Confirmation and Description of the Larva of the Aquatic Dance Fly, Proclinopyga Melander (Diptera: Empididae: Clinocerinae)

Overcoming life stage‐centric biases illuminates arthropod diversity, systematics and biology

“…The potential for molecular identification methods to help address these issues, allowing non‐typical semaphoronts to contribute to studies in biodiversity inventory and systematics, has been recognized since DNA sequences first became readily accessible (Caterino et al, 2000; Stern et al, 1997). Associations of larvae through DNA sequencing have become routine (Ahrens et al, 2007; Caterino & Tishechkin, 2006; Curiel & Morrone, 2012; Jin et al, 2022; Miller et al, 2005; Sinclair et al, 2022; Zhou et al, 2007). A number of authors have also demonstrated successful associations of sexes in dimorphic species (Corley & Ferreira, 2017; Ekrem et al, 2010; Ferreira & Ivie, 2022; Gariepy et al, 2022).…”

Development of a multi-entry identification key for economically important fruit fly larvae (Diptera, Tephritidae, Dacinae)

“…Several keys for the identification of adult specimens are available ( White and Elson-Harris 1992 ; Virgilio et al 2014 ). Descriptions of larvae of some species are given by White and Elson-Harris 1992 , but other authors give more detailed descriptions of the larvae of some species ( Elson‐Harris 1988 ; Carroll and Wharton 1989 ; Carroll 1998 ; Carroll et al 2004 onwards; Frías et al 2008 ; Lasserre et al 2009 ; Steck and Ekesi 2015 ; Balmes and Mouttet 2017 ; Dutra et al 2018a , b ; Kamayev et al 2020 ; Rodriguez et al 2021 ). However, this information is not always easy to access, and the keys are difficult to follow unless specialized expertise is available.…”

Morphological and molecular characterization ofStomachicola muraenesocisYamaguti, 1934 (Digenea: Hemiuridae) from the daggertooth pike congerMuraenesox cinereus(Forsskål)

“…Stomachicola and Allostomachicola are distinguished by the position of the seminal vesicle (restricted to hindbody vs forebody) (Gibson and Bray, 1979). Species of Stomachicola are distributed worldwide and known to infect several fish species (particularly marine eels) from different families including Acanthuridae (Gupta and Ahmad, 1978; Pande et al ., 2000), Anguillidae (Sinclair et al ., 1972, Stunkard, 1980), Ariidae (Bilqees, 1971), Carangidae (Pandey and Tewari, 1984), Chirocentridae (Shen, 1990), Congridae (Gupta and Sharma, 1973; Gupta and Singh, 1981; Gupta and Gupta, 1991), Cynoglossidae (Corkum, 1966; Stunkard, 1973), Engraulidae (Tanzola and Seguel, 2012), Mastacembelidae (Verma, 1973), Megalopidae (Sinclair et al ., 1972), Muraenesocidae (Yamaguti, 1934; Tseng, 1935; Bhalerao, 1943; Chauhan, 1945, 1954; Bilqees, 1971; Siddiqi and Hafeezullah, 1975; Srivastava and Sahai, 1978; Hafeezullah, 1980; Tang, 1981; Hafeezullah, 1985; Shen, 1990; Shen and Qiu, 1995; Hafeezullah and Dutta, 1998; Shaukat, 2008; Văn Hà et al ., 2012), Muraenidae (Linton, 1910; Nahhas and Cable, 1964), Paralichthyidae (Corkum, 1966; Sinclair et al ., 1972), Sciaenidae (Manter, 1931; Sinclair et al ., 1972; Overstreet, 1983 a , 1983 b ), Scombridae (Jahan, 1970; Gupta and Gupta, 1974), Serranidae (Nahhas and Short, 1965), Synbranchidae (Gupta and Gupta, 1991; Mishra et al ., 2014) and Synodontidae (Linton, 1905; Manter, 1931; Corkum, 1959; Sinclair et al ., 1972; Li and Sun, 1994).…”

“…sexaginta Li andSun, 1994, Stom. pritchardae Pande et al, 2000, Stom. lycengraulidis Tanzola andSeguel, 2012 andStom. bengalensis Mishra et al, 2014. The handling and processing of newly collected specimens of Stomachicola, in particular large worms, have been reported to be problematic primarily due to good development of musculature and contraction of the whole body of the parasite immediately after fixation (Sinclair et al, 1972;Hafeezullah, 1985). Moreover, several of the previous descriptions of species of Stomachicola were based on morphometric and morphological analyses performed by light microscopy using an inadequate number of specimens (Hafeezullah, 1985;Gupta and Gupta, 1991) or inadequate processing methods (e.g.…”

“…Moreover, several of the previous descriptions of species of Stomachicola were based on morphometric and morphological analyses performed by light microscopy using an inadequate number of specimens (Hafeezullah, 1985;Gupta and Gupta, 1991) or inadequate processing methods (e.g. different fixation temperatures, see Sinclair et al, 1972), which could influence some characteristics of taxonomic value. In addition, a high intraspecific (individual) variability in most morphological and metrical characters has been reported for Stom.…”