Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T02:24:48.828Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A new genus of caryophyllidean tapeworms (Cestoda) from Mystus catfishes (Bagridae) in India: cleaning up taxonomic chaos

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 April 2022

T. Scholz
Affiliation:
Institute of Parasitology, Biology Centre of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic & Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, Branišovská 31, 370 05 České Budějovice, Czech Republic
R. Biswas
Affiliation:
Helminthology Laboratory & Molecular Taxonomy Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Burdwan, Golapbag, Burdwan 713104, India
B.K. Patra
Affiliation:
Helminthology Laboratory & Molecular Taxonomy Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Burdwan, Golapbag, Burdwan 713104, India
A. Ash*
Affiliation:
Helminthology Laboratory & Molecular Taxonomy Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Burdwan, Golapbag, Burdwan 713104, India
*
Author for correspondence: A. Ash, E-mail: anirbanash@gmail.com

Abstract

A new genus, Mystocestus, is proposed to accommodate a new species, Mystocestus anindoi n. g., n. sp. from Mystus vittatus (Bloch) (type host) in West Bengal and Mystus cavasius (Hamilton) (Siluriformes: Bagridae) in Maharashtra, India. The new genus is most similar to Lucknowia Gupta, 1961 in the shape of the body, which is elongate, slightly tapering towards the anterior end, and scolex, which is digitiform, but differs in the shape of the ovary, which is H-shaped (vs. inverted A-shaped in Lucknowia), the absence of a seminal receptacle (present in Lucknowia) and exclusively cortical vitelline follicles (vs. some follicles in the medulla in the latter genus). Molecular data support the erection of the new genus and place it close to Bovienia Fuhrmann, 1931, species of which can be easily distinguished by exclusively lateral vitelline follicles (lateral and median in the new genus), the presence of a seminal receptacle (absent in Mystocestus) and scolex shape (digitiform, with blunt or slightly concave anterior edge in the new genus vs. small, unspecialized or spatulate in Bovienia). The convoluted taxonomy of tapeworms placed in Mystoides Mathur, 1992 is critically reviewed to clean up taxonomic chaos in Indo-Malayan caryophyllideans. Mystoides was erected in an unpublished PhD thesis and thus its generic name becomes unavailable and also, its type species is conspecific with Lucknowia fossilisi Gupta, 1961 from the stinging catfish, Heteropneustes fossilis (Bloch). Other species of this genus are also conspecific with L. fossilisi. In addition, specific names of most of these taxa are unavailable because they were described in unpublished theses or conference abstracts. Based on recent revisions of Indo-Malayan caryophyllideans, the following nine genera with 15 species are considered valid (numbers of species of individual genera are provided in parentheses): Bovienia (3), Djombangia (1), Lucknowia (2), Lytocestus (2), Mystocestus (1), Pseudocaryophyllaeus (2) (all family Lytocestidae); Adenoscolex (1), Lobulovarium (2), Paracaryophyllaeus (1) (all family Caryophyllaeidae).

Type
Research Paper
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

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.)

Footnotes

These authors contributed equally.

References

Ash, A, Scholz, T, de Chambrier, A, Brabec, J, Oros, M, Kar, PK, Chavan, S and Mariaux, J (2012) Revision of Gangesia (Cestoda: Proteocephalidea) in the Indomalayan region: morphology, molecules and surface ultrastructure. PLoS One 7(10), e46421.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ash, A, Scholz, T, Oros, M and Kar, PK (2011a) Tapeworms (Cestoda: Caryophyllidea), parasites of Clarias batrachus (Pisces: Siluriformes) in the Indomalayan region. Journal of Parasitology 97, 435459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ash, A, Scholz, T, Oros, M, Levron, C and Kar, PK (2011b) Cestodes (Caryophyllidea) of the stinging catfish Heteropneustes fossilis (Siluroformes: Heteropneustidae) from Asia. Journal of Parasitology 97, 899907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caira, JN and Jensen, K (Eds) (2017) Planetary biodiversity inventory (2008–2017): tapeworms from vertebrate bowels of the earth. Lawrence, Kansas, The University of Kansas, Natural History Museum.Google Scholar
Caira, JN, Jensen, K and Barbeau, E (Eds) (2022) Global cestode database. Available at www.tapewormdb.uconn.edu (1/2022) (accessed 14 January 2022).Google Scholar
Chervy, L (2009) Unified terminology for cestode microtriches: a proposal from the international workshops on cestode systematics in 2002–2008. Folia Parasitologica 56, 199230.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Froese, R and Pauly, D (Eds) (2021) FishBase. Available at www.fishbase.org, version (8/2021) (accessed 14 January 2022).Google Scholar
Gupta, SP (1961) Caryophyllaeids (Cestoda) from freshwater fishes of India. Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 28, 3850.Google Scholar
ICZN (1999) International code of zoological nomenclature. 4th ed. London, The International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature. p. 306.Google Scholar
ICZN (2012) International code of zoological nomenclature. Amendment of articles 8, 9, 10, 21 and 78 of the international code of zoological Nomenclature to expand and refine methods of publication. ZooKeys 219, 110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuchta, R and Caira, JN (2010) Three new species of Echinobothrium (Cestoda: Diphyllidea) from Indo-Pacific stingrays of the genus Pastinachus. Folia Parasitologica 57, 185196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuchta, R and Scholz, T (2007) Diversity and distribution of fish tapeworms of the order “Bothriocephalidea” (Eucestoda). Parassitologia 49, 129146.Google Scholar
Mackiewicz, JS (1972) Caryophyllidea (Cestoidea): a review. Experimental Parasitology 34, 417512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackiewicz, JS (1994) Order Caryophyllidea van Beneden in Carus, 1863. pp. 2143 in Khalil, LF, Jones, A and Bray, RA (Eds) Keys to the cestode parasites of vertebrates. Wallingford, CAB International.Google Scholar
Mathur, N (1992) Morphotaxonomy of piscian cestodes and their ecological study in Heteropneustes fossilis (Bloch). PhD thesis, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, India.Google Scholar
Mathur, N, Srivastav, AK and Narayan, A (2014) Study of an unsegmented cestode from the fish Mystus aor (Ham.) from Bundelkhand region of Uttar Pradesh. Research Journal of Biological Sciences India, Flora and Fauna 20, 291294.Google Scholar
Narayan, A and Singh, D (2017) Morpho-taxonomic study of an interesting cestode, Mystoides chhaviensis n. species of Channa punctatus (Bloch) from Parichha Dam district Jhansi Uttar Pradesh India. International Journal of Global Science Research 4, 543546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narayan, A and Yadav, RK (2017) Morpho-taxonomy study of an interesting cestode, Mystoides muraiensis n. sp. of Heteropneustes fossilis (Bloch) from Central India. MSc thesis, pp. 812 in State Level Seminar on Recent Trends in Zoology, Newasa, India.Google Scholar
Olson, PD, Littlewood, DTJ, Bray, RA and Mariaux, J (2001) Interrelationships and evolution of the tapeworms (Platyhelminthes: Cestoda). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 19, 443467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oros, M, Ash, A, Brabec, J, Kar, PK and Scholz, T (2012) A new monozoic tapeworm, Lobulovarium longiovatum n. g., n. sp. (Cestoda: Caryophyllidea), from barbs Puntius spp. (Teleostei: Cyprinidae) in the Indomalayan region. Systematic Parasitology 83, 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pathak, A (2002) Studies on the morphology, taxonomy and ecology of piscian cestode parasites of district Jalaun. PhD thesis, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, India.Google Scholar
Sahu, VK (2007) Faunastic survey of piscian tapeworms of Bundelkhand region of Madhya Pradesh. PhD thesis, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, India.Google Scholar
Scholz, T and Kuchta, R (2017) A digest of fish tapeworms. Vie et Milieu 67, 4358.Google Scholar
Scholz, T and Oros, M (2017) Caryophyllidea van Beneden in Carus, 1863. pp. 4764 in Caira, JN and Jensen, K (Eds) Planetary biodiversity inventory (2008–2017): tapeworms from vertebrate bowels of the earth. Special Publication No. 25. Lawrence, Kansas, University of Kansas, Natural History Museum.Google Scholar
Scholz, T, Waeschenbach, A, Oros, A, Brabec, J and Littlewood, DTJ (2021) Phylogenetic reconstruction of early diverging tapeworms (Cestoda: Caryophyllidea) reveals ancient radiations in vertebrate hosts and biogeographic regions. International Journal for Parasitology 51, 263277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Singh, R (2009) Morphotaxonomy of piscian cestodes and their ecological study in Channa marulius (Ham.). PhD thesis, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh, India.Google Scholar
Singh, NK (2011a) Studies on morphology and taxonomy of certain piscian cestodes of Pratapgarh (U.P.), India. PhD thesis, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Avadh University, Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh, India.Google Scholar
Singh, P (2011b) Morphotaxonomical studies of piscian cestodes and their ecological study in Clarias batrachus (Linn.). PhD thesis, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Avadh University, Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh, India.Google Scholar
Srivastav, AK, Singh, AR and Narayan, A (2011) Morphotaxonomic study of a new tapeworm from edible fish Heteropneustes fossilis (Bloch) from district Lalitpur (U.P.) India. Flora and Fauna 17, 153156 (cited after Mathur et al., 2014 and Narayan & Singh, 2017).Google Scholar
Waeschenbach, A, Webster, BL and Littlewood, DTJ (2012) Adding resolution to ordinal level relationships of tapeworms (Platyhelminthes: Cestoda) with large fragments of mtDNA. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 63, 834847.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed