Comparative Mitogenomic Analyses and New Insights into the Phylogeny of Thamnocephalidae (Branchiopoda: Anostraca)

Abstract

Thamnocephalidae, a family of Anostraca which is widely distributed on all continents of the world except Antarctica, currently consists of six genera and approximately 63 recognized species. The relationships among genera in Thamnocephalidae and the monophyly of Thamnocephalidae, determined using morphological characteristics or gene markers, remain controversial. In order to address the relationships within Thamnocephalidae, we sequenced Branchinella kugenumaensis mitogenomes and conducted a comparative analysis to reveal the divergence across mitogenomes of B. kugenumaensis. Using newly obtained mitogenomes together with available Anostracan genomic sequences, we present the most complete phylogenomic understanding of Anostraca to date. We observed high divergence across mitogenomes of B. kugenumaensis. Meanwhile, phylogenetic analyses based on both amino acids and nucleotides of the protein-coding genes (PCG) provide significant support for a non-monophyletic Thamnocephalidae within Anostraca, with Asian Branchinella more closely related to Streptocephalidae than Australian Branchinella. The phylogenetic relationships within Anostraca were recovered as follows: Branchinectidae + Chirocephalidae as the basal group of Anostraca and halophilic Artemiidae as a sister to the clade Thamnocephalidae + Streptocephalidae. Both Bayesian inference (BI)- and maximum likelihood (ML)-based analyses produced identical topologies.

Complete Mitogenome of the Triplophysa bombifrons: Comparative Analysis and Phylogenetic Relationships among the Members of Triplophysa

“…In total, 550 SNPs were distributed widely among the 13 PCGs, the nad5 gene (1839 bp) demonstrated a higher ratio (12.34%) than other PCGs relative to the size of the gene, whereas the atp6 gene (684 bp) had the lowest ratio (0.58%). A similar result has been reported in Branchinella kugenumaensis mitogenomes, indicating that sequence divergence within the same species is a common phenomenon [20].…”

“…This genus represents an ideal system by which to address questions about past climatic and geological events and their impacts on current biodiversity. Due to the morphological plasticity of this genus, traditional taxonomy cannot accurately distinguish all species, particularly in the case of morphologically similar and related species [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20].…”

“…[21]. Over the last decade, more than 20 Triplophysa mitogenomes have been reported [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. Although some groups of Triplophysa have been addressed phylogenetically, a comprehensive phylogenetic analysis has never been presented.…”

Phylogenetic analysis of problematic Asian species ofArtemiaLeach, 1819 (Crustacea, Anostraca), with the descriptions of two new species

“…Artemia is, however, a special case. Artemia is a recently evolved and established group (see Bellec et al, 2019;Xu et al, 2021;Sun & Cheng, 2022), and the Asian sexual species are recent within the genus (Eimanifar et al, 2015). Artemia populations and species are regionally adapted to the stringent local conditions of hypersaline habitats (except A. franciscana).…”

Mitogenomic phylogeny and divergence time estimation of Artemia leach, 1819 (Branchiopoda: Anostraca) with emphasis on parthenogenetic lineages

“…Despite this, A. urmiana, A. tibetiana, and A. amati exhibited low genetic distances based on partial mitochondrial markers (COI, 16S and 12S) in comparison with other anostracan families (e.g., Aguilar et al, 2017). The low genetic distances within Artemia are likely related to its relatively recent divergence times among anostracan species within genera (see Eimanifar et al, 2015;Bellec et al, 2019;Xu et al, 2021;Sun & Cheng, 2022;Asem et al, 2023;also reviewed in Rogers, 2015). Our (2024) argued the taxonomic status of Asian Artemia using only close genetic distances, but ignored isolation based on morphological differentiation and molecular (mitochondrial and nuclear SSR) markers.…”