Abstract
AbstractTransmission between hosts is crucial to the growth, development and reproduction of many parasites. As a consequence, parasites are under selection to maximise transmission success and exhibit many behavioural and morphological adaptations that allow detection of, and movement between, hosts. However, transmission success is not determined by parasites alone, but is also shaped by host behaviours. Often, host behaviours function to minimise the risk of exposure to parasites; in some cases, however, host behaviours may be manipulated by parasites to increase transmission success. In this study, we investigated transmission of the parasitic miteRiccardoella oudemansibetween slug (Limacus maculatus) hosts, considering the role of both host and parasite behaviour in determining transmission success. Host-host transmission occurred when slugs were in physical contact, but mites were also capable of moving across the substrate to locate new hosts, a process facilitated by mucus trails. We found no strong evidence that slugs avoid parasitised conspecifics, or that mites manipulate slug behaviour to increase transmission. Finally, mites showed a preference for the mucus of parasitised slugs, but did not discriminate between mucus from their own host and another parasitised slug. A general preference for mucus from parasitised slugs is likely to be important in encouraging mites to remain in close contact with their host and may also facilitate host-switching and outbreeding. We encourage further study of parasitism byRiccardoellain limacid slugs, where cross-species variation in host social behaviour may drive differences in the rate and success of parasite transmission across slug species.
Funder
New College, University of Oxford
Pembroke College, University of Oxford
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Reference49 articles.
1. Adamo SA (2013) Parasites: evolution’s neurobiologists. J Exp Biol 216:3–10
2. Akimov IA, Zabludovska SA (2009) Host-parasite coevolutionary relationships of mites of the genus Riccardoella (Prostigmata, Ereynetidae) and terrestrial mollusks. Vestn Zool 43:517–524
3. Allan F, Rollinson D, Smith J, Dunn A (2009) Host choice and penetration by Schistosoma haematobium miracidia. J Helminthol 83:33–38
4. Bailey RJE, Birkett MA, Ingvarsdóttir A, Mordue AJ, Mordue W, O’Shea B, Pickett JA, Wadhams LJ (2006) The role of semiochemicals in host location and non-host avoidance by salmon louse (Lepeophtheirus salmonis) copepodids. Can J Fish Aquat 63:448–456
5. Baur A, Baur B (2005) Interpopulation variation in the prevalence and intensity of parasitic mite infection in the land snail Arianta arbustorum. Invert Biol 124:194–201