Evolutionary genetic aspects of host association in generalist ectoparasites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the use of the host for dispersal by most parasite species, the extremely loose relationship typical between highly mobile hosts and generalist ectoparasites may lead to very different gene flow patterns between the two, leading in turn to different spatial genetic structure, and potentially different demographic history. I examined how similar gene flow patterns are between Cimex adjunctus, a generalist ectoparasite of bats present throughout North America, and two of its key bat hosts. I first analyzed the continent-scale genetic structure and demographic history of C. adjunctus and compared it to that of two of its hosts, the little brown myotis and the big brown bat, using microsatellite and mitochondrial data. Second, I compared spatial genetic structure of C. adjunctus with Cimex lectularius, or common bed bug, which associates with a broader range of host species. Third, I compared the effect of land cover on spatial genetic structure of C. adjunctus and of the big brown bat in the Great Lakes region. My results support the emerging hypothesis that generalist ectoparasites and their highly mobile hosts display weak, but positive, correlation in spatial genetic structure and demographic history.\nGeneralist parasites associate with different hosts, which are, in some cases, evolutionarily divergent from each other. In such cases, it is not clear how hosts may affect adaptive genetic variation in the parasites. In the Cimex genus, parasite species associate with a range of hosts, including bats, humans, and swallows. I examined how hosts affect adaptive genetic variation in these generalist ectoparasites. I analyzed variation at two salivary protein genes, one coding for an apyrase and the other for a nitrophorin, in 10 species of Cimex. These proteins affect the way parasites feed on their hosts, by preventing clotting and vasoconstriction, and may experience selection depending on host ecology or physiology. I also analyzed allelic divergence at the same two genes in a single species, C. adjunctus, associated with several bat species in North America. My results suggest selection and adaptation to the host at genes coding for salivary proteins of blood-feeding ectoparasites across the Cimex genus, and also within C. adjunctus.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".