Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-rbxfs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T01:31:43.115Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Biotic and abiotic drivers affect parasite richness, prevalence and abundance in Mytilus galloprovincialis along the Northern Adriatic Sea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 August 2021

C. Bommarito*
Affiliation:
Department of Marine Ecology, GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel, Hohenbergstr. 2, 24105, Kiel, Germany
M. Wahl
Affiliation:
Department of Marine Ecology, GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel, Hohenbergstr. 2, 24105, Kiel, Germany
D.W. Thieltges
Affiliation:
Department of Coastal Systems, NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, P.O. Box 59, 1790, AB Den Burg Texel, The Netherlands
C. Pansch
Affiliation:
Environmental and Marine Biology, Åbo Akademi University, Artillerigatan 6, 20520 Åbo, Finland
M. Zucchetta
Affiliation:
Institute of Polar Sciences, ISP-CNR, Via Torino 155, 30172 Venice-Mestre, Italy
F. Pranovi
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Sciences, Informatics and Statistics, University Ca’ Foscari of Venice, Via Torino 155, 30172, Venice, Italy
*
Author for correspondence: C. Bommarito, E-mail: cbommarito@geomar.de

Abstract

Although it is generally known that a combination of abiotic and biotic drivers shapes the distribution and abundance of parasites, our understanding of the interplay of these factors remains to be assessed for most marine host species. The present field survey investigated spatial patterns of richness, prevalence and abundance of parasites in Mytilus galloprovincialis along the coast of the northern Adriatic Sea. Herein, the relationships between biotic (host size, density and local parasite richness of mussel population) and abiotic (eutrophication and salinity) drivers and parasite richness of mussel individuals, prevalence and abundance were analysed. Local parasite richness was the most relevant factor driving parasite species richness in mussel individuals. Prevalence was mainly driven by eutrophication levels in three out of four parasite species analysed. Similarly, abundance was driven mainly by eutrophication in two parasite species. Mussel size, density and salinity had only minor contributions to the best fitting models. This study highlights that the influence of abiotic and biotic drivers on parasite infections in mussels can be differentially conveyed, depending on the infection measure applied, i.e. parasite richness, prevalence or abundance. Furthermore, it stresses the importance of eutrophication as a major factor influencing parasite prevalence and abundance in mussels in the Adriatic Sea.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Map of the sampling stations along the North Adriatic Sea. In the western area salinity decreases (surrounding area of the Po Estuary). A wind-driven circulation of water masses together with the Po River discharge results in a west-east gradient of nutrients: The western area of the northern region is characterized by eutrophic waters while the eastern area is characterized by oligotrophic waters.

Figure 1

Table 1. Station name, average salinity, average temperature, average trophic index TRIX (indicator of trophic status of coastal waters), mussel mean density (±s.d.) and average length (±SE) of mussels collected in each station along the North Adriatic Sea

Figure 2

Fig. 2. Local parasite richness per station (A) and mean parasite richness per mussel individual (i.e. infra-community richness; B) at each of the 16 sampling stations from east (S1) to west (S16) in the North Adriatic Sea. In (a) the presence of each one parasite species is considered as 1. Error bars in (B) represent the SE.

Figure 3

Fig. 3. Prevalence (A) and mean abundance (B) of the four most common parasite species found in Mytilus galloprovincialis mussels collected during the sampling (n = 20 mussels at each station): Parvatrema duboisi, Mytilicola sp. Eugymnanthea inquilina and Urastoma cyprinae. Prevalence is calculated as proportion of infected individuals (between 0 and 1). All plots are based on sampling station arranged from east (S1) to west (S16) of the Northern Adriatic Sea. Error bars represent the SE. Notice the different scale for Mytilicola sp. and Urastoma cyprinae abundance.

Figure 4

Table 2. Summary table of the relative contribution (Akaike weights) of the drivers to mean parasite richness per mussel individual, prevalence (for Parvatrema duboisi, Eugymnanthea inquilina, Mytilicola sp., Urastoma cyprinae) and abundance (for P. duboisi and E. inquilina), determined based on the average model with a threshold of AICc <2

Supplementary material: File

Bommarito et al. supplementary material

Bommarito et al. supplementary material

Download Bommarito et al. supplementary material(File)
File 273.8 KB