Advertisement

Marine Biology

, Volume 143, Issue 6, pp 1117–1125 | Cite as

Adaptations of subtropical Venus clams to predation and desiccation: endurance of Gafrarium tumidum and avoidance of Ruditapes variegatus

  • T. KuriharaEmail author
Article

Abstract

Intertidal endobenthic bivalves are often dislodged from sediments by hydrodynamic forces. As a result, they encounter the dangers of predation and desiccation, which are generally harsh near the sediment surface. To cope with such dangers, the bivalves possibly possess: (1) a strong body to endure predation and desiccation stress, (2) quick mobility to avoid the stresses, or (3) a high growth rate for attaining a size refuge. The present study examined which of these modes are adopted by the subtropical cobbled-shore Venus clams Gafrarium tumidum (Röding, 1798) and Ruditapes variegatus (Sowerby, 1852), revealing the following interspecific differences. (1) G. tumidum survived better than R. variegatus did in harsh experimental conditions, namely: the experimental cages exposed to predation and desiccation on a cobbled shore; a laboratory aquarium with a predatory crab Scylla serrata; and ovens with high temperatures (27°C and 34°C). (2) R. variegatus was more mobile than G. tumidum was, digging into the sediment on a cobbled shore more rapidly at both high and low tides. (3) The two species with shell lengths 20–30 mm showed similar growth rates (median: −0.2 to 44.5 μm day−1) in seasonal mark–recapture surveys over 2 years. Overall, to cope with the dangers of predation and desiccation G. tumidum appears to have a strong body, while R. variegatus displays rapid mobility, and neither species seems to attain a size refuge through rapid growth. Such species-specific modes are discussed in relation to the interspecific differences found in shell morphology.

Keywords

Bivalve Sediment Surface Shell Length Cobble Sandy Sediment 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgements

I am obliged to Drs. Y. Shimadzu, Y. Takada, S. Wada and an anonymous referee for their constructive comments regarding this manuscript. I thank Mrs. Y. Hosokawa for her help with the measurement of samples. I am indebted to the staff of the Ishigaki Tropical Station for their advice and assistance during the study. The present study was supported in part by the Fisheries Research Center Seeds Research Program. The experiments in the present study comply with the current laws of Japan.

References

  1. Arnold WS (1984) The effects of prey size, predator size and sediment composition on the rate of predation of the blue crab, Callinectes sapidus Rathbun, on the hard clam, Mercenaria mercenaria (Linné). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 80:207–219Google Scholar
  2. Baron J (1992) Reproductive cycles of the bivalve molluscs Atactodea striata (Gmelin), Gafrarium tumidum Röding and Anadara scapha (L.) in New Caledonia. Aust J Mar Freshw Res 43:393–402Google Scholar
  3. Berg CJ, Alatalo P (1985) Biology of the tropical bivalve Asaphis deflorata (Linné, 1758). Bull Mar Sci 37:827–838Google Scholar
  4. Bertness MD, Garrity SD, Levings SC (1981) Predation pressure and gastropod foraging: a tropical–temperate comparison. Evolution 35:995–1007Google Scholar
  5. Blundon JA, Kennedy VS (1982a) Mechanical and behavioral aspects of blue crab, Callinectes sapidus (Rathbun), predation on Chesapeake Bay bivalves. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 65:47–65Google Scholar
  6. Blundon JA, Kennedy VS (1982b) Refuges for infaunal bivalves from blue crab, Callinectes sapidus (Rathbun), predation in Chesapeake Bay. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 65:67–81Google Scholar
  7. Boulding EG (1984) Crab-resistant features of shells of burrowing bivalves: decreasing vulnerability by increasing handling time. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 76:201–223Google Scholar
  8. Brown JH, Lomolino MV (1998) Biogeography. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass.Google Scholar
  9. Charnov EL (1976) Optimal foraging: attack strategy of a mantid. Am Nat 110:141–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Commito JA (1982) Effects of Lunatia heros predation on the population dynamics of Mya arenaria and Macoma balthica in Maine, USA. Mar Biol 69:187–193Google Scholar
  11. Commito JA, Ambrose WG (1985) Multiple trophic levels in soft-bottom communities. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 26:283–289Google Scholar
  12. Commito JA, Currier CA, Kane LR, Reinsel KA, Ulm IM (1995) Dispersal dynamics of the bivalve Gemma gemma in a patchy environment. Ecol Monogr 65:1–20Google Scholar
  13. Eggleston DB (1990) Functional responses of blue crabs Callinectes sapidus Rathbun feeding on juvenile oysters Crassostrea virginica (Gmelin): effects of predator sex and size, and prey size. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 143:73–90Google Scholar
  14. Eggleston DB, Lipcius RN, Hines AH (1992) Density-dependent predation by blue crabs upon infaunal clam species with contrasting distribution and abundance patterns. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 85:55–68Google Scholar
  15. Emerson CW, Grant J (1991) The control of soft-shell clam (Mya arenaria) recruitment on intertidal sandflats by bedload sediment transport. Limnol Oceanogr 36:1288–1300Google Scholar
  16. Grant J (1981) Sediment transport and disturbance on an intertidal sandflat: infaunal distribution and recolonization. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 6:249–255Google Scholar
  17. Haddon M, Wear RG, Packer HA (1987) Depth and density of burial by the bivalve Paphies ventricosa as refuges from predation by the crab Ovalipes catharus. Mar Biol 94:25–30Google Scholar
  18. Hilgerloh G (1997) Predation by birds on blue mussel Mytilus edulis beds of the tidal flats of Spiekeroog (southern North Sea). Mar Ecol Prog Ser 146:61–72Google Scholar
  19. Hines AH, Whitlatch RB, Thrush SF, Hewitt JE, Cummings VJ, Dayton PK, Legendre P (1997) Nonlinear foraging response of a large marine predator to benthic prey: eagle ray pits and bivalves in a New Zealand sandflat. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 216:191–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hughes RN, Elner RW (1979) Tactics of a predator, Carcinus maenas, and morphological responses of the prey, Nucella lapillus. J Anim Ecol 48:65–78Google Scholar
  21. Jangoux M (1982) Food and feeding mechanisms: Asteroidea. In: Jangoux M, Lawrence JM (eds) Echinoderm nutrition. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 117–159Google Scholar
  22. Kurihara T (2002) Spatial and temporal fluctuation in the density of the intertidal limpet, Patelloida striata Quoy & Gaimard, on subtropical cobbled shores. J Moll Stud 68:83–90Google Scholar
  23. Kurihara T, Takada Y, Kosuge T, Kobayashi M, Katoh M, Mito K (2000) Species composition of epifauna and infauna on intertidal boulder shores at Ishigaki Island in subtropical Japan. Bull Seikai Natl Fish Res Inst 78:31–47Google Scholar
  24. Leonard GH, Bertness MD, Yund PO (1999) Crab predation, waterborne cues, and inducible defenses in the blue mussel, Mytilus edulis. Ecology 80:1–14Google Scholar
  25. Matthiessen GC (1960) Intertidal zonation in populations of Mya arenaria. Limnol Oceanogr 5:381–388Google Scholar
  26. Ota N, Tokeshi M (2000) Population analysis of Ruditapes variegatus (Sowerby) (Bivalvia: Veneridae) on an intertidal boulder shore. Venus Jpn J Malacol 59:29–36Google Scholar
  27. Paine RT (1976) Size-limited predation: an observational and experimental approach with the MytilusPisaster interaction. Ecology 57:858–873Google Scholar
  28. Porter WP, Gates DM (1969) Thermodynamic equilibria of animals with environment. Ecol Monogr 39:227–244Google Scholar
  29. Ricciardi A, Serrouya R, Whoriskey FG (1995) Aerial exposure tolerance of zebra and quagga mussels (Bivalvia: Dreissenidae): implications for overload dispersal. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 52:470–477Google Scholar
  30. Robert R, Parra R (1991) Experimental study of predation by the gilthead bream Sparus aurata and the gray triggerfish Balistes capriscus on the Manila clam Ruditapes philippinarum (in French with English abstract). Aquat Living Resour 4:181–189Google Scholar
  31. Rodrigues CL (1986) Predation of the naticid gastropod Neverita didyma (Röding) on the bivalve Ruditapes philippinarum (Adams & Reeve): evidence for a preference linked functional response. Publ Amakusa Mar Biol Lab Kyushu Univ 8:125–141Google Scholar
  32. Saito H, Imabayashi H, Kawai K (1999) Growth of the bivalve-feeder Halla okudai (Polychaeta: Lysaretidae) under wild and rearing conditions, in relation to species and abundance of prey organisms. Fish Sci (Tokyo) 65:230–234Google Scholar
  33. Sakurai I, Seto M (1999) Behavioral characteristics of the juvenile Japanese littleneck clam Ruditapes philippinarum in response to sand erosion and deposition (in Japanese with English abstract). Sci Rep Hokkaido Fish Exp Stn 54:41–46Google Scholar
  34. Sakurai I, Seto M, Nakao S (1996) Effects of water temperature, salinity and substrata on burrowing behaviors of the three bivalves, Pseudocardium sachalinensis, Mactra chinensis, and Ruditapes philippinarum (in Japanese with English abstract). Nippon Suisan Gakkaishi 62:878–885Google Scholar
  35. Savidge WB, Taghon GL (1988) The influence of passive advection on the colonization of two types of disturbance on an intertidal sandflat. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 115:137–155Google Scholar
  36. Seed R, Brown RA (1978) Growth as a strategy for survival in two marine bivalves, Cerastoderma edule and Modiolus modiolus. J Anim Ecol 47:283–292Google Scholar
  37. Seitz RD, Lipcius RN, Hines AH, Eggleston DB (2001) Density-dependent predation, habitat variation, and the persistence of marine bivalve prey. Ecology 82:2435–2451Google Scholar
  38. Sponaugle S, Lawton P (1990) Portunid crab predation on juvenile hard clams: effects of substrate type and prey density. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 67:43–53Google Scholar
  39. Turner SJ, Grant J, Pridmore RD, Hewitt JE, Wilkinson MR, Hume TM, Morrisey DJ (1997) Bedload and water-column transport and colonization processes by post-settlement benthic macrofauna: does infaunal density matter? J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 216:51–75Google Scholar
  40. Underwood AJ (1997) Experiments in ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  41. Vermeij GJ (1973) Morphological patterns in high-intertidal gastropods: adaptive strategies and their limitations. Mar Biol 20:319–346Google Scholar
  42. Vermeij GJ (1978) Biogeography and adaptation. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  43. Vermeij GJ (1987) Evolution and escalation: an ecological history of life. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
  44. Woodin SA (1978) Refuges, disturbance, and community structure: a marine soft-bottom example. Ecology 59:274–284Google Scholar
  45. Zaklan SD, Ydenberg R (1997) The body size-burial depth relationship in the infaunal clam Mya arenaria. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 215:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis, 4th edn. Prentice Hall, Engelwood Cliffs, N.J.Google Scholar
  47. Zipser E, Vermeij GJ (1978) Crushing behavior of tropical and temperate crabs. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 31:155–172Google Scholar
  48. Zwarts L, Wanink J (1989) Siphon size and burying depth in deposit- and suspension-feeding benthic bivalves. Mar Biol 100:227–240Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ishigaki Tropical StationSeikai National Fisheries Research InstituteOkinawaJapan

Personalised recommendations