2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.jip.2009.02.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Morphology and taxonomy of the microsporidium Liebermannia covasacrae n. sp. from the grasshopper Covasacris pallidinota (Orthoptera, Acrididae)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
13
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
1
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…), Libermannia (Sokolova et al. ), and Tubulinosema (herein, Table ). Surprisingly, both phylogenetic and distance matrix analyses suggest that Anncaliia spp.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…), Libermannia (Sokolova et al. ), and Tubulinosema (herein, Table ). Surprisingly, both phylogenetic and distance matrix analyses suggest that Anncaliia spp.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Such variations prove once again that the nuclear phase, and type of sporogony (polysporoblastic vs. disporoblastic) can vary in closely related species as it has been previously demonstrated for Liebermannia spp. (Sokolova et al, 2009).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A possible explanation is the divergence of these forms from a common ancestor with two dissimilar developmental sequences proceeding within determinative and intermediate hosts, respectively. In another case, three species of the genus Liebermannia, all from orthopteran insects, are similar in ultrastructure but different in nuclear phase, so that the presence of diplokaryotic spores is removed from the revised genus diagnosis (Sokolova et al 2009). Another example is the taxonomy of Nosema/Vairimorpha clade in which assignment to one of these two genera, formally based upon developmental sequence, is not congruent with phylogenetic relationships, substantiating the need for revision of these taxa (Baker et al 1995;Kyei-Poku et al 2008).…”
Section: Differential Diagnosismentioning
confidence: 99%