Resurrection of Anthocephalum Linton, 1890 (Cestoda: Tetraphyllidea) and taxonomic information on five proposed members
- 51 Downloads
Anthocephalum Linton, 1890 is resurrected as a valid genus within the Tetraphyllidea. Anthocephalum differs from other tetraphyllidean genera in having pedicellate bothridia combined with complete, regular loculi on the bothridial margins. Phyllobothrium gracile from Torpedo marmorata and Phyllobothrium centrurum (the type-species) from Dasyatis centroura are added to Anthocephalum and their descriptions are amended. Anthocephalum alicae n.sp. from Dasyatis americana is described. It can be distinguished from the above two species in being shorter, in having fewer segments per worm and fewer testes per segment. Anthocephalum cairae n. sp. from Dasyatis americana is described. It can be distinguished from the above three species in having a greater number of marginal loculi per bothridium. Anthocephalum duszynskii n. sp. from Urolophus halleri is also described. It differs from all of the above species, except for A. gracile in loculi number and from A. gracile in being shorter, having fewer segments per worm and fewer testes in a dorsal/ventral field. The generic diagnosis of Anthocephalum is emended to include information from A. gracile, A. centrurum and the three new species. The proximal bothridial surfaces of Anthocephalum centrurum and the three new species are covered with short, stumpy microtriches and thick, spiniform microtriches, their distal bothridial surfaces are covered with slender spiniform microtriches and their cirri were found to be armed with spiniform microtriches, rather than spines. All species placed in Anthocephalum are parasites of batoid fish. A brief discussion of potentially covert members of Anthocephalum is also included.
KeywordsVitelline Follicle Excretory Duct Genital Atrium Mature Segment Marginal Loculus
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Brooks, D.R., Mayes, M.A. & Thorson, T.B. (1980) Cestode parasites in Myliobatis goodei Garman (Myliobatiformes: Myliobatidae) from Rio de la Plata, Uruguay, with a summary of cestodes collected from South American elasmobranchs during 1975–1979. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 93, 1239–1252.Google Scholar
- Caira, J.N. (1989) A revision of the North American papillose Allocreadiidae (Digenea) with independent cladisitic analyses of larval and adult forms. Bulletin of the University of Nebraska State Museum, 11, 1–58.Google Scholar
- Caira, J.N. & Gavarrino, M.M. (1990) Grillotia similis (Linton, 1908) comb. n. (Cestoda: Trypanorhyncha) from nurse sharks in the Florida Keys. Journal of the Helminthological Society of Washington, 57, 15–20.Google Scholar
- Caira, J.N. & Ruhnke, T.R. (1090) A new species of Calliobothrium (Tetraphyllidea: Onchobothriidae) from the Whiskery shark, Furgaleus macki, in Australia Journal of Parasitology, 76, 319–324.Google Scholar
- Euzet, L. (1959) Recherches sur les cestodes tétraphyllides des sélaciens des côtes de France. Thése de PhD, Faculté des Sciences, Université de Montpellier, 263 pp.Google Scholar
- Linton, E. (1890) Notes on entozoa of marine fishes. II. Annual Report of the United States Commision of Fish and Fisheries for 1887, 15, 719–889.Google Scholar
- Schmidt, G. (1986) Handbook of tapeworm identification, Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, 675 pp.Google Scholar
- Southwell, T. (1925) A monograph on the Tetraphyllidea. Memoirs of the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, New Series, 2, 1–368.Google Scholar
- Wardle, R.A. & McCleod, J.A. (1952) The zoology of tape-worms. Minneapolis, Minnesota, University of Minnesota Press, 780 pp.Google Scholar
- Wedl, K. (1855) Helminthologische notizen. Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien. Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Klasse. Abteilung I, 16, 371–395.Google Scholar
- Williams, H.H. (1968) The taxonomy, ecology, and host-specificity of some Phyllobothriidae (Cestoda: Tetraphyllidea), a critical revision of Phyllobothrium Beneden, 1849, and comments on some allied genera, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 253, 231–307.Google Scholar