PeerJ

PeerJ. 6: e4638

Lighten up the dark: metazoan parasites as indicators for the ecology of Antarctic crocodile icefish (Channichthyidae) from the north-west Antarctic Peninsula

Thomas Kuhn¹, Vera M.A. Zizka², Julian Münster¹, Regina Klapper¹, Simonetta Mattiucci³, Judith Kochmann¹, Sven Klimpel¹

1. Institute for Ecology, Evolution and Diversity, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre, Senckenberg Gesellschaft für Naturforschung, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

2. Aquatic Ecosystem Research, Faculty of Biology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany

3. Department of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Section of Parasitology, University of Roma “La Sapienza”, Rome, Italy

Donald Baird

© 2018 Kuhn et al.

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4638

Published online: 11 May 2018

Abstract

Due to its remote and isolated location, Antarctica is home to a unique diversity of species. The harsh conditions have shaped a primarily highly adapted endemic fauna. This includes the notothenioid family Channichthyidae. Their exceptional physiological adaptations have made this family of icefish the focus of many studies. However, studies on their ecology, especially on their parasite fauna, are comparatively rare. Parasites, directly linked to the food chain, can function as biological indicators and provide valuable information on host ecology (e.g., trophic interactions) even in remote habitats with limited accessibility, such as the Southern Ocean. In the present study, channichthyid fish (Champsocephalus gunnari: n = 25, Chaenodraco wilsoni: n = 33, Neopagetopsis ionah: n = 3, Pagetopsis macropterus: n = 4, Pseudochaenichthys georgianus: n = 15) were collected off South Shetland Island, Elephant Island, and the tip of the Antarctic Peninsula (CCAML statistical subarea 48.1). The parasite fauna consisted of 14 genera and 15 species, belonging to the six taxonomic groups including Digenea (four species), Nematoda (four), Cestoda (two), Acanthocephala (one), Hirudinea (three), and Copepoda (one). The stomach contents were less diverse with only Crustacea (Euphausiacea, Amphipoda) recovered from all examined fishes. Overall, 15 new parasite-host records could be established, and possibly a undescribed genotype or even species might exist among the nematodes.

Introduction

The exploration of remote habitats such as those of Antarctica has significantly influenced the understanding of the molecular, physiological, and behavioral mechanisms by which organisms adapt in order to survive, grow, and reproduce under extreme conditions. The evolutionary origin of Antarctic crocodile icefish (Notothenioidei) can be dated back to the isolation of the Antarctic continent and the surrounding Southern Ocean (Oligocene/Miocene boundary, approx. 25 mya) by the opening of the Drake Passage and the formation of the Antarctic circumpolar current (Eastman, 1993; Near, Pesavento & Cheng, 2003; Kock, 2005; Garofalo et al., 2009). This isolation gave rise to a roughly circular ocean front, the Antarctic Polar Front, which acts as a climatic and biologic barrier and decouples the Southern Ocean surrounding Antarctica from warm subtropical waters further north. The extensive temperature decrease coupled with ice sheet expansion, following the opening of the Drake Passage, led to a process of selection by exposure to freezing conditions in resident communities. The extinction of a large part of the endemic fish fauna due to freezing intolerance fueled the evolution of cold-adapted species (Bargelloni et al., 1994; Wöhrmann, 1997; Kock, 2005; Cheng, di Prisco & Verde, 2009; Near et al., 2012). This period of extreme cooling, ice sheet growth, and formation of sea ice along the Antarctic continental shelf, together with little competition between species, is thought to be the period of strong diversification and radiation within the Notothenioidei (approx. 15 mya) (Eastman, 1993). The suborder evolved from a benthic living ancestor endemic to Antarctica, which adapted to the cold environment by the expression of antifreeze glycoproteins, finally radiated, and successfully occupied many ecological niches (Bargelloni et al., 1994; Near, 2004; Kock, 2005). Today, the Notothenioidei strongly dominate the teleost fish diversity and abundance in the Southern Ocean and account for 90% of the fish biomass and for over 50% of all fish species in most regions of the Antarctic Sea (Wöhrmann, 1997; Flores et al., 2004; Kock, 2005; Reid et al., 2007; Near et al., 2012). The suborder contains 130 species in eight families (Artedidraconidae, Bovichtidae, Pseudaphritidae, Eleginopsidae, Nototheniidae, Harpagiferidae, Bathydraconidae, Channichthyidae) (Near, Pesavento & Cheng, 2003; Near et al., 2012).

Within the Notothenioidei, species of crocodile icefish (Channichthyidae) form a monophyletic group and are, with regard to morphological characters, one of the most derived clades of the Notothenioidae (Iwami, 1985; Near, Pesavento & Cheng, 2003; Kock, 2005). While Channichthyidae have been the focus of many studies dealing with their unique physiological adaptations (e.g., their complete lack of the oxygen-binding hemoglobin) (Sidell et al., 1997; Feller & Gerday, 1997; Garofalo et al., 2009), studies on their ecology are comparatively rare. Parasites can function as biological indicators as they are directly linked to the food chain and can provide valuable information on the ecology of the host. For instance, metazoan parasites, and especially helminths, have evolved complex life-cycles, including several hosts among different trophic levels, and are therefore deeply embedded within food webs. As a proxy for long-term trophic interactions, their analyses increase the knowledge on the ecology of the hosts and their linkage in the food web (Klimpel, Seehagen & Palm, 2003; Lafferty et al., 2008) without the need for great sampling efforts of the various trophic levels involved.

In the present study, we aimed to analyze the parasite fauna and stomach contents of Champsocephalus gunnari Lönnberg, 1905, Chaenodraco wilsoni Regan, 1914, Neopagetopsis ionah Nybelin, 1947, Pagetopsis macropterus Boulenger, 1907, and Pseudochaenichthys georgianus Norman, 1937, all members of the family Channichthyidae. The effort was made to increase our currently limited knowledge of their ecology and the host range of their associated parasite fauna.

Materials and Methods

A total of 80 channichthyid fish (C. gunnari: n = 25, C. wilsoni: n = 33, N. ionah: n = 3, P. macropterus: n = 4, P. georgianus: n = 15) were collected and sorted on board of the German RV Polarstern during the research cruise ANT-XXVIII/4 (2012) to the South Shetland Islands region, Elephant Island and the tip of the Antarctic Peninsula (CCAML statistical subarea 48.1) (see Table 1; Fig. 1). Fishes were caught with a bottom trawl (mouth opening: 2.5–3.2 × 16–18 m) with a towing time of 30 min. After each haul fish species were identified according to Gon & Heemstra (1990) and sorted by species. Individuals were packed in plastic bags, labelled and deep frozen at −40 °C for subsequent examination.

See full table Table 1. Trawl and catch data.

Figure 1View larger versionFigure 1. Sampling locations off the Antarctic Peninsula.Specific information on coordinates of the stations (1–8) are summarized in Table 1. Map data © Esri, DeLorme, GEBCO, NOAA, NGDC.

Parasitological examination and stomach content analysis

Total length and standard length were measured to the nearest millimeter and total weight was measured to the nearest 1.0 g. Gills, nostrils, skin, fins, eyes, and mouth cavity were examined for ectoparasites. Fish were then opened, the intestinal organs were removed, and transferred separately into petri dishes filled with 0.9% saline solution. Liver (LG), gonads (GO), full (SW), and empty stomachs (SWempty) were weighed to the nearest 0.1 g. The liver, gonads, stomach, gut, gall bladder, pyloric caeca were then dissected and microscopically examined for endoparasites with a magnification of 6.7–45× (SZ 61; Olympus, Hamburg, Germany). Host tissue was removed from isolated parasites. Digenea, Cestoda, Crustacea, and some nematodes were fixed in 4% borax buffered formalin and preserved in 70% ethanol with 4% glycerol for morphological identification. The remaining nematodes were preserved in EtOH (abs.) for subsequent molecular identification. Stomach contents were removed from each fish and isolated food items were separated and identified to the lowest possible taxon. Terminology for parasitological and ecological examination followed Bush et al. (1997). Parasite species were morphologically identified using original description as well as identification keys (Zdzitowiecki, 1991a; Klöser & Plötz, 1992; Zdzitowiecki, 1997; Rocka, 2004; Utevsky, 2005). In addition, randomly chosen subsamples from nematode specimens were identified using molecular methods.

Molecular nematode identification

Genomic DNA was isolated and purified from 117 parasite larvae for nematode species identification, using the peqGOLD Tissue DNA MicroSpin Kit (Peqlab Biotechnology GmbH, Erlangen, Germany) according to the instructions of the manufacturer. An approx. 639 bp long fragment of the mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase 2 (cox2) region was amplified using the primers 211-F (5′-TTT TCT AGT TAT ATA GAT TGR TTY AT-′3) and 210-R (5′-CAC CAA CTC TTA AAA TTA TC-3′) (Nadler & Hudspeth, 2000). The PCR-reaction (25 μl) included 12.5 μl Master-Mix (Peqlab Biotechnology GmbH, Erlangen, Germany) containing dNTP (0.4 mM), MgCl₂ (4 mM), Buffer (40 mM Tris-HCL, 32 mM (NH₄)₂SO₄, 0.02% Tween 20) HotStart Taq-Polymerase (0.625 u), 1.5 μl of each primer (10 pmol μl⁻¹), 7 μl ddH₂O, and 2.5 μl genomic DNA. The PCR temperature and cycling parameters were: initial denaturation at 94 °C for 180 s, 40 cycles of 94 °C for 30 s (denaturation), 46 °C for 60 s (annealing), 72 °C for 90 s (extension), followed by a final extension at 72 °C for 10 min. Samples without DNA were included as negative controls in each PCR run. PCR products were visualized on 1% agarose gels. To estimate the size of the PCR products, a 100 bp ladder marker (peqGOLD, Erlangen, Germany) was used. Afterwards, PCR products were purified with the peqGOLD Cycle-Pure Kit (Peqlab Biotechnology GmbH, Erlangen, Germany) following the instructions of the manufacturer. The purified products were sequenced by Seqlab (Goettingen GmbH, Germany) using primer 210-R.

Sequence analyses

Analyses were performed using Geneious v.8.1.7. Sequence data were compared with previously published Genbank data using a BLASTn search (Altschul et al., 1990). For phylogenetic reconstruction, a multiple sequence alignment including the 117 obtained sequences as well as 19 previously annotated reference sequences of phylogenetically closely related anisakid species was generated using MUSCLE as implemented in Geneious v.8.1.7 using default parameters (Alignment S3).

Bayesian inference analysis was performed on the 634 base pair MUSCLE alignment using MrBayes v3.1.2 (Huelsenbeck & Ronquist, 2001) as implemented in Geneious v.8.1.7. The GTR substitution model with gamma rate variation (five categories) was used. Default parameters were used for Markov Chain Monte Carlo parameters (chain length: 1,100,000; subsampling frequency: 200; heated chains 4; heated chain temp: 0.2 burn-in length: 10,000; random seed: 31,049). A consensus tree was constructed from the tree output files after discarding the first 10% (support threshold: 50%; burn-in: 10%) and visualised using TreeGraph 2 (Stöver & Müller, 2010). Anisakis simplex (s.s.) (Accession No: KT852484) as a common and closely related taxon was included as an outgroup.

Data analysis/statistics

Statistical analyses were conducted in R (version 3.0.2). Host biometric values, parasite abundances, and parasite intensities are given with standard deviation (±SD). Parasite fauna diversity was calculated using the Shannon–Wiener index (H′) and Pielous’s evenness (J′) according to Magurran (1988).

In order to compare the parasitological findings of the examined specimens with other members of the family Channichthyidae, data of metazoan parasites from the different species of this family were collected by a search on Google Scholar and Web of Knowledge. The names of the known channichthyid species, combined with the keywords “parasite” “Digenea,” “Monogenea,” “Cestoda,” “Nematoda,” “Acanthocephala,” and “Crustacea” were used. In addition to original publications, Klimpel et al. (2009) and Oguz et al. (2015) were taken into consideration. Validity of species names were checked by using The World Register of Marine Species (www.marinespecies.org). Only unambiguous records were included. The results are given in Table S1.

Results

Parasite infection data

A total of 2,563 individual parasites was isolated from the 80 samples of channichthyid fishes belonging to 14 different genera and 15 species, including 15 new host records (Tables 2 and 3; Table S2).

See full table Table 2. Parasitological data from the examined channichthyid P. georgianus.

See full table Table 3. Parasitological data from the examined channichthyids Chaenodraco wilsoni, Champsocephalus gunnari, Neopagetopsis ionah, and Pagetopsis macropterus.

Parasites belonged to the six taxonomic groups Digenea (four species), Nematoda (four), Cestoda (two), Acanthocephala (one), Hirudinea (three), and Copepoda (one) (Tables 2 and 3; Fig. 2). P. georgianus had the highest number of parasite species with 13 species belonging to six different taxa, followed by C. wilsoni (seven species), while numbers of parasite species of C. gunnari (four), N. ionah (three), and P. macropterus (four) were comparatively low. The predominant species were postlarval diphyllobothriidean cestodes and the larval nematodes Contracaecum osculatum and C. radiatum, which occurred in all five host species with overall prevalences of 35%, 55%, and 45%, respectively.

Figure 2View larger versionFigure 2. Relative composition of parasite taxa found in five channichthyid fish species.Results are based on parasite prevalence. Cestoda and Nematoda were present in all examined fish species. White: Digenea, light grey: Cestoda, medium grey: Acanthocephala, blue-gray: Nematoda, brown: Hirudinea, black: Crustacea.

Stomach content analysis

There were no pronounced differences in diet composition of the five examined fish species (Table 4). A total of 71.25% (n = 57) of fish stomachs contained prey items (C. wilsoni: 69.7%, C. gunnari: 96.0%; N. ionah: 66.7%; P. macropterus: 100%; P. georgianus: 26.7%). Only Crustacea were found among all stomach samples. Due to the frequently advanced state of digestion, only a minor part could be identified to a lower taxonomic level. Prey items that could be further identified belonged to the order Euphausiacea, which constituted an average abundance of 70.2% with a numerical percentage of prey (n) ranging from 37.8 to 90.5%, mostly of the genus Euphausia sp., and an average frequency of occurrence of F[%] = 54.2 ranging from 25.0% to 83.3%. On the species level, Euphausia superba was identified in fish of C. wilsoni and C. gunnari with F[%] = 30.4% and F[%] = 54.2, respectively. Single specimens of the order Amphipoda were only found in C. gunnari, with F[%] = 8.3.

See full table Table 4. Food items isolated from the five channichthyid species.

Molecular nematode identification

The 117 obtained sequences using BLASTn-analyses showed highest congruence with eight different sequences that could not all be annotated to a species level in GenBank (Table S3). The vast majority (100 sequences) belonged to the genus Contracaecum with Contracaecum cf. osculatum D (31) and C. cf. osculatum E (28) being the dominant genotypes. C. radiatum (14) and C. osculatum (s.l.) (8) were identified, and 16 individuals that were assigned to Contracaecum sp. Three sequences were assigned to Contracaecum aff. multipapillatum A and one sequence was identified as Pseudoterranova decipiens. Interestingly, 16 sequences could not be assigned to any of the anisakid genera present in the Antarctic and showed highest similarity (approx. 85%) to the ascarid Parascaris equorum.

Phylogenetic analyses

A total of 138 Operational Taxonomic Units were included in the final dataset. In order to further identify the taxonomic status of the anisakid nematode sequences obtained, a set of 18 reference anisakid sequences of known identity (Pseudoterranova krabbei HM147279; P. decipiens (s.s.) HM147278; P. decipiens E HM147282; P. cystophorae EU477209; P. ceticola DQ116435; P. cattani KC782949; P. bulbosa HM147280; P. azarasi HM147281; C. radiatum EU477210, C. osculatum (s.s.) EU477206; C. osculatum E EU477207; C. osculatum D EU477205; C. osculatum B EU477404; C. osculatum A EU477203; C. osculatum baicalensis EU477208; C. ogmorhini (s.s.) EU477211; C. mirounga EU477213; C. margolisi EU477212) were included in the phylogenetic reconstruction (Fig. 3). A. simplex s.s. (KX158869) was used as an outgroup. Most of our sequences clustered with the respective species clade according to the species identification via BLASTn (Fig. 3). The single sequence of P. decipiens (Pg_11_4b) forms a sister clade together with P. decipiens E. A total of six individuals that were identified as Contracaecum sp. were grouped within the same clade as C. mirounga. The three sequences that showed low identity with Contracaecum aff. multipapillatum A clustered together with the 16 sequences of “P. equorum” as a monophyletic sister clade of C. margolisi and C. ogmorhini (s.s.).

Figure 3View larger versionFigure 3. Phylogenetic tree of nematode sequences.Phylogenetic reconstruction of 117 obtained sequences and 19 anisakid reference species. Branch support values are given for the consensus tree constructed from 9,902 original raw trees. For sample abbreviations please see Table S3. The following sample-coding was used: “Species initials_Host-Nr._Nematode-No.”. GenBank accession numbers were given for reference sequences.

Discussion

Overall, 15 metazoan parasite species of 13 different genera were identified. Among the detected parasite species, nine and six species were present as larval or adult stages, respectively, with larval parasites showing high infestation rates. Generally, adult stages would indicate the fish as the final host for the parasite species, whereas larval stages are found in intermediate hosts feeding on zooplankton. P. georgianus showed the highest diversity with 13 different parasite species. This high number of taxa might reflect the feeding behavior, life style and zone preference of the fish, ranging from benthic to pelagic (Iwami & Kock, 1990). The other four fish species had a less diverse fauna. Compared to other members of the suborder Notothenioidei (e.g., Dissostichus eleginoides (47 parasites species), Macrourus whitsoni (25), Notothenia coriiceps (37) (Palm et al., 1998; Klimpel et al., 2009; Münster et al., 2016)) this is a rather low parasite diversity, found within this study (see also Table S1). Among the sampled species, Cestoda (postlarvae) were the dominant parasite groups in terms of prevalence and intensity. Cestoda often use Antarctic elasmobranchs and birds as final hosts (Rocka, 2017). For nematodes, except for Ascarophis nototheniae, Channichthyidae serve as intermediate hosts and marine mammals as final hosts and occurred as L3-larvae in the examined fishes. In the case of the genera Pseudoterranova and Contracaecum, the main final hosts are Pinnipedia (Klöser et al., 1992; McClelland, 2002), just like the only acanthocephalan Corynosoma bullosum, which was isolated from P. georgianus, matures in a pinniped host (e.g., Mirounga leonine) (Zdzitowiecki, 1991a). These findings emphasize the role of Channichthyidae as important intermediate hosts, mostly preying on crustaceans infected with larval stages. The low infection parameters (prevalence and intensity) and diversity of Digenea is surprising as they are probably the most diverse metazoan parasite group within Antarctic waters (Rocka, 2006). Whether seasonal variations of abundances, as assumed to occur in some digenean species (Rohde, 2005), might have influenced these numbers cannot be evaluated due to a lack of comparable studies taken during the austral winter. Another explanation could be the high abundance of Euphausiacea in these waters, which are not known to harbor larval digeneans. The low diversity is in accordance to the findings in previous studies (Table S1).

In the following we are going to discuss the fish according to their ecology.

Champsocephalus gunnari and Chaenodraco wilsoni

A high similarity of C. wilsoni and C. gunnari (81.6%) was revealed and might be explained by the fact that these two species share a similar food spectrum, including almost exclusively Crustacea. C. wilsoni complements its diet with other small crustaceans such as the Euphausiacea Thysanoessa macrura, Amphipoda (Themisto gaudichaudii), and occasionally small fish (Pleuragramma antarctica) whereas C. wilsoni includes also Hyperiidea and Mysida (Iwami & Kock, 1990; Eastman, 1993; Kock et al., 1994; Frolkina, 2002; Flores et al., 2004; Kock, 2005; Kock et al., 2008; Kock, Gröger & Jones, 2013). Stomach content analyses of the present study support previous investigations, with food items mainly consisting of Euphausiacea, which in some cases could be identified as E. superba. No residues of fish species were found, which supports the role of C. wilsoni and C. gunnari as highly specialized on krill. Parasite diversity and infection parameters are also in accordance with the postulated feeding ecology of the species. Parasite species diversity was low and consisted of mainly larval cestodes (Diphyllobothriidea indet.), nematodes (C. osculatum, C. radiatum, Contracaecum sp., Nematoda indet.), and one digenean species (C. gunnari: Macvicaria georgiana; C. wilsoni: Neolebouria antarctica). These parasites use fish as second intermediate or paratenic hosts. M. georgiana and N. antarctica were present in the adult stage, respectively, indicating the role of the fish as final hosts in the life cycle of these digenean parasites.

Digenea are mainly present in coastal zones of Western Antarctica while they are scarce in the open sea and deep waters. Especially in the Weddell Sea and around the South Shetland Islands this parasite taxon is rare and particularly the species N. antarctica shows a low abundance in this area compared to other Antarctic regions (South Georgia) (Zdzitowiecki, 1991b, 1997; Rocka, 2006; Oguz et al., 2012). Representatives of the order Diphyllobothriidea are commonly known to infect zooplankton (i.e., E. superba) as first intermediate host and are frequently found around the South Shetland Islands in channichthyid representatives (Kock, 1992; Rocka, 2003, 2006; Palm, Klimpel & Walter, 2007; Oguz et al., 2012). Due to the fact that exclusively plerocercoid larval stages were present C. gunnari and C. wilsoni can be considered intermediate hosts.

The most prominent parasites in prevalence and intensity were the Nematoda with the larval stages (L3) of the species C. osculatum and C. radiatum which both infect seals (e.g., Leptonychotes weddellii, in this region) as a final host (Klöser et al., 1992). Channichthyids are known to occupy a key position in the life cycle of Antarctic Contracaecum (Kock, 1992; Oguz et al., 2012). The present study reveals a slightly higher prevalence and intensity of C. osculatum than of C. radiatum. This observation is contrary to the assumption, that C. radiatum developed a pelagic life cycle and therefore shows a higher abundance in pelagic fish species. On the contrary, C. osculatum developed a benthic life cycle (Klöser et al., 1992; Kock, 1992; Palm et al., 1994). Contradicting observations of the present study can be explained by the targeted host species. Even if representatives of the Channichthyidae play a key role in the life cycle of Antarctic Contracaecum, both fish might be representatives of lower importance. C. radiatum is highly abundant in piscivorous channichthyids like Chaenocephalus aceratus, C. rhinoceratus, and C. dewitti that feed on pelagic Pleurogramma antarcticum (Klöser et al., 1992; Kock, 1992; Palm et al., 1994).

Neopagetopsis ionah and Pagetopsis macropterus

Reliable data on the feeding behavior of N. ionah and P. macropterus are scarce. The food spectrum is described as a mixture of euphausiids, copepods, pteropods, and fish where the proportion of different items in the diet varies greatly with time and space (Kock, 1992; Eastman, 1993; Kock, 2005; Kock, Gröger & Jones, 2013). Stomach content analyses of the present study revealed only food items belonging to the Crustacea (Table 4). More precisely identified residues were assigned to the order Euphausiacea or the genus Euphausia. No residues of copepods, pteropods or fish were found. The absence of these food items could be explained by the fact that individuals around the South Shetland Islands prey preferential on euphausiids as this taxon is strongly represented and provides a high biomass in this region (Ichii, Naganobu & Ogishima, 1996; Reiss et al., 2008).

Parasitological findings are in accordance with stomach content analyses but contradict literature data which describe N. ionah as piscivorous (Iwami & Kock, 1990; Kock, 1992, 2005; Eastman, 1993; Kock, Gröger & Jones, 2013). Present stomach content and parasitological investigations indicate a diet mainly based on krill and other crustaceans for N. ionah. Compared to the other four channichthyid species, P. macropterus showed higher intensities of the three endoparasites Diphyllobothriidea indet., C. osculatum and C. radiatum. In relation to the literature about the feeding ecology, these higher parasite intensities could be explained by a piscivorous feeding of P. macropterus which leads to an accumulation of parasites via the prey (Kock, 1992; Williams, MacKenzie & McCarthy, 1992; Klimpel, Seehagen & Palm, 2003; Palm, Klimpel & Walter, 2007). Because parasite intensity and diversity integrates the feeding ecology for a longer period, in the case of P. macropterus, it is more likely, that the fish species principally has a diet including fish. However, this could not be verified by stomach content analyses. Thus, it was not possible to contradict the hypothesis of a principally piscivorous diet in the species. The small sample size for both species is not representative in order to interpret the feeding behavior.

Pseudochaenichthys georgianus

Like N. ionah and P. macropterus, the food spectrum of P. georgianus includes Crustacea and fish, with the proportion of the different items varying in time and space (Kock, 1992, 2005; Eastman, 1993; Kock, Gröger & Jones, 2013). Similar to the former two species it is possible, that individuals of P. georgianus around the South Shetland Islands prey intensively on krill because of its high abundance. The problem of contradictions in parasitological findings and stomach content analyses in P. georgianus are similar to P. macropterus.

Endoparasite diversity and intensity of P. georgianus was high and greatly exceeded parasite parameters of the other four fish species. Similar to the previous four species the cestode Diphyllobothriidea indet. and the nematode species C. osculatum, C. radiatum, and Contracaecum sp. were isolated in the larval stage. In addition, high numbers of the cestode Tetraphyllidae indet. and the nematode P. decipies were detected. For both taxa P. georgianus serves as a second intermediate or paratenic host. Final host for Tetraphyllidae indet. are elasmobranchs, while representatives of Pseudoterranova are parasites of marine mammals. High prevalence and parasite intensity in P. georgianus (Table 2) points to a strong accumulation of parasites through a piscivorous or unspecialized feeding behavior. In contrast to the other four channichthyid species, P. georgianus was infected with a species belonging to the acanthocephalans. C. bullosum infects marine fish as intermediate host, mammals or birds act as final hosts (Zdzitowiecki, 1991a). C. bullosum occurred in the cystacanth stage of development in P. georgianus. The life cycle of Acanthocephalans is largely linked to the benthic environment, and the group is rarely found in planktonic organisms (Marcogliese, 1995). Thereby benthic amphipods and ostracods are used as first intermediate hosts. Fish that exploit the bottom layer are therefore commonly used as second intermediate or final host, depending on the acanthocephalan species (Zdzitowiecki, 1991a; Kock, 1992; Rocka, 2006; Palm, Klimpel & Walter, 2007). The occurrence of this parasite in P. georgianus gives therefore more information about the horizontal distribution of its host than about the diet.

Molecular analyses of nematodes

Molecular analyses of a subsample of anisakid nematodes and the subsequent phylogenetic reconstructions were conducted in order to confirm previous morphological identification and identify the nematodes to (sibling) species level.

While GenBank analyses did not provide sufficient resolution for identification to species level (e.g., Contracaecum sp., Nematoda indet.), phylogenetic reconstruction including a set of 18 reference species allowed a more accurate species assignment. Analyses clearly revealed the species C. osculatum (sensu lato), which splits into the two sibling species C. osculatum D and C. osculatum E. Another nematode species, C. radiatum, was identified by molecular investigations (Table S2). No sibling species of C. radiatum are known. The parasite species is known to be distributed in the Southern Ocean and occurs in high numbers around Antarctica. Representatives of the Channichthyidae are also known to be infested with larval forms of C. radiatum (Klöser et al., 1992; Kock, 1992; Arduino et al., 1995; Mattiucci & Nascetti, 2007; Palm, Klimpel & Walter, 2007).

The species P. decipiens (s.l.) was identified which supports previous investigations in the Antarctic region (Palm et al., 1994; Zhu et al., 2002; Palm, Klimpel & Walter, 2007; Timi et al., 2014). Only one sequence was obtained and it was assigned to the species P. decipiens E, a sibling species of the P. decipiens complex known from Antarctic waters. It differs genetically from the four-other species of the complex (P. bulbosa, P. azarasi, P. krabbei, P. cattani) from the North Atlantic, Norwegian Sea, Baltic Sea, and Arctic-Boreal and Japanese waters (Zhu et al., 2002; Mattiucci & Nascetti, 2007; Timi et al., 2014). Previous studies included that it can be assumed that all individuals of P. decipiens found in this study belong to the sibling species P. decipiens E. However, further investigations based on the cox2 marker are needed to verify this assumption. Pseudoterranova was only found in representatives of the host species P. georgianus and could not be detected in any of the other targeted fish species.

A total of 16 nematode samples revealed similar sequences using sequence analysis, but could not be clearly assigned to existing sequences in GenBank (Fig. 3; Table S3). These samples came exclusively from nematodes found in the host species C. wilsoni and C. gunnari. Sequence analyses (BLASTn) showed the highest sequence identity to a phylogenetically related species annotated as P. equorum in GenBank. This equine ascarid nematode is an important cosmopolitan in foals (Lindgren et al., 2008). Species like this or closely related ones have no affiliation to the marine or Antarctic environment in any life stage and were never found in this region. This excludes the occurrence of individuals of this species in representatives of the Channichthyidae. This is also supported by the low sequence identity of the GenBank comparison (83–85%, Table S3). The relevant sequences form a separate clade including also those sequences that have been identified as Contracaecum aff. multipapillatum A before. These results indicate that the sequences might belong to a species of Contracaecum that have not been annotated before. Further investigations are needed in order to clarify their taxonomic status.

Conclusion

Although Channichthyidae have been extensively studied, only few have dealt with the ecology or the parasite fauna. The large number of 15 new host records found in this study shows the importance of studies within Antarctic water to gain a better understanding of this unique habitat. Most recorded parasite species can be characterized by a broad host range including a variety of different Notothenioidei, emphasizing their important role as hosts in the Southern Ocean. Furthermore, a possible undescribed genotype or even species might exist among the nematodes.

Supplementary Material

Open In Web Browser

Acknowledgments

We thank Karl-Hermann Kock, Volker Siegel, and Christopher Jones for their contributions during the field work on the RV Polarstern and we gratefully acknowledge Birgit Nagel for her technical assistance.

Additional Information and Declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Thomas Kuhn conceived and designed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Vera M.A. Zizka performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper.

Julian Münster conceived and designed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Regina Klapper analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Simonetta Mattiucci analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper.

Judith Kochmann authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Sven Klimpel conceived and designed the experiments, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, approved the final draft.

Data Availability

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

The raw data are provided in the Supplemental Files.

Articles from PeerJ are provided here courtesy of PeerJ, Inc

PMC Copyright Notice

The articles available from the PMC site are protected by copyright, even though access is free. Copyright is held by the respective authors or publishers who provide these articles to PMC. Users of PMC are responsible for complying with the terms and conditions defined by the copyright holder.

Users should assume that standard copyright protection applies to articles in PMC, unless an article contains an explicit license statement that gives a user additional reuse or redistribution rights. PMC does not allow automated/bulk downloading of articles that have standard copyright protection.

See the copyright notice on the PMC site, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/about/copyright/, for further details and specific exceptions.

References

Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ, authors. Basic local alignment search tool. Journal of Molecular Biology. 1990;215(3):403–410. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Arduino P, Nascetti G, Cianchi R, Plötz J, Mattiucci S, D’Amelio S, Paggi L, Orecchia P, Bullini L, authors. Isozyme variation and taxonomic rank of Contracaecum radiatum (v. Linstow, 1907) from the Antarctic Ocean (Nematoda, Ascaridoidea). Systematic Parasitology. 1995;30(1):1–9. [Cross Ref]

Bargelloni L, Ritchie PA, Patarnello T, Battaglia B, Lambert DM, Meyer A, authors. Molecular evolution at subzero temperatures: mitochondrial and nuclear phylogenies of fishes from Antarctica (suborder Notothenioidei), and the evolution of antifreeze glycopeptides. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 1994;11:854–863. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Bush AO, Lafferty KD, Lotz JM, Shostak AW, authors. Parasitology meets ecology on its own terms: Margolis et al. revisited. Journal of Parasitology. 1997;83(4):575–583. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Cheng C-HC, di Prisco G, Verde C, authors. Cold-adapted Antarctic fish: the discovery of neuroglobin in the dominant suborder Notothenioidei. Gene. 2009;433(1–2):100–101. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Eastman JT, author. Antarctic Fish Biology: Evolution in a Unique Environment. 1993. San Diego: Academic Press;

Feller G, Gerday C, authors. Adaptations of the hemoglobinless Antarctic icefish (Channichthyidae) to hypoxia tolerance. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Physiology. 1997;118(4):981–987. [Cross Ref]

Flores H, Kock K-H, Wilhelms S, Jones CD, authors. Diet of two icefish species from the South Shetland Islands and Elephant Island, Champsocephalus gunnari and Chaenocephalus aceratus. Polar Biology. 2004;27(2):119–129. [Cross Ref]

Frolkina ZA, author. Distribution of mackerel icefish (Champsocephalus gunnari) (Channichthyidae) around South Georgia at various stages of its life cycle. CCAMLR Science. 2002;9:49–69

Garofalo F, Pellegrino D, Amelio D, Tota B, authors. The Antarctic hemoglobinless icefish, fifty five years later: a unique cardiocirculatory interplay of disaptation and phenotypic plasticity. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Molecular & Integrative Physiology. 2009;154(1):10–28. [Cross Ref]

Gon O, Heemstra PC, authors. Fishes of the Southern Ocean. 1990. Grahamstown: JLB Smith Institute of Ichthyology;

Huelsenbeck JP, Ronquist F, authors. MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics. 2001;17(8):754–755. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Ichii T, Naganobu M, Ogishima T, authors. Competition between the krill fishery and penguins in the South Shetland Islands. Polar Biology. 1996;16(1):63–70. [Cross Ref]

Iwami T, author. Osteology and relationships of the family Channichthyidae. Memoirs of National Institute of Polar Research, Series E, Biology and Medical Science. 1985;36:1–69

Iwami T, Kock KH, authors; Gon O, Heemstra PC, editors. Channichthyidae. Fishes of the Southern Ocean. 1990. Grahamstown: JLB Smith Institute of Ichthyology; p. 381–399

Klimpel S, Busch MW, Kellermanns E, Kleinertz S, Palm HW, authors. Metazoan Deep Sea Fish Parasites. 2009. Solingen: Verlag Natur & Wissenschaft;

Klimpel S, Seehagen A, Palm HW, authors. Metazoan parasites and feeding behaviour of four small-sized fish species from the central North Sea. Parasitology Research. 2003;91(4):290–297. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Klöser H, Plötz J, authors. Morphological distinction between adult Contracaecum radiaturn and Contracaecum osculatum (Nematoda, Anisakidae) from the Weddell seal (Leptonychotes weddelli). Zoologica Scripta. 1992;21(2):129–132. [Cross Ref]

Klöser H, Plötz J, Palm H, Bartsch A, Hubold G, authors. Adjustment of anisakid nematode life cycles to the high Antarctic food web as shown by Contracaecum radiatum and C. osculatum in the Weddell Sea. Antarctic Science. 1992;4(02):171–178. [Cross Ref]

Kock K-H, author. Antarctic Fish and Fisheries. 1992. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;

Kock K-H, author. Antarctic icefishes (Channichthyidae): a unique family of fishes. A review, Part I. Polar Biology. 2005;28(12):862–895. [Cross Ref]

Kock K-H, Gröger J, Jones CD, authors. Interannual variability in the feeding of ice fish (Notothenioidei, Channichthyidae) in the southern Scotia Arc and the Antarctic Peninsula region (CCAMLR Subareas 48.1 and 48.2). Polar Biology. 2013;36(10):1451–1462. [Cross Ref]

Kock K-H, Pshenichnov L, Jones CD, Gröger J, Riehl R, authors. The biology of the spiny icefish Chaenodraco wilsoni Regan, 1914. Polar Biology. 2008;31(3):381–393. [Cross Ref]

Kock KH, Wilhelms S, Everson I, Groger J, authors. Variations in the diet composition and feeding intensity of mackerel icefish Champsocephalus gunnari at South Georgia (Antarctic). Marine Ecology Progress Series. 1994;108:43–58. [Cross Ref]

Lafferty KD, Allesina S, Arim M, Briggs CJ, De Leo G, Dobson AP, Dunne JA, Johnson PT, Kuris AM, Marcogliese DJ, Martinez ND, Memmott J, Marquet PA, McLaughlin JP, Mordecai EA, Pascual M, Poulin R, Thieltges DW, authors. Parasites in food webs: the ultimate missing links. Ecology Letters. 2008;11(6):533–546. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Lindgren K, Ljungvall Ö, Nilsson O, Ljungström B-L, Lindahl C, Höglund J, authors. Parascaris equorum in foals and in their environment on a Swedish stud farm, with notes on treatment failure of ivermectin. Veterinary Parasitology. 2008;151(2–4):337–343. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Magurran AE, author. Ecological Diversity and its Measuement. 1988. Dordrecht: Springer; p. 1–5

Marcogliese DJ, author. The role of zooplankton in the transmission of helminth parasites to fish. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries. 1995;5(3):336–371. [Cross Ref]

Mattiucci S, Nascetti G, authors. Genetic diversity and infection levels of anisakid nematodes parasitic in fish and marine mammals from Boreal and Austral hemispheres. Veterinary Parasitology. 2007;148(1):43–57. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

McClelland G, author. The trouble with sealworms (Pseudoterranova decipiens species complex, Nematoda): a review. Parasitology. 2002;124(7):183–203. [Cross Ref]

Münster J, Kochmann J, Klimpel S, Klapper R, Kuhn T, authors. Parasite fauna of Antarctic Macrourus whitsoni (Gadiformes: Macrouridae) in comparison with closely related macrourids. Parasites & Vectors. 2016;9(1):403 [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Nadler SA, Hudspeth DS, authors. Phylogeny of the Ascaridoidea (Nematoda: Ascaridida) based on three genes and morphology: hypotheses of structural and sequence evolution. Journal of Parasitology. 2000;86(2):380–393. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Near TJ, author. Estimating divergence times of notothenioid fishes using a fossil-calibrated molecular clock. Antarctic Science. 2004;16(1):37–44. [Cross Ref]

Near TJ, Dornburg A, Kuhn KL, Eastman JT, Pennington JN, Patarnello T, Zane L, Fernández DA, Jones CD, authors. Ancient climate change, antifreeze, and the evolutionary diversification of Antarctic fishes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2012;109(9):3434–3439. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Near TJ, Pesavento JJ, Cheng C-HC, authors. Mitochondrial DNA, morphology, and the phylogenetic relationships of Antarctic icefishes (Notothenioidei: Channichthyidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 2003;28(1):87–98. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Oguz MC, Heckmann RA, Cheng CC, El-Naggar A, Tepe Y, authors. Ecto and endoparasites of some fishes from the Antarctic region. Scientia Parasitologica. 2012;13:119–128

Oguz MC, Tepe Y, Belk MC, Heckmann RA, Aslan B, Gurgen M, Bray RA, Akgul U, authors. Metazoan parasites of antarctic fishes. Turkish Journal of Parasitology. 2015;39(2):174–178. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Palm H, Andersen K, Klöser H, Plötz J, authors. Occurrence of Pseudoterranova decipiens (Nematoda) in fish from the southeastern Weddell Sea (Antarctic). Polar Biology. 1994;14(8):539–544. [Cross Ref]

Palm HW, Klimpel S, Walter T, authors. Demersal fish parasite fauna around the South Shetland Islands: high species richness and low host specificity in deep Antarctic waters. Polar Biology. 2007;30(12):1513–1522. [Cross Ref]

Palm HW, Reimann N, Spindler M, Plötz J, authors. The role of the rock cod Notothenia coriiceps Richardson, 1844 in the life-cycle of Antarctic parasites. Polar Biology. 1998;19(6):399–406. [Cross Ref]

Reid WDK, Clarke S, Collins MA, Belchier M, authors. Distribution and ecology of Chaenocephalus aceratus (Channichthyidae) around South Georgia and Shag Rocks (Southern Ocean). Polar Biology. 2007;30(12):1523–1533. [Cross Ref]

Reiss CS, Cossio AM, Loeb V, Demer DA, authors. Variations in the biomass of Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba) around the South Shetland Islands, 1996–2006. ICES Journal of Marine Science. 2008;65(4):497–508. [Cross Ref]

Rocka A, author. Cestodes of the Antarctic fishes. Polish Polar Research. 2003;24:261–276

Rocka A, author. Nematodes of the Antarctic fishes. Polish Polar Research. 2004;25:135–152

Rocka A, author. Helminths of Antarctic fishes: life cycle biology, specificity and geographical distribution. Acta Parasitologica. 2006;51(1):26–35. [Cross Ref]

Rocka A, author; Klimpel S, Kuhn T, Mehlhorn H, editors. Cestodes and nematodes of antarctic fishes and birds. Biodiversity and Evolution of Parasitic Life in the Southern Ocean. 2017. Cham: Springer International Publishing; p. 77–107

Rohde K, author. Marine Parasitology. 2005. Wallingford: CABI Publishing;

Sidell BD, Vayda ME, Small DJ, Moylan TJ, Londraville RL, Yuan M-L, Rodnick KJ, Eppley ZA, Costello L, authors. Variable expression of myoglobin among the hemoglobinless Antarctic icefishes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1997;94(7):3420–3424. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Stöver BC, Müller KF, authors. TreeGraph 2: combining and visualizing evidence from different phylogenetic analyses. BMC Bioinformatics. 2010;11(1):7 [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Timi JT, Paoletti M, Cimmaruta R, Lanfranchi AL, Alarcos AJ, Garbin L, George-Nascimento M, Rodríguez DH, Giardino GV, Mattiucci S, authors. Molecular identification, morphological characterization and new insights into the ecology of larval Pseudoterranova cattani in fishes from the Argentine coast with its differentiation from the Antarctic species, P. decipiens sp. E (Nematoda: Anisakidae). Veterinary Parasitology. 2014;199(1–2):59–72. [Cross Ref] [PubMed]

Utevsky AY, author. An identification key to Antarctic fish leeches (Hirudinea: Piscicolidae). Ukrainian Antarctic Journal. 2005;3:135–144

Williams HH, MacKenzie K, McCarthy AM, authors. Parasites as biological indicators of the population biology, migrations, diet, and phylogenetics of fish. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries. 1992;2(2):144–176. [Cross Ref]

Wöhrmann APA, author. Gefierschutzsubstanzen bei Fischen der Polarmeere und ihre Bedeutung für Evolution und Ökologie. Polarforschung. 1997;65:27–40

Zdzitowiecki K, author; Wägele JW, Sieg J, editors. Antarctic acanthocephala. Synopses of the Antarctic Benthos. 1991a. Koenigstein: Koeltz Scientific Books; p. 1–116

Zdzitowiecki K, author. Occurrence of digeneans in open sea fishes off the South Shetland Islands and South Georgia, and a list of fish digeneans in the Antarctic. Polish Polar Research. 1991b;12:55–72

Zdzitowiecki K, author; Wägele JW, Sieg J, editors. Antarctic Digenea, parasites of fishes. Synopses of the Antarctic Benthos. 1997. Koenigstein: Koeltz Scientific Books; p. 1–156

Zhu XQ, D’amelio S, Palm HW, Paggi L, George-Nascimento M, Gasser RB, authors. SSCP-based identification of members within the Pseudoterranova decipiens complex (Nematoda: Ascaridoidea: Anisakidae) using genetic markers in the internal transcribed spacers of ribosomal DNA. Parasitology. 2002;124:615–623. [PubMed]

[Back]

Table 1. Trawl and catch data.

Nr | Station | Date | Action | PosLat | PosLon | Depth (m) | C.w. | C.g. | N.i. | P.m. | P.g.
1 | PS79/204 | March 20, 2012 | Set | 61°14.35′S | 55°48.88′W | 131.8 | 1 |  |  |  | 2
Haul | 61°16.06′S | 55°47.31′W | 146.9 |  |  |
2 | PS79/242 | March 27, 2012 | Set | 61°35.90′S | 57°17.00′W | 430.0 |  |  | 2 |  |
Haul | 61°35.40′S | 57°20.60′W | 430.0
3 | PS79/247 | March 28, 2012 | Set | 62°29.27′S | 61°24.79′W | 122.0 | 2 |  |  |  |
Haul | 62°28.18′S | 61°22.00′W | 122.0
4 | PS79/257 | March 30, 2012 | Set | 62°01.50′S | 59°36.20′W | 176.0 |  |  |  |  | 2
Haul | 62°00.50′S | 59°37.60′W | 176.0
5 | PS79/259 | March 30, 2012 | Set | 62°00.00′S | 59°14.80′W | 131.0 |  |  |  |  | 3
Haul | 62°00.00′S | 59°10.70′W | 131.0
6 | PS79/265 | March 31, 2012 | Set | 61°49.30′S | 58°34.70′W | 193.0 |  |  | 1 |  | 1
Haul | 61°50.10′S | 58°30.70′W | 193.0
7 | PS79/268 | April 1, 2012 | Set | 62°15.61′S | 55°18.44′W | 366.1 | 29 |  |  |  |
Haul | 61°13.77′S | 55°17.68′W | 351.9 |  |  |  |
8 | PS79/269 | April 1, 2012 | Set | 62°21.40′S | 55°18.90′W | 314.0 |  |  |  | 4 |
Haul | 62°23.20′S | 55°17.60′W | 314.0
| PS79/209 | February 21, 2012 | Set | n.d | n.d | n.d |  |  |  |  | 3
Haul | n.d | n.d | n.d
| PS79/220 | March 23, 2012 | Set | n.d | n.d | 425.0 |  |  |  |  | 1
Haul | n.d | n.d | 395.0
| PS79/221 | March 23, 2012 | Set | n.d | n.d | n.d | 1 | 25 |  |  |
Haul | n.d | n.d | n.d |  |  |
| PS79/253 | March 29, 2012 |  | Course to PS79/269 | 300.0 |  |  |  |  | 2
| PS79/266 | March 30, 2012 | Set | n.d | n.d | n.d |  |  |  |  | 1
Haul | n.d | n.d | n.d |  |  |  |

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4638/table-1

Notes:

Information on date, position (S = south, W = west) and depth (m) are given for each station. For some trawls data about the duration or position were missing (n.d). The number of individuals caught [n] is given for each species.

C.g., Champsocephalus gunnari; C.w., Chaenodraco wilsoni; N.i., Neopagetopsis ionah; P.m., Pagetopsis macropterus; P.g., Pseudochaenichthys georgianus.

[Back]

[Back]

Figure 1. Sampling locations off the Antarctic Peninsula.

Specific information on coordinates of the stations (1–8) are summarized in Table 1. Map data © Esri, DeLorme, GEBCO, NOAA, NGDC.

[Back]

[Back]

Table 2. Parasitological data from the examined channichthyid P. georgianus.

Species | Parasite | Stage | Location | n | P[%] | MI (I) | MA | H′ | J′
Pseudochaenichthys georgianus (n = 15) | Digenea |  | SP | 7 | 20.0 | 2.3 | 0.5 | 1.5 | 0.6
 Elytrophalloides oatesi | A | S | 1 | 13.3 | 2.5 (1–4) | 0.3
 Gonocerca phycidis | A | S | 5 | 6.7 | 1.0 (1) | 0.1
 Neolebouria antarctica | A | P | 1 | 6.7 | 1.0 (1) | 0.1
Nematoda |  | BC/L/S/I/P/FT | 460 | 93.3 | 32.8 | 30.7
 Ascarophis nototheniae* | A | S | 1 | 6.7 | 1.0 (1) | 0.1
 Contracaecum osculatum (s.l.)* | Lv | BC/L/S/I/P/FT | 240 | 93.3 | 17.1 (2–54) | 16.0
 Contracaecum radiatum* | Lv | BC/L/S/I/P | 171 | 86.7 | 13.2 (1–34) | 11.4
 Contracaecum sp. | Lv | BC/L/S/P | 13 | 42.9 | 2.2 (1–4) | 0.9
 Nematoda indet | Lv | L/I | 1 | 13.3 | 1.0 (1) | 0.1
 Pseudoterranova decipiens (s.l.) | Lv | BC/L/S | 33 | 33.3 | 6.6 (2–16) | 2.2
Cestoda |  | BC/L/S/I/P/FT | 1,774 | 100 | 118.3 | 118.3
 Diphylloboththriidea indet | Lv | BC/L/S/I/P/FT | 612 | 80.0 | 51.0 (1–170) | 40.8
 Tetraphyllidae indet | Lv | BC/L/S/I/P/FT | 1,162 | 100 | 77.5 (4–238) | 77.5
Acanthocephala |  | BC/S/P | 5 | 20.0 | 1.7 | 0.3
 Corynosoma bullosum* | Lv | BC/S/P | 5 | 20.0 | 1.7 (1–3) | 0.3
Hirudinae |  | SU/MC/G | 8 | 33.3 | 1.6 | 0.5
 Nototheniobdella sawyeri* | A | MC/G | 6 | 26.7 | 1.5 (1–3) | 0.4
 Trulliobdella capitis | A | SU | 2 | 13.3 | 1.0 (1) | 0.1
Copepoda |  | SU | 1 | 6.7 | 1.0 | 0.0
 Eubrachiella antarctica* | A | SU | 1 | 6.7 | 1.0 (1) | 0.1

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4638/table-2

Notes:

A, adult; Lv, larval; BC, body cavity; L, liver; S, stomach; I, intestine; P, pylorus; FT, fat tissue; SU, surface; MC, mouth cavity; G, gills; n, total number of parasites; Location, location of the parasite inside the host; P[%], prevalence; MI, mean intensity; I, intensity (in parentheses); MA, mean abundance; H′, diversity index, J′, eveness.

Parasites isolated from stomach and intestine were located in the lumen of these organs. New host records are marked with an asterisk (*).

[Back]

[Back]

Table 3. Parasitological data from the examined channichthyids Chaenodraco wilsoni, Champsocephalus gunnari, Neopagetopsis ionah, and Pagetopsis macropterus.

Species | Parasite | Stage | Location | n | P[%] | MI (I) | MA | H′ | J′
Chaenodraco wilsoni (n = 33) | Digenea |  | S/I/P | 3 | 6.1 | 1.5 | 0.1 | 1.9 | 0.8
 Neolebouria antarctica | A | S/I/P | 3 | 6.1 | 1.5 (1–2) | 0.1
Nematoda |  | L/S/I/P | 58 | 48.5 | 3.9 | 1.9
 Contracaecum osculatum (s.l.)* | Lv | L | 35 | 39.4 | 2.7 (1–7) | 1.1
 Contracaecum radiatum* | Lv | L/S/I/P | 17 | 33.3 | 1.5 (1–3) | 0.5
 Contracaecum sp. | Lv | L | 6 | 3.0 | 6.0 (6) | 0.2
 Nematoda indet | Lv | L/P | 5 | 12.1 | 1.3 (1–2) | 0.2
Cestoda |  | L/F/T | 10 | 30.3 | 2.5 | 0.3
 Diphyllobothriidea indet | Lv | L/FT | 10 | 30.3 | 2.5 (1–4) | 0.3
Hirudinea |  | S/MC/G | 43 | 30.3 | 1.4 | 0.4
 Notobdella nototheniae* | A | S | 32 | 15.2 | 6.4 (1–20) | 1.0
 Nototheniobdella sawyeri | A | MC/G | 9 | 21.2 | 1.3 | 0.3
 Trulliobdella capitis | A | S | 2 | 6.1 | 1.0 (1) | 0.1
Champsocephalus gunnari (n = 25) | Digenea |  | P | 2 | 8.0 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 1.6 | 0.9
 Macvicaria georgiana* | A | P | 2 | 8.0 | 1.0 (1) | 0.1
Nematoda |  | BC/L/S/I/P | 51 | 72.0 | 2.8 | 2.0
 Contracaecum osculatum (s.l.)* | Lv | L/P | 14 | 40.0 | 1.4 (1–2) | 0.6
 Contracaecum radiatum* | Lv | L/I/P | 10 | 28.0 | 1.4 (1–3) | 0.4
 Contracaecum sp. | Lv | P | 5 | 16.0 | 1.2 (1–2) | 0.2
 Nematoda indet | Lv | BC/L/S/I/P | 22 | 48.0 | 1.8 (1–6) | 0.9
Cestoda |  | L/S/P/FT | 9 | 28.0 | 1.3 | 0.4
 Diphyllobothriidea indet | Lv | L/S/P/FT | 9 | 28.0 | 1.3 (1–2) | 0.4
Neopagetopsis ionah (n = 3) | Nematoda |  | L/S/P | 9 | 100 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 1.2 | 0.5
 Contracaecum osculatum (s.l.)* | Lv | L | 6 | 100 | 2.0 (1–3) | 2.0
 Contracaecum radiatum* | Lv | P | 2 | 66.7 | 1.0 (1) | 0.7
 Contracaecum sp. | Lv | S | 1 | 33.3 | 1.0 (1) | 0.3
Cestoda |  | BC/L/S | 5 | 66.7 | 2.5 | 1.7
 Diphyllobothriidea indet | Lv | BC/L/S | 5 | 66.7 | 2.5 (2–3) | 1.7
Pagetopsis macropterus (n = 4) | Nematoda |  | BC/L/S/I/FT | 44 | 100 | 11.0 | 11.0 | 1.0 | 0.7
 Contracaecum osculatum (s.l.)* | Lv | BC/L/S/FT | 34 | 100 | 8.5 (3–19) | 8.5
 Contracaecum radiatum* | Lv | L/S/I/FT | 10 | 100 | 2.5 (1–6) | 2.5
Cestoda |  | BC/L/S/FT | 65 | 100 | 16.3 | 16.3
 Diphyllobothriidea indet | Lv | BC/L/S/FT | 65 | 100 | 16.3 (7–34) | 16.3
Hirudinea |  | MC/G | 4 | 50.0 | 2.0 | 4.0
 Nototheniobdella sawyeri | A | MC/G | 4 | 50.0 | 2.0 (1–3) | 4.0

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4638/table-3

Notes:

A, adult; Lv, larval; BC, body cavity; L, liver; S, stomach; I, intestine; P, pylorus; FT, fat tissue; SU, surface; MC, mouth cavity; G, gills; n, total number of parasites; Location, location of the parasite inside the host; P[%], prevalence; MI, mean intensity; I, intensity (in parentheses); MA, mean abundance; H′, diversity index; J′, eveness.

Parasites isolated from stomach and intestine were located in the lumen of these organs. New host records are marked with an asterisk (*).

[Back]

[Back]

Figure 2. Relative composition of parasite taxa found in five channichthyid fish species.

Results are based on parasite prevalence. Cestoda and Nematoda were present in all examined fish species. White: Digenea, light grey: Cestoda, medium grey: Acanthocephala, blue-gray: Nematoda, brown: Hirudinea, black: Crustacea.

[Back]

[Back]

Table 4. Food items isolated from the five channichthyid species.

Fish species | Food item | F[%] | N[%] | W[%] | IRI
C. wilsoni (n = 33) | Crustacea indet. | 60.9 | 35.3 | 33.3 | 4177.7
Euphausiacea | 47.8 | 57.6 | 59.0 | 5573.5
Euphausia sp. | 30.4 | 39.5 | 32.9 | 2201.0
Euphausia superba | 17.4 | 26.5 | 29.3 | 970.9
C. gunnari (n = 25) | Crustacea indet. | 33.3 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 666.0
Amphipoda | 8.3 | 1.5 | 0.3 | 14.9
Euphausiacea | 83.3 | 90.5 | 88.6 | 14919.0
Euphausia sp. | 54.2 | 62.1 | 52.8 | 6227.6
Euphausia superba | 29.2 | 23.4 | 35.9 | 1731.6
N. ionah (n = 3) | Crustacea indet. | 50.0 | 23.2 | 8.3 | 1575.0
Euphausiacea | 50.0 | 76.8 | 91.7 | 8425.0
Euphausia sp. | 50.0 | 76.8 | 91.7 | 8425.0
P. macropterus (n = 4) | Crustacea indet. | 75.0 | 62.2 | 58.2 | 9030.0
Euphausiacea | 25.0 | 37.8 | 41.8 | 1990.0
Euphausia sp. | 25.0 | 37.8 | 41.8 | 1990.0
P. georgianus (n = 15) | Crustacea indet. | 50.0 | 11.5 | 8.1 | 980.0
Euphausiacea | 50.0 | 88.5 | 84.0 | 8625.0
Euphausia sp. | 50.0 | 88.5 | 84.0 | 8625.0

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.4638/table-4

Note:

F[%], frequency of occurrence; N[%], numerical percentage of prey; W[%], weight percentage of prey; IRI, index of relative importance.

[Back]

[Back]

Figure 3. Phylogenetic tree of nematode sequences.

Phylogenetic reconstruction of 117 obtained sequences and 19 anisakid reference species. Branch support values are given for the consensus tree constructed from 9,902 original raw trees. For sample abbreviations please see Table S3. The following sample-coding was used: “Species initials_Host-Nr._Nematode-No.”. GenBank accession numbers were given for reference sequences.

[Back]