Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T09:57:20.576Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Egg size and form as taxonomic criteria in Diphyllobothrium (Cestoda, Pseudophyllidea)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Karin Andersen
Affiliation:
Zoologisk Museum, University of Oslo
Odd Halvorsen
Affiliation:
Institute of Biology and Geology, University of Tromsö

Summary

The size and form (length, width, and length: width ratio) of eggs of Diphyllobothrium dendriticum, D. ditremum and D. laturn vary considerably among individual worms within each species. The size of eggs varies with host species and a decrease in egg size with increasing intensity of infestation is indicated. The egg size of D. laturn increases during the first 10–12 days of egg production. For single worm infections in golden hamsters the mean egg length and width of D. ditremum are significantly smaller than the corresponding means of D. dendriticum and D. latum, while D. latum has significantly wider eggs than D. dendriticum. As taxonomic characteristics, egg size and form may contribute to species delimitation at the population level. For identification at the individual level the best possible accuracy is about 80%. This accuracy is considerably reduced when variation in host species and intensities of infestations are introduced. Scanning electron microscope studies did not reveal any differences among eggs of the three species.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

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

Andersen, K. (1972). Studies of the helminth fauna of Norway. XXIV. The morphology of Diphyllobothrium ditremum (Creplin, 1825) from the golden hamster (Mesocrisetus auratus Waterhouse, 1839) and a comparison with D. dendriticum (Nitzsch, 1824) and D.latum(L. 1758) from the same final host. Norwegian Journal of Zoology 20, 255–64.Google Scholar
Delyamure, S. L. (1955). Helminthfauna of marine mammals. In Ecology and Phylogeny (ed. Skrjabin, K. I.). Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Jerusalem 1968.Google Scholar
Hilliard, D. K. (1960). Studies on the helminth fauna of Alaska. XXXVIII. The taxonomic significance of eggs and coracidia of some diphyllobothriid cestodes. Journal of Paraeitology 46, 703–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilliard, D. K. (1972). Studies on the helminth fauna of Alaska. LI. Observation on eggshell formation in some diphyllobothriid cestodes. Canadian Journal of Zoology 50, 585–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuhlow, F. (1953). Beiträge zur Entwicklung und Systematik heimischer. Diphyllobothrium Arten. Zeitschrift für Tropenmedizin und Parasitologie 4, 203–34.Google Scholar
Magath, T. B. (1919). The eggs of Diphyllobothrium latum. Journal of the American Medical Association 73, 85–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magath, T. B. (1929). Experimental studies on Diphyllobothrium latum. American Journal of Tropical Medicine 9, 1748.Google Scholar
Markowski, S. (1949). On the species of Diphyllobothrium occurring in birds and their relation to man and other hosts. Journal of Helminthology 23, 107–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, M. C. (1966). Evaluation of criteria for the recognition of Diphyllobothrium species. Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 85, 8999.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rausch, R. L. & Hilliard, D. K. (1970). Studies on the helminth fauna of Alaska. XXIX. The occurrence of Diphyllobothrium latum (Linnaeus, 1758) (Cestoda: Diphyllobothriidae) in Alaska, with notes on other species. Canadian Journal of Zoology 48, 1201–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stunkard, H. W. (1965). Variation and criteria of generic and specific determination of Diphyllobothriid cestodes. Journal of Helminthology 39, 281–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vergeer, T. (1936). The eggs and the coracidia of Diphyllobothrium latum. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts and Letters 21, 715–26.Google Scholar
Vik, R. (1964). The genus Diphyllobothrium. An example of inter-dependence in systematics and experimental biology. Experimental Paraeitology 15, 361–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wardle, R. A. (1935). Fish-tapeworm. Bulletin of the Biological Board of Canada 45, 25.Google Scholar
Wardle, R. A. & McLeod, J. A. (1952). The Zoology of Tapeworms. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar