Marine Biology

, Volume 151, Issue 5, pp 1959–1966 | Cite as

Encounters between Antarctic limpets, Nacella concinna, and predatory sea stars, Lysasterias sp., in laboratory and field experiments

  • Marta MarkowskaEmail author
  • Anna Kidawa
Research Article


Antarctic limpets, Nacella concinna, from the Admiralty Bay (King George Island, South Shetlands) for at least part of the year (austral winter) co-exist with predatory sea stars Lysasterias sp. Our laboratory and field experiments established that the presence of Lysasterias sp. or its odour had considerable influence upon their behaviour. Limpets’ responses, consisting of shell mushrooming, shell rotation and flight, were distinctly different from their reaction to other stimuli, such as food and conspecific odours, or mechanical stimulation. Moreover, a significant impact of sea star presence on limpets’ activity was observed, with limpets fleeing to a distance of 60 cm from the predator. Such reactions allow limpets to lower the incidence of sea star predation, but at the cost of presumptive disrupting of foraging and an additional energy expended for locomotion. A visible difference was noted between two limpet populations, with the rockpool limpets responding only after physical contact with being touched by a sea star, and the subtidal ones responding at a distance of up to 20 cm.


Odour Escape Response Subtidal Zone Subtidal Environment Conspecific Odour 
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.



Data presented in this study were collected during the XXVIII Polish Antarctic Expedition at H. Arctowski Station (King George Island, South Shetlands). The work was financed by the State Committee for Scientific Research grant 3 P04F 023 25 (years 2003–2006). We would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for constructive advice that has improved our paper.


  1. Beaumont AR, Wei JHC (1991) Morphological and genetic variation in the Antarctic limpet Nacella concinna (Strebel, 1908). J Moll Stud 57:443–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berry RJ, Rudge PJ (1973) Natural selection in Antarctic limpet. Br Antarct Surv Bull 35:73–81Google Scholar
  3. Blankley WO, Branch GM (1984) Co-operative prey capture and unusual brooding habits of Anasterias rupicola (Verrill) (Asteroidea) at sub-Antarctic Marion Island. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 20:171–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Branch GM (1979) Aggression by limpets against invertebrate predators. Anim Behav 27:408–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davenport J (1997) Comparisons of the biology of the intertidal subantarctic limpets Nacella concinna and Kerguelenella lateralis. J Moll Stud 63:39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Espoz C, Castilla JC (2000) Escape responses of four Chilean intertidal limpets to seastars. Mar Biol 137:887–892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Leber KM (1985) The influence of predatory decapods, refuge, and mirohabitat selection on seagrass communities. Ecology 66(6):1951–1964CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Mahon AR, Amsler CD, McClintock JB, Baker BJ (2002) Chemo-tactile predator avoidance responses of the common Antarctic limpet Nacella concinna. Polar Biol 25:469–473Google Scholar
  9. Marko PB, Palmer R (1991) Responses of a rocky shore gastropod to the Effluents of predatory and non-predatory crabs: avoidance and attraction. Biol Bull 181:363–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. McClintock JB (1985) Avoidance and escape responses of the Sub-Antarctic limpet Nacella edgari (Powell) (Mollusca: Gastropoda) to the seastar Anasterias perrieri (Smith) (Echinodermata: Asteroidea). Polar Biol 4:95–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McKillup SC, McKillup RV (1994) The decision to feed by a scavenger in relation to the risks of predation and starvation. Oecologia 97:41–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Moore PG, Howarth J (1996) Foraging by marine scavengers: effects of relatedness, bait damage and hunger. J Sea Res 36:267–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Morton B, Chan K, Britton JC (1995) Hunger overcomes fear in Nassarius festivus, a scavenging gastropod on Hong Kong shores. J Moll Stud 61:55–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nolan CP (1991) Size, shape and shell morphology in the Antarctic limpet Nacella concinna at Signy Island, South Orkney Islands. J Moll Stud 57:225–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Peckarsky BL (1980) Predator–prey interaction between stoneflies and mayflies: behavioral observations. Ecology 61(4):932–943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Phillips DW (1978) Chemical mediation of invertebrate defensive behaviors and the ability to distinguish between foraging and inactive predators. Mar Biol 49:237–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Picken GB (1980) The distribution, growth and reproduction of the Antarctic limpet Nacella (Patinigera) concinna (Strebel 1908). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 42:71–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rochette R, Himmelman JH (1996) Does vulnerability influence trade-offs made by whelks between predation risk and feeding opportunities? Anim Behav 52:783–794CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rochette R, Dill LM, Himmelman JH (1997) A field test of threaty sensitivity in a marine gastropod. Anim Behav 54:1053–1062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rochette R, Tetreault F, Himmelman JH (2001) Aggregation of whelks, Buccinum undatum, near feeding predators: the role of reproductive requirements. Animal Behav 61:31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Scheibling RE, Hamm J (1991) Interaction between sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis) and their predators in field and laboratory experiments. Mar Biol 110:105–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shabica SV (1976) The natural history of the Antarctic limpets Patinigera polaris (Hombron and Jacquinot). Ph D Thesis, Oregon State University, Corvallis, p 294Google Scholar
  23. Simpson RD (1976) Physical and biotic factors limiting the distribution and abundance of littoral mollusks on Macquerie Island (subantarctic). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 21:11–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sparrevik E, Leonardsson K (1995) Effects of large Saduria entomon (Isopoda) on spatial distribution of their small S. entomon and Monoporeia affinis (Amphipoda) prey. Oecologia 101:177–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Vadas RL, Burrows MT, Hughes RN (1994) Foraging strategies of dogwhelks, Nucella lapillus (L.): interacting effects of age, diet and chemical cues to the threat of predation. Oecologia 100:439–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vadas RL, Elner RW, Garwood PE, Babb IG (1986) Experimental evaluation of aggregation behavior in the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis. Mar Biol 90:433–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Walker AJM (1972) Introduction to the ecology of the Antarctic limpets Patinigera polaris (Hombron and Jacquinot) at Signy Island, South Orkney Islands. Br Antarct Surv Bull 28:49–71Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Antarctic BiologyPolish Academy of SciencesWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations