Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T04:11:33.021Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Testing the resource economic monopolization hypothesis and its consequences for the mating system of Alpheus estuariensis (Decapoda, Caridea, Alpheidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 July 2018

Danillo Barroso Open the ORCID record for Danillo Barroso [Opens in a new window] ,
Douglas Fernandes Rodrigues Alves  and
Gustavo L. Hirose
Danillo Barroso*
Affiliation:
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação, Universidade Federal de Sergipe, Av. Marechal Rondon. s/n°. Rosa Elze. 49100-000. São Cristóvão SE, Brazil
Douglas Fernandes Rodrigues Alves
Affiliation:
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação, Universidade Federal de Sergipe, Av. Marechal Rondon. s/n°. Rosa Elze. 49100-000. São Cristóvão SE, Brazil NEBECC: Group of Studies on Crustacean Biology, Ecology and Culture, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Distrito de Rubião Júnior, s/n, CEP: 18618-970, Botucatu, SP, Brasil
Gustavo L. Hirose
Affiliation:
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação, Universidade Federal de Sergipe, Av. Marechal Rondon. s/n°. Rosa Elze. 49100-000. São Cristóvão SE, Brazil NEBECC: Group of Studies on Crustacean Biology, Ecology and Culture, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Distrito de Rubião Júnior, s/n, CEP: 18618-970, Botucatu, SP, Brasil
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: D. Barroso, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ecologia e Conservação, Universidade Federal de Sergipe, Av. Marechal Rondon. s/n°. Rosa Elze. 49100-000. São Cristóvão SE, Brazil email: danillo.bio2013@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of the present study is to test the resource economic monopolization hypothesis and the hypothesis of monogamy using the shrimp Alpheus estuariensis as a model. The shrimps were collected in two areas in the Vaza-Barriz estuary, north-east Brazil, from August to November 2016. The average abundance of refuges was obtained through 30 random replicates. The shrimp presented a random distribution in both areas. Males and females found together showed a weak relation between their sizes, with males being larger than females. In addition, the cheliped of males grows proportionally more than that of females. The great abundance of refuges present in the environment, added to the aforementioned results, do not support the idea of refuge-guarding behaviour or monogamy. These results, which are in disagreement with those already found for some shrimps of the same family, genus, and even species, reinforce the idea that Alpheidae can be used as a model in the study of how environmental conditions are capable of shaping the social behaviour of a species.

Keywords

Population distributionsnapping-shrimprefugemonopolizationguarding behaviour
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 99 , Issue 3 , May 2019 , pp. 639 - 647
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2018 

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

Adams, J., Edwards, A.J. and Emberton, H. (1985) Sexual size dimorphism and assortative mating in the obligate coral commensal Trapezia ferruginea Latreille (Decapoda, Xanthidae). Crustaceana 48, 188–194.Google Scholar
Almeida, A.O., Boehs, G., Araújo-Silva, C.L. and Bezerra, L.E.A. (2012) Shallow-water caridean shrimps from southern Bahia, Brazil, including the first record of Synalpheus ul (Ríos & Duffy, 2007) (Alpheidae) in the southwestern Atlantic Ocean. Zootaxa 3347, 1–35.Google Scholar
Almeida, A.O. and Mantelatto, F.L. (2013) Extension of the known southern distributions of three estuarine snapping shrimps of the genus Alpheus fabricius, 1798 (Caridea, Alpheidae) in South America. Crustaceana 86, 1715–1722.Google Scholar
Amâncio-Martinelli, S., Santana, C.C.S. and Guimarães, M.B. (2013) Influência da evolução costeira holocênica na ocupação por grupos sambaquieros: resultados das prospecções arqueológicas nas regiões litorâneas dos estados de Sergipe e da Bahia no Nordeste do Brasil. Diálogo Andino 41, 149–157.Google Scholar
Anker, A., Hurt, C. and Knowltom, N. (2008) Revision of the Alpheus cristulifrons species complex (Crustacea: Decapoda: Alpheidae), with description of a new species from the tropical Eastern Atlantic. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 88, 543–562.Google Scholar
Arnold, S.J. and Duvall, D. (1994) Animal mating systems: a synthesis based on selection theory. American Naturalist 143, 317–348.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A. (1999) Indicadores de monogamia en el cangrejo comensal Pinnixa transversalis (Milne Edwards & Lucas) (Decapoda: Brachyura: Pinnotheridae): distribución poblacional, asociación macho-hembra y dimorfismo sexual. Revista de Biología Marina y Oceanografía 34, 303–313.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A. (2008) Social monogamy in the shrimp Pontonia margarita, a symbiont of Pinctada mazatlanica, off the Pacific coast of Panama. Marine Biology 153, 387–395.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A. (2010) The symbiotic lifestyle and its evolutionary consequences: social monogamy and sex allocation in the hermaphroditic shrimp Lysmata pederseni. Naturwissenschaften 97, 729–741.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A., Bolaños, J.A., Hernandez, J.E., Lira, C. and López, R. (2011) Monogamy does not last long in Pontonia mexicana, a symbiotic shrimp of the amber pen-shell Pinna carnea from the southeastern Caribbean Sea. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 407, 41–47.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A. and Díaz-Valdés, M. (2011) The symbiotic shrimp Ascidonia flavomaculata lives solitarily in the tunicate Ascidia mentula: implications for its mating system. Invertebrate Biology 130, 351–361.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A., Guéron, R., Simpson, L. and Ambrosio, L.J. (2016b) Population distribution, host-switching, and chemical sensing in the symbiotic shrimp Lysmata pederseni: implications for its mating system in a changing reef seascape. Coral Reefs 35, 1213–1224.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A., Hemphill, C.A. and Ritson-Williams, R. (2015) The sexual and mating system of the shrimp Odontonia katoi (Palaemonidae, Pontoniinae), a symbiotic guest of the Ascidian Polycarpa aurata in the Coral Triangle. PLoS ONE 10, 1–18.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A. and Hernáez, P. (2015) Population distribution, sexual dimorphism, and reproductive parameters in the crab Pinnixa valdiviensis Rathbun, 1907 (Decapoda: Pinnotheridae), a symbiont of the ghost shrimp Callichirus garthi (Retamal, 1975) in the southeastern Pacific. Journal of Crustacean Biology 35, 68–75.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A. and Piantoni, C. (2010) Sexual system, sex ratio, and group living in the shrimp Thor amboinensis (De Man): relevance to resource-monopolization and sex-allocation theories. Biological Bulletin 219, 151–165.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A., Ritson-Williams, R. and Fuentes, M.S. (2013) Sexual and mating system in a caridean shrimp symbiotic with the winged pearl oyster in the Coral Triangle: gonochorism and monogamy in shrimp. Journal of Zoology 289, 172–181.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A., Simpson, L., Ambrosio, L.J., Guéron, R. and Mora, N. (2016a) Monogamy in a hyper-symbiotic shrimp. PLoS ONE 11, 1–17.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A., Stotz, W. and Thiel, M. (2002) Agonistic behavior and development of territoriality during ontogeny of the sea anemone dwelling crab Allopetrolisthes spinifrons (H. Milne Edwards, 1837) (Decapoda: Anomura: Porcellanidae). Marine and Freshwater Behavior and Physiology 35, 189–202.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A. and Thiel, M. (2003) Predicting territorial behavior in symbiotic crabs using host characteristics: a comparative study and proposal of a model. Marine Biology 142, 93–100.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A. and Thiel, M. (2007) The mating system of symbiotic crustaceans. A conceptual model based on optimality and ecological constraints. In Duffy, E. and Thiel, M. (eds) Evolutionary ecology of social and sexual systems: crustaceans as model organisms New York, NY: Oxford University Press, p. 249.Google Scholar
Baeza, J.A., Thiel, M.T. and Stotz, W.B. (2001) The life history of Allopetrolisthes spinifrons, a crab associate of the sea anemone Phymactis clematis. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 81, 69–76.Google Scholar
Barash, D. (1982) Sociobiology and behaviour. New York, NY: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Bauer, R.T. (2004) Remarkable shrimps: adaptations and natural history of the Carideans. Norman, OH: Oklahoma University Press.Google Scholar
Bauer, R.T. and Abdalla, J.H. (2001) Male mating tactics in the shrimp Palaemonetes pugio (Decapoda, Caridea): precopulatory mate guarding vs pure searching. Ethology 107, 185–199.Google Scholar
Biagi, R. and Mantelatto, F.L.M. (2006) Relative growth and sexual maturity of the hermit crab Paguristes erythrops (Anomura, Diogenidae) from South Atlantic. Hydrobiologia 559, 247–254.Google Scholar
Bradbury, J.W. and Vehrencamp, S.L. (1976) Social organization and foraging in emballonurid bats. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 1, 337–381.Google Scholar
Brown, J.L. (1964) The evolution of diversity in avian territorial systems. The Wilson Bulletin 76, 160–169.Google Scholar
Carvalho, M.E.S. and Fontes, A.L. (2007) A carcinicultura no espaço litorâneo Sergipano. Revista da Fapese 3, 87–112.Google Scholar
Castro, P. (1971) The natantian shrimps (Crustacea, Decapoda) associated with invertebrates in Hawaii. Pacific Science 25, 395–403.Google Scholar
Chapman, M.R. and Kramer, D.L. (1996) Guarded resources: the effect of intruder number on the tactics and success of defenders and intruders. Animal Behaviour 52, 83–94.Google Scholar
Christy, J.H. (1987) Competitive mating, mate choice and mating associations of brachyuran crabs. Bulletin of Marine Science 41, 177–191.Google Scholar
Corgos, A. and Freire, J. (2006) Morphometric and gonad maturity in the spider crab Maja brachydactyla: a comparison of methods for estimating size at maturity in species with determinate growth. Journal of Marine Science 63, 851–859.Google Scholar
Correa, C. and Thiel, M. (2003) Mating systems in caridean shrimp (Decapoda: Caridea) and their evolutionary consequences for sexual dimorphism and reproductive biology. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural 76, 187–203.Google Scholar
Costa-Souza, A.C., Rocha, S.S., Bezerra, L.E.A. and Almeida, A.O. (2014) Breeding and heterosexual pairing in the snapping shrimp Alpheus estuariensis (Caridea: Alpheidae) in a tropical bay in northeastern Brazil. Journal of Crustacean Biology 34, 593–603.Google Scholar
Criales, M.M. (1984) Shrimps associated with coelenterates, echinoderms, and molluscs in the Santa Marta region, Colombia. Journal of Crustacean Biology 4, 307–317.Google Scholar
Diesel, R. (1988) Male-female association in the spider crab Inachus phalangium: the influence of female reproductive stage and size. Journal of Crustacean Biology 8, 63–69.Google Scholar
Duffy, J.E., Morrison, C.L. and Ríos, R. (2000) Multiple origins of eusociality among sponge-dwelling shrimps (Synalpheus). Evolution 54, 503–516.Google Scholar
Dworschak, P.C. and OTT, J.A. (1993) Decapod burrows in mangrove channel and back reef environments at the Atlantic barrier reef, Belize. Ichnos 2, 277–290.Google Scholar
Dworschak, P.C. and Pervesler, P. (2002) Alpheus migrans Lewinsohn & Holthuis, 1978 (Decapoda, Caridea, Alpheidae): burrow morphology and first record from the Red Sea. Crustaceana 75, 351–357.Google Scholar
Elliot, J.M. (1983) Some methods for the statistical analysis of samples of benthic invertebrates, 2nd edn. Ambleside: Fresh Water Biological Association.Google Scholar
Emlen, S.T. and Oring, L.W. (1977) Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science 197, 215–223.Google Scholar
Foster, S.A. (1985) Group foraging by a coral reef fish: a mechanism for gaining access to defended resources. Animal Behaviour 33, 782–792.Google Scholar
Grafen, A. and Ridley, M.A. (1983) A model of mating guarding. Journal of Theoretical Biology 102, 549–567.Google Scholar
Grant, J.W.A. (1993) Whether or not to defend? The influence of resource distribution. Marine Behaviour and Physiology 23, 137–153.Google Scholar
Hartnoll, R.G. (1978) The determination of relative growth in Crustacea. Crustaceana 34, 281–293.Google Scholar
Huber, M.E. (1987) Aggressive behavior of Trapezia intermedia Miers and T. digitalis latreille (Brachyura: Xanthidae). Journal of Crustacean Biology 7, 238–248.Google Scholar
Huxley, J.S. (1950) Relative growth and form transformation. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 137, 465–469.Google Scholar
Jormalainen, V. (1998) Precopulatory mate guarding in crustaceans: male competitive strategy and intersexual conflict. Quarterly Review of Biology 73, 275–304.Google Scholar
Mathews, L.M. (2002a) Tests of the mate-guarding hypothesis for social monogamy: male snapping shrimp prefer to associate with high-value females. Behavioral Ecology 14, 63–67.Google Scholar
Mathews, L.M. (2002b) Territorial cooperation and social monogamy: factors affecting intersexual behaviours in pair-living snapping shrimp. Animal Behaviour 63, 767–777.Google Scholar
Nakashima, Y. (1987) Reproductive strategies in a partially protandrous shrimp, Athanas kominatoensis (Decapoda: Alpheidae): sex change as the best of a bad situation for subordinates. Journal of Ethology 5, 145–159.Google Scholar
Parker, G.A. (1970) Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Biological Reviews 45, 525–567.Google Scholar
Peiró, D.F., Baeza, J.A. and Mantelatto, F.L. (2013) Host-use pattern and sexual dimorphism reveals the mating system of the symbiotic pea crab Austinixa aidae (Crustacea: Brachyura: Pinnotheridae). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 93, 715–723.Google Scholar
Pfaller, J.B., Alfaro-Shigueto, J., Giffoni, B., Ishihara, T., Mangel, J.C., Peckham, S.H., Bjoorndal, K.A. and Baeza, J.A. (2014) Social monogamy in the crab Planes major, a facultative symbiont of loggerhead sea turtles. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 4611, 124–132.Google Scholar
Rice, W.R. (1989) Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43, 223–225.Google Scholar
Sampedro, M.P., González-Gurriarán, E., Freire, J. and Muiño, R. (1999) Morphometry and sexual maturity in the spider crab Maja squinado (Decapoda: Majidae) in Galicia, Spain. Journal of Crustacean Biology 19, 578–592.Google Scholar
Shuster, S.M. and Wade, M.J. (2003) Mating systems and strategies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Silliman, B.R., Layman, C.A. and Altieri, A.H. (2003) Symbiosis between an Alpheid shrimp and a Xanthoid crab in salt marshes of mid-Atlantic states, USA. Journal of Crustacean Biology 23, 876–879.Google Scholar
Sokal, R.R. and Rohlf, F.J. (2012) Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman and Company.Google Scholar
Soledade, G.O. and Almeida, A.O. (2013) Snapping shrimps of the genus Alpheus fabricius, 1798 from Brazil (Caridea: Alpheidae): updated checklist and key for identification. Nauplius 21, 89–122.Google Scholar
Stieglitz, T., Ridd, P. and Müller, P. (2000) Passive irrigation and functional morphology of crustacean burrows in a tropical mangrove swamp. Hydrobiologia 421, 69–76.Google Scholar
Thiel, M. and Baeza, J.A. (2001) Factors affecting the social behaviour of crustaceans living symbiotically with other marine invertebrates: a modelling approach. Symbiosis 30, 163–190.Google Scholar
Thiel, M., Zander, A. and Baeza, J.A. (2003a) Movements of the symbiotic crab Liopetrolisthes mitra between its host sea urchin Tetrapygus niger. Bulletin of Marine Science 72, 89–101.Google Scholar
Thiel, M., Zander, A., Valdivia, N., Baeza, J.A. and Rueffler, C. (2003b) Host fidelity of a symbiotic porcellanid crab: the importance of host characteristics. Journal of Zoology 261, 353–362.Google Scholar
Wehrtmann, I.S. (1990) Distribution and reproduction of Ambidexter panamense and Palaemonetes schmitti in Pacific Costa Rica (Crustacea, Decapoda). Revista de Biología Tropical 38, 327–329.Google Scholar
Wickler, W. and Seibt, U. (1981) Monogamy in Crustacea and man. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 57, 215–234.Google Scholar
Wilson, E.O. (1975) Sociobiology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, M.F. and Pianka, E.R. (1963) Sexual selection, sex ratio and mating system. American Naturalist 97, 405–407.Google Scholar
Zar, J.H. (2010) Biostatistical analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar