Experimental and Applied Acarology

, Volume 74, Issue 4, pp 347–363 | Cite as

Impact of the erineum strain of Colomerus vitis (Acari: Eriophyidae) on the development of plants of grapevine cultivars of Iran

  • Saeid Javadi Khederi
  • Mohammad Khanjani
  • Mansur Gholami
  • Enrico de Lillo


The present experiment was aimed at determining the influence of the grape erineum strain of Colomerus vitis (GEM) (Acari: Eriophyidae) on responses of local grapevine cultivars. GEM was applied at five density levels to each of five cultivars, i.e. Shahani, Sahebi Uroomie, Khalili Bovanat, Rishbaba and Sezdang Ghalat (listed from early to late grape ripening). The experiment was performed in a full factorial design (12 replicates each) and effects of the mite on the relative content of leaf chlorophyll, internode and cane length, leaf area and weight, number and size of the erinea, and percentage of leaves with erinea were investigated. Also mite density on leaves and in buds was assessed. Data were analyzed with a two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test to separate means among treatment levels and cultivars. The relative content of chlorophyll (expressed in Spad units) in infested leaves was reduced along with an increase in mite density and it was shown to be highly significant at the two higher mite density levels for Khalili Bovanat, Rishbaba and Sezdang Ghalat; Shahani and Sahebi Uroomie leaves appeared to be less affected by mite infestation. The highest mite density treatment displayed a strong correlation with weight (positive correlation) and size (negative correlation) of the leaves of four cultivars; leaves of Sahebi Uroomie appeared to be less affected. The reduced internode length was weak in infested plants. Most infested plants produced shorter canes and their lengths appeared to have a strong negative correlation with the highest mite density in four cultivars; canes of Sahebi Uroomie did not appear affected. At the highest mite density, canes of Khalili Bovanat and Sahebi Uroomie displayed the most and the least shortening effects, respectively. The percentage of leaves with erinea, as well as the number of erinea per leaves and the diameter of erinea increased along with the mite population density. The mite densities in buds (April 2014) and on leaves with erinea (in November 2013) were higher at the highest treatment level in the medium-late (Rishbaba) and late ripening (Sezdang Ghalat) cultivars, than in the early and early-medium ripening ones. Almost all data collected in the current experiment allowed the conclusion that Sahebi Uroomie and Shahani were less affected than the other cultivars (Khalili Bovanat, Rishbaba and Sezdang Ghalat).


Grape Mite density Plant responses Plant morphology Correlation 



The authors are highly grateful to Prof. Edward A. Ueckermann (ARC-Plant Protection Research Institute, Pretoria, South Africa) and Prof. James W. Amrine Jr. (West Virginia University, Morgantown, USA) for their critical review and valuable comments. This work is part of a PhD dissertation of the senior author that was funded by Bu-Ali Sina University Hamedan, Iran.


  1. Abbott WS (1925) A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. J Econ Entomol 18:265–267. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anonymous (2011) Agricultural Statistics subsequent letters in West Iran. Jihad organization in Hamedan province. Horticultural products, vol 1Google Scholar
  3. Avgin S, Bahadiroğlu G (2004) The effect of Colomerus vitis (Pgst.) (Acarina: Eriophyidae) on the yield and quality of grapes in Islahiye, Gaziantep. J Agric Sci 14(2):73–78Google Scholar
  4. Bernard MB, Horne PA, Hoffmann AA (2005) Eriophyid mite damage in Vitis vinifera (grapevine) in Australia: Calepitrimerus vitis and Colomerus vitis (Acari: Eriophyidae) as the common cause of the widespread “Restricted Spring Growth” syndrome. Exp Appl Acarol 35:83–109. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Carew ME, Goodisman MAD, Hoffmann AA (2004) Species status and population structure of grapevine eriophyoid mites. Entomol Exp Appl 111:87–96. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Craemer C, Saccaggi DL (2013) Frequent quarantine interception in South Africa of grapevine Colomerus species (Trombidiformes: Prostigmata: Eriophyidae): taxonomic and distributional ambiguities. Int J Acarol 39(3):239–243. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. de Lillo E (2001) A modified method for eriophyoid mite extraction (Acari, Eriophyoidea). Int J Acarol 27(1):67–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dellei A, Szendrey L (1991) The mite infestation of different grapevine varieties in the vineyards of Heves County. Növén 27(2):55–61Google Scholar
  9. Dennill GB (1991) A pruning technique for saving vineyards severely infested by the grapevine bud mite Colomerus vitis (Pagenstecher) (Eriophyidae). Crop Prot 10(4):310–314. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duso C, de Lillo E (1996) Damage and control of Eriophyoid mites in crops: 3.2.5 Grape. In: Lindquist EE, Sabelis MW, Bruin J (eds) Eriophyoid mites—their biology, natural enemies and control. Elsevier, Amsterdam. Google Scholar
  11. Gholami M, Khanjani M, Mirab-balou M (2005) Study on resistance of different cultivars of grape to Colomerus vitis in west of Iran. In: Proceeding of the 4th congress of Iranian horticultural sciences, 8–10 Nov 2005, Mashhad, Iran, pp 183–184Google Scholar
  12. Hluchý M, Pospíšil Z (1992) Damage and economic injury levels of eriophyid and tetranychid mites on grapes in Czechoslovakia. Exp Appl Acarol 14:95–106. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hoagland DR, Arnon DI (1950) The water-culture method for growing plants without soil. Calif Agric Exp Sta Circ 347:1–32Google Scholar
  14. Ioriatti C, Bertamini M, Catoni M (1997) Influenza di Aculus schlechtendali sull’attività fotosintetica fogliare e sulla colorazione dei frutti di melo. Inf Fitop 47(9):49–53. Google Scholar
  15. Javadi Khederi S, de Lillo E, Khanjani M, Gholami M (2014a) Resistance of grapevine to the erineum strain of Colomerus vitis (Acari: Eriophyidae) in western Iran and its correlation with plant features. Exp Appl Acarol 63:15–35. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Javadi Khederi S, Khanjani M, Asali Fayaz B (2014b) Resistance of three grapevine cultivars to Grape Erineum Mite, Colomerus vitis (Acari: Eriophyidae), in field conditions. Persian J Acarol 3(1):63–75Google Scholar
  17. Javadi Khederi S, Khanjani M, Gholami M, de Lillo E (2018) Sources of resistance to the erineum strain of Colomerus vitis (Acari: Eriophyidae) in grapevine cultivars. Syst Appl Acarol 23(3):405–425. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Karami MJ (2012) Characteristics of white grape cultivars of Fars Province, Iran. Seed Plant Improve J 28(3):353–381Google Scholar
  19. Khanjani M, Hadad Irani-Nejad K (2009) Injurious mites of agricultural crops in Iran, 2nd edn. Bu-Ali Sina University Press Center, HamadanGoogle Scholar
  20. Kido H, Stafford EM (1955) The biology of the grape bud mite Eriophyes vitis (Pgst.). Hilgardia 24(6):119–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Králíková Y (1990) Škodlivost vlnovníkovců na révě vinné. (Damage potential of Colomerus vitis (Pag.) in vine.) Thesis for degree in agriculture at VŠZ BrnoGoogle Scholar
  22. Malagnini V, de Lillo E, Saldarelli P, Beber R, Duso C, Raiola A, Zanotelli L, Valenzano D, Giampetruzzi A, Morelli M, Ratti C, Causin R, Gualandri G (2016) Transmission of grapevine Pinot gris virus by Colomerus vitis (Acari: Eriophyidae) to grapevine. Arch Virol 161(9):2595–2599. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Mohiseni AA, Golmohammadi M, Kooshki MH (2011) Investigations on the resistance of 25 olive genotypes to Aceria oleae and Oxycenus niloticus (Acari: Eriophyidae) under greenhouse condition. Plant Prot 33(2):39–48Google Scholar
  24. Monfreda R, Nuzzaci G, de Lillo E (2007) Detection, extraction, and collection of Eriophyoid mites. Zootaxa 1662:35–43Google Scholar
  25. Petanović R, Kielkiewicz M (2010) Plant–eriophyoid mite interactions: specific and unspecific morphological alterations. Part II. Exp Appl Acarol 51:81–91. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. SAS Institute (2003) GLM: a guide to statistical and data analysis, version 9.1. SAS Institute, CaryGoogle Scholar
  27. Smith LM, Stafford EM (1948) The bud mite and the erineum mite of grapes. Hilgardia 18(7):317–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. SPSS (2004) SPSS base 13.0 user’s guide. SPSS, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  29. Uddling J, Gelang-Alfredsson J, Piikki K, Pleijel H (2007) Evaluating the relationship between leaf chlorophyll concentration and SPAD-502 chlorophyll meter readings. Photosynth Res 91:37–46CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Walton VM, Dreves AJ, Gent DH, James DJ, Martin RR, Chambers U, Skinkis PA (2007) Relationship between rust mite Calepitrimerus vitis (Nalepa), bud mite Colomerus vitis (Pagenstecher) (Acari: Eriophyidae) and short shoot syndrome in Oregon vineyards. Int J Acarol 33(4):307–318. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Whitehead VB, Rust DJ, Pringle KA, Albertse G (1978) The bud-infesting strain of the grape leaf blister mite, Eriophyes vitis (Pgst.), on vines in the Western Cape Province. J Entomol Soc South Afr 41:9–15Google Scholar
  32. Wu J, Li L-Y, Xu X-A, Yang Y-Z, Wang D-S (2006) Physiological variation of damaged leaves of tomato by Aculops lycopersici. Acta Hortic Sin 33(6):1215–1218Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of AgricultureBu-Ali Sina UniversityHamedanIran
  2. 2.Department of Horticulture, Faculty of AgricultureBu-Ali Sina UniversityHamedanIran
  3. 3.Department of Soil, Plant and Food Sciences, Entomological and Zoological SectionUniversity of Bari Aldo MoroBariItaly

Personalised recommendations