Capsaloides istiophori Yamaguti, 1968

Chisholm, Leslie A. & Whittington, Ian D., 2006, Revision of Capsaloides (Monogenea: Capsalidae) with a redescription of C. magnaspinosus Price, 1939 from the nasal tissue of Tetrapterus audax (Istiophoridae) collected off Nelson Bay, New South Wales, Australia, Zootaxa 1160, pp. 1-20 : 9

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.172308

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6255191

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03FC8787-E163-FFCD-FED3-FEEA9E3EFBB9

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Capsaloides istiophori Yamaguti, 1968
status

 

Capsaloides istiophori Yamaguti, 1968 View in CoL ( Figs 3 View FIGURE 3 A, 4A, 4B)

Type­host: Istiophorus platypterus (Shaw, 1792) (Istiophoridae) . The type­host was originally recorded as I. orientalis (Temminck & Schlegel, 1844) which is now considered a synonym of I. platypterus (see Froese & Pauly 2005).

Type­locality: Hawaii, USA [Pacific Ocean].

Additional records: Tetrapterus audax (Philippi, 1997) , Hawaii, USA [Pacific Ocean] (see Yamaguti 1968); Istiophorus platypterus and Makaira indica (Cuvier, 1832) , from Cape Bowling Green, off Townsville and Cape Moreton, off Brisbane, Queensland, Australia [Pacific Ocean] (see Speare 1994, 1999).

Site: Gills.

Specimens examined: Holotype (USNPC 63598); 1 voucher (QM G212195).

Remarks

Yamaguti (1968) stated that this species differed from the closely related C. tetrapteri because the “posterior sinus” of the body and the isolated group of anterior dorsomarginal body sclerites was better developed in C. istiophori . We are unclear what “better developed” means, but the depth of the “posterior sinus” is a plastic character which is highly dependent on the method of flattening and state of contraction of the parasite. There are a greater number of dorsomarginal body sclerites in the left isolated anterior group of C. istiophori (14 sclerites comprising 5–7 cusps) than in C. tetrapteri (3–5 sclerites comprising 5–7 cusps). However, we have found that the number of sclerites in the anterior isolated group varies between parasites of different sizes (see Remarks for C. tetrapteri ) and therefore this character is likely uninformative when comparing parasites of different sizes/developmental stages. There are 10 bi­ or tricuspid dorsomarginal body sclerites in the right anterior isolated group of C. istiophori and only 0–4 in C. tetrapteri . The holotype of C. istiophori is much larger than the holotype and paratypes of C. tetrapteri and we consider that the larger number of sclerites may be a developmental difference rather than an indicator of species differences. The number of cusps associated with the dorsomarginal body sclerites decreases posteriorly ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 A) and the body sclerites end in the posterior third of the body which is also the case for C. tetrapteri ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 D). The haptoral accessory sclerites we examined in the holotype of C. istiophori ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 B) are slightly different from those illustrated by Yamaguti (1968) apparently from a paratype ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 A). This demonstrates that the morphology of the haptoral accessory sclerites likely varies between specimens of different sizes and may represent continual growth throughout parasite life (e.g. Kearn 1990). Nevertheless, the haptoral accessory sclerites of C. istiophori ( Figs 4 View FIGURE 4 A, 4B) are similar morphologically to those of C. tetrapteri ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 E). Therefore we could find no clear characters to separate C. istiophori from C. tetrapteri . Because we consider C. tetrapteri to be synonymous with C. perugiai (see Remarks of C. tetrapteri and C. perugiai ), C istiophori is also, therefore, a synonym of C. perugiai .

GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF