Table 1.
Present measurements of Anisakis typica and Hysterothylacium sp.
Figure 1.
A–F: Anisakis typica larvae: light, CLSM and SEM microscopy.
A- Aanterior end with boring tooth; B- SEM of lips with papilla, boring tooth and excretory pore; C- Esophagus and ventriculus; D- Position of excretory pore; E- CLSM reconstruction with detail boring tooth and excretory pore; F- SEM of tail with mucron terminal. Abbreviations: e - esophagus; ep - excretory pore; t - tooth; p - papilla; v - ventriculus; m - mucron.
Figure 2.
Alignment of ITS-1 and ITS-2 sequences representing Anisakis spp.
Dots indicate identity with the first sequence, dashes are inferred insertion-deletion events and * represents our sample.
Figure 3.
Maximum likelihood reconstruction between sequences of Anisakis typica obtained in this study (*) and sequences of Anisakis species from the GenBank, with the tree inferred from the ITS data set.
The numbers on the tree branches represent the percentage of bootstrap resampling. Ascaris lumbricoides was used as an out group.
Figure 4.
Maximum likelihood reconstruction between sequences of Anisakis typica obtained in this study (*) and sequences of Anisakis species from the GenBank, with the tree inferred from mtDNA cox-2 and LSU data sets.
The numbers on the tree branches represent the percentage of bootstrap resampling. Ascaris lumbricoides was used as an out group.
Figure 5.
A–H: Hysterothylacium sp. larvae: SEM and CLSM microscopy.
A- SEM of anterior end with alae and excretory pore; B- Detail of L3 lips with inconspicuous boring tooth and papillae; C- Detail of lips of L4 with dorsal lip showing double papilla; D- CLSM of esophagus; E- CLSM reconstruction with ventriculus, intestinal caecum and esophagus; F: CLSM reconstruction with nerve ring and excretory pore; G- SEM of tail; H- SEM micrograph with a detail of the digitiform tip with terminal mucron. Abbreviations: a - alae; ep - excretory pore; p – papilla; t - tooth; dl - dorsal lip; e - esophagus; ic - intestinal caecum; v - ventriculus; n - nervous ring and m - mucron.
Table 2.
List of species from the Genbank used for comparison in phylogenetic analysis and alignments.
Figure 6.
Alignment of mtDNA cox-2 sequences representing Hysterothylacium and Iheringascaris taxa.
Dots indicate identity with the first sequence, dashes are inferred insertion-deletion events and * represents our samples.
Figure 7.
Maximum likelihood reconstruction between sequences of Hysterothylacium obtained in this study (*) and sequences of Hysterothylacium and Iheringascaris spp. from the GenBank, with the tree inferred from mtDNA cox-2 and LSU data sets.
The numbers on the tree branches represent the percentage of bootstrap resampling. Heterocheilus tunicatus was used as an out group.
Figure 8.
Maximum likelihood reconstruction between sequences of Hysterothylacium sp. larvae obtained in this study (*) and sequences of other anisakid species from the GenBank inferred from the ITS dataset.
The numbers on the tree branches represent the percentage of bootstrap resampling. Heterocheilus tunicatus was used as an out group.
Figure 9.
Ecological data of Anisakis typica and Hysterothylacium sp.: prevalence expressed as a percentage.
Figure 10.
Ecological data of Anisakis typica and Hysterothylacium sp.: mean abundance (no. of parasites/fish) transformed using the fourth root.
Figure 11.
Ecological data of Anisakis typica and Hysterothylacium sp.: mean intensity (no. of parasites/parasitized fish); the bars represent the standard deviation.