Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:06:55.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Studies on Penetrocephalus ganapatii, a new genus (Cestoda: Pseudophyllidea) from the marine teleost Saurida tumbil (Bloch)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

K. Hanumantha Rao
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Leeds and Department of Zoology, Trinity College, University of Dublin

Extract

1. The character of the scolex, the long filamentous neck and the morphology of the proglottids are features which justify the establishment of a new genus, Penetrocephalus, to accommodate the pseudophyllid species P. ganapatii (= Both-riocephalus ganapatii (Rao, 1954), B. penetratus (Subhapradha, 1955)) from the marine teleost Saurida tumbil Bloch, off Waltair, Bay of Bengal.

2. The anatomy of the female reproductive system is described in detail, and a preliminary interpretation of the histochemistry of egg-shell formation is given.

3. On the basis of histochemical tests it is suggested that Mehlis's gland, which surrounds the cellular ootype, secretes a phospholipid-like material which may aid in the release of shell precursors from the vitelline cells, but it does not form part of the shell. It appears also to be responsible for the synthesis of PAS-positive yolky matter found in these cells in the egg capsule. The functions of Mehlis's gland in helminths are discussed.

4. In a majority of helminths where the egg-shell is a quinone-tanned protein, it is considered that it is solely if not entirely derived from shell globules in the vitelline cells.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1960

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

Baker, J. R. (1946). The histochemical recognition of lipine. Quart. J. Micr. Sci. 87, 441–69.Google ScholarPubMed
Hilmy, J. S. (1929). Bothriocephalus scorpii (Muller 1776), Cooper 1917. Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 23, 385–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himes, M. & Moriber, L. (1955). A triple stain for deoxyribonucleic acid, polysaccharides and proteins. Stain Tech. 31, 6770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leblond, C. P., Glegg, R. E. & Eidinger, D. (1957). Presence of carbohydrates with free 1,2-glycol groups in sites stained by the periodic-acid-Schiff technique. J. Histochem. Cytochem. 5, 445–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Monné, L. (1955). On the nature of the gram basophilia. Ark. Zool. 7, 559–72.Google Scholar
Pearse, A. G. E. (1955). Copper phthalocyanins as phospholipid stains. J. Path. Bact. 70, 554–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rao, K. H. (1954). A new bothrioeephalid parasite (Cestoda) from the gut of the fish Saurida tumbil (Bloch). Curr. Sci. 23, 333–4.Google Scholar
Rao, K. H. (1959 a). On Ptychobothrium cypseluri n.sp. (Cestoda: Pseudophyllidea) from the flying fish Cypselurus poecilopterus (Cuv. & Val.) caught off Waltair. J. Helminth. 33, 267–72.Google Scholar
Rao, K. H. (1959 b). Observations on the Mehlis's gland complex in the liver fluke, Fasciola hepatica L. J. Parasit. 45, 347–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawson, D. (1957). The anatomy of Eubothrium crassum (Bloch) from the pyloric caeca and small intestine of Salmo trutta L. J. Helminth. 31, 103–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smyth, J. D. (1956). Studies on tapeworm physiology. IX. A histochemical study of egg-shell formation in Schistocephalus solidus (Pseudophyllidea). Exp. Parasitol. 5, 519–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smyth, J. D. & Clegg, J. A. (1959). Egg-shell formation in trematodes and cestodes. Exp. Parasitol. 8, 286323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stephenson, W. (1947). Physiological and histochemical observations on the adult liver fluke, Fasciola hepatica (L.). III. Egg-shell formation. Parasitology, 39, 128–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Subhapradha, C. K. (1955). Two new bothriocephalids from the marine fish Saurida tumbil Bloch. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. 41 (1), B, 2030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willmer, E. N. (1958). Some aspects of cellular differentiation. Presidential address, Section of Physiology. Advanc. Sci., Lond., no. 58, September, 19.Google Scholar