ArticleActa parasitologica2023
The Coincidental Evolution of Virulence Partially Explains the Virulence in a Generalist Entomopathogenic.
Article in Acta parasitologica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe parasites' virulence is labile after jumping to a new host species, and it might derivate in gaining virulence against a new host as a side effect of living in a non-host environment (coincidental evolution of virulence hypothesis).
methodsTo test this hypothesis, we monitored the experimental evolution of the Rhabditis regina nematode for over 290 generations (4 years) in three environments (strains): (1) the natural host, Phyllophaga polyphylla, (2) an alternate host, Tenebrio molitor, and (3) saprophytic medium (beef; the food that may provide evidence for the coincidental evolution of virulence). Each strain was exposed to P. polyphylla, T. molitor, or Galleria mellonella. We compared the host survival and immune response (proPO, PO, and lytic activity) of infected versus uninfected hosts.
resultsThe saprophytic nematodes gained virulence only against G. mellonella. However, the P. polyphylla strain was more effective in killing P. polyphylla than T. molitor, and the T. molitor strain was more effective against T. molitor than P. polyphylla. Additionally, one dauer larva was sufficient to kill the hosts. Finally, the immune response did not differ between the challenged and control groups.
conclusionThe coincidental evolution of virulence partially explains our results, but they might also support the short-sighted hypothesis. Additionally, we found evidence for immunomodulation because nematodes passed unnoticed to the immune response. It is crucial to analyze the virulence of entomopathogens from the point of view of the evolution of virulence to be aware of potential scenarios that might limit biological control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.