Supplementary material from "The evolution of constitutive and induced defences to infectious disease"

In response to infectious disease, hosts typically mount both constitutive and induced defences. Constitutive defence prevents infection in the first place, while induced defence typically shortens the infectious period. The two routes to defence, therefore, have very different implications not only to individuals but also to the epidemiology of the disease. Moreover, the costs of constitutive defences are likely to be paid even in the absence of disease, while induced defences are likely to incur the most substantial costs when they are used in response to infection. We examine theoretically the evolutionary implications of these fundamental differences. A key result is that high virulence in the parasite typically selects for higher induced defences even if they result in immunopathology leading to very high disease mortality. Disease impacts on fecundity are critical to the relative investment in constitutive and induced defence with important differences found when parasites castrate their hosts. The trade-off between constitutive and induced defence has been cited as a cause of the diversity in defence, but we show that the trade-off alone is unlikely to lead to diversity. Our models provide a framework to examine relative investment in different defence components both experimentally and in the field.