Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T15:44:12.665Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Observations on the taxonomy and biology of Tylenchorhynchus macrurus (Goodey, 1932) Filipjev, 1936 and Tylenchorhynchus icarus sp.nov.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

H. R. Wallace  and
D. N. Greet
H. R. Wallace
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts., England
D. N. Greet
Affiliation:
Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts., England
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The large and small forms of Tylenchorhynchus macrurus are distinguished as separate species. The large form becomes T. icarus and differs from the small form, T. macrurus in the greater number of annules on the female tail, longer stylet and slimmer body. The oxygen consumption of both species is similar when assessed in terms of body surface area. Soil samples from the field indicated that (a) greatest concentrations of T. icarus occurred at about 5 cm. depth, (b) few occurred below 24 cm., the depth of the top soil, and (c) numbers of T. icarus in the top 5 cm. of soil decreased during dry periods and increased after rain. T. icarus migrates to the wet end of a moisture gradient and has maximum mobility in soil at a moisture content corresponding to field capacity and at 20° C. T. icarus survived osmotic pressure equivalent to 1 m urea for 4 days. Their oxygen consumption increased with increasing osmotic pressure but in 1 m urea there was a decline which was even more pronounced in 2 m urea. Of a population of T. icarus 35% survived for 32 weeks in soil with plants. In damp sand at 10° C, oxygen consumption was steady for 32 weeks but after 48 weeks the nematodes were dead. It is suggested that the free-living stages of plant parasitic nematodes have similar migratory habits.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 54 , Issue 1 , February 1964 , pp. 129 - 144
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1964

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

REFERENCES

Allen, M. W. (1955). A review of the nematode genus Tylenchorhynchus. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool. 61, 129–66.Google Scholar
Blake, C. D. (1961). Importance of osmotic potential as a component of the total potential of the soil water on the movement of nematodes. Nature, Lond., 192, 144–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blake, C. D. (1962). Some observations on the orientation of Ditylenchus dipsaci and invasion of oat seedlings. Nematologica, 8, 177–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brand, T. von (1960). Influence of size, mobility, starvation and age on metabolic rate. In Nematology, Fundamentals and Recent Advances with Emphasis on Plant Parasitic and Soil Forms, chapter 33. Edited by Sasser, J. N. and Jenkins., W. R.Chapel, Hill: University North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Christie, J. R. & Perry, V. G. (1951). Removing nematodes from soil. Proc. helm. Soc. Wash. 18, 106–8.Google Scholar
Filipjev, I. N. (1936). On the classification of the Tylenchinae. Proc. helm. Soc. Wash. 3, 80–2.Google Scholar
Goodey, T. (1932). The genus Anguillulina Gerv. & v. Ben., 1859, vel Tylenchus Bastian, 1865. J. Helminth. 10, 75–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hesling, J. J. & Wallace, H. R. (1961). Observations on the biology of chrysanthemum eelworm Aphelenchoides ritzema-bosi (Schwartz) Steiner in florists' chrysanthemum. I. Spread of eelworm infestation. Ann. appl. Biol. 49, 195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holter, H. & Linderstrom-Lang, K. (1943). On the cartesian diver. C.R. Lab. Carlsberg, 24, 333–478.Google Scholar
Seinhorst, J. W. (1956). Een eenvoudige methode voor het afscheiden van aaltjes uit grond. Tijdschr. Plziekt. 61, 188–90.Google Scholar
Steiner, G. (1914). Freilebende Nematoden aus der Schweiz. I. Arch. Hydrobiol. (Plankt.), 9, 259–76.Google Scholar
Wallace, H. R. (1958 a). Movement of eelworms. I. The influence of pore size and moisture content of the soil on the migration of larvae of the beet eelworm, Heterodera schachtii Schmidt. Ann. appl. Biol. 46, 74–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, H. R. (1958 b). Movement of eelworms. II. A comparative study of the movement in soil of Heterodera schachtii Schmidt and of Ditylenchus dipsaci (Kühn) Filipjev. Ann. appl. Biol. 46, 86–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, H. R. (1960). Movement of eelworms. VI. The influence of soil type, moisture gradients and host plant roots on the migration of the potato-root eelworm Heterodera rostochiensis Wollenweber. Ann. appl. Biol. 48, 107–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, H. R. (1961). The orientation of Ditylenchus dipsaci to physical stimuli. Nematologica, 6, 222–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar