Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T15:52:37.719Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Particle selection and feeding behaviour in two cirratulid polychaetes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 August 2017

Wagner F. Magalhães  and
Julie H. Bailey-Brock
Wagner F. Magalhães
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2538 McCarthy Mall, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA Water Resources Research Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2540 Dole Street, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA
Julie H. Bailey-Brock*
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2538 McCarthy Mall, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA Water Resources Research Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2540 Dole Street, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: J.H. Bailey-Brock, Department of Biology, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2538 McCarthy Mall, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA email: jbrock@hawaii.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Cirratulid polychaetes are abundant and diverse members of the benthic macrofauna and their particle collection mechanisms may strongly affect particle mixing and sediment grain size distribution in sediments. The feeding morphology differs in having a pair or many feeding tentacles and the ecological importance of both methods of food collection needs to be better investigated to understand their costs and benefits. Particle selection and feeding behaviour of a bitentaculate (Aphelochaeta honouliuli) and a multitentaculate species (Timarete hawaiensis) were comparatively observed. Feeding behaviour observations were done with individuals with or without feeding tentacles and exposed to three different size ranges of glass beads (0–20, 40–70 and 70–110 µm in diameter). Particle selection was tested for coated and uncoated glass beads of three different size ranges in 20 specimens of each species. Feeding behaviour was similar in both species and the methods of particle collection and ingestion are described. Individuals of T. hawaiensis, in which the feeding tentacles were removed, were observed collecting particles with the aid of branchiae. The multitentaculate species studied was more successful in collecting particles from greater foraging radii and at a faster rate than the bitentaculate species but the experimental design may have disfavoured the latter. Two-way ANOVA results showed that both bitentaculate and multitentaculate species significantly selected in favour of smaller particle sizes. Further studies about particle encounter, selection and ingestion are needed and may aid understanding of the phylogenetic relationships between the bitentaculate and multitentaculate cirratulids.

Keywords

Deposit-feedingCirratulidaeselectivityparticle size
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 97 , Special Issue 5: Proceedings of the 12th International Polychaete Conference Amgueddfa Cymru - National Museum Wales Cardiff, Wales, UK, 1-5 August 2016 , August 2017 , pp. 1069 - 1074
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2017 

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

Binard, A. and Jenner, R. (1929) Morphologie du lobe préoral des Polychètes. Recueil del l'Institut Zoologique Torley-Rousseau 2, 117–240.Google Scholar
Blake, J.A. (1996) Family Cirratulidae Ryckholdt, 1851. Including a revision of the genera and species from the eastern North Pacific. In Blake, J.A., Hilbig, B. and Scott, P.H. (eds) Taxonomic atlas of the benthic fauna of the Santa Maria basin and the Western Santa Barbara channel. Volume 6 – The Annelida Part 3, Polychaeta: Orbiniidae to Cossuridae. Santa Barbara, CA: Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, pp. 263–384.Google Scholar
Brauer, S. (2014) Untersuchungen zur Phylogenie der Cirratulidae (Annelida). Doctoral dissertation, Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultät – Jahrgang 2014, 103 pp.Google Scholar
Dauer, D.M. (1994) Functional ciliary groups of the feeding palps of Spionid polychaetes. In Dauvin, J.-C., Laubier, L. and Reish, D.J. (eds) Actes de la 4ème Conference internationale des Polychètes. Mémoires du Muséum National D'histoire Naturelle 162, 81–84.Google Scholar
Dobbs, F.C. and Scholly, T.A. (1986) Sediment processing and selective feeding by Pectinaria koreni (Polychaeta: Pectinariidae). Marine Ecology Progress Series 29, 165–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fauchald, K. and Jumars, P.A. (1979) The diet of worms: a study of polychaete feeding guilds. Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review 17, 193–284.Google Scholar
George, J.D. (1964) Organic matter available to the polychaete Cirriformia tentaculata (Montagu) living in an intertidal mud flat. Limnology and Oceanography 9, 453–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hentschel, B.T. (1996) Ontogenetic changes in particle-size selection by deposit-feeding spionid polychaetes: the influence of palp size on particle contact. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 206, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jumars, P.A. (1993) Gourmands of mud: diet choice in deposit feeders. In Hughes, R.N. (ed.) Mechanisms of diet choice. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 136–168.Google Scholar
Jumars, P.A., Dorgan, K.M. and Lindsay, S.M. (2015) Diet of worms emended: an update of polychaete feeding guilds. Annual Review of Marine Science 7, 497–520.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jumars, P.A., Self, R.F.L. and Nowell, A.R.M. (1982) Mechanics of particle selection by tentaculate deposit-feeders. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 64, 47–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magalhães, W.F. and Bailey-Brock, J.H. (2010) Redescription of Cirriformia crassicollis (Kinberg, 1866) and Timarete hawaiensis (Hartman, 1956) new combination, (Polychaeta: Cirratulidae), endemic polychaetes to the Hawaiian Islands. Zootaxa 2625, 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magalhães, W.F. and Bailey-Brock, J.H. (2013) Bitentaculate Cirratulidae (Annelida: Polychaeta) from the northwestern Pacific Islands with description of nine new species. Zootaxa 3630, 80–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rouse, G.W. and Pleijel, F. (2001) Polychaetes. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 354 pp.Google Scholar
Sanders, H.L. (1958) Benthic studies in Buzzards Bay. I. Animal–sediment relationships. Limnology and Oceanography 3, 245–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Self, R.F.L. and Jumars, P.A. (1978) New resource axes for deposit feeders? Journal of Marine Research 36, 627–641.Google Scholar
Shull, D.H. and Yasuda, M. (2001) Size-selective downward particle transport by cirratulid polychaetes. Journal of Marine Research 59, 453–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taghon, G.L. (1982) Optimal foraging by deposit-feeding invertebrates: roles of particle size and organic coating. Oecologia (Berlin) 52, 295–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitlatch, R.B. (1974) Food-resource partitioning in the deposit feeding polychaete Pectinaria gouldii . Biological Bulletin 147, 227–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitlatch, R.B. (1980) Patterns of resource utilization and coexistence in marine intertidal deposit feeders. Journal of Marine Research 38, 743–765.Google Scholar
Whitlatch, R.B. (1989) Mechanistic approaches to the study of deposit-feeding in polychaetes. In Lopez, G., Taghon, G. and Levinton, J. (eds) Ecology of marine deposit feeders. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, pp. 291–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J.D. and McDermott, J.J. (1997) Feeding behavior of Dipolydora commensalis (Polychaeta: Spionidae): particle capture, transport, and selection. Invertebrate Biology 116, 115–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, W.J. (1973) The estuary as a habitat. An analysis of data on the soft-bottom macrofauna of the estuarine area of the rivers Rhine, Meuse and Scheldt. Zoologische Verhandlungen Leiden 126, 1–242.Google Scholar