Dero (Allodero) lutzi Michaelsen, 1926

Hosts (prevalence; range): S. fuscovarius (1/51; 6)** and S. cf. similis (1/2; 23)**.

Site of infection: ureters

Stage: juvenile

Type host and type locality: S. ruber (= H. rubra), Belo Horizonte, Brazil.

Comments: this oligochaete was described as Schmardaella lutzi by Michaelsen (1926) and after the subgenus Allodero was erected by Sperber (1948) in the genus Dero for parasitic and symbiotic species. There are some debates on the nature of the relationship between anurans and Dero (Allodero) spp. (e.g. Lutz 1927; Harman 1971). Andrews et al. (2015) integrating field data and laboratory experiments with tree frogs confirmed a free-living and a parasitic stage of Dero (Allodero) hylae Goodchild. These authors did not find oligochaetes in breeding pounds of hylids but found free-living stages in nearby bromealid tanks. In this way, the aquatic environment of bromealids provides a way for oligochaetes to infect hylids by cloaca and then reach ureters and kidneys (Andrews et al. 2015). Our specimens of D. (A.) lutzi are segmented and do not present reproductive organs; body segments have forked se- tae only in ventral region, and these worms lack branchial fossa and gills; when alive they are red and when fixed are white (see Michaelsen 1926 and Oda et al. 2015). These features are changed in free-living stages; for this reason, Andrews et al. (2015) mentioned that the free-living stage of D. (A.) hylae could be confounded by non-parasitic species of Dero pointing out the importance to collect oligochaetes from the tree frogs for parasitological studies. From the 18 anuran species reported with D. (A.) lutzi in South America (Brazil and Venezuela), only one is bufonid while the others are hylids (Morais et al. 2017).

**This data has already been published by Morais et al. (2017).