Molecular characterisation of acanthocephalans from Australian marine teleosts: proposal of a new family, synonymy of an
- PDF / 2,028,004 Bytes
- 23 Pages / 547.087 x 737.008 pts Page_size
- 28 Downloads / 184 Views
(0123456789().,-volV) ( 01234567 89().,-volV)
Molecular characterisation of acanthocephalans from Australian marine teleosts: proposal of a new family, synonymy of another and transfer of taxa between orders Daniel C. Huston
. Thomas H. Cribb
. Lesley R. Smales
Received: 19 September 2019 / Accepted: 10 December 2019 / Published online: 7 January 2020 Ó Springer Nature B.V. 2020
Abstract We provide molecular data (cox1, 18S rDNA and 28S rDNA) for 17 acanthocephalan species and 20 host-parasite combinations from Australian marine teleosts collected from off Queensland, Australia. Fourteen of these acanthocephalans are characterised with molecular data for the first time and we provide the first molecular data for a species of each of the genera Heterosentis Van Cleave, 1931, Pyriproboscis Amin, Abdullah & Mhaisen, 2003 and Sclerocollum Schmidt & Paperna, 1978. Using 18S and 28S rDNA sequences, the phylogenetic position of each newly sequenced species is assessed with both single-
This article was registered in the Official Register of Zoological Nomenclature (ZooBank) as C1C6A0B8-0716-4C0F-997B7AF68C95B0B4. This article was published as an Online First article on the online publication date shown on this page. The article should be cited by using the doi number. This is the Version of Record. This article is part of the Topical Collection Acanthocephala D. C. Huston (&) Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, The University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia e-mail: [email protected] T. H. Cribb School of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia L. R. Smales Parasitology Section, South Australian Museum, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
gene and concatenated 18S?28S maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference analyses. Additional phylogenetic analyses focusing on the genus Rhadinorhynchus Lu¨he, 1912 and related lineages are included. Our phylogenetic results are broadly consistent with previous analyses, recovering previously identified inconsistencies but also providing new insights and necessitating taxonomic action. We do not find sufficient evidence to recognise the Gymnorhadinorhynchidae Braicovich, Lanfranchi, Farber, Marvaldi, Luque & Timi, 2014 as distinct from the Rhadinorhynchidae Lu¨he, 1912. The family Gymnorhadinorhynchidae and its sole genus, Gymnorhadinorhynchus Braicovich, Lanfranchi, Farber, Marvaldi, Luque & Timi, 2014, are here recognised as junior synonyms of Rhadinorhynchidae and Rhadinorhynchus, respectively. The two species currently assigned to Gymnorhadinorhynchus are recombined as Rhadinorhynchus decapteri (Braicovich, Lanfranchi, Farber, Marvaldi, Luque & Timi, 2014) n. comb. and Rhadinorhynchus mariserpentis (Steinauer, Garcia-Vedrenne, Weinstein & Kuris, 2019) n. comb. In all of our analyses, Rhadinorhynchus biformis Smales, 2014 is found basal to the Rhadinorhynchidae ? Transvenidae Pichelin & Cribb, 2001, thus resulting in a paraphyletic Rhadinorhynchidae. It appears that R. biformis may require a new genus and family; how
Data Loading...
