DOI: 10.5061/dryad.sxksn0341
title: Phototaxic Behaviour of Flies with and without an ectoparasitic mite

description: First, we demonstrated that flies are less likely to be infected by mites
 when exposed in light environments than dark environments using
 micro-arena experiments. In baseline conditions (mite-free environments),
 unmated female flies and mated female flies spent significantly more time
 in the dark side of the phototaxis chambers. Males did not show
 significant negative or positive phototaxis. Contrarily, when exposed to
 mites, neither unmated or mated females displayed significant phototaxis.
 Flies became less negatively phototaxic when threatened with mites,
 suggesting phototaxis is a mechanism of behavioural immunity.
description: Phototaxis experiments were conducted in phototaxis chambers.
 Flies were observed and if they were on the light or dark side of the
 chamber was recorded at each minute interval. Female flies were either
 exposed to mites or alone in the phototaxis chamber. We also tested the
 impact of mating status on female phototaxis (and the mating-status,
 exposure interaction). The phototaxis behaviour of Male flies unexposed to
 mites was also measured. Additional experiments
 followed females in a phototaxis chamber with a single mite. Either 1) a
 mated female and 1 mite or 2) an unmated female and 1 mite. The location
 of both the fly and mite were recorded at each interval.
 Experiments are described in full (in review).
description: <strong>Flies.csv description</strong>
 The goal of this experiment was to test if flies changed their
 phototaxis behaviour (% time in light) in response to the presence of
 mites (in a previous experiment we found flies are more vulnerable to
 infection in the dark). Each fly was also assigned a unique ID.
 Each fly was observed for N number of observations (Nobs, 1
 minute apart), and the number of observations at which they were in the
 dark was recorded (Ndark). PropDark = Ndark/Nobs.
 Female flies were either mated (M), unmated (U). Females were
 also either exposed to mites (E) or not exposed to mites (N).
 Male flies not exposed to mites were also observed.
 <em>Fly Variable Names/codes</em><br>
 <br> Group: Flies were unmated females unexposed to mites
 (UnmatedFUnexposed), mated females unexposed to mites
 (MatedFUnexposed), Male flies unexposed to mites (MaleUnexposed), Mated
 females exposed to mites (MatedFExposed), or unmated females exposed to
 mites (UnMatedFExposed). FlyID: a unique identify for
 each fly Sex: fly sex (male/female)
 Mating status: mating status of female flies (Mated=M,
 Unmated=U), male mating status was not considered (NA).
 Nobs: number of observations for a fly NDark:
 the number of observations at which a fly was in the dark side of the
 phototaxic chamber PropDark: NDark/NObs
 <strong>Mites.csv description</strong>
 We also recorded the position of the mites in the mites. Mites
 were either in a chamber alone (solo), with a mated female fly
 (WithMated), or with an unmated female fly (WithUnmated). The ID of the
 fly paired with the mite is listed when applicable (see
 flies.csv). Each mite was observed for N number of
 observations (Nobs, 1 minute apart), and the number of observations at
 which they were in the dark was recorded (Ndark). PropDark =
 Ndark/Nobs. <em>Mite Variable
 Names/codes</em> Group: Mites were either in
 chambers alone (solo), in a chamber with a mated female fly (WithMated),
 or in a chamber with an umated female fly (WithUnmated)
 MiteCode: A unique code for each mite
 Paired.fly: the fly the mite was with in the WithMated and
 WithUnmated condition, NA when the mite was alone (as in the Solo
 group) Nobs: number of observations for a
 mite NDark: the number of observations at which a mite
 was in the dark side of the phototaxic chamber
 PropDark: NDark/NObs