Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T15:19:14.709Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Pentastomid parasites from the Lower Palaeozoic of Sweden

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2011

Dieter Walossek
Affiliation:
Institut für Paläontologie, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität, Nussallee 8, D-53115 Bonn 1, Germany
Klaus J. Müller
Affiliation:
Institut für Paläontologie, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität, Nussallee 8, D-53115 Bonn 1, Germany

Abstract

Small phosphatised fossils from late Cambrian limestones of Västergötland, Sweden, share major external features with larval extant Pentastomida, such as a prominent head with two pairs of stumpy limbs adapted for attachment, and a slender trunk of four portions. Even such details, as paired forehead structures, pores on the inner edges of the head limbs and paired papillae at the rear of the trunk correspond with structures of extant pentastomid larvae. Neither the fossils nor the Recent pentastomids add any additional body segments during growth (segment constancy). Since characters of this kind and in this combination do not occur elsewhere, the fossils are recognised as true Pentastomida. Major differences, such as distinctly divided head limbs, partial occurrence of vestigial trunk limbs, and a different mode of trunk development during growth can be explained as representing merely the plesiomorphic state of characters of Pentastomida, indicating that the fossils are representatives of its stem-group prior to branching into the two Recent lineages. The fossils clearly document the marine origin of the Pentastomida, and that their specific morphology and parasitic life style were already established in the late Cambrian at a high degree of diversification, long before the terrestrialisation of their present final hosts, the tetrapods. General arthropod affinities are recognisable not least in the nature of the limbs, but the morphology of stem- and crown-group pentastomids gives no clues for closer relationship with any of the major (eu)arthropod taxa.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1994

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

Abele, L. G., Kim, W. & Felgenhauer, B. E. 1989. Molecular evidence for inclusion of the Phylum Pentastomida in the Crustacea. MOL BIOL ECOL 6(6), 685–91.Google Scholar
Abele, L. G., Spears, T., Kim, W. & Applegate, M. 1992. Phylogeny of selected maxillopodan and other crustacean taxa based on 18S ribosomal nucleotide sequences: a preliminary analysis. ACTA ZOOL 73(5), 373–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldridge, R. J., Briggs, D. E. G., Clarkson, E. N. K. & Smith, M. P. 1986. The affinities of conodonts—new evidence from the Carboniferous of Edinburgh, Scotland. LETHAIA 19, 279–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ali, J. H. & Riley, J. 1983. Experimental life-cycle studies of Raillietiella gehyrae Bovien, 1927, and Raillietiella frenatus Ali, Riley and Self, 1981: pentastomid parasites of geckos utilising insects as intermediate hosts. PARASITOLOGY 86, 147–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ali, J. H. & Riley, J. 1984. The distribution of cephalic sense organs in four species of Raillietiella (Pentastomida: Cephalobaenida). PARASITOLOGY 90, 411–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, M. L., Bohn, M., HØeg, J. T. & Jensen, P. G. 1990. Cyprid ultrastructure and adult morphology in Ptyascus barnwelli. new species, and P. glaber (Cirripedia: Rhizocephala), parasitic on semiterrestrial crabs. J CRUST BIOL 10(1), 20–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andres, D. 1989. Phosphatisierte Fossilien aus dem unteren Ordoviz von Südschweden. BERLINER GEOWISS ABH (A) 106, 919.Google Scholar
Banaja, A. A., James, L. J. & Riley, J. 1975. An experimental investigation of a direct life-cycle in Reighardia sternae (Diesling, 1864), a pentastomid parasite of the herring gull (Larus argentatus). PARASITOLOGY 71, 493503.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Böckeler, W. 1982. Experimented, licht- und elektronenmikroskopische Untersuchungen zur Parasitologie und Ontogenie von Reighardia sternae (Cephalobaenidae, zugleich ein Beitrag zur systematischen Stellung der Pentastomida. Unpublished habilitation thesis, University of Kiel, pp. 1159.Google Scholar
Böckeler, W. 1984. Embryogenese und ZNS-Differenzierung bei Reighardia sternae, Licht- und elektronenmikroskopische Untersuchungen zur Tagmosis und systematischen Stellung der Pentastomiden. ZOOL JB ANAT 111, 297342.Google Scholar
Boxshall, G. A. & Huys, R. 1989. New Tantulocarid, Stygotantulus stocki, parasitic on harpacticoid copepods, with an analysis of the phylogenetic relationships within the Maxillopoda. J CRUST BIOL 9, 126–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briggs, D. E. G., Clarkson, E. N. K., & Aldridge, R. J. 1983. The conodont animal. LETHAIA 16, 114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Jun-Yuan, Bergström, J., Lindström, M. & Hou, Xianguang 1991. Fossilized Soft-bodied Fauna. The Chengjiang Fauna—Oldest Soft-bodied Fauna on Earth. NATL GEOGRAPHIC RES EXPLOR 7(1) 819.Google Scholar
Conway Morris, S. 1979. The Burgess shale (Middle Cambrian) fauna. ANN REV ECOL SYST 10, 327–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conway Morris, S. 1981. Parasites and the fossil record. PARASITOLOGY 82, 498509.Google Scholar
Esslinger, J. H. 1962a. Development of Porocephalus crotali (Humboldt, 1808) (Pentastomida) in experimental intermediate hosts. J PARASITOL 48, 452–6.Google Scholar
Esslinger, J. H. 1962b. Morphology of the egg and larva of Porocephalus crotali (Pentastomida). J PARASITOL 48(3), 457–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fioroni, P. 1980. The Dorsal organ of Arthropods with special reference to Crustacea Malacostraca—a comparative embryological survey. ZOOL JB ANAT 104, 425–65.Google Scholar
Grygier, M. J. 1984. Comparative morphology and ontogeny of the Ascothoracida, a step toward a phylogeny of the Maxillopoda. Unpublished thesis, University of California, San Diego.Google Scholar
Grygier, M. J. 1987. New records, external and internal anatomy, and systematic position of Hansen's Y-larvae (Crustacea: Maxillopoda: Facetotecta). SARSIA 72, 261–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadley, N. F. 1986. The Arthropod cuticle. SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN 255, 98106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haffner, K. von 1964. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Pentastomida. Der Hakenapparat, die Hakenmuskulatur und die Parapodiallappen von Raillietiella affinis Bouvien, 1927. MITT HAMBURG ZOOL MUS INST, KOSSWIG-FESTSCHRIFT, 51–8.Google Scholar
Haffner, K. von 1971. Das Pentastomidenproblem (Tagmosis, Metamerie, Organisation, Evolution, systematische Stellung). MITT HAMBURG ZOOL MUS INST 67, 53107.Google Scholar
Haffner, K. von 1973. Über die Entwicklung, vergleichende Anatomie und Evolution der Extremitäten von Pentastomiden. Z ZOOL SYST EVOLUT-FORSCH 11, 241–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haffner, K. von 1977. Über die systematische Stellung und die Vorfahren der Pentastomida auf Grund neuer vergleichender Untersuchungen. ZOOL ANZ (JENA) 199(5/6), 353–70.Google Scholar
Haffner, K. von, Sachs, R. & Rack, G. 1967. Das Vorkommen von Stachellarven aus der Familie der Linguatulidae (Pentastomida) in afrikanischen Huftieren und ihr Parasitismus. Z PARASITENKD 29, 329–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haffner, K. von, Rack, G. & Sachs, R. 1969. Verschiedene Vertreter der Familie Linguatulidae (Pentastomida) als Parasiten von Säugetieren der Serengeti (Anatomie, Systematik, Biologie). MITT HAMBURG ZOOL MUS INST 66, 93144.Google Scholar
Haugerud, R. E. 1988. Human pentastomiasis. TIDSKR NOR LÆGEFOREN 1, 2831.Google Scholar
Haugerud, R. E. 1989. Evolution in the Pentastomids. PARASITOLOGY TODAY 5(4), 126–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heymons, R. 1923. Beiträge zur Systematik und Morphologie der Zungenwürmer (Pentastomida). ZOOL ANZ (JENA) 55, 154–67.Google Scholar
Heymons, R. 1926. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Gattung Raillietiella Samb. (Pentastomida). ZOOL ANZ (JENA) 67, 4556.Google Scholar
Heymons, R. 1926/1927. Pentastomida. In Kükenthal, W. (ed.) Handbuch der Zoologie, eine Naturgeschichte der Stämme des Tierreiches 3(1), 69131. Berlin, Leipzig: De Gruyter & Co.Google Scholar
Heymons, R. 1935. Pentastomida. In Dr. H. G. Bronns Klassen und Ordnungen des Tierreichs, 5. Band: Arthropoda, IV. Abteilung: Arachnoidea, 1. Buck Pentastomida, 1267. Leipzig: Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H.Google Scholar
Heymons, R. 1941. Über die Lebensweise der in Krokodilen vorkommenden Pentastomida. SITZUNGSBER GES NATURFORSCH FREUNDE BERLIN JAHRGANG 1940, 253269.Google Scholar
Huys, R. 1991. Tantulocarida (Crustacea: Maxillopoda): A new taxon from the temporary meiobenthos. P.S.Z.N.I.: MAR ECOL 12(1), 134.Google Scholar
Karuppaswamy, S. A. 1977. Occurrence of β-chitin in the cuticle of a Pentastomid Raillietiella gowrii. EXPERIENTIA 33, 735–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindström, M. 1954. 21. Conodonts from the Lowermost Ordovician strata of South-Central Sweden. GEOL FÖREN FÖRHANDL 76(4), 517618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mikulic, D. G., Briggs, D. E. G. & Kluessendorf, J. 1985. A Silurian Soft-Bodies Biota. SCIENCE 228(4700), 715–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moritz, M. 1982. 18. Stamm Pentastomida (sy. Linguatulida, Zungenwürmer). In Gruner, H.-E. (ed.) Lehrbuch der Speziellen Zoologie, Bd. I Wirbellose Tiere, III, 517545. Stuttgart: Fischer.Google Scholar
Müller, K. J. 1979. Phosphatocopine ostracodes with preserved appendages from the Upper Cambrian of Sweden. LETHAIA 12, 127.Google Scholar
Müller, K. J. 1990. 3.11.3. Upper Cambrian ‘Orsten’. In Briggs, D. E. G. & Crowther, P. R. (eds) Palaeobiology, a Synthesis, 274–77. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
Müller, K. J. & Walossek, D. 1985. Skaracarida, a new order of Crustacea from the Upper Cambrian of Västergötland, Sweden. FOSSILS STRATA 17, 165.Google Scholar
Müller, K. J. & Walossek, D. 1986a. Arthropodal larval stages from the Upper Cambrian ‘Orsten’ of Sweden. TRANS R SOC EDINBURGH: EARTH SCI 77, 157–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, K. J. & Walossek, D. 1986b. Martinssonia elongata gen. et sp.n., a crustacean-like euarthropod from the Upper Cambrian ‘Orsten’ of Sweden. ZOOLOGICA SCRIPTA 15(1), 7392.Google Scholar
Müller, K. J. & Walossek, D. 1987. Morphology, ontogeny, and life habit of Agnostus pisiformis from the Upper Cambrian of Sweden. FOSSILS STRATA 19, 1124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, K. J. & Walossek, D. 1988. External morphology and larval development of the Upper Cambrian maxillopod Bredocaris admirabilis. FOSSILS STRATA 23, 170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, K. J. & Walossek, D. 1991. Ein Blick durch das <Orsten>- Fenster in die Arthropodenwelt vor 500 Millionen Jahren. VH DTSCH ZOOL GES 84, 281–94.Google Scholar
Osche, G. 1959. “Arthropodencharactere” bei einem Pentastomiden Embryo (Reighardia sternae). ZOOL ANZ (JENA) 163, 169–78.Google Scholar
Osche, G. 1963. Die Systematische Stellung und Phylogenie der Pentastomida. Z MORPH ÖKOL TIERE 52, 487596.Google Scholar
Pflugfelder, O. 1980. Protarthropoda. In Seidel, F. (ed.) Morphogenese der Tiere, erste Reihe: Deskriptive Morphogenese, Lieferung 4:J—I, 11124. Stuttgart, New York: Fischer.Google Scholar
Repetski, J. E. 1978. A Fish from the Upper Cambrian of North America. SCIENCE 200, 529–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riley, J. 1983. Recent advances in our understanding of pentastomid reproductive biology. PARASITOLOGY 71, 493503.Google Scholar
Riley, J. 1986. The biology of pentastomids. ADV PARASITOL 25, 46128.Google ScholarPubMed
Riley, J. & Banaja, A. A. 1975. Some ultrastructural observations on the integument of a pentastomid. TISSUE AND CELL 7, 3350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riley, J., Banaja, A. A. & James, J. L. 1978. The phylogenetic relationships of the Pentastomida: The case for their inclusion within the Crustacea. INT J PARASITOL 8, 245254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Self, J. T. 1969. Biological Relationships of the Pentastomida; A Bibliography of PARASITOLOGY 24, 63119.Google Scholar
Storch, V. 1984. 37. Pentastomida. In Bereiter-Hahn, J., Matoltsy, A. G. & Richards, K. S. (eds) Biology of the integument, 1, Invertebrates, 709–13. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Storch, V. & Böckeler, W. 1979. Electron Microscopic Observations on the Sensilla of the Pentastomid Reighardia sternae (Diesing, 1864). Z PARASITENKD 60, 7786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storch, V. & Böckeler, W. 1982. Zur Ultrastruktur der Terminalanhänge larvaler Reighardia sternae (Pentastomida). Z PARASITENKD 68, 103–7.Google Scholar
Storch, V. & Jamieson, B. G. M. 1992. Further spermatological evidence for including the Pentastomida (tongue worms) in the Crustacea). INT J PARASITOL 22(1), 95108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, G. & Böckeler, W. 1992. Light and electron microscopical investigations on the feeding mechanism of Reighardia sternae (Pentastomida; Cephalobaenida). ZOOL JB ANAT 122(1), 112.Google Scholar
Walossek, D. 1993. The Upper Cambrian Rehbachiella kinnekultensis Mülller, 1983, and the phylogeny of Branchiopoda and Crustacea. FOSSILS STRATA 32, 1202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walossek, D. & Müller, K. J. 1990. Upper Cambrian stem-lineage crustaceans and their bearing upon the monophyly of Crustacea and the position of Agnostus. LETHAIA 23(4), 409–27.Google Scholar
Walossek, D. & Müller, K. J. 1992. The ‘Alum shale window’— contribution of ‘Orsten’ arthropods to the phylogeny of Crustacea. ACTA ZOOLOGICA 73, 305312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walossek, D. and Szaniawski, H. 1991. Cambrocaris baltica n. gen. n. sp., a possible stemlineage crustacean from the Upper Cambrian of Poland. LETHAIA 24(4), 363378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winch, J. M. & Riley, J. 1986. Studies on the behaviour, and development in fish, of Subtriqueta subtriqueta: a uniquely freeliving pentastomid larva from a crocodilian. PARASITOLOGY 93, 8198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wingstrand, K. G. 1972. Comparative spermatology of a pentastomid Raillietiella hemidactyli and a branchiuran crustacean Argulus foliaceus with a discussion of pentastomid relationships. BIOL SKR K DAN VIDENSK SELSK 19, 172.Google Scholar