Biological Invasions

, Volume 7, Issue 6, pp 895–912

Host specificity of Sacculina carcini, a potential biological control agent of the introduced European green crab Carcinus maenas in California

  • Jeffrey H. R Goddard
  • Mark E Torchin
  • Armand M Kuris
  • Kevin D. Lafferty
Article

Abstract

The European green crab, Carcinus maenas, is an introduced marine predator established on the west coast of North America. We conducted laboratory experiments on the host specificity of a natural enemy of the green crab, the parasitic barnacle Sacculina carcini, to provide information on the safety of its use as a possible biological control agent. Four species of non-target, native California crabs (Hemigrapsus oregonensis, H. nudus, Pachygrapsus crassipes and Cancer magister) were exposed to infective larvae of S. carcini. Settlement by S. carcini on the four native species ranged from 33 to 53%, compared to 79% for green crabs. Overall, cyprid larvae tended to settle in higher numbers on individual green crabs than on either C. magister or H. oregonensis. However, for C. magister this difference was significant for soft-shelled, but not hard-shelled individuals. Up to 29% of the native crabs arrested early infections by melanizing the rootlets of the parasite. Most native and green crabs settled on by S. carcini became infected, especially when settled on by >3 cyprids. Infected green crabs died at more than twice the rate of uninfected green crabs. In contrast to green crabs, all infected native crabs died without producing an externa (reproductive sac). At high settlement intensities, infected native crabs frequently exhibited neurological symptoms (twitching, loss of movement) before death. These results indicate that use of S. carcini as a biological control agent could result in the death of native crabs. The magnitude of this effect would be proportional to the density of infected green crabs in the environment and the probability that cyprids would contact native crabs in the wild. Potential benefits of biological control should be assessed in relation to these potential non-target effects.

Keywords

biological control Carcinus maenas Hemigrapsus nudus Hemigrapsus oregonensis host response host specificity Pachygrapsus crassipes Sacculina carcini  

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barratt, BIP, Evans, AA, Ferguson, CM, Barker, GM, McNeill, MR, Phillips, CB 1997Laboratory nontarget host range of the introduced parasitoidsMicroctonus aethiopoides and M hyperodae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) compared with field parasitism in New ZealandEnvironmental Entomology26694702Google Scholar
  2. Boettner, GH, Elkinton, JS, Boettner, CJ 2000Effects of a biological control introduction on three nontarget native species of saturniid mothsConservation Biology1417981806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boone, EJ, Boettcher, AA, Sherman, TD, O’Brian, JJ 2003Characterization of settlement cues used by the rhizocephalan barnacle Loxothylacus texanusMarine Ecology Progress Series252187197Google Scholar
  4. Caltagirone, LE 1981Landmark examples in classical biological controlAnnual Review of Entomology26213232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cohen, AN, Carlton, JT, Fountain, MC 1995Introduction, dispersal and potential impacts of the green crabCarcinus maenas in San Francisco Bay, CaliforniaMarine Biology122225237Google Scholar
  6. Combes, C 2001Parasitism: The Ecology and Evolution of Intimate InteractionsUniversity of Chicago PressChicagoGoogle Scholar
  7. Drach, P 1939Mue et cycle d’intermue chez les Crustacés DécapodesAnnales de l’Institut Oceanographique de Monaco19103391Google Scholar
  8. Glenner, H, Werner, M 1998Increased susceptibility of recently moulted Carcinus maenas (L.) to attack by the parasitic barnacle Sacculina carcini Thompson 1836Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology2282933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Glude, JB 1955The effects of temperature and predators on the abundance of the soft-shell clam Mya arenaria in New EnglandTransactions of the American Fisheries Society841326Google Scholar
  10. Greathead, D 1995

    Benefits and risks of classical biological control

    Hokkanen, HLynch, J eds. Biological Control: Benefits and RisksCambridge University PressCambridge, England5363
    Google Scholar
  11. Grosholz, ED, Ruiz, GM 1996Spread and potential impact of the recently introduced European green crab, Carcinus maenas, in central CaliforniaMarine Biology122239247Google Scholar
  12. Grosholz, ED, Ruiz, GM 2003Biological invasions drive size increases in marine and estuarine invertebratesEcology Letters6700705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Grosholz, ED, Ruiz, GM, Dean, CA, Shirley, KA, Maron, JL, Connors, PG 2000The impacts of a nonindigenous marine predator in a California bayEcology8112061224Google Scholar
  14. Hanks, RW 1961Chemical control of the green crab, Carcinus maenas (L.)Proceedings of the National Shellfish Association527586Google Scholar
  15. Henneman, M, Memmott, J 2001Infiltration of a Hawaiian community by introduced biological control agentsScience29313141316CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hiatt, RW 1948The biology of the lined shore crab, Pachygrapsus crassipes RandallPacific Science2135213Google Scholar
  17. Hickman, CP, Roberts, LS, Hickman, FM 1988Principals of Integrated ZoologyTimes Mirror/Mosby College PublishersSt. Louis, MOGoogle Scholar
  18. Høeg, JT 1984aA culture system for rearing marine invertebrate larvae and its application to larvae of rhizocephalan barnaclesJournal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology84167172Google Scholar
  19. Høeg, JT 1984bSize and settling behaviour in male and female cypris larvae of the parasitic barnacle Sacculina carcini Thompson (Crustacea: Cirripedia: Rhizocephala)Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology76145156Google Scholar
  20. Høeg, JT 1995The biology and life cycle of the Rhizocephala (Cirripedia)Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom75517550Google Scholar
  21. Høeg JT (1997) The epicaridean parasite Portunion maenadis as a biological control agent on Carcinus maenas. In: Thresher RE (ed) Proceedings of the First International Workshop on the Demography, Impacts and Management of the Iintroduced Populations of the European Crab, Carcinus maenas, pp 85–86. CSIRO Centre for Research on Introduced Marine Pests Technical Report 11. Hobart, TasmaniaGoogle Scholar
  22. Høeg, JT, Lützen, J 1985Crustacea Rhizocephala. Marine Invertebrates of ScandinaviaNorwegian University PressOsloGoogle Scholar
  23. Høeg, JT, Lützen, J 1995Life cycle and reproduction in the Cirripedia RhizocephalaOceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review33427485Google Scholar
  24. Høeg JT, Werner M and Glenner H (1997) The parasitic castrator Sacculina carcini as a possible control agent of Carcinus maenas: background and results of preliminary work. In: Thresher RE (ed) Proceedings of the First International Workshop on the Demography, Impacts and Management of Introduced Populations of the European Crab, Carcinus maenas , pp 69–75. CSIRO Centre for Research on Introduced Marine Pests Technical Report 11, HobartGoogle Scholar
  25. Howarth, FG 1991Environmental impacts of classical biological controlAnnual Review of Entomology36485509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jensen, GC, McDonald, PS, Armstrong, DA 2002East meets west: competitive interactions between green crab Carcinus maenas, and native and introduced shore crab Hemigrapsus sppMarine Ecology Progress Series225251262Google Scholar
  27. Kuris, AM 1971Population interactions between a shore crab and two symbionts. PhD dissertationUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeley, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  28. Kuris, AM, Lafferty, KD 1992Modelling crustacean fisheries: effects of parasites on management strategiesCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences49327336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kuris, AM, Torchin, ME, Lafferty, KD 2002Fecampia erythrocephala rediscovered: prevalence and distribution of a parasitold of the European shore crab, Carcinus maenasJournal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom82955960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lafferty, KD, Kuris, AM 1996Biological control of marine pestsEcology7719892000Google Scholar
  31. Louda, SM 2000

    Negative ecological effects of the musk thistle biological control agent, Rhinocyllus conicus

    Follett, PDuan, J eds. Nontarget Effects of Biological ControlKluwer Academic PublishersBoston215243
    Google Scholar
  32. Louda, SM, Pemberton, RW, Johnson, MT, Follett, PA 2003Nontarget effects–The Achilles heel of biological controlRetrospective analyses to reduce risk associated with biocontrol introductions. Annual Review of Entomology48365396Google Scholar
  33. McDonald, PS, Jensen, GC, Armstrong, DA 2001The competitive and predatory impacts of the nonindigenous crab Carcinus maenas (L.) on early benthic phase Dungeness crab Cancer magister DanaJournal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology2583954CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. McFadyen, REC 1998Biological controls of weedsAnnual Review of Entomology43369393CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Minchin D (1997) The influence of the parasitic cirripede Sacculina carcini on its brachyuran host Carcinus maenas within its home range. In: Thresher RE (ed) Proceedings of the First International Workshop on the Demography, Impacts and Management of the Introduced Populations of the European Crab, Carcinus maenas, pp 76–80. CSIRO Centre for Research on Introduced Marine Pests Technical Report 11. Hobart, TasmaniaGoogle Scholar
  36. Ropes, JW 1968The feeding habits of the green crab, Carcinus maenas (L.)Fishery Bulletin of the United States Fish & Wildlife Service67183203Google Scholar
  37. Rubiliani, C, Turquier, Y, Payen, G 1982Recherche sur l’ontogenèse des rhizocéphales. I. Les stades précoces de la phase endoparasitaire chez Sacculina carcini ThompsonCahiers de Biologie Marine23287297Google Scholar
  38. Sands, DPA 1998

    Guidelines for testing host specificity of agents for biological control of arthropod pests

    Zalucki, MDrew, RWhite, G eds. Pest Management–Future Challenges: 6th Australia Applied Entomological Research ConferenceUniversity of QueenslandBrisbane556560
    Google Scholar
  39. Secord, D 2003Biological control of marine invasive species: cautionary tales and land-based lessonsBiological Invasions5117131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Simberloff, D, Stiling, P 1996aHow risky is biological controlEcology7719651974Google Scholar
  41. Simberloff, D, Stiling, P 1996bRisks of species introduced for biological controlBiological Conservation78185192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sokal, RR, Rohlf, FJ 1981BiometryFreemanNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. Strong, DR, Pemberton, RW 2000Biological control of invading species–risk and reformScience28819691970CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Thomas, MB, Willis, AJ 1998Biocontrol–risky but necessaryTrends in Ecology and Evolution13325329Google Scholar
  45. Thompson, JN 1994The coevolutionary processThe University of Chicago PressChicagoGoogle Scholar
  46. Thresher RE (1996) Environmental tolerances of larvae of the European parasitic barnacle, Sacculina carcini (Rhizocephala: Sacculinidae): implications for use as a biological control agent against the introduced European crab, Carcinus maenas, CSIRO Centre for Research on Introduced Marine Pests. Hobart, TasmaniaGoogle Scholar
  47. Thresher, RE, Werner, M, Hoeg, JT, Svane, I, Glenner, H, Murphy, NE, Wittwer, C 2000Developing the options for managing marine pests: specificity trials on the parasitic castrator, Sacculina carcini, against the European crab, Carcinus maenas, and related speciesJournal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology2543751CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Torchin, ME, Lafferty, KD, Kuris, AM 1996Infestation of an introduced host, the European green crab, Carcinus maenas, by a symbiotic nemertean egg predator,Carcinonemertes epalti Journal of Parasitology82449453PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Torchin, ME, Lafferty, KD, Kuris, AM 2001Release from parasites as natural enemies: increased performance of a globally introduced marine crabBiological Invasions3333345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Veillet, A 1945Recherches sur le parasitisme des crabes at des galathées par les Rhizocéphales et les EpicaridesAnnales de l’Institut Océanographique de Monaco22193341Google Scholar
  51. Walker, G 1987Further studies concerning the sex ratio of the larvae of the parasitic barnacle, Sacculina carcini ThompsonJournal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology106151163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Walker, G 1988Observations on the larval development of Sacculina carciniM (Crustacea: Cirripedia: Rhizocephala)Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom68377390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Walton WC (1997) Attempts at physical control of Carcinus maenas within coastal ponds of Martha’s Vineyard, MA (northeastern coast of North America). In: Proceedings of the First International Workshop on the Demography, Impacts and Management of Introduced Populations of the European Crab, Carcinus maenas, 64–65. CSIROCentre for Research on Introduced Marine Pests Technical Report 11, Hobart, TasmaniaGoogle Scholar
  54. Yamada, S 2001Global Invader: The European Green Crab. Sea Grant CommunicationsCorvalisOregon140Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffrey H. R Goddard
    • 1
  • Mark E Torchin
    • 2
  • Armand M Kuris
    • 2
  • Kevin D. Lafferty
    • 3
    • 2
  1. 1.Marine Science InstituteUniversity of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA
  2. 2.Marine Science Institute and Department of Ecology, Evolution and Marine BiologyUniversity of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA
  3. 3.Western Ecological Research Center, US Geological Survey, Marine Science InstituteUniversity of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA

Personalised recommendations