Cargando…

Host tolerance and resistance to parasitic nest flies differs between two wild bird species

1. Hosts have developed and evolved defense strategies to limit parasite damage. Hosts can reduce the damage that parasites cause by decreasing parasite fitness (resistance) or without affecting parasite fitness (tolerance). Because a parasite species can infect multiple host species, determining th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Grab, Kirstine M., Hiller, Brian J., Hurlbert, John H., Ingram, McKenzie E., Parker, Alexandra B., Pokutnaya, Darya Y., Knutie, Sarah A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6854101/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31832149
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5682
_version_ 1783470171824848896
author Grab, Kirstine M.
Hiller, Brian J.
Hurlbert, John H.
Ingram, McKenzie E.
Parker, Alexandra B.
Pokutnaya, Darya Y.
Knutie, Sarah A.
author_facet Grab, Kirstine M.
Hiller, Brian J.
Hurlbert, John H.
Ingram, McKenzie E.
Parker, Alexandra B.
Pokutnaya, Darya Y.
Knutie, Sarah A.
author_sort Grab, Kirstine M.
collection PubMed
description 1. Hosts have developed and evolved defense strategies to limit parasite damage. Hosts can reduce the damage that parasites cause by decreasing parasite fitness (resistance) or without affecting parasite fitness (tolerance). Because a parasite species can infect multiple host species, determining the effect of the parasite on these hosts and identifying host defense strategies can have important implications for multi‐host–parasite dynamics. 2. Over 2 years, we experimentally manipulated parasitic flies (Protocalliphora sialia) in the nests of tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor) and eastern bluebirds (Sialia sialis). We then determined the effects of the parasites on the survival of nestlings and compared defense strategies between host species. We compared resistance between host species by quantifying parasite densities (number of parasites per gram of host) and measured nestling antibody levels as a mechanism of resistance. We quantified tolerance by determining the relationship between parasite density and nestling survival and blood loss by measuring hemoglobin levels (as a proxy of blood recovery) and nestling provisioning rates (as a proxy of parental compensation for resources lost to the parasite) as potential mechanisms of tolerance. 3. For bluebirds, parasite density was twice as high as for swallows. Both host species were tolerant to the effects of P. sialia on nestling survival at their respective parasite loads but neither species were tolerant to the blood loss to the parasite. However, swallows were more resistant to P. sialia compared to bluebirds, which was likely related to the higher antibody‐mediated immune response in swallow nestlings. Neither blood recovery nor parental compensation were mechanisms of tolerance. 4. Overall, these results suggest that bluebirds and swallows are both tolerant of their respective parasite loads but swallows are more resistant to the parasites. These results demonstrate that different host species have evolved similar and different defenses against the same species of parasite.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6854101
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68541012019-12-12 Host tolerance and resistance to parasitic nest flies differs between two wild bird species Grab, Kirstine M. Hiller, Brian J. Hurlbert, John H. Ingram, McKenzie E. Parker, Alexandra B. Pokutnaya, Darya Y. Knutie, Sarah A. Ecol Evol Original Research 1. Hosts have developed and evolved defense strategies to limit parasite damage. Hosts can reduce the damage that parasites cause by decreasing parasite fitness (resistance) or without affecting parasite fitness (tolerance). Because a parasite species can infect multiple host species, determining the effect of the parasite on these hosts and identifying host defense strategies can have important implications for multi‐host–parasite dynamics. 2. Over 2 years, we experimentally manipulated parasitic flies (Protocalliphora sialia) in the nests of tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor) and eastern bluebirds (Sialia sialis). We then determined the effects of the parasites on the survival of nestlings and compared defense strategies between host species. We compared resistance between host species by quantifying parasite densities (number of parasites per gram of host) and measured nestling antibody levels as a mechanism of resistance. We quantified tolerance by determining the relationship between parasite density and nestling survival and blood loss by measuring hemoglobin levels (as a proxy of blood recovery) and nestling provisioning rates (as a proxy of parental compensation for resources lost to the parasite) as potential mechanisms of tolerance. 3. For bluebirds, parasite density was twice as high as for swallows. Both host species were tolerant to the effects of P. sialia on nestling survival at their respective parasite loads but neither species were tolerant to the blood loss to the parasite. However, swallows were more resistant to P. sialia compared to bluebirds, which was likely related to the higher antibody‐mediated immune response in swallow nestlings. Neither blood recovery nor parental compensation were mechanisms of tolerance. 4. Overall, these results suggest that bluebirds and swallows are both tolerant of their respective parasite loads but swallows are more resistant to the parasites. These results demonstrate that different host species have evolved similar and different defenses against the same species of parasite. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-10-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6854101/ /pubmed/31832149 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5682 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Grab, Kirstine M.
Hiller, Brian J.
Hurlbert, John H.
Ingram, McKenzie E.
Parker, Alexandra B.
Pokutnaya, Darya Y.
Knutie, Sarah A.
Host tolerance and resistance to parasitic nest flies differs between two wild bird species
title Host tolerance and resistance to parasitic nest flies differs between two wild bird species
title_full Host tolerance and resistance to parasitic nest flies differs between two wild bird species
title_fullStr Host tolerance and resistance to parasitic nest flies differs between two wild bird species
title_full_unstemmed Host tolerance and resistance to parasitic nest flies differs between two wild bird species
title_short Host tolerance and resistance to parasitic nest flies differs between two wild bird species
title_sort host tolerance and resistance to parasitic nest flies differs between two wild bird species
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6854101/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31832149
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5682
work_keys_str_mv AT grabkirstinem hosttoleranceandresistancetoparasiticnestfliesdiffersbetweentwowildbirdspecies
AT hillerbrianj hosttoleranceandresistancetoparasiticnestfliesdiffersbetweentwowildbirdspecies
AT hurlbertjohnh hosttoleranceandresistancetoparasiticnestfliesdiffersbetweentwowildbirdspecies
AT ingrammckenziee hosttoleranceandresistancetoparasiticnestfliesdiffersbetweentwowildbirdspecies
AT parkeralexandrab hosttoleranceandresistancetoparasiticnestfliesdiffersbetweentwowildbirdspecies
AT pokutnayadaryay hosttoleranceandresistancetoparasiticnestfliesdiffersbetweentwowildbirdspecies
AT knutiesaraha hosttoleranceandresistancetoparasiticnestfliesdiffersbetweentwowildbirdspecies