Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 184, Issue 1, pp 205–218 | Cite as

Competition with stone crabs drives juvenile spiny lobster abundance and distribution

  • Donald C. Behringer
  • John E. Hart
Community ecology – original research

Abstract

Interspecific competition is assumed to have a strong influence on the population dynamics of competing species, but is not easily demonstrated for mobile species in the wild. In the Florida Keys (USA), anecdotal observations have long pointed to an inverse relationship in abundance of two large decapod crustaceans found co-occurring in hard-bottom habitat, the stone crab Menippe mercenaria and the Caribbean spiny lobster Panulirus argus. We used them to explicitly test whether competition for a renewable resource (shelter) can drive the abundance and distribution of the inferior competitor. We first explored this relationship in shelter competition mesocosm experiments to determine the competitively dominant species. Results showed that stone crabs are clearly the dominant competitors regardless of the number of lobsters present, the presence of co-sheltering species such as the spider crab, Damithrax spinosissimus, or the order of introduction of competitors into the mesocosm. We also found that lobsters use chemical cues from stone crabs to detect and avoid them. We then tested the ramifications of this competitive dominance in the field by manipulating stone crab abundance and then tracking the abundance and distribution of spiny lobsters through time. Increased stone crab abundance immediately resulted in decreased lobster abundance and increased aggregation. The opposite occurred on sites where stone crabs were removed. When we stopped removing stone crabs from these sites, they soon returned and lobster abundance decreased. This study explicitly demonstrated that interspecific competition can drive population dynamics between these species, and ultimately, community composition in these shallow water habitats.

Keywords

Competition Community ecology Panulirus argus Menippe mercenaria 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank D. Cleveland, J. Anderson, R. Squibb, B. Gutzler, C. Butler, J. Butler, and J. Spadaro for field and laboratory assistance. J. Hart was partially supported by a graduate research assistantship from the University of Florida School of Natural Resources and the Environment. This research was supported by NOAA Florida Sea Grant College Program grant R/LR-B-65 and National Science Foundation grant OCE-0928398 to DCB.

Author contribution statement

DCB and JEH conceived and designed the study, JEH conducted the experiments, and DCB and JEH wrote the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

All applicable institutional and/or national guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.

References

  1. Alley TR (1982) Competition theory, evolution, and the concept of an ecological niche. Acta Biotheor 31:165–179CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson JR, Behringer DC (2013) Spatial dynamics in the social lobster Panulirus argus in response to diseased conspecifics. Mar Ecol-Prog Ser 474:191–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson BJ, Akcakaya HR, Araujo MB, Fordam DA, Martinez-Meyer E, Thuiller W, Brook BW (2009) Dynamics of range margins for metapopulations under climate change. Proc R Soc B 276:1415–1420CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Andree SW (1981) Locomotory activity patterns and food items of benthic postlarval spiny lobsters, Panulirus argus. M.S. Thesis, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  5. Beck MW (1995) Size-specific shelter limitation in stone crabs: a test of the demographic bottleneck hypothesis. Ecology 76(3):968–980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beck MW (1997) A test of the generality of the effects of shelter bottlenecks in four stone crab populations. Ecology 78(8):2487–2503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Behringer DB, Butler MJ IV (2010) Disease avoidance influences shelter use and predation in Caribbean spiny lobster. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:747–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Behringer DC, Butler MJ IV, Shields JD (2006) Ecology: avoidance of disease in social lobsters. Nature 441:421CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Berger DK, Butler MJ IV (2001) Octopuses influence den selection by juvenile Caribbean spiny lobster. Mar Freshw Res 52:1049–1053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Berger KM, Gese EM (2007) Does interference competition with wolves limit the distribution and abundance of coyotes? J Anim Ecol 76:1075–1085CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Blank GS, Figler MH (1996) Interspecific shelter competition between the sympatric crayfish species Procambarus clarkia (Girard) and Procambarus zonangulus (Hobbs and Hobbs). J Crust Biol 16(2):300–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Butler MJ IV, Hunt JH, Herrnkind WF, Childress MJ, Bertelsen R, Sharp W, Matthews T, Field JM, Marshall HG (1995) Cascading disturbances in Florida Bay, USA: cyanobacteria blooms, sponge mortality, and implications for juvenile spiny lobsters Panulirus argus. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 129:119–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Butler IV MJ, Herrnkind WF (2000) Puerulus and juvenile ecology. In: Phillips BF, Cobb JS, Kittaka J (eds) Spiny Lobster Management, 2nd edn. Blackwell Scientific Press, Oxford, pp 276–301Google Scholar
  14. Butler MJ IV, MacDiarmid AB, Booth JD (1999) The cause and consequence on ontogenetic changes in social aggregation in New Zealand spiny lobsters. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 188:179–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Butler MJ IV, Paris CB, Goldstein JS, Matsuda H, Cowen RK (2011) Behavior constrains the dispersal of long-lived spiny lobster larvae. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 422:223–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Capelli GM, Munjal BJ (1982) Aggressive interactions and resource competition in relation to species displacement among crayfish of the genus Orconectes. J Crust Biol 2(4):486–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Case TJ, Gilpin ME (1974) Interference competition and niche theory. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 71(8):3073–3077CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Childress MJ, Herrnkind WF (1997) Den sharing by juvenile Caribbean spiny lobsters (Panulirus argus) in nursery habitat: cooperation or coincidence? Mar Freshw Res 48:751–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Childress MJ, Herrnkind WF (2001) The guide effect influence on the gregariousness of juvenile Caribbean spiny lobsters. Anim Behav 62:465–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Codella SG Jr, Raffa KF (1995) Contributions of female oviposition patterns and larval behavior to group defense in conifer sawflies (Hymenptera: Diprionidae). Oecologia 103:24–33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Connell JH (1961) The influence of interspecific competition and other factors on the distribution of the barnacle Chthamalus stellatus. Ecology 42:710–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dunning JB, Danielson BJ, Pulliam HR (1992) Ecological processes that affect populations in complex landscapes. Oikos 65:169–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Eggleston DB, Lipcius RN (1992) Shelter selection by spiny lobster under variable predation risk, social conditions, and shelter size. Ecology 73(3):992–1011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fletcher RJ (2007) Species interactions and population density mediate the use of social cues for habitat selection. J Anim Ecol 76:598–606CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Gustafsson L (1987) Interspecific competition lowers fitness in collard flycatchers Ficedula albicollis: an experimental demonstration. Ecology 68(2):291–296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hampe A (2004) Bioclimate envelope models? What they detect and what they hide. Global Ecol Biogeogr 13:469–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hobbs JPA, Munday PL (2004) Intraspecific competition controls spatial distribution and social organization of the coral dwelling goby Gobiodon histro. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 278:253–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Holbrook SJ, Schmitt RJ (2002) Competition for shelter space causes density-dependent predation mortality in damselfishes. Ecology 83:2855–2868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Holt RD, Barfield M (2011) Theoretical perspectives on the statics and dynamics of species borders in patchy environments. Am Nat 178(4):6–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Horner AJ, Nickles SP, Weissburg MJ, Derby CD (2006) Source and specificity of chemical cues mediating shelter preference of Caribbean spiny lobsters (Panulirus argus). Biol Bull 211:128–139CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Kanciruk P, Herrnkind W (1978) Mass migration of spiny lobster, Panulirus argus (Crustacean: Palinuridae): behavior and environmental correlates. Bull Mar Sci 28(4):601–623Google Scholar
  32. Kough AS, Paris CB, Butler MJ IV (2013) Larval connectivity and the international management of fisheries. PLoS ONE 8(6):e64970CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Kuefler D, Avger T, Fryxell JM (2013) Density- and resource-dependent movement characteristics in a rotifer. Funct Ecol 27:323–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Langkilde T, Shine R (2004) Competing for crevices: interspecific conflict influences retreat-site selection in montane lizards. Oecologia 140(4):684–691CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Lavalli KL, Herrnkind WF (2001) Collective defense by spiny lobster (Panulirus argus) against triggerfish (Balistes capriscus): effects of number of attackers and defenders. New Zeal J Mar Freshw Res 43(1):15–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lavalli KL, Herrnkind WF (2009) Defensive strategies of Caribbean spiny lobsters: effects of group size and predator group size. New Zeal J Mar Freshw Res 43(1):15–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Liesenjohann T, Palme R, Eccard JA (2013) Differential behavioral and endocrine responses of common voles (Microtus arvalis) to nest predators and resource competitors. BMC Ecol 13:33CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. Lindberg WJ, Frazer TK, Stanton GR (1990) Population effects of refuge dispersion for adult stone crabs (Xanthidae, Menippe). Mar Ecol Prog Ser 66:239–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. MacArthur R, MacArthur J (1961) On bird species diversity. Ecology 42:594–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Martin PR, Martin TE (2001) Ecological and fitness consequences of species coexistence: a removal experiment with wood warblers. Ecology 82(1):189–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Marx JM, Herrnkind WF (1985) Macroalgae (Rhodophyta: Laurencia spp.) as habitat for juvenile spiny lobster, Panulirus argus. Bull Mar Sci 36:423–431Google Scholar
  42. Mintz JD, Lipcius RN, Eggleston DB, Seebo MS (1994) Survival of juvenile Caribbean spiny lobster: effects of shelter size, geographic location and conspecific abundance. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 112:255–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Moss J, Behringer DC, Shields JD, Baeza A, Aguilar-Perera A, Bush PG, Dromer C, Herrera- Moreno A, Gittens L, Matthews TR, McCord MR, Scharer MT, Reynal L, Truelove N, Butler MJ (2013) Distribution, prevalence, and genetic analysis of Panulirus argus virus 1 (PaV1) from the Caribbean Sea. Dis Aquat Org 104:129–140CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. O'Neill DJ, Cobb JS (1979) Some factors influencing the outcome of shelter competition in lobsters (Homarus americanus). Mar Behav Phy 6(1):33–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Park T (1954) Experimental studies of interspecies competition. II. Temperature, humidity, and competition in two species of Tribolium. Physiol Zool 27:177–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pearson RG, Dawson TP (2003) Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: are bioclimatic envelope models useful? Global Ecol Biogeogr 12:361–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Porter H (1960) Zoeal stages of the stone crab Menippe mercenaria (Say). Chesap Sci 1(3–4):168–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ratchford SG, Eggleston DB (1998) Size- and scale-dependent chemical attraction contribute to an ontogenetic shift in sociality. Anim Behav 56:1027–1034CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Robertson DR (1996) Interspecific competition controls abundance and habitat use of territorial Caribbean damselfishes. Ecology 77(3):885–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Shields JD, Behringer DC (2004) A new pathogenic virus in the Caribbean spiny lobster Panulirus argus from the Florida Keys. Dis Aquat Org 59:109–118CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Shulman MJ (1984) Resource limitation and recruitment patterns in a coral reef fish assemblage. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 74:85–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Spicer JI, Gaston KJ (1999) Physiological diversity and its ecological implications. Blackwell Science, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  53. Stentiford GD, Shields JD (2005) A review of the parasitic dinoflagellates Hematodinium species and Hematodinium-like infections in marine crustaceans. Dis Aquat Organ 66:47–70CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Tilman D (1994) Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats. Ecology 75(1):2–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Usio N, Konishi M, Nakano S (2001) Species displacement between an introduced and a ‘vulnerable’ crayfish: the role of aggressive interactions and shelter competition. Biol Invasions 3:179–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wang D (1975) Agonistic and shell fighting behaviors of two sympatric species of hermit crabs. M.S. thesis, University of Delaware, LewesGoogle Scholar
  57. Wilber DH (1988) The influence of sexual selection and predation on the mating and postcopulatory guarding. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 24(6):445–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zimmer-Faust RK, Tyre JE, Case JF (1985) Chemical attraction causing aggregation in the spiny lobster, Panulirus interruptus (Randall), and its probable ecological significance. Biol Bull 169:106–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Forest Resources and Conservation, Program in Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA
  2. 2.Emerging Pathogens Institute, University of FloridaGainesvilleUSA
  3. 3.School of Natural Resources and EnvironmentUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations