Longidorus vinearum Bravo & Roca, 1995

Gutierrez-Gutierrez, Carlos, Santos, Margarida Teixeira, Inacio, Maria Lurdes, Eisenback, Jonathan D. & Mota, Manuel, 2020, Description of Longidorus bordonensis sp. nov. from Portugal, with systematics and molecular phylogeny of the genus (Nematoda, Longidoridae), Zoosystematics and Evolution 96 (1), pp. 175-193 : 175

Longidorus vinearum Bravo & Roca, 1995 Suppl. material 1: Fig. S1(1-9), Suppl. material 5: Table S3

Remarks.

Longidorus vinearum was originally described from around roots of grapevine ( Vitis L.) in Dois Portos, Torres Vedras, Portugal ( Bravo and Roca 1995). Subsequently, Bravo and Roca (1998) reported it from the rhizosphere of olive trees ( Olea europaea L.) in Matela, Vimioso, Portugal. Recently, Archidona-Yuste et al. (2016) found four populations of this species associated with wild olive trees in Andalusia (Spain) and characterized these populations molecularly. Three populations resembling this Longidorus species were detected parasitizing grapevine roots at Dois Portos, Torres Vedras (type locality of L. vinearum ), Ordasqueira, Torres Vedras, and Picanceira, Mafra, and another population from around the roots of wild olive trees at Valverde, Évora, all in Portugal (Table 1 , Suppl. material 5: Table S3). These populations prompted us to characterize them genotypically and phenotypically, including the topotype specimens, in order to confirm their identification. Unfortunately, only one specimen was found at Picanceira, Mafra (Table 1 ) and used to complete the molecular analysis. These findings represent the third and fourth records of this species for Portugal and the Iberian Peninsula, respectively. We confirm a wider geographical distribution of this species in this geographical region.

Longidorus vinearum populations are characterized by a lip region, which is broadly rounded frontally, and more so laterally, and almost totally continuous with the outline of the body; a vulva near mid-body; the amphidial fovea large and clearly asymmetrically bilobed; the odontostyle long and robust; short tail characterized by having a bluntly rounded to hemispherical shape, dorsal side quite more convex than ventral side with rounded terminus; males characterized by large-sized spicules (average = 112.0 µm) and a large number of supplements, one pair of adanal and 18 or 19 mid-ventral supplements (Suppl. material 1: Fig. S1(1-9); Suppl. material 5: Table S3). Morphological and morphometrical traits of the topotype population from Dois Portos, Torres Vedras (Suppl. material 5: Table S3) agree very well with the original description ( Bravo and Roca 1995). Morphometric measurements of adult specimens of the topotype population are coincident with those provided in the original description ( Bravo and Roca 1995) (Suppl. material 5: Table S3) except for minor differences in a and c’ ratios (69.2-79.8 vs 70.7-101.3; 0.6-0.7 vs 0.5-0.8), lip region diameter (21.9-23.4 vs 18.0-27.5), length from the oral aperture to guiding ring (34.5-43.2 vs 36.0-47.0), tail length (45.3-61.8 vs 38.0-57.0), odontostyle length (113.8-126.4 vs 105.5-132.0), and odontophore length (65.3-82.5 vs 58.0-85.0) for the females (Suppl. material 5: Table S3), which may be due to intraspecific variability, as reported by Archidona-Yuste et al. (2016). Also, the topotype population shows similarity to four populations from Córdoba province, southern Spain ( Archidona-Yuste et al. 2016); however, minor differences were detected in females such as L, a and c’ ratios, lip region diameter length, odontostyle and odontophore lengths, distance from oral aperture to guiding ring, and, in males, spicule length. In addition, the topotype population agrees closely with the morphological features and morphometric measurements of all Portuguese populations examined (Suppl. material 5: Table S3), except for a higher V ratio (47.1-50.1 vs 45.8-51.4, 44.0), a longer odontostyle (113.8-126.4 vs 112.9-121.7, 116.8) µm and a smaller J length (11.7-17.4 vs 13.1-21.3, 19.7) µm (Suppl. material 5: Table S3). Nevertheless, these differences further expand the intraspecific variation of the species and should be regarded as geographical intraspecific variation. According to the polytomous key by Chen et al. (1997) and its supplements ( Loof and Chen 1999; Peneva et al. 2013), the topotypes and other studied Portuguese populations of this species have the following codes: A45, B45, C34, D2, E3, F45, G1, H1, I12, J?, K?. Unfortunately, we did not detect the first juvenile-stage. However, this stage was characterized in the original description ( Bravo and Roca 1995) and later by Archidona-Yuste et al. (2016), who also characterized this species molecularly.