Next Article in Journal
Barcode Reveals Hidden Diversity and Cryptic Speciation among Butterfly Rays Distributed in the Americas
Previous Article in Journal
Diatom Flora from Time-Series Sediment Trap in the Kuroshio Extension Region of the Northwestern Pacific
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Morphological and Molecular Analysis Describing Two New Species of Myxobolus (Cnidaria, Myxosporea) in Mugil curema (Mugilidae) from Brazil †

by
Diego Henrique Mirandola Dias Vieira
1,*,
Melissa Miyuki Osaki-Pereira
1,
Vanessa Doro Abdallah
2,
Sarah Letícia Paiva Oliveira
2,
Aline Gabriely Torres Duarte
2,
Reinaldo José da Silva
1 and
Rodney Kozlowiski de Azevedo
3
1
Division of Parasitology, Institute of Biosciences, São Paulo State University (Unesp), Botucatu 18618-689, São Paulo, Brazil
2
Parasitology and Pathology Sector, Institute of Biological and Health Sciences, Federal University of Alagoas, Maceió 57072-970, Alagoas, Brazil
3
Postgraduate Program in Environmental Systems Analysis, CESMAC University Center, Maceió 57051-160, Alagoas, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub: DF7A41CE-371F-436A-91DD-5A488DF2586E, urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:F8374B6D-4C92-40AB-A814-424E32558172, urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:CA99B87B-C8CF-4D71-AEFA-52752360A55B.
Submission received: 14 April 2024 / Revised: 10 July 2024 / Accepted: 15 July 2024 / Published: 30 July 2024

Abstract

:
We present descriptions of two newly discovered species of Myxobolus (Myxobolidae) that infect Mugil curema: Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. found in gills and Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. found in intestines. These descriptions are based on the morphology of myxospores, histological analysis, and sequencing of the small subunit ribosomal DNA (ssrDNA). The myxospores of both species differ in the width and length of their spore bodies, and their ssrDNA sequences showed a 10.6% difference. These findings support the identification of these parasites as distinct and previously unknown species. Phylogenetic analysis revealed a subclade consisting of species that parasitize Mugiliformes, with Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. being closely related to Myxobolus maceioensis, and Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. being closely related to Myxobolus curemae. Our analysis aligns with previous research suggesting a strong correlation between host orders and phylogenetic patterns within the Myxobolidae family.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Mugil curema Valenciennes, 1836 belongs to the family Mugilidae Jarocki, 1822, and these fish are known as “white mullets”. Mugil curema inhabits a range of environments, predominantly coastal and estuarine [1,2,3,4,5], that are distributed from the United States to southern Brazil [1,6,7]. In Brazil, they are predominantly found in the northeast region [6,8]. These fish are used commercially through fishing and aquaculture and are an important food source [4,9,10].
Myxozoans, increasingly recognized as widespread and diverse endoparasitic cnidarians, constitute vital components of ecosystems [11]. While fish primarily serve as hosts for myxozoans, some species also parasitize other classes of animals [12]. Myxobolus Bütschli, 1882, the largest genus within the family Myxosporea Bütschli, 1881, encompasses over 1000 identified species [13]. These parasites are known to infest a multitude of organs across approximately sixteen fish orders in the Americas [12,13,14].
There are several Myxobolus spp. described that parasitize different organs of mugilids [15,16,17,18,19,20]. Regarding M. curema, two Myxobolus spp. that parasitize the gills were recently described: Myxobolus curemae Vieira, Agostinho, Negrelli, Silva, Azevedo, and Abdallah, 2022, which parasitizes hosts from southeastern Brazil, and Myxobolus maceioensis Vieira, Agostinho, Negrelli, Silva, Azevedo, and Abdallah, 2022, which parasitizes hosts from northeastern Brazil. Myxobolus hani Faye, Kpatcha, Diebakate, Fall, and Toguebaye, 1999 parasitizes the branchial spines of the gill arch of M. curema, which was collected off Senegal [21]. In addition to these species, there is a report that Myxobolus sp. parasitizes the heart of M. curema, which was collected from the Atlantic Ocean off Senegal [22].
During a survey of myxozoan parasites isolated from M. curema, plasmodia-containing myxospores consistent with Myxobolus were observed in gills and intestines. Herein, we use morphology, histology, and phylogenetics to describe the new species of Myxobolus.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Host Sampling and Morphological Analysis

Mugil curema were obtained fresh from fishermen who commercialize this type of fish at Mundaú Lagoon located in Maceió (n = 42), Alagoas, Brazil (9°37′36.5″ S 35°47′06.3″ W). Host specimens were examined, with both internal and external organs evaluated to locate plasmodia-containing myxospores, using a Leica S6 D stereomicroscope (Leica Microsystems, Wetzlar, Germany). Plasmodia were extracted, prepared between a slide and coverslip, and analyzed using light microscopy. Mature myxospores belonging to the genus Myxobolus were identified in the gills and intestines of the infected hosts. Tissue samples hosting plasmodia were collected for morphological and molecular analysis.
Measurements of 30 myxospores from each myxozoan species from one fish specimen were made using a differential interference contrast microscope (DIC) at 1000× magnification. Digital images of the spores were obtained, and their measurements were taken with the assistance of Leica LAS V3.8 software (Leica Application Suite, V3; Leica Microsystems, Wetzlar, Germany). Myxospores were measured according to the methods outlined by Lom and Arthur (1989) [23], with a focus on spore size, polar capsule size, and the number of turns of the polar filament. All measurements are presented in micrometers (μm) and are expressed as a range, along with the corresponding means ± standard deviations. The prevalence of infection was calculated according to the methodology described by Bush et al. (1997) [24].

2.2. Molecular and Phylogenetic Analysis

Plasmodia-containing samples of the host’s gills and intestine were stored in absolute ethanol for DNA extraction. The procedures followed the animal tissue protocols of the DNeasy® Blood & Tissue Kit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA, USA). Access to the genetic data was authorized by the Brazilian Ministry of Environment (Sisgen A425DD8). The primers used are shown in Table 1. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) conditions and parameters used were the same as those used by Vieira et al. (2022) [25]. The polymerase chain reactions (PCRs) were carried out at a final volume of 25 μL using PCR Ready-to-Go beads (Pure TaqTMReady-to-GoTM beads, GE Healthcare, Chicago, IL, USA) and contained 20–40 ng of extracted DNA, 10 pmol of each primer, and 20 μL of distilled water. Amplifications were performed on a Bio-Rad MJ Mini Gradient Thermal Cycler (Bio-Rad Laboratories, PA, USA), with an initial denaturation at 95 °C for 3 min, followed by 35 cycles of 95 °C for 1 min, annealing at 55 °C for 45 s, and 72 °C for 2 min, and a final extension at 72 °C for 7 min. The PCR products were analyzed via electrophoresis, with GelRed staining of a 1% agarose gel in a Tris–acetate–EDTA buffer (Tris 40 mM, acetic acid 20 mM, EDTA 1 mM) followed by visualization under UV light. Amplicons sizes were estimated by comparing each one with the 1 kb Plus DNA Ladder (Invitrogen, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). The PCR reaction products were purified with magnetic beads from the Ampure XP kit (Beckman Coulter, Brea, CA, USA) following the manufacturer’s protocol and sequenced using the same PCR amplification primers. DNA amplification was conducted using the Bio-Rad Mycycler thermocycler (Bio-Rad Laboratories Ltd., Gladesville, Australia). The resulting PCR product was subjected to electrophoresis on a 1% agarose gel in TAE buffer, alongside a 1 kb DNA ladder (Invitrogen, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) and visualized under UV light. Following this, the PCR product was purified and sequenced utilizing the BigDye® Terminator v3.1 Cycle Sequencing Kit (Applied Biosystems, Waltham, MA, USA), employing an ABI3730xl automatic DNA analyzer (Applied Biosystems, Waltham, MA, USA), and precipitated through an ethanol/EDTA/sodium acetate reaction as per the manufacturer’s instructions.
Contiguous sequences were assembled and edited in Sequencher v. 5.2.4 (Gene Codes, Ann Arbor, MI, USA) and subjected to Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST) analysis (http://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov accessed on 10 December 2023) to confirm their identity. The consensus sequences of the Myxobolus ssrDNA gene were aligned using the Geneious 7.1.3 software [31] with ClustalW [32] to compare with other partial sequences of related species of myxozoans available on GenBank. The outgroup used was Myxidium ceccarellii (KJ499821).
Phylogenetic analyses were conducted using Bayesian inference (BI) and maximum-likelihood (ML) methods. Bayesian inference was carried out using MrBayes 3.1.2 [33], employing a GTR+I+G evolutionary model. Markov Chain Monte Carlo analysis was executed for 10 million generations, with log-likelihood scores plotted. The burn-in, comprising the initial 25% of generations, was discarded, and the consensus tree (majority rules) was generated from the remaining topologies. Nodes with posterior probabilities exceeding 90% were considered strongly supported. ML analyses were performed using RAxML v8 [34] on the CIPRES online platform [35], with 1000 bootstrap replications. Nodes with bootstrap values exceeding 70% were deemed well-supported. The tree generated after the BI and ML was analyzed in Figtree 1.4.2 [36] and edited in CorelDraw® (CorelDraw Graphics Suite, version x8, Corel Corporation, Ottawa, ON, Canada).

3. Results

From 42 specimens of M. curema from Mundaú lagoon, six (14.3%) had plasmodia of an unknown species of Myxobolus in the gill lamellae (Figure 1A) and five (11.9%) had plasmodia of an unknown species of Myxobolus in the intestine (Figure 1B,C). Only one host specimen was parasitized in the gills and intestine simultaneously. Below is the description of the two novel species, based on morphological data, ssrDNA sequencing, and information regarding their phylogenetic relationship.

3.1. Species Description

3.1.1. Taxonomic Summary

Phylum Cnidaria Verrill, 1865
Subphylum Endocnidozoa Schuchert, 1996
Class Myxozoa Grassé, 1970
Subclass Myxosporea Bütschli, 1881
Order Bivalvulida Shulman, 1959
Family Myxobolidae Thélohan, 1892
Genus Myxobolus Bütschli, 1882
Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. (Figure 2A–D and Figure 3A)
Type-host: Mugil curema Valenciennes, 1836 (Mugiliformes, Mugilidae).
Prevalence: 6 of 42 (14.3%) fish.
Intensity: on average one plasmodium per parasitized host.
Type-locality: Mundaú lagoon, municipality of Maceió, Alagoas State, Brazil (9°37′52.7″ S 35°46′23.1″ W)
Site of infection: Base of gill lamellae (basifilamental).
Type-material: A glass with myxospores (hapantotype) was deposited in the collection of the Instituto Nacional de Pesquisa da Amazônia (INPA), Brazil (Num. INPA–CND 000105). The ssrDNA partial sequences were deposited in GenBank with accession number PP926142.
Etymology: The specific name is derived from the host collection site (Mundaú = mundauensis)
Description: White plasmodia measuring up to 1 mm at the base of gill lamellae. Mature myxospores elongated in valvular view and oval in sutural views, 5.9–7.1 (6.9 ± 0.6) µm long, 4.9–6.1 (5.5 ± 0.4) µm wide, and 4.2–4.4 (4.3 ± 0.1) µm thick. Mucous envelope, intercapsular appendix absent and edge markings present. Two pyriform polar capsules at the anterior pole of the myxospore, occupying half of the myxospore body, and equal in size, 2.9–3.7 (3.2 ± 0.3) µm long and 1.2–2.0 (1.6 ± 0.2) µm wide. Polar tubules coiled with 4 turns. Sporoplasm single and filled entire space below polar capsules.

3.1.2. Taxonomic Summary

Phylum Cnidaria Verrill, 1865
Subphylum Endocnidozoa Schuchert, 1996
Class Myxozoa Grassé, 1970
Subclass Myxosporea Bütschli, 1881
Order Bivalvulida Shulman, 1959
Family Myxobolidae Thélohan, 1892
Genus Myxobolus Bütschli, 1882
Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. (Figure 3B and Figure 4)
Type-host: Mugil curema Valenciennes, 1836 (Mugiliformes, Mugilidae).
Prevalence: 5 of 42 (11.9%) fish.
Intensity: several plasmodia per parasitized host.
Type-locality: Mundaú lagoon, municipality of Maceió, Alagoas State, Brazil (9°37′52.7″ S 35°46′23.1″ W)
Site of infection: Intestine (lamina propria).
Type-material: A glass with myxospores (hapantotype) was deposited in the collection of the Instituto Nacional de Pesquisa da Amazônia (INPA), Brazil (Num. INPA–CND 000104). The ssrDNA partial sequences were deposited in GenBank with accession number PP926143.
Etymology: The specific name is derived from a tribute to Patricia Matos who has contributed so much to the study of the biodiversity of Brazilian myxozoans.
Description: White plasmodia measuring on average approximately 0.5 mm in the intestine. Mature myxospores ellipsoidal in valvular and in sutural views, 7.9–9.3 (8.6 ± 0.4) µm long, 8.3–9.3 (8.9 ± 0.3) µm wide, and 4.9–5.8 (5.5 ± 0.2) µm thick. Mucous envelope, intercapsular appendix, and edge markings absent. Two pyriform polar capsules, at the anterior pole of the myxospore, occupying more than half of the myxospore body, and equal in size, 3.8–5.0 (4.4 ± 0.3) µm long and 2.6–3.5 (3.0 ± 0.2) µm wide. Polar tubules coiled with 4–5 turns. Sporoplasm single and filled entire space below polar capsules.

3.2. Molecular and Phylogenetic Analysis

One partial ssrDNA sequence of the M. mundauensis n. sp. (1800-bp) and one partial ssrDNA sequence of the Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. (1523-bp) were obtained. When aligned with each other, the partial sequences of M. mundauensis n. sp. and Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. showed 89.4% similarity and differed in 165 nucleotides.
The species that most genetically resembles M. mundauensis n. sp. was M. maceioensis with 91.6% similarity and 145 different nucleotides. The species that most genetically resembles Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. was M. curemae with 91.4% similarity and 175 different nucleotides including gaps.
Phylogenetic analysis of species genetically similar to the two new species showed a division into three main clades (Figure 5). The main clade is composed of Myxobolus spp. that parasitize Mugiliformes. The other two clades are formed by Henneguya spp. that parasitize Siluriformes and Myxobolus and Henneguya spp. that parasitize Characiformes. There is also a clear division into clades by species that parasitize marine and freshwater fish. Myxobolus maceioensis appears as a sister species of M. mundauensis n. sp., while M. curemae appears as a sister species of Myxobolus patriciae n. sp.

3.3. Remarks

The new species were compared with all Myxobolus species already described and showed differences in morphological, morphometric or molecular aspects. When compared to each other, the species showed few similarities, because Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. is higher in all measurements observed compared to M. mundauensis n. sp. Emphasis was given on comparison with species that parasitize the gills or intestines of Mugiliformes with similar morphometry to the new species (Table 2). The species that most resembled M. mundauensis n. sp. was M. curemae. There were no observable morphometric differences, but there was a genetic difference of 11.8% (189 different nucleotides) and geographical distance (northeast vs. southeastern Brazil). Furthermore, M. curemae has a round myxospore body, while M. mundauensis n. sp. presents the body slightly elongated. Myxobolus bragantinus Cardim, Silva, Hamoy, Matos & Abrunhosa, 2018 also did not show morphometric differences about M. mundauensis n. sp. However, the shape of the body of M. bragantinus is spherical, while M. mundauensis n. sp. is elongated; there are differences in the host (Mugil rubrioculus Harrison, Nirchio, Oliveira, Ron & Gaviria, 2007) and in the region where M. bragantinus was described (northern Brazil). Furthermore, when compared molecularly, the partial sequences of the two species showed a difference of 8% in nucleotides. The partial sequence of M. bragantinus was not used in the phylogenetic analysis due to its small size (992 bp). Regarding species that parasitize other families of hosts or other organs, the species that most resembled M. mundauensis n. sp. was Myxobolus nigerae Dar, Kaur & Chisti, 2016. There are no major morphometric differences between the species, but morphologically M. nigerae appears ovoid or subspherical, while M. mundauensis n. sp. is elongated. Furthermore, M. nigerae was described as parasitizing the gills of Schizopyge niger (Heckel, 1838) from India, having a host and geographical location far from the new species. Unfortunately, there is no M. nigerae genetic sequence available for comparison. Myxobolus imparfinis Vieira, Tagliavini, Abdallah & Azevedo, 2018 also has morphometry similar to the new species. However, it was described as parasitizing the gills of Imparfinis mirini Haseman, 1911, a freshwater fish from Brazil. Furthermore, there is a difference in the length of the myxospore, as the range in M. mundauensis n. sp. was 5.9–7.1 while in M. imparfinis it was 7.1–8.4.
Regarding the species that parasitize intestines from Mugiliformes, the species that most closely resembles Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. was M. cerveirensis. Although there are similarities between species, the main difference is in the width of the myxospore body (8.9 ± 0.3 vs. 6.8 ± 0.2). Regarding the molecular comparison, there was a difference of 13% in nucleotides concerning the available partial sequences of both species. In addition, M. cerveirensis was described in the intestine of Chelon ramada (Risso, 1827) from Portugal, with differences in host and geographic region. Myxobolus intestinicola has a smaller body in width than M. patriciae n. sp. (8.9 ± 0.3 vs. 6.5 ± 0.3) and their polar capsules are smaller (4.4 ± 0.3 vs. 3.4 ± 0.3), while M. adeli has a smaller body in length (8.6 ± 0.4 vs. 6.2 ± 0.3). Regarding species that parasitize other families of hosts or other organs, the species that most resembled M. patriciae n. sp. is Myxobolus adiposus Rocha, Casal, Alves, Antunes, Rodrigues & Azevedo 2019 that parasitizes the adipose tissue of Chelon ramada (Risso, 1827). There are no major morphometric or morphological differences between the species; however, our phylogenetic analysis shows a great molecular difference between species that have different hosts. Myxobolus xinyangensis Wu, Wang, Sato & Zhang, 2019, which parasitizes the muscles of Abbottina rivularis (Basilewsky, 1855), also presents similar morphometry to M. patriciae n. sp. However, M. xinyangensis has larger polar capsules (5.6 ± 0.67 vs. 4.4 ± 0.3) and bigger thickness (6.4 ± 0.28 vs. 5.5 ± 0.2) than those found in M. patriciae n. sp., differentiating the two species.

4. Discussion

We present two new Myxobolus species, M. mundauensis n. sp. found in the gills and M. patriciae n. sp. found in the intestine, characterized by morphology, host specificity, tissue tropism, and molecular features. The BI phylogenetic analysis conducted in this study distinctly separates these novel species from other Myxobolus species with sequences accessible in the NCBI database. Their closest evolutionary relationship with species parasitizing Mugiliformes underscores the significant influence of host order on the phylogenetic positioning of myxosporeans, corroborating recent research findings [20,25]. This investigation provides further evidence supporting the coevolutionary dynamics between myxosporeans and their vertebrate hosts, with all authentic mugiliform-infecting myxobolids forming a well-supported monophyletic subclade.
Histozoic myxozoan species are considered to be the most pathogenic [44], with some being potentially fatal [45]. Myxobolus species can induce lesions that serve as entry points for secondary viral and bacterial infections upon cyst rupture, releasing mature spores [46]. Only a select few myxozoan species exhibit a preference for parasitizing the intestine [44]. Among the most extensively studied myxozoans infecting the gastrointestinal tract are Enteromyxum spp. and Ceratomyxa shasta, both capable of inflicting severe damage to the intestinal epithelium and causing chronic enteritis [47,48,49,50,51,52]. Myxobolus nodulointestinalis Masoumian, Baska & Molnár, 2006 was described parasitizing the intestine of Mesopotamichthys sharpeyi (Günther, 1874) and caused a deep bulge in the intestinal lumen and intestinal cavity, leading to tissue deformations and a small degeneration of the muscle layer [53]. In this study, no clinical symptoms were observed for the mullets and no obvious pathology due to Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. and Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. was appreciable. Regarding the gills, plasmodia on different sites can inflict different degrees of damage to the health of the host [54]. For example, Myxobolus basilamellaris Lom & Molnár, 1983 develops between the afferent and efferent arterial vessels of the base of gill filaments and causes ischemic necrosis of the gill, which can cause fish death due to gill failure [55]. However, in heavily infected gills and intestines, quite large areas of the organ were replaced by plasmodia, with a possible interference in normal physiology. More studies need to be carried out to confirm the degree of pathogenicity of the new species to the hosts.
In the present study, novel species of myxozoans were characterized based on morphology, bolstered by phylogenetic investigation. The combined evidence definitively confirmed the presence of two new species, designated as M. mundauensis n. sp. and M. patriciae n. sp. Based on our findings, we advocate continual monitoring of these parasites in aquaculture settings to evaluate potential pathogenic impacts that they may elicit. The current study significantly enhances our understanding of the myxosporean diversity infecting Mugil curemae, showcasing the breadth of myxosporean fauna that can infect a single host species.

Author Contributions

D.H.M.D.V.: Formal analysis, Data curation and Writing—original draft. M.M.O.-P.: Phylogeny analysis and editing. V.D.A.: Supervision, Writing—review and editing and Project Administration. S.L.P.O.: Investigation and Methodology. A.G.T.D.: Investigation and Methodology. R.J.d.S.: Funding acquisition and Resources. R.K.d.A.: Supervision, Writing—review and editing and Project Administration. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) [grant numbers 2020/05412-9 and 2019/25223-9], Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Alagoas (FAPEAL) [grant number 60030.0000000464/2020] and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico–CNPq [grant number 309125/2017-0].

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

  1. Crosetti, D.; Blaber, S.J. Biology, Ecology and Culture of Grey Mullets (Mugilidae), 1st ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  2. Froese, R.; Pauly, D. FishBase. Available online: https://www.fishbase.org/ (accessed on 4 September 2023).
  3. Marin, E.B.J.; Quintero, A.; Bussière, D.; Dodson, J.J. Reproduction and recruitment of white mullet (Mugil curema) to a tropical lagoon (Margarita Island, Venezuela) as revealed by otolith microstructure. Fish Bull. 2003, 101, 809–821. [Google Scholar]
  4. Trape, S.; Durand, J.D.; Vigliola, L.; Panfili, J. Recruitment success and growth variability of mugilids in a West African estuary impacted by climate change. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 2017, 198, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Mai, A.C.G.; Santos, M.L.D.; Lemos, V.M.; Vieira, J.P. Discrimination of habitat use between two sympatric species of mullets, Mugil curema and Mugil liza (Mugiliformes: Mugilidae) in the rio Tramandaí Estuary, determined by otolith chemistry. Neotrop. Ichtyol. 2018, 16, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Avigliano, E.; Ibañez, A.; Fabré, N.; Fortunato, R.C.; Méndez, A.; Pisonero, J.; Volpedo, A.V. White mullet Mugil curema population structure from Mexico and Brazil revealed by otolith chemistry. J. Fish Biol. 2020, 97, 1187–1200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Ibáñez, A.L.; Colín, A. Reproductive biology of Mugil curema and Mugil cephalus from western Gulf of Mexico waters. Bull. Marine Sci. 2014, 90, 941–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Cicero, L.H.; Souza, U.P.; Rotundo, M.M.; Pereira, C.D.S.; Sadauskas-Henrique, H. Biometric and hematological indices of Mugil curema inhabiting two Neotropical estuaries. Reg. Stud. Mar. Sci. 2020, 38, 101377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Albieri, R.J.; Araújo, F.G.; Uehara, W. Differences in reproductive strategies between two co-occurring mullets Mugil curema Valenciennes 1836 and Mugil liza Valenciennes 1836 (Mugilidae) in a tropical bay. Trop. Zool. 2010, 23, 51–62. [Google Scholar]
  10. Lima, A.R.B.; Torres, R.A.; Jacobina, U.P.; Pinheiro, M.A.A.; Adam, M.L. Genomic damage in Mugil curema (Actinopterygii: Mugilidae) reveals the effects of intense urbanization on estuaries in northeastern Brazil. Marin. Pollut. Bull. 2019, 138, 63–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Okamura, B.; Gruhl, A.; Bartholomew, J.L. Myxozoan Evolution, Ecology and Development, 1st ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  12. Eiras, J.C.; Molnár, K.; Lu, Y.S. Synopsis of the species of Myxobolus Bütschli, 1882 (Myxozoa: Myxosporea: Myxobolidae). Syst. Parasitol. 2005, 61, 1–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Eiras, J.C.; Cruz, C.F.; Saraiva, A.; Adriano, E.A. Synopsis of the species of Myxobolus (Cnidaria, Myxozoa, Myxosporea) described between 2014 and 2020. Folia Parasitol. 2021, 68, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Guimarães, J.; Casal, G.; Alves, Â.; Araújo, C.; Rocha, S. Myxozoan survey of thicklip grey mullet Chelon labrosus reinforces successful radiation of Myxobolus in mugiliform hosts. Parasite 2023, 30, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Maeno, Y.; Sorimachi, M.; Ogawa, K.; Egusa, S. Myxobolus spinacurvatura sp. n. (Myxosporea, Bilvalvulida) parasitic in deformed mullet, Mugil cephalus. Fish Pathol. 1990, 25, 37–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Bahri, S.; Marques, A. Myxosporean parasites of the genus Myxobolus from Mugil cephalus in Ichkeul lagoon, Tunisia: Description of two new species. Dis. Aquat. Org. 1996, 27, 115–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Eiras, J.C.; D’Souza, J. Myxobolus goensis n. sp. (Myxozoa, Myxosporea, Myxobolidae), a parasite of the gills of Mugil cephalus (Osteichthyes, Mugilidae) from Goa, India. Parasite 2004, 11, 243–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Eiras, J.C.; Abreu, P.C.; Robaldo, R.; Junior, J.P. Myxobolus platanus n. sp. (Myxosporea, Myxobolidae), a parasite of Mugil platanus Gunther, 1880 (Osteichthyes, Mugilidae) from Lagoa dos Patos, RS, Brazil. Arq. Bras. Med. Vet. Zootec. 2007, 59, 895–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Kim, W.S.; Kim, J.H.; Oh, M.J. Morphologic and Genetic Evidence for Mixed Infection with Two Myxobolus Species (Myxozoa: Myxobolidae) in Gray Mullets, Mugil cephalus, from Korean Waters. Korean J. Parasitol. 2013, 51, 369–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Rocha, S.; Azevedo, C.; Oliveira, E.; Alves, A.; Antunes, C.; Rodrigues, P.; Casal, G. Phylogeny and comprehensive revision of mugiliform-infecting myxobolids (Myxozoa, Myxobolidae), with the morphological and molecular redescription of the cryptic species Myxobolus exiguus. Parasitology 2019, 146, 479–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Faye, N.; Kpatcha, T.K.; Debakate, C.; Fall, M.; Toguebaye, B.S. Gill infections due to myxosporean (myxozoa) parasites in fishes from Senegal with description of Myxobolus hani sp. n. Bull. Eur. Assoc. Fish Pathol. 1999, 19, 14–16. [Google Scholar]
  22. Faye, N.; Kpatcha, T.K.; Fall, M.; Toguebaye, B.S. Heart infections due to myxosporean (Myxozoa) parasites in marine and estuarine fishes from Senegal. Bull. Eur. Assoc. Fish Pathol. 1997, 17, 115–117. [Google Scholar]
  23. Lom, J.; Arthur, J.R. A guideline for the preparation of species descriptions in Myxosporea. J. Fish Dis. 1989, 12, 151–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Bush, A.O.; Lafferty, K.D.; Lotz, J.M.; Shostak, A.W. Parasitology meets ecology on its own terms: Margolis et al. revisited. J. Parasitol. 1997, 83, 575–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Vieira, D.H.M.D.; Narciso, R.B.; da Silva, R.J. Morphological and molecular characterization of the cryptic species Myxobolus cataractae n. sp. (Cnidaria: Myxozoa: Myxobolidae) parasitizing Imparfinis mirini (Siluriformes: Heptapteridae). Parasitol. Int. 2022, 88, 102560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Barta, J.R.; Martin, S.D.; Liberator, P.A.; Dashkevicz, M.; Anderson, J.W.; Feighner, S.D.; Elbrecht, A.; Perkins-Barrow, A.; Jenkins, M.C.; Danforth, H.D. Phylogenetic relationships among eight Eimeria species infecting domestic fowl inferred using complete small subunit ribosomal DNA sequences. J. Parasitol. 1997, 83, 262–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Kent, M.L.; Khattra, J.; Hedrick, R.P.; Devlin, R.H. Tetracapsula renicola n. sp. (Myxozoa: Saccosporidae); The PKX myxozoan—The cause of proliferative kidney disease of salmonid fishes. J. Parasitol. 2000, 86, 103–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Hallett, S.L.; Diamant, A. Ultrastructure and small-subunit ribosomal DNA sequence of Henneguya lesteri n. sp. (Myxosporea), a parasite of sand whiting Sillago analis (Sillaginidae) from the coast of Queensland, Australia. Dis. Aquat. Org. 2001, 46, 197–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Eszterbauer, E. Genetic relationship among gill-infecting Myxobolus species (Myxosporea) of cyprinids: Molecular evidence of importance of tissue-specificity. Dis. Aquat. Org. 2004, 58, 35–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Andree, K.B.; Szekely, C.; Molnár, K.; Gresoviac, S.J.; Hedrick, R.P. Relationships among members of the genus Myxobolus (Myxozoa: Bilvalvidae) based on small subunit ribosomal DNA sequences. J. Parasitol. 1999, 85, 68–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Kearse, M.; Moir, R.; Wilson, A.; Stones-Havas, S.; Cheung, M.; Sturrock, S.; Buxton, S.; Cooper, A.; Markowitz, S.; Duran, C. Geneious Basic: An integrated and extendable desktop software platform for the organization and analysis of sequence data. Bioinformatics 2012, 28, 1647–1649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Larkin, M.A.; Blackshields, G.; Brown, N.P.; Chenna, R.; Mcgettigan, P.A.; McWilliam, H.; Valentin, F.; Wallace, I.M.; Wilm, A.; Lopez, R.; et al. Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0. Bioinformatics 2007, 23, 2947–2948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ronquist, F.; Huelsenbeck, J.P. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 2003, 19, 1572–1574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Guindon, S.; Gascuel, O. A simple, fast, and accurate algorithm to estimate large phylogenies by maximum likelihood. Syst. Biol. 2003, 52, 696–704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Miller, M.A.; Pfeiffer, W.; Schwartz, T. Creating the CIPRES Science Gateway for inference of large phylogenetic trees. In Proceedings of the 2010 Gateway Computing Environments Workshop (GCE), New Orleans, LA, USA, 14 November 2010; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Rambaut, A. FigTree 1.4.2. Software; Institute of Evolutionary Biology, University Edinburgh: Edinburgh, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  37. Cardim, J.; Silva, D.; Hamoy, I.; Matos, E.; Abrunhosa, F. Myxobolus bragantinus n. sp. (Cnidaria: Myxosporea) from the gill filaments of the redeye mullet, Mugil rubrioculus (Mugiliformes: Mugilidae), on the eastern Amazon coast. Zootaxa 2018, 4482, 177–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Vieira, D.H.M.D.; Agostinho, B.N.; Negrelli, D.C.; Silva, R.J.; Azevedo, R.K.; Abdallah, V.D. Taxonomy and Systematics of Two New Species of Myxobolus (Cnidaria: Myxobolidae) Parasitizing the Gills of Mugil curema (Mugilidae) from the Brazilian Coast. Acta Parasitol. 2022, 67, 1206–1216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Shulman, S.S.; Protozoa, P. Bykhovskaya-Pavlovskaya, I.E. Key to Parasites of Freshwater Fishes of the USSR; Keys to Fauna of the USSR, No. 80; Nauka: Leningrad, Russia, 1962; pp. 7–151. [Google Scholar]
  40. Rocha, S.; Casal, G.; Alves, Â.; Antunes, C.; Rodrigues, P.; Azevedo, C. Myxozoan biodiversity in mullets (Teleostei, Mugilidae) unravels hyperdiversification of Myxobolus (Cnidaria, Myxosporea). Parasitol. Res. 2019, 118, 3279–3305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Marcotegui, P.; Martorelli, S. Myxobolus saladensis sp. nov., a new species of gill parasite of Mugil liza (Osteichthyes, Mugilidae) from Samborombón Bay, Buenos Aires, Argentina, Iheringia. Sér. Zool. 2017, 107, e2017026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Narasimhamurti, C.C.; Kalavati, C. Myxosoma lairdi n. sp. (Protozoa: Myxosporidia) parasitic in the gut of the estuarine fish, Liza macrolepis Smith. Proc. Anim. Sci. 1979, 88, 269–272. [Google Scholar]
  43. Yurakhno, V.M.; Ovcharenko, M.O. Study of Myxosporea (Myxozoa), infecting worldwide mullets with description of a new species. Parasitol. Res. 2014, 113, 3661–3674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Gomez, D.; Bartholomew, J.L.; Sunyer, J.O. Biology and mucosal immunity to myxozoans. Develop. Comp. Immunol. 2014, 43, 243–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Lom, J.; Dyková, I. Myxozoan genera: Definition and notes on taxonomy, life-cycle terminology and pathogenic species. Folia Parasitol. 2006, 53, 1–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Feist, S.W.; Longshaw, M. Phylum Myxozoa. In Fish Diseases and Disorders; Woo, P.T.K., Ed.; Volume 1: Protozoan and Metazoan Infections; CABI: Wallingford, UK, 2006; pp. 230–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Bartholomew, J.L. Host resistance to infection by the myxosporean parasite Ceratomyxa shasta: A review. J. Aquat. Anim. Health 1998, 10, 112–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Bartholomew, J.L.; McDowell, T.S.; Hedrick, R.P. Susceptibility of rainbow trout resistant to Myxobolus cerebralis to selected salmonid pathogens. In Propagated Fish in Resource Management; Nickum, M.J., Mazik, P.M., Nickum, J.G., Mackinlay, D.D., Eds.; American Fisheries Society: New York, NY, USA, 2004; pp. 549–557. [Google Scholar]
  49. Sitjá-Bobadilla, A.; Palenzuela, O.; Riaza, A.; Macias, M.A.; Alvarez-Pellitero, P. Protective acquired immunity to Enteromyxum scophthalmi (myxozoa) is related to specific antibodies in Psetta maxima (L.) (Teleostei). Scand. J. Immunol. 2007, 66, 26–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Fleurance, R.; Sauvegrain, C.; Marques, A.; Le Breton, A.; Guereaud, C.; Cherel, Y.; Wyers, M. Histopathological changes caused by Enteromyxum leei infection in farmed sea bream Sparus aurata. Dis. Aquat. Org. 2008, 79, 219–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Alvarez-Pellitero, P.; Palenzuela, O.; Sitjá-Bobadilla, A. Histopathology and cellular response in Enteromyxum leei (Myxozoa) infections of Diplodus puntazzo (Teleostei). Parasitol. Int. 2008, 57, 110–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Bjork, S.J.; Bartholomew, J.L. Invasion of Ceratomyxa shasta (Myxozoa) and comparison of migration to the intestine between susceptible and resistant fish hosts. Int. J. Parasitol. 2010, 40, 1087–1095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Masoumian, M.; Baska, F.; Molnár, K. Myxobolus nodulointestinalis sp. n. (Myxosporea; Myxobolidae), a parasite of the intestine of Barbus sharpeyi. Dis. Aquat. Org. 1996, 24, 35–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Zhang, J.; Wang, Y.; Zhao, Y. The description of Myxobolus meijiangensis n. sp. (Myxozoa: Myxobolidae) and its pathogenicity to the gills of goldfish. Parasitol. Int. 2023, 97, 102795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Wang, M.M.; Zhang, J.Y.; Zhao, Y.J. New record for Myxobolus basilamellaris in China with histopathological insights into gill infestation. J. Fish. China 2021, 45, 1555–1562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. (AC) Myxozoans parasitizing Mugil curema from the Mundaú Lagoon. (A): Plasmodia of Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. in the base of the lamella of the gills (black arrow). (B): Plasmodia (black arrow) of Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. in the lamina propria of intestines. (C): Details of the plasmodia of Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. (black arrow).
Figure 1. (AC) Myxozoans parasitizing Mugil curema from the Mundaú Lagoon. (A): Plasmodia of Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. in the base of the lamella of the gills (black arrow). (B): Plasmodia (black arrow) of Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. in the lamina propria of intestines. (C): Details of the plasmodia of Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. (black arrow).
Taxonomy 04 00026 g001
Figure 2. (AD) Mature myxospores of Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. (INPA–CND 000105) found parasitizing the gills of Mugil curema; (A,B): frontal view; (C): apical view; (D): side view.
Figure 2. (AD) Mature myxospores of Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. (INPA–CND 000105) found parasitizing the gills of Mugil curema; (A,B): frontal view; (C): apical view; (D): side view.
Taxonomy 04 00026 g002
Figure 3. (A,B) Schematic drawing of the new species of Myxobolus described in this study. (A): Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. (B): Myxobolus patriciae n. sp.
Figure 3. (A,B) Schematic drawing of the new species of Myxobolus described in this study. (A): Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. (B): Myxobolus patriciae n. sp.
Taxonomy 04 00026 g003
Figure 4. Mature myxospores of Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. (INPA–CND 000104) found parasitizing the intestine of Mugil curema. Highlighted myxospore where it is possible to observe the turns of the polar filament inside the polar capsule.
Figure 4. Mature myxospores of Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. (INPA–CND 000104) found parasitizing the intestine of Mugil curema. Highlighted myxospore where it is possible to observe the turns of the polar filament inside the polar capsule.
Taxonomy 04 00026 g004
Figure 5. Phylogenetic tree of Bayesian inference analysis based on partial ssrDNA sequences showing the position of Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. and Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. among other genetically similar Henneguya/Myxobolus species. Node numbers represent respectively posterior probabilities for Bayesian inference (BI) and bootstraps for the maximum-likelihood (ML). Values less than 0.9 for BI and 70 for ML are represented by dashes. The scale bar represents the number of substitutions per site.
Figure 5. Phylogenetic tree of Bayesian inference analysis based on partial ssrDNA sequences showing the position of Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. and Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. among other genetically similar Henneguya/Myxobolus species. Node numbers represent respectively posterior probabilities for Bayesian inference (BI) and bootstraps for the maximum-likelihood (ML). Values less than 0.9 for BI and 70 for ML are represented by dashes. The scale bar represents the number of substitutions per site.
Taxonomy 04 00026 g005
Table 1. Primers used for the amplification and sequencing of the ssrDNA of the new Myxobolus spp.
Table 1. Primers used for the amplification and sequencing of the ssrDNA of the new Myxobolus spp.
PrimerSequence 5′-3′Paired withReference
Erib1ACCTGGTTGATCCTGCCAGAct1r[26]
Myxgen4FGTGCCTTGAATAAATCAGAGErib10[27]
Act1rAATTTCACCTCTCGCTGCCAErib1[28]
Erib10CTTCCGCAGGTTCACCTACGGMyxgen4F[26]
MB5GGTGATGATTAACAGGAGCGGTMX3[29]
MX3CCAGGACATCTTAGGGCATCACAGAMB5[30]
Table 2. Morphometric comparison for Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. and Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. (in bold) with Myxobolus spp. that parasitize the gills and intestine of mullets with similar morphometry to the new species. SBP: spore body length; SPW: spore body width; LP: length of polar capsules; WP: width of polar capsules; T: thickness; TP: number of turns of polar filaments. The measurements are given in μm. The standard deviation is given after the values.
Table 2. Morphometric comparison for Myxobolus mundauensis n. sp. and Myxobolus patriciae n. sp. (in bold) with Myxobolus spp. that parasitize the gills and intestine of mullets with similar morphometry to the new species. SBP: spore body length; SPW: spore body width; LP: length of polar capsules; WP: width of polar capsules; T: thickness; TP: number of turns of polar filaments. The measurements are given in μm. The standard deviation is given after the values.
SpeciesSBLSPWTLPWPTPHostSite of InfectionCountryReference
M. mundauensis n. sp.6.9 ± 0.3 (5.9–7.1)5.5 ± 0.4 (4.9–6.1)4.3 ± 0.1 (4.2–4.4)3.2 ± 0.2 (2.9–3.7)1.6 ± 0.2 (1.2–2.0)4Mugil curemaGillsBrazilPresent study
M. aestuarium7.8 ± 0.37.1 ± 0.75.1 ± 0.33.4 ± 0.22.1 ± 0.23–4Chelon labrosusGillsPortugal[14]
M. bragantinus6.2 ± 0.36.2 ± 0.3-2.4 ± 0.31.5 ± 0.2-Mugil rubriolocusGillsBrazil[37]
M. chelonari8.3 ± 0.27.1 ± 0.43.9 ± 0.22.3 ± 0.13–4Chelon labrosusGillsPortugal[14]
M. curemae6.5 ± 0.35.9 ± 0.45.0 ± 0.33.0 ± 0.31.9 ± 0.24Mugil curemaGillsBrazil[38]
M. douroensis8.2 ± 0.37.3 ± 0.25.6 ± 0.23.9 ± 0.22.5 ± 0.23–4Chelon labrosusGillsPortugal[14]
M. hani8.0 ± 0.47.1 ± 0.3----Mugil curemaGillsSenegal[21]
M. invictus8.5 ± 0.27.9 ± 0.23.6 ± 0.22.0 ± 0.13Chelon labrosusGillsPortugal[14]
M. maceioensis7.2 ± 0.57.1 ± 0.65.0 ± 0.23.6 ± 0.32.2 ± 0.24Mugil curemaGillsBrazil[38]
M. parvus6.5–75.5–64–4.23.8–4.2 2.0-Liza saliensGillsTurkey[39]
M. pupkoi8.4 ± 0.37.7 ± 0.45.1 ± 0.33.2 ± 0.22.0 ± 0.23–4Chelon labrosusGillsPortugal[14]
M. ramadus8.2 ± 0.57.9 ± 0.26.4 ± 0.24.2 ± 0.23.0 ± 0.35–6Chelon ramadaGillsPortugal[40]
M. saladensis10.0 ± 11.19.2 ± 0.5-3.8 ± 0.22.3 ± 0.14–5Mugil lizaGillsArgentina[41]
M. patriciae n. sp.8.6 ± 0.4 (7.9–9.3)8.9 ± 0.3 (8.3–9.3)5.5 ± 0.2(4.9–5.8)4.4 ± 0.3 (3.8–5.0)3.0 ± 0.2 (2.6–3.5)5–6Mugil curemaIntestineBrazilPresent study
M. intestinicola7.7 ± 0.36.5 ± 0.35.6 ± 0.23.4 ± 0.32.1 ± 0.24–5Chelon labrosusIntestinePortugal[14]
M. cerveirensis8.1 ± 0.26.8 ± 0.25.3 ± 0.34.2 ± 0.22.8 ± 0.24–5Chelon ramadaIntestinePortugal[40]
M. lizae9.0–9.54.6–5.2-3.22.05–7Planiliza MacrolepisIntestineIndia[42]
M. adeli6.2 ± 0.3 7.2 ± 0.3 4.6 ± 0.43.1 ± 0.31.8 ± 0.24Liza aurataIntestineJapan[43]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Vieira, D.H.M.D.; Osaki-Pereira, M.M.; Abdallah, V.D.; Oliveira, S.L.P.; Duarte, A.G.T.; da Silva, R.J.; de Azevedo, R.K. Morphological and Molecular Analysis Describing Two New Species of Myxobolus (Cnidaria, Myxosporea) in Mugil curema (Mugilidae) from Brazil. Taxonomy 2024, 4, 548-560. https://doi.org/10.3390/taxonomy4030026

AMA Style

Vieira DHMD, Osaki-Pereira MM, Abdallah VD, Oliveira SLP, Duarte AGT, da Silva RJ, de Azevedo RK. Morphological and Molecular Analysis Describing Two New Species of Myxobolus (Cnidaria, Myxosporea) in Mugil curema (Mugilidae) from Brazil. Taxonomy. 2024; 4(3):548-560. https://doi.org/10.3390/taxonomy4030026

Chicago/Turabian Style

Vieira, Diego Henrique Mirandola Dias, Melissa Miyuki Osaki-Pereira, Vanessa Doro Abdallah, Sarah Letícia Paiva Oliveira, Aline Gabriely Torres Duarte, Reinaldo José da Silva, and Rodney Kozlowiski de Azevedo. 2024. "Morphological and Molecular Analysis Describing Two New Species of Myxobolus (Cnidaria, Myxosporea) in Mugil curema (Mugilidae) from Brazil" Taxonomy 4, no. 3: 548-560. https://doi.org/10.3390/taxonomy4030026

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop