Attraction of the amphipod Gammarus pulex to water-borne cues of food

Abstract

We examined the ability of the amphipod Gammarus pulex to detect chemical cues released from potential food sources. Therefore, response of G. pulex to chemical cues from food was tested in paired-choice laboratory experiments. Comparisons were made between artificial and natural leaves, with and without the importance of aufwuchs, and with different components of the aufwuchs community. Our study demonstrated that G. pulex actively chose its food and that G. pulex is most strongly attracted to the aufwuchs on discs rather than to the leaf itself. Fungi and bacteria are more important in the food selection process than algae probably because fungal and bacterial cues are more specific cues for decaying leaves than algal cues, since algae also grow on mineral substrates and then do not contribute to leaf decomposition.

Preferences of juveniles and adults of the invasive Ponto-Caspian amphipod Pontogammarus robustoides for various species of macrophytes and artificial substrata

“…Individuals of P. robustoides of the body length below 6 mm feed mainly on periphyton and plant detritus, but they can also consume tissues of living vascular plants (Berezina et al, 2009) or macroalgae, such as Cladophora sp., by puncturing their cell walls and sucking the contents of their cells (Berezina & Panov, 2003). Given that amphipods are able to perceive chemical signals from the potential food sources and use them in their foraging behaviour (De Lange et al, 2005), the presence of appropriate food may affect their habitat selection. Thus, it is possible that juvenile gammarids in our experiments selected particular plant substrata depending not only on their physical structure, but also on their nutritional quality.…”

“…It was found that various gammarid species could use signals released by potential food sources (De Lange et al, 2005), predators (Baumgärtner et al, 2002) and/or mussel beds constituting a suitable substratum for some of them (van Overdijk et al, 2003;Kobak & _ Zytkowicz, 2007;Kobak et al, 2009). Physical properties of the substratum are one of the most important parameters determining its quality and affecting habitat choice.…”

Influence of substrate preference and complexity on co-existence of two non-native gammarideans (Crustacea: Amphipoda)

“…Substrate choice and activity patterns of gammarids can be influenced by a number of factors such as age of the gammarid and time of day (Elliott 2005), structure of substrates and physical and chemical parameters in the environment (Wijnhoven et al 2003;Palmer and Ricciardi 2004;Franken et al 2006;McGrath et al 2007), availability of food (van Dolah 1978;Dahl and Greenberg 1996;De Lange et al 2005;McGrath et al 2007), presence/absence of parasites in gammarids (Mazzi and Bakker 2003;Kaldonski et al 2007), presence/absence/density of predators or predator odors and age of predators (Mathis and Hoback 1997;Dahl and Greenberg 1996;Wudkevich et al 1997;Max Neil et al 1999;Sudo and Azeta 2001;Baumgärtner et al 2002Baumgärtner et al , 2003Pennuto and Keppler 2008) and presence/absence of conspecifics (van Riel et al 2007;Piscart et al 2007). We conducted the substrate-choice experiments in the absence of predators, parasites and food (except macrophytes) and both test species faced the same physical and chemical conditions.…”

GamTox: A Low-Cost Multimetric Ecotoxicity Test withGammarusspp. forInandEx SituApplication

“…The experiments are executed under the same conditions as chosen for the culture concerning light and temperature (15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22) • C). The exposures are arranged in rectangular white-opaque hard-polyethylen containers (PE, 400 mL: 10 cm × 10 cm × 6 cm in high); the exposure lasts for 12 days without any renewal of water, food, or faeces (Figure 1).…”

“…Behavioral alterations have been linked to changes in acetylcholinesterase activity under exposure to neurotoxic pesticides in several aquatic species including gammarids [10,14,15]. Feeding rate is a sensitive sublethal endpoint compared to community-related measures which require changes in species composition before an impact is detected [16,17]. Bloor and Banks [18] compared in situ and ex situ feeding assays with both the pollution-sensitive G. pulex, and the pollution tolerant A. aquaticus.…”