Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2003 Nov 7;270(Suppl 2):S172–S174. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2003.0033

Infection increases the value of nuptial gifts, and hence male reproductive success, in the Hymenolepis diminuta-Tenebrio molitor association.

Hilary Hurd 1, Richard Ardin 1
PMCID: PMC1809939  PMID: 14667373

Abstract

During copulation, male insects pass accessory gland components to the female with the spermatophore. These gifts can affect female reproductive behaviour, ovulation and oviposition. Here, we show that female mealworm beetles, Tenebrio molitor, mated with males infected with metacestodes of the rat tapeworm, Hymenolepis diminuta, produced significantly more offspring than those mated with uninfected males. There is a significant positive relationship between parasite intensity in the male and reproductive output in the female. Infection results in a significant increase in bean-shaped accessory gland (BAG) size. We suggest that infected males pass superior nuptial gifts to females and discuss the confounding effects of infection in male and female beetles upon overall fitness costs of infection for the host and the likelihood that the parasite is manipulating host investment in reproduction.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (77.9 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Carver F. J., Gilman J. L., Hurd H. Spermatophore production and spermatheca content in Tenebrio molitor infected with Hymenolepis diminuta. J Insect Physiol. 1999 Jun;45(6):565–569. doi: 10.1016/s0022-1910(98)00165-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Carver F. J., Hurd H. The effect of metacestodes of Hymenolepis diminuta on the bean-shaped accessory glands in male Tenebrio molitor. Parasitology. 1998 Feb;116(Pt 2):191–196. doi: 10.1017/s0031182097002126. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Gillott Cedric. Male accessory gland secretions: modulators of female reproductive physiology and behavior. Annu Rev Entomol. 2002 Jun 4;48:163–184. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.48.091801.112657. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Grafen A. Biological signals as handicaps. J Theor Biol. 1990 Jun 21;144(4):517–546. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5193(05)80088-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Hurd H. Parasite manipulation of insect reproduction: who benefits? Parasitology. 1998;116 (Suppl):S13–S21. doi: 10.1017/s0031182000084900. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hurd H., Parry G. Metacestode-induced depression of the production of, and response to, sex pheromone in the intermediate host Tenebrio molitor. J Invertebr Pathol. 1991 Jul;58(1):82–87. doi: 10.1016/0022-2011(91)90165-m. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1999.0812. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
  8. Polak M., Starmer W. T. Parasite-induced risk of mortality elevates reproductive effort in male Drosophila. Proc Biol Sci. 1998 Nov 22;265(1411):2197–2201. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0559. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Worden BD, Parker PG, Pappas PW. Parasites reduce attractiveness and reproductive success in male grain beetles. Anim Behav. 2000 Mar;59(3):543–550. doi: 10.1006/anbe.1999.1368. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES