H. oculeus Kossack, 1911

Type host. Eurasian coot, Fulica atra Linnaeus ( Gruiformes: Rallidae).

Type locality. Germany; specific type locality unknown.

Additional hosts. Mallard duck, Anas platyrhynchos Linnaeus (Syn. Anas boschas Linnaeus) ( Anseriformes: Anatidae); Baillon’s crake, Porzana pusilla (Pallas) ( Gruiformes: Rallidae); other species of Rallidae—Yamaguti (1971). NHMUK on-line Host-Parasite Database lists 9 host species (avian and invertebrate) for H. oculeus and 2 avian host species for Transcoelum oculeus (Kossack, 1911) Witenberg, 1923 .

Estimated frοm figure in οriginal descriptiοn.

= Nοt present. 1Estimated frοm figure in οriginal descriptiοn. 2Measurement frοm McDοnald (1981). 3Estimated frοm Fig. 169 οf Bashkirοva (1950). 4Estimated frοm Fig. 17.2 οf McDοnald (1981).

Additional localities. Russian Federation; South America; Chennai (previously Madras, India)— Yamaguti (1971). NHMUK on-line Host-Parasite Database lists 7 localities and 15 references for H. oculeus and at least 2 localities and 4 references for T. oculeus .

Previously proposed synonyms. Transcoelum sigillum Witenberg, 1923 (= Hyptiasmus sigillum [Witenberg, 1923] n. comb.)— Bashkirova (1950) and Dubois (1959); Hyptiasmus (Hyptiasmus) brumpti Dollfus, 1948 — Dubois (1959).

Remarks. This species was originally described as Hyptiasmus oculeus Kossack, 1911, but it was transferred to Transcoelum (= Hyptiasmus) by Witenberg (1923) as the type species for Transcoelum . Bashkirova (1950) and Yamaguti (1958, 1971) considered this species to be in Transcoelum (= Hyptiasmus); while Dubois (1959), Kanev et al. (2002a) and Dronen & Blend (2005) considered it to be in Hyptiasmus . Although T. sigillum was considered a synonym of this species by Dubois (1959), we agree with Yamaguti (1971), who considered T. sigillum to be a separate species. The posterior extent of the vitelline fields is somewhat in doubt for this species (“are so completely obscured by the uterine loops, that their in-depth consideration is impossible”— Kossack 1911). The vitelline fields were considered to be confluent posteriorly by Kanev et al. (2002a) and Dronen & Blend (2005), and this species is placed in Hyptiasmus as originally suggested by Kossack (1911); however, if they are not confluent posteriorly, this species would be assigned to Prohyptiasmus . Until the extent of the vitelline fields is documented, we recommend that any specimens in Hyptiasminae where the genital pore is prepharyngeal be compared to species of both Hyptiasmus and Prohyptiasmus for purposes of identification. Specimens used in the original description were from the Berlin Museum, labelled as “ Monostomum mutabile Zeder, 1800 ”. No oral or ventral sucker described—Kossack (1911) and Bashkirova (1950).