Pratylenchus loosi, Loof 1960, Loof, 1960

Alvani, Somaye, Mahdikhani-Moghadam, Esmat, Rouhani, Hamid & Mohammadi, Abbas, 2016, A checklist of the family Pratylenchidae Thorne, 1949 from Iran, Zootaxa 4079 (2), pp. 179-204: 187

publication ID

http://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4079.2.2

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:162312D2-32D7-4246-B5E8-7844BA349F79

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/404887B6-FF9D-2449-A9B3-FAD3181AFDD5

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Pratylenchus loosi
status

 

14. P. loosi   Loof 1960

Syn: P. coffeae   apud Loos 1953

(Pourjam et al. 1997) 15 ♀: L = 530 (420–645) µm; a = 31 (24–38); b = 6 (4.7–7.6); b' = 3.9 (2.9–4.7); c = 18.3 (15.8–24); c' = 2.9 (2.3–3.6); St = 16.5 (15–18) µm; V = 82 (80–83)

3 ♂: L= 440 (435–450) µm; a = 41 (37–48); b = 5.3 (5.1–5.8); b' = 3.7 (3.5–3.9); c = 19.3 (18–20); c' = 2.5; St = 13.3 (12–14) µm; Spicules = 39 (34–43) µm

Associated plants and localities. Citrus (Gilan and Mazandaran), Crocus sativus   (South Khorasan), fruit trees (Ardabil), millet (Gilan) and tea (Gilan and Mazandaran).

References. Tanha Maafi 1992 [P]; Pourjam et al. 1997 [F], 1999 b [F, M]; Nassaj Hosseini, S.M. et al., Jahad Daneshgahi Institute of Gilan, Rasht, 2004, pers. com; Hajieghrari, B. et al., Moghan College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Ardabil, 2004, pers. com; Hajieghrari et al. 2004 [M], 2005, 2006a, b [M]; Seraji, A. & Mirghasemi, S.T, Tea Research Center of Iran, Lahijan, 2006, pers. com; Hajieghrari et al. 2007 [M]; Ghahramaninejad Mianeji, A. et al., Tabriz University, Tabriz, 2010, pers. com; Majd Taheri, Z. et al., Islamic Azad University of Damghan, Damghan, 2010, pers. com [P; M]; Divsalar et al. 2011 [P], 2012; Seraji, A. et al., Tea Research Center of Iran, Lahijan, 2012, pers. com; Mahdikhani –Moghadam & Alvani 2013; Majd Taheri et al. 2013 [F, M]; Mirghasemi, S.N. et al., Gilan University, Rasht, 2014, pers. com; Shariat, K, Islamic Azad University of Damghan, Damghan, 2014, pers. com.

Remarks. The Iranian specimens of P. l oo s i (Pourjam et al. 1997) closely correspond to the original description (Loof 1960), but the lateral fields are more or less areolated on the posterior part of body, and the inner lines of the fields mostly fuse after the vulva (vs after anus). It is characterized by having a labial region with two annuli, abundance of males, females with long, oval or quadrangular spermatheca filled with rounded sperm, and tail terminus smooth and varying in shape from finely pointed to somewhat conoid or intended. The Iranian population of P. loosi   is similar to the Iranian population of P. coffeae (Pourjam et al. 1997)   . There is no significant difference in a, c, V ratios (a = 24–38, c = 16.5–22, V = 80–83 in P. loosi   and a = 22–32, c = 15.8–24 and V = 80– 82.5 in P. coffeae   ) and most other morphometric data. Distinct differences, however, are observed in c' ratio (2.3– 3.6 in P. loosi   and 1.9–2.3 in P. co f f e ae) and in the tail shape (narrowly rounded, sometimes with slight indentation in P. loosi   and bluntly rounded, truncate or indented in P. co f f e ae). PBW (body width at the level of phasmid) is a good character for identification (6–7 µm in P. l oo s i and 8–11 µm in P. coffeae   ). Difference in tail shape, together with the mean values of the morphometrics mentioned may provide sufficient diagnostic characters to separate P. loosi   and P. coffeae   . Unfortunately, intraspecific variations (specially in P. coffeae   ) or morphological changes may occur, making identification of the two species difficult.