Skip to main content
Log in

Comparing macroalgal food and habitat choice in sympatric, tube-building amphipods, Ampithoe lacertosa and Peramphithoe humeralis

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Marine Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

For small tube-building amphipods that live on the algae they consume, food and habitat are tightly linked. This study compared two closely related amphipods to determine whether the species’ algal preferences are based on the food value of the algae or on some other aspect of their algal habitat. Ampithoe lacertosa and Peramphithoe humeralis are both abundant on Shannon Point beach (Anacortes, Washington, USA; 48°30.542′ N, 122°41.070′ W) but specialize on different algae. In observations and laboratory experiments conducted July–September 1997, 2007, and 2008, the two species exhibited markedly different choices of food and habitat when offered six common macroalgae. Ampithoe lacertosa ate all algae offered, but preferentially built tubes on the green alga Ulva lactuca. Survival was relatively low among juveniles maintained on single species diets, except when they were fed Mazzaella splendens. Conversely, P. humeralis consumed primarily the brown kelp Saccharina latissima, Alaria marginata, and Desmarestia ligulata and preferred those species for tube building. Juvenile P. humeralis could not survive on a diet of U. lactuca or M. splendens. While A. lacertosa builds simple, temporary tubes and relocates frequently, P. humeralis is a highly thigmotactic species that builds long-term, complex tubes on the alga it prefers to eat. Feeding and habitat preferences of the two species were not clearly linked to nitrogen content of the algae, C:N ratio, or toughness of the algal tissue. Instead, preferences of the species may be related to their mobility and the permanence of the tubes they build. Ampithoe lacertosa and P. humeralis also use different feeding strategies; the former appears to mix algae to produce a high-quality diet, while the latter is more selective and has a capacity for compensatory feeding. The species are abundant on the same protected rocky shores, but specialize on different algae for habitat and food. Results suggest that the nutritional requirements of these sympatric mesograzers differ considerably and even closely related species can exhibit divergent behavioral strategies.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amsler CD, McClintock JB, Baker BJ (1998) Chemical defense against herbivory in the Antarctic marine macroalgae Iridaea cordata and Phyllophara antarctica (Rhodophyceae). J Phycol 34:53–59

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Barnard JL (1965) Marine amphipoda of the family Ampithoidae from southern California. Proc US Nat Mus 118:1–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett BE (1966) A contribution to the knowledge of the amphipodous crustacean Ampithoe valida Smith (1873). Dissertation, University of New Hampshire

  • Bell SS (1991) Amphipods as insect equivalents? An alternative view. Ecology 72:350–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bingham BL, Braithwaite LF (1986) Defense adaptations of the dendrochirote holothurian Psolus chitonoides Clark. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 98:311–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brawley SH (1992) Mesoherbivores. In: John DM, Hawkins SJ, Price JH (eds) Systematics association special volume. Clarendon, Oxford, pp 235–263

    Google Scholar 

  • Brawley SH, Adey WH (1981) The effect of micrograzers on algal community structure in a coral reef microcosm. Mar Biol 61:167–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buschmann AH (1990) Intertidal macroalgae as refuge and food for Amphipoda in central Chile. Aquat Bot 36:237–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke KR, Warwick RM (2001) Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and interpretation. PRIMER-E, Plymouth

    Google Scholar 

  • Conover WJ (1980) Practical nonparametric statistics, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Croker RA (1967) Niche diversity in five sympatric species of intertidal amphipods (Crustacea: Haustoriidae). Ecol Monogr 37:173–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronin G, Hay ME (1996) Effects of light and nutrient availability on the growth, secondary chemistry, and resistance to herbivory of two brown seaweeds. Oikos 77:93–106

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cruz-Rivera E, Hay ME (2000a) The effects of diet mixing on consumer fitness: macroalgae, epiphytes, and animal matter as food for marine amphipods. Oecologia 123:252–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cruz-Rivera E, Hay ME (2000b) Can quantity replace quality? Food choice, compensatory feeding, and fitness of marine mesograzers. Ecology 81:201–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cruz-Rivera E, Hay ME (2001) Macroalgal traits and the feeding and fitness of an herbivorous amphipod: the roles of selectivity, mixing, and compensation. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 218:249–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dayton PK, Tegner MJ (1989) Bottoms beneath troubled waters: benthic impacts of the 1982–1984 El Niño in the temperate zone. In: Glynn PW (ed) Global consequences of the 1982–83 El Niño -southern oscillation. Elsevier, Miami, pp 433–472

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffy JE (1990) Amphipods on seaweeds: partners or pests? Oecologia 85:267–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy JE, Hay ME (1990) Seaweed adaptations to herbivory. Bioscience 40:368–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy JE, Hay ME (1991) Food and shelter as determinants of food choice by an herbivorous marine amphipod. Ecology 72:1286–1298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy JE, Hay ME (1994) Herbivore resistance to seaweed chemical defense: the roles of mobility and predation risk. Ecology 75:1304–1319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy JE, Hay ME (2000) Strong impacts of grazing amphipods on the organization of a benthic community. Ecol Monogr 70:237–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edgar GJ (1992) Patterns of colonization of mobile epifauna in a Western Australian seagrass bed. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 157:225–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaines SD (1985) Herbivory and between-habitat diversity: the differential effectiveness of defenses in a marine plant. Ecology 66:473–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham MH (2002) Prolonged reproductive consequences of short-term biomass loss in seaweeds. Mar Biol 140:901–911

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths CS (1979) A redescription of the kelp curler Ampithoe humeralis (Crustacea, Amphipoda) from South Africa and its relationship to Macropisthopous. Ann S Afr Mus 78:131–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker SD, Steneck RS (1990) Habitat architecture and the abundance and body-size-dependent habitat selection of a phytal amphipod. Ecology 71:2269–2285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay ME (1991) Fish-seaweed interactions on coral reefs: effects of herbivorous fishes and adaptations of their prey. In: Sale PF (ed) The ecology of fishes on coral reefs. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 96–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Hay ME (1992) The role of seaweed chemical defenses in the evolution of feeding specialization and in the mediation of complex interactions. In: Paul VJ (ed) Ecological roles of marine natural products. Comstock, New York, pp 93–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Hay ME, Fenical W (1988) Marine plant-herbivore interactions: the ecology of chemical defense. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 18:111–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay ME, Steinberg PD (1992) The chemical ecology of plant-herbivore interactions in marine versus terrestrial communities. In: Rosenthal GA, Berenbaum MR (eds) Herbivores: their interactions with secondary plant metabolites: evolutionary and ecological processes, vol 2, 2nd edn. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 371–413

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hay ME, Duffy JE, Pfister CA, Fenical W (1987) Chemical defense against different marine herbivores: are amphipods insect equivalents? Ecology 68:1567–1580

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hay ME, Paul VJ, Lewis SM, Gustafson K, Tucker J, Trindell RN (1988a) Can tropical seaweeds reduce herbivory by growing at night? Diel patterns of growth, nitrogen content, herbivory, and chemical versus morphological defenses. Oecologia 75:233–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay ME, Renaud PE, Fenical W (1988b) Large mobile versus small sedentary herbivores and their resistance to seaweed chemical defenses. Oecologia 75:246–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay ME, Pawlik JR, Duffy JE, Fenical W (1989) Seaweed-herbivore-predator interactions: host-plant specialization reduces predation on small herbivores. Oecologia 81:418–427

    Google Scholar 

  • Hay ME, Duffy JE, Fenical W (1990) Host-plant specialization decreases predation on a marine amphipod: an herbivore in plant’s clothing. Ecology 71:733–743

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay ME, Kappel QE, Fenical W (1994) Synergisms in plant defenses against herbivores: interactions of chemistry, calcification, and plant quality. Ecology 75:1714–1726

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heller SS (1968) Some aspects of the biology and development of Ampithoe lacertosa (Crustacea: Amphipoda). Thesis, University of Washington, Seattle

  • Holmlund MB, Peterson CH, Hay ME (1990) Does algal morphology affect amphipod susceptibility to fish predation? J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 138:65–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozloff EN (1996) Marine invertebrates of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle

    Google Scholar 

  • Littler M, Littler D (1980) The evolution of thallus form and survival strategies in benthic marine macroalgae: field and laboratory tests of a functional form model. Am Nat 116:25–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Main KL (1987) Predator avoidance in seagrass meadows: prey behavior, microhabitat selection, and cryptic coloration. Ecology 68:170–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McArdle BH (1988) The structural relationship: regression in biology. Can J Zool 66:2329–2339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson WG (1979a) Experimental studies of selective predation on amphipods: consequences for amphipod distribution and abundance. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 38:225–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson WG (1979b) A comparative study of amphipods in seagrasses from Florida to Nova Scotia. Bull Mar Sci 30:80–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicotri ME (1980) Factors involved in herbivore food preference. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 42:13–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelletreau KN, Muller-Parker G (2002) Sulfuric acid in the phaeophyte alga Desmarestia munda deters feeding by the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis. Mar Biol 141:1–9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Poore AGB (2005) Scales of dispersal among hosts in a herbivorous marine amphipod. Aust Ecol 30:219–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poore AGB, Steinberg PD (1999) Preference-performance relationships and effects of host plant choice in an herbivorous marine amphipod. Ecol Monogr 68:443–464

    Google Scholar 

  • Poore AGB, Steinberg PD (2001) Host plant adaptation in a herbivorous marine amphipod: genetic potential not realized in field populations. Evolution 55:68–80

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Poore AGB, Hill NA, Sotka EE (2008) Phylogenetic and geographic variation in host breadth and composition by herbivorous amphipods in the family Amphithoidae. Evolution 62–1:21–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson AI, Lucas JS (1983) Food choice, feeding rates, and the turnover of macrophyte biomass by a surf-zone inhabiting amphipod. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 72:99–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scagel RF (1967) Guide to the common seaweeds of British Columbia. British Columbia Provincial Museum, Victoria

    Google Scholar 

  • Skutch AF (1926) On the habits and ecology of the tube-building amphipod Ampithoe rubricata Montagu. Ecology 7:481–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sotka EE (2007) Restricted host use by the herbivorous amphipod Peramphithoe tea is motivated by food quality and abiotic refuge. Mar Biol 151:1831–1838

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sotka EE, Hay ME (2002) Geographic variation among herbivore populations in tolerance for a chemically rich seaweed. Ecology 83:2721–2735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg PD (1984) Algal chemical defense against herbivores: allocation of phenolic compounds in the kelp Alaria marginata. Science 223:405–407

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Steneck RS, Watling L (1982) Feeding capabilities and limitations of herbivorous molluscs: a functional group approach. Mar Biol 68:299–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoner AW (1979) Species-specific predation on amphipod crustacea by the pinfish Lagodon rhomboides: mediation by macrophyte standing crop. Mar Biol 55:201–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor RB (1998) Short-term dynamics of a seaweed epifaunal assemblage. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 227:67–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor RB, Brown PJ (2006) Herbivory in the gammarid amphipod Aora typica: relationships between consumption rates, performance and abundance across ten seaweed species. Mar Biol 149:455–463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tegner MJ, Dayton PK (1987) El Nino effects on southern California kelp forest communities. Adv Ecol Res 17:243–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Alstyne KL (1988) Herbivore grazing increases polyphenolic defenses in the intertidal brown alga Fucus distichus. Ecology 68:655–663

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Alstyne KL (1989) Adventitious branching as an herbivore-induced defense in the intertidal brown alga Fucus distichus. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 56:169–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Alstyne KL, Houser LT (2003) Dimethylsulfide release during macroinvertebrate grazing and its role as an activated chemical defense. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 250:175–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Alstyne KL, Pelletreau KN (2000) Effects of nutrient enrichment on growth and phlorotannin production in Fucus gardneri embryos. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 206:33–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Alstyne KL, McCarthy JJ, Hustead CL, Duggins DO (1999) Geographic variation in polyphenolic levels of Northestern Pacific kelps and rockweeds. Mar Biol 133:371–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Alstyne KL, Wolfe GV, Friedenberg TL, Neill A, Hicken C (2001) Activated defense systems in marine macroalgae: evidence for an ecological role for DMSP cleavage. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 213:53–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittam TS, Siegel-Causey D (1981) Species incidence functions and Alaskan seabird colonies. J Biogeogr 8:421–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The first author was supported by National Science Foundation grant OCE-9424050 (Research Experience for Undergraduates program). C. Staude, G. Muller-Parker, K. Van Alstyne, and G. Jensen gave helpful information and suggestions. We thank D. Reed for providing published data. S. Sulkin provided space at the Shannon Point Marine Center. Comments from K. Holsman, G. Jensen, T. Loher, and three anonymous reviewers improved the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Sean McDonald.

Additional information

Communicated by J. P. Grassle.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

(PDF 234 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McDonald, P.S., Bingham, B.L. Comparing macroalgal food and habitat choice in sympatric, tube-building amphipods, Ampithoe lacertosa and Peramphithoe humeralis . Mar Biol 157, 1513–1524 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-010-1425-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-010-1425-5

Keywords

Navigation