Goussia

Goussia is a taxonomic genus, first described in 1896 by Labbé, containing parasitic protists which largely target fish and amphibians as their hosts. Members of this genus are homoxenous and often reside in the gastrointestinal tract of the host, however others may be found in organs such as the gallbladder or liver.[1] The genera Goussia, as current phylogenies indicate, is part of the class Conoidasida, which is a subset of the parasitic phylum Apicomplexa; features of this phylum, such as a distinct apical complex containing specialized secretory organelles, an apical polar ring, and a conoid are all present within Goussia, and assist in the mechanical invasion of host tissue.[2] The name Goussia is derived from the French word gousse, meaning pod. This name is based on the bi-valve sporocyst morphology which some Goussians display. Of the original 8 classified Goussians, 6 fit the “pod” morphology.[3] As of this writing, the genera consists of 59 individual species.

Goussia
Scientific classification Edit this classification
Domain: Eukaryota
Clade: Diaphoretickes
Clade: SAR
Clade: Alveolata
Phylum: Apicomplexa
Class: Conoidasida
Order: Eucoccidiorida
Family: Barrouxiidae
Genus: Goussia
Labbe 1896
Species

Goussia aculeati
Goussia alburni
Goussia anopli
Goussia arinae
Goussia auratus
Goussia balatonica
Goussia bettae
Goussia biwaensis
Goussia bohemica
Goussia carpelli
Goussia centropomi
Goussia cernui
Goussia chalupskyi
Goussia cichlidarurn
Goussia clupearum
Goussia cultrati
Goussia cruciata
Goussia degiusti
Goussia girellae
Goussia grygieri
Goussia gymnocephali
Goussia flaviviridis
Goussia freemani
Goussia hyalina
Goussia hyperolisi
Goussia iroquoina
Goussia janae
Goussia koertingi
Goussia lacazei
Goussia legeri
Goussia leucisci
Goussia luciopercae
Goussia lusca
Goussia malayensis
Goussia metchnikovi
Goussia minuta
Goussia molnarica
Goussia neglecta
Goussia nipponica
Goussia noelleri
Goussia notemigonica
Goussia notropicum
Goussia pannonica
Goussia peleci
Goussia polylepidis
Goussia pogonognathi
Goussia scardinii
Goussia siliculiformis
Goussia sinensis
Goussia soumbediounensis
Goussia sparis
Goussia spraguei
Goussia stankovitchi
Goussia subepithelialis
Goussia thelohani
Goussia trichogasteri
Goussia vanasi
Goussia vimbae
Goussia wakabayashii

Description

Physiology

Goussians share a similar morphology, with certain characteristics remaining widely conserved throughout the genera. In general goussians have thin walled oocysts lacking a micropyle, which contain four bivalved sporocysts.[1] The two valves composing the sporocyst are identical and have a single longitudinal joint running along the midline. In some specific species there is a dual membrane structure which is associated with the joint. These associated membranes are quite delicate and can be difficult to observe under an electron microscope as the fixation process often leads to damage or the full destruction of this membranous structure.[4] As do many apicomplexans, Goussia feature a conical shaped structure towards the apical end of their cells made of fibers, which are currently unknown, that surround the rhoptries. The conoid is thought to have a mechanical function and assist in the entrance into host cells in order to form a characteristic parasitophorous vacuole.[5]

Rhopteries and micronemes are located below the conoid in the apical end of the cell. These two organelles have a unique secretory function and aid in the adhesion to enterocytes in the gastrointestinal tract. This ensures that Goussia is able to gain substantial access to host cells, before being passed through the host with the feces.[6]

Members of the genera Goussia also retain an apical polar ring, which act as microtubule organizing centers in the cell and apicoplasts, which are specialized plastids involved in various synthesis activities carried out by the cell, (heam, lipids etc). It has been noted that the destruction of the apicoplast does not immediately kill the cell, but it prevents it from infecting other host cells. Apicoplasts are currently being investigated as a potential drug target to treat apicomplexans; due to the fact that it is derived from previously photosynthetic algae, herbicidal medications may be able to effectively treat these parasitic conditions without harming any of the host metabolic processes.[7]

History

In 1896 Labbé described two new protist genera - Goussia and Crystallospora - which only remained distinct genera up until 1909, at which time both Crystallospora and Goussia were reduced to synonyms of Eimeria.[3] Around 1920 other protistologists used the term Goussia as a generic term to refer to new species. Subsequently, by 1953, Goussia began to somewhat re-emerge, and by some, was now classified as a subgenera of Eimeria but was later relegated to an Eimerial synonym once again.[3] Currently, Goussia and Eimeria are widely considered to be separate genera, with the presence of a Stieda body being characteristic of Eimeria.

Stiedal bodies are microscopic organelles located at the polar regions of the cell and act as plugs, keeping the sporocyst’s occluding holes closed until the sporozoites are ready to be released. As it stands there are some piscine coccidia which lack Stiedal bodies and are part of other related genera. These will likely be remedied at some point and these organisms will see new classification under the genre Goussia.[3]

Lifecycle

As Goussians are members of the Coccidians, they exhibit merogany, gamogany and sporogoany, and in representative infections, which are both homoxenous and occur in the gastro intestinal tract of the host, all three lifecycle stages, with the exception of the motile zoites may be observed at all stages of the tract; no particular lifecycle stage is strongly associated with any gross anatomical feature of the host.[8] The vast majority of parasitic cells are localized to the anterior of the intestines, as cell lingering towards the posterior are expulsed from the host with the feces, ready to begin looking for another host.[8] Initially infection occurs with the motile zoite phase of the lifecycle. These cells direct their apical cell apparatus towards the host’s enterocytes and proceed to enter the cells so that their lifecycles may continue. Once physically inside the host’s enterocytes, Goussia localizes in the cell between the cytoplasm and the cell membrane, this particular localization is referred to as extracytoplasmic.[8] Extracytoplasmic localization has two sub stages which occur, the first stage being referred to as “monopodial” and the second stage being referred to as “spider-like”. The monopodial stage occurs on the luminal side of the enterocyte and is characterized by a very close association between the hosts cell membrane and the host derived parasitophorous vacuole membrane, and a single large area of contact with the host cells cytoplasm; thus lending to the name “monopodial”.[8] The spider-like stage is similar to the monopodial stage in that there is a close association of both the host cell membrane and the parasitophorous membrane, however, as opposed to a single large cytoplasmic contact site, there are many more contact sites which tend to be much more filose in morphology.[8]

Hosts

While largely confined to freshwater fish as hosts, some members of Goussia parasitize fish which swim in brackish waters, and others have abandoned fish all together in favour of amphibians and reptiles, such as reed frogs or common geckos. And while the vast majority of Goussia lifecycles are homoxenous, there have been a few examples of heteroxenous lifecycles which utilize tubifex worms as a sort of vector.[9]

Ecology

Found globally, Goussians are limited in that they need some sort of water source, both to mature in their sporogamy stage, and to be transmitted from host to host. The majority of its identified hosts are freshwater fish.

Phylogeny

Proper taxonomic categorization of Goussia has been a challenge ever since the genera’s inception. This is due in part to the various similarities shared between Goussia and Eimeria including, similar hosts, lifecycle progression and general cell structure. Although the structure of the oocyst in Eimeria can be used as a distinct morphological feature to help identify members of the genus the same is not true for members of Goussia. Goussian oocysts are quite variable and are in no way an exact predictor of taxonomic classification, but at the very least if the species in question lacks the distinctive Eimerian oocyst, than it may reasonably suggest that the species could be a member of Goussia.[10] As mentioned above stideal bodies also help in the classification of new species under the goussian genera, however these structures are quite small and rely on electron microscopy to be seen. In the classification of new species it would be most prudent to rely more on DNA technologies to differentiate between different species.

Host records

References

  1. Dogga, S. K., Bartošová-Sojková, P., Lukeš, J., & Soldati-Favre, D. (2015). Phylogeny, Morphology, and Metabolic and Invasive Capabilities of Epicellular Fish Coccidium Goussia janae. Protist, 166(6), 659–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protis.2015.09.003
  2. Morrissette, N. S., & Sibley, L. D. (2002). Cytoskeleton of Apicomplexan Parasites. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 66(1), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.66.1.21-38.2002
  3. Dyková, I., & Lom, J. (1981). Fish coccidia: critical notes on life cycles, classification and pathogenicity. Journal of Fish Diseases, 4(6), 487–505. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2761.1981.tb01161.x
  4. Jirků, M, Modrý D, Šlapeta JR, Koudela B & Lukeš J (2002). The Phylogeny of Goussia and Choleoeimeria (Apicomplexa; Eimeriorina) and the Evolution of Excystation Structures in Coccidia. Protist 153(4) 379–390. https://doi.org/10.1078/14344610260450118.
  5. Morrissette NS, & Sibley LD (2002) Cytoskeleton of Apicomplexan Parasites. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 66(1) 21–38 https://doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.66.1.21-38.2002R
  6. Morrissette NS, & Sibley LD (2002) Cytoskeleton of Apicomplexan Parasites. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews 66(1) 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.66.1.21-38.2002
  7. Botté CY, Dubar F, McFadden GI, Maréchal E & Biot C (2012) Plasmodium falciparum Apicoplast Drugs: Targets or Off-Targets? Chemical Reviews 112(3) 1269–1283. https://doi.org/10.1021/cr200258w
  8. Gestal, C., & Azevedo, C. (2005). Ultrastructure of Goussia cruciata (Apicomplexa: Coccidia) infecting the liver of horse mackerel, Trachurus trachurus (L.), from Ibero-Atlantic waters. Journal of Fish Diseases, 28(3), 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2761.2005.00611.x
  9. Steinhagen D & Körting W (1990) The Role of Tubificid Oligochaetes in the Transmission of Goussia carpelli. The Journal of Parasitology, 76(1), 104–107. https://doi.org/10.2307/3282636
  10. Jirků M, Jirků, M, Oborník M, Lukeš J, & Modrý D (2009). Goussia Labbé, 1896 (Apicomplexa, Eimeriorina) in Amphibia: Diversity, Biology, Molecular Phylogeny and Comments on the Status of the Genus. Protist, 160(1), 123–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protis.2008.08.003
  11. Steinhagen D, Stemmer B, Körting W (1994) Goussia aculeati from the three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus): field observations and ultrastructural features. Appl Parasitol 35(2):99-106
  12. Molnár K, Avenant-Oldewage A, Székely C (2004) A survey of coccidian infection of freshwater fishes in South Africa, with the description of Goussia anopli n. sp. (Apicomplexa: Eimeriidae). Syst Parasitol 59(1):75-80
  13. Belova LM, Krylov MV (2001) Eight new species of coccidia (Sporozoa, Coccidia) in fishes from the continental waters of Russia. Parazitologiia 35(3):221-227
  14. Molnár K, Shaharom-Harrison F, Székely C (2003) A survey of coccidian infections of freshwater fishes of Peninsular Malaysia, with descriptions of three species of Goussia Labbé, 1896 (Apicomplexa: Eimeriidae). Syst Parasitol. 55(1):11-18
  15. Steinhagen D, Körting W (1990) The role of tubificid oligochaetes in the transmission of Goussia carpelli. J Parasitol 76(1):104-107
  16. Paperna, I.; Landsberg, J. H.; Feinstein, N. (1986). "Ultrastructure of the macrogamont of Goussia cichlidarum Landsberg and Paperna, 1985, a Coccidian parasite in the swimbladder of Cichlid fish". Annales de Parasitologie Humaine et Comparée. 61 (5): 511–520. doi:10.1051/parasite/1986615511. ISSN 0003-4150. open access
  17. El-Mansy A (2008) New exogenous stages of oocysts, sporocysts, and sporozoites of Goussia cichlidarum Landsberg and Paperna 1985 (Sporozoa: Coccidia) and impact of endogenous stages on the swim bladder of tilapias in Egypt. Parasitol Res 102(2):233-241
  18. Azevedo C (2001) Fine structure of sporogonic stages of Goussia clupearum (Apicomplexa: Eimeriidae) in the liver of infected fish (Belone belone L.), using light and electron microscopy. Parasitol Res 87(4):326-330
  19. Gestal C, Azevedo C (2005) Ultrastructure of Goussia cruciata (Apicomplexa: Coccidia) infecting the liver of horse mackerel, Trachurus trachurus (L.), from Ibero-Atlantic waters. J Fish Dis. 28(3):125-132
  20. Gestal C, Azevedo C (2006) Ultrastructural aspects of hepatic coccidiosis caused by Goussia lusca n. sp. (Apicomplexa: Coccidia) infecting Trisopterus luscus (Gadidae) from the NE Atlantic Ocean. Dis Aquat Organ 71(1):25-31
  21. El-Mansy A (2008) Goussia molnarica n. sp. (Apicomplexa: Coccidia) infecting the gut of the freshwater catfish Clarias gariepinus in Egypt. Dis Aquat Organ 82(2):165-169
  22. Baska F, Molnár K (1989) Ultrastructural observations on different developmental stages of Goussia sinensis (Chen, 1955), a parasite of the silver carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix Valenciennes, 1844). Acta Vet Hung 37(1-2):81-87
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.