Detail
Article
Online article
FT
Medvik - BMC
  • Something wrong with this record ?

Does invasive Chondrostoma nasus shift the parasite community structure of endemic Parachondrostoma toxostoma in sympatric zones?

A. Simková, P. Navrátilová, M. Dávidová, M. Ondračková, M. Sinama, R. Chappaz, A. Gilles, C. Costedoat,

. 2012 ; 5 () : 200.

Language English Country England, Great Britain

Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

BACKGROUND: The composition of parasite communities in two cyprinid species in southern France - native and threatened Parachondrostoma toxostoma and introduced Chondrostoma nasus - was investigated. In sympatry, these two species form two hybrid zones in the Durance and Ardeche Rivers. Due to their different feeding preference and habitat positions in allopatry, we supposed a difference in parasite communities between fish species. We expected more similar parasite communities in sympatric zones associated with habitat overlap (facilitating the transmission of ectoparasites) and similar feeding (more generalist behaviour when compared to allopatry, facilitating the transmission of endoparasites) in both fish species. Finally, we investigated whether P. toxostoma x C. nasus hybrids are less parasitized then parental species. METHODS: One allopatric population of each fish species plus two sympatric zones were sampled. Fish were identified using cytochrome b gene and 41 microsatellites loci and examined for all metazoan parasites. RESULTS: A high Monogenea abundance was found in both allopatric and sympatric populations of C. nasus. Trematoda was the dominant group in parasite communities of P. toxostoma from the allopatric population. In contrast, the populations of P. toxostoma in sympatric zones were parasitized by Dactylogyrus species found in C. nasus populations, but their abundance in endemic species was low. Consequently, the similarity based on parasite presence/absence between the sympatric populations of P. toxostoma and C. nasus was high. Sympatric populations of P. toxostoma were more similar than allopatric and sympatric populations of this species. No difference in ectoparasite infection was found between P. toxostoma and hybrids, whilst C. nasus was more parasitized by Monogenea. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in endoparasites between P. toxostoma and C. nasus in allopatry are probably linked to different feeding or habitat conditions, but host-parasite evolutionary associations also play an important role in determining the presence of Chondrostoma-specific monogeneans. Our findings suggest that Dactylogyrus expanded with the source host C. nasus into introduced areas and that P. toxostoma became infected after contact with C. nasus. Although the genotype of P. toxostoma and recombinant genotypes of hybrids are susceptible to Dactylogyrus transmitted from C. nasus, the intensity of infection is low in these genotypes.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc13012471
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20130412092450.0
007      
ta
008      
130404s2012 enk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1186/1756-3305-5-200 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)22967821
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a enk
100    1_
$a Simková, Andrea $u Department of Botany and Zoology, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic. simkova@sci.muni.cz
245    10
$a Does invasive Chondrostoma nasus shift the parasite community structure of endemic Parachondrostoma toxostoma in sympatric zones? / $c A. Simková, P. Navrátilová, M. Dávidová, M. Ondračková, M. Sinama, R. Chappaz, A. Gilles, C. Costedoat,
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND: The composition of parasite communities in two cyprinid species in southern France - native and threatened Parachondrostoma toxostoma and introduced Chondrostoma nasus - was investigated. In sympatry, these two species form two hybrid zones in the Durance and Ardeche Rivers. Due to their different feeding preference and habitat positions in allopatry, we supposed a difference in parasite communities between fish species. We expected more similar parasite communities in sympatric zones associated with habitat overlap (facilitating the transmission of ectoparasites) and similar feeding (more generalist behaviour when compared to allopatry, facilitating the transmission of endoparasites) in both fish species. Finally, we investigated whether P. toxostoma x C. nasus hybrids are less parasitized then parental species. METHODS: One allopatric population of each fish species plus two sympatric zones were sampled. Fish were identified using cytochrome b gene and 41 microsatellites loci and examined for all metazoan parasites. RESULTS: A high Monogenea abundance was found in both allopatric and sympatric populations of C. nasus. Trematoda was the dominant group in parasite communities of P. toxostoma from the allopatric population. In contrast, the populations of P. toxostoma in sympatric zones were parasitized by Dactylogyrus species found in C. nasus populations, but their abundance in endemic species was low. Consequently, the similarity based on parasite presence/absence between the sympatric populations of P. toxostoma and C. nasus was high. Sympatric populations of P. toxostoma were more similar than allopatric and sympatric populations of this species. No difference in ectoparasite infection was found between P. toxostoma and hybrids, whilst C. nasus was more parasitized by Monogenea. CONCLUSIONS: The differences in endoparasites between P. toxostoma and C. nasus in allopatry are probably linked to different feeding or habitat conditions, but host-parasite evolutionary associations also play an important role in determining the presence of Chondrostoma-specific monogeneans. Our findings suggest that Dactylogyrus expanded with the source host C. nasus into introduced areas and that P. toxostoma became infected after contact with C. nasus. Although the genotype of P. toxostoma and recombinant genotypes of hybrids are susceptible to Dactylogyrus transmitted from C. nasus, the intensity of infection is low in these genotypes.
650    _2
$a zvířata $7 D000818
650    12
$a společenstvo $7 D058448
650    _2
$a Cyprinidae $x růst a vývoj $x parazitologie $7 D003530
650    _2
$a paraziti $x klasifikace $x izolace a purifikace $7 D010271
651    _2
$a Francie $7 D005602
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Navrátilová, Petra $u -
700    1_
$a Dávidová, Martina $u -
700    1_
$a Ondračková, Markéta $u -
700    1_
$a Sinama, Melthide $u -
700    1_
$a Chappaz, Rémi $u -
700    1_
$a Gilles, André $u -
700    1_
$a Costedoat, Caroline $u -
773    0_
$w MED00165371 $t Parasites & vectors $x 1756-3305 $g Roč. 5(2012), s. 200
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22967821 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20130404 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20130412092721 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 975669 $s 810752
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2012 $b 5 $d 200 $i 1756-3305 $m Parasites & vectors $n Parasit Vectors $x MED00165371
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20130404

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...