Advertisement

Ocean Science Journal

, Volume 53, Issue 1, pp 101–106 | Cite as

Effect of Mudflat Trampling on Activity of Intertidal Crabs

  • Tae Won Kim
  • Sanha Kim
  • Jung-Ah Lee
Article
  • 60 Downloads

Abstract

Many people visit intertidal mudflats to collect bait and seafood, or for eco-tourism and recreation, and as a consequence trample on the mudflats frequently. Trampling would not be life threatening to most animals in the intertidal flats as they have evolved hiding behavior to escape predation. However, what is the effect of trampling on the behavior of intertidal animals? In this study, the effect of mudflat trampling on the activity of crabs (e.g. fiddler crabs, sentinel crabs) living on the mudflat was explored. The number of crabs active on the mudflat surface in experimental plots (1.5 × 1.5 m2) before and after (10 min. and 30 min.) trampling of three different intensities (Heavy trampling = 60 steps; Moderate trampling = 20 steps; and No trampling) was compared in two different mudflat systems. After trampling, the number of crabs active on the surface decreased and was significantly lower than that of control plots. The more intensively trampled the mudflat was, the fewer crabs were active on the mudflat surface. Surprisingly, the number of active crabs did not recover even 30 min. after trampling. The results clearly support the hypothesis that trampling can severely interfere with the behavior of crabs living on intertidal mudflats.

Keywords

anthropogenic influence behavioral ecology conservation education recreational ecology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Brosnan DM, Crumrine LL (1994) Effects of human trampling on marine rocky shore communities. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 177:79–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown AC, McLachlan A (2002) Sandy shore ecosystems and the threats facing them: some predictions for the year 2025. Environ Conserv 29:62–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cheung LTO, Jim CY (2014) Expectations and willingness-to-pay for ecotourism services in Hong Kong’s conservation areas. Int J Sust Dev World 21:149–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hannak JS, Kompatscher S, Stachowitsch M, Herler J (2011) Snorkelling and trampling in shallow-water fringing reefs: risk assessment and proposed management strategy. J Environ Manage 92:2723–2733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hong SK, Koh CH, Harris RR, Kim JE, Lee JS, Ihm BS (2010) Land use in Korean tidal wetlands: impacts and management strategies. Environ Manage 45:1014–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Huff TM (2011) Effects of human trampling on macro- and meiofauna communities associated with intertidal algal turfs and implications for management of protected areas on rocky shores (Southern California). Mar Ecol-Evol Persp 32:335–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Johnson GEL, Attrill MJ, Sheehan EV, Somerfield PJ (2007) Recovery of meiofauna communities following mudflat disturbance by trampling associated with crab-tiling. Mar Environ Res 64:409–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kay AM, Liddle MJ (1989) Impact of human trampling in different zones of a coral-reef flat. Environ Manage 13:509–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kim TW (2010) Food storage and carrion feeding in the fiddler crab Uca lactea. Aquat Biol 10:33–39. doi:10.3354/ab00264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kim TW, Choe JC (2003) The effect of food availability on the semilunar courtship rhythm in the fiddler crab Uca lactea (de Haan) (Brachyura: Ocypodidae) Behav Ecol Sociobiol 54:210–217. doi:10.1007/s00265-003-0614-3Google Scholar
  11. Kim TW, Christy JH (2015) A mechanism for visual orientation may facilitate courtship in a fiddler crab. Anim Behav 101:61–66. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.12.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kim TW, Christy JH, Choe JC (2004a) Semidome building as sexual signaling in the fiddler crab Uca lactea (Brachyura: Ocypodidae). J Crustacean Biol 24:673–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kim TW, Christy JH, Dennenmoser S, Choe JC (2009) The strength of a female mate preference increases with predation risk. P R Soc B 276:775–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kim TW, Kim KW, Srygley RB, Choe JC (2004b) Semilunar courtship rhythm of the fiddler crab Uca lactea in a habitat with great tidal variation. J Ethol 22:63–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kim TW, Sakamoto K, Henmi Y, Choe JC (2008) To court or not to court: reproductive decisions by male fiddler crabs in response to fluctuating food availability. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62:1139–1147. doi:10.1007/s00265-007-0542-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Koo BJ, Kwon KK, Hyun JH (2007) Effect of environmental conditions on variation in the sediment-water interface created by complex macrofaunal burrows on a tidal flat. J Sea Res 58:302–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Leite LG, Ciotti AM, Christofoletti RA (2012) Abundance of biofilm on intertidal rocky shores: Can trampling by humans be a negative influence? Mar Environ Res 79:111–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liddle MJ (1991) Recreation ecology- effects of trampling on plants and corals. Trends Ecol Evol 6:13–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Micheli F, Heiman KW, Kappel CV, Martone RG, Sethi SA, Osio GC, Fraschetti S, Shelton AO, Tanner JM (2016) Combined impacts of natural and human disturbances on rocky shore communities. Ocean Coast Manage 126:42–50. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2016.03.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Milazzo M, Badalamenti F, Riggio S, Chemello R (2004) Patterns of algal recovery and small-scale effects of canopy removal as a result of human trampling on a Mediterranean rocky shallow community. Biol Conserv 117:191–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mitsch WJ, Wu XY, Nairn RW, Weihe PE, Wang NM, Deal R, Boucher CE (1998) Creating and restoring wetlands- a wholeecosystem experiment in self-design. Bioscience 48:1019–1030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Moellmann AM, Corbisier TN (2003) Does tourist flow affect the meiofauna of sandy beaches? Preliminary results. J Coastal Res 19:590–598Google Scholar
  23. Monz CA, Pickering CM, Hadwen WL (2013) Recent advances in recreation ecology and the implications of different relationships between recreation use and ecological impacts. Front Ecol Environ 11:441–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Otani S, Kozuki Y, Yamanaka R, Sasaoka H, Ishiyama T, Okitsu Y, Sakai H, Fujiki Y (2010) The role of crabs (Macrophthalmus japonicus) burrows on organic carbon cycle in estuarine tidal flat, Japan. Estuar Coast Shelf S 86:434–440. doi:10.1016/j.ecss.2009.07.033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rossi F, Forster RM, Montserrat F, Ponti M, Terlizzi A, Ysebaert T, Middelburg JJ (2007) Human trampling as short-term disturbance on intertidal mudflats: effects on macrofauna biodiversity and population dynamics of bivalves. Mar Biol 151:2077–2090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schlacher TA, Thompson L (2012) Beach recreation impacts benthic invertebrates on ocean-exposed sandy shores. Biol Conserv 147:123–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Yoo JW, Lee YW, Lee CG, Kim CS (2013) Effective prediction of biodiversity in tidal flat habitats using an artificial neural network. Mar Environ Res 83:1–9. doi:10.1016/j.marenvres.2012.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zeil J (1998) Homing in fiddler crabs (Uca lactea annulipes and Uca vomeris: Ocypodidae). J Comp Physiol A 183:367–377. doi:10.1007/s003590050263CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korea Institute of Ocean Science & Technology (KIOST) and the Korean Society of Oceanography (KSO) and Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Ocean Sciences, College of Natural SciencesInha UniversityIncheonKorea
  2. 2.The Biodiversity FoundationSeoulKorea
  3. 3.JNC Fisheries Inc.JejuKorea

Personalised recommendations