Such changed behavioural patterns could be beneficial for the par

Such changed behavioural patterns could be beneficial for the parasite, for example, enhancing its transmission. Yet, in other cases, they could be just by-products of infection or they could benefit the host, that is, be part of its antiparasite tactics (see Moore, 2002 for review).

When the parasite-induced Alvelestat purchase behavioural changes benefit the parasite, they are described as ‘manipulative’. There are several usages of this term (reviewed by Poulin, 2010), but it can be broadly defined as ‘any alteration in behaviour that has fitness benefits for the parasite, such that the infected hosts behave in ways that facilitate the transmission or dispersal of the parasite, and therefore the completion of its life cycle’ (Poulin, 2010). The idea of parasites

taking control of host behaviour has attracted enormous attention of biologists (e.g. Holmes & Bethel, 1972; Dawkins, 1982; Moore, 2002; Thomas, Adamo & Moore, 2005; Poulin, 1994, 2007, 2010); several hundred instances of host manipulation by parasites, spanning all major parasite groups, have been described (see review in Moore, 2002). Apart from simply documenting behavioural changes correlated with the parasites’ presence, a growing number of experimental field studies have demonstrated that the parasite manipulations genuinely enhance parasite transmission (reviews in Moore, 2002; Poulin, 2007) and the knowledge of proximate neural mechanisms of the parasites’ manipulation of hosts’

behaviour has been rapidly increasing, as well (see e.g. special issue on ‘neural parasitology’, Dorsomorphin Adamo & Webster, 2013). The conspicuous broodsacs of Leucochloridium spp. sporocysts invading tentacles of their intermediate terrestrial snail (usually Succinea) hosts, despite some cautionary notes (Moore, MCE公司 2002; Casey et al., 2003), have become a classic textbook example (e.g. references above) of manipulation of host behaviour by a parasite. The behaviour of Leucochloridium has also captured attention of the general public – see, for example, numerous video clips on the web showing ‘zombi snails’ manipulated by their ‘mind-controlling’ parasites. What is the evidence that Leucochloridium sporocysts manipulate the behaviour of their snail hosts? Unfortunately, it does not seem very strong. The conspicuous features that are indicated as facilitating transmission of the parasite to its final avian hosts are characteristics of the appearance and behaviour of the parasite and not of its snail hosts. When ready for transmission, the sporocysts form elongated extensions – broodsacs – that penetrate into the snail’s protruding eyestalks during day time (Halík, 1931; Wesenberg-Lund, 1931). When in the tentacles, the contrastingly coloured, white, green/yellow and black-striped broodsacs, continuously pulsate at a rate of 60-80 contractions per minute (Halík, 1931; Wesenberg-Lund, 1931).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>