Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:07:08.490Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

CONSTANCY OF STYLOSTOME FORM IN TWO WATER MITE SPECIES

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Carmine A. Lanciani  and
Bruce P. Smith
Carmine A. Lanciani
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA 3261 1 and Department of Biology, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada E3B 6E1
Bruce P. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA 3261 1 and Department of Biology, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada E3B 6E1
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent studies have suggested that the stylostome of parasitic larval water mites of the genus Arrenurus Dugès is a product of the mite, not the host. We tested this hypothesis by comparing stylostomes of the similar species Arrenurus novimarshallae Wilson and Arrenurus pseudotenuicollis Wilson formed in each of two mosquito species, Anopheles crucians Wiedemann and Anopheles quadrimaculatus Say: if the stylostome is produced by the mite, not the host, then stylostome form is likely to be constant in different host species parasitized by the mite.

The stylostome of A. pseudotenuicollis is a short, broad, convoluted sac, and stylostomes within the two host species did not differ significantly. The stylostome of A. novimarshallae is a long, thin, convoluted tube, and although it was significantly smaller in A. quadrimaculatus than in A. crucians, its form remained constant. Dark pigment deposits around the stylostome’s attachment point and along the tube may represent host defense that reduces stylostome growth in A. quadrimaculatus. Laboratory-reared A. novimarshallae often die after a brief engorgement period on A. quadrimaculatus but not on A. crucians.

Thus, the stylostome of these two mite species has a consistent form in each of two host species, an observation compatible with the hypothesis that the stylostome is a product of the mite. In addition, the ease of distinguishing these two mite species on the basis of stylostome morphology attests to the potential value of the stylostome as a taxonomic character.

Résumé

Des études récentes ont permis de suggérer que la stylostome des larves de mites d’eau parasitiques du genre Arrenurus Dugès est un produit de l’acarien plutôt que de l’hôte. Nous avons testé cette hypothèse en comparant les stylostomes des espèces similaires Arrenurus novimarshallae Wilson et Arrenurus pseudotenuicollis Wilson, formés dans deux espèces de moustiques, Anopheles crucians Wiedemann et Anopheles quadrimaculatus Say : si le stylostome est produit par l’acarien, la forme du stylostome devrait être constante dans différentes espèces d’hôtes parasitées par la même espèce de mite.

Le stylostome de A. pseudotenuicollis est un sac court, large, convoluté; les stylostomes formés chez les deux espèces d’hôtes étaient sans différence significative. Le stylostome de A. novimarshallae est un tube long, mince, convoluté, et quoique significativement plus petit chez A. quadrimaculatus que chez A. crucians, sa forme est la même. Des dépôts pigmentaires noirs autour du pont d’attache du stylostome et le long du tube pourraient indiquer une réaction de défense de l’hôte réduisant la croissance du stylostome chez A. quadrimaculatus. Les A. novimarshallae élevés au laboratoire meurent souvent après un bref engorgement chez A. quadrimaculatus mais pas chez A. crucians.

Ainsi, le stylostome de ces deux espèces de mite a une forme semblable chez deux espèces de moustiques, observation qui est compatible avec l’hypothèse voulant que le stylostome est produit par l’acarien. De plus, la facilité de distinction entre les deux espèces d’acariens d’après la morphologie du stylostome atteste de la valeur taxonomique de ce trait.

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 121 , Issue 6 , June 1989 , pp. 439 - 443
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Åbro, A. 1979. Attachment and feeding devices of water-mite larvae (Arrenurus spp.) parasitic on damselflies (Odonata, Zygoptera). Zool. Ser. 8: 221–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Åbro, A. 1982. The effects of parasitic water mite larvae (Arrenurus spp.) on zygopteran imagoes (Odonata). J. Invert. Pathol. 39: 373–381.Google Scholar
Åbro, A. 1984. The initial stylostome formation by parasitic larvae of the watermite genus Arrenurus on zygopteran imagines. Acarologia 25: 33–46.Google Scholar
Davids, C. 1973. The water mite Hydrachna conjecta Koenike, 1895 (Acari, Hydrachnellae), bionomics and relation to species of Corixidae (Hemiptera). Neth. J. Zool. 23: 363–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hass, T., Roberts, L.W., Hildebrandt, P., and Cavanaugh, D.C.. 1977. Stylostome formation by Leptotrombidium mites (Acari: Trombiculidae). J. Parasitol. 64: 712–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanciani, C.A. 1979. Detachment of parasitic water mites from the mosquito Anopheles crucians (Diptera: Culicidae). J. Med. Ent. 15: 99–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miyazaki, I. 1936. Über das Saugorgan von zwei Arten Wassermilbenlarven. Annot. Zool. Jpn. 15: 306–308.Google Scholar
Mullen, G.R. 1974. The taxonomy and bionomics of aquatic mites (Acarina: Hydrachnellae) parasitic on mosquitoes in North America. Doctoral Dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York. 263 pp.Google Scholar
Pflügfelder, O. 1970. Schadwirkungen der Arrenurus-Larven (Acari, Hydrachnellae) am Flügel der Libelle Sympetrum meridionale Selys und S. fonscolombei Selys (Odonata). Z. Parasitenkd. 34: 171–176.Google Scholar
Redmond, B.L., and Hochberg, J.. 1981. The stylostome of Arrenurus spp. (Acari: Parasitengona) studied with the scanning electron microscope. J. Parasitol. 67: 308–313.Google Scholar
Smith, B.P. 1988. Host–parasite interaction and impact of larval water mites on insects. A. Rev. Ent. 33: 487–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, J.L. 1986. Three new species of water mites of the genus Arrenurus, subgenus Megaluracarus (Acarina: Arrenuridae) from the southeastern United States. J. Tenn. Acad. Sci. 61: 87–90.Google Scholar