identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03F3E74EFFDAFFE7CEA85785FE2BFC2F.text	03F3E74EFFDAFFE7CEA85785FE2BFC2F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ligula intestinalis (Linnaeus 1758)	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Occurrence of  Ligula intestinalis and rate of infection </p>
            <p> We found infection with  L. intestinalis in freshwater bream from Lakes Onego, Ladoga, Svyatozero and Konchezero. This is the first record of this cestode in bream from these water bodies. Infection indices could not be calculated because the material from these lakes was limited and collected in different years. </p>
            <p> In Lake Syamozero infection rates of bream with  L. intestinalis were low: prevalence 8.9% with ratio 1.52, intensity of infection from 1 to 3 tapeworms per fish, abundance 0.12 (Fig. 2). These values are similar to those recorded in 1975, when prevalence was 6.7% and mean abundance was 0.07 (Novokhatskaya et al., 2008). In June 2024, we also examined several individuals of roach  R. rutilus and white bream  Blicca bjoerkna but did not find any plerocercoids of  L. intestinalis in them. </p>
            <p>Phylogenetic analysis</p>
            <p> We obtained partial sequences of two mtDNA regions, COI (396 bp) and Cyt b 405 bp), from 28 individuals of  L. intestinalis from Karelia. They were used for phylogenetic reconstruction together with the previously published sequences of  Ligula spp. from different hosts and localities (Table 1, Fig. 3). </p>
            <p> Ecologica  Montenegrina , 80, 2024, 21-37 </p>
            <p>Table 1</p>
            <p> Ab738 PQ356679 PQ329020  Abramis brama Russia: Karelia, </p>
            <p>Ab739</p>
            <p>PQ356680 PQ329021</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Russia: Karelia, Ab740 </p>
            <p>PQ356681 PQ329022</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Russia: Karelia, 126a </p>
            <p>OP933968 OP908173</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Russia: 126b </p>
            <p>OP933988 OP908193</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Russia 126c </p>
            <p>OP933969 OP908174</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Russia 126g </p>
            <p>OP933970 OP908175</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Russia: 126h </p>
            <p>OP933971 OP908176</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Russia: </p>
            <p>brama_Lip20 OP408033 OP390380</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Czech Republic: </p>
            <p>brama_Lip1 OP408034 OP390381</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Czech Republic: </p>
            <p>brama_Lip2 OP408035 OP390382</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Czech Republic: </p>
            <p>brama_Lip14 OP408036 OP390383</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Czech Republic: </p>
            <p>brama_Rimov1 OP408037 OP390384</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Czech Republic: </p>
            <p>EE1Ab</p>
            <p>JQ279121 JQ279085</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Estonia </p>
            <p>EE2Ab</p>
            <p>EU241192 EU241275</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Estonia: </p>
            <p>EE3ab</p>
            <p>EU241160 EU241276</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Estonia: </p>
            <p>EE4Ab</p>
            <p>EU241195 EU241294</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Estonia: </p>
            <p>EE5Ab</p>
            <p>JQ279122 JQ279086</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Estonia: </p>
            <p>FR30Ab EU241201 EU241259</p>
            <p> Abramis brama France: </p>
            <p>RU3Ab</p>
            <p>EU241212 EU241252</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Russia: </p>
            <p>RU4Ab</p>
            <p>EU241158 EU241253</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Russia: </p>
            <p>RU5Ab</p>
            <p>EU241210 EU241309</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Russia: </p>
            <p>RU8Ab</p>
            <p>EU241211 EU241310</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Russia: </p>
            <p>CZ14Ab EU241182 EU241263</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Czech Republic: Nove </p>
            <p>CZ16Ab EU241179 EU241283</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Czech Republic: Nove </p>
            <p>CZ17Ab EU241183 EU241284</p>
            <p> Abramis brama Czech Republic: Nove </p>
            <p> CZ18Ab EU241184 EU241285  Abramis brama Czech Republic: Nove </p>
            <p> Table 1 CZ24Ab EU241180 EU241267  Abramis brama Czech Republic: Nove </p>
            <p>OK</p>
            <p>OP933980 OP908185</p>
            <p> Rutilus rutilus Czech Republic </p>
            <p>UA3 OP933986 OP908191</p>
            <p> Rutilus rutilus Ukraine: </p>
            <p>CZ90Rr EU241178 EU241282</p>
            <p> Rutilus rutilus Czech Republic: </p>
            <p>S4</p>
            <p>OP933972 OP908177</p>
            <p> Rutilus rutilus Iran: Alborz </p>
            <p>CZ7Rr EU241159 EU241278</p>
            <p> Rutilus rutilus Czech Republic: </p>
            <p>CR22 OP933981 OP908186</p>
            <p> Rutilus rutilus France: </p>
            <p> FR67Aa JQ279124 JQ279088  Alburnus alburnus</p>
            <p> CZ106Pc EU241167 EU241244  Podiceps cristatus eryth_Most1 OP408040 OP390387  Scardinius erythrophthalmus</p>
            <p>France:</p>
            <p>Czech Republic:</p>
            <p>Czech Republic:</p>
            <p>blicc_Lip OP408038 OP390385</p>
            <p> Blicca bjoerkna Czech Republic: MCf-FB04919371 MW602520  Pusa hispida saimensis Finland: Lake </p>
            <p>IE2Rr</p>
            <p>EU241206 EU241250</p>
            <p> Rutilus rutilus Ireland: Lough </p>
            <p>GB2Pp</p>
            <p> EU241175 EU241304  Phoxinus phoxinus</p>
            <p>United Kingdom: Ru</p>
            <p> OP933995 OP908201  Hemiculter lucidus</p>
            <p>Russia: Lake</p>
            <p> CN1 Hb</p>
            <p> EU241153 EU241229  Hemiculter bleekeri</p>
            <p>China: lac</p>
            <p>AU1Gt</p>
            <p> EU241146 EU241222  Galaxias truttaceus</p>
            <p>Australia Au2</p>
            <p> OP933951 OP908156  Galaxias maculatus</p>
            <p>Australia: Goodga Au3</p>
            <p> OP933952 OP908157  Galaxias maculatus</p>
            <p>Australia:</p>
            <p>TN63Ps</p>
            <p> JQ279139 JQ279102  Pseudophoxinus callensis</p>
            <p>Tunisia: Remel,</p>
            <p> IE3 Gg</p>
            <p>EU241188 EU241305</p>
            <p> Gobio gobio Ireland: Lough </p>
            <p>ALG1Bc</p>
            <p>JQ279109 JQ279074</p>
            <p> Barbus sp. Algeria </p>
            <p>IE4Gg</p>
            <p>EU241208 EU241290</p>
            <p> Gobio Gobio Ireland: Lough </p>
            <p>H11 OP933994 OP908199</p>
            <p>Neogobious Hungury:</p>
            <p>ALG2Bc</p>
            <p>EU241143 EU241219</p>
            <p> Barbus sp. Algeria: Hamiz </p>
            <p>TN62Ps</p>
            <p> JQ279138 JQ279101  Pseudophoxinus callensis</p>
            <p>Tunisia: Joumine</p>
            <p> CN4Nt EU241157 EU241237  Neosalanx taihuensis China: Zhanghe Ecologica  Montenegrina , 80, 2024, 21-37 </p>
            <p> Table 1 CN8 OP933997 OP908203  Neosalanx taihuensis China </p>
            <p> CA19Sa EU241150 EU241224  Semotilus atromaculatus</p>
            <p> CA5Sa EU241149 EU241226  Semotilus atromaculatus</p>
            <p> Oregon_C4 OP934005 OP908211  Rhinichthys osculus</p>
            <p> CA1Cp EU241152 EU241228  Couesius plumbeus</p>
            <p>Canada</p>
            <p>Canada</p>
            <p>Canada: Mckenzie</p>
            <p>Canada</p>
            <p> ET2 OP934000 OP908206</p>
            <p> Barbus sp. Ethiopia </p>
            <p>ET5 OP934001 OP908207</p>
            <p> Barbus sp. Ethiopia </p>
            <p>K1CO OP934009 OP908215</p>
            <p> Barbus sp Kenya 1c </p>
            <p> OP934010 OP908216  Rastrineobola argentea</p>
            <p>Kenya</p>
            <p>C2</p>
            <p> OP934011 OP908217  Rastrineobola argentea</p>
            <p>Kenya</p>
            <p>C3</p>
            <p> OP934012 OP908218  Rastrineobola argentea</p>
            <p>Kenya 4c</p>
            <p> OP934013 OP908219  Rastrineobola argentea</p>
            <p>Kenya 5c</p>
            <p> OP934014 OP908220  Rastrineobola argentea</p>
            <p>Kenya 6c</p>
            <p> OP934015 OP908221  Rastrineobola argentea</p>
            <p>Kenya 7c</p>
            <p> OP934016 OP908222  Rastrineobola argentea</p>
            <p>Kenya 8c</p>
            <p> OP934017 OP908223  Rastrineobola argentea</p>
            <p>Kenya 9c</p>
            <p> OP934018 OP908224  Rastrineobola argentea</p>
            <p>Kenya</p>
            <p> 10c OP934019 OP908225  Rastrineobola argentea</p>
            <p>Kenya</p>
            <p> K3CO OP934020 OP908226  Rastrineobola argentea</p>
            <p>Kenya</p>
            <p> K4CO OP934021 OP908227  Rastrineobola argentea</p>
            <p> Kenya Tanz2 OP934022 OP908228  Engraulicypris sardella Tanzania Tanz3 OP934023 OP908229  Engraulicypris sardella Tanzania Tanz8a OP934024 OP908230  Engraulicypris sardella Tanzania </p>
            <p>Bn151 OP934025 OP908231</p>
            <p> Barbus anoplus South </p>
            <p> SA_Mpum OP934026 OP908232  Barbus anoplus South DRC OP934027 OP908233  Barbus sp Democratic Republic </p>
            <p> Table 1 Namibia 2 OP934028 OP908234  Barbus paludinosus Namibia </p>
            <p>SA_Limpop OP934029 OP908235</p>
            <p> Barbus anoplus South Namibia 1 OP934030 OP908236  Barbus paludinosus Namibia </p>
            <p>SA_Buff OP934031 OP908237</p>
            <p> Barbus anoplus South </p>
            <p>Bn159 OP934032 OP908238</p>
            <p> Barbus anoplus South </p>
            <p> NZ 2 OP934033 OP908239  Gobiomorphus breviceps</p>
            <p>New</p>
            <p> NZS OP934034 OP908240  Gobiomorphus breviceps New </p>
            <p> Ecologica  Montenegrina , 80, 2024, 21-37 </p>
            <p> The phylogenetic analysis (BI) and maximum Likelihood (ML) analysis of concatenated partial genes showed that there were six geographically distinct lineages within the monophyletic  L. intestinalis complex (Fig. 3). This result is consistent with the previous studies (Bouzid et al. 2008; Štefka et al. 2009; Nazarizadeh et al., 2022, 2023). On the phylogenetic tree, all samples from Karelia were placed in the clade “  L. intestinalis Lineage A ”, which included parasites of various cyprinid fish from around the world. The clade position was supported by high posterior probability (1.0) and bootstrap support (100) (Fig. 3). </p>
            <p>Haplotype analysis</p>
            <p> Haplotype analysis was performed for the sequences of  L. intestinalis from freshwater bream obtained in this study and those available in GenBank. The indices of genetic diversity in  L. intestinalis datasets of concatenated sequences of cox1 and cytb and separate datasets of the same genes are presented in Table 2. </p>
            <p>Abbreviations: n, number of samples; h, number of haplotypes; Hd, haplotype diversity; Pi, nucleotide diversity; k, total number of mutations.</p>
            <p>Haplotype analysis of the 53 concatenated sequences revealed 40 haplotypes. Most of the individual plerocercoids had their own unique haplotype (Fig. 4). Only six haplotypes were shared by two or more tapeworms. The most numerous haplotype was noted in four individuals of the parasite in Lake Syamozero as well as in a cestode from Lake Řimov in Czech Republic. One haplotype was identified in three tapeworms from different geographical localities (Estonia, Czech Republic, Rybinsk). Another haplotype was detected in three cestodes from Rybinsk. Two other haplotypes were found in two plerocercoids from Lake Syamozero each (Ab643/Ab649 and Ab665/Ab666). One haplotype was noted in two tapeworms: one from Lake Syamozero and the other from Lake Konchezero (Ab657 and Ab660).</p>
            <p>Out of the 40 haplotypes revealed in our study, 22 haplotypes were found in specimens from Karelian lakes, and 21 of them were unique. Each plerocercoid sampled from bream in Lake Ladoga and Lake Onego had its own unique haplotype (Fig. 4). Fifteen haplotypes, each corresponding to an individual tapeworm, were found in cestodes from Lake Syamozero (Fig. 4). Within Lake Syamozero, three haplotypes represented by the greatest number of tapeworms were sampled in the Kurmoila Bay (Fig. 1), which might be associated with the larger amount of material sampled in this locality.</p>
            <p>P-distances of concatenated cytb+cox1 of samples from Karelian lakes varied from 0.1 to 2.3 %. P-distances of the same markers between the Karelian samples and the tapeworms from Rybinsk, Estonia, Czech Republic and France were 0.45%, 0.75%, 0.7% and 0.5%, respectively.</p>
            <p>Examination of partial sequences separately for cox1 and Cyt b revealed different patterns (Table 2). All Cyt b sequences were divided into 26 haplotypes. Karelian tapeworms were represented by 13 haplotypes, including 10 unique ones. At the same time, one of the most common haplotypes was noted only in Karelian specimens from lakes Syamozero, Konchezero, Onego, Ladoga (Ab650, Ab656, Ab657, Ab660, Ab661, Ab663, Ab667, Ab740). One haplotype was shared by five cestodes from Syamozero (Ab641 Ab646 Ab736 Ab738 Ab739) and worms from Czech lakes Rimov and Lipno. One haplotype of tapeworms from Syamozero and Onego (Ab640, Ab643, Ab649) was shared with those from Rybinsk reservoir (RU3Ab) and Lake Pepsi (EE2Ab) in Estonia. Another haplotype was common for tapeworms from Lake Syamozero and Lake Pepsi (EE4Ab) in Estonia.</p>
            <p> The least variable site was cox1: 17 haplotypes in total and 12 haplotypes in Karelia (Table 2). Five haplotypes were unique for  L. intestinalis from Karelian bream, while all the others were shared with tapeworms from other geographical locations. The best-represented haplotype was found in 11 tapeworms from Karelia (Syamozero, Konchezero) and 11 cestodes from Rybinsk, Estonia, Czech Republic and France. Two less common haplotypes, each in a different group of worms, were identified in two cestodes from Syamozero and four tapeworms from Rybinsk. Similarly, two haplotypes were found in two different groups including tapeworms from Syamozero and Estonia. Haplotypes of cestodes from Ladoga and Svyatozero coincided with those from Czech reservoirs. </p>
            <p>Discussion</p>
            <p> Our results indicate an expanding dispersal of the cestodes  Ligula intestinalis parasitizing freshwater bream in Karelia. One of the reasons is the dispersal of the bream itself, which has been noted in ichthyological studies (Sterligova et al. 2016). In Lakes Onego, Ladoga, and Svyatozero, where we recorded  L. intestinalis in bream for the first time, these parasites had been previously recorded in other fish: roach  Rutilus rutilus and crucian carp  Carassius carassius L., 1758 (Rumyantsev 2007) in Lakes Onego and Svyatozero and roach  R. rutilus , vimba bream  Vimba vimba L., 1758, blue bream  Ballerus ballerus L., 1758 and bleak  Alburnus alburnus L., 1758 (Rumyantsev &amp; Mamontova 2008) in Lake Ladoga. The infection rates in all these water bodies were low (prevalence less than 7%, mean abundance 0.1). In Lake Konchezero, freshwater bream was introduced in the 1960s (Sterligova et al. 2016) and has acclimatised. Our results show that its parasitic fauna now includes  L. intestinalis . </p>
            <p> Lake Syamozero was the only Karelian lake where plerocercoids of  L. intestinalis have been recorded in bream before the present study. The only other host in which  L. intestinalis has been noted in Lake Syamozero is bleak,  A. alburnus , and infection indices are low (prevalence 6%, mean abundance 0.06) (Novokhatskaya 2008). </p>
            <p> No infection of freshwater bream with  L. intestinalis had been noted in Syamozero in the 1950s (Shulman 1962) (Fig. 2), the first record dating back to 1973 (Malakhova &amp; Ieshko 1977). Since that time, the abundance of this parasite has varied, the fluctuations being possibly associated with the state of the bream population. In 1970s-1990s, it was mainly represented by immature individuals (about 70%); the maturation rates were slow, and the fecundity was low. This long-term depression was probably due to fishing restrictions and eutrophication of the lake. The numbers of bream increased as a result of long-term ban on bream fishing, and there was not enough benthos, which is an energy-rich resource, for all the bream in the lake. Moreover, eutrophication, caused by the use of fertilizers, resulted in a depression of the benthic communities, while the abundance and biomass of plankton increased. Under these conditions, bream mostly fed on zooplankton, which is a low-energy resource. The role of copepods in bream diet became more significant, and the infection rates of bream with  L. intestinalis plerocercoids increased correspondingly. The parasite probably depressed the growth rate of the host even further (Ieshko &amp; Malakhova 1982; Novokhatskaya et al. 2008; Sterligova et al. 2016). Current infection rates of bream with  L. intestinalis are similar to those from 1975, which indicates that the share of plankton in the bream diet is fairly high. </p>
            <p> We provided new gene sequences of  L. intestinalis from  A. brama and identified new haplotypes. Haplotype diversity was high both for the parasites from different countries and for Karelia (0.98–0.99), but the nucleotide diversity was low (0.000.006–0.007). Tajimaʼs D values were negative both in Europe and in Karelia, with statistically insignificant values, suggesting that  L. intestinalis population in freshwater bream in the European part of Palearctic is genetically diverse and rapidly expanding. Our data support the hypothesis, based on historical demography modeling, that isolation with continuous gene flow is the most likely scenario of the divergence of  L. intestinalis (Nazarizadeh et al. 2024) . </p>
            <p> All the samples of plerocercoids involved in our study were placed into Lineage A of  L. intestinalis (Nazarizadeh et al. 2023) . The authors have suggested that  L. intestinalis from freshwater bream have certain haplotypes that are almost never found in other cyprinids (Nazarizadeh et al. 2022). Having examined water bodies situated at a distance of 50-150 km from each other, they concluded that the differences in prevalence between fish host species in different lakes might be influenced not only by the parasite’s ecology but also by its genetic diversity (Nazarizadeh et al. 2022). We arrived at the same conclusion in this study. Different haplotypes of  L. intestinalis from bream could be found in the same location in lake (e.g. Kurmoila Bay of Lake Syamozero), while the same haplotypes could be found in locations separated by a distance of 5-20 km within the lake. </p>
            <p>Nazarizadeh et al. (2022) note that the heterogeneity of the helminth population in the sample of bream is due to the fact that the material is collected in different seasons. We caught bream individuals in Kurmoila Bay for 12 days in June 2024 but our sample was also rather heterogeneous (22 haplotypes). Large numbers of bream spawn and migrate in the lake in the study period, and their populations mix, which affects the diversity of the parasites (Sterligova et al. 2016).</p>
            <p> In summer, the mixing and dispersal of the plerocercoids is facilitated by the feeding of young bream from different populations in shallow and well-warmed littoral areas and numerous bays of Lake Syamozero. Conditions are favourable there for copepods, which are the first intermediate hosts of  L. intestinalis . Accumulations of young fish in such places attracts the final hosts, fish-eating birds. Large numbers of gulls (Black-headed Gull,  Chroicocephalus ridibundus and Herring Gull,  Larus argentatus ), which are probably the main hosts of  L. intestinalis , have been observed at Lake Syamozero (Sazonov 2004). In this way, the transmission of the parasite in the ecosystem is promoted. Similar results have been obtained in a study of  Ligula circulation in some aquatic ecosystem in south-western Spain (Capasso et al. 2024). </p>
            <p> Variation in the occurrence of haplotypes of  L. intestinalis in different locations may be due to the different species of fish-eating birds, their definitive hosts, as well as their migration pathways. Among the definitive hosts of  Ligula intestinalis indicated by Dubinina (1980), different species of gulls, goosanders, grebes, cormorants, making both short- and long-distance migrations for wintering or nesting, are found in Northwestern Russia (Noskov et al. 2016). Nazarizadeh et al. (2022) suggest that fish-eating birds such as Great Cormorant  P. carbo , grebes  Podiceps auritus (Linnaeus) ,  P. cristatus and  P. nigricollis Brehm, Goosander Mergus merganser , and Common Pochard  Aythya ferin a (Linnaeus) may be potential final hosts of  L. intestinalis in the Czech Republic. </p>
            <p> So far,  L. intestinalis has been noted in Karelia only in Great Crested Grebe  Podiceps cristatus and Great Cormorant  Phalacrocorax carbo (Dubinina 1980; Yakovleva et al. 2020) but this may be due to the limited scope of parasitological research. Though  P. carbo has been shown to expand into the water area of Lake Ladoga, this bird has not yet been noted at Syamozero, Onego, Svyatozero and Konchezero (Lapshin &amp; Mikhaleva 2021). </p>
            <p> Our molecular data on  L. intestinalis indirectly support the connections between water bodies on the migratory routes of fish-eating birds, particularly, gulls, discovered by Noskov et al. (2016). The numbers of Herring Gull and Black-headed Gull in the Karelia has been increasing in recent decades (Zimin et al. 1993; Noskov et al. 2016). Numerous colonies of these birds are observed along the shores of many Karelian water bodies, and local residents report that gulls often feed on discarded fish. These species of fish-eating birds may transmit  L. intestinalis both between lakes within Karelia and between Karelia and Europe. Black-headed Gull and Herring Gull, wintering on the southern coast of the North Sea and the Baltic Sea (Noskov et al. 2016), are likely to maintain a more homogeneous population of the parasite within the northern part of their range. This hypothesis is supported by the occurrence of the same haplotypes in bream in the Karelian water bodies examined in our study and in water bodies in other regions (Fig. 4). </p>
            <p> The study of the first intermediate hosts of  L. intestinalis , i.e. crustaceans, would be interesting for identification of factors influencing the dispersal rate, the survival and the host specificity of this parasite. The life products of bird colonies strongly influence the zooplankton in the littoral zone of freshwater bodies (Krylov et al. 2012). The birds do not only release infective agents into water but also change the structure and abundance of zooplankton. These changes are likely to affect the implementation of the life cycle of  L. intestinalis and the survival of its lineages/subspecies. </p>
            <p>Conclusion</p>
            <p> In this study, we obtained data on the occurrence of the cestode  L. intestinalis in freshwater bream inhabiting several lakes in Northwestern Russia and examined the genetic structure of its plerocercoids using two mitochondrial genes (Cyt b and COI). Our results highlight the need to study this parasite in other fish of the region in order to understand its specificity to the second intermediate host. It is also important to obtain the data on the bird species that serve as the main infection vectors of  L. intestinalis . These data would contribute to epidemiology, control and treatment options of  Ligula infection. </p>
            <p>Acknowledgements</p>
            <p>We are grateful to our colleagues, particularly to Drs. Olga Sterligova, Eugeny Ieshko, Sergey Bugmyrin, and Fedor Fariseev (IB KarRC RAS), for their help with material collection. We extend our sincere thanks to the two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on the first version of the manuscript.</p>
            <p>The study was funded by the Russian Science Foundation, project no. 24-26-00251.</p>
            <p>Ethics Approval</p>
            <p>The paper does not contain any studies involving animal experiments. The wild animal study protocol was approved by the Institute of Biology of Karelian Research Centre, the Russian Academy of Sciences (protocol no. 7 of 8 July 2023). Research Fishing was under Permit of North-West Territorial Administration of the Federal Agency for Fishery (7820240317689) of 14 May 2024.</p>
            <p>References</p>
            <p>Bardhan, A. (2022) Fish-borne parasites proficient in zoonotic diseases: a mini review. Insights in Veterinary Science, 6, 5–12. https://doi.org/10.29328/journal.ivs.1001035</p>
            <p>Bean, C.W. &amp; Winfield, I.J. (1989) Biological and ecological effects of a Ligula intestinalis (L.) infestation of the gudgeon, Gobio gobio (L.), in Lough Neagh, Northern Ireland. Journal of Fish Biology, 34, 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.1989.tb02963.x</p>
            <p>Benzer, S. (2020) Ligula intestinalis infection of Pseudorasbora parva in Hirfanlı Dam Lake, Kırşehir, Turkey. Journal of Fisheries, 8 (1), 762–767. https://doi.org/10.17017/j.fish.192</p>
            <p>Bouzid, W., Lek, S., Mace, M., Ben Hassine O., Etienne R., Legal L. &amp; Loot G. (2008 a) Genetic diversity of Ligula intestinalis (Cestoda: Diphyllobothriidea) based on analysis of inter-simple sequence repeat markers. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research, 46 (4), 289–296. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0469.2008.00471.x</p>
            <p>Bouzid, W., Štefka, J., Hypša, V., Lek, S., Scholz, T., Legal, L., Ben Hassine, O.K. &amp; Loot, G. (2008 b) Geography and host specificity: two forces behind the genetic structure of the freshwater fish parasite Ligula intestinalis (Cestoda: Diphyllobothriidae). International Journal for Parasitology, 38, 1465–1479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpara.2008.03.008</p>
            <p>Bush, A.O., Lafferty, K.D., Lotz, J.M., Shostak, A.W. (1997) Parasitology meets ecology on its own terms: Margolis et al. revisited. Journal of Parasitology. 83, 575–583.</p>
            <p>https://doi.org/10.2307/3284227</p>
            <p>Capasso, S., Parejo, M., Reyes-González, J.M., Navedo, J.G., Morán-López, R., Masero, J.A. &amp; Gutiérrez, J.S. (2024). Noninvasive Methods Unveil the Trophic Transmission of the Tapeworm Ligula intestinalis in Gull-Billed Terns. Ecology and Evolution, 14: e70564.</p>
            <p>https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.70564</p>
            <p>Dubinina, M.N. (1980) Tapeworms (Cestoda, Ligulidae) of the Fauna of the USSR. New Delhi: Amerind Publ. Co. Pvt. Lid. 320 pp.</p>
            <p>Geraudie. P., Boulange-Lecomte, C., Gerbron, M., Hinfray, N., Brion, F. &amp; Minier, C. (2010) Endocrine effects of the tapeworm Ligula intestinalis in its teleost host, the roach (Rutilus rutilus). Parasitology. 137, 697–704. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003118200999151X</p>
            <p>Gutiérrez, J. S. &amp; Hoole, D. (2021) Ligula intestinalis. Trends in Parasitology, 38(4), 344–345.</p>
            <p>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pt.2021.09.005</p>
            <p>Ieshko, E. P. &amp; Malakhova, R. P. (1982) Parasitological characterization of fish infestationas an indicator of ecological changes in a water body. Changes in the structure of fish population in eutrophic water bodies. Moscow: Nauka, 248 pp.</p>
            <p>Ipek, Z.Z., Minaz, M. &amp; Kayış, Ş. (2023) Determination of the use of Ligula intestinalis as a bioindicator in malathion residues. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30 (33), 80732–80740.</p>
            <p>https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-28129-0</p>
            <p>Izvekova, G. I. (1999) Some aspects of parasite-host relationships in the system Ligula intestinalis L. (Cestoda: Pseudophyllidae) – bream. Biology Bulletin, 26 (4), 357–362.</p>
            <p>Kesik, H.K., Celik, F., Turk, C., Simsek S., Kilinc S. G. &amp; Gul, A. (2024) Sequence and Haplotype Analyses of Ligula intestinalis in Acanthobrama marmid (Cyprinidae) in Turkey. Acta Parasitologica, 69: 453–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11686-023-00762-2</p>
            <p>Krylov, A.V., Kulakov, D.V., Chalova, I.V. &amp; Papchenkov, V.G. (2012) Zooplankton of freshwater bodies under the influence of hydrophilic birds. Izhevsk: Publisher Permyakov S.A. 204 pp.</p>
            <p>Kumar.S., Stecher, G., Li, M., Knyaz, C., Tamura, K. (2018) MEGAX: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 35, 1547– 1549. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msy096</p>
            <p>Lanfear, R., Frandsen, P.B., Wright, A.M., Senfeld, T. &amp; Calcott, B., (2017) Partitionfinder 2: New methods for selecting partitioned models of evolution for molecular and morphological phylogenetic analyses. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 34, 772–773.</p>
            <p>https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msw260</p>
            <p>Lapshin, N.V. &amp; Mikhaleva, E. V. (2021) On the status of the great cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo in Karelia. Russian Journal of Ornithology, 30, 2074, 2487–2496. [In Russian]</p>
            <p>Leigh, J.W. &amp; Bryant, D. (2015) POPART: full-feature software for haplotype network construction. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 6, 1110–1116. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12410</p>
            <p>Malakhova, R.P. &amp; Ieshko, E.P. (1977) Changes in the parasite fauna of fish of Syamozero for the last 20 years. Syamozero and perspectives of its fishery utilization. Petrozavodsk: Karelsky Nauchny Centr. 185–199. [In Russian].</p>
            <p>Minh, B.Q., Schmidt, H.A., Chernomor, O., Schrempf, D., Woodhams, M.D., von Haeseler, A. &amp; Lanfear, R. (2020) IQ-TREE 2: New Models and Efficient Methods for Phylogenetic Inference in the Genomic Era. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 37, 1530–1534.</p>
            <p>https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msaa015</p>
            <p>Milyanchuk, N.P., Ilmast, N.V., Sterligova, O. P,. Rasputina, Е.N. &amp; Filatov, I.V. (2019) Fish population of Syamozero in the area of trout farm. Proceedings of the Karelian Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 11, 42–49. https://doi.org/10.17076/eco1116 [In Russian]</p>
            <p>Nazarizadeh, M., Peterka, J., Kubečka, J., Vašek, M., Jůza, T., de Moraes, K.R. &amp; Štefka, J. (2022) Different hosts in different lakes: prevalence and population genetic structure of plerocercoids of Ligula intestinalis (Cestoda) in Czech water bodies. Folia Parasitologica, 69, 2022.018.</p>
            <p>https://doi.org/10.14411/fp.2022.018</p>
            <p>Nazarizadeh, M., Nováková, M., Loot, G., Gabagambi, N.P., Fatemizadeh, F., Osano, O., Presswell, B., Poulin, R., Vitál, Z., Scholz, T., Halajian, A., Trucchi, E., Kočová, P. &amp; Štefka, J. (2023) Historical dispersal and host-switching formed the evolutionary history of a globally distributed multi-host parasite – The Ligula intestinalis species complex. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 180, 107677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2022.107677.</p>
            <p>Nazarizadeh, M., Nováková, M., Vlček, J. &amp; Štefka, J. (2024) Host-associated genetic differentiation in the face of ongoing gene flow: ecological speciation in a pathogenic parasite of freshwater fish. bioRxiv, 2024.01.27.577373. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.27.577373</p>
            <p>Noskov, G.A., Rymkevich, T.A. &amp; Gaginskaya, A.R., eds. (2016) Migrations of birds of the North-West of Russia. Neotropical birds. St. Petersburg: ANO LA "Professional ", 641 pp. [In Russian].</p>
            <p>Novokhatskaya, O.V. (2008) Parasitofauna of fish of eutrophic lakes (on the example of Syamozero). Theses for the PhD. Zoological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences. St. Petersburg, 164 pp. [In Russian]</p>
            <p>Novokhatskaya, O.V., Ieshko, E.P. &amp; Sterligova, O.P. (2008) Character of long-term changes in the parasitofauna of bream Abramis brama L. in an eutrophic water body. Parasitologiya, 42 (4), 308–317. [In Russian]</p>
            <p>Nyman, T., Papadopoulou, E., Ylinen, E., Wutke, S., Michell, C.T., Sromek, L., Sinisalo, T., Andrievskaya, E., Alexeev, V. &amp; Kunnasranta, M. (2021) DNA barcoding reveals different cestode helminth species in northern European marine and freshwater ringed seals. International Journal for Parasitology: Parasites and Wildlife, 15, 255–261.</p>
            <p>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijppaw.06.004</p>
            <p>Oyoo-Okoth, E., Wim, A., Osano, O., Kraak, M.H.S., Ngure, V., Makwali, J. &amp; Orina, P.S. (2010) Use of the fish endoparasite Ligula intestinalis (L., 1758) in an intermediate cyprinid host (Rastreneobolaargentea) for biomonitoring heavy metal contamination in Lake Victoria, Kenya. Lakes &amp; Reservoirs: Research &amp; Management, 15, 63–73.</p>
            <p>https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1770.2010.00423.x</p>
            <p>Rambaut, A. (2012) FigTree v1. 4. Molecular evolution, phylogenetics and epidemiology. https://github.com/rambaut/figtree/releases. Accessed 1 January 2024</p>
            <p>Reiczigel, J., Marozzi, M., Fabian, I. &amp; Rozsa, L. (2019) Biostatistics for parasitologists – a primer to Quantitative Parasitology. Trends in Parasitology, 35, 277–281.</p>
            <p>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pt.2019.01.003</p>
            <p>Rozas, J., Ferrer-Mata, A., Sánchez-DelBarrio, J.C., Guirao-Rico, S., Librado, P., Ramos-Onsins, S.E. &amp; Sánchez-Gracia, A. (2017) DnaSP 6: DNA Sequence Polymorphism Analysis of Large Datasets. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 34, 3299–3302.</p>
            <p>https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msx248</p>
            <p>Rumyantsev, E.A. (2007) Fish parasites in lakes of the European North (fauna, ecology, evolution). Petrozavodsk: KRC RAS, 240 pp. [In Russian]</p>
            <p>Rumyantsev, E.A. &amp; Ieshko, E.P. (1997) Fish parasites in Karelian waters. Petrozavodsk: KRC RAS. 120 pp. [In Russian]</p>
            <p>Rumyantsev, E.A. &amp; Mamontova, O.V. (2008) Parasites of freshwater fishes. Petrozavodsk: Petrozavodsk State University, 174 pp. [In Russian]</p>
            <p>Sazonov, S.V. (2004) Ornithofauna of the taiga of Eastern Fennoscandia. Historical and zonal-landscape factors of formation. Moscow: Nauka, 390 pp. [In Russian]</p>
            <p>Selcuk, M. A., Celik, F., Simsek, S., Ahmed, H., Kesik, H. K., Gunyakti Kilinc, S. &amp; Caoe, J. (2024) Genetic, haplotype and phylogenetic analysis of Ligula intestinalis by using mt-CO1 gene marker: ecological implications, climate change and eco-genetic diversity. Brazilian Journal of Biology, 84, e258626. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.258626</p>
            <p>Shulman, S.S. (1962) Parasite fauna of fish of Syamozero lakes group. Proceedings of Syamozero complex expedition, 2, 173–244. [In Russian]</p>
            <p>Štefka, J., Hypša, V. &amp; Scholz, T. (2009) Interplay of host specificity and biogeography in the population structure of a cosmopolitan endoparasite: microsatellite study of Ligula intestinalis (Cestoda). Molecular Ecology, 18, 1187–1206.</p>
            <p>https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2008.04074.x</p>
            <p>Sterligova, O.P., Ilmast, N.V. &amp; Savosin, D.S. (2016) Cyclostomata and fishes of the fresh waters of Karelia. Petrozavodsk: KRC RAS, 223 pp. [In Russian]</p>
            <p>Villesen, P. (2007) FaBox: an online toolbox for fasta sequences. Molecular Ecology Notes, 7: 965– 968. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01821.x</p>
            <p>Waeschenbach, A., Brabec, J., Scholz, T., Littlewood, D.T.J. &amp; Kuchta, R. (2017) The catholic taste of broad tapeworms – multiple routes to human infection. International Journal for Parasitology, 47, 831–843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpara.2017.06.004</p>
            <p>Yakovleva, G.A., Artem'ev, A.V. &amp; Lebedeva, D.I. (2020) Expansion of the Great Cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo L. 1758) to the Northwest of Russia as a Possibility of the Spread of Parasites. Russian Journal of Biological Invasions, 11 (1), 92–96.</p>
            <p>https://doi.org/10.1134/S2075111720010129</p>
            <p>Zimin, V.B., Sazonov, S.V., Lapshin, N.V., Khokhlova, T.Y., Artyemiev, A.V., Annenkov V.G. &amp; Yakovleva M.V. (1993) Ornithofauna of Karelia. Petrozavodsk: KarRC RAS. 220 pp. [In Russian]</p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F3E74EFFDAFFE7CEA85785FE2BFC2F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Lebedeva, Daria I.;Kochneva, Albina A.;Lysenko, Lydmila A.;Kantserova, Nadezda P.;Zaitsev, Dmitry O.;Milyanchuk, Nikolay P.;Sukhovskaya, Irina V.	Lebedeva, Daria I., Kochneva, Albina A., Lysenko, Lydmila A., Kantserova, Nadezda P., Zaitsev, Dmitry O., Milyanchuk, Nikolay P., Sukhovskaya, Irina V. (2024): Mapping of Ligula plerocercoids in the freshwater bream Abramis brama in Lake Syamozero and some other lakes of Northwestern Russia. Ecologica Montenegrina 80: 21-37, DOI: 10.37828/em.2024.80.3, URL: https://doi.org/10.37828/em.2024.80.3
