Research Article
Print
Research Article
Karyotype characteristics and gene COI sequences of Chironomus bonus Shilova et Dzhvarsheishvili, 1974 (Diptera, Chironomidae) from the South Caucasus (Republic of Georgia, Paravani river)
expand article infoMukhamed Kh. Karmokov‡
‡ Tembotov Institute of Ecology of Mountain territories RAS, Nalchik, Russia

Corresponding author: Mukhamed Kh. Karmokov ( lacedemon@rambler.ru )

Academic editor: Vladimir Gokhman
© 2022 Mukhamed Kh. Karmokov.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation: Karmokov MK (2022) Karyotype characteristics and gene COI sequences of Chironomus bonus Shilova et Dzhvarsheishvili, 1974 (Diptera, Chironomidae) from the South Caucasus (Republic of Georgia, Paravani river). Comparative Cytogenetics 16(1): 19-38. https://doi.org/10.3897/CompCytogen.v16.i1.79182
ZooBank: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:981493F9-8804-4910-B040-067A49CBC066
Open Access

Abstract

The study presents data on the karyotype characteristics and the mitochondrial gene COI sequences of the non-biting midge Chironomus bonus Shilova et sDzhvarsheishvili 1974 (Diptera Chironomidae) from the South Caucasus. The species belongs to the Ch. plumosus group of sibling species one of the most widespread and successful groups in the genus Chironomus Meigen 1803. The karyotype of the studied population is monomorphic. The morphological and chromosomal characteristics of Ch. bonus from the Caucasus are similar to those previously described for this species (Kiknadze et al. 1991a). In the phylogenetic tree based on the COI gene sequences one can observe several clear clusters. We named them Palearctic Ch. plumosus Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai and Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus clusters. The calculated K2P genetic distances within each cluster have not exceeded the 3% threshold for the genus Chironomus. Contrary to this the distances between the clusters exceed this range and correspond to separate species. The Ch. bonus sequences belong to the cluster consisting of Ch. plumosus (Linnaeus 1758) sequences from European populations and do not form a separate clade of the phylogenetic tree. One can suppose that the origin of the Ch. plumosus group of sibling species dates back to 5.75–3.43 million years ago (Mya) the epochs of Late Miocene (7,3–5,3 Mya) and early Pliocene (5,3–2,58 Mya). On the other hand Palearctic Ch. plumosus Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai and Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus clusters appeared relatively recently in the Middle Pleistocene 1.288–0.307 Mya. The possible relationship between the climate changes in the Pliocene and the origin of the Ch. plumosus group are discussed. Chironomidae

Keywords

Chironomus bonus, COI gene, Diptera, mitochondrial DNA, phylogeny, polytene chromosomes, South Caucasus

Introduction

Shilova and Dzhvarsheishvili first described Chironomus bonus Shilova et Dzhvarsheishvili, 1974 from Paravani Lake in the Republic of Georgia (Shilova and Dzhvarsheishvili 1974). According to the Fauna Europaea web source (Pape and Beuk 2016), the species is known in Europe from the French mainland, Switzerland, and Bulgaria. The species has also been found in the Republic of Armenia (Sevan Lake) (Kiknadze et al. 2016).

The species Ch. bonus belongs to the Ch. plumosus group of sibling species, one of the most widespread and successful groups in the genus Chironomus Meigen, 1803. According to Shobanov (2000), the group of sibling species is a quasi-taxonomic category that unites species which are similar in morphology and karyotype. Often, there are no clear diagnostic criteria for groups of species, and the association is based on the principle of relative similarity. Shobanov (1989) and Kiknadze et al. (1991) developed the morphological characteristics of the Ch. plumosus group. These characteristics include several key features. In general, the larvae are relatively large, ranging from 16 to 30 mm. The larvae of most species belong to the plumosus-type, with the so-called sculpturing on the outer (ventral) side of the ventromental plates. Most species in the group prefer lowland rivers with slow current and high sediment silt. In addition, they are widely present in different types of ponds and lakes, of both natural and artificial origin. Several species of the group (at least Ch. plumosus (Linnaeus, 1758) and Ch. borokensis Kerkis, Filippova, Schobanov, Gunderina et Kiknadze, 1988, see below) can tolerate low oxygen concentrations for an extended period (Shobanov 2001).

According to Kiknadze et al. (2016), the group consists of 14 species: Ch. agilis Schobanov et Djomin, 1988; Chironomus sp. prope agilis (syn. Ch. agilis 2) Kiknadze, Siirin et Filippova, 1991; Ch. balatonicus Dévai, Wülker et Scholl, 1983; Ch. bonus Shilova et Dzhvarsheishvili, 1974; Ch. borokensis Kerkis, Filippova, Shobanov, Gunderina et Kiknadze, 1988; Ch. entis Shobanov, 1989; Ch. muratensis Ryser, Scholl et Wülker, 1983; Ch. nudiventris Ryser, Scholl et Wülker, 1983; Ch. plumosus; Ch. sinicus Kiknadze, Wang, Istomina et Gunderina, 2005; Chironomus sp. J Kiknadze, 1991; Chironomus sp. K Golygina et Ueno, 2008; Ch. suwai Golygina et Martin, 2003; and Ch. usenicus Loginova et Belyanina, 1994. The identification of these species can only be done through karyological analysis (reviewed in Kiknadze et al. 1996; Butler et al. 1999). Most of them often occur sympatrically in the same body of water, which can severely complicate the identification process.

The majority of the species in the Ch. plumosus group have a Palearctic distribution. Only two of them, Ch. plumosus and Ch. entis, are also found in the Nearctic, and they can therefore be considered as Holarctic species (Butler et al. 1999; Kiknadze et al. 2000; Golygina and Kiknadze 2001). Adult morphology suggests that Palearctic Ch. plumosus has a very wide distribution range from Western Europe to the Far East (Linevich and Sokolova 1983). However, karyological analysis has shown that Ch. borokensis and Chironomus sp. prope agilis replace Ch. plumosus in Eastern Siberia and the Far East (Kiknadze et al. 1996; Golygina et al. 2003). As indicated before, the karyotype study is the only reliable method for recognizing species in this group.

The karyotype of Ch. bonus has been described by Kerkis et al. (1989) and Kiknadze et al. (1991a). A short communication about the Ch. bonus karyotype was presented by Belyanina (1983). Some information on the karyotype and external morphology of Ch. bonus from Bulgaria was given by Michailova (1994). The biggest DNA databases, GenBank and BOLD, do not contain any DNA data on Ch. bonus, including sequences of the COI gene.

The aim of the work is to present the description of the karyotype and gene COI sequences of Ch. bonus from the South Caucasus, as well as to compare the karyotype characteristics and DNA data of Ch. bonus with the corresponding information available for other species of the Ch. plumosus group.

Methods

For both DNA and karyological studies, we used fourth-instar larvae of Ch. bonus. We collected larvae from a particular site in the Republic of Georgia (South Caucasus): 18.07.17, 41°19.305'N, 43°45.563'E, Ninotsminda district in the region of Samtskhe-Javakheti, one of the branches of the Paravani river, just 0.6 km north of Saghamo settlement, altitude of ca. 2000 m a.s.l. The maximum depth of the river is about 1 m, and the salinity of the water is about 40 ppm. The collection site is marked on the map with a dark circle (Fig. 1). The geographic division of the Caucasus follows Gvozdetsky (1963).

Figure 1.

Collection site of Ch. bonus in South Caucasus. The collection site is marked with dark circle.

The head capsules and bodies of six larvae were slide-mounted in Faure-Berlese medium. The specimens have been deposited at the Tembotov Institute of Ecology of the Mountain Territories RAS in Nalchik, Russia. We studied the karyotype of all six larvae from the Caucasus region.

For karyological study, we fixed the larvae in an ethanol-glacial acetic acid solution (3:1). The preparations of the chromosomes were made using the ethanol-orcein technique (see Dyomin and Ilyinskaya 1988; Dyomin and Shobanov 1990). The banding sequences were designated as per the accepted convention, specifying the abbreviated name of the species, the symbol of the chromosome arm, and sequence number, as h’bonA1, h’bonB1, etc. (Keyl 1962; Wülker and Klötzli 1973).

We performed the identification of chromosome banding sequences for arms A, E, and F using photomaps by Kiknadze et al. (1991a, 2016) in the system of Keyl (1962) and chromosome mapping for arms C and D as per Kiknadze et al. (1991a, 2016) in the system of Dévai et al. (1989). The chromosome preparations were studied using a Carl Zeiss Axio Imager A2 microscope.

DNA extraction, amplification and sequencing

We used four karyologically studied larvae of Ch. bonus for further DNA extraction. DNA was extracted from the larvae and preserved in 96% ethanol using a Diatom DNA Prep 100 kit (Izogen Laboratory Ltd, Moscow, Russia) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. DNA extraction was performed on vacuum-dried samples without prior homogenization. Samples were incubated in a lysis buffer at a temperature of 55.5 °C for 16 h. After the extraction, the head capsules were retrieved for dry mounting. The resulting DNA solutions were stored at -18 °C. The amplification of the mitochondrial COI gene was conducted using the MasterMix X5 kit (Dialat Ltd, Moscow).

To amplify the mitochondrial COI gene’s barcoding region, primers 911 (5´-TTTCTACAAATCATAAAGATATTGG-3´) and 912 (5´- TAAACTTCAGGGTGACCAAAAAATCA-3´) (Folmer et al. 1994) were used. PCR was performed in a 25-µL reaction volume. The amplification profile consisted of an initial step of 95 °C for 5 min, followed by 45 cycles of 95 °C for 30 s, 50 °C for 30 s, and 72 °C for 50 s, and finally an 8-min extension step at 72 °C, a final elongation at 72 °C (8 min), and final storage at 4 °C. The resulting PCR products were purified by precipitation in a 0.15 M CH3COONa solution in 90% ethanol and then rinsed with 70% ethanol. The results were visualized by 1.5% agarose gel electrophoresis with ethidium bromide.

Purified PCR products were sequenced in both directions. DNA sequencing of the COI gene was performed according to Sanger using the BigDye Terminator v3.1 commercial kit (ThermoFisher) and the ABI 3130×l genetic analyzer (ThermoFisher) at Syntol JSC (Moscow, Russia). The GenBank accession numbers of the three sequences obtained in this study are MZ014021, MZ014022, and MZ014023.

Phylogenetic analysis

For the phylogenetic comparison, we used DNA data (sixty-one COI gene sequences) from both the GenBank and BOLD (Ratnasingham and Hebert 2007) databases. Accession numbers of used sequences in GenBank and BOLD: Chironomus dorsalis Meigen, 1818 (JN887047.1); Ch. balatonicus (JN016826.1); Ch. muratensis (AF192194.1); Chironomus sp. prope agilis (AF192190.1); Ch. borokensis (AB740261.1); Ch. usenicus (JN016807.1, JN016809.1, JN016808.1); Ch. entis (KF278213.1, KF278212.1, KJ085531.1, KJ087284.1, KJ089893.1, GBDPC429-14, MGOCF102-16); Ch. plumosus (AB740263.1, AB740262.1, JN016830.1, JN016829.1, CHBAL014-20, CHIFI298-16, CHIFI299-16, LEFIJ3947-16, LEFIJ3948-16, PGBAL006-19, PGBAL007-19, PGBAL009-19, PGCBG089-20, BSCHI661-17, BSCHI063-11, BSCHI115-17, BSCHI219-17, BSCHI284-17, BSCHI350-17, BSCHI517-17, BSCHI644-17, GBDP44143-19, GBDP44180-19, LC050899.1, LC050900.1, JCDB364-15, JCDB363-15, GBDP11685-12, GBDP11686-12, GBDP11687-12, GBDP12282-12, XJDQD1039-18, XJDQD1037-18, XJDQD1038-18, XJDQD1036-18, MN750315.1, GBDPC430-14, SDP408034-15, GBDPC133-14, GBDPC138-14, GBDPC144-14, GBDPC166-14); and Pagastiella orophila (Edwards, 1929) (JN265047.1).

We found some COI gene data in both the GenBank and BOLD databases only for seven species of the Ch. plumosus group out of 14. We used in our study COI gene sequences from both the aforementioned databases for Ch. balatonicus, Ch. muratensis, Chironomus sp. prope agilis, Ch. borokensis, Ch. usenicus, Ch. entis, and Ch. plumosus, with available data for species with Holarctic and Nearctic distributions. The most abundant data on the COI gene are available for Ch. plumosus (GenBank and BOLD – 66 and 138 sequences, respectively) and Ch. entis (GenBank and BOLD – 339 and 13 sequences, respectively). DNA sequences of Ch. plumosus obtained from material collected from both Western and Eastern Europe, the Middle East, the Far East, and Northern America were included into the analysis. Concerning Ch. entis, available DNA sequences are more uniform and were obtained from material collected almost exclusively from Northern America (Canada). In cases when a large number of sequences were available from the same region, we used no more than 5–6 sequences with different haplotypes to avoid overloading the phylogenetic tree.

We conducted the alignment of COI sequences with MUSCLE with a genetic code of “invertebrate mitochondrial” packaged in MEGA 6 (Tamura et al. 2013). The pairwise sequence distances (Tables 1–4) consisting of the estimated number of base substitutions per site using MEGA 6 and the K2P model (Kimura 1980) were calculated. The analysis involved 61 nucleotide sequences. The codon positions included were 1st+2nd+3rd+Noncoding. All positions containing gaps and missing data were eliminated. There was a total of 579 positions in the final data set.

Table 1.
Download as
CSV
XLSX

Estimates of evolutionary divergence between sequences of Palearctic Ch. plumosus cluster. The number of base substitutions per site (%) from between sequences are shown. Analyses were conducted using the Kimura 2-parameter model (Kimura 1980).

№ Sequences 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 JN016807.1 Ch. usenicus Russia, Saratov terr. 0
2 JN016809.1 Ch. usenicus Russia, Saratov terr. 0.364 0
3 JN016808.1 Ch. usenicus Russia, Saratov terr. 0.182 0.182 0
4 MZ014023 Ch. bonus Georgia, S. Caucasus 0.547 0.547 0.364 0
5 MZ014022 Ch. bonus Georgia, S. Caucasus 0.364 0.364 0.182 0.182 0
6 MZ014021 Ch. bonus Georgia, S. Caucasus 0.547 0.547 0.364 0.364 0.182 0
7 JN016830.1 Ch. plumosus Russia, Saratov Terr. 0.547 0.547 0.364 0.730 0.547 0.731 0
8 JN016829.1 Ch. plumosus Russia Saratov Terr. 0.182 0.182 0 0.364 0.182 0.364 0.364 0
9 AB740263.1 Ch. plumosus Russia 0.547 0.547 0.364 0.730 0.547 0.730 0.730 0.364 0
10 AB740262.1 Ch. plumosus Russia 0.182 0.182 0 0.364 0.182 0.364 0.364 0 0.364 0
11 CHBAL014-20 Ch. plumosus Montenegro 0.364 0.364 0.182 0.547 0.364 0.547 0.182 0.182 0.547 0.182 0
12 PGBAL006-19 Ch. plumosus Montenegro 0.364 0.364 0.182 0.547 0.364 0.547 0.182 0.182 0.547 0.182 0 0
13 PGBAL007-19 Ch. plumosus Montenegro 0.547 0.547 0.364 0.730 0.547 0.731 0.364 0.364 0.730 0.364 0.182 0.182 0
14 PGBAL009-19 Ch. plumosus Montenegro 0.547 0.547 0.364 0.730 0.547 0.731 0.364 0.364 0.730 0.364 0.182 0.182 0 0
15 PGCBG089-20 Ch. plumosus Montenegro 0.364 0.364 0.182 0.547 0.364 0.547 0.182 0.182 0.547 0.182 0 0 0.182 0.182 0
16 BSCHI661-17 Ch. plumosus Poland 0.547 0.547 0.364 0.730 0.547 0.731 0.731 0.364 0.730 0.364 0.547 0.547 0.731 0.731 0.547 0
17 BSCHI063-11 Ch. plumosus Sweden 0.731 0.731 0.547 0.914 0.731 0.916 0.916 0.547 0.914 0.547 0.731 0.731 0.916 0.916 0.731 0.182 0
18 BSCHI115-17 Ch. plumosus Sweden 0.364 0.364 0.182 0.547 0.364 0.547 0.547 0.182 0.547 0.182 0.364 0.364 0.547 0.547 0.364 0.547 0.731 0
19 BSCHI219-17 Ch. plumosus Sweden 0.182 0.182 0 0.364 0.182 0.364 0.364 0 0.364 0 0.182 0.182 0.364 0.364 0.182 0.364 0.547 0.182 0
20 BSCHI284-17 Ch. plumosus Sweden 0.182 0.182 0 0.364 0.182 0.364 0.364 0 0.364 0 0.182 0.182 0.364 0.364 0.182 0.364 0.547 0.182 0 0
21 BSCHI350-17 Ch. plumosus Sweden 0.364 0.364 0.182 0.547 0.364 0.547 0.547 0.182 0.547 0.182 0.364 0.364 0.547 0.547 0.364 0.547 0.731 0 0.182 0.182 0
22 BSCHI517-17 Ch. plumosus Sweden 0.547 0.547 0.364 0.730 0.547 0.731 0.731 0.364 0.730 0.364 0.547 0.547 0.731 0.731 0.547 0 0.182 0.547 0.364 0.364 0.547 0
23 BSCHI644-17 Ch. plumosus Sweden 0.182 0.182 0 0.364 0.182 0.364 0.364 0 0.364 0 0.182 0.182 0.364 0.364 0.182 0.364 0.547 0.182 0 0 0.182 0.364 0
24 GBDP44143-19 Ch. plumosus UK 0.547 0.547 0.364 0.730 0.547 0.731 0.731 0.364 0.730 0.364 0.547 0.547 0.731 0.731 0.547 0 0.182 0.547 0.364 0.364 0.547 0 0.364 0
25 GBDP44180-19 Ch. plumosus Iran 2.028 2.406 2.217 2.592 2.406 2.595 2.217 2.217 2.219 2.217 2.028 2.028 2.217 2.217 2.028 2.217 2.406 2.406 2.217 2.217 2.406 2.217 2.217 2.217 0

We conducted the estimation of phylogenetic relationships in BEAST V1.10.4 (Suchard et al. 2018) by the Bayesian Markov-chain Monte-Carlo (MCMC) method, using the HKY+G substitution model as selected in MEGA 6. The determination of the appropriate model in MEGA 6 (Tamura et al. 2013) was performed. The strict clock as a clock model and the Yule process as a speciation model were used. We run MCMC for 10.000.000 iterations and 1000 iterations of burn in. Our analysis involved 61 nucleotide sequences, and we eliminated all positions with less than 95% site coverage. There were 579 positions in the final data set. We used the COI sequence of Pagastiella orophila (Genbank accession number JN265047.1) as an outgroup.

Table 2.
Download as
CSV
XLSX

Estimates of evolutionary divergence between sequences of Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus cluster. The number of base substitutions per site (%) from between sequences are shown. Analyses were conducted using the Kimura 2-parameter model (Kimura 1980).

№ Sequences 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1 GBDPC429-14 Ch. entis US, Michigan 0
2 KF278213.1 Ch. entis Canada, Quebec 0.914 0
3 KF278212.1 Ch. entis Canada, Quebec 1.099 0.182 0
4 MGOCF102-16 Ch. entis US, New York 0.914 0 0.182 0
5 KJ085531.1 Ch. entis Canada, Ontario 0.547 0.730 0.914 0.730 0
6 KJ087284.1 Ch. entis Canada, Ontario 0.547 0.730 0.914 0.730 0 0
7 KJ089893.1 Ch. entis Canada, Ontario 0.547 0.730 0.914 0.730 0 0 0
8 GBDPC430-14 Ch. plumosus US, Michigan 0.730 0.730 0.913 0.730 0.547 0.547 0.547 0
9 SDP408034-15 Ch. plumosus US, Minnisota 0.730 0.730 0.913 0.730 0.547 0.547 0.547 0 0
10 GBDPC133-14 Ch. plumosus Canada 1.285 0.364 0.547 0.364 1.099 1.099 1.099 1.098 1.098 0
11 GBDPC138-14 Ch. plumosus Canada 1.285 0.364 0.547 0.364 1.099 1.099 1.099 1.098 1.098 0 0
12 GBDPC144-14 Ch. plumosus Canada 0.730 0.730 0.913 0.730 0.547 0.547 0.547 0 0 1.098 1.098 0
13 GBDPC166-14 Ch. plumosus Canada 1.099 0.547 0.731 0.547 0.914 0.914 0.914 1.098 1.098 0.916 0.916 1.098 0

We also tried to get average estimates of divergence time between different branches and clusters that appear on the obtained phylogenetic tree (Figs 3, 4). The age of the most recent common ancestors (TMRCAs) for DNA clades was estimated in BEAST V1.10.4 (Suchard et al. 2018) by the MCMC method, using the HKY+G substitution model as selected in MEGA 6. We used a strict clock as a clock model and a constant size as a coalescent model, with the same calibration point assumed by Cranston et al. (2012). The time estimate of 36 million years ago (Mya) for the root node of the divergence between Pagastiella orophila and all Chironomus species was used as a calibration point. We ran MCMC for 10.000.000 iterations and 1000 iterations of burn in. Tracer v1.7.1 was used to examine the BEAST log file and ESSs for each parameter, which were all > 200.

Table 3.
Download as
CSV
XLSX

Estimates of evolutionary divergence between sequences of Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai cluster. The number of base substitutions per site (%) from between sequences are shown. Analyses were conducted using the Kimura 2-parameter model (Kimura 1980).

№ Sequences 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
1 AB740261.1 Ch. borokensis Russia 0
2 GBDP17582-15 Ch. plumosus Japan 1.283 0
3 GBDP17583-15 Ch. plumosus Japan 1.468 0.547 0
4 JCDB364-15 Ch. plumosus Japan 1.469 0.182 0.364 0
5 JCDB363-15 Ch. plumosus Japan 1.469 0.182 0.364 0.000 0
6 GBDP11685-12 Ch. plumosus South Korea 0.364 1.654 1.839 1.841 1.841 0
7 GBDP11686-12 Ch. plumosus South Korea 0.182 1.469 1.654 1.656 1.656 0.182 0
8 GBDP11687-12 Ch. plumosus South Korea 0.182 1.469 1.654 1.656 1.656 0.182 0 0
9 GBDP12282-12 Ch. plumosus South Korea 0 1.283 1.468 1.469 1.469 0.364 0.182 0.182 0
10 XJDQD1039-18 Ch. plumosus China 1.468 0.913 1.467 1.097 1.097 1.839 1.654 1.654 1.468 0
11 XJDQD1037-18 Ch. plumosus China 1.468 0.913 1.467 1.097 1.097 1.839 1.654 1.654 1.468 0 0
12 XJDQD1038-18 Ch. plumosus China 1.468 0.913 1.467 1.097 1.097 1.839 1.654 1.654 1.468 0 0 0
13 XJDQD1036-18 Ch. plumosus China 1.468 0.913 1.467 1.097 1.097 1.839 1.654 1.654 1.468 0 0 0 0
14 MN750315.1 Ch. plumosus China 1.845 2.028 2.592 2.217 2.217 2.219 2.034 2.034 1.845 2.214 2.214 2.214 2.214 0
Table 4.
Download as
CSV
XLSX

Estimates of evolutionary divergence between sequences of Ch. plumosus from Finland and sequences of Ch. balatonicus, Ch. muratensis and Chironomus sp. prope agilis. The number of base substitutions per site (%) from between sequences are shown. Analyses were conducted using the Kimura 2-parameter model (Kimura 1980).

№ Sequences 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 CHIFI299-16 Ch. plumosus Finland, Satakunta 0
2 CHIFI298-16 Ch. plumosus Finland, Satakunta 1.099 0
3 LEFIJ3947-16 Ch. plumosus Finland, Regio aboensis 3.939 3.555 0
4 LEFIJ3948-16 Ch. plumosus Finland, Regio aboensis 3.566 3.573 3.362 0
5 AF192190.1 Chironomus sp. prope agilis Russia 6.306 6.315 8.357 6.930 0
6 JN016826.1 Ch. balatonicus Russia, Saratov_terr. 3.372 3.378 3.555 0.547 6.315 0
7 AF192194.1 Ch. muratensis Russia 4.119 4.123 3.156 4.123 8.115 3.929 0

Recent research demonstrates that the range of divergence rates of the COI gene sequence in insects varies from 1.5% to 2.3% per 1 Mya (Jamnongluk et al. 2003; Stevens et al. 2006 etc.). In the study of tenebrionid beetles, Papadopoulou et al. (2010) obtained a divergence rate of 3.54% per 1 Mya for the COI gene (2.69% when combined with the 16S rRNA gene) under the preferred partitioning scheme and substitution model selected using Bayes factors. In our study, we used for calculations of divergence time these three commonly assumed mutation rates: 1.5%, 2.3%, and 3.54%. We calculated TMRCAs for the nodes 1–9 of the phylogenetic tree (Fig. 3). The obtained values are given in Table 5.

Table 5.
Download as
CSV
XLSX

Substitutions that distinguish Ch. bonus sequence from sequences in the Palearctic Ch. plumosus cluster; nonsyn. and syn. - nonsynonymous and synonymous substitutions respectively.

№ Substitution type Position in the sequence Codon Position in codon Ch. bonus sequence
1 nonsyn. 2 1 1st MZ014021.1
2 syn. 212 71 1st MZ014021.1
3 syn. 340 113 3rd MZ014021.1 MZ014022.1 MZ014023.1
4 nonsyn. 609 203 2nd MZ014023.1
5 nonsyn. 642 214 2nd MZ014023.1
6 nonsyn. 644 215 1st MZ014023.1

Results

Based on morphological and chromosomal characters, we identified the larvae belonging to the genus Chironomus at the studied site as Ch. bonus. The morphology of Ch. bonus larvae from the South Caucasus is similar to that previously described for this species by Kiknadze et al. (1991b).

Karyotype of Ch. bonus from the South Caucasus

The diploid number of chromosomes in the Ch. bonus karyotype is 2n = 8 plus the B-chromosome. Such a picture for the C. bonus karyotype is based on the almost constant presence of an additional B-chromosome in the karyotype of each larva. The chromosome arm combinations are AB, CD, EF, and G (the “thummi” cytocomplex) (Fig. 2). The chromosomes AB and CD are metacentric, EF is submetacentric, and G is telocentric. Arm G homologues are paired in the nucleolus and Balbiani rings (BRs) regions. The centromeric bands are easily identifiable. There is one nucleolus and two BRs on the arm G, and one BR is present on the arm B.

Figure 2.

Karyotype of Ch. bonus from the South Caucasus; h’bonA1.1, h’bonB1.1 etc. – genotypic combinations of banding sequences; BR – Balbiani rings, N – nucleolus. Arrows indicate centromeric bands.

Banding sequences and chromosomal polymorphism of Ch. bonus from the South Caucasus

The karyotype of Ch. bonus from the South Caucasus is monomorphic. The banding sequences of all the chromosome arms of Ch. bonus are identical to those of Ch. plumosus. The difference between the karyotypes of both species is the presence of one additional B-chromosome in almost all studied Ch. bonus larvae. In total, there are 7 banding sequences in the Ch. bonus banding sequences pool (Fig. 2):

h’bonA1 1a-2c 10a-12a 13ba 4a-c 2g-d 9e-4d 2h-3i 12cb 13c-14f 15a-14g 15b-19f C*

h’bonB1 25s-a 24s-a 23z-a 22u-a 21t-a 20n-a 19p-a 18o-a 17m-a 16m-a 15r-a 14r-a 13z-a 12y-v C**

p’bonC1 1a-2c 6c-f 7a-d 16a-17a 6hg 11d-12d 4a-6b 11c-8a 15e-13a 3c-2d 17b-22g C

p’bonD1 1a-3g 11a-13a 10a-8a 18d-a 7g-4a 10e-b 13b-17f 18e-24g C

h’bonE1 1a-3e 5a-10b 4h-3f 10c-13g C***

h’bonE1 1a-3a 4c-10b 3e-b 4b-3f 10c-13g C*

h’bonF1 1a-d 6e-1e 7a-10b 18ed 17d-11a 18a-c 10dc 19a-23f C

h’bonG1 not mapped

* revised mapping by Golygina and Kiknadze (2008, 2012)

** mapped according to system of Maximova-Shobanov (Maximova 1976; Shobanov 1994), mapping revised by Golygina and Kiknadze (2008).

*** mapped according to Keyl (1962).

Results of phylogenetic analysis of COI gene sequences of Ch. bonus and estimated ages of the most recent common ancestors (TMRCAs) for DNA clades

Overall, we successfully obtained three complete COI gene sequences of Ch. bonus from six larvae from the South Caucasus. (MZ014021.1: 627 bp, base composition is 25.99% A, 36.84% T, 16.91% G, and 20.26% C; MZ014022.1: 658 bp, base composition is 26.59% A, 36.17% T, 16.57% G, and 20.67% C; MZ014023.1: 650 bp, base composition is 27.08% A, 35.38% T, 16.77% G, and 20.77% C). Each of the three sequences had a different haplotype. This is the first DNA data obtained for Ch. bonus.

The resulting phylogenetic tree (Fig. 3) represents a very complex pattern, with several obvious clusters with rather high probabilities. We conditionally named them the Palearctic Ch. plumosus cluster, the Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai cluster, and the Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus cluster.

Figure 3.

Phylogenetic tree of Chironomus species estimated by the Bayesian inference (BA). Support values are given if they exceed 0.5. The numbers at the nodes indicate posterior probabilities; Node 1, Node 2 etc. – nodes of the tree for which TMRCAs were calculated.

The Palearctic Ch. plumosus cluster (Figs 3, 4), is formed mostly by Ch. plumosus sequences from Western and Eastern Europe (UK, Sweden, Poland, Montenegro, and the European part of Russia). The only available sequences of Ch. usenicus from Russia (Saratov Terr.) and, surprisingly, sequences of Ch. bonus obtained in this study, are also included in this cluster. It is formed by sequences obtained from material identified through both karyological and morphological analyses (all Ch. usenicus and Ch. bonus sequences, together with a few Ch. plumosus ones, i.e., JN016830.1, JN016829.1, AB740262.1, AB740263.1), and we therefore named it the Palearctic Ch. plumosus cluster.

Figure 4.

Phylogenetic tree of Palearctic Ch. plumosus cluster estimated by the Bayesian inference (BA). Support values are given if they exceed 0.5. The numbers at the nodes indicate posterior probabilities.

The Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai cluster mostly formed by Ch. plumosus sequences from the Far East (China, South Korea, and Japan) and a sequence of Ch. borokensis from Russia. We named this branch as the Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai cluster because this particular Ch. borokensis sequence (AB740261.1) was obtained from the material identified through karyological analysis (Kondo et al. 2016). According to the BOLD database, Ch. plumosus sequences from the Far East were obtained from specimens identified only through morphological analysis. Perhaps the observed picture is an error in species identification, which can happen quite often when chromosomal analysis is not involved, and at least some of these Ch. plumosus specimens from the Far East could actually be Ch. borokensis. On the other hand, at least two Japanese sequences that we used in our study from Lake Suwa could be Ch. suwai. We assume this because Lake Suwa is the type locality for the species. According to Golygina et al. (2003), the karyotype of Ch. suwai is closely related to that of Ch. borokensis as indicated by many common banding patterns, but it differs by the much smaller size of the centromeric bands. Also, Golygina et al. (2003) suppose that the true Ch. plumosus does not occur in Japan.

Almost the same pattern is observed in the Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus cluster, consisting equally of Ch. plumosus and Ch. entis sequences. According to the data from Proulx et al. (2013), just two sequences of Ch. entis (KF278213.1 and KF278212.1) and three sequences of Ch. plumosus (GBDPC133-14/KF278209.1, GBDPC138-14/KF278210.1 and GBDPC144-14/KF278216.1) from this cluster were obtained from material identified through karyological analysis. Except for these sequences, it is most likely an error in species identification as well, and at least some of the Ch. plumosus sequences presented in BOLD from Northern America could actually be Ch. entis and vice versa. Also, in this cluster, there are no Ch. plumosus or Ch. entis sequences from the Palearctic region. Given all this data, we named this cluster the Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus cluster.

In addition to the above-mentioned obvious clusters of the tree (Fig. 3), there is a fourth ambiguous cluster formed by Ch. balatonicus, Ch. muratensis, Chironomus sp. prope agilis, and all Ch. plumosus sequences from Finland. We know from the BOLD database that these Ch. plumosus sequences were obtained from adults identified just through morphological analysis. Perhaps this pattern is an error in species identification, and these Finnish specimens could actually belong to other already known or even previously undescribed species.

Genetic distances

Calculated pairwise sequence distances (Tables 1–4) consisting of the estimated number of base substitutions per site using the K2P model (Kimura 1980) show an interesting pattern. Proulx et al. (2013), who used genetic, morphological, and karyological information to discriminate Chironomus species from Canada, showed that intraspecific K2P distances for Chironomus species characterized by the COI gene ranged from zero to 3%. These values also could be used as a reference for distinguishing Chironomus species in the present work, but data on the COI gene should be complemented with other methods. In our study, the distances between the Palearctic Ch. plumosus cluster’s sequences are less than 3% and range from 0 to 2.595% (Table 1). If data on the Iranian Ch. plumosus are removed, the distances between all other sequences in this cluster are less than 1%, ranging from 0 to 0.914%. Distances between the sequences of Ch. bonus obtained in this study are very small, varying from 0.182% to 0.364%. The sequences of Ch. usenicus and of several individuals of Ch. plumosus from Russia (Saratov Terr.), Sweden, and Montenegro are closest to those of Ch. bonus in terms of distances.

Almost the same pattern is observed in the Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus cluster, where the distances between the sequences are also lower than the 3% range, varying from 0 to 1.285% (Table 2).

In the Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai cluster, the distances between the sequences are also lower than the 3% range, varying from 0 to 2.217% (Table 3). If we disregard Ch. plumosus sequence MN750315.1 from China, Hongze, Jiangsu, the distances between all other sequences in this cluster are significantly less, reaching only 1.839%.

At the same time, the average distances between the various clusters exceed the 3% threshold. The distance between Palearctic Ch. plumosus and Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai clusters is 3.55%. The distance between Palearctic Ch. plumosus and Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus clusters is 3.75%. Finally, the distance between Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai and Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus clusters is 5.98%.

In the fourth cluster, which contains Ch. plumosus sequences from Finland, the distances between the sequences are generally higher than the 3% range (Table 4). Interestingly, the distances between the sequence of Chironomus sp. prope agilis and all other sequences are pretty high, varying from 4.123 to 8.357%. On the other hand, analogous distances in the case of Ch. muratensis are also fairly high, varying from 4.119 to 8.115%. However, the distances between the sequence of Ch. balatonicus and most of the Finnish sequences of Ch. plumosus are also high enough, varying from 3.372 to 3.555%. At the same time, the distance between the sequence of Ch. balatonicus and one Finnish sequence of Ch. plumosus from Regio aboensis (LEFIJ3948-16) is just 0.547%, which is much lower than the 3% range, and we therefore can assume that this Ch. plumosus sequence could actually belong to Ch. balatonicus. Moreover, the distances between the three other Ch. plumosus sequences from Finland, i.e., that from Regio aboensis (LEFIJ3947-16) and two from Satakunta (CHIFI299-16 and CHIFI298-16), are relatively high, varying from 3.555 to 3.939%. At the same time, the distance between the two latter sequences is just 1.099%, which is lower than the 3% threshold. Considering the tree topology (Fig. 3) and genetic distances between the sequences, we can suggest that a particular sequence from Regio aboensis, on the one hand, and another two sequences from Satakunta, on the other hand, belong to two different, possibly previously undescribed species. This assumption is quite possible because Michailova (2001) found in Finland (Lake Arima and Lokka Reservoir) two unknown karyotypes similar to those of the Ch. plumosus group. She proposed that at least one of these karyotypes could correspond to Ch. coaetaneus Hirvenoja, 1998 (Hirvenoja 1998), which may be related to Ch. plumosus.

Some sequences in the Palearctic Ch. plumosus cluster initially were not complete, and it was hard to make a good comparison. But still, we found a small number of substitutions that distinguish the sequences of Ch. bonus from other sequences in the Palearctic Ch. plumosus cluster. Overall, we found six substitutions of that kind (Table 5). Four of them are nonsynonymous substitutions, and the remaining two are synonymous ones. Among them, there is a single unique 340-position substitution that was found in all three sequences of Ch. bonus. All other substitutions are also found in certain sequences from other clusters. Only this unique substitution clearly distinguishes Ch. bonus from other species in our entire data set.

Tempo of diversification

According to the obtained results, the earliest split of the Ch. plumosus group of sibling species occurred during the Late Miocene (7,3–5,3 Mya) and early Pliocene (5,3–2,58 Mya) epoch (Fig. 3; Table 6, node 2), dating back to 5.75–3.43 Mya (substitution rates for all earliest and latest estimates in this chapter are 1.5% and 3.54%, respectively). The most recent common ancestor of all Palearctic Ch. plumosus, Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai, and Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus clusters lived 2.88–1.72 Mya (Fig. 3; Table 6, node 3). This split occurred in the Early Pleistocene. The most recent common ancestor of all members of the Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus cluster lived 0.638–0.378 Mya (Fig. 3; Table 6, node 5). The split between Palearctic Ch. plumosus and Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai clusters dates back to 1.97–1.17 Mya (Fig. 3; Table 6, node 7). The most recent common ancestor of all members of the Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai cluster lived 0.906–0.539 Mya (Fig. 3; Table 6, node 6). The most recent common ancestor of all members of the Palearctic Ch. plumosus cluster lived 1.288–0.759 Mya (Fig. 3; Table 6, node 6). If we disregard the Iranian Ch. plumosus sequence, the most recent common ancestor of all other members of the Palearctic Ch. plumosus cluster dates back even later, 0.517–0.307 Mya (Fig. 3; Table 6, node 6).

Table 6.
Download as
CSV
XLSX

Estimations of the age of the most recent common ancestors (TMRCAs) for DNA clades.

Node number Mean value (Mya) Stdev. 95% HPD interval ESS
Divergence rate 1.5%
Node 0 29.177 5.499 19.403, 40.569 6368
Node 1 17.288 3.874 10.391, 25.051 5221
Node 2 5.746 1.293 3.321, 8.280 4724
Node 3 2.883 0.698 1.689, 4.333 4562
Node 4 3.895 0.995 2.147, 5.844 5323
Node 5 0.638 0.212 0.284, 1.057 3230
Node 6 0.906 0.26 0.447, 1.427 3866
Node 7 1.971 0.505 1.027, 2.927 4836
Node 8 1.288 0.395 0.612, 2.077 5470
Node 9 0.517 0.169 0.229, 0.852 3570
Divergence rate 2.3%
Node 0 24.538 4.519 15.765, 33.035 7072
Node 1 13.716 2.992 8.518, 20.073 5990
Node 2 4.380 0.933 2.639, 6.220 5168
Node 3 2.204 0.511 1.288, 3.228 5429
Node 4 2.962 0.727 1.683, 4.467 5722
Node 5 0.481 0.155 0.217, 1.378 3759
Node 6 0.692 0.197 0.335, 1.071 4840
Node 7 1.503 0.375 0.820, 2.230 5210
Node 8 0.979 0.296 0.466, 1.570 5899
Node 9 0.395 0.129 0.177, 0.649 3576
Divergence rate 3.54%
Node 0 21.017 3.923 13.900, 28.841 6753
Node 1 11.123 2.492 6.596, 16.182 5914
Node 2 3.431 0.763 2.043, 4.944 4731
Node 3 1.715 0.410 1.013, 2.548 4676
Node 4 2.317 0.586 1.257, 3.468 5414
Node 5 0.378 0.124 0.164, 0.624 3784
Node 6 0.539 0.151 0.271, 0.835 4660
Node 7 1.170 0.295 0.634, 1.743 4902
Node 8 0.759 0.229 0.349, 1.206 6108
Node 9 0.307 0.101 0.137, 0.509 3832

Discussion

Studied larvae of Ch. bonus have a monomorphic karyotype, with its details similar to those previously described for this species by Kiknadze et al. (1991a). Following Proulx et al. (2013), we can conclude that the genetic distances between observed Palearctic Ch. plumosus, Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai, and Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus clusters exceed the 3% range. This result leads us to some interesting conclusions about the level of divergence between the Palearctic and Nearctic populations of Ch. plumosus. Our calculations show that the distance (3.75%) between the Palearctic and Nearctic sequences of Ch. plumosus exceeds the 3.0% range for Chironomus species. One can say that since the divergence time of 2.88–1.72 Mya (Fig. 3; Table 6, node 3), the Nearctic populations of Ch. plumosus have already become a separate species.

We can propose two possible explanations for the observed pattern within the Palearctic Ch. plumosus cluster (Fig. 4), which also included the Ch. bonus sequences obtained during this study. The first explanation is similar to that earlier suggested by Guryev and Blinov (2002), who found that populations of Ch. entis and Ch. plumosus did not group together on the trees based on the mitochondrial cytb gene according to their species affiliation. They suggested that it could result from interspecific hybridization followed by recurrent crosses. Consequently, the offspring inherited mtDNA of one of the parental species. In this case, even an insignificant selective advantage of this mtDNA is able to lead to the rapid fixation of the new haplotype in the population. Later, Polukonova et al. (2009) in the work where they studied the COI sequences of cytologically identified Ch. usenicus, also inclined to this explanation when some Ch. usenicus and Ch. plumosus COI gene sequences were almost identical. In addition, Proulx et al. (2013) reported that the COI sequences of cytologically identified Ch. plumosus and Ch. entis larvae collected from Canada cluster together, and some of these sequences are identical. We can therefore assume that the separation of Ch. bonus and Ch. plumosus from a common ancestor could occur long ago. During this time, in the gene pool of Ch. bonus, a unique, separate line of COI gene emerged, but then, an interspecific hybridization between a male of Ch. bonus and a female of Ch. plumosus occurred. In the hybrid offspring, the Ch. plumosus COI sequence gradually replaced that of Ch. bonus.

The observed pattern also can be explained by a relatively recent separation of the two species, with Ch. plumosus being a parental species to Ch. bonus. The COI gene sequences of these species are therefore very similar, with a very low number of new substitutions in the Ch. bonus lineage. However, we discovered a number of substitutions that clearly distinguish Ch. bonus from Ch. usenicus and Ch. plumosus from European populations (Table 5).

We can assume that the Ch. plumosus group originated from the common ancestor during the Pliocene of 5.75–3.43 Mya. However, since we have certain DNA data only for seven species of the Ch. plumosus group out of 14, this temporary estimate could change in the future in favor of the older age. At the same time, the obtained age of the most recent common ancestor of the Ch. plumosus group corresponds rather well to the estimations by Demin and Polukonova (2008) (5.8–3.7 Mya), despite the substantially lower amount of data available for those authors.

We can be more confident about the age of the most recent common ancestors of species constituting the Palearctic Ch. plumosus, Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai, and Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus clusters. It is possible that the age of the Palearctic Ch. plumosus, Far Eastern Ch. borokensis-Ch. suwai, and Nearctic Ch. entis-Ch. plumosus clusters is 0.638–0.378, 0.906–0.539 and 1.288–0.759 million years (Myr) respectively. The age of European populations of Ch. plumosus is approximately 0.517–0.307 Myr. We therefore suggest that observed clusters have arisen relatively recently in the Middle Pleistocene sub-epoch.

We concluded that the most recent common ancestor of the Ch. plumosus group originated in the Pliocene epoch (5.3–2.58 Mya). It is known that this epoch is characterized by the appearance of a new type of biome, the first true grasslands, due to the retreat of the forests associated with the gradual cooling of the climate that began in the previous epochs. True grasslands and Serengeti-like communities of grazing animals probably did not appear until the Late Miocene in the New World and the Pliocene in the Old World (ca. 5 Mya) (Pärtel 2005).

Due to the heterogeneity of the landscapes, new stagnant water bodies became increasingly abundant. In contrast to lowland rivers, which usually have similar environmental parameters, each of these stagnant water bodies was often characterized by a unique combination of size, shape, depth, temperature profile, mineralization level etc. This variation in environmental parameters could easily lead to differences in breeding time between various populations or individuals that can potentially lead to reproductive isolation and the emergence of new species. We suggest that the species divergence in this group could have been caused by invasion of their common ancestor into newly originated water bodies.

Data availability statement

The data (Figs and Tables) that support this study are available in FigShare at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.17060912.v1 and https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.17060666.v1.

Acknowledgements

We are sincerely grateful to E.A. Kuchinova, a researcher of the Laboratory of Ecology and Evolution of Vertebrates, Tembotov Institute of Ecology of Mountain territories RAS, for her big help in lab work.

This study was partially supported by a grant No. 18-04-00961 from the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR).

References

  • Belyanina SI (1983) Karyotypical analysis of the chironomid (Diptera, Chironomidae) of the USSR fauna. Doctor of Science Dissertation, Saratov, Russian Federation: Medical Institute, 455 pp. [In Russian]
  • Butler MG, Kiknadze II, Golygina VV, Martin J, Istomina AG, Wülker W, Sublette JE, Sublette MF (1999) Cytogenetic differentiation between Palearctic and Nearctic populations of Chironomus plumosus L. (Diptera, Chironomidae). Genome 42: 797–815. https://doi.org/10.1139/g99-014
  • Demin AG, Polukonova NV (2008) Divergence time estimation of chironomids of genus Chironomus (Diptera) using the «molecular clock» hypothesis. Entomological and parasitological research in the Volga region 7: 8–14. [In Russian]
  • Dévai G, Miskolczi M, Wülker W (1989) Standardization of chromosome arms B, C and D in Chironomus (Diptera, Chironomidae). Acta Biologica Debricina. Supplementum Oecologica Hungarica 2(1): 79–92.
  • Dyomin SYu, Iliynskaya NB (1988) Change of the density of polytene chromosomes from different organs of Chironomus plumosus larvae. Tsitologiya 30(4): 407–415. [In Russian]
  • Dyomin SYu, Shobanov NA (1990) Karyotype of Chironomus entis from the plumosus group (Diptera, Chironomidae) living in the European part of the Soviet Union. Tsitologiya 32(10): 1046–1054. [In Russian]
  • Folmer O, Black M, Hoeh W, Lutz R, Vrijenhoek R (1994) DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Molecular Marine Biology and Biotechnology 3: 294–299.
  • Golygina VV, Kiknadze II (2001) Karyopool of Chironomus plumosus L. (Diptera, Chironomidae) in Palearctic. Tsitologiya 43: 507–519. [In Russian] https://doi.org/10.1139/g00-052
  • Golygina VV, Kiknadze II (2008) The revision of chromosome I (AB) mapping in Chironomus plumosus group (Diptera, Chironomidae). Comparative Cytogenetics 2: 37–55.
  • Golygina VV, Martin J, Kiknadze II, Siirin MT, Ivanchenko OV, Makarchenko EA (2003) Chironomus suwai, a new species of the plumosus group (Diptera, Chironomidae) from Japan. Aquatic Insects 25: 177–189. https://doi.org/10.1076/aqin.25.3.177.15258
  • Guryev VP, Blinov AG (2002) Phylogenetic relationships among holarctic populations of Chironomus entis and Chironomus plumosus in view of possible horizontal transfer of mitochondrial genes. Russian Journal of Genetics 38(3): 310–315.
  • Gvozdetskii NA (1963) The Caucasus. A Description of Its Nature. Moscow: State Publishing House of Geographic Literature, 261 pp. [In Russian]
  • Hirvenoja M (1998) Chironomus coaetaneus sp.n. (Diptera, Chironomidae) from the Lokka reservoir, northern Finland. Oulanka Reports 18: 53–62.
  • Jamnongluk W, Baimai V, Kittayapong P (2003) Molecular phylogeny of tephritid fruit flies in the Bactrocera tau complex using the mitochondrial COI sequences. Genome 46: 112–118. https://doi.org/10.1139/g02-113
  • Kerkis IE, Kiknadze II, Istomina AG (1989) Comparative analysis of karyotypes of three sibling-species in plumosus group (Diptera. Chironomidae). Tsitologiya 31: 713–720. [In Russian]
  • Keyl H–G (1962) Chromosomenevolution bei Chironomus. II. Chromosomenumbauten und phylogenetische Beziehungen der Arten. Chromosoma 13(4): 464–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00327342
  • Kiknadze II, Shilova AI, Kerkis IE, Shobanov NA, Zelentsov NI, Grebenyuk LP, Istomina AG, Prasolov VA (1991a) Karyoypes and larval morphology in tribe Chironomini. Atlas. Nauka Publish, Novosibirsk, 115 pp. [In Russian]
  • Kiknadze II, Filippova MA, Siirin MT, Kerkis IE (1991b) Chromosomal polymorphism in Chironomus entis (Diptera, Chironomidae). Zoologicheskii Zhournal 70: 106–120. [In Russian]
  • Kiknadze II, Istomina AG, Gunderina LI, Aimanova KG, Salova TA, Savvinov DD (1996) Banding sequence pools of chironomid of Yakutian Permafrost. Tribe Chironomini. Novosibirsk, 166 pp. [In Russian with English summary]
  • Kiknadze II, Butler MG, Golygina VV, Wülker WF, Martin J, Sublette JE, Sublette MF (2000) Intercontinental cytogenetic differentiation in Chironomus entis Shobanov, a Holarctic species in the plumosus group (Diptera, Chironomidae). Genome 43: 857–873. https://doi.org/10.1139/g00-052
  • Kiknadze II, Istomina AV, Golygina VV, Gunderina LI (2016) Karyotypes of Palearctic and Holarctic species of the genus Chironomus [Electronic resource]. Novosibirsk, 489 pp.
  • Kimura M (1980) A simple method for estimating evolutionary rate of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. Journal of Molecular Evolution 16: 111–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01731581
  • Kondo NI, Ueno R, Ohbayashi K, Golygina VV, Takamura K (2016) DNA barcoding supports reclassification of Japanese Chironomus species (Diptera: Chironomidae). Entomological Science 19: 337–350. https://doi.org/10.1111/ens.12212
  • Linevich AA, Sokolova NYu (1983) Geographical distribution. In: Sokolova NYu et al. (Eds) Chironomus plumosus L. (Diptera, Chironomidae). Systematics, Morphology, Ecology, Production. Nauka, Moscow, 9–22. [In Russian]
  • Maximova FL (1976) The karyotype of Chironomus plumosus from Ust’-Izhora wild population of Leningrad region. Tsitologiya 18: 1264–1268. [In Russian]
  • Michailova P (1994) Karyological and external morphological characteristics of Chironomus bonus Shilova et Dyvarsheishvili (Chironomidae, Diptera) from Bulgaria. Studia Dipterologica 1(2): 187–194.
  • Michailova P (2001) Cytogenetic characteristics of species of the Chironomus plumosus group (Chironomidae, Diptera) in Finland. Cytobios 105(409): 99–114.
  • Pape P, Beuk T (2016) Diptera, Chironomidae. Fauna Europaea version 2017.06. https://fauna-eu.org [accessed 1 December 2021]
  • Papadopoulou A, Anastasiou I, Vogler AP (2010) Revisiting the insect mitochondrial molecular clock: the mid-Aegean trench calibration. Molecular Biology and Evolution 27(7): 1659–1672. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msq051
  • Pärtel M, Bruun HH, Sammul M (2005) Biodiversity in temperate European grasslands: origin and conservation. Grassland Science in Europe 10: 1–14.
  • Polukonova NV, Djomin AG, Mugue NS, Shaikevich EV (2009) Comparison of Chironomus usenicus and Chironomus curabilis with species of the group plumosus (Diptera) inferred from the mitochondrial DNA gene COI and by the polytene chromosomes banding pattern. Russian Journal of Genetics 45(8): 899–905. https://doi.org/10.1134/S102279540908002X
  • Proulx I, Martin J, Carew M, Hare L (2013) Using various lines of evidence to identify Chironomus species (Diptera: Chironomidae) in eastern Canadian lakes. Zootaxa 3741(4): 401–458. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3741.4.1
  • Shobanov NA (1989) Morphological differentiation of species of the genus Chironomus of plumosus group (Diptera, Chironomidae). In: Biology, systematic and functional morphology of invertebrates. Nauka, Leningrad, 250–279.
  • Shobanov NA (1994) Karyofund of Chironomus plumosus L. (Diptera, Chironomidae). 2. Inversion variants of chromosomal arms. Tsitologiya 36: 123–128. [In Russian]
  • Shobanov NA (2000) The genus Chironomus Meigen (Diptera, Chironomidae). Taxonomy, Biology, and Evolution. Doctor of Science Dissertation, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation: Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, 464 pp. [In Russian]
  • Shobanov NA (2001) Function of Ventral and Lateral Processes in Larvae of Chironomus (Diptera, Chironomidae). Journal of Evolutionary Biochemistry and Physiology 37: 384–387. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012970711312
  • Shilova AI, Dzhvarsheishvili BA (1974) A new species of the genus Chironomus from East Georgia. Informatsionnyi Bulleten “Biologiya Vnutrennich Vod” 24: 37–42. [In Russian]
  • Stevens MI, Greenslade P, Hogg ID, Sunnucks P (2006) Southern Hemisphere Springtails: Could Any Have Survived Glaciation of Antarctica? Molecular Biology and Evolution 23(5): 874–882. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msj073
  • Suchard MA, Lemey P, Baele G, Ayres DL, Drummond AJ, Rambaut A (2018) Bayesian phylogenetic and phylodynamic data integration using BEAST 1.10. Virus Evolution 4(1): vey016. https://doi.org/10.1093/ve/vey016
  • Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S (2013) MEGA6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis version 6.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30: 2725–2729. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst197
  • Wülker W, Klötzli AM (1973) Revision der Gattung Chironomus Meig. IV. Arten des lacunarius- (commutatus-) complexes. Archiv für Hydrobiologie 72(2): 474–489.

ORCID

Mukhamed Kh. Karmokov https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3797-2511

login to comment