Revista Brasileira de Entomologia Revista Brasileira de Entomologia
Rev Bras Entomol 2017;61:101-6 - Vol. 61 Núm.2 DOI: 10.1016/j.rbe.2017.03.005
Host–parasite interaction and impact of mite infection on mosquito population
Atwa A. Atwaa, Anwar L. Bilgramia,, , , Ahmad I.M. Al-Saggafb
a King Abdulaziz University, Deanship of Scientific Research, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
b King Abdulaziz University, Faculty of Sciences, Department of Biological Sciences, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
Recebido 11 Janeiro 2017, Aceitaram 16 Março 2017

During the present study, the host–parasite relationship between mosquitoes and parasitic mites was investigated. The 8954 individuals of male and female mosquitoes belonging to 26 genera: seven each of Aedes and Culex, six of Anopheles and one each of Toxorhynchites, Coquillettidia and Uranotaenia were collected from 200 sites. The male and female mosquitoes were collected from the State of Uttar Pradesh, located at 26.8500°N, 80.9100°E in North India by deploying Carbon dioxide-baited and gravid traps. The intensity of mite's infection, type and number of mites attached to mosquitoes, mite's preference for body parts and host sexes were the parameters used to determine host–parasite relationship. Eight species of mites: Arrenurus acuminatus, Ar. gibberifrons, Ar. danbyensis, Ar. madaraszi, Ar. kenki, Parathyas barbigera, Leptus sp., and Anystis sp., parasitized mosquitoes. Parasitic mites preferred host's thorax for attachment as compared to the head, pre-abdomen or appendages. The present study suggests phoretic relationship between parasitic mites and mosquitoes. Wide occurrence, intensity of infection, parasitic load, and attachment preferences of the mites suggested their positive role in biological control of adult mosquitoes. The present study will set the path of future studies on host–parasite relationships of mites and mosquitoes and define the role of parasitic mites in the biological control of mosquitoes.

Mosquito, Mites, Host, Parasite, Infection, Biocontrol
Rev Bras Entomol 2017;61:101-6 - Vol. 61 Núm.2 DOI: 10.1016/j.rbe.2017.03.005