Nematocyst complements of nudibranchs in the genus Flabellina in the Gulf of Maine and the effect of diet manipulations on the cnidom of Flabellina verrucosa

Frick, Kinsey E.

doi:10.1007/s00227-005-0034-1

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, the storage of microbasic mastigophores (a penetrant nematocyst) was favored in both cases (Frick, 2003). A later study by Frick (2005) confirmed that the kleptocnidae complement in several species of the genus Flabellina is highly dependent upon the nudibranchs’ prey species, although the proportion of kleptocnida types in the nudibranch may vary from the proportions of nematocyst types in the prey. These results suggest that the nudibranchs respond to the presence of a potential predator either by altering their feeding, which changes their kleptocnidae complement, or by retaining particular nematocysts from their prey (Frick, 2003).…”

Section: Kleptocnidae Functionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…The most convincing evidence supporting a defensive function of nudibranch kleptocnidae emerged from recent research by Kinsey Frick (2003, 2005). Many aeolid nudibranchs retain only a subset of the available nematocyst types from their cnidarian prey (reviewed in Greenwood, 1988), although at least some species may incorporate nematocysts randomly (Martin, 2003).…”

Section: Kleptocnidae Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Acquisition and use of nematocysts by cnidarian predators

Greenwood

2009

Toxicon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although toxic, physically destructive, and produced solely by cnidarians, cnidocysts are acquired, stored, and used by some predators of cnidarians. Despite knowledge of this phenomenon for well over a century, little empirical evidence details the mechanisms of how (and even why) these organisms use organelles of cnidarians. However, in the past twenty years a number of published experimental investigations address two of the fundamental questions of nematocyst acquisition and use by cnidarian predators: 1) how are cnidarian predators protected from cnidocyst discharge during feeding, and 2) how are the nematocysts used by the predator?

show abstract

Section: Kleptocnidae Functionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Kleptocnidae Functionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acquisition and use of nematocysts by cnidarian predators

Greenwood

2009

Toxicon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is important to note, however, that these preferences might be dependent on the particular prey item. Research on the cnidome of the nudibranch Flabellina verrucosa indicates a preferential uptake of a particular type of mastigophore (microbasic mastigophores) when feeding on Obelia , but this nudibranch does not appear to selectively sequester particular types of nematocysts when feeding on Tubularia (Frick ). In ctenophores, H. rubra appears to consistently sequester the smaller microisorhizas over macroisorhizas from their cnidarian prey (Carré et al.…”

Section: The Evolution Of Nematocyst Sequestration In Metazoamentioning

confidence: 99%

Sequestration of nematocysts by divergent cnidarian predators: mechanism, function, and evolution

Goodheart

Bely

2016

Invertebrate Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals have evolved diverse mechanisms to protect themselves from predators. Although such defenses are typically generated endogenously, some species have evolved the ability to acquire defenses by sequestering defensive chemicals or structures from other species. Chemical sequestration is widespread among animals, but the ability to sequester entire structures, such as organelles, appears to be rare. Here, we review information on the seques-tration of functional nematocysts, the stinging organelles produced by Cnidaria, by divergent predators. Nematocyst sequestration has evolved multiple times, having been documented in Ctenophora, Acoelomorpha, Platyhelminthes, and Mollusca. For each of these phyla, we review the phylogenetic distribution, mechanisms, and possible functions of nematocyst sequestration. We estimate that nematocyst sequestration has evolved 9-17 times across these four phyla. Although data on the mechanism of sequestration remain limited, similarities across several groups are evident. For example, in multiple groups, nematocysts are transported within cells from the gut to peripheral tissues, and certain types of nematocysts are selectively sequestered over others, suggesting convergent evolution in some aspects of the sequestration process across phyla. Similarly, although the function of nematocyst sequestra-tion has not been well documented, several studies do suggest that the nematocysts seques-tered by these groups are effective for defense. We highlight several traits that are common to Ctenophora, Acoelomorpha, Platyhelminthes, and Mollusca and suggest hypotheses for how these traits could have played a role in the evolution of nematocyst sequestration. Finally, we propose a generalized working model for the steps that may lead to the evolution of nemato-cyst sequestration and discuss important areas for future research.

show abstract

“…, b, c), is crucial for our ongoing investigations on nematocyst incorporations in the nudibranchs A. glauca and Aolidia papillosa (Linnaeus, 1761) (C. Östman, F. Gustavsson, A. Karlsson, C. Roat, in preparation). To gain an insight, if these nudibranchs have a preference for storing‐specific cnidae (see Conklin and Mariscal ; Day and Harris ; Frick , ) and if immature nematocysts are incorporated into their cnidosacs (see Greenwood and Mariscal ; Martin and Walther ), we first performed a similar detailed study of the cnidocysts of S. viduatus as we did with M. senile (Östman et al . , b, c).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Karlsson, C. Roat, in preparation). To gain an insight, if these nudibranchs have a preference for storing-specific cnidae (see Day and Harris 1978;Frick 2003Frick , 2005 and if immature nematocysts are incorporated into their cnidosacs (see Greenwood and Mariscal 1984;Martin and Walther 2002), we first performed a similar detailed study of the cnidocysts of S. viduatus as we did with M. senile (Ö stman et al 2010a, b, c). Carlgren (1940) reported four cnidae types of S. viduatus (as Actinothoe viduata, Muller) from the Gullmarsfjord, namely basitrichs (= b-mastigophores), microbasic amastigophores (= p-amastigophores) (see Ö stman et al 2010a), microbasic p-mastigophores and spirocysts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cnidae in the sea anemone Sagartiogeton viduatus (Muller, 1776) (Cnidaria, Anthozoa); A comparison to cnidae in the sea anemone Metridium senile (Linnaeus, 1761) (Cnidaria, Anthozoa)

Östman

Borg²,

Roat

et al. 2012

Acta Zoologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cnidom of the sea anemone Sagartiogeton viduatus (Muller, 1776) is described from interference‐contrast light micrographs (LMs) and scanning electron micrographs (SEMs). Special attention is given to nematocyst maturation, including the differentiation of the shaft into proximal and main regions as helical folding of the shaft wall proceeds. Comparisons are made with Metridium senile (Linnaeus, 1761), whose cnidom, with a few exceptions, is closely similar to that of S. viduatus. The two anemones possess b‐ and p‐mastigophores, p‐amastigophores, isorhizas and spirocysts. Although the majority of cnidae in S. viduatus is smaller than corresponding ones in M. senile, they are grouped into the same size classes as those of M. senile, namely small, medium and large. The main differences from M. senile cnidae are the followings: (1) Large acontia p‐amastigophores are the largest nematocysts in S. viduatus. (2) They are noticeably larger than the large acontia b‐mastigophores, and (3) they are separated from the p‐amastigophores of M. senile by the sinusoid pattern of their U‐shaped capsular matrix. (4) The large acontia b‐mastigophores are microbasic and not mesobasic as in M. Senile, and (5) they do not produce darts. (6) Another difference from M. senile is the absence of catch‐tentacle isorhizas.

show abstract

Nematocyst complements of nudibranchs in the genus Flabellina in the Gulf of Maine and the effect of diet manipulations on the cnidom of Flabellina verrucosa

Cited by 9 publications

References 10 publications

Acquisition and use of nematocysts by cnidarian predators

Acquisition and use of nematocysts by cnidarian predators

Sequestration of nematocysts by divergent cnidarian predators: mechanism, function, and evolution

Cnidae in the sea anemone Sagartiogeton viduatus (Muller, 1776) (Cnidaria, Anthozoa); A comparison to cnidae in the sea anemone Metridium senile (Linnaeus, 1761) (Cnidaria, Anthozoa)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About