Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T21:16:37.037Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predation in time and space: peeling and drilling in terebrid gastropods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2016

Geerat J. Vermeij ,
Edith Zipser  and
Elizabeth C. Dudley
Geerat J. Vermeij
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742
Edith Zipser
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742
Elizabeth C. Dudley
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Maryland, College Park, Md. 20742
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two types of predation (shell breakage at the lip by calappid crabs and drilling by gastropods) were studied in more than 6000 Recent and 1500 fossil terebrid gastropods. The occurrence of lip-peeling was assessed by the frequency of shell repair, defined as the number of repaired injuries divided by the total number of shells in a sample. This frequency is interpreted as a measure of the demonstrated importance of the shell as a protective device against peeling. In the Recent fauna, frequencies of repair are highest in the tropical Indo-West-Pacific, intermediate in tropical America, and lowest in warm-temperate areas. When comparisons are restricted to particular size classes, these geographical differences become blurred, especially among smaller shells. Slender, many-whorled species have significantly lower frequencies of repair than do terebrids with more compact shells. Samples of Terebra affinis from atolls have fewer repairs than do those from high islands or continental shores. Among fossils, there is no difference in repair between Paleogene and Neogene samples. In the Miocene, warm-temperate terebrids had frequencies of repair similar to those of tropical species. The frequency of repair is loosely correlated with the number of species of shell-peeling calappid crabs. Frequencies of drilling have been at high modern levels since Eocene time. Incomplete drill-holes are common in large Recent species, and suggest that the terebrid shell is well adapted to withstand attacks by naticid gastropods. The results of this study are consistent with those of architectural analyses of soft-bottom gastropod assemblages and with other studies on predation of gastropods.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , Summer 1980 , pp. 352 - 364
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

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

Literature Cited

Bertness, M. D., Garrity, S., and Levings, S. 1980. Predation pressure and gastropod foraging tactics: a latitudinal pattern. Submitted.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davoli, F. 1976. Terebridae (Gastropoda: Toxoglossa) come probabili validi documenti per l'interpretazione paleoecologica e geologico-storica di bacini neogenici europei. Boll. Soc. Paleontol. Ital. 15:49–58.Google Scholar
Dudley, E. C. and Vermeij, G. J. 1978. Predation in time and space: drilling in the gastropod Turritella. Paleobiology. 4:436–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garth, J. S. 1946. The littoral brachyuran fauna of the Galapagos archipelago. Allan Hancock Pacific Expeditions (Los Angeles) 5:341–601.Google Scholar
Garth, J. S. 1960. Distribution and affinities of the brachyuran Crustacea. Syst. Zool. 9:105–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gauld, D. T. 1960. An annotated check-list of the Crustacea of Ghana. IV. Brachyura. J. West Afr. Sci. Assoc. 6:68–72.Google Scholar
Glaessner, M. F. 1969. Decapoda. Pp. R399–R533. In: Moore, R. C., ed. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Part R (Arthropoda 4, 2). Univ. Kansas Press; Lawrence, Kansas.Google Scholar
Guinot, D. 1966. La faune carcinologique (Crustacea Brachyura) de l'Océan Indien occidental et de la Mer Rouge. Catalogue, remarques biogéographiques et bibliographie. Mém. Inst. Fond. Afr. Noir. 77:1–352.Google Scholar
Hecht, A. D. and Agan, B. 1972. Diversity and age relationships in Recent and Miocene bivalves. Syst. Zool. 21:308–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holthuis, L. B. 1958. West Indian crabs of the genus Calappa, with a description of three new species. Studies Fauna Curaçao and other Caribbean Islands 34:146–186.Google Scholar
Kojumdjieva, E. 1974. Les gastéropodes perceurs et leurs victimes du Miocène de Bulgarie du nord-ouest. Bulg. Acad. Sci. Bull. Geol. Inst. (ser. Paleontol.) 25:5–24.Google Scholar
Marsh, J. A. Jr. 1977. Terrestrial inputs of nitrogen and phosphorus on fringing reefs of Guam. Proc. Third Int. Coral Reef Symp. Pp. 331–336.Google Scholar
Menge, B. A. and Lubchenco, J. 1980. Community structure and organization: a cline of increasing consumer pressure in temperate and tropical rocky intertidal communities. In Preparation.Google Scholar
Miller, B. A. 1975. The biology of Terebra gouldi Deshayes, 1859, and a discussion of life history similarities among other terebrids of similar proboscis type. Pacific Sci. 29:227–241.Google Scholar
Morrison, J. P. E. 1968. Four American Hastula species. Texas Conchologist. 4(9):67–70.Google Scholar
Palmer, A. R. 1979. Fish predation and the evolution of gastropod shell sculpture: experimental and geographic evidence. Evolution. 33:697–713.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rudman, W. D. 1969. Observations on Pervicacia tristis (Deshayes, 1859) and a comparison with other toxoglossan gastropods. Veliger. 12:53–64.Google Scholar
Shoup, J. B. 1968. Shell opening by crabs of the genus Calappa. Science. 160:887–888.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sohl, N. F. 1969. The fossil record of shell boring by snails. Am. Zool. 9:725–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J. D. 1970. Feeding habits of predatory gastropods in a Tertiary (Eocene) molluscan assemblage from the Paris Basin. Palaeontology. 13:255–260.Google Scholar
Vermeij, G. J. 1974. Marine faunal dominance and molluscan shell form. Evolution. 28:656–664.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vermeij, G. J. 1976. Interoceanic differences in vulnerability of shelled prey to crab predation. Nature. 260:135–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vermeij, G. J. 1977a. Patterns in crab claw size: the geography of crushing. Syst. Zool. 26:138–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vermeij, G. J. 1977b. The Mesozoic marine revolution: evidence from snails, predators and grazers. Paleobiology. 3:245–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vermeij, G. J. 1978. Biogeography and Adaptation: Patterns of Marine Life. 332 pp. Harvard Univ. Press; Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Vermeij, G. J. 1979a. Shell architecture and causes of death in Micronesian reef snails. Evolution. 33:686–696.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vermeij, G. J. 1979b. The architectural geography of some gastropods. Pp. 427–433. In: Gray, J. and Boucot, A. J., eds. Historical Biogeography, Plate Tectonics, and the Changing Environment. Oregon State Univ. Press; Corvallis, Oregon.Google Scholar
Vermeij, G. J. 1980. The occurrence, interpretation, and paleoecological applications of shell repair in gastropods. Submitted.Google Scholar
Zipser, E. and Vermeij, G. J. 1978. Crushing behavior of tropical and temperate crabs. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 32:155–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar