Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T01:14:35.325Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intraspecific patterns of ectoparasite abundances on Paraguayan bats: effects of host sex and body size

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2008

Steven J. Presley  and
Michael R. Willig
Steven J. Presley*
Affiliation:
Center for Environmental Sciences and Engineering and Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-4210, USA
Michael R. Willig
Affiliation:
Center for Environmental Sciences and Engineering and Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-4210, USA
*
1Corresponding author. Email: steven.presley@uconn.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Although levels of parasitism can vary greatly among individual bats of the same species, little is known about the characteristics of hosts that affect such variation. Bats were captured via mist nets from June 1995 to July 1997 from 28 localities throughout Paraguay. Over 17 500 ectoparasites were collected from 2909 bats; however, analyses of ectoparasite abundance were restricted to more abundant taxa of host and ectoparasite. We quantified the abundances of 29 taxa of ectoparasite on 19 species of bat host, as well as total abundance of ectoparasites regardless of taxonomic affiliation for 22 species of bat from Paraguay. The effects of host sex and host body size on these estimates of ectoparasite abundance were evaluated separately for each species of host. Ectoparasites did not respond consistently to host body size: ectoparasite abundance increased with host body size in 12 instances and decreased with host body size in 11 instances. Regardless of the existence or direction of effects of host body size on ectoparasite abundance, female hosts generally harboured more ectoparasites than did male hosts. Differences in host quality associated with the sex of bats, especially those related to behaviour, may be a more important determinant of ectoparasite abundance than are differences in size. Opportunities for host transfer are critical for species persistence of ectoparasites; consequently, ectoparasite populations on host individuals that form social groups or colonies should be larger, less prone to stochastic extinction, and have greater opportunity for speciation.

Keywords

ArthropodaChiropteraectoparasite abundancehost social systemhost specificityMacronyssidaeParaguayroosting ecologySpinturnicidaeStreblidae
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , January 2008 , pp. 75 - 83
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

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

LITERATURE CITED

ALTIZER, S., NUNN, C. L., THRALL, P. H., GITTLEMAN, J. L., ANTONOVICS, J., CUNNINGHAM, A. A., DOBSON, A. P., EZENQA, V., JONES, K. E., PEERSEN, A. B., POSS, M. & PULLIAM, J. R. C. 2003. Social organization and parasite risk in mammals: integrating theory and empirical studies. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 34:417–547.Google Scholar
ANIMAL CARE AND USE COMMITTEE 1998. Guidelines for the capture, handling, and care of mammals as approved by the American Society of Mammalogists. Journal of Mammalogy 79:1416–1431.Google Scholar
BARCLAY, R. M. R. & HARDER, L. D. 2003. Life histories of bats: life in the slow lane. Pp. 209–253 in Kunz, T. & Fenton, M. (eds.). Bat ecology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
BROWN, C. R. & BOMBERGER BROWN, M. 1986. Ectoparasitism as a cost of coloniality in cliff swallows (Hirundo pyrrhonota). Ecology 67:1206–1218.Google Scholar
BROWN, C. R., BOMBERGER BROWN, M. & RANNALA, B. 1995. Ectoparasites reduce long-term survival of their avian host. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B 262:313–319.Google Scholar
CHAPMAN, B. R. & GEORGE, J. E. 1991. The effects of ectoparasites on cliff swallow growth and survival. Pp. 69–92 in Loye, J. & Zuk, M. (eds.). Bird–parasite interactions: ecology, evolution, and behaviour. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
DICK, C. W. 2007. High host specificity of obligate ectoparasites. Ecological Entomology 32:446–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DICK, C. W. & PATTERSON, B. D. 2007. Against all odds: explaining high host specificity in dispersal-prone parasites. International Journal for Parasitology 37:871–876.Google Scholar
DICK, C. W., GANNON, M. R., LITTLE, W. E. & PATRICK, M. J. 2003. Ectoparasite associations of bats from central Pennsylvania. Journal of Medical Entomology 40:813–819.Google Scholar
EMERSON, S. B., GREENE, H. W. & CHARNOV, E. L. 1994. Allometric aspects of predator-prey interactions. Pp. 123–139 in Wainwright, P. & Reilly, S. (eds.). Ecological morphology: integrative organismal biology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
EMLEN, J. T. 1986. Responses of breeding cliff swallows to nidicolous parasite infestations. Condor 88:110–111.Google Scholar
FOLSTAD, I. & KARTER, A. J. 1992. Parasites, bright males, and the immunocompetence handicap. The American Naturalist 139:603–622.Google Scholar
GETTINGER, D. & ERNEST, K. A. 1995. Small-mammal community structure and the specificity of ectoparasite associations in central Brazil. Revista Brasiliera de Biologia 55:331–341.Google Scholar
HAYES, F. E. 1995. Status, distribution, and biogeography of the birds of Paraguay. Monographs in Field Ornithology 1:1–230.Google Scholar
HURLBERT, S. H. 2003. Design and analysis: uncertain intent, uncertain result. Ecology 84:810–812.Google Scholar
KEEL, S., GENTRY, A. H. & SPINZI, L. 1993. Using vegetation analysis to facilitate the selection of conservation sites in eastern Paraguay. Conservation Biology 7:66–75.Google Scholar
KRASNOV, B. R., MORAND, S., HAWLENA, H., KHOKHLOVA, I. S. & SHENBROT, G. I. 2005. Sex-biased parasitism, seasonality and sexual size dimorphism in desert rodents. Oecologia 146:209–217.Google Scholar
KUNZ, T. H. & LUMSDEN, L. F. 2003. Ecology of cavity and foliage roosting bats. Pp. 3–89 in Kunz, T. & Fenton, M. (eds.). Bat ecology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
LOYE, J. E. & CARROLL, S. P. 1991. Nest ectoparasite abundance and cliff swallow colony site selection, nestling development, and departure time. Pp. 222–241 in Loye, J. & Zuk, M. (eds.). Bird–parasite interactions: ecology, evolution, and behaviour. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
MACARTHUR, R. H. & WILSON, E. O. 1963. An equilibrium theory of insular zoogeography. Evolution 17:373–387.Google Scholar
MAPPES, T., MAPPES, J. & KOTAIHO, J. 1994. Ectoparasites, nest site choice and breeding success in the pied flycatcher. Oecologia 98:147–149.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MARSHALL, A. G. 1982. Ecology of insects ectoparasitic on bats. Pp. 369–401 in Kunz, T. (ed.). Ecology of bats. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
MCGILL, B. J. 2006. A renaissance in the study of abundance. Science 314:770–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MØLLER, A. P. 1990. Effects of a haematophagous mite on the barn swallow (Hirundo rustica): a test of the Hamilton and Zuk Hypothesis. Evolution 44:771–784.Google Scholar
MØLLER, A. P. 1991. Parasite load reduces song output in a passerine bird. Animal Behaviour 41:723–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MØLLER, A. P. 1993. Ectoparasites increase the cost of reproduction in their hosts. Journal of Animal Ecology 62:309–322.Google Scholar
MOORE, S. L. & WILSON, K. 2002. Parasites as a viability cost of sexual selection in natural populations of mammals. Science 297:2015–2018.Google Scholar
MORAN, M. D. 2003. Arguments for rejecting the sequential Bonferroni in ecological studies. Oikos 100:403–405.Google Scholar
MORAND, S., GOUY DE BELLOCQ, J., STANKO, M. & MIKLISOVÁ, D. 2004. Is sex-biased ectoparasitism related to sexual size dimorphism in small mammals of central Europe? Parasitology 129:505–510.Google Scholar
MOSS, W. W. & CAMIN, J. H. 1970. Nest parasitism, productivity, and clutch size in purple martins. Science 168:1000–1003.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
PATTERSON, B. D., DICK, C. W. & DITTMAR, K. 2007. Roosting habits of bats affect their parasitism by bat flies (Diptera: Streblidae). Journal of Tropical Ecology 23:177–189.Google Scholar
PRESLEY, S. J. 2004. Ectoparasitic assemblages of Paraguayan bats: ecological and evolutionary perspectives. Ph.D. dissertation, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, USA.Google Scholar
PRESLEY, S. J. 2007. Streblid bat fly assemblage structure on Paraguayan Noctilio leporinus (Chiroptera: Noctilionidae): nestedness and species co-occurrence. Journal of Tropical Ecology 23:409– 417.Google Scholar
RADOVSKY, F. J. 1966. Revision of the macronyssid and laelapid mites of bats: outline of classification with descriptions of new genera and new type species. Journal of Medical Entomology 3:93–99.Google Scholar
RICE, W. R. 1989. Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43:223–225.Google Scholar
RÍOS, E. & ZARDINI, E. 1989. Conservation of biological diversity in Paraguay. Conservation Biology 3:118–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ROSENZWEIG, M. L. 1995. Species diversity in space and time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 436 pp.Google Scholar
RUDNICK, A. 1960. A revision of the mites of the family Spinturnicidae (Acarina). University of California Publications in Entomology 17:157–283.Google Scholar
SHEELER-GORDON, L. L. & OWEN, R. D. 1999. Host tracking or resource tracking? The case of Periglischrus wing mites (Acarina: Spinturnicidae) of leaf-nosed bats (Chiroptera: Phyllostomidae) from Michoacan, Mexico. Acta Zoológica Mexicana (nueva serie) 76:85–102.Google Scholar
SIMMONS, N. B. 2005. Order Chiroptera. Pp. 312–529 in Wilson, D. & Reeder, D. (eds.). Mammal species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference, third edition, vol. 1. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.Google Scholar
SOLIMAN, S., MARZOUK, A. S., MAIN, A. J. & MONTASSER, A. A. 2001. Effect of sex, size, and age of commensal rat hosts on the infestation parameters of their ectoparasites in a rural area of Egypt. Journal of Parasitology 87:1308–1316.Google Scholar
TER HOFSTEDE, H. M. & FENTON, M. B. 2005. Relationships between roost preferences, ectoparasite density, and grooming behaviour of neotropical bats. Journal of Zoology 266:333–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TER HOFSTEDE, H. M., FENTON, M. B. & WHITAKER, J. O. 2004. Host and host-site specificity of bat flies (Diptera: Streblidae and Nycteribiidae) on Neotropical bats (Chiroptera). Canadian Journal of Zoology 82:616–626.Google Scholar
THORNHILL, N. W. (ed.). 1993. The natural history of inbreeding and outbreeding: theoretical and empirical perspectives. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. 584 pp.Google Scholar
TOMPKINS, D. M. & CLAYTON, D. H. 1999. Host resources govern the specificity of swiftlet lice: size matters. Journal of Animal Ecology 68:489–500.Google Scholar
WENZEL, R. L. & TIPTON, V. J. 1966. Some relationships between mammal hosts and their ectoparasites. Pp. 677–723 in Wenzel, R. & Tipton, V. (eds.). Ectoparasites of Panama. Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.Google Scholar
WHITEMAN, N. K. & PARKER, P. G. 2004. Effects of host sociality on ectoparasite population biology. Journal of Parasitology 90:939–947.Google Scholar
WILLIG, M. R., PRESLEY, S. J., OWEN, R. D. & LÓPEZ-GONZÁLEZ, C. 2000. Composition and structure of bat assemblages in Paraguay: a subtropical-temperate interface. Journal of Mammalogy 81:386–401.Google Scholar
WIMBERGER, P. H. 1984. The use of green plant material in bird nests to avoid ectoparasites. Auk 101:615–618.Google Scholar
ZELMER, D. A., PAREDES-CALDERÓN, L., LEÓN-RÈGAGNON, V. & GARCÍA-PRIETO, L. 2004. Nestedness in colonization-dominated systems: helminth infracommunities of Rana vaillanti Brocchi (Anura: Ranidae) in Los Tuxtlas, Veracruz, Mexico. Journal of Parasitology 90:705–710.Google Scholar