Marine Biology

, Volume 151, Issue 1, pp 233–242 | Cite as

Symbiotic associations between crustaceans and gelatinous zooplankton in deep and surface waters off California

  • Rebeca GascaEmail author
  • Eduardo Suárez-Morales
  • Steven H. D. Haddock
Research Article


Using a remotely operated submersible (ROV) in the sea off Monterey, California, we collected deep-living zooplankton and observed their associations with crustacean symbionts. Little is known about the nature of these symbioses. Among the most interesting findings was the description of a previously unknown modality of symbiosis of the deep-living copepod Pseudolubbockia dilatata Sars. It was recorded within the subumbrellar cavity of three specimens of the bathypelagic hydromedusa Aegina citrea Eschscholtz at depths of 606–1,098 m. One of these medusae hosted a mating pair of adult copepods along with the remains of their molts corresponding to copepodid stages CV of the female and CII, CIII, CIV, and CV of the male; another medusa had an adult female, and molts of a female CV and of male CIII, CIV and CV copepodids. Our data indicate that the medusae were occupied first by an early male copepodid, and then the female joined as a CV. The presence of an adult female alone with its CV molt in a third medusa suggests that females invade the host regardless of the presence of the male in it. The medusa represents a protected environment for these copepods during vulnerable stages or processes (molting and mating). We also observed 13 new associations between hyperiid amphipods and gelatinous zooplankton at different depths. These involve four new records among members of the Infraorder Physosomata, for which only six other associations were known, and five species of amphipods and six hosts among the gelatinous zooplankton not previously recorded as symbionts. Data are provided on three families of Hyperiidea for which symbiotic associations were hitherto unknown. The ROV represents a valuable tool for the observation and sampling of these associations, whose existence has been known for a long time, but which are still poorly understood.


Symbiotic Association Remotely Operate Vehicle Cyclopoid Copepod Gelatinous Zooplankton Adult Copepod 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We thank the crews of the ROV “Tiburon” and “Western Flyer” and also Bruce Robison (MBARI) for assistance in obtaining specimens. Rosa María Hernández-Flores deposited the specimens in the collection of zooplankton of El Colegio de la Frontera Sur, Mexico. Claudia Mills, Friday Harbor Laboratories, University of Washington, kindly provided information about the specimens of the medusa Neoturris. Edgar Tovar helped in the identification of L. zacae.


  1. Boxshall GA (1990) Precopulatory mate guarding in copepods. Bijdr Dierkd 60:209–213Google Scholar
  2. Boxshall GA, Halsey SH (2004) An introduction to copepod diversity, vol. 166. The Ray Society, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. Buecher E, Sparks C, Brierley A, Boyer H, Gibbons M (2001) Biometry and size distribution of Chrysaora hysoscella (Cnidaria, Scyphozoa) and Aequorea aequorea (Cnidaria, Hydrozoa) off Namibia with some notes on their parasite Hyperia medusarum. J Plankton Res 23:1073–1080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. De Lima M, Valentin JL (2001) New records of Amphipoda Hyperiidea in associations with gelatinous zooplankton. Hydrobiologia 448:229–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gasca R, Haddock SHD (2004) Associations between gelatinous zooplankton and hyperiid amphipods (Crustacea: Peracarida) in the Gulf of California. Hydrobiologia 530/531:529–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gardner GA, Szabo I (1982) British Columbia pelagic marine Copepoda: an identification manual and annotated bibliography. Can Spec Publ Fish Aquat Sci 62:1–536Google Scholar
  7. Go YB, Oh B-C, Terazaki M (1998) Feeding behavior of the poecilostomatoid copepods Oncaea spp. on chaetognaths. J Mar Syst 15:475–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Haddock, SHD, Heine, JN (2005) Scientific blue-water diving. California Sea Grant, La Jolla, CAGoogle Scholar
  9. Harbison GR, Bigs DC, Madin LP (1977) The associations of Amphipoda Hyperiidea with gelatinous zooplankton-II. Associations with Cnidaria, Ctenophora and Radiolaria. Deep Sea Res 24:465–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hay ME, Parker JD, Burkepile DE, Caudill CC, Wilson AE, Hallinan ZP, Chequer AD (2004) Mutualisms and aquatic community structure: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 35:175–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heron GA, Damkaer DM (1969) Five species of deep-water cyclopoid copepods from the plankton of the Gulf of Alaska. Smithson Contrib Zool 20:1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heron GA, Damkaer DM (1978) Seven Lubbockia species (Copepoda: Cyclopoida) from the plankton of the Northeast Pacific, with a Review of the Genus. Smithson Contrib Zool 267:1–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Heron GA, Bradford-Grieve JM (1995) The marine fauna of New Zealand: pelagic Copepoda: Poecilostomatoida: Oncaeidae. NZOI Mem 104:5–57Google Scholar
  14. Humes AG (1953) Two new semiparasitic harpacticoid copepods from the coast of New Hampshire. J Wash Acad Sci 37(5):170–178Google Scholar
  15. Humes AG (1969) A cyclopoid copepod, Sewellochiron fidens n. gen., n. sp. associated with a medusa in Puerto Rico. Beaufortia 16(219):171–183Google Scholar
  16. Humes AG (1985) Cnidarians and copepods: a success story. Trans Am Microsc Soc 104:313–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Huys R, Böttger-Schnack R (1997) On the diphyletic origin of the Oncaeidae Giesbrecht, 1892 (Copepoda: Poecilostomatoida) with a phylogenetic analysis of the Lubbockiidae fam. nov. Zool Anz 235:243–261Google Scholar
  18. Izawa K (1991) Evolutionary reduction of body segments in the poecilostome Cyclopoida (Crustacea: Copepoda). Bull Plankton Soc Jpn (Spec Vol):71–86Google Scholar
  19. Kramp PL (1965) The Hydromedusae of the Pacific and Indian Oceans. Dana Rep 63:1–162Google Scholar
  20. Laval P (1980) Hyperiid amphipods as crustacean parasitoids associated with gelatinous zooplankton. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev 18:11–56Google Scholar
  21. Lonsdale DJ, Frey MA, Snell TW (1997) The role of chemical signals in copepod reproduction. J Mar Syst 15:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Madin LP, Harbison GR (1977) The associations of Amphipoda Hyperiidea with gelatinous zooplankton-I. Associations with Salpidae. Deep Sea Res 24:449–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mayer AG (1910) Medusae of the World, Vol I. The Hydromedusae. Carnegie Institution of Washington, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  24. Razouls C (1996) Diversité et répartition géographique chez les copépodes pélagiques. 2-Platycopioida, Misophrioida, Mormonilloida, Cyclopoida, Poecilostomatoida, Siphonostomatoida, Harpacticoida, Monstrilloida. Ann Inst Oceanogr Paris Nouv Ser 72:1–149Google Scholar
  25. Reddiah K (1968) Three new species of Paramacrochiron (Lichomolgidae) associated with medusae. Crustaceana (Suppl 1):193–209Google Scholar
  26. Reddiah K (1969) Pseudomacrochiron stocki n.g., n.sp., a cyclopoid copepod associated with a medusa. Crustaceana 16:43–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Robison BH (2004) Deep pelagic biology. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 300:253–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sars GO (1909) Note préliminaire sur trois formes remarquables de Copépodes, provenant des Campaignes de S.A.S. le Prince Albert de Monaco. Bull Inst Oceanogr 147:1–8Google Scholar
  29. Shih C-t, Chen Q-c (1995) Zooplankton of China Seas (2). The Hyperiidea (Crustacea: Amphipoda). China Ocean Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  30. Thurston MH (1977) Depth distribution of Hyperia spinigera Bovallius, 1889 (Crustacea: Amphipoda) and medusae in the North Atlantic Ocean, with notes on the association between Hyperia and coelenterates. In: Angel M (ed) A voyage of discovery. Pergamon, Oxford, pp 499–536Google Scholar
  31. Van Duren LA, Videler JJ (1996) The trade-off between feeding, mate seeking and predator avoidance in copepods: behavioural responses to chemical cues. J Plankton Res 18:805–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Vinogradov G (1999) Amphipoda. In: Boltovskoy D (ed) South Atlantic zooplankton. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, pp 1141–1240Google Scholar
  33. Vinogradov ME, Volkov AF, Semenova TN (1996) Hyperiid amphipods (Amphipoda, Hyperiidea) of the world oceans. Science Publ Inc., LebanonGoogle Scholar
  34. Wrobel D, Mills C (1998) Pacific coast pelagic invertebrates. A guide to the common gelatinous animals. Sea Challengers, MontereyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rebeca Gasca
    • 1
    Email author
  • Eduardo Suárez-Morales
    • 1
  • Steven H. D. Haddock
    • 2
  1. 1.El Colegio de la Frontera Sur (ECOSUR)Quintana RooMexico
  2. 2.Monterey Bay Aquarium Research InstituteMoss LandingUSA

Personalised recommendations