Identification of aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae) species of economic importance in Kenya using DNA barcodes and PCR-RFLP-based approach

Abstract

Aphids are among pests of economic importance throughout the world. Together with transmitting plant viruses, aphids are capable of inflicting severe crop production losses. They also excrete honeydew that favours the growth of sooty mold which reduces the quality of vegetables and fruits and hence their market values. Rapid and accurate identification of aphids to the species level is a critical component in effective pest management and plant quarantine systems. Even though morphological taxonomy has made a tremendous impact on species-level identifications, polymorphism, morphological plasticity and immature stages are among the many challenges to accurate identification. In addition, their small size, presence of cryptic species and damaged specimens dictate the need for a strategy that will ensure timely and accurate identification. In this study, polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP)-based on mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I gene and DNA barcoding were applied to identify different aphid species collected from different agro-ecological zones of Kenya. Three restriction enzymes RsaI, AluI and Hinf1 produced patterns that allowed unambiguous identification of the species except Aphis craccivora and Aphis fabae. Analyses of the barcode region indicated intraspecific and interspecific sequence divergences of 0.08 and 6.63%, respectively. DNA barcoding identified all species, including the morphologically indistinguishable A. craccivora and A. fabae and separated two subspecies of A. fabae. Based on these results, both PCR-RFLPs and DNA barcoding could provide quick and accurate tools for identification of aphid species within Aphididae subsequently aiding in effective pest management programmes and enhance plant quarantine systems.

Unusual occurrence of a DAG motif in the Ipomovirus Cassava brown streak virus and implications for its vector transmission

“…tabacum , and not cassava. There are many species of aphids present in East Africa [ 84 ] and several species of CBSV and UCBSV [ 17 , 20 ]. It is therefore possible that incorrect combinations of vector and virus were the reason these older transmission studies using different aphid species were inconclusive.…”

Phylogeny and species reassessment of Hyalopterus (Aphididae, Aphidinae)

“…Molecular-based approaches have demonstrated great potentials for accurately delimiting species, recognizing cryptic species and detecting host-specific lineages for aphids (Beji et al, 2015;Chen, Jiang, Chen, & Qiao, 2016;Cocuzza & Cavalieri, 2014;Foottit et al, 2008Foottit et al, , 2009Kinyanjui et al, 2016;Lee, Lee, Lee, & Kim, 2015;Li et al, 2020;Rebijith et al, 2013;Wang et al, 2011Wang et al, , 2013Wang & Qiao, 2009;Wen et al, 2013;Zhu et al, 2017). However, most studies limited the species delimitation methods to thresholdbased and/or single-gene approaches.…”

DNA barcoding and species delimitation of Chaitophorinae (Hemiptera, Aphididae)

“…Additionally, the application range was expanded to pest control and quarantine (Armstrong and Ball 2005, Ratnasingham and Hebert 2007, Naaum et al 2012, Pelletier et al 2012). For aphids, the DNA barcoding approach has played an efficient role in the rapid identification of species on specific plants (Naaum et al 2012, Chen et al 2013b, Wang et al 2013a, Wang et al 2013b, Wen et al 2013, Wang et al 2015), the effective distinction of morphologically indistinguishable species and subspecies (Wang and Qiao 2009, Rebijith et al 2013, Cocuzza and Cavalieri 2014, Beji et al 2015, Kinyanjui et al 2016), the recognition of cryptic species (Rebijith et al 2013, Lee et al 2015), and in species classification (Cocuzza and Cavalieri 2014, Mroz et al 2015). Likewise, DNA barcoding may be used in species diversity assessment within different regions (Podmore et al 2015, Chen et al 2016); and is a powerful tool for the identification of multi-life stages, different morphs, and biological debris (Shufran and Puterka 2011).…”