The effects induced by acanthocephalans on
their intermediate hosts were discussed by
various authors and range from increased
conspicuousness, either by the larvae acquiring
pigmentation or by pigmentation dystrophy of
the host, which results from the interference of
the acanthocephalan with the metabolic pathway
for ommochrome pigmentation in the isopod
hosts (Oetinger & Nickol, 1982).
This was not the case in the Caribbean termite,
N. acajutlae. In the U. S. Virgin Islands Fuller et
al. (2003), Fuller & Jeyasingh (2004), and
Nickol et al. (2006) found only workers
infected. It is not clear why the workers of the
Brazilian species of termites, known to feed the
soldiers, do not get infected themselves, as only
the workers feed directly on the feces of the final
hosts, anteaters and didelphid marsupials,
although this behavior has not been observed
directly. Another interesting aspect is that in the
life cycle of G. echinodiscus there are no
paratenic hosts involved, as there are in the life
cycle of N. acajutlae in the Caribbean.
R e ichensper g e r ( 1 9 2 2 ) d e s c r i b e d
Acanthocephalus aenigma Reichensperger,
1922, as a new species based on cystacanths
from the hemocoel of specimens of two termite
species from the locality of Encano Alto, State of
Santa Catarina, Southern Brazil. One of them
was Cornitermes cumulans, the same species
that built the nests lately recolonized by
Labiotermes emersoni (Araujo, 1954) in the
P.N. Serra da Canastra (Figs 1 and 2), and found
infected by the cystacanths of G. echinodiscus
reported in the present work. According to
Nickol et al. (2006) “Nothing further is known
about this species, and usually it is considered to
be unrecognizable. Meyer (1932) assigned it to
Oligacanthorhynchus Travassos, 1915, as an
appendix. Possession of 30 proboscis hooks
instead of 36 distinguishes it from O.
venezuelensis and suggests that A. aenigma
properly should be assigned to Neoncicola
Schmidt, 1972”. In the cystacanths' description,
Reichensperger (op. cit.) mentioned that the
testes were located in the mid-trunk, unlike the
DISCUSSION
Neotrop. Helminthol., 8(2), 2014
position found in the cystacanths described in
the present work. So, there is a possibility that
the acanthocephalan found as cystacanths in the
termites from Santa Catarina, might be yet
another species. This confirms that Meyer (op.
cit.) was correct assigning the species to
Oligacanthorhynchidae, as the testes in this
family are post equatorial, but not in the
posterior region of the trunk.
Specimens of O. heberi were originally
described showing an unprecedented
dimorphism in soldiers (called by the authors
“major soldiers” and “minor soldiers”,
respectively) ─ a case of parasitism by
acanthocephalans not perceived by Raw & Egler
(1985). In 1991, Cancello published a short note
on the presence of acanthocephalan larvae in the
hemocoel of termite soldiers [Cornitermes
cumulans, Orthognathotermes sp., and
Paracornitermes sp. (today Labiotermes). Since
then, other species of termites have been
recorded with the same kind of parasites: Termes
spp., Amitermes amifer, Embiratermes
neotemicus, and Spinitermes sp.]. But,
unhappily, because the acanthocephalan larvae
found in these species, the true identity of these
larvae will have to wait to be determined.
In 2003, one of us (JFRA) received specimens of
termites fixed in ethanol from the junior authors
(normal and parasitized soldiers of O. heberi -
Figs 3 and 4 of the present paper). Rocha &
Cancello (2009, pg. 8), in the revision of
Orthognathotermes stated: “The minor soldiers
described by Raw & Egler (1985) are
individuals infested by an undetermined species
of Acanthocephala. The soldier caste is
monomorphic, contrary to the original
description”.
Six species of Gigantorhynchus were
considered valid by Yamaguti (1963) and Amin
(in Crompton & Nickol, 1985), two of which
were the first to be described to Science and from
Brazil: G. echinodiscus found i n
myrmecophagids and G. lutzi found in didelphid
marsupials (Caluromys philander (Linnaeus,
1758). Besides having different final hosts, the
Brazilian species differ by the number of hooks
335