Impact of intraguild predation on the biological control of Panonychus citri (McGregor) (Acari: Tetranychidae) by Phytoseiid Mites

Impact of intraguild predation on the biological control of Panonychus citri (McGregor) (Acari: Tetranychidae) by Phytoseiid Mites | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Impact of intraguild predation on the biological control of Panonychus citri (McGregor) (Acari: Tetranychidae) by Phytoseiid Mites MUHAMMAD ASIF QAYYOUM This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5933915/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background: Predatory mites are essential for integrated pest management, particularly in citrus agroecosystems where Panonychus citri (citrus red mite) is a significant pest. Understanding the reproductive behavior, consumption rates, and intraguild predation (IGP) patterns of predatory mites is vital for determining their potential as biological control agents. This study evaluates three predatory mite species— Neoseiulus californicus , Neoseiulus barkeri , and Scapulaseius newsami —to better understand their reproductive and predatory behaviors under different prey combinations. Main Results: The study revealed several key patterns in the reproductive and consumption behaviors of the three predatory mite species, with notable differences in their responses to P. citri and intraguild prey. Neoseiulus californicus exhibited a preoviposition period of 1.9 days when fed P. citri and laid a total of 27.8 eggs per female with a daily egg production of 1.8. It showed a higher fecundity when compared to N. barkeri (1.25 eggs per day) and S. newsami (1.34 eggs per day). The preoviposition period for N. barkeri and S. newsami was similar, approximately 1.6-1.8 days, but N. barkeri demonstrated slightly lower reproductive rates when feeding on P. citri , with a total of 25.2 eggs and a daily egg production of 1.26 eggs. S. newsami laid 25.65 eggs and had a slightly higher daily egg production rate of 1.33 eggs. For all three species, the longevity ranged between 26 and 28 days, with no significant differences observed between species or prey conditions. N. californicus had the highest total consumption of P. citri at 412.6 individuals, with a daily consumption rate of 13.0 per female. In contrast, N. barkeri consumed 405.81 P. citri individuals, and S. newsami consumed 408.47 P. citri individuals. When both P. citri and intraguild prey ( N. barkeri or S. newsami larvae) were offered, the consumption of P. citri decreased significantly. N. californicus showed a preference for P. citri in these mixed prey conditions, with a total consumption of 150.7 P. citri individuals and a daily consumption of 3.8. N. barkeri and S. newsami showed similar patterns with lower consumption rates in mixed prey conditions. N. californicus and N. barkeri exhibited a clear preference for intraguild prey, consuming 206.86 and 206.68 phytoseiid larvae, respectively. S. newsami preferred N. californicus over N. barkeri in intraguild predation, consuming 203.48 and 186.71 phytoseiid larvae, respectively. In mixed prey conditions, N. californicus showed the highest consumption of P. citri and N. barkeri , whereas S. newsami preferred N. californicus to N. barkeri larvae, consuming significantly more of N. californicus . The presence of intraguild prey significantly reduced the total consumption of P. citri by all three species. Specifically, N. barkeri and S. newsami reduced their total P. citri consumption when mixed with their intraguild counterparts ( N. californicus and S. newsami larvae). The results were statistically significant (P < 0.05) in most cases for differences in preoviposition periods, longevity, egg production, and consumption rates. The highest variation was observed in the total consumption rates of P. citri and phytoseiid larvae when prey combinations were altered. The study analyzed the reproductive and consumption behaviors of three predatory mite species, Neoseiulus californicus , N. barkeri , and S. newsami . Neoseiulus californicus had a preoviposition period of 1.9 days and laid 27.8 eggs per female, with a daily egg production of 1.8. It had higher fecundity compared to N. barkeri and S. newsami . N. barkeri and S. newsami had similar preoviposition periods, but N. barkeri had slightly lower reproductive rates. All three species had longevity ranging between 26 and 28 days. N. californicus had the highest total consumption of P. citri at 412.6 individuals, with a daily consumption rate of 13.0 per female. When both P. citri and intraguild prey were offered, the consumption of P. citri decreased significantly. N. californicus and N. barkeri showed a preference for P. citri in mixed prey conditions, while S. newsami preferred N. californicus over N. barkeri larvae. The presence of intraguild prey significantly reduced the total consumption of P. citri by all three species. The results were statistically significant in most cases. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that Neoseiulus californicus , Neoseiulus barkeri , and Scapulaseius newsami exhibit distinct reproductive and consumption behaviors when feeding on P. citri and intraguild prey. While N. californicus showed the highest fecundity and consumption of P. citri , all three species showed preference for intraguild prey when both prey types were available. These findings emphasize the complex interactions of predatory mites in biological control, suggesting that their effectiveness may be influenced by prey availability and the presence of intraguild predators. Further research on the impact of these interactions in natural agroecosystems is necessary to optimize the use of these species in pest management strategies. Entomology predatory mites Panonychus citri reproductive performance predatory performance biological control integrated pest management Introduction The citrus red mite ( Panonychus citri ) is a significant pest and threat to global citrus crops and is challenging to manage; that causes economic damage through reduced fruit quality, yield losses, and increased production costs from intensive pest management strategies (Qayyoum et al. 2021a ; Qayyoum et al. 2021b ; Qayyoum et al. 2021c ). It is well-known for its quick reproduction and development of resistance against different chemical control methods, which makes it a significant challenge for agricultural management (Alves et al. 2018 ; Pan et al. 2020 ). Recently, the potential use of intraguild predation among phytoseiid mites has been highlighted, and effective biological control strategies are needed to suppress this pest (Mendel & Schausberger 2011 ; Wilken et al. 2014 ; Momen & Abdel-Khalek 2021 ; Novljan et al. 2023 ). Intraguild predation occurs between species that share the same prey and may have profound effects on pest population dynamics and the efficacy of biological control agents (Pérez-Sayas et al. 2015 ; Momen & Abdel-Khalek 2021 ). Under extreme conditions of low densities of natural or favourable mite/insect prey, some phytoseiid mites may even kill and consume their phytoseiid competitors (Ahmad et al. 2015 ). The discrimination between conspecific (the same predatory species) and heterospecific (another predatory species) individuals as was previously known in some generalist phytoseiid mites (Schausberger et al. 2020 ; Schausberger & Rendon 2022 ). Generalist phytoseiid mites (type III) tended to predate on heterospecific compared to conspecific prey, however, T. urticae was not suppressed (Schausberger & Hoffmann 2008 ). The main aspect of Intraguild predation in immature and female predatory phytoseiid mites has been studied in previous investigations (Ahmad et al. 2015 ; Momen & Abdel-Khalek 2021 ). Neoseiulus californicus and N. cucumeris are used as biological control against mite ( P. citri ) and insect pests (Mendel & Schausberger 2011 ), while Scapulaseius newsami is found in citrus fields in southern China. These mites are selective predators (McMurtry et al. 2013 ; Qayyoum et al. 2021a ). Qayyoum et al. ( 2021a ) evaluated the biological control potential of Neoseiulus californicus , N. cucumeris, and Scapulaseius newsami against Panonychus citri using the "Relative Control Potential" metric. Results showed that all predators preferred eggs, with N. cucumeris having a higher RCP and potential for maximum reproduction, while S. newsami resulted in similar results as N. californicus . In addition to that, environmental aspects, including the use of pesticides, habitat management, and climatic conditions, may also complicate the interaction between P. citri and its natural enemies (Qayyoum et al. 2021a ; Qayyoum et al. 2021b ; Qayyoum et al. 2021c ). The use of some pesticides is an example where its application can not only kill P. citri but also impact the survival and fecundity of predatory mites, potentially altering the efficacy of biological control (Hellmann et al. 2024 ; Rizzo et al. 2024 ; Savi et al. 2024 ). Differential mite responses to pesticides suggest relying on a few species for toxicity assessments could undermine biological control systems, making selecting the correct species crucial for controlling P. citri populations (Li et al. 2018 ; Teodoro et al. 2020 ; Momen & Abdel-Khalek 2021 ; Qayyoum et al. 2021a ). Factors affecting the strength of Intraguild predation and biological control outcomes depend on predator species, ranging from harmful to harmless Intraguild predators, including predator aggressiveness, activity, and habitat characteristics (Walzer & Schausberger 2015 ). Herein, we describe the reproduction and consumptive behaviour of three predatory mites ( N. californicus , N. barkeri , and S. newswami) by feeding on three different populations (Susceptible, soyabean oil treated population and F1 generations (mixture of both populations). Here we also study the intraguild predation among three predatory mites in the absence or presence of P. citri . Additionally, the influence of different intraguild predation -prey on ovipositional period, longevity, predation rate, and fecundity of female predatory mites as intraguild predation was evaluated. Moreover, these parameters were compared to those achieved on mixed with P. citri . Methodology Mites’ cultures Neoseiulus californicus and N. barkeri were collected from a mass-rearing laboratory on Tetranychus urticae Koch. and Tyrophagus putrescentiae, respectively. S. newsami and P. citri were isolated from citrus/lemon orchards in 2019 and cultivated for 6 months before the start of the experiment. The predator-prey synchronizations were obtained by raising N. californicus , N. barkeri , and S. newsami on P. citri . Predator eggs were transferred to fresh leaf (lemon) discs containing sufficient prey to produce same-aged females. The above-mentioned rearing was done at controlled conditions of temperature (26 ± 1°C), photoperiod (16: 8 h (Light: Dark)) and relative humidity (75 ± 1%). Leaf Disks The experiment was conducted on a lemon leaf disc (lower leaf surface upward) (3.5 cm diameter) placed on a water-saturated sponge. Its edges were wiped with absorbent paper to avoid mite escape and retain moisture (all leaf discs). Mites that were attached to absorbent paper were excluded from the study data. 4 of the same units were tested as the one test group by adding them into a small plastic box (15 cm×15 cm×6.5 cm) and repeated 10 times (10×4). Water was filled in all plastic boxes upto just below leaf discs and maintained. All experimental procedures were performed under the conditions described previously under the control. Uniform age for adult females (> 24 h old) was obtained by isolating them from the colony when they were still immature and collecting from stock cultures. Mated females were then starved for 24 hours before being placed in experimental units. Injured or less active females were removed from the experiments. Intraguild Predation Test In the experiments, female predatory mites were considered intraguild predators, and heterospecific larvae were considered the intraguild prey (Montserrat et al. 2012 ). Phase 1–1st series of experiments (f): Larval stages of phytoseiid prey were only available to the female predatory mites. The larval stage was chosen for the ease of handling and because once the larvae hatch, they are immediately picked up by the predatory mites. Similar results were observed by Momen ( 2010 ); Momen and Abdel-Khalek ( 2021 ) Showing species preference with species like N. barkeri and N. californicus also preferring the larval stage. Females were monitored in a no-choice situation in each predatory species and fed only P. citri larvae as a control. A site-choice experiment was performed in a second set of experiments to test female predatory mites' food preferences. Mites were fed a diet of 50% P. citri larvae and 50% phytoseiid larvae. Ovipositional period, ovipositional rate, quantity of each food source consumed (based on counting the larval corpses), and female mite survival were measured as several experimental factors. Visible observations were made daily, and at all temporal sampling points, all residual food and corpses were removed and replaced by the same amount of fresh food. The goal of this experiment was to obtain an indication of the voracity and food preference of the females when two prey species were offered. Statistical Analysis One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to test mean pre-oviposition and oviposition periods, longevity, mean total and daily number of eggs laid per female, mean total and daily number of prey consumed per female on each tested predator species for each prey source per species was performed using the SPSS computer program. Data were assessed for normality and homogeneity of variances before the analyses. Post hoc comparisons were performed using Tukey's HSD test when substantial differences were found. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Three independent experiments were performed, and data are shown as means ± SE. This detailed methodology effectively compared selected mite species' reproductive and predatory performance under controlled conditions. Results Performance of Neoseiulus californicus Under Different Prey Treatments Neoseiulus californicus exhibited significant variations in longevity, ovipositional periods, fecundity, and consumption rates depending on the type of prey provided. The preoviposition period, ranging from approximately 1.8 to 1.9 days, did not differ significantly across the various prey treatments (F = 1.53, P = 0.196), indicating that the initiation of oviposition in N. californicus is independent of prey type. In contrast, the ovipositional period showed significant variation based on the prey type (F = 8.56, P < 0.0001). Females fed solely on Panonychus citri laid eggs for an average of 26 ± 0.667 days, while those fed exclusively on Neoseiulus barkeri larvae or Scapulaseius newsami larvae oviposited for 25.7 ± 0.483 days and 25.7 ± 0.483 days, respectively. Mixed diets, including combinations of P. citri with either N. barkeri or S. newsami larvae, resulted in shorter ovipositional periods, ranging from 25 to 25.6 days. Longevity was significantly influenced by prey type (F = 137.29, P < 0.0001). Females fed exclusively on P. citri lived for an average of 28.1 ± 0.316 days, while those fed solely on N. barkeri or S. newsami larvae lived slightly shorter, averaging 28 ± 0 days. In contrast, females on mixed diets exhibited reduced longevity, with lifespans decreasing to between 26 and 27 days depending on the specific combination of prey. Fecundity, measured as the total number of eggs laid per female, was also significantly affected by prey type (F = 40.89, P < 0.0001). Females fed solely on P. citri or N. barkeri larvae laid an average of 27.8 ± 0.422 eggs each. In comparison, those on mixed diets laid fewer eggs, with totals ranging from 26 to 27 eggs. Similarly, daily egg production was higher in the sole-prey groups, averaging between 1.8 and 2 eggs per day, compared to the mixed diet groups, which ranged from 1.3 to 1.6 eggs per day (F = 5.7, P < 0.0001). Consumption rates of Panonychus citri were significantly higher in females fed solely on this prey compared to those on mixed diets (F = 150.4, P < 0.0001). Solely fed females consumed an average of 412.6 ± 0.966 P. citri individuals, whereas those on mixed diets consumed between 150.7 ± 34.9 and 171.1 ± 36.9 individuals. Daily consumption mirrored these trends, with sole-prey groups consuming approximately 13 ± 1.054 P. citri individuals per day, compared to mixed diet groups, which ranged from 3.2 ± 1.549 to 4.139 ± 1.037 individuals per day (F = 194.22, P < 0.0001). Similarly, the total consumption of phytoseiid larvae was significantly influenced by prey treatment (F = 6386, P < 0.0001). Females fed solely on N. barkeri or S. newsami larvae consumed an average of approximately 412 individuals each, whereas those on mixed diets consumed significantly fewer larvae, averaging between 206.86 and 216.2 individuals. Daily consumption rates of phytoseiid larvae followed a comparable pattern, with sole-prey groups consuming around 13.7 individuals per day, while mixed diet groups consumed between 3.707 and 3.798 individuals per day (F = 18029.98, P < 0.0001). Overall, Neoseiulus californicus demonstrated a strong preference for Panonychus citri when provided as a sole food source, resulting in higher consumption rates, enhanced longevity, and increased fecundity. However, the introduction of mixed diets significantly reduced both P. citri and phytoseiid larvae consumption, suggesting that alternative prey may dilute the predator's effectiveness in controlling P. citri populations. Table 1 Performance metrics of Neoseiulus californicus under different prey treatments. Prey Periods Eggs laid per female Consumption rates Preoviposition (days) Oviposition (days) Longevity (days) Total Eggs Daily Eggs Total Consumption (P.citri) Daily Consumption (P.citri) Total Consumption (Phytoseiid Larvae) Daily Consumption (Phytoseiid Larvae) Ratio of P. citri : Phytoseiid larvae 20 P.citri 1.9 ± 0.316A 26 ± 0.667A 28.1 ± 0.316A 27.8 ± 0.422A 1.8 ± 0.422AB 412.6 ± 0.966A 13 ± 1.054A - - 20 N. barkeri (larvae) 1.8 ± 0.422A 25.7 ± 0.483A 28 ± 0A 27.8 ± 0.422A 2 ± 0A - - 417.17 ± 4.26A 13.884 ± 0.1498A 20 S. newsami 1.9 ± 0.316A 25.7 ± 0.483A 28 ± 0A 27.4 ± 0.516AB 2 ± 0A - - 411.89 ± 6.59A 13.736 ± 0.1458A 10 P. citri + 10 N. barkeri (larvae) 1.6 ± 0.516A 25.6 ± 0.516A 27 ± 0B 27 ± 0B 1.6 ± 0.516AB 150.7 ± 34.9B 3.2 ± 1.549B 206.86 ± 1.15C 3.798 ± 0.1397B 01:01.2 10 P. citri + 10 S. newswami (larvae) 1.9 ± 0.316A 25 ± 0B 26.4 ± 0.516C 26.3 ± 0.483C 1.4 ± 0.516B 171.1 ± 36.9B 3.282 ± 0.2428B 216.2 ± 4.94B 3.707 ± 0.1126B 01:01.1 10 N. barkeri + 10 S. newsami 2 ± 0A 25 ± 0B 26 ± 0D 26 ± 0C 1.3 ± 0.483B 165.5 ± 40B 4.139 ± 1.037B 208.77 ± 3.24C 3.742 ± 0.0913B 1.11:1 F-value 1.53 8.56 137.29 40.89 5.7 150.4 194.22 6386 18029.98 P-value 0.196 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Performance of Neoseiulus barkeri under Different Prey Treatments Neoseiulus barkeri exhibited significant variations in preoviposition periods, ovipositional durations, longevity, fecundity, and consumption rates depending on the type of prey provided (all P < 0.0001). The preoviposition period ranged from 1.575 ± 0.02635 days to 1.625 ± 0.02635 days. Females fed solely on Panonychus citri had a preoviposition period of 1.575 ± 0.02635 days, whereas those fed exclusively on Neoseiulus californicus larvae exhibited a longer preoviposition period of 1.625 ± 0.02635 days. Similarly, females fed on Scapulaseius newsami larvae showed a preoviposition period of 1.575 ± 0.02635 days, while those on mixed diets of P. citri with either N. californicus or S. newsami larvae had preoviposition periods of 1.625 ± 0.02635 days (F = 10.8, P < 0.0001). Ovipositional periods varied significantly across treatments (F = 14.78, P < 0.0001), with females fed solely on Panonychus citri laying eggs for an average of 24.77 ± 0.0949 days. Those fed exclusively on Neoseiulus californicus larvae laid eggs for 24.61 ± 0.137 days, while females fed on Scapulaseius newsami larvae had an ovipositional period of 24.7 ± 0.1414 days. Mixed diet groups, including 10 P. citri + 10 N. californicus and 10 P. citri + 10 S. newsami larvae, showed slightly shorter ovipositional periods ranging from 24.34 ± 0.1647 to 24.44 ± 0.1897 days. Longevity was significantly influenced by prey type (F = 11.41, P < 0.0001). Females fed solely on Panonychus citri lived for an average of 28.07 ± 0.0949 days, while those fed exclusively on Neoseiulus californicus larvae and Scapulaseius newsami larvae lived for 27.87 ± 0.0949 days and 27.89 ± 0.137 days, respectively. In contrast, females on mixed diets exhibited reduced longevity, with lifespans decreasing to between 27.72 ± 0.1398 and 27.73 ± 0.1418 days. Fecundity, measured as the total number of eggs laid per female, was highest in females fed solely on Panonychus citri (25.2 ± 0.1764 eggs) and those fed exclusively on Neoseiulus californicus larvae (25.04 ± 0.1713 eggs) (F = 35.74, P < 0.0001). Females on mixed diets laid fewer eggs, with totals ranging from 24.26 ± 0.2066 to 24.68 ± 0.2251 eggs. Similarly, daily egg production was significantly higher in sole-prey groups, averaging between 1.251 ± 0.01449 and 1.258 ± 0.01398 eggs per day, compared to mixed diet groups, which ranged from 1.227 ± 0.00949 to 1.237 ± 0.00949 eggs per day (F = 11.07, P < 0.0001). Consumption rates of Panonychus citri were significantly higher in females fed solely on this prey, with an average total consumption of 405.81 ± 0.166 individuals (F = 130.58, P < 0.0001). In contrast, mixed diet treatments resulted in lower consumption rates of P. citri , ranging from 165.6 ± 39.1 to 180.9 ± 36.8 individuals. Daily consumption followed a similar pattern, with sole-prey groups consuming approximately 13.595 ± 0.0108 individuals per day, compared to mixed diet groups, which ranged from 3.344 ± 1.144 to 3.7 ± 1.418 individuals per day (F = 257.86, P < 0.0001). Similarly, the total consumption of phytoseiid larvae was significantly influenced by prey treatment (F = 6386, P < 0.0001). Females fed solely on Neoseiulus californicus larvae consumed 415.13 ± 3.46 phytoseiid larvae, and those fed solely on Scapulaseius newsami larvae consumed 407.33 ± 0.258 phytoseiid larvae. In contrast, mixed diet groups consumed significantly fewer larvae, averaging between 106.3 ± 0.156 and 111.45 ± 6.14 phytoseiid larvae. Daily consumption rates of phytoseiid larvae followed a similar pattern, with sole-prey groups consuming approximately 13.773 ± 0.12 and 13.651 ± 0.042 individuals per day, while mixed diet groups consumed between 3.336 ± 1.149 and 3.798 ± 1.144 individuals per day (F = 27668.21, P < 0.0001; F = 407.82, P < 0.0001, respectively). Overall, Neoseiulus barkeri strongly preferred Panonychus citri when provided as a sole food source, resulting in higher consumption rates, enhanced longevity, and increased fecundity. However, introducing mixed diets significantly reduced both P. citri and phytoseiid larvae consumption, suggesting alternative prey may dilute the predator's effectiveness in controlling P. citri populations. Table 2 Performance metrics of Neoseiulus barkeri under different prey treatments. Prey Periods Eggs laid per female Consumption rates Preoviposition (days) Oviposition (days) Longevity (days) Total Eggs Daily Eggs Total Consumption (P.citri) Daily Consumption (P.citri) Total Consumption (Phytoseiid Larvae) Daily Consumption (Phytoseiid Larvae) Ratio of P. citri : Phytoseiid larvae 20 P.citri 1.575 ± 0.02635B 24.77 ± 0.0949A 28.07 ± 0.0949A 25.2 ± 0.1764A 1.258 ± 0.01398A 405.81 ± 0.166A 13.595 ± 0.0108A - - 20 N.californicus 1.625 ± 0.02635A 24.61 ± 0.137A 27.87 ± 0.0949BC 25.04 ± 0.1713A 1.251 ± 0.01449AB - - 415.13 ± 3.46A 13.773 ± 0.12A 20 S. newsami 1.575 ± 0.02635B 24.7 ± 0.1414A 27.89 ± 0.137B 24.68 ± 0.2251B 1.236 ± 0.00966C - - 407.33 ± 0.258B 13.651 ± 0.042A 10 P. citri + 10 N. clifornicus 1.625 ± 0.02635A 24.41 ± 0.137B 27.73 ± 0.1418C 24.44 ± 0.1897BC 1.237 ± 0.00949BC 179.3 ± 34.7B 3.645 ± 1.314B 106.81 ± 0.208D 3.344 ± 1.144B 1.09:1 10 P. citri + 10 S. newsami 1.575 ± 0.02635B 24.61 ± 0.137A 27.86 ± 0.0966BC 24.54 ± 0.1713B 1.236 ± 0.00516C 165.6 ± 39.1B 3.7 ± 1.418B 106.3 ± 0.156D 3.342 ± 1.145B 1.11:1 10 N. calfornicus + 10 S. newsami 1.625 ± 0.02635A 24.34 ± 0.1647B 27.72 ± 0.1398C 24.26 ± 0.2066C 1.227 ± 0.00949C 180.9 ± 36.8B 3.58 ± 0.324B 111.45 ± 6.14C 3.336 ± 1.149B 1.07:1 F-value 10.8 14.78 11.41 35.74 11.07 130.58 257.86 27668.21 407.82 P-value 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Performance of Scapulaseius newsami under Different Prey Treatments Scapulaseius newsami exhibited notable differences in various performance metrics subjected to different prey treatments, including preoviposition periods, ovipositional durations, longevity, fecundity, and consumption rates, with all comparisons showing statistically significant results (P < 0.0001). The preoviposition period ranged from 1.525 ± 0.02635 days to 1.625 ± 0.02635 days. Females fed solely on Panonychus citri had the shortest preoviposition period at 1.625 ± 0.02635 days, while those fed exclusively on Neoseiulus barkeri or Neoseiulus californicus had slightly shorter preoviposition periods of 1.525 ± 0.02635 days, though these differences were not large (F = 28.8, P = 0). This suggests a minor influence of prey type on the initial stage of reproduction. Ovipositional periods showed significant variation (F = 19.75, P = 0), with females fed solely on P. citri laying eggs for an average of 25.17 ± 0.1337 days, significantly longer than the periods for those fed N. barkeri (24.92 ± 0.1317 days) and N. californicus (24.62 ± 0.1317 days). Mixed diet groups, including 10 P. citri + 10 N. barkeri and 10 P. citri + 10 N. californicus , exhibited slightly shorter ovipositional periods of 24.92 ± 0.1317 days and 25.02 ± 0.1317 days, respectively. The differences indicate that the ovipositional duration is impacted by the diet, particularly the type of prey. Longevity was significantly influenced by the prey type, with females fed P. citri living the longest (27.95 ± 0.165 days) compared to those fed N. barkeri (26.62 ± 0.1874 days) or N. californicus (26.32 ± 0.1874 days) (F = 110.73, P = 0). Mixed diet groups had slightly reduced longevity, averaging 26.6 ± 0.1563 days, which was consistent with the reduction in fecundity and consumption rates observed in these treatments. The total number of eggs laid per female, a key measure of fecundity, was highest in the P. citri treatment group at 26.66 ± 0.2221 eggs, followed by those fed N. barkeri (25.97 ± 0.2359 eggs) and N. californicus (25.65 ± 0.2068 eggs) (F = 25.59, P = 0). Mixed diets resulted in slightly lower fecundity, with averages ranging from 25.97 ± 0.2359 to 26.22 ± 0.1874 eggs. Daily egg production was also highest in P. citri treatments, with a rate of 1.334 ± 0.00966 eggs per day, while mixed diet groups had an average daily egg production of 1.345 ± 0.00527 eggs per day (F = 7.62, P = 0), showing only a minor difference. Consumption rates of P. citri were highest in the sole-prey group, with total consumption reaching 408.47 ± 18.15 individuals, significantly higher than those on mixed diets (F = 95.4, P = 0). Mixed diet groups, such as 10 P. citri + 10 N. barkeri and 10 P. citri + 10 N. californicus , consumed considerably fewer P. citri individuals, averaging 188.08 ± 31.48 and 186.71 ± 30.69 individuals, respectively. Daily consumption rates of P. citri in mixed diets ranged from 3.582 ± 1.006 to 3.913 ± 1.489 individuals per day, which was significantly lower than in the sole-prey treatments (13.725 ± 0.563 for P. citri alone) (F = 215.68, P = 0). In terms of Phytoseiid larvae consumption, the results also showed significant differences (F = 332, P = 0). Females fed solely on P. citri did not consume any larvae, while females fed N. barkeri and N. californicus larvae consumed 432.2 ± 36 and 431.71 ± 30.3 larvae, respectively. Mixed diet groups consumed fewer larvae, with totals ranging from 206.68 ± 5.18 to 206.18 ± 5.94 larvae. Daily consumption of Phytoseiid larvae in mixed diets ranged from 4.046 ± 1.227 to 5.094 ± 0.01174 larvae, substantially lower than the daily consumption rates in sole-prey treatments, where larvae consumption was not recorded (F = 310.39, P = 0). In conclusion, Scapulaseius newsami displayed significant preference for P. citri as a food source, resulting in higher fecundity, longer longevity, and increased consumption rates. The introduction of mixed diets, however, led to reduced overall performance, suggesting that while P. citri is an optimal food source, the inclusion of other prey like N. barkeri and N. californicus may have a diluting effect on the predator's efficiency. These results emphasize the importance of prey selection in biological control strategies. Table 3 Performance metrics of Scapulaseius newsami under different prey treatments. Prey Periods Eggs laid per female Consumption rates Preoviposition (days) Oviposition (days) Longevity (days) Total Eggs Daily Eggs Total Consumption (P.citri) Daily Consumption (P.citri) Total Consumption (Phytoseiid Larvae) Daily Consumption (Phytoseiid Larvae) Ratio of P. citri : Phytoseiid larvae 20P.citri 1.625 ± 0.02635A 25.17 ± 0.1337A 27.95 ± 0.165A 26.66 ± 0.2221A 1.334 ± 0.00966B 408.47 ± 18.15A 13.725 ± 0.563A - - 20 N. barkeri 1.525 ± 0.02635C 24.92 ± 0.1317BC 26.62 ± 0.1874B 25.97 ± 0.2359B 1.345 ± 0.00527A - - 432.2 ± 36A 14.925 ± 1.1A 20N.californicus 1.525 ± 0.02635C 24.62 ± 0.1317D 26.32 ± 0.1874C 25.65 ± 0.2068C 1.335 ± 0.00527B - - 431.71 ± 30.3A 14.732 ± 0.898A 10 P. citri + 10 N. barkeri 1.575 ± 0.02635B 24.92 ± 0.1317BC 26.6 ± 0.1563B 25.97 ± 0.2359B 1.345 ± 0.00527A 188.08 ± 31.48B 3.582 ± 1.006B 206.68 ± 5.18B 5.094 ± 0.01174B 1:1.42 10 P. citri + 10 N. californicus 1.625 ± 0.02635A 25.02 ± 0.1317AB 26.72 ± 0.1874B 26.22 ± 0.1874B 1.345 ± 0.00527A 186.71 ± 30.69B 3.913 ± 1.489B 203.48 ± 6.53B 4.13 ± 1.319B 1:1.06 10 N. barkeri + 10 P. citri 1.575 ± 0.02635B 24.82 ± 0.1317C 26.54 ± 0.1647BC 26.04 ± 0.1647B 1.345 ± 0.00527A 203.8 ± 51.3B 3.539 ± 1.067B 206.18 ± 5.94B 4.046 ± 1.227B 1:1.14 F-value 28.8 19.75 110.73 25.59 7.62 95.4 215.68 332 310.39 P-value 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Discussion This study investigates the reproductive, food consumption, and intraguild predation (IGP) patterns of three predatory mite species— Neoseiulus californicus , Neoseiulus barkeri , and Scapulaseius newsami —on Panonychus citri , a key pest in citrus agroecosystems. The findings presented here provide valuable insights into the potential of these species as biological control agents, demonstrating their efficiency in prey consumption, reproduction, and responses to IGP. The present study proved that predation rates of the 3 tested predator species were bidirectional in the absence or presence of P. citri as EG-prey (Lucas, 2005). Previously, N. californicus and N. barkeri were used as predator and prey (specifically larval stage) in intraguild predation interaction among biological control agents (Maleknia et al. 2016; Haghani et al. 2019; (Momen & Abdel-Khalek 2021 )). While S. newsami was part of our studies before as a predator against P. citri (Qayyoum et al. 2021a ), but the intraguild predation was observed for the first time. Studies on phytoseiid mites have found that their diet specialization reflects their cannibalism performances. Generalist predators prefer heterospecific immatures over conspecific immatures, while specialist predators often do not (Schausberger 2003 ; Schausberger & Hoffmann 2008 ). The competitiveness of predatory mites is positively correlated with their prey range. The border between these categories is vague, and further evaluation of the prey range of type II and type III species is needed. All three predators used here perform type II to type III as we observed in our last study (Qayyoum et al. 2021a ). Daily prey (adult female of P. citri ) consumption rates of all three used mites showed similar results as observed in our previous work against N. californicus and S. newsami (Qayyoum et al. 2021a ). In contrast to previous work, the fecundity rate varies within predators (Higher ( N. californicus ); Lower ( N. barkeri )). Females of N. californicus consumed non-significant IG-prey of N. barkeri and S. newsami , in contrast, Momen and Abdel-Khalek ( 2021 ) resulted in significant results with lower consumption than our study. When P. citri was combined with IG-prey, predatory mites gave higher preference to IG-prey (Phhytoseiid larvae) compared to EG-prey ( P. citri ). While Momen and Abdel-Khalek ( 2021 ) and Hatherly et al. (2005) stated that N. californicus most preferred the Teteranychus urticae compared to IG-prey. This contradicted results from previous studies that suggested a change in prey from T. urticae to P. citri may change the prey consumption preference of N. californicus (Domingos et al. 2010 ; Xiao et al. 2013 ; Novljan et al. 2023 ). The fecundity rate of N. californicus decreased when offered P. citri in combination with S. newsami and N. barkeri with similar results to Momen and Abdel-Khalek ( 2021 ) against T. urticae + Amblyseius swirskii. N. californicus this behavior was commonly observed as like all other Phytoseiids (Schausberger 2003 ). The intraguild predation of N. californicus fevers more N. barkeri even their habitat difference (McMurtry et al. 2013 ) while S. newsami is commonly observed along with N. californicus in the citrus orchards. The egg production of N. californicus increased by feeding on P. citri and N. barkeri compared to S. newsami as observed by Farazmand et al. (2015). In contrast, Momen and Abdel-Khalek ( 2021 ) find different results from our findings by giving justification that N. barkeri and N. califorinus have a habitat difference, but we think the survival ability of predatory mites change their feeding preferences (Fathipour & Maleknia 2016 ). The other evidence is that most predators with type II functional response feed on the family Tetranychidae while type III are generalist species (McMurtry & Croft 1997 ; McMurtry et al. 2013 ). N. californicus was observed as type III response type behavior (SHENG et al. 2014 ; Zhang et al. 2015) which may likely prefer species other than Tetranychidae. Female N. barkeri daily consumption was found similar by feeding on either EG-prey or IG-preys. By combining P. citri with IG-prey, N. barkeri prefer both prey almost equally with a slightly higher preference towards P. citri . N. barkeri also prefers N. californicus to S. newsami by offering N. californics and S. newsami combinations. In all combinations, the daily consumption decreased to nearly half of that of prey offered alone. It suggested that IG-predator response was affected by changes in prey/food combinations (Ahmad et al. 2015 ). Momen and Abdel-Khalek ( 2021 ) endorsed our result of N. barkeri performance feeding on T. urticae, N. californicus , and A. swirskii. They also concluded that oviposition rates were decreased due to feeding on less nutritive IG-prey (Walzer and Schausberger 1999), as observed in our study except for P. citri and S. newsami combination which behaved similarly to feeding on no choice test. In contrast, Walzer and Schausberger (1999), Hatherly et al. (2005), Momen and Abdel-Khalek (2009b), Farazmand et al. (2015), and Momen and Abdel-Khalek ( 2021 ) indicated that phytoseiids produced higher total egg production by feeding on other phytoseiid larvae in the absence of their main prey (EG-prey) due to higher nutrition value. The above statement was justified by N. barkeri feeding on N. californicus larvae rather than S. newsami or in combination only by our study. Interesting results presently in the fecundity and longevity of S. newsami -fed IG-prey and combinations were different to those fed on EG-prey P. citri which contradicted with Momen and Abdel-Khalek ( 2021 ) for A. swirskii as well as our results of N. californicus and N. barkeri . This phenomenon was the endorsed that fecundity rate decreased by feeding on less nutritive IG-prey (Walzer and Schausberger 1999). S. newsami resulted in the IG-preferred the IG-prey than EG-prey in terms of consumption rate similar to N. californicus and previous our study (Qayyoum et al. 2021a ). S. newsami preferred more N. californicus to N. barkeri . S. newsami has been identified as a dominant and efficient predator species from the citrus-growing region of Southern China (Guangdong Province) during the highest infestation of P. citri (Song et al. 2019) in competition with N. californicus with similar type-III functional responses (McMurtry et al. 2013 ) due to habitat references, and high prey consumption ability (Qayyoum et al. 2021a ). The study contributes valuable insights into the potential of Neoseiulus californicus , Neoseiulus barkeri , and Scapulaseius newsami as biological control agents against Panonychus citri . Their varying predation, reproductive, and intraguild predation patterns suggest that prey combinations and habitat preferences play significant roles in their effectiveness as biological control agents. The interaction between predatory mites and their environment in real agroecosystems becomes more complex (Janssen et al. 2007 ), with habitat complexity and prey and predator dispersal capabilities influencing intraguild predations (Magalhães et al. 2004 ). The impact of these interactions on extraguild prey, predator, and intraguild prey should be linked with other species' interactions (Moreno-Ripoll et al. 2014 ). The complexity of agroecosystems increases when other organisms, such as secondary prey, parasitoids, and neutral insects, are involved (Chailleux et al. 2014 ). Enhancing the link between community ecology theory and biological control is crucial for developing better pest management strategies. This study's findings support the need for further research into predator-prey dynamics, especially in agroecosystem contexts where multiple species interactions influence control strategies. The study advocates for a more integrated approach to pest management, incorporating ecological theory to enhance biological control outcomes. Summary This study explores the reproductive, food consumption, and intraguild predation (IGP) patterns of three predatory mite species— Neoseiulus californicus , Neoseiulus barkeri , and Scapulaseius newsami —on Panonychus citri , a pest in citrus agroecosystems. The study demonstrates the efficiency of these species in consuming prey, reproducing, and responding to IGP. Predation rates were observed to be bidirectional, with a preference for IG-prey in some cases. The fecundity of these species varied, with N. californicus exhibiting higher reproductive rates, while N. barkeri and S. newsami showed a preference for different prey combinations. The study emphasizes the role of predatory mites in biological control, showing the influence of food combinations on predation and reproduction rates. The findings highlight the complexity of predator-prey interactions and underscore the importance of considering these dynamics in pest management strategies. References Ahmad S, Pozzebon A, Duso C (2015) Predation on heterospecific larvae by adult females of Kampimodromus aberrans, Amblyseius andersoni, Typhlodromus pyri and Phytoseius finitimus (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Exp Appl Acarol 67:1–20 Alves EB, Casarin NFB, Omoto C (2018) Lethal and sublethal effects of pesticides used in Brazilian citrus groves on Panonychus citri (Acari: Tetranychidae). Arq Inst Biol 85:1–8e0622016 Chailleux A, Mohl EK, Teixeira Alves M, Messelink GJ, Desneux N (2014) Natural enemy-mediated indirect interactions among prey species: potential for enhancing biocontrol services in agroecosystems. Pest Manag Sci 70:1769–1779 Domingos CA, Melo JWS, Gondim MGC, de Moraes GJ, Hanna R, Lawson-Balagbo LM et al (2010) Diet-dependent life history, feeding preference and thermal requirements of the predatory mite Neoseiulus baraki (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Exp Appl Acarol 50:201–215 Fathipour Y, Maleknia B (2016) Chapter 11 - Mite Predators. In: Omkar (ed) Ecofriendly Pest Management for Food Security. Academic, San Diego, pp 329–366 Hellmann JK, Keagy J, Carlson ER, Kempfer S, Bell AM (2024) Predator-induced transgenerational plasticity of parental care behaviour in male three-spined stickleback fish across two generations. Proc Biol Sci 291:20232582 Janssen A, Sabelis MW, Magalhães S, Montserrat M, van der Hammen T (2007) Habitat structure affects intraguild predation. Ecology 88:2713–2719 Li L, Jiao R, Yu L, He XZ, He L, Xu C et al (2018) Functional response and prey stage preference of Neoseiulus barkeri on Trasonemus confusus . Syst Appl Acarol 23:2244–2258 Magalhães S, Tudorache C, Montserrat M, van Maanen R, Sabelis MW, Janssen A (2004) Diet of intraguild predators affects antipredator behavior in intraguild prey. Behav Ecol 16:364–370 McMurtry JA, Croft BA (1997) Life-styles of phytoseiid mites and their roles in biological control. Annu Rev Entomol 42:291–321 McMurtry JA, de Moraes GJ, Sourassou NF (2013) Revision of the lifestyles of phytoseiid mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Syst Appl Acarol 18:297–320 Mendel D, Schausberger P (2011) Diet-dependent intraguild predation between the predatory mites Neoseiulus californicus and Neoseiulus cucumeris . J Appl Entomol 135:311–319 Momen F (2010) Intra-and interspecific predation by Neoseiulus barkeri and Typhlodromus negevi (Acari: Phytoseiidae) on different life stages: predation rates and effects on reproduction and juvenile development. Acarina.–2010.–№ 18 (1) Momen FM, Abdel-Khalek A (2021) Intraguild predation in three generalist predatory mites of the family Phytoseiidae (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Egypt J Biol Pest Control 31:8 Montserrat M, Magalhaes S, Sabelis M, De Roos A, Janssen A (2012) Invasion success in communities with reciprocal intraguild predation depends on the stage structure of the resident population. Oikos 121:67–76 Moreno-Ripoll R, Gabarra R, Symondson WOC, King RA, Agustí N (2014) Do the interactions among natural enemies compromise the biological control of the whitefly Bemisia tabaci? J Pest Sci 87:133–141 Novljan M, Bohinc T, Kreiter S, Döker I, Trdan S (2023) The indigenous species of predatory mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) as biological control agents of plant pests in Slovenia. Acarologia 63:1048–1061 Pan D, Dou W, Yuan G-R, Zhou Q-H, Wang J-J (2020) Monitoring the resistance of the citrus red mite (Acari: Tetranychidae) to four acaricides in different citrus orchards in China. J Econ Entomol 113:918–923 Pérez-Sayas C, Pina T, Gómez-Martínez MA, Camañes G, Ibáñez-Gual MV, Jaques JA et al (2015) Disentangling mite predator-prey relationships by multiplex PCR. Mol Ecol Resour 15:1330–1345 Qayyoum MA, Song Z-W, Khan BS, Akram MI, Shabbir MZ, Hussain I et al (2021a) Selection of suitable predatory mites against, Panonychus citri (McGregor)(Acari: Tetranychidae) using relative control potential metrics and functional response. Egypt J Biol Pest Control 31:1–9 Qayyoum MA, Song Z-W, Zhang B-X, Li D-S (2021b) Dispersal mechanism assessment for Panonychus citri (Acari: Tetranychidae) secondary outbreaks. Ann Entomol Soc Am. https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/saab1008 Qayyoum MA, Song Z-W, Zhang B-X, Li D-S, Khan BS (2021c) Behavioral response of Panonychus citri (McGregor) (Acari: Tetranychidae) to synthetic chemicals and oils. PeerJ, 9, e10899 Rizzo R, Ragusa E, Benelli G, Lo Verde G, Zeni V, Maggi F et al (2024) Lethal and sublethal effects of carlina oxide on Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae) and Neoseiulus californicus (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Pest Manag Sci 80:967–977 Savi PJ, de Moraes GJ, Hountondji FCC, Nansen C, de Andrade DJ (2024) Compatibility of synthetic and biological pesticides with a biocontrol agent Phytoseiulus longipes (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Exp Appl Acarol 93:273–295 Schausberger P (2003) Cannibalism among phytoseiid mites: a review. Exp Appl Acarol 29:173–191 Schausberger P, Hoffmann D (2008) Maternal manipulation of hatching asynchrony limits sibling cannibalism in the predatory mite Phytoseiulus persimilis. J Anim Ecol 77:1109–1114 Schausberger P, Rendon D (2022) Transgenerational effects of grandparental and parental diets combine with early-life learning to shape adaptive foraging phenotypes in Amblyseius swirskii . Commun Biology 5:246 Schausberger P, Seiter M, Raspotnig G (2020) Innate and learned responses of foraging predatory mites to polar and non-polar fractions of thrips’ chemical cues. Biol Control 151:104371 SHENG F, XU WANGE, X., WANG B (2014) Life table of experimental population of Amblyseius orientalis feeding on Carpoglyphus lactis. Chin J Biol Control 30:194 Teodoro AV, de Oliveira NNFC, Galvão AS, de Sena Filho JG, Pinto-Zevallos DM (2020) Interference of plant fixed oils on predation and reproduction of Neoseiulus baraki (Acari: Phytoseiidae) feeding on Aceria guerreronis (Acari: Eriophyidae). Biol Control 143:104204 Walzer A, Schausberger P (2015) Interdependent effects of male and female body size plasticity on mating behaviour of predatory mites. Anim Behav 100:96–105 Wilken S, Verspagen JMH, Naus-Wiezer S, Van Donk E, Huisman J (2014) Comparison of predator–prey interactions with and without intraguild predation by manipulation of the nitrogen source. Oikos 123:423–432 Xiao Y, Osborne LS, Chen J, McKenzie CL (2013) Functional responses and prey-stage preferences of a predatory gall midge and two predacious mites with twospotted spider mites, Tetranychus Urticae , as Host. J Insect Sci 13:1–12 Zhang, X., Lv, J., Hu, Y., Wang, B., Chen, X., Xu, X.et al. (2015). Prey Preference and Life Table of Amblyseius orientalis on Bemisia tabaci and Tetranychus cinnabarinus. PLoS ONE , 10, e0138820. Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-5933915","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":409380849,"identity":"a2b30784-430c-4b35-ab76-186d5e519fdc","order_by":0,"name":"MUHAMMAD ASIF QAYYOUM","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Guizhou university","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"MUHAMMAD","middleName":"ASIF","lastName":"QAYYOUM","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-01-31 05:46:14","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":false,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"humanSubjectConsent":false,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5933915/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5933915/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":75284905,"identity":"3ba8b0af-57fe-412b-8c0e-87ac87717079","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-02-03 04:21:03","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1078438,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5933915/v1/8195328a-b574-4c7b-9646-bc128e17fab1.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eImpact of intraguild predation on the biological control of \u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e (McGregor) (Acari: Tetranychidae) by Phytoseiid Mites\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe citrus red mite (\u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e) is a significant pest and threat to global citrus crops and is challenging to manage; that causes economic damage through reduced fruit quality, yield losses, and increased production costs from intensive pest management strategies (Qayyoum et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021a\u003c/span\u003e; Qayyoum et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021b\u003c/span\u003e; Qayyoum et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021c\u003c/span\u003e). It is well-known for its quick reproduction and development of resistance against different chemical control methods, which makes it a significant challenge for agricultural management (Alves et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Pan et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Recently, the potential use of intraguild predation among phytoseiid mites has been highlighted, and effective biological control strategies are needed to suppress this pest (Mendel \u0026amp; Schausberger \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Wilken et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Momen \u0026amp; Abdel-Khalek \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Novljan et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntraguild predation occurs between species that share the same prey and may have profound effects on pest population dynamics and the efficacy of biological control agents (P\u0026eacute;rez-Sayas et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Momen \u0026amp; Abdel-Khalek \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Under extreme conditions of low densities of natural or favourable mite/insect prey, some phytoseiid mites may even kill and consume their\u0026ensp;phytoseiid competitors (Ahmad et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). The discrimination between conspecific (the same predatory species) and heterospecific (another predatory species) individuals as was previously known in some generalist phytoseiid mites (Schausberger et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Schausberger \u0026amp; Rendon \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Generalist phytoseiid mites (type III) tended to predate on\u0026ensp;heterospecific compared to conspecific prey, however, T. urticae was not suppressed (Schausberger \u0026amp; Hoffmann \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). The main aspect of Intraguild predation in immature and female predatory phytoseiid mites has been studied in previous investigations (Ahmad et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Momen \u0026amp; Abdel-Khalek \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e and N. cucumeris are used as biological control against mite (\u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e) and insect pests (Mendel \u0026amp; Schausberger \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), while \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e is found in citrus fields in southern China. These mites are selective predators (McMurtry et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Qayyoum et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021a\u003c/span\u003e). Qayyoum et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021a\u003c/span\u003e) evaluated the biological control potential of \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e, N. cucumeris, and \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e against \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e using the \"Relative Control Potential\" metric. Results showed that all predators preferred eggs, with N. cucumeris having a higher RCP and potential for maximum reproduction, while \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e resulted in similar results as \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition to that, environmental aspects, including the use of pesticides, habitat management,\u0026ensp;and climatic conditions, may also complicate the interaction between \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e and its natural enemies (Qayyoum et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021a\u003c/span\u003e; Qayyoum et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021b\u003c/span\u003e; Qayyoum et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021c\u003c/span\u003e). The use of some pesticides is an example\u0026ensp;where its application can not only kill \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e but also impact the survival and fecundity of predatory mites, potentially altering the efficacy of biological control (Hellmann et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Rizzo et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Savi et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Differential mite responses to pesticides suggest relying on a few species for toxicity assessments could undermine biological control systems, making selecting the correct species crucial for controlling \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e populations (Li et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Teodoro et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Momen \u0026amp; Abdel-Khalek \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Qayyoum et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021a\u003c/span\u003e). Factors affecting the strength of Intraguild predation and biological control outcomes depend on predator species, ranging from harmful to harmless Intraguild predators, including predator aggressiveness, activity, and habitat characteristics (Walzer \u0026amp; Schausberger \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHerein, we describe the reproduction and consumptive behaviour of three predatory mites (\u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e, and S. newswami) by feeding on three different populations (Susceptible, soyabean oil treated population and F1 generations (mixture of both populations). Here we also study the intraguild predation among three predatory mites in the absence or presence of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e. Additionally, the influence of different intraguild predation -prey on ovipositional period, longevity,\u0026ensp;predation rate, and fecundity of female predatory mites as intraguild predation was evaluated. Moreover, these parameters were compared to those achieved\u0026ensp;on mixed with \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eMites\u0026rsquo; cultures\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e\u0026ensp;and \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e were collected from a mass-rearing laboratory on Tetranychus urticae Koch. and Tyrophagus putrescentiae, respectively. \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e were isolated from citrus/lemon orchards in\u0026ensp;2019 and cultivated for 6 months before the start of the experiment. The predator-prey synchronizations were obtained by raising\u0026ensp;\u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e on \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e. Predator eggs were transferred to fresh leaf (lemon) discs containing sufficient prey to produce same-aged\u0026ensp;females. The above-mentioned rearing was done at controlled conditions of temperature (26\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1\u0026deg;C), photoperiod (16:\u0026ensp;8 h (Light: Dark)) and relative humidity (75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1%).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLeaf Disks\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe experiment was conducted on a lemon leaf disc (lower leaf surface upward) (3.5\u0026ensp;cm diameter) placed on a water-saturated sponge. Its edges\u0026ensp;were wiped with absorbent paper to avoid mite escape and retain moisture (all leaf discs). Mites that were attached to\u0026ensp;absorbent paper were excluded from the study data. 4 of the same\u0026ensp;units were tested as the one test group by adding them into a small plastic box (15 cm\u0026times;15 cm\u0026times;6.5 cm) and repeated 10 times (10\u0026times;4). Water was filled in all plastic boxes\u0026ensp;upto just below leaf discs and maintained. All experimental procedures were performed\u0026ensp;under the conditions described previously under the control. Uniform age for adult females (\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;24 h old) was obtained by isolating them from the colony when they were still immature and collecting from\u0026ensp;stock cultures. Mated females were\u0026ensp;then starved for 24 hours before being placed in experimental units. Injured or less\u0026ensp;active females were removed from the experiments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eIntraguild Predation Test\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the experiments, female predatory\u0026ensp;mites were considered intraguild predators, and heterospecific larvae were considered the intraguild prey (Montserrat et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Phase 1\u0026ndash;1st series\u0026ensp;of experiments (f): Larval stages of phytoseiid prey were only available to the female predatory mites. The larval stage was chosen for the ease of handling and because once the larvae\u0026ensp;hatch, they are immediately picked up by the predatory mites. Similar results were observed by Momen (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e); Momen and Abdel-Khalek (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) Showing species preference with species like \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e also preferring the larval stage. Females were\u0026ensp;monitored in a no-choice situation in each predatory species and fed only \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e larvae as a control.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA site-choice experiment was performed in a\u0026ensp;second set of experiments to test female predatory mites' food preferences. Mites were fed a diet of 50% P.\u0026ensp;citri larvae and 50% phytoseiid larvae. Ovipositional period, ovipositional rate, quantity of each food source consumed (based on\u0026ensp;counting the larval corpses), and female mite survival were measured as several experimental factors. Visible observations were made daily, and at all temporal sampling points, all residual food and corpses\u0026ensp;were removed and replaced by the same amount of fresh food. The goal of this experiment was to obtain an indication of the voracity\u0026ensp;and food preference of the females when two prey species were offered.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStatistical Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to test mean pre-oviposition and oviposition periods, longevity, mean total and daily number of eggs laid per female, mean total and daily number of prey consumed per female on each tested predator species for each prey source per species was performed using the SPSS computer program.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eData were assessed for normality and homogeneity of variances before the analyses. Post hoc comparisons were performed using Tukey's HSD test when substantial differences were found. A p-value\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.05 was considered statistically significant. Three independent experiments were performed, and data are shown as means\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SE. This detailed methodology effectively compared selected mite species' reproductive and predatory performance under controlled conditions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePerformance of\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003eUnder Different Prey Treatments\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e exhibited significant variations in longevity, ovipositional periods, fecundity, and consumption rates depending on the type of prey provided. The preoviposition period, ranging from approximately 1.8 to 1.9 days, did not differ significantly across the various prey treatments (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;1.53, P\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.196), indicating that the initiation of oviposition in \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e is independent of prey type.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn contrast, the ovipositional period showed significant variation based on the prey type (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;8.56, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001). Females fed solely on \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e laid eggs for an average of 26\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.667 days, while those fed exclusively on \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus barkeri\u003c/em\u003e larvae or \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e larvae oviposited for 25.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.483 days and 25.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.483 days, respectively. Mixed diets, including combinations of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e with either \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e or \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e larvae, resulted in shorter ovipositional periods, ranging from 25 to 25.6 days.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLongevity was significantly influenced by prey type (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;137.29, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001). Females fed exclusively on \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e lived for an average of 28.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.316 days, while those fed solely on \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e or \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e larvae lived slightly shorter, averaging 28\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0 days. In contrast, females on mixed diets exhibited reduced longevity, with lifespans decreasing to between 26 and 27 days depending on the specific combination of prey.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFecundity, measured as the total number of eggs laid per female, was also significantly affected by prey type (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;40.89, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001). Females fed solely on \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e or \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e larvae laid an average of 27.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.422 eggs each. In comparison, those on mixed diets laid fewer eggs, with totals ranging from 26 to 27 eggs. Similarly, daily egg production was higher in the sole-prey groups, averaging between 1.8 and 2 eggs per day, compared to the mixed diet groups, which ranged from 1.3 to 1.6 eggs per day (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.7, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsumption rates of \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e were significantly higher in females fed solely on this prey compared to those on mixed diets (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;150.4, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001). Solely fed females consumed an average of 412.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.966 \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e individuals, whereas those on mixed diets consumed between 150.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;34.9 and 171.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;36.9 individuals. Daily consumption mirrored these trends, with sole-prey groups consuming approximately 13\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.054 \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e individuals per day, compared to mixed diet groups, which ranged from 3.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.549 to 4.139\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.037 individuals per day (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;194.22, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSimilarly, the total consumption of phytoseiid larvae was significantly influenced by prey treatment (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6386, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001). Females fed solely on \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e or \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e larvae consumed an average of approximately 412 individuals each, whereas those on mixed diets consumed significantly fewer larvae, averaging between 206.86 and 216.2 individuals. Daily consumption rates of phytoseiid larvae followed a comparable pattern, with sole-prey groups consuming around 13.7 individuals per day, while mixed diet groups consumed between 3.707 and 3.798 individuals per day (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;18029.98, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall, \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e demonstrated a strong preference for \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e when provided as a sole food source, resulting in higher consumption rates, enhanced longevity, and increased fecundity. However, the introduction of mixed diets significantly reduced both \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e and phytoseiid larvae consumption, suggesting that alternative prey may dilute the predator's effectiveness in controlling \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e populations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerformance metrics of \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e under different prey treatments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"11\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrey\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePeriods\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEggs laid per female\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c10\" namest=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsumption rates\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePreoviposition (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOviposition (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLongevity (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal Eggs\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily Eggs\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal Consumption (P.citri)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily Consumption (P.citri)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal Consumption (Phytoseiid Larvae)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily Consumption (Phytoseiid Larvae)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRatio of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e: Phytoseiid larvae\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20 P.citri\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.9\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.316A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.667A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.316A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.422A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.422AB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e412.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.966A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.054A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20 \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e (larvae)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.422A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.483A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.422A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e417.17\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.26A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.884\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1498A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20 \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.9\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.316A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.483A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.4\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.516AB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e411.89\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.59A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.736\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1458A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10 \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e (larvae)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.516A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.516A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.516AB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e150.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;34.9B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.549B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e206.86\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.15C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.798\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1397B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e01:01.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10 \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 S. newswami (larvae)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.9\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.316A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.4\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.516C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.3\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.483C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.4\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.516B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e171.1\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;36.9B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.282\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.2428B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e216.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.94B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.707\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1126B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e01:01.1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10 \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0D\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.3\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.483B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e165.5\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;40B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.139\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.037B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e208.77\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.24C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.742\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.0913B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.11:1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.56\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e137.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.89\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e150.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e194.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6386\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18029.98\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.196\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePerformance of\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003eNeoseiulus barkeri under\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003eDifferent Prey Treatments\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus barkeri\u003c/em\u003e exhibited significant variations in preoviposition periods, ovipositional durations, longevity, fecundity, and consumption rates depending on the type of prey provided (all P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe preoviposition period ranged from 1.575\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635 days to 1.625\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635 days. Females fed solely on \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e had a preoviposition period of 1.575\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635 days, whereas those fed exclusively on \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e larvae exhibited a longer preoviposition period of 1.625\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635 days. Similarly, females fed on \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e larvae showed a preoviposition period of 1.575\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635 days, while those on mixed diets of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e with either \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e or \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e larvae had preoviposition periods of 1.625\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635 days (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10.8, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOvipositional periods varied significantly across treatments (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;14.78, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001), with females fed solely on \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e laying eggs for an average of 24.77\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.0949 days. Those fed exclusively on \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e larvae laid eggs for 24.61\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.137 days, while females fed on \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e larvae had an ovipositional period of 24.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1414 days. Mixed diet groups, including 10 \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e and 10 \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e larvae, showed slightly shorter ovipositional periods ranging from 24.34\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1647 to 24.44\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1897 days.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLongevity was significantly influenced by prey type (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;11.41, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001). Females fed solely on \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e lived for an average of 28.07\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.0949 days, while those fed exclusively on \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e larvae and \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e larvae lived for 27.87\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.0949 days and 27.89\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.137 days, respectively. In contrast, females on mixed diets exhibited reduced longevity, with lifespans decreasing to between 27.72\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1398 and 27.73\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1418 days.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFecundity, measured as the total number of eggs laid per female, was highest in females fed solely on \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e (25.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1764 eggs) and those fed exclusively on \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e larvae (25.04\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1713 eggs) (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;35.74, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001). Females on mixed diets laid fewer eggs, with totals ranging from 24.26\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.2066 to 24.68\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.2251 eggs. Similarly, daily egg production was significantly higher in sole-prey groups, averaging between 1.251\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.01449 and 1.258\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.01398 eggs per day, compared to mixed diet groups, which ranged from 1.227\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00949 to 1.237\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00949 eggs per day (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;11.07, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsumption rates of \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e were significantly higher in females fed solely on this prey, with an average total consumption of 405.81\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.166 individuals (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;130.58, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001). In contrast, mixed diet treatments resulted in lower consumption rates of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e, ranging from 165.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;39.1 to 180.9\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;36.8 individuals. Daily consumption followed a similar pattern, with sole-prey groups consuming approximately 13.595\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.0108 individuals per day, compared to mixed diet groups, which ranged from 3.344\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.144 to 3.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.418 individuals per day (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;257.86, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSimilarly, the total consumption of phytoseiid larvae was significantly influenced by prey treatment (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;6386, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001). Females fed solely on \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e larvae consumed 415.13\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.46 phytoseiid larvae, and those fed solely on \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e larvae consumed 407.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.258 phytoseiid larvae. In contrast, mixed diet groups consumed significantly fewer larvae, averaging between 106.3\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.156 and 111.45\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.14 phytoseiid larvae. Daily consumption rates of phytoseiid larvae followed a similar pattern, with sole-prey groups consuming approximately 13.773\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.12 and 13.651\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.042 individuals per day, while mixed diet groups consumed between 3.336\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.149 and 3.798\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.144 individuals per day (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;27668.21, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001; F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;407.82, P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001, respectively).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall, \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus barkeri\u003c/em\u003e strongly preferred \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e when provided as a sole food source, resulting in higher consumption rates, enhanced longevity, and increased fecundity. However, introducing mixed diets significantly reduced both \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e and phytoseiid larvae consumption, suggesting alternative prey may dilute the predator's effectiveness in controlling \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e populations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerformance metrics of \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus barkeri\u003c/em\u003e under different prey treatments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"11\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrey\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePeriods\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEggs laid per female\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c10\" namest=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsumption rates\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePreoviposition (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOviposition (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLongevity (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal Eggs\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily Eggs\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal Consumption (P.citri)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily Consumption (P.citri)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal Consumption (Phytoseiid Larvae)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily Consumption (Phytoseiid Larvae)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRatio of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e: Phytoseiid larvae\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20 P.citri\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.575\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.77\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.0949A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.07\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.0949A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1764A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.258\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.01398A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e405.81\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.166A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.595\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.0108A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20 N.californicus\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.625\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.61\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.137A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.87\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.0949BC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.04\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1713A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.251\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.01449AB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e415.13\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.46A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.773\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.12A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20 \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.575\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1414A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.89\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.137B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.68\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.2251B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.236\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00966C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e407.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.258B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.651\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.042A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10 \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 N. clifornicus\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.625\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.41\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.137B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.73\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1418C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.44\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1897BC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.237\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00949BC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e179.3\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;34.7B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.645\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.314B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e106.81\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.208D\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.344\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.144B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.09:1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10 \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.575\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.61\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.137A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.86\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.0966BC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.54\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1713B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.236\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00516C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e165.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;39.1B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.7\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.418B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e106.3\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.156D\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.342\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.145B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.11:1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10 N. calfornicus\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.625\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.34\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1647B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.72\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1398C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.26\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.2066C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.227\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00949C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e180.9\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;36.8B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.58\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.324B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e111.45\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.14C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.336\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.149B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.07:1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.78\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e35.74\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e130.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e257.86\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27668.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e407.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePerformance of\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003eunder Different Prey Treatments\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e exhibited notable differences in various performance metrics subjected to different prey treatments, including preoviposition periods, ovipositional durations, longevity, fecundity, and consumption rates, with all comparisons showing statistically significant results (P\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.0001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe preoviposition period ranged from 1.525\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635 days to 1.625\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635 days. Females fed solely on \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e had the shortest preoviposition period at 1.625\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635 days, while those fed exclusively on \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus barkeri\u003c/em\u003e or \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e had slightly shorter preoviposition periods of 1.525\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635 days, though these differences were not large (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;28.8, P\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0). This suggests a minor influence of prey type on the initial stage of reproduction.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOvipositional periods showed significant variation (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;19.75, P\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0), with females fed solely on \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e laying eggs for an average of 25.17\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1337 days, significantly longer than the periods for those fed \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e (24.92\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1317 days) and \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e (24.62\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1317 days). Mixed diet groups, including \u003cem\u003e10 P. citri\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 N. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003e10 P. citri\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 N. californicus\u003c/em\u003e, exhibited slightly shorter ovipositional periods of 24.92\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1317 days and 25.02\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1317 days, respectively. The differences indicate that the ovipositional duration is impacted by the diet, particularly the type of prey.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLongevity was significantly influenced by the prey type, with females fed \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e living the longest (27.95\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.165 days) compared to those fed \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e (26.62\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1874 days) or \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e (26.32\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1874 days) (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;110.73, P\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0). Mixed diet groups had slightly reduced longevity, averaging 26.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1563 days, which was consistent with the reduction in fecundity and consumption rates observed in these treatments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe total number of eggs laid per female, a key measure of fecundity, was highest in the \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e treatment group at 26.66\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.2221 eggs, followed by those fed \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e (25.97\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.2359 eggs) and \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e (25.65\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.2068 eggs) (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;25.59, P\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0). Mixed diets resulted in slightly lower fecundity, with averages ranging from 25.97\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.2359 to 26.22\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1874 eggs. Daily egg production was also highest in \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e treatments, with a rate of 1.334\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00966 eggs per day, while mixed diet groups had an average daily egg production of 1.345\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00527 eggs per day (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;7.62, P\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0), showing only a minor difference.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsumption rates of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e were highest in the sole-prey group, with total consumption reaching 408.47\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;18.15 individuals, significantly higher than those on mixed diets (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;95.4, P\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0). Mixed diet groups, such as \u003cem\u003e10 P. citri\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 N. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003e10 P. citri\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 N. californicus\u003c/em\u003e, consumed considerably fewer \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e individuals, averaging 188.08\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;31.48 and 186.71\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;30.69 individuals, respectively. Daily consumption rates of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e in mixed diets ranged from 3.582\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.006 to 3.913\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.489 individuals per day, which was significantly lower than in the sole-prey treatments (13.725\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.563 for \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e alone) (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;215.68, P\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn terms of \u003cem\u003ePhytoseiid larvae\u003c/em\u003e consumption, the results also showed significant differences (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;332, P\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0). Females fed solely on \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e did not consume any larvae, while females fed \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e larvae consumed 432.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;36 and 431.71\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;30.3 larvae, respectively. Mixed diet groups consumed fewer larvae, with totals ranging from 206.68\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.18 to 206.18\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.94 larvae. Daily consumption of \u003cem\u003ePhytoseiid larvae\u003c/em\u003e in mixed diets ranged from 4.046\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.227 to 5.094\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.01174 larvae, substantially lower than the daily consumption rates in sole-prey treatments, where larvae consumption was not recorded (F\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;310.39, P\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn conclusion, \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e displayed significant preference for \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e as a food source, resulting in higher fecundity, longer longevity, and increased consumption rates. The introduction of mixed diets, however, led to reduced overall performance, suggesting that while \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e is an optimal food source, the inclusion of other prey like \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e may have a diluting effect on the predator's efficiency. These results emphasize the importance of prey selection in biological control strategies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePerformance metrics of \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e under different prey treatments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"11\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePrey\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c4\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePeriods\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEggs laid per female\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c8\" namest=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsumption rates\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePreoviposition (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOviposition (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLongevity (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal Eggs\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily Eggs\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal Consumption (P.citri)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily Consumption (P.citri)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal Consumption (Phytoseiid Larvae)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily Consumption (Phytoseiid Larvae)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRatio of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e: Phytoseiid larvae\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20P.citri\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.625\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.17\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1337A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.95\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.165A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.66\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.2221A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.334\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00966B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e408.47\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;18.15A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.725\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.563A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20\u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.525\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.92\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1317BC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.62\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1874B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.97\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.2359B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.345\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00527A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e432.2\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;36A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.925\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.1A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20N.californicus\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.525\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.62\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1317D\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.32\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1874C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.65\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.2068C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.335\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00527B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e431.71\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;30.3A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.732\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.898A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.575\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.92\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1317BC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.6\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1563B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.97\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.2359B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.345\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00527A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e188.08\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;31.48B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.582\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.006B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e206.68\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.18B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.094\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.01174B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1:1.42\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.625\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.02\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1317AB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.72\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1874B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.22\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1874B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.345\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00527A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e186.71\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;30.69B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.913\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.489B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e203.48\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;6.53B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.13\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.319B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1:1.06\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;10 \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.575\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02635B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.82\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1317C\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.54\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1647BC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26.04\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.1647B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.345\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.00527A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e203.8\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;51.3B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.539\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.067B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e206.18\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.94B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.046\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.227B\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1:1.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e110.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95.4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e215.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e332\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e310.39\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eP-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study investigates the reproductive, food consumption, and intraguild predation (IGP) patterns of three predatory mite species\u0026mdash;\u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus barkeri\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e\u0026mdash;on \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e, a key pest in citrus agroecosystems. The findings presented here provide valuable insights into the potential of these species as biological control agents, demonstrating their efficiency in prey consumption, reproduction, and responses to IGP. The present study proved that predation rates of the 3 tested predator species were bidirectional in the absence or presence of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e as EG-prey (Lucas, 2005). Previously, \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e were used as predator and prey (specifically larval stage) in intraguild predation interaction among biological control agents (Maleknia et al. 2016; Haghani et al. 2019; (Momen \u0026amp; Abdel-Khalek \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e)). While \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e was part of our studies before as a predator against \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e (Qayyoum et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021a\u003c/span\u003e), but the intraguild predation was observed for the first time.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eStudies on phytoseiid mites have found that their diet specialization reflects their cannibalism performances. Generalist predators prefer heterospecific immatures over conspecific immatures, while specialist predators often do not (Schausberger \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e; Schausberger \u0026amp; Hoffmann \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). The competitiveness of predatory mites is positively correlated with their prey range. The border between these categories is vague, and further evaluation of the prey range of type II and type III species is needed. All three predators used here perform type II to type III as we observed in our last study (Qayyoum et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021a\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDaily prey (adult female of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e) consumption rates of all three used mites showed similar results as observed in our previous work against \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e (Qayyoum et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021a\u003c/span\u003e). In contrast to previous work, the fecundity rate varies within predators (Higher (\u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e); Lower (\u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e)). Females of \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e consumed non-significant IG-prey of N. barkeri and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e, in contrast, Momen and Abdel-Khalek (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) resulted in significant results with lower consumption than our study. When \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e was combined with IG-prey, predatory mites gave higher preference to IG-prey (Phhytoseiid larvae) compared to EG-prey (\u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e). While Momen and Abdel-Khalek (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) and Hatherly et al. (2005) stated that \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e most preferred the Teteranychus urticae compared to IG-prey. This contradicted results from previous studies that suggested a change in prey from T. urticae to \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e may change the prey consumption preference of \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e (Domingos et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Xiao et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Novljan et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). The fecundity rate of \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e decreased when offered \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e in combination with \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e with similar results to Momen and Abdel-Khalek (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) against T. urticae\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Amblyseius swirskii. \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e this behavior was commonly observed as like all other Phytoseiids (Schausberger \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). The intraguild predation of \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e fevers more \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e even their habitat difference (McMurtry et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) while \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e is commonly observed along with \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e in the citrus orchards. The egg production of \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e increased by feeding on \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e compared to \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e as observed by Farazmand et al. (2015). In contrast, Momen and Abdel-Khalek (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) find different results from our findings by giving justification that \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e and N. califorinus have a habitat difference, but we think the survival ability of predatory mites change their feeding preferences (Fathipour \u0026amp; Maleknia \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). The other evidence is that most predators with type II functional response feed on the family Tetranychidae while type III are generalist species (McMurtry \u0026amp; Croft \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1997\u003c/span\u003e; McMurtry et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e was observed as type III response type behavior (SHENG et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Zhang \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e 2015) which may likely prefer species other than Tetranychidae.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e daily consumption was found similar by feeding on either EG-prey or IG-preys. By combining \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e with IG-prey, \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e prefer both prey almost equally with a slightly higher preference towards \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e also prefers \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e to \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e by offering N. californics and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e combinations. In all combinations, the daily consumption decreased to nearly half of that of prey offered alone. It suggested that IG-predator response was affected by changes in prey/food combinations (Ahmad et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Momen and Abdel-Khalek (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) endorsed our result of \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e performance feeding on T. urticae, \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e, and A. swirskii. They also concluded that oviposition rates were decreased due to feeding on less nutritive IG-prey (Walzer and Schausberger 1999), as observed in our study except for \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e combination which behaved similarly to feeding on no choice test. In contrast, Walzer and Schausberger (1999), Hatherly et al. (2005), Momen and Abdel-Khalek (2009b), Farazmand et al. (2015), and Momen and Abdel-Khalek (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) indicated that phytoseiids produced higher total egg production by feeding on other phytoseiid larvae in the absence of their main prey (EG-prey) due to higher nutrition value. The above statement was justified by \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e feeding on \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e larvae rather than \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e or in combination only by our study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInteresting results presently in the fecundity and longevity of \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e-fed IG-prey and combinations were different to those fed on EG-prey \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e which contradicted with Momen and Abdel-Khalek (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) for A. swirskii as well as our results of \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e. This phenomenon was the endorsed that fecundity rate decreased by feeding on less nutritive IG-prey (Walzer and Schausberger 1999). \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e resulted in the IG-preferred the IG-prey than EG-prey in terms of consumption rate similar to \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e and previous our study (Qayyoum et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021a\u003c/span\u003e). \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e preferred more \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e to \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e has been identified as a dominant and efficient predator species from the citrus-growing region of Southern China (Guangdong Province) during the highest infestation of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e (Song et al. 2019) in competition with \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e with similar type-III functional responses (McMurtry et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) due to habitat references, and high prey consumption ability (Qayyoum et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021a\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study contributes valuable insights into the potential of \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus barkeri\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e as biological control agents against \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e. Their varying predation, reproductive, and intraguild predation patterns suggest that prey combinations and habitat preferences play significant roles in their effectiveness as biological control agents. The interaction between predatory mites and their environment in real agroecosystems becomes more complex (Janssen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e), with habitat complexity and prey and predator dispersal capabilities influencing intraguild predations (Magalh\u0026atilde;es et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e). The impact of these interactions on extraguild prey, predator, and intraguild prey should be linked with other species' interactions (Moreno-Ripoll et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). The complexity of agroecosystems increases when other organisms, such as secondary prey, parasitoids, and neutral insects, are involved (Chailleux et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Enhancing the link between community ecology theory and biological control is crucial for developing better pest management strategies. This study's findings support the need for further research into predator-prey dynamics, especially in agroecosystem contexts where multiple species interactions influence control strategies. The study advocates for a more integrated approach to pest management, incorporating ecological theory to enhance biological control outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Summary","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study explores the reproductive, food consumption, and intraguild predation (IGP) patterns of three predatory mite species\u0026mdash;\u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus barkeri\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e\u0026mdash;on \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e, a pest in citrus agroecosystems. The study demonstrates the efficiency of these species in consuming prey, reproducing, and responding to IGP. Predation rates were observed to be bidirectional, with a preference for IG-prey in some cases. The fecundity of these species varied, with \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e exhibiting higher reproductive rates, while \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e showed a preference for different prey combinations. The study emphasizes the role of predatory mites in biological control, showing the influence of food combinations on predation and reproduction rates. The findings highlight the complexity of predator-prey interactions and underscore the importance of considering these dynamics in pest management strategies.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAhmad S, Pozzebon A, Duso C (2015) Predation on heterospecific larvae by adult females of Kampimodromus aberrans, Amblyseius andersoni, Typhlodromus pyri and Phytoseius finitimus (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Exp Appl Acarol 67:1\u0026ndash;20\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlves EB, Casarin NFB, Omoto C (2018) Lethal and sublethal effects of pesticides used in Brazilian citrus groves on \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e (Acari: Tetranychidae). Arq Inst Biol 85:1\u0026ndash;8e0622016\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChailleux A, Mohl EK, Teixeira Alves M, Messelink GJ, Desneux N (2014) Natural enemy-mediated indirect interactions among prey species: potential for enhancing biocontrol services in agroecosystems. Pest Manag Sci 70:1769\u0026ndash;1779\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDomingos CA, Melo JWS, Gondim MGC, de Moraes GJ, Hanna R, Lawson-Balagbo LM et al (2010) Diet-dependent life history, feeding preference and thermal requirements of the predatory mite Neoseiulus baraki (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Exp Appl Acarol 50:201\u0026ndash;215\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFathipour Y, Maleknia B (2016) Chapter 11 - Mite Predators. In: Omkar (ed) Ecofriendly Pest Management for Food Security. Academic, San Diego, pp 329\u0026ndash;366\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHellmann JK, Keagy J, Carlson ER, Kempfer S, Bell AM (2024) Predator-induced transgenerational plasticity of parental care behaviour in male three-spined stickleback fish across two generations. Proc Biol Sci 291:20232582\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJanssen A, Sabelis MW, Magalh\u0026atilde;es S, Montserrat M, van der Hammen T (2007) Habitat structure affects intraguild predation. Ecology 88:2713\u0026ndash;2719\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi L, Jiao R, Yu L, He XZ, He L, Xu C et al (2018) Functional response and prey stage preference of \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus barkeri\u003c/em\u003e on \u003cem\u003eTrasonemus confusus\u003c/em\u003e. Syst Appl Acarol 23:2244\u0026ndash;2258\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMagalh\u0026atilde;es S, Tudorache C, Montserrat M, van Maanen R, Sabelis MW, Janssen A (2004) Diet of intraguild predators affects antipredator behavior in intraguild prey. Behav Ecol 16:364\u0026ndash;370\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcMurtry JA, Croft BA (1997) Life-styles of phytoseiid mites and their roles in biological control. Annu Rev Entomol 42:291\u0026ndash;321\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcMurtry JA, de Moraes GJ, Sourassou NF (2013) Revision of the lifestyles of phytoseiid mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Syst Appl Acarol 18:297\u0026ndash;320\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMendel D, Schausberger P (2011) Diet-dependent intraguild predation between the predatory mites \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus cucumeris\u003c/em\u003e. J Appl Entomol 135:311\u0026ndash;319\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMomen F (2010) Intra-and interspecific predation by \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus barkeri\u003c/em\u003e and Typhlodromus negevi (Acari: Phytoseiidae) on different life stages: predation rates and effects on reproduction and juvenile development. \u003cem\u003eAcarina.\u0026ndash;2010.\u0026ndash;№ 18 (1)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMomen FM, Abdel-Khalek A (2021) Intraguild predation in three generalist predatory mites of the family Phytoseiidae (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Egypt J Biol Pest Control 31:8\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMontserrat M, Magalhaes S, Sabelis M, De Roos A, Janssen A (2012) Invasion success in communities with reciprocal intraguild predation depends on the stage structure of the resident population. Oikos 121:67\u0026ndash;76\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoreno-Ripoll R, Gabarra R, Symondson WOC, King RA, Agust\u0026iacute; N (2014) Do the interactions among natural enemies compromise the biological control of the whitefly Bemisia tabaci? J Pest Sci 87:133\u0026ndash;141\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNovljan M, Bohinc T, Kreiter S, D\u0026ouml;ker I, Trdan S (2023) The indigenous species of predatory mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) as biological control agents of plant pests in Slovenia. Acarologia 63:1048\u0026ndash;1061\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePan D, Dou W, Yuan G-R, Zhou Q-H, Wang J-J (2020) Monitoring the resistance of the citrus red mite (Acari: Tetranychidae) to four acaricides in different citrus orchards in China. J Econ Entomol 113:918\u0026ndash;923\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eP\u0026eacute;rez-Sayas C, Pina T, G\u0026oacute;mez-Mart\u0026iacute;nez MA, Cama\u0026ntilde;es G, Ib\u0026aacute;\u0026ntilde;ez-Gual MV, Jaques JA et al (2015) Disentangling mite predator-prey relationships by multiplex PCR. Mol Ecol Resour 15:1330\u0026ndash;1345\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQayyoum MA, Song Z-W, Khan BS, Akram MI, Shabbir MZ, Hussain I et al (2021a) Selection of suitable predatory mites against, \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e (McGregor)(Acari: Tetranychidae) using relative control potential metrics and functional response. Egypt J Biol Pest Control 31:1\u0026ndash;9\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQayyoum MA, Song Z-W, Zhang B-X, Li D-S (2021b) Dispersal mechanism assessment for \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e (Acari: Tetranychidae) secondary outbreaks. Ann Entomol Soc Am. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/saab1008\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQayyoum MA, Song Z-W, Zhang B-X, Li D-S, Khan BS (2021c) Behavioral response of \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e (McGregor) (Acari: Tetranychidae) to synthetic chemicals and oils. PeerJ, 9, e10899\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRizzo R, Ragusa E, Benelli G, Lo Verde G, Zeni V, Maggi F et al (2024) Lethal and sublethal effects of carlina oxide on Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae) and \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Pest Manag Sci 80:967\u0026ndash;977\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSavi PJ, de Moraes GJ, Hountondji FCC, Nansen C, de Andrade DJ (2024) Compatibility of synthetic and biological pesticides with a biocontrol agent Phytoseiulus longipes (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Exp Appl Acarol 93:273\u0026ndash;295\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchausberger P (2003) Cannibalism among phytoseiid mites: a review. Exp Appl Acarol 29:173\u0026ndash;191\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchausberger P, Hoffmann D (2008) Maternal manipulation of hatching asynchrony limits sibling cannibalism in the predatory mite Phytoseiulus persimilis. J Anim Ecol 77:1109\u0026ndash;1114\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchausberger P, Rendon D (2022) Transgenerational effects of grandparental and parental diets combine with early-life learning to shape adaptive foraging phenotypes in \u003cem\u003eAmblyseius swirskii\u003c/em\u003e. Commun Biology 5:246\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchausberger P, Seiter M, Raspotnig G (2020) Innate and learned responses of foraging predatory mites to polar and non-polar fractions of thrips\u0026rsquo; chemical cues. Biol Control 151:104371\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSHENG F, XU WANGE, X., WANG B (2014) Life table of experimental population of Amblyseius orientalis feeding on Carpoglyphus lactis. Chin J Biol Control 30:194\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTeodoro AV, de Oliveira NNFC, Galv\u0026atilde;o AS, de Sena Filho JG, Pinto-Zevallos DM (2020) Interference of plant fixed oils on predation and reproduction of \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus baraki\u003c/em\u003e (Acari: Phytoseiidae) feeding on \u003cem\u003eAceria guerreronis\u003c/em\u003e (Acari: Eriophyidae). Biol Control 143:104204\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWalzer A, Schausberger P (2015) Interdependent effects of male and female body size plasticity on mating behaviour of predatory mites. Anim Behav 100:96\u0026ndash;105\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWilken S, Verspagen JMH, Naus-Wiezer S, Van Donk E, Huisman J (2014) Comparison of predator\u0026ndash;prey interactions with and without intraguild predation by manipulation of the nitrogen source. Oikos 123:423\u0026ndash;432\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eXiao Y, Osborne LS, Chen J, McKenzie CL (2013) Functional responses and prey-stage preferences of a predatory gall midge and two predacious mites with twospotted spider mites, \u003cem\u003eTetranychus Urticae\u003c/em\u003e, as Host. J Insect Sci 13:1\u0026ndash;12\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang, X., Lv, J., Hu, Y., Wang, B., Chen, X., Xu, X.et al. (2015). Prey Preference and Life Table of Amblyseius orientalis on Bemisia tabaci and Tetranychus cinnabarinus. \u003cem\u003ePLoS ONE\u003c/em\u003e, 10, e0138820.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"Guizhou University","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"predatory mites, Panonychus citri, reproductive performance, predatory performance, biological control, integrated pest management","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5933915/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5933915/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBackground:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\nPredatory mites are essential for integrated pest management, particularly in citrus agroecosystems where \u003cem\u003ePanonychus citri\u003c/em\u003e (citrus red mite) is a significant pest. Understanding the reproductive behavior, consumption rates, and intraguild predation (IGP) patterns of predatory mites is vital for determining their potential as biological control agents. This study evaluates three predatory mite species—\u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus barkeri\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e—to better understand their reproductive and predatory behaviors under different prey combinations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMain Results:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\nThe study revealed several key patterns in the reproductive and consumption behaviors of the three predatory mite species, with notable differences in their responses to \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e and intraguild prey. \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e exhibited a preoviposition period of 1.9 days when fed \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e and laid a total of 27.8 eggs per female with a daily egg production of 1.8. It showed a higher fecundity when compared to \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e (1.25 eggs per day) and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e (1.34 eggs per day). The preoviposition period for \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e was similar, approximately 1.6-1.8 days, but \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e demonstrated slightly lower reproductive rates when feeding on \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e, with a total of 25.2 eggs and a daily egg production of 1.26 eggs. \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e laid 25.65 eggs and had a slightly higher daily egg production rate of 1.33 eggs. For all three species, the longevity ranged between 26 and 28 days, with no significant differences observed between species or prey conditions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e had the highest total consumption of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e at 412.6 individuals, with a daily consumption rate of 13.0 per female. In contrast, \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e consumed 405.81 \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e individuals, and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e consumed 408.47 \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003eindividuals. When both \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e and intraguild prey (\u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003eor \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e larvae) were offered, the consumption of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003edecreased significantly. \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e showed a preference for \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e in these mixed prey conditions, with a total consumption of 150.7 \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e individuals and a daily consumption of 3.8. \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e showed similar patterns with lower consumption rates in mixed prey conditions. \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e exhibited a clear preference for intraguild prey, consuming 206.86 and 206.68 phytoseiid larvae, respectively. \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e preferred \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e over \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e in intraguild predation, consuming 203.48 and 186.71 phytoseiid larvae, respectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn mixed prey conditions, \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e showed the highest consumption of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e, whereas \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e preferred \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e to \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e larvae, consuming significantly more of \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e. The presence of intraguild prey significantly reduced the total consumption of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e by all three species. Specifically, \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e reduced their total \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003econsumption when mixed with their intraguild counterparts (\u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003eand \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e larvae).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results were statistically significant (P \u0026lt; 0.05) in most cases for differences in preoviposition periods, longevity, egg production, and consumption rates. The highest variation was observed in the total consumption rates of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003eand phytoseiid larvae when prey combinations were altered.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study analyzed the reproductive and consumption behaviors of three predatory mite species, \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e had a preoviposition period of 1.9 days and laid 27.8 eggs per female, with a daily egg production of 1.8. It had higher fecundity compared to \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003ehad similar preoviposition periods, but \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e had slightly lower reproductive rates. All three species had longevity ranging between 26 and 28 days. \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e had the highest total consumption of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003eat 412.6 individuals, with a daily consumption rate of 13.0 per female. When both \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e and intraguild prey were offered, the consumption of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e decreased significantly. \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003eshowed a preference for \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e in mixed prey conditions, while \u003cem\u003eS. newsami\u003c/em\u003e preferred \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e over \u003cem\u003eN. barkeri\u003c/em\u003e larvae. The presence of intraguild prey significantly reduced the total consumption of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e by all three species. The results were statistically significant in most cases.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConclusion:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\nThis study demonstrates that \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus californicus\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eNeoseiulus barkeri\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eScapulaseius newsami\u003c/em\u003e exhibit distinct reproductive and consumption behaviors when feeding on \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e and intraguild prey. While \u003cem\u003eN. californicus\u003c/em\u003e showed the highest fecundity and consumption of \u003cem\u003eP. citri\u003c/em\u003e, all three species showed preference for intraguild prey when both prey types were available. These findings emphasize the complex interactions of predatory mites in biological control, suggesting that their effectiveness may be influenced by prey availability and the presence of intraguild predators. Further research on the impact of these interactions in natural agroecosystems is necessary to optimize the use of these species in pest management strategies.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Impact of intraguild predation on the biological control of Panonychus citri (McGregor) (Acari: Tetranychidae) by Phytoseiid Mites","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-02-03 04:04:58","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5933915/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"c373c6d2-423d-458a-9421-0d0757027637","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 3rd, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":43655480,"name":"Entomology"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-02-03T04:04:58+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-02-03 04:04:58","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-5933915","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-5933915","identity":"rs-5933915","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}