Chesapeake Science

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 282–284 | Cite as

Aspects of an undescribed reproductive behavior inFundulus heteroclitus (Pisces: Cyprinodontae) from Virginia

  • K. W. Able
  • M. Castagna
Short Papers and Notes


Large numbers of eggs ofFundulus heteroclitus have been found in shells of the intertidal mussel,Modiolus demissus, near Wachapreague, Virginia, during six consecutive summers and in Brown’s Bay, Vírgínia, during 1972. Egg deposition in shells in aquaria has been observed. This behavior may serve to protect the eggs from predation. In nature the eggs in shells are exposed to high temperatures and desiccation for long periods during lower tide levels. Hatching has occurred in 14 to 17 day under these conditions. Eggs taken from mussel shells and eggs stripped and fertilized in the laboratory did not have chorionic filaments or the filaments were greatly reduced in number and length. The habit of egg deposition in shells and the morphology of the eggs are different from that reported forF. heteroclitus from Woods Hole, Massachusetts.

Literature Cited

  1. Abbott, R. T. 1954. American seashells. Van Nostrand Co., New York, 541 p.Google Scholar
  2. Armstrong, P. B., andJ. S. Child. 1965. Stages in the normal development ofFundulus heteroclitus.Biol. Bull. 128:143–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brummett, A. R. 1966. Observations on the eggs and breeding season ofFundulus heteroclitus at Beaufort, North Carolina.Copeia 3:616–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chidester, F. E. 1920. The behavior ofFundulus heteroclitus on the salt marshes of New Jersey.Amer. Nat. 54:551–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Costello, D. P., M. W. Davidson, A. Eggers, M. H. Fox andC. Henley. 1957. Method for obtaining and handling marine eggs and embryos. Marine Biol. Lab., Woods Hole, Mass. 247 p.Google Scholar
  6. Foster, N. R. 1967. Comparative studies on the biology of killifishes (Pisces, Cyprinodontidae). Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell Univ. 369 p.Google Scholar
  7. Harrington, R. W., Jr. 1959. Delayed hatching in stranded eggs of marsh killifish,Fundulus confluentus.Ecology 40:430–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Miller, R. R. 1955. An annotated list of the American cyprinodontid fishes of the genusFundulus, with the description ofFundulus persimilis, from Yucatan.Occ. Pap. Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich. 568:1–25.Google Scholar
  9. Newman, H. N. 1907. Spawning behavior and sexual dimorphism inFundulus heteroclitus and allied fish.Biol. Bull. 12:314–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Nichols, J. T., andC. M. Breder, Jr. 1927. The marine fishes of New York and southern New England.Zoologica 9:1–192.Google Scholar
  11. Oppenheimer, J. M. 1937. The normal stages ofFundulus heteroclitus.Anat. Rec. 68:1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Peters, N. 1963. Embryonale anpassungen oviparer sahnkarpfen aus periodisch austroknenden gewassern.Int. Revue Ges Hydrobiol. 48:257–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Shanklin, D. R. 1959. Studies on theFundulus chorion.J. Cell Comp. Physiol. 53:1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Solberg, A. N. 1938. The development of a bony fish.Prog. Fish Culturist 40:1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Estuarine Research Federation 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. W. Able
    • 1
  • M. Castagna
    • 2
  1. 1.Biology DepartmentMcGill UniversityMontréalCanada
  2. 2.Virginia Institute of Marine ScienceWachapreague

Personalised recommendations