Reproductive cycle of the subarctic brooding asteroid Leptasterias polaris

Boivin, Y.; Larrivée, Denis H.; Himmelman, John H.

doi:10.1007/bf00392673

Cited by 25 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As indicated above, probably all A. vulgaris and most L. polaris in this group should have developed gonads (Smith 1940. Nichols & Barker 1984, Boivin et al 1986). The third group measured 20 to 50 cm and will be called large adults.…”

Section: Distribution and Population Structure Of Seastarsmentioning

confidence: 63%

“…Nevertheless, it is likely that the 1 to 20 cm group represents a number of recent year classes. The size at sexual maturity for L. polarisis unknown, although Boivin et al (1986) indicate that individuals > 10 cm in diameter have fully developed gonads. Thus, gonads probably develop at a somewhat smaller size.…”

Section: Distribution and Population Structure Of Seastarsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…al. 1982, Boivin et al 1986). There is no published information on its growth or population biology.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Distribution, population structure and feeding of subtidal seastars in the northern Gulf of St. Lawrence

Himmelman¹,

Dutil²

1991

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The distribution and size-structure of seastar populations in the Mingan Islands, northern Gulf of St. Lawrence, were examined using quantitative sampling by SCUBA Asterias vulgaris and Leptasterias polaris are the most abundant seastars. In both species, individuals measuring 1 to 5 cm in diameter are concentrated in the rocky subtidal zone, a t a slightly greater depth for A. vulgans (4 to 7 m) than for L. polaris (0 to 3 m). With increasing size and probably the onset of sexual maturity, both species aggregate near the low tide level and join concentrations of several earlier year classes. This shift in distribution is most marked for A vulgaris. Finally, adults measuring > 15 to 20 cm in diameter are associated with mixed and sediment substrata at greater depths. The aggregation in shallow water upon attaining 5 cm in diameter probably occurs because the seastars are attracted to the mussel beds in this zone, whereas the shift to habitats at greater depths at size 15 to 20 cm may b e caused by a change in food preference towards larger prey which are concentrated in the sediment zone (e.g. large bivalves). Crossaster papposus and Solaster endeca are rarer species and also show different patterns of size partitioning related to depth and substratum. Seastars appear to be the dominant predators In the northern Gulf and probably play an important role in determining community structure. A variety of interactions (competition, predation, facilitation) exist between A. vulgaris and L. polaris, and between these seastars and the most abundant benthic carnivore, the whelk Buccinum undatum.

show abstract

Section: Distribution and Population Structure Of Seastarsmentioning

confidence: 63%

Section: Distribution and Population Structure Of Seastarsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Distribution, population structure and feeding of subtidal seastars in the northern Gulf of St. Lawrence

Himmelman¹,

Dutil²

1991

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The interaction between A. vulgaris and L. polaris is possibly also affected by variability in the recruitment of A. vulgaris, which is determined by such factors as fertilization success and larval transport and survival (discussed in Gaymer et al 2001b). Recruitment of L. polaris is probably more stable because of its benthic mode of reproduction (Himmelman et al 1982, Boivin et al 1986. A number of studies of marine invertebrates also suggest that interactions between competing species will depend more on recruitment rates than on the reproductive success of sub-populations (Underwood & Denley 1984, Roughgarden et al 1984, Connolly & Roughgarden 1999.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of intra- and interspecific interactions on the feeding behavior of two subtidal sea stars

Gaymer¹,

Himmelman

Johnson³

2002

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Competition and its effects are difficult to demonstrate, as they vary depending on the species present and the environmental conditions in each community. We conducted laboratory and field experiments to evaluate the effects of intra-and interspecific interactions on the use of food resources and behavior of the sea stars Leptasterias polaris and Asterias vulgaris, 2 major predators in subtidal communities of the northern Gulf of St. Lawrence. We demonstrate interference (encounter) competition between the two. For both species, the presence of the other (as detected by both contact and chemical signals) decreased feeding activity and provoked behavioral changes (avoidance, decrease in percentage feeding). These effects were reversible and short-lived, and were more pronounced when there was a shortage of food and when sea stars were exposed to simulated attacks by the other species (involving pedicellarial pinching). L. polaris seemed to be the inferior competitor as (1) it switched to less profitable prey size (smaller mussels, Mytilus edulis) when A. vulgaris was present, and (2) it avoided A. vulgaris and reduced its feeding activity when food was scarce. The dominance of A. vulgaris is possibly attenuated at our study site (near its northern distributional limit) by the reduction of its fitness when water temperatures are low (most of the year) and during the winter when it migrates to deeper water. Competition for food resources seems to occur periodically (mainly summer), in localized areas (patches and beds of mussels) or when sea stars form dense aggregations in which they are likely to interact frequently. Interactions, and thus the chance of competition, are less likely at greater depths. Coexistence seems to be permitted by both the attenuation of the dominance of A. vulgaris and by the great variations in how L. polaris and A. vulgaris interact (strongly affected by variations in prey availability, sea star abundance, and in the patterns of prey use by both sea stars).

show abstract

“…Recent studies of L. polaris and A. vulgaris have focused on large adults (420 cm in diameter) and considered their distribution and abundance (Himmelman & Lavergne, 1985;Jalbert, 1986;Jalbert et al, 1989;Himmelman, 1991;Himmelman & Dutil, 1991), activity patterns (movement, feeding and reproduction; Himmelman et al, 1982;Boivin et al, 1986;Dutil, 1988;Himmelman & Dutil, 1991;Rochette et al, 1994;Hamel & Mercier, 1995) and interspeci¢c interactions (Morissette & Himmelman, 2000a,b). Dutil (1988) and Himmelman & Dutil (1991) suggest that L. polaris and A. vulgaris are competing because of their overlap in space and food utilization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distribution and feeding ecology of the seastars Leptasterias polaris and Asterias vulgaris in the northern Gulf of St Lawrence, Canada

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extensive field observations were made in the Mingan Islands, northern Gulf of St Lawrence, to evaluate spatial and temporal variations in the use of habitat and prey resources by two major subtidal predators, the seastars Leptasterias polaris and Asterias vulgaris. Although both seastars have similar size structures and generally overlapped in their spatial and temporal distribution, the degree of overlap varied in different sites and appeared to be related to prey abundance, substratum type and slope. Three general patterns were observed: (1) both species aggregating in shallow water and decreasing in numbers with depth; (2) the two species showing inverse depth distributions; and (3) both seastars occurring in low numbers across the subtidal zone. Temporal changes in availability of the preferred prey of the two seastars, the mussel Mytilus edulis, appeared to be a major factor affecting their abundance and distribution. The two seastars occurred together in dense aggregations on mussel beds in shallow water. They consume similar-sized mussels until the number of mussels becomes reduced when A. vulgaris, but not L. polaris, begins to select larger mussels. Once a mussel bed is decimated, the seastars appear to move away, possibly in search of other beds. Intensive seastar foraging limits the distribution of mussels to a few metres in depth. Below the mussel zone, the two seastars are spatially segregated at a small spatial scale (1 m2 quadrat) and select different alternative prey, L. polaris feeding mainly on the crevice-dwelling clam Hiatella arctica and A. vulgaris on the ophiuroid Ophiopholis aculeata. The size partitioning of the preferred prey in shallow water, and spatial segregation and selection of different alternative prey at greater depths may reflect mechanisms permitting the two seastars to coexist.

show abstract

Reproductive cycle of the subarctic brooding asteroid Leptasterias polaris

Cited by 25 publications

References 24 publications

Distribution, population structure and feeding of subtidal seastars in the northern Gulf of St. Lawrence

Distribution, population structure and feeding of subtidal seastars in the northern Gulf of St. Lawrence

Effect of intra- and interspecific interactions on the feeding behavior of two subtidal sea stars

Distribution and feeding ecology of the seastars Leptasterias polaris and Asterias vulgaris in the northern Gulf of St Lawrence, Canada

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About