Lutzomyia umbratilis, the Main Vector of Leishmania guyanensis, Represents a Novel Species Complex?

Vera Margarete Scarpassa; Ronildo Baiatone Alencar

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0037341

Abstract

Background

Lutzomyia umbratilis is an important Leishmania guyanensis vector in South America. Previous studies have suggested differences in the vector competence between L. umbratilis populations situated on opposite banks of the Amazonas and Negro Rivers in the central Amazonian Brazil region, likely indicating a species complex. However, few studies have been performed on these populations and the taxonomic status of L. umbratilis remains unclear.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Phylogeographic structure was estimated for six L. umbratilis samples from the central Amazonian region in Brazil by analyzing mtDNA using 1181 bp of the COI gene to assess whether the populations on opposite banks of these rivers consist of incipient or distinct species. The genetic diversity was fairly high and the results revealed two distinct clades ( = lineages) with 1% sequence divergence. Clade I consisted of four samples from the left bank of the Amazonas and Negro Rivers, whereas clade II comprised two samples from the right bank of Negro River. No haplotypes were shared between samples of two clades. Samples within clades exhibited low to moderate genetic differentiation (F_ST = −0.0390–0.1841), whereas samples between clades exhibited very high differentiation (F_ST = 0.7100–0.8497) and fixed differences. These lineages have diverged approximately 0.22 Mya in the middle Pleistocene. Demographic expansion was detected for the lineages I and II approximately 30,448 and 15,859 years ago, respectively, in the late Pleistocene.

Conclusions/Significance

The two genetic lineages may represent an advanced speciation stage suggestive of incipient or distinct species within L. umbratilis. These findings suggest that the Amazonas and Negro Rivers may be acting as effective barriers, thus preventing gene flow between populations on opposite sides. Such findings have important implications for epidemiological studies, especially those related to vector competence and anthropophily, and for vector control strategies. In addition, L. umbratilis represents an interesting example in speciation studies.

Citation: Scarpassa VM, Alencar RB (2012) Lutzomyia umbratilis, the Main Vector of Leishmania guyanensis, Represents a Novel Species Complex? PLoS ONE 7(5): e37341. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037341

Editor: Luciano A. Moreira, Centro de Pesquisas René Rachou, Brazil

Received: February 10, 2012; Accepted: April 20, 2012; Published: May 18, 2012

Copyright: © 2012 Scarpassa, Alencar. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: This study was funded by National Council of Scientific and Technological Development grants, process numbers 409058/2006-8 to Toby Vicent Barrett and 575482/2008-7 to VMS, and by the Foundation of Research Support of the State of Amazonas to VMS, Brazil. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

In the last three decades, molecular genetic markers have been widely used for elucidating the population structure and evolutionary genetics in insect vectors, and these studies have contributed to differentiate members of cryptic species complexes, primarily in malaria [1], [2], [3], leishmaniasis [4], [5], and Chagas [6], [7], [8] vectors. Cryptic species are discrete species that are difficult or sometimes impossible to distinguish morphologically [9], although their genetics, behavioral/ecological aspects, susceptibility to infection, and feeding habits (ranging from anthropophily to zoophily) often vary, defining their vector or non-vector status. Furthermore, species that diverged very recently complicates the understanding of reproductive isolation, evolutionary relationships and geographic distributions because gene flow may occur between them. In case of vectors, the potential gene flow between species or between different evolutionary units may have relevant epidemiological consequences, as it may facilitate inter-specific transfer of epidemiologically important genes or alleles and changes the transmission patterns of the diseases [10].

The main vector of Leishmania guyanensis Floch, 1954 that causes American Cutaneous Leishmaniasis (ACL), Lutzomyia umbratilis Ward & Fraiha, 1977 (Diptera: Psychodidae), occurs in northern South America, including Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, French Guyana, Peru, Suriname and Venezuela [11], [12]. In Brazil, L. umbratilis has been registered in the Amazonian region [11] and in the state of Pernambuco [13] from the northeastern region. Consequently, populations of this species occupy extensive areas separated by geographic barriers, including the largest rivers, the Amazonas and Negro, in Amazonian Brazil. Additionally, sandflies have very limited dispersal capabilities, usually no more than 1 km [14], [15], are abundant in peridomestic environments of rural communities and therefore are distributed in discontinuous areas [16]. Taken together, these characteristics suggest that L. umbratilis populations are more susceptible to evolving into differentiated populations, incipient species and, ultimately, reproductively isolated species.

Lutzomyia umbratilis has been implicated in Le. guyanensis transmission in Brazil [17], [18], [19], French Guyana [20], [21], [22] and Venezuela [23]. In Amazonian Brazil, this species was incriminated in Le. guyanensis transmission in the states of Pará [17], [18], [19], Amazonas [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], Acre [29] and Rondônia [30]. In the municipality of Manaus (Amazonas), where L. umbratilis is recognized as the most important vector, the number of human cases of ACL was considered the highest in Brazil, comprising ∼57.4% of the autochthonous cases in the region [31]. In Peixoto de Azevedo, Mato Grosso, Brazil, an infection with Leishmania braziliensis Vianna, 1911 was identified in L. umbratilis [12]. Moreover, the susceptibility of this vector to Leishmania seems to vary in the central Amazonian Brazil region [25]. Lutzomyia umbratilis populations naturally infected with Le. guyanensis have been observed east of the Negro River and north of the Amazonas River; however, at south of the Amazonas River fluvial system have not been reported evidences of natural infections by Leishmania for this species [25]. Arias and Freitas [25] suggested that the fluvial system formed by the Amazonas, Solimões and Negro Rivers may act as a barrier to the Le. guyanensis transmission cycle, where L. umbratilis populations display distinct degrees of vector competence between the opposite sides. However, only a few studies have tested the role of this barrier in L. umbratilis genetic subdivision.

A biological analysis, under laboratory conditions, was conducted with two L. umbratilis populations from Manaus and Manacapuru (left and right sides of the Negro River, respectively) from Amazonas, Brazil. The results of this study revealed significant differences in the life cycle, fecundity, fertility, emergence degree and adult longevity between populations, which are indicative of intrinsic biological differences [32]. Subsequently, a study that combined morphology, chromosome and isozymes analysis of four L. umbratilis populations of this fluvial system showed significant differences in the bristle lengths of 4^th instar larvae and in the number and size of the spines of armature of the female genital atrium [33]. This latter has been a useful marker for distinguishing closely related species in sandflies [34]. Although polytene chromosome analysis was not possible, the metaphasic karyotype was 2n = 6. Isozymes did not reveal differences among populations. Isozymes evolve relatively slow rate likely due to negative selection and the amino acid codon wobble effect. Consequently, they are not informative markers for detecting incipient or recently diverged species [35]. Therefore, the taxonomic status of L. umbratilis remains unclear.

Genes encoding mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) have been widely employed in population studies, molecular taxonomy and phylogenetic relationships of many organisms [36]. The rapid evolution and usually maternal inheritance of this marker makes it an attractive tool to evolutionary studies of recently diverged groups, where only the most rapidly evolving nucleotide sites accumulate substitutions. The mitochondrial genome of the majority of the animal taxa harbors 2 ribosomal RNA genes, 22 transfer RNA genes, and 13 protein-coding genes. The cytochrome oxidase subunit I (COI) is one of the largest protein-coding genes, which functions in electron transport and ATP synthesis and exhibits the most conserved amino acid sequence [37]. It has been widely used in phylogeographic structure and population genetics studies of insects [37], [38], [39]. The Folmer region, 648 base-pairs (bp) at the 5′ end of this gene, has emerged as the standard barcode region [40]. However, few sandfly studies have used this gene [4].

We analyzed the phylogeographic structure of L. umbratilis populations on opposite sides of the Negro River and on the left bank of Amazonas River in the central Amazonian Brazil region by analyzing an 1181 bp fragment of the COI gene from mtDNA to assess whether L. umbratilis populations on both sides comprise incipient or distinct species.

Results

One hundred and eleven L. umbratilis specimens were sequenced from six locations from the central Amazonian Brazil region using an 1181 bp fragment of the COI gene (Table 1, Figure 1). Nucleotide substitutions were detected in 57 (4.8%) sites, of which 22 (1.86%) were parsimoniously informative. Transitions were more common (93%) than transversions (6.9%), and no deletions or insertions were observed. Base frequencies were estimated as follows: A = 0.3078; T = 0.3991; C = 0.1520; G = 0.1409, where the A+T (∼70.7%) content was similar to that observed for other insects [37].

Download:

Figure 1. Collection sites of Lutzomyia umbratilis from Amazonian Brazil.

1, Cachoeira Porteira; 2, BR-174 Highway; 3, Rio Preto da Eva; 4, Manaus; 5, Manacapuru; 6, Novo Airão. Figures A and B are expanded sizes.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037341.g001

Download:

Table 1. Collection sites and sample sizes of Lutzomyia umbratilis and Lutzomyia anduzei from Amazonian Brazil.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037341.t001

Table 2 shows the haplotype frequencies in the localities studied. The results revealed a high genetic variation with 52 haplotypes, most of which were singletons and private to their localities (88.46%). The number of haplotypes per locality ranged from four (in Rio Preto da Eva and Manaus) to 17 (in Novo Airão). All haplotypes were connected in the network (Figure 2); however, two distinct haplotype groups ( = clades) separated by ten mutational steps were visualized. Clade I clustered 28 haplotypes (H1 to H28) corresponding to four samples from the left bank of the Negro and Amazonas Rivers: Cachoeira Porteira, 43 km from the BR-174 Highway, Rio Preto da Eva and Manaus (Table 2). Clade II contained 24 haplotypes (H29 to H52) comprising two samples from the right bank of Negro River: Manacapuru and Novo Airão. In clade I, H1 had the highest frequency and it was shared among all samples analyzed from left bank of the Negro and Amazonas Rivers. H17 was shared between the BR-174 Highway and Rio Preto da Eva samples, and based on its position in the haplotypes network may suggest contemporary gene flow. H7 was highly divergent haplotype and formed a reticulation that included H17. Clade II harbored two more frequent haplotypes (H31 and H34) separated by only one mutational event, and H31 may be indicative of older haplotypes. In both clades, the most haplotypes are at the tips and may be more recently derived, characteristic of population expansion [41]. Moreover, four clade I haplotypes (H3, H7, H8, H9 from Cachoeira Porteira) exhibited longer branch-length with missing intermediate. No haplotypes were shared between samples on the opposite banks of rivers. Table S1 shows the variable sites of the haplotypes observed in L. umbratilis. The two samples of clade II (H29 to H52) contained five fixed mutations (position sites: 258, 285, 429, 933, 1170). Phylogenetic relationships demonstrated by Bayesian Inference (BI) analysis also revealed two monophyletic clades, but with moderate support (0.64 and 0.77, Figure 3). Clade I clustered the samples from the left bank of the Negro and Amazonas Rivers, whereas the clade II grouped the samples from the right bank of Negro River. Clade II consisted of two subclades (0.67) that resulted of one transition A↔G in the position 660 (Table S1). These substitutions occurred randomly among individuals of the Manacapuru and Novo Airão samples. Six haplotypes (H53 to H58) of outgroup Lutzomyia anduzei (Rozeboom, 1942) were strongly supported (1.00) on an isolated cluster. A similar topology tree was visualized by Maximum-Likelihood (ML) analysis (data not shown).

Download:

Figure 2. Parsimony haplotypes network of the 52 haplotypes of Lutzomyia umbratilis.

H1 to H52, haplotypes. The haplotype circle sizes are proportional to number of individuals observed in each haplotype. Empty smaller circles represent mutational events. Clades I and II are in red and blue colors, respectively.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037341.g002

Download:

Figure 3. Bayesian Inference (BI) topology tree of the 52 haplotypes of Lutzomyia umbratilis inferred under the TIM1+I model.

Numbers on each branch (above branch) represent posterior probabilities obtained in the BI. Lutzomyia anduzei was used as outgroup.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037341.g003

Download:

Table 2. Haplotype frequency of Lutzomyia umbratilis and Lutzomyia anduzei from Amazonian Brazil.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037341.t002

The intra-population genetic diversity measures for each sample, combined data and for two clades are shown in Table 3. Haplotype and nucleotide diversities were used as measures of L. umbratilis genetic diversity. Within clade I, the Rio Preto da Eva sample exhibited the lowest haplotype and nucleotide diversities, whereas Manaus and Cachoeira Porteira samples had the highest haplotype diversity. Within clade II, two samples showed slightly high haplotype diversity, as did clades I and II. The nucleotide diversity was slightly low in all analyses.

Download:

Table 3. Intra-population genetic diversity measures for each sample, combined data and haplotype clade of Lutzomyia umbratilis.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037341.t003

Tajima's D test [42] was negative and significant for Cachoeira Porteira and Novo Airão samples (P<0.05) and for clades I and II (P<0.001), reflecting significant deviations from the neutral model likely due an excess of rare haplotypes consistent with recent population expansion or positive selection (Table 4). Fu's Fs [43] was negative and significant for Cachoeira Porteira and Novo Airão, combined data and for two clades (P<0.0001), and for BR-174 Highway and Manacapuru (P<0.05), rejecting the mutation-drift equilibrium and strongly favoring the interpretation of recent population expansion or selective sweeps. Mismatch distribution was unimodal for all samples, except Rio Preto da Eva (data no shown), and for clades I and II (Figure 4), supporting the model of sudden expansion. The bimodal mismatch distribution for Rio Preto da Eva may reflect a bottleneck event. The raggedness index (r) calculated for all samples and clades did not reject the null hypothesis of sudden demographic expansion. The sum of squared deviations (SSD) goodness-of-fit test was also not significant (Table 4, Figure 4). Thus, the time since the population expansion was calculated for clades I and II using t = τ/2μ, where μ is the mutation rate per site per generation [41]. The mutation rate of 10⁻⁸/site/year [44] and an approximation of five generations/year for L. umbratilis [32] were used for this calculation. The time to expansion estimated for clades I and II were approximately 30,448 years ago (95% CI, 12,599–51,947) and 15,859 years ago (95% CI, 11,642–21,566), respectively. Both expansion times were in the late Pleistocene.

Download:

Figure 4. Observed mismatch distributions for the clades I and II of Lutzomyia umbratilis.

Bars are observed distribution, the line shows the distribution simulated under a sudden expansion model. The p-values are from the sum of squared deviations goodness of fit test for the sudden expansion model.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037341.g004

Download:

Table 4. Neutrality tests and population expansion parameters estimated for each sample, combined data and haplotype clade of Lutzomyia umbratilis.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037341.t004

Within clade I, F_ST values for four samples ranged from low to moderate (−0.0390 to 0.1841) (Table 5). Moreover, the F_ST value (0.1841) was moderately high between Rio Preto da Eva and Manaus; it likely reflects the small Manaus sample size (n = 4). Similarly, the F_ST value within clade II between two samples was low (0.0548). Unlikely, the samples between clades I and II yielded very high F_ST values and were highly significant after the Bonferroni correction (0.7100 to 0.8497). This result was also observed between clades I and II (0.7776).

Download:

Table 5. Genetic differentiation among samples and haplotype clade of Lutzomyia umbratilis.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037341.t005

Table 5 also shows the average number of nucleotide substitution per site between populations (D_xy), the number of net nucleotide substitutions per site between populations (D_a), the number of shared polymorphisms (S_s) and the number of fixed differences (S_f). Similarly, F_ST, the highest D_xy and D_a values were detected between clades I and II. Furthermore, few or no shared polymorphisms or fixed differences were found between samples of two clades, particularly in comparisons between Manacapuru and three BR-174 Highway, Rio Preto da Eva and Manaus samples (S_s = 0; S_f = 6–7). Interestingly, Manacapuru versus Cachoeira Porteira and Novo Airão versus Cachoeira Porteira, which are geographically further apart, harbored more shared polymorphisms and less fixed differences (S_s = 2, S_f = 3; S_s = 6, S_f = 1, respectively). Although the F_ST value (0.0569) was statistically significant between Cachoeira Porteira and Rio Preto da Eva (both from clade I), the D_xy and D_a values were low, and no fixed differences were found between them. As described above, the genetic divergence observed between the populations does not fit the isolation-by-distance model. Analyzing all samples together, the correlation between genetic and geographic distances was negative (r = −0.063116) and not significant (P = 0.366), perhaps because geographically closer populations are more differentiated, which likely can be attributed to the rivers acting as barriers.

Sequence divergence and the average number of nucleotide differences (K) between clades I and II were 1.0% and 9.99, respectively, whereas between L. umbratilis and the closely related species L. anduzei were ∼5.8% and 12.78, respectively. Given an evolutionary rate of 2.3% per million years estimated for the COI gene in insects [45], the divergence time suggests that the two clades have diverged approximately 0.22 Mya during the middle Pleistocene.

Discussion

Genetic diversity and phylogeographic structure

In this study, the phylogenetic analyses revealed the presence of two distinct L. umbratilis clades from the opposite sides of the rivers, which were separated by a substantial genetic division in the haplotype network. Similarly, a high and significant genetic differentiation (F_ST = 0.7100–0.8497) was detected between two clades. These results combined with the lack of shared haplotypes and presence of fixed differences between populations of these clades suggest that the Amazonas and Negro Rivers may be acting as effective barriers, thus preventing gene flow between L. umbratilis populations from opposite sides.

The genetic differentiation detected in this study supports the biological and morphological differences initially observed by Justianiano et al. [32] and Justianiano [33]. Taken together, these findings might explain possible differences in the vector competence of these sandflies, a hypothesis proposed by Arias and Freitas [25]. Further studies of experimental infections and transmission dynamics (anthropophily degree, resting behavior, biting peak, infectivity rate of samples from field) in these populations are needed to confirm or refute this hypothesis.

The F_ST values detected between samples of two clades were similar to those described by Soto et al. [16] between samples of Lutzomyia longipalpis Lutz & Neiva, 1912 from Central and South America using polymorphisms of the ND4 gene from mtDNA (F_ST = 0.52 to 0.933), over a much larger geographic area than in the present study. Another study analyzed nine populations of the L. longipalpis complex from northeastern region and state of Minas Gerais, Brazil, using Ctyb gene sequences from mtDNA and a larger geographic area [46]. They also detected the presence of two groups but a lower genetic differentiation (F_ST = 0.184) than that observed here. Comparing these findings, our very high F_ST values over short geographic distances appear rare in sandflies species, and according to Wright [47] this genetic differentiation is fairly high. Additionally, the divergence degree detected between two lineages of the present study fall within a differentiation range described between two cryptic species of Anopheles cruzii complex [1], thus suggesting that two species could exist within L. umbratilis, although this hypothesis was moderately supported in the phylogenetic analyses.

Unlikely, the genetic differentiation verified among L. umbratilis samples within each clade (samples from the same side of the rivers) was low, even when populations were separated by geographic distances ranging 353.67 to 394.02 km apart (Table 5), a differentiation degree consistent with those described for populations within species [47]. This result may be due to ongoing gene flow or sharing of a recent common history, as recent population expansion (Table 4, Figures 2 and 4). Taken together, this study suggests that L. umbratilis populations across rivers from the central Amazonian Brazil region may represent an advanced speciation process consisting of two incipient or distinct species that likely initiated their independent evolutionary histories after the complete formation of the Amazonas and Negro Rivers between the late Tertiary and early Quaternary ∼5.3 to 1.6 Mya [48].

Riverine Barrier Hypothesis

The riverine barrier hypothesis originally proposed by Wallace [49] states that major Amazonian rivers significantly reduce or prevent gene flow between populations inhabiting opposite river banks, promoting speciation. In a phylogenetic and population genetics approach, the three main predictions of the riverine barrier hypothesis are as follows: (1) sister intraspecific clades and species will occur across major rivers rather than within major Amazonian interfluves [50], [51]; (2) phylogeographic analyses should allow the differentiation of primary divergence across rivers (predicted by the riverine barrier hypothesis) from secondary contact along rivers between nonsister lineages [50], [51]; and (3) within a river basin, genetic similarity between populations separated by a river should be higher in the headwaters, where the river is narrower, than in its lowest part [51], [52].

The first prediction fits the best with our data. The two genetic lineages observed in this study may be derived from an ancestral gene pool, and their complete fragmentation would have occurred after the more recent formation of the Amazonas and Negro Rivers, ∼2.4 Mya to present [53], attributed as the most probable evolutionary force. This vicariant event allied the low dispersal rate of the sandflies, and the amenable environmental conditions for adaptation and also drift should have contributed to the high divergence level between the populations of these banks. The deep genetic split in these populations across rivers is also supported by other facts. The lack of isolation by distance among samples and the strong bimodality observed in the mismatch distribution when all samples were analyzed together (data not shown) are consistent with long-term isolation and the lack of recent gene flow between these populations. Avise [54] and He et al. [55] have argued that significant evolutionary clustering of haplotypes in different geographical regions has been frequently interpreted as evidence of a past population fragmentation, particularly when haplotype clusters are separated by long branch-length with missing intermediates. This argument fits the framework of the L. umbratilis populations on opposite banks, as represented in the Figure 2.

However, the estimated sequence divergence between two lineages was lower (1.0%) that between two closely related species L. umbratilis and L. anduzei (5.8%) of this study and among four clades of L. longipalpis complex (9.47–10.91%) using COI gene [4]. A rough estimate of divergence time suggests that the separation between L. umbratilis populations from opposite banks was ∼0.22 Mya during the middle Pleistocene. Although this comparison involves different genetic markers, this divergence time suggests that L. umbratilis diversification from the central Amazonian region may be more recent than that estimated for the L. longipalpis complex based on two genes (Cacophony IVS6 Intron gene = 0.98 to 1.47 Mya [56]; Cytb gene = 0.45 Mya [46]). Based on the 1–2.5% divergence with the Cytb gene, Esseghir et al. [57] proposed that diversification among closely related species in the Phlebotomus genus may have occurred in the Quaternary period, and our findings support this hypothesis. On the other hand, this separation time may be insufficient for two lineages of L. umbratilis to have formed distinct species, based on the allopatric speciation studies in Drosophila [58]. Nonetheless, the hypothesis that these lineages could represent two species will only be confirmed or refuted with further studies using other molecular genetic markers and additional sampling along the river banks and within interfluves.

Recent expansion of L. umbratilis populations

All samples, except Rio Preto da Eva, and the two clades analyzed in this study exhibited high levels of genetic diversity measured by the haplotype diversity. In contrast, the nucleotide diversity was slightly low when compared to other Diptera species [3], [38], [59]. This pattern of genetic diversity may reflect population expansion after a period of low effective population size likely caused by bottlenecks or founder events where populations contracted. The star-shaped haplotype network detected for L. umbratilis is also consistent with population expansion (Figure 2), where the most haplotypes are at the tips and, in such cases, the sudden expansion enhances the retention of new mutations [43]. Additionally, Tajima's D and Fu's Fs tests were negative and highly significant for two lineages and for samples from Cachoeira Porteira and Novo Airão, as well as the mismatch distribution was unimodal. Taken together, these data strongly suggest that a recent population expansion attributed to the deviation from neutral expectations in these populations rather than background selection. The estimate time of expansion for the lineages I and II was ∼30,448 and 15,859 years ago, respectively. The confidence intervals of these estimates overlap, suggesting that these expansions could have occurred at the same time in the late Pleistocene. The climatic conditions and presence of animal and human populations likely created more favorable habitats for expansions of these populations.

The two genetic lineages detected in this study that may also differ biologically [32] and morphologically [33] are of vital importance for epidemiological studies, especially those related to vector competence, anthropophily and behavioral aspects, and for vector control strategies, including the genetic control. In addition, L. umbratilis represents an interesting example in speciation studies.

Materials and Methods

Sandfly collection and identification

Lutzomyia umbratilis adults were sampled from six localities including Cachoeira Porteira, in the municipality of Oriximiná, in Pará, Brazil; at km 43 of BR-174 Highway and km 65 of AM-010 Highway in the municipality of Rio Preto da Eva, Manaus, km 60 of AM-070 Highway in the municipality of Manacapuru, and km 60 and km 70 of AM-352 Highway in the municipality of Novo Airão, in Amazonas, Brazil (Figure 1). Table 1 summarizes the collection sites, co-ordinates, and the sample sizes. Sandflies were collected with CDC (Centers for Disease Control) miniature light traps and with aspirators on the bases of tree trunks. To collect a randomly population sample and avoid an excess of offspring from the same females, we sampled more than five tree trunks within the same area. Both sides of Highways and roads within the collection area were sampled. The specimens were preserved in 95% ethanol and stored at −80°C until total DNA was extracted. Morphological identification was performed on genitalia according to the taxonomic key of Young and Duncan [11]. This study and catch protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the National Institute of Research of the Amazon, the Brazilian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Brazil. The sample collections were authorized by the Brazilian Institute of Environment and Natural Renewable Resources (IBAMA) and by the Authorization System and Information on Biodiversity (SISBIO), license number 12733-1 for the collections of L. umbratilis and L. anduzei from the states of Amazonas and Roraima, Brazil, and license number 14054-5 for the collections of L. umbratilis from Cachoeira Porteira, state of Pará, Brazil.

DNA extraction, PCR, and sequencing

Total genomic DNA was extracted individually from whole sandflies using a phenol and chloroform method [60], resuspended in 20 µL of 1× TE buffer (10 mM Tris-Cl pH 8.0, 1 mM EDTA pH 8.0) and stored at −80°C until PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) analysis. An 1181 bp fragment from the COI gene was amplified using 10 µM primers UEA3/UEA10. The primer sequences and amplification conditions are described in Zhang and Hewitt [61]. The PCR products were visualized on 1% agarose gels under UV light, purified with PEG and sequenced bi-directionally on an Automated Sequencer (ABI 3130 XL model, Applied Biosystems).

Phylogenetic analysis

The sequences were edited by using the BIOEDIT [62]. The estimated genealogical relationships of the haplotypes were generated in the TCS, 1.21 [63], at the 95% confidence level and the homoplasies were resolved using the rules of Crandall and Templeton [64]. Phylogenetic relationships among the haplotypes were inferred by Bayesian inference (BI) analysis, which was implemented in the MR. BAYES [65], using the evolutionary model (TIM1+I) that best fit the COI data sets; this model was previously determined in the jMODELTEST [66]. The settings were two simultaneous independents runs of the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) for 100 million generations, sampling every 1,000 generations with a burn in of 25%. Lutzomyia anduzei was selected as an outgroup in the phylogenetic analysis based on the morphologic similarities to L. umbratilis [11], which have been misidentified as L. anduzei in the past [12]. Both species have a large overlapping region in northern South America [11]. Lutzomyia anduzei is also an anthropophilic species [11] and can be a secondary vector of Le. guyanensis [18]. In the present study, four L. anduzei specimens from municipality of Novo Airão (Amazonas, Brazil), one from municipality of Autazes (Amazonas, Brazil), and two from Amajari (Roraima, Brazil) were sequenced as shown in the Tables 1 and 2. These sequences (H53 to H58) were used as outgroup in the phylogenetic analyses (Figure 3).

Genetic diversity and population structure

The intra-population genetic diversity measures (haplotype and nucleotide diversities, K values, number of polymorphic sites, transition and transversion rates) and Tajima's D [42] and Fu's Fs tests [43] for each sample, combined data and for the two clades were inferred using DNASP, 4.0 [67] and ARLEQUIN, 3.1 [68]. A neutrality test, Tajima's D, was implemented to test strict neutrality, whereas the neutrality test, Fu's Fs, was estimated to test population size stability. The latter test is more powerful for detecting population expansion and genetic hitchhiking. The mismatch distribution (an observed distribution of pair-wise nucleotide differences among haplotypes) was computed for each sample, combined data and for clades I and II in ARLEQUIN, 3.1 [68] with 1,000 permutations. The raggedness index (r) [69] and sum of squared deviations (SSD) between observed and expected mismatch distributions were calculated as a test statistic to validate the estimated sudden expansion model. Genetic differentiation, on the basis of F_ST pairwise between samples and between clades, was inferred in ARLEQUIN, 3.1 [68], whereas the average number of nucleotide substitutions per site between populations (D_xy) [70], the number of net nucleotide substitutions per site between populations (D_a), the number of shared polymorphisms between population pairs (S_s) and number of fixed differences between population pairs (S_f) were calculated in DNASP, 4.0 [67].

The estimated divergence time between the two clades was calculated assuming a mutation rate of 2.3% per million years for the COI gene [45]. This calculation used the sequence divergence between the two clades based on the Kimura two-parameter (K2P) evolutionary model estimated in MEGA, 4.0 [71]. The sequence divergence between L. umbratilis and the L. anduzei outgroup was also estimated based on the K2P.

The correlation between straight-line geographic distances and F_ST values among samples was assessed using Mantel test [72] in ARLEQUIN, 3.1 [68] with 1,000 permutations. Straight-line geographic distances were estimated in Google Earth. Haplotypes sequences of L. umbratilis (H1, H30, H31) and L. anduzei (H53, H54, H55) are deposited in GenBank under the accession numbers JQ839256 to JQ839261.

Supporting Information

Table S1.

Variable sites of haplotypes of Lutzomyia umbratilis and Lutzomyia anduzei. H, haplotypes; H1 to H52, haplotypes of Lutzomyia umbratilis; H53 to H58, haplotypes of Lutzomyia anduzei. The dots indicate identical nucleotides with the H1. The frequency of each haplotype is provided in Table 2.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037341.s001

(DOC)

Acknowledgments

The authors are especially grateful for Sara A. Bickersmith (Wadsworth Center, Albany, NY, USA) who kindly and generously helped in the Bayesian inference statistical analyses and for Juliana de Souza Araujo (UFAM, Manaus) who kindly helped to prepare the figures. RBA was a doctoral student of the Graduate Program in Entomology at INPA, and received a fellowship from CNPq (from February 2008 to July 2010) and FAPEAM (from August 2010 to January 2012).

Author Contributions

Conceived and designed the experiments: VMS. Performed the experiments: VMS RBA. Analyzed the data: VMS. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: VMS RBA. Wrote the paper: VMA. Revised the manuscript: RBA.

References

1. Rona LDP, Carvalho-Pinto CJ, Mazzoni CJ, Peixoto AA (2010) Estimation of divergence time between two sibling species of the Anopheles (Kertezia) cruzii complex using a multilocus approach. BMC Evolutionary Biology 10: 91.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
2. Loaiza JR, Bermingham E, Sanjur OI, Scott ME, Bickersmith SA, et al. (2012) Review of genetic diversity in malaria vectors (Culicidae: Anophelinae). Inf Genet Evol 12: 1–12.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
3. Scarpassa VM, Conn JE (2011) Mitochondrial DNA detects a complex evolutionary history with Pleistocene Epoch divergence for the Neotropical Malaria Vector Anopheles nuneztovari sensu lato. Am J Trop Med Hyg 85: 857–867.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
4. Arrivillaga JC, Norris DE, Feliciangeli MD, Lanzaro GC (2002) Phylogeography of the neotropical sand fly Lutzomyia longipalpis inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences. Inf Genet Evol 2: 83–95.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
5. Bauzer LGCR, Nataly AS, Maingon RDC, Peixoto AA (2007) Lutzomyia longipalpis in Brazil: a complex or a single species? A mini-review. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 102: 1–12.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
6. Costa J, Freitas-Sibajev MG, Marchon-Silva V, Pires MQ, Pacheco R (1997) Izoenzymes detect variation in populations of Triatoma brasiliensis (Hemiptera, Reduviidae, Triatominae). Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 92: 459–464.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
7. Monteiro FA, Barrett TV, Fitzpatrick S, Cordon-Rosalis C, Feliciangeli D, et al. (2003) Molecular phylogeography of the Amazonian Chagas disease vectors Rhodnius prolixus and R. robustus. Mol Ecol 12: 997–1006.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
8. Monteiro FA, Donnelly MJ, Beard CB, Costa J (2004) Nested clade and phylogeographic analyses of the disease vector Triatoma brasiliensis in Northeast Brazil. Mol Phyl Evol 32: 46–56.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
9. Mayr E (1942) Systematics and the Origin of Species. New York: Columbia University Press.
10. Mazzoni CJ, Araki AS, Ferreira GEM, Azevedo RVDM, Barbujani G, et al. (2008) Multilocus analysis of introgression between two sand fly vectors of leishmaniasis. BMC Evolutionary Biology 8: 141.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
11. Young DG, Duncan NA (1994) Guide to the identification and geographic distribution of Lutzomyia sandflyies in Mexico, the West Indies, Central and South America (Diptera: Psychodidade). Mem Am Entomol Inst 54: 1–881.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
12. Azevedo ACR, Lainson R, Souza AA, Fé NF, Feliciangeli DM, et al. (2002) Comparative studies of populaitons of Lutzomyia umbratilis (Diptera: Psychodidae) in Brazil and Venezuela. J Med Entomol 39: 587–600.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
13. Balbino VQ, Marcondes CB, Alexander B, Luna LKS, Lucena MMM, et al. (2001) First report of Lutzomyia (Nyssomyia) umbratilis Ward & Frahia, 1977 outside of Amazonian region, in Recife, State of Pernambuco, Brazil (Diptera: Psychodidae: Phlebotominae). Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 96: 315–317.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
14. Dye C, Davies CR, Lainson R (1991) Communication among phlebotomine sandflies: a field study of domesticated Lutzomyia longipalpis populations in Amazonian Brazil. Anim Behav 42: 183–192.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
15. Morrison AC, Ferro C, Morales A, Tesh RB, Wilson ML (1993) Dispersal of the sand fly Lutzomyia longipalpis (Diptera: Psychodidae) at an endemic focus of visceral leishmaniasis in Colombia. J Med Entomol 30: 427–435.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
16. Soto SIU, Lehmann T, Rowton ED, Véles ID, Porter CH (2001) Speciation and population structure in the morphospecies Lutzomyia longipalpis (Lutz & Neiva) as derived from the mitochondrial ND4 gene. Mol Phylogenet Evol 18: 84–93.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
17. Lainson R, Ward D, Shaw JJ (1976) Cutaneous leishmaniasis in North Brazil: Lutzomyia anduzei as a major vector. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 70: 171–172.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
18. Lainon R, Shaw JJ, Ward RD, Ready PD, Naiff RD (1979) Leishmaniasis in Brazil: XIII. Isolation of Leishmania from armadillos (Dasypus novemcinctus), and observation on the epidemiology of cutaneous leishmaniasis in north Pará State. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 73: 239–242.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
19. Lainson R, Shaw JJ, Ward RD, Ready PD, Miles M, et al. (1981) Leishmaniasis in Brazil: XVI. Isolation and identification of Leishmania species from sandflies, wild mammals and man in north Pará State, with particular reference to L. brasiliensis guyanensis causative agent of “pian-bois”. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 75: 530–536.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
20. Le Pont F, Pajot FX (1980) La leishmaniose em Guyane Française. 1. Étude de l'écologie et du taux d'infection naturelle de Lutzomyia (Nyssomyia) umbratilis Ward et Fraiha, 1977 em saison seche. Considérations épidémiologiques. Cahiers ORSTOM Série Ent Méd et Parasitologie 18: 359–382.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
21. Gentile B, Le Pont F, Pajot FX, Besnard R (1981) Dermal leishmaniasis in French Guiana: the sloth (Choloepus didactylus) as reservoir host. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 75: 612–613.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
22. Pajot FX, Le Pont F, Gentile B, Besnard R (1982) Epidemiology of leishmaniasis in French Guiana. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 76: 112–113.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
23. Feliciangeli MD, Pérez JR, Ramirez A (1985) First Venezuelan record of Lutzomyia umbratilis Ward & Fraiha 1977 (Diptera: Psychodidae), a proven vector of Leishmania brasiliensis guyanensis. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 79: 878.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
24. Arias JR, Freitas RA (1977) Flebotomíneos da Amazônia central do Brasil. 1. Resultados obtidos das capturas feitas em isca humana e eqüina. (Diptera: Psychodidae). Acta Amaz 7: 507–527.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
25. Arias JR, Freitas RA (1978) Sobre os vectores da leishmaniose cutânea na Amazônia central do Brasil. 2. Incidência de flagelados em flebotomíneos selváticos. Acta Amaz 8: 387–396.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
26. Arias JR, Naiff RD (1981) The principal reservoir host of cutaneous leishmaniasis in the urban area of Manaus, Central Amazon of Brazil. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 76: 279–286.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
27. Nery LCR, Lorosa ES, Franco AMR (2004) Feeding preference of the sand flies Lutzomyia umbratilis and L. spathotrichia (Diptera: Psychodidae, Phlebotominae) in an urban forest patch in the city of Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 99: 571–574.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
28. Pinheiro FG, Luz SLB, Franco AMR (2008) Infecção natural por tripanosomatídeos (Kinetoplastida: Trypanosomatidae) em Lutzomyia umbratilis (Diptera: Psychodidae) em áreas de leishmaniose tegumentar americana no Amazonas, Brasil. Acta Amaz 38: 165–172.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
29. Azevedo ACR, Costa SM, Pinto MCG, Souza JL, Cruz HC, et al. (2008) Studies on the sandfly fauna (Diptera: Psychodidae: Phlebotominae) from transmission areas of American Cutaneous Leishmaniasis in state of Acre, Brazil. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 103: 760–767.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
30. Gil LHS, Araújo MS, Villalobos JM, Camargo LMA, Ozaki LS, et al. (2009) Species structure of sand fly (Diptera: Psychodidae) fauna in the Brazilian western Amazon. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 104: 955–959.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
31. Guerra JAO, Talhari S, Paes MG, Garrido M, Talhari JM (2003) Aspectos clínicos e diagnósticos da leishmaniose tegumentar americana em militares simultaneamente expostos à infecção na Amazônia. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop 36: 587–590.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
32. Justiniano SCB, Chagas AC, Pessoa FAC, Queiroz RG (2004) Comparative biology of two populations of Lutzomyia umbratilis (Diptera: Psychodidae) of central Amazonia, Brazil, under laboratory conditions. Braz J Biol 64: 227–235.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
33. Justiniano SCB (2004) Biologia comparada de populações de Lutzomyia umbratilis (Diptera: Psychodidae) da Amazônia Central Brasileira. 151 p. Doctoral Thesis. Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia.
34. Valenta DT, Anez N, Tang Y, Killick-Kendrick R (1999) The genital atrium as a good taxonomic character to distinguish between species of phlebotomine sandflies (Diptera: Psychodidae) from Venezuela. Ann Trop Med Parasitol 93: 389–399.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
35. Scarpassa VM, Tadei WP, Suarez MF (1999) Population structure and genetic divergence in Anopheles nuneztovari (Diptera, Culicidae) from Brazil and Colombia. Am J Trop Med Hyg 60: 1010–1018.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
36. Avise JC (1994) Molecular Markers, Natural History and Evolution. Chapman & Hall, New York.
37. Simon C, Frati F, Beckenbach A, Crespi B, Liu H, et al. (1994) Evolution, weighting, and phylogenetic utility of mitochondrial gene sequences and a compilation of conserved polymerase chain reaction primers. Ann Entomol Soc Am 87: 651–701.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
38. Pramual P, Kuvangkadilok C, Baimai V, Walton C (2005) Phylogeography of the black fly Simulium tani (Diptera: Simuliidae) from Thailand as inferred from mtDNA sequences. Mol Ecol 14: 3989–4001.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
39. Scarpassa VM, Cardoza TB, Cardoso-Júnior RP (2008) Population genetics and phylogeography of Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) from Brazil. Am J Trop Med Hyg 78: 895–903.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
40. Herbert PDN, Stoeckle MY, Zemlak TS, Francis CM (2004) Identification of birds through DNA barcodes. PloS Biol 2: 312.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
41. Slatkin M, Hudson RR (1991) Pairwise comparison of mitochondrial DNA sequences in stable and exponentially growing populations. Genetics 129: 555–562.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
42. Tajima F (1989) Statistical method for testing the neutral mutation hypothesis by DNA polymorphisms. Genetics 123: 585–595.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
43. Fu YX (1997) Statistical tests of neutrality of mutations against population growth, hitchhiking and background selection. Genetics 147: 915–925.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
44. Powell JR, Caccone A, Amato GD, Yoon C (1986) Rate of nucleotide substitution in Drosophila mitochondrial DNA and nuclear DNA are similar. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 83: 9090–9093.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
45. Brower A (1994) Rapid morphological radiation and convergence among races of the butterfly Heliconius erato inferred from patterns of mitochondrial DNA evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91: 6491–6495.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
46. Coutinho-Abreu IV, Sonoda IV, Fonseca JA, Melo MM, Balbino VQ, et al. (2008) Lutzomyia longipalpis s.l. in Brazil and the impact of the São Francisco River in the speciation of this sand fly vector. Parasites & Vectors 1: 16.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
47. Wright S (1978) Evolution and the Genetics of Populations, vol. 4, Variability Within and Among Natural Populations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
48. Haffer J (2008) Hypotheses to explain the origin of species in Amazonia. Braz J Biol 68: 917–947.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
49. Wallace AR (1852) On the monkeys of the Amazon. Proc Zool Soc London 20: 107–110.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
50. Moritz C, Patton JL, Schneider CJ, Smith TB (2000) Diversification of rainforest faunas: an integrated molecular approach. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31: 533–563.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
51. Aleixo A (2004) Historical diversification of a terra-firme forest bird superspecies: a phylogeographic perspective on the role of different hypotheses of Amazonian diversification. Evolution 58: 1303–1317.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
52. Gascon C, Malcolm JR, Patton JL, Silva MNF, Bogart JP, et al. (2000) Riverine barriers and the geographic distribution of Amazonian species. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97: 13672–13677.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
53. Figueredo J, Hoorn C, Van der Ven P, Soares E (2009) Late Miocene onset of the Amazon River and the Amazon deep-sea fan: Evidence from the Foz do Amazonas Basin. Geology 37: 619–622.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
54. Avise JC (1987) Intraspecific phylogeography: the mitochondrial DNA bridge between population genetics and systematic. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 18: 489–522.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
55. He L, Watabe H, Xiangyu J, Gao J, Liang X, et al. (2007) Genetic differentiation and cryptic speciation in natural populations of Drosophila lacertosa. Mol Phylog Evol 43: 24–31.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
56. Bottecchia M, Oliveira SG, Bauzer LGSR, Souza NA, Ward RD, et al. (2004) Genetic divergence in the cacophony IVS6 Intron among five Brazilian populations of Lutzomyia longipalpis. J Mol Evol 58: 754–761.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
57. Esseghir S, Ready PD, Killick-Kendrick R, Ben Ismail R (1997) Mitochondrial haplotypes and phylogeography of Phlebotomus vectors of Leishmania major Insect. Insect Mol Biol 6: 211–225.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
58. Coyne JA, Orr HA (2004) Speciation. Sinauer Associates Inc.: Sunderland, MS.
59. Mirabello L, Conn JE (2006) Molecular population genetics of the malaria vector Anopheles darlingi in Central and South America. Heredity 96: 311–321.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
60. Sambrook J, Russell DW (2001) A Laboratory Manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, New York.
61. Zhang DX, Hewitt GM (1996) Assessment of the universality and utility of a set of conserved mitochondrial COI primers in insects. Insect Mol Biol 6: 143–150.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
62. Hall TA (1999) BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucl Acids Symp Ser 41: 95–98.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
63. Clement M, Posada D, Crandall KA (2000) TCS: a computer program to estimate gene genealogies. Mol Ecol 9: 1657–1660.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
64. Crandall KA, Templeton AR (1993) Empirical tests of some predictions from coalescent theory with applications to intraspecific phylogeny reconstruction. Genetics 134: 959–969.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
65. Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP (2003) Mr. Bayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19: 1572–1574.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
66. Posada D (2008) jModelTest: Phylogenetic model averaging. Mol Biol Evol 25: 1253–1256.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
67. Rozas J, Sánches-DelBarrio JC, Messeguer X, Rozas R (2003) DnaSP, DNA polymorphism analyses by the coalescent and other methods. Bioinformatics 19: 2496–2497.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
68. Excoffier L, Laval G, Schneider S (2006) Arlequin Version 3.1: An integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Computational and Molecular Population Genetics Lab (CMPG), Institute of Zoology, University of Berne, Switzerland. CMPG website. Available: http://cmpg.unibe.ch/software/arlequin3. Accessed 2011 December 12.
69. Rogers AR, Harpending H (1992) Population growth makes waves in the distribution of pairwise differences. Mol Biol Evol 9: 552–569.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
70. Nei M (1987) Molecular Evolutionary Genetics. Columbia University Press, New York.
71. Tamura K, Dudley J, Nei M, Kumar S (2007) MEGA4: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis (MEGA) Software, Version 4.0. Mol Biol Evol 24: 1596–1599.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
72. Mantel N (1967) The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Research 27: 209–220.
- View Article
- Google Scholar

[ref1] 1. Rona LDP, Carvalho-Pinto CJ, Mazzoni CJ, Peixoto AA (2010) Estimation of divergence time between two sibling species of the Anopheles (Kertezia) cruzii complex using a multilocus approach. BMC Evolutionary Biology 10: 91.
View Article
Google Scholar

[2] View Article

[3] Google Scholar

[ref2] 2. Loaiza JR, Bermingham E, Sanjur OI, Scott ME, Bickersmith SA, et al. (2012) Review of genetic diversity in malaria vectors (Culicidae: Anophelinae). Inf Genet Evol 12: 1–12.
View Article
Google Scholar

[5] View Article

[6] Google Scholar

[ref3] 3. Scarpassa VM, Conn JE (2011) Mitochondrial DNA detects a complex evolutionary history with Pleistocene Epoch divergence for the Neotropical Malaria Vector Anopheles nuneztovari sensu lato. Am J Trop Med Hyg 85: 857–867.
View Article
Google Scholar

[8] View Article

[9] Google Scholar

[ref4] 4. Arrivillaga JC, Norris DE, Feliciangeli MD, Lanzaro GC (2002) Phylogeography of the neotropical sand fly Lutzomyia longipalpis inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences. Inf Genet Evol 2: 83–95.
View Article
Google Scholar

[11] View Article

[12] Google Scholar

[ref5] 5. Bauzer LGCR, Nataly AS, Maingon RDC, Peixoto AA (2007) Lutzomyia longipalpis in Brazil: a complex or a single species? A mini-review. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 102: 1–12.
View Article
Google Scholar

[14] View Article

[15] Google Scholar

[ref6] 6. Costa J, Freitas-Sibajev MG, Marchon-Silva V, Pires MQ, Pacheco R (1997) Izoenzymes detect variation in populations of Triatoma brasiliensis (Hemiptera, Reduviidae, Triatominae). Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 92: 459–464.
View Article
Google Scholar

[17] View Article

[18] Google Scholar

[ref7] 7. Monteiro FA, Barrett TV, Fitzpatrick S, Cordon-Rosalis C, Feliciangeli D, et al. (2003) Molecular phylogeography of the Amazonian Chagas disease vectors Rhodnius prolixus and R. robustus. Mol Ecol 12: 997–1006.
View Article
Google Scholar

[20] View Article

[21] Google Scholar

[ref8] 8. Monteiro FA, Donnelly MJ, Beard CB, Costa J (2004) Nested clade and phylogeographic analyses of the disease vector Triatoma brasiliensis in Northeast Brazil. Mol Phyl Evol 32: 46–56.
View Article
Google Scholar

[23] View Article

[24] Google Scholar

[ref9] 9. Mayr E (1942) Systematics and the Origin of Species. New York: Columbia University Press.

[ref10] 10. Mazzoni CJ, Araki AS, Ferreira GEM, Azevedo RVDM, Barbujani G, et al. (2008) Multilocus analysis of introgression between two sand fly vectors of leishmaniasis. BMC Evolutionary Biology 8: 141.
View Article
Google Scholar

[27] View Article

[28] Google Scholar

[ref11] 11. Young DG, Duncan NA (1994) Guide to the identification and geographic distribution of Lutzomyia sandflyies in Mexico, the West Indies, Central and South America (Diptera: Psychodidade). Mem Am Entomol Inst 54: 1–881.
View Article
Google Scholar

[30] View Article

[31] Google Scholar

[ref12] 12. Azevedo ACR, Lainson R, Souza AA, Fé NF, Feliciangeli DM, et al. (2002) Comparative studies of populaitons of Lutzomyia umbratilis (Diptera: Psychodidae) in Brazil and Venezuela. J Med Entomol 39: 587–600.
View Article
Google Scholar

[33] View Article

[34] Google Scholar

[ref13] 13. Balbino VQ, Marcondes CB, Alexander B, Luna LKS, Lucena MMM, et al. (2001) First report of Lutzomyia (Nyssomyia) umbratilis Ward & Frahia, 1977 outside of Amazonian region, in Recife, State of Pernambuco, Brazil (Diptera: Psychodidae: Phlebotominae). Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 96: 315–317.
View Article
Google Scholar

[36] View Article

[37] Google Scholar

[ref14] 14. Dye C, Davies CR, Lainson R (1991) Communication among phlebotomine sandflies: a field study of domesticated Lutzomyia longipalpis populations in Amazonian Brazil. Anim Behav 42: 183–192.
View Article
Google Scholar

[39] View Article

[40] Google Scholar

[ref15] 15. Morrison AC, Ferro C, Morales A, Tesh RB, Wilson ML (1993) Dispersal of the sand fly Lutzomyia longipalpis (Diptera: Psychodidae) at an endemic focus of visceral leishmaniasis in Colombia. J Med Entomol 30: 427–435.
View Article
Google Scholar

[42] View Article

[43] Google Scholar

[ref16] 16. Soto SIU, Lehmann T, Rowton ED, Véles ID, Porter CH (2001) Speciation and population structure in the morphospecies Lutzomyia longipalpis (Lutz & Neiva) as derived from the mitochondrial ND4 gene. Mol Phylogenet Evol 18: 84–93.
View Article
Google Scholar

[45] View Article

[46] Google Scholar

[ref17] 17. Lainson R, Ward D, Shaw JJ (1976) Cutaneous leishmaniasis in North Brazil: Lutzomyia anduzei as a major vector. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 70: 171–172.
View Article
Google Scholar

[48] View Article

[49] Google Scholar

[ref18] 18. Lainon R, Shaw JJ, Ward RD, Ready PD, Naiff RD (1979) Leishmaniasis in Brazil: XIII. Isolation of Leishmania from armadillos (Dasypus novemcinctus), and observation on the epidemiology of cutaneous leishmaniasis in north Pará State. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 73: 239–242.
View Article
Google Scholar

[51] View Article

[52] Google Scholar

[ref19] 19. Lainson R, Shaw JJ, Ward RD, Ready PD, Miles M, et al. (1981) Leishmaniasis in Brazil: XVI. Isolation and identification of Leishmania species from sandflies, wild mammals and man in north Pará State, with particular reference to L. brasiliensis guyanensis causative agent of “pian-bois”. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 75: 530–536.
View Article
Google Scholar

[54] View Article

[55] Google Scholar

[ref20] 20. Le Pont F, Pajot FX (1980) La leishmaniose em Guyane Française. 1. Étude de l'écologie et du taux d'infection naturelle de Lutzomyia (Nyssomyia) umbratilis Ward et Fraiha, 1977 em saison seche. Considérations épidémiologiques. Cahiers ORSTOM Série Ent Méd et Parasitologie 18: 359–382.
View Article
Google Scholar

[57] View Article

[58] Google Scholar

[ref21] 21. Gentile B, Le Pont F, Pajot FX, Besnard R (1981) Dermal leishmaniasis in French Guiana: the sloth (Choloepus didactylus) as reservoir host. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 75: 612–613.
View Article
Google Scholar

[60] View Article

[61] Google Scholar

[ref22] 22. Pajot FX, Le Pont F, Gentile B, Besnard R (1982) Epidemiology of leishmaniasis in French Guiana. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 76: 112–113.
View Article
Google Scholar

[63] View Article

[64] Google Scholar

[ref23] 23. Feliciangeli MD, Pérez JR, Ramirez A (1985) First Venezuelan record of Lutzomyia umbratilis Ward & Fraiha 1977 (Diptera: Psychodidae), a proven vector of Leishmania brasiliensis guyanensis. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 79: 878.
View Article
Google Scholar

[66] View Article

[67] Google Scholar

[ref24] 24. Arias JR, Freitas RA (1977) Flebotomíneos da Amazônia central do Brasil. 1. Resultados obtidos das capturas feitas em isca humana e eqüina. (Diptera: Psychodidae). Acta Amaz 7: 507–527.
View Article
Google Scholar

[69] View Article

[70] Google Scholar

[ref25] 25. Arias JR, Freitas RA (1978) Sobre os vectores da leishmaniose cutânea na Amazônia central do Brasil. 2. Incidência de flagelados em flebotomíneos selváticos. Acta Amaz 8: 387–396.
View Article
Google Scholar

[72] View Article

[73] Google Scholar

[ref26] 26. Arias JR, Naiff RD (1981) The principal reservoir host of cutaneous leishmaniasis in the urban area of Manaus, Central Amazon of Brazil. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 76: 279–286.
View Article
Google Scholar

[75] View Article

[76] Google Scholar

[ref27] 27. Nery LCR, Lorosa ES, Franco AMR (2004) Feeding preference of the sand flies Lutzomyia umbratilis and L. spathotrichia (Diptera: Psychodidae, Phlebotominae) in an urban forest patch in the city of Manaus, Amazonas, Brazil. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 99: 571–574.
View Article
Google Scholar

[78] View Article

[79] Google Scholar

[ref28] 28. Pinheiro FG, Luz SLB, Franco AMR (2008) Infecção natural por tripanosomatídeos (Kinetoplastida: Trypanosomatidae) em Lutzomyia umbratilis (Diptera: Psychodidae) em áreas de leishmaniose tegumentar americana no Amazonas, Brasil. Acta Amaz 38: 165–172.
View Article
Google Scholar

[81] View Article

[82] Google Scholar

[ref29] 29. Azevedo ACR, Costa SM, Pinto MCG, Souza JL, Cruz HC, et al. (2008) Studies on the sandfly fauna (Diptera: Psychodidae: Phlebotominae) from transmission areas of American Cutaneous Leishmaniasis in state of Acre, Brazil. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 103: 760–767.
View Article
Google Scholar

[84] View Article

[85] Google Scholar

[ref30] 30. Gil LHS, Araújo MS, Villalobos JM, Camargo LMA, Ozaki LS, et al. (2009) Species structure of sand fly (Diptera: Psychodidae) fauna in the Brazilian western Amazon. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 104: 955–959.
View Article
Google Scholar

[87] View Article

[88] Google Scholar

[ref31] 31. Guerra JAO, Talhari S, Paes MG, Garrido M, Talhari JM (2003) Aspectos clínicos e diagnósticos da leishmaniose tegumentar americana em militares simultaneamente expostos à infecção na Amazônia. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop 36: 587–590.
View Article
Google Scholar

[90] View Article

[91] Google Scholar

[ref32] 32. Justiniano SCB, Chagas AC, Pessoa FAC, Queiroz RG (2004) Comparative biology of two populations of Lutzomyia umbratilis (Diptera: Psychodidae) of central Amazonia, Brazil, under laboratory conditions. Braz J Biol 64: 227–235.
View Article
Google Scholar

[93] View Article

[94] Google Scholar

[ref33] 33. Justiniano SCB (2004) Biologia comparada de populações de Lutzomyia umbratilis (Diptera: Psychodidae) da Amazônia Central Brasileira. 151 p. Doctoral Thesis. Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia.

[ref34] 34. Valenta DT, Anez N, Tang Y, Killick-Kendrick R (1999) The genital atrium as a good taxonomic character to distinguish between species of phlebotomine sandflies (Diptera: Psychodidae) from Venezuela. Ann Trop Med Parasitol 93: 389–399.
View Article
Google Scholar

[97] View Article

[98] Google Scholar

[ref35] 35. Scarpassa VM, Tadei WP, Suarez MF (1999) Population structure and genetic divergence in Anopheles nuneztovari (Diptera, Culicidae) from Brazil and Colombia. Am J Trop Med Hyg 60: 1010–1018.
View Article
Google Scholar

[100] View Article

[101] Google Scholar

[ref36] 36. Avise JC (1994) Molecular Markers, Natural History and Evolution. Chapman & Hall, New York.

[ref37] 37. Simon C, Frati F, Beckenbach A, Crespi B, Liu H, et al. (1994) Evolution, weighting, and phylogenetic utility of mitochondrial gene sequences and a compilation of conserved polymerase chain reaction primers. Ann Entomol Soc Am 87: 651–701.
View Article
Google Scholar

[104] View Article

[105] Google Scholar

[ref38] 38. Pramual P, Kuvangkadilok C, Baimai V, Walton C (2005) Phylogeography of the black fly Simulium tani (Diptera: Simuliidae) from Thailand as inferred from mtDNA sequences. Mol Ecol 14: 3989–4001.
View Article
Google Scholar

[107] View Article

[108] Google Scholar

[ref39] 39. Scarpassa VM, Cardoza TB, Cardoso-Júnior RP (2008) Population genetics and phylogeography of Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) from Brazil. Am J Trop Med Hyg 78: 895–903.
View Article
Google Scholar

[110] View Article

[111] Google Scholar

[ref40] 40. Herbert PDN, Stoeckle MY, Zemlak TS, Francis CM (2004) Identification of birds through DNA barcodes. PloS Biol 2: 312.
View Article
Google Scholar

[113] View Article

[114] Google Scholar

[ref41] 41. Slatkin M, Hudson RR (1991) Pairwise comparison of mitochondrial DNA sequences in stable and exponentially growing populations. Genetics 129: 555–562.
View Article
Google Scholar

[116] View Article

[117] Google Scholar

[ref42] 42. Tajima F (1989) Statistical method for testing the neutral mutation hypothesis by DNA polymorphisms. Genetics 123: 585–595.
View Article
Google Scholar

[119] View Article

[120] Google Scholar

[ref43] 43. Fu YX (1997) Statistical tests of neutrality of mutations against population growth, hitchhiking and background selection. Genetics 147: 915–925.
View Article
Google Scholar

[122] View Article

[123] Google Scholar

[ref44] 44. Powell JR, Caccone A, Amato GD, Yoon C (1986) Rate of nucleotide substitution in Drosophila mitochondrial DNA and nuclear DNA are similar. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 83: 9090–9093.
View Article
Google Scholar

[125] View Article

[126] Google Scholar

[ref45] 45. Brower A (1994) Rapid morphological radiation and convergence among races of the butterfly Heliconius erato inferred from patterns of mitochondrial DNA evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91: 6491–6495.
View Article
Google Scholar

[128] View Article

[129] Google Scholar

[ref46] 46. Coutinho-Abreu IV, Sonoda IV, Fonseca JA, Melo MM, Balbino VQ, et al. (2008) Lutzomyia longipalpis s.l. in Brazil and the impact of the São Francisco River in the speciation of this sand fly vector. Parasites & Vectors 1: 16.
View Article
Google Scholar

[131] View Article

[132] Google Scholar

[ref47] 47. Wright S (1978) Evolution and the Genetics of Populations, vol. 4, Variability Within and Among Natural Populations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.

[ref48] 48. Haffer J (2008) Hypotheses to explain the origin of species in Amazonia. Braz J Biol 68: 917–947.
View Article
Google Scholar

[135] View Article

[136] Google Scholar

[ref49] 49. Wallace AR (1852) On the monkeys of the Amazon. Proc Zool Soc London 20: 107–110.
View Article
Google Scholar

[138] View Article

[139] Google Scholar

[ref50] 50. Moritz C, Patton JL, Schneider CJ, Smith TB (2000) Diversification of rainforest faunas: an integrated molecular approach. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31: 533–563.
View Article
Google Scholar

[141] View Article

[142] Google Scholar

[ref51] 51. Aleixo A (2004) Historical diversification of a terra-firme forest bird superspecies: a phylogeographic perspective on the role of different hypotheses of Amazonian diversification. Evolution 58: 1303–1317.
View Article
Google Scholar

[144] View Article

[145] Google Scholar

[ref52] 52. Gascon C, Malcolm JR, Patton JL, Silva MNF, Bogart JP, et al. (2000) Riverine barriers and the geographic distribution of Amazonian species. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97: 13672–13677.
View Article
Google Scholar

[147] View Article

[148] Google Scholar

[ref53] 53. Figueredo J, Hoorn C, Van der Ven P, Soares E (2009) Late Miocene onset of the Amazon River and the Amazon deep-sea fan: Evidence from the Foz do Amazonas Basin. Geology 37: 619–622.
View Article
Google Scholar

[150] View Article

[151] Google Scholar

[ref54] 54. Avise JC (1987) Intraspecific phylogeography: the mitochondrial DNA bridge between population genetics and systematic. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 18: 489–522.
View Article
Google Scholar

[153] View Article

[154] Google Scholar

[ref55] 55. He L, Watabe H, Xiangyu J, Gao J, Liang X, et al. (2007) Genetic differentiation and cryptic speciation in natural populations of Drosophila lacertosa. Mol Phylog Evol 43: 24–31.
View Article
Google Scholar

[156] View Article

[157] Google Scholar

[ref56] 56. Bottecchia M, Oliveira SG, Bauzer LGSR, Souza NA, Ward RD, et al. (2004) Genetic divergence in the cacophony IVS6 Intron among five Brazilian populations of Lutzomyia longipalpis. J Mol Evol 58: 754–761.
View Article
Google Scholar

[159] View Article

[160] Google Scholar

[ref57] 57. Esseghir S, Ready PD, Killick-Kendrick R, Ben Ismail R (1997) Mitochondrial haplotypes and phylogeography of Phlebotomus vectors of Leishmania major Insect. Insect Mol Biol 6: 211–225.
View Article
Google Scholar

[162] View Article

[163] Google Scholar

[ref58] 58. Coyne JA, Orr HA (2004) Speciation. Sinauer Associates Inc.: Sunderland, MS.

[ref59] 59. Mirabello L, Conn JE (2006) Molecular population genetics of the malaria vector Anopheles darlingi in Central and South America. Heredity 96: 311–321.
View Article
Google Scholar

[166] View Article

[167] Google Scholar

[ref60] 60. Sambrook J, Russell DW (2001) A Laboratory Manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, New York.

[ref61] 61. Zhang DX, Hewitt GM (1996) Assessment of the universality and utility of a set of conserved mitochondrial COI primers in insects. Insect Mol Biol 6: 143–150.
View Article
Google Scholar

[170] View Article

[171] Google Scholar

[ref62] 62. Hall TA (1999) BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for Windows 95/98/NT. Nucl Acids Symp Ser 41: 95–98.
View Article
Google Scholar

[173] View Article

[174] Google Scholar

[ref63] 63. Clement M, Posada D, Crandall KA (2000) TCS: a computer program to estimate gene genealogies. Mol Ecol 9: 1657–1660.
View Article
Google Scholar

[176] View Article

[177] Google Scholar

[ref64] 64. Crandall KA, Templeton AR (1993) Empirical tests of some predictions from coalescent theory with applications to intraspecific phylogeny reconstruction. Genetics 134: 959–969.
View Article
Google Scholar

[179] View Article

[180] Google Scholar

[ref65] 65. Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP (2003) Mr. Bayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19: 1572–1574.
View Article
Google Scholar

[182] View Article

[183] Google Scholar

[ref66] 66. Posada D (2008) jModelTest: Phylogenetic model averaging. Mol Biol Evol 25: 1253–1256.
View Article
Google Scholar

[185] View Article

[186] Google Scholar

[ref67] 67. Rozas J, Sánches-DelBarrio JC, Messeguer X, Rozas R (2003) DnaSP, DNA polymorphism analyses by the coalescent and other methods. Bioinformatics 19: 2496–2497.
View Article
Google Scholar

[188] View Article

[189] Google Scholar

[ref68] 68. Excoffier L, Laval G, Schneider S (2006) Arlequin Version 3.1: An integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Computational and Molecular Population Genetics Lab (CMPG), Institute of Zoology, University of Berne, Switzerland. CMPG website. Available: http://cmpg.unibe.ch/software/arlequin3. Accessed 2011 December 12.

[ref69] 69. Rogers AR, Harpending H (1992) Population growth makes waves in the distribution of pairwise differences. Mol Biol Evol 9: 552–569.
View Article
Google Scholar

[192] View Article

[193] Google Scholar

[ref70] 70. Nei M (1987) Molecular Evolutionary Genetics. Columbia University Press, New York.

[ref71] 71. Tamura K, Dudley J, Nei M, Kumar S (2007) MEGA4: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis (MEGA) Software, Version 4.0. Mol Biol Evol 24: 1596–1599.
View Article
Google Scholar

[196] View Article

[197] Google Scholar

[ref72] 72. Mantel N (1967) The detection of disease clustering and a generalized regression approach. Cancer Research 27: 209–220.
View Article
Google Scholar

[199] View Article

[200] Google Scholar