‘Manipulation’ without the parasite: altered feeding behaviour of mosquitoes is not dependent on infection with malaria parasites

Abstract

Previous studies have suggested that Plasmodium parasites can manipulate mosquito feeding behaviours such as probing, persistence and engorgement rate in order to enhance transmission success. Here, we broaden analysis of this ‘manipulation phenotype’ to consider proximate foraging behaviours, including responsiveness to host odours and host location. Using Anopheles stephensi and Plasmodium yoelii as a model system, we demonstrate that mosquitoes with early stage infections (i.e. non-infectious oocysts) exhibit reduced attraction to a human host, whereas those with late-stage infections (i.e. infectious sporozoites) exhibit increased attraction. These stage-specific changes in behaviour were paralleled by changes in the responsiveness of mosquito odourant receptors, providing a possible neurophysiological mechanism for the responses. However, we also found that both the behavioural and neurophysiological changes could be generated by immune challenge with heat-killed Escherichia coli and were thus not tied explicitly to the presence of malaria parasites. Our results support the hypothesis that the feeding behaviour of female mosquitoes is altered by Plasmodium, but question the extent to which this is owing to active manipulation by malaria parasites of host behaviour.

Avian malaria: a new lease of life for an old experimental model to study the evolutionary ecology ofPlasmodium

“…Plasmodium parasites have been shown to manipulate their hosts at different stages of the parasite's life cycle ( [16,56], but see [57]). In particular, we previously reported that infected birds attract significantly more mosquitoes than uninfected ones, possibly through the emission of distinct olfactory signals [16].…”

Climate, environmental and socio-economic change: weighing up the balance in vector-borne disease transmission

“…Combining data for these two species to estimate vital rates would not necessarily generate realistic inference. Furthermore, data and research are particularly needed to better understand the influence of environmental factors on key parameters such as the EIP [89], vector competence [94,113], biting behaviour and interactions with infection [118,119], because these have been very under-researched to date.…”

Epidemiological Implications of Host Biodiversity and Vector Biology: Key Insights from Simple Models

“…(iii) Infection does not alter vector behavior, although this does occur for some pathogen/vector combinations (Auld and Tinsley 2015; but see Cator et al 2013). (iv) There are no density-dependent thresholds of vector-host ratio, though this can occur if hosts respond to high vector densities by increased grooming behavior and/or immune response to bites (Levin and Fish 1998;Darbro and Harrington 2007; but see also Charlwood et al 1995).…”