4.5 Review

The rise of ecological parasitology: twelve landmark advances that changed its history

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR PARASITOLOGY
Volume 51, Issue 13-14, Pages 1073-1084

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpara.2021.07.001

Keywords

Population biology; Community ecology; Coevolution; Biodiversity; Climate change; Parasitology

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ecological parasitology has seen significant growth over the past fifty years, with key advances in areas such as parasite population dynamics, natural selection, and host-parasite interactions. However, there are challenges and opportunities that need to be addressed for the future development of this field.
In the five decades since the first publication of the International Journal for Parasitology, ecological parasitology has grown from modest beginnings to become a modern discipline with a strong theoretical foundation, a diverse toolkit, and a multidisciplinary approach. In this review, I highlight 12 advances in the field that have spurred its growth over the past 50 years. Where relevant, I identify pivotal contributions that have altered the course of research, as well as the influence of developments in other fields such as mainstream ecology and molecular biology. The 12 key advances discussed are in areas including parasite population dynamics and community assembly, the regulation of host population abundance and food web structure, parasites as agents of natural selection, the impacts of biodiversity and anthropogenic changes on host-parasite interactions, the biogeography of parasite diversity, and the evolutionary genetics of parasites. I conclude by identifying some challenges and opportunities lying ahead, which need to be met for the future growth of ecological research on host-parasite interactions. (c) 2021 Australian Society for Parasitology. Published by 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

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available