Journals / Türkiye Entomoloji Dergisi / 2007 / Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 2

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

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

Pages
83–95
Publication Date
2007-04-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

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

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis: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.
📊
Key Findings & Data: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.
💡
Conclusion & Impact: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
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2003-2004 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Akarlar · ılıman iklim meyve ağaçları · tür çeşitliliği

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

🔖

Cite This Article

KUMRAL, N. A., KOVANCI, B. (2007). The diversity and abundance of mites in agrochemical-free and conventional deciduous fruit orchards of Bursa, Turkey. Türkiye Entomoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 2, 83–95. https://ajindex.com/articles/93492

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  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. 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.
  7. Çobanoğlu, S., 1993. Türkiye’nin önemli elma bölgelerinde bulunan Phytoseiidae türleri üzerinde sistematik çalışmalar I. Türk. Entomol. Derg., 17 (1): 41-54.
  8. Çobanoğlu, S. & A. Kazmierski, 1999. Tydeidae and Stigmaeidae (Acari: Prostigmata) from orchards, trees and shrups in Turkey, Biol. Bull. Poznan, 36 (1): 71-82.
  9. 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. 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.
  10. Gyorffy, S., 2006. Possible relationship between the mite populations of a peach orchard and the surrounding vegetation. Novenyvedelem, 42 (4): 195-204.
  11. Hughes, A. M., 1976.
  12. The mites of stored food and houses, Ministry of Agriculture, Fishers and Food Technical Bulletin, London. Kasap, İ., S. Çobanoğlu, Y. Aktuğ & E. Denizhan, 2004. Van gölü elma bahçelerinde saptanan zararlı ve yarar