4.1 Article

Use of chemical cues by coral reef animal larvae for habitat selection

期刊

AQUATIC BIOLOGY
卷 19, 期 3, 页码 231-238

出版社

INTER-RESEARCH
DOI: 10.3354/ab00532

关键词

Sensory mechanisms; Settlement cues; Fish; Crustacean; Cephalopod

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan [21780178]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [24780188] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present study explored the importance of chemical cues for habitat selection by fish (6 species), crustacean (1 species), and cephalopod (1 species) larvae in a 4-channel choice flume at Ishigaki Island, Japan. The larval attraction toward chemical cues from reef patches (sea-grass bed patch, live coral patch, dead coral patch, and control water; Expt 1) and microhabitats within a given reef patch (live coral colonies, dead coral colonies, seagrass, and conspecifics; Expt 2) was tested in a 4-channel choice flume. The results in Expt 1 showed that 3 fish species used chemical cues to move significantly towards reef patches: Chromis viridis toward live coral patch water and Lutjanus fulviflamma and L. gibbus toward seagrass bed patch water. In Expt 2, 6 of 8 species (4 fishes, 1 cephalopod, and 1 crustacean) used chemical cues to move significantly toward conspecific water (Apogon properuptus, C. viridis, Dascyllus reticulatus, L. fulviflamma, Octopus cyanea, and Palaemonidae sp.). Overall, these results suggest that marine species can actively select settlement habitats according to olfactory cues (more specially, cues from conspecifics). Moreover, these results highlight the importance of conspecific cues over other types of information (reef patch and microhabitat) for habitat selection. Social aggregation of fish, crustacean, and cephalopod larvae with older conspecifics may be the result of individuals using conspecific 'guides' to potentially find beneficial resources (availability of resources and low mortality).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据