Skip to main content
Log in

Phenotypic variation in shell form in the intertidal acorn barnacle Chthamalus montagui: distribution, response to predators and life history trade-offs

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Marine Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The acorn barnacle Chthamalus montagui can present strong variation in shell morphology, ranging from flat conic to a highly bent form, caused by a substantial overgrowth of the rostrum plate. Shell shape distribution was investigated between January and May 2004 from geographical to microhabitat spatial scales along the western coast of Britain. Populations studied in the north (Scotland and Isle of Man) showed a higher degree of shell variation compared to those in the south (Wales and south-west England). In the north, C. montagui living at lower tidal levels and in proximity to the predatory dogwhelk, Nucella lapillus, were more bent in profile. Laboratory experiments were conducted to examine behavioural responses, and vulnerability of bent and conic barnacles to predation by N. lapillus. Dogwhelks did not attack one morphotype more than the other, but only 15 % of attacks on bent forms were successful compared to 75 % in conic forms. Dogwhelk effluent reduced the time spent feeding by C. montagui (11 %), but there was no significant difference between conic and bent forms. Examination of barnacle morphology indicated a trade-off in investment in shell structure and feeding appendages associated with being bent, but none with egg or somatic tissue mass. These results are consistent with C. montagui showing an induced defence comparable to that found in its congeners Chthamalus anisopoma and Chthamalus fissus on the Pacific coast of North America, but further work to demonstrate inducibility is required.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agrawal AA (2001) Phenotypic plasticity in the interactions and evolution of species. Science 294:321–326

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson DT (1987) Cirral activity of barnacles. In: Southward AJ (ed) Barnacle biology. Crustacean Issues 5:135–174

  • Appleton RD, Palmer AR (1988) Water-borne stimuli released by predatory crabs and damaged prey induce more predator-resistant shells in a marine gastropod. Proc Nat Acad Sci 85:4387–4391

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Arsenault DJ, Marchinko KB, Palmer AR (2001) Precise tuning of barnacle leg length to coastal wave action. Proc R Soc B 268:2149–2154

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bertness MD, Gaines SD, Yeh SM (1998) Making mountains out of barnacles: the dynamics of acorn barnacle hummocking. Ecology 79:1382–1394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourget E (1987) Barnacle shells: composition structure and growth. In: Southward AJ (ed) Barnacle biology. Crustacean Issues 5:267–285

  • Burrows MT, Hughes RN (1991) Variation in foraging behaviour among individuals and populations of dogwhelks Nucella lapillus: natural constraints on energy intake. J Anim Ecol 60:497–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark CW, Harvell CD (1992) Inducible defences and the allocation of resources: a minimal model. Am Nat 139:521–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connell JH (1961) Effects of competition predation by Thais lapillus and other factors on natural populations of the barnacle Balanus balanoides. Ecol Monogr 31:61–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crisp DJ, Maclean FJ (1990) The relation between the dimensions of the cirral net, the beat frequency and the size and age of the animal in Balanus balanoides and Elminius modestus. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 70:505–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crisp DJ, Southward AJ, Southward EC (1981) On the distribution of the intertidal barnacles Chthamalus stellatus, Chthamalus montagui and Euraphia depressa. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 61:359–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crothers JH (1985) Dog-whelks: an introduction to the biology of Nucella lapillus (L.). Field Stud 6:291–360

  • Dunkin SD, Hughes RN (1984) Behavioral components of prey selection by dogwhelks Nucella lapillus (L.) feeding on barnacles Semibalanus balanoides (L.) in the laboratory. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 79:91–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebling FG, Kitching JA, Muntz L, Taylor CM (1964) The ecology of Lough Ine: experimental observations of the destruction of Mytilus edulis and Nucella lapillus by crabs. J Anim Ecol 33:73–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvell CD (1984) Predator-induced defence in a marine bryozoan. Science 224:1357–1359

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Harvell CD (1990) The ecology and evolution of inducible defences. Q Rev Biol 65:323–340

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Iyengar EV, Harvell CD (2002) Specificity of cues inducing defensive spines in the bryozoan Membranipora membranacea. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 225:205–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarrett JN (2008) Inter-population variation in shell morphology of the barnacle Chthamalus fissus. J Crustacean Biol 28:16–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarrett JN (2009) Predator-induced defense in the barnacle Chthamalus fissus. J Crustacean Biol 29:329–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson MP, Hughes RN, Burrows MT, Hawkins SJ (1998) Beyond the predation halo: small scale gradients in barnacle populations affected by the relative refuge value of crevices. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 231:163–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kishida O, Trussell GC, Mougi A, Nishimura K (2010) Evolutionary ecology of inducible morphological plasticity in predator-prey interaction: toward the practical links with population ecology. Popul Ecol 52:37–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitching JA, Muntz L, Ebling FJ (1966) The ecology of Lough Ine. XV. The ecological significance of shell and body forms in Nucella. J Anim Ecol 35:113–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lively CM (1986a) Predator-induced shell dimorphism in the acorn barnacle Chthamalus anisopoma. Evolution 40:232–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lively CM (1986b) Competition, comparative life histories and maintenance of shell dimorphism in a barnacle. Ecology 67:858–864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lively CM (1986c) Canalization versus developmental conversion in a spatially-variable environment. Am Nat 128:561–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lively CM, Hazel WN, Schellenberger MJ, Michelson KS (2000) Predator-induced defence: variation for inducibility in an intertidal barnacle. Ecology 81:1240–1247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marchinko KB (2003) Dramatic phenotypic plasticity in barnacle legs Balanus glandula (Darwin): magnitude age dependence and speed of response. Evolution 57:1281–1290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miner BG, Donovan DA, Portis LM, Goulding TC (2013) Whelks induce an effective defense against sea stars. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 493:195–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raimondi PT, Forde SE, Delph LF, Lively CM (2000) Processes structuring communities: evidence for trait-mediated indirect effects through induced polymorphisms. Oikos 91:353–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reimer O, Tedengren M (1996) Phenotypical improvement of morphological defences in the mussel Mytilus edulis induced by exposure to the predator Asterias rubens. Oikos 75:383–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reimer O, Olsson B, Tedengren M (1995) Growth physiological rates and behaviour of Mytilus edulis exposed to the predator Asterias rubens. Mar Freshw Behav Physiol 25:233–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Relyea RA, Auld JR (2004) Having the guts to compete: how intestinal plasticity explains costs of inducible defences. Ecol Lett 7:869–875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roff DA (1996) The evolution of threshold traits in animals. Q Rev Biol 71:3–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoeppner NM, Relyea RA (2005) Damage digestion and defence: the roles of alarm cues and kairomones for inducing prey defences. Ecol Lett 8:505–512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith LD, Jennings JA (2000) Induced defensive responses by the bivalve Mytilus edulis to predators with different attack modes. Mar Biol 136:461–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Southward AJ (1991) 40 years of change in species composition and population density of barnacles on a rocky shore near Plymouth. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 71:495–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tollrian R, Harvell CD (1999) The ecology and evolution of inducible defences. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Toth GB, Pavia H (2000) Water-borne cues induce chemical defence in a marine alga (Ascophyllum nodosum). Proc Nat Acad Sci 97:14418–14420

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Trussell GC (1996) Phenotypic plasticity in an intertidal snail: the role of a common crab predator. Evolution 50:448–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Buskirk J, Arioli M (2002) Dosage response of an induced defence: how sensitive are tadpoles to predation risk? Ecology 83:1580–1585

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vos M, Kooi BW, DeAngelis DL, Mooij WM (2004) Inducible defences and the paradox of enrichment. Oikos 105:471–480

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by a NERC New Investigator Award to S. R. Jenkins. Special thanks are due to Georgina Budd, Patricia Masterson and Thea De Kline for providing much appreciated assistance in the field, and Kevin Atkins, Peter Rendle and John Rundle for technical support. J.M. is grateful to Prof. R. D. Pingree and Prof. A. J. Southward for offering their comments and expertise on oceanography and rocky shore ecology, respectively, and also indebted to many people at SAMS in Scotland, who generously cooperated in fieldwork surveys. Thanks to two anonymous reviewers for assistance in substantially improving the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stuart R. Jenkins.

Additional information

Communicated by J. Grassle.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Murua, J., Burrows, M.T., Hughes, R.N. et al. Phenotypic variation in shell form in the intertidal acorn barnacle Chthamalus montagui: distribution, response to predators and life history trade-offs. Mar Biol 161, 2609–2619 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-014-2532-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-014-2532-5

Keywords

Navigation