Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
The effect of diet and time after bacterial infection on fecundity, resistance, and tolerance in Drosophila melanogaster
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
The effect of diet and time after bacterial infection on fecundity, resistance, and tolerance in Drosophila melanogaster
Do you wish to request the book?
The effect of diet and time after bacterial infection on fecundity, resistance, and tolerance in Drosophila melanogaster
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
The effect of diet and time after bacterial infection on fecundity, resistance, and tolerance in Drosophila melanogaster
2016
Overview
Mounting and maintaining an effective immune response in the face of infection can be costly. The outcome of infection depends on two host immune strategies: resistance and tolerance. Resistance limits pathogen load, while tolerance reduces the fitness impact of an infection. While resistance strategies are well studied, tolerance has received less attention, but is now considered to play a vital role in host–pathogen interactions in animals. A major challenge in ecoimmunology is to understand how some hosts maintain their fitness when infected while others succumb to infection, as well as how extrinsic, environmental factors, such as diet, affect defense. We tested whether dietary restriction through yeast (protein) limitation affects resistance, tolerance, and fecundity in Drosophila melanogaster. We predicted that protein restriction would reveal costs of infection. Because infectious diseases are not always lethal, we tested resistance and tolerance using two bacteria with low lethality: Escherichia coli and Lactococcus lactis. We then assayed fecundity and characterized bacterial infection pathology in individual flies at two acute phase time points after infection. As expected, our four fecundity measures all showed a negative effect of a low‐protein diet, but contrary to predictions, diet did not affect resistance to either bacteria species. We found evidence for diet‐induced and time‐dependent variation in host tolerance to E. coli, but not to L. lactis. Furthermore, the two bacteria species exhibited remarkably different infection profiles, and persisted within the flies for at least 7 days postinfection. Our results show that acute phase infections do not necessarily lead to fecundity costs despite high bacterial loads. The influence of intrinsic variables such as genotype are the prevailing factors that have been studied in relation to variation in host tolerance, but here we show that extrinsic factors should also be considered for their role in influencing tolerance strategies. The outcome of infection depends on two host immune strategies: resistance and tolerance. Here, we tested whether dietary yeast (protein) limitation affects tolerance, resistance, and fecundity in Drosophila melanogaster. Our four fecundity measures all showed a negative effect of a low yeast diet, but diet did not affect resistance to Escherichia coli or Lactococcus lactis. However, E. coli‐infected flies on a low yeast diet were more tolerant to infection 24 h postinfection than flies on a high yeast diet and then became less tolerant 72 h postinfection.
