Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Zooplankton capture by two scleractinian corals,Madracis mirabilis andMontastrea cavernosa, in a field enclosure

  • Published:
Marine Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Capture of zooplankton by scleractinian corals has been noted for several species, yet quantitative information on rates of capture and differential capture by prey taxon has been lacking. We used field enclosures to examine prey capture for two coral species,Madracis mirabilis (Duchassaing and Michelotti) andMontastrea cavernosa (Linnaeus), on the north coast of Jamaica (Discovery Bay) in November 1989, February and March 1990, and January 1992.M. mirabilis has small polyps and a branching colony morphology (high surface/volume ratio), whereasM. cavernosa has large polyps and mounding colonies (low surface/volume ratio). Corals were isolated front potential prey, then were introduced into enclosures with enhanced zooplankton concentrations for 15- to 20-min feeding periods. Corals were fixed immediately after the experiment to prevent digestion, and coelenteron contents were examined for captured zooplankton. Plankton pumps were used to sample ambient zooplankton in the enclosures near the end of each run. Selectivity and capture rates were calculated for each prey taxon in each experiment; both indices were high for relatively uncommon large prey, and low for copepods, which were often the most common items in the plankton. Sizes of zooplankton captured by both species were generally larger than those available considering all prey taxa combined, but were almost the same for both coral species, even though the corals' polyp sizes are very different. This occurred primarily because small copepods, with low capture rates, dominated most plankton samples. For specific prey species, or group of species, there were few significant differences in size between the prey available and the prey captured.M. mirabilis, with small polyps, also captured far more prey per unit coral biomass than didM. cavernosa, with much larger polyps. We hypothesize that the large differences in capture rate of prey taxa are related to escape or avoidance behavior by those potential prey, and to the mechanics of capture, rather than to any selectivity by the corals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abelson A, Miloh T, Loya Y (1993) Flow patterns induced by substrata and body morphologies of benthic organisms, and their roles in determining availability of food particles. Limnol Oceanogr 38: 1116–1124

    Google Scholar 

  • Alldredge AL, King JM (1977) Distribution, abundance and substrate preferences of demersal reef zooplankton at Lizard Island Lagoon, Great Barrier Reef. Mar Biol 41: 317–333

    Google Scholar 

  • Alldredge AL, King JM (1980) Effects of moonlight on the vertical migration patterns of demersal zooplankton. J exp mar Biol Ecol 44: 133–156

    Google Scholar 

  • DiSalvo LH (1971) Ingestion and assimilation of bacteria by two scleractinian coral species. In: Muscatine L, Davis LV (eds) Experimental coelenterate biology. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, pp 129–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Drenner RW, McComas SR (1980) The roles of zooplankter escape ability and fish size selectivity in the selective feeding and impact of planktivorous fish. Am Soc Limnol Oceanogr Spec Symp 3: 587–593

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmondson CH (1928) The ecology of an Hawaiian coral reef. Bull Bernice P. Bishop Mus 45: 1–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Emery AR (1968) Preliminary observations on coral reef zooplankton. Limnol Oceanogr 13: 293–303

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabricius KE, Genin A, Benayahu Y (1995) Flow-dependent herbivory and growth in zooxanthellae-free soft corals. Limnol Oceanogr 40: 1290–1301

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferraris JD (1982) Surface zooplankton at Carrie Bow Cay, Belize. In: Rützler K, Macintyre IG (eds) The Atlantic barrier reef ecosystem at Carrie Bow Cay, Belize. I. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp 143–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerritsen J (1984) Size efficiency reconsidered: a general foraging model for free-swimming aquatic animals. Am Nat 123: 450–467

    Google Scholar 

  • Glynn P (1973) Ecology of a Caribbean coral reef. The Porites reefflat biotope. Part II. Plankton community with evidence for depletion. Mar Biol 22: 1–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Goreau TF, Goreau NI, Yonge CM (1971) Reef corals: autotrophs or heterotrophs? Biol Bull mar biol Lab, Woods Hole 247–260

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene CH, Landry MR, Monger DC (1986) Foraging behavior and prey selection by the ambush entangling predator,Pleurobrachia bachei. Ecology 67: 1493–1501

    Google Scholar 

  • Helmuth B, Sebens KP (1993) The influence of colony morphology and orientation to flow on particle capture by the coralAgaricia agaricites (Linnaeus). J exp mar Biol Ecol 1889: 1–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobson ES, Chess JR (1979) Zooplankters that emerge from the lagoon floor at night at Kune and Midway Atolls, Hawaii. Fish Bull US 77: 275–280

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivlev VS (1961) Experimental ecology of the feeding of fishes. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Jakubczak RS (1989) The nutrition and neurophysiology of reef corals. PhD dissertation, Department of Biology, University of Georgia, Athens, Ga

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson AS, Sebens KP (1993) Consequences of a flattened morphology: effects of flow on feeding rates of the scleractinian coxal Meandrina meandrites. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 99: 99–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Koehl MAR (1977) Water flow and the morphology of zoanthid colonies. In: Taylor DL (ed) 3rd int coxal Reef Symp. University of Miami, Miami, Fla., pp 437–444

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang JC, Chornesky EA (1988) Competition between scleractinian reef corals: a review of mechanisms and effects. In: Dubinsky Z (ed) Ecosystems of the world: coxal reefs. Elsevier Press, Amsterdam, pp 209–252

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis JB (1992) Heterotrophy in corals: zooplankton predation by the hydrocoralMillepora complanata. Mar Ecol Prog Sex 90: 251–256

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis JB, Price WS (1975) Feeding mechanisms and feeding strategies of Atlantic reef corals. J Zool Lond 176: 527–544

    Google Scholar 

  • Liddell WD, Ohlhorst S (1987) Patterns of reef community structure, North Jamaica. Bull mar Sci 40: 311–329

    Google Scholar 

  • Muscatine L (1973) Nutrition of corals. In: Jones OA, Endean R (eds) Biology and geology of coxal reefs, 2nd edn. Academic Press, New York, pp 79–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Muscatine L, Porter JW (1977) Reef corals: mutualistic symbiosis adapted to nutrient-poor environments. Bio Sci 27: 454–459

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohlhorst SL (1982) Diel migration patterns of demersal reef zooplankton. J exp mar Biol Ecol 60: 1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohlhorst SL (y1985) Reef zooplankton collected along a depth gradient at Discovery Bay, Jamaica. In: Reaka M (ed) The ecology of coxal reefs. NOAA Symp Sex Undersea Res 3: 101–116

  • Ohman MD (1988) Behavioral responses of zooplankton to predation. Bull mar Sci 43: 530–550

    Google Scholar 

  • Paffenhöfer G (1991) Some characteristics of abundant subtropical copepods in estuarine, shelf and oceanic waters. Proc 4th int Conf on Copepoda. Bull Plankton Soc Japan 1991: 201–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Pastorok RA (1981) Prey vulnerability and size selection byChaoborus larvae. Ecology 62: 1311–1324

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearre SP (1982) Estimating prey preference by predators: uses of various indices and a proposal of another based onλ 2. Can J Fish aquat Sciences 39: 914–923

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter JW (1974) Zooplankton feeding by the Caribbean reef-building coxal Montastrea cavernosa. In: Cameron et al. (eds) Proc 2nd int coxal Reef Symp.Great Barrier Reef Committee, Brisbane, pp 111–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter JW (1976) Autotrophy, heterotrophy and resource partitioning in Carribbean reef building corals. Am Nat 110: 731–742

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter JW, Porter KG (1977) Quantitative sampling of demersal plankton migrating from different coxal reef substrates. Limnol Oceanogr 22: 553–556

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter JW, Porter KG, Batac-Catalan Z (1977) Quantitative sampling of Indo-Pacific demersal reef plankton. In: Taylor DL (ed) Proc. 3rd int. Coral Reef Symp. University of Miami, Miami, Fla., pp 105–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter KG, Porter JW, Ohlhorst SL (1978) Analysis of resident reef zooplankton composition and habits. In: Stoddaxt DR, Johannes RE (eds) Coral reefs: research methods. Monogr oceanogr Methodol (UNESCO) 5: 499–514

  • Purcell JE, Creswell FP, Cargo DG, Kennedy VS (1991) Differential ingestion of bivalve larvae by the scyphozoan Chrysaora quinquecirrha and the ctenophoreMnemiopsis leidyi. Biol Bull mar biol Lab, Woods Hole 180: 103–11l

    Google Scholar 

  • Purcell JE, Siferd TD, Marliave JB (1987) Vulnerability of larval herring (Clupea harengus) to capture by the jellyfishAequorea victoria. Mar Biol 94: 157–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Robichaux DM, Cohen AC, Reaka ML, Allen D (1981) Experiments with zooplankton on coxal reefs, or will the real demersal plankton please come up? Mar Ecol Prog Sex 2: 77–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubenstein DJ, Koehl MAR (1977) The mechanism of filter feeding: some theoretical considerations. Am Nat 111: 981–994

    Google Scholar 

  • Rützler K, Ferraris JD, Larson RJ (1980) A new plankton sampler for coxal reefs. Pubbl Staz Zool Napoli (I. Mar Ecol) 1: 65–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebens KP (1977) Autotrophy and heterotrophy nutrition of coxal reef zoanthids. In: Taylor DL (ed) Proc 3rd int coxal Reef Symp. University of Miami, Miami, Fla., pp 397–406

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebens KP (1979) The energetics of asexual reproduction and colony formation in benthic marine invertebrates. Am Zool 19: 683–697

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebens KP (1987) Coelenterata. In: Vernberg FJ, Pandian TJ (eds) Animal energetics, 1st edn. Academic Press, New York, pp 55–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebens KP, Johnson AS (1991) The effects of water movement on prey capture and distribution of reef corals. Hydrobiologia 226: 91–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebens KP, Koehl MAR (1984) Predation on zooplankton by the benthic anthozoansAlcyonium siderium (Alcyonacea) andMetridium senile (Actiniaria) in the New England subtidal. Mar Biol 81: 225–271

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebens KP, Mancy EJ Jr (1992) A portable diver-operated plankton sampler for near-substratum use. In: Cahoon LB (ed) Proceedings of the American Academy of Underwater Sciences; 12th Annual Symposium. A.A.U.S., Wilmington, NC

    Google Scholar 

  • Sebens KP, Witting J, Helmuth B (1996) Effects of branch spacing and water flow on particle capture by the reef coxalMadracis mirabilis. J exp mar Biol Ecol (in press)

  • Shimeta J, Jumars Pa (1991) Physical mechanisms and rates of particle capture by suspension feeders. Oceangr mar Biol A Rev 29: 191–257

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Biometry, 2nd edn. W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorokin YI (1973) On the feeding of some scleractinian corals with bacteria and dissolved organic matter. Limnol Oceanogr 18: 380–385

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorokin YI (1991) Biomass, metabolic rates and feeding of some common reef zoantharians and octocorals. Aust J mar freshwat Res 42: 729–741

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiffon Y (1976) Nutrition experimentale chez les cerianthaires. In: Mackie GO (ed) Coelenterate ecology and behavior. Plenum, New York, pp 147–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Trager G, Achituv Y, Genin A (1994) Effects of prey escape ability, flow speed, and predator feeding mode on zooplankton capture by barnacles. Mar Biol 120: 251–259

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Präet M (1980) Absorption des substances dissoutes dans le milieu, des particules et des produits de la digestion extracellulaire chezActinia equina L. Reprod Nutr Dev (Paris) 20: 1391–1399

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanderploeg HA, Scavia D (1979) Two electivity indices for feeding with special reference to zooplankton grazing. J Fish Res Bd Can 36: 362–365

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellington GM (1982) An experimental analysis of the effects of light and zooplankton on coxal zonation. Oecologia 52: 311–320

    Google Scholar 

  • Yen J (1985) Selective predation by the carnivorous marine copepodEuchaeta elongata: laboratory measurements of predation rates verified by field observations of temporal/spatial feeding patterns. Limnol Oceanogr 30: 577–597

    Google Scholar 

  • Yen J, Fields D (1992) Escape responses ofAcartia hudsonica (Copepoda) nauplii from the flow field ofTemora longicornis (Copepoda). In: Sprules GO, Schulze PC, Williamson CE (eds) Advanced techniques for in situ studies of zooplankton abundance. Plenum, Stuttgart, pp 123–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Yonge CM (1968) Living corals.Proc R Soc (Ser B) 169: 329–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Yonge CM, Nicholls AG (1931) Studies on the physiology of corals. V. The effect of starvation in light and in darkness on the relationship between corals and zooxanthellae. Scient Rep Gt Barrier Reef Exped 1: 177–211

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. L. A. Savina

    Present address: Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries, 01970, Gloucester, Massachusetts, USA

  2. K. R. Graham

    Present address: OASIS Environmental Inc., 900 w. 5th Ave., 99501, Anchorage, Alaska, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Zoology, University of Maryland, 20742, College Park, Maryland, USA

    K. P. Sebens & K. S. Vandersall

  2. Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, University of Maryland System, 21613, Cambridge, Maryland, USA

    K. P. Sebens

  3. Marine Science Center, Northeastern University, 01908, Nahant, Massachusetts, USA

    K. P. Sebens, L. A. Savina & K. R. Graham

Authors
  1. K. P. Sebens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. S. Vandersall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L. A. Savina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. K. R. Graham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Communicated by J.P. Grassle, New Brunswick

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sebens, K.P., Vandersall, K.S., Savina, L.A. et al. Zooplankton capture by two scleractinian corals,Madracis mirabilis andMontastrea cavernosa, in a field enclosure. Mar. Biol. 127, 303–317 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00942116

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00942116

Keywords

Search

Navigation