| Literature DB >> 23840603 |
Patrick M Brock1, Ailsa J Hall, Simon J Goodman, Marilyn Cruz, Karina Acevedo-Whitehouse.
Abstract
Within individuals, immunity may compete with other life history traits for resources, such as energy and protein, and the damage caused by immunopathology can sometimes outweigh the protective benefits that immune responses confer. However, our understanding of the costs of immunity in the wild and how they relate to the myriad energetic demands on free-ranging organisms is limited. The endangered Galapagos sea lion (Zalophus wollebaeki) is threatened simultaneously by disease from domestic animals and rapid changes in food availability driven by unpredictable environmental variation. We made use of this unique ecology to investigate the relationship between changes in immune activity and changes in body condition. We found that during the first three months of life, changes in antibody concentration were negatively correlated with changes in mass per unit length, skinfold thickness and serum albumin concentration, but only in a sea lion colony exposed to anthropogenic environmental impacts. It has previously been shown that changes in antibody concentration during early Galapagos sea lion development were higher in a colony exposed to anthropogenic environmental impacts than in a control colony. This study allows for the possibility that these relatively large changes in antibody concentration are associated with negative impacts on fitness through an effect on body condition. Our findings suggest that energy availability and the degree of plasticity in immune investment may influence disease risk in natural populations synergistically, through a trade-off between investment in immunity and resistance to starvation. The relative benefits of such investments may change quickly and unpredictably, which allows for the possibility that individuals fine-tune their investment strategies in response to changes in environmental conditions. In addition, our results suggest that anthropogenic environmental impacts may impose subtle energetic costs on individuals, which could contribute to population declines, especially in times of energy shortage.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23840603 PMCID: PMC3695956 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0067132
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Comparison of full and null models on the effect of changes in immune measures on changes in body condition; F-tests in pups, likelihood ratio tests in juveniles.
| Pups | Juveniles | |||||||
| Condition Variable | Immune Variable | N | F |
| Ntotal | Nindividuals | Likelihood Ratio |
|
| ΔMLR | ΔIgG | 51 | 3.452 | 0.005** | 73 | 38 | 4.991 | 0.661 |
| ΔMLR | ΔPHA | 55 | 1.205 | 0.319 | 61 | 36 | 12.860 | 0.075 |
| ΔMLR | ΔWBC | 51 | 2.431 | 0.034* | 84 | 45 | 2.687 | 0.912 |
| ΔSFT | ΔIgG | 47 | 2.578 | 0.028* | – | – | – | – |
| ΔSFT | ΔPHA | 55 | 1.036 | 0.419 | – | – | – | – |
| ΔSFT | ΔWBC | 51 | 2.294 | 0.044* | – | – | – | – |
| ΔALB | ΔIgG | 39 | 2.342 | 0.046* | 58 | 35 | 15.740 | 0.027* |
| ΔALB | ΔPHA | 42 | 0.912 | 0.509 | 42 | 27 | 7.594 | 0.369 |
| ΔALB | ΔWBC | 39 | 0.603 | 0.749 | 61 | 36 | 5.952 | 0.545 |
‘Δ’ denotes ‘change in’, ‘MLR’ mass per unit length (kg in pups; Ln (kg) in juveniles), ‘SFT’ skinfold thickness (cm), ‘ALB’ albumin concentration (relative peak intensity), ‘IgG’ total immunoglobulin G concentration (mg mL−1), ‘WBC’ total leukocyte concentration (109 L−1) and ‘PHA’ response to phytohemagglutinin (mm).
The effects of changes in immune measures on changes in body condition for models of relationships that explained significantly more variation than equivalent null models (Table 1); see Tables S2–3 for full model details.
| Condition Variable | Colony | Immune Variable | N | Slope | SE |
|
| |
| Pups | ΔMLR (kg) | HIC | ΔIgG (mg/ml) | 27 | −0.0511 | 0.0214 | −2.385 | 0.025* |
| CC (Females) | ΔIgG (mg/ml) | 24 | 0.1134 | 0.0353 | 3.208 | 0.004** | ||
| ΔMLR (kg) | HIC | ΔWBC (109/l) | 25 | 0.1604 | 0.1458 | 1.100 | 0.283 | |
| CC | ΔWBC (109/l) | 26 | 0.3613 | 0.1228 | 2.941 | 0.007** | ||
| ΔSFT (cm) | HIC | ΔIgG (mg/ml) | 24 | −0.0042 | 0.0019 | −2.262 | 0.034* | |
| CC | ΔIgG (mg/ml) | 23 | 0.0100 | 0.0035 | 2.855 | 0.010* | ||
| ΔSFT (cm) | HIC | ΔWBC (109/l) | 25 | 0.0231 | 0.0124 | 1.864 | 0.076 | |
| CC | ΔWBC (109/l) | 26 | 0.0266 | 0.0175 | 1.514 | 0.144 | ||
| ΔALB (relative PI) | HIC | ΔIgG (mg/ml) | 22 | −0.0018 | 0.0008 | −2.235 | 0.038* | |
| CC | ΔIgG (mg/ml) | 17 | −0.0003 | 0.002 | −0.176 | 0.863 | ||
| Juveniles | ΔALB (relative PI) | HIC (Males) | ΔIgG (mg/ml) | 30, 17 | −0.0073 | 0.0033 | −2.244 | 0.034* |
| CC | ΔIgG (mg/ml) | 28, 18 | 0.0003 | 0.0032 | 0.101 | 0.920 |
‘Δ’ denotes ‘change in’, ‘MLR’ mass per unit length (kg), ‘SFT’ skinfold thickness (cm), ‘ALB’ albumin concentration (relative peak intensity), ‘IgG’ total immunoglobulin G concentration (mg mL −1), ‘WBC’ total leukocyte concentration (109 L−1) and ‘PHA’ response to phytohemagglutinin (mm). Juvenile sample sizes are shown as the total number of data points followed by the number of individuals.
Figure 1Predicted relationships between changes in immune measures and changes in body condition in Galapagos sea lion pups resident in the human-impacted (A, C, E) and the control (B, D, F) colonies.
Dotted lines represent 95% confidence intervals, ‘Δ’ denotes ‘change in’, ‘MLR’ mass per unit length (kg), ‘SFT’ skinfold thickness (cm), ‘ALB’ albumin concentration (relative peak intensity), ‘IgG’ total immunoglobulin G concentration (mg mL−1), ‘WBC’ total leukocyte concentration (109 L−1) and ‘PHA’ response to phytohemagglutinin (mm). Note that the relationship shown in (B) is for females only.