2017
DOI: 10.1007/s10658-017-1364-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Description and molecular phylogeny of one new and one known needle nematode of the genus Paralongidorus (Nematoda: Longidoridae) from grapevine in Portugal using integrative approach

Abstract: A new and a known longidorid nematode, Paralongidorus lusitanicus n. sp. and Paralongidorus plesioepimikis, are described and illustrated from populations extracted from soil associated with grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) from Escaroupim and Pó (central-Western Portugal), respectively. The new needle nematode P. lusitanicus n. sp. is characterised by a very large body size (8072-12,022 μm), an expanded and rounded lip region, ca 30 μm wide, with a clear constriction followed by a depression posterior to the amp… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

4
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
2
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Phylogenetic analyses based on three rDNA molecular markers (D2-D3 expansion domains of 28S rRNA gene, ITS1 region and the partial 18S rRNA) and mitochondrial DNA coxI resulted in a general consensus of species phylogenetic positions for the majority, and were generally congruent with those given by previous phylogenetic analysis ( Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez et al, 2018;Archidona-Yuste et al, 2019;Cai et al, 2020;Inserra et al, 2021). Phylogeny based on several ribosomal and mitochondrial markers also confirm the SEM results, clearly separating L. iberis n. comb.…”
Section: Remarks and New Relationshipssupporting
confidence: 77%
“…Phylogenetic analyses based on three rDNA molecular markers (D2-D3 expansion domains of 28S rRNA gene, ITS1 region and the partial 18S rRNA) and mitochondrial DNA coxI resulted in a general consensus of species phylogenetic positions for the majority, and were generally congruent with those given by previous phylogenetic analysis ( Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez et al, 2018;Archidona-Yuste et al, 2019;Cai et al, 2020;Inserra et al, 2021). Phylogeny based on several ribosomal and mitochondrial markers also confirm the SEM results, clearly separating L. iberis n. comb.…”
Section: Remarks and New Relationshipssupporting
confidence: 77%
“…10). This tree is similar to the most recent phylogenetic analysis showed by Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez et al (2017), Barsi andLuca (2017), and showing P. bikanerensis in a position outside of the main clade for Paralongidorus. Longidorus jonesi is well-related phylogenetically to accession described from Japan (KF552069) .…”
Section: Phylogenetic Relationships Of Paralongidorus Sali and Longidorus Jonesisupporting
confidence: 89%
“…The major difference used to separate Longidorus, Longidoroides, and Paralongidorus is the shape of amphids (pouch like in Longidorus and Longidoroides vs. funnel/stirrup shaped in Paralongidorus) and the opening of amphidial aperture (pore-like in Longidorus vs. slit-like in Longidoroides and Paralongidorus) (Oliveira and Neilson, 2006). Several new species of Paralongidorus have published with complete molecular characterization and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) observations (Palomares-Rius et al, 2008Pedram et al, 2012;Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez et al, 2017;Barsi and Luca, 2017) which enables the discrimination between Longidorus and Paralongidorus species. However, there is no molecular evidence to distinguish Longidoroides species which leaves the status of this Ruihang Cai, 1 Munawar Maria, 1 Nan Qu, 1 Pablo Castillo, 3 genus as junior synonym of Paralongidorus as suggested by Decraemer and Coomans (2007).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Subsequently, they were centrifuged in 18 µl of solution containing 10 µl ddH 2 O, 6 µl 10× PCR buffer, and 2 µl of proteinase K (20 mg/ml) (Nalgene), and frozen at −80 °C (15 min). Samples were mixed for 15 sec and PCR assays were conducted as described by Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez et al (2018). The tubes were incubated at 57 °C (1 h), 65 °C (1 h), and 95 °C (15 min).…”
Section: Dna Extraction Pcr and Sequencingmentioning
confidence: 99%