Advertisement

Habitat Ecology of Enteroctopus dofleini from Middens and Live Prey Surveys in Prince William Sound, Alaska

  • D. Scheel
  • A. Lauster
  • T. L. S. Vincent

The population ecology of mobile predators is often regulated by a complex mix of factors. Understanding the mechanisms that regulate the abundance and distribution of organisms remains a central goal of marine ecology (Estes and Peterson, 1998). Recent studies have emphasized the success of using multiple mechanisms to understand control of population dynamics, particularly in marine species (National Science Foundation, 1998; Connolly and Roughgarden, 1998; Karlson, 2002).

Keywords

Prey Item Habitat Selection Prey Availability Experimental Marine Biology Habitat Ecology 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Authorities for species retrieved 25 Feb 2004 from the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) on-line database at http://www.itis.usda.gov.
  2. Ambrose, R. F. 1984. Food preferences, prey availability, and the diet of Octopus bimaculatus Verrill. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 77: 29–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ambrose, R. F. 1988. Population dynamics of Octopus bimaculatus: influence of life history patterns, synchronous reproduction and recruitment. Malacologia 29(1): 23–39.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, R. C. 1994. Octopus bites clam. The Festivus 25(5): 58–59.Google Scholar
  5. Anderson, R. C. 1996. Sedating and euthanizing octopuses. Drum and Croaker 27: 7–8.Google Scholar
  6. Anderson, T. 1997. Habitat selection and shelter use by Octopus tetricus. Marine Ecology Progress Series 150: 149–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Andrews, P. L. R., and E. M. Tansey. 1981. The effects of some anaesthetic agents in Octopus vulgaris. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology 70C: 241–247.Google Scholar
  8. Aronson, R. B. 1986. Life history and den ecology of Octopus briareus Robson in a marine lake. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 95: 37–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown, J. S. 1988. Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competition. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 22: 37–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chapman, M. G. 1986. Assessment of some controls in experimental transplants of intertidal gastropods. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 103: 181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Charnov, E. L. 1976. Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. Theoretical Population Biology 9: 129–136.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Connolly, S. R., and J. Roughgarden. 1998. A latitudinal gradient in northeast Pacific intertidal community structure: evidence for an oceanographically based synthesis of marine community theory. American Naturalist 151(4): 311–326.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Cosgrove, J. A. 1987. Aspects of the natural history of Octopus dofleini, the Giant Pacific Octopus. M.Sc. thesis, University of Victoria.Google Scholar
  14. Curio, E. 1976. The Ethology of Predation. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  15. Dodge, R., and Scheel, D. 1999. Remains of the prey: recognizing the middens of Octopus dofleini. The Veliger 42(3): 260–266.Google Scholar
  16. Estes, J. A., and C. H. Peterson. 1998. The dynamics of marine benthic/demersal ecosystems. Whitepaper, NSF Workshop on OEUVRE -Ocean Ecology: Understanding and vision for research. On the web at www.joss.ucar.edu/joss_psg/project/oce_workshop/oeuvre/estes_peterson.html, retrieved 19 Jul 2004.
  17. Forsythe, J. W., and R. T. Hanlon. 1997. Foraging and associated behavior by Octopus cyanea Gray, 1849 on a coral atoll, French Polynesia. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 209:15–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frazer, T. K., and W. J. Lindberg. 1994. Refuge spacing similarly affects reef-associated species from three phyla. Bulletin of Marine Science 55(2–3): 388–400.Google Scholar
  19. Gaines, S. D., and J. Roughgarden. 1987. Fish in offshore kelp forests affect recruitment to intertidal barnacle populations. Science 235: 479–481.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Garstang, W. 1900. The plague of octopus on the south coast, and its effect on the crab and lobster fisheries. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 6: 260–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gillespie, G. E., G. Parker, and J. Morrison. 1998. A review of octopus fisheries biology and British Columbia octopus fisheries. Canadian Stock Assessment Secretariat Research Document 98/87. Ottawa, Canada: Fisheries and Oceans Canada.Google Scholar
  22. Griffiths, C. L., and P. A. R. Hockey. 1987. A model describing the interactive roles of predation, competition and tidal elevation in structuring mussel populations. South African Journal of Marine Science 5: 547–556.Google Scholar
  23. Grisley, M. S., P. R. Boyle, and L. N. Key. 1996. Eye puncture as a route of entry for saliva during predation on crabs by the octopus Eledone cirrhosa (Lamarck). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 202: 225–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hartwick, E. B. 1983. Octopus dofleini. In P. R. Boyle (editor), Cephalopod Life Cycles. Volume I, pp. 277–291. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  25. Hartwick, E. B., R. F. Ambrose, and S. M. C. Robinson. 1984a. Dynamics of shallow-water populations of Octopus dofleini. Marine Biology 82: 65–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hartwick, E. B., R. F. Ambrose, and S. M. C. Robinson. 1984b. Den utilization and the movements of tagged Octopus dofleini. Marine Behaviour and Physiology 11: 95–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hartwick, E. B., and I. Barriga. 1997. Octopus dofleini: biology and fisheries in Canada. In M. A. Lang, and F. G. Hochberg (editors), Proceedings of the workshop on The Fishery and Market Potential of Octopus in California, pp. 45–56. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
  28. Hartwick, E. B., P. A. Breen, and L. Tulloch. 1978. A removal experiment with Octopus dofleini (Wulker). Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 35: 1492–1495.Google Scholar
  29. Hartwick, E. B., S. M. C. Robinson, R. F. Ambrose, D. Trotter, and M. Walsh. 1988. Inshore-offshore comparison of Octopus dofleini with special reference to abundance, growth and physical condition during winter. Malacologia 29(1): 57–68.Google Scholar
  30. Hartwick, B., and G. Thorarinsson. 1978. Den associates of the giant Pacific octopus, Octopus dofleini (Wulker). Ophelia 17: 163–166.Google Scholar
  31. Hartwick, B., L. Tulloch, and S. MacDonald. 1981. Feeding and growth of Octopus dofleini (Wulker). The Veliger 24(2): 129–138.Google Scholar
  32. Hochberg, F. G. 1998. Class Cephalopoda. In P. V. Scott, and J. A. Blake (editors), Taxonomic atlas of the benthic fauna of the Santa Barbara basin and the western Santa Barbara channel. Volume 8, The Mollusca, Part I: The Aplacophora, Polyplacophora, Scaphopoda, Bivalvia, and Cephalopoda. Santa Barbara, California: Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History.Google Scholar
  33. Holling, C. S. 1959. Some characteristics of simple types of predation and parasitism. The Canadian Entomologist 91(7): 385–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Iribarne, O. O. 1990. Use of shelter by the small Patagonian octopus Octopus tehuelchus: availability, selection and effects on fecundity. Marine Ecology Progress Series 66: 251–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Karlson, R. H. 2002. Dynamics of Coral Communities. Population and Community Biology Series. Volume 23. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  36. Laidig, T. E., P. B. Adams, C. H. Baxter, and J. L. Butler. 1995. Feeding on euphausiids by Octopus rubescens. California Fish and Game 81(2): 77–79.Google Scholar
  37. Legac, M.1969. Some observations on the building up of hiding-places by the Octopus vulgaris Lam. in the Channel regions of the north-eastern Adriatic. Thalassia Jugoslavica 5: 193–199.Google Scholar
  38. Mather, J. A. 1982. Factors affecting the spatial distribution of natural populations of Octopus joubini Robson. Animal Behaviour 30: 1166–1170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mather, J. A. 1993. Octopuses as predators: implications of management. In T. Okutani, R. K. O’Dor, and T. Kubodera (editors), Recent Advances in Cephalopod Fisheries Biology, Volume 1, pp. 275–282. Tokyo: Tokai University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Mather, J. A. 1994. ‘Home’ choice and modification by juvenile Octopus vulgaris (Mollusca: Cephalopoda): specialized intelligence and tool use? Journal of Zoology London 233: 359–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mather, J. A., and M. Nixon. 1995. Octopus vulgaris (Cephalopoda) drills the chelae of crabs in Bermuda. Journal of Molluscan Studies 61: 405–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mather, J. A., S. Resler, and J. Cosgrove. 1985. Activity and movement patterns of Octopus dofleini. Marine Behaviour and Physiology 11: 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mottet, M. G. 1975. The fishery biology of Octopus dofleini (Wulker). Technical Report No. 16, Management and Research Division, Washington Department of Fisheries.Google Scholar
  44. Nagasawa, K., S. Takayanagi, and T. Takami. 1993. Cephalopod tagging and marking in Japan: a review. In T. Okutani, R. K. O’Dor and T. Kubodera (editors), Recent Advances in Cephalopod Fisheries Biology. Volume 1, pp. 313–329. Tokyo: Tokai University Press.Google Scholar
  45. National Science Foundation. 1998. OEUVRE Ocean Ecology: Understanding and vision for research. Report on the 1998 workshop OEUVRE -Ocean Ecology: Understanding and vision for research. Biological Oceanography, National Science Foundation. On the web at www.joss.ucar.edu/joss_psg/project/oce_workshop/oeuvre retrieved 19 Jul 2004.
  46. O’Dor, R. K., D. M. Webber, and F. M. Boegeli. 1988. A multiple buoy acoustic-radio telemetry system for automated positioning and telemetry of physical and physiological data. In C. J. Amlaner Jr. (editor), Proceedings of the Tenth International Symposium on Biotelemetry, pp. 444–452. Fayetteville: The University of Arkansas Press.Google Scholar
  47. Piatt, J. F. 1990. The aggregative response of common murres and Atlantic puffins to schools of capelin. Avian Biology 14: 36–51.Google Scholar
  48. Pulliam, H. R. 1974. On the theory of optimal diets. American Naturalist 108: 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rees, W. J., and J. R. Lumby. 1954. The abundance of octopus in the English channel. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 33: 515–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rigby, R. P. 2004. Ecology of immature octopus, Enteroctopus dofleini: growth, movement and behavior. Ph.D. dissertation. Hokkaido University, Hokkaido, Japan.Google Scholar
  51. Rigby, R. P., and Y. Sakurai. 2004. Temperature and feeding related to growth efficiency of immature octopuses Enteroctopus dofleini. Suisanzoshoku 52(1): 29–36.Google Scholar
  52. Sato, K. 1994. Saving the mizudako. Fisheries Research 13(6) (Suppl.): 82–89. [In Japanese].Google Scholar
  53. Sato, K. 1996. Survey of sexual maturation in Octopus dofleini in the coastal waters off Cape Shiriya, Shimokita Peninsula, Aomori Prefecture. Nippon Suisan Gakkaishi 62(3): 355–360. [In Japanese, with English abstract].Google Scholar
  54. Scheel, D. 2002. Characteristics of habitats used by Enteroctopus dofleini in Prince William Sound and Cook Inlet, Alaska. P.S.Z.N. Marine Ecology 23(3): 185–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schoener, T. W. 1971. Theory of feeding strategies. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 2: 369–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Smith, C. D. 2003. Diet of Octopus vulgaris in False Bay, South Africa. Marine Biology 143: 1127–1133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Smith, K. N., and W. F. Herrnkind. 1992. Predation on early juvenile spiny lobsters Panulirus argus (Latreille): influence of size and shelter. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 157: 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Steer, M. A., and J. M. Semmens. 2003. Pulling or drilling, does size or species matter? An experimental study of prey handling in Octopus dierythraeus (Norman, 1992). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 290: 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Stephens, D. W. and J. R. Krebs. 1986. Foraging theory. In J. R. Krebs and T. Clutton-Brock (editors), Monographs in behavior and ecology. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Vincent, T. L. S., D. Scheel, J. S. Brown, and T. L. Vincent. 1996. Trade-offs and coexistence in consumer-resource models: it all depends on what and where you eat. American Naturalist 148(6): 1038–1058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Vincent, T. L. S., D. Scheel, and K. Hough. 1998. Aspects of the diet and foraging behavior of Octopus dofleini in its northernmost range. Marine Ecology 19(1): 13–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Webber, D. M., and R. K. O’Dor. 1986. Monitoring the metabolic rate and activity of free-swimming squid with telemetered jet pressure. Journal of Experimental Biology 126: 205–224.Google Scholar
  63. Wülker, G. 1910. Ueber Japanische Cephalopoden. Beitrage zur kenntnis der systematic und anatomie der dibranchiaten. Abhandlungen der mathematische- physikalische Klasse der Koeniglich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 3 (Suppl. 1): 1–77.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Scheel
    • 1
  • A. Lauster
    • 1
  • T. L. S. Vincent
    • 1
  1. 1.Environmental SciencesAlaska Pacifi c UniversityAnchorageUSA

Personalised recommendations