Eriosoma lanigerum (woolly aphid)
Identity
- Preferred Scientific Name
- Eriosoma lanigerum (Hausmann, 1802)
- Preferred Common Name
- woolly apple aphid
- Other Scientific Names
- Aphis lanata Salisbury, 1816
- Aphis laniger Hausmann, 1802
- Aphis lanigera (Hausmann, 1802)
- Aphis lanigerum Hausmann, 1802
- Coccus mali Bingley, 1803
- Eriosoma lanata (Salisbury, 1816)
- Eriosoma laniger Hausmann, 1802
- Eriosoma mali Leach, 1818
- Eriosoma pyri Fitch, 1851
- Lachnaphis lanigera (Hausmann, 1802)
- Lachnus laniger (Hausmann, 1802)
- Mimaphidus lanata (Salisbury, 1816)
- Mimaphidus lanigerum (Hausmann, 1802)
- Mimaphidus mali (Leach, 1818)
- Myzoxyles lanigerum (Hausmann, 1802)
- Myzoxyles mali (Leach, 1918)
- Myzoxylos lanata (Salisbury, 1816)
- Myzoxylus laniger
- Myzoxylus lanigerus (Hausmann, 1802)
- Myzoxylus mali Blot, 1831
- Schizoneura lanigera Gillette, 1908
- International Common Names
- EnglishAmerican blightapple root aphidelm rosette aphidwoolly aphid
- Frenchpuceron lanigèrepuceron lanigère du pommier
- Spanishafido de sangrepulgón lanigeropulgón lanigero del manzano
- Local Common Names
- Brazilpulgao lanigeropulgao lanigero da macieira
- Denmarkblodlus
- Finlandverikirva
- Germanywollige Apfelblutlaus
- Israelknimat hadam
- Italyafide lanigero del melopidocchio rosso del melopidocchio sanguigno
- Japanringo-watamusi
- Netherlandsappelbloedluiswollige bloedluis
- Norwayblodlus
- Swedenblodlus
- Turkeyelma kabuklu biti
- EPPO Code
- ERISLA
Pictures
Eriosoma lanigerum
Wooly aphids on branch
NBAIR
Colony
Eriosoma lanigerum (woolly aphid); Close-up of colony on Fuji apple tree.
© Sanjay Acharya/via Wikimedia Commons - CC BY-SA 4.0
Colony
Eriosoma lanigerum (woolly aphid); Colony on apple tree.
©Ivana Jovicic
Eriosoma lanigerum
Aphid colonies on the branch
NBAIR
Eriosoma lanigerum
Wooly aphids
NBAIR
Colour illustration
Eriosoma lanigerum (woolly aphid); Life stages (right) and infestation on apple, causing galls on stem (left).
©AgrEvo
Distribution
Host Plants and Other Plants Affected
| Host | Family | Host status | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Amelanchier | Rosaceae | Wild host | Börner (1952) |
| Cotoneaster | Rosaceae | Wild host | |
| Cotoneaster horizontalis | Rosaceae | Wild host | Börner (1952) |
| Cotoneaster multiflorus | Rosaceae | Wild host | Heie (1980) |
| Crataegus | Rosaceae | Wild host | |
| Crataegus coccinea | Rosaceae | Wild host | Blackman and Eastop (1994) |
| Crataegus columbiana | Rosaceae | Wild host | Börner (1952) |
| Crataegus crus-galli | Rosaceae | Wild host | Blackman and Eastop (1994) |
| Crataegus cuneata | Rosaceae | Wild host | Blackman and Eastop (1994) |
| Crataegus douglasii | Rosaceae | Wild host | Börner (1952) |
| Cydonia oblonga (quince) | Rosaceae | Wild host | Börner (1952) |
| Malus (ornamental species apple) | Rosaceae | Main | |
| Malus baccata | Rosaceae | Main | Börner (1952) |
| Malus domestica (apple) | Rosaceae | Main | Verma and Thapa (2005) |
| Malus floribunda | Rosaceae | Main | Börner (1952) |
| Malus fusca | Rosaceae | Main | Börner (1952), Blackman and Eastop (1994) |
| Malus halliana | Rosaceae | Main | Higuchi (1969) |
| Malus prunifolia | Rosaceae | Main | Börner (1952) |
| Malus sieboldii | Rosaceae | Main | Börner (1952) |
| Malus sieversii | Rosaceae | Main | Kadyrbekov (2002) |
| Malus sylvestris (crab-apple tree) | Rosaceae | Wild host | Börner (1952) |
| Mespilus germanica | Rosaceae | Wild host | Holman (2009) |
| Photinia villosa | Rosaceae | Wild host | Holman (2009) |
| Prunus domestica (plum) | Rosaceae | Wild host | |
| Pyracantha (Firethorn) | Rosaceae | Wild host | |
| Pyrus (pears) | Rosaceae | Other | |
| Pyrus bourgaeana | Rosaceae | Wild host | Holman (2009) |
| Pyrus communis (European pear) | Rosaceae | Other | Heie (1980) |
| Pyrus polycarpa | Rosaceae | Wild host | Holman (2009) |
| Sorbus | Rosaceae | Wild host | Börner (1952) |
| Sorbus americana (American mountainash) | Rosaceae | Wild host |
Symptoms
Woolly apple aphid is an important economic pest of apple, causing severe damage through direct feeding on the roots and stems. It does not feed on the leaves. Aphid colonies on the trunk, branches or twigs can cause deformations, blisters, splitting and cancer-like swellings of the bark (Blackman and Eastop, 1984; 2022). Compounds in aphid saliva that are toxic to trees are partly responsible for the severity of this damage. Galling of aerial plant parts can reach the size of a walnut and interfere with sap circulation.
Root infestations also cause galling. Damage to roots encourages secondary infection, particularly the formation of root canker, a disease caused by basidiomycete fungi (Molinari, 1986). In growth chamber experiments, stem splitting and root galling formed because of E. lanigerum feeding, 4 and 8 weeks after initial infection, respectively. Feeding resulted in greater shoot and root dry weights and disruption in nutrient balance, with reduced foliar nitrogen and phosphorous compared to control trees (Weber and Brown, 1988).
List of Symptoms/Signs
| Symptom or sign | Life stages | Sign or diagnosis |
|---|---|---|
| Plants/Fruit/honeydew or sooty mould | ||
| Plants/Roots/galls along length | ||
| Plants/Roots/galls at junction with stem | ||
| Plants/Roots/swollen roots | ||
| Plants/Stems/canker on woody stem | ||
| Plants/Stems/external feeding | ||
| Plants/Stems/galls | ||
| Plants/Stems/honeydew or sooty mould |
Prevention and Control
Prevention
The best method of preventing the introduction of E. lanigerum is to control imported plant material (apples and other host plants).
Control
In many parts of the world, the most important natural enemies of E. lanigerum, Aphelinus mali and predators such as Forficula auricularia and coccinellids, can reduce the population of this aphid. Woolly apple aphids are also effectively controlled by chemicals. However, colonies on the roots escape predation and are also difficult to control with insecticides, therefore resistant rootstocks have an important role in pest management.
Biological Control
The chalcidoid parasite A. mali has been introduced into many countries in attempts to control E. lanigerum. It was originally native to the USA but has become acclimatized in Europe and has now been introduced into apple-growing regions worldwide. Where above-ground infestations dominate, control of E. lanigerum has been very successful, but where root-feeding populations are important, the results have been less good. A review of the history and results of biological control of this pest is provided by Clausen (1978).
In laboratory studies performed by Mueller et al. (1992), A. mali parasitized all stages of E. lanigerum, but preferred third-instar nymphs, whereas rates of parasitism were inversely proportional to host colony size, with small colonies and long, thin colonies having a greater proportion of individuals parasitized.
Aphelinus mali was first introduced into India during the 1930s, and 98% control was soon achieved in the Kullu Valley, Himachal Pradesh (Thakur and Dogra, 1980).
In field studies undertaken in New Zealand, Shaw and Walker (1996) reported that parasitism of E. lanigerum by A. mali exceeded 80% by late April, and control was achieved without the need for specific aphicide sprays. High levels of parasitism by A. mali (80%) were also recorded at low population densities of E. lanigerum in Mexico (Tejada and Rumayor, 1986), whereas parasitism rates of over 50% were recorded during the summer in West Virginia, USA (Brown and Schmitt, 1994). E. lanigerum was controlled by A. mali in pesticide-free apple orchards in Israel (Oppenheim et al., 1997). The parasitism of E. lanigerum by A. mali was evaluated in apple orchards in southern Brazil by Monteiro et al. (2004). This species parasitized more than 50% of the E. lanigerum. No chemical control against the woolly apple aphid is necessary in the climatic conditions in that area.
In the Netherlands, the predatory coccinellid Exochomus quadripustulatus is the most common and most widespread coccinellid in apple orchards, and contributes to aphid control alongside A. mali in the spring (Bogya, 1996). In India, releases of A. mali have been accompanied by releases of the predators Brinckochrysa scelestes and Eupeodes confrater as a biological control for E. lanigerum (Thakur and Dogra, 1980; Thakur et al., 1992). In Europe, the earwig F. auricularia could be an important supplementary biological control agent against E. lanigerum (Mueller et al., 1988; Helsen et al., 2007; Lordan et al., 2015).
The use of entomopathogenic nematodes to control root-dwelling populations of E. lanigerum was described by Brown et al. (1992) and Berkvens et al. (2014).
Host-Plant Resistance
The development of apple cultivars and rootstocks with genetic resistance to E. lanigerum is an important form of defence. Apple cultivars with some degree of reported resistance include Northern Spry (Cummins et al., 1981) and Golden Delicious (Sachan and Gangwar, 1987). However, most interest has centred on the Malling Merton (MM) series of rootstocks, which are derived from Northern Spry. These rootstocks are not totally resistant to E. lanigerum, but infestation levels are significantly and consistently lower than on other rootstocks, and they have been widely used in pest control programmes. Thirty cultivars and breeding lines of eight Malus species were tested for resistance to E. lanigerum in a Chinese study (Deng et al., 1993), in which a line of Malus baccata (Jin 67) was selected as stock for future breeding. It exhibited less root damage due to E. lanigerum, was winter hardy and induced dwarfism in apple crosses. The resistance characteristics of the three resistant genes (Er1, Er2 and Er3) which are carried by the apple cultivars Northern Spy, Robusta 5 and Aotea, respectively, to the woolly apple were studied by Sandanayaka et al. (2003) in New Zealand.
Recommended chemical treatments against E. lanigerum on the aerial parts of trees usually consist of mineral oil, applied in the winter against hibernating immature forms of the aphid and other apple pests. This is followed by sprays of systemic products during the growing period of the tree, but especially after flowering, when predators are less abundant (Molinari, 1986).
Pesticide regulations vary in different countries. For further information, visit the following resources: EU pesticides database (http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/pesticides/eu-pesticides-database/), PAN pesticide database (www. pesticideinfo.org) and IRAC: Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (https://irac-online.org)
IPM
The reduced use of broad-spectrum pesticides, enhanced diversity of arboreal predators and parasitoids, and high populations of key natural enemies, particularly the parasitoid A. mali, are key features of IPM in apple against E. lanigerum. IPM programmes have been described in Australia (Thwaite, 1997; Nicholas et al., 2005), New Zealand (Shaw and Walker, 1996), Romania (Baicu et al., 1997) and South Africa (Nel and Addison, 1993).
Chemical Control
Due to the variable regulations around (de-)registration of pesticides, we are for the moment not including any specific chemical control recommendations. For further information, we recommend you visit the following resources:
•
EU pesticides database (https://food.ec.europa.eu/plants/pesticides/eu-pesticides-database_en)
•
PAN pesticide database (www.pesticideinfo.org)
•
Your national pesticide guide
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
Copyright © CABI. CABI is a registered EU trademark. This article is published under a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
History
Published online: 16 April 2024
Language
English
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
SCITE_
Citations
Export citation
Select the format you want to export the citations of this publication.
EXPORT CITATIONSExport Citation
View Options
View options
Get Access
Login Options
Check if you access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.