The intricate relationships between parasites and their hosts often involve a choreography of behavioral changes, with parasites manipulating their hosts in a way that enhances - or seemingly enhances – their transmission (Hughes et al., 2012; Moore, 2002; Poulin, 2010). Host manipulation is increasingly acknowledged as a pervasive adaptive transmission strategy employed by parasites, and as such is one of the most remarkable manifestations of the extended phenotype (Dawkins, 1982).

In this laboratory study, Rigaud et al. (2023) delved into the time course of antipredator behavioral modifications induced by the acanthocephalan Pomphorhynchus laevis in its amphipod intermediate host Gammarus pulex. This system has a good foundation of prior knowledge (Bakker et al., 2017; Fayard et al., 2020; Perrot-Minnot et al., 2023), nicely drawn upon for the present work. This parasite orchestrates a switch from predation suppression, during the noninfective phase, to predation enhancement upon maturation. Specifically, G. pulex infected with the non-infective acanthella stage of the parasite can exhibit increased refuge use and reduced activity compared to uninfected individuals (Dianne et al., 2011, 2014), leading to decreased predation by trout (Dianne et al., 2011). In contrast, upon reaching the infective cystacanth stage, the parasite can enhance the susceptibility of its host to trout predation (Dianne et al., 2011).

The present work aimed to understand the temporal sequence of these behavioral changes across the entire ontogeny of the parasite. The results confirmed the protective role of P. laevis during the acanthella stage, wherein infected amphipods exhibited heightened refuge use. This protective manipulation, however, became significant only later in the parasite's ontogeny, suggesting a delayed investment strategy, possibly influenced by the extended developmental time of P. laevis. The protective component wanes upon reaching the cystacanth stage, transitioning into an exposure strategy, aligning with theoretical predictions and previous empirical work (Dianne et al., 2011; Parker et al., 2009). The switch was behavior-specific. Unlike the protective behavior, a decline in the amphipod activity rate manifested early in the acanthella stage and persisted throughout development, suggesting potential benefits of reduced activity for the parasite across multiple stages. Furthermore, the findings challenge previous assumptions regarding the condition-dependency of manipulation, revealing that the parasite-induced behavioral changes predominantly occurred in the presence of cues signaling potential predators. Finally, while amphipods infected with acanthella stages displayed survival rates comparable to their uninfected counterparts, increased mortality was observed in those infected with cystacanth stages.

Understanding the temporal sequence of host behavioral changes is crucial for deciphering whether it is adaptive to the parasite or not. This study stands out for its meticulous examination of multiple behaviors over the entire ontogeny of the parasite highlighting the complexity and condition-dependent nature of manipulation. The protective-then-expose strategy emerges as a dynamic process, finely tuned to the developmental stages of the parasite and the ecological challenges faced by the host. The delayed emergence of protective behaviors suggests a strategic investment by the parasite, with implications for the host's survival and the parasite's transmission success. The differential impact of infection on refuge use and activity rate further emphasizes the need for a multidimensional approach in studying parasitic manipulation (Fayard et al., 2020). This complexity demands further exploration, particularly in deciphering how trophically-transmitted parasites shape the behavioral landscape of their intermediate hosts and its temporal dynamic (Herbison, 2017; Perrot-Minnot & Cézilly, 2013).  As we discover the many subtleties of these parasitic manipulations, new avenues of research are unfolding, promising a deeper understanding of the ecology and evolution of host-parasite interactions.

References

Bakker, T. C. M., Frommen, J. G., & Thünken, T. (2017). Adaptive parasitic manipulation as exemplified by acanthocephalans. Ethology, 123(11), 779–784. https://doi.org/10.1111/eth.12660

Dawkins, R. (1982). The extended phenotype: The long reach of the gene (Reprinted). Oxford University Press.

Dianne, L., Perrot-Minnot, M.-J., Bauer, A., Gaillard, M., Léger, E., & Rigaud, T. (2011). Protection first then facilitation: A manipulative parasite modulates the vulnerability to predation of its intermediate host according to its own developmental stage. Evolution, 65(9), 2692–2698. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01330.x

Dianne, L., Perrot-Minnot, M.-J., Bauer, A., Guvenatam, A., & Rigaud, T. (2014). Parasite-induced alteration of plastic response to predation threat: Increased refuge use but lower food intake in Gammarus pulex infected with the acanothocephalan Pomphorhynchus laevis. International Journal for Parasitology, 44(3–4), 211–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpara.2013.11.001

Fayard, M., Dechaume‐Moncharmont, F., Wattier, R., & Perrot‐Minnot, M. (2020). Magnitude and direction of parasite‐induced phenotypic alterations: A meta‐analysis in acanthocephalans. Biological Reviews, 95(5), 1233–1251. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12606

Herbison, R. E. H. (2017). Lessons in Mind Control: Trends in Research on the Molecular Mechanisms behind Parasite-Host Behavioral Manipulation. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 5, 102. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2017.00102

Hughes, D. P., Brodeur, J., & Thomas, F. (2012). Host manipulation by parasites. Oxford university press.

Moore, J. (2002). Parasites and the behavior of animals. Oxford University Press.

Parker, G. A., Ball, M. A., Chubb, J. C., Hammerschmidt, K., & Milinski, M. (2009). When should a trophically transmitted parasite manipulate its host? Evolution, 63(2), 448–458. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00565.x

Perrot-Minnot, M.-J., & Cézilly, F. (2013). Investigating candidate neuromodulatory systems underlying parasitic manipulation: Concepts, limitations and prospects. Journal of Experimental Biology, 216(1), 134–141. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.074146

Perrot-Minnot, M.-J., Cozzarolo, C.-S., Amin, O., Barčák, D., Bauer, A., Filipović Marijić, V., García-Varela, M., Servando Hernández-Orts, J., Yen Le, T. T., Nachev, M., Orosová, M., Rigaud, T., Šariri, S., Wattier, R., Reyda, F., & Sures, B. (2023). Hooking the scientific community on thorny-headed worms: Interesting and exciting facts, knowledge gaps and perspectives for research directions on Acanthocephala. Parasite, 30, 23. https://doi.org/10.1051/parasite/2023026

Poulin, R. (2010). Parasite Manipulation of Host Behavior. In Advances in the Study of Behavior (Vol. 41, pp. 151–186). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-3454(10)41005-0

Rigaud, T., Balourdet, A., & Bauer, A. (2023). Time-course of antipredator behavioral changes induced by the helminth Pomphorhynchus laevis in its intermediate host Gammarus pulex: The switch in manipulation according to parasite developmental stage differs between behaviors. bioRxiv, ver. 6 peer-reviewed and recommended by Peer Community in Zoology. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.04.25.538244

Insect species richness and diversity comparisons between samples of the tropics around the world are rare, especially in taxa composed mainly of cryptic species as parasitoid wasps.

The article by Hopkins et al. (2024) compares samples of parasitoid wasps of the subfamily Rhyssinae (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) collected by Malaise traps in tropical rainforests of Perú and Uganda. The samples presented several differences in the time of collecting, covertures, and the sampling number; however, they used the same kind of traps, and the taxonomic process for species delimitation was made for the same team of ichneumonid experts, using equivalent characters.

Publications about this kind of comparative study are difficult to find because cooperative projects on insect richness and diversity from South American and African continents are not frequent. In this sense, this study presented a valuable contrast that shows interesting results about the higher richness and lower abundance of the biota of the American tropics, even with a small sample, in comparison with the biota of the African tropics. The results are supported mainly by the rarefaction curves shown. This pattern of higher species richness and lower specimen abundance, observed in other American tropical taxa such as trees, birds, or butterflies, is observed too in these parasitoid wasps, increasing the body of information that could support the extension of the pattern to the entire biota of the American tropics. The authors recognize the study's limitations, which include strong differences in the size of the forest coverture between places. However, these differences and others are enough described and discussed.

This work is useful because it increases the information about the diversity patterns of the tropics around the world and because study a taxon mainly composed of cryptic species, with a small amount of information in tropical regions.

References

Hopkins T., Tuomisto H., Gómez I.C., Sääksjärvi I. E. 2024. A comparison of the parasitoid wasp species richness of tropical forest sites in Peru and Uganda – subfamily Rhyssinae (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae). bioRxiv, ver. 2 peer-reviewed and recommended by Peer Community in Zoology. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.08.23.554460

I recommend the Van Steenberge et al. study. With over 2000 endemic species, the East African cichlids are a well-established model system in speciation research (Salzburger 2018) and several models have been proposed and tested to explain how these radiations formed (Kocher 2004). Hybridization was shown to be a main driver of the rapid speciation and adaptive radiations of the East African Cichlid fishes (Seehausen 2004). However, it is obvious that unrestrained hybridization also has the potential to reduce taxonomic diversity by erasing species barriers. In the classical model of cichlid evolution, special emphasis was placed on mate preference (Kocher 2004). However, no attention was placed on species recognition, which was implicitly assumed. There is, however, more research needed on what species recognition means, especially in radiating lineages such as cichlids. In a previous study, Nevado et al. 2011 found traces of asymmetrical hybridization between members of the Lake Tanganyika radiation: the genus Ophthalmotilapia. This recommended study by Van Steenberge et al. is based on Nevado et al. (2011), which detected that in one genus of Ophthalmotilapia mitochondrial DNA ‘typical’ for one of the four species (O. nasuta) was also found in three other species (O. ventralis, O. heterodonta, and O. boops). The authors suggested that this could be explained by the fact that females of the three other species accepted O. nasuta males, but that O. nasuta females were more selective and accepted only conspecifc males. This could hence be due to asymmetric mate preferences, or by asymmetric abilities for species recognition. 

This is exactly what the current study by Van Steenberge et al. did. They tested the latter hypothesis by presenting females of two different Ophthalmotilapia species with con- and heterospecific males. This was tested through experiments, making use of wild specimens of two species: O. nasuta and O. ventralis. The authors assumed that if they performed classical “choice-experiments”, they would not notice the recognition effects, given that females would just select preferred, most likely conspecific, males. Instead, specimens were only briefly presented to other fishes since the authors wanted to compare differences in the ability for ‘species recognition’. In this, the authors followed Mendelson and Shaw (2012) who used “a measurable difference in behavioural response towards conspecifics as compared to heterospecifics’’ as a definition for recognition. Instead of the focus on selection/preference, they investigated if females of different species behaved differently, and hence detected the difference between conspecific and heterospecific males. This was tested by a short (15 minutes) exposure to another fish in an isolated part of the aquarium. Recognition was defined as the ‘difference in a particular behaviour between the two conditions’. What was monitored was the swimming behaviour and trajectory (1 image per second) together with known social behaviours of this genus. The selection of these behaviours was further facilitated based on experimental set-ups of reproductive behaviour or the same species previously described by the same research team (Kéver et al. 2018).

The result was that O. nasuta females, for which it was expected that they would not hybridize, showed a different behaviour towards a con- or a heterospecific male. They interacted less with males of the other species. What was unexpected is that there was no difference in behaviour of the females whether they recognized a male or (control) female of their own species. This suggests that they did not detect differences in reproductive behaviour, but rather in the interactions between conspecifics. For females of O. ventralis, for which there are indications for hybridization in the wild, they did not find a difference in behaviour. Females of this species behaved identically with respect to the right and wrong males as well as towards the control females. Interestingly is thus that a complex pattern between species in the wild could be (partially) explained by the behaviour/interaction at first impression of the individuals of these species. 

References

Kéver L, Parmentier E, Derycke S, Verheyen E, Snoeks J, Van Steenberge M, Poncin P (2018) Limited possibilities for prezygotic barriers in the reproductive behaviour of sympatric Ophthalmotilapia species (Teleostei, Cichlidae). Zoology, 126, 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zool.2017.12.001

Kocher TD (2004) Adaptive evolution and explosive speciation: the cichlid fish model. Nature Reviews Genetics, 5, 288–298. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg1316

Mendelson TC, Shaw KL (2012) The (mis)concept of species recognition. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27, 421–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.04.001

Nevado B, Fazalova V, Backeljau T, Hanssens M, Verheyen E (2011) Repeated Unidirectional Introgression of Nuclear and Mitochondrial DNA Between Four Congeneric Tanganyikan Cichlids. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 28, 2253–2267. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msr043

Salzburger W (2018) Understanding explosive diversification through cichlid fish genomics. Nature Reviews Genetics, 19, 705–717. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41576-018-0043-9

Seehausen O (2004) Hybridization and adaptive radiation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 19, 198–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.01.003

Steenberge MV, Jublier N, Kéver L, Gresham S, Derycke S, Snoeks J, Parmentier E, Poncin P, Verheyen E (2022) The initial response of females towards congeneric males matches the propensity to hybridise in Ophthalmotilapia. bioRxiv, 2021.08.07.455508, ver. 3 peer-reviewed and recommended by Peer Community in Zoology. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.07.455508

Some insects are known to be phytosanitary threats on a wide diversity of plants and can have important economic and ecological impacts in their native area. This is the case of some species within the jewel beetle subfamily Agrilinae (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), which are associated with broadleaf forest declines and diebacks (Jendek & Poláková, 2014). These thermophilous borers are expected to be favoured by climate change and the global deterioration of forest health, and ultimately expand their range and damage.  

Active flight plays a crucial role in the life strategies of most insects, facilitating essential activities such as mate searching, locating trophic resources, finding favorable environmental conditions, and dispersing to or colonizing new geographic areas (Dudley, 2002). Studying flight capacities provides valuable insights into the ecology of these species and helps estimate their ability to spread within new environments. Assessing the flight capacities of pest and alien species is therefore critical for evaluating their dispersal potential and for designing effective monitoring and control strategies. 

The study by Le Souchu et al. (2024) aimed to assess intra- and interspecific variability in active flight of several Agrilinae species and to evaluate the effects of sex and mass on this variability. Using computerised flight mills, they assessed the flight performance of twelve species, most of them associated with oaks. A key feature of the study is the extensive dataset used, which reveals significant variability in flight distance and capacity among species and individuals. Body mass positively influenced flight capacity in some species, while no sexual dimorphism was observed. The findings suggest a generally low average dispersal propensity within these species and highlight the critical role of rare, exceptional individuals in driving colonization and spread patterns at both population and species levels.

Overall, the study provides a valuable comparative analysis of flight behavior and performance in several Agrilinae species associated with oak forests. Because flight behaviour and performance of these insects are poorly known despite their critical role in dispersal inside and outside native ranges and their relevance for management purposes, this study contributes to filling this gap. From a broader perspective, the findings revealed several common traits among the studied species and provide insights into the influence of different factors on flight activity.

References

Dudley, R. (2002) The biomechanics of insect flight: form, function, evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691186344

Jendek, E., Poláková, J. (2014) Host Plants of World Agrilus (Coleoptera, Buprestidae). Springer International Publishing, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08410-7

Le Souchu, E., Sallé, A., Bankhead-Dronnet, S., Laparie, M., Sauvard, S. (2024) Intra- and interspecific variations in flight performance of oak-associated Agrilinae (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) using computerised flight mills . bioRxiv, ver.2 peer-reviewed and recommended by PCI Zoology https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.07.01.601558

In animals, male weapons such as antlers, horns, spurs, fangs, and tusks typically provide advantages in male contests and increase access to females, thereby enhancing reproductive success. However, such large and extravagant morphological structures are expected to come at a cost, potentially imposing trade-offs with life history traits, physiological functions, or certain behaviors (Emlen, 2001; Emlen, 2008). These costs should be manageable only by males in the best condition. The present study by Blackwell et al. (2024) examines this assumption through a comprehensive study on the European earwig, where males possess forceps-like cerci that vary widely in size within populations.

In the European earwig (Forficula auricularia), male forceps are used in male-male contests as weapons to deter competitors prior to mating (Styrsky & Rhein, 1999) or to interrupt mating pairs by non-copulating males (Forslund, 2000; Walker & Fell, 2001). Despite providing benefits in terms of mating success (Eberhard & Gutierrez, 1991; Tomkins & Brown, 2004), it remains unknown whether long or short forceps are associated with other important life-history traits.

In this laboratory study, Blackwell et al. (2024) investigated two European earwig populations, each divided into two subpopulations: one with the shortest forceps and one with the longest forceps. They examined the potential costs of long forceps on six different traits: one reproductive trait (sperm storage); three non-reproductive behavioral traits such as locomotor performance (involved in search for resources), fleeing reaction face to a risk (long forceps are supposed to be correlated with boldness), and aggregation behavior (European earwigs are facultative group-living organisms); and survival (when deprived of food and subsequently when exposed to an entomopathogenic fungus).

As males in the best condition are supposed to be those that can afford to develop large forceps, Blackwell et al. (2024) predicted that males with long forceps would perform better than those with short forceps across the investigated traits. However, their predictions were not validated, as no correlation between weapon size and male quality was detected in either population. Although the sample size is sometimes limited, the consistency of these results across different populations adds robustness to their conclusions.

By demonstrating that forceps length in the European earwig does not reliably indicate male quality, this paper challenges existing theories and highlights the complexity of evolutionary processes shaping morphological traits. Furthermore, the study raises important questions about the evolutionary mechanisms maintaining weapon size diversity, providing a fresh perspective that could stimulate further research and debate in the field, notably the search for other traits where costs might be incurred.

References

Blackwell, S.E.M., Pasquier, L., Dupont, S., Devers, S., Lécureuil, C. & Meunier, J. (2024). Relationship between weapon size and six key behavioural and physiological traits in males of the European earwig. bioRxiv, ver. 3 peer-reviewed and recommended by Peer Community in Zoology. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.03.20.585871

Eberhard, W.G., & Gutierrez, E.E. (1991). Male dimorphisms in beetles and earwigs and the question of developmental constraints. Evolution, 45(1), 18–28. https://doi.org/10.2307/2409478

Emlen, D.J. (2001). Costs and the diversification of exaggerated animal structures. Science, 291(5508), 1534–1536. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1056607

Emlen, D.J. (2008). The evolution of animal weapons. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 39(1), 387–413. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173502

Forslund, P. (2000). Male-male competition and large size mating advantage in European earwigs, Forficula auricularia. Animal Behaviour, 59(4), 753–762. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1999.1359

Styrsky, J.D., & Rhein, S.V. (1999). Forceps size does not determine fighting success in European earwigs. Journal of Insect Behavior, 12(4), 475–482. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020962606724

Tomkins, J.L., & Brown, G.S. (2004). Population density drives the local evolution of a threshold dimorphism. Nature, 431, 1099–1103. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02936.1.

Walker, K.A., & Fell, R.D. (2001). Courtship roles of male and female European earwigs, Forficula auricularia L. (Dermaptera: Forficulidae), and sexual use of forceps. Journal of Insect Behavior, 14(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007843227591