Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T04:07:49.435Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Egg production by metacercariae of Microphallus papillorobustus: a reproductive insurance?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2024

C.L. Wang  and
F. Thomas
C.L. Wang
Affiliation:
Centre d'Etude sur le Polymorphisme des Micro-Organismes CEPM/UMR CNRS-IRD 9926 Equipe: ‘Evolution des Systèmes Symbiotiques’, IRD, 911 Avenue Agropolis, B.P. 5045 34032 Montpellier Cedex 1, France.
F. Thomas*
Affiliation:
Centre d'Etude sur le Polymorphisme des Micro-Organismes CEPM/UMR CNRS-IRD 9926 Equipe: ‘Evolution des Systèmes Symbiotiques’, IRD, 911 Avenue Agropolis, B.P. 5045 34032 Montpellier Cedex 1, France.
*
*Author for correspondence Fax: (33) 04 67 41 62 99, E-mail: fthomas@mpl.ird.fr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study aimed to determine whether metacercariae of Microphallus papillorobustus (Trematoda: Microphallidae) produce eggs by self-fertilization when their intermediate host, the gammarid Gammarus insensibilis, dies before being eaten by predatory definitive hosts. Such a mechanism would allow the parasite to reproduce even if transmission fails. The percentage of metacercariae that produced eggs and the mean number of eggs were significantly higher in metacercariae placed in a Ringer's solution compared with those in salt water or metacercariae remaining inside the dead gammarid. The lack of egg production in metacercariae removed from dead gammarids in the field supported the idea that self-fertilization is not, for this parasite, a mechanism of reproductive insurance when establishment in the definitive hosts fails.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 76 , Issue 3 , September 2002 , pp. 279 - 281
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2002

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

Combes, C. (1995) Interactions durables: ecologie et evolution du parasitisme. Masson, Paris.Google Scholar
Helluy, S. (1981) Parasitisme et comportement. Etude de la métacercaire de Microphallus papillorobustus (Rankin 1940) et de son influence sur les gammares. 164 pp. Thèse de Doctorat de Spécialité, USTL Montpellier, Montpellier, France.Google Scholar
Helluy, S. (1984) Relations hôtes-parasites du Microphallus papillorobustus (Rankin 1940). III Facteurs impliqués dans les modifications du comportement des Gammarus hô tes intermédiaires et tests de prédation. Annales de Parasitologie Humaine et Comparée 59, 41–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poulin, R. (1998) Evolutionary ecology of parasites. London, Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Rebecq, J. (1964) Recherches systématiques, biologiques et écologiques sur les formes larvaires de quelques Trématodes de Camargue. Thèse de doctorat d'état, Faculté des Sciences de Marseille, Marseille, France.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, F. (1996) Conséquences écologiques et évolu-tives des interactions hô tes-parasites au sein des l'association amphipode (Gammarus)-Trématodes (Microphallus et Maritrema ). PhD thesis, Université de Montpellier, Montpellier, France.Google Scholar
Thomas, F., Renaud, F. & Cézilly, F. (1996) Assortative pairing by parasitic prevalence in Gammarus insensibilis (Amphipoda): patterns and processes. Animal Behaviour 52, 683–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar