Zombies without puppeteers: Morgan's Canon and the passive manipulation hypothesis in Xenos vesparum/Polistes dominula.

IF 2.1
Frontiers in parasitology Pub Date : 2026-09-03 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fpara.2026.1907843
Philip T Starks
{"title":"Zombies without puppeteers: Morgan's Canon and the passive manipulation hypothesis in <i>Xenos vesparum</i>/<i>Polistes dominula</i>.","authors":"Philip T Starks","doi":"10.3389/fpara.2026.1907843","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Parasite-associated changes in host behavior are often framed as manipulation, especially when altered behavior benefits parasite transmission. In the <i>Xenos vesparum</i>/<i>Polistes dominula</i> system, infected wasps abandon nests, aggregate before hibernation, overwinter, and later join established nests; a sequence often described through zombie or puppet-master metaphors. Recent studies have tied this phenotype to caste-related plasticity, gene expression, neuroanatomy, and ecological context, but the causal distinction between active parasite control and passive activation of host responses remains unresolved. Here I argue that passive manipulation should be treated as a useful null model and possible evolutionary starting point: infection may trigger pre-existing host responses that the parasite subsequently exploits. Archived pseudo-parasite observations are presented as an illustration: a sterile nylon implant, with no capacity for signaling, was associated with reduced energy use and nest desertion, whereas encapsulation intensity did not predict metabolic change. These observations do not prove passive manipulation by <i>X. vesparum</i>, but they show that early components of the infected phenotype can be induced without a living parasite. More broadly, parasite-benefiting behavior should not be treated as sufficient evidence for parasite-designed control. Distinguishing active from passive manipulation requires experiments that compare true infection, mechanical insult, parasite secretions, and naturally occurring host alternative phenotypes.</p>","PeriodicalId":73098,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in parasitology","volume":"5 ","pages":"1907843"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13582532/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in parasitology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpara.2026.1907843","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Parasite-associated changes in host behavior are often framed as manipulation, especially when altered behavior benefits parasite transmission. In the Xenos vesparum/Polistes dominula system, infected wasps abandon nests, aggregate before hibernation, overwinter, and later join established nests; a sequence often described through zombie or puppet-master metaphors. Recent studies have tied this phenotype to caste-related plasticity, gene expression, neuroanatomy, and ecological context, but the causal distinction between active parasite control and passive activation of host responses remains unresolved. Here I argue that passive manipulation should be treated as a useful null model and possible evolutionary starting point: infection may trigger pre-existing host responses that the parasite subsequently exploits. Archived pseudo-parasite observations are presented as an illustration: a sterile nylon implant, with no capacity for signaling, was associated with reduced energy use and nest desertion, whereas encapsulation intensity did not predict metabolic change. These observations do not prove passive manipulation by X. vesparum, but they show that early components of the infected phenotype can be induced without a living parasite. More broadly, parasite-benefiting behavior should not be treated as sufficient evidence for parasite-designed control. Distinguishing active from passive manipulation requires experiments that compare true infection, mechanical insult, parasite secretions, and naturally occurring host alternative phenotypes.

僵尸没有木偶操纵:摩根的经典和被动操纵假说在Xenos vesparum/Polistes dominula。
与寄生虫相关的宿主行为改变通常被认为是操纵行为,特别是当行为改变有利于寄生虫传播时。在小黄蜂/小黄蜂系统中,受感染的黄蜂弃巢,在冬眠前聚集,越冬后加入已建立的巢;通常通过僵尸或木偶大师的隐喻来描述的一系列事件。最近的研究将这种表型与种姓相关的可塑性、基因表达、神经解剖学和生态环境联系起来,但寄生虫主动控制和宿主被动激活反应之间的因果区别仍未解决。在这里,我认为被动操作应该被视为一个有用的零模型和可能的进化起点:感染可能触发寄生虫随后利用的预先存在的宿主反应。存档的伪寄生虫观察作为一个例证:无菌尼龙植入物,没有信号传导能力,与减少能量消耗和巢遗弃有关,而封装强度并不能预测代谢变化。这些观察结果并不能证明X. vesparum的被动操纵,但它们表明,感染表型的早期成分可以在没有活寄生虫的情况下被诱导。更广泛地说,有益于寄生虫的行为不应被视为寄生虫设计控制的充分证据。区分主动和被动操作需要比较真实感染、机械损伤、寄生虫分泌物和自然发生的宿主替代表型的实验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书