Abstract
A literature review for a recent ultrastructural study of a trichinelloid eggshell revealed consistently occurring errors in the literature on nematode eggshell anatomy. Examples included nematodes of medical, veterinary, and agricultural importance in several orders. Previous researchers had warned of some of these errors decades ago, but a comprehensive solution was not offered until 2012 when a clarifying new anatomical and developmental interpretation of nematode eggshells was proposed by members of the Caenorhabditis elegans Research Community. However, their findings were explained using arcane acronyms and technical jargon intended for an audience of experimental molecular geneticists, and so their papers have rarely been cited outside the C. elegans community. Herein we (1) provide a critical review of nematode eggshell literature in which we correct errors and relabel imagery in important historical reports; (2) describe common reporting errors and their causes using language familiar to researchers having a basic understanding of microscopy and nematode eggs; (3) recommend a new hexalaminar anatomical and terminological framework for nematode eggshells based on the 2012 C. elegans framework; and (4) recommend new unambiguous terms appropriate for the embryonated/larvated eggs regularly encountered by practicing nematodologists to replace ambiguous or ontogenetically restricted terms in the 2012 C. elegans framework. We also (5) propose a resolution to conflicting claims made by the C. elegans team versus classical literature regarding Layer #3, (6) extend the C. elegans hexalaminar framework to include the polar plugs of trichinelloids, and (7) report new findings regarding trichinelloid eggshell structure.