Oecologia

, Volume 69, Issue 2, pp 268–276 | Cite as

Interactions between the leech Glossiphonia complanata and its gastropod prey

  • Christer Brönmark
  • Björn Malmqvist
Original Papers
Received:

Summary

Predator-prey interactions between the predatory leech, Glossiphonia complanata, and its gastropod prey were investigated in laboratory experiments, including behavioural observations with the aid of time-lapse video technique. Six gastropod species were investigated, viz. Lymnaea peregra, Planorbis planorbis, Physa fontinalis, Ancylus fluviatilis, Bithynia tentaculata, and Theodoxus fluviatilis. The species studied exhibited anti-predator defences, which had their maximum efficiency at different stages of encounter with G. complanata. The activity of B. tentaculata decreased with increasing leech activity, but was relatively higher when food was present than when not. Handling times were dependent on the time elapsed since the previous meal was captured (intercatch interval), which in turn was related to the size of the previous prey. Handling time was also related to the size of both predator and prey. The capture efficiency was high for small prey and the leeches spent more time in patches with higher yield. They were, however, unable to discriminate between patches of different prey density.

Keywords

Laboratory Experiment Maximum Efficiency Behavioural Observation Prey Density Handling Time 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ansell AD (1969) Defensive adaptations to predation in the Mollusca. Proc mar biol ass India, Symp ser 3:487–512Google Scholar
  2. Boag DA, Thomson C, Van Es J (1984) Vertical distribution of young pond snails (Basommatophora: Pulmonata): implications for survival. Can J Zool 62:1485–1490Google Scholar
  3. Brönmark C (1985) Interactions between macrophytes, epiphytes and herbivores: an experimental approach. Oikos 45:26–30Google Scholar
  4. Chernin E, Michelson H, Augustine DW (1956) Studies on the biological control of schistosome-bearing snails. II. The control of Australorbis glabratus populations by the leech, Helobdella fusca, under laboratory conditions. Am J Trop Med Hyg 5:308–314Google Scholar
  5. Cook RM, Cockrell BJ (1978) Predator ingestion rate and its bearing on feeding time and the theory of optimal diets. J Anim Ecol 47:529–547Google Scholar
  6. Croll RP (1983) Gastropod chemoreception. Biol Rev 58:293–319Google Scholar
  7. Davies RW, Everett RP (1975) The feeding of four species of freshwater Hirudinoidea in Southern Alberta. Verh Internat Verein Limnol 19:2816–2827Google Scholar
  8. Dawkins R, Krebs JR (1979) Arms races between and within species. Proc R Soc Lond B 205:489–511Google Scholar
  9. Degner E (1921) Über einen Abwehrreflex bei Physa fontinalis L. Arch Molluskenkunde 53:117–120Google Scholar
  10. Elliott JM, Mann KH (1979) A key to the British freshwater leeches. Freshw Biol Ass, Scient Publ No. 40Google Scholar
  11. Feder HM (1972) Escape responses in marine invertebrates. Sci Am 227:92–100Google Scholar
  12. Harding WA (1910) A revision of the British leeches. Parasitology 3:130–201Google Scholar
  13. Janzen DH (1980) When is it coevolution? Evolution 34:611–612Google Scholar
  14. Jung T (1955) Zur Kenntnis der Ernährungsbiologie der in dem Raum zwischen Harz und Heide vorkommenden Hirudinen. Zool Jahrb (Allg Zool) 66:79–128Google Scholar
  15. Michelson EH (1957) Studies on the biological control of schistosome-bearing snails. Predators and parasites of fresh-water Mollusca: a review of the literature. Parasitology 47:413–426Google Scholar
  16. Mittelbach GG (1981) Foraging efficiency and body size: a study of optimal diet and habitat use of bluegills. Ecology 62:1370–1386Google Scholar
  17. Palmer AR (1979) Fish predation and the evolution of gastropod shell sculpture: experimental and geographic evidence. Evolution 33:697–713Google Scholar
  18. Pyke GH (1984) Optimal foraging theory: a critical review. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 15:523–575Google Scholar
  19. Pyke GH, Pulliam HR, Charnov EL (1977) Optimal foraging: a selective review of theory and tests. Quart Rev Biol 52:137–154Google Scholar
  20. Reynoldson TB, Piearce B (1979a) Feeding on gastropods by lakedwelling Polycelis in the absence and presence of Dugesia polychroa (Turbellaria, Tricladida). Freshwat Biol 9:357–367Google Scholar
  21. Reynoldson TB, Piearce B (1979b) Predation on snails by three species of triclad and its bearing on the distribution of Planaria torva in Britain. J Zool Lond 189:459–484Google Scholar
  22. Sih A (1982) Optimal behavior: Can foragers balance two conflicting demands. Science 210:1041–1043Google Scholar
  23. Sih A (1982) Optimal patch use: variation in selective pressure for efficient foraging. Am Nat 120:666–685Google Scholar
  24. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Biometry. 2nd ed, Freeman, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  25. Sterry PR, Thomas JD, Parience RL (1983) Behavioural responses of Biomphalaria glabrata (Say) to chemical factors from aquatic macrophytes including decaying Lemna paucicostata (Hegelm ex Engelm). Freshwat Biol 13:465–476Google Scholar
  26. Townsend CR (1973) The role of the osphradium in chemoreception by the snail Biomphalaria glabrata (Say). Anim Behav 21:549–556Google Scholar
  27. Townsend CR, McCarthy TK (1980) On the defence strategy of Physa fontinalis (L.), a freshwate pulmonate snail. Oecologia (Berlin) 46:75–79Google Scholar
  28. Underwood AJ (1979) The ecology of intertidal gastropods. Adv Mar Biol 16:111–210Google Scholar
  29. Vermeij GT (1982) Unsuccessful predation and evolution. Am Nat 120:701–720Google Scholar
  30. Vermeij GT, Covich AP (1978) Coevolution of freshwater gastropods and their predators. Am Nat 112:833–843Google Scholar
  31. Wells MJ, Buckley SKL (1972) Snails and trails. Anim Behav 20:345–355Google Scholar
  32. Wrona FJ, Davies RW, Linton L (1979) Analysis of the food niche of Glossiphonia complanata (Hirudinoidea: Glossiphoniidae). Can J Zool 57:2136–2142Google Scholar
  33. Wrona FJ, Davies RW, Linton L, Willialis J (1981) Competition and coexistence between Glossiphonia complanata and Helobdella stagnalis (Glossiphoniidae: Hirudinoidea). Oecologia (Berlin) 48:133–137Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christer Brönmark
    • 1
  • Björn Malmqvist
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EcologyUniversity of LundLundSweden

Personalised recommendations