Research Article |
Corresponding author: Witold Morek ( wmorek@op.pl ) Academic editor: Pavel Stoev
© 2020 Witold Morek, Bartłomiej Surmacz, Łukasz Michalczyk.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Morek W, Surmacz B, Michalczyk Ł (2020) Novel integrative data for two Milnesium Doyère, 1840 (Tardigrada: Apochela) species from Central Asia. Zoosystematics and Evolution 96(2): 499-514. https://doi.org/10.3897/zse.96.52049
|
Tardigrada are a phylum of microscopic animals inhabiting a variety of ecosystems, both aquatic and terrestrial, being recognised for their remarkable abilities to withstand tough environmental conditions. The order Apochela groups exclusively carnivorous species, with the vast majority representing the genus Milnesium Doyère, 1840. Representatives of this genus are characterised by simplified morphology, therefore possessing an extremely limited set of taxonomically meaningful morphological traits. Nevertheless, the taxonomy of Milnesium is mostly based on classical data: observations and measurements in light microscopy with the majority of descriptions lacking integrative data, most importantly DNA barcodes, but also scanning electron microscopy photographs and developmental variability analysis. Hence, re-descriptions that include novel integrative data are urgently needed. In this contribution, we provide new taxonomic data for two species described from Central Asia, Milnesium almatyense (a single population) and Milnesium reductum Tumanov, 2006 (five populations): morphometrics, DNA barcodes, SEM observations and description of developmental variability. As a result, we amend the description of both species and reveal phylogenetic relationships of those species and other sequenced congeners. The integrative data confirm the validity of the two species and include them in the growing set of Milnesium species associated with DNA sequences.
developmental variability, DNA barcoding, integrative description, M. almatyense, M. reductum, phylogeny
Tardigrades, commonly named as water bears, are a phylum of cosmopolitan invertebrates, inhabiting almost all environments across the world (
So far, the tardigrade fauna of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyz Republic have not been thoroughly investigated, with only a few contributions published in the current century, focusing mostly on descriptions of new species (e.g.:
Thus, the aim of this study was to collect integrative data for two species, M. almatyense and M. reductum, based on the material collected in the proximity of their loci typici in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyz Republic, respectively. The integrative analysis of six populations of the two species provided novel morphological and developmental traits and DNA barcodes, amending the descriptions of these taxa and allowed us to identify their kin.
We analysed six samples containing M. almatyense (one sample) and M. reductum (five samples) originating from Kazakhstan and Kyrgyz Republic (detailed collection data are listed in Table
The collection details of populations analysed in this study. Analysis types: LCM – morphometry and general morphology in PCM; DNA – DNA extraction and sequencing; SEM – imaging in SEM; DEV – developmental analysis (hatching). The “?” indicates the lacking sequence.
Sample code | Locality | Coordinates Altitude | Sample type | Specimens analysed | GenBank accession numbers | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LCM | DNA | SEM | DEV | |||||
KZ.003 | Kazakhstan, Ile-Alatau | 43°1'54.6"N, 76°36'54.36"E, 1866 m asl | lichen | 3 | 4 | 10 | 2 | 18S rRNA: MT509118; 28S rRNA: MT509119; ITS-2: MT509111; COI: MT511064 |
KG.012 | Kyrgyz Republic, Tashkömür | 41°22'22.2"N, 72°14'43.02"E, 726 m asl | moss +lichen | 5 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 18S rRNA: MT509115; 28S rRNA: MT509120; ITS-2: MT509112; COI: MT511060, MT511061 |
KG.013 | Kyrgyz Republic, Tashkömür | 41°22'22.5"N, 72°14'46.62"E, 762 m asl | moss +lichen | 24 | 4 | 5 | 0 | 18S rRNA: MT509115; 28S rRNA: ?; ITS2: MT509112; COI: MT511060 |
KG.014 | Kyrgyz Republic, Tashkömür | 41°22'23.22"N, 72°14'48.3"E, 784 m asl | moss +lichen | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 18S rRNA: MT509116; 28S rRNA: MT509121; ITS-2: MT509113; COI: MT511062 |
KG.142 | Kyrgyz Republic, Toluk | 41°55'7.86"N, 73°37'49.32"E, 1520 m asl | lichen | 18 | 4 | 10 | 0 | 18S rRNA: MT509117; 28S rRNA: MT509122; ITS-2: MT509114; COI: MT511063 |
KG.147 | Kyrgyz Republic, Toluk | 41°55'6.42"N, 73°37'52.74"E, 1522 m asl | moss +lichen | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 18S rRNA: MT509115; 28S rRNA: MT509123; ITS-2: MT509114; COI: MT511063 |
In addition to the new populations, paratypes of both species were examined: a single specimen of M. almatyense (slide No. 199) and five specimens of M. reductum (slide No. 192). The slides were loaned from the Zoological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, Russia.
The specimens were mounted on permanent microscope slides according to the method by
Cultures were established from live specimens and viable eggs deposited in exuviae, which were incubated at standard rearing conditions described by
Moreover, the analytical method by
Genomic DNA was extracted from four individuals from each of the six analysed populations (except for a single population of M. reductum where only one specimen was sequenced). The extraction method follows Chelex® 100 resin (Bio-Rad) protocol by
PCR protocols and primers references for specific protocols for amplification of the four DNA fragments sequenced in the study.
DNA fragment | Primer name | Primer direction | Primer sequence (5’-3’) | Primer source | PCR programme |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
18S rRNA | 18S_Tar_Ff1 | forward | AGGCGAAACCGCGAATGGCTC |
|
|
18S_Tar_Rr1 | reverse | GCCGCAGGCTCCACTCCTGG | |||
28S rRNA | 28S_Eutar_F | forward | ACCCGCTGAACTTAAGCATAT |
|
|
28SR0990 | reverse | CCTTGGTCCGTGTTTCAAGAC |
|
||
ITS-2 | ITS2_Eutar_Ff | forward | GCATCGATGAAGAACGCAGC |
|
|
ITS2_Eutar_Rr | reverse | TCCTCCGCTTATTGATATGC | |||
COI | COI_Mil.tar_Ff | forward | TATTTTATTTTTGGTATTTGATGTGC |
|
|
COI_Mil.tar_Rr | reverse | CCTCCCCCTGCAGGATC | |||
jjLCO1490 | forward | TITCIACIAAYCAYAARGAYATTGG |
|
|
|
jjHCO2198 | reverse | TAIACYTCIGGRTGICCRAARAAYCA |
To uncover the phylogenetic relationships of the two analysed species, the recent dataset by Morek and Michalczyk (
BI marginal posterior probabilities were calculated using MrBayes v3.2 (
As the dataset analysed herein is only slightly larger than the dataset by Morek and Michalczyk (
Milnesium almatyense
was represented by single haplotype in each gene, whereas M. reductum exhibited three 18S rRNA haplotypes, four 28S rRNA haplotypes, three ITS-2 haplotypes and four haplotypes of COI. The maximum genetic distance between the analysed populations of M. reductum was as follows: 0.2% in 18S rRNA, 0.5% in 28S rRNA, 1.3% in ITS-2 and 2.9% in COI, thus there was very little structuring within the M. reductum clade. The summary of haplotypes and the matrices of genetic distances between the populations are available in Suppl. materials
Thanks to the observations in high quality PCM and SEM, as well as morphometric measurements of multiple specimens, including sexually-immature instars (the analysis with the algorithm developed by
Specifically, for M. almatyense (Fig.
Similarly, for M. reductum (Fig.
Measurements (in μm) and the pt values of selected morphological structures of 13 adult females of Milnesium almatyense Tumanov, 2006 from Kazakhstan, KZ.003, mounted in Hoyer’s medium. All available specimens were measured (N – number of specimens/structures measured, RANGE refers to the smallest and the largest structure amongst all measured specimens; SD – standard deviation).
Character | N | Range | Mean | SD | |||
µm | pt | µm | pt | µm | pt | ||
Body length | 13 | 311–665 | 1254–1679 | 502 | 1512 | 107 | 122 |
Peribuccal papillae length | 9 | 4.9–8.2 | 14.6–21.1 | 6.4 | 19.3 | 1.0 | 2.1 |
Lateral papillae length | 12 | 3.6–6.0 | 12.2–15.8 | 4.8 | 14.7 | 0.9 | 1.0 |
Buccal tube | |||||||
Length | 13 | 24.6–40.2 | – | 32.9 | – | 5.2 | – |
Stylet support insertion point | 12 | 17.4–28.4 | 67.0–71.9 | 22.8 | 69.6 | 3.7 | 1.6 |
Anterior width | 10 | 7.8–16.0 | 31.7–41.3 | 12.1 | 36.2 | 2.9 | 3.2 |
Standard width | 10 | 6.5–13.1 | 26.2–33.1 | 10.0 | 29.9 | 2.2 | 2.2 |
Posterior width | 10 | 6.6–13.7 | 26.6–35.9 | 10.0 | 30.0 | 2.4 | 2.9 |
Standard width/length ratio | 10 | 26%–33% | – | 30% | – | 2% | – |
Posterior/anterior width ratio | 10 | 73%–92% | – | 83% | – | 7% | – |
Claw 1 heights | |||||||
External primary branch | 11 | 10.4–16.6 | 39.3–49.2 | 13.8 | 42.3 | 2.1 | 2.6 |
External base + secondary branch | 7 | 9.0–16.2 | 35.3–42.4 | 13.0 | 38.5 | 2.6 | 2.4 |
External branches length ratio | 6 | 87%–98% | – | 93% | – | 4% | – |
Internal primary branch | 12 | 9.7–15.6 | 35.6–48.8 | 13.1 | 40.1 | 1.8 | 3.2 |
Internal base + secondary branch | 8 | 8.6–15.4 | 34.2–39.8 | 12.2 | 37.1 | 2.2 | 2.0 |
Internal spur | 6 | 3.4–5.3 | 11.7–13.6 | 4.4 | 12.6 | 0.7 | 0.8 |
Internal branches length ratio | 8 | 89%–100% | – | 94% | – | 4% | – |
Claw 2 heights | |||||||
External primary branch | 13 | 11.3–19.3 | 42.5–56.1 | 15.4 | 47.0 | 2.4 | 3.2 |
External base + secondary branch | 11 | 9.0–16.3 | 36.3–44.8 | 13.3 | 40.5 | 2.3 | 2.2 |
External branches length ratio | 11 | 74%–96% | – | 86% | – | 6% | – |
Internal primary branch | 12 | 10.6–17.5 | 41.5–50.4 | 14.8 | 44.3 | 2.1 | 2.4 |
Internal base + secondary branch | 9 | 8.7–15.8 | 35.1–41.4 | 13.1 | 38.3 | 2.0 | 1.9 |
Internal spur | 7 | 4.3–5.4 | 12.3–15.6 | 4.7 | 13.7 | 0.5 | 1.4 |
Internal branches length ratio | 9 | 82%–92% | – | 88% | – | 3% | – |
Claw 3 heights | |||||||
External primary branch | 12 | 10.9–19.6 | 44.0–56.1 | 15.8 | 48.8 | 2.4 | 3.3 |
External base + secondary branch | 10 | 8.6–17.2 | 34.7–44.8 | 13.5 | 41.6 | 2.9 | 3.0 |
External branches length ratio | 9 | 71%–91% | – | 85% | – | 7% | – |
Internal primary branch | 9 | 10.8–19.3 | 43.5–48.7 | 15.4 | 46.3 | 2.8 | 1.8 |
Internal base + secondary branch | 8 | 9.6–16.6 | 39.0–47.3 | 13.9 | 41.3 | 2.5 | 2.6 |
Internal spur | 9 | 3.8–7.2 | 10.8–18.2 | 4.7 | 13.7 | 1.0 | 1.9 |
Internal branches length ratio | 6 | 83%–91% | – | 87% | – | 3% | – |
Claw 4 heights | |||||||
Anterior primary branch | 7 | 12.9–23.6 | 52.0–63.4 | 18.5 | 58.5 | 3.7 | 3.4 |
Anterior base + secondary branch | 9 | 9.8–19.7 | 39.5–50.2 | 15.1 | 45.9 | 3.5 | 3.4 |
Anterior branches length ratio | 6 | 68%–85% | – | 78% | – | 6% | – |
Posterior primary branch | 9 | 13.0–23.6 | 52.0–65.9 | 19.0 | 59.6 | 3.4 | 4.8 |
Posterior base + secondary branch | 8 | 10.1–19.7 | 40.7–52.3 | 15.4 | 47.5 | 3.1 | 3.6 |
Posterior branches length ratio | 7 | 74%–84% | – | 80% | – | 3% | – |
The morphology of Milnesium almatyense Tumanov, 2006 adults. A Habitus, PCM; B The pseudoplate arrangement based on adult specimens from population KZ.003, drawing; C SEM photograph of mouth opening; with six, unequal in size peribuccal lamellae, so-called 4+2 configuration; D SEM photograph of claws II with a [2-3] CC and visible accessory points. All the scale bars are given in µm.
The morphology of Milnesium almatyense Tumanov, 2006 adults cuticle. A Sculptured dorsal cuticle, with visible pseudoplates, specimen from KZ.003 population, PCM; B Sculptured dorsal cuticle, with visible pseudoplates, paratype, PCM; C Dorsal cuticle with visible pseudopores, the same specimens on A from KZ.003 population, PCM; D Dorsal cuticle with visible pseudopores, paratype, PCM. E SEM photograph of dorsal cuticle with visible sculpture and caudal, complex pseudoplate. F SEM photograph of details of sculpture of the dorsal cuticle. The photographs A and C, as well as B and D depict the same specimen and paratype, respectively. All the scale bars are given in µm.
Joined measurements (in μm) and the pt values of selected morphological structures of 34 adult females of Milnesium reductum Tumanov, 2006 from five populations from Kyrgyz Republic, KG.012; KG.013; KG.014, KG.142 and KG.147, mounted in Hoyer’s medium. Individuals were chosen to represent the entire body length range, with as equal representation of all available life stages as possible (N – number of specimens/structures measured, RANGE refers to the smallest and the largest structure amongst all measured specimens; SD – standard deviation).
Character | N | Range | Mean | SD | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
µm | pt | µm | pt | µm | pt | ||
Body length | 31 | 363–730 | 1217–1693 | 555 | 1535 | 143 | 110 |
Peribuccal papillae length | 30 | 3.7–8.8 | 13.3–22.1 | 6.4 | 17.8 | 1.3 | 2.1 |
Lateral papillae length | 31 | 4.6–10.0 | 14.6–23.7 | 7.1 | 19.1 | 1.6 | 2.2 |
Buccal tube | |||||||
Length | 34 | 25.8–43.9 | – | 36.4 | – | 5.7 | – |
Stylet support insertion point | 34 | 18.3–29.3 | 62.9–72.9 | 24.8 | 68.4 | 3.3 | 2.5 |
Anterior width | 33 | 7.7–16.8 | 25.8–41.3 | 11.9 | 32.2 | 2.4 | 3.6 |
Standard width | 33 | 5.6–16.2 | 20.0–39.8 | 9.8 | 26.4 | 2.6 | 4.6 |
Posterior width | 33 | 6.6–17.8 | 22.2–43.7 | 11.3 | 30.3 | 2.9 | 4.7 |
Standard width/length ratio | 33 | 20%–40% | – | 26% | – | 5% | – |
Posterior/anterior width ratio | 33 | 74%–120% | – | 94% | – | 11% | – |
Claw 1 heights | |||||||
External primary branch | 32 | 14.9–24.0 | 48.1–60.4 | 19.5 | 54.0 | 2.5 | 3.5 |
External base + secondary branch | 30 | 9.2–15.1 | 28.9–38.8 | 12.7 | 34.6 | 1.7 | 2.4 |
External branches length ratio | 28 | 57%–72% | – | 64% | – | 4% | – |
Internal primary branch | 33 | 14.2–23.4 | 45.3–57.9 | 18.6 | 51.3 | 2.6 | 3.7 |
Internal base + secondary branch | 33 | 8.8–14.7 | 24.4–37.4 | 12.2 | 33.6 | 1.7 | 3.2 |
Internal spur | 26 | 4.6–8.1 | 13.1–20.7 | 6.2 | 16.4 | 0.8 | 2.0 |
Internal branches length ratio | 32 | 53%–75% | – | 66% | – | 5% | – |
Claw 2 heights | |||||||
External primary branch | 33 | 16.8–26.8 | 49.5–65.8 | 21.7 | 59.2 | 2.9 | 3.7 |
External base + secondary branch | 30 | 9.8–16.0 | 33.0–40.4 | 13.1 | 36.7 | 2.0 | 1.8 |
External branches length ratio | 29 | 56%–70% | – | 62% | – | 3% | – |
Internal primary branch | 33 | 15.5–26.4 | 48.8–64.9 | 20.7 | 57.2 | 3.1 | 3.8 |
Internal base + secondary branch | 30 | 8.3–17.9 | 31.7–50.7 | 13.0 | 35.8 | 2.1 | 3.5 |
Internal spur | 25 | 5.0–8.8 | 14.8–21.3 | 7.0 | 18.3 | 0.9 | 2.1 |
Internal branches length ratio | 29 | 50%–87% | – | 63% | – | 6% | – |
Claw 3 heights | |||||||
External primary branch | 33 | 16.0–26.9 | 49.8–70.1 | 22.0 | 60.5 | 3.1 | 4.7 |
External base + secondary branch | 31 | 9.3–16.2 | 32.8–42.0 | 13.5 | 36.9 | 2.0 | 2.3 |
External branches length ratio | 30 | 53%–67% | – | 61% | – | 4% | – |
Internal primary branch | 31 | 14.2–25.9 | 48.6–64.5 | 20.9 | 58.3 | 3.2 | 4.4 |
Internal base + secondary branch | 28 | 9.3–16.0 | 31.7–41.2 | 13.1 | 35.8 | 2.1 | 2.3 |
Internal spur | 26 | 5.3–9.5 | 15.0–23.3 | 7.1 | 18.6 | 1.1 | 2.1 |
Internal branches length ratio | 26 | 53%–71% | – | 62% | – | 5% | – |
Claw 4 heights | |||||||
Anterior primary branch | 34 | 17.4–31.3 | 59.6–80.9 | 25.7 | 70.8 | 3.9 | 4.7 |
Anterior base + secondary branch | 32 | 9.9–20.5 | 31.3–50.4 | 14.4 | 39.6 | 2.6 | 3.3 |
Anterior spur | 26 | 5.1–8.5 | 14.6–25.3 | 6.8 | 18.0 | 1.1 | 2.6 |
Anterior branches length ratio | 32 | 45%–65% | _ | 56% | – | 5% | – |
Posterior primary branch | 33 | 18.4–31.5 | 61.2–82.7 | 26.2 | 72.2 | 3.8 | 5.1 |
Posterior base + secondary branch | 33 | 9.4–19.2 | 36.4–48.8 | 15.2 | 41.7 | 2.8 | 3.2 |
Posterior branches length ratio | 32 | 50%–65% | – | 58% | – | 4% | – |
The morphology of Milnesium reductum Tumanov, 2006 A Habitus of adult female, PCM; B SEM photograph of mouth opening; with six, unequal in size peribuccal lamellae, so-called 4+2 configuration; C SEM photograph of smooth dorsal cuticle with visible single, complex pseudoplate; D smooth dorsal cuticle, with visible single pseudoplate and faint pseudopores, specimen from KG.013 population, PCM; E smooth dorsal cuticle, with visible single pseudoplate and faint pseudopores, paratype, PCM. All the scale bars are given in µm.
The morphology of claws of Milnesium reductum Tumanov, 2006 A Photograph of hatchlings claws III with a [2-2] CC, PCM; B Photograph of hatchlings claws IV with a [2-2] CC, PCM; C SEM photograph of claws II with a [2-3] CC lacking accessory points; D SEM photograph of tip of primary branch of claws lacking accessory points. All the scale bars are given in µm.
Adding the two species to the dataset published by
In the currently available dataset, the species with the closest affinity to M. almatyense is M. berladnicorum, thus we compared the genetic distances between the two species, which are as follows: 0.2% in 18S rRNA, 0.9% in 28S rRNA, 4.0% in ITS-2 and 6.9% in COI. M. reductum is indicated as the sister species for the entire clade (genetic distances between M. reductum and the remaining species of clade A are as follows: 0.5–2.4% in 18S rRNA, 3.4–5.7% in 28S rRNA, 10.2–16.3% in ITS-2 and 13.8–16.3% in COI).
Fragment of the Bayesian phylogenetic tree (“clade A”), based on the analysis of concatenated 18S rRNA + 28S rRNA + ITS-2 + COI nucleotide sequences, obtained by
Considering the similarity and problematic taxonomy of M. tardigradum and M. pseudotardigradum, as well as of M. almatyense, M. berladnicorum and M. variefidum, we introduce names for these two species clusters: the tardigradum complex and the almatyense complex, respectively (Fig.
New observations under a high class PCM and SEM, as well as ontogenetic variability analysis, allowed for a substantial amendment of the original descriptions of M. almatyense and M. reductum. Furthermore, sequencing of the four standard DNA barcodes delivered a new line of evidence supporting the erection of the two species and allowed an inference of their phylogenetic positions. DNA barcodes also provide an important and useful tool for identification of both species. Currently, integrative data are available only for 14 of 41 formally-described Milnesium species (34%;
Although the number of species that were tested against developmental variability in CC is not too high (20 species, including the undescribed species that were analysed by
In contrast to the original description of M. almatyense, our analysis of the type and new material showed that the dorsal cuticle is not smooth, but covered with fine sculpturing and pseudoplates. These characteristics were missed due to the insufficient quality of the light microscope used by
The recent phylogenetic analysis of the genus Milnesium suggested that species generally cluster by geography (
We are deeply grateful to Denis Tumanov (Saint-Petersburg State University, Russia) for the loan of the type material and valuable comments on the manuscript. We also thank the reviewers, Reinhardt M. Kristensen (University of Copenhagen, Denmark) and Peter Degma (Comenius University, Slovakia), for their valuable comments that improved our manuscript. The study was supported by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education via the Diamond Grant programme (grant no. DI2015 016845 to WM, supervised by ŁM) and by the Jagiellonian University (grant no. DS/MND/WB/IZ/16/2018 to WM). Some of the analyses were carried out with the equipment purchased from the Sonata Bis programme of the Polish National Science Centre (grant no. 2016/22/E/NZ8/00417 to ŁM).
The relationships between body length and buccal tube length in Milnesium berladnicorum
Data type: Graph
Explanation note: Graph illustrating the relationships between the body length and buccal tube length of Milnesium berladnicorum Ciobanu, Zawierucha, Moglan & Kaczmarek, 2014, with clearly visible clusters corresponding to instars 1–3.
Matrix of Milnesium reductum genetic distances
Data type: genetic distance matrix
Explanation note: Summary of haplotypes and the matrix of uncorrected p distances between the five Milnesium reductum Tumanov, 2006 populations analysed in this study.
The relationships between body length and buccal tube length in Milnesium almatyense
Data type: Graph
Explanation note: Graph illustrating the relationships between the body length and buccal tube length of Milnesium almatyense Tumanov, 2006, with clearly visible clusters corresponding to instars 1–3.
The relationships between body length and buccal tube length in Milnesium reductum
Data type: Graph
Explanation note: Graph illustrating the relationships between the body length and buccal tube length of Milnesium reductum