Advertisement

Biologia

, Volume 74, Issue 5, pp 501–508 | Cite as

Sex differences in immunity in a natural population of bush-cricket (Orthoptera: Phaneropterinae)

  • Hasan SevgiliEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Immune defense often differs between sexes, where females generally exhibit higher individual immunity than males. Such sexually dimorphic immune defense stems from differential investment into reproduction as females allocate more resources into mating. Contrary to prevailing predictions, some studies have found that females exhibit a weaker immune response than males. In this study, I examined both humoral (phenoloxidase activity and lytic activity) and cellular (encapsulation ability) immune parameters including cuticular melanization in a field population of a bush-cricket (Isophya reticulata) that is an endemic species in the northeastern part of Turkey. As expected, females showed a higher phenoloxidase activity than males, whereas there were no sex differences in lytic activity. Males expressed a higher encapsulation response than females. These results indicated that sex differences in immunity may be variable and females may not always exhibit higher immunity than males. Another interesting finding of this study was a positive relationship between stridulatory file length, phenoloxidase activity, and wing melanization. This finding demonstrated a connection between size differences in stridulatory apparatus that affect sexual signaling and immune response.

Keywords

Sex-based immunity Phenoloxidase Lytic activity Encapsulation Isophya Bush-cricket 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Nilgün Tokgöz for her assistance in the laboratory work. The author is also grateful to Kenneth M. Fedorka and Ian Kutch for their comments that improved the quality of this manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares he has no conflict of interests.

References

  1. Adamo SA (2004) Estimating disease resistance in insects: phenoloxidase and lysozyme-like activity and disease resistance in the cricket Gryllus texensis. J Insect Physiol 50:209–216.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinsphys.2003.11.011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Adamo SA, Jensen M, Younger M (2001) Changes in lifetime immunocompetence in male and female Gryllus texensis (formerly G. integer): trade-offs between immunity and reproduction. Anim Behav 62:417–425.  https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2001.1786
  3. Ahtiainen JJ, Alatalo RV, Kortet R, Rantala MJ (2004) Sexual advertisement and immune function in an arachnid species (Lycosidae). Behav Ecol 15:602–606.  https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arh062 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ahtiainen JJ, Alatalo RV, Kortet R, Rantala MJ (2005) A trade-off between sexual signalling and immune function in a natural population of the drumming wolf spider Hygrolycosa rubrofasciata. J Evol Biol 18:985–991.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2005.00907.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Barthel A, Staudacher H, Schmaltz A, Heckel DG, Groot AT (2015) Sex-specific consequences of an induced immune response on reproduction in a moth. BMC Evol Biol 15:282.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-015-0562-3 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Bonduriansky R (2001) The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biol Rev 76:305–339.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S1464793101005693 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Boughton RK, Joop G, Armitage SAO (2011) Outdoor immunology: methodological considerations for ecologists. Funct Ecol 25:81–100.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2010.01817.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cerenius L, Soderhall K (2004) The prophenoloxidase-activating system in invertebrates. Immunol Rev 198:116–126.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0105-2896.2004.00116.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Cooper D, Eleftherianos I (2017) Memory and specificity in the insect immune system: current perspectives and future challenges. Front Immunol 8:539.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2017.00539 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Cornet S, Gandon S, Rivero A (2013) Patterns of phenoloxidase activity in insecticide resistant and susceptible mosquitoes differ between laboratory-selected and wild-caught individuals. Parasit Vectors 6:315.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-3305-6-315 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Cotter SC, Myatt JP, Benskin CMH, Wilson K (2008) Selection for cuticular melanism reveals immune function and life-history trade-offs in Spodoptera littoralis. J Evol Biol 21:1744–1754.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2008.01587.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Faivre B, Gregoire A, Preault M, Cezilly F, Sorci G (2003) Immune activation rapidly mirrored in a secondary sexual trait. Science 300:103–103.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1081802 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Fedorka KM, Sevgili H (2014) The influence of nuptial feeding and sperm transfer on the immunological cost of reproduction in the ground cricket Al lonemobius socius. Physiol Entomol 39:89–93.  https://doi.org/10.1111/phen.12051
  14. Fedorka KM, Zuk M, Mousseau TA (2004) Immune suppression and the cost of reproduction in the ground cricket, Allonemobius socius. Evolution 58:2478–2485.  https://doi.org/10.1554/04-399 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Fedorka KM, Copeland EK, Winterhalter WE (2013) Seasonality influences cuticle melanization and immune defense in a cricket: support for a temperature-dependent immune investment hypothesis in insects. J Exp Biol 216:4005–4010.  https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.091538 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Gershman SN (2008) Sex-specific differences in immunological costs of multiple mating in Gryllus vocalis field crickets. Behav Ecol 19:810–815.  https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arn040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gershman SN, Barnett CA, Pettinger AM, Weddle CB, Hunt J, Sakaluk SK (2010a) Inbred decorated crickets exhibit higher measures of macroparasitic immunity than outbred individuals. Heredity 105:282–289.  https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.2010.1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Gershman SN, Barnett CA, Pettinger AM, Weddle CB, Hunt J, Sakaluk SK (2010b) Give 'til it hurts: trade-offs between immunity and male reproductive effort in the decorated cricket, Gryllodes sigillatus. J Evol Biol 23:829–839.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2010.01951.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Gillespie JP, Kanost MR, Trenczek T (1997) Biological mediators of insect immunity. Annu Rev Entomol 42:611–643.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.42.1.611 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Kavanagh MW (1987) The efficiency of sound production in two cricket species, Gryllotalpa australis and Teleogryllus commodus (Orthoptera, Grylloidea). J Exp Biol 130:107–119Google Scholar
  21. Kotiaho JS (2001) Costs of sexual traits: a mismatch between theoretical considerations and empirical evidence. Biol Rev 76:365–376.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S1464793101005711 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Kurtz J, Sauer KP (2001) Gender differences in phenoloxidase activity of Panorpa vulgaris hemocytes. J Invertebr Pathol 78:53–55.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jipa.2001.5040 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kurtz J, Wiesner A, Gotz P, Sauer KP (2000) Gender differences and individual variation in the immune system of the scorpionfly Panorpa vulgaris (Insecta : Mecoptera). Dev Comp Immunol 24:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0145-305X(99)00057-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Kutch IC, Sevgili H, Wittman T, Fedorka KM (2014) Thermoregulatory strategy may shape immune investment in Drosophila melanogaster. J Exp Biol 217:3664–3669.  https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.106294
  25. McCartney J, Kokko H, Heller KG, Gwynne DT (2012) The evolution of sex differences in mate searching when females benefit: new theory and a comparative test. Proc R Soc London Ser B 279:1225–1232.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2011.1505 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Montealegre-Z F (2009) Scale effects and constraints for sound production in katydids (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae): correlated evolution between morphology and signal parameters. J Evol Biol 22:355–366.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2008.01652.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Montealegre-Z F, Ogden J, Jonsson T, Soulsbury CD (2017) Morphological determinants of signal carrier frequency in katydids (Orthoptera): a comparative analysis using biophysical evidence of wing vibration. J Evol Biol 30:2068–2078.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jeb.13179 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Nigam Y, Maudlin I, Welburn S, Ratcliffe NA (1997) Detection of phenoloxidase activity in the hemolymph of tsetse flies, refractory and susceptible to infection with Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense. J Invertebr Pathol 69:279–281.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jipa.1996.4652 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Nunn CL, Lindenfors P, Pursall ER, Rolff J (2009) On sexual dimorphism in immune function. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B Biol Sci 364:61–69.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0148 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rantala MJ, Kortet R (2003) Courtship song and immune function in the field cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Biol J Linn Soc Lond 79:503–510.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1095-8312.2003.00202.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rantala MJ, Roff DA (2005) An analysis of trade-offs in immune function, body size and development time in the Mediterranean field cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus. Funct Ecol 19:323–330.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2005.00979.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rantala MJ, Roff DA (2006) Analysis of the importance of genotypic variation, metabolic rate, morphology, sex and development time on immune function in the cricket, Gryllus firmus. J Evol Biol 19:834–843.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2005.01048.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Rantala MJ, Koskimaki J, Taskinen J, Tynkkynen K, Suhonen J (2000) Immunocompetence, developmental stability and wingspot size in the damselfly Calopteryx splendens L. Proc R Soc Biol 267:2453–2457.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1305 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rolff J (2002) Bateman's principle and immunity. Proc R Soc London Ser B 269:867–872.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2002.1959 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rolff J, Siva-Jothy MT (2002) Copulation corrupts immunity: a mechanism for a cost of mating in insects. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99:9916–9918.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.152271999 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. Roth O, Scharsack JP, Keller I, Reusch TBH (2011) Bateman's principle and immunity in a sex-role reversed pipefish. J Evol Biol 24:1410–1420.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02273.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Ryder JJ, Siva-Jothy MT (2000) Male calling song provides a reliable signal of immune function in a cricket. Proc R Soc London Ser B 267:1171–1175.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1125 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schneider PM (1985) Purification and properties of threee lysozymes from hemolymph of the cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus (Degeer). Insect Biochem 15:463–470.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-1790(85)90058-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sevgili H (2004) A revision of Turkish species of Isophya Brunner von Wattenwyl (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae: Phaneropterinae). Hacettepe University, Ankara, p 387Google Scholar
  40. Sevgili H (2016) İki çalı çekirgesi üzerinde doğal bağışıklık parametrelerinden fenoloksidaz aktivitesi ile litik aktivitenin ve hemolimfteki protein konsantrasyonunun yöntemsel olarak belirlenmesi. Akademik Ziraat Dergisi 5:51–62Google Scholar
  41. Sevgili H, Demirsoy A, Çıplak B (2012) Description and bioacoustics of a new species of the genus Isophya (Orthoptera: Tetigoniidae: Phaneropterinae) from Turkey. Zootaxa 3361:33–44.  https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.209689 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sevgili H, Onal H, Yigit A (2015) Mating behavior and spermatophore characteristics in two closely related bushcricket species of the genus Phonochorion (Orthoptera: Phaneropterinae). J Insect Behav 28:369–386.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10905-015-9509-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Simmons LW, Zuk M, Rotenberry JT (2005) Immune function reflected in calling song characteristics in a natural population of the cricket Teleogryllus commodus. Anim Behav 69:1235–1241.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.09.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Srygley RB (2012) Ontogenetic changes in immunity and susceptibility to fungal infection in Mormon crickets Anabrus simplex. J Insect Physiol 58:342–347.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinsphys.2011.12.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Stoehr AM, Kokko H (2006) Sexual dimorphism in immunocompetence: what does life-history theory predict? Behav Ecol 17:751–756.  https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/ark018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Strand MR (2008) The insect cellular immune response. Insect Sci 15:1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7917.2008.00183.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Team RC (2012) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation Statistical Computing, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  48. Tregenza T, Simmons LW, Wedell N, Zuk M (2006) Female preference for male courtship song and its role as a signal of immune function and condition. Anim Behav 72:809–818.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.01.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. True JR (2003) Insect melanism: the molecules matter. Trends Ecol Evol 18:640–647.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2003.09.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Vincent CM, Gwynne DT (2014) Sex-biased immunity is driven by relative differences in reproductive investment. Proc R Soc B 281:20140333.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.0333
  51. Zuk M (1990) Reproductive strategies and disease susceptibility: an evolutionary viewpoint. Parasitol Today 6:231–233.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-4758(90)90202-F CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Zuk M, McKean KA (1996) Sex differences in parasite infections: patterns and processes. Int J Parasitol 26:1009–1023.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7519(96)80001-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Zuk M, Simmons LW, Rotenberry JT, Stoehr AM (2004) Sex differences in immunity in two species of field crickets. Can J Zool 82:627–634.  https://doi.org/10.1139/Z04-032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute of Zoology, Slovak Academy of Sciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Department of Molecular Biology and GeneticOrdu UniversityOrduTurkey

Personalised recommendations