| Literature DB >> 29713645 |
Tomáš Pakosta1, Lukáš Vetešník2, Andrea Šimková1.
Abstract
Carassius gibelio is an extraordinary cyprinid species exhibiting both sexual and asexual reproduction. We hypothesized that parasitism selection is one of the potential mechanisms contributing to the coexistence of the two reproductive forms of C. gibelio living in the same habitat. We performed a four-year study to investigate the dynamics of parasite infection in C. gibelio. According to the Red Queen prediction, the asexual form is a target of parasite adaptation due to its low genetic variability. Both sexual and gynogenetic forms of C. gibelio exhibited similar levels of prevalence, with monogeneans being the most frequently observed parasite group. We observed the temporal dynamics of parasite infection in the last year of investigation, when both forms were more strongly parasitized. The sexual form was more parasitized by ectoparasites in the first and last years and less parasitized by nematodes in the last year when compared to the gynogenetic form. We found no trend of high parasite infection in gynogenetic mtDNA haplotypes. We conclude that Red Queen dynamics is not the mechanism driving parasite infection in sexual-gynogenetic C. gibelio over a long time scale. Alternatively, we suggest that the dynamics of parasite infection in this complex may be generated by multiple mechanisms.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29713645 PMCID: PMC5866858 DOI: 10.1155/2018/6983740
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Haplotypes of the mitochondrial control region (D-loop) in investigated specimens of Carassius auratus complex. Total numbers of specimens and the numbers of specimens in each of four consecutive years (in parentheses) are shown for each mtDNA haplotype.
|
| Haplotype | Number of diploids | Number of triploids |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| G01 | – | 43 (11/4/14/14) |
| G02 | 61 (16/21/15/9) | 27 (7/8/5/7) | |
| G04 | 34 (10/9/6/9) | 2 (0/1/0/1) | |
| G05 | 9 (1/2/5/1) | – | |
| G07 | – | 11 (8/2/0/1) | |
| G11 | – | 8 (4/3/1/0) | |
|
| |||
|
| A01 | 5 (3/1/1/0) | – |
|
| |||
|
| L01 | 1 (0/0/1/0) | – |
|
| |||
|
| M01 | 2 (0/1/0/1) | – |
Prevalence, abundance (mean ± standard deviation, SD), and intensity of infection (minimum–maximum) for parasite species in Carassius gibelio. P: prevalence, A: abundance, and I: intensity of infection.
| Parasite species | Diploid males | Diploid females | Triploid females | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P (%) | A | I | P (%) | A | I | P (%) | A | I | ||
| Mean (±SD) | Mean (±SD) | Mean (±SD) | ||||||||
| Monogenea |
| 100 | 55.29 (60.92) | 6–353 | 100 | 59.48 (51.10) | 6–291 | 100 | 48.68 (36.75) | 12–187 |
|
| 100 | 45.02 (48.06) | 8–301 | 100 | 43.88 (38.44) | 3–214 | 100 | 39.30 (32.21) | 5–196 | |
|
| 100 | 62.02 (69.52) | 4–419 | 100 | 64.56 (60.44) | 12–330 | 100 | 58.77 (53.23) | 5–372 | |
|
| 100 | 17.29 (19.73) | 1–118 | 98 | 19.02 (18.61) | 0–93 | 100 | 16.68 (13.01) | 1–90 | |
|
| 100 | 17.88 (20.28) | 2–125 | 100 | 15.81 (13.36) | 2–76 | 100 | 13.56 (10.20) | 1–73 | |
|
| 77 | 2.42 (3.45) | 0–22 | 81 | 2.75 (2.65) | 0–15 | 65 | 1.32 (1.81) | 0–10 | |
|
| 46 | 7.98 (13.82) | 0–66 | 56 | 5.23 (8.06) | 0–46 | 63 | 5.89 (8.50) | 0–39 | |
|
| 83 | 42.81 (135.46) | 0–970 | 87 | 105.42 (267.80) | 0–1387 | 87 | 18.85 (25.74) | 0–180 | |
|
| 44 | 2.79 (8.76) | 0–62 | 42 | 2.56 (6.77) | 0–35 | 23 | 0.26 (0.53) | 0–3 | |
|
| 38 | 2.60 (9.02) | 0–62 | 58 | 5.42 (13.99) | 0–71 | 60 | 2.45 (3.63) | 0–23 | |
|
| 8 | 0.12 (0.47) | 0–3 | 13 | 0.17 (0.47) | 0–2 | 7 | 0.08 (0.30) | 0–2 | |
|
| ||||||||||
| Cestoda | Caryophyllidea sp. | 2 | 0.02 (0.14) | 0-1 | 4 | 0.73 (5.08) | 0–37 | – | – | – |
|
| ||||||||||
| Trematoda |
| – | – | – | 8 | 0.15 (0.63) | 0–4 | 5 | 0.15 (0.73) | 0–5 |
|
| – | – | – | – | – | – | 1 | 0.01 (0.10) | 0-1 | |
| Digenea sp. | 15 | 0.37 (1.24) | 0–8 | 8 | 0.23 (0.87) | 0–5 | 7 | 0.09 (0.35) | 0–2 | |
|
| ||||||||||
| Nematoda |
| 23 | 0.92 (2.94) | 0–20 | 25 | 2.40 (7.00) | 0–46 | 45 | 7.98 (17.94) | 0–103 |
|
| 17 | 3.46 (13.40) | 0–72 | 31 | 10.27 (42.30) | 0–299 | 22 | 4.89 (29.71) | 0–280 | |
|
| ||||||||||
| Hirudinea |
| 2 | 0.02 (0.14) | 0-1 | 2 | 0.02 (0.14) | 0-1 | 4 | 0.04 (0.20) | 0-1 |
|
| ||||||||||
| Mollusca | Glochidium ( | 8 | 0.08 (0.27) | 0-1 | 6 | 0.10 (0.45) | 0–3 | 3 | 0.05 (0.31) | 0–2 |
|
| ||||||||||
| Protozoa |
| 58 | 11.52 (32.58) | 0–162 | 65 | 6.56 (9.05) | 0–36 | 44 | 9.09 (26.95) | 0–192 |
|
| ||||||||||
| Crustacea |
| 15 | 0.31 (0.89) | 0–5 | 21 | 0.62 (1.62) | 0–8 | 13 | 0.32 (0.97) | 0–6 |
|
| 13 | 0.13 (0.34) | 0-1 | 15 | 0.17 (0.43) | 0–2 | 18 | 0.29 (0.94) | 0–8 | |
The effects of ploidy, sex, year, and body size on parasite abundance (transformed in log). Parasite abundance was expressed by total parasite abundance, abundance of the most common parasitic groups, genera, or species in Carassius gibelio. The statistically significant p values are shown in bold.
| Dependent variable | Predicted variables |
|
| Total | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total parasites | Year | 14.432 |
| 10.038 |
|
| Sex | 0.002 | 0.960 | |||
| Ploidy | 0.002 | 0.964 | |||
| Body size | 11.572 |
| |||
| Year | 3.556 |
| |||
| Ploidy | 0.001 | 0.979 | |||
|
| |||||
| Monogenea | Year | 13.720 |
| 9.119 |
|
| Sex | 0.010 | 0.922 | |||
| Ploidy | 0.206 | 0.651 | |||
| Body size | 6.660 |
| |||
| Year | 4.063 |
| |||
| Ploidy | 0.279 | 0.598 | |||
|
| |||||
|
| Year | 8.387 |
| 5.530 |
|
| Sex | 0.482 | 0.488 | |||
| Ploidy | 0.051 | 0.822 | |||
| Body size | 6.851 |
| |||
| Year | 1.927 | 0.127 | |||
| Ploidy | 0.069 | 0.794 | |||
|
| |||||
|
| Year | 18.599 |
| 9.557 |
|
| Sex | 0.110 | 0.740 | |||
| Ploidy | 0.038 | 0.846 | |||
| Body size | 1.446 | 0.231 | |||
| Year | 4.489 |
| |||
| Ploidy | 0.073 | 0.787 | |||
|
| |||||
|
| Year | 11.887 |
| 8.268 |
|
| Sex | 0.210 | 0.647 | |||
| Ploidy | 0.151 | 0.698 | |||
| Body size | 8.936 |
| |||
| Year | 1.847 | 0.140 | |||
| Ploidy | 0.191 | 0.662 | |||
|
| |||||
| Nematoda | Year | 12.201 |
| 8.217 |
|
| Sex | 1.884 | 0.172 | |||
| Ploidy | 7.624 |
| |||
| Body size | 14.008 |
| |||
| Year | 1.191 | 0.315 | |||
| Ploidy | 7.690 |
| |||
Figure 1Parasite abundance (transformed in log) in sexual diploid form (F2n: diploid females and M2n: diploid males) and gynogenetic triploid females (F3n). Parasite abundance is expressed using the total parasites (a), Monogenea (b), Dactylogyrus species (c), Gyrodactylus species (d), Ichthyophthirius multifiliis (e), and Nematoda (f).