Developmental Stage of Parasites Influences the Structure of Fish-Parasite Networks

Bellay, Sybelle; Oliveira, Edson Fontes de; Almeida‐Neto, Mário; Lima-Júnior, Dilermando P.; Takemoto, Ricardo Massato; Luque, José L.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0075710

Cited by 44 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Parasites are typically found in communities in which different species coexist in fish of the same host species or in different host species (MUÑOZ et al, 2006;TAVARES & LUQUE, 2008;BELLAY et al, 2013;ALCÂNTARA & TAVARES-DIAS, 2015). Protozoan and monogenoidean ectoparasites are parasites typical of lentic environments, but their reproduction is strongly favored by eutrophized environments like the hydrographic basin of this study (TAKIYAMA et al, 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Moreover, the Kn indicated good body condition and general health for A. falcirostris and A. falcatus. In host-parasite networks, the host body provides a microhabitat for ectoparasites and endoparasites species (GUIDELLI et al, 2006;BELLAY et al, 2013). It has been suggested that high parasite species diversity may be an indicator of individual fish growth and body condition.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Parasite communities of the predatory fish, Acestrorhynchus falcatus and Acestrorhynchus falcirostris, living in sympatry in Brazilian Amazon

Hoshino

Neves

Tavares‐Dias

2016

Rev. Bras. Parasitol. Vet.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the parasite communities of wild Acestrorhynchus falcatus and Acestrorhynchus falcirostris populations living in sympatry in Brazilian Amazon. In these two hosts, a total of 12 parasite species e 1-9 parasite species were found per fish, and 10 of these species are metazoans. Eight species of parasites were common to both host species and four of them exhibited differences in abundance and/or prevalence. Parasite communities of the hosts were taxonomically similar (83%) and composed of both ectoparasites and endoparasites, and characterized by high prevalence and high abundance of endoparasites and an aggregated dispersion pattern. For A. falcirostris, the dominant parasite was Ichthyophthirius multifiliis, and for A. falcatus, it was Piscinoodinium pillulare. Shannon diversity and Berger-Parker dominance were similar for both hosts, while the parasites species richness and evenness showed differences influenced by the ectoparasites species. These two populations of hosts that inhabited the same geographical area had different sizes, but were exposed to the same infective stages, and acquired qualitatively and quantitatively similar endoparasites community, thus indicating that the amounts and types of prey congeneric that they were eating were similar. Therefore, the overlap in the same occurrence area play an important role in the parasite communities to these phylogenetically related hosts.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parasite communities of the predatory fish, Acestrorhynchus falcatus and Acestrorhynchus falcirostris, living in sympatry in Brazilian Amazon

Hoshino

Neves

Tavares‐Dias

2016

Rev. Bras. Parasitol. Vet.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, any relationship between the body size of the fish and the burden of parasites using it as an intermediate host should be positive, because large hosts are unlikely to serve as prey. Interest in the patterns and process of parasite communities in freshwater fish assemblages of tropical areas have been demonstrated in several studies (Guégan et al 1992;Choudhury and Dick 2000;Poulin 2001; Pérez-Ponce de León and Choudhury 2005; Luque and Poulin 2008;Bellay et al 2013;Bellay et al 2015;Salgado-Maldonado et al 2016). Factors such as the biogeography, ecology of both tropical freshwater fish and parasites, as well as environmental conditions, all contribute towards parasites fauna in such studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of the parasite communities in a fish assemblage of a river in the Brazilian Amazon region

Baia

Florentino

Silva

et al. 2018

Acta Parasitologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper characterizes the pattern of ectoparasite and endoparasite communities in an assemblage of 35 sympatric fish from different trophic levels in a tributary from the Amazon River system, northern Brazil. In detritivorous, carnivorous, omnivorous and piscivorous hosts, the species richness consisted of 82 ectoparasites and endoparasites, but protozoan ectoparasites such as Ichthyophthirius multifiliis, Piscinoodinium pillulare and Tripartiella sp. were dominant species predominated, such that they were present in 80% of the hosts. The taxon richness was in the following order: Monogenea > Nematoda > Digenea > Crustacea > Protozoa > Acanthocephala = Cestoda > Hirudinea. Among the hosts, the highest number of parasitic associations occurred in Satanoperca jurupari, Aequidens tetramerus, Hoplerythrinus unitaeniatus, Hoplosternum littorale, Cichlasoma amazonarum, Chaetobranchus flavescens, Squaliforma emarginata, Chaetobranchopsis orbicularis and Hoplias malabaricus. A weak positive correlation between ectoparasite abundance and length of the hosts was observed. Ectoparasite communities of detritivorous, carnivorous and omnivorous hosts were similar, but these differed from the communities of piscivorous hosts. Larval endoparasite species with low host specificity were the main determinants of the parasite infracommunity structure of the fish assemblage. Fish assemblage had few species of helminth that were specialist endoparasites, while many were parasites at the larval stage, infecting intermediate and paratenic hosts. Finally, carnivorous and omnivorous hosts harbored endoparasite communities that were more heterogeneous than those of detritivorous and piscivorous hosts. This result lends supports to the notion that the feeding habits of the host species are a significant factor in determining the endoparasites fauna.

show abstract

“…1D in Olesen et al 2007) and expect that individuals with the same role play similar functions in determining the structure of the parasite community. In fact, these cz-scores have been used to explain the specificity of host-endoparasite networks (Bellay et al 2011(Bellay et al , 2013 or to determine the role of native and invasive plants and pollinators (Traveset et al 2013). Network analysis has arguably been under-exploited in studies of host-parasite invasions (Médoc et al 2017), although it has been more widely applied to understand invasions of other biological systems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Native and invasive hosts play different roles in host–parasite networks

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parasites are often key players in biological invasions since they can mediate the impact of host invasions or can themselves become invasive species. However, the nature and extent of parasite‐mediated invasions are often difficult to delineate. Here, we used individual‐based, weighted bipartite networks to study the roles (degrees of interactions of individuals in a modular network according to their within‐ and among‐module connections) played by native and invasive host individuals to their parasite communities. We studied two phylogenetically and ecologically close fish species, Mugil cephalus s.l. and Planiliza haematocheilus (Teleostei: Mugilidae). Planiliza haematocheilus is native to the Sea of Japan and invasive in the Sea of Azov whereas, M. cephalus s.l. is native to both seas. Based on the common evolutionary history that drives native host–parasite networks, we hypothesised that 1) native networks have higher modularity than invaded ones; and 2) invasive hosts in the invaded area play a peripheral role to structure parasite communities. We analysed the whole parasite community and subsets based on transmission strategy and host specificity of the parasite species to establish whether modularity and host roles are related to these features in the native and invaded areas. All networks were found to be modular. However, modularity tended to be higher in networks of the native area rather than those of the invaded area. Host individuals of both fish species played similar roles in the native area, whereas invasive hosts played a peripheral role in the networks of the invaded area. We propose that long‐term monitoring of the roles of invasive hosts in parasite communities can be a useful proxy for estimating the maturity of the establishment of the invasive hosts in an ecosystem.

show abstract

Developmental Stage of Parasites Influences the Structure of Fish-Parasite Networks

Cited by 44 publications

References 35 publications

Parasite communities of the predatory fish, Acestrorhynchus falcatus and Acestrorhynchus falcirostris, living in sympatry in Brazilian Amazon

Parasite communities of the predatory fish, Acestrorhynchus falcatus and Acestrorhynchus falcirostris, living in sympatry in Brazilian Amazon

Patterns of the parasite communities in a fish assemblage of a river in the Brazilian Amazon region

Native and invasive hosts play different roles in host–parasite networks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About