Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T13:49:59.350Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Observations on the Breeding and Settlement of Mytilus Edulis (L.) in British Waters

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

P. N. J. Chipperfield
P. N. J. Chipperfield
Affiliation:
Liverpool Universityand I.C.I. Marine Paints Research Station, Brixham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

During 1946 and 1947, regular samples of Mytilus edulis from a number of localities ontheBritish coasts, including Conway, Brancaster and Liverpool, were examined for gonad conditionand spawning. For each sample, the mean stage of gonad development was computed. The criteria employed in distinguishing the stages of gonad development are described.

Ripening of the gonads takes place within a few weeks of the onset of spawning, in general commencing when the sea temperature has risen above 7–0° C. There appears to be no correlation between nutritional condition and ripening of the gonads, or subsequent spawning.

In all localities and in each year in which observations were made spawning occurred in late spring (mid-April to the end of May) and in most areas lasted for a short period only (2–4 weeks). At Brixham, in 1949 and 1950, the duration of the spawning period was longer (4-6 weeks). In most cases, 70–80% of the mature population spawned during the first 7–10 days of the breeding period. No evidence of periodic spawning was obtained.

In all cases, spawning commenced in a period during which the mean temperature to which the mussels were exposed was rising from c. 9–5° C. to 11–12–5° C. In most cases, the onset of spawning was coincident with a period of spring tides, and of predominantly bright sunny weather. The initial rate of spawning appears to be directly related to the rate of increase in mean temperature to which the mussels are exposed.

After spawning, mussels enter into a ‘neuter’ or ‘resting spent’ stage in which all traces of sexuality are lost.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , October 1953 , pp. 449 - 476
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1953

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

REFERENCES

Battle, H. 1932. Rhythmical sexual maturity and spawning of certain bivalve mollusks. Contrib. Canadian Biol., N.S., Vol. 7, No. 20, pp. 257–76.Google Scholar
Berner, L. 1935. La Reproduction des Moules comestibles {Mytiblus edulis L. et Mytilus gallo-provincialis Lmk.) et leur repartition geographique. Bull. Inst. Ocean., Monaco, No. 680, 8 pp.Google Scholar
Borisiak, A. 1909. Pelecypoda du Plankton de la Mer Noire. Bull. Sci. France Belg., T. 42, pp. 149–84.Google Scholar
Bruce, J. R. 1926. The respiratory exchange of the mussel {Mytilus edulis). Biochem. Journ., Vol. 20, pp. 829–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coe, W. R. & Fox, D. L. 1942. Biology of the California sea-mussel {Mytilus californianus). I. Journ. Exp. Zool., Vol. 90, pp. 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corlett, J. 1948. Rates of settlement and growth of the ‘pile’ fauna of the Mersey estuary. Trans. Liverpool Biol. Soc., Vol. 56, pp. 2–28.Google Scholar
Daniel, R. J. 1921. Seasonal changes in the chemical composition of the mussel (Mytilus edulis). Rept. Lanes. Sea Fish. Lab., 1920, pp. 74–84.Google Scholar
Dodgson, R. W. 1928. Report on mussel purification. Min. Agr. Fish., Fish. Invest., Ser. 2, Vol. 10, No. 1, 498 pp.Google Scholar
Elmhirst, R. 1923. Notes on the breeding and growth of marine animals in the Clyde Sea Area. Ann. Rept. Scot. Mar. Biol. 1922, pp. 19–43.Google Scholar
Engle, J. B. & Loosanoff, V. L. 1944. On season of attachment of larvae of Mytilus edulis Linn. Ecology, Vol. 25, pp. 433–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, I. A. 1922. Biology and economic value of the sea mussel Mytilus edulis. Bull. U.S. Bur. Fish., Vol. 38, pp. 127–259.Google Scholar
Harris, J. E. 1946. Report on anti-fouling research, 1942–44. Journ. Iron & Steel Instit., Vol. 150, No. 2, pp. 143–56.Google Scholar
Havinga, B. 1929. Krebse und Weichteire. Handb. Seefischerei Nordeuropas, Bd. 3, H. 2, 147 pp.Google Scholar
Herdman, W. A. & Scott, A. 1895. Report on the investigations carried on in 1894 in connection with the lancashire Sea-Fisheries Laboratory at University College, Liverpool.Trans. Liverpool Biol. Soc., Vol. 9, pp. 104–62.Google Scholar
Hutchins, L. W. 1947. The bases for temperature zonation in geographical distribution. Ecol. Monogr., Vol. 17, pp. 325–35. (Coll. Reprints Woods Hole, No. 374.)Google Scholar
Jensen, A. S. & Sparck, R. 1934. Bløddyr. II. Saltvandsmuslinger. Danmarks Fauna, Nr. 40, 208 pp.Google Scholar
Johnstone, J. 1898. The spawning of the mussel (Mytilus edulis). Trans. Liverpool Biol. Soc., Vol. 13, pp. 104–21.Google Scholar
Kändler, R. 1926. Muschellarven aus dem Helgoländer Plankton. Wiss. Meeresunters., Abt. Helgoland, N.F., Bd. 16, No. 5, 9 pp.Google Scholar
Korringa, P. 1947. Relations between the moon and periodicity in the breeding of marine animals. Ecol. Monogr., Vol. 17, pp. 347–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebour, M. V. 1938. Notes on the breeding of some lamellibranchs from Plymouth and their larvae. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. 23, pp. 119–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lo Bianco, S. 1899. Notizie biologiche riguardanti specialmente il periodo di maturita sessuale degli animali del golfo di Napoli. Mitt. Zool. Stat. Neap., Vol. 13, pp. 448–573.Google Scholar
Loosanoff, V. L. 1942. Shell movements of the edible mussel Mytilus edulis (L.) in relation to temperature. Ecology, Vol. 23, pp. 231–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mcintosh, W. C. 1891. Report on the mussel and cockle beds in the estuaries of the Tees, the Esk, and the Humber. 87 pp.Google Scholar
Matthews, A. 1913. Notes on the development of Mytilus edulis and Alcyonium digitatum in the Plymouth Laboratory. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. 9, pp. 557–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, T. C. 1928. Pelagic dissoconchs of the common mussel, Mytilus edulis, with observations on the behavior of the larvae of allied genera. Biol. Bull Woods Hole, Vol. 55, pp. 180–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orton, J. H. 1924. An account of investigations into the cause or causes of the unusual mortality among oysters in English oyster beds during 1920 and 1921. Min. Agr. Fish., Fish. Invest., Ser. 2, Vol. 6, No. 3, 199 pp.Google Scholar
Orton, J. H. 1933. Strange spat fall of the common mussel on the co/mmon cockle. Nature, London, Vol. 131, pp. 513–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelseneer, P. 1935. Essai d'Ethologie Zoologique d'tude des Mollusques. 662 pp. Bruxelles.Google Scholar
Pyefinch, K. A. 1950. Notes on the ecology of ship-fouling organisms. Journ. Anim. Ecol., Vol. 19, pp. 29–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runnström, S. 1929. Weitere Studien über die Temperaturanpassung der Fortpflanzung und Entwicklung mariner Tiere. Bergens Mus. Arbok, Nr 10, 46 pp.Google Scholar
Scott, A. 1900. Breeding of M. edulis. Rept. Lanes Sea Fish. Lab., 1900, pp. 36–9.Google Scholar
Spärck, R. 1920. Nogle bemaerkninger angående yngleforhold hos Mytilus edulis L. Ved. Medd. Danske Naturh. Foren., Bd. 71, pp. 161–64.Google Scholar
Stafford, J. 1912. On the recognition of bivalve larvae in plankton collections. Contrib. Canad. Biol., 1906–10, pp. 221–42.Google Scholar
Stott, F. C. 1931. The spawning of Echinus esculentus and some changes in gonad composition. Journ. Exp. Biol., Vol. 8, pp. 133–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, Shih-Feng 1941. The breeding of the escallop [Pecten maximus (L.)] with a note on the growth rate. Trans. Liverpool Biol. Soc., Vol. 54, pp. 9–28.Google Scholar
Thorson, G. 1946. Reproduction and larval development of Danish marine bottom invertebrates, with special reference to the planktonic larvae in the Sound (øresund). Medd. Komm. Danmarks Fisk. Havund. København, Ser. Plankton, Bd. 4, No. 1, 523 pp.Google Scholar
Visscher, J. P. 1927. Nature and extent of fouling of ships' bottoms. Bull. U.S. Bur. Fish., Vol. 43, Pt 2, pp. 193–252.Google Scholar
Werner, B. 1939. Über die Entwicklung und Artunterscheidung von Muschellarven des Nordseeplanktons, unter besonder Berucksichtigung der Schalenentwicklung. Zool. Jahrb., Abt. Anat., Bd. 66, pp. 1–54.Google Scholar
Whedon, W. F. 1936. Spawning habits of the mussel Mytilus californianus Conrad with notes on the possible relation to mussel poison. Mussel poison. I. Univ. Calif. Pub. Zool., Vol. 41, pp. 35–44.Google Scholar
White, K. 1939. Mytilus. L.M.B.C. Memoirs, Nr 31. 177 pp. Liverpool.Google Scholar
Williamson, H. C. 1907. The spawning, growth, and movement of the mussel (Mytilus edulis L.), horse-mussel (Modiolus modiolus L.) and the spoutfish (Solen siliqua L.). 25th Ann. Rept. Scot. Fish. Bd, 1906, Sci. Invest., pp. 221–55.Google Scholar
Young, R. T. 1942. Spawning season of the California mussel Mytilus californianus. Ecology, Vol. 23, pp. 490–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, R. T. 1945. Stimulation of spawning in the mussel (Mytilus californianus). Ecology, Vol. 26, pp. 58–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, R. T. 1946. Spawning and setting season of the mussel Mytilus californianus. Ecology, Vol. 27, pp. 354–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar