Next Article in Journal
Effects of Species-Specific Auditory Stimulation on Broiler Embryos on Hatchability, Developmental Stability, Behavior, and Performance Characteristics
Previous Article in Journal
Energy and Arginine Density in the Diets of Arbor Acre Hens from 40 to 50 Weeks of Age: Effects on Development and Lipid Metabolism of Embryos
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Animals
Volume 13
Issue 23
10.3390/ani13233738
animals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Diversity of Trematodes in Myotis Bats (Chiroptera, Vespertilionidae) from the Samarskaya Luka (European Russia)

by
Nadezhda Yu. Kirillova
,
Alexander A. Kirillov
* and
Victoria A. Vekhnik
Laboratory for Biodiversity, Institute of Ecology of the Volga Basin of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Samara Federal Research Center of RAS, Togliatti 445003, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Animals 2023, 13(23), 3738; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13233738
Submission received: 26 September 2023 / Revised: 15 November 2023 / Accepted: 28 November 2023 / Published: 3 December 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Wildlife)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Different species of bats often inhabit the same territories but have differences in diet. Bats become infected with parasitic worms such as trematodes when they feed on insects. Fluke diversity is determined by bats’ dietary breadth. The purpose of our research was to study trematode diversity in five Myotis species inhabiting Samarskaya Luka National Park. In the 2005–2007 period, we studied parasitic worms in bats and found 11 trematode species. One parasite species, Prosthodendrium cryptolecithum, was recorded for the first time in Russia. Only three fluke species were revealed in all studied bat species. Our study shows that trematode species diversity is higher in Myotis daubentonii and M. dasycneme. The trematode fauna of M. brandtii, M. nattereri, and M. mystacinus is less diverse. Our results confirm the similarity of habitats and diets among the five Myotis species and show weak competition among bats for food items.

Abstract

Various bat species often occupy the same habitats. Cohabitation should induce different preferences in spatial or trophic components of the bat ecological niche to reduce their competition. This determines the differences in the trematode fauna of Myotis spp. The purpose of our research was to study the biodiversity of trematodes in syntopic populations of five Myotis species in the Samarskaya Luka National Park. In the 2005–2007 period, we studied 867 bat specimens via the methods of complete helminthological dissection. In total, 11 trematode species from the families Plagiorchiidae (Plagiorchis koreanus, P. mordovii, P. muelleri, and P. vespertilionis), Pleurogenidae (Parabascus duboisi), and Lecithodendriidae (Prosthodendrium ascidia, Pr. chilostomum, Pr. cryptolecithum, Pr. hurkovaae, Pr. longiforme, and Lecithodendrium linstowi) were found in five Myotis species. Only three trematode species, P. koreanus, Pr. chilostomum, and P. duboisi, are common to all studied Myotis spp. Prosthodendrium cryptolecithum was recorded for the first time in Russia. Trematode species diversity is higher in Myotis daubentonii and M. dasycneme. The trematode fauna of M. brandtii, M. nattereri, and M. mystacinus is less diverse. The determining factor in the infection of bats with trematodes is feeding on semi-aquatic insects, possible second intermediate hosts of the parasites. The infection of bats with flukes occurs at different levels of host (Myotis spp.) abundance as a result of the realization of the main bat trophic relationships. Our results confirm the data that the ecological niches of the five Myotis species partially overlap. Analysis of the trematode fauna in Myotis spp. showed that, in the Samarskaya Luka, there may be weak competition for food items among bats.

1. Introduction

Recently, more and more attention has been paid to the study of groups of co-inhabiting and even taxonomically close species of bats. In such communities, rather complex and contrasting relationships develop between their members [1,2,3,4,5]. Various bat species often occupy the same habitats. In this case, the principle of competitive exclusion can be applied, according to which species with the same ecology cannot live in the same space. Co-habiting species should exhibit different preferences for some components of the ecological niche, either spatial or trophic, in order to reduce their competition [6].
The territory of European Russia is inhabited by 27 species of bats. The bat fauna of the Middle Volga region includes 16 species [7,8,9,10]. Among them are five species of the genus Myotis (Chiroptera, Vespertilionidae): the whiskered bat Myotis mystacinus (Kuhl, 1819), Daubenton’s bat Myotis daubentonii (Kuhl, 1817), pond bat Myotis dasycneme (Boie, 1825), Brandt’s bat Myotis brandtii (Eversmann, 1845), and Natterer’s bat Myotis nattereri (Kuhl, 1817). All studied bats are sedentary species, wintering in underground shelters, caves, and abandoned adits [2,9]. Among the sedentary bat species inhabiting the Samarskaya Luka, the populations of M. brandtii and M. daubentonii have the highest abundance [2].
Despite relative similarities in habitat preferences, various Myotis spp. have significant trophic and chorological differences [7,11,12]. The lifestyle differences, particularly their feeding habits and spatial distribution, affect the trematode fauna of Myotis spp. In this regard, studies on the helminth fauna of syntopic Myotis species and, especially, their flukes, are of particular interest.
Studies of helminths in various bat species of the genus Myotis have been carried out in many European countries [13]. The most studied helminth fauna is of M. mystacinus; its diversity has been studied in Poland, Austria, Italy, France, Switzerland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, and Azerbaijan. In this bat species, 27 species of parasitic worms, including 16 trematode species, have been registered in Europe and the countries of the former USSR [13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36].
The helminth fauna of M. dasycneme has been studied in the Czech Republic, Poland, and Hungary [18,20,21,23,37]. Data on the helminths in M. daubentonii were obtained in France, Germany, Italy, Norway, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, and Turkey [16,18,20,21,23,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44]. The parasitic worms in M. nattereri have been studied in Switzerland, Austria, Spain, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Poland, and Belarus [15,17,18,20,21,23,37,43,45,46,47].
Data on M. brandtii helminths in Western and Central Europe are known only from studies by Shimalov et al. [43,47]. The scarcity of data on the parasitic worms of M. brandtii in Europe is probably due to the fact that M. mystacinus and M. brandtii began to be distinguished as independent species only in the last 40 years [7,8]. Thus, data from helminthological studies of M. mystacinus apparently refer to both sympatric chiropteran species.
There are known data about trematodes in Myotis myotis Borkhausen, 1797, from Spain, Switzerland, Austria, Germany, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, and Poland [14,18,20,21,23,38,45,46,48]. Trematodes in Myotis emarginatus (E. Geoffroy, 1806) have been studied in France, Austria, the Czech Republic, and Poland [18,20,21,23,40,45].
There is little information about trematodes, as well as about other helminths, of Myotis blythii Tomes, 1857, which have been studied in Slovakia, Hungary, and Serbia [18,48,49]; Myotis capaccinii Bonaparte, 1837, which have been studied in France, Italy, and Bulgaria [34,35,40,50]; Myotis bechsteinii Kuhl, 1817, which have been studied in Switzerland, the Czech Republic, and Ukraine [14,18,31,38]; and Myotis aurascens Kuzyakin, 1935, and Myotis alcathoe Helversen et Heller, 2001, which have been studied only in Turkey [44,51].
Recently, Frank and coauthors [13] presented a summary of parasites (including seven trematode species) in Myotis spp. inhabiting European countries. Unfortunately, this review did not include some data on parasites of bats from Western and Central Europe and the former USSR.
There are very few works containing data on helminths in Myotis spp. in Russia. The first report of parasitic worms in M. mystacinus was presented by Sten’ko et al. [52], where three species of trematodes were found in Crimea. Podvyaznaya [53,54] studied one species, Allassogonoporus amphoraeformis (Mödlinger, 1930), from M. brandtii in the Voronezh Nature Reserve. Demidova and Vekhnik [55] studied trematodes in M. mystacinus and M. brandtii from the Samarskaya Luka, in which two and nine trematode species were identified, respectively. Five species of trematodes were found in M. brandtii from Karelia [56]. Gulyaev and co-authors [57] provided data on one studied specimen of M. brandtii from the Magadan Oblast, in which only Plagiorchis sp. was found. Previously, we studied the helminths in M. dasycneme and M. daubentonii from Mordovia, where three and six trematode species were identified in bats, respectively [58,59]. Our previous works, devoted to parasites of vertebrates from the Middle Volga region, include information about flukes in all five chiropteran species [60,61,62,63,64].
Thus, the aim of our present research was to study the biodiversity of trematodes in syntopic populations of five Myotis species from the Samarskaya Luka (European Russia).

2. Materials and Methods

The material for this research was collected during our own field studies on bat ecology and helminths in the territory of the Samarskaya Luka National Park (Samara Oblast, European Russia), which were conducted in the 2005–2007 period. The study area was the coastal zone of the Volga River in the northern part of the Samarskaya Luka (Samara Oblast). Bats were studied at three trapping stations of the National Park near Solnechnaya Polyana, Bogatyr and Shiryaevo villages (Figure 1).
In total, we studied 247 M. brandtii, 262 M. daubentonii, 135 M. dasycneme, 125 M. mystacinus, and 98 M. nattereri. Bats were caught with mist nets at night. We used the common method of placing the net between two vertical sticks, which were 6 m long telescopic fishing rods [65]. We also studied bats that died of natural causes in their wintering sites.
Bats were examined using complete helminthological dissection [66,67]. Trematodes were collected from bats and fixed in 70% ethanol for further investigations. Trematodes were stained with aceto-carmine, dehydrated in a graded ethanol series (70–96%) and cleared in clove oil. The parasitic worms were then mounted in Canada balsam. Trematode species were identified according to Zdzietowiecki [20,23], Khotenovsky [24], Sharpilo and Iskova [31], Tkach et al. [41], and Skrjabin and Antipin [68].
To characterize the helminth infection of Myotis bats, the following indices, which are generally accepted in parasitology, were used: prevalence (P, %), mean abundance (MA), intensity range (I, specimens), and mean intensity (MI) [69,70]. To determine the species diversity of trematodes, Shannon (H’) and Shannon evenness (E) indices were calculated. The significance of differences between Shannon index values was measured using Student’s t-test. The degree of similarity between the trematode faunas of Myotis spp. was revealed using the Jaccard (CJ) (qualitative data) and Sørensen (CN) (quantitative data) similarity indices [71]. The degree of similarity was assessed as low (0–0.33), medium (0.34–0.66), and high (0.67–1).
The dominance of species in the parasite community was determined using the Palia-Kovnatsky dominance index (D) [72]. Trematode dominance groups were as follows: 10–100, dominants; 1–10, subdominants; 1–0.001, adominants. The Mann–Whitney (U) test was used to compare the total infections of Myotis spp. and assess the significance of differences in infection with individual trematode species. A dendrogram of similarity of helminth faunas of Myotis spp. was obtained using the unweighted pair group method with arithmetic average (UPGMA) and the Morisita index as a distance measure in PAST 2.17 [73]. To standardize bat sample size, we used the species richness index (bootstrap estimator), which predicts the number of helminth species not included in collections [74,75]. The taxonomy of flukes was provided according to Fauna Europaea (http://www.fauna-eu.org/, accessed on 3 August 2023) [76]. Trematode voucher specimens qwee stored in the parasitological collection of the Institute of Ecology of the Volga River Basin of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Togliatti, Russia). Accession numbers are No. 332–338 (P. vespertilionis), 373–379 (P. koreanus), 322 (P. muelleri), 392–396 (P. mordovii), 231, 232, 238 (Pr. ascidia), 167, 260–262 (Pr. chilostomum), 179, 180, 256 (Pr. cryptolecithum), 289, 290 (Pr. hurkovaae), 205, 310 (Pr. longiforme), 202, 203, 217 (P. duboisi), 370 (L. linstowi).

3. Results

A total of 11 species of trematodes were revealed in five bat species from the Samarskaya Luka National Park (Table 1).
The greatest richness of the trematode fauna was found in M. brandtii, including 10 trematode species (Table 1). The total infection of M. brandtii with flukes reached 100%, MA = 50.4. According to the Palia–Kovnatsky dominance index, two species dominated in the trematode fauna of M. brandtii: Pr. ascidia (D = 44.9) and P. koreanus (13.5). The group of subdominants included P. duboisi (6.3), Pr. cryptolecithum (3.3), and Pr. chilostomum (1.6) (Figure 2).
Eight species of trematodes were revealed in M. daubentonii and M. dasycneme. The total infection in both species was 100%; the abundance index was 64.2 and 67.6, respectively.
The trematode fauna of M. daubentonii are dominated by L. linstowi (33.5) and P. vespertilionis (15.7), while Pr. longiforme (8.2), Pr. chilostomum (6.8), and P. duboisi (2.6) are subdominants. The trematode fauna of M. dasycneme are dominanted by Pr. ascidia (33.6) and P. mordovii (13.1); subdominants are P. duboisi (8.9), P. koreanus (5.9), Pr. cryptolecithum (4.6), and Pr. hurkovaae (1.1).
In Myotis mystacinus, as well as in M. nattereri, six species of trematodes were found. The total infection of M. mystacinus with flukes was 60%, MA = 12.8. Among trematodes identified in M. mystacinus, Pr. ascidia is dominant (59.3), while P. koreanus (5.6) is subdominant. The total infection of M. nattereri compared to other Myotis bats is low and amounted to only 32%, and the MA was 2.6. In the trematode fauna of M. nattereri, the dominant is P. koreanus (27.1), the subdominant is Pr. ascidia (1.7). The remaining four species in the trematode fauna of M. nattereri are adominants.
In the trematode fauna of Myotis bats, the structure and number of dominant and subdominant species are different (Figure 2). For all five Myotis species, no common dominant or subdominant trematode species was identified. Only two species of trematodes, P. koreanus and Pr. ascidia, are the dominant or subdominant for four bat species, and P. duboisi for three Myotis species (Figure 2).
Only three of the eleven trematode species were found together in all five bat species: P. koreanus, Pr. chilostomum, and P. duboisi (Table 1). Prosthodendrium ascidia was found in four species of bats. Plagiorchis vespertilionis, P. mordovii, P. muelleri, Pr. hurkovaae, and L. linstowi were each recorded in three host species. Two host species were noted for Pr. cryptolecithum and Pr. longiforme (Table 1).
Values of trematode species diversity in Myotis spp. from the Samarskaya Luka National Park are shown in Table 2.
The diversity indices of the trematode fauna are significantly higher for M. daubentonii and M. dasycneme, with the exception of the Margalef index values. The values of the Margalef index for these bat species are slightly lower than for M. brandtii and M. nattereri (Table 2). The trematode fauna of M. brandtii and M. nattereri are less diverse. The least diversity in the trematode fauna was observed in M. mystacinus (Table 2). This bat species has a significantly lower Shannon diversity, Shannon evenness, Margalef and Simpson evenness indices than other species (Table 2). The differences in the Shannon species diversity index among the trematode fauna of five chiropteran species are significant (p < 0.001), with the exception of the pair M. daubentonii—M. dasycneme (p > 0.05).
A comparison of trematode infection of five Myotis species using the Kruskal–Wallis test revealed significant differences (H = 425.6, p < 0.0001). A pairwise comparison of infection of different Myotis spp. using the Mann–Whitney test revealed significant differences in most cases (p < 0.0001), with the exception of the pair M. daubentonii—M. dasycneme (Table 3).
An analysis of the infections of bats with common trematode species using the Mann–Whitney test showed significant differences in infection with Pr. chilostomum (in all cases), P. koreanus, and P. duboisi (in most cases) (Table 3). Differences in the infection with P. koreanus in pairs M. brandtii—M. dasycneme, M. mystacinus—M. nattereri, M. nattereri—M. daunentonii, as well as in the infection of M. mystacinus and M. nattereri with P. duboisi, were not significant. There were no significant differences in the infection with P. koreanus in pairs M. brandtii—M. dasycneme, M. mystacinus—M. nattereri, M. nattereri—M. daunentonii, as well as in the infection of M. mystacinus and M. nattereri with P. duboisi (Table 3).
We conducted a comparative analysis of the helminth faunas of Myotis species inhabiting the Samarskaya Luka. A similarity dendrogram of the parasite fauna of five bat species is presented in Figure 3.
A cophenetic correlation coefficient of 0.802 confirms the validity of the cluster. As a result of the cluster analysis, the considered Myotis species were divided into two clusters with the most similar helminth fauna (Figure 3).
Flukes parasitizing M. mystacinus and M. nattereri form the first cluster, in which the greatest similarity of trematode communities is observed (0.83). These species of bats differ maximally in trematode composition from the three other Myotis spp. thatare included in the second cluster (Figure 3).
The second cluster is formed by a clade of trematode faunas of M. brandtii and M. daubentonii (0.78) that is close to the trematode fauna of M. dasycneme, more similar to that of M. brandtii (0.78), and less similar to that of M. daubentonii (0.75) (Figure 3). The remaining pairs showed an average degree of similarity ranging from 0.57 to 0.63.

4. Discussion

Analysis of the trematode fauna of Myotis spp. from the Samarskaya Luka National Park showed that the species composition was the richest in M. brandtii (10 species). Slightly fewer trematode species were found in M. daubentonii and M. dasycneme (eight species each), and the smallest number of trematode species was found in M. mystacinus and M. nattereri—six species each (Table 1).
Analysis of the species diversity of trematodes in Myotis spp. showed that the trematode fauna are more diverse for M. daubentonii and M. dasycneme, despite the fact that a larger number of trematode species were found in M. brandtii (Table 1 and Table 2). The value of the Shannon diversity index for M. brandtii is lower, which is associated with the high abundance and dominance of one species in its trematode fauna, Pr. ascidia (Figure 2). At the same time, the Margalef index, which takes into account species richness and the total number of parasite specimens, is significantly higher in M. brandtii, from which the largest number of trematodes was collected (Table 2). The abundance and dominance of Pr. ascidia in M. mystacinus also leads to a significant decrease in the Shannon index. As a result, this species of bats has the lowest species diversity of the studied flukes (Table 2, Figure 2).
All trematode species were found in Myotis spp. at the mature stage and are host-specific parasites of bats. Three of the eleven recorded trematode species (Pr. ascidia, Pr. cryptholecithum, and P. duboisi) in bats in the study area were found only in Myotis spp. In addition to Myotis spp., other species of bats from the Samarskaya Luka also participate in the life cycles of eight more species of trematodes [60,61,63].
Infection of bats with trematodes occurs entirely when feeding on semi-aquatic insects, which serve as second intermediate hosts of these parasites. Thus, findings of P. koreanus and P. vespertilionis indicate the consumption of adult forms of Diptera, Ephemeroptera, Megaloptera, Trichoptera, and Odonata by bats [31]. The presence of Pr. chilostomum in the helminth fauna of Myotis spp. indicates that bats consume adults of Trichoptera and, possibly, Odonata [31]. The second intermediate hosts of Pr. ascidia are the chironomid larvae, such as Chironomis plumosus (Linnaeus, 1758) [31,77].
The life cycles of P. mordovii, P. muelleri, L. linstowi, Pr. longiforme, Pr. cryptolecithum, Pr. hurkovaae, P. duboisi, and P. lepidotus are currently not studied. Probably, the second intermediate hosts of these trematodes, like other bat trematodes, are insects that develop in the aquatic environment [31].
Trematodes are parasites with a complex life cycle, including a change of hosts. Accordingly, the trematode fauna of Myotis spp. depends on the presence/absence of various first (freshwater gastropods) and second (semi-aquatic insects) intermediate hosts at each site. In turn, the species composition of trematodes and their infection of intermediate hosts are determined by the diversity and abundance of final hosts (bats), which ensure the release of trematode eggs into the external environment.
According to Smirnov and Vekhnik [12], among Myotis spp., in terms of relative abundance index, M. daubentonii (10.3%) is the most numerous in the Samarskaya Luka; M. dasycneme (7.5%) and M. brandtii (6.5%) are slightly less common. M. mystacinus (2.3%) and M. nattereri (0.2%) are rare in the study area. Analysis of the trematode fauna of bats showed that the most abundant species, M. daubentonii, does not have the largest number of trematode species (eight) but the same number as in M. dasycneme (Table 1). Myotis brandtii, inferior in relative abundance to M. daubentonii and M. dasycneme, nevertheless has the largest number of trematode species (10). The least abundant species, M. nattereri, has the same number of trematodes as M. mystacinus (six species each) (Table 1). When analyzing the infection of bats with trematodes, significant differences were established, which confirm that the highest parasitic load of trematodes is carried by M. daubentonii and M. dasycneme, to a lesser extent than M. brandtii, and the lowest parasitic load on Myotis spp. is revealed in M. mystacinus and M. nattereri (Table 1 and Table 3).
It should be noted that the infection of bats with flukes occurs at different levels of host abundance (Myotis spp.) as a result of the realization of the main trophic relationships between chiropterans. The presented differences in the trematode fauna of various Myotis species are mainly associated with preferences for certain food items. The widest feeding range was found in M. daubentonii, whose diet in the Samarskaya Luka includes 10 food items from nine orders of insects. The diet of M. dasycneme, M. brandtii, and M. mystacinus is slightly smaller and contains nine food objects from eight orders of insects [12]. Myotis nattereri also has nine food items, but from seven orders of insects [12].
Despite the similar composition of the diet, the proportion of various food items of the five bat species is not the same [12]. Thus, the main diet of M. daubentonii and M. dasycneme consists of Trichoptera, Lepidoptera, and Diptera. Coleoptera are somewhat less represented in the diet of these two species, and among the food items for M. daubentonii there are also representatives of the orders Hemiptera and Homoptera. Insects of other orders are rarely found in the diet of M. daubentonii and M. dasycneme [12].
The diet of M. brandtii is dominated by Lepidoptera and Diptera; Coleoptera are rather less represented; insects of the orders Trichoptera, Neuroptera, Homoptera, and Hymenoptera are rarely found [12]. In M. mystacinus, the main diet components are Lepidoptera; Trichoptera are less represented, and Coleoptera, Homoptera, and Diptera are rare. The diet of M. nattereri is dominated by Lepidoptera. Members of Trichoptera, Coleoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, and Homoptera are present in the diet in equal proportions [12].
The identified differences in the infection of bats with common trematode species can be explained by the different proportions of food items (second intermediate hosts of trematodes) in the diet of Myotis spp.
The diversity of the trematode fauna of bats also depends on the number of hunting grounds that bats visit. Visiting more hunting sites expands the bats’ diet, which ultimately increases the likelihood of their infection with various species of trematodes.
Myotis spp. show unequal preferences for different types of hunting grounds. Among bats, the largest number of hunting sites was found for M. brandtii, M. daubentonii, and M. dasycneme [78]. Myotis nattereri prefers to hunt in only one type of hunting sites, whereas M. mystacinus has two types of hunting grounds [78]. Our identification of a greater number of trematode species in M. brandtii, M. daubentonii, and M. dasycneme, compared to that in M. nattereri and M. mystacinus, confirms these data on hunting preferences (Table 1).
In addition, Myotis spp. occupy different spatial niches when hunting sites overlap [78]. Thus, M. daubentonii and M. dasycneme hunt above the water surface, M. brandtii feeds high in the tree crowns, and M. mystacinus hunts immediately below (the middle and lower parts of the tree crowns). Myotis nattereri prefers to hunt in open confined spaces above the ground, such as forest edges, wide forest glades, and paths [78]. The association of different Myotis species with certain hunting grounds also affects the diversity and abundance of insects in the diet of bats. Ultimately, this determines the species composition and abundance of trematodes in Myotis spp.
A comparative analysis of the trematode fauna of five Myotis species inhabiting the Samarskaya Luka National Park showed a significant similarity in the composition of trematodes in different bat species (Figure 3). This is due to their similar lifestyle and feeding on semi-aquatic insects, which serve as second intermediate hosts of flukes. Thus, the finding of three common trematode species in bats (P. koreanus, Pr. chilostomum, and P. duboisi) indicates that they feed on the same food items (insects)—the second intermediate hosts of these trematode species. Our data confirm the partial overlap of spatial and trophic niches of various Myotis spp. and their division according to food preferences and hunting grounds.

5. Conclusions

Eleven trematode species were found in five species of Myotis spp. from the Samarskaya Luka National Park. The trematode Pr. cryptolecithum was recorded in bats of Russian fauna for the first time.
Analysis of the trematode species diversity in Myotis spp. showed that the trematode fauna are more diverse in M. daubentonii and M. dasycneme (8 species each), despite the fact that a larger number of trematode species were found in M. brandtii (10). The lowest species diversity of trematodes was observed in M. mystacinus, while the number of trematode species noted in M. mystacinus and M. nattereri is the same (six species each). All Myotis species participate to varying degrees in the realization of the life cycles of trematodes on the territory of the Samarskaya Luka. However, abundant bat species (M. daubentonii, M. dasycneme, and M. brandtii) carry the main parasitic load and have both the highest trematode species diversity and high infection rates. Despite the relatively low abundance of M. mystacinus and M. nattereri and their low infection with trematodes, these species are also involved in the distribution and preservation of the abundance of the parasites.
The determining factor in the infection of bats with trematodes is feeding on semi-aquatic insects (second intermediate hosts). Therefore, the infection of bats with trematodes occurs at different levels of host abundance (Myotis spp.) as a result of the realization of the main trophic relationships.
The diversity of the trematode fauna of Myotis spp. is associated with the number of hunting sites that bats visit. Various Myotis species visiting the same hunting grounds and consuming the same food items (but in different proportions) have an average degree of similarity in the trematode fauna. The revealed differences in the trematode fauna of Myotis spp. are associated both with the food preferences of various species and with the variety of hunting grounds they use.
Our parasitological results confirm the data on the partial overlap of the ecological niches of the five Myotis species in spatial and trophic components. An analysis of the trematode fauna of Myotis spp. showed that, in the territory of the Samarskaya Luka, there may be weak competition for food items among bats due to their specialization and divergent habitats.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, N.Y.K. and A.A.K.; methodology, N.Y.K. and V.A.V.; software, A.A.K.; validation, N.Y.K., A.A.K. and V.A.V.; formal analysis, A.A.K.; investigation, N.Y.K. and A.A.K.; resources, A.A.K. and V.A.V.; data curation, N.Y.K.; writing—original draft preparation, N.Y.K. and A.A.K.; writing—review and editing, A.A.K. and V.A.V.; visualization, N.Y.K. and A.A.K.; supervision, N.Y.K.; project administration, A.A.K.; funding acquisition, A.A.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Russian Science Foundation, grant number 23-24-10021, https://rscf.ru/project/23-24-10021/ (accessed on 5 September 2023).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Our research was conducted in compliance with the ethical standards of humane treatment of animals in accordance with the recommended standards described by the Council Directive 86/609/EEC of 24 November 1986 regarding the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes and with the Commission Recommendation 2007/526/EC of 18 June 2007 on guidelines for the accommodation and care of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes. The study was carried out in accordance with the Agreement on Scientific Cooperation between the Institute of Ecology of the Volga Basin RAS (IEVB RAS) and the Samarskaya Luka National Park. The research theme, trapping and handling procedures were approved by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Ecology of Russia according to the research topics of the Samarskaya Luka National Park in 2005–2010.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors are deeply grateful to Vladimir Vekhnik (Zhiguli Nature Reserve) for his invaluable help in bat catching and identification.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Carter, T.C.; Menzel, M.A.; Chapman, B.R.; Miller, K.V. Partitioning of Food Resources by Syntopic Eastern Red (Lasiurus borealis), Seminole (L. seminolus) and Evening (Nycticeius humeralis) Bats. Am. Midl. Nat. 2004, 151, 186–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Smirnov, D.G.; Vekhnik, V.P. Abundance and structure of bat communities (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae), wintering in the artificial caves in the Samarskaya Luka. Rus. J. Ecol. 2011, 1, 64–72. [Google Scholar]
  3. Mancina, C.A.; García-Rivera, L.; Miller, B.W. Wing morphology, echolocation, and resource partitioning in syntopic Cuban mormoopid bats. J. Mammal. 2012, 93, 1308–1317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Andreas, M.; Reiter, A.; Cepakova, E.; Uhrin, M. Body size as an important factor deter-mining trophic niche partitioning in three syntopic rhinolophid bat species. Biologia 2013, 68, 170–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Salinas-Ramos, V.B.; Ancillotto, L.; Bosso, L.; Sanchez-Cordero, V.; Russo, D. Interspe-cific competition in bats: State of knowledge and research challenges. Mammal Rev. 2020, 50, 68–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Gause, G.F. The Struggle for Existence; Williams & Wilkins: Baltimore, MD, USA, 1934; pp. 1–163. [Google Scholar]
  7. Strelkov, P.P.; Ilyin, V.Y. Bats of the South of the Middle and Lower Volga regions. Proc. Zool. Inst. Acad. Sci. USSR 1990, 225, 42–167. [Google Scholar]
  8. Il’in, V.Y.; Vekhnik, V.P.; Smirnov, D.G.; Kurmaeva, N.M.; Zolina, N.F.; Matrosova, O.M. Dynamics of abundance of bats (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae) during hibernation in caves of the Samarian Luka over a 20-year period. Rus. J. Ecol. 1999, 30, 428–431. [Google Scholar]
  9. Smirnov, D.G.; Vekhnik, V.P.; Kurmaeva, N.M.; Shepelev, A.A.; Il’in, V.Y. Species structure and dynamics of bat communities (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae) hibernating in artificial caves of Samara Luka. Biol. Bull. 2007, 34, 507–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Mammals of Russia. Available online: http://rusmam.ru/mammal/index?sort=sort (accessed on 25 September 2023).
  11. Smirnov, D.G.; Vekhnik, V.P. Biotopic structure of bat communities inhabiting flood plain ecosystems of the Samarskaya Luka. Proc. Samara Sci. Cent. RAS 2012, 14, 177–179. [Google Scholar]
  12. Smirnov, D.G.; Vekhnik, V.P. Ecology of nutrition and differentiation of the trophic niches of bats (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae) in Floodplain Ecosystems of the Samara Bend. Biol. Bull. 2014, 1, 53–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Frank, R.; Kuhn, T.; Werblow, A.; Liston, A.; Kochmann, J.; Klimpel, S. Parasite diversity of European Myotis species with special emphasis on Myotis myotis (Microchiroptera, Vespertilionidae) from a typical nursery roost. Parasite Vectors 2015, 8, 101–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Dubois, G. Les Trematodes de Chiropteres de la collection Villy Aellen. Etude suivie d’une revision du sous-genre Prosthodendrium Dollfus 1937 (Lecithodendriinae Lühe). Rev. Suiss. Zool. 1955, 62, 469–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Dubois, G. Contribution a l’etude des trematodes des Chiropteres. Rev. Suiss. Zool. 1956, 63, 683–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Soltys, A. The helminth fauna of bats (Chiroptera) of Lublin Palatinate. Act. Parasitol. Polon. 1959, 7, 599–613. [Google Scholar]
  17. Dubois, G. Contribution a l’etude des Trematodes de Chiropteres. Revision du genre Allassogonoporus Olivier 1938 et note additionnelle sur le sous-genre Prosthodendrium Dollfus 1931. Rev. Suiss. Zool. 1963, 70, 103–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Hurkova, J. Bat trematodes in Czechoslovakia. I. A systematical review of occurring species. Vest. Ceskosl. Zool. Spol. 1963, 27, 250–276. [Google Scholar]
  19. Matsaberidze, G.V.; Khotenovsky, I.A. To the Trematode Fauna of Bats in Georgia. In Helminth Fauna of Animals and Plants in Georgia; Kurashvili, B.E., Ed.; Metsniereba: Tbilisi, Georgia, 1967; pp. 83–94. [Google Scholar]
  20. Zdzietowiecki, K. Helminths of bats in Poland. II. Trematodes of the subfamily Lecithodendriinae. Acta Parasitol. Pol. 1969, 16, 208–226. [Google Scholar]
  21. Zdzietowiecki, K. Helminths of bats in Poland. III. Trematodes of the subfamily Lecithodendriidae, except for Lecithodendriinae. Acta Parasitol. Pol. 1969, 16, 227–237. [Google Scholar]
  22. Skvortsov, V.G. Trematodes of the genus Prosthodendrium (family Lecithodendriidae) from bats in Moldavia. In Parasites of Vertebrate Animals; Spassky, A.A., Ed.; Stiintsa: Kishinev, Moldova, 1969; pp. 87–97. [Google Scholar]
  23. Zdzietowiecki, K. Helminths of bats in Poland. I. Cestodes and trematodes of the family Plagiorchiidae. Acta Parasitol. Pol. 1970, 17, 175–188. [Google Scholar]
  24. Khotenovsky, I.A. Family Pleurogenidae Looss, 1899. In Trematodes of Animals and Man: Essentials of Trematodology; Skryabin, K.I., Ed.; Nauka: Moscow, Russia, 1970; Volume 23, pp. 135–306. [Google Scholar]
  25. Skvortsov, V.G. Trematodes of the family Lecithodendriidae from bats in Moldavia. In Parasites of Animals and Plants in Moldavia; Spassky, A.A., Ed.; Stiintsa: Kishinev, Moldova, 1970; Volume 5, pp. 17–36. [Google Scholar]
  26. Skvortsov, V.G. Nematodes of Bats from Moldavia (Report 2). In Parasites of Animals and Plants in Moldavia; Spassky, A.A., Ed.; Stiintsa: Kishinev, Moldova, 1971; Volume 7, pp. 75–93. [Google Scholar]
  27. Shakhtakhtinskaya, Z.M.; Mustafaev, Y.S.; Sailov, D.I. About helminths of some bats of Azerbaijan. Proc. Azerb. St. Univ. Biol. Ser. 1971, 2, 25–30. [Google Scholar]
  28. Chiriac, E.; Barbu, P. L’etude comparee de l’helminthofaune des chiropteres de Roumanie (1-ere note). Anal. Univ. Buc. Biol. Anim. 1973, 22, 19–24. [Google Scholar]
  29. Skvortsov, V.G. Ecological and Faunistic Analysis of Helminth Fauna of Bats in Moldavia. In Parasites of Animals and Plants; Spassky, A.A., Ed.; Stiintsa: Kishinev, Moldova, 1973; Volume 9, pp. 92–155. [Google Scholar]
  30. Melnichenko, E.D.; Panasenko, N.A. To the helminth fauna of bats in the Middle Dnieper region. Vest. zool. 1979, 3, 76–78. [Google Scholar]
  31. Sharpilo, V.P.; Iskova, N.I. Trematodes. Plagiorchiata; Fauna of Ukraine; Naukova Dumka: Kiev, Ukraine, 1989; Volume 34, pp. 1–280. [Google Scholar]
  32. Tkach, V.V. First finding of males of Pterygodermatites bovieri (Nematoda, Rictulariidae) parasitizing bats. Zool. Zhurn. 1991, 70, 125–127. [Google Scholar]
  33. Tkach, V.V. Helminths of Bats from the Fauna of Ukraine. In Bats; Materials of 6th meeting on bats of the CIS countries; Khujand State University: Khujand, Tajikistan, 1995; pp. 90–95. [Google Scholar]
  34. Ricci, M. Report on trematode parasites of bats in Italy. Parassitologia 1995, 37, 199–214. [Google Scholar]
  35. Lanza, B. I Parassiti dei Pipistrelli (Mammalia, Chiroptera) Della Fauna Italiana; Museo Regionale di Scienze Naturali: Turin, Italy, 1999; pp. 1–318. [Google Scholar]
  36. Bychkova, E.I.; Akimova, L.N.; Degtyarik, S.M.; Yakovich, M.M. Helminths of Vertebrares and Man in Belarus; Belarusskaya Nauka Publish: Minsk, Belarus, 2017; pp. 1–316. [Google Scholar]
  37. Matskási, I. The Systematico–faunistical survey of the Trematode fauna of Hungarian bats. I. Annales Hist.-Nat. Mus. Nation. Hung. Pars Zool. 1967, 59, 217–238. [Google Scholar]
  38. Rysavy, B. Cizopasni cervi netopyru (Microchiroptera) prezimujich v nekterych jeskynich Cescoslovenska. Cescoslov. Parasitol. 1956, 3, 161–179. [Google Scholar]
  39. Odening, K. Exkretionssystem und systematische stellung einiger fledermaustrematoden aus Berlin und umgebung nebst bemerkungen zum Lecithodendrioiden komplex. Zeitsch. Parasitenk. 1964, 24, 453–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Combes, C.; Clerc, B. Recherches eco-parasitologiques sur l’helminthofaune des Chiropteres dans l’est des Pyrenees. Ann. Parasitol. 1970, 45, 537–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Bakke, T.A.; Mehl, R. Two species of fluke recorded in bats in Norway. Fauna Oslo Nor. 1977, 30, 224–226. [Google Scholar]
  42. Tkach, V.V.; Pawlowski, J.; Sharpilo, V.P. Molecular and morphological differentiation between species of the Plagiorchis vespertilionis group (Digenea, Plagiorchiidae) occurring in European bats, with a re-description of P. vespertilionis (Muller, 1780). Syst. Parasitol. 2000, 47, 9–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Shimalov, V.; Demyanchik, M.; Demyanchik, V. A study on the helminth fauna of the bats (Mammalia, Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae) in Belarus. Parasitol. Res. 2002, 88, 1011. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  44. Sumer, N.; Yildirimhan, H.S. Intestinal Helminth Parasites of Two Bat Species of the Genus Myotis Kaup, 1829 (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae) from Turkey, with DNA Sequencing of Helminth Nuclear LSR rDNA. Acta Zool. Bulg. 2019, 71, 273–278. [Google Scholar]
  45. Kochseder, G. Untersuchungen über trematoden und cestoden aus fledermäusen in der Steiermark. In Untersuchungen über Trematoden und Cestoden aus Fledermäusen in der Steiermark. Sitzungsberichten der Österr.; Akademie der Wissenschaften; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1969; Volume 8, pp. 205–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Alvarez, F.; Rey, J.; Quinterios, P.; Iglesias, R.; Santos, M.; Sanmartin, M.L. Helminth parasites in some Spanish bats. Wiad. Parazytol. 1991, 37, 321–329. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  47. Shimalov, V.V.; Demyanchik, M.G.; Demyanchik, V.T. The helminth fauna of bats (Microchiroptera) in the Republic of Belarus. Proc. Nation. Acad. Sci. Belarus. Biol. Ser. 2011, 3, 104–110. [Google Scholar]
  48. Modlinger, G. Trematoden ungarischer Chiropteren. Stud. Zool. Bud. 1930, 1, 191–203. [Google Scholar]
  49. Horvat, Z.; Cabrilo, B.; Paunovic, M.; Karapandza, B.; Jovanovic, J.; Budinski, I.; Bjelic Cabrilo, O. Gastrointestinal digeneans (Platyhelminthes: Trematoda) of horseshoe and vesper bats (Chiroptera: Rhinolophidae and Vespertilionidae) in Serbia. Helminthologia 2017, 54, 17–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Janchev, Y.; Stoykova, R. Study on the helminth fauna of bats (Chiroptera) in Bulgaria. Izv. Zool. Inst. 1973, 37, 113–146. [Google Scholar]
  51. Sumer, N.; Yildirimhan, H.S. Helminth parasites of the Whiskered brown bat, Myotis aurescens (Kuzyakin, 1935) (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae) from Turkey. Acta Zoo. Bulg. 2018, 70, 113–116. [Google Scholar]
  52. Sten’ko, R.P.; Dulitskiy, A.I.; Karpenko, O.V.; Dushevskiy, V.P. Helminth fauna of Crimean chiropterans. Zool. Zhurn. 1986, 65, 1133–1139. [Google Scholar]
  53. Podvyaznaya, I.M. The fine structure of the digestive tract of Allassogonoporus amphoraeformis (Trematoda: Allassogonoporidae). Parazitologiia 1994, 28, 403–412. [Google Scholar]
  54. Podvyaznaya, I.M. The fine structure of the male reproductive system and genital atrium of bat parasite Allassogonoporus amphoraeformis (Trematoda: Allassogonoporidae). Parazitologiia 1996, 30, 229–235. [Google Scholar]
  55. Demidova, T.N.; Vekhnik, V.P. Trematodes (Trematoda, Monorchiidae) of Myotis brandtii and M. mystacinus (Chiroptera, Vespertilionidae) from the Samarskaya Luka (Russia). Vestn. Zool. 2004, 38, 71–74. [Google Scholar]
  56. Lebedeva, D.I.; Belkin, V.V.; Stanyukovich, M.K.; Bespyatova, L.A.; Bugmyrin, S.V. First records of bat parasites in Karelia. Transact. Karel. Res. Cent. RAS 2020, 8, 120–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Gulyaev, V.D.; Orlovskaya, O.M.; Dokuchaev, N.E. Helminths of bats from Magadan region. Plecotus et al. 2002, 5, 86–92. [Google Scholar]
  58. Kirillov, A.A.; Ruchin, A.B.; Artaev, O.N. Helminths of bats (Chiroptera) from Mordovia. Bull. Volzhsk. Univ. Tatisch. 2015, 4, 319–328. [Google Scholar]
  59. Ruchin, A.B.; Kirillov, A.A.; Chikhlyaev, I.V.; Kirillova, N.Y. Parasitic Worms of Land Vertebrates of the Mordovia Nature Reserve; Flora and Fauna of Reserves; Committee of RAS for the Conservation of Biological Diversity: Moscow, Russia, 2016; Volume 124, pp. 1–72. [Google Scholar]
  60. Kirillov, A.A.; Kirillova, N.Y.; Chikhlyaev, I.V. Trematodes of Terrestrial Vertebrates of the Middle Volga Region; Cassandra: Togliatti, Russia, 2012; pp. 1–329. [Google Scholar]
  61. Kirillov, A.A.; Kirillova, N.Y.; Vekhnik, V.P. Trematodes (Trematoda) of bats (Chiroptera) from the Middle Volga region. Parazitologiia 2012, 46, 384–413. [Google Scholar]
  62. Kirillova, N.Y.; Kirillov, A.A.; Vekhnik, V.P. Comparative analysis of the helminth fauna of Myotis brandtii and Myotis mystacinus (Chiroptera, Vespertiluonidae) in the Samarskaya Luka National Park (Russia). Nat. Conserv. Res. 2022, 7, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kirillova, N.Y.; Shchenkov, S.V.; Kirillov, A.A.; Ruchin, A.B. Trematodes of genera Gyrabascus and Parabascus from bats in European Russia: Morphology and molecular phylogeny. Biology 2022, 11, 878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Kirillova, N.Y.; Kirillov, A.A.; Vekhnik, V.A.; Ruchin, A.B. Trematodes of Small Mammals (Soricomorpha, Erinaceomorpha, Chiroptera, Rodentia) in the Middle-Volga Region (European Russia); Occurrence Dataset, Version 1.6; Institute of Ecology of the Volga River Basin of Russian Academie of Sciences: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2023; Available online: https://www.gbif.org/dataset/25dee5e7-4e48-49a3-987f-a6799c9ed568 (accessed on 26 September 2023).
  65. Jones, C.; McShea, W.J.; Conroy, M.J.; Kunz, J.H. Capturing Mammals. In Measuring and Monitoring Biological Diversity: Standard Methods for Mammals; Wilson, D.E., Cole, F.R., Nichils, J.D., Rudran, R., Foster, M.S., Eds.; Smithsonian Institution Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1996; pp. 115–155. [Google Scholar]
  66. Ivashkin, V.M.; Kontrimavichus, V.L.; Nasarova, N.S. Methods of the Collection and Studies of Helminths of Land Mammals; Nauka: Moscow, Russia, 1971; pp. 3–123. [Google Scholar]
  67. Anikanova, V.S.; Bugmyrin, S.V.; Ieshko, E.P. Methods of the Collection and Studies of Helminths of Small Mammals; Karelian Scientific Center of RAS: Petrozavodsk, Russia, 2007; pp. 3–145. [Google Scholar]
  68. Skrjabin, K.I.; Antipin, D.I. Superfamily Plagiorchiidae Lühe, 1901. In Essentials of trematodology. Trematodes of Animals and Man; Skrjabin, K.I., Ed.; Academy of Sciences of the USSR: Moscow, Russia, 1958; Volume 14, pp. 75–634. [Google Scholar]
  69. Bush, A.O.; Lafferty, K.D.; Lotz, J.M.; Shostak, A.W. Parasitology meets ecology on its own terms: Margolis et al. revisited. J. Parasitol. 1997, 83, 575–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Rozsa, L.; Reiczigel, J.; Majoros, G. Quantifying parasites in samples of hosts. J. Parasitol. 2000, 86, 228–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Magurran, A.E. Ecological Diversity and Its Measurement; Mir: Moscow, Russia, 1992; pp. 3–182. [Google Scholar]
  72. Bakanov, A.I. Quantitated Estimation of Dominance in Ecological Communities; The manuscript was deposited in All-Union Institute of Scientific and Technical Information (VINITI) by 08.12.1987, No. 8593–B87; IBIW RAS Publishing: Borok, Russia, 1987; p. 64. [Google Scholar]
  73. Hammer, O.; Harper, D.A.T.; Ryan, P.D. PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Version 2.16. Palaeontol. Electron. 2001, 4, 9. [Google Scholar]
  74. Smith, E.P.; van Belle, G. Nonparametric estimation of species richness. Biometrics 1984, 40, 119–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Poulin, R. Comparison of three estimators of species richness in parasite component communities. J. Parasitol. 1998, 84, 485–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Fauna Europaea. Available online: https://fauna-eu.org/ (accessed on 3 August 2023).
  77. Lühe, M. Parasitische Plattwurmer. I. Trematodes. In Die Susswasserfauna Deutschlands; Verlag von Gustav Fischer: Jena, Germany, 1909; Volume 17, pp. 1–218. [Google Scholar]
  78. Smirnov, D.G.; Vekhnik, V.P. Association of bats to different types of hunting grounds in floodplain ecosystems in the Samarskaya Luka. In Recent Problems of Biological Research in Western Siberia and Adjacent Territories; Starikov, V.P., Ed.; Timer Publish: Surgut, Russia, 2011; pp. 98–101. [Google Scholar]
Animals 13 03738 g001
Figure 1. Map of bat trapping sites in the Samarskaya Luka National Park. Red crosses on the map indicate the trapping sites.
Figure 1. Map of bat trapping sites in the Samarskaya Luka National Park. Red crosses on the map indicate the trapping sites.
Animals 13 03738 g001
Animals 13 03738 g002
Figure 2. Dominant and subdominant species of trematodes in Myotis bats from the Samarskaya Luka (D – the Palia–Kovnatsky dominance index).
Figure 2. Dominant and subdominant species of trematodes in Myotis bats from the Samarskaya Luka (D – the Palia–Kovnatsky dominance index).
Animals 13 03738 g002
Animals 13 03738 g003
Figure 3. Similarity dendrogram obtained using Morisita index (UPGMA) for the trematode fauna of Myotis spp. from the Samarskaya Luka National Park. Cophen. corr.: r = 0.802.
Figure 3. Similarity dendrogram obtained using Morisita index (UPGMA) for the trematode fauna of Myotis spp. from the Samarskaya Luka National Park. Cophen. corr.: r = 0.802.
Animals 13 03738 g003
Table 1. Trematodes in Myotis spp. from the Samarskaya Luka National Park.
Table 1. Trematodes in Myotis spp. from the Samarskaya Luka National Park.
Trematode SpeciesM. brandtiiM. daubentoniiM. dasycnemeM. mystacinusM. nattereri
Family Plagiorchiidae
Plagiorchis koreanus
(Ogata, 1938)		81.4(1–111)10.3/8.4 128.2(1–26)5.2/1.563.7(1–52)9.8/6.243.2(1–10)3.9/1.740.8(1–13)4.2/1.7
Plagiorchis mordovii
(Schaldybin, 1958)		25.1(1–15)3.9/1.03.8(1–5)2.0/0.176.3(1–50)15.2/11.6––
Plagiorchis muelleri
(Tkach et Sharpilo, 1990)		24.4(1–9)2.8/0.7––13.6(1–6)2.3/0.310.2(1–5)2.0/0.2
Plagiorchis vespertilionis
(Müller, 1780)		18.2(1–8)2.5/0.579.4(1–99)16.0/12.711.1(1–21)7.1/0.8––
Prosthodendrium ascidia (Beneden, 1873)87.5(1–178)29.6/25.9–74.8(3–225)40.6/30.472.0(1–51)14.6/10.512.2(1–5)2.9/0.4
Prosthodendrium chilostomum (Mehlis, 1831)32.8(1–62)7.3/2.456.1(1–73)13.8/7.716.3(1–13)5.1/0.80.8(27)27.0/0.26.1(1–3)1.7/0.1
Prosthodendrium cryptolecithum (Zdzitowiecki, 1969)39.7(1–70)10.6/4.2–53.3(1–94)10.9/5.8––
Prosthodendrium hurkovaae (Dubois, 1960)–22.9(1–60)8.7/2.029.6(1–21)8.1/2.4–5.1(1–3)2.0/0.1
Prosthodendrium longiforme (Bhalerao, 1926)27.5(1–9)2.9/0.866.8(1–110)11.6/7.9–––
Family Pleurogenidae
Parabascus duboisi
(Hurkova, 1961)		54.7(1–59)10.6/5.836.6(1–61)12.6/4.663.0(1–58)15.2/9.62.4(2–3)2.3/0.13.1(1–5)3.0/0.1
Family Lecithodendriidae
Lecithodendrium linstowi
(Dollfus, 1931)		9.7(1–31)8.8/0.976.7(1–125)36.1/27.7–1.6(1)1.0/0.02–
Total1088(8.0) 26(6.6)6(6.1)
Note: 1—prevalence of infection (P), in brackets—intensity range (I), after brackets—mean intensity (MI), beyond the line—mean abundance (MA); 2—in brackets—predicted number of species not included in collections due to insufficient host sampling.
Table 2. Values of trematode biodiversity indices in Myotis spp.
Table 2. Values of trematode biodiversity indices in Myotis spp.
IndexM. brandtiiM. daubentoniiM. dasycnemeM. mystacinusM. nattereri
Margalef index, DMg0.9550.7190.7680.6780.906
Shannon index, H’1.5551.5841.5920.6161.127
Shannon evenness index, E0.6750.7620.7660.3440.629
Simpson index, d3.1753.8173.7181.4392.110
Table 3. Validity of differences in the infection of Myotis spp. with common trematode species.
Table 3. Validity of differences in the infection of Myotis spp. with common trematode species.
Bat SpeciesPlagiorchis koreanusParabascus duboisiProsthodendrium chilostomumTotal Infection
UpUpUpUp
M. mystacinus/ M. brandtii7549.00.00017222.00.000110,540.00.00013895.00.0001
M. mystacinus/M. daubentonii14,310.00.01610,650.00.00017375.00.00012328.00.0001
M. mystacinus/M. dasycneme5496.00.00013214.00.00017141.00.00011156.00.0001
M. mystacinus/M. nattereri6048.00.8586084.00.7605740.00.0132433.00.0001
M. dasycneme/M. brandtii14,840.00.07313,760.00.0113,860.00.0011234.00.0001
M. dasycneme/M. daubentonii10,210.00.000112,500.00.00019814.00.000117,330.00.7455
M. dasycneme/M. nattereri4296.00.00012551.00.00015970.00.02769.50.0001
M. brandtii/M. daubentonii13,430.00.000127,540.00.00222,380.00.000124,650.00.0001
M. brandtii/M. nattereri5873.00.00015738.00.00018847.00.0001292.00.0001
M. daubentonii/M. nattereri11,390.00.0578419.00.00016124.00.0001166.50.0001
Note: unsignificant differences are shown in bold (p ˃ 0.05).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kirillova, N.Y.; Kirillov, A.A.; Vekhnik, V.A. The Diversity of Trematodes in Myotis Bats (Chiroptera, Vespertilionidae) from the Samarskaya Luka (European Russia). Animals 2023, 13, 3738. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13233738

AMA Style

Kirillova NY, Kirillov AA, Vekhnik VA. The Diversity of Trematodes in Myotis Bats (Chiroptera, Vespertilionidae) from the Samarskaya Luka (European Russia). Animals. 2023; 13(23):3738. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13233738

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kirillova, Nadezhda Yu., Alexander A. Kirillov, and Victoria A. Vekhnik. 2023. "The Diversity of Trematodes in Myotis Bats (Chiroptera, Vespertilionidae) from the Samarskaya Luka (European Russia)" Animals 13, no. 23: 3738. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13233738

APA Style

Kirillova, N. Y., Kirillov, A. A., & Vekhnik, V. A. (2023). The Diversity of Trematodes in Myotis Bats (Chiroptera, Vespertilionidae) from the Samarskaya Luka (European Russia). Animals, 13(23), 3738. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13233738

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop