Diphascon (Diphascon) ziliense, Lisi, Oscar, Sabella, Giorgio & Pilato, Giovanni, 2014
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.3802.4.3 |
|
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:7CA7E9A1-1398-4544-843A-B4565272D96D |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5621826 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/471FA838-FFDC-891B-FF55-F9E5A10CFCFA |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Diphascon (Diphascon) ziliense |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Diphascon (Diphascon) ziliense sp. nov.
( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 A – E )
Type locality. Sicily, Caronia, by the side of Zilio Lake (37° 57′N, 14° 25′E; 1069 m a.s.l.).
Material examined. Caronia, by the side of Zilio Lake: holotype (slide No. 5500) and 1 paratype (slide No. 5499) in a moss sample collected by Mr. Angelo Zappalà, 29.5.1989.
Specific diagnosis. Cuticle with small tubercles but without gibbosities, eye spots absent; bucco-pharyngeal apparatus of the Diphascon type; pharyngeal bulb with two rod-shaped macroplacoids and a septulum; claws of the Hypsibius type, accessory points extremely thin, almost invisible; lunules present; a cuticular bar present near the internal claw on the first three pairs of legs; two short cuticular bars present on the hind legs (one near the base of the anterior claw and another between the anterior and the posterior claw).
Description of the holotype. Body length, 286 µm, colourless; eye spots absent; cuticle with small tubercles (<1.9 µm in diameter) more evident on the dorsal and lateral surface of the body ( Fig. 3A View FIGURE 3 A – E ), and also present, although less visible, on the legs. Bucco-pharyngeal apparatus of the Diphascon type: with a rigid buccal tube without ventral lamina, and a flexible pharyngeal tube with a spiral thickening; a drop shaped thickening is present between the buccal and the pharyngeal tube ( Fig. 3B View FIGURE 3 A – E ); mouth without peribuccal lamellae or papulae; very thin transverse ridges are visible in the buccal cavity, teeth are not visible but their absence needs to be confirmed. Buccal tube with dorsal and ventral apophyses for the insertion of the stylet muscles in the shape of hooks symmetrical with the respect to the frontal plane.
Mixibius parvus sp. nov. Mixibius tibetanus *
Slide No. 5336 Holotype Paratype
* According to Li & Li (2008) (paratype: Tibet 0706003).
Bucco-pharyngeal tube length, measured from the anterior margin of the stylet sheaths to the caudal end, excluding pharyngeal apophyses, 57.8 µm; buccal tube length, measured from the anterior margin of the stylet sheaths to the caudal end of the drop-shaped thickening, 26.6 µm; buccal tube length is 46% of the total length of the bucco-pharyngeal tube (pbf = 46); pharyngeal tube 31.2 µm long; external width of the buccal tube, 2.3 µm (ptd = 8.7). Stylet supports inserted on the buccal tube at 60.4% of its length (ptd = 60.4); pharyngeal bulb (34.1 µm x 30.9 µm) with apophyses, two rod-shaped macroplacoids and a septulum ( Fig. 3B View FIGURE 3 A – E ). First macroplacoid 7.3 µm long (ptd = 27.4); second macroplacoid 5.8 µm long (ptd = 21.8); septulum 2.9 µm long (ptd = 10.9); entire placoid + septulum row length 16.5 µm (ptd = 62.0); entire macroplacoid row length 13.4 µm (ptd = 50.4).
Claws of the Hypsibius type, well developed ( Fig. 3C, D, E View FIGURE 3 A – E ); with a short basal portion; in the external claws the basal portion is enlarged ( Fig. 3C, D View FIGURE 3 A – E ) and has a slightly indented margin; a very visible septum is present between the basal common portion and the branches ( Fig. 3D, E View FIGURE 3 A – E ). Legs I, external and internal claw lengths, 11.3 µm (ptd index = 42.5) and 8.8 µm (ptd = 33.1), respectively; legs II, external and internal claw lengths, 12.0 µm (ptd = 45.1) and 8.2 µm (ptd = 30.8), respectively; legs III, external and internal claw lengths, 12.1 µm (ptd = 45.5) and 8.5 µm (ptd = 32.0), respectively; legs IV, posterior and anterior claw lengths, 13.4 µm (ptd = 50.4) and 10.4 µm (ptd = 39.1), respectively. Main branches of all claws with extremely thin and short accessory points, which are very difficult to see; well developed, flexible lunules present ( Fig. 3C, D View FIGURE 3 A – E , arrow 1); a cuticular bar is visible near the internal claws of the first three pairs of legs ( Fig. 3C, D View FIGURE 3 A – E , arrow 2); two short cuticular bars present on the hind legs: one near the base of the anterior claw and the other between the anterior and the posterior claws ( Fig. 3E View FIGURE 3 A – E , arrows).
Eggs not found.
Remarks. The paratypes are similar to the holotype in both qualitative and metric characters ( Table 2 View TABLE 2 ).
Dihascon (D.) ziliense sp. nov D. (D.) procerum D. (D.) ramazzottii Etymology. The name ziliense refers to the locus typicus; the species was found in mosses growing by the side of Zilio Lake.
Differential diagnosis. Few species of the sub-genus Diphascon (Diphascon) have a cuticle with tubercles (or granulation) and a pharyngeal bulb with two macroplacoids and a septulum: D. (D.) oculatum Murray, 1906 ; D. (D.) nodulosum ( Ramazzotti, 1957) ; D. (D.) ramazzottii ( Robotti, 1970) , D. (D.) granifer Greven, 1972 ; D. (D.) opistoglyptum Maucci, 1987 ; D. (D.) burti Nelson, 1991 and D. (D.) procerum Pilato, Sabella & Lisi, 2014 .
The new species differs from D. (D.) oculatum , D. (D.) nodulosum , D. opistoglyptum and D. (D.) burti in lacking eye spots and in having lunules and a cuticular bar on the legs. In addition, it also differs from: D. (D.) oculatum in having cuticular tubercles present in the central and anterior portion of the body, in having a clearly shorter pharyngeal tube and longer placoids; from D. (D.) nodulosum in having caudal tubercles less developed, a shorter pharyngeal tube and longer macroplacoids; from D. (D.) opistoglyptum in having cuticular ornamentation not limited to the posterior portion of the body and in lacking a microplacoid; from D (D.) burti in lacking a pseudoseptulum (i.e. the cuticular thickening situated posterior to the septulum in the pharyngeal lumen, as described by Nelson (1991) in D. (D.) burti ).
Diphascon (D.) ziliense sp. nov. differs from D. (D.) granife r in having lunules and in having a cuticular bar on the first three pairs of legs and two bars on the hind legs.
It differs from D. (D.) ramazzottii in lacking eye spots, in having a more evident cuticular ornamentation and the presence of lunules. In addition, it has longer claws in proportion to the body size and the buccal tube length ( Table 2 View TABLE 2 ), and the main branch of the internal claws is less developed in relation to the total claw length ( Table 2 View TABLE 2 ; Figs 4A and 4 View FIGURE 4 A, B C).
The new species is very similar to D. (D.) procerum but differs in having a more visible cuticular ornamentation. In addition, a very obvious difference is the stouter claws, with a wider common portion and the main branches shorter in proportion to the total length of the respective claws (but they are of comparable length in both species in proportion to the buccal tube length) ( Table 2 View TABLE 2 ; Fig. 4A, B View FIGURE 4 A, B and D).
TABLE 2. Measurements (in µm) and pt values (in brackets) of selected structures of two specimens (holotype and paratype) of Diphascon (D.) ziliense sp. nov., the holotype of Diphascon (D.) procerum, and one paratype of Diphascon (D.) ramazzottii. (In brackets the values of the ptd index).
| Slide No. 5500 Holotype | 5499 Paratype | 3171 Holotype | 1464 Paratype |
|---|---|---|---|
| µm | µm | µm | µm |
| Body length 286 | 158 | 358 | 346 |
| Bucco-pharyngeal tube length 57.8 | ? | 64.8 | 71.5 |
| Buccal tube length 26.6 pbf =46 | 19.6 pbf =? | 27.3 pbf =42.1 | 30.9 (pbf= 43.2) |
| External buccal tube width 2.3 (8.7) | 1.7 (8.7) | 2.2 (8.1) | 2.4 (7.8) |
| Stylet supports insertion point (60.4) | (63.3) | (61.1) | (59.2) |
| Pharyngeal tube length 31.2 | ? | 37.6 | 40.3 |
| First macroplacoid 7.3 (27.4) | 4.8 (24.5) | 7.3 (26.7) | 8.3 (26.9) |
| Second macroplacoid 5.8 (21.8) | 4.0 (20.4) | 6.9 (25.3) | 6.1 (19.7) |
| Septulum 2.9 (10.9) | 2.2 (11.2) | 2.8 (10.3) | 3.1 (10.0) |
| Placoids + septulum 16.5 (62.0) | 11.3 (57.7) | 17.3 (63.4) | 18.2 (58.9) |
| Macroplacoid row 13.4 (50.4) | 9.1 (46.4) | 14.5 (53.1) | 14.6 (47.2) |
| External claw I 11.4 (42.9) | ? (?) | 11.6 (42.5) | ? (?) |
| % main branch / total claw length 8.2 71.9 | ?? | 9.3 80.2 | ?? |
| Internal claw I 8.5 (32.0) | ? (?) | 7.7 (28.2) | ? (?) |
| % main branch / total claw length 5.4 63.5 | ?? | 6.7 87.0 | ?? |
| External claw II 12.0 (45.1) | 9.4 (48.0) | ? ? | 10.9 (35.2) |
| % main branch / total claw length 9.6 80.0 | ?? | ?? | 8.5 77.9 |
| Internal claw II 8.1 (30.4) | ? (?) | 9.1 (33.3) | 8.2 (26.5) |
| % main branch / total claw length 5.4 66.7 | ?? | 8.1 89.0 | 6.2 75.6 |
| External claw III 12.1 (45.5) | 9.6 (49.0) | ? (?) | 10.3 (33.3) |
| % main branch / total claw length 9.7 80.2 | ?? | ?? | 8.1 78.6 |
| Internal claw III 8.5 (32.0) | ? (?) | ? (?) | 8.9 (28.8) |
| % main branch / total claw length 5.8 68.2 | ?? | ?? | 6.9 77.5 |
| Posterior claw IV 13.4 (50.4) | 10.0 (51.0) | 14.0 (51.3) | 13.5 (43.7) |
| % main branch / total claw length 10. 2 76.1 | 7.9 79.0 | 11.7 83.6 | 10.3 76.3 |
| Anterior claw IV 10.2 (38.4) | 7.7 (39.2) | 9.7 (35.5) | ? (?) |
| % main branch / total claw length 7.7 75.5 | 5.7 74.0 | 8.3 85.6 | ?? |
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.