Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T00:13:33.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Descriptions of flea larvae (Siphonaptera: Hystrichopsyllidae, Ctenophthalmidae, Leptopsyllidae) of the specific parasites of the mountain beaver (Rodentia: Aplodontidae) in North America

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2012

Robert L.C. Pilgrim  and
Terry D. Galloway
Robert L.C. Pilgrim
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand
Terry D. Galloway*
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3T 2N2
*
1 Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The larvae of the four species of primary flea parasites of the mountain beaver, Aplodontia rufa (Rafinesque), are described and illustrated for the first time, and a key to their identification is provided. The larva of Hystrichopsylla schefferi Chapin is very large, with a total body length of more than 10 mm in the late third instar. Its mandible, with a series of marginal teeth along a scoop-shaped tip, is characteristic of members of the formerly recognized subgenus Hystroceras. The larvae of Paratyphloceras oregonensis Ewing and Trichopsylloides oregonensis Ewing are very similar to one another, but the former is much larger, with a total body length of about 8 mm in the late third instar, compared with 5 mm for the latter. These two species can also be separated in all instars on the basis of the setation on the abdominal segments. The larva of Dolichopsyllus stylosus (Baker) is extraordinary. The mandible bears two enormous, tusklike setae on a swollen base, the hypopharynx is a spiny, trilobed structure without setae, and there are five processes on the labial palps instead of the four typical in other species.

Résumé

On trouvera ici la première description des larves de quatre espèces de puces parasites primaires du castor de montagne, Aplodontia rufa (Rafinesque), ainsi que des illustrations et un clef d'identification des espèces. La larve d'Hystrichopsylla schefferi Chapin est très grande et elle atteint plus de 10 mm de longueur vers la fin de son troisième stade. Sa mandibule, qui porte une série de dents marginales à son extrémité en forme de cuiller, est caractéristique des membres de l'ancien sous-genre Hystroceras, maintenant non reconnu. Les larves de Paratyphloceras oregonensis Ewing et de Trichopsylloides oregonensis Ewing sont très semblables, mais la première est beaucoup plus grande avec une longueur totale de 8 mm vers la fin du troisième stade, alors que la seconde atteint seulement 5 mm. Les deux espèces se distinguent aussi à tous les stades par la pilosité de leurs segments abdominaux. La larve de Dolichopsylla stylosus (Baker) est remarquable. La mandibule porte deux soies énormes en forme de crocs fixées sur une base enflée, l'hypopharynx forme une structure trilobée, épineuse, mais glabre et les palpes labiaux portent cinq diverticules au lieu des quatre habituels chez les autres espèces.

[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 139 , Issue 4 , August 2007 , pp. 489 - 509
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 2007

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

Bartkowska, K. 1972. Morfologia larwy Rhadinopsylla (Actenophthalmus) integella J&R (Siphonaptera: Hystrichopsyllidae). Polskie Pismo Entomologie, 42: 535–543.Google Scholar
Carraway, L.N., and Verts, B.J. 1993. Aplodontia rufa. Mammalian Species No. 431. American Society of Mammalogists.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cotton, M.J. 1970. The comparative morphology of some species of flea larvae (Siphonaptera) associated with nests of small mammals. Entomologists' Gazette, 21: 191–204.Google Scholar
Elbel, R.E. 1951. Comparative studies on the larvae of certain species of fleas (Siphonaptera). Journal of Parasitology, 37: 119–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elbel, R.E. 1991. Siphonaptera. In Immature insects, Vol. 2. Edited by Stehr, F.W.. Kendall Hunt Publishing Co., Dubuque, Iowa. pp. 674–689.Google Scholar
Godin, A.M. 1964. A review of the literature on the mountain beaver. US Fish and Wildlife Service Special Scientific Report, Wildlife, 78: 1–33.Google Scholar
Holland, G.P. 1949. The Siphonaptera of Canada. Canada Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin 70.Google Scholar
Holland, G.P. 1985. The fleas of Canada, Alaska and Greenland (Siphonaptera). Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Canada 130.Google Scholar
Hubbard, C.A. 1947. Fleas of western North America: their relation to public health. Iowa State College Press, Ames, Iowa.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, R.E. 1998. Résumé of the Siphonaptera (Insecta) of the world. Journal of Medical Entomology, 35: 377–389.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, R.E., Lewis, J.H., and Maser, C. 1988. The fleas of the Pacific northwest. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, Oregon.Google Scholar
Medvedev, S.G., and Kotti, B.K. 1992. Classification of the family Leptopsyllidae (Siphonaptera). Parazitologiya, 26: 483–496. [In Russian.]Google Scholar
Moser, B.A., Koehler, P.G., and Patterson, R.S. 1991. Separation of cat flea (Siphonaptera: Pulicidae) instars by individual rearing and head width measurements. Journal of Economic Entomology, 84: 922–926.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oudemans, A.C. 1913. Suctoriologisches aus Maulwurfsnestern. Tijdschrift voor Entomologie, 56: 238–280, pl. 8-14.Google Scholar
Pilgrim, R.L.C. 1988. Flea larvae — their morphology in relation to taxonomy, biology and phylogeny. In Proceedings, Symposium: The Results and Perspectives of Further Research of Siphonaptera in Palearct from the Aspect of Their Significance for Practice, 6-11 June 1988. Slovak Entomological Society, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava. pp. 107–116 + 2 pl.Google Scholar
Pilgrim, R.L.C. 1991. External morphology of flea larvae (Siphonaptera) and its significance in taxonomy. Florida Entomologist, 74: 386–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pilgrim, R.L.C. 1992 a. Preparation and examination of flea larvae (Siphonaptera) by light and electron microscopy. Journal of Medical Entomology, 29: 953–959.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pilgrim, R.L.C. 1992 b. Taxonomy of flea larvae. II. Differentiation among lower taxa. In Proceedings of the XIXth International Congress of Entomology, Beijing, 28 June – 4 July 1991. p. 48, Abstract of Section 12S5.Google Scholar
Pilgrim, R.L.C. 1998. Larvae of the genus Notiopsylla (Siphonaptera: Pygiopsyllidae) with a key to their identification. Journal of Medical Entomology, 35: 362–376.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pilgrim, R.L.C., and Galloway, T.D. 2000. Descriptions of flea larvae (Siphonaptera: Ceratophyllidae: Ceratophyllus spp.) found in the nests of swallows (Aves: Passeriformes: Hirundinidae) in North America, north of Mexico. The Canadian Entomologist, 132: 15–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pilgrim, R.L.C., and Galloway, T.D. 2003. Descriptions of flea larvae (Siphonaptera: Ceratophyllidae, Leptopsyllidae) found in nests of the House Martin, Delichon urbica (Aves: Hirundinidae), in Great Britain. Journal of Natural History, 37: 473–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smit, F.G.A.M. 1975. Siphonaptera collected by Dr. J. Martens in Nepal. Senckenbergiana Biologica, 55: 357–398.Google Scholar