Abstract
Abstract Bud mite, blister mite ( Colomerus vitis Pagenstecher), and rust mite ( Calepitrimerus vitis Nalepa) (Acari: Eriophyoidae) are recognized grapevine pests. Much of the biology and ecology of these pests is poorly understood. We used two types of molecular markers to gain further insight into the breeding biology and population structure of these mites, using individuals collected from sites around south‐eastern Australia. Patterns of genetic variation observed using PCR‐RFLP of ITS 1 (Internal Transcribed Spacer 1) confirmed the separate species status of the rust mite, and resolved the species status of bud and blister mites, revealing two closely related but distinct species. Microsatellite markers revealed extensive genetic differentiation between bud mite populations and blister mite populations even at micro‐geographical levels, suggesting low movement in these species. The findings indicate that separate control strategies are needed against bud and blister mites, and that localized control strategies are likely to be effective given their limited dispersal.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 6
Claim · model-written summary
The rust mite of grapevine is a separate species, confirmed by ITS1 PCR-RFLP patterns.
Verbatim
e0“Bud mite, blister mite ( Colomerus vitis Pagenstecher), and rust mite ( Calepitrimerus vitis Nalepa) (Acari: Eriophyoidae) are recognized grapevine pests”
e1“confirmed the separate species status of the rust mite”
Claim · model-written summary
Bud and blister mites of grapevine are two closely related but distinct species.
Verbatim
e0“Bud mite, blister mite ( Colomerus vitis Pagenstecher), and rust mite ( Calepitrimerus vitis Nalepa) (Acari: Eriophyoidae) are recognized grapevine pests”
e2“resolved the species status of bud and blister mites, revealing two closely related but distinct species”
Claim · model-written summary
Bud mite and blister mite populations on grapevine show extensive genetic differentiation, even at micro-geographical levels.
Verbatim
e0“Bud mite, blister mite ( Colomerus vitis Pagenstecher), and rust mite ( Calepitrimerus vitis Nalepa) (Acari: Eriophyoidae) are recognized grapevine pests”
e3“Microsatellite markers revealed extensive genetic differentiation between bud mite populations and blister mite populations”
Claim · model-written summary
Grapevine bud and blister mites suggest low movement between populations.
Verbatim
e0“Bud mite, blister mite ( Colomerus vitis Pagenstecher), and rust mite ( Calepitrimerus vitis Nalepa) (Acari: Eriophyoidae) are recognized grapevine pests”
e4“suggesting low movement in these species”
Claim · model-written summary
Separate control strategies are needed against grapevine bud and blister mites.
Verbatim
e0“Bud mite, blister mite ( Colomerus vitis Pagenstecher), and rust mite ( Calepitrimerus vitis Nalepa) (Acari: Eriophyoidae) are recognized grapevine pests”
e5“The findings indicate that separate control strategies are needed against bud and blister mites”
Claim · model-written summary
Localized control strategies are likely to be effective against grapevine mites because their dispersal is limited.
Verbatim
e0“Bud mite, blister mite ( Colomerus vitis Pagenstecher), and rust mite ( Calepitrimerus vitis Nalepa) (Acari: Eriophyoidae) are recognized grapevine pests”
e6“localized control strategies are likely to be effective given their limited dispersal”