4.0 Article

Feeding preferences of Acanthaster planci (Echinodermata : Asteroidea) under controlled conditions of food availability

Journal

PACIFIC SCIENCE
Volume 61, Issue 1, Pages 113-120

Publisher

UNIV HAWAII PRESS
DOI: 10.1353/psc.2007.0011

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Feeding preferences of the crown-of-thorns sea star, Acanthaster planci (L.), were studied in a series of laboratory-based feeding trials wherein Sea stars were provided with equal availability of six different coral species. The order in which corals were consumed was then used to ascertain feeding Preferences. Crown-of-thorns sea stars exhibited strong and consistent feeding Preferences across replicate feeding trials. The most readily eaten coral species was Acropora byacinthus, followed by A. gemmifera, A. nasuta, A. formosa, Stlo-phora pistillata, Montipora undata, and Pocillopora damicornis. Crown-of-thorns sea stars also consumed Goniopora lobata, Fungia fungites, Goniastrea retiformes, and Pavona cactus but only after all Acropora and Montipora (Family Acroporidae) as well as Pocillopora and Stylophora (Family, Pocilloporidae) were eaten. The least-preferred corals were Favites abidita, Porites lobata, Symphyllia recta, Echinopora horrida, and Porites cylindrica. Of these, P. cylindrica was never eaten in any of the feeding trials in which it was offered. Observed feeding preferences substantiate findings from previous studies, where corals from the families Acroporidae and Pocilloporidae,were preferred over all other corals. Further research is required to assess the Underlying basis of feeding Preferences of A. planci, but this study confirms that these starfish readily distinguish between different corals and have innate Preferences for certain species. Still, most corals were eventually consumed, showing that when food is limited (during population outbreaks) A. planci is likely to consume virtually all different Coral Species, causing extreme devastation to coral reef ecosystems.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available