Parasites and host communities

Parasites have the potential to have large effects on their host communities; they can

Indirect interactions

Most of what we've talked about so far have been direct interactions, where (e.g.) parasites change the fecundity and mortality of their hosts, leading to population cycles. In indirect interactions, the direct (-/+) interaction between parasites and one host leads to a change in the interaction between two hosts, or between one host and another species in the community. These interactions can be density-mediated (the parasite changes the population density of the target host, benefiting the second species indirectly) or trait-mediated (the parasite changes the behavior of its host, which somehow hurts or helps another species). For example, here are the direct effects between deer, moose, and parasite populations:
In contrast, here are the indirect interactions (width of the arrow indicates strength of the interaction):
Here is an example for a parasite that changes the behavior of its host to encourage trophic transmission:
Figuring the costs and benefits of parasitism: distinction between individual-level and population-level effects

Parasite-mediated coexistence

Parasite-mediated invasion

Parasite-mediated resistance to invasion

Parelaphostrongylus tenuis (meningeal worm): kills moose (Alces alces) and caribou (Rangifer tarandus) in clinical infections (by causing brain pathology), but doesn't kill white-tailed deer. (moose density is inversely correlated with density of P. tenuis eggs in deer feces)

P. tenuis has a two-host life cycle, from gastropods which are eaten accidentally by grazing ungulates and back again (via excreted eggs which hatch into larvae and bore into the gastropods when they crawl over the larvae).

In the absence of the worm, moose can outcompete white-tailed deer for forage. It has been assumed that P. tenuis has caused or assisted the rise of deer and the decline of moose in the southern boreal forest, and that the existence of deer and P. tenuis would prevent the reintroduction of moose. Where moose were seen to persist in the presence of deer, it was assumed that some kind of habitat separation was occurring.

Schmidt and Nudds built a model very much like the macroparasite model we looked at in class; the only difference is that the model has two possible definitive hosts, moose and deer (all the intermediate gastropod hosts are lumped into one big box), which compete by Lotka-Volterra competition in the absence of the parasite. P. tenuis is assumed to kill moose but have no effect on deer. The authors then look at the results of the model for different parameter values to see what the possibilities are. They are not as clean-cut as the classical dogma would have it; it looks like (depending on parameters that we don't know), moose could outcompete deer, be outcompeted by deer, or coexist even in the presence of deer and P. tenuis.

Major points of the paper are that:

Example: killifish and cestodes (Lafferty and Morris)

trophic cascades (APPARENT mutualism) Lafferty 1992: not a mutualism at the individual level? INDIRECT. (depends on level of parasitism, costs, benefits) (predator population size might be max. with no parasites, but individual decisions maximize individual fitness) flow through food webs??

Example: ecosystem engineering

ECOSYSTEM ENGINEERS: cockles

Other examples

protection from other parasites: cowbirds eat botflies? concomitant immunity (heterologous immunity == cross reaction)

Large-scale community structure