Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 140, Issue 4, pp 586–590 | Cite as

The distribution of Echinococcus granulosus in moose: evidence for parasite-induced vulnerability to predation by wolves?

  • Damien O. Joly
  • François Messier
Population Ecology

Abstract

The role of parasites in influencing the trophic dynamics of hosts is becoming increasingly recognized in the ecological literature. Echinococcus granulosus is a tapeworm that relies on the predator-prey relationship between the definitive host (wolf, Canis lupus) and the intermediate host, (moose, Alces alces) to complete its life cycle. Heavy infection by E. granulosus may predispose moose to increased risk of predation by wolves. Theory predicts that parasite-induced vulnerability to predation will reduce the degree of aggregation of parasites in a host population. We tested for different levels of aggregation of E. granulosus in moose in areas of low, moderate, and high levels of wolf predation using Green’s coefficient of dispersion. Parasite aggregation was lower in an area with high predation rate, thus we hypothesize that heavy infection by E. granulosus predisposes moose to predation by wolves. This increase in predation rate due to parasite infection may influence the role of wolves in regulating moose populations. We discuss alternative explanations for the negative correlation between predation rate and parasite aggregation.

Keywords

Alces alces Canis lupus Hydatid disease Disease Predation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This manuscript was improved by comments from C. Osenberg, K. Lafferty, S. Ferguson, D. Gummer, T. Armstrong and B. Patterson and an anonymous reviewer. We are grateful to A. Plante for technical support. Financial support for the original study was provided by the Canadian National Sportmen’s Shows, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), and the Ministère du Loisir, de la Chasse et de la Pêche du Québec. Damien O. Joly was supported by the University of Saskatchewan and Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and subsequently the USGS-National Wildlife Health Center.

References

  1. Adjei EL, Barnes A, Lester RJG (1986) A method for estimating possible parasite-related host mortality illustrated using data from Callitetrarhynchus gracilis (Cestoda: Trypanorhyncha) in lizardfish (Saurida spp.). Parasitology 92:227–243Google Scholar
  2. Anderson RM, Gordon DM (1982) Processes influencing the distribution of parasite numbers within host populations with special emphasis on parasite-induced host mortalities. Parasitology 85:373–398PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Boutin S (1992) Predation and moose population dynamics: a critique. J Wildl Manage 56:116–127Google Scholar
  4. Crête M, Rivest L-P, Jolicoeur H, Brassard J-M, Messier F (1986) Predicting and correcting helicopter counts of moose with observations made from fixed-wing aircraft in southern Québec. J Appl Ecol 23:751–761Google Scholar
  5. Gasaway WC, Boertje RD, Grangaard DV, Kelleyhouse DG, Stephenson RO, Larsen DG (1992) The role of predation in limiting moose at low densities in Alaska and Yukon and implications for conservation. Wildl Monogr 120Google Scholar
  6. Gordon DM, Rau ME (1982) Possible evidence for mortality induced by the parasite Apatemon gracilis in a population of brook sticklebacks (Culaea inconstans). Parasitology 84:41–47Google Scholar
  7. Gray DR (1993) The use of muskox kill sites as temporary rendezvous sites by arctic wolves with pups in early winter. Arctic 46:324–330Google Scholar
  8. Green RH (1966) Measurement of non-randomness in spatial distributions. Res Popul Ecol 8:1–7Google Scholar
  9. Hadeler KP, Freedman HI (1989) Predator-prey populations with parasitic infection. J Math Biol 27:609–631PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Hayes RD, Harestad AS (2000) Wolf functional response and regulation of moose in the Yukon. Can J Zool 78:60–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hudson PJ, Dobson AP, Newborn D (1992) Do parasites make prey vulnerable to predation? Red grouse and parasites. J Anim Ecol 61:681–692Google Scholar
  12. Ihaka R, Gentleman R (1996) R: a language for data analysis and graphics. J Comput Graph Stat 5:299–314 Google Scholar
  13. Ives AR, Murray DL (1997) Can sublethal parasitism destabilize predator-prey population dynamics? A model of snowshoe hares, predators and parasites. J Anim Ecol 66:265–278Google Scholar
  14. Janovy J Jr, Kutish GW (1998) A model of encounters between host and parasite populations. J Theor Biol 134:391–401Google Scholar
  15. Joly DO, Patterson BR (2003) Use of selection indices to model the functional response of predators. Ecology 84:1635–1639Google Scholar
  16. Keymer AE, Anderson RM (1979) The dynamics of infection of Trilobium confusum by Hymenolepis diminuta: the influence of infective-stage density and spatial distribution. Parasitology 79:195–207PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Krebs CJ (1999) Ecological methodology, 2nd edn. Harper Collins, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Lafferty KD (1999) The evolution of trophic transmission. Parasitol Today 15:111–115CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. McNeill MA, Rau ME (1987) Echinococcus granulosus (Cestoda: Taeniidae) infections in moose (Alces alces) from southwestern Québec. J Wildl Dis 23:418–421PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Mech LD (1970) The wolf: the ecology and behavior of an endangered species. Natural History Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Messier F (1985a) Social organization, spatial distribution, and population density of wolves in relation to moose density. Can J Zool 63:1068–1077Google Scholar
  22. Messier F (1985b) Solitary living and extraterritorial movements of wolves in relation to social status and prey abundance. Can J Zool 63:239–245Google Scholar
  23. Messier F (1994) Ungulate population models with predation: a case study with the North American moose. Ecology 75:478–488Google Scholar
  24. Messier F (1996) On the functional and numerical responses of wolves to changing prey density. In: Carbyn LN, Fritts SH, Seip DR (eds) Ecology and conservation of wolves in a changing world. University of Alberta Press, Edmonton, pp 187–197Google Scholar
  25. Messier F, Crête M (1985) Moose-wolf dynamics and the natural regulation of moose populations. Oecologia 65:503–312Google Scholar
  26. Messier F, Joly DO (2000) Comment: the regulation of moose density by wolf predation. Can J Zool 78:506–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Messier F, Rau ME, McNeill MA (1989) Echinococcus granulosus (Cestoda: Taeniidae) infections and moose-wolf population dynamics in southwestern Québec. Can J Zool 67:216–219Google Scholar
  28. Murray DL, Cary JR, Keith LB (1997) Interactive effects of sublethal nematodes and nutritional status on snowshoe hare vulnerability to predation. J Anim Ecol 66:250–264Google Scholar
  29. Myers JH (1978) Selecting a measure of dispersion. Environ Entomol 7:619–621Google Scholar
  30. Pennycuick L (1971) Frequency distributions of parasites in a population of three-spined sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus L., with particular reference to the negative binomial distribution. Parasitology 63:389–406PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Peterson RO (1977) Wolf ecology and prey relationships on Isle Royale. National Park Service Science Monograph no. 11, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  32. Post E, Peterson RO, Stenseth NC, McLaren BE (1999) Ecosystem consequences of wolf behavioural response to climate. Nature 410:905–907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rau ME, Caron FR (1979) Parasite-induced susceptibility of moose to hunting. Can J Zool 57:2466–2468Google Scholar
  34. Rausch RL (1995) Life cycle patterns and geographic distribution of Echinococcus species. In: Thompson RCA , Lymbery AJ (eds) Echinococcus and hydatid disease. CAB International, Wallingford, pp 90–134Google Scholar
  35. Rousset F, Thomas F, De Meeûs T, Renaud F (1996) Inference of parasite-induced host mortality from distributions of parasite loads. Ecology 77:2203–2211Google Scholar
  36. Shaw DJ, Dobson AP (1995) Patterns of macroparasite abundance and aggregation in wildlife populations: a quantitative review. Parasitology 111(Suppl):S111–S133PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Shaw DJ, Grenfell BT, Dobson AP (1998) Patterns of macroparasite aggregation in wildlife host populations. Parasitology 117:597–610CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Siegel S, Castellan NJ (1988) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry, 3rd edn. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  40. Thompson RCA (1995) Biology and systematics of Echinococcus. In: Thompson RCA , Lymbery AJ (eds) Echinococcus and hydatid disease. CAB International, Wallingford, pp 1–37Google Scholar
  41. Tompkins DM, Begon M (1999) Parasites can regulate wildlife populations. Parasitol Today 15:311–313CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Van Ballenberghe V, Ballard WB (1994) Limitation and regulation of moose populations: the role of predation. Can J Zool 72:2071–2077Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada
  2. 2.Department of Wildlife EcologyUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations