University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Doctoral Dissertations Student Scholarship Fall 1974 FORAGING STRATEGIES AND PREDATION EFFECTS OF ASTERIAS RUBENS AND NUCELLA LAPILLUS JOHN HENRY ANNALA Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/dissertation Recommended Citation ANNALA, JOHN HENRY, "FORAGING STRATEGIES AND PREDATION EFFECTS OF ASTERIAS RUBENS AND NUCELLA LAPILLUS" (1974). Doctoral Dissertations. 1076. https://scholars.unh.edu/dissertation/1076 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 75-14,200 | i ANNALA, John Henry, 1946- FORAGING STRATEGIES AND PREDATION EFFECTS OF I £ ASTERIAS RUBENS AND NUCELLA LAPILLUS. I University of New Hampshire, Ph.D., 1974 Ecology \ I i [ j ■! i ; Xerox University Microfilms,Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED. FORAGING STRATEGIES AND PREDATION EFFECTS OF ASTERIAS RUBENS AND NUCELLA LAPILLUS by JOHN ANNALA B.S., University of Maine, 1968 A THESIS Submitted to the University of New Hampshire In Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Graduate School Department of Zoology September, 197^ This thesis has been examined and approved. Thesii :or, Larry G. Harris, Asst. Prof. of Zoology Robert A/croker, Asso. Prof. of Zoology 7 ? _ Edward N. Francq, Ass ology John P. Sutherland, Asst. Professor of Zoology fr'lVktlG/ Ellsworth H. Wheeler, Asst. Prof. of Zoology ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank Larry Harris for advice and support throughout this study. I also extend my thanks to all the people who aided in my diving collections, especially A1 Kuzirian, Marty Bowen, Joe Murdoch, Paul Pelletier, Dave Potter, Wendy Elcome and Mark Wheeler. My deepest love and appreciation goes to my wife, Carol for all her support during the course of my graduate career. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................. ±± LIST OF TABLES............................... vi LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS........................ x ABSTRACT...................................... xiv I. INTRODUCTION.................................. 1 II. PART I. FORAGING STRATEGIES OF ASTERIAS RUBENS AND NUCELLA LAPILLUS IN THE ROCKY INTERTIDAL.................................... 3 Introduction.................................. 4 Site Descriptions ............................ 9 Materials and Methods ........................ 13 R e s u l t s ........................................ 17 Predator Size Distributions and Densities.................................. 17 Prey Abundance and Size Distributions..... 22 Feeding Cycles.............................. 33 Prey Size Selection....................... 43 Food Resource Overlap..................... 50 Prey Size "Specialization"................. 57 Feeding Rates and Energetics..............61 Foraging Strategies........................ 75 Discussion and Conclusions................... 84 Literature Cited .............................. 91 III. PART II. PREDATION EFFECTS OF ASTERIAS RUBENS AND NUCELLA LAPILLUS IN THE iii Page ROCKY INTERTIDAL............................. 96 Introduction.................................. 97 Site Descriptions.............................101 Methods........................................103 Results........................................106 Causes of Barnacle Mortality-Predation by Asterias and Nucella.................. 106 Removal Studies............................Ill Discussion.................................... 125 Literature Cited.............................. 133 IV. PART III. PREDATION EFFECTS OF ASTERIAS RUBENS ON A SUBTIDAL PILING EPIFAUNAL COMMUNITY......................................136 Introduction.................................. 137 Site Description.............................. l4l Materials and Methods........................ 146 Results........................................149 Seasonal Cycles of the Piling Community..l49 Seasonal Cycles of Asterias .............. 157 Feeding Cycles..*-......................... 171 Prey Size Selection....................... 175 Predation Impact of Asterias on Mytilus Populations................................ 178 Other Predators and Grazers.......... .. l8l Removal Studies............................183 Competition Between Epifaunal Species.... 203 iv Page Discussion................................. 207 Literature Cited .......................... 212 Appendix A ................................. 2lH Appendix B ................................. 215 LIST OP TABLES Page I-I. Prey sizes available to and size selected by (mean - 1 S.D.) Asterias at Milbridge and Nubble Light.......................,.. .. 47 I-II. Prey species overlap, prey size overlap, and total food resource overlap between Nucella and Asterias at each of the three study sites........................................ 52 I-III. Prey sizes taken by Nucella and Asterias (mean - 1 S.D.) at Milbridge and Nubble Light during 1973........................... 56 I-IV. Size specialization of Nucella and Asterias on Balanus and Mytilus at the three study sites........................... 59 I-V. Average laboratory feeding rates (mean £ 1 S.D.) of Nucella and Asterias on Balanus and Mytilus......................... 62 I-VI. Caloric content of, and relationship between length and dry weight, and caloric content and dry weight for Balanus and Mytilus 64 I-VIIa. Feeding equations on the consumption of Mytilus and Balanus by Nucella............. 66 I-VIIb. Feeding equations on the consumption of Mytilus and Balanus by Asterias............ 68 I-VIII. Average caloric gain to Nucella and Asterias while feeding on Mytilus and Balanus...... 8l vi Page II-I. Number of predators removed from MLW to HW from each of the three experi­ mental study areas at Port Stark....... 105 Mean Balanus densities and % coverage of barnacles at LW, MW, and HW in each of the four treatment areas at Port Stark at the conclusion of the predator removal studies.................................... 112 Mean Balanus densities at LW, MW, and HW in each of the four treatment areas at Port Stark at the conclusion of the predator removal studies................. 114 II-IV. Size determinations of Nucella and Asterias (mean - 1 S.D.) at LW in the predator removal areas at the conclusion of the removal experiments............... 121 Biomass (wet weight) and numbers of important epifaunal species (mean * 95% p confidence interval) per 0.1 m at 1 m on the pilings in 1972 and 1973............. 150 Average densities of Asterias on the randomly chosen, control, starfish removal, and all predator removal pilings.158 Average size (mean - 95% confidence interval) of Asterias on the randomly vii Page chosen, starfish removal, and all predator removal pilings, and on the bottom beneath the pier................ 164 III-IV. Average Mytilus size consumed (mean - 1 S.D.) by Asterias on the bottom beneath the pier........................ 176 III-V. Percent mortality of Mytilus on the pilings due to Asterias predation..... 179 III-VI. Percent coverage of epifaunal species (mean - 95% confidence interval) at 1 m on each of the series of treatment pilings determined by the photographic technique................................ 184 III-VII. Percent coverage of epifaunal species (mean - 95$ confidence interval)