Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:50:32.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Determination of prey capture rates in the stony coral Galaxea fascicularis: a critical reconsideration of the clearance rate concept

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 September 2011

Ronald Osinga*
Affiliation:
Wageningen University, Aquaculture & Fisheries, Wageningen, The Netherlands
Sanne Van Delft
Affiliation:
Wageningen University, Aquaculture & Fisheries, Wageningen, The Netherlands Burgers’ Zoo, Arnhem, The Netherlands
Muhammad Wahyudin Lewaru
Affiliation:
Wageningen University, Aquaculture & Fisheries, Wageningen, The Netherlands Padjadjaran University, Fisheries and Marine Science Faculty, Indonesia
Max Janse
Affiliation:
Burgers’ Zoo, Arnhem, The Netherlands
Johan A.J. Verreth
Affiliation:
Wageningen University, Aquaculture & Fisheries, Wageningen, The Netherlands
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: R. Osinga, Wageningen University, Aquaculture & Fisheries, Wageningen, The Netherlands email: ronald.osinga@wur.nl

Abstract

In order to determine optimal feeding regimes for captive corals, prey capture by the scleractinian coral Galaxea fascicularis was determined by measuring clearance of prey items from the surrounding water. Colonies of G. fascicularis (sized between 200 and 400 polyps) were incubated in 1300 ml incubation chambers. Nauplii of the brine shrimp Artemia sp. were used as the prey item. A series of incubation experiments was conducted to determine the maximal capture per feeding event and per day. To determine maximal capture per feeding event, total uptake of nauplii after one hour was determined for different prey item availabilities ranging from 50 to 4000 nauplii per polyp. To determine maximal capture per day, the corals were subjected to four repetitive feeding events at three different prey item densities (50, 100 and 150 nauplii per polyp). Alongside these quantitative experiments, it was tested to what extent the feeding response of corals is triggered by chemical cues. One hour after food addition, extract of Artemia nauplii was added to the incubation chambers to test its effect on subsequent prey capture rates. In all experiments, prey capture was expressed as the number of nauplii consumed per coral polyp. Total capture of Artemia nauplii by G. fascicularis after a single feeding event increased linearly up till a prey item availability of 2000 nauplii per polyp. Maximal capture per feeding event was estimated at 1200 nauplii per polyp, which is higher than rates reported in previous studies. It became apparent that at high densities of Artemia nauplii, the clearance rate method does not discriminate between active capture and passive sedimentation. Repetitive feeding with 50 nauplii per polyp resulted in a constant total prey capture per feeding event. At a supply of 100 nauplii per polyp, total capture decreased after the first feeding event, and remained constant during the subsequent feeding events at a level comparable to the lower food availability. However, at a supply of 150 nauplii per polyp, total capture per event was higher throughout the entire four-hour incubation period, which obfuscates an accurate estimation of the maximal daily food uptake. In all incubations, a decrease in capture efficiency was observed within the course of the feeding event. In all repetitive feeding experiments, capture efficiency increased immediately upon addition of a new batch of food. This increase in efficiency was not caused by a priming effect of extract of Artemia. The inconsistencies in the data show that estimates of prey capture based on clearance rates should be interpreted with caution, because this method does not take into account potential dynamics of prey capture and release.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2011

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

Allemand, D., Tambutte, E., Girard, J.-P. and Jaubert, J. (1998) Organic matrix synthesis in the scleractinian coral Stylophora pistillata: role in biomineralization and potential target of the organotin tributyltin. Journal of Experimental Biology 201, 20012009.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anthony, K.R.N. and Fabricius, K.E. (2000) Shifting roles of heterotrophy and autotrophy in coral energetics under varying turbidity. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 252, 221253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borneman, E. (2008) Introduction to the husbandry of corals in aquariums: a review. In Leewis, R.J. and Janse, M. (eds) Public aquarium husbandry series, Volume 2: advances in coral husbandry in public aquariums. Arnhem: Burgers’ Zoo, pp. 314.Google Scholar
Carlson, B. (2008) General introduction: advances in coral husbandry in public aquaria. In Leewis, R.J. and Janse, M. (eds) Public aquarium husbandry series, Volume 2: advances in coral husbandry in public aquariums. Arnhem: Burgers’ Zoo, pp. ixxv.Google Scholar
Clausen, I. and Riisgård, H.U. (1996) Growth, filtration and respiration in the mussel Mytilus edulis: no evidence for physiological regulation of the filter-pump to nutritional needs. Marine Ecology Progress Series 141, 3745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dai, C.-F. and Lin, M.-C. (1993) The effects of flow on feeding of three gorgonians from southern Taiwan. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 173, 5769.Google Scholar
Dubinsky, Z. and Jokiel, P.L. (1994) Ratio of energy and nutrient fluxes regulates symbiosis between zooxanthellae and corals. Pacific Science 48, 313324.Google Scholar
Fabricius, K.E. and Wolanski, E. (2000) Rapid smothering of coral reef organisms by muddy marine snow. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 50, 115120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fabricius, K.E. (2005) Effects of terrestrial runoff on the ecology of corals and coral reefs: review and synthesis. Marine Pollution Bulletin 50, 125146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferrier-Pagès, C., Witting, J., Tambutté, E. and Sebens, K.P. (2003) Effect of natural zooplankton feeding on the tissue and skeletal growth of the scleractinian coral Stylophora pistillata. Coral Reefs 22, 229240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frost, T.M. (1978) In situ measurements of clearance rates for the freshwater sponge Spongilla lacustris. Limnology and Oceanography 23, 10341039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golbuu, Y., Victor, S., Wolanski, E. and Richmond, R.H. (2003) Trapping of fine sediment in a semi-enclosed bay, Palau, Micronesia. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 57, 941949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goreau, T.F., Goreau, N.I. and Yonge, C.M. (1971) Reef corals: autotrophs or heterotrophs? Biological Bulletin. Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole 141, 247260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heidelberg, K., Sebens, K.B. and Purcell, J.E. (1997) Effects of prey escape behavior and water flow on prey capture by the scleractinian coral, Meandrina meandrites. Proceedings of the 8th International Coral Reef Symposium 2, 10811086.Google Scholar
Hii, Y.-S., Soo, C.-L. and Liew, H.-C. (2008) Feeding of scleractinian coral, Galaxea fascicularis, on Artemia salina nauplii in captivity. Aquaculture International 17, 363376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houlbrèque, F. and Ferrier-Pagès, C. (2009) Heterotrophy in tropical scleractinian corals. Biological Reviews 84, 117.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jørgensen, C.B. (1955) Quantitative aspects of filter feeding in invertebrates. Biological Reviews 30, 391454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavorano, S., Gili, C., Muti, C., Taruffi, M., Corsino, D. and Gnone, G. (2008) The CORALZOO project—preliminary results of the evaluation of different types and concentrations of zooplankton food on the growth of Pocillopora damicornis (Linnaeus, 1758) comparing diurnal and nocturnal feeding. In Leewis, R.J. and Janse, M. (eds) Public aquarium husbandry series, Volume 2: advances in coral husbandry in public aquariums. Arnhem: Burgers’ Zoo, pp. 1925.Google Scholar
Lehman, J.T. and Porter, J.W. (1973) Chemical activation of feeding in the Caribbean reef/building coral Montastrea cavernosa. Biological Bulletin. Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole 145, 140149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leversee, G.J. (1976) Flow and feeding in fan-shaped colonies of the gorgonian coral, Leptogorgia. Biological Bulletin. Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole 151, 344356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mariscal, R.N. and Lenhoff, H.M. (1968) The chemical control of feeding behaviour in Cyphastrea ocellina and in some other Hawaiian corals. Journal of Experimental Zoology 49, 689699.Google Scholar
Osinga, R., Kleijn, R., Groenendijk, E., Niesink, P., Tramper, J. and Wijffels, R.H. (2001) Development of in vivo sponge cultures: particle feeding by the tropical sponge Pseudosuberites aff. andrewsi. Marine Biotechnology 3, 544554.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Osinga, R., Charko, F., Cruzeiro, C., Janse, M., Grymonpre, D., Sorgeloos, P. and Verreth, J.A.J. (2009) Feeding corals in captivity: uptake of four Artemia-based feeds by Galaxea fascicularis. Proceedings of the 11th International Coral Reef Symposium 1, 152156.Google Scholar
Osinga, R., Schutter, M., Griffioen, B., Wijffels, R.H., Verreth, J.A.J., Shafir, S., Henard, S., Taruffi, M., Lavorano, S. and Gili, C. (2011) The biology and economics of coral growth. Marine Biotechnology 13, 658671.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petersen, D. and Laterveer, M. (2008) Nutrition in juvenile corals—a case study at Rotterdam Zoo. In Leewis, R.J. and Janse, M. (eds) Public aquarium husbandry series, Volume 2: advances in coral husbandry in public aquariums. Arnhem: Burgers’ Zoo, pp. 15–18.Google Scholar
Pile, A.J., Patterson, M.R. and Witman, J.D. (1996) In situ grazing on plankton <10 m by the boreal sponge Mycale lingua. Marine Ecology Progress Series 141, 95102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purser, A., Larsson, A.I., Thomsen, L. and Van Oevelen, D. (2010) The influence of flow velocity and food concentration on Lophelia pertusa (Scleractinia) zooplankton capture rates. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 395, 5562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiswig, H.M. (1971) Particle feeding in natural populations of three marine demosponges. Biological Bulletin. Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole 141, 568591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riisgård, H.U., Thomassen, S., Jakobsen, H., Weeks, J.M. and Larsen, P.S. (1993) Suspension feeding in marine sponges Halichondria panicea and Haliclona urceolus: effects of temperature on filtration rate and energy costs of pumping. Marine Ecology Progress Series 96, 177188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schutter, M., Van Velthoven, B., Janse, M., Osinga, R., Janssen, M., Wijffels, R.H. and Verreth, J.A.J. (2008) The effect of irradiance on long-term skeletal growth and net photosynthesis in Galaxea fascicularis under four light conditions. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 367, 7580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schutter, M., Kranenbarg, S., Wijffels, R.H., Verreth, J.A.J. and Osinga, R. (2011) Modification of light utilization for skeletal growth by water flow in the scleractinian coral Galaxea fascicularis. Marine Biology 158, 769777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorokin, Y.I. (1973) On the feeding of some scleractinian corals with bacteria and dissolved organic matter. Limnology and Oceanography 18, 380385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Titlyanov, E.A. and Titlyanova, T.V. (2002) Reef-building corals—symbiotic autotrophic organisms: 1. General structure, feeding pattern, and light-dependent distribution in the shelf. Russian Journal of Marine Biology 28, S1S15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yonge, C.M. (1930) Studies on the physiology of corals. I. Feeding mechanisms and food. Scientific Reports of the Great Barrier Reef Expedition 1928–1928 1, 1357.Google Scholar