Published in

BioMed Central, Helgoland Marine Research, 3(58), p. 162-167, 2004

DOI: 10.1007/s10152-004-0181-7

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Associational resistance of fouled blue mussels (Mytilus edulis) against starfish (Asterias rubens) predation: relative importance of structural and chemical properties of the epibionts

Journal article published in 2004 by Jürgen Laudien ORCID, Martin Wahl
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Several epibiotic species reduce starfish (Asterias rubens) preference for the blue mussel Mytilus edulis in the Baltic. The aim of this study was to reveal whether this associational resistance was caused by structural or chemical aspects of the different epibionts. To assess structural epibiont effects, an in situ experiment was conducted with unfouled mussels and mussels equipped with artificial epibionts (dummies) exposed to natural predation by A. rubens. The chemically inert dummies closely matched the structural properties of the locally common epibionts Balanus improvisus (barnacle), Ceramium strictum (red alga), Halichondria panicea (sponge), and Laomedea flexuosa (hydrozoan). Starfish fed indiscriminately in all treatments. Chemical effects of epibionts on the attractiveness of mussels for A. rubens were investigated by incorporating freeze-dried epibionts or mussel tissue into Phytagel pellets at natural concentrations. Starfish were allowed to choose among these structurally similar but chemically different prey items in an in vitro experiment. The predators exhibited significant preferences among the food pellets, which closely matched their preferences for corresponding natural mussel–epibiont associations. Thus, chemical aspects of epibionts appear to play a larger role in this associational resistance than do structural aspects. Implications of these indirect interactions for benthic communities are discussed.