Edhazardia aedis

When two different parasites find themselves in a small host animal like a mosquito, there is only so much of the host to go around. So there is a pretty good chance that those co-occurring parasites are going to fight it out, and there's no guarantee that there will be a winner out of this conflict.

Photo of E. aedis spores from here

Edhazardia aedis is a microsporidian parasite that specialises on infecting Aedes aegypti - also known as the mosquito that can act as the main vector for a variety of viruses include those that causes degnue fever, yellow fever, and Chikungunya. Edhazardia aedis can spread through the mosquito population via two methods; (1) the parasite can proliferation throughout the mosquito's body until it ultimately overwhelms the host, which dies and dissolves into a cloud of infective spores, or (2) if an infected female mosquito survives the ordeal to adulthood and still manage to produce offspring, her mosquito babies will inherit E. aedis from her (gee, thanks a lot mum!).

But E. aedis can sometimes run into a competing species - Vavraia culicis. It is also a microsporidian, but unlike E. aedis, it is a generalist that can infect many different species of mosquitoes. It is also a mosquito-killer which has the same general modus operandi as E. aedis, where the parasite's spores are released when the host finally succumbs. This study found that mosquito larvae which have less access to food and are infected by both parasites tend to die earlier - and when the host dies, the spores are dispersed for both E. aedis and V. culicis - so everyone wins, right? Well not quite.

While host death does release the spores which allow them to infect more mosquito larvae, the parasites get more spores for their bucks by keeping their host alive for longer - so a host that ends up keeling over too early is not very cost effective. This applies to both E. aedis and V. culicis. Even before host death, the cost of co-infection starts manifesting itself. Regardless of whether the host dies sooner or later, both parasites produce less spores in co-infections. If E. aedis is sharing a host, it produces half as many spores as it would have if it had the host all to itself. But co-infection is even more costly for V. culicis, which manages to produce only a bit over a quarter of the spore it would have in single infections.

It is unknown how these two parasites duke it out in the mosquito, or why E. aedis has a competitive edge over V. culicis. Perhaps by being a specialist of A. aegypti, E. aedis has some sort of home ground advantage when it comes to getting the most out of its host. So it seems that some parasites just don't like sharing, and when it comes to living with others, sometimes it pays for a parasite to be a specialist.

Reference:
Duncan, A. B., Agnew, P., Noel, V., & Michalakis, Y. (2015). The consequences of co-infections for parasite transmission in the mosquito Aedes aegypti. Journal of Animal Ecology 84: 498-508.

Plasmodium falciparum (revisited)

This is the seventh and final post in a series of blog posts written by students from my third year Evolutionary Parasitology unit (ZOOL329/529) class of 2014. This particular post was written by Brianna Barwise about how Plasmodium falciparum - the most deadly strain of malaria - give their mosquito host a sugar craving (you can read the previous post about how the Emerald Cockroach Wasp acquires its skills for wrestling a cockroach into a submissive zombie here).

Photo by AFPMB

Ever felt like you had no control over your sugar cravings? Well, for mosquitoes infected with the apicomplexan parasite Plasmodium falciparum, that can certainly be the case. A recent study conducted by Vincent Nyasembe and colleagues have found that parasitized Anopheles gambiae mosquitoes have a significantly increased sugar uptake and attraction to nectar sources. Mosquitoes infected with the oocyst and sporozoite stages of P. falciparum showed a respective 30% and 24% increase in attraction to plant odours than those that were uninfected, with a respective 70% and 80% increase in probing activity. The study also revealed an increase in sugar uptake of those mosquitos infected with the oocyst stage of the parasite.

The relationship between these microscopic parasites and their pesky insect hosts is actually one of upmost importance to people. Plasmodium falciparum causes malaria in humans, and is transmitted by female mosquitos of the Anopheles genus. Anopheles gambiae is one of the most efficient malaria vectors and with the majority of malarial death being caused by P. falciparum, developing our understanding of this host/parasite relationship is crucial.

Behavioural manipulation of hosts by parasites to enhance their own survival and transmission rates has been well documented - from viruses that alter the egg-laying behaviour of wasps to hairworms that cause their landlubber cricket hosts to plunge themselves into water. Previous studies of Plasmodium parasites have shown they manipulate vector behaviour, with infected vectors having an increased attraction to their vertebrate hosts for a blood meal. However, this is the first study to demonstrate changed behaviour in mosquito vectors towards nectar sources.

Feeding on nectar is critical for the survival of malaria vectors. Increased attraction to nectar sources and sugar uptake could be explained by parasite manipulation to increase available energy for its own metabolism and improve survival of its vector (and thus likelihood the parasite will be transmitted). Further, an increased attraction to vertebrate hosts during non-transmissible stages of the parasite's development would be disadvantageous as it increases the risk of vector mortality. Thus, selective pressure would favour the parasite to drive a preference for nectar feeding during this time.

Alternatively, the change in behaviour could be attributed to a compensation made by the mosquito itself for the energy deficit created by the parasite. Generally speaking, parasitic infection inflicts energetic costs in the host vector, which leads to a decrease in reproductive potential and reduction in lifespan. Nyasembe suggests that it is possible the increased probing is to satisfy its own metabolic demands along with that of the parasite growing inside it.

Therefore, further study is required to establish whether the increased attraction to nectar sources and sugar uptake is a physiological adjustment by An. Gambiae in response to infection or if it is direct behavioural manipulation by the parasite. Either way, unlike much of humanity, at least they have some excuse for consuming an excess of sugar.

Reference:
Nyasembe, V., Teal, P., Sawa, P., Tumlinson, J., Borgemeister, C. & Torto, B. 2014. Plasmodium falciparum Infection Increases Anopheles gambiae Attraction to Nectar Sources and Sugar Uptake. Current Biology 24: 217-221.

This post was written by Brianna Barwise

January 21 - Dirofilaria immitis

Heartworm, Dirofilaria immitis, is a filarial nematode parasite that usually infects dogs or other canines, but can also infect cats, foxes, ferrets, and sea lions. The adult worms live in the right ventricle of the heart, hence their common name. After the adults mate, they produce microscopic larvae known as microfilariae, which are ingested by mosquitos when they bite the mammalian host. The larvae complete their development in the mosquito and then are transmitted to a new host when she feeds again. Although most dogs do not show signs of infection, in some cases worms can cause issues and need to be treated. However the treatments are sometimes risky because the dead worms can get carried to the lungs and cause respiratory distress or failure. Preventative therapies, such as giving dogs the drug ivermectin, are effective and safe. Heartworm are also hosts to the endosymbiotic bacteria, Wolbachia (see January 12th).

Image from this website.