The acceptability of mosses as food for generalist herbivores, slugs in the Arionidae

Abstract

Observations in the held suggest that moss shoots are seldom freely consumed by either vertebrate or invertebrate herbivores, but damage to immature capsules by slugs is abundant. Palatability of the mosses Mnium hornum, Brachythecium rutabulum and Funaria hygrometrica to the generalist herbivores, Arion subfuscus and A. rufus was investigated by offering the slugs four stages in the moss life cycle; protonema, leafy shoot, immature capsule and mature capsule. The slugs showed a preference for immature capsules and protonemata in all moss species tested. Consumption of shoots of M. hornum and B. rutabulum was negligible even after seven days starvation, but some shoots of F. hygrometrica were eaten in every overnight trial performed. Shoot extracts on starch‐wafer substrate appeared to be more acceptable than intact shoots suggesting that the cell wall provides the barrier to free consumption. The form and location of a possible feeding deterrent is discussed.

Comparison of gemma production among three Lophozia species during the growing season

“…Another explanation could indicate that a high level of gemma predation (cf. Davidson et al, 1990) favours decreased dormancy of gemmae (Brown and Venable, 1991).…”

Detecting herbivory in two mosses from an Atlantic Forest, Brazil

“…We cannot ignore that bryophytes are poorly studied in relation to their interactions with other organisms, particularly in tropical environments, but we suggest that the injury pattern found in plants of H. tamarisci and L. concinnum may be due to higher protein values compared to total phenol values. For instance, many herbivores prefer immature sporophytes of mosses over leafy gametophytes because the immature sporophytes contain few phenolic acids and much more energy (spores with proteins, lipids, and carbohydrates) in contrast to the gametophytes (Davidson et al, 1990;Glime, 2006;Cornelissen et al, 2007). During our observations in the field and in the laboratory, we did not find injury in sporophytes of these species but only leaf injury.…”

“…The injury pattern that we found in H. tamarisci and L. concinnum has not been commonly recorded for bryophytes, except for bryophytes in tundra and a few species from temperate forests, where these plants make up a large part of the biomass (Prins, 1982;Wyatt & Stoneburner, 1989;Davidson et al, 1990;Glime, 2006). We cannot ignore that bryophytes are poorly studied in relation to their interactions with other organisms, particularly in tropical environments, but we suggest that the injury pattern found in plants of H. tamarisci and L. concinnum may be due to higher protein values compared to total phenol values.…”

Testing the Ecological and Physiological Factors Influencing Reproductive Success in Mosses

“…It is known that microarthropods eat microbes and detritus that live on and among the mosses, but in general, do not feed on the moss tissue itself (Block, 1985, Hopkin, 1997, Klironomos et al, 1992, Sadaka-Laulan et al, 1998, which implies that the mosses are not particularly palatable (Jennings & Barkham, 1975) with the exception of immature protonema and sporophyte capsules (Davidson et al, 1990). Mosses do provide a protected habitat for numerous microarthropods as well as a passing and feeding ground for many other invertebrates (Block, 1985, Glime, 2007).…”