Research Article |
Corresponding author: Xiao-Yue Hong ( xyhong@njau.edu.cn ) Academic editor: Enrico de Lillo
© 2015 Xiao Han, Yun Zuo, Xiao-Feng Xue, Xiao-Yue Hong.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Han X, Zuo Y, Xue X-F, Hong X-Y (2015) Eriophyoid mites (Acari, Eriophyoidea) associated with tea plants, with descriptions of a new genus and two new species. ZooKeys 534: 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.534.5961
|
A new genus and two new species of mites in the family Eriophyidae, Theaphyes rapaneae gen. n. and sp. n. which is found on the type host Rapanea neriifolia (Sieb. et Zucc.) Mez (Myrsinaceae) and Paracaphyllisa theacea sp. n., are described and illustrated. They are vagrants on the tea plant Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze and no apparent symptoms were detected. A key to the eriophyoid mites including thirteen species associated with tea plants all over the world is provided.
Prostigmata, Camellia spp., Theaceae, taxonomy, Yunnan Province, China
Tea plants (Camellia) are perennial evergreen plants in the family Theaceae. They constitute a highly diverse taxon, presently composed of approximately 625 species (
Eriophyoid mites (Acari: Prostigmata) have a worldwide distribution. Eriophyoidea is a large mite superfamily with more than 4,000 described species (
Between 2009 and 2013, field investigations were conducted in southern part of China in order to look for eriophyoids on tea plants, leading to the discovery of a new genus and two new species. It is worth noting that the new genus and the new species were also found on the type host Rapanea neriifolia (Sieb. et Zucc.) Mez (Myrsinaceae).
Along with the current new records, thirteen species have been reported from tea plants worldwide (Table
Family | Subfamily | Tribe | Species |
---|---|---|---|
Eriophyidae | Cecidophyinae | Colomerini | Cosetacus camelliae (Keifer, 1945) |
Theaphyes rapaneae gen. et sp. n. | |||
Nothopodinae | Colopodacini | Paracolopodacus camelliae Kuang & Huang, 1994 | |
Phyllocoptinae | Acaricalini | Acaphyllisa indiae (Keifer, 1954) | |
Acaphyllisa parindiae Keifer, 1978 | |||
Acaphylla theae (Watt, 1898) | |||
Acaphylla theavagrans Kadono, 1992 | |||
Paracaphyllisa theacea sp. n. | |||
Calacarini | Calacarus carinatus (Green, 1890) | ||
Tegonotini | Phyllocoptacus camelliae Kuang & Lin, 2005 | ||
Shevtchenkella camelliae Song, Xue & Hong, 2008 | |||
Phyllocoptini | Tergilatus camelliae Wei, Feng & Huang, 1999 | ||
Diptilomiopidae | Diptilomiopinae | Diptilomiopus camelliae Wang & Chen, 2013 |
Plants were examined in field by the aid of hand-lens (30×) and eriophyoids, together with parts of their host plants, were placed in vials and stored in 75% ethanol. Each vial was marked with the collection data and herbaria were prepared for future identification of plant samples.
In the laboratory, the liquid contents were poured into a Petri dish from the vials, mite specimens were picked up using a fine pin and slide-mounted using Keifer’s Booster and modified Berlese medium (
Host plant names and their synonymies are in accordance with The Plant List (http://www.theplantlist.org/). Data on eriophyoid mites were extracted from the catalogue by
Thirteen eriophyoid mite species in eleven genera of two eriophyoid families have been reported from tea plants around the world (Table
Theaphyes rapaneae sp. n.
Body fusiform; scapular tubercles placed ahead of rear shield margin and scapular setae projecting upwards; frontal shield lobe absent. All coxal setae present; antaxial genual seta absent from leg II; tarsal solenidion slightly knobbed, located below empodium; empodium entire. Opisthosoma with a wide dorsal furrow; all usual opisthosoma setae present with the exception of setae e and h1; female genital cover flap appressed to coxal plates.
The genus designation is the combination of Thea- and -phyes; Thea- is derived from the family name of the host plant, -phyes is derived from the type genus Eriophyes in the family Eriophyidae. The gender is feminine.
The new genus is assigned to the Family Eriophyidae, Subfamily Cecidophyinae, Tribe Colomerini. It is similar to Epicecidophyes clerodendris Mondal & Chakrabarti, 1981, but can be differentiated from the latter by the absence of opisthosomal setae e (setae e are present in Epicecidophyes) and by a wide furrow on the dorsal opisthosoma (a broad middorsal ridge is on the dorsal opisthosoma of Epicecidophyes). The tarsal solenidion is located below the empodium similarly to Catachela machaerii Keifer, 1969, Dechela epelis Keifer, 1965 and Dechela phoebe Wang, Han, Xue & Hong, 2014.
FEMALE: (n = 9, ventral-dorsal position on slides). Body fusiform, white, 152 (152–153), 80 (80–85) wide. Gnathosoma 19 (19–20), projecting obliquely downwards, pedipalp coxal setae (ep) 2 (2–3), dorsal pedipalp genual setae (d) 8 (7–8), cheliceral stylets 20 (19–20). Prodorsal shield 58 (57–58), 80 (80–82) wide, admedian lines complete curving mesally at their posterior ends; frontal shield lobe absent. Scapular tubercles ahead of rear shield margin, 25 (24–25) apart, scapular setae (sc) 2 (2–3), projecting upward. Coxigenital region with 5 (5–6) semiannuli between coxae and genitalia. Coxal plates with a few short lines, anterolateral setae on coxisternum I (1b) 7 (6–7), 15 (15–16) apart, proximal setae on coxisternum I (1a) 11 (10–11), 14 (14–15) apart, proximal setae on coxisternum II (2a) 12 (12–15), 33 (32–33) apart. Prosternal apodeme absent. Leg I 27 (26–27), femur 11 (10–11), basiventral femoral setae (bv) 5 (5–6); genu 3 (2–3), antaxial genual setae (l’’) 21 (20–21); tibia 3 (2–3), paraxial tibial setae (l’) 4 (4–5), located at 2/3 from the dorsal base; tarsus 7 (6–7), paraxial, fastigial, tarsal setae (ft’) 15 (15–16), antaxial, fastigial, tarsal setae (ft’’) 18 (18–20), paraxial, unguinal, tarsal setae (u’) 4 (4–5); tarsal empodium (em) 5 (4–5), simple, 5-rayed, tarsal solenidion (ω) 5 (5–6), slightly knobbed, located below empodium. Leg II 20 (20–21), femur 10 (10–11), basiventral femoral setae (bv) 6 (6–7); genu 3 (2–3), antaxial genual setae (l’’) absent; tibia 2 (2–3); tarsus 7 (6–7), paraxial, fastigial, tarsal setae (ft’) 3 (3–4), antaxial, fastigial, tarsal setae (ft’’) 18 (17–18), paraxial, unguinal, tarsal setae (u’) 4 (3–4); tarsal empodium (em) 5 (4–5), simple, 5-rayed, tarsal solenidion (ω) 7 (7–8), little knobbed, located below empodium. Opisthosoma dorsally with 26 (26–29) semiannuli, smooth, with a wide furrow, ventrally with 54 (52–54) semiannuli, with linear microtubercles. Setae c2 19 (18–19) on ventral semiannulus 6 (6–7), 85 (80–85) apart; setae d 35 (34–35) on ventral semiannulus 21 (20–21), 32 (30–32) apart; setae e absent, setae f 15 (15–16) on 5th–6th ventral semiannulus from rear, 20 (20–21) apart. Setae h1 absent, h2 50 (50–60). Genital coverflap 20 (18–20), 38 (38–39) wide, coverflap with 22–23 longitudinal ridges in one rank, some ridges not complete, setae 3a 6 (5–6), 24 (18–24) apart.
MALE: (n = 4, ventral-dorsal position on slides). 142 (142–145), 69 (69–70) wide; white. Gnathosoma 19 (18–19), projecting obliquely downwards, pedipalp coxal setae (ep) 2 (1–2), dorsal pedipalp genual setae (d) 6 (5–6), cheliceral stylets 17 (16–17). Prodorsal shield 53 (53–54), 65 (65–70) wide, admedian lines complete curving mesally at their posterior ends; frontal shield lobe absent. Scapular tubercles ahead of rear shield margin, 22 (22–24) apart, scapular setae (sc) 3 (2–3), projecting upward. Coxigenital region with 5 (5–6) semiannuli between coxae and genitalia. Coxal plates with a few short lines, anterolateral setae on coxisternum I (1b) 5 (5–6), 10 (10–12) apart, proximal setae on coxisternum I (1a) 7 (7–8), 14 (12–14) apart, proximal setae on coxisternum II (2a) 10 (10–11), 27 (27–28) apart. Prosternal apodeme absent. Leg I 20 (20–21), femur 12 (11–12), basiventral femoral setae (bv) 5 (5–6); genu 3 (2–3), antaxial genual setae (l’’) 17 (17–18); tibia 3 (2–3), paraxial tibial setae (l’) 4 (4–5), located at 2/3 from the dorsal base; tarsus 5 (4–5), paraxial, fastigial, tarsal setae (ft’) 13 (13–14), antaxial, fastigial, tarsal setae (ft’’) 17 (15–17), paraxial, unguinal, tarsal setae (u’) 4 (4–5); tarsal empodium (em) 5 (4–5), simple, 5-rayed, tarsal solenidion (ω) 5 (5–6), slightly knobbed, located below empodium. Leg II 18 (17–18), femur 9 (8–9), basiventral femoral setae (bv) 4 (4–6); genu 2 (2–3), antaxial genual setae (l’’) absent; tibia 3 (3–4); tarsus 5 (4–5), paraxial, fastigial, tarsal setae (ft’) 4 (4–5), antaxial, fastigial, tarsal setae (ft’’) 15 (14–15), paraxial, unguinal, tarsal setae (u’) 3 (3–4); tarsal empodium (em) 5 (4–5), simple, 5-rayed, tarsal solenidion (ω) 7 (7–8), slightly knobbed, located below empodium. Opisthosoma dorsally with 28 (26–28) semiannuli, smooth, with a wide furrow; ventrally with 51 (48–51) semiannuli, with linear microtubercles. Setae c2 12 (12–13) on ventral semiannulus 6 (5–6), 65 (64–69) apart; setae d 20 (18–22) on ventral semiannulus 16 (15–17), 27 (25–27) apart; setae e absent, setae f 14 (14–15) on 5th–6th ventral semiannulus from rear, 20 (18–20) apart. Setae h1 absent, h2 52 (51–52). Genitalia 20 (20–21) wide, setae 3a 5 (5–6), 15 (13–15) apart.
Rapanea neriifolia (Sieb. et Zucc.) Mez (Myrsinaceae)
Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze
Vagrant. No damage to the host plant was observed.
Nanling National Forest Park, Guangdong Province (24°53'50"N, 113°01'18"E), elevation 1,408 m, 31 July 2012, coll. Qiong Wang, Hao-Sen Li and Jing-Feng Guo.
Holotype, single female on a microscope slide (slide number NJAUAcariEriGD21.1; marked Holotype), from R. neriifolia. Paratypes, 4 females and 4 males mounted on separate microscope slides (slide number NJAUAcariEriGD21.2–NJAUAcariEriGD21.9), same collection data of the holotype.
10 females mounted on separate microscope slides (slide numbers NJAUAcariEriYN304B.1–NJAUAcariEriYN304B.10), from C. sinensis.
The specific designation rapaneae is the genitive case derived from the genus name of the type host plant, Rapanea.
This species is found on the Myrsinaceae R. neriifolia and also on C. sinensis. Slight morphological differences were observed between the populations found on the two host species: the population on C. sinensis is longer, thinner and with more ventral annuli (62–66) than the population on R. neriifolia which is provided with fewer ventral annuli (52–54). The population found on C. sinensis occurred with other eriophyoid species and no males were collected. Current data do not allow understanding if the mite species colonizes regularly and successfully C. sinensis and it needs further biological studies.
FEMALE: (n = 8, ventral-dorsal position on slides). Body fusiform, 200 (190–200), 80 (75–80) wide; white. Gnathosoma 35 (32–35), projecting obliquely downwards, pedipalp coxal setae (ep) 3 (2–3), dorsal pedipalp genual setae (d) 9 (8–9), cheliceral stylets 40 (38–40). Prodorsal shield 50 (50–52), 75 (70–75) wide, median line absent, admedian and submedian lines sinuous; front shield lobe present 12 (11–12). Scapular tubercles ahead of rear shield margin, 37 (35–37) apart, scapular setae (sc) 4 (3–4), projecting anteriorly. Coxigenital region with 8 (8–9) semiannuli between coxae and genitalia, smooth. Coxal plates smooth, anterolateral setae on coxisternum I (1b) 10 (10–11), 14–15 apart, anterolateral setae on coxisternum I (1a) 15 (13–15), 12 (11–12) apart, proximal setae on coxisternum II (2a) 40 (35–40), 30 (30–31) apart. Prosternal apodeme absent. Leg I 37 (37–40), femur 15 (14–15), basiventral femoral setae (bv) 15 (15–16); genu 5 (4–5), antaxial genual setae (l’’) 43 (42–43); tibia 8 (7–8), paraxial tibial setae (l’) 1, located at center; tarsus 8 (7–8), paraxial, fastigial, tarsal setae (ft’) 30 (29–30), antaxial, fastigial, tarsal setae (ft’’) 33 (33–34), paraxial, unguinal, tarsal setae (u’) 6 (5–6); tarsal empodium (em) 5 (5–6), divided, 5-rayed, tarsal solenidion (ω) 12 (11–12), slightly knobbed. Leg II 34 (32–34), femur 12 (12–14), basiventral femoral setae (bv) 11 (10–11); genu 5 (4–5), antaxial genual setae (l’’) absent; tibia 6 (5–6); tarsus 8 (7–8), paraxial, fastigial, tarsal setae (ft’) 9 (9–10), antaxial, fastigial, tarsal setae (ft’’) 26 (26–27), paraxial, unguinal, tarsal setae (u’) 5 (4–5); tarsal empodium (em) 5 (5–6), divided, 5-rayed, tarsal solenidion (ω) 11 (11–12), slightly knobbed. Opisthosoma dorsally with 38 (37–38) semiannuli, smooth, with three ridges, ventrally with 62 (62–69) semiannuli, with rounded microtubercles. Setae c2 35 (33–35) on ventral semiannulus 15 (12–15), 60 (57–60) apart; setae d 70 (67–70) on ventral semiannulus 26 (25–27), 45 (43–45) apart; setae e 50 (50–52) on ventral semiannulus 41 (41–44), 20 (19–20) apart, setae f 23 (23–25) on 6th–7th ventral semiannulus from rear, 15 (15–16) apart. Setae h1 absent, h2 55 (52–55). Genital coverflap 15 (15–16), 30 (29–30) wide, coverflap with 23 (18–23) longitudinal ridges and dense short lines at base, setae 3a 14 (13–14), 20 (20–21) apart.
MALE: Unknown.
Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze
Vagrant. No damage to the host plant was observed.
Pihe Village, Fugong County, Nujiang Lisu autonomous prefecture, Yunnan Province (26°33'05"N, 98°55'08"E), elevation 2,122 m, 26 June 2013, coll. Xiao Han, Qiong Wang and Jing-Feng Guo.
Holotype, single female on a microscope slide (slide number NJAUAcariEriYN304C.1; marked Holotype). Paratypes 7 females mounted on separate microscope slides (slide number NJAUAcariEriYN304C.2–NJAUAcariEriYN304C.8).
The specific designation theacea is derived from the family name of the host plant; feminine in gender.
This new species is similar to Paracaphyllisa adinandrae Kuang & Luo, 2005, but can be differentiated from the latter by the design of prodorsal shield which is provided with admedian and submedian lines (prodorsal shield design of P. adinandrae has median, admedian and submedian lines), smooth coxal plates (coxal plates have short lines in P. adinandrae) and coverflap with 23 (18–23) longitudinal ridges and dense short lines at its base (coverflap is smooth in P. adinandrae).
The new species is surrounded with white hairs around the body.
Acaphylla indiae;
Acaphyllisa indiae;
Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze.
Vagrant, causing leaf rusting.
Indomalayan region.
Acaphyllisa parindiae;
Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze.
Vagrant, causing leaf rusting.
Indomalayan region.
Phytoptus theae Watt, 1898
Eriophyes theae (Watt, 1903);
Acaphylla theae;
Acaphylla steinwedeni;
Acaphylla steinwedeni;
Acaphylla steinwedeni;
Acaphylla steinwedeni;
Acaphylla steinwedeni;
Camellia japonica L., C. oleifera Abel, C. reticulata Lindl., C. sasanqua Thunb., C. sinensis (L.) Kuntze, C. sinensis var. assamica (J.W. Mast.) Kitam.
Vagrant. This species occurs on the undersurface of the leaves and is often associated with Calacarus carinatus (Green) (reported as C. adornatus (Keifer, 1940)). Acaphylla steinwedeni does not leave as much debris on the leaves as C. carinatus, but it may actually be more important as a rust mite. Both mite species overwinter on the leaves and show no deuterogyny.
Australian, Nearctic, Indomalayan and Palaearctic regions.
Phytoptus theae was reported infesting C. sinensis by
Acaphylla theavagrans;
Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze.
Vagrant, causing rust.
Indomalayan region.
Typhlodromus carinatus Green, 1890: 35.
Eriophyes carinatus;
Epitrimerus adornatus;
Calacarus carinatus;
Camellia caudata Wallich, C. sinensis (L.) Kuntze, C. kissi Wallich, C. japonica L., C. sasanqua Thunb., Capsicum annuum L. (Solanaceae), Viburnum opulus L. (Adoxaceae).
Vagrant, causing bronzing and leaving white cast skin streaks. Wax is produced on the five ridges and prodorsal shield.
Africotropical, Australian, Indomalayan, Nearctic, Palaearctic regions.
This free-living species leaves much debris on the host leaves and occurs on the leaves associated with A. steinwedeni. They both overwinter on the leaves and show no deuterogyny.
Aceria camelliae;
Cosetacus camelliae;
Cosetacus camelliae;
Camellia japonica L., Camellia sp.
Vagrant. The mite lives under leaf and flower buds, probably causing premature flower drop.
Australian, Nearctic, Neotropic, Palaearctic regions.
Diptilomiopus camelliae;
Camellia caudata Wallich.
Vagrant. No damage to the host was observed.
On the border between Palaearctic and Indomalayan regions.
Paracolopodacus camelliae;
Camellia oleifera Abel.
Vagrant.
On the border between Palaearctic and Indomalayan regions.
Phyllocoptacus camelliae;
Phyllocoptacus camelliae;
Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze.
Vagrant.
On the border between Palaearctic and Indomalayan regions.
Shevtchenkella camelliae;
Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze.
Vagrant, causing no apparent damage to the host plant.
On the border between Palaearctic and Indomalayan regions.
Tergilatus camelliae;
Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze.
Not stated.
On the border between Palaearctic and Indomalayan regions.
1 | Gnathosoma small in comparison to the body, chelicerae straight or slightly curved | 2 |
– | Gnathosoma large in comparison to the body, chelicerae abruptly curved and bent down near their base | Diptilomiopus camelliae Wang & Chen, 2013 |
2 | Tibiae reduced or completely fused with tarsi | Paracolopodacus camelliae Kuang & Huang, 1994 |
– | Tibiae distinct from tarsi | 3 |
3 | Setae e absent | 4 |
– | Setae e present | 5 |
4 | Median line absent, admedian lines complete curving mesally at their posterior ends; frontal lobe absent. Scapular setae sc projecting upward. Empodium 5-rayed | Theaphyes rapaneae gen. et sp. n. |
– | Median, admedian and submedian lines incomplete; frontal lobe present. Scapular setae sc projecting upward. Empodium 6-rayed | Tergilatus camelliae Wei, Feng & Huang, 1999 |
5 | Female genital apodeme bent up and shortened, usually appearing as a heavy transverse line in ventral view, ridges on female coverflap in 2 uneven ranks | Cosetacus camelliae (Keifer, 1945) |
– | Female genital apodeme extending moderate distance forward, does not appear as a heavy transverse bar in ventral view, female coverflap smooth or variably sculptured | 6 |
6 | Empodium entire | 7 |
– | Empodium divided | 9 |
7 | Scapular tubercles and setae sc absent | Calacarus carinatus Green, 1890 |
– | Scapular tubercles and setae sc present | 8 |
8 | Dorsal opisthosoma with anterior annuli fused forming a broad plate joined to prodorsal shield. Prodorsal shield with admedian and submedian lines, scapular tubercles ahead of rear shield margin, scapular setae sc projecting upward. Leg II without genual setae (l’’), tarsal empodium 6-rayed. Coverflap smooth | Phyllocoptacus camelliae Kuang & Lin, 2005 |
– | Dorsal opisthosoma without fused annuli forming a plate. Prodorsal shield smooth, scapular tubercles on rear shield margin, scapular setae sc projecting posteriorly. Leg II with usual setae, tarsal empodium 7-rayed. Coverflap with 14 longitudinal ridges | Shevtchenkella camelliae Song, Xue & Hong, 2008 |
9 | Coxal setae 1b absent | 10 |
– | Coxal setae 1b present | 11 |
10 | Coxal area with short lines, prodorsal shield with median line present on the posterior 2\5 and 4\5, frontal lobe bilobed, coxae smooth | Acaphylla theae (Watt, 1898) |
– | Coxal area smooth, prodorsal shield with median line absent, frontal lobe not as above, coxae with granules | Acaphylla theavagrans Kadono, 1992 |
11 | Genual II setae (l”) absent | 12 |
– | Genual II setae (l”) present; prodorsal shield without median line, admedian lines with short recurving sections, meeting cross lines at 1/4 and 2/3, tarsal empodium 3-rayed | Acaphyllisa parindiae Keifer, 1978 |
12 | Prodorsal shield with median line complete, submedian lines curving from the median and forming a double loop between the dorsal tubercles, prodorsal shield laterally with a broad lobe over the coxae. Leg II with femoral seta (bv) absent, tarsal empodium 8-rayed | Acaphyllisa indiae Keifer, 1954 |
– | Prodorsal shield without median line, submedian lines not as above, prodorsal shield laterally without a broad lobe over the coxae. Leg II with femoral seta (bv) present, tarsal empodium 5-rayed | Paracaphyllisa theacea sp. n. |
This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31172132). We thank Jing-Feng Guo of NJAU for reviewing an earlier draft of this manuscript. We are very grateful to JW Amrine Jr for valuable comments on the manuscript.