Dirofilaria aethiops Webber, 1955, a filarial parasite of monkeys I. The morphology of the adult worms and microfilariae

Abstract

1. Dirofilaria aethiops Webber, 1955 has been discovered in African monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops). Adult worms were found in the interfascicular connective tissue, especially in the thighs; microfilariae were found in the blood.2. The adult worms are morphologically similar to other members of the genus, from which they differ principally in the structure of the spicules of the male worms. The thickening of the left spicule is complex at the twist; the latter is nearer to the proximal than to the distal end. The right spicule is robust and ends in a cap-like structure.3. The microfilariae are indistinguishable from those of other members of the genus.4. In Dirofilaria schoutedeni Vuylsteke & Rodhain, 1938 the left spicule is simpler in structure than the left spicule of D. aethiops, and the twist is nearer to the distal end than to the proximal end. The distal part of the right spicule of D. schoutedeni has longitudinal markings but no cap.5. D. aethiops has been recorded from Tanganyika, Uganda and Gambia, in Cercopithecus and Colobus monkeys.6. The anatomy of the female D. aethiops, as it is shown in serial sections, is briefly described.

Studies withBrugia pahangi. 14. Intrauterine development of the microfilaria and a comparison with other filarial species

“…The in utero development of microfilariae of Dipetalonenia viteae (Terry et al t 1961), Mrofilaria aethiops (Webber, 1955), Dirqfilaria immitis (Kotcher, 1941;Taylor, I960), Folyelfa spp. (Kotcher, 1941), Litomosoldes carinii (Kershaw, 1948;McFadzean and Smiles, J956;Taylor, 1960), Loa ha (Penel, 1905;Huffman, 1911), Onchocerca volvulus (Prom, 901;Parsons, 1908;Blacklock, 1926;Neafie, 1972) and Wuchereria bancrofti (Lewis, 1877;19 *>ahr, 1912) has been studied by Jight microscopy.…”

Dirofilaria (Nochtiella) linstowi n.sp. a Filarioid of Monkeys in Ceylon

“…This species has since been studied and redescribed. Webber (1955b) considered it distinct from D. aethiops and D. scJioutcdeni but Chabaud and Rousselot (1956) after redescribing D. corynodes noted that this species had characters intermediate between D. aethiops and D. schoutedeni and concluded : "qu'il est preferable de designe l'ensemble sous le nom de D. corynodes". They proposed that these two species be synonymized with D. corynodes.…”

“…They proposed that these two species be synonymized with D. corynodes. It must be noted, as pointed out by Lopez-Neyra (1950), that D. aethiops is a nomen nudum since Hawking and McFadzean (1954) referred to it as an East African species "to be called D. aethiops" before it was first described by Webber (1955a).…”

“…The other African species D. tawila was originally placed in a separate genus Tawila. Webber (1955b) pointed out that apart from the chitinous ring round the mouth, it had the characters of Dirofilaria. Shoho (1965) showing that the pre-oesophageal ring is present in D. immitis decided to place D. tawila in the genus Dirofilaria.…”

“…The adults of D. magnilarvatum are much smaller, the spicule sizes and ratios are different, the post anal papillae are more numerous and the microfilariae are considerably larger. Webber (1955b) synonymised D. macacae with D. repens. Whether it is a valid species or not, it clearly differs from D. linstowi n.sp.…”