Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T13:33:25.423Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Competition between the non-native amphipod Caprella mutica and two native species of caprellids Pseudoprotella phasma and Caprella linearis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Richard Shucksmith ,
Elizabeth J. Cook ,
David J. Hughes  and
Michael T. Burrows
Richard Shucksmith*
Affiliation:
Scottish Association for Marine Science, Dunstaffnage Marine Laboratory, Oban, Argyll, PA37 1QA
Elizabeth J. Cook
Affiliation:
Scottish Association for Marine Science, Dunstaffnage Marine Laboratory, Oban, Argyll, PA37 1QA
David J. Hughes
Affiliation:
Scottish Association for Marine Science, Dunstaffnage Marine Laboratory, Oban, Argyll, PA37 1QA
Michael T. Burrows
Affiliation:
Scottish Association for Marine Science, Dunstaffnage Marine Laboratory, Oban, Argyll, PA37 1QA
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: R. Shucksmith, Scottish Association for Marine Science, Dunstaffnage Marine Laboratory, Oban, Argyll, PA37 1QA email: rshucksmith@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Competition plays an important role in invasion dynamics. According to Elton's biodiversity and invasibility hypothesis, non-native species must be competitively superior to the resident species in order to successfully invade. An invader that is ecologically similar to a native species may cause intense interspecific competition as they both require the same resource. Furthermore, an increase in the density of an invading competitor may enhance the intensity of the competitive interaction, however, this may be reduced if the inferior competitor has a refuge that reduces the amount of time it is in direct contact with the superior competitor. In laboratory-based competition experiments between the non-native caprellid Caprella mutica and two ecologically similar native caprellids Caprella linearis and Pseudoprotella phasma, C. mutica successfully displaced both species from homogeneous artificial habitat patches after 48 hours. Patches that contained a refuge reduced the number of C. linearis being displaced but only when C. mutica was at a low density. Potentially aggressive interactions between C. mutica and the native C. linearis may have caused C. linearis to be displaced from the patches and could have caused significantly higher mortality of C. linearis compared to the controls. This is the first study to show that the non-native C. mutica has the ability to displace ecologically similar native species when the resource space is limited and when the density of C. mutica was significantly (10 times) lower than the density of C. linearis.

Keywords

non-nativecompetitioncaprellidsrefugeamphipods
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 89 , Issue 6 , September 2009 , pp. 1125 - 1132
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2009

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

REFERENCES

Ashton, G. (2006) Distribution and dispersal of the non-native caprellid amphipod, Caprella mutica Schurin 1935. PhD thesis. University of Aberdeen, UK.Google Scholar
Bell, S.S., McCoy, E.D. and Mushinksy, H.R. (1991) Habitat structure: the physical arrangement of objects in space. London: Chapman and Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berryman, A.A. and Hawkins, B.A. (2006) The refuge as an integrating concept in ecology and evolution. Oikos 115, 192–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradshaw, C., Collins, P. and Brand, R.A. (2003) To what extent does upright sessile epifauna affect benthic biodiversity and community composition? Marine Biology 143, 783–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Branch, G.M. (1984) Competition between marine organisms: ecological and evolutionary implications. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review 22, 429–593.Google Scholar
Branch, G.M. and Barkai, A. (1988) Interspecific behaviour and its reciprocal interaction with evolution, populations dynamics and community structure. In Chelazzi, G. and Vannini, M. (eds) Behavioural adaptions to intertidal life. New York: Plenum Press, 225–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byers, J.E. (2000) Competition between two estuarine snails: implications for invasions of exotic species. Ecology 81, 1225–1239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byers, J.E. (2002) Physical habitat attribute mediates biotic resistance to non-indigenous species invasion. Oecologia 130, 146–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Connell, J.H. (1983) On the prevalence and relative importance of interspecific competition: evidence from field experiments. American Naturalist 122, 661–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, E.J., Black, K.D., Sayer, M.D.J., Cromey, C., Angel, D., Katz, T., Eden, N., Spanier, E., Karakassis, I., Tsapakis, M. and Malej, A. (2006) Pan-European study on the influence of caged mariculture on the development of sub-littoral fouling communities. ICES Journal of Marine Science 63, 637–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, E.J., Jahnke, M., Kerckhof, F., Minchin, D., Faasse, M., Boos, K. and Ashton, G.A. (2007) European distribution of the introduced amphipod, Caprella mutica (Schurin, 1935). Aquatic Invasions 4, 411–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C. (1872) The origin of species by means of natural selection. London: John Murray, Studio Editions Ltd.Google Scholar
Dick, J.T.A., Montgomery, W.I. and Elwood, R.W. (1999) Intraguild predation may explain an amphipod replacement: evidence from laboratory populations. Journal Zoology 249, 463–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elton, C.S. (1958) The ecology of invasions by animals and plants. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franke, D.H. and Janke, M. (1998) Mechanisms and consequences of intra- and interspecific interference competition in Idotea baltica (Pallas) and Idotea emarginata (Fabricius) (Crustacea: Isopoda): a laboratory study of possible proximate causes of habitat segregation. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 227, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosholz, E.D. and Ruiz, G.M. (2003) Biological invasions drive size increases in marine and estuarine invertebrates. Ecology Letters 6, 700–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guerra-García, J.M. and García-Gómez, J.C. (2001) The spatial distribution of Caprellidea (Crustacea: Amphipoda): a stress bioindicator in Ceuta (North Africa, Gibraltar area). Marine Ecology 22, 1014–1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guerra-García, J.M., Corzo, J. and García-Gómez, J.C. (2002) Clinging behaviour of the caprellidea (Amphipoda) from the Strait of Gibraltar. Crustaceana 75, 41–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gurvevitch, J., Morrow, L.L., Wallace, A. and Walsh, J.S. (1992) A meta-analysis of competition in field experiments. American Naturalist 140, 539–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, R.J. (1940) On the biology of the Caprellidae growth and moulting of Pseudoprotella phasma Montagu. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 24, 483–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchinson, G.E. (1959) Homage to Santa Rosalia or why are there so many kinds of animals? American Naturalist 93, 145–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keith, D.E. (1971) Substrate selection in caprellid amphipods of southern California, with emphasis on Caprella californica Stimpson and Caprella equilibra Say (Amphipoda). Pacific Science 25, 387–394.Google Scholar
Levine, J.M. and D'Antonio, C.M. (1999) Elton revisited; a review of evidence linking diversity and invasibility. Oikos 87, 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, J.M., Adler, P.B. and Yelenik, S.G. (2004) A meta-analysis of biotic resistance to ecotic plant invasions. Ecology Letters 7, 975–989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, P.S., Jensen, G.C. and Armstrong, D.A. (2001) The competitive and predatory impacts of the nonindigenous crab Carcinus maenas (L.) on early benthic phase Dungeness crab Cancer magister Dana. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 258, 39–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melbourne, B.A., Cornell, H.V., Davies, K.F., Dugaw, C.J., Elmendorf, S., Freestone, A.L., Hall, R.J., Harrison, S., Hastings, A., Holland, M., Holyoak, M., Lambrinos, J., Moore, K. and Yokomizo, H. (2007) Invasion in a heterogeneous world: resistance, coexistence or hostile takeover? Ecology Letters 10, 77–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Menge, B.A. and Sutherland, J.P. (1976) Species-diversity gradients: synthesis of roles of predation, competition and temporal heterogeneity. American Naturalist 110, 351–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michel, K., Nauwelaerts, S., Stamhuis, E. and Boos, K. (2007) Is the Japanese skeleton shrimp Caprella mutica a filter feeder? I. Head morphology and kinematics. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A 146, 125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moksnes, P.O., Lipcius, R.N., Pihl, L. and van Montfrans, J. (1997) Cannibal–prey dynamics in young juveniles and postlarvae of the blue crab. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 215, 157–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, P.G. (1984) The fauna of the Clyde sea area Crustacea: Amphipoda. University Marine Biological Station Millport, Occasional Publications, No. 2, 84 pp.Google Scholar
Nakata, K. and Goshima, S. (2003) Competition for shelter of preferred sizes between the native crayfish species Cambaroides japonicus and the alien crayfish species Pacifastacus leniusculus in Japan in relation to prior residence, sex difference, body size. Journal of Crustacean Biology 23, 897–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nauwelaerts, S., Michel, K., Stamhuis, E. and Boos, K. (2007) Is the Japanese skeleton shrimp Caprella mutica a filter feeder? II. Mechanics. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A 146, 126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paine, R.T. (1966) Food web complexity and species diversity. American Naturalist 100, 65–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Race, M.S. (1982) Competitive displacement and predation between introduced and native mud snails. Oecologia 54, 337–347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robertson, D.R. (1998) Implications of body size for interspecific interactions and assemblage organization among coral-reef fishes. Australian Journal of Ecology 23, 252–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, D.R. and Polunin, N.V.C. (1981) Coexistence: symbiotic sharing of feeding territories and algal food by some coral reef fishes from the Western Indian Ocean. Marine Biology 62, 185–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenzweig, M.L. (1981) A theory of habitat selection. Ecology 62, 327–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenzweig, M.L. (1991) Habitat selection and population interactions: the search for mechanism. American Naturalist 137, S5–S28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schoener, T.W. (1986) Mechanistic approaches to community ecology: a new reductionism? American Zoology 26, 81–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shucksmith, R. (2007) Biological invsions: the role of biodiversity in determining community susceptibility to invasion. PhD thesis. University of Aberdeen, UK.Google Scholar
Stachowicz, J.C., Fried, H., Osman, R.W. and Whitlatch, R.B. (2002) Biodiversity, invasion resistance, and marine ecosystem function: reconciling pattern and process. Ecology 83, 2575–2590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stachowicz, J.J. and Byrnes, J.E. (2006) Species diversity, invasion success and ecosystem functioning: combining experimental and observational approaches to assess the roles of resource competition, facilitation and extrinsic factors. Marine Ecology Progress Series 311, 251–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanner, J.E. (2006) Landscape ecology of interactions between seagrass and mobile epifauna: the matrix matters. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 68, 404–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilman, D. (2004) Niche tradeoffs, neutrality, and community structure: a stochastic theory of resource competition, invasion, and community assembly. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 101, 10854–10861.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Underwood, A.J., Chapman, M.G. and Crowe, T.P. (2004) Identifying and understanding ecological preferences for habitat or prey. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 300, 161–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willis, K., Cook, E.J., Fernandez, M.L. and Takeuchi, I. (2004) First record of the caprellid amphipod, Caprella mutica, for the UK. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 84, 1027–1028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar