wainstein, A. 1958. New species of Typhlodromus (Parasitiformes: Phytoseiidae) from Georgia [In Russian]. J. Acad. Gruzia 21(2): 201–207.Google Scholar
Wainstein, A. 1959. A new subgenus and species of the genus Phytoseius Ribaga, 1902 (Phytoseiidae, Parasitiformes). Zool. Zhurn. 38: 1361–1365.Google Scholar
Willmann, C. 1949. Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Salzgebietes von Ciechocinek. Verhoff. Mus. Nat. Bremen 1: 117.Google Scholar
Willman, C. 1952. Dei Milbenfauna der Noorseeinsel Wangerooge. Verhoff. Inst. Meeres. Bremerhaven. 1: 146.Google Scholar
Womersley, H. 1954. Species of the subfamily Phytoseiinae (Acarina: Laelaptidae) from Australia. Australian J. Zool. 2: 169–191.Google Scholar