|
How many monarchs in natural populations are infected with O.
elektroscirrha?
(Continued)
Abstract
| Background |
Methods | Results
| Discussion |
Acknowledgments | References
| Appendices |
Sonia's Research Questions
DISCUSSION
Ophryocystis elektroscirrha has a wide geographic
distribution, and the prevalence of heavily infected adult D.
plexippus is highly variable among populations (ranging from
near zero to almost 100%). Within North America, parasites are most
prevalent in southern Florida, where over 70% of the monarchs are
heavily infected. Approximately 30% of the migratory population
in western North America is heavily infected, whereas the eastern
migratory population has < 10% heavily infected adults. Estimates
of prevalence from older collections indicate that these differences
may have persisted for up to 30 years. Although parasite prevalence
varied among years within the eastern migratory population, there
was no trend of progressive increases or decreases, as might be
expected for a recently introduced pathogen or one that was unable
to persist in a host population.
These data are consistent with previous measures of
adult parasite loads in several monarch populations (Leong et
al., 1992, 1997a), and suggest an association between host migratory
behavior and parasite prevalence. The eastern migratory population
in North America migrates the farthest distance each year and has
the lowest prevalence of heavy infection. Monarchs west of the Rocky
Mountains migrate considerably shorter distances (Fig.
1), and monarchs in southern Florida breed year-round and do
not migrate (Knight, 1997). Another non-migratory monarch population
in Hawaii has been shown to bear extremely high parasite loads (up
to 100% heavily infected; Brower et al., 1995, Leong et
al., 1997a).
Many factors may be responsible for among-population
differences in parasite prevalence, including genetic variation
in host or parasite lineages (Read et al., 1995), environmental
differences in temperature or humidity (Benz, 1987), and the different
host migratory distances. Migration may affect parasite prevalence
by influencing the mortality of infected hosts or by affecting disease
transmission. For example, theoretical models of host-parasite interactions
predict declines in parasite prevalence with increasing host mortality
(Anderson & May, 1991). Therefore, if infected hosts suffer
disproportionate mortality during migration, prevalence should decrease
as migratory distances increase. Second, in the absence of host
migration, parasites may accumulate in the hosts' environment over
time (Shaw, 1994; Roberts et al., 1995), and hosts that undergo
periodic migration may escape infection. Finally, migration and
overwintering separate monarch reproductive intervals by up to 6
months, and could reduce the transmission of O. elektroscirrha
by limiting the number of times that vertical transmission occurs
each year.

If the mortality of infected hosts during migration
is responsible for low prevalence in the longest-distance migrants,
prevalence of heavy infection may increase in the summer generations
due to biparental transmission (Altizer & Augustine, 1997),
then decline during the autumn migration. In addition, if no parental
transmission occurs at the overwintering sites (when hosts are not
reproducing), the frequency of high parasite loads should decline
during the overwintering period due to the mortality of infected
adults. However, no changes in the prevalence of heavily infected
adults were detected among periods of breeding, migration, and overwintering
in eastern North America (Fig. 5).
Because prevalence in this population is so low and breeding monarchs
were sampled near the northern limits of their summer range, these
results must be regarded with caution. However, observations from
eastern and western migratory populations suggest that this disease
does not cause increased mortality during the overwintering period
alone, as no significant declines in prevalence were detected during
overwintering (Fig. 6).
In contrast, parasite prevalence in summer breeding
monarchs in western North America declined with increasing distance
between breeding and overwintering sites. Samples collected from
locations more distant from overwintering sites were associated
with lower average parasite loads and prevalence of heavy infection
(Fig. 7). This pattern suggests
that heavily infected monarchs may fail to reach breeding sites
at the most distant extremes of their range. Deviations from this
general pattern indicate that other factors influence the distribution
of disease among breeding monarchs in western North America. One
factor that may become increasingly important is the sale and transfer
of live monarchs for special events by breeders in North America.
Depending on the rearing practices involved, large numbers of healthy
or infected butterflies may be released and artificially decrease
or enhance parasite prevalence in local patches (Brower et al.,
1995).
Laboratory studies of O. elektroscirrha transmission
demonstrate that low parasite loads (classes 1-3) can result from
mating or other contact between healthy and infected adults (Altizer
1998). Temporal changes in the frequency of monarchs with low parasite
loads indicate that spore transfer between adults also occurs during
phases of migration and overwintering, when monarchs cluster in
dense aggregations (Fig. 5). At
overwintering colonies, the prevalence of adults with low parasite
loads increased throughout the overwintering period (Fig.
6). This increase in the prevalence of monarchs with low parasite
loads probably results from contact between healthy and heavily
infected butterflies during intervals of high host density. Transfer
via direct or indirect contact between adults may be important to
the persistence of this parasite in the eastern migratory population,
where heavily infected adults (and hence vertical transmission)
are rare.
Temporal changes in the frequency of heavily infected
adults in southern Florida show a decline in prevalence in October
and November 1995, compared with high prevalence in other months
of that year (Fig. 8). Recent work
by Knight (1997) determined that this decline coincides with an
influx of eastern autumn migrants into southern Florida. Moreover,
most of the uninfected monarchs in the November sample were, as
determined by thin layer chromatography, members of the eastern
migratory population (A. J. Knight, pers. comm.). Two other samples
of monarchs collected during November in Cuba also contained a mix
of migrating and locally breeding butterflies (C. Dockx and L. P.
Brower, unpublished) and showed prevalence similar to monarchs collected
in November in southern Florida. This evidence suggests that uninfected
migrating monarchs enter regions of high parasite prevalence in
southern Florida and Cuba in the autumn, temporarily decreasing
parasite prevalence.
Among Australian monarchs, prevalence of O. elektroscirrha
followed a latitudinal gradient along the eastern coast. Monarchs
sampled farther north in Rockhampton (Queensland) had lower parasite
prevalence than those collected in New South Wales near Sydney (Fig.
9), and monarchs collected near Brisbane showed intermediate
prevalence. The distribution of monarchs in Australia is confined
largely to eastern regions of Queensland and New South Wales, and
their winter range is restricted to eastern coast (Zalucki 1986).
Although stable overwintering colonies have been observed in the
Sydney Basin for many years (James, 1993), conditions in the Sydney
area also support breeding monarch populations throughout the year
(James, 1993). However, conditions near Rockhampton (in Queensland,
north of Brisbane) become too hot and dry in summer to maintain
a continuous breeding population (M. P. Zalucki, pers. comm.). Thus,
variation in parasite prevalence observed in Australian monarchs
may reflect host breeding ecology and migratory behavior, with prevalence
highest in areas where monarchs are present year-round and lower
in regions where monarch populations are ephemeral.
To understand the role of parasites in regulating
animal populations, or underlying factors that mediate parasite
abundance, more investigations of natural populations are required
(Dobson & Hudson, 1995; Gulland, 1995). Observations of between-population
variation in prevalence show clearly that parasite prevalence and
average parasite loads are lower in migratory than in non-migratory
monarch populations. Although fine-scale observations within populations
do not indicate that differential mortality of infected hosts during
overwintering generates this pattern, other processes related to
host movement may still affect pathogen abundance. In particular,
the observation that the distance from overwintering to breeding
areas is correlated negatively with average parasite loads in western
North America suggests that spring migration may be important in
regulating disease prevalence. In addition, contact leading to spore
transfer between adults at overwintering colonies is likely to sustain
O. elektroscirrha in the eastern migratory population, where
parental transmission is limited by the low frequency of infected
adults.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I thank the following individuals for access to previously
collected samples of monarch butterflies, or for assistance with
collecting and assessing disease prevalence in more recent samples:
Alfonso Alonso-M., James Anderson, Peter Andolfatto, Christine Arnott,
Lorelle Berkeley, William Calvert, Paul Cherubini, Christina Dockx,
Eneida Montesiņos-P., Dennis Frey, Bobby Gendron, Elizabeth Goehring,
Kari Geurts, Anthony OToole, Gard Otis, Imants Pone, Michelle
Prysby, Eduardo Rendon-S., Elizabeth Rutkin, Michelle Solensky,
Tonya Van Hook, and Myron Zalucki. I thank Don Alstad, Peter Thrall,
David Andow, Linda Kinkel, Janis Antonovics and two anonymous reviewers
for insightful discussion and comments on the manuscript. This work
was supported in part by NSF Grants DEB-9220829 and ESI-9554476
to Karen Oberhauser, by NSF Grants BMS-7514265, DEB-781065, DEB-8119382,
BSR-8500416, and OEB-9221091 to L. P. Brower, and by the following
awards to Sonia Altizer.: NSF Grant DEB-9700916, two Minnesota Center
for Community Genetics Graduate Research Awards, and two James W.
Wilkie Awards for research in natural history from the Bell Museum
of Natural History at the University of Minnesota.
REFERENCES
Ackery, P.R. & Vane-Wright, R. I. (1984) Milkweed
Butterflies: their Cladistics and Biology. British Museum (Natural
History), London.
Agresti, A. (1996) An Introduction to Categorical
Data Analysis. John Wiley and Sons, NewYork. 290pp.
Alonso-Mejia, A. (1996) Biology and Conservation
of Overwintering Monarch Butterflies in Mexico. Ph.D. Thesis
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Altizer, S.M. (1998) Ecological and Evolutionary
Interactions between Monarch Butterflies and the Protozoan Parasite,
Ophryocystis elektroscirrha. Ph.D. Thesis, University
of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN.
Altizer, S.M. & Augustine, D.J. (1997) Interactions
between frequency-dependent and vertical transmission in host-parasite
systems. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London SeriesB,
264, 807-814.
Altizer, S.M. & Oberhauser, K.S. (1999) Effects
of the protozoan parasite, Ophryocystis elektroscirrha, on
the fitness of monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus).
Journal of Invertebrate Pathology. In press.
Anderson, R.M. & May, R.M. (1991) Infectious
Disease of Humans: Dynamics and Control. Oxford University Press,
Oxford.
Antonovics, J. & Thrall, P.H. (1995) The cost
of resistance and the maintenance of genetic polymorphism in host-pathogen
systems. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B,
257, 105-110.
Benz, G. (1987) Environment. Epizootiology of Insect
Diseases (ed. by J. R. Fuxa and Y. Tanada), pp. 177-214. John
Wiley and Sons, New York.
Brower, L.P. (1995) Understanding and misunderstanding
the migration of the monarch butterfly (Nymphalidae) in North America:
1857-1995. Journal of the Lepidopterists Society, 49,
304-385.
Brower, L.P. (1996) Monarch butterfly orientation:
missing pieces of a magnificent puzzle. Journal of Experimental
Biology, 199, 93-103.
Brower, L.P., Fink, L.S., Brower, A.V.S., Leong, K.,
Oberhauser, K., Altizer, S. et al. (1995) On the dangers
of interpopulational transfers of monarch butterflies. BioScience,
45(8), 540-544.
Brower, L.P. & Malcolm, S.B. (1991) Animal migrations:
endangered phenomena. American Zoologist, 31, 265-276.
Calvert, W.H. & Brower, L.P. (1986) The location
of monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus L.) overwintering
colonies in Mexico in relation to topography and climate. Journal
of theLepidopterists Society, 40, 164-187.
Calvert, W.H. & Lawton, R.O. (1993) Comparative
phenology of variation in size, weight, and water content of eastern
North American monarch butterflies at five overwintering sites in
Mexico. Biology and Conservation of the Monarch Butterfly
(ed.by S. B. Malcolm and M. P. Zalucki), pp. 299-307. Natural History
Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, California.
Dobson, A.P. & Hudson, P.J. (1995) Microparasites:
observed patterns in wild animal populations. Ecology of Infectious
Diseases in Natural Populations (ed. by A. P. Dobson and B.
T. Grenfell), pp. 52-89. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Folstad, I., Nilssen, F.I., Halvorsen, A.C. &
Andersen, O. (1991) Parasite avoidance: the cause of post-calving
migrations in Rangifer? Canadian Journal of Zoology,
69(9), 2423-2429.
Getz, W.M. & Pickering, J. (1983) Epidemic models:
thresholds and population regulation. American Naturalist,
121, 892-898.
Gulland, F.M.D. (1995) The impact of infectious diseases
on wild animal populations - a review. Ecology of Infectious
Diseases in Natural Populations (ed. by A. P. Dobson and B.
T. Grenfell), pp. 20-51. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hardy, I.C. and Field, S.A. (1998) Logistic analysis
of animal contests. Animal Behaviour, 56, 787-792.
Hausfater, G. & Meade, B.J. (1982) Alternation
of sleeping groves by yellow baboons (Papio cyanocephalus)
as a strategy for parasite avoidance. Primates, 23:
287-297.
James, D.J. (1993) Migration biology of the monarch
butterfly in Australia. Biology and Conservation of the Monarch
Butterfly (ed. by S. B. Malcolm and M. P. Zalucki), pp. 89-200.
Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, California.
Knight, A.L. (1997) A Population Study of Monarch
Butterflies in North-central and South Florida. Masters Thesis,
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Leong, K.L.H., Kaya, H.K., Yoshimura, M.A. & Frey,
D.F. (1992) The occurrence and effect of a protozoan parasite, Ophryocystis
elektroscirrha (Neogregarinida: Ophryocystidae) on overwintering
monarch butterflies, Danaus plexippus (Lepidoptera: Danaidae)
from two California winter sites. Ecological Entomology,17,
338-342.
Leong, K.L.H., Yoshimura, M.A. & Kaya, H.K. (1997a)
Occurrence of a neogregarine protozoan, Ophryocystis elektroscirrha
McLaughlin and Myers, in populations of monarch and queen butterflies.
Pan-Pacific Entomologist, 73(1), 49-51.
Leong, K.L.H., Yoshimura, M.A., Kaya, H.K. & Williams,
H. (1997b) Instar susceptibility of the monarch butterfly (Danaus
plexippus) to the neogregarine parasite, Ophryocystis elektroscirrha.
Journal of Invertebrate Pathology, 69(1), 79-83.
Lockhart, A.B., Thrall, P.H. & Antonovics, J.
(1996) Sexually transmitted diseases in animals: ecological and
evolutionary implications. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge
Philosophical Society, 71, 415-471.
McLaughlin, R.E. & Myers, J. (1970) Ophryocystis
elektroscirrha sp. n. a neogregarine pathogen of the monarch
butterfly Danaus plexippus (L.) and the Florida queen butterfly
Danaus gilippus berenice Cramer. Journal of Protozoology,
17, 300-305.
Nagano, C.D., Sakai, W.H., Malcolm, S.B., Cockrell,
B.J., Donahue, J.P. & Brower, L.P. (1993) Spring migration
of monarch butterflies in California. Biology and Conservation of
the Monarch Butterfly (ed. by S. B. Malcolm and M. P. Zalucki),
pp. 219-232. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles,
California.
Read, A.F., Albon, S.D., Antonovics, J., Apanius,
V., Dwyer, G., Holt, R.D. et al. (1995) Group report: genetics
and evolution of infectious disease in natural populations. Ecology
of Infectious Diseases in Natural Populations (ed. by A. P.
Dobson and B. T. Grenfell), pp. 450-477. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Roberts, M.G., Smith, G. & Grenfell, B.T. (1995)
Mathematical models for macroparasites of wildlife. Ecology of
Infectious Diseases in Natural Populations (ed. by A. P. Dobson
and B. T. Grenfell), pp. 177-208. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Shaw, D.J. (1994) Distribution of macroparasites
in naturally-fluctuating host populations. Ph.D. Thesis, St.
Catherines College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, U.K.
Urquhart, F.A. & Urquhart, N.R. (1978) Autumnal
migration routes of the eastern population of the monarch butterfly
(Danaus plexippus) (L.) (Danaidae: Lepidoptera) in North
America to the overwintering site in the neovolcanic plateau of
Mexico. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 56, 1754-1764.
Van Hook, T. (1993) Non-random mating behavior in
monarch butterflies overwintering in Mexico. Biology and Conservation
of the Monarch Butterfly (ed. by S. B. Malcolm and M. P. Zalucki),
pp. 49-60. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, LosAngeles,
California.
Weisberg, S. (1985) Applied Linear Regression.
Second edition. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 324pp.
Zalucki, M.P. (1986) The monarch butterfly --
a non-pest exotic insect. The Ecology of Exotic Animals and Plants:
Some Australian Case Histories. (ed. by R. L. Kitching), pp.
129- 142. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Location and date of monarch collections
used to assess disease prevalence among populations. For samples
marked with an asterisk, multiple dates and locations have been
combined into a single entry. Note that Mexico is included in North
American collections.
| Population |
Date |
Location |
Activity |
N |
| |
|
|
|
|
| Eastern North |
9/68 |
Massachusetts |
Migrating |
15 |
| America |
9/70 |
Massachusetts |
Migrating |
36 |
| |
9/71 |
Massachusetts |
Migrating |
74 |
| |
9/72 |
Massachusetts* |
Migrating |
153 |
| |
9/73 |
Massachusetts* |
Migrating |
697 |
| |
11/77-3/78 |
Central Mexico*1 |
Overwintering |
582 |
| |
9/79 |
Kansas |
Migrating |
54 |
| |
1/81 |
Central Mexico1 |
Overwintering |
70 |
| |
11/81 |
Central Mexico1 |
Overwintering |
90 |
| |
10/82 |
Texas* |
Migrating |
121 |
| |
12/83 |
Central Mexico1 |
Overwintering |
84 |
| |
1/85 |
Central Mexico1 |
Overwintering |
26 |
| |
10/85 |
N. Florida |
Migrating |
50 |
| |
10/88 |
N. Florida |
Migrating |
26 |
| |
4/93 |
N. Florida |
Migrating |
42 |
| |
10/93 |
Texas |
Migrating |
134 |
| |
11/93-3/94 |
Central Mexico*1 |
Overwintering |
3,184 |
| |
4/94 |
N. Florida |
Migrating |
55 |
| |
7/94 |
Minnesota, Wisconsin* |
Breeding |
183 |
| |
10/94 |
Texas, N. Florida* |
Migrating |
320 |
| |
1/95-3/95 |
Central Mexico* |
Overwintering |
600 |
| |
7/95 |
Minnesota, Wisconsin* |
Breeding |
207 |
| |
10/95 |
Texas |
Migrating |
48 |
| |
11/95-3/96 |
Central Mexico*1 |
Overwintering |
3,393 |
| |
7/96 |
Minnesota, Wisconsin* |
Breeding |
56 |
| |
3/97 |
Central Mexico1 |
Overwintering |
1,309 |
| |
6/97-8/97 |
Minnesota, Wisconsin* |
Breeding |
370 |
| |
|
|
|
|
| Western North |
12/79 |
Santa Cruz, California |
Overwintering |
99 |
| America |
11/89-3/90 |
California Coastline*2 |
Overwintering |
946 |
| |
8/96 |
Davis, California |
Breeding |
40 |
| |
1/97-2/97 |
California Coastline*2 |
Overwintering |
717 |
| |
7/97-8/97 |
California, Colorado,
Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washingon* |
Breeding |
309 |
| |
9/97 |
Bolinas, California |
Overwintering |
30 |
| |
|
|
|
|
| South Florida |
12/68 |
Miami, Florida |
Breeding |
7 |
| |
11/70 |
Flamingo, Florida |
Migrating |
80 |
| |
4/90 |
Miami, Florida |
Breeding |
46 |
| |
12/94-11/95 |
Miami, Florida |
Breeding |
292 |
| |
7/96 |
Miami, Florida |
Breeding |
21 |
| |
|
|
|
|
| Caribbean |
11/95 |
Cuba |
|
21 |
| |
11/96 |
Cuba |
|
51 |
| |
|
|
|
|
| Northern South America |
1/68 |
Trinidad |
Breeding |
11 |
| |
7/95 |
Colombia |
Breeding |
27 |
| |
11/95 |
Venezuela |
Breeding |
6 |
| |
|
|
|
|
| Australia |
4/96 |
Sydney, New South Wales |
Breeding |
39 |
| |
7/96 |
Rockhampton, Queensland |
Breeding |
24 |
| |
7/96-10/96 |
Mt. Crosby, Queensland |
Breeding |
45 |
1 Represents from one to eight different
overwintering areas in Central Mexico (including Sierra Chincua,
Cerro Pelon, Palomas, Sierra El Campanario, Sierra Chivati-Huacal,
Cerro Altamirano, and Herrada; for locations, see Calvert &
Brower, 1986).
2 Represents from 1 to 10 different overwintering
locations along the California coastline (including Bolinas, Stinson
Beach, Moran Lake, Morro Bay, Pismo Beach, Ellwood, Gaviota, Leo
Carillo, Cemetario, and Refugio; L.P. Brower & W. Calvert, unpublished).
Appendix B.
Samples of eastern North American migratory monarchs collected during
breeding, migratory, and overwintering periods. Unless specified,
overwintering sites in Central Mexico include Sierra Chincua, Cerro
Pelon, Cerro Altamirano, Sierra El Campanario, Sierra Chivati-Huacal,
Herrada, and Palomas. Breeding monarchs in Minnesota and Wisconsin
were captured within a 250 kilometer radius of St Paul, Minnesota.
Migrating monarchs in Texas were captured in Central Texas.
| Location |
Date |
Activity |
N |
| Five sites in Central
Texas |
10/93 |
Migrating South |
134
|
| Five sites in Central
Mexico |
11/93 |
Overwintering |
495
|
| Seven sites in Central
Mexico |
12/93 |
Overwintering |
648
|
| Seven sites in Central
Mexico |
1/94 |
Overwintering |
705
|
| Seven sites in Central
Mexico |
2/94 |
Overwintering |
698
|
| Six sites in Central
Mexico |
3/94 |
Overwintering |
594
|
| Minnesota and Wisconsin |
6/94-8/94 |
Breeding |
183
|
| Central Texas and N
Florida |
10/94 |
Migrating South |
320
|
| Four sites in Central
Mexico |
1/95 |
Overwintering |
400
|
| Sierra Chincua, Central
Mexico |
2/95 |
Overwintering |
100
|
| Sierra Chincua, Central
Mexico |
3/95 |
Overwintering |
100
|
| Minnesota and Wisconsin |
6/95-8/95 |
Breeding |
207
|
| Central Texas |
10/95 |
Migrating South |
48
|
| Sierra Chincua, Central
Mexico |
11/95 |
Overwintering |
1 000 |
| Sierra Chincua, Central
Mexico |
1/96 |
Overwintering |
1 000
|
| Sierra Chincua, Central
Mexico |
3/96 |
Overwintering |
1 393
|
| Minnesota and Wisconsin |
6/96-8/96 |
Breeding |
56
|
| Sierra Chincua, Central
Mexico |
3/97 |
Overwintering |
1 309
|
| Minnesota and Wisconsin |
6/97-8/97 |
Breeding |
370
|
Appendix C.
Collection sites, dates, and sample sizes of breeding monarchs captured
in western North America in July and August 1997.
| Location |
Date |
N |
| Bay Area, California |
7/97 |
11 |
| San Luis Obispo, California |
7/97 |
14 |
| El Dorado Hills, California |
7/97 |
63 |
| Richvale, California |
8/97 |
28 |
| Gazelle, California |
8/97 |
44 |
| Minden and Reno, Nevada |
7/97 |
21 |
| Talent, Oregon |
8/97 |
23 |
| Salt Lake City, Utah |
8/97 |
30 |
| Grand Junction, Colorado |
8/97 |
25 |
| Denver, Colorado |
8/97 |
4 |
| Umatilla, Oregon |
8/97 |
11 |
| Outlook, Washington |
8/97 |
32 |
Return
to top | Parasites & Natural
Enemies Home Page | Research
Topics | Site Overview
|