Advertisement

Parasitology Research

, Volume 116, Issue 1, pp 199–206 | Cite as

Competitive growth, energy allocation, and host modification in the acanthocephalan Acanthocephalus dirus: field data

  • Sara C. Caddigan
  • Alaina C. Pfenning
  • Timothy C. SparkesEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

The acanthocephalan Acanthocephalus dirus is a trophically transmitted parasite that modifies both the physiology and behavior of its intermediate host (isopod) prior to transmission to its definitive host (fish). Infected isopods often contain multiple A. dirus individuals and we examined the relationships between host sharing, body size, energy content, and host modification to determine if host sharing was costly and if these costs could influence the modification of host behavior (mating behavior). Using field-based measures of parasite energy content (glycogen, lipid) and parasite body size (volume), we showed that host sharing was costly in terms of energy content but not in terms of body size. Analysis of the predictors of host behavior revealed that energy content, and body size, were not predictors of host behavior. Of the variables examined, parasite intensity was the only predictor of host behavior. Hosts that contained more parasites were less likely to be modified (i.e., less likely to undergo mating suppression). We suggest that intraspecific competition influenced parasite energy content and that the costs associated with competition are likely to shape the strategy of growth and energy allocation adopted by the parasites. These costs did not appear to have a direct effect on the modification of host mating behavior.

Keywords

Caecidotea intermedius Mating suppression Glycogen Lipid Body size 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Funding was provided by DePaul University through the Paid Leave Program (University Research Council), a Competitive Research Grant (University Research Council), a Faculty Summer Research Grant (College of Science and Health), the Undergraduate Research Assistantship Program, the Undergraduate Summer Research Program and the Department of Biological Sciences. Amit Raj and Sarah Blackstock assisted in the field.

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical standards

The study was performed in compliance with national laws and regulations.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Amat F, Gozalbo A, Navarro JC, Hontoria F, Varó I (1991) Some aspects of Artemia biology affected by cestode parasitism. Hydrobiologia 212:39–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amin OM (2013) Classification of the Acanthocephala. Folia Parasitol 60:273–305CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Ball MA, Parker GA, Chubb JC (2008) The evolution of complex life cycles when parasite mortality is size- or time-dependent. J Theor Biol 253:202–214CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Benesh DP, Valtonen ET (2007a) Sexual differences in larval life history traits of acanthocephalan cystacanths. Int J Parasitol 37:191–198CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Benesh DP, Valtonen ET (2007b) Proximate factors affecting the larval life history of Acanthocephalus lucii (Acanthocephala). J Parasitol 93:742–749CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Benesh DP, Chubb JC, Parker GA (2013) Complex life cycles: why refrain from growth before reproduction in the adult niche? Am Nat 181:39–51CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bierbower SM, Sparkes TC (2007) Parasite-related pairing success in an intermediate host, Caecidotea intermedius (Isopoda): effects of male behavior and reproductive physiology. J Parasitol 93:445–449CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Brattey J (1980) Preliminary observations on larval Acanthocephalus lucii (Müller, 1776) (Acanthocephala: Echinorhynchidae) in the isopod Asellus aquaticus (L.). Parasitology 81: xlix-1.Google Scholar
  9. Bush AO, Lafferty KD, Lotz JM, Shostak AW (1997) Parasitology meets ecology on its own terms: Margolis et al. revisited. J Parasitol 83:575–583CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Caddigan SC, Barkauskas RT, Sparkes TC (2014) Intra-population variation in behavior modification by the acanthocephalan Acanthocephalus dirus: are differences mediated by host condition? Parasitol Res 113:4307–4311CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Camp JW, Huizinga HW (1979) Altered color, behavior and predation susceptibility of the isopod Asellus intermedius infected with Acanthocephalus dirus. J Parasitol 65:667–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Camp JW, Huizinga HW (1980) Seasonal population interactions of Acanthocephalus dirus (Van Cleave 1931) in the creek chub, Semotilus atromaculatus, and isopod, Asellus intermedius. J Parasitol 66:299–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cézilly F, Thomas F, Médoc V, Perrot-Minnot M-J (2010) Host-manipulation by parasites with complex life cycles: adaptive or not? Trends Parasitol 26:311–317CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Chubb JC, Ball MA, Parker GA (2009) Living in intermediate hosts: evolutionary adaptations in larval helminths. Trends Parasitol 26:93–102CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Cornet S (2011) Density-dependent effects on parasite growth and parasite-induced host immunodepression in the larval helminth Pomphorhynchus laevis. Parasitology 138:257–265CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Crompton DWT (1970) An ecological approach to acanthocephalan physiology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Debat V, David P (2001) Mapping phenotypes: canalization, plasticity and developmental stability. Trends Ecol Evol 16:555–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dezfuli BS, Giari L, Poulin R (2001) Costs of intraspecific and interspecific host sharing in acanthocephalan cystacanths. Parasitology 122:483–489CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Dezfuli BS, Volponi S, Beltrami I, Poulin R (2002) Intra- and interspecific density-dependent effects on growth in helminth parasites of the cormorant, Phalacrocorax carbo sinensis. Parasitology 124:537–544CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Dezfuli BS, Lui A, Giovinazzo G, Giari L (2008) Effect of Acanthocephala infection on the reproductive potential of crustacean intermediate hosts. J Inverteba Pathol 98:116–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dianne L, Rigaud T, Léger E, Motreuil S, Bauer A, Perrot-Minnot M-J (2010) Intraspecific conflict over host manipulation between different larval stages of an acanthocephalan parasite. J Evol Biol 23:2648–2655CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Dianne L, Perrot-Minnot M-J, Bauer A, Gaillard M, Léger E, Rigaud T (2011) Protection first then facilitation: a manipulative parasite modulates the vulnerability to predation of its intermediate host according to its own developmental stage. Evolution 65:2692–2698CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Dianne L, Bollache L, Lagrue C, Franceschi N, Rigaud T (2012) Larval size in acanthocephalan parasites: influence of intraspecific competition and effects on intermediate host behavioural changes. Parasite Vectors 5:166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Forbes MRL (1993) Parasitism and host reproductive effort. Oikos 67:444–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Franceschi N, Bauer A, Bollache L, Rigaud T (2008) The effects of parasite age and intensity on variability in acanthocephalan-induced behavioural manipulation. Int J Parasitol 38:1161–1170CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Franceschi N, Bollache L, Cornet S, Bauer A, Motreuil S, Rigaud T (2010) Co-variation between the intensity of behavioural manipulation and parasite development time in an acanthocephalan-amphipod system. J Evol Biol 23:2143–2150CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Fredensborg BL, Mouritsen KN, Poulin R (2004) Intensity-dependent mortality of Paracalliope novizealandiae (Amphipoda: Crustacea) infected by a trematode: experimental infections and field observations. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 311:253–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Graff DJ (1964) Metabolism of C14-glucose by Moniliformis dubius (Acanthocephala). J Parasitol 50:230–234CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Hechtel LJ, Johnson CL, Juliano SA (1993) Modification of antipredator behavior of Caecidotea intermedius by its parasite Acanthocephalus dirus. Ecology 74:710–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Holmes JC (2002) Effects of concurrent infections on Hymenolepis diminuta (Cestoda) and Moniliformis dubius (Acanthocephala). I General effects and comparison with crowding. J Parasitol 88:434–439PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Horvath K (1971) Glycogen metabolism in larval Moniliformis dubius (Acanthocephala). J Parasitol 57:132–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jokela J, Uotila L, Taskinen J (1993) Effect of the castrating trematode parasite Rhipidocotyle fennica on energy allocation of fresh-water clam Anodonta piscinalis. Func Ecol 7:332–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kennedy CR (2006) Ecology of the Acanthocephala. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kopp DA, Bierbower SM, Murphy AD, Mormann K, Sparkes TC (2016) Parasite-related modification of mating behaviour and refuge use in the aquatic isopod Caecidotea intermedius: neurological correlates. Behaviour. doi: 10.1163/1568539X-00003379 Google Scholar
  35. Korkofigas E, Park T, Sparkes TC (2016) Acanthocephalan-related variation in the pattern of energy storage of a behaviorally and physiologically modified host: field data. Parasitol Res 115:339–345CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Labaude S, Cézilly F, Tercier X, Rigaud T (2015) Influence of host nutritional condition on post-infection traits in the association between the manipulative acanthocephalan Pomphorhynchus laevis and the amphipod Gammarus pulex. Parasite Vectors 8:403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lawlor BJ, Read AF, Keymer AE, Parveen G, Crompton DWT (1990) Non-random mating in a parasitic worm: mate choice my males? Anim Behav 40:870–876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lefèvre T, Adamo SA, Biron DG, Missé D, Hughes D, Thomas F (2009) Invasion of the body snatchers: the diversity and evolution of manipulative strategies in host-parasite interactions. Adv Parasitol 68:45–83CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Lindström J, Pike TW, Blount JD, Metcalfe NB (2009) Optimization of resource allocation can explain the temporal dynamics and honesty of sexual signals. Am Nat 174:515–525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Maure F, Brodeur J, Hughes D, Thomas F (2013) How much energy should manipulative parasites leave to their hosts to ensure altered behaviours? J Exp Biol 216:43–46CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. McCurdy DG, Forbes MR, Boates JS (2000) Male amphipods increase their mating effort before behavioural manipulation by trematodes. Can J Zool 78:606–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Michaud M, Milinski M, Parker GA, Chubb JC (2006) Competitive growth strategies in intermediate hosts: experimental tests of parasite life-history model using the cestode, Schistocephalus solidus. Evol Ecol 20:39–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Moore J (2002) Parasites and the behavior of animals. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  44. Oetinger DF (1987) Effects of Acanthocephalus dirus (Acanthocephala) on morphometrics and reproduction of Caecidotea intermedius (Crustacea: Isopoda). Trans Am Microsc Soc 106:240–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Oetinger DF, Nickol BB (1982) Developmental relationships between acanthocephalans and altered pigmentation in freshwater isopods. J Parasitol 68:463–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Parker GA, Chubb JC, Roberts GN, Michaud M, Milinski M (2003) Optimal growth strategies of larval helminths in their intermediate hosts. J Evol Biol 16:47–54CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Parker GA, Ball MA, Chubb JC (2009) To grow or not to grow? Intermediate and paratenic hosts as helminth life cycle strategies. J Theor Biol 258:135–147CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Parshad VR, Crompton DWT (1981) Aspects of acanthocephalan reproduction. Adv Parasitol 19:73–138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Perrot-Minnot M-J, Maddaleno M, Balourdet A, Cézilly F (2012) Host manipulation revisited: no evidence for a causal link between altered photophobia and increased trophic transmission of amphipods infected with acanthocephalans. Func Ecol 26:1007–1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Plaistow SJ, Troussard J-P, Cézilly F (2001) The effect of the acanthocephalan parasite Pomphorhynchus laevis on the lipid and glycogen content of its intermediate host Gammarus pulex. Int J Parasitol 31:346–351CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Ponton F, Biron DG, Joly C, Helluy S, Duneau D, Thomas F (2005) Ecology of parasitically modified populations: a case study from a gammarid-trematode system. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 299:205–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Poulin R (1994) The evolution of parasite manipulation of host behaviour: a theoretical analysis. Parasitology 109:S109–S118CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Poulin R (1995) “Adaptive” changes in the behaviour of parasitized animals: a critical review. Int J Parasitol 25:1371–1383CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Poulin R (2007) Evolutionary ecology of parasites, 2nd edn. Princeton University Press, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  55. Poulin R (2010) Parasite manipulation of host behavior: an update and frequently asked questions. Adv Stud Behav 41:151–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Poulin R, Morand S (2000) Testes size, body size and male-male competition in acanthocephalan parasites. J Zool (Lond) 250:551–558Google Scholar
  57. Poulin R, Brodeur J, Moore J (1994) Parasite manipulation of host behaviour: should hosts always lose? Oikos 70:479–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Poulin R, Nichol K, Latham ADM (2003) Host sharing and host manipulation by larval helminths in shore crabs: cooperation or conflict? Int J Parasitol 33:425–433CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Poulin R, Fredensborg BL, Hansen E, Leung TLF (2005) The true cost of host manipulation by parasites. Behav Process 68:241–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rauque CA, Semenas L (2011) Parasite volume as an indicator of competition: the case of Acanthocephalus tumescens and Pseudocorynosoma sp. (Acanthocephala) in their intermediate host. J Parasitol 97:999–1002CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Read CP, Phifer K (1959) The role of carbohydrates in the biology of cestodes. VII. Interactions between individual tapeworms of the same and different species. Exp Parasitol 8:46–50CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Roberts LS (2000) The crowding effect revisited. J Parasitol 86:209–211PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Sánchez MI, Thomas F, Perrot-Minnot M-J, Biron DG, Bertrand-Michel J, Missé D (2009) Neurological and physiological disorders in Artemia harboring manipulative cestodes. J Parasitol 95:20–24CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Sánchez MI, Rode NO, Flaven E, Redón S, Amat F, Vasileva GP, Lenormand T (2012) Differential susceptibility to parasites of invasive and native species of Artemia living in sympatry: consequences for the invasion of A. franciscana in the Mediterranean region. Biol Invasions 14:1819–1829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Sparkes TC, Keogh DP, Pary RA (1996) Energetic costs of mate guarding behavior in male stream-dwelling isopods. Oecologia 106:166–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sparkes TC, Wright VM, Renwick DT, Weil KA, Talkington JA, Milhalyov M (2004) Intra-specific host sharing in the manipulative parasite Acanthocephalus dirus: does conflict occur over host modification? Parasitology 129:335–340CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Sparkes TC, Weil KA, Renwick DT, Talkington JA (2006) Development-related effects of an acanthocephalan parasite on pairing success of its intermediate host. Anim Behav 71:439–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sparkes TC, Rush V, Foster SA (2008) Reproductive costs, condition and carotenoid-based colour in natural populations of threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus). Ecol Freshw Fish 17:292–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Steinauer ML, Nickol BB (2003) Effect of cystacanth body size on adult success. J Parasitol 89:251–254CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Thomas F, Renaud F, Rousset F, Cézilly F, De Meeûs T (1995) Differential mortality of two closely related host species induced by one parasite. Proc Roy Soc Lond B 260:349–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Thomas F, Brown SP, Sukhdeo M, Renaud F (2002) Understanding parasite strategies: a state-dependent approach. Trends Parasitol 18:387–390CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Thomas F, Adamo S, Moore J (2005) Parasitic manipulation: where are we and where should we go? Behav Process 68:185–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Thomas F, Brodeur J, Maure F, Franceschi N, Blanchet S, Rigaud T (2011) Intraspecific variability in host manipulation by parasites. Infect Genet Evol 11:262–269CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Van Handel E (1965) Microseparation of glycogen, sugars, and lipids. Anal Biochem 11:266–271CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Verweyen L, Klimpel S, Palm HW (2011) Molecular phylogeny of the Acanthocephala (class Palaeacanthocephala) with a paraphyletic assemblage of the orders Polymorphida and Echinorhynchida. PLoS One 6:2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Weinersmith KL, Warinner CB, Tan V, Harris DJ, Mora AB, Kuris AM, Lafferty KD, Hechinger RF (2014) A lack of crowding? Body size does not decrease with density for two behavior-manipulating parasites. Integr Comp Biol 54:184–192CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sara C. Caddigan
    • 1
    • 2
  • Alaina C. Pfenning
    • 1
  • Timothy C. Sparkes
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesDePaul UniversityChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Kirksville College of Osteopathic MedicineA. T. Still University of Health SciencesKirksvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations