Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T10:25:57.470Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Demodex aurati sp.nov. and D. criceti, ectoparasites of the Golden Hamster (Mesocricetus auratus)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Wm. B. Nutting
Wm. B. Nutting
Affiliation:
University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A new species, Demodex aurati, is described from the Golden Hamster, Mesocricetus auratus. It differs in both morphological detail and ecological niche from D. criceti present on the same host.

When pieces of heavily parasitized skin were ‘subplanted’ for 100 days no change in morphological features of either D. aurati or D. criceti occurred.

D. aurati is a low grade pathogen, apparently only harvesting the cells of the follicular epithelium.

The life cycle of D. aurati is described.

The presence on one host species of two different species of this genus, which has affinities with demodicids of evolutionally remotely related hosts, poses an interesting problem in species specificity and ectoparasite evolution.

I wish to thank Dr Miriam Shaw, Miss Shirley DiBenedetto and Miss Helen Krause for their excellent technical help, and Dr Lawrence Bartlett and Dr Harold Rauch for perusal of the manuscript and suggestions on project procedure.

This investigation was supported by a research grant E-562 from the Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, of the National Institutes of Health, Public Health Service.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 51 , Issue 3-4 , November 1961 , pp. 515 - 522
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1961

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Baker, E. W. & Wharton, G. W. (1952). An Introduction to Acarology, 465 pp. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bennison, J. C. (1943). Demodicosis of horse with particular reference to equine members of the genus Demodex. J. R. Army Vet. Cps, 14, 34–49, 66–73.Google Scholar
Cram, E. B. (1925). Demodectic mange of the goat in the United States. J. Am. Vet. Med. Ass. 66, 475–80.Google Scholar
Hirst, S. (1918). On four new species of the genus Demodex Owen. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. 2, 145–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirst, S. (1919). Studies on Acari. I. The Genus Demodex Owen, 53 pp. London: Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.).Google Scholar
Hirst, S. (1921). On some new or little-known Acari, mostly parasitic in habit. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 2, 357–78.Google Scholar
Maynard, W. F. (1922). A case of follicular mange transmitted from dog to man. Vet. J. 78, 435.Google Scholar
Neumann, L. G. (1914). Parasites and Parasitic Diseases of the Domestic Animals. New York: W. R. Jenkins.Google Scholar
Nutting, W. B. (1950). Studies on the genus Demodex Owen (Acari, Demodicodea, Demodicidae). Thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.Google Scholar
Nutting, W. B. & Rauch, H. (1958). Demodex criceti sp.nov. (Acarina: Demodicidae) with notes on its biology. J. Parasit. 44, 328–33.Google Scholar
Nutting, W. B. & Rauch, H. (1961). The effect of biotin deficiency in Mesocricetus auratus on parasites of the genus Demodex. J. Parasit. 47, 319–22.Google Scholar