Biodiversity Data Journal : Research Article
PDF
Research Article
Diversity and distribution of the cladocerans (Crustacea, Branchiopoda) in Thailand
expand article infoWijittra Choedchim‡, Supiyanit Maiphae§
‡ Faculty of Science and Technology, Princess of Naradhiwas University, Narathiwat Province, Thailand
§ Animal Systematics and Ecology Speciality Research Unit (ASESRU), Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science and Biodiversity Center (BDCKU), Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand
Corresponding author: Supiyanit Maiphae (supiyanit.m@ku.ac.th)
Academic editor: Sameer Padhye
Received: 15 Mar 2023 | Accepted: 12 May 2023 | Published: 25 May 2023
© 2023 Wijittra Choedchim, Supiyanit Maiphae
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation: Choedchim W, Maiphae S (2023) Diversity and distribution of the cladocerans (Crustacea, Branchiopoda) in Thailand. Biodiversity Data Journal 11: e103553. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.11.e103553
 Open Access

Abstract

An updated checklist of the cladoceran fauna from inland aquatic habitats in Thailand (a high-diversity hotspot in Southeast Asia), based on published cladoceran records found in literature is presented. The checklist updates nomenclature and species distributions, especially habitat preferences. A total of 138 valid recorded species is relatively high. However, the estimators indicate that more species are expected to be found with more research. The north-eastern and southern regions of Thailand are well-studied regions of high species richness with 100 and 96 cladoceran species, respectively, whereas the northern and eastern regions have large research gaps that should be studied further. Moreover, each habitat type seems to have a unique cladoceran community as the similarity values amongst them are mostly low (Sorensen similarity index < 0.50). Therefore, it is suggested that habitats with unique characteristics, such as peat swamps, stream and cave pools, are worthy of further exploration. If the current records of cladoceran diversity in Thailand confirms a high diversity of this animal in the tropical region, then the geographical distribution of each species can be properly explained.

Keywords

Anomopoda, Ctenopoda, taxonomy, biogeography, Oriental Region

Introduction

Thailand is a biodiversity hotspot in Southeast Asia. Few species of freshwater zooplankton have been reported previously, but high diversity is currently shown in various groups, including copepods, rotifers and cladocerans. Research in Thailand on cladocerans began with Boonsom in 1984 and researchers have started to pay more attention to this group of zooplankton since 1997, with more research published. A total of 34 research papers and five research reports have been published, with the majority of studies covering taxonomy and diversity (Boonsom 1984, Pholpunthin 1997, Sanoamuang 1998, Korovchinsky 2000, Pipatcharoenchai 2001, Saeng-aroon 2001, Sa-ardrit 2002, Kotov and Sanoamuang 2004, Kotov et al. 2005a, Kotov et al. 2005b, Maiphae 2005, Maiphae et al. 2005, Sa-ardrit and Beamish 2005, Sanoamuang and Faitakum 2005, Sinev et al. 2007, Sinev and Sanoamuang 2007, Korovchinsky and Sanoamuang 2008a, Maiphae et al. 2008, Chittapun et al. 2009, Maiphae and Janpriang 2009, Maiphae et al. 2010, Choedchim and Maiphae 2012, Meksuwan et al. 2012, Sinev and Kotov 2012, Korovchinsky and Sanomuang 2013, Sinev and Sanoamuang 2013, Van Damme and Maiphae 2013, Van Damme et al. 2013, Tiang-nga et al. 2016, Sinev et al. 2017, Alonso et al. 2019, Jantawong and Maiphae 2020, Tiang-nga et al. 2020, Plangklang and Athibai 2021, Tiang-nga et al. 2021, Sinev et al. 2023) and many fewer covering ecology and aquaculture (Kotov et al. 2013a, Choedchim et al. 2017, Manklinniam et al. 2018).

After almost four decades of intensive study on the diversity of cladoceran in bodies of water in Thailand, 138 species have been identified. However, the taxonomic status of some recorded species has changed given that the taxonomical ranking of these species has changed greatly due to enhanced understanding of their evolution, along with the application of more tools (Van Damme et al. 2005, Van Damme et al. 2010, Van Damme et al. 2011). In addition, it seems that many more species have been discovered in recent years despite its being a relatively well-studied region. This is probably due to the high diversity of microhabitats, with some yet to be surveyed. Therefore, we revise and update the checklist of the cladocerans in Thailand in this paper in light of recent insights into their taxonomy and nomenclature, including analysis of the species diversity and the ecological and geographical distribution of this group. This research contributes to existing knowledge on this important component of freshwater biota in Thailand and offers suggestions for how this knowledge gap could be filled in the future.

Materials and method

In the present study, a checklist of cladoceran species in Thailand was compiled from the existing 39 research papers and research reports, as mentioned above. The updated names of each species were presented and used for all analyses and the species names used in previous publications were provided. Data on biogeographical distribution are mostly drawn from literature, as shown in Table 1. Occurrences are identified in eight large biogeographical regions (Palearctic, Afrotropical, Oriental, Nearctic, Neotropical, Australian, Pacific and Antarctic), as described in Segers (2007).

Table 1.
Download as
CSV
XLSX

List of cladoceran species, their habitat occurrence and distribution in Thailand. (Abbreviation codes: c = canal, d = dam, e = estuary, f = floodplain, ff = fish field, l = lake, m = marsh, mi = mine, ml = man-made lake, p = pond, po = pool, ps = peat swamp, r = river, rc = roadside canal, re = reservoir, rf = rice field, sf = saline rice field, st = stream, sw = swamp, tp = temporary pond, w = wastewater treatment pond, wf = waterfall, N = north, NE = northeast, W = west, E = east, C = central, S = south, Aus = Australian, Afr = Afrotropical, Nea = Nearctic, Neo = Neotropical, Ori = Oriental, Pal = Palearctic; Reference codes: 1 = Boonsom 1984, 2 = Pholpunthin 1997, 3 = Sanoamuang 1998, 4 = Saeng-aroon 2001, 5 = Pipatcharoenchai 2001, 6 = Sa-ardrit 2002, 7 = Kotov and Sanoamuang 2004, 8 = Sa-ardrit and Beamish 2005, 9 = Kotov et al. 2005a, 10 = Kotov et al. 2005b, 11 = Maiphae 2005, 12 = Maiphae et al. 2005, 13 = Sanoamuang and Faitacum 2005, 14 = Sinev et al 2007, 15 = Sinev and Sanoamuang 2007, 16 = Maiphae et al. 2008, 17 = Korovchinshky and Sanoamuang 2008a, 18 = Chittapun et al. 2009, 19 = Maiphae and Janpriang 2009, 20 = Maiphae et. al. 2010, 21 = Meksuwan et al. 2012, 22 = Choedchim and Maiphae 2012, 23 = Sinev and Kotov 2012, 24 = Kotov et al. 2013a, 25 = Van Damme and Maiphae, 2013, 26 = Van Damme et al. 2013, 27 = Sinev and Sanoamuang 2013, 28 = Korovchinsky and Sanoamuang 2013, 29 = Tiang-nga et al. 2016, 30 = Choedchim et al. 2017, 31 = Sinev et al. 2017, 32 = Manklinniam et al. 2018, 33 = Alonso et al. 2019, 34 = Jantawong and Maiphae 2020, 35 = Korovchinsky 2000, 36 = Tiang-nga et al. 2020, 37 = Tiang-nga et al. 2021, 38 = Plangklang and Athibai 2021, 39 = Sinev et al. 2023).

Species Habitat occurrence Distribution in Thailand Biogeographical distribution Remarks

References for records

in Thailand
Family Bosminidae
1 Bosmina fatalis Burckhardt, 1924 sw, ml, r, re W Ori It is rare in Thailand. 5
2 Bosmina longirostris (O. F. Müller, 1776) sw, re W, C, S Cosmopolitan It can be confused with B. fatalis (Kořínek et al. 1997). 1,5,11,12
3 Bosmina meridionalis Sars, 1904 f, l, p, ps, r, re, rf, sw NE, S Aus, Ori 3,13,19,30,36
4 Bosminopsis deitersi Richard, 1895 d, f, l, mi, ml, p, po, r, rc, re, rf, st, sw, tp, wf NE, W, E, C, S Cosmopolitan 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,11,12,13,20,30,36
Family Chydoridae
5 Acroperus africanus Neretina & Kotov, 2015 l NE Aus, Ori It can be confused with A harpae and A. angustatus (Neretina and Kotov 2015). 36
6 Acroperus harpae (Baird, 1834) c, m, ps, r, sw NE, S Cosmopolitan (widely distributes in Pal) It can be confused with sibling species, A. angustatus (Sinev 2009). 3,4,6,11,12
7 Alona affinis (Leydig, 1860) f, l, m, mi, p, ps, r, rf, st, sw NE, W, C, S Afr, Aus, Neo, Ori, Pal 1,3,4,6,8,11,12,13,19,36
8 Alona guttata Sars, 1862 d, f, l, m, p, po, ps, r, mi, st, sw NE, W, S Cosmopolitan 4,6,8,11,12,13,30,36
9 Alona intermedia Sars, 1862 l, sw NE, S Cosmopolitan 4,6
10 Alona kotovi Sinev, 2012 l S Ori Known from South Vietnam and it is rare in Thailand. 30
11 Alona quadrangularis (O.F. Müller, 1776) f, l, m, p, r NE, S Afr, Aus, Neo, Ori Sinev (2012) proposed that previous records of A. quadrangularis from Southeast Asia (Korovchinsky 2013) belong to A. kotovi from South Vietnam. 4,11,12,13
12 Alona siamensis Sinev & Sanoamuang, 2007* f, ps NE Ori Previously recorded as Alona cf. dentifera (Maiphae 2005, Maiphae et al. 2005Maiphae 2005, Maiphae et al. 2005, Sanoamuang and Faitakum 2005, Nachai 2006). 15
13 Alonella clathratula Sars, 1896 f, l, p, r, sw NE, S Afr, Aus, Neo, Ori It is rare in Thailand. 3,4,11,12,13
14 Alonella excisa (Fischer, 1854) c, d, f, l, mi, p, po, ps, re, sw, NE, S Cosmopolitan 2,3,4,6,11,12,13,19,36
15 Alonella nana (Baird, 1850) m, ps, r, re, sw C, S Afr, Aus, Pal It is rare in Thailand. 1,6,11,12,30
16 Anthalona harti Van Damme, Sinev & Dumont, 2011 l, p, ps, r, rf, sf, sw NE, C, S Afr, Ori It is a sibling species of Alona verrucosa (Sinev and Kotov 2012). 30,34,36,38
17 Anthalona milleri (Kiser, 1948) p NE Ori It is rare in Thailand. Previously recorded as Alona milleri (Sanoamuang 1998). 3
18 Anthalona sanoamuangae Sinev & Kotov, 2012* l, r NE, S Ori Known from Vietnam, Laos and it is rare in Thailand. 23,30
19 Anthalona spinifera Tiang-nga, Sinev & Sanoamuang, 2016* l, r, rf, sw NE Ori Known from Malaysia and it is rare in Thailand. 29,36
20 Anthalona vandammei Sinev, Tiang-nga & Sanoamuang, 2023* l, sw NE, S Ori Previously recorded as Alona verrucosa (Maiphae et al. 2008). Endemic in Thailand. 39
21 Anthalona verrucosa (Sars, 1901) c, d, l, m, mi, p, po, ps, r, re, rf, sw NE, W, S Afr, Aus, Neo, Ori All records as Alona verrucosa in Thailand before Van Damme et al. (2010) needed to be confirmed their species status. 1,3,4,5,6,8,11,12,13,19,20
22 Armatalona macrocopa (Sars, 1894) l, tp NE Aus, Ori In the Oriental Region, it was known only from Thailand. 14
23 Camptocercus australis Sars, 1896 f, l, p, po, st, sw NE, W, S Aus, Neo, Ori 4,6,8,11,12,13,30
24 Camptocercus rectirostris Schoedler, 1862 l, ml W, C, S Ori, Pal 1,2
25 Camptocercus uncinatus Smirnov, 1971 l, r, re NE, W, S Afr, Neo, Ori, Pal Camptocercus latikae is its junior synonym. 2,3,5
26 Celsinotum macronyx (Daday, 1898) f, l, p, ps, rf, sw NE, S Ori Previously recorded as Alona macronyx (Sanoamuang 1998, Sa-ardrit 2002, Maiphae et al. 2005). 3,6,11,12,23,30
27 Chydorus eurynotus Sars, 1901 c, d, f, l, m, mi, p, po, ps, r, re, rf st, sw, wf NE, W, C, S Circumtropical 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,11,12,13,19,30,34,36
28 Chydorus idrisi Sinev, 2014 l NE Ori 36
29 Chydorus obscurirostris Frey, 1987 d, p, ps, r, sw, NE, S Aus, Ori 6,11,12,13
30 Chydorus opacus Frey, 1987 ps, sw S Aus, Ori It is rare in Thailand. 6
31 Chydorus parvus Daday, 1898 d, f, l, m, mi, p, po, ps, r, rc, re, rf, st, sw NE, W, S Afr, Ori 3,4,5,6,8,11,12,13,19,30
32 Chydorus pubescens Sars, 1901 d, l, m, mi, p, po, ps, r, st, sw NE, W, S Circumtropical 3,6,8,11,12,13,36
33 Chydorus reticulatus Daday, 1898 d, f, l, m, mi, ml, p, ps, r, rf, sw NE, W, S Ori 2,3,5,6,11,12,13,19,36
34 Chydorus sinensis Frey, 1987 f, l, sw NE Ori Closely related to C. obscurirostris tasekberae (Sanoamuang 1998). It was recorded from China and Thailand. 3,4,13
35 Chydorus sphaericus (O.F. Müller, 1776) re NE, C, S Cosmopolitan 1,11,12
36 Chydorus ventricosus Daday, 1898 c, d, f, m, mi, ml, p, po, ps, r, rf, st, sw NE, W, C, S Circumtropical 1,3,6,8,11,12,13,19,30,36
37 Coronatella acuticostata (Sars, 1903) l NE Ori Closely related to C. undata (Fuentes-Reinés et al. 2021). 36
38 Coronatella monacantha (Sars, 1901) d, f, l, m, mi, p, po ps, rf, sw, wf NE, S Afr, Neo, Ori Previously recorded as Alona monacantha (Sanoamuang 1998, Sa-ardrit 2002, Maiphae et al. 2005, Maiphae and Janpriang 2009). 3,6,11,12,13,19,20,30
39 Coronatella rectangula (Sars, 1862) d, l, p, po, ps, r, re, st, sw NE, W, S Cosmopolitan All previous references were recorded as Alona rectangular, except Choedchim et al. (2017) and Tiang-nga et al. (2020). Alona coronata is its junior synonym. 2,3,5,6,8,11,12,30,36
40 Dadaya macrops (Daday, 1898) d, f, l, m, mi, p, po, ps, r, rc, rf, st, sw NE, W, C, S Circumtropical 1,3,4,6,8,11,12,13,19,20,36
41 Disparalona caudata Smirnov, 1996 r, re, sw NE, S Aus, Ori Closely related to D. rostrata (Sanoamuang 1998). 3,11,12
42 Disparalona chappuisi Brehm, 1934 l NE Afr, Ori, Pal It is rare in Thailand. 36
43 Disparalona hamata Birge, 1879 d, ps, r, sm NE, W, S Cosmopolitan 3,4,6,8,11,12,13
44 Disparalona rostrata (Koch, 1841) d, f NE, S Ori, Pal It is rare in Thailand. 6,13
45 Dunhevedia crassa King, 1853 d, f, l, m, mi, ml, p, po, ps, r, re, rf, sf, st, sw, w NE, W, C, S Cosmopolitan 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,11,12,13,19,24,30, 36,38
46 Dunhevedia serrata Daday, 1898 f, l, m, mi, p, ps, rf, sw NE, W, S Afr, Ori 3,4,6,8,11,12,13,19,36
47 Ephemeroporus barroisi (Richard, 1894) c, d, f, l, m, mi, ml, p, po, ps, r, re, rf, sf, st, sw, wf N, NE, W, C, S Cosmopolitan 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,11,12,13,19,20,21, 30,34,36,38
48 Ephemeroporus epiaphantoii Alonso, 1987 r S Pal, Ori In the Oriental Region, it was known only from Thailand. 21
49 Ephemeroporus hybridus (Daday, 1905) sw S Afr, Nea, Neo, Ori 11,12
50 Ephemeroporus phintonicus (Margaritora, 1969) m, p, ps, sw S Aus, Ori 6,11,12
51 Ephemeroporus tridentatus (Bergamin, 1939) ps, re, sw S Neo, Ori 11,12
52 Euryalona orientalis (Daday, 1898) l, p, ps, r, rc, re, rf, st, sw NE, W, C, S Circumtropical 1,2,3,4,5,8,11,12,13,18,19,30,36
53 Flavalona cheni (Sinev, 1999) m, rf, sw C, S Afr, Ori, Pal Previously recorded as Alona cheni (Maiphae et al. 2005, Maiphae and Janpriang 2009, Chittapun et al. 2009). 11,12,18,19
54 Flavalona costata (Sars, 1862) l NE Afr, Neo, Ori, Pal 36
55 Graptoleberis testudinaria (Fischer, 1848) l, p, sw NE, S Cosmopolitan 3,6,36
56 Karualona arcana Tiang-nga, Sinev & Sanoamuang, 2021* rf NE Ori Endemic in Thailand. 37
57 Karualona iberica (Alonso & Pretus, 1989) m, ps, re, rf, sw S Afr, Aus Ori, Pal 11,12,19,20
58 Karualona karua (King, 1853) f, l, ml, ps, re, sf, sw NE, C, S Aus, Ori, Pal 1,2,13,20,30,34,36,38
59 Karualona kwangsiensis (Chiang 1963) l, r, rf, sw NE Ori 36
60 Karualona serrulata Van Damme, Maiphae & Sa-ardrit, 2013* ps, sw S Ori Karualona sp. in Sa-ardrit (2002) represents this species. Endemic in Thailand. 26
61 Kurzia brevilabris Rajapaksa & Fernando, 1986 f, l NE Ori Endemic in the Oriental Region. 13,36
62 Kurzia longirostris (Daday, 1898) c, l, m, ml, ff, ps, rc, re, rf, st, sw NE, W, C, S Aus, Ori 1,3,4,5,6,8,11,12,18,30,36
63 Leberis davidi (Richard, 1895) ff, r C Neo, Nea, Ori Previously recorded as Alona davidi (Boonsom 1984). 1
64 Leberis diaphanus (King, 1853) sf, sw NE, W, C, S Afr, Aus, Ori Previously recorded as Alona diaphana (Sanoamuang 1998, Sa-ardrit 2002, Sa-ardrit and Beamish 2005, Maiphae et al. 2005, Sanoamuang and Faitakum 2005). It is misspelled as Leberis diaphana in Maiphae and Janpriang (2009).

2,3,4,6,8,11,12,13,19,30,34,

36,38
65 Leydigia acanthocercoides (Fischer, 1854) l, ml, re, st NE, W, C, S Pal, Ori 1,3,5,8,30
66 Leydigia ciliata Gauthier, 1939 l, ps NE, S Afr, Aus Neo, Ori L. ankammaraoi is its junior synonym. 2,13,38
67 Leydigia laevis Gurney, 1927 p NE Aus, Ori In the Oriental Region, it was known only from Thailand. 3
68 Leydigia australis Sars, 1885 d, l S Aus, Ori 6,30
69 Matralona freyi (Idris & Fernando, 1981) p, ps, sw S Ori Previously recorded as Alona freyi (Sa-ardrit 2002, Maiphae et al. 2005). 8,11,12,13,36
70 Nicsmirnovius eximius (Kiser, 1948) f, ps, st, sw NE, W, S Aus, Ori 8,11,12,13,36
71 Notoalona globulosa (Daday, 1898) f, d, c, m, mi, l, p, po, ps, r, rc, rf, sw NE, S Afr, Aus, Neo, Ori 3,4,6,11,12,
13,19,30,36
72 Notoalona pseudomacronyx Van Damme, Maiphae & Sa-ardrit, 2013* sw S Afr, Ori 26
73 Oxyurella singalensis (Daday, 1898) d, f, l, m, mi, p, po, ps, r, rc, re, rf, st NE, W, C, S Afr, Ori 1,3,4,6,8,11,12,13,19,20,36
74 Ovalona archeri Sars, 1888 sw S Aus, Ori Previously recorded as Alona archeri (Maiphae 2005). 2,11,12,19
75 Ovalona cambouei de Guerne & Richard, 1893 l, p, ps, rf, sf NE, S Afr, Ori, Pal Previously recorded as Alona cambouei (Maiphae 2005). It can be confused with a sibling species, O. pulchella (Maiphae 2014). 3,11,12,19,20,36,38
76 Ovalona pulchella King, 1853 l, p, r, rf NE, C, S Afr, Neo, Ori

Previously recorded as Alona pulchella (Maiphae 2005).

It is a species group and it is a sibling species of O. cambouei and O. glabra (Sinev 2015).		 3,4,18,20,34
77 Pleuroxus aduncus (Jurine, 1820) r C Cosmopolitan 1
78 Pleuroxus denticulatus Birge, 1879 ff C Afr, Nea Pal, Ori 1
79 Pleuroxus uncinatus Baird, 1850 m S Afr, Aus, Neo, Ori, Pal It is closely related to P. trigonellus and P. bdatonicus is its junior synonym (Frey 1965). 11,12
80 Pleuroxus quasidenticulatus Smirnov, 1996 st, sw NE, W, S Aus, Neo, Ori, Pal It is closely related to P. denticulatus (Sinev and Sanoamuang 2013). In the Oriental Region, it was known only from Thailand. 6,8,27
81 Picripleuroxus laevis (Sars, 1862) mi, p, NE, W, S Afr, Aus Ori, Pal 3,6,8,11,12,13,19
82 Pseudochydorus globosus (Baird, 1843) f, l NE, S Cosmopolitan 13,30
83 Rheoalona mekongensis Sinev, Tieng-nga & Sanoamuang, 2017* r NE Ori Endemic in Thailand. 31
84 Salinalona sarasinorum Van Damme & Maiphae, 2013* e, sw S Ori Previously recorded as Alona sarasinorum (Maiphae 2005). A. taraporevalae is its junior synonym. 11,12,25
Family Daphniidae
85 Ceriodaphnia cornuta Sars, 1885 f, ff, l, ml, ps, r, re, rf, sf, st, sw, tp NE, W, C, S Cosmopolitan 1,3,4,5,6,8,11,12,13,18,19,20,30, 34,36,38
86 Ceriodaphnia pulchella Sars, 1862 re C Afr, Ori It is rare and the occurrences in Thailand need to be confirmed. 1
87 Ceriodaphnia reticulata (Jurine, 1820) re C Afr, Neo,Nea, Ori, Pal It is rare and the occurrences in Thailand need to be confirmed. Its junior synonyms are C. serrata and C. kuerzii. 1
88 Daphnia lumholtzi Sars, 1885 f, l, st NE, W, C Afr, Aus, Nea, Neo, Ori Daphniopsis sumanae Rane, 1986 is its junior synonym. 1,3,4,5,8,13,36
89 Daphnia similis Claus, 1876 re C Ori, Pal Hudec (1991) proposed that D. similis in Asia may belong to D. similoides. Therefore, the species status needs to be confirmed. 1
90 Scapholeberis kingi Sars, 1903 d, f, l, m, mi, ml, p, po, ps, r, re, rf, st, sw NE, W, C, S Afr, Aus, Ori, Pal 1,3,4,5,6,8,11,12,13,18,19,20,36
91 Simocephalus exspinosus (De Geer, 1778) f, l, p NE Aus, Ori, Pal 3,4,13
92 Simocephalus heilongjiangensis Shi & Shi, 1994 d, f, l, m, p, po, ps, rf, st, sw NE, W, S Afr, Aus, Ori Previously recorded as Simocephalus mesorostris (Sa-ardrit 2002;Maiphae et al. 2005). S. mesorostris is its junior synonym. 3,4,6,8,11,12,13,19,36
93 Simocephalus latirostris Stingelin, 1906 l, r, re C, S Aus, Neo, Ori 1,30
94 Simocephalus vetulus (O.F. Müller, 1776) p, r, re, sw NE, C Afr, Aus, Neo, Ori, Pal Closely related to sibling species, S. mixtus, S. vetuloides, S. gibbosus, S. elizabethae and S. punctatus (Orlova-Bienkowskaja 2001). 1,3
95 Simocephalus serrulatus (Koch, 1841) d, f, l, mi, p, ps, r, rf, st, sw NE, W, S Afr, Aus, Nea, Neo, Ori 3,4,6,8,11,12,13,19,30,36
Family Ilyocryptidae
96 Ilyocryptus cf. bhardwaji Battish, 1981 no data N Ori Known from India and Thailand. 7
97 Ilyocryptus isanensis Kotov, Stifter & Sanoamuang, 2005* rf, tp NE Ori Endemic in Thailand. 10
98 Ilyocryptus raridentatus Smirnov, 1989 f N Aus, Ori Its junior synonyms are I. cf. sarsi in Kotov and Štifter (2006) and I. cf. raridentatus in Kotov et al. (2011), (Kotov et al. 2012). 7
99 Ilyocryptus spinifer Herrick, 1882 c, d, f, l, mi, ml, p, po, ps, r, rc, re, rf, sf, st, sw NE, W, C, S Cosmopolitan The junior synonym are I. agilis in Kim (1988), I. sordidus in Chiang and Du (1979)(Kotov et al. 2012) and I. halyi (Michael and Sharma 1988, Kotov and Dumont 2000).

1,3,4,5,6,8,11,12,13,18,19,30,

36,38
100 Ilyocryptus thailandensis Kotov & Sanoamuang, 2004* ps N Ori Endemic in Thailand. 7
Family Macrothricidae
101 Grimaldina brazzai Richard, 1892 f,l, p, re NE, W, S Circumtropical 5,6,13,30,36
102 Guernella raphaelis Richard, 1892 f, l, p, r, rc, rf, sw NE, W, C, S Circumtropical 3,6,8,11,12,13,18,19,20,30,36,38
103 Macrothrix flabelligera Smirnov, 1992 c, d, l, m, mi, p, ps, po, r, sw, wf NE, S Aus, Ori In the Oriental Region, it was known from Thailand and Cambodia. 2
104 Macrothrix cf. gauthieri Smirnov, 1976 m, r S Afr, Aus, Ori It can be confused with M. triserialis (Smirnov 1992). 11,12
105 Macrothrix hirsuticornis Norman & Brady, 1867 r C Pal Kotov (2007), Kotov (2008) confirms its distribution only in Pal. Therefore, the occurrence in Thailand needs to be confirmed. 1
106 Macrothrix cf. laticornis (Fischer, 1851) l, ml, p, r, rf, st, sw, tp NE, W, S Aus, Neo, Ori, Pal M. bialatus is its junior synonym. In the Oriental Region, it was known only from Thailand. 3,5,6,8,11,12
107 Macrothrix malaysiensis Idris & Fernando, 1981 ps, sw S Aus, Ori 11,12
108 Macrothrix odiosa Gurney, 1916 d, f, l, mi, p, ps, rf, sw NE, S Afr, Aus Ori, Pal 4,6,11,12,13,19,30,36
109 Macrothrix paulensis (Sars, 1900) m, p NE, S Neo, Ori It is rare in Thailand. 3,11,12
110 Macrothrix pholpunthini Kotov, Maiphae & Sanoamuang, 2005* l, ps NE, S Ori It was known from Thailand and Cambodia. 9,26,30,36
111 Macrothrix spinosa King, 1853 d, f, l, m, mi, p, po, ps, r, rc, re, rf, sf, st sw NE, W, C, S Macrothrix goeldi is its junior synonym. 2,3,4,6,8,11,12,13,18,19,20,30, 34,36,38
112 Macrothrix cf. superaculeata Smirnov, 1982 m S Neo, Ori It is rare in Thailand. 11,12
113 Macrothrix triserialis Brady, 1886 d, f, l, m, p, po, ps r, rc, re, rf, sf, sw NE, W, C, S Circumtropical

1,2,3,5,6,8,11,12,13,19,20,30,

36,38
114 Streblocerus pygmaeus Sars, 1901 -mi, p, re, sw, wf NE, W, C, S Neo, Ori 1,3,5,6,11,12
115 Streblocerus cf. serricaudatus (Fisher 1849) l, re NE Aus, Nea, Ori Pal 36
116 Streblocerus spinulatus Smirnov, 1992 l NE Ori Endemic in the Oriental Region. 36
Family Moinidae
117 Moina macrocopa (Straus, 1820) ff, rf C Ori, Pal Its junior synonyms are M. easu and M. ganapati. 1,32
118 Moina micrura Kurz, 1874 f, l, p, r, rc, re, rf, sw, w, tp NE, W, C, S Cosmopolitan M. dodhui is its junior synonym.

1,3,4,5,6,8,11,12,13,20,30,34,

36,38
119 Moina siamensis Alonso, Neretina, Sanoamuang, Saengphans & Kotov, 2019* po, rc, rf, w N, NE, W, E, C, S Ori It could be easily confused with the sibling species, M. weismanni. Endemic in Thailand. 33
120 Moinodaphnia macleayi (King, 1853) d, f, l, mi, po, ps, r, re, rf, sw NE, W, C, S Circumtropical Moina submucronata and Moinodaphnia macleayi in Goulden (1968) are its junior synonyms.

1,3,6,11,12,13,18,19,20,30,34,

36,38
Family Sididae
121 Diaphanosoma celebensis Stingelin, 1900 l S Aus, Ori It can be confused with D. volzi (Korovchinsky 1989). It is rare in Thailand. 30
122 Diaphanosoma dubium Manuilova, 1964 f, re, sw N, NE, W, E Ori, Pal 13,17,28,35,36
123 Diaphanosoma excisum Sars, 1885 f, ff, l, m, p, ps, r, rc, re, rf, sw, N, NE, W, C, S, E Circumtropical 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,11,12,13,17,18,19,20, 28,30,34,35,38
124 Diaphanosoma elongatum Korovchinsky & Sanoamuang, 2008* d, l, r N, NE, W, E, C Ori Endemic in Thailand. 17,28,36
125 Diaphanosoma macrophthalma Korovchinsky & Mirabdullaev, 1995 l, p, r, re, sw NE Ori 17
126 Diaphanosoma cf. modigliani Richard, 1894 ml, p, re C Ori It is rare in Thailand. 1,34
127 Diaphanosom a sarsi Richard, 1894 ff, l, p, st, sw N, NE, W, E, C, S Circumtropical 1,3,4,8,11,12,17,28,36
128 Diaphanosoma senegal Gauthier, 1951 p, rc, rf, tp N, NE, W, E Afr, Ori It is rare in Thailand. Korovchinsky and Sanoamuang (2008b) confirms that specimens found in Thailand are a subspecies, D. senegal isanensis. 17,28
129 Diaphanosoma tropicum Korovchinsky, 1998 st NE Ori It is rare in Thailand. 17
130 Diaphanosoma volzi Stingelin, 1905* c, l, m, p, r, sw N, NE, W, E, C, S Afr, Aus, Ori 1,3,4,6,13,17,28,36
131 Latonopsis australis Sars, 1888 c, d, f, l, m, mi, p, po, ps, r, re, rf, sf, sw N, NE, W, E, C, S Afr, Aus, Neo, Nea, Ori 1,3,4,6,8,11,12,13,17,19,28,30, 36,38
132 Pseudosida bidentata Herrick, 1884 f, ff, l, p, rc, rf, st, sw NE, W, C, S Afr, Aus, Neo, Nea, Ori It can be confused with P. szalayi (Chatteerjee et al. 2013). 1,3,6,8,11,12,13,19,20,30
133 Pseudosida ramosa (Daday, 1904) p, ps, sw NE, S Aus, Neo, Ori 3,11,12
134 Pseudosida szalayi (Daday, 1898) l, rf, sf N, NE, W, E Ori, Pal It is the closest species to P. bidentata (Korovchinsky 2010). 17,28,36,38
135 Sarsilatona papuana Daday, 1900 ps S Ori It is rare in Thailand. 22
136 Sarsilatona serricauda (Sars, 1901) p, rf S Neo, Nea, Ori, Pal 6,19
137 Sida crystallina (O.F. Müller, 1776) f, l, ps, rf NE, S Aus, Neo, Ori, Pal 4,11,12,13,19
138 Sida ortiva Korovchinsky, 1979 c, l, m, re, sw NE, E Ori, Pal Previously recorded as Sida crystallina ortiva (Tiang-nga et al. 2020) which it is the junior synonym. 17,36

For the data analysis—to answer the following research questions: (1) whether some geographical regions in Thailand were more diverse in cladoceran species than others, regardless of the differences in sampling efforts and (2) whether some habitat types were richer than other types—we divided all the records in Thailand into six geographical regions comprising the north (N), northeast (NE), west (W), east (E), central (C) and south (S) (Fig. 1), based on natural drainage, including landforms and drainage. Northern Thailand is a mountainous area where high mountains are incised by steep river valleys and upland areas that border the central plain. Like the north, the geography of the western region is characterised by high mountains and steep river valleys. The northeast region is a large plateau basin that is extremely flat in some parts with a few low, rugged and rocky hills. Unlike the other areas, the northeast has a long dry season. The central region is a large lowland basin formed by the accumulation of sediment, sand, rocks and mud. The geography of the eastern region is characterised by short mountain ranges alternating with small basins of short rivers that drain into the Gulf of Thailand. Southern Thailand, part of a narrow peninsula, is distinctive in terms of climate, terrain and resources. We also categorised all habitats into 22 types comprising canal, dam, estuary, floodplain, fish field, lake, marsh, mine, man-made lake, pond, pool, peat swamp, river, roadside canal, reservoir, rice field, saline rice field, stream, swamp, temporary pond, wastewater treatment pond and waterfall. The definitions for each habitat type are noted in Suppl. material 1. The species richness estimators, including jackknife1, jackknife2 and bootstrap, were analysed by a species accumulation curve using the EstimateS programme. The jackknife estimator is suitable and tends to reduce the bias in small data samples. In addition, bootstrap is a simple method used to derive estimates of standard errors and confidence intervals for complex estimators of the distribution. Therefore, both estimators were analysed to confirm that the trends in the evaluation results were consistent. In addition, Sorensen’s Similarity Index, which is a statistic used to gauge the similarity of two samples, was used to explore the similarities in species composition amongst regions and habitat types. The index was calculated with Microsoft Excel 2016.

Figure 1.  

Map of Thailand showing number of data records and species richness found in each region. Numbers in bracket indicate number of species with restricted distribution in that region.

Results

The dataset contained 723 records for cladoceran published in 39 papers. Overall, seven families, 49 genera and 138 species of cladocerans have been found in Thailand. Of these, 15 species were described from Thailand, while eight were reasoned to be endemic to Thailand. The highest represented families were Chydoridae (80 species), followed by Sididae (18 species), Macrothricidae (16 species), Daphniidae (11 species), Ilyocryptidae (5 species), Bosminidae (4 species) and Moinidae (4 species) (Table 1). The NE region showed the most diverse range of species (100), followed by the S (97), W (52), C (48), N (13) and E regions (11) (Fig. 1).

Only five species (3.62%)—Diaphanosoma excisum, D. sarsi, D. volzi, Latonopsis australis and Moina siamensis— were found in all regions and many species were restricted to only one region. One species, Bosmina fatalis, has been found only in the W region, while three species (2.17%) have been found only in the N region (Ilyocryptus cf. bhardwaji, I. raridentatus and I. thailandensis) and nine species (6.52%) have been found only in the C region (Leberis davidi, Pleuroxus aduncus, P. denticulatus, Ceriodaphnia pulchella, C. reticulata, Daphnia similis, Diaphanosoma cf. modigliani, Macrothrix hirsuticornis and Moina macrocopa). In the S region, only 20 species (14.49%) have been found (Alona kotovi, Chydorus opacus, Ephemeroporus epiaphantoii, E. hybridus, E. phintonicus, E. tridentatus, Karualona iberica, K. serrulata, Leydigia australis, Matralona freyi, Notoalona pseudomacronyx, Ovalona archeri, Pleuroxus uncinatus, Salinalona sarasinorum, Macrothrix cf. gauthieri, M. malaysiensis, M. cf. superaculeata, Diaphanosoma celebensis, Sarsilatona papuana and S. serricauda), while 21 species (15.22%) have been found only in the NE region (Acroperus africanus, Alona siamensis, Anthalona milleri, A. spinifera, Armatoalona macrocopa, Chydorus idrisi, C. sinensis, Coronatella acuticostata, Disparalona chappuisi, Flavalona costata, Karualona arcana, K. kwangsiensis, Kurzia brevilabris, Leydigia laevis, Rheoalona mekongensis, Simocephalus exspinosus, Ilyocryptus isanensis, Streblocerus cf. serricaudatus, S. spinulatus, Diaphanosoma macrophthalma and D. tropicum) (Fig. 2).

Figure 2.  

The Venn diagram shows the number of cladocerans restricted to each region and shared between regions. Number in bracket represents number of total species in that region.

According to the general species accumulation curve, the sampling effort (in this case, the number of research papers) is considered insufficient given that the observed values of S (138) align with those calculated in the bootstrap estimator (152.94) and the asymptote estimates of the jackknife 1 (170.31) and jackknife 2 (183.20) variation indicators (Fig. 3).

Figure 3.  

General species accumulation curve over the number of research papers.

Sorensen’s Similarity Index indicated that the E and N regions showed the highest similarity in terms of cladoceran species composition (0.75), followed by the S and the NE (0.72) and the W and the NE (0.64), whereas the least similarity was found between the S and the N, which were of equal value, along with the S and the E (0.11) (Suppl. material 2).

The highest species richness was found in swamps and lakes (77 species each), followed by ponds (60 species), peat swamps (55) and rivers (54 species each), whereas estuaries showed the lowest species richness (one species) (Fig. 4). Sorensen’s Similarity Index showed that the similarity of cladoceran species composition was less than 0.50 between most habitat types, whereas only 45 pairs from 231 pairs of different habitats showed a similarity of more than 0.50. Pools and dams had the highest similarity of cladoceran species composition (0.81), followed by mines and dams (0.75), swamps and peat swamps (0.72) and pools and mines (0.69), whereas no similarities (0) were found in 28 pairs of different habitat types (Suppl. material 3).

Figure 4.  

Cladocerans species richness in each habitat type. Abbreviation codes; see Table 1.

Twenty-four species were found in various habitat types (> 10 habitats); Ephemeroporus barroisi, Dunhevedia crassa and Ilyocryptus spinifer occurred in most habitat types (16). In contrast, 28 species were found in only one habitat type: eight species were found only in lakes (Acroperus africanus, Alona kotovi, Chydorus idrisi, Coronatella acuticostata, Disparalona chappuisi, Flavalona costata, Streblocerus spinulatus and Diaphanosoma celebensis); four species were found only in reservoirs (Chydorus sphaericus, Ceriodaphnia pulchella, C. reticulata and Daphnia similis); four species were found only in rivers (Ephemeroporus epiaphantoii, Pleuroxus aduncus, Rheoalona mekongensis and Macrothrix hirsuticornis); three species were found only in swamps (Ephemeroporus hybridus, Notoalona pseudomacronyx and Ovalona archeri); two species were found only in ponds (Anthalona milleri and Leydigia laevis), two species were found only in marshes (Macrothrix cf. superaculeata and Pleuroxus uncinatus) and one species was found only in rice fields (Karualona arcana), floodplains (Ilyocryptus raridentatus), peat swamps (Ilyocryptus thailandensis), streams (Diaphanosoma tropicum) and fish fields (Pleuroxus denticulatus). Estuarine habitats mostly showed little or no similarity to other habitats (0–0.03). Only Salinalona sarasinorum could be found in estuarine waters at a distribution of up to 12 part per thousand.

Discussion

Species richness

Since being poorly known in Thailand 30 years ago, the number of identified and studied cladoceran species has continued to increase. More intensive diversity studies in various types of microhabitats, including the taxonomic revision of some species, have led to more species being recorded. A total of 38 new records have been identified during the past 15 years compared to the records of Maiphae et al. (2008). Of these, 15 species are described from Thailand and eight species are endemic to Thailand. In addition, 16 synonymies were detected in previous records (Table 1). The total number of species identified in Thailand is relatively high and accounts for approximately 45% (about 298 species) of all records in Southeast Asia (Korovchinsky 2013, Tiang-nga et al. 2020). In addition, the species richness of cladocerans in Thailand is relatively high compared with records from other countries in Southeast Asia, as shown by the following statistics: Malaysia has about 104 species (Korovchinsky 2013, Sinev and Yusoff 2015); Indonesia has about 118 species (Korovchinsky 2013); the Philippines has about 55 species (Korovchinsky 2013, Pascual et al. 2014,Lopez et al. 2017); Laos has about 80 species (Kotov et al. 2013b, Siboualipha et al. 2020); Cambodia has about 60 species (Tanaka and Ohtaka 2009); Vietnam has about 130 species (Sinev and Korovchinsky 2013, Korovchinsky 2013, Sinev 2014, Sinev and Irina 2021). These differences are not only because more sampling sites were explored in Thailand, but also because the studied sites included a high diversity of habitat types (22 types). However, the estimator indices indicated that the present number of records is an underestimate and that more species could be discovered in Thailand with more research, particularly in less studied regions (i.e. the N, W and E). Currently, high species richness is found in the W, despite relatively few sites being sampled in comparison to the size of the area. The W region comprises mountain ranges and plains and is similar to the N region. Therefore, it would be interesting to explore more sites and microhabitats, especially peat swamps, streams and cave pools, as the discovery of more species is expected.

The N region of Thailand is relatively large. However, few studies have been conducted despite all cladoceran microhabitats being represented. Researchers have focused on the Ilyocryptidae (Kotov and Sanoamuang 2004), Sididae (Korovchinsky and Sanomuang 2013) and Moinidae (Alonso et al. 2019) families following their interest in taxa reported from the N. Likewise, only the Sididae and Moinidae families (Alonso et al. 2019) have been researched in the E region. This is one reason why the cladoceran compositions in these two regions have a high level of similarity. Likewise, the NE and S regions also show numerous similarities in cladoceran composition due to a similar research focus. The E region is the smallest in Thailand, but it is the most interesting to investigate due to its diverse geography (river basins and coastal areas with a mountain range in the middle). However, the N and E regions have a large research gap that could be targeted by further studies researching their species diversity. The distribution pattern for the species and range boundaries of each species could then be tentatively outlined and more extensive zoogeography could be analysed.

Geographical distribution

Present records show that the proportion of commonly distributed species is less than that of restricted species. Only Diaphanosoma excisum, D. sarsi, D. volzi, Latonopsis australis and Moina siamensis were found in all regions. Of the other species, Bosminopsis deitersi and Ephemeroporus barroisi are also common, as they are distributed in every region, except the N, which might be because studies are lacking in that region, as mentioned previously. Korovchinsky (1992) made it clear that Sididae, especially the genus Diaphanosoma, contribute substantially to all continents. In addition, amongst Moinidae, Moina is much more common in the limnetic zone of tropical lakes. These small and transparent species are relatively immune to fish predation (Dumont 1994), which could explain their wide distribution, especially in oriental and circumtropical regions that have a high abundance of planktivorous fish. Bosminopsis deitersi is a species known for its multicontinental range and broad ecological requirements (Garibian et al. 2021). The hidden diversity of this species would be interesting to investigate. Moina siamensis was recently described in Thailand (Alonso et al. 2019), where it is found in every region. Existing records for M. siamensis in Thailand need to be re-examined, however, because its characteristics are similar to M. micrura (another widely distributed species in Thailand). Notably, Daphnia is almost absent from the country; of this wide range of environmentally tolerant species, only D. lumholtzi can be found. This result differs from tropical India, which has a relatively high diversity of Daphnia (Ctenodaphnia) (Padhye et al. 2016). Besides latitude, which positively correlates to the distribution of this genus, lower temperature (compared to Thailand), even in its tropical zone, might be the reason for the higher richness of this genus in India. However, other factors, such as predators, might co-influence the distribution of this genus and other planktonic ones. The genus rarely found in Thailand is replaced by more Sidids, Moinids and Bosminids, as mentioned previously. In tropical regions, fish are more numerous than elsewhere and it is hypothesised that the effects of predation by planktivorous fish are high here. Usually, large Daphnia cannot survive under intensive fish predation. Additionally, the tropics also contain invertebrates that are known to prey on Daphnia, such as the larvae of the phantom midge Chaoborus and the water boatman Notonecta (Ebert 2005).

Microhabitat distribution

Lakes and swamps are heterogeneous environments that harbour the highest cladoceran diversity and include high-richness habitats. A total of 77 species are found in these habitats, accounting for about 56% of the known cladoceran species in Thailand. Two biologically rich lakes in Thailand, Kud-Thing Lake and Thale-Noi Lake, are Ramsar sites where fauna thrive. Apart from cladocerans, other groups of zooplankton, fish, birds and aquatic plants have high diversity in these lakes. Kud-Thing Lake is a large natural lake connected to the Mekong River and Thale-Noi Lake is connected to Songkhla Lake (Ramsar Sites Information Service 2023). These geographical characteristics provide complex lake structures that enable organisms to live in several microhabitats and ecological niches.

It was also found that similar habitat structures led to similar cladoceran compositions. Pools, dams and mines are permanent man-made habitats that show a high similarity of cladoceran compositions. Swamps and peat swamps, which are natural habitats mostly covered with aquatic plants, also showed high similarity in cladoceran composition. Some types of habitats, such as estuarine waters, have unique structures, leading to low similarity with other habitats. The species found in these unique habitats, such as Salinalona sarasinorum, warrant further study, particularly in other research fields, such as ecophysiology. Some cladoceran habitats have scarcely been studied, including peat swamps, streams and cave pools. Thailand has several small and large cave systems in each region. Copepods are a good example of organisms that are well studied in cave pools and high numbers of copepods are seen in this harsh habitat (Watiroyram 2021, Sanoamuang and Watiroyram 2021). It is expected that some yet-to-be-discovered cladoceran species may be present.

Although the taxonomy and distribution of most cladoceran species are now clearly understood, further studies should be carried out to reach a plateau. To determine the actual species richness of the country and gain a greater understanding of the ecological and biogeographical distribution of cladocerans, increased sampling efforts should be directed at less-studied habitats, such as peat swamps, streams, cave pools and groundwater. In addition, the habitats on islands in the Thai–Malaysia Peninsula would also be interesting to explore and are anticipated to contribute greatly to a better understanding of the biogeographical distribution of this animal in Southeast Asia. Moreover, it would be interesting to further integrate both morphological and genetic diversity given that cryptic species are assumed to be widely distributed in nature and amongst biogeographical regions (Pfenninger and Schwenk 2007) and that their discovery and description are pivotal to the correct assessment of actual biodiversity patterns. Since we now know that the cladoceran community in Thailand could somehow be representative of tropical countries, it would be interesting to use the cladoceran species as a model to study functional traits and as bioindicators to measure the health of aquatic environments. This would meet the purpose of this updated checklist, which aims to contribute to more aspects of cladoceran research in tropical regions.

Acknowledgements

Suggestions and criticisms from referees greatly improved a first version of the manuscript. WC would like to thank the financial support from the Faculty of Science and Technology, Princess of Naradhiwas University. SM would like to thank the Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science at Kasetsart University for all facilities.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

References

Supplementary materials

Suppl. material 1: Definitions of each type of habitat in this study 
Authors:  Wijittra Cheodchim and Supiyanit Maiphae
Data type:  definition
Brief description: 

This document describes the features used to identify each type of water source in this study.

Download file (14.34 kb)
Suppl. material 2: Sorensen’s Similarity Index of cladoceran species amongst geographical regions 
Authors:  Wijittra Cheodchim and Supiyanit Maiphae
Data type:  index
Download file (8.63 kb)
Suppl. material 3: Sorensen’s Similarity Index of cladoceran species amongst habitat types 
Authors:  Wijittra Choedchim and Supiyanit Maiphae
Data type:  index
Download file (10.66 kb)
login to comment