Journal of Wood Science

, Volume 64, Issue 4, pp 427–435 | Cite as

It’s what’s inside that counts: computer-aided tomography for evaluating the rate and extent of wood consumption by shipworms

  • François CharlesEmail author
  • Jennifer Coston-Guarini
  • Jean-Marc Guarini
  • François Lantoine
Original Article


Experiments were done to investigate in situ colonization of pine wood blocks by marine wood borers at the mouth of a small mountain river in the foothills of the Eastern Pyrenees. Standardized blocks were recovered after remaining underwater for increasingly long durations, until the available resource was exhausted by the shipworms assemblage that developed. Computer-aided tomography (CT) was used for visualizing and quantifying biogenic structures into the wooden blocks. The biodiversity survey of the wood pieces colonized indicated that up to three species of shipworms shared the resource at the same time. The specific wood consumption rate of Nototeredo norvagica was estimated 185 mm3 ind−1 day−1. The quantification of voids created by shipworm crowding indicated that total tunnelling represents, on average, 60% of the initial volume of a wood block, revising upward earlier estimates of wood destruction by 28%. CT analysis provides the quantitative measurements necessary to parameterize individual-based growth models linking wood consumption with the species diversity of shipworm assemblages.


Wood destruction Coarse woody debris Teredinidae CT scan Modelling 



F. Charles expressly thanks Dr. Michel Gras for the organization and Mr. Régis Truillet for the realization of CT examinations of the wood blocks at the St. Pierre Clinic in Perpignan. We are also grateful to Joseph Garrigue, curator of the Réserve Naturelle Nationale de la Forêt de la Massane for sharing his expert knowledge of the river. This work was supported by the EC2CO (Écosphère Continentale et Côtière) national program of the CNRS-INSU, as part of the DRIL (Dynamique et Réactivité des Interfaces Littorales) topics, under the title: De la forêt à la Mer: Transfert et recyclage du bois mort sur la marge continentale méditerranéenne. JC-G was supported by the “Laboratoire d’Excellence” LabexMER (ANR-10-LABX-19) and co-funded by a Grant from the French government under the program “Investissements d’Avenir”.


  1. 1.
    Perkins EJ (1974) Decomposition of litter in the marine environment. In: Dickinson CH, Pugh GJF (eds) Biology of plant litter decomposition. Academic Press, London, pp 683–722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Maser C, Sedell JR (1994) From the forest to the sea: the ecology of wood in streams, rivers, estuaries, and oceans. St. Lucie Press, Delray BeachGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hendy IW (2012) Habitat creation for animals by teredinid bivalves in Indonesian mangrove ecosystems. Dissertation, University of Portsmouth, UKGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yücel M, Galand PE, Fagervold SK, Contreira-Pereira L, Le Bris N (2013) Sulfide production and consumption in degrading wood in the marine environment. Chemosphere 90:403–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Charles F, Coston-Guarini J, Lantoine F, Guarini JM, Yücel M (2014) Ecogeochemical fate of coarse organic particles in the sediments of the Rhone River prodelta. Est Coast Shelf Sci 141:97–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clapp WF, Kenk R (1963) Marine borers. An annotated bibliography. Office of Naval Research, Department of the Navy, ACR-74, Washington, DC, p 1136Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Björdal CG, Nilsson T (2008) Reburial of shipwrecks in marine sediments: a long-term study on wood degradation. J Archaeol Sci 35:862–872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Atwood WG, Johnson AA (1924) Marine structures, their deterioration and preservation: report of the committee on marine piling investigations of the Division of Engineering and Industrial Research of the National Research Council. National Research Council (US). Division of Engineering and Industrial Research, National research council, Washington, DC, p 534Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    King AJ, Cragg SM, Li Y, Dymond J, Guille MJ, Bowles DJ, Bruce NC, Graham IA, McQueen-Mason SJ (2010) Molecular insight into lignocellulose digestion by a marine isopod in the absence of gut microbes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:5345–5350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Betcher MA, Fung JM, Han AW, O’Connor R, Seronay R, Concepcion GP, Distel DL, Haygood MG (2012) Microbial distribution and abundance in the digestive system of five shipworm species (Bivalvia: Teredinidae). PLoS One 7(9):e45309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lechene CP, Luyten Y, McMahon G, Distel DL (2007) Quantitative imaging of nitrogen fixation by individual bacteria within animal cells. Science 317:1563–1566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    O’Connor RM, Fung JM, Sharp KH, Benner JS, McClung C, Cushing S, Lamkin ER, Fomenkov AI, Henrissat B, Londer YY, Scholz MB, Posfa J, Malfatti S, Susannah G, Tringe SG, Woyke T, Malmstrom RR, Coleman-Derr D, Altamia MA, Dedrick S, Kaluziak ST, Haygood MG, Distel DL (2014) Gill bacteria enable a novel digestive strategy in a wood feeding mollusk. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111:E5096–E5104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cragg SM, Beckham GT, Bruce NC, Bugg TDH, Distel DL, Dupree P, Green Etxabe A, Goodell BS, Jellison J, McGeehan JE, McQueen-Mason SJ, Schnorr K, Walton PH, Watts JEM, Zimmer M (2015) Lignocellulose degradation mechanisms across the tree of life. Curr Opin Chem Biol 29:108–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McIntosh H, de Nys R, Whalan S (2012) Shipworms as a model for competition and coexistence in specialized habitats. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 461:95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    McClain C, Barry J (2014) Beta-diversity on deep-sea wood falls reflects gradients in energy availability. Biol Lett 10:20140129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nishimoto A, Haga T, Asakura A, Shirayama Y (2015) An experimental approach for understanding the process of wood fragmentation by marine wood borers in shallow temperate waters. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 538:53–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Turner RD (1966) A survey and illustrated catalogue of the Teredinidae (Mollusca: Bivalvia). The museum of comparative zoology. Harvard University, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Robertson AI, Daniel PA (1989) Decomposition and the annual flux of detritus from fallen timber in tropical mangrove forests. Limnol Oceanogr 34:640–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Charles F, Coston-Guarini J, Guarini JM, Fanfard S (2016) Wood decay at sea. J Sea Res 114:22–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Crisp DJ, Jones LWG, Watson W (1953) Use of stereoscopy for examining shipworm infestation in vivo. Nature 172:408–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Haderlie EC, Mellor JC (1973) Settlement, growth rates and depth preference of the shipworm Bankia setacea (Tryon) in Monterey Bay. Veliger 15:265–286Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mann R, Gallager SM (1985) Growth, morphometry and biochemical composition of the wood boring molluscs Teredo navalis L., Bankia gouldi (Bartsch), and Nototeredo knoxi (Bartsch) (Bivalvia: Teredinidae). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 85:229–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Amon DJ, Sykes D, Ahmed F, Copley JT, Kemp KM, Tyler PA, Young CM, Glover AG (2015) Seeing in the dark: ecosystem functions of the wood-boring genus, Xylophaga revealed by micro-computed-tomography. Front Mar Sci 2:10. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Eriksen AM, Gregory D (2016) Degradation of archaeological remains by shipworm. Conserv Manag Archaeol Sites 18:30–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nelder JA, Mead R (1965) A simplex method for function minimization. Comp J 7:308–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Scheltema RS (1971) Dispersal of phytoplanktotrophic shipworm larvae (Bivalvia: Teredinidae) over long distances by ocean currents. Mar Biol 11:5–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fanfard S (2016) “Resource community” relationship: case of marine benthic invertebrate communities exploiting coarse debris derived from terrestrial plants (in French). Ph.D. Dissertation, Pierre and Marie Curie University Paris 6, FranceGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Borges LM, Merckelbach LM, Sampaio I, Cragg SM (2014) Diversity, environmental requirements, and biogeography of bivalve wood-borers (Teredinidae) in European coastal waters. Front Zool 11:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Roch F (1940) Die Teredinidae des Mittelmeeres. Thalassia 4:1–147Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Isham LB, Tierney JQ (1953) Some aspects of the larval development and metamorphosis of Teredo (Lyrodus) pedicellata de Quatrefages. Bull Mar Sci Gulf Caribbean 2:574–589Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Calloway CB, Turner RD (1988) Brooding in the Teredinidae (Mollusca: Bivalvia). In: Thompson MF, Nagabhushanam R (eds) Marine biodeterioration: advanced techniques applicable to the Indian Ocean. Oxford & IBH Publishing, New Delhi, pp 215–226Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Strathmann R, Strahmann MF (1982) The relationship between adult size and brooding in marine invertebrates. Am Nat 119:91–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Paulus MJ, Gleason SS, Kennel SJ, Hunsicker PR, Johnson DK (2000) High resolution X-ray computed tomography: an emerging tool for small animal cancer research. Neoplasia 2:62–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japan Wood Research Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sorbonne Université, CNRS, Laboratoire d’Ecogéochimie des Environnements Benthiques, LECOBBanyuls-sur-MerFrance
  2. 2.UMR 6539-LEMAR CNRS/UBO/IRD/Ifremer, Laboratoire des sciences de l’environnement marin-IUEMPlouzanéFrance

Personalised recommendations