Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2006 Aspects of Antipredation in Panulirus Argus and Panulirus Guttatus: Behavior, Morphology, and Ontogeny Peter Edward Bouwma Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES ASPECTS OF ANTIPREDATION IN PANULIRUS ARGUS AND PANULIRUS GUTTATUS: BEHAVIOR, MORPHOLOGY, AND ONTOGENY. By PETER EDWARD BOUWMA A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Biological Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Degree Awarded: Fall Semester, 2006 The members of the Committee approve the dissertation of Peter E. Bouwma defended on October 4, 2006. ___________________________ William F. Herrnkind Professor Directing Dissertation ___________________________ David E. Thistle Outside Committee Member ___________________________ Joseph Travis Committee Member ___________________________ Walter R. Tschinkel Committee Member ___________________________ Thomas A. Houpt Committee Member Approved: ______________________________________ Timothy S. Moerland, Chair, Department of Biological Science The office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members. ii For Mom, Dad, Andy, Laura, Doc, and Dee. I couldn’t have done it without you. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This work would not have been possible without the wisdom, patience, editing skills, and knowledge of lobster biology and behavioral ecology from my major professor, Bill Herrnkind. I can only hope to contribute to this discipline a fraction of what he has over the last 40 years. I also thank Walter Tschinkel, Joseph Travis, David Thistle, and Thomas Houpt for their contributions to this work as the members of my doctoral committee. This research was supported by funds from the Florida State University Department of Biological Science, the Sigma Xi Scientific Research Society, the Aylesworth Foundation for the Advancement of Marine Science, Florida State University Office of Research, the Office of Science Teaching Activities in the FSU Department of Biological Science, the Florida Institute of Oceanography, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Florida Sea Grant, and Old Dominion University. I would also like to thank the Keys Marine Laboratory and the Florida State University Coastal and Marine Laboratory for invaluable logistical support at all stages of this project. My work in the Florida Keys would not have been possible without many friends at the Keys Marine Laboratory and elsewhere. Cindy Lewis and Lonny Anderson have both helped me immeasurably throughout my tenure in the Keys. I will forever owe them both a debt of gratitude for everything they have done. I also thank Amy Parsons for all her help in the Keys. Fernando Briones, Steve Heiney, Chris Catlett, Lisa Tipsword, Jon Fajens, Chris Humphries, and Kevin McCarthy all provided sage advice, logistical support, and camaraderie; I thank them all for their help. Tracy Zeigler, Andrew Hannes, David Cleveland, Mary Alice Coffroth, Tom Walcott, Adrienne Sloan, Frank Trampus, Sean Kinane, and Darren Parsons all provided both logistical support and friendship during my tenure at KML. I would also like to thank the Lobster Crews at both Old Dominion University and Clemson University. My time in the Keys would not have been possible without the support of Mark Butler and his students Jason Goldstein, Donald Behringer, Scott Donahue, Jennifer Lear, Tom Dolan, and David Cook. Michael Childress and Adrianna iv Zito were also invaluable in the planning and execution of my work in the Keys. John Hunt, Bill Sharp, Tom Matthews, Rodney Bertelson, and Lynn Cox at the Fish and Wildlife Research Institute in Marathon, FL provided additional logistical support. Allison George assisted in the care and training of triggerfish. Arley and Laura Bouwma assisted me with data collection in the field. Kari Lavalli was an invaluable resource concerning lobster/triggerfish interactions and loaned me a camcorder when I thought all else was lost. David Mann loaned me the hydrophone that changed my life. Many others, whose names I can no longer recall, also contributed to success of my work in the Keys; I thank you all! I would also like to thank the EERDG group in the Department of Biological Science at FSU, as well as other FSU faculty and graduate students for their help in the planning and analysis of this work. I also thank Judy Bowers for saving me from myself more times than I can count. Andrew Bouwma provided important statistical support. Kevin Smith wrote an event recorder program to help in the analysis of my videotapes. Kent Smith, Frank Stevenson, Steve Wilson, Barbara Shoplock, Maurizio Tomaiuolo, and Kim Young all assisted me in catching triggerfish. Mark Daniels, Bobby Henderson, and Dennis Tinsley helped care for triggerfish held at the FSUCML. Finally, I thank Denise Akob for her infinite patience and caring during both my data analysis and the composition of this work. v TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables .................................................................................................................... vii List of Figures.................................................................................................................... ix Abstract.............................................................................................................................. xi INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 1. ANTIPREDATOR SOUND, BEHAVIOR, AND WEAPONRY IN THE SPINY LOBSTERS PANULIRUS ARGUS AND PANULIRUS GUTTATUS..................................9 2. APOSEMATISM BY WEAPONRY AND SOUND? RETALIATORY DEFENSIVE BEHAVIOR IN CARIBBEAN SPINY LOBSTER PANULIRUS ARGUS .......................33 3. SOUND PRODUCTION IN CARIBBEAN SPINY LOBSTER PANULIRUS ARGUS AND ITS ROLE IN ESCAPE DURING PREDATORY ATTACK BY OCTOPUS BRIAREUS .........................................................................................................................55 4. THE ONTOGENY OF ANTI-PREDATOR RESPONSES TO ALARM ODOR IN CARIBBEAN SPINY LOBSTER PANULIRUS ARGUS..................................................73 CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................91 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................95 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ...........................................................................................111 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1. (a) Descriptions of lobster defensive actions and (b) triggerfish actions recorded during attacks by gray triggerfish Balistes capriscus on Panulirus argus and P. guttatus individuals............................................................................................................26 Table 1.2. (a) Mean lobster defensive actions per minute of encounter (± SE) for P. argus and P. guttatus and (b) results of two-way ANOVAs comparing means for time to subdue and lobster defensive actions (tailflips, whips, pirouettes) with fish individual and species type as factors (plus the interaction of fish individual X species type). N = 15 for P. argus and 14 for P. guttatus for all ANOVAs. Number of different fish: N = 6 for both species........................................................................................................................27 Table 1.3. Measurements of lobster antennal weaponry as predicted by body size (Carapace Length) and species (Panulirus argus or P. guttatus) in multiple linear regression models. Separate models were fit for (a) the width of the antenna flagellum 10 cm from the base (Wflag10), (b) antenna flagellum cross-sectional area near base (XSflag), and (c) antenna base cross-sectional area (XSbase). DF = degrees of freedom, Type III SS = type three sums of squares, F = F statistic......................................................................28 Table 1.4. Measurements of lobster body size as predicted by carapace length and species (Panulirus argus or P. guttatus) in multiple linear regression models. Separate models were fit for (a) the width of the anterior carapace (Wac), (b) width of the abdomen rd (Wab), and (c) width of the 3 walking leg (W3wl). DF = degrees of freedom, Type III SS = type three sums of squares, F = F statistic......................................................................29 Table 2.1. (a) Descriptions of a subset of individual Panulirus argus defensive actions (during attacks only) and (b) triggerfish (Balistes capriscus) attack behaviors recorded during encounters in both the aposematic trials and the triggerfish choice experiment....50 Table 2.2. (a) Number of defensive actions per minute of encounter and results of t-tests comparing means for stridulating (N = 12) and muted (N = 13) lobsters during encounters with triggerfish. (b) Triggerfish attack behaviors per minute of encounter and results of t- tests comparing means for fish attacking stridulating (N = 12) versus muted (N = 13) lobsters. ..............................................................................................................................51 Table 3.1. Numbers of individuals escaping from octopuses at least once, individuals escaping at least once without injury, individuals grasped on the antenna