Advertisement

Unravelling the phylogeny, cryptic diversity and morphological evolution of Diptilomiopus mites (Acari: Eriophyoidea)

  • Qing Liu
  • Yan-Mei Yuan
  • Yan Lai
  • Guo-Quan Wang
  • Xiao-Feng XueEmail author
Article

Abstract

The Eriophyoidea, notable for specific morphological characters (four-legged mites) and gall-formation in host plants (gall mites), is one of the most species-rich superfamilies of Acari. Monophyly of the superfamily Eriophyoidea is accepted by all acarologists; however, monophyly of most genera has not been evaluated in a molecular phylogenetic network. Furthermore, most eriophyoid mites, especially species in the genus Diptilomiopus, are morphologically similar, challenging their identification. Here we test the phylogeny and cryptic diversity of Diptilomiopus species using fragments of two mitochondrial (COI and 12S) and two nuclear (18S and 28S) genes. Our results revealed the monophyly of Diptilomiopus. Sequence distance, barcode gap, and species delimitation analyses of the COI gene allowed us to resolve cryptic diversity of Diptilomiopus species. Additionally, we supposed that characteristics of genu fused with femur on both legs and seta ft′ absent on leg II evolved only once within Diptilomiopus, which are potential morphological synapomorphies. In contrast, characteristics of both setae ft′ and ft″ divided into a short branch and a long branch were supposed evolving multiple times independently. Our findings contribute to the understanding of phylogeny and morphological evolution of Diptilomiopus species and provide a DNA-based approach for species delimitation of Diptilomiopus mites.

Keywords

Eriophyoid mites Phylogeny Cryptic diversity Morphological synapomorphies 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Mr. Jimmy Chew (Borneo Jungle Girl Camp, Keningau, Sabah, Malaysia) for kindly collecting mite specimens in Sabah, Malaysia. This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31970437).

Supplementary material

10493_2019_443_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (164 kb)
Supplementary material 1 Phylogenetic trees inferred from nucleotide sequences of 18S gene using maximum likelihood method. Node numbers indicate maximum likelihood bootstrap proportion (BSP) (PDF 166 kb)
10493_2019_443_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (157 kb)
Supplementary material 2 Phylogenetic trees inferred from nucleotide sequences of 18S gene using Bayesian method. Node numbers indicate Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP) (PDF 159 kb)
10493_2019_443_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (133 kb)
Supplementary material 3 Phylogenetic trees inferred from nucleotide sequences of two mitochondrial (COI and 12S) and two nuclear (18S and 28S) gene fragments using maximum likelihood method. Node numbers indicate maximum likelihood bootstrap proportion (BSP) (135 kb)
10493_2019_443_MOESM4_ESM.pdf (132 kb)
Supplementary material 4 Phylogenetic trees inferred from nucleotide sequences of two mitochondrial (COI and 12S) and two nuclear (18S and 28S) gene fragments using Bayesian method. Node numbers indicate Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP) (134 kb)
10493_2019_443_MOESM5_ESM.pdf (439 kb)
Supplementary material 5 Phylogenetic trees of Diptilomiopus species inferred from nucleotide sequences of (A) COI (no partitioned), (B) COI (partitioned by three codons), (C) 18S and (D) 28S using Bayesian method. Node numbers (black) indicate Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP). Branch numbers (red) indicate support values inferred by bPTP. Blue bars indicate delimitated species by analyses of GYMC and bPTP (440 kb)
10493_2019_443_MOESM6_ESM.docx (39 kb)
Supplementary material 6 (DOCX 40 kb)
10493_2019_443_MOESM7_ESM.docx (19 kb)
Supplementary material 7 (DOCX 20 kb)
10493_2019_443_MOESM8_ESM.xls (39 kb)
Supplementary material 8 Pairwise genetic distance of Diptilomiopus species in COI, 18S and 28S gene. (XLSX 40 kb)

References

  1. Alfaro ME (2003) Bayes or bootstrap? A simulation study comparing the performance of Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling and bootstrapping in assessing phylogenetic confidence. Mol Biol Evol 20:255–266.  https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msg028 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Amrine JW Jr, Manson DCM (1996) Preparation, mounting and descriptive study of eriophyoid mites. In: Lindquist EE, Sabelis MW, Bruin J (eds) Eriophyoid mites: their biology, natural enemies and control. World Crop Pests, vol 6. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 383–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amrine JW Jr, Stasny TA, Flechtmann CHW (2003) Revised keys to world genera of Eriophyoidea (Acari: Prostigmata). Indira Publishing House, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  4. Amrine JW Jr, Stasny TA (1994) Catalog of the Eriophyoidea (Acarina: Prostigmata) of the world. Indira Publishing House, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  5. Campbell CL, Tanaka N, White KH, Thorsness PE (1994) Mitochondrial morphological and functional defects in yeast caused by yme1 are suppressed by mutation of a 26S protease subunit homologue. Mol Biol Cell 5:899–905.  https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.5.8.899 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Capinera JL (2008) Encyclopedia of entomology. Springer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chandrapatya A, Konvipasruang P, Amrine JW Jr (2016) New eriophyoid mites from Thailand. Syst Appl Acarol 21:55–78.  https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.21.1.5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chetverikov PE, Craemer C, Neser S (2018) New pseudotagmic genus of acaricaline mites (Eriophyidae, Acaricalini) from a South African palm Hyphaene coriacea and remarks on lateral opisthosomal spines and morphology of deutogynes in Eriophyoidea. Syst Appl Acarol 23:1073–1101.  https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.23.6.6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chetverikov PE, Cvrkovic T, Makunin A, Sukhareva S, Vidovic B, Petanovic R (2015) Basal divergence of Eriophyoidea (Acariformes, Eupodina) inferred from combined partial COI and 28S gene sequences and CLSM genital anatomy. Exp Appl Acarol 67:219–245.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-015-9945-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Craemer C, Amrine JW Jr, Childers CC, Rogers ME, Achor DS (2017) A new eriophyoid mite species, Diptilomiopus floridanus (Acari: Eriophyoidea: Diptilomiopidae), from citrus in Florida, USA. Syst Appl Acarol 22:386–402.  https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.22.3.5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cvrković T, Chetverikov P, Vidović B, Petanović R (2016) Cryptic speciation within Phytoptus avellanae s.l. (Eriophyoidea: Phytoptidae) revealed by molecular data and observations on molting Tegonotus-like nymphs. Exp Appl Acarol 68:83–96.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-015-9981-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Dabert J, Ehrnsberger R, Dabert M (2008) Glaucalges tytonis sp. n. (Analgoidea, Xolalgidae) from the barn owl Tyto alba (Strigiformes, Tytonidae): compiling morphology with DNA barcode data for taxon descriptions in mites (Acari). Zootaxa 1719:41–52Google Scholar
  13. Dabert M, Witalinski W, Kazmierski A, Olszanowski Z, Dabert J (2010) Molecular phylogeny of acariform mites (Acari, Arachnida): strong conflict between phylogenetic signal and long-branch attraction artifacts. Mol Phylogenet Evol 56:222–241.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2009.12.020 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Duarte ME, de Mendonca RS, Skoracka A, Silva ES, Navia D (2019) Integrative taxonomy of Abacarus mites (Eriophyidae) associated with hybrid sugarcane plants, including description of a new species. Exp Appl Acarol 78: 373–401.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-019-00388-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Drummond AJ, Rambaut A (2007) BEAST: Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees. BMC Evol Biol 7:214.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-7-214 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Ezard THG, Fujisawa TE, Barraclough TG (2014) Splits: species' limits by threshold statistics. R package version 1.0–19/r51. http://RForge.Rproject.org/projects/splits/
  17. Flechtmann CHW (2004) Eriophyid mites (AcariL Eriophyidae) from brazilian sedges (Cyperaceae). Int J Acarol 30:157–164.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01647950408684385 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Folmer O, Black M, Hoeh W, Lutz R, Vrijenhoek R (1994) DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Mol Mar Biol Biotechnol 3:294–299PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Fujisawa T, Barraclough TG (2013) Delimiting species using single-locus data and the generalized mixed Yule coalescent approach: a revised method and evaluation on simulated data sets. Syst Biol 62:707–724.  https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syt033 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Guo J-F, Li H-S, Wang B, Xue X-F, Hong X-Y (2015) DNA barcoding reveals the protogyne and deutogyne of Tegolophus celtis sp. nov. (Acari: Eriophyidae). Exp Appl Acarol 67:393–410.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-015-9953-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Hillis DM, Dixon MT (1991) Ribosomal DNA: molecular evolution and phylogenetic inference. Q Rev Biol 66:411–453.  https://doi.org/10.1086/417338 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Hillis DM, Bull JJ (1993) An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst Biol 42:182–192.  https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/42.2.182 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Huang K-W, Wang C-F (2004) Eriophyoid mites of Taiwan: descriptin of three species of Calacarini from Hueysuen (Acari: Eriophyoidea: Phyllocoptinae). Zootaxa 527:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kambhampati S, Smith PT (1995) PCR primers for the amplification of four insect mitochondrial gene fragments. Insect Mol Biol 4:233–236.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2583.1995.tb00028.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Katoh K, Standley DM (2013) MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Mol Biol Evol 30:772–780.  https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst010 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Kearse M, Moir R, Wilson A, Stones-Havas S, Cheung M, Sturrock S, Buxton S, Cooper A, Markowitz S, Duran C, Thierer T, Ashton B, Meintjes P, Drummond A (2012) Geneious Basic: an integrated and extendable desktop software platform for the organization and analysis of sequence data. Bioinformatics 28:1647–1649.  https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bts199 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Kimura M (1980) A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J Mol Evol 16:111–120.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01731581 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Klimov PB, OConnor BM, Chetverikov PE, Bolton SJ, Pepato AR, Mortazavi AL, Tolstikov AV, Bauchan GR, Ochoa R (2018) Comprehensive phylogeny of acariform mites (Acariformes) provides insights on the origin of the four-legged mites (Eriophyoidea), a long branch. Mol Phylogenet Evol 119:105–117.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2017.10.017 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Lanfear R, Frandsen PB, Wright AM, Senfeld T, Calcott B (2017) PartitionFinder 2: new methods for selecting partitioned models of evolution for molecular and morphological phylogenetic analyses. Mol Biol Evol 34:772–773.  https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msw260 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Lewandowski M, Skoracka A, Szydlo W, Kozak M, Druciarek T, Griffiths DA (2014) Genetic and morphological diversity of Trisetacus species (Eriophyoidea: Phytoptidae) associated with coniferous trees in Poland: phylogeny, barcoding, host and habitat specialization. Exp Appl Acarol 63:497–520.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-014-9805-z CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Li H-S, Xue X-F, Hong X-Y (2014a) Homoplastic evolution and host association of Eriophyoidea (Acari, Prostigmata) conflict with the morphological-based taxonomic system. Mol Phylogenet Evol 78:185–198.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2014.05.014 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Li H-S, Xue X-F, Hong X-Y (2014b) Cryptic diversity in host-associated populations of Tetra pinnatifidae (Acari: Eriophyoidea): What do morphometric, mitochondrial and nuclear data reveal and conceal? Bull Entomol Res 104:221–232.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485313000746 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Lindquist EE (1996) External anatomy and notation of structures. In: Lindquist EE, Sabelis MW, Bruin J (eds) Eriophyoid mites: their biology, natural enemies and control. World Crop Pests, vol 6. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 3–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Liu S, Li J, Guo K, Qiao H, Xu R, Chen J, Xu C, Chen J (2016) Seasonal phoresy as an overwintering strategy of a phytophagous mite. Sci Rep 6:25483.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep25483 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Michalska K, Skoracka A, Navia D, Amrine JW Jr (2010) Behavioural studies on eriophyoid mites: an overview. Exp Appl Acarol 51:31–59.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-009-9319-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Miller MA, Pfeiffer W, Schwartz T (2010) Creating the CIPRES Science Gateway for inference of large phylogenetic trees. In: Proceedings of the Gateway Computing Environments Workshop (GCE), 14 Nov 2010, New Orleans, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  37. Nalepa A (1916) Neue Gallmilben (32. Fortsetzung). Anzeiger der kaiserlichen Akademie Wissenschaften. Mathematische-naturwissenschaftliche Klasse Wien 53:283–284Google Scholar
  38. Navia D, de Mendonca RS, Skoracka A, Szydlo W, Knihinicki D, Hein GL, da Silva Pereira PR, Truol G, Lau D (2013) Wheat curl mite, Aceria tosichella, and transmitted viruses: an expanding pest complex affecting cereal crops. Exp Appl Acarol 59:95–143.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-012-9633-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Petanovic R, Kielkiewicz M (2010) Plant-eriophyoid mite interactions: specific and unspecific morphological alterations. Part II. Exp Appl Acarol 51:81–91.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-009-9328-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Pons J, Barraclough T, Gomez-Zurita J, Cardoso A, Duran D, Hazell S, Kamoun S, Sumlin W, Vogler A (2006) Sequence-based species delimitation for the DNA taxonomy of undescribed insects. Syst Biol 55:595–609.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150600852011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Puillandre N, Lambert A, Brouillet S, Achaz G (2012) ABGD, Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery for primary species delimitation. Mol Ecol 21:1864–1877.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2011.05239.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. R Core Team (2018) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. https://www.R-project.org/
  43. Ronquist F, Teslenko M, van der Mark P, Ayres DL, Darling A, Hohna S, Larget B, Liu L, Suchard MA, Huelsenbeck JP (2012) MrBayes 3.2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Syst Biol 61:539–542.  https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/sys029 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Sabelis MW, Bruin J (1996) Evolutionary ecology: Life history patterns, food plant choice and dispersal. In: Lindquist EE, Sabelis MW, Bruin J (eds) Eriophyoid mites: their biology, natural enemies and control. World Crop Pests, vol 6. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 329–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schmidt AR, Jancke S, Lindquist EE, Ragazzi E, Roghi G, Nascimbene PC, Schmidt K, Wappler T, Grimaldi DA (2012) Arthropods in amber from the Triassic Period. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109:14796–14801.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1208464109 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Sidorchuk EA, Schmidt AR, Ragazzi E, Roghi G, Lindquist EE (2015) Plant-feeding mite diversity in Triassic amber (Acari: Tetrapodili). J Syst Palaeontol 13:129–151.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14772019.2013.867373 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Silvestro D, Michalak I (2011) raxmlGUI: a graphical front-end for RAxML. Org Divers Evol 12:335–337.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13127-011-0056-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Skoracka A, Dabert M (2010) The cereal rust mite Abacarus hystrix (Acari: Eriophyoidea) is a complex of species: evidence from mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences. Bull Entomol Res 100:263–272.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007485309990216 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Skoracka A, Kuczyński L, Szydło W, Rector B (2013) The wheat curl mite Aceria tosichella (Acari: Eriophyoidea) is a complex of cryptic lineages with divergent host ranges: evidence from molecular and plant bioassay data. Biol J Linnean Soc 109:165–180.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bij.12024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Skoracka A, Lopes LF, Alves MJ, Miller A, Lewandowski M, Szydlo W, Majer A, Rozanska E, Kuczynski L (2018) Genetics of lineage diversification and the evolution of host usage in the economically important wheat curl mite, Aceria tosichella Keifer, 1969. BMC Evol Biol 18:122.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-018-1234-x CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. Skoracka A, Smith L, Oldfield G, Cristofaro M, Amrine JW Jr (2010) Host-plant specificity and specialization in eriophyoid mites and their importance for the use of eriophyoid mites as biocontrol agents of weeds. Exp Appl Acarol 51:93–113.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-009-9323-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Stamatakis A (2006) RAxML-VI-HPC: maximum likelihood-based phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models. Bioinformatics 22:2688–2690.  https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btl446 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S (2013) MEGA6: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 6.0. Mol Biol Evol 30:2725–2729.  https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst197 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  54. Toews DP, Brelsford A (2012) The biogeography of mitochondrial and nuclear discordance in animals. Mol Ecol 21:3907–3930.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05664.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Whiting MF, Carpenter JC, Wheeler QD, Wheeler WC (1997) The Strepsiptera problem: phylogeny of the holometabolous insect orders inferred from 18S and 28S ribosomal DNA sequences and morphology. Syst Biol 46:1–68.  https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/46.1.1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Xue X-F, Song Z-W, Amrine JW Jr, Hong X-Y (2007) Eriophyoid mites on coniferous plants in China with descriptions of a new genus and five new species (Acari: Eriophyoidea). Int J Acarol 33:333–345.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01647950708683695 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Xue X-F, Dong Y, Deng W, Hong X-Y, Shao R (2017) The phylogenetic position of eriophyoid mites (superfamily Eriophyoidea) in Acariformes inferred from the sequences of mitochondrial genomes and nuclear small subunit (18S) rRNA gene. Mol Phylogenet Evol 109:271–282.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2017.01.009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Xue X-F, Guo J-F, Dong Y, Hong X-Y, Shao R (2016) Mitochondrial genome evolution and tRNA truncation in Acariformes mites: new evidence from eriophyoid mites. Sci Rep 6:18920.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep18920 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  59. Zhang J, Kapli P, Pavlidis P, Stamatakis A (2013) A general species delimitation method with applications to phylogenetic placements. Bioinformatics 29:2869–2876.  https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btt499 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. Zhang Z-Q (2011) Animal biodiversity: an outline of higher-level classification and survey of taxonomic richness. Magnolia Press, AucklandGoogle Scholar
  61. Zhang Z-Q (2018) Repositories for mite and tick specimens: acronyms and their nomenclature. Syst Appl Acarol 23:2432–2466.  https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.23.12.12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zhao S, Amrine JW Jr (1997) Investigation of snowborne mites (Acari) and relevancy to dispersal. Int J Acarol 23:209–213.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01647959708683565 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zhao Y, Li W, Wang G-Q (2018) New asian phyllocoptines (Eriophyidae, Phyllocoptinae): descriptions of Namengia latifloris gen. nov. & sp. nov. (Acaricalini) and Petanovicia cathartica sp. nov. (Phyllocoptini) from northwest Laos. Syst Appl Acarol 23:2022–2032.  https://doi.org/10.11158/saa.23.10.11 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EntomologyNanjing Agricultural UniversityNanjingChina
  2. 2.Department of Plant ProtectionGuangxi UniversityNanningChina

Personalised recommendations