Ultrastructural investigation of coelomocytes in representatives of Naidinae and Rhyacodrilinae (Annelida, Clitellata, Tubificidae)

Various types of free-floating cells are found in the coelomic fluid of representatives of several annelid groups. The ultrastructure of these "coelomocytes," however, has been studied to a limited degree. In this study, we used a transmission electron microscope to investigate the coelomocytes in specimens of five species of Naidinae and three species of Rhyacodrilinae (all oligochaetous clitellates within the family Tubificidae). These were compared with each other and with previously described coelomocytes of representatives of other oligochaete taxa. Only one distinguishable coelomocyte type was found in the studied specimens: a round to oblong cell without pseudopodia or other appendages, primarily containing membrane-bound granules of varying electron density, a prominent network of rough endoplasmic reticulum, and free ribosomes. This type differs to a great extent from most of the previously described coelomocytes, but shows similarities to certain types found in members of Enchytraeidae and Megascolecidae. Although we noticed some variation, we did not find any ultrastructural characters in these cells obviously useful for phylogenetic studies within Tubificidae.

Molecular evidence for the non-monophyletic status of Naidinae (Annelida, Clitellata, Tubificidae)

Naidinae (former Naididae) is a group of small aquatic clitellate annelids, common worldwide. In this study, we evaluated the phylogenetic status of Naidinae, and examined the phylogenetic relationships within the group. Sequence data from two mitochondrial genes (12S rDNA and 16S rDNA), and one nuclear gene (18S rDNA), were used. Sequences were obtained from 27 naidine species, 24 species from the other tubificid subfamilies, and five outgroup taxa. New sequences (in all 108) as well as GenBank data were used. The data were analysed by parsimony and Bayesian inference. The tree topologies emanating from the different analyses are congruent to a great extent. Naidinae is not found to be monophyletic. The naidine genus Pristina appears to be a derived group within a clade consisting of several genera (Ainudrilus, Epirodrilus, Monopylephorus, and Rhyacodrilus) from another tubificid subfamily, Rhyacodrilinae. These results demonstrate the need for a taxonomic revision: either Ainudrilus, Epirodrilus, Monopylephorus, and Rhyacodrilus should be included within Naidinae, or Pristina should be excluded from this subfamily. Monophyly of four out of six naidine genera represented by more than one species is supported: Chaetogaster, Dero, Paranais, and Pristina, respectively.

Phylogeny of Tubificidae (Annelida, Clitellata) based on mitochondrial and nuclear sequence data

The tubificid clitellates are a common component in the freshwater bottom fauna and are also the most abundant oligochaete group in marine habitats. There are over 800 described species classified in six subfamilies; Tubificinae, Limnodriloidinae, Rhyacodrilinae, Telmatodrilinae, Phallodrilinae, and Naidinae. In this study we examine the phylogenetic relationships in Tubificidae using a combination of mitochondrial 16S rDNA and nuclear 18S rDNA sequence data. Sequences were obtained from five outgroup and 56 ingroup taxa, including five of the six subfamilies of Tubificidae. The data were analysed by maximum parsimony and Bayesian inference. The resulting tree topologies are virtually without conflict. Several associations traditionally recognized within the family Tubificidae are supported, in the Bayesian analysis including a sister group relationship between Tubificinae and Limnodriloidinae. The results also indicate that Rhyacodrilinae is polyphyletic--some of its members (Heterodrilus spp.) fall into a clade with Phallodrilinae, all other groups with Naidinae. Naidinae is also polyphyletic with two rhyacodriline genera, Monopylephorus and Ainudrilus, nested within. Most of the tubificid genera included in the study are supported as monophyletic; however, Tubifex and Limnodriloides are refuted, and Tubificoides is unresolved from other tubificine taxa.

Development of the genital ducts in Telmatodrilinae (Tubificidae, Clitellata)

In Tubificidae, the male genital duct comprises a funnel in the testes segment, followed by a vas deferens, an atrium, and, frequently, a copulatory structure in the adjacent ovarian segment. There may also be a diffuse or compact prostate gland in association with the duct. The morphology and position of the genital ducts are important for the classification of the oligochaetous Clitellata. Different parts of the male duct, however, have been named without regard to whether they are homologous or not. One way to establish better hypotheses of homology is to study the detailed morphology and/or the development of the genital ducts. The morphogenesis of the genital ducts in Alexandrovia onegensis (Telmatodrilinae) is described. The male funnel originates by multiplication of peritoneal (mesodermal) cells in the posterior septum in the testes segment. A cord of these cells breaks through the septum and grows backwards into the next segment, where it connects to the epidermis. This cord gives rise to the vas deferens, and is therefore mesodermal in origin. The atrium in A. onegensis develops from a primary epidermal (ectodermal) invagination. The vas deferens and atrium connect and a continuous duct from the testes segment to the exterior is formed. Several compact prostate glands develop along the atrium, each being formed from cells in the atrial epithelium. The spermatheca develops from an invagination of the epidermis in the testes segment. The female duct is formed from peritoneal (mesodermal) cells in the posterior septum in the ovarian segment. These developmental findings strengthen the hypothesis about a closer relationship between the Telmatodrilinae and Tubificinae (both Tubificidae).

Molecular phylogeny of naidid worms (Annelida: Clitellata) based on cytochrome oxidase I

Naidids are tiny, primarily freshwater oligochaete annelids which reproduce asexually by fission. We investigated the phylogenetic relationships within this group by sequencing 1224 bp of the mitochondrial gene cytochrome oxidase I (COI) from 26 species of naidids (representing 13 of the 23 genera currently recognized), as well as from four tubificids, their closest allies. Although not completely concordant, maximum parsimony and Bayesian inference analyses agreed in several important respects, with no well-supported conflicts. Our study, the first detailed molecular investigation of naidid relationships, suggests that naidids fall into two groups, one comprised of the genus Pristina, and another comprised of all other genera sampled. The clear division of naidids into these two groups best matches an early, simple classification of the group by Lastockin (1924); the more recent classifications proposed by Sperber (1948) and Nemec and Brinkhurst (1987) are not as consistent with our results. We note that our study suggests the genus Stylaria is comprised of two distinct species, Stylaria lacustris and Stylaria fossularis, rather than merely two morphotypes of a single species. Based on our phylogenetic results, we suggest that pigmented eyes evolved only once among naidids but must have been lost multiple times, and that the elongation of the prostomium into a proboscis evolved at least twice independently. The simplest form of fission, architomy (fragmentation), occurs in two of the most basally branching naidid genera, and may represent the plesiomorphic condition for naidids.

18S rDNA phylogeny of the Tubificidae (Clitellata) and its constituent taxa: dismissal of the Naididae

The phylogeny of the Tubificidae, and of most of its subfamilies and some of its genera, is revisited, on the basis of sequences of 18S ribosomal DNA in a selection of species. Forty-six new 18S sequences of Naididae (6), Tubificidae (37), Phreodrilidae (1), Lumbriculidae (1), and Enchytraeidae (1) are reported and aligned together with corresponding sequences of 21 previously studied taxa. The 18S gene of Insulodrilus bifidus provides the first molecular evidence that phreodrilids are closely related to tubificids, corroborating previous conclusions based on morphology. The data further support the monophyletic status of Tubificidae, provided that the "Naididae" is regarded a part of this family; "naidids" may not even constitute a monophyletic group. It is thus suggested that the family name Naididae is formally suppressed as a junior synonym of the Tubificidae. The 18S gene also resolves a number of relationships within the tubificids. Among the subfamilies, Tubificinae is supported, Rhyacodrilinae and Phallodrilinae are revealed as nonmonophyletic, and Limnodriloidinae remains unresolved. Most tubificid genera tested for monophyly are corroborated by the data, only one (Tubifex) is refuted, and two (Tubificoides and Limnodriloides) are unresolved from other taxa. It is concluded that it will be valuable to expand the taxonomic sampling for 18S rDNA in clitellates, and in annelids in general, as this is likely to improve the resolution at many levels. However, it will be equally important to combine the annelid 18S data with other gene sequences and nonmolecular characters, to estimate the phylogeny of these common and diverse worms with greater precision.

Validating Livanow: molecular data agree that leeches, Branchiobdellidans, and Acanthobdella peledina form a monophyletic group of oligochaetes

To investigate the phylogenetic relationships of leeches, branchiobdellidans, and acanthobdellidans, whole nuclear 18S rDNA and over 650 bp of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I were acquired from 101 annelids, including 36 leeches, 18 branchiobdellidans, Acanthobdella peledina, as well as 28 oligochaetes and combined with homologous data for 17 polychaete outgroup taxa. Parsimony analysis of the combined aligned dataset supported monophyly of leeches, branchiobdellidans, and acanthobdellidans in 100% of jackknife replicates. Monophyly of the oligochaete order Lumbriculida with Acanthobdellida, Branchiobdellida, and Hirudinea was supported in 84% of jackknife replicates. These results provide support for the hypotheses that leeches and branchiobdellidans are sister groups, that acanthobdellidans are sister to them, and that together with the family Lumbriculidae they all constitute a clade within Oligochaeta. Results support synonymy of the classes Clitellata and the more commonly used Oligochaeta. Leeches branchiobdellidans, and acanthobdellidans should be regarded as orders equal to their closest relatives, the order Lumbriculida.

Molecular phylogeny of the Annelida

Traditionally, the Annelida has been classified as a group comprising the Polychaeta and the Clitellata. Recent phylogenetic analyses have led to profound changes in the view that the Annelida, as traditionally formulated, is a natural, monophyletic group. Both molecular and morphological analyses support placement of the Siboglinidae (formerly the Pogonophora) as a derived group within the Annelida; there is also evidence, based on molecular analysis of the nuclear gene elongation factor-1α, that the unsegmented echiurids are derived annelids. While monophyly of the Clitellata is well-supported by both molecular and morphological analyses, there is no molecular evidence to support monophyly of the polychaete annelids; the Clitellata fall within a paraphyletic polychaete grade. Relationships among groups of polychaete annelids have not yet been resolved by molecular analysis. Within the Clitellata, paraphyly of the Oligochaeta was indicated in a phylogenetic analysis of cytochrome c oxidase I, which supported a sister relationship between the leeches, including an acanthobdellid and a branchiobdellid, and two of the four oligochaetes in the analysis. There is some evidence from analysis of 18S rRNA sequences for a sister-group relationship between the clitellates and the taxon Aeolosoma. There is no agreement regarding the body form of the basal annelid, and while molecular analyses provide strong support for the Eutrochozoa, the identity of sister-group to the Annelida among the Eutrochozoa remains enigmatic. It is recommended that future investigations include additional conserved gene sequences and expanded taxon sampling. It is likely that the most productive approach to resolving annelid phylogeny, and thus increasing our understanding of annelid evolution, will come from combined analyses of several gene sequences.

Phylogenetic analysis of Tubificidae (Annelida, Clitellata) based on 18S rDNA sequences

Tubificids are aquatic clitellate worms, but recent analyses of morphological characters suggested that this family, as currently recognized, is paraphyletic. Sequences of the 18S rDNA gene of 40 protostome worm species (including 13 representatives of the Tubificidae) and 2 mollusc species were cladistically analyzed to test the monophyly of the Tubificidae and that of some of its constituent subfamilies. Under all alignments tested, the same general phylogenetic pattern emerged. The data support the idea that the Naididae, another clitellate taxon, is associated with some "rhyacodriline" groups within the Tubificidae. The data also corroborate the idea that the Tubificinae and the Limnodriloidinae are monophyletic but indicate that the Rhyacodrilinae and the Phallodrilinae are not. Bathydrilus does not appear to be closely related to other "phallodriline" genera.

Development of the genital ducts and spermathecae in the Rhyacodrilines rhyacodrilus coccineus and Monopylephorus rubroniveus (Oligochaeta, tubificidae)

The male genital duct in Tubificidae consists of a funnel, a vas deferens, an atrium, and, frequently, a copulatory structure. There may also be a diffuse or compact prostate gland in association with the duct. The morphogenesis of this duct is described for Rhyacodrilus coccineus and Monopylephorus rubroniveus (Rhyacodrilinae). The funnel and vas deferens in both species originate from peritoneal (mesodermal) cells in the posterior septum in the testis segment. The atrium in R. coccineus develops from a primary epidermal (ectodermal) invagination. A typical atrium is not formed in M. rubroniveus; the entire duct is of mesodermal origin. In the latter species, a shallow epidermal invagination occurs, into which both male ducts open, but it bears resemblance to a copulatory structure, which usually forms from a secondary invagination, rather than to a proper atrium. We therefore conclude that M. rubroniveus lacks an atrium. The copulatory structure is termed the male bursa. Both species have diffuse prostate glands that differentiate from peritoneal (mesodermal) cells surrounding the male duct. In R. coccineus the cells cover the atrium, whereas in M. rubroniveus they cover only a part of the vas deferens. The development of the spermathecae and female ducts is also examined. The spermatheca is of ectodermal origin in both studied species, i.e., it forms as an invagination of the epidermis. The female duct develops from peritoneal (mesodermal) cells in the posterior septum of the ovary segment. However, in M. rubroniveus the first sign of the duct disappears and a proper duct never develops.