Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-4ws75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T16:49:41.540Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Major drivers of biodiversity loss and their impacts on helminth parasite populations and communities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2023

D.J. Marcogliese*
Affiliation:
Aquatic Contaminants Research Division, Water Science and Technology Directorate, Science and Technology Branch, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Montreal, QC, Canada
*
Author for correspondence: D.J. Marcogliese, E-mail: david.marcogliese@dfo-mpo.gc.ca
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The world's biodiversity is in peril. The major threats to biodiversity globally are habitat change, overexploitation, climate change, invasive species and pollution. Not only do these stressors impact free-living organisms, but they affect parasitic ones as well. Herein, this perspective examines the potential consequences of these anthropogenic perturbations on helminth populations and communities, with emphasis on significant developments over the past decade. Furthermore, several case studies are examined in more detail for each of these threats to biodiversity. While effects are widespread and diverse, for the most part all these environmental stressors have negative effects on parasite populations and communities. Those parasites with complex life cycles that are trophically transmitted are often more at risk, although larval parasites with a wide host spectrum, and directly transmitted ectoparasites, appear less threatened and may even benefit. However, differential effects on hosts and parasites, on parasite life cycle stages and on host–parasite interactions made specific predictions difficult and context-dependent. Experimental laboratory and mesocosm studies on specific parasites that test effects on the different life cycle stages, hosts and host–parasite interactions, permitting the determination of net effects of an environmental stressor, yield insightful and sometimes counterintuitive results, although they remain a simplification of real-world complexity. Recent advances in the use of parasites as bioindicators of effects also are discussed.

Information

Type
Centenary Review
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), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Table 1. Selected examples of parasitological studies of hosts residing outside and inside marine and freshwater protected areas.

Figure 1

Fig. 1. Effects of temperature on parasite and host traits in the life cycle of the freshwater trematode Ribeiroia ondatrae in its gastropod first intermediate host (Planorbella trivolvis) and tadpoles of its anuran second intermediate host (Pseudacris regilla). The width of the arrow reflects the intensity of the effect. Net effects indicate that metacercarial numbers are lowest in tadpoles at the highest temperature, while pathology peaks at the intermediate temperature. A dashed line indicates no effect. Diagram based on table 2 in Marcogliese (2016) and the results from Paull & Johnson (2011) and Paull et al. (2012).

Figure 2

Fig. 2. Effects of temperature deviations on components of the life cycle and host–parasite interactions, relative to ambient temperature (18°C) in the trematode Himasthla elongata, infecting the first snail (Littorina littorea) and second mussel (Mytilus edulis sensu lato) intermediate hosts. Optimal temperature for transmission and infection success is 22°C. Dotted lines indicate   no effect. Based on results from Díaz-Morales et al. (2022).

Figure 3

Table 2. Comparison of characteristics of helminth parasitological communities in invasive round gobies (Neogobius melanostomus) between North America and European fresh waters.

Figure 4

Fig. 3. Effects of four pesticides (atrazine, glyphosate, carbaryl and malathion) on life history traits of the trematode Echinostoma trivolvis and its first intermediate host, the snail Planorbella trivolvis, and the green frog tadpole, Lithobates clamitans. The width of the arrows indicates relative magnitude of the effect. The net effect is that exposure of this host–parasite system to pesticides would increase infection levels in the tadpoles. Dotted lines indicate  no effect. Based on results from Rohr et al. (2008a).

Figure 5

Fig. 4. Generalized overall effects of agrochemicals (insecticides and herbicides) on gastropod intermediate host and parasite life history traits and net risk of infection to humans by Schistosoma haematobium. Results varied among individual pesticides. Information tabulated and summarized in Hoover et al. (2020).

Figure 6

Table 3. Selected examples of helminth parasites used as indicators of recovery from various natural and anthropogenic perturbations to ecosystems.