| Literature DB >> 28285504 |
Chalobol Wongsawad1,2, Pheravut Wongsawad1, Kom Sukontason3, Worawit Maneepitaksanti4, Nattawadee Nantarat1.
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the morphology and reconstruct the phylogenetic relationships of Centrocestus formosanus originating from 5 species of freshwater fish, i.e., Esomus metallicus, Puntius brevis, Anabas testudineus, Parambassis siamensis, and Carassius auratus, in Chiang Mai province, Thailand. Sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) and phylogeny based on internal transcribed spacer 2 (ITS2) and mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (CO1) were performed. The results showed similar morphologies of adult C. formosanus from day 5 after infection in chicks. C. formosanus originated from 4 species of freshwater fish had the same number of circumoral spines on the oral sucker, except for those from C. auratus which revealed 34 circumoral spines. The phylogenetic tree obtained from SRAP profile and the combination of ITS2 and CO1 sequence showed similar results that were correlated with the number of circumoral spines in adult worms. Genetic variability of C. formosanus also occurred in different species of freshwater fish hosts. However, more details of adult worm morphologies and more sensitive genetic markers are needed to confirm the species validity of C. formosanus with 34 circumoral spines originating from C. auratus in the future.Entities:
Keywords: Centrocestus formosanus; Chiang Mai; Thailand; freshwater fish; molecular phylogeny
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28285504 PMCID: PMC5365256 DOI: 10.3347/kjp.2017.55.1.31
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Korean J Parasitol ISSN: 0023-4001 Impact factor: 1.341
Fig. 1The morphology of adult Centrocestus formosanus with 32 and 34 circumoral spines. (A) C. formosanus originated from Puntius brevis (a1) showing 32 spines arranged in 2 alternate rows around its oral sucker (a2). (B) C. formosanus originated from Carassius auratus (b1) showing 34 spines arranged in 2 alternate rows around its oral sucker (b2).
Measurements of Centrocestus formosanus adults recovered in the small intestines of chicks at day 5 post infection
| No. of oral spines | 32 | 32 | 32 | 32 | 34 | |
|
| ||||||
| Body | L | 610–750 (670) | 590–710 (632) | 540–900 (660) | 432–640 (537.3) | 600–750 (668) |
| W | 270–350 (298) | 240–320 (276) | 220–290 (252) | 196–270 (237) | 200–290 (259) | |
|
| ||||||
| Oral sucker | L | 57.5–72.5 (66.5) | 57.5–80 (69.5) | 55–65 (61.5) | 42–65 (72.5) | 60–80 (70) |
| W | 62.5–87.5 (78.5) | 65–80 (72.5) | 65–82.5 (72.5) | 58–72.5 (64.3) | 52.5–82.5 (76) | |
|
| ||||||
| Ventral sucker | L | 50–75 (60) | 47.5–60 (54) | 50–62.5 (56.9) | 44–55 (49.7) | 52.5–57.5 (55.5) |
| W | 62.5–70 (64) | 52.5–62.5 (58) | 55–72.5 (61.9) | 50–62.5 (58.3) | 55–70 (65.5) | |
|
| ||||||
| Prepharynx | 17.5–82.5 (53) | 35–50 (44) | 7.5–62.5 (36) | 22–82.5 (44) | 17.5–32.5 (26.5) | |
|
| ||||||
| Pharynx | L | 37.5–62.5 (51.5) | 35–62.5 (47) | 45–55 (51) | 40–50 (46.7) | 45–57.5 (49.5) |
| W | 37.5–52.5 (47) | 35–45 (40.5) | 25–50 (40) | 32–52.5 (41.5) | 37.5–50 (44) | |
|
| ||||||
| Esophagus | L | 50–100 (64.5) | 30–80 (54.5) | 30–62.5 (45) | 20–50 (31.7) | 32.5–62.5 (51.5) |
|
| ||||||
| Ovary | L | 67.5–100 (82) | 55–90 (79) | 50–100 (71.9) | 40–67.5 (52.5) | 62.5–87.5 (76.5) |
| W | 62.5–137.5 (103.5) | 70–150 (99.5) | 75–125 (96.9) | 66–82.5 (73.3) | 65–150 (105.5) | |
|
| ||||||
| Right testis | L | 100–120 (110.5) | 70–100 (85) | 65–120 (85) | 68–100 (84.3) | 57.5–92.5 (76) |
| W | 62.5–157.5 (121) | 92.5–155 (119.5) | 82.5–112.5 (96.25) | 88–125 (107.7) | 100–137.5 (120.5) | |
|
| ||||||
| Left testis | L | 87.5–137.5 (103.5) | 75–100 (84.5) | 62.5–87.5 (71.9) | 60–87.5 (74.2) | 67.5–125 (87) |
| W | 50–142.5 (108.5) | 87.5–120 (87.5) | 87.5–105 (95) | 80–120 (100) | 82.5–125 (103.5) | |
|
| ||||||
| Egg | L | 32.5–40 (38) | 37.5–40 (39) | 37.5–42.5 (41) | 34–42.5 (38.8) | 40–47.5 (43.5) |
| W | 22.5–22.5 (22.5) | 17.5–25 (20.5) | 20–22.5 (21) | 20–25 (22.5) | 20–20 (20) | |
Unit (μm), range (mean), L=length, W=width.
Fig. 2Cladogram constructed based on SRAP profile using UPGMA method. The adult worms of clade ‘A’ had 32 circumoral spines, whereas those of clade ‘B’ had 34 circumoral spines.
Fig. 3Cladogram constructed based on the combination of ITS2 and CO1 sequence with 1,000 bootstrap replicates. (A) Maximum-likelihood (ML) method. The adult worms of clade ‘A’ and clade ‘B b1’ had 32 circumoral spines, whereas those of clade ‘B b2’ had 34 circumoral spines. (B) Neighbor-joining (NJ) method. The adult worms of clade ‘A’ had 32 circumoral spines, whereas those of clade ‘B’ had 34 circumoral spines.