Worldwide paleodistribution of capillariid parasites: Paleoparasitology, current status of phylogeny and taxonomic perspectives

PLoS One. 2019 Apr 30;14(4):e0216150. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216150. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

Introduction: Paleoparasitology, the study of parasites in the past, brings the knowledge of where and when they occurred in preterit populations. Some groups of parasites, as capillariids, have a complex and controversial systematic, hindering the paleoparasitological diagnosis. In this article, we synthesized the occurrence of capillariids in both the New and the Old World in ancient times, and discussed the difficulty of the diagnosis of species and the strategies for identification. The present review also shows the current status of the phylogeny in capillariids and indicates the necessity to try new approaches for a better understanding of capillariid paleodistribution.

Methods: For the systematic review, a predefined guideline defined by PRISMA was used. The articles collected were identified, screened, and included in the review following criteria for eligibility. The current status of the phylogeny of capillariids was accessed using MUSCLE, Bioedit v.7.0.5 and MEGA v. 7.0.21 programs.

Results: The review discussed 38 articles that presented information about capillariids in past populations. Most of capillariid eggs found in the New and Old World were not identified. However, Calodium hepaticum eggs were the most identified, as some from Eucoleus genus. It was observed that sites from the New World had a better chance for capillariid egg identification, due to previous knowledge of its host, when compared to the Old World. In the 18S rDNA phylogenetic analyses, two datasets were constructed, one including sequences from 7 Moravec's genera, where 3 genus-specific clusters, with high bootstrap values, could be observed for Capillaria (ML = 99%, NJ = 96%), Eucoleus (ML / NJ = 100%) and Paratrichosoma (ML / NJ = 100%). A fourth cluster of 18S rDNA dataset I revealed lack of definition of Pearsonema and Aonchotheca genera. The 18S rDNA dataset II comprised 8 Moravec's genera and defined 3 clusters, 2 genus-specific for Eucoleus (ML = 99%, NJ = 100%) and Capillaria (ML / NJ = 98%). The third 18S rDNA dataset II cluster included 6 genera and exhibited, once again, Pearsonema and Aonchotheca poor discrimination. The cox1 gene data consist of 4 Moravec's genera, and in spite of grouping some species-specific clusters, did not show genera-specific definition.

Conclusions: Despite the numerous archaeological findings, both in the New and the Old Worlds, the identification of capillariid species based on the morphology and morphometry of eggs remains imprecise, often resulting in a generic diagnosis of a group or morphotype of capillariid. Capillariid is one of the most diverse group of helminths recovered in archaeological sites. The phylogenetic trees produced in this study showed limited genetic information available, unresolved genera and incongruence with the classical taxonomy. The elucidation of the paleodistribution of capillariids can give insights of the ancient host-parasite associations but also in modern sceneries.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • Systematic Review

MeSH terms

  • Animals
  • DNA, Ribosomal / genetics
  • Internationality*
  • Paleontology*
  • Parasites / classification*
  • Parasites / genetics
  • Phylogeny*

Substances

  • DNA, Ribosomal

Grants and funding

We declare that all the funding or sources of support received during this specific study are presented. This study was supported by grants-in-aid and fellowship from Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Rio de Janeiro (http://www.faperj.br/) (AMI, grant number 26/202.945/2016); fellowships from Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (http://www.cnpq.br/) (AMI, grant number 307932/2014-1 and 312934/2017-3) (JRMS, grant number 470724/2014-5); grants-in-aid and fellowships from Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (http://www.capes.gov.br/) (AMI and VHB, grant number 23038000059/2015-61) and grants-in-aid and fellowships from the Comité français d’évaluation de la coopération universitaire et scientifique avec le Brésil, COFECUB research and cooperation program (https://www.campusfrance.org/fr/cofecub) (AMI, ML and VHB, grant number 33387UA). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.