Chromaspirina inaurita Wieser & Hopper, 1967

Armenteros, Maickel, Ruiz-Abierno, Alexei & Decraemer, Wilfrida, 2014, Revision of Desmodorinae and Spiriniinae (Nematoda: Desmodoridae) with redescription of eight known species, European Journal of Taxonomy 96, pp. 1-32 : 18

Chromaspirina inaurita Wieser & Hopper, 1967

Figs 9A–B , 10 , Table 2

Chromaspirina inaurita Wieser & Hopper, 1967: 273 .

Material examined

3 ♂♂, 5 ♀♀ and 8 juveniles, deposited in the nematode collection at Centro de Investigaciones Marinas, Universidad de La Habana, CUBA.

Description

Cuticle faintly and homogeneously striated (annuli 0.8–1 μm width). Inner labial setae papilliform. Six outer labial sensilla short setiform (~ 1–3 μm long), more or less at the same level of the four cephalic sensilla (~ 8–10 μm long) and two additional setae, one ventral and one dorsal. Amphidial fovea cryptospiral located far forward in the head, only the posterior border contacts the first cuticle annuli. Eight longitudinal rows of somatic setae running along the whole body, the most anterior longer (6–8 μm) than the others (~ 1–3 μm). Buccal cavity with three small teeth, one dorsal and two ventrosublateral. Pharynx muscular with posterior bulb. Cardia extended longitudinally. Secretory-excretory system not observable. Tail conical, final portion without striation and surface smooth.

Male monorchic, anterior testis to the left of the intestine, no precloacal supplements, three postcloacal supplements like papillae (sometimes a fourth posterior smaller one). Spicules curved and slightly cephalated. Gubernaculum a simple rod with proximal end slightly widened.

Female didelphic, ovaries antidromously reflexed, both genital branches to the left of the intestine. Vulva a transversal slit.

Juveniles are similar to adults, except for the development of the reproductive system.

Remarks

Maria et al. (2009) made a revision of Chromaspirina Filipjev, 1918 and provided an illustrated key to the species. The morphology of the measured specimens closely resembles the type species described by Wieser & Hopper (1967) from Florida. However, two important differences occurred: (1) Florida specimens were smaller than the ones from Cuba (1180–1350 µm vs 2110–2592 µm) and (2) there was no evidence of sexual dimorphism in the shape and size of the amphidial fovea. The adaptation of the species to local environments seems to be the most plausible explanation for this phenotypic plasticity, but existence of a complex of cryptic species is also possible.

Figures

Fig. 9. A–B. Chromaspirina inaurita Wieser & Hopper, 1967, ♂. A. Anterior region. B. Tail region and copulatory apparatus. C–D. Paradesmodora immersa Wieser, 1954, ♂. C. Anterior region. D. Tail region and copulatory apparatus.

Fig. 10. Chromaspirina inaurita Wieser & Hopper, 1967, SEM microphotographs of ♀. A. Labial region, en face view. B. Head, oblique lateral view. C. Vulva region. D. Tail tip.