Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine what ecological benefits Geodia vosmaeri (Gv) and Amphimedon erina (Ae) gain from their symbiosis. The prevailing, though untested, hypotheses are that Ae protects Gv from predators through chemical defenses and that Gv provides Ae access to substrata. Data from our experiments support these hypotheses. During field surveys, Ae was never found growing without Gv in this habitat. Ae was the only epibiont on 81% of the Gv surveyed. Field feeding assays using chemical extracts indicated that Ae is less palatable than Gv. Laboratory feeding assays using sponge tissue demonstrated that spongivorous sea stars avoided contact with Ae tissue and frequently accepted Gv tissue for consumption. In caging experiments, predator exclusion had no effect on Gv tissue loss. Amphimedon erina may benefit from the vertical substrata represented by Gv colonies because Ae grown in a vertical orientation experienced less tissue loss compared to Ae grown horizontally. Taken together, our results provide empirical support for the hypothesis that Gv is afforded chemical protection from predators through Ae and some evidence that Ae benefits from growing on Gn substrata.
Guest editors: M. Maldonado, X. Turon, M. A. Becerro & M. J. Uriz / Ancient animals, new challenges: developments in sponge research
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ávila, E., J. L. Carballo, & J. A. Cruz-Barraza, 2007. Symbiotic relationships between sponges and other organisms from the Sea of Cortes (Mexican Pacific coast): same problems, same solutions. Porifera Research: Biodiversity, Innovation and Sustainability: 147–156.
Burns, E. & M. Ilan, 2003. Comparison of anti-predatory defenses of Red Sea and Caribbean sponges. II. Physical defense. Marine Ecology Progress Series 252: 115–123.
Callaway, R. M., 2007. Positive interactions and interdependence in plant communities. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Cardenas, P., 2010. Phylogeny, taxonomy and evolution of the Astrophorida (Porifera, Demospongiae). Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Bergen (http://bora.uib.no/handle/1956/4020).
Chanas, B. & J. R. Pawlik, 1995. Defenses of Caribbean sponges against predatory reef fish. II. Spicules, tissue toughness, and nutritional quality. Marine Ecology Progress Series 127: 195–211.
de Laubenfels, M. W., 1936. A discussion of the sponge fauna of the Dry Tortugas in particular and the West Indies in General, with material for a revision of the families and orders of the Porifera. Papers from Tortugas Laboratory, 30: 1–225, pls 1–22.
Dunlap, M. & J. R. Pawlik, 1996. Video-monitored predation by Caribbean reef fishes on an array of mangrove and reef sponges. Marine Biology 126: 117–123.
Engel, S. & J. R. Pawlik, 2000. Allelopathic activities of sponge extracts. Marine Ecology Progress Series 207: 273–281.
Engel, S. & J. R. Pawlik, 2005a. Interactions among Florida sponges. I. Reef habitats. Marine Ecology Progress Series 303: 133–144.
Engel, S. & J. R. Pawlik, 2005b. Interactions among Florida sponges. II. Mangrove habitats. Marine Ecology Progress Series 303: 145–152.
Graham, M. H. & M. S. Edwards, 2001. Statistical significance versus fit: estimating the importance of individual factors in ecological analysis of variance. Oikos 93: 505–513.
Hay, M. E., Q. E. Kappel & W. Fenical, 1994. Synergisms in plant defenses against herbivores—interactions of chemistry, calcification, and plant-quality. Ecology 75: 1714–1726.
Hill, M. S., 1996. Symbiotic zooxanthellae enhance boring and growth rates of the tropical sponge Anthosigmella varians forma varians. Marine Biology 125: 649–654.
Hill, M. S., 1998. Spongivory on Caribbean reefs releases corals from competition with sponges. Oecologia 117: 143–150.
Hill, M. S. & A. L. Hill, 2002. Morphological plasticity in the tropical sponge Anthosigmella varians: responses to predators and wave energy. The Biological Bulletin 202: 86–95.
Hill, M. S., N. A. Lopez & K. A. Young, 2005. Anti-predator defenses in western North Atlantic sponges with evidence of enhanced defense through interactions between spicules and chemicals. Marine Ecology Progress Series 291: 93–102.
Hollander, M. & D. A. Wolfe, 1999. Nonparametric statistical methods. Wiley-Interscience, Inc., New York.
Jones, A., J. Blum & J. Pawlik, 2005. Testing for defensive synergy in Caribbean sponges: bad taste or glass spicules? Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 322: 67–81.
Mack, G. A. & J. H. Skillings, 1980. A Friedman-type rank test for main effects in a two-factor. ANOVA Journal of the American Statistical Association 75: 947–951.
Meylan, A., 1988. Spongivory in hawksbill turtles: a diet of glass. Science 239: 393–395.
Palumbi, S., 1985. Spatial variation in an alga-sponge commensalism and the evolution of ecological interactions. The American Naturalist 126: 267–274.
Pawlik, J. R., B. Chanas, R. J. Toonen & W. Fenical, 1995. Defenses of Caribbean sponges against predatory reef fish: I. Chemical deterrency. Marine Ecology Progress Series 127: 183–194.
Pawlik, J. R., S. E. McMurray & T. P. Henkel, 2007. Abiotic factors control sponge ecology in Florida mangroves. Marine Ecology Progress Series 339: 93–98.
Rützler, K., 1970. Spatial competition among Porifera: solution by epizoism. Oecologia 5: 85–95.
Ruzicka, R. & D. F. Gleason, 2009. Sponge community structure and anti-predator defenses on temperate reefs of the South Atlantic Bight. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 380: 36–46.
Sarà, M., 1970. Competition and cooperation in sponge populations. Symposium of the Zoological Society of London 25: 273–284.
Silva, C. M. M., 2002. Revisão das espécies de Geodia Lamarck, 1815 (Porifera, Astrophorida, Geodiidae) do Atlântico Ocidental e Pacífico Oriental. Ph.D. Dissertation. Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo.
Sollas, W. J., 1886. Preliminary account of the tetractinellid sponges dredged by H.N.S. Challenger, 1872–1876. Part. I. The Choristida. Scientific Proceedings of the Royal Dublin Society. (new ser.) 5: 177–199.
Southwell, M. W., J. B. Weisz, C. S. Martens & N. Lindquist, 2008. In situ fluxes of dissolved inorganic nitrogen from the sponge community on Conch Reef, Key Largo, Florida. Limnology and Oceanography 53: 986–996.
Waddell, B. & J. R. Pawlik, 2000a. Defenses of Caribbean sponges against invertebrate predators. I. Assays with hermit crabs. Marine Ecology Progress Series 195: 125–132.
Waddell, B. & J. R. Pawlik, 2000b. Defenses of Caribbean sponges against invertebrate predators: II. Assays with sea stars. Marine Ecology Progress Series 195: 133–144.
Weisz, J. B., A. J. Massaro, B. D. Ramsby & M. S. Hill, 2010. Zooxanthellar symbionts shape host sponge trophic status through translocation of carbon. Biological Bulletin 219: 189–197.
Wilcox, T. P., M. Hill & K. DeMeo, 2002. Observations on a new two-sponge symbiosis from the Florida Keys. Coral Reefs 21: 198–204.
Wulff, J. L., 1995. Sponge-feeding by the Caribbean starfish Oreaster reticulatus. Marine Biology 123: 313–325.
Wulff, J. L., 1997a. Mutualisms among species of coral reef sponges. Ecology 78: 146–159.
Wulff, J. L., 1997b. Parrotfish predation on cryptic sponges of Caribbean coral reefs. Marine Biology 129: 41–52.
Wulff, J. L., 2005. Trade-offs in resistance to competitors and predators, and their effects on the diversity of tropical marine sponges. The Journal of Animal Ecology 74: 313–321.
Wulff, J. L., 2006a. Ecological interactions of marine sponges. Canadian Journal of Zoology 84: 146–166.
Wulff, J. L., 2006b. Sponge systematics by starfish: predators distinguish cryptic sympatric species of Caribbean fire sponges, Tedania ignis and Tedania klausi n. sp. (Demospongiae, Poecilosclerida). Biological Bulletin 211: 83–94.
Wulff, J. L., 2008a. Collaboration among sponge species increases sponge diversity and abundance in a seagrass meadow. Marine Ecology 29: 193–204.
Wulff, J. L., 2008b. Life-history differences among coral reef sponges promote mutualism or exploitation of mutualism by influencing partner fidelity feedback. The American Naturalist 171: 597–609.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ramsby, B., Massaro, A., Marshall, E., Wilcox, T., Hill, M. (2011). Epibiont–basibiont interactions: examination of ecological factors that influence specialization in a two-sponge association between Geodia vosmaeri (Sollas, 1886) and Amphimedon erina (de Laubenfels, 1936). In: Maldonado, M., Turon, X., Becerro, M., Jesús Uriz, M. (eds) Ancient Animals, New Challenges. Developments in Hydrobiology, vol 219. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4688-6_27
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4688-6_27
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-4687-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-4688-6
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)