Back

Mouth-attaching copepod Salmincola markewitschi reduces the body condition and growth of juvenile salmonid Salvelinus leucomaenis by decreasing host feeding activity: evidence from parasite removal experiment

Murakami, L.; Hasegawa, R.; Aruga, N.; Sato, N.; Nakamura, S.; Kajihara, H.; Koizumi, I.

2024-10-13 ecology
10.1101/2024.10.08.617322 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Ectoparasitic copepods in the genus Salmincola Wilson, 1915 are considered harmful to host salmonids, yet experimental studies on whether and how these copepods affect hosts are critically limited. We evaluated the effects of the mouth-attaching Salmincola markewitschi Shedko and Shedko, 2002 on juvenile white-spotted charr Salvelinus leucomaenis (Pallas, 1814) using a parasite removal experiment where all individuals were artificially infected, and then parasites were removed in one group (i.e., treatment), while the copepods were left in another group (i.e., control). We hypothesized that the copepods reduce host feeding, thereby reducing host body condition and growth. The alternative hypothesis is that parasites do not change host feeding, or even increase because of the compensation for the negative effect. In this case, host condition and growth would not be reduced. The control group (parasite remained) had lower food consumption, body condition, and growth compared to the treatment (parasite removed). Thus, S. markewitschi negatively affected hosts by reducing host feeding, and no behavioral compensation was observed. It remains unknown, however, whether reduced feeding was due to impaired swallowing or physiological stresses caused by infections. Further experiments on gill- and body-surface-attaching Salmincola species could provide deeper insights into how these parasites influence host health.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.