Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, 8140, New Zealand.
Department of Physics, Chemistry, and Biology (IFM), Linköping University, 58183, Linköping, Sweden.
Ecology. 2017 Sep;98(9):2401-2412. doi: 10.1002/ecy.1927. Epub 2017 Aug 9.
Some parasites move from one host to another via trophic transmission, the consumption of the parasite (inside its current host) by its future host. Feeding links among free-living species can thus be understood as potential transmission routes for parasites. As these links have different dynamic and structural properties, they may also vary in their effectiveness as trophic transmission routes. That is, some links may be better than others in allowing parasites to complete their complex life cycles. However, not all links are accessible to parasites as most are restricted to a small number of host taxa. This restriction means that differences between links involving host and non-host taxa must be considered when assessing whether transmission routes for parasites have different food web properties than other links. Here we use four New Zealand lake food webs to test whether link properties (contribution of a link to the predator's diet, prey abundance, prey biomass, amount of biomass transferred, centrality, and asymmetry) affect trophic transmission of parasites. Critically, we do this using both models that neglect the taxonomy of free-living species and models that explicitly include information about which free-living species are members of suitable host taxa. Although the best-fit model excluding taxonomic information suggested that transmission routes have different properties than other feeding links, when including taxonomy, the best-fit model included only an intercept. This means that the taxonomy of free-living species is a key determinant of parasite transmission routes and that food-web properties of transmission routes are constrained by the properties of host taxa. In particular, many intermediate hosts (prey) attain high biomasses and are involved in highly central links while links connecting intermediate to definitive (predator) hosts tend to be dynamically weak.
一些寄生虫通过营养传播从一个宿主转移到另一个宿主,即当前宿主食用寄生虫(在其体内)成为未来宿主。因此,自由生活物种之间的摄食联系可以被理解为寄生虫潜在的传播途径。由于这些联系具有不同的动态和结构特性,它们作为营养传播途径的有效性也可能不同。也就是说,一些联系可能比其他联系更能让寄生虫完成其复杂的生命周期。然而,并非所有联系都对寄生虫开放,因为大多数联系仅限于少数宿主分类群。这种限制意味着,在评估寄生虫的传播途径是否具有与其他联系不同的食物网特性时,必须考虑涉及宿主和非宿主分类群的联系之间的差异。在这里,我们使用四个新西兰湖泊食物网来测试联系特性(联系对捕食者饮食的贡献、猎物丰度、猎物生物量、转移的生物量、中心性和不对称性)是否影响寄生虫的营养传播。至关重要的是,我们使用既忽略自由生活物种分类学信息的模型,也使用明确包括有关自由生活物种哪些是合适宿主分类群成员的信息的模型来做到这一点。尽管排除分类学信息的最佳拟合模型表明,传播途径具有与其他摄食联系不同的特性,但当包括分类学时,最佳拟合模型仅包含一个截距。这意味着自由生活物种的分类学是寄生虫传播途径的关键决定因素,并且传播途径的食物网特性受到宿主分类群特性的限制。特别是,许多中间宿主(猎物)达到高生物量并参与高度中心的联系,而连接中间宿主到最终宿主(捕食者)的联系往往动态较弱。