ABSTRACT
A comparison of ribosomal internal transcribed spacer 1 (ITS1) elements of digenetic trematodes (Platyhelminthes) including unidentified digeneans isolated from Cyathura carinata (Crustacea: Isopoda) revealed DNA sequence similarities at more than half of the spacer at its 3' end. Primary sequence similarity was shown to be associated with secondary structure conservation, which suggested that similarity is due to identity by descent and not chance. Using an analysis of apomorphies, the sequence data were shown to produce a distinct phylogenetic signal. This was confirmed by the consistency of results of different tree reconstruction methods such as distance approaches, maximum parsimony, and maximum likelihood. Morphological evidence additionally supported the phylogenetic tree based on ITS1 data and the inferred phylogenetic position of the unidentified digeneans of C. carinata met the expectations from known trematode life-cycle patterns. Although ribosomal ITS1 elements are generally believed to be too variable for phylogenetic analysis above the species or genus level, the overall consistency of the results of this study strongly suggests that this is not the case in digenetic trematodes. Here, 3' end ITS1 sequence data seem to provide a valuable tool for elucidating phylogenetic relationships of a broad range of phylogenetically distinct taxa.
Subject(s)
Conserved Sequence/genetics , DNA, Ribosomal/genetics , Evolution, Molecular , Phylogeny , Trematoda/genetics , Animals , Base Sequence , Cloning, Molecular , Molecular Sequence Data , Nucleic Acid Conformation , Sequence Analysis, DNA , Sequence Homology, Nucleic Acid , Trematoda/classificationABSTRACT
Analysis of 18S rDNA sequences isolated from Cyathura carinata (Crustacea: Isopoda) indicate that two different species of the Digenea (Platyhelminthes: Trematoda) parasitize this isopod species for which parasitic associations have previously been unknown. Phylogenetic analysis, based on the largest data set of digenetic 18S rDNA sequences published to date, also suggests that 18S rDNA is unsuitable for the reconstruction of phylogenetic relationships of the major digenetic lineages either due to rapid radiation of these lineages or the presence of homoplasy at this level.
