Control of seagrass communities and sediment distribution by Callianassa (Crustacea, Thalassinidea) bioturbation

Suchanek, Thomas H.

doi:10.1357/002224083788520216

Cited by 210 publications

(114 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

109

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Whether the absence of seagrass is due to the burrowing activity of the shrimp or whether the seagrass prevents the burrowing remains unclear. Transplantation experiments demonstrate that Callianassa bioturbation negatively influences the health and standing crop of Thalassia, although the root mat may inhibit the invasion by the shrimp (Suchanek 1983). The latter is supported by the findings of Harrison (1987): C. californiensis cannot settle in transplanted Zostera japonica.…”

Section: Influence Of Callianassid Bioturbationmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Callianassids of reef lagoon environments are known to influence sediment grain size distribution. Suchanek (1983) found that sediment pumped from mounds into collection buckets contained mainly smaller particles (< 1.4 mm), whereas larger particles are stored in deep chambers of the burrows in C. rathbunae. Experiments with painted tracer sediment demonstrated that within days smaller particles accumulate at the surface, whereas coarser particles are stored in deeper chambers (30-50 cm) (Tudhope and Scoffin, 1984;Suchanek et al, 1986).…”

Section: Influence Of Callianassid Bioturbationmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…According to Suchanek (1983Suchanek ( , 1985 G. acanthochirus is a seagrass harvester rather than a deposit feeder; it produces no mounds and can be hand-fed with seagrass. The Twin Cays burrows, however, indicate that G. acanthochirus is a deposit feeder.…”

Section: Glypturus Acanthochirusmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Decapod burrows in mangrove‐channel and back‐reef environments at the Atlantic barrier reef, Belize

Dworschak

Ott

1993

Ichnos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Burrows of decapod crustaceans were investigated by in situ resin casting in various mangrove and back-reef environments. Alpheid shrimps (A. floridanus and A. heterochaelis) were the most numerous burrowing shrimps in soft muddy sediments of mangrove channels. Their burrows consist either of a single U or a series of U's inhabited by a pair of shrimp or are Y-shaped and inhabited by a single shrimp and a gobiid associate. Large mounds and deep funnels are produced by the thalassinidean Glypturus acanthochirus, both in bare sediments of mangrove channels and in back-reef subtidal sediments. Their burrows consist of a spiral with several radiating branches leading to the surface and deeper blind chambers often filled with shell particles reaching to a depth of over 160 cm. The thalassinidean Neocallichirus grandimana inhabits the intertidal of protected back-reef sands; it occupies shallow, mainly horizontal burrows. Corallianassa longiventris, characteristic of coarse sediments of the intertidal and shallow subtidal back-reef, inhabits simple J-to U-shaped burrows with blindly ending chambers in 60 to 80 cm sediment depth. Axiopsis serratifrons lives in pairs in sediments with a higher content of coral rubble; its burrows are simple, inclined, and spiral-shaped and reach a sediment depth of 30 cm.All burrows described in this paper are similar to those previously recorded for the respective species. Only the burrows of alpheids are less deep than those described from the intertidal. The burrowing activity of G. acanthochirus greatly influences grain size distribution and accumulation of large shell particles in deeper sediment layers. Burrow types reflect the systematic group to which the animals belong rather than feeding modes.

show abstract

Section: Influence Of Callianassid Bioturbationmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Influence Of Callianassid Bioturbationmentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Decapod burrows in mangrove‐channel and back‐reef environments at the Atlantic barrier reef, Belize

Dworschak

Ott

1993

Ichnos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In northern-Brazil studies on this species are scarce, principally in the estuaries of the bragantine region (northern of Pará State). The callianassid shrimps plays an important role in soft-sediment intertidal benthic habitats as they promote the bioturbation, which directly influence in the chemical (Aller et al 1983, Waslenchuk et al 1983, Ziebis et al 1996, Bird et al 2000 and physical properties of the sediments (Suchanek 1983, Suchanek and. These organisms significantly enhance the sediment turnover, organic matter and nutrient cycling (Waslenchuk et al 1983, Branch and Pringle 1987, Ziebis et al 1996, Webb and Eyre 2004 and redistribute the metals and contaminants , AbuHilal et al 1988).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of feeding in the larval development of the ghost shrimp Callichirus major (Decapoda: Callianassidae)

Abrunhosa

Arruda

Simith

et al. 2008

An. Acad. Bras. Ciênc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigated whether the callianassid Callichirus major shows a lecithotrophic behaviour during larval development. Two experiments were carried out. In the first experiment, larvae were subjected to an initial period of feeding, while in the second they were subjected to an initial period of starvation. In Experiment 1, 80% of C. major larvae succeeded moulting to juvenile stage in treatment with larvae fed every day. In the treatments with larvae fed for 1, 2 and 3 days there was total mortality before they reached the megalopal stage. In Experiment 2, zoea larvae showed more resistance when subjected to an initial period of starvation in which larvae starved for 1, 2 and 3 days and had survival rates of 100, 60 and 80%, respectively. But, a delay in the development duration of the zoeal stages was observed. Total mortality was observed for larvae reared in the treatment with entire starvation. The results suggest that zoeal stages of C. major are not lecithotrophic.

show abstract

“…In the intertidal zone, where physical stresses or biogenic disturbances are common and the community impact of predation and competition is relaxed, facilitation may be an important albeit hitherto largely overlooked structur-ing force (Bertness 1999). Soft-sediment environments, for instance, can be greatly affected by bioturbation or related biogenic disturbances that significantly depress the density and number of other benthic organisms (Rhoads & Young 1970, Brenchley 1981, Wilson 1981, Reise 1983, Suchanek 1983, DeWitt & Levinton 1985, Posey 1986, Flach 1993, Berkenbusch et al 2000, Bolam et al 2000. In such habitats, facilitation processes typically involve the immigration of a disturbance-resistant organism that stabilises the substrate and thereby paves the way for a range of otherwise excluded disturbance-sensitive species (Bertness 1999 and references therein).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intertidal facilitation and indirect effects: causes and consequences of crawling in the New Zealand cockle

Mouritsen¹

2004

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioturbation by the ghost shrimp Callianassa filholi and the lugworms Abarenicola affinis as well as coverage by macroalgae cause the New Zealand cockle Austrovenus stutchburyi (Veneridae) to relocate by crawling longer distances on the sediment surface. On the surface, the cockles become targets for sublethal predation by benthic-feeding fishes, which crop off their feet. This renders the cockles unable to bury for up to 8 wk, thus exposing them to a 5-fold higher predation pressure from shorebirds and the whelk Cominella glandiformis than buried conspecifics. Shell dimensions, foot size, general condition, gender, age, and infections by gymnophallid trematodes do not influence the crawling activity of cockles. However, heavy infection by the digenean trematode Curtuteria australis and the shell-boring spionid polychaete Boccardia acus reduces the distance travelled, and these organisms may hence reinforce the impact of the biogenic disturbers by forcing repeated crawling of the cockles to reach an undisturbed site. The presence of biogenic disturbers and some parasites therefore benefits predating fishes by providing them with an otherwise inaccessible food source, and these in turn benefit birds and whelks through foot-cropping, thus increasing the availability of prey. The gymnophallids also receive an advantage through transmission success to their definitive shorebird hosts. The question as to whether Curtuteria australis benefits, depends on the balance between its loss to fishes (unsuitable hosts) and its increased trophic transmission to its bird hosts. The spionid B. acus on the other hand is negatively affected, since its fate is linked to that of its substrate, which is the shell of the cockle. If the cockle is predated, the attached B. acus will perish also.

show abstract

Control of seagrass communities and sediment distribution by Callianassa (Crustacea, Thalassinidea) bioturbation

Cited by 210 publications

References 18 publications

Decapod burrows in mangrove‐channel and back‐reef environments at the Atlantic barrier reef, Belize

Decapod burrows in mangrove‐channel and back‐reef environments at the Atlantic barrier reef, Belize

The importance of feeding in the larval development of the ghost shrimp Callichirus major (Decapoda: Callianassidae)

Intertidal facilitation and indirect effects: causes and consequences of crawling in the New Zealand cockle

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About