THE EVOLUTION OF PARASITES IN RESPONSE TO TOLERANCE IN THEIR HOSTS: THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND APPARENT COMMENSALISM
Martin R. Miller
Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN, England, United Kingdom
E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorAndrew White
Department of Mathematics, School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh EH14 4AS, Scotland, United Kingdom
E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorMichael Boots
Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN, England, United Kingdom
E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorMartin R. Miller
Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN, England, United Kingdom
E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorAndrew White
Department of Mathematics, School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh EH14 4AS, Scotland, United Kingdom
E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorMichael Boots
Department of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN, England, United Kingdom
E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Abstract Tolerance to parasites reduces the harm that infection causes the host (virulence). Here we investigate the evolution of parasites in response to host tolerance. We show that parasites may evolve either higher or lower within-host growth rates depending on the nature of the tolerance mechanism. If tolerance reduces virulence by a constant factor, the parasite is always selected to increase its growth rate. Alternatively, if tolerance reduces virulence in a nonlinear manner such that it is less effective at reducing the damage caused by higher growth rates, this may select for faster or slower replicating parasites. If the host is able to completely tolerate pathogen damage up to a certain replication rate, this may result in apparent commensalism, whereby infection causes no apparent virulence but the original evolution of tolerance has been costly. Tolerance tends to increase disease prevalence and may therefore lead to more, rather than less, disease-induced mortality. If the parasite is selected, even a highly efficient tolerance mechanism may result in more individuals in total dying from disease. However, the evolution of tolerance often, although not always, reduces the individual risk of dying from infection.
Literature Cited
- Anderson, R. M., and R. M. May. 1981. The population dynamics of microparasites and their invertebrate hosts. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 291: 451–524.
- Anderson, R. M., and R. M. May. 1982. Coevolution of hosts and parasites. Parasitology 85: 411–426.
- Boots, M., and R. G. Bowers. 1999. Three mechanisms of host resistance to microparasites—avoidance, recovery and tolerance—show different evolutionary dynamics. J. Theor. Biol. 201: 13–23.
- Boots, M., and R. G. Bowers. 2004. The evolution of resistance through costly acquired immunity. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 271: 715–723.
- Bremermann, H. J., and J. Pickering. 1983. A game-theoretical model of parasite virulence. J. Theor. Biol. 100: 411–426.
- Chao, L., K. A. Hanley, C. L. Burch, C. Dahlberg, and P. E. Turner. 2000. Kin selection and parasite evolution: higher and lower virulence with hard and soft selection. Q. Rev. Biol. 75: 261–275.
- Ebert, D. 1998. Evolution: experimental evolution of parasites. Science 282: 1432–1435.
- Ebert, D., and J. J. Bull. 2003. Challenging the trade-off model for the evolution of virulence: Is virulence management feasible Trends Microbiol. 11: 15–20.
- Ebert, D., and K. L. Mangin. 1997. The influence of host demography on the evolution of virulence of a microsporidian gut parasite. Evolution 51: 1828–1837.
- Fineblum, W. L., and M. D. Rausher. 1995. Tradeoff between resistance and tolerance to herbivore damage in a morning glory. Nature 377: 517–520.
- Frank, S. A. 1992. A kin selection model for the evolution of virulence. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 250: 195–197.
- Frank, S. A. 1994. Kin selection an virulence in the evolution of protocells and parasites. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 258: 153–161.
- Frank, S. A. 1996. Models of parasite virulence. Q. Rev. Biol. 71: 37–78.
- Gandon, S., and Y. Michalakis. 2000. Evolution of parasite virulence against qualitative or quantitative host resistance. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 267: 985–990.
- Gandon, S., M. J. Mackinnon, S. Nee, and A. F. Read. 2001. Imperfect vaccines and the evolution of pathogen virulence. Nature 414: 751–756.
- Gandon, S., M. J. Mackinnon, S. Nee, and A. F. Read. 2002a. Microbial evolution: antitoxin vaccines and pathogen virulence—reply. Nature 417: 610.
- Gandon, S., M. van Baalen, and V. A. A. Jansen. 2002b. The evolution of parasite virulence, superinfection, and host resistance. Am. Nat. 159: 658–669.
- Gandon, S., M. J. Mackinnon, S. Nee, and A. F. Read. 2003. Imperfect vaccination: some epidemiological and evolutionary consequences. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270: 1129–1136.
- Kover, P. X., and B. A. Schaal. 2002. Genetic variation for disease resistance and tolerance among Arabidopsis thaliana accessions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99: 11270–11274.
- Lenski, R. E., and R. M. May. 1994. The evolution of virulence in parasites and pathogens: Reconciliation between two competing hypotheses. J. Theor. Biol. 169: 253–265.
- Mackinnon, M. J., and A. F. Read. 1999a. Genetic relationships between parasite virulence and transmission in the rodent malaria Plasmodium chabaude. Evolution 53: 689–703.
- Mackinnon, M. J., and A. F. Read. 1999b. Selection for high and low virulence in the malaria parasite Plasmodium chabaudi. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 266: 741–748.
- Mauricio, R., M. D. Rausher, and D. S. Burdick. 1997. Variation in the defencse strategies of plants: Are resistance and tolerance mutually excllusive Ecology 78: 1301–1311.
- May, R. M., and M. A. Nowak. 1994. Superinfection, metapopulation dynamics, and the evolution of diversity. J. Theor. Biol. 170: 95–114.
- May, R. M., and M. A. Nowak. 1995. Coinfection and the evolution of parasite virulence Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 261: 209–215.
- Mosquera, J., and F. R. Adler. 1998. Evolution of virulence: a unified framework for coinfection and superinfection. J. Theor. Biol. 195: 293–313.
- Nowak, M. A., and R. M. May. 1994. Superinfection and the evolution of parasite virulence. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 255: 81–89.
- Read, A. F., and P. H. Harvey. 1993. Parasitology: the evolution of virulence. Nature 362: 500–501.
- Restif, O., and J. C. Koella. 2003. Shared control of epidemiological traits in a coevolutionary model of host-parasite interactions. Am. Nat. 161: 827–836.
- Rolff, J., and M. T. Siva-Jothy. 2003. Invertebrate ecological immunology. Science 301: 472–475.
- Ray, B. A., and J. W. Kirchner. 2000. Evolutionary dynamics of pathogen resistance and tolerance. Evolution 54: 51–63.
- Schurch, S., and B. A. Roy. 2004. Comparing single- vs. mixed-genotype infections of Mycospharella graminicola on wheat: effects on pathogen virulence and host tolerance. Evol. Ecol. 18: 1–14.
- Simms, E. L., and J. Triplett. 1994. Costs and benefits of plant-responses to disease: resistance and tolerance. Evolution 48: 1973–1985.
- Strauss, S. Y., and A. A. Agrawal. 1999. The ecology and evolution of plant tolerance to herbivory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14: 179–185.
- Tiffin, P. 2000. Are tolerance, avoidance, and antibiosis evolutionarily and ecologically equivalent responses of plants to herbivores Am. Nat. 155: 128–138.
- Tiffin, P., and M. D. Rausher. 1999. Genetics constraints and selection acting on tolerance to herbivory in the common morning glory Ipomoea purpurea. Am. Nat. 154: 700–716.
- van Baalen, M. 1998. Coevolution of recovery ability and virulence. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 265: 317–325.
- van Baalen, M., and M. W. Sabelis. 1995. The dynamics of multiple infection and the evolution of virulence. Am. Nat. 146: 881–910.
- Zuckerman, E., A. Eshel, and Z. Eyal. 1997. Physiological aspects related to tolerance of spring wheat cultivars to Septoria tritici blotch. Phytopathology 87: 60–65.