Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T09:02:33.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Morph-specific habitat and sex distribution in the caridean shrimp Hippolyte obliquimanus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 March 2016

Rafael C. Duarte Open the ORCID record for Rafael C. Duarte [Opens in a new window]  and
Augusto A.V. Flores Open the ORCID record for Augusto A.V. Flores [Opens in a new window]
Rafael C. Duarte*
Affiliation:
Centro de Biologia Marinha, Universidade de São Paulo, São Sebastião, Brazil
Augusto A.V. Flores
Affiliation:
Centro de Biologia Marinha, Universidade de São Paulo, São Sebastião, Brazil
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: R.C. Duarte, Centro de Biologia Marinha, Universidade de São Paulo, São Sebastião, Brazil Email: rafaduarte87@usp.br
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Polymorphism may allow individuals to expand habitat use through morph-specific resource demands. However, the underlying mechanisms maintaining different morphotypes in nature are difficult to identify. We sampled populations of the shrimp Hippolyte obliquimanus in the macroalgae Sargassum furcatum and Galaxaura marginata to examine morph-specific distribution patterns, population structure and female reproductive output, as an initial step to understand polymorphism in this species. Two main colour morphotypes were identified: homogeneous shrimps (H), which change their colour, mostly from pink to greenish-brown tones, and striped translucent shrimps (ST), whose colour remain unaltered. Distribution of individuals between habitats was clearly morph-specific. H shrimps occupied colour-matching substrates, mainly Sargassum, where they can attain large densities, and ST individuals were evenly distributed in both algae. Brood production and size-fecundity relationships were similar between morphs and habitats, suggesting these are relatively fixed traits in the population. However, sex proportions, defined as the male to female ratio, were different between morphs and macroalgae. H shrimps were chiefly females (1:2.04) and ST shrimps mostly males (1:0.30). Given the likely polygynic pure-search mating system in H. obliquimanus, the female-biased sex ratio observed in Sargassum is apparently more advantageous than the Mendelian proportion found in Galaxaura habitat. Clustering on vegetated habitat, the female-biased H morph may be relatively cryptic and sedentary, compared with the male-biased ST morph which apparently combines a more neutral camouflage strategy to a generalized habitat use. Altogether, results suggest that selection for sex-specific traits favours the maintenance of polymorphism in H. obliquimanus.

Keywords

Colour polymorphismbackground matchingsex ratioreproductive trade-offsalgal habitatSargassumGalaxauracamouflage
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 97 , Issue 2 , March 2017 , pp. 235 - 242
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Andersson, M. (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Barry, C.K. (1974) Role of form vision in habitat selection of the grass shrimp Hippolyte californiensis . Marine Biology 26, 261–270.Google Scholar
Bauer, R.T. (1981) Color patterns of the shrimps Heptacarpus pictus and H. paludicola (Caridea: Hippolytidae). Marine Biology 64, 141–152.Google Scholar
Bauer, R.T. (2004) Remarkable shrimps, adaptations and natural history of the carideans. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Bedini, R., Canali, M.G. and Bertuccelli, M. (2011) Spatio-temporal and colour distribution of Hippolyte inermis (Leach, 1815) (Crustacea, Decapoda, Hippolytidae) in five Posidonia oceanica meadows in the north Tyrrhenian Sea (Italy). In Pessani, D., Tirelli, T. and Froglia, C. (eds) Atti IX Colloquium Crustacea Mediterranea, Torino, 2–6 September 2008, pp. 17–29.Google Scholar
Beukema, J. (1992) Dynamics of juvenile shrimp Crangon crangon in a tidal-flat nursery of the Wadden Sea after mild and cold winters. Marine Ecology Progress Series 83, 157–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booth, C.L. (1990) Evolutionary significance of ontogenetic color change in animals. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 40, 125–163.Google Scholar
Christie, H., Nina Mari Jørgensen, N.M. and Norderhaug, K.M. (2007) Bushy or smooth, high or low; importance of habitat architecture and vertical position for distribution of fauna on kelp. Journal of Sea Research 58, 198–208.Google Scholar
Chunco, A.J., Mckinnon, J.S. and Servedio, M.R. (2007) Microhabitat variation and sexual selection can maintain male color polymorphisms. Evolution 61, 2504–2515.Google Scholar
Correa, C. and Thiel, M. (2003) Mating systems in caridean shrimp (Decapoda: Caridea) and their evolutionary consequences for sexual dimorphism and reproductive biology. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural 76, 187–203.Google Scholar
Cournoyer, B.L. and Cohen, J.H. (2011) Cryptic coloration as a predator avoidance strategy in seagrass arrow shrimp color morphs. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 402, 27–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diffendorfer, J.E. (1998) Testing models of source-sink dynamics and balanced dispersal. Oikos 81, 417–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duffy, J. (1996) Species boundaries, specialization, and the radiation of sponge-dwelling alpheid shrimp. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 58, 307–324.Google Scholar
Edmunds, M. (1974) Defence in animals: a survey of antipredator defences. Harlow: Longman Group.Google Scholar
Emlen, S.T. and Oring, L.W. (1977) Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science 197, 215–223.Google Scholar
Flores, A.A.V., Gomes, C.C. and Villano, W.F. (2009) Source populations in coastal crabs: parameters affecting egg production. Aquatic Biology 7, 31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forsman, A. (1995) Opposing fitness consequences of colour pattern in male and female snakes. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 8, 53–70.Google Scholar
Forsman, A., Ahnesjö, J., Caesar, S. and Karlsson, M. (2008) A model of ecological and evolutionary consequences of color polymorphism. Ecology 89, 34–40.Google Scholar
Forsman, A. and Appelqvist, S. (1998) Visual predators impose correlational selection on prey color pattern and behavior. Behavioral Ecology 9, 409–413.Google Scholar
Forsman, A. and Appelqvist, S. (1999) Experimental manipulation reveals differential effects of colour pattern on survival in male and female pygmy grasshoppers. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 12, 391–401.Google Scholar
Forsman, A. and Shine, R. (1995) The adaptive significance of colour pattern polymorphism in the Australian scincid lizard Lampropholis delicata . Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 55, 273–291.Google Scholar
Galeotti, P. and Rubolini, D. (2004) The niche variation hypothesis and the evolution of color polymorphism in birds: a comparative study of owls, nightjars and raptors. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 82, 237–248.Google Scholar
Gamble, F.W. and Keeble, F.W. (1900) Hippolyte varians: a study in colour-change. Quarterly Journal of Micro Science 43, 589–703.Google Scholar
Gotmark, F., Post, P., Olsson, J. and Himmelmann, D. (1997) Natural selection and sexual dimorphism: sex-biased sparrowhawk predation favours crypsis in female chaffinches. Oikos 80, 540–548.Google Scholar
Hacker, S.D. and Madin, L.P. (1991) Why habitat architecture and color are important to shrimps living in pelagic Sargassum: use of camouflage and plant-part mimicry. Marine Ecology and Progress Series 70, 143–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, R.K. (1984) The trophic ecology of caridean shrimps in an eelgrass community. Aquatic Botany 18, 155–174.Google Scholar
Huijbers, C.M., Nagelkerken, I., Lössbroek, P.A.C., Schulten, I.E., Siegenthaler, A., Holderied, M.A. and Simpson, S.D. (2012) A test of the senses: fish select novel habitats by responding to multiple cues. Ecology 93, 46–55.Google Scholar
Hultgren, K.M. and Stachowicz, J.J. (2010) Size-related habitat shifts facilitated by positive preference induction in a marine kelp crab. Behavioral Ecology 21, 329–336.Google Scholar
Hurtado-Gonzales, J.L. and Uy, J.A.C. (2009) Alternative mating strategies may favour the persistence of a genetically based color polymorphism in a pentamorphic fish. Animal Behaviour 77, 1187–1194.Google Scholar
Jormalainen, V., Merilaita, S. and Tuomi, J. (1995) Differential predation on sexes affects colour polymorphism of the isopod ldotea baltica (Pallas). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 55, 45–68.Google Scholar
Jormalainen, V. and Tuomi, J. (1989) Sexual differences in habitat selection and activity of the colour polymorphic isopod ldotea baltica . Animal Behaviour 38, 576–585.Google Scholar
Joron, M. (2005) Polymorphic mimicry, microhabitat use, and sex-specific behavior. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 18, 547–556.Google Scholar
Kettlewell, H. (1955) Selection experiments on industrial melanism in the Lepidoptera. Heredity 9, 323–342.Google Scholar
Lecchini, D., Mills, S.C., Brié, C., Maurin, R. and Banaigs, B. (2010) Ecological determinants and sensory mechanisms in habitat selection of crustacean postlarvae. Behavioral Ecology 21, 599–607.Google Scholar
Leite, F.P.P. and Turra, A. (2003) Temporal variation in Sargassum biomass, Hypnea epiphytism and associated fauna. Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology 46, 665–671.Google Scholar
Magurran, A.E. and Garcia, C.M. (2000) Sex differences in behaviour as an indirect consequence of mating system. Journal of Fish Biology 57, 839–857.Google Scholar
Merilaita, S. and Jormalainen, V. (1997) Evolution of sex differences in microhabitat choice and colour polymorphism in Idotea baltica . Animal Behaviour 54, 769–778.Google Scholar
Palma, A.T. and Steneck, R.S. (2001) Does variable coloration in juvenile marine crabs reduce risk of visual predation? Ecology 82, 2961–2967.Google Scholar
Poore, A.G.B. and Steinberg, P.D. (1999) Preference–performance relationships and effects of host plant choice in an herbivorous marine amphipod. Ecological Monographs 69, 443–464.Google Scholar
Pulliam, R.H. (1988) Source, sinks and population regulations. American Naturalist 132, 652–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaefer, H.M. and Stobbe, N. (2006) Disruptive coloration provides camouflage independent of background matching. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 273, 2427–2432.Google Scholar
Shuster, S.M. and Wade, M.J. (1991) Equal mating success among male reproductive strategies in a marine isopod. Nature 350, 608–610.Google Scholar
Sinervo, B. and Lively, C.M. (1996) The rock-paper-scissors game and the evolution of alternative male strategies. Nature 380, 240–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokal, R. and Rohlf, F.J. (1995) Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. 3rd edition. New York: WH Freeman and Company.Google Scholar
Somers, K.M. (1991) Characterizing size-specific fecundity in crustaceans. In Wenner, A. and Kuris, A. (eds) Crustacean egg production. Rotterdam: A.A. Balkema, pp. 357–378.Google Scholar
Stevens, M. and Merilaita, S. (2009) Animal camouflage: current issues and new perspectives. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 364, 423–427.Google Scholar
Tanaka, M.O. and Leite, F.P.P. (1998) The effect of sieve mesh size on the abundance and composition of macrophyte-associated macrofaunal assemblages. Hydrobiologia 389, 21–28.Google Scholar
Tanaka, M.O. and Leite, F.P.P. (2003) Spatial scaling in the distribution of macrofauna associated with Sargassum stenophyllum (Mertens) Martius: variation on faunal groups, gammarid life habits, and assemblage structure. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 293, 1–22.Google Scholar
Terossi, M., Greco, L. and Mantelatto, F.L. (2008) Hippolyte obliquimanus (Decapoda: Caridea: Hippolytidae) a gonochoric or hermaphroditic shrimp species? Marine Biology 154, 127–135.Google Scholar
Terossi, M. and Mantelatto, F.L. (2010) Sexual ratio, reproductive period and seasonal variation of the gonochoric shrimp Hippolyte obliquimanus (Caridea: Hippolytidae). Marine Biology Research 6, 213–219.Google Scholar
Terossi, M., Wehrtmann, I.S. and Mantelatto, F.L. (2010) Interpopulation comparison of reproduction of the Atlantic shrimp Hippolyte obliquimanus (Caridea: Hippolytidae). Journal of Crustacean Biology 30, 571–579.Google Scholar
Turner, R.L. and Lawrence, J.M. (1979) Volume and composition of echinoderm eggs: implications for the use of egg size in life history models. In Stancyk, S.E. (ed.) Reproductive ecology of marine invertebrates. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, pp. 25–40.Google Scholar
Underwood, A.J. (1997) Experiments in ecology: their logical design and interpretation using analysis of variance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Valen, L. (1965) Morphological variation and width of ecological niche. American Naturalist 99, 377–390.Google Scholar
Wehrtmann, I.S. (1990) Distribution and reproduction of Ambidexter panamense and Palaemonetes schmitti in Pacific Costa Rica (Crustacea, Decapoda). Revista de Biologia Tropical 38, 327–329.Google Scholar
West-Eberhard, M. (2003) Developmental plasticity and evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wickler, W. and Seibt, U. (1981) Monogamy in Crustacea and man. Zeitschrift fur Tierpsychologie 57, 215–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Duarte and Flores supplementary material

Supplementary Figure

Download Duarte and Flores supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 404.7 KB