4.4 Article

Physiological resistance of grasshopper mice (Onychomys spp.) to Arizona bark scorpion (Centruroides exilicauda) venom

Journal

TOXICON
Volume 52, Issue 5, Pages 597-605

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.toxicon.2008.07.004

Keywords

Centruroides; Grasshopper mouse; Onychomys; Predator-prey coevolution; Reciprocal selection; Scorpion; Venom resistance; Venom toxicity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Predators feeding on toxic prey may evolve physiological resistance to the preys' toxins. Grasshopper mice (Onychomys spp.) are voracious predators of scorpions in North American deserts. Two species of grasshopper mice (Onychomys torridus and Onychomys arenicola) are broadly sympatric with two species of potentially lethal bark scorpion (Centruroides exilicauda and Centruroides vittatus) in the Sonoran and Chihuahuan deserts, respectively. Bark scorpions produce toxins that selectively bind sodium (Na+) and potassium (K+) ion channels in vertebrate nerve and muscle tissue. We previously reported that grasshopper mice showed no effects of bark scorpion envenomation following natural stings. Here we conducted a series of toxicity tests to determine whether grasshopper mice have evolved resistance to bark scorpion neurotoxins. Five populations of grasshopper mice, either sympatric with or allopatric to bark scorpions, were injected with bark scorpion venom: LD50S were estimated for each population. All five populations of grasshopper mice demonstrated levels of venom resistance greater than that reported for non-resistant Mus musculus. Moreover, venom resistance in the mice showed intra- and interspecific variability that covaried with bark scorpion sympatry and allopatry, patterns consistent with the hypothesis that venom resistance in grasshopper mice is an adaptive response to feeding on their neurotoxic prey. (c) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available