Systematic Parasitology

, Volume 96, Issue 9, pp 799–804 | Cite as

Cladistic analysis of the morphological characters of Pseudocharopinus Kabata, 1964 and keys to the species of Pseudocharopinus and Charopinus Krøyer, 1863 based on the morphology of adult females

  • Susan M. DippenaarEmail author
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Arthropoda


Kabata separated species of Pseudocharopinus Kabata, 1964 and Charopinus Krøyer, 1863 in 1964 based mainly on four characteristics. Currently Pseudocharopinus has 11 species while Charopinus consists of three species considered valid. Pseudocharopinus malleus (Rudolphi in Nordmann, 1832) and Charopinus dubius T. Scott, 1900 were collected and studied from hosts off South Africa. Additional to previous reports from South African waters, P. malleus is reported from Torpedo sinuspersici Olfers and T. fuscomaculata Peters while C. dubius is reported from Leucoraja wallacei (Hulley) and Rajella dissimilis (Hulley), all new host records. In an attempt to estimate the evolutionary relationships among Pseudocharopinus spp. a cladistic analysis was performed by means of parsimony using described and illustrated features of the adult females. Due to the mostly unresolved 50% majority rule tree, a key for the identification of the adult females of Pseudocharopinus spp. is compiled. Additionally, a key for the identification of adult females of Charopinus spp. is provided.



I would like to acknowledge the National Research Foundation (NRF) (GUN 61251) for financial assistance to collect copepods during surveys of the FRS Africana. However, any opinion, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this manuscript are those of the author and therefore the NRF does not accept any liability in regard thereto. I also thank the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) for permission to participate on demersal surveys. Additionally, the Oceanographic Research Institute (ORI), especially Dr S Fennessy, is acknowledged for donating host specimens caught during prawn surveys. The University of Limpopo (UL) is thanked for field and laboratory assistance as well as Ms BP Jordaan for assistance during sampling periods.


This study was funded by the University of Limpopo, National Research Foundation (GUN 61251).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares that she has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All applicable institutional, national and international guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.


  1. Benkirane, O., Coste, F., & Raibaut, A. (1999). On the morphological variability of the attachment organ of Lernaeopodidae (Copepoda: Siphonostomatoida). Folia Parasitologica,46, 67–75.Google Scholar
  2. Chandran, A., & Balakrishnan Nair, N. (1980). Morphology of the male of Pseudocharopinus narcinae (Pillai) (Copepoda: Lernaeopodidae). Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Science (Animal Science),89, 441–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dippenaar, S. M. (2004). Reported siphonostomatoid copepods parasitic on marine fishes of southern Africa. Crustaceana,77, 1281–1328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dippenaar, S. M. (2012). A redescription of Pseudocharopinus pteromylaei Raibaut et Essafi, 1979 (Siphonostomatoida: Lernaeopodidae) collected from the South African east coast. Folia Parasitologica,59, 202–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dippenaar, S. M., & Molele, R. A. (2015). Siphonostomatoid copepods infecting Squalus acutipinnis Regan, 1908 off South Africa. African Journal of Marine Science,37, 605–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fricke, R., Eschmeyer, W. N., & Van der Laan, R. (Eds). (2019). Eschmeyerʼs catalog of fishes: Genera, species, references. Electronic version Accessed on 12 February 2019.
  7. Froese, R., & Pauly, D. (2018). FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication. version (10/2018). Accessed 12 February 2019.
  8. Henderson, A. C., Flannery, K., & Dunne, J. (2002). An investigation into the metazoan parasites of the spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias L.), off the west coast or Ireland. Journal of Natural History,36, 1747–1760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ho, J.-S. (1977). Marine flora and fauna of the northeastern United States. Copepoda: Lernaeopodidae and Sphyriidae. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Report, United States National Marine Fisheries Service,406, 1–14.Google Scholar
  10. Humes, A. G., & Gooding, R. U. (1964). A method for studying the external anatomy of copepods. Crustaceana,6, 238–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kabata, Z. (1964). Revision of the genus Charopinus Krøyer, 1863 (Copepoda: Lernaeopodidae). Videnskabelige Meddelelser Dansk Naturhistorisk Forening,127, 85–112.Google Scholar
  12. Kabata, Z. (1979). Parasitic Copepoda of British Fishes. London: The Ray Society.Google Scholar
  13. Luque, J. L., & Farfán, C. (1991). Some copepods parasitic on elasmobranch fishes from the Peruvian coast, with the description of two new species of Eudactylina van Beneden, 1853 (Eudactylinidae) and four new records. Journal of Natural History,25, 1233–1246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Markewitch, A. P. (1956). Parasitic copepods on the fishes of the USSR. Kiev: Izdatelstvo Akademii Nauk Ukrrainskoi SSR (In Russian).Google Scholar
  15. Oldewage, W. H. (1992). Occurrence and distribution of parasitic Copepoda (Crustacea) off the southern coast of South Africa. South African Journal of Wildlife Research,22, 33–35.Google Scholar
  16. Oldewage, W. H. (1993). Occurrence and distribution of copepod fish parasites on the west coast of South Africa. Journal of African Zoology,107, 413–418.Google Scholar
  17. Pillai, N. K. (1962). Copepods parasitic on south Indian fishes: families Lernaeopodidae and Naobranchidae. Journal of the Marine Biological Association, India,4, 58–94.Google Scholar
  18. Pillai, N. K. (1985). Fauna of India. Parasitic copepods of marine fishes. Calcutta: Zoological Survey of India.Google Scholar
  19. Raibaut, A., & Essafi, K. (1979). Description de deux espèces nouvelles de Copépodes parasites de Sélaciens de Tunisie. Bulletin du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle,4, 435–443.Google Scholar
  20. Raibaut, A., & Maamouri, K. (1975). Remarques sur deux espèces de Copépodes parasites de Sélaciens de Tunisie. Bulletin du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle,3, 1037–1047.Google Scholar
  21. Rangnekar, M. P. (1957). Copepod parasites of the families Argulidae, Caligidae, Dichelestidae, and Lernaeopodidae. Journal of the University of Bombay,26, 8–20.Google Scholar
  22. Swafford, D. L. (2000). PAUP*: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), Version 4.0v10. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
  23. Van der Laan, R., Fricke, R., & Eschmeyer, W. N. (eds). (2019). Eschmeyerʼs catalog of fishes: Classification. Electronic version Accessed on 12 February 2019.
  24. Walter, T. C., & Boxshall, G. (2018). World of Copepods database. Pseudocharopinus Kabata, 1964. Accessed on 14 February 2019.
  25. Wilson, C. B. (1913). Crustacean parasites of West Indian fishes and land crabs, with descriptions of new genera and species. Proceedings of the United States National Museum,44, 189–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wilson, C. B. (1944). Parasitic copepods in the United States National Museum. Proceedings of the United States National Museum,94, 529–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Yamaguti, S., & Yamasu, T. (1959). Parasitic copepods from fishes of Japan with descriptions of 26 new species and remarks on two known species. Biological Journal of Okayama University,5, 89–165.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiodiversityUniversity of LimpopoSovengaSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations