Crustaceans as Powerful Models in Aquatic Chemical Ecology



Crustaceans use chemical cues to find and assess mates, signal dominance, recognize known conspecifics, find favored foods and appropriate habitats, and assess threats such as the presence of predators. The behavior demonstrating these cues is dramatic (e.g., males of some species will guard and try to copulate with sponges, rocks, or even other males treated with water holding receptive, conspecific females), but the specific chemicals eliciting these behaviors have rarely been unambiguously described. Here I discuss the known compounds that affect crustacean behaviors and note that identifying active chemical signals and cues may be a challenge because these chemicals may: (1) occur at low concentrations in a media holding many other metabolites, (2) be complex blends instead of particular pure compounds – and it may be the blend itself (the specific ratio of different signaling molecules) that carries information, (3) be “combination-lock” cascades of chemical signals and cues that have to occur in the correct order to generate a critical behavior, and (4) have been selected as critical molecules eliciting behavior because they rapidly degrade, thus preventing maladaptive behavior based on old data. These potential traits will make separation and structural determination difficult. Despite many signals and cues being delivered via water, there are several examples of cuing compounds being lipid-soluble; it is important for biologists to realize that even lipids dissolve to some degree in water and can thus function as waterborne cues. Because of the critical role that crustaceans play in marine and freshwater food webs, the effects of chemical mediation of crustacean behavior can reach far beyond the direct effects on crustaceans to impact community organization and even ecosystem-level processes.


Chemical Signal Blue Crab Hermit Crab Male Crab Stone Crab 



My research has been supported primarily by the U.S. National Science Foundation and the Fogarty International Center of the National Institutes of Health.


  1. Acquistapace P, Calamai L, Hazlett BA, Gherardi F (2005) Source of alarm substances in crayfish and their preliminary chemical characterization. Can J Zool 83:1624–1630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Asai N, Fusetani N, Matsunaga S, Sasaki J (2000) Sex pheromones of the hair crab EP Erimacrus isenbeckii. Part 1: isolation and structures of novel ceramides. Tetrahedron 56:9895–9899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atema J, Steinbach MA (2007) Chemical communication in the social behavior of the lobster Homarus americanus and other decapod crustacea. In: Duffy E, Thiel M (eds) Ecology and evolution of social behavior: crustaceans as model systems, pp. 115–144. Oxford University Press, New York, p 520Google Scholar
  4. Bagoien E, Kiorboe T (2005) Blind dating – mate finding in planktonic copepods. I. Tracking the pheromone trail of Centropages typicus. Mar Ecol Progr Ser 300:105–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bailey RJE, Birkett MA, Ingvarsdottir A, Mordue (Luntz) AJ, Mordue W, O’Shea B, Pickett JA, Wadhams LJ (2006) The role of semiochemicals in host location and non-host avoidance by salmon louse (Lepeophtheirus salmonis) copepodids. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 63:448–456Google Scholar
  6. Burkepile DE, Parker JD, Woodson CD, Mills HJ, Kubanek J, Sobecky PA, Hay ME (2006) Chemically-mediated competition between microbes and animals: microbes as consumers in food webs. Ecology 87:2821–2831CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bushmann PJ, Atema J (1996) Nephropore rosette glands of the lobster Homarus americanus: possible sources of urine pheromones. J Crust Biol 16:221–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cruz-Rivera E, Hay ME (2003) Prey nutritional quality interacts with chemical defenses to affect consumer feeding and fitness. Ecol Monogr 73:483–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dreanno C, Kirby RR, Clare AS (2006) Locating the barnacle settlement pheromone: spatial and ontogenetic expression of the settlement-inducing protein complex of Balanus amphitrite. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 273:2721–2728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ferner MC, Smee DL, Chang YP (2005) Cannibalistic crabs respond to the scent of injured conspecifics: danger or dinner? Mar Ecol Prog Ser 300:193–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gil-Turnes MS, Fenical W (1992) Embryos of Homarus americanus are protected by epibiotic bacteria. Biol Bull 182:105–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gil-Turnes MS, Hay ME, Fenical W (1989) Symbiotic marine bacteria chemically defend crustacean embryos from a pathogenic fungus. Science 246:116–118CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hardege JD, Jennings A, Hayden D, Muller CT, Pascoe D, Bentley MG, Clare AS (2002) Novel behavioural assay and partial purification of a female-derived sex pheromone in Carcinus maenas. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 244:179–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hassler C, Brockmann HJ (2001) Evidence for use of chemical cues by male horseshoe crabs when locating nesting females (Limulus polyphemus). J Chem Ecol 27:2319–2335CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Hay ME (1996) Marine chemical ecology: what is known and what is next? J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 200:103–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hay M, Kubanek J (2002) Community and ecosystem level consequences of chemical signaling in the plankton. J Chem Ecol 28:1981–1996Google Scholar
  17. Hay ME, Pawlik JR, Duffy JE, Fenical W (1989) Seaweed-herbivore-predator interactions: host-plant specialization reduces predation on small herbivores. Oecologia 81:418–427Google Scholar
  18. Hay ME, Duffy JE, Fenical W (1990) Host-plant specialization decreases predation on a marine amphipod: an herbivore in plant’s clothing. Ecology 71:733–743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hayden D, Jennings A, Muller C, Pascoe D, Bublitz R, Webb H, Breithaupt T, Watkins L, Hardege J (2007) Sex-specific mediation of foraging in the shore crab, Carcinus maenas. Horm Behav 52:162–168CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Horner AJ, Weissburg MJ, Derby CD (2004) Dual antennular chemosensory pathways can mediate orientation by Caribbean spiny lobsters in naturalistic flow conditions. J Exp Biol 207:3785–3796CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Kamio M, Matsunaga S, Fusetani N (2002) Copulation pheromone in the crab Telmessus cheiragonus (Brachyura: Decapoda). Mar Ecol Prog Ser 234:183–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Long JD, Smalley GW, Barsby T, Anderson JT, Hay ME (2007) Chemical cues induce consumer-specific defenses in a bloom-forming marine phytoplankton. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 104:10512–10517CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Mathews LM (2003) Tests of the mate-guarding hypothesis for social monogamy: male snapping shrimp prefer to associate with high-value females. Behav Ecol 14:63–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McClintock JB, Janssen J (1990) Pteropod abduction as a chemical defense in a pelagic Antarctic amphipod. Nature 346:462–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Miller G, Tybur JM, Jordan BD (2007) Ovulatory cycle effects on tip earnings by lap dancers: economic evidence for human estrus? Evol Hum Behav 28:375–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Moore PA (2007) Agonistic behavior in freshwater crayfish: the influence of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on aggressive behavior and dominance. In: Duffy JE, Thiel M, Duffy JE, Thiel M (eds) Evolutionary ecology of social and sexual systems: crustacea as models organisms. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 90–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moore PA, Bergman DA (2005) The smell of success and failure: the role of intrinsic and extrinsic chemical signals on the social behavior of crayfish. Integr Comp Biol 45:650–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pohnert G, Steinke M, Tollrian R (2007) Chemical cues, defence metabolites and the shaping of pelagic interspecific interactions. Trends Ecol Evol 22:198–204CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Raffell JA, Krug PJ, Zimmer RK (2004) The ecological and evolutionary consequences of sperm chemoattraction. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 101:4501–4506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rittschof D, Cohen JH (2004) Crustacean peptide and peptide-like pheromones and kairomones. Peptides 25:1503–1516CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Sato T, Goshima S (2007) Female choice in response to risk of sperm limitation by the stone crab, Hapalogaster dentate. Anim Behav 73:331–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Selander E, Thor P, Toth G, Pavia H (2006) Copepods induce paralytic shellfish toxin production in marine dinoflagellates. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 273:1673–1680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Smee DL, Weissburg MJ (2006a) Clamming up: environmental forces diminish the perceptive ability of bivalve prey. Ecology 87:1587–1598CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Smee DL, Weissburg MJ (2006b) Hard clams (Mercenaria mercenaria) evaluate predation risk using chemical signals from predators and injured conspecifics. J Chem Ecol 32:605–619CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Snell TW, Morris RD (1993) Sexual communication in copepods and rotifers. Hydrobiologia 255:109–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stachowicz JJ, Hay ME (1999a) Reduced mobility is associated with compensatory feeding and increased diet breadth of marine crabs. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 188:169–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stachowicz JJ, Hay ME (1999b) Reducing predation through chemically-mediated camouflage: indirect effects of plant defenses on herbivores. Ecology 80:495–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Stebbing PD, Bentley MG, Watson GJ (2003) Mating behaviour and evidence for a female released courtship pheromone in the signal crayfish Pacifastacus leniusculus. J Chem Ecol 29:465–475CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Stern K, McClintock MK (1998) Regulation of ovulation by human pheromones. Nature 392:177–179CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Tankersley RA, Bullock TM, Forward RB, Rittschof D (2002) Larval release behaviors in the blue crab Callinectes sapidus: role of chemical cues. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 273:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Thornhill R, Gangestad SW (1999) The scent of symmetry: a human sex pheromone that signals fitness? Evol Hum Behav 20:175–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Toth GB (2004) Screening for induced herbivore resistance in Swedish intertidal seaweeds. Mar Biol 151:1597–1604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tricarico E, Gherardi F (2006) Shell acquisition by hermit crabs: which tactic is more efficient? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 60:492–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Yoshida WY, Bryan PJ, Baker BJ, McClintock JB (1995) Pteroenone: a defensive metabolite of the abducted Antarctic pteropod Clione antartica. J Org Chem 60:780–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ziegler TA, Forward RB (2007) Larval release behaviors in the caribbean spiny lobster, Panulirus argus: role of peptide pheromones. J Chem Ecol 33:1795–1805CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of BiologyGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations