The complete mitochondrial genomes of the Leuciscus baicalensis and Rutilus rutilus: A detailed genomic comparison among closely related species of the Leuciscinae subfamily.

• Leuciscinae was monophyletic group and Leuciscus was paraphyletic group. • A promising potential of comparative mitogenomes in phylogenetics between fishes. • Mitogenomes should be considered in clarifying phylogenetics of fish. Cyprinidae is the largest family in the order of freshwater fish Cypriniformes. Increased subfamily members of Cyprinidae have been suggested to be re-classified for decades. In this study, we sequenced the mitochondrial genomes (mitogenomes) of Leuciscus baicalensis and Rutilus rutilus collected from northwest China and compared with other closely related species to determine their associated family or subfamily. We used Illumina NovaSeq to sequence the entire mitochondrial genomes of Leuciscus baicalensis and Rutilus rutilus and characterized the mitogenomes by the gene structure, gene order, and the secondary structures of the 22 tRNA genes. We compared mitogenome features of Leuciscinae with other subfamilies in Cyprinidae. We used the analytic Bayesian Information and Maximum Likelihood methods to determine phylogenetic trees of 13 PCGs. The mitogenomes of Leuciscus baicalensis and Rutilus rutilus were 16,607 bp and 16,606 bp, respectively. Organization and location of these genes were consistent with already studied Leuciscinae fishes. Synonymous codon usage was conservative in Leuciscinae as compared with other subfamilies in Cyprinidae. Phylogenetic analysis indicated that Leuciscinae was a monophyletic group, and genus Leuciscus was a paraphyletic group. Our approach, for the first time, of studying comparative mitochondrial genomics and phylogenetics together provided a supportive platform to the analysis of population genetics and phylogeny for Leuciscinae. Our results indicated a promising potential of comparative mitochondrial genomics in the manifestation of phylogenetic relationships between fishes, leading us to a suggestion that mitogenomes should be routinely considered in clarifying phylogenetics of family and subfamily members of fish. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]