Next Article in Journal
Recruiting on the Spot: A Biodegradable Formulation for Lacewings to Trigger Biological Control of Aphids
Next Article in Special Issue
Disparity of Phoresy in Mesostigmatid Mites upon Their Specific Carrier Ips typographus (Coleoptera: Scolytinae)
Previous Article in Journal
Linking Termite Feeding Preferences and Soil Physical Functioning in Southern-Indian Woodlands
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Insects
Volume 10
Issue 1
10.3390/insects10010005
insects-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Gamasina Mites (Acari: Mesostigmata) Associated with Animal Remains in the Mediterranean Region of Navarra (Northern Spain)

by
Sandra Pérez-Martínez
1,*,
María Lourdes Moraza
1 and
Marta Inés Saloña-Bordas
2
1
Department of Environmental Biology, University of Navarra, Pamplona 31008, Navarra, Spain
2
Department of Zoology and Animal Cell Biology, University of Basque Country, Bilbao 48940, Basque Country, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Insects 2019, 10(1), 5; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10010005
Submission received: 16 October 2018 / Revised: 10 December 2018 / Accepted: 19 December 2018 / Published: 5 January 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Importance of Phoretic Mites and Nematodes in Community Interactions Involving Insects)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Mites should not be overlooked as a forensic tool, as many are commonly associated with decomposing animal matter and are closely associated with specific insect carriers and habitats. It is necessary to increase our understanding of the diversity of mites that are found in human and animal remains, their geographical distribution, and their population dynamics. This work is the first study of the role of mites in forensic science in the Mediterranean region of Navarra (northern Spain). Samples were taken using three types of traps (96 modified McPhail, 96 modified pitfall, and 32 carrion on surface) baited with pig carrion during the period between 11 April and 24 June, 2017. Insects were collected in 100% of the traps and only 27% of them contained mites. Information on 26 species of mites belonging to seven families, their ontogenetic phoretic stage/s, their abundance, and presence/absence during the spring season of the study is given. The most abundant species collected were Macrocheles merdarius, Poecilochirus austroasiaticus, and Poecilochirus subterraneus. We are contributing 16 new records for the Iberian Peninsula: seven species of Parasitidae, three species of Macrochelidae, four species of Eviphididae, one species of Halolaelapidae, and one species of Laelapidae.

1. Introduction

Mites inhabit nearly every ecosystem throughout the world, although most species are associated with specific environments. Some mites have adapted to ephemeral environments such as carcasses and corpses, which represent a limited food source exploited by other organisms, including their host necrophilous insects with which mites share similar trophic and ecological requirements [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]. In such habitats, when the food source modifies or disappears, the altered environment may become unsuitable to its inhabitants. Should this happen, the inhabitants could be forced to migrate to new habitats in which to complete development or reproduction. Mites are small animals devoid of wings and some have acquired a phoretic strategy [8,12] to facilitate their dispersion to other food resources. The phoretic species should assume the risk of losing population density, as some specimens may become detached and perish during the journey; it is also possible that none of the mites arrive successfully to a suitable habitat [6]. Despite these risks, this strategy is advantageous to the phoretic species, not only in terms of its survival, but also in terms of allowing the species to potentially expand its geographical distribution range [13]. The relationship between the host and its phoretic mite may be the result of a co-evolution process. The phoretic travel may involve mite preference in the choice of a host (specificity) and mite selection of the ontogenetic stage or sex to migrate [12,14].
The remains of animals represent dynamic and ephemeral ecosystems, changing over time and eventually being reduced to dry substrate in a relatively short period of time. As a consequence, sarcosaprophagous mites may act as generalists and develop phoretic instars in their life cycles [12,14]. Different species may develop different strategies, adapt different instars to phoresy, and develop special/specific structures to facilitate attachment to a host during the transport [7,9,12]. The first mites will arrive with the first flies (blowflies and flesh flies) and will detach from their hosts as soon as they land on the remains in order to lay eggs. A few hours or days later, additional species will arrive on beetles, and therefore a specific model of succession may be established for mites in parallel to the insect community [7,9].
In ephemeral environments, phoretic mite species could be generalists and appear throughout the year travelling on a variety of hosts, while in long-lasting environments they would depend on their specific carriers.
At least 127 species of mesostigmatid mites have been reported using the phoretic strategy to disperse and several species are predominant on animal and human corpses [7,9]. The families most commonly associated with necrophilous insects are Macrochelidae, Parasitidae, Ascidae, and Uropodidae. The reproductive process of these mites can be by means of anfigonic sexual reproduction and/or parthenogenesis, depending on the families and even the species. Their life cycle includes three immature stages (larva, protonymph, and deutonymph) followed by the molting of each, and finally the adult stage. All stages are active, although the larvae do not feed in some cases (i.e., some phytoseiid species) and some mites do not feed during the phoretic stage in other cases [6]. The phoretic stage (phoront) differs among families not only in the location where they attach themselves to the hosts but also in the manner with which they attach themselves, and in some species a polymorphism even exists between non-phoretic and phoretic individuals [6,15,16,17]. At the same time, it is not uncommon to find polymorphism among the phoretic population [18]. The existence of polymorphic species must be taken into account by forensic entomologists to avoid errors in species identification. Moreover, different phenotypes may have different biology and ecology and therefore provide different forensic information.
Mites associated with animal remains can be considered a potentially useful tool in forensic investigations due to their specificity, abundance, and diversity. They can be found in almost every type of environment with high accuracy in habitat requirements such as stored food, clothing, and decomposing matter [9]. Due to their small size (0.1–1 mm), mites are able to colonize relatively inaccessible places before other animals, may go unnoticed in transported goods, and may cause the introduction of exotic biota. They can be easily overlooked during a crime scene investigation and special care is needed when collecting forensic samples [3]. In forensic cases, the presence or absence of specific mites may provide clues [7] and evidence which may be admissible in court [19,20,21,22]. For these and other reasons, accurate mite identification is essential as a potential indicator of habitat, geographic localization, and time markers.
The aim of this paper is to contribute to the knowledge of phoretic Gamasina mites associated with animal remains in a particular Mediterranean region. A thorough knowledge of specific adaptations of mites to ephemeral environments is needed in order to better apply the information provided by mites to the results of forensic investigations.

2. Materials and Methods

The fieldwork was carried out in an enclosed triangular area of 600 m2 ((40 m × 30)/2) designated for scientific research in “El Carrascal” (Unzué) (42.651411, −1.641214), located in central Navarra (northern Spain). “El Carrascal” is a Mediterranean forest located at an altitude of 568 m.a.s.l. resulting from the degradation of a natural forest of Quercus rotundifolia Lam. in which Quercus coccifera L. currently predominates. Following Köppen’s classification [23], the weather in this zone is Mediterranean with cool summers. In spring (March, April, and May), the average temperature reaches 13.5–15.5 °C. The accumulated precipitation is about 125–250 L/m2 and average daily insolation is 5.7–8.5 h depending on the month and zone. Summers (June, July, and August) are hot, sunny, and without rain. The average temperature is 20–22 °C, average precipitation is 90–125 L/m2, and the average insolation is 9–10 h. It is close to a highway and 1.5 km from the nearest urban center (in a straight line). The location is relatively isolated with limited human disturbances or problems related to bad odors, yet it is not far from a major road. As such, this area shares similar characteristics to places where cadavers are likely to be found [24,25,26].
Faunistic samples were taken using three types of traps: ‘modified McPhail’ (D) (Figure 1), placed approximately 2 m above the ground; ‘modified pitfall’ (C) (Figure 2); and ‘carrion on surface’ (L) (Figure 3). The D trap was an inverted McPhail trap, with a plate-like structure added inside to place c.a. 20 g of bait and 30% propylene glycol as preservative. The C trap was a pitfall trap with a small amount of propylene glycol and c.a. 20 g of bait hanging from a metal structure placed above the trap, and L traps consisted of c.a. 150 g of bait placed directly on the ground with four jars to entrap mesofauna around it. The D traps attracted and captured flying insects and C and L traps attracted flying and walking insects. The design of the C and D traps allowed us to catch mites in their phoretic stage and the aim of the L traps was to catch adult mites whose phoretic deutonymphs could not be determined to species level (this trap has the advantage of allowing mites to continue to develop). Every trap (except D) was enclosed within metal cages to protect them from wild animals and the bait used was pig (Sus scrofa domesticus) entrails (heart, lungs, and liver), a model accepted as representative of human decomposition [27].
When a mite specimen detached and fell into the collecting medium, noting the type of trap where the mite was captured enabled us to deduce if it had arrived in the traps by way of a flying or walking insect.
In this study, a total of 224 traps were analyzed: 96 D, 96 C, and 32 L. During each sampling week 8 D, 8 C, and 2 L traps were set. The relative position of the traps and the distance between them is shown in Figure 4.
The traps remained in the field for approximately one week before being removed once the bait became dry. The sampling periods extended from 7 April, when the traps were placed, to 24 June 2017. The collection dates were as follows: 11 April, 24 April, 29 April, 7 May, 13 May, 21 May, 27 May, 4 June, 10 June, 17 June, and 24 June.
The contents of each trap were preserved in glass jars with 70% ethanol to avoid fungus and bacterial proliferation, which could potentially damage the samples while awaiting analysis. In the laboratory, mites in the preservative liquid were separated from other necrophiles/necrophagous arthropods, counted according to the operational taxonomic unit (OTU), then stored in individual vials in 70% alcohol. Finally, some individuals of each OTU were cleared using Nesbitt’s fluid, mounted in Hoyer’s medium on microscope slides, and identified to species level (if possible) using a compound microscope (OLYMPUS OPTICAL CO., LTD. model BX51TF, Japan) equipped with a phase contrast optical system. Identification was made following specialized taxonomic keys [1,2,5,28,29,30,31,32,33,34].
Table 1 and Table 2 detail data about captured Gamasina species following the order proposed by Hallan [35] listed together with other related biological aspects. Females without spermatophore inside their accessory sperm system were considered as virgin (not having mated) females. Mated females bear spermatophores, eggs, or larvae inside their bodies.
Specimens are deposited in the Museum of Zoology, University of Navarra (MZUNAV), Pamplona, Spain.

3. Results

Of the 224 traps analyzed, 15% of D, 39% of C, and 28% of L traps contained mites, meaning that trapping efficiency was 27%. However, 100% of every type contained insects.
Altogether, 844 gamasid mites were collected from traps baited with decomposing organic matter. They belonged to 7 families, 15 genera, and 26 species (Table 1).
The most diverse families were Parasitidae, represented by 11 species, followed by Macrochelidae and Eviphididae, represented by 4 species for each family.
The most abundant species were Poecilochirus subterraneus (268 specimens), Macrocheles merdarius (116), Poecilochirus austroasiaticus (111), and Poecilochirus carabi (91). Fewer than 50 individuals were collected from the other species (Table 1).
Adult females were collected only from families Macrochelidae, Ascidae, Veigaiidae, Laelapidae, in the genus Alliphis, and in the species Parasitus (Coleogamasus) americanus, Pergamasus sp., and Scarabaspis inexpectatus. For the species Macrocheles glaber, Macrocheles merdarius, Macrocheles muscaedomesticae, and Cosmolaelaps lutegiensis, some females carried an egg or a larva internally. For the other species, deutonymphs were collected and only two males of the family Parasitidae were found. Its presence will be discussed later.
In D traps, the species Gamasodes spiniger and Macrocheles muscaedomesticae were collected, both associated with flying insects. Parasitus (Coleogamasus) americanus, Pergamasus sp., Vulgarogamasus remberti, Alliphis kargi, Halolaelaps sp., Cosmolaelaps vacua (Michael, 1891), Hypoaspis (Geolaelaps) sp., and Cosmolaelaps lutegiensis (Shcherbak, 1971) were found exclusively in C traps. Parasitus consanguineus Oudemans & Voigts, 1904, Veigaia planicola (Berlese, 1892), Glyptholaspis confusa, Macrocheles glaber, Alliphis necrophilus, Scarabaspis inexpectatus, and Proctolaelaps sp. were found exclusively in L traps; and Cornigamasus lunaris, Parasitus coleoptratorum, Parasitus fimetorum, Poecilochirus austroasiaticus Vitzthum, 1930, Poecilochirus carabi G. & R. Canestrini, 1882, Poecilochirus subterraneus, Macrocheles merdarius, Crassicheles holsaticus, and Halolaelaps octoclavatus were found in both C and L traps (Table 1). The most effective trap, in terms of the diversity of what was captured, was the pitfall trap (C). The trap captured 19 mite species from the 26 reported in this research.
During the three-month monitoring period, a progressive increase in the number of species was observed (Table 2), with 2 species being the average number found in April, 5 species in May, and 13 species in June.
Regarding the presence/absence of the species, three different patterns were observed: species such as P. coleoptratorum, P. austroasiaticus, P. carabi, and P. subterraneus appeared continually from their first appearance (2 or 3 weeks after placement of traps) until 24 June; G. spiniger, P. fimetorum, M. muscaedomesticae, and C. holsaticus were present only intermittently; and species such as V. remberti, G. confusa, and Halolaelaps sp. were occasional (appearing only on one occasion 5 weeks after the placement of traps). M. muscaedomesticae arrived the first collection day, 1 week after the placement of traps (11 April). Poecilochirus species delayed their presence, with P. austroasiaticus (fifth week, 13 May) arriving before P. carabi and P. subterraneus, which were collected 3 weeks later (4 June).
A total of 16 species are new records for the Iberian Peninsula: Cornigamasus lunaris (Berlese, 1882), Gamasodes spiniger (Trägårdh, 1910), Parasitus (Coleogamasus) americanus (Berlese, 1906), Parasitus coleoptratorum (Linneaus, 1758), Parasitus fimetorum (Berlese, 1903), Poecilochirus subterraneus (Müller, 1859), Vulgarogamasus remberti (Oudemans, 1912), Glyptholaspis confusa (Foá, 1900), Macrocheles glaber (Müller, 1860), Macrocheles merdarius (Berlese, 1889), Alliphis kargi Arutunian, 1991, Alliphis necrophilus Christie, 1983, Crassicheles holsaticus Willm, 1937, Scarabaspis inexpectatus (Oudemans, 1903), Halolaelaps octoclavatus (Vitzthum, 1920), and Cosmolaelaps lutegiensis (Shcherbak, 1971).

4. Discussion

Species in the families Parasitidae, Macrochelidae, Ascidae, Laelapidae, and Dinychidae (Uropodina) are frequently found on human corpses [7,36,37], reaching them via phoresy on insects. Each species colonizes a corpse at a specific phoretic development stage, the most common being the virgin and gravid females and the deutonymphs of both sexes [6]. Males rarely travel phoretically. The accurate determination of phoretic stage and the correct identification of the species are both critical. Knowing the evolutionarily selected phoretic stage of a given species and the development time of each stage of its lifecycle, an expert could accurately calculate the time elapsed from the moment of colonization to the moment in which that species is found [38]. For example, Macrochelidae only travel as adult females [39], whereas Parasitidae has selected deutonymphs of both sexes as the dispersive stage [1]. In other families, as for example Scarabaspis inexpectatus (Eviphididae), adult females and males as well as deutonymphs of both sexes may be the phoretic travelers [40].
Phoresy is common in Macrochelidae and their main hosts are Diptera and Coleoptera [2,41], with high specificity in terms of host preferences. Species of Glyptholaspis are carried by scarab beetles and muscid flies [1,7,42]; Macrocheles glaber has been found as a phoretic mite on beetles of the families Scarabaeidae, Staphylinidae, Carabidae, and Histeridae [40,43], on genus Nicrophorus (Silphidae), and on Muscidae [1,2,42,44]. Macrocheles merdarius is rarely found on flies; it is an opportunistic species on scarab beetles [1,40,42,45,46]. Macrocheles muscaedomesticae is a specialist species of flies [42]. It is frequently found on Musca domestica [1,41,44,46,47], but it has also been reported as phoretic on Fannia spp., Stomoxys calcitrans Linnaeus, 1758, and Drosophila simulans Sturtevant, 1919 [2,48]. M. muscaedomesticae may occasionally be transported by beetles of the genus Penton and Geotrupes [40].
Phoretic Macrocheles species always select the female, although the condition in which this female travels may vary: some are virgin females and others are mated females. We were sure that mated females travel because they carried eggs or larvae in their bodies and no males traveled with them, nor were they waiting for them in the trap to mate with them (males were not found in the traps). This phenomenon was previously observed and commented upon [40,49,50,51], the conclusion being that during phoretic travel, mite embryos continue their development while awaiting an optimum environment. However, Filiponni et al. explained that this reproductive behavior is influenced by the quality of the substrate remaining at the previous habitat and by the mite feeding prior to travel [50].
Some members of the family Parasitidae are adapted to ephemeral environments and have developed a phoretic strategy to disperse, selecting the deutonymph as the traveling stage [1]. Phoretic deutonymphs are associated with flies [52,53] and beetles [1,5,7,10,14,16,31,40,41,45,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63], although the grade of specificity with their hosts may vary depending on the species [8]. Adult specimens of P. coleoptratorum and P. (C.) americanus were found in L traps in this study. We suggest that deutonymphs of both species fell into the traps when their host insect came in contact with the bait and laid its eggs. This insect behavior could be the signal that induces deutonymphs to detach from the host’s body [64] and continue their development in the new habitat, subsequently molting into the adult stage.
P. carabi and P. necrophori had been considered as synonymous based on external anatomy [31,33]. Baker and Schwarz [59] rejected the synonymy because both species are reproductively isolated. Our specimens were identified as P. carabi after many morphological considerations. After re-examining specimens previously found in Navarra cited as P. necrophori [65], we conclude that those specimens should be assigned to P. carabi. As such, we do not consider P. carabi as a new record for the Iberian Peninsula. Nevertheless, a deep revision of different populations of both morphotypes is clearly needed to obtain a better understanding of the biology and dynamics of these species.
Vulgarogamasus remberti is a species not normally associated with decomposing organic matter, but it is associated with mice and voles [31]. Its presence may be due to shrews, which occasionally fall into the jars.
In the family Eviphididae, phoresy is common on flies and carrion beetles [1,34]. Alliphis necrophilus specifically inhabits decaying animal tissue [34] and is often associated with Silphidae [66]. Alliphis kargi is phoretic on Scarabaeidae [34] and females, males, and deutonymphs were found on Scarabaspis inexpectatus [40]. Crassicheles holsaticus is reported associated with Sphaeroceridae [67] and Staphylinidae [30] in Russia and England, respectively.
Proctolaelaps euserratus Karg, 1994 was cited in Spain, being the most abundant mite in a single human corpse in August [25,68]. A different unclassified species of Proctolaelaps was collected in this study whose low abundance could increase from spring to summer (the last sampling date of this study was 24 June).
Veigaia planicola has been previously found in Navarra [65,69]. This species is frequently found in the surface layer of the soil, forest litter, and occasionally in rodent nests [1]. Its presence in the trap may be due to the visits of shrews, which feed on carrion insects, or merely due to the presence of traps on the surface of their natural habitat.
The presence or absence of species in a given location depends on the season, the geographical region [36], and the abundance and dispersal strategy of their hosts [42]. This research started in spring (11 April) and finished in early summer (24 June); the increase in the average number of species present each month could be related to the increase in temperature and, as a consequence, an increase in diversity and activity of the available hosts.

5. Conclusions

Mites are associated with animal remains and exhibit high specificity with regard to their insect carriers. Therefore, they should not be ignored as a forensic tool and special care should be taken when processing insects collected from a crime scene or from other forensic evidence, as they may carry mites attached to their bodies or detached in the preservative fluid. Accordingly, it is necessary to have a deep understanding of the diversity present in a given region beforehand, together with knowledge of the biology and ecology of each mite species and its insect host. Moreover, it is necessary to be especially careful with those species known to have more than one phoretic stage, and with species with more than one phenotype. An incorrect identification could introduce errors in the interpretation of the data.
The most abundant species in this research was Poecilochirus subterraneus (deutonymphs) (traps C and L), Poecilochirus austroasiaticus (traps C and L), and Poecilochirus carabi (traps C and L), and virgin and mated females of Macrocheles merdarius (traps C and L). Gamasodes spiniger was the only species collected in all three types of traps (C, D, and L). These five species of mites may be able to provide crucial information to an expert when examining forensic organic remains. During the spring in the Mediterranean region of Navarra (northern Spain), phoretic mites on carrion insects exhibited three patterns regarding presence/absence: occasional, intermittent, and continual.
Of the 26 species reported in this research, 7 species of the family Parasitidae, 3 species of Macrochelidae, 4 species of Eviphididae, 1 species of Halolaelapidae, and 1 species of Laelapidae are new records for the Iberian Peninsula.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: S.P.-M., M.L.M., and M.I.S.-B.; Investigation: S.P.-M.; Methodology: S.P.-M. and M.L.M.; Resources: S.P.-M. and M.L.M.; Supervision: M.L.M. and M.I.S.-B.; Validation: S.P.-M., M.L.M., and M.I.S.-B.; Visualization: S.P.-M., M.L.M., and M.I.S.-B.; Writing—original draft: S.P.-M.; Writing—review and editing: S.P.-M., M.L.M., and M.I.S.-B.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the Asociación de Amigos of University of Navarra for supporting the PhD research of Sandra Pérez-Martínez; to the slaughterhouse of Estella for providing the pig entrails; to the Carpinterias Metálicas SPM.SL for donating the metal trap structures; and Sharooz Kazemi (Graduate University of Advanced Technology, Kerman, Iran) for his assistance in the identification of one species. Helpful and interesting comments by the reviewers were appreciated.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bregetova, N.G.; Vainshtein, B.A.; Kadite, B.A.; Koroleva, E.V.; Petrovs, A.D.; Tikhomirov, S.I.; Shcherbat, G.I. A Key to the Soil-Inhabiting Mites. Mesostigmata; Gilyarov, M.S., Ed.; Nauka: Leningrad, Rusia, 1977. [Google Scholar]
  2. Hyatt, K.H.; Emberson, R.M. A review of the Macrochelidae (Acari: Mesostigmata) of the British Isles. Bull. Br. Mu. Nat. Hist. Zool. 1988, 54, 63–125. [Google Scholar]
  3. Saloña-Bordas, M.I.; Perotti, M.A. Acarología forense. Cienc. Forense 2015, 12, 91–112. [Google Scholar]
  4. Goff, M.L. Use of acari in establishing a postmortem interval in a homicide case on the island of Ohau, Hawaii. In Modern Acarology: Proceedings of the VIII International Congress of Acarology; Dusbábek, F., Bukva, V., Eds.; SPB Academic Publishing: The Hague, The Netherlands, 1991; pp. 439–442. ISBN1 9051030541. ISBN2 9789051030549. [Google Scholar]
  5. Mašán, P. Mites (Acarina) associated with burying and carrion beetles (Coleoptera, Silphidae) and description of Poecilochirus mrciaki sp.n. (Mesostigmata, Gamasina). Biol. Bratisl. 1999, 54, 515–524. [Google Scholar]
  6. Krantz, G.W.; Walter, D.E. A Manual of Acarology, 3rd ed.; Texas Tech University Press: Lubbock, TX, USA, 2009; ISBN 9780896726208. [Google Scholar]
  7. Perotti, M.A.; Braig, H.R. Phoretic mites associated with animal and human decomposition. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2009, 49, 85–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Camerik, A.M. Phoresy revisited. In Trends in Acarology; Sabelis, M., Bruin, J., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2010; pp. 333–336. ISBN 978-90-481-9837-5. [Google Scholar]
  9. Perotti, M.A.; Braig, H.R.; Goff, M.L. Phoretic Mites and Carcasses: Acari Transported by Organisms Associated with Animal and Human Decomposition. In Current Concepts in Forensic Entomology; Amendt, J., Campobasso, C.P., Grassberger, M., Goff, M.L., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2010; pp. 69–92. ISBN 9781402096846. [Google Scholar]
  10. Saloña-Bordas, M.I.; Perotti, M.A. First contribution of mites (Acari) to the forensic analysis of hanged corpses: A case study from Spain. Forensic Sci. Int. 2014, 244, e6–e11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Saloña-Bordas, M.I.; Bahillo de la Puebla, P.; Díaz Martín, B.; Sumner, J.; Perotti, M.A. Ixodes ricinus (Ixodidae), an occasional phoront on necrophagous and coprophagous beetles in Europe. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2015, 65, 243–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Farish, D.J.; Axtell, R.C. Phoresy redefined and examined in Macrocheles muscaedomesticae (Acarina: Marcochelidae). Acarologia 1971, 13, 16–29. [Google Scholar]
  13. Szymkowiak, P.; Górski, G.; Bajerlein, D. Passive dispersal in arachnids. Biol. Lett. 2007, 44, 75–101. [Google Scholar]
  14. Nehring, V.; Müller, J.K. Social environment affects the life history tactic of a phoretic mite. J. Evol. Biol. 2009, 22, 1616–1623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Lindquist, E.E.; Walter, D.E. Antennoseius (Vitzthumia) janus n.sp. (Acari: Ascidae), a mesostigmatic mite exhibiting adult female dimorphism. Can. J. Zool. 1989, 67, 1291–1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Athias-Binche, F.; Schwarz, H.H.; Meierhofer, I. Phoretic association of Neoseius novus (Ouds., 1902) (Acari: Uropodina) with Nicrophorus spp. (Coleoptera: Silphidae): A case of sympatric speciation? Int. J. Acarol. 1993, 19, 75–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Beaulieu, F.; Déchêne, A.D.; Walter, D.E. Phase morphs and phoresy: New species of Antennoseius (Vitzthumia) mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Ascidae) associated with pyrophilous carabids (Carabidae: Sericoda spp.) in Alberta, Canada. Zootaxa 2008, 1961, 37–57. [Google Scholar]
  18. Lindquist, E.E.; Moraza, M.L. A new genus of flower-dwelling melicharid mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Ascoidea) phoretic on bats and insects in Costa Rica and Brazil. Zootaxa 2008, 1685, 1–37. [Google Scholar]
  19. Prichard, J.G.; Kossoris, P.D.; Leibovitch, R.A.; Robertson, L.D.; Lovell, F.W. Implications of Trombiculid Mite Bites: Report of a Case and Submission of Evidence in a Murder Trial. J. Forensic Sci. 1986, 31, 301–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Solarz, K. Indoor mites and forensic acarology. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2009, 49, 135–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Turner, B. Forensic entomology: A template for forensic acarology? Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2009, 49, 15–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Desch, C.E. Human hair follicle mites and forensic acarology. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2009, 49, 143–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Kottek, M.; Grieser, J.; Beck, C.; Rudolf, B.; Rubel, F. World map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorol. Z. 2006, 15, 259–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Ramos-Pastrana, Y.; Wolff, M. Postmortem interval estimation based on Chrysomya albiceps (Diptera, Calliphoridae) in a forensic case in the Andean Amazon, Caquetá, Colombia. Acta Amaz. 2017, 47, 369–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Saloña, M.I.; Moraza, M.L.; Carles-Tolrá, M.; Iraola, V.; Bahillo, P.; Yélamos, T.; Outerelo, R.; Alcaraz, R. Searching the soil: Forensic importance of edaphic fauna after the removal of a corpse. J. Forensic Sci. 2010, 55, 1652–1655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Sumodan, P.K. Insect detectives. Resonance 2002, 7, 51–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Catts, E.P.; Goff, M.L. Forensic Entomology in Criminal Investigations. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1992, 37, 253–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Athias-Henriot, C. Mésostigmates (Uro.Excl.) édaphiques méditerráneens (Acaromorpha, Anactinotrichida). Acarologia 1961, 3, 381–509. [Google Scholar]
  29. Krantz, G.W. A manual of Acarology; Texas Tech University Press: Corvallis, OR, USA, 1978; ISBN 0882460641. [Google Scholar]
  30. Evans, G.O. Adults of the genus Crassicheles Karg (Acari: Mesostigmata). Int. J. Acarol. 1980, 6, 33–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hyatt, K.H. Mites of the subfamily Parasitinae (Mesostigmata: Parasitidae) in the British Isles. Bull. Br. Mus. (Nat. Hist. Zool.) 1980, 38, 237–378. [Google Scholar]
  32. Karg, W. The Family Acari (Acarina), Milben, Unterordnung Parasitiformes (Anactinochaeta), Uropodina Kramer, Schildkroȯtenmilben; VEB Gustav Fischer Verlag: Jena, Germany, 1989; ISBN 3334003086. [Google Scholar]
  33. Karg, W. Acari (Acarina), Milben Parasitiformes (Anactinochaeta), Cohors Gamasina Leach; Gustav Fischer Verlag Jena: Raubmilben, Germany, 1993; ISBN 3334604454. [Google Scholar]
  34. Mašán, P.; Halliday, B. Review of the European genera of Eviphididae (Acari: Mesostigmata) and the species occurring in Slovakia. Zootaxa 2010, 2585, 1–122. [Google Scholar]
  35. Hallan, J. Synopsis of the described Arachnida of the world. Available online: http://bug.tamu.edu/research/collection/hallan/Acari/Family/Mesostigmata1.htm (accessed on 15 October 2018).
  36. Tüzün, A.; Murat, H.G.; Bilgili, G. Forensic Acarology. Türk Bilim. Derlemeler Derg. 2015, 8, 54–56. [Google Scholar]
  37. Dhooria, M.S. (Ed.) Forensic Acarology. In Fundamentals of Applied Acarology; Springer: Singapore, 2016; pp. 441–448. [Google Scholar]
  38. Perotti, M.A. Mégnin re-analysed: The case of the newborn baby girl, Paris, 1878. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2009, 49, 37–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Krantz, G.W. Reflections on the biology, morphology and ecology of the Macrochelidae. Rev. Lit. Arts Am. 1998, 22, 125–137. [Google Scholar]
  40. Bahrami, F.; Arbabi, M.; Shoushtari, R.V.; Kazemi, S. Mesostigmatic Mites Associated with Coleoptera and Biodiversity Calculation of These Mites Phoretic on Dung Beetles in Golestan Province (North of Iran). Middle-East J. Sci. Res. 2011, 9, 345–366. [Google Scholar]
  41. Goff, M.L. Gamasid mites as potential indicators of postmortem interval. In Progress in Acarology Volume; Channabasavanna, G., Viraktamatch, C., Eds.; Oxford and IBH Publishing: New Delhi, India, 1989; Volume 1, pp. 443–450. [Google Scholar]
  42. Niogret, J.; Lumaret, J.; Bertrand, M. Review of the phoretic association between coprophilous insects and Macrochelid mites (Acari: Mesostigmata) in France. Elytron 2008, 20, 99–121. [Google Scholar]
  43. Bloszyk, J.; Bajerlein, D.; Blaszak, C. The use of pedicels of phoretic deutonymph of Uropoda orbicularis (Acari: Uropodidae) connected with coprophagous beetles (Insecta: Coleoptera) by Macrocheles. Pol. J. Entomol. 2002, 71, 241–246. [Google Scholar]
  44. Evans, G.O.; Browning, E. British mites of the subfamily Macrochelinae Trägardh (Gamasina-Macrochelidae). Bull. Br. Mus. (Nat. Hist. Zool.) 1956, 4, 1–56. [Google Scholar]
  45. Costa, M. The mesostigmatic mites associated with Copris hispanus (L.) (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae) in Israel. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. Zool. 1963, 45, 25–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Axtell, R.C. Phoretic Relationship of Some Common Manure-Inhabiting Macrochelidae (Acarina: Mesostigmata) to the House Fly. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 1964, 57, 584–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Rodrigueiro, T.S.C.; do Prado, A.P. Macrocheles muscaedomesticae (Acari, Macrochelidae) and a species of Uroseius (Acari, Polyaspididae) phoretic on Musca domestica (Diptera, Muscidae): Effects on dispersal and colonization of poultry manure. Iheringia Série Zool. 2004, 94, 181–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Perotti, A.; Brasesco, M. Especificidad forética de Macrocheles muscaedomesticae (Acari: Macrochelidae). Ecol. Austral 1996, 6, 3–8. [Google Scholar]
  49. Marquardt, T.; Kaczmarek, S.; Halliday, B. Ovoviviparity in Macrocheles glaber (Müller) (Acari: Macrochelidae), with notes on parental care and egg cannibalism. Int. J. Acarol. 2015, 41, 71–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Filipponi, A.; Francaviglia, G. Larviparitá facoltativa in alcuni Macrochelidi (Acari: Mesostigmata) associati a muscidi di interesse sanitario. Parasitologia 1964, 6, 99–113. [Google Scholar]
  51. Kamaruzaman, N.A.C.; Mašán, P.; Velásquez, Y.; González-Medina, A.; Lindström, A.; Braig, H.R.; Perotti, M.A. Macrocheles species (Acari: Macrochelidae) associated with human corpses in Europe. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2018, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Samsinak, K. Mites on flies of the family Sphaeroceridae. II. Acarologia 1989, 30, 85–105. [Google Scholar]
  53. Lundqvist, L. Phoretic Gamasina (Acari) from Southern Sweden: Taxonomy, host preferences and seasonality. Acarologia 1998, 39, 111–114. [Google Scholar]
  54. Springett, B.P. Aspects of the relationship between burying beetles, Necrophorus spp. and the mites, Poecilochirus necrophori Vitz. J. Anim. Ecol. 1968, 37, 417–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Schwarz, H.H.; Müller, J.K. The dispersal behaviour of the phoretic mite Poecilochirus carabi (Mesostigmata, Parasitidae): Adaptation to the breeding biology of its carrier Necrophorus vespilloides (Coleoptera, Silphidae). Oecologia 1992, 89, 487–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Brown, J.M.; Wilson, D.S. Local specialization of phoretic mites on sympatric carrion beetle hosts. Ecology 1992, 73, 463–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Blackman, S.W.; Evans, G.O. Observations on a mite (Poecilochirus davydovae) predatory on the eggs of burying beetles (Nicrophorus vespilloides) with a review of its taxonomic status. J. Zool. 1994, 234, 217–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Schwarz, H.H.; Walzl, M.G. Pairing, oviposition and development in two sibling species of phoretic mites (Acari: Mesostigmata: Parasitidae: Poecilochirus spp.) associated with burying beetles (Coleoptera: Silphidae: Nicrophorus spp.). J. Nat. Hist. 1996, 30, 1337–1348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Baker, A.S.; Schwarz, H.H. Morphological differences between sympatric populations of the Poecilochirus carabi complex (Acari: Mesostigmata: Parasitidae) associated with burying beetles (Silphidae: Nicrophorus). Syst. Parasitol. 1997, 37, 179–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Salmane, I.; Telnov, D. Mesostigmata Mites (Acari: Parasitiformes) Associated with Beetles (Insecta: Coleoptera) in Latvia. Latvijas Entomol. 2009, 47, 58–70. [Google Scholar]
  61. González Medina, A.; González Herrera, L.; Perotti, M.A.; Jiménez Ríos, G. Occurrence of Poecilochirus austroasiaticus (Acari: Parasitidae) in forensic autopsies and its application on postmortem interval estimation. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2013, 59, 297–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Barton, P.S.; Weaver, H.J.; Manning, A.D. Contrasting diversity dynamics of phoretic mites and beetles associated with vertebrate carrion. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2014, 63, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. García-Guerrero, D.A.; Monjarás-Barrera, J.I.; Hernandez-Juarez, A.; Aguirre-Uribe, L.A. Asociación del ácaro Poecilochirus sp. (Acari: Parasitidae) y Nicrophorus marginatus (Coleoptera: Silphidae) en Saltillo, Coahuila, México. Entomol. Mex. 2014, 1, 69–73. [Google Scholar]
  64. Houck, M.A.; OConnor, B.M. Ecological and Evolutionary Significance of Phoresy in the Astigmata. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1991, 36, 611–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Moraza, M.L.; Hernández, M.A. Mesostigmata mite community in two Japanese larch (Larix kaempferi) plantations and an oak (Quercus pyrenaica) forest in Navarra (northern Spain). Rev. Ibérica Aracnol. 2016, 28, 35–44. [Google Scholar]
  66. Christie, J.E. A new species of Alliphis (Mesostigmata: Eviphididae) from Britain. Acarologia 1983, 24, 231–242. [Google Scholar]
  67. Makarova, G.L. Gamasid Mites of the Genus Crassicheles (Mesostigmata, Eviphididae) in Russia and Ontogenesis of Crassicheles greeni. Entomol. Rev. 1994, 73, 107–117. [Google Scholar]
  68. Mašán, P.; Perotti, M.A.; Saloña-Bordas, M.I.; Braig, H.R. Proctolaelaps euserratus, an ecologically unusual melicharid mite (Acari, Mesostigmata) associated with animal and human decomposition. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2013, 61, 415–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Moraza, M.L. Efecto de la degradación de un encinar de Quercus rotundifolia en la comunidad de ácaros cryptostigmados y mesostigmados (Acari: Cryptostigmata, Mesostigmata). Rev. Ibérica Aracnol. 2007, 13, 171–182. [Google Scholar]
Insects 10 00005 g001 550
Figure 1. Modified McPhail trap (D).
Figure 1. Modified McPhail trap (D).
Insects 10 00005 g001
Insects 10 00005 g002 550
Figure 2. Modified pitfall trap (C).
Figure 2. Modified pitfall trap (C).
Insects 10 00005 g002
Insects 10 00005 g003 550
Figure 3. Carrion on surface trap (L).
Figure 3. Carrion on surface trap (L).
Insects 10 00005 g003
Insects 10 00005 g004 550
Figure 4. The location of the traps in the research field. Black lines represent the path connecting traps; solid red circles represent McPhail traps (D); solid blue rectangles represent pitfall traps (C); solid yellow rectangles represent carrion on surface (L) traps; small solid black circles represent jars.
Figure 4. The location of the traps in the research field. Black lines represent the path connecting traps; solid red circles represent McPhail traps (D); solid blue rectangles represent pitfall traps (C); solid yellow rectangles represent carrion on surface (L) traps; small solid black circles represent jars.
Insects 10 00005 g004
Table
Table 1. Mites collected from April to June (2017).
Table 1. Mites collected from April to June (2017).
Sp. No.FamilySpeciesNo.StageTrap
1ParasitidaeCornigamasus lunaris (Berlese, 1882)2DNC, L
2 Gamasodes spiniger (Trägårdh, 1910)34DNC, D, L
3 Parasitus (Coleogamasus) americanus
(Berlese, 1906)		1♀ eC
4 Parasitus coleoptratorum (Linneaus, 1758)38♂, DNC, L
5 Parasitus consanguineus
Oudemans & Voigts, 1904		2DNL
6 Parasitus fimetorum (Berlese, 1903)20DNC, L
7 Pergamasus sp.2♀, ♂C
8 Poecilochirus austroasiaticus Vitzthum, 1930111DNC, L
9 Poecilochirus carabi G. & R. Canestrini, 188291DNC, L
10 Poecilochirus subterraneus (Müller, 1859)268DNC, L
11 Vulgarogamasus remberti (Oudemans, 1912)1DNC
12VeigaiidaeVeigaia planicola (Berlese, 1892)1♀L
13MacrochelidaeGlyptholaspis confusa (Foá, 1900)1♀L
14 Macrocheles glaber (Müller, 1860)45♀, ♀ e, ♀ LvL
15 Macrocheles merdarius (Berlese, 1889)116♀, ♀ e, ♀ LvC, L
16 Macrocheles muscaedomesticae (Scopoli, 1772)27♀ e, ♀ LvD, C
17EviphididaeAlliphis kargi Arutunian, 19911♀C
18 Alliphis necrophilus Christie, 19831♀L
19 Crassicheles holsaticus Willm, 193721DNC, L
20 Scarabaspis inexpectatus (Oudemans, 1903)3♀, DNL
21AscidaeProctolaelaps sp.7♀L
22HalolaelapidaeHalolaelaps sp.1DNC
23 Halolaelaps octoclavatus (Vitzthum, 1920)34DNC, L
24LaelapidaeCosmolaelaps vacua (Michael, 1891)2♀C
25 Cosmolaelaps lutegiensis (Shcherbak, 1971)12♀, ♀ eC
26 Hypoaspis (Gaeolaelaps) sp.2♀C
Total collected:844
List of families and species collected. 1–26 Numbers correspond to species in the third column (Sp. No.); number of specimens (No.); stage and sex (Stage) of the captured specimens are abbreviated as follows: gravid female with an egg and larva inside (♀ Lv), gravid female with egg (♀ e), female (♀), male (♂) and deutonymph (DN); type of traps (Trap) in which they were found.
Table
Table 2. Table of presence/absence of species found in each sampling.
Table 2. Table of presence/absence of species found in each sampling.
Sp. No.11 April24 April29 April7 May13 May21 May27 May4 June10 June17 June24 June
1 •
2 • •• •••••
3 •
4 •••••
5 ••
6 •• •••
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Presence (black cells)/absence (white cells) of collected species in each sampling date. Numbers 1–26 in the first column (Sp. No.) correspond with the species names in Table 1.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Pérez-Martínez, S.; Moraza, M.L.; Saloña-Bordas, M.I. Gamasina Mites (Acari: Mesostigmata) Associated with Animal Remains in the Mediterranean Region of Navarra (Northern Spain). Insects 2019, 10, 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10010005

AMA Style

Pérez-Martínez S, Moraza ML, Saloña-Bordas MI. Gamasina Mites (Acari: Mesostigmata) Associated with Animal Remains in the Mediterranean Region of Navarra (Northern Spain). Insects. 2019; 10(1):5. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10010005

Chicago/Turabian Style

Pérez-Martínez, Sandra, María Lourdes Moraza, and Marta Inés Saloña-Bordas. 2019. "Gamasina Mites (Acari: Mesostigmata) Associated with Animal Remains in the Mediterranean Region of Navarra (Northern Spain)" Insects 10, no. 1: 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10010005

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop