A Phylogenetic Study of the Family Tephritidae (Insecta: Diptera) Using a Mitochondrial DNA Sequence

Proceedings of 6th International Fruit Fly Symposium 6–10 May 2002, Stellenbosch, South Africa pp. 439–443

A phylogenetic study of the family Tephritidae (Insecta: Diptera) using a mitochondrial DNA sequence

P. Fernández, D. Segura, C. Callejas & M.D. Ochando* Departamento de Genética, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Universidad Complutense, 28040 – Madrid, Spain

Achievements in tephritid taxonomy have greatly contributed to both basic research and pest management programmes. However, despite the large amount of taxonomic data available, the higher classification of the family Tephritidae is still a matter of debate. A molecular approach could help to provide a more accurate classification. A molecular study was therefore undertaken to gain insight into the phylogenetic relationships within the family Tephritidae. A DNA region of the mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase II gene was compared in species representing six genera of the family, namely Ceratitis, Rhagoletis, Dacus, Bactrocera, Anastrepha and Toxotrypana. A dendrogram was constructed using the neighbour-joining method with Liriomyza huidobrensis and Drosophila yakuba as outgroups. Two main clusters were obtained in the tree, the first grouping being the Ceratitis species, C. capitata, C. rosa, and C. cosyra, and the second showing two main branches, one for Dacus, Bactrocera and Rhagoletis, and the other for Anastrepha and Toxotrypana. The results are discussed in relation to published phylogenies.

INTRODUCTION a better understanding of the phylogenetic rela- Among the most devastating of agricultural tionships within the Tephritidae family (Han & pests, the family Tephritidae, commonly known as McPheron 1994, 1997, 2001; Malacrida et al. 1996; fruit flies, includes more than 4000 species in McPheron & Han 1997; Smith & Bush 1997; some 500 genera distributed all around the world Morrow et al. 2000; Han 2000). (White & Elson-Harris 1994). The enormous eco- Specifically, mitochondrial DNA is a powerful nomic effort required in eradication programmes, material for phylogenetic studies. Its small size, together with great crop losses that these flies different rates of evolutionary change, lack of cause in fruit production, explains the increasing recombination, and maternal inheritance make it interest in the study of their biology. suitable material for systematic studies at a wide Taxonomy is an essential foundation of biologi- variety of taxonomic levels (Simon et al. 1994; Han cal research. Developments in tephritid taxon- & McPheron 2001). Among the mitochondrial omy have greatly contributed to progress in genes, cytochrome oxidase II, usedbydifferent areas of pure research and to pest management authors to infer relationships within insect species programmes. However, despite the large number (Sperling & Hickey 1994; Caterino & Sperling of taxonomic data available, the higher classifica- 1999; Gómez-Zurita et al. 2000, Durando et al. tion of the family Tephritidae, based primarily on 2000), is particularly useful. morphological data, is still a matter of debate A molecular study was therefore undertaken to (White 1996; Korneyev 2001). Many characters compare a DNA region of the mitochondrial are difficult to interpret, and disagreements in cytochrome oxidase II gene from different tephritid the definition of groups have arisen owing to the species belonging to six different genera, in or- relative importance that researchers place on der to obtain an estimate of the phylogenetic rela- these characters (Drew 1989). tionships within some members of this dipteran In the last two decades the development of family. molecular techniques, based mostly on PCR and/ or sequencing, has provided new and powerful MATERIALS AND METHODS tools to address the most diverse of biological problems. Taxonomy has profited much from Samples and DNA isolation them. A more accurate classification of the Insect samples included 16 species representing Tephritidae might be gained through the use of six genera in the family Tephritidae, namely, molecular techniques. Indeed, a number of recent Ceratitis, Rhagoletis, Dacus, Bactrocera, Anastrepha studies using molecular data have contributed to and Toxotrypana, from representative areas of each taxon distribution (Table 1). *To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: [email protected] Total DNA from individual adults or pupae was 440 Proceedings of the 6th International Fruit Fly Symposium

Table 1. Species used and origin of the samples. were analysed using an ABIPRISM 377 DNA sequencer (Applied Biosystems). Species Origin Sequence alignment and phylogenetic analysis Anastrepha obliqua Mexico Alignment of the sequences and the estimation Anastrepha striata Mexico of interspecific pairwise percentage sequence Anastrepha suspensa U.S.A. (Florida) divergence was performed by the clustal method Bactrocera cacuminata Australia using the MegAlign programme included in the Bactrocera cucurbitae U.S.A. (Hawaii) DNASTAR package (Lasergene System 1994). Bactrocera dorsalis U.S.A. (Hawaii) A neighbour-joining (NJ) tree (Saitou & Nei Bactrocera latifrons U.S.A. (Hawaii) 1987) was generated from the Jukes-Cantor Bactrocera oleae Spain distances (Jukes & Cantor 1969) using Drosophila Bactrocera zonata Mauritius Island yakuba and Liriomyza huidobrensis as outgroups Ceratitis capitata Spain (accession numbers 12918 and AF327292, Gene- Ceratitis cosyra South Africa Bank database). Dacus ciliatus Réunion Island Dacus demmerezi Réunion Island The reliability of the tree was evaluated using Rhagoletis cerasi Switzerland 1000 bootstrap replicates (Felsenstein 1985), Rhagoletis pomonella U.S.A. (New York) and by constructing a consensus tree from the Toxotrypana curvicauda U.S.A. (Florida) 1000 bootstrapped trees obtained. Phylogenetic analysis was performed using the PHYLIP software package (Felsenstein 1993). isolated applying a method specific for small samples, using SDS dissolution, phenol-chloro- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION form extraction and ethanol precipitation (Reyes Nucleotide sequences of 259 bp were obtained et al. 1997). for the cytochrome oxidase II region studied. Interspecific pairwise percentage sequence DNA amplification and sequencing differences ranged from 0.8 to 22.8% (Table 2), The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was used to with a mean of 16%. The lowest value observed amplify a 259 bp segment of the mitochondrial was for comparisons between Bactrocera dorsalis cytochrome oxidase II gene. The primers used were and Bactrocera cacuminata (0.8%). The highest CO2A (5’-GGACTACAAGATAGAGCCTC-3’) and interspecific divergence was found between CO2B (5’-CTTCAGTATCATTGATGACC-3’), provided Anastrepha suspensa and Bactrocera latifrons by C. Fleming (The Queen’s University of Belfast, (22.8%). The mean of 16% for the interspecific U.K.). The amplified fragment corresponds to posi- sequence differences is close to the 11% found tions 3124-3382 of the mitochondrial genome of by Han & McPheron (1997) in representative Drosophila yakuba (Clary & Wolstenholme 1985). species of the family Tephritidae (based on the Amplifications were performed in a PTC-100 analysis of a fragment of mitochondrial 16S MJ research thermocycler, in 100 µl reactions ribosomal DNA). The sequence divergence values containing 1 µl of genomic DNA, 1 µM of each obtained in the present work were generally low primer, 0.2 mM of each dNTP,2 mM of MgCl2,10µl (20% or less). Comparisons of these results with of 10 × Eco Taq buffer (Ecogen), and 2.5 units of those reported by others authors show that Eco Taq polymerase (Ecogen). PCR conditions in- they would normally be thought to correspond to volved a initial cycle of 5 min at 94°C, 30 cycles of related species. In the case of Bactrocera dorsalis 30 s at 94°C, 1 min at 55°C or 57°C (Bactrocera and Bactrocera cacuminata, a divergence of dorsalis), and 1 min 30 s at 72°C. The final cycle 0.8% falls in the range of values generally found had an additional step of 6 min at 72°C. Nega- at the intraspecific levels. This close relationship tive controls were always included. PCR prod- between these species agrees with recent classifi- ucts were purified using a PCR purification kit cations which place them both in the ‘Bactrocera (Boehringer). dorsalis complex’ (White & Elson-Harris 1994). Nucleotide sequences were determined directly This is a group of morphologically inseparable but from PCR fragments using the dideoxy chain biologically distinct species whose members may termination method (Sanger et al. 1977) with be referred to as sibling species (White 1996). fluorescently-labelled dideoxynucleotide termina- In the genus Rhagoletis, comparisons among tors (Applied Biosystems). Sequencing reactions members of the pomonella and cingulata groups Fernandez et al.: A phylogenetic study of the family Tephritidae using mitochondrial DNA 441

Table 2. Percentage sequence divergence in the cytochrome oxidase II gene between tephritid species.

A. obliqua * A. suspensa 1.5 * A. striata 5.8 6.2 * B. cucurbitae 18.1 17.8 18.5 * B. cacuminata 18.9 19.7 17.4 13.9 * B. dorsalis 18.1 18.9 17.4 13.9 0.8 * B. latifrons 22.4 22.8 19.7 16.6 13.9 13.5 * B. oleae 19.3 19.3 20.1 16.6 15.4 15.8 17.0 * B. zonata 18.9 19.3 18.1 12.4 6.9 6.6 11.2 15.1 * C. cosyra 15.1 15.1 17.0 16.6 15.8 15.4 19.7 18.9 16.6 * C. capitata 13.1 13.1 14.7 17.4 15.4 15.1 20.8 17.4 16.6 6.6 * D. ciliatus 14.3 13.5 15.1 14.7 18.1 17.4 18.5 17.0 15.4 17.0 15.1 * D. demmerezi 18.1 18.9 19.7 16.6 14.3 13.9 16.2 16.2 15.8 16.6 17.0 10.8 * R. cerasi 16.6 16.2 15.8 18.1 17.0 17.4 21.2 21.2 18.9 18.5 17.0 17.4 20.5 * R. pomonella 13.5 13.9 15.4 17.0 15.8 15.4 19.7 17.4 16.6 15.1 11.6 15.1 17.8 14.3 * T. curvicauda 14.3 14.7 13.5 18.1 15.8 15.8 20.8 19.3 18.1 13.1 13.1 19.3 17.8 18.1 15.8 * 123456789 10111213141516 showed sequence divergences below 0.5% species of the genera Dacus, Bactrocera and (McPheron & Han 1997). These groups are Rhagoletis, and the other for species of the genera complexes of sympatrically distributed sibling Anastrepha and Toxotrypana. species that differ in host-plant choice. Recent classifications of the family Tephritidae, Figure 1 shows a phylogenetic tree for the based mainly on morphological characters (White species in the present work, with Liriomyza & Elson-Harris1994; Korneyev 2001), place species huidobrensis and Drosophila yakuba as outgroups, of the genera Ceratitis, Bactrocera and Dacus in constructed using the neighbour-joining method the subfamily Dacinae, whereas the species of the based on Jukes-Cantor distances. Two major genera Anastrepha, Toxotrypana and Rhagoletis clusters can be seen. The first comprises the are included in the subfamily Trypetinae. Similarly, Ceratitis species C. capitata, C. rosa and C. cosyra, a close relationship between members of the while the second has two main branches, one for tribes Ceratitini (including the genus Ceratitis)

Fig. 1. Relationships among the 16 studied species in the family Tephritidae. The tree was constructed using the neighbour-joining method. 442 Proceedings of the 6th International Fruit Fly Symposium and Dacini has been reported, based on morpho- CLARY,D.O.& WOLSTENHOLME,D.R.1985.The mitochon- logical (Hancock 1986; Foote et al. 1993; Norrbom drial DNA molecule of Drosophila yakuba: nucleo- tide sequence, gene organization and genetic code. et al. 1999) and molecular data (Han & McPheron Journal of Molecular Evolution 22: 252–271. 1997, 2001; Malacrida et al. 1996). However, the DREW,R.A.I.1989. Taxonomic characters used in identify- results of the present work show the Ceratitis ing Tephritidae. In: Robinson, A.S. & Hooper, G. (Eds) species to be clearly separated from the rest of the Fruit Flies: Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control, studied genera, and places the species of the Vol. 3A. Elsevier, Amsterdam. tribe Dacini (genera Bactrocera and Dacus) with DURANDO, C.M., BAKER, R.H., ETGES, W.J., HEED, W.B., WASSERMAN, M. & DESALLE, R. 2000. Phylogenetic members of the subfamily Trypetinae (genus analysis of the repleta species group of the genus Rhagoletis). This relationship between Bactrocera Drosophila using multiple sources of characters. and Rhagoletis species is consistent with the re- Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 16: 296–307. sults obtained by Han & McPheron (1994) and FELSENSTEIN,J.1985.Confidence limits and phylogenies: Malacrida et al. (1996), based on the analysis of an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39: 783– nuclear ribosomal DNA and allozyme data, 779. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1993. PHYLIP (Phylogeny Inference respectively. Package) version 3.5c. Department of Genetics, Uni- A closer relationship between Anastrepha and versity of Washington, Seattle. Toxotrypana has been suggested (Kitto 1983; FOOTE, R.H., BLANC, F.L. & NORRBOM, A.L. 1993. Hand- Norrbom & Foote 1989; Han & McPheron 1994; book of the Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) of America 1997, 2001). The present analysis supports close North of Mexico. Comstock Publishing Associates, Ithaca, NY.mmm affinities between members of this group, GÓMEZ-ZURITA, J., JUAN, C. & PETITPIERRE, E. 2000. The currently placed in the tribe Toxotrypanini (Foote evolutionary history of the genus Timarcha (Coleop- et al. 1993; White & Elson-Harris 1994; Korneyev tera, Chrysomelidae) inferred from mitochondrial 2001). COII gene and partial 16S rDNA sequences. Molecular In summary, the present data agree with those Phylogenetics and Evolution 14: 304–317. of previous investigations using different charac- HAN, H-Y. & McPHERON, B.A. 1994. Phylogenetic study of selected tephritid flies (Insecta: Diptera: Tephriti- ters (morphological and molecular) in terms of dae) using partial sequences of the nuclear 18S ribo- the close affinity between Anastrepha and Toxo- somal DNA. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 22: trypana, and in terms of the relationships between 447– 457. Bactrocera and Rhagoletis. However, the data also HAN, H-Y. & McPHERON, B.A. 1997. Molecular phylogen- revealed Ceratitis species to be equally separated etic study of Tephritidae (Insecta: Diptera) using par- tial sequences of the mitochondrial 16S ribosomal from all other genera studied. DNA. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 7: 17–32. Thus the classification – especially the higher HAN, H-Y. & McPHERON, B.A. 2001. Nucleotide sequence classification – of the family Tephritidae, and the data as tool to test phylogenetic relationships among phylogenetic relationships of its members, re- higher groups of Tephritidae: a case study using main unsolved. Both the morphological and the mitochondrial ribosomal DNA. Fruit flies (Tephriti- partial molecular approaches are severely limited. dae): In: Aluja, M. & Norrbom, A.L. (Eds) Phylogeny and Evolution of Behavior. CRC Press, Boca Raton. In future, the addition of more data from different HAN, H-Y. 2000. Molecular phylogenetic study of the sequences and species will probably contribute tribe Trypetini (Diptera:Tephritidae),using mitochon- to the resolution of the relationships among the drial 16S ribosomal DNA sequences. Biochemical Sys- species of this important pest group. tematics and Ecology 28: 501–513. HANCOCK, D.L. 1986. Classification of the Trypetinae (Diptera: Tephritidae), with a discussion of the Afro- ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS tropical fauna. Journal of the Entomological Society The authors are very grateful to C. Fleming who of Southern Africa 49: 275–305. kindly provided the primers, and to B. Barnes, JUKES, T.H. & CANTOR, C.R. 1969. Evolution of protein C. Fleming, J. Frey, G. Gould, T. Grové, A. Handler, molecules, In: Munro, H.N. (Ed.) Mammalian Protein D. Haymer, E. Hernández-Ortiz, F.Jerónimo, E. Jang, Metabolism. 21–132. Academic Press, New York. T. Kakouli, S. Lux, D. Moreno, S. Opp, R. Pereira, KITTO, G.B. 1983. An immunological approach to the phylogeny of the Tephritidae. In: Cavalloro, R. (Ed.) S. Quilici, M. Robson, S. Seewooruthun and N. Zenz Fruit Flies of Economic Importance. A.A. Balkema, for their kind help in providing sample flies. Rotterdam. KORNEYEV, V.A. 2001. Phylogenetic relationships among REFERENCES higher groups of Tephritidae. In: Aluja, M. & Norr- CATERINO, M.S. & SPERLING, F.A.H. 1999. Papilio phylog- bom, A.L. (Eds) Fruit flies (Tephritidae): Phylogeny eny based on mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I and Evolution of Behavior. CRC Press, Boca Raton. and II genes. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution MALACRIDA, A., GUGLIELMINO, C.R., D’ADAMO, P., 11: 122–137. TORTI, C., MARINONI, F. & GASPERI, G. 1996. Allozyme Fernandez et al.: A phylogenetic study of the family Tephritidae using mitochondrial DNA 443

divergence and phylogenetic relationships among a new method for reconstructing phylogenetics trees. species of Tephritidae flies. Heredity 76: 592–602. Molecular Biology and Evolution 4: 406–425. McPHERON, B.A. & HAN, H-Y. 1997. Phylogenetic analysis SANGER, F., NICKLEN, S. & COULSON, A.R. 1977. DNA of North American Rhagoletis (Diptera: Tephritidae) sequencing with chain terminator inhibitors. Proceed- and related genera using mitochondrial DNA se- ings of the National Acadeny of Science, U.S.A. 74: 453– quence data. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 7: 467. 1–16. SIMON, C., FRATI, F., BECKENBACH, A., CRESPI, B., LIU, H. MORROW, J., SCOTT, L., CONGDON, B., YEATES, D., & FLOOK, P. 1994. Evolution, weighting, and phylo- FROMMER, M.& SVED, J.2000.Close genetic similarity genetic utility of mitochondrial gene sequences and between two sympatric species of tephritid fruit fly a compilation of conserved polymerase chain reac- reproductively isolated by mating time. Interna- tions primers. Annals of the Entomological Society of tional Journal of Organic Evolution 54: 899–910. America 87: 651–701. NORRBOM, A.L. & FOOTE, R.H. 1989. The taxonomy and SMITH, J.J. & BUSH, G. 1997. Phylogeny of the genus zoogeography of the genus Anastrepha (Diptera: Rhagoletis (Diptera: Tephritidae) inferred from DNA Tephritidae). In: Robinson, A.S. & Hooper, G. (Eds) sequences of mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase II. Fruit Flies. Their Biology, Natural Enemies and Control, Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 7: 33–43. Vol. 3A. Elsevier, Amsterdam. SPERLING, F.A.H.& HICKEY, A.D. 1994. Mitochondrial DNA NORRBOM, A.L., CARROLL, L.E. & FREIDBERG, A. 1999. sequence variation in the spruce budworm species Status of knowledge. In: Thompson, F.C. (Ed.) Fruit Fly complex (Choristoneura: Lepidoptera). Molecular Expert Identification System and Bioystematic Informa- Biology and Evolution 11: 656–665. tion Database. Myia (1998) 9: 1–524. WHITE,I.M.1996.Fruit fly taxonomy:recent advances and REYES, A., LINACERO, R. & OCHANDO, M.D. 1997. Molecu- new approaches. In: McPheron, B.A. & Steck, G.J. (Eds) lar genetic and integrated control: a universal geno- Fruit Fly Pests. A World Assessment of Their Biology and mic DNA microextraction method for PCR, RAPD, Management. St Lucie Press, Delray Beach, U.S.A. restriction and Southern analysis. IOBC/wprs Bulletin WHITE, I.M. & ELSON-HARRIS, M. 1994. Fruit Flies of 20: 71–78 Economic Significance: Their Identification and Bio- SAITOU, N. & NEI, M. 1987. The neighbor joining method, nomics. CAB International, Wallingford, U.K.