Notes on the genusTunga(Siphonaptera: Tungidae) II – neosomes, morphology, classification, and other taxonomic notes

Abstract

This review focuses on the neosomes, morphology, and taxonomy of adult species of the genus Tunga, complementing the previously published data on the phylogeny, ecology, and pathogenic role. Neosomes are structures formed after penetration of adult females into the skin of hosts resulting in significant enlargement, being the most characteristic and most frequently observed form in hosts. Neosomes can be differentiated by shape, measurements, and sites of attachment to principal hosts. The taxonomic value and morphometric data of the most widely used characteristics to separate species – such as frontal curvature, head chaetotaxy, preoral internal sclerotization, ventral and dorsal genal lobes, eyes, maxillary palps, fusion of pronotum and mesonotum, metacoxae, metatarsi chaetotaxy, spermatheca (females), manubrium, basimere, telomere, and phallosome (males) – are comparatively analyzed. The sexes, individual variations, undescribed species, higher taxa, as well as a proposal for division of the genus into two subgenera (Tunga and Brevidigita) are presented (as previously given by Wang). A key for females, males, and gravid females (neosomes) also is included for identifying the 13 known species. Data on host specificity and geographical distribution may also support the identification of Tunga species because some sand fleas and their hosts may have co-evolved.

An Assemblage of Fleas (Siphonaptera) From Canada, México, and the United States of America, in the Hastriter Collecton (Brigham Young University)

“…Tunga monositus Barnes and Radovsky 1969:19–36 (México), Audy et al 1972:489, 491, 493, M. Rothschild and Schlein 1975:467, 485, M. Rothschild 1976:98, 101,106, plate VIIII, Lavoipierre eta al 1979a: 197–216, 1979b:85–94, Cheetham 1988:66–67, M. Rothschild 1988:313–323, 1991:625–626 (none), Adams and Lewis* 1995:24 (México), Beaucournu et al 1996:71 (none), Hinz 1996:175, 178, Ponce-Ulloa and Llorente-Bousquets 1996:557 (México), Hastriter 1997:281 (UT), Beaucournu et al 2012:209, 211, 215, Linardi and Moreira de Avelar 2014:3518–3525, Linardi et al 2014:4 (none), Light et al 2020:48 (Baja CA),…”

“…Lavoipierre et al (1979a, b) described the feeding process and tissue reactions of the host via histological techniques. Linardi and Moreira de Avelar (2014) and Linardi et al (2014) stressed the importance of the external shape of neosomes as a taxonomic tool for differentiation of neosomes of numerous tungid species.…”

Current status of the knowledge on the epidemiology of tungiasis in the Americas

“…T. penetrans parasitizes at least 26 species of domestic, sylvatic, and synanthropic animals ( 1 ) ( Table 1 ). The remarkably broad host-specificity of T. penetrans is reflected by animals as different as anteaters and armadillos, on one side of the host spectrum, and monkeys and jaguars on the other side ( 6 ). In contrast, T. trimamillata and T. hexalobulata parasitize only a limited number of animal species and the spatial occurrence of these Tunga species is restricted ( 7 ).…”

Tungiasis: a poorly-known diagnosis in Europe. Two paradigmatic cases from Portugal

“…In such countries, there are recurrent and massive infestations with dozens of parasites present on the foot, which can cause considerable morbidity such as superinfections and handicap. This infestation is more common in the dry season (1,5). In developed countries, the majority of cases are travelers returning from endemic areas (3).…”

“…Only the species Tunga penetrans and rarely Tunga trimamillata cause the disease in humans (1). It is an exclusively tropical ectoparasitosis that occurs in South America, the Caribbean, and Sub-Saharan Africa (2).…”