Sanguinicola
Plehn, 1905
comprises 26 species that collectively infect fishes from 8 orders (Cypriniformes, Characiformes, Siluriformes, Esociformes, Salmoniformes, Labriformes, Centrarchiformes, and Perciformes). Its revision is warranted because several species assigned to the genus could represent new genera, nucleotide sequences are wanting, many species have incomplete descriptions, and types for most species are missing or of poor quality. Herein, we emend
Sanguinicola
based on morphology and the first nucleotide-based phylogenetic analysis that includes multiple sequences from morphologically identified adult specimens. We describe
Sanguinicola plehnae
Warren and Bullard n. sp. from the heart of northern pike,
Esox lucius
Linnaeus, 1758 from Russia; provide supplemental observations of
Sanguinicola volgensis
(
Rašín, 1929
)
McIntosh, 1934
from the heart of sabrefish (type species),
Pelecus cultratus
(Linnaeus, 1758) Berg, 1949 from Russia; describe
Sanguinicola
cf.
volgensis
from the heart of ide,
Leuciscus idus
(Linnaeus, 1758) Berg, 1949 from Russia; and describe
Pseudosanguinicola occidentalis
(
Van Cleave and Mueller, 1932
) Warren and Bullard n. gen., n. comb. from the heart of walleye,
Sander vitreus
(Mitchill, 1818) Bailey, Latta, and Smith, 2004 from eastern North America.
Sanguinicola plehnae
differs from its congeners by having lateral tegumental spines that total 118–122, are small (3% of body width), and protrude 2–3 µm from the tegument (lacking associated conical protrusion) as well as by having a large testis (>40% of body length).
Sanguinicola volgensis
differs from its congeners by having posteriorly directed lateral tegumental spines encased in a tegumental conical protrusion as well as by having an ovoid egg. Specimens of
S.
cf.
volgensis
differ from those of
S. volgensis
by having a body that is 5–6× longer than wide (vs. 2–3× in
S. volgensis
) and <90 lateral tegumental spines (vs. >95).
Pseudosanguinicola
Warren and Bullard n. gen. differs from
Sanguinicola
by having densely transverse rows of lateral tegumental spines (vs. a single column of large spines). The phylogenetic analysis utilizing the large subunit ribosomal DNA (
28S
) failed to reject monophyly of
Sanguinicola.