English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Tapeworm manipulation of copepod behaviour: parasite genotype has a larger effect than host genotype

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons56593

Benesh,  Daniel P.
Department Evolutionary Ecology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology, Max Planck Society;

External Resource

Link
(Publisher version)

https://datadryad.org/stash/dataset/doi:10.5061/dryad.v41d698
(Supplementary material)

Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Benesh, D. P. (2019). Tapeworm manipulation of copepod behaviour: parasite genotype has a larger effect than host genotype. Biology Letters, 15: 20190495. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2019.0495.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0004-EE12-C
Abstract
Compared with uninfected individuals, infected animals can exhibit altered phenotypes. The changes often appear beneficial to parasites, leading to the notion that modified host phenotypes are extended parasite phenotypes, shaped by parasite genes. However, the phenotype of a parasitized individual may reflect parasitic manipulation, host responses to infection or both, and disentangling the contribution of parasite genes versus host genes to these altered phenotypes is challenging. Using a tapeworm (Schistocephalus solidus) infecting its copepod first intermediate host, I performed a full-factorial, cross-infection experiment with five host and five parasite genotypes. I found that a behavioural trait modified by infection, copepod activity, was affected by both host and parasite genotype. There was no clear evidence for host genotype by parasite genotype interactions. Several observations indicated that host behaviour was chiefly determined by parasite genes: (i) all infected copepods, regardless of host or parasite genotype, exhibited behavioural changes, (ii) parasitism reduced the differences among copepod genotypes, and (iii) within infected copepods, parasite genotype had twice as large an effect on behaviour as host genotype. I conclude that the altered behaviour of infected copepods primarily represents an extended parasite phenotype, and I discuss how genetic variation in parasitic host manipulation could be maintained.