Advertisement

Systematic Parasitology

, Volume 65, Issue 1, pp 27–41 | Cite as

Nesippus orientalis Heller, 1868 (Pandaridae: Siphonostomatoida): descriptions of the adult, young and immature females, a first description of the male and aspects of their functional morphology

  • Susan M. Dippenaar
  • Bea P. Jordaan
Article

Abstract

Nesippus orientalis Heller, 1868, a cosmopolitan species found in the mouth and on the gill-arches of a number of shark hosts, is distinguished from other species by the presence of dorsal plates on the fourth thoracic segment. Specimens were collected from various sharks caught in the nets of the Natal Sharks Board, off the coast of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Collected specimens were preserved in 70% ethanol and studied using the wooden slide technique and scanning electron microscopy. Careful examination of adult females revealed features previously not described in detail. Furthermore, some female specimens were still grasping the placoid scales of their hosts. These specimens showed how the maxillipeds are used to clasp the host. Immature, young females and males, some still attached to the young females, were also collected. The males use their maxillipeds, which have a slightly different structure to those of the female, to hold onto the females.

Keywords

Corrugate Surface Plumose Seta Dorsal Plate Parasitic Copepod Frontal Plate 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Natal Sharks Board and Department of Biodiversity at the University of Limpopo (UL) for field and laboratory support, Ms A. Möller (UL) for assistance with SEM observations, Mr R Sandrock (UL) and Mr C Visser (UL) for help with photos and illustrations, Prof. PAS Olivier (UL) for advice regarding the manuscript and the Research and Development Administration (UL) for financial support.

References

  1. Barnard K.H. (1955). South African parasitic Copepoda. Annals of the South African Museum 41:223–312Google Scholar
  2. Benz G.W. (1981). Observations on the attachment scheme of the parasitic copepod Pandarus satyrus (Copepoda: Pandaridae). Journal of Parasitology 67:966–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benz G.W. (1986). Distribution of siphonostomatoid copepods parasitic upon large pelagic sharks in the western North Atlantic. Syllogeus 58:211–219Google Scholar
  4. Benz G.W. (1992). How Pandarus species (Copepoda: Pandaridae) attach to their shark hosts. Journal of Parasitology 78:368–370Google Scholar
  5. Benz G.W., Mollet H.F., Ebert D.A., Davis C.R., Van Sommeran S.R. (2003). Five species of parasitic copepods (Siphonostomatoida) from the body surface of a white shark captured in Morro Bay, California. Pacific Science 57:39–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cressey R.F. (1967a) Revision of the family Pandaridae (Copepoda, Caligoida). Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 121:1–133Google Scholar
  7. Cressey R.F. (1967b) Caligoid copepods parasitic on sharks of the Indian Ocean. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 121:1–21Google Scholar
  8. Cressey R.F. (1970) Copepods parasitic on sharks from the west coast of Florida. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 38:1–30Google Scholar
  9. Cressey R., Boyle H. (1978). A new genus and species of parasitic copepod (Pandaridae) from a unique new shark. Pacific Science 32:25–30Google Scholar
  10. Heller C. (1868) Crustaceen. Reise der Österreichischen Fregatte Novara um die Erde in den Jahren 1857, 1858, 1859. Zoologie 2(3):1–280, pls 1–25Google Scholar
  11. Hewitt G.C. (1967). Some New Zealand parasitic Copepoda of the family Pandaridae. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 1:180–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Humes A.G., Gooding R.U. (1964). A method for studying the external anatomy of copepods. Crustaceana 6:238–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Huys R., Boxshall G.A. (1991). Copepod evolution. London: The Ray Society, London, 468 ppGoogle Scholar
  14. Kabata Z. (1974). Mouth and mode of feeding of Caligidae (Copepoda), parasites of fishes, as determined by light and scanning electron microscopy. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 31:1583–1588Google Scholar
  15. Kabata Z. (1979). Parasitic copepods of British fishes. London, The Ray Society, 468 ppGoogle Scholar
  16. Oldewage W.H. (1993). Three species of piscine parasitic copepods from southern African coastal waters. South African Journal of Zoology 28:113–121Google Scholar
  17. Pillai N.K. (1985). The fauna of India: copepod parasites of marine fishes. Calcutta, Zoological Survey of India, 900 ppGoogle Scholar
  18. Rokicki J., Bychawska D. (1991). Parasitic copepods of Carcharhinidae and Sphyridae (Elasmobranchia) from the Atlantic Ocean. Journal of Natural History 25:1439–1448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Wilson C.B. (1905). New species of parasitic copepods from the Massachusetts coast. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 18:127–132Google Scholar
  20. Wilson C.B. (1907). North American parasitic copepods belonging to the family Caligidae. Parts 3 and 4. A revision of the Pandarinae and the Cecropinae. Proceedings of the United States National Museum 33:323–490Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biodiversity, School of Molecular and Life SciencesUniversity of LimpopoSovengaSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations