Description and molecular phylogeny of Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. (Nematoda: Criconematidae) from Iran

Publications

Share / Export Citation / Email / Print / Text size:

Journal of Nematology

Society of Nematologists

Subject: Life Sciences

GET ALERTS DONATE

ISSN: 0022-300X
eISSN: 2640-396X

DESCRIPTION

55
Reader(s)
188
Visit(s)
0
Comment(s)
0
Share(s)

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue / page

Related articles

Description and molecular phylogeny of Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. (Nematoda: Criconematidae) from Iran

Hossein Mirbabaei Karani / Ali Eskandari * / Reza Ghaderi / Akbar Karegar

Keywords : Criconematidae, Mesocriconema , M. abolafiai n. sp., Phylogeny, Morphology, Morphometric, New species, 28S rRNA, 18S rRNA, ITS rRNA

Citation Information : Journal of Nematology. Volume 52, Pages 1-17, DOI: https://doi.org/10.21307/jofnem-2020-048

License : (CC-BY-4.0)

Received Date : 15-October-2019 / Published Online: 25-May-2020

ARTICLE

ABSTRACT

Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. is described by morphological, morphometric, and molecular approaches. The new species is characterized by a body slightly curved with 402 to 612 μm length, 90 to 113 cuticular body annuli with smooth to irregular margins lacking of crenation with not more than one anastomoses, lip region not offset, small flattened submedian lobes, stylet robust (52.8-60.0 µm) with well-developed knobs, open vulva with simple anterior lip, straight vagina, filled spermatheca with globular sperms, presence of males, and conical-acute tail with last annulus bilobed or rounded. Discussions are made on the characterization of M. abolafiai n. sp. from the most closely related species, M. ozarkiense, and several other species having similar tail shape. Furthermore, results of phylogenetic analyses inferred from D2 to D3 expansion fragments of 28S rRNA, 18S rRNA, and ITS rRNA gene sequences revealed the phylogenetic position of the new species within representatives of Criconematidae and supported morphological justifications for considering this population from Iran as a new species in the genus Mesocriconema.

Graphical ABSTRACT

Ring nematodes of the genus Mesocriconema (Andrássy, 1965) are damaging root ectoparasites of many economical important crops (Cordero et al., 2012). This genus was first proposed for species of the genus Criconemoides (Taylor, 1936) sensu lato with crenated margins of annuli (Andrássy, 1965). Simultaneously and independently, De Grisse and Loof (1965) proposed to divide the large genus Criconemoides into several genera including Macroposthonia with type species M. annulata (De Man, 1880) being among them (De Grisse and Loof, 1965). Luc and Raski (1981) declared Criconemoides and Macroposthonia as genera dubia and placed most of their species in the genus Criconemella (De Grisse and Loof, 1965). Based upon SEM microscopy and discussing on plesiomorphic and apomorphic states of characters, Loof and De Grisse (1989) replaced the generic name Macroposthonia by the oldest available synonym Mesocriconema and revalidated Criconemoides based on the arguments of Loof and De Grisse (1967), but Siddiqi (2000) still considered Macroposthonia as a valid name. Brzeski et al. (2002) accepted this synonymy and provided a compendium of the genus Mesocriconema with 90 species (species having open vulva and submedian lobes arising from reduced pseudolips). Moreover, they considered that Mesocriconema differs from Criconemoides (species with closed vulva and pseudolips not reduced). Geraert (2010) replaced some species in the genus Neobakernema (Ebsary, 1981b) by validation of this genus and listed 90 valid species under Mesocriconema excluding M. lamothei from Mexico (Cid del Prado Vera, 2009) that was not included in the list. After that, three other species have been identified. Mesocriconema ozarkiense (Cordero et al., 2012) was described from Ozark National Forest in Washington, USA (Cordero et al., 2012). Mesocriconema ericaceum (Powers et al., 2016) was differentiated from M. xenoplax (Raski, 1952; Loof and De Grisse, 1989) by morphological characters and mitochondrial genome (COI) analysis (Powers et al., 2016). Mesocriconema nebraskense (Olson et al., 2017) was described as a monosexual, cryptic species sympatrically distributed with its cryptic counterpart, M. curvatum (Raski, 1952; Loof and De Grisse, 1989; Olson et al., 2017). In this paper, we describe the new species M. abolafiai n. sp., based on morphological and molecular characteristics.

Material and methods

Nematode populations and morphological characterization

The specimens were recovered from two localities in Dehdasht and Basht (Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad province, Southern Iran). The nematodes were extracted from the soil around roots of a grass (Phragmites sp.) using the combination of sieving and centrifugal-flotation method (Jenkins, 1964), killed and fixed by hot FPG (4:1:1, formaldehyde: propionic acid: glycerin), processed to anhydrous glycerin (De Grisse, 1969), and finally mounted in glycerin on permanent slides using paraffin wax. Specimens preserved in glycerin were selected for observation under SEM according to Abolafia (2015). The nematodes were hydrated in distilled water, dehydrated in a graded ethanol-acetone series, critical point dried, coated with gold, and observed with a Zeiss Merlin microscope (5 kV) (Zeiss, Oberkochen, Germany).

Morphometric and morphological characters of the nematode populations were studied by a light microscope, equipped with a Dino-eye microscope eyepiece camera in conjunction with its Dino Capture version 2.0 software. The nematode species identified by using data documented by Brzeski et al. (2002) and Geraert (2010), as well as by comparison with recently published descriptions (Cid del Prado Vera, 2009; Cordero et al., 2012; Powers et al., 2016; Olson et al., 2017).

DNA extraction

For molecular analysis, DNA was extracted from a single specimen, and three amplifications were conducted on that single specimen. A single female nematode was transferred into a drop of distilled water on a microscopic slide and examined under a light microscope. The nematode specimen was transferred into deionized water, washed three times and then put into an Eppendorf tube with 8 µl distilled water. Then, 12 µl lysis buffer (500 mM KCl, 100 mM Tris-HCL pH 8, 15 mM MgCl2, 10 mM DTT, 4.5% Tween 20) and 2 µl proteinase K were added to the Eppendorf tube. Nematode specimen was crushed with a microhomogenizer during 2 min. The tubes were incubated at 65°C for an hour and then at 95°C for 15 min (Tanha Maafi et al., 2003).

PCR amplification and sequencing

For DNA amplification the protocol described by Tanha Maafi et al. (2003) was used. The D2 to D3 expansion regions of the 28S rRNA gene was amplified with the forward D2A (5´-ACAAGTACCGTGAGGGAAAGTTG-3´) and the reverse D3B (5´-TCGGAAGGAACCAGCTACTA-3´) primers (Nunn, 1992). The 18S rRNA was amplified as two partially overlapping fragments, using three universal and one nematode-specific primer (1912R). First 18S fragment forward primer 988F (5´-CTCAAAGATTAAGCCATGC-3´) and reverse primer 1912R (5´-TTTACGGTCAGAACTAGGG-3´) and the second fragment forward primer 1813F (5´-CTGCGTGAGAGGTGAAAT-3´) and reverse 2646R (5´-GCTACCTTGTTACGACTTTT-3´) were used in the PCR reactions for the amplification of the 18S rRNA gene (Holterman et al., 2006). The ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 regions were amplified with the forward TW81 (5´-GTTTCCGTAGGTGAACCTGC-3´) and reverse AB28 (5´-ATATGCTTAAGTTCAGCGGGT-3´) primers (Joyce et al., 1994).

The PCR products were purified using the QIAquick Gel Extraction Kit (Takapozist, Iran) according to the manufacturer’s instruction and used for direct sequencing. The PCR products were sequenced in both directions (BioNeer Inc., Korea). The newly obtained sequences of the new species were submitted to GenBank database under accession numbers MN334221 for the 18S, MN334222 for the 28S D2-D3, and MN334228 for the ITS sequences.

Phylogenetic analysis

The sequences of the studied specimens were compared with sequences of other taxa in GenBank, and then, the closest sequences were selected for phylogenetic analyses. The sequences of 18S rRNA and D2 to D3 segments of 28S rRNA were aligned with ClustalX 1.83 (Thompson et al., 1997), using default parameter values and were manually edited if necessary. The best fitted model of DNA evolution was obtained using jModelTest v. 2 (Darriba et al., 2012) with the Akaike information criterion (AIC). The best-fit nucleotide substitution models were considered to be GTR + I + G for 18S and 28S, and SYM + G for ITS. The phylogenetic tree of sequences was inferred by the Bayesian method using MrBayes 3.1.2 (Ronquist and Huelsenbeck, 2003). Four MCMC chains for 1,000,000 generations were run. The Markov chains were sampled at intervals of 100 generations. Two runs were conducted for analysis. After discarding burn-in samples and evaluating convergence, the remaining samples were retained for further analyses. The topologies were used to generate a 50% majority rule consensus tree. Posterior probabilities (PP) are given for appropriate clades. Pairwise divergences between taxa were computed as absolute distance values and as percentage mean distance values based on whole alignment, with adjustment for missing data with PAUP* 4.0b 10 (Swofford, 2002). Trees were visualized using TreeView (Page, 1996).

Results

Systematics

Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp.

(Figs 1-3; Table 1).

Table 1.

Morphometric characters of Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. (measurements are in μm and in the form of average ± s.d. (range)).

10.21307_jofnem-2020-048-t001.jpg
Figure 1:

Diagnostic drawings of Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. Female (A, C-E, H, I) and Male (B, F, G). A, F: entire body; B-D: anterior end and pharyngeal region; E: reproductive system; G-I: posterior end.

10.21307_jofnem-2020-048-f001.jpg
Figure 2:

Light micrographs of Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. Female (A-J) and male (K-M). A: entire body; B, C and K: anterior end and pharyngeal region; D: cuticle at mid-body; E and F: cuticle at posterior end; G: vulval region and part of reproductive system; H-J and L: posterior end; M: spicule, gubernaculum and cloaca. (Scale bars: A = 50 µm; B-M = 10 µm).

10.21307_jofnem-2020-048-f002.jpg
Figure 3:

SEM micrograghs of Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. Female (A-L). A: anterior end (arrow pointing the secretory–excretory pore); B-E: lip region in sublateral, left subventral, frontal and right subventral views, respectively (arrows pointing the amphids); F: annuli; G: cuticle at mid-body; H: entire body; I-K: posterior end in lateral, subventral and terminal views, respectively (white arrow pointing the vulva, black arrow pointing the anus); L: excretory pore (arrow).

10.21307_jofnem-2020-048-f003.jpg

Description

Female

Body is slightly curved ventrally when relaxed by heat, assuming an open C-shaped. Cuticular annuli are retrorse, and margins are smooth to irregular across the entire body, without any hint of crenation. Not more than one anastomosis is observed. Cephalic region is not offset, tapering and slightly conical. Oral disc has rounded edges, and slit-like amphidial apertures are located laterally on the disc. Four small flattened submedian lobes are visible at the same level with a labial plate. Submedian lobes in SEM resemble a tongue with a central, longitudinal crease, not fused with labial plates. First body annulus is slightly smaller than the second annulus, not retrorse. Stylet is robust, with well-developed knobs that possess moderate anterior projections and 9 to 11 µm in width. Secretory–excretory pore is located at 27 to 30 annuli from the anterior end, almost at 4 to 5 annuli behind the pharyngeal basal bulb, which is small, pyriform, 10 to 13.5 µm in width and 18 to 20 µm in length. Female genital gonad is outstretched and spermatheca is slightly oval, offset from gonad, filled with globular sperm cells about 1 µm in diameter. Vagina is straight, occasionally slightly curved. Vulva is open with simple anterior lip. The post-vulval region of the body tapers gradually, ending in a pointed terminus or a small bilobed end annulus. SEM reveals that the anal opening is located usually three annuli posterior to the vulva.

Male

Body is vermiform and curved ventrally when fixed by heat treatment. Lateral field has four distinct longitudinal incisures. Lip region has distinct transverse striation, 8 to 9 µm wide and 5 to 7 µm high. Stylet and pharynx are degenerated. Spicules (33.6-35.0 µm in length) are slender and tylenchoid, ending to a distinct penial tube (4-5 µm in length). Gubernaculum is simple and slightly curved. Bursa not is observed. Tail is elongated-conical, ending to a pointed terminus.

Juvenile

Similar to female in general characteristics. Body is straight or slightly curved ventrally after fixation. Annuli are retrorse, lacking any crenation and ornamentation. Total number of annuli approximately equals to that of females, but annuli are narrower than of females (average 4.4 vs 5.5 µm).

Diagnosis

Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. is characterized by 90 to 113 cuticular annuli with smooth to irregular margins lacking crenation, small and flattened submedian lobes, stylet 52.8 to 60.0 µm long, open vulva with a simple anterior vulval lip, straight vagina, spermatheca filled with globular sperm, presence of males, and conical-acute tail with last annulus bilobed or rounded.

Relationships

Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. is characterized by having flattened submedian lobes groups with M. antipolitanum (De Guiran, 1963); M. citricola (Siddiqi, 1965; Loof and De Grisse, 1989); M. juliae (Crozzoli and Lamberti, 2001); M. napoense (Talavera and Hunt, 1997); M. oostenbrinki (Loof, 1964); M. ozarkiense (Cordero et al., 2012); M. paralineolatum (Rashid et al., 1987); M. planilobatum (Ta1avera and Hunt, 1997); and M. rusticum (Khan et al., 1976) in the diagnostic compendium developed by Brzeski et al. (2002).

Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. can be distinguished from M. antipolitanum and M. rusticum by differences in the size of submedian lobes (small vs large), tail shape (conical vs rounded), spermatheca (filled vs empty) and occurring of males (present vs absent). It differs from M. citricola by a different shape of the anterior vulval lip (simple vs bilobed) and higher number of cuticular annuli (90-113 vs 73-78). It can be differentiated from M. juliae by stylet length (52.8-60.0 vs 79-86 µm) and shape of the anterior vulval lip (simple vs bilobed). Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. can be distinguished from M. napoense, M. paralineolatum, and M. planilobatum by the number of cuticular annuli (90-113 vs 73-79, 82-88, 75-84, respectively) and vagina direction (straight vs sigmoid). It differs from M. oostenbrinki by a different shape of the anterior vulval lip (simple vs bilobed), the number of cuticular annuli (90-113 vs 84-94), and vagina direction (straight vs sigmoid). Our new species can be distinguished from M. ozarkiense by differences in the posterior end of cuticular annuli on post-vulval region (smooth vs crenated), spermatheca (filled vs empty), occurring of males (presence vs absence), vagina direction (straight vs sigmoid), and VL/VB ratio (1.5-1.9 vs 1.0-1.4).

Regarding general morphometric characters and tail shape, our populations can also come similar to M. denoudeni (De Grisse, 1967; Loof and De Grisse, 1989); M. jessiense (Van den Berg, 1992, 1994); M. reedi (Diab and Jenkins, 1966; Loof and De Grisse, 1989); M. raskiense (De Grisse, 1964; Andrássy, 1965); M. vadense (Loof, 1964; Loof and De Grisse, 1989); M. kirjanovae (Andrássy, 1962; Loof and De Grisse, 1989); M. paradenoudeni (Rashid et al., 1987; Loof and De Grisse, 1989); and M. parareedi (Ebsary, 1981a; Loof and De Grisse, 1989). However, our populations can be differentiated from M. denoudeni by a different tail terminus shape (conical-acute vs conical-rounded), the number of post-vulval annuli (11-14 vs 8-11), VL/VB ratio (1.5-1.9 vs 1.0-1.3), and presence of males. The new species differs from M. jessiense and M. reedi by having more annuli at post-vulval region (11-14 vs 8-9 and 9-10) and higher value for the VL/VB ratio (1.5-1.9 vs 0.8-1.1 and 1.1-1.3), and differs from M. reedi by having a larger body size (402-612 vs 360-470 µm). In comparison with M. raskiense, it has more annuli throughout body (90-113 vs 62-72), and a different structure of cuticular annuli (smooth and without anastomoses vs crenated with anastomoses at mid-body). It also differs from M. vadense by the number of cuticular annuli (90-113 vs 70-81), the number of post-vulval annuli (11-14 vs 7-10), VL/VB ratio (1.5-1.9 vs 0.8-1.3), and tail shape (conical-acute vs conical-rounded).

M. abolafiai n. sp. can be further distinguished from M. kirjanovae, M. citricola, M. paradenoudeni, and M. parareedi by a different shape of the anterior vulval lip (simple vs bilobed), and variations in the number of cuticular annuli (90-113 vs 79-89, 73-78, 102-130, and 111-121, respectively).

The males recovered in the type population have a unique elongated tail with pointed terminus, which only could be observed in M. raskiense and M. vadense. Spicules in our population are comparable with those of M. vadense (33-35 vs 30-34 µm) but shorter than those in M. raskiense (33.6-35.0 vs 38-43 µm). Males in some other species including M. brevicauda (Van den Berg and Spaull, 1985; Loof and De Grisse, 1989); M. curvatum, M. involutum (Loof, 1987, 1989); M. irregulare (De Grisse, 1964; Loof and De Grisse, 1989); M. juliae and M. oostenbrinki have more or less similar tails but shorter in size or with a different terminus shape.

Type host and locality

The type population was found from a canebrake in Dehdasht, Kohgiloyeh and Boyer-Ahmad province (30°49.42´N, 51°28.91´E). The other population was recovered from the rhizosphere of dog-rose shrubs (Rosa canina L.) in Basht, Kohgiloyeh and Boyer-Ahmad province (30°19.29´N, 51°15.04´E) during April 2017 by the first author.

Type specimens

Holotype, 10 paratype females and three paratype males, as well as five female specimens from the other recovered population were deposited in the nematode collection of the Department of Plant Protection, College of Agriculture, University of Zanjan, Zanjan, Iran.

Etymology

The species epithet refers to the name of Dr. Joaquín Abolafia, the well-known nematologist from University of Jaén, Spain, who works on nematode systematics.

Phylogenetic relationships

The 28S alignment was 738 bp long and consisted of 58 sequences as ingroups and three sequences, including Aglenchus agricola (Andrássy, 1954; De Man 1884) (AY780979), Eutylenchus excretorius (Sher et al., 1966) (AY780980), and Merlinius brevidens (Allen, 1955; Siddiqi, 1970) (KP313844), as outgroups (Table 2). Phylogenetic relationships of M. abolafiai n. sp. with other representatives of Criconematidae (Taylor, 1936; Thorne, 1949) inferred from the analysis of D2 to D3 expansion fragments of 28S rRNA gene sequences with collapsed branches, with PP less than 50%, are given in Figure 4. In this tree, M. abolafiai n. sp. formed a cluster with an isolate of M. xenoplax (MG680454) and an unnamed population (AY780967). Partial 28S rRNA sequences of the M. abolafiai n. sp. from Iran show about 23 bp (3%) difference with the closet species according to 28S tree (M. xenoplax: MG680454), whereas two species distinguished with some characters such as tail (conical vs subcylindrical) and vagina (straight vs sigmoid) shape. There is not any record of partial 28S rRNA sequences of M. ozarkience that it is closest species to M. abolafiai n. sp. based on morphological characteristics.

Table 2.

List of species, collection localities and GenBank accession numbers of individual specimens used in this study for phylogenetic analysis based on 28S rRNA gene.

10.21307_jofnem-2020-048-t002.jpg
Figure 4:

Bayesian 50% majority rule consensus tree as inferred from the D2 to D3 expansion segments of 28S rRNA gene dataset of Criconematoidea under the general time reversible model of sequence evolution with correction for invariable sites and a gamma-shaped distribution (GTR + I + G). Posterior probabilities more than 50% are given for appropriate clades. The new obtained sequence in this study is indicated in bold. Scale bar=expected changes per site.

10.21307_jofnem-2020-048-f004.jpg

The 18S alignment was 1538 bp long and consisted of 60 sequences as ingroups and Merlinius joctus (Thome, 1949; Sher, 1974) as outgroup (Table 3). Phylogenetic relationships of M. abolafiai n. sp. with other representatives of Criconematidae inferred from the analysis of 18S rRNA gene sequences with collapsed branches, with PP less than 50%, are given in Figure 5. The new species clustered with M. rusticum (MF094965) and Mesocriconema sp. (MF094967), all in a sister clade with M. curvatum (MF094891). The most important morphologically differences between M. abolafiai n. sp. and M. rusticum are related to lip region and post-vulval shape, respectively. The lip region in M. rusticum is set off with large submedian lobes, anteriorly flattened giving appearance of truncate anterior, but the lip region in M. abolafiai n. sp. is not offset, tapering and slightly conical. The post-vulval part is rounded in M. rusticum and tail end multi-lobed, mostly bent dorsally, whereas in M. abolafiai n. sp. post-vulval region of the body tapers gradually, ending in a pointed terminus or a small bilobed end annulus. The other interesting result inferred from the phylogenetic analysis of the present study is that the 18S rRNA gene is not a good marker for species differentiation in the Mesocriconema genus, because there is only one nucleotide difference between M. abolafiai n. sp. and M. rusticum, whereas these species are well separated based on morphological characteristics.

Table 3.

List of species, collection localities and GenBank accession numbers of individual specimens used in this study for phylogenetic analysis based on 18S rRNA gene.

10.21307_jofnem-2020-048-t003.jpg
Figure 5:

Bayesian 50% majority rule consensus tree as inferred from the 18S rRNA gene dataset of Criconematoidea under the general time reversible model of sequence evolution with correction for invariable sites and a gamma-shaped distribution (GTR + I + G). Posterior probabilities more than 50% are given for appropriate clades. The new obtained sequence in this study is indicated in bold. Scale bar = expected changes per site.

10.21307_jofnem-2020-048-f005.jpg

The ITS alignment was 401 bp long and consisted of 70 sequences as ingroups and Coslenchus rhombus (Andrássy, 1982) as outgroup (Table 4). Phylogenetic relationships of M. abolafiai n. sp. with other representatives of Criconematidae inferred from the analysis of ITS rRNA gene sequences with collapsed branches, with PP less than 50%, are given in Figure 6. In this tree, the new species clustered with an isolate of M. curvatum (MF094891) with 37 bp difference (9.2%), and in a distant position from the morphologically related species, M. ozarkiense (JQ708122) with 129 bp difference (32%).

Table 4.

List of species, collection localities and GenBank accession numbers of individual specimens used in this study for phylogenetic analysis based on ITS rRNA gene.

10.21307_jofnem-2020-048-t004.jpg
Figure 6:

Bayesian 50% majority rule consensus tree as inferred from the ITS rRNA gene dataset of Criconematoidea under the symmetrical model of sequence evolution with a gamma-shaped distribution (SYM + G). Posterior probabilities more than 50% are given for appropriate clades. The new obtained sequence in this study is indicated in bold. Scale bar = expected changes per site.

10.21307_jofnem-2020-048-f006.jpg

Remark

The genus Mesocriconema has a large number of species, which are morphologically very close to each other. Powers et al. (2016) distinguished 24 COI haplotype groups; only five of them corresponded to morphologically characterized species. The authors further noticed that it is not unexpected that additional sampling of Mesocriconema will continue to reveal cryptic species within Linnaean morphospecies; as these species have been described in the recent works (Powers et al., 2016; Olson et al., 2017).

Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. comes close to M. ozarkiense and some other species bearing conical tails with narrow tails (Table 5); however, detailed morphological observations made by light microscopy and SEM, as well as molecular phylogenetic analysis using different genes allowed us to consider Mabolafiai n. sp. as a new species. The new species can be differentiated from the most closely related species, M. ozarkiense, by some morphological and morphometric characters, as well as a different phylogenetic position in the ITS rRNA tree which resulted from a 129 bp (32%) nucleotide divergence. Unfortunately, there is no molecular information on 28S rRNA and 18S rRNA genes of M. ozarkiense so the above results can be further supported by additional analyses of these gene sequences.

Table 5.

Summary of the diagnostic characteristics of 12 species of Mesocriconema recently described worldwide. For other species, see (Brzeski et al., 2002). (St measurements in µm, L measurements in mm).

10.21307_jofnem-2020-048-t005.jpg

Acknowledgements

The authors thank anonymous reviewers and the editor of this MS for their valuable suggestions to improve the manuscript. SEM pictures were obtained with the assistance of Dr Joaquín Abolafia and the technical staff (Amparo Martínez-Morales) and equipment of ‘Centro de Instrumentación Científico-Técnica (CICT)’ from University of Jaén, Spain, and the financial support of the research activities ‘PAIUJA 2017/2018: EI_RNM02_2017’ and ‘PAIUJA 2019/2020: EI_RNM02_2019’ of the University of Jaén.

References


  1. Abolafia, J. 2015. A low-cost technique to manufacture a container to process meiofauna for scanning electron microscopy. Microscopy Research and Technique 78:771–776.
  2. Allen, M. W. 1955. A review of the nematode genus Tylenchorhynchus . University of California Publications in Zoology 61:129–165.
  3. Andrássy, I. 1954. Revision der Gattung Tylenchus Bastian, 1865 (Tylenchidae, Nematoda). Acta Zoologica Hungaricae 1:5–42.
  4. Andrássy, I. 1962. Neue Nematoden-Arten aus Ungarn, II. Fünf neue Arten der Unterklasse Secernentea (Phasmidia). Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungariae 8:1–23.
  5. Andrássy, I. 1965. Verzeichnis und Bestimmungsschlüssel der Arten der Nematoden-Gattungen Criconemoides Taylor, 1936 und Mesocriconema n. gen. Opuscula Zoologica Instituti Zoosystematici Universitatis Budapestinensis 5:153–171.
  6. Andrássy, I. 1982. The genera and species of the family Tylenchidae Örley, 1880 (Nematoda). The genus Coslenchus Siddiqi, 1978. Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientarum Hungaricae 28:193–232.
  7. Brzeski, M. W. , Loof, P. A. A. and Choi, Y. E. 2002. Compendium of the genus Mesocriconema Andrássy, 1965 (Nematoda: Criconematidae). Nematology 4:341–360.
  8. Cid del Prado Vera, I. 2009. Three new species of nematodes from Los Tuxtlas reserve area, Veracruz, Mexico. Order Tylenchida, Criconematidae (Nemata). Nematropica 39:187–197.
  9. Cordero, M. A. , Robbins, R. T. and Szalanski, A. L. 2012. Taxonomic and molecular identification of Mesocriconema and Criconemoides species (Nematoda: Criconematidae). Journal of Nematology 44:399–426.
  10. Crozzoli, R. and Lamberti, F. 2001. Known and new species of Mesocriconema Andrássy, 1965 (Nematoda: Criconematidae) from Venezuela. Russian Journal of Nematology 9:85–105.
  11. Darriba, D. , Taboada, G. L. , Doallo, R. and Posada, D. 2012. jModel Test 2: more models, new heuristics and parallel computing. Nature Methods 9:772.
  12. De Grisse, A. 1964. Morphological observations on Criconemoides, with a description of four new species found in Belgium (Nematoda). Mededelingen van de Landbouwhogeschool en de Opzoekingsstations van de Staat te Gent 29:734–761.
  13. De Grisse, A. 1967. Description of fourteen new species of Criconematidae with remarks on different species of this family. Biologisch Jaarboek Dodonaea 35:66–125.
  14. De Grisse, A. 1969. Redescription ou modifications de quelques techniques utilisées dans l'étude des nématodes phytoparasitaires. Mededlingen van de Rijksfaculteit der Landbouwwetenschappen te Gent 34:351–369.
  15. De Grisse, A. and Loof, P. A. A. 1965. Revision of the genus Criconemoides (Nematoda). Mededelingen van de Landbouwhogeschool en de Opzoekingsstations van de Staat te Gent 30:577–603.
  16. De Grisse, A. and Maas, P. W. 1970. Macroposthonia longistyleta n. sp. and Discocriconemella surinamensis n. sp. from Surinam (Nematoda: Criconematidae). Nematologica 16:123–132.
  17. De Guiran, G. 1963. Quatre especes nouvelles du genre Criconemoides Taylor (Nematoda - Criconematidae). Revue de Pathologie Vegetale et d’Entolomogie Agricole de France 42:1–11.
  18. De Man, J. G. 1880. Die einheimischen, frei in der reinen Erde und im süssen Wasser lebenden Nematoden. Tijdschrift der Nederlandsche Dierkundige Vereeniging 5:1–104.
  19. De Man, J. G. 1884. Die frei in der reinen Erde und im süβen Wasser lebenden Nematoden der niederländischen Fauna Brill, Leiden.
  20. Diab, K. A. and Jenkins, W. R. 1966. Three new species of Criconemoides (Nematoda: Criconematidae). Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 33:5–7.
  21. Ebsary, B. A. 1981a. Two new species of Macroposthonia (Nematoda: Criconematidae) from Canada. Canadian Journal of Zoology 59:115–118.
  22. Ebsary, B. A. 1981b. Neobakernema n. gen. (Nematoda: Criconematidae) with an emendation of Bakernema Wu, 1964. Canadian Journal of Zoology 59:2215–2116.
  23. Ebsary, B. A. 1982. Bakernema yukonense n. sp. (Nematoda: Criconematidae) with keys to the species of Criconemella and Discocriconemella . Canadian Journal of Zoology 60:3033–3047.
  24. Ebsary, B. A. 1991. Catalog of the order Tylenchida (Nematoda) Agriculture Canada Publication 1869/B, Ottawa.
  25. Geraert, E. 2010. The Criconematidae of the world. Identification of the family Criconematidae (Nematoda) Academia Press, Gent, Belgium.
  26. Holterman, M. , Wurff, A. , Elsen, S. , Megen, H. , Bongers, T. , Holovachov, O. , Bakker, J. and Helder, J. 2006. Phylum-wide analysis of SSU rDNA reveals deep phylogenetics relationships among nematodes and accelerated evolution toward crown clades. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 23:1792–1800.
  27. Jenkins, W. R. 1964. A rapid centrifugal-flotation technique for separating nematodes from soil. Plant Disease Reporter 48:692.
  28. Joyce, S. A. , Reid, A. , Driver, F. and Curran, J. 1994. Application of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods to the identification of entomopathogenic nematodes. In Burnell, A. M. , Ehlers, R. U. and Masson, J. P. (Eds), COST 812 biotechnology: genetics of entomopathogenic nematode-bacterium complexes. Proceedings of symposium and workshop, St Patrick’s College, Maynooth, Kildare County, Ireland European Commission, DG XII, Luxembourg, pp. 178–187.
  29. Khan, E. , Chawla, M. L. and Saha, M. 1976. Criconematoidea (Nematoda: Tylenchida) from India, with descriptions of nine new species, two new genera and a family. Indian Journal of Nematology 5:70–100.
  30. Loof, P. A. A. 1964. Four new species of Criconemoides from the Netherlands. Verslagen en Mededelingen van de Plantenziektenkundige Dienst (Jaarboek 1963) 141:160–168.
  31. Loof, P. A. A. 1987. Macroposthonia involuta n. sp., a new species of Criconematidae (Nematoda). Mededelingen Faculteit Landbouwwetenschappen Rijksuniversiteit Gent 52:107–111.
  32. Loof, P. A. A. 1989. Identification of criconematids. In Fortuner, R. (Ed.), Nematode identification and expert system technology Plenum Press,, New York, NY, 139–152.
  33. Loof, P. A. A. and De Grisse, A. 1967. Re-establishment of the genus Criconemoides Taylor, 1936 (Nematoda: Criconematidae). Mededlingen van de Rijksfaculteit der Landbouwwetenschappen te Gent 32:466–475.
  34. Loof, P. A. A. and De Grisse, A. 1989. Taxonomic and nomenclatorial observations on the genus Criconemella De Grisse & Loof, 1965 sensu Luc & Raski, 1981. Mededelingen Faculteit Landbouwwetenschappen Rijksuniversiteit Gent 54:53–74.
  35. Luc, M. and Raski, D. J. 1981. Status of the genera Macroposthonia, Criconemoides, Criconemella and Xenocriconemella (Criconematidae: Nematoda). Revue de Nématologie 4:3–21.
  36. Mohilal, N. and Dhanachand, C. H. 1998. Three new species of the family Criconematidae (Taylor, 1936) Thome, 1949 from Manipur. Uttar Pradesh Journal of Zoology 18:127–133.
  37. Nunn, G. B. 1992. Nematode molecular evolution, PhD thesis, University of Nottingham U.K.
  38. Olson, M. , Harris, T. , Higgins, R. , Mullin, P. , Powers, K. , Olson, S. and Powers, T. 2017. Species delimitation and description of Mesocriconema nebraskense n. sp. (Nematoda: Criconematidae), a morphologically cryptic, parthenogenetic. Journal of Nematology 49:42–66.
  39. Page, R. D. 1996. TreeView: an application to display phylogenetic trees on personal computers. Computer Applications in the Biosciences 12:357–358.
  40. Powers, T. O. , Mullin, P. , Higgins, R. , Harris, T. and Powers, K. S. 2016. Description of Mesocriconema ericaceum n. sp. (Nematoda: Criconematidae) and notes on other nematode species discovered in an ericaceous heath bald community in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, USA. Nematology 18:879–903.
  41. Pramodini, M. , Mohilal, N. and Dhanachand, C. 2006. A new species Discocriconemella waitha from Manipur with redescription of Discocriconemella spermata Mohilal & Dhanachand, 1998. Indian Journal of Nematology 36:70–76.
  42. Pramodini, M. , Mohilal, N. and Gambhir, R. K. 2007. Criconemella lobelia sp. n. and Caloosia langolus sp. n. from lemon plants of Manipur. Flora & Fauna 13:433–438.
  43. Rashid, F. , Geraert, E. and Sharma, R. D. 1987. Criconematidae (Nemata) from Brazil. Nematologica 32:374–397.
  44. Raski, D. J. 1952. On the morphology of Criconemoides Taylor, 1936, with descriptions of six new species (Nematoda: Criconematidae). Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 19:85–99.
  45. Ronquist, F. and Huelsenbeck, J. P. 2003. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19:1572–1574.
  46. Sher, S. A. 1974. The classification of Tetylenchus Filipjev, 1936, Leipotylenchus n.gen. (Leipotylenchinae n.subf.) and Triversus n.gen. (Nematoda: Tylenchoidea). Nematologica 19:318–325.
  47. Sher, S. A. , Corbett, D. C. M. and Colbran, R. C. 1966. Revision of the family Atylenchidae Skarbilovich, 1959 (Nematoda: Tylenchoidea). Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 33:60–66.
  48. Siddiqi, M. R. 1965. Criconemoides citricola n. sp. (Nematoda: Criconematidae), with a redescription of Criconema murrayi (Southern, 1914). Nematologica 11:239–243.
  49. Siddiqi, M. R. 1970. On the plant-parasitic. nematode genera Merlinius gen. n. and Tylenchorhynchus Cobb and the classIfication of the families Dolichodoridae and Belonolaimidae n. rank. Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 37:68–77.
  50. Siddiqi, M. R. 2000. Tylenchida, parasites of plants and insects 2nd ed, CABI Publishing, Wallingford.
  51. Swofford, D. L., 2002. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), version 4.0b 10 Sinauer Association, Sunderland, MA.
  52. Talavera, M. and Hunt, D. J. 1997. Observations on species of Discocriconemella de Grisse & Loof, 1965 and Macroposthonia de Man, 1880 (Nematoda: Tylenchida: Criconematidae) from Ecuador, with the proposal of M. napoensis n. sp. and M planilobata n. sp. Systematic Parasitology 36:133–142.
  53. Tanha Maafi, Z. T. , Subbotin, S. A. and Moens, M. 2003. Molecular identification of cyst-forming nematodes (Heteroderidae) from Iran and a phylogeny based on ITS-rDNA sequences. Nematology 5:99–111.
  54. Taylor, A. L. 1936. The genera and species of the Criconematinae, a sub-family of the Anguillulinidae (Nematoda). Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 55:391–421.
  55. Thompson, J. D. , Gibson, T. J. , Plewniak, F. , Jeanmougin, F. and Higgins, D. G. 1997. The CLUSTAL_X windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. Nucleic Acids Research 25:4876–4882.
  56. Thorne, G. 1949. On the classification of the Tylenchida, new Order (Nematoda: Phasmidia). Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 16:37–73.
  57. Van den Berg, E. 1992. New Criconematinae (Nemata) from the Carolina area of Eastern Transvaal, South Africa. Phytophylactica 24:253–269.
  58. Van den Berg, E. 1994. New and known Criconematoidea (Nemata) from forests in South Africa with a Redescription of Mesocriconema teres (Raski, 1952) Loof & De Grisse, 1989. Fundamental and Applied Nematology 17:551–562.
  59. Van den Berg, E. and Spaull, V. W. 1985. Some Tylenchid nematodes from Aldabra Atoll with a description of a new species. Phytophylactica 17:19–25.
  60. Wouts, W. M. 2006. Criconematina (Nematoda: Tylenchida). Fauna of New Zealand 55 Landcare Research, Lincoln.
XML PDF Share

FIGURES & TABLES

Figure 1:

Diagnostic drawings of Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. Female (A, C-E, H, I) and Male (B, F, G). A, F: entire body; B-D: anterior end and pharyngeal region; E: reproductive system; G-I: posterior end.

Full Size   |   Slide (.pptx)

Figure 2:

Light micrographs of Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. Female (A-J) and male (K-M). A: entire body; B, C and K: anterior end and pharyngeal region; D: cuticle at mid-body; E and F: cuticle at posterior end; G: vulval region and part of reproductive system; H-J and L: posterior end; M: spicule, gubernaculum and cloaca. (Scale bars: A = 50 µm; B-M = 10 µm).

Full Size   |   Slide (.pptx)

Figure 3:

SEM micrograghs of Mesocriconema abolafiai n. sp. Female (A-L). A: anterior end (arrow pointing the secretory–excretory pore); B-E: lip region in sublateral, left subventral, frontal and right subventral views, respectively (arrows pointing the amphids); F: annuli; G: cuticle at mid-body; H: entire body; I-K: posterior end in lateral, subventral and terminal views, respectively (white arrow pointing the vulva, black arrow pointing the anus); L: excretory pore (arrow).

Full Size   |   Slide (.pptx)

Figure 4:

Bayesian 50% majority rule consensus tree as inferred from the D2 to D3 expansion segments of 28S rRNA gene dataset of Criconematoidea under the general time reversible model of sequence evolution with correction for invariable sites and a gamma-shaped distribution (GTR + I + G). Posterior probabilities more than 50% are given for appropriate clades. The new obtained sequence in this study is indicated in bold. Scale bar=expected changes per site.

Full Size   |   Slide (.pptx)

Figure 5:

Bayesian 50% majority rule consensus tree as inferred from the 18S rRNA gene dataset of Criconematoidea under the general time reversible model of sequence evolution with correction for invariable sites and a gamma-shaped distribution (GTR + I + G). Posterior probabilities more than 50% are given for appropriate clades. The new obtained sequence in this study is indicated in bold. Scale bar = expected changes per site.

Full Size   |   Slide (.pptx)

Figure 6:

Bayesian 50% majority rule consensus tree as inferred from the ITS rRNA gene dataset of Criconematoidea under the symmetrical model of sequence evolution with a gamma-shaped distribution (SYM + G). Posterior probabilities more than 50% are given for appropriate clades. The new obtained sequence in this study is indicated in bold. Scale bar = expected changes per site.

Full Size   |   Slide (.pptx)

REFERENCES

  1. Abolafia, J. 2015. A low-cost technique to manufacture a container to process meiofauna for scanning electron microscopy. Microscopy Research and Technique 78:771–776.
  2. Allen, M. W. 1955. A review of the nematode genus Tylenchorhynchus . University of California Publications in Zoology 61:129–165.
  3. Andrássy, I. 1954. Revision der Gattung Tylenchus Bastian, 1865 (Tylenchidae, Nematoda). Acta Zoologica Hungaricae 1:5–42.
  4. Andrássy, I. 1962. Neue Nematoden-Arten aus Ungarn, II. Fünf neue Arten der Unterklasse Secernentea (Phasmidia). Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungariae 8:1–23.
  5. Andrássy, I. 1965. Verzeichnis und Bestimmungsschlüssel der Arten der Nematoden-Gattungen Criconemoides Taylor, 1936 und Mesocriconema n. gen. Opuscula Zoologica Instituti Zoosystematici Universitatis Budapestinensis 5:153–171.
  6. Andrássy, I. 1982. The genera and species of the family Tylenchidae Örley, 1880 (Nematoda). The genus Coslenchus Siddiqi, 1978. Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientarum Hungaricae 28:193–232.
  7. Brzeski, M. W. , Loof, P. A. A. and Choi, Y. E. 2002. Compendium of the genus Mesocriconema Andrássy, 1965 (Nematoda: Criconematidae). Nematology 4:341–360.
  8. Cid del Prado Vera, I. 2009. Three new species of nematodes from Los Tuxtlas reserve area, Veracruz, Mexico. Order Tylenchida, Criconematidae (Nemata). Nematropica 39:187–197.
  9. Cordero, M. A. , Robbins, R. T. and Szalanski, A. L. 2012. Taxonomic and molecular identification of Mesocriconema and Criconemoides species (Nematoda: Criconematidae). Journal of Nematology 44:399–426.
  10. Crozzoli, R. and Lamberti, F. 2001. Known and new species of Mesocriconema Andrássy, 1965 (Nematoda: Criconematidae) from Venezuela. Russian Journal of Nematology 9:85–105.
  11. Darriba, D. , Taboada, G. L. , Doallo, R. and Posada, D. 2012. jModel Test 2: more models, new heuristics and parallel computing. Nature Methods 9:772.
  12. De Grisse, A. 1964. Morphological observations on Criconemoides, with a description of four new species found in Belgium (Nematoda). Mededelingen van de Landbouwhogeschool en de Opzoekingsstations van de Staat te Gent 29:734–761.
  13. De Grisse, A. 1967. Description of fourteen new species of Criconematidae with remarks on different species of this family. Biologisch Jaarboek Dodonaea 35:66–125.
  14. De Grisse, A. 1969. Redescription ou modifications de quelques techniques utilisées dans l'étude des nématodes phytoparasitaires. Mededlingen van de Rijksfaculteit der Landbouwwetenschappen te Gent 34:351–369.
  15. De Grisse, A. and Loof, P. A. A. 1965. Revision of the genus Criconemoides (Nematoda). Mededelingen van de Landbouwhogeschool en de Opzoekingsstations van de Staat te Gent 30:577–603.
  16. De Grisse, A. and Maas, P. W. 1970. Macroposthonia longistyleta n. sp. and Discocriconemella surinamensis n. sp. from Surinam (Nematoda: Criconematidae). Nematologica 16:123–132.
  17. De Guiran, G. 1963. Quatre especes nouvelles du genre Criconemoides Taylor (Nematoda - Criconematidae). Revue de Pathologie Vegetale et d’Entolomogie Agricole de France 42:1–11.
  18. De Man, J. G. 1880. Die einheimischen, frei in der reinen Erde und im süssen Wasser lebenden Nematoden. Tijdschrift der Nederlandsche Dierkundige Vereeniging 5:1–104.
  19. De Man, J. G. 1884. Die frei in der reinen Erde und im süβen Wasser lebenden Nematoden der niederländischen Fauna Brill, Leiden.
  20. Diab, K. A. and Jenkins, W. R. 1966. Three new species of Criconemoides (Nematoda: Criconematidae). Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 33:5–7.
  21. Ebsary, B. A. 1981a. Two new species of Macroposthonia (Nematoda: Criconematidae) from Canada. Canadian Journal of Zoology 59:115–118.
  22. Ebsary, B. A. 1981b. Neobakernema n. gen. (Nematoda: Criconematidae) with an emendation of Bakernema Wu, 1964. Canadian Journal of Zoology 59:2215–2116.
  23. Ebsary, B. A. 1982. Bakernema yukonense n. sp. (Nematoda: Criconematidae) with keys to the species of Criconemella and Discocriconemella . Canadian Journal of Zoology 60:3033–3047.
  24. Ebsary, B. A. 1991. Catalog of the order Tylenchida (Nematoda) Agriculture Canada Publication 1869/B, Ottawa.
  25. Geraert, E. 2010. The Criconematidae of the world. Identification of the family Criconematidae (Nematoda) Academia Press, Gent, Belgium.
  26. Holterman, M. , Wurff, A. , Elsen, S. , Megen, H. , Bongers, T. , Holovachov, O. , Bakker, J. and Helder, J. 2006. Phylum-wide analysis of SSU rDNA reveals deep phylogenetics relationships among nematodes and accelerated evolution toward crown clades. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 23:1792–1800.
  27. Jenkins, W. R. 1964. A rapid centrifugal-flotation technique for separating nematodes from soil. Plant Disease Reporter 48:692.
  28. Joyce, S. A. , Reid, A. , Driver, F. and Curran, J. 1994. Application of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods to the identification of entomopathogenic nematodes. In Burnell, A. M. , Ehlers, R. U. and Masson, J. P. (Eds), COST 812 biotechnology: genetics of entomopathogenic nematode-bacterium complexes. Proceedings of symposium and workshop, St Patrick’s College, Maynooth, Kildare County, Ireland European Commission, DG XII, Luxembourg, pp. 178–187.
  29. Khan, E. , Chawla, M. L. and Saha, M. 1976. Criconematoidea (Nematoda: Tylenchida) from India, with descriptions of nine new species, two new genera and a family. Indian Journal of Nematology 5:70–100.
  30. Loof, P. A. A. 1964. Four new species of Criconemoides from the Netherlands. Verslagen en Mededelingen van de Plantenziektenkundige Dienst (Jaarboek 1963) 141:160–168.
  31. Loof, P. A. A. 1987. Macroposthonia involuta n. sp., a new species of Criconematidae (Nematoda). Mededelingen Faculteit Landbouwwetenschappen Rijksuniversiteit Gent 52:107–111.
  32. Loof, P. A. A. 1989. Identification of criconematids. In Fortuner, R. (Ed.), Nematode identification and expert system technology Plenum Press,, New York, NY, 139–152.
  33. Loof, P. A. A. and De Grisse, A. 1967. Re-establishment of the genus Criconemoides Taylor, 1936 (Nematoda: Criconematidae). Mededlingen van de Rijksfaculteit der Landbouwwetenschappen te Gent 32:466–475.
  34. Loof, P. A. A. and De Grisse, A. 1989. Taxonomic and nomenclatorial observations on the genus Criconemella De Grisse & Loof, 1965 sensu Luc & Raski, 1981. Mededelingen Faculteit Landbouwwetenschappen Rijksuniversiteit Gent 54:53–74.
  35. Luc, M. and Raski, D. J. 1981. Status of the genera Macroposthonia, Criconemoides, Criconemella and Xenocriconemella (Criconematidae: Nematoda). Revue de Nématologie 4:3–21.
  36. Mohilal, N. and Dhanachand, C. H. 1998. Three new species of the family Criconematidae (Taylor, 1936) Thome, 1949 from Manipur. Uttar Pradesh Journal of Zoology 18:127–133.
  37. Nunn, G. B. 1992. Nematode molecular evolution, PhD thesis, University of Nottingham U.K.
  38. Olson, M. , Harris, T. , Higgins, R. , Mullin, P. , Powers, K. , Olson, S. and Powers, T. 2017. Species delimitation and description of Mesocriconema nebraskense n. sp. (Nematoda: Criconematidae), a morphologically cryptic, parthenogenetic. Journal of Nematology 49:42–66.
  39. Page, R. D. 1996. TreeView: an application to display phylogenetic trees on personal computers. Computer Applications in the Biosciences 12:357–358.
  40. Powers, T. O. , Mullin, P. , Higgins, R. , Harris, T. and Powers, K. S. 2016. Description of Mesocriconema ericaceum n. sp. (Nematoda: Criconematidae) and notes on other nematode species discovered in an ericaceous heath bald community in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, USA. Nematology 18:879–903.
  41. Pramodini, M. , Mohilal, N. and Dhanachand, C. 2006. A new species Discocriconemella waitha from Manipur with redescription of Discocriconemella spermata Mohilal & Dhanachand, 1998. Indian Journal of Nematology 36:70–76.
  42. Pramodini, M. , Mohilal, N. and Gambhir, R. K. 2007. Criconemella lobelia sp. n. and Caloosia langolus sp. n. from lemon plants of Manipur. Flora & Fauna 13:433–438.
  43. Rashid, F. , Geraert, E. and Sharma, R. D. 1987. Criconematidae (Nemata) from Brazil. Nematologica 32:374–397.
  44. Raski, D. J. 1952. On the morphology of Criconemoides Taylor, 1936, with descriptions of six new species (Nematoda: Criconematidae). Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 19:85–99.
  45. Ronquist, F. and Huelsenbeck, J. P. 2003. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19:1572–1574.
  46. Sher, S. A. 1974. The classification of Tetylenchus Filipjev, 1936, Leipotylenchus n.gen. (Leipotylenchinae n.subf.) and Triversus n.gen. (Nematoda: Tylenchoidea). Nematologica 19:318–325.
  47. Sher, S. A. , Corbett, D. C. M. and Colbran, R. C. 1966. Revision of the family Atylenchidae Skarbilovich, 1959 (Nematoda: Tylenchoidea). Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 33:60–66.
  48. Siddiqi, M. R. 1965. Criconemoides citricola n. sp. (Nematoda: Criconematidae), with a redescription of Criconema murrayi (Southern, 1914). Nematologica 11:239–243.
  49. Siddiqi, M. R. 1970. On the plant-parasitic. nematode genera Merlinius gen. n. and Tylenchorhynchus Cobb and the classIfication of the families Dolichodoridae and Belonolaimidae n. rank. Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 37:68–77.
  50. Siddiqi, M. R. 2000. Tylenchida, parasites of plants and insects 2nd ed, CABI Publishing, Wallingford.
  51. Swofford, D. L., 2002. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), version 4.0b 10 Sinauer Association, Sunderland, MA.
  52. Talavera, M. and Hunt, D. J. 1997. Observations on species of Discocriconemella de Grisse & Loof, 1965 and Macroposthonia de Man, 1880 (Nematoda: Tylenchida: Criconematidae) from Ecuador, with the proposal of M. napoensis n. sp. and M planilobata n. sp. Systematic Parasitology 36:133–142.
  53. Tanha Maafi, Z. T. , Subbotin, S. A. and Moens, M. 2003. Molecular identification of cyst-forming nematodes (Heteroderidae) from Iran and a phylogeny based on ITS-rDNA sequences. Nematology 5:99–111.
  54. Taylor, A. L. 1936. The genera and species of the Criconematinae, a sub-family of the Anguillulinidae (Nematoda). Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 55:391–421.
  55. Thompson, J. D. , Gibson, T. J. , Plewniak, F. , Jeanmougin, F. and Higgins, D. G. 1997. The CLUSTAL_X windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. Nucleic Acids Research 25:4876–4882.
  56. Thorne, G. 1949. On the classification of the Tylenchida, new Order (Nematoda: Phasmidia). Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 16:37–73.
  57. Van den Berg, E. 1992. New Criconematinae (Nemata) from the Carolina area of Eastern Transvaal, South Africa. Phytophylactica 24:253–269.
  58. Van den Berg, E. 1994. New and known Criconematoidea (Nemata) from forests in South Africa with a Redescription of Mesocriconema teres (Raski, 1952) Loof & De Grisse, 1989. Fundamental and Applied Nematology 17:551–562.
  59. Van den Berg, E. and Spaull, V. W. 1985. Some Tylenchid nematodes from Aldabra Atoll with a description of a new species. Phytophylactica 17:19–25.
  60. Wouts, W. M. 2006. Criconematina (Nematoda: Tylenchida). Fauna of New Zealand 55 Landcare Research, Lincoln.

EXTRA FILES

COMMENTS