Phylogenetic relationships between pinworms (Nematoda: Enterobiinae) parasitising the critically endangered orang-utan, according to the characterisation of molecular genomic and mitochondrial markers
Language English Country Germany Media print-electronic
Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- MeSH
- Enterobiasis parasitology veterinary MeSH
- Enterobius classification genetics MeSH
- Phylogeny * MeSH
- Genetic Markers MeSH
- DNA, Intergenic genetics MeSH
- Mitochondria genetics MeSH
- Molecular Sequence Data MeSH
- Pongo abelii parasitology MeSH
- Pongo pygmaeus parasitology MeSH
- Electron Transport Complex IV genetics MeSH
- Amino Acid Sequence MeSH
- Genetic Speciation MeSH
- Animals MeSH
- Check Tag
- Animals MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Names of Substances
- Genetic Markers MeSH
- DNA, Intergenic MeSH
- Electron Transport Complex IV MeSH
Pinworms (Nematoda: Enterobiinae) include 52 species parasitising primates throughout the world. In the present study, we performed the first ever molecular analysis to investigate the phylogenetic position of recently described pinworms parasitising the Sumatran orang-utan. The phylogenetic analysis of mitochondrial CO1 and chromosomal 18S rDNA and ITS1 regions could support the independent status of several Nematoda species. Our molecular data clearly suggest that Enterobius (Colobenterobius) buckleyi and Lemuricola (Protenterobius) pongoi together with Pongobius hugoti form separate clades among other studied species, which significantly supports the hypothesis of recently described new species parasitising the orang-utan (Pongo abelii and Pongo pygmaeus). The phylogenetic tree based on cytochrome oxidase 1 (CO1) gene variability showed possible close relationships between L. (Protenterobius) pongoi and P. hugoti; thus, we can assume that these species could have initially diverged in sympatry from a common ancestor.
See more in PubMed
J Mol Evol. 1980 Dec;16(2):111-20 PubMed
J Parasitol. 2005 Dec;91(6):1314-7 PubMed
BMC Evol Biol. 2007 Aug 28;7:147 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 2006 Dec;100(1):51-7 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 2010 Mar;106(4):817-20 PubMed
Ann Parasitol Hum Comp. 1961 Jan-Apr;36:113-26 PubMed
Int J Parasitol. 1995 Sep;25(9):1065-75 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 2006 Nov;99(6):729-36 PubMed
Proc Biol Sci. 1997 Feb 22;264(1379):285-9 PubMed
Int J Parasitol. 1996 Feb;26(2):147-59 PubMed
Int J Parasitol. 2002 May;32(5):527-31 PubMed
Infect Genet Evol. 2007 Mar;7(2):168-79 PubMed
Syst Biol. 1999 Sep;48(3):523-46 PubMed
Ann Parasitol Hum Comp. 1972 May-Jun;47(3):391-8 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 2003 Oct;91(4):267-72 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 2011 Jan;108(1):87-93 PubMed
Bioinformatics. 2001 Aug;17(8):754-5 PubMed
Mol Biol Evol. 2011 Oct;28(10):2731-9 PubMed
Z Parasitenkd. 1963 Oct 29;23:354-9 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 2003 Sep;91(1):46-50 PubMed
J Parasitol. 2010 Oct;96(5):954-60 PubMed
Korean J Parasitol. 1999 Dec;37(4):197-213 PubMed
