Marine Biology

, Volume 26, Issue 3, pp 261–270 | Cite as

Role of form vision in habitat selection of the grass shrimp Hippolyte californiensis

  • C. K. Barry


The caridean shrimp Hippolyte californiensis Holmes locates its host plant, the eel grass Zostera marina, visually, discriminating it on the basis of its form. Using models of the plant, the form-specific sign stimuli optimally releasing the host-selection response were investigated. Shrimps preferentially approached dark forms presented against a lighter background. The more a form contrasted with the background, the higher was its stimulatory value. Shrimps showed differential responses to solid forms of varying shape, preferring a stripe-like rectangle in a vertical orientation. Rectangular forms 50° (visual angle) or more in height and between 12° and 20° in width were maximally stimulating. Patterns of several vertical stripes had a greater releasing value for the approach response than a solid rectangle form of optimal dimensions. The greater the spatial frequency of a striped pattern, the reater was its attractiveness. Shrimps discriminated patterns of stripes whose elements were as small as 2° wide, giving an estimate of their visual acuity. Along with the relative contrast, the most important stimulus parameters of striped patterns are the continuous, straight form of the edges and their vertical orientation. It is postulated that the scototactic response of H. californiensis to relatively large, dark, solid forms is involved in the distant detection of clumps of eel grass. At closer range, the eel grass plants are then discriminated on the basis of the stripelike pattern of the leaves.


Habitat Selection Solid Form Vertical Orientation Vertical Stripe Distant Detection 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Ache, B.W. and D. Davenport: The sensory basis of host recognition by symbiotic shrimps, genus Betaeus. Biol. Bull. mar. biol. Lab., Woods Hole 143, 94–111 (1972)Google Scholar
  2. Barry, C.K.: Experimental analysis of habitat selection in epiphytic shrimps of the genus Hippolyte in California. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, San Diego 1973Google Scholar
  3. Dixon, W.J. and F.J. Massey: Introduction to statistical analysis, 288 pp. New York: Mc Graw-Hill 1957Google Scholar
  4. Fricke, H.-W. und M. Hentschel: Die Garnelen-Seeigel-Partnerschaft — eine Untersuchung der optischen Orientierung der Garnele. Z. Tierpsychol. 28, 453–462 (1971)Google Scholar
  5. Jacobs-Jessens, U.F.: Zur Orientierung der Hummel und einige anderer Hymenopteren. Z. vergl. Physiol. 41, 597–641 (1959)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jander, R. und M. Schweder: Über das Formunterschei dungsvermögen der Schmeissfliege Calliphora erythrocephala. Z. vergl. Physiol. 72, 186–196 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. —: Das Strauch-spezifische Perceptor-System der Stabheuschrecke (Carausius morosus). Z. vergl. Physiol. 70, 425–447 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. —: Die Bedeutung von Streifenmustern für das Formsehen der roten Waldameise (Formica rufa L.). Z. Tierpsychol. 20, 1–9 (1963)Google Scholar
  9. Kinosita, H. and A. Okajima. Analysis of shellsearching behavior of the land hermit crab, Coenobita rugosus H. Milne Edwards. J. Fac. Sci. Tokyo Univ. (Sect. 4) 11, 293–358 (1968)Google Scholar
  10. McCann, G.D. and J.C. Dill: Fundamental properties of intensity, form and motion perception in the visual system of Calliphora phoenica and Musca domestica. J. gen. Physiol. 53, 385–413 (1969)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Meyer, H.W.: Visuelle Schlüsselreize für die Auslösung der Beutefanghandlung beim Bachwasserläufer Velia caprai (Hemiptera, Heteroptera). Z. vergl. Physiol. 72, 260–297 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rabaud, E.: Recherches sur l'adaption et le comportement des pagures. Archs. Zool. exp. gén. 82, 181–285 (1941)Google Scholar
  13. Reese, E.S.: The behavioral mechanism underlying shell selection by hermit crabs. Behaviour 21, 78–126 (1963)Google Scholar
  14. Tinbergen, N. and A.C. Perdeck: On the stimulus situation releasing the begging response of newly hatched herring gull chicks (Largus argentatus argentatus Pont.). Behaviour 3, 1–39 (1951)Google Scholar
  15. Voss, Ch.: Über das Formsehen der roten Waldameise (Formica rufa Gruppe). Z. vergl. Physiol. 55, 225–254 (1967)Google Scholar
  16. Watermann, T.H., C.A.G. Wiersma and B.M.H. Bush: Afferent visual response in the optic nerve of the crab Podopthalmus. J. cell. comp. Physiol. 63, 135–155 (1963)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1974

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. K. Barry
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Fachbereich BiologieUniversität RegensburgRegensburgGermany (FRG)
  2. 2.Solana BeachUSA

Personalised recommendations