Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T07:09:30.414Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

X.—On the Feeding Mechanism of a Mysid Crustacean, Hemimysis Lamornæ

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2012

H. Graham Cannon  and
S. M. Manton
H. Graham Cannon
Affiliation:
Professor of Zoology in the University of Sheffield
S. M. Manton
Affiliation:
Yarrow Student of Girton College, Cambridge.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The general biology of the Mysids has recently been studied at great length by Blegvad (1922) at Copenhagen. His paper, containing a very complete literature list, deals with Mysis inermis, Rathke, Mysis flexuosa, Müller, and Mysis neglecta, Sars. His comments on feeding are limited, and refer chiefly to the nature of the food that the animals ate in captivity. Gelderd's work (1909) on the digestive system of the Schizopoda describes the course taken by the food through the gastric mill, the masticatory functions of this apparatus, and the method by which the masticated food and digestive juices are brought together, but does not deal with the manner in which the food reaches the stomach. An account, then, of the method by which a mysid collects its food would fill a gap in our knowledge of these forms. The only description, as far as we are aware, of the feeding habits of a mysid is that of Depdolla (1923), who worked on Praunus [Mysis] flexuosus, but his account is superficial and in our opinion very inaccurate. The following paper deals with the feeding habits of a small mysid, Hemimysis lamornœ, about 8 mm. long, which has established itself in the larger fish-tanks at the M.B.A. laboratory at Plymouth. It breeds freely all the year round, and can be obtained from the tanks in abundance, although it is stated to be only a rare visitor in the Plymouth district.

Type
Research Article
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 55 , Issue 1 , 1927 , pp. 219 - 253
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1927

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature

Blegvad, H., 1922. “On the Biology of some Danish Gammarids and Mysids,” Rep. Danish Biol. St., Copenhagen, vol. xxviii, pp. 1–103.Google Scholar
Borradaile, L. A., 1917. “On the Structure and Function of the Mouth-parts of the Palæmonid Prawns,” Proc. Zool. Soc., London, 1917, pp. 31–71.Google Scholar
Borradaile, L. A., 1922. “On the Mouth-parts of the Shore Crab,” J. Linn. Soc., London, vol. xxv, pp. 115–42, pls. x, xi.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borradaile, L. A., 1926. “Notes upon Crustacean Limbs,” Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., London, ser. 9, vol. xvii, pp. 193–213, pls. vii–x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cannon, H. G., 1922. “On the Labral Glands of a Cladoceran (Simocephalus vetulus), with a description of its mode of feeding,” Q.J. Microsc. Sci., London, vol. lxvi, pp. 213–34, pls. ix, x.Google Scholar
Cannon, H. G., 1924. “On the Development of an Estherid Crustacean,” Phil. Trans. R. Soc., London, ser. B, vol. ccxii, pp. 395–430, pls. xviii–xxiv.Google Scholar
Depdolla, Ph., 1923. “Nahrung und Nahrungserwerb bei Praunus flexuosus (Müll.),” Biol. Centralb., Leipzig, Bd. xliii, pp. 534–46.Google Scholar
Dollo, L., 1909. “La Paleontologie Ethologoque,” Bull. Soc. geol. paleont. hydr., Bruxelles. Mémoires, t. xxiii, pp. 377–421, pls. viii–xi.Google Scholar
Franke, H., 1925. “Der Fangapparat von Chydorus sphericus,” Zs. wiss. Zool., Leipzig, Bd. cxxv, pp. 271–98.Google Scholar
Gelderd, C., 1909. “Research on the Digestive System of the Schizopoda,” Cellule, Louvain, t. xxv, pp. 6–70, pls. i–iv.Google Scholar
Lundblad, O., 1920. “Vergleichende Studien über die Nahrungsaufnahme einiger schwedischer Phyllopoden,” Arkivf. Zoologi, Stockholm, Bd. xiii, pp. 1–114, 1 pl.Google Scholar
Naumann, E., 1921. “Spezielle Untersuchungen über die Ernahrungsbiologie des tierischen Limnoplanktons, I. über die Technik des Nahrungserwerbes bei den Cladoceren und ihre Bedeutung fur die Biologie der Gewässertypen,” Act Univ., Lund, N.F., Avd. 2, Bd. xvii, Nr. 4, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar
Richter, Rud., 1926. “Von Bau und leben der Trilobiten,” Zool. Anz., Leipzig, Bd. lxv, pp. 297–311.Google Scholar
Scourfield, D. J., 1926. “On a New Type of Crustacean from the Old Red Sandstone (Rhynie Chert Bed, Aberdeenshire), Lepidocaris rhyniensis, gen. et sp. nov.,” Phil. Trans. R. Soc., London, ser. B, vol. ccxiv, pp. 153–87, pls. xxi–xxiii.Google Scholar
Storch, O., 1924. “Morphologie und Physiologie des Fangapparates der Daphniden,” Ergbn. Zool., Jena, Bd. vi, pp. 125–234.Google Scholar
Storch, O., 1925 a. “Der Phyllopoden-Fangapparat,” Intern. Rev. Hydrobiol., Leipzig, Bd. xii, 1 Teil, pp. 369–91; Bd. xiii, 2 Teil, pp. 68–93, pls. iii–v.Google Scholar
Storch, O., 1925 b. “Über die Bau und Function der Trilobitengliedmassen,” Zs. wiss. Zool., Leipzig, Bd. cxxv, pp. 299–356, pl. vi.Google Scholar
Storch, O., 1926. “Zur Frage der Deutung der Trilobitengliedmassen,” Zool. Anz., Leipzig, Bd. 67, pp. 145–59.Google Scholar
Storch, O., and Pfisterer, O., 1925 c. “Der Fangapparat von Diaptomus,” Zs. vergl. Physiol., Berlin, Bd. iii, pp. 330–76.Google Scholar