Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T13:23:23.770Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Habitat selection by Lernanthropus cynoscicola (Copepoda: Lernanthropidae): host as physical environment, a major determinant of niche restriction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 October 2003

J. T. TIMI
J. T. TIMI
Affiliation:
Laboratorio de Parasitología, Departamento de Biología, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Funes 3350, (7600) Mar del Plata, Argentina, CONICET
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

As a potential ultimate cause of microhabitat restriction for ectoparasites of fish, it has been postulated that selection has favoured narrow microhabitats to facilitate mating. The evidence for this hypothesis is evaluated with males and females of the parasitic copepod Lernanthropus cynoscicola, by using methods commonly used in community ecology, and considering the influence of host ontogeny on site selection. No evidence supporting the mating hypothesis was found after comparison of niche measurements between both sexes. Furthermore, aggregation among individuals of the same sex was stronger than among males and females, and the co-occurrence of both sexes did not depart from that expected by chance; also, negative correlations between the intensity of infection of both sexes were observed. Restriction of the microhabitats cannot therefore be due to facilitation of mating. Moreover, both sexes displayed a sequential displacement over the gill arches and differential preferences by specific gill sections in response to an increasing host size, probably as a consequence of a host-size related cline of optimal conditions where fitness is improved. Thus, reproductive benefits other than increased chances of mating may have played a role in the evolution of restricted niches in parasites, and selection may have favoured a narrowing of the niche around sites where fitness is maximized.

Keywords

microhabitat selectionLernanthropus cynoscicolaparasitic copepodsmating hypothesis
Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 127 , Issue 2 , August 2003 , pp. 155 - 163
Copyright
2003 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

BUSH, A. O., LAFFERTY, K. D., LOTZ, J. M. & SHOSTAK, A. W. (1997). Parasitology meets ecology on its own terms: Margolis et al. revisited. Journal of Parasitology 83, 575–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
COMBES, C. & THÉRON, A. (2000). Metazoan parasites and resource heterogeneity: constraints and benefits. International Journal for Parasitology 30, 299–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
COSTE, F., RAIBAUT, A., MANIER, J.-F. & ROUSSET, V. (1979). Reproduction et sexualité des copépodes parasites de poissons. IV – Étude cytologique ultrastructurale de la spermatogenèse de Lernanthropus kroyeri van Beneden 1851, copépode parasite du loup. Bulletin de la Société Zoologique de France 104, 125–135.Google Scholar
DAVEY, J. T. (1980). Spatial distribution of the copepod parasite Lernanthropus kroyeri on the gills of bass, Dicentrarchus labrax (L.). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 60, 1061–1067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DE MEEÜS, T., MORAND, S., MAGNAN, N., DO CHI, T. & RENAUD, F. (1995). Comparative host-parasite relationship of two copepod species ectoparasitic on three fish species. Acta Œcologica 16, 361–374.Google Scholar
ETCHEGOIN, J. A. & SARDELLA, N. H. (1990). Some ecological aspects of the copepod parasites of the common hake, Merluccius hubbsi, from the Argentine-Uruguayan coasts. International Journal for Parasitology 20, 1009–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HAIR, J. D. & HOLMES, J. C. (1975). The usefulness of measures of diversity, niche width and niche overlap in the analysis of helminth communities in waterfowl. Acta Parasitologica Polonica 23, 253–265.Google Scholar
HO, J.-S. & DO, T. T. (1985). Copepods of the family Lernanthropidae parasitic on Japanese marine fishes, with a phylogenetic analysis of the Lernanthropus genera. Reports of the Sado Marine Biological Station, Niigata University 15, 31–76.Google Scholar
JANOVY, Jr. J., CLOPTON, R. E., CLOPTON, D. A., SNYDER, S. D., EFTING, A. & KREBS, L. (1995). Species density distributions as null models for ecologically significant interactions of parasite species in an assemblage. Ecological Modelling 77, 189–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KABATA, Z. (1959). Ecology of the genus Acanthochondria Oakley (Copepoda, Parasitica). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 38, 249–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KABATA, Z. (1981). Copepoda (Crustacea) parasitic on fishes: problems and perspectives. Advances in Parasitology 19, 1–71.Google Scholar
LLEWELLYN, J. (1956). The host specificity, micro-ecology, adhesive attitudes, and comparative morphology of some trematode gill parasites. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 35, 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MORAND, S., POULIN, R., ROHDE, K. & HAYWARD, C. (1999). Aggregation and species coexistence of ectoparasites of marine fishes. International Journal for Parasitology 29, 663–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PALING, J. E. (1968). A method of estimating the relative volumes of water flowing over the different gills of a freshwater fish. Journal of Experimental Biology 48, 533–544.Google Scholar
POULIN, R. (1998). Evolutionary Ecology of Parasites: From Individuals to Communities. Chapman and Hall, London.
POULIN, R. (2001). Interaction between species and the structure of helminth communities. Parasitology 122 (Suppl.), S3–S11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
POULIN, R., CURTIS, M. A. & RAU, M. E. (1991). Size, behaviour, and acquisition of ectoparasitic copepods by brook trout, Salvelinus fontinalis. Oikos 61, 169–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PRICE, P. W. (1980). Evolutionary Biology of Parasites. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
RAIBAUT, A. & TRILLES, J. P. (1993). The sexuality of parasitic crustaceans. Advances in Parasitology 32, 367–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ROHDE, K. (1979). A critical evaluation of intrinsec and extrinsec factors responsible for niche restriction in parasites. American Naturalist 114, 648–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ROHDE, K. (1980). Host specificity indices for parasites and their application. Experientia 36, 1370–1371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ROHDE, K. (1989). Simple ecological systems, simple solutions to complex problems? Evolutionary Theory 8, 305–350.Google Scholar
ROHDE, K. (1991). Intra- and interspecific interactions in low density populations in resource-rich habitats. Oikos 60, 91–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ROHDE, K. (1993). Ecology of Marine Parasites, 2nd Edn. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.
ROHDE, K. (1994). Niche restriction in parasites: proximate and ultimate causes. Parasitology 109 (Suppl.), S69–S84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ROHDE, K. & HOBBS, R. (1986). Species segregation: competition or reinforcement of reproductive barriers? In Parasite Lives. Papers on Parasites, their Hosts and their Associations to Honour J. F. A. Sprent (ed. Cremin, M., Dobson, C. & Moorhouse, D. E.), pp. 189–199. University of Queensland Press, St Lucia, London and New York.
SHARPLES, A. D. & EVANS, C. W. (1995). Metazoan parasites of the snapper, Pagrus auratus (Bloch & Schneider, 1801), in New Zealand. 2. Site-specificity. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 29, 203–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SHOTTER, R. A. (1976). The distribution of some helminth and copepod parasites in tissues of whiting Merlangius merlangus L. from Manx waters. Journal of Fish Biology 8, 101–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SUKHDEO, M. V. K. & BANSEMIR, A. D. (1996). Critical resources that influence habitat selection decisions by gastrointestinal helminth parasites. International Journal for Parasitology 26, 483–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SUKHDEO, M. V. K. & SUKHDEO, S. S. (1994). Optimal habitat selection by helminths in the host environment. Parasitology 109 (Suppl.), S41–S55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SUYDAM, E. L. (1976). The macroecology of three species of monogenetic trematodes of fishes from the Beaufort-Cape Hatteras area. Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 38, 240–246.Google Scholar
TIMI, J. T. & ETCHEGOIN, J. A. (1996). A new species of Lernanthropus (Copepoda: Lernanthropidae) parasite of Cynoscion striatus (Pisces: Sciaenidae), from Argentinean waters and new records of Lernanthropus trachuri (Brian, 1903). Folia Parasitologica 43, 71–74.Google Scholar
VAN DEN BROEK, W. L. F. (1979). Copepod ectoparasites of Merlangius merlangus and Platichthys flesus. Journal of Fish Biology 14, 371–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WILSON, C. B. (1922). North American parasitic copepods belonging to the family Dichelesthiidae. Proceedings of the United States National Museum 60, 1–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ZAR, J. H. (1984). Biostatistical Analysis, 2nd Edn. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.