1999
DOI: 10.1006/anbe.1998.0999
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evidence for adaptive changes in egg laying in crickets exposed to bacteria and parasites

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
166
1

Year Published

2003
2003
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 180 publications
(173 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
(57 reference statements)
6
166
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Both male and female hosts can compensate for an increased risk of mortality imposed by an infection by increasing their investment in earlier reproduction. For example, among female hosts, Tasmanian devils (Sarcophilus harrisii) infected by a transmissible cancer mature and breed earlier [12], and crickets (Acheta domesticus) infected by a bacterium, and water fleas (Daphnia magna) infected by a microsporidian lay more eggs [13,14]. Among male hosts, frogs (Lithobates pipiens) infected by a fungus increase sperm production [15], flies (Drosophila nigrospiracula) infected by a parasitic mite, and amphipods (Corophium volutator) infected by trematodes increase reproductive effort [16,17], and beetles (Tenebrio molitor) infected by tapeworms provide higher quality nuptial gifts to their mates, thus increasing egg production [18].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Both male and female hosts can compensate for an increased risk of mortality imposed by an infection by increasing their investment in earlier reproduction. For example, among female hosts, Tasmanian devils (Sarcophilus harrisii) infected by a transmissible cancer mature and breed earlier [12], and crickets (Acheta domesticus) infected by a bacterium, and water fleas (Daphnia magna) infected by a microsporidian lay more eggs [13,14]. Among male hosts, frogs (Lithobates pipiens) infected by a fungus increase sperm production [15], flies (Drosophila nigrospiracula) infected by a parasitic mite, and amphipods (Corophium volutator) infected by trematodes increase reproductive effort [16,17], and beetles (Tenebrio molitor) infected by tapeworms provide higher quality nuptial gifts to their mates, thus increasing egg production [18].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Frogs infected by B. dendrobatidis often have lower body condition than uninfected frogs [28][29][30]; when this occurs, they might reduce calling effort. On the other hand, infected hosts with relatively good body condition may have the plasticity to respond to the infection by investing more in present reproductive effort than uninfected individuals when their expectation of survival to the next reproductive bout is lower [13][14][15][16][17][18]. Such a response could at least partially counteract the effects of natural selection on disease resistance, because it may reduce differences in reproductive success between more and less vulnerable males.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This may reflect an increased investment in the current litter, to the potential detriment of future reproduction. Iteroparous species, such as mice, usually do not put all their investment into one reproductive bout, because it may reduce future reproductive success and therefore overall lifetime fecundity [70,71]. However, if longevity is reduced by a parasite, such a shift in investment priorities may occur [72].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Any response in females that occurs specifically in response to CW, rather than normal wounding, would remain undetected. In contrast, infection is known to induce resource allocation (Gustafsson et al 1994;Adamo 1999;Reaney and Knell 2010). Siva-Jothy (2009) argued that fe-males are able to predict the time of mating and, therefore, the physiological and infection costs of CW.…”
Section: Life-history Consequences Of Cwmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such microbes can enter copulatory wounds (see references in Reinhardt et al 2005;Otti et al 2009;Siva-Jothy 2009), and elicit immune responses (Otti et al 2009(Otti et al , 2013Siva-Jothy 2009). Microbes can also increase an infected host's investment into current reproduction (Gustafsson et al 1994;Adamo 1999;Reaney and Knell 2010), and sexually transmitted microbes particularly benefit from, and select for, increased mating activity of the host (albeit inducing sterility) (Lockhart et al 1996). Under the condition that sterility does not occur immediately, copulatory infection, or the associated immune response, may induce the wound recipient to invest more into current reproductive output.…”
Section: Selection For the Transfer Of Stds In The Wound Inflictormentioning
confidence: 99%