The comparative phylogeography of shore crabs and their acanthocephalan parasites
Comparing the genetic structure of host populations with that of their parasites can shed light on the efficiency and independence of their respective dispersal mechanisms. The degree of congruence between host and parasite genetic structure should reflect to what extent they share dispersal mechanisms. Here, we contrast the genetic structure of the acanthocephalan parasite Profilicollis novaezelandensis with that of its intermediate host, the hairy-handed shore crab Hemigrapsus crenulatus, along the east coast of New Zealand’s South Island. We expected no congruence in their phylogeographic patterns because of the very different modes of dispersal used by the crabs (planktonic drift) and the acanthocephalans (bird-mediated dispersal). Based on analysis of cytochrome oxidase subunit I gene sequences, we found no significant genetic structure among isolated populations of the crab and those of their parasite, along a roughly 600 km stretch of coastline. Surprisingly, based on a distance-based co-evolutionary analysis statistical tool (PACo), we observed an overall significant level of congruence between host and parasite population-level phylogenies. The most parsimonious interpretation is that statistical significance does not translate into biological significance, with the result likely due to chance, possibly because bird movements that disperse parasites coincidentally match patterns of crab dispersal by ocean currents in parts of our study area. In this system, the connectivity among different localities and the apparent genetic mixing among populations may have implications for host–parasite co-evolution.
We thank Lynda Hay, Lance Hay, Jahmaine Hay and Kirby McKenzie for assistance with crab collection in the field, and Dr. Bronwen Presswell for providing an adult acanthocephalan specimen.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare having no conflict of interest.
Collection and euthanasia of crabs were approved by the Otago University Animal Ethics Committee (Application no. ET 2/17).
- Brockerhoff AM, Smales LR (2002) Profilicollis novaezelandensis n. sp (Polymorphidae) and two other acanthocephalan parasites from shore birds (Haematopodidae and Scolopacidae) in New Zealand, with records of two species in intertidal crabs (Decapoda: Grapsidae and Ocypodidae). Syst Parasitol 52:55–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Fordham R (1968) Dispersion and dispersal of the Dominican gull in Wellington, New Zealand. Proc N Z Ecol Soc 15:40–50Google Scholar
- Harper JT, Saunders GW (2001) The application of sequences of the ribosomal cistron to the systematics and classification of the florideophyte red algae (Florideophyceae, Rhodophyta). Cah Biol Mar 42:25–38Google Scholar
- Lanfear R, Frandsen PB, Wright AM, Senfeld T, Calcott B (2016) PartitionFinder 2: new methods for selecting partitioned models of evolution for molecular and morphological phylogenetic analyses. Mol Biol Evol 34:772–773Google Scholar
- Martinez-Aquino A, Reyna-Fabian ME, Rosas-Valdez R, Razo-Mendivil U, Pérez-Ponce de León G, Garcia-Varela M (2009) Detecting a complex of cryptic species within Neoechinorhynchus golvani (Acanthocephala: Neoechinorhynchidae) inferred from ITSs and LSU rDNA gene sequences. J Parasitol 95:1040–1047PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- McLay CL (1988) Brachyura and crab-like Anomura of New Zealand. University of Auckland Marine Laboratory, AucklandGoogle Scholar
- Miller MA, Pfeiffer W, Schwartz T (2010) Creating the CIPRES science gateway for inference of large phylogenetic trees. In: Proceedings of the gateway computing environments workshop, New Orleans, LA, pp 1–8Google Scholar
- Rowe L (2013) Dispersal of southern black-backed gulls (Larus dominicanus dominicanus) banded in Canterbury, New Zealand, 1959–1993. Notornis 60:134–142Google Scholar