Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T18:29:16.075Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Note on the Genus Diaphanocephalus (Nematoda: Strongylidae), Parasitic in Reptiles, with a Description of Three New Species

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

R. Daubney
R. Daubney
Affiliation:
Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The genus Diaphanocephalus was erected by Diesing in 1851 to contain certain species included in Rudolphi's Synopsis in the old genus Strongylus. The species in question were Strongylus galeatus Rud., 1819, re-named Diaphanocephalus strongyloides by Diesing, and subsequently indicated as the type-species of the genus; S. costatus; and possible S. viperae Rud., which Diesing listed as a species inquirenda. In deciding upon the necessity for the new genus Diesing seems to have been influenced largely by the characters of the head. His diagnosis shows that he considered the supporting rays of the buccal capsule to be four only in number, regarding two of these as divided each into two distinct processes. Molin (1861) gave an emended diagnosis of Diesing's genus and proposed the new genus Kalicephalus for certain other strongyle parasites in reptiles. It has already been pointed out (Baylis and Daubney) that the generic characters used by Molin are unreliable and that Railliet and Henry (1909) were justified in abolishing Kalicephalus in favour of the older genus, Diaphanocephalus. Recently, Skrjabin (1916) has given a diagnosis of the genus. Through the kindness of Dr H. A. Baylis the writer has been able to examine specimens in the collection of the British Museum (Natural History), and the Wellcome Bureau of Scientific Research. The material examined includes four specimens of the genus Diaphanocephalus.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 1923 , pp. 67 - 74
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1923

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

Baylis, H. A. and Daubney, R.Report on the Parasitic Nematodes in the Collection of the Zoological Survey of India. Mem. Ind. Mus. Calcutta. [In press.]Google Scholar
Diesing, K. M. (1851). Systema Helminthum, Vienna, II. pp. 82, 297–298.Google Scholar
Linstow, O. von (1904). Nematoda in the Collection of the Colombo Museum. Spolia Zeylanica, I. 4, pp. 9–10. PL I, figs. 14–18.Google Scholar
Linstow, O. von (1906). Helminthes from the Collection of the Colombo Museum. Spolia Zeylanica. III. 2, p. 168.Google Scholar
Linstow, O. Von (1908). Recent additions to the Collection of Entozoa in the Indian Museum. Rec. Ind. Mus. Calcutta, II. 1, p. 109.Google Scholar
Molin, R. (1861). Il Sottordino degli Acrofalli, etc. Mem. r. 1st Veneto, IX. (1860), pp. 114–125., 154–161.; Pl. VII, figs. 1–3; PI. VIII, figs. 4–6.Google Scholar
Railliet, A. (1916). Nématodes parasites des Rongeurs. (Review of Hall, M. C., “Nematode Parasites of Mammals of the Orders Rodentia, etc.”) Rec. Méd vét. XCII. p. 521.Google Scholar
Railliet, A. and Henry, A. (1909). Sur la Classification des Strongylidae, II. Ankylostominae. Compt. Bend, Soe. Biol. Paris, LXVI. 4, pp. 168–171.Google Scholar
Rudolphi, C. A. (1819). Enlozoorum Synopsis, Berlin, pp. 37, 647–649.Google Scholar
Skrjabin, K. I. (1916). Parasitic Trematodes and Nematodes collected by the Expedition of Prof. V. Dogiel and I. Sokolov in British East Africa. [No. 4.] English version, pp. 119–120.Google Scholar