Eriophyoid Mites: Progress and Prognoses

pp 115-149

Effectiveness of eriophyid mites for biological control of weedy plants and challenges for future research

  • L. SmithAffiliated withUSDA-ARS Western Regional Research Center Email author 
  • , E. de LilloAffiliated withDipartimento di Biologia e Chimica Agroforestale e Ambientale, Facoltà di Agraria, Università Bari, Italy
  • , J. W. AmrineJr.Affiliated withDepartment of Biology, West Virginia University

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access


Eriophyid mites have been considered to have a high potential for use as classical biological control agents of weeds. We reviewed known examples of the use of eriophyid mites to control weedy plants to learn how effective they have been. In the past 13 years, since Rosenthal’s 1996 review, 13 species have undergone some degree of pre-release evaluation (Aceria genistae, A. lantanae, Aceria sp. [boneseed leaf buckle mite (BLBM)], A. salsolae, A. sobhiani, A. solstitialis, A. tamaricis, A. thalgi, A. thessalonicae, Cecidophyes rouhollahi, Floracarus perrepae, Leipothrix dipsacivagus and L. knautiae), but only four (A. genistae, Aceria sp. [BLBM], C. rouhollahi and F. perrepae) have been authorized for introduction. Prior to this, three species (Aceria chondrillae, A. malherbae and Aculus hyperici) were introduced and have become established. Although these three species impact the fitness of their host plant, it is not clear how much they have contributed to reduction of the population of the target weed. In some cases, natural enemies, resistant plant genotypes, and adverse abiotic conditions have reduced the ability of eriophyid mites to control target weed populations. Some eriophyid mites that are highly coevolved with their host plant may be poor prospects for biological control because of host plant resistance or tolerance of the plant to the mite. Susceptibility of eriophyids to predators and pathogens may also prevent them from achieving population densities necessary to reduce host plant populations. Short generation time, high intrinsic rate of increase and high mobility by aerial dispersal imply that eriophyids should have rapid rates of evolution. This raises concerns that eriophyids may be more likely to lose efficacy over time due to coevolution with the target weed or that they may be more likely to adapt to nontarget host plants compared to insects, which have a longer generation time and slower population growth rate. Critical areas for future research include life history, foraging and dispersal behavior, mechanisms controlling host plant specificity, and evolutionary stability of eriophyid mites. This knowledge is critical for designing and interpreting laboratory and field experiments to measure host plant specificity and potential impact on target and nontarget plants, which must be known before they can be approved for release. One of the more successful examples of an eriophyid mite controlling an invasive alien weed is Phyllocoptes fructiphilus, whose impact is primarily due to transmission of a virus pathogenic to the target, Rosa multiflora. Neither the mite nor the virus originated from the target weed, which suggests that using “novel enemies” may sometimes be an effective strategy for using eriophyid mites.


Biocontrol Invasive plant Weed Host plant specificity Efficacy