Advanced Search
Entomology 2017 (Denver, Colorado)
  • Eitan Recht - Plant Protection & Inspection Services
  • Yuval Gotlieb - The Hebrew University
  • Efrat Gavish-Regev - The Hebrew University
  • Lise Roy - Université Paul Valéry
  • María L. Moraza - Universidad de Navarra
  • Eddie Ueckermann - North West University
  • Monica R. Young - University of Guelph

As broad spectrum pesticides are being withdrawn and sustainable control practices are adopted, accurate taxonomic identification is crucial for the evaluation of new acarine biocontrol agents (ABAs). While little is known on ABAs of the red poultry mite (RPM), compared to ABAs of plant feeding mites, recent studies have identified potential ABAs for RPM. The poultry scientific community has yet to adopt the release and conservation of ABAs, partially because they lack the taxonomic expertise required to monitor the mite fauna before and after predator releases. Although the number of molecular taxonomy studies have increased substantially, species identification of mites is based almost entirely on morphology and is dependent on traditional taxonomists. Without reliable DNA barcodes for identification, and with only few mite taxonomists left for accurate morphological identification, we are clearly facing a taxonomic crisis. In the present study, we integrated molecular and morphological taxonomic tools with the aim of developing a library of mite DNA barcodes based on expertly identified specimens, to facilitate mite identification through DNA barcodes. Mites were collected from manure in poultry houses, bird nests, and from nearby soils. Series of isomorphic specimens were imaged, placed individually in micro-plates and sent to the Canadian Center for DNA barcoding for the sequencing. Following their return, mites were mounted on slides and 34 species were identified, belonging to the families (in parentheses no. of species per family) Laelapidae (4), Blattisociidae (3), Rhodacaridae (2), Digmasellidae (3), Melicharidae (3), Parasitidae (8), Macrochelidae (6), Ascidae (1) and Cheyletidae (4).

Powered by ClearMash Solutions Ltd -
Volcani treasures
About
Terms of use
Mites associated with the red poultry mite and their impact potential on biocontrol
  • Eitan Recht - Plant Protection & Inspection Services
  • Yuval Gotlieb - The Hebrew University
  • Efrat Gavish-Regev - The Hebrew University
  • Lise Roy - Université Paul Valéry
  • María L. Moraza - Universidad de Navarra
  • Eddie Ueckermann - North West University
  • Monica R. Young - University of Guelph
Mites associated with the red poultry mite and their impact potential on biocontrol

As broad spectrum pesticides are being withdrawn and sustainable control practices are adopted, accurate taxonomic identification is crucial for the evaluation of new acarine biocontrol agents (ABAs). While little is known on ABAs of the red poultry mite (RPM), compared to ABAs of plant feeding mites, recent studies have identified potential ABAs for RPM. The poultry scientific community has yet to adopt the release and conservation of ABAs, partially because they lack the taxonomic expertise required to monitor the mite fauna before and after predator releases. Although the number of molecular taxonomy studies have increased substantially, species identification of mites is based almost entirely on morphology and is dependent on traditional taxonomists. Without reliable DNA barcodes for identification, and with only few mite taxonomists left for accurate morphological identification, we are clearly facing a taxonomic crisis. In the present study, we integrated molecular and morphological taxonomic tools with the aim of developing a library of mite DNA barcodes based on expertly identified specimens, to facilitate mite identification through DNA barcodes. Mites were collected from manure in poultry houses, bird nests, and from nearby soils. Series of isomorphic specimens were imaged, placed individually in micro-plates and sent to the Canadian Center for DNA barcoding for the sequencing. Following their return, mites were mounted on slides and 34 species were identified, belonging to the families (in parentheses no. of species per family) Laelapidae (4), Blattisociidae (3), Rhodacaridae (2), Digmasellidae (3), Melicharidae (3), Parasitidae (8), Macrochelidae (6), Ascidae (1) and Cheyletidae (4).

Scientific Publication
You may also be interested in