Bursa (Türkiye)'nın konvansiyonel ve zirai kimyasal kullanılmayan ılıman iklim meyve bahçelerindeki akarların çeşitliliği ve zenginliği

Abstract

Keywords

• Akarlar, ılıman iklim meyve ağaçları, tür çeşitliliği, tür zenginliği

The diversity and abundance of mites in agrochemical-free and conventional deciduous fruit orchards of Bursa, Turkey

Abstract

A survey was conducted in Bursa, during 2003-2004 to evaluate the impact of conventional growing on the mite diversity and abundance in 6 deciduous fruit trees, apple, pear, peach, plum, quince and cherry. In this aim, the differences between conventional and agrochemical-free sites were observed. Additionally, an evaluation was performed in terms of mite species diversity and abundance among deciduous fruit tree species in this study. As a result of this study, pear, cherry, quince and peach were less preferred than apple and plum, respectively, for mite colonization and diversity. Among a total of 36 species, in conventional sites, Panonychus ulmi (Koch) (Acari: Tetranychidae), Tetranychus urticae Koch (Acari: Tetranychidae) and Typhlodromus athiasae P. & S. (Acari: Phytoseiidae) and, in agrochemical-free sites, Amblyseius potentillae (Garman) (Acari: Phytoseiidae), Bryobia rubrioculus (Scheuten) (Acari: Tetranychidae), Amphitetranychus viennensis (Z.) (Acari: Tetranychidae) and Tydeus californicus (Banks) (Acari: Tydeidae) were predominant species and formed more than 66% of the mite specimens collected during two-years. The mite abundance did not significantly differ between conventional and agrochemical-free sites, despite the less species diversity in conventional sites. This suggests that the predatory and neutral fauna may be more affected by agrochemicals than spider mites, such as P. ulmi, T. urticae, and a phytoseiid mite, T. athiasae. On the other hand, this study demonstrated that the mite diversity in conventional sites was decreased by agricultural practices as the high number of unique species was found. Furthermore, based on Sorenson similarity index, the analysis of species similarity brought up that the species composition was quite changed by human activity in conventional sites

Keywords

• -

References

1. Auger, P., R. Bonafos, S. Kreiter & R. Delorme, 2005. A genetic analysis of mancozeb resistance in Typhlodromus pyri (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Exp. Appl. Acarol., 37 (1-2): 83-91.
2. Barbosa, D. G. F., M. G. C. Gondım Jşnior, R. Barros, & J.V. Oliveira., 2003. Diversidade de ácaros em aceroleira (Malpighia emarginata A.DC.) na Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco em Recife, PE. Neotropical Entomol., 32 (4): 577-583.
3. Bonafos, R., E. Serrano, V. Vigues, P. Auger & S. Kreiter, 2005. When typhlodromes show resistance: Typhlodromus pyri, Amblyseius andersoni, what about deltamethrin, lambda-cyhalothrin and ethyl-chlorpyriphos. Phytoma, 579: 54-56.
4. Castagnoli, M., M. Liguori & R. Nannelli, 1985. Preliminary observations on acari of the peach tree in Tuscany, Acta Horticulturae, 173: 553-560.
5. Chao, A., R. L. Chazdon, R. K. Colwell, & T.-J. Shen, 2005. A new statistical approach for assessing compositional similarity based on incidence and abundance data. Ecology Letters, 8: 148-159.
6. Colwell, R. K., 2005. EstimateS: Statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 7.5. Persistent URL .
7. Cranham, J. E. & W. Helle, 1985. Pesticide resistance in Tetranychidae. In: Spider Mites: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control, (Eds., Helle W., Sabelis M.W.), Vol 1B Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 405-422.
8. Çobanoğlu, S., 1993. Türkiye’nin önemli elma bölgelerinde bulunan Phytoseiidae türleri üzerinde sistematik çalışmalar I. Türk. Entomol. Derg., 17 (1): 41-54.

9. Çobanoğlu, S. & A. Kazmierski, 1999. Tydeidae and Stigmaeidae (Acari: Prostigmata) from orchards, trees and shrups in Turkey, Biol. Bull. Poznan, 36 (1): 71-82.
10. Fournier, D., M. Pralavorio, J. B. Berge & A. Cuany, 1985. Pesticide resistance in Phytoseiidae. In: Spider Mites: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control, (Eds., Helle W., Sabelis M.W.), Vol 1B Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 423-432.
11. Gutierrez J. 1985. Mounting Techniques. In: Spider Mites: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control, (Eds., Helle W., Sabelis M.W.), Vol 1A Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 351-353.
12. Gyorffy, S., 2006. Possible relationship between the mite populations of a peach orchard and the surrounding vegetation. Novenyvedelem, 42 (4): 195-204.
13. Hughes, A. M., 1976. The mites of stored food and houses, Ministry of Agriculture, Fishers and Food Technical Bulletin, London.
14. Kasap, İ., S. Çobanoğlu, Y. Aktuğ & E. Denizhan, 2004. Van gölü elma bahçelerinde saptanan zararlı ve yararlı akar türleri, Türkiye I. Bitki Koruma Kongresi Bildirileri, 8-10 Eylül, Samsun, 104s.
15. Khan, I. A., Y. J. Zhu & A. Mansoor, 2005. Toxicity of some pesticides to the predatory mite Typhlodromus pyri Scheuten (Acari, Phytoseiidae), applied in apple orchards in North Rhine, Germany. Sarhad J. Agri., 21 (3): 445-449.
16. Kishimoto, H., 2002. Species composition and seasonal occurrence of spider mites (Acari: Tetranychidae) their predators in Japanese pear orchards with different agrochemical spraying programs. Appl. Entomol. Zool., 37 (4): 603-615.
17. Kreiter, S., M. S. Tixier, P. Auger, N. Muckensturm, G. Sentenac, B. Doublet & M. Weber, 2000. Phytoseiid mites of vineyards in France (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Acarologia, 41 (1/2): 77-96.
18. Kumral, N. A. & B. Kovancı, 2007. Susceptibility of female populations of Panonychus ulmi (Koch) (Acari: Tetranychidae) to some acaricides in apple orchards. J. Pest Sci., 80 (3): 131-137.
19. Liguori, M., S. Simoni & M. Castagnoli, 2002. Aspects of life history of Tydeus californicus (Banks) (Acari Tydeidae). Redia, 85: 143-153.
20. Manko, O. V. & O. G. Vlasova, 2003. Species composition and the dynamics of Tetranychus mite populations in the apple tree plantations of Ukraine. Arch. Phytopathol. Plant Prot. 36 (1): 33-40.
21. Nauen, J., N. Stumpf, A. Elbert, C. P. W. Zebitz & W. Kraus, 2001. Acaricide toxicity and resistance in larvae of different strains of Tetranychus urticae and Panonychus ulmi (Acari: Tetranychidae). Pest Manag. Sci., 57: 253–261.
22. Overmeer, W. P. J., 1985. Alternative prey and other food resources. In: Spider Mites: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control, (Eds., Helle W., Sabelis M.W.), Vol 1B Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 131-139.
23. Rasmy, A. H., M. A. Zaher & B. A. Abou-Awad, 1972. Mites associated with deciduous fruit trees in U.A.R. Z. Angew. Entomol., 70 (2): 179-183.
24. Rodriguez-Navarro, S., J. Mcmurtry & M. L. Estébanes-González, 2003. Ácaros fitófagos y sus depredadores asociados a frutales en Teziutlán, Puebla, México. Folia Entomológic Mexicana, 42 (1): 79-90.
25. Sabelis, M. W, A. Janssen, J. Bruin, F. M. Bakker, B. Drukker, P. Scutareanu & P. C. J. Van Rijn, 1999. Interactions between arthropod predators and plants: A conspiracy against herbivorous arthropods? In: Ecology and Evolution of the Acari (Eds., Bruin, J., van der Geest L.P.S, Sabelis M.W.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, pp. 207-230.
26. SAS Institute. 2002. JMP User’s Guide, Version 5.0. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
27. Schausberger, P., B. A. Croft, 2000. Cannibalism and intraguild predation among phytoseiid mites: Are aggressiveness and prey preference related to diet specialization? Exp. Appl. Acarol., 24: 709–725.
28. Shimoda, T. & J. Takabayashi, 2001. Migration of specialist insect predators to exploit patchily distributed spider mites. Popul. Ecol., 43: 15-21.
29. Solomon, M. G., J.V. Cross, J. D. Fitzgerald, C. A. M. Campbell, R. L. Jolly, R. W. Olszak, E. Niemczyk & H. Vogt, 2000. Biocontrol of Pests of Apples and Pears in Northern and Central Europe- 3. Predators. Biocontrol Sci. Tech., 10: 91- 128.
30. Song, C., G. H. Kim, S. J. Ahn, N. J. Park & K.. Y. Cho, 1995. Acaricide susceptibilities of field-collected populations of two-spotted spider mite, Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae) from apple orchards. Korean J. Appl. Entomol., 34: 328-333.
31. Toyoshima, S. & H. Amano, 2006. Diversity and abundance of phytoseiid mites on Magnolia hypoleuca Siebold et Zuccarini, a candidate source of natural enemies in natural vegetation. Appl. Entomol. Zool., 41 (2): 349–355.
32. Van De Vrie, M., 1985. Apple. In: Spider Mites: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control, (Eds., Helle W., Sabelis M.W.), Vol 1B Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 311-325.
33. Van Den Boom, C. E. M., Van Beek T. A. & M. Dicke, 2003. Differences among plant species in acceptance by the spider mite Tetranychus urticae Koch. J. Appl. Entomol., 127 (3): 177-183.
34. Villaronga, P., J. R. Cosialls & J. Bonet, 1993. Mite fauna associated to peach orchards in Lleida (Spain). Bulletin OILB/SROP,16 (4): 14-21.
35. Yanar, D. & O. Ecevit, 2004. İlaçlı ve ilaçsız elma bahçelerinde bitki zararlısı tetranychid, eryophyiid akar (Tetranychidae, Eryophyiidae: Acarina)’lar ve predatör akarların popülasyon yoğunlukları, Türkiye I. Bitki Koruma Kongresi Bildirileri, 8-10 Eylül, Samsun, 76s.
36. Yanar, D. & O. Ecevit, 2005. Tokat ilinde elma (Malus communis L.) bahçelerinde görülen bitki zararlısı ve predatör akar türleri, Ondokuz Mayıs Üniv. Zir. Fak. Derg., 20 (1):18-23.
37. Zaher, M. A., Z. R. Soliman & G. S. El-Safi, 1974. Survey and population studies on mites associated with deciduous fruit trees in Giza, Egypt, Bulletin de la Societe Entomologique d'Egypte, 57: 425-433.
38. Zaki, A. M., 1992. Population dynamics of mites associated with some stone fruit trees in Menoufia, Egypt. Acta Phytopathol. et Entomol. Hungarica, 27 (1-4): 679-685.