Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T16:47:34.831Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lernaeocera obtusa n.sp., a hitherto undescribed parasite of the haddock (Gadus aeglefinus L.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

Z. Kabata
Z. Kabata
Affiliation:
The Marine Laboratory, Aberdeen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The fishes harbouring parasites of the genus Lernaeocera can be divided, according to the presence or absence of contact with the coastal waters, into ‘inshore’ and ‘offshore’ groups. According to literature, only L. branchialis occurs commonly on hosts in both groups. The difference between this and the remaining species of the genus is explained by the existence of two different species covered by the name L. branchialis. One of these species is parasitic on cod and whiting, the other on haddock. The two species have also different intermediate hosts (flounder and lemon sole respectively) and differ in morphology of the adult male and female and in the mode of attachment to the final host.

Lernaeocera of whiting and cod is distributed mainly in the coastal area, while that from haddock extends over the whole of the North Sea. The former, but not the latter, is present outside the European continental shelf. All these differences lead to the conclusion that the two types represent two different species. The old name is retained for the parasite of cod and whiting. The parasite of haddock is the new species, to which the name Lernaeocera obtusa is given.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , November 1957 , pp. 569 - 592
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1957

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

Basset-Smith, P. W., 1896. Notes on the parasitic copepoda of fish obtained at Plymouth, with descriptions of new species. Ann. Mag. not. Hist., Vol. 18, pp. 8–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blainvuxe, H. M. D. de, 1822. Mémoire surles Lérnees (Lernaea, Linn.). J. Phys. Chim. Hist, nat., T. 95, pp. 372–80 and 437–47.Google Scholar
Capart, A., 1948. Le Lernaeocera branchialis (Linné 1767). Cellule, Vol. 52, pp. 159–212.Google Scholar
Dollfus, R. P., 1953. Parasites Animaux de la Morue Atlanto-Arctique. Encycl. biol., Vol. 43, pp. 350–63.Google Scholar
Fabrictos, O., 1780. Fauna Groenlandica. 452 pp. Hafhiae et Lipsiae.Google Scholar
Fisher, R. A., 1936. The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems. Ann. Eugen., Lond., Vol. 8, pp. 179–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginsburg, J., 1938. Arithmetical definition of the species, subspecies and race concept with a proposal for modified nomenclature. Zoologica, N. Y., Vol. 23 (13), p. 253.Google Scholar
Gouillart, M., 1937. Recherches sur les Copépodes parasites. Trav. Sta. zool. Wimereux, T. 12, pp. 309–457.Google Scholar
Günther, A., 1862. Catalogue of the Acanthopterygii Pharyngognathi and Anacanthini in the collection of the British Museum. Vol. 4, 534 pp. London: British Museum.Google Scholar
KrØyer, H., 1863. Bidrag til Kundsgab om Snyltekrebsene. Naturh. Tidsskr., Bd. 2, pp. 74–426.Google Scholar
Linnaeus, C., 1767. Systema Naturae, 12th Ed.Google Scholar
Mahalanobis, P. C., 1930. On tests and measures of group divergences. J. Asiat. Soc. Beng., Vol. 26, pp. 541–88.Google Scholar
Müller, O. F., 1789. Zoologia Danica, Vol. 3.Google Scholar
Oorde De Lint, G. M. Van & Schuurmans, Stekhoven J. H., 1936. Copepoda parasitica. Tierw. N.-v. Ostsee, Teil 10c, pp. 73–198 (Lief. 31).Google Scholar
Quidor, A., 1912. Copepodes Parasites. Deuxiéme Expédition Antarctique Francaise (1908–1910), Paris, pp. 197–215.Google Scholar
Rae, B. B., 1939. Factors in the growth of lemon soles. Sci. Invest. Fish. Scot., 1939, No. 3, 18 pp.Google Scholar
Scott, A., 1901. Lepeophtheirus and Lernaea. L.M.B.C. Memoir, No. 6.Google Scholar
Scott, T., 1900. Notes on some crustacean parasites of fishes. Rep. Fish. Bd Scot., No. 18, pp. 144–88.Google Scholar
Scott, T. & Scott, A., 1913. British Parasitic Copepoda. London: Ray Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shulman, S. S. & Shulman-Albova, R. E., 1953. Parasites of Fishes of the White Sea. 192 pp. Acad. Sci. U.R.S.S. Moscow. [In Russian.]Google Scholar
Sproston, N. G., 1941. The developmental stages of Lernaeocera branchialis. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 25, pp. 441–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sproston, N. G. & Hartley, P. H. T., 1941. The ecology of some parasitic copepods of gadoids and other fishes. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 25, pp. 361–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stekhoven, J. H. Schuurmans, 1935. Copepoda parasitica from the Belgian coast. Bull. Mus. Hist. nat. Belg., T. 11, No. 7, 13 pp.Google Scholar
Stekhoven, J. H. Schuurmans,1936. Beobachtungen zur Morphologie und Physiologie der Lernaeocera branchialis L. und Lernaeocera lusci Basset-Smith. Z. Parasitenk., Bd. 8, pp. 659–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SchuurmansStekhoven, J. H. Stekhoven, J. H. & Punt, A., 1937. Weitere Beiträge zur Morphologie und Physiologie der Lernaeocera branchialis L. Z. Parasitenk., Bd. 9, pp. 648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
StrØm, H., 1762. Physisk og Oeconomisk Beskrivelse over Fogderiet SØndmor, beliggende i Bergens Stift i Norge. FØrste Part. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Templeman, W., 1953. Knowledge of division of stocks of cod, haddock, redfish and American plaice in subareas 3 and 2 of the Northwest Atlantic Convention area. Ann. Proc. int. Comm. N.W. Atlant. Fish., Vol. 3, pp. 63–5.Google Scholar
Thomson, G. N., 1889. Parasitic Copepoda of New Zealand. Trans. Proc. N.Z. Inst., Vol. 22, pp. 353–75Google Scholar
Wilson, C. B., 1917. North American parasitic copepods belonging to the Lernaeidae with a revision of the entire family. Proc. U.S. nat. Mus., Vol. 53, pp. 1–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar