Advertisement

acta ethologica

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 159–164 | Cite as

Are blue land crabs (Cardisoma guanhumi) attracted to falling fruit?

  • Lindsay Shimasaki
  • Kevin Kitagawa
  • Melinda Hernandez
  • Daniel T. Blumstein
Article

Abstract

Many species rely on multiple modalities to acquire information about predation risk, potential mates, and food. We studied the sensory modalities of blue land crabs, Cardisoma guanhumi, used for food detection. We isolated the acoustic and seismic cues of falling fruit and measured latency to emerge from their burrows after hearing the sound of falling fruits, seismic signals associated with fruit drop, and a combination of both modalities. In contrast to a previous study, we found no support that either substrate-born vibration or sound-enhanced emergence time. In fact, the actual fruit drop caused slower emergence times at one site. This crab lives in a seismically variable environment and perhaps such species are likely to rely more on other modalities to identify food.

Keywords

Multimodal stimulus assessment Foraging cues Cardisoma guanhumi 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Rafe Boulon and the Virgin Islands National Park for permission to work in the park (VIIS-2009-SCI-0028) and the UCLA Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and the UCLA Office of Instructional Development for its generous support. We also thank Jonathan Drury, John Fong, and Peter Narins for assistance and advice; Phil Ender, Xiao Chen, and Christine Wells for statistical advice; Earl Smith from Oyo Geospace for technical assistance; the staff at the Virgin Islands Environmental Resource Station for hospitality and accommodation; and the editor and an anonymous reviewer for astute comments that have helped us improve our paper.

References

  1. Acquistapace P, Aquiloni L, Hazlett BA, Gherard F (2002) Multimodal communication in crayfish: sex recognition during mate search by male Austropotamobius pallipes. Can J Zool 80:2041–2045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amemiya T (1984) Tobit models: a survey. J Econ 24:3–61Google Scholar
  3. Barrett-Lennard LG, Ford JKB, Heise KA (1996) The mixed blessing of echolocation: differences in sonar use by fish-eating and mammal-eating killer whales. Anim Behav 51:553–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Caro T (2005) Antipredator defenses in birds and mammals. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  5. Evans TA, Lai JCS, Toledano E, McDowall L, Rakotonarivo S, Lenz M (2005) Termites assess wood size by using vibration signals. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:3732–3737PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fenton MB, Bell GP (1979) Echolocation and feeding behaviour in four species of Myotis (Chiroptera). Can J Zool 57:1271–1277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gerhardt HC, Huber F (2002) Acoustic communication in insects and anurans: common problems and diverse solutions. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  8. Gherardi F, Tiedemann J (2004) Chemical cues and binary individual recognition in the hermit crab Pagurus longicarpus. J Zool 263:23–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goyret J, Markwell PM, Raguso RA (2007) The effect of decoupling olfactory and visual stimuli on the foraging behavior of Manduca sexta. J Exp Biol 210:1398–1405PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hahn TR, Thomas G (2009) Passive acoustic detection of schools of herring. J Acoust Soc Am 125:2896–2908PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hazlett BA, McLay C (2000) Contingencies in the behaviour of the crab Heterozius rotundifrons. Anim Behav 59:965–974PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hebets EA, Papaj DR (2005) Complex signal function: developing a framework of testable hypotheses. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 57:197–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Herreid CF (1963) Observations on the feeding behavior of Cardisoma guanhumi (Latreille) in Southern Florida. Crustaceana 5:176–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hill K (2001) Species account: Cardisoma guanhumi. www.sms.si.edu/irlspec/cardis_guanhu.htm
  15. Hölldobler B (1999) Multimodal signals in ant communication. J Comp Physiol [A] 184:129–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. McDonald JF, Moffitt RA (1980) The uses of tobit analysis. Rev Econ Stat 62:318–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Narins PM, Willi UB (2007) Mostly malleus: ground sound detection by the remarkable ear of the golden mole. Abstract: 19th International Congress on Acoustics, Madrid, 2–7 September 2007Google Scholar
  18. Neuweiler G (1990) Auditory adaptations for prey capture in echolocating bats. Physiol Rev 70:615–641PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Partan SR, Marler P (2005) Issues in the classification of multimodal communication signals. Am Nat 166:231–245PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Payne RS (1971) Acoustic location of prey by barn owl (Tyto alba). J Exp Biol 54:535PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Roche BE, Schulte-Hostedde AI, Brooks RJ (1999) Route choice by deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus): reducing the risk of auditory detection by predators. Am Midl Nat 142:194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rybak F, Sureau G, Aubin T (2002) Functional coupling of acoustic and chemical signals in the courtship behavior of the male Drosophila melanogaster. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 269:695–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schnitzler H, Moss CF, Denzinger A (2003) From spatial orientation to food acquisition in echolocating bats. Trends Ecol Evol 18:386–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Shettleworth SJ (2001) Animal cognition and animal behaviour. Anim Behav 61:277–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Siemers BM, Swift SM (2006) Differences in sensory ecology contribute to resource partitioning in the bats Myotis bechsteinii and Myotis nattereri (Chiroptera: Vespertilionidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 59:373–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Siemers BM, Stilz P, Schnitzler H (2001) The acoustic advantage of hunting at low heights above water: behavioural experiments on the European trawling’ bats Myotis capaccinii., M. dasycneme and M. daubentonii. J Exp Biol 204:3843–3854PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Siemers BM, Goerlitz HR, Robsomanitrandrasana E, Piep M, Ramanamanjato J, Rokotondravony D, Ramilijaona O, Ganzhorn JU (2007) Sensory basis of food detection in wild Microcebus murinus. Int J Primatol 28:291–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Uetz GW, Roberts JA, Taylor PW (2009) Multimodal communication and mate choice in wolf spiders: female response to multimodal versus unimodal signs. Anim Behav 78:299–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wolcott DL, Wolcott TG (1987) Nitrogen limitation in the herbivorous land crab Cardisoma guanhumi. Physiol Zool 60:262–268Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag and ISPA 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lindsay Shimasaki
    • 1
  • Kevin Kitagawa
    • 1
  • Melinda Hernandez
    • 1
  • Daniel T. Blumstein
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations