Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 66, Issue 2, pp 291–298 | Cite as

Characteristics of foraging in the soft-bottom benthic starfish Luidia clathrata (echinodermata: Asteroidea): prey selectivity, switching behavior, functional responses and movement patterns

  • James B. McClintock
  • John M. Lawrence
Original Papers

Summary

Luidia clathrata show a strong preference for the infaunal bivalve Mulinia lateralis in Tampa Bay, Florida. Quantitative and qualitative changes in diet occurred over a 7-month period. Individuals may shift from intraoral macrofaunal feeding to intra- and extraoral detrital feeding during periods of low macrofaunal availability. In the laboratory L. clathrata showed switching behavior, feeding disproportionately on the most abundant of two simulataneously presented food models. This switching mechanism may be related to either contact-chemoreceptive rejection of lowdensity food or enhanced distance-chemoreception of high density food. The use of standardized food models eliminated the possibility that handling time was important in switching behavior. Both fed and starved individuals showed functional responses to changes in prey density. However starved individuals ingested greater numbers of prey and spent more time foraging than did fed individuals. Switching and functional response behaviors may be important in promoting nutritional uptake and in causing density-dependent mortality of prey populations. Movement patterns of L. clathrata are directional in the absence of bivalve prey, but become non-directional once patches of prey are encountered. This allows individuals to remain in areas of high prey density. Luidia clathrata has characteristics of an optimal forager, where energy is maximized per unit feeding time.

Keywords

Bivalve Movement Pattern Functional Response Prey Density Prey Population 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Brun E (1972) Food and feeding habits of Luidia clathrata (Echinodermata: Asteroidea). J Mar Biol Ass UK 52:225–236Google Scholar
  2. Carey AG (1972) Food sources of sublittoral, bathyal and abyssal asteroids in the northeast Pacific Ocean. Ophelia 10:35–47Google Scholar
  3. Charnov EL (1976) Optimal foraging: attack strategy of a mantid. Am Nat 110:141–151Google Scholar
  4. Cody ML (1971) Finch flocks in the Mohave Desert. Theor Pop Biol 2:142–158Google Scholar
  5. Cody ML (1974) Optimization in ecology. Science 183:1156–1164Google Scholar
  6. Collins ARS (1974) Biochemical investigations of two responses involved in the feeding behavior of Acanthaster planci (L.). I. Assay methods and preliminary results. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 15:173–184Google Scholar
  7. Diehl WJ, Lawrence JM (1979) Effect of nutrition on the excretion rate of soluble nitrogen products of Luidia clathrata (Say) (Echinodermata: Asteroidea). Comp Biochem Physiol 62A:801–806Google Scholar
  8. Downey ME (1973) Starfishes from the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico. Smith Cont Zool 126:22–23Google Scholar
  9. Emlen JM (1966) The role of time and energy in food preference. Am Nat 100:611–617Google Scholar
  10. Emlen JM (1973) Ecology: an evolutionary approach. Addison-Wesley Publ Co, Reading Mass, p 85Google Scholar
  11. Ernsting G (1977) Effects of food deprivation and type of prey on predation by Notiophilus biquattatus F. (Caribidae) on springtails (Collembola). Oecologia (Berlin) 31:13–20Google Scholar
  12. Feder HM, Christensen AM (1966) Aspects of asteroid biology. In: Boolootian RA (ed) Physiology of Echinodermata. Interscience Publ, New York, pp 87–127Google Scholar
  13. Holling CS (1966) The functional response of invertebrate predators to prey density. Mem Entomol Soc Can 48:1–86Google Scholar
  14. Hughes RN (1980) Optimal foraging in the marine context. Oceanogr Mar Biol Ann Rev 18:423–481Google Scholar
  15. Hulings NC, Hemlay DW (1963) An investigation of the feeding habits of two species of sea stars. Bull Mar Sci 13:345–359Google Scholar
  16. Huxley CJ (1976) Response of Acanthaster planci (L.) to partial stimuli. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 22:199–206Google Scholar
  17. Jost P (1982) “Optimal foraging” un test de la theorie avec l'asterie Astropecten aranciacus. Symbioses 15:227–229Google Scholar
  18. Klinger TS (1982) Feeding rates of Lytechinus variegatus Lamarck (Echinodermata: Echinoidea) on differing physiognomies of an artificial food of uniform composition. In: Lawrence JM (ed) Echinoderms: Proceedings of the International Conference, Tampa Bay, AA Balkema Press, Rotterdam, pp 29–32Google Scholar
  19. Landenberger DE (1968) Studies on selective feeding in the Pacific starfish Pisaster ochraceus in Southern California. Ecology 49:1062–1075Google Scholar
  20. Lawrence JM, Erwin K, Turner RL (1974) Stomach contents of Luidia clathrata (Asteroidea). Fla Sci 37:8Google Scholar
  21. Lechowitz MJ (1982) The sampling characteristics of electivity indices. Oecologia (Berlin) 52:22–30Google Scholar
  22. McClintock JB, Lawrence JM (1981) An optimization study on the feeding behavior of Luidia clathrata (Say) (Echinodermata: Asteroidea). Mar Behav Physiol 7:263–275Google Scholar
  23. McClintock JB, Lawrence JM (1982) Photoresponse and associative learning in Luidia clathrata (Say) (Echinodermata: Asteroidea). Mar Behav Physiol 9:13–21Google Scholar
  24. McClintock JB, Lawrence JM (1984) Ingestive conditioning in Luidia clathrata (Say) (Echinodermata: Asteroidea): effect of nutritional condition on selectivity, teloreception, and rates of ingestion. Mar Behav Physiol 10:167–181Google Scholar
  25. McClintock JB, Klinger TS, Lawrence JM (1983) Extraoral feeding in Luidia clathrata (Say) (Echinodermata: Asteroidea). Bull Mar Sci 33:171–172Google Scholar
  26. McClintock JB, Klinger TS, Lawrence JM Chemoreception in Luidia clathrata (Echinodermata: Asteroidea): qualitative and quantitative aspects of chemotactic responses to low molecular weight compounds Mar Biol (in press)Google Scholar
  27. Menge BA (1972) Foraging strategy of a starfish in relation to actual prey availability and environmental predicatability. Ecol Monogr 42:25–50Google Scholar
  28. Murdoch WW (1969) Switching in general predators: experiments on predator specificity and stability of prey populations. Ecol Monogr 39:335–354Google Scholar
  29. Murdoch WW, Oaten A (1975) Predation and population stability. Adv Ecol Res 9:1–130Google Scholar
  30. Murdoch WW, Avery S, Smyth MEB (1975) Switching in predatory fish. Ecology 56:1094–1105Google Scholar
  31. Ormond RFG, Hanscomb NJ, Beach DH (1976) Food selection and learning in the crown-of-thorns starfish, Acathaster planci (L.). Mar Behav Physiol 4:93–105Google Scholar
  32. Penchaszadeh PE, Lera ME (1983) Alimentación de tres especies tropicles de Luidia (Echinodermata: Asteroidea) en Golfo Triste, Venezuela. Car J Sci 19:1–6Google Scholar
  33. Pulliam HR (1974) On the theory of optimal diets. Am Nat 108:575–587Google Scholar
  34. Pyke G, Pulliam HE, Charnov E (1977) Optimal foraging: a selective review of theories and tests. Quart Rev Biol 52:137–154Google Scholar
  35. Rapport DJ (1980) Optimal foraging for complementary resources. Am Nat 116:324–346Google Scholar
  36. Scheibling RE (1981) Optimal foraging movements of Oreaster reticulatus (L.) (Echinodermata: Asteroidea). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 51:173–185Google Scholar
  37. Schoener TW (1971) Theory of feeding strategies. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 2:369–404Google Scholar
  38. Vanderploeg HA, Scavia D (1979) Two electivity indices for feeding with special reference to zooplankton grazing. J Fish Res Board Can 36:362–365Google Scholar
  39. Zar JH (1974) Biostatistical analysis. Prentice-Hall Inc, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, p 620Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • James B. McClintock
    • 1
  • John M. Lawrence
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA

Personalised recommendations