Premium
Effects of the oophagous bivalve A cesta oophaga on the morphology and fecundity of its deep‐sea tubeworm host, L amellibrachia luymesi
Author(s) -
Burris Zair P.,
Lord Joshua P.,
Young Craig M.
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
marine ecology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.668
H-Index - 58
eISSN - 1439-0485
pISSN - 0173-9565
DOI - 10.1111/maec.12061
Subject(s) - fecundity , biology , host (biology) , zoology , predation , predator , bay , deep sea , ecology , bivalvia , mollusca , fishery , population , oceanography , geology , demography , sociology
The deep‐sea bivalve A cesta oophaga lives attached to the anterior end of the vestimentiferan tubeworm, L amellibrachia luymesi, at cold methane seeps. The bivalve is found almost exclusively on female tubeworms, where it consumes the lipid‐rich eggs of L . luymesi that are spawned year round ( Biological Bulletin , 209, 2005, 87). It is apparent that A . oophaga benefits directly from this close association, but the consequences for the tubeworm host may be more complicated than just a simple predator–prey interaction. Since A . oophaga completely surrounds the tube opening and plume of the worm, it is likely that its presence would limit oxygen uptake by L . luymesi , thereby inhibiting worm growth and reproduction. We hypothesized that occupied tubeworms would compensate for this by growing larger plumes for oxygen uptake. To explore the effects of bivalve presence/absence on female tubeworms, several morphological features, including body size, plume length, tube diameter, and tube segment length, as well as instantaneous fecundity, were compared. Results suggest that the mere presence of A . oophaga has a significant impact on the morphology of its host worm, as all measures of worm size, except for tube segment length, were significantly greater with clams present. Additionally, instantaneous fecundity was 3.5 times higher in occupied worms, implying that tubeworms are not oxygen‐deprived or energy limited as a result of bivalve presence. Our findings suggest that the association between these two deep‐sea organisms may be a more complex form of symbiosis than the simple predator–prey relationship, as previously thought.