Effect of the type of citrus fruit on the biological parameters of Panonychus citri (Acari: Tetranychidae) under laboratory conditions

0Citations
Citations of this article
4Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The citrus red mite, Panonychus citri (McGregor, 1916), is considered a very important pest in most citrus-growing countries. The developmental periods, reproduction rates, and population growth parameters of P. citri were evaluated using the fruit peel under experimental conditions (25 ± 1 °C, 50 ± 5% RH and 14:10 h photoperiod) on five Citrus species: Mexican lime (C. ×aurantiifolia (Christm.) Swingle), grapefruit (C. ×paradisi Macfad.), sweet orange (C. ×sinensis (L.) Osbeck), mandarin (C. reticulata Blanco), and tangelo fruit (C. ×tangelo J.W. Ingram & H.E. Moore). The developmental period of the immature stages of P. citri averaged 26.64, 25.93 and 25.75 d for sweet orange, mandarin, and tangelo fruit, respectively. The adult stage was not achieved in Mexican lime and grapefruit. Immature survival was less than 50% in mandarin and tangelo fruit, in contrast, in sweet orange it was 57%. On average, oviposition was 3.55, 4.95 and 5.00 eggs female-1, on sweet orange, mandarin, and tangelo fruit, respectively. The intrinsic natural growth rate (rm), net reproduction rate (R0), generation time (T), and finite growth rate (λ) of P. citri showed significant differences among the tested species (p < 0.05). The rm and R0 values were 0.005 and 1.209 for sweet orange, 0.026 and 2.474 for mandarin and 0.020 and 2.000 for tangelo fruit. The results indicated that mandarin was the most suitable species for the P. citri population growth, whereas sweet orange was less suitable to proliferate. These differences are important in the integrated management of P. citri on citrus.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Viola, G., Tello, V., & Zarzar, M. (2023). Effect of the type of citrus fruit on the biological parameters of Panonychus citri (Acari: Tetranychidae) under laboratory conditions. Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research, 83(2), 137–145. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-58392023000200137

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free