Epizoic and parasitic rotifers

May, Linda

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-0465-1_8

Cited by 30 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Seison and Zelinkiella (cf . Hollowday, 1950), both being parasitic or commensal (see May, 1989) . Seison forms a class of its own, the strongly deviating Seisonidea (see further Ricci et al ., 1993), while Zelinkiella belongs to Bdelloidea, which class is otherwise very poorly represented in the real oceans .…”

Section: The Oceansmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Relation to habitat in rotifers

Pejler¹

1995

Hydrobiologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rotifera should be especially suited for an analysis of habitat relations because this group contains such a high number of species, inhabiting diverse environments . Furthermore, rotifers are to a large extent cosmopolitan, implying that ecological barriers, rather than geographical, are decisive of their distribution . In this review a short characterization of the rotifer fauna in different habitats is given, whereby macroenvironments and microenvironments are reported separately . The macroenvironments are classified as follows : `harmonious' lakes and ponds, arctic and antarctic waters, hot springs, hypertrophic-saprobic environments, mires, strongly acidic waters, saline waters, temporary water bodies, subterranean waters, running waters, oceans, terrestrial environments . The following microenvironments are distinguished : macrophytes (housing periphytic rotifers), open water (with planktic forms), minerogenous sediments (with psammon and hyporheos), organogenous sediments, other organisms (i .e . parasites and epizoans) .Many rotifers are more or less euryecious, while relatively few are strongly restricted in their choice of habitat . In extreme environments a low number of species is found, but often a high number of individuals within these species . These rotifers are usually primary consumers, and for natural reasons extreme environments are characterized by a low number of trophic levels .In environments with a high species number the separate species differ very much in their morphology, making it difficult to find common traits which may be interpreted as adaptations to the respective habitats . The most apparent adaptations ought to be found among the planktic rotifers, and these adaptations seem to constitute largely a protection against predators . Rotifers in extreme environments are usually not very apart in a morphological or taxonomical respect, with their most close relatives living in `normal' habitats and sometimes euryecious (an apparent exception from this rule is formed by the class Seisonidea) . Adaptations to deviating chemical and physical environments may develop relatively rapidly (seen from a geological perspective), while the more fundamental changes (occurring during a longer period of time) seem to be a response to biotic factors (e .g ., the development of different types of trophi for facilitating food collection) .

show abstract

Section: The Oceansmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A review concerning these was recently given by May (1989) . After this a new parasitic species was described by .…”

Section: Other Organismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relation to habitat in rotifers

Pejler¹

1995

Hydrobiologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The rotifer species found in this study, Embata laticeps, has been found previously on Asellus aquaticus (Linnaeus, 1758) and Gammarus pulex (Linnaeus, 1758). Other rotifers are epizoic on diverse freshwater crustacea, as Daphnia Muller, 1785, Asellus Geoffroy, 1762, Gammarus Fabricius, 1775 (May 1989), or decapods Figure 23. Distribution of each epibiont species (mean densities) and total mean density of epibionts, along the anterioposterior axis of Caridina ensifera.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The species of the genus Amphileptus have never been previously found as epibionts on crustaceans, although they are not typical sessile ciliates and therefore, they should be considered as ciliates of the fauna associated with C. ensifera. Rotifers are well-known as epibionts or as living in close association with other organisms, but little is known of the types of relationships involved (May 1989). Seisonidae, Monogononta, and Bdelloidea include epizoic and parasitic species associated with Protozoa, Porifera, Rotifera, Annelida, Mollusca, Bryozoa, Echinodermata, Mollusca, Crustacea, and Vertebrata.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epibiontic communities on the freshwater shrimpCaridina ensifera(Crustacea, Decapoda, Atyidae) from Lake Poso (Sulawesi, Indonesia)

Fernández-Leborans

Rintelen

2007

Journal of Natural History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The epibiont communities of the freshwater shrimp Caridina ensifera, endemic to Lake Poso (Sulawesi, Indonesia), were analysed for the first time based on their morphological and biometrical characteristics and taxonomic position. Seven ciliated protozoans and a rotifer were examined: three suctorian ciliate protozoan species (Acineta sulawesiensis, Podophrya maupasi, and Spelaeophrya polypoides), three peritrichs (Zoothamnium intermedium, Vorticella globosa, and Cothurnia compressa), a haptorid (Amphileptus fusidens), and the rotifer species Embata laticeps. A mean number of 314.6 epibionts was found per shrimp specimen. The distribution of the epibiont species on the surface of the basibiont was recorded, to allow calculation of the density on the different colonized individuals of C. ensifera and on each anatomical unit of the shrimp. The most abundant species, Zoothamnium intermedium and Acineta sulawesiensis, were also the ones most widely distributed. The statistical analysis showed that Zoothamnium, Acineta, Podophrya, and Embata were the epibiont genera most widely distributed on the basibiont, and the pairs of epibiont genera Zoothamnium-Embata, Podophrya-Acineta, Spelaeophrya-Amphileptus, and Cothurnia-Vorticella followed a similar pattern of distribution. There was a significant difference between the distribution patterns of the different epibiont species on the shrimp. The analysis of the densities of the epibionts throughout the longitudinal axis of the shrimp showed a gradient from the anterior to the posterior end of the body, and a significantly different distribution of each epibiont species. Their colonization follows a certain pattern of behaviour, the species occupying the available substratum, with particular requirements of each functional group, but with a trend resulting in equilibrium among species and groups, compensating for diversity and density. The possible adaptations of the epibionts, as well as the colonization patterns are discussed.

show abstract

“…Several rotifers have been reported to be parasitic on many protozoan and crustacean species, and commensal with other species of Protozoa, Porifera, Mollusca and Echinodermata. [15]. The mutualism between the Branchiura Argulus and the rotifer Philodina might have evolved from a hyper-parasitism and later converted into a service-resource relationship.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mutualistic association of rotifer Philodina roseola with the branchiuran fish ectoparasite Argulus bengalensis at its embryonic stage

Banerjee

Poddar

Manna³

et al. 2016

Biol. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several rotifers including Philodina spp. are well known to make commensal and parasitic associations with different animals. The present investigation was carried out to decipher the relationship of Philodina roseola with a piscine ectoparasite Argulus bengalensis in its embryonic stage. Mechanical removal of the symbiont P. roseola from the argulid egg strips resulted in the complete (100%) failure in hatching. Several P. roseola individuals were found to feed on the solidified jelly coat of the eggs enabling the larvae to emerge under both laboratory and field conditions. Under the laboratory condition, the experimental removal of P. roseola did not affect the embryonic development, but it rendered the jelly coat intact; therefore, the larvae were unable to make hatching furrow and subsequently died. The results of our experiments thus prove this service–resource relationship to be a mutualism. Although the association is facultative for P. roseola , it is obligatory for Argulus spp. An act of intervention in this relationship thus offers a promising control of argulosis.

show abstract

Epizoic and parasitic rotifers

Cited by 30 publications

References 19 publications

Relation to habitat in rotifers

Relation to habitat in rotifers

Epibiontic communities on the freshwater shrimpCaridina ensifera(Crustacea, Decapoda, Atyidae) from Lake Poso (Sulawesi, Indonesia)

Mutualistic association of rotifer Philodina roseola with the branchiuran fish ectoparasite Argulus bengalensis at its embryonic stage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About