Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T10:49:59.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The reproductive habits and sex-determination of the nematode Rhabditis pellio Bütschli, with a note on its taxonomy and nomenclature

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

D. A. T. New
D. A. T. New
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology and Comparative Anatomy, University of Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The nematode Rhabditis pellio Bütschli may be cultured indefinitely on earthworm extract.

2. Although the females of this nematode are usually capable of parthenogenetic reproduction, males are produced in the offspring only if copulation has taken place.

3. Occasionally non-parthenogenetic generations appear but these do not represent a separate species.

4. An explanation is given for the sex ratio found under natural conditions and it is suggested that sex-determination works on a chromosomal arrangement of XO = male and XX = female.

5. The nematode named R. terrestris Stephenson 1942 is probably the same as that named R. pellio Bütschli by Johnson 1913.

6. The nomenclature of R. pellio Bütschli is discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 43 , Issue 1-2 , May 1953 , pp. 94 - 101
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1953

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

Chitwood, B. G. & Chitwood, M. B. (1950). An Introduction to Nematology. Washington, D.C., U.S.A.Google Scholar
Dougherty, E. C. & Calhoun, H. G. (1948). Experiences in culturing Rhabditis pellio and related soil nematodes. Proc. Helm. Soc. Wash. 15, 55.Google Scholar
Dougherty, E. C. & Nigon, V. (1949). Reproductive patterns and attempts at crossing Rhabditis elegans Maupas 1900 and R. briggsae Dougherty & Nigon 1949. J. Exp. Zool. 112, 485.Google Scholar
Goodey, T. (1951). Soil and Freshwater Nematodes. London: Methuen and Co. Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyman, L. H. (1951). The Invertebrates, vol. III. London: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Johnson, G. E. (1913). On the nematodes of the common earthworm. Quart. J. Micr. Sci. 58, 605.Google Scholar
Maupas, E. (1900). Modes et Formes de Reproduction des Nematodes. Arch. Zool. exp. gén. 8, 463.Google Scholar
Otter, G. W. (1933). On the biology and life history of Rhabditis pellio (Nematoda). Parasitology, 25, 296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potts, F. A. (1910). Notes on the free-living nematodes. Quart. J. Micr. Sci. 55, 433.Google Scholar
Stephenson, W. (1942 a). On the culturing of Rhabditis terrestris n.sp. Parasitology, 34, 246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephenson, W. (1942 b). The effect of variations in osmotic pressure upon a free-living soil nematode. Parasitology, 34, 253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephenson, W. (1944). The effect of certain inorganic chloride solutions upon the movement of a soil nematode (Rhabditis terrestris Stephenson) and upon its bodily size. Parasitology, 35, 167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephenson, W. (1945). The effects of acids on a soil nematode. Parasitology, 36, 158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar