• This record comes from PubMed

Ultrastructure of the uterus, embryonic envelopes and the coracidium of the enigmatic tapeworm Tetracampos ciliotheca (Cestoda: Bothriocephalidea) from African sharptooth catfish (Clarias gariepinus)

. 2020 Mar ; 119 (3) : 847-858. [epub] 20200103

Language English Country Germany Media print-electronic

Document type Journal Article

Links

PubMed 31901107
DOI 10.1007/s00436-019-06496-3
PII: 10.1007/s00436-019-06496-3
Knihovny.cz E-resources

Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) was used to study the ultrastructure of the uterus and egg morphology in the enigmatic bothriocephalidean tapeworm Tetracampos ciliotheca. The uterine wall, underlain by well-developed muscle bundles, consists of a syncytial epithelium which is characterized by the abundance of free ribosomes, mitochondria and cisternae of granular endoplasmic reticulum (GER). On the apical surface of the uterine epithelium, there is an abundant network of cytoplasmic microlamellae projecting into the uterine lumen. The lumen is filled with freely lying eggs which are located close to the uterine wall but do not contact with the microlamellae of the uterine epithelium. The developed eggs possess an oncosphere surrounded by four envelopes: (1) a thin egg shell; (2) an outer envelope; (3) a syncytial, ciliated inner envelope; and (4) the oncospheral membrane. The mature hexacanth is armed with three pairs of oncospheral hooks, as well as somatic and hook muscles and five types of cells (1) binucleated subtegumental cell, (2) somatic cells, (3) penetration gland cells, (4) nerve cells and (5) germinative cells. Considering the relative scarcity of descriptive and comparative studies on the ultrastructure of the uterus and egg morphology in the order Bothriocephalidea, we concluded that Tet. ciliotheca displays a unique type of egg development. Based on these results, we discuss plausible ideas relating to the function of these structures for consideration in future studies.

See more in PubMed

Int J Parasitol. 1997 Sep;27(9):1065-74 PubMed

Int J Parasitol. 1973 May;3(3):321-7 PubMed

J Parasitol. 2017 Dec;103(6):747-755 PubMed

Parasitol Res. 2012 Feb;110(2):1009-17 PubMed

Parasitol Res. 1990;76(3):251-62 PubMed

Parasitol Res. 2018 Mar;117(3):783-791 PubMed

Parasitology. 1981 Jun;82(Pt 3):429-43 PubMed

Int J Parasitol. 2015 Oct;45(12):761-71 PubMed

J Parasitol. 1972 Oct;58(5):849-63 PubMed

J Parasitol. 1968 Oct;54(5):957-69 PubMed

Syst Parasitol. 2008 Oct;71(2):81-136 PubMed

Int Rev Cytol. 1974;39:191-283 PubMed

Z Parasitenkd. 1974 Apr 22;43(3):135-49 PubMed

Int J Parasitol. 2000 Jun;30(7):805-17 PubMed

Int J Parasitol. 2010 Oct;40(12):1419-31 PubMed

J Parasitol. 2006 Oct;92(5):953-61 PubMed

Adv Parasitol. 1966;4:107-86 PubMed

Folia Parasitol (Praha). 2008 Mar;55(1):42-52 PubMed

Parasitology. 1973 Feb;66(1):9-18 PubMed

Parasitol Res. 2018 Aug;117(8):2653-2663 PubMed

Z Parasitenkd. 1979 Aug;59(2):151-9 PubMed

J Cell Biol. 1963 Apr;17:208-12 PubMed

J Parasitol. 1974 Apr;60(2):209-26 PubMed

C R Biol. 2013 Jul;336(7):321-30 PubMed

Parasitol Int. 2010 Dec;59(4):539-48 PubMed

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...