Synergism and antagonism between two trematode species in the snail Lymnaea rubiginosa

Lie, Kian Joe; Lim, Hok-Kan; Ow-Yang, C. K.

doi:10.1016/0020-7519(73)90064-7

Cited by 17 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with this logic are well-documented observations of interference competition between trematode species (reviewed by Lim and Heyneman 1972). Competition between two species of trematodes within individual snails, herein termed the "infracommunity" (Holmes and Price 1986), often results in losses of subordinate species (reviewed in Lie et al 1973, Combes 1982, Sousa 1992. It is not clear, however, that interactions are frequent enough to significantly affect attributes of community structure at the level of the trematode community within a host population (the "component community" sensu Holmes and Price 1986) (Holmes 1990, Sousa 1990, 1993.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Although trematode species might isolate themselves if they specialized among various host phenotypes, or more readily infected unparasitized than parasitized snails, there is no evidence that this occurs in our host-parasite system with the possible exception of size selectivity (Sousa 1990(Sousa , 1993. In experimental studies of other snail-trematode systems, if miracidia (searching stages hatched from trematode eggs) were selective, they were more likely to penetrate snails infected with other trematode species than uninfected snails , Kuris 1973, Lie et al 1973, 1976,Boss 1977,Jourdane 1980,Lie 1982. The propensity of trematode miracidia to penetrate infected hosts would increase the incidence of parasite co-occurrences and make our analysis of structure conservative.…”

Section: Interpretation Of Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analysis of Larval Trematode Communities

Lafferty¹,

Sammond²,

Kuris³

1994

Ecology

117

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We can compare natural communities with null models of communities to indicate how they differ from random assemblages of species (i.e., how much structure is present). However, because null models draw on observed values of species' prevalences, whatever structure already exists in natural communities affects the composition of a null model and weakens its comparative power. To address this, we developed formulae to estimate "pre—interactive" species prevalences permitting a more sensitive quantification of community structure. Nonetheless, if a null model deviates from the community that we base it on, it is difficult to separate the effects of heterogeneity in recruitment from competition. We have developed a method to test for each independently. Applying our analytical techniques to a well—studied guild of larval trematodes in the salt marsh snail Cerithidea californica revealed that competitive interactions among species were the most significant structuring force. Interestingly, spatial heterogeneity acted to significantly intensify species co—occurrences. This differs from previous studies, which argued that the isolating effects of spatial heterogeneity, not competition, structure these communities by reducing co—occurrences.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Interpretation Of Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Larval Trematode Communities

Lafferty¹,

Sammond²,

Kuris³

1994

Ecology

117

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, one form of heterogeneity that we have not been able to assess is the repeatedly documented differential high susceptibility of previously infected snails (e.g. 44,69). This source of heterogeneity could greatly intensify the expected frequency of multiple infections.…”

Section: Heterogeneitymentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Temporal heterogeneity may have subtler effects on structure, however. Prior residency is an important factor that determines dominance for some interactive pairs of trematodes (61,69). Here, species that recruit early will have an advantage.…”

Section: Heterogeneitymentioning

confidence: 99%

COMMUNITY STRUCTURE: Larval Trematodes in Snail Hosts

Kuris¹,

Lafferty²

1994

Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst.

174

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In species assemblages of larval trematodes in individual snail hosts, fewer multispecies infections are observed than might be expected by chance. Both interspecific competition and the isolating effect of heterogeneity in recruitment may explain this pattern of community structure. Here, we analyzed the expected and observed frequency of double infections, using data culled from 62 studies. Our analysis included 296,180 host snails. Of these, 62,942 were infected with one or more species of trematode (23% pooled over all studies, 24% average across studies). By incorporating information from subsamples, we were able to estimate the proposed isolating effect of heterogeneity in recruitment. Surprisingly, spatial and temporal heterogeneity as well as differential prevalence among host size classes typically led to intensification of interactions (average increases in interactions by +19%, +19%, and +23%, respectively), while partitioning among host species usually led to isolation of potential competitors (a-1% average decrease in interactions). We calculated the expected number of interspecific double infections by applying rules of independent assortment to the frequency of trematode species. The majority of the 14,333 expected interactions did not persist; only 4,346 double infections were actually observed (a 69% decrease, 62% average). Competition, via a variety of interspecific competitive mechanisms by dominant species, is the structuring process most consistent with this paucity of observed multispecies interactions. How important is competition? Overall, we estimated that 13% (10% average) of the trematode infections were lost to interspecific interactions. Subordinate species in particular suffered very high losses.

show abstract

“…To date, this has been primarily assessed via the establishment (prevalence) of parasite species after co-exposure (Lie et al, 1973;Basch and DiConza, 1975;Christensen et al, 1987;Sousa, 1992). However, recent evidence suggests that co-infection can influence the evolution of hosts and parasites by modulating host life history (Escribano et al, 2001;Zakikhani et al, 2003), parasite transmission (Paul et al, 2002) and the virulence of the interaction (Escribano et al, 2001).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%