邢唷��>� 


���


����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������欹�€ ��簲
bjbj碫碫 2�
�<
�<
�%�������D D ������������8��
gt�U.
��"������揝昐昐昐昐昐昐$JV�靀�筍
�)'��)')'筍�����諸>>>)'|����揝>)'揝>>:�>,�>�����鐑uHX�
��3F �> S霻0U�> 糦�<��糦�>�>8糦�/?P����>�!D�#C���筍筍�=@���U)')')')'��������������������������������������������������������������������糦���������D M:

 Environmental constraints influencing survival of an African parasite in a north temperate habitat: effects of temperature on development within the host R.C. Tinsley1*, J. York1, L.C. Stott1, A. Everard1, S. Chapple1 and M.C. Tinsley2 1 School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UG, UK 2 School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, 我要吃瓜, Stirling FK9 4LA Running title: Temperature effects on within-host parasite development * Corresponding author: E-mail: r.c.tinsley@bristol.ac.uk  SUMMARY The monogenean Protopolystoma xenopodis has been established in Wales for >40 years following introduction with Xenopus laevis from South Africa. This provides an experimental system for determining constraints affecting introduced species in novel environments. Parasite development post-infection was followed at 15, 20 and 25癈 for 15 weeks and at 10�C for e"1 year and correlated with temperatures recorded in Wales. Development was slowed/ arrested at d"10�C which reflects habitat conditions for >6 months/ year. There was wide variation in growth at constant temperature (body size differing by >10 times) potentially attributable in part to genotype-specific host-parasite interactions. Parasite density had no effect on size but host sex did: worms in males were 1.8 times larger than in females. Minimum time to patency was 51 days at 25癈 and 73 days at 20癈 although some infections were still not patent at both temperatures by 105 days p.i. In Wales, fastest developing infections may mature within one summer (about 12 weeks), possibly accelerated by movements of hosts into warmer surface waters. Otherwise, development slows/stops in October朅pril, delaying patency to about 1 year p.i., while wide variation in developmental rates may impose delays of 2 years in some primary infections and even longer in secondary infections. Key words: Xenopus, Protopolystoma, Monogenea, temperature, development, parasite introductions, life cycle timing INTRODUCTION Introductions of parasites into new geographical regions have important implications for their impacts on native species, increased disease risks and fundamental processes in evolutionary biology (Drake, 2003; Brooks and Hoberg, 2007; Moret et al. 2007; Barr� and Uilenberg, 2010). Temperature is a major abiotic factor affecting parasite infection dynamics (Kutz et al. 2005; Marcogliese, 2008; Karvonen et al. 2010), so it can be predicted that temperature change might have a major influence on the ability of parasites to establish in areas of introduction. For parasites in endotherm vertebrates, only the 憃ff-host� stages are vulnerable to changes in external temperature, primarily influencing the dynamics of invasion. However, for helminth parasites in ectotherm hosts, all life cycle stages are affected. There may be some modulation in these effects as a result of host behavioural responses to environmental temperature: thus, hosts that seek refuge from extreme low temperatures may protect their parasites from adverse conditions, and short-term movements into warmer environments (for instance, basking by hosts) may increase rates of parasite physiological processes. Importantly, external temperature change (whether or not modulated by the host) has added significance for ectotherms because their immune responses are temperature dependent (for instance, Le Morvan et al. 1998; Carey et al. 1999). This investigation involves a helminth parasite of an ectotherm vertebrate host introduced from the Mediterranean climate of the Cape, South Africa, to a cool temperate environment in Wales, U.K. The African amphibian Xenopus laevis has become adapted to diverse environments in North and South America, Europe and Asia, showing a tolerance of water temperatures near to 30癈 in desert regions and near to freezing in areas where habitats are ice-covered in winter (Tinsley and McCoid, 1996). The monogenean Protopolystoma xenopodis is strictly specific to X. laevis and was almost certainly introduced with its host to Wales in the early 1960s (Tinsley et al. 2010a). For this helminth, there are extensive laboratory data indicating that life cycle processes are strongly regulated by environmental conditions, especially temperature (reviewed by Tinsley, 2004). These empirical studies support the prediction that P. xenopodis should have extreme difficulty in host-to-host transmission in Wales (Tinsley et al. 2010a). It has nevertheless survived despite these constraints for over 40 years. The interaction represents a 憂atural experiment� regarding the factors affecting a parasite introduction. Habitat conditions for the host-parasite population in Wales, enabling interpretation of life cycle events, have been described by Tinsley et al. (2010a). The study site is a man-made pond (area 140 m2) in farmland. With reference to the parasite developmental periods considered below, data loggers located on the pond bottom recorded water temperatures that were more-or-less continuously <10癈 from mid-October to late April (>6 months) (in 2006-2008). Temperatures were >15癈 for 5 months in 2007 and 4.25 months in 2008; and >18癈 for a total of 6 days in 2007 and 2 days in 2008. Diurnal temperature variation in the pond showed a range of up to 8癈 at midday in early June, between deep water in permanent shade (15癈) and shallow water over mud banks exposed to sunshine (23癈). Habitat area where these elevated temperatures can develop is constrained by the structure of the pond: most of the perimeter (>70%) is formed by vertical stone walls alongside which water depth is c. 60cm above c. 1m of mud, but there are ramps for access by livestock that provide gently sloping banks and shallow water (<30% of the perimeter). 我要吃瓜 half of the water surface is shaded by tree canopy and about half exposed to sun (Tinsley et al. 2010a). As part of a larger study of the host-parasite interactions, temperature effects have been quantified at a series of key points in the life cycle. Tinsley et al. (2010a) considered viability and developmental rates of eggs. This paper records growth and developmental rates of juveniles post-infection. Further studies of environmental constraints on survival post-infection and reproduction are considered in a separate account (Tinsley et al. 2010b). The procedures have employed parasites taken from natural infections 慽n the wild� and maintained under controlled environmental conditions in the laboratory. Temperatures were selected to enable reconstruction of life cycle schedules in the range 10-20癈 (relevant to the Welsh site) and at 25癈. Data at this highest temperature are relevant to conditions in S. Africa (see Jackson and Tinsley, 2002) but also allow predictions relating to future warming in temperate regions. Results provide assessment of the factors affecting establishment of introduced parasites from warm climate regions in cool, non-native environments. MATERIALS AND METHODS Sources of material The overall programme of experiments employed hosts and parasites from 2 sources: the introduced population in Wales and a consignment of adult X. laevis carrying a natural infection of P. xenopodis, caught at one locality on the Cape, South Africa and imported to the UK within 48h of capture in December 2006. For the present account, data are reported only for the S. African material. This latter sample represented a 憌ild-type� for hosts and parasites of this system since the Cape was the probable geographical origin of the Welsh population (Tinsley and McCoid, 1996). To provide na飗e hosts for experimental infections, X. laevis were spawned in the laboratory following injection of Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin (Sigma); tadpoles were reared to metamorphosis on a diet of finely-ground fish flakes, commercial Xenopus tadpole food (Blades Ltd.) or milk; post-metamorphic stages were fed with commercial pelleted Xenopus diet or chopped ox heart (following Tinsley, 2010). A series of families was produced from different parents and the offspring of each spawning were kept separate throughout development. All lab-raised hosts employed in experimental infections in this account were from a single F1 family of full-sibs (designated 慡ib 17�), bred from wild-caught parents, and were exposed to parasite larvae hatched from eggs from naturally-infected X. laevis from the same S. African population. (Other combinations of hosts and parasites from Wales and South Africa, mentioned briefly below, will be documented in future accounts.) Eggs of P. xenopodis for experimental infection were pooled from the output of about 30 X. laevis. As a guide to the genetic diversity of larvae used in experiments, this 慹gg factory� carried 1-3 adult worms/ host (estimated from egg output, see Tinsley, 2004). Experimental infections The wild-caught hosts were maintained in aquaria (each with about 10 animals in 50 l of water) and fed weekly with chopped ox heart. Parasite eggs were collected at each water change (every 48 or 72h): the water was allowed to settle and sediment decanted, with rinsings, into crystallizing dishes; eggs were transferred with a Pasteur pipette to Petri dishes and incubated at controlled temperature and illumination. At the end of larval development, eggs collected during one 24h period typically hatch over several days (Jackson et al. 2001; Tinsley et al. 2010a). To obtain freshly-emerged oncomiracidia for host exposures, Petri dishes containing ready-to-hatch eggs were transferred from incubator to stereo microscope stage, and the disturbance (movement, increased illumination, together with water currents induced with a Pasteur pipette) resulted in rapid hatching. Larvae known to be <1 h old were removed with a pipette, counted, and introduced into a container with a na飗e, juvenile, laboratory-raised X. laevis (typically 35-45mm snout-vent length at the time of infection) in 300ml of aged tapwater. Each prospective host was exposed to invasion with precisely 20 swimming oncomiracidia and was left undisturbed in dim illumination for about 24h. Experimentally-infected animals were marked using numbers and letters made with stainless steel wire cooled in liquid nitrogen to produce a unique identifier (Tinsley, 2010), maintained in groups generally of 20 in aquarium tanks (45 x 45 x 45cm containing 50 l of water), and fed once or twice weekly with chopped ox-heart. Effects of temperature on parasite development post-infection All host exposures were carried out at 20癈 using larvae from eggs incubated at 20癈 to ensure equivalent invasion success. Subsequent parasite development was studied at 4 temperatures: 10, 15, 20 and 25癈. For trials at 15 and 25癈, animals were acclimated to their respective temperatures over several weeks before infection, brought to 20癈 for the period of exposure (24h) and then returned to their maintenance temperature in stages of 2-3癈/ day (i.e. about 2 days). For experiments at 10癈, acclimated animals were brought up to and down from 20癈 over a longer period (typically 1-2 weeks). Experimentally-infected hosts were maintained in rooms with environmental control providing constant water temperature (variation typically within 1癈). Onset of patency was detected by screening the tank sediment for P. xenopodis eggs; at the first record of eggs in bulk water collections, animals were transferred to individual containers and the water screened after 48 or 72h to identify the host(s) responsible. For records at 15, 20 and 25癈, most infections were terminated and the hosts dissected at 105 (� 2) days post exposure; 13 out of 60 infections were terminated just outside this range (at -3, -4 or +3 days). To allow for predicted slow development at 10癈, these infections (n=26) were maintained for 150-180 days p.i. before dissection, so results are not directly comparable with those from the 3 higher temperatures. One result (below) is cited from a preliminary trial following experimental infection in a different sibship of X. laevis maintained at 10癈 for 13 months. Infection outcome Parasites were recovered from the urinary system by dorsal host dissection: removal of the vertebral column allowed extraction of bladder, kidneys and associated ducts intact (preventing loss of worms from severed ducts until after transfer to a Petri dish). Urinary bladder and kidneys were examined in separate dishes of 0.3% buffered saline (approximately isotonic with amphibian urine) with the kidneys finely teased apart with dissection needles. Fixatives typically cause irregular distortion of P. xenopodis with transverse folding in the midbody and the haptor attaching to the head. In unflattened specimens, internal features (arrangement of gut, shape and size of haptoral sclerites) may be difficult to determine. For this study, worms were flattened individually under gentle pressure from a coverslip during infiltration of 10% formal saline: this achieved a consistent natural form with the hamuli lying flat. For microscope examination, worms stored in formalin were rinsed in water, transferred to a drop of glycerine under a coverslip, and examined unstained with a Nikon Optiphot microscope. Morphometric characters were measured using a digital camera (Infinity Camera V, Luminera Corporation) with dimensions recorded with Image-Pro Express version 6 software (Media Cybernetics, Inc). Data were recorded for numbers of parasites recovered in the kidneys and urinary bladder, prepatent period, and body size and developmental stage at termination. For each worm, a suite of morphometric characters was measured, following criteria defined by Tinsley and Jackson (1998) and Jackson and Tinsley (2007). Data in this account are limited to total body length (including haptor), body length (measured to the junction of body with haptor), large hamulus total length (top of dorsal root to the distal lobe adjacent to the base of the point), and one additional character: body area (representing the space within the profile of the body proper excluding the haptor, calculated by the Image-Pro programme). Data analysis Allometric relationships between body size metrics were assessed using linear models in R (version 2.11.1, R Development Core Team, 2010). Parasite body size data were analyzed with linear mixed effect models using lmer from lme4 in R. The effects of the covariates host sex, host body weight, host fat body weight, host gonad weight, intensity of infection and temperature on parasite body size were investigated alongside that of the fixed factor host sex. The logs of parasite body size measures were used to improve the normality of residuals and equalize variances between temperature treatments. Models all included the random effects of 慼ost� nested within the 憈ank� in which groups of hosts were housed. Models were fitted using maximum likelihood, then simplified and selected based on AIC scores. The significance of terms was assessed by comparing models with and without the term of interest using likelihood ratio tests. Time to patency data were investigated using non-parametric Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (SPSS version 16), comparing survival curves by the Log-Rank method. Means are reported � their standard errors. RESULTS Effects of temperature on parasite developmental migrations within the host Protopolystoma xenopodis first invades the host kidneys and later migrates to the urinary bladder (Tinsley and Owen, 1975). At the 3 higher temperatures (examined at around 105 days p.i.), worms that had completed migration to the urinary bladder comprised 77% of the total at 15癈, 83% at 20癈, and 100% at 25癈 (n = 189, 150 and 105 worms respectively in 18-22 hosts per temperature). The fraction of the population at 20癈 that still remained in the kidneys was dominated by a cohort of worms that were stunted in development (considered below). Excluding this apparently abnormal occurrence, only 1 worm at 20癈 had not completed migration by the 105 day end-point. At 15癈, 13 out of 18 hosts carried worms in the kidneys alongside already-migrated worms in the bladder, suggesting migration in progress at the time of the 105 day termination (and in the remaining 5 hosts in this group all worms had completed migration). After 150-180 days p.i. at 10癈, almost all worms (56 out of 57 in 26 hosts) remained in the kidneys; the single worm that had migrated to the bladder was found in a host examined after 177 days. In a trial with 2 hosts from an unrelated sibship (see above), worms were found still in both sites after 13 months p.i. (totals 10 in the bladder and 6 in the kidneys), indicating a considerable delay to migration. Assessment of morphometric characters Protopolystoma xenopodis has an oval to lanceolate body (see Tinsley and Jackson, 1998). Parasite size was assessed using four metrics: total body length (including the haptor), body length (excluding the haptor), body area, and hamulus length. These measures were all correlated, but the nature of the allometric relationships between variables differed (Fig. 1). There was a tight linear relationship between total body length and body length (R2 = 0.996) (Fig. 1A) confirming the effectiveness of standardizing the fixation procedures (see above) and the repeatability of results. Experience gained during fixation suggested that calculation of total body area would give an informative measure of differences in parasite size. In the case of the relationship between total body length and body area, an accelerating quadratic curve was the best fit of the data (F(1,396) = 2437, P<<0.0001) (Fig. 1B). This reflects a progression in which juveniles in the host kidneys are thin and spindle-like (up to about 1mm long) and begin to develop the rounded body at migration to the urinary bladder. In contrast, the rate of increase of hamulus size with total body length declined with increasing size and was best described by a negative quadratic relationship (F(1,395) = 107.7; P<< 0.0001) (Fig. 1C). This reflects a growth pattern in which the hamuli can reach maximum size in worms 2-3mm long and show little or no further growth during continued expansion of the body (up to 4mm total length in Fig. 1C). The hamuli are hard structures, not affected by fixation; measurement of total length provided a sensitive indicator of growth differences that were not apparent from the soft-tissue measurements (see below). Effects of environmental factors on parasite growth Parameter estimates from model outputs are shown in Table 1. Frequency distributions of body size metrics are illustrated in Figs. 2, 3 and 4 with photographs of representative parasite individuals reproduced to scale to reflect developmental variation. (In a few cases of poor image quality of the worm of the specific size, the nearest worm to that size is shown.) Parasite body area varied from 0.02 mm2 to 5.02 mm2, with an overall mean of 1.04 mm2 (� 0.058, n = 403). Temperature had a major effect on body area; cooler temperatures significantly curtailed growth (Fig. 2, �2 = 11.91, df = 1, P <� 0.001). Parasites infecting hosts maintained at 15篊 were very small: mean body area 0.103 mm2 (� 0.005 SE, n = 160). The 5篊 increase from 15 to 20篊 resulted in more than a ten fold increase in parasite size: mean area 1.22 mm2 (� 0.080 SE, n = 138 at 20篊). The further increase from 20 to 25篊 resulted in almost another doubling of body area: mean 2.24 mm2 (� 0.106 SE, n = 105 at 25篊). Host sex influenced parasite body area but the effect was inconsistent across the temperatures (Fig. 5). At 15 and 20篊, parasites in male hosts were larger than those in females, whereas at 25篊 mean body area of parasites in males was less than that in females. Considering the data for each temperature separately, there was strong statistical support for these differences in parasite size between the host sexes (15篊, �2 = 8.31, df = 1, P = 0.004; 20�C, �2 = 5.94, df = 1, P = 0.015; 25�C, �2 = 5.52, df = 1, P = 0.012). Nevertheless, due to the order of model simplification when analyzing the whole data set, this differential effect of sex at the three temperatures was not significant across the entire experiment (Sex * Temperature interaction, �2 = 1.384, df = 1, P = 0.240). The 25�C data were based on a skewed host sex ratio: 4 females, 16 males (gender was unknown at the time of exposure). The comparison, although statistically significant, could have been biased by the chance occurrence of a few very susceptible individuals. This aside, averaging all the data across the three temperatures, parasites infecting male hosts were 1.8 times larger than those in females (S.E. range: 1.46 to 2.14 times, �2 = 8.37, df = 1, P = 0.004). Parasite size was not significantly correlated with infection intensity per host (�2 = 0.872, df = 1, P = 0.350). Host weight was positively correlated with parasite body area: parasites grew largest in heavier toads (�2 = 7.62, df = 1, P = 0.006). The relationship was investigated between parasite growth (body area) and two indices of host condition: fat body weight and gonad weight. Hosts with heavier fat bodies had smaller parasites (�2 = 5.25, df = 1, P = 0.022). In contrast, host gonad weight did not significantly covary with parasite body area (�2 = 0.37, df = 1, P = 0.543). Equivalent analysis was extended to total body length and hamulus length as measures of parasite size (Figs. 3, 4). Parameter estimates differed slightly, but the broad trends were consistent with those described above (Table 1). The only exceptions were that host body weight and fat body weight had only modest and non-significant effects on parasite hamulus length. The effect of temperature on these metrics concurred with that recorded for body area: thus, the 5癈 difference from 15 to 20癈 was accompanied by >300% increase in body length and total body length, but the further 5癈 change from 20 to 25癈 was accompanied by increase of only about 30% (mean total body length 0.65 (�0.24 SD) mm at 15癈, 1.94 (�0.51 SD) mm at 20癈, 2.38 (�0.56 SD) mm at 25癈). Twenty parasites infecting 8 toads maintained at 20篊 had unexpectedly small size; this was particularly obvious in the distribution of hamulus lengths (Figs. 1C, 4). Removing these individuals from the above analyses did not qualitatively influence the parameter estimates nor the significance of model terms. Within-population variation and growth retardation Within each temperature group there was typically very wide morphometric variation: compare, for instance, the images of the smallest and largest worms at 25癈 (Fig. 2e and g; Fig. 3i and k). Fig. 3 shows that the more-or-less normal distributions of total body lengths at 20 and 25癈 span the major part of the entire range (although the curves are staggered by 0.8-1.0mm and maximum size at 25癈 exceeds that at 20癈 by >20%). In Fig. 4, however, the variation in hamulus lengths at 20癈 is bimodal with one subset having a mean and range about 100�m shorter than the other. The smaller subset is identified in Fig. 1C (total body lengths d" 1mm, hamulus lengths mostly d" 65�m) as having a growth pattern that does not fit that of the rest of the experimental infections. Although body size is very small, this group is not distinguished in Figs. 1A and 1B because of wide overlaps in length and area metrics. However, hamulus development provides unambiguous identification. Hamulus lengths in the small 20癈 worms were typically around 30-45�m with a few examples 60-85�m (overall mean 48�m) (Fig. 4d-f). Mean length amongst the major subset of worms at 20�C was 149�m (range 121-180�m) (Fig. 4g-i). Hamuli in the small 20�C worms were shorter even than in the population that developed at 15�C (mean 95�m, range 69-123�m, Fig. 4a-c)), and actually closer in size and developmental stage to those in worms at 10�C (mean 50�m, see below). The sequence of stages in Fig. 4d-f and a-c shows that hamulus length increase involves elongation of the shaft followed by divergence of dorsal and ventral roots. All worms that developed at 15 and 25癈 and the subset of larger worms at 20癈 had hamuli with well-developed separate dorsal and ventral roots (e.g. Fig. 4a-c and g-l) and differed from one another mainly by temperature-related size (compare means illustrated by Fig. 4b, h, k). The group of small worms at 20癈 is distinctive in that hamulus shafts remained short without division of roots (Fig. 4d-f), reflecting a much earlier stage in development. In the early stages of normal growth in the kidneys, the haptor develops 6 muscular suckers. These were present in all worms at 15癈 but had not completed development in the small 20癈 worms: in most cases, the 1st pair was recently formed, the 2nd beginning to differentiate and the 3rd entirely undeveloped. This combination of characteristics of body size, hamulus length and shape, and sucker formation, suggests severe growth stunting in this subset of worms. The stunted worms at 20癈 differed from those of similar size that developed at 15癈 in the appearance of their intestinal tracts. Digestion in P. xenopodis results in accumulation within the gut caeca of brown-black pigments, principally haematin, the products of intracellular breakdown of host blood (Tinsley, 1973). In worms at 15癈 (and also at 10癈), the gut was typically cream-coloured or pale pink (Fig. 6A) suggesting reduced digestive activity at low temperatures. In the stunted worms at 20癈, the gut appearance (Fig. 6B) resembled that of the other worms at 20 (Fig. 6C) and 25癈 with the red-brown digestive caeca lined by a haematin-laden gastrodermis reflecting active blood intake, digestive breakdown and accumulation and expulsion of residues. The origin and host distribution of the parasites displaying the stunted phenotype was also distinctive. They were encountered only in hosts maintained at 20癈 (and not in those at 15 and 25癈 infected at the same time) and only from experimental infections using larvae of S. African origin. Almost exclusively, they were restricted to the progeny of a single pairing of S. African hosts (Sib 17). There were 3 exceptions: stunted worms were found in 2 hosts (one in each) of Welsh origin, and in 1 host (5 worms) from a different pair of S. African parents. With these exceptions, stunted worms were not found in over 160 experimental infections generated under identical conditions using larvae (20 per exposure) from the S. African 慹gg factory� in other combinations of lab-raised Welsh or S. African hosts. Experimental infections using larvae hatched from an egg factory of Welsh X. laevis also never produced stunted worms (over 120 exposures, 20 larvae /host), including Sib 17 S. African hosts (20 exposures at 20癈). Within the Sib 17 infections of S. African origin (the focus of this account), stunted worms were found in 8 out of 22 exposed hosts. In all cases, the stunted worms were recovered in the kidneys of host individuals that also carried normally-developing worms in the urinary bladder. These latter had body areas at least twice, and as much as 10 times, larger than the stunted worms in the kidneys of the same host (see representative body areas in Fig. 2, also lengths in Fig. 3). So, the stunted worms formed a discrete group and in no cases were they part of a continuum of sizes in which they were simply the smallest of a wide range. Parasite growth and development at low temperatures Parasites from hosts maintained at 10癈 represented growth attained by 150-180 days p.i.. Although development is not directly comparable with that at the higher temperatures (observed after a shorter period), the haptor remained at a very early juvenile stage: the smallest worms had no suckers (only the beginnings of sucker musculature forming around the marginal hooklets); other worms had the first (posterior) suckers developed, the second in early formation, and the third not yet visible; the largest had 2 pairs of suckers and the third developing. Hamulus lengths ranged from 15�m (little extension anterior to the point) to 77�m (in which the roots were just beginning to divide), mean 50�m. The gut was branched but showed little haematin accumulation (reflecting low digestive activity). Effects of temperature on time to patency At the endpoint of the trial, microscope preparations showed that all worms at 15癈 had immature reproductive systems. Experimental infections developed to the stage of egg production within the 105 day duration only at 25 and 20篊. The first host individual became patent at 51 days p.i. at 25篊 compared with 73 days at 20篊. Median time to patency was 57.5 days at 25篊 (n=17) and 91.0 days at 20篊 (n=21). Survival analysis demonstrated a significant difference in the rate of progression to patency at the 2 temperatures ((�2 (df=1) =8.76; p=0.003). At 25�C, 16 of the 20 hosts originally exposed had developed patent infections by the termination date and one surviving infection remained non-patent. The other 3 hosts were uninfected at dissection. At 20篊, only 13 of the exposed hosts (n = 22) had developed patent burdens, and there were 8 hosts carrying infections that had not yet become patent; the remaining host was parasite-free. DISCUSSION General characteristics As in all other parasites of ectotherm vertebrates, life cycle processes of P. xenopodis are temperature-dependent. This investigation, using host and parasite material derived from the field and maintained under controlled conditions in the laboratory, calibrates the dominant impact of temperature on a series of events. Tinsley et al. (2010a) showed that low temperatures inhibit egg development and extend hatch time; the present study demonstrates continuing in-host effects that retard post-larval development and the schedule of migrations, restrict body size and delay the onset of patency. From knowledge of basic biological functions, these thermal effects are predictable for an African parasite in a cool north temperate environment. However, the present study is distinctive in providing empirical data to quantify the constraints in an environmentally-relevant context. Results also demonstrate a series of general features. (i) For all parameters measured, there is considerable within-population variation in schedules. For instance, amongst experimentally-infected hosts maintained at 25癈, patency in the fastest developing burdens began at 7.5 weeks, but the slowest developing infection was still not patent after 15 weeks. (ii) The extent of variation in schedules increases with reduction in temperature. So, not only are events delayed at lower temperatures, the wider variation between individuals results in even longer delays for a proportion of the population. (iii) Relationships between temperature and certain life history characteristics are non-linear. There is a threshold near to 10癈 at which development is very slow (kidney to bladder migration not complete >1 year p.i.). From 15 to 25癈, there is a strong positive relationship with temperature, but body size characters show greater proportional increases between 15 and 20癈 than between 20 and 25癈 (e.g. body area increasing by 10x and 2x with these respective 5癈 shifts, see above). (iv) Low temperature inhibition of parasite development imposes long interruptions on life history schedules. Thus, worms unable to reach maturity by the end of summer may be held in check until the following summer; larval invasion terminated by arrest of egg hatching in September does not resume until the next July (see Tinsley et al. 2010a). (v) While temperature represents a dominant effect on life cycle processes, operating � in this ectotherm vertebrate system � on parasite stages both external and internal to the host, the present experiments also indicate effects attributable to genetic variation in hosts and parasites and the interaction between the two. The context of environmental conditions affecting infection Temperature. Regarding ii) � iv) above, the temperature regime recorded in the natural habitat is likely to indicate the minimum of the range actually experienced by parasites developing within infected hosts. The temperature logger represented conditions for hosts occurring on the pond bottom (both when inactive and when feeding on benthic invertebrates, see Measey and Tinsley, 1998), but internal body temperature may increase periodically when X. laevis are active in the surface water. The parasites benefit from their location within a mobile habitat for which host behaviour determines actual thermal environment. In ponds with a covering of vegetation, animals may 慼ang� from the surface with nostrils exposed where they are hidden from aerial predators (Tinsley, 2010). Their physiology (including digestion) � and the physiology of their parasites (including development) � is influenced by warmer conditions at these times. Spot checks in mid-summer showed that P. xenopodis may experience temperatures near to and above 20癈 at times when hosts move into surface water. During winter there is typically limited thermal stratification and X. laevis show reduced activity in the bottom mud (Tinsley and McCoid, 1996). Therefore, the records of low temperature periods at the pond are likely to represent closely the conditions experienced by both off-host and within-host parasite stages. Host x parasite interactions. Regarding i) and v) above, experiments were carried out on a single sibship of hosts, lab-raised from S. African hosts, in order to limit variation in host genotype effects on parasite survival and development. Data relate to infections using a single source of eggs of P. xenopodis from the same wild-caught population as the sibship parents. The infection protocol was designed to ensure first, that all animals were exposed under comparable conditions to produce equivalent initial parasite populations, and second, that hosts were transferred with minimum delay to their final temperature. This was intended to reduce the period for recognition and response by the host at the exposure temperature (and, potentially, the period for adaptation by the parasite) before experience of the immune environment characteristic of the test temperature. Despite this design, the data are characterized by considerable between-host and within-host variation. Effects of temperature on parasite growth and development The experimental infection data provide snapshots of the effects of temperature on migration from the kidneys, the site of initial development, to the urinary bladder where P. xenopodis reaches sexual maturity. In the present studies with a 15 week endpoint, migration was complete at 25癈, almost complete at 20癈, and in mid progress at 15癈. With further reduction to 10癈, progression to the point of migration may not begin until about 6 months p.i. and may still not be complete after more than one year. In lab infections maintained for 150-180 days p.i. at 10癈, most of the parasite population reached a stage where haptoral suckers were still not completely differentiated and where mean hamulus length was only about 50�m; this equates to the development of worms 3-4 weeks p.i. at about 20�C (unpublished). So, P. xenopodis can survive for prolonged periods at low temperatures and development is not arrested, but life cycle progress is disproportionately slow compared with that achieved at 5-10癈 higher. Effects of internal environmental factors on parasite growth and development Host factors. There is wide-ranging evidence for host gender-related effects on parasites, including differences in infection levels (Krasnov and Matthee, 2010). In a meta-analysis of nematodes and cestodes, mainly in mammals, Poulin (1996) identified a small but significant host gender difference in parasite size, with worms larger in male than in female hosts. The present data show the same overall effect in an amphibian/ monogenean system but this is complicated by a significant reverse direction at 25癈. It is possible that chance differences in host susceptibility were responsible in the unbalanced sex ratio at 25癈. Alternatively, the gender effects may indeed change at the highest temperatures which enhance both reproductive activity and immune defences in this amphibian (Tinsley, 2010). Nevertheless, in the entire data set of 60 hosts and over 400 parasites, the presence of significantly larger worms in male hosts (by a factor of 1.8) may have implications for differences in nutrient removal and, potentially, in pathogenic effects between the host sexes (see below). Parasite factors. Given the very wide developmental variation within the 3 experimental populations, ecological theory would predict an effect of parasite density on growth rates. Indeed, worm burdens in these laboratory infections are high relative to those typically encountered in nature (see Tinsley, 2005): this should increase the rigor of tests of crowding effects on parasite size. However, the data demonstrate that density does not represent a significant factor contributing to variation in the parameters assessed. Host x parasite interactions. For certain outcomes, the potential effects on parasite growth are best interpreted as interactions of host and parasite factors. The positive relationship in this system between host body weight and parasite size (measured as area) parallels the findings of Barber (2005) with experimental infections of Schistocephalus solidus in Gasterosteus aculeatus. For this cestode, faster growing hosts (assessed by body weight increase) supported a larger total weight of parasites. As in the present studies, Barber抯 experimental design aimed to reduce effects of genetic variation (including use of progeny of a single selfed parasite in infections of laboratory-raised sticklebacks). Nevertheless, there was very wide between-host growth variation, with a 120-fold range in tapeworm mass at the end of the study. These differences were considered most likely to be due to differential host responses to infection (Barber, 2005). The negative relationship, in the present experiments, between host energy reserves and parasite size (hosts with heavier fat bodies had smaller parasites) may be interpreted in two ways, as effects of host immunity or parasite pathology. Hosts in superior condition (with surplus energy) may be better able to respond immunologically, compromising the growth of their parasites. Alternatively, parasites achieving larger size may impose a greater cost on their hosts, depleting host energy reserves. These alternative interpretations cannot be resolved in the present analysis. Data recorded in Figs. 2 and 3 emphasize the very considerable range of endpoints for growth within the respective populations at 15, 20 and 25癈. Since a series of potential external and internal environment and parasite effects can be excluded (see above), a major influence on the growth (and size) differences at each temperature is likely to be variation at the level of infectivity/ susceptibility of individual parasites and hosts (i.e. compatibility). A special case of this is represented by the cohort of worms showing stunted development at 20癈. This cannot be interpreted primarily as a general host effect: each host individual carrying stunted worms also carried others with a normal growth phenotype from the same experimental exposure, developing in the same host environment. Equally, this is not primarily a parasite effect: with very few exceptions, affected worms occurred only in a single sibship of host. So, it is likely that the phenomenon represents a genotype-specific interaction between host and parasite. It may have resulted from the presence of a parasite genotype in the wild parasite population sample (the egg factory) employed for the experimental infections that has poor compatibility with the genetic constitution of Sib 17 hosts. The existence of this parasite type within the original host population might predict that there were other host genotypes in that South African population in which the parasite could perform well. With very few exceptions, stunted worms did not appear in the limited number of other host sibships tested, but this could be explained by the opposite possibilities: either that they grew normally or that they died in these other host families. The gut morphology of worms at 10 and 15癈 was characterized by diffuse pale contents and a lack of brown/ black pigment suggesting low metabolic activity. So, slow growth (small size at termination) is likely to be related to low temperature effects on food intake and digestion. By contrast, the guts of stunted worms at 20癈 (of even smaller size than those at 15癈) had correlates of active digestive function, including haematin-laden gastrodermal cells, comparable with those of worms showing more rapid growth at 20 and 25癈. It is possible, therefore, that poor growth in the cohort of stunted worms occurs in spite of high nutrient intake and reflects diversion of energy and products away from growth to other processes. In nematodes, a similar effect has been attributed to immune-mediated damage and the cost of repair in worms that show sub-optimal performance in resistant hosts (Wilkes et al. 2004; Viney et al. 2006). If applicable to P. xenopodis, this may indicate that part of the parasite population, infecting putatively incompatible hosts, experiences costs of infection that are greater than those imposed by a 5 or even 10癈 decrease in temperature. In genetically more diverse host and parasite populations in nature, it could be expected that developmental variation may be even greater than that shown in the present experiments. Parasite size, assessed here at a specific time point, may be correlated with pathogenic effects on the host (extent of tissue damage including blood removal), transmission schedules (including period to patency), contribution to parasite reproduction (including body size-related egg output rates). The variation recorded in these infections of full-sib hosts (for instance, body area of worms at 25癈 differing by a factor of >10, see Fig. 2) provides a minimum indication of the heterogeneity that must exist in infection outcomes in the wild. Effects of temperature on period to parasite maturation In the present combination of host sibship and parasite isolate, no infections developed to maturity within the 15 week timeframe at constant 15癈. The minimum time to patency at 20癈 was about 10.5 weeks p.i., close to the minimum of 9 weeks recorded at the same temperature by Jackson and Tinsley (2001). With a 5癈 increase in temperature, minimum time to patency was reduced by about 30%. In these data, patent period relates to the onset of egg production by the first individual worm in the first patent host, but there was considerable between-host variation. Comprehensive consideration of reproductive performance, including times to maturity and rates of egg production, is included in a further paper (Tinsley et al. 2010b). The limited data on development at 10癈 (with migration still incomplete after >1 year p.i.) add to the evidence that the life cycle of P. xenopodis may operate over very extended timescales in cool climate regions. There are strong parallels between the temperature effects documented here for the monogenean P. xenopodis and for the digenean Gorgoderina vitelliloba. This parasite of frogs, Rana temporaria native to north temperate environments, initially invades the kidneys and then migrates to and matures in the urinary bladder. Development and migration are temperature-dependent: at low temperatures, juvenile worms may remain in the kidneys for >5 months (Mitchell, 1973). Interpretation of life cycle events in the natural habitat in Wales Based on knowledge of reproductive biology (reviewed by Tinsley, 2004, 2005), it is possible to calibrate a seasonal cycle of parasite transmission in the X. laevis population in Wales. Interpretation relates to the temperature record at this site and summarizes findings on egg development given by Tinsley et al. (2010a). Egg production by P. xenopodis can continue throughout the year albeit at very low rates in winter. From about mid-October to late April, output is probably <1 e/w/d (the per capita rate <10癈); in summer, the mean maximum is probably about 9 e/w/d (Jackson and Tinsley, 1998; Tinsley et al. 2010a). The data of Tinsley et al. (2010a) show that all eggs produced between early August and early April die without hatching. The overall period during which egg production may actually contribute to transmission involves a maximum of 16 weeks. However, output at the beginning and end, in April and late July/ early August, has limited impact so the effective duration of reproductive output is only about 10 weeks per year. With the temperature cycle recorded in 2008, infective larvae may begin to hatch in early July and most invasions occur in the following 2 months until early/mid September. There may be continuing invasion at low level until late September but with decreasing viability of worms establishing at low temperatures. At most, host invasion is restricted to about 10 weeks each year (Tinsley et al. 2010a). For na飗e individuals experiencing a primary infection (the design of present experiments), the first infections to reach patency would require about 9 weeks (data of Jackson and Tinsley, 2001) or 10.5 weeks (this study) at constant 20癈. The field site records show only a few days of temperatures >18癈 in 2007 and 2008, so the pre-patent period should typically be much longer. Laboratory infections failed to develop to patency within 15 weeks at 15癈 and, although the pre-patent period was not determined at this temperature, all worms had immature reproductive systems indicating that it must be several weeks in excess of the end-point of the experiments. The trials at 15癈 correspond with summer temperatures on the pond bottom (close to the average of 15.5癈 recorded for the 3 months June � August in 2008, see Tinsley et al. 2010a). This evidence should exclude maturation of any infections during their first summer season. However, field studies have recorded that some natural infections can become egg producing in late September after invasion earlier in the summer (unpublished). These are likely to have originated from the earliest egg hatching, i.e. in early July, suggesting a period to patency of about 12 weeks. The difference between predicted and actual timescales may be related to the periodic movements of X. laevis into warmer surface water during periods of activity, permitting faster parasite development. These data may provide a measure of the impact of host behaviour on parasite life cycle progress: host transport of parasites into areas of habitat where developmental rates are increased could improve the schedule to maturation by more than 1 month. By the time these first invasions mature, water temperatures have fallen below 15癈 and the pond surface would experience little diurnal warming; as a result, continuing development of worms from later invasions would be much slower. The final stages of maturation of worms invading in mid/ late July could perhaps be completed by early/ mid October. All other invasions occurring in August and September will fail to complete development to maturity until temperatures increase again in summer of the following year. Although it is possible for P. xenopodis to reach maturity within a single summer, all eggs produced by these adults during their first half year of patency will die. Production of eggs that actually contribute to transmission will not begin until the next spring, leading to the earliest invasions from these eggs in early July (i.e. exactly one year following host invasion). These predictions are based on earliest recorded outcomes in experiments (慴est performance�), but a prominent feature of the life history attributes is the wide variation in population data, including rates of development to maturity (considered in detail by Tinsley et al., 2010b). Thus, while the first of the experimental infections at 20癈 began egg production at 10.5 weeks p.i., over one third of the exposed hosts had still not reached patency after a further 4.5 weeks (see above). With similar variation between individuals at field temperatures, some larvae invading even in early July would not become mature until the following mid summer. Parasites taking a year or more to reach maturity have little or no time for production of eggs that will hatch before the next winter抯 憇hutdown�, so their first contribution to onward transmission may be delayed for 2 years p.i. The schedule will be further extended for parasites invading hosts that have already experienced a primary infection. Jackson and Tinsley (2001) recorded that, in comparison with primary infections, median pre-patent period in secondary infections was delayed by a factor of more than 2 (up to a maximum of 7 months p.i.) at constant 20癈. It is possible that worms showing similar retarded development after invading mid-summer in one year might not reach maturity until at least 2 years later (with their eggs contributing to transmission only after a further year). These calculations show how the life cycle can be completed in the low temperate regime in Wales, but 憌indows� of activity are very reduced, time scales for development very extended, and numerical characteristics of transmission very restricted. Parasite egg production rates comparable with those of P. xenopodis are rarely encountered in other host-parasite systems, and delays to maturity by 2 or more years are exceptional even amongst free-living invertebrates. Pre-reproductive mortality during such extended periods must inevitably reduce future transmission. Clearly, parasite life cycle schedules with these characteristics also rely on relatively long host life span. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank the Thomas family, Croescwtta Farm, Vale of Glamorgan, for access to the field site. We are grateful for assistance in the lab from Josie Richards and Andy Bond. FINANCIAL SUPPORT This project was supported by research grant BB/D523051/1 from BBSRC. REFERENCES Barber, I. (2005). Parasites grow larger in faster growing fish hosts. International Journal for Parasitology 35, 137-143. Barr�, N. and Uilenberg, G. (2010). Spread of parasites transported with their hosts: case study of two species of cattle tick. Revue scientifique et technique, Office international des 閜izooties 29, 149-160. Brooks, D.R. and Hoberg, E.P. (2007). How will global climate change affect parasite-host assemblages? Trends in Parasitology 23, 571-574. Carey, C., Cohen, N. and Rollins-Smith, L. (1999). Amphibian declines: an immunological perspective. Developmental and Comparative Immunology 23, 459-472. Drake, J.M. (2003). The paradox of the parasites: implications for biological invasion. Proceedings of the Royal Society, London B 270, S133-S135. Jackson, J.A. and Tinsley, R.C. (1998). Effects of temperature on oviposition rate in Protopolystoma xenopodis (Monogenea: Polystomatidae). International Journal for Parasitology 28, 309-315. Jackson, J.A. and Tinsley, R.C. (2001). Protopolystoma xenopodis (Polystomatidae: Monogenea) primary and secondary infections in Xenopus laevis. Parasitology 123, 455-463. Jackson, J.A. and Tinsley, R.C. (2002). Effects of environmental temperature on the susceptibility of Xenopus laevis and X. wittei (Anura) to Protopolystoma xenopodis (Monogenea). Parasitology Research 88, 632-638. Jackson, J.A. and Tinsley, R.C. (2007). Evolutionary divergence in polystomatids infecting tetraploid and octoploid Xenopus in East African highlands: biological and molecular evidence. Parasitology 134: 1223-1235. Jackson, J.A., Tinsley, R.C. and Du Preez, L.H. (2001). Differentiation of two locally sympatric Protopolystoma (Monogenea: Polystomatidae) species by temperature-dependent larval development and survival. International Journal for Parasitology 31, 815-821. Karvonen, A., Rintam鋕i, P., Jokela, J. and Valtonen, E.T. (2010). Increasing water temperature and disease risks in aquatic systems: climate change increases the risk of some, but not all, diseases. International Journal for Parasitology 40, 1483-1488. Krasnov, B.R. and Matthee, S. (2010). Spatial variation in gender-based parasitism: host-related, parasite-related and environment-related effects. Parasitology 137, 1527-1536. Kutz, S.J., Hoberg, E.P., Polley, L. and Jenkins, E.J. (2005). Global warming is changing the dynamics of Arctic host-parasite systems. Proceedings of the Royal Society, London B 272, 2571-2576. Le Morvan, C., Troutaud, D. and Deschaux, P. (1998). Differential effects of temperature on specific and nonspecific immune defences in fish. Journal of Experimental Biology 201, 165-168. Marcogliese, D.J. (2008). The impact of climate change on the parasites and infectious diseases of aquatic animals. Revue scientifique et technique, Office international des 閜izooties 27, 467-484. Measey, G.J. and Tinsley, R.C. (1998). Feral Xenopus laevis in South Wales. Herpetological Journal 8, 23-27. Mitchell, J.B. (1973). The effect of temperature on the development of Gorgoderina vitelliloba in Rana temporaria. International Journal for Parasitology 3, 545-548. Moret, Y., Bollache, L., Wattier, R. and Rigaud, T. (2007). Is the host or the parasite the most locally adapted in an amphipod-acanthocephalan relationship? A case study in a biological invasion context. International Journal for Parasitology 37, 637-644. Poulin, R. (1996). Helminth growth in vertebrate hosts: does host sex matter? International Journal for Parasitology 26, 1311-1315. R Development Core Team (2010). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org. Tinsley, R.C. (1973). Ultrastructural studies on the form and function of the gastrodermis of Protopolystoma xenopi (Monogenoidea: Polyopisthocotylea). Biological Bulletin 144, 541-555. Tinsley, R.C. (2004). Platyhelminth parasite reproduction: some general principles derived from monogeneans. Canadian Journal of Zoology 82, 270-291. Tinsley, R.C. (2005). Parasitism and hostile environments. In Parasitism and Ecosystems (ed. Thomas, F., Renaud, F. and Gu間an J-F.), pp. 85-112. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Tinsley, R.C. (2010). Amphibians, with special reference to Xenopus. In: The UFAW handbook on the care and management of laboratory and other research animals, 8th Edition (ed. Hubrecht, R. and Kirkwood, J.), pp. 741-760. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford. Tinsley, R.C. and Jackson, J.A. (1998). Speciation of Protopolystoma Bychowsky, 1957 (Monogenea: Polystomatidae) in hosts of the genus Xenopus (Anura: Pipidae). Systematic Parasitology 40, 93-141. Tinsley, R.C. and McCoid, M.J. (1996). Feral populations of Xenopus outside Africa. In The Biology of Xenopus (ed. Tinsley, R.C. and Kobel, H.R.), pp. 81- 94. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Tinsley, R.C. and Owen, R. W. (1975). Studies on the biology of Protopolystoma xenopodis (Monogenoidea): the oncomiracidium and life cycle. Parasitology 71, 445-463. Tinsley, R.C., York, J., Everard, A., Stott, L.C., Chapple, S. and Tinsley, M.C. (2010a). Environmental constraints influencing survival of an African parasite in a north temperate habitat: effects of temperature on egg development. (submitted) Tinsley, R.C, York, J., Stott, L.C., Everard, A., Chapple, S. and Tinsley, M.C. (2010b). Long-term persistence of an African parasite in a north temperate habitat: environmental constraints on survival and reproduction. (to be submitted). Viney, M.E., Steer, M.D. and Wilkes, C.P. (2006). The reversibility of constraints on size and fecundity in the parasitic nematode Strongyloides ratti. Parasitology 133, 477-483. Wilkes, C.P., Thompson, F.J., Gardner, M.P., Paterson, S. and Viney, M.E. (2004). The effect of the host immune response on the parasitic nematode Strongyloides ratti. Parasitology 128, 661-669.  CAPTIONS TO FIGURES Fig. 1. Relationships of body size metrics in P. xenopodis following development in X. laevis for 105 days p.i. (combined data for infections at 15, 20 and 25癈; sample sizes 60 hosts, 396 parasites; lines are best fits from linear models). Parasite total body length (including haptor) is plotted against: (A) body length (excluding the haptor), (B) body area, (C) total hamulus length (see text for measurement criteria). Quadratic functions were significantly better fits than linear relationships in (B) and (C) (see text). In (C), note the group of points displaced below the negative quadratic relationship followed by the majority of the overall population: these represent worms stunted in development at 20癈 (see text and Fig. 4). Fig. 2. Histograms showing frequencies of body areas of P. xenopodis developing in experimental infections of X. laevis for 105 days p.i. at 15癈 (blue bars), 20癈 (yellow) and 25癈 (red). Mean body area differed significantly between temperature treatments (see text). Images of worms are photomicrographs of formalin-fixed, unstained individuals selected to show representative sizes and positioned above the centre of their respective body area ranges. Worms with areas illustrating a) the mean at 15癈, b) minimum at 20癈 and e
c�������������������������B C Y k � � � � 蹼嶙胪霉瑵瑵瑵瑵瑵瑦伂潿箃h恡恀恀恏h-�5�6�>*颁闯丑2贵�丑2贵�5�>*颁闯丑2贵�丑2贵�5�>*颁闯贬*
丑2贵�丑2贵�5�6�;�>*颁闯丑2贵�丑2贵�5�6�>*颁闯丑2贵�丑2贵�5�;�>*颁闯贬*
丑2贵�丑2贵�5�;�>*颁闯丑2贵�丑2贵�>*颁闯丑2贵�丑2贵�5�>*
丑2贵�丑诵耻5�>*
丑2贵�丑�>*颁闯丑2贵�丑肠齿<�>*CJh2F�h誦u>*CJh2F�h]4�>*CJ#
�����������B � � � � � � � � � � � � � � ���������������������������$a$gd2F�$a$$a$� � 3 6 7 8 @ A P i � � ��������" R n € � &�� ag���  pqstu€�麟孢卦驮仍仍脑兰兰兰兰脑脑脑脑冈丛丛霸荚瑺欉憠�h8P�h誦uh8P�h8P�\�h8P�h誦u\�ht6�5�>*
h2F�h2F� h2F�6�h2F�h贏~h&�h鵶XhNIhG�h朣� h-~j6�h-~j5�>*
h-~jh]4�5�>*
h2F�5�>*
h2F�>*h2F�h2F�5�>*CJh2F�5�>*CJ3� � � � � � 3 4 6 7 8 @ A �������qrs�����������������������������$a$gd�F$a$gd-~j$a$$a$gd2F�����������HUnty�������$%7Bgj������������&)4���������耜汴苷殃阃赏耐楞笺湍脱费慵臣臣臣ВЙЙЙ毇毇 h覯�6�h3�h�;�hh
:h覯�h1`h纜� h贏~6�h�,ch瀒� h�h誦u]� h纜�]�h)Dh誦u6�h)Dh纜�6�h�>�h纜�]�h�;�h誦uh誦u6乚�h1`h3�h縵Bh纜�h覯�hKK>h€�h��h��hh
:6��� � �$�$�$�$%%,%-%r's'�)�)E+F+M,N,f,g,..�2�2���������������������������$a$gd糢�$a$gd�FYptux{~�������*+4@_bd}�������Y^��[]� � � � � � !!!@!A!F!Q!黹礤磙碲碇阎硗硗睃碲砥戮郝韭韭侗订盯侗稙稙殩灃彇�h�h?�h?�h?�hd5Mh纜�h�7�h糢�h�h糢�H*
h糢�6�h糢�hX�h鈃�h硙�hcNh鈃�h}$E h (6�h (h鶿�h誦u6乚�h-Y,h�;�h誦uh1`h�
h�9�h�9�5Q!V!`!j!k!�!�!�!�!�!�!�!�!�!�!�!�!�!�!"@"]"d"n"s"y"z"~"�"�"#<#j#y#|#~#€#�#�#�#�#�#�#�#�#�#�#$$0$:$A$H$L$`$h$o$�$�$�$�$�$蝾赕赈挹赕曛暌赕贽晡晟隍谂僚搅揭焦焦殿鳖殿殿殿殿沟━镰痢�h護�h緇�h糢�h誦uh�Ah2t6hn8h��hM�h纜�h硙� hd5M6�h€�hX�hf>镑丑�;袄丑-驰,丑覯�丑猨*丑诲5惭丑狈<�h�h?:e h�6�=�$�$�$%%#%-%[%�%�%�%�%�%�%f&�&�&�&q's'�'�'�'�'�'�'�'((g(o(�(�(�(�(�(�(�(�(�()1);)�)�)�)�)�)�)�)�)�)�)�)*Q*Z*�*镫驸掴驸孚驸肘肘意吻饫饧飧饫粹粹诎Α獯庖庵鉂旨謾憴謾謾�h"�h"�H*h"�h�� h� <�]�h� <�h@�6乚�h� <�hXjsh眐=hO�h@�6乚�hB&�h@�h�"hh�oh��h猨*h€�h@� h@�6�h誦u h8P�\�h8P�h誦u\�h�-�9�*�*++E+F+G+J+N+Z+{+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+7,J,L,M,N,f,g,k,|,�,�,�,�,�,�,- - -- -0-4-`-h- . ...~.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�/�/�/�/G0Q0d0m0蝣铞赕彡蓐鲑再晷晏耆募纲匈藤匈写莅偬偬搭刺刺斧告徭抚福福笩斧h僁~hn$�hl� h~'�6�ht�hq�h~'�h~'�h~'�6�h�oh哊h-Y,h�%G h⺄A6�h⺄Ah�P h霶G6�h霶Gh@�h��h簆�h�� h��6�>m0�0�0�0�0�0�0 1$1(1=1]1�1�12 22^2_2�2�2�2�2�2�2c3�3�3�3 414�4�4�4+5A5B5C5F5�5�5�5�5�5�5�566!6.65676h6i6豇禳禳妩狲刑饶兰栏泪来袄蠢台ぬ湗敇彉嫎�hz)h頛: h沍$6�h7�h沍$h礪�h0%!h�;�h"z;h=d1hJ�h\th�
�h��heL�h�%Gh8P�h誦uh8P�h誦u6� h~'�6�h-Y,h� <�h�h~'�hn$�h霶Gh�Yhib%h~'�5�2�2�2C5F5/909B9C9e>f>7A8AFAGA肊腅蘀虴FF繧罥^K`K咾嘖FR���������������������������$a$gd�F$a$gd�Fi6�6�6�6�6�6�677B7E7J7K7c7m7o7�7�7�78�8
9 9,90919:9A9B9C9 ;7;;;G;L;o;r;<�-<�3<�8<�B<�N<��<��<��<��<��<��<��<��<��<��<�=瘘扈滂溧滠哲鸯挽鹑痨镁勾槦弸弴弸嚁嚁﹪�h驩�h� h�\�h�h�6乗� h�\� h�?�\�heL�heL�heL� h祍�6� h笶�6� h軽�6� h烜#6� h礪�6�h簆�h鑢�h�?�hIq\h�Uh59�h�-�h眐=h=d1h礪�h\/�h猙�h沍$5===e>f>�>�>�>�>�>�>�>�>�>?? ??S?�?�?�?�?�?C@E@F@G@X@f@嶡廆獲禓稝窣臔釦0A1A2A4A6A7A8AGA袮覣魽鯝3B6BCCCCwCxCDDuDvD鮀鯠朎桬腅麴扈溧茑茕劁熹祓凿凿孕倘娜倘孕孕孕苄孕煨叫复拇拇拇拇拇拇拇拇拇拇拇hX� h�;�6�h軽�h軽�h護�h瞜�hO�h�h�7�h�(�h�;�h��h�*�h鑢�h笶�h軽�heL�h�h驩�D腅蘀虴顴FFFF3F桭橣繤荈蠪誇谾GGG2G4G=G?G@GAGLGMGQGRGSGYG\G]GaGeGjG婫汫淕滸烥罣臛譍貵镚隚鞧鯣黹豳再兴锹礁匠疆┊ぢ陇ぢ殶殶殶暉晲嫄媶媮媩 h��\� h禵�\� h鐰�\� hX;k\� h護�\� h/i\� ht\� h�)�\� h烲�\� h�(�\� h�$\� h��\� ha[�\� h餻�\� h��\�hjd� hjd�6�h8P� h�/�6�h8P�h8P�6�h8P�hk3b6�h1^�#h8P�h謏�5丆JOJQJ^JaJ0鯣,H}H匟$IbImI縄繧罥豂郔酙JJJ%J'J(J疛稪肑諮躂KKK.K\K]K^K_K`KnK匥咾嘖燢筀轐逰酜IMJMSM]M^MeMhM瘐腽腈脞挹廒肘意腿腿兔途玩腈雇椽＊矗礊礊檿崟墔亝h;!>hmV�h禵�h{5�h;y7H*
h;y7 h驩�\� h�\�h聇F6乗�h�07h聇F6乗� h聇F\� h8}�\� hZ�\� h畕�\� h葃�\� h焒�\�h/ihIq\h畕�hZ�h焒� h/i\� h轑�\� h��\� h鐰�\� hX;k\�2hMvM~M圡婱孧怣癕碝袽)N-NgN訬軳颪鯪 OOO$O2O:OrO塐嶰桹狾玂癘礝諳譕{P€P丳侾桺齈OQRQYQfQtQ扱擰琎璔蒕蔘霶 R7RERFRGR祓琰氵阕阌泓鲜爬呕琅阑爬阕蹲阌悴ぉ煠煩煩煒�h_|�h聇F h釽�\� h_|�\� h聇F\�h_|�h5H h;y7H* h蕔�\� h5H\� h;!>\� hmV�\�h4kh�8gh纗Oh;y7H*h簆�h;y7 h�?�\�h驩�h�?�h癴�h禵�h;!>;FRGR{R|RfWgWv`x`ee苅莍鷌鹖LsNsvv雡靪雤靭鰚鱺{�~�瞾硜矃����������������������������$a$gd�FGRKRRRhRkRtR{R癛盧禦稲{S鞸頢(T*T@TBT凾員圱淭濼猅癟睺諸郥zU~U€U哢圲腢芔頤鳸鶸VVVVVV V&V/V8V9VLVNVQVRV燰璙筕篤繴罺誚諺譜釼3W黩眚梓溧溧茇茕袖袖兴淝涿淇淝浠茕充夸夸讳ｄ娩夸卿ｄ娩h�>Ihf?H*
h簆�h聾�h5�hf?H*
h癩�h.X�h�8ghH� hf?H*
h��hf?H*
h�*�h4kh��hf? h)$V6� h釽�6� htq@6�h8P�h謏�6�@3W7WEWFWZW[WeWfWgWlW{W僕擶淲蔠蘔蚖蠾裌訵遅郬醀骔鳺X X)X+XPXqX鑈 Y YZZBZLZNZxZ奪擹朲衂襔訸T[V[\Z\瀄燶轡(]2]D]H]Z]^]`]d]n]衇^ ^瘘禳狲蔌蔌嬴昭气网坡绝坪绝簿气网餐莺荮荮海荮蒽hIq\h僁~h�
hf?h5�hf?H*
hk�h4[|h+�h�>Ihf?h� nhFha�hD�h!j�h俼Phf?B*ph�h�8gh瓸=hf?H*
hf?h聾�@ ^5^9^^€^砠蝆觀馸鮚`8`:`X`r`x`z`坄奰宍抈aaa a\a^a豠赼0b2blbnb宐産€c刢恈餭騝,d.d甦癲赿躣e.e`e渆╡鈋黣f&f'fofpfsftf抐沠�f6gUgeg€g僩骻鰃!h"h赕孚骊嬷嬷嬷骧孚骧嬉孚嫖嫖骧捂阪捂阪骧媸奇骆怄奇捂疽壕揖揖�hh竘�h篧qh=hZh8 4h4kh莦�hS?h+�h5�hf?H*
h4[|hf?h�
hf?h�
h!j�h� nh!j�G"h#h=h>h@hDhGh\h`hahchohphxh|h}hh媓宧峢廻杊﹉瞙糷ii+i/i0i2i3i4i舏苅莍鑙鵬鷌鹖jNj╦﹋眏瞛穓竕糺羓耲Jkuk搆瞜砶駅刲╨麴麴轲轲遽遽葆籴逭逖翎腿没萌窗ええòぐ鹧盃�h趍�hU�h蚙�hG9h7W�h釽�h!,]h釽�h��h��6� h��6� h釽�6�h篧qhFhS?h� nhhM�hf?h4[|hOK�hOK�hOK�ha�hh-u#=╨nn&nun宯弉爊琻硁磏衝鄋醤鷑⺪�nfp巔畃秔躳䅟qqq&q*q:q>q@qDqHqLqNqfqhqlqvqzq琿瞦膓蝢謖$r&r^rvr鋜顁魊ss,s0sBsNs緎It倀抰漷麴扈翳翳翡嘬茑嘣茑芡瓶透袋帱窗窗带船船墁艾ìㄜ翡桎h=hZh�?9hKUh��h骵Qh��hhM�h��h��h��h��h��h確mhN`ehhM�h確mh僈�h€�h�h釽�hOK�hkRh趍�hU�@漷瀟踭閠阾餿魌�t
u5u?uTuYuau猽玼瞮磚評鄒vvvvv_vrvvv{vv舦魐鱲鴙wwww,w5w7w8wsw眞衱鑧閣陊䎱xxxx*x?x@xAx\xmxnxyxzx}x妜皒秞衳鎥鰔y麴麴酎豇禅禅桎嘬噤茑潼溧剜朽剜悬嘬嘬噤倘甜塘教涮涮涓溧溧溧 h扞�6�h=-
h�5h僈�h聇Fh僈�h{[�h{[�H*
h纘�h腜h{[�h扞�h>S�h碠�h�3�hxr2h€�hN`eHy,y>yQy[y^y_yiynyoy剏媦峺巠歽磞竬緔莥葃藋鹹鼀zzzzzzz+z.z8z>z@zAz陑靭饅鹺{>{U|t|瞸磡葇貄迀閨饇騶}}9}`}﹠粆h~r~w~搤瀪竳箏舿豇瘌扈扈溧澍茗豇糗溧澍瘌桫柝柙柢绦刃匦绦睦祭祭睦咐蠢栏咐h榚zh}� h謖�6�h�h>S�h=-
h謖�h�hS;Uh媉�h�\h khG9h� Mh�3�hL�h纘�h簆�hN`eh-d|hZ*�h扞�B舿鄜qu|€"€:€?€P€Q€R€X€梹檧潃珋瑎眬秬縺纮讇貈賭軃�€� �"�$�%�w�z�{�}�~�眮瞾硜葋觼鋪鎭�&�)�G�J�O�b�d�m�剛唫憘聒眸殄辄辄辄辄彷蔹蛰拯獒厌獒烷陕竞淡愆愆ォ々々潻櫏櫓� h �\�h�+�h*f�h[h�h~; h媉�h轑�6� h媉�6�h桜�h€�h扞�h僈�hr'�h khMU�hG9h��h=-
h�'�hL�hh媉�h}�h謖�h謖�h�>9憘,�-�.�3�鄡銉鋬渼鄤鋭鎰皡磪鑵饏騾���Q�Y�}�絾蹎銌鋯陠雴顔饐���.�P�2�4�6�8�@�B�D�F�j�桎柢总沂坡韭憾憾捕捕露寒憾玻棊倅倅�h嶪CJH*aJhRY�h嶪CJH*aJh嶪CJH*
aJhRY�h嶪CJH*
aJhRY�h嶪CJ aJ h�<�h嶪h�)�h謏�h竘�h��h8P�h8P�h8P�6� h8P�6� h僆�6�h8P�hk3b6�h*f�hw&�h~; h砳>\� h*f�\� h[\�/矃磪��h�j�緤繆蕣藠銑鋳攷晭葟蓮缾翋皰睊��]�^�洉湑鄼��������������������������$a$gd�F$a$gd�F$a$gd�Fj�x�|��6�鷫��� �/�3�h�m�厞墛枈珚紛繆缞蓨蕣藠訆鈯銑鋳0�1�3�=�L�M�U�Y�_�k�r�s�厠崑磱釈鈰銒雼韹駤�&�1�豇麴祠梏漪辔嘉烦藩ΒΚ潽槗槗槗槗槗槑槑墲� h�&�6� h��6� h��6� h�$'6� h鶦�6� h])�6�h�@h�� h� �6�h搚�h�� h��6�#h8P�h8P�5丆JOJQJ^JaJ#h8P�h ,�5丆JOJQJ^JaJh�h蕕�hthD�hG9h謏�h糉Jh�)�31�6�K�M�t�x�妼帉棇秾緦蕦 ��<�>�a�j�m�o�r�s�y�z�厤憤拲鐛韻�(�3�9�:�Z�[�搸攷晭泿�+�?�檹菑葟蓮蠌袕訌輳鎻髲�蝽黜麒麒黜沩蜣俎皂蛸蛳逝岳辉驶郴允允疅畾畷悷嫙 h��6� hG"�6� h�.�6� h)n6� hJ$6� hT�6� h�7�6� hl;6�h�!h�!6� h�!6� h6� h}�6� h^Q6� hOY6� h蹳�6� h��6� h$6� h��6� h�$'6� h��6� h])�6� h�&�6�h�&�6��Y�_�緪繍缾翋茞葠蓯迱類鰫$�E�爲⿷瘧睉饝麘�� �瘨皰睊祾窉鲯��'�I�[�k�寭洆窊罁��� ���迶瘐桡拶再闾翘陆愿愿霸珳棐菞崚垝棈梼�棐梲 h��6�h|S� hr66� hn b6� hqJ�6� hKq
6� h|S�6� h+j6� h燳d6� h(?6� h蕕�6�h)nh)n6� h_�6� h7I"6� h�$'6� h�!6�h_�h_�6� h)n6� hl;6� h繨6� h�.�6�hg|�hg|�6� h��6� hG"�6� h��6�0迶駭X�Z�\�]�^�n�啎檿洉湑〞粫紩輹龝 ��D�n�o�q�垨姈憱敄〇矕艝茤菛�� �!�$�(�B�F�O�W�\�a�k�崡挆洍痣驷葜抑团两凉恋帘怠潤潟帣瓆h"~�h6lg h+ 6�h瞡�h��hvEAh��hvEAhJ^h��h+ hr'�h�eh� h+jh�3�hr6h��h';�h��6� h ,�>*
h��h#h#h';� h環6� h揮�6� h竳a6� h��6� h�3�6� hqJ�6�0緱����h�i�q�r�x�仒崢潣獦瑯皹睒謽輼飿䴓��)�1�;�J�K�\�`�s��矙迿邫鄼釞%�/�€�帤潥� �<�Q�[�挍摏敍暃窙錄霙
�瘌噤禅桁柝澍刑星刑娩炕痘洳灇獤挭挭鬲h�#€hV~�h@e�hr6hh@e�6�h��h��hj� h+ 6�h+ h�h�.a h6lg6�h��hvEAh}�hg yhDhhk6Ph�#+h<3Xh_�h�Vh�eh"~�h8鄼釞� ���=�>�>�?�寻崵侉讪愍瞠爱碑捶捣搁�厂�/�2�箩�办�翱�����������������������������驳诲�贵$补$驳诲�贵
��狈�摆�颈�耻��枩櫆/�0�憺鸀鼮䴙��
���<�>�C�L�]�^�v�殶隉霟鵁!�@�T�U�Y�b�r�u�y�z��啝敔枲櫊煚窢笭範>�@�D�a�r�s�t�篪秫赍赅贶卦腥良芳芳芳布Σ凡ΣΣΣ疾〔崱� h贑�\� h�7\� h"�\� h:G-\� hY�\� hn b\�h#v?6乗� h#v?\� h�"�\� h鮋�\�h鮋�6乗�h��h�07\�hc�h"~�hj�hx]� h@e�\� hV~�\� h��\�h�#€ h��6�h��h��7t�z�|�垺憽洝湣ァ谩恰獭搿��F�b�|�挞猗姊稷颌 �叮福"�.�0�3�5�=�?�H�j�尋崵潳�.�D�G�s�€�N�O�睛忙姚驭Ё瘐瘐腽骛腽腈腽腽狃荃哲熊踯嗣蹙喘川棞挆挆湇垗儘 h媐q\� h��\� h%(�\� h��\� h禛�\� hR�\�h禛�6乗� ht�\�hg#6乗�hR�hR�6乗� h~Jp\�h"�h"�\� hTf�\� h\�\�h"�6乗� h"�\� hp=/\� h q�\� h�=;\� h��\� hY�\� h鮋�\�2Ё阀铵鳔扫炸亘侉讪郇猕悒戗瞑毆洩篇仟元鬲飒愍瞠 � ��'�8�;�L�O�o�p�莲芦�?�W�Z�p�s�儸$�c�d�檄循墉榄瓠���?�A�瘐膈驷谛尚阪逆逆逆糠鷾曻曻慂♂♂ h矱�\� h�X�\�t�z�埗暥┒抖欢径慷�*�-�E�F�L�e�l�z�伔柗撤捣7�>�C�Q�V�\�q�}�S��两�#�凭蔷罹瘊膪斛斛瘊纡彳狷译寅歪歪歪腿宛纫鸵兔竟补补精拒Α� h㏕�\� h� �\� h�5\� h裷�\�him76乗�hj�6乗� hj�\� him7\� h\� h^\� hv:\� h�<\� h��\� hZY�\� hBQ\� h駽\� h��\� h5N\� h\\�\� hBgS\�;罹-�/�1�2�i�j�k�骺�
�枥衾p�Ａ枇榱@�E�K�L�N�P�S�β章芈迓 �*�D�E�K�喢嚸埫娒嬅斆暶櫭痣戕谥椅手谄诼谥谵诰诤箔ǎ湪棌垙儚億u|n�h
M6乗�h _�6乗�hP�6乗� hP�\�hP�5乗�hP�hP�\� h�`�\�h��6乗� h��\� h _�\� h駽\�h駽h駽\�h��h6lghP^�h㏕�h�*hFKh誡|hRh鮋� h鮋�6�ht�h鮋�6� h\� hZY�\� h�5\� h<6<�\�*O�P�)�*����D�E�嬈屍磺记f�g�⒀Ｑ+�,�嘹嶷屳嵼庉熭犦����������������������������$a$gd�Fgd�F櫭澝撩拿让苊朊��2�F�U�Z�b�i�⒛茨吣钅���C�D�E�嬇懪撆ヅ芭门膛团倥芘嗯昱����0�1�脘荃招似跛趿跛沟彼牂晳崙墤崙厑厎墵墆憤憏uhJ^h;{Jh�98h橧 hXp@h��h+7eh�.�h媤�h鵑�h�� h��6�h
MhP�6�hBgSh�`�h
Mh
Mh
M\� h
M\� hu~�\� h�`�\� h _�\�hP�6乗�hP�hP�\�hP�5乗�hP�hP�6乗� hP�\� h� �\�-1�n�o�r�y�z�€�偲壠屍嵠浧炂锲�1�2�8�B�N�Q�d�勄吳炃熐犌非呵磺记星浊耷咔榍昵����#�8�;�C�f�j�嵢柸樔と豇痣豇玮葩肘养蜕纳外饪夂澈獐ν悢�hl[hl[h鐱shl[hXy�h{N�hg&hg& hp[86�h{N�hfj[h檟6乗� h檟\� h鶹�\� h鶹�6�h鶹�hp[8 h�.�\�h�#�6乗� h�#�\� hp[8\�h�� hXp@6�hXp@h檟h;{JhK|�5とトθ度溉救厝e�f�g�l�p�{�|�嬌捝荷派仙锷鹕���"�,�5�9�C�I�N�W�X�d�k�~�嵤犑适惺沂焓笫X�喫嵥乃铌驸掴掴谟谙谒锨诿诿厦炕旷悯泌梅诿醭醑醑猫茫悯湗攼寪h0Q�h 1�h=\h黦�h�
�h�
� h�
�6�h㏕�h�
�hwn�h籠Fhl[h�eh匔Vh�
�h
bhlnh�6�hX-�hg�h�&�hg�hg&h㏕�h矱Ohl[hl[h�98h矱Ohl[6乃潘撬伤偎�/�@�[�a�k�{�}�疤捞颂烫樛溚⑼
�?�D�M�\�]�段盐治阄砦裎魑��(�,�6�L�N�V�a�h�{�}�喯囅傧�>�贬�产�触�埿バ残缎市肠�颈�⊙麴綮梏潇羿茇茉苄绦刃眯孕吭环曰吩辉环环环环怀糠糠⒃丑�<� h<�6�h<�h�h蠮�h��h�5Qh玠� hyX6�hXp@hg�hyXh秪vh� �h&05h��h鶹�h3B�h��h;{Jh 1�h!-�h� |@⊙⒀Ｑぱ�镆鲆撚斢涤扔沼抻�!�4�H�I�Q�T�k�l�(�*�+�,�徴愓抡握渍谡稣 ����8�=�D�E�F�O�U�麴麴祓屦彷僬姓陶饶滥寄几继即按暊憼崍崉崿�h� h>"H6�h>"Hhwn�hHxh>"Hh�(;hHxh�h鐱sh4gh=\h/a�h癋�hKh籠FhLsGh鎒LhH=� h蟤�6�h蟤�h��h��h#6h� |h�5Qhg�h�5Qh玠�h秪vh僤03U�_�喼堉氈浿敝局又橹裰髦��/�C�Y�[�`�f�k�o�p�u�壸涀∽匙棺甲阶抛谱幼圩钭�O�Ｘ藏敦贺仑�@�l�呝嗁炠犢馁刨儋曩筚;�@��堏曏挹扈痂溧滠栲荑茇茑澡需锑仍囔嘣湓溶能儡几几写讣案绩激既hLsGhw�h昷�h_3�h��h�5Qh�h�:Ih� �h滽Ah�'yhdh鎒Lh��h/a�h�;�h€h>"Hh4ghg�hwn�hBh�>@挹呲缵筅G�z�嬠樭欅哇综谯圹 �� ���T�q�y�盾�D�_�d�嬢屳嵼庉炤熭.�<�@�J�K�L�M�`��欈熮まマмㄞ┺缔掇赁��豇瘌扈扈熹爨燔熵屿柘杷锨粝兰副舂舂舡舂啷潠�h� h� 5�h擳�h�
h軸h�
hn �h� �hJg4hdhdhk3bh腗h=\h/a�h`P�h4+8h滽A h鈟�6�h鈟�h�.ah2 �hHxh�:IhW!�h� �hdhKh�5犦L�M�_�`�︕мㄞ┺缔掇3�4�� �椸樴5�6�提�������������������劌�d�

]劌�gd昷�劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d昷� $d�

a$gd昷�$a$gd�
$a$$a$gd�F��&�(�2�3�4�O�哆� �'�(�/�1�s�娻屶栢椸樴绵��(�*�4�5�6�B�愥坚酷酸提灬鲠$�<�[�佲傗勨忊愨光砚� �耥獒檐组铀瓶朴浩涌癫搏洍挆崚梿矀珆搏＋� h昷�5�h擳�h@h@ h@6� h@5�h@h@h�
5�hcvh�
6�hcvh�
hcvh�
5� h){�6�h){�h){� h){�5�h){�h){�5�h){� h瀒�5� h瀒�6�h瀒�h瀒�5�h瀒�h�
h� h� 5� h� 6�1提歪忊愨>�?���蹁鲣扮v�w������������������劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d昷� �0齰劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d昷� �
0�劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d昷� �0�劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d昷� �#�/�0�3�?�^�g�h�с点恒勉香玢縻� ���:�D�愪樹劁滗邃桎鲣%�X�f�棋戾铄疱7�>�奇戽礞镦�掔熺㈢扮骁:�妁垸聩样轾聩聩轾腿两菇唇冉连檻�h@h@h@5�h�
hcvh�936�hcvh�93hcvh�935� ha6�h' �hahaha ha5�h�93hcvh�
5乗�hcvh�
6乚�h擳�hcvh�
5�hcvh�
6�hcvh�
7:�f�i�u�v�w�よ�'�*�4�5�6�G�耖箝���(�)�/�=�O�e�f�g�p�q��冴龟殃躁汴骊 ���铉嘭焉匮帕沽疮哩沿绚焉焉沿褲晭�噖pwhphcvheu5�hcvheuhcvheu6�hcvh�`�6�hcvh�`�hcvhe%�hcvhe%�5�hcvh�93h擳�hQ�hQ� hQ�5� hQ�6�h@#ahQ�5�hQ�h�
hcvh�
6�hcvh�
hcvh�
5�hcvh@h@h@h@h@h@5� h@6�(w�5�6���p�q�����╈D�s�t�2�3�������������������劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d昷�劌�勁d�

]劌�^勁gd昷�劌�d�

]劌�gd昷� �
0�劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d昷� �0劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d昷����M�觌������)�+�0�2�p�楈欖レъ╈漓蚂旗��s�t�來夗禹轫�"�瘌桡搌紫窍拦勃⒉骨洆媱}v}搉g筥筥hcvheu6�hcvh~F�hcvh~F�5�hcvh翽�hcvh?U�hcvh瞜�hcvh?U�5�hcvh瞜�5�hcvh�
hcvh�B5�hcvh�B6�hcvh�Bhcvheuhcvhe%�hcvh�935�hcvhe%�5�hQ�hQ� hQ�5� hQ�6�hcvhQ�6�hQ�hQ�5�hQ�he%�""�%�/�2�3�@�㈩筋绢李填兕�%�*�,�傦冿愶氾涳わワ里秋巷语罪仫亠��� ��黟殁谟擞谟谟擞怯凯湈湈渱渏XjXjXjX#h圡�h圡�6丆JOJQJ^JaJ#h圡�h�
6丆JOJQJ^JaJ#hcvh�
6丆JOJQJ^JaJh圡�CJOJQJ^JaJ hcvh�
CJOJQJ^JaJ#hcvh�
5丆JOJQJ^JaJ*
hcvh�
h6Q5hcvh�
6�hcvh�
hcvh�
5�hcvh��hcvh~F�hcvheuhcvheu5�!3�祟填傦冿~��F�G�� �膀彬欞��������������� �0�劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d昷�劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d昷� �
0�劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d昷�劌�d�

]劌�gd昷�$劌�d�

]劌�a$gd昷� �0劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d昷��$�%�(�*�2�3�6�7�C�}�~��烉娥酿��"�9�:�<�G�e�勸嬹燅雕神恬 �&�J�b�q�栻Ⅱｒヲ彬蛤�疴屑协煄熲巼噖噖噖��噖噖噑�噖o噖��j h昷�5�h�Fh6Q5hcvh�
6�hcvh�
5�hcvh�
 hcvh�
CJOJQJ^JaJh圡�CJOJQJ^JaJh圡�6丆JOJQJ^JaJ&h圡�h�
6丆JH*
OJQJ^JaJ#h圡�h�
6丆JOJQJ^JaJhp9CJOJQJ^JaJhp96丆JOJQJ^JaJ)���︙刁扼��j�w�圁嶔橍欞汈燈聂�1�4�A�D�N�O�P�V�汋漉� ����+�,�\�i�傱岞��P�]�圌戼.��v
剉
唙
赍赍蝙搦搦座酉逝良良帕细芭良帕━晲晲暋晲晲暐帟� h��CJH*
U
h��6�h��h��h��5�h6Q5h軸hcvh��h�h�5�h){� h�6�h� h�5� h_�5�h_�h�
hcvh^a�hcvh%'# h昷�5�hcvh�
5�hcvh�
hcvh�5s5欞汈O�P��,�-���x
皜
瞼
f�
h�
鑼
陮
l�
n�
������������������$a$gd鷟�gd1zMgd6Q5gd�� �0�劌�勑�0齗劌�^勑`�0齡d){� �0�劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d-� �0�劌�勑�0�d�

]劌�^勑`�0齡d昷�) minimum at 25�C show that individuals in this size class (d"0.4mm2) occur at all 3 temperatures; c) mean, d) maximum body area at 20�C; f) mean, g) maximum body area at 25�C. Sample sizes for 15, 20 and 25�C: 160, 138, 105 respectively. Scale box for all parasite specimens 0.25mm2. Fig. 3. Histograms showing frequencies of total body lengths of P. xenopodis developing in experimental infections of X. laevis for 105 days p.i. at 15�C (blue bars), 20�C (yellow) and 25�C (red). Mean length differed significantly between temperature treatments (see text). Images of worms are photomicrographs of formalin-fixed, unstained individuals selected to show representative sizes and positioned above the centre of their respective length classes: worms with a) minimum, b) mean, c) maximum total body length at 15�C (n=160); d) mean, e) maximum amongst a subset of the population at 20�C with stunted development (see text) (n=20); f) minimum, g) mean, h) maximum amongst the majority of the population at 20�C with normal development (n=114); i) minimum, j) mean, k) maximum at 25�C (n=103). Note pale intestinal contents in worms at 15�C compared with brown/ black guts of all those at 20 and 25�C; the 2 largest worms at 20 (g, h) and 25�C (j,k) are sexually mature (single yellow egg visible in forebody), others immature. Scale bar for all specimens 50�m. Fig. 4. Histograms showing frequencies of total hamulus lengths in P. xenopodis developing in experimental infections of X. laevis for 105 days p.i. at 15�C (blue bars), 20�C (yellow) and 25�C (red). The distribution at 20�C is bimodal with a subset of worms having hamuli 29-85�m long and others 120-180�m long. Mean hamulus length differed significantly between temperature treatments (see text). Images of hamuli are taken from photomicrographs of formalin-fixed, unstained individuals selected to show representative sizes and positioned above their respective length classes. Hamuli illustrating a) minimum, b) mean, c) maximum at 15�C (n=159); d) minimum, e) mean, f) maximum amongst a subset of the population at 20�C with stunted development (n=20), and g) minimum, h) mean, i) maximum with normal development at 20�C (n=118); j) minimum, k) mean, l) maximum at 25�C (n=103). Hamuli of stunted worms at 20�C are distinguished by little growth proximal to the point and lack division of roots compared with all others that have bifid shafts and separate dorsal and ventral roots. Scale bar 100�m. Fig. 5. Variation in body size of P. xenopodis according to host sex. Parasite size (expressed as area) after development of experimental infections for 105 days p.i. in male (light bars) and female (dark bars) X. laevis at 15, 20 and 25�C. Bars show means �S.E. of raw data. Between-sex differences at each temperature are significant (see text); worm/host sample sizes: 72/8B&, 87/10@& at 15�C, 83/13B&, 51/9@& at 20�C, 76/16B&, 27/4@& at 25�C. Fig. 6. Photomicrographs of P. xenopodis in experimental infections of X. laevis showing longitudinal intestinal branches leading into transverse caeca lined by gastrodermal cells involved in intracellular digestion of host blood. Worms are unstained preparations in which body parenchyma appears light blue. In (A), following development at 15�C, the gut is pale with little accumulation in the lumen or gastrodermis of breakdown products of blood digestion. In (B), stunted worm developing at 20�C shows correlates of active digestion including intracellular accumulation of haematin; despite retarded growth, its gut activity resembles that of worms developing normally at 20�C (C) and at 25�C. Images show transverse width in the same midbody region of the 3 worms at the same magnification (scale bar 0.1mm); (A) and (C) are the worms with average body size for their groups (15 and 20�C) relative to the body width of the small stunted worm in (B).     PAGE  PAGE 1 唙
膙
苬
講
豽
靪
6x
8x
>x
纗
趚
.y
By
瞼
:�
T�
▉
紒
趥
迋
�
�
�
�
畨
葔
�
&�
$�
>�
z�
帊
紟
�
.�
V�
X�
Z�
鈵
鋹
簯
缿
D�
L�
d�
h�
簰
謷
迴
P�
顡
饟
�
f�
h�
j�
l�
n�
p�
t�
v�
z�
|�
€�
倲
啍
瘘扃扃禳恻恻禳禳禳恻恻恻恻挹拗撄尹尹吸挹亿肄沂抟廾即按按按�hz�jhz�U
h�8�h鷟�h�h�7ph�3�h��hWe�huQAhPA.h1zM h��6� h6Q56�h6Q5h軸h軸H*
h軸h��An�
r�
t�
x�
z�
~�
€�
剶
啍
様
殧
湐
矓
磾
稊
笖
簲
����������������$a$gd鷟�
匋��
&`#$
啍
垟
敂
枖
様
湐
灁
獢
瑪
當
皵
矓
稊
笖
簲
躏躏膈秕圊镫苷h�8�h鷟�hz�h=�0JmHnHu
h' � h' �0Jjh' �0JU
0&P 1恏
皡. 奥A!�"�#悹$�8%�靶靶愋^

2���� 0@P`p€�����2(�
�
0@P`p€����� 0@P`p€����� 0@P`p€����� 0@P`p€����� 0@P`p€����� 0@P`p€�8
X
�
V~_H
mH nH sH tH @`�@NormalCJ_H
aJmH sH tH :

: Heading 1
$
@&6乚丗
F Heading 2$$
@&
a$5丆JaJV@
V ,� Heading 3$
ゐ�<�@&5丆JOJQJ\乛JaJDA`��D
Default Paragraph FontVi��VTable Normal :V�4�
4�
la�(k ��(No List8B@
�8 Body Text 5�>*
CJ8P@

8Body Text 26乚�4@

4Header  ���!
.)@�!
.Page Number8Q@
2
8Body Text 3$a$�T@
B
��>� Block Text7$凨�勑�0��(*$
5$7$8$9DH$]凨齘勑`�0齛$CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH ZY
R
Z[Document Map-D
M� �€CJOJQJ^JaJB'�a
BY\�Comment ReferenceCJaJ<�
r
<�Y\�Comment TextCJaJF���
FY\�Comment Text CharmH sH tH @jq
r
@Y\�Comment Subject5乗丗��
�
FY\�Comment Subject Char5
\
H�
�
HY\�Balloon TextCJOJQJ^JaJZ���
ZY\�Balloon Text Char CJOJQJ^JaJmH sH tH PK!倞��[Content_Types].xml瑧薺�0E鲄䞍卸豶�(ヘ微Iw},�浔-j弰4 蛇w旄P�-t#b螜{U畯銧擉T閁^h卍}悒)蛔*1P�' 揯鬃W孱0)櫐T闉9<搇�#ぼ$yi}佸;纞@囨�(顚跄H滖男u�*D谞z內/0娗盃瘥�$€�X3aZ⒁锣,癉0j~�3叨蝏沩~i>�赝3縗`�?�/�[�G殁\�!�-跼k.搒粣..椃碼婵�?
��PK!ブх�6
_rels/.rels剰蟡�0囷吔冄}Q颐%v/C/�(h"�脎O� �劋秣�=孂釘� 毆免C?薶醰=�偵叅�%[xp啠{鄣_糚眩<�1�0�堎O糝瓸d焉襃E�4b$q_�槥�6L吁R�7`畯ㄉ�趁0虨O��,錏n7擫i鋌〃/鉙綈╡械根铸
��PK!ky���theme/theme/themeManager.xml蘉 � @醹愘7c�(Eb菜�C�A菭覠圩邈�7芜諞K Y,� 奺�.埛饇,�ㄚH�,l崆骈x纱�逫萻Q}#諓叚递 值+�!�,較�$j=婫W栌�)釫�+& 8�
��PK!柕�Ptheme/theme/theme1.xml靁Oo�6�豾 toc'vu娯睕-M膎�i墫豍襂}阢€
煤a�豰嘺[�廿�4�:l携癎R捙X^�6貖�>$�┇最�!)O赹齬虲$駓@摪磔�/瓂H*�橊劥�)戅祶鬟粖譛Db俙}"譹蹕擩讞枻肵^�)I`n蘀�紛p)�杵li筕[]�1M<斷绒彥O蠵擊6r�=瘔抸纆b營g吜u崘S賓b嘱€O缽嗕掘肦罝郢櫉反qu 痝嫎Z岸串o~俸lAp發x妏T0�+[}`j纂鹾絲A�帮儲V�2虵蒳朄鰍瀡分�5\|夻蕼汰Nвle瞂�ds趈cs倭惻7琊嵨f坊赅 肉W琊�+唻7爤唁`�陲g�葮稠J�雷j|唫h(�驞-姷咩� dX�﹊J曝�(钼x$(��:隶;渌�!�I_蠺到S1ｗ犍鳢�?E��?勉?ZB为m渼錟/魁煜��?瀪篁�誼Y�'奎鼀5襣&螊/燑鲮蓩�>籊餗丟e鴲艱�眢3Vq%'#q��域娡$�8翚K秊�敉)f檞9:牡�
澹 x}r�x墘�渨⒇
顁�:\TZaG�*檡8I耲鎎R祈c|X呕�强絀 u3KG駈D1�NIB襰鼆� 眍R曦u楘侹>V�.EL+M2�#'歠嫸i~橵�l硔u8z�篐� �*�鏄�:�(W�鈽� ~J攘T鴈\O*餿HG絸HY垫�}KN吡P�*菥甩眿�T鸭�9/#辐A7聁Z��$*c?��韖U咤n嗚w�N蝴%幓O�穒鑸4=3跅P獫 愉锸1弇\\9�肭戸�釳負�2a鸇鵠�;Yt籠繇[x掛簌嶇]蓕Wr�|蒥斚g-闯� eW� �)6-r及CS�j嗜 i歞 鸇袊A轿�IqbJ#x剃簝6k愢�#A凷h半�&蕦t(Q�%焯p%m崌&]賑aSl=怷眚�狳\P�1籑h�9�M喱蘓甦DA碜aV譈潤[輬fJ澝璓|8�謩A�V^咉筬 蘃犿n鬓�-��"醼d>襷消╪湐菉� €丞饝>錆b�窎&�芪猡2黄v棍弈Ky霞ん鯠:菠湝,AGm\nz惹i�脵��.u蠂YC�6霴Mf撳3o秗跑$5叺麥翹H匱[XF64蘐,褱薓0隕)`#�5Y僠�;寒%�1馯儋�m;麣昍>QD⑧嵷D靋p�U�'��&LE�/p彟璵︓鉁%]枢�8fi劤r玈4蟙7y\萡轏鈦n暡逦瘖I�R��3U魚7+侖€赘#澂m�q˙iD€屏��笅卛*窵6�9�m蝁&困鰅�咠HE倫=(K&鶱!V霄.K抏凩D暷暕{D �釜鱲E軎歞e类N茻麨e�(訫N9邷R旖6吻&3(逯a有漩/DU韟�<遻藠鑹Y浾瘸槙秱V桍�)�9穁[辨4^n媛��5喠�!J峋�?�Q�3鹐Bo–��羾M�Ⅹ抦<�.恦p崜戳Y觙瓝禯綴_p�=al-資鼄Nc蜋宋膳�4vfa侵vl々脸'S喥鵄�8苵�*u猓{噼-高�0%M0�7%仭��<€浞鸵嵖��PK! 褠煻
'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.rels剰M �0匃倃oo雍�&輬协�勪5 6?$Q祉 �,.嘺緳i粭澤c2�1h�:闀q毩m胳嶡RN壻;d癭値o7�g慘(M&$R(.1榬'J摐袏T鶂�8V�"＆A然蠬鱱}狇�
|�$絙{�朠�除8塯/]As賲(⑵锑#洩L蔥汉倪��PK
-!倞��[Content_Types].xmlPK
-!ブх�6
+
_rels/.relsPK
-!ky���theme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK
-!柕�P�theme/theme/theme1.xmlPK
-! 褠煻
'� theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK]
� D��
���� $$$$$'� �YQ!�$�*m0i6=腅鯣hMGR3W ^"h╨漷y舿憘j�1��迶
�t�ЁA�$�罹櫭1�と乃⊙U�挹�� �:��"���唙
啍
簲
~€������������������������������������������������� �2FR矃鄼O�犦提w�3�欞n�
簲
������������� '!�!�晙�8�


@����€€€�饞�

�0�(
� �養 �
S��
�
�
 ?

�
��H�F

�4U�F

�,S�F

渆U�F

\砊�F

剬!�F

dlS�F

$lS�F

��F

<��F

$��F

l�!�F

��F

�S�F

旍�F

�=�F

詏U�F

bU�F

�S�F

<躎�F

炱�F

�F

L�F

鋖U�F

$mU�F

那�F

��F

�9�F

<:�F

<��F

|��F

瑅U�F

靨U�F

�F

<��F

|��F

DnS�F

刵S�F

膎S�F

t{W�F

磠W�F

魗W�F

S�F

<銼�F

|銼�F

L1V�F

�1V�F

�1V�F

LOT�F

孫T�F

蘋T�F

?T�F

\?T�F

PT�F

LPT�F

孭T�F

tMV�F

碝V�F

鬗V�F

4NV�F

tNV�F

碞V�F

煸�F

,��F

l��F

�F

煺�F

,��F

剓�F

膡�F

|�F

D|�F

剕�
%
.
.
6
?
u
�
�
�����<mtt�##�����>�����!�!�!(6(6碍碍v�j�j���嬖嬖钤� �2�2�
�
�.�.�L�熧︐纲纲x�x�n�n�&�&�5�E�







 





 !
"
#$%&'()
*+,-./0
1234
5
6789:;<�
=
>
?@ABCDEFG
�!
,
5
=
A
A

�
�
�����  Hrxx�((�����C�����!�!�!/6/6淡淡x�p�p�堤堤���煸踉踉�*�8�8� � �4�4�R�ベ百举举|�|�r�r�-�-�=�E�


   !"#$%&'()*+,-./01
23456789:;<�=>?@ABCDEFGBB*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€country-region€9H*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€place€8D*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€City€>C*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags €PostalCode€=F*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags €PlaceName€=G*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags €PlaceType€
0�HGFHDCBGFHBBHHBHBBBHBHHBBHBHHBBBHHBHBHDBHHDHDHDHHDHBFGHDDHDHHFGHDDHDHDHDEOP^_h��������������    # ( - 6 W ^ � � � � � � j s #,��6 @ � � � � ^f�����������fn$$`'h'�/�/ 2222;2F2�2�2�2�233s3y3�3�3�34+434A4M4�4�4b5k5�5�5�7�7�7�7�8�8�8�8�8�8999v@y@RAYA淎烝BBQB[B覤貰鰾鼴CCZCdC滷rGxGH H_HdHdHeHkHlHtHpKrK綨繬釴銷OOPP轖郠RRTR赗躌篠糞T T/T1T~T匱甎蟇諻颴鸛嘮嶼>[E[P\W\奬慭n]t]朸漗W_]_U`\`aa9b@bicnc攃渃'd/dee'e/e6eBe踡鉳沶To\o誵譹箂聅NwOwRzUz*}3}��
��;�B�?�F�簤綁&�)�j�r�硦簥 � �蛯詫賹鄬��+�1�鲹����(�4�;�/�5�E�L�褳贋� �'�3���_�b�Y�a�b�m�n�y�敨槴櫕＋柛煾a�d�t�~�嵟柵哑萜炱衿�t�€�ㄇ睬仪厍5�A�壬由錾��
��-�9�嬍櫴浭な凼缡u�{�}�偹Ｋ凰�$�/�9�>�G�愄溙姨滋 �)�+�9�樛ね赐纪峦送淹淄嗤柰樜の滴嘉俏挝J�V�h�l�t�z�傁埾2�8�>�F�O�W�钚j�v�炑ㄑ费窖q�|�}�堃屢愐懸浺敢囊乙滓菀逡胍蛞
�加扔子萦煊粲B�N�C�R�{�囌氄犝⒄罢抡镏踔�鹱}�嗀庁椮欂ж蓉拓县重遑褙��呝娰�(�/�=�N�Z�傏壼溭Ｚ呟屰捽欅R�W�周丬滠檐燔F�K�溳┹草据妮溯休剌佥圯Q�T��9�?�[�b�V�Y�曚樹��晴淑�q�x�诣砧M�S�傞夐揲溟嬯戧U�V�浑岭?�B�|�咁镱纛 �麸�○D�K�� �!�#�$�&�'�)�*�2�5�?�B�E���n�
� � �����p  (��€�����&2��!,!�!�!"#"#�#�#�#O%^%�'�'�)�)6*7*�+�+�+�+�,�,I.K.F/N/�/�/11�2�2�34Y4f4 556/6E6�78)8u8�8�9�9�:�:2;>;�;�;h>r>??�?@鶣A8A9A/CBC怑扙EINI塈業凧孞pKrK鳮鶮組綨繬PPVPWP蚉鉖RRTR赗躌�RS篠糞/T1TXTdT窾EWbWcWYX\X閇齕_^_aa鴆dAgBg歫璲攌杒耹膌苐檔乸坧纐羜恟憆ss騰 w苭輜謝豿i{r{||T~`~s~u~褋迊8�;�
� �h�t�Q�]�i�z�鑸飯-�/�E�R�����拹皭菒艗賿��櫃€�鄽铓龤W�Y��s�霝秊槦 ��嫛敗k�~�S�d�櫏ゥ摟毀敤煥惝洚史胤壓：黾��<�J�j�偫{�|�'�(�%�2�炱�伹兦媲烨P�側勅等�F�j�s�吷H�o�魇�H�[�铀H�S�逄樛ㄍ赐鐾h�ο��/�c�e�叫 �b�w�y�叛妊扪嫜A�溡乙 �r�犛橛粲a�€�苍辉驹鲈�浿恐R�€�茏庾�5�7�^���%�'�S�T�炠临尜栀M�i�纶内R�T�]�`�港痕<�?�A�R�冘呠贶[�拜遢燧��相粥� ��.�如淑@�G�彘铋垭祀涭㈧れ犰\�c�� �!�#�$�&�'�)�*�B�E�333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333Y
k
�
�
���8�8dHdHG�H�溙溙d�e�p�黑g�m�n�臂梯梯��� �!�!�#�$�&�'�)�*�B�E����8�8dHdH妮溯E��諳&Y�
�琻攅*O�
a@
xh
刪
剺⺗刪
`剺�.l@
xh
刪
剺⺗刪
`剺�.�諳�琻������������lzu=
'k2S
xW f
� � "�#鸻Dh=-
I
砨
鮞
渄
Kq
��
M郩
v檟�
�R���嶪*k瞦6)�.K3S8/r�u/B4g����篰鵴B 蚢 B �
� � + �2 ��z�J^1`}m�,駽NIP[LeMfl A+ ~; 橧 UM  醁+j鏽搘�*繨齃P�f(s�['�>缚颁
蹿环测*�7蒏蝑蹿叠辞尝&腜)苍%
词�
�%镑:�:蚕叠�!�9迟��!骋9碍哊蚐����<)C軸歮<#6/8p9€W癤a��
�4pZb�-�>錖繳ya褹玒^�腗頠kR k� � 0%!艶!(L!@O!\!S "7I"瞫"磗"#�#�##%'#�?#烜#歚#g#-u#$�$$�$J$沍$tT%ib%脇%d&�&�&g&&賢&|&'�$'縉'靣' (!&(~+(T:(z)([)�*�*.A*猨*�#+)+:++鬘++竍+�),TI,賂,-Y,m,"-:G-妝-f.�...PA.赩.�/'./i0/+4/p=/V/竜/0軨0pW0僤0�10;1=d1睰2xr2�938 4a4薂4%S4積4Jg4蓒4�4�5j'56)5&05%=5螧5 D5(N56Q5鯷5骫56r6�06婰62t6�07iX71Y7im7;y7
8�84+838�98p[8n8唝8雤8�?9>d9Qh9墄9歾9h
:� :頛:聄:v:d;�(;O);�5;�=;l;"z;� <�<6<�豃<�cX<�籡<��==╙=鱡=眐=>�>;!>KK>#c>砳>~>(?f?nQ?S?PY?瀅?#v?�@@YH@=e@Xp@tq@�A�A�0A�3AvEA滽AuQA⺄A\B�B;;B匓B@QBfB縵BpCrC)D[lDcmDXE}$E�$EFF�F籠FtF聇FG�%GMCG扜G霶G SGLsG>"H5H�9HJH-RH^SH� I�I� I99I�:I�J�?J糉J鸚J蘝J;{Jz~Jh K�K�KFKJ;K凴K�L獴L鎒L�M�M� MP5Md5MGCM*FM砯M1zM�N5N騍NcN7lN�O-O霢O矱O{Pk6P坕P鷜P顉P�P~QBQ�5Q�5Q�8Q^QYcQ骵Q醞Q觬Q�5RRqR
}R�S鬫SdSBgS莌S/T�T奭T�UKU-US;U晄U�V�V�V)$V匔VU[V%W�.WyX�X�X�X<3XP7X睸X鵶X� Y�YY.YOY蚖YOgYZeBZ=hZ}[� [�[l[�[淔[�H[O[腝[J`[fj[�\=\�5\�;\f\Iq\p\�]!]�]!,]83]哬]芛]@v]^f>^8V^�7_(T`穄`k`0r`Q~`� aRa@#a�.a�1a�2a貹a竳a
bn bbk3b�5b荓b翹b嘨b#qb鄐bc�%c�,c?c肔cd燳d匽d�e�e�e�e�0e+7e�7e�9e?:e�;eN`e,{ef�-f�=f`f�/g�8g6lg梟g�"he'h/i?i(Pi稺i^
jo,j玼j-~j)k�k�k4kX;kZ;kFkOwkDk�l�;l腣l\lW]ligl06m確m峟m� n� n螴nlnG o�o�o閃ouyoIp�7p~Jp羒p�qjBqq篧q媐q遟q7rwrq`r)r�4s�5s鐱sFs镠s9^s耟sXjs$}s�t�"tR:t\t�%u�+u 0uBMuxau誦ueueXvcvuqv秪v�w8Xw総wyxHx�yg y�'y閐y攖y轐zzTz榚z%V{﹡{�|� |�|�-|4[|誡|-d|�}B}a ~�;~贏~僁~U
[�€�€�#€.I€€�+�FG�鵑�������l����3�YI�鶹�Pl�硍�W!��'��(�50�H=�峞�������J�ZY�f�@�� �_��z#�B&�'�\)�4�@�艬�釽�RY�蚙�3B����'�'(�';�>��"��>�僓�\��3�^:�C�KC�Tf�瀒�膟�!Y�4h�皔�聗��������/��3�/5�9U�餤��G+�]4�癋�Z��:�' ���n$�3�餻�h�鶩�韑�g|�G�}���"�圡�*f�Vo��/�95�8P�bc��^G�j�痳�cv���s�� �l���� �� �R�
:�`A�瞛�k��8�oB�\�u��
���矱�媉�瞗�$��-�虳�鉡�@e�瞭��(�齃�����?�|S�}�&�碠�,*��9�朣�-�9�詃�鷟�w� ,�綜�緇�){�~1�驦�We�鷛�n~�����}�R��>�鈃�:��&���m���)�#=�}~�N��"��&��)�\�x]�7W�Kx��+�".��6��7�衊�蕔�g�鞬��#�9�桜� F�gF�轑�鎃����6�59��;�1L��祍�H�b�������宼�*�S�1�=�蠮�����酑�{N�砃�糢�p�����\/�X�礪�癩�錫�搚�Y���hI�Y\�裷���' �����B|�妦�F�O�0�僆�h`� e�_��
�����+��+��3�1B�O�q �T��!�騔�焒�)�!�%P�硙�D�� �_�g�WH�>S��
���橞�5v�M�|!�=�瞜�jn�=~���_3�"U��� �v1�趍�-t�~�GL�圥�2\�昷����3�?U�ye�wn�駉�Dz�B�c�S6��?�pA�OK�>t�Uw�莦��*�D.��8��;�轛�X��������*�黃�ZV�Wy�+ �^X�鵲�q��$�Z*�hM�SO�遟�侽�=^�攅�厁��$�GS�慮�禵�"~��=�VK�MU�遟�Kp�7��3�zS�揮�鯹�蔯�n�8}�橤�鈟��.��7�贑�魀�u~��!�V0�N<�笶�kO�萫�U�g� ,�醷���5��婤�烲�P�#R�yl���^ ���纑��"��&�僈�猙��4�eL�軽�Xy� ��$�,I�P[�+p�_|�J
�� �9;��;�顰�0Q�!j�{�K|��L��'�薢� q����.@�鐰�癴�爄�護�鎤����0�Z�"��*�~F�� ��8��<�禛�鶿�葃��-��?�\\�^a�歸���7
�n �q&�Br�圠�k���m �簆���j�hJ�╨�蟤�謖�(�/� 9�a�畕��)�qJ�mh�V~�"�e%�p,�hO�/�@ ���<�D�覯�謏�30��;�.X�絡�纘�纜�泘��$�H'�揢�舓�y�纇�鑢�€��7��9�狜�`P�u�@�誘�z�p�㏕��`�媤���2F�.�€���t�P�0��<�聾�裈�玠�;m�飌�鶦�鉊�扞�Y�竌�俬��^� 2�黡�F8�風�{[�/a�Ja�f���%(�禝�Vq����i��-� 1�}M�筤�鵬�Jo��
�����*,�#d������ �dM�*:�9a��*� (�])�mV�jd�uw�� �
�@€
(y


��睳睴睵窺窼窽竄竅竆竇竈竛竜竡竢笂笅玮D�`@``@`T`�@`Z`\`�@```d`�@`l`�@`p`r`�@`�`
@`�`
@`�`H
@`v
��
Unknown��
��
��������G�
�* €�
Times New Roman5�


€Symbol3.�
�* €�
Arial5.�
�*a€�

TahomaA�
�犽 B�Cambria Math"1�鹦h
俓鴨俓鴨拲鈌#${�
#${�
��x�倐24dｑｑG3僎���
HX�

?����������������������� �2!xx���CParasite persistence and local adaptation in a limiting environmentsobsMatt Tinsley
�

鄥燆鵒h珣+'迟0�

����


4
L
X
x
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�DParasite persistence and local adaptation in a limiting environmentsobsNormal.dotmMatt Tinsley2Microsoft Office Word@寙G@疮�笆
@磟bHX�
@磟bHX�
#$�

胀諟.摋+,0@

hp�������� �
�University of Bristol�
{ｑ
DParasite persistence and local adaptation in a limiting environmentTitle

   !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<�=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~€�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������




���






������������
�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������Root Entry
�������� �FuHX�

€1Table
���������衁WordDocument

��������2�
SummaryInformation(
�����DocumentSummaryInformation8
������������

CompObj������������y������������������������
���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
� ���� �F'Microsoft Office Word 97-2003 Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8�9瞦