# New records of the genus Bryobia (Acari: Tetranychidae) from Syria with description of a new species

Ziad Barbar, Philippe Auger

► To cite this version:

Ziad Barbar, Philippe Auger. New records of the genus Bryobia (Acari: Tetranychidae) from Syria with description of a new species. Acarologia, 2020, 60 (2), pp.268-288. 10.24349/acarologia/20204367. hal-02512012

HAL Id: hal-02512012

https://hal.science/hal-02512012

Submitted on 19 Mar 2020

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Acarologia

A quarterly journal of acarology, since 1959
Publishing on all aspects of the Acari

All information:

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

http://www1.montpellier.inra.fr/CBGP/acarologia/acarologia-contact@supagro.fr

OPEN ACCESS

Acarologia is proudly non-profit,
with no page charges and free open access

Please help us maintain this system by
encouraging your institutes to subscribe to the print version of the journal
and by sending us your high quality research on the Acari.

Subscriptions: Year 2020 (Volume 60): 450 €

http://www1.montpellier.inra.fr/CBGP/acarologia/subscribe.php

Previous volumes (2010-2018): 250 € / year (4 issues)

Acarologia, CBGP, CS 30016, 34988 MONTFERRIER-sur-LEZ Cedex, France

ISSN 0044-586X (print), ISSN 2107-7207 (electronic)

The digitalization of Acarologia papers prior to 2000 was supported by Agropolis Fondation under
the reference ID 1500-024 through the « Investissements d'avenir » programme
(Labex Agro: ANR-10-LABX-0001-01)

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

**Acarologia** is under **free license** and distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons-BY-NC-ND which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Acarologia

Open Science
in Acarology

# New records of the genus *Bryobia* (Acari: Tetranychidae) from Syria with description of a new species

Ziad Barbarª, Philippe Augerᵇ

## Original research

### ABSTRACT

Three species of Tetranychidae belonging to the genus *Bryobia* were collected from Latakia governorate, Syria in 2019: *Bryobia (Allobia) syriensis* n. sp. collected from *Salvia verbenaca* L., is described; *Bryobia (Allobia) nikitensis* and *Bryobia (Bryobia) gigas* collected from *S. verbenaca* and from soil litter, respectively, are reported. New observations of *Bryobia* specimens previously reported from the same governorate during 2014-2016 revealed that specimens of *Bryobia (Bryobia) watersi* were misidentified as *Bryobia (Bryobia) graminum* and *Bryobia (Bryobia) kissophila*. Among them, we found two aberrant females bearing three propodosomal lobes. By analogy, we discussed the cases of the trilobed species, *Bryobia bakeri* and *Bryobia aegyptiacus*, and concluded that they could be teratological forms of quadrilobed *Bryobia* species rather than species with a particular pattern of propodosomal lobes.

**Keywords** Tetranychid mite; bryobiine mite; new species; new records

**Zoobank** http://zoobank.org/26A372EC-4BD0-40AB-AA7C-F98BF94299FA

## Introduction

Among the spider mite family, the genus *Bryobia* is the fourth largest genus in terms of species (Migeon and Dorkeld, 2019) and since the revision of the genus *Pseudobryobia* by Arabuli *et al.* (2019), it contains 143 taxa.

Several species belonging to this genus are worldwide distributed, polyphagous, and could be distinctly economically injurious to crops (Vacante, 2010). To date, seven species of the genus *Bryobia* are known from Syria: *Bryobia (Allobia) nikitensis* (Livshits and Mitrofanov), *Bryobia (Bryobia) gigas* Auger *et al.*, *B. (B.) graminum* (Schrank), *B. (B.) kissophila* Eyndhoven, *B. (B.) praetiosa* Koch, *B. (B.) vasiljevi* Reck and *B. (Lyobia) rubrioculus* (Scheuten) (El-Hariri, 1968; Barbar, 2014, 2018; Zeity, 2017; Zeity and Srinivasa, 2019; Zriki *et al.*, 2015). However, some specimens of this genus collected during 2014–2016 still remained unidentified (of which two specimens bearing only three propodosomal lobes each with one seta) and those of *B. (B.) graminum* and *B. (B.) kissophila* seem to be misidentified as the identification was based only on morphological characteristics of adult females (Barbar, 2014, 2018).

The aims of the current paper are to present the results of some field samplings of *Bryobia* species undertaken in Latakia governorate in 2019 and to re-examine all specimens of this genus collected in the same governorate over the period 2014–2016 and reported by Barbar (2014, 2018).

The description of a new species of *Bryobia* is provided. A new record, new host plants and the cases of misidentifications are reported. Finally, the observation of unusual *Bryobia* specimens’ prodorsal lobes lead us to discuss the identity of *Bryobia bakeri* (Zaher, Gomaa and El-Enany, 1982) and *Bryobia aegyptiacus* (Zaher, Gomaa and El-Enany, 1982).

Received 18 October 2019

Accepted 17 March 2020

Published 19 March 2020

Corresponding author

Ziad Barbar:
ziadbarbar88@gmail.com

Academic editor
Migeon, Alain

DOI

10.24349/acarologia/20204367

ISSN 0044-586X (print)

ISSN 2107-7207 (electronic)

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

Copyright
Barbar Z. and Auger P.

Distributed under
Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0

<footnote>ªDepartment of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Al-Baath University, P.O. Box 77, Al-Sham St., Homs, Syria.</footnote>

<footnote>ᵇCBGP, INRAE, CIRAD, IRD, Montpellier SupAgro, Univ Montpellier, Montpellier, France.</footnote>
**Materials and methods**

**Field sampling**

Samplings of tetranychid fauna were conducted in Latakia governorate in April and June, 2019. Mites were collected from soil litter and from leaves of common weed species within a small forest (about six hectares, 57 m above the sea level) of *Pinus halepensis* Mill. located at Attabiyyat (35°30′24″ N, 35°46′49″ E) in the south-western Latakia city, Syria. Mites were removed from leaves using the “dipping-checking-washing-filtering” method (Boller, 1984). For collecting mites from litter, materials were placed on a sieve (25 cm Ø x 10 cm; its screen with 5 mesh/cm) and shaken over a black plastic sheet (1.5 m²). Collected mites were cleared in lactic acid for 48 hours, mounted on slides in Hoyer’s medium, and then dried in an oven at 40 °C for three days.

**Mite observation and description**

The specimens were examined using an Olympus® CH20 microscope. Measurements were realized using the scale of a reticle installed on the eyepiece lens. Mite body parts of specimens were pictured using a mobile phone camera (13 megapixels) fixed on the eyepiece lens and images were transferred to the professional quality vector graphics software Inkscape ® 0.92 installed on a computer for drawing with the aid of the computer’s mouse.

All measurements are given in micrometers (µm) and the setal nomenclature used in the description follows Lindquist (1985). The holotype measurements are followed by measurements of the range of paratypes in parentheses. In addition to the key body measurements such as the distance between setae $v_2$ and setae $h_1$ and members of setae $sc_2$ (Saito et al., 1999), body length representing the distance between the tip of palps to the end of idiosoma and body width representing the widest transverse part of the hysterosoma, are also provided. The distance between two setae was measured as the distance from the center of one setal base to the other. Legs were measured from coxea to the distal margin of tarsi (excluding claws and empodia). Leg setal counts are given in the order: coxa-trochanter-femur-genu-tibia-tarsus. Numbers of setae refer to tactile setae, solenidia are given in parentheses and alternative counts are given in brackets. When asymmetry in number of setae on a leg segment was present, only the maximal number was considered.

**Systematics**

**Family Tetranychidae Donnadieu, 1875**

**Subfamily Bryobiinae Berlese, 1913**

**Tribe Bryobiini Reck, 1952**

**Genus Bryobia Koch, 1836**

**Bryobia (Alobia) nikitensis Livshits and Mitrofanov, 1969**

Two female specimens of this species were recorded on a new host plant: it was found on *Salvia verbenaca* L., Attabiyyat, south-west of Latakia city, Syria (35°30′24″ N, 35°46′49″ E, 23 April 2019). This species has been previously collected from *Sarcopoterium spinosum* (L.) in Syria (Barbar, 2018; Zeity and Srinivasa, 2019).

**Bryobia (Alobia) syriensis n. sp.**

Zoobank: A423D4AA-D815-4BEF-94B8-47FD082F3ED3

Figures 1–10

**Type material** — Holotype (female), 23 female and 2 male paratypes on 10 microscopic preparations, from *S. verbenaca*, Attabiyyat, south-west of Latakia city, Syria (35°30′24″
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1** *Bryobia syriensis* n. sp., female: A – dorsal aspect; B – dorsal seta $c_1$. Scale bars = 100 µm (A), 10 µm (B).</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /></figure>

**Figure 2** *Bryobia syriensis* n. sp., female: A, B, C – variation in propodosomal lobes; D – detail of the prodorsal striation of the area immediately anterior to setae c₁. Scale bars = 20 µm (A, B, C), 30 µm (D).
N, 35°46'49" E), 23 April and 2 June, 2019, coll. Z. Barbar. The holotype and paratypes
are deposited in the Arthropod Collection of the Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of
Agriculture, Albaath University, Homs, Syria.

**Diagnosis** — This species belongs to *Bryobia* (*Allobia*) Livshitz and Mitrofanov (1971) which is characterized by the following: propodosomal lobes absent or poorly developed, if present, outer and inner lobes not separated by deep incision; distance between *f*₁ members longer than distance between *f*₂ members; *f*₁ and *f*₂ well separated laterally. It can be distinguished from others *Byrobia* species by a combination of the following characteristics: females with weakly developed median propodosomal lobes with small and shallow incision, outer lobes reduced to very small tubercles; setae *v*₂ about twice as long as setae *v*₁; dorsal body setae short, spatulate, serrate and inserted in small tubercles; peritreme ends in a tiny anastomosis consisting of 3–4 loges; tarsus III with tactile seta and solenidion subequal in length forming duplex; tarsus IV with solenidion well-separated from tactile, proximal, about 3/4 the length of tactile; leg I shorter than body length, empodial claws I-IV uncinate, each with one pair of tenent hairs; empodium I with one pair of tenent hairs and empodia II-IV with two rows of tenent hairs.

**Female description** — (n = 24). Relatively small, 548 (488–548) long excluding gnathosoma, 663 (575–663) including gnathosoma, and 384 (327–384) wide.

**Dorsum** – Prodorsum with four pairs of setae (Figure 1A); median propodosomal lobes weakly developed with fused base (variations in propodosomal lobes due to mounting are presented in Figure 2A-C); outer propodosomal lobes reduced to small tubercles; setae $v_2$ about twice as long as setae $v_1$ (Figure 2). Distance between members of first ($v_1$) and second ($v_2$) pair of propodosomal setae insertions 10 (8–12) and 47 (45–50), respectively. Dorsal body setae short, spatulate and serrate, 12–17 width, subequal in length except for $v_1$ far smaller, inserted on small tubercles (Figure 1B). Measurements of dorsal setae: $v_1$ 11 (10–11); $v_2$ 23 (22–26); $sc_1$ 21 (21–25); $sc_2$ 23 (21–25); $c_1$ 25 (23–29); $c_2$ 23 (21–26); $c_3$ 23 (21–25); $d_1$ 23 (21–25); $d_2$ 23 (21–25); $d_3$ 23 (21–23); $e_1$ 23 (21–23); $e_2$ 23 (21–23); $e_3$ 23 (21–23); $f_1$ 23 (21–25); $f_2$ 21 (21–23); $h_1$ 18 (18–23). Distances between setae: $sc_2-sc_2$ 237 (202–237), $c_1-c_1$ 83 (64–83), $d_1-d_1$ 60 (55–64), $e_1-e_1$ 51 (41–51), $f_1-f_1$ 148 (126–148), $f_2-f_2$ 115 (110–115), $h_1-h_1$ 46 (40–50), $c_1-d_1$ 101 (81–101), $d_1-e_1$ 81 (69–81), $v_2-h_1$ 535 (470–535). Setae $f_1$ and $f_2$ lateral, distance between $f_1$ members larger than between $f_2$ members. Dorsal body surface granulated with longitudinal and irregular folds on propodosoma (Figure 2D) and with transverse spaced granulate striae on medial hysterosoma irregularly arched posteriorly (Figure 1).

**Gnathosoma** – Stylophore slightly notched anteriorly, longer than wide (Figure 3A). Tibial claw of palpus bidentate. Palptarsus smaller than tibial claw, with three tactile setae, three eupathidia and one solenidion; eupathidia and solenidion subequal in length (Figure 3B). Peritreme ends in a tiny bulbous anastomosis (about 7 in diameter) consisting of 3–4 loges (Figure 3C).

**Venter** – Striation transverse, sparse and broken between *1a* and *3a* pairs of setae, irregularly longitudinal, sparse and broken between *3a* and *4a* pairs of setae, transverse and broken between *4a* and aggenital (*ag*) pairs of setae, irregular in the area anterior to genital flap and longitudinal between (*ag*) setae. Genitoanal region with two pairs of genitals (*g*₁₋₂), three pairs of pseudanal (*ps*₁₋₃) and two pairs of ventrocaudal (*h*₂₋₃) setae. Sacculus of spermatheca elongate, with smooth surface, seems constricted in its distal third, 15 (15–16) long, 7 (6–7) wide (Figure 3D).

**Legs** – (Figures 4, 5, 6). Leg I shorter than body length, 389 (381–391) long, leg II 290 (253–290), leg III 290 (255–290), leg IV 306 (299–322). Length of segments of leg I as follows: trochanter 18 (18–24), femur 115 (108–115), genu 64 (57–69), tibia 74 (64–78), tarsus 69 (60–69). Leg setal counts as follows:

$$
\text{I: } 2 - 1 - 14[15] - 8 - 13 + (1) - 18 + (3) + 2 \text{ duplexes}
$$

$$
\text{II: } 1 - 1 - 10 - 5 - 9 - 15 + (1) + 1 \text{ duplex}
$$

$$
\text{III: } 1 - 1 - 6 - 6 - 9 - 14 + 1 \text{ duplex}
$$

IV: $1 - 1 - 5 - 6 - 9 - 14 + (1)$
<figure><img src="image_12.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 3** *Bryobia syriensis* n. sp., female: A – stylophore; B – palpal tibia and tarsus; C – peritreme; D – spermatheca. Scale bars = 50 µm (A), 10 µm (B, C), 15 µm (D).</figcaption></figure>

True claws uncinate, each with one pair of tenent hairs. Empodium I with one pair of tenent hairs, empodia II-IV each with two rows of tenent hairs (Figure 6A, B). Tarsus III associated tactile seta and solenidion forming duplex sub-equal in length (Figure 6C), on tarsus IV solenidion well-separated from tactile, proximal, about 3/4 the length of tactile (Figure 6D). Coxisternal setae 1b, 44, smooth about twice as long as setae 1c, 24, serrate (Figure 6E).

**Male description** — (n = 2). Small, 311–317 long excluding gnathosoma and 366–377 including gnathosoma, 207–210 wide.

**Dorsum** – Without prodorsal projections, setae $v_1$ and $v_2$ located on tiny tubercles (Figure 7A). Setae $v_1$ and $v_2$ short, subspatulate, serrate, $v_2$ twice as long as $v_1$ (Figure 8A). Distance between first ($v_1$) and second ($v_2$) pair of propodosomal setae insertions 14–18 and 54–56,
A

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /></figure>

B

<figure><img src="image_14.png" /></figure>

C

<figure><img src="image_15.png" /></figure>

D

<figure><img src="image_16.png" /></figure>

**Figure 4** *Bryobia syriensis n. sp.*, female: A – tibia and tarsus I; B – femur and genu I; C – tibia and tarsus II; D – femur and genu II. Scale bar = 50 µm (A, B, C, D).
A

<figure><img src="image_17.png" /></figure>

B

<figure><img src="image_18.png" /></figure>

C

<figure><img src="image_19.png" /></figure>

D

<figure><img src="image_20.png" /></figure>

**Figure 5** *Bryobia syriensis n. sp.*, female: A – tibia and tarsus III; B – femur and genu III; C – tibia and tarsus IV; D – femur and genu IV.
Scale bar = 50 µm (A, B, C, D).
<figure><img src="image_21.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 6** *Bryobia syriensis* n. sp., female: A – claw and empodium I; B – claw and empodium II; C – duplex setae on tarsus III; D – solenidion and associated tactile setae on tarsus IV; E – coxisternal setae *Ib* and *Ic*. Scale bars = 10 µm (A, B), 20 µm (C, D), 25 µm (E).</figcaption></figure>

respectively. Other dorsal body setae subequal in length, elongate subspatulate, enlarged distally (setae $c_1$ less enlarged), serrate, all inserted on tiny tubercles (Figure 7B, C). Dorsocentral setae ($c_1$, $d_1$ and $e_1$) shorter than distances between consecutive setae. Measurements of dorsal setae: $v_1$ 7; $v_2$ 14–15; $sc_1$ 28; $sc_2$ 28–32; $c_1$ 30–35; $c_2$ 30–35; $c_3$ 28; $d_1$ 28–30; $d_2$ 28–30; $d_3$ 28; $e_1$ 30–32; $e_2$ 30–32; $e_3$ 28–30; $f_1$ 25–30; $f_2$ 30; $h_1$ 23. Distances between setae: $sc_2$–$sc_2$ 150–170, $c_1$–$c_1$ 55–60, $d_1$–$d_1$ 41–51, $e_1$–$e_1$ 23–25, $f_1$–$f_1$ 64–68, $f_2$–$f_2$ 48–53, 64–68, $h_1$–$h_1$ 20, $c_1$–$d_1$ 44–48, $d_1$–$e_1$ 39–46, $v_2$–$h_1$ 274–304. Dorsal body surface granulate with few longitudinal and irregular folds on propodosoma, with transverse spaced striae on medial hysterosoma, and with arched striae on the surface between $d_1$–$d_3$ and $e_1$–$e_3$ (Figures 7A).

**Gnathosoma** – Stylophore slightly notched anteriorly, longer than wide, as in female. Tibial claw of palpus bidentate. Palptarsus as in female with solenidion shorter than eupathidia (Figure 8B). Peritreme ends in small bulb with four pointed denticles at its distal margin (Figure 8C).

**Aeadeagus** – Without knob, bent dorsad near at right angle, weakly sigmoid, with tapering distal part and acute tip pointing caudad, shaft dorsal margin curved (Figure 8D).

**Legs** – (Figures 9, 10). Leg I longer than body length 451 long, leg II 290–304, leg III 260–281, leg IV 288–304. Length of segments of leg I as follows: trochanter 18–23, femur 133–150, genu 69–76, tibia 81, tarsus 81. Leg setal counts as follows:

$$I: 2 - 1 - 14[15] - 8 - 13 + (1) - 18 + (8) + 2 \text{ duplexes}$$

$$II: 1 - 1 - 10[11] - 6[5] - 9 - 15 + (1) + 1 \text{ duplex}$$

$$III: 1 - 1 - 7 - 6 - 9 - 14 + 1 \text{ duplex}$$
<figure><img src="image_22.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 7** *Bryobia syriensis* n. sp., male: A – dorsal aspect; B – dorsal seta $c_1$; C – dorsal seta $e_1$. Scale bars = 50 µm (A), 20 µm (B, C).</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_23.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 8** *Bryobia syriensis* n. sp., male: A – propodosomal lobes; B – palpal tibia and tarsus; C – peritreme; D – aeadeagus. Scale bars = 20 µm (A), 10 µm (B, C, D).</figcaption></figure>

$$IV: 1 - 1 - 5 - 6 - 9 - 14 + (1)$$

True claws uncinate. Claws I-IV each with one pair of tenent hairs. Empodia I-IV each with two rows of tenent hairs. Tarsus III associated tactile seta and solenidion forming duplex sub-equal in length; tarsus IV with solenidion well-separated from tactile, proximal, about 2/3 the length of tactile.

**Etymology** — This species was named after the country, Syria, where it was collected.

**Remarks** — Among the species that belong to the subgenus *Bryobia* (*Allobia*) (as defined by Livshitz and Mitrofanov, 1971) to which *B. (A.) syriensis* n. sp. also belongs, it is very close to *B. (A.) livschitzi* Mitrofanov and Strunkova, 1968 (Livshitz and Mitrofanov, 1971), *B. (A.) ziziphorae* Strunkova and Mitrofanov, 1983, *B. (A.) tuttlei* Smiley and Baker, 1995, *B. (A.) reckiana* Mitrofanov and Strunkova, 1968, *B. (A.) strunkovae* Mitrofanov, 1968 (Livshitz and Mitrofanov, 1971), *B. (A.) montana* Mitrofanov, 1973 and *B. (A.) giannitensis* Hatzinikolis and Panou, 1996. However *B. (A.) syriensis* differs from *B. (A.) livschitzi* by having dorsal body
<figure><img src="image_24.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 9** *Bryobia syriensis n. sp.*, male: A – tibia and tarsus I; B – femur and genu I; C – tibia and tarsus II; D – femur and genu II. Scale bar = 50 µm (A, B, C, D).</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_25.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 10** *Bryobia syriensis* n. sp., male: A – tibia and tarsus III; B – femur and genu III; C – tibia and tarsus IV; D – femur and genu IV. Scale bar = 50 µm (A, B, C, D).</figcaption></figure>
setae spatulate (vs. subsaptulate with pointed or rounded tip in *B. (A.) livschitzi*); by differences in femoral setal count 14[15] – 10 – 6 – 5 and 12 – (7-8) – 4 – 4 in *B. (A.) syriensis* and *B. (A.) livschitzi*, respectively; and by differences in tibial setal count on legs II-IV, 9 – 9 – 9 and 7 – 7 – 7 in *B. (A.) syriensis* and *B. (A.) livschitzi*, respectively.

*Bryobia* (*A.* *syriensis* can be separated from *B. (A.) ziziphorae* by the following characters: the outer prodorsal lobes are more developed in *B. (A.) ziziphorae* and the shape of setae v₂ is also different; the distal end of the peritreme consists of a tiny anastomosis of 3–4 loges in *B. (A.) syriensis* whereas it is simple in *B. (A.) ziziphorae*; solenidion and tactile seta on tarsus IV are well-separated in *B. (A.) syriensis* vs. a duplex setae is present in *B. (A.) ziziphorae*; and the femoral, tibial and tarsal setal counts obviously differ between the two species.

The main differences between females of *B. (A.) syriensis* and *B. (A.) tuttlei* are the following: the outer propodosomal lobes are very reduced in *B. (A.) syriensis* but well developed in *B. (A.) tuttlei*; setae v₁ are about half the length of v₂ in *B. (A.) syriensis* whereas they are quite similar in size in *B. (A.) tuttlei*; the spermatheca has a smooth surface in *B. (A.) syriensis* vs. reticulate in *B. (A.) tuttlei*; obvious differences in leg setal counts are observed between the two species (with the exception of genu II and femur IV). In the male of *B. (A.) syriensis* dorsal body setae are elongated, subspatulate but in males of *B. (A.) tuttlei* they are spatulate (similar to those of female).

*Bryobia* (*A.* *syriensis* clearly differs from *B. (A.) reckiana* by having spatulate, serrate and distally rounded dorsal body setae vs. lanceolate in *B. (A.) reckiana*; solenidion and tactile seta on tarsus IV are well-separated in *B. (A.) syriensis* vs. a duplex seta is present in *B. (A.) reckiana*; the empodium I of *B. (A.) syriensis* bears only one pair of tenent hairs whereas two rows of tenent hairs are present in *B. (A.) reckiana*; leg setal counts are very different between the two species.

*Bryobia* (*A.* *syriensis* and *B. (A.) strunkovae* can be separated by: a smaller body width of *B. (A.) syriensis*, 327–384 vs. 572 in *B. strunkovae*; the leg I length that is far shorter (381–391) than the body length in *B. (A.) syriensis* whereas it is about as long as the body length (640) in *B. (A.) strunkovae*; the distal end of the peritreme is less developed in *B. (A.) syriensis* than in *B. (A.) strunkovae*; solenidion and tactile seta on tarsus IV are well-separated in *B. (A.) syriensis* but a duplex seta is present in *B. (A.) strunkovae*; finally, obvious differences between the setal counts of the two species are present.

*Bryobia* (*A.* *syriensis* differs from *B. (A.) montana* by having one pair of tenent hairs on empodium I vs. two rows in *B. (A.) montana*; solenidion and tactile seta on tarsus IV are well-separated in *B. (A.) syriensis* vs. a duplex seta is present in *B. (A.) montana*; and by very different leg setal counts.

The main differences between *B. (A.) syriensis* and *B. (A.) giannitensis* are: a smaller body size of *B. (A.) syriensis*, 575–663 long and 327–384 wide vs. 789–809 and 650–559; a far shorter leg I in *B. (A.) syriensis* (381–391) compared to *B. (A.) giannitensis* (603–609); setae v₁ and v₂ are spatulate in *B. (A.) syriensis* but lanceolate in *B. (A.) giannitensis*; in *B. (A.) syriensis* one pair of tenent hairs is present on claws II-IV but each of them bears two pairs of tenent hairs in *B. (A.) giannitensis*; obvious differences in leg setal counts between the two species are also observed.

**Bryobia (Bryobia) gigas Auger, Arabuli and Migeon, 2015**

Four females of this species were collected from soil litter, Attabiyyat, south-west of Latakia city, Syria (35°30′24″ N, 35°46′49″ E), 23 April 2019. This species has been already collected from *Bituminaria bituminosa* (L.) in Syria (Zeity and Srinivasa, 2019) but this host plant was not present in the place where we collected these specimens.

**Bryobia (Bryobia) watersi Manson, 1967**

The specimens of this species were identified as *Bryobia* sp. and misidentified as *B. (B.) graminum* and/or *B. (B.) kissophila* in previous studies (Barbar, 2014, 2018). This was
<figure><img src="image_26.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 11** *Bryobia watersi*, female: A-D – variations in propodosomal lobes. Scale bars = 25 µm (A, B, C, D).</figcaption></figure>

due to species identification only based on the morphological characteristics of females and
particularly on variations in the shape of propodosomal lobes. In the present study, comparisons
of all the specimens collected (including females, a male and juveniles, Figures 11-15) with the
detailed redescriptions of *B. (B.) graminum*, *B. (B.) kissophila* and *B. (B.) praetiosa* by Mathys
(1957) and the original description of *B. (B.) watersi* by Manson (1967) were undertaken. This
led us to the conclusion that the morphological characteristics of the Syrian specimens fit well
with those provided in the original description of *B. (B.) watersi* by Manson (1967) even if few
morphological small differences were found: the dorsal body setae are slightly longer in Syrian
females (there are no obvious differences in juveniles); genu II and tarsus IV of Syrian females
with 6 and 14 setae respectively vs. 5 and 15 setae; genu II-III of Syrian male with 6 – 5 setae
vs. 4[5] – 6; and tarsus III of Syrian deutonymphs with 10 setae vs. 11[12].

**Remarks** — This species was collected from several host plants surrounding a citrus orchard located at Al-ya’robiyah, Latakia governorate, Syria (35°30′24″ N, 35°48′33″ E) and was found on: *Amaranthus retroflexus* L., a new host plant (five females, 15 April 2014, previously identified as *Bryobia* sp.), *Malva sylvestris* L. (five females, two deutonymphs, three protonymphs and two larvae, 1 January 2014; four females, 15 February 2014; three females, 7 April 2015; two females, two protonymphs and one larva, 18 February 2016, previously misidentified as *B. (B.) graminum*; six females and one larva, 16 April 2016, previously misidentified as *B. (B.) kissophila*), *Urtica urens* L., a new host plant (three females and one protonymph, 15 April, 2014, previously identified as *Bryobia* sp.) and *Trifolium* sp., a new host plant (four females, three deutonymphs and one male, 14 April, 2015, previously identified as *Bryobia* sp.).

Among the specimens of *B. (B.) watersi* mentioned above, two females collected from
*A. retroflexus* have only three propodosomal lobes each with a single seta (Figures 15 A-B).
Initially, the specific identification of these specimens led to a result that they are either new
specimens (or closely related species) of the two “trilobed” species *B. bakeri* Zaher *et al.* (1982)
<figure><img src="image_27.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 12** *Bryobia watersi*, female: A-D – variations in spermatheca. Scale bars = 20 µm (A, B, C, D).</figcaption></figure>

and *B. aegyptiacus* Zaher *et al.* (1982) or they are aberrant *Bryobia* specimens. Actually, the overall propodosomal lobe shapes of the trilobed Syrian specimens are closer to those of *B. bakeri* (Figure 15A) than those of *B. aegyptiacus*. Nevertheless, the Syrian specimens differ from those two species by the palptarsus setal count [unusual counts are found in the two species described by Zaher *et al.* (1982)] and by small differences in the global leg setal counts. These results led to conclude that the Syrian trilobed specimens did not belong to *B. bakeri* nor to *B. aegyptiacus*.

Indeed, despite the differences between the propodosomal lobes of the specimen presented
<figure><img src="image_28.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 13** *Bryobia watersi*, male: propodosomal lobes. Scale bar = 25 µm.</figcaption></figure>

in Figure 15B (typical of abnormal "asymmetrical" lobes; the outer lobe of the left side is obviously missing) and those of the specimen presented in Figure 15A (the axis of symmetry passes through the middle of the single inner lobe), we concluded that these females are abnormal individuals of *B. (B.) watersi* for several reasons:

(1) Both specimens are morphologically identical to *B. (B.) watersi* [i.e. having similar leg ambulacra, leg chaetotaxy and articles dimensions, same shape and length of dorsal body setae and peritreme etc.].

(2) Both specimens were collected together with specimens of *B. (B.) watersi* (same host plant, same date and place of collection).

(3) Several attempts carried out in 2015 and 2016 to re-collect additional trilobed individuals (in the same location where they were collected first) were unsuccessful and all re-collected individuals were *B. (B.) watersi*.

(4) Propodosomal lobe aberrations have already been reported in several *Bryobia* species (Arabuli and Auger, 2016; Fashing et al. 2016; Smiley and Baker, 1995).

This variability in the propodosomal lobe shape found in the two Syrian trilobed individuals of *B. (B.) watersi* guided us to question about the taxonomical value of the number of propodosomal lobes used to separate *B. bakeri* and *B. aegyptiacus* from other *Bryobia* species. Several arguments tend to show that these specimens could be teratological forms rather than species with a particular propodosomal lobes pattern:

(1) Specimens are rare: like the Syrian trilobed specimen of *B. (B.) watersi* of the Figure 15A, only one specimen of *B. bakeri* and one of *B. aegyptiacus* are known. Although Smiley and Baker (1995) reported a possible additional female of *B. bakeri*, it could belong to another species because its leg setal count is far different from that of the type specimen of *B. bakeri* (it shares the same setal count only on five leg articles; as a comparison, the Syrian trilobed *B. (B.) watersi* are closer to *B. bakeri* for the reason that they share the same setal count on 12 leg articles).

(2) Specimens with three propodosomal lobes (each bearing one seta) are known to occur in several species of *Bryobia*: Smiley and Baker (1995) mentioned that in a few species of
<figure><img src="image_29.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 14** *Bryobia watersi*, immature stages: A – dorsal seta *e*₁ of larva; B-C – propodosomal lobes of protonymph; D – propodosomal lobes of deutonymph. Scale bars = 20 µm (A), 50 µm (B, C, D).</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_30.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 15** *Bryobia watersi*, female: A-B – trilobed propodosomal lobes. Scale bars = 50 µm (A, B).</figcaption></figure>
*Bryobia* some aberrant females (with two or three propodosomal lobes) appear sometimes. Since that work, several cases of *Bryobia* species with three propodosomal lobes have been reported (Arabuli and Auger, 2016; Fashing *et al.* 2016). In the detailed study by Fashing *et al.* 2016, it was demonstrated that both morphotypes (with three or four propodosomal lobes) of *Bryobia abyssiniae* Fashing and Ueckermann, 2016 belong to the same species, and about 9.5% of observed specimens had a single propodosomal inner lobe (with a single seta $v_1$).

(3) The two Syrians trilobed specimens are conspecific despite the fact that one of them is obviously an aberrant form (asymmetry) and the other has a symmetrical propodosomal lobe pattern similar to that found in *B. bakeri*.

This tends to show that a bryobiine mite with an unpaired inner propodosomal lobe bearing a unique seta $v_1$, can be an aberrant specimen despite a symmetrical propodosomal trilobed lobe pattern.

In our opinion, all these elements together strongly suggest that *B. bakeri* and *B. aegyptiacus* would be more aberrant individuals of two species of *Bryobia* (four-lobed) than species characterized by unpaired inner propodosomal lobe. Even if the data are insufficient to assign these “trilobed” species to an existing four-lobed *Bryobia* species, the demonstration presented here is consistent with the synonymy of the genus *Septobia* with the genus *Bryobia* by Bolland *et al.* (1998).

## Acknowledgements

The first author would like to thank Professor Hassan Khalil for his valuable help in the identification of host plants. Thanks are due to Dr. Mahran Zeity and Dr. Mohamed W. Negm for supplying scientific papers to the first author.

## References

Arabuli T., Auger P. 2016. Intraspecific morphological variability in *Bryobia rubrioculus* (Scheuten, 1857) (Acari: Tetranychidae) from Georgia (Caucasus). 8th Symposium of the European Association of Acarologists. Valencia, Spain, 11th-15th July 2016. Oral presentation.

Arabuli T., Maric I., Auger P. 2019. Revision of the genus *Pseudobryobia* McGregor, 1950 (Acari, Tetranychidae), Acarologia, 59(3): 291-300. doi:10.24349/acarologia/20194331

Barbar Z. 2014. Occurrence, population dynamics and winter phenology of spider mites and their phytoseiid predators in a citrus orchard in Syria. Acarologia, 54: 409-423. doi:10.1051/acarologia/20142143

Barbar Z. 2018. New mite records (Acari: Mesostigmata, Trombidiformes) from soil and vegetation of some Syrian citrus agrosystems, Acarologia, 58(4): 919-927. doi:10.24349/acarologia/20184298

Bolland H.R., Gutierrez J., Flechtmann C.H.W. 1998. World catalogue of the spider mite family (Acari: Tetranychidae). Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers. pp. 392.

Boller E.F. 1984. Eine anfache Ausschwemm-Methode zur schellen Erfassung von Raumilben, Trips und anderen Kleinathropoden im Weinbau, Schweiz Zeitschrift für Obst-und Weinbau, 120: 249-255.

El-Hariri G. 1968. A list of recorded Syrian insect and Acari. Faculty of Agriculture, University of Aleppo. pp.160.

Fashing, N.J., Ueckermann, E.A., Fashing, P.J., Nguyen, N., Back, A.M. Allison L.A. 2016. *Bryobia abyssiniae* (Prostigmata: Tetranychidae), a new species from the highlands of Ethiopia. Int. J. Acarol., 42: 366-376. doi:10.1080/01647954.2016.1194891

Hatzinikolis E.N., Panou H.N. 1996. Three new species of *Bryobia* (Acari, Tetranychidae) from fruit trees in Greece. Acarologia, 37: 107-113.

Lindquist, E.E. 1985. External anatomy. In: Helle, W. & Sabelis, M.W. (Eds.), Spider mites. Their Biology, natural enemies and control. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishing. p. 3-28.

Livshits I.Z., Mitrofanov V.I. 1971. The mites of the genus *Bryobia* C.L. Koch, 1836 (Acari-formes, Bryobiidae). Trudy Gosudarstvennogo Nikitskogo Botanicheskogo Sada, 51: 1-112.

Manson D.C.M. 1967. The spider mite family Tetranychidae in New Zealand. I. The genus *Bryobia*. Acarologia, 9: 76-123.

Mathys G. 1957. Contribution à la connaissance de la systématique et de la biologie du genre *Bryobia* en Suisse romande. Mitteilungen der Schweizerischen Entomologischen Gesellschaft, 30: 189-284.

Migeon A., Dorkeld F. 2006-2019. Spider Mites Web: a comprehensive database for the Tetranychidae. Available from: http://www.montpellier.inra.fr/CBGP/spmweb (accessed July, 15, 2019).
Mitrofanov V.I. 1973. Three new species of mites of the genus *Bryobia* C.L. Koch, 1836 (Acariformes, Tetranychoidea) from the Pamir. Trudy Gosudarstvennogo Nikitskogo Botanicheskogo Sada, 51: 12-14.

Saito Y., Mori K., Chittenden A.R. 1999. Body characters reflecting the body size of spider mites in flattened specimens (Acari, Tetranychidae). Applied Entomology and Zoology, 34: 383-386.
doi:10.1303/aez.34.383

Smiley R.L., Baker E.W. 1995. A report on some tetranychid mites (Acari: Prostigmata) from Yemen.
Int. J. Acarol., 21: 135-164. doi:10.1080/01647959508684055

Strunkova Z.I., Mitrofanov V.I. 1983. New species of the family Bryobiidae (Acariformes) from Middle Asia. Zool. Zh., 62: 464-468.

Vacante V. 2010. Citrus mites, Identification, bionomy and control. CABI Head Office, Oxfordshire, UK.
pp. 378. doi:10.1079/9781845934989.0000

Zaher M.A., Gomaa E.A., and El-Enany M.A. 1982. Spider mites of Egypt (Acari: Tetranychidae). Int. J. Acarol., 8: 91-114. doi:10.1080/01647958208683284

Zeity M. 2017. Some new records of spider mites (Acari, Tetranychidae) from Syria. Acarologia, 57(3): 651-654. doi:10.24349/acarologia/20174184

Zeity M., Srinivasa N. 2019. Updated contribution to the knowledge of Tetranychoidea (Acari: Tetranychidae, Tenuipalpidae) from Syria with reinstatement of genus *Nuciforaella* Vacante. Syst. Appl. Acarol., 24(4): 529-543. doi:10.11158/saa.24.4.1

Zriki G., Shaabo A., Boubou A. 2015. A preliminary survey of the spider mites (Acari: Tetranychidae) in Latakia Governorate of Syria. Acarologia, 55: 303-309. doi:10.1051/acarologia/20142173