Cargando…

Can reduced predation offset negative effects of sea louse parasites on chum salmon?

The impact of parasites on hosts is invariably negative when considered in isolation, but may be complex and unexpected in nature. For example, if parasites make hosts less desirable to predators then gains from reduced predation may offset direct costs of being parasitized. We explore these ideas i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Peacock, Stephanie J., Connors, Brendan M., Krkošek, Martin, Irvine, James R., Lewis, Mark A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Royal Society 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3871327/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24352951
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.2913
_version_ 1782296796418015232
author Peacock, Stephanie J.
Connors, Brendan M.
Krkošek, Martin
Irvine, James R.
Lewis, Mark A.
author_facet Peacock, Stephanie J.
Connors, Brendan M.
Krkošek, Martin
Irvine, James R.
Lewis, Mark A.
author_sort Peacock, Stephanie J.
collection PubMed
description The impact of parasites on hosts is invariably negative when considered in isolation, but may be complex and unexpected in nature. For example, if parasites make hosts less desirable to predators then gains from reduced predation may offset direct costs of being parasitized. We explore these ideas in the context of sea louse infestations on salmon. In Pacific Canada, sea lice can spread from farmed salmon to migrating juvenile wild salmon. Low numbers of sea lice can cause mortality of juvenile pink and chum salmon. For pink salmon, this has resulted in reduced productivity of river populations exposed to salmon farming. However, for chum salmon, we did not find an effect of sea louse infestations on productivity, despite high statistical power. Motivated by this unexpected result, we used a mathematical model to show how a parasite-induced shift in predation pressure from chum salmon to pink salmon could offset negative direct impacts of sea lice on chum salmon. This shift in predation is proposed to occur because predators show an innate preference for pink salmon prey. This preference may be more easily expressed when sea lice compromise juvenile salmon hosts, making them easier to catch. Our results indicate how the ecological context of host–parasite interactions may dampen, or even reverse, the expected impact of parasites on host populations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3871327
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher The Royal Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-38713272014-02-07 Can reduced predation offset negative effects of sea louse parasites on chum salmon? Peacock, Stephanie J. Connors, Brendan M. Krkošek, Martin Irvine, James R. Lewis, Mark A. Proc Biol Sci Research Articles The impact of parasites on hosts is invariably negative when considered in isolation, but may be complex and unexpected in nature. For example, if parasites make hosts less desirable to predators then gains from reduced predation may offset direct costs of being parasitized. We explore these ideas in the context of sea louse infestations on salmon. In Pacific Canada, sea lice can spread from farmed salmon to migrating juvenile wild salmon. Low numbers of sea lice can cause mortality of juvenile pink and chum salmon. For pink salmon, this has resulted in reduced productivity of river populations exposed to salmon farming. However, for chum salmon, we did not find an effect of sea louse infestations on productivity, despite high statistical power. Motivated by this unexpected result, we used a mathematical model to show how a parasite-induced shift in predation pressure from chum salmon to pink salmon could offset negative direct impacts of sea lice on chum salmon. This shift in predation is proposed to occur because predators show an innate preference for pink salmon prey. This preference may be more easily expressed when sea lice compromise juvenile salmon hosts, making them easier to catch. Our results indicate how the ecological context of host–parasite interactions may dampen, or even reverse, the expected impact of parasites on host populations. The Royal Society 2014-02-07 /pmc/articles/PMC3871327/ /pubmed/24352951 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.2913 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ © 2013 The Authors. Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/, which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Articles
Peacock, Stephanie J.
Connors, Brendan M.
Krkošek, Martin
Irvine, James R.
Lewis, Mark A.
Can reduced predation offset negative effects of sea louse parasites on chum salmon?
title Can reduced predation offset negative effects of sea louse parasites on chum salmon?
title_full Can reduced predation offset negative effects of sea louse parasites on chum salmon?
title_fullStr Can reduced predation offset negative effects of sea louse parasites on chum salmon?
title_full_unstemmed Can reduced predation offset negative effects of sea louse parasites on chum salmon?
title_short Can reduced predation offset negative effects of sea louse parasites on chum salmon?
title_sort can reduced predation offset negative effects of sea louse parasites on chum salmon?
topic Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3871327/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24352951
http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.2913
work_keys_str_mv AT peacockstephaniej canreducedpredationoffsetnegativeeffectsofsealouseparasitesonchumsalmon
AT connorsbrendanm canreducedpredationoffsetnegativeeffectsofsealouseparasitesonchumsalmon
AT krkosekmartin canreducedpredationoffsetnegativeeffectsofsealouseparasitesonchumsalmon
AT irvinejamesr canreducedpredationoffsetnegativeeffectsofsealouseparasitesonchumsalmon
AT lewismarka canreducedpredationoffsetnegativeeffectsofsealouseparasitesonchumsalmon