Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T08:13:22.792Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Molecular evidence of three closely related species of Biacetabulum Hunter, 1927 (Cestoda: Caryophyllidea): a case of recent speciation in different fish hosts (Catostomidae)?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 May 2021

Dalibor Uhrovič Open the ORCID record for Dalibor Uhrovič [Opens in a new window] ,
Mikuláš Oros Open the ORCID record for Mikuláš Oros [Opens in a new window] ,
Olena Kudlai Open the ORCID record for Olena Kudlai [Opens in a new window] ,
Anindo Choudhury Open the ORCID record for Anindo Choudhury [Opens in a new window]  and
Tomáš Scholz Open the ORCID record for Tomáš Scholz [Opens in a new window]
Dalibor Uhrovič
Affiliation:
Institute of Parasitology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Hlinkova 3, 040 01Košice, Slovak Republic and University of Veterinary Medicine and Pharmacy, Košice, Slovak Republic
Mikuláš Oros
Affiliation:
Institute of Parasitology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Hlinkova 3, 040 01Košice, Slovak Republic and University of Veterinary Medicine and Pharmacy, Košice, Slovak Republic
Olena Kudlai
Affiliation:
Institute of Parasitology, Biology Centre of Academy of Sciences of Czech Republic and Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, Branišovská 31, 370 05České Budějovice, Czech Republic Laboratory of Parasitology, Nature Research Centre, Akademijos 2, LT-08412Vilnius, Lithuania;
Anindo Choudhury
Affiliation:
Division of Natural Sciences, St. Norbert College, De Pere, Wisconsin, USA
Tomáš Scholz*
Affiliation:
Institute of Parasitology, Biology Centre of Academy of Sciences of Czech Republic and Faculty of Science, University of South Bohemia, Branišovská 31, 370 05České Budějovice, Czech Republic
*
Author for correspondence: Tomáš Scholz, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Monozoic tapeworms (Caryophyllidea) are dominant components of parasite communities of suckers (Catostomidae) in North America, with Biacetabulum Hunter, 1927 representing one of the more species-rich genera. Molecular (28S rDNA) and morphological (including scanning electron microscopy and histology) evaluation of newly collected tapeworms from different fish hosts revealed the existence of four similar (and three closely related) species of Biacetabulum. These four species differ from their congeners by having a long body (up to 48 mm long) with a very long, slender neck (its length represents ≥30% of total body length), a large, globular scolex with a prominent central acetabulum-like loculus on the dorsal and ventral sides, two pairs of shallow lateral loculi and a distinct, slightly convex apical disc, and a cirrus-sac that is situated between the anterior arms of the ovarian wings. Taken together, the morphological and molecular data and the host associations of these species provide evidence of their host specificity. Biacetabulum isaureae n. sp. occurs in notch clip redhorse, Moxostoma collapsum, in South Carolina (USA), B. longicollum n. sp. in silver redhorse, Moxostoma anisurum (type host), and golden redhorse, M. erythrurum, in Manitoba (Canada) and West Virginia (USA), B. overstreeti n. sp. in a spotted sucker, Minytrema melanops, in Mississippi, and B. hypentelii n. sp. in northern hogsucker, Hypentelium nigricans, in Tennessee (USA). The new species differ from each other in the number of postovarian vitelline follicles, the posterior extent of preovarian vitelline follicles and relative size of the cirrus sac.

Keywords

28S DNAcomparative morphologyEucestodafishNearctic regionSEMspecies complexsuckers
Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 148 , Issue 9 , August 2021 , pp. 1040 - 1056
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ash, A, Scholz, T, Oros, M and Kar, PK (2011) Tapeworms (Cestoda: Caryophyllidea), parasites of Clarias batrachus (Pisces: Siluriformes) in the Indomalayan Region. Journal of Parasitology 97, 435–459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barčák, D, Oros, M, Hanzelová, V and Scholz, T (2014) Phenotypic plasticity in Caryophyllaeus brachycollis Janiszewska, 1953 (Cestoda: Caryophyllidea): does fish host play a role? Systematic Parasitology 88, 153–166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barčák, D, Oros, M, Hanzelová, V and Scholz, T (2017) A synoptic review of Caryophyllaeus Gmelin, 1790 (Cestoda: Caryophyllidea), parasites of cyprinid fishes in the Palaearctic Region. Folia Parasitologica 64, 027.10.14411/fp.2017.027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bazsalovicsová, B, Králová-Hromadová, I, Brabec, J, Hanzelová, V, Oros, M and Scholz, T (2014) Conflict between morphology and molecular data: a case of the genus Caryophyllaeus (Cestoda, Caryophyllidea), monozoic tapeworms of cyprinid fishes. Folia Parasitologica 61, 347–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brabec, J, Scholz, T, Králová-Hromadová, I, Bazsalovicsová, E and Olson, PD (2012) Substitution saturation and nuclear paralogs of commonly employed phylogenetic markers in the Caryophyllidea, an unusual group of nonsegmented tapeworms (Platyhelminthes). International Journal for Parasitology 42, 259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calentine, RL (1965) The biology and taxonomy of Biacetabulum (Cestoda: Caryophyllaeidae). Journal of Parasitology 50, 243–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chervy, L (2009) Unified terminology for cestode microtriches: a proposal from the International Workshops on Cestode Systematics in 2002–2008. Folia Parasitologica 56, 199–230.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Darriba, D, Taboada, GL, Doallo, R and Posada, D (2012) JModelTest 2: more models, new heuristics and parallel computing. Nature Methods 9, 772.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edgar, RC (2004) MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Research 32, 1792–1797.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Froese, R and Pauly, D (eds) (2020) FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication. Available at http://www.fishbase.org (Accessed December 2019).Google Scholar
Guindon, S, Dufayard, JF, Lefort, V, Anisimova, M, Hordijk, W and Gascuel, O (2010) New algorithms and methods to estimate maximum-likelihood phylogenies: assessing the performance of PhyML 3.0. Systematic Biology 59, 307–321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanzelová, V, Oros, M, Barčák, D, Miklisová, D, Kirin, D and Scholz, T (2015) Morphological polymorphism in tapeworms: redescription of Caryophyllaeus laticeps (Cestoda: Caryophyllidea) and characterization of its morphotypes from different fish hosts. Systematic Parasitology 90, 177–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, GW (1927) Notes on the Caryophyllaeidae of North America. Journal of Parasitology 14, 16–26.10.2307/3271398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, GW (1929) New caryophyllaeidae from North America. Journal of Parasitology 15, 185–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuchta, R, Řehulková, E, Francová, K, Scholz, T and Šimková, A (2020) What do we know about parasites of cypriniform fishes? Diversity of monogeneans and tapeworms across two continents. International Journal for Parasitology 50, 771–786.10.1016/j.ijpara.2020.06.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littlewood, DT, Curini-Galletti, M and Herniou, EA (2000) The interrelationships of Proseriata (Platyhelminthes: Seriata) tested with molecules and morphology. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 16, 449–466.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mackiewicz, JS (1968) Two new caryophyllaeid cestodes from the spotted sucker, Minytrema melanops (Raf.) (Catostomidae). Journal of Parasitology 54, 808–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackiewicz, JS (1972) Caryophyllidea (Cestoidea): a review. Experimental Parasitology 34, 417–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackiewicz, JS (1994). Order Caryophyllidea van Beneden in Carus, 1863. In Khalil, LF, Jones, A and Bray, RA (eds), Keys to the Cestode Parasites of Vertebrates. Wallingford, UK: CAB International, pp. 21–43.Google Scholar
Olson, PD, Scholz, T, Poddubnaya, LG and Littlewood, DTJ (2008) On the derived position of Archigetes and the early evolution of the tapeworms (Platyhelminthes: Cestoda). Journal of Parasitology 94, 898–904.10.1645/GE-1456.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oros, M, Scholz, T, Hanzelová, V and Mackiewicz, JS (2010) Scolex morphology of monozoic cestodes (Caryophyllidea) from the Palaearctic Region: a useful tool for species identification. Folia Parasitologica 57, 37–46.10.14411/fp.2010.006CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oros, M, Brabec, J, Kuchta, R, Choudhury, A and Scholz, T (2016) A synoptic review of Promonobothrium Mackiewicz, 1968 (Cestoda: Caryophyllidea), parasites of suckers (Catostomidae) in North America, with description of two new species. Folia Parasitologica 63, 14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oros, M, Uhrovič, D and Scholz, T (2018) A new classification of Glaridacris Cooper, 1920 (Cestoda: Caryophyllidea), parasites of suckers (Catostomidae) in North America, including erection of Pseudoglaridacris n. gen. Journal of Parasitology 104, 60–69.10.1645/17-58CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oros, M, Uhrovič, D, Choudhury, A, Mackiewicz, JS and Scholz, T (2020) Scolex morphology of monozoic tapeworms (Caryophyllidea) from the nearctic region: taxonomic and evolutionary implications. Folia Parasitologica 67, 003 (11 pp.).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rambaut, A (2012) FigTree v1. 4. Molecular evolution, phylogenetics and epidemiology. Edinburgh, UK: University of Edinburgh, Institute of Evolutionary Biology. Available at http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree.Google Scholar
Ronquist, F, Teslenko, M, Van Der Mark, P, Ayres, DL, Darling, A, Höhna, S and Huelsenbeck, JP (2012) MrBayes 3.2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Systematic Biology 61, 539–542.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scholz, T and Choudhury, A (2014) Parasites of freshwater fishes in North America: why so neglected? Journal of Parasitology 100, 26–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholz, T and Kuchta, R (2017) A digest of fish tapeworms. Vie et Milieu 67, 43–58.Google Scholar
Scholz, T and Oros, M (2017) Caryophyllidea van Beneden in Carus, 1863. In Caira, JN and Jensen, K (eds), Planetary Biodiversity Inventory (2008–2017): Tapeworms From Vertebrate Bowels of the Earth. University of Kansas, Lawrence, Natural History Museum, Special Publication No. 25, pp. 47–64.Google Scholar
Scholz, T, Oros, M, Bazsalovicsová, E, Brabec, J, Waeschenbach, A, Xi, B-W, Aydogdu, A, Besprozvannykh, V, Shimazu, T, Králová-Hromadová, I and Littlewood, DTJ (2014) Molecular evidence of cryptic diversity in Paracaryophyllaeus (Cestoda: Caryophyllidea), parasites of loaches (Cobitidae) in Eurasia, including description of P. vladkae n. sp. Parasitology International 63, 841–850.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scholz, T, Oros, M, Choudhury, A, Brabec, J and Waeschenbach, A (2015) New circumscription of freshwater fish parasites Monobothrium Diesing, 1863 and Promonobothrium Mackiewicz, 1968 (Cestoda: Caryophyllidea) using morphological and molecular evidence. Journal of Parasitology 101, 29–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scholz, T, Waeschenbach, A, Oros, A, Brabec, J and Littlewood, DTJ (2021) Phylogenetic reconstruction of early diverging tapeworms (Cestoda: Caryophyllidea) reveals ancient radiations in vertebrate hosts and biogeographic regions. International Journal for Parasitology 51, 263–277.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tamura, K, Stecher, G, Peterson, D, Filipski, A and Kumar, S (2013) MEGA6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 6.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30, 2725–2729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Werle, E, Schneider, C, Volker, M and Fiehn, W (1994) Convenient single-step, one tube purification of PCR products for direct sequencing. Nucleic Acids Research 22, 4354–4355.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed