The effect of host social system on parasite population genetic structure: comparative population genetics of two ectoparasitic mites and their bat hosts

BMC Evolutionary Biology

Philippe Christe³  Nadia Bruyndonckx³  Gerald Kerth¹  Jaap van Schaik² 

[1] Zoological Institute & Museum, Greifswald University, J.-S.-Bach-Str. 11 / 12, D-17489 Greifswald, Germany;Department of Behavioural Ecology and Evolutionary Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Ornithology, Eberhard-Gwinner-Strasse, 82319 Seewiesen, Germany;Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, Biophore, CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland

关键词: Spinturnix bechsteini;    Myotis bechsteinii;    Spinturnix myoti;    Myotis myotis;    Social system;    Local adaptation;    Host-parasite interaction;    Coevolution;   

Others  :  858066
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2148-14-18

 received in 2013-09-17, accepted in 2014-01-17,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

The population genetic structure of a parasite, and consequently its ability to adapt to a given host, is strongly linked to its own life history as well as the life history of its host. While the effects of parasite life history on their population genetic structure have received some attention, the effect of host social system has remained largely unstudied. In this study, we investigated the population genetic structure of two closely related parasitic mite species (Spinturnix myoti and Spinturnix bechsteini) with very similar life histories. Their respective hosts, the greater mouse-eared bat (Myotis myotis) and the Bechstein’s bat (Myotis bechsteinii) have social systems that differ in several substantial features, such as group size, mating system and dispersal patterns.

Results

We found that the two mite species have strongly differing population genetic structures. In S. myoti we found high levels of genetic diversity and very little pairwise differentiation, whereas in S. bechsteini we observed much less diversity, strongly differentiated populations and strong temporal turnover. These differences are likely to be the result of the differences in genetic drift and dispersal opportunities afforded to the two parasites by the different social systems of their hosts.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that host social system can strongly influence parasite population structure. As a result, the evolutionary potential of these two parasites with very similar life histories also differs, thereby affecting the risk and evolutionary pressure exerted by each parasite on its host.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 van Schaik et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Loehle C: Social barriers to pathogen transmission in wild animal populations. Ecology 1995, 76:326-335.
• [2]Ezenwa VO: Host social behavior and parasitic infection: a multifactorial approach. Behav Ecol 2004, 15(3):446-454.
• [3]Hart BL: Behavioral adaptations to pathogens and parasites: five strategies. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 1990, 14(3):273-294.
• [4]Gandon S, Michalakis Y: Local adaptation, evolutionary potential and host-parasite coevolution: interactions between migration, mutation, population size and generation time. J Evol Biol 2002, 15:451-462.
• [5]Nadler SA: Microevoltion and the genetic structure of parasite populations. J Parasitol 1995, 81:395-403.
• [6]Altizer S, Nunn CL, Thrall PH: Social organization and parasite risk in mammals: Integrating theory and empirical studies. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 2003, 34:517-547.
• [7]Gandon S, Nuismer SL: Interactions between genetic drift, gene flow, and selection mosaics drive parasite local adaptation. Am Nat 2009, 173:212-224.
• [8]Nuismer SL, Gomulkiewicz R, Ridenhour BJ: When is correlation coevolution? Am Nat 2010, 175(5):525-537.
• [9]McCoy KD, Boulinier T, Tirard C: Comparative host-parasite population structures: disentangling prospecting and dispersal in the Black-Legged Kittiwake Rissa tridactyla. Mol Ecol 2005, 14:2825-2838.
• [10]Gómez-Díaz E, González-Solís J, Peinado MA, Page RDM: Lack of host-dependent genetic structure in ectoparasites of Calonectris shearwaters. Mol Ecol 2007, 16(24):5204-5215.
• [11]Hafner MS, Demastes JW, Spradling TA, Reed DL: Cophylogeny between pocket gophers and chewing lice. University of Chicago Press; 2003.
• [12]Rudnick A: A revision of the mites of the family Spinturnicidae (Acarina). Univ Calif Publ Entomol 1960, 17:157-284.
• [13]Deunff J, Walter G, Bellido A, Volleth M: Description of a cryptic species, Spinturnix bechsteini n. sp. (Acari: Mesostigmata, Spinturnicidae), parasite of Myotis bechsteinii (Kuhl, 1817) (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae) by using ecoethology of host bats and statistical methods. J Med Entomol 2004, 41:826-832.
• [14]Zahn A, Dippel B: Male roosting habits and mating behaviour of Myotis myotis. J Zool 1997, 243:659-674.
• [15]Kerth G, Morf L: Behavioral and genetic data suggest that Bechstein’s bat predominately mate outside the breeding habitat. Ethology 2004, 110:987-999.
• [16]Kerth G, Kiefer A, Trappmann C, Weishaar M: High gene diversity at swarming sites suggest hot spots for gene flow in the endangered Bechstein’s bat. Conserv Genet 2003, 4(4):491-499.
• [17]Krapp F: Handbuch der Säugetiere Europas. Bd. 4/II: Fledertiere (Chiroptera) II, Vespertilionidae 2, Mollosidae, Nycteridae. Wiebelsheim: Aula Verlag; 2004.
• [18]Hutterer R: Bat migrations in Europe: a review of banding data and literature, vol. 28. Bonn: Federal Agency for Nature Conservation; 2005.
• [19]Ruedi M, Walter S, Fischer MC, Scaravelli D, Excoffier L, Heckel G: Italy as a major ice age refuge area for the bat Myotis myotis (Chiroptera : Vespertilionidae) in Europe. Mol Ecol 2008, 17(7):1801-1814.
• [20]Kerth G, Petrov B, Conti A, Anastasov D, Weishaar M, Gazaryan S, Jaquiery J, Konig B, Perrin N, Bruyndonckx N: Communally breeding Bechstein’s bat have a stable social system that is independent from the postglacial history and location of the populations. Mol Ecol 2008, 17:2368-2381.
• [21]Bruyndonckx N, Dubey S, Ruedi M, Christe P: Molecular cophylogenetic relationships between European bats and their ectoparasitic mites (Acari, Spinturnicidae). Mol Phylogenet Evol 2009, 51(2):227-237.
• [22]Giorgi MS, Arlettaz R, Guillaume F, Nussle S, Ossola C, Vogel P, Christe P: Causal mechanisms underlying host specificity in bat ectoparasites. Oecologia 2004, 138(4):648-654.
• [23]Bruyndonckx N, Henry I, Christe P, Kerth G: Spatio-temporal population genetic structure of the parasitic mite Spinturnix bechsteini is shaped by its own demography and the social system of its bat host. Mol Ecol 2009, 18(17):3581-3592.
• [24]Christe P, Glaziot O, Evanno G, Bruyndonckx N, Devevey G, Yannic G, Patthey P, Maeder A, Vogel P, Arlettaz R: Host sex and ectoparasite choice: preference for, and higher survival on female hosts. J Anim Ecol 2007, 76:703-710.
• [25]Lourenco S, Palmeirim JM: Which factors regulate the reproduction of ectoparasites of temperate-zone cave-dwelling bats? Parasitol Res 2008, 104:127-134.
• [26]Lourenco S, Palmeirim JM: Can mite parasitism affect the condition of bat hosts? Implications for the social structure of colonial bats. J Zool 2007, 273:161-168.
• [27]Giorgi MS, Arlettaz R, Christe P, Vogel P: The energetic grooming costs imposed by a parasitic mite (Spinturnix myoti) upon its bat host (Myotis myotis). Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2001, 268(1480):2071-2075.
• [28]Christe P, Arlettaz R, Vogel P: Variation in intensity of a parasitic mite (Spinturnix myoti) in relation to the reproductive cycle and immunocompetence of its bat host (Myotis myotis). Ecol Lett 2000, 3:207-212.
• [29]Reckardt K, Kerth G: Does the mode of transmission between hosts affect the host choice strategies of parasites? Implications from a field study on bat fly and wing mite infestation of Bechstein’s bats. Oikos 2009, 118:183-190.
• [30]Christe P, Giorgi MS, Vogel P, Arlettaz R: Differential species-specific ectoparasitic mite intensities in two intimately coexisting sibling bat species: resource-mediated host attractiveness or parasite specialization? J Anim Ecol 2003, 72:866-872.
• [31]Castella V, Ruedi M, Excoffier L: Contrasted patterns of mitochondrial and nuclear structure among nursery colonies of the bat Myotis myotis. J Evol Biol 2001, 14(5):708-720.
• [32]Kerth G, Safi K, Koenig B: Mean colony relatedness is a poor predictor of colony structure and female philopatry in the communally breeding Bechstein’s bat (Myotis bechsteinii). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2002, 52(3):203-210.
• [33]Sambrook JE, Fritsch F, Manitatis T: Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual. 2nd edition. New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 1989.
• [34]Worthington Wilmer J, Barratt E: A non-lethal method of tissue sampling for genetic studies of Chiropterans. Bat Res News 1996, 37(1):1-3.
• [35]Simons C, Frati F, Beckenbach A, Crespi B, Liu H, Floors P: Evolution, weighting, and phylogenetic utility of mitochondrial gene sequences and a compilation of conserved polymerase chain reaction primers. Ann Entomol Soc Am 1994, 87(6):651-701.
• [36]van Schaik J, Bruyndonckx N, Kerth G, Christe P: Isolation and characterisation of microsatellite loci for two species of Spinturnicid bat wing mites (Spinturnix myoti and Spinturnix bechsteini). Acarologia 2011, 51(1):127-131.
• [37]Excoffier L, Laval G, Schneider S: Arlequin ver. 3.0: An integrated software package for population genetics data analysis. Evol Bioinformatics Online 2005, 1:47-50.
• [38]Clement M, Posada D, Crandall KA: TCS: a computer program to estimate gene genealogies. Mol Ecol 2000, 9(10):1657-1659.
• [39]Goudet J: FSTAT 2.9.3: a program to estimate and test gene diversities and fixation indices (updated from Goudet 1995). Switzerland: Lausanne; 2002.
• [40]van Oosterhout C, Hutchinson WF, Wills DPM, Shipley P: Microchecker: Software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Mol Ecol 2004, 4:535-538.
• [41]Rousset F: GENEPOP ’ 007: a complete re-implementation of the GENEPOP software for Windows and Linux. Mol Ecol Resour 2008, 8(1):103-106.
• [42]Peakall R, Smouse PE: GENALEX 6: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Mol Ecol 2006, 6(1):288-295.
• [43]Excoffier L, Lischer HEL: Arlequin suite ver 3.5: a new series of programs to perform population genetics analyses under Linux and Windows. Mol Ecol Resour 2010, 10(3):564-567.
• [44]Meirmans PG, Van Tienderen PH: GENOTYPE and GENODIVE: two programs for the analysis of genetic diversity of asexual organisms. Mol Ecol 2004, 4(4):792-794.
• [45]Rousset F: Genetic differentiation and estimation of gene flow from F-statistics under isolation by distance. Genetics 1997, 145(4):1219-1228.
• [46]Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P: Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 2000, 155:945-959.
• [47]Evanno G, Regnaut S, Goudet J: Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTURE: a simulation study. Mol Ecol 2005, 14(8):2611-2620.
• [48]R Development Core Team: R: A language and environment for statisical computing. 2151 edition. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statisical Computing; 2012.
• [49]Castella V, Ruedi M, Excoffier L, Ibanez C, Arlettaz R, Hausser J: Is the Gibraltar Strait a barrier to gene flow for the bat Myotis myotis (Chiroptera : Vespertilionidae)? Mol Ecol 2000, 9(11):1761-1772.
• [50]Leo N, Hughes J, Yang X, Poudel S, Brogdon W, Barker S: The head and body lice of humans are genetically distinct (Insecta: Phthiraptera, Pediculidae): evidence from double infestations. Heredity 2005, 95(1):34-40.
• [51]Price PW: General concepts on evolutionary biology of parasites. Evolution 1977, 31(2):405-420.
• [52]Kerth G, Mayer F, Konig B: Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) reveals that female Bechstein’s bats live in closed societies. Mol Ecol 2000, 9(6):793-800.
• [53]Kerth G, Van Schaik J: Causes and consequences of living in closed societies: lessons from a long-term socio-genetic study on Bechstein’s bats. Mol Ecol 2012, 21(3):633-646.
• [54]Reckardt K, Kerth G: Roost selection and roost switching of female Bechstein’s bats (Myotis bechsteinii) as a strategy of parasite avoidance. Oecologia 2007, 154(3):581-588.
• [55]Caillaud D, Craft ME, Meyers LA: Epidemiological effects of group size variation in social species. J R Soc Promot Interface 2013, 10(83):20130206.