Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T07:51:49.094Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Rodent malaria parasites suffer from the presence of conspecific clones in three-clone Plasmodium chabaudi infections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 October 2003

J. C. DE ROODE
Affiliation:
Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, Ashworth Laboratories, King's Buildings, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT, Scotland, UK
A. F. READ
Affiliation:
Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, Ashworth Laboratories, King's Buildings, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT, Scotland, UK
B. H. K. CHAN
Affiliation:
Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, Ashworth Laboratories, King's Buildings, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT, Scotland, UK
M. J. MACKINNON
Affiliation:
Institute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, Ashworth Laboratories, King's Buildings, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT, Scotland, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We studied infection dynamics of Plasmodium chabaudi in mice infected with 3 genetically distinct clones – 1 less virulent than the other 2 – either on their own or in mixtures. During the acute phase of infection, total numbers of asexual parasites in mixed-clone infections were equal to those produced by the 3 clones alone, suggesting strong in-host competition among clones. During the chronic phase of the infection, mixed-clone infections produced more asexual parasites than single-clone infections, suggesting lower levels of competition than during the acute phase, and indicating that a genetically diverse infection is harder to control by the host immune system. Transmission potential over the whole course of infection was lower from mixed-clone infections than from the average of the 3 single-clone infections. These results suggest that in-host competition reduces both growth rate and probability of transmission for individual parasite clones.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
2003 Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Average log10 asexual parasite density (A) and log10 gametocyte density (B) through time in mice infected with either clone AS, AT or ER of Plasmodium chabaudi or a mixture of these 3 clones. Numbers represent the means of 4 mice (AS), 5 mice (AT, ER) and 19 mice (Mixed). Because parasite and gametocyte densities of 0 were set to 104 (see text), the y-axis starts at 4.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. (A) Total number of asexual parasites produced during the acute phase of infection (days 0–12) for single-clone infections (AS, AT, ER), mixed-clone infections (Mixed) and the predicted numbers based on the ‘Average all’ (Av. all), ‘Average virulent’ (Av. vir.) and ‘Sum’ (Sum) hypotheses. Bars represent ±1 S.E. Significance levels for testing whether predicted values under the ‘Average all’, ‘Average virulent’ or ‘Sum’ hypotheses differ from ‘Mixed’ are denoted as: ***P<0·001; **0·001

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Best-fit regression lines between parasite density at primary and recrudescent peaks (log10 transformed) and day p.i. for mice infected with single-clone infections (—— [lozf ], [squf ], [utrif ]) or mixed-clone infections of Plasmodium chabaudi clones AS, AT and ER (–––, ○).

Figure 3

Fig. 4. (A) Total number of gametocytes produced during the acute phase of infection (days 0–12) for single-clone infections (AS, AT, ER), mixed-clone infections (Mixed) and the predicted numbers based on the ‘Average all’ (Av. all), ‘Average virulent’ (Av. vir.) and ‘Sum’ (Sum) hypotheses. See Fig. 2 (A) for a description of annotations. (B) As for (A), but for chronic phase (days 12–70). (C) As for (A), but for the whole course of infection (days 0–70).

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Maximum weight loss (A) and maximum red blood cell loss (B) in single-clone infections (AS, AT, ER), mixed-clone infections (Mixed) and as predicted under the ‘Average all’ (Av. all), ‘Average virulent’ (Av. vir.) and ‘Sum’ (Sum) hypotheses. See Fig. 2 (A) for a description of annotations.