Parasite-induced increases in the energy costs of movement of host freshwater fish

Slavík, Ondřej; Horký, Pavel; Douda, Karel; Velíšek, Josef; Kolářová, Jitka; Lepič, Pavel

doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2017.01.010

Cited by 40 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The relationship between glochidia and fish is mainly described as phoretic (i.e., a form of symbiosis where the symbiont is mechanically transported by its host) rather than nutritive or for protection. Glochidia usually do not grow while on the hosts (but see Barnhart et al., ; Douda, ; Fritts, Fritts, Carleton, & Bringolf, ; Reis, Collares‐Pereira, & Araujo, ; Taeubert et al., ), and they have a small (although detectable) impact on fish fitness and behaviour, which may increase at high levels of infestation and when mussels have longer encystment periods (as those of margaritiferid and quadruline species) (Horký, Douda, Maciak, Závorka, & Slavík, ; Slavík et al., ; Thomas, Adamo, & Moore, ). The main advantage of having fish as hosts is thought to be related to dispersal, including upstream colonization (Barnhart et al., ; Horký et al., ; Schwalb, Morris, & Cottenie, ; Schwalb, Poos, & Ackerman, ; Terui et al., ) and promoting connectivity among populations (Leibold et al., ; Newton, Woolnough, & Strayer, ).…”

Section: Why Are Fish Important For Freshwater Mussels?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Fish and mussels: Importance of fish for freshwater mussel conservation

Ilarri²,

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Co‐extinctions are increasingly recognized as one of the major processes leading to the global biodiversity crisis, but there is still limited scientific evidence on the magnitude of potential impacts and causal mechanisms responsible for the decline of affiliate (dependent) species. Freshwater mussels (Bivalvia, Unionida), one of the most threatened faunal groups on Earth, need to pass through a parasitic larval (glochidia) phase using fishes as hosts to complete their life cycle. Here, we provide a synthesis of published evidence on the fish–mussel relationship to explore possible patterns in co‐extinction risk and discuss the main threats affecting this interaction. We retrieved 205 publications until December 2015, most of which were performed in North America, completed under laboratory conditions and were aimed at characterizing the life cycle and/or determining the suitable fish hosts for freshwater mussels. Mussel species were reported to infest between one and 53 fish species, with some fish families (e.g., Cyprinidae and Percidae) being used more often as hosts than others. No relationship was found between the breadth of host use and the extinction risk of freshwater mussels. Very few studies focused on threats affecting the fish–mussel relationship, a knowledge gap that may impair the application of future conservation measures. Here, we identify a variety of threats that may negatively affect fish species, document and discuss the concomitant impacts on freshwater mussels, and suggest directions for future studies.

show abstract

Section: Why Are Fish Important For Freshwater Mussels?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Fish and mussels: Importance of fish for freshwater mussel conservation

Ilarri²,

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consequently, several adverse effects of glochidiosis on fish host have been reported, including, for example, energetic cost and dysfunction of liver, kidneys and gills (Slavik et al, 2017), altered behavior (Horky et al, 2014;Terui et al, 2017) and reduced expression of secondary sexual traits and decreased sperm quality (Kekäläinen et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of glochidia infection on growth of fish: freshwater pearl mussel Margaritifera margaritifera and brown trout Salmo trutta

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effect of freshwater mussels' (Unionoida) glochidia on the growth of fish host has remained poorly studied. We compared the specific growth rate of the juvenile, PIT-marked brown trout (Salmo trutta) between uninfected controls to those experimentally infected (average initial intensity of infection 8000 fish -1 ) with Margaritifera margaritifera glochidia, kept in high and low feeding. Growth and mortality of fish were monitored for 10 months. Our hypothesis was that glochidiosis would impair the growth of fish. According to our hypothesis, infected fish gained statistically significantly less weight than the control fish throughout the experiment. A proportional increase in weight of control individuals was 11% higher than that of the infected fish. However, neither the feeding regime (high, low) nor the period (September-November, November-March, March-May), had a significant effect on the growth difference between control and infected fish. As the effect of infection on the growth of fish was subtle and no effect on host mortality was detected either, this may turn public opinion favorable for M. margaritifera conservation even if the salmonid host population is important for commercial or recreational fishing.

show abstract

“…As a result, host suitability will be primarily determined by adaptations of mussels to a specific host fish species. However, despite an usually low prevalence and abundance of glochidia in fish populations (Blažek & Gelnar, ; Martel & Lauzon‐Guay, ), recent findings indicate that glochidia can have multiple effects on host fish physiology (Ooue, Terui, Urabe, & Nakamura, ; Slavík et al., ), behaviour (Filipsson et al., ; Horký, Douda, Maciak, Závorka, & Slavík, ) and condition status (Douda et al., ), which can operate at environmentally relevant glochidia densities. These potentially substantial costs to fish of hosting glochidia could play a significant role in mussel–fish coevolution.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Glochidia of S. woodiana are relatively large (390-400 lm), triangular in shape and attach to fish fins and gills where they became encysted, parasitising the host fish for several days depending on ambient temperature (Dudgeon & Morton, 1984). It has recently been documented that S. woodiana can cause significant harm to its hosts Slav ık et al, 2017), supporting the possibility that potential host species might evolve resistance against S. woodiana glochidia. From data collected in the non-native part of its range, S. woodiana is considered to be a generalist host whose larvae are capable of development on almost all available fish species (Douda, Vrt ılek, Slav ık, & Reichard, 2012;Watters, 1997).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of local adaptation in shaping fish‐mussel coevolution

Douda

Liu

et al. 2017

Freshwater Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract1. The survival of affiliate (dependent) species in a changing environment is determined by the interactions between the affiliate species and their available hosts.However, the patterns of spatial and temporal changes in host compatibility are often unknown despite host shifts having direct impact on the persistence of local populations. Bivalves of the order Unionida (freshwater mussels) are a functionally important but declining group of affiliate species, which are dependent on freshwater fish to host their parasitic larvae. The role of local adaptations and host fish resistance in shaping freshwater mussel host relationships remains poorly understood. 2.We used an invasive East Asian unionid bivalve, Sinanodonta woodiana, and its potential host fishes to study the mechanisms shaping fish-mussel coevolution using a combination of laboratory cross-exposure methods and field-collected data. We tested whether generalist host use of S. woodiana is pertinent to native host species, with special attention to bitterling fishes (Cyprinidae: Acheilognathinae) that are characterised by a mutual association with freshwater mussels. We also tested whether the pattern of the parasite-host association varies temporally (between areas of ancient and recent sympatry) and spatially (at a sub-basin level in its native range). 3.Results revealed the ability of S. woodiana to widely exploit non-bitterling host fishes at a global scale. In contrast, the ability of S. woodiana to exploit closely associated bitterling fishes was low in its native range (with ancient sympatry). In areas of recent sympatry (non-native S. woodiana range in Europe), S. woodiana glochidia were demonstrated to readily parasitise local, evolutionarily naive bitterling species at high density. 4.The results of a population-level experiment with three native populations of S. woodiana and rose bitterling, Rhodeus ocellatus, from various sub-basins of the River Yangtze confirmed that mussel populations vary in their compatibility with particular host populations. However, there was no evidence of population-specific adaptive coevolution.5. This study provides the first evidence for a role of fish counter-adaptations against freshwater mussel glochidia, and documents the importance of population-level variation in shaping compatibility between glochidia and their host

show abstract

Parasite-induced increases in the energy costs of movement of host freshwater fish

Cited by 40 publications

References 51 publications

Fish and mussels: Importance of fish for freshwater mussel conservation

Fish and mussels: Importance of fish for freshwater mussel conservation

Effect of glochidia infection on growth of fish: freshwater pearl mussel Margaritifera margaritifera and brown trout Salmo trutta

The role of local adaptation in shaping fish‐mussel coevolution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About