title: Refuge sharing network predicts ectoparasite load in a lizard.
abstract: Living in social groups facilitates cross-infection by parasites. However, empirical studies on indirect transmission within wildlife populations are scarce. We investigated whether asynchronous overnight refuge sharing among neighboring sleepy lizards, Tiliqua rugosa, facilitates indirect transmission of its ectoparasitic tick, Amblyomma limbatum. We fitted 18 neighboring lizards with GPS recorders, observed their overnight refuge use each night over 3 months, and counted their ticks every fortnight. We constructed a transmission network to estimate the cross-infection risk based on asynchronous refuge sharing frequencies among all lizards and the life history traits of the tick. Although self-infection was possible, the network provided a powerful predictor of measured tick loads. Highly connected lizards that frequently used their neighbors' refuges were characterized by higher tick loads. Thus, indirect contact had a major influence on transmission pathways and parasite loads. Furthermore, lizards that used many different refuges had lower cross- and self-infection risks and lower tick loads than individuals that used relatively fewer refuges. Increasing the number of refuges used by a lizard may be an important defense mechanism against ectoparasite transmission in this species. Our study provides important empirical data to further understand how indirectly transmitted parasites move through host populations and influence individual parasite loads.
authors.forename: Stephan T
authors.initials: ST
authors.lastname: Leu
authors.forename: Peter M
authors.initials: PM
authors.lastname: Kappeler
authors.forename: C Michael
authors.initials: CM
authors.lastname: Bull
references.citation: Primates. 2002 Jan;43(1):41-9
references.pmid: 12091746
references.citation: Oecologia. 2007 Nov;154(2):411-21
references.pmid: 17713789
references.citation: J Theor Biol. 1997 Jan 21;184(2):165-9
references.pmid: 9059596
references.citation: Oecologia. 2007 Dec;154(3):581-8
references.pmid: 17805579
references.citation: Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2007;62(1):15-27
references.pmid: 32214613
references.citation: Int J Parasitol. 1991 Dec;21(8):907-11
references.pmid: 1787031
references.citation: Oecologia. 2006 Jan;146(4):675-80
references.pmid: 16133193
references.citation: Parasitology. 2008 Nov;135(13):1561-9
references.pmid: 18814808
references.citation: Prev Vet Med. 2003 Jun 12;59(3):147-67
references.pmid: 12809760
references.citation: Int J Parasitol. 1996 Oct;26(10):1009-23
references.pmid: 8982783
references.citation: Oecologia. 2000 Mar;122(4):574-581
references.pmid: 28308351
references.citation: Parasitol Res. 2006 Aug;99(3):214-22
references.pmid: 16541265
references.citation: Oecologia. 1993 Dec;96(3):415-419
references.pmid: 28313658
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2002 Sep 7;269(1502):1811-9
references.pmid: 12350269
references.citation: Int J Parasitol. 2000 Aug;30(9):973-9
references.pmid: 10980285
references.citation: Am Nat. 2004 Nov;164 Suppl 5:S90-103
references.pmid: 15540145
references.citation: Anim Behav. 1998 Sep;56(3):719-725
references.pmid: 9784222
references.citation: Physiol Zool. 1998 May-Jun;71(3):303-11
references.pmid: 9634177
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2009 Apr 7;276(1660):1263-8
references.pmid: 19129138