Oecologia

, Volume 178, Issue 4, pp 999–1015 | Cite as

Sex- and habitat-specific movement of an omnivorous semi-terrestrial crab controls habitat connectivity and subsidies: a multi-parameter approach

  • Lena Hübneṙ
  • Steven C. Pennings
  • Martin Zimmer
Physiological ecology - Original research

Abstract

Distinct habitats are often linked through fluxes of matter and migration of organisms. In particular, intertidal ecotones are prone to being influenced from both the marine and the terrestrial realms, but whether or not small-scale migration for feeding, sheltering or reproducing is detectable may depend on the parameter studied. Within the ecotone of an upper saltmarsh in the United States, we investigated the sex-specific movement of the semi-terrestrial crab Armases cinereum using an approach of determining multiple measures of across-ecotone migration. To this end, we determined food preference, digestive abilities (enzyme activities), bacterial hindgut communities (genetic fingerprint), and the trophic position of Armases and potential food sources (stable isotopes) of males versus females of different sub-habitats, namely high saltmarsh and coastal forest. Daily observations showed that Armases moved frequently between high-intertidal (saltmarsh) and terrestrial (forest) habitats. Males were encountered more often in the forest habitat, whilst gravid females tended to be more abundant in the marsh habitat but moved more frequently. Food preference was driven by both sex and habitat. The needlerush Juncus was preferred over three other high-marsh detrital food sources, and the periwinkle Littoraria was the preferred prey of male (but not female) crabs from the forest habitats; both male and female crabs from marsh habitat preferred the fiddler crab Uca over three other prey items. In the field, the major food sources were clearly vegetal, but males have a higher trophic position than females. In contrast to food preference, isotope data excluded Uca and Littoraria as major food sources, except for males from the forest, and suggested that Armases consumes a mix of C4 and C3 plants along with animal prey. Digestive enzyme activities differed significantly between sexes and habitats and were higher in females and in marsh crabs. The bacterial hindgut community differed significantly between sexes, but habitat effects were greater than sex effects. By combining multiple measures of feeding ecology, we demonstrate that Armases exhibits sex-specific habitat choice and food preference. By using both coastal forest and saltmarsh habitats, but feeding predominantly in the latter, they possibly act as a key biotic vector of spatial subsidies across habitat borders. The degree of contributing to fluxes of matter, nutrients and energy, however, depends on their sex, indicating that changes in population structure would likely have profound effects on ecosystem connectivity and functioning.

Keywords

Saltmarsh Coastal forest Land crab Sexual dimorphism Spatial subsidy Habitat connectivity Motile link organism 

References

  1. Alderson B, Mazumder D, Saintilan N, Zimmerman K, Mulry P (2013) Application of isotope mixing models to discriminate dietary sources over small-scale patches in saltmarsh. Mar Ecol Progr Ser 487:113–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anger K (1995) The conquest of freshwater and land by marine crabs: adaptations in life-history patterns and larval bioenergetics. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 193:119–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barbier EB, Hacker SD, Kennedy C, Koch E, Stier AC, Silliman BR (2011) The value of estuarine and coastal ecosystem services. Ecol Monogr 81:169–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Breed GA, Jonsen ID, Myers RA, Bowen WD, Leonard ML (2006) Sex-specific, seasonal foraging tactics of adult grey seals (Halichoerus grypus) revealed by state-space analysis. Ecology 90:3209–3221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brittain RA, Schimmelmann A, Parkhurst DF, Craft CB (2012) Habitat use by coastal birds inferred from stable carbon and nitrogen isotopes. Estuar Coasts 35:633–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buck TL, Breed GA, Pennings SC, Chase ME, Zimmer M, Carefoot TH (2003) Diet choice in an omnivorous saltmarsh crab: different food types, body size and habitat complexity. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 292:103–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cai W-J (2011) Estuarine and coastal ocean carbon paradox: CO2 sinks or sites of terrestrial carbon incineration? Annu Rev Mar Sci 3:123–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Créach V, Schricke MT, Bertru G, Mariotti A (1997) Stable isotopes and gut analyses to determine feeding relationships in saltmarsh macroconsumers. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 44(5):599–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Currin CA, Newell SY, Paerl HW (1995) The role of standing dead Spartina alterniflora and benthic microalgae in saltmarsh food webs—considerations based on multiple stable isotope analysis. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 121:99–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Deegan LA, Garritt RH (1997) Evidence for spatial variability in estuarine food webs. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 147:31–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dìaz-Tenorio LM, García-Carreno FL, Navarrete del Toro MA (2006) Characterization and comparison of digestive proteinases of the Cortez swimming crab, Callinectes bellicosus, and the arched swimming crab, Callinectes arcuatus. Invertebr Biol 125:125–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dittmer J, Lesobre J, Raimond R, Zimmer M, Bouchon D (2012) Influence of changing plant food sources on the gut microbiota of saltmarsh detritivores. Microb Ecol 64:814–825PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Doi H, Matsumasa M, Toya T, Satoh N, Mizota C, Maki Y, Kikuchi E (2005) Spatial shifts in food sources for macrozoobenthos in an estuarine ecosystem: carbon and nitrogen stable isotope analyses. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 64:316–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ewers C, Beiersdorf A, Wieski K, Pennings SC, Zimmer M (2012) Predator/prey-interactions promote decomposition of low-quality detritus. Wetlands 32:931–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fantle MS, Dittel AI, Schwalm SM, Epifanio CE, Fogel ML (1999) A food web analysis of the juvenile blue crab, Callinectes sapidus, using stable isotopes in whole animals and individual amino acids. Oecologia 120:416–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Frenkel D (2004) Introduction to Monte Carlo Methods. In: Attig N, Binder K, Grubmüller H, Kremer K (eds) Computational soft matter: from synthetic polymers to proteins. John von Neumann Institute for Computing, Jülich, pp 23–59Google Scholar
  17. Garcia EA, Bertness MD, Alberti J, Silliman BR (2011) Crab regulation of cross-ecosystem resource transfer by marine foraging fire ants. Oecologia 166:1111–1119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Giddins RL, Lucas JS, Neilson MJ, Richards GN (1986) Feeding ecology of the mangrove crab Neosarmatium smithi (Crustacea: Decapoda: Sesarmidae). Mar Ecol Prog Ser 33:147–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gratton CJ, Vander Zanden MJ (2009) Flux of aquatic insect productivity to land: comparison of lentic and lotic ecosystems. Ecology 90:2689–2699PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gratton CJ, Donaldson J, Vander Zanden MJ (2008) Ecosystem linkages between lakes and the surrounding terrestrial landscape in northeast Iceland. Ecosystems 11:764–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Guest MA, Connolly RM, Loneragan NR (2004) Carbon movement and assimilation by invertebrates in estuarine habitat at a scale of metres. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 278:27–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Haines EB (1976a) Relation between the stable carbon isotope composition of fiddler crabs, plants and soils in a saltmarsh. Limnol Oceanogr 21:880–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Haines EB (1976b) Stable carbon isotope ratios in the biota, soils and tidal water of a Georgia saltmarsh. Estuar Coast Mar Sci 4:609–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Haines EB, Montague CL (1979) Food sources of estuarine invertebrates analyzed using 13C/12C ratios. Ecology 60:48–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. He X (2003) A continuous spectrophotometric assay for the determination of diamondback moth esterase activity. Arch Insect Biochem Physiol 54:68–76PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Helfer V, Broquet T, Fumagalli L (2012) Sex-specific estimates of dispersal show female philopatry and male dispersal in a promiscuous amphibian, the alpine salamander (Salamandra atra). Mol Ecol 21:4706–4720PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Henry HAL, Jefferies RL (2009) Opportunistic herbivores, migratory connectivity, and catastrophic shifts in Arctic coastal systems. In: Silliman BR, Grosholz ED, Bertness MD (eds) Human impacts on saltmarshes: a global perspective. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 85–102Google Scholar
  28. Ho C-K, Pennings SC (2008) Consequences of omnivory for trophic interactions on a saltmarsh shrub. Ecology 89(6):1714–1722PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hoekman D, Dreyer J, Jackson R, Townsend P, Gratton CJ (2011) Lake to land subsidies: experimental addition of aquatic insects increases terrestrial arthropod densities. Ecology 92:2063–2072PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Johnston DJ, Freeman J (2005) Dietary preference and digestive enzyme activities as indicators of trophic resource utilization by six species of crab. Biol Bull 208:36–46PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Johnston DJ, Yellowlees D (1998) Relationship between dietary preference and digestive enzyme complement of the slipper lobster, Thenus orientalis (Decapoda: Scyllaridae). J Crustac Biol 18:656–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jones RF, Baltz DM, Allen RL (2002) Patterns of resource use by fishes and macroinvertebrates in Barataria Bay, Louisiana. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 237:271–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kanaya G, Takagi S, Nobata E, Kikuchi E (2007) Spatial dietary shift of macrozoobenthos in a brackish lagoon revealed by carbon and nitrogen stable isotope ratios. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 345:117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kasai A, Horie H, Sakamoto W (2004) Selection of food sources by Ruditapes philippinarum and Mactra veneriformis (Bivalva: Mollusca) determined from stable isotope analysis. Fish Sci 70:11–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kneib RT (1997) The role of tidal marshes in the ecology of estuarine nekton. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev 35:163–220Google Scholar
  36. Knight TM, McCoy MW, Chase JM, McCoy KA, Holt RD (2005) Trophic cascades across ecosystems. Nature 437(7060):880–883PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Krest JM, Moore WS, Gardner LR, Morris JT (2000) Marsh nutrient export supplied by groundwater discharge: evidence from radium measurements. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 14:167–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kurata K, Minami H, Kikuchi E (2001) Stable isotope analysis of food sources for salt marsh snails. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 223:167–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kyomo J (1992) Variations in the feeding habits of males and females of the crab Sesarma intermedia. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 83:151–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lachnit T, Bümel M, Imhoff JF, Wahl M (2009) Specific epibacterial communities on macroalgae: phylogeny matters more than habitat. Aquat Biol 5:181–186Google Scholar
  41. Lee SY (1998) Ecological role of grapsid crabs in mangrove ecosystems: a review. Mar Freshw Res 49:335–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lewis TL, Mews M, Jelinski DE, Zimmer M (2007) Detrital subsidy to the supratidal zone provides feeding habitat for intertidal crabs. Estuar Coast 30:451–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Loreau M, Naeem S, Inchausti S (2002) Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: synthesis and perspectives. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  44. Lundberg J, Moberg F (2003) Mobile link organisms and ecosystem functioning: implications for ecosystem resilience and management. Ecosystems 6:87–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Marczak LB, Ho C-K, Wieski K, Vu H, Denno RF, Pennings SC (2011) Latitudinal variation in top-down and bottom-up control of a saltmarsh food web. Ecology 92:276–281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mattila JM, Zimmer M, Vesakoski O, Jormalainen V (2014) Habitat-specific gut microbiota of the marine herbivore Idotea balthica (Isopoda). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 455:22–28Google Scholar
  47. Mazumder D, Saintilan N, Williams RJ (2006) Trophic relationships between itinerant fish and crab larvae in a temperate Australian saltmarsh. Mar Freshw Res 57:193–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. McCann KS (2012) Food webs. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  49. McIvor CC, Odum WE (1988) Food, predation risk, and microhabitat selection in a marsh fish assemblage. Ecology 69:1341–1351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Muyzer G, de Waal EC, Uitterlinden AG (1993) Profiling of complex microbial populations by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis analysis of polymerase chain reaction-amplified genes coding for 16S rRNA. Appl Environ Microbiol 59:695–700PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Myers RT, Zak DR, White DC, Peacock A (2001) Landscape-level patterns of microbial community composition and substrate use in upland forest ecosystems. Soil Sci Soc Am J 65:359–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Nordhaus I (2004) Feeding ecology of the semi-terrestrial crab Ucides cordatus (Decapoda: Brachyura) in a mangrove forest in northern Brazil. PhD thesis. University of BremenGoogle Scholar
  53. Orr M, Zimmer M, Mews M, Jelinski DE (2005) Wrack deposition on different beach types: spatial and temporal variation in the pattern of subsidy. Ecology 86:1496–1507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Parsons KA, De la Cruz AA (1980) Energy flow and grazing behavior of conocephaline grasshoppers in a Juncus roemerianus marsh. Ecology 6:1045–1050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pavasovic M, Richardson NA, Anderson AJ, Mann D, Mather PB (2004) Effect of pH, temperature and diet on digestive enzyme profiles in the mud crab, Scylla serrata. Aquaculture 242:641–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pennings SC, Carefoot TH, Siska EL, Chase ME, Page TA (1998) Feeding preferences of a generalist salt-marsh crab: relative importance of multiple plant traits. Ecology 79:1968–1979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Peterson BJ, Howarth RW (1987) Sulfur, carbon and nitrogen isotopes used to trace organic matter flow in the salt-marsh estuaries of Sapelo Island, Georgia. Limnol Oceanogr 32:1195–1213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Peterson CH, Renaud PE (1989) Analysis of feeding preference experiments. Oecologia 80:82–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Platt SG, Elsey RM, Liu H, Rainwater TR, Nifong JC, Rosenblatt AE, Heithaus M, Mazzotti FJ (2013) Frugivory and seed dispersal by crocodilians: an overlooked form of saurochory? J Zool 291:87–99Google Scholar
  60. Plumley FG, Davis DE, McEnerney JT, Everest JW (1980) Effects of a photosynthesis inhibitor, atrazine, on the saltmarsh fiddler crab, Uca pugnax. Estuaries 3:217–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Polis GA, Anderson WB, Holt RD (1997) Toward an integration of landscape and food web ecology: the dynamics of spatially subsidized food webs. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 28:289–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Riera P, Richard P, Gremare A, Blanchard G (1996) Food source of intertidal nematodes in the Bay of Marennes-Oleron (France), as determined by dual stable isotope analysis. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 142:303–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rosenblatt AE, Heithaus MR, Mather ME, Matich P, Nifong JP, Ripple WJ, Silliman BR (2013) The roles of large predators in coastal ecosystems. Oceanography 26:156–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Schofield JA, Hagerman AE, Harold A (1998) Loss of tannins and other phenolics from willow leaf litter. J Chem Ecol 24:1409–1421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Seiple W (1979) Distribution, habitat preferences and breeding periods in the crustaceans Sesarma cinereum and S. reticulatum (Brachyura: Decapoda: Grapsidae). Mar Biol 52:77–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Seiple W, Salmon M (1987) Reproductive, growth and life-history contrasts between two species of grapsid crabs, Sesarma cinereum and S. reticulatum. Mar Biol 94:1–6Google Scholar
  67. Silliman BR, Zieman JC (2001) Top-down control of Spartina alterniflora production by periwinkle grazing in a Virginia saltmarsh. Ecology 82:2830–2845CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sullivan MJ, Moncreiff S (1990) Edaphic algae are important component of saltmarsh food-webs: evidence from multiple stable isotope analyses. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 62:149–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Teal JM (1962) Energy flow in the saltmarsh ecosystem of Georgia. Ecology 43:614–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Thaxter CB, Daunt F, Hamer KC, Watanuki Y, Harris MP, Grémillet D, Peters G, Wanless S (2009) Sex-specific food provisioning in a monomorphic seabird, the common guillemot Uria aalge: nest defence, foraging efficiency or parental effort? J Avian Biol 40:75–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Treplin M, Pennings SC, Zimmer M (2013) Decomposition in a US saltmarsh is driven by dominant species not species complementarity. Wetlands 33:83–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Valiela I, Teal JM (1974) Nutrient limitations in salt marsh vegetation. In: Reimold RJ, Queen WH (eds) Ecology of Halophytes. Academic Press, New York, pp. 547–563Google Scholar
  73. Vander Zanden MJ, Gratton CJ (2011) Blowin’ in the wind: reciprocal airborne carbon fluxes between lakes and land. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 68:170–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wolf PJ, Shanholtzer SF, Reimold RJ (1975) Population estimates for Uca pugnax (Smith, 1870) on the Duplin estuary marsh, Georgia, USA (Decapoda Brachyura, Ocypodidae). Crustaceana 29:79–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zimmer M (2002) Nutrition in terrestrial isopods (Isopoda: Oniscidea): an evolutionary-ecological approach. Biol Rev 77:455–493PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zimmer M (2005) Cellulases. In: Graça MAS, Bärlocher F, Gessner MO (eds) Methods to study litter decomposition: a practical guide. Kluwer, London, pp 249–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Zimmer M, Pennings SC, Buck TL, Carefoot TH (2002) Species-specific patterns of litter processing by terrestrial isopods (Isopoda: Oniscidea) in high intertidal saltmarshes and coastal forests. Funct Ecol 16:596–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zimmer M, Pennings SC, Buck TL, Carefoot TH (2004) Saltmarsh litter and detritivores: a closer look at redundancy. Estuaries 27:753–769CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lena Hübneṙ
    • 1
  • Steven C. Pennings
    • 2
  • Martin Zimmer
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Zoologisches InstitutChristian-Albrechts-Universität zu KielKielGermany
  2. 2.Department of Biology and BiochemistryUniversity of HoustonHoustonUSA
  3. 3.Leibniz Center for Tropical Marine Ecology-Mangrove EcologyBremenGermany

Personalised recommendations