Patterns of specificity and diversity in species of Paraorygmatobothrium Ruhnke, 1994 (Cestoda: Phyllobothriidae) in Moreton Bay, Queensland, Australia, with the description of four new species
- 183 Downloads
A survey of tapeworms of galeomorph sharks from Moreton Bay (Queensland, Australia) identified a complex of species of Paraorygmatobothrium Ruhnke, 1994 infecting 11 carcharhiniform and two orectolobiform species. Combined morphological and multi-locus molecular analyses (based on the 28S nuclear ribosomal RNA and partial mitochondrial NADH dehydrogenase subunit 1 genes) revealed the presence of 12 species of Paraorygmatobothrium; four species (Paraorygmatobothrium christopheri n. sp., P. harti n. sp., P. sinclairtaylori n. sp. and P. ullmanni n. sp.) are considered to be new to science and are formally described, four represent known species, and four lack sufficient morphological data to allow definitive identification. In contrast to previous records for the genus, four of the species found in this study exhibited low host specificity [P. orectolobi (Butler, 1987) Ruhnke, 2011, P. sinclairtaylori, P. ullmanni and Paraorygmatobothrium sp. 3], three stenoxenic species were each found in two closely-related sharks (P. orectolobi, P. ullmanni and Paraorygmatobothrium sp. 3) and one euryxenic species was found in five species from two shark families (P. sinclairtaylori). One species was found to exhibit mild morphologically plasticity (P. orectolobi), with size range being associated with different shark species. Conversely, collections of almost morphologically indistinguishable specimens from single shark species were found to represent multiple species of Paraorygmatobothrium. The findings of this study indicate that the description of species of this genus on the basis of morphological data alone is problematic and that the inclusion of multi-locus molecular data is essential for future work on Paraorygmatobothrium. Host specificity, morphology and phylogenetic relatedness of species of Paraorygmatobothrium are explored.
We thank Drs Stephen Taylor, Nathan Hart and Jeremy F.P. Ullmann and John Page, Dave Thompson, Tane Sinclair-Taylor and Joanna Stead, for their assistance in the collection of elasmobranch specimens. We thank Dr Susan Theiss for her assistance in the production of SEM images and Dr Tim Ruhnke for providing primers for nad1 sequencing. We also thank the Queensland Shark Control Program for access to the spiral valve of a Carcharias taurus, caught off Rainbow Beach, Queensland, Australia.
THC and SCC acknowledge the Australian Biological Resources Study (ABRS) for their ongoing support. This study was funded by the ABRS National Taxonomy Research Grant RF215-40.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All applicable institutional, national and international guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.
- Bernot, J. P., Caira, J. N., & Pickering, M. (2016). Diversity, phylogenetic relationships and host associations of Calliobothrium and Symcallio (Cestoda: ‘Tetraphyllidea’) parasitising triakid sharks. Invertebrate Systematics, 30, 616–634.Google Scholar
- Cutmore, S. C., Bennett, M. B., & Cribb, T. H. (2009). Paraorygmatobothrium taylori n. sp. (Tetraphyllidea: Phyllobothriidae) from the Australian weasel shark Hemigaleus australiensis White, Last & Compagno (Carcharhiniformes: Hemigaleidae). Systematic Parasitology, 74, 49–58.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cutmore, S. C., Bennett, M. B., & Cribb, T. H. (2010). A new tetraphyllidean genus and species, Caulopatera pagei n. g., n. sp. (Tetraphyllidea: Phyllobothriidae), from the grey carpetshark Chiloscyllium punctatum Müller & Henle (Orectolobiformes: Hemiscylliidae). Systematic Parasitology, 77, 13–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Johnson, J. W. (2010). Fishes of the Moreton Bay Marine Park and adjacent continental shelf waters, Queensland, Australia. Memoirs of the Queensland Museum, 54, 299–353.Google Scholar
- Last, P. R., & Stevens, J. D. (2009). Sharks and Rays of Australia (2nd ed.). Collingwood: CSIRO Publishing, 644 pp.Google Scholar
- Lockyer, A. E., Olson, P. D., & Littlewood, D. T. J. (2003). Utility of complete large and small subunit rRNA genes in resolving the phylogeny of the Neodermata (Platyhelminthes): Implications and a review of the cercomer theory. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 78, 155–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Maddison, W. P., & Maddison, D. R. (2015). Mesquite: A modular system for evolutionary analysis. Version 3.01. http://mesquiteproject.org.
- Miller, M. A., Pfeiler, E., & 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, LA, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
- Naylor, G. J. P., Caira, J. N., Jensen, K., Rosana, K. A. M., White, W. T., & Last, P. R. (2012). A DNA sequence-based approach to the identification of shark and ray species and its implications for global elasmobranch diversity and parasitology. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 367, 1–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ruhnke, T. R. (2011). Tapeworms of elasmobranchs (Part III). A monograph on the Phyllobothriidae (Platyhelminthes, Cestoda). Bulletin of the University of Nebraska State Museum, 25, i–xii, 1–208.Google Scholar
- Ruhnke, T. R., & Carpenter, S. D. (2008). Two new species of Paraorygmatobothrium Ruhnke, 1994 (Tetraphyllidea: Phyllobothriidae) from the smooth-hound Mustelus mustelus (L.) and the gummy shark M. antarcticus Günther (Carcharhiniformes: Triakidae). Systematic Parasitology, 71, 213–222.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sambrook, J., & Russell, D. W. (2001). Molecular cloning: A laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Harbor Laboratory Press.Google Scholar
- Vardo-Zalik, A. M., & Campbell, R. A. (2011). Five new species of Acanthobothrium van Beneden, 1849 (Cestoda: Tetraphyllidea) in elasmobranchs from the northwest Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico with first records from smooth-hound sharks and guitarfish. Zootaxa, 2938, 41–64.Google Scholar