Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T06:42:19.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Local differences in immunocompetence reflect resistance of sticklebacks against the eye fluke Diplostomum pseudospathaceum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 September 2005

M. KALBE
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institute for Limnology, Department of Evolutionary Ecology, August-Thienemann-Strasse 2, D-24306 Plön, Germany
J. KURTZ
Affiliation:
Max Planck Institute for Limnology, Department of Evolutionary Ecology, August-Thienemann-Strasse 2, D-24306 Plön, Germany Present address: Experimental Ecology, Universitätsstrasse 16, ETH-Zentrum, CHN JR.1, CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We investigated population differences in immunological adaptation of three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) to one of their most abundant macroparasites, the eye fluke Diplostomum pseudospathaceum. We compared infection success in lab-bred fish of 2 populations in northern Germany, from a lake, where eye flukes are prevalent, and a river, where these parasites do not occur. In order to discriminate between protection through innate and acquired immunity, we exposed fish either only once or repeatedly. Lake fish were significantly less susceptible than river sticklebacks already after a single exposure, indicating that in sympatric hosts innate immunity plays the major role in the defence against this helminth infection. In both habitat types, previous exposures only marginally decreased infection rates within 12 weeks. Lake fish showed higher immunocompentence by means of respiratory burst activity and spleen size, regardless of the infection status. Furthermore, they were in a better energy status than river fish, as indicated by a higher hepatosomatic index and haematocrit value. Interestingly, F1 hybrid fish of both populations ranged between the pure habitat types in parasite susceptibility as well as in immunological and condition parameters. Our results suggest that sticklebacks from lakes are better adapted to cope with higher parasite abundance in this habitat.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2005 Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Graphical representation of the experimental design.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Diplostomum pseudospathaceum infection of lab-bred sticklebacks derived from a lake population, a river population and the F1 hybrid. D. pseudospathaceum occurs naturally only in the lake population. Bars show mean parasite loads (with 95% confidence limits) resulting from experimental exposure of individual sticklebacks to 20 cercariae each. (A) Infection of naïve fish, i.e. without previous exposure (cf Table 1, ‘Infection 1’). (B) Infection of fish that had been exposed for the first or second time (cf Table 1, ‘Infection 2’). (C) Infection of fish that had been exposed for the first, second, or third time (cf Table 1, ‘Infection 3’).

Figure 2

Table 1. Results of analyses of variance (ANOVA) for the effect of fish population of origin, previous parasitic exposure, dissection round, fish sex and fish sibship on Diplostomum pseudospathaceum infection

Figure 3

Fig. 3. Measures of immunity and body condition of lab-bred sticklebacks derived from a lake population, a river population and the F1 hybrid. The fish were experimentally exposed to the eye fluke Diplostomum pseudospathaceum. The 2 different bars (with 95% confidence limits) for each population distinguish fish with or without a stimulatory exposure 2 days prior to dissecting and obtaining the measures of immunity and condition. Otherwise, fish with differing history of previous exposure were pooled, since there were no corresponding differences in the traits measured (cf Table 2). (A) Ratio of head kidney granulocytes to lymphocytes. (B) Respiratory burst of head kidney cells, measured in an in vitro chemiluminescence-enhanced assay. (C) Splenosomatic index, i.e. the weight of the spleen in relation to body weight. (D) Hepatosomatic index, i.e. the weight of the liver in relation to body weight, which is a measure of metabolic body condition. (E) Haematocrit value, representing the amount of cellular compounds in whole blood samples. (F) Body condition factor, as a function of fish length and fish weight.

Figure 4

Table 2. Results of analyses of variance (ANOVA) for the effect of fish population of origin, previous parasitic exposure, dissection round, fish sex and fish sibship on measures of fish immunity and body condition