Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30051865›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2018

The evolution of constitutive and induced defences to infectious disease.

Mike Boots, Alex Best

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The impact ofAoB PLANTS · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Mike BootsDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley CA, USA mboots@berkeley.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-3763-6136
Alex BestSchool of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S3 7RH, UK.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/L010879/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In response to infectious disease, hosts typically mount both constitutive and induced defences. Constitutive defence prevents infection in the first place, while induced defence typically shortens the infectious period. The two routes to defence, therefore, have very different implications not only to individuals but also to the epidemiology of the disease. Moreover, the costs of constitutive defences are likely to be paid even in the absence of disease, while induced defences are likely to incur the most substantial costs when they are used in response to infection. We examine theoretically the evolutionary implications of these fundamental differences. A key result is that high virulence in the parasite typically selects for higher induced defences even if they result in immunopathology leading to very high disease mortality. Disease impacts on fecundity are critical to the relative investment in constitutive and induced defence with important differences found when parasites castrate their hosts. The trade-off between constitutive and induced defence has been cited as a cause of the diversity in defence, but we show that the trade-off alone is unlikely to lead to diversity. Our models provide a framework to examine relative investment in different defence components both experimentally and in the field.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionAnimalsDisease ResistanceHost-Parasite InteractionsModels, Biologicaldefenceevolutionimmunitymodelsnatural enemiesparasites

Identifiers

PMID30051865
PMCPMC6083258

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.