| Literature DB >> 21658217 |
Giuseppe Paladini1, Tine Huyse, Andrew P Shinn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Historically, non-native species of Gambusia (Poeciliidae) have been used to control larval stages of the Asian tiger mosquito, Stegomyia albopicta Reinert, Harbach et Kitching, 2004 throughout Italy. The potential utility of indigenous populations of Aphanius fasciatus (Valenciennes) (Teleostei: Cyprinodontidae) as an appropriate alternative biological control is currently being explored. A sub-sample of ten fish collected from Cervia Saline, Italy (salinity 65 ppt; 30°C) to assess their reproductive capability in captivity, harboured a moderate infection of Gyrodactylus von Nordmann, 1832 (Platyhelminthes, Monogenea). A subsequent morphological and molecular study identified this as being a new species.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21658217 PMCID: PMC3135561 DOI: 10.1186/1756-3305-4-100
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Figure 1. a - light micrograph of the opisthaptoral central hook complex showing the hamuli, the dorsal bar and the ventral bar (ventral view); b, c - scanning electron micrographs (SEM) of the marginal hooks; d, e - SEM of the marginal hook sickles; f - light micrograph of a marginal hook sickle; g - light micrograph of the male copulatory organ (MCO) bearing one principal spine and nine small spines in a single row. Scale bars: a = 5 μm; b-g = 3 μm.
Pair-wise genetic distances based on the 5.8S and ITS2 rDNA fragment of Gyrodactylus salinae n. sp. and the Gyrodactylus species showing highest similarity in the BLAST search on GenBank (Tamura-Nei + gamma model)
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | |||||||
| 2. | 0.083 | ||||||
| 3. | 0.135 | 0.139 | |||||
| 4. | 0.086 | 0.088 | 0.113 | ||||
| 5. | 0.097 | 0.076 | 0.121 | 0.048 | |||
| 6. | 0.140 | 0.151 | 0.023 | 0.124 | 0.132 | ||
| 7. | 0.179 | 0.189 | 0.225 | 0.193 | 0.188 | 0.232 | |
| 8. | 0.112 | 0.098 | 0.128 | 0.075 | 0.091 | 0.137 | 0.191 |
Figure 2Drawings of the opisthaptoral hard parts and male copulatory organ (MCO) of . a - opisthaptoral central hook complex; b - MCO; c, d - marginal hook sickles; e - marginal hook sickle of Gyrodactylus rugiensoides Huyse et Volckaert, 2002 from Pomatoschistus minutus (Pallas) collected from Texel, The Netherlands (re-drawn from the paratype 2002.2.14.2); f - a size invariant overlay of the marginal hook sickles of G. salinae n. sp. (broken line) with G. rugiensoides (solid line); g - a size variant overlay of the marginal hook sickles of G. salinae n. sp. (broken line) with G. rugiensoides (solid line). Scale bars: a, b = 5 μm; c-e = 3 μm.
Morphological measurements (mean ± 1 standard deviation followed by the range in parentheses) of Gyrodactylus salinae n. sp. from Aphanius fasciatus (Valenciennes) collected from Cervia Saline, Italy, compared with those of Gyrodactylus rugiensoides Huyse et Volckaert, 2002 from Pomatoschistus minutus (Pallas) collected from Texel, The Netherlands (paratypes acc. nos. BMNH 2002.2.14.2-3)
| Variable | ||
|---|---|---|
| Total body length | 447 ± 63.3 (375-575) | 787.5 (700-875) |
| Total body width | 116 ± 26.7 (88-163) | 159 (155-162.5) |
| Opisthaptor length × width | 75 ± 8.9 (60-88) × 80 ± 5.7 (70-88) | 112.5 (110-115) × 147.5 (145-150) |
| Anterior pharynx bulb length × width | 18.8 ± 3.1 (15.0-24.5) × 22.1 ± 2.4 (19.5-27.2) | 32.9 (30.1-35.7) × 48.3 (46.8-49.7) |
| Posterior pharynx bulb length × width | 8.1 ± 0.7 (6.6-8.8) × 24.6 ± 2.4 (21.8-29.0) | 34.1 (27.7-40.5) × 78.4 (76.5-80.4) |
| MCO length × width | 14.4 ± 2.1 (11.9-18.5) × 12.7 ± 2.7 (10.1-17.6)1 | 14.8 (13.6-15.9) × 15.1 (14.0-16.1) |
| H aperture | 17.9 ± 0.8 (17.0-19.6) | 18.0 (17.5-18.5) |
| H proximal shaft width | 7.0 ± 0.6 (6.3-8.1) | 8.1 (7.6-8.6) |
| H point length | 24.8 ± 0.5 (23.9-25.9) | 29.9 (29.3-30.5) |
| H distal shaft width | 4.1 ± 0.4 (3.2-4.6) | 5.4 (5.3-5.4) |
| H shaft length | 31.9 ± 2.9 (28.2-37.3) | 33.8 (33.5-34.2) |
| H inner curve length | 3.8 ± 0.6 (2.3-4.6) | 3.9 (3.5-4.3) |
| H aperture angle (°) | 36.6 ± 1.2 (33.8-37.9) | 32.5 (30.7-34.4) |
| H point curve angle (°) | 12.2 ± 2.3 (7.4-15.4) | 10.1 (9.4-10.7) |
| Inner H aperture angle (°) | 41.4 ± 1.3 (39.2-43.5) | 38.5 (36.4-40.7) |
| H root length | 16.8 ± 0.9 (14.7-18.3) | 19.4 (19.2-19.7) |
| H total length | 51.7 ± 1.6 (48.7-54.6) | 58.1 (57.9-58.2) |
| DB total length | 20.9 ± 1.7 (18.1-22.9) | 25.6 (23.8-27.4) |
| DB width | 1.9 ± 0.2 (1.6-2.2) | 1.8 (1.7-1.9) |
| DB attachment point length | 9.4 ± 0.4 (8.8-9.9) | 8.7 (8.6-8.7) |
| VB total width | 25.0 ± 1.1 (23.5-26.7) | 26.2 (25.3-27.1) |
| VB total length | 22.5 ± 1.6 (19.2-25.5) | 20.4 (20.4-20.5) |
| VB process-to-mid length | 3.0 ± 0.5 (2.1-4.0) | 2.0 (1.8-2.3) |
| VB median length | 6.2 ± 0.4 (5.6-6.8) | 6.2 (5.9-6.6) |
| VB process length | 2.9 ± 0.4 (2.1-3.5) | 1.2 (1.1-1.3) |
| VB membrane length | 13.2 ± 1.1 (10.7-15.2) | 11.9 (11.8-11.9) |
| MH total length | 26.8 ± 0.6 (25.9-27.6) | 30.7 (30.7-30.8) |
| MH shaft length | 20.8 ± 0.3 (20.2-21.5) | 24.3 (24.1-24.5) |
| MH sickle length | 6.3 ± 0.2 (6.1-6.6) | 6.6 (6.3-6.9) |
| MH sickle proximal width | 4.0 ± 0.2 (3.6-4.4) | 4.3 (4.2-4.3) |
| MH toe length | 1.8 ± 0.1 (1.6-2.0) | 1.7 (1.6-1.7) |
| MH sickle distal width | 3.6 ± 0.2 (3.3-4.0) | 3.7 (3.5-3.9) |
| MH aperture | 5.6 ± 0.2 (5.4-6.0) | 5.7 (5.6-5.7) |
| MH instep/arch height | 0.6 ± 0.1 (0.5-0.7) | 0.5 (0.5-0.6) |
Measurements are provided in micrometres and follow those detailed in Shinn et al. [12], plus three additional measurements of the dorsal bar. Due to the limited number of G. rugiensoides specimens available for study, only the mean and range is presented.
1Based on the measurement of 5 specimens.
Gyrodactylus species parasitising different family members belonging to the order Cyprinodontiformes
| Recorded host species | Host family | References | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fundulidae | [ | ||
| Fundulidae | [ | ||
| Poeciliidae | [ | ||
| Poeciliidae | [ | ||
| Nothobranchiidae | [ | ||
| Cyprinodontidae | [ | ||
| Poeciliidae | [ | ||
| Fundulidae | [ | ||
| Poeciliidae | [ | ||
| Cyprinodontidae | [ | ||
| Poeciliidae | [ | ||
| Goodeidae | [ | ||
| Goodeidae | [ | ||
| Poeciliidae | [ | ||
| Cyprinodontidae | [ | ||
| Cyprinodontidae | [ | ||
| Poeciliidae | [ | ||
| Poeciliidae | [ | ||
| Poeciliidae | [ | ||
| Aplocheilidae | [ | ||
| Cyprinodontidae | current study | ||
| Cyprinodontidae | [ | ||
| Fundulidae | [ | ||
| Fundulidae | [ | ||
| Cyprinodontidae | [ | ||
| Poeciliidae | [ | ||
| Poeciliidae | [ |
* Gyrodactylus avalonia Hanek et Threlfall, 1969 is suspected to be a junior synonym of Gyrodactylus arcuatus Bychowsky, 1933, but until molecular characterisation of G. avalonia is available, this species is considered as valid (J. Lumme and S.D. King, pers. comm.).
Figure 3A size invariant comparison of the marginal hook sickle of . a - Gyrodactylus cyprinodontis Mizelle et Kritsky, 1967; b - overlay of G. salinae n. sp. with G. cyprinodontis (solid line); c - Gyrodactylus hargisi Williams et Rogers, 1971; d - overlay of G. salinae n. sp. with G. hargisi (solid line); e - Gyrodactylus mobilensis Williams et Rogers, 1971; f - overlay of G. salinae n. sp. with G. mobilensis (solid line); g - Gyrodactylus nevadensis Mizelle et Kritsky, 1967; h - overlay of G. salinae n. sp. with G. nevadensis (solid line); i - Gyrodactylus saratogensis Mizelle et Kritsky, 1967; j - overlay of G. salinae n. sp. with G. saratogensis (solid line); k - Gyrodactylus tularosae Kritsky et Stockwell, 2005; l - overlay of G. salinae n. sp. with G. tularosae (solid line). Scale bars = 3 μm.