Biology and ecology of Zercon hamaricus Kaczmarek et al. 2021 (Parasitiformes: Zerconidae) with morphological study of all instars

Figures & data

Table I. Duration (in days, average ± SD [range]), length and width (in µm, average ± SD [range]) of larvae (L), protonymphs (P), deutonymphs (D) and females (F) and the length:width ratio ([range]:1) in the first day (after moult) and the last day (before moult to the next stage, juveniles) in Z. hamaricus; statistical significance of length/width change before/after moult between L and P, P and D and D and female.

	L		P		D		F
	Duration						-
	4.7 ± 2.4 [3–13^d]^c		4.1 ± 0.8 [3–5]^c		4.9 ± 0.6 [4–6]^c
	Length	Width	Length	Width	Length	Width	Length	Width
minimal (1^st day)	217 ± 23^a [190–245]	142 ± 11^a [131–160]	274 ± 22^a [254–297]	165 ± 15^a [145–180]	361 ± 30^a [297–381]	227 ± 17^a [193–245]	458 ± 7 [447–465]	332 ± 14 [314–347]
maximal (last day)	258 ± 32^a [229–304]	153 ± 17^a [137–173]	333 ± 35^b [267–376]	191 ± 19^a [160–222]	409 ± 6^b [402–419]	239 ± 2^a [236–241]	-	-
Length:width 1^st day	[1.45–1.62]:1		[1.57–1.75]:1		[1.54–1.67]:1		[1.33–1.43]:1
Length:width last day	[1.63–1.76]:1		[1.63–1.93]:1		[1.68–1.74]:1		-
L-P moult	length: ns, width: ns				-
P-D moult	-		length: *, width: *				-
D-F moult	-				length: *, width: *

^a,b– statistical significance between length/width of particular ontogenetic stage in the first and last day of observation, where different letters show significant differences; ^c– statistical significance between duration of juveniles, ns/* – not significant/significant change in length/width between the last day of preceding and the first day of the following stage.

^done larva with extremely prolonged duration (13 days), if excluded then average duration 4.1 ± 0.9 [3–6].

Table II. Share (in % per sample) of larvae (L), protonymphs (P), deutonymphs (D), females (F) and males (M), total abundance (A) of sample and stage, female:male (F:M) and juvenile:adult (juv:ad) ratios of Z. hamaricus in samples collected at its type locality.

sample [250 cm^3]	L [%]	P [%]	D [%]	F [%]	M [%]	A/sample	F:M	juv:ad
1	22.50	27.5	15.0	25.0	10.0	40	2.5:1	1.9:1
2	17.65	45.88	14.12	15.29	7.06	85	2.2:1	3.5:1
3	9.77	36.84	30.83	15.04	7.52	133	2.0:1	3.4:1
4	10.0	38.38	29.46	12.97	9.19	370	1.4:1	3.5:1
5	11.36	27.27	27.27	17.05	17.05	88	1.0:1	1.9:1
6	4.62	18.46	18.46	29.23	29.23	65	1.0:1	0.7:1
A/stage	87	277	204	125	88	781	1.4:1	2.7:1

Figure 1. Zercon hamaricus SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) micrographs of eggs. (a) air-dried egg; (b) egg dried with the use of HMDS (hexamethyldisilazane); (c,d) exochorion; (e) typical view of hatched egg; (f) inner surface of egg chorion; (g,h) stoma-like structure on the inner egg surface (asterisk). Scale bars (µm): a–c, e = 50; d, f–h = 25.

Figure 2. Zercon hamaricus micrographs. (a) egg, stereomicroscopic view; (b) opened egg on a moss twig, stereomicroscopic view; (c) larva, posterior view of anal region, SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) micrograph. Scale bars (µm): a, b = 100; c = 25.

Figure 3. SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) micrographs of a Zercon hamaricus larva. (a) dorsal habitus; (b) lateral habitus; (c) anterior part of idiosoma, lateral view; (d) posterior part of idiosoma, lateral view; (e) sternal and anal region; (f) epistome; (g) opisthonotum, dorsal view; (h) opisthonotum, posterodorsal cavities. Scale bars (µm): a, b, g = 100; c, d, e = 50; f, h = 25.

Figure 4. SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) micrographs of a Zercon hamaricus protonymph. (a) dorsal habitus; (b) lateral habitus; (c) anterior part of idiosoma, lateral view (*metapodal plate); (d) posterior part of idiosoma, lateral view; (e) sternal and anal region; (f) epistome; (g) opisthonotum, dorsal view; (h) peritreme, lateral view. Scale bars (µm): a, b = 150; c–e = 50; f, h = 25; g = 100.

Figure 5. SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) micrographs of a Zercon hamaricus deutonymph. (a) dorsal habitus; (b) lateral habitus; (c) anterior part of idiosoma, lateral view; (d) posterior part of idiosoma, lateral view (*metapodal plate); (e) sternal region; (f) epistome; (g) opisthonotum, dorsal view; (h) peritrematal region, lateral view. Scale bars (µm): a, b = 200; c, e, h = 50; d = 100; f = 25; g = 150.

Figure 6. SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) micrographs of a female Zercon hamaricus. (a) dorsal habitus; (b) lateral habitus; (c) anterior part of idiosoma, lateral view; (d) posterior part of idiosoma, lateral view; (e) sternal region; (f) epistome; (g) opisthonotum, dorsal view; (h) peritrematal region, lateral view (*post-coxal cuticular spines). Scale bars (µm): a, b, g = 200; c–e = 100; f = 25; h = 50.

Figure 7. SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) micrographs of a male Zercon hamaricus. (a) dorsal habitus; (b) lateral habitus; (c) anterior part of idiosoma, lateral view; (d) posterior part of idiosoma, lateral view; (e) sternal region; (f) epistome; (g) opisthonotum, dorsal view; (h) peritrematal region, lateral view (*post-coxal cuticular spines). Scale bars (µm): a, b, g = 200; c–e = 100; f = 25; h = 50.

Figure 8. SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) micrographs of Zercon hamaricus. (a) female, anterior view; (b) female, posterior view; (c) chelicera of male; (d) chelicera of female; (e) post-coxal region of male, ventral view; (f) post-coxal region of deutonymph, ventral view (*metapodal plate); (g) post-coxal region of a deutonymph, lateral view (*metapodal plate); (h) post-coxal region of protonymph, ventral view (*metapodal plate). Scale bars (µm): a, b = 100; c–f, h = 25; g = 50.

Figure 9. Micrographs of a female Zercon hamaricus. (a) peritrematal shield, SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) micrograph, ventral view; (b, d) peritrematal shield and post-coxal region, transmitted light microscopy, ventral view; (c, e) magnifications of the areas marked with rectangles on “b” and “d”, respectively. *post-coxal cuticular spines. Scale bars (µm): a, c, e = 50; b, d = 100.