Next Article in Journal
Artificial Nesting Hills Promote Wild Bees in Agricultural Landscapes
Next Article in Special Issue
Effects of Color and Light Intensity on the Foraging and Oviposition Behavior of Culex pipiens biotype molestus Mosquitoes
Previous Article in Journal
Effects of Adult Feeding Treatments on Longevity, Fecundity, Flight Ability, and Energy Metabolism Enzymes of Grapholita molesta Moths
Previous Article in Special Issue
Anopheles albimanus (Diptera: Culicidae) Ensemble Distribution Modeling: Applications for Malaria Elimination
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Insects
Volume 13
Issue 8
10.3390/insects13080724
insects-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Population Genetic Structure and Population History of the Biting Midge Culicoides mahasarakhamense (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae)

by
Pairot Pramual
1,*,
Panya Jomkumsing
1,
Komgrit Wongpakam
2,
Kotchaphon Vaisusuk
3,
Wasupon Chatan
4 and
Bhuvadol Gomontean
1
1
Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Mahasarakham University, Mahasalakan 44150, Thailand
2
Walai Rukhavej Botanical Research Institute, Mahasarakham University, Mahasalakan 44150, Thailand
3
Department of Veterinary Technology and Veterinary Nursing, Faculty of Agricultural Technology, Rajabhat Maha Sarakham University, Mahasalakan 44000, Thailand
4
Department of Veterinary Clinic, Faculty of Veterinary Sciences, Mahasarakham University, Mahasalakan 44000, Thailand
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Insects 2022, 13(8), 724; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13080724
Submission received: 11 July 2022 / Revised: 10 August 2022 / Accepted: 10 August 2022 / Published: 13 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Vector-Borne Diseases in a Changing World)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Biting midges are important blood sucking insects. Many species are pests of humans and other animals, including economically important livestock. A new biting midge species, Culicoides mahasarakhamense, was recently described in Thailand. This species is a pest and a potential vector of blood protozoa transmitted to domestic chickens and other avian species. Knowledge of genetic diversity and genetic differentiation among populations of vector species is of paramount importance as it can be used to design effective control programs. However, this information is lacking for C. mahasarakhamense. In this study, we used mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase I (COI) sequences as genetic markers to evaluate the level of genetic diversity and the genetic structure of C. mahasarakhamense from Thailand. The level of genetic diversity was relatively high, but most populations were not genetically different. However, one population from northern Thailand was found to be genetically highly different from others. Historical population isolation and geographic distance separation are possible explanations for the high level of genetic differentiation. This information will help in monitoring the spread of the parasitic disease agents carried by C. mahasarakhamense from different populations.

Abstract

Biting midges of the genus Culicoides Latreille are significant pests and vectors of disease agents transmitted to humans and other animals. Understanding the genetic structure and diversity of these insects is crucial for effective control programs. This study examined the genetic diversity, genetic structure, and demographic history of Culicoides mahasarakhamense, a possible vector of avian haemosporidian parasites and Leishmania martiniquensis, in Thailand. The star-like shape of the median joining haplotype network, a unimodal mismatch distribution, and significant negative values for Tajima’s D and Fu’s FS tests indicated that populations had undergone recent expansion. Population expansion time was estimated to be 2000–22,000 years ago. Population expansion may have been triggered by climatic amelioration from cold/dry to warm/humid conditions at the end of the last glaciations, resulting in the increased availability of host blood sources. Population pairwise FST revealed that most (87%) comparisons were not genetically different, most likely due to a shared recent history. The exception to the generally low level of genetic structuring is a population from the northern region that is genetically highly different from others. Population isolation in the past and the limitation of ongoing gene flows due to large geographic distance separation are possible explanations for genetic differentiation.

1. Introduction

Biting midges of the genus Culicoides Latreille (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) are blood-sucking insect pests and vectors of viruses, protozoans, and nematodes transmitted to humans and other animals, including economically important livestock. The important disease-causing agents transmitted by biting midges include Oropouche fever in humans, bluetongue disease and epizootic hemorrhagic disease in ruminants, African horse sickness in equines, and leucocytozoonosis in domestic chickens [1,2,3].
An understanding of the genetic diversity, genetic structure, and population history of vector species provides important information required for effective disease control programs [4,5,6]. Knowledge of the level of genetic differentiation, and the rate and direction of gene flow can potentially be used for determining the spread of the disease agent. The level of genetic diversity and genetic structure can be used to determine the species status of the vector which could be related to the degree of competency (i.e., the ability of the vector to acquire pathogens and transmit them to a susceptible host) [6]. For example, different genetic lineages of the mosquito Aedes albopictus Skuse, originating from historical isolation and divergence, have different competencies for chikungunya virus [7]. Information gathered from a population genetic study could also be used to identify the sources of incursion by parasites and vector species [8,9].
Population genetic studies of Culicoides have generally found a low level of genetic differentiation within newly colonized areas (e.g., within a single country) but the genetic structure exists across the native range [8,9,10,11,12,13]. High dispersal capacity through wind assistance, long-distance dispersal followed by colonization and population expansion might explain this pattern of genetic structure [8,9]. For example, a population genetic study of Culicoides imicola Kieffer, a major vector species of the bluetongue virus (BTV) and African horse sickness viruses (AHSV) [14], revealed a high level of genetic structuring among populations within the native range in sub-Saharan Africa [12]. In contrast, low or no genetic structure exists in populations in recently colonized areas such as France [15] and Spain [10]. A similar situation has been observed in another vector species of BTV in Australia, Culicoides brevitarsis Macfie. This biting midge species is native to Southeast Asia and has entered Australia recently. Because of the short history of C. brevitarsis in Australia, no genetic structure was detected [8].
Culicoides mahasarakhamense Pramual, Jomkumsing, Piraonapicha, Jumpato has recently been described from Maha Sarakham province, northeastern Thailand [16]. They have now been recorded in several locations in northeastern, central [17], and northern [18] regions of the country. Molecular blood meal analysis indicated that this midge is a chicken biter [19]. Molecular screening of the parasites found that C. mahasarakhamense was a potential vector of avian haemosporidian parasites, Leucocytozoon sp., that can cause Leucocytozoonosis, which is a disease found in many avian species including domestic chickens [1]. This biting midge species is also a potential vector of Plasmodium juxtanucleare and P. gallinaceum [17]. These plasmodium species can cause avian malaria which reduces the productivity of poultry [20]. Furthermore, a recent study found that C. mahasarakhamense was also a potential vector of the flagellated protozoan, Leishmania martiniquensis [18], the causative agent of Leishmaniasis. Therefore, this biting midge species is potentially a significant vector of disease agents transmitted to humans and other animals. Thus, understanding the genetic diversity, genetic structure, and population demographic history of C. mahasarakhamense will provide important baseline information for fully understanding the transmission ecology of these parasites that this biting midge species is a potential vector.
The parasitic disease agents found in C. mahasarakhamense are geographically restricted to particular locations. Leucocytozoon sp. was detected in one location from the northeast (Maha Sarakham (MK) province) and Plasmodium juxtanucleare and P. gallinaceum were found in another location (Roi Et (RE) province), also in the northeast of Thailand [17]. So far, the, flagellated protozoa, Leishmania martiniquensis has been found only in Lamphun province, northern Thailand [18]. Therefore, understanding the genetic diversity and genetic differentiation of C. mahasarakhamense will be useful for monitoring the spread of parasitic disease agents that might possibly be transmitted by this biting midge species. In this study we used mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) sequences to infer the genetic diversity and genetic structure of C. mahasarakhamense in Thailand. In addition, we also inferred the population demographic history of this species to examine whether it experienced recent demographic expansion in response to climatic and environmental change during the Pleistocene, as has been found in other blood-sucking Diptera species such as black flies [21,22] and mosquitoes [23,24]. This information will also contribute to an understanding of the factors underlying the biodiversity of one of the most significant diversity hotspots.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Specimen Collections and Identification

Adult female specimens of C. mahasarakhamense were collected from eight sampling sites in Thailand between November 2020 and February 2021 (Table 1 and Figure 1). Information for five additional locations was retrieved from previous publications (four from [16,17] and one from [18]). All sampling locations were at or near cattle pens and/or chicken shelters where biting midges were abundant. Adult fly specimens were collected using a sweep-net, by sweeping around animals and randomly in the air close to the animal shelters. Specimen collections were conducted between 17:00 and 19:00 p.m. as biting midges are actively searching for a host blood meal during this time period. Specimens were preserved in 80% ethanol and stored at −20 °C until used. Specimens were identified using descriptions of Pramual et al. [16].

2.2. DNA Extraction, Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), and Sequencing

A total of 110 specimens were used for molecular study. DNA was extracted using the GF-1 Nucleic Acid Extraction Kit (Vivantis Technologies Sdn. Bhd, Shah Alam, Malaysia). Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was used to amplify the COI gene barcoding region using the primers LCO1490 (5′-GGTCAACAAATCATAAAGATATTGG-3′) and HCO2198 (5′-TAAACTTCAGGGTGACCAAAAAATCA-3′) [25]. PCR reaction conditions followed those in [26]. PCR products were checked with 1% agarose gel electrophoresis and purified using a PureDireX PCR CleanUp & Gel Extraction Kit (Bio-Helix, Taiwan, China). DNA sequencing was performed at ATCG Company Limited (Thailand Science Park (TSP), Pathumthani, Thailand) using the same primers as for PCR. Among 110 specimens used for molecular study, only 86 were successful for PCR and sequencing.

2.3. Data Analysis

A total of 123 sequences with a sequence length of 647 bp were included in the data analyses; of these, 86 were obtained in the present study (GenBank accession nos. ON819766-ON819851) and the rest were retrieved from the NCBI GenBank database. Genetic relationships between mitochondrial DNA haplotypes were inferred using the median-joining (MJ) network [27] method in the software Network ver. 10.2.0.0 (https://www.fluxus-engineering.com (accessed on 2 February 2022)). Intraspecific genetic divergence was calculated based on the Kimura 2-parameter (K2P) model using TaxonDNA [28]. Genetic diversity indices based on haplotype diversity (h) and nucleotide diversity (π) were calculated using the K2P model in Arlequin ver. 3.5 [29]. Genetic differentiation between populations based on pairwise FST was calculated in Arlequin using 1023 permutations for each statistical test. The sequential Bonferroni correction was used to adjust the significance level for multiple tests. To avoid bias as a result of a small sampling size, populations with sample sizes of less than three were not included in the FST analysis. The relationship between the level of genetic differentiation (based on FST values) and geographic distance (km) was used to test the isolation-by-distance (IBD) model using Mantel’s test [30]. The IBD model was tested using IBD ver. 1.52 [31] with 1000 randomizations.
To test whether the population had undergone recent demographic expansion, mismatch distribution analysis was conducted in Arlequin. A unimodal mismatch distribution provides a signal of population expansion [32]. The sum-of-squares deviation (SSD) and Harpending’s raggedness index [33] were used to test the deviation from sudden or spatial expansion models, respectively. The mismatch distribution, SSD, and Harpending’s raggedness index were estimated in Arlequin. If the mismatch distribution analysis indicated a signal of population expansion, the expansion times were estimated using the equation τ = 2ut (where u = mTμ, mT is the length of the nucleotide sequences (647 bp) under study, μ is the mutation rate per nucleotide, and t is the generation time) [32]. The divergence rate of 3.54% per million years for insect COI gene [34] was used. The generation time of C. mahasarakhamense is unknown. Therefore, we assumed that it was similar to the closely related species, C. arakawae (Arakawa) that has a generation time of approximately one month [35] which was used for the population expansion time calculation.

3. Results

3.1. Genetic Diversity of Culicoides Mahasarakhamense

A total of 56 haplotypes were identified among 123 COI sequences. The overall haplotype diversity was 0.8517. Within each population, the haplotype diversity ranged between 0 and 1.0000 (Figure 2). The overall nucleotide diversity was 0.0040 and ranged between 0 and 0.0075 in each population (Figure 2). Intraspecific genetic divergence based on the K2P model ranged between 0 and 3.0465% with an average of 0.4017%.

3.2. Mitochondrial Genealogy and Population Genetic Structure

The MJ network (Figure 3) of 123 COI sequences revealed neither major genetic breaks nor geographic associations of the haplotypes. Overall, the MJ network was a star-like shape in which the central haplotype had the highest frequency (47 specimens from the northeast and central regions shared this haplotype). Almost all haplotypes connected to the central haplotype by short branch lengths, with the exception of three long divergent haplotypes. These genetically divergent haplotypes were all from the northeastern region of Thailand (SK and NL populations). Two haplotypes from the SK population were 1.05–2.43% divergent from the main lineage. A haplotype from NL was 1.50–2.42% divergent from the main lineage.
Population genetic structure based on population pairwise FST analysis revealed that most (48 from 55) comparisons expressed no significant genetic differentiation. Seven comparisons were significantly statistically different. Five of these were comparisons between LP from the northern region with other populations. The insignificant comparisons between LP and five other populations (MK1, MK2, RE, NL, LO) were likely due to small sample sizes (n ≤ 10) of the latter five populations as both showed high (>0.301) FST values (Figure 4). Two other comparisons that were statistically significantly different were between SR and RE and NL, all from the northeastern region. Isolation-by-distance analysis revealed no significant (r2 = 0.2706, p = 0.0980) relationship between genetic and geographic distance.

3.3. Population History

Mismatch distribution analysis produced a unimodal graph (Figure 5), but the SSD was statistically significantly different from the simulation under the sudden expansion model (SSD = 0.1135, p < 0.0001). However, when the observed data were fitted with the spatial expansion model, SSD (0.0028, p = 0.5500), and Harpending’s Raggedness index (0.0302, p = 0.6500), there was no significant difference between the observed and simulated data. Tajima’s D (−2.5734, p < 0.0001) and Fu’s FS (−26.6812, p < 0.0001) were also highly significantly negative, supporting the population expansion hypothesis. Population expansion time was estimated to be 2884 years ago (95% C.I. 2011–22,199 years ago).

4. Discussion

The K2P intraspecific genetic divergence based on COI sequences of C. mahasarakhamense found in this study (3.05%) was higher than previously reported (max. 2.03%) [16]. This is not unexpected given the larger sample size (123 vs. 30) and wider geographic coverage of the sampling locations (north, northeast, central vs. northeast). The relatively high intraspecific genetic divergence in C. mahasarakhamense found in this study is due to the presence of three divergent haplotypes identified here. If these three divergent haplotypes were omitted, the maximum K2P intraspecific genetic divergence would only have been 1.66%. However, the level of genetic divergence of these haplotypes (max. 2.43%) compared to the main lineage occurred within the expected range of intraspecific genetic variations of Culicoides species [17,36,37,38,39]. Although the level of genetic divergence fell within the range of the within-species genetic divergence of Culicoides species, the relatively high level of genetic divergence of these three haplotypes compared to the rest could be indicative of the presence of cryptic species or an early stage of divergence. Further study with more specimens included from populations that possessed the divergent haplotypes is needed to test this hypothesis.
Population genetic structure analysis revealed that most comparisons (87%) were not genetically significantly different. The exceptions to the general overall low level of genetic structuring were comparisons between a population from the north (LP) with others, as five from ten comparisons were genetically significantly different. Although the FST values between LP and five other populations (MK1, MK2, RE, NL, LO) were not statistically significant, the values were relatively high (>0.26) compared to other comparisons (<0.06). Therefore, no statistical significance between LP and these populations was most likely because of the small sample sizes (n ≤ 10) rather than the high gene flow between these populations. High FST values between LP and the other populations was due to the presence of two haplotypes that were genetically relatively highly different from others. These haplotypes are possibly relicts of ancestral polymorphism. Three other specimens of the LP population were connected directly to the central haplotype with only a single mutation step. Among these, one specimen shared a haplotype with the UB population in the northeastern region from which it is geographically separated by >700 km. Haplotype sharing with populations in the northeast and two others that are genetically closely related to the most common haplotype indicated that there has been gene flow between LP and other populations, in contradiction with the high FST values. The LP population is geographically separate from the remaining populations included in this study by >420 km. This geographic distance is far beyond the active flight range of biting midges which have a maximum of only 6 km [40]. There are two possible explanations for long-distance gene flow between these populations. First, the gene flow is mediated by wind-assisted long-distance dispersal. This mechanism was postulated as a factor responsible for the incursion of some vector species such as C. imicola [9], C. obsoletus [13], and C. brevitarsis [8] across long geographic distances. However, long-distance dispersal is not common because the successful colonization of new areas requires the presence of many suitable environmental conditions such as climate, ecology of the new habitat, and availability of hosts [41]. In addition, the long distance dispersal of biting midges on land by wind is usually much shorter (<85 km) than over sea (up to 700 km) [41,42]. Furthermore, there are two major monsoon winds in Thailand. The northwest monsoon begins in May and flows from the southwest to the northeast bringing moisture from Indian Ocean to the country and generating the rainy season. The northeast monsoon begins in October and flows from the northeast to the southwest bringing cold and dry air from the higher latitude in China to the country generating the cold season [43]. Culicoides is highly abundant during the rainy season (southwest monsoon). If wind-assisted long-distance dispersal actually occurs, it is more likely to be between populations in the southwest to the northeast regions. However, the LP and UB sites are located along a northwest to southeast directional axis; thus, the southwest monsoon wind is unlikely to have assisted long-distance dispersal between these populations. The second and more likely explanation for the gene flow between LP and UB is that it is mediated by human agency. Biting midge species can be transported with livestock [44] and livestock transportation (e.g., of chickens) is very common in Thailand. It might be possible that C. mahasarakhamense can be transported with livestock from UB to LP or vice versa resulting in gene flow between these populations. However, this long-distance gene flow will be very rare given that there is a large FST value between LP and other populations.
In contrast to the situation of LP, the RB population is located in the central region with >480 km between it and the other populations included in this study but with low FST values (<0.081) and only LP is significantly different from the others. This result indicates a high gene flow between RB and other populations. However, the genetic connectivity between RB and other populations in the northeast is more likely to be related to historical movement as indicate by the interior position of the haplotypes of this population in the MJ network [45]. Mismatch distribution analysis revealed that the C. mahasarakhamense species had undergone spatial population expansion dating back to approximately 2000–22,000 years ago. This population expansion is possibly related to the recovery from cold and dry conditions at the end of the Pleistocene with ensuing warm and humid conditions of the warming period. Although Culicoides does not strictly require free water for reproduction, they do need a high moisture content substrate for development of immature stages [3]. The adults would also find humid conditions advantageous because the dry conditions could cause serious dehydration problems due to their small size combined with a relatively large surface area. The historical, long-distance movement between RB and populations in the northeast of Thailand could be a result of wind assistance by the northwest monsoon wind. As explained above, the southwest monsoon wind flows from southwest to the northeast and could bring biting midges from RB to the northeastern region.
Climatic amelioration will have produced a more favorable environment and the historical population expansion of C. mahasarakhamense could also be associated with the increasing population density of the host blood source, the domestic chickens. A previous study based on the molecular identification of host blood indicated that the C. mahasarakhamense species are chicken biters [16,19]. A high density of this species was found in a chicken shelter [16]. A recent study found that the domestic chicken was first domesticated in northeastern Thailand around 3200–3600 years ago [46]. Thus, the increasing host density could potentially have led to the population expansion of C. mahasarakhamense. A similar situation has been reported in a mammalophilic black fly species, Simulium nodosum Puri in Thailand [22]. The population expansion of this black fly species was dated back to 2600–5200 years ago which related to the time of agricultural proliferation leading to increased domestic animal and human population densities [22].

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, the population genetic structure and population history analyses revealed that both ongoing and historical factors have contributed to the genetic diversity and genetic structure of C. mahasarakhamense. A population from the north (LP) that was reported as a possible vector of Leishmania martiniquensis [20] is genetically distinct from others. Geographic distance is most likely a limiting factor for gene flow. However, there was a geographically large sampling gap between the northern population and others included in this study. Therefore, it will be useful for further study to examine populations located between the LP and other populations included in this study. This will enable the testing of the hypothesis that geographic distance is a barrier to gene flow for C. mahasarakhamense. This information could be useful for monitoring the spread of disease agents potentially transmitted by this biting midge species.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.P.; methodology, P.J. and P.P.; formal analysis, P.P.; investigation, P.J., K.W., K.V. and W.C.; resources, P.J., K.W. and K.V.; data curation, P.P. and P.J.; writing—original draft preparation, P.P.; writing—review and editing, P.P. and B.G.; visualization, B.G.; funding acquisition, P.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research project was funded by Mahasarakham University, grant number 6501001/2565.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The protocol used in this study was approved by Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, Mahasarakham University (IACUC-MSU) (approval number: IACUC-MSU-18/2022).

Data Availability Statement

The data generated during the study have already been reported in the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Adrian Plant for valuable comments on a previous version of the manuscript and Chonticha Kunprom and Theerasak Thongyan for assistance with specimen collection.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Valkiūnas, G. Avian Malaria Parasites and Other Haemosporidia; CRC: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  2. Santiago-Alarcon, D.; Palinauskas, V.; Schaefer, H.M. Diptera vectors of avian Haemosporidian parasites: Untangling parasite life cycles and their taxonomy. Biol. Rev. 2012, 87, 928–964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Mullen, G.R.; Murphree, C.S. Biting midges (Ceratopogonidae). In Medical and Veterinary Entomology, 3rd ed.; Mullen, G.R., Durden, L.A., Eds.; Elsevier: San Diego, CA, USA, 2019; pp. 213–236. [Google Scholar]
  4. Tabachnick, W.J.; Black, I.V.W. Making a case for molecular population genetic studies of arthropod vectors. Parasitol. Today 1995, 11, 27–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Pérez De Rosas, A.R.; Segura, E.L.; Garcia, B.A. Microsatellite analysis of genetic structure in natural Triatoma infestans (Hemiptera: Reduviidae) populations from Argentina: Its implication in assessing the effectiveness of Chagas’ disease vector control programmes. Mol. Ecol. 2007, 16, 1401–1412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. McCoy, K.D. The population genetic structure of vectors and our understanding of disease epidemiology. Parasite 2008, 15, 444–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Vega-Rúa, A.; Marconcini, M.; Madec, Y.; Manni, M.; Carraretto, D.; Gomulski, L.M.; Gasperi, G.; Failloux, A.B.; Malacrida, A.R. Vector competence of Aedes albopictus populations for chikungunya virus is shaped by their demographic history. Commun. Biol. 2020, 3, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Onyango, M.G.; Beebe, N.W.; Gopurenko, D.; Bellis, G.; Nicholas, A.; Ogugo, M.; Djikeng, A.; Kemp, S.; Walker, P.J.; Duchemin, J.B. Assessment of population genetic structure in the arbovirus vector midge, Culicoides brevitarsis (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae), using multi-locus DNA microsatellites. Vet. Res. 2015, 46, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Jacquet, S.; Huber, K.; Talavera, S.; Burgin, L.E.; Carpenter, S.; Sanders, C.; Dicko, A.H.; Djerbal, M.; Goffredo, M.; Lhor, Y.; et al. Range expansion of the Bluetongue vector, Culicoides imicola, in continental France likely due to rare wind-transport events. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Calvo, J.H.; Calvete, C.; Martinez-Royo, A.; Estrada, R.; Miranda, M.A.; Borras, D.; Sato I Monteys, V.; Pages, N.; Delgado, J.A.; Collantes, F.; et al. Variations in the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I gene indicate northward expanding populations of Culicoides imicola in Spain. Bull. Entomol. Res. 2009, 99, 583–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Onyango, M.G.; Michuki, G.N.; Ogugo, M.; Venter, G.J.; Miranda, M.A.; Elissa, N.; Djikeng, A.; Kemp, S.; Walker, P.J.; Duchemin, J.B. Delineation of the population genetic structure of Culicoides imicola in East and South Africa. Parasit. Vectors 2015, 8, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Jacquet, S.; Garros, C.; Lombaert, E.; Walton, C.; Restrepo, J.; Allene, X.; Baldet, T.; Cetre-Sossah, C.; Chaskopoulou, A.; Delecolle, J.C.; et al. Colonization of the Mediterranean basin by the vector biting midge species Culicoides imicola: An old story. Mol. Ecol. 2015, 24, 5707–5725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Mignotte, A.; Garros, C.; Dellicour, S.; Jacquot, M.; Gilbert, M.; Gardès, L.; Balenghien, T.; Duhayon, M.; Rakotoarivony, I.; de Wavrechin, M.; et al. High dispersal capacity of Culicoides obsoletus (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae), vector of bluetongue and Schmallenberg viruses, revealed by landscape genetic analyses. Parasit. Vectors 2021, 14, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Mellor, P.S.; Boorman, J.; Baylis, M. Culicoides biting midges: Their role as arbovirus vectors. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2000, 45, 307–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Jacquet, S.; Huber, K.; Guis, H.; Setier-Rio, M.L.; Goffredo, M.; Allène, X.; Rakotoarivony, I.; Chevillon, C.; Bouyer, J.; Baldet, T.; et al. Spatio-temporal genetic variation of the biting midge vector species Culicoides imicola (Ceratopogonidae) Kieffer in France. Parasit. Vectors 2016, 9, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Pramual, P.; Jomkumsing, P.; Piraonapicha, K.; Jumpato, W. Integrative taxonomy uncovers a new Culicoides (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) biting midge species from Thailand. Acta Trop. 2021, 220, 105941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Pramual, P.; Jomkumsing, P.; Jumpato, W.; Bunauea, S. Molecular detection of avian haemosporidian parasites in biting midges (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) from Thailand. Acta Trop. 2021, 224, 106118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Sunantaraporn, S.; Thepparat, A.; Phumee, A.; Sor-Suwan, S.; Boonserm, R.; Bellis, G.; Siriyasatien, P. Culicoides Latreille (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) as potential vectors for Leishmania martiniquensis and Trypanosoma sp. in northern Thailand. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2021, 15, e0010014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Jomkumsing, P.; Surapinit, A.; Saengpara, T.; Pramual, P. Genetic variation, DNA barcoding and blood meal identification of Culicoides Latreille biting midges (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) in Thailand. Acta Trop. 2021, 217, 105866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ruff, M.D. Important parasites in poultry production systems. Vet. Parasitol. 1999, 84, 337–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Pramual, P.; Kuvangkadilok, C.; Baimai, V.; Walton, C. Phylogeography of the black fly Simulium tani (Diptera: Simuliidae) from Thailand as inferred from mtDNA sequences. Mol. Ecol. 2005, 14, 3989–4001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Chaiyasan, P.; Pramual, P. Population genetic structure and demographic history of the black fly vector, Simulium nodosum in Thailand. Med. Vet. Entomol. 2016, 30, 286–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. O’loughlin, S.M.; Okabayashi, T.; Honda, M.; Kitazoe, Y.; Kishino, H.; Somboon, P.; Sochantha, T.; Nambanya, S.; Saikia, P.K.; Dev, V.; et al. Complex population history of two Anopheles dirus mosquito species in Southeast Asia suggests the influence of Pleistocene climate change rather than human-mediated effects. J. Evol. Biol. 2008, 21, 1555–1569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Morgan, K.; O’Loughlin, S.M.; Chen, B.I.N.; Linton, Y.M.; Thongwat, D.; Somboon, P.; Fong, M.Y.; Butlin, R.; Verity, R.; Prakash, A.; et al. Comparative phylogeography reveals a shared impact of Pleistocene environmental change in shaping genetic diversity within nine Anopheles mosquito species across the Indo-Burma biodiversity hotspot. Mol. Ecol. 2011, 20, 4533–4549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Folmer, O.; Black, M.; Hoeh, W.; Lutz, R.; Vrijenhoek, R. DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Mol. Mar. Biol. Biotechnol. 1994, 3, 294–299. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  26. Tangkawanit, U.; Wongpakam, K.; Pramual, P. A new black fly (Diptera: Simuliidae) species of the subgenus Asiosimulium Takaoka Choochote from Thailand. Zootaxa 2018, 4388, 111–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Bandelt, H.J.; Forster, P.; Röhl, A. Median-joining networks for inferring intraspecific phylogenies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 1999, 16, 37–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Meier, R.; Shiyang, K.; Vaidya, G.; Ng, P.K. DNA barcoding and taxonomy in Diptera: A tale of high intraspecific variability and low identification success. Syst. Biol. 2006, 55, 715–728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Excoffier, L.; Lischer, H.E. Arlequin suite ver 3.5: A new series of programs to perform population genetics analyses under Linux and Windows. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 2010, 10, 564–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Mantel, N. The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Res. 1967, 27, 209–220. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  31. Bohonak, A.J. IBD (Isolation by Distance): A programme for analysis of isolation by distance. J. Hered. 2002, 93, 153–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Roger, A.R.; Harpending, H. Population growth makes waves in the distribution of pairwise genetic differences. Mol. Biol. Evol. 1992, 9, 552–569. [Google Scholar]
  33. Harpending, H.C. Signature of ancient population growth in a low-resolution mitochondrial DNA mismatch distribution. Hum. Biol. 1994, 66, 591–600. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  34. Papadopoulou, A.; Anastasiou, I.; Vogler, A.P. Revisiting the insect mitochondrial molecular clock: The mid-Aegean trench calibration. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2010, 27, 1659–1672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Sun, W.K. Laboratory colonization of biting midges (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). J. Med. Entomol. 1974, 11, 71–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Ander, M.; Troell, K.; Chirico, J. Barcoding of biting midges in the genus Culicoides: A tool for species determination. Med. Vet. Entomol. 2013, 27, 323–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Nielsen, S.A.; Kristensen, M. Delineation of Culicoides species by morphology and barcode exemplified by three new species of the subgenus Culicoides (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) from Scandinavia. Parasit. Vectors 2015, 8, 151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Harrup, L.E.; Laban, S.; Purse, B.V.; Reddy, Y.K.; Reddy, Y.N.; Byregowda, S.M.; Kumar, N.; Purushotham, M.; Kowali, S.; Prasad, M.; et al. DNA barcoding and surveillance sampling strategies for Culicoides biting midges (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) in southern India. Parasit. Vectors 2016, 9, 461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Bakhoum, M.T.; Sarr, M.; Fall, A.G.; Huber, K.; Fall, M.; Sembène, M.; Seck, M.T.; Labuschagne, K.; Gardès, L.; Ciss, M.; et al. DNA barcoding and molecular identification of field-collected Culicoides larvae in the Niayes area of Senegal. Parasit. Vectors 2018, 11, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Brenner, R.J.; Wargo, M.J.; Stains, G.S.; Mulla, M.S. The dispersal of Culicoides mohave (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) in the desert of southern California. Mosq. News 1984, 44, 343–350. [Google Scholar]
  41. Hendrickx, G.; Gilbert, M.; Staubach, C.; Elbers, A.; Mintiens, K.; Gerbier, G.; Ducheyne, E. A wind density model to quantify the airborne spread of Culicoides species during north-western Europe bluetongue epidemic, 2006. Prev. Vet. Med. 2008, 87, 162–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Ducheyne, E.; De Deken, R.; Bécu, S.; Codina, B.; Nomikou, K.; Mangana-Vougiaki, O.; Georgiev, G.; Purse, B.V.; Hendrickx, G. Quantifying the dispersal of Culicoides species in Greece and Bulgaria by wind. Geospat. Health 2007, 1, 177–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Climate of Thailand. Available online: https://www.tmd.go.th/en/archive/thailand_climate.pdf (accessed on 3 August 2022).
  44. Purse, B.V.; Carpenter, S.; Venter, G.J.; Bellis, G.; Mullens, B.A. Bionomics of temperate and tropical Culicoides midges: Knowledge gaps and consequences for transmission of Culicoides-borne viruses. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2015, 60, 373–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Avise, J.C. Phylogeography: The History and Formation of Species; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  46. Peters, J.; Lebrasseur, O.; Irving-Pease, E.K.; Paxinos, P.D.; Best, J.; Smallman, R.; Callou, C.; Gardeisen, A.; Trixl, S.; Frantz, L.; et al. The biocultural origins and dispersal of domestic chickens. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2022, 119, e2121978119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Insects 13 00724 g001 550
Figure 1. Map of Thailand (modified from http://mitrearth.org (accessed on 1 August 2022)) indicating the 13 sampling locations of Culicoides mahasarakhamense used in this study. Details of sampling locations are included in Table 1. Locality symbols are labeled according to geographic region: red, north; blue, northeast; green, central.
Figure 1. Map of Thailand (modified from http://mitrearth.org (accessed on 1 August 2022)) indicating the 13 sampling locations of Culicoides mahasarakhamense used in this study. Details of sampling locations are included in Table 1. Locality symbols are labeled according to geographic region: red, north; blue, northeast; green, central.
Insects 13 00724 g001
Insects 13 00724 g002 550
Figure 2. Haplotype diversity and percentage nucleotide diversity (±standard deviation) of 12 populations of Culicoides mahasarakhamense in Thailand.
Figure 2. Haplotype diversity and percentage nucleotide diversity (±standard deviation) of 12 populations of Culicoides mahasarakhamense in Thailand.
Insects 13 00724 g002
Insects 13 00724 g003 550
Figure 3. Median joining network of 123 mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase I (COI) sequences of Culicoides mahasarakhamense in Thailand. Each circle represents a haplotype and sizes are relative to the number of individuals sharing such haplotypes. Haplotypes are labelled according to the geographic region as in Figure 1. Crossbars indicate mutation steps.
Figure 3. Median joining network of 123 mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase I (COI) sequences of Culicoides mahasarakhamense in Thailand. Each circle represents a haplotype and sizes are relative to the number of individuals sharing such haplotypes. Haplotypes are labelled according to the geographic region as in Figure 1. Crossbars indicate mutation steps.
Insects 13 00724 g003
Insects 13 00724 g004 550
Figure 4. Heatmap for the pairwise FST values between 11 populations of Culicoides mahasarakhamense in Thailand calculated based on COI sequences using the Kimura 2-parameter model. White circles indicate statistical significance after Bonferroni correction. Details of populations are provided in Table 1.
Figure 4. Heatmap for the pairwise FST values between 11 populations of Culicoides mahasarakhamense in Thailand calculated based on COI sequences using the Kimura 2-parameter model. White circles indicate statistical significance after Bonferroni correction. Details of populations are provided in Table 1.
Insects 13 00724 g004
Insects 13 00724 g005 550
Figure 5. Mismatch distribution based on 123 mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase I (COI) sequences of Culicoides mahasarakhamense in Thailand. Values of sum-of-square deviation (SSD), Harpending’s Raggedness index, Tajima’s D, and Fu’s FS tests are given.
Figure 5. Mismatch distribution based on 123 mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase I (COI) sequences of Culicoides mahasarakhamense in Thailand. Values of sum-of-square deviation (SSD), Harpending’s Raggedness index, Tajima’s D, and Fu’s FS tests are given.
Insects 13 00724 g005
Table
Table 1. Sampling locations of Culicoides mahasarakhamense specimens in Thailand used in this study.
Table 1. Sampling locations of Culicoides mahasarakhamense specimens in Thailand used in this study.
Location (Code)Sampling Site TypeRegionN (hn)Latitude/LongitudeElevation (m)Collection Date
1. Ban Wai, Kantharawichai District, Maha Sarakham (MK1)CSNortheast4 (2) 116.3075° N/103.1891° E15020 January 2021
2. Lerng Jan Reservior, Mueang Maha Sarakham District, Maha Sarakham Province (MK2)CPNortheast6 (3) 116.1730° N/103.2622° E14028 January 2020
3. Mahasarakham University, Kantharawichai District, Maha Sarakham Province (MK3)CPNortheast10 (6) 116.2488° N/103.2505° E15025 February 2019
4. Nadun District, Maha Sarakham Province (MK4)CP/CSNortheast2 (2)15.6830° N/103.2358° E14020 February 2021
5. Ban Nong Bon, Mueang Roi Et District, Roi Et Province (RE)CP/CSNortheast10 (8) 115.9241° N/103.6980° E1309 February 2020
6. Waritchaphum District, Sakon Nakhon Province (SK)CP/CSNortheast14 (10)17.2422° N/103.5744° E22027 March 2021
7. Phon Sawan District, Nakhon Phanom Province (NP)CPNortheast1 (1)17.4616° N/104.4658° E15020 November 2020
8. Prangku District, Sisaket Province (SR)CP/CSNortheast27 (15)14.8305° N/104.0605° E1406 March 2021
9. Non Sang District, Nongbua Lampu Province (NL)CP/CSNortheast7 (6)16.8233° N/102.5688° E18027 February 2021
10. Phu Ruea District, Loei Province (LO)CSNortheast4 (4)17.4308° N/101.3500° E65020 January 2021
11. Kud Khaopun District, Ubon Ratchathani Province (UB)CP/CSNortheast17 (12)15.7330° N/104.9680° E13013 January 2021
12. Paktho District, Ratchaburi Province (RB)CP/CSCentral14 (8)13.5058° N/99.7125° E51 November 2021
13. Banhong District, Lamphun Province (LP)N/ANorth7 (5) 218.3169° N/98.8141° E300September 2019–January 2020
Total 123
CS, chicken shelter; CP, cattle pens. hn, number of haplotype. 1 Data from Pramual et al. [16] and Jomkumsing et al. [17]; 2 Data from Sunantaraporn et al. [18].
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Pramual, P.; Jomkumsing, P.; Wongpakam, K.; Vaisusuk, K.; Chatan, W.; Gomontean, B. Population Genetic Structure and Population History of the Biting Midge Culicoides mahasarakhamense (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Insects 2022, 13, 724. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13080724

AMA Style

Pramual P, Jomkumsing P, Wongpakam K, Vaisusuk K, Chatan W, Gomontean B. Population Genetic Structure and Population History of the Biting Midge Culicoides mahasarakhamense (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). Insects. 2022; 13(8):724. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13080724

Chicago/Turabian Style

Pramual, Pairot, Panya Jomkumsing, Komgrit Wongpakam, Kotchaphon Vaisusuk, Wasupon Chatan, and Bhuvadol Gomontean. 2022. "Population Genetic Structure and Population History of the Biting Midge Culicoides mahasarakhamense (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae)" Insects 13, no. 8: 724. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13080724

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop