Tetraphyllidea

Abstract: The phylogeny of the Eucestoda was evaluated based on a suite of 49 binary and multistate characters derived from comparative morphological and ontogenetic studies; attributes of adult and larval tapeworms were considered. A single most parsimonious tree (MPT) (consistency index = 0.872; retention index = 0.838; and homoplasy index = 0.527) was fully resolved and is specified by the following: (Gyrocotylidea, (Amphilinidea, ((Spathebothriidea, (Pseudophyllidea, ((Dipbyllidea, (Trypanorhyncha, (Tetraphyllidea, (Lecanicephalidea, ((Nippotaeniidea, (Tetrabothriidea, Cyclophyllidea)), Proteocephalidea))))), Haplobothriidea))), Caryophyllidea))). Monophyly for the Eucestoda was firmly corroborated. Trees derived from the primary and bootstrap analyses were congruent, but low values, particularly for relationships among the tetrafossate tapeworms, indicated additional examination is warranted. The MPT was found to be the most efficient hypothesis for describing character evolution and in specifying relationships among the orders when compared to those concepts that had been developed for the tapeworms over the past century. Areas of congruence were shared among the current hypothesis and one or more of the prior hypotheses. Major conclusions include: (I) Caryophyllidea are basal and monozooy is ancestral; (2) difossate forms are primitive, and the Pseudophyllidea are the sister group of the strongly polyzoic tapeworms; (3) Nippotaeniidea are highly derived; (4) the higher tapeworms (Tetraphyllidea, Lecanicephalidea, Proteocephalidea, Nippotaeniidea, Tetrabothriidea, and Cyclophyllidea) are closely related or potentially coordinate groups; (5) Tetrabothriidea and the Cyclophyllidea are sister groups; and (6) Tetraphyllidea is paraphyletic, with the Onchobothriidae basal to the Phyllobothriidae. Character support for placement of the Tetrabothriidea continues to be contradictory, and this order may represent a key to understanding the phylogeny of the higher cestodes. The current study constitutes a complete historical review and poses a new and robust hypothesis for the phylogeny of the Eucestoda.

Abstract: This study had two main objectives: (1) to construct an extensive, explicit list of characters and character states that might serve as a starting point, and perhaps even a model, for the compilation of a more complete list of characters for all cestode taxa; and (2) to use this character list to generate a hypothesis of the phylogenetic relationships among species representing most of the tetraphyllidean, lecanicephalidean and diphyllidean genera. Specimens of one species in each of 48 genera of tetraphyllideans, eight genera of lecanicephalideans, the three genera of diphyllideans, two genera of proteocephalideans and two genera of trypanorhynchs, were examined as whole-mounts and sections, with light and scanning electron microscopy. A list of 120 morphological characters was compiled. Four phylogenetic analyses were conducted using PAUP* and/or NONA. The first was a comprehensive analysis with the 56 tetraphyllidean and lecanicephalidean species as ingroups and the remaining seven species as outgroups. The second was an analysis of the three diphyllidean species as ingroups and the two proteocephalidean and the two trypanorhynch species as outgroups. The third was an analysis of the eight lecanicephalidean species and the “tetraphyllideans” Echeneibothrium sp. and Pseudanthobothrium n. sp. as ingroups and an outgroup consisting of the seven species used as outgroups in the first analysis. In the fourth analysis, the ingroup consisted of the 14 hooked tetraphyllideans (onchobothriids), and the outgroup consisted of the seven species used as outgroups in the first analysis. The results of these analyses support the following phylogenetic hypotheses: The diphyllideans are monophyletic and Echinobothrium n. sp. and Macrobothridium sp. are more closely related to one another than either is to Ditrachybothridium macrocephalum. The tetraphyllideans, lecanicephalideans and proteocephalideans are more closely related to each other than they are to the diphyllideans or the trypanorhynchs. The ordinal status of the lecanicephalideans is dubious. The lecanicephalidean species are more closely related to some of the tetraphyllidean taxa than these tetraphyllidean taxa are to the remainder of the tetraphyllidean taxa. The proteocephalideans appear to belong within the tetraphyllidean clade. The “tetraphyllidean” species Echeneibothrium sp. and Pseudanthobothrium n. sp. are members of the lecanicephalidean clade. The position of “Discobothrium” n. sp. within the lecanicephalideans is dubious. Within the tetraphyllideans, the non-acetabulate species Litobothrium daileyi, Disculiceps galapagoensis and Cathetocephalus sp. are the most basal members of the group. The family Onchobothriidae is monophyletic, as it is currently defined. Within the onchobothriids, the uniloculate species are basal to the multiloculate species; the species with unipronged hooks are basal to the species with multipronged hooks. Although relationships among the phyllobothriids, as they are currently defined, remain poorly resolved, the family Phyllobothriidae is not monophyletic. These results suggest that some aspects of the classification of the lecanicephalidean and tetraphyllidean taxa require revision. However, such revision should be based on further analyses including a broader representation of the genera and species in these groups.