. The Biological bulletin. Biology; Zoology; Biology; Marine Biology. 130 KARL PERRY MAUZEY These observations are very similar to those of Feder (1959) in California. He reports somewhat greater feeding on barnacles (Balanus glandula, B. nubilis and Tetraclita squamosa rubescens} () and on Mytilus californianus () but less feeding on Acmaea spp. () and on chitons (mostly Mopalia muscosa} (). There is a large difference with respect to Katharina tunicata, the chiton mainly eaten in the San Juan Island area. Only of his observations were on this species, as compared with
. The Biological bulletin. Biology; Zoology; Biology; Marine Biology. 130 KARL PERRY MAUZEY These observations are very similar to those of Feder (1959) in California. He reports somewhat greater feeding on barnacles (Balanus glandula, B. nubilis and Tetraclita squamosa rubescens} () and on Mytilus californianus () but less feeding on Acmaea spp. () and on chitons (mostly Mopalia muscosa} (). There is a large difference with respect to Katharina tunicata, the chiton mainly eaten in the San Juan Island area. Only of his observations were on this species, as compared with of mine. In both studies, a few organisms are fed on heavily, while a large number is eaten only occasionally. Although Balanus, Aciuaea and M. ednlis are the numerically dominant prey, they represent a much smaller percentage of the total biomass of food. Dry weight versus length correlations were established for the six most prominent species PERCENT BALANUS SPP. ACMAEA SPP. MYTILUS EDULIS LITTORINA SPP. KATHARINA TUNICATA THAIS SPR TONICELLA LINEATA MARGARITES SPP. CRABS SEARLESIA DIRA MOPALIA SPP. CALLIOSTOMA COSTATUM TUNICATES STRONGYLOCENTROTUS SPP OYSTER BRACHIOPOD AMPHIPOD WORM TUBE. 788 288 FIGURE 1. Percentages of Pisastcr feeding on indicated prey, summed over the entire study period, March, 1962, through January, 1964. The number observed feeding on each prey category is given at the end of the bar. consumed by Pisaster (Mauzey, unpublished data). Only those parts of the prey that are actually eaten by Pisaster were weighed, , shells, and the girdle of chitons, were omitted. The size and number of all prey could not be recorded in the field due to lack of time underwater. Therefore, I estimated the average size and number of each prey for all feedings, based on impressions gathered over the entire period of the study. This method permits only a rough estimate of the biomass ingested (Table I). Research in progress suggests that the seasonal pattern reported
Size: 1011px × 2471px
Photo credit: © Library Book Collection / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookauthorlilliefrankrat, booksubjectbiology, booksubjectzoology
