Parasite-induced change in host behaviour and susceptibility to predation in an eye fluke–fish interaction

Seppälä, Otto; Karvonen, Anssi; Valtonen, E. T.

doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2003.10.021

Cited by 142 publications

(130 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

120

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The mean intensity of infection for the analysed fish species was lower than Höglund and Thulin (1990), who reports that fish harbouring more than 40 Diplostomum metacercariae on their eyes are largely parasitized. According to several authors, the high infection rate with diplostomid metacercariae in fish can cause blindness or visual impairment (EIRAS, 1994), cataracts (SHARIFF et al, 1980;KARVONEN et al, 2004), problems with a food intake and growth (OWEN et al, 1993) and increased susceptibility to predation (CROWDEN;BROOM, 1980;SEPPÄLÄ et al, 2004). However, Karvonen et al (2004) and Owen et al (1993) report effects in fish with less than 10 Diplostomum spathaceum metacercariae (Rudolphi, 1819) and correlations between the number of metacercariae and the intensity of the effect.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Diplostomum and Austrodiplostomum metacercariae are frequently found in the eyes of freshwater fishes, which are the second intermediate hosts during the life cycle of the parasite (SEPPÄLÄ et al, 2004). The adult stage parasitises the digestive tract of piscivorous birds, and Phalacrocorax brasilianus (Gmelin, 1789) [=Phalacrocorax olivaceus] is considered definitive host of this digenean in Brazil (TRAVASSOS et al, 1969;NORONHA et al, 2009;MONTEIRO et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This makes the fish more susceptible to predation and facilitates the transmission of the parasite to the definitive hosts (SEPPÄLÄ et al, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

New host records and a checklist of fishes infected with Austrodiplostomum compactum (Digenea: Diplostomidae) in Brazil

Ramos

Franceschini

Zago

et al. 2013

Rev. Bras. Parasitol. Vet.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reports the infection of fishes by Austrodiplostomum compactum metacercariae in the Chavantes reservoir, medium Paranapanema River, municipality of Ipaussu, São Paulo State, Brazil. Twenty-three fish species were analysed, and 13 were infected with A. compactum metacercariae (56.5%) in their eyes. The following six fish species are new hosts for this metacercaria: Crenicichla haroldoi (1/1), Eigenmannia trilineata (11/6), Hoplosternum littorale (11/1), Iheringichthys labrosus (17/2), Leporinus amblyrhynchus (11/1), and Piaractus mesopotamicus (3/1). These new species increase the number of Brazilian fish species infected with this parasite to 36. Based on these findings, we hypothesise that the metacercariae larval stage of the parasite has a low specificity for the second intermediate host (fish). The majority of fish species infected in Brazil belong to the Loricariidae and Cichlidae families. For the fish species with higher mean abundances in Brazil, six are non-native species, and currently, Plagioscion squamosissimus has the highest mean abundance. The majority of fish species infected with A. compactum in Brazil are concentrated in the Paraná basin, although this may be related to the distribution of researchers.Keywords: Freshwater fishes, parasite, Trematoda, metacercariae, infection, Paraná basin. ResumoEste estudo relata a infecção por metacercárias de Austrodiplostomum compactum em peixes do reservatório de Chavantes, médio Paranapanema, Ipaussu, São Paulo, Brasil. Vinte e três espécies de peixes foram analisadas, e 13 estavam infectadas com metacercárias (56,5%) em seus olhos. Seis espécies de peixes foram registradas como novos hospedeiros: Crenicichla haroldoi (1/1), Eigenmannia trilineata (11/6), Hoplosternum littorale (11/1), Iheringichthys labrosus (17/2), Leporinus amblyrhynchus (11/1), and Piaractus mesopotamicus (3/1), aumentando para 36 o número de peixes brasileiros infectados por este parasita. Assim, inferimos que este estágio larval do parasita possui baixa especificidade parasitária em relação ao seu segundo hospedeiro intermediário (peixes). No Brasil, a maioria das espécies de peixes infectadas pertence às famílias Loricariidae e Cichlidae. Quanto às espécies de peixes com as maiores abundâncias médias no Brasil, seis são espécies não-nativas, sendo Plagioscion squamosissimus a espécie com a maior abundância média. Ainda, a maioria das espécies de peixes infectadas por A. compactum no Brasil, estão concentradas na bacia do Paraná, sendo este fato possivelmente relacionado com a distribuição de pesquisadores.Palavras-chave: Peixes de água doce, parasita, Trematoda, metacercária, infecção, bacia do Paraná.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

New host records and a checklist of fishes infected with Austrodiplostomum compactum (Digenea: Diplostomidae) in Brazil

Ramos

Franceschini

Zago

et al. 2013

Rev. Bras. Parasitol. Vet.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the earlier studies examining the risk of non-host predation as a cost of host manipulation, the susceptibility of infected and uninfected hosts to different predator types have been investigated experimentally only in the eye fluke (D. spathaceum)-fish interaction (Seppälä et al 2004(Seppälä et al , 2005(Seppälä et al , 2006. In those studies, eye fluke-infected fish were more susceptible to artificial predation (capture by a dip net), imitating predation by gulls and terns (definitive hosts of the parasite; Seppälä et al 2004Seppälä et al , 2005, but infection did not predispose fish to predation by pike, a non-host predaceous fish species (Seppälä et al 2006).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Mouritsen & Poulin (2003) estimated that only 2.5% of Curtuteria australis (Trematoda) metacercariae inducing surfacing in their cockle intermediate hosts are transmitted successfully to bird definitive hosts, whereas 17.1% are lost to fishes, which are non-host predators that take advantage of manipulation. However, the risk of non-host predation as a cost of manipulation has been considered only in very few other study systems (Microphallus sp.-snail: Levri & Lively 1996, Levri 1998; Diplostomum spathaceum-fish: Seppälä et al 2006; Pomphorhynchus laevis-gammarid: Lagrue et al 2007), and its consequences for parasite transmission success have been investigated experimentally only in the eye fluke (D. spathaceum)-fish interaction (Seppälä et al 2004(Seppälä et al , 2005(Seppälä et al , 2006. Therefore, empirical studies examining the ratio between the benefits and costs of manipulation for parasite transmission are in high demand.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Host manipulation by parasites in the world of dead-end predators: adaptation to enhance transmission?

2008

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trophically transmitted parasites often alter their intermediate host's phenotype, thereby predisposing the hosts to increased predation. This is generally considered a parasite strategy evolved to enhance transmission to the next hosts. However, the adaptive value of host manipulation is not clear as it may be associated with costs, such as increased susceptibility to predators that are unsuitable next hosts for the parasites. We examined the ratio between the benefits and costs of host manipulation for transmission success of Acanthocephalus lucii (Acanthocephala), a parasite that alters the hiding behaviour and pigmentation of its isopod hosts. We experimentally compared the susceptibility of infected and uninfected isopods to predation by perch (Perca fluvialis; definitive host of the parasite) and dragonfly larvae (dead end). We found that the parasite predisposed the isopods to predation by both predators. However, the increased predation vulnerability of the infected isopods was higher towards perch. This suggests that, despite the costs due to non-host predation, host manipulation may still be advantageous for the parasite.

show abstract

Comment on a perspective: Molecular detections of new agents in finfish—Interpreting biological significance for fish health management

Mordecai,

Di Cicco,

Deeg

et al. 2024

J Aqua Anim Hlth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Parasite-induced change in host behaviour and susceptibility to predation in an eye fluke–fish interaction

Cited by 142 publications

References 29 publications

New host records and a checklist of fishes infected with Austrodiplostomum compactum (Digenea: Diplostomidae) in Brazil

New host records and a checklist of fishes infected with Austrodiplostomum compactum (Digenea: Diplostomidae) in Brazil

Host manipulation by parasites in the world of dead-end predators: adaptation to enhance transmission?

Comment on a perspective: Molecular detections of new agents in finfish—Interpreting biological significance for fish health management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About