Unaspis citri (citrus snow scale)
- Taxonomic Tree
- Distribution Table
- Risk of Introduction
- Hosts/Species Affected
- Growth Stages
- List of Symptoms/Signs
- Biology and Ecology
- Natural enemies
- Notes on Natural Enemies
- Detection and Inspection
- Similarities to Other Species/Conditions
- Prevention and Control
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.Generate report
PicturesTop of page
IdentityTop of page
Preferred Scientific Name
- Unaspis citri (Comstock, 1883)
Preferred Common Name
- citrus snow scale
Other Scientific Names
- Chionaspis annae Malenotti
- Chionaspis citri Comstock, 1883
- Dinaspis annae Malenotti
- Dinaspis veitchi Green & Laing, 1923
- Prontaspis citri (Comstock) MacGillivray, 1921
- Unaspis annae Malenotti
International Common Names
- English: orange chionaspis; orange snow scale; white louse scale
- Spanish: cochinilla blanca de los citrus; cochinilla blanca del tronco; escama de nieve de los cítricos; escama de nieve de los citricos (mexico); guagua nevada de los cítricos; piojo bianco; piojo blanco de los citricos (mexico); piojo harinoso de los citricos; queresa del naranjo
- Portuguese: cochonilha branca da aranjeira (brasil)
Local Common Names
- Brazil: cochonilha branca da aranjeira
- Germany: schneeweisse citrus-schildlaus
- UNASCI (Unaspis citri)
Taxonomic TreeTop of page
- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Metazoa
- Phylum: Arthropoda
- Subphylum: Uniramia
- Class: Insecta
- Order: Hemiptera
- Suborder: Sternorrhyncha
- Unknown: Coccoidea
- Family: Diaspididae
- Genus: Unaspis
- Species: Unaspis citri
DescriptionTop of page The adult female scales are mussel or oyster-shell shaped, brown or brown-black with a lighter coloured margin, moderately convex and often have a distinct longitudinal dorsal ridge. The scales attain a length of 2.25 mm. The male scales are smaller, white, felted, elongate oval in shape with three longitudinal ridges. The exuviae of both sexes are terminal and brownish-yellow.
Authoritative identification involves detailed microscopic examination of slide-mounted, teneral, adult females. Detailed morphological descriptions, illustrations and keys to Unaspis are provided by Balachowsky (1954), Ferris (1937) and Williams and Watson (1988).
DistributionTop of page U. citri originated in Asia and has spread widely in other tropical and subtropical regions. It is now found in North, Central and South America, Africa and Oceania (see the computer-generated maps and CIE, 1962 for an exact list of countries). The pest was found in Portugal (Azores) in the 1920s, but there have been no records since.
See also CABI/EPPO (1998, No. 154).
Distribution TableTop of page
The distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.
|Continent/Country/Region||Distribution||Last Reported||Origin||First Reported||Invasive||Reference||Notes|
|-Guangdong||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|-Hong Kong||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|-Hubei||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|-Java||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|-Peninsular Malaysia||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Singapore||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Vietnam||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Benin||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Congo Democratic Republic||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Côte d'Ivoire||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Guinea||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Mauritius||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Nigeria||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Sierra Leone||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Togo||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Bermuda||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Mexico||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|USA||Restricted distribution||EPPO, 2014|
|-California||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|-Florida||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|-Georgia||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|-Louisiana||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
Central America and Caribbean
|Antigua and Barbuda||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Barbados||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|British Virgin Islands||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Cuba||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Dominica||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Dominican Republic||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|El Salvador||Present||EPPO, 2014|
|Grenada||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Guadeloupe||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Haiti||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Jamaica||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Montserrat||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Panama||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Puerto Rico||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Saint Kitts and Nevis||Restricted distribution||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Saint Lucia||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Saint Vincent and the Grenadines||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Trinidad and Tobago||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|United States Virgin Islands||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Argentina||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|-Espirito Santo||Present||Culik et al., 2009|
|-Rio de Janeiro||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|-Rio Grande do Sul||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|-Sao Paulo||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Chile||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Colombia||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Ecuador||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Guyana||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Paraguay||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Peru||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Uruguay||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Venezuela||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|Netherlands||Absent, confirmed by survey||NPPO of the Netherlands, 2013; EPPO, 2014|
|Portugal||Restricted distribution||EPPO, 2014|
|-Azores||Restricted distribution||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|-New South Wales||Restricted distribution||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|-Queensland||Widespread||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
|-South Australia||Present||EPPO, 2014|
|Cook Islands||Present||Williams and Watson, 1988; EPPO, 2014|
|Fiji||Present||CIE, 1962; Williams and Watson, 1988; EPPO, 2014|
|Kiribati||Present||Williams and Watson, 1988; EPPO, 2014|
|Micronesia, Federated states of||Present||EPPO, 2014|
|New Caledonia||Present||CIE, 1962; Williams and Watson, 1988; EPPO, 2014|
|New Zealand||Absent, invalid record||EPPO, 2014|
|Niue||Present||Williams and Watson, 1988; EPPO, 2014|
|Papua New Guinea||Present||Williams and Watson, 1988; EPPO, 2014|
|Samoa||Present||CIE, 1962; Williams and Watson, 1988; EPPO, 2014|
|Solomon Islands||Present||CIE, 1962; Williams and Watson, 1988; EPPO, 2014|
|Tonga||Present||CIE, 1962; Williams and Watson, 1988; EPPO, 2014|
|Vanuatu||Present||Williams and Watson, 1988; EPPO, 2014|
|Wallis and Futuna Islands||Present||CIE, 1962; EPPO, 2014|
Risk of IntroductionTop of page U. citri is listed in the European Community Plant Health Directive Annex IIAI and is a quarantine pest on plants of Citrus spp., Fortunella spp. and Poncirus spp. (other than fruit and seeds). U. citri appears on the quarantine pest list of Russia and is under renewed consideration by EPPO as a potential A1 quarantine pest.
U. citri is a more tropical species than the closely related U. yanonensis. In West Africa, it is confined to the humid tropical zone along the coast and does not occur where there is a dry season (Vilardebo, 1974). In Queensland and New South Wales, in Australia, U. citri is confined to the non-irrigated humid coastal regions and does not occur in the semi-arid irrigated citrus-cultivation areas inland (Maelzer, 1979).
U. citri also has less of a tendency to attack fruits than U. yanonensis.
Hosts/Species AffectedTop of page U. citri is polyphagous attacking plant species belonging to 12 genera in nine families. The main hosts of economic importance are Citrus spp., especially orange, but the insect is also recorded on a wide range of other crops, mostly fruit crops and ornamentals, including banana, Capsicum spp., coconut, guava, hibiscus, jackfruit, kumquat, pineapple, soursop, Spanish moss and trifoliate orange.
Growth StagesTop of page Flowering stage, Fruiting stage, Vegetative growing stage
SymptomsTop of page Infestations of U. citri usually occur on the trunk and main limbs of trees under ten years old. Heavy infestations spread to the twigs, leaves and fruit. This results in yellow spotting on the undersides of leaves which drop prematurely, dieback of twigs and weakening and eventual killing of branches. Heavily infested bark becomes dark, dull, and hard, appears tight and subsequently splits. Weakened limbs and twigs become infected with fungi and may be subsequently attacked by wood-boring insects.
List of Symptoms/SignsTop of page
|Fruit / discoloration|
|Fruit / external feeding|
|Leaves / abnormal colours|
|Leaves / abnormal leaf fall|
|Leaves / abnormal leaf fall|
|Leaves / honeydew or sooty mould|
|Leaves / necrotic areas|
|Stems / dieback|
|Stems / external feeding|
Biology and EcologyTop of page U. citri is sexually reproductive and produces several overlapping generations a year. The active first instars are most abundant during late spring, summer and autumn and populations tend to peak in late autumn. The life cycle takes 10-12 weeks to complete during the summer but longer during cooler weather. Each female can produce up to 169 first instars (over a period of 146 days); the average number of offspring per female is about 80. For a short period after hatching, the first instars are attracted to light and move upwards towards the apical twigs or on to the fruit, especially if leaf fall has occurred. Once a feeding site has been selected the females and immature males become sessile (Hely et al., 1982).
Laboratory studies of the population dynamics of U. citri showed that the net reproductive rate, intrinsic rate of increase and finite rate of increase were higher on orange than on lemon. The longevity of female scales on orange was approximately 13 weeks compared to 17 weeks on lemon (Fernandez and Garcia, 1988). Population studies in Colombia have shown that at any given time, 86.5 to 95.5% of U. citri are not feeding and that 43.9 to 79.3% of first instars are males which cease to feed after the second moult (Mosquear, 1979).
Like other diaspids, the main dispersal stage of U. citri is the first instar which as well as being mobile may be naturally dispersed by wind and animals. Once a feeding site has been selected the insect becomes sessile and is not naturally dispersed. However, it is readily carried on consignments of plant material and fruit.
Natural enemiesTop of page
|Natural enemy||Type||Life stages||Specificity||References||Biological control in||Biological control on|
|Aphytis lingnanensis||Parasite||Adults/Nymphs||Australia; Queensland; Florida; Solomon Islands; USA||Citrus|
Notes on Natural EnemiesTop of page Important natural enemies include the hymenopterous parasitoids Aphytis lingnanensis and Aspidiotiphagus lounsburyi and in Australia, a predatory caterpillar, Batrachedra sp. (for a complete list see Waterhouse and Norris, 1987). In Australia Batrachedra sp. causes spectacular reductions in the number of scales whenever pest populations become dense (Hely et al., 1982).
See Rosen (1990) for a discussion and further references to the natural enemies of Diaspididae.
ImpactTop of page U. citri is one of the principal pests of Citrus spp. in many of the citrus-growing regions of the world. It infests the trunk, branches and small shoots causing serious damage to orchards due to leaf drop and rapid dieback. Relatively small numbers of scales can cause damage.
Detection and InspectionTop of page The small size, dark colour and sessile nature of the female scales makes them difficult to detect unless present in large numbers. In contrast the large white masses of male scales are conspicuous, hence the common name of citrus snow scale. On citrus fruit, the female scales can be confused with the common Lepidosaphes spp. or easily overlooked as dirt particles.
Similarities to Other Species/ConditionsTop of page U. citri should be distinguished from U. yanonensis which occurs throughout South-East Asia, Australia and France (Smith et al., 1992). Adult female U. citri have relatively few pygidial dorsal ducts, do not have marked divisions between the thoracic segments and have subjacent median lobes. Adult female U. yanonensis have numerous pygidial dorsal ducts, usually have marked divisions between the thoracic segments and have distinct median lobes.
On citrus fruit, the female scales can be confused with the common Lepidosaphes spp.. Adult female U. citri scales often have a distinct longitudinal dorsal ridge which is absent in Lepidosaphes spp.. Secondly, the male U. citri are white, felted, elongate oval in shape with three longitudinal ridges. Male scales of Lepidosaphes spp. are mussel or oyster-shell shaped, purplish or brown and similar in appearance to, but smaller than, the female scales.
Prevention and ControlTop of page
Due to the variable regulations around (de)registration of pesticides, your national list of registered pesticides or relevant authority should be consulted to determine which products are legally allowed for use in your country when considering chemical control. Pesticides should always be used in a lawful manner, consistent with the product's label.
Regulatory Control (Plant Quarantine and Certification)
Importation of citrus plants for planting from countries where U. citri occurs should be prohibited. Fruits should be subject to requirements such as area freedom, place of production freedom or treatment.
Existing biological control agents include the hymenopterous parasitoids Aphytis lingnanensis used in Florida (USA), the Solomon Islands and Cuba, and Aspidiotiphagus lounsburyi in Cuba. Construction of field cages to enclose citrus trees has facilitated the release and establishment of A. lingnanensis in citrus groves in Florida (Brooks and Vitelli, 1976). U. citri increased greatly in numbers after 1963 in Florida and was not effectively suppressed by biological methods. High-volume pesticide sprays were required for control (Simanton, 1974). Browning (1994) provided an up-to-date assessment of biological control in Florida. Partial success has been obtained with A. lingnanensis and efforts are being made to make additional introductions.
Chemical control is possible but the waxy surfaces, sessile nature, intermittent feeding and overlapping generations of U. citri make it difficult to control. In Cuba, the insecticides sulphur, carbaryl, dimethoate and malathion are commonly used (Castineiras and Obregon, 1986). In laboratory and field trials, mineral oil or a mineral oil/dimethoate mixture was found to be the most effective against the mobile stages and against the general population (Fernandez and Rodriquez, 1988).
ReferencesTop of page
Balachowsky AS, 1954. Les cochenilles paléarctiques de la tribu des Diaspidini. Paris, France: Institut Pasteur.
Browning HW, 1994. Classical biological control of citrus scale insects. In Rosen D, Bennett FD, Capinera JL, eds. Pest management in the subtropics: biological control - a Florida perspective. Andover, UK: Intercept Limited, 49-78.
Charles JG; Henderson RC, 2002. Catalogue of the exotic armoured scale insects (Hemiptera: Coccoidea: Diaspididae) in New Zealand. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand, 32(4):587-615; many ref.
Culik MP; Ventura JA; Martins Ddos S, 2009. Scale insects (Hemiptera: Coccidae) of pineapple in the State of Espírito Santo, Brazil. Acta Horticulturae [Proceedings of the Sixth International Pineapple Symposium, Joao Pessoa, Brazil, 18-23 November 2007.], No.822:215-218. http://www.actahort.org
EPPO, 2014. PQR database. Paris, France: European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. http://www.eppo.int/DATABASES/pqr/pqr.htm
Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería Servicio Fitosanitario del Estado (Costa Rica), 2009. Listado de Plagas (insectos y ácaros) en cultivos de importancia económica en Costa Rica (C). http://www.protecnet.go.cr/laboratorios/plagcul/cultivoc.htm
Mplzer DA, 1979. The current status of the biological control of insect pests of citrus in Australia. Australian Applied Entomological Research Conference. Queensland Agricultural College, Lawes, June 1979. Invited reviews and situation papers. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization. Canberra Australia, 236-240
Rosen D, 1990. Armoured Scale Insects: their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control. World Crop Pests 4B. Amsterdam, Netherland: Elsevier.
Simanton WA, 1976. Occurrence of insect and mite pests of Citrus, their predators and parasitism in relation to spraying operations. Tall Timbers Research Station: Proceedings Tall Timbers Conference on Ecological Animal Control by Habitat Management, No. 6, Feb. 28 - March 1, 1974, Gainesville, Florida. Tall Timbers Research Station. Tallahasee, Florida USA, 135-163
Smith IM; McNamara DG; Scott PR; Harris KM(Editors), 1992. Quarantine pests for Europe: data sheets on quarantine pests for the European Communities and for the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization. Wallingford, UK; CAB International, ix + 1032 pp.
Distribution MapsTop of page
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/