ArticlePLoS pathogens2026
Defense against parasites covaries with reproductive timing, not with resistance.
Article in PLoS pathogens, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Defense is the ability of a host to minimize fitness loss to parasites. It is among the most variable phenotypes in host populations, and this variation facilitates rapid adaptation under parasite-mediated selection. We do not, however, know the underlying host traits that explain this variation in defense against parasites. A common assumption is that the most defended hosts are the most resistant, meaning they limit the establishment and growth of infecting parasites. Under this assumption, resistance traits should evolve readily under parasite selection. Resistance is, however, just one of many strategies hosts use to defend against parasites, and it does not consistently covary with fitness in the presence of parasites. We accordingly asked: which host traits covary with defense against parasites? We used controlled exposures to characterize genetic variation in defense of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans against its natural microsporidian parasites. We report extensive variation in defense among wild strains of C. elegans: some strains lost 60% of fecundity under parasite exposure, while others were unaffected. We then tested the covariance of defense with two prominent host traits, resistance and reproductive timing. Our results did not support the hypothesis that resistance covaries with defense: strains with lower parasite burden did not have higher relative fecundity under exposure. Our results instead supported the hypothesis that life history covaries with defense: host strains that reproduced quickly had higher relative fecundity under exposure, consistent with the idea that parasites diminish future reproductive opportunities. The observed variation in defense among host strains indicates significant potential for wild C. elegans populations to evolve in response to their natural parasites. Because reproductive timing underpins this variation in defense, parasite-mediated selection could operate directly on host life history traits and should also be highly sensitive to shifts in life history driven by other biotic and abiotic factors.
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.