14.06.2013 Views

PROGRESS IN PROTOZOOLOGY

PROGRESS IN PROTOZOOLOGY

PROGRESS IN PROTOZOOLOGY

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

188 B. M. HONIGBERG<br />

tion among different members. One pattern (exemplified by Naegleria)<br />

is characterized by the lobose pseudopodia encountered in amebae<br />

of the subclass Lobosia. Another pattern (exemplified by Dimorpha<br />

and other helioflagellates) is marked by typical axopodia terminating<br />

internally in a central granule or centroplast, as in heliozoa<br />

of the order Centrohelida. Future studies can be expected to lead to<br />

a more natural regrouping of the forms placed here for convenience.""<br />

As might have been expected, the order RHIZOMASTIGIDA was omitted<br />

from the more recent scheme published by L e v i n e et al. (1980). Actually,<br />

the constitution of this "order" has varied among the standard<br />

protozoology texts; e.g., Hall (1953) included the following genera<br />

among RHIZOMASTIGIDA: Histomonas, Heliobodo, Mastigamoeba, Mastigella,<br />

Mastigina and Rhizomastix. Amon other workers, he felt also<br />

that Pteridomonas was a chrysomonad and that Actinomonas and Dimorpha<br />

had helioflagellate affinities. Grasse (1952) thought that Pteridomonas<br />

was also a helioflagellate. Many authors (e.g., Kudo 1966)<br />

included Tetramitus and Naegleria in RHIZOMASTIGIDA. Certain protozoologists<br />

assigned at least some of the rhizomastigid genera to many<br />

flagellate and rhizopod assemblages. Vickerman, who until recently<br />

(Vickerman 1976) considered Cercomonas and Heteromita as BO-<br />

DON<strong>IN</strong>A incertae sedis, included these two genera in his discussion of<br />

zooflagellates at the 1981 session in Warsaw. According to him (V i ck<br />

e r m a n, personal communication): Cercomonas and Heteromita are<br />

clearly related to each other and sufficiently distinct from both chrysomonads<br />

and sarcodines to merit a separate small order. Accordingly,<br />

using the characteristics presented by him at the 1981 Congress, I propose<br />

to create, with Vickerman as the sole authority, a new<br />

order among MASTIGOPHORA.<br />

Order CERCOMONADIDA Vickerman<br />

Two heterodynamic acronematic flagella whose kinetosomes cap cone<br />

of microtubules closely enveloping drawn out anterior part of nucleus;<br />

cone apparently attached to nucleus; microtubules, some lying along<br />

nucleus, not all subpellicular (as in Kinetoplastida)-, single, membranebounded,<br />

postnuclear organelle of unknown function loosely capping<br />

posterior part of nucleus; extrusomes resembling haptocysts of heliozoans<br />

often associated with surface microtubule tracks; several mitochondria<br />

with tubular cristae; food ingestion by pseudopodia; contractile vacuole<br />

usually postnuclear, may be adbasal (as in Kinetoplastida).<br />

Cercomonas, Heteromita<br />

Some of the former members of RHIZOMASTIGIDA can be now<br />

assigned to known flagellate and rhizopod taxa, and this is reflected in<br />

http://rcin.org.pl

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!