MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6892601693 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.11085326

Dactylosoma Labbe 1894

2020· article· en· W6892601693 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtist diversity and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenusParasite hostingHost (biology)Taxonomy (biology)Type species

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1.3. The genus Dactylosoma Members of the genus Dactylosoma have undergone a fair number of taxonomic disputes, with D. ranarum being the first described species of the genus. Although Lankester (1871) is often given credit for the discovery of D. ranarum (see Saunders, 1960; Levine, 1971; Barta et al., 1987; Barta, 1991; Davies and Johnston, 2000), it is clear from the original descriptions (Lankester, 1871, 1882) that he was working with a species of Lankesterella Labbé 1899 (initially known as “ Drepanidium ” erected by Lankester (1871, 1882) however, this name had already been used by Ehrenberg (1861) for a ciliate). Nöller (1913) clarified that the first description of D. ranarum was by Kruse (1890) who believed he was describing additional developmental stages of the “ Drepanidium ” parasite that was Lankesterella minima (Chaussat, 1850). Kruse (1890) suggested that the parasite should be grouped with the haemogregarines, proposing the name Haemogregarina ranarum (Kruse, 1890) if the generic name “ Drepanidium ” was to fall away. Celli and San Felice (1891) also regarded it as H. ranarum, and Grassi and Feletti (1892) as a malarial parasite, due to its resemblance to human malaria. However, Labbé (1894) recognised differences between these genera, subsequently erecting Dactylosoma based on: (1) different elongated and amoeboid body forms; (2) areolar structure, vesicular nucleus and hyaline appearance of the protoplasm; (3) lack of pigment, but presence of retractile granules; (4) minimal effect on the host cell and nucleus; and (5) merogony (“sporulation”) that gives rise to between 5 and 12 merozoites (“sporozoites”) grouped in a rosette- or fan-like appearance. Labbé (1894) named the species he placed in this newly erected genus, Dactylosoma splendens Labbé 1894, however, according to Wenyon (1926) who supported the designation of Nöller (1913), Kruse (1890) had first used the species name “ ranarum ” for this parasite, thus Dactylosoma splendens was renamed Dactylosoma ranarum (Kruse, 1890). Currently there are five recognised species of Dactylosoma, two of which infect fish hosts, namely Dactylosoma iethrinorum Saunders, 1960, and Dactylosoma salvelini Fantham, Porter and Richardson, 1942 (see Table 1). The remaining three species were described from anuran hosts. The first, Dactylosoma ranarum, is the most common and a cosmopolitan species reported from several anuran species. According to Barta (1991), this species has been recorded from Pelophylax kl. esculentus (Linnaeus, 1758) in France (Laveran, 1899), the Caucasus (Finkelstein, 1908), and Corsica (Boulard et al., 1982) and other European countries (França, 1908; Nöller, 1913). Furthermore, this species has also been recorded from Central and South America in Rhinella marina (Linnaeus, 1758) (see Walton, 1946) and in an unidentified toad from Pará, Brazil (Durham, 1902). Additionally, there have been reports in Africa from Pel. kl. esculentus collected in Constantine, Algeria (Billet, 1904), Pelophylax saharicus (Boulenger in Hartert, 1913) from Morocco (Seabra-Babo et al., 2015), and Pelophylax ridibundus (Pallas, 1771) (syn. Rana ridibunda) from North Africa (Walton, 1947, 1949), all included within the Palearctic realm. From the Ethiopian realm, hosts include Hyperolius sp. (syn. Rappia marmorata), Amnirana galamensis (Dumeril and Bibron, 1841) (syn. Hylarana galamensis, Rana galamensis), Ptychadena oxyrhynchus (Smith, 1849) (syn. Rana oxyrhynchus), Ptychadena submascareniensis (Guibé and Lamotte, 1953) (syn. R. mascareniensis) and Sclerophrys regularis (Reuss, 1833) (syn. Amietophrynus regularis, Bufo regularis) from the Gambia (Dutton et al., 1907). It is clear from the illustrations provided that the latter hosts were infected with several different blood parasites, all grouped as “ Drepanidia ” (Dutton et al., 1907; Walton, 1948). Amnirana albolabris (Hallowell, 1856) (syn. Hylarana albolabris, Rana albolabris) is reported as a host for D. ranarum from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Schwetz, 1930; Walton, 1947) in Central Africa, and Scl. gutturalis (syn. Scl. regularis) in South Africa (Fantham et al., 1942). The giant bullfrog, Pyxicephalus adspersus Tschudi, 1838 is also reported to be infected with D. ranarum from an unspecified location possibly in sub-Saharan Africa (Walton, 1947). Lastly, there are also reports from Sylvirana guentheri (Boulenger, 1882) from Tonkin, northern Vietnam (Mathis and Léger, 1911) and Yung Foh Lee, Yang Ming Shan, Taiwan (Manwell, 1964). The type host and type locality for D. ranarum is Pel. kl. esculentus and probably Naples, Italy, respectively (Kruse, 1890). The second species, Dactylosoma sylvatica Fantham, Porter and Richardson, 1942 was described from the wood frog Lithobates sylvaticus (LeConte, 1825) (syn. Rana sylvatica) collected in the Province of Quebec, Canada. The third species is Dactylosoma taiwanensis Manwell, 1964, described from the Alpine cricket frog, Fejervarya limnocharis (Gravenhorst, 1829) (syn. Rana Iimnocharis) in Hualien, Hua Lien Hsien, Taiwan (see Table 1). In addition to the summary of reported species of Dactylosoma mentioned above, Netherlands et al. (2015) reported on an unidentified species of Dactylosoma in Ptychadena anchietae (Bocage, 1868) from northern KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Species previously regarded as members of Dactylosoma are Babesiosoma mariae (Hoare, 1930) and Babesiosoma jahni (Nigrelli, 1929). Two enigmatic species previously assigned to Dactylosoma, Dactylosoma tritonis (Fantham, 1905) and D. amaniae (Awerinzew, 1914) are more likely inclusions of rickettsial organisms according to Levine (1988) and Barta (1991). Dactylosoma clariae (Haiba, 1962) (syn. Cytauxzoon clariae and Haemohormidium clariae) and Dactylosoma tilapiae Imam, Marzouk, Hassan, Derhall and Itman, 1985 were considered by Negm-Eldin (1998) to not contain sufficient proof to document the validity of these species (Smit et al., 2003). Species of Dactylosoma are characterised by similar merogonic development as for species of Babesiosoma, except for the morphologically distinct primary and secondary meronts and a varying number of merozoites produced in these cycles. In summary, D. ranarum undergoes primary merogony when a merozoite enters the host frogs’ erythrocytes. Within erythrocytes, merozoites undergo simultaneous peripheral budding, transforming into a large multinucleate meront producing up to 16 merozoites arranged in the characteristic rosette- or hand-like nature for which the genus was named (see Labbé, 1894; Nöller, 1913; Barta, 1991; Lainson, 2007). Merozoites then separate and penetrate other erythrocytes, either repeating the cycle of primary merogony or initiating secondary merogony. The cycle is repeated in secondary merogony with meronts producing up to eight merozoites that either repeat secondary merogony or mature into gamonts (see Nöller, 1913; Barta et al., 1987). To date, no complete cycles for any species of Dactylosoma have been elucidated. However, Barta (1991) used frogs captured on the island of Corsica, France, to experimentally infect the North American glossiphoniid leech Desserobdella picta (Verrill, 1872), the natural vector of B. stableri (see below) with D. ranarum. In his study, although no observations on the development of gametes or zygote formation were made, D. ranarum was found to undergo sporogonic development within the intestinal epithelium of this experimentally infected leech host. The oocysts observed appear to be polysporoblastic producing 30 or more sporozoites by a process of exogenous budding directly into the cytoplasm of the epithelial cell (Barta, 1991). Other haematophagous invertebrates have also been considered as potential vectors. Nöller (1913) was the first to experimentally attempt transmission of D. ranarum using the glossiphoniid leech Hemiclepsis margmata (Müller, 1774), however, this was unsuccessful despite repeated attempts. Boulard et al. (1982) also tested the mosquito Culicoides nubeculosus (Meigen, 1830) as the potential vector of D. ranarum, but the experiments yielded no results. Although phlebotomine sand flies are the known vectors for different blood parasites of anurans (Feng and Chung, 1940; Desportes, 1942), none thus far have been tested as potential vectors for any species of Dactylosoma.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.006

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicProtist diversity and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207