Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-23T19:49:27.575Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ecological exeriments on Foraminiferida

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

J. W. Murray
J. W. Murray
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, University of Bristol
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Fifteen experiments on the foraminiferid Elphidium crispum (L.) are described. They deal with feeding, movement, the substratum, and salinity, and their bearing on ecology.

The daily production of feeding cysts was used as a measure of the metabolic rate and healthiness of the foraminiferids. Phaeodactylum tricornutum, both living and dead, was used as food; a distinct preference was shown for living food. However, kaolin and graphite having a similar size to the Phaeodactylum were also accepted as food. It is suggested that E. crispum selects its food on the basis of size. The colour of the protoplasm is shown to be closely related to the pigments of the food

Movement in the horizontal plane is normally random. However, this species prefers a clean, hard substratum to one of clay; once a specimen has escaped from a clay substratum, it is loathe to return to it and therefore movement in this instance must be directed and not random.

Movement in the horizontal plane is normally random. However, this species prefers a clean, hard substratum to one of clay; once a specimen has escaped from a clay substratum, it is loathe to return to it and therefore movement in this instance must be directed and not random.

The rate of feeding is shown to be closely related to the salinity of the water, the feeding rate decreasing with the salinity. The amount of calcium present in sea water or in subsaline waters does not appear to affect the rate of feeding. However, lowered temperatures help E. crispum to survive for longer periods in subsaline water. At temperatures of 8° and 16° C , cultures survived subsaline water of 20%0 salinity for 38 days, but at a salinity of i5%03 only the culture kept at 8 C survived (for 15 days).

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 43 , Issue 3 , November 1963 , pp. 621 - 642
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1963

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Armstrong, F. A. J. & Boalch, G. T., 1960. Volatile organic matter in algal culture media and sea water. Nature, Lond., Vol. 185, pp. 761–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, Z. M., 1953. An introduction to the study of movement and dispersal in Allogromia laticollaris Arnold. Contr. Cushman Fdn, Vol. 4, pp. 15–21.Google Scholar
Buchanan, J. B. & Hedley, R. H., 1960. A contribution to the biology of Astrorhiza limicola (Foraminifera). J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 39, 549–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boltovskoy, E., 1954. Beobachtungen über Einfluss der Ernährung auf die Foraminiferenschalen. Paläont. Z., Bd. 28, pp. 204–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradshaw, J. S., 1955. Preliminary laboratory experiments on ecology of foraminiferal populations. Micropaleontology, Vol. 1, pp. 351–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradshaw, J. S., 1957 Laboratory studies on the rate of growth of the foraminifer ‘Streblus beccarii (Linné) var. tepida (Cushman)’. J. Paleont., Vol. 31, pp. 1138–47.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, J. S., 1961. Laboratory experiments on the ecology of Foraminifera. Contr. Cushman Fdn, Vol. 12, pp. 87–106.Google Scholar
Gunter, G., 1947 a. Paleoecological import of certain relationships of marine animals to salinity. J. Paleont., Vol. 21, pp. 77–9.Google Scholar
Bradshaw, J. S., 1947 b. Extended remarks on relationships of marine animals to salinity. J. Paleont., Vol. 21, pp. 498–500.Google Scholar
Howes, N. H., 1939. The ecology of a saline lagoon in south east Essex. J. Linn. Soc. (Zool.), Vol. 40, pp. 383–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jepps, M. W., 1942. Studies on Polystomella Lamarck (Foraminifera). J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 25, pp. 607–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lankford, R. R., 1959. Distribution And Ecology Of Foraminifera From East Mississippi Delta Margin. Bull. Amer. Ass. Petrol. Geol., Vol. 43, pp. 2068–99.Google Scholar
Lee, J. J., Pierce, S., Teutchoft, M. & McLaughlin, J., 1961. Growth and physiology of Foraminifera in the laboratory. Pt. 1. Collection and maintenance. Micropaleontology, Vol. 7, pp. 461–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metcalf, Z. P., 1930. Salinity and size. Science, N.S., Vol. 72, p. 526.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Myers, E. H., 1942. A quantitative study of the productivity of Foraminifera in the sea. Proc. Amer. phil. Soc., Vol. 85, pp. 325–42.Google Scholar
Myers, E. H., 1943. Life activities of Foraminifera in relation to marine ecology. Proc. Amer phil. Soc., Vol. 86, pp. 439–58.Google Scholar
Nyholm, K. G., 1957. Orientation and binding power of Recent monothalamous Foraminifera in soft sediments. Micropaleontology, Vol. 3, pp. 75–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pantin, C. F. A., 1960. Notes on Microscopical Technique for Zoologists. 76 pp. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, R. A., 1954. The vapour pressure and osmotic equivalence of sea water. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 33, pp. 449–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Said, R., 1953. Foraminifera of Great Pond, East Falmouth, Massachusetts. Contr. Cushman Fdn, Vol. 4, pp. 7–14.Google Scholar
Sandon, H., 1932. The food of Protozoa. Publ. Fac. Sci. Egypt. Univ., No. 1, pp. 1–187.Google Scholar
Sinclair, G. W., 1947. Notes on ‘Paleoecological imports of salinity.’ J. Paleont., Vol. 21, pp. 294–5.Google Scholar