Advertisement

Marine Biology

, Volume 156, Issue 5, pp 1057–1071 | Cite as

Waterborne cues from crabs induce thicker skeletons, smaller gonads and size-specific changes in growth rate in sea urchins

  • Rebecca Selden
  • Amy S. Johnson
  • Olaf Ellers
Original Paper

Abstract

Indirect predator-induced effects on growth, morphology and reproduction have been extensively studied in marine invertebrates but usually without consideration of size-specific effects and not at all in post-metamorphic echinoids. Urchins are an unusually good system, in which, to study size effects because individuals of various ages within one species span four orders of magnitude in weight while retaining a nearly isometric morphology. We tracked growth of urchins, Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis (0.013–161.385 g), in the presence or absence of waterborne cues from predatory Jonah crabs, Cancer borealis. We ran experiments at ambient temperatures, once for 4 weeks during summer and again, with a second set of urchins, for 22 weeks over winter. We used a scaled, cube-root transformation of weight for measuring size more precisely and for equalizing variance across sizes. Growth rate of the smallest urchins (summer: <17 mm diameter; winter: <7 mm diameter) decreased by 40–42% in response to crab cues. In contrast, growth rate of larger urchins was unaffected in the summer and increased in response to crab scent by 7% in the winter. At the end of the 22-week experiment, additional gonadal and skeletal variables were measured. Cue-exposed urchins developed heavier, thicker skeletons and smaller gonads, but no differences in spine length or jaw size. The differences depended on urchin size, suggesting that there are size-specific shifts in gonadal and somatic investment in urchins.

Keywords

Nominal Diameter Spine Length Gonad Index Interambulacral Plate Crushed Conspecific 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank M. Wright, M. Pratt, M. Devin and R. Russell for help with collecting or providing sea urchins; J. Allen, P. Dickinson, M. Pratt, T. Edgell and two anonymous reviewers for feedback on the manuscript; and M. Murray, J. Hauptman and A. Garfield for technical support. Crabs were donated by Allen’s Seafood, Harpswell, ME. This work was funded by a Beckman Foundation Fellowship to R. Selden, by a planning grant from Maine SeaGrant to A. Johnson and O. Ellers, and through Bowdoin College by two Faculty Fund Research awards, a Rusack Project Initiation Grant and a Faculty Leave Fellowship to A. Johnson. The project described was supported by NIH Grant Number P20 RR-016463 from the INBRE Program of the National Center for Research Resources. The experiments comply with the current laws of the country in which the experiments were performed.

Open Access

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

References

  1. Appleton RD, Palmer RA (1988) Water-borne stimuli released by predatory crabs and damaged prey induce more predator-resistant shells in a marine gastropod. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85:4387–4391. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.85.12.4387 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Behrens Yamada S, Navarrete SA, Needham C (1998) Predation induced changes in behavior and growth rate in three populations of the intertidal snail, Littorina sitkana (Philippi). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 220:213–226. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-0981(97)00106-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernstein BB, Williams BE, Mann KH (1981) The role of behavioral responses to predators in modifying urchins’ (Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis) destructive grazing and seasonal foraging patterns. Mar Biol (Berl) 63:39–49. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00394661 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bishop CD, Watts SA (1992) Biochemical and morphometric study of growth in the stomach and intestine of de echinoid Lytechnius variegates (Echinodermata). Mar Biol (Berl) 144:459–467. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00350038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brookes JI, Rochette R (2007) Mechanism of a plastic phenotypic response: predator-induced shell thickening in the intertidal gastropod Littorina obtusata. J Evol Biol 20:1015–1027. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2007.01299.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brady SM, Scheibling RE (2005) Repopulation of the shallow subtidal zone by green sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis) following mass mortality in Nova Scotia, Canada. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 85:1511–1517. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315405012713 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chiaverano L, Mianzan H, Ramirez F (2004) Gonad development and somatic growth patterns of Olindias sambaquiensis (Limnomedusae, Olindiidae). Hydrobiol 530/531:373–381. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-004-2666-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chivers DP, Smith RJF (1998) Chemical alarm signalling in aquatic predator–prey systems: a review and prospectus. Ecoscience 5:338–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Côté I (1995) Effects of predatory crab effluent on byssus production in mussels. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 188:233–241. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0981(94)00197-L CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Côté I, Jelnikar E (1999) Predator-induced clumping behaviour in mussels (Mytilus edulis Linnaeus). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 235:201–211. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-0981(98)00155-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crowl TA, Covich AP (1990) Predator-induced life-history shifts in a freshwater snail. Science 247:949–951. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.247.4945.949 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dalziel B, Boulding EG (2005) Water-borne cues from a shell-crushing predator induce a more massive shell in experimental populations of an intertidal snail. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 317:25–35. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2004.11.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dumont CP, Drolet D, Deschênes I, Himmelman JH (2007) Multiple factors explain the covering behaviour in the green sea urchin, Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis. Anim Behav 73:979–986. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.11.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ebert TA (1980) Relative growth of sea urchin jaws: an example of plastic resource allocation. Bull Mar Sci 30:467–474Google Scholar
  15. Ebert TA (1999) Plant and animal populations: methods in demography. Academic Press, London, p 312Google Scholar
  16. Ebert TA (2001) Growth and survival of post-settlement sea urchins. In: Lawrence JM (ed) Edible sea urchins: biology and ecology. Elsevier, Rotterdam, pp 79–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ebert TA (2008) Longevity and lack of senescence in the red sea urchin Strongylocentrotus franciscanus. Exp Gerontol 43:734–738. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exger.2008.04.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ebert TA, Russell MP (1993) Growth and mortality of subtidal red sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus franciscanus) at San Nicolas Island, California, USA: problems with models. Mar Biol (Berl) 117:79–89. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00346428 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ebert TA, Dixon JD, Schroeter SC, Kalvass PE, Richmond NT, Bradbury WA, Woodby DA (1999) Growth and mortality of red sea urchins Strongylocentrotus franciscanus across a latitudinal gradient. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 190:189–209. doi: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps190189 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Edgell TC, Neufeld CJ (2008) Experimental evidence for latent developmental plasticity: intertidal whelks respond to a native but not an introduced predator. Biol Lett 4:385–387. doi: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2008.0204 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Edwards PB, Ebert TA (1991) Plastic responses to limited food availability and spine damage in the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus purpuratus (Stimpson). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 145:205–220. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0981(91)90176-W CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ellers O (1993) A mechanical model of growth in regular sea urchins: predictions of shape and a developmental morphospace. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 254:123–129. doi: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1993.0136 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ellers O, Johnson AS (2009) Polyfluorochrome marking slows growth only during the marking month in the green sea urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis. Invert Biol 128(2). doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7410.2008.00159.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ellers O, Telford M (1997) Muscles advance the teeth in sand dollars and other sea urchins. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 264:1525–1530. doi: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1997.0211 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ellers O, Johnson AS, Moberg PE (1998) Structural strengthening of urchin skeletons by collagenous sutural ligaments. Bio Bull 195:136–144. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/1542821 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Freeman A (2006) Size-dependent trait-mediated indirect interactions among sea urchin herbivores. Behav Ecol 17:182–187. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arj014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Freeman AS, Byers JE (2006) Divergent induced responses to an invasive predator in marine mussel populations. Science 313:831–833. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1125485 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fuller WA (1987) Measurement error models. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Griffiths CL, Richardson CA (2006) Chemically induced predator avoidance behaviour in the burrowing bivalve Macoma balthica. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 331:91–98. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2005.10.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Guidetti P, Mori M (2005) Morpho-functional defences of Mediterranean sea urchins, Paracentrotus lividus and Arbacia lixula, against fish predators. Mar Biol (Berl) 147:797–802. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-005-1611-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Guillou M, Lumingas LJL (1999) Variation in the reproductive strategy of the sea urchin Sphaerechinus granularis (Echinodermata: Echinoidea) related to food availability. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 79:131–136. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315498000149 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Guillou M, Lumingas LJL, Michel C (2000) The effect of feeding or starvation on resource allocation to body components during the reproductive cycle of the sea urchin Sphaerechinus granularis (Lamarck). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 245:183–196. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-0981(99)00162-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hagen NT, Mann KH (1992) Functional response of the predator’s American lobster Homarus americanus (Milne-Edwards) and Atlantic wolfish Anarhichas lupus (L.) to increasing numbers of the green sea urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis (Müller). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 159:89–112. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0981(92)90260-H CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hagen NT, Andersen A, Stabell OB (2002) Alarm responses of the green sea urchin, Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis, induced by chemically labelled durophagous predators and simulated acts of predation. Mar Biol (Berl) 140:365–374. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s002270100694 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Harvell CD (1990) The ecology and evolution of inducible defenses. Q Rev Biol 65:323–340. doi: https://doi.org/10.1086/416841 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Harvell CD (1992) Inducible defenses and allocation shifts in amarine bryozoan. Ecology 73:1567–1576. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/1940010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Harvey PH, Pagel MD (1991) The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  38. Havardsson B, Imsland AK (1999) The effect of astaxanthin in feed and environmental temperature on carotenoid concentration in the gonads of the green sea urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis Müller. J World Aquac Soc 30:208–218. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-7345.1999.tb00868.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hereu B, Zabala M, Linares C, Sala E (2005) The effects of predator abundance and habitat structural complexity on survival of juvenile sea urchins. Mar Biol 146:293–299. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-004-1439-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Himmelman JH, Steele DH (1971) Foods and predators of the green sea urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis in Newfoundland waters. Mar Biol 9:315–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hollander J (2008) Testing the grain-size model for the evolution of phenotypic plasticity. Evol Int J Org Evol 62:1381–1389. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00365.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Howe NR, Harris LG (1978) Transfer of the sea anemone pheromone, anthopleurine, by the nudibranch Aeolidia papillosa. J Chem Ecol 4:551–561. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988919 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Howe NR, Sheikh YM (1975) Anthopleurine: a sea anemone alarm pheromone. Science 189:386–388. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.238286 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hunt HL, Scheibling RE (1997) Role of early post-settlement mortality in recruitment of benthic marine invertebrates. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 155:269–301. doi: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps155269 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Jacobsen HP, Stabell OB (1999) Predator-induced alarm responses in the common periwinkle, Littorina littorea: dependence on season, light conditions, and chemical labelling of predators. Mar Biol (Berl) 134:551–557. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s002270050570 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Jacobsen HP, Stabell OB (2004) Antipredator behaviour mediated by chemical cues: the role of conspecific alarm signalling and predator labelling in the avoidance response of a marine gastropod. Oikos 104:43–50. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.12369.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Johnson AS, Ellers O, Lemire J, Minor M, Leddy HA (2002) Sutural loosening and skeletal flexibility during growth: determination of drop-like shapes in sea urchins. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 269:215–220. doi: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2001.1881 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kats LB, Dill LM (1998) The scent of death: chemosensory assessment of predation risk by prey animals. Ecoscience 5:361–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Knip DM, Scheibling RE (2007) Invertebrate fauna associated with kelp enhances reproductive output of the green sea urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 351:150–159. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2007.06.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. LaBarbera M (1989) Analyzing body size as a factor in ecology and evolution. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 20:97–117. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.20.110189.000525 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Laforsch C, Beccara L (2006) Inducible defenses: the relevance of chemical alarm cues in Daphnia. Limnol Oceanogr 51:1466–1472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lawrence JM, Lawrence AL, Holland ND (1965) Annual cycle in the size of the gut of the purple sea urchin Strongylocentrotus purpuratus (Stimpson). Nature 205:1238–1239. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/2051238a0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Leonard GH, Bertness MD, Yund PO (1999) Crab predation, waterborne cues, and inducible defenses in the blue mussel, Mytilus edulis. Ecology 80:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Levitan DR (1991) Skeletal changes in the test and jaws of the sea urchin Diadema antillarum in response to food limitation. Mar Biol (Berl) 111:431–435. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01319415 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lively CM, Hazel WN, Schellenberger MJ, Michelson KS (2000) Predator-induced defense: variation for inducibility in an intertidal barnacle. Ecology 81:1240–1247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mann KH, Wright JLC, Welsford BE, Hatfield E (1984) Responses of the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis (O. F. Müller) to water-borne stimuli from potential predators and potential food algae. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 79:233–244. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0981(84)90197-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. McKay KM, Heck KL (2008) Presence of the Jonah crab Cancer borealis significantly reduces kelp consumption by the green sea urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 356:295–298. doi: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07238 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Miner BG (2007) Larval feeding structure plasticity during pre-feeding stages of echinoids: not all species respond to the same cues. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 343:158–165. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2006.11.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Nakaoka M (2000) Nonlethal effects of predators on prey populations: predator-mediated change in bivalve growth. Ecology 81:1031–1045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Palmer RA (1990) Effect of crab effluent and scent of damaged conspecifics on feeding, growth, and shell morphology of the Atlantic dogwhelk Nucella lapillus (L.). Hydrobiologia 193:155–182. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00028074 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Peacor SD (2003) Phenotypic modifications to conspecific density arising from predation risk assessment. Oikos 100:409–415. doi: https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.12043.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Pearce CM, Williams SW, Yuan F, Castell JD, Robinson SMC (2005) Effect of temperature on somatic growth and survivorship of early post-settled green sea urchins, Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis (Müller). Aquac Res 36:600–609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Pearse JS, Clark ME, Leighton DL, Mitchell CT, North WJ (1970) Marine waste disposal and sea urchin ecology. In: Kelp habitat improvement project. California Institute of Technology, p 87Google Scholar
  64. Phillips DW (1978) Chemical mediation of invertebrate defensive behaviors and the ability to distinguish between foraging and inactive predators. Mar Biol (Berl) 49:237–243. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00391136 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Raymond BC, Scheibling RE (1987) Recruitment and growth of sea urchins (Strongylocentotus droebachiensis) following mass mortalities off Nova Scotia, Canada. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 108:31–54. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0981(87)90129-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Reimer O, Tedengren M (1996) Phenotypical improvement of morphological defences in the mussel Mytilus edulis induced by exposure to the predator Asterias rubens. Oikos 75:383–390. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/3545878 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rotjan RD, Blum J, Lewis SM (2004) Shell choice in Pagurus longicarpus hermit crabs: does predation threat influence shell selection behavior? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 56:171–176. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-004-0770-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Russell MP (1998) Resource allocation plasticity in sea urchins: rapid, diet induced, phenotypic changes in the green sea urchin, Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis (Müller). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 220:1–14. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-0981(97)00079-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Russell MP (2001) Spatial and temporal variation in growth of the green sea urchin, Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis, in the Gulf of Maine, USA. In: Barker M (ed) Echinoderms 2000: Proceedings of tenth international echinoderm conference, Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 533–538Google Scholar
  70. Russell MP, Urbaniak LM (2004) Does calcein affect estimates of growth rates in sea urchins? In: Heinzeller T, Nebelsick JH (eds) Proceedings of the 11th international echinoderm conference, Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 53–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Russell MP, Ebert TA, Petraitis PS (1998) Field estimates of growth and mortality of the green sea urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis. Ophelia 48:137–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Scheibling RE (1996) The role of predation in regulating sea urchin populations in eastern Canada. Oceanol Acta 19:421–430Google Scholar
  73. Scheibling RE, Anthony SX (2001) Feeding, growth and reproduction of sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis) on single and mixed diets of kelp (Laminaria spp.) and the invasive alga Codim fragile ssp. tomentosoides. Mar Biol (Berl) 139:139–146. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s002270100567 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Scheibling RE, Hamm J (1991) Interactions between sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis) and their predators in field and laboratory experiments. Mar Biol (Berl) 110:105–116. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01313097 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Scheibling RE, Hatcher BG (2001) The ecology of Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis. In: Lawrence JM (ed) Edible sea urchins: biology and ecology. Elsevier, Rotterdam, pp 271–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Scheibling RE, Raymond BG (1990) Community dynamics on a subtidal cobble bed following mass mortality of sea urchins. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 63:127–145. doi: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps063127 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Steneck RS, Vavrinec J, Leland AV (2004) Accelerating trophic-level dysfunction in kelp forest ecosystems of the western North Atlantic. Ecosystems 7:323–332. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-004-0240-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Stibor H, Lünig J (1994) Predator-induced phenotypic variation in the pattern of growth and reproduction in Daphnia hyalina (Crustacea: Cladocera). Funct Ecol 8:97–101. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2390117 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Strathmann RR, Fenaux L, Strathmann MF (1992) Heterochronic developmental plasticity in larval sea urchins and its implications for evolution of nonfeeding larvae. Evol Int J Org Evol 46:972–986. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2409750 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Tegner MJ, Levin LA (1983) Spiny lobsters and sea urchins: analysis of a predator–prey interaction. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 73:125–150. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0981(83)90079-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Tollrian R, Harvell CD (1999) The ecology and evolution of inducible defenses. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  82. Trussell GC (1996) Phenotypic plasticity in an intertidal snail: the role of a common crab predator. Evol Int J Org Evol 50:448–454. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2410815 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Trussell GC, Nicklin MO (2002) Cue sensitivity, inducible defense, and trade-offs in a marine snail. Ecology 83:1635–1647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Trussell GC, Smith LD (2000) Induced defenses in response to an invading crab predator: an explanation of historical and geographic phenotypic change. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:2123–2127. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.040423397 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Trussell GC, Ewanchuk PJ, Bertness MD (2003) Trait-mediated effects in rocky intertidal food chains: predator risk cues alter prey feeding rates. Ecology 84:629–640. doi: https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2003)084[0629:TMEIRI]2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Trussell GC, Ewanchuk PJ, Bertness MD, Silliman BR (2004) Trophic cascades in rocky shore tide pools: distinguishing lethal and nonlethal effects. Oecologia 139:427–432. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-004-1512-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Vamosi SM (2005) On the role of enemies in divergence and diversification of prey: a review and synthesis. Can J Zool 83:894–910. doi: https://doi.org/10.1139/z05-063 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Vaughn D, Strathmann RR (2008) Predators induce cloning in echinoderm larvae. Science 319:1503. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1151995 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Vermeij GJ (2002) Characters in context: molluscan shells and the forces that mold them. Paleobiology 28:41–54. doi: https://doi.org/10.1666/0094-8373(2002)028<0041:CICMSA>2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Warton DI, Wright IJ, Falster DS, Westoby M (2006) Bivariate line-fitting methods for allometry. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 81:259–291. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1464793106007007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Weisberg S (1980) Applied linear regression. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  92. Wetzel MA, Leuchs H, Koop JHE (2005) Preservation effects on wet weight, dry weight, and ash-free dry weight biomass estimates of four common estuarine macro-invertebrates: no difference between ethanol and formalin. Helgol Mar Res 59:206–213. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10152-005-0220-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Zar JH (1996) Biostatistical analysis. Prentice-Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2009

Open AccessThis is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyBowdoin CollegeBrunswickUSA
  2. 2.Ecology, Evolution, and Marine BiologyUniversity of California-Santa BarbaraSanta BarbaraUSA

Personalised recommendations