Search

Arguments for the need to conserve aquatic predator (AP) populations often focus on the ecological and socioeconomic roles they play. Here, we summarize the diverse ecosystem functions and services connected to APs, including regulating food webs, cycling nutrients, engineering habitats, transmitting diseases/parasites, mediating ecological invasions, affecting climate, supporting fisheries, generating tourism, and providing bioinspiration. In some cases, human-driven declines and increases in AP populations have altered these ecosystem functions and services. We present a social ecological framework for supporting adaptive management decisions involving APs in response to social and environmental change. We also identify outstanding questions to guide future research on the ecological functions and ecosystem services of APs in a changing world., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Species interactions can influence ecosystem functioning by enhancing or suppressing the activities of species that drive ecosystem processes, or by causing changes in biodiversity. However, one important class of species interactions - parasitism - has been little considered in biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (BD-EF) research. Parasites might increase or decrease ecosystem processes by reducing host abundance. Parasites could also increase trait diversity by suppressing dominant species or by increasing within-host trait diversity. These different mechanisms by which parasites might affect ecosystem function pose challenges in predicting their net effects. Nonetheless, given the ubiquity of parasites, we propose that parasite-host interactions should be incorporated into the BD-EF framework., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Recent reviews have argued that disease control is among the ecosystem services yielded by biodiversity. Lyme disease (LD) is commonly cited as the best example of the 'diluting' effect of biodiversity on disease transmission, but many studies document the opposite relationship, showing that human LD risk can increase with forestation. Here, we unify these divergent perspectives and find strong evidence for a positive link between biodiversity and LD at broad spatial scales (urban to suburban to rural) and equivocal evidence for a negative link between biodiversity and LD at varying levels of biodiversity within forests. This finding suggests that, across zoonotic disease agents, the biodiversity-disease relationship is scale dependent and complex., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Recent efforts to include parasites in food webs have drawn attention to a previously ignored facet of foraging ecology: parasites commonly function as prey within ecosystems. Because of the high productivity of parasites, their unique nutritional composition and their pathogenicity in hosts, their consumption affects both food-web topology and disease risk in humans and wildlife. Here, we evaluate the ecological, evolutionary and epidemiological significance of feeding on parasites, including concomitant predation, grooming, predation on free-living stages and intraguild predation. Combining empirical data and theoretical models, we show that consumption of parasites is neither rare nor accidental, and that it can sharply affect parasite transmission and food web properties. Broader consideration of predation on parasites will enhance our understanding of disease control, food web structure and energy transfer, and the evolution of complex life cycles., (Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Historically, the role of parasites in ecosystem functioning has been considered trivial because a cursory examination reveals that their relative biomass is low compared with that of other trophic groups. However there is increasing evidence that parasite-mediated effects could be significant: they shape host population dynamics, alter interspecific competition, influence energy flow and appear to be important drivers of biodiversity. Indeed they influence a range of ecosystem functions and have a major effect on the structure of some food webs. Here, we consider the bottom-up and top-down processes of how parasitism influences ecosystem functioning and show that there is evidence that parasites are important for biodiversity and production; thus, we consider a healthy system to be one that is rich in parasite species.

Parasite increased trophic transmission (PITT) is one of the more fascinating tales of parasite evolution. The implications of this go beyond cocktail party anecdotes and science fiction plots as the phenomenon is pervasive and likely to be ecologically and evolutionarily important. Although the subject has already received substantial review, Kevin Lafferty here focuses on evolutionary aspects that have not been fully explored, specifically: (1) How strong should PITT be? (2) How might sexual selection and limb autotomy facilitate PITT? (3) How might infrapopulation regulation in final hosts be important in determining avoidance of infected prey? And (4) what happens when more than one species of parasite is in the same intermediate host?

There are a variety of ways that environmental changes affect parasites, suggesting that information on parasites can indicate anthropogenic impacts. Parasitism may increase if the impact reduces host resistance or increases the density of intermediate or definitive hosts. Parasitism may decrease if definitive or intermediate host density declines or parasites suffer higher mortality directly (eg. from toxic effects on parasites) or indirectly (infected hosts suffer differentially high mortality). Although these scenarios are opposing, they can provide a rich set of predictions once we understand the true associations between each parasite and impact. In this review, Kevin Lafferty discusses how parasite ecologists have used and can use parasites to assess environmental quality.