Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:16:36.392Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Loads of trematodes: discovering hidden diversity of paramphistomoids in Kenyan ruminants

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 October 2016

MARTINA R. LAIDEMITT*
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Center for Evolutionary and Theoretical Immunology, Parasite Division Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico, 167 Castetter MSCO3 2020 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131, USA
EVA T. ZAWADZKI
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Center for Evolutionary and Theoretical Immunology, Parasite Division Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico, 167 Castetter MSCO3 2020 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131, USA
SARA V. BRANT
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Center for Evolutionary and Theoretical Immunology, Parasite Division Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico, 167 Castetter MSCO3 2020 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131, USA
MARTIN W. MUTUKU
Affiliation:
Center for Biotechnology Research and Development, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), P.O. Box 54840-00200, Nairobi, Kenya
GERALD M. MKOJI
Affiliation:
Center for Biotechnology Research and Development, Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), P.O. Box 54840-00200, Nairobi, Kenya
ERIC S. LOKER
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Center for Evolutionary and Theoretical Immunology, Parasite Division Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico, 167 Castetter MSCO3 2020 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131, USA
*
*Corresponding author: Center for Evolutionary and Theoretical Immunology, University of New Mexico, Department of Biology, 167 Castetter MSCO3 2020, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131, USA. E-mail: mlaidemitt@unm.edu

Summary

Paramphistomoids are ubiquitous and widespread digeneans that infect a diverse range of definitive hosts, being particularly speciose in ruminants. We collected adult worms from cattle, goats and sheep from slaughterhouses, and cercariae from freshwater snails from ten localities in Central and West Kenya. We sequenced cox1 (690 bp) and internal transcribed region 2 (ITS2) (385 bp) genes from a small piece of 79 different adult worms and stained and mounted the remaining worm bodies for comparisons with available descriptions. We also sequenced cox1 and ITS2 from 41 cercariae/rediae samples collected from four different genera of planorbid snails. Combining morphological observations, host use information, genetic distance values and phylogenetic methods, we delineated 16 distinct clades of paramphistomoids. For four of the 16 clades, sequences from adult worms and cercariae/rediae matched, providing an independent assessment for their life cycles. Much work is yet to be done to resolve fully the relationships among paramphistomoids, but some correspondence between sequence- and anatomically based classifications were noted. Paramphistomoids of domestic ruminants provide one of the most abundant sources of parasitic flatworm biomass, and because of the predilection of several species use Bulinus and Biomphalaria snail hosts, have interesting linkages with the biology of animal and human schistosomes to in Africa.

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016

INTRODUCTION

The Superfamily Paramphistomoidea is a prominent group of digeneans where adults are characterized by the absence of an oral sucker and the presence of an acetabulum at or near the posterior end of the body. The systematics of this group of digeneans is a work in progress. Sey (Reference Sey1991) concluded it is comprised of eight families, whereas Jones (Reference Jones, Jones, Bray and Gibson2005a ) concluded there are 12 families. Paramphistomoids are often called rumen flukes because many of the best-known representatives live in this habitat in domestic ruminants. However, many species also inhabit the intestines of fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and non-ruminant mammals. They feature a life cycle in which cercariae produced in rediae emerge from snails and encyst on vegetation as metacercariae, which are later ingested by the definitive host (Jones, Reference Jones, Jones, Bray and Gibson2005a ). As part of a larger study to determine how digenean community diversity influences the transmission of schistosomes in Kenya, we provide new results regarding the overall diversity and host relationships of paramphistomoids in Kenya, based on cercariae collected from snails and adult worms from domestic animals from abattoirs.

Paramphistomoids are of interest to parasitologists in several contexts. They are diverse in number of species and provide an understudied model group for those focused on revealing patterns and mechanisms of diversity. Of the 12 recognized paramphistomoid families recognized by Jones (Reference Jones, Jones, Bray and Gibson2005a ), representatives of nine occur in Africa. The diversity of paramphistomoids in Africa reflects the presence of many species of terrestrial mammals, including elephants, rhinoceroses, hippopotami and a rich diversity of wild and domestic ruminants. Three families in particular (Paramphistomidae, Gastrodiscidae and Gastrothylacidae) are speciose in Africa. The distribution of diversity in rumen hosts can partly be explained by characters (e.g. regressed pharyngeal appendages) that are apomorphic, which have allowed them to colonize the forestomach (Sey Reference Sey1991). The three families comprise over 40% of all known paramphistomoids, the majority of which use ruminants as their definitive hosts (Sey, Reference Sey1991).

Paramphistomoids have thick bodies, which make detailed morphological characterization of adult features and species identification challenging (Horak, Reference Horak1971; Jones, Reference Jones1991; Mage et al. Reference Mage, Bourgne, Toullieu, Rondelaud and Dreyfuss2002; Rinaldi et al. Reference Rinaldi, Perugini, Capuano, Fenizia, Musella, Veneziano and Cringoli2005). The bodies of paramphistomoid cercariae are also relatively thick and typically filled with cystogenous material or pigment, also rendering identification difficult. Nonetheless, a meticulous framework for paramphistomoid identification and classification has been developed (see reviews by Sey, Reference Sey1991; Jones, Reference Jones, Jones, Bray and Gibson2005a ). Given the inherent difficulties in identification, coupled with a growing list of studies from other digenean groups documenting the presence of cryptic species (Detwiler et al. Reference Detwiler, Zajac, Minchella and Belden2012; Herrmann et al. Reference Herrmann, Poulin, Keeney and Blasco-Costa2014; McNamara et al. Reference McNamara, Miller and Cribb2014), paramphistomoids are ideal for studies attempting to meld traditional morphological identification with sequence data characterization provided by molecular approaches. The number of studies that use molecular techniques to provide assessments of the diversity of paramphistomoids have in general been limited, especially so for African species (Lotfy et al. Reference Lotfy, Brant, Ashmawy, Devkota, Mkoji and Loker2010; Mansour et al. Reference Mansour, Ellazek and Madkour2014; Sibula et al. Reference Sibula, Dhlamini and Dube2014; Titi et al. Reference Titi, Mekroud, Chibat Mel, Boucheikhchoukh, Zein-Eddine, Djuikwo-Teukeng, Vignoles, Rondelaud and Dreyfuss2014; Dube et al. Reference Dube, Sibula and Dhlamini2015).

In addition to being speciose, paramphistomoids are often remarkably abundant (Horak, Reference Horak1971; Cheruiyot and Wamae, Reference Cheruiyot and Wamae1988; Rolfe et al. Reference Rolfe, Boray and Collins1994; Sanabria and Romero, Reference Sanabria and Romero2008). In fact, one might be hard pressed to find a larger source of sheer digenean biomass than is presented routinely at abattoirs by ruminant paramphistomoids. Given the large worm populations that can occur in individual cattle, goats or sheep, vast numbers of paramphistomoid eggs are regularly passed into the environment. In rural West Kenya, we can routinely collect 10 000 paramphistomoid eggs from a single cow dung sample. As domestic ruminants regularly seek water from natural habitats, it is not surprising that many paramphistomoid eggs enter freshwater, creating the potential for high levels of infection in their snail hosts (Chingwena et al. Reference Chingwena, Mukaratirwa, Kristensen and Chimbari2002a ; Mohammed et al. Reference Mohammed, Madsen and Ahmed2016).

A review of the East African paramphistomoid literature reveals that many of the described species are transmitted by Biomphalaria and Bulinus, the snail genera also of concern with respect to their role in transmission of human schistosomiasis in Africa (Dinnik, Reference Dinnik1954; Dinnik and Dinnik, Reference Dinnik and Dinnik1957; Dinnik, Reference Dinnik1961; Eduardo, Reference Eduardo1983; Brown, Reference Brown1994; Chingwena et al. Reference Chingwena, Mukaratirwa, Kristensen and Chimberi2002b ; Jones, Reference Jones, Jones, Bray and Gibson2005b , Reference Jones, Jones, Bray and Gibson c ). In some areas, Bulinus and Biomphalaria are the most commonly implicated snail hosts for paramphistomoids (Dinnik, Reference Dinnik1965; Wright et al. Reference Wright, Rollinson and Goll1979; Loker et al. Reference Loker, Moyo and Gardner1981; Chingwena et al. Reference Chingwena, Mukaratirwa, Kristensen and Chimberi2002b ; Ahmed et al. Reference Ahmed, Ibrahim and Idris2006; Mohammed et al. Reference Mohammed, Madsen and Ahmed2016). The presence of other digenean species utilizing the same snail species as schistosomes could be a factor that influences the overall success of animal and human schistosome transmission (Lim and Heyneman, Reference Lim and Heyneman1972; Combes, Reference Combes1982; Hechinger et al. Reference Hechinger, Wood and Kuris2011; Spatz et al. Reference Spatz, Cappa and de Nunez2012). This is particularly so for species such as paramphistomoids that produce rediae as larval stages within their snail hosts, because rediae may attack, damage and consume schistosome sporocysts (Lim and Heyneman, Reference Lim and Heyneman1972).

We collected cercariae and adult worms from ten localities in Kenya. We provide stained whole mounts and provisional identification of adults that are linked to sequence data for cytochrome oxidase 1 (cox1) and the internal transcribed region 2 (ITS2). In some cases, we provide matches with sequences obtained from cercariae and adult worms thus providing probable life cycle linkages. We also provide new hypotheses for phylogenetic relationships among the paramphistomoids that include available sequences from NCBI GenBank, which show that some species of paramphistomoids are geographically widespread throughout Africa. Data presented here will contribute to an increased understanding of the superfamily Paramphistomoidea, including providing greater clarification for how these worms are distributed among hosts, their potential roles if any in causing disease in domestic or wild animals, and their interactions with other digeneans, including schistosomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sampling

We collected larval and adult paramphistomoids from ten different localities in central and especially western Kenya between 2005 and 2015 (Table 1). All species of field-collected aquatic snails were brought to the laboratory at Kisian, near Kisumu, Kenya. The snails were cleaned and then placed individually into 12-well tissue culture plates in 3 mL of aged tap water. The tissue culture plates were placed in natural light for 2 h to induce shedding of cercariae. Snails shedding cercariae were identified using keys and information in Brown and Kristensen (Reference Brown and Kristensen1989) and Brown (Reference Brown1994), and cercariae were preliminarily identified using keys (Frandsen and Christensen, Reference Frandsen and Christensen1984; Schell, Reference Schell1985) and by reference to regional monographs (e.g. Fain, Reference Fain1953). All cercariae designated as paramphistomoids were confirmed as such according to Sey (Reference Sey1991). Snails were either dissected at the time of collection to procure rediae, or re-shed two and four weeks later to determine if snails were harboring prepatent infections at the time of collection. Snails were kept in 20 L plastic tanks and fed red leaf lettuce following collection. Cercariae and rediae were preserved in 95% ethanol for later molecular analysis.

Table 1. Collection localities in central and west Kenya

Adults were collected from the rumen or reticulum of Bos indicus, Capra aegagrus hircus and Ovis aries from one slaughterhouse in central Kenya and three in Western Kenya (Table 1). Adults were preserved in 95% ethanol for later molecular and morphological identification.

Staining adult worms

Adult worms were placed into 70% ethanol for 24 h prior to staining. Sections of the adult worms were stained and mounted according to Eduardo (Reference Eduardo1982). Because of their thickness, each adult was sectioned frontally using a razor blade. Part of the posteroterminally placed acetabulum was severed and used for molecular analysis.

Collection of molecular data

A partial sequence of cox1 mtDNA and internal transcribed spacer two (ITS2) were amplified by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to facilitate differentiation among paramphistomoid specimens. One to six cercariae, one to three rediae or a portion of the acetabulum from adults were used for DNA extraction. Genomic DNA was extracted from 120 paramphistomoid samples (Table 2) by the alkaline-lysis (HOT-SHOT) method (Truett et al. Reference Truett, Heeger, Mynatt, Truett, Walker and Warman2000), or by the QIAamp DNA Micro Kit following the manufacturer's instructions, with a final elution volume of 30 µL (Qiagen, Valencia, CA). Although not the equal of the QIAamp Kit with respect to absolute quality of the DNA produced, the HOT-SHOT method also produced DNA of quality and proved more amenable for use under conditions where controlled conditions were less available.

Table 2. Specimen name, host collected from, collection locality, provisional identification, Museum of Southwestern Biology/KEMRI voucher numbers, and GenBank accession numbers of paramphistomoid specimens used in this study

PA1-PA44 contain representatives of the 16 different clades used to construct the ML and Bayesian trees. PA45-PA120 were included in the preliminary trees. An (*) denotes samples that are in Kenya.

Cox1 oligonucleotide primers were designed based on the barcode region (Folmer et al. Reference Folmer, Black, Hoeh, Lutz and Vrijenhoek1994) and on conserved regions in the Fasciola hepatica (NC_002546), Paragonimus westermani (AF219379) and Paramphistomum cervi (NC_023095) mitochondrial genomes. Cox1 was amplified using primers 123F [5′-ATTCGTTTGAACTATATGGA-3′] and 858R [5′-CATATGATGAGCCCAAACAAC-3′]. The volume of each PCR reaction was 25 µL with 1 µL of 100 ng of DNA, 0·8 mm L−1 dNTPs, 2·5 mm L−1 MgCl2, 0·25 units of Ex Taq DNA (Clontech, Mountain View, CA) and 0·4 µ m L of each primer. PCR cycles were programmed as follows: 2 min denaturation hold at 94 °C; 94 °C for 1 min, 46 °C for 30 s and 72 °C for 1 min for three cycles; 94 °C for 1 min, 45 °C for 30 s, and 72 °C for 1 min for three cycles; 94 °C for 1 min, 44 °C for 30 s and 72 °C for 1 min for three cycles; 94 °C for 1 min, 44 °C for 30 s and 72 °C for 1 min for 20 cycles, and followed by an extension step for 7 min at 72 °C.

ITS2 was amplified using GA1 [5′-AGA ACA TCG ACA TCT TGA AC-3′] (Anderson and Barker, Reference Anderson and Barker1998) and BD2 primers [5′-TAT GCT TAA ATT CAG CGG GT-3′] (Bowles et al. Reference Bowles, Blair and Mcmanus1995). The volume of each reaction was 25 µL, with 12·5 µL of Premix Taq™ (Clontech, Mountain View, CA), 0·4 µ m L−1 of each primer, and one μL of 55 ng of DNA. PCR cycles were performed on Eppendorf Mastercycler epigradient machines, which were programmed as follows: 1 C s−1 rate of change, one cycle at 98 °C for 10 s, followed by 30 cycles of 98 °C for 1 min, 52 °C for 2 min and 72 °C for 1 min with an extension step for 7 min at 72 °C.

PCR fragments were separated by agarose gel electrophoresis and visualized with 0·5% GelRed™ Nucleic acid gel stain (Biotium, Hayward, CA). PCR products were purified using the QIAquick purification kit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA) or by ExoSap-IT® (Affymetrix, Santa Clara, CA). Both strands were sequenced using an Applied Biosystems 3130 automated sequencer and BigDye terminator cycle sequencing kit Version 3.1 (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA). DNA sequences were verified by aligning reads from the 5′ and 3′ directions using Sequencher 5·0 and manually corrected for ambiguous base calls (Gene Codes, Ann Arbor, MI).

Outgroup determination

To determine the most appropriate outgroup available for our data, we reconstructed trees with the most likely outgroups based on Lockyer et al. (Reference Lockyer, Olson and Littlewood2003) and chose the sister group to the paramphistomoids (ingroup). Species from the following nine families were used from 12 digenean mitochondrial genomes for maximum-likelihood (ML) analysis: Dicrocoelium dendriticum (NC_025280), Fasciola gigantica (NC_024025), P. cervi (NC_023095), Opisthorchis felineus (NC_011127), Clonorchis sinensis (NC_012147), Orthocoelium streptocoelium (NC_028071), Echinostoma hortense (NC_028010), Fischoederius elgonatus (NC_028001), P. westermani (NC_027673), Eurytrema pancreaticum (NC_026916), F. hepatica (NC_002546) and Ogmocotyle sikae (NC_027112).

Sequence alignment and phylogenetic analyses

Phylogenetic analyses were done with cox1 and ITS2 sequences using ML and Bayesian interference (BI). The analysis included four specimens from NCBI-GenBank for cox1 and 43 for ITS2 (Table 2). Non-identical haplotypes of cox1 and ITS2 sequences were aligned by eye and edited in MEGA6 (Tamura et al. Reference Tamura, Stecher, Peterson, Filipski and Kumar2013). A total of 690 bases were used for cox1 alignment and 385 bases for ITS2 alignments. Sequences generated in this study were submitted to GenBank (Table 2). ML analyses used PAUP* 4·0 b10 (Wilgenbusch and Swofford, Reference Wilgenbusch and Swofford2003) and BI analyses were carried out using MrBayes (v 3.12) (Ronquist and Huelsenbeck, Reference Ronquist and Huelsenbeck2003). MrModeltest 2·0 (Nylander, Reference Nylander2004) was used to find the best fit model of substitution for BI and ML for both genes. Heuristic searchers were utilized for ML analyses (excluding the third codon for cox1) and 100 bootstrap replicates were run for each dataset. For BI analyses of the cox1 dataset (excluding the third codon for cox1), the parameters were: nst = 6, rates = invgamma and ngammacat = 4. Four heated chains were run simultaneously for 1 000 000 generations. For BI analyses of the ITS2 dataset, the parameters were: nst = 6, rates = gamma and ngammacat = 4. Four heated chains were run simultaneously for 1 400 000 generations. In both datasets, the trees were sampled every 100 cycles, and the first 25% of trees with pre-asymptotic likelihood scores were discarded as burn-in. A number of generations were determined sufficient because the s.d. dropped below 0·01 at the end of the runs.

Nucleotide substitution saturation at the third codon was tested in DAMBE5 (Xia, Reference Xia2013) for cox1. Uncorrected pairwise distance values were calculated in MEGA6 (Tamura et al. Reference Tamura, Stecher, Peterson, Filipski and Kumar2013). Data were summarized within and between groups (Tables 3 and 4). We used similar criteria of other studies that used a P-distance value >5% difference with cox1 and nd1 mtDNA markers and >1·0% for ITS to indicate separate species (Vilas et al. Reference Vilas, Criscione and Blouin2005; Brant and Loker, Reference Brant and Loker2009; Detwiler et al. Reference Detwiler, Bos and Minchella2010).

Table 3. Intra- and interclade P- distance values of cox1 amplified from paramphistomoids from Kenya

Values in bold are intraclade divergences. Note that “–” indicates only a single specimen was collected and within distances could not be calculated.

Table 4. Intra- and interclade p-distance values of ITS2 amplified from paramphistomoids from Kenya

Values in bold are intraclade divergences. Note that “–” indicates only a single specimen was collected and within distances could not be calculated.

RESULTS

Samples

Paramphistomoid adults were collected from three species of ruminants and cercariae and/or rediae were collected from four different genera of planorbid snails (Biomphalaria, Bulinus, Ceratophallus, Segmentorbis) from ten localities in central and west Kenya (Tables 1 and 2). Paramphistomoid cercariae were not found in other snail species examined (Melanoides tuberculata, Radix natalensis, Physa acuta and Bellamya unicolor). Ruminants were typically heavily infected, and often hundreds of adult worms could be quickly collected per host. From our samples collected, we examined and sequenced 79 adult and 41 cercariae specimens (120 total specimens) that represented obvious variants. To facilitate sampling if a large numbers of adult worms were acquired from a single host, we separated them by differences in adult host morphology (size and presence of a pouch or a genital sucker). To further assure collection of a diversity of specimens, we sampled both adult worms and rediae/cercariae from different localities

Outgroup determination

With the diversity of sequence data available in GenBank, our analysis revealed that O. sikae (Notocotylidae) is more closely related to paramphistomoids than members of Echinostomatidae or Fasciolidae used as outgroups for other paramphistomoid molecular phylogenies (Lotfy et al. Reference Lotfy, Brant, Ashmawy, Devkota, Mkoji and Loker2010; Shylla et al. Reference Shylla, Ghatani, Chatterjee and Tandon2011; Ghatani et al. Reference Ghatani, Shylla, Tandon, Chatterjee and Roy2012). For phylogenetic analyses of both genes, we used three species of notocotylids as outgroup taxa.

Cox1 phylogenetic analyses and pairwise distance divergences

In general, trees were first constructed incorporating all 120 specimens (Supplementary Figs. S1 and S2). Because some clades were represented by multiple specimens (haplotypes with a 1–4 bp difference for cox1) we reduced the number of specimens per clade to simplify the trees for display purposes (Figs. 1 and 2). Many of the deeper nodes were not supported; however, the trees nonetheless provided a useful way to visualize the overall diversity of specimens found, and to provide comparisons with available systematic treatments. The specific clades identified (names next to the bolded black vertical lines) on the cox1 tree represent conspecifics (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Phylogenetic relationships of 44 samples of paramphistomoids from this study and from GenBank based on cox1 (690 bp) sequences inferred from ML (bootstrap values) analysis. Specimens are named based on sample name, the host it was collected from and are colour coded based on intraclade P-distance values <1·3% and interclade values >6·5%. An orange star represents clades where we matched cercariae and adult sequences. Identifications were made based on GenBank sequences and on the species descriptions in the literature (parentheses). An (*) denotes intermediate host use from studies in the literature that have not been sequenced confirmed.

Fig. 2. Phylogenetic relationships of 44 samples of paramphistomoids from this study and from GenBank based on ITS2 (385 bp) sequences inferred from ML (bootstrap values) analysis. Specimens are named based on sample name, the host it was collected from, and colour coded based on clade designation from cox1 distance values. A red star represents clades where we have found evidence of putative hybrids. Adjacent to these indicated clades, are clade numbers that correspond to the same specimens and clade numbers as appearing on the cox1 tree (Fig. 1).

Partial sequences of cox1 (690 bp) were obtained for all 120 samples (Supplementary Fig. S1). ML and BI (Supplementary Fig. S3) trees were created for the cox1 alignment, and the ML tree is shown (Fig. 1). MrModeltest 2·3 selected the GTR + I + G model of nucleotide substitution. Based on bootstrap and posterior probabilities in Table 3, 16 distinct cox1 clades were identified among Kenyan specimens and are portrayed alongside the tree in Fig. 1 (vertical black lines or arrows). We used genetic distance data to determine if a clade was comprised more than one species. A single species was of determined for specimens with genetic distance values <1·3%, and species were designated as distinct when genetic distance values were >6·2% (Table 3). Most interclade pairwise distance values were >10·0% and they ranged up to 19·9%. These same clade numbers or scientific names were also used adjacent to the ITS2 tree in Fig. 2.

ITS2 phylogenetic analyses and pairwise distance divergences

For ITS2, sequences were obtained from all 120 samples and our phylogenetic analyses also included 46 samples from GenBank (Supplementary Fig. S2). The ITS2 alignment included 61 bp of 5·8S, 283 bp of ITS2 and 46 bp of 28S. The average intraclade pairwise distance was 0·30% and the average interclade pairwise distance was 3·9% (Table 4). MrModeltest 2·3 selected the GTR + G model of nucleotide substitution for ITS2. Both BI and ML analyses were run using 33 or 46, respectively, additional relevant species sequences from GenBank, with the ML tree shown (Figs 2 and Fig S4). Not surprisingly, the degree of resolution provided by phylogenetic analysis of ITS2 sequences was not high given the more conservative rate of change of this widely used nuclear gene marker (Locke et al. Reference Locke, McLaughlin, Dayanandan and Marcogliese2010). Based on ML and BI analyses, 12 ITS2 clades were identified among our Kenyan specimens (Fig. 2 and Supplementary Fig. S4). Intraclade genetic distance values were <0·6%, and interclade genetic distance values were >1·0%.

Further comparisons of the cox1 and ITS2 datasets

Cox1 and ITS2 trees did not conflict, but the ITS2 trees did not have as much support for the deeper nodes as cox1 (Figs 1 and 2). All 12 clades from ITS2 were represented in the cox1 dataset. The cox1 genetic distance data enabled differentiation among some of the worms clustered with Cotylophoron cotylophorum in the ITS2 dataset, and also clearly differentiated clades 14 and 15 (Fig. 2).

In three cases (clades 4, 10 and 16), cox1 sequence matches (<1·3%) were obtained between worms from ruminants and cercariae from snails (Fig. 1, orange stars). Clade 2 matched an ITS2 sequence from GenBank of cercariae from Ceratophallus natalensis, thus also confirming the intermediate host for this clade (Fig. 1). In four cases (clades 1, 5, 10 and 12), sequences were found from cercariae with no matches from adult worms for either sequence (Fig. 1). In at least five cases (PA7, PA26, PA27, PA35 and PA42), the ITS2 nuclear sequences obtained clustered in different clades than what is seen in the cox1 trees (clades highlighted with red star in Fig. 2). These samples appear to have nuclear mitochondrial discordance (NMD) and are identified as worms with likely hybrid ancestry (see discussion).

Provisional identification of the paramphistomoids

Provisional identifications were based on the paramphistomoid systematics literature (Eduardo, Reference Eduardo1983; Sey, Reference Sey1991; Jones, Reference Jones, Jones, Bray and Gibson2005b , Reference Jones, Jones, Bray and Gibson c , Reference Jones, Jones, Bray and Gibson d ) pertaining to intermediate or definitive host use, and descriptions of adult worms in comparison to our mounted adult specimens (Table 5, Fig. 3). Some of the sequences we obtained matched sequences from named species in GenBank, and in those cases the names we provide here are the ones from GenBank (clades 4, 8 and 16). Four clades were represented only by cercariae and did not match any sequences derived from adult worms in this study or from GenBank. These included two clades from B. pfeifferi (clades 1 and 12), one from Segmentorbis kanisaensis (clade 5) and one from C. natalensis (clade 10). Our 16 clades represented three different families of Paramphistomoidea: Gastrothylacidae, Paramphistomidae and Stephanopharyngidae. Species names in quotation marks in Fig. 1 were assigned based on our morphological identification from species descriptions.

Fig. 3. Sections of adult paramphistomoids collected from domestic ruminants in Kenya and their provisional identifications. (A) Calicophoron phillerouxi, (B) Calicophoron raja, (C) Calicophoron clavula, (D) Calicophoron microbothrium, (E) Cotylophoron sp., (F) Cotylophoron cotylophorum, (G) Cotylophoron sp., (H) Carmyerius exporous, (I) Carmyerius gregarius, (J) Carmyerius mancupatus. Note that the photographed specimens represent sections of adults, and presence of some organs like the testes (T) or genital sucker (GS) are indicated. For the genus Carmyerius, a ventral pouch was present, but is not visible in the sections chosen for presentation.

Table 5. Provisional identification of the paramphistomoids was based on species descriptions and intermediate host use from the literature and on position in phylogenetic trees

Cercariae (C), adults (A) and their associated hosts are listed. Ventral pouch, acetabulum type and genital sucker were useful morphological features for genus and species placement.

DISCUSSION

Paramphistomoid flukes are speciose in sub-Saharan Africa, reflective of the presence there of many mammal species, particularly wild and domestic ruminants. These flukes are also ubiquitous and can have a high prevalence among domestic ruminants reaching 100% in some villages (Chingwena et al. Reference Chingwena, Mukaratirwa, Kristensen and Chimbari2002a ; Nzalawahe et al. Reference Nzalawahe, Kassuku, Stothard, Coles and Eisler2015). During our sampling of Kenyan slaughterhouses we found up to 90% of the domestic ruminants infected, and many individual animals harboured hundreds of adult worms. Of the many adult worm and cercariae samples collected, we further investigated 120 samples (79 adult worms and 41 cercariae) determined most likely to be genetically distinctive. We found 16 distinct clades in three families of the Paramphistomoidea. For future comparisons, all of our specimens are available as vouchers at the Parasite Division, Museum of Southwestern Biology (MSB) or at the Kenyan Medical Research Institute (KEMRI).

Previous studies have used the easily obtained ITS2 sequence as a molecular marker to distinguish among paramphistomoid species (Itagaki et al. Reference Itagaki, Tsumagari, Tsutsumi and Chinone2003; Rinaldi et al. Reference Rinaldi, Perugini, Capuano, Fenizia, Musella, Veneziano and Cringoli2005; Goswami et al. Reference Goswami, Prasad, Tandon and Chatterjee2009; Lotfy et al. Reference Lotfy, Brant, Ashmawy, Devkota, Mkoji and Loker2010; Sanabria et al. Reference Sanabria, Moré and Romero2011; Ichikawa et al. Reference Ichikawa, Kondoh, Bawn, Maw, Htun, Thein, Gyi, Sunn, Katakura and Itagaki2013; Shylla et al. Reference Shylla, Ghatani and Tandon2013; Ghatani et al. Reference Ghatani, Shylla, Roy and Tandon2014; Dube et al. Reference Dube, Sibula and Dhlamini2015). ITS2 is helpful for distinguishing paramphistomoid genera and differentiating more divergent species within a genus (Rinaldi et al. Reference Rinaldi, Perugini, Capuano, Fenizia, Musella, Veneziano and Cringoli2005; Ghatani et al. Reference Ghatani, Shylla, Tandon, Chatterjee and Roy2012). Because mitochondrial DNA accumulates substitutions more frequently than the internal transcribed spacers, it is more useful to differentiate among closely related species, particularly cryptic species (Blouin, Reference Blouin2002; Vilas et al. Reference Vilas, Criscione and Blouin2005; Locke et al. Reference Locke, Al-Nasiri, Caffara, Drago, Kalbe, Lapierre, McLaughlin, Nie, Overstreet, Souza, Takemoto and Marcogliese2015), or to reveal intraspecific variation (Ghatani et al. Reference Ghatani, Shylla, Roy and Tandon2014). Consequently, we used genetic distance values for cox1 sequence data as the primary means to delineate species. For cox1, interclade P-distance values were >6·2%, although the majority of pairwise comparisons were >10·0%. In contrast, intraclade pairwise divergence values were <1·3%. Other studies have used a P-distance value >5% difference with cox1 and nd1 mtDNA markers to indicate separate species (Vilas et al. Reference Vilas, Criscione and Blouin2005; Brant and Loker, Reference Brant and Loker2009; Detwiler et al. Reference Detwiler, Bos and Minchella2010). Our data suggests that ITS2 should not be used alone to differentiate species for paramphistomoids.

We also examined the delineated clades with respect to where they grouped in either ML or BI phylogenetic analyses based on either cox1 or ITS2 sequences. In general, there was low bootstrap/posterior probability support for many of the deeper nodes in either ML or BI trees, suggesting that broader taxon sampling, along with sequencing of additional markers, is needed to more definitively support or refute the morphologically based systematic framework developed for paramphistomoids (Sey, Reference Sey1991; Jones, Reference Jones, Jones, Bray and Gibson2005a ). The phylogenetic trees were useful, however, in providing preliminary hypotheses for how the various clades were related to one another (see the paragraph below). Relative to other paramphistomoid molecular phylogenetic studies involving specimens from African ruminants and snails, we recovered five out of the six previously reported taxa from Kenya, Egypt and Tanzania noted by Lotfy et al. (Reference Lotfy, Brant, Ashmawy, Devkota, Mkoji and Loker2010), three of the three identified taxa from Zimbabwe, Zambia and Botswana (Dube et al. Reference Dube, Sibula and Dhlamini2015) and one of the two identified taxa from Algeria (Titi et al. Reference Titi, Mekroud, Chibat Mel, Boucheikhchoukh, Zein-Eddine, Djuikwo-Teukeng, Vignoles, Rondelaud and Dreyfuss2014). The extent of overlap among specimens recovered from all four studies suggests that at least some of the species have broad distributions in Africa. Additional sampling is needed to provide a more comprehensive picture of African paramphistomoid diversity, particularly from Central and West Africa.

The phylogenetic trees provided support for anatomically based taxon delineations as four clades identified as Calicophoron grouped together, as did three clades of Carmyerius and four clades of Cotylophoron. Furthermore, worms in the Stephanopharyngidae (Stephanopharynx) formed a clade, as did presumptive members of the Gastrothylacidae. However, all presumptive members of the Paramphistomidae did not group together. It is possible that this is a paraphyletic group or certain genera, such as Cotylophoron belong in a different family. Clade 1 is quite divergent from the other specimens discussed and it is possible it represents a different family or superfamily. The trees also show some incongruences between nuclear and mitochondrial sequences (discussed further below).

With respect to host use, specimens from a particular clade were reported from the same snail host species or genus. Also, different clades that group together tend to share the same genus of snail host (Calicophoron, in clades 13–16, in Bulinus) or snail genera in related tribes (Carymerius in clades 2, 3 and 5 in Segmentorbis and Ceratophallus). For 10 of 11 clades for which snail host usage could be identified, those snails belong in the family Planorbidae. Snail host use may thus have had an important impact on paramphistomoid diversification, which has also been suggested for other digenean groups (Brant and Loker, Reference Brant and Loker2013). In only one instance have we found cercariae that we have assigned to the same clade (clade 10) that derive from two different snail genera: cercariae from C. natalensis collected from this study and cercariae from Biomphalaria sudanica collected by Lotfy et al. (Reference Lotfy, Brant, Ashmawy, Devkota, Mkoji and Loker2010). Many other digenean groups also indicate high first intermediate host specificity (Shoop, Reference Shoop1988; Donald et al. Reference Donald, Kennedy, Poulin and Spencer2004; Detwiler et al. Reference Detwiler, Bos and Minchella2010; Brant and Loker, Reference Brant and Loker2013). By contrast, adult worms of a particular clade were often recovered from more than one definitive host species, and we recovered up to three different taxa of paramphistomoids from an individual bovine.

Sequence data derived from life cycle stages from different hosts provide an important alternative way to piece together the complex life cycles of digeneans, especially when experimental exposures are not possible (Chibwana et al. Reference Chibwana, Nkwengulila, Locke, McLaughlin and Marcogliese2015). We provide supportive evidence for the life cycles of four of our identified clades (Fig. 1) by matching genetic sequences (<0·6% for ITS2 and <1·3% cox1) collected from cercariae and adults: (1) ITS2 sequences from cercariae from C. natalensis (GU735645) collected in Kenya grouped with sequences from adult worms we recovered from cattle (clade 2), provisionally identified as Carmyerius exporous (Dinnik and Dinnik, Reference Dinnik and Dinnik1960). (2) Cercariae (clade 4) we collected from C. natalensis matched adults collected in this study as well as two adults from Botswana (KP639636) and Kenya (GU735658) identified as Carmyerius dollfusi by Dube et al. (Reference Dube, Sibula and Dhlamini2015). The latter species was synonymized with C. mancupatus (Sey, Reference Sey1991), a species known to be transmitted by C. natalensis (Dinnik, Reference Dinnik1965). (3) Sequences from seven adults we obtained (clade 15) matched sequences collected from a cercariae sample from B. forskalii. We provisionally identified the adults as C. phillerouxi, which is known to be transmitted by B. forskalii (Dinnik, Reference Dinnik1961). (4) Lastly, two cercariae samples we collected from B. forskalii matched with 23 adults collected in this study, and with one cercariae sample from B. forskalii and 18 adults in GenBank, all of which were identified as C. microbothrium (clade 16). As the host record and sequence databases grow, the probabilities that more matches will be found also increases, providing a way forward in working out life cycles that will help offset increasing difficulties in doing so with more conventional experimental infections.

The most common paramphistomoid genus we collected was Calicophoron (40 out of the 120 specimens examined), and the most abundant species was Calicophoron microbothrium which is transmitted by bulinid snails. This species is the most geographically widespread paramphistome in Africa, its presence confirmed with molecular markers from Egypt, Kenya, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Algeria and Botswana (Lotfy et al. Reference Lotfy, Brant, Ashmawy, Devkota, Mkoji and Loker2010; Titi et al. Reference Titi, Mekroud, Chibat Mel, Boucheikhchoukh, Zein-Eddine, Djuikwo-Teukeng, Vignoles, Rondelaud and Dreyfuss2014; Dube et al. Reference Dube, Sibula and Dhlamini2015). Given the difficulties in discriminating this species from others based on morphology alone, the broad geographic distribution, and the diversity of different bulinid snails reported as hosts, this species is a good candidate for further inspection as a possible complex of cryptic species. Presently the best sequence available to evaluate this possibility is cox1, but most of the data in the literature thus far for this species are for ITS2. Our ML analysis based on 354 bp of ITS2 (figure not shown) suggests there are distinct clades among the samples identified as C. microbothrium in GenBank, with an average distance among them of 0·75%. Other sequence markers are needed to determine if C. microbothrium is a complex of cryptic species, and how well differentiated they prove to be from the other Calicophoron clades (13–15) identified in this study.

We found some specimens with discordant nuclear and mitochondrial sequences, consistent with the possibility of hybrid origins (red stars, Fig. 2). For example, two samples (PA12 and PA24) grouped with C. microbothrium in the ITS2 trees, but fell in their own clade (3) in the cox1 trees. PA12 and PA24 were also morphologically distinct from C. microbothrium, being provisionally identified as members of the gastrothylacid genus Carmyerius. As we have noted, multiple species of paramphistomoids are frequently recovered from a single ruminant host, creating circumstances conducive for potential hybridization. The putative parental species and hybrids (PA7, PA12, PA24 PA27, PA35) all use Bulinus as intermediate hosts. It seems possible that the likelihood of successful hybridization would be increased if both parental species use the same genus or species of intermediate host, if as appears intermediate host use is more specific than definitive host use among the paramphistomoids. Other examples of sequence discordance in digeneans also involve groups with closely related species that can hybridize, and that share snail hosts, such as with some species of fasciolids and schistosomes (Steinauer et al. Reference Steinauer, Hanelt, Mwangi, Maina, Agola, Kinuthia, Mutuku, Mungai, Wilson, Mkoji and Loker2008; Peng et al. Reference Peng, Ichinomiya, Ohtori, Ichikawa, Shibahara and Itagaki2009). Further studies using microsatellite markers or RADSeq technology will be needed to verify a hybrid origin for paramphistomoids with discordant sequences.

Members of the basommatophoran family Planorbidae are the most common intermediate hosts transmitting paramphistomoids in Kenya, although snails of the Family Lymnaeidae have also been identified as hosts for paramphistomoids in East Africa (Sey, Reference Sey1991). The snail hosts for some of the clades we have identified such as clades 3, 6, 7, 8 (C. cotylophorum), 9 and 11 (Stephanopharynx sp.) are unknown or require additional sequence-based verification. Bulinus snails, with an ancient history and diversification in Africa (Van Damme Reference Van Damme1984; Brown, Reference Brown1994; De Groeve, Reference De Groeve2005), are particularly prominent as African paramphistomoid hosts (Sey, Reference Sey1991). By contrast, Biomphalaria supports fewer paramphistomoid species and has a much shorter evolutionary history in Africa, with estimates ranging from <1–5 mya (million years ago) (Woodruff and Mulvey, Reference Woodruff and Mulvey1997; Campbell et al. Reference Campbell, Jones, Lockyer, Hughes, Brown, Noble and Rollinson2000; DeJong et al. Reference DeJong, Morgan, Paraense, Pointier, Amarista, Ayeh-Kumi, Babiker, Barbosa, Bremond, Pedro Canese, de Souza, Dominguez, File, Gutierrez, Incani, Kawano, Kazibwe, Kpikpi, Lwambo, Mimpfoundi, Njiokou, Noel Poda, Sene, Velasquez, Yong, Adema, Hofkin, Mkoji and Loker2001). It is noteworthy that clade 1, which is known only from cercariae from B. pfeifferi, is one of the most divergent clades we recovered. Clade 1 cercariae are also much larger than the other paramphistomoid cercariae we recovered (about 2·0× longer in combined body and tail length). This raises a possibility that the diversification of paramphistomoids is more recent than the longer evolutionary history of Bulinus in Africa might suggest. More data are needed to resolve the phylogenetic position of this and other paramphistomoid clades, including those found in non-ruminant species.

In Kenya, Bulinus globosus, B. nasutus, B. africanus, B. tropicus, B. forskalii and Biomphalaria pfeifferi, are known to transmit paramphistomoids as well as ruminant and/or human schistosomes (Southgate et al. Reference Southgate, Brown, Warlow, Knowles and Jones1989; Brown, Reference Brown1994). The overlap in use of snail hosts creates opportunities for distinctive interactions between the two common digenean groups. For example, in Kenya, Southgate et al. (Reference Southgate, Brown, Warlow, Knowles and Jones1989) found that Bulinus tropicus was capable only of supporting the development of Schistosoma bovis to production of cercariae if it was first exposed to C. microbothrium. Similarly, in South America, Biomphalaria oligoza and Biomphalaria orbignyi are naturally resistant to S. mansoni, but become susceptible to S. mansoni if first exposed to Zygocotyle lunata (Spatz et al. Reference Spatz, Cappa and de Nunez2012). Paramphistomoids can also have the opposite influence on the success of other digeneans during co-infections. For example, as compared to snails exposed only to F. hepatica, significantly fewer Pseudosuccinea columella produced F. hepatica cercariae if first exposed to Calicophoron daubneyi and then later exposed to F. hepatica (Dreyfuss et al. Reference Dreyfuss, Vignoles and Rondelaud2016).

This study has shown that even in a fairly circumscribed area within one East African country that a considerable diversity of paramphistomoid flukes is present and that several of these fluke species are abundantly represented. Paramphistomoids are of veterinary interest because of their ubiquitous presence in herds of cattle, sheep and goats that are routinely watered in natural habitats where the presence of susceptible species of snails ensures their transmission. Whether the species we have encountered have long parasitized domestic livestock or represent recent acquisitions from the region's many wild ruminants is an interesting question for future study. Studies currently underway in Kenya indicate that paramphistomoid infections are very common in some snail populations, so much so that they may represent significant impediments to the ongoing transmission of schistosomes using the very same snail hosts in the same aquatic habitats (Laidemitt M.R., personal communication, 2016). Furthermore, the spectra of freshwater snails used by these two common digenean groups are broadly overlapping, further increasing the likelihood that interesting interactions and accommodations have been made over evolutionary time. It will be interesting to more fully ascertain how these two major groups of digeneans influence one another's abundance. It is clear though that the domestication of livestock ensures that both paramphistomoid and schistosome (both human and ruminant schistosome species) life cycles are perpetuated side-by-side in the same habitats year after year. Livestock domestication may well prove to have had multiple downstream effects – mediated by the digeneans of livestock – on the present-day transmission of the all-too-common human blood flukes of sub-Saharan Africa.

SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL

The supplementary material for this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031182016001827.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank Sarah K. Buddenborg, Dr Si-Ming Zhang, Dr Ben Hanelt, Joesph Kinuthia, and Ibrahim Mwangi for assistance with collection of field samples; Kylie Greider for help with sequencing preparation; and to the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi, Kenya for sequencing a number of our samples. This research was undertaken with the approval of the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation, Permit Number NACOSTI/P/15/9609/4270.

FINANCIAL SUPPORT

Technical assistance at the University of New Mexico Molecular Biology Facility was supported by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number P30GM110907. We gratefully acknowledge the following agencies for their financial support: The National Institute of Health (NIH) grant RO1 AI101438, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation for the Grand Challenges Explorations Initiative grant. All authors were supported by each grant. The content for this paper is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. This paper was published with the approval of the Director of KEMRI.

References

REFERENCES

Ahmed, A. A. M., Ibrahim, N. A. and Idris, M. A. (2006). Laboratory studies on the prevalence and cercarial rhythms of trematodes from Bulinus truncatus and Biomphalaria pfeifferi snails from Khartoum State, Sudan. Sultan Qaboos University Medical Journal 6, 6569.Google ScholarPubMed
Anderson, G. R. and Barker, S. C. (1998). Inference of phylogeny and taxonomy within the Didymozoidae (Digenea) from the second internal transcribed spacer (ITS2) of ribosomal DNA. Systematic Parasitology 41, 8794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blouin, M. S. (2002). Molecular prospecting for cryptic species of nematodes: mitochondrial DNA versus internal transcribed spacer. International Journal of Parasitology 32, 527531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowles, J., Blair, D. and Mcmanus, D. P. (1995). A molecular phylogeny of the human schistosomes. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 4, 103109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brant, S. V. and Loker, E. S. (2009). Molecular systematics of the avian schistosome genus Trichobilharzia (Trematoda: Schistosomatidae) in North America. Journal of Parasitology, 95, 941963.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brant, S. V. and Loker, E. S. (2013). Discovery-based studies of schistosome diversity stimulate new hypotheses about parasite biology. Trends in Parasitology, 29, 449459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, D. S. (1994). Freshwater Snails of Africa and their Medical Importance, 2nd Edn. Taylor & Francis, London, Bristol, PA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, D. S. and Kristensen, T. K. (1989). A Field Guide to African Freshwater Snails, Southern African Species. Danish Bilharziasis Laboratory, Publication number 383.Google Scholar
Campbell, G., Jones, C. S., Lockyer, A. E., Hughes, S., Brown, D., Noble, L. R. and Rollinson, D. (2000). Molecular evidence supports an African affinity of the Neotropical freshwater gastropod, Biomphalaria glabrata, Say 1818, an intermediate host for Schistosoma mansoni . Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 267, 23512358.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheruiyot, H. K. and Wamae, L. W. (1988). Incidence of bovine paramphistomiasis in Kenya. Bulletin of Animal Health and Production in Africa 36, 5557.Google Scholar
Chibwana, F. D., Nkwengulila, G., Locke, S. A., McLaughlin, J. D. and Marcogliese, D. J. (2015). Completion of the life cycle of Tylodelphys mashonense (Sudarikov, 1971) (Digenea: Diplostomidae) with DNA barcodes and rDNA sequences. Parasitology Research 114, 36753682.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chingwena, G., Mukaratirwa, S., Kristensen, T. K. and Chimbari, M. (2002 a). Larval trematode infections in freshwater snails from the highveld and lowveld areas of Zimbabwe. Journal of Helminthology 76, 283293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chingwena, G., Mukaratirwa, S., Kristensen, T. K. and Chimberi, M. (2002 b). Susceptibility of freshwater snails to the amphistome Calicophoron microbothrium and the influence of the species on susceptibility of Bulinus tropicus to Schistosoma haematobium and Schistosoma mattheei infections. Journal of Parasitology 88, 880883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Combes, C. (1982). Trematodes – Antagonism between species and sterilizing effects on snails in biological-control. Parasitology 84, 151175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Groeve, E. (2005). The late Cenozoic freshwater Mollusca of the Tugen Hills (Kenya): Taxonomy, palaeoecology and palaeozoogeography . MSc. Thesis. Gent: University of Gent, 117 pp.Google Scholar
DeJong, R. J., Morgan, J. A., Paraense, W. L., Pointier, J. P., Amarista, M., Ayeh-Kumi, P. F., Babiker, A., Barbosa, C. S., Bremond, P., Pedro Canese, A., de Souza, C. P., Dominguez, C., File, S., Gutierrez, A., Incani, R. N., Kawano, T., Kazibwe, F., Kpikpi, J., Lwambo, N. J., Mimpfoundi, R., Njiokou, F., Noel Poda, J., Sene, M., Velasquez, L. E., Yong, M., Adema, C. M., Hofkin, B. V., Mkoji, G. M. and Loker, E. S. (2001). Evolutionary relationships and biogeography of Biomphalaria (Gastropoda: Planorbidae) with implications regarding its role as host of the human bloodfluke, Schistosoma mansoni . Molecular Biology and Evolution 18, 22252239.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Detwiler, J. T., Bos, D. H. and Minchella, D. J. (2010). Revealing the secret lives of cryptic species: examining the phylogenetic relationships of echinostome parasites in North America. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 55, 611620.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Detwiler, J. T., Zajac, A. M., Minchella, D. J. and Belden, L. K. (2012). Revealing cryptic parasite diversity in a definitive host: echinostomes in muskrats. Journal of Parasitology 98, 11481155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinnik, J. A. (1954). Paramphistomum sukari n. sp. from Kenya cattle and its intermediate host. Parasitology 44, 414421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinnik, J. A. (1961). Paramphistomum phillerouxi sp. nov. Paramphistomatidae) and its development in Bulinus forskalii . Journal of Helminthology Trematoda 35, 6990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinnik, J. A. (1965). The snail hosts of certain Paramphistomatidae and Gastrothylacidae (Trematoda) discovered by the late Dr. P. L. LeRoux in Africa. Journal of Helminthology 39, 141150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinnik, J. A. and Dinnik, N. N. (1954). The life cycle of Paramphistomum microbothrium Fischoeder, 1901 (Trematoda, Paramphistomidae). Parasitology 44, 285299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinnik, J. A. and Dinnik, N. N. (1957). Development of Paramphistomum sukari Dinnik, 1954 (Trematoda: Paramphistomidae) in a snail host. Parasitology 47, 209216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinnik, J. A. and Dinnik, N. N. (1960). Development of Carmyerius exoporus Maplestone (Trematoda: Gastrothylacidae) in a snail host. Parasitology 50, 469480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, K. M., Kennedy, M., Poulin, R. and Spencer, H. G. (2004). Host specificity and molecular phylogeny of larval Digenea isolated from New Zealand and Australian topshells (Gastropoda: Trochidae). International Journal for Parasitology 34, 557568.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dreyfuss, G., Vignoles, P. and Rondelaud, D. (2016). Pseudosuccinea columella: experimental co-infections of juvenile and pre-adult snails with the digeneans Calicophoron daubneyi and Fasciola hepatica . Journal of Helminthology 23, 17.Google Scholar
Dube, S., Sibula, M. S. and Dhlamini, Z. (2015). Molecular analysis of selected paramphistome isolates from cattle in southern Africa. Journal of Helminthology 15.Google ScholarPubMed
Eduardo, S. L. (1982). The taxonomy of the family Paramphistomidae Fischoeder, 1901 with special reference to the morphology of species occurring in ruminants. 2. Revision of the genus Paramphistomum Fischoeder, 1901. Systematic Parasitology 4, 189238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eduardo, S. L. (1983). The taxonomy of the family Paramphistomidae Fischoeder, 1901 with special reference to the morphology of species occurring in ruminants. 3. Revision of the genus Calicophoron Nasmark, 1937. Systematic Parasitology. 5, 2579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fain, A. (1953). Contribution à l’étude des formes larvaires des trématodes au Congo belge et spécialement de la larve de Schistosoma Mansoni. Mémoires. Institut Royal Colonial Belge. Section des Sciences Naturelles et Médicales 22, 1312.Google Scholar
Folmer, O., Black, M., Hoeh, W., Lutz, R. and Vrijenhoek, R. (1994). DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome C oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Molecular Marine Biology and Biotechnology 3, 294299.Google ScholarPubMed
Frandsen, F. and Christensen, N. O. (1984). An introductory guide to the identification of cercariae from African freshwater snails with special reference to cercariae of trematode species of medical and veterinary importance. Acta Tropica 41, 181202.Google Scholar
Ghatani, S., Shylla, J. A., Tandon, V., Chatterjee, A. and Roy, B. (2012). Molecular characterization of pouched amphistome parasites (Trematoda: Gastrothylacidae) using ribosomal ITS2 sequence and secondary structures. Journal of Helminthology, 86, 117124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ghatani, S., Shylla, J. A., Roy, B. and Tandon, V. (2014). Multilocus sequence evaluation for differentiating species of the trematode Family Gastrothylacidae, with a note on the utility of mitochondrial COI motifs in species identification. Gene 548, 277284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goswami, L. M., Prasad, P. K., Tandon, V. and Chatterjee, A. (2009). Molecular characterization of Gastrodiscoides hominis (Platyhelminthes: Trematoda: Digenea) inferred from ITS rDNA sequence analysis. Parasitology Research 104, 14851490.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gretillat, S. (1964). Valeur taxonomique des caractéres morphologiques et anatomiques du pore génital chez les Trématodes du genre Carmyerius (Gastrothylacidae). Revue d'élevage et de médecine vétérinaire des pays tropicaux 17, 421428.Google Scholar
Hechinger, R. F., Wood, A. C. and Kuris, A. M. (2011). Social organization in a flatworm: trematode parasites form soldier and reproductive castes. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 278, 656665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrmann, K. K., Poulin, R., Keeney, D. B. and Blasco-Costa, I. (2014). Genetic structure in a progenetic trematode: signs of cryptic species with contrasting reproductive strategies. International Journal of Parasitology 44, 811818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horak, I. G. (1971). Paramphistomiasis of domestic ruminants. Advances in Parasitology 9, 3372.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ichikawa, M., Kondoh, D., Bawn, S., Maw, N. N., Htun, L. L., Thein, M., Gyi, A., Sunn, K., Katakura, K. and Itagaki, T. (2013). Morphological and molecular characterization of Explanatum explanatum from cattle and buffaloes in Myanmar. Journal of Veterinary Medicine Science 75, 309314.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Itagaki, T., Tsumagari, N., Tsutsumi, K. and Chinone, S. (2003). Discrimination of three amphistome species by PCR-RFLP based on rDNA ITS2 markers. Journal of Veterinary Medicine Science 65, 931933.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, A. (1991). Characterisation of the muscular organs of paramphistomes from Asian fishes. Systematic Parasitology 18, 916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, A. (2005 a). Superfamily Paramphistomoidea fischoeder, 1901. In Keys to the Trematoda (ed. Jones, A., Bray, R. A. and Gibson, D. I.), pp. 221327. CABI Publishing and the Natural History Museum, New York.Google Scholar
Jones, A. (2005 b). Family Paramphistomidae Fischoeder, 1901. In Keys to the Trematoda (ed. Jones, A., Bray, R. A. and Gibson, D. I.), pp. 229246. CABI Publishing and the Natural History Museum, New York.Google Scholar
Jones, A. (2005 c). Family Gastrothylacidae Stiles & Goldberger 1910. In Keys to the Trematoda (ed. Jones, A., Bray, R. A. and Gibson, D. I.), pp. 337341. CABI Publishing and the Natural History Museum, New York.Google Scholar
Jones, A. (2005 d). Family Stephanopharyngidae Stiles & Goldberger 1910. In Keys to the Trematoda (ed. Jones, A., Bray, R. A. and Gibson, D. I.), pp. 347348. CABI Publishing and the Natural History Museum, New York.Google Scholar
Lim, H. K. and Heyneman, D. (1972). Intramolluscan inter-trematode antagonism: a review of factors influencing the host-parasite system and its possible role in biological control. Advances in Parasitology 10, 191268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Locke, S. A., McLaughlin, J. D., Dayanandan, S. and Marcogliese, D. J. (2010). Diversity and specificity in Diplostomum spp. metacercariae in freshwater fishes revealed by cytochrome c oxidase I and internal transcribed spacer sequences. International Journal of Parasitology 40, 333343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Locke, S. A., Al-Nasiri, F. S., Caffara, M., Drago, F., Kalbe, M., Lapierre, A. R., McLaughlin, J. D., Nie, P., Overstreet, R. M., Souza, G. T., Takemoto, R. M. and Marcogliese, D. J. (2015). Diversity, specificity and speciation in larval Diplostomidae (Platyhelminthes: Digenea) in the eyes of freshwater fish, as revealed by DNA barcodes. International Journal of Parasitology 45, 841855.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lockyer, A. E., Olson, P. D. and 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, 155171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loker, E. S., Moyo, H. G. and Gardner, S. L. (1981). Trematode-gastropod associations in 9 non-lacustrine habitats in the Mwanza Region of Tanzania. Parasitology 83, 381399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Looss, A. (1896). Recherches sur la faune parasitaire d'Egypte. In Mémoires présentés à l'Institut égyptien, t. 3 Le Caire.Google Scholar
Lotfy, W. M., Brant, S. V., Ashmawy, K. I., Devkota, R., Mkoji, G. M. and Loker, E. S. (2010). A molecular approach for identification of paramphistomes from Africa and Asia. Veterinary Parasitology 174, 234240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mage, C., Bourgne, H., Toullieu, J. M., Rondelaud, D. and Dreyfuss, G. (2002). Fasciola hepatica and Paramphistomum daubneyi: changes in prevalences of natural infections in cattle and in Lymnaea truncatula from central France over the past 12 years. Veterinary Research 33, 439447.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mansour, M. F. A., Ellazek, Y. O. and Madkour, M. M. (2014). Molecular characterization of five digenetic trematode species from different hosts in Egypt. The Egyptian Society of Experimental Biology Journal 10, 18.Google Scholar
McNamara, M. K., Miller, T. L. and Cribb, T. H. (2014). Evidence for extensive cryptic speciation in trematodes of butterflyfishes (Chaetodontidae) of the tropical Indo-West Pacific. International Journal of Parasitology 44, 3748.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mohammed, N. A. I., Madsen, H. and Ahmed, A. A. M. (2016). Types of trematodes infecting freshwater snails found in irrigation canals in the East Nile locality, Khartoum, Sudan. Infectious Diseases of Poverty 5, 1626.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nylander, J. A. A. (2004). MrModeltest v2. Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University.Google Scholar
Nzalawahe, J., Kassuku, A. A., Stothard, J. R., Coles, G. C. and Eisler, M. C. (2015). Associations between trematode infections in cattle and freshwater snails in highland and lowland areas of Iringa Rural District, Tanzania. Parasitology 142, 14301439.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peng, M., Ichinomiya, M., Ohtori, M., Ichikawa, M., Shibahara, T. and Itagaki, T. (2009). Molecular characterization of Fasciola hepatica, Fasciola gigantica, and aspermic Fasciola sp. in China based on nuclear and mitochondrial DNA. Parasitology Research 105, 809815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rinaldi, L., Perugini, A. G., Capuano, F., Fenizia, D., Musella, V., Veneziano, V. and Cringoli, G. (2005). Characterization of the second internal transcribed spacer of ribosomal DNA of Calicophoron daubneyi from various hosts and locations in southern Italy. Veterinary Parasitology 131, 247253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rolfe, P. F., Boray, J. C. and Collins, G. H. (1994). Pathology of infection with Paramphistomum ichikawai in sheep. International Journal of Parasitology 24, 9951004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ronquist, F. and Huelsenbeck, J. P. (2003). MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19, 15721574.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanabria, R. E. F. and Romero, J. R. (2008). Review and update of paramphistomosis. Helminthologia 45, 6468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanabria, R., Moré, G. and Romero, J. R. (2011). Molecular characterization of the ITS-2 fragment of Paramphistomum leydeni (Trematoda: Paramphistomidae). Veterinary Parasitology 177, 182185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schell, S. C. (1985). Handbook of Trematodes of North America north of Mexico. University Press of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho.Google Scholar
Sey, O. (1991). CRC Handbook of the Zoology of Amphistomes. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla.Google Scholar
Shoop, W. L. (1988). Trematode transmission patterns. Journal of Parasitology 74, 4659.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shylla, J. A., Ghatani, S., Chatterjee, A. and Tandon, V. (2011). Secondary structure analysis of ITS2 in the rDNA of three Indian paramphistomid species found in local livestock. Parasitol Res 108, 10271032.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shylla, J. A., Ghatani, S. and Tandon, V. (2013). Utility of divergent domains of 28S ribosomal RNA in species discrimination of paramphistomes (Trematoda: Digenea: Paramphistomoidea). Parasitology Research 112, 42394253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sibula, M. S., Dhlamini, Z. and Dube, S. (2014). Molecular characterization of paramphistomes from cattle from matebeleland region (Zimbabwe) using random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPDs) and amplified ribosomal DNA restriction analysis (ARDRA). Advances in Bioresearch 5, 9299.Google Scholar
Sobrero, R. (1962). Ricostruzione del ciclo di vita di Paramphistomum clavula (Näsmark, 1937), parassita dei ruminanti in Somalia. Parassitologia 4, 165167.Google Scholar
Southgate, V. R., Brown, D. S., Warlow, A., Knowles, R. J. and Jones, A. (1989). The influence of Calicophoron microbothrium on the susceptibility of Bulinus tropicus to Schistosoma bovis . Parasitology Research 75, 381391.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spatz, L., Cappa, S. M. and de Nunez, M. O. (2012). Susceptibility of wild populations of Biomphalaria spp. from neotropical South America to Schistosoma mansoni and interference of Zygocotyle lunata . Journal of Parasitology 98, 12911295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steinauer, M. L., Hanelt, B., Mwangi, I. N., Maina, G. M., Agola, L. E., Kinuthia, J. M., Mutuku, M. W., Mungai, B. N., Wilson, W. D., Mkoji, G. M. and Loker, E. S. (2008). Introgressive hybridization of human and rodent schistosome parasites in western Kenya. Molecular Ecology 17, 50625074.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, 27252729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Titi, A., Mekroud, A., Chibat Mel, H., Boucheikhchoukh, M., Zein-Eddine, R., Djuikwo-Teukeng, F. F., Vignoles, P., Rondelaud, D. and Dreyfuss, G. (2014). Ruminal paramphistomosis in cattle from northeastern Algeria: prevalence, parasite burdens and species identification. Parasite 21, 50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Truett, G. E., Heeger, P., Mynatt, R. L., Truett, A. A., Walker, J. A. and Warman, M. L. (2000). Preparation of PCR-quality mouse genomic DNA with hot sodium hydroxide and tris (HotSHOT). Biotechniques 29, 5254.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Damme, D. (1984). The Freshwater Mollusca of Northern Africa: Distribution, Biogeography and Paleoecology. Dr W. Junk Publishers, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Vilas, R., Criscione, C. D. and Blouin, M. S. (2005). A comparison between mitochondrial DNA and the ribosomal internal transcribed regions in prospecting for cryptic species of platyhelminth parasites. Parasitology 131, 839846.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilgenbusch, J. C. and Swofford, D. (2003). Inferring evolutionary trees with PAUP*. Current Protocols in Bioinformatics, Chapter 6, Unit 6 4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodruff, D. S. and Mulvey, M. (1997). Neotropical schistosomiasis: African affinities of the host snail Biomphalaria glabrata (Gastropoda: Planorbidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 60, 505516.Google Scholar
Wright, C. A., Rollinson, D. and Goll, P. H. (1979). Parasites in Bulinus senegalensis (Mollusca: Planorbidae) and their detection. Parasitology 79, 95105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xia, X. (2013). DAMBE5: a comprehensive software package for data analysis in molecular biology and evolution. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30, 17201728.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1. Collection localities in central and west Kenya

Figure 1

Table 2. Specimen name, host collected from, collection locality, provisional identification, Museum of Southwestern Biology/KEMRI voucher numbers, and GenBank accession numbers of paramphistomoid specimens used in this study

Figure 2

Table 3. Intra- and interclade P- distance values of cox1 amplified from paramphistomoids from Kenya

Figure 3

Table 4. Intra- and interclade p-distance values of ITS2 amplified from paramphistomoids from Kenya

Figure 4

Fig. 1. Phylogenetic relationships of 44 samples of paramphistomoids from this study and from GenBank based on cox1 (690 bp) sequences inferred from ML (bootstrap values) analysis. Specimens are named based on sample name, the host it was collected from and are colour coded based on intraclade P-distance values <1·3% and interclade values >6·5%. An orange star represents clades where we matched cercariae and adult sequences. Identifications were made based on GenBank sequences and on the species descriptions in the literature (parentheses). An (*) denotes intermediate host use from studies in the literature that have not been sequenced confirmed.

Figure 5

Fig. 2. Phylogenetic relationships of 44 samples of paramphistomoids from this study and from GenBank based on ITS2 (385 bp) sequences inferred from ML (bootstrap values) analysis. Specimens are named based on sample name, the host it was collected from, and colour coded based on clade designation from cox1 distance values. A red star represents clades where we have found evidence of putative hybrids. Adjacent to these indicated clades, are clade numbers that correspond to the same specimens and clade numbers as appearing on the cox1 tree (Fig. 1).

Figure 6

Fig. 3. Sections of adult paramphistomoids collected from domestic ruminants in Kenya and their provisional identifications. (A) Calicophoron phillerouxi, (B) Calicophoron raja, (C) Calicophoron clavula, (D) Calicophoron microbothrium, (E) Cotylophoron sp., (F) Cotylophoron cotylophorum, (G) Cotylophoron sp., (H) Carmyerius exporous, (I) Carmyerius gregarius, (J) Carmyerius mancupatus. Note that the photographed specimens represent sections of adults, and presence of some organs like the testes (T) or genital sucker (GS) are indicated. For the genus Carmyerius, a ventral pouch was present, but is not visible in the sections chosen for presentation.

Figure 7

Table 5. Provisional identification of the paramphistomoids was based on species descriptions and intermediate host use from the literature and on position in phylogenetic trees

Supplementary material: Image

Laidemitt supplementary material

Figure S1

Download Laidemitt supplementary material(Image)
Image 9.1 MB
Supplementary material: Image

Laidemitt supplementary material

Figure S2

Download Laidemitt supplementary material(Image)
Image 2.9 MB
Supplementary material: Image

Laidemitt supplementary material

Figure S3

Download Laidemitt supplementary material(Image)
Image 2.4 MB
Supplementary material: Image

Laidemitt supplementary material

Figure S4

Download Laidemitt supplementary material(Image)
Image 4.9 MB