Marine Biology

, Volume 99, Issue 2, pp 247–253 | Cite as

Mating behaviour and reproductive cycle of Archaster typicus (Echinodermata: Asteroidea)

  • J. -Q. Run
  • C. -P. Chen
  • K. -H. Chang
  • F. -S. Chia


This study examines the reproductive cycle, the mechanism of male-on-female pairing behavior and the spawning behavior of Archaster typicus Müller et Troschel. Field studies were conducted in the intertidal zone of the sand beaches at Penghu, Taiwan (23 32′N; 119 33′E) at ebb-tide in 1984 and 1985. The pairing behavior of A. typicus is a reproductive behavior which leads to simultaneous spawning, increasing the probability of fertilization. As the breeding season approaches, sea stars, especially males, display increased mobility. Because only males tend to mount another individual and because males can detect the sex of another individual by contact with the side of their arms, a male-on-female pair is formed when a male encounters a female. Eighty-five percent of the sea stars observed were paired during the pairing season. Spawning by a paired female is closely followed by spawning of its paired male; male spawning, however, does not induce spawning in its paired female. During spawning, the male turns slightly so that its arms overlap the arched arms of the female. The gonad volume of males is much less than that of females. This may result from the high efficiency of fertilization in this species, which does not require a large amount of gametes to be released, or from the higher energetic demands made on the males.


Beach Field Study Breeding Season Intertidal Zone Reproductive Cycle 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature cited

  1. Boschma, H. (1924). Über einen Fall von Kopulation bei einer Asteridae (Archaster typicus). Zool. Anz. 58:283–285Google Scholar
  2. Chia, F. S. (1974). Classification and adaptive significance of developmental patterns in marine invertebrates. Thalassia jugosl. 10: 321–339Google Scholar
  3. Clemente, L. S., Anicete, B. Z. (1949). Studies on sex-ratio, sexual dimorphism and early development of the common starfish, Archaster typicus Müller et Troschel (family Archasteridae). Nat. appl. Sci. Bull. Univ. Philipp. 9: 297–318Google Scholar
  4. Farmanfarmaian, A., Giese, A. C., Boolootian, R. A., Bennett, J. (1958). Annual reproductive cycles in four species of west coast starfishes. J. exp. Zool. 138:355–367Google Scholar
  5. Hyman, L. H. (1955). The invertebrates. Vol. IV, Echinodermata McGraw-Hill New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Kanatani, H. (1969). Induction of spawning and oocyte maturation by 1-methyladenine in starfishes. Expl Cell Res. 57: 333–337Google Scholar
  7. Komatsu, M. (1983). Development of the sea-star, Archaster typicus, with a note on male-on-female superposition. Annotnes zool. jap. 56: 187–195Google Scholar
  8. Lawrence, J. M., Lane, J. M. (1982). The utilization of nutrients by post-metamorphic echinoderms. In: Jangoux, M., Lawrence, J. M. (eds.) Echinoderm nutrition. A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam, p. 331–371Google Scholar
  9. Mayo, P., Mackie, A. M. (1976). Studies of avoidance reactions in several species of predatory British seastars (Echinodermata: Asteroidea). Mar. Biol. 38: 41–49Google Scholar
  10. Mortensen, T. (1931) Contributions to the study of the development and larval forms of echinoderms. I & II. K. danske Vidensk. Selsk. Skr. (Nat. Math. Afd. 9. raekke) 4: 1–39Google Scholar
  11. Nichols, D., Barker, M. F. (1984). Reproductive and nutritional periodicities in the starfish, Marthasterias glacialis, from Plymouth Sound. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K. 64: 461–470Google Scholar
  12. Ohshima, H., Ikeda, H. (1934a). Male-female superposition of the sea-star Archaster typicus Müll. et Trosch. Proc. imp. Acad. Japan 10: 125–128Google Scholar
  13. Ohshima, H., Ikeda, H. (1934b). Sexual size-dimorphism in the sea-star Archaster typicus Müll. et Trosch. Proc. imp. Acad. Japan 10: 180–183Google Scholar
  14. Pennington, J. T. (1985). The ecology of fertilization of echinoid eggs: the consequences of sperm dilution, adult aggregation, and synchronous spawning. Biol. Bull. mar. biol. Lab., Woods Hole 169: 417–430Google Scholar
  15. Sloan, N. A. (1984). Interference and aggregation: close encounters of the starfish kind. Ophelia 23: 23–31Google Scholar
  16. Sokal, R. R., Rohlf, F. J. (1981). Biometry. The principles and practice of statistics in biological research. 2nd ed. W. H. Freeman & Co., San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  17. Thorson, G. (1946). Reproduction and larval development of Danish marine bottom invertebrates. Meddr Kommn Danm. Fisk.-og Havunders. (Ser Plankton). 4: 1–523Google Scholar
  18. Tyler, P. A., Pain, S. L. (1982). The reproductive biology of Plutonaster bifrons, Dytaster insignis and Psilaster andromeda (Asteroidea: Astropectinidae) from the Rockall Trough. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K. 62: 869–887Google Scholar
  19. Tyler, P. A., Pain, S. L. Gage, J. D. (1982). The reproductive biology of the deep-sea asteroid Bathybiaster vexillifer. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K. 62: 57–69Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. -Q. Run
    • 1
  • C. -P. Chen
    • 2
  • K. -H. Chang
    • 1
    • 2
  • F. -S. Chia
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Marine BiologyNational Sun Yat-sen UniversityKaohsiungTaiwan, Republic of China
  2. 2.Institute of ZoologyAcademia SinicaTaipeiTaiwan, Republic of China

Personalised recommendations