Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Taylor & Francis Open Select logoLink to Taylor & Francis Open Select
. 2019 Jun 23;45(5):315–327. doi: 10.1080/01647954.2019.1629624

First record of the family Ameronothridae (Acari: Oribatida) from Japan – new species, juvenile morphology, ecology and biogeographic remarks

Tobias Pfingstl a,✉, Shimpei F Hiruta b, Maximilian Wagner a, Wataru Hagino c, Satoshi Shimano d
PMCID: PMC6636892  PMID: 31391659

ABSTRACT

The Ameronothridae are recorded for the first time from Japanese coasts with the new species Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. from Hokkaido. The report of this species represents the most southern occurrence of an Ameronothrus species in the Asian Pacific region. Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. can be easily distinguished from its congeners by the conspicuously pusticulate body surface and the loss of dorsal companion setae d on all genua in the adult stage. Based on adult and juvenile morphology, a close relation to Ameronothrus maculatus and A. schneideri is suggested. Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. is classified as a lichenivorous inhabitant of sediment-free rocky coastal substrates. Due to a lack of genetic sequence data of nearly all ameronothrid species a molecular genetic comparison is yet unfeasible, but a Bayesian inference tree based on the 18S rRNA gene shows a paraphyletic clustering of the ameronothrid A. yoichi sp. n. and Paraquanothrus grahami.

http://www.zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:5B772E2C-7D5E-4C86-9955-AB84A84C50DA

KEYWORDS: Littoral, ontogeny, Hokkaido, systematics, cold temperate zone

Graphical abstract

graphic file with name TACA_A_1629624_UF0001_OC.jpg

Open in a new tab

Introduction

The Ameronothridae are a group of several genera of freshwater and marine associated oribatid mites that either live in ephemeral rock pools of terrestrial environments or in various habitats of coastal regions. The taxonomic history of this family was subject to many controversies and confusing changes so that differing concepts still can be found. Berlese early proposed the genus Ameronothrus Berlese, 1896 and included it in Carabodidae (Berlese 1896), but later Willmann (1931) noticed that this genus represents an independent taxon. Though the latter author is often given as family author in literature (e.g. Weigmann 2006), it was Vitzthum (1942) who first mentioned the name Ameronothridae and hence is the true author of this taxon (e.g. Pfingstl 2017). Decades later, Schulte (1975) noticed remarkable morphological similarities between the northern hemispheric marine associated Ameronothridae, till then only consisting of the single genus Ameronothrus, and the southern hemispheric marine associated Podacaridae, containing the genera Podacarus, Halozetes, Alaskozetes, Antarcticola and Pseudantarcticola, therefore he suggested merging the two families. Based on reasonable argumentation, Weigmann and Schulte (1977) supported his suggestion and hence included all the former Podacaridae but also the freshwater associated South African Aquanothridae in the family Ameronothridae and this concept was followed by most subsequent literatures (e.g. Subías 2004; Norton and Behan-Pelletier 2009). Nevertheless, Pfingstl (2017) questioned this taxonomic rearrangement highlighting molecular genetic and biogeographic studies that indicated an independent evolutionary origin of Ameronothridae and Podacaridae. Consequently, the latest concept of Ameronothridae (Norton and Franklin 2018) again excludes the Podacaridae, but retains the freshwater associated genera, Aquanothrus, Paraquanothrus and Chudalupia as subfamily Aquanothrinae besides the marine associated Ameronothrus. Due to this confusing background, we will mainly focus in this paper on the genus Ameronothrus, which represents the northern hemispheric littoral members of the Ameronothridae.

Ameronothrus presently contains 13 species (Subías 2004) that inhabit various coastal habitats, as, for example, rocky intertidal shores, salt marshes, limnic estuary zones, but also terrestrial habitats on further inlands (Schulte et al. 1975). They are known to feed on a wide variety of food, including lichen, algae and fungi (Schulte 1976). Some species are stenotopic, others are holeurytopic inhabitants of marine-associated environments, whereas species at lower latitudes show greater affinity for littoral habitats and species found at higher latitudes are mainly restricted to terrestrial habitats (Schulte et al. 1975; Marshall and Convey 2004).

Apart from single exceptional records in the Caribbean (Willmann 1936) and on the South African coast (Weigmann 1975), Ameronothrus species are distributed in the Holarctic (Schulte 1975), where they predominantly occur within cold-temperate regions (e.g. Procheş and Marshall 2001). Most records are from European coasts of the Northern and Baltic Sea, but there are also numerous reports from European Atlantic shores, as well as from polar coasts of Greenland and other arctic islands. Further comprehensive findings stretch along the Pacific North American coast from Alaska to California (Schulte 1975), whereas few records are known from the Atlantic North American coast and from the Mediterranean Sea (Schulte 1975; Pfingstl 2017). For a long time, the Asian Pacific shorelines seemed to be devoid of Ameronothrus, until two species Ameronothrus nidicola Sitnikova, 1975 and Ameronothrus oblongus Sitnikova, 1975 were discovered in the Far East of Russia, on Kamchatka (Sitnikova 1975), and later they were also reported from the Kuril Islands (e.g. Klimov 1998). However, although there is important subsequent literature on the systematics of Ameronothridae (Krause et al. 2016; Pfingstl 2017; Norton and Franklin 2018) and on further records from various Holarctic locations (e.g. Bücking et al. 1998; Søvik 2003), no further Ameronothrus species have been discovered and published for the last four decades.

In the course of an ongoing project investigating the intertidal mite fauna of Japanese coasts, we found Ameronothrus individuals on the shore of Hokkaido. Therefore, aim of the present paper is, first, to assess the taxonomic status of the found individuals; second, provide a detailed description; third, give information on juvenile morphology and fourth, discuss the biogeographic aspects of this record.

Material and methods

Samples of littoral algae and lichens were scraped off rocks and concrete walls with a knife or a small shovel and then put in Berlese-Tullgren funnels for about 24 h to extract mites. Afterwards, collected specimens were stored in ethanol (100%) for morphological and molecular genetic investigation.

Sample locations

  1. Hokkaido, Muroran, dark green algae growing on large rock in upper eulittoral area; coordinates 42°18ʹ25ʹ’N 140°58ʹ32ʹ’E; 13 September 2018.

  2. Hokkaido, Yoichi, grey lichen growing extensively in spray zone on large quay wall; coordinates 43°14ʹ52ʹ’N 140°42ʹ35ʹ’E; 14 September 2018.

Molecular genetic analyses

For inferring phylogenetic relationships and providing reference sequences, whole genomic DNA was extracted from 11 ethanol-fixed adult specimens of the family Ameronothridae using Chelex resin according to the adjusted protocols in Pfingstl et al. (2019). A ~ 566 bp long fragment of the mitochondrial DNA cytochrome oxidase subunit I (COI) was amplified as stated in Pfingstl et al. (2019) using the primer pair Mite COI-2F and Mite COI-2R (for primer composition see Otto and Wilson 2001). Furthermore, the complete 18S rRNA locus (~1733 bp) was amplified including primers shown in Dabert et al. (2010) along with the protocols in Skoracka and Dabert (2010). Subsequent DNA purification steps included enzymatic ExoSAP-IT (Affymetrix) and Sephadex G-50 resin (GE Healthcare). Cycle sequencing, using BigDye Sequence Terminator v3.1 kit (Applied Biosystems), was conducted according to Schäffer et al. (2008). Automatic capillary sequencing and sequence visualization was operated on an ABI 3130xl (Applied Biosystems) device. All generated sequences are deposited in GenBank under accession numbers MK883430 – MK883440 (COI) and MK880170 – MK880177 (18S) (see Table 1). MUSCLE (Edgar 2004), integrated in the software MEGA 7.0 (Kumar et al. 2016), was used to align sequences. Additionally, already published 18S fragment sequences were downloaded from GenBank for subsequent phylogenetic analysis (for Accession numbers see Table 1). To assess the best fitting substitution model, the implemented model search module in MEGA was applied. Model selection was based on lowest Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) scores. Phylogenetic Bayesian inference (BI) and maximum likelihood (ML) analysis were conducted for the 18S locus in MrBayes 3.2 (Ronquist et al. 2012) and RaxML HPC v.8.0. (Stamatakis 2014), respectively. Posterior probabilities were generated from Metropolis-coupled Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations over 10 million generations in two independent runs, 7–8 chains, Kimura-2 parameter model + gamma (as a result of model test – see above) and 25% burn-in. To ensure stationary of all parameter and check for convergence, results were analysed in Tracer v.1.6. (Rambaut and Drummond 2007) and a 50% majority rule consensus tree was summarized from post burn in trees. For ML analysis, GTR+gamma model was employed on 10.000 bootstrap replicates to assess node support. ML and BI topologies were visualized in FigTree 1.4.2 (available at http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree). Both approaches revealed the same overall topologies yielding in high node supports. However, only the BI tree is shown in this study. We only used the 18S locus for species delimitation and phylogenetic inference because relevant COI or 28S sequences were not available in GenBank.

Table 1.

GenBank accession numbers for COI and 18S rRNA sequences used in this study.

  ID COI 18S Reference
Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. JP14_A_01 MK883430   This study
JP14_A_02 MK883431  
JP14_A_03 MK883432  
JP14_A_04 MK883433 MK880170
JP14_A_05 MK883434 MK880171
JP14_A_06 MK883435 MK880172
JP14_A_07 MK883436 MK880173
JP14_A_08 MK883437 MK880174
JP14_A_09 MK883438 MK880175
JP14_A_10 MK883439 MK880176
JP14_A_11 MK883440 MK880177
Fortuynia smiti   MH285694 Pfingstl et al. (2019)
Indopacifica pantai a   MH285692
Litoribates bonairensis   MF997502 Pfingstl et al. (2017)
Thasecazetes falcidactylus   MF997501
Scapheremaeus nakanoshimensis   LC367334 Bayartogtokh et al. (2018)
Limnozetes rugosus   KX397636 Krause et al. (2016)
Hydrozetes lacustris   KX397631
Paraquanothrus grahami b   KX397627
Schusteria littorea   HM070345 Pepato et al. (2010)
Scutovertex sculptus   GQ864305 Dabert et al. (2010)
Scapheremaeus palustris   EU433989 Schaefer et al. (2010)
Cymbaeremaeus cymba   EU432201 Maraun et al. (2009)
Thalassozetes shimojanai   AB818524 Iseki and Karasawa (2014)
Open in a new tab

GenBank synonyms: a Selenoribatidae gen. sp. and bAquanothrus sp.

Drawings and photographs

Preserved animals were embedded in Berlese mountant for microscopic investigation in transmitted light. Drawings were made with an Olympus BH-2 Microscope equipped with a drawing attachment. These drawings were first scanned, then processed and digitized with the free and open-source vector graphics editor Inkscape (https://inkscape.org).

The map of Hokkaido Island was made by GMT5.2.1 (http://gmt.soest.hawaii.edu/) and further modified with Adobe Photoshop 7.0.

For photographic documentation, specimens were air-dried and photographed with a Keyence VHX-5000 digital microscope.

Morphological terminology used in this paper follows that of Grandjean (1953), Schulte (1975) and Norton and Behan-Pelletier (2009).

Results

Descriptions of new taxa

Family Ameronothridae Vitzthum 1942Genus Ameronothrus Berlese 1896

Type species – Eremaeus lineatus Thorell, 1871

Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. Pfingstl and Shimano

Zoobank ID. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:5B772E2C-7D5E-4C86-9955-AB84A84C50DA

Type material/locality

Holotype: adult female, Japan, Hokkaido, Yoichi, grey lichen in spray zone on quay wall; 13 September 2018, coll. S. Shimano, T. Pfingstl, S. Hiruta. (Number: TP-20,180,913–01). Two paratypes: adult male and adult female; same data as for holotype (numbers: TP-20,180,913–02, TP-20,180,913–03). All on microscopic slides, deposited at the Collection of Arachnida, Department of Zoology, National Museum of Nature and Science, Tokyo (NMST). Two additional paratypes from the same sample deposited in the collection of the Senckenberg Museum für Naturkunde Görlitz (SMNG) (number: 59,954).

Etymology

The specific name ‘yoichi” is given as noun in apposition and refers to its type locality.

Differential diagnosis

Colour dark brown, nearly black. Body length 525–600 µm. Notogastral cuticle with densely packed large nodules. Prodorsal lamellar keels converging, anteriorly fused by a semicircular translamella. Short clavate sensilli present. Interlamellar and exobothridial setae absent. Labiogenal articulation complete. All adanal setae located posteriorly of anal orifice. Primilateral setae on tarsus I absent. Dorsal companion seta d on genu I, II and III and all tibiae reduced to alveolus. Tarsal distal setae ending with a small nodule.

Description

Measurements

Females (N = 2), length: 563–600 μm (mean 582 μm), width: 381–388 μm (mean 385 μm); males (N = 3), length: 525–556 μm (mean 535 μm), width: 306–356 μm (mean 325 μm).

Integument

Cuticle thin, easily deformable, showing large nodules. Cerotegument dense covering conspicuous nodular integument, consequently showing the same pusticulate pattern. Colour dark brown.

Prodorsum

(Figure 1A, 2A) Rostrum rounded in dorsal view, demarcated from the remainder of prodorsum by strong transverse caudally arched ridge ct. Obvious lamellar keels (cl) converging, anteriorly fused by semicircular translamella. Transversal ridges originating from bothridia, forming medially several irregular longitudinal ridges next to the anterior border of notogaster. Rostral seta (ro) spiniform, long and smooth (approx. 35 µm). Lamellar seta (le) short, thickened, blunt and smooth (approx. 11 µm). Interlamellar seta (in) and exobothridial seta (ex) absent. Bothridium cup-like, orifice wide and circular. Sensillum (ss) short (approx. 30 µm), strongly clavate, globular head with inconspicuous linear elevations.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. adult. (a) male dorsal view, legs omitted; (b) female ventral view, legs distal segments omitted. Scale bar valid for both depictions.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. stereomicroscopic photographs of adult female. (a) dorsal view; (b) ventral view; (c) lateral view.

Gnathosoma

Palp pentamerous 0–2–1–3-9 (solenidion not included), trochanter very short, femur by far longest segment, genu, tibia and tarsus of almost equal length (Figure 3A). Solenidion ω on palptarsus associated with eupathidium acm. Atelebasic rutellum. Distal part with wide paraxial tooth followed by a smaller tooth merging into a series of inconspicuous projections forming an undulating membranous edge (Figure 3B). Incision between rutellar teeth with darker sclerotization. Setae a (approx. 15 µm) and m (approx. 25 µm) long, robust and smooth. Mentum regular, seta h setiform, robust (approx. 23 µm). Labiogenal articulation complete. Chelicera chelate, mobile digit darker sclerotized; distinct strong interlocking teeth. Träghårds organ (tg) slender blunt lamella, slightly upward orientated. Seta cha and chb robust and barbed, cha longer (approx. 40 µm), chb shorter (approx. 23 µm) with a strong curvature (Figure 3C). No porose areas were detectable on any of the above-mentioned parts.

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Open in a new tab

Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. mouthparts adult. (a) left pedipalp antiaxial view; (b) left rutellum ventral view; (c) left chelicera antiaxial view.

Gastronotic region

(Figure 1A, 2A) Oval in dorsal view, convex in lateral view; no distinct border between anterior median notogastral and prodorsal region. Ascleritic incision pgn visible along the lateral humeral area. Fifteen pairs of short, thickened and blunt notogastral setae (12–15 µm), c1-3, da, dm, dp, la, lm, lp, h1-3, p1-3; setae p1 and h1 conspicuously longer than others, the latter unilaterally barbed. Five pairs of notogastral lyrifissures present but difficult to trace due to the rough cuticular surface; ia between seta c2 and c3, but closer to the latter; im between seta lm and lp; ih laterad and anterior to h3; lyrifissures ip and ips laterally of seta p3 and p2 respectively. Orifice of the opisthonotal gland (gla) not traceable due to heavy ornamention.

Lateral aspect

(Figure 2C) Pedotectum I and II absent. Discidium dis between acetabulum III and IV, developed as conspicuous rounded ridge.

Podosoma and venter

(Figure 1B, 2B) Epimeral setation 3–1–2–2, all setae setiform and smooth, seta 1b conspicuously longer (approx. 37 µm) than others (10–21 µm). Genital orifice large, rectangular with rounded corners, anteriorly broader. Six pairs of genital setae arranged in longitudinal rows, whereas the fifth pair slightly laterally displaced and first slightly longer than others (30–37 µm). One pair of short, setiform aggenital setae ag. Strongly curved obvious transversal ridge between genital and anal opening. Anal valves were triangular but strongly rounded. Outer part of preanal organ rectangular with rounded edges, inner part shaped like a transverse bar. Two pairs of thin anal setae, an1-2 (19–25 µm), inserting close to the median border. Three pairs of short adanal setae, ad1-3 (approx. 12 µm), all located posteriorly of anal orifice. Lyrifissure iad flanking anterior third of anal plates.

Legs

(Figure 4) Ambulacrum tridactylous, median claw broad and strong, lateral claws weaker developed and dorsally slightly dentate. Extensive brachytracheae with slit-like stigmata on the dorsal paraxial face of all femora and tracheal sacculi ventrally on all tibiae and dorsally on trochanter III and IV. Dorsal companion seta d (usually associated with solenidia) on genu I, II and III and all tibiae reduced to alveolus. Primilateral setae of tarsus I absent. Tectal (tc) and iteral (it) setae as well as most other terminal tarsal setae with spoon-shaped or nodular tips (these are sometimes difficult to observe). Famulus ε on tarsus I rod-like, blunt and next to solenidion ω1, solenidion ω2 shorter and in slight paraxial position. Solenidia ω1 and ω2 on tarsus II adjacent. Chaetome and solenidia see Table 2.

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Open in a new tab

Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. adult legs. (a) right leg I antiaxial view; (b) right leg II antiaxial view; (c) left leg III dorsolateral view of antiaxial aspect; (d) left leg IV ventrolateral view of antiaxial aspect.

Table 2.

Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. development of leg setation and solenidia from larva to adult (except for tritonymph).

  Instars Trochanter Femur Genu Tibia Tarsus Chaetome Solenidia
Leg I larva - d, bv´´ (l), d, σ (l), v´, d, φt (pl), s, (a), (u), (p), (tc), (ft), ε, ωt 0–2–3–4-14 1–1–1
  protonymph - - - - ω2 0–2–3–4-14 1–1–2
  deutonymph - l´´ - φ 2 - 0–3–3–4-14 1–2–2
  adult - l´ v´, d lost v´´, d lost (it) 0–4-3–4-16 1–2–2
Leg II larva - d, bv´´ (l), d, σ l´, v´, d, φ (pv), s, (a), (u), (p), (tc), (ft), ω 0–2-3–3-13 1–1–1
  protonymph - - - - - 0–2-3-3-13 1–1–1
  deutonymph - l´´ - l´´ - 0–3-3–4-13 1–1–2
  adult - l´ v´, d lost v´´, d lost (it) 0–4-3–4-15 1–1-2
Leg III larva - d, ev´ l´, d, σ v´´, d, φ (pv), s, (a), (u), (p), (tc), (ft) 0–2–2–2-13 1–1-0
  protonymph v´ - - - - 1-2–2-2-13 1-1-0
  deutonymph l´ - - - - 2-2-2-2-13 1-1-0
  adult - l´ d lost (l), d lost (it) 2-3-1–3-15 1-1-0
Leg IV protonymph - - - - (pv), (u), (p), ft´´ 0–0–0–0-7 0-0-0
  deutonymph - d, ev´ d, l´ v´, d, φ s, (a), (tc) 0–2-2-2-12 0–1-0
  adult v´ - - (l), d lost (it) 1-2-2-3-14 0–1-0
Open in a new tab

First development of setae characterized by letters, () = pairs of setae, – = no change with regard to preceding stage, d lost = dorsal companion seta reduced.

Common features of juvenile stages

Apheredermous. Colour dark brown. Integument soft and strongly plicate (“nymphes plissées” in the sense of Grandjean 1953). Prodorsum triangular, rostrum rounded, cerotegument overall finely granular. Rostral seta (ro) thin, long and smooth, lamellar (le) and interlamellar setae (in) thickened, blunt and barbed. Exobothridial seta (ex) small and smooth. Bothridia small cup-like. Sensillum short, clavate, head with inconspicuous linear elevations. Hysterosoma oval in dorsal view, slightly convex in lateral view. Notogastral setae thickened and barbed, posterior setae longest, median dorsal setae shortest. Orifice of opisthonotal gland gla located in latero-ventral folds on a level with anterior third of anal valves. Legs monodactylous, with slightly invaginated porose areas on the same leg segments and position as brachytracheae in adults. Solenidia on genu and tibia always associated with dorsal companion setae (both approx. the same size).

Larva

(N = 1): length 249 µm.

Prodorsal region. Sensillum short clavate, head drop-shaped with a pointed tip.

Gastronotic region. Twelve pairs of notogastral setae; c1-3, da, dm, dp, la, lm, lp, h1-3.

Ventral region of idiosoma. Epimeral setation 2(3)-1-2, third seta on epimeron 1(given in parentheses) developed as protective seta (number in parentheses includes this seta) covering Claparède’s organ. No anogenital setae present in this stage. Posterior third of anal orifice framed by smooth and short seta h3 and smooth and long seta h2.

Legs. Chaetome and solenidia see Table 2.

Protonymph

(N = 1): length 286 µm.

Prodorsal region. Sensillum short clavate, head globular without pointed tips from this stage.

Gastronotic region (Figure 5A, 6A, 6C). Fifteen pairs of notogastral setae; c1-3, da, dm, dp, la, lm, lp, h1-3, p1-3.

Figure 5.

Figure 5.

Open in a new tab

Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. protonymph. (a) dorsal view; (b) ventral view. Scale bar valid for both depictions.

Figure 6.

Figure 6.

Open in a new tab

Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. stereomicroscopic photographs of protonymph. (a) dorsal view; (b) ventral view; (c) lateral view. Scale bars 100 µm.

Ventral region of idiosoma (Figure 5B, 6B). Epimeral setation 3–1-2-1. One pair of short genital setae, placed on the anterior half of genital valves. Adanal and anal setae not developed. Setae p3 and p2 short and smooth framing posterior half of anal orifice, seta p1 longer and slightly barbed.

Legs. Chaetome and solenidia see Table 2.

Deutonymph

(N = 5): length 356–425 µm (mean 388 µm).

Gastronotic region (Figure 7A, 7C). Fifteen pairs of notogastral setae, same positions and shapes as in protonymph.

Figure 7.

Figure 7.

Open in a new tab

Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. deutonymph. (a) dorsal view; (b) ventral view, distal leg segments omitted; (c) lateral view, legs drawn simplified.

Ventral region of idiosoma (Figure 7B). Epimeral setation 3–1-2–2, seta 4b added in a median position. Two pairs of short genital setae aligned in a longitudinal row. Three pairs of short, smooth adanal setae ad1-3 flanking anal orifice.

Legs. Chaetome and solenidia see Table 2.

Tritonymph no data available

Ecological data

The specimen from Muroran (Figure 8) was found in black algae growing on a large rock in the upper eulittoral zone of a rough coastal area with strong wave action. The sea at this location belongs to the North Pacific Ocean but still is influenced by the warm Tsugaru current which flows eastwards through the strait of Tsugaru (between Hokkaido and Honshu connecting the Sea of Japan with the Pacific Ocean). The air temperature at Muroran ranges from −2.6°C in February to 20.1°C in August, while the sea surface temperature ranges from approximately 2°C in the coldest month to 23°C in the warmest month (Table 3).

Figure 8.

Figure 8.

Open in a new tab

Distribution of Ameronothrus species in the northern Asian Pacific region.

Table 3.

Climate data for the two record locations on Hokkaido. SST = sea surface temperature range derived from historical data (www.seatemperature.org); as there were no direct data for Muroran, available data for the next closest town, named Date (20 km away), was taken as reference. AAT = average air temperature for the year 2018 taken from Japan Meteorological Agency (www.jma.go.jp).

  Muroran/Date
 Yoichi
  SST
 AAT
 SST
 AAT
  Min°C Max°C °C Min°C Max°C °C
Jan 2,5 9 −1,2 4,9 9,3 −3,4
Feb 2,1 5,2 −2,6 4,9 7,2 −5
Mar 1,8 5,1 3 4,8 7 1,7
Apr 3,6 7,7 7,2 5,9 9,6 7,3
May 4,8 12,5 11,4 7,5 13,3 11,8
Jun 10 19,3 14,7 11,7 18,3 15,9
Jul 15,3 22 18,9 16,5 21,3 20,3
Aug 19,6 23,2 20,1 20,4 23,3 20,2
Sep 17,5 22,9 18,5 18,4 23,4 16,9
Oct 13,8 18,7 13,9 14,2 19,4 11,5
Nov 9,7 14,8 7,9 9,7 15,1 5,3
Dec 5,1 12,2 0,6 6,8 11,4 −1,9
Open in a new tab

The population from Yoichi was collected from large layers of grey lichen growing on a massive quay wall. The sample was taken in the supralittoral area, which is only exposed to spray from the seawater. This location lies at the Sea of Japan (Figure 8) in an area that is influenced by the warm northwards flowing Tsushima current. The air temperature in Yoichi ranges from −5°C in the winter to 20°C in the summer, whereas sea surface temperature is the lowest in March with approx. 4.8°C and the highest in September with 23.4°C (Table 3).

Genetic data

COI as well as 18S rRNA sequence data confirm all investigated specimens as members of A. yoichi. The Bayesian inference tree based on 18S rRNA further shows a well-separated A. yoichi clade but places it in paraphyly to Paraquanothrus grahami Norton & Franklin, 2018, a supposed member of the Ameronothridae (Figure 9). Additionally, A. yoichi as well as P. grahami are placed outside other members of the superfamily Ameronothroidea, namely the Selenoribatidae and Fortuyniidae that are represented as a monophyletic group in the tree.

Figure 9.

Figure 9.

Open in a new tab

Bayesian inference tree based on 18S rRNA sequences (1751 bp). Different families are highlighted in colour. Individual sequences of the newly described Ameronothrus yoichi sp. n. species are labelled from JP14_A_03 – JP14_A_11. References and accession numbers for newly created and downloaded sequences can be found in Table 1.

Discussion

Systematics

The new species Ameronothrus yoichi can be easily distinguished from its congeners by its unique prodorsal ridge structure, the conspicuously pusticulate body surface showing densely packed large nodules and the loss of dorsal companion setae d on all genua in the adult stage. Most other characteristics do overlap with certain species and hence can only be used in specific combinations for determination. Schulte (1975) classified four groups of Ameronothrus species based on morphological correlations, (I) the Ameronothrus marinus group containing A. marinus (Banks, 1896), A. bilineatus (Michael, 1888), A. schusteri Schubart, 1970 and A. schubarti Weigmann & Schulte 1975, (II) the Ameronothrus maculatus group consisting of A. maculatus (Michael, 1882) and A. schneideri (Oudemans, 1903), (III) the Ameronothrus lineatus group with A. lineatus (Thorell, 1871) and A. nigrofemoratus (L. Koch, 1879) and (IV) the monotypic Ameronothrus lapponicus Dalenius, 1963 group. Ameronothrus yoichi does not share any group-specific characters with the A. marinus and the A. lapponicus group. It shows the same loss of dorsal tibial setae d as the A. lineatus group (whereas in A. yoichi the alveoli of these setae are still present), but differs in all the other group traits. It shares the lack of primilateral tarsal setae (pl), the reduction of the ascleritic incision pgn and the complete labiogenal articulation with the A. maculatus group, but shows a differing anal setation with two instead of only one pair of setae. Based on these conformities, A. yoichi seems to be closest related to A. maculatus and A. schneideri, though there is no complete match with the group. Unfortunately, the descriptions of A. dubinini, A. nidicola and A. oblongus (Sitnikova 1975, 1977) are not detailed enough for a thorough comparison and classification into one evolutionary group in the sense of Schulte (1975); therefore, a clear assessment of phylogenetic relationships within Ameronothrus is not feasible yet.

The same applies to juvenile morphology as information on the above-mentioned three species and A. nigrofemoratus and A. schubarti is lacking. Nevertheless, a comparison with known Ameronothrus juveniles shows that A. yoichi exhibits the same developmental patterns and formulas, e.g. prodorsal, notogastral, epimeral and anogenital setation, but differs from other species in certain characteristics. Ameronothrus marinus, A. bilineatus and A. schneideri already lack a trichobothrium in the juvenile stages and A. lineatus and A. lapponicus show uniform shapes of notogastral setae (e.g. Schulte 1975; Ermilov et al. 2012) whereas A. yoichi juveniles show enlarged and broadened, posterior notogastral setae. A similar condition can only be found in the nymphs of A. maculatus, but here seta lp is not thickened and enlarged as it is in A. yoichi.

In a larger phylogenetic context, the present data places A. yoichi in a paraphyletic position to Paraquanothrus grahami, the second supposedly member of Ameronothridae. This contrasts with the recently suggested close relationship of Aquanothrinae and Ameronothridae (Norton and Franklin 2018) and questions its inclusion in the latter. The suggested independent evolutionary origin of the littoral Ameronothridae, Fortuyniidae and Selenoribatidae (Krause et al. 2016; Pfingstl 2017), all members of the superfamily Ameronothroidea, on the other hand, is supported as shown by their paraphyletic placement. The monophyletic origin of Fortuyniidae and Selenoribatidae was already confirmed by certain studies (Iseki and Karasawa 2014; Krause et al. 2016) and is further affirmed by the present data. Nonetheless, comprehensive molecular genetic studies, including many more taxa, are necessary to solve found discrepancies and to verify indicated phylogenetic positions.

Ecology

Schulte et al. (1975) postulated four ecological groups of ameronothrid mites: (I) stenotopic inhabitants of the marine littoral populating characteristic salinity ranges, (II) eurytopic inhabitants of the littoral living in saline and brackish waters, (III) holeurytopic inhabitants of the littoral living in limnic, brackish, marine and terrestrial habitats and (IV) stenotopic inhabitants of inland regions dwelling exclusively in terrestrial habitats. Based on the few present records of A. yoichi it is difficult to assess the ecology of this species but the populations were found in the upper marine eulittoral and supralittoral area hence a strictly terrestrial lifestyle (group IV) can be excluded. Additionally, they were found at relatively low latitudes and species occurring at lower latitudes usually tend to be stenotopic and restricted to marine environments (Schulte et al. 1975; Marshall and Convey 2004); therefore, A. yoichi most likely belongs to group I or II.

Several Ameronothrus species, i.e. A. marinus, A. schusteri, A. lineatus, A. maculatus and A. schubarti are known to live mainly in the sediment-free rock littoral (Schulte et al. 1975) and the same may apply to A. yoichi as both investigated populations were found restricted to this habitat. Ameronothrus yoichi shows three claws on each leg, which further points to the rocky substrate as the main habitat because tridactylous Ameronothrus species are usually found on solid substrates while monodactylous species are mainly restricted to soft substrates (Schulte 1975).

All Ameronothrus species are microphytophagous and can be classified into three groups, namely, lichenivorous species feeding on lichen growing on hard substrates of the coast or inland, algivorous species subsisting on diverse algae from hard coastal substrates and fungivorous species feeding on fungal growth in the upper soil layer of salt marshes (Schulte 1976). Based on its predominant occurrence in lichen on a hard substrate, A. yoichi most likely belongs to the lichenivorous group. However, feeding experiments in the lab would be necessary to confirm such a food preference.

In all known cases, Ameronothrus species are larviparous (Bücking et al. 1998) or at least ovoviviparous (Søvik 2003), which means that larvae hatch immediately after deposition. The same is true for A. yoichi as we found fully developed larvae contained within eggshells inside the body of a female.

Biogeographic aspects

In a global context, the occurrence of A. yoichi at a latitude of approximately 42 degrees North is nothing unusual because distributions of most Ameronothrus species stretch further south (Schulte 1975). In the Asian Pacific region, on the other hand, represents the record of A. yoichi on Hokkaido the southernmost occurrence of an Ameronothrus species. The congeneric A. nidicola and A. oblongus were reported from Kunashir Island (Klimov 1998), which is very close to Hokkaido but lies approximately two degrees more northern (see Figure 8). The distribution of both species stretches further north with records from Sakhalin Island, Lovushki and the Peninsula of Kamchatka (Ryabinin 2015). This pattern indicates that A. nidicola and A. oblongus are adapted to colder climates than A. yoichi whereas it is not clear yet how far the distribution of the latter reaches into the South. Records from Honshu are lacking, but occurrences in the north and hence colder regions of this Japanese Island should be considered. Water temperatures seem to play an important role in shaping the distributions of Ameronothrus as shown in A. lineatus and A. nigrofemoratus. These species reach the latitude of 38° North at the Pacific American shore where consistently cold waters prevail while they only reach a latitude of 50° North at European coasts where comparable water temperatures are present (Schulte 1975). Japanese coasts are strongly influenced by the warm Kuroshio Current and its branch the Tsushima Current and these warm waters may limit the southern distribution of Asian Pacific Ameronothrus species.

However, biogeographic studies combined with local climate data would be necessary to prove such a correlation. Unfortunately, most studies on Ameronothrus species provide the locations of the species found, but no detailed information on the climate prevailing at these locations, therefore only vague conclusions might be drawn. In the light of global warming, local climates may change rapidly and hence distributions of Ameronothrus species may alter, therefore providing reference data is the first step in predicting these shifts.

Funding Statement

This investigation was funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF): [I 3815] for TP and by bilateral Programs, Joint Research Projects (JSPS) and JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers [17K07271]; [18K06392] for SS and SFH.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Dr. Hirotsugu Ono (National Museum of Nature and Science, Tokyo) for the deposition of type specimens.

References

  1. Bayartogtokh B, Hiruta SF, Shimano S.. 2018. Two new species of Scapheremaeus from Southern Japan (Acari: Oribatida: Cymbaeremaeidae), with genetic information. Systematic and Applied Acarology. 23:1545–1559. [Google Scholar]
  2. Berlese A. 1896. Acari, Myriapoda et Scorpiones hucusque in Italia reperta. Ordo Cryptostigmata II (Oribatidae). Padova: Portici; p. 98. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bücking J, Ernst H, Siemer F. 1998. Population dynamics of phytophagous mites inhabiting rocky shores – K-strategists in an extreme environment? In: Ebermann E, editor. Arthropod biology: contributions to morphology, ecology and systematics. biosystematics and ecology series 14. Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften; p. 93–143. [Google Scholar]
  4. Dabert M, Witalinski W, Kazmierski A, Olszanowski Z, Dabert J. 2010. Molecular phylogeny of acariform mites (Acari, Arachnida): strong conflict between phylogenetic signal and long-branch attraction artifacts. Molecular Phylogeny and Evolution. 56:222–241. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Edgar RC. 2004. MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Research. 32:1792–1797. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ermilov SG, Stary J, Block W. 2012. Morphology of juvenile instars of Ameronothridae (Acari: Oribatida). Zootaxa. 3224:1–40. [Google Scholar]
  7. Grandjean F. 1953. Essai de classification des Oribates (Acariens). Bulletin De La Société Zoologique De France. 78:421–446. [Google Scholar]
  8. Iseki A, Karasawa S. 2014. First record of Maculobates (Acari: Oribatida: Liebstadiidae) from Japan, with a redescription based on specimens from the Ryukyu Archipelago. Species Diversity. 19:59–69. [Google Scholar]
  9. Klimov PB. 1998. To the knowledge of mites and ticks (Acari) of Kuril Islands. Far Eastern Entomologist. 63:1–36. [Google Scholar]
  10. Krause A, Pachl P, Schulz G, Lehmitz R, Seniczak A, Schaefer I, Scheu S, Maraun M. 2016. Convergent evolution of aquatic life by sexual and parthenogenetic oribatid mites. Experimental and Applied Acarology. 70:439–453. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Kumar S, Stecher G, Tamura K. 2016. MEGA7: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 33:1870–1874. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Maraun M, Erdmann G, Schulz G, Norton RA, Scheu S, Domes K. 2009. Multiple convergent evolution of arboreal life in oribatid mites indicates the primacy of ecology. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences. 276:3219–3227. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Marshall DJ, Convey P. 2004. Latitudinal variation in habitat specifity of ameronothroid mites (Oribatida). Experimental and Applied Acarology. 34:21–35. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Norton RA, Behan-Pelletier VM. 2009. Suborder Oribatida. Chapter 15 In: Krantz G, Walter DE, editors. A Manual of Acarology. Lubbock: Texas Tech University Press; p. 430–564. [Google Scholar]
  15. Norton RA, Franklin E. 2018. Paraquanothrus n. gen. from freshwater pools in the USA, with new diagnoses of aquanothrus, aquanothrinae, and ameronothridae (Acari, Oribatida). Acarologia. 58:557–627. [Google Scholar]
  16. Otto JC, Wilson K. 2001. Assessment of the usefulness of ribosomal 18S and mitochondrial COI sequences in Prostigmata phylogeny. In: Halliday RB, Walter DE, Proctor H, Norton RA, Colloff MJ, editors. Acarology: proceedings of the 10th International Congress Melbourne: CSIRO Publisher; p. 100–109. [Google Scholar]
  17. Pepato AR, Da Rocha CE, Dunlop JA. 2010. Phylogenetic position of the acariform mites: sensitivity to homology assessment under total evidence. BMC Evolutionary Biology. 10:1–23. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Pfingstl T. 2017. The marine-associated lifestyle of ameronothroid mites (Acari, Oribatida) and its evolutionary origin: a review. Acarologia. 57:693–721. [Google Scholar]
  19. Pfingstl T, Baumann J, Lienhard A, Schatz H. 2017. New fortuyniidae and selenoribatidae (Acari, Oribatida from Bonaire (Lesser Antilles) and morphometric comparison between Eastern Pacific and Caribbean populations of Fortuyniidae. Systematic and Applied Acarology. 22:2190–2217. [Google Scholar]
  20. Pfingstl T, Lienhard A, Jagersbacher-Baumann J. 2019. Hidden in the mangrove forest: the cryptic intertidal mite Carinozetes mangrovi sp. nov. (Acari, Oribatida, Selenoribatidae). Experimental and Applied Acarology. 63:481–495. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Pfingstl T, Lienhard A, Shimano S, Yasin ZB, Shau-Hwai AT, Jantarit S, Petcharad B. 2019. Systematics, genetics and biogeography of intertidal mites (Acari, Oribatida) from the Andaman Sea and Strait of Malacca. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research. 57:91–112. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Procheş S, Marshall DJ. 2001. Global distribution patterns of non-halacarid marine intertidal mites: implications for their origins in marine habitats. Journal of Biogeography. 28:47–58. [Google Scholar]
  23. Rambaut A, Drummond A. 2007. Tracer v1.4. http://beast.bio.ed.ac.uk/Tracer
  24. Ronquist F, Teslenko M, Van Der Mark P, Ayres DL, Darling A, Höhna S, Larget B, Liang L, Suchard MA, Huelsenbeck JP. 2012. MrBayes 3.2: efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Systematic Biology. 61:539–542. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Ryabinin NA. 2015. Oribatid mites (Acari, Oribatida) in soils of the Russian Far East. Zootaxa. 3914:201–244. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Schaefer I, Norton RA, Scheu S, Maraun M. 2010. Arthropod colonization of land–linking molecules and fossils in oribatid mites (Acari, Oribatida). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 57:113–121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Schäffer S, Krisper G, Pfingstl T, Sturmbauer C. 2008. Description of Scutovertex pileatus sp. nov. (Acari, Oribatida, Scutoverticidae) and molecular phylogenetic investigation of congeneric species in Austria. Zoologischer Anzeiger. 247:249–258. [Google Scholar]
  28. Schulte G. 1975. Holarktische Artareal der Ameronothridae (Acari, Oribatei). Veröffentlichungen des Institutes Für Meeresforschung Bremerhaven. 15:339–357. [Google Scholar]
  29. Schulte G. 1976. Zur Nahrungsbiologie der terrestrischen und marinen Milbenfamilie Ameronothridae (Acari, Oribatei). Pedobiologia. 16:332–352. [Google Scholar]
  30. Schulte G, Schuster R, Schubart H. 1975. Zur Verbreitung und Ökologie der Ameronothriden (Acari, Oribatei) in terrestrischen, limnischen und marinen Lebensräumen. Veröffentlichungen Des Institutes Für Meeresforschung Bremerhaven. 15:359–385. [Google Scholar]
  31. Sitnikova LG. 1975. Superfamily Nothroidea Grandjean, 1954 In: Giiyarov MS, editor. Opredeltel’ obitayushilm pochve kleshchei (Sarcoptiformes). Moscow: Nauka; p. 71–94. (In Russian). [Google Scholar]
  32. Sitnikova LG. 1977. New species of oribatid mites of the families Ameronothridae and Hermanniidae (Oribatei) of the fauna of Soviet Union. Parasitologicheskii Sbornik Leningrad. 27:161–168. [(In Russian)]. [Google Scholar]
  33. Skoracka A, Dabert M. 2010. The cereal rust mite Abacarus hystrix (Acari: Eriophyoidea) is a complex of species: evidence from mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences. Bulletin of Entomological Research. 100:263–272. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Søvik G. 2003. Observations on ovoviviparity and mixed-parity mode in arctic populations of Ameronothrus lineatus (Acari, Oribatida). Acarologia. 43:393–398. [Google Scholar]
  35. Stamatakis A. 2014. RAxML version 8: A tool for phylogenetic analysis and post‐analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics. 30:1312–1313. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Subías LS. 2004. Listado sistemático, sinonímico y biogeográphico de los ácaros oribátidos (Acariformes: Oribatida) del mundo. Graellsia. 60:3–305. [Google Scholar]
  37. Vitzthum HG. 1942. Acarina In: Braun HG, editor. Klassen und Ordnungen des Tierreichs. Leipzig: Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft Becker and Erler Kom. Ges; p. 1011. [Google Scholar]
  38. Weigmann G. 1975. Vorkommen von Ameronothrus (Acari, Oribatei) im Litoral Südafrikas. Veröffentlichungen des Institutes für Meeresforschung Bremerhaven. 15:65–67. [Google Scholar]
  39. Weigmann G. 2006. Hornmilben (Oribatida) . Die Tierwelt Deutschlands 76. Teil. Keltern: Goecke & Evers; p. 520. [Google Scholar]
  40. Weigmann G, Schulte G. 1975. Ameronothrus schubarti n. sp. aus dem marinen Litoral Kaliforniens. Senckenbergiana Biologica. 56:33––143.. [Google Scholar]
  41. Weigmann G, Schulte G. 1977. The evolution of the family ameronothridae (acari: oribatei) I. Morphological Aspects. Acarologia. 19:161––166.. [Google Scholar]
  42. Willmann C. 1931. Moosmilben oder Oribatiden (Cryptostigmata) In: Dahl F, editor. Die Tierwelt Deutschlands. Band 22. Jena: Fischer Jena; p. 79–200. [Google Scholar]
  43. Willmann C. 1936. Oribatiden von Bonaire und Curaçao. Zoologische Jahrbücher Der Systematik. 67:429–441. [Google Scholar]

Articles from International Journal of Acarology are provided here courtesy of Taylor & Francis

RESOURCES