Study
A specialized fungal parasite (Massospora cicadina) hijacks the sexual signals of periodical cicadas (Hemiptera: Cicadidae: Magicicada)
Cooley, John R.; Marshall, David C.; Hill, Kathy B. R.
Scientific Reports, 2018
Infected cicadas were observed in the field during an emergence, and their signalling behaviour compared with uninfected animals. Because periodical cicada courtship uses a precisely timed acoustic exchange — a male calls, a receptive female responds with a timed wing flick — the behaviour can be scored objectively rather than described impressionistically.
- Studied in
- Magicicada, Massospora cicadina
- Sample size
- infected and uninfected cicadas observed and tested in the field
Infected males produced the female wing-flick response to the calls of other males, in addition to calling themselves. Healthy males approached and attempted to mate with them. Infected animals of both sexes continued attempting to mate despite the posterior abdomen having been replaced by a mass of fungal spores, so that copulation transferred spores rather than gametes.
What it means
The authors' reading, and ours. Where they differ, that difference is the point.
How the authors put it
Massospora infection is associated with behaviour that increases transmission, including production of the opposite sex's signal, giving the fungus access to both sexes as recipients.
How NatureHQ reads it
The observation is remarkable and the framing around it usually is not. What is documented: infected males give the female signal, healthy males respond to it, and mating attempts transfer spores from an animal whose abdomen is already gone. That doubles the pool of individuals a single infected male can reach. What is *not* documented anywhere is a mechanism — nothing shows the fungus acting on the nervous system, and this study is an observation of behaviour rather than a demonstration of control. The distinction is why NatureHQ will describe the behaviour in full and decline the word "zombie": manipulation is a reasonable hypothesis that fits, and it is not the same as having been shown.
- Observational; no manipulation established that the fungus causes the behaviour rather than accompanying it.
- Sample sizes are constrained by infection prevalence during a single emergence.
- Alternative explanations — general disinhibition, or damage to the signalling system producing the wrong output — are not excluded.
What this study is used for on NatureHQ
One study can inform several subjects. Here is everywhere this one is cited.
Published by: Nature PortfolioPublished in a Nature Portfolio journal.
doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-19813-0
This reference was resolved automatically against Crossref on 2026-08-11.
NatureHQ summarises research in its own words and does not reproduce published text. Reviewed 2026-08-11.