Behavioural modifications and increased predation risk of <i>Gammarus pulex</i> infected with <i>Polymorphus minutus</i>

Marriott, D. R.; Collins, M. L.; Paris, R. M.; Gudgin, D. R.; Barnard, C. J.; McGregor, Peter K.; Gilbert, Francis; Hartley, J. C.; Behnke, J. M.

doi:10.1080/00219266.1989.9655047

Cited by 18 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cezilly & Perrot‐Minnot (2005) review a number of examples of trophically transmitted parasites where manipulation increases predation by both host and non‐host species. For example, although the definitive hosts of the acanthocephalan Polymorphus minutus are aquatic birds, P. minutus increased the susceptibility of G. pulex to fish predators (Marriott et al. 1989).…”

Section: Parasites and Predatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How parasites affect interactions between competitors and predators

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a synthesis of empirical and theoretical work investigating how parasites influence competitive and predatory interactions between other species. We examine the direct and indirect effects of parasitism and discuss examples of density and parasiteinduced trait-mediated effects. Recent work reveals previously unrecognized complexity in parasite-mediated interactions. In addition to parasite-modified and apparent competition leading to species exclusion or enabling coexistence, parasites and predators interact in different ways to regulate or destablize the population dynamics of their joint prey. An emerging area is the impact of parasites on intraguild predation (IGP). Parasites can increase vulnerability of infected individuals to cannibalism or predation resulting in reversed species dominance in IGP hierarchies. We discuss the potential significance of parasites for community structure and biodiversity, in particular their role in promoting species exclusion or coexistence and the impact of emerging diseases. Ongoing invasions provide examples where parasites mediate native/invader interactions and play a key role in determining the outcome of invasions. We highlight the need for more quantitative data to assess the impact of parasites on communities, and the combination of theoretical and empirical studies to examine how the effects of parasitism scale up to community-level processes.

show abstract

Section: Parasites and Predatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How parasites affect interactions between competitors and predators

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…P. minutus is a trophically transmitted parasite which exploits amphipods as intermediate hosts and waterbirds as definitive hosts (Kennedy, 2006). Infection with P. minutus is known to influence G. roeseli's distribution , reproduction (Dezfuli et al 2008), physiology (Piscart et al 2007;Sures and Radszuweit, 2007), and behaviour (Marriott et al 1989;Bauer et al 2005;Médoc et al 2006Médoc and Beisel, 2008), but nothing has been reported regarding its trophic ecology once infected.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parasite-induced changes in the diet of a freshwater amphipod: field and laboratory evidence

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trophically transmitted parasites are likely to strongly influence food web-structure. The extent to which they change the trophic ecology of their host remains nevertheless poorly investigated and field evidence is lacking. This is particularly true for acanthocephalan parasites whose invertebrate hosts can prey on other invertebrates and contribute to leaf-litter breakdown. We used a multiple approach combining feeding experiments, neutral lipids and stable isotopes to investigate the trophic ecology of the freshwater amphipod Gammarus roeseli parasitized by the bird acanthocephalan Polymorphus minutus. Infected compared to uninfected amphipods consumed as many dead isopods, but fewer live isopods and less leaf material. Infection had no influence on the total concentration of neutral lipids. Contrary to what we expected based on laboratory findings, the nitrogen isotope signature, which allows for the estimation of consumer's trophic position, was not influenced by infection status. Conversely, the carbon isotope signature, which is used to identify food sources, changed with infection and suggested that the diet of infected G. roeseli includes less perilithon (i.e. fixed algae on rocks, stones) but more terrestrial inputs (e.g. leaf material) than that of uninfected conspecifics. This study shows evidence of changes in the trophic ecology of P. minutus-infected G. roeseli and we stress the need to complement feeding experiments with field data when investigating top-down effects of infection in an opportunistic feeder which adapts its diet to the available food sources.

show abstract

“…The question of specificity was raised since it has been stressed that non‐host predators sometimes benefit from feeding on the profitable prey that are manipulated intermediate hosts (Table 1: Marriott et al 1989, Ness and Foster 1999, Mouritsen and Poulin 2003, Kaldonski et al 2008, Seppälä et al 2008). It has been proposed that the lowest degree of specificity required for a host manipulation strategy to be adaptive may be tightly connected to the predation risk hosts are exposed to without manipulation (initial predation risk, Seppälä and Jokela 2008), or may depend on whether parasites show age‐dependent mortality or die only through random predation of their host (Parker et al 2009).…”

Section: From Multidimensionality To Specificitymentioning

confidence: 99%

When trophically‐transmitted parasites combine predation enhancement with predation suppression to optimize their transmission

Médoc

Beisel

2011

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trophically‐transmitted parasites are known for their ability to enhance predation of their intermediate host but they are less known for their ability to suppress predation. We review recent literature on host manipulation explaining why and when in its life cycle a parasite benefits from preventing the predation of its host. Predation suppression occurs in intermediate hosts as long as the parasite larva has not reached the developmental conditions allowing it to successfully establish in the next host (competency). We also examine the possibility that predation suppression may occur in hosts harbouring competent larvae (post competency) since some parasites have been shown to manipulate host behaviour in a way that decreases the risk of parasite death through non‐host predation (i.e. the consumption of its intermediate host by a predator that does not risk infection). Predation suppression when the parasite is competent has to be considered with respect to non‐host predation risk and is not mutually exclusive with predation enhancement. We use the recent theoretical advances in host manipulation to investigate the conditions under which predation suppression could evolve post competency.

show abstract

Behavioural modifications and increased predation risk of Gammarus pulex infected with Polymorphus minutus

Abstract: 1989) Behavioural modifications and increased predation risk of Gammarus pulex infected with Polymorphus minutus , Journal of Biological Education, 23:2, 135-141 To link to this article: http://dx.

Cited by 18 publications

References 13 publications

How parasites affect interactions between competitors and predators

How parasites affect interactions between competitors and predators

Parasite-induced changes in the diet of a freshwater amphipod: field and laboratory evidence

When trophically‐transmitted parasites combine predation enhancement with predation suppression to optimize their transmission

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About