Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T23:37:29.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The life-cycle of Prosorhynchus crucibulum (Rudolphi, 1819) Odhner, 1905, and a comparison of its cercaria with that of Prosorhynchus squamatus Odhner, 1905

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

R. A. Matthews
R. A. Matthews
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, Cards.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The adult of P. crucibulum is redescribed to form a basis for comparison with the cercaria and metacercaria. Particular emphasis is given to the structure and function of the rhynchus, digestive system and reproductive system. Some features, notably prepharyngeal glands and spematophores, have not previously been recorded in this species.

The sporocyst and cercaria which were found in Mytilus edulis are described for the first time. Out of 6907 mussels examined from Borth Rocks, Cardigan Bay, 0·26% were infected with P. crucibulum and 0·06 % with P. squamatus. The cercaria of the latter is redescribed on a comparative basis with that of P. crucibulum, to avoid confusion. The two cercariae are clearly distinguished by three features – flame-cell formula, shape of the excretory vesicle, and structure of the tail stem (this being bilobed in P. crucibulum and trilobed in P. squamatus). The significance of the two types of tail in securing attachment to the second intermediate host is discussed.

Metacercariae of P. crucibulum were obtained experimentally in ‘O’ group specimens of Scophthalmus maximus. Three other species of fish, namely Limanda limanda, Onus mustelus and Gobius minutus were also successfully infected. The metacercariae did not develop in the following fish: S. rhombus, Pleuronectes platessa, Cottus bubalis and Blennius pholis. Possible mechanisms which might account for host specificity within Pleuronectidae and Scophthalmus are suggested.

The development of the metacercaria in the connective tissues and musculature of S. maximus was followed over a period of 10 months. Within 1 month of infection the hyaline cyst of parasitic origin breaks down, enabling the parasite to feed directly on the host tissues. This feature is thought to account for the advanced development of the metacercaria, which 1 month after infection could clearly be identified with the adult on the basis of comparative morphology, and at 2 months resembles the adult in every respect except the development of the vitellaria. Egg production only occurs within the intestine of Conger conger, the definitive host.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 66 , Issue 1 , February 1973 , pp. 133 - 164
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1973

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

Barry, J. M., & O'Rourke, F. J., (1959). Species specificity of fish mucus. Nature, London, no. 4704, 2039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bayliss, H. A., & Idris Jones, E., (1933). Records of parasitic worms from marine fishes at Plymouth. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 18, 627–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinkmann, A. Jr. (1957). Fish trematodes from Norwegian waters. IIa. The Norwegian species of the orders Aspidogastrea and Digenea (Gasterostomata). Universitetet i Bergen. Årbok, 4, 29 pp.Google Scholar
Burton, R. B., (1967). Fine structure of the reproductive system of a frog lung fluke. I. Mehlis' gland and associated ducts. Journal of Parasitology 53, 540–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chubrik, C. M., (1952). On the life cycle of the fish trematode Prosorhynchus squamatus Odhner, 1905. Compte rendu de l'Académie des Sciences de l'U.R.S.S. 85, 2.Google Scholar
Clegg, J. A., (1965). Secretion of lipoprotein by Mehlis' gland in Fasciola hepatica. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 118, 969–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cole, H. A., (1935). On some larval trematodes parasites of the mussel (Mytilus edulis) and the cockle (Cardium edule). Parasitology 27, 276–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dannevig, E. H., (1955). Tidsskrift for Hermetikindustri, p. 121.Google Scholar
Dollfus, R. P., (1953). Aperçu général sur l'histoire naturelle des parasites animaux de la morue atlante-arctique Gadus callariae L. (= morhua L.). Paris, 423 pp.Google Scholar
Dubois, G., (1944). A propos de la specificité parasitaire des Strigeida. Bulletin de la Société neuchateloise des Sciences naturelles, p. 69.Google Scholar
Giard, A., (1874). Sur l'enoystment du Bucephalus haimeanus. Comptes rendus hebdomadaire des séances de l'Acádemie des Sciences 79, 485–7.Google Scholar
Hopkins, S. H., (1954). The American species of trematode confused with Bucephalus (Bucephalopsis) haimeanus. Parasitology 44, 333–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hunter, G. W., & Hamilton, J. M., (1941). Studies on host parasite reactions to larval parasites. IV. The cyst of Uvulifera ambloplitis (Hughes). Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 60, 498–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaitschikov, I. M., (1928). Zur Kenntnis der parasitischen Würmer einiger Gruppen von Wirbeltieren der russischen Arktis. [In Russian.] Trucdy Morskogo nauchnogo instituta 3, 5–79.Google Scholar
James, B. L., Bowers, E. A., & Richards, J. G., (1966). The ultrastracture of the daughter sporocyst of Cercaria bucephalopsis haimeana Lacaze-Duthiers, 1854 (Digenea: Bucephalidae) from the edible cockle, Cardium edule L. Parasitology 56, 753–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johri, L. M., & Smyth, J. D., (1956). A histochemical approach to the study of helminth morphology. Parasitology 46, 107–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, D. O., (1943). The anatomy of three digenetic trematodes, Skrjabiniella aculeatus (Odhner), Lecithochirium rufoviride (Rud.) and Sterrhurus fusiformis (Lühe) from Conger conger (Linn.) Parasitology 35, 40–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kniskern, V. B., (1950). Rhipidocotyle septpapillata Krull, 1934 (Trematoda); the cercaria and notes on the life history. Journal of Parasitology 36, 155–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kniskern, V. B., (1952). Studies on the trematode family Bucephalidae Roche, 1907. 2. The life history of Rhipidocotyle septpapillata Krull, 1934. Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 71, 317–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krull, W. H., (1934). Some observations on the cercaria and redia of a species of Clinostomum. Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 1, 34–5.Google Scholar
Lebour, M. V., (1908). Fish trematodes of the Northumberland coast. I. Report of the Northumbrian Sea Fisheries Committee 1907, 23–67.Google Scholar
Linton, E., (1940). Trematodes from fishes mainly from the Woods Hole region Massachusetts. United States National Museum 88, 1–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liston, J., Peters, J., & Stern, J. A., (1960). Parasites in summer-caught Pacific Rockfishes. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Special Scientific Report, Fisheries no. 352, 10 pp.Google Scholar
McManus, J. F. A., (1946). Journal of Pathology and Bacteriology 58, 93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manter, H. W., (1931). Some digenetic trematodes of marine fishes of Beaufort, North Carolina. Parasitology 23, 396–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, R. A., (1968). Studies on the helminth parasites of some marine (teleost) fishes. Ph.D. Thesis, University College of Wales, Aberystwyth.Google Scholar
Nicoll, W., (1910). On the entozoa of fishes from the Firth of Clyde. Parasitology 3, 322–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicoll, W., (1914). Trematode parasites of fishes in the English Channel. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, N.S. 10, 466–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odhner, T., (1905). Die Trematoden des arkitschen Gebietes. Fauna Arctica 4, 289–372.Google Scholar
Olsson, P., (1876). Bidrag till Skandinaviens helminthfauna. I. Kungliga Svenska vetenskaps akademiens handlingar 14, 35.Google Scholar
Pearse, A. G. E., (1961). Histochemistry, Theoretical and Applied, 2nd ed.London: J. and A. Churchill Limited, 998 pp.Google Scholar
Rebecq, J., & Leray, C., (1961). Metacercaires de Prosorhynchus crucibulum (Rudolphi 1819) (Trematoda, Bueephalidae) chez deux Gobiesocidae (Teleosteens). Vie Milieu 12, 378–80.Google Scholar
Rees, G., (1970). Some helminth parasites of fishes of Bermuda and an account of the attachment organ of Alcicornis carangis MacCallum, 1917 (Digenea: Bueephalidae). Parasitology 60, 195–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, J. D., & Thacker, G. T., (1969). New intergeneric cross within the Pleuronectidae dab × flounder. Nature, London 221, 484–486.Google Scholar
Rudolphi, C. A., (1819). Entozoorum synopsis cui accedunt mantessa duplex et indices locupletissimi. Berolini. 811 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shulman, S. S., & Shulman-Albova, R. E., (1953). Parasites of Fishes of the White Sea. An S.S.S.R.Google Scholar
Siebold, C. T. von, (1848). Lehrbuch der vergleichenden anatomie der wirbellosen Thiere. Berlin.Google Scholar
Smyth, J. D., (1962). Introduction to Animal Parasitology. London: English University Press.Google Scholar
Sproston, M. G., (1939). Notes sur la faune parasitaire des poissons à Roscoff. Travaux de la station biologique de Roscoff 16, 1–28.Google Scholar
Swift, D. R., (1970). Some aspects of fish farming in the British Isles. Veterinary Record 87, 522–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wagener, G. R., (1858). Enthelminthica 6. Ueber Distoma Campanula (Gasterostoma fimbriatum Siebold) Duj. und Monostoma bipartitum Wedl. Archiv für Naturgeschichte II, 24, 250–6.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. A., (1968). The hatching mechanism of the egg of Fasciola hepatica L. Parasitology 58, 79–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woodhead, A. E., (1929). Life history studies on the trematode family, Bucephalidae. Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 48, 256–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodhead, A. E., (1930). Life history studies on the trematode family Bucephalidae. II. Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 49, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamaguti, S., (1958). Systema Helminthum. 1. The Digenetic Trematodes of Vertebrates. London: Interscience Publishers Limited. 1575 pp.Google Scholar
Ziegler, H. E., (1883). Bucephalus und Gasterostomum. Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Zoologie 39, 537–71.Google Scholar