10Table 4. System <strong>of</strong> nomenclature <strong>of</strong> cestode <strong>larval</strong> stages proposedby Gulyaev (1997a) based on that <strong>of</strong> Jarecka (1975) withevolutionary stages addedFirst intermediate hostMeta<strong>cestodes</strong>Second intermediate hostCercoid Metacercoids PostlarvaProcercoidCercoscolexPlerocercoidProtolarvaAmphicyst Tetrathyridium LarvacystoidCysticercus Blastocyst LarvacystCysticercoidcepted by the Sh<strong>or</strong>ter Oxf<strong>or</strong>d Dictionary and utilisedin zoological terms such as metam<strong>or</strong>phosis. Cercoidis a useful term in that it is a component <strong>of</strong> many <strong>of</strong>the names <strong>of</strong> known <strong>larval</strong> f<strong>or</strong>ms, but suffers from thedisadvantage that not all names (e.g. cysticercus) aref<strong>or</strong>med from it. Because <strong>of</strong> differences <strong>of</strong> opinion, theneutral term larva is used in this review.(c) Freeman (1973) objected to Jarecka’s (1970)division <strong>of</strong> <strong>larval</strong> <strong>cestodes</strong> into cercoids and metacercoids(cercoids which have lost their cercomer) on thegrounds that many groups <strong>of</strong> <strong>cestodes</strong> do not possesscercomers in the early stages <strong>of</strong> development. Jarecka(1975) and Jarecka et al. (1981), however, have arguedthat, based on the earlier views <strong>of</strong> Janicki & Rosen(1917), all <strong>cestodes</strong> possess cercomers but they differin f<strong>or</strong>m. Jarecka et al. (1981) argued that the cercomers<strong>of</strong> procercoids, the cyst walls <strong>of</strong> cysticercoidsand the bladders <strong>of</strong> cysticerci are homologous, as theyall possess microvilli on their surfaces and they aretheref<strong>or</strong>e modifications <strong>of</strong> the cercomer. An additionalpotential objection to the system <strong>of</strong> Jarecka (1975)would be that it does not deal with paratenic hosts,a phenomenon which is common within the Pseudophyllidea(e.g. Mueller, 1938; Robert et al., 1988) andin the Proteocephalidea (e.g. Biserkov & Genov, 1988;Biserkov & Kostadinova, 1997).(d) One particular term, cercoscolex, warrantsspecific comment as it has an extremely confusedusage. It was coined by Jarecka (1970a,b) f<strong>or</strong> caudate,non-lacunate cestode larvae with invaginatedscoleces, which lose their cercomers in a secondintermediate host and was applied to the generaValip<strong>or</strong>a, Paradilepis and Neogryp<strong>or</strong>hynchus, currentlyincluded in the family Gryp<strong>or</strong>hynchidae (seeSpasskii & Spasskaya (1973) f<strong>or</strong> definition <strong>of</strong> theGryp<strong>or</strong>hynchinae) thereby conf<strong>or</strong>ming with the usageby Leuckart (1876) and Villot (1883) under the term‘gryp<strong>or</strong>hynchus’ <strong>or</strong> ‘gryp<strong>or</strong>hynque’. In 1975, Jareckaexpanded the definition to include other acetabulatemeta<strong>cestodes</strong> lacking a primary lacuna (e.g. Proteocephalidea)as well as those in which the primarylacuna was a transit<strong>or</strong>y feature (Dipylidium). Jareckaet al. (1981) subsequently extended the term to includethe dilepidid genera Paricterotaenia and Anomotaenia,which have withdrawn scoleces and to anymetacestode with microtriches rather than microvillion the cyst wall. <strong>The</strong>y subsequently asserted (Jareckaet al., 1984) that this metacestode was typical f<strong>or</strong>dilepidids. Freeman (1973) by contrast used the termprecysticercoid f<strong>or</strong> the meta<strong>cestodes</strong> <strong>of</strong> Choanotaeniaand other related dilepidid genera. Gabrion & Helluy(1982) reviewed the m<strong>or</strong>phogenesis <strong>of</strong> meta<strong>cestodes</strong><strong>of</strong> the Dilepididae and concluded that the term monocercus<strong>of</strong> Villot (1883) applied to 31 dilepidid speciesin which an elongate cercomer disintegrated into globuleswhich persist in the metacestode. <strong>The</strong>y consideredthat the monocercus was characteristic <strong>of</strong> the Dilepididae.<strong>The</strong> <strong>terminology</strong> applied to meta<strong>cestodes</strong> <strong>of</strong> theDilepididae is theref<strong>or</strong>e particularly complex.M<strong>or</strong>e recent additionsM<strong>or</strong>e recent modifications to these systems <strong>of</strong> <strong>terminology</strong>are essentally restricted to cysticerci andcysticercoids. However, significant advances in understanding<strong>of</strong> the life-cycles <strong>of</strong> terabothriideans,in which the <strong>larval</strong> stage was recognised as auniacetabulo-plerocercoid (Hoberg, 1987; Galkin,1996), have also been made without the introduction
11Table 5. Nomenclature employed by Freeman (1973) to describe the <strong>larval</strong> stages <strong>of</strong> <strong>cestodes</strong>, as modified byUbelaker (1983).Cestode taxon Definition ExampleTermHymenolepididae/Anoplocephalidae/Davaineidae/Dilepididaerostello-cysticercoidwith rostellumarostello-cysticercoid no rostellum Anoplocephalinaeanacanth<strong>or</strong>ostello-cysticercoid without hooks Hymenolepis diminutaacanth<strong>or</strong>ostello-cysticercoid with hooks Hymenolepis nanacaudate-cysticercoidwith cercomeracaudate-cysticercoidwithout cercomerlongicaudate-cysticercoid with long cercomer Drepanidotaenia lanceolatabrevicaudate-cysticercoid with sh<strong>or</strong>t cercomer Raillietina spp.circumcaudate-cysticercoidAploparaksis spp.micranth<strong>or</strong>ostello-cysticercoid with small hooks Davainea proglottinaprecysticercoidChoanotaenia spp.Taeniidaeheteracantho-cysticercustwo rows <strong>of</strong> dissimilar hooks Taenia soliumhomeacantho-cysticercus hooks similar Foss<strong>or</strong>, Mon<strong>or</strong>odotaeniaanacantho-cysticercus lacking hooks Taenia saginatastrobilo-cysticercus segmentation in metacestode Taenia taeniaef<strong>or</strong>mis, T. polyacanthamulticephalo-cysticercus multiple scoleces Taenia serialisGryp<strong>or</strong>hynchidaeacanthacetabulo-plerocercoidLinstowiinaeprecysticercusMesocestoididaeinvaginated acetabulo-plerocercoidValip<strong>or</strong>aOoch<strong>or</strong>isticaMesocestoidesNippotaeniideauni-acetabulo-plerocercoidProteocephalideaglandacetabulo-plerocercoidOphiotaenia filaroidesinvaginated acetabulo-plerocercoid plerocercoid I C<strong>or</strong>allotaenia minutamet-acetabulo-plerocercoid plerocercoid IIculci-acetabulo-plerocercoidProteocephalus parallacticusPseudophyllideaacaudate bothrio-plerocercoidstrobilobothriate-plerocercoidEubothrium salveliniDiphyllobothrium dendriticumHaplobothriideatentaculo-plerocercoidCaryophyllideacaudate post-plerocercoidSpathebothriidea(a)caudate–adultArchigetes, CaryophyllaeusCyathocephalus, BothrimonusTetraphyllideabothrio - plerocercoidTrypan<strong>or</strong>hynchatentaculo - plerocercoidneoplerocercoidLacist<strong>or</strong>hynchus tenuis