Hosts can avoid parasites (and pathogens) by reducing social contact, but such isolation may carry costs, e.g. increased vulnerability to predators. Thus, many predator–host–parasite systems confront hosts with a trade-off between predation and parasitism. Parasites, meanwhile, evolve higher virulence in response to increased host sociality and consequently, increased multiple infections. How does predation shift coevolution of host behaviour and parasite virulence? What if predators are selective, i.e. predators disproportionately capture the sickest hosts? We answer these questions with an eco-coevolutionary model parametrized for a Trinidadian guppy–
- Award ID(s):
- 1939399
- PAR ID:
- 10313456
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
- Volume:
- 9
- ISSN:
- 2296-701X
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Gyrodactylus spp. system. Here, increased predation drives host coevolution of higher grouping, which selects for higher virulence. Additionally, higher predator selectivity drives the contact rate higher and virulence lower. Finally, we show how predation and selectivity can have very different impacts on host density and prevalence depending on whether hosts or parasites evolve, or both. For example, higher predator selectivity led to lower prevalence with no evolution or only parasite evolution but higher prevalence with host evolution or coevolution. These findings inform our understanding of diverse systems in which host behavioural responses to predation may lead to increased prevalence and virulence of parasites. -
Wildlife species are often heavily parasitized by multiple infections simultaneously. Yet research on sylvatic transmission cycles, tend to focus on host interactions with a single parasite and neglects the influence of co- infections by other pathogens and parasites. Co-infections between macro-parasites and micro-parasites can alter mechanisms that regulate pathogenesis and are important for understanding disease emergence and dy- namics. Wildlife rodent hosts in the Lyme disease system are infected with macro-parasites (i.e., ticks and hel- minths) and micro-parasites (i.e., Borrelia spp.), however, there has not been a study that investigates the interaction of all three parasites (i.e., I. pacificus, Borrelia spp., and helminths) and how these co-infections impact prevalence of micro-parasites. We live-trapped rodents in ten sites in northern California to collect feces, blood, ear tissue, and attached ticks. These samples were used to test for infection status of Borrelia species (i.e., micro- parasite), and describe the burden of ticks and helminths (i.e., macro-parasites). We found that some rodent hosts were co-infected with all three parasites, however, the burden or presence of concurrent macro-parasites were not associated with Borrelia infections. For macro-parasites, we found that tick burdens were positively associ- ated with rodent Shannon diversity while negatively associated with predator diversity, whereas helminth burdens were not significantly associated with any host community metric. Ticks and tick-borne pathogens are associated with rodent host diversity, predator diversity, and abiotic factors. However, it is still unknown what factors helminths are associated with on the community level. Understanding the mechanisms that influence co- infections of multiple types of parasites within and across hosts is an increasingly critical component of characterizing zoonotic disease transmission and maintenance.more » « less
-
Predators and parasites are critical, interconnected members of the community and have the potential to shape host populations. Predators, in particular, can have direct and indirect impacts on disease dynamics. By removing hosts and their parasites, predators alter both host and parasite populations and ultimately shape disease transmission. Selective predation of infected hosts has received considerable attention as it is recognized to have important ecological implications. The occurrence and consequences of preferential consumption of uninfected hosts, however, has rarely been considered. Here, we synthesize current evidence suggesting this strategy of selectively predating uninfected individuals is likely more common than previously anticipated and address how including this predation strategy can change our understanding of the ecology and evolution of disease dynamics. Selective predation strategies are expected to differentially impact ecological dynamics and therefore, consideration of both strategies is required to fully understand the impact of predation on prey and host densities. In addition, given that different strategies of prey selectivity by predators change the fitness payoffs both for hosts and their parasites, we predict amplified coevolutionary rates under selective predation of infected hosts compared to uninfected hosts. Using recent work highlighting the critical role that predators play in disease dynamics, we provide insights into the potential mechanisms by which selective predation on healthy individuals can directly affect ecological outcomes and impact long‐term host–parasite coevolution. We contrast the consequences of both scenarios of selective predation while identifying current gaps in the literature and future research directions.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Resource selection is widely appreciated to be context‐dependent and shaped by both biological and abiotic factors. However, few studies have empirically assessed the extent to which selective foraging behaviour is dynamic and varies in response to environmental conditions for free‐ranging animal populations.
Here, we assessed the extent that forage selection fluctuated in response to different environmental conditions for a free‐ranging herbivore, moose (
Alces alces ), in Isle Royale National Park, over a 10‐year period. More precisely, we assessed how moose selection for coniferous versus deciduous forage in winter varied between geographic regions and in relation to (a) the relative frequency of forage types in the environment (e.g. frequency‐dependent foraging behaviour), (b) moose abundance, (c) predation rate (by grey wolves) and (d) snow depth. These factors are potentially important for their influence on the energetics of foraging. We also built a series of food‐chain models to assess the influence of dynamic foraging strategies on the stability of food webs.Our analysis indicates that moose exhibited negative frequency dependence, by selectively exploiting rare resources. Frequency‐dependent foraging was further mediated by density‐dependent processes, which are likely to be predation, moose abundance or some combination of both. In particular, frequency dependence was weaker in years when predation risk was high (i.e. when the ratio of moose to wolves was relatively low). Selection for conifers was also slightly weaker during deep snow years.
The food‐chain analysis indicates that the type of frequency‐dependent foraging strategy exhibited by herbivores had important consequences for the stability of ecological communities. In particular, the dynamic foraging strategy that we observed in the empirical analysis (i.e. negative frequency dependence being mediated by density‐dependent processes) was associated with more stable food web dynamics compared to fixed foraging strategies.
The results of this study indicated that forage selection is a complex ecological process, varying in response to both biological (predation and moose density) and abiotic factors (snow depth) and over relatively small spatial scales (between regions). This study also provides a useful framework for assessing the influence of other aspects of foraging behaviour on the stability of food web dynamics.
-
null (Ed.)Research on the ‘ecology of fear’ posits that defensive prey responses to avoid predation can cause non-lethal effects across ecological scales. Parasites also elicit defensive responses in hosts with associated non-lethal effects, which raises the longstanding, yet unresolved question of how non-lethal effects of parasites compare with those of predators. We developed a framework for systematically answering this question for all types of predator–prey and host–parasite systems. Our framework reveals likely differences in non-lethal effects not only between predators and parasites, but also between different types of predators and parasites. Trait responses should be strongest towards predators, parasitoids and parasitic castrators, but more numerous and perhaps more frequent for parasites than for predators. In a case study of larval amphibians, whose trait responses to both predators and parasites have been relatively well studied, existing data indicate that individuals generally respond more strongly and proactively to short-term predation risks than to parasitism. Apart from studies using amphibians, there have been few direct comparisons of responses to predation and parasitism, and none have incorporated responses to micropredators, parasitoids or parasitic castrators, or examined their long-term consequences. Addressing these and other data gaps highlighted by our framework can advance the field towards understanding how non-lethal effects impact prey/host population dynamics and shape food webs that contain multiple predator and parasite species.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2021.758374
