Marine Biology

, Volume 91, Issue 1, pp 47–57 | Cite as

Morphology and field behavior of pteropod molluscs: feeding methods in the families Cavoliniidae, Limacinidae and Peraclididae (Gastropoda: Thecosomata)

  • R. W. Gilmer
  • G. R. Harbison
Article

Abstract

From 1983 to 1985 we studied the in-situ feeding behavior of fourteen species belonging to nine genera of thecosomatous pteropods, one in the family Limacinidae, seven in the family Cavoliniidae, and one in the family Peraclididae. All the euthecosomes we examined fed with a large spherical mucous web. Peraclis reticulata (D'Orbigny), however, uses a funnel-shaped mucous sheet, resembling that of other pseudothecosomes. Although the feeding mechanisms are similar in all the animals we examined closely, we found great differences in the size and morphology of the external part of the mantle. In species of Diacria and Cavolinia the external mantle attains its greatest complexity, and appears to be used for the sorting or rejection of food and for flotation. Species of the other five cavoliniid genera we studied have greatly reduced external mantles and sink slowly while feeding. Species of Limacina have no external mantle but appear to arrest sinking by setting their mucous webs. P. reticulata, which also appears to be neutrally buoyant, has an extensive external mantle that completely covers the shell. We conclude that feeding with a large mucous web explains the presence of fragments of large, fast moving prey in the stomach contents of both pseudothecosomes and euthecosomes. At present, it is impossible to decide whether thecosomes should be regarded as carnivorous trappers of prey or as suspension feeders. The use of an external mucous web for feeding is probably common to all thecosome pteropods and is the fundamental andaptation that enables them to live holoplanktonically.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature cited

  1. Bé, A. W. H. and R. W. Gilmer: A zoogeographic and taxonomic review of euthecosomatous pteropods. In: Oceanic micropaleontology, Vol. 1, pp 733–808. Ed. by A. T. S. Ramsey. London: Academic Press 1977Google Scholar
  2. Boas, J. E. V.: Zur Systematik und Biologie der Pteropoden. Zool. Jahrb. 1, 311–340 (1886)Google Scholar
  3. Costa, A.: Illustrazione della Spirialis recurvirostra. Ann. Mus. Zool. R. Napoli 4, 56–58 (1867)Google Scholar
  4. Denton, E. J. and T. L. Shaw: The buoyancy of gelatinous animals. J. Physiol. 161, 14–15 (1961)Google Scholar
  5. Gilmer, R. W.: Free floating mucus webs: a novel feeding adapation for the open ocean. Science, N.Y. 176, 1239–1240 (1972)Google Scholar
  6. Gilmer, R. W.: Some aspects of feeding in thecosomatous pteropod molluscs. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 15, 127–144 (1974)Google Scholar
  7. Hamner, W. M.: Blue-water plankton. Natl. geogr. Mag. 146, 530–545 (1974)Google Scholar
  8. Jøgensen, C. B.: Biology of suspension feeding, 358 pp. Oxford: Pergamon Press 1966Google Scholar
  9. Marshall, N. B.: Animal ecology. In: Deep oceans, pp 205–224. Ed. by P. J. Herring and M. R. Clarke. New York: Praeger Publishers 1971Google Scholar
  10. McGowan, J.: The Thecosomata and Gymnosomata of California. Veliger 3 (Suppl.), 103–130 (1968)Google Scholar
  11. Meisenheimer, J.: Pteropoda. Wiss. Ergebn. dtsch. Tiefsee-Exped. ‘Valdivia’ 9, 1–314 (1905)Google Scholar
  12. Meisenheimer, J.: Die Pteropoden der deutschen Südpolar Expedition 1901–1903. Dtsch. Südpol. Exp. 1901–1903 9, 92–152 (1906)Google Scholar
  13. Morton, J. E.: The biology of Limacina retroversa. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K. 33, 297–312 (1954)Google Scholar
  14. Morton, J. E.: Locomotion. In: Physiology of Mollusca, pp 383–423. Ed. by K. M. Wilbur and C. M. Yonge. New York: Academic Press 1964Google Scholar
  15. Pafort-van Iersel, T. and S. van der Spoel: The structure of the columnellar muscle system in Clio pyramidata and Cymbulia peroni (Thecosomata Gastropoda) with a note on the phylogeny of both species. Bijdr. Dierkd. 48, 111–126 (1979)Google Scholar
  16. Pelseneer, P.: Report on the pteropoda collected by H.M.S. “Challenger” during the years 1873–1876. II. The Thecosomata. Rep. Sci. Res. Voy. H.M.S. “Challenger” during the years 1873–1876. Zoology 23, 1–132 (1888a)Google Scholar
  17. Pelseneer, P.: Report on the pteropoda collected by H.M.S. “Challenger” during the years 1873–1876. III. Anatomy. Rep. Sci. Res. Voy. H.M.S. “Challenger” during the years 1873 to 1876. Zoology 23, 1–97 (1888b)Google Scholar
  18. Péron, F. and Lesueur: Histoire de la famille des mollusques ptéropodes. Caractères des dix genres qui doivent la composer. Ann. Mus. Hist. Nat. 15, 57–69 (1810)Google Scholar
  19. Rang, P. C. A. L. and F. L. A. Souleyet: Histore naturelle des mollusques ptéropodes. Monographie comprenant la description de toutes les espèces, 101 pp. Paris: J. B. Baillière 1852Google Scholar
  20. Richter, G.: Zur Stammesgeschichte pelagischer Gastropoden. Nat. Mus. 103, 265–275 (1973)Google Scholar
  21. Richter, G.: Jäger, Fallensteller und Sammler. Zur Ernährung planktischer Schnecken. Nat. Mus. 107, 221–234 (1977)Google Scholar
  22. Silver, M. W. and K. W. Bruland: Differential feeding and fecal pellet composition of salps and pteropods, and the possible origin of the deep-water flora and olive-green “cells”. Mar. Biol. 62, 263–273 (1981)Google Scholar
  23. Spoel, S. van der: Euthecosomata a group with remarkable developmental stages, 375 pp. Gorinchem: Noorduyn & Zn 1967Google Scholar
  24. Spoel, S. van der: A new form of Diacria quadridentata and shell growth in the species (Gastropoda, Pteropoda). Vidensk. Meddr. dan. naturhist. Foren. 131, 217–224 (1968)Google Scholar
  25. Spoel, S. van der: Geographical variation in Cavolinia tridentata (Mollusca, Pteropoda). Bijdr. Dierkd. 44, 100–112 (1974)Google Scholar
  26. Spoel, S. van der: Pseudothecosomata, Gymnosomata and Heteropoda. (Gastropoda), 484 pp. Utrecht: Bohn, Scheltema and Holkema 1976Google Scholar
  27. Tesch, J. J.: The Thecosomata and Gymnosomata of the Siboga Expedition. Siboga Rep. 52, 1–92 (1904)Google Scholar
  28. Tesch, J. J.: Pteropoda. In: Das Tierreich 36, pp 1–154. Ed. by T. E. Schulze. Berlin: R. Friedländer 1913Google Scholar
  29. Tesch, J. J.: The thecosomatous pteropods I. The Atlantic. Dana Rep. 28, 1–82 (1946)Google Scholar
  30. Wormelle, R.: A survey of the standing crop of plankton of the Florida current. VI. A study of the distribution of the pteropods of the Florida current. Bull. mar. Sci. Gulf Carib. 12, 93–136 (1962)Google Scholar
  31. Wormuth, J. H.: Vertical distributions and diel migrations of Euthecosomata in the northwest Sargasso Sea. Deep-Sea Res. 28A, 1493–1515 (1981)Google Scholar
  32. Yonge, C. M.: Ciliary feeding mechanisms in the thecosomatous pteropods. J. Linn. Soc. 36, 417–429 (1926)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. W. Gilmer
    • 1
  • G. R. Harbison
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BiologyWoods Hole Oceanographic InstitutionWoods HoleUSA

Personalised recommendations