Abstract
Aurantiactinomyxon is one of the most diverse myxozoan collective groups, comprising types that mostly infect freshwater and marine oligochaetes belonging to the family Naididae Ehrenberg, 1828, but also Lumbriculidae Claus, 1872. In this study, a comprehensive revision of all known aurantiactinomyxon types is performed and highlights the fallibility of using the form and length of the valvular processes as main criterion for differentiating among style-less actinospore morphotypes. The demise of the guyenotia collective group is proposed based on the ambiguous features of several types that allow conformity with both the aurantiactinomyxon and guyenotia definitions. Nonetheless, the information presently available clearly shows that a general shift is needed in our approach to actinospore grouping, which should probably be based on actinospore functionality relative to environment and host ecology, rather than on morphology. Life cycle studies based on experimental transmission and molecular inferences of the 18S rDNA have linked aurantiactinomyxon (including former guyenotia) to myxozoans belonging to a diverse array of genera, including Chloromyxum, Henneguya, Hoferellus, Myxobolus, Paramyxidium, Thelohanellus and Zschokkella. This undoubtedly shows a high capacity of the aurantiactinomyxon morphotype to promote infection in intrinsically distinct vertebrate hosts and environmental habitats, consequently increasing interest in its study for attaining a better understanding of myxozoan-host interactions. The identification of novel and known types, however, is impeded by the lack of concise information allowing a comprehensive analysis of biological, morphological, and molecular criteria. In this sense, the compilation of data presented in this study will ultimately help researchers seeking to perform reliable identifications.
Introduction
Infections of aquatic oligochaetes by actinospores were first reported by Štolc (1899), who created the Actinomyxidia to encompass hexactinomyxon, synactinomyxon and triactinomyxon types that the author found infecting tubificids in Czechia. Over time, recognition of the homology between these organisms and myxozoans, led to the relocation of Actinomyxidia to the phylum Myxozoa Grassé, 1970, which became divided into the classes Myxosporea Bütschli 1881 (fish parasites producing myxospores) and Actinosporea Noble, 1980 (worm parasites producing actinospores). In 1984, the ground-breaking discovery that Myxobolus cerebralis Hofer, 1903 develops triactinomyxon actinospores in the gut epithelium of the oligochaete Tubifex tubifex (Müller) (Wolf & Markiw, 1984), showed that myxozoan life cycles comprise both myxospore and actinospore phases, with members of the classes Myxosporea and Actinosporea representing morphologically distinct phases of the same species. This led to a major taxonomic revision, with Kent et al. (1994) proposing the demise of the class Actinosporea, and the use of its generic names as vernacular designations for actinospore morphotypes established within distinct collective groups.
Currently, there are ca. 20 valid actinospore collective groups (Lom & Dyková, 2006; Rangel et al., 2011; Milanin et al., 2017; Atkinson et al., 2019; Rocha et al., 2019a, 2019b, 2020), with aurantiactinomyxon being one of the most diverse. This collective group was first described by Janiszewska (1957), who defined its actinospores having a style-less epispore, with three equal processes that curve downwards and embrace with their whole base the epispore cavity. Lom & Dyková (2006) updated the definition, and described aurantiactinomyxon as having three stout, semicircularly curved, leaf-like valvular processes attached to an ellipsoidal body with protruding polar capsules at the apex and containing a sporoplasm with many secondary cells. To date, 61 aurantiactinomyxon types have been reported based on these definitions (Table 1), with differentiation between types mostly relying on morphometric comparisons. Molecular data of the 18S rDNA is available for only 20 types. Another eight 18S rDNA sequences are available in GenBank but constitute unpublished submissions to the NCBI database; while the sequences with GenBank accession numbers MN294775 and MN294776 appear identified as aurantiactinomyxon in the database but have been published as belonging to the presently demised echinactinomyxon collective group (see Rocha et al., 2019a; Gao et al., 2021).
Table 1.
Summary of data available for aurantiactinomyxon types (including former guyenotia). SBL: actinospore body length; SBW: actinospore body width; LVP: length of valvular processes; WVP: width of valvular processes; PCL: polar capsule length; PCW: polar capsule width; SCn: number of secondary cells; AV: apical view; SV: side view; n.d.: not provided; ET: experimental transmission; MI: molecular inference. Measurements are means ± SD (range) (when available), given in µm.
| Aurantiactinomyxon type/myxosporean species | Host | Location | SBL | SBW | LVP | WVP | PCL | PCW | SCn | GenBank accession number | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aurantiactinomyxon raabei junioris Janiszewska, 1957 | Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri Claparède | Poland: River Ropa | 17 | 17 | 25–30 | − | − | − | 16 | − | Janiszewska 1957 |
| Limnodrilus sp.; Tubifex sp. | France: Villeneuve de la Raho, Latour-Bas-Elne, Bages, Roussillon, Pyrénées-Orientales | 17 | 17 | 25–35 | 11–15 | − | − | 16 | − | Marques, 1984 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon pavinsis (Ormierès, 1968) Marques, 1984/Chloromyxum truttae (Léger, 1906)/MI | Stylodrylus heringianus Claparède | France: Besse-en-Chandesse |
10 (9–11) |
10 (9–11) |
12 (10–14) |
− | 3.0 (2.5–3.5) | 2.0 (1.5–2.5) | 12 | − | Ormières, 1968 |
| Stylodrylus heringianus Claparède | France: Couze Pavin | 8–12 | 8–12 | 10–20 | 6–8 | − | − | 16 | − | Marques, 1984 | |
| Tubifex sp. | Germany: Landsberg am Lech, Bavaria | 10.0 ± 1.0 | 10.0 ± 1.0 | 12.0 ± 2.0 | − | 3.0 ± 0.5 | 2.0 ± 0.5 | 12 | − | Oumouna et al., 2003 | |
| Stylodrylus heringianus Claparède | Scotland: highland freshwater system of the River Amhainnan Stratha Bhig | 9.0 | 9.0 | 10.0 | − | 2.8 | 2.3 | − | AJ582006 | Holzer et al., 2004 | |
| Unidentified lumbriculid | Italy: Sordo River | 9.7 ± 0.5 | 9.7 ± 0.5 | 17.4 ± 1.4 | 7.7 ± 0.5 | − | − | − | − | Marcucci et al.,2009 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon stellans Marques, 1984 | Unidentified tubificids | France: Villeneuve de la Raho, Bages, Plaine du Roussillon, Pyrénées-Orientales | 15–20 | – | 70–90 | 15–20 | 8–10 | 8–10 | <16 | – | Marques, 1984 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon trifolium Marques, 1984 | Unidentified tubificids | France: Villeneuve de la Raho, Latour-Bas-Elne, Bages, Roussillon, Pyrénées-Orientales | 20–25 | 20–25 | 40–50 | 17–20 | – | – | 32 | – | Marques, 1984 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Burtle et al., 1991/Henneguya ictaluri Pote, Hanson, & Shivaji, 2000/ET and MIa | Dero digitata (Müller) | USA: channel catfish pond | 19.5 | 19.5 | 29.5 | – | – | – | >32 | – | Burtle et al., 1991;Bellerud et al., 1992, 1995; Pote et al., 1992, 2000; Styer et al., 1991, 1992 |
|
Dero digitata (Müller) |
USA: channel catfish pond, Oktibbeha County, Mississippi |
20.6 ± 1.1 (19.0–22.8) |
21.8 ± 1.0 (20.9–22.8) |
28.4 ± 1.6 (26.6–32.3) |
9.9 ± 0.8 (9.5–11.4) | – | – | 40–42 | – | Bellerud, 1993 | |
|
Dero digitata (Müller) |
USA: channel catfish pond, Oktibbeha County, Mississippi |
23.0 (20.0–24.0) |
23.0 (20.0–24.0) |
26.0 (21.0–32.0) |
11.0 (8.0–12.0) | – | – | – | – | Pote & Waterstrat, 1993 | |
| Dero digitata (Müller) | USA: channel catfish pond, Sunflower County, Mississippi |
20.9 ± 0.6 (20.1–22.3) |
20.9 ± 0.6 (20.1–22.3) |
27.7 ± 0.7 (26.3–28.9) |
10.0 ± 0.4 (9.4–10.9) | – | – | – | – | Rosser et al., 2014 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon minor Styer et al., 1992 | Dero digitata (Müller) | USA: channel catfish pond | 13–16 | 13–16 | 36 | 11 | – | – | – | – | Styer et al., 1992 |
| Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri Claparède | Ireland: Cloonee river system |
14.1 ± 1.3 (13.0–15.6) |
14.1 ± 1.3 (13.0–15.6) |
31.0 ± 3.7 (26.0–36.0) |
10.6 ± 1.1 (9.1–13.0) | 2.7 ± 0.2 (2.6–3.1) | 2.7 ± 0.2 (2.6–3.1) | ~12 | – | Negredo & Mulcahy, 2001 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 1 of Bartholomew et al., 1992 | Nais bretscheri Michaelsen | USA: experimental tanks | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | Bartholomew et al., 1992 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of El-Matbouli et al., 1992/Hoferellus carassii Achmerov, 1960/ET | Tubifex tubifex (Müller), Lophochaeta ignota Štolc, Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri Claparède | ET using infected goldfish Carassius auratus | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | El-Matbouli et al., 1992 |
| Nais elinguis Müller | Germany | 23.5 ± 3.1 | 23.5 ± 3.1 | 48.8 ± 8.2 | 11.7 ± 1.5 | – | –– | 22 | – | Trouillier et al., 1996 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Grossheider & Korting, 1992/Hoferellus cyprini (Doflein, 1898) Berg, 1898 (syn. Mitraspora cyprini Fujita, 1912)/ETb | Nais spp. | Germany: ET using H. cyprini from common carp Cyprinus carpio | ~12.7 | ~12.7 | ~31.1 | ~6.9 | ~6.9 | – | – | – | Grossheider & Korting, 1992 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon janiszewskai Bellerud, 1993/Henneguya exilis (Kudo, 1929)/MI | Dero digitata (Müller) | USA: Sunflower, Sunflower County, Mississippi |
13.8 ± 1.1 (11.8–15.8) |
11.8 ± 1.1 (9.9–13.8) |
52.0 ± 9.9 (37.4–63.0) |
5.9 ± 0.0 (5.9–5.9) | – | – | 8 | – | Bellerud, 1993 |
| Dero digitata (Müller) | USA: commercial catfish ponds, Mississippi | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | Lin et al., 1999 | |
| Dero digitata (Müller) | USA: commercial catfish pond, Sunflower County, Mississippi |
11.7 ± 0.9 (10.2–13.3) |
11.7 ± 0.9 (10.2–13.3) |
42.5 ± 2.5 (37.6–46.2) |
6.5 ± 0.9 (5.2–8.5) | – | – | – | – | Rosser et al., 2014 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon mississippiensis Bellerud, 1993/Henneguya mississippiensis Rosser et al., 2005/MI | Dero digitata (Müller) | USA: Starkville, Oktibbeha County, Mississippi |
14.2 ± 1.8 (n.d.–17.1) |
13.6 ± 1.2 (9.9–13.8) |
32.4 ± 3.3 (22.8–39.9) |
7.3 ± 1.7 (3.8–11.4) | – | – | 30 | − | Bellerud, 1993 |
| Dero digitata (Müller) | USA: channel catfish pond | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | AF021878 | Hanson et al., 2001 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Benajiba & Marques, 1993/Paramyxidium giardi (Cépède, 1906) Freeman & Kristmundsson, 2018/ET and MI | Tubifex spp. | France: ET using Paramyxidium giardi from European eel Anguilla anguilla | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | Benajiba & Marques, 1993 |
| Tubificoides pseudogaster (Dahl) | Portugal: Minho River |
14.4 ± 0.6 (13.6–15.9) |
12.7 ± 0.7 (11.3–13.3) | 22.4 ± 2.4 (18.1–27.6) | 15.5 ± 0.9 (13.3–17.0) | 2.6 ± 0.3 (1.9–3.5) | 2.6 ± 0.3 (1.9–3.5) | – | MK635346 | Rocha et al., 2019c | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Pote & Waterstrat, 1993 | Dero digitata (Müller) | USA: channel catfish pond, Oktibbeha County, Mississippi | ~23.0 | ~23.0 | 40 | 8 | – | – | – | – | Pote & Waterstrat, 1993 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 1 of Yokoyama et al., 1993 | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Japan: goldfish Carassius auratus pond | 11 | 11 | 16 | – | – | – | 8 | – | Yokoyama et al., 1993; Yokoyama, 1997 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 2 of Yokoyama et al., 1993/Thelohanellus hovorkai Achmerov, 1964/ET and MI | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Japan: goldfish Carassius auratus pond | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | Yokoyama et al., 1993 |
| Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Japan: common carp Cyprinius carpio fry pond | 18–22 | 18–22 | 25–33 | – | 2 | 2 | 32 | – | Yokoyama, 1997 | |
| Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: ET using Thelohanellus hovorkai from a C. carpio fish farm |
18.6 (18.3–18.9) |
18.6 (18.3–18.9) |
29.0 (28.2–29.6) |
9.2 (8.1–10.2) | 3.42 (3.4–3.5) | 3.36 (3.3–3.4) | 32 | − | Székely et al., 1998 | |
| Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Japan | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | AJ133419 | Anderson et al., 2000 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 1 of Hallett et al., 1997 | Pacifidrilus vanus (Erséus) | Hong Kong Island | 10.1 | 10.7 | ~3.0 | ~3.0 | 1.9 | 1.9 | − | − | Hallett et al., 1997 |
| Auratiactinomyxon type 2 of Hallett et al., 1997 |
Pacifidrilus darvelli (Erséus) Limnodriloides toloensis Erséus |
Hong Kong Island | 9.4–12.5 | 11.6–14.0 | – | – | 2.5–3.0 | 2.5–3.0 | −− | − | Hallett et al., 1997 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 3 of Hallett et al., 1997 | Pacifidrilus vanus (Erséus) | Hong Kong Island | 9.4–10.6 | 6.9–10.9 | – | − | − | −− | − | −− | Hallett et al., 1997 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of McGeorge et al., 1997 | Unidentified tubificid | Scotland: Atlantic salmon Salmo salar hatchery |
13.7 (12–15) |
13.7 (12–15) |
25.6 (19–31) |
12.0 (10–14) | 2.7 (2–3) | 2.7 (2–3) | − | − | McGeorge et al., 1997 |
| Lumbriculus variegatus (Müller) | Scotland: Atlantic salmon Salmo salar hatchery | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | Özer & Wootten, 2001 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 1 of El-Mansy et al., 1998a | Tubifex tubifex (Müller) | Hungary: polyculture fish farm south of Budapest | 18.3 | 18.3 | 17.5 | 9.9 | 2.0 | 2.0 | – | – | El-Mansy et al., 1998a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 2 of El-Mansy et al., 1998a | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: polyculture fish farm south of Budapest | 22.8 | 22.8 | 65.7 | 10.5 | 4.0 | 1.7 | – | – | El-Mansy et al., 1998a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 3 of El-Mansy et al., 1998a | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: polyculture fish farm south of Budapest | 22.8 | 22.8 | 70.3 | 8.0 | 2.9 | 2.9 | – | – | El-Mansy et al., 1998a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 4 of El-Mansy et al., 1998a | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: polyculture fish farm south of Budapest | 19.4 | 19.4 | 55.7 | 11.2 | 2.9 | 2.9 | – | – | El-Mansy et al., 1998a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 5 of El-Mansy et al., 1998a | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: polyculture fish farm south of Budapest | 9.9 | 9.9 | 17.2 | 3.9 | 1.4 | 1.4 | – | – | El-Mansy et al., 1998a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 6 of El-Mansy et al., 1998a | Limnodrilus sp. | Hungary: polyculture fish farm south of Budapest | 19.7 | 19.7 | 24.2 | 11.2 | 2.8 | 2.8 | – | – | El-Mansy et al., 1998a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 7 of El-Mansy et al., 1998a | Actinospores collected from water | Hungary: polyculture fish farm south of Budapest | 18.9 | 18.9 | 24.4 | 9.5 | 2.8 | 2.5 | – | – | El-Mansy et al., 1998a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 8 of El-Mansy et al., 1998a | Limnodrilus sp. | Hungary: polyculture fish farm south of Budapest | 22.6 | 22.6 | 12.2 | 9.0 | 1.4 | 1.4 | − | − | El-Mansy et al., 1998a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 9 of El-Mansy et al., 1998a | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: polyculture fish farm south of Budapest | 18.8 | 18.8 | 51.3 | 9.5 | 2.3 | 2.3 | − | − | El-Mansy et al., 1998a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 10 of El-Mansy et al., 1998a | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: polyculture fish farm south of Budapest | 15.5 | 15.5 | 16.7 | 8.8 | 1.7 | 1.7 | – | – | El-Mansy et al., 1998a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 11 of El-Mansy et al., 1998a | Actinospores collected from water | Hungary: polyculture fish farm south of Budapest | 8.5 | 8.5 | 31.9 | 3.7 | 3.4 | 2.0 | – | – | El-Mansy et al., 1998a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 12 of El-Mansy et al., 1998a | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: polyculture fish farm south of Budapest | 12.1 | 12.1 | 26.5 | 8.7 | 2.8 | 3.1 | – | – | El-Mansy et al., 1998a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 1 of El-Mansy et al., 1998b | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: Lake Balaton | 18.8 | 18.8 | 51.3 | 9.5 | 2.3 | 2.3 | – | – | El-Mansy et al., 1998b |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 2 of El-Mansy et al., 1998b | Limnodrilus sp. | Hungary: Lake Balaton | 21.1 | 21.1 | 22.6 | 11.7 | 2.8 | 2.0 | – | – | El-Mansy et al., 1998b |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 3 of El-Mansy et al., 1998b | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: Lake Balaton | 9.9 | 9.9 | 17.2 | 3.9 | 1.4 | 1.4 | – | – | El-Mansy et al., 1998b |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Székely et al., 1998/Thelohanellus nikolskii Achmerov, 1955/ET and MI | Tubifex tubifex (Müller) | Hungary: ET using T. nikolskii from infected Cyprinus carpio in the Kis-Balaton reservoir |
21.1 (21.0–21.2) |
21.1 (21.0–21.2) |
13.4 (11.3–15.5) |
9.0 (8.5–9.6) | 2.1 (2.0–2.2) | 2.1 (2.0–2.2) | 16 | – | Székely et al., 1998 |
| Nais sp. | Hungary: Kis Balaton |
10.3 (9.3–12.0) |
10.3 (9.3–12.0) |
14.6 (12.7–16.0) |
6.5 (5.3–7.3) | 3.3 | 2.6 | 8 | DQ231156 | Borkhanuddin, 2013; Borzák et al., 2021 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Xiao & Desser, 1998 | Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri Claparède | Canada: Lake Sasajewun, Ontario |
12.0 (11.5–13.8) |
11.0 (10.0–12.5) |
24.0 (21.0–26.0) |
13.0–16.0 | 3.0 (2.7–3.4) | 1.5 (1.4–1.7) | 64–128 | − | Xiao & Desser, 1998 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Székely et al., 2000 | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Spain: Mijares River, Province of Castellón |
8.1 (7.3–8.9) |
8.1 (7.3–8.9) |
6.1 (4.8–7.3) |
5.6 (4.8–6.5) | 1.6 (1.5–1.7) | 1.1 (1.0–1.1) | 64 | −− | Székely et al., 2000 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Kent et al., 2001 | Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri Claparède | Canada: Ontario | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | AF378356 | AF378356 Kent et al., 2001 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type A1 of Negredo & Mulcahy, 2001c | Lophochaeta ignota Štolc | Ireland: Cloonee river system |
14.4 ± 1.3 (12.6–16.9) |
14.4 ± 1.3 (12.6–16.9) |
21.1 ± 1.0 (18.2–23.4) |
16.1 ± 2.1 (13.0–19.5) | 3.0 ± 0.3 (2.5–3.9) | 3.0 ± 0.3 (2.5–3.9) | 10 | – | Negredo & Mulcahy, 2001 |
| Lophochaeta ignota Štolc | Ireland: Cloonee river system | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | AF483598 | Negredo et al., 2003 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type A3 of Negredo & Mulcahy, 2001 | Lophochaeta ignota Štolc | Ireland: Cloonee river system | ~9.1 | ~9.1 |
20.8 ± 1.8 (18.2–23.4) |
10.4 | – | – | ~10 | ~ | Negredo & Mulcahy, 2001 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Hallett et al., 2002d | Tubifex tubifex (Müller) | Germany: Bavaria |
19.4 (16.8–21.4) |
19.4 (16.8–21.4) |
37.3 (28.5–49.2) |
15.7 (14.2–18.1) | 3.1 (2.6–3.9) | 3.1 (2.6–3.9) | 30 | AF487455 | Hallett et al., 2002 |
| Tubifex tubifex (Müller) | Germany: Bavaria |
19.7 (18.1–22.0) |
19.7 (18.1–22.0) |
87.7 (75.1–103.6) |
13.1 (10.4–15.5) | 3.1 | 3.1 | 30 | AF487455 | Hallett et al., 2002 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 1 of Özer et al., 2002 | Tubifex tubifex (Müller) | Scotland: Atlantic salmon fish farm |
14.4 (12.0–15.0) |
14.4 (12.0–15.0) |
32.0 (31.0–36.0) |
14.8 (13.0–15.0) | 2.7 (2.0–3.0) | 2.7 (2.0–3.0) | 64–128 | – | Özer et al., 2002a |
| Tubifex tubifex (Müller) | Scotland: Atlantic salmon fish farm | 14.2 | 14.2 | 33.0 | – | 2.6 | 2.5 | − | AJ582004 | Holzer et al., 2004 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 2 of Özer et al., 2002 | Tubifex tubifex (Müller) | Scotland: Atlantic salmon fish farm |
14.9 (14.0–18.7) |
14.9 (14.0–18.7) |
24.8 (23.4–26.5) |
15.3 (14.0–15.6) | 2.5 (1.8–2.8) | 2.5 (1.8–2.8) | 64 | − | Özer et al., 2002a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 3 of Özer et al., 2002 | Tubifex tubifex (Müller) | Scotland: Atlantic salmon fish farm |
24.0 (23.4–24.9) |
21.8 (20.8–23.4) |
114.5 (101.4–124.8) |
– | 4.0 | 3.2 | 32 | – | Özer et al., 2002a |
| Tubifex tubifex (Müller) | Scotland: Atlantic salmon fish farm | 21.1 | 19.3 | 114.0 | – | 4.0 | 3.5 | – | AJ582005 | Holzer et al., 2004 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 4 of Özer et al., 2002 | Tubifex tubifex (Müller) | Scotland: Atlantic salmon fish farm |
11.9 (11.2–14.0) |
11.9 (11.2–14.0) |
28.3 (23.4–31.2) |
11.9 (10.9–14.0) | 2.5 (2.0–3.0) | 2.5 (2.0–3.0) | 32 | – | Özer et al., 2002a |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 1 of Oumouna et al., 2003 | Unidentified | Gremany: trout fish farm, Landsberg am Lech, Bavaria | 16.1 ± 1.0 | 16.1 ± 1.0 | 76.0 ± 1.0 | – | 5.0 ± 0.3 | 4.0 ± 0.2 | – | – | Oumouna et al., 2003 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 1 of Székely et al., 2003 | Tubifex tubifex (Müller) | Japan: Fuji Mountain at Honshu |
13.5 (13.0–14.0) |
13.5 (13.0–14.0) |
12.4 (10.0–14.0) |
13.5 (13.0–14.0) | 2.0 | 1.0 | 8 | – | Székely et al., 2003 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Székely et al., 2004 | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | South Africa: Rietvlei River |
19.6 (18.1–21.8) |
19.6 (18.1–21.8) |
10.5 (9.9–17.4) |
15.2 (13.3–18.7) | 2.7 (2.6–2.9) | 2.7 (2.6–2.9) | 64 | − | Székely et al., 2004 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type A of Eszterbauer et al., 2006/Thelohanellus hovorkai Achmerov, 1964/ET and MI | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: fish farm near Budapest |
20.0 (18.0–22.0) |
20.0 (18.0–22.0) |
47.0 (37.0–58.0) |
10.0 (8.0–12.0) | 3.0 (2.0–3.3) | – | 32 | DQ231153 DQ231154 | Eszterbauer et al., 2006 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type B of Eszterbauer et al., 2006d | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: fish farm near Budapest |
18.0 (17.0–20.0) |
18.0 (17.0–20.0) |
24.0 (20.0–30.0) |
9.8 (9.0–10.0) | 2.5 (2.0–3.0) | – | – | – | Eszterbauer et al., 2006 |
| Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: River Tisza |
19.0 (18.0–21.0) |
19.0 (18.0–21.0) |
16.0 (14.0–20.0) |
8.4 (7.0–10.6) | 2.6 (2.0–4.1) | − | − | DQ231148 | Eszterbauer et al., 2006 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Hallett et al., 2006/Myxobolus intimus Zaika, 1965/MI | Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri Claparède | Germany: pet shop in Munich |
AV 13.8 (13.0–14.9) SV 13.6 |
AV 13.8 (13.0–14.9) SV 13.6 |
AV 17.7 (15.5–22.0) SV 20.1 (18.1–22.0) |
AV 10.7 (9.7–14.2) SV 10.4 | 3.1 | 2.3 | 16 | AY495708 | Hallett et al., 2006 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 1 of Hallett et al., 2006 | Unidentified | Germany: pet shop in Munich | AV 12.0 (11.7–13.0) | AV 12.0 (11.7–13.0) | AV 26.6 (24.6–31.1) | AV 10.1 (9.1–10.4) | 2.3 | 3.0 | 16 | − | Hallett et al., 2006 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Morris & Freeman, 2010 | Tubifex tubifex (Müller) | Scotland: brown trout Salmo trutta fish farm | 11.0 ± 1.0 | 11.0 ± 1.0 |
23.0 ± 4.0 (20.0–33.0) |
11.0 ± 1.0 (11.0–13.0) | − | − | ~16 | − | Morris & Freeman, 2010 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Xi et al., 2013 | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | China: crucian carp pond, Jiangsu Province |
AV 19.7 (18.9–21.1) SV 20.3 (18.6–21.9) |
AV 19.7 (18.9–21.1) SV 19.6 (17.8–20.7) |
170.8 (167.5–176.3) |
12.9 (11.2–13.5) | 3.1 (2.9–3.2) | 1.7 (1.5–1.9) | 64 | HQ613406 | Xi et al., 2013 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type JD of Xi et al., 2015 | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | China: fish farm at Jiangsu Province | 15.6 |
21.2 (17.1–24.0) |
21.7 (20.0–24.4) |
14.0 (11.2–16.4) | 2.3 (2.0–2.8) | 2.3 (2.0–2.8) | >30 | KP642133– 34 | Xi et al., 2015 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon types 1 & 2 of Zhao et al., 2016/Thelohanellus kitauei Egusa & Nakajima, 1981/MId,e | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: Kis-Balaton Reservoir |
19.7 (17.3–23.3) |
19.7 (17.3–23.3) |
20.4 (18.7–23.3) |
8.9 (7.4–10.0) | 3.4 | 2.8 | >28 | KU66464 | Zhao et al., 2016 |
| Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | China: Datong Lake, Honghu City, Hubei Province |
AV 20.9 (19.3–22.1) SV 18.4 (17.6–23.0) |
AV 20.9 (19.3–22.1) SV 22.3 (21.6–23.0) |
19.7 (17.9–22.3) |
11.6 (9.8–13.0) | 3.0 (2.8–3.3) | 2.4 (2.2–2.6) | 32 | KU664644 | Zhao et al., 2016 | |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Zhao et al., 2017/Thelohanellus testudineus Liu et al., 2013/MI | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | China: Carassius auratus gibelio fish farm, Hubei Province | 15.5 ± 0.5 (14.5–16.4) | 15.5 ± 0.5 (14.5–16.4) | 13.2 ± 0.9 (11.5–16.2) | 7.4 ± 0.4 (6.7–8.0) | 2.5 ± 0.2 (2.3–2.9) | 2.0 ± 0.2 (1.8–2.4) | 32 | KY475588 KY475589 | Zhao et al., 2017 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Milanin et al., 2017 | Pristina americana Černosvitov | Brazil: fish farm in Porto Ferreira city, São Paulo State |
10.9 (8.7–11.5) |
10.9 (8.7–11.5) |
18.6 (18.1–20.1) |
9.0 (8.5–9.4) | 2.1 (1.6–2.4) | 2.1 (1.6–2.4) | − | KX068207 | Milanin et al., 2017 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon of Freeman & Kristmundsson, 2018 | Lumbriculus variegatus (Müller) | Iceland: lake Vifilsstadavatn | 10.4 (9.0–12.5) | 10.4 (9.0–12.5) | 15.4 (14.5–16.3) | 8.5 (7.5–10.0) | = | = | = | MH414928 | Freeman & Kristmundsson (2018) |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 1 of Milanin et al., 2018 | Pristina synclites Stephenson |
Brazil: fish farm in Terenos city, Mato Grosso do Sul state |
8.7 (8.2–9.7) |
8.7 (8.2–9.7) |
14.6 (12.2–16.3) |
6.9 (5.4–8.8) | 1.3 (1.0–1.4) | 1.3 (1.0–1.4) | − | MG878981 | Milanin et al., 2018 |
| Aurantiactinomyxon type 2 of Milanin et al., 2018 | Pristina synclites Stephenson |
Brazil: fish farm in Terenos city, Mato Grosso do Sul state |
11.2 (10.2–11.9) |
11.2 (10.2–11.9) |
30.4 (25–33.3) |
7.0(5.4–7.7) | 1.5(1.3– 1.8) | 1.5(1.3– 1.8) | − | MG878982 | Milanin et al.,2018 |
| Guyenotia sphaerulosa Naville, 1930 | Tubifex tubifex (Müller) | France: Luc-sur-Mer, Calvados | 15 | 15 | 40 | − | 6 | 5 | 32 | − | Naville, 1930;Marques, 1984 |
| Guyenotia of Xiao & Desser, 1998 | Lumbriculus variegatus (Müller) | Canada: Lake Sasajewun, Ontario |
9.5 (9.0–10.5) |
8.8 (8.0–9.5) |
21.0 (16.0–25.0) |
4.5–6.5 | 3.0(2.8–3.3) | 2.0(1.8–2.2) | 8–16 | − | Xiao & Desser,1998 |
| Guyenotia of Eszterbauer et al., 2006 | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: Temperate Water Fish Farm near Budapest |
10 (9.5–11) |
10 (9.5–11) |
16 (15–19.5) |
4.5(4.0–5.5) | 1.6(1.4–2.0) | − | − | AY77906 | Eszterbauer et al.,2006 |
| Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | Hungary: River Tisza near Tiszafüred |
11 (10–12) |
11 (10–12) |
17 (15–21) |
4.5(3.5–5.5) | 1.6(1.3–2.0) | − | − | AY779063 | Eszterbauer et al.,2006 | |
| Guyenotia of Xi et al., 2013 | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | China: freshwater pond, Jiangsu |
10.3 (9.6–10.9) |
10.3 (9.6–10.9) |
18.5 (16.5–20.6) |
6.0(5.4–6.4) | − | 1.8(1.6–2.1 | − | − | Xi et al., 2013 |
| Guyenotia type CZ of Sun et al., 2014 | Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard | China: Changzhou |
10.7 (10.0–12.1) |
10.7 (10.0–12.1) |
20.5 (17.4–23.8) |
5.8(4.8–6.3) | 1.8(1.7–2.0) | – | – | KF912953 | Sun et al., 2014 |
aDescribed as Aurantiactinomyxon major by Styer et al. (1992). A 100% sequence similarity was reported by Rosser et al. (2014), but GenBank accession number was not provided.
bMeasurements calculated from image available in the original description.
cOriginally suggested to potentially be Aurantiactinomyxon pavinsis, but 18S rDNA does not match the sequence obtained by Holzer et al. (2004) from the type-host.
dPresents a case of polymorphism, in which two different phenotypes of Aurantiactinomyxon share one genotype.
eType 1 was previously described as Aurantiactinomyxon type 4 by Borkhanuddin (2013), with slightly distinct measurements.
Assigning novel types to a specific collective group can be complicated given the overlapping definitions of several groups that share main morphological features, such as the formation of single spores versus multi-spore cages, and presence/absence of style or valvular processes. In fact, a boundary-less “continuum of form” has been suggested to exist between collective groups that differ based solely on the form of a specific morphological character, as is the case of aurantiactinomyxon, echinactinomyxon Janiszewska, 1957, guyenotia Naville, 1930, neoactinomyxum Granata, 1922 and raabeia Janiszewska, 1955 (see Hallett et al., 2006; Atkinson, 2011). Differentiation between these style-less morphotypes is based on the shape and length of the valvular processes, which are traditionally defined as being long and straight in echinactinomyxon, curved in raabeia, leaf-like and curved downwards in aurantiactinomyxon, digitiform in guyenotia, and short and spherical in neoactinomyxum (see review in Lom & Dyková, 2006). Although the original definition of aurantiactinomyxon also stated that the valvular processes embraced with their whole base the epispore cavity (Janiszewska, 1957), this criterion has been widely disregarded by researchers (see types in Burtle et al., 1991; Bellerud, 1993; Yokoyama et al., 1993; Yokoyama, 1997; Trouillier et al., 1996; Hallett et al., 1997; El-Mansy et al., 1998a, b; Székely et al., 1998; Özer et al., 2002a; Rosser et al., 2014; Milanin et al., 2018), not being included in the updated definition by Lom & Dyková (2006).
Recently, Rocha et al. (2019a) showed that the shape of the valvular processes is a morphological character too variable for distinguishing between raabeia and echinactinomyxon, based on the observation of a type producing actinospores with long valvular processes that were either curved or straight. Consequently, the demise of the echinactinomyxon collective group was proposed and the definition of raabeia was updated to encompass actinospores having straight valvular processes (Rocha et al., 2019a). Similarly, many of the aurantiactinomyxon types included in this synopsis display ambiguous features allowing conformity with the definitions of other collective groups. For instance, Aurantiactinomyxon janiszewskai and the Aurantiactinomyxon type of Xi et al., 2013 have long valvular processes that best resemble those of raabeia (Bellerud, 1993; Xi et al., 2013). Although the processes of the first curve downwards as traditionally described for aurantiactinomyxon, the second is depicted has having straight processes and would probably be better allocated to raabeia. The boundary between these collective groups is further blurred by the report of aberrant spores displaying unequal and different-shaped caudal processes, as is the case of the Raabeia type 4 of Özer et al., 2002 (see Özer & Wootten, 2002). The distinction between aurantiactinomyxon and neoactinomyxum is also tenuous, given that several aurantiactinomyxon types have short valvular processes, which only differ from neoactinomyxum by being triangular or rounded with slightly pointed ends rather than completely spherical (see types in Hallett et al., 1997; Negredo & Mulcahy, 2001; Oumona et al., 2003; Székely et al., 2000, 2003, 2004; Xi et al., 2015; Zhao et al., 2016). It should be noted that a few neoactinomyxum have been reported to have triangular valvular processes [see types described by Borkhanuddin et al. (2014) and Xi et al. (2015)].
However, it is with guyenotia that the lack of a distinctive boundary is most evident. Several aurantiactinomyxon types described in the literature have digitiform valvular processes that conform with the definition of guyenotia, including the Aurantiactinomyxon type of Burtle et al., 1991, Aurantiactinomyxon type of El-Matbouli et al., 1992, Aurantiactinomyxon type 1 of Yokoyama et al., 1993, Aurantiactinomyxon type 3 of Hallett et al., 1997, Aurantiactinomyxon types 2 and 5 of El-Mansy et al., 1989a, Aurantiactinomyxon type 3 of Özer et al., 2002, Aurantiactinomyxon type 1 of Oumouna et al., 2003, Aurantiactinomyxon type A of Eszterbauer et al., 2006, and the Aurantiactinomyxon of Hallett et al., 2006. The inclusion of types with digitiform processes within the aurantiactinomyxon collective group was previously noticed by Xiao & Desser (1998), who suggested they should be transferred to guyenotia. However, the fallibility of this morphological criterion has led authors to compare aurantiactinomyxon and guyenotia interchangeably (see Burtle et al., 1991; Eszterbauer et al., 2006; Xi et al., 2013). Moreover, Hallett et al. (2002) proved that a single aurantiactinomyxon type can produce actinospores with different process length and shape, having observed two distinct phenotypes associated with the same genotype: one displaying swollen, leaf-like processes with either pointed or rounded ends, and the other having elongated, digitiform-like processes. This clearly shows that there is no real boundary between aurantiactinomyxon and guyenotia. Consequently, the demise of the guyenotia collective group is here proposed, with the transference of its types to aurantiactinomyxon. Original names are retained so as not to increase confusion. The decision to invalidate the oldest group rather than the most recent one relates to the low number of guyenotia that have been reported in the literature; only 5 types of guyenotia have been described versus the 61 types of aurantiactinomyxon that are presently known (see Table 1). Accordingly, aurantiactinomyxon is tentatively defined as having a spherical, subspherical, cylindrical or triangular actinospore body with 3 polar capsules protruding from the apex. Three equally sized latero-posterior valvular processes arise from the actinospore body without a style, curving downwards and tapering to a rounded or pointed end, being leaf-like, propeller-like, digitiform or triangular. Nonetheless, this should be regarded as a temporary definition, given that the increase of our knowledge of actinospore biodiversity will undoubtedly blur even more the boundaries between aurantiactinomyxon, raabeia, and even neoactinomyxum. Overall, this “continuum of form” demonstrates that a general shift is needed in our approach to actinospore grouping (Atkinson, 2011), which should probably be based on actinospore functionality relative to environment and host ecology, rather than on morphology.
The great majority of aurantiactinomyxon types reported in the literature infect freshwater oligochaetes belonging to the family Naididae Ehrenberg, 1828 [currently includes members of the former Tubificidae (Erséus et al., 2008)], with reports mainly from the species Branchiura sowerbyi Beddard, but also T. tubifex, Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri Claparède, and Dero digitata (Müller), and less frequently from Lophochaeta ignota Štolc, and members of the genera Nais Müller and Pristina Ehrenberg. A few types have their oligochaete hosts identified only up to the genus- or family-level (see Marques, 1984; Grossheider & Körting, 1992; Benajiba & Marques, 1993), while a few others lack host information (see El-Mansy et al., 1998a; Oumouna et al., 2003; Hallett et al., 2006). Only the three Aurantiactinomyxon types described by Hallett et al. (1997), and the Aurantiactinomyxon type of Rocha et al., 2019, are known to occur in the marine environment, parasitizing naidid oligochaetes belonging to the genera Limnodriloides Pierantoni, Pacifidrilus Erséus, and Tubificoides Lastočkin. The only exceptions to the usage of naidids as hosts are Aurantiactinomyxon pavinsis, widely reported from the freshwater lumbriculid Stylodrilus heringianus Claparède (see Marques, 1984; Oumouna et al., 2003; Holzer et al., 2004; Marcucci et al., 2009), the Aurantiactinomyxon of Freeman & Kristmundsson, 2018, and the Aurantiactinomyxon type of McGeorge et al., 1997 as reported from Lumbriculus variegatus (Müller) by Özer & Wootten (2001). The former Guyenotia type of Xiao & Desser, 1998 was also reported from L. variegatus (Xiao & Desser, 1998). A few types have been reported from more than a single host species: Aurantiactinomyxon raabei junioris, Aurantiactinomyxon minor, Aurantiactinomyxon of El-Matbouli et al., 1992, Aurantiactinomyxon of Benajiba & Marques, 1993, and Aurantiactinomyxon of Székely et al., 1998 supposedly infect more than a single naidid species (Table 1), while Aurantiactinomyxon pavinsis and the Aurantiactinomyxon type of McGeorge et al., 1997 have been reported from both naidids and lumbriculids (Table 1). Considering that these reports are not backed-up by molecular data, Rocha et al. (2019c) suggested that aurantiactinomyxon might be host specific, further proposing that actinospores of new isolates be identified through a comprehensive morphological and biological comparison to known types sharing the same annelid host.
Individual prevalence of infection of aurantiactinomyxon types is typically low, ranging from 0.01% to 1.5% in wild environments, and from 0.26% to 4.6% in surveys performed from fish farms, though there is evidence of significant spatial and temporal variations (see El-Mansy et al., 1998a,b; Özer et al., 2002b; Eszterbauer et al., 2006) that probably reflect host genetics, proximity, and habitat preferences, as well as abiotic factors (see Alexander et al., 2015 and references therein). Higher prevalence of infection has been reported when considering the number of infected individuals within only a specific host species, rather than in relation to the annelids population that was sampled (see Székely et al., 2000; Negredo & Mulcahy, 2001), or when pooling all aurantiactinomyxon types occurring in a single annelid species to determine the prevalence of infection of the collective group in a specific sampling site (see El-Mansy et al., 1998a,b). Experimental transmission studies have also reported higher values of prevalence of infection. For instance, Székely et al. (1998) reported 12.5% and 16.7% prevalence of infection of the aurantiactinomyxon counterparts of Thelohanellus nikolskii Achmerov, 1955 and Thelohanellus hovorkai Achmerov, 1964, respectively.
About 60 myxosporean life cycles have been elucidated to date (see Eszterbauer et al., 2015), with aurantiactinomyxon types being actinospore counterparts to Chloromyxum truttae (Léger, 1906), Henneguya exilis (Kudo, 1929), the PGD agent Henneguya ictaluri Pote, Hanson, & Shivaji, 2000, Henneguya mississippiensis Rosser et al., 2005, Hoferellus carassii Achmerov, 1960, Hoferellus cyprini (Doflein, 1898) Berg, 1898, Myxobolus intimus Zaika, 1965, Paramyxidium giardi (Cépède, 1906) Freeman & Kristmundsson, 2018, T. hovorkai, Thelohanellus kitauei Egusa & Nakajima, 1981, T. nikolskii, and Thelohanellus testudineus Liu et al., 2013 (Eszterbauer et al., 2015 and references therein; Zhao et al., 2016, 2017; Rocha et al., 2019c; Borzák et al., 2021). The former Guyenotia type of Eszterbauer et al., 2006 has also been linked to an unidentified Zschokkella sp. from Carassius auratus Linnaeus, 1758 (Eszterbauer et al., 2006; data in GenBank). Clarification of the life cycles of H. carassii and H. cyprini were based solely on experimental transmission studies, with all others established through molecular inference, based on DNA match between myxosporean and actinosporean counterparts (99.2% to 100% similarity reported in the literature). However, the 18S rDNA sequences of the actinospores reported to match H. ictaluri and H. exilis were not made available (see Lin et al., 1999; Rosser et al., 2014), so that molecular information can only be found for the myxosporean stage. In turn, no sequence is available for the myxosporean stage of T. hovorkai, which accounts for two distinct actinospore stage sequences in GenBank. Anderson et al. (2000) reported a single 710 bp 18S rDNA sequence (AJ133419) obtained from both myxosporean and actinosporean stages of T. hovorkai. Actinospores were retrieved from infections in B. sowerbyi and were identified by the authors as belonging to the Aurantiactinomyxon type 2 of Yokoyama et al., 1993, previously reported to be the life cycle counterpart of T. hovorkai based on experimental transmission (see Yokoyama et al., 1993; Yokoyama, 1997; Székely et al., 1998). Later, Eszterbauer et al. (2006) obtained two similarly sized sequences (DQ231153 with 817 bp and DQ231154 with 785 bp) from aurantiactinomyxon actinospores in B. sowerbyi that were reported to match unpublished sequences of T. hovorkai obtained by the authors during a previous experimental infection study, though being morphologically and genetically different from the Aurantiactinomyxon type 2 of Yokoyama et al., 1993 (see Yokoyama, 1997; Yokoyama et al., 1993; Székely et al., 1998). Presently, both these aurantiactinomyxon types remain identified as life cycle counterparts of T. hovorkai, being included as such in Table 1.
A more comprehensive and clear understanding of the diversity of this collective group is necessary to help clarify important interactions with annelid hosts and involvement in myxozoan life cycles. The description of novel types and re-description of known types that remain without molecular data, namely those comprising reports from several hosts, will surely contribute towards this aim. Thus far, molecular-based studies are limited by the paucity of available data but have shown that morphologically similar aurantiactinomyxon actinospores may be distantly related (Rocha et al., 2019c), in the same manner that morphologically different actinospores can share the same genotype (see Hallett et al., 2002; Eszterbauer et al., 2006; Zhao et al., 2016). Consequently, the combined analysis of biological, morphological, and molecular criteria is imperative for performing reliable type identification (Rocha et al., 2019c). This task is significantly hampered by the difficulty in obtaining earlier reports, and due to imprecision and confusion of information in the literature.
In this study, a comprehensive summary of the biological characters and morphometry of all types described within the aurantiactinomyxon group and former guyenotia is provided as an important tool for researchers working in this field. Sixty-six types were counted, with data from original descriptions and subsequent reports. Aurantiactinomyxon eiseniellae Ormières & Frézil, 1969 was not included in the count, as Marques (1984) transferred this type to the neoactinomyxum collective group. Morphometric characters include actinospore body length and width, length and width of valvular processes, length and width of polar capsules, and number of secondary cells. Number of coils of polar tubules was not included, given that this information is available only for the Aurantiactinomyxon of Székely et al., 1998 (3–4), Aurantiactinomyxon of Xiao & Desser, 1998 (3–4), Aurantiactinomyxon of Rocha et al., 2019c (4–5), and the Guyenotia of Xiao & Desser, 1998 (3–4) (Borzák et al., 2021; Rocha et al., 2019c; Székely et al., 1998; Xiao & Desser, 1998). Information on host, locality and availability of molecular data is also provided.
Acknowledgments
The author wishes to acknowledge Doctor Stephen Atkinson for his suggestions. This research was funded by national funds through Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT), within the scope of the project PTDC/BIA-BMA/6363/2020, and the FCT employment contract 2022.06670.CEECIND.
Author contributions
SR performed all literature review and manuscript writing.
Funding
Open access funding provided by FCT|FCCN (b-on).
Declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Conflict of interest
The author declares no competing interests.
Footnotes
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
- Alexander JD, Kerans BL, El-Matbouli M, Hallett SL, Stevens L. Annelid–Myxosporean interactions. In: Okamura B, Gruhl A, Bartholomew JL, editors. Myxozoan evolution, ecology and development. Springer International Publishing; 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Anderson C, Canning EU, Schäfer S, Yokoyama H, Okamura B. Molecular confirmation of the life cycle of Thelohanellus hovorkai Achmerov, 1960 (Myxozoa: Myxosporea) Bulletin of the European Association of Fish Pathologists. 2000;20:111–115. [Google Scholar]
- Atkinson, S. D. (2011). Diversity, life cycles and population genetics of freshwater Myxozoa from the Pacific Northwest of North America. PhD thesis, The University of Queensland, Australia.
- Atkinson SD, Hallett SL, Díaz-Morales D, Bartholomew JL, de Buron I. First myxozoan infection (Cnidaria: Myxosporea) in a marine polychaete from North America and erection of actinospore collective group Saccimyxon. Journal of Parasitology. 2019;105(2):252–262. doi: 10.1645/18-183. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bartholomew J, Rohivec JS, Fryer JL. Ceratomyxa shasta infections of salmonid fish. In: Kimura T, editor. Proc OJI Int Symp Salmonid Diseases. Hokkaido University Press; 1992. pp. 267–275. [Google Scholar]
- Bellerud, B. L. (1993). Etiological and epidemiological factors effecting outbreaks of Proliferative Gill Disease on Mississippi channel catfish farms. PhD thesis, Mississippi State University, Starkville, Mississippi State, USA.
- Bellerud, B. L., Pote, L. M., Chenney, E. M., & Hackthorn, J. A. (1992). Actinomyxid parasites present in aquatic oligochaete populations of PGD infected and uninfected catfish ponds. In Proceedings of the Eastern Fish Health and American Fisheries Society, Fish Health Section Workshop, Auburn, USA.
- Bellerud BL, Pote LM, Lin TL, Johnson MJ, Boyle CR. Etiological and epizootological factors associated with outbreaks of Proliferative Gill Disease in channel catfish. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health. 1995;7(2):124–131. doi: 10.1577/1548-8667(1995)007<0124:EAEFAW>2.3.CO;2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Benajiba MH, Marques A. The alternation of actinomyxidian and myxosporidian sporal forms in the development of Myxidium giardi (parasite of Anguilla anguilla) through oligochaetes. Bulletin of the European Association of Fish Pathologists. 1993;13(3):100–103. [Google Scholar]
- Borkhanuddin, M. H (2013). Studies of fish parasitic myxozoans in Lake Balaton, Hungary and in freshwater and marine biotopes in Malaysia. PhD thesis, University of Pannonia, Hungary.
- Borkhanuddin MH, Cech G, Molnár K, Németh S, Székely C. Description of raabeia, synactinomyxon and neoactinomyxum developing stages of myxosporeans (Myxozoa) infecting Isochaetides michaelseni Lastočkin (Tubificidae) in Lake Balaton and Kis-Balaton Water Reservoir, Hungary. Systematic Parasitology. 2014;88:245–259. doi: 10.1007/s11230-014-9496-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Borzák R, Borkhanuddin MH, Cech G, Molnár K, Hallett SL, Székely C. New data on Thelohanellus nikolskii Achmerov, 1955 (Myxosporea, Myxobolidae) a parasite of the common carp (Cyprinus carpio, L.): The actinospore stage, intrapiscine tissue preference and molecular sequence. International Journal for Parasitology Parasites and Wildlife. 2021;15:112–119. doi: 10.1016/j.ijppaw.2021.04.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Burtle GJ, Harrison LR, Styer EL. Detection of a triactinomyxid myxozoan in an oligochaete from ponds with Proliferative Gill Disease in channel catfish. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health. 1991;3(4):281–287. doi: 10.1577/1548-8667(1991)003<0281:DOATMI>2.3.CO;2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- El-Mansy A, Székely C, Molnár K. Studies on the occurrence of actinosporean stages of fish myxosporeans in a fish farm of Hungary, with the description of triactinomyxon, raabeia, aurantiactinomyxon and neoactinomyxon types. Acta Veterinaria Hungarica. 1998;46(2):259–284. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- El-Mansy A, Székely C, Molnár K. Studies on the occurrence of actinosporean stages of myxosporeans in Lake Balaton, Hungary, with the description of triactinomyxon, raabeia and aurantiactinomyxon types. Acta Veterinaria Hungarica. 1998;46(4):437–450. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- El-Matbouli M, Fischer-Scherl T, Hoffmann RW. Transmission of Hoferellus carassii Achmerov, 1960 to goldfish Carassius auratus via an aquatic oligochaete. Bulletin of the European Association of Fish Pathologists. 1992;12(2):54–56. [Google Scholar]
- Erséus C, Wetzel MJ, Gustavsson L. ICZN rules—A farewell to Tubificidae (Annelida, Clitellata) Zootaxa. 2008;1744:66–68. doi: 10.11646/zootaxa.1744.1.7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Eszterbauer E, Atkinson S, Diamant A, Morris D, El-Matbouli M, Hartikainen H. Myxozoan life cycles: practical approaches and insights. In: Okamura B, Gruhl A, Bartholomew JL, editors. Myxozoan evolution, ecology and development. Springer; 2015. pp. 175–198. [Google Scholar]
- Eszterbauer E, Marton S, Rácz OZ, Letenyei M, Molnár K. Morphological and genetic differences among actinosporean stages of fish-parasitic myxosporeans (Myxozoa): difficulties of species identification. Systematic Parasitology. 2006;65(2):97–114. doi: 10.1007/s11230-006-9041-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Freeman, M.A., & Kristmundsson, A. (2018). Studies of Myxidium giardi Cépède, 1906 infections in Icelandic eels identifies a genetically diverse clade of myxosporeans that represents the Paramyxidium n. g. (Myxosporea: Myxidiidae). Parasites & Vectors, 11, 551. 10.1186/s13071-018-3087-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- Gao Z-P, Yang K, Chen K, Xi B-W, Xie J. Morphological characters and DNA identification of several actinosporean collected from oligochaete Branchiura sowerbyi. Acta Hydrobiologica Sinica. 2021;45(2):446–454. doi: 10.7541/2021.2019.264. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Grossheider G, Körting W. First evidence that Hoferellus cyprini (Doflein, 1898) is transmitted by Nais sp. Bulletin of the European Association of Fish Pathologists. 1992;12(1):17–20. [Google Scholar]
- Hallett SL, Atkinson SD, El-Matbouli M. Molecular characterisation of two aurantiactinomyxon (Myxozoa) phenotypes reveals one genotype. Journal of Fish Diseases. 2002;25(10):627–631. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2761.2002.00405.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Hallett SL, Atkinson SD, Erséus C, El-Matbouli M. Myxozoan parasites disseminated via oligochaete worms as live food for aquarium fishes: descriptions of aurantiactinomyxon and raabeia actinospore types. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms. 2006;69:213–225. doi: 10.3354/dao069213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hallett, S. L., Erséus, C., & Lester, R. J. G. (1997). Actinosporea from Hong Kong marine oligochaeta. In B. Morton (Ed.), Proceedings of the Eight International Marine Biological Workshop: the Marine Flora and Fauna of Hong Kong and Southern China. Hong Kong University Press, Hong Kong, 1–7.
- Hanson LA, Lin D, Pote LMW, Shivaji R. Small subunit rRNA gene comparisons of four actinosporean species to establish a polymerase chain reaction test for the causative agent of Proliferative Gill Disease in channel catfish. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health. 2001;13(2):117–123. doi: 10.1577/1548-8667(2001)013<0117:SSRGCO>2.0.CO;2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Holzer AS, Sommerville C, Wootten R. Molecular relationships and phylogeny in a community of myxosporeans and actinosporeans based on their 18S rDNA sequences. International Journal of Parasitology. 2004;34:1099–1111. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2004.06.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Janiszewska J. Actinomyxidia II: new systematics, sexual cycle, description of new genera and species. Zoologica Poloniae. 1957;8:3–34. [Google Scholar]
- Kent ML, Andree KB, Bartholomew JL, El-Matbouli M, Desser SS, Devlin RH, Feist SW, Hedrick RP, Hoffmann RW, Khattra J, Hallett SL, Lester RJ, Longshaw M, Palenzeula O, Siddall ME, Xiao C. Recent advances in our knowledge of the Myxozoa. Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology. 2001;48(4):395–413. doi: 10.1111/j.1550-7408.2001.tb00173.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kent ML, Margolis L, Corliss JO. The demise of a class of protists - taxonomic and nomenclatural revisions proposed for the protist phylum Myxozoa Grasse, 1970. Canadian Journal of Zoology. 1994;72(5):932–937. doi: 10.1139/z94-126. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Lin D, Hanson LA, Pote LM. Small subunit ribosomal RNA sequence of Henneguya exilis (class Myxosporea) identifies the actinosporean stage from an oligochaete host. Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology. 1999;46(1):66–68. doi: 10.1111/j.1550-7408.1999.tb04585.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lom J, Dyková I. Myxozoan genera: definition and notes on taxonomy, life-cycle terminology and pathogenic species. Folia Parasitologica. 2006;53(1):1–36. doi: 10.14411/fp.2006.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Marcucci C, Caffara M, Goretti E. Occurrence of actinosporean stages (Myxozoa) in the Nera River system (Umbria, central Italy) Parasitology Research. 2009;105(6):1517–1530. doi: 10.1007/s00436-009-1586-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Marques, A. (1984). Contribution à la connaissance des Actinomyxidies: ultrastructure, cycle biologique, systématique. PhD thesis, Université des Sciences et Techniques de Languedoc, Montepellier, France.
- McGeorge J, Sommerville C, Wootten R. Studies of actinosporean myxozoan stages parasitic in oligochaetes from the sediments of a hatchery where Atlantic salmon harbour Sphaerospora truttae infection. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms. 1997;30(2):107–119. doi: 10.3354/dao030107. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Milanin T, Atkinson SD, Silva MRM, Alves RG, Maia AAM, Adriano EA. Occurrence of two novel actinospore types (Cnidaria: Myxosporea) in Brazilian fish farms, and the creation of a novel actinospore collective group. Seisactinomyxon. Acta Parasitologica. 2017;62(1):121–128. doi: 10.1515/ap-2017-0014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Milanin T, Atkinson SD, Silva MRM, Alves RG, Tavares LER, Ribeiro AM, Maia AAM. Occurrence of two novel actinospore types (Cnidaria: Myxozoa) in fish farms in Mato Grosso do Sul state. Brazil. Parasitology Research. 2018;117(6):1757–1764. doi: 10.1007/s00436-018-5856-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Morris DJ, Freeman MA. Hyperparasitism has wide-ranging implications for studies on the invertebrate phase of myxosporean (Myxozoa) life cycles. International Journal for Parasitology. 2010;40(3):357–369. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2009.08.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Naville A. Le cycle chromosomique d'une nouvelle Actinomyxidie: Guyenotia sphaerulosa n. gen.; n.sp. Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science. 1930;73:545–575. [Google Scholar]
- Negredo C, Dillane E, Mulcahy MF. Small subunit ribosomal DNA characterization of an unidentified aurantiactinomyxon form and its oligochaete host Tubifex ignotus. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms. 2003;54(3):229–241. doi: 10.3354/dao054229. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Negredo C, Mulcahy MF. Actinosporean infections in oligochaetes in a river system in southwest Ireland with descriptions of three new forms. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms. 2001;46(1):67–77. doi: 10.3354/dao046067. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Oumouna M, Hallett S, Hoffmann R, El-Matbouli M. Seasonal occurrence of actinosporeans (Myxozoa) and oligochaetes (Annelida) at a trout hatchery in Bavaria, Germany. Parasitology Research. 2003;89(3):170–184. doi: 10.1007/s00436-002-0683-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ormières R. A propos de deux parasites d’oligochètes de Besse: Diaspora (Coccidiomorpha Doflein, 1901) et Aurantiactinomyxon (Actinomyxidia Štolc, 1899) Annales de la Station Biologique de Besse-en-Chandesse. 1968;3:185–191. [Google Scholar]
- Özer A, Wootten R. Release of actinosporean and myxosporean spores from their hosts, with special reference to both stages of Sphaerospora truttae (Myxozoa, Myxosporea) Acta Parasitologica. 2001;46(2):103–112. [Google Scholar]
- Özer A, Wootten R. Biological characteristics of some actinosporeans. Journal of Natural History. 2002;36(18):2199–2209. doi: 10.1080/00222930110089175. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Özer A, Wootten R, Shinn AP. Survey of actinosporean types (Myxozoa) belonging to seven collective groups found in a freshwater salmon farm in Northern Scotland. Folia Parasitologica. 2002;49(3):189–210. doi: 10.14411/fp.2002.036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Özer A, Wootten R, Shinn AP. Infection prevalence, seasonality and host specificity of actinosporean types (Myxozoa) in an Atlantic salmon fish farm located in Northern Scotland. Folia Parasitologica. 2002;49(4):263–268. doi: 10.14411/fp.2002.050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pote, L. M., Chenney, E. F., Lin, T. L., & Hackathorn, J. A. (1992). Experimental transmission of Proliferative Gill Disease (PGD) in channel catfish after exposure to actinosporea released by Dero sp. isolated from a pond during an outbreak of PGD. Proceedings of the 8th Southern Conference on Animal Parasites, Mississippi State, USA.
- Pote LM, Hanson LA, Shivaji R. Small subunit ribosomal RNA sequences link the cause of proliferative gill disease in channel catfish to Henneguya n. sp. (Myxozoa: Myxosporea) Journal of Aquatic Animal Health. 2000;12(3):230–240. doi: 10.1577/1548-8667(2000)012<0230:SSRRSL>2.0.CO;2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Pote LM, Waterstrat P. Communications: motile stage of Aurantiactinomyxon sp. (Actinosporea: Triactinomyxidae) isolated from Dero digitata found in channel catfish ponds during outbreaks of Proliferative Gill Disease. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health. 1993;5(3):213–218. doi: 10.1577/1548-8667(1993)005<0213:CMSOAS>2.3.CO;2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Rangel LF, Cech G, Székely C, Santos MJ. A new actinospore type Unicapsulactinomyxon (Myxozoa), infecting the marine polychaete, Diopatra neapolitana (Polychaeta: Onuphidae) in the Aveiro Estuary (Portugal) Parasitology. 2011;138(6):698–712. doi: 10.1017/s0031182011000163. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rocha S, Alves Â, Fernandes P, Antunes C, Azevedo C, Casal G. New actinosporean description prompts union of the raabeia and echinactinomyxon collective groups (Cnidaria, Myxozoa) Diseases of Aquatic Organisms. 2019;135(3):175–191. doi: 10.3354/dao03389. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rocha S, Rangel LF, Castro R, Severino R, Azevedo C, Santos MJ, Casal G. The potential role of the sphaeractinomyxon collective group (Cnidaria, Myxozoa) in the life cycle of mugiliform-infecting myxobolids, with the morphological and molecular description of three new types from the oligochaete Tubificoides insularis. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology. 2019;160:33–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jip.2018.12.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rocha S, Alves Â, Antunes C, Azevedo C, Casal G. Molecular data infers the involvement of a marine aurantiactinomyxon in the life cycle of the myxosporean parasite Paramyxidium giardi (Cnidaria, Myxozoa) Parasitology. 2019;146(12):1555–1563. doi: 10.1017/s0031182019000866. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rocha S, Alves Â, Antunes C, Fernandes P, Azevedo C, Casal G. Characterisation of sphaeractinomyxon types (Cnidaria: Myxozoa) from marine and freshwater oligochaetes in a Portuguese estuary, with the demise of the endocapsa collective group. Folia Parasitologica. 2020;67:2020.002. doi: 10.14411/fp.2020.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rosser TG, Griffin MJ, Quiniou SMA, Greenway TE, Khoo LH, Wise DJ, Pote LM. Molecular and morphological characterization of myxozoan actinospore types from a commercial catfish pond in the Mississippi delta. Journal of Parasitology. 2014;100(6):828–839. doi: 10.1645/13-446.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Štolc A. Actinomyxidies, nouveau groupe de Mesozoaires parent des Myxosporidies. Bulletin International de l’Académie des Sciences de Bohème. 1899;12:1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Styer EL, Harrison LR, Burtle GJ. Communications: Experimental production of Proliferative Gill Disease in channel catfish exposed to a myxozoan-infected oligochaete, Dero digitata. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health. 1991;3:288–291. doi: 10.1577/1548-8667(1991)003<0288:CEPOPG>2.3.CO;2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Styer, E. L., Harrison, L. R., & Burtle, G. J. (1992). Six new species of actinomyxids from Dero digitata. International Workshop on Myxosporea, October 6–8, 1992, České Budějovice, Czech Republic (abstract only).
- Sun H-W, Xi B-W, Xie J. Morphological characters and DNA identification of a new actinosporean type Guyenotia CZ collected from oligochaete Branchiura sowerbyi. Acta Hydrobiologica Sinica. 2014;38(6):1179–1184. doi: 10.7541/2014.171. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Székely C, Avenant-Oldewage A, Molnár K. Description of a new actinosporean type from South African freshwaters. Dieases of Aquatic Organisms. 2004;61:95–102. doi: 10.3354/dao061095. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Székely C, El-Mansy A, Molnár K, Baska F. Development of Thelohanellus hovorkai and Thelohanellus nikolskii (Myxosporea : Myxozoa) in oligochaete alternate hosts. Fish Pathology. 1998;33(3):107–114. doi: 10.3147/jsfp.33.107. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Székely C, Sitjà-Bobadilla A, Álvarez-Pellitero P. First report on the occurrence of an actinosporean stage (Myxozoa) in oligochaetes from Spanish freshwaters. Acta Veterinaria Hungarica. 2000;48(4):433–441. doi: 10.1556/004.48.2000.4.6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Székely C, Yokoyama H, Urawa S, Timm T, Ogawa K. Description of two new actinosporean types from a brook of Fuji Mountain, Honshu, and from Chitose River, Hokkaido. Japan. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms. 2003;53(2):127–132. doi: 10.3354/dao053127. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Trouillier A, El-Matbouli M, Hoffmann RW. A new look at the life-cycle of Hoferellus carassii in the goldfish (Carassius auratus auratus) and its relation to "Kidney Enlargement Disease" (KED) Folia Parasitologica. 1996;43:173–187. [Google Scholar]
- Wolf K, Markiw ME. Biology contravenes taxonomy in the Myxozoa: new discoveries show alternation of invertebrate and vertebrate hosts. Science. 1984;225:1449–1452. doi: 10.1126/science.225.4669.1449. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Xi BW, Zhang JY, Xie J, Pan LK, Xu P, Ge XP. Three actinosporean types (Myxozoa) from the oligochaete Branchiura sowerbyi in China. Parasitology Research. 2013;112(4):1575–1582. doi: 10.1007/s00436-013-3306-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Xi BW, Zhou ZG, Xie J, Pan LK, Yang YL, Ge XP. Morphological and molecular characterization of actinosporeans infecting oligochaete Branchiura sowerbyi from Chinese carp ponds. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms. 2015;114(3):217–228. doi: 10.3354/dao02859. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Xiao CX, Desser SS. Actinosporean stages of myxozoan parasites of oligochaetes from Lake Sasajewun, Algonquin Park, Ontario: New forms of echinactinomyxon, neoactinomyxum, aurantiactinomyxon, guyenotia, synactinomyxon and antonactinomyxon. Journal of Parasitology. 1998;84(5):1010–1019. doi: 10.2307/3284635. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Yokoyama H. Transmission of Thelohanellus hovorkai Achmerov, 1960 (Myxosporea: Myxozoa) to common carp Cyprinus carpio through the alternate oligochaete host. Systematic Parasitology. 1997;36(2):79–84. doi: 10.1023/a:1005752913780. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Yokoyama H, Ogawa K, Wakabayashi H. Involvement of Branchiura sowerbyi (Oligochaeta, Annelida) in the transmission of Hoferellus carassii (Myxosporea, Myxozoa), the causative agent of kidney enlargement disease (KED) of goldfish Carassius auratus. Fish Pathology. 1993;28:135–139. doi: 10.3147/jsfp.28.135. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Zhao D, Borkhanuddin MH, Wang W, Liu Y, Cech G, Zhai Y, Székely C. The life cycle of Thelohanellus kitauei (Myxozoa: Myxosporea) infecting common carp (Cyprinus carpio) involves aurantiactinomyxon in Branchiura sowerbyi. Parasitology Research. 2016;115(11):4317–4325. doi: 10.1007/s00436-016-5215-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zhao DD, Zhai YH, Liu Y, Wang SJ, Gu ZM. Involvement of aurantiactinomyxon in the life cycle of Thelohanellus testudineus (Cnidaria: Myxosporea) from allogynogenetic gibel carp Carassius auratus gibelio, with morphological, ultrastructural, and molecular analysis. Parasitology Research. 2017;116(9):2449–2456. doi: 10.1007/s00436-017-5547-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]