Helminth parasites of freshwater fish in Chiapas, Mexico

Abstract

An inventory based on previously published records and original data is presented for the helminth parasites reported in 54 fish species from 17 families from the state of Chiapas, southeast Mexico. This survey reports the presence of 43 helminth species in Chiapas for the first time. The actualized inventory of helminth parasites of freshwater fish from Chiapas contains 88 species from 67 genera and 40 helminth families. Trematodes and nematodes were the most abundant taxonomic groups. The helminth fauna in freshwater fishes from Chiapas consists of Central American species. All the helminth species recorded in Chiapas have also been collected from bodies of freshwater between the Isthmus of Tehuantepec and the Isthmus of Panama. This inventory shows that this fauna is quite similar to that from the neighboring basins of the lower Grijalva-Usumacinta system and the Yucatan Peninsula. The taxonomic composition and distribution data reported here for the helminth fauna of Chiapas' freshwater fish, contribute to a better understanding of this faunal component in Central America.

Host specificity and the structure of helminth parasite communities of fishes in a Neotropical river in Mexico

“…These high parasite densities seem to be the rule in Neotropical regions and these results are supported by those of [32, 33], who found high densities in fishes of other Mexican basins. Availability and effective use of resources seem to promote high densities of parasites, improving reproductive efficiency.…”

Patterns of Distribution of the Helminth Parasites of Freshwater Fishes of Mexico

“…We lack, however, a summary of its distribution. Previous attempts to synthesise distributional data on a broad scale [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] are now updated as new data has become available, new taxa have been described [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15] and recent survey works have been published [16], [17], [18]. However previous studies on helminth parasites of freshwater fishes of Mexico indicate: 1) that each family has a typical helminth fauna and that species distribution corresponds to that of their hosts in such a way that the composition of the helminth fauna of a given basin is more influenced by its ichthyological composition than by limnological factors [2], [7], [19], [20]; 2) that the helminth parasite fauna of freshwater fishes of neotropical Mexico, particularly the south-eastern region is part of a Central American parasite fauna [6], [19], and that this fauna, although different, can be traced back to South American origins [19]; 3) Central American neotropical and a nearctic components have been identified within the fauna of helminth parasites of freshwater fishes in Mexico; Central American species (S = 119) parasitize typical neotropical fish families and are found mostly in Mexican neotropical drainage basins south of the Trans Mexican Volcanic Belt, 19° - 21° N meridian, while most nearctic species (S = 48) are distributed, mostly in Goodeids, from nearctic basins of Mexico in bodies of water in the Mexican Highland Plateau from the Río Lerma basin to the Río Bravo basin [21].…”

Cooling water of power plant creates “hot spots” for tropical fishes and parasites

“…Twelve metazoan parasite species have been reported on A. nigrofasciata in its native range (see checklists by Salgado-Maldonado 2008;Sandlund et al 2010). Within the species' present (introduced) distribution range, Mexico is the only country in which the parasite fauna of A. nigrofasciata has been studied, and eight parasite species have been described (see checklists and studies by Moravec 1998;Salgado-Maldonado 2013;Salgado-Maldonado and RubioGodoy 2014).…”

“…The aim was to analyze the parasite fauna and feeding ecology of the tropical cichlid Amatitlania nigrofasciata that has established a self-sustaining population in a thermally altered stream of the Rhine drainage system in Germany. Twenty parasite species are currently known to infect the study species (Moravec 1998;Salgado-Maldonado 2008;Sandlund et al 2010;Salgado-Maldonado 2013;SalgadoMaldonado and Rubio-Godoy 2014); however, all studies except one (Mexico) were conducted in the species' native range. We chose two sites at a distance of 3 km for sample collection and predicted that (a) the diet composition of A. nigrofasciata will differ between sampling sites due to differences in food supply related to local thermal regime, and accordingly (b) variation in parasite load (prevalence and intensity) and composition should be expected, especially for parasite types transmitted via the ingestion of intermediate hosts.…”