Nematodes of the order Dorylaimida from Romania. The genus Enchodelus Thorne, 1939. 3. Species with rounded tail and long odontostyle Author Ciobanu, Marcel Institute of Biological Research, Department of Taxonomy and Ecology, 48 Republicii Str., 400015 Cluj-Napoca, Romania & Departamento de Biología Animal, Vegetal y Ecología, Universidad de Jaén, Campus ‘ Las Lagunillas’ s / n, Edificio B 3, 23071 Jaén, Spain Author Popovici, Iuliana Institute of Biological Research, Department of Taxonomy and Ecology, 48 Republicii Str., 400015 Cluj-Napoca, Romania Author Guerrero, Pablo Departamento de Biología Animal, Vegetal y Ecología, Universidad de Jaén, Campus ‘ Las Lagunillas’ s / n, Edificio B 3, 23071 Jaén, Spain Author Santiago, Reyes Peña- Departamento de Biología Animal, Vegetal y Ecología, Universidad de Jaén, Campus ‘ Las Lagunillas’ s / n, Edificio B 3, 23071 Jaén, Spain text Nematology 2010 2010-12-31 12 4 609 618 journal article 57139 10.1163/138855410X12628646275925 8fe77e43-c94c-4b55-8dce-9d5ab95c7347 8111712 Enchodelus saxifragae Popovici, 1995 ( Fig. 4 ) MATERIAL EXAMINED Six females from Suhardu Mic Mountains, three females from Parâng Mountains, two female paratypes and two male paratypes from Retezat Mountains. MEASUREMENTS Fig. 4. Enchodelus saxifragae Popovici, 1995 . A: Female, entire; B-D: Anterior region in median, lateral view; E: Vagina ; F: Pharyngeal expansion; G, H: Female genital system; I: Male posterior region; J, K: Female caudal region; L, M: Spicule. (Scale bars: A = 200 µm; B, C, F-I = 20 µm; D, E, J-M = 10 µm.) Table 4. Morphometric data of Enchodelus saxifragae Popovici, 1995 . All measurements in µm (except L, in mm) and in the form: mean ± standard deviation (range).

Character	Hăşmaş Mountains	Parâng Mountains	Retezat Mountains	Retezat
(Suhardu Mic Mountain)	(Coasta lui Rus)	(Piatra Iorgovanului)	Mountains (Albele)
Female	Female	Male	Male
n	6	3	2	2
L	1.85 ± 0.1 (1.61-2.09)	2.17 ± 0.1 (2.06-2.27)	2.10, 2.30	2.09, 2.32
a	31.9 ± 5.7 (26.9-39.5)	29.7 ± 2.2 (27.2-31.2)	32.8, 33.6	27.7, 32.2
b	5.1 ± 0.4 (4.6-5.7)	5.6 ± 0.3 (5.3-5.9)	5.5, 6.1	5.6, 5.8
c	76.6 ± 10.8 (65.6-91.0)	104.2 ± 10.5 (94.1-115.1)	65.7, 76.8	63.5, 71.5
c ļ	0.7 ± 0.1 (0.7-0.8)	0.5 ± 0.0 (0.5-0.6)	0.8, 0.8	?, 0.8
V	48.7 ± 1.5 (47.4-51.0)	48.7 ± 1.3 (47.3-49.7)	–	–
Lip region diam.	18.2 ± 0.3 (18-18.5)	20.2 ± 0.3 (20-20.5)	19.5, 21	20, 20
Odontostyle length	39.3 ± 1.5 (37-41.5)	39.2 ± 1.0 (38-40)	37.5, 40.5	37, 40
Odontophore length	54.2 ± 0.8 (53-55)	55.5 ± 0.5 (55-56)	51, 53	50, 56
Guiding ring from ant. end	26.0 ± 1.2 (24-27)	22.2 ± 1.0 (21-23)	23.5, 26	25, 25
Neck length	364 ± 10.2 (347-375)	387 ± 1.8 (386-389)	378, 384	378, 402
Pharyngeal expansion length	146 ± 7.5 (138-156)	163 ± 8.8 (154-171)	156, 157	155, 165
Diam. at neck base	54.6 ± 3.9 (50-59)	69.2 ± 5.3 (64-75)	61, 63	63, 74
at mid-body	58.8 ± 6.3 (51-66)	73.3 ± 2.5 (71-76)	64, 69	65, 84
at anus	33.6 ± 1.1 (32-35)	38.2 ± 1.9 (36-39)	40, 42	–, 43
Prerectum length	195 ± 25.0 (166-228)	177 ± 30.0 (150-209)	248? –	198, –
Rectum length	43.6 ± 2.5 (41-46)	48.8 ± 5.0 (44-54)	48, 49?	49, 55
Tail length	25.0 ± 2.3 (23-29)	21.0 ± 1.7 (19-22)	30, 32	33, 33
Spicule length	–	–	–, 67	–, 74
Ventromedian supplements	–	–	–, 13	–, 14

NEW OBSERVATIONS ON MALE ( BASED ON THE TWO PARATYPES AVAILABLE ) Adcloacal pair of supplements situated at 13.5 or 13.0 µ m from cloacal aperture posterior ventromedian supplement at 19.5 or 30 µ m from adcloacal pair, ventromedian supplements 9-24 µ m apart. Spicules rather robust, 5.3 or 4.4 times as long as wide and 1.7 anal body diam. long. Lateral guiding piece also robust, distinctly falcate in posterior half, furcate at tip, 14 or 16.5 µ m long and ca 4.0 or 3.3 times as long as wide. DISTRIBUTION Cliff vegetation, Suhardu Mic Mountain, Hăşmaş Mountains (Eastern Romanian Carpathians); subalpine meadow, Coasta lui Rus, Parâng Mountains (Southern Romanian Carpathians); cliff vegetation on Albele Peak and the Piatra Iorgovanului area, Retezat Mountains (Southern Romanian Carpathians); sites nos 3, 7-9 in Table 1. REMARKS The females examined perfectly fit the original description ( Popovici, 1995 ) as well as the Iberian specimens recently studied by Guerrero et al. (2008). However, some differences have been noted in male features, such as the peculiar morphology of the lateral guiding pieces, a character which might be a relevant diagnostic feature of this species.