Burrow morphology and behavior of the mud shrimp Upogebia omissa (Decapoda:Thalassinidea:Upogebiidae)

Coelho, Vânia R.; Cooper, Roland A.; Rodrigues, Sérgio de Almeida

doi:10.3354/meps200229

Cited by 79 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, both our sample size (716 individuals) and the percentage of egg carrying females (6.7%) are in the range of previously published studies on thalassinidean shrimps. According to Coelho et al (2000), the relatively low number of individuals reported in demographic studies of ghost shrimps might be due to the cryptic life style of these species. It might be speculated that egg-bearing females are situated deeper in the sediment and, thus, not easily accessible to the yabby pump.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Egg production of the burrowing shrimp Callichirus seilacheri (Bott 1955) (Decapoda, Callianassidae) in northern Chile

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The thalassinidean shrimp Callichirus seilacheri is a common species in the intertidal zone of the South American Pacific coast. However, our knowledge of its reproductive ecology is rather limited. The present study was carried out between January and December 2003 at Las Machas, northern Chile. Although ovigerous females were encountered almost throughout the study period, they were particularly abundant between May and September when water temperatures were lowest and sediment coverage of the burrow entrances was highest. Females of C. seilacheri produced numerous (17,450 ± 3,796 eggs) and small (0.884 ± 0.080 mm; 0.262 ± 0.054 mm 3 ) eggs when compared to other thalassinidean shrimps for which such information is available. Fecundity was positively correlated with female size; however, correlations were allometric, which might be related to the elasticity of the abdomen. Egg volume increased by 41.2% during embryogenesis, and egg loss during the incubation period was on average 8%. Females inverted on average 14.9% of their dry weight into egg production.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Egg production of the burrowing shrimp Callichirus seilacheri (Bott 1955) (Decapoda, Callianassidae) in northern Chile

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is thought that the irrigation and burrow wall 'grooming' (maintenance) and 'gardening' (feeding) activities performed by thalassinidean shrimp could contribute to creating environmental microniches within the burrow (Astall et al, 1997;Coelho et al, 2000;Abed-Navandi et al, 2005), which may influence the microbial signature at different burrow depths and between individual burrows. Niche separation could be one of the most important controls on microbial diversity (Ramette and Tiedje, 2007).…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, thalassinidean shrimp are known to sort sediment particles using their mouth parts and compact the finer particles into the burrow wall, especially in those species that maintain long-term burrow structures, such as the upogebiids (Coelho et al, 2000). In addition, many thalassinidean shrimp excrete mucus to aid in the compaction of the burrow wall sediment and may 'garden' their burrow by incorporating organic matter into the walls (Astall et al, 1997;Coelho et al, 2000;Dworschak et al, 2006;Koller et al, 2006). It can be envisaged that the presence of this material may influence the structure and diversity of bacterial communities within the burrow walls.…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Bioturbating shrimp alter the structure and diversity of bacterial communities in coastal marine sediments

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioturbation is a key process in coastal sediments, influencing microbially driven cycling of nutrients as well as the physical characteristics of the sediment. However, little is known about the distribution, diversity and function of the microbial communities that inhabit the burrows of infaunal macroorganisms. In this study, terminal-restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis was used to investigate variation in the structure of bacterial communities in sediment bioturbated by the burrowing shrimp Upogebia deltaura or Callianassa subterranea. Analyses of 229 sediment samples revealed significant differences between bacterial communities inhabiting shrimp burrows and those inhabiting ambient surface and subsurface sediments. Bacterial communities in burrows from both shrimp species were more similar to those in surface-ambient than subsurface-ambient sediment (R ¼ 0.258, Po0.001). The presence of shrimp was also associated with changes in bacterial community structure in surrounding surface sediment, when compared with sediments uninhabited by shrimp. Bacterial community structure varied with burrow depth, and also between individual burrows, suggesting that the shrimp's burrow construction, irrigation and maintenance behaviour affect the distribution of bacteria within shrimp burrows. Subsequent sequence analysis of bacterial 16S rRNA genes from surface sediments revealed differences in the relative abundance of bacterial taxa between shrimp-inhabited and uninhabited sediments; shrimp-inhabited sediment contained a higher proportion of proteobacterial sequences, including in particular a twofold increase in Gammaproteobacteria. Chao1 and ACE diversity estimates showed that taxon richness within surface bacterial communities in shrimp-inhabited sediment was at least threefold higher than that in uninhabited sediment. This study shows that bioturbation can result in significant structural and compositional changes in sediment bacterial communities, increasing bacterial diversity in surface sediments and resulting in distinct bacterial communities even at depth within the burrow. In an area of high macrofaunal abundance, this could lead to alterations in the microbial transformations of important nutrients at the sediment-water interface.

show abstract

“…Nicol 1932, Gerlach et al 1976, Schuhmacher 1977, Dworschak 1981, Kropp 1981, Scott et al 1988, Manjulatha & Babu 1991, Miller et al 1992, Trager et al 1992, Loo et al 1993, Trager & Genin 1993, Nickell & Atkinson 1995, Stamhuis & Videler 1998a,b,c, Achituv & Pedrotti 1999, Coelho et al 2000, Valdivia & Stolz 2006. A unique adaptation to filter feeding is found in the sessile small hermit crab Paguritta harmsi living in the calcareous tubes of a coral epibiont polychaete worm.…”

Section: Decapodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Particle capture mechanisms in suspension-feeding invertebrates

Riisgård¹,

Larsen²

2010

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

214

179

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A large number of suspension-feeding aquatic animals (e.g. bivalves, polychaetes, ascidians, bryozoans, crustaceans, sponges, echinoderms, cnidarians) have specialized in grazing on not only the 2 to 200 µm phytoplankton but frequently also the 0.5 to 2 µm free-living bacteria, or they have specialized in capturing larger prey, e.g. zooplankton organisms. We review the different particle capture mechanisms in order to illustrate the many solutions to the common problem of obtaining nourishment from a dilute suspension of microscopic food particles. Despite the many differences in morphology and living conditions, particle capture mechanisms may be divided into 2 main types. (1) Filtering or sieving (e.g. through mucus nets, stiff cilia, filter setae), which is found in passive suspension feeders that rely on external currents to bring suspended particles to the filter, and in active suspension feeders that themselves produce a feeding flow by a variety of pump systems. Here the inventiveness of nature does not lie in the capture mechanism but in the type of pump system and filter pore-size. (2) A paddle-like flow manipulating system (e.g. cilia, cirri, tentacles, hair-bearing appendages) that acts to redirect an approaching suspended particle, often along with a surrounding 'fluid parcel', to a strategic location for arrest or further transport. Examples include (1) sieving (e.g. by microvilli in sponge choanocytes, mucus nets in polychaetes, acidians, and salps among others), filter setae in crustaceans, 'ciliary sieving' by stiff laterofrontal cilia in bryozoans and phoronids; and (2) 'cirri trapping' in mussels and other bivalves with eu-laterofrontal cirri, ciliary 'catch-up' in bivalve and gastropod veliger larvae, some polychaetes, entroprocts, and cycliophores. These capture mechanisms may involve contact with a particle, and possibly mechanoreception or chemoreception, or may include redirection of particles by the interaction of multiple currents (e.g. in scallops and other bivalves without eu-laterofrontal cirri). Based on the review, we discuss the current physical and biological understanding of the capture process and suggest a number of specific problems related to particle capture, which may be solved in the future using advanced theoretical, computational and experimental techniques.

show abstract

Burrow morphology and behavior of the mud shrimp Upogebia omissa (Decapoda:Thalassinidea:Upogebiidae)

Cited by 79 publications

References 31 publications

Egg production of the burrowing shrimp Callichirus seilacheri (Bott 1955) (Decapoda, Callianassidae) in northern Chile

Egg production of the burrowing shrimp Callichirus seilacheri (Bott 1955) (Decapoda, Callianassidae) in northern Chile

Bioturbating shrimp alter the structure and diversity of bacterial communities in coastal marine sediments

Particle capture mechanisms in suspension-feeding invertebrates

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About