| Literature DB >> 29988462 |
Anssi Karvonen1, Kai Lindström2.
Abstract
Parasitism is considered a major selective force in natural host populations. Infections can decrease host condition and vigour, and potentially influence, for example, host population dynamics and behavior such as mate choice. We studied parasite infections of two common marine fish species, the sand goby (Pomatoschistus minutus) and the common goby (Pomatoschistus microps), in the brackish water Northern Baltic Sea. We were particularly interested in the occurrence of parasite taxa located in central sensory organs, such as eyes, potentially affecting fish behavior and mate choice. We found that both fish species harbored parasite communities dominated by taxa transmitted to fish through aquatic invertebrates. Infections also showed significant spatiotemporal variation. Trematodes in the eyes were very few in some locations, but infection levels were higher among females than males, suggesting differences in exposure or resistance between the sexes. To test between these hypotheses, we experimentally exposed male and female sand gobies to infection with the eye fluke Diplostomum pseudospathaceum. These trials showed that the fish became readily infected and females had higher parasite numbers, supporting higher susceptibility of females. Eye fluke infections also caused high cataract intensities among the fish in the wild. Our results demonstrate the potential of these parasites to influence host condition and visual abilities, which may have significant implications for survival and mate choice in goby populations.Entities:
Keywords: host–parasite interaction; mate choice; parasite community; sexual selection; virulence
Year: 2018 PMID: 29988462 PMCID: PMC6024149 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.4151
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Prevalence (% fish infected) and mean abundance (number of parasites per fish ± SE) of the parasite taxa detected in sand gobies captured from three locations in the Northern Baltic Sea in June 2014–October 2015
| Parasite | June 2014 | June 2015 | October 2015 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Station | Långholmen | Vargskär | Station | Långholmen | Vargskär | Station | Långholmen | Vargskär | |
|
|
90 |
86.7 |
67.7 |
96.7 |
96.7 |
66.7 |
16.7 |
57.1 | |
|
| 0.0 |
10 | 0.0 |
10 |
3.3 |
10 | 0.0 |
57.1 | |
|
| 0.0 |
6.7 |
3.2 |
26.7 |
23.3 |
30 |
16.7 |
78.6 | |
|
|
3.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
6.7 |
3.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
21.4 | |
|
|
31 |
33.3 |
9.7 |
40 |
30 |
40 |
16.7 |
64.3 | |
|
|
56 |
80 |
80.6 |
50 |
26.7 |
70 | 0.0 |
71.4 | |
|
| 0.0 |
6.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
|
|
13.8 |
13.3 |
6.5 |
3.3 |
3.3 |
3.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
|
|
3.4 |
3.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
| Unidentified nematode |
10.3 |
16.7 |
16.1 |
6.7 | 0.0 |
6.7 | 0.0 |
7.1 | |
|
|
6.9 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
|
|
6.9 | 0.0 |
6.5 | 0.0 |
6.7 |
6.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
Figure 1Female sand gobies (Pomatoschistus minutus). Photograph by Kai Lindström
Prevalence (% fish infected) and mean abundance (number of parasites per fish ± SE) of the parasite taxa detected in common gobies captured from three locations in the Northern Baltic Sea in June 2014–October 2015
| Parasite | June 2014 | June 2015 | October 2015 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Station | Långholmen | Vargskär | Station | Långholmen | Vargskär | Station | Långholmen | Vargskär | |
|
|
100 |
95.8 |
96.7 |
100 | 0.0 |
60.0 | |||
|
|
3.3 |
50.0 |
16.7 |
3.3 | 0.0 |
6.7 | |||
|
| 0.0 | 0.0 |
3.3 |
30.0 |
83 |
13.3 | |||
|
| 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
3.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |||
|
|
3.3 |
83 |
30 |
13.3 |
83 |
13.3 | |||
|
|
16.7 |
58.3 |
63.3 |
76.6 |
45.8 |
73.3 | |||
|
|
3.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |||
|
|
3.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 |
13.3 | 0.0 |
3.3 | |||
|
|
6.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |||
| Unidentified nematode |
6.7 |
4.2 | 0.0 |
3.3 |
42 | 0.0 | |||
|
| 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |||
|
| 0.0 |
4.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |||
Figure 2Estimated mean total parasite abundance (±SE) in sand gobies and common gobies captured at three sampling times (a, sampling locations combined) and from three sampling locations (b, sampling times combined) in the Northern Baltic Sea. Estimates are from GLM models. Numbers of fish studied are indicated in Table 1
Figure 3Mean abundance of Diplostomum spp. eye flukes (±SE) in female and male sand gobies captured from Vargskär at three sampling times (a). Estimated mean abundance of D. pseudospathaceum eye flukes (±SE) from the ANCOVA model in female and male sand gobies exposed to experimental parasite infection in three containers in the laboratory (b)
Figure 4Relationship between the abundance of Diplostomum spp. eye flukes and the coverage of parasite‐induced cataracts in eye lenses of sand gobies (data pooled across sampling locations and sampling times). Black line shows the fit of the nonlinear regression model [cataract coverage = 90.4 + −111.1*exp(−0.76*parasites), R 2 = .41, F 3,35 = 72.5, p < .0001]