We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Some anatomical structures vary greatly in number among species, a phenomenon that often remains unexplained. We investigate interspecific variation in the number of collar spines among trematodes from the superfamily Echinostomatoidea, using a dataset comprising hundreds of species. These trematodes possess a ring of spines around their anterior sucker; in some families, they form 2 arcs on either side of the sucker, with a central gap, whereas in other families, they form a continuous collar with no gap. First, we confirm that even numbers of spines are the norm among species in which they are arranged as 2 arcs with a central gap, while odd numbers (mainly prime numbers) predominate among species in which spines form a continuous collar. Second, we tested whether variation among species in the number of spines might reflect selective pressures. The spines serve to attach the worm to the inside lining of the host gut. Our analysis confirms that spine numbers correlate positively with worm body size among echinostomes, supporting the hypothesis that larger worms require more spines for stronger attachment. Finally, we tested whether phylogenetic conservatism may explain interspecific variation in the number of collar spines, i.e. whether closely related species have more similar numbers of spines than expected by chance due to shared ancestry. Our analysis confirms that spine numbers show strong phylogenetic conservatism across species. Overall, our findings indicate that the number of collar spines, a hallmark of echinostomes, is the product of conserved phylogenetic inheritance overlaid by adaptive functional adjustments.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.