Skip to main content

Table 1 Monogenean abundance (A, mean ± SD), prevalence (P) and intensity of infection (II, min–max) for each of fish groups (Rutilus rutilus, Abramis brama, F1 generation with roach mtDNA (F1 R. rutilus × A. brama), F1 generation with common bream mtDNA (F1 A. brama × R. rutilus))

From: Monogeneans in intergeneric hybrids of leuciscid fish: Is parasite infection driven by hybrid heterosis, genetic incompatibilities, or host-parasite coevolutionary interactions?

Parasite species

R. rutilus

A. brama

F1 R. rutilus x A. brama

F1 A. brama x R. rutilus

A

P (%)

II

(min–max)

A

P (%)

II

(min–max)

A

P (%)

II

(min–max)

A

P (%)

II

(min–max)

D. crucifer

108.44 ± 115.38

100

6–374

13.77 ± 13.13a*

77

6–37a*

23.13 ± 27.09a*

80

2–94

D. caballeroi

5.44 ± 12.29

44

1–48

2.00 ± 5.79

23

2–21

0.07 ± 0.26

7b

1

D. rutili

5.94 ± 9.93

72

1–33

2.38 ± 3.80

54

1–11

8.53 ± 15.78

67

1–57

D. nanus

8.00 ± 9.78

83

1–33

1.38 ± 1.71a*

46b

1–4

5.60 ± 9.86

60

2–33

D. suecicus

4.28 ± 11.79

39

1–48

0.62 ± 1.04

31

1–3

0.40 ± 1.06

20

1–4

D. fallax

1.22 ± 2.56

33

1–10

0.31 ± 0.48

31

1a

0.27 ± 1.03

7

4

D. similis

3.78 ± 5.34

56

1–16

0.31 ± 0.63

23

1–2

D. sphyrna

3.83 ± 5.27

61

1–18

0.23 ± 0.59a

15b

1–2

0.60 ± 1.45a

20b

1–5

D. rarissimus

2.17 ± 4.89

28

4–20

0.20 ± 0.77

7

3

D. auriculatus

21.08 ± 45.40

100

2–171

0.47 ± 1.36d*

13e*

2–5

D. wunderi

13.69 ± 14.01

92

1–41

0.46 ± 0.97c*

23d*

1–3

0.87 ± 1.88d*

27e*

2–7

D. zandti

174.15 ± 145.69

100

30–471

3.62 ± 3.59c*

69d

1–11c*

1.80 ± 3.32d*

53e*

1–13e*

D. falcatus

15.00 ± 12.35

85

4–37

0.38 ± 1.39c*

8d*

5

1.40 ± 2.41d*

40e

1–7e*

G. vimbi

47.06 ± 101.19

78

1–398

8.23 ± 11.25

62

2–36

4.85 ± 7.22a

46

2–21a

7.67 ± 11.16

67

1–40

G. carassii

7.94 ± 14.72

61

1–52

0.23 ± 0.83

8

3

0.31 ± 0.63a

23b

1–2

G. elegans

1.92 ± 3.20

38

1–10

0.38 ± 0.77

23

1–2

5.13 ± 11.84

47

1–46

P. homoion

12.72 ± 19.74

50

1–67

2.00 ± 4.26

31

1–12

1.00 ± 1.78

31

1–5a

2.67 ± 8.50

20

2–33

  1. aSignificant differences between R. rutilus and F1 generation revealed by Mann–Whitney test, bsignificant differences between R. rutilus and F1 generation revealed by Fisher exact test, csignificant differences between A. brama and F1 generation revealed by Mann–Whitney test, dsignificant differences between A. brama and F1 generation revealed by Fisher exact test, asterisks indicate significant difference after Bonferroni correction