Skip to main content

DNA barcoding does not separate South American Triatoma (Hemiptera: Reduviidae), Chagas Disease vectors

Abstract

Background

DNA barcoding assumes that a biological entity is completely separated from its closest relatives by a barcoding gap, which means that intraspecific genetic distance (from COI sequences) should never be greater than interspecific distances. We investigated the applicability of this strategy in identifying species of the genus Triatoma from South America.

Findings

We calculated intra and interspecific Kimura-2-parameter distances between species from the infestans, matogrossensis, sordida and rubrovaria subcomplexes. In every subcomplex examined we observed at least one intraspecific distance greater than interspecific distances.

Conclusions

Although DNA barcoding is a straightforward approach, it was not applicable for identifying Southern American Triatoma species, which may have diverged recently. Thus, caution should be taken in identifying vector species using this approach, especially in groups where accurate identification of taxa is fundamentally linked to public health issues.

Findings

DNA barcoding, as proposed by Hebert et al. [1] assumes that a biological entity is completely separated from its closest relatives by a barcoding gap[2], which means that intraspecific genetic distances (from COI sequences) are never greater than interspecific distances.

Triatoma Laporte (Hemiptera: Reduviidae) is the most diverse genus of Chagas Disease vectors, and accurate identification of species is imperative for the efficiency of vector control programs. The Triatoma genus is divided into species complexes and subcomplexes according to geographic distribution and morphological similarity [3].

Recently, Justi et al. [4] reported that the relationships between species assigned to South American Triatoma subcomplexes could not be untangled with the data in hand. We were then prompted to investigate whether DNA barcoding would be a useful tool for identifying the species within the infestans, matogrossensis, sordida and rubrovaria subcomplexes [3].

Kimura-2-parameter genetic distances [5] were calculated pairwise within each of the above mentionedsubcomplexes (Table 1) using the software MEGA v. 5 [6], and intra and interspecific distances were compared.

Table 1 K2p-distances between species of the Triatoma subcomplexes studied

In all subcomplexes we observed at least one intraspecific distance greater than interspecific distances (Table 1). To be considered appropriate to identify species within a group, intraspecific distances must always be greater than interspecific ones [2], and therefore DNA barcoding is not accurate for the species-level identification of South American Triatoma. Moreover, the method fails to account for hybridization events, which are naturally observed in Triatoma[7],[8], and introgression, which is frequent in nuclear DNA [9]. These considerations argue that Hebert et al.’s [1] proposal of cataloguing biodiversity based only on DNA barcoding may severely underestimate it.

Besides that, as highlighted by Dujardin et al.[10], the morphological changes observed in closely related “species”, or “lineages” as we prefer to call them, may have led taxonomists to rush into describing subspecies or species, even genera. Molecular phylogenetic studies are in their infancy in unravelling the evolution of Triatominae, and a comprehensive molecular phylogeny, including more than one specimen for most lineages, was published only in 2014 [4], although several analyses were conducted focusing on small species groups. Taken together, these statements make it clear that further investigations of Triatominae evolution are long overdue, preferably integrating morphological, molecular and ecological data.

Lineage evolution has not occurred, but it is happening now. Concerning lineages designated in the infestans complex (including the subcomplexes studied here), separation is much clearer in terms of morphology than in molecular systematics. In cases where lineages have not reached reciprocal monophyly, defining taxonomic entities is not a straightforward issue [11]. Therefore caution is necessary, especially in a group where accurate identification of taxa is fundamentally linked to public health issues.

Conclusions

Although DNA barcoding is a straightforward approach, it was not applicable for identifying Southern American Triatoma species, which may have diverged recently. Thus, caution should be taken in identifying vector species using this approach, especially in groups where accurate identification of taxa is fundamentally linked to public health issues.

Authors’ information

CD is PhD student funded by Instituto Oswaldo Cruz and SAJ is a Post Doctoral Fellow funded by CNPq.

References

  1. Hebert PDN, Cywinska A, Ball SL, DeWaard JR: Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. 2003, In Proc Roy SocLond B, Biol Sci

    Google Scholar 

  2. Meyer CP, Paulay G: DNA barcoding: error rates based on comprehensive sampling. PLoS Biol. 2005, 3 (Suppl. 12): e422-10.1371/journal.pbio.0030422.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Schofield CJ, Galvão C: Classification, evolution, and species groups within the Triatominae. Acta Trop. 2009, 110 (Suppl 2-3): 88-100. 10.1016/j.actatropica.2009.01.010.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Justi SA, Russo AMC, Santos-Mallet JR, Obara MT, Galvão C: Molecular phylogeny of Triatomini (Hemiptera: Reduviidae: Triatominae). Parasit Vectors. 2014, 7: 149-10.1186/1756-3305-7-149.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kimura M: A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J Mol Evol. 1980, 16: 111-120. 10.1007/BF01731581.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Tamura K, Peterson D, Peterson N, Stecher G, Nei M, Kumar S: MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony method. Mol Biol Evol. 2011, 28: 2731-2739. 10.1093/molbev/msr121.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Carcavallo RU, Girón IG, Jurberg J, Galvao C, Noireau F, Canale D: Mutations, Hybrids and Teratologies. Atlas of Chagas Disease Vectors in the Americas. Edited by: Editora FIOCRUZ. 1998, Carcavallo, Girón, Jurberg, Lent, Rio de Janeiro, 515-536.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Costa J, Peterson AT, Dujardin JP: Morphological evidence suggests homoploid hybridization as a possible mode of speciation in the Triatominae (Hemiptera, Heteroptera, Reduviidae). Inf Gen Evol. 2009, 9: 263-270. 10.1016/j.meegid.2008.12.005.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhang AB, Sota T: Nuclear gene sequences resolve species phylogeny and mithocondrial introgression inLeptocarabus beetles showing trans-species polymorphisms. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2007, 45: 534-546. 10.1016/j.ympev.2007.07.003.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dujardin JP, Costa J, Bustamante D, Jaramillo N, Catalá S: Deciphering morphology in Triatominae: the evolutionary signals. Acta Trop. 2009, 110 (Suppl 2-3): 101-111. 10.1016/j.actatropica.2008.09.026.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Arnold ML: Natural Hybridization and species concepts. Natural Hybridization and Evolution. 1997, Arnold: Oxford University Press, Oxford, 11-22.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Carlos G. Schrago for reviewing our manuscript and for the useful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cleber Galvão.

Additional information

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

SAJ designed the study, acquired data, performed all the analyses, interpreted the results, drafted and reviewed the manuscript. CD designed the study, acquired data, performed all the analyses, interpreted the results, drafted and reviewed the manuscript. CG designed the study and reviewed the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Open Access  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

To view a copy of this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Justi, S.A., Dale, C. & Galvão, C. DNA barcoding does not separate South American Triatoma (Hemiptera: Reduviidae), Chagas Disease vectors. Parasites Vectors 7, 519 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-014-0519-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-014-0519-1

Keywords