4.7 Article

Evolutionary insights into bot flies (Insecta: Diptera: Oestridae) from comparative analysis of the mitochondrial genomes

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.01.249

关键词

Evolution; Mitochondrial genome; Phylogeny

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China [31872964, 31572305]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2019JQ0318]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bot flies (Oestridae) are obligate endoparasites of mammals, and their extraordinary diversification is of great importance in understanding the evolution of parasitism. However, evolutionary analysis of Oestridae has long been impeded by lack of information. Here, the first three mitochondrial genomes of nasal bot flies (Cephalopina titillator, Cephenemyia trompe and Rhinoestrus usbekistanicus) and a comparative mitochondria! genomic analysis between subfamilies of Oestridae arc presented. Contrasting to many other parasites, mitochondria! genomes of oestrids are conserved in structure, and genes have retained the same order and direction as the ancestral insect mitochondria) genome. Nucleotide composition is highly heterogenous, with Gasterophilinae possessing highest GC content and smallest genomic size. Mitochond rial evolutionary rates vary considerably, with Hypodermatinae and Oestrinae exhibiting a faster average rate than Cuterebrinae and Gasterophilinae. In addition, the first phylogenomic analysis covering all four bot fly subfamilies was conducted, supporting monophyly of Oestridae and a sister-group relationship of Hypodermatinae and Oestrinae. The only topological ambiguity is Cuterebrinae being a sister-group of either (Hypodermatinae + Oestridae) or Gasterophilinae. Thus, we suggest that mitochondria! genomes carry a great potential for phylogenetic analysis of Oestridae, and more information of Cuterebrinae is needed to illuminate the early evolutionary radiation and parasite-host coevolution of bot flies. (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据