THE EFFECTS OF THE DEPOSIT FEEDING POLYCHAETE <i>PECTINARIA GOULDII</i> ON THE INTERTIDAL SEDIMENTS OF BARNSTABLE HARBOR1

Gordon, Donald C.

doi:10.4319/lo.1966.11.3.0327

Cited by 90 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Whitlatch, 1974;Fenchel et al, 1975;Fenchel and Kofoed, 1976), or could not be demonstrated (Reid and Reid, 1969). Examples of the latter are known (Nichols, 1959;Mangum, 1964;Gordon, 1966;Powell, 1977), and usually impose relatively fixed upper or lower limits on the grain size utilized. However, the distinction between particle-size selection mechanisms and simple morphological constraints may b e artificial or at best imprecise (e.g.…”

Section: Assessment Of Selective Feedingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Grain-Size Selection by Deposit-Feeding Holothurians and Echinoids (Echinodermata) from a Shallow Reef Lagoon, Discovery Bay, Jamaica

Hammond¹

1982

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The size-frequency distribution of sediments from the foreguts of the aspidochirote holothurians Isostichopus badionotus, Holothur~a rnexlcana and H. arenicola, and the spatangoid echinoids Meoma venlricosa and Plagiobr~ssus grandis, collected in the field, closely resembled those of sediments sampled adjacent to each animal. The differences in graphic mean grain size fell within the range of variability of the available sediment. Laboratory experiments using 2 grades of poorly sorted sand confirmed that I badionotus, H. mexicana, H. arenicola, H. grisea, Actlnopyga agassiziand the apodous holothurian Euapta lappa did not discriminate between different size grains. Small and large specimens of the first 3 species showed no difference In the spectrum of grain sizes ingested In the laboratory. Critical evaluation of previous reports reveals no unequivocal evidence of selective feeding by deposit-feeding holothurians. In general, deposit-feeding holothurians and spatangoids appear to be incapable of exercising any preference for particular grain sizes. The significance of the differences in surface texture of the buccal podia between holothurian species is unclear, but texture does not appear to b e related to size of food particles in any simple way. It is suggested that feeding may not b e a purely mechanical process, as previously thought, but that adhesive mucus on the buccal podia might play a role. In contrast to other deposit-feeding taxa, grain size does not appear to b e a significant mechanism for resource partitioning between coexisting species of tropical holothurians; other studies suggest microhabitat differences may be more important.

show abstract

Section: Assessment Of Selective Feedingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Grain-Size Selection by Deposit-Feeding Holothurians and Echinoids (Echinodermata) from a Shallow Reef Lagoon, Discovery Bay, Jamaica

Hammond¹

1982

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…of sediment size and composition by organisms, through alterations of grain size distribution (Rhoads and Stanley 1964;Gordon 1966), pelletization (Risk and Moffat 1977), and aggregate formation (Rhoads et al 1978) may alter sediment stability. Median grain size of sand and degree of pclletization in the surface 2-3 mm did not differ significantly between my treatments.…”

Section: Modificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sediment stability around animal tubes: The roles of hydrodynamic processes and biotic activity1

Luckenbach

1986

Limnology & Oceanography

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fecal pellets are ejected at the water-sediment interface along with pseudofeces (disturbed material that is not ingested). Gordon (1966) calculated that individuals can process 6 g sediment day-'. Clymenella torquata also feeds at subsurface depths, sometimes as deep as 20 cm (Mangum 1964;Rhoads 1974;Rhoads and Boyer 1982).…”

Section: Recruitment Of Individuals Into the Plankton: The Importancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cistenides gouldii is a burrowing, tubicolous worm. It is a selective deposit feeder (Whitlatch 1974;Gordon 1966). Individuals feed below the surface by orienting themselves head down in the sediments.…”

Section: Recruitment Of Individuals Into the Plankton: The Importancementioning

confidence: 99%

Recruitment of individuals into the plankton: The importance of bioturbation1

Marcus

Schmidt-Gengenbach

1986

Limnology & Oceanography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The eggs of many planktonic copepods sink to the bottom in coastal waters and become buried beneath several centimeters of sediment where they cannot hatch. Bioturbation by three polychaetes, Nephtys incisa, Cistenides gouldii, and Clymenella torquata, promoted the burial of diapause eggs of the planktonic copepod Labidocera aestiva in a laboratory study. More important feeding by the two conveyor‐belt‐feeding species, C. gouldii and C. torquata, promoted the return of buried eggs to the water and water‐sediment interface. The viability of the eggs was unaffected by the translocation process and in these new positions eggs were able to hatch. We suggest that in the field bioturbation directly influences the recruitment of individuals into planktonic populations.

show abstract

THE EFFECTS OF THE DEPOSIT FEEDING POLYCHAETE PECTINARIA GOULDII ON THE INTERTIDAL SEDIMENTS OF BARNSTABLE HARBOR1

Cited by 90 publications

References 9 publications

Analysis of Grain-Size Selection by Deposit-Feeding Holothurians and Echinoids (Echinodermata) from a Shallow Reef Lagoon, Discovery Bay, Jamaica

Analysis of Grain-Size Selection by Deposit-Feeding Holothurians and Echinoids (Echinodermata) from a Shallow Reef Lagoon, Discovery Bay, Jamaica

Sediment stability around animal tubes: The roles of hydrodynamic processes and biotic activity1

Recruitment of individuals into the plankton: The importance of bioturbation1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About