The evolution of virulence in vector-borne and directly transmitted parasites

Ewald (1994) has suggested that vector-borne parasites are expected to evolve a higher level of host exploitation than directly transmitted parasites, and this should thereby result in them being more virulent. Indeed, some data do conform to this general pattern. Nevertheless, his hypothesis has generated some debate about the extent to which it is valid. I explore this issue quantitatively within the framework of mathematical epidemiology. In particular, I present a dynamic optimization model for the evolution of parasite replication strategies that explicitly explores the validity of this hypothesis. A few different model assumptions are explored and it is found that Ewald's hypothesis has only qualified support as a general explanation for why vector-borne parasites are more virulent than those that are directly transmitted. I conclude by suggesting that an alternative explanation might lie in differences in inoculum size between these two types of transmission.