| Literature DB >> 23049796 |
María José Ruiz-López1, Ryan J Monello, Matthew E Gompper, Lori S Eggert.
Abstract
Understanding factors that determine heterogeneity in levels of parasitism across individuals is a major challenge in disease ecology. It is known that genetic makeup plays an important role in infection likelihood, but the mechanism remains unclear as does its relative importance when compared to other factors. We analyzed relationships between genetic diversity and macroparasites in outbred, free-ranging populations of raccoons (Procyon lotor). We measured heterozygosity at 14 microsatellite loci and modeled the effects of both multi-locus and single-locus heterozygosity on parasitism using an information theoretic approach and including non-genetic factors that are known to influence the likelihood of parasitism. The association of genetic diversity and parasitism, as well as the relative importance of genetic diversity, differed by parasitic group. Endoparasite species richness was better predicted by a model that included genetic diversity, with the more heterozygous hosts harboring fewer endoparasite species. Genetic diversity was also important in predicting abundance of replete ticks (Dermacentor variabilis). This association fit a curvilinear trend, with hosts that had either high or low levels of heterozygosity harboring fewer parasites than those with intermediate levels. In contrast, genetic diversity was not important in predicting abundance of non-replete ticks and lice (Trichodectes octomaculatus). No strong single-locus effects were observed for either endoparasites or replete ticks. Our results suggest that in outbred populations multi-locus diversity might be important for coping with parasitism. The differences in the relationships between heterozygosity and parasitism for the different parasites suggest that the role of genetic diversity varies with parasite-mediated selective pressures.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23049796 PMCID: PMC3458861 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0045404
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Location of the 12 study sites contained within the 6 source areas in central Missouri, USA.
Source areas were defined based on Fst assessments as Baskett, Rudolf Bennitt, Davisdale, Reform, Prairie Forks and Whetstone Creek. Location and treatments of each site are indicated by closed circles (control sites which did not receive supplemental food and thus raccoons did not aggregate), open circles (sites which received food, but food was dispersed so as to not to cause raccoons to aggregate) or open squares (sites which received supplemental food at a single site so as to cause raccoons to aggregate).
Ranking of models estimating abundance of (a) replete and (b) non-replete ticks (n = 259) and (c) lice (n = 307) in raccoons, including non-genetic and genetic terms.
| Model | k | ΔAICc | W | Δ | log (l) |
| (a) | |||||
| Aggregation+Food+Month+IR+IR2+Area | 15 | 0.00 | 0.43 | 0.00 | −458.53 |
| Aggregation+Food+Month+IR2+Area | 14 | 0.74 | 0.30 | 1.45 | −460.03 |
| Aggregation+Food+Month+Area | 13 | 1.69 | 0.18 | 2.33 | −461.62 |
| (b) | |||||
| Month+Year+Aggregation+Food+Age+Sex+ Area | 18 | 0.00 | 0.34 | 0.00 | −984.55 |
| Month+Year+Aggregation+Food+Area | 14 | 0.74 | 0.23 | 1.45 | −989.48 |
| Month+Year+Aggregation+Food+Age+Sex+IR2+Area | 19 | 2.22 | 0.11 | 3.04 | −984.50 |
| Month+Year+Aggregation+Food+Age+Sex+IR+Area | 19 | 2.22 | 0.11 | 3.04 | −984.50 |
| Month+Year+Aggregation+Food+IR2+Area | 15 | 2.92 | 0.08 | 4.31 | −989.45 |
| Month+Year+Aggregation+Food+IR+Area | 15 | 2.99 | 0.08 | 4.45 | −989.48 |
| (c) | |||||
| Aggregation+ Age+Sex+Age*Sex | 10 | 0.00 | 0.53 | 0.00 | −579.82 |
| Aggreg+Food+Age+Sex+Body Condition+Age*Sex | 12 | 1.80 | 0.21 | 2.46 | −578.57 |
| Aggregation+ Sex | 4 | 2.23 | 0.17 | 3.04 | −587.24 |
Analyses were conducted separately for each species and category within species. Models included represent the 90% confidence set (∑weight >0.90) used to calculate the model averages. k = number of model parameters, W i = Akaikés weight, Δi = evidence ratio, log (l) = log-likelihood value.
Figure 2Relationship between multi-locus genetic diversity (internal relatedness, IR) and individual parasite load.
A- replete tick abundance; B- non-replete tick abundance; C- lice abundance and D- endoparasite richness.
Model averaged estimates and odds ratios of parameters included in the 90% confidence set of models (∑weight >0.90) used to estimate abundance of non-replete and replete D. variabilis.
| Replete | Non-replete | |||||
| Predictor | β(±95%CI) | SE | Odds(±95%CI) | β (±95%CI) | SE | Odds(±95%CI) |
| IR | 0.40(−0.05,0.85) | 0.23 | 1.49(0.95,2.34) | −0.02(−0.23,0.18) | 0.11 | 0.98(0.79,1.20) |
| IR2 | −0.52(−1.01, −0.03) | 0.25 | 0.59(0.36,0.97) | −0.03(−0.25,0.18) | 0.11 | 0.97(0.78,1.20) |
| Area (Davis) | 0.82(0.15,1.49) | 0.34 | 2.27(1.16,4.43) | 1.53(1.17, 1.89) | 0.19 | 4.61(3.22,6.61) |
| Area (PF) | 0.15(−0.79,1.09) | 0.48 | 1.18(0.46,3.03) | 1.31(0.80,1.81) | 0.26 | 3.71(2.22,6.11) |
| Area (R) | 1.10(0.32,1.87) | 0.39 | 3.00(1.37,6.48) | 1.32(0.86,1.77) | 0.23 | 3.74(2.36,5.87) |
| Area (Ref) | 0.17(−0.79,1.14) | 0.49 | 1.18(0.45,3.13) | 0.83(0.30, 1.36) | 0.27 | 2.29(1.35,3.90) |
| Area (Whet) | 0.89(0.16,1.62) | 0.37 | 2.43(1.17,5.05) | 0.39(−0.03,0.81) | 0.21 | 1.47(0.97,2.25) |
| Month (August) | −0.18(−1.02,0.67) | 0.43 | 0.83(0.36,1.95) | −0.87(−1.34, −0.41) | 0.24 | 0.42(0.26,0.66) |
| Month (July) | 0.85(0.17,1.54) | 0.35 | 2.34(1.18,4.66) | 0.95(0.57,1.33) | 0.19 | 2.59(1.77,3.78) |
| Month (June) | 0.57(−0.22,1.37) | 0.41 | 1.77(0.80,3.93) | 0.71(0.28,1.14) | 0.22 | 2.03(1.32,3.13) |
| Month (May) | 0.58(−0.26,1.42) | 0.43 | 1.78(0.77,4.14) | 0.45(−0.02,0.91) | 0.24 | 1.57(0.98,2.48) |
| Aggregation (Yes) | 0.60(0.09,1.10) | 0.26 | 1.82(1.09,3.00) | 0.36(0.08,0.64) | 0.14 | 1.43(1.08,1.89) |
| Food (Yes) | −0.14(−0.88,0.60) | 0.37 | 0.87(0.41,1.82) | −0.41(−0.81, −0.01) | 0.20 | 0.66(0.44,0.99) |
| Year (2007) | – | – | −0.12(−0.35,0.11) | 0.12 | 0.88(0.70,1.12) | |
| Sex (Male) | – | – | 0.31(0.10,0.52) | 0.11 | 1.36(1.11,1.68) | |
| Age II | – | – | −0.07(−0.34,0.21) | 0.14 | 0.93(0.71,1.23) | |
| Age III | – | – | 0.12(−0.19,0.43) | 0.16 | 1.13(0.83,1.54) | |
| Age IV | – | – | 0.05(−0.27,0.37) | 0.16 | 1.05(0.76,1.45) | |
The parameters Area (Baskett), Year (2006), Food (No) and Sex (Female) were used as the reference level and model average set to 0.
Davis = Davisdale CA, PF = Prairie Forks CA, R = Rudolf Bennitt CA, Ref = Reform CA, Whet = Whetstone Creek CA.
Ranking of models estimating endoparasite richness in a raccoon population (n = 250) including non-genetic and genetic terms.
| Model | k | ΔAICc | W | Δ | log (l) |
| Age+Food+Year+Sex+IR+Area | 14 | 0.00 | 0.22 | 0.00 | −489.61 |
| Age+Food+Year+IR+Area | 13 | 0.46 | 0.18 | 1.26 | −490.96 |
| Age+Food+Year+Sex+Area | 13 | 0.91 | 0.14 | 1.58 | −491.19 |
| Age+Food+Year+Area | 12 | 1.28 | 0.12 | 1.89 | −492.48 |
| Age+Food+Year+Sex+IR+IR2+Area | 15 | 2.12 | 0.08 | 2.89 | −489.54 |
| Age+Food+Year+Sex+IR2+Area | 14 | 2.27 | 0.07 | 3.12 | −490.75 |
| Age+Food+Year+IR+IR2+Area | 14 | 2.59 | 0.06 | 3.65 | −490.91 |
| Age+Food+Year+IR2+Area | 13 | 2.71 | 0.06 | 3.87 | −492.08 |
Models included represent the 90% confidence set (∑weight >0.90) used to calculate the model averages. k = number of model parameters, W i = Akaikés weight, Δi = evidence ratio, log (l) = log-likelihood value.
Model averaged estimates and odds ratios of parameters included in the 90% confidence set of models (∑weight >0.90) used to estimate endoparasite species richness.
| Predictor | β(±95%CI) | SE | Odds(±95%CI) |
| IR | 0.39(−0.05,0.84) | 0.23 | 1.48(0.95,2.32) |
| IR2 | 0.21(−0.24,0.66) | 0.23 | 1.23(0.79,1.94) |
| Area (Davis) | −0.08(−0.79,0.62) | 0.36 | 0.93(0.45,1.86) |
| Area (PF) | −0.64(−1.58,0.30) | 0.48 | 0.53(0.21,1.35) |
| Area (R) | −1.18(−2.00, −0.36) | 0.42 | 0.31(0.13,0.70) |
| Area (Ref) | 0.25(−0.75,1.25) | 0.51 | 1.28(0.47,3.49) |
| Area (Whet) | 1.13(0.29,1.98) | 0.43 | 3.10(1.34,7.24) |
| Year (2007) | 0.53(0.07,0.98) | 0.23 | 1.70(1.07,2.66) |
| Food (Yes) | 0.89(0.19,1.59) | 0.36 | 2.43(1.21,4.90) |
| Age II | 0.13(−0.52,0.79) | 0.33 | 1.14(0.60, 2.20) |
| Age III | 0.69(0.00,1.38) | 0.35 | 1.99(1.00, 3.97) |
| Age IV | −0.02(−0.73,0.68) | 0.36 | 0.98(0.48, 1.97) |
| Sex (Male) | −0.37(−0.81,0.08) | 0.23 | 0.69(0.44, 1.08) |
The parameters Area (Baskett), Year (2006), Food (No) and Sex (Female) were used as the reference level and model average set to 0. Davis = Davisdale CA, PF = Prairie Forks CA, R = Rudolf Bennitt CA, Ref = Reform CA, Whet = Whetstone Creek CA.
Figure 3Effect sizes of single-locus for endoparasite richness and replete-ticks abundance.
Effect sizes were calculated for each of the 14 microsatellite loci. Each effect size includes 95% Confidence Interval. Open circles represent the effect size for endoparasite richness and closed circles for replete tick abundance.