Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T12:34:05.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Depth related variation in the structure and functioning of the compound eye of the Norway lobster Nephrops norvegicus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

E. Gaten ,
P.M.J. Shelton ,
C.J. Chapman  and
A.M. Shanks
E. Gaten
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LE1 7RH
P.M.J. Shelton
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LE1 7RH
C.J. Chapman
Affiliation:
Marine Laboratory, Victoria Road, Aberdeen, AB9 8DB
A.M. Shanks
Affiliation:
Marine Laboratory, Victoria Road, Aberdeen, AB9 8DB
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The mobility and quantity of retinula cell proximal screening pigment, and the liability of the eyes to light-induced damage, were investigated in the Norway lobster, Nephrops norvegicus (L.), obtained from three separate populations from depths of 18, 75, and 135 m.

During the morning after capture, the migration of the proximal pigment in response to the onset of illumination below the threshold for damage varied between the three populations. In the eyes of deep water N. norvegicus, the proximal screening pigment was located close to or below the basement membrane when dark-adapted and rose to a position midway up the rhabdoms when light-adapted. In the dark-adapted N. norvegicus from shallow water the proximal pigment was located more distally than in eyes of deep water animals. After the onset of illumination, the pigment migrated distally to completely cover the rhabdoms. The amount of retinula cell proximal screening pigment was found to decrease linearly with depth.

When dark-adapted individuals from each depth were exposed to light a positive correlation was obtained between the photon fluence rate (PER) and the proportion of the retina damaged. For a given light exposure the amount of damage was highest in animals from deeper water. The PFR causing 25% damage was approximately 1 log unit higher in animals from 18 m compared to those from 135 m.

The amount of damage varied with the delay between capture of the animals and exposure to light. When exposed 2 h after capture significant differences between depths were seen but the results were influenced by the incomplete dark adaptation of some specimens.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 70 , Issue 2 , May 1990 , pp. 343 - 355
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1990

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

Aréchiga, H. & Atkinson, R.J.A., 1975. The eye and some effects of light on locomotor activity in Nephrops norvegicus. Marine Biology, 32, 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, R.J.A. & Naylor, E., 1976. An endogenous activity rhythm and the rhythmicity of catches of Nephrops norvegicus (L.). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 25, 95–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbe, M.F., Tyrell, M., Gower, D.J. & Welch, W.J., 1988. Hyperthermia protects against light damage in the rat retina. Science, New York, 241, 1817–1820.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brandenburger, J.L., Eakin, R.M. & Reed, C.T., 1976. Effects of light- and dark-adaptation on the photic microvillus and photic vesicles of the pulmonate snail Helix aspersa. Vision Research, 16, 1205–1210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cason, J.E., 1950. A rapid one-step Mallory-Heidenhain stain for connective tissue. Stain Technology, 25, 225–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chamberlain, S.C., Meyer-Rochow, V.B. & Dossert, W.P., 1986. Morphology of the compound eye of the giant deep-sea isopod Bathynomus giganteus. Journal of Morphology, 189, 145–156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapman, C.J., 1980. Ecology of juvenile and adult Nephrops. In The Biology and Management of Lobsters, vol. II (ed. J.S., Cobb and B.F., Phillips), pp. 143–178. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, C.J., & Bailey, N., 1987. Recent progress in Norway lobster research. In Developments in Fisheries Research in Scotland (ed. R.S., Bailey and B.B., Parrish), pp. 99–111. Farnham, England: Fishing News Books.Google Scholar
Chapman, C.J., Johnstone, A.D.F. & Rice, A.L., 1975. The behaviour and ecology of the Norway lobster, Nephrops norvegicus (L.). In Proceedings of the Ninth European Marine Biology Symposium, Oban, Scotland, 1974 (ed. H., Barnes), pp. 59–74. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.Google Scholar
Eguchi, E. & Waterman, T.H., 1979. Freeze-etch and histochemical evidence for cycling in crayfish photoreceptor membranes. Cell and Tissue Research, 169, 419–434.Google Scholar
Elofsson, R. & Hallberg, E., 1977. Compound eyes of some deep-sea and fiord mysid crustaceans. Acta Zoologica, 58, 169–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farmer, A.S.D., 1975. Synopsis of biological data on the Norway lobster, Nephrops norvegicus (Linnaeus, 1758). F.A.O. Fisheries Synopsis, no. 112, 97 pp.Google Scholar
Gaten, E., 1988. Light-induced damage to the dioptric apparatus of Nephrops norvegicus (L.) and the quantitative assessment of the damage. Marine Behaviour and Physiology, 13, 169–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hallberg, E., 1978. The Compound Eye of Crustaceans and its Screening Pigments. Doctoral Dissertation, Lund University.Google Scholar
Hiller-Adams, P. & Case, J.F., 1984. Optical parameters of euphausiid eyes as a function of habitat depth. Journal of Comparative Physiology, 154 (A), 307–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jerlov, N.G., 1976. Marine Optics. Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co. [Elsevier Oceanography Series 14.]Google Scholar
Karnovsky, M.J., 1965. A formaldehyde-glutaraldehyde fixative of high osmolality for use in electron microscopy. Journal of Cell Biology, 27, 137A-138A.Google Scholar
Land, M.F., 1981. Optics and vision in invertebrates. In Handbook of Sensory Physiology, vol. VII/6B (ed. H., Autrum), pp. 471–492. Berlin: springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Lindström, M. & Nilsson, H.L., 1988. Eye function of Mysis relicta Lovsén (Crustacea) from two photic environments. Spectral sensitivity and light tolerance. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 120, 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loew, E.R., 1976. Light, and photoreceptor degeneration in the Norway lobster, Nephrops norvegicus (L.). Proceedings of the Royal Society (B), 193, 31–44.Google ScholarPubMed
Meyer-Rochow, V.B., 1981. The eye of Orchomene sp. cf. O. rossi, an amphipod living under the Ross Ice Shelf. Proceedings of the Royal Society (B), 212, 93–111.Google Scholar
Meyer-Rochow, V.B. & Eguchi, E., 1984. The effects of temperature and light on particles associated with crayfish visual membrane: a freeze-fracture analysis and electrophysiological study. Journal ofNeurobiology, 13, 935–959.Google ScholarPubMed
Meyer-Rochow, V.B. & Tiang, K.M., 1984. The eye of Jasus edwardsii (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palinuridae): electrophysiology, histology and behaviour. Zoologica, 134, 1–61.Google Scholar
Nilsson, H.L., 1982. Rhabdom breakdown in the eye of Cirolana borealis (Crustacea) caused by exposure to daylight. Cell and Tissue Research, 227, 633–639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noell, W.K., Delmelle, M.C. & Albrecht, R., 1971. Vitamin A deficiency effect on retina: dependence on light. Science, New York, 172, 72–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noell, W.K., Walker, V.S., Kang, B.S. & Berman, S., 1966. Retinal damage by light in rats. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 5, 450–473.Google ScholarPubMed
Pantin, C.F.A., 1969. Notes on Microscopical Technique for Zoologists. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Razmjoo, S. & Hamdorf, K., 1976. Visual sensitivity and the variation of total photopigment content in the blowfly photoreceptor membrane. Journal of Comparative Physiology, 105 (A), 279–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roach, J.L.M. & Wiersma, C.A.G., 1974. Differentiation and degeneration of crayfish photoreceptors in darkness. Cell and Tissue Research, 153, 137–144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwemer, J. & Henning, U., 1984. Morphological correlates of visual pigment turnover in photoreceptors of the fly, Calliphora erythrocephala. Cell and Tissue Research, 236, 293–303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shelton, P.M.J., Gaten, E. & Chapman, C.J., 1985. Light and retinal damage in Nephrops norvegicus (L). Proceedings of the Royal Society (B), 226, 217–236.Google Scholar
Shelton, P.M.J., Gaten, E. & Chapman, C.J., 1986. Accessory pigment distribution and migration in the compound eye of Nephrops norvegicus (L.) (Crustacea: Decapoda). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 98, 185–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welsh, J.H. & Chace, F.A., 1937. Eyes of deep-sea crustaceans. I. Acanthephyridae. Biological Bulletin. Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, Mass., 72, 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welsh, J.H. & Chace, F.A., 1938. Eyes of deep-sea crustaceans. II. Sergestidae. Biological Bulletin. Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, Mass., 74, 364–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar