Low levels of crustacean parasite infestation in fish species from the Matapi River in the state of Amapá, Brazil

Abstract

This first study investigated the crustacean parasite fauna in 66 species of fish from the Matapi River basin, state of Amapá (Brazil). Fish were collected every two months between March 2012 and August 2013, encompassing dry and rainy seasons. Among the 66 species examined (corresponding to 722 fish specimens) only 11 species were parasitized. The infestation prevalence was 2.2%, and a total of 48 specimens of parasites were distributed between three different parasite groups. These included Argulus elongatus, Dolops reperta and Argulus multicolor (Branchiura), Ergasilus xinguensis and Gamidactylus sp. (Copepoda), and Isopoda (Braga patagonica), but branchiuran species were predominant. This was the first report of these parasite species for Leporinus fasciatus, Astyanax bimaculatus, Curimata incompta, Pygocentrus nattereri, Crenicichla cincta, Crenicichla johanna, Geophagus camopiensis, Pterophyllum scalare, Plagioscion squamosissimus, Hypostomus plecostomus and Propimelodus eigenmanni. Lastly, this study expands the range of occurrence of these six parasite species to the Matapi River basin in eastern Amazon.

Diversity and community ecology of metazoan parasites in Pimelodus ornatus (Siluriformes: Pimelodidae) from the Amazonas River in Brazil

“…No crustacean parasite species was found on the gills of P. ornatus from the Amazonas River. Similar findings were reported by Neves & Tavares-Dias (2019) for Ageneiosus ucayalensis (Castelnau, 1855), Pimelodella eigenmanni (Boulenger, 1891), Colomesus asellus (Muller & Troschel, 1849), Pimelodus blochii (Valenciennes, 1840), P. ornatus, Platynematichthys notatus (Jardine, 1841) and Peckoltia lineola (Armbruster, 2008) from Matapi River, a tributary of the Amazonas River, in Amapá State (Brazil). This absence of parasitic crustacean species may be due to the water velocity and daily tides from the Amazonas River (Abreu et al, 2020), given that these ectoparasites need to swim to find adequate hosts, while others depend on the flow of water and swimming speed (Neves & Tavares-Dias, 2019).…”

Ectoparasites infecting Mugil curema (Mugiliformes: Mugilidae) in Amapá state estuary, in the northern Brazilian coast region

“…abundance, intensity, richness, prevalence and diversity), which provide information on the structure of the parasitic community at different levels. Once the diversity and infection levels of parasites can be in uenced by abiotic and biotic factors (Pedro et al 2016;Santos et al 2017;Neves & Tavares-Dias 2019), studies on species composition of parasites are required to understand the role of the parasite community in ecosystems (Mentz et al 2016;Pedro et al 2016;Neves & Tavares-Dias 2019). The ectoparasite community on M. curema was low, consisting of only one species of Monogenea and three species of Crustacea.…”

“…Understanding how the parasites are distributed and their interactions with host sh populations and environment are among the basic aims of parasitology of sh (Cavalcanti 2011;Golzio et al 2017;Nedić et al 2018;Neves & Tavares-Dias 2019). In this context, parasite-host-environment systems constitute excellent study models to explore these essential aspects of parasitic ecology in wild sh populations.…”

“…One of these most important interactions is with different taxa of parasite species, which can result in diseases. Such diseases can be highly damaging for sh and consequently to the local economics (Cavalcanti et al 2011;Golzio et al 2017;Nedić et al 2018;Neves & Tavares-Dias 2019). Parasitic diseases usually occur when there is an imbalance between environment, host and parasite community in sh population (Pedro et al 2016;Mentz et al 2016).…”

“…Providing that the associations between ectoparasites and impacts have been established, this could offer predictive tools to assess the magnitude of impacts on sh populations (Fajer-Ávila et al 2006;Golzio et al 2017;Neves & Tavares-Dias 2019). Thus, it is important to know the parasitic fauna of wild sh populations and to consider the effects of parasites on host health, because these may help to understand impacts on sh populations and effects of aquatic ecosystems on parasite communities (Mentz et al 2016;Neves & Tavares-Dias, 2019). The aim of this study was to investigate the ectoparasite fauna in M. curema from the Amapá state estuary, in the Brazilian coast.…”