Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T13:14:59.122Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Cost of interspecific competition between trematode colonies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2020

K.N. Mouritsen*
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Aquatic Biology, Aarhus University, Ole Worms Allé 1, 8000Aarhus C, Denmark
C.K. Elkjær
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Aquatic Biology, Aarhus University, Ole Worms Allé 1, 8000Aarhus C, Denmark
*
Author for correspondence: K.N. Mouritsen, E-mail: kim.mouritsen@bios.au.dk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In a range of trematode species, specific members of the parthenitae colony infecting the molluscan first intermediate host appear specialized for defence against co-infecting species. The evolution of such division of labour requires that co-infection entails fitness costs. Yet, this premise has very rarely been tested in species showing division of labour. Using Himasthla elongata (Himasthlidae) and Renicola roscovita (Renicolidae) infecting periwinkles Littorina littorea as study system, we show that the size of emerged cercariae is markedly reduced in both parasite species when competing over host resources. Cercarial longevity, on the other hand, is negatively influenced by competition only in R. roscovita. Season, which may impact the nutritional state of the host, also affects cercarial size, but only in H. elongata. Hence, our study underlines that cercarial quality is, indeed, compromised by competition, not only in the inferior R. roscovita (no division of labour) but also in the competitively superior H. elongata (division of labour).

Information

Type
Research Paper
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Body dimensions (mean of mean ± standard error) of cercariae emerging from single- and double-infected periwinkles Littorina littorea during autumn (September–October) and winter (December–January). (A) Projected body area (mm2 × 10−2) of Himasthla elongata cercariae; (B) ventral sucker area (mm2 × 10−3) of H. elongata cercariae; (C) projected body area (mm2 × 10−2) of Renicola roscovita cercariae. NHimasthla, autumn: single/double = 14/6; NHimasthla, winter: single/double = 6/4; NRenicola, autumn: single/double = 10/6; NRenicola, winter: single/double = 15/4.

Figure 1

Table 1. Summary statistics of reduced-model ANCOVAs, including body size (projected area) or ventral sucker area of Himasthla elongata or Renicola roscovita cercariae as dependent variable, competition (single/double infection) and season (autumn/winter) as independent fixed factors, and host size (shell height of Littorina littorea) as a covariate.

Figure 2

Fig. 2. Survival rates (LT50) of Himasthla elongata and Renicola roscovita cercariae from single- and double-infected periwinkles Littorina littorea. NHimasthla: single/double = 16/8; NRenicola: single/double = 17/8.

Figure 3

Table 2. Summary statistics of reduced-model ANCOVAs, including survival (LT50) of Himasthla elongata or Renicola roscovita cercariae as dependent variable, competition (single/double infection) and season (autumn/winter) as independent fixed factors, and host size (shell height of Littorina littorea) as a covariate.