Predator-induced defenses differ between sympatric Mytilus edulis and M. trossulus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MEPS Marine Ecology Progress Series Contact the journal Facebook Twitter RSS Mailing List Subscribe to our mailing list via Mailchimp HomeLatest VolumeAbout the JournalEditorsTheme Sections MEPS 475:135-143 (2013) - DOI: https://doi.org/10.3354/meps10106 Predator-induced defenses differ between sympatric Mytilus edulis and M. trossulus J. B. Lowen1,*, D. J. Innes2, R. J. Thompson1 1Ocean Sciences Centre, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, A1C 5S7 Canada 2Department of Biology, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, A1B 3X9 Canada *Email: jlowen@mun.ca ABSTRACT: This is the first study to compare defenses to predation in closely related species of Mytilus and draws attention to the role of predation in determining their distribution, abundance and co-existence. We experimentally determined whether 2 blue mussel species, Mytilus edulis and M. trossulus, that co-exist within a hybrid zone in Newfoundland, Canada, differ in their predator-induced responses. Both species recognized cues from predators, although the magnitude of the responses to these cues varied with the predator (Asterias rubens or Cancer irroratus) and the traits measured (growth, attachment strength, shell thickness and adductor muscle mass) after 122 d of exposure. Both mussel species showed decreased growth following exposure to sea stars. Both predator species induced an increase in attachment strength in both mussel species (M. edulis > M. trossulus). M. edulis displayed plasticity in partitioning resources among defensive traits in the presence of sea stars (growth in adductor muscle) or crabs (increased shell thickness). These responses were not observed in M. trossulus, which is therefore likely more susceptible to these predators than is M. edulis. The preference of sea stars for M. trossulus supports this conclusion. Differences in predator-inducible defenses increase the likelihood of M. edulis succeeding M. trossulus in mussel aggregations, which in turn explains the often abrupt increase in the proportion of M. edulis among larger mussels. Such predator-induced defenses, and the resultant predator-prey interactions, affect the temporal and spatial distributions of mussel species and their potential to coexist and hybridize. KEY WORDS: Predator-induced defenses · Sibling species · Mytilus edulis · Mytilus trossulus · Hybrid zone · Asterias rubens · Cancer irroratus · North Atlantic Full text in pdf format PreviousNextCite this article as: Lowen JB, Innes DJ, Thompson RJ (2013) Predator-induced defenses differ between sympatric Mytilus edulis and M. trossulus. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 475:135-143. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps10106 Export citation RSS - Facebook - Tweet - linkedIn Cited by Published in MEPS Vol. 475. Online publication date: February 14, 2013 Print ISSN: 0171-8630; Online ISSN: 1616-1599 Copyright © 2013 Inter-Research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".