Next Article in Journal
Influence of Information Literacy on Farmers’ Green Production Technology Adoption Behavior: The Moderating Role of Risk Attitude
Previous Article in Journal
Photosynthetic Performance and Urea Metabolism After Foliar Fertilization with Nickel and Urea in Cotton Plants
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agriculture
Volume 15
Issue 7
10.3390/agriculture15070700
agriculture-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Comparative Study of the Biological and Life Table Parameters of Two Spider Mite Pest Species, Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux and Oligonychus punicae Hirst (Trombidiformes: Tetranychidae), on Moringa oleifera Lam. (Moringaceae)

by
Julio César Chacón-Hernández
1,*,
Salvador Ordaz-Silva
2,
Eduardo Osorio-Hernández
1,
Imelda Virginia López-Sánchez
2,
Efrain Neri-Ramírez
1 and
José Guadalupe Pedro-Méndez
2
1
Faculty of Engineering and Sciences, Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas, Ciudad Victoria 87019, Mexico
2
Faculty of Business and Engineering San Quintín, Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, San Quintín 22930, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2025, 15(7), 700; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15070700
Submission received: 21 January 2025 / Revised: 25 February 2025 / Accepted: 24 March 2025 / Published: 26 March 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Crop Protection, Diseases, Pests and Weeds)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Oligonychus punicae Hirst and Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux (Acari: Tetranychidae) are two species of feeding spider mites that cause damage to the leaves of Moringa oleifera Lam. (Moringaceae). This research aimed to compare the biological and demographic parameters between T. merganser and O. punicae on M. oleifera leaflets. We calculated the demographic parameters for both spider mite species based on individual females’ daily age-specific survival rate (lx) and age-specific fecundity (mx). The mean immature period of O. punicae females (10.30 days) and males (10.05 days) was more extended than the T. merganser (8.62 and 8.61 days), respectively. The oviposition of T. merganser (58.02 eggs/female) was more significant than O. punicae (21.84 eggs/female), which caused its intrinsic natural growth rate to be higher for T. merganser (0.2771 d−1) than for O. punicae (0.1948 d−1). The generation time of T. merganser was shorter (13.01 days) than that of O. punicae (15.77 days), indicating that T. merganser has more life cycles per year than O. punicae. The Weibull model determined that the survival curves of T. merganser and O. punicae are Type I, and the O. punicae population decreases more slowly than the T. merganser population. The results of this study can be used to develop management and control strategies for both mite species in the M. oleifera crop.

1. Introduction

The moringa tree (Moringa oleifera Lamarck [Moringaceae]) is native to the sub-Indian continent and grown worldwide in the tropics and subtropical regions such as Africa, Cambodia, Nepal, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, Central and South America (ranging from Mexico to Peru, including Brazil and Paraguay), and Sri Lanka [1,2]. In Cameroon, to a density of 250,000 to 500,000 plants per ha, moringa farmers can harvest nine times a year over four years, yielding between 144 and 288 tons/ha of fresh leaves, equivalent to 24–49 t of dry matter [3]. In India, the cost of moringa cultivation is 97,700 rupees (Rs) (approximately 1112.89 US dollars) [4]. The moringa tree leaves contain more protein than milk and eggs, more calcium than milk, more iron than spinach, more vitamin C than oranges, and more vitamin A than carrots [1,2,5,6]. The global market for moringa products was valued at USD 6.2 billion in 2023; by 2032, it is estimated at USD 12.7 billion [7]. However, there are a series of stress factors that make moringa production difficult, among them, stress from insect and mite pests, which include 12 species of Lepidoptera, ten Coleoptera, six Hemiptera, two Thysanoptera, two Diptera [8], and eight phytophagous mites (Eutetranychus orientalis Klein, Oligonychus perseae Tuttle, Baker and Abbatiello, Oligonychus punicae Hirts, Tetranychus neocaledonicus André, Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux, Tetranychus truncatus Ehara, Tetranychus udaipurensis Gupta and Gupta, and Tetranychus urticae Koch, [Acari: Tetranychidae]) [9].
Monjarás-Barrera et al. [10] reported T. merganser and O. punicae caused damage to the foliage of M. oleifera. These authors observed that under greenhouse conditions, T. merganser caused scattered chlorotic spots to mature leaflets due to their feeding. Meanwhile, O. punicae, under field conditions, caused stippling on mature leaves. However, the biological and demographic parameters of these two species of mites on M. oleifera are still unknown.
Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux (Trombidiformes: Tetranychidae) is found in China, India, Mexico, the United States, and Thailand. This mite feeds on 24 host plants species, including chili pepper (Capsicum annuum L. [Solanaceae]), papaya (Carica papaya L. [Caricaceae]), and prickly pear cactus crops (Opuntia ficus-indica L. [Cactaceae]) [9]. Tetranychus species such as T. merganser feed through their stylet. These tetranychid mites penetrate their stylet in stomata openings or between epidermis pavement cells without causing harm to them. T. merganser feeds by ingesting the content of mesophyll cells until they are empty, causing cellular death [11]. Valencia-Domínguez et al. [12] classified T. merganser as the main pest mite of C. papaya crop in the State of Yucatan, Mexico, and by 2022, T. merganser was considered an important pest of papaya crops in several regions of the Gulf of Mexico [13]. Lima-Espíndola and Vanegas-Rico [14] reported that this species causes economic losses of 586 ± 234 dollars per hectare in prickly pear cactus crops.
Oligonychus punicae Hirst (Trombidiformes: Tetranychidae) is distributed around the world, including Mexico and the United States, feeding on 121 plants species, including avocado (Persea americana [Lauraceae]), mango (Mangifera indica L. [Anacardiaceae]), and grapevine (Vitis vinifera [Vitaceae]) L. [9]. In Mexico, O. punicae causes severe damage to avocado crops [15]. The feeding habits of this spider mite reduce the chlorophyll content of the leaf, causing a reduction in the photosynthetic rate of 50%, which causes a 20% decrease in avocado production [16,17]. In addition, Peña and Wysoki [18] mentioned that in periods of drought, 70 adult females per leaf or 300 mites per leaf cause partial defoliation to an avocado tree. Chemical pesticides are the primary method of controlling O. punicae and T. merganser. However, tetranychid mites, like these two mite species, have a high fecundity, a high oviposition rate, and a short life cycle and quickly develop resistance to chemical insecticides [19,20,21,22]. Therefore, developing management strategies requires more knowledge of the biology and life table parameters of T. merganser and O. punicae.
The biological and demographic parameters of T. merganser and O. punicae has been reported on different host plants and temperatures [21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29]. Segura-Martínez [21] evaluated the demographic parameters of T. merganser on five host plant species. Ullah et al. [23] evaluated the performance of T. merganser on P. vulgaris at different temperatures. On the other hand, Reyes-Pérez et al. [24] evaluated the biological and demographic parameters of T. merganser at different temperatures.
Just like T. merganser, the biological and demographic parameters of O. punicae are affected by temperature [25], host plant species [22,26], and a variety of host plant species [27,28]. González-Hernández et al. [22] evaluated the performance of O. punicae on P. americana, Pithecellobium dulce (Roxb.) Benth [Fabaceae] and Rosa hybrida L. (Rosaceae). Ferraz et al. [25] evaluated the behavior of O. punicae at different temperatures on Eucalyptus tereticornis Sm (Myrtaceae). Ferraz et al. [26] evaluated the performance of O. punicae on six eucalyptus species in a clonal mini orchard. Vásquez et al. [27] evaluated the biological demographic parameters of O. punicae on six grape cultivars (Chenin Blanc, Sauvignon, Sirah, Tucupita, Red Globe, and Villanueva) (Vitis vinifera L. [Vitaceae]). Cerna et al. [28] evaluated the life table parameters of O. punicae on three varieties of avocado. The biological and demographic parameters of T. merganser and O. punicae, such as the developmental time from egg to adult, survival, fecundity, longevity, and intrinsic growth rate are a function of the host plants and temperature.
The main demographic parameters estimated from fertility life tables are the net reproductive rate (RO), the intrinsic rate of increase (rm), the mean generation time (GT), the doubling time (DT), and the finite rate of increase (λ). Of these parameters, the rm is a key demographic parameter to assess population growth and behavior of insects and mites on different host plants, temperatures, and control agents [29,30,31,32]. On the other hand, life table parameters allow us to know the time needed for a pest arthropod to complete a generation, which indicates its ability to adapt more quickly or slowly to the host. These parameters help to clarify why some mite species become significant pests and others do not when fed the same host plant. Ullah et al. [23] compared the life history of T. merganser and T. kanzawai (Kishida) on Phaseolus vulgaris beans. Bonato et al. [33] compared the life table parameters of Mononychellus progresivus (Doreste) and Oligonychus gossypii (Zacher) on Manihot esculenta Crantz (Euphorbiaceae). Meza et al. [34] compared the optimal development of T. urticae and M. progresivus on M. esculenta. Ullah et al. [35] compared the life table parameters of Tetranychus piercei (McGregor) and T. truncatus (Ehara) on P. vulgaris. T. merganser has a short life cycle, higher fecundity rate, oviposition rate, and intrinsic growth rate than O. punicae on different host plants [21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29]. Therefore, we hypothesized that T. merganser has a better biological performance on M. oleifera than O. punicae. This research aimed to compare the biological and life table parameters amongst T. merganser and O. punicae on M. oleifera.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Mites Rearing

We started T. merganser and O. punicae colonies with biological material obtained from the Physiology Laboratory at the Engineering and Sciences Faculty at the Autonomous University of Tamaulipas. We used the taxonomic keys of Barker and Tuttle [36] to determine species. We performed the experiments simultaneously to avoid any possible effect caused by the tree’s age on the biological parameters and life tables of T. merganser and O. punicae. Both studies were conducted under the same laboratory conditions, at 29 ± 1 °C and 75 ± 5% relative humidity (RH) with a photoperiod of 12:12 h (light:dark). Oligonychus punicae shows better performance at 29 ± 2 °C, 70 ± 10% RH, and 12:12 h L:D on leaves of E. tereticornis [25], while T. merganser at 27 °C, 60 ± 2% RH, and 14:10 h L:D on leaves of C. papaya [24] and 30 °C, 65 ± 5% RH, and 16:8 h L:D on leaves of P. vulgaris. The mite species, either T. merganser or O. punicae, were reared on bean plants (Phaseolus vulgaris L. var. Michigan [Fabaceae]) under greenhouse conditions at 29 ± 4 °C and 70 ± 10% relative humidity (RH). Bean plants were grown in plastic pots (15 cm diameter × 10 cm height) with a growth medium of peat moss, irrigated once a week with HUMIMAX (Agrofersa, Saltillo, Coahuila, Mexico) (Humic substances derived from 12% leonardite, 2% soluble potassium, 0.5% amino acids, 3% manganese (Mn), 3% iron (Fe), 1% zinc (Zn), 0.5% boron (B), and 78% humectants, dispersants, and penetrants) at 2.5 mL per liter of water. We raised each species for three months (several generations) before conducting the experiments to ensure stable T. merganser and O. punicae populations.

2.2. Host Plant

The moringa tree was grown as an ornamental tree in an urban area of Ciudad Victoria, Tamaulipas (23°46′22.8′′ N, 99°5′57.1′′ W, 256 m above sea level) and was three years old when the leaves were used for the experiment. The moringa tree was watered every three days and fertilized every two weeks with HUMIMAX at 2.5 mL per liter of water. Mature and healthy leaves were collected from M. oleifera. These leaves were transported in resealable plastic bags inside a cooler with a frozen gel pack at a temperature of 7 ± 2 °C to the Physiology Laboratory. The transfer time of the leaves to the laboratory was 25 min. In the laboratory, under running water, we gently rubbed the moringa leaflets by hand to remove dirt and surface microorganisms that could hinder the mite’s mobility.

2.3. Immature Development and Performance of Adults

To determine the developmental time of the immature stages and construct the fertility life tables of T. merganser and O. punicae, we used a cohort of 85 and 80 eggs of T. merganser (63 females and 22 males) and O. punicae (56 females and 24 males) on M. oleifera, respectively, which we followed individually. We conducted all the experiments in a rearing chamber (Lumistell, Celaya, Guanajuato, Mexico) at 29 ± 1 °C, 75 ± 5% RH, and a 12:12 h (light/dark) photoperiod. To determine the biological parameters of both T. merganser and O. punicae, we used the methodologies of Gotoh and Gomi [37] and Uddin et al. [38]. With a sterilized scalpel, we cut squares of 4 cm2 from each leaflet and placed them with the underside facing up on water-saturated cotton in Petri dishes measuring 5 cm diameter. We randomly selected an adult female and an adult male from the colony of T. merganser or O. punicae. In both cases, the individuals (female and male) were placed on the M. oleifera leaflet squares with a fine camel hair brush. We let the female and male mate for 10 h. After this time, we removed the females, males, and additional eggs; and maintained one egg on each square of the M. oleifera leaflet. We changed the squares of the leaflets every three days to guarantee their freshness, and the mites were transferred to them. We performed observations twice a day with the help of a stereo microscope (UNICO Stereo & Zoom Microscopes ZM180, Dayton, NJ, USA). We recorded the duration of development time from egg, larval, protochrysalis, protonymph, deutochrysalis, deutonymph, and teliochrysalis, and survival and sex ratio (% female) of T. merganser and O. punicae were determined after reaching adulthood, i.e., after observing the development of teliochrysalis, we recorded the number of T. merganser and O. punicae females and males that reached the adult stage.

2.4. Oviposition and Life Table Parameters

When the T. merganser or O. punicae females from the immature development study reached the teleiochrysalis stage, we placed a male in each leaf square to mate with them. We replaced the male with another from the colony if he died or became caught in the cotton threads before the female died. We excluded females who died from drowning, improper handling, or who became entangled in the cotton thread from the data analysis. The eggs laid by a female were recorded daily until her death. In this way, the pre- and post-oviposition periods, oviposition period, the total number of eggs laid per female, the eggs laid per female per day, and the longevity of the females of 25 O. punicae and T. merganser females were determined [37,38].
We used the daily age-specific survival rate (lx) and age-specific fecundity (mx) based on female individuals to generate life tables for T. merganser and O. punicae on M. oleifera leaflets. The intrinsic rate of natural increase (rm) was estimated from the fertility table according to the equation given by Birch [39] and Carey [40]: ∑e−rxlxmx = 1. We calculated the gross reproductive rate (GRR = ∑ mx), net reproductive rate (RO = ∑lxmx), the mean generation time (GT = lnRO/rm), the finite rate of increase (λ = erm), and the doubling time (DT = ln2/rm) based on equations provided by Birch [39] and Carey [40].

2.5. Statistical Analyses

We used the t-test (p < 0.05) to separately compare the development time of each developmental stage, the pre- and post-oviposition periods, oviposition periods, longevity, and fecundity of O. punicae and T. merganser. Before performing the t-test, the data were subjected to the Shapiro–Wilk and F tests to determine normal distribution and homogeneity of variances, respectively. Additionally, we used the chi-square test to determine whether the percentage of T. merganser females is equal to that of O. punicae, e.g., whether the female/male ratio is homogeneous in both mite species. The Jackknife non-parametric method was applied to obtain pseudo-values for each demographic parameter (GRR, rm, RO, GT, λ, and DT), and the mean and standard error were estimated [29,41]. We compared those parameters to the t-test (p < 0.05). The R software version 4.4.1. was used for all analyses [42].
The Weibull distribution was used to describe and compare the survival of the T. merganser and O. punicae populations. The probability that a female of T. merganser or O. punicae lives at least until time t is given by [43]
S(t) = Exp(−[t/b]^c) for t ≥ 0,
where c and b are the scale and shape parameters, respectively. The shape parameter (c) was used to distinguish between type I, II, and III survival curves; if c > 1, mortality rate is an increasing function of age, if c = 1, mortality rate is constant, and if c < 1, mortality rate is a decreasing function of age [43,44]. Meanwhile, the scale parameter (b) indicates which population decreases more slowly between the two mite species (i and j), that is, if bi > bj for i is different from j. However, statistically equal c values between two populations do not ensure that the average longevity of those two populations is similar. Moreover, populations with similar shape parameters can have different mean longevities [44]. We used the “R2nls” function to estimate the pseudo-coefficient of determination (Pseudo-R2) as a measure of goodness of fit of the Weibull model to the survival data [45]. The parameters c and b and their 95% confidence intervals were estimated using the “nls” and “confit2” functions. Furthermore, the log-rank test was used to examine the null hypothesis of no difference in survival curve between the T. merganser and O. punicae populations [46]. The R software version 4.4.1. was used for all analyses [42].

3. Results

3.1. Development Time of Immature Stages

Both females and males of T. merganser and O. punicae completed their development on M. oleifera. The developmental time of the egg, larva, protonymph, deutonymph, and theliochrysalis of the females differed significantly between the two mite species (p < 0.01; Table 1). The total developmental time (from egg to adult) of T. merganser females differed significantly to O. punicae females time (p < 0.0001). T. merganser females (8.62 days) developed faster than O. punicae females (10.30 days) (Table 1). Nevertheless, there were no significant differences in protochrysalis and deutochrysalis periods between the two mite species (p > 0.05).
Regarding the male, the mean developmental time of egg, larva, protonymph, deutochrysalis, deutonymph, and theliochrysalis of T. merganser differed significantly to O. punicae (p < 0.05; Table 1). However, there were no significant differences in the protochrysalis period between T. merganser and O. punicae (p > 0.05). The total developmental time (from egg to adult) of the T. merganser males differed significantly to the O. punicae males’ egg–adult period (p < 0.0001). T. merganser males developed faster (8.61 days) than O. punicae males (10.05 days) (Table 1).
In this study, for both sexes, the survival of T. merganser and O. punicae showed that mites successfully developed on M. oleifera. The egg–adult survival rate did not differ significantly between the two mite species (Table 2). However, T. merganser females showed higher survival rates (83.78%) than O. punicae females (80.36%), indicating that a newly laid T. merganser egg is more likely to survive until the sexual maturation stage than O. punicae. Meanwhile, the survival rates of O. punicae males (75.00%) were higher than T. merganser males (73.08%).
The percentage of females was statistically similar between T. merganser (76.54%) (female:male = 3.2:1) and O. punicae (71.43%) (female:male = 2.5:1) (χ2 = 0. 17647, df = 1, p = 0.6744). The sex ratio for T. merganser and O. punicae was female-biased.

3.2. Female Longevity and Oviposition

The pre- and post-oviposition and oviposition periods, female adult longevity, total eggs/female, and daily egg production/female (eggs/female/day) significantly differed between the two mite species (Table 3). O. punicae (23.04 days) had a longer oviposition period than T. merganser (12.96 days). Nevertheless, the longevity of female O. punicae was significantly longer than that of female T. merganser. Both the total fecundity (58.02 eggs/female) and number of eggs laid by T. merganser females (3.30 eggs/female/day) were significantly higher than O. punicae (21.84 eggs/female and 1.69 eggs/female/day).
The Weibull model was fitted to the survival data of T. merganser and O. punicae, with pseudo-R2 values of 0.9910 and 0.9948, respectively. Estimates of Weibull model parameters c and b for T. merganser and O. punicae survival are shown in Table 4. The shape parameter c was higher than one (c > 1) for both populations of mite species and higher for T. merganser (c = 4.964), classifying the survival curve of T. merganser and O. punicae into Type I, where the risk of death increases with age. The scale parameter (b) was higher in the O. punicae population (b = 22.974), indicating that the O. punicae population decreased more slowly than the T. merganser population (b = 19.369) when fed with M. oleifera foliage. The survival curves of T. merganser and O. punicae females presented significant differences (Log-rank test, χ2 = 7.9208, df = 1, p = 0.0027). Figure 1 shows that O. punicae females had greater survival than T. merganser females. O. punicae females that fed on M. oleifera foliage lived significantly longer than T. merganser females that fed on M. oleifera. The survival curves indicated that the mortality of adult females of T. merganser began to be observed from day 11, while for O. punicae from day 12. The survival of adult females of T. merganser began to decrease rapidly after day 14, while, for adult females of O. punicae, it started at day 16. However, the mortality rate of O. punicae was slower than that of T. merganser (Figure 1). In both populations, the proportion of living females decreased as time passed, although T. merganser females showed greater fecundity than O. punicae females (Table 3). The time in which the population of O. punicae and T. merganser was reduced to 50% was very close to the time predicted by the Weibull distribution (LT50–P) and that obtained by the experimental data (LT50–E) (Table 4, Figure 1).

3.3. Life Table Parameters

The gross reproduction rate (GRR), net reproductive rate (RO), intrinsic rate of natural increase (rm, day−1), mean generation time (GT, in days), finite rate of increase (λ), and doubling time (DT) are shown in Table 5. The values of RO (37.23) and rm (0.2771) were significantly higher for T. merganser than those obtained for O. punicae (20.96 and 0.1948). Similarly, GRR and λ were the highest for T. merganser (52.84 and 1.32, respectively) and the lowest for O. punicae when both mite species fed M. oleifera (40.65 and 1.21, respectively). The mean generation time (GT) differed among the two mite species and was longest for O. punicae (15.77 days) and shortest for T. merganser (13.01 days).

4. Discussion

The present study demonstrates that both females and males of T. merganser and O. punicae develop successfully to adulthood when fed M. oleifera. The biological and demographic parameters of T. merganser were better than those of O. punicae. These differences could be because host plants respond differently to the attack of phytophagous arthropods. Plants may activate their defenses in a species-specific manner and aim to reduce the performance of the phytophagous arthropod [47,48]. These differences may be because the host plant reacts differently (elicitation specificity) to each species of pest arthropod or has differential effects on each species (specificity in effect) [49]. Plants can have adverse effects (resistance) or positive effects (susceptibility) to the attack of pest arthropods. In this regard, Moreira et al. [50] mentioned that the oviposition and saliva secretions of each species of phytophagous arthropod can be differential in each species and trigger a specific biochemical and physiological response in each species of arthropod, which causes the host plant to improve its traits that increase its resistance and reduce the less effective ones. Although further research is required, salicylic acid (SA) and jasmonic acid (JA) are present in M. oleifera and play an important role in plant defense against pest arthropods [51]. JA is an elicitor/effector and is the primary regulator of induced defenses triggered by mites [52]. Furthermore, M. oleifera leaves and seeds contain proteinase inhibitors encoded by JA-dependent genes [53]. Santamaria et al. [52] documented that proteinase inhibitors (PIs) interfere with the physiology of phytophagous arthropods, by inhibiting the activities of proteases involved in the growth and development of either herbivorous arthropods or intestinal digestive function. Thus, for some arthropod species, JA, AS, and PIs act as elicitors and trigger the plant immune response, and for other species, they act as effectors, since they hinder plant defense [51,52]. Other studies have reported that a host plant affects Tetranychidae species differently when assessed under the same environmental conditions. Ullah et al. [23] found that T. kanzawai performed better than T. merganser at 15 to 30 °C on beans; however, at 35 °C, T. merganser outperformed T. kanzawai. Bonato et al. [33] found that life table parameters of Mononychellus progresivus (Doreste) were better than those of Oligonychus gossypii (Zacher) when fed with Manihot esculenta Crantz (Euphorbiaceae) at 31 °C, 70 ± 10 RH, and 12 L:12 D photoperiod. Meza et al. [34] reported that T. urticae developed better than M. progresivus when fed with M. esculenta at 30 °C, 70 ± 5 RH, and 12 L:12 D photoperiod. Ullah et al. [35] documented that Tetranychus piercei (McGregor) performed better than T. truncatus (Ehara) when fed with P. vulgaris at 25 ± 1 °C, 60–70% RH, and at 16 L:8 D photoperiod.
Our results support the idea that phytochemicals present in the leaf of M. oleifera elicit different effects on the yield of T. merganser and O. punicae, but further trials are required to identify these bioactive compounds and determine whether M. oleifera resistance is because of its resistance mechanisms involving antibiosis (reduced growth, survival, and fecundity), antixenosis (non-preference), or tolerance. Li et al. [54] documented that JA-regulated proteins, such as proteinase inhibitors (PIs) and polyphenol oxidases, can cause anti-feeding effects against spider mites. These authors reported that MeJA-treated def-1 plants reduced fecundity and damage caused by T. urticae. Meanwhile, Ament et al. [55] found that direct JA-dependent defenses caused an increase in egg mortality rate or increased the time required for the embryonic development of T. urticae. Thaler et al. [56] reported that plants treated with JA reduced T. urticae egg production, reducing the number of spider mites after 10 days, equivalent to one generation of spider mites. Cui et al. [57] found that the Te16 gene (an herbivore-associated elicitor) is a specific protein for Tetranychidae, such as T. urticae, T. kanzawai, T. truncatus, T. piercei, T. evansi, T. pueraricola, and Panonychus citri, and is expressed more strongly in the salivary glands and to a lesser extent during the egg period. They demonstrated that the absence of the Te16 gene reduces egg hatching and survival of T. evansi. Furthermore, these authors found that the presence of the gene in the leaves of its host plant (e.g., Nicotiana benthamiana) caused a reduction in the survival and palatability of the plant to T. evansi.
The performance of T. merganser and O. punicae is temperature-dependent [23,25]. Although further study is required, the optimal temperatures for biological functions between O. punicae and T. merganser are different, which may lead to differences in their performances on M. oleifera; Ullah et al. [23] reported that the highest intrinsic rate of natural increase (rm = 0.411 ± 0.006, day–1) of T. merganser was at 35 °C on P. vulgaris at different tested temperatures (15 to 35 °C, 60–70% RH, and 16:8 h L:D) and rm showed a linear relationship with increasing temperature. These authors reported that T. merganser has a 44.8% survival rate at 37.5 °C. In contrast, Ferraz et al. [25] found that the highest rm of O. punicae was at 29 °C (rm = 0.20 ± 0.003, day–1) on E. tereticornis at different tested temperatures (21 to 33 °C, 60–80% RH, and 12:12 h L:D). These authors reported that O. punicae eggs did not hatch at 37 °C.
Overall, biological and demographic parameters are different between Tetranychus species, Oligonychus species, and Tetranychus and Oligonychus (Table S1) [21,22,23,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74]. Table S1 shows the development time from egg to adult, fecundity, generation time, and intrinsic growth rate of different Tetranychus and Oliginychus species at temperatures that matched or overlapped with our study (28, 29, and 30 °C). Tetranychus merganser had faster egg-to-adult development than O. punicae, indicating that M. oleifera reacted differently to the presence of T. merganser than to O. punicae. We found that the total time from egg to adult of T. merganser (female: 8.62 ± 0.10 days, male: 8.61 ± 0.15 days) and O. punicae (female: 10.30 ± 0.09, male: 10.05 ± 0.201) is longer and shorter than those reported for Tetranychus spp. (female: 5.9 to 11.47 days; male: 5.6 to 11.50 days) [21,23,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74] and Oligonychus spp. (female: 9.0 to 11.7 days; male: 8.8 to 11.90 days) [22,58,59,60,61,62,63,64], raised around 29 °C, respectively (Table S1). This variation between species of Tetranychus and Oligonychus may be caused by phylogenetic factors, morphological (cuticles, lignified cell walls, spines, thorns, and trichomes), and chemical (terpenes, phenolic compounds, tannins, flavonoids, sulfur, and nitrogen) host plant factors, experimental conditions, geographical location of the species, temperature, humidity, and researchers’ methodology, which exert a significant effect on all developmental stages of Tetranychus spp. and Oligonychus spp.
Spider mite species have diverse lifestyles, including little web (LW), non-systematic and complicated web (CW), and woven nest (WN). Tetranychus species have a CW lifestyle, which consists of weaving a web with a three-dimensional and irregularly complicated structure. Oligonychus species have a WN lifestyle, which consists of building systematic nest-like web structures and dragging behavior while spinning [75,76]. Saito and Sato [76] mentioned that species with CW life types, e.g., Tetranuchus species, show better biological and demographic parameters and can adapt more rapidly to unstable habitats than species with WN life types, such as Oligonychus spp. Just like those documented by Saito and Sato [76] and our results, Table S1 shows that Tetranychus species have better performance than Oligonychus species at a temperature around 29 °C.
The values of c and b in the two mite populations did not overlap (Table 4), which ensures the difference in the mean longevities between the populations of T. merganser and O. punicae. Pinder et al. [44] mentions that populations with similar shape parameters can have different mean longevities. Although these values were similar, they do not ensure the mean longevity is similar since the values of b can differ because the mean longevity is determined by both parameters [44]. This result was corroborated by the log-rank test, which shows that the probability of survival of both mite species differs significantly.
Saito [77] and Gotoh et al. [78] mentioned that to consider a spider mite as a pest, it must have higher rm values than non-pest species, Therefore, should T. merganser be considered a pest for the M. oleifera crop, but not O. punicae? T. merganser can adapt more quickly to M. oleifera than O. punicae because it showed a short generation time and higher fecundity, leading to a higher intrinsic rate of natural increase (rm). In this regard, Lawo and Lawo [31] mentioned that the rm describes the adaptation of pest arthropods to different host plants, temperatures, sources of nutrition, and pathogen attacks; it can also be used to assess the level of damage and determine the effect of pesticides on them, which can help improve pest control strategies in crops. On the other hand, Li [19] documented that pest arthropods with shorter GT and higher rm develop resistance to pesticides more quickly than pest arthropods with longer GT. The pest arthropods with short GT have numerous life cycles per year, which allows them to increase their genetic diversity and have more selection cycles of resistant alleles to increase the resistant individual percentage in the final population [79]. Generally, Tetranychus species have a shorter generation time than Oligonychus species (Table S1), which is consistent with our results. Therefore, it is no coincidence that the Arthropod Pesticide Resistance Database (APRD) reported 24 species of the Tetranychidae family as pesticide-resistant. Of these, 19 species are from the Tetranychus genus and one from the Oligonychus genus (the rest are one Bryobia species, one Eotetranychus species, and two Panonychus species) [80]. These discrepancies may be due to the shorter GT of Tetranychus species than Oligonychus species (Table S1) and the frequent use of pesticides for their control. Therefore, results like those presented in Table S1 should be considered when implementing strategies for managing and controlling mites with synthetic chemical pesticides in agriculture because they show which pest mite species might generate resistance more quickly than others.
In conclusion, T. merganser adapts better to M. oleifera than O. punicae since T. merganser showed a shorter developmental time from egg to adult, a higher rate of survival and fecundity, and a faster intrinsic rate of increase than O. punicae. T. merganser has more opportunity to develop resistance to systematic chemical pesticides because it has a shorter GT and a higher rm than O. punicae. Therefore, we consider T. merganser to be a potential pest for the M. oleifera crop compared to O. punicae under the conditions evaluated in this study. However, both mite species can complete their development on moringa, so T. merganser and O. punicae can affect the growth of the moringa tree and have an economic impact on moringa production, which can range from leaf loss to tree death, but further research is required to determine the loss of tree biomass caused by the attack of these phytophagous mites. The results presented here are important for developing and planning integrated pest management programs for both mite species tested. More studies are required, including evaluating the effect of physical and chemical characteristics, the nutritional quality of M. oleifera, and different experimental conditions on the biological and demographic parameters of T. merganser and O. punicae.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/agriculture15070700/s1: Table S1: Host, development time (d) from egg to adult, fecundity (eggs/female), generational time (d), and intrinsic rate of natural increase (rm; d−1) of Tetranychus spp. and Oligonychus spp.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.C.C.-H. and S.O.-S.; methodology, J.C.C.-H. and E.O.-H.; software, J.C.C.-H. and E.N.-R.; validation, J.C.C.-H. and I.V.L.-S.; formal analysis, J.C.C.-H., J.G.P.-M. and I.V.L.-S.; investigation, J.C.C.-H., S.O.-S., E.O.-H. and E.N.-R.; resources, J.C.C.-H. and J.G.P.-M.; data curation, J.C.C.-H., S.O.-S. and E.O.-H.; writing—original draft preparation, J.C.C.-H.; writing—review and editing, S.O.-S., E.O.-H. and J.C.C.-H.; visualization, J.C.C.-H., E.N.-R. and I.V.L.-S.; supervision, J.C.C.-H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors express their appreciation to the Faculty of Engineering and Sciences of the Autonomous University of Tamaulipas for support and providing the facilities for this research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Raj, M.; Pandit, S. Moringa oleifera: A boon to agriculture. J. Inst. Agric. Anim. Sci. 2023, 37, 113–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Rahman, M.A.; Das, A.K.; Sultana, S.; Khan, S.; Das, C.; Paul, M.; Current, D. Exploring knowledge and uses of Moringa oleifera and understanding its cultivation constraints and proposed solutions: A case from Bangladesh. Discov. Agric. 2024, 2, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Bidima, I.M. Production and Processing of Moringa; CTA and EWB Cameroon: Yaounde, Cameroon, 2016; p. 40. [Google Scholar]
  4. Samsai, T. A study on moringa production and marketing in the southern region of Tamil Nadu. Pharma Innov. 2023, 12, 1947–1952. [Google Scholar]
  5. Zheng, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wu, J. Yield and quality of Moringa oleifera under different planting densities and cutting heights in southwest China. Ind. Crops Prod. 2016, 91, 88–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pareek, A.; Pant, M.; Gupta, M.M.; Kashania, P.; Ratan, Y.; Jain, V.; Pareek, A.; Chuturgoon, A.A. Moringa oleifera: An updated comprehensive review of its pharmacological activities, ethnomedicinal, phytopharmaceutical formulation, clinical, phytochemical, and toxicological aspects. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 2098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Straits Research. Moringa Products Market. 2024. Available online: https://straitsresearch.com/report/moringa-products-market (accessed on 18 January 2025).
  8. Joshi, R.C.; David, B.V.; Kant, R. A review of the insect and mite pests of Moringa oleifera Lam. Agric. Dev. 2016, 29, 29–33. [Google Scholar]
  9. Migeon, A.; Dorkeld, F. Spider Mites Web: A Comprehensive Database for the Tetranychidae. 2025. Available online: https://www1.montpellier.inrae.fr/CBGP/spmweb (accessed on 18 January 2025).
  10. Monjarás-Barrera, J.I.; Lara-Villalón, M.; JuárezAragón, M.C.; Torres-Castillo, J.A. New Report of Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux and Oligonychus punicae Hirst1 on Moringa oleifera Lam. Southwest. Entomol. 2015, 40, 847–849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bensoussan, N.; Santamaria, M.E.; Zhurov, V.; Diaz, I.; Grbić, M.; Grbić, V. Plant herbivore interaction: Dissection of the cellular pattern of Tetranychus urticae feeding on the post plant. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Valencia-Domínguez, H.M.; Otero-Colina, G.; Santillán-Galicia, M.T.; Hernández-Castro, E. Acarofauna en papaya var. Maradol (Carica papaya L.) en el estado de Yucatán, México. Entomotropica 2011, 26, 27–40. [Google Scholar]
  13. Alfaro-Valle, E.; Martínez-Hernández, A.G.; Otero-Colina, G.; Lara-Reyna, J. High susceptibility of Tetranychus merganser (Acari: Tetranychidae), an emergent pest of the tropical crop Carica papaya, towards Metarhizium anisopliae s.l. and Beauveria bassiana strains. PeerJ 2022, 10, e14064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Lima-Espíndola, J.; Vanegas-Rico, J.M. Damage caused by Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux (Acari: Tetranychidae) on nopal verdura Opuntia ficus-indica (L.) Miller during winter. J. Entomol. Acarol. Res. 2017, 49, 121–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Peña, J.E.; Hoddle, M.S.; Aluja, M.; Palevsky, E.; Ripa, R.; Wysoki, M. Insect and mite pests. In The Avocado: Botany, Production and Uses, 2nd ed.; Schaffer, B., Wolstenholme, B.N., Whiley, A.W., Eds.; CAB International: Oxfordshire, UK, 2013; pp. 423–488. [Google Scholar]
  16. Maoz, Y.; Gal, S.; Zilberstein, M.; Izhar, Y.; Alchanatis, V.; Coll, M.; Palesvsky, E. Determining an economic injury level for persea mite, Oligonychus perseae, a new pest on avocado in Israel. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2011, 138, 110–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Castañeda-Cabrera, C.; Perales-Segovia, C.; Silos-Espino, H.; Lopez-Muraira, I.G.; Miranda-Salcedo, M.; Garcia-Munguia, A.M. Evaluación de extractos etanólicos de plantas silvestres sobre Oligonychus punicae Hirst y Oligonychus perseae Tuttle, Baker y Abbatiello, 1976 (Trombidiformes: Tetranychidae), en el cultivo de aguacate en México. J. Agric. Sci. Res. 2022, 2, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  18. Peña, J.; Wysoki, M. Plagas en Israel, México, Estados Unidos, Centroamérica y Perú. Plagas del palto en México. In Manejo de Plagas en Paltos y Cítricos; Ripa, R., Larral, P., Eds.; Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias: Santiago, Chile, 2008; pp. 303–309. [Google Scholar]
  19. Li, T. Shortest generation time. In Book of Insect Records; University of Florida: Gainesville, FL, USA, 1995; pp. 13–14. Available online: https://entnemdept.ufl.edu/walker/ufbir/chapters/chapter_06.shtml (accessed on 27 December 2024).
  20. Van Leeuwen, T.; Tirry, L.; Yamamoto, A.; Nauen, R.; Dermauw, W. The economic importance of acaricides in the control of phytophagous mites and an update on recent acaricide mode of action research. Pestic. Biochem. Phys. 2015, 121, 12–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Segura-Martínez, M.T.d.J.; Ordaz-Silva, S.; Hernández-Juárez, A.; Heinz-Castro, R.T.Q.; Mora-Ravelo, S.G.; Chacón-Hernández, J.C. Life table parameters of Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux (Acari: Tetranychidae) on five host plants. Insects 2023, 14, 473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. González-Hernández, E.; Chacón-Hernández, J.C.; Heinz-Castro, R.T.Q.; Hernández-Juárez, A.; Moreno-Ramírez, Y.d.-R.; Neri-Ramírez, E. Biology and life table of Oligonychus punicae Hirst (Trombidiformes: Tetranychidae) on three host plants. Fla. Entomol. 2024, 107, 20230002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ullah, M.S.; Moriya, D.; Badii, M.H.; Nachman, G.; Gotoh, T. A comparative study of development and demographic parameters of Tetranychus merganser and Tetranychus kanzawai (Acari: Tetranychidae) at different temperatures. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2011, 54, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Reyes-Pérez, N.; Villanueva-Jiménez, J.A.; de-la-Cruz-Vargas-Mendoza, M.; Cabrera-Mireles, H.; Otero-Colina, G. Parámetros poblacionales de Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux (Acari: Tetranychidae) en papayo (Carica papaya L.) a diferentes temperaturas. Agrociencia 2013, 47, 147–157. [Google Scholar]
  25. Ferraz, J.C.B.; Neto, A.V.G.; DeFrança, S.M.; Silva, P.R.R.; Melo, J.W.D.S.; De Lima, D.B. Temperature-dependent development and reproduction of Oligonychus punicae (Acari: Tetranychidae) on Eucalyptus. Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2021, 26, 918–927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ferraz, J.C.B.; Silva, P.R.R.; Amaranes, M.P.; Silva-Melo, J.W.; Lima, D.B.; França, S.M. Biology and fertility life table of Oligonychus punicae Hirst (Acari: Tetranychidae) associated with eucalyptus in a clonal minigarden. Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2020, 25, 103–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Vásquez, C.; Aponte, O.; Morales, J.; Sanabria, M.E.; García, G. Biological studies of Oligonychus punicae (Acari: Tetranychidae) on grapevine cultivars. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2008, 45, 59–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Cerna, E.; Badii, M.H.; Ochoa, Y.; Aguirre, L.A.; Landeros, J. Life table of Oligonychus punicae Hirst (Acari: Tetranychidae) in avocado leaves (Persea americana Mill) in the Hass, Fuerte and Criollo cultivars. Univ. Cienc. 2009, 25, 133–140. [Google Scholar]
  29. Maia, A.H.N.; Luiz, A.J.B.; Campanhola, C. Statistical influence on associated fertility life table parameters using jackknife technique: Computational aspects. J. Econ. Entomol. 2000, 93, 511–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Roy, M.; Brodeur, J.; Cloutier, C. Effect of temperature on intrinsic rates of natural increase (rm) of a coccinellid and its spider mite prey. BioControl 2003, 48, 57–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Lawo, J.-P.; Lawo, N.C. Misconceptions about the comparison of intrinsic rates of natural increase. J. Appl. Entomol. 2011, 135, 715–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Herrero, M.; Dami, L.C.; Fogliata, S.V.; Casmuz, A.S.; Gómez, D.R.; Gastaminza, G.A.; Murúa, M.G. Fertility life table, population parameters and biotic potential of Helicoverpa gelotopoeon (Dyar) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). An. Acad. Bras. Ciênc. 2018, 90, 3831–3838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Bonato, O.; Baumgärtner, J.; Gutierrez, J. Comparison of biological and demographic parameters for Mononychellus progresivus and Oligonychus gossypii on cassava: Influence of temperature. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1995, 75, 119–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Meza, N.C.; Bellotti, A.; Duque, M.C. Tablas de vida de Mononychellus progresivus Doreste y Tetranychus urticae (Koch) (Acarina: Tetranychidae) en Yuca. Rev. Colomb. Entomol. 1987, 13, 11–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Ullah, M.S.; Gotoh, T.; Lim, U.T. Life history parameters of three phytophagous spider mites, Tetranychus piercei, T. truncatus and T. bambusae (Acari: Tetranychidae). J. Asia. Pac. Entomol. 2014, 17, 767–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Barker, E.W.; Tuttle, D.M. A Guide to the Spider Mites (Tetranychidae) of the United States; Indira Publishing House: West Bloomfield, MI, USA, 1994; p. 347. [Google Scholar]
  37. Gotoh, T.; Gomi, K. Life-history traits of the kanzawa spider mite Tetranychus kanzawai (Acari: Tetranychidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2003, 38, 7–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Uddin, M.N.; Alam, M.Z.; Miah, M.R.U.; Mian, M.I.H.; Mustarin, K.E. Life table parameters of Tetranychus urticae Koch (Acari: Tetranychidae) on different bean varieties. Afr. Entomol. 2015, 23, 418–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Birch, L.C. The intrinsic rate of increase of an insect population. J. Anim. Ecol. 1948, 17, 15–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Carey, J.R. Applied Demography for Biologists: With Special Emphasis on Insects; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1993; p. 206. [Google Scholar]
  41. Meyer, J.S.; Ingersoll, C.G.; McDonald, L.L.; Boyce, M.S. Estimating uncertainty in population growth rates: Jackknife vs. Bootstrap techniques. Ecology 1986, 67, 1156–1166. [Google Scholar]
  42. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2024; Available online: https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 11 November 2024).
  43. Bouras, S.L.; Papadoulis, G.T. Influence of selected fruit tree pollen on life history of Euseius stipulatus (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2005, 36, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Pinder, J.E.; Wiener, J.G.; Smith, M.H. The Weibull distribution: A new method of summarizing survivorship data. Ecology 1978, 59, 175–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Schabenberger, O.; Pierce, F.J. Contemporary Statistical Models for the Plant and Soil Sciences. CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2002; p. 760. [Google Scholar]
  46. Méndez, I.R.; Namihira, D.G.; Moreno, L.A.; Sosa, C. El Protocolo de Investigación; Editorial Trillas: Mexico City, Mexico, 1984; pp. 178–188. [Google Scholar]
  47. Kant, M.R.; Sabelis, M.W.; Haring, M.A.; Schuurink, R.C. Intraspecific variation in a generalist herbivore accounts for differential induction and impact of host plant defences. Proc. R. Soc. B 2008, 275, 443–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Godinho, D.P.; Janssen, A.; Días, T.; Cruz, C.; Magalhães, S. Down-regulation of plant defence in a resident spider mite species and its effect upon con- and heterospecifics. Oecologia 2016, 180, 161–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. McNutt, D.W.; Underwood, N. Variation in plant-mediated intra-and interspecific interactions among insect herbivores: Effects of host genotype. Ecosphere 2016, 7, e01520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Moreira, X.; Nell, C.S.; Katsanis, A.; Rasmann, S.; Mooney, K.A. Herbivore specificity and the chemical basis of plant–plant communication in Baccharis salicifolia (Asteraceae). New Phytol. 2018, 220, 703–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Arif, Y.; Bajguz, A.; Hayat, S. Moringa oleifera extract as a natural plant biostimulant. J. Plant Growth Regul. 2023, 42, 1291–1306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Santamaria, M.E.; Arnaiz, A.; Rosa-Diaz, I.; González-Melendi, P.; Romero-Hernandez, G.; Ojeda-Martinez, D.A.; Garcia, A.; Contreras, E.; Martinez, M.; Diaz, I. Plant Defenses Against Tetranychus urticae: Mind the Gaps. Plants 2020, 9, 464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Bijina, B.; Chellappan, S.; Krishna, J.G.; Basheer, S.M.; Elyas, K.K.; Bahkali, A.H.; Chandrasekaran, M. Protease inhibitor from Moringa oleifera with potential for use as therapeutic drug and as seafood preservative. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2011, 18, 273–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Li, C.; Williams, M.M.; Loh, Y.-T.; Lee, G.I.; Howe, G.A. Resistance of cultivated tomato to cell content-feeding herbivores is regulated by the octadecanoid-signaling pathway1. Plant Physiol. 2002, 130, 494–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Ament, K.; Kant, M.R.; Sabelis, M.W.; Haring, M.A.; Schuurink, R.C. Jasmonic acid is a key regulator of spider mite-induced volatile terpenoid and methyl salicylate emission in tomato. Plant Physiol. 2004, 135, 2025–2037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Thaler, J.S.; Karban, R.; Ullman, D.E.; Boege, K.; Bostock, R.M. Cross-talk between jasmonate and salicylate plant defense pathways: Effects on several plant parasites. Oecologia 2002, 131, 227–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Cui, J.-R.; Zhou, B.; Tang, Y.-J.; Zhou, J.-Y.; Ren, L.; Li, F.; Hoffmann, A.A.; Hong, X.-Y. A new spider mite elicitor triggers plant defence and promotes resistance to herbivores. J. Exp. Bot. 2023, 75, 1493–1509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Chaaban, S.B.; Chermiti, B.; Kreiter, S. Effects of host plants on distribution, abundance, developmental time and life table parameters of Oligonychus afrasiaticus (McGregor) (Acari: Tetranychidae). Papéis Avulsos Zool. (SãoPaulo) 2012, 52, 121–132. [Google Scholar]
  59. Gotoh, T.; Nagata, T. Development and reproduction of Oligonychus coffeae (Acari: Tetranychidae) on tea. Int. J. Acarol. 2001, 27, 293–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Chen, W.-H.; Li, C.-Y.; Chang, T.-Y. Temperature-dependent development and life history of Oligonychus litchii (Acari: Tetranychidae), on wax apple. J. Asia Pac. Entomol. 2016, 19, 173–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Quan, L.; Xu, H.; Chen, B. Effects of temperature on the development and reproduction of Oligonychus litchii Lo and Ho (Acari: Tetranychidae) when reared on litchee. Fla. Entomol. 2019, 102, 43–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Lin, M.Y. Temperature-dependent life history of Oligonychus mangiferus (Acari: Tetranychidae) on Mangifera indica. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2013, 61, 403–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Abu-shosha, M.A.; Abdallah, A.A.; Abdel-Aziz, N.M.; Mahmoud, A.S. Effect of temperature on biology of Oligonychus mangiferus (Rahman and Sapra) (Acari: Tetranychidae). J. Plant Prot. Path. Mansoura Univ. 2017, 8, 389–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Orozco-Hoyos, J.; Duque-Echeverry, M.C.; Mesa-Cobo, N.C. Efecto de la temperatura sobre la tabla de vida de Oligonychus yothersi en Coffea arabica. Cenicafé 1990, 41, 5–18. [Google Scholar]
  65. Gotoh, T.; Sugimoto, N.; Pallini, A.; Knapp, M.; Hernandez-Suarez, E.; Ferragut, F.; Ho, C.-C.; Migeon, A.; Navajas, M.; Nachman, G. Reproductive performance of seven strains of the tomato red spider mite Tetranychus evansi (Acari: Tetranychidae) at five temperatures. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2010, 52, 239–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Hasanvand, I.; Jafari, S.; Khanjani, M. Effect of temperature on development and reproduction of Tetranychus kanzawai (Tetranychidae), fed on apple leaves, Int. J. Acarol. 2020, 46, 31–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Gotoh, T.; Moriya, D.; Nachman, G. Development and reproduction of five Tetranychus species (Acari: Tetranychidae): Do they all have the potential to become major pests? Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2015, 66, 453–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Domingues, C.A. Biologia e exigências térmicas do ácaro-vermelho (Tetranychus ludeni Zacher) em folhas de algodoeiro. Pesq. Agropec. Bras. 2002, 37, 573–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Ullah, M.S.; Haque, M.A.; Nachman, G.; Gotoh, T. Temperature-dependent development and reproductive traits of Tetranychus macfarlanei (Acari: Tetranychidae). Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2012, 56, 327–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Islam, M.T.; Jahan, M.; Gotoh, T.; Ullah, M.S. Host-dependent life history and life table parameters of Tetranychus truncatus (Acari: Tetranychidae). Syst. Appl. Acarol. 2017, 22, 2068–2082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Karami-Jamour, T.; Shishehbor, P. Development and life table parameters of Tetranychus turkestani (Acarina: Tetranychidae) at different constant temperaturas. Acarologia 2012, 52, 113–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Noronha, A.C.S.; Ferreira, C.T.; Tavares, E.J.M.; Lima, B.D. Fertility life table of Tetranychus palmarum Flechtmann & Noronha (Acari: Tetranychidae) in oil palm. Neotrop. Entomol. 2018, 47, 591–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Gotoh, T.; Suwa, A.; Kitashima, Y.; Rezk, H.A. Developmental and reproductive performance of Tetranychus pueraricola Ehara and Gotoh (Acari: Tetranychidae) at four constant temperatures, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2004, 39, 675–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Kumral, N.A.; Göksel, P.H.; Aysan, E.; Kolcu, A. Life table of Tetranychus urticae (Koch) (Acari: Tetranycidae) on different Turkish eggplant cultivars under controlled conditions. Acarologia 2019, 59, 12–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Saito, Y. The concept of life types in Tetranychinae. An attempt to classify the spinning behaviour of Tetranychinae. Acarologia 1983, 24, 377–391. [Google Scholar]
  76. Saito, Y.; Sato, Y. Diversity in life types of spider mites. Front. Arachn. Sci. 2024, 3, 1436082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Saito, Y. Comparative studies on life histories of species of spider mites (Acarina: Tetranychidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1983, 14, 83–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Gotoh, T.; Ishikawa, Y.; Kitashima, Y. Life-history traits of the six Panonychus species from Japan (Acari: Tetranychidae). Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2003, 29, 241–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Siddiqui, J.A.; Fan, R.; Naz, H.; Bamisile, B.S.; Hafeez, M.; Ghani, M.I.; Wei, Y.; Xu, Y.; Chen, X. Insights into insecticide resistance mechanisms in invasive species: Challenges and control strategies. Front. Physiol. 2023, 13, 1112278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Mota-Sanchez, D.; Wise, J.C. The Arthropod Pesticide Resistance Database; Michigan State University: East Lansing, MI, USA, 2024; Available online: http://www.pesticideresistance.org (accessed on 25 December 2024).
Agriculture 15 00700 g001
Figure 1. Survival of Tetranychus merganser and Oligonychus punicae feeding on Moringa oleifera, with values observed (black dots) and estimated with the Weibull distribution model (solid line).
Figure 1. Survival of Tetranychus merganser and Oligonychus punicae feeding on Moringa oleifera, with values observed (black dots) and estimated with the Weibull distribution model (solid line).
Agriculture 15 00700 g001
Table 1. Development duration (days ± S.E.) and survival rate (% ± S.E.) from egg to adult of Tetranychus merganser and Oligonychus punicae females and males reared on Moringa oleifera.
Table 1. Development duration (days ± S.E.) and survival rate (% ± S.E.) from egg to adult of Tetranychus merganser and Oligonychus punicae females and males reared on Moringa oleifera.
StageSexTetranychus merganserOligonychus punicaeStatistic
t Value (df)Probability
Eggs♀3.09 ± 0.034.09 ± 0.04–17.21 (122)p < 0.0001
♂3.18 ± 0.054.12 ± 0.10–7.98 (47)p < 0.0001
Larva♀0.81 ± 0.021.20 ± 0.03–10.13 (119)p < 0.0001
♂0.85 ± 0.041.25 ± 0.05–5.50 (44)p < 0.0001
Protochrysalis♀0.73 ± 0.030.77 ± 0.03–0.74 (118)p = 0.4631
♂0.75 ± 0.050.73 ± 0.05–0.16 (43)p = 0.8769
Protonymph♀0.81 ± 0.021.24 ± 0.03–9.05 (116)p < 0.0001
♂0.84 ± 0.041.2 ± 0.05–4.74 (41)p < 0.0001
Deutochrysalis♀0.85 ± 0.020.79 ± 0.031.24 (116)p = 0.2158
♂0.90 ± 0.040.75 ± 0.052.26 (40)p = 0.0290
Deutonymph♀1.01 ± 0.021.24 ± 0.03–3.13 (112)p = 0.0022
♂0.95± 0.031.28 ± 0.05–4.85 (33)p < 0.0001
Teliochrysalis♀1.08 ± 0.030.84 ± 0.035.14 (105)p < 0.0001
♂1.07 ± 0.040.77 ± 0.064.10 (28)p = 0.0002
Egg–Adult♀8.62 ± 0.1010.30 ± 0.09–11.51 (102)p < 0.0001
♂8.61 ± 0.1510.05 ± 0.20–5.55 (28)p < 0.0001
df: degrees of freedom.
Table 2. Hatchability of eggs, survival rates of immature stages, and sex ratio of Tetranychus merganser and Olygonychus punicae on Moringa oleifera.
Table 2. Hatchability of eggs, survival rates of immature stages, and sex ratio of Tetranychus merganser and Olygonychus punicae on Moringa oleifera.
StageSexTetranychus merganserOligonychus punicaeStatistic
χ2 Value
(df = 1)		Probability
Hatchability (%)♀97.3092.860.1036p = 0.7475
♂96.15100.000.0755p = 0. 7834
Survival Rate in Larvae (%)♀97.2298.080.0037p = 0.9509
♂96.0091.670.0999p = 0. 7519
Survival Rate in Protonymph (%)♀98.5798.000.0016p = 0.9676
♂95.8395.240.0018p = 0. 966
Survival Rate in Deutonymph (%)♀98.5395.920.0350p = 0.8515
♂95.4595.000.0010p = 0. 974
Survival Rate (Egg to Adult) (%)♀83.7880.360.0712p = 0.7895
♂73.0875.000.0248p = 0. 8746
Sex Ratio (% Female) 76.5471.430.1764p = 0.6744
df: degrees of freedom.
Table 3. Pre-oviposition, oviposition period, female adult longevity (days ± S.E.), eggs per female and eggs/female/day (mean ± S.E.) of Tetranychus merganser and Oligonychus punicae on Moringa oleifera.
Table 3. Pre-oviposition, oviposition period, female adult longevity (days ± S.E.), eggs per female and eggs/female/day (mean ± S.E.) of Tetranychus merganser and Oligonychus punicae on Moringa oleifera.
Reproductive ParametersMite SpeciesStatistic
Tetranychus merganserOligonychus punicaet Value (df)Probability
Pre-Oviposition1.18 ± 0.061.36 ± 0.06–2.15 (48)p = 0.0365
Oviposition12.96 ± 0.1823.04 ± 0.16–42.39 (48)p < 0.0001
Post-Oviposition1.08 ± 0.081.32 ± 0.05–2.45 (48)p = 0.0182
Eggs/Female58.02 ± 0.9021.84 ± 0.1647.37 (40)p < 0.0001
Egg/♀/Day3.30 ± 0.011.69 ± 0.0151.53 (40)p < 0.0001
Longevity18.04 ± 0.2025.84 ± 0.19–28.07 (40)p < 0.0001
df: degrees of freedom.
Table 4. Weibull function parameter values for survival curves of Tetranychus merganser and Oligonychus punicae feeding on Moringa oleifera.
Table 4. Weibull function parameter values for survival curves of Tetranychus merganser and Oligonychus punicae feeding on Moringa oleifera.
ParametersTetranychus merganserOligonychus punicae
b19.36922.974
ee0.14900.1456
t value130.03157.79
Pr (>|t|)p < 0.0001p < 0.0001
CI95%19.0623–19.675922.6789–23.2701
c4.96453.907
ee0.24640.1283
t value20.1530.46
Pr (>|t|)p < 0.0001p < 0.0001
CI95%4.4571–5.47173.6469–4.1677
LT50–P1821
LT50–E17–1820–21
Seudo-R20.99100.9948
Table 5. Demographic parameters (mean ± S.E.) of Tetranychus merganser and Oligonychus punicae on Moringa oleifera.
Table 5. Demographic parameters (mean ± S.E.) of Tetranychus merganser and Oligonychus punicae on Moringa oleifera.
Demographic ParametersMite SpeciesStatistic
Tetranychus merganserOligonychus punicaet Value (df)Probability
GRR Female/Female52.84 ± 0.5940.65 ± 0.1623.23 (40)p < 0.0001
RO (Offspring)37.23 ± 0.5820.96 ± 0.1531.55 (40)p < 0.0001
GT (Days)13.01 ± 0.0415.77 ± 0.03–49.11 (40)p < 0.0001
rm (Day−1)0.2771 ± 0.000.1948 ± 0.0048.24 (40)p < 0.0001
DT (Day)2.49 ± 0.013.5948 ± 0.01–51.37 (40)p < 0.0001
λ (Day−1)1.32 ± 0.001.21 ± 0.0039.28 (40)p < 0.0001
rm: The intrinsic rate of natural increase. GRR: Gross reproductive rate. RO: Net reproductive rate. GT: The mean generation time, λ: The finite rate of increase. DT: Doubling time. df: degrees of freedom.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chacón-Hernández, J.C.; Ordaz-Silva, S.; Osorio-Hernández, E.; López-Sánchez, I.V.; Neri-Ramírez, E.; Pedro-Méndez, J.G. Comparative Study of the Biological and Life Table Parameters of Two Spider Mite Pest Species, Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux and Oligonychus punicae Hirst (Trombidiformes: Tetranychidae), on Moringa oleifera Lam. (Moringaceae). Agriculture 2025, 15, 700. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15070700

AMA Style

Chacón-Hernández JC, Ordaz-Silva S, Osorio-Hernández E, López-Sánchez IV, Neri-Ramírez E, Pedro-Méndez JG. Comparative Study of the Biological and Life Table Parameters of Two Spider Mite Pest Species, Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux and Oligonychus punicae Hirst (Trombidiformes: Tetranychidae), on Moringa oleifera Lam. (Moringaceae). Agriculture. 2025; 15(7):700. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15070700

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chacón-Hernández, Julio César, Salvador Ordaz-Silva, Eduardo Osorio-Hernández, Imelda Virginia López-Sánchez, Efrain Neri-Ramírez, and José Guadalupe Pedro-Méndez. 2025. "Comparative Study of the Biological and Life Table Parameters of Two Spider Mite Pest Species, Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux and Oligonychus punicae Hirst (Trombidiformes: Tetranychidae), on Moringa oleifera Lam. (Moringaceae)" Agriculture 15, no. 7: 700. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15070700

APA Style

Chacón-Hernández, J. C., Ordaz-Silva, S., Osorio-Hernández, E., López-Sánchez, I. V., Neri-Ramírez, E., & Pedro-Méndez, J. G. (2025). Comparative Study of the Biological and Life Table Parameters of Two Spider Mite Pest Species, Tetranychus merganser Boudreaux and Oligonychus punicae Hirst (Trombidiformes: Tetranychidae), on Moringa oleifera Lam. (Moringaceae). Agriculture, 15(7), 700. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15070700

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop