Systematic Parasitology

, Volume 94, Issue 2, pp 275–291 | Cite as

A new species of Pseudopandarus Kirtisinghe, 1950 (Copepoda: Siphonostomatoida: Pandaridae) from sharks of the genus Squalus L. in New Caledonian waters



Both sexes of a new species of pandarid copepod are described from sharks of the genus Squalus L. (Squaliformes: Squalidae). Specimens of Pseudopandarus cairae n. sp. were collected from Squalus bucephalus Last, Séret & Pogonoski and S. melanurus Fourmanoir & Rivaton in New Caledonian waters, the first parasitic copepod to be described from either host species. This is the eighth nominal species of Pseudopandarus Kirtisinghe, 1950 and the first to be described from a shark of the order Squaliformes. Pseudopandarus cairae n. sp. is easily distinguished from P. australis Cressey & Simpfendorfer, 1988, P. longus (Gnanamuthu, 1951) Cressey, 1967, and P. pelagicus Rangnekar, 1977 in having the female genital complex concealed beneath an elongate dorsal genital shield with a trilobed posterior margin. It can be distinguished from P. gracilis Kirtisinghe, 1950 and P. scyllii Yamaguti & Yamasu, 1959 by the armature of the leg 4 endopod and by the proportions of the dorsal genital shield. The new species is unique among known species of Pseudopandarus in its possession of only 1 setal element on the distal endopod segment of leg 4. In addition to describing the new species, the host associations of all species of Pseudopandarus are reviewed and observations are made regarding sexual dimorphism and mode of attachment. A key to the species considered valid is provided.


Posterior Margin Distal Segment Outer Margin Setal Element Plumose Seta 
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.



We are grateful to Jean-Lou Justine for collecting the specimens on which this description is based. We thank Rod Bray for collecting comparative material of P. gracilis from South Africa. We are grateful to Rony Huys and Argun Özak for providing insightful comments on early versions of the formal drawings. We also thank Chad Walter for providing reprints and maintaining helpful resources on the World of Copepods Database. JPB is a predoctoral student in the Institute for Biomedical Sciences at the George Washington University. This work is from a dissertation to be presented to the above program in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Ph.D. degree.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All applicable institutional, national and international guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.


  1. Benz, G. W. (1992). How Pandarus species (Copepoda: Pandaridae) attach to their shark hosts. Journal of Parasitology, 78(2), 368–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boxshall, G. A., & Huys, R. (2007). Copepoda of New Caledonia. In: Payri, C. E. & Richer de Forges, B. (Eds), Compendium of Marine Species from New Caledonia. Nouméa, New Caledonia: Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, pp. 259–265.Google Scholar
  3. Compagno, L. J. (1984). Sharks of the world: an annotated and illustrated catalogue of shark species known to date. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization.Google Scholar
  4. Compagno, L. J. V., & Niem, V. H. (1998). Carcharhinidae. Requiem sharks. In: Carpenter, K. E. & Niem, V. H. (Eds), FAO Identification Guide for Fishery Purposes. The Living Marine Resources of the Western Central Pacific. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization, pp. 1312–1360.Google Scholar
  5. Cressey, R. F. (1967a). Revision of the family Pandaridae (Copepoda: Caligoida). Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 121(3570), 1–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cressey, R. F. (1967b). Caligoid copepods parasitic on sharks of the Indian Ocean. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 121(3572), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cressey, R., & Simpfendorfer, C. (1988). Pseudopandarus australis, a new species of pandarid copepod from Australian sharks. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 101(2), 340–345.Google Scholar
  8. Dippenaar, S. M. (2004). Reported siphonostomatoid copepods parasitic on marine fishes of southern Africa. Crustaceana, 77(11), 1281–1328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dippenaar, S. M., & Jordaan, B. P. (2006). 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. Systematic Parasitology, 65, 27–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Dippenaar, S. M., & Jordaan, B. P. (2007). New host and geographical records of siphonostomatoid copepods associated with elasmobranchs off the KwaZulu-Natal coast, South Africa. The Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research, 74(2), 169–175.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Ebert, D. A., & Stehmann M. F. W. (2013). Sharks, batoids, and chimaeras of the North Atlantic. FAO Species Catalogue for Fishery Purposes, No. 7. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization, pp. 1–523.Google Scholar
  12. Froese, R., & D. Pauly (Eds). (2016). FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication., version (01/2016).
  13. Gnanamuthu, C. (1951). New copepod parasites of sharks. Journal of Natural History, 4(48), 1236–1256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Henderson, A. C., Reeve, A. J., & Tang, D. (2013). Parasitic copepods from some northern Indian Ocean elasmobranchs. Marine Biodiversity Records, 6, e44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ingram, A. L., &, Parker, A. R. (2006). The functional morphology and attachment mechanism of pandarid adhesion pads (Crustacea: Copepoda: Pandaridae). Zoologischer Anzeiger, 244(3), 209–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kirtisinghe, P. (1950). Parasitic copepods of fish from Ceylon. III. Parasitology, 40(1–2), 77–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Pillai, N. K. (1985). The fauna of India: Copepod parasites of marine fishes (pp. 164–169). Calcutta: Zoological Survey of India.Google Scholar
  18. Pollerspöck, J., & Straube, N. (2016)., World Wide Web electronic publication, Version 2016.
  19. Poulin, R., Krasnov, B. R., & Mouillot, D. (2011). Host specificity in phylogenetic and geographic space. Trends in Parasitology, 27(8), 355–361.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Rangnekar, P. G. (1977). Two species of copepods from the marine fishes of Bombay. Journal of the University of Bombay, 44(71), 26–34.Google Scholar
  21. Rangnekar, P., & Rangnekar, M. (1972). Copepods parasitic on the fishes of Bombay family Pandaridae I. Journal of the University of Bombay, 41(68), 72–87.Google Scholar
  22. Walter, T. C., & Boxshall, G. (2016). World of Copepods database. Accessed at on 2016-04-07.
  23. Yamaguti, S., & Yamasu, T. (1959). Parasitic copepods from fishes of Japan with descriptions of 26 new species and remarks on two known species. Biological Journal of Okayama University, 5(3–4), 89–165.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Biomedical SciencesGeorge Washington UniversityWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Life SciencesThe Natural History MuseumLondonUK

Personalised recommendations